How can Minkowski spacetime be expressed as a U(2) manifold?

etotheipi
Homework Statement
It's question 6 of Example Sheet 1, very near the bottom of this document:
https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/9707012.pdf
An image is attached below
Relevant Equations
N/A
1618677370034.png


Firstly, since ##\{ \mathbb{I}, \sigma_x, \sigma_y, \sigma_z \}## is a basis of the space of ##2 \times 2## Hermitian matrices, and because ##X = t \mathbb{I} + x\sigma_x - y \sigma_y + z \sigma_z##, the map is one-to-one (because each matrix has unique decomposition). It's also easily checked the determinant of ##dX## is ##-ds^2##.

Next, need to show that any unitary ##U## can be expressed as asked. Consider an arbitrary ##U = \begin{pmatrix} a & b \\ c & d \end{pmatrix}##, then by constraining ##U U^{\dagger} = U^{\dagger} U = \mathbb{I}## we may write ##aa^* + bb^* = aa^* + cc^* + dd^* + cc^* = bb^* + dd^* = 1## and ##ac^* + bd^* = ab^* + cd^* = 0##.

It follows from the first four that ##|a| = |d| \implies d = a^* e^{i \varphi_1}## for some ##\varphi_1## and likewise ##|b| = |c| \implies c = b^* e^{i \varphi_2}## for some ##\varphi_2##. Thus, substituting for ##c## and ##d^*## in the equation ##ab^* + cd^*=0## gives\begin{align*}
ab^*(1 + e^{i (\varphi_2 - \varphi_1)}) = 0 &\implies \varphi_2 = \varphi_1 + (2n+1)\pi \\

&\implies e^{i \varphi_2} = e^{i \varphi_1} e^{2n\pi i} e^{i \pi} = - e^{i \varphi_1}
\end{align*}Therefore, defining a new parameter ##\tau## by ##\tau := \varphi_1 / 2##, and similarly defining ##\alpha := a \text{exp}(-i \varphi_1 / 2)## and ##\beta := b \text{exp}(-i \varphi_1 / 2)##, the most general form is indeed ##U = e^{i \tau} \begin{pmatrix} \alpha & \beta \\ -\beta^* & \alpha^* \end{pmatrix}## which satisfies ##|\alpha|^2 + |\beta|^2 = |a|^2 + |b|^2 = 1##.

I am confused how to do the last part, i.e. to express the metric in terms of the parameters of ##U##. From the definition of the Cayley map we can write down ##(1-iX)dU = i(1+U)dX = 2dU(1+U)^{-1}##, but I don't see how that helps. I'd be grateful for a hint about how to get started; thanks :smile:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Actually, I figured out how to do it. You can just take the determinant of the relation they asked you to use, and substitute for ##\mathrm{det}(dU)##. Welp, sorry for posting 🙃
 
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