So I tried learning about spinors yesterday, and got myself confused. Hopefully someone can tell me if I'm barking up the right tree...(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

The way they were introduced was by exhibiting a homomorphism from C^3 to C^2 by using the dot product:

(x1, y1, z1) . (x2, y2, z2) = x1*x2 + y1*y2 + z1*z2

Then a C^3 vector can be isotropic or "orthogonal to itself" (v.v = 0), e.g., v = (1, i, 0).

Now we can map isotropic C^3 vectors into C^2, but it's a 1:2 mapping. It seems this has something to do with the Bloch sphere, whose surface can be represented by vectors in C^3, or more simply in C^2.

There seems to be a natural analog in R^3, where I can either specify unit-length vectors or give a "latitude" and "longitude" (R^2). Two things escape me though:

1) In R^3, I'm using unit vectors, whereas in C^3 I'm using isotropic ones.

2) The 2:1 homomorphism should reflect the fact that two C^2 vectors map to the same isotropic C^3 vector, which probably indicates that the former specify unique points, while the latter specify lines -- but I haven't figured out why the C^3 vectors don't specify unique points, as in R^3. That is, antipodal points on the Bloch sphere should have distinct spinors but the same isotropic C^3 vector.

Any help is greatly appreciated!

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**

Join Physics Forums Today!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# Spinors and the Bloch sphere

Can you offer guidance or do you also need help?

Draft saved
Draft deleted

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**