##SU(2)## doublets, Majorana Fermions and Higgs

spaghetti3451
Messages
1,311
Reaction score
31
Say ##L## and ##L^{c}## are a pair of ##SU(2)## doublets (electroweak-charge fermions) and ##N_{1}## and ##N_{1}^{c}## are a pair of neutral Majorana fermions.

Say that these fermions couple to the Higgs via Yukawa coupling and have vector masses ##M_0## and ##M_1## respectively:

$$M_{0}LL^{c} + M_{1}N_{1}N_{1}^{c} + YHLN_{1}^{c} + Y^{c}H^{\dagger}L^{c}N_{1}$$What is the difference between ##L## and ##L^{c}##?

What does the superscript ##c## signify?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Charge conjugation. Your ##LL^c## term breaks SU(2) gauge invariance.
 
How does the ##LL^{c}## term break ##SU(2)## gauge invariance?
 
I really meant to say SU(2)xU(1). You are missing a number of bars on your fermion fields. The term ##\bar L L^c## is not a hypercharge singlet because ##\bar L## and ##L^c## have the same hypercharge.
 
Orodruin said:
I really meant to say SU(2)xU(1). You are missing a number of bars on your fermion fields. The term ##\bar L L^c## is not a hypercharge singlet because ##\bar L## and ##L^c## have the same hypercharge.

But, ##L## is the complex conjugate of ##L^{c}##. So, isn't ##LL^{c}## a scalar?

Why then do we need to have ##\bar{L}L^{c}##?
 
Without the bar your expression is not Lorentz invariant.
 
The Lagrangian is taken from equation (1.1) in page 2 of the article in the link https://arxiv.org/abs/1609.06320.

In the article, there is no bar on ##L##. What am I getting wrong here?
 
They are being sloppy. Any specialist reading that is going to understand what they mean.
 
Okay, in the Dirac Lagrangian, it is possible to have the mass term ##m\bar{\psi}\psi##.

So, why can't we have the term ##M_{0}\bar{L}L## and not ##M_{0}\bar{L}L^{c}## here?
 
  • #10
The first one because you cannot have a mass term involving two left-handed fields. The second because it violates gauge invariance.
 
  • #11
So, let me get this right:

the correct term is ##M_{0}LL^{c}## and not ##M_{0}\bar{L}L^{c}##?
 
  • #12
Also, why is ##M_0## called the vector mass and not simply the mass?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K