Understanding Helicity in Quantum Mechanics: Explained by a Scientist

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Mk
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Helicity
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of helicity in quantum mechanics, exploring its definition, mathematical representation, and implications in quantum field theory (QFT). Participants seek clarification on the nature of helicity, its relationship with angular momentum and momentum, and its significance in particle interactions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants define helicity as the proportionality constant between the momentum operator and the Pauli-Lubanski vector, suggesting it represents the projection of total angular momentum along the direction of momentum.
  • Others argue that helicity is related to the direction of a particle's spin in relation to its momentum, emphasizing the use of a helicity operator to measure this relationship.
  • One participant challenges the clarity of the definitions provided, asserting that they refer to eigenvalues rather than the operator itself.
  • There is a contention regarding the interpretation of helicity, with some participants questioning the physical meaning of "rotation" for point-like particles and the relevance of group theory in defining helicity.
  • Disagreements arise over the definitions and implications of helicity, with participants asserting differing views on the relationship between particles and quantum states.
  • Some participants suggest specific texts for further reading on helicity in quantum mechanics and quantum field theory, indicating a desire for deeper understanding.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the definition and implications of helicity, with no consensus reached on the correct interpretation or representation of the concept. Disagreements persist regarding the role of group theory and the physical interpretation of helicity in relation to point-like particles.

Contextual Notes

Limitations in definitions and interpretations are evident, with participants highlighting the need for clarity in the mathematical representation of helicity and its physical implications. The discussion reflects ongoing uncertainties and challenges in understanding the concept within quantum mechanics.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to students and researchers in quantum mechanics and quantum field theory, particularly those seeking to understand the concept of helicity and its applications in particle physics.

Mk
Messages
2,039
Reaction score
4
It is quite difficult to understand, can someone explain what is helicity?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Mk said:
It is quite difficult to understand, can someone explain what is helicity?

It is defined as the proportionality constant between the operators:4momentum and Pauli-Lubanski 4 vector in the case of a massless irreductible representation of the Poincaré group.
It has the physical meaning of the projection of the total angular momentum on the direction of the linear momemntum of the particle.It is denoted by "lambda":
\lambda=:\frac{\vec{J}\cdot\vec{P}}{P^{0}}
It can take only positive/negative integer/semiinteger values.
For the photon:\lambda=\pm 1;for the scalar boson it is zero,for the graviton it is \pm 2 [/tex]<br /> <br /> Daniel.
 
Mk said:
It is quite difficult to understand, can someone explain what is helicity?

Helicity is used in QM and it expresses the connection between the direction in which a particle rotates around some axis through that particle (expressed by the spin quantum number) and the direction of propagation of a particle (expressed by its momentum p = mv).

In QM you can measure the spin of some particle by using the spin quantum operator S' and the momentum is expressed by some vector p. Now if you want to measure the helicity of some particle you just apply a new operator (the helicity-operator) onto the particle's wavefunction. This new operator is defined as p.S' and it measures the components of the spin operator along the direction of momentum p (this is the direction along which the particle moves). p.S' is the scalar product of some vector with an operator and suppose for example that p is along the z-axis then the helicity operator is nothing else then the length of vector p (this is the momentum-value of the particle) multiplyed with the z-component of the spin operator S'. So you measure the spin along the z-axis.

Positive helicity means that the rotation-axis of the spin is in the same direction as the direction in which the particle moves. If helicity is negative, it is the other way around


regards
marlon

these concepts are very important in QFT, and more specifically the weak interactions because particles of different helicity behave totally different under such interactions. Only left handed fermions will feel the weak force and therefore are fundamentally different as right handed fermions...
 
dextercioby said:
It is defined as the proportionality constant between the operators:


This is wrong...
What you are referring to is the eigenvalue of this helicity operator, not the operator itself... GROUPTHEORY dextercioby... :rolleyes:


Besides, i don't think that this definition will bring much clarity...

And besides, also i this case the direction of the spin can be defined in terms of the direction of momentum...


marlon
 
Yes,it's not a fortunate exprimation.That relation should include "hats",of course.It is the operator:

\hat{\lambda} =\frac{\hat{\vec{J}}\cdot\hat{\vec{P}}}{P^{0}}
\hat{W}^{\mu}=:\hat{\lambda}\hat{P}^{\mu}
Yields the comutation relations with the generators of the Poincaré group
[\hat{\lambda},\hat{M}_{\mu\nu}]_{-}=\hat{0}
[\hat{\lambda},\hat{W}_{\mu}]_{-}=\hat{0}
[\hat{\lambda},\hat{P}_{\mu}]_{-}=\hat{0}

Daniel.

PS.What i said about its eigenvalues is correct.
 
marlon said:
Helicity is used in QM and it expresses the connection between the direction in which a particle rotates around some axis through that particle (expressed by the spin quantum number) and the direction of propagation of a particle (expressed by its momentum p = mv).

regards
marlon

Wow,Marlon,that's the second thread with the bunch of nonsense like "the direction in which a particle rotates around some axis through that particle".
Are u inventing new physics and i don't see it...?

Daniel.

PS.Since these particles are pointlike,how would u define their rotation ??
 
dextercioby said:
Wow,Marlon,that's the second thread with the bunch of nonsense like "the direction in which a particle rotates around some axis through that particle".
Are u inventing new physics and i don't see it...?

Daniel.

PS.Since these particles are pointlike,how would u define their rotation ??

Please review your group theory... Ever heard of rotations in spin space or is this some new physics?

And yes, your definition is wrong in this sense that you are referring to the actual eigenvalues of the helicity operator, not the operator itself...

Tell me, what do you think this operator expresses, HMMM??


marlon
 
marlon said:
Please review your group theory... Ever heard of rotations in spin space or is this some new physics?


Tell me, what do you think this operator expresses, HMMM??

marlon

I don't need group theory.Rotations in spin space would not apply to particles,but to quantum states,WHICH ARE VECTORS.They are rotations of vectors/quanutm states,not of particles.Read first principle of QM.It will enlighten you.The particle is pointlike and,hopefully,u know it.So speaking about "axis through that particle" and rotating round an axis through the particle makes me laugh...Really... :-p
I said what it represents.The projection of the total angular momentum on the direction of movement.If u come up with another definition,u're free to do so,as long as it is correct.

Daniel.
 
dextercioby said:
I don't need group theory

wrong again...err i could have sworn i said that before to you. Spin-rotations are defined using the principles of group theory, which you don't seem to grasp.

Rotations in spin space would not apply to particles,but to quantum states,WHICH ARE VECTORS.

Newsflash : particles are the same as quantumstates man, they are represented by it...this remark really is useless...useless arguing...


They are rotations of vectors/quanutm states,not of particles.Read first principle of QM.

this was my entire point...really...thank you...don't keep on whinning about particles vs quantumstates.

The particle is pointlike and,hopefully,u know it.So speaking about "axis through that particle" and rotating round an axis through the particle makes me laugh...Really... :-p

it is really not that difficult to envision. think of a rotating sphere... :wink:


I said what it represents.The projection of the total angular momentum on the direction of movement.If u come up with another definition,u're free to do so,as long as it is correct.

Daniel.

i gave the correct definition, you did not...


marlon
 
  • #10
I'll just wait till you guys figure it out...
 
  • #11
Mk said:
I'll just wait till you guys figure it out...

:smile: Which is never... :-p

My advice:take Sakurai "Modern Quantum Mechanics" for helicity in QM and Bailin & Love "Weak Interactions" for helicity in QFT.
Learn as much math is possible.

Daniel.
 
  • #12
Mk said:
I'll just wait till you guys figure it out...


Hi, MK, just read my first post and do feel free to ask more questions if something is not clear. All my other posts here, you must disregard, because they are waiste of time...

Besides, don't do any QFT not yet. That is a stupid advice. First start out with any thorough book on QM and there you will also find some explanation for the helicity-operator. I always used Bransden and Joachain "QUANTMMECHANICS"

regards
marlon
 

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
966
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
11K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
8K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
6K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K