# Untitled Document

Gauge Invariance and Canonical Variables

I.B. Khriplovich<sup>1</sup><sup>1</sup>1E-mail address: khriplovich@inp.nsk.su and A.I. Milstein<sup>2</sup><sup>2</sup>2E-mail address: milstein@inp.nsk.su

Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics,

630090 Novosibirsk, Russia,

and Novosibirsk University, Novosibirsk, Russia

## Abstract

We discuss some paradoxes arising due to the gauge-dependence of canonical variables in mechanics.

1. Rather elementary problems discussed in this note originate partly from tutorials on quantum mechanics at the Novosibirsk University, partly from discussions on elementary particle physics and quantum field theory with our colleagues. These problems turned out difficult not only for undergraduates. To our surprise, they caused confusion even of some educated theorists. So, hopefully, a short note on the subject will be useful, at least from the methodological point of view, so much the more that we are not aware of any explicit discussion of the matter in literature.

Though the questions have arisen in quantum mechanics or even in more elevated subjects, they belong in essence to classical mechanics. Just to classical mechanics we confine mainly in the present note.

2. Let us consider the simple problem of a charged particle in a constant homogeneous magnetic field. Its Hamiltonian is well-known:

$$H=\frac{1}{2m}\left(𝐩\frac{e}{c}𝐀\right)^2.$$
(1)   
It is also well-known that various gauges are possible for the vector potential $`𝐀`$. With the magnetic field $`𝐁`$ directed along the $`z`$ axis, one can choose, for instance,

$$𝐀=B(0,x,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}).$$
(2)   
In this gauge the Hamiltonian is independent of $`y`$, and therefore the corresponding component $`p_y`$ of the canonical momentum is an integral of motion. However, one can choose equally well another gauge:

$$𝐀=B(y,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0},\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}).$$
(3)   
Then it is the component $`p_x`$ of the canonical momentum which is conserved.

But how it comes that a component of $`𝐩`$ transverse to the magnetic field can be conserved, and that, moreover, the conserved component can be chosen at will? The obvious answer is that the canonical momentum $`𝐩`$ is not a gauge-invariant quantity and therefore has no direct physical meaning. As to our visual picture of the transverse motion in a magnetic field, it is not the canonical momentum $`𝐩`$ which precesses and thus permanently changes its direction, but the velocity

$$𝐯=\frac{1}{m}\left(𝐩\frac{e}{c}𝐀\right).$$

As distinct from the canonical momentum $`𝐩`$, the velocity $`𝐯`$ is a gauge-invariant and physically uniquely defined quantity.

3. It is only natural that not only the space components $`𝐩`$ of the canonical momentum, but as well its time component, the Hamiltonian $`H`$, is gauge-dependent. It is the kinetic energy $`HeA_0`$ which is gauge-invariant.

As a rather striking manifestation of this fact, let us consider an example of a well-known physical system whose energy is conserved, but the Hamiltonian can be time-dependent. We mean the motion of a charged particle in a time-independent electric field $`𝐄`$, for instance, in the Coulomb one. Let us choose here the gauge $`A_0=0`$. In it the vector potential becomes obviously

$$𝐀=ct𝐄,$$

so that now the Hamiltonian (1) depends on time explicitly. Nevertheless, the energy of a particle in a time-independent electromagnetic field is certainly conserved. Indeed, here the equations of motion become

$$\dot{𝐫}=\{H,𝐫\}=\frac{1}{m}(𝐩+et𝐄),$$
(4)   
$$m\ddot{𝐫}=\frac{d}{dt}(𝐩+et𝐄)=\{H,𝐩+et𝐄\}=e𝐄$$
(5)   
(we use the Poisson brackets $`\{\mathrm{},\mathrm{}\}`$ in these classical equations). Since for a time-independent electric field its strength can be always written as a gradient of a scalar function: $`𝐄=\mathbf{}\phi `$, equation (5) has first integral

$$\frac{1}{2}m\dot{𝐫}^2+e\phi =const,$$

which is obviously nothing but the integral of energy. On the other hand, in virtue of equation (4), the Hamiltonian in the gauge $`A_0=0`$ coincides in fact with the kinetic energy:

$$H=\frac{1}{2m}(𝐩+et𝐄)^2=\frac{1}{2}m\dot{𝐫}^2.$$

It looks quite natural: the kinetic energy $`HeA_0`$, being gauge-invariant, should coincide with the Hamiltonian in the gauge $`A_0=0`$.

At last, an obvious comment on the situation in quantum mechanics. Though the Hamiltonian is not gauge-invariant, the Schrödinger equation is. Its gauge invariance is saved by the gauge transformation of the wave function. In particular, in the gauge $`A_0=0`$ the time-dependence of the Hamiltonian results only in some extra time-dependent phase for the wave function.

\***

We appreciate useful discussions with S.A. Rybak and V.V. Sokolov. We are grateful to S.A. Rybak also for the advice to publish this note. The work was supported by by the Ministry of Education through grant No. 3N-224-98, and by the Federal Program Integration-1998 through Project No. 274.