Proving the "Thread Change: Spinor Identity

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion focuses on proving the identity involving two spinors, specifically the relationship θ^{α}θ^{β}=\frac{1}{2}ε^{αβ}(θθ). Participants explore various approaches to derive this identity, including the use of antisymmetry and metric contractions, while addressing the presence of a factor of 1/2 and potential errors in reasoning.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant proposes to express θ^{α}θ^{β} as A ε^{αβ} and attempts to determine A through metric contractions.
  • Another participant suggests that there is a minus sign on the right-hand side of the identity and provides an identity involving ε to support their argument.
  • A participant expresses confusion about where the factor of 1/2 disappears in their derivation and questions whether they should have started with a different expression involving the antisymmetry of the spinors.
  • Another participant points out a potential oversight regarding a factor of 2 in the calculations related to A.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not appear to reach a consensus on the correct form of the identity or the presence of the factor of 1/2. Multiple competing views and interpretations of the derivation remain present in the discussion.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference specific notations and identities that may depend on their chosen conventions, which could affect the interpretation of signs and factors in the equations. The discussion includes unresolved mathematical steps and assumptions regarding the properties of spinors.

ChrisVer
Science Advisor
Messages
3,372
Reaction score
465
THREAD CHANGE *SPINOR IDENTITY*...although it's connected with SuSy in general, it's more basic...

I am trying to prove for two spinors the identity:
[itex]θ^{α}θ^{β}=\frac{1}{2}ε^{αβ}(θθ)[/itex]

I thought that a nice way would be to use the antisymmetry in the exchange of α and β, and propose that:
[itex]θ^{α}θ^{β}= A ε^{αβ}[/itex]
where A is to be determined... To do so I contracted with another metric ε so that:

[itex]ε_{γα}θ^{α}θ^{β}= A ε_{γα}ε^{αβ} = Α (-δ^{β}_{γ})[/itex]
So I got that:

[itex]θ_{γ}θ^{β}= Α (-δ^{β}_{γ})[/itex]
So for β≠γ I'll have that
[itex]θ_{γ}θ^{β}=0[/itex]
And for β=γ I'll have that
[itex]θ_{β}θ^{β}=-A=-θ^{β}θ_{β}[/itex]
or [itex]A=(θθ)[/itex]

And end up:
[itex]θ^{α}θ^{β}= ε^{αβ} (θθ)[/itex]

Another way I could determine A, would be by dimensionaly asking for [spinor]^2 term, without indices which would lead me again in A=(θθ)...but the same problem remains
Unfortunately I cannot understand how the 1/2 factor disappears...Meaning I counted something twice (I don't know what that something is)..

Could it be that I had to write first:
[itex]θ^{α}θ^{β}=\frac{(θ^{α}θ^{β}-θ^{β}θ^{α})}{2}[/itex]
and then say that the difference on the numerator is proportional to the spinor metric ε? If so, why?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I think there is a minus sign on right hand side.Anyway ,you should use the identity ##ε_{AB}ε^{CD}=δ^{D}_{A}δ^{C}_{B}-δ^{C}_{A}δ^{D}_{B}##.
So,
##-\frac{1}{2}ε^{AB}(θθ)=-\frac{1}{2}ε^{AB}ε_{CD}θ^Cθ^D=-\frac{1}{2}[δ^{B}_{C}δ^{A}_{D}-δ^{A}_{C}δ^{B}_{D}]θ^Cθ^D=-\frac{1}{2}[θ^Bθ^A-θ^Aθ^B]=θ^Aθ^B##
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
Thanks... although I'm also trying to understand how/where I did the "mistake" in my approach :)
The minus, at least for the notations I'm following, is for when you have the conjugate spinors ...
 
ChrisVer said:
And for β=γ I'll have that
[itex]θ_{β}θ^{β}=-A=-θ^{β}θ_{β}[/itex]
or [itex]A=(θθ)[/itex]
don't you think you have missed a factor of 2 here.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
9K