Is the Lagrangian in the Standard Model exact or approximate?

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
5
down vote

favorite
4












We say that the Standard Model has $SU(3)_C otimes SU(2)_L otimes U(1)_Y$ symmetries. However, the $SU(2)_L$ symmetry of the doublet ($u, d$) is not exact because $u$ and $d$ have different masses. Does this imply that the Standard Model Lagrangian is not precise because it treats ($u, d$) as though it has an exact $SU(2)$ symmetry? Furthermore, if treating ($u ,d$) as an $SU(2)$ doublet makes the Lagrangian imprecise, can we treat $u$ and $d$ separately so as to develop a more precise Lagrangian?










share|cite|improve this question



























    up vote
    5
    down vote

    favorite
    4












    We say that the Standard Model has $SU(3)_C otimes SU(2)_L otimes U(1)_Y$ symmetries. However, the $SU(2)_L$ symmetry of the doublet ($u, d$) is not exact because $u$ and $d$ have different masses. Does this imply that the Standard Model Lagrangian is not precise because it treats ($u, d$) as though it has an exact $SU(2)$ symmetry? Furthermore, if treating ($u ,d$) as an $SU(2)$ doublet makes the Lagrangian imprecise, can we treat $u$ and $d$ separately so as to develop a more precise Lagrangian?










    share|cite|improve this question

























      up vote
      5
      down vote

      favorite
      4









      up vote
      5
      down vote

      favorite
      4






      4





      We say that the Standard Model has $SU(3)_C otimes SU(2)_L otimes U(1)_Y$ symmetries. However, the $SU(2)_L$ symmetry of the doublet ($u, d$) is not exact because $u$ and $d$ have different masses. Does this imply that the Standard Model Lagrangian is not precise because it treats ($u, d$) as though it has an exact $SU(2)$ symmetry? Furthermore, if treating ($u ,d$) as an $SU(2)$ doublet makes the Lagrangian imprecise, can we treat $u$ and $d$ separately so as to develop a more precise Lagrangian?










      share|cite|improve this question















      We say that the Standard Model has $SU(3)_C otimes SU(2)_L otimes U(1)_Y$ symmetries. However, the $SU(2)_L$ symmetry of the doublet ($u, d$) is not exact because $u$ and $d$ have different masses. Does this imply that the Standard Model Lagrangian is not precise because it treats ($u, d$) as though it has an exact $SU(2)$ symmetry? Furthermore, if treating ($u ,d$) as an $SU(2)$ doublet makes the Lagrangian imprecise, can we treat $u$ and $d$ separately so as to develop a more precise Lagrangian?







      particle-physics lagrangian-formalism standard-model quarks gauge-invariance






      share|cite|improve this question















      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited Aug 13 at 15:44

























      asked Aug 13 at 12:21









      Shen

      589112




      589112




















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes

















          up vote
          11
          down vote













          You seem to be mixing up a few different things. The Standard Model does not say the up and down quark must have the same mass.



          • The up and down quark form a doublet of the flavor symmetry $SU(2)_F$. This is an approximate symmetry that is broken explicitly by the up and down quark mass difference.

          • The left-handed up and down quarks form a doublet $Q_L$ of weak isospin $SU(2)_L$. This is a factor of the Standard Model gauge group.

          • The right-handed up and down quarks form two singlets $U_R$ and $D_R$ of weak isospin $SU(2)_L$.

          • The gauge symmetry of the Standard Model does place restrictions on the masses of the quarks; namely it requires them to all be zero. The quarks instead acquire masses through the Higgs mechanism, which breaks electroweak symmetry.

          • There is no requirement for the up quark and down quark to get the same mass, because their masses come from independent Yukawa couplings, namely $H Q_L U_R$ and $H Q_L D_R$.

          You've asked almost ten questions about $SU(2)_F$ and $SU(2)_L$, and I really recommend just picking up any book on the Standard Model and reading through it.






          share|cite|improve this answer



























            up vote
            2
            down vote













            The standard model Lagrangian does not model quantum gravity nor dark matter (as far as we know), hence it is certainly not an 'exact' description of the universe anyway.



            However, your question is with regards to the SU(2) symmetry in the standard model Lagrangian. In this respect, there is no loss of precision as far as I know when one treats the SU(2) doublets on the same footing because it is a spontaneously broken symmetry and spontaneous symmetry breaking need not be put into the Lagrangian by hand.



            As a simple example, in the Ising spin model of Ferromagnetism, a spin can either point up or it can point down and the up and down spin configurations are treated on an equal footing and this is manifest as a symmetry of the system, even though in the low-temperature regime the system will spontaneously choose a preferred spin direction and form a Ferromagnet.






            share|cite|improve this answer




















              Your Answer




              StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
              return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
              StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
              StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
              );
              );
              , "mathjax-editing");

              StackExchange.ready(function()
              var channelOptions =
              tags: "".split(" "),
              id: "151"
              ;
              initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

              StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
              // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
              if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
              StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
              createEditor();
              );

              else
              createEditor();

              );

              function createEditor()
              StackExchange.prepareEditor(
              heartbeatType: 'answer',
              convertImagesToLinks: false,
              noModals: false,
              showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
              reputationToPostImages: null,
              bindNavPrevention: true,
              postfix: "",
              noCode: true, onDemand: true,
              discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
              ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
              );



              );













               

              draft saved


              draft discarded


















              StackExchange.ready(
              function ()
              StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f422512%2fis-the-lagrangian-in-the-standard-model-exact-or-approximate%23new-answer', 'question_page');

              );

              Post as a guest






























              2 Answers
              2






              active

              oldest

              votes








              2 Answers
              2






              active

              oldest

              votes









              active

              oldest

              votes






              active

              oldest

              votes








              up vote
              11
              down vote













              You seem to be mixing up a few different things. The Standard Model does not say the up and down quark must have the same mass.



              • The up and down quark form a doublet of the flavor symmetry $SU(2)_F$. This is an approximate symmetry that is broken explicitly by the up and down quark mass difference.

              • The left-handed up and down quarks form a doublet $Q_L$ of weak isospin $SU(2)_L$. This is a factor of the Standard Model gauge group.

              • The right-handed up and down quarks form two singlets $U_R$ and $D_R$ of weak isospin $SU(2)_L$.

              • The gauge symmetry of the Standard Model does place restrictions on the masses of the quarks; namely it requires them to all be zero. The quarks instead acquire masses through the Higgs mechanism, which breaks electroweak symmetry.

              • There is no requirement for the up quark and down quark to get the same mass, because their masses come from independent Yukawa couplings, namely $H Q_L U_R$ and $H Q_L D_R$.

              You've asked almost ten questions about $SU(2)_F$ and $SU(2)_L$, and I really recommend just picking up any book on the Standard Model and reading through it.






              share|cite|improve this answer
























                up vote
                11
                down vote













                You seem to be mixing up a few different things. The Standard Model does not say the up and down quark must have the same mass.



                • The up and down quark form a doublet of the flavor symmetry $SU(2)_F$. This is an approximate symmetry that is broken explicitly by the up and down quark mass difference.

                • The left-handed up and down quarks form a doublet $Q_L$ of weak isospin $SU(2)_L$. This is a factor of the Standard Model gauge group.

                • The right-handed up and down quarks form two singlets $U_R$ and $D_R$ of weak isospin $SU(2)_L$.

                • The gauge symmetry of the Standard Model does place restrictions on the masses of the quarks; namely it requires them to all be zero. The quarks instead acquire masses through the Higgs mechanism, which breaks electroweak symmetry.

                • There is no requirement for the up quark and down quark to get the same mass, because their masses come from independent Yukawa couplings, namely $H Q_L U_R$ and $H Q_L D_R$.

                You've asked almost ten questions about $SU(2)_F$ and $SU(2)_L$, and I really recommend just picking up any book on the Standard Model and reading through it.






                share|cite|improve this answer






















                  up vote
                  11
                  down vote










                  up vote
                  11
                  down vote









                  You seem to be mixing up a few different things. The Standard Model does not say the up and down quark must have the same mass.



                  • The up and down quark form a doublet of the flavor symmetry $SU(2)_F$. This is an approximate symmetry that is broken explicitly by the up and down quark mass difference.

                  • The left-handed up and down quarks form a doublet $Q_L$ of weak isospin $SU(2)_L$. This is a factor of the Standard Model gauge group.

                  • The right-handed up and down quarks form two singlets $U_R$ and $D_R$ of weak isospin $SU(2)_L$.

                  • The gauge symmetry of the Standard Model does place restrictions on the masses of the quarks; namely it requires them to all be zero. The quarks instead acquire masses through the Higgs mechanism, which breaks electroweak symmetry.

                  • There is no requirement for the up quark and down quark to get the same mass, because their masses come from independent Yukawa couplings, namely $H Q_L U_R$ and $H Q_L D_R$.

                  You've asked almost ten questions about $SU(2)_F$ and $SU(2)_L$, and I really recommend just picking up any book on the Standard Model and reading through it.






                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  You seem to be mixing up a few different things. The Standard Model does not say the up and down quark must have the same mass.



                  • The up and down quark form a doublet of the flavor symmetry $SU(2)_F$. This is an approximate symmetry that is broken explicitly by the up and down quark mass difference.

                  • The left-handed up and down quarks form a doublet $Q_L$ of weak isospin $SU(2)_L$. This is a factor of the Standard Model gauge group.

                  • The right-handed up and down quarks form two singlets $U_R$ and $D_R$ of weak isospin $SU(2)_L$.

                  • The gauge symmetry of the Standard Model does place restrictions on the masses of the quarks; namely it requires them to all be zero. The quarks instead acquire masses through the Higgs mechanism, which breaks electroweak symmetry.

                  • There is no requirement for the up quark and down quark to get the same mass, because their masses come from independent Yukawa couplings, namely $H Q_L U_R$ and $H Q_L D_R$.

                  You've asked almost ten questions about $SU(2)_F$ and $SU(2)_L$, and I really recommend just picking up any book on the Standard Model and reading through it.







                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  share|cite|improve this answer



                  share|cite|improve this answer










                  answered Aug 13 at 12:50









                  knzhou

                  33.9k897170




                  33.9k897170




















                      up vote
                      2
                      down vote













                      The standard model Lagrangian does not model quantum gravity nor dark matter (as far as we know), hence it is certainly not an 'exact' description of the universe anyway.



                      However, your question is with regards to the SU(2) symmetry in the standard model Lagrangian. In this respect, there is no loss of precision as far as I know when one treats the SU(2) doublets on the same footing because it is a spontaneously broken symmetry and spontaneous symmetry breaking need not be put into the Lagrangian by hand.



                      As a simple example, in the Ising spin model of Ferromagnetism, a spin can either point up or it can point down and the up and down spin configurations are treated on an equal footing and this is manifest as a symmetry of the system, even though in the low-temperature regime the system will spontaneously choose a preferred spin direction and form a Ferromagnet.






                      share|cite|improve this answer
























                        up vote
                        2
                        down vote













                        The standard model Lagrangian does not model quantum gravity nor dark matter (as far as we know), hence it is certainly not an 'exact' description of the universe anyway.



                        However, your question is with regards to the SU(2) symmetry in the standard model Lagrangian. In this respect, there is no loss of precision as far as I know when one treats the SU(2) doublets on the same footing because it is a spontaneously broken symmetry and spontaneous symmetry breaking need not be put into the Lagrangian by hand.



                        As a simple example, in the Ising spin model of Ferromagnetism, a spin can either point up or it can point down and the up and down spin configurations are treated on an equal footing and this is manifest as a symmetry of the system, even though in the low-temperature regime the system will spontaneously choose a preferred spin direction and form a Ferromagnet.






                        share|cite|improve this answer






















                          up vote
                          2
                          down vote










                          up vote
                          2
                          down vote









                          The standard model Lagrangian does not model quantum gravity nor dark matter (as far as we know), hence it is certainly not an 'exact' description of the universe anyway.



                          However, your question is with regards to the SU(2) symmetry in the standard model Lagrangian. In this respect, there is no loss of precision as far as I know when one treats the SU(2) doublets on the same footing because it is a spontaneously broken symmetry and spontaneous symmetry breaking need not be put into the Lagrangian by hand.



                          As a simple example, in the Ising spin model of Ferromagnetism, a spin can either point up or it can point down and the up and down spin configurations are treated on an equal footing and this is manifest as a symmetry of the system, even though in the low-temperature regime the system will spontaneously choose a preferred spin direction and form a Ferromagnet.






                          share|cite|improve this answer












                          The standard model Lagrangian does not model quantum gravity nor dark matter (as far as we know), hence it is certainly not an 'exact' description of the universe anyway.



                          However, your question is with regards to the SU(2) symmetry in the standard model Lagrangian. In this respect, there is no loss of precision as far as I know when one treats the SU(2) doublets on the same footing because it is a spontaneously broken symmetry and spontaneous symmetry breaking need not be put into the Lagrangian by hand.



                          As a simple example, in the Ising spin model of Ferromagnetism, a spin can either point up or it can point down and the up and down spin configurations are treated on an equal footing and this is manifest as a symmetry of the system, even though in the low-temperature regime the system will spontaneously choose a preferred spin direction and form a Ferromagnet.







                          share|cite|improve this answer












                          share|cite|improve this answer



                          share|cite|improve this answer










                          answered Aug 13 at 12:39









                          Mason

                          637314




                          637314



























                               

                              draft saved


                              draft discarded















































                               


                              draft saved


                              draft discarded














                              StackExchange.ready(
                              function ()
                              StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f422512%2fis-the-lagrangian-in-the-standard-model-exact-or-approximate%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                              );

                              Post as a guest













































































                              Popular posts from this blog

                              How to check contact read email or not when send email to Individual?

                              Bahrain

                              Postfix configuration issue with fips on centos 7; mailgun relay