Probability Density and Current of Dirac Equation

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on determining the probability density and current from the Dirac equation, specifically the equation i∂ψ/∂t = (-iα·∇ + βm)ψ. The participants clarify the process of taking the Hermitian conjugate of the Dirac equation, emphasizing the importance of matrix order reversal and the correct application of the adjoint operation. They conclude that the continuity equation can be derived from the relationship d/dt(ψ†ψ) = -∇·(ψ†αψ), which is essential for understanding the probability current in quantum mechanics.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the Dirac equation and its components, including the gamma matrices.
  • Knowledge of Hermitian conjugates and their application in quantum mechanics.
  • Familiarity with continuity equations in physics, particularly in quantum contexts.
  • Basic grasp of vector calculus, especially divergence and gradient operations.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of the continuity equation from the Dirac equation in detail.
  • Learn about the properties of Hermitian operators and their significance in quantum mechanics.
  • Explore the role of probability current in quantum field theory and its relation to charge current.
  • Investigate the differences between the Dirac equation and the Klein-Gordon equation regarding probability density and current.
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, particularly those specializing in quantum mechanics and quantum field theory, as well as students and researchers interested in the mathematical foundations of the Dirac equation and its implications for probability density and current.

Sekonda
Messages
201
Reaction score
0
Hey,

I'm trying to determine the probability density and current of the Dirac equation by comparison to the general continuity equation. The form of the Dirac equation I have is

i\frac{\partial \psi}{\partial t}=(-i\underline{\alpha}\cdot\underline{\nabla}+\beta m)\psi

According to my notes I am supposed to determine the following sum to make the relevant comparisons to the continuity equation and therefore determine the probability density/current

\psi(Dirac)^{\dagger}+\psi^{\dagger}(Dirac)

Where 'Dirac' refers to the above equation. However I have tried this and I can only get it to work if I multiply one term by 'i' and the other by '-i' in the above.

\psi(i\frac{\partial \psi}{\partial t})^{\dagger}+\psi^{\dagger}(i\frac{\partial \psi}{\partial t})=-i\psi\frac{\partial \psi^{*}}{\partial t}+i\psi^{*}\frac{\partial \psi}{\partial t}\neq i\frac{\partial (\psi^{*}\psi)}{\partial t}

Any help is appreciated!

Thanks,
SK
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Your notes should use the gamma matrices. It's the modern treatment on the Dirac equation/field and make the special relativity invariance easier to see.
 
Perhaps they should but I'm reckoning these are introduced later, so considering we don't 'know' these yet this appears to be the simplest way of demonstrating the probability density/current of the Dirac equation. I'm confused though, I perhaps maybe taking the adjoint of the Dirac equation incorrectly.
 
Have you considered that taking the hermitian conjugate is not only taking the complex conjugate but also the transposition?
 
I think so, taking the adjoint of ψ doesn't bring out a minus sign does it? With regards to the RHS of the Dirac equation I think β is diagonal and so the transposition doesn't affect it, though I'm a bit confused as how I'd go about doing the hermitian conjugate on the dot product of the alpha matrix with the ∇...

I wouldn't be surprised though if this transposition is the issue, I'll keep looking at it!
 
Also, \psi^{\dagger}\psi is a number, while \psi\psi^{\dagger} is a matrix, so I don't really quite get the whole thing.
 
Sekonda said:
I think so, taking the adjoint of ψ doesn't bring out a minus sign does it? With regards to the RHS of the Dirac equation I think β is diagonal and so the transposition doesn't affect it, though I'm a bit confused as how I'd go about doing the hermitian conjugate on the dot product of the alpha matrix with the ∇...

I wouldn't be surprised though if this transposition is the issue, I'll keep looking at it!

The complicated thing is correctly taking the Hermitian conjugate of the Dirac equation. What I think is true is this:

  1. i \dfrac{d\Psi}{dt} = -i \alpha \cdot (\nabla \Psi) + \beta m \Psi
  2. -i \dfrac{d\Psi^\dagger}{dt} = +i (\nabla \Psi^\dagger \cdot \alpha) + \Psi^\dagger \beta m
Taking the conjugate reverses the order of matrices. So if you multiply the top equation on the left by -i \Psi^\dagger and multiply the bottom equation on the right by +i \Psi and add them, you get:
\Psi^\dagger \dfrac{d\Psi}{dt} + \dfrac{d\Psi^\dagger}{dt}\Psi= - \Psi^\dagger \alpha \cdot (\nabla \Psi) - (\nabla \Psi^\dagger) \cdot \alpha \Psi

(the terms involving \beta cancel). You can rewrite this as (I think):

\dfrac{d}{dt} (\Psi^\dagger \Psi) = - \nabla \cdot (\Psi^\dagger \alpha \Psi)

This can be rearranged as a continuity equation for probability.

There's a different continuity equation for electric charge, but I've forgotten what that is.
 
Thanks Stevendaryl!

This is exactly what I wanted, I can see what was incorrect now - brilliant!

Thanks again,
SK
 
stevendaryl said:
The complicated thing is correctly taking the Hermitian conjugate of the Dirac equation. What I think is true is this:

  1. i \dfrac{d\Psi}{dt} = -i \alpha \cdot (\nabla \Psi) + \beta m \Psi
  2. -i \dfrac{d\Psi^\dagger}{dt} = +i (\nabla \Psi^\dagger \cdot \alpha) + \Psi^\dagger \beta m
Taking the conjugate reverses the order of matrices. So if you multiply the top equation on the left by -i \Psi^\dagger and multiply the bottom equation on the right by +i \Psi and add them, you get:
\Psi^\dagger \dfrac{d\Psi}{dt} + \dfrac{d\Psi^\dagger}{dt}\Psi= - \Psi^\dagger \alpha \cdot (\nabla \Psi) - (\nabla \Psi^\dagger) \cdot \alpha \Psi

(the terms involving \beta cancel). You can rewrite this as (I think):

\dfrac{d}{dt} (\Psi^\dagger \Psi) = - \nabla \cdot (\Psi^\dagger \alpha \Psi)

This can be rearranged as a continuity equation for probability.

There's a different continuity equation for electric charge, but I've forgotten what that is.

My last comment was stupid. If you multiply probability current by the electron charge, you get the charge current. It's that simple. For some reason, though, that's not the case with the solutions of the Klein Gordon equation.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K