|
|
|
Main Menu
|
|
Sections
Meta
Talkback
Downloads
Information
|
|
|
|
|
![[parent]](https://images.physicslibrary.org/images/uparrow.png) Viewing Message
|
|
|
| ``Re: Why we can say a spinor be a representation of SU(2)?''
by hobo_physicist on 2007-03-02 04:50:07 |
|
| Hehehe, yeah that was a typo there on the commutation relation. Again you are perfectly correct to have spot it. Actually, it's something Hugh might do too. I've been to his Lectures at Cambridge and he has a reputation for doing stuff like that.
Sorry, I forgot to mention that
J_z = diagonal (1,0,-1) in units of hbar.
I wrote the reply late at night, and low on coffee :D That line should come just before I jumped straight into J_\pm
The thing in the notes that I wanted you too see was the proportinality factor \sqrt{(j \mp m)(j \pm m + 1 )} which was derived purely from the commutation relations, so it will be true for all representations.
The rest of the notes are pretty good save a few typos here and there which you should be cautious of. But all in all, I did learn a lot just from reading these.
When you're ready and if you can find a copy check out
http://www.amazon.com/Theory-Groups-Quantum-Mechanics/dp/0486602699/ref=sr_1_1/104-2487869-8804769?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1172828810&sr=1-1
Hermann was the "MAN" in those days.
Hobo |
| | [ reply | up | top ] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
