The spin–statistics connection is obtained for classical particles. The connection holds within pseudomechanics, a theory of particle motion that extends classical physics to include anticommuting Grassmann variables, and that exhibits classical analogs of both spin and statistics. Classical realizations of Lie groups are constructed in a canonical formalism generalized to include Grassmann variables. The theory of irreducible canonical realizations of the Poincaré group is developed in this framework, with particular emphasis on the rotation subgroup. The behavior of irreducible realizations under time inversion and charge conjugation is obtained. The requirement that the Lagrangian retain its form under the combined operation of charge conjugation and time reversal leads directly to the spin–statistics connection by an adaptation of Schwinger’s 1951 proof to irreducible canonical realizations of the Poincaré group of spin Generalized spin coordinates and momenta satisfy fundamental Poisson bracket relations for even, and fundamental Poisson antibracket relations for odd.
REFERENCES
1.
W.
Pauli
, “The connection between spin and statistics
,” Phys. Rev.
58
, 722
(1940
).2.
W.
Pauli
, “The connection between spin and statistics
,” Phys. Rev.
58
, 716
–722
(1940
).3.
W. Pauli, “Exclusion principle and quantum mechanics,” in Nobel Lectures-Physics: 1942–62 (Elsevier, New York, 1964) pp. 27–43.
4.
W.
Pauli
, “On the connection between spin and statistics
,” Prog. Theor. Phys.
5
, 526
–543
(1950
).5.
H. J.
Bhabha
, “On the postulational basis of the theory of elementary particles
,” Rev. Mod. Phys.
21
, 451
–462
(1949
).6.
Julian
Schwinger
, “Theory of quantized fields I
,” Phys. Rev.
82
, 914
–927
(1951
).7.
N.
Burgoyne
, “On the connection of spin and statistics
,” Nuovo Cimento
8
, 607
–609
(1958
).8.
Gerhard
Lüders
and Bruno
Zumino
, “Connection between spin and statistics
,” Phys. Rev.
110
, 1450
–1453
(1958
).9.
R. F. Streater and A. S. Wightman, PCT, Spin and Statistics, and All That (Benjamin, New York, 1964).
10.
G. F.
Dell’Antonio
, “On the connection between spin and statistics
,” Ann. Phys. (N.Y.)
16
, 153
–157
(1961
).11.
Julian
Schwinger
, “Spin, statistics, and the TCP theorem
,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.
44
, 223
–228
(1958
).12.
Julian Schwinger, Particles and Sources (Gordon and Breach, New York, 1969), pp. 25–27.
13.
L.
Brown
and J.
Schwinger
, “Spin and statistics
,” Prog. Theor. Phys.
26
, 917
–926
(1961
).14.
15.
Steven
Weinberg
, “Feynman rules for any spin. II. Massless particles
,” Phys. Rev.
134B
, 882
–896
(1964
).16.
Steven
Weinberg
, “Feynman Rules for any spin. III
,” Phys. Rev.
181
, 1893
–1899
(1969
).17.
C. L.
Hammer
and R. H.
Good
, “Quantization process for massless particles
,” Phys. Rev.
111
, 342
–345
(1958
).18.
R. H. Good, “Theory of particles with zero rest-mass,” in Lectures in Theoretical Physics, Summer Institute of Theoretical Physics, University of Colorado, Boulder, edited by W. E. Brittin and L. G. Dunham (Interscience, New York, 1958).
19.
Ian Duck and E. C. G. Sudarshan, Pauli and the Spin-Statistics Theorem (World Scientific, Singapore, 1997).
20.
O. W.
Greenberg
, “Spin-statistics, spin-locality, and TCP: Three distinct theorems
,” Phys. Lett. B
416
, 144
–149
(1998
).21.
Julio
Finkelstein
and David
Rubinstein
, “Connection between spin, statistics, and kinks
,” J. Math. Phys.
9
, 1762
–1779
(1968
).22.
Ralf D.
Tscheuschner
, “Topological spin-statistics relation in quantum field theory
,” Int. J. Theor. Phys.
28
, 1269
–1310
(1989
).23.
Ralf D.
Tscheuschner
, “Coinciding versus noncoinciding: Is the topological spin-statistics theorem already proven in quantum mechanics?
,” J. Math. Phys.
32
, 749
–752
(1990
).24.
A. P.
Balachandran
, A.
Daughton
, Z.-C.
Gu
, G.
Marmo
, R. D.
Sorkin
, and A. M.
Srivastava
, “A topological spin-statistics theorem or a use of the antiparticle
,” Mod. Phys. Lett. A
5
, 1575
–1585
(1990
).25.
A. P.
Balachandran
, R. D.
Sorkin
, W. D.
McGlinn
, L.
O’Raifeartaigh
, and S.
Sen
, “The spin-statistics connection from homology groups of configuration space and an anyon Wess-Zumino term
,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. A
7
, 6887
–6906
(1992
).26.
A. P.
Balachandran
, A.
Daughton
, Z.-C.
Gu
, R. D.
Sorkin
, G.
Marmo
, and A. M.
Srivastava
, “Spin-statistics theorems without relativity or field theory
,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. A
8
, 2993
–3044
(1993
).27.
A. P.
Balachandran
, W. D.
McGlinn
, L.
O’Raifeartaigh
, S.
Sen
, R. D.
Sorkin
, and A. M.
Srivastava
, “Topological spin-statistics theorems for strings
,” Mod. Phys. Lett. A
7
, 1427
–1442
(1992
).28.
A. P.
Balachandran
, T.
Einarsson
, T. R.
Govindarajan
, and R.
Ramachandran
, “Statistics and spin on two-dimensional surfaces
,” Mod. Phys. Lett. A
6
, 2801
–2810
(1991
).29.
In fact, no relation between spin and statistics holds for topological geons in canonical quantum gravity, in which topology change, and thus the existence of anti-geons, is forbidden. See
H. F.
Dowker
and R. D.
Sorkin
, “Spin and statistics in quantum gravity,” arXiv:
gr-qc/0101042.30.
I could not locate the origin of this formulation, but Finkelstein and Rubinstein state the theorem for kinks using almost exactly these words in Sec. V.4 of their 1968 paper, Ref. 21.
31.
R. P.
Feynman
, “The theory of positrons
,” Phys. Rev.
76
, 749
–759
(1949
).32.
R. P. Feynman, R. B. Leighton, and M. Sands, The Feynman Lectures on Physics (Addison–Wesley, Reading, MA, 1965), Vol. III, Chap. 4.
33.
R. P. Feynman, “The reason for antiparticles,” in R. P. Feynman and S. Weinberg, Elementary Particles and the Laws of Physics (Cambridge U.P., Cambridge, 1987).
34.
D. E.
Neuenschwander
, “Question #7. The spin-statistics theorem
,” Am. J. Phys.
62
, 972
(1994
).35.
Ian
Duck
and E. C. G.
Sudarshan
, “Toward an understanding of the spin-statistics theorem
,” Am. J. Phys.
66
, 284
–303
(1998
).36.
M. V.
Berry
and J. M.
Robbins
, “Indistinguishability for quantum particles: Spin, statistics, and the geometric phase
,” Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A
453
, 1771
–1790
(1997
).37.
It may be that electron–hole pairs would suffice in condensed matter applications.
38.
R.
Mickelsson
, “Geometry of spin and statistics in classical and quantum mechanics
,” Phys. Rev. D
30
, 1843
–1845
(1984
).39.
H. C.
Corben
, “Spin in classical and quantum theory
,” Phys. Rev.
121
, 1833
–1839
(1961
).40.
Ralph
Schiller
, “Quasi-classical theory of the spinning electron
,” Phys. Rev.
125
, 1116
–1123
(1962
).41.
Ralph
Schiller
, “Quasi-classical theory of a relativistic spinning electron
,” Phys. Rev.
128
, 1402
–1412
(1962
).42.
A. J.
Hanson
and T.
Regge
, “The relativistic spherical top
,” Ann. Phys. (N.Y.)
87
, 498
–566
(1974
).43.
Patrick L.
Nash
, “A Lagrangian theory of the classical spinning electron
,” J. Math. Phys.
25
, 2104
–2108
(1984
).44.
Jin-Ho
Cho
and Jae-Kwan
Kim
, “Derivation of the classical Lagrangian for the relativistic spinning particle
,” Phys. Lett. B
332
, 118
–122
(1994
).45.
F. A.
Berezin
and M.
Marinov
, “Particle spin dynamics as the Grassmann variant of classical mechanics
,” Ann. Phys. (N.Y.)
104
, 336
(1977
).46.
Carlos A. P.
Galvao
and Claudio
Teitelboim
, “Classical supersymmetric particles
,” J. Math. Phys.
21
, 1863
–1880
(1980
).47.
Robert Geroch, Mathematical Physics (University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1985), Chap. 19.
48.
W.-K. Tung, Group Theory in Physics (World Scientific, Singapore, 1985), Chaps. 7–10.
49.
E. C. G. Sudarshan, and N. Mukunda, Classical Dynamics: A Modern Perspective (Wiley, New York, 1974), pp. 391, 454–466.
50.
F. A. Berezin, The Method of Second Quantization (Academic, New York, 1966).
51.
M. S. Swanson, Path Integrals and Quantum Processes (Academic, New York, 1992), Chap. 5.
52.
Reference 51, p. 120.
53.
The result to be proven concerns symmetries of Poisson brackets for dynamical variables of a single massive particle; there is no need to examine what is meant by “identical” particles in the present discussion.
54.
R.
Casalbuoni
, “On the quantization of systems with anticommuting variables
,” Nuovo Cimento Soc. Ital. Fis., A
33
, 115
–124
(1976
).55.
R.
Casalbuoni
, “The classical mechanics for Bose-Fermi systems
,” Nuovo Cimento Soc. Ital. Fis., A
33
, 389
–431
(1976
).56.
F. A.
Berezin
and G. I.
Kac
, “Lie Groups with commuting and anticommuting parameters
,” Math. USSR. Sb.
11
, 311
–325
(1970
).57.
L.
Corwin
, Y.
Ne’eman
, and S.
Sternberg
, “Graded Lie algebras in mathematics and physics (Bose-Fermi symmetry)
,” Rev. Mod. Phys.
47
, 573
–603
(1975
).58.
Steven Weinberg, The Quantum Theory of Fields III (Cambridge U.P., Cambridge, 2000), pp. 25–26.
59.
J.
Gomis
, M.
Novell
, A.
Poch
, and K.
Rafanelli
, “Pseudoclassical description of a relativistic spinning particle
,” Phys. Rev. D
32
, 1985
–1992
(1985
).60.
J.
Gomis
and M.
Novell
, “Pseudoclassical description for a nonrelativistic spinning particle. I. The Levy-Leblond equation
,” Phys. Rev. D
33
, 2212
–2219
(1986
).61.
J.
Gomis
, M.
Novell
, and K.
Rafanelli
, “Pseudoclassical model of a particle with arbitrary spin
,” Phys. Rev. D
34
, 1072
–1075
(1986
).62.
P.
Di Vecchia
and F.
Ravndal
, “Supersymmetric Dirac particles
,” Phys. Lett. A
73
, 371
–373
(1979
).63.
F.
Ravndal
, “Supersymmetric Dirac particles in external fields
,” Phys. Rev. D
21
, 2823
–2832
(1980
).64.
Steven Weinberg, The Quantum Theory of Fields I (Cambridge U.P., Cambridge, 1995), pp. 58–62.
65.
E.
Wigner
, “On unitary representations of the inhomogeneous Lorentz group
,” Ann. Math.
40
, 149
–204
(1939
).66.
P. A. M.
Dirac
, “Forms of relativistic dynamics
,” Rev. Mod. Phys.
21
, 392
–399
(1949
).67.
Steven Weinberg, Gravitation and Cosmology (Wiley, New York, 1972), pp. 58–61.
68.
M.
Pauri
and G. M.
Prosperi
, “Canonical realizations of the Poincare group. I. General theory
,” J. Math. Phys.
16
, 1503
–1521
(1975
).69.
Reference 48, pp. 103–105.
70.
A.
Loinger
, “New concept of representation of a Lie algebra
,” Ann. Phys. (N.Y.)
23
, 23
–27
(1963
).71.
Reference 49, pp. 322–327.
72.
In the corresponding classical unitary representation, this result follows immediately from Schur’s lemma.
73.
P. A. M. Dirac, The Principles of Quantum Mechanics (Clarendon, New York, 1958), 4th ed., pp. 144–146.
74.
E. J. Saletan, and A. H. Cromer, Theoretical Mechanics (Wiley, New York, 1971), pp. 335–40.
75.
Reference 49, pp. 447–453.
76.
M.
Pauri
and G. M.
Prosperi
, “Canonical realizations of the rotation group
,” J. Math. Phys.
8
, 2256
–2267
(1967
).77.
V.
Bargmann
and E. P.
Wigner
, “Group theoretical discussion of relativistic wave equations
,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.
34
, 211
–223
(1948
).78.
M.
Fierz
and W.
Pauli
, “On relativistic wave equations for particles of arbitrary spin in an electromagnetic field
,” Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A
173
, 211
–232
(1939
).79.
E. P. Wigner, Group Theory and its Application to the Quantum Mechanics of Atomic Spectra (Academic, New York, 1959), Chap. 26.
80.
Reference 64, pp. 78–79.
81.
A. R. Edmonds, Angular Momentum in Quantum Mechanics (Princeton U.P., Princeton, 1960), p. 72.
82.
U. Fano and G. Racah, Irreducible Tensorial Sets (Academic, New York), pp. 27–31.
83.
John P.
Costella
, Bruce H. J.
McKellar
, and Andrew A.
Rawlinson
, “Classical antiparticles
,” Am. J. Phys.
65
, 835
–841
(1997
).84.
R. P.
Feynman
, “A relativistic cut-off for classical electrodynamics
,” Phys. Rev.
74
, 939
–946
(1948
).85.
There is no loss of generality in this restriction, although the total Lagrangian in pseudoclassical models contains terms corresponding to more than one irreducible realization, see Eq. (20), and in general, contains a term that mixes vector and spinor variables.
86.
Schwinger’s original proof can be generalized by substituting flavor symmetry for invariance, see also Ref. 35.
87.
Reference 6, p. 927.
88.
M.
Pauri
and G. M.
Prosperi
, “Canonical realizations of Lie symmetry groups
,” J. Math. Phys.
7
, 366
–375
(1966
).
This content is only available via PDF.
© 2004 American Association of Physics Teachers.
2004
American Association of Physics Teachers
AAPT members receive access to the American Journal of Physics and The Physics Teacher as a member benefit. To learn more about this member benefit and becoming an AAPT member, visit the Joining AAPT page.
