The Dirac Equation: Understanding Spinors and Approximations

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the Dirac equation, specifically focusing on the understanding of spinors and various approximations involved in its solutions. Participants are exploring specific equations and their derivations, as well as the implications of certain assumptions in the context of quantum mechanics.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion regarding the transition from equation (2.100) to (2.101) and seeks clarification on the assumptions made.
  • Another participant questions the equivalence of the expression ##(\vec{p} \cdot \sigma) (\vec{p} \cdot \vec{\sigma})## and suggests it equals ##\boldsymbol{p}^2##.
  • A subsequent reply confirms the equivalence of ##(\vec{p} \cdot \sigma) (\vec{p} \cdot \vec{\sigma})## to ##\boldsymbol{p}^2## and discusses the importance of considering terms up to order ##p^4## in the derivation.
  • Participants discuss the cancellation of terms in the equations leading to (2.113) and the implications of dropping higher-order terms.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants appear to agree on the equivalence of certain expressions and the importance of order in approximations, but there remains uncertainty regarding the specific transitions between equations and the assumptions involved.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in the discussion regarding the assumptions made in the derivations, the dependence on the definitions of terms, and the unresolved nature of some mathematical steps leading to the conclusions drawn.

park
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
TL;DR
dirac equation and it's solution
I'm studying about dirac equation and it's solution.
When we starts with the equation (2.75), I can understand that it is possible to set 2 kinds of spinor.
스크린샷 2020-03-31 오후 2.51.18.png

스크린샷 2020-03-31 오후 2.51.39.png

But my question is...
1. After the assumption (2.100), how can we set the equation like (2.101)
스크린샷 2020-03-31 오후 2.52.18.png

2. I can't get (2.113) from (2.111) using (2.112)... Approximation and operator made me so crazy!
Please help me...
스크린샷 2020-03-31 오후 2.52.50.png
 
Physics news on Phys.org
First step: what is ##(\vec{p} \cdot \sigma) (\vec{p} \cdot \vec{\sigma}) ## equal to?
 
nrqed said:
First step: what is ##(\vec{p} \cdot \sigma) (\vec{p} \cdot \vec{\sigma}) ## equal to?

Equal to ##\boldsymbol{p}^2## !
 
park said:
Equal to ##\boldsymbol{p}^2## !
Right!

Now, the key point is that they work up to order ##p^4##, i.e. they drop all terms of higher order.

So notice that the following term on the left of (2.111) is

$$ (T+e \phi) (-p^2/(8m^2c^2)= -p^4/(16m^3c^2) ~\text{plus terms of order } p^4 \text{ and higher}.$$

This term cancels exactly the term ##- (\vec{p} \cdot \vec{\sigma})^2\, p^2/(16m^3c^2) ## that appears on the right side. This leaves Eq, (2.113), which is valid up to order ##p^4##.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
5K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
5K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K