This article (except the introduction and the afterwords) is my answer to one of the homework problems that I did when I took a quantum field theory course. The original problem asked to verify the formula for linear change of variables in integration. It was originally written on 2024-02-06.


Introduction

Although Grassmann numbers are purely mathematical concept, but like most people, I was introduced to them in physics class. I then had the natural question: how to formally define Grassmann numbers? In a homework given by my professor of QFT course, I found that I had to answer the question to do a problem in the homework in a way that I am satisfied with.

Numbers

Let (G0,+)\p{\mbb G_0,+} and (G1,+)\p{\mbb G_1,+} be two abelian groups such that G0∩G1={0}\mbb G_0\cap\mbb G_1=\B{0}. For convenience, for any k∈Nk\in\bN, define Gk≔Gk mod 2\mbb G_k\ceq\mbb G_{k\bmod2}. Define a multiplication on G0∪G1\mbb G_0\cup\mbb G_1 such that

  • multiplication is associative, non-degenerate, and distributive over addition;
  • G0\mbb G_0 are commuting numbers and G1\mbb G_1 are anticommuting numbers: ∀ψ1∈Gk1,ψ2∈Gk2:ψ1ψ2=(−)k1k2ψ2ψ1;\forall\psi_1\in\mbb G_{k_1},\psi_2\in\mbb G_{k_2}: \psi_1\psi_2=\p{-}^{k_1k_2}\psi_2\psi_1;
  • and there is a unity 1∈G01\in\mbb G_0 such that 1+⋯+1≠01+\cdots+1\ne0 for any finite number of summands.

We then have to have ∀ψ1∈Gk1,ψ2∈Gk2:ψ1ψ2∈Gk1+k2.\forall\psi_1\in\mbb G_{k_1},\psi_2\in\mbb G_{k_2}: \psi_1\psi_2\in\mbb G_{k_1+k_2}. Therefore, G0\mbb G_0 is a commutative ring with characteristic zero, and G1\mbb G_1 is a G0\mbb G_0-module. We can then define linear functions with this structure. In this sense, the multiplication on G1\mbb G_1 defines a symplectic bilinear form.

These are not enough to define every property we need for G0\mbb G_0 and G1\mbb G_1. I will introduce more properties as axioms later.

Tensors

It seems that we need this property as an axiom: for any linear function λ ⁣:Gk→G0\func\lmd{\mbb G_k}{\mbb G_0}, ∃!φ∈Gk:λ=(ψ↦φψ).\exists!\vphi\in\mbb G_k:\lmd=\p{\psi\mapsto\vphi\psi}. I call this property the first representation property, analog to the Riez representation theorem. I will call linear functions that maps objects to G0\mbb G_0 linear functionals, and the dual space of a G0\mbb G_0-module as the set of all linear functionals on it.

With the fist representation property, we can identify Gk\mbb G_k with its dual space so that any multilinear map (tensor) have well-defined components. For any kk-linear map T ⁣:(G1n)k→G0\func T{\p{\mbb G_1^n}^k}{\mbb G_0} (or alternatively called a rank-kk tensor on G1n\mbb G_1^n), we can write it uniquely in the form T ⁣(ψ1,…,ψk)=ψ1i1⋯ψkikai1⋯ik,\fc T{\psi_1,\dots,\psi_k}=\psi_{1i_1}\cdots\psi_{ki_k}a_{i_1\cdots i_k}, where the components Ti1⋯ik∈GkT_{i_1\cdots i_k}\in\mbb G_k, and the dummy indices are summed from 11 to nn. Denote the set of all rank-kk tensors on G1n\mbb G_1^n as T1nk\mcal T_1^{nk}.

Similarly, we can define kk-linear maps T ⁣:(G0n)k→G0\func T{\p{\mbb G_0^n}^k}{\mbb G_0} (or rank-kk tensors on G0n\mbb G_0^n), whose components are in G0\mbb G_0, and denote the set of all of them as T0nk\mcal T_0^{nk}. Tensors from T0nk\mcal T_0^{nk} and those from T1nk\mcal T_1^{nk} can be multiplied and contracted together without any problems. However, the result of these operations may not be in T0nk\mcal T_0^{nk} or T1nk\mcal T_1^{nk}, but some tensor that takes arguments from both G0n\mbb G_0^n and G1n\mbb G_1^n.

Linear endomorphisms

Here we will need another property as an axiom: for any linear function λ ⁣:Gk→Gk\func\lmd{\mbb G_k}{\mbb G_k}, ∃!φ∈G0:λ=(ψ↦φψ).\exists!\vphi\in\mbb G_0:\lmd=\p{\psi\mapsto\vphi\psi}. I call this property the second representation property. This is very similar to the first representation property, but it covers linear endomorphisms on Gk\mbb G_k instead of linear functionals on Gk\mbb G_k.

With the second representation property, we can prove that any possible linear endomorphism JJ on Gkn\mbb G_k^n can be written as a unique matrix in G0n×n\mbb G_0^{n\times n} acting on the components of the argument: J ⁣(ψ)i=Jijψj,\fc J\psi_i=J_{ij}\psi_j, where Jij∈G0J_{ij}\in\mbb G_0 are called the components of the linear endomorphism JJ. From now on, we do not need to distinguish between matrices in G0n×n\mbb G_0^{n\times n} and linear endomorphisms on Gkn\mbb G_k^n.

For a matrix J∈G0n×nJ\in\mbb G_0^{n\times n}, we can define its determinant as det⁡J≔J1i1⋯Jninεi1⋯in[n]∈G0,\det J\ceq J_{1i_1}\cdots J_{ni_n}\veps^{\b n}_{i_1\cdots i_n}\in\mbb G_0, where ε[n]∈T0nn\veps^{\b n}\in\mcal T_0^{nn} is the Levi-Civita symbol, which is a completely antisymmetric tensor on G0n\mbb G_0^n whose components take values in {−1,0,1}⊂G0\B{-1,0,1}\subset\mbb G_0.

Analytic functions

For any T∈T1nkT\in\mcal T_1^{nk}, define a degree-kk monomial on G1n\mbb G_1^n as MT ⁣:G1n→G0,ψ⟼T ⁣(ψ,…,ψ),\vfunc{M_T}{\mbb G_1^n}{\mbb G_0}{\psi}{\fc T{\psi,\dots,\psi}}, which is a degree-kk homogeneous function on G1n\mbb G_1^n. Note that different tensors may correspond to the same monomial. Especially, for any k>nk>n, a degree-kk monomial must be trivial (send any input to zero). Also, if there is any pair of indices such that TT is symmetric in exchanging them, then the monomial MTM_T must be trivial. Therefore, we only need to consider the those completely antisymmetric tensors when studying monomials. Denote the set of all completely antisymmetric rank-kk tensors on G1n\mbb G_1^n as T1n[k]\mcal T_1^{n\b k}, and then the fact that we only need antisymmetric tensors to define monomials can be written as MT1n[k]=MT1nkM_{\mcal T_1^{n\b k}}=M_{\mcal T_1^{nk}}.

An analytic function ff on G1n\mbb G_1^n is defined as a sum of monomials: f ⁣:G1n→G0,ψ⟼∑kMT[k] ⁣(ψ),\vfunc f{\mbb G_1^n}{\mbb G_0}\psi{\sum_k \fc{M_{T^{\b k}}}\psi}, where T[k]∈T1n[k]T^{\b k}\in\mcal T_1^{n\b k}, whose components may be referred to as expansion coefficients. We do not need to worry about the convergence because this is a finite sum (k≤nk\le n). Denote the set of all analytic functions on G1n\mbb G_1^n as An\mcal A_n.

Two properties of analytic functions:

  • If f∈Anf\in\mcal A_n, then for any δ∈G1n\dlt\in\mbb G_1^n, the translation (ψ↦f ⁣(ψ+δ))∈An\p{\psi\mapsto\fc f{\psi+\dlt}}\in\mcal A_n.
  • If f∈Anf\in\mcal A_n, then for any J∈G0n×nJ\in\mbb G_0^{n\times n}, the linear transformation in the argument f∘J∈Anf\circ J\in\mcal A_n.

Integrals

Now we define that a linear function ∫:An→Gn\int:\mcal A_n\to\mbb G_n is called an integral if it satisfies the following property: ∀f∈An,δ∈G1n:∫f=∫ψ↦f ⁣(ψ+δ),\forall f\in\mcal A_n,\dlt\in\mbb G_1^n:\int f=\int\psi\mapsto\fc f{\psi+\dlt}, which intuitively means that an integral is invariant under translation.

With this definition of an integral, we are now interested in the most general form of an integral.

Because ∫\int is linear, we can find its form on monomials, and then sum them up to get the form on all analytic functions. As a linear function on monomials, it must be of the form (by the second representation property) ∫MT[k]=ci1⋯ik[k]Ti1⋯ik[k],\int M_{T^{\b k}}=c^{\b k}_{i_1\cdots i_k}T^{\b k}_{i_1\cdots i_k}, where c[k]∈T0n[k]c^{\b k}\in\mcal T_0^{n\b k} does not depend on T[k]T^{\b k}. Plug this form into the translational invariance of ∫\int, and we have ci1⋯ik[k]Ti1⋯ik[k]=∫ψ↦(ψi1+δi1)⋯(ψik+δik)Ti1⋯ik[k]=∫ψ↦∑l(kl)ψi1⋯ψilδil+1⋯δikTi1⋯ik[k]=∑l(kl)ci1⋯il[l]δil+1⋯δikTi1⋯ik[k]\begin{align*} c_{i_1\cdots i_k}^{\b k}T^{\b k}_{i_1\cdots i_k} &=\int\psi\mapsto\p{\psi_{i_1}+\dlt_{i_1}}\cdots\p{\psi_{i_k}+\dlt_{i_k}}T^{\b k}_{i_1\cdots i_k}\\ &=\int\psi\mapsto\sum_l\binom kl\psi_{i_1}\cdots\psi_{i_l} \dlt_{i_{l+1}}\cdots\dlt_{i_k}T^{\b k}_{i_1\cdots i_k}\\ &=\sum_l\binom kl c^{\b l}_{i_1\cdots i_l}\dlt_{i_{l+1}}\cdots\dlt_{i_k}T^{\b k}_{i_1\cdots i_k} \end{align*} (here the binomial coefficient should be regarded as its image under the natural ring homomorphism from Z\bZ to G0\mbb G_0, which must be non-zero because G0\mbb G_0 has characteristic zero). Regarding T[k]T^{\b k} as the independent variable, this equation is a homogeneous linear equation L[k] ⁣(T[k])=0\fc{L^{\b k}}{T^{\b k}}=0 associated with the linear operator LL on T1n[k]\mcal T_1^{n\b k} defined as Li1⋯ik[k]≔ci1⋯ik[k]−∑l(kl)ci1⋯il[l]δil+1⋯δik.L^{\b k}_{i_1\cdots i_k}\ceq c^{\b k}_{i_1\cdots i_k}-\sum_l\binom kl c^{\b l}_{i_1\cdots i_l}\dlt_{i_{l+1}}\cdots\dlt_{i_k}. For the solution set of the linear equation to be the whole space T1n[k]\mcal T_1^{n\b k}, we need L[k]=0L^{\b k}=0. Again by the second representation property, we need all the components to vanish (strictly speaking, we need the completely antisymmetric part to vanish, but they are already completely antisymmetric): ∀k≤n,δ∈G1n,i1,…,ik:ci1⋯ik[k]−∑l(kl)ci1⋯il[l]δil+1⋯δik=0.\forall k\le n,\dlt\in\mbb G_1^n,i_1,\dots,i_k: c^{\b k}_{i_1\cdots i_k}-\sum_l\binom kl c^{\b l}_{i_1\cdots i_l}\dlt_{i_{l+1}}\cdots\dlt_{i_k}=0. The first term cancels with the l=kl=k term in the sum, so this equation does not impose any requirement for c[k]c^{\b k} but only impose requirements for c[l]c^{\b l} with l<kl<k. Then, we can induce on kk: the equation for k=0k=0 does nothing; the equation for k=1k=1 requires c[0]c^{\b 0} to vanish; the equation for k=2k=2, given that c[0]c^{\b 0} vanishes, now requires c[1]c^{\b 1} to vanish; and so on. For each kk, the equation additionally requires c[k−1]c^{\b{k-1}} to vanish. Finally, when we reach k=nk=n, which is the end of the induction, we require c[l]c^{\b l} to vanish for all l<nl<n, and there is no requirement for c[n]c^{\b n}. Therefore, the integral of any monomial is zero except for the degree-nn monomial, and thus we only need to consider the nnth degree term when finding the integral of an analytic function.

Note that Tkn[n]=Gkε[n]\mcal T_k^{n\b n}=\mbb G_k\veps^{\b n} (in other words, the most general form of a completely antisymmetric rank-nn tensor on Gkn\mbb G_k^n is a constant in Gk\mbb G_k times the Levi-Civita symbol). Therefore, ci1⋯in[n]=cnεi1⋯in[n],Ti1⋯in[n]=dεi1⋯in[n],c^{\b n}_{i_1\cdots i_n}=c_n\veps^{\b n}_{i_1\cdots i_n}, \quad T^{\b n}_{i_1\cdots i_n}=d\veps^{\b n}_{i_1\cdots i_n}, where cn=∈G0c_n=\in\mbb G_0 and d∈Gnd\in\mbb G_n. The definition of an integral does not impose any requirement for cnc_n, so it can be any element in G0\mbb G_0. For convenience, define cn≔1c_n\ceq1 for all nn, and then we have ∫Mdε[n]=εi1⋯in[n]dεi1⋯in[n]=n! d,\int M_{d\veps^{\b n}}=\veps^{\b n}_{i_1\cdots i_n}d\veps^{\b n}_{i_1\cdots i_n} =n!\,d, where n!n! is the image of n!n! under the natural ring homomorphism from Z\bZ to G0\mbb G_0. The integral of any monomial with its degree different from nn is zero, so the integral of any analytic function is just that of its degree-nn term: ∫ψ↦∑kMT[k] ⁣(ψ)=n! T1⋯n[n].\int\psi\mapsto\sum_k \fc{M_{T^{\b k}}}\psi=n!\,T^{\b n}_{1\cdots n}.

Linear change of integrated variable

Now, for a linear endomorphism J∈G0n×nJ\in\mbb G_0^{n\times n} and an analytic function f∈Anf\in\mcal A_n, consider the integral ∫f∘J\int f\circ J. We only needs to consider the degree-nn monomial term, which is MT[n] ⁣(J ⁣(ψ))=Ji1j1ψj1⋯Jinjnψjndεi1⋯in[n],\fc{M_{T^{\b n}}}{\fc J\psi}=J_{i_1j_1}\psi_{j_1}\cdots J_{i_nj_n}\psi_{j_n}d\veps^{\b n}_{i_1\cdots i_n}, where T[n]=dε[n]T^{\b n}=d\veps^{\b n} is used. Notice that εi1⋯inJi1j1⋯Jinjn\veps_{i_1\cdots i_n}J_{i_1j_1}\cdots J_{i_nj_n} itself is a rank-nn completely antisymmetric tensor on G0n\mbb G_0^n, so it can also be written as a constant times ε[n]\veps^{\b n}. By letting j1,…,jnj_1,\dots,j_n be 1,…,n1,\dots,n respectively, we see that the constant is just det⁡J\det J. Therefore, MT[n] ⁣(J ⁣(ψ))=MT[n] ⁣(ψ)det⁡J.\fc{M_{T^{\b n}}}{\fc J\psi}=\fc{M_{T^{\b n}}}\psi\det J. By the linearty of the integral, we have ∀f∈An:∫f∘J=det⁡J∫f.\forall f\in\mcal A_n:\int f\circ J=\det J\int f.

Afterwords

Actually, before I wrote my answer, I already know the exterior algebra. In this article, my definition to Grassmann numbers is more abstract and puts the commuting numbers and anticomuuting numbers in more equal footings. This definition is closer to what I intuitively think Grassmann numbers could be.

There are several potential problems in this article:

  • Some axioms are given, but I did not prove that they are consistent.
  • Some claims are made without proof. They may turn out to be wrong.
  • I did not prove that the usual definition of Grassmann numbers (with exterior algebra) can be formulated as a special case of my definition.
  • I am not educated in supersymmetry, which is where Grassmann numbers are applied most. I only made my definition comply with the properties of Grassmann numbers that I have learned for doing the path integral of fermionic fields.