Solving Simple Matrix Algebra Homework Problem

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a problem from quantum field theory related to the commutation relations of Pauli matrices as presented in Ryder's textbook. The original poster expresses confusion regarding the satisfaction of these relations by a specific operator form.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to verify the commutation relations using a specific form of the operator K and raises questions about discrepancies in the expected results. Other participants contribute by referencing the properties of Pauli matrices and suggesting corrections to the original poster's calculations.

Discussion Status

Participants are exploring the relationships between the operators and the commutation relations. Some guidance has been offered regarding the definitions of the operators involved, and there is acknowledgment of a potential typo in the textbook that could clarify the confusion. The discussion reflects a collaborative effort to understand the mathematical framework without reaching a definitive conclusion.

Contextual Notes

There is mention of specific equations from the textbook that are under scrutiny, and the original poster considers the possibility of a typo affecting their understanding of the problem. The discussion highlights the importance of precise definitions in quantum mechanics.

Jimmy Snyder
Messages
1,137
Reaction score
21

Homework Statement


This is from Ryder's QFT book, second ed. page 37. At the bottom of the page it says that the commutation relations (eqn 2.68?) are satisfied by:
K = \pm i\frac{\sigma}{2}
However, I do not find this to be so. What am I missing?

Homework Equations


Here is one of the commutation relations that I think he means.
[K_x,K_y] = -iJ_z

The Attempt at a Solution


Using K = i\frac{\sigma}{2}, I get:
[K_x,K_y] = [i\frac{\sigma_x}{2},i\frac{\sigma_y}{2}] = \frac{-1}{4}[\sigma_x,\sigma_y] = -\frac{1}{2}\sigma_z = iK_z \neq -iJ_z
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Isn't there an i in the commutation relations of the Pauli matrices as well?
 
yep,
<br /> \left[\sigma_j,\sigma_k\right]=2i\epsilon_{jkl}\sigma_l<br />
 
Thanks Dick. Here is the corrected attempt. I still don't get the right commutation relation.

[K_x,K_y] = [i\frac{\sigma_x}{2},i\frac{\sigma_y}{2}] = \frac{-1}{4}[\sigma_x,\sigma_y] = -i\frac{\sigma_z}{2} = -K_z \neq -iJ_z
 
yes, you do get the right relation. Ryder is talking about (2-component) Pauli spinors for which J_z=\frac{\sigma_z}{2}.

Look at equation (2.74). That is a boost and a rotation of a 2-component spinor where the rotation generator is
\frac{\vec \sigma}{2} and the boost generator is i\frac{\vec \sigma}{2}.
 
olgranpappy said:
J_z=\frac{\sigma_z}{2}.
Thanks olgranpappy, your reply is what I needed. If I make the substitutions K = i\frac{\sigma}{2} and J = \frac{\sigma}{2}, then I get:

[K_x,K_y] = [i\frac{\sigma_x}{2},i\frac{\sigma_y}{2}] = -i\frac{\sigma_z}{2} = -iJ_z just as in (2.68)

I have also verified the other relations in (2.68). I came close to solving it this morning as I was driving to work. It occurred to me that there might be a typo in the book and that the author meant J instead of K in eqn (2.69). If I had followed that thought a while longer, I might have come up with the solution on my own. Thanks again for your help.
 
no problem. cheers.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K