Query in Zeidler's Volume II QFT

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on a query regarding Zeidler's Quantum Field Theory (QFT) Volume II, specifically the equation S Ψ^+_{p,s} = (sk)Ψ^+_{p,s} when p=p^3 k. The user seeks clarification on why the S^1 and S^2 terms do not contribute when S is expressed as S=S^1i+S^2j+S^3k. Participants suggest that S^1 is represented by the 4x4 matrix with (1/2)*sigma^1 as its diagonal blocks, and they discuss the implications of this on the wave function, particularly in relation to eigenstates of gamma^3.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Quantum Field Theory (QFT) concepts
  • Familiarity with spin operators and their matrix representations
  • Knowledge of eigenstates and their properties in quantum mechanics
  • Basic understanding of the notation used in QFT, including sigma matrices
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of spin operators in Quantum Mechanics
  • Learn about the application of sigma matrices in QFT
  • Research the implications of eigenstates in the context of gamma matrices
  • Examine the derivation of equations in QFT, focusing on Zeidler's Volume II
USEFUL FOR

Students and researchers in Quantum Field Theory, physicists working with spin operators, and anyone seeking to deepen their understanding of the mathematical framework of QFT as presented in Zeidler's work.

Avogadro Number
Messages
20
Reaction score
2
Hello!

I am studying Zeidler's QFT Volume II, and I have a query on page 808:
It is claimed that
S Ψ^+_{p,s} = (sk)Ψ^+_{p,s} when p=p^3 k.
I tried my hand at deriving this, but when we write S=S^1i+S^2j+S^3k,
then the S^3k term acting on Ψ^+_{p,s} does give skΨ^+_{p,s},
but I don't see why the S^1 i and S^2 j terms don't give any contribution.
To those who are knowledgeable and happen to have access to the book,
could you please help me out? Many thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I am sure there are far more people browsing the internet knowledgeable of QFT who do not have an electronic/a paper copy of this book than the ones who do, so if you can at least define the terms of the equality, it would increase your chances of receiving an answer.
 
dextercioby said:
I am sure there are far more people browsing the internet knowledgeable of QFT who do not have an electronic/a paper copy of this book than the ones who do, so if you can at least define the terms of the equality, it would increase your chances of receiving an answer.
@dextercioby: Yes, thanks for the suggestion. I should have done it the first time round, but the notation is rather heavy, and it is hard to type it all. So I have uploaded the images of 3 relevant pages. :) I wonder it it will help. Thanks!
 

Attachments

  • 9AEA28BF-A637-4A9D-B994-88669ED89427.jpeg
    9AEA28BF-A637-4A9D-B994-88669ED89427.jpeg
    35.1 KB · Views: 390
  • D8A17B5A-F544-4730-9F29-0539C0D055E1.jpeg
    D8A17B5A-F544-4730-9F29-0539C0D055E1.jpeg
    36.1 KB · Views: 400
  • D977FAAC-6BA7-4A8A-A1D4-1ED698F288F6.jpeg
    D977FAAC-6BA7-4A8A-A1D4-1ED698F288F6.jpeg
    29.3 KB · Views: 402
Avogadro Number said:
@dextercioby: Yes, thanks for the suggestion. I should have done it the first time round, but the notation is rather heavy, and it is hard to type it all. So I have uploaded the images of 3 relevant pages. :) I wonder it it will help. Thanks!
##S^1## contains ##\sigma^{23}## ,right? What is the result of applying this to the wave function (which is an eigenstate of the spin in the z direction)
 
Yes, my understanding was that S^1 is the 4x4 matrix with the 2x2 matrices (1/2)*sigma^1 as its diagonal blocks.
Then if what Zeidler's claim is true, this S^1 ought to kill the 4x1 column vector u appearing in the wave function, but it does not.
What am I doing wrong? Thanks!
 
Avogadro Number said:
Yes, my understanding was that S^1 is the 4x4 matrix with the 2x2 matrices (1/2)*sigma^1 as its diagonal blocks.
Then if what Zeidler's claim is true, this S^1 ought to kill the 4x1 column vector u appearing in the wave function, but it does not.
What am I doing wrong? Thanks!
S^1 is sigma^(23). What happens if we apply this to an eigenstate of gamma^3 ?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 167 ·
6
Replies
167
Views
11K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 87 ·
3
Replies
87
Views
8K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K