Fourier transform of Coulomb potential

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the Fourier transform of the Coulomb potential, specifically addressing the mathematical challenges associated with the divergence at \( r = 0 \) and exploring alternative approaches such as the Yukawa potential. Participants examine the implications of regularization techniques and the conditions under which the Fourier transform can be evaluated.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Ian expresses confusion regarding the divergence of the Fourier transform of the Coulomb potential at \( r = 0 \) and seeks clarification.
  • One participant suggests using the Yukawa potential as a means to address the divergence issue, noting that the long-range Coulomb potential can be recovered by taking the limit \( m \rightarrow 0 \).
  • Another participant argues that the Fourier transform does not diverge at \( r = 0 \) in 3D but is ultraviolet (UV) divergent, proposing regularization by introducing a small mass.
  • The same participant provides a detailed calculation of the Fourier transform, demonstrating the use of spherical coordinates and the regularization technique involving an imaginary part in the momentum variable \( p \).
  • Another participant acknowledges finding a solution to the integral using the "imaginary part" trick, confirming that they arrived at the same conclusion independently.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the nature of the divergence at \( r = 0 \) and the best approach to resolve it. Multiple competing views regarding the treatment of the Coulomb potential and the use of regularization techniques remain present.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the limitations of the Fourier transform in the context of the Coulomb potential, particularly regarding the assumptions made about the behavior at \( r = 0 \) and the implications of regularization methods. The dependence on the definitions of the potentials and the mathematical techniques employed is also noted.

IanBerkman
Messages
52
Reaction score
1
Dear all,

In my quantum mechanics book it is stated that the Fourier transform of the Coulomb potential
$$\frac{e^2}{4\pi\epsilon_0 r}$$
results in
$$\frac{e^2}{\epsilon_0 q^2}$$

Where ##r## is the distance between the electrons and ##q## is the difference in wave vectors.

What confuses me, is how the Fourier transform of the first term is taken since the integral diverges at r = 0.
I hope anyone can clear this up for me.

Thanks,
IanEDIT: It is already solved, ##r## and ##q## need to be taken as vectors. This thread can be deleted.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
In condensed matter applications, the divergence problem is solved by introducing screened Coulomb potential (known as Yukawa Potential):

\begin{equation}
V(r) = \frac{e^2}{4\pi\epsilon_{0}} \frac{e^{-mr}}{r}
\end{equation}

One can get the usual (long-range) Coulomb potential back if one takes the limit where ## m \rightarrow 0##.

Thus, one takes the Fourier transform of the screened Coulomb potential and takes the limit ## m \rightarrow 0## to obtain the correct result.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: IanBerkman
The Fourier transform doesn't diverge at ##r=0## in 3D. It's however UV divergent. The latter is solved by regularizing the integral with a small finite photon mass as mentioned in #2 and then make ##m \rightarrow 0##. Here I'll introduce the regularization a bit later in the calculation, leading to the same result.

So let's do it. I just transform ##1/r## to save typing the constants (the ##\epsilon_0=1## in physical units anyway). So let's evaluate
$$\tilde{V}(\vec{p})=\int_{\mathbb{R}^3} \mathrm{d}^3 \vec{x} \frac{1}{|\vec{x}|} \exp(-\mathrm{i} \vec{x} \cdot \vec{p}).$$
The first step is to introduce spherical coordinates with ##\vec{p} \neq 0## in the polar direction. Then the integral over ##\varphi \in [0,2 \pi]## is trivial, and for the integral over ##\vartheta## we introduce ##u=\cos \vartheta## and use ##\mathrm{d} \vartheta \sin \vartheta=\mathrm{d} u##, which leads to
$$\tilde{V}(\vec{p})=2 \pi \int_0^{\infty} \mathrm{d} r \int_{-1}^{1} \mathrm{d} u r \exp(-\mathrm{i} u r p).$$
The ##u## integral is easy:
$$\tilde{V}(\vec{p})=2 \pi \mathrm{i} \int_0^{\infty} \mathrm{d} r \frac{1}{p} [\exp(-\mathrm{i} r p)-\exp(\mathrm{i} r p)].$$
Now to make sense of this integral we have to regularize it by introducing a small negative (positive) imaginary part to ##p## in the left (right). Then both integrals give the same result, and together you have (taking the imaginary parts in ##p## to ##0## again)
$$\tilde{V}(\vec{p})=\frac{4 \pi}{p^2}.$$
QED.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: IanBerkman
vanhees71 said:
The ##u## integral is easy:
$$\tilde{V}(\vec{p})=2 \pi \mathrm{i} \int_0^{\infty} \mathrm{d} r \frac{1}{p} [\exp(-\mathrm{i} r p)-\exp(\mathrm{i} r p)].$$
Now to make sense of this integral we have to regularize it by introducing a small negative (positive) imaginary part to ##p## in the left (right). Then both integrals give the same result, and together you have (taking the imaginary parts in ##p## to ##0## again)
$$\tilde{V}(\vec{p})=\frac{4 \pi}{p^2}.$$
QED.

I came to this part and found the solution to this integral somewhere, not knowing I had to use the "imaginary part" trick. I tried it on my own with this trick and got to the same conclusion.

Thanks.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K