GUT Model Rank 4: Georgi-Glashaw SU(5) & Lie Algebras

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the necessity of having a rank of at least 4 in Grand Unified Theories (GUTs), specifically referencing the Georgi-Glashow model of SU(5). Participants explore the implications of rank in relation to the generators of the gauge groups involved in unifying the strong, weak, and electromagnetic interactions, examining both mathematical and physical perspectives.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions why GUT models must have a rank of at least 4, referencing the generators S, R, T3, and T8 in the Georgi-Glashow model.
  • Another participant notes that the standard model has rank 4, implying that any group containing it as a subgroup must also have a rank of at least 4.
  • A participant seeks to understand the physical significance of rank 4 groups in the context of unifying interactions, specifically questioning the role of the generators in SU(3) and their relation to observable quantities.
  • Discussion includes the concept that the rank relates to the number of mutually commuting operators and simultaneous observables, with examples from SU(3) and how they relate to observable charges.
  • One participant challenges another's explanation regarding the U(1) and SU(2) generators, suggesting a misunderstanding of their roles in particle interactions.
  • Participants discuss the concept of orthogonality in color charge operators and how it relates to observable quantities in the context of SU(3) color charge conservation.
  • There is a mention of ladder operators in SU(2) and their analogy to W bosons, with an exploration of how these concepts generalize to SU(3).
  • One participant expresses gratitude for the insights gained, indicating a desire to further study field theory for deeper understanding.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying levels of understanding and interpretations regarding the implications of rank in GUTs. There is no consensus on the physical significance of rank 4 groups, and some disagreements arise over the roles of specific generators and their combinations.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference specific mathematical structures and concepts, such as Cartan sub-algebras and the properties of diagonal generators, without fully resolving the implications of these concepts in the context of GUTs.

squarks
Messages
16
Reaction score
0
I hope this is the right place to ask this question:

Why does GUT Model has to have a rank of at least 4 (Such as Georgi-Glashaw Model of SU(5) )? In Georgi's Lie Algebras book it vaguely states that they correspond to the generators S, R, T3 and T8, where S and R are generators of U(1) and SU(2) respectively (No idea what T is -- Does it have something to do with colour or QCD?).

Can someone help me in the right direction? Thank you in advance
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The standard model has rank 4, this means that anything which contains the standard model as a subgroup must have rank AT LEAST 4.

Note that SO(10) has rank 5 and E6 has rank 6, both of which people use to build GUTs.
 
Thanks Ben

You answered my question from mathematical point of view (don't get me wrong, it was very helpful), but what does it mean physically? The U(1) generator gives spin, SU(2) generator gives rotation... I believe the the other two generators comes from SU(3), but not sure what they are.

or am I missing the whole point? The question that is being asked is "Why are rank 4 groups important in the context of describing the unification of strong, weak and electromagnetic interactions (from physics point of view)?"
 
The issue of rank has to do with the total number of mutually commuting operators and thus total number of simultaneous observables. [tex]SU(3)_{\text{color}}[/tex] has rank 2 so we can (if we could observe color directly) see say redness and (blue+antigreen)ness simultaneously. These we assume are independent of
* total charge, [tex]Q[/tex] of the [tex]U(1)_{em}[/tex] gauge group
and
* the observable weak-isospin component [tex]I_3[/tex] of the [tex]SU(2)_{iso}[/tex]which distinguishes e.g. the electron from its neutrino.

Now if we suppose we can distinquish two independent quark color components of the three, these plus the two definitely observable e-m and isospin charges yields 4 simultaneously observable gauge charges.
 
jambaugh said:
redness and (blue+antigreen)ness
Is there a reason behind your not mentioning redness + (blue+green)ness ?
 
squarks said:
The U(1) generator gives spin,

No. The U(1) generator forms a linear combination with one of the SU(2) generators to give a photon. The orthogonal linear combination gives the Z boson.

SU(2) generator gives rotation...

Again, no. The SU(2) generators form linear combinations to make W+-, Z, and the photon.

"Why are rank 4 groups important in the context of describing the unification of strong, weak and electromagnetic interactions (from physics point of view)?"

I don't really understand what jambaugh's saying---so apologies if I'm repeating something (s)he wrote.

Let me attack this from another vantage point. You can take the generators of SU(N) and form what's called ladder operators---the example you're probably familiar with is SU(2) spin. There, you take the Pauli matrices and form linear combinations:

[tex]\sigma_{\pm} = \sigma_1 \pm i \sigma_2[/tex]

The ladder operators work on a Hilbert space of spins, so that

[tex]\sigma_+ |\downarrow\rangle = \# |\uparrow\rangle[/tex],
[tex]\sigma_+ | \uparrow \rangle = 0[/tex],

where I've forgotten the numbers. Then the diagonal sigma matrix is left alone:

[tex]\sigma_3 |\uparrow\rangle = | \uparrow \rangle[/tex].

How does this work with W bosons? Well, SU(2) from the standard models isn't REALLY isospin, but is completely analogous to the SU(2) spin example I just showed. You can imagine the down quark as having "spin down" and the up quark as having "spin up". Then, schematically:

[tex]W^+ | down \rangle = |up\rangle[/tex], etc.

So the W+ and W- bosons change "upness" and "downness". The Z boson, on the other hand, leaves upness and downness alone.

We can generalize this. In SU(3), there are eight Gell-Mann matrices (generalization of Pauli Matrices). The diagonal Gell-Mann matrices (look them up on Wikipedia, usually [tex]\lambda_{3,8}[/tex]) commute with each other. The other six form linear combinations which I forget, but look suspiciously like the [tex]\sigma_\pm[/tex] that I wrote down above. These six linear combinations of gluons change, say, a red up quark to an anti-blue up quark, for example. The diagonal generators don't change the color of the quark at all---they change red to anti-red or blue to anti-blue.

Now it turns out that these diagonal generators are very special: you can add or multiply two diagonal matrices and always get a diagonal matrix. Also, diagonal matrices A and B always obey AB - BA = 0. You can see they form sort of a subset of all of the generators which are floating around---technically, we call this the Cartan sub-Algebra. The number of diagonal generators of SU(N) turns out to be N-1, which is the rank of SU(N). In general, the rank of the gauge group is the number of diagonal generators of the algebra---so you can see that if you want to get the SM from some larger group, that larger group has to contain at least the diagonal bits to give you the proper mathematical structures that you need.
 
humanino said:
Is there a reason behind your not mentioning redness + (blue+green)ness ?

I was picking "orthogonal" colors. The three color operators add to 0 = R+G+B.
I could have picked Redness and Greenness and simply pointed out the Blueness is B= -(R+G).
 
Thanks for all of your help

I certainly understand more than I did, but not completely. I think it will become more clearer once I study field theory. For now, this is good enough.

Thanks again
 
jambaugh said:
I was picking "orthogonal" colors. The three color operators add to 0 = R+G+B.
I could have picked Redness and Greenness and simply pointed out the Blueness is B= -(R+G).
The reason I am wondering is, in deep inelastic scattering in the appropriate kinematics for factorisation theorems to apply, we "pull out" a single quark, leaving behind not an orthogonal component, but really the opposite color. Anyway, thanks for the answer :smile:
 
  • #10
humanino said:
The reason I am wondering is, in deep inelastic scattering in the appropriate kinematics for factorisation theorems to apply, we "pull out" a single quark, leaving behind not an orthogonal component, but really the opposite color. Anyway, thanks for the answer :smile:

I believe that this has to do with color conservation. You are leaving an orthogonal component but one in the vector representation of the su(3) color group('s Lie algebra).

The orthogonality I was using was in the context of the space of observables spanned by the commuting set of color operators. This is orthogonality in the adjoint representation of su(3) restricted to the particular choice of Cartan sub-algebra. This is the orthogonality in weight space. (or in its dual space to be precise).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
5K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
6K