In mathematics, the spin representations are particular projective representations of the orthogonal or special orthogonal groups in arbitrary dimension and signature (i.e., including indefinite orthogonal groups). More precisely, they are two equivalent representations of the spin groups, which are double covers of the special orthogonal groups. They are usually studied over the real or complex numbers, but they can be defined over other fields.
Elements of a spin representation are called spinors. They play an important role in the physical description of fermions such as the electron.
The spin representations may be constructed in several ways, but typically the construction involves (perhaps only implicitly) the choice of a maximal isotropic subspace in the vector representation of the group. Over the real numbers, this usually requires using a complexification of the vector representation. For this reason, it is convenient to define the spin representations over the complex numbers first, and derive real representations by introducing real structures.
The properties of the spin representations depend, in a subtle way, on the dimension and signature of the orthogonal group. In particular, spin representations often admit invariant bilinear forms, which can be used to embed the spin groups into classical Lie groups. In low dimensions, these embeddings are surjective and determine special isomorphisms between the spin groups and more familiar Lie groups; this elucidates the properties of spinors in these dimensions.
Let V be a finite-dimensional real or complex vector space with a nondegenerate quadratic form Q. The (real or complex) linear maps preserving Q form the orthogonal group O(V, Q). The identity component of the group is called the special orthogonal group SO(V, Q). (For V real with an indefinite quadratic form, this terminology is not standard: the special orthogonal group is usually defined to be a subgroup with two components in this case.) Up to group isomorphism, SO(V, Q) has a unique connected double cover, the spin group Spin(V, Q). There is thus a group homomorphism h: Spin(V, Q) → SO(V, Q) whose kernel has two elements denoted {1, −1}, where 1 is the identity element. Thus, the group elements g and −g of Spin(V, Q) are equivalent after the homomorphism to SO(V, Q); that is, h(g) = h(−g) for any g in Spin(V, Q).
The groups O(V, Q), SO(V, Q) and Spin(V, Q) are all Lie groups, and for fixed (V, Q) they have the same Lie algebra, so(V, Q). If V is real, then V is a real vector subspace of its complexification VC = V ⊗RC, and the quadratic form Q extends naturally to a quadratic form QC on VC. This embeds SO(V, Q) as a subgroup of SO(VC, QC), and hence we may realise Spin(V, Q) as a subgroup of Spin(VC, QC). Furthermore, so(VC, QC) is the complexification of so(V, Q).
In the complex case, quadratic forms are determined uniquely up to isomorphism by the dimension n of V. Concretely, we may assume V = Cn and
The corresponding Lie groups are denoted O(n, C), SO(n, C), Spin(n, C) and their Lie algebra as so(n, C).
In the real case, quadratic forms are determined up to isomorphism by a pair of nonnegative integers (p, q) where n = p + q is the dimension of V, and p − q is the signature. Concretely, we may assume V = Rn and
The corresponding Lie groups and Lie algebra are denoted O(p, q), SO(p, q), Spin(p, q) and so(p, q). We write Rp,q in place of Rn to make the signature explicit.
The spin representations are, in a sense, the simplest representations of Spin(n, C) and Spin(p, q) that do not come from representations of SO(n, C) and SO(p, q). A spin representation is, therefore, a real or complex vector space S together with a group homomorphism ρ from Spin(n, C) or Spin(p, q) to the general linear group GL(S) such that the element −1 is not in the kernel of ρ.
If S is such a representation, then according to the relation between Lie groups and Lie algebras, it induces a Lie algebra representation, i.e., a Lie algebra homomorphism from so(n, C) or so(p, q) to the Lie algebra gl(S) of endomorphisms of S with the commutator bracket.
Spin representations can be analysed according to the following strategy: if S is a real spin representation of Spin(p, q), then its complexification is a complex spin representation of Spin(p, q); as a representation of so(p, q), it therefore extends to a complex representation of so(n, C). Proceeding in reverse, we therefore first construct complex spin representations of Spin(n, C) and so(n, C), then restrict them to complex spin representations of so(p, q) and Spin(p, q), then finally analyse possible reductions to real spin representations.
Let V = Cn with the standard quadratic form Q so that
The symmetric bilinear form on V associated to Q by polarization is denoted ⟨.,.⟩.
A standard construction of the spin representations of so(n, C) begins with a choice of a pair (W, W∗) of maximal totally isotropic subspaces (with respect to Q) of V with W ∩ W∗ = 0. Let us make such a choice. If n = 2m or n = 2m + 1, then W and W∗ both have dimension m. If n = 2m, then V = W ⊕ W∗, whereas if n = 2m + 1, then V = W ⊕ U ⊕ W∗, where U is the 1-dimensional orthogonal complement to W ⊕ W∗. The bilinear form ⟨.,.⟩ associated to Q induces a pairing between W and W∗, which must be nondegenerate, because W and W∗ are totally isotropic subspaces and Q is nondegenerate. Hence W and W∗ are dual vector spaces.
More concretely, let a1, ... am be a basis for W. Then there is a unique basis α1, ... αm of W∗ such that
If A is an m×m matrix, then A induces an endomorphism of W with respect to this basis and the transpose AT induces a transformation of W∗ with
for all w in W and w∗ in W∗. It follows that the endomorphism ρA of V, equal to A on W, −AT on W∗ and zero on U (if n is odd), is skew,
for all u, v in V, and hence (see classical group) an element of so(n, C) ⊂ End(V).
Using the diagonal matrices in this construction defines a Cartan subalgebra h of so(n, C): the rank of so(n, C) is m, and the diagonal n×n matrices determine an m-dimensional abelian subalgebra.
Let ε1, ... εm be the basis of h∗ such that, for a diagonal matrix A, εk(ρA) is the kth diagonal entry of A. Clearly this is a basis for h∗. Since the bilinear form identifies so(n, C) with , explicitly,
it is now easy to construct the root system associated to h. The root spaces (simultaneous eigenspaces for the action of h) are spanned by the following elements:
and, if n is odd, and u is a nonzero element of U,
Thus, with respect to the basis ε1, ... εm, the roots are the vectors in h∗ that are permutations of
together with the permutations of
if n = 2m + 1 is odd.
A system of positive roots is given by εi + εj (i ≠ j), εi−εj (i < j) and (for n odd) εi. The corresponding simple roots are
The positive roots are nonnegative integer linear combinations of the simple roots.
One construction of the spin representations of so(n, C) uses the exterior algebra(s)
There is an action of V on S such that for any element v = w + w∗ in W ⊕ W∗ and any ψ in S the action is given by:
where the second term is a contraction (interior multiplication) defined using the bilinear form, which pairs W and W∗. This action respects the Clifford relations v2 = Q(v)1, and so induces a homomorphism from the Clifford algebra ClnC of V to End(S). A similar action can be defined on S′, so that both S and S′ are Clifford modules.
The Lie algebra so(n, C) is isomorphic to the complexified Lie algebra spinnC in ClnC via the mapping induced by the covering Spin(n) → SO(n) [2]
It follows that both S and S′ are representations of so(n, C). They are actually equivalent representations, so we focus on S.
The explicit description shows that the elements αi ∧ ai of the Cartan subalgebra h act on S by
A basis for S is given by elements of the form
for 0 ≤ k ≤ m and i1 < ... < ik. These clearly span weight spaces for the action of h: αi ∧ ai has eigenvalue −1/2 on the given basis vector if i = ij for some j, and has eigenvalue 1/2 otherwise.
It follows that the weights of S are all possible combinations of
and each weight space is one-dimensional. Elements of S are called Dirac spinors.
When n is even, S is not an irreducible representation: and are invariant subspaces. The weights divide into those with an even number of minus signs, and those with an odd number of minus signs. Both S+ and S− are irreducible representations of dimension 2m−1 whose elements are called Weyl spinors. They are also known as chiral spin representations or half-spin representations. With respect to the positive root system above, the highest weights of S+ and S− are
respectively. The Clifford action identifies ClnC with End(S) and the even subalgebra is identified with the endomorphisms preserving S+ and S−. The other Clifford module S′ is isomorphic to S in this case.
When n is odd, S is an irreducible representation of so(n,C) of dimension 2m: the Clifford action of a unit vector u ∈ U is given by
and so elements of so(n,C) of the form u∧w or u∧w∗ do not preserve the even and odd parts of the exterior algebra of W. The highest weight of S is
The Clifford action is not faithful on S: ClnC can be identified with End(S) ⊕ End(S′), where u acts with the opposite sign on S′. More precisely, the two representations are related by the parity involution α of ClnC (also known as the principal automorphism), which is the identity on the even subalgebra, and minus the identity on the odd part of ClnC. In other words, there is a linear isomorphism from S to S′, which identifies the action of A in ClnC on S with the action of α(A) on S′.
if λ is a weight of S, so is −λ. It follows that S is isomorphic to the dual representation S∗.
When n = 2m + 1 is odd, the isomorphism B: S → S∗ is unique up to scale by Schur's lemma, since S is irreducible, and it defines a nondegenerate invariant bilinear form β on S via
Here invariance means that
for all ξ in so(n,C) and φ, ψ in S— in other words the action of ξ is skew with respect to β. In fact, more is true: S∗ is a representation of the opposite Clifford algebra, and therefore, since ClnC only has two nontrivial simple modules S and S′, related by the parity involution α, there is an antiautomorphism τ of ClnC such that
for any A in ClnC. In fact τ is reversion (the antiautomorphism induced by the identity on V) for m even, and conjugation (the antiautomorphism induced by minus the identity on V) for m odd. These two antiautomorphisms are related by parity involution α, which is the automorphism induced by minus the identity on V. Both satisfy τ(ξ) = −ξ for ξ in so(n,C).
When n = 2m, the situation depends more sensitively upon the parity of m. For m even, a weight λ has an even number of minus signs if and only if −λ does; it follows that there are separate isomorphisms B±: S± → S±∗ of each half-spin representation with its dual, each determined uniquely up to scale. These may be combined into an isomorphism B: S → S∗. For m odd, λ is a weight of S+ if and only if −λ is a weight of S−; thus there is an isomorphism from S+ to S−∗, again unique up to scale, and its transpose provides an isomorphism from S− to S+∗. These may again be combined into an isomorphism B: S → S∗.
For both m even and m odd, the freedom in the choice of B may be restricted to an overall scale by insisting that the bilinear form β corresponding to B satisfies (1), where τ is a fixed antiautomorphism (either reversion or conjugation).
The symmetry properties of β: S ⊗ S → C can be determined using Clifford algebras or representation theory. In fact much more can be said: the tensor square S ⊗ S must decompose into a direct sum of k-forms on V for various k, because its weights are all elements in h∗ whose components belong to {−1,0,1}. Now equivariant linear maps S ⊗ S → ∧kV∗ correspond bijectively to invariant maps ∧kV ⊗ S ⊗ S → C and nonzero such maps can be constructed via the inclusion of ∧kV into the Clifford algebra. Furthermore, if β(φ,ψ) = εβ(ψ,φ) and τ has sign εk on ∧kV then
for A in ∧kV.
If n = 2m+1 is odd then it follows from Schur's Lemma that
(both sides have dimension 22m and the representations on the right are inequivalent). Because the symmetries are governed by an involution τ that is either conjugation or reversion, the symmetry of the ∧2jV∗ component alternates with j. Elementary combinatorics gives
and the sign determines which representations occur in S2S and which occur in ∧2S. [3] In particular
for v ∈ V (which is isomorphic to ∧2mV), confirming that τ is reversion for m even, and conjugation for m odd.
If n = 2m is even, then the analysis is more involved, but the result is a more refined decomposition: S2S±, ∧2S± and S+ ⊗ S− can each be decomposed as a direct sum of k-forms (where for k = m there is a further decomposition into selfdual and antiselfdual m-forms).
The main outcome is a realisation of so(n,C) as a subalgebra of a classical Lie algebra on S, depending upon n modulo 8, according to the following table:
n mod 8 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Spinor algebra |
For n ≤ 6, these embeddings are isomorphisms (onto sl rather than gl for n = 6):
The complex spin representations of so(n,C) yield real representations S of so(p,q) by restricting the action to the real subalgebras. However, there are additional "reality" structures that are invariant under the action of the real Lie algebras. These come in three types.
The type of structure invariant under so(p,q) depends only on the signature p−q modulo 8, and is given by the following table.
p−q mod 8 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Structure | R + R | R | C | H | H + H | H | C | R |
Here R, C and H denote real, hermitian and quaternionic structures respectively, and R + R and H + H indicate that the half-spin representations both admit real or quaternionic structures respectively.
To complete the description of real representation, we must describe how these structures interact with the invariant bilinear forms. Since n = p + q ≅ p − q mod 2, there are two cases: the dimension and signature are both even, and the dimension and signature are both odd.
The odd case is simpler, there is only one complex spin representation S, and hermitian structures do not occur. Apart from the trivial case n = 1, S is always even-dimensional, say dim S = 2N. The real forms of so(2N,C) are so(K,L) with K + L = 2N and so∗(N,H), while the real forms of sp(2N,C) are sp(2N,R) and sp(K,L) with K + L = N. The presence of a Clifford action of V on S forces K = L in both cases unless pq = 0, in which case KL=0, which is denoted simply so(2N) or sp(N). Hence the odd spin representations may be summarized in the following table.
n mod 8 | 1, 7 | 3, 5 | |
---|---|---|---|
p−q mod 8 | so(2N,C) | sp(2N,C) | |
1, 7 | R | so(N,N) or so(2N) | sp(2N,R) |
3, 5 | H | so∗(N,H) | sp(N/2,N/2)† or sp(N) |
(†) N is even for n > 3 and for n = 3, this is sp(1).
The even-dimensional case is similar. For n > 2, the complex half-spin representations are even-dimensional. We have additionally to deal with hermitian structures and the real forms of sl(2N, C), which are sl(2N, R), su(K, L) with K + L = 2N, and sl(N, H). The resulting even spin representations are summarized as follows.
n mod 8 | 0 | 2, 6 | 4 | |
---|---|---|---|---|
p-q mod 8 | so(2N,C)+so(2N,C) | sl(2N,C) | sp(2N,C)+sp(2N,C) | |
0 | R+R | so(N,N)+so(N,N)∗ | sl(2N,R) | sp(2N,R)+sp(2N,R) |
2, 6 | C | so(2N,C) | su(N,N) | sp(2N,C) |
4 | H+H | so∗(N,H)+so∗(N,H) | sl(N,H) | sp(N/2,N/2)+sp(N/2,N/2)† |
(*) For pq = 0, we have instead so(2N) + so(2N)
(†) N is even for n > 4 and for pq = 0 (which includes n = 4 with N = 1), we have instead sp(N) + sp(N)
The low-dimensional isomorphisms in the complex case have the following real forms.
Euclidean signature | Minkowskian signature | Other signatures | |
The only special isomorphisms of real Lie algebras missing from this table are and
In mathematical physics and mathematics, the Pauli matrices are a set of three 2 × 2 complex matrices that are traceless, Hermitian, involutory and unitary. Usually indicated by the Greek letter sigma, they are occasionally denoted by tau when used in connection with isospin symmetries.
In mechanics and geometry, the 3D rotation group, often denoted SO(3), is the group of all rotations about the origin of three-dimensional Euclidean space under the operation of composition.
In number theory, the study of Diophantine approximation deals with the approximation of real numbers by rational numbers. It is named after Diophantus of Alexandria.
In mathematics, a sesquilinear form is a generalization of a bilinear form that, in turn, is a generalization of the concept of the dot product of Euclidean space. A bilinear form is linear in each of its arguments, but a sesquilinear form allows one of the arguments to be "twisted" in a semilinear manner, thus the name; which originates from the Latin numerical prefix sesqui- meaning "one and a half". The basic concept of the dot product – producing a scalar from a pair of vectors – can be generalized by allowing a broader range of scalar values and, perhaps simultaneously, by widening the definition of a vector.
The Lorentz group is a Lie group of symmetries of the spacetime of special relativity. This group can be realized as a collection of matrices, linear transformations, or unitary operators on some Hilbert space; it has a variety of representations. This group is significant because special relativity together with quantum mechanics are the two physical theories that are most thoroughly established, and the conjunction of these two theories is the study of the infinite-dimensional unitary representations of the Lorentz group. These have both historical importance in mainstream physics, as well as connections to more speculative present-day theories.
In physics, a sigma model is a field theory that describes the field as a point particle confined to move on a fixed manifold. This manifold can be taken to be any Riemannian manifold, although it is most commonly taken to be either a Lie group or a symmetric space. The model may or may not be quantized. An example of the non-quantized version is the Skyrme model; it cannot be quantized due to non-linearities of power greater than 4. In general, sigma models admit (classical) topological soliton solutions, for example, the skyrmion for the Skyrme model. When the sigma field is coupled to a gauge field, the resulting model is described by Ginzburg–Landau theory. This article is primarily devoted to the classical field theory of the sigma model; the corresponding quantized theory is presented in the article titled "non-linear sigma model".
In mathematical physics, the gamma matrices, also called the Dirac matrices, are a set of conventional matrices with specific anticommutation relations that ensure they generate a matrix representation of the Clifford algebra It is also possible to define higher-dimensional gamma matrices. When interpreted as the matrices of the action of a set of orthogonal basis vectors for contravariant vectors in Minkowski space, the column vectors on which the matrices act become a space of spinors, on which the Clifford algebra of spacetime acts. This in turn makes it possible to represent infinitesimal spatial rotations and Lorentz boosts. Spinors facilitate spacetime computations in general, and in particular are fundamental to the Dirac equation for relativistic spin particles. Gamma matrices were introduced by Paul Dirac in 1928.
In mathematics, in particular in algebraic geometry and differential geometry, Dolbeault cohomology (named after Pierre Dolbeault) is an analog of de Rham cohomology for complex manifolds. Let M be a complex manifold. Then the Dolbeault cohomology groups depend on a pair of integers p and q and are realized as a subquotient of the space of complex differential forms of degree (p,q).
In mathematics, especially functional analysis, a Fréchet algebra, named after Maurice René Fréchet, is an associative algebra over the real or complex numbers that at the same time is also a Fréchet space. The multiplication operation for is required to be jointly continuous. If is an increasing family of seminorms for the topology of , the joint continuity of multiplication is equivalent to there being a constant and integer for each such that for all . Fréchet algebras are also called B0-algebras.
The Newman–Penrose (NP) formalism is a set of notation developed by Ezra T. Newman and Roger Penrose for general relativity (GR). Their notation is an effort to treat general relativity in terms of spinor notation, which introduces complex forms of the usual variables used in GR. The NP formalism is itself a special case of the tetrad formalism, where the tensors of the theory are projected onto a complete vector basis at each point in spacetime. Usually this vector basis is chosen to reflect some symmetry of the spacetime, leading to simplified expressions for physical observables. In the case of the NP formalism, the vector basis chosen is a null tetrad: a set of four null vectors—two real, and a complex-conjugate pair. The two real members often asymptotically point radially inward and radially outward, and the formalism is well adapted to treatment of the propagation of radiation in curved spacetime. The Weyl scalars, derived from the Weyl tensor, are often used. In particular, it can be shown that one of these scalars— in the appropriate frame—encodes the outgoing gravitational radiation of an asymptotically flat system.
In the domain of mathematics known as representation theory, pure spinors are spinors that are annihilated, under the Clifford algebra representation, by a maximal isotropic subspace of a vector space with respect to a scalar product . They were introduced by Élie Cartan in the 1930s and further developed by Claude Chevalley.
There are various mathematical descriptions of the electromagnetic field that are used in the study of electromagnetism, one of the four fundamental interactions of nature. In this article, several approaches are discussed, although the equations are in terms of electric and magnetic fields, potentials, and charges with currents, generally speaking.
Coherent states have been introduced in a physical context, first as quasi-classical states in quantum mechanics, then as the backbone of quantum optics and they are described in that spirit in the article Coherent states. However, they have generated a huge variety of generalizations, which have led to a tremendous amount of literature in mathematical physics. In this article, we sketch the main directions of research on this line. For further details, we refer to several existing surveys.
The theory of causal fermion systems is an approach to describe fundamental physics. It provides a unification of the weak, the strong and the electromagnetic forces with gravity at the level of classical field theory. Moreover, it gives quantum mechanics as a limiting case and has revealed close connections to quantum field theory. Therefore, it is a candidate for a unified physical theory. Instead of introducing physical objects on a preexisting spacetime manifold, the general concept is to derive spacetime as well as all the objects therein as secondary objects from the structures of an underlying causal fermion system. This concept also makes it possible to generalize notions of differential geometry to the non-smooth setting. In particular, one can describe situations when spacetime no longer has a manifold structure on the microscopic scale. As a result, the theory of causal fermion systems is a proposal for quantum geometry and an approach to quantum gravity.
In differential geometry, a field in mathematics, a Lie bialgebroid consists of two compatible Lie algebroids defined on dual vector bundles. Lie bialgebroids are the vector bundle version of Lie bialgebras.
Buchholz's psi-functions are a hierarchy of single-argument ordinal functions introduced by German mathematician Wilfried Buchholz in 1986. These functions are a simplified version of the -functions, but nevertheless have the same strength as those. Later on this approach was extended by Jäger and Schütte.
In set theory and logic, Buchholz's ID hierarchy is a hierarchy of subsystems of first-order arithmetic. The systems/theories are referred to as "the formal theories of ν-times iterated inductive definitions". IDν extends PA by ν iterated least fixed points of monotone operators.
In supersymmetry, type IIA supergravity is the unique supergravity in ten dimensions with two supercharges of opposite chirality. It was first constructed in 1984 by a dimensional reduction of eleven-dimensional supergravity on a circle. The other supergravities in ten dimensions are type IIB supergravity, which has two supercharges of the same chirality, and type I supergravity, which has a single supercharge. In 1986 a deformation of the theory was discovered which gives mass to one of the fields and is known as massive type IIA supergravity. Type IIA supergravity plays a very important role in string theory as it is the low-energy limit of type IIA string theory.
In supersymmetry, type IIB supergravity is the unique supergravity in ten dimensions with two supercharges of the same chirality. It was first constructed in 1983 by John Schwarz and independently by Paul Howe and Peter West at the level of its equations of motion. While it does not admit a fully covariant action due to the presence of a self-dual field, it can be described by an action if the self-duality condition is imposed by hand on the resulting equations of motion. The other types of supergravity in ten dimensions are type IIA supergravity, which has two supercharges of opposing chirality, and type I supergravity, which has a single supercharge. The theory plays an important role in modern physics since it is the low-energy limit of type IIB string theory.
In supersymmetry, type I supergravity is the theory of supergravity in ten dimensions with a single supercharge. It consists of a single supergravity multiplet and a single Yang–Mills multiplet. The full non-abelian action was first derived in 1983 by George Chapline and Nicholas Manton. Classically the theory can admit any gauge group, but a consistent quantum theory resulting in anomaly cancellation only exists if the gauge group is either or . Both these supergravities are realised as the low-energy limits of string theories, in particular of type I string theory and of the two heterotic string theories.