A How Does U(1) Double-Cover SO(2) for a Specified Angle?

  • A
  • Thread starter Thread starter pellis
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Complex Numbers
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on demonstrating how the U(1) circle group of complex numbers serves as a double cover for the rotation group SO(2) through specific examples. The user seeks clarity on the relationship between unit complex numbers and 2D rotations, noting that while some sources suggest a two-fold cover, others imply a one-to-one mapping. The conversation highlights the confusion surrounding the mapping of rotations to points in U(1) and the implications of clockwise versus anticlockwise rotations reaching the same point. The user plans to provide a proof based on a Clifford algebra approach, using a table to illustrate the double cover concept. A clear example is requested to solidify understanding of the U(1) to SO(2) relationship.
pellis
Messages
80
Reaction score
19
TL;DR Summary
Can someone please provide an explicit example of two complex numbers for double cover U(1) of SO(2) for a specified angle R(θ)?
I'm trying to find an explicit example showing exactly how the U(1) “circle group” of complex numbers double-covers 2D planar rotations R(θ) that form the rotation group SO(2).

There are various explanations available online, some of which are clear but seem to be at variance with other explanations. (I leave aside other more technical explanations suited only to graduate students in mathematics - I'm only a chemist - such as those in https://ncatlab.org/nlab/, math.stackexchange, or even https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Covering_space.)

Like some other texts, even the usually clear (late) Pertti Lounesto wrote, in his “Clifford Algebras and Spinors”: “The fact that two opposite elements of the spin group Spin(2) represent the same rotation in SO(2) is expressed by saying that Spin(2) is a two-fold cover of SO(2), and written as Spin(2)/{±1} is isomorphic to SO(2).” … without giving any example.

1. In what seems like a trivial sense, the unit complex numbers exp(i(θ+2nπ)) for integers n>±1 appear to provide not just a two-fold but rather an n-fold cover of R(θ); but the relevant points in U(1) would then be identical for a given R(θ), which to me looks like 1:1 rather than 2:1 (?)

2. Another account, if I read it correctly, appears to suggest that a rotation R(θ) maps to the two points exp(±iθ) in U(1) – but that results in a reflection in the real plane z = (cos(θ) + isin(θ)) and z = (cos(θ) - isin(θ)), which doesn’t seem to agree with what someone wrote elsewhere, that "one rotation in SO(2) maps to two rotations in U(1)".

3. There’s also the case where an anticlockwise rotation by θ in the 2D plane reaches the same point as a clockwise rotation (i.e. in the alternative direction) by (θ-2π), and which yields the same final position, as (1.) above, for an anticlockwise rotation by (θ + 2π). And this is just a special case of how the same point is reached by π rotations in opposite directions.

The answer I seek is a clear and unambiguous example of the U(1) double cover of SO(2), identifying the angle θ of a single rotation R(θ) and the corresponding two (distinct?) resulting points exp(i….) and a different exp(I,,,,).

Clarification or other advice will be much appreciated.

Thank you for reading the whole question.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
I think I've resolved the question and will post the proof in a day or so.
 
pellis said:
I think I've resolved the question and will post the proof in a day or so.
Tabulated data towards a solution for the question, based on Cl2 Clifford algebra approach that uses the factorised rotor exp() in a generalisable "sandwich product" form exp(-iθ/2)rexp(+iθ/2) to rotate a vector.

More detailed explanation to follow, once I'm satisfied that the table leads to a correct illustration of the double cover.
 

Attachments

Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Back
Top