A Algebra - Clifford, Dirac, Lorentz

spaghetti3451
Messages
1,311
Reaction score
31
In the representation theory of Lorentz transformations, the words Clifford algebra and Dirac algebra are used interchangeably. However, there is a distinction between the two. Indeed, the Dirac algebra is the particular Clifford algebra ##Cl_{4}({\bf{C}})\equiv Cl_{1,3}({\bf{C}})## with a basis generated by the matrices ##\gamma^{\mu}## called Dirac matrices which have the property that ##\{\gamma^{\mu},\gamma^{\nu}\}=2g^{\mu\nu}##.

On the other hand, the spinor representation of the Lorentz algebra can be obtained using the Dirac matrices which obey the Dirac algebra. The above is a qualitative picture of the key difference between the Clifford algebra, Dirac algebra and the Lorentz algebra.

Can someone please flesh out the mathematical details?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think that's enough for a whole book. You can certainly find out more by Googling.

Lorentz transformations in spinor space and in four-vector space only require the Pauli Algebra or "Algebra of Physical Space", not the Dirac Algebra. David Hestenes wrote a book "Space-Time Algebra" in which he used the Dirac matrices as the basis for spacetime, but it seems that the only case in which this was actually useful was in a different way of writing the Dirac equation itself. Special Relativity can be described perfectly well using a vector algebra that is equivalent to the Pauli Algebra, which I usually call informally "Complex Four-vector Algebra" to make it easy to understand, and which William Baylis calls the "Algebra of Physical Space", for example in his book "Electrodynamics: A Modern Geometric Approach". It is also possible to write the Dirac equation in the Algebra of Physical Space (Pauli Algebra) rather than the full Dirac algebra.
 
I asked online questions about Proposition 2.1.1: The answer I got is the following: I have some questions about the answer I got. When the person answering says: ##1.## Is the map ##\mathfrak{q}\mapsto \mathfrak{q} A _\mathfrak{p}## from ##A\setminus \mathfrak{p}\to A_\mathfrak{p}##? But I don't understand what the author meant for the rest of the sentence in mathematical notation: ##2.## In the next statement where the author says: How is ##A\to...
The following are taken from the two sources, 1) from this online page and the book An Introduction to Module Theory by: Ibrahim Assem, Flavio U. Coelho. In the Abelian Categories chapter in the module theory text on page 157, right after presenting IV.2.21 Definition, the authors states "Image and coimage may or may not exist, but if they do, then they are unique up to isomorphism (because so are kernels and cokernels). Also in the reference url page above, the authors present two...
When decomposing a representation ##\rho## of a finite group ##G## into irreducible representations, we can find the number of times the representation contains a particular irrep ##\rho_0## through the character inner product $$ \langle \chi, \chi_0\rangle = \frac{1}{|G|} \sum_{g\in G} \chi(g) \chi_0(g)^*$$ where ##\chi## and ##\chi_0## are the characters of ##\rho## and ##\rho_0##, respectively. Since all group elements in the same conjugacy class have the same characters, this may be...

Similar threads

Back
Top