(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); "Proving" the Jacobi identity from invariance

Hi all,

In an informal and heuristic manner, I have heard that the "change" in something is the commutator with it, i.e. [itex]\delta A =[J,A][/itex] for an operator [itex]A[/itex] where the change is due to the Lorentz transformation [itex]U = \exp{\epsilon J} = 1 + \epsilon J + \ldots[/itex] where [itex]J[/itex] is one of the six generators of the Lorentz group (rotation or boost). That is, if we have an operator [itex]\phi\ :\ G\to G[/itex], where [itex]G[/itex] is the vector space spanned by the size generators [itex]J_i,K_i[/itex] of the Lorentz group, (i.e. [itex]G[/itex] is the vector representation of the Lorentz algebra) then

[tex]\delta (\phi(T)) = \delta\phi (T) + \phi (\delta T)[/tex]

so, using the above definition of "change"

[tex][J,\phi(T)] = \delta\phi (T) + \phi ([J,T])[/tex].

We can then define [itex]\phi[/itex] to be invariant by saying that [itex]\delta\phi = 0[/itex], and hence

[tex][J,\phi(T)] = \phi([J,T])[/tex].

If one does the same for a Lie product [itex]\mu(X,Y) = [X,Y][/itex] then

[tex]\delta\mu(Y,Z) =\delta\mu (Y,Z) + \mu(\delta Y, Z) + \mu(Y,\delta Z)[/tex]

We say that [itex]\mu[/itex] is invariant and set [itex]\delta\mu = 0[/itex] and hence

[tex][J,\mu(Y,Z)] =\mu([J,Y], Z) + \mu(Y,[J, Z])[/tex]

or

[tex][J,[Y,Z]] =[[J,Y], Z] + [Y,[J, Z]][/tex]

which is the Jacobi identity. This seems great, but I don't understand a few points.

1. I believe the Lie product commutator enters as if we have an operator [itex]A[/itex] on the vectors in the Lorentz(e.g. Minkowski space), it must change asgroup

[tex]A\to A' = UAU^{-1} = A + \epsilon [J,A] + \ldots[/tex]

correct? But in the above description with [itex]\phi[/itex] and [itex]\mu[/itex], these are operators on the Lorentz, which I thought would remain unchanged.algebra

2. Is the expression

[tex]\delta\mu(Y,Z) =\delta\mu (Y,Z) + \mu(\delta Y, Z) + \mu(Y,\delta Z)[/tex]

rigourous? What about terms like [itex]\mu(\delta Y, \delta Z)[/itex]? Or are those second order?

Any help would be great,

Ianhoolihan

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**

Join Physics Forums Today!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# Proving the Jacobi identity from invariance

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**