Regarding Einstein Summation Convention

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The Einstein Summation Convention dictates that repeated indices in a mathematical expression indicate summation over those indices. However, an index cannot be repeated more than twice in a monomial. The discussion highlights a specific example where the expression εijkajaj is incorrect due to the index j being repeated three times. The correct formulation should replace ajaj with aiaj to adhere to the convention.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of tensor notation and indices
  • Familiarity with the Einstein Summation Convention
  • Basic knowledge of linear algebra
  • Experience with mathematical expressions involving tensors
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the implications of the Einstein Summation Convention in tensor calculus
  • Learn about the properties of Levi-Civita symbols in multidimensional spaces
  • Explore common errors in tensor notation and how to avoid them
  • Review examples of correct and incorrect tensor expressions
USEFUL FOR

Students of mathematics, physicists, and anyone working with tensor analysis or advanced mathematical concepts will benefit from this discussion.

clayton26
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
So, I realize the basic theory behind Einstein Summation Convention is that any repeated set of indices implicitly indicates a sum over those indices. However, what if an index is repeated three times?

For example, my mathematics professor posted this problem:

εijkajaj = ?

As you can see, j is repeated thrice. So how do I approach this?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It's nothing to approach, it's incorrect. In a monomial (product of indexed objects) an index can appear no more than 2 times.
 
clayton26 said:
So, I realize the basic theory behind Einstein Summation Convention is that any repeated set of indices implicitly indicates a sum over those indices. However, what if an index is repeated three times?

For example, my mathematics professor posted this problem:

εijkajaj = ?

As you can see, j is repeated thrice. So how do I approach this?

It looks like a simple error. ajaj should be aiaj
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
5K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
5K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K