Solving the Mystery of ##\bar{\psi}_L \psi_L = \bar{\psi} \psi_L##

  • Thread starter Thread starter Monaliza Smile
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Mystery
Monaliza Smile
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
Hi,

It's known that ## \bar{\psi}_L \psi_L = \bar{\psi} \psi_L## I tried to work this out but i do not reach that
Here what I do : since ## \bar{\psi} = \psi^\dagger \gamma^0##, and ## \gamma_5 \gamma_0 = - \gamma_0 \gamma_5 ##

then

## \bar{\psi}_L \psi_L = \frac{1}{4} (1-\gamma_5 ) \psi^\dagger \gamma^0 (1-\gamma_5 ) \psi = \frac{1}{4} \psi^\dagger \gamma^0 (1+\gamma_5 ) (1-\gamma_5 ) \to 0 ##

I get this equals zero ! since (1+\gamma_5 ) (1-\gamma_5 ) = 0

so what's wrong I made ?

Best ..
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I knew the answer ## \bar{\psi}_L \gamma^\mu \psi_L ## which equals ## \bar{\psi} \gamma^\mu \psi_L ##
 
Not sure I understand what you're trying to do. You want to prove this?
$$\bar{\psi}_L\gamma^{\mu}\psi_L=\bar{\psi}_L\gamma^{\mu}\psi_L$$
 
To solve this, I first used the units to work out that a= m* a/m, i.e. t=z/λ. This would allow you to determine the time duration within an interval section by section and then add this to the previous ones to obtain the age of the respective layer. However, this would require a constant thickness per year for each interval. However, since this is most likely not the case, my next consideration was that the age must be the integral of a 1/λ(z) function, which I cannot model.
Back
Top