Ryder, QFT, 1985, pg. 40, Eq. (2.69) K = sigma?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Living_Dog
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Qft Sigma
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around a specific equation from Ryder's "Quantum Field Theory" regarding the relationship between the K operators and the Pauli matrices. Participants explore the implications of this equation, particularly in the context of their dimensionality and role as generators of boosts in different spaces.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions how K, which is represented as a 4x4 matrix, can equal +/- i/2 sigma, given that sigma refers to the 2x2 Pauli matrices.
  • Another participant clarifies that the K operators are different, with the 4x4 K's being generators of boosts in spacetime and the 2x2 sigma's being generators of boosts in spin 1/2 space.
  • A participant expresses frustration with Ryder's clarity, suggesting that the text lacks sufficient explanation and leaves readers confused about the material.
  • One participant mentions that visibility of certain pages in the book can vary based on geographic location, affecting access to the relevant equations.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that the K operators and the Pauli matrices are distinct entities serving different purposes, but there is no consensus on the clarity of Ryder's explanations or the implications of the equation in question.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note that the visibility of specific pages in the book may vary, which could impact the discussion and understanding of the equation.

Living_Dog
Messages
98
Reaction score
0
Ryder, QFT, 1985, pg. 40, Eq. (2.69) K = sigma??

For the similar page in the 2nd edition, turn page 37 at this http://books.google.com/books?id=nn...resnum=1&ved=0CCwQ6wEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false".

He states that K = +/- i/2 sigma.

How is this possible since the Pauli matrices are 2x2's and the K's are 4x4's. So ok, maybe he doubled up on the sigma's, but still, K_x != sigma_x, etc.

Thanks in advance.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org


37 and 38 aren't visible in the preview. There's no K on the pages I can see.
 


They are different K's. The 4x4 ones are the generators of boosts in spacetime. The 2x2 ones are the generators of boosts in spin 1/2 space. He most definitely did not double up on the sigmas here. He's just using the same letter since they are both generators of boosts.
 


matonski said:
They are different K's. The 4x4 ones are the generators of boosts in spacetime. The 2x2 ones are the generators of boosts in spin 1/2 space. He most definitely did not double up on the sigmas here. He's just using the same letter since they are both generators of boosts.

Well then, what does this mean?

BTW, I moved on knowing how Ryder makes statements that are clear to him (and strong students) that leaves me in the dark. You know my previous post about the mystery with the \xi? It turns out that the way I described it in the end - as being utterly unnecessary - was correct. He dropped it in the 2nd edition!

So this post is more in the way of a request to make the Ryder text less of a book on magic and more of a book on physics. (NOTE: texts are horrible teachers. They have no room for clearly EXPLAINING the material. I stopped buying books once I realized this. Now I pick one and struggle with it. Also PF is a very big help in this regard. So if no one has an answer then this bit of Ryder will remain in the dark... for me.)

I just checked the link. Page 37 is visible and the equation is at the bottom. Here is a snap of what I see:
http://img198.imageshack.us/img198/6726/ryder2edpg37.th.jpg

Uploaded with ImageShack.us
 
Last edited by a moderator:


Fredrik said:
37 and 38 aren't visible in the preview. There's no K on the pages I can see.
Visibility (of free parts of a commercial book) strongly depends on where in the world your computer is.
 

Similar threads

Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K