Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2308.11147

Photon topology

Eric Palmerduca·Hong Qin
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

The topology of photons in vacuum is interesting because there are no photons with $\boldsymbol{k}=0$, creating a hole in momentum space. We show that while the set of all photons forms a trivial vector bundle $\gamma$ over this momentum space, the $R$- and $L$-photons form topologically nontrivial subbundles $\gamma_\pm$ with first Chern numbers $\mp2$. In contrast, $\gamma$ has no linearly polarized subbundles, and there is no Chern number associated with linear polarizations. It is a known difficulty that the standard version of Wigner's little group method produces singular representations of the Poincar\'{e} group for massless particles. By considering representations of the Poincar\'{e} group on vector bundles we obtain a version of Wigner's little group method for massless particles which avoids these singularities. We show that any massless bundle representation of the Poincar\'{e} group can be canonically decomposed into irreducible bundle representations labeled by helicity, which in turn can be associated to smooth irreducible Hilbert space representations. This proves that the $R$- and $L$-photons are globally well-defined as particles and that the photon wave function can be uniquely split into $R$- and $L$-components. This formalism offers a method of quantizing the EM field without invoking discontinuous polarization vectors as in the traditional scheme. We also demonstrate that the spin-Chern number of photons is not a purely topological quantity. Lastly, there has been an extended debate on whether photon angular momentum can be split into spin and orbital parts. Our work explains the precise issues that prevent this splitting. Photons do not admit a spin operator; instead, the angular momentum associated with photons' internal degree of freedom is described by a helicity-induced subalgebra corresponding to the translational symmetry of $\gamma$.

Explore related subjects

math-phmath.MPphysics.opticsphysics.plasm-phquant-ph

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Eric Palmerduca, Hong Qin. 2023-08-22. Photon topology. https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevd.109.085005

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Why we should condition denoising diffusion generative models on windows of past observations

Data assimilation (DA) is, traditionally, a cycling process that relies on time-dependent priors to propagate information from past observations to future cycles. Using denoising diffusion generative modeling for DA is challenging because standard approaches use a fixed training data set, which in turn leads to a static prior that ignores information from past observations. Because past observations are ignored, DA systems with static priors lead to larger posterior errors than cycling DA systems. Incorporating time-dependent priors into generative models, however, requires expensive and frequent retraining. Motivated by linear systems theory - where the dependence of a prediction of a Kalman filter on past observations decays exponentially - we condition diffusion models on short windows of past observations. Specifically, we describe training procedures for two frameworks: a diffusion DA system predicting the current state given a set of past observations, and a diffusion ``direct observation prediction'' (DOP) system, predicting future observations given a set of past observations. Using a canonical linear system, we show that both systems can achieve the minimal posterior error characteristic of a fully-cycled DA/DOP system, without re-training, provided the time windows are long enough. The linear setup ensures analytical tractability, avoids confounding neural network training errors, and confirms that conditioning on windows of past observations is required for efficient and accurate diffusion-based DA or DOP.

math-ph↗
arXiv2026

The kinematic structures and the inertial geometry of a moving charge

We ask how much of the geometry a charged particle moves in is fixed by its motion, and how much a particle must bring. We ask of a symplectic structure only that it relate velocity to momentum as Hamilton's equations do, and we ask it of every energy at once. In particular, we show that the structures meeting that demand are the canonical one and its twists by a closed two-form of the base. A field provides the two-form, a particle the multiplier before it, which we identify constitutively with its charge. Thus, a single energy governs a family of structures, and each particle takes the one its charge fixes. We then ask what a particle must bring to be given a momentum, and we show that the degree of that map settles the degree at which a field enters Newton's Second Law. An antisymmetric bilinear form returns no Lorentz force, whilst a Randers metric returns one --- a length whose difference from a Riemannian one is linear in the velocity. Moreover, we find that metric already within the twisted structure, as its primitive over a level of the free energy, and its law of transport to be nonlinear, no affine connection being known to serve. Under an indefinite signature the length parts from the dynamics, and the extremals turn from shortest to longest. On the round sphere a monopole flux leaves no such metric, whilst the transport remains and prequantisation, given a unit of action, restricts the charge to a lattice. In this manner, we conclude that each charge-to-mass ratio receives a geometry of its own, so that by a functionalist criterion none of them is the spacetime of a charged particle.

math-ph↗