Spinor Lorentz Transform via Vectors - Cross Product Issue

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the derivation of the Lorentz transformation operator for right-handed spinors, particularly focusing on the complications arising from cross products during the derivation of the second term related to infinitesimal rotations. Participants explore the mathematical intricacies involved in expressing these transformations using spinor notation and the implications of the cross product in the calculations.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents the expression for the Lorentz transformation operator acting on a right-handed spinor and describes a derivation process involving cross products.
  • Another participant suggests using the fundamental representation of SO(3) in relation to SU(2) to simplify the evaluation of rotations and boosts.
  • A later reply emphasizes that the calculation can be avoided by using established results, but also acknowledges the desire to derive the answer directly.
  • One participant questions how to manage the cross product in the context of the transformation equations and seeks clarification on the relationship between the terms involved.
  • Another participant introduces a relation for the cross product in terms of spinor notation, suggesting it may clarify the derivation process.
  • Further contributions discuss the commutation relations of the sigma matrices and their implications for the transformations being analyzed.
  • One participant expresses satisfaction upon finding a resolution to their earlier confusion regarding the cross product and its role in the calculations.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the necessity and method of deriving the transformation operator directly, with some advocating for established results while others prefer to work through the calculations. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the best approach to handle the cross product in this context.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the complexity of the calculations involved, particularly in managing the cross product and its implications for the transformation equations. There are references to specific mathematical properties of the sigma matrices that may influence the derivation process.

bolbteppa
Messages
300
Reaction score
41
The Lorentz transformation operator acting on an undotted, i.e. right-handed, spinor can be expressed as $$e^{-\frac{1}{2} \sigma \cdot \mathbf{\phi} + i\frac{1}{2} \sigma \cdot \mathbf{\theta}}.$$

There is a very cool, almost childlike, derivation of this expression in Landau Vol. 4 S. 18 I've never seen anywhere else, deriving ##e^{-\frac{1}{2} \sigma \cdot \mathbf{\phi}}## first, then ##e^{ i\frac{1}{2} \sigma \cdot \mathbf{\theta}}##.

When deriving the second term, a cross product arises in the calculation, and I can't make sense of what to do with it. To properly explain the calculation, I have derived ##e^{-\frac{1}{2} \sigma \cdot \mathbf{\phi}}## first to set the notation, and hopefully pique your interest, and then tried to derive the second term. My question will be: can you finish the calculation, and explain the cross product issue?

Given a position vector $$\mathbf{r} = (x,y,z) = (x^1,y^1,z^1),$$ define $$\sigma \cdot \mathbf{r} = \begin{bmatrix} z & x - iy \\ x + iy & - z \end{bmatrix} = x^i \sigma_i = x \begin{bmatrix} 0 & 1 \\ 1 & 0 \end{bmatrix} + y \begin{bmatrix} 0 & -i \\ i & 0 \end{bmatrix} + x \begin{bmatrix} 1 & 0 \\ 0 & -1 \end{bmatrix}$$
so that
$$x^i = \frac{1}{2} \mathrm{tr}[(\sigma \cdot \mathbf{r}) \sigma_i],$$
abbreviated as
$$\mathrm{r} = \frac{1}{2} \mathrm{tr}[(\sigma \cdot \mathbf{r}) \sigma].$$Adding $$tI = x^0 \sigma_0$$ to this gives $$T(t,\mathbf{r}) = T(t,x^1,x^2,x^3) = T(t,x,y,z) = T = x^i \sigma_i = \begin{bmatrix} t + z & x - iy \\ x + iy & t - z \end{bmatrix}$$
so that
$$t = \frac{1}{2} \mathrm{tr}(T)$$ and $$x^i = \frac{1}{2} \mathrm{tr}(T \sigma_i),$$
i.e.
$$\mathbf{r} = \frac{1}{2} \mathrm{tr}(T \sigma).$$

If we perform an infinitesimal Lorentz boost on ##(t,\mathbf{r})## with infinitesimal velocity ## \delta \mathbf{V}## the Lorentz transformation of ##(t,\mathbf{r})## becomes
\begin{align}
t' &= t - \mathbf{r} \cdot \delta \mathbf{V}, \\
\mathbf{r}' &= \mathbf{r} - t \delta \mathbf{V}
\end{align}
and that of ##T## becomes $$T' = BTB^+ = (I + \lambda)T(I + \lambda^+) = T + \lambda T + T \lambda^+$$
so that our goal is to find ##B##, i.e. ##\lambda##, via
\begin{align}
t' &= t - \mathbf{r} \cdot \delta \mathbf{V} = t - \frac{1}{2} \mathrm{tr}(T \sigma \cdot \delta \mathbf{V}) \\
&= \frac{1}{2}\mathrm{tr}(T') = \frac{1}{2}\mathrm{tr}(BTB^+ ) \frac{1}{2}\mathrm{tr}[(I + \lambda)T(I + \lambda^+)) = t + \frac{1}{2}\mathrm{tr}[T (\lambda + \lambda^+)]
\end{align}
so that $$\lambda + \lambda^+ = - \sigma \cdot \delta \mathbf{V}$$ implies $$\lambda = \lambda^+ = -\frac{1}{2}\sigma \cdot \delta \mathbf{V}.$$
(Can justify this fully by expanding ##\mathbf{r}'## in the same way and solving both equations for ##\lambda, \lambda^+##)
giving, for ##\delta \mathbf{V} = \mathbf{\phi}##,
\begin{align}
B &= I + \lambda = I - \frac{1}{2}\sigma \cdot \mathbf{\phi} \\
&= e^{- \frac{1}{2}\sigma \cdot \mathbf{\phi}},
\end{align}
the first part of our Lorentz transformation operator. Calculating the second part is the issue, hence my question. The cross product complicates things.

Under an infinitesimal rotation ##\delta \theta## we see
\begin{align}
\mathbf{r}' &= \mathbf{r} - \delta \theta \times \mathbf{r} \\
&= \frac{1}{2} \mathrm{tr}(T \sigma) - \delta \theta \times \frac{1}{2} \mathrm{tr}(T \sigma) \\
&= \frac{1}{2}\mathrm{tr}(T'\sigma) = \frac{1}{2}\mathrm{tr}(BTB^+\sigma) \frac{1}{2}\mathrm{tr}[(I + \lambda)T(I + \lambda^+)\sigma) = \frac{1}{2} \mathrm{tr}(T \sigma) + \frac{1}{2}\mathrm{tr}[ \lambda T \sigma + T \lambda^+ \sigma ]
\end{align}
and solving for ##\lambda## in the equality
$$- \delta \theta \times \frac{1}{2} \mathrm{tr}(T \sigma) = \frac{1}{2}\mathrm{tr}[ \lambda T \sigma + T \lambda^+ \sigma ]$$
is unmanageable to me, but the answer is $$\lambda = \frac{1}{2}i \sigma \cdot \delta \mathbf{\theta}.$$
How do you deal with this cross product and get the answer?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Start with the rotations. What's done here is to use the fact that the "fundamental representation" for ##\mathrm{SO}(3)## on 3D real vectors is just the adjoint representation of the group ##\mathrm{SU}(2)##. The rotation in the representation ##s=1/2## is given by
$$\hat{R}(\vec{\varphi})=\exp(-\mathrm{i} \vec{\varphi} \cdot \hat{\vec{\sigma}}/2).$$
Now you can evaluate this by using the series expansion of the matrix exponential. Then it's very easy to show that with
$$\vec{x}' \cdot \hat{\vec{\sigma}}=\hat{R} \vec{x} \cdot \hat{\vec{\sigma}} \hat{R}^{\dagger}.$$
##\vec{x}'## is indeed just the rotated ##\vec{x}## with angle ##|\vec{\varphi}|## around the direction of ##\vec{\varphi}##.

The same can be done for the boost with the extended definition, ##x^{\mu} \cdot \hat{\sigma}_{\mu}##, where ##\sigma_0=\hat{1}##.

For infinitesimal transformations it's even simpler. You just use
$$\exp(-\mathrm{i} \delta \vec{\varphi} \cdot \hat{\vec{\sigma}}/2) = \hat{1}-\mathrm{i} \delta \vec{\varphi} \cdot \hat{\vec{\sigma}}/2$$
for rotations or
$$\exp(-\delta \vec{\eta} \cdot \hat{\vec{\sigma}}/2) = \hat{1}-\mathrm{i} \delta \vec{\eta} \cdot \hat{\vec{\sigma}}/2.$$
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: bolbteppa
Landau indeed says we don't actually need to do the calculation and can do what you just said.

However he mentions that it's also possible to directly work the answer out, in the way I have indicated, and that is my question: directly working the answer out.

How in the world does

$$- \delta \theta \times \frac{1}{2} \mathrm{tr}(T \sigma) = \frac{1}{2}\mathrm{tr}[ \lambda T \sigma + T \lambda^+ \sigma ]$$

reduce to

$$\lambda = \frac{1}{2}i \sigma \cdot \delta \mathbf{\theta}?$$
 
For the rotation you have
$$X'=R X R^{\dagger},$$
and for an infinitesimal ##\delta \vec{\varphi}## you get commutators of ##\sigma## matrices, but these fullfil the commutator relations for angular momenta (up to a factor of ##2##),
$$[\sigma_j,\sigma_k]=2\mathrm{i} \epsilon_{jkl} \sigma_l.$$
Tinkering everything together you must get
$$\delta \vec{x} = -\delta \vec{\varphi} \times \vec{x},$$
or in Cartesian Ricci notation
$$\delta x_j=-\epsilon_{jkl} \delta v_k x_l.$$
 
I don't really get what you mean, but I think I found the answer. Using the relation for the cross product given here

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spinors_in_three_dimensions#Formulation

\begin{align}
X &= \mathbf{\sigma} \cdot \mathbf{x}, \\
Y &= \mathbf{\sigma} \cdot \mathbf{y}, \\
i \mathbf{\sigma} \cdot ( \mathbf{x} \times \mathbf{y}) &= \frac{1}{2}(XY - YX)
\end{align}

I should have written

\begin{align}
\mathbf{r}' &= \mathbf{r} - \delta \theta \times \mathbf{r} \\
&= \frac{1}{2} \mathrm{tr}(T \sigma) - \frac{1}{2} \mathrm{tr}( \delta \theta \times \mathbf{r}) \\
&= \frac{1}{2}\mathrm{tr}(T'\sigma) = \frac{1}{2}\mathrm{tr}(BTB^+\sigma) \frac{1}{2}\mathrm{tr}[(I + \lambda)T(I + \lambda^+)\sigma) = \frac{1}{2} \mathrm{tr}(T \sigma) + \frac{1}{2}\mathrm{tr}[ \lambda T \sigma + T \lambda^+ \sigma ]
\end{align}

and so I think that settles it, phew!
 
What I meant is the following. Starting from the infinitesimal rotation (and not distinguishing upper and lower indices since these are purely Cartesian anyway)
$$x_j'\sigma_j=(1-\mathrm{i} \delta \vec{\phi} \cdot \vec{\sigma}/2)x_j \sigma_{j} (1-\mathrm{i} \delta \vec{\phi} \cdot \vec{\sigma}/2)=x_j \sigma_j -\mathrm{i} \delta \phi_k/2 x_j [\sigma_k,\sigma_j]=x_j \sigma_j +\epsilon_{kjl} \delta \phi_k x^j \sigma_l = [x_j -(\delta \vec{\phi} \times \vec{x})_j]\sigma_j,$$
directly proves that you induce an infinitesimal rotation on the spatial components ##x_j## of the four-position vector (of course you don't change the time component, because it figures in the spinor representation as ##x^0 \hat{1}##, and ##[\hat{1},\sigma_j]=0##).
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: bolbteppa
Ah, nice!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K