Writing 3rd Order Tensor Symmetric Part in Tensor Form

Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on defining the symmetric part of a third-order tensor in tensor form. A third-order tensor is represented as a "3 by 3 by 3" array, and various types of symmetry can be applied to its indices. The anti-symmetric part is given by a specific formula, and the user seeks a similar expression for the symmetric part, which would involve all positive signs. The symmetric part's properties should be straightforward to verify. The conversation emphasizes the need for clarity in defining symmetry for tensors of different orders.
mikeeey
Messages
57
Reaction score
0
Can some one write for me the Symmetric part of a third order tensor (as a tensor form)

Thanks .
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What do you mean by "symmetric" for a third order tensor? A second order tensor would be represented (in a given coordinate system) by a 3 by 3 matrix (or 4 by 4 if you are counting time) and it would be symmetric if and only if A_{ij}= A_{ji}. But a third order tensor would be represented by a "3 by 3 by 3" array, A_{ijk}. And then we can have several different kinds of "symmetry":
A_{ijk}= A_{jik}, or A_{ijk}= A_{ikj}, or A_{ijk}= A_{kji}. You could even have a kind of symmetry by "rotating" the indices: A_{ijk}= A_{kij}= A_{jki}.
 
Ok i will explain .
T_{[abc]} = \frac{1}{6} \big( T_{abc} -T_{acb} + T_{bca} -T_{bac} + T_{cab} -T_{cba} \big)
this is the anti-symmetric part of a third order tensor, i want to write me the symmetric part of a third order tensor
 
T_{[abc]} = \frac{1}{6} \big( T_{abc} -T_{acb} + T_{bca} -T_{bac} + T_{cab} -T_{cba} \big)
 
The symmetric part is like the antisymmetric part, but with all signs +. Its symmetry should be easy to verify.
 
Thanks you very much . Lperrich.
 
Thread 'How to define a vector field?'
Hello! In one book I saw that function ##V## of 3 variables ##V_x, V_y, V_z## (vector field in 3D) can be decomposed in a Taylor series without higher-order terms (partial derivative of second power and higher) at point ##(0,0,0)## such way: I think so: higher-order terms can be neglected because partial derivative of second power and higher are equal to 0. Is this true? And how to define vector field correctly for this case? (In the book I found nothing and my attempt was wrong...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K