The Schrödinger equation as the non-relativistic limit of the Dirac equation

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The Schrödinger equation is established as the non-relativistic limit of the Dirac equation through a systematic reduction of the Dirac Lagrangian, \(\mathcal{L} = \bar{\psi} \left( i \gamma^\mu \partial_\mu - m \right) \psi\), to the form \(\mathcal{L} = \psi^\dagger \left( i \partial_t + \frac{\nabla^2}{2m} \right) \psi\). This transition involves recognizing that in the non-relativistic limit, the energy \(E\) can be expressed as \(E = m + T\), where \(T\) represents kinetic energy. The Klein-Gordon equation is utilized to derive the Schrödinger equation, confirming that each spinor component satisfies the necessary conditions. The discussion highlights the equivalence of different approaches, including the transition to Pauli's equation while neglecting spin.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the Dirac equation and its components
  • Familiarity with the Klein-Gordon equation
  • Knowledge of Lagrangian mechanics in quantum field theory
  • Basic principles of non-relativistic quantum mechanics
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of the Schrödinger equation from the Klein-Gordon equation
  • Explore Gordon Baym's text on quantum mechanics for insights on the Dirac equation
  • Investigate the implications of spin in the context of the Dirac equation
  • Learn about projection operators in quantum mechanics and their applications
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, particularly those specializing in quantum mechanics and quantum field theory, as well as students seeking to understand the relationship between relativistic and non-relativistic quantum equations.

nonequilibrium
Messages
1,412
Reaction score
2
Hello,

I'm reading Griffiths' introduction to elementary particles and he seems to claim that the Schrödinger equation can be seen as a non-relativistic limit of the Dirac equation. I was wondering how one could deduce this, e.g. how do we go from
\mathcal L = \bar{\psi} \left( i \gamma^\mu \partial_\mu - m \right) \psi
to
\mathcal L = \psi^\dagger \left( i \partial_t + \frac{\nabla^2}{2m} \right) \psi
(and somewhere along the way the psi goes from having 4 components to having one (?))

But maybe I misinterpreted Griffiths; he simply states that the psi of the Dirac equation non-relativistically becomes the regular quantum mechanical wavefunction, and I assumed the latter to be the psi of the Schrödinger equation.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Each spinor component satisfies the Klein-Gordan equation

(p^\mu p_\mu - m^2 ) \psi =0,

where we can write

p^\mu p_\mu = E^2 - |\vec{p}|^2.

In the nonrelativistic limit,

E = m + T,~~~T\ll m,

so

E^2 \approx m^2 + 2 m T.

The KG equation becomes

2mT \psi = |\vec{p}|^2 \psi,

which, upon identifying

T = i \partial_t,~~~\vec{p}= -i \nabla

is the Schrödinger equation for a free particle. The same argument goes through if we include a background potential.
 
As far as I know, the Lagrangian whose Euler equation gives Schroedinger equation should be:
<br /> \mathcal{L} = \frac{i \, \hbar}{2} \, \left( \psi^{\dagger} \, \dot{\psi} - \dot{\psi}^{\dagger} \, \psi \right) - \frac{\hbar^2}{2 m} \, \nabla \psi^{\dagger} \, \nabla \psi<br />
where \psi is a two-row column spinor, and \psi^{\dagger} is the Hermitian adjoint.

Maybe it's the same as the one you had posted by some integration by parts, but I just wanted to point it out.
 
There are 2 equivalent ways, one is spelled out by fzero (going from the Dirac eqn to the KG eqn for the Dirac spinor and ignoring spin and special relativity one gets the SE directly), the other is going to Pauli's equation and then neglect spin.

Gordon Baym's text on QM has a nice description of the Dirac eqn and its approximations.
 
In the rest frame of the particle its 4-momentum is p^{\mu}=(m c, 0), and the Dirac equation in momentum space is:
<br /> \left( \hat{\gamma}^{0} - \hat{1} \right) \, \psi = 0<br />
Depending on the choice of the explicit form of the time-like gamma matrix, we have two linearly independent out of the 4 components of the Dirac spinor equal to zero. What are these combinations? Those are the combinations that correspond to the 2 spin projections for the antiparticle state. So, Dirac equation simply projects them out.

Indeed the matrix:
<br /> \hat{P} = \alpha \left( \hat{\gamma}^{0} - \hat{1} \right)<br />
take its square and use (\hat{\gamma}^{0})^{2} = \hat{1}
<br /> \hat{P}^{2} = 2 \alpha^{2} \, \left( \hat{1} - \hat{\gamma}^{0} \right)<br />
and choose 2\alpha = -1, we get a projection operator that projects the antiparticle states. Its complementary operator:
<br /> \hat{P}&#039; = \hat{1} - \hat{P} = \frac{\hat{1} + \hat{\gamma}^{0}}{2}<br />

Act with this operator on the left of the Dirac equation, use the anticommutation relations to move it to the right of the gamma matrices to obtain an equation for \hat{P}&#039; \phi = \psi (although this is a 4 spinor, it has only 2 independent components). Then, assume this function to be multiplied by a variable phase \psi = e^{i f(x)} \, \psi. By choosing it appropriately, you may be able to obtain a non-relativistic approximation.
 
Last edited:
Thank you all.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
701
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 39 ·
2
Replies
39
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
2K