In problem C of section 1.4 of Ramon's Field Theory: A Modern Primer, we are asked to build a field bilinear in $\chi_L$ and $\psi_L$, two left-handed weyl spinors, which transforms as the (1,0) representation of $\text{SL}(2,\mathbb{C})$. This representation is equivalent to the behavior of rank 2 tensors $B_{\mu\nu}$ which are antisymmetric and selfdual, i.e., $$B_{\mu\nu}=-B_{\mu\nu}\\B_{\mu\nu}=\frac{1}{2}\epsilon_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}B^{\rho\sigma}.$$ One can check that both $i\psi_L^\dagger \sigma^\mu\psi_L$ and $i\chi_L^\dagger\sigma^\mu\chi_L$ are 4-vectors. I think the correct way to proceed is to use them to build the field $B_{\mu\nu}$. My first approavh was to antisymmetrize and selfdualize $\psi_L^\dagger \sigma^\mu\psi_L\chi_L^\dagger \sigma^\nu\chi_L$. This of course fails to be bilinear in the fields. Does any body have any clue? Would something like $\psi_L^\dagger\sigma^\mu\sigma^\nu\chi_L$ work?


Since both fields transform as $(\tfrac{1}{2},0)$ we can treat them as $SU(2)$ spinors and ignore everything else. So the question is how do you multiply two $j=\tfrac{1}{2}$ spinors to get a $j=1$ vector? Easy enough, just use regular Pauli matrices: $$ b_L^{\pm,0} = \psi_{L\alpha} \sigma^{\pm,3}_{\alpha\beta} \chi_{L\beta}$$ or $$ \vec{b}_L = \psi_{L,\alpha} \vec{\sigma}_{\alpha\beta} \chi_{L,\beta}$$

To see that this is equivalent to an anti-symmetric Lorentz tensor that satisfies $B_{\mu\nu} = \tilde{B}_{\mu\nu}$ write $$B_{\mu\nu} = \begin{pmatrix}0 & -b_L^x & -b_L^y & -b_L^z \\ b_L^x & 0 & -b_L^z & b_L^y \\ b_L^y & b_L^z & 0 & -b_L^x \\ b_L^z & -b_L^y & b_L^x & 0\end{pmatrix}$$

  • $\begingroup$ Are you sure $(1,0)$ is not the antisymmetric selfdual tensors? Your argument for showing it is not only takes into account antisymmetry. Selfduality further restricts dimension. Maxwell's field tensor tranforms under $(1,0)\oplus(0,1)$. I will need some time to understand your answer! Thanks! $\endgroup$ – Iván Mauricio Burbano Dec 28 '18 at 21:31
  • $\begingroup$ How us it that $b_L^{\pm,0}$ is a spin 1 vector? I think I don't understand the notation properly. $\endgroup$ – Iván Mauricio Burbano Dec 28 '18 at 21:32
  • $\begingroup$ If self-duality means hermiticity then Maxwell's field tensor with real entries is already self-dual. I'm not sure what you mean by self-dual. $\endgroup$ – Luke Pritchett Dec 28 '18 at 21:35
  • $\begingroup$ Oh sorry, by self duality I mean that the condition $B_{\mu\nu}=\frac{1}{2}\epsilon_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}B^{\rho\sigma}$ is fulfilled. $\endgroup$ – Iván Mauricio Burbano Dec 28 '18 at 21:36
  • $\begingroup$ Oh, I see. I've edited the answer $\endgroup$ – Luke Pritchett Dec 28 '18 at 21:43

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.