Contraction of an asymmetric tensor?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the contraction of an asymmetric tensor A^{\mu\nu} with a corresponding tensor a_{\mu\nu}. The original poster expresses confusion about how the symmetric part of the tensor appears to vanish during contraction, despite understanding that A^{\mu\nu} can be decomposed into symmetric and anti-symmetric components. A correction is made regarding a notation error, clarifying that a^{\mu\nu} is anti-symmetric, which is crucial to understanding the contraction process. The key point is that the symmetric part does not contribute to the contraction due to the properties of anti-symmetry. Overall, the conversation highlights the importance of correctly interpreting tensor properties in mathematical expressions.
Dixanadu
Messages
250
Reaction score
2
Hey guys,

So in my notes I've got this statement written:

If tensor with no symmetry properties, A^{\mu\nu}, contracts to a_{\mu\nu}, we can write this as A^{\mu\nu}a_{\mu\nu}=\frac{1}{2}a_{\mu\nu}(A^{\mu\nu}-A^{\nu\mu}) as a_{\mu\nu} (A^{\mu\nu}+A^{\nu\mu}) = 0. So I don't see how the symmetric part contracts to 0.

*Note* I do also have written that a^{\mu\nu}=-a^{\nu\mu} but I am not sure if this is relevant.

I understand that you can decompose the tensor A^{\mu\nu} into the sum of symmetric and anti-symmetric parts, but i don't see why the symmetric part vanishes under contraction.

If someone could explain I'd be very grateful - thank you!
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Dixanadu said:
Hey guys,

So in my notes I've got this statement written:

If tensor with no symmetry properties, A^{\mu\nu}, contracts to a_{\mu\nu}, we can write this as A^{\mu\nu}a_{\mu\nu}=\frac{1}{2}a_{\mu\nu}(A^{\mu\nu}-B^{\nu\mu}) as a_{\mu\nu} (A^{\mu\nu}+A^{\nu\mu}) = 0. So I don't see how the symmetric part contracts to 0.

*Note* I do also have written that a^{\mu\nu}=-a^{\nu\mu} but I am not sure if this is relevant.

I understand that you can decompose the tensor A^{\mu\nu} into the sum of symmetric and anti-symmetric parts, but i don't see why the symmetric part vanishes under contraction.

If someone could explain I'd be very grateful - thank you!
Your notes are inaccurate. What you tried to note down is probably:
If a^{\mu\nu}=-a^{\nu\mu}, then A^{\mu\nu}a_{\mu\nu}=\frac{1}{2}a_{\mu\nu}(A^{\mu\nu}-A^{\nu\mu}),
for any A^{\mu\nu}.
 
Whoops that B was meant to be an A -- error fixed! but what do you mean by inaccurate exactly? what part is wrong?
 
my2cts said:
Your notes are inaccurate. What you tried to note down is probably:
If a^{\mu\nu}=-a^{\nu\mu}, then A^{\mu\nu}a_{\mu\nu}=\frac{1}{2}a_{\mu\nu}(A^{\mu\nu}-A^{\nu\mu}),
for any A^{\mu\nu}.
Dixanadu said:
Whoops that B was meant to be an A -- error fixed! but what do you mean by inaccurate exactly? what part is wrong?
The part where you wrote B instead of A ?
 
Yes -- sorry about that!
 
I think it's easist first to watch a short vidio clip I find these videos very relaxing to watch .. I got to thinking is this being done in the most efficient way? The sand has to be suspended in the water to move it to the outlet ... The faster the water , the more turbulance and the sand stays suspended, so it seems to me the rule of thumb is the hose be aimed towards the outlet at all times .. Many times the workers hit the sand directly which will greatly reduce the water...
Back
Top