Recent content by Superfluid universe

Hello Mathematicalphysicist. In the book "Introduction to Superfluidity" by Andreas Schmitt, it was mentioned that U(1) was the simplest symmetry, which means there are other symmetries too. ( in my opinion)...

Can I ask you, Orodruin, why is Color the charge for the strong force, and not Isospin? I think it's because Isospin is not a gauge symmetry?

So it's a combination of third component of weak isospin and hypercharge.

Hey, Orodruin. Thanks for replying to me. So the charge from what I am getting is Weak isospin, right?

We have the electric charge for the electromagnetic force, the color charge for the strong force. What is the charge for the weak force? Thank you. :)

Thank you, MathematicalPhysicist. Another example : https://arxiv.org/pdf/1206.3906.pdf This article talks about global u(1) symmetry in superfluid neutron stars. It says that the goldstone mode for that symmetry breaking is a phonon. I was asking for other symmetries that exist in...

Yes. I can add more information. For example, I've read that in superfluids there is a global U(1) symmetry. I was asking if there are other symmetries as well. :)

Thank you! :)

Could you please help me with the formula? Thank you. :)

c² = (n/m) ∂²U/∂n² where U = vacuum energy density as a function of the quasiparticle density n = quasiparticle number density m = bare mass of quasiparticle Is there a book, article where this formula is explained? Thank you.

I am reading "Introduction to superfluidity" by Andreas Schmitt. He mentions the global symmetry U(1). What other symmetries are there in superfluids? Thank you.

Yes, i read that paragraph. But since they didn't give any examples of other quantum numbers, i asked you. :)

Peter, you meantioned quantum numbers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_number May I ask if there are more quantum numbers than stated in this article? Even hypothetical ones.

"Note that the article says the charge operators correspond to simple roots, not the charge quantum numbers." Ah, i thought they used "charge operator" and "charge" as synonyms. Thanks for engaging with me.

Thanks for replying to me, Peter. I get that it is complicated, but is there any way of explaining it a bit simplified? At least what they mean by "correspond to".