Van der Waerden's Derivation of the Dirac Equation

In summary: So, the Dirac equation admits a generalization by using two-component spinors and two mass matrices M1, M2. However, it seems that it is still restricted to the case where the mass matrices commute.In summary, Sakurai credits B. L. van der Waerden for discovering a way to derive the Dirac equation from two-component wave functions. This involves decomposing E^2-p^2=m^2 and defining two spinors, phi^R and phi^L, which are related to each other by the Dirac operator. This shows the connection between non-commutative geometry and the discrete fifth dimension models of elementary particles. Van der Waerden's work has been further studied by Dvoegl
  • #1
arivero
Gold Member
3,496
173
Sakurai credits B. L. van der Waerden 1932 a pretty derivation of Dirac equation from two-component wave functions. First decompose E^2-p^2=m^2 as

[tex]
(i \hbar {\partial \over \partial x_0} + {\bf \sigma} . i \hbar \nabla)
(i \hbar {\partial \over \partial x_0} - {\bf \sigma} . i \hbar \nabla)
\phi= (mc)^2 \phi
[/tex]

This phi has two components, but it is a second order equation, so another two components are needed (say, the first derivative of phi) to fully specify a solution. Instead, we define

[tex]
\phi^R\equiv{1 \over mc}
(i \hbar {\partial \over \partial x_0} - {\bf \sigma} . i \hbar \nabla) \phi
[/tex]

and [tex]\phi^L\equiv\phi[/tex]. Then we have

[tex]
i \hbar ({\bf \sigma} . \nabla - {\partial \over \partial x_0} ) \phi^L= - m c \phi^R
[/tex]

[tex]
i \hbar (-{\bf \sigma} . \nabla - {\partial \over \partial x_0} ) \phi^R= - m c \phi^L
[/tex]

Now you see the trick. These are the usual left and right handed two-component spinors; if you define

[tex]
\psi=
\begin{pmatrix}{\phi^R + \phi^L \cr \phi^R - \phi^L}
\end{pmatrix}
[/tex]

then the equation for the four component spinor [tex]\psi[/tex] is just Dirac equation!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Why have I started this thread here, instead of at the Quantum Mechanics subforum? Because it shows what is going on in the "non commutative geometry", or "discrete 5th dimension", models of elementary particles. Weyl spinors live in two parallell sheets of space-time, and the Dirac operator connects both sheets.

EDITED: you can see how geometric is Dirac equation if you put [tex]L_0 \equiv \hbar / m c[/tex]. In this way our pair of equations become
[tex]
i L_0 ( \vec \sigma \cdot \vec \nabla - {\partial \over \partial x_0} ) \phi^L= - \phi^R
[/tex]
[tex]
i L_0 (- \vec \sigma \cdot \vec \nabla - {\partial \over \partial x_0} ) \phi^R= - \phi^L
[/tex]

We have thus a purely geometrical game, jumping across an Euclidean operator and a Minkowskian one! Planck's constant lives still there because the spinors have [tex]\hbar /2[/tex] angular momentum... but you need to reintroduce mass if you want to define such momentum, do you?
 
Last edited:
  • #3
Now, I am intrigued by the following feature: the mass constant, m, does not to need to be the same when going from R to L that when going from L to R. Thus v. d. Waerden's equation seems to be a bit more general than Dirac's (EDITED: how general it is, has has been studied by Dvoeglazov). Moreover, we could want to treat us with two or three generations in the same multiplet, by generalising m to be a mass matrix M. Again, Waerden's seems to be more general than Dirac's.
 
Last edited:
  • #4
Can u post a reference to van Waerden's original article,please?

Daniel.
 
  • #5
dextercioby said:
Can u post a reference to van Waerden's original article,please?

Daniel.

It's from his book: B.L. van der Waerden, Gruppentheoretische Metode in der
Quanten Mechanik (Springer, Berlin, 1932), Ch. 13.

Bartel Leendert van der Waerden (1903-1996) is credited with developing
spinor analysis after Paul Ehrenfest (who came up with the name spinor)
suggested this to him.

Regards, Hans
 
Last edited:
  • #6
Hans de Vries said:
It's from his book: B.L. van der Waerden, Gruppentheoretische Metode in der
Quanten Mechanik (Springer, Berlin, 1932), Ch. 13.
Thanks Hans! I only had the Sakurai reference (equations 3.24 to 3.29 of Advanced Quantum Mechanics). I should have expected that you have read every occurence of [tex]\hbar/mc[/tex] in the literature :cool: !

It could exist a more recent revised English translation:
Group Theory and Quantum Mechanics (Springer, Berlin, 1974)
 
Last edited:
  • #7
Hans de Vries said:
Bartel Leendert van der Waerden (1903-1996) is credited with developing
spinor analysis after Paul Ehrenfest (who came up with the name spinor)
suggested this to him.
I am not familiar with the dotted/undotted notation for spinors, but it seems that Landau Relativistic Quantum Theory (er, the one which is not from Landau, but BLP) also follows van der Waerden derivation.

The book (BLP) explicitly says that there is not point on defining different masses m1, m2, because they can be absorbed in redefinitions of the spinor fields. But they do not consider the case of two noncommuting mass matrices M1, M2, which could be used to give different mass to L and R spinors (one can always put [M1,M2]=O(c) so that in the nonrelativistic limit both masses become equal).
 

FAQ: Van der Waerden's Derivation of the Dirac Equation

What is Van der Waerden's derivation of the Dirac Equation?

Van der Waerden's derivation of the Dirac Equation is a mathematical proof that was developed by Dutch mathematician, physicist, and astronomer Hermann Arthur Jahn Van der Waerden in 1929. It is a fundamental equation in quantum mechanics that describes the behavior of fermions, such as electrons, in terms of their wave functions.

Why is Van der Waerden's derivation of the Dirac Equation important?

Van der Waerden's derivation of the Dirac Equation is important because it provides a mathematical framework for understanding the behavior of fermions, which are fundamental particles that make up matter. It has been used to successfully predict and explain a wide range of phenomena in quantum mechanics, and is considered a cornerstone of modern physics.

How does Van der Waerden's derivation of the Dirac Equation differ from other derivations?

Van der Waerden's derivation of the Dirac Equation is unique in that it is based on the theory of spinors, which are mathematical objects that describe the quantum states of fermions. This approach allows for a more elegant and concise derivation compared to other methods that use matrices or differential equations.

Can Van der Waerden's derivation of the Dirac Equation be applied to other particles besides fermions?

No, Van der Waerden's derivation of the Dirac Equation is specifically designed for fermions, which have half-integer spin. Other types of particles, such as bosons, have integer spin and require different mathematical frameworks to describe their behavior.

Are there any limitations or criticisms of Van der Waerden's derivation of the Dirac Equation?

While Van der Waerden's derivation of the Dirac Equation is widely accepted and has been successful in predicting and explaining many phenomena, it does have some limitations. For example, it does not take into account the effects of gravity, and it cannot be used to describe interactions between particles. Additionally, some critics argue that the use of spinors in the derivation is not intuitive and can be difficult to conceptualize.

Back
Top