Dirac Equation Derivation with Inhomogeneous Lorentz Group in QFT Book

nklohit
Messages
13
Reaction score
0
I've seen the derivation of Dirac Equation using Inhomogeneous Lorentz Group in L H Ryder's QFT book.Can anybody give some comprehensible descriptions of this method?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You could take a look at Srednicki's book (draft copy free online, google to find it), which starts with reps of the Lorentz group and slowly builds up to the Dirac lagrangian.

Incidentally, the Dirac equation can't really be derived, it is just postulated as following from the simplest lagrangian (that is, terms with the fewest derivatives) that can be written down for a field corresponding to spin-1/2 particles.

For the extreme version of this point of view, see Weinberg's book (which is thorough and extremely detailed, and therefore comprehensible, but only with a lot of effort).
 
It's also interesting to note the relation between KG and Dirac eqs. You can by a special simple change of variables, transform the second order (KG equation) into a system of first order equations (Dirac), out pops tha pauli matrices.

I'm not sure what it prooves, but it's at least when coming from the classical path, an interesting insight about a possible mathematical relation between the spin ½ system and the spinless KG. It sort of allows for a kind of mathematical "interpretation" of what spin ½ is in terms of a "transformation" of a spinless system.

when I took the QM courses I don't recall this beeing the way it was shown in class but I just noted this myself when playing around, and found it to be an interesting curiosity.

/Fredrik
 
We can simply derive KG equation from Dirac equation. More generally ,even the Bargmann-Wigner equation which describes the higher spins can also lead to KG equation, but the fai function in the equation are totally different which result in the corresponding spin quantum numbers.
 
Thanks to everyone. I am trying Weinberg's and Srednicki's besides Ryder's.
 
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...
Back
Top