Ryder, QFT 2nd Ed. Page 47, eqn (1.122)

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jimmy Snyder
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Qft
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around an equation from Ryder's Quantum Field Theory textbook, specifically focusing on the manipulation of expressions involving Pauli matrices and angular momentum vectors. Participants are examining the algebraic steps leading to a specific result, questioning their reasoning and the notation used.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss various algebraic manipulations of the equation, with some attempting to simplify terms while others express confusion over specific components. There is a mention of temporarily ignoring certain vector components to facilitate calculations.

Discussion Status

Some participants have expressed satisfaction with the results of their manipulations, while others have acknowledged challenges in understanding the steps taken. There is a mix of affirmation and encouragement among participants, with no explicit consensus reached on the overall approach.

Contextual Notes

One participant notes the time taken to progress through the material, suggesting a potential struggle with the complexity of the concepts involved. There is also a mention of external factors affecting understanding, such as inspiration and practice.

Jimmy Snyder
Messages
1,137
Reaction score
21

Homework Statement


(1 - \frac{i}{2}\mathbf{\sigma\cdot\theta})\mathbf{\sigma}(1 + \frac{i}{2}\mathbf{\sigma\cdot\theta}) = \mathbf{\sigma - \theta\times\sigma}

Homework Equations


The Attempt at a Solution


At one point in this, I temporarily ignore the y and z components. I hope the notation is not too confusing.
(1 - \frac{i}{2}\mathbf{\sigma\cdot\theta})\mathbf{\sigma}(1 + \frac{i}{2}\mathbf{\sigma\cdot\theta}) = \mathbf{\sigma} + \frac{i}{2}(\mathbf{\sigma}(\mathbf{\sigma\cdot\theta}) - (\mathbf{\sigma\cdot\theta})\mathbf{\sigma})
= \mathbf{\sigma} + \frac{i}{2}(\sigma_x(\sigma_x\theta_x + \sigma_y\theta_y + \sigma_z\theta_z) - (\sigma_x\theta_x + \sigma_y\theta_y + \sigma_z\theta_z)\sigma_x) + ()
= \mathbf{\sigma} + \frac{i}{2}(\theta_x + 2i\sigma_z\theta_y - 2i\sigma_y\theta_z) - (\theta_x - 2i\sigma_z\theta_y + 2i\sigma_y\theta_z)) + ()
= \mathbf{\sigma} - 2(\sigma_z\theta_y - \sigma_y\theta_z) + ()
and finally, putting the y and z compenents back in:
(1 - \frac{i}{2}\mathbf{\sigma\cdot\theta})\sigma(1 + \frac{i}{2}\mathbf{\sigma\cdot\theta}) = \mathbf{\sigma - 2\theta\times\sigma}
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
\left[ \vec{\sigma}-\frac{i}{2}\left( \vec{\sigma}\cdot \vec{\theta}\right) \vec{\sigma}\right] \left[ 1+\frac{i}{2}\left( \vec{\sigma}\cdot \vec{\theta}\right) \right] =\vec{\sigma}+\frac{i}{2}\vec{\sigma}\left( \vec{\sigma}\cdot \vec{\theta}\right) -\frac{i}{2}\left( \vec{\sigma}\cdot \vec{\theta}\right) \vec{\sigma}+\mathcal{O}\left( \theta ^{2}\right)

=\left[ \sigma _{i}+\frac{i}{2}\left( \sigma _{i}\sigma _{j}-\sigma _{j}\sigma _{i}\right) \theta _{j}\right] \vec{e}_{i}+\mathcal{O}\left( \theta ^{2}\right)=\left( \sigma _{i}+\frac{i}{2}2i\varepsilon _{ijk}\sigma _{k}\theta _{j}\right) \vec{e}_{i}=\vec{\sigma}-\vec{\theta}\times \vec{\sigma}+\mathcal{O}\left( \theta ^{2}\right)

So Ryder was right this time.
 
dextercioby said:
Ryder was right this time.
Thanks dextercioby. I do try hard to solve these matters before I post. It has taken me a month just to get to page 92. I cannot explain what mental blindness caused me to have trouble with this one though.
 
I don't think it's mental blindness; it's just lack of exercise and at some points also the inspiration's missing. Just keep up the good work !
 

Similar threads

Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
Replies
44
Views
6K
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
4K