Skip to article frontmatterSkip to article content
Site not loading correctly?

This may be due to an incorrect BASE_URL configuration. See the MyST Documentation for reference.

The Aharonov-Bohm effect

The first system we will explore is a particle moving in a region containing a magnetic field. This allows us to explore the structure of quantum mechanics in a background electromagnetic field, and leads to a surprising consequence -- even when the field vanishes where the particle can move, it has a measurable effect on the particle’s wavefunction.

Charged particle in an electromagnetic field

So far we have considered the case of a constant magnetic field. Here we will consider the more general case of an electromagnetic field.

Gauge potentials

Two of Maxwell’s equations,

Et=c×BB=0\begin{align} \frac{\del {\vec E}}{\del t} & = c {\vec\nabla}\times{\vec B}\\ {\vec\nabla}\cdot{\vec B} & = 0 \end{align}

imply that in a simply connected region, E{\vec E}, {\vec B}$ can be written in the form

E=1cAtΦB=×A\begin{align} {\vec E} & = - \frac{1}{c} \frac{\del {\vec A}}{\del t} - {\vec \nabla} \Phi\\ {\vec B} & = {\vec\nabla}\times{\vec A} \end{align}

The fact that a single solution A,Φ{\vec A}, \Phi can generally only be found in a simply connected region will become important to us below.

Classical mechanics

The Lagrangian for a charged particle in this background is

L12mx˙2+ecx˙AqΦL - \half m {\dot{\vec x}}^2 + \frac{e}{c} {\dot{\vec x}}\cdot{\vec A} - q \Phi

where qq is the charge of the particle. Applying the Euler-Lagrange equation to this, combined with (2), leads to the Lorentz force law

mx¨=qcx˙×B+qEm {\ddot{\vec x}} = \frac{q}{c}{\vec{\dot x}}\times{\vec B} + q {\vec E}

As it happens we cannot simply write LL in terms of the physical field variables E,B{\vec E}, {\vec B}. To get a sensible variational principle the Lagrangian needs to be written a s afunction of the vector and scalar potentials Φ,A\Phi, {\vec A}.

It is important to note that Φ,A\Phi, {\vec A} are ambiguously defined via (2). If we shift

AAΛΦΦ+1cΛt\begin{align} {\vec A} & \to {\vec A} - {\vec\nabla}\Lambda \\ \Phi & \to \Phi + \frac{1}{c} \frac{\del \Lambda}{\del t} \end{align}

then the electric and magnetic fields do not change. This shift in fact makes no real physical change: it is called a gauge transformation or gauge symmetry. You can show that the action S=dtLS = \int dt L changes only by boundary terms (that is, by the integral of a divergence), so that the gauge symetry is a symmetry of the dynamics.

The Hamiltonian becomes

H=12m(pqcA(x,t))2+qΦ(x,t)H = \frac{1}{2m} \left({\vec p} - \frac{q}{c} {\vec A}({\vec x}, t)\right)^2 + q \Phi({\vec x},t)

where the canonical momentum is

pi=mx˙i+ecAip_i = m {\dot x}^i + \frac{e}{c} A^i

Since x˙i{\dot x}^i does not transform under gauge transformations, this means that pip_i does:

pipiecΛxip_i \to p_i - \frac{e}{c} \frac{\del \Lambda}{\del x^i}

Thus the first term in (6) is gauge invariant. The last term shifs by

HH+ectΛH \to H + \frac{e}{c} \frac{\del}{\del t} \Lambda

This shift affects Hamiltons equations:

ddtpddtectxiΛ\frac{d}{dt} p \to \frac{d}{dt} - \frac{e}{c} \frac{\del}{\del t} \frac{\del}{\del x^i} \Lambda

consistent with the gauge transformation of pp.

Quantum case

In the quantum case, if we let ψ(x,t)=eiecΛψ\psi(x,t) = e^{- i \frac{e}{\hbar c} \Lambda} \psi', then

p^ieiecΛψ=eiecΛ(p^iecΛxi)ψ{\hat p}_i e^{- i \frac{e}{\hbar c} \Lambda} \psi' = e^{- i \frac{e}{\hbar c} \Lambda} ({\hat p_i} - \frac{e}{c}\frac{\del \Lambda}{\del x^i})\psi'

Similarly,

iteiecΛψ=eiecΛ(it+ecΛt)ψi\hbar \frac{\del}{\del t} e^{- i \frac{e}{\hbar c} \Lambda} \psi' = e^{- i \frac{e}{\hbar c} \Lambda} (i\hbar \frac{\del}{\del t} + \frac{e}{c} \frac{\del \Lambda}{\del t})\psi'

Thus, if we apply (5) to A,ΦA,\Phi in the quantum Hamiltonian, and also shift ψeieΛ/(c)ψ\psi \to e^{-i e\Lambda/(\hbar c)}\psi, the Schroedinger equation remains unchanged.

The Aharonov-Bohm effect

Now we consider the setup show below, which is a modification of the classic double slit experiment (we will review this below since we haven’t covered it yet). A source of some particle at x=xsourcex = x_{source}, which we take to produce particles in the same state each time, is behind a screen at x=0x = 0 with two slits. The effect of the screen is to split the state into two wavepackets, ψ1(x,t)\psi_1({\vec x}, t) and ψ2(x,t)\psi_2({\vec x}, t). We also assume that if we block slit 1(2) the system is in state A1ψ1A_1 \psi_1(A2ψ2A_2 \psi_2), where AiA_i enforces d2xAi2ψi2=1\int d^2 x |A_i|^2 |\psi_i|^2 = 1. With both slits open the particle is in state ψ(x,t)=ψ1+ψ2\psi({\vec x},t) = \psi_1 + \psi_2 such that d2xψ1+ψ22=1\int d^2 x |\psi_1 + \psi_2|^2 = 1. Note that we are ignoring the zz direction here, we can assume that the particles move more or less at z=0z = 0, or that the wavefunction is more or less constant in the zz direction.

Illustration of double-slit experiment

Now let us place a detector with resolution δ\delta that detects the yy position of the particle, at x=xmeasx = x_{meas}. If we block slit 2, the probability for the particle to hit the screen at yy with resiolution δ\delta is p1(y,δ)=δϕ1(xmeas,y)2p_1(y,\delta) = \delta |\phi_1(x_{meas},y)|^2, as illustrated in the image above.

The probability that the particle is detected at yy within resolution δ\delta is

p12(y,δ)=ψ1+ψ22δ=δ(ψ12+ψ22+ψ1ψ2+ψ2ψ1)p_{12}(y,\delta) = |\psi_1 + \psi_2|^2 \delta = \delta\left(|\psi_1|^2 + |\psi_2|^2 + \psi_1^* \psi_2 + \psi_2^* \psi_1\right)

The typical story is that ψi(xscreen,y,t)=fi(y,t)eiky\psi_i(x_{screen},y,t) = \sim f_i(y,t) e^{i k y} where ff is some envelope function. If we block either screen, we see that envelope function, but if we do not, then we see interference patterns. The point is that the probabilities do not add, the wavefunctions do.

Now let is place a solenoid just behind the screen. We assume we can arrange it so that ψi\psi_i has negligible support near the solenoid. The solenoid produces a magnetic field B=Bz^{\vec B} = B{\hat z} in the zz direction inside, with total magnetic flux interiord2xB=Φ\int_{interior} d^2 x B = \Phi.

Outside the solenoid, B=0{\vec B} = 0. We thus might be tempted to assume that we can set A=0{\vec A} = 0. However, we can only do this everywhere in a simply connected region and the region outside of the solenoid fails to be simply connected. This is why I was careful to state that we can solve B=×A{\vec B} = {\vec\nabla} \times{\vec A} for A{\vec A} in a simply connected region. Consider two overlapping regions R1,R2R_1, R_2 as shown, and take a path C=C1+C2C = C_1 + C_2 around the solenoid that passes through both of them at z=0z = 0, such that CiC_i lies in region RiR_i. By Stoke’s theorem,

dl(×A)=Rd2xBz=Φ=C1d(l(×A)+C2dl×A)\oint d{\vec l}\cdot({\vec\nabla}\times{\vec A}) = \int_R d^2 x B_z = \Phi = \oint_{C_1}d({\vec l}\cdot({\vec\nabla}\times{\vec A}) + \oint_{C_2}d{\vec l}\cdot{\vec\nabla}\times{\vec A})

Now in region R1R_1 or R2R_2 we could set A=0{\vec A} = 0 but by the above, we cannot do so in both. If Ai{\vec A}_i is the vector potential in region RiR_i, then in the overlap regions, we must have A1=A2+Λ{\vec A}_1 = {\vec A}_2 + {\vec\nabla} \Lambda; they are related by a gauge transformation.

Aharono-Bohm experiment

Now, what do our wavefunctions look like? Outside of the solenoid, they satisfy the time-dependent Schroedinger equation

22m(i=ecA)ψ=itψ- \frac{\hbar^2}{2m} \left(-i {\vec\nabla} = \frac{e}{c} {\vec A}\right) \psi = i\hbar \del_t \psi

where I have started using the notation t=t\del_t = \frac{\del}{\del t}. Now in a region RiR_i, we can write

ψi(x,t)=eiecx0xdlAϕi\psi_i({\vec x},t) = e^{\frac{i e}{c} \int_{x_0}^{\vec x}d{\vec l}\cdot A} \phi_i

where the line integral stays in region RiR_i. Using this,

(iecA)ψi=eiecx0xdlA(i)ϕi(-i{\vec \nabla} - \frac{e}{c} {\vec A})\psi_i = e^{\frac{i e}{c} \int_{x_0}^{\vec x}d{\vec l}\cdot A} (-i{\vec\nabla})\phi_i

so that

22m2ϕi=itϕi- \frac{\hbar^2}{2m}\nabla^2 \phi_i = i\hbar \del_t \phi_i

and ϕi\phi_i are the wavefunctions for the double slit experiment absent the screen.

We assume that the wavefunction ϕi\phi_i has support only in RiR_i, so that we can unambigoulsy write ψi\psi_i via the above shift. Now let us measure the position of the particle at xmeasx_{meas}. The result is

p(y,δ)=δeiecx0,R1xmeasdlA ϕ1+eiecx0,R2xmeasdlAϕ2=ϕ12+ϕ22+ϕ2ϕ1eiecΦ+c.c.\begin{align} p(y,\delta) & = \delta e^{i \frac{e}{c} \int_{x_0,R_1}^{x_{meas}} d{\vec l}\cdot{\vec A}}\ \phi_1+ e^{i \frac{e}{c} \int_{x_0,R_2}^{x_{meas}} d{\vec l}\cdot{\vec A}}\phi_2 \\ & = |\phi_1|^2 + |\phi_2|^2 + \phi_2^* \phi_1 e^{i\frac{e}{c}\Phi} + c.c. \end{align}

In other words, as we change Φ\Phi, the interference fringes will undergo a phase shift proportional to the magnetic flux through the solenoid.