Calculating an expression for trace of generators of two Lie algebra

vnikoofard
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
Suppose we have
$$[Q^a,Q^b]=if^c_{ab}Q^c$$

where Q's are generators of a Lie algebra associated a SU(N) group. So Q's are traceless. Also we have
$$[P^a,P^b]=0$$
where P's are generators of a Lie algebra associated to an Abelian group. We have the following relation between these generators
$$[Q^a,P^b]=if^c_{ab}P^c$$

I would like to know what we can say above the following trace. Is it equal to zero?
$$tr([Q^a,P^b]Q^c P^d)$$

Comment:
From the cyclic property of trace we have
$$tr[A,B]=0$$
for any matrices. Also
$$tr([A,B]C)=0$$
just for symmetric matrices. Maybe these relations help!
Cheers!
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Some quick calculations let me assume that this is not true. You could check the Poincaré algebra.
 
##\textbf{Exercise 10}:## I came across the following solution online: Questions: 1. When the author states in "that ring (not sure if he is referring to ##R## or ##R/\mathfrak{p}##, but I am guessing the later) ##x_n x_{n+1}=0## for all odd $n$ and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible, so that ##x_n=0##" 2. How does ##x_nx_{n+1}=0## implies that ##x_{n+1}## is invertible and ##x_n=0##. I mean if the quotient ring ##R/\mathfrak{p}## is an integral domain, and ##x_{n+1}## is invertible then...
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...
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...

Similar threads

Replies
19
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
19
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Back
Top