on the Dirac equation, expands the gamma^nu d_nu term as: gamma^nu d_nu=gamma^0 d/dt + gamma * nabla where gamma=(gamma^1, gamma^2, gamma^3), but to my knolwdge gamma^nu d_nu=gamma^nu mu_(nu v) d^v=gamma^0 d/dt + gamma * nabla

Paxton Hoffman 2022-07-22 Answered
on the Dirac equation, expands the γ μ μ term as:
γ μ μ = γ 0 t + γ
where γ = ( γ 1 , γ 2 , γ 3 ), but to my knowledge,
γ μ μ = γ μ η μ ν ν = γ 0 t γ
using the convention η μ ν = diag ( + , , , ).
You can still ask an expert for help

Expert Community at Your Service

  • Live experts 24/7
  • Questions are typically answered in as fast as 30 minutes
  • Personalized clear answers
Learn more

Solve your problem for the price of one coffee

  • Available 24/7
  • Math expert for every subject
  • Pay only if we can solve it
Ask Question

Answers (1)

Kali Galloway
Answered 2022-07-23 Author has 16 answers
Yes. You are missing the fact that he is using the convention
= ( 1 , 2 , 3 )
as opposed to
= ( 1 , 2 , 3 )
The first convention is by far the most common in my experience.
Not exactly what you’re looking for?
Ask My Question

Expert Community at Your Service

  • Live experts 24/7
  • Questions are typically answered in as fast as 30 minutes
  • Personalized clear answers
Learn more

You might be interested in

asked 2022-04-07
Accelerating particles to speeds infinitesimally close to the speed of light?
asked 2022-07-22
Consider a (classical) system of several interacting particles. Can it be shown that, if the Lagrangian of such a system is Lorenz invariant, there cannot be any space-like influences between the particles?
asked 2022-07-16
Special relativity says that anything moving (almost) at the speed of light will look like its internal clock has (almost) stopped from the perspective of a stationary observer. How do we see light as alternating electric and magnetic fields?
asked 2022-07-13
It is experimentally known that the equation of motion for a charge e moving in a static electric field E is given by:
d d t ( γ m v ) = e E
Is it possible to show this using just Newton's laws of motion for the proper frame of e, symmetry arguments, the Lorentz transformations and other additional principles?
asked 2022-05-18
"You are traveling in a car going at a constant speed of 100 km/hr down a long, straight highway. You pass another car going in the same direction which is traveling at a constant speed of 80 km/hr. As measured from your car’s reference frame this other car is traveling at -20 km/hr. What is the acceleration of your car as measured from the other car’s reference frame? What is the acceleration of the other car as measured from your car’s reference frame?"

Shouldn't they both appear to have an acceleration of zero, because both velocities are constant? I can imagine sitting in the faster car and watching the slower car, its speed would not appear to change, only its position?
asked 2022-05-08
The reason the galaxy does not spin around me (relative to me) at a trillion times the speed of light when I do a pirouette is the inertial frame of reference to which I am confined along with the rest of humanity.
Where does this frame of reference end?
To the best of my limited understanding, gravity doesn't just stop at some point. Anything that has mass has gravity; gravitational waves (or whatever) extend from the mass spherically. They weaken as they get further away from the source, they get pushed around by other, more powerful, gravity waves, they become progressively weaker as the distance increases, but do they ever vanish completely, i.e. get reduced to absolute zero? Or do they become weaker and weaker forever, without zeroing out? And if so, where does a frame of reference end?
asked 2022-07-23
Is the classical Doopler Effect, for light shift, 1 v / c, exact? What is it an approximation of?

New questions