Products of gamma matrices in n dimensions

Michi123
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hello,

i have here some identities for gamma matrices in n dimensions to prove and don't know how to do this. My problem is that I am not very familiar with the ⊗ in the equations. I think it should be the Kronecker-product. If someone could give me a explanation of how to work with this stuff it would be great.
here the exercise:
Let γ(n)μ1... μn be the totally antisymmetric products of n γ-matrices and γ(n)⊗γ(n) = γ(n)μ1... μn ⊗ γ(n)μ1... μn.

it should hold that:
1.)γμ γν γ(2)⊗γμ γν γ(2) = γ(4)⊗γ(4) +2(5μ -4) γ(2)⊗γ(2) +4μ(2μ-1) id⊗id
2.)γργμγσγν⊗γργνγσγμ= -γ(4)⊗γ(4) +4γ(2)⊗γ(4) + 4μ(3μ-1) id⊗id

id is the n dimensional identity matrix and μ =d/2 where d is the dimension
for the gamma matrices in n dimensions also holds the basic anticommutation relation and ημνημν = d

greetz mk
 
Ok, I think the antisymmetric product of the gamma-matrices is defined by:
##\gamma^{(n)} =\gamma^{[\mu_1\mu_2\ldots\mu_n]}= \frac{1}{n!}\epsilon_{\mu_1 \mu_2 \ldots \mu_n}\gamma^{\mu_1}\gamma^{\mu_2}\ldots\gamma^{\mu_n}##
It would be good to show that ##\gamma^\nu\cdot\gamma^{[\mu_1\mu_2\ldots\mu_n]} = \gamma^{[\nu\mu_1\mu_2\ldots\mu_n]} + \sum\limits_{i=1} ^n (-1)^{i+1} g^{\nu\mu_i}\gamma^{[\mu_1\mu_2\ldots\hat\mu_i\ldots\mu_n]}. ##The ## \hat\mu_i## means that this indice is deleted from the product because ##\nu## and ##\mu_i## were equal. So if ##\nu## is different than all other indices, I'm left with a n+1 matrices product. If ##\nu## matches with one indice, I'm left with a n-1 matrices product. I am not pretty sure how to do this. For the cases n=2 or n=3 one can do this simply and just form an antisymmetric product to see how this works. But I can't do this for the general case, i.e. for arbitrary n. Perhaps one can do this by induction or just by using some combinatorial stuff?! If one has this identity, the tensor-product identities in the first post should follow by using this relation.
 
Last edited:
To solve this, I first used the units to work out that a= m* a/m, i.e. t=z/λ. This would allow you to determine the time duration within an interval section by section and then add this to the previous ones to obtain the age of the respective layer. However, this would require a constant thickness per year for each interval. However, since this is most likely not the case, my next consideration was that the age must be the integral of a 1/λ(z) function, which I cannot model.
Back
Top