Can classical EM be derived from QFT?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter maka89
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Classical Em Qft
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion explores whether classical electromagnetism (EM) can be derived from quantum field theory (QFT), specifically through the lens of gauge invariance in the Lagrangian formulation of the Klein-Gordon and Dirac equations. Participants examine the theoretical implications and methods of deriving classical EM from QFT principles.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that classical EM can be derived from QFT by demanding phase invariance in the free field Lagrangian for the Klein-Gordon or Dirac equations.
  • Another participant describes a Lagrangian for special relativistic point mechanics and discusses how it leads to the relativistic equation of motion for a particle in an electromagnetic field, emphasizing the role of gauge invariance.
  • A different participant clarifies that the derivation should focus on the Lagrangian density for the Klein-Gordon or Dirac field and references Griffiths' work on local gauge invariance generating electrodynamics.
  • One participant acknowledges a misunderstanding and elaborates on the simplicity of deriving EM interactions from QFT, mentioning the necessity of gauge invariance for massless spin-1 fields and the implications for classical limits.
  • Another participant notes that reaching the classical limit from QFT involves quantum many-body theory and coarse-graining procedures, which lead to macroscopic electrodynamics.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the methods and implications of deriving classical EM from QFT. Some agree on the foundational role of gauge invariance, while others highlight complexities and additional steps required to reach classical descriptions. No consensus is reached on the simplicity or practicality of the derivation methods discussed.

Contextual Notes

The discussion involves assumptions about gauge invariance and the nature of fields in QFT, as well as the dependence on specific formulations of Lagrangians. The implications of these assumptions on the derivation process remain unresolved.

maka89
Messages
66
Reaction score
4
In QFT, one can derive the equations for particles interacting electromagnetically by demanding phase invariance for the field when writing down the free field lagrangian for the klein-gordon or dirac equation.

Question: Does classical EM follow from this method also? (At least theoretically, given that you know the fine structure constant). If not what comes in the way?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Almost :-). The most simple way to describe special relativistic point mechanics is to use a Lagrangian of the form
$$L=\frac{m}{2} \dot{x}^{\mu} \dot{x}_{\mu} + L_{\text{int}}(x^{\mu},\dot{x}^{\mu}),$$
where the dot denotes derivatives with respect to proper time and ##L_{\text{int}}## is homogeneous of degree 1 wrt. ##\dot{x}^{\mu}##, i.e.,
$$\dot{x}^{\mu} \frac{\partial L_{\text{int}}}{\partial \dot{x}^{\mu}}=L_{\text{int}}.$$
Then ##\tau## is an affine parameter, i.e., since ##L## is not dependent explicitly on ##\tau##, the quantity
$$H=p_{\mu} \dot{x}^{\mu}-L=\frac{m}{2} \dot{x}^{\mu} \dot{x}_{\mu}=\text{const},$$
and thus you can choose ##\tau## as the proper time, so that ##H=mc^2/2##.

The most simple equation of motion, fulfilling this properties, is provided by
$$L_{\int}=\frac{q}{c} A_{\mu} \dot{x}^{\mu},$$
where ##A_{\mu}=A_{\mu}(x)## is a vector field and ##q## a parameter. Then the Euler-Lagrange equations give
$$p_{\mu}=m \dot{q}_{\mu}+\frac{q}{c} A_{\mu},\\
\dot{p}_{\mu} = m \ddot{q}_{\mu} +\frac{q}{c} \dot{u}^{\nu} \partial_{\nu} A_{\mu}=\frac{q}{c} \dot{q}^{\nu} \partial_{\mu} A_{\nu}$$
or
$$m \ddot{q}_{\mu} = \frac{q}{c} F_{\mu \nu} \dot{x}^{\nu}, \quad F_{\mu \nu}=\partial_{\mu} A_{\nu}-\partial_{\nu} A_{\mu},$$
and that's the relativistic equation of motion for a particle in the electromagnetic field, represented by the four-potential ##A_{\mu}##.

It is clear that only ##F_{\mu \nu}## is observable, and that indeed the equations of motion do not change under the gauge transformation
$$A_{\mu}'=A_{\mu}+\partial_{\mu} \chi,$$
where ##\chi## is an arbitrary scalar field. Indeed the change in the Lagrangian is a total derivative of a function of ##x## only:
$$L_{\text{int}}'=L_{\text{int}} + \frac{q}{c} \dot{x}^{\mu} \partial_{\mu} \chi=L_{\text{int}} + \frac{q}{c}+\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d} \tau} \chi.$$
The equation of motion is thus gauge invariant.
 
Thanks vanshees71, that was interesting. I did, however mean the lagrangian density for the klein-gordon or dirac field.

One gets the feynman diagram vertices for EM by demanding local gauge invariance in the lagrangian of the field(i read this in chap 11.3 in griffiths introduction to elementary particles, which there are pdfs of online).

From Griffiths:
"Thus the requirement of local gauge invariance, applied to the free Dirac Lagrangian, generates all of electrodynamics, and specifies the current produced by Dirac particles."

Is this a simpler(in the sense of less parameters), yet way less practical, way of deriving classical electrodynamics(Maxwells eqs.)?
 
Last edited:
Yes, sure. I obviously misunderstood the question. I thought you mean, how to derive the em. interaction in classical theory, and I took it to mean classical theory of point charges.

Your case is, from an advanced point of view, simpler since in QFT you can start from the unitary irreducible representations of the Poincare group and formally derive how local microcausal relativistic QFTs with a stable ground state must look like. You are lead to massive and massless fields for the various spin 0, 1/2, 1,...

It also turns out that a massless spin-1 field is necessarily described as a gauge field, if you demand that there are only a discrete (finite) number of intrinsic degrees of freedom as it should be for spin-like quantities. This immediately lead to the conclusion that any massless field of spin ##s \geq 1/2## has only two (and not ##2s+1##) polarizations (e.g., helicities ##\pm s##).

Now this enforces you for an interacting theory of massless spin-1 field to obey U(1) gauge invariance and one very successful way is "minimal coupling". In this sense Griffiths is right when he says that from this the entire Maxwell theory of electromagnetism follows as the classical limit of QED.

To get to the classical limit you have to do quantum many-body theory and some coarse-graining procedure (e.g., gradient expansion and Markov approximation of the Kadanoff-Baym equations). In linear-response approximation this leads to the usual constitutive relations for macroscopic electrodynamics.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: bhobba and dextercioby

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
917
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
5K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K