Spin 1/2 vs Spin 2: Does 360 Degrees Change?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter alphachapmtl
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Spin Spin 1/2
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the behavior of spin 1/2 and spin 2 particles, specifically regarding the number of degrees of rotation required for their wave functions to return to an identical state. Participants explore the implications of these spin representations in the context of quantum mechanics and the Standard Model.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant notes that a spin 1/2 particle requires a 720-degree rotation (2 x 360 degrees) for its wave function to return to its original state and questions whether a spin 2 particle would require a 180-degree rotation (360/2) for the same effect.
  • Another participant compares the behavior of spin particles, suggesting that a spin-1 particle appears unchanged after a 360-degree rotation, likening it to a two-headed arrow.
  • A third participant provides a detailed explanation of different spin representations, mentioning that the spin-0 representation is trivial and consists of scalars, while spin-1/2 particles are represented as spinors, and spin-1 particles as vectors.
  • A later reply challenges the previous claims, asserting that representations on wavefunctions by SU(2) are single-valued for integer spins and double-valued for half-integer spins, suggesting a misunderstanding among earlier participants.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the implications of spin representations and the corresponding rotations required for wave functions. There is no consensus on the relationship between the rotations of spin 1/2 and spin 2 particles.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference various representations and properties of particles, but the discussion does not resolve the mathematical or conceptual complexities involved in these representations.

alphachapmtl
Messages
81
Reaction score
1
As mentionned in the "A question about nonlocality" thread,
the electron (a spin 1/2 particle) must turn twice to be back in its original position (so that its complex wave function is identically restore).

Now my question is this:
If a spin 1/2 particle must turn 2*360 for it's wave function to be identical, can we say that a spin 2 particle must turn 360/2 for it's wave function to be identical ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
alphachapmtl said:
Now my question is this:
If a spin 1/2 particle must turn 2*360 for it's wave function to be identical, can we say that a spin 2 particle must turn 360/2 for it's wave function to be identical ?

Yes, it is like a two-headed arrow. And spin-1 particle looks the same only if one turns it a 360 degrees, it is like an arrow. Do you know how to represent a spin-0 particle?:cool:

sam
 
Here is a related quote for those interested.
(but it's a bit more than what I can understand myself)
from http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/week109.html >>

The spin-0 representation is the trivial representation. Physicists call vectors in this representation "scalars", since they are just complex numbers. Particles transforming in the spin-0 representation of SU(2) are also called scalars. Examples include pions and other mesons. The only fundamental scalar particle in the Standard Model is the Higgs boson - hypothesized but still not seen.

The spin-1/2 representation is the fundamental representation, in which SU(2) acts on C^2 in the obvious way. Physicists call vectors in this representation "spinors". Examples of spin-1/2 particles include electrons, protons, neutrons, and neutrinos. The fundamental spin-1/2 particles in the Standard Model are the leptons (electron, muon, tau and their corresponding neutrinos) and quarks.

The spin-1 representation comes from turning elements of SU(2) into 3x3 matrices using the double cover SU(2) → SO(3). This is therefore also called the "vector" representation. The spin-1 particles in the Standard Model are the gauge fields: the photon, the W and Z, and the gluons.

Though you can certainly make composite particles of higher spin, like hadrons and atomic nuclei, there are no fundamental particles of spin greater than 1 in the Standard Model. But the Standard Model doesn't cover gravity. In gravity, the spin-2 representation is very important. This comes from letting SO(3), and thus SU(2), act on symmetric traceless 3x3 matrices in the obvious way (by conjugation). In perturbative quantum gravity, gravitons are expected to be spin-2 particles
 
No guys i think you are making something wrong...
Representations on wavefunctions by SU(2) is siglevalued on integers spin (s=1,2,3..)
and double valued on half integers (s=1/2,3/2..).
Thats the only motivation...


regards marco.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 61 ·
3
Replies
61
Views
6K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
8K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 71 ·
3
Replies
71
Views
18K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
6K