Levi-Civita Identity Proof Help (εijk εijl = 2δkl)

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the proof of the Levi-Civita identity, specifically the equation εijk εijl = 2δkl. A participant initially attempted a proof by substituting l=j and m=l but encountered issues, leading to the expression δjj δkl - δjl δkj = δkl - δlk. The correct approach involves recognizing the summation convention and correctly applying the identity δjj = 3, which is essential for reaching the accurate result.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the Levi-Civita symbol and its properties
  • Familiarity with the Kronecker delta function
  • Knowledge of index notation and summation convention
  • Basic principles of tensor algebra
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of the Levi-Civita symbol in detail
  • Learn about the Kronecker delta and its applications in tensor calculus
  • Explore examples of index notation in physics and engineering contexts
  • Investigate the implications of summation convention in tensor equations
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for students and professionals in mathematics, physics, and engineering who are working with tensor calculus and need a deeper understanding of the Levi-Civita identity and its applications.

John Delaney
Messages
3
Reaction score
1
Homework Statement
Prove εijk εijl = 2δkl
Relevant Equations
εijk εilm = δjl δkm - δjm δkl
I assumed that this would be a straightforward proof, as I could just make the substitution l=j and m=l, but upon doing this, I end up with:

δjj δkl - δjl δkj

= δkl - δlk

Clearly I did not take the right approach in this proof and have no clue as to how to proceed.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Well you are right that you can do it just by making a 'substitution'. However, bear in mind that summation convention is in use here. You have to sum over the indices that are repeating. With that, you should be able to get the right result.
 
Antarres said:
Well you are right that you can do it just by making a 'substitution'. However, bear in mind that summation convention is in use here. You have to sum over the indices that are repeating. With that, you should be able to get the right result.

Thank you for the reminder, completely forgot that δjj = 3 rather than 1.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
10K
Replies
14
Views
12K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
5K
Replies
4
Views
10K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
8K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K