1
$\begingroup$

From the book Heat Kernels and Dirac Operators:

Proposition 3.27. If $V$ is an even-dimensional real Euclidean vector space, then every finite-dimensional $\mathbb{Z}_2$-graded complex module $E$ of the Clifford algebra $C(V)$ is isomorphic to $W\otimes S$, for the $\mathbb{Z}_2$-graded complex vector space $$W = \mathrm{Hom}_{C(V)} (S, E).$$

If we forget about Clifford multiplication, $S$ (the spinor module introduced in proposition 3.19) and $E$ are just graded vector spaces and $L(S,E)$ comes with an obvious grading. Hence each $T\in L(S,E)$ has a unique decomposition $T=A+B$, but $T\in W$ does not imply that $A,B\in W$, does it? So what grading on $W$ is meant in the above proposition?

$\endgroup$

1 Answer 1

2
$\begingroup$

Warning: The definition of $\mathrm{Hom}_{C(V)} (S, E)$ is not stated in the book and there are different opinions concerning what it should be: As explained here, I think that its elements should be defined to commute with the Clifford action, but in these lecture notes they are defined to super-commute.

But $T\in W$ does not imply that $A,B\in W$, does it?

I think that it actually does: Note that $T\in L(S,E)$ satisfies $T\in W$ if and only if $\gamma_E(a)\circ T=T\circ \gamma_S(a)$ for all $a\in C^0(V)\cup C^1(V)\subset C(V)$. But this equation is equivalent to \begin{equation}\tag{1} \gamma_E(a)\circ A-A\circ \gamma_S(a)=\gamma_E(a)\circ B-B\circ \gamma_S(a) \end{equation} If $a\in C^0(V)\cup C^1(V)$, then one side of $(1)$ is odd and the other side of $(1)$ is even, and hence both sides of $(1)$ are equal to $0$. Since this holds for all $a\in C^0(V)\cup C^1(V)$, we obtain that $A$ and $B$ both commute with the Clifford action.

$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ This indeed works as the grading on $Hom_{C(V)}(S,E)$, i.e. grading $0$ homomorphisms are those that preserve the $\mathbb Z/2$-grading and grading $1$ homomorphisms are those that exchange the $\mathbb Z/2$-grading of $S$ and $E$. What's tricky, I think, is that it's possible that the $\mathbb Z/2$-grading on $Hom_{C(V)}(S,E)$ is trivial (everything lies in one degree). For example consider $E = S\otimes L$ where $L$ is a complex line bundle which does not split as a sum of real line bundles. $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 14 at 19:31
  • $\begingroup$ @Overflowian Thank you for the comment - "What's tricky..." - Why would that be a problem? $\endgroup$
    – Filippo
    Commented Nov 16 at 19:35
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Well, it's not a problem but that's what confused me. In practically all common examples the even and odd subspaces are isomorphic. For example: positive and negative spinors, even and odd forms or in presence of a real or quaternionic structures the eigenspaces of the associated operator. What's even more confusing is that we can construct easily $E= E^0\oplus E^1$ where $E^0\simeq E^1$ but the twisting space does not split non trivially. That's why I said that it's tricky; of course it's subjective. $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 17 at 9:22

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .