[GiNaC-devel] Improved dummy index renaming -> clifford exam fails

[Vladimir Kisil]

>>>>> "CD" == Chris Dams <Chris.Dams at mi.infn.it> writes:
    CD> pairs.  Also not that B~mu~mu + 1 has yielded an exception as
    CD> long as I can remember when, for instance, asked what its free
    CD> indices are.

	Taking all that in account I am deleting the entire "anticommuting"
  portion from the clifford.cpp. It looks like the performance is not
  seriously affected by this.

    CD> the metric with up-indices is the inverse of the metric with
    CD> down-indices, we arive at the identity
    CD> e~mu e~alpha e.mu = (2 - dim) * e~alpha,
    CD> where dim is the number of row/columns of the metric.

	I saw this rule in the diracgamma contraction but have doubts that it
  will be simple as that for generic Clifford units with metric
  diag_matrix(1,-1,0) for example. 
	
	Best,
-- 
Vladimir V. Kisil     email: kisilv at maths.leeds.ac.uk
--                      www: http://maths.leeds.ac.uk/~kisilv/