A Clarifying Fradkin's Terminology on Quantum Numbers of Gauge Groups

Click For Summary
The discussion seeks to clarify Fradkin's terminology regarding quantum numbers in gauge groups, specifically in the context of Wilson loops. It posits that the Wilson loop acts as a charged operator, transforming non-trivially under gauge transformations as described by the equation W -> U(x) W U(x)^{-1}. Additionally, it asserts that the transformation under the fundamental representation indicates that the Wilson loop is represented as an N x N matrix for SU(N) gauge fields. The term "quantum numbers" is interpreted as the charges linked to each gauge group generator. This interpretation aligns with Fradkin's intended meaning.
paralleltransport
Messages
128
Reaction score
97
TL;DR
I'd like to clarify some terminology
Hi, I'd like to clarify the following terminology
(Fradkin, Quantum Field Theory an integrated approach)
1640455247572.png


"carry the quantum numbers of the representation of the gauge group":
Does the author basically mean that the wilson loop is a charged operator, in a sense that it transforms non-trivially under gauge transformation:
W -> U(x) W U(x)^{-1}

Furthermore, the fact that the wilson loop transforms under the fundamental representation means that it is just a N x N matrix for SU(N) gauge field and transforms according the conjugation law above?

Finally, the so called "quantum numbers" are then just the charges associated with each gauge group generator?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes, I think that's what Fradkin means.
 
Thread 'Some confusion with the Binding Energy graph of atoms'
My question is about the following graph: I keep on reading that fusing atoms up until Fe-56 doesn’t cost energy and only releases binding energy. However, I understood that fusing atoms also require energy to overcome the positive charges of the protons. Where does that energy go after fusion? Does it go into the mass of the newly fused atom, escape as heat or is the released binding energy shown in the graph actually the net energy after subtracting the required fusion energy? I...

Similar threads