Did I Make a Mistake in My Klein-Gordon Equation Continuity Derivation?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion centers on the derivation of the continuity equation from the Klein-Gordon equation using a novel approach. The user explores an alternative method by manipulating the Klein-Gordon equation with fields, specifically the equation \displaystyle \left [ g^{\mu \nu} \left ( \frac{\partial}{\partial x^{\nu}} - \frac{e}{c}A_{\nu} \right ) \left ( \frac{\partial}{\partial x^{\mu}}-\frac{e}{c}A_{\mu} \right ) \right ] \psi=\frac{m_0^2 c^2}{\hbar^2} \psi. The user arrives at a result that suggests a relationship involving the divergence of the 4-current but expresses uncertainty regarding its validity. The discussion highlights the importance of correctly applying complex conjugates and operator products in quantum field theory.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the Klein-Gordon equation and its applications in quantum mechanics.
  • Familiarity with 4-vector notation and covariant derivatives.
  • Knowledge of complex conjugates in quantum wave functions.
  • Basic principles of electromagnetic field theory as they relate to quantum mechanics.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of the continuity equation in quantum field theory, specifically in the context of the Klein-Gordon equation.
  • Learn about the implications of complex conjugates in quantum mechanics and their role in deriving physical equations.
  • Explore the mathematical properties of 4-vectors and their applications in relativistic quantum mechanics.
  • Investigate operator algebra in quantum field theory, focusing on the manipulation of wave functions and fields.
USEFUL FOR

Students and researchers in theoretical physics, particularly those focusing on quantum mechanics and field theory, will benefit from this discussion. It is also relevant for anyone interested in the mathematical foundations of the Klein-Gordon equation and continuity equations in quantum contexts.

Telemachus
Messages
820
Reaction score
30

Homework Statement


I was just studying the Klein Gordon equation with fields. In particular I was reviewing the continuity equation. In the derivation for it, the usual approach is to take the klein-gordon equation (I'm using 4-vector covariant notation), multuply by the complex conjugate of the wave function by the left, then take the complex conjugate of this equation, then substract one from the other, and working one gets the divergence of the 4-current. I've tryied something else, I just wanted to see what I've obtained if instead of taking the complex conjugate of the equation, I've just stated the same equation for the complex conjugate of the wave function, then multiplied by the left by the wave function, and substracted this from the klein-gordon with fields equation for the wave function multiplied by the left by the complex conjugate. I hoped to get nothing at all, perhaps an identity of the form 0=0, and did this just as a practice. I wanted to discuss the result I get, so here I am.

Homework Equations



The klein gordon equation with fields reads as follows:

##\displaystyle \left ( \hat p^{\mu}-\frac{e}{c}A^{\mu} \right ) \left ( \hat p_{\mu}-\frac{e}{c}A_{\mu} \right ) \psi=m_0^2 c^2 \psi##

##\displaystyle \left [ g^{\mu \nu} \left ( \frac{\partial}{\partial x^{\nu}} - \frac{e}{c}A_{\nu} \right ) \left ( \frac{\partial}{\partial x^{\mu}}-\frac{e}{c}A_{\mu} \right ) \right ] \psi=\frac{m_0^2 c^2}{\hbar^2} \psi## (1)

Here p is the four momentum operator, A is the four vector for the electromagnetic field.

##\displaystyle A^{\mu}=(A_0,\vec A)=g^{\mu \nu}A_{\nu}##

##\displaystyle \hat p^{\mu}=i\hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial x_{\mu}}=i\hbar \nabla^{\mu}=\left ( i\hbar\frac{\partial}{\partial (ct)},-i\hbar \vec \nabla \right ) ##3. The Attempt at a Solution [/B]

So this is what I did. I took the Klein gordon equation in the form (1), and then multiplied it by the c.c. of the wave function, to obtain:

##\displaystyle \psi^* \left [ g^{\mu \nu} \left ( \frac{\partial}{\partial x^{\nu}} - \frac{e}{c}A_{\nu} \right ) \left ( \frac{\partial}{\partial x^{\mu}}-\frac{e}{c}A_{\mu} \right ) \right ] \psi=\psi^* \frac{m_0^2 c^2}{\hbar^2} \psi=\frac{m_0^2 c^2}{\hbar^2} \left | \psi \right |^2 ## (2)

In the same way I've considered the equation for the complex conjugate of the wave function, and multiplied it by the wave function by the left to obtain:

##\displaystyle \psi \left [ g^{\mu \nu} \left ( \frac{\partial}{\partial x^{\nu}} - \frac{e}{c}A_{\nu} \right ) \left ( \frac{\partial}{\partial x^{\mu}} -\frac{e}{c}A_{\mu} \right ) \right ] \psi^*=\frac{m_0^2 c^2}{\hbar^2} \left | \psi \right |^2## (3)

Then I made the substraction (2)-(3), and after some algebra I've arrived to:

##\displaystyle -g^{\mu \nu} \left [ \frac{\partial}{ \partial x^{\mu} } \left ( \psi^* \frac{ \partial \psi}{\partial x^{\nu}} - \psi \frac{ \partial \psi^* }{ \partial x^{\nu} } \right ) + \frac{ie}{\hbar c} \left ( \frac{\partial \psi }{\partial x^{\nu}} A_{\mu} \psi^* - \frac{\partial \psi^*}{\partial x^{\nu}} A_{\mu} \psi \right ) \right ]=0##

I don't know if this result is right, I could made some mistake, I have eliminated lots of products of operators and things like that. I wanted to know if someone had tried this before, and if this relation has any sense at all.

Thanks in advance.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I'll give in here furhter details on the calculation I've carried on, so I can get some corrections in the procedure, and in the way make a review and perhaps detecting some mistakes by my self. First of all there was a mistake in eq. (1) in a sign, but that was when I wrote this here, in my calculations I did that right.

So (1) should be:

##\displaystyle \left [ g^{\mu \nu} \left ( \frac{\partial}{\partial x^{\nu}} + \frac{e}{c}A_{\nu} \right ) \left ( \frac{\partial}{\partial x^{\mu}}+\frac{e}{c}A_{\mu} \right ) \right ] \psi=\frac{m_0^2 c^2}{\hbar^2} \psi##

And similarly for (2) and (3)

After the substraction (2)-(3) I get:

##\displaystyle \psi^* \left [ -g^{\mu \nu} \left ( \frac{\partial}{\partial x^{\nu}} + \frac{e}{c}A_{\nu} \right ) \left ( \frac{\partial}{\partial x^{\mu}} + \frac{e}{c}A_{\mu} \right ) \right ] \psi - \displaystyle \psi \left [ -g^{\mu \nu} \left ( \frac{\partial}{\partial x^{\nu}} + \frac{e}{c}A_{\nu} \right ) \left ( \frac{\partial}{\partial x^{\mu}} + \frac{e}{c}A_{\mu} \right ) \right ] \psi^*=0 ##

Expanding the terms:

##\displaystyle -g^{\mu \nu} \left \{ \psi^* \left [ \frac{\partial}{\partial x^{\nu}} \frac{\partial}{\partial x^{\mu}} + \frac{\partial}{\partial x^{\nu}} \frac{ie}{\hbar c}A_{\mu} + \frac{ie}{\hbar c}A_{\nu} \frac{\partial}{\partial x^{\mu}} -\frac{e^2}{\hbar^2 c^2 } A_{\nu}A_{\mu} \right ] \psi - \psi \left [ \frac{\partial}{\partial x^{\nu}} \frac{\partial}{\partial x^{\mu}} + \frac{\partial}{\partial x^{\nu}} \frac{ie}{\hbar c}A_{\mu} + \frac{ie}{\hbar c}A_{\nu} \frac{\partial}{\partial x^{\mu}} -\frac{e^2}{\hbar^2 c^2 } A_{\nu}A_{\mu} \right ] \psi^* \right \}=0 ##

Then:
##\displaystyle -g^{\mu \nu} \left \{ \psi^* \frac{\partial}{\partial x^{\nu}} \frac{\partial}{\partial x^{\mu}} \psi - \psi \frac{\partial}{\partial x^{\nu}} \frac{\partial}{\partial x^{\mu}} \psi^* + \frac{ie}{\hbar c} \left ( \psi^* \frac{\partial}{\partial x^{\nu}} A_{\mu} \psi - \psi \frac{\partial}{\partial x^{\nu}} A_{\mu} \psi^* + \psi^* A_{\nu} \frac{\partial}{\partial x^{\mu}} \psi - \psi A_{\nu} \frac{\partial}{\partial x^{\mu}} \psi^* \right ) \\ -\frac{e^2}{\hbar^2 c^2 } \left ( \psi^* A_{\nu}A_{\mu} \psi - \psi A_{\nu}A_{\mu}\psi^* \right ) \right \}=0##

The last term in parenthesis equals zero.

For the next step, I've used that:

1) ##\displaystyle \frac{\partial}{\partial x^{\nu}}\left ( \psi^* \frac{\partial}{\partial x^{\mu}}\psi \right )= \frac{\partial \psi^*}{\partial x^{\nu}}\frac{\partial \psi }{\partial x^{\mu}}+\psi^* \frac{\partial}{\partial x^{\nu}}\frac{\partial}{\partial x^{\mu}}\psi ##

2) ##\displaystyle \frac{\partial}{\partial x^{\nu}}\left ( \psi^* A_{\mu} \psi \right )= \frac{\partial \psi^*}{\partial x^{\nu}} A_{\mu} \psi+\psi^* \frac{\partial}{\partial x^{\nu}}A_{\mu}\psi ##

3) ##\displaystyle g^{\mu \nu} \left ( \frac{\partial \psi^*}{\partial x^{\nu}}\frac{\partial \psi }{\partial x^{\mu}} - \frac{\partial \psi}{\partial x^{\nu}}\frac{\partial \psi^* }{\partial x^{\mu}} \right ) = 0##

And after making all that substitutions I get the result I've posted at the beginning of this topic (I have one correction for it, that I've noted while typing this):

##\displaystyle -g^{\mu \nu} \left [ \frac{\partial}{ \partial x^{\nu} } \left ( \psi^* \frac{ \partial \psi}{\partial x^{\mu}} - \psi \frac{ \partial \psi^* }{ \partial x^{\mu} } \right ) + \frac{ie}{\hbar c} \left ( \frac{\partial \psi }{\partial x^{\nu}} A_{\mu} \psi^* - \frac{\partial \psi^*}{\partial x^{\nu}} A_{\mu} \psi \right ) \right ]=0##
 
Last edited:
I think there is a sign error somewhere because all you're showing is that \partial (\psi^*\partial\psi)+\frac{ie}{\hbar c}\partial\psi A \psi is real i.e. z-z^*=2Im(z) which is not a trivial statement for complex fields
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Telemachus
Yes, I think you are right. But for a different reason. I actually didn't substract the c.c. of the equation (what I did was substracting the k-g eq. for the . But anyway, the first term is equal to the one that one obtains by doing exactly what you said, that is the procedure the book follows to obtain the continuity equation (I'm following Greiner's relativistic quantum mechanics btw). So the second term must be equal to the one obtained in that way (because it must be equal to the first term) or it could be zero. I think it actually should be zero, so what I would obtain si the continuity equation without fields, but I should demonstrate that

##\displaystyle \frac{\partial \psi }{\partial x^{\nu}} A_{\mu} \psi^*= \frac{\partial \psi^*}{\partial x^{\nu}} A_{\mu} \psi ##

Thanks for your answer :)
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K
Replies
95
Views
8K
Replies
5
Views
3K