Clarifying the SUSY equations in Weinberg III

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Si
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Weinberg
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the SUSY equations presented in Weinberg III, specifically the correctness of equation (27.1.12). The participant questions whether the \Omega dependent factors in this equation should be swapped to maintain gauge covariance, as the current formulation leads to inconsistencies with the left-chiral superfield requirement in (27.3.12). The participant emphasizes the necessity for (27.1.12) to be accurate to ensure the validity of subsequent equations, indicating a potential typo that could disrupt the theoretical framework. The inquiry highlights the importance of precise notation in supersymmetry formulations.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of SUSY (Supersymmetry) concepts
  • Familiarity with gauge transformations in quantum field theory
  • Knowledge of left-chiral superfields and their properties
  • Proficiency in interpreting equations from Weinberg's Quantum Field Theory, specifically Volume III
NEXT STEPS
  • Review the derivation of SUSY equations in Weinberg III, focusing on equations (27.1.10) to (27.3.12)
  • Study gauge covariance principles in quantum field theories
  • Examine literature on left-chiral superfields and their gauge invariance
  • Explore common typographical errors in theoretical physics texts and their implications
USEFUL FOR

The discussion is beneficial for theoretical physicists, particularly those specializing in supersymmetry and quantum field theory, as well as educators preparing lectures on these advanced topics.

Si
Messages
20
Reaction score
0
Hi there,

I'm giving lectures on SUSY following Weinberg III. Here's my problem: Is (27.1.12) correct? I mean, shouldn't the \Omega dependent factors be swapped? Otherwise \Phi^\dagger \Gamma is not gauge covariant!

My understanding is that the extended gauge transformations of (27.1.11) and (27.1.12) are generalizations of the ordinary ones in (27.1.2) and (27.1.4) respectively, i.e. one generalizes \Lambda(x_+) to \Omega(x_+,\theta_L), the point being that \Phi remains left-chiral after the \Omega transformation (and F and D terms are extended gauge invariant). But comparing (27.1.12) with (27.1.4) shows the \Omega factors of the transformation are the wrong way round.

Of course I can just correct this "typo" in my own lecture notes, but the problem is that I really need (27.1.12) to be true. Otherwise, jumping ahead to page 130 (hardback edition), I can't get (27.3.12) to be the gauge covariant left-chiral superfield it needs to be. I have now wasted 2 days going through literature and the web to sort this out, with no success!

So, why is (27.1.12) true / if it is a typo, how can I get (27.3.12) to be a left-chiral gauge covariant superfield?

Thank a lot in advance for any help you can give.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Si said:
...(27.1.12)...shouldn't the \Omega dependent factors be swapped?

By 27.1.10 Γ=Γ so it doesn't matter.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
6K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K