Irreducible representation of SU(2)

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter davidge
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Representation Su(2)
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the irreducible representations of the group ##SU(2)##, focusing on the methods of proving their equivalence to representations using Ladder Operators. Participants explore the complexity of such proofs and alternative methods for demonstrating irreducibility.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant inquires about the ease of proving that every irreducible representation of ##SU(2)## is equivalent to the one using Ladder Operators.
  • Another participant suggests that the proof involves several steps but is not particularly difficult, mentioning the classification of irreducible representations of ##\mathfrak{sl}_\mathbb{R}(2,\mathbb{C})## and its relation to ##\mathfrak{su}_\mathbb{R}(2,\mathbb{C})##.
  • A mathematical formulation is provided, detailing the operation rules for the representation space using maximal vectors and the actions of operators ##H##, ##X##, and ##Y##.
  • One participant proposes an alternative method to show irreducibility by demonstrating that a representation cannot be transformed into block diagonal form through similarity transformations.
  • Another participant notes that while brute force calculations may work for specific cases, understanding the broader series of representations and their eigenvalues is generally more desirable.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the methods for proving irreducibility and the complexity involved, indicating that there is no consensus on the best approach or the ease of the proof.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention the need for clarity on the translation of algebraic representations to group representations and the exact action of operators, which may depend on specific definitions and assumptions.

davidge
Messages
553
Reaction score
21
I'm reading a paper on physics where it's said it can be shown that every irreducible representation of ##SU(2)## is equivalent to the one which uses the Ladder Operators. I am a noob when it comes to this subject, but I'd like to know whether or not the proof is easy to carry out.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It takes a few steps but is not really difficult. Usually the irreducible representations of ##\mathfrak{sl}_\mathbb{R}(2,\mathbb{C})## are classified and ##\mathfrak{su}_\mathbb{R}(2,\mathbb{C}) \cong \mathfrak{sl}_\mathbb{R}(2,\mathbb{C})##. I'm not sure how they are translated to the group representations, but I assume you meant those of the tangent spaces, normally referred to as generators.

Let ##v_m## be a maximal vector of the ##(m+1)## dimensional representation space. Then for ##k=0, \ldots , m## we define
$$
v_{m-2k-2} := \frac{1}{(k+1)!}\;Y^{k+1}.v_m\; \text{ and } \;v_{-m-2}=v_{m+2}=0
$$
and get the following operation rules
$$
\begin{array}{ccc}
H.v_{m-2k}&=&(m-2k)\;v_{m-2k}\\
X.v_{m-2k}&=&(m-k+1)\;v_{m-2k+2}\\
Y.v_{m-2k}&=&(k+1)\;v_{m-2k-2}
\end{array}
$$
##H## is the semisimple part which defines the eigen values, ##X## is ascending, and ##Y## descending.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: davidge
Thanks.

Maybe an other, more easy way, to show that a representation is irreducible, would be to show that it can't be rewritten using similarity transformation in block diagonal form.

What are your thoughts?
 
In a single case a brute force calculation is probably doable for a given representation, especially for such small groups. But in general, one wants to know the rest of the series, here ##A_n## or even more generally all semisimple cases as well plus the exact action, i.e. the eigenvalues. The advantage of the theorem above is, that we know that all (finite dimensional) irreducible representations look like this.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: davidge

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K