Hi, I have a question about non-relativistic SUSY, see e.g. "non-relativistic SUSY" by Clark and Love.(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

The supersymmetric Galilei algebra with central extension M can easily be obtained from the N=1 Super PoincarĂ© algebra by an Inonu-Wigner contraction. In this proces, SUSY and spacetime translations are decoupled! The characteristic commutator of rel. SUSY is schematically (using Weyl spinors)

[tex]

\{ Q, \bar{Q} \} = P

[/tex]

This can be motivated by the fact that Q, being a Weyl spinor, is in the (1/2,0) rep. of the Lorentz algebra, and Q-bar is in the (0,1/2) rep. such that the commutator must be in the (1/2,1/2) rep. which is the vector representation. This lead you to use [itex]P_{\mu}[/itex] on the right hand side of the commutator.

Now, non-relativistically one obtains the commutator

[tex]

\{ Q, \bar{Q} \} = M

[/tex]

with M being the central extension playing the role of mass, and Q only transforming under SO(3) rotations. SUSY becomes an "internal symmetry", and perhaps calling it "SUSY" is somewhat of a misnomer.

My question is: how can I again use a group-theoretical argument to motivate that this is what you expect, as in the rel. case? Instead of a vector one now seems to get a scalar on the RHS of the commutator, but I can't see how to motivate this.

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**

Join Physics Forums Today!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# Non-relativistic SUSY

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**