Next: Lorentz Invariance of Dirac
Up: Relativistic Electron Theory
Previous: Introduction
Consider the motion of an electron in the absence of an electromagnetic field. In classical relativity,
electron energy,
, is related to electron momentum,
, according to the well-known formula
|
(1112) |
where
is the electron rest mass.
The quantum mechanical equivalent of this expression is the wave equation
|
(1113) |
where the
's are interpreted as differential operators according to Equation (1111). The above equation
takes into account the correct relativistic relation between electron energy and momentum, but is nevertheless unsatisfactory from the
point of view of relativistic theory, because it is highly asymmetric between
and the other
's. This makes the equation
difficult to generalize, in a manifestly Lorentz invariant manner, in the presence of an electromagnetic field. We must therefore look for a new equation.
If we multiply the wave equation (1113) by the operator
then we obtain
|
(1114) |
This equation is manifestly Lorentz invariant, and, therefore, forms a more convenient starting point for relativistic quantum mechanics.
Note, however, that Equation (1114) is not entirely equivalent to Equation (1113), because, although every
solution of (1113) is also a solution of (1114), the converse is not true. In fact, only those solutions of (1114)
belonging to positive values of
are also solutions of (1113).
The wave equation (1114) is quadratic in
, and is thus not of the form required by the laws of quantum theory. (Recall that we showed, from
general principles, in Chapter 3, that the
time evolution equation for the wavefunction should be linear in the operator
, and, hence, in
.) We, therefore, seek a wave equation that is
equivalent to (1114), but is
linear in
. In order to ensure that this equation transforms in a simple way under a Lorentz transformation, we
shall require it to be rational and linear in
,
,
, as well as
. We are thus
lead to a wave equation of the form
|
(1115) |
where the
's and
are dimensionless, and independent of the
's. Moreover, according to standard relativity, because we are considering the case of no electromagnetic field, all points in space-time
must be equivalent. Hence, the
's and
must also be independent of
the
's. This implies that the
's and
commute with the
's and the
's. We, therefore, deduce that the
's and
describe an internal degree of freedom that is independent of space-time coordinates. Actually, we shall show later that these operators are related to electron spin.
Multiplying (1115) by the operator
, we obtain
|
(1116) |
where
.
This equation is equivalent to (1114) provided that
for
.
It is helpful to define the
, for
, where
for
.
Equations (1117)-(1119) can then be shown to reduce to
|
(1122) |
One way of satisfying the above anti-commutation relations is to represent the operators
as matrices. However, it turns
out that the smallest dimension in which the
can be realized is four. In fact, it is easily verified that the
matrices
for
, satisfy the appropriate anti-commutation relations. Here, 0
and
denote
null and identity matrices, respectively, whereas the
represent the
Pauli matrices
introduced in Section 5.7.
It follows from (1120) and (1121) that
Note that
,
, and the
, are all Hermitian matrices, whereas the
, for
, are anti-Hermitian.
However, the matrices
, for
, are Hermitian. Moreover, it is easily demonstrated that
|
(1127) |
for
.
Equation (1115) can be written in the form
|
(1128) |
where
. Alternatively, we can write
where
, and
is the vector of the
matrices. The previous expression is known as the Dirac equation.
Incidentally, it is clear that, corresponding to the four rows and columns of the
matrices, the wavefunction
must take the form of a
column matrix, each element of which is, in general, a function of the
.
We saw in Section 5.7 that the spin of the electron requires the wavefunction to have two components. The reason
our present theory requires the wavefunction to have four components is because the wave equation (1114) has twice
as many solutions as it ought to have, half of them corresponding to negative energy states.
We can incorporate an electromagnetic field into the above formalism by means of the standard prescription
, and
, where
is the magnitude of the electron charge,
the scalar potential, and
the
vector potential. This prescription can be expressed in the Lorentz invariant form
|
(1130) |
where
is the potential 4-vector. Thus,
Equation (1128) becomes
|
(1131) |
whereas
Equation (1129) generalizes to
|
(1132) |
If we write the wavefunction in the spinor form
|
(1133) |
then the Hermitian conjugate of Equation (1132) becomes
|
(1134) |
where
|
(1135) |
Here, use has been made of the fact that the
and
are Hermitian matrices that commute with the
and
.
It follows from
times Equation (1131) that
|
(1136) |
The Hermitian conjugate of this expression is
|
(1137) |
where
now acts backward on
, and use has been made of the fact that the matrices
and
are Hermitian. Taking the difference between the previous two equation, we obtain
|
(1138) |
where
|
(1139) |
Writing
, where
Equation (1138) becomes
|
(1142) |
The above expression has the same form as the non-relativistic probability conservation equation (284). This
suggests that we can interpret the positive definite real scalar field
as the relativistic probability density, and the vector field
as the relativistic probability current. Integration of the above expression over all space, assuming that
as
, yields
|
(1143) |
This ensures that if the wavefunction is properly normalized at time
, such that
|
(1144) |
then the wavefunction remains properly normalized at all subsequent times, as it evolves in accordance with the Dirac equation.
In fact, if this were not the case then it would be impossible to interpret
as a probability density. Now, relativistic
invariance demands that if the wavefunction is properly normalized in one particular inertial frame then it should
be properly normalized in all inertial frames. This is the case provided that Equation (1138) is Lorentz invariant (i.e., if it has the property
that if it holds
in one inertial frame then it holds in all inertial frames),
which is true as long as the
transform as the contravariant components of a 4-vector under Lorentz transformation (see Exercise 4).
Next: Lorentz Invariance of Dirac
Up: Relativistic Electron Theory
Previous: Introduction
Richard Fitzpatrick
2013-04-08