One of the encouraging points of string theory is the ability to single out specific gauge groups, a feat that Chew himself thougth impossible back in 1970. But it extracts groups as SO(32) or E8xE8.... elegant it is, but not simple.(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

So lets ask, is there really no way single out SU(3) from some consistency argument. Here the definite property is that [tex] \bf 3 \times 3 = 6 + \bar 3[/tex]

and that the representations with size [itex]n (n\pm 1) /2[/itex] are seen to happen in string theory whenorientifoldsare involved. Here we could look to some 14 of Sp(6), or to SO(6), with a 15 what recovers back all the important game of SU(3), via

[tex]\bf 15 = >> 1_0 + 3_4 + \bar 3_{-4} + 8_0 [/tex]

while for higher Sp(2n) or SO(2n) groups using this same decomposition we still get the adjoint but not the defining and conjugate irreps of SU(n).

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

Dismiss Notice

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!

# A The failure to booststrap SU(3).

Have something to add?

Draft saved
Draft deleted

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