Question about the helicity operator

  • Thread starter Thread starter jdstokes
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Helicity Operator
jdstokes
Messages
520
Reaction score
1
In relativistic quantum field theory the Dirac spinors can be chosen to be eigenstates of the helicity operator \vec{\Sigma}\cdot \vec{p} /|\vec{p}|.

I want to show that \vec{\Sigma}\cdot \vec{a} commutes with the Dirac Hamiltonian only if \vec{a}\propto \vec{p}. As usual I'm using Einstein summation everywhere.

[\vec{\Sigma}\cdot \vec{a}, H_\mathrm{Dirac}]\psi=[\vec{\Sigma}\cdot \vec{a}, -i\hbar c \gamma^i\partial_i + mc^2]\psi =-i\hbar c[\Sigma^ia_i, \gamma^i \partial_i]\psi

[\Sigma^i a_i, \gamma^l \partial_l]\psi=[\frac{i}{2}\epsilon^{ijk}\gamma_j\gamma_k a_i, \gamma^l \partial_l]\psi= \frac{i}{2}\epsilon_{ijk}[\gamma^j\gamma^k a^i, \gamma^l \partial_l]\psi = \frac{i}{2}\epsilon_{ijk}(\gamma^j\gamma^k a^i \gamma^l \partial_l-\gamma^l \partial_l\gamma^j\gamma^k a^i ]\psi

since \epsilon^{ijk} = \epsilon_{ijk}(-1)^3 and \gamma_i = -\gamma^i,\, a_i = -a^i in flat spacetime with (+,-,-,-) signature.

Now suppose a^i = \partial^i. Then using equality of mixed partials and dividing out any constants gives

\epsilon_{ijk}(\gamma^j\gamma^k\gamma^l \partial_l\partial^i\psi - \gamma^l\gamma^j\gamma^k \partial_l\partial^i \psi)

Using the relation \{ \gamma^\mu,\gamma^\nu \} = 2\eta^{\mu\nu} twice and the fact that \eta^{ij}\partial_i = \partial^j in flat spacetime gives

\epsilon_{ijk}(\gamma^k \partial^j - \gamma^j\partial^k)\partial^i \psi

Now, in the sum over k,j the term in brackets is anti-symmetric but so is \epsilon_{ijk} so I don't see why this should vanish.

Any help would be appreciated.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Woops \epsilon_{ijk} is symmetric in j,k since \epsilon^{ijk} is anti-symmetric.

Edit: Hang on, \epsilon_{ijk} should still be anti-symmetric, just differing in sign from \epsilon^{ijk}. I still don't see why this should vanish?
 
Last edited:
Presumably \partial^j \partial k^k is symmetric in j,k.
 
Sorry I didn't understand what you wrote. Are you suggesting something along these lines?

\epsilon_{ijk}\gamma^k\partial^j = -\epsilon_{ikj}\gamma^k\partial^j = -\epsilon_{ijk}\gamma^j\partial^k.

Therefore

\epsilon_{ijk}(\gamma^k\partial^j - \gamma^j\partial^k)\partial^i\psi = -4\epsilon_{ijk}\gamma^j\partial^k\partial^i\psi.

But

\epsilon_{ijk} is anti-symmetric in i,k whereas \partial^i\partial^k is symmetric in i,k. Therefore each term in the sum over j vanishes.
 
Last edited:
Um, yes... each term actually vanishes separately, the gamma matrix is simply along for the ride.
 
You'll find it much easier to work directly with standard Dirac solutions in two component form, which are built around the helicity operator. Or look up the angular momentum operator -- see, for example, F. Gross's Relativistic Quantum Mechanics and Field Theory.

Helicity, with a fixed direction of course, commutes with free Hamiltonians for any spin. This is the basis for the elegant Jacob and Wick formalism -- something every particle physicist should master.
Regards,
Reilly Atkinson
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
I am reading WHAT IS A QUANTUM FIELD THEORY?" A First Introduction for Mathematicians. The author states (2.4 Finite versus Continuous Models) that the use of continuity causes the infinities in QFT: 'Mathematicians are trained to think of physical space as R3. But our continuous model of physical space as R3 is of course an idealization, both at the scale of the very large and at the scale of the very small. This idealization has proved to be very powerful, but in the case of Quantum...
Thread 'Lesser Green's function'
The lesser Green's function is defined as: $$G^{<}(t,t')=i\langle C_{\nu}^{\dagger}(t')C_{\nu}(t)\rangle=i\bra{n}C_{\nu}^{\dagger}(t')C_{\nu}(t)\ket{n}$$ where ##\ket{n}## is the many particle ground state. $$G^{<}(t,t')=i\bra{n}e^{iHt'}C_{\nu}^{\dagger}(0)e^{-iHt'}e^{iHt}C_{\nu}(0)e^{-iHt}\ket{n}$$ First consider the case t <t' Define, $$\ket{\alpha}=e^{-iH(t'-t)}C_{\nu}(0)e^{-iHt}\ket{n}$$ $$\ket{\beta}=C_{\nu}(0)e^{-iHt'}\ket{n}$$ $$G^{<}(t,t')=i\bra{\beta}\ket{\alpha}$$ ##\ket{\alpha}##...

Similar threads

Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
517
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
56
Views
5K
Replies
18
Views
3K
Replies
20
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Back
Top