Quotient law and the curl in index notation

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter SiennaTheGr8
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Curl Index quotient
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the expression of the curl in index notation, specifically the equation ##(\nabla \times \vec v)^i = \epsilon^{i j k} \nabla_j v_k##. The participant questions the application of the quotient law, suggesting that ##\partial_j v_k## should be a tensor, which contradicts established understanding. The conclusion is that the quotient law does not apply in this context due to the properties of the Levi-Civita symbol ##\epsilon^{i j k}##, which is neither arbitrary nor a tensor.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of vector calculus and curl operations
  • Familiarity with index notation in tensor calculus
  • Knowledge of the properties of the Levi-Civita symbol
  • Basic concepts of tensor algebra and the quotient law
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties and applications of the Levi-Civita symbol in tensor calculus
  • Learn about the implications of the quotient law in various mathematical contexts
  • Explore advanced topics in tensor analysis, focusing on symmetry and anti-symmetry
  • Investigate the relationship between vector fields and their derivatives in the context of differential geometry
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, physicists, and students of advanced calculus or differential geometry who are working with vector fields and tensor analysis.

SiennaTheGr8
Messages
513
Reaction score
210
TL;DR
In index notation, the curl can be expressed in a way where the quotient law would seem to "fail." There must be a subtlety that I'm missing.
If I'm not mistaken, the curl can be expressed like this in index notation:

##(\nabla \times \vec v)^i = \epsilon^{i j k} \nabla_j v_k = \epsilon^{i j k} (\partial_j v_k - \Gamma^m_{j k} v_m) = \epsilon^{i j k} \partial_j v_k ##

(where the last equality is because ##\epsilon^{i j k}\Gamma^m_{j k}## is both symmetric and anti-symmetric in ##j## and ##k##). But now with ##(\nabla \times \vec v)^i = \epsilon^{i j k} \partial_j v_k##, doesn't the quotient law say that ##\partial_j v_k## is a tensor, even though it obviously isn't? Clearly I'm wrong. Is there a subtlety to the quotient law that I'm missing?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Quotient law is not applicable here because ##\epsilon## is not an arbitrary tensor.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: SiennaTheGr8 and renormalize

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
6K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K