Is the S-matrix in Weinberg's book always unitary?

Join the discussion
Registration is free. Start your own thread to ask a follow-up.
2 replies · 2K views
eoghan
Messages
201
Reaction score
7
Hi,
I've read a lot of posts about how Weinberg describes the S-matrix invariance in his book, but none of theme answered my questions.
At page 116, sec 3.3 - "Lorentz Invariance" of Quantum theory of fields vol.1 Weinberg says:
"Since the operator [itex]U(\Lambda, a)[/itex] is unitary we may write
[tex] S_{\beta\,\alpha}=\langle\Psi_{\beta}^-\mid\Psi_{\alpha}^+\rangle<br /> =\langle\Psi_{\beta}^- \mid U^{\dagger}U\mid \Psi_{\alpha}^+\rangle[/tex]
From this equation he gets some conditions that the S-matrix has to fulfill.
But if the operator [itex]U(\Lambda, a)[/itex] is unitary, then shouldn't be
[itex]U^{\dagger}U=1[/itex]?
And so the equation above is always satisfied no matter the form of the S matrix!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes, this equation is an obvious identity. Lorentz invariance is the next assertion - that when you apply U to Ψ+ and Ψ- they transform as representations of the inhomogeneous Lorentz group (Eq. 3.1.1), leading to Eq 3.3.1.
 
Uhm... ok, but now another question arises...
[itex]U^{\dagger}U=1[/itex], but [itex]\Psi_{\alpha}[/itex] and [itex]\Psi_{\beta}[/itex]
are two different states, so they can transform with two different irreducible representations.
In that case [itex]U^{\dagger}[/itex] and [itex]U[/itex] are two matrices of different kind, so how can i say that [itex]U^{\dagger}U=1[/itex]?