Three dimensional representation of ##U(1)\times SU(2)##

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the three-dimensional representation of the gauge group ##U(1)\times SU(2)##, specifically focusing on the mass term associated with a non-chiral Dirac fermion in this context. Participants explore the implications of this representation within the framework of the Standard Model and the conditions under which mass terms can be introduced.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a mass term for a three-dimensional representation of ##U(1)\times SU(2)## with zero hypercharge and questions its origin.
  • Another participant asserts that the mass term is simply a parameter of the Lagrangian and discusses the differences in mass term introduction between chiral and non-chiral fermions.
  • A participant revises the mass term expression and seeks clarification on its equivalence to a previously referenced expression in a paper.
  • There is a suggestion that the two expressions may differ only by a constant.
  • One participant raises a question about the independence of the fields ##L^+##, ##L^0##, and ##L^-##, and challenges the notation used in the discussion.
  • A later reply clarifies that the discussion pertains to a triplet added to the electroweak sector of the Standard Model, specifying its properties and reference to a detailed paper.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the nature and implications of the mass term, with some asserting it is straightforward while others question the notation and relationships between the fields. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the equivalence of the mass term expressions and the implications of the triplet representation.

Contextual Notes

Participants have not fully clarified the assumptions underlying their claims, particularly regarding the notation and the relationship between the fields. The discussion also reflects varying interpretations of mass term implications in the context of the Standard Model.

Ramtin123
Messages
22
Reaction score
0
Consider a three dimensional representation of ##U(1)\times SU(2)## with zero hypercharge ##Y=0##:

$$ L= \begin{pmatrix} L^+ \\ L^0 \\ L^- \end{pmatrix} $$

Then the mass term is given by [1]:

$$ \mathcal{L} \supset -\frac m 2 \left( 2 L^+ L^- +L^0 L^0 \right) $$

I am wondering where the mass term is coming from.

I know that in the Standard Model the mass term for a doublet which is in two dimensional representation, is given by ## m \bar L L##.

Any ideas or comments appreciated.

Reference:

  1. Eqn (4) in arXiv:0710.1668v2 [hep-ph]
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It is just a parameter of the Lagrangian. Since ##L## is a full non-chiral Dirac fermion, there is no problem in introducing that mass term, just as there is no problem in introducing a mass term in QED. The problem in introducing fermion masses in the SM is that the SM is chiral and left- and right-handed fields transform differently under SU(2). In turn, this means that the mass term needs to be generated through something like the Higgs mechanism, but this is not an issue here.
 
Thanks Orodruin . So, in this case mass term should read:

$$ -\frac m 2 \bar L L = -\frac m 2 \left( L^{+†} L^+ + L^{0†} L^0 + L^{-†} L^- \right)$$

So, why should this expression be the same as the expression above in eqn (4) of arXiv:0710.1668v2 [hep-ph] ?
 
Isn't this the same up to a constant?
 
##L^+##, ##L^0## and ##L^-## are independent fields. Let's call them ##\psi^+##, ##\phi^0## and ##\chi^-##.
So I am wondering why ##\psi^{+†}=\chi^-## or ##\chi^{-†}=\psi^+## ?
 
Then I didn't understand your notation. Which particular model are you discussing?
 
I am adding a triplet to electro-weak sector of the Standard Model. The triplet is in real non-chiral representation of ##SU(2)_L \times U(1)_Y##, and has vanishing hyper charge ##Y=0##.
The model is discussed in details in section 3.1 of this paper.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K