Quantization of the electromagnetic field

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the quantization of the electromagnetic field, specifically how to express static electric and magnetic fields in a quantized framework. Participants explore theoretical aspects of quantization, including the use of annihilation and creation operators, and the implications for electrostatic and magnetostatic fields.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions how static electric and magnetic fields can be expressed in a quantized version, referencing the roles of annihilation and creation operators.
  • Another participant provides a rough sketch of solving related problems using a scalar field, discussing the Hamiltonian and the introduction of a new field related to the original field.
  • The same participant elaborates on the ground state of the field in the presence of a spatially-dependent source, introducing the relationship between annihilation operators of different fields.
  • A later reply raises a question about expressing the interaction term in the Schrödinger equation for the Stark effect when treating the field as quantized, contrasting it with a semi-quantum case.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express various viewpoints on the quantization of static fields, with no consensus reached on the specific expressions or methods to be used. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the best approach to represent these fields in a quantized context.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on definitions of static fields and the unresolved mathematical steps in the proposed solutions. The discussion also reflects varying levels of familiarity with the concepts involved.

Konte
Messages
90
Reaction score
1
TL;DR
quantization, electromagnetic field
Hi everyone,

It is about the quantization of the electromagnetic field. The expression of field E and B are defined with:
-the annihilation a- and creation a+ operators, and the frequency ω.
So my question is: how does these fields must be expressed if they where "static"? I mean, how the electrostatic and magnetostatic fields must be expressed in quantized version?

Thank you.
Konte
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Konte said:
Summary:: quantization, electromagnetic field

Hi everyone,

It is about the quantization of the electromagnetic field. The expression of field E and B are defined with:
-the annihilation a- and creation a+ operators, and the frequency ω.
So my question is: how does these fields must be expressed if they where "static"? I mean, how the electrostatic and magnetostatic fields must be expressed in quantized version?

Thank you.
Konte
In quantum theory a "situation" is described by the state, not by the operators describing observables.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Konte
Here's a rough sketch of how this problem is solved, using a scalar field instead of a vector field for simplicity.

We start with the KG Hamiltonian with a spatially-dependent source ##J(\mathbf{x})##:
$$H = \int d^{3}x ~\frac{1}{2}\pi^2 + \frac{1}{2}(\nabla \phi)^2 + \frac{1}{2}m^2\phi^2 + J\phi.$$ Rewrite the Hamiltonian in terms of a new field ##\psi## related to ##\phi## via
$$\phi = \psi + K(\mathbf{x}),$$ where ##K## is some fixed function. If we choose ##K## such that
$$-\nabla^2 K + m^2 K +J = 0,$$then (after integrating out surface terms) the Hamiltonian will simplify to
$$H = \int d^{3}x ~\frac{1}{2}\pi^2 + \frac{1}{2}(\nabla \psi)^2 + \frac{1}{2}m^2\psi^2 + ...,$$ where the ommited terms depend only on ##K##. The important point is that now the linear term is gone and we can expand via creation-annihilation operators as if the field were free.

The groundstate of the field in the presence of ##J##, which I will call ##|\Omega\rangle##, is defined by $$a_\mathbf{k} |\Omega\rangle = 0$$ where ##a_\mathbf{k}## is the annihilation operator associated with the field ##\psi.## Now ##a## is related to the annihilation operators of the original field ##\phi##, which I will call ##b##, by some relation along the lines of $$a_\mathbf{k} = b_\mathbf{k} - f(\mathbf{k})$$ where ##f(\mathbf{k})## is some c-number. You can figure out what ##f(\mathbf{k})## should be exactly from the second expression above if you feel so inclined (I don't). In any case the definition of the groundstate ##|\Omega\rangle## can now be rewritten as
$$b_\mathbf{k} |\Omega\rangle = f(\mathbf{k})|\Omega\rangle,$$ which means that ##|\Omega\rangle## is some coherent state of the free theory.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Konte, gentzen, mattt and 1 other person
HomogenousCow said:
Here's a rough sketch of how this problem is solved, using a scalar field instead of a vector field for simplicity.

We start with the KG Hamiltonian with a spatially-dependent source ##J(\mathbf{x})##:
$$H = \int d^{3}x ~\frac{1}{2}\pi^2 + \frac{1}{2}(\nabla \phi)^2 + \frac{1}{2}m^2\phi^2 + J\phi.$$ Rewrite the Hamiltonian in terms of a new field ##\psi## related to ##\phi## via
$$\phi = \psi + K(\mathbf{x}),$$ where ##K## is some fixed function. If we choose ##K## such that
$$-\nabla^2 K + m^2 K +J = 0,$$then (after integrating out surface terms) the Hamiltonian will simplify to
$$H = \int d^{3}x ~\frac{1}{2}\pi^2 + \frac{1}{2}(\nabla \psi)^2 + \frac{1}{2}m^2\psi^2 + ...,$$ where the ommited terms depend only on ##K##. The important point is that now the linear term is gone and we can expand via creation-annihilation operators as if the field were free.

The groundstate of the field in the presence of ##J##, which I will call ##|\Omega\rangle##, is defined by $$a_\mathbf{k} |\Omega\rangle = 0$$ where ##a_\mathbf{k}## is the annihilation operator associated with the field ##\psi.## Now ##a## is related to the annihilation operators of the original field ##\phi##, which I will call ##b##, by some relation along the lines of $$a_\mathbf{k} = b_\mathbf{k} - f(\mathbf{k})$$ where ##f(\mathbf{k})## is some c-number. You can figure out what ##f(\mathbf{k})## should be exactly from the second expression above if you feel so inclined (I don't). In any case the definition of the groundstate ##|\Omega\rangle## can now be rewritten as
$$b_\mathbf{k} |\Omega\rangle = f(\mathbf{k})|\Omega\rangle,$$ which means that ##|\Omega\rangle## is some coherent state of the free theory.
I have a little question that answer can surely help me to understand more: how do we express the interaction term (in the Schrödinger equation) with electrostatic field in the "Stark effect" case when we treat the field as quantized field ? In semi-quantum case, it is only expressed as the product of dipolar moment with classical electrostatic field : ##\mu . E##
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 78 ·
3
Replies
78
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K