W. Pauli: The connection between spin and statistics

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the connection between spin and statistics as articulated by W. Pauli, particularly focusing on the characterization of spinors in both non-relativistic and relativistic contexts. Participants explore the implications of group theory on the representation of spinors, including the transition from non-relativistic to relativistic frameworks.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the two integral positive numbers (p,q) mentioned by Pauli, noting that a spinor is typically characterized by a single number.
  • Another participant asserts that relativistic spinors are characterized by two semi-integer positive numbers related to the SL(2, C) group.
  • A participant describes the structure of a non-relativistic spinor wave function, suggesting that it has 2j+1 components and asks how this changes in the relativistic case.
  • Discussion includes a transition from the double cover of SO(3) to the double cover of SO(1,3), indicating a change in the number of parameters needed to describe irreducible representations in special relativity.
  • One participant proposes that the number of parameters for transformation groups must increase when extending from rotations to boosts, but another challenges this view, asserting that the parameters for both remain three.
  • A later reply clarifies that the irreducible representations of the Lorentz group can be labeled by pairs of "SU(2) labels" and provides examples of Weyl and Dirac spinors with their respective representations.
  • References to external resources, such as Wikipedia, are shared for further clarification on the topic.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the characterization of spinors and the implications of group theory, indicating that multiple competing perspectives remain unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the complexity of the relationship between the parameters of transformation groups and the parameters labeling irreducible representations, suggesting a nuanced understanding is necessary.

jostpuur
Messages
2,112
Reaction score
19
http://prola.aps.org/abstract/PR/v58/i8/p716_1

I'm trying to read this, and it's not going very well! :frown:

On the second page:

A tensor or spinor which transforms irreducibly under this group can be characterized by two integral positive numbers [itex](p,q)[/itex]. (The corresponding "angular momentum quantum number" [itex](j,k)[/itex] are then given by [itex]p=2j+1[/itex], [itex]q=2k+1[/itex], with integral or half-integral [itex]j[/itex] and [itex]k[/itex].)

What two numbers is Pauli talking about? Isn't a spinor of a particle usually characterized by a one number?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Relativistic spinors are characterized by 2 semiinteger positive numbers, corresponding to the nonunitary, finite dimensional representations of the SL(2, C) group.
 
Is this right:

If a spinor of a non-relativistic particle is characterized by a number [itex]j[/itex] (which is integer or half-integer), then the wave function has [itex]2j+1[/itex] components, that means it is of form

[tex] \psi(x) = \left(\begin{array}{c}<br /> \psi_{j}(x) \\ \psi_{j-1}(x) \\ \vdots \\ \psi_{-j}(x) \\<br /> \end{array}\right)[/tex]

If that was right, how is the situation changed when we give up the assumption of non-relativisticness?
 
We basically go, in group theory language, from the double cover of SO(3) = SU(2) (Galilei case) to the double cover of [itex]SO_{o} (1,3)[/itex] = SL(2,C).

In term of Lie algebras (= stands for isomorphisms),

so(3)=su(2), finite dimensional irreds described by one parameter.

so(1,3) = sl(2,c) = su(2) [itex]\oplus[/itex] su(2), thus in the special relativistic case the numbers of parameters describing the irreds is double (2).
 
If I want to have a transformation group that transforms some objects under rotations, the group will need to be parametrized with three variables. If I then want to extend the transformation to be applied with (relativistic) boosts too, the amount of parameters must be increased to six. Is this, what the two indices are all about?

That doesn't make fully sense. The amount of parameters in rotations and boosts are always going to be three in both. How is this related to the [itex]j[/itex], which is related to the amount of components in spinor?

That almost sounds as if a particle could transform like spin-1/2 particle in rotations, and like spin-1 particle in boosts. Wouldn't make any sense!
 
See also this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Representations_of_the_Lorentz_Group" page.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
jostpuur said:
If I want to have a transformation group that transforms some objects under rotations, the group will need to be parametrized with three variables. If I then want to extend the transformation to be applied with (relativistic) boosts too, the amount of parameters must be increased to six. Is this, what the two indices are all about?

That doesn't make fully sense. The amount of parameters in rotations and boosts are always going to be three in both. How is this related to the [itex]j[/itex], which is related to the amount of components in spinor?

That almost sounds as if a particle could transform like spin-1/2 particle in rotations, and like spin-1 particle in boosts. Wouldn't make any sense!

I think you are confusing the parameters needed for the group manifold, and the parameters labeling the irreducible representations.

As bigubau said, the irreducible representations of the Lorentz group can be labeled by a pair of "[tex]SU(2)[/tex] labels": [tex](i,j)[/tex]. For a given [tex](i,j)[/tex], the dimension of the representation is (2j+1)(2i+1). A right and left handed Weyl spinor are labeled as [tex](0, 1/2)[/tex] and [tex](1/2, 0)[/tex], respectively. While a Dirac spinor, which is reducible, is labeled as [tex](1/2,0)\oplus (0,1/2)[/tex] and has 4 components.
 
element4 said:
See also this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Representations_of_the_Lorentz_Group" page.

This link turned out to be helpful. And this:

[tex] \mathfrak{so}(1,3)\otimes\mathbb{C} = \mathfrak{sl}(2,\mathbb{C})\oplus\mathfrak{sl}(2,\mathbb{C})[/tex]

I'll return to this thread later.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 87 ·
3
Replies
87
Views
9K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
24K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
6K