Lorentz Group: Tensor Representation Explained

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the representations of the Lorentz group, specifically focusing on the (m,n) representations and their implications for tensor transformations. Participants explore the mathematical framework and physical interpretations of these representations, including their applications to quantum field theory and angular momentum addition.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant describes the transformation properties of an object in an (m,n) representation, questioning how indices transform under Lorentz transformations and their relationship to SU(2) representations.
  • Another participant provides a specific example for the (1/2, 1/2) representation, detailing the transformation of a two-index object and its connection to four-vectors, while noting the importance of Hermitian properties.
  • A third participant clarifies that (j1,j2) representations describe irreducible representations and explains the dimensionality of the (1,1) representation, emphasizing the decomposition of tensors into scalar, antisymmetric, and traceless symmetric components.
  • One participant references a book that discusses the transformation of tensors and suggests that there is a general method to show the equivalence of the (m/2,m/2) representation to tensors.
  • Another participant summarizes the argument for the (m/2,m/2) representation, explaining how tensor products of spin-1/2 representations lead to higher-rank tensors and how these can be expressed in terms of four-vectors.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying levels of understanding and approaches to the topic, with some agreeing on the mathematical framework while others raise questions about specific transformations and representations. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the generalization of these concepts to higher representations.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the complexity of the representations and the need for careful consideration of symmetries and transformations. There are references to specific mathematical structures and properties that may require further exploration to fully understand the implications.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to students and researchers in theoretical physics, particularly those focused on quantum field theory, representation theory, and the mathematical foundations of particle physics.

chingel
Messages
307
Reaction score
23
I've been trying to understand representations of the Lorentz group. So as far as I understand, when an object is in an (m,n) representation, then it has two indices (let's say the object is ##\phi^{ij}##), where one index ##i## transforms as ##\exp(i(\theta_k-i\beta_k)A_k)## and the other index as ##\exp(i(\theta_k+i\beta_k)B_k)##, where A and B are commuting su(2) generators of dimension (2m+1) and (2n+1) respectively and ##\theta## are the rotation angles and ##\beta## the rapidities.

It is often said (for example I am reading the Schwartz QFT book, where it is mentioned), that the (n/2,n/2) representation corresponds to a tensor with n indices.

How is this the case? How can I see it?

Is the meaning of the tensor representation that each index transforms using the usual 4x4 Lorentz transformation matrix? How is it the same as a two index object where each index transforms under a (n+1) dimensional su(2) representation?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: nomadreid
Physics news on Phys.org
At least for the (1/2, 1/2) representation I figured it out by surfing on the internet. I can choose for A representation the ##\sigma/2## matrices and for B take ##-\sigma^*/2##, then the two index object ##\phi^{ij}## transforms as $$\phi \rightarrow \exp(i(\theta_k-i\beta_k)\sigma_k/2)\, \phi\, \exp(i(\theta_k-i\beta_k)\sigma_k/2)^\dagger,$$ where we have just matrix multiplication. Note that the element ##\exp(i(\theta_k-i\beta_k)\sigma_k/2)## belongs to SL(2) with complex entries. So the determinant of ##\phi## is constant under the transformation, and the transformation keeps the ##\phi## Hermitian if it was Hermitian to begin with (it has to be Hermitian to be connected to the identity). Now we can identify the matrix ##\phi## as (you might want to double check the signs) $$\phi = \begin{bmatrix} p^0+p^3 & p^1-ip^2 \\ p^1+ip^2 & p^0-p^3 \end{bmatrix},$$ where the determinant gives just ##p_\mu p^\mu=m^2##, which is good because it is constant, and also then we can check that under the ##\phi## transformation the ##p^\mu## transform as we would expect under Lorentz transformations. So in the end we can say that the (1/2,1/2) representation indeed can be written using four parameters that transform as a four vector.

But now how do I do it for the (1,1) case to show that it has 4x4 components that transform as a two index Lorentz tensor ##T_{\mu\nu}##?
 
The point is that ##(j_1,j_2)## describe irreducible representations. It's ##(2j_1+1) (2j_2+1)## dimensional, i.e., for ##(1,1)## you have 9, not 16 components. This is easy to understand, because you can decompose the general 2nd-rank Tensor into a scalar part (1 component), given by its trace, the antisymmetric piece (6 components) and the traceless symmetric piece (9 components).

For a very good and didactical introduction to the group- and representation-theoretical analysis of the Lorentz and Poincare groups, see

Sexl, Urbandtke, Relativity, Groups, Particles, Springer (2001)
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: chingel and dextercioby
Thanks, I managed to take a quick look at the book and chapter 8 seems to cover exactly what I was asking about (and that I didn't find in my QFT books).

On a quick skim apparently if we had for a four vector ##p_\mu\sigma^\mu## and transforming this under (1/2,1/2) gave the proper transformation for ##p_\mu##, then more generally there is this quantity ##T^{ij\dots}\sigma_i\sigma_j\dots##, and using this I think they can show the equivalence to tensors. However I'll have to read the chapter in more detail to figure out the details how exactly this works out.
 
So for anybody who is interested, the argument is quite simple in my opinion.

First we know from angular momentum addition that by adding m copies of spin 1/2 (I mean by doing a tensor product of them) and symmetrizing, we get a m/2 representation of SU(2).

So a (m/2,m/2) representation of the Lorentz group can be written as ##\phi_{i_1\dots i_m j_1\dots j_m}##, where it is symmetric over the i indices, and also symmetric over the j indices, and each index transforms as (1/2) representation of SU(2) either LH for i or RH for j.

Now before we showed that (1/2,1/2) is a four vector, where we used ##\phi_{ij} = p^\mu \sigma_{\mu,ij}## (or the other way around it is ##\frac12 \sigma_{\mu,ji}\phi_{ij} = p^\mu ##) where ##\sigma_\mu## is ##(1,\vec{\sigma})##. So now we can just consider each pair of indices ##(i_1, j_1)## etc and each of those is a four vector, so we just have a tensor product of m pairs each of which transforms as a four vector, so the 4 tensor is like this $$T^{\mu_1\dots\mu_m} = \phi_{i_1\dots i_m j_1\dots j_m} \sigma^{\mu_1}_{i_1j_1}\dots\sigma^{\mu_m}_{i_mj_m} .$$ From this we see that the 4 tensor T has to be symmetric, because the right hand side is due to ##\phi## being symmetric.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: dextercioby

Similar threads

  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K