Why Is the Scalar Potential Ignored in Coulomb Gauge?

eoghan
Messages
201
Reaction score
7
Hi there,
I'm studying the interaction of one electron atom with an electromagnetic field. In every textbook the starting point is the hamiltonian of the system containing the scalar potential and the vector potential. But then the scalar potential is ignored and I don't understand why.
I've read that in the coulomb gauge I can choose the scalar potential to be 0, why??
 
Physics news on Phys.org
In electromagnetism, you're allowed to perform the gauge transformation

\textbf{A} \rightarrow \textbf{A}'= \textbf{A}+\nabla\lambda

\Phi \rightarrow \Phi'= \Phi - \partial_t \lambda

The situation you're describing is a combination of the Lorenz and Coulomb gauges. In the Lorenz gauge, you have

-\partial_t \Phi + \nabla \cdot \textbf{A} = 0

The Lorenz gauge is only a partial gauge fixing, so you still have the freedom to do an additional gauge transformation. In particular, if you choose the gauge function λ such that

\Phi = \partial_t \lambda

you will have, after the gauge transformation, \Phi' = 0 and \nabla\cdot\textbf{A}'=0, which is the Coulomb gauge.
 
Thank you!
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top