Gauge in the Aharonov Bohm effect

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the gauge choice in the context of the Aharonov-Bohm effect, particularly focusing on the implications of selecting different vector potentials and their effects on energy levels. The scope includes theoretical considerations and gauge transformations in quantum mechanics.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions whether a vector potential of the form ##\textbf{A} = \alpha \frac{\Phi}{2\pi r} \hat{\phi}## could be a valid gauge choice, suggesting it leads to different energy levels compared to Griffiths' choice.
  • Another participant argues that the transformation proposed is not a true gauge transformation because it does not account for the vector potential inside the solenoid, where the magnetic field is non-zero.
  • A third participant emphasizes that physically observable quantities are gauge invariant, asserting that the energy eigenvalues calculated do not correspond to a gauge-invariant Hamiltonian, and highlights the importance of the magnetic flux as a gauge-invariant quantity.
  • One participant expresses appreciation for the insights provided in the responses.
  • Another participant notes that the energy spectrum is gauge invariant, referencing a specific equation from Ballentine's book.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants exhibit disagreement regarding the validity of the proposed gauge transformation and its implications on energy levels. There is no consensus on the interpretation of gauge invariance in this context.

Contextual Notes

The discussion touches on the limitations of gauge transformations, particularly in relation to boundary conditions and the behavior of vector potentials in different regions.

KDPhysics
Messages
73
Reaction score
24
TL;DR
Why doesn't gauge transforming the vector potential for a solenoid affect the energy levels of a particle orbiting it a fixed radius?
In p.385 of Griffiths QM the vector potential ##\textbf{A} = \frac{\Phi}{2\pi r}\hat{\phi}## is chosen for the region outside a long solenoid. However, couldn't we also have chosen a vector potential that is a multiple of this, namely ##\textbf{A} = \alpha \frac{\Phi}{2\pi r} \hat{\phi}## where ##\alpha## is some constant? The two are related by a gauge transformation:
$$\alpha\frac{\Phi}{2\pi r}\hat{\phi} = \frac{\Phi}{2\pi r} \hat{\phi}+\nabla\bigg((\alpha-1)\frac{\Phi}{2\pi}\phi\bigg)$$
When I solve the TISE with this new gauge I get that the energy levels are:
$$E_n = \frac{\hbar^2}{2mb^2}\bigg(n-\alpha \frac{\Phi}{\Phi_0}\bigg)^2$$
which is different from what Griffiths even if the magnetic flux is quantized. How is it possible that the ground state depends on the gauge choice?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Demystifier
Physics news on Phys.org
To study a gauge transformation one must consider the vector potential everywhere, i.e. not only outside of the solenoid, but also inside of it. Since the magnetic field does not vanish in the interior, it can be shown that a multiplication by ##\alpha## is not really a gauge transformation in the interior. Hence your transformation is not really a gauge transformation. But nice try!
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: KDPhysics
Physically observable quantities are always gauge invariant. Whatever you calculate are not the energy eigenvalues of a gauge-invariant Hamiltonian. In the AB effect what's observable is a relative phase, but this phase is not gauge dependent but is given by the magnetic flux inside the solenoid, which is a gauge-invariant quantity. The gauge transformation must also fulfill the boundary conditions at the boundary of the solenoid.

A very concise treatment of gauge invariance in quantum mechanics can be found in the textbook by Cohen-Tannoudji et al.

Very illuminating is also

K.-H. Yang, Gauge-invariant interpretations of quantum mechanics, Ann. Phys. (NY) 101, 62 (1976)
https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-4916(76)90275-X

K.-H. Yang, Physical interpretation of classical gauge transformations, Ann. Phys. (NY) 101, 97 (1976)
https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-4916(76)90276-1
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: dextercioby, PeterDonis and KDPhysics
Thanks for the answers, very enlightening!
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Demystifier and vanhees71
Note also that energy spectrum is gauge invariant. See e.g. Ballentine's book, Eq. (11.23).
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
987
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
679
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
2K