# Line element in relativistic quantum mechanics?

+ 1 like - 0 dislike
666 views

## Background

I noticed the following. Let us take a look at the massless Klien Gordon equation (in relativistic quantum mechanics) along a paticular axis  $x$:

$$- \hbar^2\partial_t^2 \psi = - \hbar^2 c^2 \partial_x^2 \psi$$

Writing in terms of the translation operator $\hat T$ and the unitary operator $\hat U$ and using the notation that $\delta k$ is a small shift in $k$ and cancelling factors:

$$\frac {2I - U(\delta t) - U(-\delta t)}{c^2 \delta t^2} | \psi \rangle = \frac {2I - T(\delta x) - T(-\delta x)}{\delta x^2} | \psi \rangle$$

Taking the inner product and taking a ratio:

$$\frac{\langle 2I - U(\delta t) - U(-\delta t) \rangle}{\langle 2I - T(\delta x) - T(-\delta x) \rangle } = \frac{c^2 \delta t^2}{\delta x^2}$$

Substracting $1$ both sides:

$$\frac{ \langle - U(\delta t) - U(-\delta t) + T(\delta x) + T(-\delta x) \rangle}{\langle 2I - T(\delta x) - T(-\delta x) \rangle } = \frac{c^2 \delta t^2 - \delta x^2}{\delta x^2}$$

Multplying $\delta x^2$ both sides:

$$0 = {c^2 \delta t^2 - \delta x^2} - {\delta x^2} \frac{ \langle - U(\delta t) - U(-\delta t) + T(\delta x) + T(-\delta x) \rangle}{\langle 2I - T(\delta x) - T(-\delta x) \rangle }$$

This can only classically become:

$$\delta s^2 = {c^2 \delta t^2 - \delta x^2} = 0$$

if one postulates:

$$\frac{\delta x}{\delta t} = c$$

## Question

Is there a way to prove

$$\frac{\delta x}{\delta t} = c$$

this without postulating it?

+ 1 like - 0 dislike

If you have the equation

$$(\partial_0^2-\partial_1^2)\Psi=0$$ then for any twice differentiable function $f$ a solution is $\Psi(x^0,x^1):=f(x^0-x^1)$. This is a constant shape (given by $f$) moving along the $x^1$-axis at constant speed $c$. So if I consider the same solution at a different time, $x^0+\delta x^0$, this implies $\delta x^1=\delta x^0$ for looking at the same part of the moving shape.

Introducing the operators $U$ and $T$ you write a discretisation of the partial derivatives of the KG equation. The "$=$"-sign between the l.h.s. and the r.h.s. of this discretisation implies a relation between $c\delta t$ and $\delta x$, or $\delta x^0$ and $\delta x^1$ in my above notation, which quantities are classical throughout your entire argument. As $|\Psi\rangle$ is to correspond to a solution of the KG equation, this relation is the one mentioned above, $\delta x^1=\delta x^0$.

Put somewhat differently, with the above relation between $\Psi$ and $f$ we have $$\Psi(x^0,x^1+\delta)=f(x^0-(x^1+\delta))=f((x^0-\delta)-x^1)=\Psi(x^0-\delta,x^1)$$ A shift from $x^0-\delta$ to $x^0$ is accompanied by a shift from $x^1$ to $x^1+\delta$.

answered Apr 26, 2021 by (90 points)

 Please use answers only to (at least partly) answer questions. To comment, discuss, or ask for clarification, leave a comment instead. To mask links under text, please type your text, highlight it, and click the "link" button. You can then enter your link URL. Please consult the FAQ for as to how to format your post. This is the answer box; if you want to write a comment instead, please use the 'add comment' button. Live preview (may slow down editor)   Preview Your name to display (optional): Email me at this address if my answer is selected or commented on: Privacy: Your email address will only be used for sending these notifications. Anti-spam verification: If you are a human please identify the position of the character covered by the symbol $\varnothing$ in the following word:p$\hbar$ysicsOverflo$\varnothing$Then drag the red bullet below over the corresponding character of our banner. When you drop it there, the bullet changes to green (on slow internet connections after a few seconds). Please complete the anti-spam verification