MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

If you define 6j symbols completely formally via trivalent graphs (take for a start, but be careful - looks like Racah coefficients to me...well, he already mentions "fudge factors" :-) I see no -1^whatever. Now in any standard work (e.g. M. Rotenberg et al.) you see a $(-1)^{S+k}$ in Biedenharn-Elliott, you see a $(-1)^{j1+j2+j3}$ when evaluating a 6j symbol containing a zero... which looks like a completely unnatural phase choice to me, especially given that outside $SU_2$, irreps are not simple integers and you can't take -1 to the power of that anyway.
What looks possible to me is that you could fix a gauge by setting the theta graph colored with $j1,j2,j3$ to $(-1)^{j1+j2+j3}$, and analogous that of $R_1,R_2,R_3$ to, eh, whatever is sensible, and thus have the 3-node 6j symbols concide with the standard ones (or so I think). Still, I find it much more natural to just set all thetas to 1.
Is there a "natural" phase choice? (AFAIK, my spectrocopist colleagues invented the 6j symbols and might had had other things in mind. :-) For $SU_2$? For another Lie group? (Please argue why it's more natural than the one I like best :-)

share|cite|improve this question
up vote 2 down vote accepted

There are two real forms of $SL(2,C)$, the compact real form $SU(2)$ and the split real form $SL(2,R)$. Mathematicians prefer the split real form and physicists the compact real form. The two cases have different signs. There is also a choice of sign conventions involved even once you have decided which real form you want.

Edit: There is another choice of sign. The two dimensional representation has an invariant symplectic form. Alternatively you can take this to be a super vector space with no even part in which case it has an invariant symmetric inner product. You need the latter convention for diagrams with unoriented edges.

share|cite|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

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