Understanding the Permitted Use of Double Summation in Math

  • Thread starter Thread starter IniquiTrance
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Summation
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion clarifies the permitted use of double summation in mathematical expressions involving indexed variables. It specifically addresses the expression \(\sum_{j=1}^n \sum_{k=1}^n a_{ik}b_{kj}\) and explains that the original formulation is incorrect due to improper summation order. The correct approach involves rearranging the summation to \(\sum_{k=1}^n \sum_{j=1}^n a_{ik}b_{kj}\), which maintains the integrity of the summation and results in a valid conclusion of 1.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of indexed summation notation
  • Familiarity with the properties of summation
  • Basic knowledge of linear algebra concepts
  • Experience with mathematical proofs and manipulations
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of summation in linear algebra
  • Learn about the rearrangement of sums and its implications
  • Explore the concept of convergence in double series
  • Investigate applications of double summation in statistical analysis
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students of mathematics, and anyone involved in mathematical proofs or linear algebra who seeks to deepen their understanding of summation techniques.

IniquiTrance
Messages
185
Reaction score
0
If I know that \sum_{k=1}^n a_{ik} = 1 and \sum_{j=1}^n b_{kj} = 1, why is the following permitted?

\sum_{j=1}^n \sum_{k=1}^n a_{ik}b_{kj} = \left(\sum_{j=1}^n b_{kj}\right) \left(\sum_{k=1}^n a_{ik}\right) = 1\cdot 1 = 1


Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It's not permitted. What you wrote makes no sense since you sum over k and one of the b_{kj} is outside that sum. That is not allowed.

What you could do is:

\sum_{j=1}^n\sum_{k=1}^n a_{ik}b{kj}= \sum_{k=1}^n \sum_{j=1}^n a_{ik}b_{kj} = \sum_{k=1}^n \left(a_{ik} \sum_{j=1}^n b_{kj}\right)= \sum_{k=1}^n a_{ik}=1
 
Thank you very much. I knew I wasn't understanding something.
 
I am studying the mathematical formalism behind non-commutative geometry approach to quantum gravity. I was reading about Hopf algebras and their Drinfeld twist with a specific example of the Moyal-Weyl twist defined as F=exp(-iλ/2θ^(μν)∂_μ⊗∂_ν) where λ is a constant parametar and θ antisymmetric constant tensor. {∂_μ} is the basis of the tangent vector space over the underlying spacetime Now, from my understanding the enveloping algebra which appears in the definition of the Hopf algebra...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
12K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K