* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download On the Extra Anomalous Gyromagnetic Ratio of the Electron and
Quantum field theory wikipedia , lookup
Dirac bracket wikipedia , lookup
Path integral formulation wikipedia , lookup
Electron configuration wikipedia , lookup
Matter wave wikipedia , lookup
Double-slit experiment wikipedia , lookup
Symmetry in quantum mechanics wikipedia , lookup
Wave function wikipedia , lookup
Scalar field theory wikipedia , lookup
Aharonov–Bohm effect wikipedia , lookup
Two-body Dirac equations wikipedia , lookup
Schrödinger equation wikipedia , lookup
Spin (physics) wikipedia , lookup
Canonical quantization wikipedia , lookup
Wave–particle duality wikipedia , lookup
Magnetic monopole wikipedia , lookup
Ferromagnetism wikipedia , lookup
Renormalization group wikipedia , lookup
Identical particles wikipedia , lookup
Renormalization wikipedia , lookup
Atomic theory wikipedia , lookup
Theoretical and experimental justification for the Schrödinger equation wikipedia , lookup
Elementary particle wikipedia , lookup
Hydrogen atom wikipedia , lookup
Quantum electrodynamics wikipedia , lookup
History of quantum field theory wikipedia , lookup
National University of Science and Technology (Zimbabwe) NuSpace Institutional Repository Applied Physics http://ir.nust.ac.zw Applied Physics Publications 2015-04-15 On the Extra Anomalous Gyromagnetic Ratio of the Electron and Other General Spin-1/2 Particles Nyambuya, G. G. http://ir.nust.ac.zw/xmlui/handle/123456789/509 This article was downloaded from NUST Institutional repository, and is made available under the terms and conditions as set out in the Institutional Repository Policy. Downloaded from NuSpace Institutional Repository, NUST, Zimbabwe NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY INSTITUTIONAL REPOSITORY NUSPACE On the Extra Anomalous Gyromagnetic Ratio of the Electron and Other General Spin-1/2 Particles Citation Nyambuya, G.G., On the Extra Anomalous Gyromagnetic Ratio of the Electron and Other General Spin-1/2 Particles., pp.1-6. Published Version Citable Link http://ir.nust.ac.zw:8080/jspui/ Terms of Use This article was downloaded from NUST Institutional repository, and is made available under the terms and conditions as set out in the Institutional Repository Policy. (Article begins on next page) On the Extra Anomalous Gyromagnetic Ratio of the Electron and Other General Spin-1/2 Particles G. G. N YAMBUYA1 ∗ 1 National University of Science & Technology, Faculty of Applied Sciences, Department of Applied Physics, P. O. Box 939, Ascot, Bulawayo, Republic of Zimbabwe. Abstract. As is well known, amongst the greatest successes of the Dirac equation at its birth where its ability to naturally account for spin as a relativistic phenomenon and its almost arcane prediction of the correct gyromagnetic ratio of the Electron. The Dirac equation forms the most fundamental basis of Quantum Field Theory (QFT). QFT is one of the most successful fields of human endeavour. The Dirac equation gives an accurate account of the Electron so much that since its birth, it has always has been thought of as an equation for the Electron. However, in its bare and natural form, it is widely believed that the same can not be said of the Dirac equation when it comes to the Proton and Neutron, which – as the Electron; are both spin-1/2 particles. For example, the Dirac equation has never in its natural form been used to explain the gyromagnetic ratio of the Proton and Neutron. Much to the contrary to this prevalent wisdom, here we show that one might account for the gyromagnetic ratio of any general spin-1/2 particle such as that of the Proton, Neutron, together with the Electron’s extra anomalous gyromagnetic ratio as second order effects within the minimally coupled Dirac theory that i.e., from the same theory that unveiled spin as a relativistic phenomenon and at the same time predicted the correct gyromagnetic ratio of the Electron. Keywords: Dirac equation, anomalous: gyromagnetic ratio, proton, Electron. “I . . . have a secret fear that new generations may not necessarily have the opportunity to become familiar with dissident ideas1 .” – Julian Seymour Schwinger (1918 − 1994) 1 Introduction T HE Dirac (1928a,b) equation is a relativistic quantum mechanical wave equation discovered by the pre-eminent British physicist – Prof. Paul Adrian Maurice (1902 − 1984). This equation was originally designed by Dirac to overcome the criticism of the Klein-Gordon equation. The Klein-Gordon equation gave negative probabilities and this is considered to be physically meaningless. Despite this fact, this equation accounts well for Bosons, that is spin zero particles. This criticism levelled against the Klein-Gordon equation, motivated Dirac to successfully seek an equation devoid of negative probabilities. However, recently, it has been shown (in Nyambuya 2013) that one can – in the framework of the KleinGordon, overcome the issue of negative probabilities without taking the root taken by Dirac, but by making a proper choice of the Klein-Gordon probability current density. The Dirac equation is consistent with Quantum Mechanics (QM) and fully consistent with the Special Theory of Relativity (STR). This equation accounts in a natural way for the nature of particle spin as a relativistic phenomenon and amongst its prophetic achievements was its successful prediction of the ∗ Email: [email protected] quoted by Sameer Shah in “If you can’t join ’em, beat ’em”: Julian Schwinger’s Conflicts in Physics. Directions in Cultural History, The UCLA Historical Journal, Vol. 21, 2005 − 2006, p.50 1 As 1 existence of anti-particles. In its bare form, the Dirac equation provided us with an impressive and accurate description of the Electron hence it being referred in most of the literature as the “Dirac Equation for the Electron”. It also accounts very well for quarks and other spin-1/2 particles although in some of the cases, there is need for modifications while in others is fails - for example, one needs the Proca equation to describe the neutron which is a spin-1/2 particle as the Electron. The first taste of glory of the Dirac equation was it being able to account for the gyromagnetic ratio of the Electron, that is g = 2, which can not be accounted for using non-relativistic QM. For several years after it’s discovery, most physicists believed that it described the Proton and the Neutron as-well, which are both spin-1/2 particles. In simple terms, it was thought or presumed that the Dirac equation was a universal equation for spin-1/2 particles. However, beginning with the experiments of Stern and Frisch in 1933, the magnetic moments of these particles were found to disagree significantly with the predictions of the Dirac equation. The Proton was found to have a gyromagnetic ratio2 gp = 5.585694713(46) which is 2.79 times larger than that predicted by the Dirac equation. The Neutron, which is electrically neutral spin-1/2 particle was found to have a gyromagnetic ratio3 gn = −3.82608545(90). These “anomalous magnetic moments” of the Neutron and Proton which are clearly not confirmatory to the Dirac Theory have been taken to be experimental indication that these partices are not fundamental particles. In the case of the Neutron, yes it is clearly not a fundamental particle since it does decay into a Proton, Electron and Neutrino, that is (n −→ p + e− + ν̄e ). If the Dirac equation is a universal equation for fundamental fermion particles, then any fundamental fermion particle must conform to this equation. Simple, any spin-1/2 particle that can not be described by it, must therefore not be a fundamental particle of nature. By definition a fundamental particle is a particle known to have no sub-structure, that is, it can not be broken down into smaller particles thus will not decay into anything else. From the Standard Model, we know that the Proton and Neutron are composed of quarks thus are not fundamental particles. The question is, is this the reason why these particle’s gyromagnetic ratio is different from that predicted by the bare Dirac equation? Prevailing wisdom (cf. Brodsky & Drell 1980, Dehmelt 1989) suggests that anomalous gyromagnetic ratio arise because the particles under question are not fundamental particles. From the theory laid down here, the answer to this is a clear no. All a particle needs to have a non-zero g-factor is spin. We show herein that the same unmodified Dirac Theory that predicted the gyromagnetic ratio of the Electron can in principle be used to explain the gyromagnetic ratio of the Proton and Neutron and perhaps any general spin-1/2 particle. 2 Dirac Equation For a particle whose rest-mass and wave-function are m0 and ψ respectively, its Dirac equation is given by: [i~γ µ ∂µ − m0 c] ψ = 0, (1) where: 0 γ = I 0 0 −I i , γ = 0 −σ i σi 0 , (2) are the 4 × 4 Dirac gamma matrices (I and 0 are the 2×2 identity and null matrices respectively) and ψ is the four component Dirac wave-function, ~ is the normalized Planck constant, c is the speed of light in √ vacuum, i = −1 and: ψ0 ψ1 ψ= (3) ψ2 , ψ3 2 http://physics.nist.gov/cgi-bin/cuu/Value?gp|search_for=all! 3 http://physics.nist.gov/cgi-bin/cuu/Value?gnn|search_for=all! 2 is the Dirac 4 × 1 four component wavefunction. Throughout this reading, the Greek indices will be understood to mean µ, ν, ... = 0, 1, 2, 3 and lower case English alphabet indices i, j, k... = 1, 2, 3. 3 Dirac Gyromagnetic Ratio For latter instructive purposes, we show here how the Dirac equation accounts very well for the gyromagnetic ratio of the Electron. As already said, amongst others, it is for this reason that the Dirac equation is said to account very well for the Electron. The present discussion follows closely that of Prof. Zee (2003, pp.177 − 179). ex In the presence of an ambient magnetic field Aex µ , the derivatives transform as ∂µ 7−→ Dµ = ∂µ +iκAµ ex where κ is a constant that has been inserted to ensure dimensional consistency. The field Aµ is to be 2 assumed to be a real normalized function the meaning of which is that Aµex Aex µ = a∗ where a∗ is a unit µ magnitude of the four vector Aex . The unit magnitude a∗ is the same for any given normalized four electromagnetic vector potential thus a∗ is a universal constant. Making this replacement (i.e. ∂µ 7−→ Dµ = ∂µ + iκAex µ ) results in equation (1) reducing to: µ [i~γ µ Dµ − m0 c] ψ = 0. µ ν (4) m20 c2 /~2 Acting on this equation with (i~γ Dµ + m0 c), we obtain γ γ Dµ Dν + ψ = 0. We have γ µ γ ν Dµ Dν = 21 ({γ µ , γ ν } + [γ µ , γ ν ]) Dµ Dν = Dµ Dµ − iσ µν Dµ Dν and for iσ µν Dµ Dν we have ex ex iσ µν Dµ Dν = (i/2)σ µν [Dµ , Dν ] = (1/2)κσ µν Fµν where Fµν is the electromagnetic field tensor of the applied external field. The above calculations reduce to: 1 µν ex m20 c2 µ ψ = 0. (5) Dµ D − κσ Fµν + 2 2 ~ Now consider a weak constant magnetic field in the z-axis such that A = (1/2)r × B where B = (0, 0, B) so that F12 = B. Neglecting second order terms we have Di D i = = = ex 2 2 (∂i )2 − κ(∂i Aex i + Ai ∂i ) + κ O(Aex,i ) 2 1 2 2 2 (∂i ) − κB(x ∂2 − x ∂1 ) + κ O(Aex,i ) , ∇2 − κB · L + κ2 O(A2ex,i ) (6) where L = r×p is the orbital angular momentum operator which means that the orbital angular momentum generates orbital magnetic moment that interacts with the magnetic field. Φ Now, if we write the Dirac four component wave-function as ψ = , we find that in the χ non-relativistic limit the component χ dominates. Thus, σ µν Fµν /2 acting on Φ is effectively equal to 1 3 −im0 t Ψ where Ψ oscillates much more 2 κσ (F12 − F21 ) = 2κB · S since S = (σ/2). Writing Φ = e im0 t 2 2 2 2 −im0 c2 t/~ −im0 c2 t/~ slowly than e so that (∂0 + m0 c /~ )e Ψ≃ e [−(2im0 c/~)∂0 Ψ]. Putting all the bits and pieces together, we have: 2 ~ ∂Ψ ∇2 + κµB B · (L + 2S) Ψ = −i~ , (7) 2m0 ∂t and this equation above and below embodies the historic fit of the Dirac equation in that it automatically tells us that the gyromagnetic ratio of the Electron is 2. However as already explained, precise measurements the lastest of which are those by Hanneke et al. (2011) give (ge − 2)/2 = 0.0115965218073(28). This value is slightly above 2 and this discrepancy in observations and theory serenaded the theorist back to the drawing board to seek harmony with observations, the result of which was the creation of QED. With the emergence of QED, this discrepancy was solved by the consideration of particle-particle interactions through the so-called Feynman diagrams/method. This approach has yielded the best ever agreement for any theory ever conceived by the human mind. The agreement between theory and observation is so impressive that QED has be dubbed “the best theory we have”. These impressive calculations where first performed by Julian Seymour Schwinger (1918 − 1994) in 1948. 3 4 New Approach Perhaps, we must begin this section by making a confession about Feynman diagrams/method. Despite the impressive computational power of the Feynman method (via the famous Feynman diagrams), we have never been comfortable with this approach because it appears at best as an artificial way to arrive at results that agree with experience. This feeling is shared by a number of notable physicists who have always wondered if “God uses Feynman diagrams too” or whether or not “God integrates empirically as is required by the Feynman method”. The fact that the gyromagnetic ratio of the Electron differs slightly from the predicted Dirac value of (ge = 2) implies that there is an extra unaccounted for interaction of the spin with the ambient magnetic field. To take this into account, naturally, we would modify (7) so that it reads: 2 ∂Ψ ~ ∇2 + κµB B · (L + 2(1 + ∆g )S) Ψ = −i~ . (8) 2m0 ∂t where ∆g is the extra anomalous gyromagnetic ratio. Having done so – i.e. writing (7) as we have done in (8) above, we would then follow up this by making the most logical hypothesis namely that the second order terms that we neglected in our initial calculation (6) are what is responsible for the extra anomalous gyromagnetic ratio of the Electron. This second order term can be written as: # " κO(A2ex,i ) 2 κµB B · S, (9) O(Aex,i ) = µB B · S thus in-cooperating this term into the new calculation, one easily deduces that: ∆g = κ O(A2ex,i ) . 2µB B · S (10) a2∗ κ . 2µB B · S (11) a2∗ κ/~µB . B cos ϑ (12) 0 ex i ex 2 0 ex Now, given that O(A2ex,i ) = Aex,i Aiex and that Aµex Aex µ = Aex A0 + Aex Ai = a∗ , Aex = A0 = 0, it follows that O(A2ex,i ) = Aex,i Aiex = a2∗ , hence: ∆g = Now, B · S = 21 ~B cos ϑ where ϑ is the angle between the orientation of the Electron and the ambient magnetic field; with this given, we will now have: ∆g = From the above, it follows that: B cos ϑ = a2∗ κ . ~µB ∆g (13) What the above implies is that the extra anomalous gyromagnetic ratio of the Electron can be thought of as being second order perturbation effect between the interaction of the the Electron and the ambient magnetic field. This extra anomalous gyromagnetic effect depends only on the component of the magnetic field along the orientation of the spin since B cos ϑ is the component of the magnetic field along the orientation of the spin. Further, since a2∗ κ/~µB ∆g is a constant, it follows that the spin will configure its self in the ambient magnetic field in a such a manner that the component of the magnetic field along the orientation of the spin has the same value always. Clearly, without the use of Feynman diagrams or elaborate mathematical formulae as is the case with QED calculations by Schwinger (1948), we have shown that one can account for the extra anomalous gyromagnetic ratio of the Electron with relative ease using the same theory that for the first time successfully explained Electron gyromagnetic ratio. Since κ, ~, µB and ∆g are all constants and | cos ϑ| ≤ 1, it follows from (13) that there is a minimum magnetic field (Bmin ) necessary to measure this effect because from this equation (13) and the condition | cos ϑ| ≤ 1, it follows that: 4 |B| ≥ 1 |a2∗ κ| = |Bmin |. ~µB |∆g | (14) In-closing, we shall substitute the parameters κ and µB into (12), i.e. κ = e/~ and µB = e~/2m, and from this substitution, it follows that: ma2∗ . (15) 2~3 B cos ϑ Thus, it is now clear that ∆g depends on the mass of the particle and because of this, one would expect that this quantity will vary for particles of different masses. ∆g = 5 Proton, Neutron and Nuclear Gyromagnetic Ratios The calculation of the previous section is not limited to the Electron but extends to any spin-1/2 particle since the Dirac equation is an equation describing spin-1/2 particles. This means we can extend this to include the Proton, Neutron and nuclei with spin-1/2 such as 57 Fe. Thus, the Dirac equation can now be thought of as an equation describing any general spin-1/2 particle – and in its description, it is able – in principle – to account for both spin and g-factor of these particles in the same manner as it successfully explains the Electron. The only setback now is that it no longer predicts forehand the value to be excepted upon measurement of the extra anomalous gyromagnetic ratio of the Electron, but merely tells us that the spin of a particular particle (Electron in this case) will always align itself with the ambient magnetic field in such a manner that the component of the magnetic field along the orientation of the spin always has the same magnitude. Why this is so, the theory can not say. If the spin did align itself randomly to the ambient magnetic field, the Dirac theory here is saying the extra anomalous gyromagnetic ratio ∆g would be a variable, its value would differ depending on the orientation of the spin to the magnetic field at the particular time of measurement. 6 General Discussion In his celebrated landmarking calculation spanning about 72 pages and published in a very condensed form in the paper Schwinger (1948); the brilliant American physicist – Julian Schwinger, demonstrated that the extra anomalous gyromagnetic ratio of the Electron could be computed and shown to be equal to (α/2π = 0.00116171491308), where (α = e2 /4πε0 ~c ∼ 1/137) is the famous fine structure constant. Because of its amazing agreement with experience, this calculation has stood unchallenged ever since and it is one of the great sources of pride for any quantum field theorist. Its (calculation) almost magical nature i.e., out of a zoo of symbols emerges the simple result such as α/2π and given that this result is in-complete accord with experiments – this alone led to the almost universal acceptance of Schwinger’s method of doing physics. Be that it may, the problem that has always been known is that Schwinger (1948)’s calculation when applied to the Proton, Neutron and atomic nuclei, it - sadly; does not yield the right numbers that are in tandem with experience. The reason often cited (cf. Brodsky & Drell 1980, Dehmelt 1989) is that the Proton, Neutron and nuclei are composite particles, they are not fundamental in their nature as is assumed of the Electron. One advantage of the present calculation is that, it applies to any general spin-1/2 particle – albeit, unlike the Dirac prediction, it (present calculation) does not give the values to be expected from experiments. All one can deduce is that particles of the same kind will have their spins always aligned in such a manner that the component of the magnetic field along the orientation of the spin always has the same magnitude. The theory has two unknown parameters namely, ϑ and a∗ . It is in principle possible that for a given magnetic field B one can measure ϑ. If this is possible, then a∗ can be found and this value is expected to be the same for all particles independent of their masses. Thus the measurement of this constant is the real test of the present ideas. Besides, the present ideas are not in any way a modification of any existing theories. All we have done is to take into account the omitted second order term in the Dirac calculation leading to the historic 5 prediction of the the gyromagnetic ratio of the Electron (ge ∼ 2). Perhaps, one thing that we must mention is that the original Dirac calculation leading to the historic (ge ∼ 2), this calculation is posted in most if not all physics textbooks as if it is an exact calculation and the emergence of the the gyromagnetic ratio from this “exact and perfect Dirac value (gD = 2)” is that the Electron is not a point particle, for if it is was a point particle, it would yield the exact Dirac value. The truth is that the Dirac value (gD = 2) is not an exact prediction of the Dirac Theory, but a first order approximation result. The present calculation is just one step further and more exact than the celebrated Dirac calculation because we merely have taken-up the second order terms and asked what their contribution to the gyromagnetic ratio would be and the answer is something we never expected at all. In our modest view, the present result is surely a profound result for it – in principle, now allows us to say that the Dirac equation does – to a reasonable extent, explain not only the Proton, but the Neutron and any general spin-1/2 particle. The very fact that one would not account for the Proton and Neutron’s gyromagnetic ratio, this led physicists to think that in its bare form, the Dirac equation is not an equation for the Electron and because this, some physicists have sought for a Dirac equation for the Proton and Neutron (cf. Chirgwin & Flint 1945). Certainly, there is need to ponder on this result further than has been conducted herein. 7 Conclusion Assuming the acceptability of what has been presented herein, we hereby make the following conclusion: 1. The Dirac equation can be considered to account for the extra anomalous gyromagnetic ratio of all spin-1/2 particles and this extra anomalous gyromagnetic ratio arise as second order effect so to the spin’s alignment with the ambient magnetic field. 2. The fact that the extra anomalous gyromagnetic ratio of a particular particle is the same for all particles of that kind, this implies that the spin of a particular particle always aligns itself in such a manner that the component of the magnetic field along the orientation of the spin always has the same magnitude. Acknowledgments: We are heftily grateful to the National University of Science & Technology (NUST)’s Research & Innovation Department and Research Board for their unremitting support rendered toward our research endeavours; of particular mention, Prof. Dr. P. Mundy, Dr. P. Makoni, Dr. D. J. Hlatywayo and Prof. Dr. Y. S. Naik’s unwavering support. This reading is dedicated to my mother Setmore Nyambuya and to the memory of my dearly missed departed father Nicholas Nyambuya (27.10.1947 − 23.09.1999). References Brodsky, S. J. & Drell, S. D. (1980), ‘Anomalous Magnetic Moment and Limits on Fermion Substructure’, Phys. Rev. D 22, 2236–2243. Chirgwin, B. H. & Flint, H. T. (1945), ‘Dirac’s Equation for the Neutron and Proton’, Nature 155, 724–724. Dehmelt, H. G. (1989), ‘Nobel Lecture: Experiments With An Isolated Subatomic Particles At Rest’, p. 50. URL: http://nobelprize.org/physics/laureates/1989/dehmelt-lecture.pdf Dirac, P. A. M. (1928a), ‘The Quantum Theory of the Electron’, Proc. Roy. Soc. (London) A117, 610–612. Dirac, P. A. M. (1928b), ‘The Quantum Theory of the Electron II’, Proc. Roy. Soc. (London) A118, 351–361. Hanneke, D., Fogwell, H., S. & Gabrielse, G. (2011), ‘Cavity Control of a Single-Electron Quantum Cyclotron: Measuring the Electron Magnetic Moment’, Phys. Rev. A 83, 052122. Nyambuya, G. G. (2013), ‘Avoiding Negative Probabilities in Quantum Mechanics’, J. Mod. Phys. 4(8), 1066–1074. Schwinger, J. (1948), ‘On Quantum-Electrodynamics and the Magnetic Moment of the Electron’, Phys. Rev. 73, 416– 417. Zee, A. (2003), Quantum Field Theory in a Nutshell, 2st edn, Princeton University Press, USA. 6