Antiparticle Mass: Dirac Equation & E=mc^2

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter widderjoos
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Mass
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the implications of the Dirac equation regarding antiparticle mass and energy. Participants clarify that while the Dirac equation suggests the existence of negative energy states, it does not imply that antiparticle masses are negative. Evidence indicates that the inertial mass of antimatter is positive, supported by phenomena such as electron-positron annihilation producing photons with positive energy. Furthermore, Quantum Field Theory describes antiparticles as having positive mass but opposite charge, resolving concerns about negative mass interpretations.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the Dirac equation and its implications in quantum mechanics
  • Familiarity with the concepts of particle-antiparticle annihilation
  • Knowledge of Quantum Field Theory and its treatment of antiparticles
  • Basic grasp of relativistic energy-momentum relations, specifically E² - p² = m²
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the implications of the Dirac sea concept in particle physics
  • Study the principles of Quantum Field Theory related to particle interactions
  • Examine experimental evidence regarding the gravitational mass of antimatter
  • Explore advanced topics in relativistic physics, particularly energy-momentum relationships
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, students of quantum mechanics, and anyone interested in the fundamental properties of antimatter and particle physics.

widderjoos
Messages
21
Reaction score
0
I've heard that the dirac equation predicts antiparticles with negative energy. Since for particles at rest, E=mc^2, shouldn't antiparticle masses be negative? If this were true, it would explain a lot. I know there's probably a counter-example that if an electron and positron annihilated, they'd make a photon with a certain energy, but couldn't that energy have come from the momenta of the particles? Or are there non-relativistic experiments that rule out this possibility?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Thanks for the reply, but doesn't there have to be something wrong with the equations or experiment for antimatter mass to be positive?
 
widderjoos said:
I've heard that the dirac equation predicts antiparticles with negative energy. Since for particles at rest, E=mc^2, shouldn't antiparticle masses be negative? If this were true, it would explain a lot. I know there's probably a counter-example that if an electron and positron annihilated, they'd make a photon with a certain energy, but couldn't that energy have come from the momenta of the particles? Or are there non-relativistic experiments that rule out this possibility?

Electron-positron annihilation produces two photons each which has the energy equivalent of the rest mass of the electron or positron (511 kev), possibly with a slight addition due to the momenta.


Also radioactive decay leading to positron emission wouldn't balance if the mass of the positron was negative.
 
Also the equations that describe anti-particles in Quantum Field Theory don't effect the mass of the particle, only its charge. "Solutions of the Dirac equation contained negative energy quantum states. As a result, an electron could always radiate energy and fall into a negative energy state. Even worse, it could keep radiating infinite amount of energy because there were infinitely many negative energy states available. To prevent this unphysical situation from happening, Dirac proposed that a "sea" of negative-energy electrons fills the universe, already occupying all of the lower energy states so that, due to the Pauli exclusion principle no other electron could fall into them. Sometimes, however, one of these negative energy particles could be lifted out of this Dirac sea to become a positive energy particle. But when lifted out, it would leave behind a hole in the sea which would act exactly like a positive energy electron with a reversed charge. These he interpreted as the positron, and called his paper of 1930 A theory of electrons and positrons." - Wikipedia
 
widderjoos said:
Thanks for the reply, but doesn't there have to be something wrong with the equations or experiment for antimatter mass to be positive?

I think your interpretation of E=mc2 is wrong. First off, let's take units with c=1, so it becomes E=m. Then E=m can be thought of as a special case of the relativistic relation E2-p2=m2, where p is the momentum. Therefore it doesn't predict anything about the sign of m.
 
bcrowell said:
I think your interpretation of E=mc2 is wrong. First off, let's take units with c=1, so it becomes E=m. Then E=m can be thought of as a special case of the relativistic relation E2-p2=m2, where p is the momentum. Therefore it doesn't predict anything about the sign of m.

Ok, thanks everyone! I see what I'm doing wrong now.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
4K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
6K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
6K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K