The Dirac Equation and the Superluminal Electron Model

By Richard Gauthier, Ph.D.

The Dirac equation (1928) is one of the most successful equations of quantum
mechanics, the theory of matter and energy at atomic and sub-atomic levels. Physicist
and historian of physics Abraham Pais (1994) has ranked the Dirac equation among the
highest achievements of twentieth-century science.
When quantum mechanics was being established in the mid 1920s, Paul A. M
Dirac did not seek a visualizable model of the electron or other quantum mechanical
objects. But a number of the quantitative physical properties of the electron described by
the Dirac equation are of a spatial or temporal nature that can lend themselves to
visualizable physical modeling. A recently proposed superluminal quantum model of the
electron by the author (Gauthier, 2005) has several of these characteristics. The present
article summarizes some of the main quantitative attributes of the Dirac electron and
describes how the superluminal model of the electron embodies a number of these
attributes. The utility of any physical model is to help deepen ones understanding of a
physical process or object corresponding to the model, and to suggest new experiments.
Whether the superluminal model of the electron can serve this purpose for the Dirac
electron is left for the reader to decide.
Brief historical summary of quantum ideas up to Dirac
In 1900, Max Planck mathematically explained the distribution of frequencies of
radiation from hot objects called black bodies. He proposed that radiant energy could
be emitted and absorbed from small oscillators in these bodies only in certain discrete
amounts he called quanta. The energy radiated was proportional to the frequency of the
oscillators. The proportionality constant later became known as Plancks constant. This
was the beginning of quantum theory.
In 1905 Albert Einstein explained the emission of electrons from the surface of a
metal when light above a certain frequency is shined on it (the photoelectric effect). He
proposed that light itself was composed of particles, where the energy in each light
particle (later called a photon) was proportional (using Plancks constant) to its
frequency.
In 1911, based on experimental evidence of sub-atomic alpha particles scattered
from thin gold foil, Ernest Rutherford proposed a model of the atom having a very small,
heavy positively charged nucleus surrounded by negatively charged electrons. But this
model was inadequate because according to the known laws of electromagnetism, the
electrons would have immediately radiated away their energy and spiraled into the
nucleus.
In 1913, Niels Bohr modeled the atom as resembling a miniature solar system,
with negative electrons circling a small, positively charged nucleus only in certain
2
allowed stationary orbits and energy levels. Electrons could radiate or absorb light energy
of a particular frequency (based on Plancks constant) when jumping from one stationary
orbit to another. Bohrs planetary model of the atom was a hybrid of pre-quantum
physics and early quantum ideas, along with some rules that Bohr supplied to make his
model fit some of the known facts about atoms. The model yielded the orderly spectrum
of wavelengths of light that can come from hydrogen atoms. These wavelengths had
earlier been described by an empirically derived mathematical formula. Although the
Bohr model worked rather well in accounting for the light spectrum of hydrogen and a
few other atoms and charged ions having one optically active electron, it was unable to
account for the spectrum of frequencies coming from atoms like helium having two or
more optically active electrons.
In a more refined Bohr planetary model of the atom, three quantum numbers were
needed to describe the orbit of an electron in an atom. A fourth quantum number was
introduced by Wolfgang Pauli in 1924 in order to describe a quantum mechanical two-
valuedness which caused an observed splitting of certain spectral frequencies. It was this
fourth quantum number that was later associated with the electrons spin by George
Uhlenbeck and Samuel Goudsmit in 1925. No acceptable visual model for the spinning
electron was ever provided. Today the electron is considered to be point-like and not
visualizable.
Also in 1925, Werner Heisenberg and his colleagues developed a more accurate
quantum mechanics called matrix mechanics. This approach was based on measured light
frequencies and intensities coming from atoms when electrons transition from one energy
level to another in an atom. With this abstract mathematical formalism Heisenberg
renounced the idea of visual models of the atom or sub-atomic particles. In 1927 he
proposed his indeterminacy relation, often called the Heisenberg uncertainty principle,
that came from matrix mechanics. This relationship sets a lower limit, related to Plancks
constant, on the accuracy with which certain pairs of physical quantities of a particle,
such as its position and momentum, can be measured together.
In 1926, Erwin Schrdinger introduced his highly successful wave mechanics,
based partly on the 1924 matter-wave description of the electron by Louis de Broglie.
Schrdinger hoped that his wave equations for the electron would provide a picture for
the structure of the charge distribution of an electron. But his hopes were not realized.
The wave equations were shown to be useful only for predicting the probability that
point-like electrons would be found in the regions of space where the waves were
present. Schrdinger and Dirac independently proved that the Heisenberg and
Schrdinger approaches to quantum mechanics are mathematically equivalent and
therefore make the same statistical predictions about atomic events.
In 1927 Pauli mathematically incorporated the idea of electron spin into the
quantum mechanics of Heisenberg and Schrdinger. Though this revised quantum
mechanics was very useful and accurate for some atoms and molecules, it was not
consistent with Einsteins theory of special relativity, and so was inaccurate when
electron speeds in atoms approached the speed of light. Schrdinger and others had tried
without success to get a relativistic wave equation for the electron.
3
Finally in 1928 Dirac introduced his relativistic wave equation. He had wanted to
find an equation for the electron that would be consistent with special relativity and
describe the known fine structure frequency spectrum of hydrogen. In technical terms the
equation was Lorentz-covariant. It correctly described the fine structure of hydrogen.
When Dirac examined the solutions to his equation, he found that, much to his surprise, it
also predicted the electrons spin and its magnetic property called the magnetic moment.
Perhaps even more surprising, his equation also suggested a positively charged particle
with the mass of the electron could exist. Based on his equation, in 1931 Dirac predicted
what he called the anti-electron (now called a positron). It was confirmed experimentally
in 1932. For his work in quantum mechanics Dirac shared with Schrdinger the Nobel
Prize for physics in 1933.
Diracs bias against forming visual models in quantum mechanics
Despite the success of Heisenbergs and Schrdinger quantum mechanics, Diracs
relativistic equation, and the later quantum electrodynamics theory in predicting the
statistical results of sub-atomic, atomic and molecular experiments, none of these
physical theories gives a visualizable image of what is actually going on behind the
symbolism of the equations, and in particular none provides a visual model for the
structure of the electron.
In developing his equation, Dirac assumed that the electron was a point-like
particle with an electric charge equal to the experimentally measured charge of the
electron. Dirac however did not try to develop visualizable physical models as aids to
picturing or understanding his mathematical results. Beware of forming models or
mental pictures at all, Dirac once said to Schrdinger (Cline, 1965) At another time
Dirac summarized this view about visualizability that was also strongly advocated by
Heisenberg: The main object of physical science is not the provision of pictures, but is
the formulation of laws governing phenomena and the applications of these laws to the
discovery of new phenomena. If a picture exists, so much the better; but whether a
picture exists or not is a matter of only secondary importance. (Cropper, 2001)
Diracs and Heisenbergs attitude of not seeking and even discouraging
visualizable models underlying quantum phenomena came to dominate quantum
theorizing. Albert Einstein took quite a different approach to visual modeling: If I cant
picture it, I cant understand it. (Wheeler, 1991)
Arthur Eddington, the astrophysicist who led the solar eclipse expedition in 1919
that confirmed Einsteins prediction about the bending of starlight as it passes the sun,
lamented (Eddington, 1928) the lack of a picture of the electron: we have perhaps
forgotten that there was a time when we wanted to be told what an electron is. The
question was never answered. No familiar conceptions can be woven round the electron,
it belongs to the waiting list.
4
More recently, physicist A.O. Barut (1991) summarized the problem of
visualizing the structure of the electron: If a spinning particle is not quite a point
particle, nor a solid three dimensional top, what can it be? What is the structure which
can appear under probing with electromagnetic fields as a point charge, yet as far as spin
and wave properties are concerned exhibits a size of the order of the Compton wave
length? The Compton wavelength is the wavelength of a photon having the same energy
as is contained in the mass of a resting electron, based on Einsteins equation
2
E mc = .
The remarkable successes of the Dirac equation
One highly condensed form of the Dirac equation for a free electron (inscribed on
a plaque in Westminster Abbey) is given by
i m c =
where 1 i = , represents four 4-by-4 square arrays of numbers, c symbolizes rate-
of-change calculations with respect to the 3 dimensions of space and one of time, is a
four-component wave equation for the electron, and m is the rest mass of the electron.. A
more expanded version of the Dirac equation for a free electron, with slightly different
symbolism
3
0
1
r
r
r
mc
ic t i x

=
( | | c c | |

( | |
c c
\ .
\ .

(x, ) 0 t =
where
0 1 2 3
, , and are 4-by-4 arrays of numbers, is Plancks constant h divided by
2 , c is the speed of light, and m is the rest mass of the electron.
The Dirac equation had four principal successes:
1) It predicted the known spin or angular momentum
1
2
of the electron.
2) It was the first electron equation in quantum mechanics to satisfy Lorentz-
covariance, an important restriction on physical theories from Einsteins special
theory of relativity. The Lorentz-covariant Dirac equation precisely yielded the
hydrogen atoms known fine structure frequency spectrum of light and provided
the four quantum numbers that describe each electron in an atom.
3) It predicted the known magnetic property of the electron, called the magnetic
moment of value / 2 e m .
4) It led to Diracs prediction of previously unknown antimatter -- the anti-electron
or positron. That prediction was confirmed when the positron, the anti-particle of
the electron, having equal mass but opposite charge as the electron, was
experimentally detected by Carl Anderson in 1932. The concept of antimatter and
its relation to matter and to light led to the development of the modern theory of
5
quantum electrodynamics (QED), which also improved on some of the
predictions of the Dirac equation.
Problematical predictions of the Dirac equation
There are several results of Diracs equation which were problematical, despite
the equations general success:
1) Diracs equation seemed to predict that electron kinetic energies could be
negative. He interpreted this result as due to the existence of an infinite sea of
negative energy electrons that is physically undetectable. When an electron gains
enough energy and jumps out of this electron sea, the hole left behind is positively
charged. If a positive hole meets an electron they will annihilate each other,
producing photons. Diracs electron sea model raised concerns for some time. At
first Dirac thought the positively charged hole was a proton, which is about 1800
times the mass of an electron, but that didnt work. The electron sea model was
better accepted several years later, when Dirac interpreted the negative energy
solution of his equation as being associated with a positron -- an anti-particle
having the same mass as an electron but having a positive charge. The electron
sea view of positrons was later revised by Richard Feynman, who, following an
idea from John Wheeler, developed a quantum electrodynamics theory where a
positron is an electron traveling backward in time. This is the currently accepted
view, but according to Feynman it is exactly equivalent to the Dirac negative
energy sea point of view.(1965)
2) The electron instantaneously moves at the speed of light. This was a surprising
result because the electron is always observed experimentally to move at less than
the speed of light. Dirac explained that the observed sub-luminal speed of the
electron is an average speed, not the instantaneous electron speed which is the
speed of light. Another way to look at this is that the position of the electrons
charge, which circulates at the velocity c, is not located at the center of mass of
the electron, which moves at a velocity less than c.
3) An electron has an oscillatory motion with the extremely high frequency of
2
0
2 2 / f mc h = or
20
2.5 10 cycles per second in addition to its normal linear
motion. Schrdinger labeled that rapid oscillatory motion Zitterbewegung or
jittery motion.
4) This oscillatory motion of the electron was found by Schrdinger to have
a minute amplitude of
1
2
/ mc or about
13
1.9 10

meters.
5) The electron has a mathematical rotation property that requires a 720-degree
rotation to bring the electron back to its original state. A normal 3-D physical
object returns to its original position after a 360-degree rotation. This
6
mathematical property of the electron has contributed to the difficulty of making a
visualizable model of the electron.
6) Using the Dirac equation, de Broglie showed that for a free electron at rest or in
uniform linear motion with no external forces acting on it, the jittery motion of
the electric charge caused the linear momentum of the charge to not be exactly
constant or conserved. It is only the electrons average linear momentum that is
conserved in the electrons motion.
7) Besides predicting the magnetic moment, Dirac found that his equation also
predicts an oscillating electric dipole moment of an electron, of magnitude
/ 2 ie mc . The value i is the quantity 1 which is called an imaginary number
in mathematics but which has well-known and useful mathematical properties and
also appears in the Dirac equation itself. But because of the appearance of the
imaginary quantity i in the expression for the electric moment, Dirac wrote in his
1928 article introducing his equation that The electric moment, being a pure
imaginary, we should not expect to appear in the model. It is doubtful whether the
electric moment has any physical meaning... In his book Principles of Quantum
Mechanics (1983) he says, referring to the dipole moment expression, that these
extra terms involve some new physical effects, but since they are not real they do
not lend themselves very directly to physical interpretation.
8) Like the electrons mathematically imaginary electric moment, the electrons
intrinsic spin and its associated magnetic moment are considered to be
paradoxical and problematical from a classical or pre-quantum standpoint. The
electrons spin is accepted because it provides a fourth quantum number for
atomic electrons and helps explain known spectroscopic frequency data. But the
spin is paradoxical because the electron seems point-like, with a size no larger
than
18
10

meters. The electrons magnetic moment is also accepted because its

physical effects are detected experimentally. But it is also paradoxical because a
magnetic moment would normally be created by a current moving in a finite-sized
loop, or by a point charge moving in a finite-sized closed circulating path.
However, the electron is experimentally found to be point-like. And no closed
circulating path of a point-like charge that would produce the electrons magnetic
moment has ever been observed.
The following is a quote from Dirac's Nobel Prize acceptance speech (1933)
referring to the electrons jittery motion: "The variables (alpha in his equation) also
give rise to some rather unexpected phenomena concerning the motion of the electron.
These have been fully worked out by Schrdinger. It is found that an electron which
seems to us to be moving slowly, must actually have a very high frequency oscillatory
motion of small amplitude superposed on the regular motion which appears to us. As a
result of this oscillatory motion, the velocity of the electron at any time equals the
velocity of light. This is a prediction which cannot be directly verified by experiment,
since the frequency of the oscillatory motion is so high and its amplitude is so small. But
one must believe in this consequence of the theory, since other consequences of the
7
theory which are inseparably bound up with this one, such as the law of scattering of light
by an electron, are confirmed by experiment."
The superluminal model of the electron
It was mentioned above that Dirac did not in this period attempt to make a
physical model of the electron and did not support such attempts. However, many of the
properties of the Dirac electron, including the problematical properties above, lend
themselves to a physical modeling approach, which may help resolve some of these
problematical properties
Recently a superluminal quantum model of the electron and the photon (Gauthier,
2005) was proposed. The electron model has a number of the characteristics of the Dirac
electron as well as a visualizable internal quantum trajectory structure. The electron
model is composed of a circulating superluminal photon-like object. The superluminal
photon model first needs to be briefly described.
The superluminal model of the photon is appropriate for a photon of any
wavelength . The model is composed of an uncharged point-like quantum that moves
along an open helical trajectory having a radius R which depends on its wavelength .
One turn of the helical trajectory corresponds to one wavelength of the photon model.
The helical trajectory can turn clockwise or counterclockwise as the quantum moves
forward, corresponding to a right or left circularly polarized photon. The radius R of the
helical trajectory of the quantum is found to be / 2 R = . The forward angle of the
helical trajectory is found to be 45 degrees. The speed of the superluminal photon along
its helical trajectory is found to be 2c = 1.414c where c is the speed of light. The
superluminal quantum has a frequency f given by / f c = or equivalently / c f = . The
photons angular frequency is given by 2 2 / f c = = . The quantum has an
energy E given by E hf = where h is Plancks constant. This is the experimental
relationship for the energy of a photon. The quantum by its helical motion also has a spin
or angular momentum of magnitude / 2 s h = = which is the experimental value of the
spin of a photon.
The equations for the trajectory of the superluminal quantum moving forward and
clockwise in the z direction (to the right in the image below) are given by
2
cos( ) cos( )
2 2
2
sin( ) sin( )
2 2
x ct t
y ct t
z ct






= =
= =
=
The 3-D trajectory of this right-handed superluminal photon looks like this.
8
Superluminal photon model.
The uncharged superluminal point-like quantum moves to the right along an
open helical trajectory of radius / 2 R = with a speed of 1.414c.
Some background facts are needed before describing the superluminal electron
model. An electron has a rest mass m and a rest energy
2
E mc = . A photon having this
rest energy E will have a frequency given by
2
0
E hf mc = = which gives
2 20
0
/ 1.2 10 f mc h = = cycles per second. This frequency
0
f corresponds to the photons
angular frequency
2
0 0
2 / f mc = = and the photons wavelength given by
/
C
h mc = which is called the Compton wavelength, which equals
12
2.4 10

m.
The superluminal electron model is composed of a charged point-like quantum
moving in a closed double-looped helical trajectory. The circular axis of the closed
double-looped helical trajectory has a double-looped length
C
(each circumference of
the double-looped circular axis is of length / 2
C
) before the helical trajectory closes on
itself. The circular axis therefore has a radius
1
0 2
1
/ 2 /
2
C
R mc

= = . The superluminal
quantum rotates around its circular axis at angular frequency
0
, with a constant helical
radius
0
2R while it moves forward with a speed c along its circular axis, just as the
forward speed of the superluminal quantum in the photon model is c. Since the
superluminal quantum follows a double-looped helical trajectory, its frequency for
traveling forward around one circumference of its double-looped circular axis is
0
2 f and
its corresponding angular frequency is
0
2 . The helical trajectory of the electrons
superluminal quantum can move forward in a clockwise or counterclockwise direction,
9
corresponding to an electron or a positron (The turning direction for the electron or the
positron is not specified in the electron modelthis would require an experimental test of
the superluminal electron model). The superluminal quantum moves along its helical
trajectory at a variable speed since its trajectory has a circular axis. Its maximum speed is
2.515c.
If the circular axis of the double looped helix is in the x-y plane, the 3-D
coordinates of the trajectory of the superluminal electron model are given (within a phase
angle which would determine the position of the superluminal quantum along its
trajectory at t=0 ) by
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0
( ) (1 2 cos( )) cos(2 )
( ) (1 2 cos( ))sin(2 )
( ) 2 sin( )
x t R t t
y t R t t
z t R t

= +
= +
=
where
2
1
0 0 2
/ and / R mc mc = = . The 3-D trajectory of the superluminal quantum in
the above electron model looks like this:
Two views of the superluminal model of the electron.
The charged superluminal point-like quantum moves in a closed double-looped helical
trajectory whose circular axis is in the x-y plane. Its maximum speed is 2.515c.
Comparing the successes of the Dirac equation results with the
superluminal model of the electron
The superluminal model of the electron has many of the physical characteristics
of the Dirac electron, and has a 3-D physical structure as well. The Dirac electron
properties and the corresponding superluminal electron models properties are
summarized below.
10
1) The Dirac electron was found to have a spin or angular momentum of
1
2
, the
known spin of the electron.
In the superluminal electron model, when the radius of the circular axis of the
closed double-looped helix is set to equal
1
2
/ mc , the calculated spin along the z-
axis of the electron model, caused by the 3-D double-looped helical trajectory
motion of the electric charge, is also
1
2
.
2) The Dirac equations success in predicting the hydrogen frequency spectrum was
partly due to its incorporating the effect on the spectrum of the electrons spin
1
2
which came out of the Dirac equation solutions.
The Dirac wave equation successfully incorporated the de Broglie
wavelength/momentum relationship / h p = of the electron. De Broglie derived
this relationship assuming that the electron at rest had an internal frequency
2
0
/ mc = .This frequency is also contained in the superluminal electron model
equations. Although de Broglie never mentioned that an electron could be
composed of a photon-like object, the frequency
0
that de Broglie used to derive
his wavelength/momentum relationship for moving electron is just the frequency
of a photon having the same energy as the energy contained in the rest mass of an
electron, according to Einsteins equation
2
E mc = .
3) The Dirac electron is found to have a magnetic property or magnetic moment of
/ 2 e m , which was the known value at that time of the electrons magnetic
moment (it was later more precisely measured to be slightly higher than this by
about 0.2%). In the superluminal electron model, when the radius of the double-
looped helical trajectory is set to be
0
2
2 /
2
R mc = , the calculated magnetic
moment is also found to be exactly / 2 e m , the same as for the Dirac electron. It
is notable that only for this helical radius value
0
2R that the root mean square
(rms) values for the radius of the electrons double-looped helical trajectory in the
x, y and z directions are all found to be exactly
0
R .
4) The Dirac equation describes both the electron and the electrons antiparticle the
positron, having equal mass and spin but opposite charge and opposite magnetic
moment.
In the superluminal electron model, the electron and the positron correspond to
the two possible helicities or turning directions of the closed double-looped
helical trajectory of an electron or a positron.
11
Problematical aspects of the Dirac electron compared with the
superluminal electron model
1) The Dirac equations negative energy electrons and his postulated electron sea
prevented the acceptance of his equation at first. This interpretation was modified
later in quantum electrodynamics by Hermann Weyls group-theoretic approach
to the symmetry structure of quantum mechanics, which put the electron and
positron on an equal footing.
The superluminal electron model with its electron and positron formed from the
two possible helicities of the double-looped helical trajectory also put the electron
and positron on an equal footing.
2) In the Dirac electron, the instantaneous speed of the electron is the speed of light
c, while its average speed is less than c.
In the superluminal electron model, although the speed of the electrically charged
quantum is superluminal, the forward speed of this quantum along the circular
axis of the double-looped helical trajectory is c. This corresponds to the forward
speed c in the superluminal model of the photon, since the electron model is
similar to a circulating photon model. Like the Dirac electron, the instantaneous
position of the charged quantum in the superluminal electron model is different
from the center of mass position of the electron (the average position of the
quantum along its trajectory.) The average motion of the superluminal electron
model would be the motion of the superluminal quantums average position,
which is x=0, y=0 and z=0 in the electron models rest frame.
3) In the Dirac electron, the frequency of the oscillatory motion of the electric charge
is the jittery motion frequency
2
0
2 2 / f mc h = or
20
2.5 10 cycles per second.
In the electron model, the circulatory frequency of the electron charge around the
circular axis of the double-looped helical trajectory is also
2
0
2 2 / f mc h = . The
corresponding jittery motion angular frequency
2
0 0
2 2 2 2 / f mc = = can
be seen in the electron models trajectory equations.
4) In the Dirac electron, the amplitude of the electric charges oscillatory motion was
found to be
1
2
/ mc or
13
1.9 10 m

.
In the electron model the radius of the circular axis of the double-looped helical
trajectory is also
1
2
/ mc . Furthermore although the average position of the
charge in the electron models rest frame is zero in the x, y and z directions, the
root mean square (rms) value of the x, y and z positions of the electric charge in
its 3-D trajectory is also found to be
1
2
/ mc . This is the value
0
R in the electron
models trajectory equations.
12
5) The Dirac electron returns to its original mathematical state after a 720 degree
mathematical rotation.
In the superluminal electron model, the superluminal quantums trajectory closes
after a 720 degree rotation about its z-axis while traveling along its double-looped
circular axis. This 720 degree rotation is easily visualizable in the electron model.
The superluminal quantums trajectory doesnt close after a 360 degree rotation
because it has completed only the first loop of its double-looped trajectory and at
360 degrees it is not in phase with its earlier trajectory.
6) In the Dirac electron at rest, instantaneous momentum is not conserved.
In the superluminal electron model at rest, the superluminal quantum has a
momentum which is constantly changing in both magnitude and direction at the
very high frequency of
2
0
2 2 / f mc h = or
20
2.5 10 cycles/sec and so, as in the
Dirac electron, instantaneous momentum would not be conserved. It is only the
electron models average linear momentum which would be conserved.
7) The Dirac equation found an electric moment of magnitude / 2 ie mc . Because of
the factor 1 i = , Dirac thought the electric moment was a physical effect, not a
real result. As was quoted earlier from his book Principles of Quantum
Mechanics (1983): these extra terms involve some new physical effects, but
since they are not real they do not lend themselves very directly to physical
interpretation. But in science and engineering, a factor i in front of a physical
quantity can also mean that the quantity is a physical vector at an angle of 90
degrees to another physical vector. In the Dirac electron the magnetic moment can
have a component / 2 e m in the z direction. The Dirac imaginary electric
moment could correspond to an electric moment vector in the x-y plane, that is,
perpendicular to the z direction. The value of an electric moment is calculated by
multiplying the distance R of the charge from an axis by the magnitude of the
electric charge: electric dipole moment d R e = .
In the superluminal electron model, we can calculate the root mean square (rms)
value of the electric dipole moment by multiplying the root mean square value of
the electric charges position by the charge e:
rms rms
d R e =
But we found previously that in the x, y and z directions, the root mean square
(rms) value of the superluminal quantum trajectorys size was
1
0 2
/
rms
R R mc = = . Therefore the rms value of the electric dipole moment is
given by:
13
1
2
( / )
/ 2
rms rms
d R e
mc e
e mc
=
=
=

which except for the imaginary factor i is just the magnitude of the electric
moment / 2 ie mc found by Dirac.
Martin Rivas (2005) comments on this imaginary electric moment that Dirac
found: But Diracs equation also predicts another term -d E, of the coupling of
an instantaneous electric dipole with the electric field. It is this oscillating electric
dipole term that we believe is lacking in quantum mechanical wave equations. In
general, the average value of this term in an electric field of smooth variation is
zero. But in high intensity fields or in intergranular areas in which the effective
potentials are low, but their gradients could be very high, this average value
should not be negligible. Rivas shows that the electric moment of the Dirac
electron could lead to interesting physical effects. For example, using a classical
electron model (...in the center of mass frame the particle describes a circle of
radius
0
/ 2 R mc = ) related to the Dirac electron, he shows that two electrons
with parallel spins can form a bound pair if their centers of mass are separated by
less than a Compton wavelength.
Conclusions
The Dirac equation of 1928 was very successful in accurately describing what
was known about the fine structure of atomic spectra. It gave a theoretical basis for the
electrons spin and magnetic moment. It led Dirac to predict the existence of previously
undetected anti-matter. This prediction was soon confirmed for the anti-electron (the
positron). But the Dirac electron could not be visualized and so remained a highly
abstract entity, having a number of remarkable yet puzzling features.
The superluminal model proposed for the electron embodies a number of the
Dirac electrons features in a visualizable quantitative model. The electron models two
possible internal helicities, corresponding to the electron and the positron, would seem to
lend themselves to experimental testing of the electron model, for example by shining left
and right circularly polarized gamma ray photons on electrons and looking for differences
in the rates of scattering of these gamma ray photons from the electrons.
References
A.O. Barut (1991), History of the Electron, in The Electron: New Theory and
Experiment, D. Hestenes and A. Weingartshofer, ed., Kluwer Academic Publishers,
Dordrecht, The Netherlands, p.109 .
B.L. Cline (1965), The Questioners: Physicists and the Quantum Theory, Thomas Y.
Crowell Co., New York.
14
W.H. Cropper (2001) Great Physicists, Cambridge University Press, New York, p. 267.
P.A.M. Dirac (1928) The quantum theory of the electron, Proc. R. Soc. A 117, 610-
624, p. 619.
P.A.M. Dirac (1983) The Principles of Quantum Mechanics, 4
th
edition, Clarendon Press,
Oxford, p. 265.
P.A.M. Dirac (1933) Theory of electrons and positrons,
http://nobelprize.org/physics/laureates/1933/dirac-lecture.pdf .
A. Eddington (1928) Religion, Causation, Science and Mysticism, in The Nature of the
Physical World, MacMillan Company.
R. Feynman (1965) Nobel lecture, at
http://nobelprize.org/physics/laureates/1965/feynman-lecture.html .
R. Gauthier (2005) Superluminal quantum models of the electron and the photon, at
http://www.superluminalquantum.org/superluminalDec2005.pdf .
A. Pais (1994) Playing with equations, the Dirac way, in Reminiscences about a great
physicist: Paul Adrien Maurice Dirac, B.N. Kursunoglu and E.P. Wigner, eds.,
Cambridge University Press, 1987, p. 98.
M. Rivas (2005) Kinematical formalism of elementary spinning particles,
http://es.arxiv.org/PS_cache/physics/pdf/0509/0509131.pdf
J. Wheeler (1991), quoted in Scientific American 257, 6, 36
Richard Gauthier
[email protected]
http://www.superluminalquantum.org
Copyright 2009 by Richard Gauthier