What part of the Dirac field is anticommutating?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the nature of anticommutation in the Dirac field, specifically questioning which components—spinors or coefficients—exhibit this property. The scope includes theoretical aspects of quantum field theory and classical field theory.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that in quantum field theory, it is the coefficients in front of the spinors that anticommute, implying that the spinors themselves should commute.
  • Another participant asserts that the creation and annihilation operators are responsible for the anticommutation, noting that the gamma matrices also satisfy anticommutation relations but are less significant in this context.
  • A question is raised about the commutation of the spinor solutions, specifically whether the product of two spinors results in a sign change.
  • A later reply confirms that there is no sign change in the product of the spinors, indicating that they commute like vector components.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on which components of the Dirac field are anticommutating, with no consensus reached on the matter.

Contextual Notes

The discussion does not clarify the definitions of terms used, such as "coefficients" or "spinors," and the implications of these definitions on the anticommutation properties remain unresolved.

RedX
Messages
963
Reaction score
3
The Dirac field is an anticommutating field. But what part of it is anticommutating? Is it the spinors, or the coefficient in front of the spinors? In quantum field theory I think it's the coefficients that anticommute, so that the spinors should commute, but not their coefficients. In classical field theory, the coefficients are just regular numbers, so then it must be that the spinors anticommute?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It's the creation and annihilation operators. The gamma matrices also satisfy anticommutation relations, but they are a lot less interesting. The anticommutation relations satisfied by the creation/annihilation operators are the reason why the particles that correspond to the Dirac field must be fermions.
 
So if you have u_{\alpha}(p) u_{\beta}(k), then this equals u_{\beta}(k) u_{\alpha}(p), and not the negative? u(p) is the usual basis solution to the Dirac equation in momentum space.
 
Exactly. There is no sign change. u(p) are not matrices, so they commute, just like vector components.

Bob.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K