Comparing Tensor Double Dot Scalar Product Definitions

Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
6 replies · 4K views
dakg
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
Ok I have seen the tensor double dot scalar product defined two ways and it all boils down to how the multiplication is defined. Does anyone know which is correct? I believe the first one is correct but I keep seeing the second one in various books on finite element methods.

1. [tex]\nabla \vec{u} \colon \nabla \vec{v} = u_{i,j} v_{j,i}[/tex]

or

2. [tex]\nabla \vec{u} \colon \nabla \vec{v} = u_{i,j} v_{i,j}[/tex]Thank you in advance,
dakg
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
You mean outer multiplication between two vectors, right? The definition i have seen (using index notation) is, in [tex]D[/tex] dimensions,

[tex]\vec{u} \otimes \vec{v}= a_{ij}=u_i v_j\;,\;1\leq i,j \leq D[/tex]
 
sorry there is a [tex]\nabla[/tex] missing

i'll edit it
 
i have it in there but it isn't printing, let me try here

[tex]\nabla \vec{u} \colon \nabla \vec{v}[/tex]
 
Do you know why? I found the first one in a Lightfoot book on transport.

They make different results, so wouldn't one be correct and the other wrong?
 
Not wrong just different.
log(e)=1
log(10)=1
3*5+2=17
3*5+2=21
Here are examples of conventions that can lead to confusion.
The convention here (using dyadic product for an example) is
1) (ab):(cd)=(a.d)(b.c) the usual rule
2) (ab):(cd)=(a.c)(b.d) the other rule
The usual rule proably is choosen because of matrix algebra
ie to be the same as matrix product