Product of two Kronecker delta symbols as a determinant

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving an equation involving the product of two Kronecker delta symbols as a determinant. The original poster expresses difficulty in verifying the equation and seeks a proof rather than just evaluation for specific indices.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the implications of the antisymmetry of the expressions involved and suggest that checking the identity for a specific choice of indices may suffice. Questions arise regarding the choice of indices and the reasoning behind it.

Discussion Status

Some guidance has been offered regarding the sufficiency of checking the identity for particular indices due to antisymmetry. Participants are exploring different perspectives on the choice of indices and the reasoning behind the proof approach.

Contextual Notes

There is an emphasis on the requirement for indices to be pairwise distinct, and the discussion includes considerations of the implications of repeated indices in the context of the Kronecker delta and determinants.

brotherbobby
Messages
777
Reaction score
172
Homework Statement
The books says that "it is fairly easy" to verify the following product of two kronecker delta symbols : ##\epsilon_{ijk} \epsilon_{pqr} = \begin{vmatrix} \delta_{ip} & \delta_{iq} & \delta_{ir} \\ \delta_{jp} & \delta_{jq} & \delta_{jr} \\ \delta_{kp} & \delta_{kq} & \delta_{kr} \\ \end{vmatrix}##
Relevant Equations
We know the definition of the krokecker alternating symbol. Here all variables can only take values between 1 and 3. If any of the indices repeat, the value of the symbol is 0. If the indices alternate, the symbol takes on a minus sign.
I don't have a clue as to how to go about proving (or verifying) the equation above. It would be very hard to take individual values of i,j and k and p,q and r for each side and evaluate ##3^6## times! More than that, I'd like a proof more than a verification.

Any help would be welcome.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Both sides vanish if any two of ##i,j,k## or any two of ##p,q,r## are equal (the LHS is zero since a LC symbol with repeated index is zero, and the RHS is zero because two columns or two rows will be equal).

So we're in the case that ##i,j,k## and ##p,q,r## are pairwise distinct. Since both sides are anti-symmetric under changing two indices from either set, it's enough to check that your identity is true for just one particular choice of indices, say ##i=1, j=2, k=3## and ##p=1,q=2, r=3.## You should think about why this is sufficient if it's not obvious at first.

You can probably also expand the determinant, but I find this way of thinking to be simpler.
 
You should think about why this is sufficient if it's not obvious at first.

I have got your answer mostly, except your quote above. It is not obvious to me as to why should the values of ##i, j \,\text{and}\, k## and those of ##p,q\, \text{and}\, r## be those as you said : 1, 2 and 3. Why not 2, 3 and 1, respectively, for example?
 
It follows from the antisymmetry of both sides. Changing ##(i,j,k)=(1,2,3)\to (2,1,3)\to (2,3,1)## changes both ##\varepsilon_{ijk}\varepsilon_{pqr}## and your determinant by a factor of ##-1## twice, and hence leaves them unchanged.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
12K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
5K