2
  1. Which is the general representation $(n,m)$ of $SU(3)$ and how can I prove that $$C_{2}^{su(3)} = \frac{1}{3}\left(\frac{1}{3}(n^2+m^2+n\cdot m)+n\cdot m\right)\delta_{ij}~? $$

  2. and the other question is why we need to define the cubic Casimir operator for $SU(3)$.

I know that the usual way is to use the basis $$\lbrace{T_{3},T_{8},F^{2}_{1},F_{2}^{1},F_{1}^{3},F_{3}^{1},F_{2}^{3},F_{3}^{2}\rbrace} $$

and then remembering that $$C_{2} = g^{ij}e_{i}e_{j}\Rightarrow C_{2}^{su(3)} = \frac{1}{3}\left(T_{3}^{2}+T_{2}^{2}+F_{1}^{2}F_{2}^{1}+F_{2}^{1}F_{1}^{2}+F_{1}^{3}F_{3}^{1}+F_{3}^{1}F^{1}_{3}+F_{2}^{3}F_{3}^{2}+F_{3}^{2}F_{2}^{3}\right) $$

but I can't see how to get the first expression. In $SU(2)$ we used its complex extension $sl(2,\mathbb{C})$ defining the new basis $$\lbrace{T_{+},T_{-},T_{3}\rbrace} $$

where $T_{i}=ie_{i}$ and $T_{\pm} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(e_{i}\pm ie_{i})$ and working a bit we can find that $$C_{2}^{su(2)} = \frac{1}{2}(T_{+}T_{-}+T_{-}T_{+}+T_{3}^{2}) $$ and using the eigenvalues of the basis elements we finally prove that $$C_{2}^{su(2)}|j>= \frac{1}{2}m(m+1)|j> $$ I think that it's something analogous maybe? the pdf's that I've been reading on internet are so unclear :(

Any help is very grateful!

Qmechanic
  • 201,751
  • Always explain your notation! How exactly are you labelling a $\mathrm{SU}(3)$ representation by two numbers $(n,m)$? (I can guess it, but it should be written out) 2. What is your definition of "Casimir operator" here (i.e. what is the l.h.s. of the equation you want to prove defined as)?
  • – ACuriousMind Dec 01 '16 at 13:39
  • @ACuriousMind Sorry! but that's my question, I don't understand what is the $(n,m)$ general representation. I've been reading and I found that there are the weight vectors, if you can edit my question giving the definition would be great! (sorry but really in my class notes I don't have more definitions, that part of the course wasn't good explain). Btw, my Casimir operator definition is $g^{ij}e_{i}e_{j}$, where $g$ is the Cartan's metric tensor, i.e., $g_{ij}=f_{il}^{k}f_{jk}^{l}$, where $f_{il}^{k}$ are the structure constant of the algebra, for $SU(2)$ is $g_{ij}=-2\delta_{ij}$ for example – Sebastián Molina Dec 01 '16 at 14:50
  • Well...in that case you can't really "prove" what you want to prove. I suspect that you have a similar formula for the cubic Casimir somewhere, yes? In that case, $n$ and $m$ might be simply defined by those two formulae (solving the two equations for the eigenvalues of the Casimirs will yield unique $n,m$), so there's little to prove. – ACuriousMind Dec 01 '16 at 14:55
  • Yes, my cubic Casimir definition is $C_{3}^{su(3)} = -id_{ijk}T_{i}T_{j}T_{k}$ where $d_{ijk} = \frac{1}{4}Tr\lbrace (\lambda_{i}\lambda_{j}+\lambda_{j}\lambda_{i})\lambda_{k}\rbrace$, $\lambda_{i}$ Gell-Mann matrices (sorry I have a lot of definitions). Btw thanks! I'll try it and I'll keep reading – Sebastián Molina Dec 01 '16 at 15:16
  • 1
    You know, you are asking for a mini-course. Start from Wikipedia, and move on to Hall's book, or Iachello, or... or... The Dynkin (n,m) notation means n quarks and m antiquarks: n single columns and 2 double columns in the young tableau. You have as many independent Casimirs as the rank, here 2. You cannot get a needed minicourse in a PSE answer. Might as well hit the books. – Cosmas Zachos Dec 06 '16 at 17:51
  • 1
    Very related question 150481. – Cosmas Zachos Feb 21 '17 at 15:09