This question is based on problem II.3.1 in Anthony Zee's book Quantum Field Theory in a Nutshell
Show, by explicit calculation, that (1/2,1/2) is the Lorentz Vector.
I see that the generators of SU(2) are the Pauli Matrices and the generators of SO(3,1)is a matrix composed of two Pauli Matrices along the diagonal. Is it always the case that the Direct Product of two groups is formed from the generators like this?
I ask this because I'm trying to write a Lorentz boost as two simultaneous quatertion rotations [unit quaternions rotations are isomorphic to SU(2)] and tranform between the two methods. Is this possible?
In other words, How do I construct the SU(2) representation of the Lorentz Group using the fact that SU(2)×SU(2)∼SO(3,1)?
Here is some background information:
Zee has shown that the algebra of the Lorentz group is formed from two separate SU(2) algebras [SO(3,1) is isomorphic to SU(2)×SU(2)] because the Lorentz algebra satisfies:
[J+i,J+j]=ieijkJk+[J−i,J−j]=ieijkJk−[J+i,J−j]=0
The representations of SU(2) are labeled by j=0,12,1,… so the SU(2)×SU(2) rep is labelled by (j+,j−) with the (1/2,1/2) being the Lorentz 4-vector because and each representation contains (2j+1) elements so (1/2,1/2) contains 4 elements.
Answer
Here is a mathematical derivation. We use the sign convention (+,−,−,−) for the Minkowski metric ημν.
I) First recall the fact that
SL(2,C) is (the double cover of) the restricted Lorentz group SO+(1,3;R).
This follows partly because:
There is a bijective isometry from the Minkowski space (R1,3,||⋅||2) to the space of 2×2 Hermitian matrices (u(2),det(⋅)), R1,3 ≅ u(2) := {σ∈Mat2×2(C)∣σ†=σ} = spanR{σμ∣μ=0,1,2,3},
R1,3 ∋ ˜x = (x0,x1,x2,x3)↦σ = xμσμ ∈ u(2),||˜x||2 = xμημνxν = det(σ),σ0 := 12×2.There is a group action ρ:SL(2,C)×u(2)→u(2) given by g↦ρ(g)σ := gσg†,g∈SL(2,C),σ∈u(2),
which is length preserving, i.e. g is a pseudo-orthogonal (or Lorentz) transformation. In other words, there is a Lie group homomorphism
ρ:SL(2,C)→O(u(2),R) ≅ O(1,3;R).Since ρ is a continuous map and SL(2,C) is a connected set, the image ρ(SL(2,C)) must again be a connected set. In fact, one may show so there is a surjective Lie group homomorphism1
ρ:SL(2,C)→SO+(u(2),R) ≅ SO+(1,3;R),ρ(±12×2) = 1u(2).The Lie group SL(2,C)=±esl(2,C) has Lie algebra sl(2,C) = {τ∈Mat2×2(C)∣tr(τ) = 0} = spanC{σi∣i=1,2,3}.
The Lie group homomorphism ρ:SL(2,C)→O(u(2),R) induces a Lie algebra homomorphism ρ:sl(2,C)→o(u(2),R)
given by ρ(τ)σ = τσ+στ†,τ∈sl(2,C),σ∈u(2),ρ(τ) = Lτ+Rτ†,where we have defined left and right multiplication of 2×2 matrices Lσ(τ) := στ =: Rτ(σ),σ,τ ∈ Mat2×2(C).
II) Note that the Lorentz Lie algebra so(1,3;R)≅sl(2,C) does not2 contain two perpendicular copies of, say, the real Lie algebra su(2) or sl(2,R). For comparison and completeness, let us mention that for other signatures in 4 dimensions, one has
SO(4;R) ≅ [SU(2)×SU(2)]/Z2,(compact form)
SO+(2,2;R) ≅ [SL(2,R)×SL(2,R)]/Z2.(split form)
The compact form (9) has a nice proof using quaternions
(R4,||⋅||2) ≅ (H,|⋅|2)andSU(2) ≅ U(1,H),
see also this Math.SE post and this Phys.SE post. The split form (10) uses a bijective isometry
(R2,2,||⋅||2) ≅ (Mat2×2(R),det(⋅)).
To decompose Minkowski space into left- and right-handed Weyl spinor representations, one must go to the complexification, i.e. one must use the fact that
SL(2,C)×SL(2,C) is (the double cover of) the complexified proper Lorentz group SO(1,3;C).
Note that Refs. 1-2 do not discuss complexification2. One can more or less repeat the construction from section I with the real numbers R replaced by complex numbers C, however with some important caveats.
There is a bijective isometry from the complexified Minkowski space (C1,3,||⋅||2) to the space of 2×2 matrices (Mat2×2(C),det(⋅)), C1,3 ≅ Mat2×2(C) = spanC{σμ∣μ=0,1,2,3},
M(1,3;C) ∋ ˜x = (x0,x1,x2,x3)↦σ = xμσμ ∈ Mat2×2(C),||˜x||2 = xμημνxν = det(σ).Note that forms are taken to be bilinear rather than sesquilinear.There is a surjective Lie group homomorphism3
ρ:SL(2,C)×SL(2,C)→SO(Mat2×2(C),C) ≅ SO(1,3;C)given by (gL,gR)↦ρ(gL,gR)σ := gLσg†R,gL,gR∈SL(2,C),σ ∈ Mat2×2(C).The Lie group SL(2,C)×SL(2,C) has Lie algebra sl(2,C)⊕sl(2,C).
The Lie group homomorphism
ρ:SL(2,C)×SL(2,C)→SO(Mat2×2(C),C)induces a Lie algebra homomorphism ρ:sl(2,C)⊕sl(2,C)→so(Mat2×2(C),C)given by ρ(τL⊕τR)σ = τLσ+στ†R,τL,τR∈sl(2,C),σ∈Mat2×2(C),ρ(τL⊕τR) = LτL+Rτ†R.
The left action (acting from left on a two-dimensional complex column vector) yields by definition the (left-handed Weyl) spinor representation (12,0), while the right action (acting from right on a two-dimensional complex row vector) yields by definition the right-handed Weyl/complex conjugate spinor representation (0,12). The above shows that
The complexified Minkowski space C1,3 is a (12,12) representation of the Lie group SL(2,C)×SL(2,C), whose action respects the Minkowski metric.
References:
Anthony Zee, Quantum Field Theory in a Nutshell, 1st edition, 2003.
Anthony Zee, Quantum Field Theory in a Nutshell, 2nd edition, 2010.
1 It is easy to check that it is not possible to describe discrete Lorentz transformations, such as, e.g. parity P, time-reversal T, or PT with a group element g∈GL(2,C) and formula (2).
2 For a laugh, check out the (in several ways) wrong second sentence on p.113 in Ref. 1: "The mathematically sophisticated say that the algebra SO(3,1) is isomorphic to SU(2)⊗SU(2)." The corrected statement would e.g. be "The mathematically sophisticated say that the group SO(3,1;C) is locally isomorphic to SL(2,C)×SL(2,C)." Nevertheless, let me rush to add that Zee's book is overall a very nice book. In Ref. 2, the above sentence is removed, and a subsection called "More on SO(4), SO(3,1), and SO(2,2)" is added on page 531-532.
3 It is not possible to mimic an improper Lorentz transformations Λ∈O(1,3;C) [i.e. with negative determinant det(Λ)=−1] with the help of two matrices gL,gR∈GL(2,C) in formula (15); such as, e.g., the spatial parity transformation P: (x0,x1,x2,x3) ↦ (x0,−x1,−x2,−x3).
No comments:
Post a Comment