text:
# The Relation between Maxwell, Dirac and the Seiberg-Witten Equationspublished: International Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences 2003, 2007-2034 (2003). This version corrects several misprints and some typos.

## 1 Introduction

In (-) using standard covariant spinor fields Campolattaro proposed that Maxwell equations are equivalent to a *non* linear Dirac like equation. The subject has been further developed in (,) using the Clifford bundle formalism, which is discussed together with some of their applications in a series of papers, e.g., (-). The crucial point in proving the mentioned equivalence (abbreviated as *MDE* in what follows, when no confusion arises), starts once we observe that to any given *representative* of a Dirac-Hestenes spinor field (see more information see section 2 and for details see (,,,) $`\psi \mathrm{sec}[^0(M)+^2(M)+^4(M)]\mathrm{sec}𝒞\mathrm{}(M,g)`$ there is associated an electromagnetic field $`F\mathrm{sec}^2(M)\mathrm{sec}𝒞\mathrm{}(M,g)`$, ($`F^20`$) through the Rainich-Misner theorem (,-) by

$$F=\psi \gamma _{21}\stackrel{~}{\psi }$$
(1)
Before proceeding we recall that for null fields, i.e., $`F^2=0`$, the spinor associated with $`F`$ through Eq.(1) must be a Majorana spinor field (,,), but we do not need such concept in this paper. Now, since an electromagnetic field $`F`$ satisfying Maxwell equation has six degrees of freedom and a Dirac-Hestenes spinor field has eight (real) degrees of freedom some authors felt uncomfortable with the approach used in (,) where some *gauge conditions* have been imposed on a *nonlinear* equation (equivalent to Maxwell equation), thereby transforming it into an usual *linear* Dirac equation (called the *Dirac-Hestenes equation* in the Clifford bundle formalism).The claim, e.g., in  is that the *MDE* found in (, ) cannot be general. The argument is that the imposition of *gauge conditions* implies that a $`\psi `$ satisfying Eq.(1) can have only six (real) degrees of freedom, and this implies that the Dirac-Hestenes equation corresponding to Maxwell equation can be only satisfied by a restricted class of Dirac-Hestenes spinor fields, namely the ones that have six degrees of freedom.

Incidentally, in  it is also claimed that the generalized Maxwell equation

$$\mathbf{}F=J_e+\gamma _5J_m$$
(2)
(where $`J_e,`$ $`J_m\mathrm{sec}^1(M)`$) describing the electromagnetic field generated by charges and monopoles  cannot hold in the Clifford bundle formalism, because according to that author the formalism implies that $`J_m=0`$.

In what follows we analyze these claims of  and prove that they are wrong (section 3). The reasons for our enterprise is that as will become clear in what follows, understanding of Eqs.(1) and (2) together with some reasonable hypothesis permit a derivation and even a possible physical interpretation of the famous Seiberg-Witten monopole equations (,,). So, our plan is the following: first we introduce in section 2 the mathematical formalism used in the paper, showing how to write Maxwell and Dirac equations using Clifford fields. We also introduce Weyl spinor fields and parity operators in the Clifford bundle formalism. In section 3 we prove that given $`F`$ in Eq.(1) we can solve that equation for $`\psi `$, and we find that $`\psi `$ has eight degrees of freedom, two of them being undetermined, the indetermination being related to the elements of the stability group of the spin plane $`\gamma _{21}`$. This is a non trivial and beautiful result which can called *inversion* formula. In section 4 we introduce a *generalized* Maxwell equation and in section 5 we introduce the *generalized* Hertz equation. In section 6 we prove a mathematical Dirac-Maxwell equivalence of the *first kind* (,), thereby deriving a Dirac-Hestenes equation from the free Maxwell equations. In section 7 we introduce a new form of a mathematical Maxwell-Dirac equivalence (called *MDE* of the second kind) different from the one studied in section 6. This new *MDE* of the second kind suggests that the electron is a ‘composite’ system. To prove the Maxwell-Dirac equivalence of the *second kind* we decompose a Dirac-Hestenes spinor field satisfying a Dirac-Hestenes equation in such a way that it results in a nonlinear generalized Maxwell (like) equation (Eq.(144)) satisfied by a certain Hertz potential field, mathematically represented by an object of the same mathematical nature as an electromagnetic field, i.e., $`\mathrm{\Pi }\mathrm{sec}^2(M)\mathrm{sec}𝒞\mathrm{}(M,g)`$.This new equivalence is very suggestive in view of the fact that there are recent (wild) speculations that the electron can be splited in two components  (see also). If this fantastic claim announced by Maris  is true, it is necessary to understand what is going on. The new Maxwell-Dirac equivalence presented in section 6 may eventually be useful to understand the mechanism behind the “electron splitting” into electrinos. We are not going to discuss these ideas here. Instead, we concentrate our attention in showing in section 8 that (the analogous on Minkowski spacetime) of the famous Seiberg-Witten monopole equations arises naturally from the *MDE* of the first kind once a reasonable hypothesis is imposed. We also present a possible coherent interpretation of that equations. Indeed, we prove that when the Dirac-Hestenes spinor field satisfying the first of Seiberg-Witten equations is an eigenvector of the parity operator, then that equation describe a pair of massless ‘monopoles’ of opposite ‘magnetic’ like charges, coupled together by its interaction electromagnetic field. Finally, in section 9 we present our conclusions.

## 2 Clifford and Spin-Clifford Bundles

Let $`=(M,g,D)`$ be Minkowski spacetime. $`(M,g)`$ is a four dimensional time oriented and space oriented Lorentzian manifold, with $`M^4`$ and $`g\mathrm{sec}T^{0,2}M`$ being a Lorentzian metric of signature (1,3). $`T^{}M`$ \[$`TM`$\] is the cotangent \[tangent\] bundle. $`T^{}M=_{xM}T_x^{}M`$, $`TM=_{xM}T_xM`$, and $`T_xMT_x^{}M^{1,3}`$, where $`^{1,3}`$ is the Minkowski vector space . $`D`$ is the Levi-Civita connection of $`g`$, $`i.e`$., $`Dg=0`$, $`𝐑(D)=0`$. Also $`𝐓(D)=0`$, $`𝐑`$ and $`𝐓`$ being respectively the torsion and curvature tensors. Now, the Clifford bundle of differential forms $`𝒞\mathrm{}(M,g)`$ is the bundle of algebras, i.e., $`𝒞\mathrm{}(M,g)=_{xM}𝒞\mathrm{}(T_x^{}M)`$, where $`xM,𝒞\mathrm{}(T_x^{}M)=𝒞\mathrm{}_{1,3}`$, the so called *spacetime* *algebra*. Recall also that $`𝒞\mathrm{}(M,g)`$ is a vector bundle associated to the  *orthonormal frame bundle*, i.e., $`𝒞\mathrm{}(M,g)`$ $`=P_{SO_{+(1,3)}}\times _{ad}𝒞l_{1,3}`$ (,). For any $`xM`$, $`𝒞\mathrm{}(T_x^{}M)`$ as a linear space over the real field $``$. Moreover, $`𝒞\mathrm{}(T_x^{}M)`$ is isomorphic to the Cartan algebra $`(T_x^{}M)`$ of the cotangent space and $`(T_x^{}M)=_{k=0}^4{}_{}{}^{k}(T_x^{}M)`$, where $`^k(T_x^{}M)`$ is the $`\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{4}{k}\right)`$-dimensional space of $`k`$-forms. Then, sections of $`𝒞\mathrm{}(M,g)`$ can be represented as a sum of non homogeneous differential forms. Let $`x^\mu `$ be Lorentz coordinate functions for $`M`$ and let $`\{e_\mu \}\mathrm{sec}FM`$ (the frame bundle) be an orthonormal basis for $`TM`$, i.e., $`g(e_\mu ,e_\nu )=\eta _{\mu \nu }=\mathrm{diag}(1,1,1,1)`$. Let $`\gamma ^\nu =dx^\nu \mathrm{sec}^1(M)\mathrm{sec}𝒞\mathrm{}(M,g)`$ ($`\nu =0,1,2,3`$) such that the set $`\{\gamma ^\nu \}`$ is the dual basis of $`\{e_\mu \}`$. Moreover, we denote by $`\stackrel{ˇ}{g}`$ the metric in the cotangent bundle.

### 2.1 Clifford Product

The fundamental *Clifford product* (in what follows to be denoted by juxtaposition of symbols) is generated by $`\gamma ^\mu \gamma ^\nu +\gamma ^\nu \gamma ^\mu =2\eta ^{\mu \nu }`$ and if $`𝒞\mathrm{sec}𝒞\mathrm{}(M,g)`$ we have

$$𝒞=s+v_\mu \gamma ^\mu +\frac{1}{2!}b_{\mu \nu }\gamma ^\mu \gamma ^\nu +\frac{1}{3!}a_{\mu \nu \rho }\gamma ^\mu \gamma ^\nu \gamma ^\rho +p\gamma ^5,$$
(3)
where $`\gamma ^5=\gamma ^0\gamma ^1\gamma ^2\gamma ^3=dx^0dx^1dx^2dx^3`$ is the volume element and $`s`$, $`v_\mu `$, $`b_{\mu v}`$, $`a_{\mu \nu \rho }`$, $`p\mathrm{sec}^0(M)\mathrm{sec}𝒞\mathrm{}(M,g)`$.

Let $`A_r,\mathrm{sec}^r(M),B_s\mathrm{sec}^s(M)`$. For $`r=s=1`$, we define the *scalar product* as follows:

For $`a,b\mathrm{sec}^1(M)\mathrm{sec}𝒞\mathrm{}(M,g).,`$

$$ab=\frac{1}{2}(ab+ba)=\stackrel{ˇ}{g}(a,b).$$
(4)
We define also the *exterior product* ($`r,s=0,1,2,3)`$ by

$`A_rB_s`$ $`=A_rB_s_{r+s},`$
$`A_rB_s`$ $`=(1)^{rs}B_sA_r,`$ (5)
where $`_k`$ is the component in $`^k(M)`$ of the Clifford field. The exterior product is extended by linearity to all sections of $`𝒞\mathrm{}(M,g)`$.

For $`A_r=a_1\mathrm{}a_r,B_r=b_1\mathrm{}b_r`$, the scalar product is defined here as follows,

$`A_rB_r`$ $`=(a_1\mathrm{}a_r)(b_1\mathrm{}b_r)`$
$`=\left|\begin{array}{ccc}a_1b_1\hfill & \mathrm{}.\hfill & a_1b_r\hfill \\ \mathrm{}\mathrm{}\mathrm{}.\hfill & \mathrm{}.\hfill & \mathrm{}\mathrm{}\mathrm{}.\hfill \\ a_rb_1\hfill & \mathrm{}.\hfill & a_rb_r\hfill \end{array}\right|`$ (9)
We agree that if $`r=s=0`$, the scalar product is simple the ordinary product in the real field.

Also, if $`rs`$, then $`A_rB_s=0`$. Finally, the scalar product is extended by linearity for all sections of $`𝒞\mathrm{}(M,g)`$.

For $`rs,A_r=a_1\mathrm{}a_r,B_s=b_1\mathrm{}b_{s\text{ }}`$we define the left contraction by

$$\mathrm{}:(A_r,B_s)A_r\mathrm{}B_s=\underset{i_1<\mathrm{}<i_r}{}ϵ^{i_1\mathrm{}.i_s}(a_1\mathrm{}a_r)(b_{_{i_1}}\mathrm{}b_{i_r})^{}b_{i_r+1}\mathrm{}b_{i_s}$$
(10)
where $``$ is the reverse mapping (*reversion*) defined by

$$:\mathrm{sec}\stackrel{p}{}(M)a_1\mathrm{}a_pa_p\mathrm{}a_1$$
(11)
and extended by linearity to all sections of $`𝒞\mathrm{}(M,g)`$. We agree that for $`\alpha ,\beta \mathrm{sec}^0(M)`$ the contraction is the ordinary (pointwise) product in the real field and that if $`\alpha \mathrm{sec}^0(M)`$, $`A_r,\mathrm{sec}^r(M),B_s\mathrm{sec}^s(M)`$ then $`(\alpha A_r)\mathrm{}B_s=A_r\mathrm{}(\alpha B_s)`$. Left contraction is extended by linearity to all pairs of elements of sections of $`𝒞\mathrm{}(M,g)`$, i.e., for $`A,B\mathrm{sec}𝒞\mathrm{}(M,g)`$

$$A\mathrm{}B=\underset{r,s}{}A_r\mathrm{}B_s,rs$$
(12)
It is also necessary to introduce the operator of *right contraction* denoted by $`\mathrm{}`$. The definition is obtained from the one presenting the left contraction with the imposition that $`rs`$ and taking into account that now if $`A_r,\mathrm{sec}^r(M),B_s\mathrm{sec}^s(M)`$ then $`A_r\mathrm{}(\alpha B_s)=(\alpha A_r)\mathrm{}B_s`$.

The main formulas used in the Clifford calculus can be obtained from the following ones (where $`a\mathrm{sec}^1(M)\mathrm{sec}𝒞\mathrm{}(M,g)`$):

$`aB_s`$ $`=a\mathrm{}B_s+aB_s,B_sa=B_s\mathrm{}a+B_sa,`$
$`a\mathrm{}B_s`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(aB_s()^sB_sa),`$
$`A_r\mathrm{}B_s`$ $`=()^{r(s1)}B_s\mathrm{}A_r,`$
$`aB_s`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(aB_s+()^sB_sa),`$
$`A_rB_s`$ $`=A_rB_s_{|rs|}+A_r\mathrm{}B_s_{|rs2|}+\mathrm{}+A_rB_s_{|r+s|}`$
$`={\displaystyle \underset{k=0}{\overset{m}{}}}A_rB_s_{|rs|+2k}`$
$`A_rB_r`$ $`=B_rA_r=\stackrel{~}{A}_r\mathrm{}B_r=A_r\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{B}_r=\stackrel{~}{A}_rB_r_0=A_r\stackrel{~}{B}_r_0`$ (13)
#### 2.1.1 Hodge Star Operator

Let $``$ be the Hodge star operator, i.e., the mapping

$$:\stackrel{k}{}(M)\stackrel{4k}{}(M),\text{ }A_kA_k$$

where for $`A_k\mathrm{sec}^k(M)\mathrm{sec}𝒞\mathrm{}(M,g)`$

$$[B_kA_k]\tau _g=B_kA_k,B_k\mathrm{sec}^k(M)\mathrm{sec}𝒞\mathrm{}(M,g).$$
(14)
$`\tau _g^4(M)`$ is a *standard* volume element. Then we can verify that

$$A_k=\stackrel{~}{A}_k\gamma ^5.$$
(15)
#### 2.1.2 Dirac Operator

Let $`d`$ and $`\delta `$ be respectively the differential and Hodge codifferential operators acting on sections of $`(M)`$. If $`A_p\mathrm{sec}^p(M)\mathrm{sec}𝒞\mathrm{}(M,g)`$, then $`\delta A_p=()^p^1dA_p`$, with $`^1=\mathrm{identity}`$.

The Dirac operator acting on sections of $`𝒞\mathrm{}(M,g)`$ is the invariant first order differential operator

$$\mathbf{}=\gamma ^aD_{e_a},$$
(16)
where $`\{e_a\}`$ is an arbitrary *orthonormal basis* for $`TUTM`$ and $`\{\gamma _b\}`$ is a basis for $`T^{}UT^{}M`$ dual to the basis $`\{e_a\}`$, i.e., $`\gamma ^b(e_a)=\delta _b^a`$, $`a,b=0,1,2,3`$. The reciprocal basis of $`\{\gamma ^b\}`$ is denoted $`\{\gamma _a\}`$ and we have $`\gamma _a\gamma _b=\eta _{ab}`$ ($`\eta _{ab}=\mathrm{diag}(1,1,1,1)`$). Also,

$$D_{e_a}\gamma ^b=\omega _a^{bc}\gamma _c$$
(17)
Defining

$$\omega _a=\frac{1}{2}\omega _a^{bc}\gamma _b\gamma _c,$$
(18)
we have that for any $`A_p\mathrm{sec}^p(M),`$ $`p=0,1,2,3,4`$

$$D_{e_a}A=e_a+\frac{1}{2}[\omega _a,A].$$
(19)
Using Eq.(19) we can show the very important result:

$`\mathbf{}A_p`$ $`=\mathbf{}A_p+\mathbf{}\mathrm{}A_p=dA_p\delta A_p,`$
$`\mathbf{}A_p`$ $`=dA_p,\mathbf{}\mathrm{}A_p=\delta A_p,`$ (20)
### 2.2 Dirac-Hestenes Spinor Fields

Now, as is well known, an electromagnetic field is represented by $`F\mathrm{sec}^2(M)\mathrm{sec}𝒞\mathrm{}(M,g)`$. How to represent the Dirac spinor fields in this formalism ? We can show that *Dirac-Hestenes* spinor fields, do the job. We give here a short introduction to these objects (when living on Minkowski spacetime) which serves mainly the purpose of fixing notations. For a rigorous theory of these objects (using vector bundles) on a general Riemann-Cartan manifold see (). Recall that there is a $`2:1`$ mapping $`𝐬^{}:𝚯^{}`$ between $``$, the set of all orthonormal ordered vector frames and $`𝚯^{}`$, the set of all spin frames of $`T^{}M`$. As discussed at length in (,) a spin coframe can be thought as a basis of $`T^{}M`$, such that two ordered basis even if consisting of the same vectors, but, with the spatial vectors differing by a $`2\pi `$ rotation are considered distinct and two ordered basis even if consisting of the same vectors, but with the spatial vectors differing by a $`4\pi `$ rotation are identified. For short, in this paper we call the spin coframes, simply spin frames. Also, vector coframes are simply called vector frames in what follows.

Consider the set $`𝒮`$ of mappings

$$Mxu(x)\mathrm{Spin}_+(1,3)\text{ }\text{ }Sl(2,)$$
(21)
Choose a constant spin frame $`\{\gamma _a\}`$, $`a=0,1,2,3`$ and choose $`\mathrm{\Xi }_0𝚯^{}`$ corresponding to a constant mapping $`u_0𝒮`$. By constant we mean that the equation $`\gamma _\mu (x)=\gamma _\mu (y)`$ ($`(\mu =0,1,2,3)`$ and $`u_0(x)=u_0(y),`$ $``$ $`x,yM`$) has meaning due to the usual affine structure that can be given to Minkowski spacetime. $`\mathrm{\Xi }_0,\mathrm{\Xi }_u𝚯^{}`$ are relate as follows

$$u_0𝐬^{}(\mathrm{\Xi }_0)u_0^1=u𝐬^{}(\mathrm{\Xi }_u)u^1$$
(22)
From now on in order to simplify the notation we take $`u_0=1`$. The frame $`𝐬^{}(\mathrm{\Xi }_0)=\{\gamma _a\}`$ is called the *fiducial* vector frame and $`\mathrm{\Xi }_{0\text{ }}`$the fiducial spin frame. We note that Eq.(22) is satisfied by *two* such $`u`$’s differing by a signal, and of course, $`𝐬^{}(\mathrm{\Xi }_u)=𝐬^{}(\mathrm{\Xi }_u)`$.

Let,

$$𝔗=\{(\mathrm{\Xi }_u,\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mathrm{\Xi }_u})\text{ }|\text{ }u𝒮,\mathrm{\Xi }_u𝚯^{},\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mathrm{\Xi }_u}\mathrm{sec}\stackrel{+}{}M\mathrm{sec}C\mathrm{}^+(M,g)\},$$
(23)
where $`\stackrel{+}{}M=^0M+^2M+^4M`$

We define an equivalence relation on $`𝔗`$ by setting

$$(\mathrm{\Xi }_u,\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mathrm{\Xi }_u})(\mathrm{\Xi }_u^{},\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mathrm{\Xi }_u^{}})$$
(24)
if and only if

$$u𝐬^{}(\mathrm{\Xi }_u)u^1=u^1𝐬^{}(\mathrm{\Xi }_u^{})u^{},\text{ }\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mathrm{\Xi }_u^{}}=\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mathrm{\Xi }_u}uu^1.$$
(25)
Definition: Any equivalence class $`[(\mathrm{\Xi }_u,\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mathrm{\Xi }_u})]`$ will be called a Dirac-Hestenes spinor field.

Before proceeding we recall that a more rigorous definition of a *DHSF* as a section of a spin-Clifford bundle is given in . We will not need such a sophistication in what follows.

We observe that the pairs $`(𝚵_u,\mathrm{\Psi }_{𝚵_u})`$ and $`(𝚵_u,\mathrm{\Psi }_{𝚵_u})=(𝚵_u,\mathrm{\Psi }_{𝚵_u})`$ are equivalent, but the pairs $`(𝚵_u,\mathrm{\Psi }_{𝚵_u})`$ and $`(𝚵_u,\mathrm{\Psi }_{𝚵_u})=(𝚵_u,\mathrm{\Psi }_{𝚵_u})`$ are not. This distinction is essential in order to give a structure of *linear space* (over the real numbers) to the set $`𝒯`$. Indeed, such a linear structure on $`𝒯`$ is defined as follows

$`a[(\mathrm{\Xi }_{u_1},\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mathrm{\Xi }_{u_1}})]+b[(\mathrm{\Xi }_{u_2},\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mathrm{\Xi }_{u_2}})]`$ $`=[(\mathrm{\Xi }_{u_1},a\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mathrm{\Xi }_{u_1}})]+[(\mathrm{\Xi }_{u_2},b\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mathrm{\Xi }_{u_2}})],`$
$`(a+b)[(\mathrm{\Xi }_{u_1},\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mathrm{\Xi }_{u_1}})]`$ $`=a[(\mathrm{\Xi }_{u_1},\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mathrm{\Xi }_{u_1}})]+b[(\mathrm{\Xi }_{u_1},\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mathrm{\Xi }_{u_1}})],`$
$`a,b`$ $`.`$ (26)
We can simplify the notation by recalling that every $`u𝒮`$ determines, of course, a unique spin frame $`\mathrm{\Xi }_u`$ . Taking this into account we consider the set of all pairs $`(u,\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mathrm{\Xi }_u})𝒮\times \mathrm{sec}𝒞\mathrm{}^+(M,g)`$

We define an equivalence relation $``$ in $`𝒮\times \mathrm{sec}𝒞\mathrm{}^+(M,g)`$ as follows. Two pairs $`(u,\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mathrm{\Xi }_u})`$, $`(u^{},\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mathrm{\Xi }_u^{}})\mathrm{sec}𝒮\times \mathrm{sec}𝒞\mathrm{}^+(M,g)`$ are equivalent if and only if

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mathrm{\Xi }_u^{}}u^{}=\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mathrm{\Xi }_u}u$$
(27)
Of course, $`𝐬^{}(\mathrm{\Xi }_u^{})=v𝐬^{}(\mathrm{\Xi }_u)v^1`$with $`v=(u^{})^1u𝒮`$. Note that the pairs $`(u,\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mathrm{\Xi }_u})`$ and $`(u,\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mathrm{\Xi }_u})`$ are equivalent but the pairs $`(u,\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mathrm{\Xi }_u})`$ and $`(u,\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mathrm{\Xi }_u})`$ are not.

Denote by $`𝒮\times \mathrm{sec}𝒞\mathrm{}^+(M,g)`$ $`/`$ the quotient set of the equivalence classes generated by $``$. Their elements are called Dirac-Hestenes *spinors*. Of course, this is the same definition as above.

From now on we simplify even more our notation. In that way, if we take two orthonormal spin frames $`𝐬^{}(\mathrm{\Xi })=\{\gamma ^\mu \}`$ and $`𝐬^{}(\dot{\mathrm{\Xi }})=\{\dot{\gamma }^\mu =R\gamma ^\mu \stackrel{~}{R}=\mathrm{\Lambda }_\nu ^\mu \gamma ^\nu \}`$ with $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_\nu ^\mu (x)\mathrm{SO}^e(1,3)`$ and $`R(x)\mathrm{Spin}^e(1,3)xM`$, $`R\stackrel{~}{R}=\stackrel{~}{R}R=1`$, then we simply write the relation (Eq.(27)) between representatives of a Dirac-Hestenes spinor field in the two spin frames as the sections $`\psi _\mathrm{\Xi }`$ and $`\psi _{\dot{\mathrm{\Xi }}}`$ of $`𝒞\mathrm{}^+(M,g)`$ related by

$$\psi _{\dot{\mathrm{\Xi }}}=\psi _\mathrm{\Xi }R.$$
(28)
Recall that since $`\psi _\mathrm{\Xi }\mathrm{sec}\stackrel{+}{}M\mathrm{sec}𝒞\mathrm{}^+(M,g)`$, we have

$$\psi _\mathrm{\Xi }=s+\frac{1}{2!}b_{\mu \nu }\gamma ^\mu \gamma ^\nu +p\gamma ^5.$$
(29)
Note that $`\psi _\mathrm{\Xi }`$ has the correct number of degrees of freedom in order to represent a *Dirac* spinor field and recall that the specification of $`\psi _\mathrm{\Xi }`$ depends on the spin frame $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$. To simplify even more our notation, when it is clear which is the spin frame $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$, and no possibility of *confusion* arises we write simply $`\psi `$ instead of $`\psi _\mathrm{\Xi }`$.

When $`\psi \stackrel{~}{\psi }0`$, where $``$ is the reversion operator, we can show that $`\psi `$ has the following canonical decomposition:

$$\psi =\sqrt{\rho }e^{\beta \gamma _5/2}R,$$
(30)
where $`\rho `$, $`\beta \mathrm{sec}^0(M)\mathrm{sec}𝒞\mathrm{}(M,g)`$ and $`R(x)\mathrm{Spin}^e(1,3)𝒞\mathrm{}_{1,3}^+`$, $`xM`$. $`\beta `$ is called the Takabayasi angle. If we want to work in terms of the usual Dirac spinor field formalism, we can translate our results by choosing, for example, the standard matrix representation of the one forms $`\{\gamma ^\mu \}`$ in $`(4)`$ (the algebra of the complex $`4\times 4`$ matrices), and for $`\psi _\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ given by Eq.(15) we have the following (standard) matrix representation ,):

$$\mathrm{\Psi }=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}\psi _1& \psi _2^{}& \psi _3& \psi _4^{}\\ \psi _2& \psi _1^{}& \psi _4& \psi _3^{}\\ \psi _3& \psi _4^{}& \psi _1& \psi _2^{}\\ \psi _4& \psi _3^{}& \psi _2& \psi _1^{}\end{array}\right).$$
(31)
where $`\psi _k(x)`$, $`k=1,2,3,4`$ and for all $`xM`$.

We recall that a *standard* Dirac spinor field is a section $`𝚿_D`$ of the vector bundle $`P_{\mathrm{Spin}^e(1,3)}\times _\lambda (4)`$, where $`\lambda `$ is the $`D(\frac{1}{2},0)D(0,\frac{1}{2})`$ representation of $`Sl(2,)\mathrm{Spin}^e(1,3)`$. For details see, e.g.,(,). The relation between $`𝚿_D`$ and $`\psi `$ is given by

$$𝚿_D=\left(\begin{array}{c}\psi _1\\ \psi _2\\ \psi _3\\ \psi _4\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{c}sib_{12}\\ b_{13}ib_{23}\\ b_{03}+ip\\ b_{01}ib_{02}\end{array}\right).$$
(32)
where $`s,b_{12},\mathrm{}`$ are the real functions in Eq.(29) and $``$ denotes the complex conjugation.

We recall that the even subbundle $`𝒞\mathrm{}^+(M,g)`$ of $`𝒞\mathrm{}(M,g)`$ is such that its typical fiber is the Pauli algebra $`𝒞\mathrm{}_{3,0}𝒞\mathrm{}_{1,3}^+`$ (which is isomorphic to $`(2)`$, the algebra of $`2\times 2`$ complex matrices). Elements of $`𝒞\mathrm{}_{1,3}^+`$ are called *biquaternions* in the old literature. The isomorphism $`𝒞\mathrm{}_{3,0}𝒞\mathrm{}_{1,3}^+`$ is exhibited by putting $`\stackrel{}{\sigma }_i=\gamma _i\gamma _0`$, whence $`\stackrel{}{\sigma }_i\stackrel{}{\sigma }_j+\stackrel{}{\sigma }_j\stackrel{}{\sigma }_i=2\delta _{ij}`$. We recall also that the Dirac algebra is $`𝒞\mathrm{}_{4,1}(4)`$ and $`𝒞\mathrm{}_{4,1}𝒞\mathrm{}_{1,3}`$.

Consider the *complexification* $`𝒞\mathrm{}_C(M,g)`$ of $`𝒞\mathrm{}(g)`$ called the *complex Clifford bundle*. Then $`𝒞\mathrm{}_C(M,g)=𝒞\mathrm{}(M,g)`$ and we can verify that the typical fiber of $`𝒞\mathrm{}_C(M,g)`$ is $`𝒞\mathrm{}_{4,1}=𝒞\mathrm{}_{1,3}`$, the Dirac algebra. Now let $`\{\mathrm{\Delta }_0,\mathrm{\Delta }_1,\mathrm{\Delta }_2,\mathrm{\Delta }_3,\mathrm{\Delta }_4\}\mathrm{sec}𝒞\mathrm{}_C(M,g)`$ be for all $`xM`$ an orthonormal basis of $`𝒞\mathrm{}_{4,1}`$. We have,

$`\mathrm{\Delta }_a\mathrm{\Delta }_b+\mathrm{\Delta }_b\mathrm{\Delta }_a`$ $`=2g_{ab},`$
$`g_{ab}=diag(+1,+1,+1,+1,1).`$ (33)
Let us identify $`\gamma _\mu =\mathrm{\Delta }_\mu \mathrm{\Delta }_4`$ and call $`I=\mathrm{\Delta }_0\mathrm{\Delta }_1\mathrm{\Delta }_2\mathrm{\Delta }_3\mathrm{\Delta }_4`$. Since $`I^2=1`$ and $`I`$ commutes with all elements of $`𝒞\mathrm{}_{4,1}`$we identify $`I`$ with $`i=\sqrt{1}`$ and $`\gamma _\mu `$ with a fundamental set generating the local Clifford algebra of $`𝒞\mathrm{}(M,g)`$. Then if $`𝒜\mathrm{sec}𝒞\mathrm{}_C(M,g)`$ we have

$$𝒜=\mathrm{\Phi }_s+A_C^\mu \gamma _\mu +\frac{1}{2}B_C^{\mu \nu }\gamma _\mu \gamma _\nu +\frac{1}{3!}\tau _C^{\mu \nu \rho }\gamma _\mu \gamma _\nu \gamma _\nu +\mathrm{\Phi }_p\gamma _5,$$
(34)
where $`\mathrm{\Phi }_s`$, $`\mathrm{\Phi }_p`$, $`A_C^\mu `$, $`B_C^{\mu \nu }`$, $`\tau _C^{\mu \nu \rho }\mathrm{sec}^0(M)\mathrm{sec}𝒞\mathrm{}_C(M,g)`$, *i.e.*, $`xM`$, $`\mathrm{\Phi }_s(x)`$, $`\mathrm{\Phi }_p(x)`$, $`A_C^\mu (x)`$, $`B_C^{\mu \nu }(x)`$, $`\tau _C^{\mu \nu \rho }(x)`$ are complex numbers.

Now, it can be verified that

$$f=\frac{1}{2}(1+\gamma _0)\frac{1}{2}(1+i\gamma _1\gamma _2);f^2=f,$$
(35)
is a primitive idempotent field of $`𝒞\mathrm{}_C(M,g)`$. We can also verify without difficulty that $`if=\gamma _2\gamma _1f`$.

Appropriate equivalence classes (see (,)) of $`𝒞\mathrm{}_C(M,g)f`$ are representatives of the standard Dirac spinor fields in $`𝒞\mathrm{}_C(M,g)`$. We can easily show that the representation of $`𝚿_D`$ in $`𝒞\mathrm{}_C(M,g)`$ is given by

$$𝚿_D=\psi f$$
(36)
where $`\psi `$ is the Dirac-Hestenes spinor field given by Eq.(29).

### 2.3 Weyl Spinors and Parity Operator

By definition, $`\psi \mathrm{sec}𝒞\mathrm{}^+(M,g)`$ is a *representative* of a Weyl spinor field (,) if besides being a representative of a Dirac-Hestenes spinor field it satisfies $`\gamma _5\psi =\pm \psi \gamma `$, where

$$\gamma _{21}=\gamma _2\gamma _1.$$
(37)
The positive (negative) “eingestates” of $`\gamma _5`$ will be denoted $`\psi _+`$ ($`\psi _{}`$). For a general $`\psi \mathrm{sec}𝒞\mathrm{}^+(M,g)`$ we can write

$$\psi _\pm =\frac{1}{2}\left[\psi \gamma _5\psi \gamma _{21}\right].$$
(38)
Then,

$$\psi =\psi _++\psi _{}.$$
(39)
The parity operator $`𝐏`$ in our formalism is represented in such a way that for $`\psi \mathrm{sec}𝒞\mathrm{}^+(M,g),`$

$$𝐏\psi =\gamma _0\psi \gamma _0$$
(40)
The following Dirac-Hestenes spinor fields are eingestates of the parity operator with eingenvalues $`\pm 1`$:

$`𝐏\psi ^{}`$ $`=+\psi ^{},\text{ }\psi ^{}=\gamma _0\psi _{}\gamma _0\psi _{},`$
$`𝐏\psi ^{}`$ $`=\psi ^{},\text{ }\psi ^{}=\gamma _0\psi _+\gamma _0+\psi _+`$ (41)
### 2.4 The spin-Dirac Operator

Associated with the covariant derivative operator $`D_{e_a}`$ (see Eq.(17)) acting on sections of the Clifford bundle there is a spin-covariant derivative operator $`D_{e_a}^s`$ acting on sections of a right spin-Clifford bundle, such that its sections are Dirac-Hestenes spinor fields. Hopefully it will be not necessary to present the details concerning this concept here (see ). Enough is to say that $`D_{e_a}^s`$ has a representative on the Clifford bundle, called $`D_{e_a}^{(s)}`$, such that if $`\psi _\mathrm{\Xi }`$ is a *representative* of a Dirac-Hestenes spinor field we have

$$D_{e_a}^{(s)}\psi _\mathrm{\Xi }=e_a(\psi _\mathrm{\Xi })+\frac{1}{2}\omega _a\psi _\mathrm{\Xi },$$
(42)
where $`\omega _a`$ has been defined by Eq.(18). The representative of the spin-Dirac operator acting on representatives of Dirac-Hestenes spinor fields is the invariant first order operator given by,

$$\mathbf{}^{(s)}=\gamma ^aD_{e_a}^{(s)}$$
(43)
¿From the definition of spin-Dirac operator we see that if we restrict our considerations to orthonormal coordinate bases $`\{\gamma ^\mu =dx^\mu \}`$ where $`\{x^\mu \}`$ are global Lorentz coordinates then $`\omega _\mu =0`$ and the action of $`\mathbf{}^{(s)}`$ on Dirac-Hestenes spinor fields is the same as the action of $`\mathbf{}`$ on these fields.

### 2.5 Maxwell and Dirac-Hestenes Equations

With the mathematical tools presented above we have the following Maxwell equation,

$$\mathbf{}F=J_e$$
(44)
satisfied by an electromagnetic field $`F\mathrm{sec}^2(M)\mathrm{sec}𝒞\mathrm{}(M,g)`$, and generated by a current $`J_e\mathrm{sec}^1(M)\mathrm{sec}𝒞\mathrm{}(M,g)`$.

The Dirac-Hestenes equation in a spin frame $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$ satisfied by a Dirac-Hestenes spinor field $`\psi \mathrm{sec}[^0(M)+^2(M)+^4(M)]\mathrm{sec}𝒞\mathrm{}(M,g)`$ is

$$\mathbf{}\psi \gamma ^2\gamma ^1m\psi \gamma ^0+\frac{1}{2}\gamma ^a\psi \omega _a\gamma ^2\gamma ^1=0.$$
(45)
For what follows we restrict our considerations only for the case of orthonormal coordinate basis, in which case the Dirac-Hestenes equation reads

$$\mathbf{}\psi \gamma ^2\gamma ^1m\psi \gamma ^0=0$$
(46)
## 3 Solution of $`\psi \gamma _{21}\stackrel{~}{\psi }=F`$

We now want solve Eq.(1) for $`\psi `$. Before proceeding we observe that on Euclidian spacetime this equation has been solved using Clifford algebra methods in . Also,on Minkowski spacetime a *particular* solution of an equivalent equation (written in terms of biquaternions) appear in . We are going to show that contrary to the claims of  a general solution for $`\psi `$ has indeed eight degrees of freedom, although two of them are *arbitrary*, i.e., not fixed by $`F`$ alone. Once we give a solution of Eq.(1) for $`\psi `$, the reason for the indetermination of two of the degrees of freedom will become clear. This involves the Fierz identities, boomerangs (,,) and the general theorem permitting the reconstruction of spinors from their bilinear covariants.

We start by observing that from Eq.(1) and Eq.(30) we can write

$$F=\rho e^{\beta \gamma _5}R\gamma _{21}\stackrel{~}{R}$$
(47)
Then, defining $`f=F/\rho e^{\beta \gamma _5}`$ it follows that

$`f`$ $`=R\gamma _{21}\stackrel{~}{R}`$ (48)
$`f^2`$ $`=1`$ (49)
Now, since all objects in Eq.(47) and Eq.(48) are even we can take advantage of the isomorphism $`𝒞\mathrm{}_{3,0}𝒞\mathrm{}_{1,3}^+`$ and making the calculations when convenient in the Pauli algebra. To this end we first write:

$$F=\frac{1}{2}F^{\mu \nu }\gamma _\mu \gamma _\nu ,F^{\mu \nu }=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}0& E^1& E^2& E^3\\ E^1& 0& B^3& B^2\\ E^2& B^3& 0& B^1\\ E^3& B^2& B^1& 0\end{array}\right),$$
(50)
where $`(E^1,E^2,E^3)`$ and $`(B^1,B^2,B^3)`$ are respectively the Cartesian components of the electric and magnetic fields.

We now write $`F`$ in $`𝒞\mathrm{}^+(M,g)`$, the even sub-algebra of $`𝒞\mathrm{}(M,g)`$. The typical fiber of $`𝒞\mathrm{}^+(M,g)`$( which is also a vector bundle) is isomorphic to the Pauli algebra. We put

$$\stackrel{}{\sigma }_i=\gamma _i\gamma _0,𝐢=\stackrel{}{\sigma }_1\stackrel{}{\sigma }_2\stackrel{}{\sigma }_3=\gamma _0\gamma _1\gamma _2\gamma _3=\gamma _5.$$
(51)
Recall that $`𝐢`$ commutes with bivectors and since $`𝐢^2=1`$ it acts like the imaginary unit $`i=\sqrt{1}`$ in $`𝒞\mathrm{}^+(M,g)`$. From Eq.(50) and Eq.(51) (taking into account our previous discussion) we can write

$$F=\stackrel{}{E}+𝐢\stackrel{}{B},$$
(52)
with $`\stackrel{}{E}=E^i\stackrel{}{\sigma }_i`$, $`\stackrel{}{B}=B^j\stackrel{}{\sigma }_j`$, $`i,j=1,2,3`$. We can write an analogous equation for $`f,`$

$$f=\stackrel{}{e}+𝐢\stackrel{}{b}$$
(53)
Now, since $`F^20`$ and

$`F^2`$ $`=F\mathrm{}F+FF`$
$`=(\stackrel{}{E}^2\stackrel{}{B}^2)+2𝐢(\stackrel{}{E}\stackrel{}{B})`$ (54)
the above equations give (in the more general case where both $`I_1=(\stackrel{}{E}^2\stackrel{}{B}^2)0`$ and $`I_2=(\stackrel{}{E}\stackrel{}{B})0)`$:

$$\rho =\frac{\sqrt{\stackrel{}{E}^2\stackrel{}{B}^2}}{\mathrm{cos}[arctg2\beta ]},\beta =\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{arctan}\left(\frac{2(\stackrel{}{E}\stackrel{}{B})}{\stackrel{}{E}^2\stackrel{}{B}^2}\right)$$
(55)
Also,

$$\stackrel{}{e}=\frac{1}{\rho }[(\stackrel{}{E}\mathrm{cos}\beta +\stackrel{}{B}\mathrm{sin}\beta )],\stackrel{}{b}=\frac{1}{\rho }[(\stackrel{}{B}\mathrm{cos}\beta \stackrel{}{E}\mathrm{sin}\beta )]$$
(56)
### 3.1  <br>A Particular Solution

Now, we can verify that

$`L`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _{21}+f}{\sqrt{2(1\gamma _5)}}}={\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\sigma }_3𝐢\stackrel{}{f}}{𝐢\sqrt{2(1𝐢(\stackrel{}{f}\stackrel{}{\sigma }_3)}}},`$ (57)
$``$ $`=f^{03}\gamma _5f^{12}\stackrel{}{f}\stackrel{}{\sigma }_3`$ (58)
is a Lorentz transformation, i.e., $`L\stackrel{~}{L}=\stackrel{~}{L}L=1`$. Moreover, $`L`$ is a particular solution of Eq.(48). Indeed,

$$\frac{\gamma _{21}+f}{\sqrt{2(1\gamma _5)}}\gamma _{21}\frac{\gamma _{12}f}{\sqrt{2(1\gamma _5)}}=\frac{f[2(1\gamma _5)]}{2(1\gamma _5)}=f$$
(59)
Of course, since $`f^2=1`$, $`\stackrel{}{e}^2=\stackrel{}{b}^21`$and $`\stackrel{}{e}\stackrel{}{b}=0,`$ there are only four real degrees of freedom in the Lorentz transformation $`L`$. From this result in  it is concluded that the solution of the Eq.(1) is the Dirac-Hestenes spinor field

$$\varphi =\sqrt{\rho }e^{\gamma _5\beta }L,$$
(60)
which has only *six* degrees of freedom and thus is not equivalent to a general Dirac-Hestenes spinor field (the spinor field that must appears in the Dirac-Hestenes equation), which has *eight* degrees of freedom. In this way it is stated in  that a the *MDE* of first kind proposed in (,) cannot hold. Well, although it is *true* that Eq.(60) is a solution of Eq.(1) it is not a *general* solution, but only a *particular* solution.

Before leaving this section we mention that there are many other Dirac-like forms of the Maxwell equations published in the literature. All are trivially related in a very simple way and in principle have nothing to do with the two kinds of *MDE* discussed in the present paper. See .

### 3.2 The General Solution

The general solution $`R`$ of Eq.(1) is trivially found. It is

$$R=LS,$$
(61)
where $`L`$ is the particular solution just found and $`S`$ is any member of the *stability group* of $`\gamma _{21}`$, i.e.,

$$S\gamma _{21}\stackrel{~}{S}=\gamma _{21},\text{ }S\stackrel{~}{S}=\stackrel{~}{S}S=1.$$
(62)
It is trivial to find that we can parametrize the elements of the stability group as

$$S=\mathrm{exp}(\gamma _{03}\nu )\mathrm{exp}(\gamma _{21}\phi ),$$
(63)
with $`0\nu <\mathrm{}`$ and $`0\phi <\mathrm{}`$. This shows that the most *general* Dirac-Hestenes spinor field that solves Eq.(1) has indeed eight degrees of freedom (as it must be the case, if the claims of ( ,) are to make sense), although two degrees of freedom are arbitrary, i.e., they are like *hidden variables*!

Now, the reason for the *indetermination* of two degrees of freedom has to do with a fundamental mathematical result: the fact that a spinor can only be reconstruct through the knowledge of its bilinear covariants and the Fierz identities. Explicitly, to reconstruct a Dirac-Hestenes spinor field $`\psi `$, it is necessary to know also, besides the bilinear covariant given by Eq.(1), the following bilinear covariants,

$$J=\psi \gamma _0\stackrel{~}{\psi }\text{ and }K=\psi \gamma _3\stackrel{~}{\psi }.$$
(64)
Now, $`J,K`$ and $`F`$ are related trough the so called Fierz identities,

$`J^2`$ $`=\sigma ^2+\omega ^2=K^2,`$
$`JK`$ $`=0,\text{ }JK=(\omega +\gamma _5\sigma )F,`$
$`\sigma `$ $`=\rho \mathrm{cos}\beta ,\text{ }\omega =\rho \mathrm{sin}\beta .`$ (65)
In the most general case when both $`\sigma ,\omega `$ are not $`0`$ we also have the notable identities first found by Crawford  (and which can be derived almost trivially using the Clifford bundle formalism),

$$\begin{array}{c}F\mathrm{}J=\omega K\\ (\gamma _5F)\mathrm{}J=\sigma K\\ FF=F\stackrel{~}{F}_0=\sigma ^2\omega ^2\end{array}\begin{array}{c}F\mathrm{}K=\omega J\\ (\gamma _5F)\mathrm{}K=\sigma J\\ (\gamma _5F)F=2\sigma \omega \end{array}$$
(66)
$`JF`$ $`=(\omega +\gamma _5\sigma )K,KF=(\omega +\gamma _5\sigma )J`$
$`F^2`$ $`=\omega ^2\sigma ^22\gamma _5\sigma \omega ,F^1=KFK/(\omega ^2+\sigma ^2)^2`$ (67)
Once we know $`\omega `$, $`\sigma `$, $`J`$, $`K`$ and $`F`$ we can recover the Dirac-Hestenes spinor field as follows. First, introduce a *boomerang* (,,) $`𝔅𝒞\mathrm{}_C(M,g)`$ given by

$$𝔅=\sigma +J+iFi\gamma _5K+\gamma _5\omega $$
(68)
Then, we can construct $`𝚿=𝔅f𝒞\mathrm{}_C(M,g)f`$ (with $`f`$ as in Eq.(35))which has the following matrix representation (once the standard representation of the Dirac gamma matrices are used)

$$\widehat{𝚿}=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}\psi _1& 0& 0& 0\\ \psi _2& 0& 0& 0\\ \psi _3& 0& 0& 0\\ \psi _4& 0& 0& 0\end{array}\right)$$
(69)
Now, it can be easily verified that $`𝚿=𝔅f`$ determines the same bilinear covariants as the ones determined by $`\psi `$. Note however that this spinor is not unique. In fact, $`𝔅`$ determines a class of elements $`𝔅\eta `$ where $`\eta `$ is an arbitrary element of $`𝒞\mathrm{}_C(M,g)f`$ which differs one from the other by a complex phase factor (, ,).

Recalling that (a representative) of a Dirac-Hestenes spinor field determines a unique element of $`\mathrm{\Phi }𝒞\mathrm{}_C(M)f`$ by $`\mathrm{\Phi }=\psi f`$, then it follows (from Eq.(69) and Eq.(31) that gives the matrix representation of $`\psi `$) that we can trivially reconstruct a $`\psi `$ that solves our problem.

## 4 The Generalized Maxwell Equation

To comment on the basic error in  concerning the Clifford bundle formulation of the generalized Maxwell equation we recall the following.

The generalized Maxwell equation (,) which describes the electromagnetic field generated by charges and monopoles, can be written in the Cartan bundle as

$$dF=K_m,dG=K_e$$
(70)
where $`F,G^2(M)`$ and $`K_m,K_e^3(M)`$.

These equations are independent of any metric structure defined on the world manifold. When a metric is given and the Hodge dual operator $``$ is introduced it is supposed that in vacuum we have $`G=F`$. In this case putting $`K_e=J_e`$ and $`K_m=J_m`$, with $`J_e,J_m\mathrm{sec}^1(M)`$, we can write the following equivalent set of equations

$`dF`$ $`=J_m\text{}dF=J_e,`$ (71)
$`\delta (F)`$ $`=J_m\text{}\delta F=J_e`$ (72)
$`\delta (F)`$ $`=J_m\text{}\delta F=J_e`$ (73)
$`dF`$ $`=J_m\text{}\delta F=J_e.`$ (74)
Now, supposing that any $`\mathrm{sec}^j(M)\mathrm{sec}𝒞\mathrm{}(M,g)`$ ($`j=0,1,2,3,4`$) and taking into account Eqs.(16-20) we get Eq.(2) by summing the two equations in (74), i.e.,

$$(d\delta )F=J_e+K_m\text{ or}\text{ }(d\delta )F=J_m+K_e,$$
(75)
or equivalently

$$\mathbf{}F=J_e+\gamma _5J_m\text{ or}\text{ }\mathbf{}(\gamma _5F)=J_m+\gamma _5J_e.\text{ }$$
(76)
Now, writing with the conventions of section 2 ,

$$F=\frac{1}{2}F^{\mu \nu }\gamma _\mu \gamma _\nu \text{}F=\frac{1}{2}(^{}F^{\mu \nu })\gamma _\mu \gamma _\nu ,\text{ }$$
(77)
then generalized Maxwell equations in the form given by Eq.(72) can be written in components ( in a Lorentz coordinate chart) as

$$_\mu F^{\mu \nu }=J_e^\mu \text{}_\mu (^{}F^{\mu \nu })=J_m^\mu $$
(78)
Now, assuming as in Eq.(1) that $`F=\psi \gamma _{21}\stackrel{~}{\psi }`$ and taking into account the relation between $`\psi `$ and the representation of the standard Dirac spinor $`\mathrm{\Psi }_D`$ given by Eq.(32), we can write Eq.(78) as

$`_\mu \overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}_D[\widehat{\gamma }_\mu ,\widehat{\gamma }_\nu ]\mathrm{\Psi }_D`$ $`=2J_e^\mu \text{}_\mu \overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}_D\widehat{\gamma }_5[\widehat{\gamma }_\mu ,\widehat{\gamma }_\nu ]\mathrm{\Psi }_D=2J_m^\mu ,`$
$`F^{\mu \nu }`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}_D[\widehat{\gamma }_\mu ,\widehat{\gamma }_\nu ]\mathrm{\Psi }\text{}(^{}F^{\mu \nu })={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}_D\widehat{\gamma }_5[\widehat{\gamma }_\mu ,\widehat{\gamma }_\nu ]\mathrm{\Psi }_D`$ (79)
The reverse of the first of Eqs.(76) equation reads

$$\stackrel{}{(\mathbf{}F)}=J_eK_m.$$
(80)
First summing, and then subtracting Eq.(2) with Eq.(70) we get the following equations for $`F=\psi \gamma _{21}\stackrel{~}{\psi }`$,

$$\mathbf{}\psi \gamma _{21}\stackrel{~}{\psi }+\stackrel{}{(\psi \gamma _{21}\stackrel{~}{\psi })}=2J_e,\mathbf{}\psi \gamma _{21}\stackrel{~}{\psi }\stackrel{}{(\psi \gamma _{21}\stackrel{~}{\psi })}=2K_m$$
(81)
which is equivalent to Eq.(16) in  (where $`𝒢`$ is used for the three form of monopolar current). There, it is observed that $`J_e`$ is even under reversion and $`K_m`$ is odd. Then, it is claimed that “since reversion is a purely algebraic operation without any particular physical meaning, the monopolar current $`K_m`$ is necessarily zero if the Clifford formalism is assumed to provide a representation of Maxwell’s equation where the source currents $`J_e`$ and $`K_m`$ correspond to fundamental physical fields.” It is also stated that Eq.(79) and Eq.(81) imposes different constrains on the monopolar currents $`J_e`$ and $`K_m`$.

It is clear that these arguments are fallacious. Indeed, it is obvious that if any *comparison* is to be made, it must be done between $`J_e`$ and $`J_m`$ or between $`K_e`$ and $`K_m`$. In this case, it is obvious that both pairs of currents have the same behavior under reversion. This kind of confusion is widespread in the literature, mainly by people that works with the generalized Maxwell equation(s) in component form (Eqs.(78)).

It seems that experimentally $`J_m=0`$ and the following question suggests itself: is there any real physical field governed by a equation of the type of the generalized Maxwell equation (Eq.(2)). The answer is yes.

## 5 The Generalized Hertz Potential Equation

In what follows we accept that $`J_m=0`$ and take Maxwell equations for the electromagnetic field $`F\mathrm{sec}^2(M)\mathrm{sec}𝒞\mathrm{}(M,g)`$ and a current $`J_e\mathrm{sec}^1(M)\mathrm{sec}𝒞\mathrm{}(M,g)`$ as

$$\mathbf{}F=J_e.$$
(82)
Let $`\mathrm{\Pi }=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{\Pi }^{\mu \nu }\gamma _\mu \gamma _\nu =\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Pi }}_e+𝐢\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Pi }}_m\mathrm{sec}^2(M)\mathrm{sec}𝒞\mathrm{}(M,g)`$ be the so called *Hertz potential* (,). We write

$$\left[\mathrm{\Pi }^{\mu \nu }\right]=\left[\begin{array}{cccc}0& \mathrm{\Pi }_e^1& \mathrm{\Pi }_e^2& \mathrm{\Pi }_e^3\\ \mathrm{\Pi }_e^1& 0& \mathrm{\Pi }_m^3& \mathrm{\Pi }_m^2\\ \mathrm{\Pi }_e^2& \mathrm{\Pi }_m^3& 0& \mathrm{\Pi }_m^1\\ \mathrm{\Pi }_e^3& \mathrm{\Pi }_m^2& \mathrm{\Pi }_m^1& 0\end{array}\right].$$
(83)
and define the *electromagnetic potential* by

$$A=\delta \mathrm{\Pi }\mathrm{sec}\mathrm{\Lambda }^1(T^{}M)\mathrm{sec}𝒞\mathrm{}(M,g),$$
(84)
Since $`\delta ^2=0`$ it is clear that $`A`$ satisfies the Lorenz gauge condition, i.e.,

$$\delta A=0.$$
(85)
Also, let

$$\gamma ^5S=d\mathrm{\Pi }\mathrm{sec}{}_{}{}^{3}(M)\mathrm{sec}𝒞\mathrm{}(M,g),$$
(86)
and call $`S`$, the *Stratton potential*. It follows also that

$$d\left(\gamma ^5S\right)=d^2\mathrm{\Pi }=0.$$
(87)
But $`d(\gamma ^5S)=\gamma ^5\delta S`$ from which we get, taking into account Eq.(79),

$$\delta S=0$$
(88)
We can put Eq.(84) and Eq.(86) in the form of a *single* generalized Maxwell like equation, i.e.,

$$\mathbf{}\mathrm{\Pi }=(d\delta )\mathrm{\Pi }=A+\gamma ^5S=𝒜.$$
(89)
Eq.(89) is the equation we were looking for. It is a legitimate physical equation. We also have,

$$\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Pi }=(d\delta )^2\mathrm{\Pi }=dA+\gamma _5dS.$$
(90)
Next, we define the electromagnetic field by

$$F=\mathbf{}𝒜=\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Pi }=dA+\gamma _5dS=F_e+\gamma _5F_m.$$
(91)
We observe that,

$$\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Pi }=0F_e=\gamma _5F_m.$$
(92)
Now, let us calculate $`F`$. We have,

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill \mathbf{}F& =& (d\delta )F\hfill \\ & =& d^2A+d(\gamma ^5dS)\delta (dA)\delta (\gamma ^5dS).\hfill \end{array}$$
(93)
The first and last terms in the second line of Eq.(90) are obviously null. Writing,

$$J_e=\delta dA,\text{and }\gamma ^5J__m=d(\gamma ^5dS),$$
(94)
we get Maxwell equation

$$\mathbf{}F=(d\delta )F=J_e,$$
(95)
if and only if the magnetic current $`\gamma ^5J_m=0`$, i.e.,

$$\delta dS=0.$$
(96)
a condition that we suppose to be satisfied in what follows. Then,

$`\mathrm{}A`$ $`=J_e=\delta dA,`$
$`\mathrm{}S`$ $`=0.`$ (97)
Now, we define,

$`F_e`$ $`=dA=\stackrel{}{E}_e+𝐢\stackrel{}{B}_e,`$ (98)
$`F_m`$ $`=dS=\stackrel{}{B}_m+𝐢\stackrel{}{E}_m.`$ (99)
and also

$$F=F_e+\gamma _5F_m=\stackrel{}{E}+𝐢\stackrel{}{B}=(\stackrel{}{E}_e\stackrel{}{E}_m)+𝐢(\stackrel{}{B}_e+\stackrel{}{B}_m).$$
(100)
Then, we get

$$\mathrm{}\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Pi }}_e=\stackrel{}{E},\mathrm{}\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Pi }}_m=\stackrel{}{B}.$$
(101)
It is important to keep in mind that:

$$\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Pi }=0\stackrel{}{E}=0\text{, and }\stackrel{}{B}=0.$$
(102)
Nevertheless, despite this result we have,

Hertz Theorem

$$\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Pi }=0\text{ }\text{ }\mathbf{}F_e=0$$
(103)
Proof.  We have immediately from the above equations that

$$\mathbf{}F_e=(\gamma _5F_m)=d(\gamma _5dS)+\delta (\gamma _5dS)=\gamma _5d^2S\gamma _5\delta dS=0.\mathrm{}$$
(104)
We remark that Eq.(103) has been called the Hertz theorem in (,) and it has been used there and also in (-) in order to find nontrivial superluminal solutions of the free Maxwell equation.

## 6 Maxwell Dirac Equivalence of First Kind

Let us consider a *generalized* Maxwell equation

$$\mathbf{}F=𝒥,$$
(105)
where $`=\gamma ^\mu _\mu `$ is the Dirac operator and $`𝒥`$ is the electromagnetic current (an electric current $`J_e`$ plus a magnetic monopole current $`\gamma _5J_m`$, where $`J_e`$, $`J_m\mathrm{sec}^1M𝒞\mathrm{}(M,g)`$). We proved in section 2 that if $`F^20`$, then we can write

$$F=\psi \gamma _{21}\stackrel{~}{\psi },$$
(106)
where $`\psi \mathrm{sec}𝒞\mathrm{}^+(M,g)`$ is a representative of a Dirac-Hestenes field. If we use Eq.(106) in Eq.(105) we get

$$\mathbf{}(\psi \gamma _{21}\stackrel{~}{\psi })=\gamma ^\mu _\mu (\psi \gamma _{21}\stackrel{~}{\psi })=\gamma ^\mu (_\mu \psi \gamma _{21}\stackrel{~}{\psi }+\psi \gamma _{21}_\mu \stackrel{~}{\psi })=𝒥.$$
(107)
from where it follows that

$$2\gamma ^\mu _\mu \psi \gamma _{21}\stackrel{~}{\psi }_2=𝒥,$$
(108)
Consider the identity

$$\gamma ^\mu _\mu \psi \gamma _{21}\stackrel{~}{\psi }_2=\psi \gamma _{21}\stackrel{~}{\psi }\gamma ^\mu _\mu \psi \gamma _{21}\stackrel{~}{\psi }_0\gamma ^\mu _\mu \psi \gamma _{21}\stackrel{~}{\psi }_4,$$
(109)
and define moreover the vectors

$$j=\gamma ^\mu _\mu \psi \gamma _{21}\stackrel{~}{\psi }_0,$$
(110)
$$g=\gamma ^\mu _\mu \psi \gamma _5\gamma _{21}\stackrel{~}{\psi }_0.$$
(111)
Taking into account Eqs.(107)-(111), we can rewrite Eq.(107) as

$$\mathbf{}\psi \gamma _{21}\stackrel{~}{\psi }=\left[\frac{1}{2}𝒥+\left(j+\gamma _5g\right)\right].$$
(112)
Eq.(112) is a spinorial representation of Maxwell equation. In the case where $`\psi `$ is non-singular (which corresponds to non-null electromagnetic fields) we have

$$\mathbf{}\psi \gamma _{21}=\frac{e^{\gamma _5\beta }}{\rho }\left[\frac{1}{2}𝒥+\left(j+\gamma _5g\right)\right]\psi .$$
(113)
The Eq.(113) representing Maxwell equation, written in that form, does not appear to have any relationship with the Dirac-Hestenes equation (Eq.(46)). However, we shall make some *algebraic* modifications on it in such a way as to put it in a form that suggest a very interesting and *intriguing relationship* between them, and consequently a possible (?) connection between electromagnetism and quantum mechanics.

Since $`\psi `$ is supposed to be non-singular ($`F0`$) we can use the canonical decomposition of $`\psi `$ and write $`\psi =\rho e^{\beta _{\gamma _5}/2}R`$, with $`\rho `$, $`\beta `$ $`\mathrm{sec}^0M\mathrm{sec}𝒞\mathrm{}(M,g)`$ and $`R`$ Spin<sub>+</sub>(1,3), $`xM`$. Then

$$_\mu \psi =\frac{1}{2}(_\mu \mathrm{ln}\rho +\gamma _5_\mu \beta +\mathrm{\Omega }_\mu )\psi ,$$
(114)
where we define the 2-form

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_\mu =2(_\mu R)\stackrel{~}{R}.$$
(115)
Using this expression for $`_\mu \psi `$ into the definitions of the vectors $`j`$ and $`g`$ (Eqs.(110,111)) we obtain that

$$j=\gamma ^\mu (\mathrm{\Omega }_\mu S)\rho \mathrm{cos}\beta +\gamma _\mu [\mathrm{\Omega }_\mu (\gamma _5S)]\rho \mathrm{sin}\beta ,$$
(116)
$$g=[\mathrm{\Omega }_\mu (\gamma _5S)]\rho \mathrm{cos}\beta \gamma _\mu (\mathrm{\Omega }_\mu S)\rho \mathrm{sin}\beta ,$$
(117)
where we define the $`spin`$ 2-form $`S`$ by

$$S=\frac{1}{2}\psi \gamma _{21}\psi ^1=\frac{1}{2}R\gamma _{21}\stackrel{~}{R}.$$
(118)
We now define

$$J=\psi \gamma _0\stackrel{~}{\psi }=\rho v=\rho R\gamma ^0R^1,$$
(119)
where $`v`$ is the velocity field of the system. To continue, we define the 2-form $`\mathrm{\Omega }=v^\mu \mathrm{\Omega }_\mu `$ and the scalars $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and $`K`$ by

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }=\mathrm{\Omega }S,$$
(120)
$$K=\mathrm{\Omega }(\gamma _5S).$$
(121)
Using these definition we have that

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_\mu S=\mathrm{\Lambda }v_\mu ,$$
(122)
$$\mathrm{\Omega }_\mu (\gamma _5S)=Kv_\mu ,$$
(123)
and for the vectors $`j`$ and $`g`$ can be written as

$$j=\mathrm{\Lambda }v\rho \mathrm{cos}\beta +Kv\rho \mathrm{sin}\beta =\lambda \rho v,$$
(124)
$$g=Kv\rho \mathrm{cos}\beta \mathrm{\Lambda }v\rho \mathrm{sin}\beta =\kappa \rho v,$$
(125)
where we defined

$$\lambda =\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{cos}\beta +K\mathrm{sin}\beta ,$$
(126)
$$\kappa =K\mathrm{cos}\beta \mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{sin}\beta .$$
(127)
The spinorial representation of Maxwell equation is written now as

$$\mathbf{}\psi \gamma _{21}=\frac{e^{\gamma _5\beta }}{2\rho }𝒥\psi +\lambda \psi \gamma _0+\gamma _5\kappa \psi \gamma _0.$$
(128)
Observe that there are (-) infinite families of non trivial solutions of Maxwell equations such that $`F^20`$ (which correspond to *subluminal* and *superluminal* solutions of Maxwell equation). Then, it is licit to consider the case $`𝒥=0`$. We have,

$$\mathbf{}\psi \gamma _{21}=\lambda \psi \gamma _0+\gamma _5\kappa \psi \gamma _0,$$
(129)
which is very similar to the Dirac-Hestenes equation.

In order to go a step further into the relationship between those equations, we remember that the electromagnetic field has *six* degrees of freedom, while a Dirac-Hestenes spinor field has *eight* degrees of freedom and that we proved in section 2 that two of these degrees of freedom are hidden variables. We are free therefore to impose two constraints on $`\psi `$ if it is to represent an electromagnetic field. We choose these two constraints as

$$\mathbf{}j=0\text{ and }\mathbf{}g=0.$$
(130)
Using Eqs.(124,125) these two constraints become

$$\mathbf{}j=\rho \dot{\lambda }+\lambda \mathbf{}J=0,$$
(131)
$$\mathbf{}g=\rho \dot{\kappa }+k\mathbf{}J=0,$$
(132)
where $`J=\rho v`$ and $`\dot{\lambda }=(v\mathbf{})\lambda ,`$ $`\dot{k}=(v\mathbf{})k.`$ These conditions imply that

$$\kappa \lambda =\lambda \kappa $$
(133)
which gives ($`\lambda 0`$):

$$\frac{\kappa }{\lambda }=const.=\mathrm{tan}\beta _0,$$
(134)
or from Eqs.(126,127):

$$\frac{K}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}=\mathrm{tan}(\beta \beta _0).$$
(135)
Now we observe that $`\beta `$ is the angle of the duality rotation from $`F`$ to $`F^{}=e^{\gamma _5\beta }F.`$ If we perform another duality rotation by $`\beta _0`$ we have $`Fe^{\gamma _5(\beta +\beta _0)}F,`$ and for the Takabayasi angle $`\beta \beta +\beta _0.`$ If we work therefore with an electromagnetic field duality rotated by an additional angle $`\beta _0`$, the above relationship becomes

$$\frac{K}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}=\mathrm{tan}\beta .$$
(136)
This is, of course, just a way to say that we can choose the constant $`\beta _0`$ in Eq.(134) to be zero. Now, this expression gives

$$\lambda =\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{cos}\beta +\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{tan}\beta \mathrm{sin}\beta =\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{\mathrm{cos}\beta },$$
(137)
$$\kappa =\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{tan}\beta \mathrm{cos}\beta \mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{sin}\beta =0,$$
(138)
and the spinorial representation of the Maxwell equation (Eq.(129)) becomes

$$\mathbf{}\psi \gamma _{21}\lambda \psi \gamma _0=0$$
(139)
Note that $`\lambda `$ is such that

$$\rho \dot{\lambda }=\lambda \mathbf{}J.$$
(140)
The current $`J=\psi \gamma _0\stackrel{~}{\psi }`$ is not conserved unless $`\lambda `$ is constant. If we suppose also that

$$\mathbf{}J=0$$
(141)
we must have

$$\lambda =\text{const.}$$

Now, throughout these calculations we have assumed $`\mathrm{}=c=1`$. We observe that in Eq.(139) $`\lambda `$ has the units of (length)<sup>-1</sup>, and if we introduce the constants $`\mathrm{}`$ and $`c`$ we have to introduce another constant with unit of mass. If we denote this constant by $`m`$ such that

$$\lambda =\frac{mc}{\mathrm{}},$$
(142)
then Eq.(139) assumes a form which is identical to Dirac-Hestenes equation:

$$\mathbf{}\psi \gamma _{21}\frac{mc}{\mathrm{}}\psi \gamma _0=0.$$
(143)
It is true that we didn’t prove that Eq.(143) is really Dirac equation since the constant $`m`$ has to be identified in this case with the electron’s mass, and we do not have any good physical argument to make that identification, until now. In resume, Eq.(143) has been obtained from Maxwell equation by imposing some gauge conditions allowed by the hidden parameters in the solution of Eq.(1) for $`\psi `$ in terms of $`F`$. In view of that, it seems more appropriate instead of using the term mathematical Maxwell-Dirac equivalence of first kind to talk about a correspondence between that equations under which the two extra degrees of freedom of the Dirac-Hestenes spinor field are treated as hidden variables.

To end this section we observe that it is to earlier to know if the above results are of some physical value or only a mathematical curiosity. Let us wait…

## 7 Maxwell-Dirac Equivalence of Second Kind

We now look for a Hertz potential field $`\mathrm{\Pi }\mathrm{sec}^2(M)`$ satisfying the following (*non linear*) equation

$$\mathbf{}\mathrm{\Pi }=(\mathbf{}𝔊+m𝔓\gamma _3+m\mathrm{\Pi }\gamma _{012}_1)+\gamma _5(\mathbf{}𝔓+m𝔊\gamma _3\gamma _5m\mathrm{\Pi }\gamma _{012}_3)$$
(144)
where $`𝔊,𝔓\mathrm{sec}^0(M)`$, and $`m`$ is a constant. According to section 5 the electromagnetic and Stratton potentials are

$$A=\mathbf{}𝔊+m𝔓\gamma _3+m\mathrm{\Pi }\gamma _{012}_{1,}$$
(145)
$$\gamma _5S=\gamma _5(\mathbf{}𝔓+m𝔊\gamma _3\gamma _5m\mathrm{\Pi }\gamma _{012}_3),$$
(146)
and must satisfy the following subsidiary conditions,

$$\mathrm{}(\mathbf{}𝔊+m𝔓\gamma _3+m\mathrm{\Pi }\gamma _{012}_1)=J_e$$
(147)
$$\mathrm{}(\gamma _5(\mathbf{}𝔓+m𝔊\gamma _3\gamma _5m\mathrm{\Pi }\gamma _{012}_3))=0,$$
(148)
$$\mathrm{}𝔊+m\mathbf{}\mathrm{\Pi }\gamma _{012}_1=0,$$
(149)
$$\mathrm{}𝔓m\mathbf{}(\gamma _5\mathrm{\Pi }\gamma _{012}_3)=0.$$
(150)
Now, in the Clifford bundle formalism, as we already explained above, the following sum is a legitimate operation

$$\psi =𝔊+\mathrm{\Pi }+\gamma _5𝔓$$
(151)
and according to the results of section 2 defines $`\psi `$ as a (representative) of some Dirac-Hestenes spinor field. Now, we can verify that $`\psi `$ satisfies the equation

$$\mathbf{}\psi \gamma _{21}m\psi \gamma _0=0$$
(152)
which is as we already know a *representative* of the standard Dirac equation (for a free electron) in the Clifford bundle, which is a Dirac-Hestenes equation (Eq.(46)), written in an orthonormal coordinate spin frame.

The above developments suggest (consistently with the spirit of the generalized Hertz potential theory developed in section 5) the following interpretation. The Hertz potential field $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ generates the real electromagnetic field of the electron (The question of the physical dimensions of the Dirac-Hestenes and Maxwell fields is discussed in .) Moreover, the above developments suggest that the electron is “composed” of two “fundamental” currents, one of *electric* type and the *other* of magnetic type circulating at the ultra microscopic level, which generate the observed electric charge and magnetic moment of the electron. Then, it may be the case, as speculated by Maris , that the electromagnetic field of the electron can be spliced into two parts, each corresponding to a new kind of subelectron type particle, the *electrino*. Of course, the above developments leaves open the possibility to generate electrinos of fractional charges. We still study more properties of the above system in another paper.

## 8 Seiberg-Witten Equations

As it is well known, the original Seiberg-Witten (monopole) equations have been written in euclidean “spacetime” and for the self dual part of the field $`F`$. However, on Minkowski spacetime, of course, there are no self dual electromagnetic fields. Indeed, Eq.(15) implies that the unique solution (on Minkowski spacetime) of the equation $`F=F`$ is $`F=0`$. This is the main reason for the difficulties in interpreting that equations in this case, and indeed in  it was attempted an interpretation of that equations only for the case of euclidean manifolds. Here we want to derive and to give a possible interpretation to that equations based on a reasonable assumption.

Now, the analogous of Seiberg-Witten monopole equations read in the Clifford bundle formalism and on Minkowski spacetime as

$$\{\begin{array}{c}\mathbf{}\psi \gamma _{21}A\psi =0\hfill \\ F=\frac{1}{2}\psi \gamma _{21}\stackrel{~}{\psi }\hfill \\ F=dA\hfill \end{array}$$
(153)
where $`\psi \mathrm{sec}𝒞\mathrm{}^+(M,g)`$ is a Dirac-Hestenes spinor field, $`A\mathrm{sec}^1(M)\mathrm{sec}𝒞\mathrm{}(M,g)`$ is an electromagnetic vector potential and $`F\mathrm{sec}^2(M)\mathrm{sec}𝒞\mathrm{}(M,g)`$ is an electromagnetic field.

Our intention in this section is:

(a) To use the Maxwell Dirac-Equivalence of the first kind (proved in section 7) and an additional hypothesis to be discussed below to derive the Seiberg-Witten equations on Minkowski spacetime.

(b) to give a (possible) physical interpretation for that equations.

### 8.1 Derivation of Seiberg-Witten Equations

Step 1. We assume that the electromagnetic field $`F`$ appearing in the second of the Seiberg-Witten equations satisfy the free Maxwell equation, i.e., $`F=0.`$

Step 2. We use the Maxwell-Dirac equivalence of the first kind proved in section 6 to obtain Eq.(139),

$$\mathbf{}\psi \gamma _{21}\lambda \psi \gamma _0=0$$
(154)
Step 3. We introduce the ansatz

$$A=\lambda \psi \gamma _0\psi ^1.$$
(155)
This means that the electromagnetic potential (in our geometrical units) is identified with a multiply of the velocity field defined through Eq.(119). Under this condition Eq.(154) becomes

$$\mathbf{}\psi \gamma _{21}A\psi =0,$$
(156)
which is the first Seiberg-Witten equation!

### 8.2 A Possible Interpretation of the Seiberg-Witten Equations

Well, it is time to find an interpretation for Eq.(156). In order to do that we recall from section 2.5 that if $`\psi _\pm `$ are Weyl spinor fields (as defined through Eq.(37), then $`\psi _\pm `$ satisfy a Weyl equation, i.e.,

$$\mathbf{}\psi _\pm =0.$$
(157)
Consider now, the equation for $`\psi _+`$ coupled with an electromagnetic field $`A=gB\mathrm{sec}^1(M)\mathrm{sec}𝒞\mathrm{}(M,g)`$, i.e.,

$$\mathbf{}\psi _+\gamma _{21}+gB\psi _+=0.$$
(158)
This equation is invariant under the gauge transformations

$$\psi _+\psi _+e^{g\gamma _5\theta };BB+\theta .$$
(159)
Also, the equation for $`\psi _{}`$ coupled with an electromagnetic field $`gB\mathrm{sec}^1(M)`$ is

$$\mathbf{}\psi \gamma _{21}+gB\psi _{}=0.$$
(160)
which is invariant under the gauge transformations

$$\psi _{}\psi _{}e^{g\gamma _5\theta };BB\theta .$$
(161)
showing clearly that the fields $`\psi _+`$ and $`\psi _{}`$ carry opposite ‘charges’. Consider now the Dirac-Hestenes spinor fields $`\psi ^{},\psi ^{}`$ given by Eq.(41) which are eigenvectors of the *parity* operator and look for solutions of Eq.(156) such that $`\psi =\psi ^{}.`$ We have,

$$\mathbf{}\psi ^{}\gamma _{21}+gB\psi ^{}=0$$
(162)
which separates in two equations,

$$\mathbf{}\psi _+^{}+g\gamma _5B\psi _+^{}=0;\text{ }\mathbf{}\psi _{}^{}g\gamma _5B\psi _{}^{}=0.$$
(163)
These results show that when a Dirac-Hestenes spinor field associated with the first of the Seiberg-Witten equations is in an eigenstate of the parity operator, that spinor field describes a pair of particles with opposite ‘charges’. We interpret these particles (following Lochack , that suggested that an equation equivalent to Eq.(163) describe massless monopoles of opposite ‘charges’) as being *massless* ‘monopoles’ in *auto-interaction*. Observe that our proposed interaction is also consistent with the third of Seiberg-Witten equations, for $`F=dA`$ implies a *null* magnetic current.

It is now well known that Seiberg-Witten equations have non trivial solutions on Minkowski manifolds (see ). From the above results, in particular, taking into account the inversion formula (Eq.(59)) it seems to be possible to find whole family of solutions for the Seiberg-Witten equations, which has been here derived from a Maxwell-Dirac equivalence of first kind (proved in section 6) with the additional hypothesis that electromagnetic potential $`A`$ is parallel to the velocity field $`v`$ (Eq.(155)) of the system described by Eq.(119). We conclude that a consistent set of Seiberg-Witten equations on Minkowski spacetime must be

$$\{\begin{array}{c}\mathbf{}\psi \gamma _{21}A\psi =0\hfill \\ F=\frac{1}{2}\psi \gamma _{21}\stackrel{~}{\psi }\hfill \\ F=dA\hfill \\ A=\lambda \psi \gamma _0\psi ^1\hfill \end{array}$$
(164)
## 9 Conclusions

In this paper we exhibit two different kinds of possible Maxwell-Dirac equivalences (*MDE*). Although many will find the ideas presented above speculative from the physical point of view, we hope that they may become important, at least from a mathematical point of view. Indeed, not to long ago, researching solutions of the free Maxwell equation ($`F=0`$) satisfying the constraint $`F^20`$ (a necessary condition for derivation of a *MDE* of the first kind) conduced to the discovery of families of *superluminal* solutions of Maxwell equations and also of all the main linear relativistic equations of theoretical Physics (,). The study of the *MDE* of the second kind reveal an unsuspected interpretation of the Dirac equation, namely that the electron seems to be a composed system build up from the self interaction of two currents of ‘electrical’ and ‘magnetic’ types. Of course, it is to earlier to say if this discovery has any physical significance. We showed also, that by using the *MDE* of the first kind together with a reasonable hypothesis we can shed light on the meaning of Seiberg-Witten monopole equations on Minkowski spacetime. We hope that the results just found may be an indication that Seiberg-Witten equations (which are a fundamental key in the study of the topology of four manifolds equipped with an euclidean metric tensor), may play an important role in Physics, whose arena where phenomena occur is a Lorentzian manifold.

acknowledgements: The author is grateful to Drs. V. V. Fernández, A. Gsponer, R. A. Mosna, A. M. Moya, I. R. Porteous and J. Vaz Jr. for useful discussions. He is grateful also to CNPq for a senior research fellowship (contract 201560/82-8) and to the Department of Mathematical Sciences, University of Liverpool for a Visiting Professor position during the academic year 2001/2002 and hospitality.


format: text

text:
# Electric magnetic duality of the confining flux tube in Abelian-projected gluodynamics11footnote 1Talk given at “Confinement V”, Gargnano, Italy, 10-14 Sep. 2002.

( Max-Planck-Institut für Physik,
Föhringer Ring 6, München, Germany
E-mail: ykoma@mppmu.mpg.de)

## Abstract

The structure of the Abelian-projected (AP) flux tube in SU(2) gauge theory in the maximally Abelian gauge is studied by applying the Hodge decomposition to the Abelian Wilson loop. It is shown that the profile of the AP flux tube has the same structure as the classical flux tube solution in the dual Abelian Higgs model, which is composed of a Coulombic and a solenoidal electric field linked by monopole supercurrent.

It is known that the profiles of the classical flux-tube solution in the dual Abelian Higgs (DAH) model and the Abelian projected (AP) flux tube, observed in lattice simulations within the Abelian projection scheme in the maximally Abelian gauge (MAG), look quite similar . We then ask how these two kinds of profiles can be related each other. This question would be non-trivial since the AP flux tube contains the quantum effects at work in non-Abelian lattice gauge simulations while the DAH flux tube is a classical solution obtained by solving the field equations. To answer the question, it is important to clarify the structure of both flux tubes .

The DAH model, after applying the Hodge decomposition to the dual gauge field, is written, in terms of its magnetic and electric parts, $`B^{\mathrm{mag}}`$ and $`B^{\mathrm{ele}}=2\pi \mathrm{\Delta }^1\delta \mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{ele}}`$, as222We use differential form notations.

$`S_{\mathrm{DAH}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\beta _m}{2}}(dB^{\mathrm{mag}}+2\pi C^{\mathrm{ele}})^2`$ (1)
$`+|(d+i(B^{\mathrm{mag}}+B^{\mathrm{ele}}))\chi |^2+\lambda (|\chi |^2v^2)^2,`$
where $`C^{\mathrm{ele}}=\mathrm{\Delta }^1\delta j`$ with an external electric current $`j=\delta \mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{ele}}`$, and $`\chi `$ denotes the complex scalar monopole field. $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{ele}}`$ is the electric Dirac string. By solving the field equations taking into account the boundary conditions of fields determined by $`B^{\mathrm{ele}}`$, we see that the flux tube is led by the superposition of two components, a Coulombic electric field $`2\pi C^{\mathrm{ele}}`$, directly induced by the electric charges, and a solenoidal electric field, $`dB^{\mathrm{mag}}`$, linked by monopole supercurrent, $`k\delta dB^{\mathrm{mag}}0`$.

On the other hand, the leading action of AP gluodynamics (reconstructed from the effective monopole action up to self-interaction term) with an external electric current $`j`$, after the Hodge decomposition on the AP gauge field, may be given by

$$S_A=\frac{\beta _e}{2}(dA^{\mathrm{ele}}+2\pi C^{\mathrm{mag}})^2i(A^{\mathrm{ele}}+A^{\mathrm{mag}},j),$$
(2)
where $`A^{\mathrm{ele}}`$ and $`A^{\mathrm{mag}}=2\pi \mathrm{\Delta }^1\delta \mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{mag}}`$ denote the electric and magnetic parts of the AP gauge field, and $`C^{\mathrm{mag}}=\mathrm{\Delta }^1\delta k`$. Here, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{mag}}`$ is the magnetic Dirac string and $`k\delta \mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{mag}}`$ the monopole current, which should be summed over by taking into account $`\delta k=0`$. The electric coupling $`\beta _e=4/e^2`$ and the magnetic coupling in the DAH model $`\beta _m=1/g^2`$ must satisfy the Dirac quantization condition, $`4\pi ^2\beta _e\beta _m=1`$ $`(eg=4\pi )`$. Here, the Abelian Wilson loop consists of electric photon and magnetic monopole parts as $`W_A[j]\mathrm{exp}[i(A^{\mathrm{ele}}+A^{\mathrm{mag}},j)]=W_{\mathrm{𝑃ℎ}}[j]W_{\mathrm{𝑀𝑜}}[j]`$. We may call $`W_{\mathrm{𝑃ℎ}}[j]=\mathrm{exp}[i(A^{\mathrm{ele}},j)]`$ and $`W_{\mathrm{𝑀𝑜}}[j]=\mathrm{exp}[i(A^{\mathrm{mag}},j)]`$ the photon Wilson loop and the monopole Wilson loop, respectively.

The action (2) is translated to the DAH action (1) by the the path-integral duality transformation. Here, we find that while the photon Wilson loop is a source of $`C^{\mathrm{ele}}`$ in the DAH action, the monopole Wilson loop provides $`B^{\mathrm{ele}}`$, through the relation $`(A^{\mathrm{mag}},j)+(k,B^{\mathrm{ele}})=2\pi (\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{mag}},\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{ele}})=2\pi N`$, where $`NZZ`$. From these duality relations we come to a conjecture that if there is a one-to-one correspondence between the AP flux tube and the DAH flux tube as for the structure, we should be able to observe a composed structure for an AP flux tube like a DAH flux tube by measuring the profiles induced by the photon and the monopole Wilson loops: while the photon Wilson loop induces a Coulombic electric field, the monopole Wilson loop leads to a solenoidal electric field with monopole supercurrents. The superposition then will lead to a full AP flux tube.

In Fig. 1, we show lattice results on the flux-tube profiles (just on the midplane of the $`q`$-$`\overline{q}`$ system) measured with the complete Abelian, the photon, and the monopole Wilson loops as sources. The measurement has been done at $`\beta =2.5115`$ on a $`32^4`$ lattice after the MAG has been fixed. The $`q`$-$`\overline{q}`$ distances are $`r=6a`$ with the lattice spacing $`a=0.081`$ fm. Inside the Fig. 1 (left) we show the same electric field profiles, focussing on the region where $`E_z0`$. We see that these lattice results, the behavior of the profiles, strongly support our conjecture: although the electric field from the monopole Wilson loop takes positive value near the center, it turns negative beyond a certain radius $`\rho `$ (in the given case, $`\rho 5.5a`$). This signals the appearance of a solenoidal electric field, which cancels the Coulombic field induced by the photon Wilson loop. The sum of these two contribution then reproduces the profile from the complete Abelian Wilson loop. There is no correlation between the photon Wilson loop and monopole current as expected.

We then conclude that the structure of the AP flux tube and the DAH flux tube is basically the same. This observation seems to support that the path-integral duality transformation, the mapping $`eg`$, works very well and then allows us indeed to have an infrared effective theory which can be treated perturbatively or even in a classical manner. Behind this idea, in particular, we find that the singularities associated with the magnetic Dirac and the electric Dirac strings play an important role to connect both theories. This connection allows us to see the similar flux-tube profile no matter whether in the AP gauge theory or in the DAH model.

The author is grateful to M. Koma, E.-M. Ilgenfritz, T. Suzuki and M.I. Polikarpov for fruitful collaboration. The computation was done on the Vector-Parallel Supercomputer NEC SX-5 at the RCNP, Osaka University, Japan.