• Register
PhysicsOverflow is a next-generation academic platform for physicists and astronomers, including a community peer review system and a postgraduate-level discussion forum analogous to MathOverflow.

Welcome to PhysicsOverflow! PhysicsOverflow is an open platform for community peer review and graduate-level Physics discussion.

Please help promote PhysicsOverflow ads elsewhere if you like it.


Please vote for this year's PhysicsOverflow ads!

Please do help out in categorising submissions. Submit a paper to PhysicsOverflow!

... see more

Tools for paper authors

Submit paper
Claim Paper Authorship

Tools for SE users

Search User
Reclaim SE Account
Request Account Merger
Nativise imported posts
Claim post (deleted users)
Import SE post

Users whose questions have been imported from Physics Stack Exchange, Theoretical Physics Stack Exchange, or any other Stack Exchange site are kindly requested to reclaim their account and not to register as a new user.

Public \(\beta\) tools

Report a bug with a feature
Request a new functionality
404 page design
Send feedback


(propose a free ad)

Site Statistics

124 submissions , 105 unreviewed
3,647 questions , 1,242 unanswered
4,637 answers , 19,674 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
434 active unimported users
More ...

Are lens spaces classified via a Weinberg angle?

+ 7 like - 0 dislike

I am thinking about Kaluza Klein theory in the 3 dimensional lens spaces. These have an isometry group SU(2)xU(1), generically, and in some way interpolate between the extreme cases of manifolds $S^2 \times S^1$ and $S^3$ (or, arguably depending of your parametrisation, across $S^2 \times S^1 ... S^3 ... S^1 \times S^2$).

My question is, simply, if the application of Kaluza Klein construction forces different coupling constants to the two groups $SU(2)$ and $U(1)$, and then a kind of discrete Weinberg angle, or if they have always the same coupling.

Note that when you build a lens space bundle over CP2 (which is equivalent to a $S^1$ bundle over $CP^2$ x $CP^1$, if I read correctly a remark of Atiyah reported by Kreck and Stolz), you get an isometry group of SU(3) times SU(2) times (1), so the same question could be asked here, in this more widely known setup. Of course that odd dimensional spaces do not carry chirality, but my question is just about having different couplings, that is all. It could be interesting, as a plus, to compare with coupling relationships coming from Non Commutative Geometry...

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
asked Oct 1, 2011 in Theoretical Physics by anonymous [ no revision ]

1 Answer

+ 9 like - 0 dislike

If your definition of a lens space means $S^3/\Gamma$, a quotient of the three-sphere, then the $U(1)$, $SU(2)$ couplings may (classically) be derived from the parent theory on the full three-sphere whose isometry is $SO(4) \approx SU(2) \times SU(2)$ (at the level of Lie algebras). The subgroup $\Gamma$ acts only inside one of the $SU(2)$ factors, let's say the second one.

Because the original $S^3$ had a symmetry between both $SU(2)$ factors, their gauge couplings coincided. However, you assumed a $\Gamma={\mathbb Z}_k$ case because you claimed that the second $SU(2)$ was broken to a $U(1)$ subgroup; that wouldn't be true for the non-Abelian groups $\Gamma$ isomorphic to the isometries of the Platonic polyhedra. The orbifolding by ${\mathbb Z}_k$ means that only states with $J_{{\rm second},3}$ being a multiple of $k$ are kept in the spectrum. It's therefore natural to define the new elementary charge $e$ as $k$ times the elementary charge in the parent, unorbifolded theory. So the natural value of the Weinberg angle obeys $\tan \theta_W=g'/g = k$; the primed $g$ refers to the $U(1)$ and is amplified $k$-times.

The charges of charged particles under the first $SU(2)$ are also affected by the orbifolding, however, and they're correlated with the charges under the $U(1)$: for large values of $k$, for example, you won't find any triplet under the first $SU(2)$ in the spectrum (but it's less trivial to say which reps of the first $SU(2)$ appear in the spectrum). For this reason, it's somewhat strange to say that the Weinberg angle becomes extreme. In some moral sense, the natural couplings of both gauge groups are still equal even in the orbifolded theory.

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
answered Oct 1, 2011 by Luboš Motl (10,178 points) [ no revision ]
In this case, thanks for the answer! I will wait for some days before accepting, just in case someone wants to propose a more extended or general one.

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
Comment: the possibility of redefine the new elementary charge also sounds a bit as the freedom in the normalisation of the hypercharge.

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)

Your answer

Please use answers only to (at least partly) answer questions. To comment, discuss, or ask for clarification, leave a comment instead.
To mask links under text, please type your text, highlight it, and click the "link" button. You can then enter your link URL.
Please consult the FAQ for as to how to format your post.
This is the answer box; if you want to write a comment instead, please use the 'add comment' button.
Live preview (may slow down editor)   Preview
Your name to display (optional):
Privacy: Your email address will only be used for sending these notifications.
Anti-spam verification:
If you are a human please identify the position of the character covered by the symbol $\varnothing$ in the following word:
Then drag the red bullet below over the corresponding character of our banner. When you drop it there, the bullet changes to green (on slow internet connections after a few seconds).
To avoid this verification in future, please log in or register.

user contributions licensed under cc by-sa 3.0 with attribution required

Your rights