Is the Pauli-Lubanski Vector Always Zero?

tamiry
Messages
8
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Hi
i've noticed that,
J^{ab}P^c + J^{bc}P^a+J^{ca}P^b = 0
[
Since
J^{ab}P^c + J^{bc}P^a+J^{ca}P^b = x^a\partial^b\partial^c -x^b\partial^a\partial^c + x^b\partial^c\partial^a-x^c\partial^b\partial^a+x^c\partial^a\partial^b-x^a\partial^c\partial^b = 0
]

Next, I tried it on the Pauli Lubanski vector. Suppose I'll look at W0 as an example
W_x = (1/2)\epsilon_{xabc}J^{ab}P^c
2W_0 = \epsilon_{0abc}J^{ab}P^c = \epsilon_{0123}J^{12}P^3+\epsilon_{0132}J^{13}P^2+\epsilon_{0231}J^{23}P^1+\epsilon_{0213}J^{21}P^3+\epsilon_{0312}J^{31}P^2+\epsilon_{0321}J^{32}P^1
= +J^{12}P^3-J^{13}P^2+J^{23}P^1-J^{21}P^3+J^{31}P^2-J^{32}P^1
= (J^{12}P^3+J^{23}P^1+J^{31}P^2)-(J^{13}P^2+J^{21}P^3+J^{32}P^1)
and in each parentheses we have an expression identical to the identity I started with.
Therefore, W0 = 0.

likewise I get for all the other W components. So, is W = 0 by definition?

Homework Equations


(none)

The Attempt at a Solution


the only thing I could have missed is the identity from above, but i looks quite solid. I don't see were did I go wrongthanks for your time
tamir
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You could get to that conclusion faster by noticing that
$$
\epsilon^{\mu\nu\lambda\rho} (x_\nu \partial_\lambda - x_\lambda \partial_\nu) \partial_\rho ~=~ 0 ~,
$$because the partial derivatives commute.

But you're only considering orbital angular momentum, hence it only applies to a spin-0 particle. If there's non-zero intrinsic spin, things are different.

Check Wikipedia's entry on the Pauli--Lubanski vector.
 
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