How Can You Simplify Problems Involving Variables in Three Dimensions?

Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
4 replies · 3K views
timscully
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
1. Variables

Given a generalized basis in three dimensions: [tex]e_{1},e_{2},e_{3}[/tex] and the standard Kronecker delta [tex]\delta_{ij}[/tex], and using Einstein summation.
With the vector [tex]\textbf{x},\textbf{y},\textbf{z}[/tex] I'm trying to simplify this problem:

2. Problem
[tex]\delta_{il} . \delta_{jm} . x_{j}[/tex]

3. My attempt
[tex]\delta_{il}.\delta_{jm} . \textbf{x} . e_{j}<br /> = (e_{i}. e_{l}) . (e_{j} . e_{m}) . \textbf{x} . e_{j}<br /> = (e_{j}. e_{j}) . (e_{l} . e_{m} . e_{j}) . \textbf{x} <br /> = 1 . (e_{l} . e_{m} . e_{j}) . \textbf{x}[/tex]

Surely this leads to [tex]\delta_{il} . \delta_{jm} . x_{j} = 0[/tex] as [tex]e_{l} , e_{m} , e_{j}[/tex] are all orthagonal ?

Ultimately I'm trying to prove that
[tex](\delta_{il} . \delta_{jm} - \delta_{jl} . \delta_{im}).x_{j}.y_{l}.z_{m}<br /> = y_{i}.x_{j}.z_{j} - z_{i}.x_{j}.y_{j}[/tex]
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Welcome to PF!

timscully said:
I'm trying to simplify this problem:
[tex]\delta_{il} . \delta_{jm} . x_{j}[/tex]

Ultimately I'm trying to prove that
[tex](\delta_{il} . \delta_{jm} - \delta_{jl} . \delta_{im}).x_{j}.y_{l}.z_{m}<br /> = y_{i}.x_{j}.z_{j} - z_{i}.x_{j}.y_{j}[/tex]

Hi timscully! Welcome to PF! :smile:

(have a delta: δ :wink:)

Forget about the basis vectors!

All δij does is replace i by j (or vice versa) in anything else.

So δijxj = xi, δijxi = xj.

So just plug 'n' play! :biggrin:
 
Thanks for the welcome.

It looks like a great forum.

So, is [tex]\delta_{ij} . x_{m}[/tex] zero, because m is neither i nor j ?
 
not a sum

timscully said:
Thanks for the welcome.

It looks like a great forum.

So, is [tex]\delta_{ij} . x_{m}[/tex] zero, because m is neither i nor j ?

Nooo:bugeye:

δijxj is a sum over all values of j, so it only depends on i: δijxj = xi.

But δijxm is not a sum; there is no "contraction"; it still depends on i j and m: δijxm = xm if i = j and = 0 if i≠j. :smile:
 
Got it. Much appreciated.