# The gamma^5 question

The question Can one show that ${\gamma^5}^\dagger = \gamma^5$ directly from the anticommutation relations? was recently closed as homework-like. I agree that this is in somewhat of a grey area as far as ontopicness here goes, but I think this is because the core of this question is a maths question:

is it possible to prove such-and-such-a-fact using only this-and-that-hypothesis?

In light of that fact, and because the question is in fact quite good, shouldn't this question be migrated (after appropriate modification if needed) to math.se?

• The question seems on-topic, especially because it uses physics notation. Why didn't you vote to reopen? – Qmechanic Dec 3 '13 at 1:37
• I kind of assumed it wouldn't do much headway. I've edited it and put it in the queue now. – Emilio Pisanty Dec 3 '13 at 1:48
• Without information of (anti)hermicity of gamma matrices 0123, actually this question may not be homework level(?). It seems op was trying to prove the problem only using the definition of $\gamma^5$ and anticommuting relations of other gamma matrices.. – user26143 Dec 3 '13 at 2:07
• The only problem is that you're far more likely to find a physicist able to constructively answer that question than you are a mathematician. I would argue that purely mathematical topics should be on-topic, provided that the underlying math is specialized to physics. – Jerry Schirmer Dec 3 '13 at 14:56