Dirac equation for the conjugated field

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the application of the Euler-Lagrange equation to the Lagrangian density of the Dirac field, specifically regarding the conjugate field. The user initially derives the equation for the conjugate field as \(\bar{\psi} (-i \partial_\mu \gamma^{\mu} -m) = 0\), but encounters an inconsistency when taking the Hermitian conjugate of the Dirac equation, resulting in an extra \(\gamma^0\). The resolution involves recognizing the necessity of including \(\gamma^0\) when manipulating the equation, confirming that the correct form aligns with the Euler-Lagrange result.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the Dirac equation and its implications in quantum mechanics.
  • Familiarity with the Euler-Lagrange equation in the context of field theory.
  • Knowledge of Hermitian conjugation and its role in quantum field theory.
  • Proficiency in manipulating gamma matrices, particularly \(\gamma^0\) and \(\gamma^{\mu}\).
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of gamma matrices in quantum field theory.
  • Learn about the implications of Hermitian conjugation in the context of the Dirac equation.
  • Explore the derivation and applications of the Euler-Lagrange equation in various field theories.
  • Investigate the role of conjugate fields in quantum mechanics and their physical interpretations.
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, particularly those specializing in quantum field theory, graduate students studying particle physics, and researchers working on the mathematical foundations of the Dirac equation.

phsopher
Messages
180
Reaction score
4
This is probably a stupid question, but when I apply the Euler-Lagrange equation to the Lagrangian density of the Dirac field I get for the conjugate field

[tex]\bar{\psi} (-i \partial_\mu \gamma^{\mu} -m) = 0[/tex] (derivative acts to the left).

But when I take a hermitian conjugate of the Dirac equation for the field I get an extra [tex]\gamma^0[/tex]:

[tex]0 = \left[ (i \partial_\mu \gamma^{\mu} -m)\psi \right]^\dagger = \psi^\dagger (-i \partial_\mu (\gamma^{\mu})^\dagger -m) = \psi^\dagger (-i \partial_\mu \gamma^0 \gamma^{\mu} \gamma^0 -m) = \psi^\dagger \gamma^0(-i \partial_\mu \gamma^{\mu} \gamma^0 -m) = \bar{\psi} (-i \partial_\mu \gamma^{\mu} \gamma^0 -m)[/tex].

What am I missing?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
phsopher said:
This is probably a stupid question, but when I apply the Euler-Lagrange equation to the Lagrangian density of the Dirac field I get for the conjugate field

[tex]\bar{\psi} (-i \partial_\mu \gamma^{\mu} -m) = 0[/tex] (derivative acts to the left).

But when I take a hermitian conjugate of the Dirac equation for the field I get an extra [tex]\gamma^0[/tex]:

[tex]0 = \left[ (i \partial_\mu \gamma^{\mu} -m)\psi \right]^\dagger = \psi^\dagger (-i \partial_\mu (\gamma^{\mu})^\dagger -m) = \psi^\dagger (-i \partial_\mu \gamma^0 \gamma^{\mu} \gamma^0 -m) = \psi^\dagger \gamma^0(-i \partial_\mu \gamma^{\mu} \gamma^0 -m) = \bar{\psi} (-i \partial_\mu \gamma^{\mu} \gamma^0 -m)[/tex].

What am I missing?

Taking the normal hermitean conjugate of the <original> Dirac eqn will not give you the <conjugated> equation. You need an extra [itex]\gamma_0[/itex].

Actually, you took out the [itex]\gamma_0[/itex] from the paranthesis without it being there next to the <m>. That's wrong.
 
Ah yes, of course. Then I can multiply with [tex]\gamma^0[/tex] from the right and get the same equation as from Euler-Lagrange. I'm such an idiot. Thanks a lot.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K