"Properly speaking, in 1+1 dim. no such thing as spin, but"

  • Thread starter Spinnor
  • Start date
  • #1
Spinnor
Gold Member
2,194
402
Could you please put the conclusion ("The spin-statistics theorem says that in local quantum field theory in two dimensions an anticommuting field must have half-integral Lorentz quantum numbers.") of the following quote in simpler terms if possible,

"Properly speaking, in 1+1 dimensions there is no such thing as spin, but there is a two-dimensional Lorentz group (or local Lorentz group, in the case of a generally covariant theory), and it makes sense to ask how a two-dimensional field transforms under this group. The spin-statistics theorem says that in local quantum field theory in two dimensions an anticommuting field must have half-integral Lorentz quantum numbers."

Quote from Google book search "is there a spin statistics theorem in 1 + 1 spacetime dimensions"

Bottom of page 187, https://books.google.com/books?id=_18hAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA187&dq=string theory: volume 1, introduction&hl=en&sa=X&ei=dr-yVOTQO8rasAStkIGQBg&ved=0CCwQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=string theory: volume 1, introduction&f=false

Also does this answer my early question about what the 2 component spinor solutions of the Dirac equation in 1+1 dimensions represent?

Thanks for any help!
 
  • Like
Likes Symmetry777

Answers and Replies

  • #2
18,839
9,018
Thanks for the post! This is an automated courtesy bump. Sorry you aren't generating responses at the moment. Do you have any further information, come to any new conclusions or is it possible to reword the post?
 

Suggested for: "Properly speaking, in 1+1 dim. no such thing as spin, but"

Replies
15
Views
554
  • Last Post
Replies
0
Views
229
  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
783
Replies
7
Views
636
Replies
5
Views
395
Replies
6
Views
371
Replies
4
Views
292
  • Last Post
2
Replies
39
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
583
  • Last Post
Replies
6
Views
365
Top