Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

Zhur. Eksptl'. i Teoret. Fiz.

REMARKS ON THE PAULI THEOREM CONCERNING THE CONNECTION BETWEEN SPIN AND STATISTICS

V.L. Pokrovskiy, Yu.B. Rumer

Published Jan 1, 1956• 0 citations
OpenAlex

Abstract

The proof given by Pauli (Pauli, Relativistic Theory of Elementary Particles'' IIL, 1947, Supplement) for a theorem concerning the connection between the spin and the statistics is based on a consideration of irreducible representations of the tensor and spinor quantities in transformations of a Lorentz group with a determinant equal to unity. A proof is given of the above theorem tn which it is shown that it is enough to restrict oneself to a consideration of the transformation of the quantities with general inversion (inverston of all four co-ordinate axes).

Related papers

Generalized Spin-Statistics Theorem

Lauri Suoranta

We derive the spin-statistics theorem in both relativistic and non-relativistic first-quantized form, extending considerably the earlier proofs. Our derivation is based on the representation theories of the groups SU (2) and SL(2,C), latter being the universal covering of the Lorentz group. We define the identity of particles. We include theories that have an internal symmetry group. We discuss consistency of the non-relativistic limit.

arXiv:1008.5382•Aug 31, 2010•1 citation

The connection between spin and statistics

Luis J. Boya

After some brief historical remarks we recall the first demonstration of the Spin-Statistics theorem by Pauli, and some further developments, like Streater-Wightman's, in the axiomatic considerations. Sudarshan's short proof then follows by considering only the time part of the kinetic term in the lagrangian: the identity SU(2)=Sp(1,C) is crucial for the argument. Possible generalization to arbitrary dimensions are explored, and seen to depend crucially on the type of spinors, obeying Bott's periodicity 8. In particular, it turns out that for space dimentions (7, 8, or 9) modulo 8, the conventional result does not automatically hold: there can be no Fermions in these dimensions.

Journal of Physics Conference Series•Nov 1, 2009•110 citations

The spin-statistics connection; some pedagogical remarks in response to Neuenschwander's question.

Arthur S. Wightman

Q: Is there a simple proof of the Spin-Statistics Theorem? A: Not if all that is assumed is invariance under the Euclidean Group. When this hypothesis is supplemented by invariance under restricted Lorentz transformations, the key move is to disregard Henry David Thoreau's advice: "Simplify, simplify" and instead: complexify, complexify.

Electronic Journal of Differential Equations•Jul 1, 2000•6 citations

The Connection Between Spin and Statistics

Wolfgang Ernst Friederich Pauli

In the following paper we conclude for the relativistically invariant wave equation for free particles: From postulate (I), according to which the energy must be positive, the necessity of Fermi-Dirac statistics for particles with arbitrary half-integral spin; from postulate (II), according to which observables on different space-time points with a space-like distance are commutable, the necessity of Einstein-Bose statistics for particles with arbitrary integral spin. It has been found useful to divide the quantities which are irreducible against Lorentz transformations into four symmetry classes which have a commutable multiplication like $+1,\ensuremath{-}1,+\ensuremath{\epsilon},\ensuremath{-}\ensuremath{\epsilon}$ with ${\ensuremath{\epsilon}}^{2}=1$.

Physical Review•Oct 15, 1940•813 citations

Toward an understanding of the spin-statistics theorem

Ian Duck, E. C. G. Sudarshan

We respond to a recent request from Neuenschwander for an elementary proof of the Spin-Statistics Theorem. First, we present a pedagogical discussion of the results for the spin-0 Klein–Gordon field quantized according to Bose–Einstein statistics; and for the spin-12 Dirac field quantized according to Fermi–Dirac statistics and the Pauli Exclusion Principle. This discussion is intended to make our paper accessible to students familiar with the matrix solution of the quantum harmonic oscillator. Next, we discuss a number of candidate intuitive proofs and conclude that none of them pass muster. The reasons for their shortcomings are fully discussed. Then we discuss an argument, originally suggested by Sudarshan, which proves the theorem with a minimal set of requirements. Although we use Lorentz invariance in a specific and limited part of the argument, we do not need the full complexity of relativistic quantum field theory. Motivated by our particular use of Lorentz invariance, if we are permitted to elevate the conclusion of flavor symmetry (which we explain in the text) to the status of a postulate, one could recast our proof without any explicit relativistic assumptions, and thus make it applicable even in the nonrelativistic context. Such an argument, presented in the text, sheds some light on why it is that the ordinary Schrödinger field, considered strictly in the nonrelativistic context, seems to be quantizable with either statistics. Finally, an argument starting with ordinary-number valued (commuting), and with Grassmann-valued (anticommuting), oscillators shows in a natural way that these must relativistically embed into Klein–Gordon spin-0 and Dirac spin-12 fields, respectively. In this way, the Spin-Statistics Theorem is understood at the expense of admitting the existence of the simplest Grassmann-valued field.

American Journal of Physics•Apr 1, 1998•107 citations

Weyl-gauge invariant proof of the Spin-Statistics Theorem

Enrico Santamato, F. De Martini

The traditional standard theory of quantum mechanics is unable to solve the spin-statistics problem, i.e. to justify the utterly important \qo{Pauli Exclusion Principle} but by the adoption of the complex standard relativistic quantum field theory. In a recent paper (Ref. [1]) we presented a proof of the spin-statistics problem in the nonrelativistic approximation on the basis of the \qo{Conformal Quantum Geometrodynamics}. In the present paper, by the same theory the proof of the Spin-Statistics Theorem is extended to the relativistic domain in the general scenario of curved spacetime. The relativistic approach allows to formulate a manifestly step-by-step Weyl gauge invariant theory and to emphasize some fundamental aspects of group theory in the demonstration. No relativistic quantum field operators are used and the particle exchange properties are drawn from the conservation of the intrinsic helicity of elementary particles. It is therefore this property, not considered in the Standard Quantum Mechanics, which determines the correct spin-statistics connection observed in Nature [1]. The present proof of the Spin-Statistics Theorem is simpler than the one presented in Ref. [1], because it is based on symmetry group considerations only, without having recourse to frames attached to the particles.

arXiv:1604.06253•Apr 21, 2016•1 citation
The proof given by Pauli (Pauli, Relativistic Theory of Elementary Particles'' IIL, 1947, Supplement) for a theorem concerning the connection between the spin and the statistics is based on a consideration of irreducible representations of the tensor and spinor quantities in transformations of a Lorentz group with a determinant equal to unity. A proof is given of the above theorem tn which it is shown that it is enough to restrict oneself to a consideration of the transformation of the quantities with general inversion (inverston of all four co-ordinate axes).
After some brief historical remarks we recall the first demonstration of the Spin-Statistics theorem by Pauli, and some further developments, like Streater-Wightman's, in the axiomatic considerations. Sudarshan's short proof then follows by considering only the time part of the kinetic term in the lagrangian: the identity SU(2)=Sp(1,C) is crucial for the argument. Possible generalization to arbitrary dimensions are explored, and seen to depend crucially on the type of spinors, obeying Bott's periodicity 8. In particular, it turns out that for space dimentions (7, 8, or 9) modulo 8, the conventional result does not automatically hold: there can be no Fermions in these dimensions.
In the following paper we conclude for the relativistically invariant wave equation for free particles: From postulate (I), according to which the energy must be positive, the necessity of Fermi-Dirac statistics for particles with arbitrary half-integral spin; from postulate (II), according to which observables on different space-time points with a space-like distance are commutable, the necessity of Einstein-Bose statistics for particles with arbitrary integral spin. It has been found useful to divide the quantities which are irreducible against Lorentz transformations into four symmetry classes which have a commutable multiplication like $+1,\ensuremath{-}1,+\ensuremath{\epsilon},\ensuremath{-}\ensuremath{\epsilon}$ with ${\ensuremath{\epsilon}}^{2}=1$.
We respond to a recent request from Neuenschwander for an elementary proof of the Spin-Statistics Theorem. First, we present a pedagogical discussion of the results for the spin-0 Klein–Gordon field quantized according to Bose–Einstein statistics; and for the spin-12 Dirac field quantized according to Fermi–Dirac statistics and the Pauli Exclusion Principle. This discussion is intended to make our paper accessible to students familiar with the matrix solution of the quantum harmonic oscillator. Next, we discuss a number of candidate intuitive proofs and conclude that none of them pass muster. The reasons for their shortcomings are fully discussed. Then we discuss an argument, originally suggested by Sudarshan, which proves the theorem with a minimal set of requirements. Although we use Lorentz invariance in a specific and limited part of the argument, we do not need the full complexity of relativistic quantum field theory. Motivated by our particular use of Lorentz invariance, if we are permitted to elevate the conclusion of flavor symmetry (which we explain in the text) to the status of a postulate, one could recast our proof without any explicit relativistic assumptions, and thus make it applicable even in the nonrelativistic context. Such an argument, presented in the text, sheds some light on why it is that the ordinary Schrödinger field, considered strictly in the nonrelativistic context, seems to be quantizable with either statistics. Finally, an argument starting with ordinary-number valued (commuting), and with Grassmann-valued (anticommuting), oscillators shows in a natural way that these must relativistically embed into Klein–Gordon spin-0 and Dirac spin-12 fields, respectively. In this way, the Spin-Statistics Theorem is understood at the expense of admitting the existence of the simplest Grassmann-valued field.
The traditional standard theory of quantum mechanics is unable to solve the spin-statistics problem, i.e. to justify the utterly important \qo{Pauli Exclusion Principle} but by the adoption of the complex standard relativistic quantum field theory. In a recent paper (Ref. [1]) we presented a proof of the spin-statistics problem in the nonrelativistic approximation on the basis of the \qo{Conformal Quantum Geometrodynamics}. In the present paper, by the same theory the proof of the Spin-Statistics Theorem is extended to the relativistic domain in the general scenario of curved spacetime. The relativistic approach allows to formulate a manifestly step-by-step Weyl gauge invariant theory and to emphasize some fundamental aspects of group theory in the demonstration. No relativistic quantum field operators are used and the particle exchange properties are drawn from the conservation of the intrinsic helicity of elementary particles. It is therefore this property, not considered in the Standard Quantum Mechanics, which determines the correct spin-statistics connection observed in Nature [1]. The present proof of the Spin-Statistics Theorem is simpler than the one presented in Ref. [1], because it is based on symmetry group considerations only, without having recourse to frames attached to the particles.