Dirac's equation and anti-matter

  • Thread starter Thread starter Salamon
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Anti-matter
Salamon
Messages
36
Reaction score
0
Can someone explain how Dirac was able to deduce that anti-matter exists? How did this follow naturally from Dirac's equation? Did Dirac have to derive his equation or was it just an empirical law of nature like Newton's gravity or Einstein's Field equations?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Dirac's intention was to find a relativistic generalization of the Schrödinger equation which is first order in time derivative. In order to do that he had to introduce new 4-component objects called spinors. At his time this was pioneering guess-work. Today I would say that the Dirac equation follows (almost) uniquely from symmetry considerations, i.e. from the requirement of a Lorentz-covariant wave equation for spin 1/2 fields. Einstein's field equations (GR) a not required, SR is sufficient.

Antimatter followed from the equation

##E^2 = (mc^2)^2 + (pc)^2##

which has two roots, i.e. allows for both positive and negative energy solutions. In addition some handwaving arguments like the Dirac sea, absence of an electron with negative energy equals presence of a positron with positive energy etc. is required. Today the framework of QFT is much more satisfactory to deal with the Dirac equation and antimatter, however one cannot fully avoid the Dirac sea which appears in normal ordering (regularization).
 
tom.stoer said:
Antimatter followed from the equation

##E^2 = (mc^2)^2 + (pc)^2##

Doesn't antimatter follow from the 4-component spinor? 2 components are for matter, the other 2 for antimatter.
 
That's a specific representation for Dirac-spinors. But antimatter exists for scalar fields as well, therefore its existence does not require antimatter.
 
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
If we release an electron around a positively charged sphere, the initial state of electron is a linear combination of Hydrogen-like states. According to quantum mechanics, evolution of time would not change this initial state because the potential is time independent. However, classically we expect the electron to collide with the sphere. So, it seems that the quantum and classics predict different behaviours!
Back
Top