Understanding Stress and Inertia Tensors: A Comprehensive Guide

AI Thread Summary
A tensor is a mathematical object that can transform vectors into other vectors, allowing for changes in direction and magnitude. The stress tensor specifically describes how forces act on a small section of a solid, indicating the direction of forces when a specific direction is provided. The inertia tensor relates angular momentum to angular velocity, particularly when they are not aligned. Tensors are essential for expressing relationships between vectors in various directions and are characterized by their transformation properties under coordinate changes. Understanding tensors is crucial for advanced topics in physics and engineering, as they encapsulate complex interactions in a concise mathematical form.
chandran
Messages
137
Reaction score
1
what is a tensor. what is a stress tensor? what is a inertia tensor?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Scroll down to the end of this page and look at the 'what is a tensor' entry

https://www.physicsforums.com/journal.php?s=&action=view&journalid=13790&perpage=10&page=7

regards
marlon
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Marlon's writeup is good. Let me try to intuitize it a bit for your particular question.
(There is a special subset of tensors called dyads. I'm using those to get the
point across in this example.)

If you want to know how much of one vector points along the direction of another
vector you use a dot product.

But a tensor is something which can result in another vector when you take the dot
product of the tensor and the vector. The vector you get out can point in a different
direction too.

In the case of stress you want to know which way the forces push or pull on a small
portion of stuff inside a solid if you were to slice a tiny face of it. Since force is
a vector and direction is another vector the stress tensor says "give me a direction
you want to look in and I'll tell you which way the forces are pointing."

Tensors can do more than that mathematically but that should help you to
undertand why you need them. You need them whenever you have general
relationships between vectors which must transform those vectors into
different directions from the original vectors.

Another way to say it is that to change the amplitude of a vector you can
multiply it by a number. To change it's direction requires multiplying it with
a tensor. A vector cross-product is actually a tensor operation because it
operates on two vectors and results in a third which points in a new direction.
 
In many materials the deformation vector (strain, S)) of the material is not in the direction of the applied stress vector (force per unit area, P). Then Hooke's law must be written as a matrix equation
S_i=\Sigma\epsilon_{ij}P_j. The \epsilon_{ij}
are the nine components of the "stress tensor". It is called a "tensor" because of the way it transforms under a rotation of coordinates.
The "tensor of inertia" is a tensor that relates angular momentum to angular velocity when they are not in the same direction. That equation is
L_i=\Sigma I_{ij}\omega_j.
 
Antiphon said:
If you want to know how much of one vector points along the direction of another
vector you use a dot product.
Well, ok, but do mention that the dot-product can be seen as a tensor itself; ie a (0,2)-tensor. You give in two vectors and this tensor gives back a scalar.
Then you also know that a vector product is a tensor...etc...

But a tensor is something which can result in another vector when you take the dot
product of the tensor and the vector.
I am not sure this is quite accurate. i think you should replace the dot product by tensor product. I mean, the dot product is defined as a (0,2)-tensor so it must always yield a scalar. You are referring to a matrix product (which is also a tensor) or more generally a tensor-product.


The vector you get out can point in a different
direction too.

What exactly are you talking about here ? A different direction to what ?

To change it's direction requires multiplying it with
a tensor.
Well this is ofcourse true but this is certainly not a very general definition of a tensor. I mean, you can change the direction of a vector by simply multiplying it by a scalar : -1 for example. Indeed a scalar is also a tensor in itself, but the point is that i can apply your way of reasoning without using the word tensor ONCE. Hence this is not complete. Besides you are only giving 50% of the definition at best because you are totally omitting the required transformation properties. In your case Christoffel symbols would also be tensors but THEY ARE NOT. I explain this i my above journal entry

regards
marlon
 
Of course all your comments are accurate Marlon, and your link already
contained everything I restated. I merely tried to translate it down to the
level of the question being asked.

I'm an EE so I prefer to think of it as "impedance matching of ideas." Not
much will get through to the original poster unless he can relate to it in terms
he already understands. Later, he can come back and learn the full and correct
meanings. Of course I presume he needed than level of explaining, but what else can I assume without further explanation from him?

What exactly are you talking about here ? A different direction to what ?

No vector operations can change the direction of a vector. For that and in
the general case (of arbitrary transformations) you need tensors.
 
Last edited:
Thread 'Question about pressure of a liquid'
I am looking at pressure in liquids and I am testing my idea. The vertical tube is 100m, the contraption is filled with water. The vertical tube is very thin(maybe 1mm^2 cross section). The area of the base is ~100m^2. Will he top half be launched in the air if suddenly it cracked?- assuming its light enough. I want to test my idea that if I had a thin long ruber tube that I lifted up, then the pressure at "red lines" will be high and that the $force = pressure * area$ would be massive...
I feel it should be solvable we just need to find a perfect pattern, and there will be a general pattern since the forces acting are based on a single function, so..... you can't actually say it is unsolvable right? Cause imaging 3 bodies actually existed somwhere in this universe then nature isn't gonna wait till we predict it! And yea I have checked in many places that tiny changes cause large changes so it becomes chaos........ but still I just can't accept that it is impossible to solve...
Hello! I am generating electrons from a 3D gaussian source. The electrons all have the same energy, but the direction is isotropic. The electron source is in between 2 plates that act as a capacitor, and one of them acts as a time of flight (tof) detector. I know the voltage on the plates very well, and I want to extract the center of the gaussian distribution (in one direction only), by measuring the tof of many electrons. So the uncertainty on the position is given by the tof uncertainty...

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
838
Replies
19
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Back
Top