Why Use a Bi-Doublet Scalar Field (2,2) Under SU(2)L x SU(2)R?

  • Thread starter Thread starter btphysics
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Group
btphysics
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
Hello,

why one can use a bi-doublet scalar field (2,2) under SU(2)L x SU(2)R ? In terms of group theory, we should have only triplets (3,1) or (1,3) since 2 x 2=3+1 ? But in left right symmetric models, indeed yukawa coupling are formed with bi-doublet scalars.

Best regards
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I don't really know about such models, but in either case individually one can have SU(2) doublet scalar fields, e.g. the Standard Model Higgs doublet, so why couldn't you have scalars which are doublets under both groups?
 
The only problem is that in terms of group theory representation, for me, that does not makes sense.
 
btphysics said:
Hello,

why one can use a bi-doublet scalar field (2,2) under SU(2)L x SU(2)R ? In terms of group theory, we should have only triplets (3,1) or (1,3) since 2 x 2=3+1 ? But in left right symmetric models, indeed yukawa coupling are formed with bi-doublet scalars.

Best regards

This is very much SM question. So, this thread should be moved to particle physics sub-forums.

As for the answer, recall that in the interacting theory of massless nucleon and mesons, we introduce the following 8 \times 8 matrix of meson fields
\Phi ( x ) = I_{ 8 \times 8 } \ \sigma ( x ) + i \gamma_{ 5 } \tau_{ i } \pi_{ i } ( x ) ,
where \sigma ( x ) is an iso-scalar in the [1] representation of SU(2) and \pi_{ i } ( x ) is an iso-vector in the [3] representation of SU(2). We couple this to the nucleon field N ( x ) \in \ [2] by (Yukawa)
\mathcal{ L }_{ \mbox{int} } = \bar{ N } ( x ) \Phi ( x ) N ( x ) .
a) The requirement that \mathcal{ L }_{ \mbox{int} } be invariant under the (vector) SU(2) transformation U, implies that
N ( x ) \rightarrow U N ( x ) , \ \ \ \Phi ( x ) \rightarrow U \Phi ( x ) U^{ \dagger } .
b) Since the nucleon in the model is massless, we also demand that \mathcal{ L }_{ \mbox{int} } be invariant under the axial iso-spin transformation U_{ 5 } = \exp ( i \gamma_{ 5 } \alpha_{ i } \tau_{ i } / 2 ). This implies
N \rightarrow U_{ 5 } N , \ \ \ \Phi \rightarrow U^{ \dagger }_{ 5 } \Phi U^{ \dagger }_{ 5 } .
With a bit of algebra we can combine the transformations in (a) and (b) to form the invariance group SU_{ L } (2) \times SU_{ R }(2) of \mathcal{ L }_{ \mbox{int} } as follows
N_{ R } \rightarrow R N_{ R } ,
in the (1 , 2) representation of SU_{ L } (2) \times SU_{ R }(2),
N_{ L } \rightarrow L N_{ L },
in the (2 , 1) representation, and
\Phi \rightarrow L \Phi R^{ \dagger },
in the (2 , 2) representation of SU_{ L } (2) \times SU_{ R }(2).

So, in short, it is the massless (chiral) fermions that require mesons from (2 , 2 ) representation.

See:
https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=3819325&postcount=6

See also pages 115-121 in the textbook by Ta-Pei Cheng & Ling-Fong Li:
“Gauge Theory of Elementary Particle Physics, Problems and Solutions” , Oxford University Press, 2000.

Sam
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes 1 person
I seem to notice a buildup of papers like this: Detecting single gravitons with quantum sensing. (OK, old one.) Toward graviton detection via photon-graviton quantum state conversion Is this akin to “we’re soon gonna put string theory to the test”, or are these legit? Mind, I’m not expecting anyone to read the papers and explain them to me, but if one of you educated people already have an opinion I’d like to hear it. If not please ignore me. EDIT: I strongly suspect it’s bunk but...
I'm trying to understand the relationship between the Higgs mechanism and the concept of inertia. The Higgs field gives fundamental particles their rest mass, but it doesn't seem to directly explain why a massive object resists acceleration (inertia). My question is: How does the Standard Model account for inertia? Is it simply taken as a given property of mass, or is there a deeper connection to the vacuum structure? Furthermore, how does the Higgs mechanism relate to broader concepts like...
Back
Top