Connection between the SU(2) group for the spin 1/2

captain
Messages
163
Reaction score
0
I wanted to ask if there is any connection between the SU(2) group for the spin 1/2 and the gauge group of weak interactions. I feel there isn't much of a connection other than the fact that they share the same group properties, but I am not sure. Thanks to anyone in advance that can clarify this for me.
 
Physics news on Phys.org


A group is a mathematical "thing", SU(2) is the set of all unitary 2x2 matrices with determinant 1. So there is the same group describing both spin 1/2 and the gauge properties of the weak interactions. But there is no physical connection.

Another example is how we use SU(3), we use it as gauge group for the strong interactions (SU(3)_colour) and as an (approximative) symmetry of the strong interactions of the three lightest quarks (SU(3)_isospin)

In the strong interaction, a quark has three colours so the spinor is (q_red, q_blue, q_green), thus this spinor transform in colour space and from the requirement that the Lagrangian should be invariant under this transformation, we can derive the gluons and their interactions with themselves and the quarks by their colour charge. So we can say that the strong force is independent of colour, we can transform the quarks to any colour we want and still have the same end result.

In the flavour symmetry, we say that the force between quarks are flavour independent, i.e it does not matter what kinds of quarks that participate in the interaction. up-down is same as strange-up etc. Thus the spinor is (u,d,s), and by imposing this SU(3) symmetry, we end up with the light hadron spectrum.

As you can see, SU(3) is used for two different things. i) The transformations of what colour quarks have, and ii) the transformation on what flavour quarks have.

Now this second symmetry is first of all approximative, due to the quark mass differences. And more, there are more than 3 quarks. So this is just an approximative, but illuminating, symmetry.

So now the SU(2) case, the SU(2)_spin is rotation of a 2-spinor in spin-space, and SU(2)_weak is rotations in weak-isospin space. The spaces are different, but works in a similar manner.

I can describe the number of CD-records I have, and the number of books I have with the same mathematical tool (arithmetic), but that does not say that there is a connection between books and cd's. The mathematical tool can be used for anything that I expect it to be useful for. Same with groups.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
If we release an electron around a positively charged sphere, the initial state of electron is a linear combination of Hydrogen-like states. According to quantum mechanics, evolution of time would not change this initial state because the potential is time independent. However, classically we expect the electron to collide with the sphere. So, it seems that the quantum and classics predict different behaviours!
According to recent podcast between Jacob Barandes and Sean Carroll, Barandes claims that putting a sensitive qubit near one of the slits of a double slit interference experiment is sufficient to break the interference pattern. Here are his words from the official transcript: Is that true? Caveats I see: The qubit is a quantum object, so if the particle was in a superposition of up and down, the qubit can be in a superposition too. Measuring the qubit in an orthogonal direction might...
Back
Top