1
$\begingroup$

According to the paper A Lagrangian formulation of the classical and quantum dynamics of spinning particles, a relativistic spinless particle in $D$ spacetime dimensions can be described by the Lagrangian $$L = \frac12 \dot{X}_\mu \dot{X}^\mu.$$ This is well-known, but the paper goes on to claim that spin can be modeled by adding the Grassmann variables $\psi^\mu$, with Lagrangian $$L = \frac12 \dot{X}_\mu \dot{X}^\mu + \frac i2 \psi_\mu \dot{\psi}^\mu.$$

I'm confused about this because it doesn't seem to have the right number of degrees of freedom. Following Wigner's classification, in $D$ spacetime dimensions, the little group of the massless particle is $E_{D-2}$. The finite dimensional representations of $E_{D-2}$ have the translations acting trivially, so the little group is effectively $SO(D-2)$. Now, I think that the particles we call "spinors" should correspond to the spinor representation of $SO(D-2)$, but the dimension of that representation grows exponentially in $D$, while here we only have $D$ Grassmann degrees of freedom.

What's going on here? How does the number of degrees of freedom line up?

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$
  1. Ref. 2 argues that OP's Lagrangian (extended with the necessary SUSY world-line (WL) reparametrization invariance, cf. e.g. this Phys.SE post) describes a Dirac-spinor, which has $2^{[D/2]}$ complex off-shell DOF and $2^{[D/2]-1}$ complex on-shell DOF.

  2. The main point is that the Clifford algebra$^1$ $$\{\psi^{\mu}, \psi^{\nu}\}_{PB}~=~-i\eta^{\mu\nu} \qquad\Leftrightarrow\qquad \{\hat{\psi}^{\mu}, \hat{\psi}^{\nu}\}_+~=~\hbar\eta^{\mu\nu}\mathbb{1}$$ with real generators $$\psi^{\mu}, \qquad \mu~\in~\{0,1, \ldots, D\!-\!1\},$$ has only $[D/2]$ anticommuting variables $$\theta^1~=~(\psi^1-\psi^0)/\sqrt{2} ,\qquad \theta^a~=~(\psi^{2a-2}+i\psi^{2a-1})/\sqrt{2} , \qquad a~\in~\{2,3, \ldots, [D/2]\},$$ constructed from appropriate linear combinations of the $\psi$s.

  3. Phrased differently, the Poisson supermanifold is $M=\mathbb{R}^{2D|D}$ with global coordinates $(x^{\mu},p_{\mu},\psi^{\mu})$. In geometric quantization we next pick an isotropic subspace, say, $N=\mathbb{R}^{D|1}\times \mathbb{C}^{[D/2]-1}$ with global coordinates $(x^{\mu},\theta^a)$, corresponding to a choice of polarization.

  4. The first-quantized wavefunction $\Psi(x,\theta)\in{\cal L}^2(N)$ in a Schrödinger-like representation can be expanded in these Grassmann-odd anticommuting $\theta$s into $2^{[D/2]}$ component fields, which precisely form a Dirac spinor in $x$-space$^2$. In particular, one may show that these component fields transform as a Dirac spinor under Lorentz rotations.

  5. The vanishing Hamiltonian constraint $H=p^2\approx 0$ imposes the (massless) mass-shell condition, while the vanishing supercharge constraint $Q=p_{\mu}\psi^{\mu}\approx 0$ imposes the (massless) Dirac equation.

References:

  1. L. Brink, P. Di Vecchia & P. Howe, Nucl. Phys. B118 (1977) 76; Chapter 4.

  2. C.M. Hull & J.-L. Vazquez-Bello, arXiv:hep-th/9308022; Chapter 2, p. 7-8.

--

$^1$ Conventions: We use the Minkowski sign convention $(-,+,\ldots,+)$ and we work in units where $c=1$.

$^2$ It seems Ref. 1 effectively fails to go to an isotropic subspace in eq. (4.12).

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I think that's just the issue -- why are there only $\lfloor D/2 \rfloor$ anticommuting Grassmann numbers? I would have thought it would be $D$, or perhaps $D-1$. $\endgroup$ – knzhou Jan 15 at 15:03
  • $\begingroup$ I updated the answer. $\endgroup$ – Qmechanic Jan 16 at 14:55
0
$\begingroup$

The gamma matrices are related to their transpose, which are again related to their negatives, both by a similarity transform [1]. The representations corresponding to these are then equivalent. I believe the second fact takes you from $2^{d+1}$ to $2^d$, while the first gets you down to $2^{d/2}$ dimensions. I think there are also some 1d representations, but those aren't the ones you're looking for, probably because they can't anti-commute unless they themselves are Grassmann valued (I don't know why that can't be the case though if you really wanted it to be though...).

[1] [Higher-dimensional gamma matrices]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higher-dimensional_gamma_matrices

$\endgroup$

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.