Hey all,(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

The way I was taught GR, the summation convention applies on terms where an index is repeated strictly with one covariant, one contravariant. But reading through a translation of Einstein's GR foundations paper just now it looks like the index placement doesn't matter (I've seen it this way on Wikipedia too! :P). I've never actually seen a term like, say, a_\mu b_\mu where you have repeated upper indices or repeated lower indices, so as yet this hasn't been an issue, but I'm curious what the consensus on the convention is, and whether it actually matters (are there terms/can there be terms in GR with repeated upper/lower indices?). Thanks!

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# Summation convention and index placement

Loading...

Similar Threads - Summation convention index | Date |
---|---|

Lorents Factor Expansion | May 14, 2015 |

A question about Einstein's summation convention | Oct 31, 2013 |

Tensors Notation - Summation Convention - meaning of (a_ij)*(a_ij) | Jan 4, 2013 |

Confusion over Einstien summation convention and metric tensors. | Oct 22, 2011 |

Summation Notation | Jul 20, 2010 |

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**