How to define the lower indexed tensor

  • Thread starter Thread starter ehrenfest
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Tensor
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
5 replies · 3K views
ehrenfest
Messages
2,001
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


Can someone help me with QC 8.4?
I am unsure
how to define the lower indexed tensor here. I have worked with upper and lower indices before but the relationship between the two has always just been given to me.

Let me know if you want to help but think that the attachment is too small to read.

Homework Equations


The Attempt at a Solution

 

Attachments

  • zwiebach142.jpg
    zwiebach142.jpg
    10.1 KB · Views: 446
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I can't see the attempt yet. However, this problem is a forced march. Just multiply both sides of equation (8.51) by two copies of [itex]\eta[/itex] to lower the indices.
 
I see:

[tex]\eta_{\beta \nu} \eta_{\alpha \mu} \epsilon ^{\mu \nu} = -\eta_{\alpha \mu} \eta_{\beta \nu} \epsilon ^{\nu \mu}[/tex]

And then 2 Minkowski metrics is just the identity matrix.

Is my Einstein notation correct?
 
Last edited:
ehrenfest said:
And then 2 Minkowski metrics is just the identity matrix.
Instead of multiplying the metrics together, use them to lower the indices on [itex]\epsilon[/itex].
For instance
[tex]\eta_{\beta\nu}\eta_{\alpha\mu}\epsilon^{\mu\nu} = \eta_{\alpha\mu}{\epsilon^{\mu}}_{\beta}[/tex]

ehrenfest said:
Is my Einstein notation correct?
Yes, but the equation you wrote is wrong. It is missing a minus sign on the r.h.s.
 
Last edited:
jimmysnyder said:
Instead of multiplying the metrics together, use them to lower the indices on [itex]\epsilon[/itex].
For instance
[tex]\eta_{\beta\nu}\eta_{\alpha\mu}\epsilon^{\mu\nu} = \eta_{\alpha\mu}{\epsilon^{\mu}}_{\alpha}[/tex]


Yes, but the equation you wrote is wrong. It is missing a minus sign on the r.h.s.

I see.


jimmysnyder said:
Yes, but the equation you wrote is wrong. It is missing a minus sign on the r.h.s.

Fixed it.
 
I'm sorry Ehrenfest, my post #4 which you quoted is incorrect. I have edited it. Please use the edited post, not the one that you quoted.