Solution Expansion of ##A^{\mu}## when ##L \rightarrow \infty##

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter JD_PM
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Expansion
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the expansion of the vector potential ##A^{\mu}## in the context of quantum field theory, particularly as the volume ##V## approaches infinity. Participants explore the implications of this limit on the formulation of the field and the associated mathematical expressions.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents the expansion of ##A^{\mu}## in terms of solutions to the harmonic equation and discusses the role of the volume term in the solution expansion.
  • The same participant notes that as the volume approaches infinity, the summation over wave vectors transitions to an integral, leading to a proposed generalization of the expressions for ##A^{\mu+}## and ##A^{\mu-}##.
  • Another participant agrees with the generalization presented, stating it is standard in quantum field theory literature.
  • One participant challenges the number of polarization degrees of freedom, suggesting that only two should be present under specific gauge conditions, which leads to a discussion about the implications of gauge choice on the field's degrees of freedom.
  • Another participant raises a concern about the behavior of ladder operators as the volume goes to infinity, arguing that boundary conditions cannot be imposed in this limit and suggesting that fields should vanish at infinity instead.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

There is partial agreement on the generalization of the expressions for ##A^{\mu+}## and ##A^{\mu-}##, but there is disagreement regarding the number of polarization degrees of freedom and the implications of taking the volume to infinity.

Contextual Notes

Participants express concerns about the mathematical implications of infinite volume, particularly regarding the behavior of ladder operators and the imposition of boundary conditions. The discussion reflects various assumptions about gauge choices and their impact on the physical interpretation of the field.

JD_PM
Messages
1,125
Reaction score
156
TL;DR
I wanted to discuss the generalization of free-Maxwell's solution. More insight is very welcomed.
Please note that

I'll write ##A^{\mu} := A^{\mu}(x)## for simplicity.

I'll work in natural units.

The Lagrangian density ##\mathscr{L} = -\frac 1 2 (\partial_{\mu} A_{\nu})(\partial^{\mu} A^{\nu})## has equations of motion

$$\Box A^{\mu}=0 \tag{1}$$

We expand ##A^{\mu}## in a complete set of solutions of the harmonic equation ##(1)##

$$A^{\mu}=A^{\mu+}+A^{\mu-} \tag{2.1}$$

Where

$$A^{\mu+}=\sum_{r=0}^3 \sum_{\vec k}\Big(\frac{1}{2V \omega_{\vec k}} \Big)^{1/2} \epsilon_r^{\mu}(\vec k) a_r(\vec k)e^{-ik \cdot x} \tag{2.2}$$

$$A^{\mu-} = \sum_{r=0}^3 \sum_{\vec k}\Big(\frac{1}{2V \omega_{\vec k}} \Big)^{1/2} \epsilon_r^{\mu}(\vec k) a_r^{\dagger}(\vec k)e^{ik \cdot x} \tag{2.3}$$

And

$$V=L^3, \ \ \ \ \omega_{\vec k}:= |\vec k|=k^0$$

Alright. I started wondering why there was a volume term involved in the solution expansion. After reading a bit I understood why. It has to do with the concept of a field (which is defined at every spacetime point and describes mechanical systems with infinite degrees of freedom) and making the problem simpler.

We are dealing with the vector potential ##A(\vec x , t)## which, at a given instant of time ##t##, must take a value at every spatial point ##\vec x##.

To simplify the problem then, the mechanical system is enclosed in a cube of volume ##V=L^3## and some periodic boundary conditions are imposed

$$x \approx x+L, \ y \approx y+L, \ z \approx z+L, \tag{3}$$

I understand that by doing that, we go from having an arbitrary 3-vector ##\vec k \in \Bbb R^3## to ##\vec k \in 2\pi/L## (where the ##2\pi## factor is chosen so that the solution-expansion term ##\exp(\mp ik \cdot x)=\exp(\mp ik^0 \cdot x^0) \exp(\pm i \vec k \cdot \vec x)## is single-valued).

Thus I understand that ##(2.2)## and ##(2.3)## are solutions of the mechanical system enclosed in a 3D lattice.

Once here: what if we wanted to generalize ##(2.2)## and ##(2.3)## for an infinitely large volume ##V_{\infty}##? Well, then we should take ##L \rightarrow \infty## in our periodic boundary conditions ##(3)##. In such conditions the summation becomes an integral; i.e. (Mandl & Shaw page 12, footnote ##9##)

$$\frac{1}{V} \sum_{\vec k} \rightarrow \frac{1}{(2 \pi)^3} \int d \vec k \tag{*}$$

So I'd say that ##(2.2)## and ##(2.3)## generalize to

$$A^{\mu+}= \frac{1}{\sqrt{16 \pi^{3}}} \sum_{r=0}^3 \int d \vec k \Big(\frac{1}{\omega_{\vec k}} \Big)^{1/2} \epsilon_r^{\mu}(\vec k) \tilde a_r(\vec k)e^{-ik \cdot x} \tag{4.1}$$

$$A^{\mu-} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{16 \pi^{3}}} \sum_{r=0}^3 \int d \vec k \Big(\frac{1}{\omega_{\vec k}} \Big)^{1/2} \epsilon_r^{\mu}(\vec k) \tilde a_r^{\dagger}(\vec k)e^{ik \cdot x} \tag{4.2}$$

Comparing to ##(2.2), (2.3)## we notice that the ladder operators get rescaled

$$a_r (\vec k) \rightarrow \tilde a_r (\vec k) = \sqrt{\frac{V}{(2\pi)^3}} a_r(\vec k) \tag{5.1}$$

And

$$\tilde a_r^{\dagger} (\vec k) =\Big( \tilde a_r(\vec k) \Big)^{\dagger} \tag{5.2}$$

Do you agree with the generalization ##(4.1), (4.2)##?

Extra insight is very welcomed!

Thanks :biggrin:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I agree with your (4.1) and (4.2). In fact, that's pretty standard in QFT literature.
 
But there should be only 2 polarization degrees of freedom, at least when you use the simpler solution of the quantization problem starting from a completely fixed Coulomb gauge, i.e., ##\vec{\nabla} \cdot \vec{A}^{+}|\text{phys} \rangle=0##. In this gauge it automatically follows for the the free field that ##A^0=0## and you have only the two transverse polarization degrees of freedom. You can choose them as helicity eigenfunctions ##\pm 1## (corresponding to left- and right-circularly polarized plane waves).
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: dextercioby
As the volume of your box goes infinity your ladder operators blow up. Infinity isn't a number, it's a place. You can't impose boundary conditions with a non-number. That's why people usually require the field to vanish at infinity.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K