Relationship between a metric and quantum mechanical matricesWhat's the relationship between the riemannian metric and Jacobi field?Physical (Quantum Mechanical) Significance of completeness of Hilbert Spaces.Relationship metric space and $sigma$-discrete baseA simple quantum mechanical systemQuantum probability and quantum measure theory3-d integration over space and complex time argument of quantum mechanical propagatorIs it true that an arbitrary rotation $Rin SO(3)$ can be decomposed into rotations about any two fixed axes?Quantum mechanical books for mathematiciansPauli matrices coordinate projectionsRelationship between metric and normed spaces

Blender - show edges angles “direction”

Bob has never been a M before

How to check participants in at events?

What should I use for Mishna study?

For airliners, what prevents wing strikes on landing in bad weather?

Superhero words!

Is there an wasy way to program in Tikz something like the one in the image?

Could solar power be utilized and substitute coal in the 19th century?

Is there a good way to store credentials outside of a password manager?

Simulating a probability of 1 of 2^N with less than N random bits

Indicating multiple different modes of speech (fantasy language or telepathy)

Greatest common substring

The One-Electron Universe postulate is true - what simple change can I make to change the whole universe?

Freedom of speech and where it applies

What will be the benefits of Brexit?

Simple image editor tool to draw a simple box/rectangle in an existing image

Can I Retrieve Email Addresses from BCC?

Is a naturally all "male" species possible?

Lightning Web Component - do I need to track changes for every single input field in a form

I'm in charge of equipment buying but no one's ever happy with what I choose. How to fix this?

Why is delta-v is the most useful quantity for planning space travel?

What to do when my ideas aren't chosen, when I strongly disagree with the chosen solution?

Pronouncing Homer as in modern Greek

Are Warlocks Arcane or Divine?



Relationship between a metric and quantum mechanical matrices


What's the relationship between the riemannian metric and Jacobi field?Physical (Quantum Mechanical) Significance of completeness of Hilbert Spaces.Relationship metric space and $sigma$-discrete baseA simple quantum mechanical systemQuantum probability and quantum measure theory3-d integration over space and complex time argument of quantum mechanical propagatorIs it true that an arbitrary rotation $Rin SO(3)$ can be decomposed into rotations about any two fixed axes?Quantum mechanical books for mathematiciansPauli matrices coordinate projectionsRelationship between metric and normed spaces













4












$begingroup$


Let $ds:=sigma_x dx+ sigma_y dy + sigma_z dz$. Then squaring $ds$, we get



$$
ds^2=sigma_x^2dx^2+ sigma_y^2dy^2+sigma_z^2dz^2 + (sigma_xsigma_y+ sigma_ysigma_x)dxdy + (sigma_xsigma_z+sigma_zsigma_x)dxdz+(sigma_ysigma_z+sigma_zsigma_y)dydz
$$



We get a lot of cross-terms, but if $sigma_x, sigma_y $ and $sigma_z$ are Pauli matrices with these properties:



$$
sigma_x^2=sigma_y^2=sigma_z^2=1\
sigma_xsigma_y=-sigma_ysigma_x\
sigma_xsigma_z=-sigma_zsigma_x\
sigma_zsigma_y=-sigma_ysigma_z
$$



Then, the metric is now the usual Euclidian metric.



$$
ds^2=dx^2+dy^2+dz^2
$$



Therefore,



$$
sigma_x dx+ sigma_y dy + sigma_z dz=sqrtdx^2+dy^2+dz^2
$$




This is not just a fluke result, because one can repeat the same exercise with



$$
ds:=alpha_x dx+ alpha_y dy + alpha_z dz-alpha_tdt
$$



and, squaring $ds$ one will get



$$
ds^2:=dx^2+ dy^2 + dz^2-dt^2
$$



provided that $alpha_x,alpha_y, alpha_y$ and $alpha_t$ and the Dirac matrices.



What is the source of this connection between eliminating the cross-terms within metrics and matrices relevant to quantum mechanics?




In the case of a generalized metric



$$
ds^2=g_munu dx^mu dx^nu
$$



with a symmetry requirement $g_mu nu=g_nu mu$ (the case of general relativity), the cross terms commute and this seems to be precisely the condition which avoid the need for matrix.



EDIT



Thinking about it some more, it seems general relativity does have a matrix-like construction. The matrices must have the following properties:



Start with



$$
ds:=A_xdx+A_ydy+A_zdz+A_tdt
$$



Squaring $ds$ produces a GR compliant tensor if the matrices have these properties:



$$
A_x^2=g_xx\
A_y^2=g_yy\
A_z^2=g_zz\
A_t^2=-g_tt\
A_xA_y=A_xA_y=frac12g_xy=frac12g_yx\
A_xA_z=A_xA_z=frac12g_xz=frac12g_zx\
A_yA_z=A_zA_y=frac12g_yz=frac12g_zy\
A_xA_t=A_tA_x=frac12g_xt=frac12g_tx\
A_yA_t=A_tA_y=frac12g_yt=frac12g_ty\
A_zA_t=A_tA_z=frac12g_zt=frac12g_tz
$$



I am not sure if this gives quantum mechanically relevant matrices or not.



But we get



$$
A_xdx+A_ydy+A_zdz+A_tdt:=sqrtg_munu dx^mu dx^nu
$$










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$
















    4












    $begingroup$


    Let $ds:=sigma_x dx+ sigma_y dy + sigma_z dz$. Then squaring $ds$, we get



    $$
    ds^2=sigma_x^2dx^2+ sigma_y^2dy^2+sigma_z^2dz^2 + (sigma_xsigma_y+ sigma_ysigma_x)dxdy + (sigma_xsigma_z+sigma_zsigma_x)dxdz+(sigma_ysigma_z+sigma_zsigma_y)dydz
    $$



    We get a lot of cross-terms, but if $sigma_x, sigma_y $ and $sigma_z$ are Pauli matrices with these properties:



    $$
    sigma_x^2=sigma_y^2=sigma_z^2=1\
    sigma_xsigma_y=-sigma_ysigma_x\
    sigma_xsigma_z=-sigma_zsigma_x\
    sigma_zsigma_y=-sigma_ysigma_z
    $$



    Then, the metric is now the usual Euclidian metric.



    $$
    ds^2=dx^2+dy^2+dz^2
    $$



    Therefore,



    $$
    sigma_x dx+ sigma_y dy + sigma_z dz=sqrtdx^2+dy^2+dz^2
    $$




    This is not just a fluke result, because one can repeat the same exercise with



    $$
    ds:=alpha_x dx+ alpha_y dy + alpha_z dz-alpha_tdt
    $$



    and, squaring $ds$ one will get



    $$
    ds^2:=dx^2+ dy^2 + dz^2-dt^2
    $$



    provided that $alpha_x,alpha_y, alpha_y$ and $alpha_t$ and the Dirac matrices.



    What is the source of this connection between eliminating the cross-terms within metrics and matrices relevant to quantum mechanics?




    In the case of a generalized metric



    $$
    ds^2=g_munu dx^mu dx^nu
    $$



    with a symmetry requirement $g_mu nu=g_nu mu$ (the case of general relativity), the cross terms commute and this seems to be precisely the condition which avoid the need for matrix.



    EDIT



    Thinking about it some more, it seems general relativity does have a matrix-like construction. The matrices must have the following properties:



    Start with



    $$
    ds:=A_xdx+A_ydy+A_zdz+A_tdt
    $$



    Squaring $ds$ produces a GR compliant tensor if the matrices have these properties:



    $$
    A_x^2=g_xx\
    A_y^2=g_yy\
    A_z^2=g_zz\
    A_t^2=-g_tt\
    A_xA_y=A_xA_y=frac12g_xy=frac12g_yx\
    A_xA_z=A_xA_z=frac12g_xz=frac12g_zx\
    A_yA_z=A_zA_y=frac12g_yz=frac12g_zy\
    A_xA_t=A_tA_x=frac12g_xt=frac12g_tx\
    A_yA_t=A_tA_y=frac12g_yt=frac12g_ty\
    A_zA_t=A_tA_z=frac12g_zt=frac12g_tz
    $$



    I am not sure if this gives quantum mechanically relevant matrices or not.



    But we get



    $$
    A_xdx+A_ydy+A_zdz+A_tdt:=sqrtg_munu dx^mu dx^nu
    $$










    share|cite|improve this question











    $endgroup$














      4












      4








      4


      1



      $begingroup$


      Let $ds:=sigma_x dx+ sigma_y dy + sigma_z dz$. Then squaring $ds$, we get



      $$
      ds^2=sigma_x^2dx^2+ sigma_y^2dy^2+sigma_z^2dz^2 + (sigma_xsigma_y+ sigma_ysigma_x)dxdy + (sigma_xsigma_z+sigma_zsigma_x)dxdz+(sigma_ysigma_z+sigma_zsigma_y)dydz
      $$



      We get a lot of cross-terms, but if $sigma_x, sigma_y $ and $sigma_z$ are Pauli matrices with these properties:



      $$
      sigma_x^2=sigma_y^2=sigma_z^2=1\
      sigma_xsigma_y=-sigma_ysigma_x\
      sigma_xsigma_z=-sigma_zsigma_x\
      sigma_zsigma_y=-sigma_ysigma_z
      $$



      Then, the metric is now the usual Euclidian metric.



      $$
      ds^2=dx^2+dy^2+dz^2
      $$



      Therefore,



      $$
      sigma_x dx+ sigma_y dy + sigma_z dz=sqrtdx^2+dy^2+dz^2
      $$




      This is not just a fluke result, because one can repeat the same exercise with



      $$
      ds:=alpha_x dx+ alpha_y dy + alpha_z dz-alpha_tdt
      $$



      and, squaring $ds$ one will get



      $$
      ds^2:=dx^2+ dy^2 + dz^2-dt^2
      $$



      provided that $alpha_x,alpha_y, alpha_y$ and $alpha_t$ and the Dirac matrices.



      What is the source of this connection between eliminating the cross-terms within metrics and matrices relevant to quantum mechanics?




      In the case of a generalized metric



      $$
      ds^2=g_munu dx^mu dx^nu
      $$



      with a symmetry requirement $g_mu nu=g_nu mu$ (the case of general relativity), the cross terms commute and this seems to be precisely the condition which avoid the need for matrix.



      EDIT



      Thinking about it some more, it seems general relativity does have a matrix-like construction. The matrices must have the following properties:



      Start with



      $$
      ds:=A_xdx+A_ydy+A_zdz+A_tdt
      $$



      Squaring $ds$ produces a GR compliant tensor if the matrices have these properties:



      $$
      A_x^2=g_xx\
      A_y^2=g_yy\
      A_z^2=g_zz\
      A_t^2=-g_tt\
      A_xA_y=A_xA_y=frac12g_xy=frac12g_yx\
      A_xA_z=A_xA_z=frac12g_xz=frac12g_zx\
      A_yA_z=A_zA_y=frac12g_yz=frac12g_zy\
      A_xA_t=A_tA_x=frac12g_xt=frac12g_tx\
      A_yA_t=A_tA_y=frac12g_yt=frac12g_ty\
      A_zA_t=A_tA_z=frac12g_zt=frac12g_tz
      $$



      I am not sure if this gives quantum mechanically relevant matrices or not.



      But we get



      $$
      A_xdx+A_ydy+A_zdz+A_tdt:=sqrtg_munu dx^mu dx^nu
      $$










      share|cite|improve this question











      $endgroup$




      Let $ds:=sigma_x dx+ sigma_y dy + sigma_z dz$. Then squaring $ds$, we get



      $$
      ds^2=sigma_x^2dx^2+ sigma_y^2dy^2+sigma_z^2dz^2 + (sigma_xsigma_y+ sigma_ysigma_x)dxdy + (sigma_xsigma_z+sigma_zsigma_x)dxdz+(sigma_ysigma_z+sigma_zsigma_y)dydz
      $$



      We get a lot of cross-terms, but if $sigma_x, sigma_y $ and $sigma_z$ are Pauli matrices with these properties:



      $$
      sigma_x^2=sigma_y^2=sigma_z^2=1\
      sigma_xsigma_y=-sigma_ysigma_x\
      sigma_xsigma_z=-sigma_zsigma_x\
      sigma_zsigma_y=-sigma_ysigma_z
      $$



      Then, the metric is now the usual Euclidian metric.



      $$
      ds^2=dx^2+dy^2+dz^2
      $$



      Therefore,



      $$
      sigma_x dx+ sigma_y dy + sigma_z dz=sqrtdx^2+dy^2+dz^2
      $$




      This is not just a fluke result, because one can repeat the same exercise with



      $$
      ds:=alpha_x dx+ alpha_y dy + alpha_z dz-alpha_tdt
      $$



      and, squaring $ds$ one will get



      $$
      ds^2:=dx^2+ dy^2 + dz^2-dt^2
      $$



      provided that $alpha_x,alpha_y, alpha_y$ and $alpha_t$ and the Dirac matrices.



      What is the source of this connection between eliminating the cross-terms within metrics and matrices relevant to quantum mechanics?




      In the case of a generalized metric



      $$
      ds^2=g_munu dx^mu dx^nu
      $$



      with a symmetry requirement $g_mu nu=g_nu mu$ (the case of general relativity), the cross terms commute and this seems to be precisely the condition which avoid the need for matrix.



      EDIT



      Thinking about it some more, it seems general relativity does have a matrix-like construction. The matrices must have the following properties:



      Start with



      $$
      ds:=A_xdx+A_ydy+A_zdz+A_tdt
      $$



      Squaring $ds$ produces a GR compliant tensor if the matrices have these properties:



      $$
      A_x^2=g_xx\
      A_y^2=g_yy\
      A_z^2=g_zz\
      A_t^2=-g_tt\
      A_xA_y=A_xA_y=frac12g_xy=frac12g_yx\
      A_xA_z=A_xA_z=frac12g_xz=frac12g_zx\
      A_yA_z=A_zA_y=frac12g_yz=frac12g_zy\
      A_xA_t=A_tA_x=frac12g_xt=frac12g_tx\
      A_yA_t=A_tA_y=frac12g_yt=frac12g_ty\
      A_zA_t=A_tA_z=frac12g_zt=frac12g_tz
      $$



      I am not sure if this gives quantum mechanically relevant matrices or not.



      But we get



      $$
      A_xdx+A_ydy+A_zdz+A_tdt:=sqrtg_munu dx^mu dx^nu
      $$







      metric-spaces quantum-mechanics






      share|cite|improve this question















      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited Mar 16 at 22:42







      Alexandre H. Tremblay

















      asked Mar 16 at 21:51









      Alexandre H. TremblayAlexandre H. Tremblay

      364213




      364213




















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          1












          $begingroup$

          Your work with infinitesimals in $Bbb R^3$ is a special case of $(vecacdotvecsigma)times(vecbcdotvecsigma)=(vecacdotvecb)I_2+i(vecatimesvecb)cdotvecsigma$; your work in $Bbb R^4$ follows from an analogous identity with gamma matrices, $not a,,not b=2acdot b$. If you want a connection of such identities to your work with $ds^2$, it's simply that these metrics have the same symmetries, be they rotational or Lorentz, as the matrices you're working with. Hence second-order PDEs such as Laplace's equation $nabla^2phi=0$ and the massless Klein-Gordon equation $squarephi=0$ require cross terms' cancellation if they're to be derived from a first-order PDE such as the Dirac equation, and this is why such equations have to use matrices, spinors etc.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$












            Your Answer





            StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
            return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
            StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
            StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
            );
            );
            , "mathjax-editing");

            StackExchange.ready(function()
            var channelOptions =
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "69"
            ;
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
            createEditor();
            );

            else
            createEditor();

            );

            function createEditor()
            StackExchange.prepareEditor(
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
            convertImagesToLinks: true,
            noModals: true,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: 10,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            imageUploader:
            brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
            contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
            allowUrls: true
            ,
            noCode: true, onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            );



            );













            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3150897%2frelationship-between-a-metric-and-quantum-mechanical-matrices%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes








            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes









            1












            $begingroup$

            Your work with infinitesimals in $Bbb R^3$ is a special case of $(vecacdotvecsigma)times(vecbcdotvecsigma)=(vecacdotvecb)I_2+i(vecatimesvecb)cdotvecsigma$; your work in $Bbb R^4$ follows from an analogous identity with gamma matrices, $not a,,not b=2acdot b$. If you want a connection of such identities to your work with $ds^2$, it's simply that these metrics have the same symmetries, be they rotational or Lorentz, as the matrices you're working with. Hence second-order PDEs such as Laplace's equation $nabla^2phi=0$ and the massless Klein-Gordon equation $squarephi=0$ require cross terms' cancellation if they're to be derived from a first-order PDE such as the Dirac equation, and this is why such equations have to use matrices, spinors etc.






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$

















              1












              $begingroup$

              Your work with infinitesimals in $Bbb R^3$ is a special case of $(vecacdotvecsigma)times(vecbcdotvecsigma)=(vecacdotvecb)I_2+i(vecatimesvecb)cdotvecsigma$; your work in $Bbb R^4$ follows from an analogous identity with gamma matrices, $not a,,not b=2acdot b$. If you want a connection of such identities to your work with $ds^2$, it's simply that these metrics have the same symmetries, be they rotational or Lorentz, as the matrices you're working with. Hence second-order PDEs such as Laplace's equation $nabla^2phi=0$ and the massless Klein-Gordon equation $squarephi=0$ require cross terms' cancellation if they're to be derived from a first-order PDE such as the Dirac equation, and this is why such equations have to use matrices, spinors etc.






              share|cite|improve this answer











              $endgroup$















                1












                1








                1





                $begingroup$

                Your work with infinitesimals in $Bbb R^3$ is a special case of $(vecacdotvecsigma)times(vecbcdotvecsigma)=(vecacdotvecb)I_2+i(vecatimesvecb)cdotvecsigma$; your work in $Bbb R^4$ follows from an analogous identity with gamma matrices, $not a,,not b=2acdot b$. If you want a connection of such identities to your work with $ds^2$, it's simply that these metrics have the same symmetries, be they rotational or Lorentz, as the matrices you're working with. Hence second-order PDEs such as Laplace's equation $nabla^2phi=0$ and the massless Klein-Gordon equation $squarephi=0$ require cross terms' cancellation if they're to be derived from a first-order PDE such as the Dirac equation, and this is why such equations have to use matrices, spinors etc.






                share|cite|improve this answer











                $endgroup$



                Your work with infinitesimals in $Bbb R^3$ is a special case of $(vecacdotvecsigma)times(vecbcdotvecsigma)=(vecacdotvecb)I_2+i(vecatimesvecb)cdotvecsigma$; your work in $Bbb R^4$ follows from an analogous identity with gamma matrices, $not a,,not b=2acdot b$. If you want a connection of such identities to your work with $ds^2$, it's simply that these metrics have the same symmetries, be they rotational or Lorentz, as the matrices you're working with. Hence second-order PDEs such as Laplace's equation $nabla^2phi=0$ and the massless Klein-Gordon equation $squarephi=0$ require cross terms' cancellation if they're to be derived from a first-order PDE such as the Dirac equation, and this is why such equations have to use matrices, spinors etc.







                share|cite|improve this answer














                share|cite|improve this answer



                share|cite|improve this answer








                edited Mar 17 at 9:05

























                answered Mar 16 at 23:24









                J.G.J.G.

                31.9k23250




                31.9k23250



























                    draft saved

                    draft discarded
















































                    Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                    But avoid


                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

                    Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function ()
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3150897%2frelationship-between-a-metric-and-quantum-mechanical-matrices%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                    );

                    Post as a guest















                    Required, but never shown





















































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown

































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown







                    Popular posts from this blog

                    How should I support this large drywall patch? Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern) Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Unicorn Meta Zoo #1: Why another podcast?How do I cover large gaps in drywall?How do I keep drywall around a patch from crumbling?Can I glue a second layer of drywall?How to patch long strip on drywall?Large drywall patch: how to avoid bulging seams?Drywall Mesh Patch vs. Bulge? To remove or not to remove?How to fix this drywall job?Prep drywall before backsplashWhat's the best way to fix this horrible drywall patch job?Drywall patching using 3M Patch Plus Primer

                    random experiment with two different functions on unit interval Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)Random variable and probability space notionsRandom Walk with EdgesFinding functions where the increase over a random interval is Poisson distributedNumber of days until dayCan an observed event in fact be of zero probability?Unit random processmodels of coins and uniform distributionHow to get the number of successes given $n$ trials , probability $P$ and a random variable $X$Absorbing Markov chain in a computer. Is “almost every” turned into always convergence in computer executions?Stopped random walk is not uniformly integrable

                    Lowndes Grove History Architecture References Navigation menu32°48′6″N 79°57′58″W / 32.80167°N 79.96611°W / 32.80167; -79.9661132°48′6″N 79°57′58″W / 32.80167°N 79.96611°W / 32.80167; -79.9661178002500"National Register Information System"Historic houses of South Carolina"Lowndes Grove""+32° 48' 6.00", −79° 57' 58.00""Lowndes Grove, Charleston County (260 St. Margaret St., Charleston)""Lowndes Grove"The Charleston ExpositionIt Happened in South Carolina"Lowndes Grove (House), Saint Margaret Street & Sixth Avenue, Charleston, Charleston County, SC(Photographs)"Plantations of the Carolina Low Countrye