P&S Exercise 3.4 Majorana Fermions Derivative of ##\chi##

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on deriving the mass term in the Majorana equation from the action's second term, specifically the expression involving $$\chi^T\sigma^2\chi$$. Participants express confusion about how the derivative leads to $$\sigma^2\chi^*$$, noting that the variation with respect to $$\chi_1^*$$ and $$\chi_2^*$$ results in zero due to the properties of Grassmann numbers. A detailed breakdown of the expression $$\chi^\dagger \sigma^2 \chi^*$$ shows that it simplifies to zero when differentiated. The conversation highlights the complexity of the topic and acknowledges the challenges faced by beginners in understanding these concepts. Overall, the discussion emphasizes the need for clarity in problem formulation within advanced physics topics.
diracsgrandgrandson
Messages
6
Reaction score
1
Homework Statement
Peskin and Schroeder Exercise 3.4 Majorana Fermions part b wants me to show that the variation of the action ##S## with respect to ##\chi^\dagger## gives the Majorana equation.
Relevant Equations
The action is given by: $$S = \int d^4 x \left[ \chi^\dagger i \sigma \cdot \partial \chi + \frac{im}{2} \left( \chi^T \sigma^2 \chi - \chi^\dagger \sigma^2 \chi^* \right) \right]$$

The Majorana equation is $$i \bar{\sigma} \cdot \partial \chi - im \sigma^2 \chi^* = 0$$
I am stuck at the final part where one is supposed to show that the derivative of the second term of the action gives the mass term in the Majorana equation. For $$\chi^T\sigma^2\chi = -(\chi^\dagger\sigma^2\chi^*)^*$$ we get $$\frac{\delta}{\delta\chi^\dagger}(\chi^\dagger\sigma^2\chi^*)^*$$ which is supposed to give $$\sigma^2\chi^*.$$ I don't see how. Suppose $$f(\chi) = \chi^*,$$ and now $$\frac{d}{d\chi}f(\chi) = \frac{d\chi^*}{d\chi}$$ which would be zero due to the field and its complex conjugate being zero.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
diracsgrandgrandson said:
I am stuck at the final part where one is supposed to show that the derivative of the second term of the action gives the mass term in the Majorana equation.
You can get the Majorana equation by varying ##S## with respect to ##\chi_1^*## and ##\chi_2^*##.

Note that ##\chi^T \sigma^2 \chi## does not contain either ##\chi_1^*## or ##\chi_2^*##.
So, this expression in the Lagrangian will not contribute when doing the variation with respect to ##\chi_1^*## and ##\chi_2^*##.

Write out the expression ##\chi^\dagger \sigma^2 \chi^*## explicitly in terms of ##\chi_1^*## and ##\chi_2^*##. Then you can look at its variation with respect to ##\chi_1^*## and ##\chi_2^*##.
 
Last edited:
TSny said:
Write out the expression χ†σ2χ∗ explicitly in terms of χ1∗ and χ2∗. Then you can look at its variation with respect to χ1∗ and χ2∗.
Doesn't that give zero?

$$
\begin{align*}
\chi^\dagger \sigma^2 \chi^* &=
\begin{pmatrix}
\chi_1^* & \chi_2^*
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
0 & -i \\
i & 0
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
\chi_1^* \\
\chi_2^*
\end{pmatrix} \\
&= \begin{pmatrix}
\chi_1^* & \chi_2^*
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
- i \chi_2^* \\
i \chi_1^*
\end{pmatrix} \\
&= i (-\chi^*_1\chi^*_2+\chi^*_2\chi_1^*)
\end{align*}
$$

which gives zero for each derivative.
 
According to the problem statement in the textbook, ##\chi_1## and ##\chi_2## are to be treated as anticommuting quantities (Grassmann numbers) with the following properties

##\chi_1 \chi_2## = -##\chi_2 \chi_1 \,\,## and ##\,\, (\chi_1 \chi_2)^* \equiv \chi_2^* \chi_1^* = - \chi_1^* \chi_2^*##
 
  • Like
Likes PhDeezNutz and diracsgrandgrandson
Ahh I see, that clarifies it, thank you. I find the problem is formulated in a very confusing way, at least for a beginner like me :)
 
Yes, it's a difficult subject. I'm also a beginner. I've been a beginner for years. :oldsmile:
 
  • Like
Likes diracsgrandgrandson, PhDeezNutz and haushofer
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