How Peskin & Schroeder simplified this horrible product of bilinears?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the simplification of a complex product of bilinear expressions involving sigma matrices as presented in Peskin & Schroeder's work. Participants explore the mathematical identities and properties of these matrices to clarify the calculations involved.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a bilinear expression and suggests that an identity involving epsilon tensors is used for simplification.
  • Another participant emphasizes the importance of providing specific page and equation numbers for clarity when asking questions about the text.
  • A third participant explains properties of sigma matrices, noting that the identity involving the Pauli matrices leads to the desired simplification, highlighting the anti-commutation of sigma matrices.
  • A participant corrects another's formatting regarding the use of LaTeX in the forum, clarifying the proper way to display equations.
  • A later reply expresses gratitude for the clarification regarding formatting, indicating a learning process.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the need for clarity in referencing materials, but there are differing views on the specific mathematical identities and properties being discussed, indicating that the discussion remains somewhat unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Some participants express uncertainty about the application of certain identities and properties of sigma matrices, and there may be missing assumptions regarding the context of the bilinear expressions.

hamad12a
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
TL;DR
I couldn't understand how to pass from sigma to sigma bar Pauli matrices.
P&S had calculated this expression almost explicitly, except that I didn't find a way to exchange the $$\nu \lambda$$ indices, but I'm sure the below identity is used,

$$
\begin{aligned}\left(\overline{u}_{1 L} \overline{\sigma}^{\mu} \sigma^{\nu} \overline{\sigma}^{\lambda} u_{2 L}\right)\left(\overline{u}_{3 L} \overline{\sigma}_{\mu} \sigma_{\nu} \overline{\sigma}_{\lambda} u_{4 L}\right) &=2 \epsilon_{\alpha \gamma} \overline{u}_{1 L \alpha} \overline{u}_{3 L \gamma} \epsilon_{\beta \delta}\left(\sigma^{\nu} \overline{\sigma}^{\lambda} u_{2 L}\right)_{\beta}\left(\sigma_{\nu} \overline{\sigma}_{\lambda} u_{4 L}\right)_{\delta} \\ &=2 \epsilon_{\alpha \gamma} \overline{u}_{1 L \alpha} \overline{u}_{3 L \gamma} \epsilon_{\beta \delta} u_{2 L \beta}\left(\sigma^{\lambda} \overline{\sigma}^{\nu} \sigma_{\nu} \overline{\sigma}_{\lambda} u_{4 L}\right)_{\delta} \end{aligned}
$$

The identity is,

$$
\epsilon_{\alpha \beta}\left(\sigma^{\mu}\right)_{\beta \gamma}=\left(\overline{\sigma}^{\mu T}\right)_{\alpha \beta} \epsilon_{\beta \gamma}
$$
 
Physics news on Phys.org
When asking questions of this kind, you'd get more help more quickly if you state the precise page number(s) and equation number(s), instead of expecting potential helpers to trawl through the book trying to find it.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71 and Demystifier
strangerep said:
When asking questions of this kind, you'd get more help more quickly if you state the precise page number(s) and equation number(s), instead of expecting potential helpers to trawl through the book trying to find it.
it's on page 51, Peskin & Schroeder's book.
 
Hey good question. This comes down to a few basic observations about sigma matrices.
First of all, we note
$$
(i\sigma ^2)_{\alpha\beta} = \epsilon_{\alpha\beta}.
$$
Next we rephrase the statement of the problem in a slightly more illuminating form:
$$
(i\sigma^2 \sigma^{\mu})_{\alpha\beta}= ((\bar{\sigma^{\mu}})^T)i\sigma^2)_{\alpha\beta}
$$
and of course two matrices are equal if and only if all their entries are equal one by one, so it is easy to see how the indices nomenclature of the statement of the problem follows (note ##\beta## is summed over).
Now, notice from the particular form of the Pauli matrices that they are all symmetric but ##\sigma^2##. This means that only ##\sigma^2## changes sign under transposition.
Moreover, consider the identity
$$
\{\sigma^i, \sigma^j\} = \delta^{ij}
$$.
Thus commuting ##\sigma^2## past all sigmas from the left (or if you wish you can reverse left and right of the identity) - and the identity matrix in the first position - in the four vector ##\sigma^{\mu}##, we obtain the desired identity, since ##\sigma^2## anti-commutes with all components except itself; but the change of sign here is taken care of by the transposition.

I hope this was clear enough.
mdb71.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71, atyy and DarMM
@mdb71 the [CODE] BB code tag is for displaying program source code, not for LaTeX. LaTeX only needs to be delimited by $$ for separate equations or ## for inline (these replace the old and delimiters which no longer work).<br /> <br /> I have used magic moderator powers to edit your post accordingly.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: mdb71
Thanks a lot, appreciate. Got it now, I was still getting used to it.
 

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K