Confrontation of Supersymmetry in Elementary Particles and Nuclear Physics

  • Stanisław Szpikowski


At first, I am very pleased to express my sincere gratitude to Professor Bruno Gruber and all of the people whom we owe the organisation of such a nice, not only from scientific point of view, Symposium. My second remark concerns the motivation of the present work. I am involved since several years in supersymmetries in nuclear physics and during seminars I delivered on our supersymmetry results I have got very often questions from elementary particle physicists: what is the difference between supersymmetry in elementary particle and nuclear physics; whether the Poincaré group is involved in nuclear supersymmetries; is there Clifford Algebra applied to fix the content of supermultiplets; and so on. Hence, I have been forced to l000k more carefully on the elementary particle supersymmetry from the point of view of similarities and differences with nuclear physics. I have been astonished as a new-comer how beauty and dramatic history of the elementary particle supersymmetry is and how many turning points in a supersymmetry development and application have been met. Hence, I would like to pass to you my astonishment connected with several steps in the historical evolution of elementary particle supersymmetries. Then, in the same way I will present the supersymmetry problem in nuclear physics. I will also illustrate the nuclear supersymmetry by examples of our recent results in light nuclei. In the final part I will compare both supersymmetries from mathematical and physical point of view.


Light Nucleus Clifford Algebra Elementary Particle Physic Interact Boson Model Supersymmetric Partner 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    F. Iachello, A. Arima, Phys. Lett. 53B, 309 (1974).ADSGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    A. Arima, F. Iachello, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.), 99, 253 (1976); Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 123, 468 (1978).Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    F. Iachello, Phys. Rev. Lett., 44, 772 (1980).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    A. B. Balantekin, I. Bars, F. Iachello, Nucl. Phys. A370, 284 (1981).MathSciNetADSGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    S. Szpikowski, P. Klosowski, L. Próchniak, Nucl. Phys. A487, 301 (1988).ADSGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    S. Szpikowski, P. Klosowski, L. Próchniak, Z. Phys. A335, 289 (1990).ADSGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    L. Próchniak, S. Szpikowski, Acta Phys. Pol. B24, 557 (1993).Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    P. M. Endt and van der Leun, Nucl. Phys. A310, 1 (1978).ADSGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stanisław Szpikowski
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of PhysicsM. Curie-Słodowska UniversityLublinPoland

Personalised recommendations