Tensor algebra, divergence of cross product

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the identity relating the curl of the cross product of two vector fields, \(\vec u\) and \(\vec v\), expressed as \(curl(\vec u \times \vec v) = div(\vec u \otimes \vec v - \vec v \otimes \vec u)\). Participants analyze the components of both sides, utilizing the epsilon-delta identity and the properties of divergence and gradient. Key corrections were made regarding the proper use of indices and the definition of the cross product, emphasizing the importance of maintaining clarity in tensor notation.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of vector calculus, specifically curl and divergence.
  • Familiarity with tensor notation and operations, including the use of epsilon and delta symbols.
  • Knowledge of continuum mechanics principles.
  • Proficiency in manipulating vector fields and their components.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of curl and divergence in vector calculus.
  • Learn about tensor products and their applications in continuum mechanics.
  • Explore the epsilon-delta identity and its implications in vector analysis.
  • Review examples of vector field manipulations to solidify understanding of cross products.
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in mathematics, physics, and engineering, particularly those focused on continuum mechanics and vector calculus.

Telemachus
Messages
820
Reaction score
30
Hi there. I wanted to demonstrate this identity which I found in a book of continuum mechanics:

##curl \left ( \vec u \times \vec v \right )=div \left ( \vec u \otimes \vec v - \vec v \otimes \vec u \right ) ##

I've tried by writting both sides on components, but I don't get the same, I'm probably making some mistake.

##\displaystyle curl \left ( \vec u \times \vec v \right )= \epsilon_{ijk} \frac{\partial}{\partial x_j}(\epsilon_{kji}u_j v_i)= \epsilon_{ijk} \left [ \epsilon_{kji} \frac{\partial u_j}{\partial x_j}v_i +u_j \epsilon_{kji} \frac{\partial v_i}{\partial x_j} \right ] ##

I've used that ##(\vec u \times \vec v )_k=\hat e_k \cdot \epsilon_{ijk} u_j v_k \hat e_i=\delta_{ki} \epsilon_{ijk} u_j v_k=\epsilon_{kji}u_j v_i## I'm not sure if this is right.

Then, using the epsilon delta identity I've got ##rot \left ( \vec u \times \vec v \right )=6 \left [ \frac{\partial u_j}{\partial x_j}v_i +u_j \frac{\partial v_i}{\partial x_j} \right ]=6 \left [ (div \vec u) \vec v + (grad \vec v) \vec u \right ]##

Expanding the right hand side of the identity in components:

##div \left ( \vec u \otimes \vec v - \vec v \otimes \vec u \right ) = \frac{\partial}{\partial x_j}(u_i v_j -v_i u_j)=v_j \frac{\partial u_i}{\partial x_j}+ u_i \frac{\partial v_j}{\partial x_j} -u_j \frac{\partial v_i}{\partial x_j}- v_i \frac{\partial u_j}{\partial x_j}=(grad \vec u) \vec v+\vec u div \vec v - (grad \vec v) \vec u- \vec v div \vec u##

PD: The title should be curl of cross product instead of divergence. Sorry.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Telemachus said:
Hi there. I wanted to demonstrate this identity which I found in a book of continuum mechanics:

##rot \left ( \vec u \times \vec v \right )=div \left ( \vec u \otimes \vec v - \vec v \otimes \vec u \right ) ##

I've tried by writting both sides on components, but I don't get the same, I'm probably making some mistake.

##\displaystyle rot \left ( \vec u \times \vec v \right )= \epsilon_{ijk} \frac{\partial}{\partial x_j}(\epsilon_{kji}u_j v_i)= \epsilon_{ijk} \left [ \epsilon_{kji} \frac{\partial u_j}{\partial x_j}v_i +u_j \epsilon_{kji} \frac{\partial v_i}{\partial x_j} \right ] ##
You shouldn't have indices that appear more than twice. ##i## appears 3 times; ##j##, 4 times.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
ups, I see. Thank you vela.
 
Telemachus said:
I've used that ##(\vec u \times \vec v )_k=\hat e_k \cdot \epsilon_{ijk} u_j v_k \hat e_i=\delta_{ki} \epsilon_{ijk} u_j v_k=\epsilon_{kji}u_j v_i## I'm not sure if this is right.
It is, but I wouldn't do those first two steps. I think of ##(\vec u\times\vec v)_k=\varepsilon_{kij}u_jv_k## as the definition of ##\vec u\times\vec v##, so it would have been my starting point. It makes sense to take this as the definition, since it implies that ##\vec u\times\vec v=(\vec u\times\vec v)_k e_k =\varepsilon_{kij}u_jv_k e_k##.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
6K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K