Lower energy levels with Dirac/Pauli theory than Schroedinger theory?

  • I
  • Thread starter Thread starter Juli
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Dirac Pauli
Juli
Messages
24
Reaction score
6
TL;DR Summary
Lower energy levels with dirac/pauli theory than Schroedinger theory
Why do the enery levels calculated with the Dirac/Pauli euqations always lie lower than the results calculated with the Schrödinger equation?
I assume it has to do something with relativistic effects and the changing masses because of this.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Please provide a specific example (or a reference to such an example)
 
hutchphd said:
Please provide a specific example (or a reference to such an example)
A specific example would be the hydrogen atom. I have linked a photo of what I mean.
Why are the corrected energys always lower? The relativistic parts are obviously taking up some energy and my question is where it goes. I don't think it's spin-orbin couling, since it just splits the levels up, some go higher, some lower. I think it's the kinetic and potential energy-terms. But why exactly? It probably has to do something with the relativistic mass, but aren't we using the rest mass in the Pauli-equation?

Screenshot 2025-01-17 160501.png
 
Juli said:
It probably has to do something with the relativistic mass, but aren't we using the rest mass

This effect should not be related to the relativistic mass. Relativistic mass is a deprecated concept that is no longer used to interpret special relativity, it is just a Lorentz factor in front of the mass.

Juli said:
A specific example would be the hydrogen atom. I have linked a photo of what I mean.
Why are the corrected energys always lower? The relativistic parts are obviously taking up some energy and my question is where it goes. I don't think it's spin-orbin couling, since it just splits the levels up, some go higher, some lower. I think it's the kinetic and potential energy-terms. But why exactly?

It is probably not true (as far as I know) that relativistic systems have lower energies than the non-relativistic ones. It is probably not even true for the hydrogen atom. As far as you have shown it is true for the first two levels of the hydrogen atom. In that case, yes it is due to the relativistic corrections to the kinetic energy as shown by the weakly relativistic calculation (at first order it's negative and larger than the other fine structure factors for the ground state and some of the first excited states).

Edit:

Juli said:
but aren't we using the rest mass in the Pauli-equation?

Also no idea what you mean by Pauli equation here, that's just Schrödinger's equation but with spin.
 
Last edited:
Juli said:
A specific example would be the hydrogen atom. I have linked a photo of what I mean.
Where does this photo come from? We need a reference.
 
I got confused about an elementary statement in quantum mechanics: As far as I know, the two commuting operators like ##\hat {\mathbf L_z}## and ##\hat {\mathbf L^2}## always have identical eigenfunctions. But, if we consider every function in the form ##\psi=f(r,\theta) e^{im\phi}## where ##f(r,\theta)## is any function including the normalization coefficient, then, this function is always eigenfunction of ##\hat {\mathbf L_z}## (##\hat {\mathbf L_z} \psi=m\hbar \psi## ) but it is not...
So I've got the field operator for a real, spin-0 field in quantum field theory. Usual expansion in terms of ladder operators and plane wave solutions you'll get in any QFT textbook. What are its eigenstates (ie states of definite field)? It would be similar to the states of definite A-field for quantized EM radiation but without the unnecessary complexity of having vector fields with polarization etc. The states of definite particle number are obviously NOT eigenstates - the expectation...
QM uses separable Hilbert spaces as model to represent quantum system's states. Take for instance a 1/2-spin particle: its quantum pure state is represented by a ray in the abstract Hilbert space ##\mathcal H_2## of dimension 2. Take an observable represented by an Hermitian unitary operator ##S \in SU(2)##. The particle quantum pure state ##\ket{\psi}## is represented by a point on the Bloch sphere $$\ket{\psi} = \cos {(\theta /2)}\ket{\uparrow} + e^{j\phi}\sin {(\theta /2)}...
Back
Top