How does QM represent the Poynting vector?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

Quantum Mechanics (QM) and Quantum Electrodynamics (QED) redefine the classical concept of electromagnetic (EM) fields by introducing subatomic particle interactions, specifically through the representation of EM wave propagation by photons. In Quantum Field Theory (QFT), fields are integral, with the Maxwell field included in the QED Lagrangian, demonstrating that particles like bosons are quanta of these fields rather than replacements. The discussion clarifies misconceptions about photon trajectories and emphasizes that the Poynting vector, which describes energy flow in classical EM fields, does not apply to single photons.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Quantum Mechanics (QM) principles
  • Familiarity with Quantum Electrodynamics (QED)
  • Knowledge of Quantum Field Theory (QFT) concepts
  • Basic grasp of classical electromagnetic theory
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the Lagrangian formulation in Quantum Field Theory
  • Explore the role of the Maxwell field in Quantum Electrodynamics
  • Investigate the concept of the Poynting vector in classical electromagnetism
  • Learn about the quantization of fields and the nature of bosons
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, students of quantum mechanics, and anyone interested in the intersection of classical and quantum theories of electromagnetism.

Rockazella
Messages
96
Reaction score
0
It’s my understanding that the field, whether it is electric, magnetic or EM field/wave is more of a classical concept. QM or QED completely replaces the field idea with subatomic particle interactions and reactions.
In classical field theory it’s said that perpendicular to the propagation of an EM wave there are electric and magnetic fields. In QM the propagation of an EM wave is represented by a photon.

My question is how does QM represent the electric and magnetic ‘fields’ that are perpendicular the direction of the moving photon?

If anything I’ve said prior to the question strikes you as incorrect feel free to correct me.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Originally posted by Rockazella
It’s my understanding that the field, whether it is electric, magnetic or EM field/wave is more of a classical concept. QM or QED completely replaces the field idea with subatomic particle interactions and reactions.
In classical field theory it’s said that perpendicular to the propagation of an EM wave there are electric and magnetic fields. In QM the propagation of an EM wave is represented by a photon.

My question is how does QM represent the electric and magnetic ‘fields’ that are perpendicular the direction of the moving photon?

If anything I’ve said prior to the question strikes you as incorrect feel free to correct me.

Surprise! Quantum Field Theory has fields in it!

The fields are described in the Lagrangean, which is where all QFT starts. Indeed the Maxwell field is part of the QED Lagrangean. After they quantize they still have fields. The particles (bosons) are quanta of the fields, which doesn't mean they replace the fields but rather they add quantum behavior. There has been lately a move by some physicists to remove particles entirely and do quantum field theory with just the fields.
 
Originally posted by Rockazella
electric and magnetic ‘fields’ that are perpendicular the direction of the moving photon?

As I said so many times before in these forums: I think this is a misconception.
Let me please state again my opinion:
- There is no such thing as a 'photon trajectory'.
- Thus, there is no 'direction of the moving photon'
- A single photon cannot be described by a field whatsoever.

Rockazella, I think what you're talking about is the Poynting vector, i.e. the vector of energy flow within an e.m. field - a purely classical concept.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K