Why Does Zitterbewegung Imply Double the Expected Relativistic Energy?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter jk22
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Energy
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the concept of zitterbewegung and its implications for relativistic energy calculations. It establishes that the energy expression $$E=2mc^2$$ arises from the zitter frequency, which is defined as twice the de Broglie electron clock rate. This frequency is crucial for accurately determining the energy of a particle, as it directly influences the expected relativistic energy. The reference to the paper at http://arxiv.org/abs/1411.1854 provides foundational insights into this phenomenon.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of relativistic energy equations, specifically $$E=mc^2$$
  • Familiarity with zitterbewegung and its significance in quantum mechanics
  • Knowledge of de Broglie wavelength and its application in particle physics
  • Basic grasp of angular frequency and its role in wave mechanics
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the implications of zitterbewegung on quantum particle behavior
  • Study the derivation and applications of the de Broglie wavelength
  • Explore advanced topics in relativistic quantum mechanics
  • Investigate the relationship between angular frequency and energy in quantum systems
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for physicists, quantum mechanics students, and researchers interested in the nuances of relativistic energy and particle behavior.

jk22
Messages
732
Reaction score
25
From this http://arxiv.org/abs/1411.1854
And $$E=\hbar\omega$$ We get $$E=2mc^2$$

Which is twice the relativistic energy. Why is that ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
jk22 said:
From this http://arxiv.org/abs/1411.1854
And $$E=\hbar\omega$$ We get $$E=2mc^2$$

Which is twice the relativistic energy. Why is that ?

At the top of the second page, they define zitter:
The angular frequency at which a particle zitters is given by twice the de Broglie electron clock rate as determined in his 1924 dissertation.

The ω which you plug into the equations is the zitter frequency, which is why your relativistic energy expression is wrong.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
11K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K