Direct product of two representations

Safinaz
Messages
255
Reaction score
8
Hi their,

It's a group theory question .. it's known that

## 10 \otimes 5^* = 45 \oplus 5, ##

Make the direct product by components:

##[ (1,1)^{ab}_{1} \oplus (3,2)^{ib}_{1/6} \oplus (3^*,1)^{ij}_{-2/3} ] \otimes [ (1,2)_{ c~-1/2} \oplus (3^*,1)_{ k~1/3} ] = (1,2)^{ab}_{ c~1/2} \oplus (3^*,1)^{ab}_{ k~4/3} \oplus (3,1)^{ib}_{ c ~ -1/3} \oplus (3,3)^{ib}_{ c~-1/3} \oplus (1,2)^{ib}_{ k~1/2} \oplus (8,2)^{ib}_{ k ~ 1/2} \oplus (3^*,2)^{ij}_{ c~-7/6} \oplus (3,1)^{ij}_{ k~-1/3} \oplus (6^*,1)^{ij}_{ k ~ -1/3} ##,

Where a,b,c =1,2, I,j,k= 1,..,3 and ## [5 \otimes 5]_{antisymmetric } = 10 ##. Now there are in the 10 x 5* product two doublets (1,2) and two triplets (3,1), in which have different indices and so different interactions...

According to the number of the degrees of freedom, one doublet and one triplet should go to 5 representation ( in 10 x 5* product ), while the last scalars goes to 45 representation..

The Question is how to know which doublet or each triplet should belongs to 5 or 45 to avoid redandunce in the degrees of freedom?

Or we say for example a doublet ## (1,2,1/2) \equiv (1,2)^{ab}_{ c~1/2} \oplus (1,2)^{ib}_{ k~1/2} ## is found in both 5 and 45 decompositions ? won't be here redundancy..

Bests,
S.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I'd suggest working the ##SU(5)## product out in components and then reducing indices along the branching rules. This should let you match up to the ##SU(3)\times SU(2)\times U(1)## irreps the way that you want.
 
May you give me further clarification or an example, because I'm not familiar with branching rules to know what do you mean..

Thanx
 
Safinaz said:
May you give me further clarification or an example, because I'm not familiar with branching rules to know what do you mean..

Thanx

A branching rule is the description of how the representation of a group decomposes into irreps of a subgroup (usually maximal). In your second equation you have the branching rules for the ##\mathbf{10}## and ##\mathbf{5^*}##. You need the corresponding branching rules for the ##\mathbf{5}## and ##\mathbf{45}## (they should be in the Slansky review). By following indices through the products you should be able to do the matching that you want to do.
 
Toponium is a hadron which is the bound state of a valance top quark and a valance antitop quark. Oversimplified presentations often state that top quarks don't form hadrons, because they decay to bottom quarks extremely rapidly after they are created, leaving no time to form a hadron. And, the vast majority of the time, this is true. But, the lifetime of a top quark is only an average lifetime. Sometimes it decays faster and sometimes it decays slower. In the highly improbable case that...
I'm following this paper by Kitaev on SL(2,R) representations and I'm having a problem in the normalization of the continuous eigenfunctions (eqs. (67)-(70)), which satisfy \langle f_s | f_{s'} \rangle = \int_{0}^{1} \frac{2}{(1-u)^2} f_s(u)^* f_{s'}(u) \, du. \tag{67} The singular contribution of the integral arises at the endpoint u=1 of the integral, and in the limit u \to 1, the function f_s(u) takes on the form f_s(u) \approx a_s (1-u)^{1/2 + i s} + a_s^* (1-u)^{1/2 - i s}. \tag{70}...
Back
Top