Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

2x2 representation of triplet

  1. Jul 1, 2015 #1

    ChrisVer

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Sorry for this "stupid" question... but I am having some problem in understanding how can someone start from let's say an SU(2) triplet and arrive in a 2x2 matrix representation of it in the Lagrangian...
    An example is the Higgs-triplet models...I think this happens with the W-gauge bosons too in the EW theory, but I'm currently losing where in the derivation/how this happens. I think for the W's this happens with the complexification?
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Jul 1, 2015 #2

    ChrisVer

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Does it happen by a map [itex] \phi_i \rightarrow \phi_i \sigma^i[/itex]?
     
  4. Jul 1, 2015 #3

    Orodruin

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member

    The tensor product of two fundamental representations is a singlet representation (the trace of the tensor) and a triplet which is the rank two symmetric tensor. You should therefore not be surprised that you can realise the triplet representation using traceless matrices.

    Alternatively, just see it as transforming under the adjoint representation, which is the triplet (the Lie algebra is three dimensional).
     
  5. Jul 2, 2015 #4

    vanhees71

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    2016 Award

    If you have a doublet ##\phi##, you can make a triplet out of it, ##\phi^{\dagger} \vec{\sigma} \phi##. I'm not sure, whether this is what you mean or need. This combination transforms under the fundamental SO(3).
     
  6. Jul 2, 2015 #5

    Orodruin

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member

    I do not think he has a doublet that he is forming a triplet from. I think he has a fundamental scalar SU(2) triplet such as that which appears in the type-II seesaw.
     
  7. Jul 2, 2015 #6

    vanhees71

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    2016 Award

    Ok, then you can make a doublet via ##\tilde{\phi}=\vec{\sigma} \cdot \vec{\phi}##, where ##\vec{\phi} \in \mathbb{R}^3## is the triplet field.
     
  8. Jul 2, 2015 #7

    Orodruin

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member

    This is not a doublet, it is an element of the Lie algebra and transforms under the adjoint representation, which is the triplet representation. The triplet is irreducible.
     
  9. Jul 2, 2015 #8

    ChrisVer

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Yup it's like my Post #2...
    It's confusing me ...
    the [itex]\phi = \begin{pmatrix} \phi_+ \\ \phi_0 \\ \phi_- \end{pmatrix}[/itex] is a triplet of SU(2). That means that it transforms as triplet under SU(2) transformations and so in the adjoint representation (I think with the [itex]\epsilon_{ab}[/itex]'s the antisymmetric metric)...
    Then also the [itex] \phi \cdot \sigma[/itex] (which is now a 2x2 matrix) transforms in the same rep with epsilons?
     
  10. Jul 2, 2015 #9

    Orodruin

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member

    The vector you have written down is just vector containing the components of a vector in the representation. The basis vectors of the adjoint representation are the basis vectors of the Lie algebra, i.e., the Pauli matrices in the case of SU(2). So all ##\phi\cdot\sigma## tells you is the full expression for the triplet, i.e., the full element of the Lie algebra.
     
  11. Jul 2, 2015 #10

    samalkhaiat

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    The triplet transforms by the adjoint map of the Lie algebra [itex]su(2)[/itex] [tex]\mbox{ad}: \ \ \phi_{i} \to \phi_{i} + \epsilon_{i j k} \phi_{j} \alpha_{k} ,[/tex] while the Hermitian [itex]2 \times 2[/itex] matrix [itex]\Phi = \tau^{i}\phi_{i}[/itex] transforms in the adjoint map of the group [itex]SU(2)[/itex]: [tex]\mbox{Ad}: \ \ \Phi \to U \Phi U^{\dagger} , \ \ U \in SU(2) .[/tex] As usual the two maps are related by [tex]\mbox{Ad} ( e^{\alpha^{i} X^{i}} ) = e^{ \alpha^{i} \mbox{ad}(X^{i}) } .[/tex]
     
  12. Jul 3, 2015 #11

    vanhees71

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    2016 Award

    True. Sorry for the confusion.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Similar Discussions: 2x2 representation of triplet
Loading...