MHB Product of Symmetric and Antisymmetric Matrix

Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on proving that the trace of the product of a symmetric matrix A and an antisymmetric matrix B is zero. The user demonstrates the calculation of the trace using index notation, showing that the trace can be expressed as a double summation. They note that since B is antisymmetric, its diagonal entries must be zero, which leads to the conclusion that the trace of the product is zero. The user also seeks clarification on using index notation and double summation signs effectively. The final conclusion is that the trace of the product of a symmetric and antisymmetric matrix is indeed zero.
ognik
Messages
626
Reaction score
2
Hi, I want to show that the Trace of the Product of a symetric Matrix (say A) and an antisymetric (B) Matrix is zero.
$So\: (AB)_{ij}=\sum_{k}^{}{a}_{ik}{b}_{kj} $
$and\: Tr(AB)=\sum_{i=j}^{}(AB)_{ij}=\sum_{i}^{}\sum_{k}^{}{a}_{ik}{b}_{ki} $
$because\:A\:is\:symetric, \: {a}_{ik}= {a}_{ki}\:so\:Tr(AB)=\sum_{i}^{}\sum_{k}^{}{a}_{ki}{b}_{ki}$
Here I am stuck - I want to say that because B is antisymetric, it's diagonal entries must be 0, but I am a bit weak with index notation, and especially with double summation signs - can't see how to show $b_{ki}$ is a diagonal element inside this summation ... I think :-)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It is not necessary to use indices. Use the facts that $\operatorname{tr}A=\operatorname{tr}A^T$ and $\operatorname{tr}(AB)=\operatorname{tr}(BA)$.
 
Thanks Evgeny, I used Tr(ABT) = Tr(ATB)
Tr(ATB)=Tr(AB) and Tr(ABT)=Tr(A(-B))=-Tr(AB)
So Tr(AB)=-Tr(AB), therefore Tr(AB)=0
But if it can be done along the lines I tried with indexes, I'd really like to see that - I am looking for opportunities to practice Indexing :-)
Also I am still unsure what to do when I come across things like $\sum_{}^{}\sum_{}^{}$
 
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 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
5K
Replies
3
Views
855
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
12K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K