Klein-Gordon for a massless particle

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on finding a solution to the Klein-Gordon equation for a massless particle, specifically the equation ∂²ψ/∂t² = c²∇²ψ. The user is considering using the Frobenius method and separation of variables but is unsure how to apply these techniques due to the presence of double derivatives. Suggestions include treating the equation similarly to the wave equation and exploring solutions like exponential functions or spherical waves. The conversation highlights the need for a deeper understanding of separation of variables in the context of partial differential equations. Overall, the discussion emphasizes the mathematical approaches to solving the Klein-Gordon equation for massless particles.
jabers
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
So I'm trying to find a solution of the Klein-Gordon equation for a massless particle. I reached the Klein-Gordon from the total energy-momentum equation. Then for a massless particle i get to this equation:
$${ \partial^2 \psi \over \partial t^2 } = c^2 \nabla^2 \psi$$How do I solve for psi? I was thinking about trying the Frobenius method, but I'm not sure how to do that. Any help would be appreciated.

Also how do I make my typed latex display in the latex format on this forum?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
so for a one dimensional wave equation the equation is:

{ \partial^2 \psi \over \partial t^2 } = { c^2 \nabla^2 \psi} = c^2 {\partial^2 \psi \over \partial x^2}

Right?

I don't see how I could use separation of variables. If it were something like this:

{ \partial x \over \partial t } = { x }

Then I could say:

{\frac{1}{x} \partial x } = {\partial t}

And then integrate but I don't see what you mean. What do you mean?

The only thing i could see doing is this:

{\partial^2 \psi \partial^2 x} = c^2 {\partial^2 \psi \partial^2 t}

And integrating twice? But that doesn't really make sense to me.
I didnt think you could separate variables to solve a differential equation when there were double derivatives in the equation.
 
Cool, thank you.
 
this equation looks pretty much like the wave-equation, for a wave moving with a speed v=c.
So I guess you can think for solutions like cos or sin, or better exponential.

If for example you say:

Ψ(r,t)= ei(-kr+ωt) which is a spherical wave, you can see how this thing behaves in your equation.
 
Thread 'Help with Time-Independent Perturbation Theory "Good" States Proof'
(Disclaimer: this is not a HW question. I am self-studying, and this felt like the type of question I've seen in this forum. If there is somewhere better for me to share this doubt, please let me know and I'll transfer it right away.) I am currently reviewing Chapter 7 of Introduction to QM by Griffiths. I have been stuck for an hour or so trying to understand the last paragraph of this proof (pls check the attached file). It claims that we can express Ψ_{γ}(0) as a linear combination of...
Thread 'Stacked blocks & pulley system'
I've posted my attempt at a solution but I haven't gone through the whole process of putting together equations 1 -4 yet as I wanted to clarify if I'm on the right path My doubt lies in the formulation of equation 4 - the force equation for the stacked block. Since we don't know the acceleration of the masses and we don't know if mass M is heavy enough to cause m2 to slide, do we leave F_{12x} undetermined and not equate this to \mu_{s} F_{N} ? Are all the equations considering all...
Back
Top