How Do You Derive a Tensor Matrix from a Potential Energy Function?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around deriving a tensor matrix from a potential energy function as presented in Goldstein's Classical Mechanics. The original poster expresses confusion regarding the transition from a specific equation representing potential energy to its corresponding tensor matrix form.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore how to express the potential energy function in terms of a tensor matrix and question the decomposition of the potential function into matrix form. There is a discussion about the representation of the potential function in Einstein's summation notation and the implications of treating it as a scalar.

Discussion Status

Some participants have offered clarifications regarding the nature of the potential function and its representation, while others are still seeking a deeper understanding of the mathematical relationships involved. The conversation reflects a mix of attempts to clarify notation and the underlying concepts without reaching a definitive conclusion.

Contextual Notes

There is mention of the original poster's reliance on the Goldstein text for notation consistency, which they find lacking in explanatory detail. The discussion also touches on the potential tensor's utility and the limitations of expressing a scalar potential function as a matrix.

KleZMeR
Messages
125
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


I am looking at Goldstein, Classical Mechanics. I am on page 254, and trying to reference page 190 for my confusion.

I don't understand how they got from equation 6.49 to 6.50, potential energy function to tensor matrix. I really want to know how to calculate a tensor from a function of this type (any type), but somehow the Goldstein text is not clear to me.

Homework Equations



V = \frac{k}{2} (\eta_{1}^2+2\eta_{2}^2 +\eta_{3}^2-2\eta_{1}\eta_{2}-2\eta_{2}\eta_{3})

\begin{array}{ccc} k & -k & 0 \\ -k & 2k & -k \\ 0 & -k & k \end{array}

The Attempt at a Solution



The solution is given. I think this is done by means of equation 5.14, but again, I am not too clear on this.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
\mathcal V=\frac 1 2 \vec \eta^T V \vec\eta=\frac 1 2 (\eta_1 \ \ \ \eta_2 \ \ \ \eta_3) \left(\begin{array}{ccc} k \ \ \ \ -k \ \ \ \ 0 \\ -k \ \ \ \ 2k \ \ \ \ -k \\ 0 \ \ \ \ -k \ \ \ \ k \end{array} \right)\ \left( \begin{array}{c} \eta_1 \\ \eta_2 \\ \eta_3 \end{array} \right)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: KleZMeR
Thanks Shyan, but how do I decompose the potential function to arrive at this? Or, rather, how do I represent my function in Einstein's summation notation? I believe from what you are showing that my potential function itself can be written as a matrix and be decomposed by two multiplications using \eta^T , \eta<br />?
 
The potential function is a scalar so you can't write it as a matrix. And the thing I wrote, that's the simplest way of getting a scalar from a vector and a tensor. So people consider this and define the potential tensor which may be useful in some ways.
In component notation and using Einstein summation convention, its written as:
<br /> \mathcal V=\frac 1 2 \eta_i V^i_j\eta^j<br />
But the potential function itself, is just \mathcal V in component notation because its a scalar and has only one component!
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: KleZMeR
Thank you! That did help a LOT. Somehow I keep resorting back to the Goldstein book because it is the same notation we use in lecture and tests, but it does lack some wording in my opinion. I guess the explanation you gave would be better found in a math-methods book.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
4K
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
8K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K