Search Results
| Search type | Search syntax |
|---|---|
| Tags | [tag] |
| Exact | "words here" |
| Author |
user:1234 user:me (yours) |
| Score |
score:3 (3+) score:0 (none) |
| Answers |
answers:3 (3+) answers:0 (none) isaccepted:yes hasaccepted:no inquestion:1234 |
| Views | views:250 |
| Code | code:"if (foo != bar)" |
| Sections |
title:apples body:"apples oranges" |
| URL | url:"*.example.com" |
| Saves | in:saves |
| Status |
closed:yes duplicate:no migrated:no wiki:no |
| Types |
is:question is:answer |
| Exclude |
-[tag] -apples |
| For more details on advanced search visit our help page | |
Results tagged with symmetry
Search options not deleted
user 209958
Symmetries play a big role in modern physics and have been a source of powerful tools and techniques for understanding theories and their dynamics. We say that something is symmetric if there is some transformation we can perform on that object that leaves some property unchanged. The set of symmetry transformations of an object forms a group, and the name of this group is used as the name of the symmetry of the object.
3
votes
0
answers
69
views
Calculation of commutation relations in the SYK model
I'm reading this paper (https://arxiv.org/abs/1604.07818). And I'm having trouble showing an equality. We consider the following $SL(2,R)$ generators.
\begin{align}
D=-t\partial_t-\frac{1}{4},\ P=\par …
- 125
4
votes
1
answer
395
views
The Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev (SYK) model and conformal $SL(2,\mathbb{R})$ symmetry in 0+1D
Several papers have argued that it has only $SL(2,\mathbb{R})$ symmetry. I would like to prove this, but I'm not sure how to do it. …
- 125