Introduction To The Variational Formulation in Mechanics Edgardo O Taroco Full Chapter

Introduction to the Variational
Formulation in Mechanics Edgardo O.

Taroco
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmass.com/product/introduction-to-the-variational-formulation-in-mechani
cs-edgardo-o-taroco/
Introduction to the Variational Formulation in Mechanics
Introduction to the Variational Formulation
in Mechanics
Fundamentals and Applications
Edgardo O. Taroco, Pablo J. Blanco and Raúl A. Feijóo

HeMoLab - Hemodynamics Modeling
Laboratory
LNCC/MCTIC - National Laboratory for
Scientific Computing, Brazil
INCT-MACC - National Institute of Science
and Technology in Medicine Assisted by
Scientific Computing, Brazil
This edition first published 2020
© 2020 John Wiley & Sons Ltd
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or
transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise,
except as permitted by law. Advice on how to obtain permission to reuse material from this title is available
at http://www.wiley.com/go/permissions.
The right of Edgardo O. Taroco, Pablo J. Blanco and Raúl A. Feijóo to be identified as the authors of this work
has been asserted in accordance with law.
Registered Offices
John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030, USA
John Wiley & Sons Ltd, The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 8SQ, UK
Editorial Office
John Wiley & Sons Ltd, The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 8SQ, UK
For details of our global editorial offices, customer services, and more information about Wiley products
visit us at www.wiley.com.
Wiley also publishes its books in a variety of electronic formats and by print-on-demand. Some content that
appears in standard print versions of this book may not be available in other formats.
Limit of Liability/Disclaimer of Warranty

While the publisher and authors have used their best efforts in preparing this work, they make no
representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents of this work and
specifically disclaim all warranties, including without limitation any implied warranties of merchantability or
fitness for a particular purpose. No warranty may be created or extended by sales representatives, written
sales materials or promotional statements for this work. The fact that an organization, website, or product is
referred to in this work as a citation and/or potential source of further information does not mean that the
publisher and authors endorse the information or services the organization, website, or product may provide
or recommendations it may make. This work is sold with the understanding that the publisher is not engaged
in rendering professional services. The advice and strategies contained herein may not be suitable for your
situation. You should consult with a specialist where appropriate. Further, readers should be aware that
websites listed in this work may have changed or disappeared between when this work was written and when
it is read. Neither the publisher nor authors shall be liable for any loss of profit or any other commercial
damages, including but not limited to special, incidental, consequential, or other damages.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication data applied for

HB ISBN: 9781119600909
Cover Design by Wiley

Cover Images: © Sandipkumar Patel/Getty Images, © Pablo Javier Blanco
Set in 10/12pt Warnock by SPi Global, Pondicherry, India
Printed and bound by CPI Group (UK) Ltd, Croydon, CR0 4YY
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
To our families
vii
Contents
Preface xv
Part I Vector and Tensor Algebra and Analysis 1
1 Vector and Tensor Algebra 3

1.1 Points and Vectors 3
1.2 Second-Order Tensors 6
1.3 Third-Order Tensors 17
1.4 Complementary Reading 22
2 Vector and Tensor Analysis 23

2.1 Differentiation 23
2.2 Gradient 28
2.3 Divergence 30
2.4 Curl 32
2.5 Laplacian 34
2.6 Integration 35
2.7 Coordinates 38
Part II Variational Formulations in Mechanics 47
3 Method of Virtual Power 49

3.1 Introduction 49
3.2 Kinematics 50
3.2.1 Body and Deformations 50
3.2.2 Motion: Deformation Rate 55
3.2.3 Motion Actions: Kinematical Constraints 61
3.3 Duality and Virtual Power 66
3.3.1 Motion Actions and Forces 67
3.3.2 Deformation Actions and Internal Stresses 69
3.3.3 Mechanical Models and the Equilibrium Operator 71
viii Contents
3.4 Bodies without Constraints 74

3.4.1 Principle of Virtual Power 75
3.4.2 Principle of Complementary Virtual Power 80
3.5 Bodies with Bilateral Constraints 81
3.6 Bodies with Unilateral Constraints 87
3.7 Lagrangian Description of the Principle of Virtual Power 94
3.8 Configurations with Preload and Residual Stresses 97
3.9 Linearization of the Principle of Virtual Power 100
3.9.1 Preliminary Results 101
3.9.2 Known Spatial Configuration 102
3.9.3 Known Material Configuration 102
3.10 Infinitesimal Deformations and Small Displacements 103
3.10.1 Bilateral Constraints 104
3.10.2 Unilateral Constraints 105
3.11 Final Remarks 106
4 Hyperelastic Materials at Infinitesimal Strains 109

4.1 Introduction 109
4.2 Uniaxial Hyperelastic Behavior 109
4.3 Three-Dimensional Hyperelastic Constitutive Laws 113
4.4 Equilibrium in Bodies without Constraints 116
4.4.1 Principle of Virtual Work 117
4.4.2 Principle of Minimum Total Potential Energy 117
4.4.3 Local Equations and Boundary Conditions 118
4.4.4 Principle of Complementary Virtual Work 120
4.4.5 Principle of Minimum Complementary Energy 121
4.4.6 Additional Remarks 122
4.5 Equilibrium in Bodies with Bilateral Constraints 123
4.6 Equilibrium in Bodies with Unilateral Constraints 128
4.7 Min–Max Principle 131
4.7.1 Hellinger–Reissner Functional 131
4.7.2 Hellinger–Reissner Principle 133
4.8 Three-Field Functional 134
Contents ix
4.9 Castigliano Theorems 136

4.9.1 First and Second Theorems 136
4.9.2 Bounds for Displacements and Generalized Loads 139
4.10 Elastodynamics Problem 144
4.11 Approximate Solution to Variational Problems 148
4.11.1 Elastostatics Problem 148
4.11.2 Hellinger–Reissner Principle 154
4.11.3 Generalized Variational Principle 156
4.11.4 Contact Problems in Elastostatics 158
5 Materials Exhibiting Creep 165

5.2 Phenomenological Aspects of Creep in Metals 165
5.3 Influence of Temperature 168
5.4 Recovery, Relaxation, Cyclic Loading, and Fatigue 170
5.5 Uniaxial Constitutive Equations 173
5.6 Three-Dimensional Constitutive Equations 182
5.7 Generalization of the Constitutive Law 188
5.8 Constitutive Equations for Structural Components 191
5.8.1 Bending of Beams 192
5.8.2 Bending, Extension, and Compression of Beams 195
5.9 Equilibrium Problem for Steady-State Creep 199
5.9.1 Mechanical Equilibrium 199
5.9.2 Variational Formulation 201
5.9.3 Variational Principles of Minimum 205
5.10 Castigliano Theorems 209
5.10.1 First and Second Theorems 209
5.10.2 Bounds for Velocities and Generalized Loads 211
5.11 Examples of Application 214
5.11.1 Disk Rotating with Constant Angular Velocity 214
5.11.2 Cantilevered Beam with Uniform Load 217
5.12 Approximate Solution to Steady-State Creep Problems 219
5.13 Unsteady Creep Problem 225
5.14 Approximate Solutions to Unsteady Creep Formulations 227
6 Materials Exhibiting Plasticity 229

6.2 Elasto-Plastic Materials 229
6.3 Uniaxial Elasto-Plastic Model 235
6.3.1 Elastic Relation 235
6.3.2 Yield Criterion 236
6.3.3 Hardening Law 238
6.3.4 Plastic Flow Rule 240
6.4 Three-Dimensional Elasto-Plastic Model 243
6.4.1 Elastic Relation 244
x Contents
6.4.2 Yield Criterion and Hardening Law 246

6.4.3 Potential Plastic Flow 249
6.5 Drucker and Hill Postulates 253
6.6 Convexity, Normality, and Plastic Potential 255
6.6.1 Normality Law and a Rationale for the Potential Law 255
6.6.2 Convexity of the Admissible Region 257
6.7 Plastic Flow Rule 258
6.8 Internal Dissipation 260
6.9 Common Yield Functions 262
6.9.1 The von Mises Criterion 263
6.9.2 The Tresca Criterion 264
6.10 Common Hardening Laws 266
6.11 Incremental Variational Principles 267
6.11.1 Principle of Minimum for the Velocity 268
6.11.2 Principle of Minimum for the Stress Rate 269
6.11.3 Uniqueness of the Stress Field 270
6.11.4 Variational Inequality for the Stress 270
6.11.5 Principle of Minimum with Two Fields 271
6.12 Incremental Constitutive Equations 272
6.12.1 Constitutive Equations for Rates 273
6.12.2 Constitutive Equations for Increments 275
6.12.3 Variational Principle in Finite Increments 278
Part III Modeling of Structural Components 281
7 Bending of Beams 285

7.2 Kinematics 285
7.3 Generalized Forces 289
7.4 Mechanical Equilibrium 290
7.5 Timoshenko Beam Model 294
8 Torsion of Bars 301

8.2 Kinematics 301
8.3 Generalized Forces 304
8.4 Mechanical Equilibrium 305
8.5 Dual Formulation 309
9 Plates and Shells 315

9.2 Geometric Description 316
9.3 Differentiation and Integration 320
Contents xi
9.4 Principle of Virtual Power 323

9.5 Unified Framework for Shell Models 326
9.6 Classical Shell Models 332
9.6.1 Naghdi Model 332
9.6.2 Kirchhoff–Love Model 335
9.6.3 Love Model 340
9.6.4 Koiter Model 342
9.6.5 Sanders Model 344
9.6.6 Donnell–Mushtari–Vlasov Model 346
9.7 Constitutive Equations and Internal Constraints 347
9.7.1 Preliminary Concepts 348
9.7.2 Model with Naghdi Hypothesis 350
9.7.3 Model with Kirchhoff–Love Hypothesis 357
9.8 Characteristics of Shell Models 360
9.8.1 Relation Between Generalized Stresses 360
9.8.2 Equilibrium Around the Normal 361
9.8.2.1 Kirchhoff–Love Model 361
9.8.2.2 Love Model 362
9.8.2.3 Koiter Model 363
9.8.2.4 Sanders Model 363
9.8.3 Reactive Generalized Stresses 364
9.8.3.1 Reactions in the Naghdi Model 364
9.8.3.2 Reactions in the Kirchhoff–Love Model 366
9.9 Basics Notions of Surfaces 369
9.9.1 Preliminaries 369
9.9.2 First Fundamental Form 370
9.9.3 Second Fundamental Form 372
9.9.4 Third Fundamental Form 375
9.9.5 Complementary Properties 375
Part IV Other Problems in Physics 377
10 Heat Transfer 379

10.2 Kinematics 379
10.3 Principle of Thermal Virtual Power 381
10.4 Principle of Complementary Thermal Virtual Power 386
10.5 Constitutive Equations 388
10.6 Principle of Minimum Total Thermal Energy 390
10.7 Poisson and Laplace Equations 390
11 Incompressible Fluid Flow 393

11.2 Kinematics 394
xii Contents
11.4 Navier–Stokes Equations 403

11.5 Stokes Flow 405
11.6 Irrotational Flow 407
12 High-Order Continua 411

12.2 Kinematics 412
12.4 Dynamics 425
12.5 Micropolar Media 427
12.6 Second Gradient Theory 429
Part V Multiscale Modeling 435
13 Method of Multiscale Virtual Power 439

13.2 Method of Virtual Power 439
13.2.1 Kinematics 439
13.2.2 Duality 442
13.2.4 Equilibrium Problem 446
13.3 Fundamentals of the Multiscale Theory 447
13.4 Kinematical Admissibility between Scales 449
13.4.1 Macroscale Kinematics 449
13.4.2 Microscale Kinematics 451
13.4.3 Insertion Operators 453
13.4.4 Homogenization Operators 456
13.4.5 Kinematical Admissibility 458
13.5 Duality in Multiscale Modeling 462
13.5.1 Macroscale Virtual Power 462
13.5.2 Microscale Virtual Power 464
13.6 Principle of Multiscale Virtual Power 467
13.7 Dual Operators 468
13.7.1 Microscale Equilibrium 468
13.7.2 Homogenization of Generalized Stresses 470
13.7.3 Homogenization of Generalized Forces 472
14 Applications of Multiscale Modeling 475

14.2 Solid Mechanics with External Forces 475
14.2.1 Multiscale Kinematics 476
14.2.2 Characterization of Virtual Power 479
14.2.3 Principle of Multiscale Virtual Power 480
14.2.4 Equilibrium Problem and Homogenization 482
Contents xiii
14.2.5 Tangent Operators 487

14.3 Mechanics of Incompressible Solid Media 490
14.3.2 Multiscale Kinematics 493
14.3.3 Principle of Multiscale Virtual Power 495
14.3.4 Incompressibility and Material Configuration 497
Part VI Appendices 501
A Definitions and Notations 503

A.1 Introduction 503
A.2 Sets 503
A.3 Functions and Transformations 504
A.4 Groups 507
A.5 Morphisms 509
A.6 Vector Spaces 509
A.7 Sets and Dependence in Vector Spaces 512
A.8 Bases and Dimension 513
A.9 Components 514
A.10 Sum of Sets and Subspaces 516
A.11 Linear Manifolds 516
A.12 Convex Sets and Cones 516
A.13 Direct Sum of Subspaces 517
A.14 Linear Transformations 517
A.15 Canonical Isomorphism 522
A.16 Algebraic Dual Space 523
A.16.1 Orthogonal Complement 524
A.16.2 Positive and Negative Conjugate Cones 525
A.17 Algebra in V 526
A.18 Adjoint Operators 528
A.19 Transposition and Bilinear Functions 529
A.20 Inner Product Spaces 532
B Elements of Real and Functional Analysis 539

B.1 Introduction 539
B.2 Sequences 541
B.3 Limit and Continuity of Functions 542
B.4 Metric Spaces 544
B.5 Normed Spaces 546
B.6 Quotient Space 549
B.7 Linear Transformations in Normed Spaces 550
B.8 Topological Dual Space 552
B.9 Weak and Strong Convergence 553
xiv Contents
C Functionals and the Gâteaux Derivative 555

C.1 Introduction 555
C.2 Properties of Operator 𝒦 555
C.3 Convexity and Semi-Continuity 556
C.4 Gâteaux Differential 557
C.5 Minimization of Convex Functionals 557
References 559
Index 575
xv
Preface
This book was written intermittently over the period between 1980 and 2016 with an
aim to provide students attending the courses organized by the authors, particularly
for the graduate students at the National Laboratory for Scientific Computing (LNCC),
with the foundational material of Mechanics using a variational tapestry. It is the result
of the knowledge acquired and divulged by E.O.T and R.A.F. since the LNCC was estab-
lished, which was initiated with the creation of the Laboratory of Computing (LAC) of
the Brazilian Center for Research in Physics (CBPF) in 1977, through the foundation of
the Laboratory for Scientific Computing (LCC) in 1980, its conversion into the category
of a national laboratory (LNCC) in 1982 and the definitive move to the city of Petrópolis
in 1998.
Part of the material presented here was used in various courses of theoretical and
applied mechanics organized by E.O.T. and R.A.F. These course were
• 1st Course on Theoretical and Applied Mechanics: Theory of Shells and their Appli-
cations in Engineering (Module I – Basic Principles, July 5 to 30, 1982; Module II –
Mechanical Models, January 3 to February 11, 1983; and Module III – Instability of
Shells, July 4 to 30, 1983).
• 2nd Course on Theoretical and Applied Mechanics: Fundamentals of the Finite Ele-
ment Method and its Applications in Engineering (Module I – Fundamentals of the
Finite Element Method, July 2 to 27, 1984; Module II – Applications of the Finite
Element Method in Solid Mechanics, January 7 to February 1, 1985, Module III –
Modern Aspects of the Finite Element Method, July 1 to 26, 1985).
• 3rd Course on Theoretical and Applied Mechanics: Optimization: Fundamentals and
Applications in Engineering (Module I – Optimization in the Modeling and Analy-
sis of Engineering Problems, July 7 to August 1, 1986; Module II – Optimal Design:
Foundations and Applications, July 6 to 31, 1987).
Unfortunately, and largely due to the long period of time that this document took to
be finished, one of the authors, Prof. Edgardo O. Taroco, left us (passed away in January
2010). Nevertheless, we decided to keep his name among the authors as an acknowledge-
ment to his deep contributions and in honor to his memory, as well as to the friendship
and generosity that he always offered us throughout all these years. Therefore, all errors
(of any kind) are the sole responsibility of P.J.B. and R.A.F.
Part of this material was used by R.A.F. in the course dictated during the Post-Doctoral
Latin American Seminar on Continuum Mechanics and Microstructure, organized by
the National Atomic Energy Commission in Argentina, sponsored by the Organization
xvi Preface
of American States (OAS), and held in Buenos Aires, July-August 1984. It was only after
1998 that the LNCC was moved to Petrópolis, and the LNCC Graduate Program was
initiated. Then, we decided to consolidate the aforementioned texts into a monograph
that would give emphasis to the formulation of the mechanics within a purely variational
structure. More recently, since P.J.B. joined the LNCC in 2009, the idea of finishing this
document, also including topics in other areas of physics as well as the extension of the
variational framework to a multi-scale paradigm, resurfaced. Currently, this material is
being used in several courses in the graduate program in Computational Modeling at
LNCC, Brazil, and also in the graduate program in Mechanical Engineering at National
University of Mar del Plata, Argentina.
Such variational framework used to present the mechanics was chosen not only
for being one of our main areas of research, but also, and fundamentally, because we
strongly believe that this way of looking into the roots of mechanics is the most suitable
and convenient perspective to approach the mathematical modeling. In fact, and as it
will become increasingly clear as we proceed, the foundational pillars upon which the
whole modeling journey rests using this variational tapestry are the following
• The first pillar is related to the description of the kinematics, that is the formalization
of the kinematical hypotheses which provides the definition of the generalized motion
actions and admissible generalized strain rate actions for the model under study.
• The second pillar consists of the mathematical duality postulated between quanti-
ties related to such motion actions and generalized strain rates with, respectively,
the external generalized forces and internal generalized stresses. In this way, forces
and stresses are constructs fully shaped by linear continuous functionals whose argu-
ments are kinematical entities. This aspect establishes a clear difference between the
approach developed in this book and the procedure followed by most of the literature
in the field of continuum mechanics, where forces and stresses are malleable entities
introduced a priori, regardless of the kinematics defined for the physical system.
• The third pillar is the Principle of Virtual Power (or its generalization, the Principle
of Multi-scale Virtual Power in the context of modeling problems with more than
one scale). This principle allows to establish, for the physical system under study, the
concept of mechanical equilibrium between external forces and internal stresses and,
when proper constitutive relations are given, this principle characterizes the general-
ized displacement field for which the associated generalized stress state equilibrates
the external forces.
These three pillars support the realm of so-called Method of Virtual Power (MVP),
which establishes well-defined basic steps targeting a fully consistent modelling tech-
nique. Such variational structure was proposed, although with subtle modifications,
by Prof. Paul Germain [114–118]. Particularly, Prof. Germain (lifetime member of the
French Academy of Science) was invited by us in 1982 to teach the course Four Lectures
on the Foundation of Shell Theory within Module I of the 1st Course on Theoretical and
Applied Mechanics that we organized, precisely, to disseminate these concepts among
students and professors from different Latin American countries. Another professor
who greatly contributed to consolidate this approach in these courses was Prof. Giovanni
Romano (Facoltà di Ingegneria dell’Università degli Studi di Napoli, Italy).
The organization of this book closely follows this spirit. In Part I we present the basic
concepts of vector and tensor algebra and analysis, where the reader is introduced to
Preface xvii
the ubiquitous use of compact vector and tensor notation. This compact notation allows
to go through the basic principles and concepts of the mechanics in a clear and concise
way, without being obscured by the presence of indices, components and metric-related
entities, which should be relegated to their specific role at the time of the calculation.
Part II is dedicated to presenting the Method of Virtual Power (MVP), from the kine-
matics, through the duality and to the Principle of Virtual Power. This Part presents the
variational groundwork which is used as a guiding theme in all that follows. The MVP is
then applied to the most general case in the mechanics of deformable bodies, while its
application to the case of hyperelastic materials, and materials which may experience
creep and plasticity phenomena is also discussed. In Part III we present the applica-
tion of the MVP to the modelling of structural components such as beams, plates and
shells. For these components, it will be clear how forces and stresses emerge as natu-
ral outgrowth of the kinematical hypotheses. In Part IV, the application of the MVP to
other problems from physics is addressed, including heat conduction, incompressible
fluid flow, and high order continua. This will help the reader to illustrate the use of this
unified theoretical framework in problems in which a purely variational approach is sel-
dom encountered in the textbooks. Finally, in Part V, we expand this variational realm
to embrace problems which require a multi-scale paradigm. This extended variational
structure has been called the Method of Multi-scale Virtual Power (MMVP). Pursuing
the same standard, the MMVP allows to provide a convenient and safe tool to substan-
tiate multi-scale models of complex physical systems, allowing to consistently provide
the groundwork on top of which multi-scale homogenization should take place. Finally,
in the Appendices, we present various mathematical concepts and results to make the
document self-contained.
Last but not least, we would like to thank all those who somehow contributed to our
excursion towards this book. In particular we thank Gonzalo R. Feijóo for his contribu-
tion in the first drafting of some chapters of this book, and to Professors Enzo A. Dari
(Bariloche Atomic Centre, Argentina), Sebastián Giusti (National Technological Univer-
sity, Faculty of Córdoba, Argentina), Santiago A. Urquiza (National University of Mar del
Plata, Argentina), Pablo J. Sánchez (National Technological University, Regional Faculty
of Santa Fe, Argentina), Alejandro Clausse (National University of Central Buenos Aires,
Argentina) and Eduardo A. de Souza Neto (Zienkiewicz Center for Computational Engi-
neering, Swansea University, United Kingdom) for their comments and discussions that
definitely enriched us and, therefore, our work. We would also like to thank our Ph.D.
students, particularly to Gonzalo D. Ares, Gonzalo D. Maso Talou, Carlos A. Bulant,
Alonso M. Alvarez and Felipe Figueredo Rocha who, with their criticisms and observa-
tions, have also helped to improve this text.
Petrópolis, Brazil Pablo J. Blanco

March 2018 Raúl A. Feijóo
1
Part I
Vector and Tensor Algebra and Analysis
The goal of the following two chapters, which comprise Part I of this book, is to provide
the reader with the basic concepts and training in the area of tensor algebra (Chapter 1)
and tensor analysis (Chapter 2) which will be omnipresent throughout this book. It is
important to highlight here the use of compact notation (also called intrinsic notation)
when invoking vector and tensors as well as algebraic and differential operations among
them. That is, vectors and tensors are written independently from the adopted coor-
dinate system. In contrast to the use of indicial notation, which puts in evidence the
components of vectors and tensors in the given coordinate system, the compact nota-
tion appears as a clean and elegant form that allows the concepts to be presented without
being obnubilated by the sometimes overwhelming presence of indexes.
At the end of these two chapters, some further reading material is suggested to com-
plement and deepen the concepts presented here. However, we highlight that for the
study of the rest of the book this reading is not mandatory. Moreover, the reader will
also find in Appendices A and B a more detailed exposition of the topics addressed in
what follows, in an attempt to make the book self-contained.
3
Vector and Tensor Algebra
1.1 Points and Vectors

Consider the three-dimensional Euclidean space, denoted by ℰ, whose geometry is built
upon a set of primitive elements called points. Note that ℰ is not a vector space in the
sense of the algebra because the addition of points is a concept without meaning.
The difference between two points X and Y of space ℰ is defined by
v = X − Y, (1.1)
where v is the vector whose origin is in Y and ends at X. All the vectors which can
be determined through the differences between points belonging to ℰ form the set V
associated with ℰ. The set V is a (real) vector space, where the two basic operations
inherent to the notion of vector space are defined, which are (i) the addition of vectors
and (ii) the product of a vector by a real number.
The addition operation between a point Y ∈ ℰ and the vector v ∈ V defines the point
X ∈ ℰ such that (1.1) is verified. This operation allows us to establish a biunivocal cor-
respondence between points of ℰ and vectors of V . In fact, we can arbitrarily pick a
point O from ℰ, and then for each point X ∈ ℰ there exists a unique vector v ∈ V such
that v = X − O.
Space V is called three-dimensional provided there exist in V sets of three vectors
{ei } = {e1 , e2 , e3 } which are linearly independent1 and can span the entire vector space
V , that is, they can generate any vector v ∈ V through the linear combination v = 𝛼i ei .2
Any of these linearly independent sets of vectors {ei } is called a basis for the (real) vector
space V .
Beyond basic operations, multiplication by a real number, and addition of vectors,
the vector space V associated with ℰ is endowed with an inner product, also called the
scalar product, operation between vectors of V . For u, v ∈ V , this operation is denoted
by u ⋅ v, which is geometrically defined by the product of the lengths of the vectors mul-
tiplied by the cosine of the angle between them. This operation satisfies the properties
of the inner product in the sense of the algebra.
1 Vectors {ei } are called linearly independent if 𝛼i ei = 𝟎 implies 𝛼i = 0 for i = 1, 2, 3.

2 Throughout this book, unless stated otherwise, Einstein notation is adopted to shorten summation
notations, resulting, for example, in the following lumped notation when indexes are repeated:
∑3
v = i=1 𝛼i ei = 𝛼i ei .
Introduction to the Variational Formulation in Mechanics: Fundamentals and Applications, First Edition.
Edgardo O. Taroco, Pablo J. Blanco and Raúl A. Feijóo.
© 2020 John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Published 2020 by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
4 1 Vector and Tensor Algebra
Also, and through the introduction of this operation, the space V has a topological
structure induced by the inner product through the definition of the norm operation
for a vector v ∈ V
√
||v|| = v ⋅ v. (1.2)
Making use of these operations, vectors u, v ∈ V are said to be orthogonal if u ⋅ v = 0.
Similarly, a basis {ei } of V is called orthogonal if ei ⋅ ej = ||ei ||||ej ||𝛿ij is verified, i, j =
1, 2, 3, where 𝛿ij is the Kronecker symbol.3 Finally, a basis of V is called orthonormal
if it is orthogonal and the norm of the vectors in the basis is unitary, that is, ||ei || = 1,
i = 1, 2, 3.
The matrix [gij ], i, j ∈ {1, 2, 3}, defined by
gij = ei ⋅ ej , i, j = 1, 2, 3, (1.3)
is not singular when the set {ei } is a basis for V . In turn, from the definition it follows
that gij = gji , that is, [gij ] is a symmetric matrix. Let us call
[g ij ] = [gij ]−1 , (1.4)
the inverse of matrix [gij ]. From the definition we obtain
g ik gkj = gik g kj = 𝛿ij , i, j = 1, 2, 3. (1.5)
With these results, we can introduce the dual basis {ei } associated with {ei } as the image
of the linear transformation
[g ij ] ∶V → V ,
(1.6)
ej → ei = g ij ej .
It can be proved that this transformation produces a basis for V . Reciprocally, the appli-
cation of [gij ] over {ei } yields the original basis {ei }. In fact
gij ej = gij g jk ek = 𝛿ik ek = ei . (1.7)
Another useful result is the following
ei ⋅ ej = g ik ek ⋅ ej = g ik gkj = 𝛿ij . (1.8)
A coordinate system consists of a basis {ei } for V , not necessarily orthogonal, and
an arbitrary point O of ℰ called the origin of the coordinate system. When the basis is
orthonormal, the coordinate system is called Cartesian.
Observe that the notion of vector was introduced independently from the adopted
basis, or, equivalently, from the coordinate system. When a basis {ei }, and then its dual
basis {ei }, is chosen, then each vector u ∈ V can be associated with a triple of real num-
bers {u1 , u2 , u3 } called components of u with respect to the basis {ei }, which are defined
as follows
ui = u ⋅ ei i = 1, 2, 3. (1.9)
i i
These are the components with respect to {e } because, as {e } is a basis, it results in
u = 𝛼i ei and then
ui = u ⋅ ei = 𝛼k ek ⋅ ei = 𝛼k 𝛿ki = 𝛼i . (1.10)
3 The Kronecker symbol 𝛿ij is such that 𝛿ii = 1 and 𝛿ij = 0 for i ≠ j.
1.1 Points and Vectors 5
In particular, given a basis {ei }, and its dual {ei }, the components of u with respect to
these bases are usually named as follows
• Components of u with respect to {ei } are contravariant components, and are

defined by
ui = u ⋅ ei i = 1, 2, 3. (1.11)
With these components the vector u can be represented through the linear combina-
tion u = ui ei .
• Components of u with respect to {ei } are covariant components, and are defined by
ui = u ⋅ ei i = 1, 2, 3. (1.12)
With these components the vector u can be represented through the linear combina-
tion u = ui ei .
If the basis is orthonormal, it is easy to show that it is identical to its dual

basis, and therefore there is no distinction between covariant and contravariant
components.
Likewise, given a coordinate system in ℰ, characterized by the basis {ei } and the point
O ∈ ℰ, we can define the coordinates of an arbitrary point X ∈ ℰ as the covariant com-
ponents of the vector X − O from V , that is
Xi = (X − O) ⋅ ei . (1.13)
Thus, the same vector u ∈ V , or the same point X ∈ ℰ, can be associated with differ-
ent triples of components and representations depending upon the chosen coordinate
system.4
To underline the difference between intrinsic and indicial notation, note that
the inner product of vectors u, v ∈ V as a function of their different components
results in
u ⋅ v = ui vi = ui vi = ui g ij vj = ui gij vj , (1.14)
that is, several expressions are possible for the same concept, which may delay the under-
standing progress.
Exercise 1.1 Verify the validity of identities given by (1.14).
4 As stated above, we will employ compact notation, which means that we highlight the entity in detriment
of its components, in this case vector u, or point X. Notation emphasizing components is also called indicial
notation, and it should only be employed during the analysis of a given specific problem, specifically when
calculations are required. In this way, we can present the concepts and operations in a clear and concise
manner, without being confined to a certain coordinate system. This also helps to call the attention to the
fact that, during calculations, we should choose that basis which makes the treatment of the problem as
simple as possible. To sum up, indicial notation is not related to concepts, but to calculus.
1.2 Second-Order Tensors

We will employ the term tensor, or second-order tensor, as a synonym for the linear
transformation between V and V .5 Then, we have
T ∶V → V ,
(1.15)
u → v = Tu,
verifying
T(u + v) = Tu + Tv ∀u, v ∈ V , (1.16)
T(𝛼u) = 𝛼Tu ∀𝛼 ∈ ℝ and ∀u ∈ V . (1.17)
Clearly, expressions (1.16) and (1.17) are equivalent to
T(𝛼u + 𝛽v) = 𝛼Tu + 𝛽Tv ∀𝛼, 𝛽 ∈ ℝ and ∀u, v ∈ V . (1.18)
Taking 𝛼 and 𝛽 zero, we obtain an expression that will be frequently used hereafter,
T𝟎 = 𝟎, (1.19)
where 𝟎 represents the null element in V .
The set of all second-order tensors, that is, the set of all linear transformations between
V and V , will be called Lin
Lin = {T; T ∶ V → V , linear}. (1.20)
Introducing the addition and multiplication by real numbers in Lin defined by
(T + S)u = Tu + Su ∀u ∈ V , (1.21)
(𝛼T)u = 𝛼(Tu) ∀u ∈ V , (1.22)
turns Lin into a vector space, where the null tensor O transforms every vector u ∈ V
into the null vector 𝟎 ∈ V , that is,
Ou = 𝟎 ∀u ∈ V . (1.23)
The identity tensor is denoted by I and is defined by
Iu = u ∀u ∈ V . (1.24)
Given T ∈ Lin, the set of vectors v ∈ V satisfying Tv = 𝟎 is denoted by 𝒩 (T), that is,
𝒩 (T) = {v ∈ V ; Tv = 𝟎}. (1.25)
It is easy to prove that 𝒩 (T) is also a vector subspace of V , called the null space of T
(also the kernel of T).
Given A, B ∈ Lin, the composition of these tensors (composed transformation) is
another tensor (linear transformation) T ∈ Lin such that
Tu = (AB)u = ABu ∀u ∈ V. (1.26)
5 In this chapter we limit the presentation to second- and third-order tensors, and some associated
operations because these are the most used elements along the book. However, in Appendices A and B the
reader will find material related to linear transformations between vector spaces of possibly different
dimensions, which naturally embraces the case of third- and also second-order tensors.
Since in general AB ≠ BA, when the identity is verified we say that A and B are com-
mutative.
From previous definitions, and given arbitrary T, S, D ∈ Lin and 𝛼 ∈ ℝ, then we have
T(SD) = (TS)D = TSD, (1.27)
T(S + D) = TS + TD, (1.28)
𝛼(TS) = T(𝛼S), (1.29)
IT = TI = T. (1.30)
Indeed, for arbitrary v ∈ V , it is
T(SD)v = T(S(Dv)) = (TS)(Dv) = (TS)Dv, (1.31)
from which (1.27) is verified. Also, we have
T(S + D)v = T((S + D)v) = T(Sv + Dv) = TSv + TDv = (TS + TD)v, (1.32)
which verifies (1.28). Similarly,
𝛼(TS)v = 𝛼(T(Sv)) = T(𝛼Sv)) = T(𝛼S)v, (1.33)
and (1.29) holds. Note finally that
ITv = I(Tv) = Tv, (1.34)
and then we have proved (1.30).
The following notation will also be used
n
⏞⏞⏞
Tn = TT...T n ∈ N, (1.35)
with T0 = I.
The transpose of a tensor T is the unique tensor TT satisfying
Tu ⋅ v = u ⋅ TT v ∀u, v ∈ V . (1.36)
Uniqueness is proved assuming that there are two tensor transposes for T, denoted by
TT1 and TT2 , and which will be assumed to be different. From definition (1.36), each tensor
satisfies
Tu ⋅ v = u ⋅ TT1 v ∀u, v ∈ V , (1.37)
Tu ⋅ v = u ⋅ TT2 v ∀u, v ∈ V . (1.38)
Subtracting both expressions yields
u ⋅ (TT1 v − TT2 v) = u ⋅ (TT1 − TT2 )v = 0 ∀u, v ∈ V . (1.39)
Recalling that a ⋅ b = 0, ∀a ∈ V implies b = 𝟎, we have
(TT1 − TT2 )v = 𝟎 ∀v ∈ V , (1.40)
and from the definition of the null tensor (1.23), we arrive at
TT1 = TT2 , (1.41)
which contradicts the fact that both tensors were different. Therefore, there exists a
unique transpose of a tensor.
Using the definition of the transpose of a tensor it is straightforward to conclude that,
for arbitrary A, S ∈ Lin and 𝛼 ∈ ℝ, we obtain
(S + A)T = ST + AT , (1.42)
(𝛼S) = 𝛼S .
T T
(1.43)
In fact, taking arbitrary u, v ∈ V , then
(S + A)T u ⋅ v = u ⋅ (S + A)v = u ⋅ Sv + u ⋅ Av = ST u ⋅ v + AT u ⋅ v
= (ST u + AT u) ⋅ v = (ST + AT )u ⋅ v, (1.44)
and so (1.42) is proved. Analogously,
(𝛼S)T u ⋅ v = u ⋅ (𝛼S)v = 𝛼u ⋅ Sv = 𝛼ST u ⋅ v, (1.45)
and so (1.43) is demonstrated.
As it is easy to see, the transpose operation is a linear transformation between Lin and
Lin. In addition, given arbitrary A, S ∈ Lin, it is
(SA)T = AT ST , (1.46)
(ST )T = S. (1.47)
In fact, for arbitrary u, v ∈ V , we have
(SA)T u ⋅ v = u ⋅ (SA)v = u ⋅ S(Av) = ST u ⋅ Av = AT ST u ⋅ v, (1.48)
and we arrive at (1.46). Analogously
(ST )T u ⋅ v = u ⋅ (ST )v = Su ⋅ v, (1.49)
and then (1.197) is verified.
A tensor S is called symmetric if
Su ⋅ v = u ⋅ Sv ∀u, v ∈ V , (1.50)
T
and in such a case we conclude that S = S . A tensor is called skew-symmetric if
Su ⋅ v = −(u ⋅ Sv) ∀u, v ∈ V , (1.51)
T
which implies S = −S .
The set of all symmetric tensors will be denoted by Sym and the set of all
skew-symmetric tensors will be denoted by Skw. In particular, the null tensor O
is symmetric and skew-symmetric.
Any tensor S ∈ Lin can be univocally represented by the addition of a symmetric ten-
sor (called Ss ) and a skew-symmetric tensor (called Sa ), that is,
S = Ss + Sa , (1.52)
where
1
Ss = (S + ST ), (1.53)
2
1
Sa = (S − ST ), (1.54)
2
are, respectively, called the symmetric component and the skew-symmetric compo-
nent of S.
Since the transpose operation yields a unique tensor transpose, it follows that the
linear combination of a symmetric (skew-symmetric) tensor results in a symmetric
(skew-symmetric) tensor. Then, Sym and Skw are vector subspaces of Lin. Moreover,
from the uniqueness of the decomposition into symmetric and skew-symmetric
components, it is concluded that Lin can be written as the direct sum of these two
subspaces
Lin = Sym ⊕ Skw. (1.55)
Consider an arbitrary W ∈ Skw and an arbitrary T ∈ Lin. Then, it is possible to show
that for any u ∈ V the following holds
u ⋅ Wu = 0, (1.56)
u ⋅ Tu = u ⋅ T u.
s
(1.57)
In fact, for arbitrary u ∈ V we have
u ⋅ Wu = WT u ⋅ u = −Wu ⋅ u, (1.58)
from where (1.56) is proved. Similarly, and using (1.56), we have
u ⋅ Tu = u ⋅ (Ts + Ta )u = u ⋅ Ts u + u ⋅ Tau = u ⋅ Tsu, (1.59)
and (1.57) follows.
The tensor product between two vectors a, b ∈ V is the second-order tensor a ⊗ b
that transforms any vector v ∈ V into vector (b ⋅ v)a, that is,
(a ⊗ b)v = (b ⋅ v)a ∀v ∈ V . (1.60)
From the previous definition, and given arbitrary a, b, c, d ∈ V , we obtain the follow-
ing results
(a ⊗ b)T = b ⊗ a, (1.61)
(a ⊗ b)(c ⊗ d) = (b ⋅ c)(a ⊗ d). (1.62)
In addition, given T ∈ Lin, it can be shown that
T(a ⊗ b) = (Ta) ⊗ b, (1.63)
(a ⊗ b)T = a ⊗ (TT b). (1.64)
Indeed, consider arbitrary u, v ∈ V , using definition (1.60) forward and backward,
we have
(a ⊗ b)T u ⋅ v = u ⋅ (a ⊗ b)v = u ⋅ (b ⋅ v)a = (u ⋅ a)(b ⋅ v) = (b ⊗ a)u ⋅ v, (1.65)
and then (1.61) holds. Now, observe that
(a ⊗ b)(c ⊗ d)u = (a ⊗ b)(d ⋅ u)c = (d ⋅ u)(b ⋅ c)a
= (b ⋅ c)(d ⋅ u)a = (b ⋅ c)(a ⊗ d)u, (1.66)
and we arrive at (1.62). Similarly, we have
T(a ⊗ b)u = (b ⋅ u)Ta = ((Ta) ⊗ b)u, (1.67)
(n ⊗ n)v Figure 1.1 Geometric concept of orthogonal

projection over the plane 𝜋 whose normal vector is n.
v
(I − n ⊗ n)v
which yields (1.63). Lastly, note that

(a ⊗ b)Tu = (b ⋅ Tu)a = (TT b ⋅ u)a = (a ⊗ (TT b))u, (1.68)
and then (1.64) is proved.
Analogously to the definition of the inner product in V , it is also possible to define
the inner product in Lin. Consider two elements T, S ∈ Lin which can be written in the
forms T = t1 ⊗ t2 and S = s1 ⊗ s2 , respectively, with t1 , t2 , s1 , s2 ∈ V . Then, we define
the inner product T ⋅ S in Lin as
T ⋅ S = (t1 ⊗ t2 ) ⋅ (s1 ⊗ s2 ) = (t1 ⋅ s1 )(t2 ⋅ s2 ). (1.69)
With definition (1.69), it is straightforward to prove that, for arbitrary T ∈ Lin and
u, v ∈ V , the following result holds
T ⋅ (u ⊗ v) = u ⋅ Tv. (1.70)
In fact, putting T = t1 ⊗ t2 , and making use of definitions (1.69) and (1.60) we obtain
T ⋅ (u ⊗ v) = (t1 ⊗ t2 ) ⋅ (u ⊗ v) = (t1 ⋅ u)(t2 ⋅ v)
= u ⋅ [(t2 ⋅ v)t1] = u ⋅ [(t1 ⊗ t2 )v] = u ⋅ Tv. (1.71)
Let us denote n the unit normal vector to the plane 𝜋 (see Figure 1.1). The tensor n ⊗ n
applied over any vector v ∈ V gives
(n ⊗ n)v = (n ⋅ v)n, (1.72)
which is the orthogonal projection of v ∈ V over the direction n. In turn, the
second-order tensor P = I − n ⊗ n applied over any vector v ∈ V yields
Pv = (I − n ⊗ n)v = v − (n ⋅ v)n, (1.73)
which is the orthogonal projection of v over the plane 𝜋.
It can be appreciated that tensor P is symmetric and also verifies P2 = P. In fact
PT = (I − n ⊗ n)T = IT − (n ⊗ n)T = I − n ⊗ n = P, (1.74)
and, for arbitrary v ∈ V , it is
P2 v = P(Pv) = P[v − (n ⋅ v)n] = Pv − (n ⋅ v)Pn = Pv, (1.75)
and the previous statements hold.
Tensors satisfying these two properties, that is, P ∈ Sym and P2 = P, are called
orthogonal projection tensors. Examples of this kind of tensor are
I, I − n ⊗ n, n ⊗ n. (1.76)
It is possible to show that
dim(Lin) = dim V × dim V = 9, (1.77)
and if we take a basis {ei } for V , the sets
{(ei ⊗ ej ); i, j = 1, 2, 3}, (1.78)
{(ei ⊗ ej ); i, j = 1, 2, 3}, (1.79)
{(e ⊗ ej ); i, j = 1, 2, 3},
i
(1.80)
{(e ⊗ e ); i, j = 1, 2, 3},
i j
(1.81)
are different possible bases for Lin. In this way, any tensor T ∈ Lin can be expressed by a
unique linear combination of the element of the chosen basis. The components of tensor
T in the chosen basis are defined in an analogous manner to that for vectors. Hence, we
have
Tij = T ⋅ (ei ⊗ ej ) = ei ⋅ Tej , (1.82)
T ij = T ⋅ (ei ⊗ ej ) = ei ⋅ Tej , (1.83)
T.ji = T ⋅ (e ⊗ ej ) = e ⋅ Tej ,
i i
(1.84)
.j
Ti = T ⋅ (ei ⊗ ej ) = ei ⋅ Tej , (1.85)
where the inner product between elements of Lin is defined in (1.69). Also, this inner
product can be introduced in terms of the trace operation, as shown below. This way,
the representation of T ∈ Lin in terms of these components is given by
.j
T = Tij (ei ⊗ ej ) = T ij (ei ⊗ ej ) = T.ji (ei ⊗ ej ) = Ti (ei ⊗ ej ), (1.86)
where the implicit summation of repeated indices is considered. Coefficients Tij , T ij , T.ji
.j
and Ti are, respectively, covariant, contravariant, and mixed components of tensor T.
In particular, the identity tensor I is
I = ei ⊗ ei , (1.87)
again with implicit summation over index i. In fact, given arbitrary u = uj ej = uj ej ∈ V ,
we have
Iu = (ei ⊗ ei )uj ej = uj ei 𝛿ij = ui ei = u, (1.88)
or equivalently,
Iu = (ei ⊗ ei )uj ej = uj g ij ei = uj ej = u. (1.89)
For a Cartesian basis {ei } for V , there is no difference between components of T. In
this case, we simply refer to the Cartesian components of the tensor.
The advantage of employing compact notation is again evident when comparing to
indicial notation. A tensor is a concept (linear transformation in V ) which does not
depend on the basis chosen for V . The same is valid for the trace operation and inner
product between tensors.
To further illustrate the conceptual aspects highlighted by the intrinsic notation, let
us introduce some of the definitions already presented in terms of both notations.
• Tensor. Compact notation: T ∈ Lin. Indicial notation
Tij = T kl gki glj = T.jk gki = Ti.k gkj , (1.90)
.j
T ij = Tkl g ki g lj = T.ki g kj = Tk g ki , (1.91)
T.ji ki
= Tkj g = T gkj = ik
Tk.l g ki glj , (1.92)
.j
Ti = Tik g kj = T kj gki = T.lk gki glj . (1.93)
• Application of a tensor over a vector. Compact notation: u = Tv, u, v ∈ V and T ∈
Lin. Indicial notation (just some of the possible expressions)
.j .j
ui = Tij vj = Tij g jk vk = Ti vj = Ti gjk vk , (1.94)
.j
i ij
u = T vj = T gjk v = ij k
T.ji vj = Ti g jk vk . (1.95)
• Composition of tensors. Compact notation: T = AB, T, A, B ∈ Lin. Indicial notation
Tij = Aik Bk.j = A.ki Bkj , (1.96)
.j
T ij = Aik Bk = Ai.k Bkj , (1.97)
T.ji = Ai.k Bk.j = A Bkj , ik
(1.98)
.j .j
Ti = A.ki Bk = Aik Bkj , (1.99)
and variants including the tensor or gij . g ij
• Tensor product between vectors. Compact notation: u ⊗ v, u, v ∈ V . Indicial nota-
tion
(u ⊗ v)ij = ui vj , (1.100)
(u ⊗ v) = u v ,ij i j
(1.101)
(u ⊗ v)i.j = u vj ,
i
(1.102)
.j
(u ⊗ v)i = ui vj . (1.103)
• Symmetric component of a tensor. Compact notation: S ∈ Sym ⇔ S = ST , and equiv-
alently Sa = O. Indicial notation
Sij = Sji =⇒ [Sij ] = [Sij ]T , (1.104)
S ij = S ji =⇒ [S ij ] = [S ij ]T , (1.105)
S.ji = Sj.i . (1.106)
Note that for a symmetric tensor the matrix of covariant components is also sym-
metric, and the same holds for contravariant components. In contrast, the matrix
representation of a symmetric tensor in mixed components is not symmetric in gen-
eral. Indeed, since S.ji = Sj.i, we conclude that the same components are symmetrically
placed in the two (different) matrix representations of the tensor.
• Skew-symmetric component of a tensor. Compact notation: W ∈ Skw ⇔ W = −WT ,

and then Ws = O. Indicial notation
Wij = −Wji =⇒ [Wij ] = −[Wij ]T =⇒ Wii = 0, (1.107)
W ij = −W ji =⇒ [W ij ] = −[W ij ]T =⇒ W ii = 0, (1.108)
W.ji = −Wj.i . (1.109)
That is, for a skew-symmetric tensor the matrix representations in covariant and
contravariant components are skew-symmetric, while the matrix representations in
mixed components are not skew-symmetric. As before, the expression W.ji = −Wj.i
indicates that these coefficients are symmetrically placed, but in the two different
matrix representations in mixed components.
The trace operation of a second-order tensor T ∈ Lin is a linear functional which asso-
ciates to each tensor T ∈ Lin a real number denoted by trT, that is,
tr ∶ Lin → ℝ,
(1.110)
T → trT,
with the property
tr(a ⊗ b) = a ⋅ b ∀a, b ∈ V . (1.111)
From the linearity of the trace operation it follows that
.j
trT = T ij tr(ei ⊗ ej ) = Tij tr(ei ⊗ ej ) = T.ji tr(ei ⊗ ej ) = Ti tr(ei ⊗ ej )
= T ij gij = Tij g ij = T.ii = Ti.i. (1.112)
These expressions allow us to evaluate trT in terms of the components of the tensor.
Evidently, the result is independent of the adopted basis.
As the transpose operation is a linear operation, we have
trT = trTT , (1.113)
tr(AB) = tr(BA), (1.114)
trI = 3. (1.115)
Indeed, putting T = t1 ⊗ t2 , A = a1 ⊗ a2 , and B = b1 ⊗ b2 , and recalling that I = ei ⊗
ei , it is
trT = tr(t1 ⊗ t2 ) = t1 ⋅ t2 = t2 ⋅ t1 = tr(t2 ⊗ t1 ) = trTT , (1.116)
and then (1.113) follows. Also, using (1.62) and (1.113) yields
tr(AB) = tr[(a1 ⊗ a2 )(b1 ⊗ b2 )] = tr[(a2 ⋅ b1 )(a1 ⊗ b2 )] = (a2 ⋅ b1 )(a1 ⋅ b2 )
= tr[(a1 ⋅ b2 )(a2 ⊗ b1 )] = tr[(a1 ⋅ b2 )(b1 ⊗ a2 )]
= tr[(b1 ⊗ b2 )(a1 ⊗ a2 )] = tr(BA), (1.117)
and (1.114) is proved. Finally, with definition (1.87), we have
trI = tr(ei ⊗ ei ) = ei ⋅ ei = 𝛿ii = 3, (1.118)
thus proving (1.115).
Notice that using the trace operation makes it possible to define an inner product in
Lin
S ⋅ T = tr(ST T) ∀S, T ∈ Lin. (1.119)
With this definition, the following properties are satisfied
S ⋅ T = T ⋅ S, (1.120)
S⋅S≥0 ∀S ∈ Lin, (1.121)
S ⋅ S = 0 ⇔ S = O, (1.122)
and the inner product, in turn, induces a norm in Lin
√ √
‖S‖ = S ⋅ S = tr(ST S). (1.123)
Expressions of the inner product in terms of some of the different tensor components
are
.j .j
A ⋅ T = Aij T ij = Aij Tij = Ai T.ji = Ai.j Ti , (1.124)
and variants also involving g ij or gij .
Now, consider arbitrary a, b, c, d ∈ V , T, A, B ∈ Lin, S ∈ Sym and W ∈ Skw. Then,
some properties of the inner product in Lin are
I ⋅ T = trT, (1.125)
A ⋅ BT = BT A ⋅ T, (1.126)
T ⋅ (u ⊗ v) = u ⋅ Tv, (1.127)
(a ⊗ b) ⋅ (c ⊗ d) = (a ⋅ c)(b ⋅ d), (1.128)
S ⋅ T = S ⋅ Ts , (1.129)
W⋅T=W⋅T , a
(1.130)
S ⋅ W = 0, (1.131)
T ⋅ A = 0 =⇒ T = O, (1.132)
T ⋅ S = 0 =⇒ T ∈ Skw, (1.133)
T ⋅ W = 0 =⇒ T ∈ Sym, (1.134)
A⋅B=A ⋅B +A ⋅B .
s s a a
(1.135)
In fact, from definition (1.119), expression (1.125) follows directly because
I ⋅ T = tr(IT T) = trT. (1.136)
Identity (1.126) is also proved directly, since
A ⋅ BT = tr(AT BT) = tr[(BT A)T T] = BT A ⋅ T. (1.137)
Exercise 1.2 Prove that identities (1.127)–(1.135) hold using the properties of the trace
operation.
The determinant of a tensor A ∈ Lin can be defined as

1[ ]
det A = 2tr(A3 ) + (trA)3 − 3(trA)tr(A2 ) . (1.138)
6
For arbitrary A, T ∈ Lin, and 𝛼 ∈ ℝ, the determinant operation satisfies
det(AT) = det(TA), (1.139)
det(AT) = (det A)(det T), (1.140)
det(𝛼T) = 𝛼 3 det T, (1.141)
det I = 1. (1.142)
The inverse of a tensor T is also a tensor T−1 with the property
T−1 T = I. (1.143)
A tensor T is called invertible if det T ≠ 0, and if T is invertible, its transpose tensor TT
is also invertible, verifying
(TT )−1 = (T−1 )T = T−T . (1.144)
Tensor Q is called an orthogonal tensor if it preserves the inner product between
vectors, that is,
Qu ⋅ Qv = u ⋅ v ∀u, v ∈ V . (1.145)
The necessary and sufficient condition for a tensor Q to be orthogonal is
QQT = QT Q = I, (1.146)
or, equivalently,
QT = Q−1 . (1.147)
The set of all orthogonal tensors is denoted by Orth.
Exercise 1.3 Show that a tensor is orthogonal if and only if QQT = QT Q = I.
Any orthogonal tensor with positive determinant is called a rotation tensor. In partic-
ular, the set of all rotation tensors is denoted by Rot.
A tensor T is called positive definite if
v ⋅ Tv > 0 ∀v ∈ V v ≠ 𝟎, (1.148)
v ⋅ Tv = 0 ⇔ v = 𝟎. (1.149)
Given a basis {ek }, it is said that all the bases {ek } have the same orientation as {ek }
if they can be obtained from a rotation of the latter. That means
ek = Rek k = 1, 2, 3. (1.150)
Since any orthogonal tensor Q is a rotation R, or it is a rotation multiplied by −1, there
exist two classes of bases each associated with an orientation. Hereafter we will assume
that one of these orientations has been chosen.
The cross product u × v between vectors u, v ∈ V , whose angle between them is 𝜃, is

another vector w such that
w ⟂ to the plane defined by u and v, (1.151)
||w|| = ||u||||v|| sin 𝜃, (1.152)
{u, v, w} have the same orientation as the adopted basis. (1.153)
Then, it follows that
u × v = −(v × u), (1.154)
u × u = 𝟎, (1.155)
u ⋅ v × w = w ⋅ u × v = v ⋅ w × u. (1.156)
Given three arbitrary elements u, v, w ∈ V , the cross product satisfies
u × (v × w) = (u ⋅ w)v − (u ⋅ v)w, (1.157)
or equivalently,
u × (v × w) = (v ⊗ w)a u. (1.158)
Exercise 1.4 Prove that (1.157) holds.
When u, v, w are linearly independent, the value of the product u ⋅ (v × w) represents

the volume of the parallelepiped 𝒫 determined by the vectors u, v, w. Then, given a
tensor T, it is not difficult to verify that
Tu ⋅ Tv × Tw
det T = , (1.159)
u⋅v×w
from where it follows that
vol(T(𝒫 ))
det T = , (1.160)
vol(𝒫 )
which provides a geometric interpretation of the determinant of a tensor T, and where
T(𝒫 ) is the image of the parallelepiped 𝒫 under the linear transformation (tensor) T
and vol(⋅) stands for the volume.
Given a second-order tensor field T ∈ Lin, we introduce the principal invariants of T
as follows
I1 (T) = trT, (1.161)
1
I2 (T) = (tr(T2 ) − (trT)2), (1.162)
2
I3 (T) = det T. (1.163)
The invariance property is established by the fact that
Ii (T) = Ii (QTQT ) ∀Q ∈ Orth i = 1, 2, 3. (1.164)
Then, any tensor T admits the representation established by the Cayley–Hamilton
theorem [132]
det(𝛼I − T) = 𝛼 3 − 𝛼 2I1 (T) − 𝛼I2(T) − I3 (T). (1.165)
By putting
p(𝛼) = det(𝛼I − T), (1.166)
it can be shown that all second-order tensors satisfy the following characteristic
equation
p(T) = O. (1.167)
Therefore, we have
T3 − I1 (T)T2 − I2 (T)T − I3 (T)I = O, (1.168)
and taking the trace of this equation, and considering the definition of the invariants
(1.161), (1.162) and (1.163), yields
1
tr(T3 ) − (trT)tr(T2 ) + ((trT)3 − (trT)tr(T2 )) = 3 det T, (1.169)
2
or equivalently,
1 1 1
det T = tr(T3 ) + (trT)3 − (trT)tr(T2), (1.170)
3 6 2
which is exactly (1.138).
Let T = Tij (ei ⊗ ej ) be a second-order tensor given in any orthonormal basis {ei } for
V , then it results in
det T = 𝜀ijk Ti1Tj2 Tk3 = 𝜀ijk T1i T2j T3k , (1.171)
where 𝜀ijk is the permutation symbol6 defined by
⎧1 if (i, j, k) is an even permutation of (1, 2, 3),

⎪
𝜀ijk = ⎨−1 if (i, j, k) is an odd permutation of (1, 2, 3), (1.172)
⎪0 otherwise.
⎩
Finally, given a tensor W ∈ Skw, there exists a unique vector w ∈ V such that
Wv = w × v ∀v ∈ V . (1.173)
Vector w associated with the skew-symmetric tensor W is called the axial vector of W.
From this definition, it follows that the kernel of W ∈ Skw, denoted by 𝒩 (W), is the
one-dimensional subspace of V spanned by the axial vector w of W, that is,
𝒩 (W) = {v ∈ V ; Wv = 𝟎} = {v ∈ V ; v = 𝜆w, ∀𝜆 ∈ ℝ}. (1.174)
1.3 Third-Order Tensors

In this section we will extend the concept of linear transformations to embrace linear
operators between V and Lin, and vice versa. This context gives rise to the notion of
third-order tensors.
6 Actually, this is a very peculiar third-order tensor, also known as the Levi–Civita symbol.
In short, third-order tensors are linear applications of the form

S ∶ Lin → V ,
(1.175)
T → ST,
as well as
S ∶ V → Lin,
(1.176)
a → Sa,
which implies that these entities can be applied to elements (vectors) of V , and also to
elements (second-order tensors) of Lin. The set, actually vector space when endowed
with the standard operations, of all third-order tensors will be called Lin. The null ele-
ment in Lin is denoted by 0, and is such that
0a = O ∀a ∈ V , (1.177)
0T = 𝟎 ∀T ∈ Lin. (1.178)
However, applications (1.175) and (1.176) are not fully characterized yet. Consider
a ∈ V , T = t1 ⊗ t2 ∈ Lin and S = s1 ⊗ s2 ⊗ s3 ∈ Lin, with t1 , t2 , s1 , s2 , s3 ∈ V . Hence, we
define application (1.175) as follows
ST = (s1 ⊗ s2 ⊗ s3 )(t1 ⊗ t2 ) = (s2 ⋅ t1 )(s3 ⋅ t2 )s1 , (1.179)
and, analogously, application (1.176) is defined by
Sa = (s1 ⊗ s2 ⊗ s3 )a = (s3 ⋅ a)(s1 ⊗ s2 ). (1.180)
In the space Lin the transpose operation of a second-order tensor was defined as
a ⋅ Tb = TT a ⋅ b. In the same manner, we can define different transpose operations for
elements in Lin. We then define the transpose operations7
a ⋅ ST = ST a ⋅ T, (1.181)
1
Sa ⋅ T = a ⋅ S T. T (1.182)
1
Let us show that these third-order tensors are unique, and also that (S )T = S holds. ToT
do this, assume that ST1 ≠ ST2 , then

a ⋅ ST = ST1 a ⋅ T ∀a ∈ V , ∀T ∈ Lin,
a ⋅ ST = ST2 a ⋅T ∀a ∈ V , ∀T ∈ Lin.
Subtracting both expressions above, we obtain
(ST1 − ST2 )a ⋅ T = 0 ∀a ∈ V , ∀T ∈ Lin, (1.183)
7 An important point to stress here is that the definition of the transpose operation is not unique in the case
of third-order tensors. As a matter of fact, the transpose operation could equivalently be defined as
Sa ⋅ T = a ⋅ ST T,
1
a ⋅ ST = S T a ⋅ T.
1
Comparing the definitions, we see that the operation (⋅)T defined here is equivalent to the operation (⋅) T
defined in the main text (also equivalent to ((⋅)T )T ). In any case, the subsequent mathematical developments
have to consistently follow the chosen definition of this operation.
which implies
(ST1 − ST2 )a = O ∀a ∈ V , (1.184)
and, from (1.177), we finally conclude that
ST1 = ST2 , (1.185)
leading to a contradiction.
1 1
Analogously, assuming that there exist S1T ≠ S2T , a similar argument yields
1 1
a ⋅ (S1T − S2T )T = 0 ∀a ∈ V , ∀T ∈ Lin, (1.186)

from which we obtain
1 1
(S1T − S2T )T = 𝟎 ∀T ∈ Lin, (1.187)

and, using (1.178), we obtain a contradiction, from which it follows that
1 1
S1T = S2T . (1.188)

Finally, from the transpose definition we have
1 1
Sa ⋅ T = a ⋅ S T T = (S T )T a ⋅ T, (1.189)
and then
1
(S − (S T )T )a ⋅ T = 0 ∀a ∈ V , ∀T ∈ Lin, (1.190)
that is,
1
(S − (S T )T )a = O ∀a ∈ V , (1.191)
and, similarly, from (1.177), we conclude that
1
S = (S T )T . (1.192)
Let us see now that, if a third-order tensor is of the form S = s1 ⊗ s2 ⊗ s3 , the following
is verified
(s1 ⊗ s2 ⊗ s3 )T = s2 ⊗ s3 ⊗ s1 . (1.193)
To obtain this result, consider definitions (1.179) and (1.180). Then, for arbitrary a ∈ V
and T = t1 ⊗ t2 ∈ Lin, we have
a ⋅ ST = a ⋅ (s1 ⊗ s2 ⊗ s3 )(t1 ⊗ t2 ) = (s2 ⋅ t1 )(s3 ⋅ t2 )(a ⋅ s1 )
= (s2 ⊗ s3 ⊗ s1 )a ⋅ (t1 ⊗ t2 ) = (s1 ⊗ s2 ⊗ s3 )T a ⋅ (t1 ⊗ t2 ) = ST a ⋅ T,
(1.194)
and (1.193) follows.
In the same manner, it can be proved that
1
(s1 ⊗ s2 ⊗ s3 ) T = s3 ⊗ s1 ⊗ s2 . (1.195)
In fact, with (1.179) and (1.180) we get
Sa ⋅ T = (s1 ⊗ s2 ⊗ s3 )a ⋅ (t1 ⊗ t2 ) = (s3 ⋅ a)(s1 ⋅ t1 )(s2 ⋅ t2 )
1
= a ⋅ (s3 ⊗ s1 ⊗ s2 )(t1 ⊗ t2 ) = a ⋅ (s1 ⊗ s2 ⊗ s3 ) T (t1 ⊗ t2 ), (1.196)
proving then (1.195).
With the previous results, we can directly obtain the following relations
1
(ST )T = S T , (1.197)
((ST )T )T = S. (1.198)
Exercise 1.5 Prove that (1.197) and (1.198) are verified.
Let a ∈ V and T = t1 ⊗ t2 ∈ Lin be arbitrary, then we can build an element of Lin

using the tensor product as follows
a ⊗ T = a ⊗ t1 ⊗ t 2 , (1.199)
T ⊗ a = t1 ⊗ t2 ⊗ a. (1.200)
In this way, considering u, v ∈ V , T, S ∈ Lin and S ∈ Lin, it is quite straightforward to
show that
(u ⊗ T)T = T ⊗ u, (1.201)
1
(T ⊗ u) = u ⊗ T,
T (1.202)
(u ⊗ T)S = (T ⋅ S)u, (1.203)
(u ⊗ T)v = u ⊗ (Tv), (1.204)
(T ⊗ u)S = TSu, (1.205)
(T ⊗ u) S = TSu,
T T T
(1.206)
(T ⊗ u)v = (u ⋅ v)T, (1.207)
(T ⊗ v) u = (T u) ⊗ v,
T T
(1.208)
(T ⊗ v)T S = TT ST v, (1.209)
T T
(S u)v = (Sv) u, (1.210)
S(v ⊗ u) = (Su)v. (1.211)
Exercise 1.6 Prove that tensor identities (1.201)–(1.211) hold.
The vector space Lin can also be endowed with an inner product structure. Consider
the elements T, S ∈ Lin, with T = t1 ⊗ t2 ⊗ t3 and S = s1 ⊗ s2 ⊗ s3 , t1 , t2 , t3 , s1 , s2 , s3 ∈
V . Then, we define the inner product T ⋅ S as follows
T ⋅ S = (t1 ⊗ t2 ⊗ t3 ) ⋅ (s1 ⊗ s2 ⊗ s3 ) = (t1 ⋅ s1 )(t2 ⋅ s2 )(t3 ⋅ s3 ). (1.212)
So, for S, T ∈ Lin (second-order tensors), it is possible to show that
(u ⊗ S) ⋅ (v ⊗ T) = (u ⋅ v)(S ⋅ T), (1.213)
(u ⊗ S) ⋅ (T ⊗ v) = TSv ⋅ u, (1.214)
(u ⊗ S) ⋅ (T ⊗ v) = STu ⋅ v.T
(1.215)
Exercise 1.7 Prove that tensor identities (1.213)–(1.215) hold.

Another transpose operation that can be introduced in Lin is the following. Consider
an arbitrary S = s1 ⊗ s2 ⊗ s3 , then we define
St = (s1 ⊗ s2 ⊗ s3 )t = s1 ⊗ s3 ⊗ s2 . (1.216)
With this operation, for an arbitrary a ∈ V , the following holds
St a = (s1 ⊗ s2 ⊗ s3 )t a = (a ⋅ s2 )(s1 ⊗ s3 ), (1.217)
and also
1
(St )T = (S T )t . (1.218)
Also, consider two arbitrary vectors u, v ∈ V , then the next result holds
(St u)v = (Sv)u. (1.219)
Moreover, and similarly to the composition of second-order tensors (composition of

linear transformations), it is possible to define the composition of third-order tensors.
Consider arbitrary S = s1 ⊗ s2 ⊗ s3 ∈ Lin and T = t1 ⊗ t2 ∈ Lin. Then we can define the
composition of S with T yielding an element in Lin. This can be fully characterized as
follows
S ○ T = (s1 ⊗ s2 ⊗ s3 ) ○ (t1 ⊗ t2 ) = (s3 ⋅ t1 )(s1 ⊗ s2 ⊗ t2 ). (1.220)
Clearly, this operation gives S ○ T ∈ Lin. Differently, for arbitrary S, R ∈ Lin, we can pro-
ceed as
S ○ R = (s1 ⊗ s2 ⊗ s3 ) ○ (r1 ⊗ r2 ⊗ r3 ) = (s2 ⋅ r1 )(s3 ⋅ r2 )(s1 ⊗ r3 ), (1.221)
noting that this case results in S ○ R ∈ Lin.
With these definitions we obtain, for example,
(u ⊗ T) ○ (S ⊗ v) = (T ⋅ S)(u ⊗ v). (1.222)
This introduction should help the reader to become familiar with the mathemati-
cal manipulation of vector and tensor algebra, as well as illustrating the introduction
of definitions and their consequences, always working with intrinsic notations, that is,
independently from the coordinate system.
In effect, it is possible to extend all the operations with vectors and second-order ten-
sors to second- and third-order tensors. An example is the definition of the cross product
between a second-order tensor S = s1 ⊗ s2 and a vector a, or between two second-order
tensors S = s1 ⊗ s2 and T = t1 ⊗ t2 , for instance
S × a = (s1 ⊗ s2 ) × a = s1 ⊗ (s2 × a), (1.223)
a × S = a × (s1 ⊗ s2 ) = (a × s1 ) ⊗ s2 , (1.224)
S × T = (s1 ⊗ s2 ) × (t1 ⊗ t2 ) = (s1 × t1 ) × (s2 × t2 ). (1.225)
With these definitions we can obtain, for example, the following result
S × a = −[a × ST ]T . (1.226)
Furthermore, we can define operations for a second-order tensor with the structure
S = s1 ⊗ s2 such as the following
S× = (s1 ⊗ s2 )× = s1 × s2 , (1.227)
which is called the Gibbs product, and this verifies
(ST )× = −S× . (1.228)
In addition, given the axial vector a of an arbitrary A ∈ Skw, and letting B be arbitrary,
the following result holds
A ⋅ B = −a ⋅ B× . (1.229)
The treatment of higher-order tensors, fourth-order tensors for example, is entirely

analogous. Nevertheless, as we increase the order of the tensor it is evident that the
number of possible operations and number of alternative equivalent definitions grows.
The simplest examples are the different transpose operations that can be introduced.
For instance, consider the fourth-order tensor 𝔻
𝔻 = d1 ⊗ d 2 ⊗ d 3 ⊗ d 4 . (1.230)
The following transpose operations can be defined
𝔻T = (d1 ⊗ d2 ⊗ d3 ⊗ d4 )T = d3 ⊗ d4 ⊗ d1 ⊗ d2 , (1.231)
𝒯 𝒯
𝔻 = (d1 ⊗ d2 ⊗ d3 ⊗ d4 ) = d2 ⊗ d1 ⊗ d3 ⊗ d4 , (1.232)
𝔻𝔗 = (d1 ⊗ d2 ⊗ d3 ⊗ d4 )𝔗 = d1 ⊗ d2 ⊗ d4 ⊗ d3 , (1.233)
𝔻 = (d1 ⊗ d2 ⊗ d3 ⊗ d4 ) = d4 ⊗ d2 ⊗ d3 ⊗ d1 ,
T T
(1.234)
among others.
1.4 Complementary Reading

For the reader interested in deepening their knowledge of the topics briefly addressed
in this chapter, we recommend reading the appendices, particularly Appendix A, where
the reader will find concepts and additional information that will ease the reading of
the following works: [23], [47], [84], [93–95], [106], [132], [135], [171], [265], [299]
and [300].
23
Vector and Tensor Analysis
2.1 Differentiation
In this chapter we will introduce a notation for the concept of differentiation abstract
enough to include in the definition functions f of the kind
D(f ) ⊂ ℝ, ℰ, V , Lin, Lin, (2.1)
R(f ) ⊂ ℝ, ℰ, V , Lin, Lin, (2.2)
where D(f ) and R(f ) are, respectively, the domain of f and the image under the transfor-
mation f , also called the codomain of f .
Let 𝒳 and 𝒴 be two normed vector spaces. For the purpose of the present chapter, we
will consider that these spaces are finite-dimensional. Suppose f ∶ 𝒳 → 𝒴 is defined
in a neighborhood of the origin (null element) of 𝒳 . Then, f (u) approaches the origin
faster than u if
‖f (u)‖𝒴
lim = 0. (2.3)
u→0
u≠0
‖u‖𝒳
This will be represented by
f (u) = o(u), u → 0, (2.4)
or, equivalently, by
f (u) = o(u). (2.5)
Similarly, f (u) = g(u) + o(u) stands for
f (u) − g(u) = o(u). (2.6)
Note that this last definition has a clear meaning even when R(f ) and R(g) are subsets of
ℰ because in such cases f (u) − g(u) ∈ V .
Example 2.1 Let 𝜙 ∶ ℝ → ℝ be such that for each t ∈ ℝ we have 𝜙(t) = t 𝛼 . Then,
𝜙(t) = o(t) if 𝛼 > 1.
Consider a function g defined in an open set ℐ of ℝ, whose image is in the set ℝ

(g is a real-valued function), or in V (g is a vector-valued function), or in Lin (g is
a second-order tensor-valued function), or in Lin (g is a third-order tensor-valued
Introduction to the Variational Formulation in Mechanics: Fundamentals and Applications, First Edition.
Edgardo O. Taroco, Pablo J. Blanco and Raúl A. Feijóo.
© 2020 John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Published 2020 by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
24 2 Vector and Tensor Analysis
̇
function), or in ℰ (g is said to be point-valued function). The derivative of g at t, g(t), if
exists, it is defined by
d 1
̇ =
g(t) g(t) = lim [g(t + 𝛼) − g(t)]. (2.7)
dt 𝛼→0 𝛼
Observe that if R(g) ⊂ ℰ then (g(t + 𝛼) − g(t)) ∈ V , and then the derivative is a vector
field. Likewise, the derivative of a real-valued function is a real number, the derivative of
a vector-valued function will be a vector field, and that of a tensor-valued function will
be a tensor field.
Function g is said to be differenciable at t ∈ ℐ if there exists the derivative at t. Thus,
from the definition of the derivative we have that
1
̇
lim [g(t + 𝛼) − g(t) − 𝛼 g(t)] = 0, (2.8)
𝛼→0 𝛼
or in an equivalent manner
̇ = o(𝛼),
g(t + 𝛼) − g(t) − 𝛼 g(t) (2.9)
from where
̇ + o(𝛼).
g(t + 𝛼) − g(t) = 𝛼 g(t) (2.10)
̇ is linear with respect to 𝛼, then, g(t + 𝛼) − g(t) can be written as the sum
Clearly, 𝛼 g(t)
of a linear term in 𝛼 and a term that approaches zero faster than 𝛼. This is a rather
useful definition for a derivative. Therefore, we define the derivative of g at t as the linear
transformation in ℝ that approaches g(t + 𝛼) − g(t) for small values of 𝛼.
Hence, consider two finite-dimensional normed vector spaces 𝒳 and 𝒴 , 𝒜 is an open
set of 𝒳 and let g ∶ 𝒜 → 𝒴 be a function. Function g is said to be differentiable at x ∈ 𝒜
if there exists the linear transformation
𝒟 g(x) ∶ 𝒳 → 𝒴 ,
(2.11)
u → 𝒟 g(x)[u],
such that
g(x + u) = g(x) + 𝒟 g(x)[u] + o(u), u → 0. (2.12)
The linear transformation 𝒟 g(x) is then called the derivative of g at x. Given that in a
finite-dimensional normed space all norms are equivalent, 𝒟 g(x) is independent from
the chosen norms for 𝒳 and 𝒴 . In turn, if there exists 𝒟 g(x), it is unique. In fact, for
each u ∈ 𝒳 it is
1 d |
𝒟 g(x)[u] = lim [g(x + 𝛼u) − g(x)] = g(x + 𝛼u)|| . (2.13)
𝛼→0 𝛼 d𝛼 |𝛼=0
If g is differentiable for all x ∈ 𝒜 , 𝒟 g represents the transformation which, for each
x ∈ 𝒜 , gives 𝒟 g(x) ∈ Lin(𝒳 , 𝒴 ), where Lin(𝒳 , 𝒴 ) is the space whose elements are
the linear transformations from 𝒳 into 𝒴 . This space is also finite-dimensional, in fact,
dim(Lin(𝒳 , 𝒴 )) = (dim 𝒳 )(dim 𝒴 ), and then we can define a norm. This fact allows us
to have notions of continuity and differentiability for 𝒟 g. In particular, g is said to be reg-
ular, or of class C 1 in 𝒜 if g is differentiable for all points x ∈ 𝒜 and if 𝒟 g is continuous.
Also, g is said to be of class C 2 in 𝒜 if g is of class C 1 and 𝒟 g is also regular, and so on.
Let us consider some examples which will be useful for the forthcoming develop-
ments.
• Consider
g ∶ V → ℝ,
(2.14)
v → g(v) = v ⋅ v.
Then
g(v + u) = (v + u) ⋅ (v + u) = v ⋅ v + 2v ⋅ u + u ⋅ u = g(v) + 2v ⋅ u + o(u).

(2.15)
From where
𝒟 g(v)[u] = 2v ⋅ u. (2.16)
• Consider
g ∶ Lin → Lin,
(2.17)
A → g(A) = A2 = AA.
Then
g(A + U) = (A + U)2 = A2 + (AU + UA) + o(U). (2.18)
From where
𝒟 g(A)[U] = AU + UA. (2.19)
• Consider
g ∶ 𝒳 → 𝒴 linear,
(2.20)
x → g(x).
Then
g(x + u) = g(x) + g(u). (2.21)
From where
𝒟 g(x)[u] = g(u). (2.22)
Frequently, it will be necessary to calculate the derivative of a product 𝜋(f , g) between
two functions f and g. In particular, we have already presented some product operations,
for example:
• Product of a real number 𝛼 by a vector v ∈ V . In this case we have 𝜋(𝛼, v) = 𝛼v.
• Inner product between two vectors in V . In this case 𝜋(u, v) = u ⋅ v.
• Inner product between two tensors, then 𝜋(A, T) = A ⋅ T.
• Tensor product between vectors, then 𝜋(u, v) = u ⊗ v.
• Application product of a second-order tensor T over a vector v. In this case it is
𝜋(T, v) = Tv.
All these operations have a common feature: they are all linear with respect to each
argument. In this case the operation is said to be bilinear. Hence, and seeking a general
rule, let us consider the following abstract product operation
𝜋 ∶ ℱ ×𝒢 → 𝒴 bilinear,
(2.23)
(f , g) → 𝜋(f , g),
where ℱ , 𝒢 and 𝒴 are finite-dimensional normed vector spaces. Consider now the
functions
f ∶ 𝒜 ⊂ 𝒳 → ℱ, g ∶ 𝒜 ⊂ 𝒳 → 𝒢, (2.24)
where 𝒳 is a finite-dimensional vector space and 𝒜 is an open subset of 𝒳 . With these
elements, the product h = 𝜋(f , g) is the function
h ∶ 𝒜 → 𝒴,
(2.25)
x → h(x) = 𝜋(f (x), g(x)).
Therefore, we have the following differentiation rule.
Product Rule. Let f and g be differentiable functions at x ∈ 𝒜 . Then, its product h =
𝜋(f , g) is also differentiable at x, and it is such that
𝒟 h(x)[u] = 𝜋(𝒟 f (x)[u], g(x)) + 𝜋(f (x), 𝒟 g(x)[u]). (2.26)
In particular, when 𝒜 is an open subset of ℝ, the product rule and the fact that 𝜋 is
bilinear lead to
̇
h(t) = 𝜋(ḟ (t), g(t)) + 𝜋(f (t), g(t)).
̇ (2.27)
Making use of this result, we obtain the following proposition. Let 𝜙, v, w, S and T
smooth functions in an open subset of ℝ such that the image of 𝜙 is ℝ, that of v, w is V ,
and for S, T it is Lin. Then, it is straightforward to prove that
̇ ̇ + 𝜙v,
(𝜙w) = 𝜙v ̇ (2.28)
̇
(v ⋅ w) = v̇ ⋅ w + v ⋅ w,
̇ (2.29)
̇ ̇ + TS, ̇
(TS) = TS (2.30)
̇
(T ⋅ S) = Ṫ ⋅ S + T ⋅ S,
̇ (2.31)
̇ ̇ + Tv.
(Tv) = Tv ̇ (2.32)
Exercise 2.1 Prove identities (2.28)–(2.32).
Another result frequently used in practice is the chain rule. Let 𝒳 , 𝒴 and ℱ be
finite-dimensional vector spaces (here we include the Euclidean point space ℰ). 𝒜 and
𝒞 are open subsets of 𝒳 and 𝒴 , respectively. Let f and g be functions such that
g ∶ 𝒜 → 𝒴, f ∶ 𝒞 → ℱ, (2.33)
and where R(g) ⊂ 𝒞 . Then, we have the following differentiation rule for the composi-
tion of functions.
Chain Rule. Let g and f be differentiable functions at x ∈ 𝒜 and y = g(x), correspond-
ingly. Then, the composition
h=f ○ g ∶𝒜 → ℱ, (2.34)
defined by
h(x) = f (g(x)), (2.35)
is differentiable at x, and the derivative is given by
𝒟 h(x) = 𝒟 f (y) ○ 𝒟 g(x), (2.36)
and its differential at x in the direction of u ∈ 𝒳 is
𝒟 h(x)[u] = 𝒟 f (g(x))[𝒟 g(x)[u]]. (2.37)
In particular, when 𝒳 ≡ ℝ, g and therefore h are real-valued functions. Putting t instead

of x in the previous expression we have
𝒟 h(t)[𝛼] = 𝒟 f (g(t))[𝒟 g(t)[𝛼]], (2.38)
which leads us to
[ ]
d d d
h(t) = f (g(t)) = 𝒟 f (g(t)) g(t) . (2.39)
dt dt dt
With this result we can prove that, for instance, the following holds
̇ ̇ T.
(ST ) = (S) (2.40)
Exercise 2.2 Prove identity (2.40).
A particularly useful result is to calculate the derivative of the determinant of a

second-order tensor. In order to do this we recall (1.165) for a second-order tensor T,
and with 𝛼 = −1, which leads to
1
det(I + T) = 1 + trT + ((trT)2 + tr(T2 )) + det T, (2.41)
2
and hence
det(I + T) = 1 + trT + o(T). (2.42)
Consider now the following
det(A + B) = det((I + BA−1 )A) = (det A) det(I + BA−1 ). (2.43)
Using now (2.42) into (2.43) we obtain
det(A + B) = det A(1 + tr(BA−1 ) + o(BA−1 ))

= det A + (det A)tr(BA−1 ) + (det A)o(BA−1 ). (2.44)
Clearly, from definition (2.12), we obtain
𝒟 (det A)[B] = (det A)tr(BA−1 ). (2.45)
From this result, it is straightforward to see that

̇ ̇ −1 ).
(det A) = (det A)tr(AA (2.46)
2.2 Gradient
In this section the definition given in (2.11) will be made specific for functions defined
in the open set 𝛺 of the Euclidean space ℰ where an origin O will be adopted, allow-
ing the biunivocal correspondence between points X ∈ ℰ and vectors x = X − O ∈ V .
Function 𝜙 in 𝛺 is said to be real-valued, vector-valued, tensor-valued (of any order),
or point-valued if the elements in the image are, for each x ∈ 𝛺, real numbers, vectors,
tensors (of any order), or points from ℰ (equivalently vectors from V ). For such func-
tions 𝜙 (assumed to be differentiable) we have seen that 𝒟 𝜙(x) ∈ Lin(𝒱 , 𝒴 ), where 𝒱
is the normed space associated with V , and where the normed space 𝒴 will denote the
normed spaces associated with ℝ, V , Lin, Lin, accordingly.
This linear application 𝒟 𝜙(x) will be called the gradient (and will be denoted by ∇𝜙(x)
or simply by ∇𝜙) of the field 𝜙 which, as seen in (2.12), is such that it approaches the
value of 𝜙 at x + u ∈ 𝛺 with an error of order o(u), in the following sense
𝜙(x + u) = 𝜙(x) + ∇𝜙(x)[u] + o(u). (2.47)
If we adopt an orthonormal basis for V , say {ei }, the previous expression is equivalent
to
1
∇𝜙(x)[ek ] = lim [𝜙(x + 𝛼ek ) − 𝜙(x)]. (2.48)
𝛼→0 𝛼
As can be easily seen, the limit is simply the partial derivative of 𝜙 with respect to xk , at
point x, that is
𝜕𝜙(x)
∇𝜙(x)[ek ] = . (2.49)
𝜕xk
Observe that, for a field in a finite-dimensional space of dimension dim 𝒴 , the
gradient is a transformation which belongs to a space of dimension (dim 𝒴 )(dim V ).
Result (2.49) allows us to easily define the representation of real-valued functions,
vector-valued functions, and tensor-valued functions, both in compact (intrinsic)
notation as well as in indicial notation, as shown in the following.
• Let 𝜙 be a real-valued function (also called scalar field) 𝜑, then
𝜕𝜑
∇𝜑 = e. (2.50)
𝜕xk k
• Let 𝜙 be a vector-valued function (also called a vector field) u, then
𝜕u 𝜕uj
∇u = ⊗ ek = (e ⊗ ek ). (2.51)
𝜕xk 𝜕xk j
• Let 𝜙 be a second-order tensor-valued function (also called a second-order tensor
field) S, then
𝜕S 𝜕Sij
∇S = ⊗ ek = (e ⊗ ej ⊗ ek ). (2.52)
𝜕xk 𝜕xk i
• Let 𝜙 be a third-order tensor-valued function (also called a third-order tensor field)
S, then
𝜕S 𝜕Sijr
∇S = ⊗ ek = (e ⊗ ej ⊗ er ⊗ ek ). (2.53)
𝜕xk 𝜕xk i
2.2 Gradient 29
• Let 𝜙 be a fourth-order tensor-valued function (also called a fourth-order tensor field)

𝕊, then
𝜕𝕊 𝜕Sijmn
∇𝕊 = ⊗ ek = (e ⊗ ej ⊗ em ⊗ en ⊗ ek ). (2.54)
𝜕xk 𝜕xk i
In intrinsic notation, the gradient of a vector field u can be defined as the second-order
tensor ∇u that satisfies
(∇u)T a = ∇(u ⋅ a), (2.55)
for any arbitrary constant vector a ∈ V .
Analogously, the gradient of a second-order tensor field S can be defined as the
third-order tensor ∇S that satisfies
(∇S)T a = ∇(ST a), (2.56)
for any arbitrary constant vector a ∈ V .
Alternatively, we can define the gradient of the tensor field S as the third-order tensor
∇S such that, for any arbitrary constant a ∈ V verifies
(∇S)t a = ∇(Sa). (2.57)
Now, consider a vector field of the form 𝜙u, with constant and arbitrary u ∈ V . Then,
the following holds
∇(𝜙u) = u ⊗ ∇𝜙. (2.58)
In fact, considering an arbitrary constant a ∈ V , from (2.55) note that
[u ⊗ (∇𝜙)]T a = [(∇𝜙) ⊗ u]a = (∇𝜙)u ⋅ a = ∇(𝜙u ⋅ a) = [∇(𝜙u)]T a. (2.59)
Then, expression (2.58) holds.
Consider now that we have a second-order tensor with the structure S = u ⊗ v. Then,
the following result can be proved
∇(u ⊗ v) = (u ⊗ ∇v) + ((∇u)T ⊗ v)T . (2.60)
Indeed, from definition (2.56), notice that
[∇(u ⊗ v)]T a = ∇((v ⊗ u)a) = ∇((a ⋅ u)v) = (a ⋅ u)∇v + v ⊗ ∇(a ⋅ u)
= (∇v ⊗ u)a + v ⊗ ((∇u)T a) = [(∇v ⊗ u) + (v ⊗ (∇u)T )]a. (2.61)
Then, using (1.195), this implies that
1 1 1
∇(u ⊗ v) = ((∇(u ⊗ v))T ) T = (∇v ⊗ u) T + (v ⊗ (∇u)T ) T
= (u ⊗ ∇v) + ((∇u)T ⊗ v)T , (2.62)
then identity (2.60) is verified.
As a consequence, we can define the second gradient of a vector field u as the
third-order tensor ∇∇u which satisfies the following
(∇∇u)T a = ∇((∇u)T a) = ∇(∇(u ⋅ a)), (2.63)
for any arbitrary constant a ∈ V . In a completely equivalent manner, ∇∇u can be defined
as
(∇∇u)a = ∇((∇u)a). (2.64)
Several results can be proved involving different types of functions. In effect, for 𝜑,
u (v), S (T) and S scalar, vector, tensor (second and third order), respectively, the follow-
ing results hold
∇(ST u) = (∇S)T u + ST ∇u, (2.65)
t
∇(Su) = (∇S) u + S∇u, (2.66)
∇(𝜑u) = 𝜑∇u + u ⊗ ∇𝜑, (2.67)
∇(v ⋅ u) = (∇v) u + (∇u) v,
T T
(2.68)
∇(𝜑S) = 𝜑(∇S) + S ⊗ ∇𝜑, (2.69)
1 1
∇(S ⋅ T) = (∇S) T + (∇T) S,
T T (2.70)
1
(∇(∇u)) = ((∇∇u)T )t ,
T (2.71)
1
T
(∇(∇u)) = ∇((∇u) ).
T (2.72)
Exercise 2.3 Prove the validity of expressions (2.65)–(2.72).
2.3 Divergence
With the definition of the gradient of a vector field, as well as the gradient of a tensor
field (of any order), we can introduce a new linear operator called divergence of 𝜙 and
denoted by div 𝜙. This operator can be represented by a (linear) operation involving the
gradient ∇𝜙 and the second-order identity tensor I, which takes the gradient ∇𝜙, which
belongs to a space of dimension (dim 𝒴 )(dim V ), into a space of dimension dim 𝒴 . We
can reinterpret the divergence operation as opposed to the gradient in this specific sense.
Then, we have
div 𝜙 = c(∇𝜙, I), (2.73)
which corresponds to the following specific definitions.
• Let 𝜙 be a vector field u, then
div u = ∇u ⋅ I, (2.74)
which in Cartesian coordinates is
𝜕u 𝜕uk
div u = ⋅e = . (2.75)
𝜕xk k 𝜕xk
• Let 𝜙 be a second-order tensor field S, then
div S = (∇S)I, (2.76)
𝜕S 𝜕Sjk
div S = ek = e. (2.77)
𝜕xk 𝜕xk j
2.3 Divergence 31
• Let 𝜙 be a third-order tensor field S, then

div S = (∇S)I, (2.78)
𝜕S 𝜕Sijk
div S = ek = (e ⊗ ej ). (2.79)
𝜕xk 𝜕xk i
• Let 𝜙 be a fourth-order tensor field 𝕊, then
div 𝕊 = (∇𝕊)I, (2.80)
𝜕𝕊 𝜕Sijrk
div 𝕊 = ek = (e ⊗ ej ⊗ er ). (2.81)
𝜕xk 𝜕xk i
Alternatively, but in a completely analogous way, we can define the divergence of a

second-order tensor field S as the unique vector field div S with the property
(div S) ⋅ a = div (ST a), (2.82)
for any arbitrary constant a ∈ V .
Similarly, for a third-order tensor S we can define
1
(div S) ⋅ A = div (S T A), (2.83)
for any arbitrary constant A ∈ Lin.
Now, it is possible to show that
div (ST) = (∇S)T + Sdiv T. (2.84)
In fact, using definitions (2.74) and (2.82) we have
div (ST) ⋅ a = div ((ST)T a) = div (TT ST a) = I ⋅ [TT ∇(ST a)] + ST a ⋅ div T
= T ⋅ ∇(ST a) + a ⋅ S div T = (∇S)T ⋅ a + a ⋅ S div T
= [(∇S)T + S div T] ⋅ a, (2.85)
and identity (2.84) follows.
Consider now the identity tensor T = I, then it follows directly that
div S = (∇S)I, (2.86)
which establishes the connection with definition (2.76).
Consider now a second-order tensor with the structure S = u ⊗ v, then from the pre-
vious results it follows that
div (u ⊗ v) = u div v + (∇u)v. (2.87)
In fact, from definition (2.76) and using expression (2.60) yields
div (u ⊗ v) = (∇(u ⊗ v))I = (u ⊗ ∇v)I + ((∇u)T ⊗ v)T I
= u(∇v ⋅ I) + (∇u I)v = u div v + (∇u)v, (2.88)
and (2.87) follows.
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
its administration. To those who know only the trading Jew of our
commercial centres, the modern Sadducees, it reveals a new aspect
of the race—that of the Jew turning aside from all enterprise, content
to live in pious mendicancy, his sole business the observance of the
minutiae of the ceremonial law; the Jew who binds on his phylactery,
wears long ringlets brought down in front of the ears in obedience to
a Levitical precept, and shuns the carrying of a pocket-handkerchief
on the Sabbath, save as a bracelet or a garter. Haluka is a mistake
and a stumbling-block in the path of Zionism. To turn Palestine into a
vast almshouse is not the way to lay the foundation of a Jewish
State. It attracts swarms of slothful bigots whose religion begins and
ends with externals, a salient example of ‘the letter that killeth,’
whose Pharisaic piety has no influence on their conduct in life. It has
established an unproductive population of inefficients, drawn from
the least desirable element of the race. Its evil effect is patent, and
the better sort of Jews themselves condemn it or advise its
restriction to the aged and infirm. It is depressing to move among
crowds of burly men, contributing nothing to the commonweal, puffed
up with self-satisfied bigotry and proud of their useless existence.
Left to his own devices the Jew gives the land a wide berth and
sticks to the town. But Western philanthropy has expended much
money and energy in putting him on to the land, rightly judging that
the foundations of a nation cannot be laid on the hawking of lead-
pencils among the Bedawin who do not want them.
“An agricultural college has been established near Jaffa, but it
was found that the youths availed themselves of the excellent
general education it afforded in order, not to till the land, but to
engage in more congenial and more profitable pursuits. Agricultural
colonies were founded, and the colonists, in addition to free land,
seed, and implements, were endowed by M. Edmund de Rothschild
with 3 francs a day for every man, 2 francs for every woman, and 1
franc for every child. This enabled the recipients to sit down and
employ Arabs to do the work, and has been stopped, to the great
chagrin of the colonists. As a matter of fact, the best of the farms to-
day depend on native labour. The mattock and the hoe are
repugnant to the Jewish colonists, who all seek for places in the
administration. The financial result is not cheering. The most
prosperous concern, perhaps, is the wine-growing establishment of
Rishon le Sion. Wine-making is the one industry the Jews take to.
They practise it individually on a small scale. The Western tourist in
Hebron is invariably accosted by some ringleted Israelite, who
proffers him his ‘guter Wein,’ and his thoughts go back to childhood
and that Brobdingnagian cluster of grapes which the spies bore
between them from the neighbouring valley of Eschol. The attitude of
the Jew with respect to agriculture is not to be wondered at. His
hereditary tendencies are against it. Centuries of urban life and
urban pursuits lie behind him. Inured to no exercise save that of his
wits, poor in physique, unused to the climate, can it be expected that
this child of the ghetto should turn to and compete with the strong
brown-lined Judaean peasant on the burning hillside? The one
exception is to be found in the Bulgarian Jews of Sephardim stock.
Hardy, stalwart, accustomed to tillage, these have made efficient
farmers, and next to them come the Jews from Roumania. But with
every inducement to settle on the land, and all sorts of props and
aids, the agricultural Jews in Palestine number only about 1000 out
318
of an ever-augmenting population. The fact is significant.”
Another point worth serious consideration is the political situation
created by Jewish immigration into Palestine. The colonists, the
majority of whom come from Russia, are a bone of contention
between the rival foreign propagandas in the country. The Russians,
as has been seen, while massacring the Jews in Bessarabia, court
their favour in Syria. The German Emperor, while tolerating anti-
Semitism in the Fatherland, earns the thanks of the Zionists by his
affability towards the exiles. The French, through the educational
efforts of the Alliance Israélite, whose pupils were hitherto mainly
drawn from the Spanish Jews, seek to turn the Jews of Palestine, as
of other parts of the Near East, into apostles of Gallic preponderance
and into instruments for the promotion of Gallic interests. The
Zionists are regarded by the French supporters of the Alliance as its
adversaries, and that for the reason that, while the mission of the
Alliance, as it is understood by the French, is the extension of the
Republic’s influence, and, therefore, very remotely connected with
the religious and national aspirations of the Jewish people, these
aspirations are precisely the point on which the Zionists lay the
319
greatest stress.
Lastly, the poverty of Palestine is a source of infinite difficulties
which can only be overcome by proportionate labour. Mr. Zangwill
has very eloquently described these conditions in one of his
speeches: “My friends,” he said, “you cannot buy Palestine. If you
had a hundred millions you could only buy the place where Palestine
once stood. Palestine itself you must re-create by labour, till it flows
again with milk and honey. The country is a good country. But it
needs a great irrigation scheme. To return there needs no miracle—
already a third of the population are Jews. If the Almighty Himself
carried the rest of us to Palestine by a miracle, what should we gain
except a free passage? In the sweat of our brow we must earn our
Palestine. And, therefore, the day we get Palestine, if the most
320
joyous, will also be the most terrible day of our movement.”
It was the consideration of the various obstacles enumerated
above, and others of a similar nature, coupled with the urgent need
to find a home for those wretched outcasts whose refuge in England
was menaced by the anti-alien agitation, that induced Dr. Herzl, in
321
July 1903, acting on Mr. Chamberlain’s suggestion, to propose
that an agreement should be entered into between the British
Government and the Jewish Colonial Trust for the establishment of a
Jewish settlement in British East Africa. The British Government,
anxious to find a way out of the “Alien Invasion” difficulty, welcomed
the proposal, and Lord Lansdowne expressed his readiness to afford
every facility to the Commission which, it was suggested, should be
sent by the Zionists to East Africa for purposes of investigation. If a
suitable site could be found, the Foreign Secretary professed himself
willing “to entertain favourably proposals for the establishment of a
Jewish colony on conditions which will enable the members to
observe their national customs. For this purpose he would be
prepared to discuss the details of a scheme comprising as its main
features the grant of a considerable area of land, the appointment of
a Jewish official as the chief of the local administration, and
permission to the colony to have a free hand in regard to municipal
legislation, and the management of religious and purely domestic
matters; such local autonomy being conditional on the right of His
322
Majesty’s Government to exercise general control.” This project
was announced at one of the meetings of the Zionist Congress at
Basel in August, 1903, and the motion submitted to the Congress for
the appointment of a committee, who should send an expedition to
East Africa in order to make investigations on the spot, was adopted.
But, though 295 voted in its favour, it was opposed by a great
minority of 177 votes, and the Russian delegates left the hall as a
protest. In a mass meeting of Zionists held in the following May in
London Mr. Israel Zangwill spoke warmly in favour of the proposal,
urging on his fellow-Zionists to take advantage of the offer made by
the British Government. But he added, “The Jewish Colonisation
Association, the one body that should have welcomed this offer of
323
territory with both hands, stood aloof.” Indeed, it cannot be said
that this new departure of Zionism has commanded universal
approval.
Nor did opposition to the scheme confine itself to platonic
protests. In the following December, Dr. Max Nordau, one of the
most distinguished men of letters among Dr. Herzl’s followers, who
had declared himself at the Basel Congress of the previous August
in favour of the proposal, was fired at in Paris by a Russian Jew, who
in his cross-examination before the Magistrate confessed that, in
making that attempt on Dr. Nordau’s life, he aimed at the enemy of
the Jewish race—the supporter of a scheme which involved the
abandonment by Zionists of Palestine as the object of the
324
movement. The incident afforded a painful proof of want of
concord, not only among the Jews generally, not only among the
supporters of various movements all theoretically recognising the
necessity of emigration, but even among the partisans themselves of
the Zionist cause. Dr. Herzl, anxious to allay the ill-feeling aroused
by his alleged abandonment of the Zionist idea, wrote a letter to Sir
Francis Montefiore, the president of the English Zionist Federation,
repudiating any desire to divert the movement away from the Holy
Land and to direct it to East Africa. Nothing, he protested, could be
further from the truth. He felt convinced that the solution of the
Jewish problem could only be effected in that country, Palestine, with
which are indelibly associated the historic and sentimental bias of
the Jewish people. But as the British Government had been
generous enough to offer territory for an autonomous settlement, it
would have been impossible and unreasonable to do otherwise than
325
give the offer careful consideration.
The clouds of misconception of which Dr. Herzl complained were
not dissipated by this declaration. If the attachment to Palestine is to
be the central idea of Zionism, it is hard to see how its realisation
could be promoted by the adoption of East Africa as a home. East
Africa, as a shrewd diplomatist has wittily observed, is not in
Palestine nor on the road to it. Its name awakens no memories or
hopes in the Jewish heart. Its soil is not hallowed by the temples and
the tombs of Israel. Its hills and vales are not haunted by the spirits
of the old martyrs and heroes of the nation. Neither the victories of
the past nor the prophetic visions for the future are in any way
associated with East Africa. In the circumstances, it is not to be
wondered at that the proposal, as Dr. Herzl admitted, did not meet
with the enthusiasm required for success, and that the strongest
opposition to the scheme came from those very Jews in the Russian
“pale” who stand in most need of a refuge from persecution. It must
be borne in mind that those very Jews who suffer most severely from
persecution are the most sincerely and wholeheartedly attached to
the ancient ideals of the race, and, owing partly to this psychological
cause, partly to their less advanced stage of development, they were
the least able to appreciate the practical advantages of the scheme
—the least disposed to submit to the dictates of prosaic expediency.
They firmly believe that, sooner or later, the beautiful dream is
destined to cohere into substance; and, like all dreamers, they abhor
compromise.
The proposal, however, met with opposition in other quarters
than the Russian Ghetto. Sir Charles Eliot, H.M.’s Commissioner for
the East Africa Protectorate, did not approve of it. While disclaiming
all anti-Semitic feeling, he said that his hesitation arose from doubt
as to whether any beneficial result would be obtained from the
scheme. The proposed colony, he pointed out, would not be
sufficiently large to relieve appreciably the congested and suffering
Jewish population of some parts of Eastern Europe, and he
expressed the fear that the climate and agricultural life would in no
way be suitable to Israelites. Moreover, when the country began to
attract British immigrants who showed an inclination to settle all
round the proposed Jewish colony, he considered that the scheme
became dangerous and deprecated its execution. It was, Sir Charles
declared, tantamount to reproducing in East Africa the very
conditions which have caused so much distress in Eastern Europe:
that is to say, the existence of a compact mass of Jews, differing in
language and customs from the surrounding population, to whom
they are likely to be superior in business capacity but inferior in
fighting power. To his mind, it is best to recognise frankly that such
326
conditions can never exist without danger to the public peace.
Sir Harry Johnston also was at first opposed to the scheme, but,
influenced partly by the development of the idea into a less crude
plan, and by the opening up of the country by the Uganda Railway,
partly, perhaps, by the intimate connection between the proposal and
the solution of our own overcrowding problem, he was ultimately
327
converted into a warm supporter of it. Soon afterwards a
Commission was despatched to East Africa to report on the tract of
land offered by the British Government for the proposed Zionist
328
settlement, —a proof that official opposition was abandoned.
But the opposition on the part of the Jews remained, as was
shown by the comments of the Jewish press of America on Mr. Israel
Zangwill’s visit to that country with a view to interesting American
Jews in the project, by his own “absolute and profound disgust” at
their cold irresponsiveness, and even more clearly by the
establishment of the London Zionist League. The President of this
association, Mr. Herbert Bentwich, in his inaugural address,
commenting on the matter, said that the British East Africa scheme
had never touched Zionism in the slightest degree; that it was a
mere accident in Jewish history to which Zionists could not devote
their energies; that the offer of territory had been made as a practical
expression of sympathy “by those who would exclude the alien
immigrant from Great Britain and as such was gratefully to be
received, but it could never be dealt with seriously,” and that the
Zionists hoped not to amend but to end the Jewish distress; that
329
being the object for which the league had been formed in London.
The Commission’s report, published in English and German, was
partly unfavourable and partly inconclusive; but even if it had been
favourable it is doubtful whether it would have met with approval. At
all events, when the scheme was definitely submitted to the Zionist
Congress at Basel, towards the end of July, 1905, it gave rise to
scenes of an unexampled character in the history of Zionism. The
Congress was divided into “Palestinians,” who were opposed to any
Jewish national settlement outside Palestine, and into
“Territorialists,” who maintained that the true aim of Zionism is to
obtain an autonomous settlement anywhere. The latter party, led by
Mr. Zangwill, was strongly in favour of the British offer; the former
was as strongly against it. After a stormy discussion the scheme was
rejected, and a resolution was adopted by an overwhelming majority,
in which the Seventh Zionist Congress reaffirmed the principle of the
creation of a legally secured home for the Jewish people in
Palestine, repudiating, both as object and as means, all colonising
activity outside Palestine, and adjacent lands, and, while thanking
the British Government for its kindness, it expressed the hope that
the latter will continue to aid the Zionists in their efforts to attain their
true aim. Thus this episode in the history of Zionism came to an end.
While the East Africa scheme was the subject of so much
discord both among the Jews and elsewhere, the leader of the
Zionists passed away. Dr. Herzl died at Edlach, in Austria, on the 3rd
of July, 1904, denied the happiness of seeing the mission to which
he had consecrated his life fulfilled. Among his adherents he has left
the reputation of a fervent apostle of emancipation, an inspired
idealist, a Messiah burning with the desire to rescue his people from
persecution and to lead them back to the Land of Promise. But even
those least inclined to follow his lead, could not but admire in him
that single-minded devotion to an ideal and that steadfastness in its
pursuit, which, whether success crowns their possessor or not,
proclaim the great man. Among the masses of his suffering co-
religionists the claims of Dr. Herzl to gratitude are less liable to
qualification. His personality produced a deep impression on their
imagination, and his efforts to realise the dream of eighteen
centuries, aided by the magic of his eloquence and the grace of his
manner, stirred their hearts to their inmost depths. Parents named
their children after Dr. Herzl, and his death aroused universal grief.
Ten thousand mourners, men and women, accompanied the funeral
to the Vienna cemetery, where the remains of the leader were laid to
rest amid the lamentations of his followers. The latter subsequently
gave a tangible proof of their gratitude by providing for their leader’s
orphaned family, and by resolving to perpetuate his memory in a
manner that would have pleased him. The memorial is to take the
form of a forest of ten thousand olive trees planted in some historic
spot in Palestine, and to be known as the Herzl Forest.
It would be rash to affirm that Zionism has died with Dr. Herzl.
Since his death, however, the movement has suffered a certain
transformation. Although his East Africa project has been rejected by
the majority of the party, and though both those who favoured it and
those who opposed it are now persuaded of the hopelessness of a
chartered home in Palestine, yet the plan of a return to the Land of
Promise still is enthusiastically adhered to, especially by the
sufferers of the Russian Ghetto: with the only difference that
repatriation is no longer looked for from the Sultan, or from the
European Powers, but from individual effort. Side by side with
political and diplomatic activity abroad, the Congress of 1905
resolved upon practical work in Palestine itself. This will take the
form of general investigation into the country’s resources and its
economic possibilities, and attempts at amelioration of its
administrative conditions. In other words, the colonisation of
Palestine is to be encouraged and its autonomy postponed until the
Jews are established in sufficient numbers to obtain their ultimate
object. “Creep into Palestine anyway. Colonise, redeem the land,
populate it, establish factories, stimulate trade; in a word, rebuild
Palestine and then see what the Sultan will say.” This is the advice
330
given by a prominent Jew to his co-religionists. Whether these
endeavours will yield the desired fruit or not is a matter on which it
would be more prudent to express an opinion after the event. It is
equally difficult to forecast the outcome of Mr. Zangwill’s “Jewish
Territorial Organisation,” which, abandoning Zion at all events for the
moment, seeks to found a Jewish Colony elsewhere. This variation
of the Zionist programme has attracted the sympathy of many of
those who stood completely aloof from the Herzl scheme. At the
same time it has driven a wedge into Zionism proper.
Meanwhile, it would be idle to deny that, viewed as a whole, the
Jewish Question at the present moment stands pretty much where it
has been at any time during the last eighteen hundred years. A few
Jews have solved the problem for themselves by assimilation to their
surroundings. Some more dwell among the Gentiles in a state of
benevolent neutrality: one with them on the surface, but at heart
distinct; performing all the duties of citizenship conscientiously and
sharing in the intellectual and political life of their adopted countries
brilliantly; yet, by their avoidance of intermarriage, implying the
existence of an insuperable barrier between themselves and those
who have not the good fortune to be descended from Abraham. But
the bulk of the race still is a people of wanderers; and their hope of
restoration little more than a beautiful, melancholy dream. There are
at the present hour upwards of ten million Jews, scattered to the four
corners of the earth. Nine of these millions live in Europe: two-thirds
of them in Russia, Roumania and Poland. In the Middle Ages
persecution in the West had driven them Eastwards. Lately
persecution in the East has turned the tide Westwards. There is no
rest for Israel. If the past and the present are any guides regarding
the future, it is safe to predict that for many centuries to come the
world will continue to witness the unique and mournful spectacle of a
great people roaming to and fro on the highways of the earth in
search of a home.
APPROXIMATE DENSITY OF THE JEWISH POPULATION.
London: Macmillan & Co. Ltd.
FOOTNOTES
1
The oldest Greek author in whose works the term occurs is the
orator Isaeus who flourished b.c. 364; the earliest Latin writer
is Plautus who died b.c. 184. Of course, the word, though very
good Hebrew, may have been imported into Europe by the
Phoenicians. But it would be a bold man who would attempt to
distinguish between Jewish and Phoenician merchants at this
time of day.
2
I. Macc. xiii. 51.
3
On the other hand, a famous Palestinian authority, Abbahu (c.
279–320 a.d.), was a noted friend of Greek. He taught it to his
daughters as “an ornament.” Of Abbahu it was said that he
was the living illustration of Ecclesiastes vii. 18 “It is good that
thou shouldst take hold of this (i.e. the Jewish Law), yet also
from that (i.e. Gentile culture) withdraw not thy hand: for he
that feareth God shall come forth of them all.” Hellenism might
appeal sometimes to the Jew’s head, though it never thrilled
his heart. Cf. p. 39 below.
4
Hdt. i. 1–5.
5
Justin Mart. Dial. i.–vii.
6
I am referring here to what seems to me characteristic of
Hebraism in the earlier periods when it came into contact and
conflict with Hellenism. In its subsequent development
Pharisaism (which gradually absorbed the whole of the Jewish
people) avoided undue asceticism and laid stress on the joy of
living. “Joyous service” became the keynote of Judaism and
Jewish life in the Middle-ages, as it was the keynote of many
Pharisees in the first centuries of the Christian era. The
Essenes, though highly important in the history of primitive
Christianity, had less influence on the main development of
Rabbinic Judaism.
7
Bk. i. ch. vi. 5–7.
8
Mac. xiv.–xv.
9
Pro L. Flacco, 28. All the references made to the Jews and
Judaism in Greek and Latin literature have been well collected
and interpreted by T. Reinach in his Textes d’auteurs grecs et
romains relatifs au Judaisme (Paris, 1895).
10
Suetonius, Julius, 84.
11
Id. Augustus, 93.
12
Suetonius, Tiberius, 36.
13
Tacitus, Historia, v. 9.
14
Suetonius, Claudius, 25. Cp. Acts, xviii. 2.
15
Sat. i. 9, 69, etc.
16
Ant. 18. 3 (4).
17
Sat. v. 184.
18
Fgm. ap. Augustin., Civ. D. 6, 11.
19
Sat. xiv. 96–99, etc.
20
Isaiah iii. 26.
21
Deuter. vii. 3; Nehem. xiii. 25.
22
Juvenal, Sat. xiv. 97.
23
Tacitus, Hist. v. 9.
24
Hist. v. 4.
25
Hist. v. 8.
26
Ib. 5. Cp. Juv. Sat. xiv. 103–4.
27
Annales, xv. 44.
28
Juv. Sat. iii. 12–14.
29
Hist. i. 1.
30
It is, however, only fair to add that the Jewish records know
nothing of these atrocities, and, as M. Reinach justly
comments, the above details (for which Dion Cassius is our
sole authority) “inspirent la méfiance.” The numbers of the
victims, as reported by Dion, are in themselves sufficient to
throw doubt upon the story.
31
H. Graetz, History of the Jews, Eng. tr. vol. ii. p. 405.
32
Mommsen, History of Rome, Eng. tr. vol. iv. p. 642.
33
Just. Mart. Dial. xvii.
34
c Cels. vi. 27.
35
This account of the fervid response of the Jews to Julian’s call,
based on the authority of Christian writers, is pronounced by
the Jewish historian Graetz “purely fictitious” (History of the
Jews, Eng. tr. vol. ii. p. 606). At any rate, it seems to be a
fiction that bears upon it a clearer mark of verisimilitude than
many a “historical” document relating to this period.
36
That the ‘Haman’ so burned was only an effigy is now clearly
shown by an original Geonic Responsum on the subject
discovered in the Cairo Geniza and published in the Jewish
Quarterly Review, xvi. pp. 651 fol.
37
The exact date of the “Tour” is disputed. It probably occupied
the thirteen years between 1160 and 1173.
38
Benjamin of Tudela’s Itinerary, p. 24 (ed. Asher). A new critical
edition (by M. N. Adler) has recently appeared in the Jewish
Quarterly Review. For the passage in the text see ibid. xvi.
730.
39
H. Graetz, History of the Jews, vol. iii. p. 31.
40
41
With regard to the legal relations between the Jews and the
various mediaeval states see J. E. Scherer’s Beiträge zur
Geschichte des Judenrechtes im Mittelalter (1901), a work
unhappily left incomplete by the death of the author.
42
Joseph Jacobs, “The God of Israel” in the Nineteenth Century,
September 1879.
43
J. E. Sandys, A History of Classical Scholarship, pp. 539 fol.
44
H. Graetz, History of the Jews, vol. iii. p. 349. For some fine
translations of Jehuda Halevi’s poems the reader may turn to
Mrs. H. Lucas’ The Jewish Year (Macmillan, 1898) and to Mrs.
R. N. Salaman’s Songs of Exile (Macmillan, 1905). Jehuda
Halevi’s philosophical dialogue the Khazari has recently been
translated into English by Dr. H. Hirschfeld (Routledge, 1905).
45
Joseph Jacobs, “The God of Israel,” The Nineteenth Century,
September, 1879. The Guide has been translated into English
by Dr. M. Friedländer (1885; new edition, Routledge, 1904).
46
47
For Maimonides see the volume on the subject by D. Yellin and
I. Abrahams in the Jewish Worthies Series, Vol. I. (Macmillan,
1903).
48
Vogelstein and Rieger, Geschichte der Juden in Rom, i, pp.
136 fol. In general this work should be consulted for all points
of contact between the Papacy and Judaism in the middle
ages.
49
Ibn Verga, Shebet Yehuda (ed. Wiener), p. 50.
50
Statutes of Avignon quoted by Israel Abrahams, Jewish Life in
the Middle Ages, p. 408.
51
In the first century of our era Aristo of Pella is said to have
been the author of an attempt to prove from the Prophets that
Jesus was the Messiah. Justin Martyr followed in his path, and
the latter writer’s arguments subsequently reappear in the
works of Tertullian and other Fathers. See W. Trollope’s edition
of S. Justini Dialogus, p. 4.
52
Heine’s famous satire “Disputation” well characterises the
futility of these public controversies; “der Jude wird verbrannt”
was Lessing’s grim summary in Nathan der Weise. See also
Schechter, Studies in Judaism, pp. 125 fol.
53
Lord Curzon, Problems of the Far East, p. 298.
54
Israel Abrahams, Jewish Life in the Middle Ages, p. 407.
55
Lord Curzon, Problems of the Far East, p. 303.
56
Inferno, xi. 49–50.
57
Deuter. xxiii. 19.
58
Ps. xv. 1, 5.
59
Koran (Sale’s tr.) ch. ii.
60
Rep. 555 E.
61
Laws, 742 c.
62
Pol. i. 3, 23.
63
Fifth Homily.
64
We hear, for example, that early in the thirteenth century
interest was fixed by law at 12½ per cent. at Verona, while at
Modena towards the end of the same century it seems to have
been as high as 20 per cent. The Republic of Genoa, a
hundred years later, despite Italy’s commercial prosperity, paid
from 7 to 10 per cent. to her creditors. Much more oppressive
were the conditions of the money market in France and
England. Instances occur of 50 per cent., and there is an edict
of Philip Augustus limiting the Jews in France to 48 per cent. At
the beginning of the fourteenth century an ordinance of Philip
the Fair allows 20 per cent. after the first year of a loan, while
in England under Henry III. there are cases on record of 10 per
cent. for two months.
65
The notorious legend of Hugh of Lincoln is placed by the
chronicler, Matthew Paris, in the year 1255. The prolific nature
of monkish imagination on this subject is shown by the
subjoined facts due to Tyrwhitt’s researches: “In the first four
months of the Acta Sanctorum by Bollandus, I find the
following names of children canonized, as having been
murdered by Jews:
XXV.Mart.Willielmus Norvicensis, 1144;

Richardus, Parisiis, 1179;
XVII.Apr. Rudolphus, Bernae, 1287;
Wernerus, Wesaliae, anno eodem;
Albertus, Poloniae, 1598.
I suppose the remaining eight months would furnish at least

as many more.” Quoted by Dr. W. W. Skeat, Chaucer, Intr., p.
xxiii.
66
A contemporary historian pathetically states that in 1248 “no
foreigner, let alone an Englishman, could look at an English
coin with dry eyes and unbroken heart.” Henry III. issued a
new coin; but it was not long ere it reached the condition of the
older one. In England the penalty for the crime was loss of life
or limbs.
67
W. Cunningham, The Growth of English Industry and
Commerce, p. 187.
68
The original charter of expulsion has recently been discovered;
it was, by a gracious irony of history, found at Leicester at a
time when a Jew had been thrice mayor of the town.
69
See above, p. 98.
70
Alami, quoted by H. Graetz, History of the Jews, vol. iv. p. 220.
71
A History of the Inquisition of Spain, by H. C. Lea (Macmillan,
Vols. I., II. and III. of which have now appeared, 1906), is a
monumental work on its subject.
72
Apologia pro vita sua, p. 29.
73
This attachment of Jews to countries with which they have long
been identified recurs at the present day. Jewish emigration
associations are constantly faced by the reluctance of very
many Russian Jews to tear themselves from Russia.
74
As a matter of fact, Celestine V. hardly deserves this sentence.
It was not cowardice but native humility, the consciousness of
the temptations of power, physical weakness, and the hermit’s
longing for tranquillity that impelled the Pope to resign after five
months and eight days’ pontificate. Commentators had hitherto
agreed in applying the above passage to Celestine V., but
recent opinion rejects the traditional interpretation. However
that may be, the point which concerns us is that Dante
censures a pope.
75
See Berliner, Persönliche Beziehungen zwischen Christen und
Juden. Reference should also be made to the same author’s
Geschichte der Juden in Rom.
76
Paradiso, xii.
77
Praef. ad Librum de Serm. Lat., quoted by Tyrwhitt in Dr. W. W.
Skeat’s Chaucer, Intr., p. xxiii.
78
See above, p. 170.
79
A good account of the Roman Ghetto may be found in E.
Rodocanachi’s Le Saint-Siège et les Juifs: Le Ghetto à Rome
(Paris, 1891).
80
Browning in his Holy-Cross Day has depicted the farcical
grotesqueness of these efforts at conversion as unsparingly as
Heine satirised the compulsory controversies. Cp. above, p. 98
n.
81
Diary, March 23, 1646.
82
I. Abrahams, Jewish Life in the Middle Ages, pp. 409–410.
83
S. Schechter, Studies in Judaism, p. 15.
84
William Hazlitt’s Translation, ch. 857.
85
Ch. 853.
86
Ch. 852.
87
Ch. 700.
88
Ch. 859.
89
Ch. 852.
90
Ch. 864.
91
Ibid.
92
H. Graetz, History of the Jews, vol. iv. p. 502.
93
Ch. 857.
94
Ch. 864.
95
Ch. 866.
96
Ch. 852.
97
Ibid.
98
Ibid.
99
Ibid.
100
Ch. 856.
101
Ch. 861.
102
Ch. 864.
103
Ch. 852.
104
Ch. 855.
105
Ch. 867.
106
Ch. 862.
107
Ch. 858.
108
Ch. 852.
109
Ch. 854.
110
Ch. 860.
111
Ch. 854.
112
Ch. 855.
113
Ch. 854.
114
Ch. 861.
115
Ch. 865.
116
Ch. 869.
117
Ch. 355. O Martin, Martin! What of the “circumcision of the
heart,” to say nothing about Christian charity? But this was in
1541.
118
Ch. 861.
119
Ch. 865.
120
Ch. 866.
121
Von den Juden und Ihren Luegen (1544) is the title of one of
these pamphlets. See H. Graetz, History of the Jews, vol. iv.
pp. 583 fol.
122
For the history of the Hamburg Jews, see M. Grunwald’s
Hamburg’s Deutsche Juden, 1904.
123
On Pfefferkorn and Reuchlin see two papers by S. A. Hirsch in
A Book of Essays (Macmillan, 1905).
124
See above, p. 175.
125
Perhaps the most lucid and impartial estimate of Spinoza’s
place in the world of thought, accessible to the English reader,
is to be found in Sir Frederick Pollock’s Spinoza: His Life and
Philosophy. This work also contains in an appendix a reprint of
the English translation (1706) of the Dutch biography of
Spinoza by his friend the Lutheran minister Johannes Colerus,
published in 1705. The latest biography of Spinoza, based on
new materials, is J. Freudenthal’s Spinoza, sein Leben und
seine Lehre, Erster Band, Das Leben Spinozas (Stuttgart,
1904).
126
Confessio Amantis, bk. vii.
127
See above, p. 199.

Introduction To The Variational Formulation in Mechanics Edgardo O Taroco Full Chapter

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Introduction To The Variational Formulation in Mechanics Edgardo O Taroco Full Chapter

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Introduction to the Variational

Formulation in Mechanics Edgardo O.

Fundamentals and Applications

Edgardo O. Taroco, Pablo J. Blanco and Raúl A. Feijóo

Limit of Liability/Disclaimer of Warranty

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication data applied for

Cover Design by Wiley

Set in 10/12pt Warnock by SPi Global, Pondicherry, India

Part I Vector and Tensor Algebra and Analysis 1

1 Vector and Tensor Algebra 3

2 Vector and Tensor Analysis 23

Part II Variational Formulations in Mechanics 47

3 Method of Virtual Power 49

3.4 Bodies without Constraints 74

4 Hyperelastic Materials at Inﬁnitesimal Strains 109

4.9 Castigliano Theorems 136

5 Materials Exhibiting Creep 165

6 Materials Exhibiting Plasticity 229

6.4.2 Yield Criterion and Hardening Law 246

Part III Modeling of Structural Components 281

7 Bending of Beams 285

8 Torsion of Bars 301

9 Plates and Shells 315

9.4 Principle of Virtual Power 323

Part IV Other Problems in Physics 377

10 Heat Transfer 379

11 Incompressible Fluid Flow 393

11.4 Navier–Stokes Equations 403

12 High-Order Continua 411

Part V Multiscale Modeling 435

13 Method of Multiscale Virtual Power 439

14 Applications of Multiscale Modeling 475

14.2.5 Tangent Operators 487

Part VI Appendices 501

A Deﬁnitions and Notations 503

B Elements of Real and Functional Analysis 539

C Functionals and the Gâteaux Derivative 555

Petrópolis, Brazil Pablo J. Blanco

Vector and Tensor Algebra and Analysis

Vector and Tensor Algebra

1.1 Points and Vectors

1 Vectors {ei } are called linearly independent if 𝛼i ei = 𝟎 implies 𝛼i = 0 for i = 1, 2, 3.

• Components of u with respect to {ei } are contravariant components, and are

If the basis is orthonormal, it is easy to show that it is identical to its dual

Exercise 1.1 Verify the validity of identities given by (1.14).

1.2 Second-Order Tensors

(n ⊗ n)v Figure 1.1 Geometric concept of orthogonal

which yields (1.63). Lastly, note that

• Skew-symmetric component of a tensor. Compact notation: W ∈ Skw ⇔ W = −WT ,

The determinant of a tensor A ∈ Lin can be deﬁned as

Exercise 1.3 Show that a tensor is orthogonal if and only if QQT = QT Q = I.

The cross product u × v between vectors u, v ∈ V , whose angle between them is 𝜃, is

Exercise 1.4 Prove that (1.157) holds.

When u, v, w are linearly independent, the value of the product u ⋅ (v × w) represents

⎧1 if (i, j, k) is an even permutation of (1, 2, 3),

1.3 Third-Order Tensors

In short, third-order tensors are linear applications of the form

do this, assume that ST1 ≠ ST2 , then

a ⋅ (S1T − S2T )T = 0 ∀a ∈ V , ∀T ∈ Lin, (1.186)

(S1T − S2T )T = 𝟎 ∀T ∈ Lin, (1.187)

S1T = S2T . (1.188)

Exercise 1.5 Prove that (1.197) and (1.198) are veriﬁed.

Let a ∈ V and T = t1 ⊗ t2 ∈ Lin be arbitrary, then we can build an element of Lin