Proving the Trace of Gamma Matrices with (Anti-)Communtation Rules

WarnK
Messages
30
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Show that tr(\gamma^{\mu}\gamma^{\nu}\gamma^{5}) = 0


Homework Equations


(anti-)commutation rules for the gammas, trace is cyclic


The Attempt at a Solution


I can do
tr(\gamma^{\mu}\gamma^{\nu}\gamma^{5}) = -tr(\gamma^{\mu}\gamma^{5}\gamma^{\nu}) = - tr(\gamma^{\nu}\gamma^{\mu}\gamma^{5})
and so on, but I don't see how that helps me. Any suggestions?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You've used the first of your "relevant equations", now use the second.
 
If I continue like this
tr(\gamma^{\mu}\gamma^{\nu}\gamma^{5}) = - tr(\gamma^{\nu}\gamma^{\mu}\gamma^{5}) = - tr( (2\eta^{\nu \mu} - \gamma^{\mu}\gamma^{\nu} )\gamma^{5}) = tr(\gamma^{\mu}\gamma^{\nu}\gamma^{5}) - tr(2\eta^{\nu \mu} \gamma^{5})
which I guess means that tr(\gamma^{5})=0
 
Oops, I didn't notice that you've already gotten as far as you need to. You've shown that your original expression is equal to minus itself. What is the only number with this property?
 
But, I have \gamma^{\mu} and \gamma^{\nu} in a different order, and the entire point is that they don't commute?
 
Last edited:
Oops, sorry, I screwed up again.

To do this one, I think you need to insert (gamma^rho)^2 (which is either one or minus one, depending on your conventions and on whether or not rho=0) into the trace,
with rho not equal to mu or nu, and then move one of the gamma^rho's around by commutation.
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...

Similar threads

Back
Top