S symmetries are spherical symmetries (rotational symmetries) - meaning that all directions are equal. For complex wave function they become unitary symmetries (SU), or simply symmetries of complex sphere.

Number of dimensions of the sphere (say, 2) gives you symmetry group corresponding to those 2 degrees of freedom - say, complex circle on a plane has SU(2) symmetry.


So, what is the question about those symmetries of rotation?

• My point is... - harvey1 - January 17, 2002 - 21:05 UTC
  • It probably can be derived too. - alexander - January 17, 2002 - 22:03 UTC
    • Two ways of approaching this - harvey1 - January 17, 2002 - 22:21 UTC
      • I really do not understand this. - alexander - January 17, 2002 - 22:43 UTC
        • Do you agree that... - harvey1 - January 17, 2002 - 23:13 UTC
          • Galaxies are not identical, like particles. - alexander - January 18, 2002 - 00:15 UTC
        • That's not the point, though - harvey1 - January 18, 2002 - 17:25 UTC
          • Harvey, you are again incorrect. - alexander - January 20, 2002 - 22:07 UTC
        • What a single principle gives you - harvey1 - January 21, 2002 - 14:37 UTC
          • Correction.Least action principle follows from f=ma,not vicevers - alexander - January 21, 2002 - 18:20 UTC
        • re: least action principle - harvey1 - January 21, 2002 - 22:33 UTC
          • Please, define energy (or action) without dp/dt. - alexander - January 24, 2002 - 06:35 UTC
      • We've lost our math HTML tags - harvey1 - January 24, 2002 - 13:59 UTC