Charge conjugation in Peskin and Schroeder

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the charge conjugation of Dirac bilinears as presented in Peskin and Schroeder's Quantum Field Theory. The specific computational issue arises from Equation 3.145, where the participant struggles with the transpose of the gamma matrix, particularly ##\gamma^2##, in the Weyl basis. The resolution reveals that the transpose of ##\gamma^2## is indeed its negative, which clarifies the confusion surrounding the equality in the equation. This insight is crucial for accurately reconstructing the transformations under C, P, T, and CPT.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Dirac bilinears and their transformations
  • Familiarity with the Weyl basis of gamma matrices
  • Knowledge of charge conjugation in quantum field theory
  • Proficiency in matrix transposition and properties of Pauli matrices
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of gamma matrices in Quantum Field Theory
  • Learn about charge conjugation and its implications in particle physics
  • Review the derivation of Dirac bilinears in Peskin and Schroeder
  • Examine the role of Pauli matrices in the context of Weyl spinors
USEFUL FOR

Quantum field theorists, particle physicists, and students studying advanced topics in quantum mechanics who are working with Dirac equations and transformations.

diegzumillo
Messages
180
Reaction score
20
Hey there

I'm trying to reconstruct the entire table of all Dirac bilinears under C, P, T and CPT transformations of page 71 and hit a wall on charge conjugation.

It's a computational problem, really. Here's a specific problem:
Equation 3.145 we have
$$-i\gamma ^2 \left( \psi ^{\dagger }\right) ^T =-i\left( \bar{\psi}\gamma ^0 \gamma ^2 \right) ^T$$

If I understand what is going on, we are taking the transpose of ##\gamma ^2##, which should have changed the sign of the whole expression. This is in Weyl basis. All my calculations following give wrong results but this and this is the first step that shows a problem, so it might be the root. What am I doing wrong?

BTW, I was going to post this in homework/coursework but I feel it doesn't fit the pre-made layout very well.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
diegzumillo said:
If I understand what is going on, we are taking the transpose of ##\gamma ^2##

Not the way I'm reading the equation you posted. On the LHS, you're taking the transpose of ##\psi^\dagger##, then multiplying that on the left with ##\gamma^2##. On the RHS, you're multiplying togethr ##\bar{\psi}##, ##\gamma^0##, and ##\gamma^2##, and then taking the transpose of the result.
 
But how does that equality hold? Working from right to left, step by step, and neglecting that -i:
$$(\bar{\psi} \gamma ^0 \gamma^2)^T$$
$$(\psi ^\dagger \gamma^0 \gamma ^0 \gamma^2)^T$$
$$(\psi ^\dagger \gamma^2)^T$$
$$ \gamma^{2T} (\psi ^\dagger)^T$$
$$ -\gamma^2 (\psi ^\dagger)^T$$

I can almost sense it. There is always a dumb mistake and I will slap my forehead. Any moment now.
 
diegzumillo said:
I can almost sense it. There is always a dumb mistake and I will slap my forehead. Any moment now.
Check eq(3.25). Then check the Pauli matrices.

In a little more detail: $$(\sigma^2)^T ~=~ - \sigma^2 ~~.$$ Therefore, (in Weyl rep), $$(\gamma^2)^T ~=~ \gamma^2 ~~.$$
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: PeterDonis
Aaaaand there it is. Right on schedule. slaps forehead

This was a rock solid information in my brain so I never bothered to check. That the transpose of ##\gamma^2## is its negative. The confusion is, of course, because I'm just looking at the 2x2 short-hand version and forgot it's actually 4x4.

Edit: Thank you! =)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K