Box^2 A_μ = J_μ ; [Dirac operator] ψ = 0 or not?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Spinnor
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Operator
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the relationship between the four-vector current J_μ and the electromagnetic potential four-vector A_μ, particularly in the context of the Dirac equation. It establishes that a source term for the Dirac equation must be a Dirac spinor, as indicated by the equation (iγ^μ∂_μ - m)ψ = -eγ^μA_μψ. The Lagrangian for a Dirac field coupled to the electromagnetic field is given as &bar;ψ{iγ^μ(∂_μ - ieA_μ) - m}ψ. The conversation also emphasizes that in Quantum Field Theory (QFT), interactions are preferred over the notion of fields being sources for one another.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the Dirac equation and its components
  • Familiarity with Lagrangian mechanics in quantum field theory
  • Knowledge of electromagnetic theory and four-vectors
  • Basic concepts of Feynman diagrams and particle interactions
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of the Dirac equation from the Lagrangian formalism
  • Learn about the role of spinors in quantum field theory
  • Explore the implications of Lorentz invariance in particle interactions
  • Investigate the concept of propagators and their significance in quantum mechanics
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, particularly those specializing in quantum field theory, particle physics, and electromagnetism, will benefit from this discussion. It is also relevant for graduate students and researchers exploring the interactions between fields and particles.

Spinnor
Gold Member
Messages
2,231
Reaction score
419
The four vector J_μ is the source of the Electromagnetic potential four vector A_μ. If I wanted a source term for the Dirac equation (not that I think there is such a thing) could it be (must it be) a spinor source term (what ever that means)?

Related question, consider the two Feynman diagrams below. In the first diagram the current is a source of a virtual photon. In the second a photon is destroyed and a electron positron pair is produced. Can I think of the virtual photon as being a source for the Dirac equation?

Diagram from,

http://www.google.com/imgres?hl=en&...49&start=12&ndsp=15&ved=1t:429,r:6,s:12,i:116

Thanks for any help!
 

Attachments

  • feynman diagram.png
    feynman diagram.png
    3 KB · Views: 583
Physics news on Phys.org
Presumably a source term would replace zero on the right hand side of the Dirac equation:

(i\gamma^\mu\partial_\mu - m)\psi = 0

Then yes, for the indices to work out, whatever goes on the RHS must be a Dirac spinor.

The Lagrangian for a Dirac field coupled to the electromagnetic field is

\bar{\psi}\{i\gamma^\mu(\partial_\mu - ieA_\mu) - m\}\psi

If you proceed from this Lagrangian to the "classical equation of motion", whatever that means for a spinor field, you get

\{i\gamma^\mu(\partial_\mu - ieA_\mu) - m\}\psi = 0

or

(i\gamma^\mu\partial_\mu - m)\psi = -e\gamma^\mu A_\mu \psi

I guess if you like you can think of the RHS as a source term, but this interpretation is maybe not so clean since the "source" of psi depends on psi.

In QFT I think we prefer to speak of generalized "interactions" rather than fields being "sources" for one another. As you are seeing, the same interaction term

e\bar{\psi}\gamma^\mu A_\mu \psi

can do many things. It can let an electron produce a photon, or let an electron absorb a photon, or destroy an electron-positron pair and create a photon, or destroy a photon and create an electron-positron pair, or destroy a photon, electron, and positron, or create a photon, electron, and positron. Lorentz invariance forces us into a theory where all these processes are essentially equivalent and described by the same term in the Lagrangian.
 
Thanks Duck! So it seems if I take some random Dirac spinor, say (1,0,0,0) and multiply it by δexp(iωt) where δ is some small number and let this source function act on a very small region of space and for a very short time (say one cycle) we can excite the Dirac field? And if ω > m waves will propagate outward? Does the propagator tell us the likely momentum in those outward waves? This is all unphysical but fun to think about?

Thanks again!
 

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
Replies
5
Views
3K