Transformation of Tensor Components

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the transformation of tensor components when changing coordinate systems, specifically addressing the rewriting of the indicial form as aikTklajl. Participants clarify that while matrix multiplication is non-commutative, the elements of the matrices (a_{ik}) commute as they are simply numbers. The transformation leads to the expression A T A^{T} in matrix form, with the transposition occurring due to the rearrangement of indices in matrix multiplication, following the rule (AB)_{ij} = A_{ik} B_{kj}.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of tensor notation and indicial form
  • Familiarity with matrix multiplication rules
  • Knowledge of matrix transposition
  • Basic concepts of linear algebra
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of tensor transformations in different coordinate systems
  • Learn about matrix multiplication and its implications in tensor calculus
  • Explore the significance of matrix transposition in linear algebra
  • Investigate the applications of tensors in physics and engineering
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, physicists, and engineers who work with tensor calculus and matrix operations, particularly those involved in theoretical physics and applied mathematics.

FluidStu
Messages
25
Reaction score
3
In the transformation of tensor components when changing the co-ordinate system, can someone explain the following:

upload_2016-3-31_14-20-12.png


Firstly, what is the point in re-writing the indicial form (on the left) as aikTklajl? Since we're representing the components in a matrix, and the transformation matrix is also a matrix, aren't we violating the non-commutativity of matrix multiplication (AB ≠ BA)?

Secondly, how does this mean A T AT in matrix form? Why are we transposing the matrix?

Thanks in advance
 
Physics news on Phys.org
FluidStu said:
Firstly, what is the point in re-writing the indicial form (on the left) as aikTklajl? Since we're representing the components in a matrix, and the transformation matrix is also a matrix, aren't we violating the non-commutativity of matrix multiplication (AB ≠ BA)?
## \mathcal A##,etc. refers to the matrices themselves but ##a_{ik}##,etc. refers to the elements of those matrices. So the ##a_{ik}##s are just numbers and commute with each other.
Actually there is no need to rearrange them in that way but the author seems to think that it makes things more clear.
FluidStu said:
Secondly, how does this mean ## \mathbf{A T A^{T}} ## in matrix form? Why are we transposing the matrix?
Remember the rule for matrix multiplication? It reads like ## (AB)_{ij}=\sum_k A_{ik} B_{kj} ##, which, if we accept the rule that repeated indices are summed over, becomes ## (AB)_{ij}=A_{ik} B_{kj} ##.
So its clear that ## a_{ik}T_{kl} ## is actually ##C=\mathcal{AT} ##. Now we have ##c_{il} a_{jl} ##. Now if I define ##d_{lj}=a_{jl} ##, the result becomes ## c_{il} d_{lj} ## which is clearly the product of two matrices. The first is ## \mathcal{AT} ## and the second was defined as a matrix that has its rows and columns swapped(because I swapped l and j in ##a_{jl}## to get ## d_{lj} ##). So its clear that the second matrix is ## \mathcal{A}^T## and so the whole product is ## \mathcal{ATA}^T ##.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: FluidStu
Shyan said:
## \mathcal A##,etc. refers to the matrices themselves but ##a_{ik}##,etc. refers to the elements of those matrices. So the ##a_{ik}##s are just numbers and commute with each other.
Actually there is no need to rearrange them in that way but the author seems to think that it makes things more clear.

Remember the rule for matrix multiplication? It reads like ## (AB)_{ij}=\sum_k A_{ik} B_{kj} ##, which, if we accept the rule that repeated indices are summed over, becomes ## (AB)_{ij}=A_{ik} B_{kj} ##.
So its clear that ## a_{ik}T_{kl} ## is actually ##C=\mathcal{AT} ##. Now we have ##c_{il} a_{jl} ##. Now if I define ##d_{lj}=a_{jl} ##, the result becomes ## c_{il} d_{lj} ## which is clearly the product of two matrices. The first is ## \mathcal{AT} ## and the second was defined as a matrix that has its rows and columns swapped(because I swapped l and j in ##a_{jl}## to get ## d_{lj} ##). So its clear that the second matrix is ## \mathcal{A}^T## and so the whole product is ## \mathcal{ATA}^T ##.
Got it! Thanks :)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
5K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K