Why is the product of Dirac spinors a 4x4 matrix?

tommy01
Messages
39
Reaction score
0
Hi togehter.

I encountered the following problem:

The timeordering for fermionic fields (here Dirac field) is defined to be (Peskin; Maggiore, ...):

<br /> T \Psi(x)\bar{\Psi}(y)= \Psi(x)\bar{\Psi}(y) \ldots x^0&gt;y^0<br />
<br /> = -\bar{\Psi}(y)\Psi(x) \ldots y^0&gt;x^0<br />

where \Psi(x) is a Dirac spinor and \bar{\Psi}(y) = \Psi(y)^\dagger \gamma^0 it's Dirac adjoint so that

<br /> S(x-y) = \langle 0|T{ \Psi(x)\bar{\Psi}(y)}|0 \rangle<br />

is the Feynman propagator which is a 4x4 matrix.
But there is my problem: while it is clear that \Psi(x)\bar{\Psi}(y)} is a 4x4 matrix, \bar{\Psi}(y)\Psi(x) is a scalar.

I would be glad for an explanation.
Thanks.
Tommy
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The indices are not contracted, and the propagator is a 4x4 matrix:

<br /> T \Psi_\alpha(x)\bar{\Psi}_\beta(y)= \Psi_\alpha(x)\bar{\Psi}_\beta(y) \hbox{\ if\ } x^0&gt;y^0<br /> \hbox{\ and\ } -\bar{\Psi}_\beta(y)\Psi_\alpha(x) \hbox{\ if\ } y^0&gt;x^0<br />

<br /> S_{\alpha\beta}(x-y) = \langle 0|T{ \Psi_\alpha(x)\bar{\Psi}_\beta(y)}|0 \rangle<br />
 
In other words, the equations must be read component-wise, or you can think of a tensor product of the 2 spinors. That's the only way you can make sense of a product in which the barred spinor appears to the right of an un-barred one.
 
Thanks a lot ...
 
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
13
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
13
Views
2K
Back
Top