Proving Shouten identity in QFT

In summary, the conversation discusses the Schouten identity for twistors, which is expressed as <pq><rs> + <pr><sq> + <ps><qr> = 0. It is shown that the left-hand side is cyclically symmetric and completely antisymmetric, but it is unclear why this implies that the LHS must be zero. The explanation is that since each twistor only has two spinorial components, and is labeled by p,q,r,s with antisymmetry on q,r,s exchanges, any three of them must be linearly dependent and thus the LHS becomes zero. This is also related to the fact that twistors are SU(2,2) spinors with Lorentz invariant products formed from
  • #1
LAHLH
409
1
Hi,

I'm trying to prove the Shouten identity for twistors:

[itex] \langle pq\rangle\langle rs\rangle+\langle pr\rangle\langle sq\rangle+\langle ps\rangle\langle qr\rangle=0 [/itex]

It's easy to show that the LHS here is cyclically symmetric under [itex] q\to r\to s \to q[/itex], and also completely antisymmetric in q,r,s (just use [itex] \langle qr \rangle=-\langle rq \rangle[/itex] etc)

But why does this imply the LHS must be zero?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Because q, r, s each take on only two values, so if you antisymmetrize on three of them you get zero.
 
  • #3
Each twistor only has two spinorial components as far as I understand it. But then we are labeling each twistor by p,q,r,s and we have antisymmetry on q,r,s exchanges. I'm not sure I follow why this implies zero still, could you say some more please.
 
  • #4
A twistor is a SU(2,2) spinor and is written as a pair of dotted and undotted Weyl spinors, ZI = (λA, μA·). From the Weyl spinors we form Lorentz invariant products <λi, λj> = εAB λiA λjB and [μi, μj] = εA·B· μiA· μjB·. For short, <λi, λj> ≡ <i j> and [μi, μj] ≡ [i j].

There are two Schouten identities,

<i j><k l> + <i k><l j> + <i l> <j k> = 0
[i j][k l] + [i k][l j] + [i l][j k] = 0

They just express the fact that the λ's (and the μ's) are objects that live in a two-space, consequently any three of them must be linearly dependent, and if you try to antisymmetrize on all three of them you'll get zero.
 

1. What is the Shouten identity in QFT?

The Shouten identity, also known as the Jacobi identity, is a fundamental relationship between the structure constants of a Lie algebra. In QFT, it is a mathematical expression that relates the commutators of the generators of the symmetry group to the structure constants of the corresponding Lie algebra.

2. Why is proving the Shouten identity important in QFT?

Proving the Shouten identity is important in QFT because it ensures that the theory is consistent and that the underlying symmetry group is valid. It also helps to establish the mathematical foundations of the theory and allows for more accurate predictions and calculations.

3. How is the Shouten identity proven in QFT?

The Shouten identity can be proven using mathematical techniques such as group theory and Lie algebras. This involves manipulating the commutators of the generators of the symmetry group and checking that they satisfy the Shouten identity relationship.

4. What are the implications of the Shouten identity being violated in QFT?

If the Shouten identity is violated in QFT, it would mean that the theory is inconsistent and cannot accurately describe physical phenomena. This could lead to incorrect predictions and a breakdown of the underlying symmetry group.

5. Are there any alternative methods for proving the Shouten identity in QFT?

Yes, there are alternative methods for proving the Shouten identity in QFT, such as using the path integral formalism or supersymmetry. These methods may provide a different perspective and can be useful for verifying the validity of the identity.

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
105
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
19
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
911
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
20
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
3K
Back
Top