SO(2,1) Lie Algebra Derivation

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the derivation of the SO(2,1) Lie algebra from the SO(3) algebra. Participants explore the relationships between different sets of generators and their implications for understanding conformal and Lorentz symmetries in various physical contexts.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant attempts to derive the SO(2,1) algebra from the SO(3) algebra using specific generator forms and commutation relations, but encounters difficulties in matching the expected results.
  • Another participant points out that the algebra for SO(2,1) is expressed in a different basis related to the conformal algebra, suggesting that the generators D, H, and K correspond to translation, dilatation, and special conformal transformations, respectively.
  • There is a proposal that different Lie algebras can describe the same group, as seen with the conformal algebra and the Lorentz algebra, raising questions about the interchangeability of generators.
  • A later reply asserts that both the conformal symmetry of a particle in 1D and the Lorentz symmetry of 3D Minkowski space are associated with the same Lie algebra, SO(2,1), despite originating from different physical systems.
  • Participants discuss the possibility of performing transformations in one framework that yield equivalent results in another, highlighting the relationship between the two algebras.
  • There is mention of the isomorphism between the generators of different physical systems, suggesting a deeper mathematical connection.
  • One participant notes that while different Lie algebras can describe the same group, they may represent different physical interpretations, as exemplified by SO(3) and SU(2).

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the derivation process and the relationships between the algebras, indicating that multiple competing perspectives remain without a consensus on the best approach or interpretation.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved questions regarding the specific calculations and transformations involved in deriving the SO(2,1) algebra from SO(3), as well as the implications of using different bases for the generators.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to those studying Lie algebras, symmetries in physics, and the mathematical relationships between different physical theories, particularly in the context of conformal and Lorentz symmetries.

geoduck
Messages
257
Reaction score
2
I'm trying to derive the SO(2,1) algebra from the SO(3) algebra.

The generators for SO(3) are given by:

[tex]M^{ij}_{ab}=i*(\delta_{a}^{i}\delta_{b}^{j}-\delta_{b}^{i}\delta_{a}^{j})[/tex]

where "a" represents the row, and "b" represents the column, and "ij" represents the generator (12=spin in 3 direction, 23=spin in 1 direction, etc.).

To get SO(2,1), I thought you just raised the "a" term by using the metric tensor:

[tex]M^{(ij)a}_{b}=i*(g^{ai}\delta_{b}^{j}-\delta_{b}^{i}g^{aj})[/tex]

and took the commutators of the Mij with each other to derive the Lie Algebra.

But when I do this I don't seem to get the Lie algebra of SO(2,1). I have some notes that say the Lie Algebra of SO(2,1) is given by:

[D,H]=-iH
[K,D]=-iK
[H,K]=2iD

where D, H, and K are the generators. I get nothing like that when I take the commutators of M12, M23, and M31.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
geoduck said:
But when I do this I don't seem to get the Lie algebra of SO(2,1). I have some notes that say the Lie Algebra of SO(2,1) is given by:

[D,H]=-iH
[K,D]=-iK
[H,K]=2iD

where D, H, and K are the generators. I get nothing like that when I take the commutators of M12, M23, and M31.

The algebra above is written in a completely different basis from the angular momentum algebra you wrote before. This is a representation appropriate to the conformal algebra acting on a particle in 1d:

[tex]\begin{split}& H = -\frac{\partial}{\partial x} ,&~~~ \mathrm{translation} \\<br /> &D = -i x \frac{\partial}{\partial x}, & ~~~\mathrm{dilatation} \\<br /> &K = - x^2 \frac{\partial}{\partial x} , & ~~~\mathrm{special ~conformal}. \end{split}[/tex]

If you want to write this in terms of angular momentum and boosts, it looks like you can write
[tex]\begin{split}& J = D, \\<br /> &B_1 = \frac{i}{2} (H+K), \\<br /> &B_2 = \frac{i}{2} (-H+K). \end{split}[/tex]
Then
[tex]\begin{split}& [J,B_1] = iB_2, \\<br /> & [J,B_2] = -iB_1, \\<br /> & [B_1,B_2] = -i J. \end{split}[/tex]

The algebra you want is obtained by identifying

[tex]M_{23} = J,~~M_{12}=B_1,~~M_{31}=B_2.[/tex]

I could have signs wrong, but you should be able to get the general idea by working through the algebra.
 
Thanks.

It seems then that different Lie Algebras can describe the same group?

The conformal algebra, when taking a linear combination of the generators, gives you the 3-dimensional Lorentz algebra: this must mean that you can use either set of generators and exponentiate to produce a representation of the group.

Does this mean that you can perform a dilation, translation, and special conformal transformation and achieve the same result with rotations and boosts?

I'm a little confused about the terminology: there's the conformal algebra, and the Lorentz algebra, but is the group that they are describing called SO(2,1)?
 
What we have are two different physical systems. The conformal symmetry of a particle in 1d and the Lorentz symmetry of 3d Minkowski space. In both cases, it turns out that the associated Lie algebra is SO(2,1). So, even though we started with different physics, the mathematical symmetry is the same. If my calculations above are correct, I've given an isomorphism between the natural generators for the two physical systems.

More generally, it can be the case that two different Lie algebras describe the same group. For example, the Lie algebras of SO(3) and SU(2) are the same, even though the groups are different. Though, they're not that different: SU(2) is mathematically a double cover of SO(3) as a manifold.
 

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K