Fermionic creation and annihilation

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Abigale
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Annihilation Creation
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the mathematical representation of fermionic creation and annihilation operators, specifically the expression for the spin operator \(\vec{S}\). Abby presents the equation \(\vec{S}= \sum\limits_{k \nu \mu} \frac{1}{2} \bf{c}_{k \mu}^{\dagger} \vec{\sigma}_{\mu \nu} \bf{c}_{k \nu}\) and seeks to demonstrate that \(\vec{S}=\sum\limits_{k \nu \mu} \frac{1}{2} \bf{h}_{k \mu}^{\dagger} \vec{\sigma}_{\mu \nu} \bf{h}_{ k \nu}\) by eliminating the minus sign. The consensus is that the summation over \(k\) from negative to positive infinity allows for this transformation, confirming the validity of the equation.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of fermionic operators and their mathematical representation
  • Familiarity with quantum mechanics concepts, particularly spin operators
  • Knowledge of summation techniques in mathematical physics
  • Proficiency in manipulating complex equations involving creation and annihilation operators
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of fermionic operators in quantum field theory
  • Learn about the implications of summing over infinite ranges in quantum mechanics
  • Explore the role of spin operators in particle physics
  • Investigate the mathematical techniques for transforming operator equations
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, quantum mechanics students, and researchers focusing on quantum field theory and fermionic systems will benefit from this discussion.

Abigale
Messages
53
Reaction score
0
Hi guys,
I consider fermionic holes and I know the creation and annihilation operators of them.

I have shown that [itex]\vec{S}= \sum\limits_{k \nu \mu} \frac{1}{2} \bf{c}_{k \mu}^{\dagger} \vec{\sigma}_{\mu \nu} \bf{c}_{k \nu} =...= \sum\limits_{k \nu \mu} \frac{1}{2} \bf{h}_{-k \mu}^{\dagger} \vec{\sigma}_{\mu \nu} \bf{h}_{ -k \nu}^{ }[/itex].
But I have to show that [itex]\vec{S}=\sum\limits_{k \nu \mu} \frac{1}{2} \bf{h}_{k \mu}^{\dagger} \vec{\sigma}_{\mu \nu} \bf{h}_{ k \nu}^{ }[/itex].

It would be nice if somebody has an idea how I can get rid of the minus sign.

THX
AbbyIs the sum maybe from minus infinity to plus infinity? Then I think I got it.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Abigale said:
Is the sum maybe from minus infinity to plus infinity? Then I think I got it.

Yes, if there is no hard cut-off on the momenta.
 
So because k is from infinity to infinity I can write:
[itex]\vec{S}= \sum\limits_{k \nu \mu} \frac{1}{2} \bf{c}_{k \mu}^{\dagger} \vec{\sigma}_{\mu \nu} \bf{c}_{k \nu} =...= \sum\limits_{k \nu \mu} \frac{1}{2} \bf{h}_{-k \mu}^{\dagger} \vec{\sigma}_{\mu \nu} \bf{h}_{ -k \nu}^{ } <br /> <br /> = \sum\limits_{-k \nu \mu} \frac{1}{2} \bf{h}_{k \mu}^{\dagger} \vec{\sigma}_{\mu \nu} \bf{h}_{ k \nu}^{ } \stackrel{(1)}{=}<br /> \sum\limits_{k \nu \mu} \frac{1}{2} \bf{h}_{k \mu}^{\dagger} \vec{\sigma}_{\mu \nu} \bf{h}_{ k \nu}^{ }[/itex].I would say (1) is true because if I regard the k from "-"infinity to "+"infinity:

[itex]\sum\limits_{-k}^{}f(k)=\sum\limits_{k}^{}f(-k)= \sum\limits_{k}^{}f(k)[/itex]
Could somebody check my thoughts? Would be nice!
THX Abby
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K