Kronecker delta as tensor proof

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves proving the tensor character of the Kronecker delta and demonstrating that it is a constant tensor, maintaining the same components across different coordinate systems. The original poster expresses confusion regarding the meaning of the problem statement and the relevant concepts of tensors.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the definition of tensors and the transformation properties that characterize them. The original poster attempts to relate the Kronecker delta to the definitions provided in their textbook, particularly regarding contravariant and covariant tensors. Some participants suggest demonstrating the transformation properties of the Kronecker delta to establish its tensor nature.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants exploring the definitions and properties of tensors. Some guidance has been offered regarding the transformation of indices and the implications of the results. However, there is no explicit consensus on the interpretation of certain steps in the proof, indicating that further clarification may be needed.

Contextual Notes

The original poster indicates a lack of understanding of tensor concepts, particularly the differences between contravariant and covariant tensors, and expresses uncertainty about the proof process. This context suggests that foundational knowledge may be a barrier to progress in the discussion.

faklif
Messages
17
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


The problem straight out of the book reads:
Prove that the Kronecker delta has the tensor character indicated.
Prove also that it is a constant or numerical tensor, that is, it has
the same components in all coordinate systems.

Without a context the first sentence might be a bit weird but to me it is still weird with a context because I can't figure out what it means. In the passage that the question is related to I find no clues so any help is appreciated.


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution


Since I don't even really understand the first part I can'r really do much about that. As for the second part I really don't know much about tensors yet and I can't fit the Kronecker delta with transformations properly so I'm at a loss. Hope someone can help!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What is the definition ("character") of a tensor stated in your book?
 
EnumaElish said:
What is the definition ("character") of a tensor stated in your book?

Thanks for your reply! What looks most like a definition to me is:

A contravariant tensor of rank 1 is a set of quantities, written X^a in the x^a coordinate system, associated with a point P, which transforms under a change of coordinates according to
<br /> X&#039;^a=\frac{{\partial}x&#039;^a}{{\partial}x^b}X^b<br />
where the transformation matrix is evaluated at P.

Then a covariant tensor is defined in a similar way but with
<br /> X&#039;_a=\frac{{\partial}x^b}{{\partial}x&#039;^a}X_b<br />

Mixed tensors are also presented and I'm thinking that maybe I'm supposed to show that the delta is a (1,1) tensor which it looks like it would be according to it's indices? Don't really know how to do that though.
 
faklif said:
Mixed tensors are also presented and I'm thinking that maybe I'm supposed to show that the delta is a (1,1) tensor which it looks like it would be according to it's indices?
Yes, that's what you're supposed to do. So make the appropriate transformation on each index. Then you should see a nice way to make use of the chain rule for derivatives.
 
Avodyne said:
Yes, that's what you're supposed to do. So make the appropriate transformation on each index. Then you should see a nice way to make use of the chain rule for derivatives.

Thank you!

<br /> \delta&#039;^a_b=\frac{{\partial}x&#039;^a}{{\partial}x^c}\frac{{\partial}x^d}{{\partial}x&#039;^b}\delta^c_d=\frac{{\partial}x&#039;^a}{{\partial}x^c}\frac{{\partial}x^c}{{\partial}x&#039;^b}=\frac{{\partial}x&#039;^a}{{\partial}x&#039;^b}=\delta^a_b<br />

So that would do it?

Two main things get me here. I have a very poor understanding of what a tensor is. Especially that I don't know much of the difference between a contravariant and covariant one, except how they transform. Then there's my lack of understanding when it comes to proofs. My background being in engineering I'm mostly just used to understanding theorems so that I can use them. So with this as an example what is it that proves that it is a (1,1) tensor? Is it the fact that in the transformation I get back the same thing I started out with? Something like, since it behaves like a tensor it is a tensor? And is what I wrote down above a definition of a tensor?
 
Yes, that's exactly correct. That proves it's a (1,1) tensor. It has the correct coordinate transformation. If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, it is a duck. If it behaves like a tensor, it is a tensor.
 
faklif said:
Thank you!

<br /> \delta&#039;^a_b=\frac{{\partial}x&#039;^a}{{\partial}x^c}\frac{{\partial}x^d}{{\partial}x&#039;^b}\delta^c_d=\frac{{\partial}x&#039;^a}{{\partial}x^c}\frac{{\partial}x^c}{{\partial}x&#039;^b}=\frac{{\partial}x&#039;^a}{{\partial}x&#039;^b}=\delta^a_b<br />

the last step -

\frac{{\partial}x&#039;^a}{{\partial}x^c}\frac{{\partial}x^c}{{\partial}x&#039;^b}=\frac{{\partial}x&#039;^a}{{\partial}x&#039;^b}=\delta^a_b<br />

seems quite incorrect to me. Since 'c' is a dummy variable here, over which the expression is summed, hence shouldn't it be :

\frac{{\partial}x&#039;^a}{{\partial}x^c}\frac{{\partial}x^c}{{\partial}x&#039;^b}=\frac{{\partial}x&#039;^a}{{\partial}x&#039;^b} \times D<br />

where D is the Dimension number of tensor space.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
14K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
12K
Replies
2
Views
2K