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

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter btphysics
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Group
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the use of a bi-doublet scalar field (2,2) under the gauge group SU(2)L x SU(2)R, particularly in the context of left-right symmetric models and Yukawa couplings. Participants explore the theoretical implications and group representation aspects of such fields.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the validity of using a bi-doublet scalar field (2,2) under SU(2)L x SU(2)R, suggesting that group theory would only allow for triplets (3,1) or (1,3) based on the decomposition of the product of representations.
  • Another participant suggests that since individual SU(2) doublet scalar fields exist, it may be plausible to have scalars that are doublets under both groups.
  • A different participant expresses skepticism about the group theory representation, indicating that the use of a bi-doublet does not make sense to them.
  • One participant elaborates on the theoretical framework involving massless nucleons and mesons, detailing how the invariance under SU(2) transformations leads to the necessity of the (2,2) representation for the Yukawa coupling in the interacting theory.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the appropriateness of using a bi-doublet scalar field (2,2). There is no consensus on the validity of this representation within the context of SU(2)L x SU(2)R, and the discussion remains unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Some participants highlight the need for massless (chiral) fermions to necessitate mesons from the (2,2) representation, but the discussion does not resolve the underlying assumptions or implications of this requirement.

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   Reactions: 1 person

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K