I Spin Angular Momentum Dirac Equation

Bob Dylan
Messages
20
Reaction score
0
In the Dirac equation, the wave-function is broken into four wave-functions in four entries in a column of a matrix. Since there are four separate versions of the wave-function, does each version have the spin angular momentum of h-bar/2? This seems overly simplistic. How does spin angular momentum work for the Dirac equation?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Bob Dylan said:
In the Dirac equation, the wave-function is broken into four wave-functions in four entries in a column of a matrix. Since there are four separate versions of the wave-function, does each version have the spin angular momentum of h-bar/2? This seems overly simplistic. How does spin angular momentum work for the Dirac equation?

The spin operator mixes the components of the Dirac wave function, so it's not a property of anyone component, but of all 4. On the other hand, orbital angular momentum does not mix the components, so it makes sense to say that a single component has an orbital angular momentum, but not to say that it has spin angular momentum.
 
Does this mean all four components share the same phase?
 
Bob Dylan said:
Does this mean all four components share the same phase?

If a particle is in a spin eigenstate, then the phases of the components must be related.

It's easiest to see with the two-component nonrelativistic limit of the Dirac equation, the Pauli equation.

With the Pauli equation, the wave function has two components: ##\psi = \left( \begin{array} \\ \alpha \\ \beta \end{array} \right)##.

If ##\psi## is spin-up in the z-direction, that means ##\left( \begin{array} \\ 1 & 0 \\ 0 & -1 \end{array} \right)
\left( \begin{array} \\ \alpha \\ \beta \end{array} \right) = +1 \left( \begin{array} \\ \alpha \\ \beta \end{array} \right)##. That implies ##\beta = 0##.

If ##\psi## is spin-up in the x-direction, that means ##\left( \begin{array} \\ 0 & 1 \\ 1 & 0 \end{array} \right)
\left( \begin{array} \\ \alpha \\ \beta \end{array} \right) = +1 \left( \begin{array} \\ \alpha \\ \beta \end{array} \right)##. That implies ##\alpha = \beta##.
 
So is h-bar (or h-bar divided by 2) a form of spin or orbital angular momentum?
 
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
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
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...

Similar threads

Replies
8
Views
7K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
19
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
959
Replies
5
Views
3K
Back
Top