Static electric field in Quantum Field Theory?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the treatment of static electric fields within the framework of quantum field theory (QFT), particularly focusing on the role of the scalar potential A° and the use of different gauge conditions. Participants explore whether static electric fields can be described using combinations of propagating photons and the implications of gauge fixing on the degrees of freedom in QFT.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that static electric fields in QFT can be described using proper combinations of transversely propagating photons.
  • Others argue that the reduction of degrees of freedom from four to two is related to gauge fixing, with the A°=0 gauge being a clear example.
  • A participant mentions that A° is a Lagrangian multiplier and not a dynamical field, leading to a discussion about the implications of this in terms of the Gauss law and physical states.
  • There is a suggestion that solving the Gauss law constraint is analogous to solving the Poisson equation in classical electrodynamics, which generates the Coulomb interaction term.
  • Some participants express a desire for A° to remain significant in QFT, despite its non-dynamical status.
  • Questions arise regarding Feynman's use of all four polarizations of the electromagnetic field in QED, with some suggesting that two of these polarizations tend to cancel out in certain contexts.
  • It is noted that different gauges, such as the Lorentz gauge, have implications for the treatment of unphysical degrees of freedom and the calculation of physical amplitudes.
  • There is mention of the need for physical gauges when considering low-energy regimes and bound states, contrasting with the use of perturbation theory in scattering calculations.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the significance of A° in QFT and the treatment of polarizations in QED. There is no consensus on the best approach to describe static electric fields or the implications of gauge fixing, indicating multiple competing perspectives remain.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on gauge conditions and the unresolved nature of how static fields are best represented in QFT. The discussion also highlights the complexity of quantizing gauge theories and the role of unphysical degrees of freedom.

Spinnor
Gold Member
Messages
2,231
Reaction score
419
In quantum field theory do we "describe" static electric fields with proper combinations of transvers propagating photons? Is that a basis? Is there a basis using the longitudinal and timelike photons to describe static fields?

Thanks for any help!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The reduction of the degrees of freedom from four to two is related to gauge fixing and looks different based on the gauge condition you use. The most transparent approach (which unfortunately is rarely discussed in lectures and textbooks) is the A°=0 gauge.

A° is not a dynamical field but a Lagrangian multiplier. This is due to the fact that there is no conjugate momentum for A°, i.e. no time derivative ∂0A0 b/c F°°=0 due to anti-symmetry of Fαβ. Therefore fixing A°=0 is reasonable from the very beginning.

This leaves us with a constraint generated by the Lagrangian multiplier A°, the so-called Gauss law G(x) ~ 0. This constraint is time-independent, i.e. commutes with the Hamiltonian [H,G(x)]=0 and can be solved for physical states, i.e. not as an operator equation G(x)=0 which would contradict commutation relations, but

G(x)|phys> = 0.

The presence of the Gauss law is related to a residual gauge symmetry, i.e. time-independent gauge transformations χ(x), ∂0χ(x) = 0 respecting

A'°(x) = A°(x) - ∂0χ(x) = 0.

Solving the Gauss law constraint is equivalent to solving the Poisson equation

ΔA°(x) = ρ(x)

in classical electrodynamics resulting

A°(x) = Δ-1 ρ(x)

which generates the 'static' Coulomb interaction term for the charge density.

V_\text{Coulomb} = e^2 \int_{\mathbb{R}^3 \times \mathbb{R}^3}d^3x\;d^3y\;\frac{\rho(x)\,\rho(y)}{4\pi\,|x-y|}

My recommendatio is always

Quantum Mechanics of Gauge Fixing
F. Lenz, H.W.L. Naus, K. Ohta, M. Thies
Annals of Physics, Volume 233, Issue 1, p. 17-50.
Abstract: In the framework of the canonical Weyl gauge formulation of QED, the quantum mechanics of gauge fixing is discussed. Redundant quantum mechanical variables are eliminated by means of unitary transformations and Gauss′s law. This results in representations of the Weyl-gauge Hamiltonian which contain only unconstrained variables. As a remnant of the original local gauge invariance global residual symmetries may persist. In order to identify these and to handle infrared problems and related "Gribov ambiguities," it is essential to compactify the configuration space. Coulomb, axial, and light-cone representation of QED are derived. The naive light-cone approach is put into perspective. Finally, the Abelian Higgs model is studied; the unitary gauge representation of this model is derived and implications concerning the symmetry of the Higgs phase are discussed.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Spinnor
Thank you Tom! So A° is useful in classical electrodynamics but in QED we can just discard A°, ouch %^). I want A° to still be important %^(.

Didn't Feynman use all four polarizations of the electromagnetic field in his version of QED but that two of the polarizations tended to cancel in some sense?

Thanks again!
 
Last edited:
Spinnor said:
Didn't Feynman use all four polarizations of the electromagnetic field in his version of QED but that two of the polarizations tended to cancel in some sense?

Thanks again!

In Feynman's book Quantum Electrodynamics, page 126, "The Sum over Four Polarizations"?
 
Spinnor said:
So A° is useful in classical electrodynamics but in QED we can just discard A° ...
It has not so much to do with classical electrodynamics or quantum electrodynamics but with the Hamiltonian analysis. A° is non-dynamical and if you want to express your theory in terms of dynamical d.o.f. = physical polarizations you must eliminate it.

Spinnor said:
I want A° to still be important
It is - but not as a dynamical field.

Spinnor said:
Didn't Feynman use all four polarizations of the electromagnetic field in his version of QED but that two of the polarizations tended to cancel in some sense?
There are several ways to quantize gauge theories. In QED the Lorentz gauge condition is sometimes preferred due to its explicit covariance. In this gauge A° is not eliminated and the unphysical d.o.f. freedom cancel in physical amplitudes. In QCD additional d.o.f., so called Fadeev-Popov ghosts are required in the Lorentz gauge to cancel the unphysical d.o.f.

But afaik in all these gauges there is no low-energy potential term. If you want to calculate scattering cross sections and use perturbation theory this is fine, but for the low-energy regime, bound states etc. physical gauges seem to be more appropriate.
 
Tom, thank you for your expertise!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
3K