Introduction to

Spintronics
GIAN Lecture I
Supriyo Bandyopadhyay
Department of Electrical and Computer
Engineering
Virginia Commonwealth University

GIAN Lecture IIT Roorkee, December 2017

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 Sundries

• Instructor: Prof. S. Bandyopadhyay

• Mailing address
– 601 W. Main Street, Richmond, VA
23284
• Telephone: 1+(804) 827-6275
• Facsimile: 1+(804) 827-0006
• E-mail: sbandy@vcu.edu
• Communication via e-mail is
preferred

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 Resources

• Textbook (recommended but not

required):
– Introduction to Spintronics, 2nd edition,
CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL) 2015
– Available from amazon.com/amazon.in
• Other resources
– APS journals
– IEEE journals
– Elsevier journals
– A few other journals

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 What can you expect to
learn in this class
• This is an engineering course and
emphasis will be on applied
aspects of spintronics.

• I expect that students in this class

have had at least one graduate
course in quantum mechanics and
one graduate course in solid state
physics

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 Syllabus
LECTURE 1

The semi-classical concept of an electron’s spin

Kronig Uhlenbeck model
Stern-Gerlach experiment
Quantum mechanical operator for “spin”:
Pauli matrices and “spinors”
Dirac and Pauli equations

LECTURE 2

Rotations on the Bloch sphere

Evolution of a spinor on the Bloch sphere
Spin flip
Rabi oscillations

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 Syllabus (continued)
LECTURE 3 LECTURE 4

Spin-orbit interaction Spin transistors

Atomic Datta-Das transistor
Rashba Other types of SPINFETs
Dresselhaus Spin bipolar junction
Spin Hall effect transistors
Spin relaxation in a solid Single spin logic
D’yakonov-Perel’
Elliott-Yafet
Bir-Aronov-Pikus
Hyperfine interactions with
nuclear spins
LECTURE 5

Spin based quantum computing

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 What is
“Spintronics”?
• Spintronics is the science and technology
of using the spin degree of freedom of a
charge carrier, either singly, or in
conjunction with the charge degree of
freedom, to store, process, sense and
communicate data and information

• Spintronics has two branches:

– dealing with classical technology (where
information is encoded and processed using
principles of classical physics), and
– quantum technology where information is
dealt with using, at least partially, principles
of quantum mechanics

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 Early success …

• Giant magnetoresistance (GMR) in FM-PM multilayer

[Baibich et al. 1988]

• Tunneling magnetoresistance (TMR) in FM-insulator-

FM heterostructure
aka Magnetic Tunnel Junction: MTJ [Miyazaki ea. and,
Moodera ea. 1995]
(Memory cell in MRAM)

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 Mental picture of spin
• Most students know that an elementary particle
has a quantum mechanical attribute called
“spin” which can be measured and has a
quantized value (including zero)

• Majority view spin as the angular momentum

associated with the elementary particle rotating
or spinning about its own axis. Since the particle
is charged, this rotational motion gives rise to a
magnetic moment which is “spin”

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 Mental picture of spin
(contd.)
• This picture is convenient and
comforting, but actually meaningless
• Landau and Lifshitz… The spin property
is peculiar to quantum theory and has no
classical interpretation. It would be
wholly meaningless to imagine the
‘intrinsic’ angular momentum of an
elementary particle as being the result of
its rotation about its own axis.
• That simplistic notion cannot explain why
the magnitude of spin cannot assume
continuous values and must be
quantized to certain specific (discrete)
values

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 Mental picture of spin
• The correct concept of spin follows from
relativistic quantum mechanics and was
first explained by Paul Andrew Maurice
Dirac who derived the Dirac equation
which is the cornerstone of relativistic
quantum mechanics of fermions.

• Richard Feynman… “It appears to be

one of the few places in physics where
there is a rule which can be stated very
simply, but for which no one has found a
simple and easy explanation. That
probably means that we do not have a
complete understanding of the
fundamental principle involved”

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 Space quantization

Bohr’s planetary model of an atom. Three quantum

numbers n, l and m

• Because the
number of m values is m=1
m=2
2l+1, the number of m=0
allowed directions of the
angular momentum m=-1 m=-2
vector in a magnetic field
is 2l+1.
• This is called “space Arbitrary
quantization of angular assignment

momentum”
• Led to the discovery of
“spin”
© S. Bandyopadhyay
 Absorption and emission
spectra
• The energy of an
electron in an atom was
supposed to be
determined by the
three quantum
numbers n, l and m
• When an electron
transitions between
energy levels in an
atom, it involves a
change in one or more
quantum numbers.
• In the process of
transitioning, an
electron emits or
absorbs EM waves
whose frequencies are
determined by the
energy difference
between the initial and
final states

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 Anomalous Zeeman
effect
• When an atom is placed in a magnetic field
and the emission or absorption spectra are
measured, it was found that the multiplicity of
the spectra (meaning all the observed
frequencies) could not be explained by the
space quantization rules (i.e. by taking into
account all possible values of n, m and l).
• Particularly, each absorption line would split
into two in a strong magnetic field. This was
referred to as the anomalous Zeeman effect.
The splitting increased linearly with the
magnetic field strength.
• We now know that the anomalous Zeeman
effect is entirely due to the “spin” of the
electron.

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 Birth of spin
• (1925): Ralph de Laer Kronig postulated that in addition to
the orbital angular momentum (associated with l), an electron
has an additional angular momentum associated with
spinning about its own axis. This has a fixed magnitude of
Explained the multiplicity of spectra, i.e. why each level will
split into more levels. But it could not explain the anomalous
Zeeman effect since this picture could not explain
immediately why the splitting should increase linearly with
an external magnetic field. Nor could it explain why the
angular momentum should have a fixed magnitude of .
• Why would the rotational angular momentum lead to level
splitting? Because the rotating electron sees an electric field
due to the nucleus and in the rest frame of the electron that
electric field becomes a magnetic field via Lorentz
transformation. That magnetic field interacts with the
magnetic moment of the electron to produce an energy
shift . Therefore, levels will be split by .

• Problem: If the size of an electron is the Lorentz radius e2/4πε0mc2 (=2.8 fm), then the
surface of the electron has to reach a rotation speed of 120 times the speed of light in order
for the spinning electron to have an angular momentum of (1/2)ħ! This violates relativistic
principles. So he never published the spinning electron idea.
• 6 months later, Uhlenbeck and Goudsmit published the same idea in Naturwissenschaften
without realizing the conflict with relativistic principles.

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 Saga continued
• Kronig sent a letter to Nature pointing out the fallacy
in Uhlenbeck and Goudsmit and thus attacking the
“spinning electron idea”
• Uhlenbeck and Goudsmit did not address the
objections of Kronig, but published an erratum in
Nature admitting that their result could not explain the
multiplicity of the atomic spectra, or level splitting, (by
a factor of 2). Kronig’s objection was left unaddressed.
• L. H. Thomas (1926).. Explained the factor of 2
discrepancy by invoking an accelerating frame of
reference for the electron. The electron is not just
spinning about its axis, but rotating around the atom in
a closed orbit and therefore constantly accelerating or
decelerating. As a result, the energy states are modified
in the electron’s rest frame, which leads to a factor of 2
correction in the energies. Now the multiplicity of the
atomic spectra could be explained.
• 1926.. Wolfgang Pauli endorses the spinning electron
idea which finally leads to its acceptance and results in
the nomenclature “spin”, but the conflict with relativity
still left unresolved.

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 Stern Gerlach
experiment
•(1922). Three years before the
Kronig-Uhlenbeck-Goudsmit
model, “spin” has been already
experimentally discovered
unwittingly by Otto Stern and
Walther Gerlach, who were
blissfully unaware of it.

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 Motivation
• Stern and Gerlach believed that a gas of hydrogenic
atoms will be magnetically birefringent because the
electron will orbit in a plane perpendicular to the
magnetic field (their view of space quantization).
This, they thought, would limit the angular
momentum to a value of
• Therefore, an atomic beam of hydrogen will split
into two beams and despite the smearing effect of
the velocity distribution, they should split so far
apart that the oppositely directed components will
be deflected outside the width of the original beam.
In that case, one will observe two distinct beams.
• This would have been a remarkable experiment
anyway since classical physics predicts that the
atomic magnets will precess in the field, but remain
randomly oriented so that the beam would be
broadened but not split into two. Thus, any
birefringence would demonstrate that quantum
physics supersedes classical physics.
• It will also be a literal demonstration of “space
quantization”

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 The Stern-Gerlach
Experiment
• Source: Wikipedia.com

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 Stern and Gerlach
• Ultimately observed two traces in a
photographic plate placed in the path of a
beam of Ag atoms passing between the
pole pieces of a magnet and interpreted
them (wrongly) as demonstration of
space quantization.

• Ag atom has zero angular momentum

and the effect was not due to angular
momentum at all, but due to spin

• 1927… Ronald Fraser noted that Ag

atoms have no orbital angular momentum
and finally attributed the Stern-Gerlach
observation to the demonstration of spin

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 Stern-Gerlach
experiment
• The Stern-Gerlach experiment effectively
“measured” the spin of Ag atoms showing that
spin is a measurable quantity

• In quantum mechanics, any measurable quantity

is described by an appropriate operator such that
the expectation value of that operator will be the
average value of the quantity measured by
repeated measurements

• This lead to a quest for an appropriate quantum

mechanical operator for “spin” that was finally
ended by Pauli when he came up with the notion
of Pauli spin matrices

© S. Bandyopadhyay
What is the operator for
spin?
• In QM, any physical quantity (that can be “measured”)
is described by an operator. Its expected value is the
average value that will be measured if repeated
measurements are made of that quantity. So, what is
the operator for spin?
• That operator will allow us to determine the expected
spin orientation (x-, y- and z-components of spin) from
the prescription

• That operator will also be used to include spin in the

equation describing the evolution of an electron’s
(spin-dependent) wavefunction in any arbitrary
system. In wave mechanics, the Schrödinger equation
describing evolution of the wavefunction in time and
space is

• Need to find this quantum mechanical operator for

spin

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 Pauli matrices

• Pauli made the first attempt to

derive the quantum mechanical
operator for spin

• He derived the quantum

mechanical operators for spin
components along three mutually
orthogonal axes – Sx, Sy and Sz

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 Pauli’s approach
• (1) The measurement of the spin angular
momentum along any coordinate axis. i.e.
the quantities Sx, Sy or Sz, should always
give the value or (consistent with
Stern-Gerlach experiment – the beam
axis was arbitrary)

• (2) The operators for spin components

along three mutually orthogonal axes
should obey commutation rules similar to
those obeyed by the operators associated
with operators for components of the
orbital angular momentum

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 Commutation rules

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 Spin operator

• In the Stern-Gerlach experiment,

assuming that the z-axis is the
axis joining the north and south
poles of the magnet, the
observation of two traces on the
photographic plate was
interpreted as being caused by a
spin angular momentum S
whose z-component (Sz) has two
values: and

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 Spin operator (contd.)
• Since the measured value of spin has two
values, the expectation value of its operator
must also have two values. Hence, the operator
must be a 2 × 2 matrix since only a 2 × 2 matrix
has two eigenvalues (eigenvalues are the
expectation values)

• Moreover, the eigenvalues of this 2 × 2 matrix

must be ± since those are the values
measured in experiments

• Finally, the 2 × 2 matrix obviously has to be

Hermitian since all quantum mechanical
operators are Hermitian (this is required
because the expected value of any physical
quantity must be “real” and only Hermitian
matrices have real eigenvalues)

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 Spin operator (contd.)

• A 2 × 2 Hermitian matrix that has

eigenvalues of ± is the matrix:

This is not the only such matrix.

There are many others… but Pauli chose this one to
for the operator Sz

© S. Bandyopadhyay
Operators for Sx and Sy

• Next, to find operators for Sx and

Sy…..

• The choice of z-axis as the axis

joining the north and south poles of
the magnet in the Stern-Gerlach
experiment is completely arbitrary

• The results of the experiment would

have been the same if this axis was
chosen as the x or y-axis instead.

© S. Bandyopadhyay
Operators for Sx and Sy
(contd.)
• Therefore, the operators for Sx and
Sy must also be 2 × 2 Hermitian
matrices with eigenvalues of ±  / 2

• Furthermore, Sx, Sy and Sz must

satisfy the commutation relations
shown earlier

• The above two requirements are

used to find operators for Sx, Sy.

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 Pauli matrices

• Pauli defined three dimensionless

matrices σx, σy and σz, such that


Sx = σ x But
2

Sy = σ y
2

Sz = σ z
2

Since the eigenvalues of Sx, Sy and Sz are , the

eigenvalues of the new σ matrices are

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 Find σx and σy

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 Find σx and σy

• Start the
search for σx
and σy with
Hermitean
matrices that
have off-
diagonal terms
only

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 Pauli spin matrices
(contd.)
• First condition: Since the
eigenvalues of these matrices are ±
1, we must have

Which leads to the possible choices for a and b = ± 1 or ± i

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 Pauli spin matrices
(contd.)
• Second condition: The
commutation relations must be
satisfied, hence
• Im(ab*) = 1
• Therefore, we will select a = +1, b=
-i
• This yields

0 1  0 −i 
=σ x = , σ y  
 1 0   i 0 
The σ matrices are called Pauli matrices and are the
normalized operators for spin

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 Properties of Pauli
matrices
• Square of each
Pauli matrix is 2
σ= σ= σ=
2 2
the 2 × 2 x y z I
identity matrix
I.
• Therefore, 2
 3 2
S = S + S + S = 3  [ I ] =  [ I ]
2 2 2 2
x y z
2 4

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 Eigenvectors of Pauli
matrices
O ϕ =λ ϕ

1 0
σz ± z =±1 ± z ; + z
=  − z= 
0 1
1  1 1 1
σx ± x =±1 ± x ; + =   − =  
x
2 1 x
2  −1
1  1 1 1
σy ± =±1 ± y ; + =   − =  
y y
2 i y
2  −i 

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 Pauli equation and
spinors
• The eigenfunctions of spin operators
are 2 × 1 column vectors called
“spinors”. Thus, the spin-dependent
“wave function” is not a scalar; it is a
2-component spinor.
• We can absorb the space and time
dependent parts of the wavefunction
in the spinor so that the general form
of a spinor is 
 φ1 (r , t ) 
[ψ (r , t )] = φ (r, t ) 
 2 
Note that in general
  a 
[ψ (r , t )] ≠ φ (r , t )  
b 

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 Extending the Schrödinger
Equation: the Pauli
equation
Schrödinger equation   ∂ 
 H + ψ ( r , t ) =
0
 i ∂t 
The normal Schrödinger equation deals with a scalar
wave function, but now we are dealing with spinor wave
functions

  ∂  
[ H ] + [ I ] ψ ( r , t ) =
[ 0]
 i ∂t 

Pauli equation… looks like two coupled Schrödinger equations

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 Solution
• Solution of the Pauli equation yields the spinor wave
functions and then those wave functions 
 φ ( r , tare
)  used
ψ ( r , t )  =    1

to find the expectation values of the three components φ ( r , t )  2

of spin angular momentum


  φ ( r ,t )
ψ ( r , t )  =   
1

φ2 ( r , t ) 

  * 
φ1 ( r , t )   
Sx ( r , t ) (= / 2 ) φ ( r , t ) φ2 ( r , t )  [σ x ]     Re φ1* ( r , t ) φ2 ( r , t ) 
*

φ2 ( r , t ) 
1


 *  * 
φ1 ( r , t )   
Sy (r ,t ) (= / 2 ) φ1 ( r , t ) φ2 ( r , t )  [σ x ]     Im φ1* ( r , t ) φ2 ( r , t ) 
φ2 ( r , t ) 

 *  * 
φ1 ( r , t )   2  2
Sz (r ,t ) [σ x ] φ r, t  ( / 2)  φ1 ( r , t ) − φ2 ( r , t ) 
(  / 2 ) φ1 ( r , t ) φ2 ( r , t ) =
 2 ( )

© S. Bandyopadhyay
What type of terms will go
into H?
• The Hamiltonian will have the
following terms: [ H=] 
H0 [I ] + H B

+ H so

K.E+P.E Zeeman spin-orbit

• The term [HB] is present only if a magnetic field is

present

• It is the Zeeman interaction term (due to the

magnetic moment of the spin interacting with a
real magnetic field)

• The [HSO] is present only if there is spin-orbit

interaction in the solid (due to magnetic moment
of the spin interacting with an effective magnetic
field arising from spin-orbit interaction).

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 Zeeman term in the
Hamiltonian
• Spin is viewed as self rotation about an
axis. The self rotation of a charged entity
will give rise to a magnetic moment
• The energy of interaction of this
magnetic moment with the magnetic flux
density is 

Eint =− µe • B

• Landé had shown that the operator for

the magnetic moment due to spin is
 
µ
• e = ( g / 2) µ Bσ where g is the gyromagnetic
ratio and µΒ is the Bohr magneton (e 2m0)
 
• Therefore, [ H B ] = −( g / 2) µ B B • σ
• Clearly, its two eigenvalues are ± ( g / 2 ) µ B B

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 Zeeman interaction

PROOF
Say the magnetic field is directed in the z-direction

• The eigenvalues of the last matrix are

• The two eigenenergies associated with the

Zeeman Hamiltonian are not degenerate and
differ by g µ B B
• Therefore, the Zeeman interaction lifts the spin
degeneracy and causes spin-splitting.
• Explains why the anomalous Zeeman effect
splitting increases linearly with B.

© S. Bandyopadhyay
A few sample problems

• Assume that the (normalized)

spinor describing an electron is
1 1
Ψ=  
5  2

– If a measurement of the spin is

made in the z-direction, what is
the probability that the
measurement will yield a value of +  2?
– What is the expectation value of
Sx?

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 Answer
• Since we are interested in measurement along the
z-direction, write the spinor as suitable
superposition of +z and –z-polarized eigenvectors
1 1 1 1 2 0
=    +  
5  2 5 0 5 1

    
+ z − pol . − z − pol .

• Therefore, the probability of measuring a spin value

of +  2 is

• The expectation value of Sx is

1 1 1   1 0 1  1   1 2 4  2
[1 2][σ x ]  = [1 2]    = [1 2] = = 
5 5 2 2 5 1 0   2  2 5 1  5 2 5
or use formula;
 1 2  2
S=
x  Re φ1*φ=  Re 
2 × =  5
 5 5 

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 Pauli and Dirac

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 Pauli equation

  ∂  
[ H ] + [ 0]
[ I ] ψ ( r , t ) =
 i ∂t 

[H] and [I] are matrices, [ψ] is a matrix

(spinor), and [0] is the 2x1 null vector

Completely non-relativistic

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 Extending the Pauli
Equation: The Dirac
Equation
• Pauli equation is non-relativistic.
Dirac extended it to relativistic
quantum mechanics
• Einstein’s equation (for a free
particle, no potential energy)
• = E 2 p 2 c 2 + m02 c 4 ; p = momentum
• Using the quantum mechanical
operators for energy and
momentum
 ∂  2 3  ∂ 
2

 i   − ∑  −i  − m0 c ψ ( x, y, z , t ) =
2 2
0
 c∂t  r =1  ∂xr  
Einstein-DeBroglie equation

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 Klein Gordon Equation

• O. Klein and W. Gordon extended

the last equation, valid for a free
particle, to a particle subjected to
a temporally and spatially varying
force field described by a vector
potential

A = ( At , Ax , Ay , Az )

 ∂ 
2 3
 ∂ 
2

 i  + eAt  − ∑  −i + eAr  − m0 c ψ ( x, y, z , t ) =
2 2
0
 c∂t  r =1  ∂xr  

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 Dirac….

• Dirac questioned the Klein-Gordon

construct for an electron
• This equation is second order in time, but
Dirac had postulated a transformation
theory whereby all meaningful equations
of quantum mechanics (of Fermions)
must be first order in time
• In relativity, space and time are
equivalent… so the correct equation must
also be first order in space.

 ∂  3  ∂  
 i  + eAt  − ∑ α r  −i + eAr  − α 0 m0 c ψ ( x, y, z , t ) =
0
 c∂ t  r =1  ∂x r  
Dirac equation

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 Dirac….

• Four new quantities: α0 and αr (r = 1,2,3)

• How to determine them?
• Dirac’s equation for a free particle (no
vector potential) is
 ∂  3  ∂  
 i   ∑ r  −i
− α  − α 0 0 ψ ( x , y , z , t ) =
m c 0
 c∂t  r =1  ∂xr  

• Dirac insisted that this be the same as

the Einstein-Debroglie equation
• But the above Dirac equation is first
order and the Einstein-Debroglie
equation is second order!

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 How to reconcile the
two?
• We take Dirac’s equation and apply it
to the operator
 ∂  3  ∂  
 i   ∑ r
+ α −i   + α 0 m0 c 
 c∂t  r =1  ∂xr  
• To yield
 ∂  3  ∂    ∂  3  ∂  
 i   + ∑ α r  −i  + α 0 m0 c   i  − ∑ α r  −i  − α 0 0 ψ =
m c 0
 c∂t  r 1 =  ∂xr    c∂t  r 1  ∂xr  

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 Dirac (contd.)

• Dirac’s “second order” equation for

a free particle had to match the
Einstein-Debroglie equation:

 ∂  3  ∂    ∂  3  ∂  
 i   ∑ r
+ α −i   + α 0 0  
m c i   ∑ r  −i
− α  − α 0 0 ψ =
m c 0
 c∂t  r 1 =  ∂xr    c∂t  r 1  ∂xr  
⇒
 ∂  2 3  ∂ 
2

 i   ∑
− −  −  ψ ( x, y , z , t ) =
2 2
i  m c 0
∂ ∂
0
 c t  r =1  xr  

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 Dirac matrices

• This match can happen only if α0

and αr (r = 1, 2, 3) are matrices.
Furthermore, these matrices must
have the following properties:

{α m } = [ I ]
2

[ 0]
{α m }{α n } + {α n }{α m } =

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 Dirac matrix (contd.)
Four matrices that satisfy these properties are all 4 x 4
matrices:

1 0 0 0  0 0 0 1
0 1 0 0  0 0 1 0 
{α 0 } =  {α1} 
0 0 −1 0  0 1 0 0
   
 0 0 0 −1  1 0 0 0
0 0 0 −i  0 0 1 0
0 0 i 0  0 0 0 −1
{α 2 } =  {α 3 } 
0 −i 0 0  1 0 0 0
   
 i 0 0 0  0 −1 0 0

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 Dirac matrices (contd.)

Dirac matrices can be written in terms of Pauli matrices

I 0   0 σx
{α 0 } =  {α1}  
 0 − I  σ
 x 0 
 0 σy  0 σz 
{α 2 } =
σ  {α3}  
 y 0  σ
 z 0 

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 The Dirac spinor
• Dirac’s “second order” equation for
a free particle became
 ∂ 
2 3
2 ∂ 
2
∂2 
 i   ∑ r 
− {α } −i   ∑− ( {α }{α } − {α }{α } ) ( i  )
2
− {α }
2
m 2 2
c ψ =
0
 c∂t  r =1 ∂xr  m ,n ∂x m ∂xn
m n n m 0 0
 

• The chosen values of the α-s make

this equation match the Einstein-
DeBroglie equation
• Since the α-s are 4 x 4 matrices
ψ 1 
 
ψ
Ψ = 2  Dirac’s relativistic wave function is a
ψ 3  4x1 column vector
 
ψ 4 

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 Dirac’s success

• Dirac applied his equation to calculate the

energy levels of an electron in the H atom and
showed that the multiplicity of the spectra can
be exactly obtained.
• More importantly, he showed that the orbital
angular momentum of the electron alone is not
a conserved quantity. However when the
quantity represented by the operator

1 0 σ  
 ; σ = σ x xˆ + σ y yˆ + σ z zˆ
2 σ 0 

is added to the orbital angular momentum, the

total quantity is conserved. Therefore, the total
angular momentum has two components:
orbital and spin.

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 Dirac’s monumental
contribution
• Showed that “spin” represented by the operator
  0 σ  is like angular momentum.


2 σ 0 

• It has two values (since the operator matrix has two

distinct eigenvalues)

• These values are quantized in units of  2

• Dirac also showed that if the procedure used to

obtain the Einstein Debroglie equation from the
first order Dirac equation for a free particle is
applied to the first order Dirac equation in the
presence of force fields, we do not obtain the Klein
Gordon equation. The discrepancy can be explained
by invoking the interaction of the spin angular
momentum with the force field. This lends further
support to the concept of spin.

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 Time-independent Dirac
equation
(steady state)

 m0 c 2 + V 0 c ( pz + eA z ) c ( px + eAx ) − i ( p y + eAy )  

   ϕ1   ϕ1 
 m0 c 2 + V c ( px + eAx ) + i ( p y + eAy )  −c ( pz + eA z )    
  ϕ2  = E  ϕ2 
0

 
 c ( pz + eA z ) c ( px + eAx ) − i ( p y + eAy )  − m0 c 2 + V 0 ϕ 
 3 
 ϕ3 
 
 ϕ
 4   ϕ4 
c 
  x ( p + eA x ) + i ( y y )
p + eA  − c ( p z + eA z ) 0 − m 0 c 2
+ V 
where
∂ 
pr = −i and as usual we will replace pr with pr + eAr in the presence of a vector potential A.
∂xr

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 Compact form of time-
independent Dirac
equation
  
( m0 c 2 + V ) [ I ] cσ •  p + eA  {ψ }( x, y, z )  {ψ }( x, y, z ) 
   =E 
 cσ •  p + eA ( −m0c + V ) [ I ] 
2  {φ }( x , y , z )   {φ }( x , y , z ) 
  

 ϕ1 
{ψ } =  
 ϕ2 
 ϕ3 
{φ} =  
 ϕ4 

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 Uncouple the equations

       
2  (
( m 0 c + V ) [ I ] + cσ • p + eA ) 
+
1
2
−
 ( )
[ I ] cσ • p + eA   [ψ ] = E [ψ ]
 E m 0 c V 
       
( − m 0 c 2
+ V )[ ] 
I +  cσ • (
p + eA )
 1
 E − m c2 − V [ ] 
I  cσ •(p + eA
)
  [φ ] =E [φ ]
 0 

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 Non-relativistic Dirac
equation
• Non-relativistic approximation ( p  m0 c ) :
E 2 = p 2 c 2 + m02 c 4 ≈ m02 c 4

• The first of the two time independent Dirac equation

reduces to

 2
 σ • p + eA  
( )
  ψ =
(
 0 m c 2
+ V ) [ I ] + 
2m0
 [ ] E [ψ ]
 
 
which reduces to
 p + eA 2
 ( )   

[ ] + µ • σ + [ ]  [ψ ] = ( E − m 0 c ) [ψ ] = E [ψ ]
2
 I B B V I
 2m 0 

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 The second of the Dirac
equations
• The second of
the Dirac
equation
reduces to
 p + eA 2
 ( )   
[ I ] + µ B B • σ + V [ I ] [φ ] =

2(−m 0 )
( E + m c ) [φ ] = E [ψ ]
0
2


 


This equation therefore applies to particles with negative

mass, or anti-matter

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 Anti-matter

=
E 2
p c +m c
2 2 2 4
0
 
p = k E

1 MeV

© S. Bandyopadhyay
 Properties of Pauli
matrices

det (σ j ) = −1
Tr (σ j ) = 0
σ 2j = I
σ xσ y σ z = iI
σ xσ y =
−σ yσ x =
iσ z
σ yσ z =
−σ zσ y =
iσ x
σ zσ x =
−σ xσ z =
iσ y
σ pσ q +σ qσ p =
0

© S. Bandyopadhyay