Continuity equation for Schrodinger equation with minimal coupling

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the continuity equation derived from the Schrödinger equation with minimal coupling to the electromagnetic field in the Coulomb gauge, expressed as ∂t ρ = ∇ · j, where j is proportional to Re[p* D p]. A question is raised about the existence of a generalized continuity equation that does not rely on the Coulomb gauge. It is suggested that while the current equation is gauge-invariant under specific transformations, finding a form that avoids the Coulomb gauge constraint remains challenging. The potential generalization would lead to an equation for ρ that does not maintain the conventional structure of a temporal derivative plus a gradient of current. The discussion emphasizes the complexity of deriving such an equation without losing the essence of probability conservation.
nembokid
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
The Schrodinger equation with the minimal coupling to the Electromagnetic field, in the Coulomb gauge \nabla \cdot A, has a continuity equation \partial_t \rho = \nabla \cdot j where j \propto Re[p^* D p] (D is the covariant gradient D= \nabla + iA.

My question is: is there any continuity equation which generalized the preceding one, without having to fix the Coulomb gauge? I think that, being the Schrodinger equation nonrelativistic, a choice of a noncovariant gauge is necessary, but maybe some ugly-to-see equation still exists.

thank you
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It seems to me that this continuity equation is gauge-invariant. It means the probability conservation.
 
Last edited:
It's gauge invariant as long as you perform gauge transformations compatible with the Coulomb gauge constraint (which does not fix completely the gauge, as is well known). But what about an equation which does not require this constraint?
 
It is the same. Start from the Schroedinger equation with an arbitrary A and φ and find the equation for ρ.
 
But this equation for \rho has no longer the form of a temporal derivative plus the gradient of a current (at least, I can't see how to put it in this form).
 
It should not be a gradient but divergence of current: divj.
 
Time reversal invariant Hamiltonians must satisfy ##[H,\Theta]=0## where ##\Theta## is time reversal operator. However, in some texts (for example see Many-body Quantum Theory in Condensed Matter Physics an introduction, HENRIK BRUUS and KARSTEN FLENSBERG, Corrected version: 14 January 2016, section 7.1.4) the time reversal invariant condition is introduced as ##H=H^*##. How these two conditions are identical?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
496
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
704
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K