Solving Antisymmetric Part of Grassman Numbers Sum

  • Thread starter LAHLH
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Numbers
In summary, the conversation discusses the use of complex Grassman variables and their anticommutation relations. The question at hand is how to write a given sum in terms of the variables used. The solution involves relabeling dummy variables and realizing the symmetry of the object in question. The final result derived is f_{abcd}=\frac{1}{2}\left(k_{cb}k_{da} -k_{db}k_{ca}+k_{da}k_{cb}-k_{db}k_{ca} \right).
  • #1
LAHLH
409
1
Hey,

If [tex] \xi^a [/tex] and [tex] \bar{\xi^a} [/tex] are some finitie number of complex Grassman variables.

i.e. if [tex]\theta, \eta [/tex] are two real grassman numbers, then [tex] \xi^a=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \left( \theta+i\eta \right) [/tex] and [tex] \bar{\xi^a}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \left( \theta-i\eta \right) [/tex].We then have the anticommutation relations:

[tex] \{ \xi^a,\xi^b \}=0 [/tex], [tex] \{ \bar{\xi^a},\bar{\xi^b} \}=0 [/tex], [tex] \{ \xi^a,\bar{\xi^b} \}=0 [/tex]

Now the question is, if I have the sum (where f is antisym on first two and last two indices: [tex] f_{abcd}=-f_{bacd}=-f_{abdc} [/tex]):

[tex] \sum_{abcd} f_{abcd} \xi^a\xi^b\bar{\xi^c}\bar{\xi^d}=\left( \sum_{ab} k_{ab}\bar{\xi^a}\xi^b \right)^2 [/tex]

How does one now go about writing [tex] f_{abcd} [/tex] in terms of [tex] k_{ab} [/tex]? I think I've managed something but I'm not convinced it's correct.

RHS:
[tex] \left( \sum_{ab} k_{ab}\bar{\xi^a}\xi^b \right)^2= \left( \sum_{ab} k_{ab}\bar{\xi^a}\xi^b \right)\left( \sum_{cd} k_{cd}\bar{\xi^c}\xi^d \right)
=\left( \sum_{abcd} k_{ab}k_{cd}\bar{\xi^a}\xi^b\bar{\xi^c}\xi^d \right)[/tex]

Now focussing on LHS to bring the correct ordering of the [tex] \xi[/tex]'s:

[tex] \sum_{abcd} f_{abcd} \xi^a\xi^b\bar{\xi^c}\bar{\xi^d}=\sum_{abcd} -f_{abcd} \xi^a\bar{\xi^c}\xi^b\bar{\xi^d}=\sum_{abcd} f_{abcd} \bar{\xi^c}\xi^a\xi^b\bar{\xi^d}= \sum_{abcd} -f_{abcd} \bar{\xi^c}\xi^a\bar{\xi^d}\xi^b[/tex]

Comparing LHS and RHS now, and relabelling dummies from RHS:[tex] \sum_{abcd} -f_{abcd} \bar{\xi^c}\xi^a\bar{\xi^d}\xi^b= \sum_{abcd} k_{ca}k_{db}\bar{\xi^c}\xi^a\bar{\xi^d}\xi^b [/tex]

I'm not sure at this point if we can simply equate [tex] -f_{abcd}=k_{ca}k_{db} [/tex] however. Since the product of [tex] \xi\xi\xi\xi [/tex] is antisymetric on exchange of c and a, and antisymmetric on exchange of any two indices (c and a, d and b, a and d but also c and d, a and b, and c and b). I'm thinking it must be the antisymmetric part of [tex]f_{abcd} [/tex] and [tex]k_{ca}k_{db} [/tex] that we can equate with each other.

I'm not sure how to find the antisymmtric part on all four indices however, if that is indeed the right track.

Appreciate any help at all, thanks alot
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I think I finally solved this if anyone is interested...

We can express RHS as:

[tex]
\left( \sum_{ab} k_{ab}\bar{\xi^a}\xi^b \right)^2= \left( \sum_{ab} k_{ab}\bar{\xi^a}\xi^b \right)\left( \sum_{cd} k_{cd}\bar{\xi^c}\xi^d \right)
=\left( \sum_{abcd} k_{ab}k_{cd}\bar{\xi^a}\xi^b\bar{\xi^c}\xi^d \right)
=\left( \sum_{abcd} k_{ab}k_{cd}\xi^b\bar{\xi^a}\xi^d \bar{\xi^c} \right)
=\left( \sum_{abcd} -k_{ab}k_{cd}\xi^b\xi^d\bar{\xi^a}\bar{\xi^c} \right)
[/tex]
Relabel dummies:
[tex] =\left( \sum_{abcd} -k_{ca}k_{db}\xi^a\xi^b\bar{\xi^c}\bar{\xi^d} \right)
[/tex]

and LHS we had:

[tex]
\sum_{abcd} f_{abcd} \xi^a\xi^b\bar{\xi^c}\bar{\xi^d}
[/tex]
So now the coefficents are hitting the same components of the tensor. Adopting Einstein convention, we have [tex] f_{abcd} \xi^a\xi^b\bar{\xi^c}\bar{\xi^d}=-k_{ca}k_{db}\xi^a\xi^b\bar{\xi^c}\bar{\xi^d} [/tex]

You can think of the object [tex] \xi^a\xi^b\bar{\xi^c}\bar{\xi^d} [/tex] as a tensor in a way. But the tricky thing is to realize how its symmetry actually works. In a sense it is antisymmetric under every index pair being swapped (due to the anticom of the grassmans). e.g. [tex] \xi^a\xi^b\bar{\xi^c}\bar{\xi^d}=-\xi^a\bar{\xi^c} \xi^b\bar{\xi^d} [/tex]. But then this symmetry isn't just minus the same object (the object being the structure [tex] \xi\xi\bar{\xi}\bar{\xi} [/tex]). Where as swapping on the first two or last two indices does leave this form invariant.
(It's easier to see this by explicitly expanding, e.g. if it was just [tex] f_{ab} \xi^a\bar{\xi^b}=g_{ab} \xi^a\bar{\xi^b} [/tex] and we only let the index run from 1,2. Then [tex] f_{12}\xi^1\bar{\xi^2}+f_{21}\xi^2\bar{\xi^1}=g_{12}\xi^1\bar{\xi^2}+g_{21}\xi^2\bar{\xi^1} [/tex]. The usual trick then would be to use the antisymmetry of the tensor to write: [tex] f_{12}\xi^1\bar{\xi^2}-f_{21}\bar{\xi^1}\xi^2=g_{12}\xi^1\bar{\xi^2}-g_{21}\bar{\xi^1}\xi^2 [/tex]. But then if it wasnt for the bars, we would be able to equate the antisymmetric parts of g and f, but the bars means, that if though of variables commute under every pair swap, the "tensor" is only antisymmetric under exchange of first two, or exchange of the second too. So actually in this case, using the arbitrary freedom of the variables, we we would have been able to deduce f=g completely.

Thus returning to the original equation:

[tex] f_{abcd} \xi^a\xi^b\bar{\xi^c}\bar{\xi^d}=-k_{ca}k_{db}\xi^a\xi^b\bar{\xi^c}\bar{\xi^d} [/tex]But as noted in post one f is already antisymmetric under these exchanges, so we can equate the whole of f, with the part of the

[tex] -k_{ca}k_{db} [/tex], which is anytisymmetrized on swapping a&b, and b&c ( not antisymmetrized on it's own first and last pair, but with the indices in accord with first and last pair of the "tensor" the coeff mutplies. )

Thus we are finally led to: [tex] f_{abcd}=-\frac{1}{2^2}\left( k_{ca}k_{db}- k_{cb}k_{da} -k_{da}k_{cb}+k_{db}k_{ca} \right) [/tex]

[tex] f_{abcd}=\frac{1}{2}\left(k_{cb}k_{da} -k_{db}k_{ca} \right) [/tex]
 
Last edited:

Related to Solving Antisymmetric Part of Grassman Numbers Sum

What is the antisymmetric part of a Grassman number sum?

The antisymmetric part of a Grassman number sum refers to the part of the sum that is invariant under the exchange of two Grassman numbers. In other words, it is the part of the sum that remains the same if the order of the Grassman numbers is switched.

Why is it important to solve the antisymmetric part of Grassman number sums?

Solving the antisymmetric part of Grassman number sums is important because it allows us to express complex physical quantities, such as fermionic fields, in terms of simpler mathematical objects. This simplifies calculations and makes it easier to understand and analyze physical systems.

What techniques are used to solve the antisymmetric part of Grassman number sums?

The most commonly used techniques are the Wick's theorem and the Fierz identity. Wick's theorem allows us to express the antisymmetric part of a Grassman number sum in terms of contractions between pairs of Grassman numbers. The Fierz identity, on the other hand, is a powerful tool for simplifying expressions involving Grassman numbers.

Are there any applications of solving the antisymmetric part of Grassman number sums?

Yes, there are many applications in theoretical physics, particularly in fields such as quantum field theory and statistical mechanics. In these fields, Grassman numbers are used to describe fermionic systems, such as electrons, and solving the antisymmetric part of Grassman number sums is essential for making predictions and understanding the behavior of these systems.

Is there a limit to the number of Grassman numbers that can be included in a sum?

No, there is no limit to the number of Grassman numbers that can be included in a sum. However, as the number of Grassman numbers increases, the complexity of the calculations also increases. In practice, the number of Grassman numbers used is determined by the specific problem being solved and the desired accuracy of the results.

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
1
Views
432
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
24
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
873
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
13
Views
1K
  • Differential Equations
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
18
Views
848
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
59
Views
4K
Back
Top