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 |
14
votes
3
answers
11k
views
Dirac spinor and Weyl spinor
EDIT: - Let $\psi_L$ and $\psi_R$ be 2 component left-handed and right-handed Weyl spinors. Their transformation properties are known. … This is possible because we started from the definition of left-handed and right-handed Weyl spinors and their transformation properties are known. Right? …
9
votes
1
answer
615
views
How do experiments prove that fermion wavefunctions really pick up a minus sign when rotated...
Theoretically, after a rotation of $2\pi$, a fermion wavefunction picks up a minus sign, and it is after a rotation through $4\pi$ that it returns to its initial quantum state. Now, the wave-functions …
8
votes
1
answer
2k
views
Does the concept of both helicity and chirality make sense for a massive Dirac spinor?
Does the concept of both helicity and chirality make sense for a massive Dirac spinor?
A massive electron in the chiral basis is written as a column made up of $\psi_L$ and $\psi_R$. What is the signi …
6
votes
1
answer
527
views
Little confusion with see-saw mechanism
Neutinos are either Dirac particles or Majorana particles but can’t be both at the same time. Then how can we write a general mass term as the sum of a Dirac mass term and a Majorana mass term? When w …
5
votes
1
answer
862
views
Does it really "prove" Spin-statistics Theorem?
In quantizing a scalar field, we impose commutation relation between the field operators by hand. On the other hand, anti-commutation relation is imposed between Dirac field operators by hand. As a co …
4
votes
1
answer
2k
views
Confusion about Dirac mass term
In chiral basis, $\psi=\begin{pmatrix}
\psi_L\\
\psi_R
\end{pmatrix}$ and therefore, $\overline\psi=\psi^\dagger\gamma^0=\begin{pmatrix}
\psi^\dagger_L & \psi^\dagger_R
\end{pmatrix}\gamma^0=\begin{pm …
3
votes
Direct product of spin representations
Each spin-1/2 particle is associated with a $(2\times\frac{1}{2}+1)$=2-dimensional vector space $\mathbb{V}$ as far as its spin degree of freedom is concerned. A composite system of two spin-1/2 parti …
3
votes
2
answers
2k
views
Question about Majorana fermion and Majorana representation
In Chiral representation, a Majorana spinor looks like:
$$\psi=\begin{pmatrix}
\psi_L\\
-i\sigma^2\psi_L^*\end{pmatrix}$$
In this representation the Right handed field is the charge-conjugate of th …
2
votes
2
answers
147
views
How is $j=1/2$ representation, $U(R(\theta,\hat{\bf n}))=e^{i{\sigma}\cdot{\hat {\bf n}}\the...
A projective unitary representation of ${\rm SO(3)}$ satisfies $$U(R_1)U(R_2)=e^{i\phi(R_1,R_2)}U(R_1R_2)\tag{1}$$ where $R_1,R_2\in {\rm SO(3)}$. How to show that the $j=1/2$ representation, $U(R(\th …
2
votes
Do massless spin-1/2 particles have to be Weyl spinors?
A massless spin-1/2 particle can be represented by 2-component Weyl spinors. This can be seen by expressing the Dirac equation with $m=0$ in the Weyl basis. … The solutions are now 4-component Dirac spinors. …
1
vote
1
answer
271
views
Massless neutrinos and Chirality
The massless neutrinos can be represented by two component Weyl spinors. …
1
vote
Why does spin appear in quantum systems but not classical systems?
The title of the question is not quite correct. I offer a a partial answer and I hope it helps to some extent! I might expand it a bit later.
The way the angular momentum is first defined in classica …
1
vote
1
answer
855
views
Do massless spin-1/2 particles have to be Weyl spinors?
Weyl spinors are massless.
Is the converse also true? Does any massless spin-1/2 fermion have to be a two-component Weyl spinor? … Is there a reason for not using two-component Weyl spinors for the electron when it is massless? …
1
vote
1
answer
1k
views
Meaning of the subscripts $L,R$ for the two component Weyl spinors $\phi_{L,R}$
It is to be emphasized that $\psi_L$ and $\psi_R$ are not 2-component spinors; $\psi_L$($\psi_R$) are still 4-component spinors with lower(upper) two entries being zero and upper(lower) two entries being … Let $$\psi_L=\begin{pmatrix}\chi\\0\end{pmatrix},~~\psi_R=\begin{pmatrix}0\\\zeta\end{pmatrix},\tag{3}$$ where $\chi$ and $\zeta$ are two-component spinors, called Weyl spinors. …