Fourier components of vector potential

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the nature of the coefficients a^{(\mu)}_\mathbf{k}(t) and \bar{a}^{(\mu)}_\mathbf{k}(t) in the equation for the vector potential. There is confusion regarding whether these coefficients are complex or real, particularly since the text suggests that the bar indicates complex conjugates. It is noted that Fourier coefficients are typically complex, as they arise from the Fourier transform of functions. The consensus leans towards the idea that the coefficients must be complex due to the complex nature of the basis vectors \mathbf{e}^{(1)}(\mathbf{k}) and \mathbf{e}^{(-1)}(\mathbf{k}). Ultimately, the discussion highlights the complexity of understanding vector potentials in electromagnetic field quantization.
dkin
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
Hi all,

I was reading the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quanti...d#Electromagnetic_field_and_vector_potential" and I am a little bit confused.

In this equation defining the vector potential

\mathbf{A}(\mathbf{r}, t) = \sum_\mathbf{k}\sum_{\mu=-1,1} \left( \mathbf{e}^{(\mu)}(\mathbf{k}) a^{(\mu)}_\mathbf{k}(t) \, e^{i\mathbf{k}\cdot\mathbf{r}} + \bar{\mathbf{e}}^{(\mu)}(\mathbf{k}) \bar{a}^{(\mu)}_\mathbf{k}(t) \, e^{-i\mathbf{k}\cdot\mathbf{r}} \right)

are the a^{(\mu)}_\mathbf{k}(t) and \bar{a}^{(\mu)}_\mathbf{k}(t) complex or real?

On my first reading I assumed complex as the text says the bar indicates complex conjugates but the vector potential is later defined as a linear addition with complex \mathbf{e}^{(1)}(\mathbf{k}) and \mathbf{e}^{(-1)}(\mathbf{k}) basis vectors so why would these vectors have complex multipliers? They are also not in bold font which would indicate scalers.

Is the bar in this case simply a label for the scaler?

Please help!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Fourier coefficients of a function are generally complex, because they are the Fourier transform of the function.
 
atyy said:
Fourier coefficients of a function are generally complex, because they are the Fourier transform of the function.

Thanks for the reply, I think the Fourier coefficients will be complex regardless as the \mathbf{e}^{(1)}(\mathbf{k}) and \mathbf{e}^{(-1)}(\mathbf{k}) vectors are complex therefore \mathbf{e}^{(1)}(\mathbf{k}) a^{(1)}_\mathbf{k}(t) should be complex regardless of whether a^{(1)}_\mathbf{k}(t) is.. I think.
 
Last edited:
Thread 'Is 'Velocity of Transport' a Recognized Term in English Mechanics Literature?'
Here are two fragments from Banach's monograph in Mechanics I have never seen the term <<velocity of transport>> in English texts. Actually I have never seen this term being named somehow in English. This term has a name in Russian books. I looked through the original Banach's text in Polish and there is a Polish name for this term. It is a little bit surprising that the Polish name differs from the Russian one and also differs from this English translation. My question is: Is there...
This has been discussed many times on PF, and will likely come up again, so the video might come handy. Previous threads: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/is-a-treadmill-incline-just-a-marketing-gimmick.937725/ https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/work-done-running-on-an-inclined-treadmill.927825/ https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/how-do-we-calculate-the-energy-we-used-to-do-something.1052162/
Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...
Back
Top