Dirac Lagrangian invariance under chiral transformation

ppedro
Messages
22
Reaction score
0
Consider the Dirac Lagrangian,

L =\overline{\psi}\left(i\gamma^{\mu}\partial_{\mu}-m\right)\psi,

where \overline{\psi}=\psi^{\dagger}\gamma^{0}, and show that, for \alpha\in\mathbb{R} and in the limit m\rightarrow0, it is invariant under the chiral transformation

\psi\rightarrow\psi'=e^{i\alpha\gamma_{5}}\psi

\psi^{\dagger}\rightarrow\left(\psi^{\dagger}\right)'=\psi^{\dagger}e^{-i\alpha\gamma_{5}}

Attempt at a solution


\begin{array}{ll}<br /> L&#039; &amp; =\overline{\psi}&#039;\left(i\gamma^{\mu}\partial_{\mu}-m\right)\psi&#039;\\<br /> &amp; =\left(\psi^{\dagger}\right)&#039;\gamma^{0}\left(i\gamma^{\mu}\partial_{\mu}-m\right)\psi&#039;\\<br /> &amp; =\psi^{\dagger}e^{-i\alpha\gamma_{5}}\gamma^{0}\left(i\gamma^{\mu}\partial_{\mu}-m\right)e^{i\alpha\gamma_{5}}\psi\\<br /> &amp; =\underset{(i)}{\underbrace{i\psi^{\dagger}e^{-i\alpha\gamma_{5}}\gamma^{0}\gamma^{\mu}\partial_{\mu}e^{i\alpha\gamma_{5}}\psi}}-\underset{(ii)}{\underbrace{m\psi^{\dagger}e^{-i\alpha\gamma_{5}}\gamma^{0}e^{i\alpha\gamma_{5}}\psi}}\\<br /> &amp; =<br /> \end{array}

For (ii) I tried using \exp\left(s\hat{X}\right)\hat{Y}\exp\left(-s\hat{X}\right)=\hat{Y}+s\left[\hat{X},\hat{Y}\right] to get

\begin{array}{ll}<br /> (ii) &amp; =m\psi^{\dagger}e^{-i\alpha\gamma_{5}}\gamma^{0}e^{i\alpha\gamma_{5}}\psi\\<br /> &amp; =m\psi^{\dagger}\left(\gamma^{0}-i\alpha\left[\gamma_{5},\gamma^{0}\right]\right)\psi\\<br /> &amp; =<br /> \end{array}

Can you help me finish this?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hint: ##\gamma_5## anti-commutes with all gamma matrices, including ##\gamma^0##.
 
Orodruin said:
Hint: ##\gamma_5## anti-commutes with all gamma matrices, including ##\gamma^0##.

I don't see it... Do you mean I should use that in (i) while also applying BCH's formula?
 
ppedro said:
I don't see it... Do you mean I should use the in (i) while also aplying BCH's formula?
There is no point in using the BCH formula. Just use the anti-commutativity.
 
How can I anti-commute with something that's in the exponent?
 
ppedro said:
How can I anti-commute with something that's in the exponent?
Use the series expansion of the exponent.
 
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