Single-Particle Electrodynamics - Assassination Science

On the other hand, for a Pauli moment only, and no electric charge, we
effectively have |g| → ∞, and hence
g − 1
g
= 1.
∣ Pauli only
Thus, the factor (g − 1)/g in front of a term tells us that, for the anomalous
part of the magnetic moment, the term is fully manifested; but for the Dirac
part of the magnetic moment, it is reduced by a factor of one-half.
Let us first consider the factor (g−1)/g in the Hamiltonian (4.77): it is the
best-known appearance of this factor. It represents, of course, the Thomas
precession reduction of the spin-orbit coupling of the electron, that allows
the g = 2 electron to still have the correct energy levels in the hydrogen
atom [213, 214]. As such, it is highly desirable, and it was an early success of
the Dirac equation that it should yield this relativistic effect automatically.
Naturally, this factor of (g − 1)/g propagates through from the Hamiltonian
to the Heisenberg equations of motion. Of fundamental concern is its
presence in the relation between the canonical and mechanical momentum
operators, equation (4.78).
(The keeping of terms up to order m 0 essentially
places us in the rest frame of the particle; i.e., terms of order v are
neglected.) One can already begin to sense the incorrectness of the identification
“p” for md t x, by realising that a purely kinematical effect—the
Thomas precession—is purporting to modify the dynamical definition of extended
minimal coupling [11].
But the clincher comes when one examines in turn the equation of motion
for this “p” operator, namely, equation (4.79): we find that a proportion
(g − 1)/g of this equation is given by the accepted equation of motion for
a magnetic moment, while the remaining 1/g of it is the rejected equation
of motion! This nonsensical result is of course a result of the destruction,
implied by (4.78), of the extended minimal coupling between p and b.
It has been pointed out by Wignall [236] that, were this to be true, it
168