Binomial formula for spherical tensors

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the application of the Newton binomial formula to commuting spherical tensors, specifically for tensors of rank 1. The participants explore the expansion of (A + B)4 and the correct representation of terms like 6AABB, emphasizing the importance of coupling rules governed by Clebsch-Gordan coefficients. The conclusion is that while the binomial formula can be applied, the resulting terms must account for the various coupling possibilities to yield a scalar result.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of spherical tensors and their ranks
  • Familiarity with the Newton binomial formula
  • Knowledge of Clebsch-Gordan coefficients
  • Basic principles of tensor algebra and coupling
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the application of Clebsch-Gordan coefficients in tensor coupling
  • Learn about the properties of commuting tensors in quantum mechanics
  • Explore advanced tensor algebra techniques for rank 1 tensors
  • Investigate the implications of tensor coupling in physical systems
USEFUL FOR

Researchers in theoretical physics, mathematicians specializing in algebra, and students studying quantum mechanics who are interested in the mathematical foundations of spherical tensors and their applications.

francesco75
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
We know that the Newton binomial formula is valid for numbers
in elementary algebra.
Is there an equivalent formula for commuting spherical tensors? If so,
how is it?
To be specific let us suppose that A and B are two spherical tensors
of rank 1 and I want to calculate (A + B)4 and I want
the result to be a scalar. The two tensors commute, AB=BA.

If I apply naively the binomial formula I have the usual expansion,
with one of term being

<br /> \frac{4!}{2! (4-2)!} A^2 B^2<br />,

where the superscript denotes the number of tensors, i.e. the order.
But according to the rules of the tensors coupling algebra, there are different
ways to couple 4 tensors of rank 1 to a scalar. So my wild guess is that the above
terms should be
<br /> (\frac{4!}{2! (4-2)!} )(\left[ A^2_0 B^2_0\right]_0+<br /> \left[ A^2_1 B^2_1 \right]_0+<br /> \left[ A^2_2 B^2_2 \right]_0)<br />,
where the subscripts are the total rank of the couplings, which are 0,1 and 2 for two tensors of rank 1 coupled togheter.
The other terms should go the same way, that is one is putting all the possible
coupling to the scalar according to the orders of the tensors.
Am I correct?
Tank you very much
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
If the tensors commute, the addition is a group, the distributive property is satisfied and the tensors are associative, you can use the binomial formula (and you can follow its proof step by step to show this).

In your example, (A+B)^4 = (A+B)(A+B)(A+B)(A+B) = (AA+AB+BA+BB)(AA+AB+BA+BB) = AAAA+AAAB+... = AAAA+4AAAB+6AABB+4ABBB+BBBB.
 
thanks He,
but still my problem remains, how to write down explicitly the term
you denote as 6AABB, taking into account that the tensors have a law
of composition or coupling. Is it correct to write AABB as the sum of all the possible
coupling of the four tensors to a scalar as I did in the last equation of my previous message?
 
I don't understand your couplings -> no idea.
 
the coupling is the one for spherical tensors, with coefficients given by Clebsch-Gordan coefficients.
For instance (again considering A end B as tensor of rank 1)
\left[AB\right]_0=&lt;1 0 1 0|1 0&gt; A_0 B_0 +&lt;1 -1 1 1|1 0&gt; A_{-1} B_1 +&lt;1 1 1 -1|1 0&gt; A_{1} B_{-1},
where the Clebsch are <j1 m1 j2 m2| J M>
and for instance A_{i} is the component i_th of the tensor A,
that we can express in cartesian representation as
A_{-1} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(a_x - i a_y),
A_{0} = a_z,
A_{-1} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(a_x +i a_y),
and a_x, a_y and a_z are the cartesian components.

So,
A_0^2 \equiv \left[AA\right]_0,
A_1^2 \equiv \left[AA\right]_1,
and so on

The other couplings can be constructed by using the tensor of rank one and the opportune Clebsch-Gordan
coefficients, according to the total rank of the tensors coupled together
 
Last edited:
I am studying the mathematical formalism behind non-commutative geometry approach to quantum gravity. I was reading about Hopf algebras and their Drinfeld twist with a specific example of the Moyal-Weyl twist defined as F=exp(-iλ/2θ^(μν)∂_μ⊗∂_ν) where λ is a constant parametar and θ antisymmetric constant tensor. {∂_μ} is the basis of the tangent vector space over the underlying spacetime Now, from my understanding the enveloping algebra which appears in the definition of the Hopf algebra...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K