Skip to main content

More Tensor Index Identity Proofs: EM II Notes 2014_08_18

Summary:  Having worked through the examples that looked the most difficult, today's notes contain examples that are pick-up work from the easy problems.  These are simple-ish tensor index identities, including the divergence of the position vector, the cross product of the position vector, the Laplacian of one over the displacement squared, and the curl of a gradient.

$\nabla \cdot \vec{r} = 3$
$= \dfrac{\partial}{\partial x_i} r_i$
Keep in mind that $r_1 = x$, $r_2 = y$, and $r_3 = z$.  Using the rules of partial differentiation, when the partial operates on the variable it is with respect to it will return 1, and when it operates on any other variable, it will return 0.  The results sum to 3.

$\vec{\nabla} \times \vec{r} = 0$
$=\epsilon_{ijk} \partial_j r_k$
$= 0$

For the $\epsilon{ijk}$ to evaluate to a non-zero result, $j$ and $k$ have to not be equal.  However, as discussed above, if $J \ne k$, then the partial derivative evaluates to zero.  Consequently, the entire expression evaluates to zero.


$\nabla^2 \dfrac{1}{r} = 0$
The trick here is to do the derivatives one at a time, keeping things in index notation and look for things to cancel out.  There's also one other identity we'll need $r^2 = x_i x_i$, where the $x_i$ are the Cartesian components of the coordinate system.

So,

$\nabla^2 \dfrac{1}{r} = \partial_i \left(- \dfrac{x_i}{r^3}\right) = -\dfrac{3}{r^3} + \dfrac{3x_i x_i}{r^5}$,

but, $x_i x_i = r^2$, so the r.h.s. above is 0.

For multipole work where you're taking partial derivatives in multiple dimensions, this comes in handy for expressions like:

$\delta_{ij}\partial_i \partial_j \partial_k \dfrac{1}{r}$,

because the terms can be rearranged to show that any such expression is 0.  For way more detail, check out the material near equation 6.26 in https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B30APQ2sxrAYcHl2R3pCSG1HQXM/edit?usp=sharing


$\vec{\nabla} \times \vec{\nabla}f = 0$

$= \epsilon_{ijk} \partial_j \partial_k f$

The trick here is to think about what terms will survive and what the Levi-Civita symbol will do to them negative sign-wise.  Only pairs of derivatives where $j \ne k$ will survive the Levi-Civita.  There will be two of each of these terms, but they will be of opposite signs and will cancel, for example,

$\epsilon_{i23}\partial_2 \partial_3 = -\epsilon_{i32}\partial_3 \partial_2$.

Hence, all terms will cancel and we have a zero result, and a handy identity moving forward:

$\epsilon_{ijk}\partial_j\partial_k = 0$


Picture of the Day
The Petra Adventure



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