The zeroth component of a particle's four-momentum is the energy divided by the speed of light. For a free particle of mass $m$, that is
$$p_0 = \frac{E_{p}}{c} = \sqrt{\vec{\bf p}^2 + m^2c^2}.$$
Now, the Dirac equation for a free electron can be put in the hamiltonian form
$$ \hat{H} \psi = i \hbar \frac{\partial \psi}{\partial t} $$
with
$$ \hat{H} = -ic\hbar \mathbf{\alpha}\cdot\mathbf{\nabla} + \beta m c^2 .$$
My question is: if the Hamiltonian is still to be interpreted as the energy, shouldn't there be a correspondence (equality, I would expect) between said hamiltonian and the particle energy given by the relativistic dispersion relation?
More specifically, if I promote the momenta in the relativistic dispertion relation to operators, shouldn't the resulting operator $\hat{p}_0$ be equal to $\hat{H}/c$?
Edit: my reasoning to believe they are different is this article: https://journals.aps.org/pra/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevA.89.052101 in which they define the $\hat{p_0}$ in the same way I did (eq. 5 in the article) and they call $\hat{H}_0$ the Dirac free particle hamiltonian, and later, both these operators appear in the same equation as if they are different things. For example, in eq. 8 they give the energy subspace projectors as:
$$ \hat{\Lambda}^{\pm} = \frac{1}{2}\left(1 \pm \frac{\hat{H}_0}{c \hat{p}_0}\right) $$
Edit 2: arvix version of said article: https://arxiv.org/abs/1403.0550