Understanding the Dirac Equation: Showing \gamma^{\mu} Must Be Square Matrices

raintrek
Messages
68
Reaction score
0
Yep, another quick question on the Dirac Equation!
I've become slightly more clued about the use of the DE now in illustrating the negative energy problem in relativistic QM as well as the existence of spin, however one thing is still puzzling me.

I've read this excerpt in a text:

(i\gamma^{\mu}\partial_{\mu} - m)\psi(x) = 0

where the four coefficients \gamma^{\mu} are constants. We shall see immediately that these coefficients cannot commute with each other. They must therefore be square matrices rather than simple numbers, so the wavefunction \psi(x) must be a column matrix.

I'm not sure I understand how this is proven. Is it something to do with

\gamma^{\mu}\gamma^{\nu} + \gamma^{\nu}\gamma^{\mu} = 2\eta^{\mu\nu}

...and if so, is there a way I can show that this condition can't be satisfied if the \gamma^{\mu} are ordinary numbers?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The Dirac equation should become the Klein-Gordon equation if the DE is multiplied by
i\gamma_\mu\partial^\mu+m. It won't if the gammas commute.
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...

Similar threads

Back
Top