Bob makes a local gauge trans., can Alice undo with some fields?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Spinnor
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Fields Gauge Local
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

Alice provides Bob with the wave-function of a charged particle, which Bob then transforms using a local gauge transformation, represented as ψ --> exp[iqθ(X,t)]ψ. Alice cannot undo this transformation with electromagnetic fields due to the nature of gauge invariance, which indicates that these transformations are not observable and represent redundant degrees of freedom. The quantization of systems with gauge invariance requires gauge fixing to ensure observables remain independent of gauge choices. This is essential for maintaining a consistent quantum theory and removing negative norm states that arise from naive quantization.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of wave-functions in quantum mechanics
  • Familiarity with gauge invariance and its implications
  • Knowledge of quantization methods, including canonical and path integral approaches
  • Basic concepts of Hermitian operators and observables in quantum theory
NEXT STEPS
  • Study "Gauge Theories in Particle Physics" by Aitchison and Hey for insights on gauge invariance
  • Learn about gauge fixing techniques in quantum field theory
  • Explore the implications of negative norm states in quantum mechanics
  • Investigate the relationship between electromagnetic potentials and gauge-invariant fields
USEFUL FOR

Quantum physicists, students of quantum field theory, and researchers interested in gauge invariance and its applications in particle physics.

Spinnor
Gold Member
Messages
2,231
Reaction score
419
Say Alice gives Bob the wave-function, a momentum eigenstate, of a charged particle. Bob then makes a local gauge transformation on the wave-function,

ψ --> exp[iqθ(X,t)]ψ.

Can Alice now undo the local gauge transformation with the right addition (or subtraction?) of electromagnetic fields?

Hope that was worded right. Thanks for any help!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You have a (probably common) misconception of what gauge invariance means. A gauge invariance is a redundancy in the degrees of freedom that we use to describe a system. This means that the degrees of freedom controlled by a gauge transformation are not observables. So it does not make sense to say that an observer will perform a gauge transformation.

If you study the details of how to quantize a system with gauge invariance, either canonically or via a path integral, you will see the terms "gauge choice" or "gauge fixing." These are formal methods introduced to account for the fact that the extra gauge degrees of freedom need to be consistently removed to have a sensible quantum theory. It is important to show that the quantization procedure leaves the observables independent of the choice of gauge. This is done in any decent textbook on quantum field theory.

You might ask, why were the redundant degrees of freedom introduced in the first place? The short answer is that naive quantization of a field that is a Lorentz vector results in the situation that some of the components of the field seem to have a negative norm, ##|\chi|^2 < 0##.. Since the norm of a state must be positive in order to have a sensible description of probabilities in quantum mechanics, we must find some way to get rid of these states. It turns out that gauge invariance provides such a mechanism. Removing the redundant gauge degrees of freedom also removes the negative norm states, leaving a sensible quantum theory.

In ordinary quantum mechanics, it should already be clear that absolute phases of wavefunctions are not observables. Observables themselves can be expressed as expectation values of Hermitian operators computed in the particular state

$$ \langle A \rangle = \int dV ~ \psi^* \hat{A} \psi, $$

so it's clear that the phase of ##\psi## cancels against the phase of ##\psi^*##. Certain measurements can be used to measure a relative phase between two states, such as are responsible for interference patterns, but the common part of the phase shared by two states is similarly not an observable.

Finally, the electromagnetic field is defined in terms of the electromagnetic potentials in precisely such a way that the fields are gauge-invariant, while the potentials transform. Consistent with the unobservable nature of gauge choice, changing the electromagnetic field in a lab cannot lead to a gauge transformation on some state.
 
It is good to know what you don't know. There is a nice presentation of gauge invariance of Maxwell's equations in "Gauge Theories in Particle Physics" Aitchision and Hey. I will reread that section with your post in mind.

Thank you!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 75 ·
3
Replies
75
Views
10K
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K