Is the Contraction of a Mixed Tensor Always Symmetric?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the properties of the contraction of mixed tensors, specifically whether the contraction results in a symmetric tensor. Participants explore the conditions under which the symmetry holds, focusing on the implications of the tensor's symmetry in its indices.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the generality of the statement regarding the symmetry of the contraction of a mixed tensor.
  • Another participant asserts that the statement is not true for a general mixed tensor.
  • It is noted that the symmetry holds only if the tensor is symmetric in both upper and lower indices.
  • A further elaboration suggests that the requirement for symmetry may be too strong, proposing that a simultaneous swap of indices suffices for the contraction to be symmetric.
  • Another participant agrees that the tensor can also be antisymmetric in both upper and lower indices, adding complexity to the conditions for symmetry.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the conditions required for the contraction of a mixed tensor to be symmetric, indicating that multiple competing perspectives remain unresolved.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the dependence on the definitions of symmetry and the specific conditions under which the properties of the tensor are evaluated, leaving some assumptions and mathematical steps unresolved.

arpon
Messages
234
Reaction score
16
Is that true in general and why:
$$A^{mn}_{.~.~lm}=A^{nm}_{.~.~ml}$$
 
Physics news on Phys.org
For a general ##A^{mn}{}_{kl}##, no.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71
It's only true when your tensor is symmetric in both upper and lower indices.
 
haushofer said:
It's only true when your tensor is symmetric in both upper and lower indices.
That's the requirement that
##A^{mn}{}_{lp}=A^{(mn)}{}_{(lp)}=\frac{1}{4}\left( A^{mn}{}_{lp} + A^{nm}{}_{lp} +A^{mn}{}_{pl}+A^{nm}{}_{pl} \right)##.
But I think that's too strong.

From what was given,
I think that [if I'm not mistaken] the only requirement is that ##A^{mn}{}_{lp}=A^{nm}{}_{pl}## (simultaneous swap),
that is,
##A^{mn}{}_{lp}=\frac{1}{2}\left( A^{mn}{}_{lp} + A^{nm}{}_{pl} \right)##.
 
Yes, you're right. The tensor is also allowed to be antisymmetric in both upper and lower indices.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
5K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K