It is well known that at times we do need explicit representations for the Dirac gamma matrices while doing calculations with fermions. Recently I found two different expressions for Majorana representation for the gamma matrices. In one paper, the form used is:(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

[tex]

\gamma_{0} = \left(

\begin{array}{cc}

0 & i\sigma_2\\

i\sigma_2 & 0

\end{array}

\right)

[/tex]

[tex]

\gamma_{1} = \left(

\begin{array}{cc}

\sigma_1 & 0\\

0 & \sigma_1

\end{array}

\right)

[/tex]

[tex]

\gamma_{2} = \left(

\begin{array}{cc}

0 & -i\sigma_2\\

i\sigma_2 & 0

\end{array}

\right)

[/tex]

[tex]

\gamma_{3} = \left(

\begin{array}{cc}

\sigma_3 & 0\\

0 & \sigma_3

\end{array}

\right)

[/tex]

[tex]

\gamma_{5} = \left(

\begin{array}{cc}

\sigma_2 & 0\\

0 & \sigma_2

\end{array}

\right)

[/tex]

However in wikipedia article on gamma matrices, the Majorana representations are diffenrent and all are complex matrices. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirac_matrices#Majorana_basis

I am confused which is the actual representation of Majorana representation? Or are both representations valid Majorana representations? Note that in the rep. I wrote, the first four matrices are real matrices.

Also can anybody tell me how to write several matrices side-by-side in latex?

Thanks.

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**

Dismiss Notice

Join Physics Forums Today!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# Majorana representation of Gamma matrices.

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**