Representations of Symmetry Operators

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the representation of symmetry operators for spin 1/2 particles, particularly in the context of a four-component spinor basis localized on two sites. Participants explore how to generalize symmetry operators from a two-dimensional to a four-dimensional representation.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents specific representations of symmetry operators for spin 1/2 particles, such as the time reversal operator and three-fold rotation symmetry, and questions how to generalize these to a four-component spinor basis.
  • Another participant argues that no generalization is necessary, suggesting that tensor products are only relevant for systems with multiple particles and that the Pauli matrices act solely on the spin coordinate without affecting the basis states.
  • A participant acknowledges the need to represent symmetry operators in terms of 4x4 matrices due to the four-dimensional basis but expresses uncertainty about the approach.
  • Further clarification is sought regarding the representation of operators acting on the spin part of the state.
  • One participant proposes that if the four states are represented as a tensor product of two 2-dimensional spaces, then operators acting only on the spin part would take the form of R ⊗ I, while expressing some resistance to this approach as cumbersome.
  • A later reply indicates a resolution of confusion regarding the representation of the operators.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the necessity of generalizing the representation of symmetry operators and the appropriate use of tensor products. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the most effective way to represent the operators in the four-component case.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in the assumptions made about the nature of the operators and their effects on the basis states, as well as the implications of using tensor products in this context.

stone
Messages
41
Reaction score
0
For spin 1/2 particles, I know how to write the representations of the symmetry operators
for instance T=i\sigma^{y}K (time reversal operator)
C_{3}=exp(i(\pi/3)\sigma^{z}) (three fold rotation symmetry) etc.

My question is how do we generalize this to, let's say, a basis of four component spinor with spins localized on two sites a and b
(|a, up>, |a, down>, |b, up>, |b, down>)^{T}

Is it a direct product i\sigma^{y}K \otimes i\sigma^{y}K
Or i\sigma^{y}K \otimes I_{2 \times 2}

Or is it something else?
It would be wonderful if you could point to any references.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
stone, No generalization is necessary. Using tensor products would be appropriate if you were talking about a system with several particles, but my understanding is that you have just one.

The Pauli matrices you've written, σy and so forth, act on the particle's spin coordinate. They do not affect |a> and |b>. Furthermore the antilinear operator K may be defined so as to also leave the basis states |a> and |b> unchanged, and therefore its only effect will be to complex conjugate the coefficients. That is, if you have a state |ψ> = α|a> + β|b>, then K|ψ> = α*|a> + β*|b>.
 
Thanks for the reply.
Yes the number of particles is still one, but the basis is now 4x4 instead of the usual 2x2, then we need to represent the symmetry operators in terms of 4x4 matrices.
I am still not sure how to go about doing this.
 
Some more help would be appreciated.
 
Ok, I yield! If you want to represent your four states as a tensor product of two 2-spaces, S ⊗ T say, then an operator R that acts only on the spin part will be of the form R ⊗ I.

I have a couple of reasons for resisting this, one is (IMHO) it's a rather cumbersome way of stating a simple fact, namely that the rotation operator acts on just the spin states. For a more general example, in which instead of |a> and |b> you had states |l m> say, which were also affected by rotations, you'd have to write the action as (S ⊗ I) ⊕ (I ⊗ L).
 
thanks for yielding!
I understand now.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K