How Does the Vector Potential Transform in the Flux-Tube Model for Anyons?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter ReyChiquito
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the transformation of the vector potential in the flux-tube model for anyons, specifically focusing on the mathematical derivation and implications of the vector potential in polar coordinates. Participants explore the relationship between the vector potential and the geometry of the coordinate system used, as well as the implications for the Hamiltonian of a system of anyons.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a Hamiltonian for a system of anyons and introduces a vector potential derived from a book, questioning the correctness of their transformation into polar coordinates.
  • Another participant points out an error in the last step of the transformation, suggesting that a factor of r is missing due to the nature of the polar coordinate transformation.
  • A subsequent participant asks for clarification on the origin of the factor, inquiring whether it relates to calculus or tensor metrics.
  • Further discussion highlights the importance of the radial coordinate in polar coordinates and its relation to the length differential.
  • One participant expresses confusion about why the transformation is not a simple change of variables, questioning the necessity of including the factor and the implications for the tangent vector in polar coordinates.
  • Another participant humorously requests a simplified explanation of the topic.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the need to include the factor of r in the transformation, but there remains uncertainty regarding the underlying reasons for its necessity and the implications of the coordinate system used. The discussion does not reach a consensus on the best way to understand these transformations.

Contextual Notes

Participants express varying levels of familiarity with the mathematical concepts involved, indicating potential gaps in foundational knowledge related to quantum mechanics and coordinate transformations.

ReyChiquito
Messages
119
Reaction score
1
I have a simple question regarding the flux-tube model for anyons. It may sound complicated but it isnt. So here we go.

Considering the interaction term [tex]L_{s}=\frac{\hbar\theta}{\pi}\dot{\phi}[/tex] where [tex]\frac{\theta}{\pi}=\alpha[/tex] is called "anyon parameter" (0 for bosons, 1 for fermions), and [tex]\phi[/tex] is the relative angle between particles.

I have proven that the Hamiltonian in relative coordinates for that kind of system can be written as
[tex]H_{r}=\frac{p_{r}^2}{m}+\frac{(p_{\phi}-\hbar\alpha)^2}{mr^2}.}[/tex]

In order to generalize the Hamiltonian for a N partices system, the book (Fractional Statistics and Quantum Theory by Khare) introduces the next vector potential:

[tex]a_{i}(\bold{r})=\frac{\Phi}{2\pi}\frac{\epsilon_{ij}r_{j}}{\bold{r^2}}[/tex] where [tex]\epsilon_{ij}[/tex] is the antisimetric tensor (i asume).

Then the book goes
[tex]\mbox{Thus }a_{x}=\frac{\Phi}{2\pi}\frac{y}{x^2+y^2}\mbox{, }a_{y}=\frac{\Phi}{2\pi}\frac{-x}{x^2+y^2}\mbox{, or in polar coordinates }[/tex]
[tex]a_{r}=0\mbox{, }a_{\phi}=\frac{\Phi}{2\pi}[/tex]

I know it seems simple to deduce this step but i don't get it, here is what I've done:
[tex]a_{i}(\bold{r})=\frac{\Phi}{2\pi\bold{r^2}}\left(\begin{array}{cc}y\\-x\end{array}\right)=\frac{\Phi}{2\pi\bold{r^2}}\left(\begin{array}{cc}rsin\phi\\-rcos\phi\end{array}\right)=-\frac{\Phi}{2\pi}\frac{1}{r}\bold{\hat{\phi}}[/tex]

What am i doing wrong??

I asked a friend of mine and he mentioned something about the metric. To tell you the truth, i don't know what he is talking about. Can anybody explain this to me please?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Yea that looks right up to the last step, you basically have it in front of you *the last equality is wrong tho*.. Keep in mind you pick up a factor of r from the transformation..

You know, ds^2 = dr^2 + r^2 d(theta)^2
 
Thx.. i knew i was missing something.

Can you explain me from where this factor arrives?

Its directly from calculus (i.e. jacobian) or has to do something with tensors and metric?
 
It's the radial coordinate of the polar coordinates. The formula Haelfix gave is the length differential in polar coordinates.
 
I understand that, maybe i need to refrace my question.

Why this isn't an ordinary change of variables?

I don't see any rates involved so i don't understand why do i have to include that factor.

If this where a simple calculus problem the tangent vector can be described in polar coordinates as
[tex]\vec{T}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}-y\\x\end{array}\right)=r\hat{\phi}[/tex]

if i used
[tex]\vec{T}=r^2\hat{\phi}[/tex]

i would be describing the wrong point in space right?, plus, how to correct the minus sign? isn't supossed to be a right hand system?

I KNOW that what I am doing is wrong, and i understand that the r factor must be included and the book is right, but i don't see any reason for including that factor.

Am i missing something simple and i need to review my clac notes?

ps. my quantum mechanics course sucked big time, it was like half spetial functions course and half "learn the dirac algebra and the conmutator operator", i harldy saw any of the stuff u should see in this subject (ie Cohen)
 
Last edited:
Dumping here. Just to see if anybody can explain it to me like i was a 4 year old :P
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K