Why is q=0 for Simple Roots in Lie Algebras?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of simple roots in Lie algebras, specifically addressing why the variable q is equal to zero in a given formula related to weights and ladder operators. The scope includes theoretical aspects of Lie algebras and mathematical reasoning regarding root systems and their implications.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant states that if \(\alpha\) and \(\beta\) are simple roots, then \(\alpha - \beta\) is not a simple root, leading to the conclusion that \(E_{-\vec{\alpha}}|E_{\vec{\beta}}\rangle = 0\).
  • Another participant reiterates the formula \(\frac{2\vec{\alpha}\cdot \vec{\mu}}{\vec{\alpha}^2}=-(p-q)\) and expresses confusion about why \(q=0\), seeking clarification.
  • A later reply explains that \(E_{\alpha}\) acts as a ladder operator, and when applied to a weight state \(|\mu\rangle\), it results in a state proportional to \(|\mu + \alpha\rangle\), while \(E_{-\alpha}\) does the opposite, leading to the conclusion that \(q=0\) in this context.
  • One participant suggests that \(q=0\) represents the lowest state, while another clarifies that this is true only in this specific case and not as a general rule.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the generality of the statement regarding \(q=0\), with some agreeing that it is the case in this specific context, while others emphasize that it does not apply universally.

Contextual Notes

The discussion involves assumptions about the properties of ladder operators and the nature of simple roots, which may not be explicitly stated or universally applicable across different scenarios in Lie algebras.

spookyfish
Messages
53
Reaction score
0
If [itex]\alpha[/itex] and [itex]\beta[/itex] are simple roots, then [itex]\alpha-\beta[/itex] is not. This means that
[tex] E_{-\vec{\alpha}}|E_{\vec{\beta}}\rangle = 0[/tex]
Now, according to the text I read, this means that [itex]q[/itex] in the formula
[tex] \frac{2\vec{\alpha}\cdot \vec{\mu}}{\vec{\alpha}^2}=-(p-q)[/tex]
is zero, where [itex]\vec{\mu}[/itex] is a weight, and [itex]p[/itex] and [itex]q[/itex] are integers. I couldn't understand why [itex]q=0[/itex], if someone could explain to me.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I'm sorry you are not generating any responses at the moment. Is there any additional information you can share with us? Any new findings?
 
spookyfish said:
If [itex]\alpha[/itex] and [itex]\beta[/itex] are simple roots, then [itex]\alpha-\beta[/itex] is not. This means that
[tex] E_{-\vec{\alpha}}|E_{\vec{\beta}}\rangle = 0[/tex]
Now, according to the text I read, this means that [itex]q[/itex] in the formula
[tex] \frac{2\vec{\alpha}\cdot \vec{\mu}}{\vec{\alpha}^2}=-(p-q)[/tex]
is zero, where [itex]\vec{\mu}[/itex] is a weight, and [itex]p[/itex] and [itex]q[/itex] are integers. I couldn't understand why [itex]q=0[/itex], if someone could explain to me.
Eα is treated as a ladder operator, when it acts on a state of some weight say |μ> it adds to it and give something proportional to|μ+α>. E will do the opposite.

In general, ##(E_α)^{P+1}|μ> =C E_α|μ+pα>=0## and ##(E_{-α})^{q+1}|μ> =C E_α|μ-qα>=0## for positive integers p and q.

comparing to your equation,
##E_{-\vec{\alpha}}|μ\rangle = 0##, we have ##q=0##.
 
So q=0 is the lowest state. Thanks...
 
In this case only, not in general.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
46
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K