Is the identification between symmetric tensors and homogeneous polynomials useful? The general question:
Given an $n$-dimensional vector space $V$ over a field $k$, there exists an identification 
$$\mathrm{Sym}^d(V) \sim k[x_1, \dots, x_n]_d$$
between the space of symmetric order $d$ tensors on $V$ and the space of order $d$ homogeneous polynomials in $n$ indeterminates over $k$. 
I am wondering whether this identification is ever of much use in the study of tensors and tensor fields. In particular, I am interested in ways in which this identification might simplify problems in differential geometry, but uses in other fields would be interesting also.

A potential example of what I'm asking about:
This question is inspired by the following observation I made, which I would also like to confirm is valid:
Let $\omega \in \mathrm{Sym}^1(V)$ be some unknown. Suppose we have a map
$$\phi \colon \mathrm{Sym}^1(V) \longrightarrow k$$
along with a few known elements $\eta, \theta, \nu_1, \nu_2 \in \mathrm{Sym}^1(V)$. Additionally, we have the following system of equations:
$$
\begin{align}
\phi(\omega) \cdot \eta + \phi(\eta) \cdot \omega &= \nu_1 \\
\phi(\omega) \cdot \theta + \phi(\theta) \cdot \omega &= \nu_2 
\end{align}
$$
Our goal is to solve for $\omega$. In light of the above, we can identify $\mathrm{Sym}^1(V)$ with $k[x_1, \dots, x_n]_1 \subset k[x_1, \dots, x_n]$, form the field of fractions $k(x_1, \dots, x_n)$ and solve the above system for $\omega$ using linear algebra. Doing so, we will arrive at an expression of the form:
$$
\left(\phi(\theta)\eta - \phi(\eta)\theta\right)\omega = \theta \cdot \nu_1 + \eta \cdot \nu_2
$$
where all the elements are now considered to be in $k(x_1, \dots, x_n)$, so all the products make sense. Dividing, we can obtain an expression for $\omega$ expressed entirely in terms of objects we know. We can now evaluate this expression on the appropriate vectors to obtain an expression for $\omega$ in terms of a basis for $\mathrm{Sym}^1(V)$.
Note: I originally posted this question here on math.se. At the time I was unsure whether it would better to post it on mathoverflow. Given that it has remained unanswered over there for some time, I figured I would try posting it here. I am not as familiar with mathoverflow as some other stack exchange sites, so please feel free to edit my post in order to make things fit better with this site if necessary.
 A: I suggest an example showing that sometimes the object we need is actually the homogeneous polynomial in velocities but in order to work with it it is convenient to view it as a symmetric tensor since it  allows us  to use invariant ways to work with the tensors. 
My  example is 
the Killing tensor. In a simplest situation 
 it is a symmetric $(0,2)$ tensor $K$ satisfying the equation $$symmetrisation \ of  (\nabla K)=0.$$ If your prefer indices, the equation above looks 
$$
K_{(ij,k)}=0. 
$$
The tensor plays improtant role in physics  and differential geometry since it is corresponds to conservative quantaties of the geodesics flow: for a 
symmetric tensor $K$ the function $K(\dot \gamma, \dot \gamma)$ is constant along geodesics  if and only if it is a Killing tensor.  We see that the geometric condition that is equavalent to the property of tensor $K$ to be Killing is actually a condition about the symmetric polynomial $K(\xi, \xi)$. 
Though the Killing equation above is equivalent to any other equation that is equivalent to the fact that  $K(\dot\gamma, \dot\gamma)$ which is quadratic polynomial in $\dot \gamma$  is preserved along geodesics, writing it in the tensorial form above allows one to use the tensorial mashinery to work with this equation. 
For example, one can use the tensorial mashinery to obtain conditions on the curvature that prevent a metric to have a Killing tensor. One can also use it in order to understand  how many Killing tensors may exist on a  manifold. 
Also projective invariance of the Killing equations is better seenable on the level of Killing tensors and I did use it very extencively in my research. 
Everything what I said is also true for higher degree $d$ of the polynomial, i.e., for higher valency  of the tensor.   
