A Interaction between matter and antimatter in Dirac equation

lagrangman
Messages
13
Reaction score
2
TL;DR Summary
Confusing interaction between matter and antimatter in Dirac equation.
I'm new to relativistic quantum mechanics and quantum field theory and was trying to learn about the Dirac equation.

Unfortunately, I got a little stumped by the interaction between matter and antimatter.

It seems like the time derivative of matter is dependent on the spatial derivative of antimatter, but not the spatial derivative of matter. Likewise, the time derivative of antimatter is dependent on the spatial derivative of matter, but not the spatial derivative of antimatter.

To me this means that if there is momentum of matter, then the antimatter field should be changing, which doesn't make sense to me.

I find this counterintuitive and was hoping that someone could explain this to me.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
lagrangman said:
Summary:: Confusing interaction between matter and antimatter in Dirac equation.

It seems like the time derivative of matter is dependent on the spatial derivative of antimatter, but not the spatial derivative of matter.
What makes you think that?
 
  • Like
Likes Vanadium 50 and vanhees71
lagrangman said:
Summary:: Confusing interaction between matter and antimatter in Dirac equation.

I'm new to relativistic quantum mechanics and quantum field theory and was trying to learn about the Dirac equation.

Unfortunately, I got a little stumped by the interaction between matter and antimatter.

It seems like the time derivative of matter is dependent on the spatial derivative of antimatter, but not the spatial derivative of matter. Likewise, the time derivative of antimatter is dependent on the spatial derivative of matter, but not the spatial derivative of antimatter.

To me this means that if there is momentum of matter, then the antimatter field should be changing, which doesn't make sense to me.

I find this counterintuitive and was hoping that someone could explain this to me.
You could read this and tell us precisely what you don't understand. A liitle mathematics might help:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirac_spinor
 
Isn't the first row of the dirac equation
$$i\frac{\partial \psi_1}{\partial t} = m \psi_1 - i \frac{\partial \psi_4}{\partial x} - i \frac{\partial \psi_4}{\partial y} - i \frac{\partial \psi_3}{\partial z}$$

I was under the impression that ##\psi_1## and ##\psi_2## were matter and ##\psi_3## and ##\psi_4## were antimatter.
 
lagrangman said:
Isn't the first row of the dirac equation
$$i\frac{\partial \psi_1}{\partial \t} = m \psi_1 - i \frac{\partial \psi_4}{\partial x} - i \frac{\partial \psi_4}{\partial y} - i \frac{\partial \psi_3}{\partial z}$$

I was under the impression that ##\psi_1## and ##\psi_2## were matter and ##\psi_3## and ##\psi_4## were antimatter.
Not quite. The Dirac spinors for both particles and antiparticles have four components. In the non-relativistic case, the solutions simplify to approximately two-component solutions, but not in general.
 
Thanks, very helpful.
 
I am not sure if this belongs in the biology section, but it appears more of a quantum physics question. Mike Wiest, Associate Professor of Neuroscience at Wellesley College in the US. In 2024 he published the results of an experiment on anaesthesia which purported to point to a role of quantum processes in consciousness; here is a popular exposition: https://neurosciencenews.com/quantum-process-consciousness-27624/ As my expertise in neuroscience doesn't reach up to an ant's ear...
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
I am reading WHAT IS A QUANTUM FIELD THEORY?" A First Introduction for Mathematicians. The author states (2.4 Finite versus Continuous Models) that the use of continuity causes the infinities in QFT: 'Mathematicians are trained to think of physical space as R3. But our continuous model of physical space as R3 is of course an idealization, both at the scale of the very large and at the scale of the very small. This idealization has proved to be very powerful, but in the case of Quantum...
Back
Top