2

I’m trying to generate some matrices which are similar to Pauli’s but with the following anti-commutation relation

$$\{\alpha_i, \alpha_j\}=\alpha_i \alpha_j + \alpha_j \alpha_i = 2 \tag{1}$$

And

$$\alpha_i^2=1 \tag{2}$$

2 trivial solutions to this can be immediately spotted: first the scalar number 1 and any unitary matrix and its inverse. The last solution is boring because it would give me only 2 possible solutions.

From $(1)$ we know the solutions should have the form $$\alpha_i=\left(\begin{array}{cc}a&b\\c&-a\end{array}\right)\tag{3}$$ With the condition that $a^2+bc=1$

Using a similar procedure found here I made an initial choice by setting $a=1 , b=c=0$ (Pauli’s $\sigma_z$ matrix) which them, gave me the following solutions

$$\alpha_1 = \left(\begin{array}{cc}1 & 0 \\0 & -1 \\\end{array}\right) \tag{4}$$ Plus $$\alpha_2 = \left(\begin{array}{cc}1 & 1 \\0 & -1 \\\end{array}\right) \tag{5}$$ $$\alpha_3 = \left(\begin{array}{cc}1 & -1 \\0 & -1 \\\end{array}\right) \tag{6}$$ Or $(4)$ plus $$\alpha_2 = \left(\begin{array}{cc}1 & 0 \\1 & -1 \\\end{array}\right) \tag{7}$$ $$\alpha_3 = \left(\begin{array}{cc}1 & 0 \\-1 & -1 \\\end{array}\right) \tag{8}$$

My obvious problem is that these matrices are not Hermitian. I believe that my initial choice led to this result, so I tried several other choices but none seems to work. At most I found 2 solutions. Therefore, my question is:

Are there any 3 or more Hermitian solutions to this problem?


EDIT As said in a previous comment $\alpha_i$, $\alpha_j$ are $n \times n$ matrices, not necessarily $2 \times 2$.

Urb
  • 2,608
J. Manuel
  • 2,231
  • What do you mean by "I assume they are independent"? Independent in what sense? Also, are you restricting your attention to $2\times 2$ matrices? – J. Murray Jun 14 '21 at 13:58
  • 3
    Did you mean to say that ${\alpha_i, \alpha_j}= 2 \Bbb{I} \delta_{ij}$ in the first line (analogously to the Pauli matrices)? Or does ${\alpha_i, \alpha_j}=2 \Bbb{I}$ for all $i$ and $j$? – Michael Seifert Jun 14 '21 at 14:10
  • @J.Murray For the first question you made, I removed the paragraph mentioning it as I feel it is unnecessary and complicating. I my question is exactlly what is in the title. – J. Manuel Jun 14 '21 at 15:59
  • @J.Murray. For you second comment, no I would accept any dimensions (an $nxn$ matrix). I just felt it would be easier to try. – J. Manuel Jun 14 '21 at 16:02
  • @MichaelSeifert I mean the second option. (1) is for all $i$ and $j$ – J. Manuel Jun 14 '21 at 16:08
  • The sentence 'two trivial solutions can be spotted first the scalar number 1 and any unitary matrix and its inverse' doesnt make sense to me. So lets take a unitary U and its inverse Udagger. Why would UU=1? Usually it doesnt, so this is not a solution. – lalala Jun 15 '21 at 19:01

1 Answers1

3

Let's start completely abstractly, and consider the abstract algebra over $\mathbb C$ generated by symbols $\sigma_1,\sigma_2,\sigma_3$ subject to your relations: $\{\sigma_i,\sigma_j\} = 2$, in particular $\sigma_i^2 = 1$.

It is not hard to see that this algebra is generated as a vector space by the 8 elements $1, \sigma_1, \sigma_2, \sigma_3, \sigma_1\sigma_2, \sigma_1\sigma_3, \sigma_2\sigma_3, \sigma_1\sigma_2\sigma_3$, all other monomials in the $\sigma_i$ can be reduced to sums of these using the relations. Let's call these elements $e_1,\ldots,e_8$.

Left-multiplication by any element $\tau$ in this algebra is a linear transformation, and the regular representation of this algebra in this basis is the matrix algebra thus obtained. The matrices corresponding to the $\sigma_i$ are an $8\times 8$-example of what you're looking for.

Concretely, what $\sigma_1$ does on the basis is $e_1\mapsto e_2, e_2\mapsto e_1, e_3\mapsto e_5, e_4\mapsto e_6, e_5\mapsto e_3, e_6\mapsto e_4, e_7\mapsto e_8, e_8\mapsto e_7$. In matrix form

$$\sigma_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 \\ \end{pmatrix}$$

Likewise you will get matrices for $\sigma_2$ and $\sigma_3$, and they will satisfy the relations.

For example, for $\sigma_2$ we have $e_1 = 1 \mapsto \sigma_2 = e_3$, and $e_2 = \sigma_1\mapsto \sigma_2\sigma_1 = 2 - \sigma_1\sigma_2 = 2e_1 - e_5$, etc, giving us the matrix form

$$\sigma_2 = \begin{pmatrix}0 & 2 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & -1 & 0 & 0 & 0\\1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 2 & 0 & 0 & 0\\0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 2 & 1 & 0\\0 & -1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & -1\\0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 2\\0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & -1 & 0 & 0\end{pmatrix}$$

and in the same way we find

$$\sigma_3 = \begin{pmatrix}0 & 2 & 2 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & -2 & -1 & 0 & 0\\0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 2 & 0 & -1 & 0\\1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 2 & 2 & 0\\0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1\\0 & -1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & -2\\0 & 0 & -1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 2\\0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0\end{pmatrix}.$$

Note that there may be smaller representations.

In case you'd like to do some computations, here are the matrices in SymPy format:

from sympy import Matrix, eye

I = eye(8)

s1 = Matrix([[0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0], [1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0], [0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0], [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0], [0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0], [0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0], [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1], [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0]])

s2 = Matrix([[0, 2, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0], [0, 0, 0, 0, -1, 0, 0, 0], [1, 0, 0, 0, 2, 0, 0, 0], [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 2, 1, 0], [0, -1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0], [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -1], [0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 2], [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -1, 0, 0]])

s3 = Matrix([[0, 2, 2, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0], [0, 0, 0, 0, -2, -1, 0, 0], [0, 0, 0, 0, 2, 0, -1, 0], [1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 2, 2, 0], [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1], [0, -1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -2], [0, 0, -1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 2], [0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0]])

Note that to find Hermitian matrices more has to be done.

doetoe
  • 9,254
  • Uaw! This is the first time somebody replies to me with the creation of an entire new algebra! Truly glorious!. A side note: I believe ${\sigma_i,\sigma_j} = 2$ for all $i$ and $j$ since ${\sigma_i,\sigma_i}=\sigma_i ^2 +\sigma_i ^2 = 1+1=2$. – J. Manuel Jun 16 '21 at 08:53
  • Ah yes, you're right of course! Edited – doetoe Jun 16 '21 at 12:07
  • Could you please clarify to how to get $\sigma_2$ and $\sigma_3$?. Unfortunately it is not clear to me how to proceed and get them. Thanks! – J. Manuel Jun 17 '21 at 16:14
  • @J.Manuel I explained a bit more, and wrote down the matrices as well. Let me know if you'd like me to add anything else. – doetoe Jun 17 '21 at 21:46
  • Thanks very much. That is fantastic!. In fact it makes the answer more accessible to those of us which are curious enough to make such questions, but with a regular knowledge of advanced math! – J. Manuel Jun 18 '21 at 14:22