Klein Paradox - Dirac equation with step potentional

Drew Carey
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
Hi all!

I was reading up on the Klein paradox in Itzykson & Zuber's Quantum Field Theory (but I think this is a pretty standard part that's probably present in most QFT textbooks) and on page 62 they have a pretty straight forward solution to the Dirac equation with a step potential.

I've noticed something odd though - they're solution is based upon solving for the two regions (V=0 and V>0) and requiring continuity at the origin. They do not however require continuity of the first derivative, and in fact their solution's first derivative isn't continuous.

When solving Schrodinger's equation with a step potential it is always customary to enforce continuity of the first derivative as the equation contains a second space derivative.

I've tried to solve the Dirac problem myself with this added constraint, but is seems unsolvable (over constrained. Though I may have some mistake in the algebra). I've searched online for other solutions to this problem, and they all seem to ignore continuity of the first derivative, without even mentioning it.

What am I missing? How can we give up on continuity of the first derivative? Especially in light of the fact that the Dirac equation is supposed to be equal to Schrodinger's equation in a non-relativistic limit these two constraints need to be satisfied by the Dirac equation solution as well, no?

Thanks in advance!
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Why do you take the continuity of the first spatial derivative for the Shrodinger's equation?
Because it's a 2nd order differential equation (wrt spatial components).
This is of course not the case for Dirac's equation, where you only have one spatial derivative.
(\slash{p} \pm m) \psi=0

The fact that Dirac's equation in the NRL yields the classical results, should not be confused of that fact that it gives even more extra information over physics. For example the non relativistic limit will drop your spinors from 4 to 2 component, while in fact they exist in one single 4component spinor.
 
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!

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
32
Views
2K
Replies
13
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Back
Top