Explanation of terminology: electroweak

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the terminology and conceptual understanding of the electroweak interaction, specifically the unification of electromagnetic and weak interactions compared to the strong interaction. Participants explore the mathematical framework of the Standard Model and the implications of gauge groups.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question why the electromagnetic and weak interactions are considered unified while the strong interaction is not, despite all three being represented in the gauge group of the Standard Model, ## U(1) \times SU(2) \times SU(3) ##.
  • There is a discussion about the generators of the gauge groups, with some participants noting that U(1) has one generator and SU(2) has three, raising questions about the association of gauge fields with these generators.
  • One participant argues that U(1) is not the gauge group of electromagnetism but rather represents weak hypercharge, while SU(2) corresponds to weak isospin, suggesting that electromagnetism arises from a combination of these components.
  • Another participant emphasizes that the lack of a single coupling constant and a global compact gauge group complicates the notion of unification between the electromagnetic and weak forces.
  • Some participants acknowledge that while the weak and electromagnetic interactions are linked through their gauge structure, the differences in coupling constants indicate that they are not fully unified.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the nature of unification between the electromagnetic and weak interactions, with some asserting a deep connection and others emphasizing the distinctions that prevent full unification. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the implications of these relationships.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in the discussion regarding the definitions of gauge groups and the assumptions about the nature of unification, which are not fully explored or agreed upon by participants.

dextercioby
Science Advisor
Insights Author
Messages
13,408
Reaction score
4,201
I'm not a specialist in this subject, so bear with me. I've always wondered why one claims that the electromagnetic and weak interactions are unified, but the strong one with the (unified) other two is not.
Mathematically, I'm aware that the full gauge group of the SM is ## U(1) \times SU(2) \times SU(3) ##, so one perceives all three interactions separately and on equal footing. In what exact sense are the weak and the em unified, but the strong not?

Thank you!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Since this is an A, what do you think the U(1) and SU(2) are?
 
dextercioby said:
I'm not a specialist in this subject, so bear with me. I've always wondered why one claims that the electromagnetic and weak interactions are unified, but the strong one with the (unified) other two is not.
Mathematically, I'm aware that the full gauge group of the SM is ## U(1) \times SU(2) \times SU(3) ##, so one perceives all three interactions separately and on equal footing. In what exact sense are the weak and the em unified, but the strong not?

Thank you!
To follow up on Vanadium's post:

U(1) has one generator and SU(2) has three generators. The key questions are: The E&M gauge field is associated to which of these generators? The ## Z_0## is associated to which ones? What about the ##W^\pm##?
 
U(1) is the gauge group of electromagnetism, while SU(2)w is the gauge group of the weak interactions. The fields are all 4 vectors (co-vectors actually): the e-m potential A and Wa, a=1,2,3. SU(2) (just as SU(3) in QCD) enters through the adjoint representation of dimension 3.

One more time, why one claims that A and W are "unified", if the there's no single coupling constant and no global compact and connected gauge group which has the direct product U(1) x SU (2) as a subgroup?
 
dextercioby said:
U(1) is the gauge group of electromagnetism, while SU(2)w is the gauge group of the weak interactions. The fields are all 4 vectors (co-vectors actually): the e-m potential A and Wa, a=1,2,3. SU(2) (just as SU(3) in QCD) enters through the adjoint representation of dimension 3.

One more time, why one claims that A and W are "unified", if the there's no single coupling constant and no global compact and connected gauge group which has the direct product U(1) x SU (2) as a subgroup?
Actually, U(1) is not the gauge group of electromagnetism and SU(2) is not the gauge group of the weak interaction. That was the point I wanted to make. That U(1) is the weak hypercharge, not the electromagnetic U(1). What happens is that electromagnetism corresponds to a linear combination of the weak hypercharge generator and of the ##T_3## diagonal generator of the weak isospin SU(2), so that the electric charge is given by ##Q = T_3 + Y/2 ## where (by abuse of notation) here ##T_3## is the eigenvalue of the diagonal generator of the weak isospin SU(2), and Y is the hypercharge. The orthogonal linear combination corresponds to the ##Z_0## boson while the ##T_\pm## correspond to the ##W^\pm##. It is in that sense that the weak interaction and the electromagnetic force are deeply linked. Now, you are right that they do not not have the same coupling constant since the coupling constants of the hypercharge U(1) and the weak isospin are not equal and this shows up through the Weinberg angle, so I agree with you that saying they are "unified" is a stretch. But they are definitely deeply linked together, in the sense I just described.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Fervent Freyja, vanhees71, mfb and 1 other person
Thanks for pointing that essential aspect to me. Now I understand.
 
dextercioby said:
U(1) is the gauge group of electromagnetism, while SU(2)w is the gauge group of the weak interactions

And there's your problem. That's a broken symmetry. The real U(1) x SU(2) has the U(1) of weak hypercharge and the SU(2) of weak isospin. The physical photons and W, Z's are mixtures of these two (and the Higgs)m, which is where unification comes in.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
6K