Elastic Energy Momentum Tensor and Defects

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on a query regarding equation 4.4 from Eshelby's paper on the elastic energy-momentum tensor. The poster expresses confusion over the claim that the energy difference between two surfaces, S and S', is proportional to the energy of the portion enclosed by S multiplied by the vector u. Concerns about dimensional consistency are raised, indicating a lack of clarity on the relationship presented in the equation. Another participant suggests that the equation may be an alternate representation of a known relationship in mechanics. The conversation highlights the complexities of understanding foundational concepts in elasticity theory.
muzialis
Messages
156
Reaction score
1
Hi All,

I am reading the seminal paper by Eshelby on the elastic energy-momentum tensor, which I attach for your convenience.
It is all beautiful but equation 4.4 at the beginning. He considers a surface S in the undeformed configuration of a body. The surface is translated by a vector u to a surface S', and the claim is made that the difference in the energies of the portions of the body enclosed by S, S' equals the energy of the portion included by S times the vector u, I really do not see that, albeit the fact it must be obvious...it does not even seem dimensionally consistent to me ...Can anybody help?, I am sure many of you read the paper and/or are familiar with these concepts, I would not hope that you read a new paper just to answer a post.

Thank you very much
 

Attachments

Physics news on Phys.org
4.4 looks like an alternate way of writing ∇E = F (equivalently, ΔE = Δx * F).
 
Andy, many thanks. sometimes I get stuck and an obviousity becomes a wall.
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Hello everyone, Consider the problem in which a car is told to travel at 30 km/h for L kilometers and then at 60 km/h for another L kilometers. Next, you are asked to determine the average speed. My question is: although we know that the average speed in this case is the harmonic mean of the two speeds, is it also possible to state that the average speed over this 2L-kilometer stretch can be obtained as a weighted average of the two speeds? Best regards, DaTario
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Back
Top