Skip to main content

Levi-Civita Product to Kronecker Delta Difference of Products: EMII Notes 2014_08_08


Summary of what's gone on before.  In the previous set of notes from the 6th, (there were no notes on the 7th), it was pointed out that the 'convenient' comment on page 11 of the notes was to cryptic.  Today's entire half hour was spent figuring out the following derivation that sprang from the convenient comment.  We want to derive:

$\epsilon_{ijk}\epsilon_{lmk} = \delta_{il}\delta_{jm} - \delta_{im}\delta_{jl}$

Here's what to do.  First remember sum notation gives you

$\epsilon_{ijk}\epsilon_{lmk} = \epsilon_{ij1}\epsilon_{lm1} + \epsilon_{ij2}\epsilon_{lm2} +\epsilon_{ij3}\epsilon_{lm3}$

Here's the first use of the big trick for the day.  Because of the properties of the Levi-Civita symbol, $\epsilon_{ijk}$, on the indices 2 and 3 will make the first term non-zero, while only the pairs 1,3 and 1,2 will make the other two terms non-zero.  Once any of these combinations is chosen however, the other two terms will vanish.  Given that, let's get to work on the first term, ignoring the other two that evaluate to zero.

$\epsilon_{ij1}\epsilon_{lm1}$

For this expression, the only index choices that will evaluate as non-zero are shown in the table below:

Index Choices and Results

i
j
l
m
Result
2
3
3
2
-1
2
3
2
3
+1
3
2
2
3
-1
3
2
3
2
+1


At this point, we have to realize tht we have two indices that reutrn either one or negative one.  This should bring the Kronecker delta to mind.  Note that when $i=l$ and $j=m$ we get $+1$, while when $i=m$ and $j=l$ we get $-1$.   We can then right these combinations as

$\delta_{il}\delta_{jm}-\delta_{im}\delta_{jl}$

So,

$\epsilon_{ijk}\epsilon_{lmk} = \delta_{il}\delta_{jm} - \delta_{im}\delta_{jl}$

and we're done.

Handy reference that I found after doing the work:




The dudes:






Comments

Popular posts from this blog

More Cowbell! Record Production using Google Forms and Charts

First, the what : This article shows how to embed a new Google Form into any web page. To demonstrate ths, a chart and form that allow blog readers to control the recording levels of each instrument in Blue Oyster Cult's "(Don't Fear) The Reaper" is used. HTML code from the Google version of the form included on this page is shown and the parts that need to be modified are highlighted. Next, the why : Google recently released an e-mail form feature that allows users of Google Documents to create an e-mail a form that automatically places each user's input into an associated spreadsheet. As it turns out, with a little bit of work, the forms that are created by Google Docs can be embedded into any web page. Now, The Goods: Click on the instrument you want turned up, click the submit button and then refresh the page. Through the magic of Google Forms as soon as you click on submit and refresh this web page, the data chart will update immediately. Turn up the:

Cool Math Tricks: Deriving the Divergence, (Del or Nabla) into New (Cylindrical) Coordinate Systems

Now available as a Kindle ebook for 99 cents ! Get a spiffy ebook, and fund more physics The following is a pretty lengthy procedure, but converting the divergence, (nabla, del) operator between coordinate systems comes up pretty often. While there are tables for converting between common coordinate systems , there seem to be fewer explanations of the procedure for deriving the conversion, so here goes! What do we actually want? To convert the Cartesian nabla to the nabla for another coordinate system, say… cylindrical coordinates. What we’ll need: 1. The Cartesian Nabla: 2. A set of equations relating the Cartesian coordinates to cylindrical coordinates: 3. A set of equations relating the Cartesian basis vectors to the basis vectors of the new coordinate system: How to do it: Use the chain rule for differentiation to convert the derivatives with respect to the Cartesian variables to derivatives with respect to the cylindrical variables. The chain

The Valentine's Day Magnetic Monopole

There's an assymetry to the form of the two Maxwell's equations shown in picture 1.  While the divergence of the electric field is proportional to the electric charge density at a given point, the divergence of the magnetic field is equal to zero.  This is typically explained in the following way.  While we know that electrons, the fundamental electric charge carriers exist, evidence seems to indicate that magnetic monopoles, the particles that would carry magnetic 'charge', either don't exist, or, the energies required to create them are so high that they are exceedingly rare.  That doesn't stop us from looking for them though! Keeping with the theme of Fairbank[1] and his academic progeny over the semester break, today's post is about the discovery of a magnetic monopole candidate event by one of the Fairbank's graduate students, Blas Cabrera[2].  Cabrera was utilizing a loop type of magnetic monopole detector.  Its operation is in concept very sim