Construction of real gamma matrices

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the construction of real gamma matrices that satisfy the Clifford algebra in a 2+1 dimensional space-time, specifically with the metric signature given by ##\eta = \mathrm{diag}(-1,1,1)##. Participants explore the dimensionality of the matrices and the implications of having different matrix dimensions on either side of the algebraic equation.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions whether it is possible to construct real gamma matrices in 2+1 dimensions, noting that they can be derived from sigma matrices.
  • Another participant provides a specific construction of the gamma matrices, stating that they can be expressed as ##\gamma^0 = i \sigma^y, \gamma^1 = \sigma^x, \gamma^2 = \sigma^x##, but acknowledges the presence of imaginary units.
  • A later reply clarifies that the matrices can be represented as real matrices, providing explicit forms for each gamma matrix and confirming they satisfy the Clifford algebra with the specified metric signature.
  • Concerns are raised about the dimensionality of the matrices, specifically whether it is valid to have different dimensions on the left-hand side and right-hand side of the algebraic expression.
  • Another participant emphasizes that all matrices involved are indeed ##2 \times 2## matrices, addressing the dimensionality concern.
  • Further clarification is provided by another participant, who illustrates the relationship between the sigma matrices and the identity matrix in the context of the algebraic expression.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the reality of the gamma matrices and the implications of matrix dimensions in the algebraic formulation. While some provide constructions that appear to satisfy the requirements, the discussion remains unresolved regarding the implications of having different matrix dimensions on either side of the equation.

Contextual Notes

There is an ongoing uncertainty regarding the necessity of real matrices versus those containing imaginary units, as well as the implications of dimensionality in the context of the Clifford algebra.

John Greger
Messages
34
Reaction score
1
TL;DR
Can I construct real gamma matrices in 2+1 dimensions?
Hi!

Is it possible to construct gamma matrices satisfying the Clifford algebra ##\{\gamma^\mu, \gamma^\nu \} = \eta^{\mu \nu}## that are *real*, for ##\eta = diag(-1,1,1)##?

I know that I can construct them in principle from sigma matrices, but I don't know how to construct real gamma matrices..

And also, do the gamma matrices necessarily have to be 3-dimensional for d=2+1?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
John Greger said:
Summary:: Can I construct real gamma matrices in 2+1 dimensions?

Is it possible to construct gamma matrices satisfying the Clifford algebra {γμ,γν}=ημν that are *real*, for η=diag(−1,1,1)?

Yes, viz:
<br /> \gamma^0 = i \sigma^y, \qquad \gamma^1 = \sigma^x, \qquad \gamma^2 = \sigma^x.<br />

John Greger said:
Summary:: Can I construct real gamma matrices in 2+1 dimensions?

And also, do the gamma matrices necessarily have to be 3-dimensional for d=2+1?
The gamma matrices are always even dimensional. In d space-time dimensions, the smallest representation has dimension 2^floor(d/2).
 
king vitamin said:
Yes, viz:
<br /> \gamma^0 = i \sigma^y, \qquad \gamma^1 = \sigma^x, \qquad \gamma^2 = \sigma^x.<br />The gamma matrices are always even dimensional. In d space-time dimensions, the smallest representation has dimension 2^floor(d/2).
Hi and thank you very much for responding.

But then I will still have i's in the matrices such that they are not real?

May I also ask, on the right hand side the metric is still a 3x3 matrix, but on left hand side the matrices are 2x2, can we really have that?
 
The matrices are all real:
$$\gamma^0=\mathrm{i} \sigma_2=\begin{pmatrix}0 & 1 \\ -1 & 0 \end{pmatrix}, \quad \gamma^1=\sigma_1=\begin{pmatrix}0 & 1 \\ 1 & 0 \end{pmatrix}, \quad \gamma^2=\sigma_3 = \begin{pmatrix}1 & 0 \\-1 & 0 \end{pmatrix}.$$
They form the Clifford algebra of the space with the fundamental form of signature ##(2,1)##, i.e.,
$$\{\sigma^{\mu},\sigma^{\nu} \}=2 \eta^{\mu \nu}=\mathrm{diag}(-1,1,1).$$
These are all ##2 \times 2## matrices of course.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: John Greger
Thank you very much for clarifying. Mabye stupid question, but is it really possible to have a LHS and RHS of different matrix dimension?
 
All matrices involved are ##2 \times 2## matrices.
 
John Greger said:
Thank you very much for clarifying. Mabye stupid question, but is it really possible to have a LHS and RHS of different matrix dimension?

Think of it like this:

$$\{\sigma^{\mu},\sigma^{\nu} \} = 2 \eta^{\mu \nu} I,$$

where ##I## is the ##2 \times 2## identity matrix, and the ##\eta^{\mu \nu}## are the components of the ##3 \times 3## matrix ##\eta = \mathrm{diag}(-1,1,1)##.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
2K