Problem with SU(3) generators's trace

  • Thread starter Thread starter Einj
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Su(3) Trace
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the correctness of a specific trace relation involving the generators of SU(3) in the adjoint representation. The user questions the equality provided by their professor, which states that the trace of the commutator of two generators multiplied by a third generator equals i(3/2)f^{abc}. They derive a different result, finding a factor of 3 instead of 1/2, leading to confusion about the validity of their reasoning. The Dynkin index for the adjoint representation is confirmed to be 3, suggesting a potential miscommunication with the professor. Clarification from the professor is recommended to resolve the discrepancy.
Einj
Messages
464
Reaction score
59
Hi everyone. I'm not sure this is the correct section for this topic and if not my apologiez.
I'm studying SU(3) and my professor wrote down the following equality:

$$Tr\left(\left[ T^a_8,T^b_8\right] T^c_8\right)=i\frac{3}{2}f^{abc}$$

where Ts are generators of the adjoint representation. I'm not sure this relation is correct and I would like to have your opinion. The Dynkin index of the adjoint representation is 3 so:

$$Tr\left(T^a_8T^b_8\right)=3\delta^{ab}$$

Now, my reasoning is:

$$Tr\left(\left[T^a_8,T^b_8\right]\right)=if^{abd}Tr(T^d_8T^c_8)=if^{abd}3\delta^{dc}=3if^{abc}$$

The difference is just a 1/2 factor but I would like to know if I'm doing something wrong.

Thanks everybody
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
The index for SU(3) should be 3 in the adjoint representaion (and N generally). You should probably ask him to clarify.
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Back
Top