• 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.


PO is now at the Physics Department of Bielefeld University!

New printer friendly PO pages!

Migration to Bielefeld University was successful!

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

205 submissions , 163 unreviewed
5,054 questions , 2,207 unanswered
5,345 answers , 22,719 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
818 active unimported users
More ...

  Fields with SO(3) diagonal subgroup symmetry

+ 5 like - 0 dislike

I read about a Higgs field $\vec{\phi}=\frac{1}{2}a\hat{r}\cdot \vec{\sigma}$ (in the context of 't Hooft-Polyakov monopole) with SO(3) diagonal subgroup symmetry consisting of simultaneous and equal rotations in real and isotopic space, wherein $\sigma^i$ is the Pauli matrix, $\hat{r}$ is the spatial unit vector.

I only know a little bit of introductory group theory for physics student. Unfortunately, I cannot see how this form of field $\phi$ comes out. Does it mean that we are using Pauli matrices as kinda bases of the isotopic space? If so, why? I've learned nothing about such thing. And by the way, what does isotopic space mean

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-08-22 05:06 (UCT), posted by SE-user huotuichang
asked Nov 4, 2013 in Theoretical Physics by sfman (270 points) [ no revision ]
retagged Aug 22, 2014
The interest is to mix internal degrees of freedom of fields ($\Phi$ is in the adjoint representation of $SO(3)$ or $SU(2)$, so has $3$ components : $\Phi = \Phi^a \sigma_a$ ), and space time degrees of freedom (we have 3 spatial dimensions $r^i$).Writing $\Phi^a = r^a$, may seem very curious, because we mix freedom degrees, which seem to have no relation. The interest is to establish topological structures, for instance, we may consider the unit vector $\hat \phi$, which lives in $S^2$, and a asymptotic sphere in space, also $S^2$, and we could consider mapping between these 2 spheres.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-08-22 05:06 (UCT), posted by SE-user Trimok

1 Answer

+ 5 like - 0 dislike

"Isotopic space" means the internal space you move around in when you do Isospin transformation. For a Nucleon, "Isotopic space" consists of all superpositions of proton and neutron, for a pion, it's all superpositions of pi0 pi+ and pi- and so on. Because of the history of gauge theory, Yang and Mills were gauging the Isospin transformation, any gauge group is sometimes called isotopic space even if it has nothing to do with isospin.

The Pauli matrices are SU(2) generators, SU(2) and SO(3) are the same Lie algebra. The 'tHooft Polyakov monopole, you have an isospin vector (it's a collection of 3 scalars which form a vector under isospin rotations) which is "radial" (or a "hedgehog" in Polyakov's terminology), meaning that

$V_1 = x f(r)$

$V_2 = y f(r)$

$V_3 = z f(r)$

where $V_i$ are the three vector isospin components (they rotate into each other when you do an Isospin rotation, nothing happens to these components when you do a spatial rotation), and x,y,z are space indices (they rotate when you do an actual rotation, nothing happens to space when you do an isospin rotation).

When you do a rotation of space on a configuration of scalar fields like this, the field is not invariant, but you can fix that if you do the same isospin rotation also, independently, at the same time. That means the solution breaks two independent SO(3)s to one SO(3).

answered Aug 22, 2014 by Ron Maimon (7,720 points) [ revision history ]
edited Aug 23, 2014 by Ron Maimon

Nice explanation, +1. Minor comment/question: you say SO(3) and SU(2) are the same, but this is only true locally, right? If so, I would suggest you make it clear in the answer, especially since the OP "only knows a little bit of introductory group theory" and in the context of magnetic monopoles as solitons this distinction is very important.

Fixed, I agree.

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).
Please complete the anti-spam verification

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

Your rights