text:
# The Schwinger 𝑆𝑈(3) construction - I: Multiplicity problem and relation to induced representations

## I Introduction

The well known Schwinger representation of the Lie algebra of $`SU(2)`$ , constructed using the annihilation and creation operators of two independent quantum mechanical harmonic oscillators, has played an important role in many widely differing contexts. Within the quantum theory of angular momentum it has made the calculation of various quantities somewhat easier than by other methods. Beyond this, it has been very effectively exploited in the physics of strongly correlated systems, in quantum optics of two mode radiation fields, and in the study of certain classes of partially coherent optical beams, namely to obtain the coherent mode decomposition of anisotropic Gaussian Schell model beams. It has also been used in a recent investigation of the Pauli spin- statistics theorem.

Bargmann has presented an entire function Hilbert space analogue of the Schwinger construction, which is extremely elegant and possesses special merits of its own. This may be viewed as a counterpart to the Fock space description of quantum mechanical oscillator systems.

Certain specially attractive features of the Schwinger $`SU(2)`$ construction should be mentioned. It leads upon exponentiation to a unitary representation (UR) of $`SU(2)`$ in which each unitary irreducible representation (UIR), labelled as usual by the spin quantum number $`j`$ with possible values $`0,1/2,1,\mathrm{},`$ appears exactly once. In other words, it is complete in the sense that no UIR of $`SU(2)`$ is missed, and also economical in the sense of being multiplicity free. Thus, reflecting these two features, it may be regarded as a ‘Generating Representation’ for $`SU(2)`$, a concept that has been effectively used in understanding the structures of various kinds of Clebsch-Gordan series for UIR’s of the non compact group $`SU(1,1)\text{[7]}`$. In addition of course the use of boson operator methods makes many operator and state vector calculations relatively easy to carry out.

It is of considerable interest to extend the Schwinger construction to other compact Lie groups, the next natural case after $`SU(2)`$ being $`SU(3)`$. The aims behind any such attempt would be to preserve the simplicity of the boson calculus, to cover all UIR’s of the concerned group, and to do it in a multiplicity free manner.

The case of $`SU(3)`$ has been studied by several authors since the work of Moshinsky. The aim of the present paper is somewhat different from previous studies, being motivated by the particular points of view mentioned above. In particular our aim is to see to what extent the attractive features of the $`SU(2)`$ construction survive when we consider $`SU(3)`$, and which ones have to be given up.

A brief overview of this paper is as follows. In Section II we collect together some relevant facts regarding unitary representations of compact Lie groups with special attention to $`SU(3)`$. In particular, we highlight the fact that the theory of induced representations leads to a unitary representation of $`SU(3)`$ which has all the properties becoming of a ‘Generating Representation’ of $`SU(3)`$ in that it contains all the UIR’s of $`SU(3)`$ exactly once each. The Hilbert space carrying this unitary representation turns out to be the Hilbert space of functions on unit sphere in $`C^3`$. In Section III, we turn to the Schwinger oscillator construction for $`SU(3)`$ and show that a naive extension of the Schwinger $`SU(2)`$-construction making use of six oscillators leads to a very ‘fat’ UR of $`SU(3)`$ containing each UIR of $`SU(3)`$ infinitely many times. We then show how the group $`Sp(2,R)`$ enables us to completely handle this multiplicity and also neatly isolate from this rather large space a subspace carrying a UR of $`SU(3)`$ of a ‘Generating Representation’ type. At this stage, we have two ’Generating Representations’ of $`SU(3)`$, one based on the Hilbert space of functions on a unit sphere in $`C^3`$ and the other based on the Fock space of six oscillators, and a natural question to ask is how the two are related. To this end, in Section IV, we make use of the Bargmann representation, to transcribe the Fock space description into a description based on a Hilbert space of square integrable functions in six complex variables satisfying certain conditions. This transcription enables us to establish an equivalence map between the Hilbert spaces supporting the two incarnations of the ’Generating Representation’ for $`SU(3)`$, details of which are given in Sections V and VI. Section VII contains concluding remarks and further outlook and an appendix gives the details of the construction of $`SU(3)\times Sp(2,R)`$ basis states.

## II Unitary representations of compact Lie groups, the $`SU(3)`$ case

It is useful to first recall some basic facts concerning the representation theory of any compact simple Lie group $`G`$. The basic building blocks are the UIR’s of $`G`$. Each UIR carries certain identifying labels (eigenvalues of Casimir operators), such as $`j`$ for $`SU(2)`$. It is of a characteristic dimension, such as $`2j+1`$ for $`SU(2)`$. In addition, we may set up some convenient orthonormal basis in the space of the UIR, as simultaneous eigenvectors of some complete commuting set of hermitian operators. The eigenvalue sets labelling the basis vectors are generalisations of the single magnetic quantum number $`m`$ for $`SU(2)`$.

A general UR of $`G`$ is reducible into UIR’s, each occurring with some multiplicity. Thus the UR as a whole is in principle completely determined upto equivalence by these multiplicities. However certain UR’s have special significance, reflecting the way they are constructed, and so deserve special attention. We consider two cases - the regular representation, and representations induced from various Lie subgroups of $`G`$.

The Hilbert space carrying the regular representation of $`G`$ is the space $`L^2(G)`$ of all complex square integrable functions on $`G`$, the integration being with respect to the (left and right) translation invariant volume element on $`G`$. On this space there are in fact two (mutually commuting) regular representations of $`G`$, the left and the right regular representations. Upon reduction into UIR’s each of these contains every UIR of $`G`$ without exception, the multiplicity of occurrence of a particular UIR is just its dimension. Thus the regular representations possess the completeness property of the Schwinger $`SU(2)`$ construction, but not its economy.

Next we look at the family of induced UR’s of $`G`$. Let $`H`$ be some Lie subgroup of $`G`$, and let $`D(h),hH`$, be the operators of a UIR of $`H`$ on some Hilbert space $`𝒱`$. Then a certain unique UR of $`G`$, with operators $`𝒟_H^{(\mathrm{ind},D)}(g)`$ for $`gG`$, can be constructed. As the labels indicate, this UR is induced from the UIR $`D()`$ of $`H`$. The Hilbert space $`_H^{(\mathrm{ind},D)}`$ of this UR consists of functions on $`G`$ with values in $`𝒱`$ obeying a covariance condition and having finite norm :

$`\psi _H^{(\mathrm{ind},D)}`$ $`:`$ $`\psi (g)𝒱,gG`$ (1)
$`\psi (gh)`$ $`=`$ $`D(h^1)\psi (g),hH`$ (2)
$`\psi ^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _G}𝑑g(\psi (g),\psi (g))_𝒱<\mathrm{}.`$ (3)
Here $`dg`$ is the (suitably normalised) invariant volume element on $`G`$, and the integrand is the squared norm of $`\psi (g)𝒱`$. The covariance condition means that $`\psi (g)`$ is essentially a function on the coset space $`G/H`$, in the sense that the ‘values’ of $`\psi (g)`$ all over a coset are determined by its ‘value’ at any one representative point. Correspondingly due to unitarity of $`D(h)`$, $`(\psi (g),\psi (g))_𝒱`$ is constant over each coset; so the expression for $`\psi ^2`$ can be simplified and expressed in terms of a $`G`$-invariant volume element on $`G/H`$. The action of $`𝒟_H^{(\mathrm{ind},D)}(g)`$ on $`\psi `$ is then given by

$`gG`$ $`:`$ $`𝒟_H^{(\mathrm{ind},D)}(g)\psi =\psi ^{}`$ (5)
$`\psi ^{}(g^{})=\psi (g^1g^{}).`$
It is clear that $`G`$ action preserves the covariance condition, and we have a UR of $`G`$ on $`_H^{(\mathrm{ind},D)}`$.

Whereas $`D()`$ was assumed to be a UIR of $`H`$, $`𝒟_H^{(\mathrm{ind},D)}()`$ is in general reducible; so it is a direct sum of the various UIR’s of $`G`$, each occurring with some multiplicity. These multiplicities are determined by the Reciprocity Theorem : Each UIR $`𝒟()`$ of $`G`$ appears in $`𝒟_H^{(\mathrm{ind},D)}()`$ as often as $`𝒟()`$ contains $`D()`$ upon restriction from $`G`$ to $`H`$.

With this general background we now take up the specific case of $`SU(3)`$. The defining representation of this group is

$$SU(3)=\{A=3\times 3\mathrm{complex}\mathrm{matrix}|A^{}A=I_{3\times 3},\mathrm{det}A=1\},$$
(6)
with the group operation given by matrix multiplication. In this representation the eight hermitian generators are $`\frac{1}{2}\lambda _\alpha ,\alpha =1,2,\mathrm{},8`$, where the matrices $`\lambda _\alpha `$ and the structure constants $`f_{\alpha \beta \gamma }`$ occurring in the commutation relations

$$[\lambda _\alpha ,\lambda _\beta ]=2if_{\alpha \beta \gamma }\lambda _\gamma ,\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma =1,2,\mathrm{},8$$
(7)
are all very well known.

A general UIR of $`SU(3)`$ is determined by two independent nonnegative integers $`p`$ and $`q`$, so it may be denoted as $`(p,q)`$. It is of dimension $`d(p,q)=\frac{1}{2}(p+1)(q+1)(p+q+2)`$. The defining three dimensional UIR in $`(\text{6})`$ is $`(1,0)`$; while the inequivalent complex conjugate UIR is $`(0,1)`$. In general the complex conjugate of $`(p,q)`$ is $`(q,p)`$; and the adjoint UIR is $`(1,1)`$ of dimension eight. Various choices of ‘magnetic quantum numbers’ within a UIR may be made. The one corresponding to the canonical subgroup $`SU(2)\times U(1)/Z_2=U(2)SU(3)`$ leads to the three quantum numbers $`I,M,Y`$ in standard notation. Here $`I`$ and $`M`$ are the isospin and magnetic quantum number labels for a general UIR of $`SU(2)`$, while $`Y`$ is the eigenvalue of the (suitably normalised) $`U(1)`$ or hypercharge generator. The subgroups $`SU(2)`$ and $`U(1)`$ commute, and for definiteness we take $`SU(2)`$ to be the one acting on the first two dimensions of the three dimensions in the UIR $`(1,0)`$. The spectrum of ‘$`IY`$’ multiplets present in the UIR $`(p,q)`$ can be described thus:

$$I=\frac{1}{2}(r+s),Y=rs+\frac{2}{3}(qp),0rp,0sq.$$
(8)
Thus for each pair of integers $`(r,s)`$ in the above ranges, we have one $`IY`$ multiplet, with $`M`$ going over the usual $`2I+1`$ values $`I,I1,\mathrm{},I+1,I`$. Then the orthonormal basis vectors for the UIR $`(p,q)`$ of $`SU(3)`$ may be written as $`|p,q;IMY>`$. This UIR can be realised via suitably constructed irreducible tensors. A tensor $`T`$ with $`p`$ indices belonging to the UIR $`(1,0)`$ and $`q`$ indices to the UIR $`(0,1)`$ is a collection of complex components $`T_{k_1\mathrm{}k_q}^{j_1\mathrm{}j_p}`$, $`j`$ and $`k=1,2,3`$, transforming under $`ASU(3)`$ by the rule

$$T_{}^{}{}_{k_1\mathrm{}k_q}{}^{j_1\mathrm{}j_p}=A_{}^{j_1}{}_{l_1}{}^{}\mathrm{}A_{}^{j_p}{}_{l_p}{}^{}A_{}^{k_1}{}_{m_1}{}^{}\mathrm{}A_{}^{k_q}{}_{m_q}{}^{}T_{m_1\mathrm{}m_q}^{l_1\mathrm{}l_p}.$$
(9)
If in addition $`T`$ is completely symmetric separately in the superscripts and in the subscripts, and is traceless, i.e., contraction of any upper index with any lower index leads to zero, then all these properties are maintained under $`SU(3)`$ action and $`T`$ is an irreducible tensor. It then has precisely $`d(p,q)`$ independent components (in the complex sense); and the space of all such tensors carries the UIR $`(p,q)`$. The explicit transition from the tensor components $`T_{k_1\mathrm{}k_q}^{j_1\mathrm{}j_p}`$ to the canonical components $`T_{IMY}^{(p,q)}`$ may be found in

The regular representations of $`SU(3)`$ act on the space $`L^2(SU(3))`$, and in each of them the UIR $`(p,q)`$ appears $`d(p,q)`$ times. We shall not be concerned with this UR of $`SU(3)`$ in our work. Instead we give now the UIR contents of some selected induced UR’s of $`SU(3)`$. For illustrative purposes we consider the following four subgroups

$`U(1)\times U(1)`$ $`=`$ $`\{A=\mathrm{diag}(e^{i(\theta _1+\theta _2)},e^{i(\theta _1\theta _2)},e^{2i\theta _1})|0\theta _1,\theta _22\pi \};`$ (11)
$`SU(2)`$ $`=`$ $`\{A=\left(\begin{array}{cc}a& \mathrm{𝟎}\\ \mathrm{𝟎}& 1\end{array}\right)|aSU(2)\};`$ (12)
$`U(2)`$ $`=`$ $`\{A=\left(\begin{array}{cc}u& \mathrm{𝟎}\\ \mathrm{𝟎}& (\mathrm{det}u)^1\end{array}\right)|uU(2)\};`$ (13)
$`SO(3)`$ $`=`$ $`\{ASU(3)|A^{}=A\}.`$ (14)
In each case, we look at the induced UR of $`SU(3)`$ arising from the trivial one dimensional UIR of the subgroup. In the first two cases, in order to apply the Reciprocity Theorem, we can use the information in $`(\text{8})`$ giving the $`SU(2)\times U(1)/Z_2`$ content of the UIR $`(p,q)`$ of $`SU(3)`$. Defining by a zero in the superscript the trivial UIR of the relevant subgroup, we have the results:

$`𝒟_{U(1)\times U(1)}^{(\mathrm{ind},0)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{p,q=0,1,\mathrm{}}{p=qmod3}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}n_{p,q}(p,q),n_{p,q}=\mathrm{min}(p+1,q+1);`$ (16)
$`𝒟_{SU(2)}^{(\mathrm{ind},0)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{p,q=0,1,\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}(p,q);`$ (17)
$`𝒟_{U(2)}^{(\mathrm{ind},0)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{p=0,1,\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}(p,p).`$ (18)
The real dimensions of the corresponding coset spaces $`SU(3)/U(1)\times U(1),SU(3)/SU(2)`$ and $`SU(3)/U(2)`$ are $`6`$, $`5`$ and $`4`$ respectively. In the case of induction from the trivial UIR of $`SO(3)`$, we need to use the fact that the UIR $`(p,q)`$ of $`SU(3)`$ does not contain an $`SO(3)`$ invariant state if either $`p`$ or $`q`$ or both are odd, while it contains one such state if both $`p`$ and $`q`$ are even. Then we arrive at the reduction

$$𝒟_{SO(3)}^{(\mathrm{ind},0)}=\underset{r,s=0,1,\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}(2r,2s),$$
(19)
with $`SU(3)/SO(3)`$ being of real dimension $`5`$.

From the above discussion we see that the induced UR $`𝒟_{SU(2)}^{(\mathrm{ind},0)}`$ of $`SU(3)`$ is particularly interesting in that it captures both the completeness and the economy properties of the Schwinger $`SU(2)`$ construction : each UIR of $`SU(3)`$ is present, exactly once. Thus we may call this a Generating Representation of $`SU(3)`$; it is much leaner than the regular representations.

## III The minimal $`SU(3)`$ Schwinger oscillator construction

An elementary oscillator operator construction of the $`SU(3)`$ generators is based on three independent pairs of annihilation and creation operators $`\widehat{a}_j,\widehat{a}_j^{}`$ obeying

$$[\widehat{a}_j,\widehat{a}_k^{}]=\delta _{jk},[\widehat{a}_j,\widehat{a}_k]=[\widehat{a}_j^{},\widehat{a}_k^{}]=0,j,k=1,2,3.$$
(20)
We write $`^{(a)}`$ for the Hilbert space on which these operators act irreducibly. The individual and total number operators are

$$\widehat{N}_1^{(a)}=\widehat{a}_1^{}\widehat{a}_1,\widehat{N}_2^{(a)}=\widehat{a}_2^{}\widehat{a}_2,\widehat{N}_3^{(a)}=\widehat{a}_3^{}\widehat{a}_3,\widehat{N}^{(a)}=\widehat{a}_j^{}\widehat{a}_j.$$
(21)
If we now define the bilinear operators

$$Q_\alpha ^{(a)}=\frac{1}{2}\widehat{a}^{}\lambda _\alpha \widehat{a},\alpha =1,2,\mathrm{},8,$$
(22)
each $`Q_\alpha ^{(a)}`$ is hermitian, and they obey the $`SU(3)`$ Lie algebra commutation relations

$$[Q_\alpha ^{(a)},Q_\beta ^{(a)}]=if_{\alpha \beta \gamma }Q_\gamma ^{(a)}.$$
(23)
In addition they conserve the total number operator:

$$[Q_\alpha ^{(a)},\widehat{N}^{(a)}]=0$$
(24)
Upon exponentiation of these generators we obtain a particular UR, $`𝒰^{(a)}(A)`$ say, of $`SU(3)`$ acting on $`^{(a)}`$, under which the creation (annihilation) operators $`\widehat{a}_j^{}`$ ($`\widehat{a}_j`$) transform via the UIR $`(1,0)`$ ($`(0,1)`$):

$`𝒰^{(a)}(A)\widehat{a}_j^{}𝒰^{(a)}(A)^1`$ $`=`$ $`A_{}^{k}{}_{j}{}^{}\widehat{a}_k^{}`$ (25)
$`𝒰^{(a)}(A)\widehat{a}_j𝒰^{(a)}(A)^1`$ $`=`$ $`A_{}^{k}{}_{j}{}^{}\widehat{a}_k`$ (26)
However upon reduction $`𝒰^{(a)}(A)`$ contains only the ‘triangular’ UIR’s $`(p,0)`$ of $`SU(3)`$, once each. In that sense this UR may be regarded as the ‘Generating Representation’ for this subset of UIR’s. For any given $`p0`$, the UIR $`(p,0)`$ is realised on that subspace $`^{(p,0)}`$ of $`^{(a)}`$ over which the total number operator $`\widehat{N}^{(a)}`$ takes the eigenvalue $`p`$; and the connection between the tensor and the Fock space descriptions is given in this manner:

$`\{T^{j_1\mathrm{}j_p}\}|T>`$ $`=`$ $`T^{j_1\mathrm{}j_p}\widehat{a}_{j_1}^{}\mathrm{}\widehat{a}_{j_p}^{}|\underset{¯}{0}>^{(p,0)}^{(a)},`$ (27)
$`\widehat{a}_j|\underset{¯}{0}>`$ $`=`$ $`0;`$ (28)
$`𝒰^{(a)}(A)|T>`$ $`=`$ $`|T^{}>,`$ (29)
$`T_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{j_1\mathrm{}j_p}`$ $`=`$ $`A_{}^{j_1}{}_{l_1}{}^{}\mathrm{}A_{}^{j_p}{}_{l_p}{}^{}T^{l_1\mathrm{}l_p}.`$ (30)
Therefore we have the (orthogonal) direct sum decompositions

$`^{(a)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{p=0,1,\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}^{(p,0)},`$ (31)
$`^{(p,0)}`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{Sp}\{\widehat{a}_{j_1}^{}\mathrm{}\widehat{a}_{j_p}^{}|\underset{¯}{0}>\},`$ (32)
$`𝒰^{(a)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{p=0,1,\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}(p,0)`$ (33)
To be able to obtain the other UIR’s as well, we bring in another independent triplet of oscillator operators $`\widehat{b}_j`$ and $`\widehat{b}_j^{}`$ obeying the same commutation relations $`(\text{20})`$ and commuting with $`\widehat{a}`$’s and $`\widehat{a}^{}`$’s :

$`[\widehat{b}_j,\widehat{b}_k^{}]`$ $`=`$ $`\delta _{jk},[\widehat{b}_j,\widehat{b}_k]=[\widehat{b}_j^{},\widehat{b}_k^{}]=0,j,k=1,2,3,`$ (35)
$`[\widehat{a}_j\mathrm{or}\widehat{a}_j^{},\widehat{b}_k\mathrm{or}\widehat{b}_k^{}]=0`$
The corresponding Hilbert space is $`^{(b)}`$, and the $`b`$-type number operators are

$$\widehat{N}_1^{(b)}=\widehat{b}_1^{}\widehat{b}_1,\widehat{N}_2^{(b)}=\widehat{b}_2^{}\widehat{b}_2,\widehat{N}_3^{(b)}=\widehat{b}_3^{}\widehat{b}_3,\widehat{N}^{(b)}=\widehat{b}_j^{}\widehat{b}_j.$$
(36)
We define the $`b`$-type $`SU(3)`$ generators as

$$Q_\alpha ^{(b)}=\frac{1}{2}\widehat{b}^{}\lambda _\alpha ^{}\widehat{b},\alpha =1,2,\mathrm{},8,$$
(37)
and they obey

$`[Q_\alpha ^{(b)},Q_\beta ^{(b)}]`$ $`=`$ $`if_{\alpha \beta \gamma }Q_\gamma ^{(b)},`$ (38)
$`[Q_\alpha ^{(b)},\widehat{N}^{(b)}]`$ $`=`$ $`0.`$ (39)
Exponentiation of these generators leads to a UR $`𝒰^{(b)}(A)`$ acting on $`^{(b)}`$, under which the creation (annihilation) operators $`\widehat{b}_j^{}`$ ($`\widehat{b}_j`$) transform via the UIR $`(0,1)`$ ($`(1,0)`$):

$`𝒰^{(b)}(A)\widehat{b}_j^{}𝒰^{(b)}(A)^1`$ $`=`$ $`A_{}^{k}{}_{j}{}^{}\widehat{b}_k^{}`$ (40)
$`𝒰^{(b)}(A)\widehat{b}_j𝒰^{(b)}(A)^1`$ $`=`$ $`A_{}^{k}{}_{j}{}^{}\widehat{b}_k`$ (41)
Now this UR of $`SU(3)`$ contains each of the triangular UIR’s $`(0,q)`$ for $`q0`$ once each, so it is a Generating Representation for this family of UIR’s. For each $`q0`$, the UIR $`(0,q)`$ is realised on that subspace $`^{(0,q)}`$ of $`^{(b)}`$ over which the total number operator $`\widehat{N}^{(b)}`$ takes the eigenvalue $`q`$. Analogous to $`(\text{30})`$, the tensor-Fock space connection is now :

$`\{T_{k_1\mathrm{}k_q}\}|T>`$ $`=`$ $`T_{k_1\mathrm{}k_q}\widehat{b}_{k_1}^{}\mathrm{}\widehat{b}_{k_q}^{}|\underset{¯}{0}>^{(0,q)}^{(b)},`$ (42)
$`\widehat{b}_k|\underset{¯}{0}>`$ $`=`$ $`0;`$ (43)
$`𝒰^{(b)}(A)|T>`$ $`=`$ $`|T^{}>,`$ (44)
$`T_{}^{}{}_{k_1\mathrm{}k_q}{}^{}`$ $`=`$ $`A_{}^{k_1}{}_{m_1}{}^{}\mathrm{}A_{}^{k_q}{}_{m_q}{}^{}T_{m_1\mathrm{}m_q}.`$ (45)
(The use of a common symbol $`|\underset{¯}{0}>`$ for the Fock ground states in $`^{(a)}`$ and $`^{(b)}`$, and $`|T>`$ in $`(\text{30})`$, $`(\text{45})`$ should cause no confusion as the meanings are always clear from the context). In place of $`(\text{33})`$ we now have :

$`^{(b)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{q=0,1,\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}^{(0,q)},`$ (46)
$`^{(0,q)}`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{Sp}\{\widehat{b}_{k_1}^{}\mathrm{}\widehat{b}_{k_q}^{}|\underset{¯}{0}>\},`$ (47)
$`𝒰^{(b)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{q=0,1,\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}(0,q)`$ (48)
From these considerations it is clear that if we want to obtain all the UIR’s $`(p,q)`$ of $`SU(3)`$, missing none, the minimal scheme is to use all six independent oscillators $`\widehat{a}_j,\widehat{a}_j^{},\widehat{b}_j,\widehat{b}_j^{}`$ and define the $`SU(3)`$ generators

$$Q_\alpha =Q_\alpha ^{(a)}+Q_\alpha ^{(b)}.$$
(49)
They act on the product Hilbert space $`=^{(a)}\times ^{(b)}`$, of course obey the $`SU(3)`$ commutation relations, and upon exponentiation lead to the UR $`𝒰(A)=𝒰^{(a)}(A)\times 𝒰^{(b)}(A)`$. However, as we see in a moment, while each UIR $`(p,q)`$ is certainly present in $`𝒰(A)`$, it occurs infinitely many times. A systematic group theoretic procedure to handle this multiplicity, based on the non compact group $`Sp(2,R)`$, will be set up below. The tensor-Fock space connection is now given as follows. To an irreducible tensor $`T_{k_1\mathrm{}k_q}^{j_1\mathrm{}j_p}`$ which is symmetric and traceless and so ‘belongs’ to the UIR $`(p,q)`$ we associate the vector $`|T>`$ by

$`|T>`$ $`=`$ $`T_{k_1\mathrm{}k_q}^{j_1\mathrm{}j_p}\widehat{a}_{j_1}^{}\mathrm{}\widehat{a}_{j_p}^{}\widehat{b}_{k_1}^{}\mathrm{}\widehat{b}_{k_q}^{}|\underset{¯}{0},\underset{¯}{0}>^{(p,0)}\times ^{(0,q)},`$ (50)
$`\widehat{a}_j|\underset{¯}{0},\underset{¯}{0}>`$ $`=`$ $`\widehat{b}_j|\underset{¯}{0},\underset{¯}{0}>=0,`$ (51)
$`𝒰(A)|T>`$ $`=`$ $`|T^{}>,`$ (52)
the components of $`T^{}`$ being given by $`(\text{9})`$. While this vector $`|T>`$ is certainly a simultaneous eigenvector of the two number operators $`\widehat{N}^{(a)},\widehat{N}^{(b)}`$ with eigenvalues $`p,q`$ respectively, the tracelessness of the tensor $`T_{k_1\mathrm{}k_q}^{j_1\mathrm{}j_p}`$ implies that (unless at least one of $`p`$ and $`q`$ vanishes) we do not get all such independent vectors in $``$. This aspect is further clarified below. On the other hand if we drop the tracelessness condition and retain only symmetry, we do span all of $`^{(p,0)}\times ^{(0,q)}`$ via $`(\text{52})`$.

The decomposition of $`𝒰(A)`$ into UIR’s, and the counting of multiplicities, is accomplished by appealing to the Clebsch-Gordan Series for the product of two triangular UIR’s $`(p,0)`$ and $`(0,q)`$:

$$(p,0)\times (0,q)=(p,q)(p1,q1)(p2,q2)\mathrm{}(pr,qr),r=\mathrm{min}(p,q)$$
(53)
Therefore at the Hilbert space level one has the orthogonal subspace decomposition

$``$ $`=`$ $`^{(a)}\times ^{(b)}`$ (54)
$`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \underset{p=0,1,\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}^{(p,0)}\right)\times \left({\displaystyle \underset{q=0,1,\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}^{(0,q)}\right)`$ (55)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{p,q=0,1,\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}^{(p,0)}\times ^{(0,q)},`$ (56)
$`^{(p,0)}\times ^{(0,q)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\rho =0,1,\mathrm{}}{\overset{r}{}}}^{(p\rho ,q\rho ;\rho )},r=\mathrm{min}(p,q).`$ (57)
Here $`^{(p\rho ,q\rho ;\rho )}`$ is that unique subspace of $`^{(p,0)}\times ^{(0,q)}`$ carrying the UIR $`(p\rho ,q\rho )`$ present on the right hand side of $`(\text{53})`$. All vectors in $`^{(p\rho ,q\rho ;\rho )}`$ are eigen vectors of $`\widehat{N}^{(a)}`$ and $`\widehat{N}^{(b)}`$ with eigenvalues $`p`$ and $`q`$ respectively; and if the tensor $`T`$ in $`(\text{52})`$ is assumed traceless, only vectors in $`^{(p,q;0)}^{(p,0)}\times ^{(0,q)}`$ are obtained on the right in that equation.

Focussing on a given UIR $`(p,q)`$, we see that it appears once each in $`^{(p,0)}\times ^{(0,q)},^{(p+1,0)}\times ^{(0,q+1)},\mathrm{}`$ in the respective irreducible subspaces $`^{(p,q;0)},^{(p,q;1)},\mathrm{}`$. Thus it is the leading piece in $`^{(p,0)}\times ^{(0,q)}`$, the next to the leading piece in $`^{(p+1,0)}\times ^{(0,q+1)}`$, and so on. Therefore the decomposition $`(\text{57})`$ of $``$ can be presented in the alternative manner

$$=\underset{p,q=0,1.\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\underset{\rho =0,1.\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}^{(p,q;\rho )},^{(p,q;\rho )}^{(p+\rho ,0)}\times ^{(0,q+\rho )}$$
(58)
each $`^{(p,q;\rho )}`$ carrying the same UIR $`(p,q)`$. Thus the index $`\rho `$ is an (orthogonal) multiplicity label with an infinite number of values. For $`\rho \rho ^{}`$, $`^{(p,q;\rho ^{})}`$ and $`^{(p,q;\rho )}`$ are mutually orthogonal. This is also evident as $`\widehat{N}^{(a)}=p+\rho ^{}`$, $`\widehat{N}^{(b)}=q+\rho ^{}`$ in the former and $`\widehat{N}^{(a)}=p+\rho `$, $`\widehat{N}^{(b)}=q+\rho `$ in the latter.

We now introduce the group $`Sp(2,R)`$ to handle in a systematic way the multiplicity index $`\rho `$. The hermitian generators of $`Sp(2,R)`$ and their commutation relations are

$`J_0`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\widehat{N}^{(a)}+\widehat{N}^{(b)}+3),`$ (59)
$`K_1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\widehat{a}_j^{}\widehat{b}_j^{}+\widehat{a}_j\widehat{b}_j),`$ (60)
$`K_2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}(\widehat{a}_j^{}\widehat{b}_j^{}\widehat{a}_j\widehat{b}_j);`$ (61)
$`[J_0,K_1]`$ $`=`$ $`iK_2,[J_0,K_2]=iK_1,[K_1,K_2]=iJ_0.`$ (62)
Using the raising and lowering combinations $`K_\pm =K_1\pm iK_2`$ we have :

$`K_+`$ $`=`$ $`\widehat{a}_j^{}\widehat{b}_j^{},K_{}=K_+^{}=\widehat{a}_j\widehat{b}_j;`$ (63)
$`[J_0,K_\pm ]`$ $`=`$ $`\pm K_\pm ,[K_+,K_{}]=2J_0.`$ (64)
The significance of this construction is that the two groups $`SU(3)`$ and $`Sp(2,R)`$, both acting unitarily on $``$, commute with one another :

$$[J_0\mathrm{or}K_1\mathrm{or}K_2,Q_\alpha ]=0$$
(65)
It is this that helps us handle the multiplicity of occurrences of each $`SU(3)`$ UIR $`(p,q)`$ in $`:\rho `$ becomes a ‘magnetic quantum number’ within a suitable UIR of $`Sp(2,R)`$.

The family of (infinite dimensional) UIR’s of $`Sp(2,R)`$ relevant here is the positive discrete family $`D_k^{(+)}`$, labelled by $`k=1/2,1,3/2,2\mathrm{}`$ (Actually we encounter only $`k3/2`$). Within the UIR $`D_k^{(+)}`$ we have an orthonormal basis $`|k,m>`$ on which the generators act as follows:

$`J_0|k,m>`$ $`=`$ $`m|k,m>,m=k,k+1,k+2,\mathrm{}`$ (66)
$`K_\pm |k,m>`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{(m\pm k)(mk\pm 1)}|k,m\pm 1>`$ (67)
From these follow the useful results

$`K_1^2+K_2^2J_0^2`$ $`=`$ $`k(1k),`$ (69)
$`|k,m>`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{(2k1)!}{(mk)!(m+k1)!}}}K_+^{mk}|k,k>,`$ (70)
$`K_+^{mk}K_{}^{mk}|k,m>`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(mk)!(m+k1)!}{(2k1)!}}|k,m>.`$ (71)
Going back to the generators $`(\text{62})`$ it is clear that on all of $`^{(p,0)}\times ^{(0,q)}`$, and so on each $`^{(p\rho ,q\rho ;\rho )}`$, $`J_0`$ has the eigenvalue $`\frac{1}{2}(p+q+3)`$; therefore on $`^{(p,q;\rho )}`$ it has the eigenvalue $`\frac{1}{2}(p+q+3)+\rho `$. It is also clear that action by $`K_\pm `$ on $`^{(p,0)}\times ^{(0,q)}`$ leads to a subspace of $`^{(p\pm 1,0)}\times ^{(0,q\pm 1)}`$. Therefore because of $`(\text{65})`$ we see that $`K_\pm `$ acting on $`^{(p,q;\rho )}`$ yield $`^{(p,q;\rho \pm 1)}`$. Of course $`^{(p,q;0)}`$ is annihilated by $`K_{}`$.

Reflecting all this we see that an orthonormal basis for $``$ can be set up labelled as follows:

$`|p,q;IMY;m>`$ $`:`$ $`p,q=0,1,2,\mathrm{};`$ (72)
$`m`$ $`=`$ $`k,k+1,k+2,\mathrm{},`$ (73)
$`k`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(p+q+3);`$ (74)
$`N^{(a)}=p+mk`$ , $`N^{(b)}=q+mk.`$ (75)
Since $`k`$ is determined in terms of $`p`$ and $`q`$, we do not include it as an additional label in the basis kets above. (The ranges for $`I,M,Y`$ within the $`SU(3)`$ UIR $`(p,q)`$ are given in $`(\text{8})`$) The $`SU(3)`$ UIR labels $`p,q`$ determine $`k`$ and so the associated UIR $`D_k^{(+)}`$ of $`Sp(2,R)`$. For fixed $`p,q`$ as $`I,M,Y,m`$ vary we get a set of states carrying the UIR $`(p,q)\times D_k^{(+)}`$ of $`SU(3)\times Sp(2,R)`$. We can now appreciate the following relationships :

$`^{(p,q;\rho )}`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{Sp}\{|p,q;IMY;k+\rho >|IMY\mathrm{varying}\},`$ (78)
$`\rho =0,1,2,\mathrm{};`$
$`^{(p,q;\rho )}`$ $`=`$ $`K_+^\rho ^{(p,q;0)};`$ (79)
$`K_{}^{(p,q;0)}`$ $`=`$ $`0.`$ (80)
Therefore the null space of $`K_{}`$ within $``$ is the subspace

$`_0`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{p,q=0,1,\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}^{(p,q;0)},`$ (81)
$`=`$ $`Sp\{|p,q;IMY;k>|p,q,IMY\text{varying}\},`$ (83)
and we see that the UR $`𝒰(A)`$ of $`SU(3)`$ on $``$ when restricted to $`_0`$ gives a UR $`𝒟_0`$ which is multiplicity free and includes every UIR of $`SU(3)`$. It is thus identical in structure to the induced representation $`𝒟_{SU(2)}^{(\mathrm{ind},0)}`$ in $`(\text{17})`$. We see how the use of $`Sp(2,R)`$ helps us isolate $`_0`$ in a neat manner.

In addition to the subspaces $`^{(p,q;\rho )},_0`$ of $``$ defined above, it is also useful to define the series of mutually orthogonal infinite dimensional subspaces

$`^{(p,q)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\rho =0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}^{(p,q;\rho )}`$ (84)
$`=`$ $`Sp\{|p,q;IMY;m>|IMYm\text{varying}\},`$ (86)
$`p,q=0,1,2,\mathrm{}.`$
Thus the infinity of occurrences of the $`SU(3)`$ UIR $`(p,q)`$ are collected together in $`^{(p,q)}`$.

In the appendix we give explicit formulae for the state vectors $`|p,q;IMY;m>`$ as functions of the operators $`\widehat{a}_j^{},\widehat{b}_j^{}`$ acting on the Fock vacuum $`|\underset{¯}{0},\underset{¯}{0}>`$.

## IV The Bargmann Representation

For some purposes the use of the Bargmann representation of the canonical commutation relations is more convenient than the Fock space description. We outline the definitions of $``$ and the $`SU(3)`$ UR $`𝒰(A)=𝒰^{(a)}(A)\times 𝒰^{(b)}(A)`$ in this language, and then turn to the problem of isolating the subspace $`_0`$ in $``$.

Vectors in $``$ correspond to entire functions $`f(\underset{¯}{z},\underset{¯}{w})`$ in six independent complex variables $`\underset{¯}{z}=(z_j),\underset{¯}{w}=(w_j),j=1,2,3`$ with the squared norm defined as

$$f^2=\underset{j=1}{\overset{3}{}}\left(\frac{d^2z_j}{\pi }\right)\left(\frac{d^2w_j}{\pi }\right)e^{z^{}zw^{}w}|f(\underset{¯}{z},\underset{¯}{w})|^2$$
(87)
Any such $`f(\underset{¯}{z},\underset{¯}{w})`$ has a unique Taylor series expansion

$$f(\underset{¯}{z},\underset{¯}{w})=\underset{p,q=0,1,\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}f_{k_1\mathrm{}k_q}^{j_1\mathrm{}j_p}z_{j_1}\mathrm{}z_{j_p}w_{k_1}\mathrm{}w_{k_q},$$
(88)
involving the tensor components $`f_{k_1\mathrm{}k_q}^{j_1\mathrm{}j_p}`$ separately symmetric in the superscripts and the subscripts. In terms of these the squared norm is

$$f^2=\underset{p,q=0,1,\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}p!q!f_{k_1\mathrm{}k_q}^{j_1\mathrm{}j_p}{}_{}{}^{}f_{k_1\mathrm{}k_q}^{j_1\mathrm{}j_p}$$
(89)
The operators $`\widehat{a}_j,\widehat{a}_j^{},\widehat{b}_j,\widehat{b}_j^{}`$ act on $`f(\underset{¯}{z},\underset{¯}{w})`$ as follows:

$$\widehat{a}_j\frac{}{z_j},\widehat{a}_j^{}z_j,\widehat{b}_j\frac{}{w_j},\widehat{b}_j^{}w_j.$$
(90)
The UR $`𝒰(A)`$ of $`SU(3)`$ acts very simply via point transformations:

$$(𝒰(A)f)(\underset{¯}{z},\underset{¯}{w})=f(A^1\underset{¯}{z},A^1\underset{¯}{w}).$$
(91)
The $`Sp(2,R)`$ generators are particularly simple:

$`J_0`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(z_j{\displaystyle \frac{}{z_j}}+w_j{\displaystyle \frac{}{w_j}}+3\right),`$ (92)
$`K_+`$ $`=`$ $`z_jw_j\underset{¯}{z}\underset{¯}{w},`$ (93)
$`K_{}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{^2}{z_jw_j}}{\displaystyle \frac{}{\underset{¯}{z}}}{\displaystyle \frac{}{\underset{¯}{w}}}.`$ (94)
We will use these below.

It is clear that the terms in $`(\text{88}),(\text{89})`$ for fixed $`p`$ and $`q`$ are contributions from $`^{(p,0)}\times ^{(0,q)}`$. The action by $`K_+`$ obeys:

$$f(\underset{¯}{z},\underset{¯}{w})^{(p,0)}\times ^{(0,q)}K_+f(\underset{¯}{z},\underset{¯}{w})=\underset{¯}{z}\underset{¯}{w}f(\underset{¯}{z},\underset{¯}{w})^{(p+1,0)}\times ^{(0,q+1)}$$
(95)
On the other hand action by $`K_{}`$ is the analytic equivalent of taking the trace: starting with (4.2) we get

$$K_{}f(\underset{¯}{z},\underset{¯}{w})=\underset{p,q=0,1,\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}pqf_{jk_1\mathrm{}k_{q1}}^{jj_1\mathrm{}j_{p1}}z_{j_1}\mathrm{}z_{j_{p1}}w_{k_1}\mathrm{}w_{k_{q1}}.$$
(96)
From these and earlier remarks we can see that the correspondences between (symmetric, traceless) tensors, entire functions, and subspaces of $``$ are:

$`^{(p,0)}\times ^{(0,q)}`$ $`\left\{f_{k_1\mathrm{}k_q}^{j_1\mathrm{}j_p}\right\}f(\underset{¯}{z},\underset{¯}{w}):`$ (99)
$`f(\lambda \underset{¯}{z},\mu \underset{¯}{w})=\lambda ^p\mu ^qf(\underset{¯}{z},\underset{¯}{w});`$
$`f(\underset{¯}{z},\underset{¯}{w})^{(p,q;\rho )}f(\underset{¯}{z},\underset{¯}{w})`$ $`=(\underset{¯}{z}\underset{¯}{w})^\rho f_0(\underset{¯}{z},\underset{¯}{w}),f_0(\underset{¯}{z},\underset{¯}{w})^{(p,q;0)}^{(p,0)}\times ^{(0,q)},`$ (101)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{}{\underset{¯}{z}}}{\displaystyle \frac{}{\underset{¯}{w}}}f_0(\underset{¯}{z},\underset{¯}{w})=0`$
Thus traceless symmetric tensors of type $`(p,q)`$ are in correspondence with entire functions $`f_0(\underset{¯}{z},\underset{¯}{w})`$ of degrees of homogeneity $`p`$ and $`q`$ respectively, obeying the partial differential equation $`(\text{101})`$. Alternatively, given any $`f(\underset{¯}{z},\underset{¯}{w})^{(p,0)}\times ^{(0,q)}`$, there is a unique ‘traceless’ part $`f_0(\underset{¯}{z},\underset{¯}{w})`$ belonging to the leading subspace $`^{(p,q;0)}`$ and annihilated by $`K_{}`$. Thus ‘trace removal’ can be accomplished by analytical means. We now give the procedure to pass from $`f(\underset{¯}{z},\underset{¯}{w})`$ to $`f_0(\underset{¯}{z},\underset{¯}{w})`$.

For any $`f(\underset{¯}{z},\underset{¯}{w})^{(p,0)}\times ^{(0,q)}`$ we can easily establish the general formula

$`K_{}\{(\underset{¯}{z}\underset{¯}{w})^nK_{}^nf(\underset{¯}{z},\underset{¯}{w})\}`$ $`=`$ $`n(p+q+2n)(\underset{¯}{z}\underset{¯}{w})^{n1}K_{}^nf(\underset{¯}{z},\underset{¯}{w})`$ (102)
$`+`$ $`(\underset{¯}{z}\underset{¯}{w})^nK_{}^{n+1}f(\underset{¯}{z},\underset{¯}{w})`$ (103)
We try for $`f_0(\underset{¯}{z},\underset{¯}{w})`$ the expression

$$f_0(\underset{¯}{z},\underset{¯}{w})=f(\underset{¯}{z},\underset{¯}{w})\underset{n=1,2,\mathrm{}}{}\alpha _n(\underset{¯}{z}\underset{¯}{w})^nK_{}^nf(\underset{¯}{z},\underset{¯}{w})$$
(104)
and get using $`(\text{103})`$ (and omitting the arguments $`\underset{¯}{z},\underset{¯}{w}`$):

$`K_{}f_0=K_{}f`$ $`(p+q+1)\alpha _1K_{}f`$ (106)
$`{\displaystyle \underset{n=1,2,\mathrm{}}{}}\{\alpha _n+(n+1)(p+q+1n)\alpha _{n+1}\}(\underset{¯}{z}\underset{¯}{w})^nK_{}^{n+1}f.`$
We can therefore attain $`K_{}f_0=0`$ by choosing

$$\alpha _n=(1)^{n1}\frac{(p+q+1n)!}{n!(p+q+1)!},n=1,2,\mathrm{}.$$
(107)
Therefore for any (bihomogeneous) polynomial $`f(\underset{¯}{z},\underset{¯}{w})^{(p,0)}\times ^{(0,q)}`$ the leading traceless part annihilated by $`K_{}`$ is an element $`f_0(\underset{¯}{z},\underset{¯}{w})`$ in $`^{(p,q;0)}`$ :

$$f_0(\underset{¯}{z},\underset{¯}{w})=f(\underset{¯}{z},\underset{¯}{w})\underset{n=1,2,\mathrm{}}{}(1)^{n1}\frac{(p+q+1n)!}{n!(p+q+1)!}(\underset{¯}{z}\underset{¯}{w})^nK_{}^nf(\underset{¯}{z},\underset{¯}{w})$$
(108)
This result can be extended and expressed in the Fock space language. Any $`|\psi >^{(p,0)}\times ^{(0,q)}`$ has a unique orthogonal decomposition into various parts belonging to various UIR’s of $`SU(3)`$; using $`(\text{71})`$ this reads:

$`|\psi >`$ $``$ $`^{(p,0)}\times ^{(0,q)}=^{(p,q;0)}{\displaystyle ^{(p1,q1;1)}^{(p2,q2;2)}\mathrm{}}:`$ (109)
$`|\psi >`$ $`=`$ $`|\psi _0>+|\psi _1>+|\psi _2>+\mathrm{},`$ (110)
$`|\psi _0>`$ $``$ $`^{(p,q;0)},K_{}|\psi _0>=0;`$ (111)
$`|\psi _1>`$ $`=`$ $`K_+|\varphi _1>^{(p1,q1;1)},`$ (112)
$`|\varphi _1>`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(p+q)!}{1!(p+q+1)!}}K_{}|\psi _1>^{(p1,q1;0),}`$ (113)
$`K_{}^2|\psi _1>`$ $`=`$ $`0;`$ (114)
$`|\psi _2>`$ $`=`$ $`K_+^2|\varphi _2>^{(p2,q2;2)},`$ (115)
$`|\varphi _2>`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(p+q2)!}{2!(p+q)!}}K_{}^2|\psi _2>^{(p2,q2;0),}`$ (116)
$`K_{}^3|\psi _2>`$ $`=`$ $`0;\mathrm{}`$ (117)
The ‘leading’ piece in $`|\psi >`$ is thus

$`|\psi _0>`$ $`=`$ $`|\psi >|\psi _1>|\psi _2>\mathrm{}`$ (118)
$`=`$ $`|\psi >\underset{¯}{\overset{^}{a}}^{}\underset{¯}{\overset{^}{b}}^{}|\varphi >,`$ (119)
$`|\varphi >`$ $`=`$ $`|\varphi _1>+\underset{¯}{\overset{^}{a}}^{}\underset{¯}{\overset{^}{b}}^{}|\varphi _2>+\mathrm{}^{(p1,0)}\times ^{(0,q1)}.`$ (120)
We can now infer that if to begin with we had $`|\psi >=\underset{¯}{\overset{^}{a}}^{}\underset{¯}{\overset{^}{b}}^{}|\varphi >`$ for some $`\varphi ^{(p1,0)}\times ^{(0,q1)}`$ then $`|\psi _0>`$ necessarily vanishes:

$$|\psi >=\underset{¯}{\overset{^}{a}}^{}\underset{¯}{\overset{^}{b}}^{}|\varphi >|\psi _0>=0$$
(121)
In the Bargmann description this means in terms of $`(\text{108})`$

$$f(\underset{¯}{z},\underset{¯}{w})=\underset{¯}{z}\underset{¯}{w}g(\underset{¯}{z},\underset{¯}{w})f_0(\underset{¯}{z},\underset{¯}{w})=0,$$
(122)
a result which can be directly verified with some effort.

The subspace $`_0`$ identified in $`(\text{83})`$ is describable in the Bargmann language as follows:

$$_0=\{f(\underset{¯}{z},\underset{¯}{w})|\frac{}{\underset{¯}{z}}\frac{}{\underset{¯}{w}}f(\underset{¯}{z},\underset{¯}{w})=0\}$$
(123)
In the Taylor series expansion $`(\text{88})`$ for such $`f(\underset{¯}{z},\underset{¯}{w})`$, the tensors $`f_{k_1\mathrm{}k_q}^{j_1\mathrm{}j_p}`$ are traceless and vice versa. The squared norm and $`SU(3)`$ action are given for $`_0`$ by $`(\text{89})`$ and $`(\text{91})`$ respectively.

## V The UR $`𝒟_{SU(2)}^{(\mathrm{ind},0)}`$ of $`SU(3)`$

The Hilbert space $`_{SU(2)}^{(\mathrm{ind},0)}`$ carrying the UR $`𝒟_{SU(2)}^{(\mathrm{ind},0)}`$ of $`SU(3)`$ consists of single component (scalar) complex functions on the coset space $`SU(3)/SU(2)`$. This coset space is the unit sphere in three dimensional complex space $`C^3`$, with the natural norm and $`SU(3)`$ action. Temporarily omitting the superscript zero and subscript $`SU(2)`$ for simplicity, we have:

$`^{(\mathrm{ind})}`$ $`=`$ $`\{\psi (\underset{¯}{\xi })C,\underset{¯}{\xi }C^3|\psi ^2={\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{3}{}}\left(\frac{d^2\xi _j}{\pi }\right)\delta (\xi ^{}\xi 1)|\psi (\underset{¯}{\xi })|^2}\},`$ (124)
$`(𝒟^{(\mathrm{ind})}(A)\psi )(\underset{¯}{\xi })`$ $`=`$ $`\psi (A^1\underset{¯}{\xi })`$ (125)
Clearly only the values of $`\psi (\underset{¯}{\xi })`$ for $`\xi ^{}\xi =1`$ are relevant. For a general $`\psi (\underset{¯}{\xi })`$ with a Taylor series expansion we write

$$\psi (\underset{¯}{\xi })=\underset{p,q=0,1,\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\psi _{k_1\mathrm{}k_q}^{j_1\mathrm{}j_p}\xi _{j_1}\mathrm{}\xi _{j_p}\xi _{k_1}^{}\mathrm{}\xi _{k_q}^{},$$
(126)
(Strictly speaking, such an expansion holds only for $`\psi (\underset{¯}{\xi })`$ in some dense subset of $`^{(\mathrm{ind})}`$). We note that here $`\psi (\underset{¯}{\xi })`$ is not an entire function of $`\xi _j`$, and since $`\xi ^{}\xi =1`$, the tensor components $`\psi _{k_1\mathrm{}k_q}^{j_1\mathrm{}j_p}`$ may be assumed to be traceless apart from being symmetric. Then they determine $`\psi (\underset{¯}{\xi })`$ uniquely and vice versa.

To express the inner product $`(\varphi ,\psi )`$ for general $`\varphi ,\psi ^{(\mathrm{ind})}`$ in terms of their tensor components, we need to evaluate

$$I_{j\mathrm{}m\mathrm{}}^{k\mathrm{}l\mathrm{}}=\underset{j=1}{\overset{3}{}}\left(\frac{d^2\xi _j}{\pi }\right)\delta (\xi ^{}\xi 1)\xi _{j_1}\mathrm{}\xi _{j_p}(\xi _{k_1}\mathrm{}\xi _{k_q})^{}(\xi _{l_1}\mathrm{}\xi _{l_p^{}})^{}(\xi _{m_1}\mathrm{}\xi _{m_q^{}}),$$
(127)
for general $`p,q,p^{},q^{}`$ and indices $`j,k,l,m`$. Using $`SU(3)`$ invariance and symmetry, we see that the result must be expressible in terms of products of Kronecker deltas. Combining this with the tracelessness of the tensor components of $`\varphi `$ and $`\psi `$, we can check first that we need only consider the case $`p=p^{},q=q^{}`$; and next that

$$I_{j\mathrm{}m\mathrm{}}^{k\mathrm{}l\mathrm{}}=𝒩\underset{PS_p}{}\underset{QS_q}{}\delta _{j_1}^{l_{P(1)}}\mathrm{}\delta _{j_p}^{l_{P(p)}}\delta _{m_{Q(1)}}^{k_1}\mathrm{}\delta _{m_{Q(q)}}^{k_q}+\mathrm{}$$
(128)
Here $`𝒩`$ is a normalising factor, and the dots denote terms with factors $`\delta _j^k`$ or $`\delta _l^m`$ or both. Again the latter can be ignored. The factor $`𝒩`$ can be computed say by setting all $`j=l=1`$ and all $`k=m=2`$ :

$$𝒩=\frac{1}{(p+q+2)!}.$$
(129)
We then get the result for any $`\varphi ,\psi ^{(\mathrm{ind})}`$:

$$(\varphi ,\psi )=\underset{p,q=0,1,\mathrm{}}{}\frac{p!q!}{(p+q+2)!}\varphi _{k_1\mathrm{}k_q}^{j_1\mathrm{}j_p}{}_{}{}^{}\psi _{k_1\mathrm{}k_q}^{j_1\mathrm{}j_p}$$
(130)
With these results, all details of the induced UR $`𝒟_{SU(2)}^{(\mathrm{ind},0)}`$ of $`SU(3)`$ are in hand : the Hilbert space $`_{SU(2)}^{(\mathrm{ind},0)}`$ in $`(\text{125})`$, the expression $`(\text{130})`$ for inner products, and the $`SU(3)`$ action as in $`(\text{125})`$.

## VI Equivalence map

The full equivalence of the two UR’s of $`SU(3)`$, one on the subspace $`_0`$ based on the six oscillator Schwinger construction of Section III, and the other the induced representation $`𝒟_{SU(2)}^{(\mathrm{ind},0)}`$, can now be set up. The tensor component expressions $`(\text{88}),(\text{126})`$ for vectors, and $`(\text{89}),(\text{130})`$ for inner products, determine the one-to-one map to achieve this in full detail :

$`f(\underset{¯}{z},\underset{¯}{w})=\{f_{k_1\mathrm{}k_q}^{j_1\mathrm{}j_p}\}`$ $`_0\psi (\underset{¯}{\xi })=\{\psi _{k_1\mathrm{}k_q}^{j_1\mathrm{}j_p}\}^{(\mathrm{ind})}:`$ (131)
$`\psi _{k_1\mathrm{}k_q}^{j_1\mathrm{}j_p}`$ $`=\sqrt{(p+q+2)!}f_{k_1\mathrm{}k_q}^{j_1\mathrm{}j_p},p,q=0,1,\mathrm{}.`$ (132)
The two inner products then match, and the $`SU(3)`$ actions given in $`(\text{91}),(\text{125})`$ on $`f(\underset{¯}{z},\underset{¯}{w})`$ and $`\psi (\underset{¯}{\xi })`$ also match.

It is worth emphasising here the two different arguments leading to the tracelessness of the symmetric tensors on the two sides of $`(\text{131})`$. In the case of the left hand side, the reason is that the argument of $`\psi (\underset{¯}{\xi })`$ obeys the constraint $`\xi ^{}\xi =1`$. As for the right hand side, it happens because entire functions $`f(\underset{¯}{z},\underset{¯}{w})_0`$ obey the partial differential equation in $`(\text{123})`$. In both cases tracelessness leads to the UR being multiplicity free, apart from being complete in the sense that all $`SU(3)`$ UIR’s do appear.

## VII Concluding remarks

To conclude, we have brought out the difficulties one encounters in naively extending the Schwinger $`SU(2)`$ construction to $`SU(3)`$ particularly if one wishes to retain the simplicity and economy intrinsic to the $`SU(2)`$ case. We have shown how these difficulties can be overcome by exploiting the group $`Sp(2,R)`$ to obtain a ‘Generating Representation’ of $`SU(3)`$ based on six bosonic oscillators. This $`UR`$ of $`SU(3)`$ contains all the representations of $`SU(3)`$ exactly once. Further, we have shown how this ‘Generating Representation’ for $`SU(3)`$ can also be constructed using the theory of induced representations and have constructively established the equivalence between the two by making use of the Bargmann representation. It is hoped that the construction presented here will have useful applications in various branches of physics much the same way as the $`SU(2)`$ construction has. Indeed, the work presented here has direct relevance to $`SU(3)`$ coherent states as will be shown in a succeeding publication.

Acknowledgements

This work was begun while NM was a Jawaharlal Nehru Chair Professor of the University of Hyderabad. The hospitality extended to him during his stay by the School of Physics, University of Hyderabad is gratefully acknowledged.

Appendix: Boson operator construction of $`SU(3)\times Sp(2,R)`$ basis states

We give here the explicit construction of the orthonormal basis states $`|p,q;IMY;m>`$ for $``$ introduced in eqn.(75). We deal first with the states $`|p,q;IIY;k>^{(p,q;0)}^{(p,q)}_0`$ having highest $`SU(2)`$ weight; then by repeated use of the $`Sp(2,R)`$ raising operator $`K_+=\underset{¯}{\overset{^}{a}}^{}\underset{¯}{\overset{^}{b}}^{}`$ with $`|p,q;IIY;m>^{(p,q;mk)}^{(p,q)}`$; and finally with the general state $`|p,q;IMY;m>`$ using the $`SU(2)`$ lowering operator. At each stage the normalisation will be ensured.

As is well known, the boson operators $`\widehat{a}_j^{},\widehat{b}_j^{}`$ carry the following $`U(2)`$ quantum numbers:

$`\begin{array}{cccc}& I& M& Y\\ \widehat{a}_1^{},\widehat{a}_2^{}& 1/2& \pm 1/2& 1/3\\ \widehat{a}_3^{}& 0& 0& 2/3\\ \widehat{b}_2^{},\widehat{b}_1^{}& 1/2& \pm 1/2& 1/3\\ \widehat{b}_3^{}& 0& 0& 2/3\end{array}`$ (A.1)
Therefore, $`\widehat{a}_\alpha ^{}\widehat{b}_\alpha ^{}\widehat{a}_1^{}\widehat{b}_1^{}+\widehat{a}_2^{}\widehat{b}_2^{}`$, $`\widehat{a}_3^{}`$ and $`\widehat{b}_3^{}`$ are $`SU(2)`$ scalars. The I-Y multiplets present in the $`SU(3)`$ UIR $`(p,q)`$ are listed in eqn.(8), and are parametrised by two integers $`r,s`$. The state $`|p,q;IIY;k>_0`$ involves $`p`$ factors $`\widehat{a}^{}`$ and $`q`$ factors $`\widehat{b}^{}`$ acting on the Fock vacuum $`|\underset{¯}{0},\underset{¯}{0}>`$, and in addition it is annihilated by $`K_{}=\underset{¯}{\overset{^}{a}}\underset{¯}{\overset{^}{b}}`$. We therefore start with the expression (guided by (A.1)):

$`|p,q;IIY;k>`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\widehat{a}_1^{}\right)^r\left(\widehat{b}_2^{}\right)^s{\displaystyle \underset{n=0,1,\mathrm{}}{\overset{(pr,qs)_<}{}}}C_n\left(\widehat{a}_\alpha ^{}\widehat{b}_\alpha ^{}\right)^n\left(\widehat{a}_3^{}\right)^{prn}\left(\widehat{b}_3^{}\right)^{qsn}|\underset{¯}{0},\underset{¯}{0}>,`$ (A.2)
$`r=I+{\displaystyle \frac{Y}{2}}`$ $`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}(pq),s=I{\displaystyle \frac{Y}{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}(qp).`$ (A.3)
The condition

$`K_{}|p,q;IIY;k>=0`$ (A.4)
gives the recursion relation

$`n(r+s+n+1)C_n=(prn+1)(qsn+1)C_{n1},n=1,2,\mathrm{},`$ (A.5)
with the solution

$`C_n={\displaystyle \frac{(1)^n}{n!}}{\displaystyle \frac{(pr)!(qs)!(r+s+1)!}{(prn)!(qsn)!(r+s+n+1)!}}C_0,n=1,2,\mathrm{}.`$ (A.6)
Using this in eqn.(A.2), and after some algebra, the normalised state is found to be:

$`|p,q;IIY;k>=𝒩_{pqIY}{\displaystyle \frac{\left(\widehat{a}_1^{}\right)^r}{r!}}{\displaystyle \frac{\left(\widehat{b}_2^{}\right)^s}{s!}}\times `$
$`{\displaystyle \underset{n=0,1,\mathrm{}}{\overset{(pr,qs)_<}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{(1)^n}{(r+s+n+1)!}}{\displaystyle \frac{\left(\widehat{a}_\alpha ^{}\widehat{b}_\alpha ^{}\right)^n}{n!}}{\displaystyle \frac{\left(\widehat{a}_3^{}\right)^{prn}}{(prn)!}}{\displaystyle \frac{\left(\widehat{b}_3^{}\right)^{qsn}}{(qsn)!}}|\underset{¯}{0},\underset{¯}{0}>^{(p,q;0)},`$
$`𝒩_{pqIY}=\left\{r!s!(r+s+1)!(pr)!(qs)!(p+s+1)!(q+r+1)!/(p+q+1)!\right\}^{1/2}.`$ (A.7)
From eqn.(78) we know that vectors in $`^{(p,q;mk)}`$ for $`m>k`$ are obtained from vectors in $`^{(p,q;0)}`$ by applying $`K_+^{mk}`$. Further, the normalisation is controlled by eqn. (3.25b). We thus obtain:

$`|p,q;IIY;m>=\left\{(2k1)!/(mk)!(m+k1)!\right\}^{1/2}\left(\underset{¯}{\overset{^}{a}}^{}\underset{¯}{\overset{^}{b}}^{}\right)^{mk}`$ $`|p,q;IIY;k>`$ (A.9)
$`^{(p,q;mk)}.`$
The last step is to reach a general value $`MI`$ for the $`SU(2)`$ magnetic quantum number. For this we apply the $`SU(2)`$ lowering operator $`J_{}=\widehat{a}_2^{}\widehat{a}_1\widehat{b}_1^{}\widehat{b}_2(IM)`$ times to the state (A.7), keeping track of normalisation. This leads to the result:

$`|p,q;IMY;m>=\left\{(I+M)!/2I!(IM)!\right\}^{1/2}\left(\widehat{a}_2^{}\widehat{a}_1\widehat{b}_1^{}\widehat{b}_2\right)^{IM}|p,q;IIY;m>.`$ (A.10)
If we combine eqns.(A.6,7,8) we get the complete expression

$`|p,q;IMY;m>=𝒩_{pqIY}\{(2k1)!(I+M)!(IM)!/(mk)!(m+k1)!2I!\}^{1/2}\times `$
$`(\underset{¯}{\overset{^}{a}}^{}\underset{¯}{\overset{^}{b}}^{})^{mk}{\displaystyle \underset{L=0}{\overset{IM}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{n=0}{\overset{(pr,qs)_<}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{(1)^{n+IML}}{(r+s+n+1)!}}{\displaystyle \frac{\left(\widehat{a}_\alpha ^{}\widehat{b}_\alpha ^{}\right)^n}{n!}}\times `$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\left(\widehat{a}_3^{}\right)^{prn}}{(prn)!}}{\displaystyle \frac{\left(\widehat{b}_3^{}\right)^{qsn}}{(qsn)!}}{\displaystyle \frac{\left(\widehat{a}_1^{}\right)^{rL}}{(rL)!}}{\displaystyle \frac{\left(\widehat{a}_2^{}\right)^L}{L!}}{\displaystyle \frac{\left(\widehat{b}_2^{}\right)^{sI+M+L}}{(sI+M+L)!}}{\displaystyle \frac{\left(\widehat{b}_1^{}\right)^{IML}}{(IML)!}}|\underset{¯}{0},\underset{¯}{0}>.`$ (A.11)
We thus have explicit expressions for all the normalised basis states $`|p,q;IMY;m>`$ of $``$.


format: text

text:
# A microscopic description for the alpha decay of nuclei using a realistic effective interaction

## Abstract

The process of $`\alpha `$ disintegration has been studied theoretically in the framework of a microscopic superasymmetric fission model (MSAFM). The nuclear interaction potential required for the $`\alpha `$ decay process has been calculated by folding in the density distribution functions of the $`\alpha `$ nucleus and the daughter nucleus with a realistic effective interaction. The nuclear microscopic $`\alpha `$-nucleus potential thus obtained has been used along with the Coulomb interaction potential to calculate the action integral within the WKB approximation. This subsequently results in a parameter free calculation for the half lives of the $`\alpha `$ decays of nuclei. The model is successful in calculating the half lives of the $`\alpha `$ disintegration processes of nuclei.

The first experimental observation of the $`\alpha `$ radioactivity  was followed by a theoretical explanation in terms of quantum mechanical barrier penetration  and was, at least, qualitatively successful. Since then the $`\alpha `$ decay half life measurements with constantly improving techniques and the quest for an explanation of their absolute magnitudes have continued unabated. Recently, predictions for $`\alpha `$ and various exotic decays have been made in detail by the analytical superasymmetric fission model (ASAFM)  with reasonable success. This was followed by the cluster model (CM) calculations for $`\alpha `$ decay  for even more comprehensive database with similar success. But both the theoretical approaches described above use phenomenological potentials for the nuclear interactions. The ASAFM uses a parabolic potential approximation for the nuclear interaction potential, which is a rather unusual $`\alpha `$-nucleus interaction potential while the CM uses even stranger nuclear interaction potential . However, they provide a benchmark against which more microscopically based treatments can be judged.

In the present work, the nuclear potentials have been obtained microscopically by double folding the $`\alpha `$ and daughter nuclei density distributions with realistic effective interaction. This procedure of obtaining nuclear interaction energy for the $`\alpha `$-nucleus interaction is absolutely fundamental in nature. Moreover, the use of a microscopic nuclear potential, free from adjustable parameters, for a wide range of $`\alpha `$-nucleus interaction is also theoretically a very radical approach. The double folding potential has then been utilised within a superasymmetric fission model description. This microscopic superasymmetric fission model (MSAFM) has been used to provide estimates of $`\alpha `$ decay half lives.

The microscopic nuclear potentials $`V_N(R)`$ have been obtained by double folding in the densities of the fragments $`\alpha `$ and daughter nuclei with the finite range realistic M3Y effective interacion as

$$V_N(R)=\rho _1(\stackrel{}{r_1})\rho _2(\stackrel{}{r_2})v[|\stackrel{}{r_2}\stackrel{}{r_1}+\stackrel{}{R}|]d^3r_1d^3r_2$$
(1)
where the density distribution function $`\rho _1`$ for the $`\alpha `$ particle has the Gaussian form

$$\rho _1(r)=0.4229exp(0.7024r^2)$$
(2)
whose volume integral is equal to $`A_\alpha (=4)`$, the mass number of $`\alpha `$-particle. The density distribution function $`\rho _2`$ used for the residual cluster, the daughter nucleus, has been chosen to be of the spherically symmetric form given by

$$\rho _2(r)=\rho _0/[1+exp((rc)/a)]$$
(3)
where

$$c=r_\rho (1\pi ^2a^2/3r_\rho ^2),r_\rho =1.13A_d^{1/3}anda=0.54fm$$
(4)
and the value of $`\rho _0`$ is fixed by equating the volume integral of the density distribution function to the mass number $`A_d`$ of the residual daughter nucleus. The finite range M3Y effective interaction $`v(s)`$ appearing in the eqn.(1) is given by

$$v(s)=7999.\mathrm{exp}(4.s)/(4.s)2134.\mathrm{exp}(2.5s)/(2.5s)$$
(5)
The total interaction energy $`E(R)`$ between the $`\alpha `$ nucleus and the residual daughter nucleus is equal to the sum of the nuclear interaction energy, the Coulomb interaction energy and the centrifugal barrier. Thus

$$E(R)=V_N(R)+V_C(R)+\mathrm{}^2l(l+1)/(2\mu R^2)$$
(6)
where $`\mu =mA_\alpha A_d/A`$ is the reduced mass, $`A`$ is the mass number of the parent nucleus and m is the nucleon mass measured in the units of $`MeV/c^2`$. The Coulomb potential $`V_C(R)`$ has been taken to be

$`V_C(R)=`$ $`Z_\alpha Z_de^2/RforRR_c`$ (7)
$`=`$ $`(Z_\alpha Z_de^2/2R_c).[3(R/R_c)^2]forRR_c`$ (8)
where $`Z_\alpha `$ and $`Z_d`$ are the atomic numbers of the $`\alpha `$-particle and the daughter nucleus respectively. The touching radial separation $`R_c`$ between the $`\alpha `$-particle and the daughter nucleus is given by $`R_c=c_\alpha +c_d`$ where $`c_\alpha `$ and $`c_d`$ has been obtained using eqn.(4). The energetics allow spontaneous emission of $`\alpha `$-particle only if the released energy

$$Q=M(M_\alpha +M_d)$$
(9)
is a positive quantity, where $`M`$, $`M_\alpha `$ and $`M_d`$ are the atomic masses of the parent nucleus, the emitted $`\alpha `$-particle and the residual daughter nucleus, respectively, expressed in the units of energy. It is important to mention here that the correctness of predictions for possible decay modes, therefore, rests on the accuracy of the ground state masses of nuclei.

In the present model (MSAFM), the half life of the parent nucleus against the split into an $`\alpha `$ and a daughter is calculated using the WKB barrier penetration probability. The assault frequecy $`\nu `$ is obtained from the zero point vibration energy $`E_v=(1/2)\mathrm{}\omega =(1/2)h\nu `$. The half life $`T`$ of the parent nucleus $`(A,Z)`$ against its split into an $`\alpha `$ $`(A_\alpha ,Z_\alpha )`$ and a daughter $`(A_d,Z_d)`$ is given by

$$T=[(h\mathrm{ln}2)/(2E_v)][1+\mathrm{exp}(K)]$$
(10)
where the action integral $`K`$ within the WKB approximation is given by

$$K=(2/\mathrm{})_{R_a}^{R_b}[2\mu (E(R)E_vQ)]^{1/2}𝑑R$$
(11)
where $`R_a`$ and $`R_b`$ are the two turning points of the WKB action integral determined from the equations

$$E(R_a)=Q+E_v=E(R_b)$$
(12)
It is important to mention here that the cluster model calculations  calculate assault frequency from the Q value in an oversimplistic manner. For the present calculations, from a fit to a selected set of experimental data on $`\alpha `$ emitters the following law  was found for the zero point vibration energies for the $`\alpha `$ decays

$`E_v=`$ $`0.1045.Qforeven(Z)even(N)parentnuclei`$ (13)
$`=`$ $`0.0962.Qforodd(Z)even(N)parentnuclei`$ (14)
$`=`$ $`0.0907.Qforeven(Z)odd(N)parentnuclei`$ (15)
$`=`$ $`0.0767.Qforodd(Z)odd(N)parentnuclei`$ (16)
which includes the shell and pairing effects. The values of the proportionality constants of $`E_v`$ with $`Q`$ is the largest for even-even parent and the smallest for the odd-odd one. If all other conditions are the same one may observe that with greater value of $`E_v`$, the life time is shortened indicating higher emission rate. The shell effects of $`\alpha `$ radioactivity is implicitly contained in the zero point vibration energy due to its proportionality with the Q value, which is maximum when the daughter nucleus has a magic number of neutrons and protons.

The two turning points of the action integral given by eqn.(10) have been obtained by solving eqns.(11) using microscopic double folding potential given by eqn.(1) along with the Coulomb potential given by eqn.(7) and the centrifugal barrier. Then the WKB action integral between these two turning points has been evaluated numerically using eqn.(1), eqn.(6), eqn.(7), eqn.(8) and eqn.(12). Finally, the half lives of the $`\alpha `$ decays have been calculated using eqn.(9) and eqn.(12).

In the present illustrative calculations the same set of experimental data of reference  for the $`\alpha `$ decay half lives have been chosen for comparison with the present theoretical calculation for which the experimental ground state masses for the parent and daughter nuclei are available. This set was selected because there is no uncertainty in the determination of the released energy Q (given by eqn.(8)) which is one of the crucial quantity for quantitative prediction of decay half lives. A normalisation factor of 0.9 for the microscopic nuclear potential has been used to obtain the optimum fit. In Fig. 1 the experimental data for logarithmic $`\alpha `$ decay half lives  have been plotted against the mass numbers of parent nuclei along with the results of the present calculations for zero angular momentum of the fragments. In the figure the open circles depict the experimental data while the continuous line with solid circles represent the corresponding calculations of the present model (MSAFM). The decay modes and the experimental values for their half lives have been presented in Table 1. The corresponding results of the present calculations of superasymmetric fission model with microscopic potentials (MSAFM) are also presented along with the results of the cluster model (CM) calculations of 1993  so as to facilitate the comparison of the results of the phenomenological calculations with the present one. The exact Q values used by the present calculation using the experimental ground state masses have also been presented along with those obtained by eqn.(4) of .

The results of the present calculations of the MSAFM have been found to predict the general trend of experimental data very well. The quantitave agreement with experimental data is excellent. The degree of reliability of the MSAFM predictions for $`\alpha `$ decay lifetimes are comparable to the CM  predictions and are better than the liquid drop description  for most of the cases. The recent result of the preformed cluster model  calculation for the $`\alpha `$ decay half-life of $`{}_{}{}^{242}Cm`$ is also much worse compared to that obtained from present calculations. The exact Q values obtained from the ground state masses and used in the present calculations differ slightly from those obtained from the measured $`\alpha `$ particle kinetic energy by applying a standard recoil correction, as well as an electron shielding correction in a systematic manner and used in the CM  calculations.

The half lives for $`\alpha `$-radioactivity have been analyzed with microscopic nuclear potentials which are based on profound theoretical basis. The results of the present calculations with MSAFM are in good agreement over a wide range of experimental data and are comparable to the best available theoretical calculations  of CM which use unrealistic nuclear interaction potentials that do not have any microscopic basis. Refinements such as introduction of dissipation while tunneling through the barrier or incorporating the dynamic shape deformations in the density distributions of the clusters may further improve results. Corrections in the Coulomb interaction energy in the overlapping region for the deformed nuclear system may also be incorporated. It is worthwhile to mention that as the first illustrative calculations using realistic microscopic nuclear interaction potentials, the results obtained for the $`\alpha `$ radioactive decay lifetimes are noteworthy. Such calculations may be extended to provide reasonable estimates of the lifetimes of nuclear decays by $`\alpha `$ emissions for the entire domain of exotic nuclei provided that good estimates of the Q values are available.