Deriving a vector identity using Pauli spin matrices

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around deriving a vector identity involving Pauli spin matrices, specifically the expression \(\left({\bf A} \cdot {\bf \sigma} \right) \left({\bf B }\cdot {\bf \sigma} \right) = {\bf A} \cdot {\bf B} I + i \left( {\bf A } \times {\bf B} \right) \cdot {\bf \sigma}\). Participants are exploring the properties of 2x2 matrices and the Pauli matrices in the context of this identity.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to prove the identity through a left side equals right side approach but expresses uncertainty about their initial steps. Some participants question the validity of expanding vectors A and B into Pauli matrices, suggesting they are scalar vectors instead. Others mention the use of commutation relations and properties of the Pauli matrices, such as being traceless.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants providing guidance on how to approach the problem. Suggestions include reformulating the expression into a 2D matrix and focusing on the identity component first. There is no explicit consensus yet, but several productive directions have been proposed.

Contextual Notes

Participants are working under the constraints of using only specific properties of the Pauli matrices and the original equation provided. There is an emphasis on understanding the mathematical structure rather than deriving a complete solution at this stage.

quasar_4
Messages
273
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



I'm supposed to derive the following:

[tex]\left({\bf A} \cdot {\bf \sigma} \right) \left({\bf B }\cdot {\bf \sigma} \right) = {\bf A} \cdot {\bf B} I + i \left( {\bf A } \times {\bf B} \right) \cdot {\bf \sigma}[/tex]

using just the two following facts:

Any 2x2 matrix can be written in a basis of spin matrices:

[tex]M = \sum{m_\alpha \sigma_\alpha}[/tex]

which means that the beta-th component is given by

[tex]m_\beta = \frac{1}{2}Tr(M \sigma_\beta)[/tex]


Homework Equations



listed above...

The Attempt at a Solution



It should just be a left side= right side proof.

I started by saying [tex]\left({\bf A} \cdot {\bf \sigma} \right) \left({\bf B }\cdot {\bf \sigma} \right) = <br /> <br /> \left(\sum_\alpha a_\alpha \sigma_\alpha \cdot \sigma \right) \left(\sum_\alpha b_\alpha \sigma_\alpha \cdot \sigma \right) = <br /> <br /> \left( \sum_\beta a_\alpha \delta_{\alpha \beta} \right) \left( \sum_\gamma b_\alpha \delta_{\alpha \gamma} \right) = <br /> <br /> \sum_\beta a_\beta \sum_\gamma b_\gamma =<br /> <br /> \frac{1}{2} Tr(A \sigma_\beta) \frac{1}{2} Tr(B \sigma_\gamma)[/tex]

Not sure if this is even the right way to start, and I can't see at all where I would go from here to get the appropriate RHS of the identity I'm proving. Any ideas? :confused:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You can't expand A or B into Pauli matrices because neither of them are 2x2 matrices. They are both vectors of scalars.

Also, are you able to use any other info, such as the product of two Pauli matrices?
 
Thanks for the reply. I can use the usual commutation relations between the Pauli matrices. Also, I know the Pauli spin matrices are traceless... not sure if that's helpful or not.
 
Yes, that helps a lot. First you will need to make a 2-D matrix from the original equation. You had the right idea originally but expanded too much early on. You should do something like:

[tex](A\cdot\sigma)(B\cdot\sigma) = \sum_{i} a_i \sigma_i \sum_{j} b_j \sigma_j<br /> = \sum_{ij}a_i b_j \sigma_i \sigma_j<br /> =M[/tex]

That last term is now a 2d matrix. You will expand that in spin matrices including the identity. I suggest solving for the [tex]m_0[/tex] (identity piece) first, since that will give you your dot product. Be sure to use properties of the trace. For example, a_i and b_j are scalars. And you can break the sum of matrices in a trace up into a sum of traces of the individual matrices.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K