Klien Gordon Equation solution under Lorentz transformation

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the transformation of the wavefunction in the context of the Klein-Gordon equation under Lorentz transformations. Participants explore the implications of these transformations for scalar fields and their representation within the framework of relativistic quantum mechanics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Technical explanation, Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the necessity of the transformation law for the wavefunction, suggesting that it must take the form \(\psi'(x')=\lambda \psi(x)\) with \(|\lambda|=1\).
  • Another participant argues that the transformation does not necessarily follow, citing the mass shell condition for representations of the Poincare group and contrasting the transformation properties of the Dirac field with those of scalar fields.
  • A different participant expresses unfamiliarity with the topic and seeks clarification on how the wavefunction's transformation is determined, specifically questioning the reasoning behind the transformation being the same up to a minus sign.
  • It is noted that the behavior of scalar fields under Poincare transformations is a result of quantum theory invariance, rather than an assumption, and that the minus sign arises from considering the full Poincare group or a relevant subgroup.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants exhibit disagreement regarding the transformation properties of the wavefunction and the implications of the Klein-Gordon equation. There is no consensus on the necessity or form of the transformation law.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the dependence on the full Poincare group and the implications of different representations, indicating that assumptions about the transformation properties may vary based on the context of the discussion.

McLaren Rulez
Messages
289
Reaction score
3
Hi,

I am using Griener's Relativistic Quantum Mechanics and I have a question. Using the Klien Gordon Equation [itex](p^{\mu}p_{\mu}-m_{0}c^{2})\psi=0[/itex], he says that the transformation law for the wavefunction i.e [itex]\psi(x)[/itex] transforming to [itex]\psi'(x')[/itex] must have the form [itex]\psi'(x')=\lambda \psi(x)[/itex] with [itex]|\lambda|=1[/itex]. I don't understand why this is the case. Can anyone help me see why this must be so?

Thank you
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It doesn't follow really. I'm thinking that any massive spin n representation of the Poincare group must obey the mass sheet condition: p^2 - m^2 = 0.

Think about the Dirac field for a second: by squaring the Dirac equation you get the Klein-Gordon equation which is satisfied by the field, but under restricted Poincare transformation, the Dirac field transforms like a (1/2,0) directsum (0,1/2) spinor, not like a (pseudo)scalar.
 
I am a doing this as a bit of holiday reading so I'm actually completely unfamiliar with what you're saying. So basically, how do we know how the wavefunction transforms when we go from one frame to another? What tells us that it must be the same up to a minus sign?

Thank you
 
[...]So basically, how do we know how the wavefunction transforms when we go from one frame to another? [...]

Actually, we don't. The scalar field's existence is a consequence of a quantum theory invariant under Poincare trasformations. Its behavior under such transformations is again a result, not an assumption. The minus sign comes from considering the full Poincare group, or a subgroup containing the spatial reflection.
 
Thank you dextercioby
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
6K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
2K