Left and right invariant metric on SU(2)

popbatman
Messages
6
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



I nedd some help to write a left-invariant and right invariant metric on SU(2)


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution

 
Physics news on Phys.org
What parametrization are you using ? And write the definitions you're working with. As per the guidelines of this particular forum, you're asked to post your work first and ask for advice/help later.

And this looks like pure mathematics subject, why did you place it here ?
 
I'm using the parametrization:

\begin{array}{cc}
x_{0} - ix_{3} & x_{1}+ix_{2} \\
-x_{1}+iy_{2} & y_{0}+iy_{3} \end{array}

Now I know that left invariant vector fields are obtained starting from vector tanget to the identity of the group (pauli matrices).
by duality i can find also a basis for the left invariant forms.
a) Is this right?

Once I've found the left invariant forms θ^{i}

I can define the metric g=g_{\mu\nu}θ^{\mu}\otimesθ^{\nu}

b)Is this the left invariant metric I'm looking for? Are the metric coefficient totally arbitrary, a part the constraints to make the metric non degenerate and strictly positive (if i want a riemannian metric)?

I'm sorry if this is not the the right place for my post! Thank you for helping!
 
I'm sorry, obvyously in the matrix is x everywhere!
 
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...

Similar threads

Back
Top