Notation clarification: SU(N) group integration

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on clarifying the meaning of det(δ/δJ) W(J) in the context of quantum field theory. It explains that this expression returns a number rather than a matrix due to the nature of the determinant and the integration over the SU(n) group. The determinant is defined through the properties of the matrix formed by functional derivatives of W(J) with respect to J. The integration over SU(n) normalizes the measure, leading to the conclusion that the determinant relates to the functional derivatives of W(J). This clarification resolves the initial confusion regarding the notation and its implications in the problem statement.
paralleltransport
Messages
128
Reaction score
97
Homework Statement
This is not a homework problem.
Relevant Equations
U is a matrix element of SU(N). dU is the haar measure (left invariant measure) on the SU(N) lie group.
Hello,

I would like help to clarify what det( {\delta \over \delta J}) W(J) (equation 15.79) actually means, and why it returns a number (and not a matrix). This comes from the following problem statement (Kaku, Quantum Field Theory, a Modern Introduction)
1640643097208.png


Naively, one would define det ({\delta \over \delta J}) W(J) to be the determinant of the matrix whose i, j'th element is
δWδJijδWδJij
 
Physics news on Phys.org
paralleltransport said:
I would like help to clarify what \det(\frac{\delta }{\delta J}) W(J).
The determinant of any n \times n matrix (such as u and \frac{\delta}{\delta J}) is given by \det (M) = \frac{1}{n!} \epsilon_{i_{1} \cdots i_{n}} \ \epsilon_{j_{1} \cdots j_{n}} \ M_{i_{1}j_{1}} \ \cdots \ M_{i_{n}j_{n}} . Now take M = u \in SU(n) and integrate over SU(n): since \det (u) = 1 and the measure is normalized \int_{SU(n)} d \mu (u) = 1, you get 1 = \frac{1}{n!} \epsilon_{i_{1} \cdots i_{n}} \ \epsilon_{j_{1} \cdots j_{n}} \int_{SU(n)} d \mu (u) \ u_{i_{1}j_{1}} \ \cdots \ u_{i_{n}j_{n}} , or 1 = \left( \frac{1}{n!} \epsilon_{i_{1} \ \cdots \ i_{n}} \ \epsilon_{j_{1} \ \cdots \ j_{n}} \frac{\delta}{\delta J_{i_{1}j_{1}}} \ \cdots \frac{\delta}{\delta J_{i_{n}j_{n}}} \right) W(J) \equiv \mbox{det}(\frac{\delta}{\delta J}) W(J) .
 
  • Like
Likes paralleltransport
OK that clears it up thanks!
 
Thread 'Help with Time-Independent Perturbation Theory "Good" States Proof'
(Disclaimer: this is not a HW question. I am self-studying, and this felt like the type of question I've seen in this forum. If there is somewhere better for me to share this doubt, please let me know and I'll transfer it right away.) I am currently reviewing Chapter 7 of Introduction to QM by Griffiths. I have been stuck for an hour or so trying to understand the last paragraph of this proof (pls check the attached file). It claims that we can express Ψ_{γ}(0) as a linear combination of...
Back
Top