I want to understand why in $\mathcal N=2$ SUSY representation (from Wess & Bagger book on SUSY and SUGRA, the second table on page 14):

$$Q_\alpha^A Q^B_\beta |1\rangle=(1)^4 \oplus 0 \oplus 2,\quad \text{with } A,B=1,2 \text{ and $|1\rangle$ is the Clifford vacuum}.$$

My wrong (miss a spin-1) method is: First symmetrize the two spin indices and antisymmetrize the A and B indices (since the generators Q anticommute) which gives $(1)^{(AB)}=1$, then antisymmetrize the two spin-indices and symmetrize A and B which gives $(0)^{\{AB\}}=0^3$, now I have $$(1\oplus 0^3)\otimes 1= 1^3\oplus 2+0.$$ (I am not sure about the $1^3$ part which I think must be instead $1^4$ but I do not know why!?)


Not sure where you're missing the 1 from, but

$$0 \otimes 1=1$$


$$ 1\otimes 1 = 0 \oplus 1 \oplus 2$$

give the result in the book.

| cite | improve this answer | |
  • $\begingroup$ How did you find the last one? ($1 \otimes 1 = (2)_{symmetric} \oplus (0)_{antisymmetric} $ ?) $\endgroup$ – Mohamed Vall Dec 21 '16 at 12:06
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Usual SU(2) representation direct product decomposition is $i \otimes j = (i+j) \oplus \dots \oplus |i-j|$. $\endgroup$ – user121664 Dec 21 '16 at 12:37
  • $\begingroup$ As for why what you're doing isn't correct, well, symmetric and antisymmetric in what indices? Spin 1 are 3d vectors, so antisymmetric has 3 components and is spin 1, while symmetric decomposes into trace and traceless, which give 0 and 2. $\endgroup$ – user121664 Dec 21 '16 at 12:40
  • $\begingroup$ I agree. when I did the Dynkin diagram I found $3\otimes 3 =1+3+5$ which exactly $0+1+2$. Thanks again $\endgroup$ – Mohamed Vall Dec 21 '16 at 12:45

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.