Indicial Notation-Proving grad(u.v) and EijkEkpq

  • Thread starter Thread starter Trinity83
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around proving identities involving indicial notation, specifically the gradient of the dot product of two vector fields and a property of the Levi-Civita symbol. Participants explore the mathematical framework and notation required to approach these proofs, focusing on both theoretical and practical aspects.

Discussion Character

  • Homework-related
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express confusion about using indicial notation and the del operator in the context of gradients and vector identities.
  • One participant suggests using a matrix of Kronecker deltas to compute the determinant for the Levi-Civita symbol identity.
  • Another participant proposes writing the vectors in component form and differentiating to approach the first problem, although they acknowledge it may be lengthy and messy.
  • A later reply emphasizes the importance of using index notation for both problems and questions the lack of attempts to solve them.
  • One participant describes their process of working through the gradient identity, noting concerns about the treatment of Kronecker deltas and assumptions made during simplification.
  • Another participant encourages showing work for better assistance and provides a structured approach to proving the Levi-Civita identity through determinants.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that both problems should be approached using index notation, but there is no consensus on the methods or solutions. Several participants express uncertainty and seek clarification on specific steps in the proofs.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include varying levels of familiarity with indicial notation and the del operator, as well as unresolved mathematical steps in the proofs being discussed.

Trinity83
Messages
3
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Prove grad(u.v)=(u.grad)v+(v.grad)u+ux(curlv)+vx(curlu) [x's are cross product, .'s are dot product]
or better seen as: [tex]\nabla[/tex](u[tex]\bullet[/tex]v)=(u[tex]\bullet[/tex][tex]\nabla[/tex])v+(V[tex]\bullet[/tex][tex]\nabla[/tex])u+u[tex]\wedge[/tex]([tex]\nabla[/tex][tex]\wedge[/tex]v)+v[tex]\wedge[/tex]([tex]\nabla[/tex][tex]\wedge[/tex]u)


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution


I am new to this notation, and I know that the gradient multiplied by a scalar (from the dot product) will be a vector, but I don't know how to show it is this identity. I have racked my brain!

Homework Statement


Show that [tex]\epsilon[/tex][tex]_{}kij[/tex][tex]\epsilon[/tex][tex]_{}kpq[/tex]=[tex]\delta[/tex][tex]_{}ip[/tex][tex]\delta[/tex][tex]_{}jq[/tex]-[tex]\delta[/tex][tex]_{}iq[/tex][tex]\delta_{}jp[/tex]

Homework Equations




The Attempt at a Solution


Again, I haven't a clue!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
For the second problem:

[tex]\epsilon_{ijk}[/tex] is called the Levi-Civita symbol. Basically, you should form a matrix of Kronecker deltas and then compute the determinant of the matrix. It should look something like this:

http://i29.tinypic.com/13ydzl0.png

You should be able to prove the identity once you've written the determinant out once or twice.
 
For 1:

Simplest possible method I know of is to write u as (u1 u2 u3) and v as (v1 v2 v3) and then solve each part.

e.g. For left part,

it is

(d/dx,d/dy,d/dz) (k)

k = scalar quantity from the dot product = u1.v1 + u2.v2 + u3.v3

so

(dk/dx,dk/dy,dk/dz)

(bit lengthy and messy)
 
rootX said:
For 1:

Simplest possible method I know of is to write u as (u1 u2 u3) and v as (v1 v2 v3) and then solve each part.

e.g. For left part,

it is

(d/dx,d/dy,d/dz) (k)

k = scalar quantity from the dot product = u1.v1 + u2.v2 + u3.v3

so

(dk/dx,dk/dy,dk/dz)

(bit lengthy and messy)

Isn't the idea to use index notation?
 
cristo said:
Isn't the idea to use index notation?

Yes, this must be proved using index notation.
 
I'm actually stuck on this too if anybody knows how to do it that'd be fantastic.
 
Why have neither of you made any attempt at solving the problem? For the first one, what is the dot product of two vectors and the cross product of two vectors in index notation?
 
because I don't know how to work with gradients in index notation..
 
I have been working on this problem all week and there's still no light at the end of the tunnel...
 
  • #10
Trinity83 said:
I have been working on this problem all week and there's still no light at the end of the tunnel...

If you show your work, then you will receive help. How about, say, answering my questions above?
 
  • #11
I gave you a starting point. Look at the link that I posted. It is an image showing how to relate the epsilon notation to the Kronecker delta notation from first principles. It is the cross-product of the matrix in the picture.

1) Write out the equation in that link.

2) Take the determinant of that matrix and set the epsilon notation equal to it.

3) Simplify the resulting algebra.

When you start simplifying the algebra, it should be apparent how to prove it.

I don't think there is an easier way to do this problem.
 
  • #12
My main problem was I didn't really know the rules with the del operator and indicial notation. I think I got it now. Using V as the del operator:

I solved out uX(VXv) and vX(VXu) which ended up cancelling out the first two terms on the right side and left me with the expanded version of the LHS. The only reservation I had about the way I solved it is that it left me with a kronecker delta at the beginning of both of the chain ruled out expressions on the LHS (not actually on the LHS, but when I expanded the two RHS expressions until they were the same as the LHS except fot the two kroneckers if that makes sense) I just ended up saying they were equal to 1 because it seems like that's something my teachers do sometimes without really giving justification.

Sorry if that's a bit confusing but I don't know a good way of writing up all the expressions with subscripts and whatnot on here.

edit: Actually after thinking about it you probably just solve for the case of the two being equal (K.D. being 1) and unequal (K.D. being 0) and the 0 case just never matters because it zeroes everything out, so you can usually just say that the indices are equal as long as they're free indices?

Sorry for not answering your question but I didn't really have time to try to write it out in this as I had to figure it out for today, especially because my only problem was really how to work with the del operator.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
9K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
24K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
30K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K