How to understand the electric-field operator?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the understanding of the electric-field operator in quantum electrodynamics, specifically focusing on the roles of annihilation and creation operators, the concept of spontaneous emission, and the implications for thermal radiation. Participants explore theoretical aspects and mathematical representations related to photon emission and absorption processes.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that the positive field operator E+ acts as an annihilation operator while the negative field E- acts as a creation operator, leading to confusion about the eigenvalues associated with photon emission and absorption.
  • One participant suggests that the extra 1 in the emission process (E+E-) corresponds to spontaneous emission, which is a consequence of quantizing the electromagnetic field.
  • Another participant questions why the spontaneous emission term is often ignored in discussions of thermal radiation, despite its relevance to the statistical occupation described by the Boltzmann function.
  • Some participants argue that the vacuum energy is defined as zero and that the spontaneous-emission term is crucial for obtaining the correct Bose distribution in thermal equilibrium, reflecting the balance between photon production and absorption rates.
  • One participant expresses uncertainty about the relationship between the emission operator's eigenvalue and the Bose-Einstein occupation number, particularly in the context of thermalized sources.
  • Another participant challenges the interpretation of the Bose-Einstein distribution as an eigenvalue of the photon-number operator, asserting that it represents a phase-space distribution function in thermal equilibrium.
  • A later reply clarifies that the ensemble-averaged photon number should correspond to the Bose-Einstein probability, raising questions about the physical meaning of spontaneous and stimulated emission in relation to the electric-field operators.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the significance of spontaneous emission in thermal radiation and the interpretation of the Bose-Einstein distribution, indicating that multiple competing perspectives remain unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include potential misunderstandings of the mathematical representations and the definitions of terms like spontaneous emission and thermal equilibrium, which may depend on specific contexts or assumptions not fully articulated in the discussion.

Jeffrey Yang
Messages
34
Reaction score
0
I know the positive field operator E+ is actually an annihilation operator a while the negative field E- is a creation operator a+.

I also learned that the absorption process can be represented as E-E+, which should be the number of photons n accroding to the principle of ladder operator. Also, the emission is E+E-, whose eigenvalu however is n+1.

How to understand this extra 1 here? Why emitted number is n+1 rather than n? Is that 1 the vacuum field? But should the vacuum field cannot released through emission?

Thanks a lot
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The 1 is spontaneous emission. It's an effect of quantizing the electromagnetic field.
 
vanhees71 said:
The 1 is spontaneous emission. It's an effect of quantizing the electromagnetic field.
Hi, thanks for your answer.
Well, what you are talking about make sense to me. However, it is always confusing to me that if the the 1 or 1/2 (symmetrized operator) is the spontaneous emission term, why we always ignore this term when we discuss about thermal radiation? Let's say thermal radiation is obviously a spontaneous emission however whose statistical occupation is described by the Boltzmann function ##1/(exp(E/kT)-1)## rather than ##1/(exp(E/kT)-1)+1/2## or just ##1/2## ?
 
The vacuum energy is by definition set to 0 (normal ordering of the Hamiltonian). The spontaneous-emission term is important to get the correct Bose distribution as the equilibrium distribution of the corresponding Boltzmann equation. The equilibrium condition is that you have as many photon production as absorption rates, and in the production part you have both the spontaneous as well as the induced part. Formally this reflects itself in the Bose-enhancement factors in the Boltzmann collision term (here collision of photons with the walls of the cavity). These precisely lead to the Bose-Einstein rather than the (relativistic) Maxwell distribution as the equilbrium distribution!
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: bhobba
vanhees71 said:
The vacuum energy is by definition set to 0 (normal ordering of the Hamiltonian). The spontaneous-emission term is important to get the correct Bose distribution as the equilibrium distribution of the corresponding Boltzmann equation. The equilibrium condition is that you have as many photon production as absorption rates, and in the production part you have both the spontaneous as well as the induced part. Formally this reflects itself in the Bose-enhancement factors in the Boltzmann collision term (here collision of photons with the walls of the cavity). These precisely lead to the Bose-Einstein rather than the (relativistic) Maxwell distribution as the equilbrium distribution!

Em..I'm not sure whether I understand your reply correctly. Here are my mind:

Let's say if now we are talking about the field in the space causing light emission of a certain thermalized source (heat body, semiconductor ...). As we said, the emission operator has an eigenvalue ##n+1 = \frac{1}{exp(E/kT) - 1} + 1##. In the above equation, photon number ##n## has been replaced by the Bose-Einstein occupation number with a temperature ##T## (defied by the environment). Now, the term ##\frac{1}{exp(E/kT) - 1}## actually drives the stimulated emission while the term ##1## drives the spontaneous emission. If now, in the aspect of thermalized source, the excitation element such as dipole, also follow a Bose-Einstein occupation but under a temperature ##T_{s}## defined by the source itself. Finally, the overall probability of spontaneous emission is ##1 \times \frac{1}{exp(E/kT_{s}) - 1} = \frac{1}{exp(E/kT_{s}) - 1}##, the probability of simulated emission is ##\frac{1}{exp(E/kT_{c}) - 1} \times \frac{1}{exp(E/kT_{s}) - 1}##.
 
The Bose-Einstein distribution is not an eigenvalue of the photon-number operator but the phase-space distribution function of photons in thermal equilibrium. So your entire posting doesn't make any sense.
 
vanhees71 said:
The Bose-Einstein distribution is not an eigenvalue of the photon-number operator but the phase-space distribution function of photons in thermal equilibrium. So your entire posting doesn't make any sense.

Well, maybe my express is not professional. What I intend to express is just because in thermal equilibrium, finally the ensemble averaged photon number ##n## should equal to the Bose-Einstein probability. What I'm thinking about is how these occupation probability is finally transferred to the emitted light considering the detailed physical meaning of spontaneous and stimulated emission term from the ##\mathbf{E}^{+}\mathbf{E}^{-}## operator
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 167 ·
6
Replies
167
Views
11K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K