Division with Einstein summation convention

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the interpretation and calculation of a scalar \( c \) in the context of a rank 2 tensor \( A^{ab} \) and a vector \( u^a \). The original poster seeks to understand how to express \( c \) in terms of the components of \( A^{ab} \) and the product of components of \( u^a \).

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the relationship between the tensor \( A^{ab} \) and the vector \( u^a \), questioning how to derive \( c \) from the equation \( c = A^{ab} / (u^a u^b) \). There is discussion about the implications of treating \( A^{ab} \) as a tensor versus its components.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided insights into the nature of tensor components and how to approach the calculation of \( c \). There is an acknowledgment of potential confusion regarding the use of Einstein summation convention and the distinction between tensors and their components. The conversation indicates a productive exploration of the topic, with participants clarifying misunderstandings.

Contextual Notes

There is an emphasis on the need to correctly interpret tensor notation and the implications of working with components. The discussion also touches on the limitations of the original poster's understanding of tensor operations and the assumptions made about the nature of \( A^{ab} \).

Powertravel
Messages
9
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



I have the following equation

Aab= c ua ub

Where Aab is a rank 2 tensor and ua is a vector and c is a scalar and a,b = {0,1,2,3}. I know both Aab , ua and ua
I want to find c explicitly but I don't know how to interpret or calculate

c = Aab / ( ua ub )

Does anyone know how I should proceed?

Homework Equations


Aab= c ua ub
3. The Attempt at a Solution

c = Aab / ( ua ub )
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Actually A^{ab}=c u^a u^b, in matrix form becomes the following:

<br /> A=c\left[ \begin{array}{ccc} u^1 u^1 \quad u^1 u^2 \quad u^1 u^3 \\ u^2 u^1 \quad u^2 u^2 \quad u^2 u^3 \\ u^3 u^1 \quad u^3 u^2 \quad u^3 u^3 \end{array} \right]<br />.

Now if you write A^{ab} in its matrix form too, you will find your answer.
 
Thank you. I got tunnel vision on getting getting some sort of contraction going. Just to be clear, did you mean that I can get c by
c = A00 / (u0)2 = A11 / (u1)2 = ... etc?
Is it even possible to evaluate Aab / (ua ub)?
 
Powertravel said:
Thank you. I got tunnel vision on getting getting some sort of contraction going. Just to be clear, did you mean that I can get c by
c = A00 / (u0)2 = A11 / (u1)2 = ... etc?
Is it even possible to evaluate Aab / (ua ub)?
Yeah, that's correct.
But your last sentence tells me that you don't know enough about what you're doing. A^{ab} is not a tensor, its only the (a,b) component of the tensor A. So A^{ab} is only a number. When you work with tensors like that, you're working in the component notation. So c=\frac{A^{ab}}{u^a u^b} is just the division of two real numbers and nothing more. Also it has nothing to do with Einstein summation convention. But I can tell you how it can be related. At first we should bring down one of the indices so that we have one index up and one index down to sum over. Then we should contract the indices:
A^{ab}=cu^a u^b \Rightarrow g_{ca}A^{ab}=c g_{ca} u^a u^b \Rightarrow A_c^{\ b}=c u_c u^b \Rightarrow A_b^{\ b}=c u_b u^b \Rightarrow c=\frac{A_b^{\ b}}{u_b u^b}
Now A_b^{\ b} and u_b u^b are just numbers, not components of a tensor.
 
That's a neat trick and clears up a lot of confusion I have. Thank you for the help.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
7K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
6K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K