Services & Resources / Wolfram Forums
-----
 /
MathGroup Archive
2004
*January
*February
*March
*April
*May
*June
*July
*August
*September
*October
*November
*December
*Archive Index
*Ask about this page
*Print this page
*Give us feedback
*Sign up for the Wolfram Insider

MathGroup Archive 2004

[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]

Search the Archive

Re: Defining anti-symmetric operation. New ideas requested.

  • To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
  • Subject: [mg47266] Re: Defining anti-symmetric operation. New ideas requested.
  • From: Jens-Peer Kuska <kuska at informatik.uni-leipzig.de>
  • Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2004 03:30:09 -0500 (EST)
  • Organization: Universitaet Leipzig
  • References: <c4gdno$t3k$1@smc.vnet.net>
  • Reply-to: kuska at informatik.uni-leipzig.de
  • Sender: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com

Hi,

you need a *orderung relation* so that Mathematica can collect
common factors and has a canonic form for the Commute[] function.
Something like

  Commute[a_, b_] /; ! OrderedQ[{a, b}] := -Commute[b, a]

will do that.

Regards
  Jens

Oleksandr Pavlyk wrote:
> 
> Dear MathGroup,
> 
> In order to explain the problem I would need to
> say few words about what I am trying to accomplish.
> So please bear with me.
> 
> I am often define bare bones of a Lie algebra,
> and check its consistency by Mathematica. To that
> end I have some generators, and I define their
> commutation relation. As an example let us take
> SU(2) with 3 generators  H[], X[], Y[]
> 
> To define the algebra I write
> 
>     Commute[ H[], X[] ] = Y[]
>     Commute[ X[], Y[] ] = H[]
>     Commute[ Y[], H[] ] = X[]
> 
> now because of properties of Commute,
> 
> Commute[ OperatorA, OperatorB ] = - Commute[OperatorB, OperatorA]
> 
> So far I am realizing this property by defining
> 
>     Commute[ X[], H[] ] := -Commute[ H[], X[] ]
>     Commute[ Y[], X[] ] := -Commute[ X[], Y[] ]
>     Commute[ H[], Y[] ] := -Commute[ Y[], H[] ]
> 
> So I come to my question. I would like Mathematica to
> define automatically
> 
>     Commute[OperatorB, OperatorA]
> 
> every time I define Commute[OperatorA, OperatorB].
> 
> I tried to approach the problem by examining
> DownValues of Commute.
> 
> (* This is evaluated if no direct definition was matched *)
> Commute[a_, b_]:=Module[{res},
>    res = HoldComplete[Commute[b,a]]/.DownValues[Commute];
>    If[ res === HoldComplete[Commute[b,a]], (* If nothing in DownValues *)
>          Return[0]      (* we declare everything else commuting *)
>        ,
>          Return[ -ReleaseHold[res] ]
>    ]
> ]
> 
> This definition indeed gives Commute[ X[], H[] ] = -Y[], but if I try
> it on some undefined generators
> 
>    Commute[ J[], H[] ]
> 
> I get infinite recursion, which is there because the very definition
> of trick solving part of Commute is also in DownValues, and hence we get
> 
>   res = HoldComplete[ Module[{},.... ] ]
> 
> Any ideas on how to encode anti-symmetric properties of Commute would
> be very appreciated.
> 
> I am sorry for slightly long post. The Mathematica notebook with the
> code is posted at
> 
>     http://www.pavlyk.com/SU(2).nb
> 
> Thank you,
> Sasha


  • Prev by Date: RE: change PlotStyle in Graphics object after the fact?
  • Next by Date: Re: Re: Infrequent Mathematica User
  • Previous by thread: Re: Defining anti-symmetric operation. New ideas requested.
  • Next by thread: RE: Defining anti-symmetric operation. New ideas requested.