Why Must Dirac Matrices in Minkowski Space Be at Least 4x4?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the necessity for Dirac matrices in four-dimensional Minkowski space to be at least 4x4 in size. Participants explore the mathematical foundations and implications of this requirement, referencing concepts from Clifford algebras and the Dirac equation.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the proof of why Dirac matrices must be at least 4x4, suggesting that this might be true only for even-dimensional matrices.
  • Another participant asserts that Dirac matrices can exist in lower dimensions, specifically mentioning 2-dimensional spacetime, while noting that for indices running from 0 to 3, the matrices must be at least 4x4.
  • A participant references a general theorem related to Clifford algebras that determines the size of matrices for various spacetime dimensions.
  • Some participants mention resources, including original articles and books, that provide arguments or translations regarding the size of Dirac matrices.
  • There is a suggestion that higher-dimensional Dirac matrices are possible, but they still only represent four degrees of freedom.
  • One participant discusses the possibility of adding zero rows and columns to Dirac matrices without affecting their anticommutation relations.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the dimensionality of Dirac matrices and the implications of their size, indicating that multiple competing views remain without a consensus on the necessity of the 4x4 size in all contexts.

Contextual Notes

Some statements depend on the definitions of dimensionality and the properties of Clifford algebras, which may not be fully resolved in the discussion.

praharmitra
Messages
308
Reaction score
1
I am currently reading Dirac Equation from Peskin-Schroeder. In a particular para it says,

"Now let us find Dirac Matrices \gamma^\mu for four-dimensional Minkowski Space. It turns out that these matrices must be at least 4X4."

What is the proof of the above statement? I think (not sure) that it was once mentioned in class, that the above can be true only for a set of even dimensional matrices. Is that true? How?

And if yes, how do we know that the matrices can't be 2X2? Can someone show me a proof or guide me in the right direction.

Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Of course there are Dirac matrices for 2-dim spacetime, too.

As far as I remember the statement is that if the index runs from 0 to 3 then one can show that the matrices must be at least 4*4. There is a general theorem (for Clifford algebras) that determines the size of the matrices for every spacetime dimension.
 
tom.stoer said:
Of course there are Dirac matrices for 2-dim spacetime, too.

As far as I remember the statement is that if the index runs from 0 to 3 then one can show that the matrices must be at least 4*4. There is a general theorem (for Clifford algebras) that determines the size of the matrices for every spacetime dimension.

That is what I meant. I have reduced the problem to showing that the Dirac Matrices are traceless.
 
praharmitra said:
I am currently reading Dirac Equation from Peskin-Schroeder. In a particular para it says,

"Now let us find Dirac Matrices \gamma^\mu for four-dimensional Minkowski Space. It turns out that these matrices must be at least 4X4."

What is the proof of the above statement? I think (not sure) that it was once mentioned in class, that the above can be true only for a set of even dimensional matrices. Is that true? How?

And if yes, how do we know that the matrices can't be 2X2? Can someone show me a proof or guide me in the right direction.

Thanks.

This is a good question. The original article of Pauli gives an argument on why, in 4D-spacetime, the Dirac's matrices must be 4 by 4 http://www.numdam.org/item?id=AIHP_1936__6_2_109_0.

The "translation" in modern notation can be found in B. Thaller's book: "Dirac's Equation".

See the discussion here

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=49915&highlight=Pauli+Dirac+matrices
 
bigubau said:
In 4 space-time dimensions ? How ?

This has nothing to do with dimensions. You may for example add m zero rows and columns to your gamma matrices without altering their anticommutation relations.
And then you may apply an arbitrary unitary similarity transform to get rid of the zeros altogether.

Of course, this doesn't alter the fact that you only get four degrees of freedoms.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
11K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K