What Are Casimir Operators and Rest Reference Conditions in Particle Physics?

  • Thread starter Thread starter noamriemer
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Definitions
noamriemer
Messages
50
Reaction score
0
Hi guys!
There is something I would like to get your help with...

I am looking at the equation:

W^{\mu}=-\frac{1}{2} \varepsilon^{\mu\nu\lambda\sigma}M_{\nu\lambda}p_{\sigma}

Which is, if I understand correctly,a Casimir Operator.
Now, I wish to look at a particle in its rest reference, meaning,
p_\mu=(m,0,0,0)

Why would these conditions yield :
W^\mu =\frac {1} {2} m\varepsilon^{\mu\nu\lambda0}M_{\nu\lambda}
?
I can seem to understand how the indices change...

The next thing I want to do, is understand what happens if I take m^2<0

Why does this condition mean that the momentum vector would be
p_\mu=(0,0,0,m)
?
Thank you
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The expression you've quoted uses the Einstein summation convention, in which repeated indices are summed over: AiBi is a convenient short way of writing \sumAiBi

And because the only non-zero element of p is p0, when you do the summation over σ, all the terms are zero except the one in which σ is zero.
 
Thank you!

But why does
p_{\mu}=(0,0,0,m) relate to m^2<0?

And likewise,

p_{\mu}=(p,0,0,p) relate to m=0?

I understand why
p_{\mu}=(m,0,0,0) relate to massive particle,
My logic here is p_0=E and E\approx m
and \vec{p}=0 (because we are looking at the reference frame)
But same logic does not work for me regarding the two eq. above...
Thank you!
 
I read Hanbury Brown and Twiss's experiment is using one beam but split into two to test their correlation. It said the traditional correlation test were using two beams........ This confused me, sorry. All the correlation tests I learnt such as Stern-Gerlash are using one beam? (Sorry if I am wrong) I was also told traditional interferometers are concerning about amplitude but Hanbury Brown and Twiss were concerning about intensity? Isn't the square of amplitude is the intensity? Please...
I am not sure if this belongs in the biology section, but it appears more of a quantum physics question. Mike Wiest, Associate Professor of Neuroscience at Wellesley College in the US. In 2024 he published the results of an experiment on anaesthesia which purported to point to a role of quantum processes in consciousness; here is a popular exposition: https://neurosciencenews.com/quantum-process-consciousness-27624/ As my expertise in neuroscience doesn't reach up to an ant's ear...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
Back
Top