Hermitianity of gamma matrices

In summary, the conversation discusses the relation of gamma matrices and their representation independence. It is discovered that the similarity transformation between different representations must be unitary, and the Majorana condition is not representation independent but can be preserved by real transformation matrices.
  • #1
ismaili
160
0
Dear guys,

I know that gamma matrices have some relations, like

[tex] \gamma^0{\gamma^\mu}^\dagger\gamma^0 = \gamma^\mu \quad---(*)[/tex]

And I am wondering if this is representation independent?
Consider,

[tex] S\gamma^0S^{-1}S{\gamma^\mu}^\dagger S^{-1}S\gamma^0 S^{-1} = S\gamma^\mu S^{-1} [/tex]

[tex] \Rightarrow \gamma'^0 \big({\gamma^\mu}^\dagger\big)' \gamma'^0 = \gamma'^\mu [/tex]

, hence, the condition that this relation is representation independent requires that

[tex] ({\gamma^\mu}^\dagger)' = {\gamma'^\mu}^\dagger [/tex]

, and this implies that

[tex] S^{-1} = S^{\dagger} [/tex] if the relation eq(*) is representation independent.

However, I've never seen any books or literature stress that the similarity transformation between different representations of gamma matrices must be unitary. But, we often used such equations, say, eq(*) as a representation independent formula.
I'm confused.

Could anybody clarify this?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
ismaili said:
Dear guys,

I know that gamma matrices have some relations, like

[tex] \gamma^0{\gamma^\mu}^\dagger\gamma^0 = \gamma^\mu \quad---(*)[/tex]

And I am wondering if this is representation independent?
Consider,

[tex] S\gamma^0S^{-1}S{\gamma^\mu}^\dagger S^{-1}S\gamma^0 S^{-1} = S\gamma^\mu S^{-1} [/tex]

[tex] \Rightarrow \gamma'^0 \big({\gamma^\mu}^\dagger\big)' \gamma'^0 = \gamma'^\mu [/tex]

, hence, the condition that this relation is representation independent requires that

[tex] ({\gamma^\mu}^\dagger)' = {\gamma'^\mu}^\dagger [/tex]

, and this implies that

[tex] S^{-1} = S^{\dagger} [/tex] if the relation eq(*) is representation independent.

However, I've never seen any books or literature stress that the similarity transformation between different representations of gamma matrices must be unitary. But, we often used such equations, say, eq(*) as a representation independent formula.
I'm confused.

Could anybody clarify this?

The solution seems that the similarity transformation matrix is really unitary.
Since, if we consider the bilinear which should be representation invariant, since it contracts all the Dirac indices:

[tex] \bar{\psi}\gamma^\mu\psi = \psi^\dagger\gamma^0\gamma^\mu\psi [/tex]

In another representation,

[tex] \bar{\psi}'\gamma'^\mu \psi' = \psi'^\dagger S^\dagger S \gamma^0 S^{-1}S \gamma^\mu S^{-1} S\psi = \psi^\dagger S^\dagger S\gamma^0\gamma^\mu \psi [/tex]

The above expression would equal to [tex] \bar{\psi}\gamma^\mu\psi [/tex] if [tex]S^\dagger S = 1 [/tex]

-------------

But, I came up with another question..
If we consider the Majorana condition:

[tex] \psi^* = B\psi [/tex],

In another representation:

[tex] (\psi')^* = B' \psi' \Rightarrow (S\psi)^* = SBS^{-1} S\psi \Rightarrow S^*\psi^* = SB\psi[/tex]

Since [tex] \psi^* = B\psi [/tex] in the old representation, we conclude that

[tex] S = S^* [/tex]

, if the Majorana condition is representation independent.

I still confused by the discovery that the representation-free relations constrain the similarity transformations between different representations. Could anyone elucidate on this?
Thank you so much!
 
  • #3
ismaili said:
The solution seems that the similarity transformation matrix is really unitary.
Since, if we consider the bilinear which should be representation invariant, since it contracts all the Dirac indices:

[tex] \bar{\psi}\gamma^\mu\psi = \psi^\dagger\gamma^0\gamma^\mu\psi [/tex]

In another representation,

[tex] \bar{\psi}'\gamma'^\mu \psi' = \psi'^\dagger S^\dagger S \gamma^0 S^{-1}S \gamma^\mu S^{-1} S\psi = \psi^\dagger S^\dagger S\gamma^0\gamma^\mu \psi [/tex]

The above expression would equal to [tex] \bar{\psi}\gamma^\mu\psi [/tex] if [tex]S^\dagger S = 1 [/tex]

-------------

But, I came up with another question..
If we consider the Majorana condition:

[tex] \psi^* = B\psi [/tex],

In another representation:

[tex] (\psi')^* = B' \psi' \Rightarrow (S\psi)^* = SBS^{-1} S\psi \Rightarrow S^*\psi^* = SB\psi[/tex]

Since [tex] \psi^* = B\psi [/tex] in the old representation, we conclude that

[tex] S = S^* [/tex]

, if the Majorana condition is representation independent.

I still confused by the discovery that the representation-free relations constrain the similarity transformations between different representations. Could anyone elucidate on this?
Thank you so much!

Hi, the Majorana condition is certainly not representation independent but as you found real transformation matrices preserve this condition. Ultimately the key component to the theory is the clifford algebra that only requires invertible transformations. Anything else is up to you.
 

Related to Hermitianity of gamma matrices

1. What is the concept of Hermitianity in relation to gamma matrices?

Hermitianity is a mathematical property that describes the symmetry of a matrix. In the context of gamma matrices, it refers to the fact that the matrix is equal to its own complex conjugate transpose.

2. Why is it important for gamma matrices to be Hermitian?

Hermitianity is important for gamma matrices because it allows for the construction of a Hermitian inner product, which is essential in quantum field theory and other areas of theoretical physics. It also ensures that the eigenvalues of the matrix are real, which has important physical implications.

3. How do you determine if a gamma matrix is Hermitian?

To determine if a gamma matrix is Hermitian, you can check if it is equal to its own complex conjugate transpose. This means that the matrix must satisfy the condition A = A*, where A* represents the complex conjugate transpose of A.

4. Can a gamma matrix be both Hermitian and anti-Hermitian?

No, a gamma matrix cannot be both Hermitian and anti-Hermitian. This is because an anti-Hermitian matrix is equal to the negative of its own complex conjugate transpose, which is not possible for a matrix to be equal to both its own complex conjugate transpose and its negative.

5. How does the Hermitianity of gamma matrices relate to physical observables?

The Hermitianity of gamma matrices is closely related to physical observables in quantum field theory. In this context, Hermitian matrices represent operators that correspond to measurable physical quantities, such as energy and momentum. The eigenvalues of these matrices can then be interpreted as the possible outcomes of a measurement.

Similar threads

  • Quantum Physics
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
24
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Back
Top