Why Does the Second Equality Hold in Multi-Linear Algebra?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on proving the equality involving the dual basis {(a_i)_j} and the basis {(e_i)_j} in multi-linear algebra, specifically exercise 4.1(a) from Spivak. The user demonstrates that the expression involving the wedge product and the alternating function Alt leads to the conclusion that the tensor product of k-parts acting on k-arguments equals the product of each part acting on its corresponding argument. The key assertion is that this equality holds true if the indices agree, yielding a result of 1, and 0 otherwise. The user seeks clarification on the implications of this equality for tensor products in general.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of dual bases in linear algebra
  • Familiarity with tensor products and their properties
  • Knowledge of alternating forms and their significance in multi-linear algebra
  • Experience with permutations and their role in linear transformations
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of dual bases in linear algebra
  • Explore the concept of tensor products in detail, focusing on their applications
  • Investigate the role of alternating forms in multi-linear algebra
  • Learn about the significance of permutations in linear transformations and their effects on tensor products
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students of linear algebra, and anyone studying multi-linear algebra concepts, particularly those interested in tensor products and dual bases.

brydustin
Messages
201
Reaction score
0
{(a_i)_j} is the dual basis to the basis {(e_i)_j}
I want to show that
((a_i)_1) \wedge (a_i)_2 \wedge... \wedge (a_i)_n ((e_i)_1,(e_i)_2,...,(e_i)_n) = 1

this is exercise 4.1(a) from Spivak. So my approach was:

\BigWedge_ L=1^k (a_i)_L ((e_i)_1,...,(e_i)_n) = k! Alt(\BigCross_L=1^k (a_i)_L)((e_i)_1,...,(e_i)_n)= k! Alt(T)((e_i)_1,...,(e_i)_n) = k!(1/k! Sum _ {permutations σ} sgn σ T ((e_i)_σ (1),...,(e_i)_σ (n))

where T = \BigCross_L=1^k (a_i)_L

So there is already a result on what T ((e_i)_1,...,(e_i)_n) is. 1 if all the sub-indices agree, and 0 otherwise. My question is... is T ((e_i)_σ (1),...,(e_i)_σ (n)) any different?

I'm assuming that in the one dimensional case we would say that T acts on one element in a linear fashion... but I'm kinda confused by the idea of having several arguments...

Otherwise,...is there an easier approach to the solution?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Okay... I have since figured out the solution ... the real question then becomes why is the second equals sign true (below):

×_L=1^k (a_i)_L ((e_i)_σ(1),... (e_i)_σ(k)) = ∏_L=1^k ((a_i)_L)(e_i)_σ(L) = 1 if and only if is identity and 0 otherwise.

where × denotes multiple(indexed) tensor products. And if this second equals sign is true then can I have this view for all tensor products? Namely, is a tensor product of k-parts operating on k-arguments equal to the product of each "part" acting on its corresponding argument (with the same index)?
Can I always hold that view of a tensor? Are there tensors where this is more obvious and others ... not so much?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 39 ·
2
Replies
39
Views
13K