Why Do GUT Theories Only Use Left Spinors?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Magister
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Gut Spinors Theories
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the use of left spinors in Grand Unified Theories (GUTs), questioning why only left spinors are typically employed and whether this choice is merely historical or has deeper implications. Participants explore the implications of using left versus right spinors, particularly in the context of chiral theories and Majorana particles.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the exclusive use of left spinors in GUT theories and whether the conjugate of the spinor is preferred for historical reasons.
  • Another participant suggests that the preference for left spinors may relate to the formulation of Majorana particles, proposing that it could be simpler to work with left spinors and their conjugates rather than both left and right spinors.
  • A third participant explains that the standard model is a chiral theory, where left and right-handed fields are treated separately, and that the convention is to use left-handed fields. They note that while right-handed spinors can be used, it would require additional hermitian conjugation to align with existing literature.
  • This participant also mentions that left-handed spinors can adequately describe right-handed fields through the use of antiparticles, emphasizing the ease of maintaining Lorentz-invariant combinations when only one type of spinor is used.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express some agreement on the convention of using left spinors in GUT theories, but there remains uncertainty regarding the reasons behind this choice and whether alternative approaches could be equally valid.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the dependence on conventions in theoretical physics and the potential complexities involved in switching between left and right spinors, but does not resolve the underlying reasons for the preference of left spinors.

Who May Find This Useful

Readers interested in theoretical physics, particularly those exploring GUTs, chiral theories, and the role of spinors in particle physics may find this discussion relevant.

Magister
Messages
82
Reaction score
0
Why in every single text about GUT theories only the left spinors are used? Why use the conjugate of the spinor instead of the spinor itself? Is it just a another historic definition?

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Magister said:
Why in every single text about GUT theories only the left spinors are used? Why use the conjugate of the spinor instead of the spinor itself? Is it just a another historic definition?

I do not know much about GUT theories, but it might be related to the fact we often have majorana particles and it is easier the formulate the them with left spinor, anti-particles and conjugate than with left and right spinors ?

In any case, if you learn about the answer, I am interested about it.
 
Barmecides has it more or less right. The standard model is a Chiral theory (left and right handed fields are treated separately) so it makes sense to write things down in terms of Weyl spinors (2-component). Whether we write them as (1/2,0) fields ("left-handed") or (0,1/2) fields ("right-handed") is a matter of convention, and the convention is to use left-handed fields. There's nothing really special about this, but if you feel like using right-handed spinors, you'll have to do a whole lot of hermitian-conjugating in order to match results with other papers!

Remember: left-handed spinors describe right-handed fields just fine (you just have to use the antiparticle). There's nothing wrong with this. And when all fields are left-handed (or right handed, but as long as it's just ONE of them) - then it's very easy to keep track of what Lorentz-invariant combinations you can write down. Otherwise, you're likely to make a mistake. TRUST ME: I speak with the voice of experience! :wink:
 
Ok. That was what I thought. I was just wondering if there was another reason for that.

Thanks a lot for your replies
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
6K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K