MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4319316271 · doi:10.3390/sym15020432

Revisiting the Schrödinger–Dirac Equation

2023· article· en· W4319316271 on OpenAlexafffund
N. Fleury, Fayçal Hammad, Parvaneh Sadeghi

Bibliographic record

VenueSymmetry · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNoncommutative and Quantum Gravity Theories
Canadian institutionsChamplain Regional CollegeBishop's University
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaBishop's University
KeywordsDirac equationTwo-body Dirac equationsDirac algebraMathematical physicsDirac seaDirac spinorKlein–Gordon equationPhysicsSpinorDirac operatorCovariant transformationQuantum mechanicsDirac fermionNonlinear system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In flat spacetime, the Dirac equation is the “square root” of the Klein–Gordon equation in the sense that, by applying the square of the Dirac operator to the Dirac spinor, one recovers the equation duplicated for each component of the spinor. In the presence of gravity, applying the square of the curved-spacetime Dirac operator to the Dirac spinor does not yield the curved-spacetime Klein–Gordon equation, but instead yields the Schrödinger–Dirac covariant equation. First, we show that the latter equation gives rise to a generalization to spinors of the covariant Gross–Pitaevskii equation. Then, we show that, while the Schrödinger–Dirac equation is not conformally invariant, there exists a generalization of the equation that is conformally invariant but which requires a different conformal transformation of the spinor than that required by the Dirac equation. The new conformal factor acquired by the spinor is found to be a matrix-valued factor obeying a differential equation that involves the Fock–Ivanenko line element. The Schrödinger–Dirac equation coupled to the Maxwell field is then revisited and generalized to particles with higher electric and magnetic moments while respecting gauge symmetry. Finally, Lichnerowicz’s vanishing theorem in the conformal frame is also discussed.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.272 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSymmetrySame topicNoncommutative and Quantum Gravity TheoriesFrench-language works237,207