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

arXiv:quant-ph/0407208

Possibility of obtaining a non-relativistic proof of the spin-statistics theorem in the Galilean frame

Gabriel D. Puccini, H. Vucetich

Published Jul 27, 2004• 1 citation
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

Here we explore the possibility to obtain a non-relativistic proof of the spin-statistics theorem. First, we examine the structure of axioms and theorems involved in a relativistic Schwinger-like proof of the spin-statistics relation. Second, starting from this structure we identify the relativistic assumptions. Last, we reformulate these assumptions in order to obtain a Galilean proof. We conclude that the spin-statistics theorem cannot be deduced into the framework of Galilean quantum field theories for three space dimensions because two of the assumptions needed to prove the theorem are incompatible. We analyze, however, the conditions under which a non-relativist proof could still be deduced.

DOI
10.48550/arxiv.quant-ph/0407208

Related papers

Note on Possibility of obtaining a non-relativistic proof of the spin-statistics theorem in the Galilean frame

Gabriel D. Puccini, H. Vucetich

We replay to the critique by Sudarshan and Shaji of our argument of impossibility to obtain a non-relativistic proof of the spin-statistics theorem in the Galilean frame.

arXiv:quant-ph/0502048•Feb 8, 2005•0 citations

SPIN–STATISTICS THEOREMS WITHOUT RELATIVITY OR FIELD THEORY

A. P. Balachandran, Alan Daughton, Z.-C. GU +3 more

Conventional proofs of the spin–statistics theorem either use relativistic quantum field theory or concern field theory solitons. We here construct new proofs of this theorem for spinning particles. They are extensions of previous work on spinless particles and require neither relativity nor field theory. They do, however, assume certain continuity conditions involving the existence of antiparticles. Non-Abelian statistics, such as parastatistics and braid statistics of order 2 or more, are excluded in our framework.

International Journal of Modern Physics A•Jul 10, 1993•39 citations

Note on Non-relativistic proof of the spin-statistics connection in the Galilean frame

E. C. G. Sudarshan, Anil Shaji

We reply to the critique by Pucchini and Vucetich of our construction of a non-relativistic proof of the spin-statistics connection using SU(2) invariance and a Weiss-Schwinger action principle.

arXiv:quant-ph/0409205•Sep 28, 2004•2 citations

Sudarshan's non-relativistic approach to the spin-statistics connection

Anil Shaji

George Sudarshan was quite a bit ahead of the times when he sketched out a non-relativistic proof of the spin-statistics connection forty years back. A recent revival of interest in the role of relativistic arguments in proving the spin-statistics connection prompted us to revisit Sudarshan's original arguments and present them in simpler fashion. The proof is designed to work in three space dimensions. Sudarshan's observation was that if we impose SU (2) invariance, along with a few other restrictions, on the kinematic part of the Lagrangian of a field theory which is derivable from a Weiss-Schwinger type of the Principle of Least Action, then the spin-statistics connection automatically follows. The assumptions and simplifications that go into constructing the proof will be carefully laid out so as to identify the limitations of this approach.

Journal of Physics Conference Series•Nov 1, 2009•0 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
Here we explore the possibility to obtain a non-relativistic proof of the spin-statistics theorem. First, we examine the structure of axioms and theorems involved in a relativistic Schwinger-like proof of the spin-statistics relation. Second, starting from this structure we identify the relativistic assumptions. Last, we reformulate these assumptions in order to obtain a Galilean proof. We conclude that the spin-statistics theorem cannot be deduced into the framework of Galilean quantum field theories for three space dimensions because two of the assumptions needed to prove the theorem are incompatible. We analyze, however, the conditions under which a non-relativist proof could still be deduced.
Conventional proofs of the spin–statistics theorem either use relativistic quantum field theory or concern field theory solitons. We here construct new proofs of this theorem for spinning particles. They are extensions of previous work on spinless particles and require neither relativity nor field theory. They do, however, assume certain continuity conditions involving the existence of antiparticles. Non-Abelian statistics, such as parastatistics and braid statistics of order 2 or more, are excluded in our framework.
George Sudarshan was quite a bit ahead of the times when he sketched out a non-relativistic proof of the spin-statistics connection forty years back. A recent revival of interest in the role of relativistic arguments in proving the spin-statistics connection prompted us to revisit Sudarshan's original arguments and present them in simpler fashion. The proof is designed to work in three space dimensions. Sudarshan's observation was that if we impose SU (2) invariance, along with a few other restrictions, on the kinematic part of the Lagrangian of a field theory which is derivable from a Weiss-Schwinger type of the Principle of Least Action, then the spin-statistics connection automatically follows. The assumptions and simplifications that go into constructing the proof will be carefully laid out so as to identify the limitations of this approach.
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.