Commutator of the Dirac Hamiltonian and gamma 5

Milsomonk
Messages
100
Reaction score
17

Homework Statement


Show that in the chiral (massless) limit, Gamma 5 commutes with the Dirac Hamiltonian in the presence of an electromagnetic field.

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


My first question is whether my Dirac Hamiltonian looks correct, I constructed it by separating the temporal derivative from the spatial part from the Dirac equation:

$$ i \gamma^\mu (\partial_\mu +iqA_\mu)\psi=0 $$
$$-i\gamma^0 \partial_t \psi=(i \gamma^i \partial_i -q\gamma^\mu A_\mu)\psi$$
$$H\psi=i\partial_t \psi=(-i\gamma^0 \gamma^i \partial_i +q \gamma^0\gamma^\mu A_\mu)\psi$$

I don't have huge confidence that this Hamiltonian is correct so if anyone has any comments I'd be very grateful :)

My second sticking point is how to compute the commutator:

$$[H,\gamma^5]$$

I see that I can just work out the sum of the commutators of each section:

$$[-i\gamma^0 \gamma^i \partial_i, \gamma^5] + [q \gamma^0\gamma^\mu A_\mu, \gamma^5]$$

But I'm not sure how to work out how gamma 5 commutes with the partial_i term, or the A_mu term, any advice would be awesome :)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think your Hamiltonian is correct.

When considering commutators, you only need to worry about the commutation of the matrices. Everything else can be "pulled out". For example,

$$[-i\gamma^0 \gamma^i \partial_i, \gamma^5] = [\gamma^0 \gamma^i , \gamma^5] \left( -i \partial_i \right)$$
 
Ah thank you! That clears everything up :)
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top