No coupling of Photons with eletric fields

eintagsfliege
Messages
17
Reaction score
0
I heard in the school a long time ago, that photons do not have a coupling with an electric field. Can someone explain it detailed? Does someone have good online literature?
Thanks in advance!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
eintagsfliege said:
I heard in the school a long time ago, that photons do not have a coupling with an electric field. Can someone explain it detailed? Does someone have good online literature?
I don't have time right now to explain it in detail but here's the basics...

Classically an electromagnetic field does not interact with itself.
But in Quantum Electrodynamics there is very weak higher-order
photon-photon scattering due to virtual electron loops. This
is called Delbruck scattering, and has been experimentally observed
via scattering of gamma rays off nuclei, iirc. I vaguely remember
that certain ultra-high-power lasers can also demonstrate the effect
somehow.

I don't know online references off the top of my head, but
Delbruck scattering is discussed in Greiner's textbook on
quantum electrodynamics.
 
Last edited:
Thank you for the
I read in several Publications that Delbruck-effect is the scattering of high-energy photons (MeV to GeV gamma rays) on a Coulomb-Field of a Nucleus.
My question is:
Why is it needed that the Photonenergies are this high?
Which magnitude is required for the Coulomb-Field?
Is it possible that an electrostatic field of a charged object (same scale) has the same effect?

It is hard to find some good literature online.
 
eintagsfliege said:
Why is it needed that the Photonenergies are this high?
A full answer to this requires working through the detailed math to
see what the quantum correction terms look like. Some people
explain it heuristically by noting that quantum corrections to
the usual Coulomb potential get stronger at small distances.
With higher energies you can probe smaller distances and
thus have more hope of seeing weak effects because of th
stronger EM field.

But I take such explanations with a grain of salt.

Which magnitude is required for the Coulomb-Field?
Is it possible that an electrostatic field of a charged object
(same scale) has the same effect?
I suspect that if you tried to create such a huge electrostatic
field it would tend to decay via electron-positron pair creation.
(This sort of thing happens in heavy ion collisions.)

It is hard to find some good literature online.
I know. A visit to the nearest University physics library is
probably needed.
 
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...

Similar threads

Replies
8
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
29
Views
3K
Replies
21
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Back
Top