Tensor Rank vs Type: Explained

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

Tensors are defined by their type (n, m), indicating n covariant and m contravariant indices, while rank refers to the number of simple terms required to express a tensor. The metric tensor is classified as a rank 2 tensor or a covariant 2-tensor, which corresponds to a tensor field of type (0,2). In General Relativity (GR), the rank of a tensor field can vary at different points, although the type remains consistent throughout the field. The discussion highlights the confusion surrounding the terms "rank" and "type," emphasizing that rank, as defined in some literature, may not change as one moves through a tensor field.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of tensor types and indices in mathematics
  • Familiarity with General Relativity (GR) concepts
  • Knowledge of matrix rank and its implications
  • Ability to interpret tensor fields and their properties
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the differences between covariant and contravariant tensors
  • Study the implications of tensor rank in General Relativity
  • Examine the properties of tensor fields and their behavior at different points
  • Explore the definitions and applications of tensor rank in various mathematical contexts
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, physicists, and students of General Relativity seeking to clarify the distinctions between tensor rank and type, as well as their applications in theoretical physics.

ddesai
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
Tensors can be of type (n, m), denoting n covariant and m contravariant indicies. Rank is a concept that comes from matrix rank and is basically the number of "simple" terms it takes to write out a tensor. Sometimes, however, I recall seeing or hearing things like "the metric tensor is a rank 2 tensor" and also "the metric is a covariant 2-tensor or type 2 tensor" I assume the two concepts, that of "type" and "rank" are unrelated, but I want another perspective.

Also, in GR mostly we deal with tensor fields as well as tensors. At different points the rank (as in matrix rank) may be different. Is this true?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
When books say "the metric tensor is a rank 2 tensor" they really mean it's a tensor field of type (0,2). In this context rank doesn't mean the dimension of the image of a linear operator acting on a vector space.
 
Rank = n+m. The tensors of a tensor field will always be of the same type. For example you wouldn't have field that was vector-valued at some points and scalar-valued at others.
 
@jcsd. That's clear. But you use the term "Rank" in a different way than for example, this paper: http://www.its.caltech.edu/~matilde/WeitzMa10Abstract.pdf. If we assume that rank is defined as it is in this paper, then can you still say it doesn't change as you move from point to point?

@Newton. So then folks mix the terminology.
 
ddesai said:
@jcsd. That's clear. But you use the term "Rank" in a different way than for example, this paper: http://www.its.caltech.edu/~matilde/WeitzMa10Abstract.pdf. If we assume that rank is defined as it is in this paper, then can you still say it doesn't change as you move from point to point?

@Newton. So then folks mix the terminology.

I completely missed the analogy with matrix rank. I suppose the metric must always be rank 4 for this meaning of rank as it has a non-zero determinant. I also would guess that the rank of a tensor field could change from point to point, for example in any tensor field that was zero at some point, but wasn't a zero tensor field.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 78 ·
3
Replies
78
Views
6K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K