Quantization of electromagnetic field

mritunjay
Messages
18
Reaction score
0
Instead of quantizing the vector potential A^μ why we do not directly quantize the B and E fields in electrodynamics.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You can. The field Hamiltonian can be written as an integral of E2 + B2 (probably with some constants that I'm missing). Expand E and B in terms of Fourier modes and you'll end up with the Hamiltonian of the harmonic oscillator. Quantization follows.
 
Yes, the Hamiltonian is H = ½ ∫ (E2 + B2) d3x, but this is only a shorthand for the same expression written out in terms of A:

H = ½ ∫ (A·2 + (∇ x A)2) d3x

You still have to quantize using the canonical variables A and E ≡ A·.
 
Bill_K said:
You still have to quantize using the canonical variables A and E ≡ A·.
That's exactly the point.

Quantizing means to identify fundamental variables and to promote a classical Poisson bracket for canonical conjugate variables to a commutator. E and B are not canonical conjugate; it is not possible to express the (classical) dynamics using E and B.
 
Thanks a lot for the answer and useful comments. But can somebody explain to me why E and B are not canonically conjugate variables?
 
mritunjay said:
... can somebody explain to me why E and B are not canonically conjugate variables?
Let's look at some action S in terms of some variables x, y, ... and their time derivatives dx/dt, dy/dt, ...

The definiton of the canonical momentum is always

p_x = \frac{\delta S}{\delta \dot{x}}

We then have the classical Poisson brackets

\{x,p_x\} = 1

In case of electrodynamics the fundamental variable x is replaced by A(x); x is something like a "continuous index". That means that the canonical momentum is defined by

P^i(x) = \frac{\delta S}{\delta \dot{A}^i(x)}

where i=1..3 is the i-th spatial direction.

Using the Lagrangian of electrodynamics one can show that P(x) corresponds to the electromagnetic field E(x). B(x) can be expressed in terms of A(x) w/o any time derivative, i.e .w/o using the canoncal conjugate momentum, so the fundamental variable is A(x) and the canonical conjugate momentum is E(x).

In addition E and B are not sufficient to define classical electrodynamics. The problem is that neither E nor B couple directly to the currents, but A does. The coupling term is

A_\mu j^\mu

which cannot be formulated using only E and B.

Note that there is one problem, namely the missing time derivative in A°(x) and therefore the missing canonical conjugate momentum which makes A°(x) a Lagrangian multiplier (instead of a dynamical field) generating the time-independent Gauss constraint. This fact is closely related to gauge symmetry.
 
Last edited:
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
If we release an electron around a positively charged sphere, the initial state of electron is a linear combination of Hydrogen-like states. According to quantum mechanics, evolution of time would not change this initial state because the potential is time independent. However, classically we expect the electron to collide with the sphere. So, it seems that the quantum and classics predict different behaviours!

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
258
Replies
23
Views
1K
Replies
22
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Back
Top