The group U(2) is the group of all $2\times 2$ matrices such that $U^\dagger U=I$. Evidently it has $4$ real parameters, and can be represented as: $$ U(2) = \{\begin{bmatrix}a&b\\ 0&d \end{bmatrix}:\,\{a,b,d\}\in\mathbb{C}\wedge|a|^2=|d|^2=1\}\cup\{\begin{bmatrix}a&0\\ c&d \end{bmatrix}:\,\{a,c,d\}\in\mathbb{C}\wedge|a|^2=|d|^2=1\}$$

I know that the Pauli matrices "generate" $SU(2)$ in the sense that I could write a general element of $SU(2)$ as $\exp(i\theta\mathbf{\hat{n}}\cdot\mathbf{\sigma})$ where $\theta\in\mathbb{R}$, $\mathbf{\hat{n}}\in S^2$ and $\mathbf{\sigma}$ is the vector of the Pauli matrices; Furthermore I can write a general element of $U(1)$ as $\exp(ix)$ where $x\in\mathbb{R}$.

To put things together, I know that $U(2)\simeq SU(2)\cup U(1)$. So does that mean I could write:

  1. $U(2) =\{\exp(ix) \exp(i\theta\mathbf{\hat{n}}\cdot\mathbf{\sigma}) \,:\,\{x,\theta\}\in\mathbb{R}\wedge\mathbf{\hat{n}}\in S^2 \}$ or
  2. $U(2) =\{\exp(ix)I+ \exp(i\theta\mathbf{\hat{n}}\cdot\mathbf{\sigma}) \,:\,\{x,\theta\}\in\mathbb{R}\wedge\mathbf{\hat{n}}\in S^2 \}$

Which one of these options is true, and how do I get to know that just from the prescription $U(2)\simeq SU(2)\cup U(1)$?

  • $\begingroup$ You seem to be using the notation $G\cup H$ for the group generated by the elements of $G$ and the elements of $H$. This is not standard notation -- it would be much less confusing to write $\langle G\cup H\rangle$ instead. $\endgroup$ – Jim Belk Nov 13 '13 at 19:36
  • $\begingroup$ Actually I followed what I read here: thespectrumofriemannium.wordpress.com/tag/unitary-group and my confusion about this notation is mainly why I posted this question. $\endgroup$ – PPR Nov 13 '13 at 19:39
  • $\begingroup$ Also, what is $\sigma$? Is it a Pauli matrix? $\endgroup$ – Jim Belk Nov 13 '13 at 19:40
  • $\begingroup$ Yes exactly. Sorry about that. $\endgroup$ – PPR Nov 13 '13 at 19:40
  • $\begingroup$ There's something wrong: the unitary group $U(2)$ has no (non-trivial) upper-triangular elements, nor lower, although, yes, it is four-dimensional. Also, it's not that $U(2)$ is the union of $SU(2)$ and $U(1)$. Rather, the quotient $U(2)/SU(2)$ is isomorphic to $U(1)$, etc. $\endgroup$ – paul garrett Nov 13 '13 at 19:47

Preliminary Note: For some reason, physicists and mathematicians have different notation for Lie groups and Lie algebras. For mathematicians, the Lie algebra corresponding to a matrix Lie group $G$ is the set $$ \mathcal{L}_{\mathrm{math}} \;=\;\{A\in\mathbb{C}^{n\times n} \mid \exp(tA) \in G\text{ for all }t\in\mathbb{R}\}. $$ For physicists, the corresponding Lie algebra is the set $$ \mathcal{L}_{\mathrm{phys}} \;=\; \{A\in\mathbb{C}^{n\times n} \mid \exp(itA) \in G\text{ for all }t\in\mathbb{R}\}. $$ These are related by the equation $$ \mathcal{L}_{\mathrm{math}} \;=\; \{i A \mid A \in \mathcal{L}_{\mathrm{phys}} \}. $$ I will follow the OP's lead and use physics notation.

Answer: The Lie algebra $\mathcal{L}_{\mathrm{phys}}$ associated to $U(2)$ is the set of all $2\times 2$ Hermitian matrices. Every such matrix has the form $$ a I \,+\, b_1\sigma_1 \,+\, b_2\sigma_2 \,+\, b_3\sigma_3 $$ where $I$ is the $2\times 2$ identity matrix, $\sigma_1,\sigma_2,\sigma_3$ are the three Pauli matrices, and $a,b_1,b_2,b_3\in\mathbb{R}$. We can write this as $$ a I + \textbf{b} \cdot \boldsymbol{\sigma} $$ where $\textbf{b} = (b_1,b_2,b_3) \in \mathbb{R}^3$, and $\boldsymbol{\sigma}$ is the $3$-tuple $(\sigma_1,\sigma_2,\sigma_3)$ of matrices.

It is true that every element of $U(2)$ can be written as an exponential $e^{iH}$, where $H$ is a $2\times 2$ Hermitian matrix. (This sort of thing isn't always true for Lie groups, but it is true in this case.) It follows that $$ U(2) \;=\; \{\exp(iaI + i\textbf{b}\cdot \boldsymbol{\sigma}) \mid a\in\mathbb{R}\text{ and }\textbf{b}\in\mathbb{R}^3\}. $$ Now, it is not true in general that $\exp(A+B) = \exp(A)\exp(B)$ when $A$ and $B$ are matrices. However, it is true as long as $A$ and $B$ commute. Since $iaI$ is a multiple of the identity matrix, it commutes with anything, so $$ U(2) \;=\; \{\exp(iaI) \exp(i\textbf{b}\cdot \boldsymbol{\sigma}) \mid a\in\mathbb{R}\text{ and }\textbf{b}\in\mathbb{R}^3\}. $$ It turns out that $\exp(iaI) = \exp(ia)I$, so it follows that $$ U(2) \;=\; \{\exp(ia) \exp(i\textbf{b}\cdot \boldsymbol{\sigma}) \mid a\in\mathbb{R}\text{ and }\textbf{b}\in\mathbb{R}^3\}. $$ This is essentially option (1) in your question.

It is possible to derive this result from a version of the reasoning you gave. In particular, let $$ H \;=\; \left\{\left.\begin{bmatrix}u & 0 \\ 0 & u\end{bmatrix} \;\right|\; u\in U(1) \right\}. $$ Then $H$ is a subgroup of $U(2)$ isomorphic to $U(1)$, and $U(2)$ is generated by the elements of $H$ together with the elements of $SU(2)$: $$ U(2) \;=\; \langle SU(2) \cup H\rangle. $$ Now, in general if you have two matrix groups it is not true that every element of $\langle G\cup H\rangle$ can be written as an element of $G$ multiplied by an element of $H$. (Instead, elements of $\langle G\cup H\rangle$ can be written as words involving elements of $G$ and elements of $H$.) However, it is true whenever every element of $G$ commutes with every element of $H$, which is why it works in this case.


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.