Skip to main content
added 120 characters in body
Source Link

Why the gamma matrices are taken 2 by 2 (Pauli matrices) in 3 dimensional Clifford Algebra. As in 4D Clifford Algebra the matrices are 4 by 4, in 3D Algebra why are they not 3 by 3 matrices? The question can be asked another way that should we use the representation according to the components of Dirac spinor?

Why the gamma matrices are taken 2 by 2 (Pauli matrices) in 3 dimensional Clifford Algebra. As in 4D Clifford Algebra the matrices are 4 by 4, in 3D Algebra why are they not 3 by 3 matrices?

Why the gamma matrices are taken 2 by 2 (Pauli matrices) in 3 dimensional Clifford Algebra. As in 4D Clifford Algebra the matrices are 4 by 4, in 3D Algebra why are they not 3 by 3 matrices? The question can be asked another way that should we use the representation according to the components of Dirac spinor?

Post Closed as "Duplicate" by Qmechanic
edited tags
Link
Qmechanic
  • 212.9k
  • 48
  • 589
  • 2.3k
Source Link

Clifford Algebra in 3D

Why the gamma matrices are taken 2 by 2 (Pauli matrices) in 3 dimensional Clifford Algebra. As in 4D Clifford Algebra the matrices are 4 by 4, in 3D Algebra why are they not 3 by 3 matrices?