1: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2: %%%%%% template.tex for PTPTeX.sty <ver.1.0> %%%%%%
3: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
4: \documentstyle[seceq]{ptptex}
5: %\documentstyle[seceq,preprint]{ptptex}
6: %\documentstyle[seceq,letter]{ptptex}
7: %\documentstyle[seceq,supplement]{ptptex}
8: %\documentstyle[seceq,addenda]{ptptex}
9: %\documentstyle[seceq,errata]{ptptex}
10:
11: %%%%% Personal Macros %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
12:
13:
14: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
15: %\pubinfo{Vol. 101, No. 4, April 1999} %Editorial Office use
16: %\setcounter{page}{} %Editorial Office use
17: %------------------------------------------------------------
18: %\nofigureboxrule%to eliminate the rule of \figurebox
19: %\notypesetlogo %comment in if to eliminate PTPTeX logo
20: %\subfontMBF %use if you have not enough fonts when using mbf.sty
21: %---- When [preprint] you can put preprint number at top right corner.
22: %\preprintnumber[3cm]{%<-- [..]: optional width of preprint # column.
23: %KUNS-1325\\ HE(TH)~97/04\\ hep-th/9702083}
24: %-------------------------------------------
25:
26: \markboth{% %running head for odd-page (authors' name)
27: Y.~Kawamura
28: }{% %running head for even-page (`short' title)
29: Cubic Matrices, Generalized Spin Algebra and Uncertainty Relation
30: }
31:
32:
33: \title{% %You can use \\ for explicit line-break
34: Cubic Matrices, Generalized Spin Algebra and Uncertainty Relation
35: }
36: %\subtitle{This is a Subtitle} %use this when you want a subtitle
37:
38: \author{% %Use \sc for the family name
39: Yoshiharu {\sc Kawamura}\footnote{E-mail:
40: haru@azusa.shinshu-u.ac.jp} %
41: }
42:
43: \inst{% %Affiliation, neglected when [addenda] or [errata]
44: Department of Physics, Shinshu University, Matsumoto 390-8621, Japan
45: }
46:
47: %\publishedin{% %Write this ONLY in cases of addenda and errata
48: %Prog.~Theor.~Phys.\ {\bf XX} (19YY), page}
49:
50: \recdate{April 16, 2003% %Editorial Office will fill in this.
51: %\today
52: }
53:
54: \abst{% %this abstract is neglected when [addenda] or [errata]
55: We propose a generalization of spin algebra using three-index objects.
56: Our results suggest the possibility that a triple commutation relation
57: among three-index objects
58: implies a kind of uncertainty relation involving their expectation values.
59: }
60:
61: \begin{document}
62:
63: \maketitle
64:
65: \section{Introduction}
66:
67: Matrices play central roles in many branches of both mathematics and physics.
68: One of the main reasons for this is the following.
69: Physical systems are often described by many variables, some of which are
70: treated on an equal footing, e.g., spatial coordinates.
71: Systems often possess symmetries under certain transformations among such variables,
72: and such symmetry transformations, in many cases, form a group; e.g.,
73: rotations of spatial coordinates form a rotational group.
74: The use of matrices makes the analysis of systems with many variables simple and systematic,
75: because the action of such group elements can be represented by matrices.
76: Group theoretical analysis has been applied successfully to a wide range of systems, e.g.,
77: the classification of elementary particles
78: and the determination of the interactions among them.\cite{G}
79: Considering its success, it is natural to ask the following questions:
80: \begin{enumerate}
81: \item Is there a generalization of matrices?
82:
83: \item If there is such a generalization, what are its advantages and applications
84: for mathematics and physics?
85: \end{enumerate}
86:
87: With regard to the first question, one might consider a many-index object, $A_{m_1 m_2 ...m_n}$,
88: since a matrix is a two-index object.
89: With regard to the second question,
90: we point out that a new mechanics has been proposed that is
91: based on many-index objects\cite{YK},
92: and its basic structure has been studied from an algebraic point of view\cite{YK2,YK3}.
93: This mechanics has a counterpart in the canonical structure of classical mechanics
94: or Nambu mechanics\cite{Nambu},
95: and can be interpreted as its $\lq$quantum' or $\lq$discretized' version.
96: It can also be regarded as a generalization of Heisenberg matrix mechanics,
97: because a generalization of the Ritz rule is employed as a guiding principle.
98: This mechanics has very interesting properties, but
99: it is not yet clear whether it is applicable to real physical systems
100: and what physical meaning many-index objects possess.
101: It may also be possible to examine the algebraic structure
102: of many-index objects independently of its dynamics to obtain information
103: concerning their physical meaning and their role in describing physical phenomena.
104: This is the main motivation of our work.
105:
106: In this paper, we propose a generalization of spin algebra using three-index objects and
107: find that a certain triple commutation relation may lead to
108: a kind of uncertainty relation.
109:
110: This paper is organized as follows.
111: In the next section, we give the definition of a three-index object.
112: We study a generalization of spin algebra in $\S$3.
113: In $\S$4, we investigate the connection between a particular triple commutation relation
114: among three-index objects
115: and an uncertainty involving their expectation values.
116: Section 5 is devoted to conclusions and discussion.
117:
118:
119: \section{Cubic matrix}
120:
121: Here we state our definition of a cubic matrix\footnote{
122: Awata, Li, Minic and Yoneya introduced many-index objects
123: to construct a quantum version of the Nambu bracket.\cite{ALMY}
124: They refer to the three-index object among these as a $\lq$cubic matrix'.
125: We use the same terminology here,
126: although the definition of the triple product we use is different from theirs.}
127: and define related terminology.
128: A cubic matrix is an object with three indices written $A_{lmn}$,
129: which is a generalization
130: of a usual matrix written analogously as $B_{mn}$.
131: We refer to a cubic matrix whose elements possess cyclic symmetry (i.e. , $A_{lmn} = A_{mnl} = A_{nlm}$)
132: as a cyclic cubic matrix.
133: We define the hermiticity of a cubic matrix by the relation
134: $A_{l'm'n'} = A_{lmn}^{*}$ for odd permutations among indices
135: and refer to a cubic matrix possessing hermiticity as a hermitian cubic matrix.
136: Here, the asterisk indicates complex conjugation.
137: A hermitian cubic matrix is a special type of cyclic cubic matrix, because it satisfies the relations
138: $A_{lmn} = A_{mln}^{*} = A_{mnl} = A_{nml}^{*} = A_{nlm} = A_{lnm}^{*}$.
139: We refer to the following form of a cubic matrix as a normal form or a normal cubic matrix:
140: \begin{eqnarray}
141: A_{lmn} = \delta_{lm} a_{mn} + \delta_{mn} a_{nl} + \delta_{nl} a_{lm} .
142: \label{AN}
143: \end{eqnarray}
144: A normal cubic matrix is a special type of cyclic cubic matrix.
145: The elements of a cubic matrix are treated as $c$-numbers throughout this paper.
146:
147: We define the triple product of cubic matrices $A_{lmn}$,
148: $B_{lmn}$ and $C_{lmn}$ by
149: \begin{eqnarray}
150: (ABC)_{lmn} \equiv
151: \sum_k A_{lmk} B_{lkn} C_{kmn} .
152: \label{cubicproduct}
153: \end{eqnarray}
154: The resultant three-index object, $(A B C)_{lmn}$,
155: does not necessarily possess cyclic symmetry, even if $A_{lmn}$, $B_{lmn}$ and $C_{lmn}$
156: are cyclic.
157: Note that this product is, in general, neither commutative nor associative; that is,
158: $(ABC)_{lmn} \neq (BAC)_{lmn}$ and
159: $(AB(CDE))_{lmn} \neq (A(BCD)E)_{lmn} \neq ((ABC)DE)_{lmn}$.
160: The triple-commutator we consider is defined by
161: \begin{eqnarray}
162: &~& [A, B, C]_{lmn} \equiv (ABC + BCA
163: + CAB - BAC - ACB - CBA)_{lmn} .
164: \label{T-comm}
165: \end{eqnarray}
166: The corresponding triple-anticommutator is defined by
167: \begin{eqnarray}
168: &~& \{A, B, C\}_{lmn} \equiv (ABC + BCA
169: + CAB + BAC + ACB + CBA)_{lmn} .
170: \label{T-anticomm}
171: \end{eqnarray}
172: If $A_{lmn}$, $B_{lmn}$ and $C_{lmn}$ are hermitian,
173: %cubic matrices,
174: then $i[A, B, C]_{lmn}$ and $\{A, B, C\}_{lmn}$ are also hermitian cubic matrices.
175: %If $G^{(N)}_1$ and $G^{(N)}_2$ are normal cubic matrices
176: %and $\widetilde{(G^{(N)}_1 G^{(N)}_2)}_{lmn}$ is a 3-cocycle,
177: %the fundamental identity holds so that
178: %\begin{eqnarray}
179: %&~& [[A, B, C], G^{(N)}_1, G^{(N)}_2]_{lmn} = [[A, G^{(N)}_1, G^{(N)}_2], B, C]_{lmn} \nonumber \\
180: %&~& ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ + [A, [B, G^{(N)}_1, G^{(N)}_2], C]_{lmn} + [A, B, [C, G^{(N)}_1, G^{(N)}_2]]_{lmn} .
181: %\label{C-fund}
182: %\end{eqnarray}
183:
184: Next, we define the product of two cubic matrices $A_{lmn}$ and $B_{lmn}$ by
185: \begin{eqnarray}
186: (AB)_{lm} \equiv
187: \sum_k A_{lmk} B_{klm} .
188: \label{product}
189: \end{eqnarray}
190: If $A_{lmn}$ and $B_{lmn}$
191: are hermitian cubic matrices,
192: the two-index object $(AB)_{lm}$
193: possess hermiticity, i.e., $(AB)_{lm} = (AB)^{*}_{ml}$.
194: If $A_{lmn}$ and $B_{lmn}$
195: are cyclic cubic matrices,
196: they commute with respect to this product, i.e.,
197: $(AB)_{lm} = (BA)_{lm}$.
198:
199:
200: \section{Generalized spin algebra}
201:
202: \subsection{Spin algebra}
203:
204: Here we review the spin algebra ${\it su}(2)$.
205: This algebra is defined by
206: \begin{eqnarray}
207: [J^a, J^b] = i \hbar \varepsilon^{abc} J^c ,
208: \label{spin-alg}
209: \end{eqnarray}
210: where the $J^a$ $(a = 1, 2, 3)$ are spin variables, $\hbar$ is the reduced Planck constant,
211: and $\varepsilon^{abc}$ is the Levi-Civita symbol.
212: Matrices in the adjoint representation are the $3 \times 3$ matrices given by
213: \begin{eqnarray}
214: (J^a)_{mn} = -i \hbar \varepsilon^{amn} ,
215: \label{adj}
216: \end{eqnarray}
217: where each of the indices $m$ and $n$ runs from 1 to 3.
218: Matrices in the spinor representation are the $2 \times 2$ matrices given by
219: \begin{eqnarray}
220: (J^a)_{mn} = \frac{\hbar}{2} (\sigma^a)_{mn} ,
221: \label{spinor}
222: \end{eqnarray}
223: where the $\sigma^a$ are Pauli matrices, and each of the indices $m$ and $n$ runs from 1 to 2.
224:
225: In general, matrices in the spin $j$ representation are the following $N \times N$ matrices:
226: \begin{eqnarray}
227: &~& (J^1)_{mn} = \frac{\hbar}{2} \Bigl(\sqrt{n(N-n)} \delta_{m n+1}
228: + \sqrt{m(N-m)} \delta_{m n-1}\Bigr) , \nonumber \\
229: &~& (J^2)_{mn} = \frac{\hbar}{2i} \Bigl(\sqrt{n(N-n)} \delta_{m n+1}
230: - \sqrt{m(N-m)} \delta_{m n-1}\Bigr) , \nonumber \\
231: &~& (J^3)_{mn} = \frac{\hbar}{2} (2m-N-1) \delta_{mn} .
232: \label{N*N}
233: \end{eqnarray}
234: Here, each of the indices $m$ and $n$ runs from 1 to $N = 2j +1$.
235: The Casimir operator $\vec{J}^2$ is given by
236: \begin{eqnarray}
237: (\vec{J}^2)_{mn} \equiv (J^1)^2_{mn} + (J^2)^2_{mn} + (J^3)^2_{mn}
238: = \hbar^2 j (j + 1) \delta_{mn} .
239: \label{casimir}
240: \end{eqnarray}
241: The spinor representation matrices (\ref{spinor}) are obtained from (\ref{N*N})
242: by setting $j = \frac{1}{2}$, and
243: the adjoint representation matrices (\ref{adj}) are obtained from (\ref{N*N})
244: by setting $j = 1$,
245: after making a suitable unitary transformation.
246:
247:
248: \subsection{Generalization}
249:
250: We now generalize the spin algebra defined by (\ref{spin-alg}) using hermitian cubic matrices.
251: In analogy to (\ref{adj}), we define the $4 \times 4 \times 4$ matrices
252: we consider as follows:
253: \begin{eqnarray}
254: (J^a)_{lmn} = -i \hbar_C \varepsilon^{almn} , ~~
255: (K^a)_{lmn} = \hbar_C |\varepsilon^{almn}| .
256: \label{adj-cubic}
257: \end{eqnarray}
258: Here, each of the indices $a$, $l$, $m$ and $n$ runs from 1 to 4,
259: and $\hbar_C$ is a new physical constant.
260: The matrices $(J^a)_{lmn}$ and $(K^a)_{lmn}$ form the algebra defined by
261: \begin{eqnarray}
262: &~& [J^a, J^b, J^c] = - i \hbar_C^2 \varepsilon^{abcd} K^d ,
263: ~~~~ [J^a, J^b, K^c] = - i \hbar_C^2 \varepsilon^{abcd} J^d , \nonumber \\
264: &~& [J^a, K^b, K^c] = i \hbar_C^2 \varepsilon^{abcd} K^d ,
265: ~~~~ [K^a, K^b, K^c] = i \hbar_C^2 \varepsilon^{abcd} J^d ,
266: \label{cubic-spin-alg}
267: \end{eqnarray}
268: where the indices $l$, $m$ and $n$ are omitted.
269: There exists a subalgebra of the algebra defined by (\ref{cubic-spin-alg})
270: whose elements are $J^a$, $J^b$, $J^c$ and $K^d$ (or
271: $K^a$, $K^b$, $K^c$ and $J^d$),
272: where $a$, $b$, $c$ and $d$ are all distinct.
273: For example, the elements $G^a = (J^1, J^2, J^3, K^4)$ form the algebra defined by
274: \begin{eqnarray}
275: &~& [G^a, G^b, G^c] = - i \hbar_C^2 \varepsilon^{abcd} G^d .
276: \label{cubic-spin-alg-G}
277: \end{eqnarray}
278: We refer to the algebra defined by (\ref{cubic-spin-alg-G}) as a $\lq$cubic spin algebra'.
279: The elements $G^a$ satisfy the so-called $\lq$fundamental indentity':
280: \begin{eqnarray}
281: &~& [[G^a, G^b, G^c], G^d, G^e] = [[G^a, G^d, G^e], G^b, G^c] \nonumber\\
282: &~& ~~~~~~~~~~~~ + [G^a, [G^b, G^d, G^e], G^c] + [G^a, G^b, [G^c, G^d, G^e]] .
283: \label{fund-id}
284: \end{eqnarray}
285:
286: As the counterparts of the spinor representation matrices (\ref{spinor}),
287: we define four kinds of hermitian $3 \times 3 \times 3$ matrices:
288: \begin{eqnarray}
289: &~& (S^1)_{lmn} \equiv \frac{\hbar_C}{\sqrt{2}} |\varepsilon_{lmn}| ,
290: ~~~~ (S^2)_{lmn} \equiv \frac{\hbar_C}{i\sqrt{2}} \varepsilon_{lmn} ,
291: \nonumber \\
292: &~& (S^3)_{lmn} \equiv \frac{\hbar_C}{\sqrt{2}} \Bigl(\delta_{lm} \xi_{mn} + \delta_{mn} \xi_{nl}
293: + \delta_{nl} \xi_{lm}\Bigr) ,
294: \nonumber \\
295: &~& (S^4)_{lmn} \equiv \frac{\hbar_C}{\sqrt{2}} \Bigl(\delta_{lm} \zeta_{mn}
296: + \delta_{mn} \zeta_{nl} + \delta_{nl} \zeta_{lm}\Bigr) .
297: \label{S3*3*3}
298: \end{eqnarray}
299: Here, each of the indices $l$, $m$ and $n$ runs from 1 to 3,
300: $\xi_{mn} \equiv (\delta_{m1} - \delta_{m2}) \delta_{n3}$ and
301: $\zeta_{mn} \equiv \delta_{m1} \delta_{n2} + \delta_{m2} \delta_{n1}$.\footnote{
302: This choice is not unique, but one instance is
303: $\xi_{mn} = \epsilon_m \varepsilon_{12n}$
304: and $\zeta_{mn} = \epsilon_m \varepsilon_{mn3}$,
305: where $\epsilon_m$ takes either the value 1 or $-1$.}
306: It is shown that the variables $(S^a)_{lmn}$
307: form the cubic spin algebra (\ref{cubic-spin-alg-G}).
308:
309: As an example of $(N+1) \times (N+1) \times (N+1)$ matrices ($N \geq 3$) that form the cubic spin algebra
310: defined by (\ref{cubic-spin-alg-G}), we have
311: \begin{eqnarray}
312: &~& (G^1)_{lmn} = \frac{\hbar_C}{8^{1/4}} \Bigl( (\delta_{lm-1} + \delta_{lm+1} \Bigr.
313: + \delta_{lm-N+1} + \delta_{lm+N-1}) \nonumber \\
314: &~& ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ \cdot (1-\delta_{lN+1})(1-\delta_{mN+1})\delta_{nN+1} \nonumber \\
315: &~& ~~~~~~~~~ + (\delta_{mn-1} + \delta_{mn+1}
316: + \delta_{mn-N+1} + \delta_{mn+N-1})(1-\delta_{mN+1})(1-\delta_{nN+1})\delta_{lN+1} \nonumber \\
317: &~& ~~~~~~~~~ + (\delta_{nl-1} + \delta_{nl+1}
318: \Bigl. + \delta_{nl-N+1} + \delta_{nl+N-1})(1-\delta_{nN+1})(1-\delta_{lN+1})\delta_{mN+1} \Bigr) , \nonumber \\
319: &~& (G^2)_{lmn} = \frac{\hbar_C}{8^{1/4}i} \Bigl( (\delta_{lm-1} - \delta_{lm+1} \Bigr.
320: + \delta_{lm-N+1} - \delta_{lm+N-1}) \nonumber \\
321: &~& ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ \cdot (1-\delta_{lN+1})(1-\delta_{mN+1})\delta_{nN+1} \nonumber \\
322: &~& ~~~~~~~~~ + (\delta_{mn-1} - \delta_{mn+1}
323: + \delta_{mn-N+1} - \delta_{mn+N-1})(1-\delta_{mN+1})(1-\delta_{nN+1})\delta_{lN+1} \nonumber \\
324: &~& ~~~~~~~~~ + (\delta_{nl-1} - \delta_{nl+1}
325: \Bigl. + \delta_{nl-N+1} - \delta_{nl+N-1})(1-\delta_{nN+1})(1-\delta_{lN+1})\delta_{mN+1} \Bigr) , \nonumber \\
326: &~& (G^3)_{lmn} = \frac{\hbar_C}{2^{1/4}} \Bigl( \delta_{lm} g^3_{mn}
327: + \delta_{mn} g^3_{nl} + \delta_{nl} g^3_{lm} \Bigr) , \nonumber \\
328: &~& (G^4)_{lmn} = \frac{\hbar_C}{8^{1/4}} \Bigl( \delta_{lm} g^4_{mn}
329: + \delta_{mn} g^4_{nl} + \delta_{nl} g^4_{lm} \Bigr) ,
330: \label{(N+1)*(N+1)*(N+1)}
331: \end{eqnarray}
332: where each of the indices $l$, $m$ and $n$ runs from 1 to $N = 2j +1$, and
333: $g^3_{mn}$ and $g^4_{mn}$ are defined by
334: \begin{eqnarray}
335: g^3_{mn} \equiv \epsilon_m (1 - \delta_{m N+1}) \delta_{n N+1} ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
336: \label{g3}
337: \end{eqnarray}
338: and
339: \begin{eqnarray}
340: &~& g^4_{mn} \equiv \epsilon_m (\delta_{mn-1} - \delta_{mn+1} + \delta_{mn-N+1} - \delta_{mn+N-1}) \nonumber \\
341: &~& ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ \cdot (1-\delta_{mN+1})(1-\delta_{nN+1}) .
342: \label{g4}
343: \end{eqnarray}
344: Here $\epsilon_m$ takes either the value 1 or $-1$.
345:
346: Before ending this section, we note that
347: there exist $N \times N$ matrices $(M^a)_{mn}$ that satisfy the relations
348: %\begin{eqnarray}
349: $[M^a, M^b, M^c]_{mn} = - i \hbar^2 \varepsilon^{abcd} (M^d)_{mn}$.
350: %\label{cubic-spin-alg-M}
351: %\end{eqnarray}
352: Here, the triple commutator $[M^a, M^b, M^c]_{mn}$ is defined by
353: \begin{eqnarray}
354: &~& [M^a, M^b, M^c]_{mn} \equiv (M^aM^bM^c + M^bM^cM^a + M^cM^aM^b \nonumber \\
355: &~& ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ - M^bM^aM^c - M^aM^cM^b - M^cM^bM^a)_{mn} \nonumber \\
356: &~& ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ = ([M^a, M^b] M^c)_{mn} + ([M^b, M^c] M^a)_{mn} \nonumber \\
357: &~& ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ + ([M^c, M^a] M^b)_{mn} ,
358: \label{T-comm-matrix}
359: \end{eqnarray}
360: with the usual definition of the triple product of matrices,
361: \begin{eqnarray}
362: (M^aM^bM^c)_{mn} \equiv \sum_{k,l} (M^a)_{mk} (M^b)_{kl} (M^c)_{ln} .
363: \label{T-pro-matrix}
364: \end{eqnarray}
365: As an example, we have
366: \begin{eqnarray}
367: &~& (M^a)_{mn} = \frac{1}{(j(j+1))^{1/4}} (J^a)_{mn} ~~~~~ (a = 1 - 3), \nonumber \\
368: &~& (M^4)_{mn} = - (j(j+1))^{1/4} \hbar \delta_{mn} ,
369: \label{Na}
370: \end{eqnarray}
371: where $(J^a)_{mn}$ is given in (\ref{N*N}).
372: %But the following relation, in general, does not hold,
373: %\begin{eqnarray}
374: %\delta N^a \delta N^b \delta N^c \geq \frac{1}{6} |\langle [N^a, N^b, N^c] \rangle|
375: %= \frac{1}{6} |\langle N^d \rangle| .
376: %\label{G-uncertainty3}
377: %\end{eqnarray}
378:
379: \section{Uncertainty relation}
380:
381: \subsection{Uncertainty relation in quantum mechanics}
382:
383: The uncertainty relation in quantum mechanics is expressed by
384: \begin{eqnarray}
385: \delta x \delta p \geq \frac{\hbar}{2} ,
386: \label{H-uncertainty}
387: \end{eqnarray}
388: where $\delta x$ and $\delta p$ represent uncertainties in the position
389: and its canonical momentum, respectively.
390: %This relation was obtained by several kinds of thought experiments \cite{Heisenberg},
391: This relation and a generalization can be elegantly formulated
392: in the present framework, as we now demonstrate.\cite{Uncertainty}
393:
394: For any observable $A$, there is a corresponding hermitian operator
395: $\hat{A}$.
396: The expectation value of $A$ is defined by
397: \begin{eqnarray}
398: \langle A \rangle \equiv \int \psi^*(\vec{r}) A \psi(\vec{r}) d^3r ,
399: \label{<A>}
400: \end{eqnarray}
401: where $\psi(\vec{r})$ is a wave function that describes the state of the system.
402: The uncertainty in the value of a measurement for $A$ is defined by
403: \begin{eqnarray}
404: \delta A \equiv \sqrt{\langle (A - \langle A \rangle)^2 \rangle}
405: = \sqrt{\langle A^2 \rangle - \langle A \rangle^2} .
406: \label{deltaA}
407: \end{eqnarray}
408: Here $\delta A$ is a standard deviation that
409: represents the magnitude of the fluctuation about the mean value.
410: For any observables $A$ and $B$, the following uncertainty relation holds:
411: \begin{eqnarray}
412: \delta A \delta B \geq \frac{1}{2} |\langle [A, B] \rangle| .
413: \label{H-uncertainty2}
414: \end{eqnarray}
415:
416: Let us derive the above relation in the matrix formalism for later convenience.
417: The following relationship exists between
418: the matrix $A_{mn}$ in Heisenberg matrix mechanics
419: and the hermitian operator $\hat{A}$:
420: \begin{eqnarray}
421: A_{mn} = \int \phi_m^*(\vec{r}) \hat{A} \phi_n(\vec{r}) d^3r .
422: \label{Amn}
423: \end{eqnarray}
424: Here, the function $\phi_n(\vec{r})$ constitute a complete set of orthonormal functions.\footnote{
425: Here, we treat the case of a discrete spectrum for simplicity, but
426: it is straightforward to extend the present argument to the case of a continuous spectrum.} From
427: (\ref{<A>}) and (\ref{Amn}), the expectation value $\langle A \rangle$ is written
428: \begin{eqnarray}
429: \langle A \rangle = \sum_{m,n} a_m^* a_n A_{mn}
430: \label{<A>-matrix}
431: \end{eqnarray}
432: for the wave function $\psi(\vec{r}) = \sum_{n} a_n \phi_n(\vec{r})$.
433: In the same way, the expectation value of $\hat{A}\hat{B}$ is written
434: \begin{eqnarray}
435: \langle A B \rangle = \sum_{m,n}\sum_{k} a_m^* a_n A_{mk} B_{kn} \equiv (\vec{\cal A}, \vec{\cal B}) .
436: \label{<AB>}
437: \end{eqnarray}
438: Here, $\vec{\cal B}$ represents the complex vector whose $k$th component is $\sum_{n} B_{kn} a_n$.
439: Then, the uncertainty relation (\ref{H-uncertainty2}) can be demonstrated by use of
440: the Schwarz inequality $|\vec{\cal A}|^2 |\vec{\cal B}|^2 \geq |(\vec{\cal A}, \vec{\cal B})|^2$
441: and the relation $\hat{A}\hat{B} = \frac{1}{2} [\hat{A}, \hat{B}] + \frac{1}{2} \{\hat{A}, \hat{B}\}$.
442: Hence, this uncertainty relation is understood as a consequence of the
443: algebraic relation between physical variables.
444: % and has a kinematical origin.
445: If the expectation value $\langle [A, B] \rangle$ does not vanish,
446: it is not possible to measure the values of $A$ and $B$ simultaneously.
447: The uncertainty relation (\ref{H-uncertainty}) can be derived
448: from the commutation relation
449: %for $\hat{x}$ and $\hat{p}$, i.e.,
450: $[\hat{x}, \hat{p}] = i\hbar$.
451:
452: \subsection{Generalized uncertainty relation}
453:
454: We have seen that the uncertainty relation
455: $\delta A \delta B \geq \frac{1}{2} |\langle C \rangle|$
456: can be derived from the commutation relation $[A, B]_{mn} = i C_{mn}$ in quantum mechanics.
457: Then, it is natural to ask whether there is a similar uncertainty relation originating in
458: a triple commutation relation $[A, B, C]_{lmn} = i D_{lmn}$.
459: (A typical such triple commutation relation is the cubic spin algebra discussed in the previous section.)
460: In the following, we find that an inequality of the form
461: %\begin{eqnarray}
462: $\delta A \delta B \delta C \geq \frac{1}{6} |\langle D \rangle|$
463: %\label{G-uncertainty}
464: %\end{eqnarray}
465: indeed can be derived for certain types of definitions of the expectation values of many-index objects.
466:
467: We define the expectation value of a cubic matrix $A_{lmn}$ by
468: %\footnote{The existence of operator formalism has not known yet.}
469: \begin{eqnarray}
470: \langle A \rangle_c \equiv \sum_{l,m,n} |a_l a_m a_n|
471: e^{i(\theta_{lm} + \theta_{mn} + \theta_{nl})} A_{lmn} ,
472: \label{cubic<A>}
473: \end{eqnarray}
474: where $a_l$ is a complex number and
475: $\theta_{lm}$ is a real antisymmetric object: $\theta_{lm} = - \theta_{ml}$.
476: Then, the expectation value of $(A B C)_{lmn}$ is given by
477: \begin{eqnarray}
478: &~& \langle A B C \rangle_c = \sum_{l,m,n} |a_l a_m a_n|
479: e^{i(\theta_{lm} + \theta_{mn} + \theta_{nl})} \sum_{k} A_{lmk} B_{lkn} C_{kmn} \nonumber \\
480: &~& ~~~~~~~~~~~ \equiv \sum_{l,m,n} \sum_k {\cal{A}}^{(k)}_{lm} {\cal{B}}^{(k)}_{nl} {\cal{C}}^{(k)}_{mn}
481: = \sum_{k} {\rm Tr}({\cal{A}}^{(k)} {\cal{C}}^{(k)} {\cal{B}}^{(k)}),
482: \label{<ABC>}
483: \end{eqnarray}
484: where ${\cal{A}}^{(k)}_{lm} \equiv |a_l a_m|^{1/2} e^{i \theta_{lm}} A_{lmk}$.
485: Further, we define the expectation value of a two-index object $B_{lm}$ by
486: %, which is constructed from the product (\ref{product}), by
487: \begin{eqnarray}
488: \langle B \rangle_s \equiv \sum_{l, m} |a_l a_m|
489: e^{i(\theta_{lm} - \theta_{ml})} B_{lm} .
490: \label{square<B>}
491: \end{eqnarray}
492: The expectation value of $(A^2)_{lm}$ is given by
493: \begin{eqnarray}
494: &~& \langle A^2 \rangle_s = \sum_{l,m} |a_l a_m|
495: e^{i(\theta_{lm} - \theta_{ml})} \sum_{k} A_{lmk} A_{klm} \nonumber \\
496: &~& ~~~~~~~ = \sum_{l,m}\sum_k {\cal{A}}^{(k)}_{lm} {\cal{A}}^{(k)}_{lm}
497: = \sum_{l,m}\sum_k {\cal{A}}^{(k)}_{lm} {\cal{A}}^{*(k)}_{ml} \equiv |{\cal{A}}^{(k)}|^2. \label{<A2>}
498: \end{eqnarray}
499: In this way, two kinds of expectation values\footnote{
500: In the case that $\theta_{lm} = \frac{1}{2}(\beta_m - \beta_l)$,
501: the expectation values $\langle A \rangle_c$ and $\langle B \rangle_s$ are reduced to
502: %\begin{eqnarray}
503: $\langle A \rangle_c \equiv \sum_{l,m,n} |a_l a_m a_n| A_{lmn}$ and
504: $\langle B \rangle_s \equiv \sum_{l,m} a_l^* a_m B_{lm}$,
505: %\label{<A><B>}
506: %\end{eqnarray}
507: where $a_m = |a_m| e^{i\beta_m}$.}
508: have been obtained without any guiding principle.
509: It is important to elucidate their physical meanings.
510: Next, by use of the inequality
511: \begin{eqnarray}
512: \Big(\sum_{k_1} |{\cal{A}}^{(k_1)}|^2\Big) \Big(\sum_{k_2} |{\cal{B}}^{(k_2)}|^2\Big)
513: \Big(\sum_{k_3} |{\cal{C}}^{(k_3)}|^2\Big)
514: \geq |\sum_{k} {\rm Tr}({\cal{A}}^{(k)} {\cal{C}}^{(k)} {\cal{B}}^{(k)})|^2
515: \label{G-Schwarz}
516: \end{eqnarray}
517: and the relation
518: \begin{eqnarray}
519: \langle A B C \rangle_c = \frac{1}{6}
520: (\langle [A, B, C] \rangle_c + \langle \{A, B, C\} \rangle_c) ,
521: \label{ABC-rel}
522: \end{eqnarray}
523: the uncertainty relation
524: \begin{eqnarray}
525: \delta A \delta B \delta C \geq \frac{1}{6} |\langle [A, B, C] \rangle_c|
526: = \frac{1}{6} |\langle D \rangle_c|
527: \label{G-uncertainty}
528: \end{eqnarray}
529: is derived, where the uncertainty $\delta A$ is defined by
530: \begin{eqnarray}
531: \delta A \equiv \sqrt{\langle (A - \langle A \Delta \rangle_s \Delta)^2 \rangle_s} .
532: \label{deltaA-cubic}
533: \end{eqnarray}
534: Here $\Delta_{lmn} = \delta_{lm} \delta_{mn}$, and
535: hence $\langle A \Delta \rangle_s = \sum_{m} |a_m|^2 A_{mmm}$.
536: Note that there exists the identity $[A, B, \Delta]_{lmn} =0$
537: for arbitrary cyclic cubic matrices $A_{lmn}$ and $B_{lmn}$.
538: Finally, we discuss the physical implication of the uncertainty relation
539: (\ref{G-uncertainty}).
540: Let us assume that the 4-dimensional space-time coordinates
541: are described by cubic matrices $(X^{\mu})_{lmn}$ ($\mu = 0,1,2,3$)
542: that satisfy the relation
543: \begin{eqnarray}
544: [X^1, X^2, X^3]_{lmn} = - i l_{P}^2 (X^0)_{lmn} ,
545: \label{space-time-T-comm}
546: \end{eqnarray}
547: where $l_P$ is the Planck length, defined by $l_P \equiv \sqrt{2 G \hbar/c^3}$.
548: Here $G$ is the Newton constant and $c$ is a speed of light. From
549: the above argument, the following uncertainty relation can be derived:
550: \begin{eqnarray}
551: \delta X^1 \delta X^2 \delta X^3 \geq \frac{l_P^2}{6} |\langle X^0 \rangle| .
552: \label{space-time-uncertainty}
553: \end{eqnarray}
554: Many people have studied uncertainty relations
555: concerning the measurement of space-time distances
556: on the basis of various kinds of thought experiments.\cite{Review,K,NvD,A-C,NS,Y}
557: Among them, relations like
558: $(\delta r)^3$ \protect\raisebox{-0.5ex}{$\stackrel{\scriptstyle >}{\sim}$}
559: $l_P^2 r \sim l_P^2 c \delta t$ derived in Refs. \citen{K,NvD,A-C,NS}
560: are deeply related to (\ref{space-time-uncertainty}).
561: Here, $\delta r$ and $\delta t$ are the uncertainty in a spatial distance $r$ and a time period
562: as seen by an observer.
563: The following Lorentz covariant form is proposed in Ref. \citen{NS}:
564: \begin{eqnarray}
565: |\varepsilon_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma} n^{\mu} \delta x_{i_1}^{\nu} \delta x_{i_2}^{\rho} \delta x_{i_3}^{\sigma}|~
566: \protect\raisebox{-0.5ex}{$\stackrel{\scriptstyle >}{\sim}$}~ l_P^2 \delta x_{i_4}^{\mu} n_{\mu} .
567: \label{space-time-uncertainty2}
568: \end{eqnarray}
569: The quantities $\delta x_{i}^{\mu}$ here are the four-vectors defining a space-time volume, and
570: $n_{\mu}$ is any four-vector that represents the velocity of an observer.
571: The space-time uncertainty relation
572: (\ref{space-time-uncertainty2}) can be regareded as originating
573: from an algebraic relation of the form
574: \begin{eqnarray}
575: [X^{\mu}, X^{\nu}, X^{\rho}] = - i l_{P}^2 \varepsilon^{\mu\nu\rho\sigma} X_{\sigma} .
576: \label{X-rel}
577: \end{eqnarray}
578: %where $X^{\mu}$s are cubic matrices representing space-time cooridinates.
579:
580: \section{Conclusions and discussion}
581:
582: We have studied the generalization of spin algebra using cubic matrices.
583: Our results suggest the possibility that a triple commutation relation among cubic matrices implies
584: a kind of uncertainty relation involving their expectation values.
585: As a physical implication, we hypothesize that the space-time uncertainty relation
586: is connected to a triple commtation relation
587: of the form $[X^1, X^2, X^3]_{lmn} = - i l_{P}^2 (X^0)_{lmn}$.
588:
589: The physical meaning of cubic matrices is not yet completely understood, and
590: there exist several questions.
591: The matrices $(J^a)_{mn}$ are representation matrices that operate on
592: a representation space called the spin space.
593: It is yet unclear whether matrices $(G^a)_{lmn}$ also act as generators and
594: what kind of representation space exists for them.
595: In quantum mechanics, a matrix element $A_{mn}$ is interpreted
596: as a probability amplitude between the state
597: described by $\phi_m$ and that described by $\phi_n$.
598: The physical meaning of a cubic matrix element $A_{lmn}$, however, is not yet known.
599: Further, the derivation of the uncertainty relation (\ref{G-uncertainty}) seems tricky,
600: because the definition of the expectation values appears to be ad hoc.
601: We need to clarify the meanings of $a_l$ and $\theta_{lm}$.
602: To elucidate such points, it may be most useful to consider closely the
603: physical meaning of expectation values.
604: It is also important to determine the relationship
605: between the space-time uncertainty relations derived
606: from string/M theories \cite{Y} and those given in (\ref{space-time-uncertainty}).
607:
608: \section*{Acknowledgements}
609: We would like to thank Professor S. Odake for useful discussions.
610:
611:
612:
613: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
614: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
615: % Some macros are available for the bibliography:
616: % o for general use
617: % \JL : general journals \andvol : Vol (Year) Page
618: % o for individual journal
619: % \PR : Phys. Rev. \PRL : Phys. Rev. Lett.
620: % \NP : Nucl. Phys. \PL : Phys. Lett.
621: % \JMP : J. Math. Phys. \CMP : Commun. Math. Phys.
622: % \PTP : Prog. Theor. Phys. \JPSJ: J. Phys. Soc. Jpn.
623: % \JP : J. of Phys. \NC : Nouvo Cim.
624: % \IJMP: Int. J. Mod. Phys. \ANN : Ann. of Phys.
625: % Usage:
626: % \PR{D45,1990,345} ==> Phys.~Rev.\ {\bf D45} (1990), 345
627: % \JL{Phys.~Lett.,A30,1981,56} ==> Phys.~Lett.\ {\bf A30} (1981), 56
628: % \andvol{B123,1995,1020} ==> {\bf B123} (1995), 1020
629: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
630: \bibitem{G}
631: H.~Georgi, {\it Lie algebra in particle physics} (Benjamin Cummings, 1982).
632:
633: \bibitem{YK}
634: Y.~Kawamura, \PTP{107,2002,1105}, hep-th/0203007.
635:
636: \bibitem{YK2}
637: Y.~Kawamura, \PTP{109,2003,1}, hep-th/0206184.
638:
639: \bibitem{YK3}
640: Y.~Kawamura, \PTP{109,2003,153}, hep-th/0207054.
641:
642: \bibitem{Nambu}
643: Y.~Nambu, \PR{D7,1973,2405}. %,Phys. Rev. {\bf D7} (1973), 2405.
644:
645: \bibitem{ALMY}
646: H.~Awata, M.~Li, D.~Minic and T.~Yoneya, J. High Energy Phys. \andvol{02,2001,013}.
647:
648: \bibitem{Uncertainty}
649: E.~H.~Kennard, Z.~Phys.\ \textbf{44} (1927), 326.\\
650: H.~P.~Robertson, \PR{34,1929,163}.
651:
652: \bibitem{Review}
653: For a review, see L.~J.~Garay, Int.~J.~Mod.~Phys.\ A \textbf{10} (1995), 145.
654:
655: \bibitem{K}
656: F.~Karolyhazy, Nuovo Cim. A \textbf{42} (1966), 390.
657: %\NC{A42,1966,390}.
658:
659: \bibitem{NvD}
660: Y.~J.~Ng and H.~van Dam, Mod.~Phys.~Lett.\ A \textbf{9} (1994), 335; A \textbf{10} (1995), 2801.
661:
662: \bibitem{A-C}
663: G.~Amelino-Camelia, Nature\ \textbf{398} (1999), 216.
664:
665: \bibitem{NS}
666: N.~Sasakura, \PTP{102,1999,169}; J. High Energy Phys. \andvol{05,2002,015}.
667:
668: \bibitem{Y}
669: For a review of uncertainty relations for string/M theories, see T.~Yoneya,
670: \PTP{103,2000,1081}.
671: \end{thebibliography}
672:
673: \end{document}
674:
675:
676:
677:
678:
679:
680:
681:
682:
683:
684:
685: