Why does the Kronecker delta interchange with itself when j equals l?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter quietrain
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Delta
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the properties of the Kronecker delta, specifically its interchangeability when indices are equal. Participants clarify that when \( j = l \), the expression \( \delta_{jm} \delta_{kl} \) simplifies to \( \delta_{km} \) due to the nature of the delta function, which is only non-zero when its indices are equal. The Einstein summation convention is also discussed, emphasizing that repeated indices indicate summation, leading to expressions like \( dk1d1m + dk2d2m + dk3d3m \). Misunderstandings regarding dummy variables and free indices are addressed, highlighting the importance of precise mathematical notation.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Kronecker delta notation and properties
  • Familiarity with Einstein summation convention
  • Basic knowledge of linear algebra and matrix representation
  • Experience with mathematical notation and index manipulation
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of the Kronecker delta in linear algebra
  • Learn about the Levi-Civita symbol and its relation to the Kronecker delta
  • Explore advanced topics in tensor calculus and index notation
  • Practice problems involving the Einstein summation convention
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, physicists, and students studying linear algebra or tensor calculus who seek to deepen their understanding of index notation and the properties of the Kronecker delta.

  • #31
quietrain said:
yes that's all the question wants. use quotient law to show that matrix is a 2nd order tensor.
I don't see how the quotient law can have anything to do with this.

quietrain said:
so how do i proceed? is diagonalizing it the right way?
I have no idea. What I do know is that it's pointless to do that unless you have a way to proceed once you have found the diagonal matrix.

quietrain said:
i think my prof also said that by the quotient law, if the matrix

(A) (scalar) = invariant, it shows that A is tensor. or something along the lines of these.
If A times a scalar is an invariant, then A is obviously invariant too. So I'm pretty sure that's not what your professor told you.

When you have a statement that you think might be useful, that may or may not be what you have been told by a professor or seen in a book, you should at least think about what it would mean if the statement is true. If you had done this here, it would have saved us both some time.

quietrain said:
anyway, i still don't really have any idea how to solve this quesiton
I don't either, and to be honest, I still doubt that you have stated the problem correctly.

Do you have any solved examples from your book or your lecture notes that you can show me? This could at least give us some idea about how the quotient law is relevant.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
hmm its ok then , that's all the question says .

thanks for everything though, i finally understood what those indexes meant
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
11K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K