Srednicki's normalization choice for lie algebra generators

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

Srednicki's Quantum Field Theory (QFT) presents two normalization choices for the generators of Lie algebras: Tr(TaTb) = 2 δab in Chapter 24 (equation 24.5) and Tr(TaTb) = (1/2) δab in Chapter 69 (equation 69.8). The difference arises from the context of the calculations, with Chapter 24 focusing on group theory and Chapter 69 on gauge theory. The normalization affects the eigenvalues, particularly in relation to the spin of fermions, which are set to half-integers. The choices reflect a matter of convenience for simplifying subsequent computations rather than a fundamental difference in the underlying algebraic structure.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Lie algebras and their generators
  • Familiarity with Quantum Field Theory concepts
  • Knowledge of eigenvalues and their significance in quantum mechanics
  • Basic grasp of group theory and gauge theory distinctions
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the implications of normalization in Lie algebra representations
  • Explore the role of eigenvalues in quantum mechanics and particle physics
  • Investigate the differences between group theory and gauge theory in QFT
  • Learn about the mathematical structure of the Lie algebras, specifically $\mathfrak{su}(n)$ and $\mathfrak{so}(n)$
USEFUL FOR

The discussion is beneficial for theoretical physicists, graduate students in physics, and researchers focusing on Quantum Field Theory and the mathematical foundations of particle physics.

hideelo
Messages
88
Reaction score
15
IN Srednicki's QFT he seems to make two different choices for normalizing the generators of lie algebras. In chapter 24 (eqn 24.5) he chooses Tr (TaTb) = 2 δab and in chapter 69 (eqn 69.8) he chooses Tr (TaTb) = (1/2) δab

Is there a reason for this? Is there any particular reason to make one choice over the other?

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
hideelo said:
IN Srednicki's QFT he seems to make two different choices for normalizing the generators of lie algebras. In chapter 24 (eqn 24.5) he chooses Tr (TaTb) = 2 δab and in chapter 69 (eqn 69.8) he chooses Tr (TaTb) = (1/2) δab

Is there a reason for this? Is there any particular reason to make one choice over the other?

Thanks
I don't think that it is an essential difference, as a basis ##T^a## is as good as a basis ##c_aT^a\; , \;c_a\in \mathbb{R}##. However, one will get different eigenvalues: ##T^a.X= \lambda X \Longrightarrow (c_aT^a).X= (c_a \lambda)X## so it is indeed a normalization. I assume we want to end up with half integers as possible values for spins. So the task in chapter ##69## (gauge theory) is different than in chapter ##24## (group theory).

(24.5) is due to a special choice of basis vectors (infinitesimal generators) which makes the following computations easier. It's a kind of natural choice here. E.g. (24.9) is easy to remember. You may chose any other basis, but it will probably lead to more calculations.

It is the same with (69.8). It is a special choice of basis vectors. Other would do as well with different equations then. Basically it is even another Lie algebra, ##\mathfrak{su}(n)## in (69.8) instead of ##\mathfrak{so}(n)## in (24.5). But this isn't the reason for his choice. It is simply a matter of convenience in regard to the following calculations. And in this case for the role of the eigenvalues. The spin of Fermions have been set to half integers first, I think, and QED as their description came second.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 65 ·
3
Replies
65
Views
6K
  • · Replies 61 ·
3
Replies
61
Views
9K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K