Quantcast
  • 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.

News

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

Attributions

(propose a free ad)

Site Statistics

145 submissions , 122 unreviewed
3,930 questions , 1,398 unanswered
4,852 answers , 20,624 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
501 active unimported users
More ...

Symmetry breaking to a special subalgebra?

+ 5 like - 0 dislike
73 views

This is a follow-up to my question here.

  • For regular subalgebras of some group's Lie algebra the root system of the subalgebra is a subset of the root system of the original's group algebra. In other words, the generators of the subalgebra are a subset of the generators of the original group.
  • Subalgebras whose root system is not a subset of the root system of the original algebra are called special subalgebras. Therefore, the generators are not a subset of the original's group generators.

Using the Higgs mechanism, as explained nicely by @Heterotic in the question I linked to above, we simply check which generators remain unbroken after one or more Higgs fields get a vev. Then:

"The remaining subgroup after the symmetry breaking is simply the group generated by the unbroken generators."

This is certainly correct for regular subalgebras, but how does this work for special subalgebras? How can we determine that we broke to a special subalgebra by giving a vev to a Higgs field, if the generators of the subalgebra are not a subset of the original's group generators?

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2015-11-01 19:26 (UTC), posted by SE-user JakobH
asked Jul 10, 2015 in Theoretical Physics by JakobH (110 points) [ no revision ]

1 Answer

+ 3 like - 0 dislike

Subalgebras whose root system is not a subset of the root system of the original algebra are called special subalgebras. Therefore, the generators are not a subset of the original's group generators.

That is not quite right. A special subalgebra is one such that their step operators do not form a subset of the algebra step operators.That is what is meant by a root system not being a subset of another root system. It does not imply that the subalgebra generators are not a subset of the algebra generators.

Example: Consider the three dimensional representation of $\mathfrak g=\mathfrak{su}(3)$, whose generators $T_a=\lambda_a/2$, where $\lambda_a$ are the Gell-Mann matrices. The step operators are
\begin{align*}
E_{\pm\alpha_1}=T_1\pm iT_2,\\
E_{\pm\alpha_2}=T_6\pm iT_7,\\
E_{\pm(\alpha_1+\alpha_2)}=T_4\pm iT_5,
\end{align*}


Regular embedding: The generators $T_1$, $T_2$ and $T_3$ form a subalgebra $\mathfrak{su}(2)$. This subalgebra step operators are $t_\pm=T_1\pm iT_2=E_{\pm\alpha_1}$. The subalgebra step operators form a subset of the algebra step operators.

Special embedding: Another $\mathfrak{su}(2)$ subalgebra is given by $T_2$, $T_5$ and $T_7$. In this case the step operators are $t_\pm=T_5\pm iT_7$ which cannot be written as a subset of the step operators of $\mathfrak{su}(3)$.

Notice the branching rules for the first embedding is $3=2\oplus 1$ while for the second is $3=3$.


  

answered Jul 12, 2016 by Diracology (90 points) [ revision history ]

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:
p$\hbar$ysicsOve$\varnothing$flow
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
...