Indicial Notation: $\mathbf{v}\cdot\mathbf{v} = a^2b^2\sin^2\theta$

  • MHB
  • Thread starter Dustinsfl
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Notation
In summary, the conversation discusses using indicial notation to show that the dot product of a vector $\mathbf{v}$ with itself is equal to $a^2b^2\sin^2\theta$, where $\mathbf{v} = \mathbf{a}\times\mathbf{b}$ and $\mathbf{v}_i\hat{\mathbf{e}}_i = a_j \hat{\mathbf{e}}_j\times b_j\hat{\mathbf{e}}_k = \varepsilon_{ijk}a_jb_k\hat{\mathbf{e}}_i$. The conversation goes into the details of deriving this result using different methods,
  • #1
Dustinsfl
2,281
5
Using indicial notation, I am trying to show that $\mathbf{v}\cdot\mathbf{v} = a^2b^2\sin^2\theta$ where $ \mathbf{v} = \mathbf{a}\times\mathbf{b}$ and $\mathbf{v}_i\hat{\mathbf{e}}_i = a_j \hat{\mathbf{e}}_j\times b_j\hat{\mathbf{e}}_k = \varepsilon_{ijk}a_jb_k\hat{\mathbf{e}}_i$.

So
\begin{alignat}{3}
\mathbf{v}\cdot\mathbf{v} & = & \varepsilon_{ijk} a_jb_k\hat{\mathbf{e}}_i\cdot\varepsilon_{ijk}a_jb_k\hat{\mathbf{e}}_i\\
& = &
\end{alignat}
We have to have a kronecker delta since the only surviving terms are when the unit vectors that are dotted with themselves but that is all I have.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
dwsmith said:
Using indicial notation, I am trying to show that $\mathbf{v}\cdot\mathbf{v} = a^2b^2\sin^2\theta$ where $ \mathbf{v} = \mathbf{a}\times\mathbf{b}$ and $\mathbf{v}_i\hat{\mathbf{e}}_i = a_j \hat{\mathbf{e}}_j\times b_j\hat{\mathbf{e}}_k = \varepsilon_{ijk}a_jb_k\hat{\mathbf{e}}_i$.

So
\begin{alignat}{3}
\mathbf{v}\cdot\mathbf{v} & = & \varepsilon_{ijk} a_jb_k\hat{\mathbf{e}}_i\cdot\varepsilon_{ijk}a_jb_k\hat{\mathbf{e}}_i\\
& = &
\end{alignat}
We have to have a kronecker delta since the only surviving terms are when the unit vectors that are dotted with themselves but that is all I have.
Your expression for [tex]\overrightarrow{v} \cdot \overrightarrow{v}[/tex] isn't correct. Your cross products in the individual terms are different in general (since we can always rotate those.) But the i components have to match. So we get:
[tex]\overrightarrow{v} \cdot \overrightarrow{v} = \epsilon _{ijk} a_i b_j \overrightarrow{e_i} \cdot \epsilon _{imn} a_m b_n \overrightarrow{e_i}[/tex]

[tex]\overrightarrow{v} \cdot \overrightarrow{v} = \epsilon _{ijk} \epsilon _{imn} a_i b_j a_m b_n [/tex]

Now we have the relation:
[tex]\epsilon _{ijk} \epsilon _{imn} = \delta _{jm} \delta _{kn} - \delta _{jn}\delta _{km}[/tex]

So
[tex]\overrightarrow{v} \cdot \overrightarrow{v} = \left ( \delta _{jm} \delta _{kn} - \delta _{jn}\delta _{km} \right ) a_i b_j a_m b_n [/tex]
etc.

-Dan
 
  • #3
topsquark said:
Now we have the relation:
[tex]\epsilon _{ijk} \epsilon _{imn} = \delta _{jm} \delta _{kn} - \delta _{jn}\delta _{km}[/tex]

Where does this relation come from?
 
  • #4
dwsmith said:
Where does this relation come from?

That is a theorem you have to prove. But it is a fact, and quite helpful when using indices to prove vector identities.
 
  • #5
dwsmith said:
Where does this relation come from?
It's listed somewhere in my Mathematical Methods text and my Electrodynamics text as well. But frankly I was lazy and looked it up on Wikipedia. You can prove it by writing all the terms for all the indicies... If you've got about a year's worth of your time. :p Obviously there are better ways to prove it.

-Dan
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #6
Now I have
$$
a_2^2b_3^2+a_3^2b_2^2 - 2a_2b_3a_3b_2 + a_1^2b_3^2+a_3^2b_1^2 - 2a_1b_3a_3b_1 + a_1^2b_2^2+a_2^2b_1^2 - 2a_1b_2a_2b_1
$$
I can't seem to extract a $a^2b^2$ out of this though.
 
  • #7
dwsmith said:
Now I have
$$
a_2^2b_3^2+a_3^2b_2^2 - 2a_2b_3a_3b_2 + a_1^2b_3^2+a_3^2b_1^2 - 2a_1b_3a_3b_1 + a_1^2b_2^2+a_2^2b_1^2 - 2a_1b_2a_2b_1
$$
I can't seem to extract a $a^2b^2$ out of this though.
The expression [tex]\delta _{jm} \delta _{kn} a_i b_j a_m b_n = a_i b_j a_j b_k [/tex] for example. When the deltas are multiplied you get only one term. You use both on form a_ b_ a_ b_ . I used the first delta on the last a term and the second delta on the last b. So your expansion will only have two terms.

By the way there are other ways to arranged this product but they all come out to be the same in the end when you rearrange the ab products. For example [tex]b_j a_j = a \cdot b[/tex].

-Dan
 
  • #8
topsquark said:
The expression [tex]\delta _{jm} \delta _{kn} a_i b_j a_m b_n = a_i b_j a_j b_k [/tex] for example. When the deltas are multiplied you get only one term. You use both on form a_ b_ a_ b_ . I used the first delta on the last a term and the second delta on the last b. So your expansion will only have two terms.

By the way there are other ways to arranged this product but they all come out to be the same in the end when you rearrange the ab products. For example [tex]b_j a_j = a \cdot b[/tex].

-Dan

The symmetric group of 1,2,3 is
$$
(123),(132),(213),(231),(312),(321)
$$
So ijk and imn run through these. My first option is ijk = 123 then I have imn = 123 or 132. By doing this, I get all these terms. I don't see how there is fewer.
 
  • #9
dwsmith said:
Using indicial notation, I am trying to show that $\mathbf{v}\cdot\mathbf{v} = a^2b^2\sin^2\theta$ where $ \mathbf{v} = \mathbf{a}\times\mathbf{b}$ and $\mathbf{v}_i\hat{\mathbf{e}}_i = a_j \hat{\mathbf{e}}_j\times b_j\hat{\mathbf{e}}_k = \varepsilon_{ijk}a_jb_k\hat{\mathbf{e}}_i$.

So
\begin{alignat}{3}
\mathbf{v}\cdot\mathbf{v} & = & \varepsilon_{ijk} a_jb_k\hat{\mathbf{e}}_i\cdot\varepsilon_{ijk}a_jb_k\hat{\mathbf{e}}_i\\
& = &
\end{alignat}
We have to have a kronecker delta since the only surviving terms are when the unit vectors that are dotted with themselves but that is all I have.
I see now. What we did with all that came before wasn't wrong, just inefficient. That sine function was killing me. However I finally found what was holding me up: [tex]\theta[/tex] is obviously the angle between the vectors a and b. And that lead me to another approach.

[tex]\overrightarrow{v} \cdot \overrightarrow{v} = (\overrightarrow{a} \times \overrightarrow{b}) \cdot (\overrightarrow{a} \times \overrightarrow{b}) [/tex]

As it happens we can evaluate cross products by the following relation:
[tex](\overrightarrow{a} \times \overrightarrow{b}) \cdot (\overrightarrow{c} \times \overrightarrow{d}) [/tex]

Applying the same trick with the Levi-Civita and Kronicker deltas we can easily derive:
[tex](\overrightarrow{a} \times \overrightarrow{b}) \cdot (\overrightarrow{c} \times \overrightarrow{d}) = ( \overrightarrow{a} \cdot \overrightarrow{c}) ( \overrightarrow{b} \cdot \overrightarrow{d}) - ( \overrightarrow{a} \cdot \overrightarrow{d}) ( \overrightarrow{b} \cdot \overrightarrow{c})
[/tex]

Our problem is a special case of this where [tex]\overrightarrow{c} = \overrightarrow{a}[/tex] and [tex]\overrightarrow{d} = \overrightarrow{b}[/tex]

Recalling [tex](\overrightarrow{a} \times \overrightarrow{b}) \cdot (\overrightarrow{a} \times \overrightarrow{b}) = ( \overrightarrow{a} \cdot \overrightarrow{a}) ( \overrightarrow{b} \cdot \overrightarrow{b}) - ( \overrightarrow{a} \cdot \overrightarrow{b}) ( \overrightarrow{b} \cdot \overrightarrow{a})[/tex]

and recalling the dot product between vectors a and b:

[tex] = a^2 b^2 - (ab~cos(\theta)) (ab~cos(\theta)) = (ab)^2(1 - cos^2(\theta))[/tex]

[tex]= a^2 b^2~sin^2(\theta)[/tex]

I've never seen this problem (I think.) What do a and b represent or is this purely a Mathematical exercise?

-Dan
 
  • #10
It was mathematical but there may be meaning to it. I just don't know yet. It is in the book Continuum Mechanics for Engineers 3rd ed by Mase
 
  • #11
I had refrained from posting here since it clearly said indicial notation, but after your approach topsquark I would like to mention that another attempt at a solution is to remember that $\vec{v} \cdot \vec{v} = |\vec{v}|^2$, but if $\vec{v} = \vec{a} \times \vec{b}$ then $|\vec{v}| = | \vec{a} \times \vec{b} | = ab \sin \theta$, where $\theta$ measures the smallest angle between vectors $\vec{a}$ and $\vec{b}$. Thus, $\vec{v} \cdot \vec{v} = a^2 b^2 \sin^2 \theta$.

Cheers! (Yes)

Fantini
 

FAQ: Indicial Notation: $\mathbf{v}\cdot\mathbf{v} = a^2b^2\sin^2\theta$

What is Indicial Notation?

Indicial notation is a mathematical notation used to represent vectors and tensors in physics and engineering. It uses superscript and subscript indices to indicate the components of a vector or tensor.

What does the equation $\mathbf{v}\cdot\mathbf{v} = a^2b^2\sin^2\theta$ represent?

This equation represents the dot product of two vectors, $\mathbf{v}$ and $\mathbf{v}$, which results in a scalar value. The dot product is calculated by multiplying the magnitudes of the two vectors and the cosine of the angle between them.

What is the significance of $a^2b^2\sin^2\theta$ in the equation?

The term $a^2b^2\sin^2\theta$ represents the square of the magnitude of vector $\mathbf{v}$, which is equal to the dot product of the vector with itself. It also includes the square of the sine of the angle between the vector and the x-axis.

How is Indicial Notation used in physics and engineering?

Indicial notation is used to simplify and generalize mathematical expressions in physics and engineering. It allows for concise representation of vector and tensor equations, making calculations and derivations more efficient.

Can Indicial Notation be used with higher dimensional vectors and tensors?

Yes, Indicial Notation can be used with vectors and tensors of any number of dimensions. It allows for easy representation and manipulation of higher dimensional objects, making it a useful tool in advanced physics and engineering applications.

Similar threads

Back
Top