2
$\begingroup$

I'm solving problem 3.D in H. Georgi Lie Algebra etc for fun where one is to compute the matrix elements of the direct product $\sigma_2\otimes\eta_1$ where $[\sigma_2]_{ij}\text{ and }[\eta_1]_{xy}$ are two different Pauli matrices in two different two dimensional spaces.

Defining the basis in our four dimensional tensor product space $$\tag{1}\left|1\right\rangle = \left|i=1\right\rangle\left|x=1\right\rangle\\ \left|2\right\rangle = \left|i=1\right\rangle\left|x=2\right\rangle\\ \left|3\right\rangle = \left|i=2\right\rangle\left|x=1\right\rangle\\ \left|4\right\rangle = \left|i=2\right\rangle\left|x=2\right\rangle$$

Now we know that when we multiply representations, the generators add in the sense of

$$\tag{2}[J_a^{1\otimes2}(g)]_{jyix} = [J_a^1]_{ji}\delta_{yx} +\delta_{ji}[J_a^2]_{yx}, $$ where the $J$s are the generators corresponding to the different representations $D_1$ and $D_2$ ($g$ stands for the group elements).

Using all of this I find that in the basis of $(1)$ the matrix representation of the tensor product is given by

$$\tag{3}\sigma_2\otimes\eta_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 & \mathbf{1} & -i & 0 \\ 1 & 0 & 0 & -i \\ i & 0 & 0 & 1 \\ 0 & i & 1 & 0 \end{pmatrix}$$

(The bold $\mathbf{1}$ is just notation, see below!) I am not asking you to redo the calculations for me but does $(3)$ make sense?

Appendix. My calculations were done in the following fashion [using equation $(2)$]: $$\tag{4}\langle 1| \sigma_2\otimes \eta_1 |1\rangle = \\ \langle j=1,y=1| \sigma_2\otimes \eta_1 |i=1,x=1\rangle \\ = [\sigma_2]_{11}\delta_{11}+\delta_{11}[\eta_1]_{11} \\ = 0.$$ Similarly for eg $$\tag{5} \langle 1| \sigma_2\otimes \eta_1 |2\rangle = \\ \langle j=1,y=1| \sigma_2\otimes \eta_1 |i=1,x=2\rangle \\ = [\sigma_2]_{11}\delta_{12}+\delta_{11}[\eta_1]_{12} \\ = 1. $$ This is how the bold $\mathbf{1}$ was obtained.

So are my calculations $(4), (5)$ totally wrong?

The Pauli matrices $$\begin{align} \sigma_1 &= \begin{pmatrix} 0&1\\ 1&0 \end{pmatrix} \\ \sigma_2 &= \begin{pmatrix} 0&-i\\ i&0 \end{pmatrix} \\ \sigma_3 &= \begin{pmatrix} 1&0\\ 0&-1 \end{pmatrix} \,. \end{align} $$

$\endgroup$
4
$\begingroup$

I think it is easier to compute direct products when you write the matrices in component form; basically, you just have to multiply each element of the first matrix by the whole second matrix: $$ \mathbf{A}\otimes\mathbf{B} = \begin{bmatrix} A_{11} \mathbf{B} & \cdots & A_{1n} \mathbf{B} \\ \vdots & \ddots & \vdots \\ A_{n1} \mathbf{B} & \cdots & A_{nn} \mathbf{B}\end{bmatrix} $$ In your case, using the Pauli matrices $\boldsymbol{\sigma}_2$ and $\boldsymbol{\eta}_1$, we get: $$ \boldsymbol{\sigma}_2 \otimes \boldsymbol{\eta}_1 = \begin{bmatrix} 0 & -i\boldsymbol{\eta}_1 \\ i\boldsymbol{\eta}_1 & 0 \end{bmatrix} = \begin{bmatrix} 0 & 0 & 0 & -i \\ 0 & 0 & -i & 0 \\ 0 & i & 0 & 0 \\ i & 0 & 0 & 0\end{bmatrix} $$

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ So my equation 5 is wrong? $\endgroup$ – Your Majesty Feb 1 '15 at 14:34
  • $\begingroup$ The direct product $\boldsymbol{\sigma}_2\otimes\boldsymbol{\eta}_1$ should be the same no matter which method you use to calculate it. Thus I believe that your equation (3) is wrong, which would imply that (5) is also wrong. Unfortunately, I do not know much about formal Lie theory, so I am unable to pinpoint exactly what went wrong. $\endgroup$ – jabirali Feb 1 '15 at 14:46
  • $\begingroup$ Are you e.g. sure that you got eq. (2) right? $\endgroup$ – jabirali Feb 1 '15 at 14:47
  • $\begingroup$ Yes eq 2 comes from the book and the derivation looks valid. $\endgroup$ – Your Majesty Feb 1 '15 at 17:28
  • $\begingroup$ Remember that your answer should be written in the basis (1). $\endgroup$ – Your Majesty Feb 2 '15 at 15:15
2
$\begingroup$

Your equation (2) is right, in principle: it is the standard coproduct of Lie algebras, but it is irrelevant, and should have never been used for anything here. The language confused you. It should read $$ \boldsymbol{J^a} = \boldsymbol{j^a} \otimes 1\!\!1 +1\!\!1\otimes \boldsymbol{j^a} .$$ If you wished to apply it to two doublet reps, you should have used the same Pauli matrix $\sigma^a$ for both $j^a$s, and multiplying by the same angle and exponentiating you would have seen how nicely the group elements tensor-factor in the respective subspaces 1 and 2: $\exp (i\theta^a \boldsymbol{J}^a)=$ $\exp(i\theta^a(\boldsymbol{j^a} \otimes 1\!\!1 +1\!\!1\otimes \boldsymbol{j^a}))=\exp(i\theta^a(\boldsymbol{j^a} \otimes 1\!\!1)) \exp(i\theta^a (1\!\!1\otimes \boldsymbol{j^a}))= \exp(i\theta^a \boldsymbol{j^a}) \otimes\exp(i\theta^a\boldsymbol{j^a} )$.

But, instead, your assignment asked you to simply mechanically evaluate the tensor product of two different matrices, to see if you understand the rules @jabirali correctly applied to get the correct answer you were meant to find. So, your equation (3) is magnificently wrong: you evaluated $\boldsymbol{\sigma_2} \otimes 1\!\!1 +1\!\!1\otimes \boldsymbol{\sigma_1} $. jabirali is actually using your conventions, basis (1), exactly.

As a further exploratory excursion, you might use his and your rules, "right matrix into entries of left matrix", "left-coarse, right-fine" to compute (2) for a common matrix, e.g. $\sigma^2$, and then C-G rotate/reduce the 4x4 matrix to find $J_2$ in the triplet representation (3x3 block) and a singlet (0! in the remaining 1x1 block).

$\endgroup$
-1
$\begingroup$

Each Pauli matrix has two non-zero elements. Therefore, direct product of Pauli matrices will have four non-zero elements. Your answer, unfortunately, has eight.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ So my equation 5 is wrong? $\endgroup$ – Your Majesty Feb 1 '15 at 14:34
  • $\begingroup$ No, it is just a wrong equation to apply. Addition of generators is just like addition of angular momenta. I haven't read the Georgi's book, but this exercise looks like something intended to get you familiarized with the direct product space. A typical QM book would then explain how this product space can be represented as a direct sum of spin-0 and spin-1 spaces. $\endgroup$ – mho Feb 1 '15 at 20:55
  • $\begingroup$ I'm asking for the answer in basis $(1)$. $\endgroup$ – Your Majesty Feb 2 '15 at 14:29

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.