andrien said:
then you should simply write ψp(t,x) which will be parity transformed spinor and then you should seek relation to original ψ.
edit-One more thing,Dirac eqn does not look like the original eqn with ψ(-x,t) but with γ0ψ(-x,t) it looks same.
my derivation is as follows:
Dirac Equation as Example,
Dirac Equation: [tex]\left(i\gamma^\mu \partial_\mu -m \right)\psi(x)=0[/tex]
Taking parity transform in both sides of the above Dirac Equation:
[tex]\left(i\gamma^0 \partial_0- i\gamma^j \partial_j -m \right)\psi^p(t,{\bf -x})=0[/tex]
Then we multiply from left [tex]\gamma^0[/tex], then we get:
[tex]\left(i\gamma^0 \partial_0+ i\gamma^j \partial_j -m \right) \gamma^0\psi^p(t,{\bf -x})=0[/tex]
that is to say, [tex]\gamma^0\psi^p(t,{\bf -x})[/tex] still obey the Dirac Equation
So
[tex]\gamma^0\psi^p(t,{\bf -x})=\eta_p\psi^p(t,{\bf x})[/tex]
Then
[tex]\psi^p(t,{\bf -x})=\eta_p \gamma^0\psi^p(t,{\bf x})[/tex]
and then:
[tex]\psi^p(t,{\bf x})=\eta_p \gamma^0\psi^p(t,{\bf -x})[/tex]
This is my derivation, the result is the same as yours and that in textbook.