Einstein Summation Convention, Levi-Civita, and Kronecker delta

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around evaluating sums using the Einstein Summation Convention, specifically involving the Kronecker delta and Levi-Civita symbol. Participants are exploring the implications of these mathematical constructs in their calculations.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are attempting to evaluate expressions involving the Kronecker delta and Levi-Civita symbol, questioning their own calculations and interpretations of the summation convention. Some are verifying their results against others' interpretations.

Discussion Status

There are multiple interpretations being explored, with some participants providing guidance on how to approach the calculations. While some results have been confirmed as correct, others are still under discussion, indicating an ongoing exploration of the topic.

Contextual Notes

Participants are working within the constraints of homework rules, which may limit the information they can use or the methods they can apply. There is also a noted confusion regarding the multiplication of results from the epsilon and delta functions.

tony873004
Science Advisor
Gold Member
Messages
1,753
Reaction score
143

Homework Statement


Evaluate the following sums, implied according to the Einstein Summation Convention.
\begin{array}{l}<br /> \delta _{ii} = \\ <br /> \varepsilon _{12j} \delta _{j3} = \\ <br /> \varepsilon _{12k} \delta _{1k} = \\ <br /> \varepsilon _{1jj} = \\ <br /> \end{array}

The Attempt at a Solution


<br /> \begin{array}{l}<br /> \delta _{ii} = \delta _{11} + \delta _{12} + \delta _{13} + \delta _{21} + \delta _{22} + \delta _{23} + \delta _{31} + \delta _{32} + \delta _{33} = 1 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 1 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 1 =3 \\ <br /> \varepsilon _{12j} \delta _{j3} = \left( {\varepsilon _{121} + \varepsilon _{122} + \varepsilon _{123} } \right)\left( {\delta _{13} + \delta _{23} + \delta _{33} } \right) = \left( {0 + 0 + 1} \right)\left( {0 + 0 + 1} \right) = \left( 1 \right)\left( 1 \right) = 1 \\ <br /> \varepsilon _{12k} \delta _{1k} = \left( {\varepsilon _{121} + \varepsilon _{122} + \varepsilon _{123} } \right)\left( {\delta _{11} + \delta _{12} + \delta _{13} } \right) = \left( {0 + 0 + 1} \right)\left( {1 + 0 + 0} \right) = \left( 1 \right)\left( 1 \right) = 1 \\ <br /> \varepsilon _{1jj} = \left( {\varepsilon _{111} + \varepsilon _{122} + \varepsilon _{133} } \right) = 0 + 0 + 0 = 0\\ <br /> \end{array}<br />

Am I doing these right? Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
tony873004 said:
<br /> \delta _{ii} = \delta _{11} + \delta _{12} + \delta _{13} + \delta _{21} + \delta _{22} + \delta _{23} + \delta _{31} + \delta _{32} + \delta _{33} = 1 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 1 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 1 =3

Your final result is correct, but \delta_{ii}=\delta_{11}+\delta_{22}+\delta_{33}

\varepsilon _{12j} \delta _{j3} = \left( {\varepsilon _{121} + \varepsilon _{122} + \varepsilon _{123} } \right)\left( {\delta _{13} + \delta _{23} + \delta _{33} } \right) = \left( {0 + 0 + 1} \right)\left( {0 + 0 + 1} \right) = \left( 1 \right)\left( 1 \right) = 1

Not quite, \varepsilon _{12j} \delta _{j3} =\varepsilon _{121} \delta _{13}+\varepsilon _{122} \delta _{23}+\varepsilon _{123} \delta _{33}

\varepsilon _{12k} \delta _{1k} = \left( {\varepsilon _{121} + \varepsilon _{122} + \varepsilon _{123} } \right)\left( {\delta _{11} + \delta _{12} + \delta _{13} } \right) = \left( {0 + 0 + 1} \right)\left( {1 + 0 + 0} \right) = \left( 1 \right)\left( 1 \right) = 1

Same problem with this one.

\varepsilon _{1jj} = \left( {\varepsilon _{111} + \varepsilon _{122} + \varepsilon _{133} } \right) = 0 + 0 + 0 = 0[/tex]

Good.
 
Thank you very much!
 
\epsilon_{12j} \delta_{j1}=\epsilon_{121}=0 by defn.
 
latentcorpse said:
\epsilon_{12j} \delta_{j1}=\epsilon_{121}=0 by defn.
I'm not sure if I get this then. Am I supposed to be multiplying the epsilon and delta results together? Or is the answer gabbagabbahey gave for #2 the final answer. By multiplying, I get 1 for your example. Here's my latest attempt at the original questions:
Thanks, gabbagabbahey and latentcorpse!
<br /> \begin{array}{l}<br /> \delta _{ii} = \delta _{11} + \delta _{22} + \delta _{33} = 1 + 1 + 1 = 3 \\ <br /> \varepsilon _{12j} \delta _{j3} = \varepsilon _{121} \delta _{13} + \varepsilon _{122} \delta _{23} + \varepsilon _{123} \delta _{33} = 0\left( 0 \right) + 0\left( 0 \right) + 1\left( 1 \right) = 1 \\ <br /> \varepsilon _{12k} \delta _{1k} = \varepsilon _{121} \delta _{11} + \varepsilon _{122} \delta _{12} + \varepsilon _{123} \delta _{13} = 0\left( 1 \right) + 0\left( 0 \right) + 1\left( 0 \right) = 0 \\ <br /> \varepsilon _{1jj} = \left( {\varepsilon _{111} + \varepsilon _{122} + \varepsilon _{133} } \right) = 0 + 0 + 0 = 0 \\ <br /> \end{array}<br />
 
For some reason (perhaps just as an example?), latentcorpse calculated \varepsilon_{12j} \delta_{j1} instead of \varepsilon_{12j} \delta_{j3}

And your latest attempt looks good to me!:approve:
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
5K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
15K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K