Commutation Relations and Symmetries for SU(2)

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the commutation relations in the context of the SU(2) group, specifically focusing on the symmetries and properties of certain matrices related to particle physics. The original poster is attempting to verify these relations using their lecture notes but is seeking clarification on the role of symmetry arguments in simplifying the verification process.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the potential use of symmetry arguments to reduce the number of cases needed to verify the commutation relations. One participant suggests that the anti-symmetry of the commutator may imply only three cases need to be checked. Another mentions the hermitian nature of the matrices as a possible simplification.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants exploring different interpretations of the original poster's question. Some guidance has been offered regarding the anti-symmetry of the commutator, but no consensus has been reached on the specifics of the symmetry arguments mentioned.

Contextual Notes

The original poster is working through group theory concepts as they relate to particle physics and is also studying SU(3), indicating a broader context of learning in advanced mathematical physics.

Astrofiend
Messages
36
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



I'm working through a bit of group theory (specifically SU(2) commutation relations). I have a question a bout symmetries in the SU(2) group. It's something I'm trying to work through in my lecture notes for particle physics, but it's a bit of a mathsy question so I thought I'd post it here where the maths gurus play!

I was showing that the matrices

<br /> <br /> \sigma_1 = \left( \begin{array}{ccc}<br /> 0 &amp; -1/2 &amp; 0\\<br /> -1/2 &amp; 0 &amp; 1/2\\<br /> 0 &amp; 1/2 &amp; 0\end{array} \right)\]<br /> <br />

<br /> <br /> \sigma_2 = \left( \begin{array}{ccc}<br /> 0 &amp; 1/2i &amp; 0\\<br /> -1/2i &amp; 0 &amp; -1/2i\\<br /> 0 &amp; 1/2i &amp; 0\end{array} \right)\]<br /> <br />

<br /> <br /> \sigma_3 = \left( \begin{array}{ccc}<br /> 1/2 &amp; 0 &amp; 0\\<br /> 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 0\\<br /> 0 &amp; 0 &amp; -1/2\end{array} \right)\]<br /> <br />

commute with via the relation

<br /> [I_i , I_j] = i \epsilon_i_j_k I_k<br />

where \epsilon_i_j_k takes it's usual meaning as the Levi-Civita symbol.

I was just going to work through each example and verify that they each satisfied the commutation relation, but somebody said to me in passing the other day that you can use symmetry arguments such that you only need to verify a few cases, with the rest following from these symmetry arguments.

I have been trying to work out what they were talking about for ages now, but in vain!

Does anybody have any ideas? Any suggestion of what these symmetries might be and how they eliminate the need to verify every last case would give relief to my aching brain! It's teasing me...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Maybe they were referencing the fact that the commutator is anti-symmetric? Because that means that you only actually have three cases.
 
maybe that they are all hermitian up to a factor of i, so maybe if you calculate the top half you can just fill in the bottom half triangle of the matrix?

*is also working through SU(3) for particle physics*

EDIT2: nevermind what I said before was stupid.
 
Last edited:
Hmmm - maybe there's an error in the notes? I'll take a look, check back and let you know what I come up with...

Thanks for the replies!

> It may indeed be that because the commutator is antisymmetric we only have to test three cases. I'll think about that one a little more...

Cheers!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K