Trace Theorems and Dirac Matrices

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter dm4b
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Dirac Matrices Trace
Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
2 replies · 4K views
dm4b
Messages
363
Reaction score
4
I think I'm missing something real simple on trace theorems and Dirac matrices, but am just not seeing it.

In the Peskin and Schroeder QFT text on page 135 we have:

gamma^(mu)*gamma^(nu)*gamma_(mu) = -2*gamma^(nu)

But, why can't we anti-commute and obtain the following:

gamma^(mu)*gamma^(nu)*gamma_(mu)
= -gamma^(nu)*gamma^(mu)*gamma_(mu)
= -4*gamma^(nu)

which contradicts the equation above?

Any help would be much appreciated. Thanks!

P.S. ^=superscript, and _=subscript (LATEX wasn't working for me)
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
dm4b said:
But, why can't we anti-commute and obtain the following:

gamma^(mu)*gamma^(nu)*gamma_(mu)
= -gamma^(nu)*gamma^(mu)*gamma_(mu)
= -4*gamma^(nu)

You missed part of the anticommutation relation:

[tex]\gamma^\mu \gamma^\nu \gamma_\mu = \left( -\gamma^\nu \gamma^\mu + 2\eta^{\mu\nu} \right) \gamma_\mu.[/tex]
 
doh! thanks ... maybe I better take a break from doing physics now ;-)
 
Last edited: