Undergrad Inner product of two tensors

  • Thread starter Thread starter Rick16
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Tensor calculus
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the inner product of two rank-2 tensors as presented in Bernacchi's book "Tensors Made Easy." The participants clarify that the inner product cannot yield a scalar due to the nature of tensor contractions. Specifically, the equation presented involves a double contraction, which results in a rank-2 tensor rather than a scalar. The conversation emphasizes that double contractions are valid and can be useful, as illustrated by the example of the electromagnetic field tensor in the Lagrangian.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of tensor calculus, particularly rank-2 tensors.
  • Familiarity with tensor contractions, including single and double contractions.
  • Knowledge of the electromagnetic field tensor and its role in physics.
  • Basic concepts from Bernacchi's "Tensors Made Easy."
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the concept of tensor contractions in detail, focusing on single vs. double contractions.
  • Explore the applications of rank-2 tensors in physics, particularly in electromagnetism.
  • Read Bernacchi's "Tensors Made Easy" to understand the author's perspective on inner products.
  • Investigate the mathematical properties of the electromagnetic field tensor and its implications in Lagrangian mechanics.
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in mathematics and physics, particularly those studying tensor calculus, electromagnetism, and theoretical physics. This discussion is beneficial for anyone seeking to deepen their understanding of tensor operations and their applications.

Rick16
Messages
158
Reaction score
46
TL;DR
Why can't the inner product of two tensors be a scalar?
I am trying to learn tensor calculus with Bernacchi's book "Tensors made easy". For the inner product of two rank-2 tensors he gets four different results, each of them a rank-2 tensor. Why can't there be a fifth solution, a scalar? What is wrong with the following equation?
$$\mathbf A \cdot \mathbf B = (A_{\mu\nu} \tilde e^\mu \tilde e^\nu)\cdot(B^{\alpha\beta}\vec e_\alpha \vec e_\beta)=A_{\mu\nu}B^{\alpha\beta} \tilde e^\mu \tilde e^\nu\vec e_\alpha \vec e_\beta=A_{\mu\nu}B^{\alpha\beta}\delta^\mu_\alpha\delta^\nu_\beta=A_{\alpha\beta}B^{\alpha\beta}=C,~i.e.~a~scalar$$
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I do not have the book you are referring to, but I would assume they introduce an inner product as a single contraction between two tensor indices. In that case, your scalar is not a single, but a double, contraction. That does not mean it may not be an interesting quantity though.

Do note that the full contraction is also not unique unless one of the tensors is symmetric. You have a choice in which indices you contract with each other.
 
So there is nothing wrong with the double contraction? Bernacchi writes about the inner tensor product "Rank ##\geq## 2 tensors leave residual indexes". This looked to me like they always must leave residual indexes. I guess he had only single contractions in mind and I misunderstood that he meant inner products in general.
 
No, there is nothing wrong with double contractions. They can often be useful. Consider for example the Lagrangian of the electromagnetic field, which contains the term ##F_{\mu\nu}F^{\mu\nu}/4## where ##F## is the electromagnetic field tensor.
 
Thank you very much for clarifying this.
 
Rick16 said:
TL;DR Summary: Why can't the inner product of two tensors be a scalar?

I am trying to learn tensor calculus with Bernacchi's book "Tensors made easy". For the inner product of two rank-2 tensors he gets four different results, each of them a rank-2 tensor. Why can't there be a fifth solution, a scalar? What is wrong with the following equation?
$$\mathbf A \cdot \mathbf B = (A_{\mu\nu} \tilde e^\mu \tilde e^\nu)\cdot(B^{\alpha\beta}\vec e_\alpha \vec e_\beta)=A_{\mu\nu}B^{\alpha\beta} \tilde e^\mu \tilde e^\nu\vec e_\alpha \vec e_\beta=A_{\mu\nu}B^{\alpha\beta}\delta^\mu_\alpha\delta^\nu_\beta=A_{\alpha\beta}B^{\alpha\beta}=C,~i.e.~a~scalar$$
Shouldn't that be the double-dot product?
 
Chestermiller said:
Shouldn't that be the double-dot product?
Yes, I wrote that wrong. The way I wrote the 3rd term, it looks like an outer product. I guess it should be written ##A_{\mu\nu}B^{\alpha\beta}\tilde e^\mu \tilde e^\nu(\vec e_\alpha \vec e_\beta)##.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 58 ·
2
Replies
58
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
932
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K