Schrödinger's equation to Dirac's

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter fluidistic
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Schrodinger's equation
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the transition from Schrödinger's equation to a relativistic framework, specifically addressing the misconception that substituting the mass "m" with the Lorentz factor-adjusted mass "\gamma m_0" simplifies this transition. It is established that the terms in Schrödinger's equation correspond to total energy expressed as kinetic plus potential energy, and that in relativistic quantum mechanics, wave function terms must adhere to Lorentz group representations. Therefore, merely introducing gamma factors does not yield a valid relativistic equation.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Schrödinger's equation and its components
  • Familiarity with relativistic mechanics and the Lorentz factor
  • Knowledge of quantum mechanics and wave functions
  • Basic concepts of kinetic and potential energy in physics
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation and implications of the Klein-Gordon equation
  • Explore the role of the Lorentz group in quantum mechanics
  • Learn about the Dirac equation and its significance in relativistic quantum theory
  • Investigate the relationship between momentum and energy in relativistic contexts
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, students of quantum mechanics, and anyone interested in the foundations of relativistic quantum theory will benefit from this discussion.

fluidistic
Gold Member
Messages
3,934
Reaction score
286
The Shrödinger's equation is [itex]i \hbar \frac{\partial \Psi (\vec r, t) }{\partial t}=-\frac{\hbar ^2}{2m} \nabla ^2 \Psi (\vec r ,t ) + V(\vec r ) \Psi (\vec r ,t)[/itex].
Where m is the mass of the considered particle at rest. I would like to know why the pass to the relativistic equation isn't as simple as changing m for [itex]\gamma m_0[/itex].
Say, if instead of using "m" in the Schrödinger's equation, I use [itex]\gamma m_0[/itex] where [itex]m_0[/itex] is the mass of the particle at rest and gamma is Lorentz factor, what would I obtain? Wouldn't this be a more accurate equation than Schrödinger's?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
fluidistic said:
I would like to know why the pass to the relativistic equation isn't as simple as changing m for [itex]\gamma m_0[/itex].

It's related to why you can't substitute [itex]\gamma m_0[/itex] for m in the non-relativistic kinetic energy equation, and thereby get the relativistic kinetic energy.

The terms of the SE, as you've written it, correspond to the statement

total energy = kinetic energy + potential energy

using the classical relationship between kinetic energy and momentum, [itex]K = p^2 / 2m[/itex].
 
In relativistic quantum mechanics the terms in an equation for a wave function must transform according to some representation of the Lorentz group (just like in relativistic mechanics). You can't achieve that simply by introducing some gamma-factors
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K