Factor in equation (3.49) of Peskin and Schroeder

  • Thread starter Thread starter jmlaniel
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Peskin Schroeder
jmlaniel
Messages
29
Reaction score
0
My question concerns the 1/2 factor in the exponential of Eq. (3.49) of Peskin and Schroeder.

This equation concerns the Lorentz boost transformation of a spinor along the z-axis (or 3-direction).

According to Eq. (3.26):

S^{03} = -\frac{i}{2}\begin{bmatrix}\sigma^3 & 0 \\0 & -\sigma^3\end{bmatrix}

and Eq. (3.30):

\Lambda_{1/2} = exp(-\frac{i}{2}\omega_{03} S^{03})

Combining these two expressions and using the infinitesimal boost (according to Eq. (3.48) and Eq. (3.21)): \omega_{03} = \eta (here \eta is the rapidity):

\Lambda_{1/2} = exp(-\frac{1}{4}\eta \begin{bmatrix}\sigma^3 & 0 \\0 & -\sigma^3\end{bmatrix})

My problem is that Peskin and Schroeder have a 1/2 factor where my simple substitution gives a 1/4?

Am I misinterpresting the meaning of \omega_{03}? I am assuming that \eta = \beta (v/c) from my understanding of Eq. (3.21)... this might be a problem?!?

Thanks for your help!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
jmlaniel said:
[...] and Eq. (3.30):

\Lambda_{1/2} = exp(-\frac{i}{2}\omega_{03} S^{03})
In my version of P&S, eq(3.30) is
$$
\Lambda_{1/2} = exp(-\frac{i}{2}\omega_{\mu\nu} S^{\mu\nu})
$$
and you must sum over ##\mu, \nu##. So you need an exponent involving
$$
(\omega_{03} S^{03} + \omega_{30} S^{30})
$$
Is that enough for you to figure out the rest...?
 
Thanks Strangerep! I just completely forgot the summation over the indices... That was also enough for me to figure out the rest!
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
According to recent podcast between Jacob Barandes and Sean Carroll, Barandes claims that putting a sensitive qubit near one of the slits of a double slit interference experiment is sufficient to break the interference pattern. Here are his words from the official transcript: Is that true? Caveats I see: The qubit is a quantum object, so if the particle was in a superposition of up and down, the qubit can be in a superposition too. Measuring the qubit in an orthogonal direction might...

Similar threads

Back
Top