Classical Electrodynamics: Explaining the Lorentz Gauge Condition

AI Thread Summary
The Lorentz gauge condition in classical electrodynamics simplifies the wave equations for scalar and vector potentials, facilitating easier solutions for charge and current distributions. This constraint, expressed as the divergence of the four-potential being zero, is crucial for maintaining Poincaré invariance in the equations of motion. While the potentials themselves lack direct physical meaning, the gauge condition aids in solving relativistic equations more efficiently. Different gauges, such as the Coulomb gauge, may be more suitable for specific problems, highlighting the importance of gauge choice in electrodynamics. Ultimately, the physical meaning of the Lorentz gauge lies in its role in simplifying complex equations while ensuring consistency with relativistic principles.
nrjsingh413
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
what is physical meaning of Lorentz gauge condition in classical electrodynamics??
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Actually the constraint

$$
\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial\phi}{\partial t} + \nabla \cdot \mathbf A = 0
$$

is due to Lorenz (Lorenz and Lorentz are easily confused):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorenz_gauge_condition

This equation is sometimes used because it leads to simple and symmetric wave equations for the scalar and vector potential, which are then easily solved for known charge and current distribution and initial conditions on the field.

The potentials are auxiliary functions without direct physical meaning. The meaning of the constraint is really just simplification of the relativistic equations so they become nice and simple.
 
You confuse me a bit with the speed-of-light factor. In relativistically covariant notation, it's
\partial_{\mu} A^{\mu}=0.
Split into temporal and spatial components this reads
\partial_0 A^0+\vec{\nabla} \cdot \vec{A}=\frac{1}{c} \partial_t \Phi + \vec{\nabla} \cdot \vec{A}.
This is, of course, in Heaviside-Lorentz units.

The good thing with this particular gauge, which should indeed be named after the Danish physicists Ludvig Lorenz instead of the Dutch physicist Hendrik Antoon Lorentz, because Lorenz was the first, using this gauge condition.

The physical merit of this particular gauge is clear: It's a Poincare invariant condition, leading to Poincare invariant equations of motion for the four-potential that at the same time separate into the components. This makes it particularly nice for radiation problems.

For other problems like the description of bound states in quantum mechanics other gauges are more convenient. In this case the Coulomb gauge is good.

It always depends on the physical problem you want to solve, what's the most appropriate gauge constraint. Choosing a gauge is an art comparable to the one to find the most convenient set of coordinates to solve a problem.
 
nrjsingh413 said:
what is physical meaning of Lorentz gauge condition in classical electrodynamics??
Can you see that maxwell eqn are total 8 in numbers but there are only 6 quantities to determine.
 
Thread 'Gauss' law seems to imply instantaneous electric field propagation'
Imagine a charged sphere at the origin connected through an open switch to a vertical grounded wire. We wish to find an expression for the horizontal component of the electric field at a distance ##\mathbf{r}## from the sphere as it discharges. By using the Lorenz gauge condition: $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A} + \frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=0\tag{1}$$ we find the following retarded solutions to the Maxwell equations If we assume that...
Maxwell’s equations imply the following wave equation for the electric field $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}}{\partial t^2} = \frac{1}{\varepsilon_0}\nabla\rho+\mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf J}{\partial t}.\tag{1}$$ I wonder if eqn.##(1)## can be split into the following transverse part $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}_T-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}_T}{\partial t^2} = \mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf{J}_T}{\partial t}\tag{2}$$ and longitudinal part...
Thread 'Recovering Hamilton's Equations from Poisson brackets'
The issue : Let me start by copying and pasting the relevant passage from the text, thanks to modern day methods of computing. The trouble is, in equation (4.79), it completely ignores the partial derivative of ##q_i## with respect to time, i.e. it puts ##\partial q_i/\partial t=0##. But ##q_i## is a dynamical variable of ##t##, or ##q_i(t)##. In the derivation of Hamilton's equations from the Hamiltonian, viz. ##H = p_i \dot q_i-L##, nowhere did we assume that ##\partial q_i/\partial...

Similar threads

Back
Top