Determinat formula in Einstein notation

In summary, the conversation discusses formulae for determinants and clarifies the correctness of an expression involving summation and Einstein notation. It is determined that both formulas are correct and equivalent.
  • #1
ianhoolihan
145
0
Hi all,

I've been looking around at formulae for determinants (using them for tensor densities) and I just want to clarify that the expression below is correct (i.e. formulae are correct):
[tex] |M| = \sum^n_{a_1,a_2, \ldots ,a_n = 1} \epsilon_{a_1a_2 \ldots a_n} M_{1a_1}M_{2a_2} \ldots M_{na_n} = \sum^n_{a_1,a_2, \ldots ,a_n = 1} \epsilon_{a_1a_2 \ldots a_n} M_{a_11}M_{a_22} \ldots M_{a_nn}[/tex]
The reason I ask is that the second formulae lends itself to Einstein notation:
[tex] |M| = \epsilon_{a_1a_2 \ldots a_n} M^{a_1}{}_1M^{a_2}{}_2 \ldots M^{a_n}{}_n[/tex]

As an aside question, is this correct in the sense that there are unmatched indices on each side of the equation? I have found the following formula which seems to correct this:
[tex] \epsilon_{b_1b_2 \ldots b_n}|M| = \epsilon_{a_1a_2 \ldots a_n} M^{a_1}{}_{b_1}M^{a_2}{}_{b_2} \ldots M^{a_n}{}_{b_n}[/tex]
I think they are both correct...?

Cheers
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Try

[tex]|M| = \frac{1}{n!} \varepsilon^{b_1 \ldots b_n} \varepsilon_{a_1 \ldots a_n} M^{a_1}{}_{b_1} \ldots M^{a_n}{}_{b_n}[/tex]
 
  • #3
Ben Niehoff said:
Try

[tex]|M| = \frac{1}{n!} \varepsilon^{b_1 \ldots b_n} \varepsilon_{a_1 \ldots a_n} M^{a_1}{}_{b_1} \ldots M^{a_n}{}_{b_n}[/tex]

OK, that's good. Putting [itex]\epsilon_{b_1 \ldots b_n}[/itex] on both sides gives my final formula.

Also, according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levi-Civita_symbol#Determinants does this not imply that my second formula is equivalent to yours?
 

1. What is the determinat formula in Einstein notation?

The determinat formula in Einstein notation is a way to express the determinant of a matrix using Einstein notation, which is a compact and efficient way to represent mathematical expressions. It involves using indices to represent repeated summations and products, making it easier to write and manipulate complex equations.

2. How is the determinat formula in Einstein notation different from the traditional formula?

The traditional formula for calculating the determinant involves expanding the matrix and computing the determinants of submatrices. In contrast, the determinat formula in Einstein notation uses repeated indices to represent the summations and products, making it more concise and easier to work with for complex matrices.

3. What is the advantage of using the determinat formula in Einstein notation?

The determinat formula in Einstein notation offers a more compact and efficient way to represent and manipulate determinants of matrices, especially for larger matrices with many elements. It also allows for easier application of mathematical operations, such as differentiation and integration, which is useful in physics and engineering applications.

4. Can the determinat formula in Einstein notation be used for any type of matrix?

Yes, the determinat formula in Einstein notation can be used for any square matrix, regardless of its size or type (e.g. real, complex, or symbolic). It is a general formula that can be applied to any matrix, making it a versatile tool in mathematical and scientific calculations.

5. Are there any limitations to using the determinat formula in Einstein notation?

One limitation of the determinat formula in Einstein notation is that it may be more difficult for beginners to understand and use, compared to the traditional formula. It also requires a good understanding of Einstein notation and matrix operations. Additionally, for very large matrices, the computational efficiency of the determinat formula in Einstein notation may be lower compared to other methods.

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
116
Replies
11
Views
1K
  • General Math
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • Math Proof Training and Practice
2
Replies
67
Views
10K
Back
Top