I Coulomb gauge Lorenz invariant?

Sebas4
Messages
13
Reaction score
2
TL;DR Summary
What is meant by Coulomb gauge not being Lorenz invariant?
Hey,

What is meant by Coulomb gauge not being Lorenz invariant?

The Coulomb gauge is just a constraint on \mathbf{A} and \phi and thus it is independent of inertial frame.

I posted the question in the wrong section. This question is in the context of QFT. The notes says:
A disadvantage of working in Coulomb gauge is that it breaks Lorentz invariance.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Sebas4 said:
TL;DR Summary: What is meant by Coulomb gauge not being Lorenz invariant?

What is meant by Coulomb gauge not being Lorenz invariant?
It means that if you have some four-potential ##A^\mu=(\phi,\vec A)## where ##A^\mu## satisfies the Coulomb gauge condition in some unprimed inertial frame, then ##A^{\mu'}=\Lambda^{\mu'}_\mu A^\mu## generally will not satisfy the Coulomb gauge condition in the primed inertial frame. It will still be a perfectly valid four-potential in the primed frame, but just not in the Coulomb gauge.
 
Of course you can write the Coulomb gauge in a manifestly covariant way.

The point is that usually you take an arbitrary inertial frame ##\Sigma^{*}## and write the Coulomb-gauge condition in (1+3)-notation as
$$\vec{\nabla}^* \cdot \vec{A}^*=0.$$
You can make this manifestly covariant by introducing the four-vector with components ##U^*=(1,0,0,0)## in this frame.

Then the Coulomb-gauge condition in a general frame reads
$$\partial_{\mu} (A^{\mu}-U^{\mu} U^{\nu} A_{\nu})=0.$$
The point is that you now have introduced a preferred inertial reference frame to define your gauge constraint.

Using this covariant notation, you get a manifestly covariant photon propagator, containing the ##U^{\mu}## of course. Now the important point is that due to gauge-invariance for any physically observable quantities like S-matrix elements for scatterings between photons and electrons+positrons in standard spinor QED the frame-dependent terms, i.e., those containing ##U^{\mu}## cancel thanks to the Ward identities.

The advantage of the Coulomb gauge is that you have a complete gauge fixing and no unphysical degrees of freedom. The disadvantage is this "fictitious breaking of Lorentz symmetry" due to the introduction of an arbitrary reference frame, i.e., the vector ##U^{\mu}##.

You can also use a manifestly covariant gauge like the Landau gauge, demanding ##\partial_{\mu} A^{\mu}=0##, but this fixes the gauge only partially, and you have to deal with unphysical degrees of freedom like longitudinal and timelike photons, which however also cancel using the Gupta-Bleuler formalism. The advantage is that there's no arbitrary preferred frame and the Feynman rules lead to simpler expressions.
 
  • Like
Likes dextercioby and Dale
Thread 'Can this experiment break Lorentz symmetry?'
1. The Big Idea: According to Einstein’s relativity, all motion is relative. You can’t tell if you’re moving at a constant velocity without looking outside. But what if there is a universal “rest frame” (like the old idea of the “ether”)? This experiment tries to find out by looking for tiny, directional differences in how objects move inside a sealed box. 2. How It Works: The Two-Stage Process Imagine a perfectly isolated spacecraft (our lab) moving through space at some unknown speed V...
Does the speed of light change in a gravitational field depending on whether the direction of travel is parallel to the field, or perpendicular to the field? And is it the same in both directions at each orientation? This question could be answered experimentally to some degree of accuracy. Experiment design: Place two identical clocks A and B on the circumference of a wheel at opposite ends of the diameter of length L. The wheel is positioned upright, i.e., perpendicular to the ground...
In Philippe G. Ciarlet's book 'An introduction to differential geometry', He gives the integrability conditions of the differential equations like this: $$ \partial_{i} F_{lj}=L^p_{ij} F_{lp},\,\,\,F_{ij}(x_0)=F^0_{ij}. $$ The integrability conditions for the existence of a global solution ##F_{lj}## is: $$ R^i_{jkl}\equiv\partial_k L^i_{jl}-\partial_l L^i_{jk}+L^h_{jl} L^i_{hk}-L^h_{jk} L^i_{hl}=0 $$ Then from the equation: $$\nabla_b e_a= \Gamma^c_{ab} e_c$$ Using cartesian basis ## e_I...
Back
Top