What is the Standard Definition of a Tensor Product of Two Vectors?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bashyboy
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Example
Bashyboy
Messages
1,419
Reaction score
5
I am have been searching for the of a tensor product of two vectors, but found seemingly conflicting definitions. For example, one source definition was, roughly, that the tensor product of two vectors was another column vector in a higher dimensional space, and another defined the tensor product of two vectors as resulting in a matrix.

So, which of the two is correct?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Maybe the issue is one of dualization, but the product of a k-tensor T and an n-tensor S is the (k+n)-tensor given by ##T\otimes S:= T(x_1,..,x_k) \otimes S(x_{k+1},..,x_{k+n})## EDIT: Here I assume vectors are treated as 0-tensors.
 
Last edited:
Bashyboy said:
I am have been searching for the of a tensor product of two vectors, but found seemingly conflicting definitions. For example, one source definition was, roughly, that the tensor product of two vectors was another column vector in a higher dimensional space, and another defined the tensor product of two vectors as resulting in a matrix.

So, which of the two is correct?

You will need to show those sources.
 
Bashyboy said:
I am have been searching for the of a tensor product of two vectors, but found seemingly conflicting definitions. For example, one source definition was, roughly, that the tensor product of two vectors was another column vector in a higher dimensional space,
I have never heard of this. What was the source? Perhaps you are confusing a tensor product with a direct product.

and another defined the tensor product of two vectors as resulting in a matrix.
I doubt you read this correctly. The tensor product of two vectors (i.e. two first order tensors) is a second order tensor tensor which in a given coordinate system can be represented by a matrix. You should be careful to distinguish between those two concepts. Physically, velocity is a vector. But a velocity vector with speed v can be represented by the array (v, 0, 0) in one coordinate system, (0, v, 0) in another, and generally (a, b, c) with a^2+ b^2+ c^2= v^2. A tensor can be represented as an array of numbers in a specific coordinate system.

So, which of the two is correct?
Strictly speaking, neither is correct! But the second is a little closer.
 
Maybe if you had a natural isomorphism ##V \rightarrow V^{*} ## (e.g., having an associated non-degenerate form ), you can see your vectors naturally/canonically as linear maps and then you get the standard definition ## v\otimes w \approx. (T\otimes S)(x,y):=T(x)S(y)##.
 
##\textbf{Exercise 10}:## I came across the following solution online: Questions: 1. When the author states in "that ring (not sure if he is referring to ##R## or ##R/\mathfrak{p}##, but I am guessing the later) ##x_n x_{n+1}=0## for all odd $n$ and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible, so that ##x_n=0##" 2. How does ##x_nx_{n+1}=0## implies that ##x_{n+1}## is invertible and ##x_n=0##. I mean if the quotient ring ##R/\mathfrak{p}## is an integral domain, and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible then...
The following are taken from the two sources, 1) from this online page and the book An Introduction to Module Theory by: Ibrahim Assem, Flavio U. Coelho. In the Abelian Categories chapter in the module theory text on page 157, right after presenting IV.2.21 Definition, the authors states "Image and coimage may or may not exist, but if they do, then they are unique up to isomorphism (because so are kernels and cokernels). Also in the reference url page above, the authors present two...
When decomposing a representation ##\rho## of a finite group ##G## into irreducible representations, we can find the number of times the representation contains a particular irrep ##\rho_0## through the character inner product $$ \langle \chi, \chi_0\rangle = \frac{1}{|G|} \sum_{g\in G} \chi(g) \chi_0(g)^*$$ where ##\chi## and ##\chi_0## are the characters of ##\rho## and ##\rho_0##, respectively. Since all group elements in the same conjugacy class have the same characters, this may be...

Similar threads

Back
Top