What gauges can be used in applied electromagnetic calculations?

Basic Information

• Paper ID: 2510.08583
• Title: What gauges can be used in applied electromagnetic calculations?
• Author: V. Onoochin
• Classification: physics.gen-ph
• Publication Date: September 30, 2025
• Paper Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.08583v1

Abstract

In classical electrodynamics, different gauges (i.e., relationships between electromagnetic potentials) are used to describe electromagnetic fields. Some gauges possess specific characteristics and are designed for calculations of special systems (such as those without free charges). All these specific gauges are simplified forms of the Lorenz gauge. However, in addition to the Lorenz gauge, the Coulomb gauge and velocity gauge can also be used without restriction to describe systems of charges and currents.

The conventional view holds that these three gauges are equivalent, meaning that the electromagnetic field expressions obtained from potentials defined in these gauges are identical. However, this paper demonstrates that solutions obtained from the Coulomb gauge and velocity gauge correspond to "superluminal propagation" of the electric field. Since such electric field propagation has not been observed experimentally and is forbidden by relativity, it can be concluded that calculations in these gauges may produce erroneous results. Therefore, these gauges cannot be used for applied electromagnetic calculations.

Research Background and Motivation

1. Research Problem

The core problem addressed in this paper is: which gauge choices are physically reasonable and mathematically correct in applied calculations of classical electrodynamics?

2. Problem Significance

Gauge choice is crucial in electromagnetic calculations because:

• Maxwell's equations are typically not solved directly, but rather through the introduction of scalar potential φ and vector potential A
• Different gauge choices affect the propagation velocity and boundary conditions of potential functions
• Incorrect gauge choices may lead to non-physical results, such as superluminal propagation

3. Limitations of Existing Methods

The conventional view holds that the Lorenz gauge, Coulomb gauge, and velocity gauge are physically equivalent, but the author points out:

• The Coulomb gauge assumes instantaneous propagation of scalar potential (v = ∞)
• The velocity gauge assumes scalar potential propagates at velocity v (v > c)
• These assumptions may lead to superluminal electric field propagation that violates relativity

4. Research Motivation

The author's starting point is to question the conventional view of gauge equivalence, and through mathematical analysis prove that certain gauges produce non-physical results, thereby providing correct guidance for gauge selection in applied electromagnetic calculations.

Core Contributions

1. Theoretical Analysis Contribution: Demonstrates that the Coulomb gauge and velocity gauge produce pathological solutions with superluminal electric field propagation
2. Mathematical Derivation: Provides explicit expressions for electric field components in the Coulomb gauge, revealing the mathematical origin of superluminal propagation
3. Physical Insight: Reveals the limitations of gauge equivalence, indicating that not all gauges are suitable for practical calculations
4. Practical Guidance: Provides clear recommendations for gauge selection in applied electromagnetic calculations, namely that only the Lorenz gauge should be used

Methodology Details

Task Definition

Analyze the effects of different gauge choices on electromagnetic field calculation results in systems containing moving charges, particularly examining whether violations of relativistic superluminal electric field propagation occur.

Theoretical Framework

1. Gauge Conditions

Lorenz Gauge: $\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A} + \frac{1}{c}\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t} = 0$

Coulomb Gauge: $\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A} = 0$

Velocity Gauge: $\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A}^{(v)} + \frac{c}{v^2}\frac{\partial \phi^{(v)}}{\partial t} = 0$

2. Potential Function Equations

In the velocity gauge, potential functions satisfy: $\left(\nabla^2 - \frac{1}{v^2}\frac{\partial^2}{\partial t^2}\right)\phi^{(v)} = -4\pi\rho$

$\left(\nabla^2 - \frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2}{\partial t^2}\right)\mathbf{A}^{(v)} = -\frac{4\pi}{c}\mathbf{J} - c\left(\frac{1}{v^2} - \frac{1}{c^2}\right)\nabla\left(\frac{\partial\phi^{(v)}}{\partial t}\right)$

Technical Innovations

1. Superluminal Propagation Analysis

The author designs a specific physical system:

• Charge q at rest at point P for t < 0
• Begins moving along the x-axis with constant velocity u at t = 0
• Electric field is detected at point O at distance D

2. Mathematical Derivation Strategy

By analyzing two components of the electric field:

• $E_\phi = -\nabla\phi_C$ (from scalar potential)
• $E_A = -\frac{1}{c}\frac{\partial \mathbf{A}_C}{\partial t}$ (from vector potential)

The author proves that these two components do not cancel each other, resulting in net superluminal electric field propagation.

3. Key Mathematical Results

In the Coulomb gauge, the electric field at point O is: $E_{C,x} = \frac{q}{(D-ut)^2}\left\{1 - \frac{u^2}{c^2}\ln\left[1-\frac{c^2t^2}{D^2}\right]\right\}$

When D > ct (superluminal region), this expression yields a non-zero electric field, violating relativity.

Experimental Setup

Theoretical Verification Scheme

The author employs theoretical analysis methods, verifying the physical reasonableness of different gauges through mathematical derivation:

1. System Setup: Suddenly accelerated moving charge system
2. Geometric Configuration: Charge moves along x-axis, detection point at origin
3. Temporal Conditions: Analysis of superluminal region D > ct
4. Computational Method: Integral transforms and spherical coordinate analysis

Analysis Tools

• Mathematica software for complex integral calculations
• Spherical coordinate integral transforms
• Green's function method

Experimental Results

Main Findings

1. Pathological Behavior of Coulomb Gauge

In the superluminal region (D > ct), the Coulomb gauge predicts:

• Electric field responds immediately to the onset of charge motion
• Electric field strength contains velocity-dependent logarithmic terms
• Violates the causality principle

2. Similar Issues with Velocity Gauge

Although complete integral solutions cannot be calculated analytically, analysis shows:

• Vector potential components are proportional to u²
• Scalar potential components do not contain u factors
• The two cannot cancel each other, similarly producing superluminal propagation

3. Mathematical Verification

Through integral calculation: $I_C = \frac{u^2}{c^2}\ln\left[1-\frac{c^2t^2}{D^2}\right]\frac{1}{D-ut}$

This confirms the existence of superluminal electric field components.

Theoretical Analysis Results

1. Breakdown of Gauge Equivalence

Traditional gauge equivalence fails in the following cases:

• Transient processes involving moving charges
• Systems requiring consideration of causality
• Analysis of superluminal propagation regions

2. Physical Consistency Verification

Only the Lorenz gauge passes the physical consistency test:

• Satisfies relativistic causality
• Electromagnetic field propagation velocity equals light speed
• No pathological solutions appear

Related Work

Historical Development

1. Maxwell Theory: Initially solved electromagnetic waves through wave equations of potential functions
2. Gauge Theory Development: Contributions from Jackson, Yang, and others
3. Modern Perspective: Research on generalized gauge invariance by Brown & Crothers

Analysis of Controversial Points

The author criticizes several important related works:

1. Yang's Decomposition Method

Yang proposed that vector potential can be decomposed as: $\mathbf{A}^{(v)} = \mathbf{A}_c + \mathbf{A}_v$

• The author points out the lack of rigorous derivation of wave equations
• Propagation velocity assumptions lack physical foundation

2. Brown & Crothers' Method

Proposed a dyadic Green's function method, but:

• Introduces unproven propagation velocity assumptions
• Mathematical derivation contains logical jumps

3. Jackson's Gauge Transformation

Attempted to prove gauge equivalence, but:

• Definition of gauge function contains mathematical problems
• $\nabla^2\Psi \neq 0$, violating Coulomb gauge conditions

Conclusions and Discussion

Main Conclusions

1. Core Conclusion: Only the Lorenz gauge is applicable for applied electromagnetic calculations
2. Theoretical Finding: The Coulomb gauge and velocity gauge produce non-physical superluminal electric field propagation
3. Practical Guidance: To avoid pathological solutions, gauges assuming superluminal potential propagation should be avoided

Physical Explanation

The root cause of superluminal propagation problems:

• Assumptions of instantaneous or superluminal scalar potential propagation
• Electric field components cannot cancel each other
• Violates the causality principle of special relativity

Limitations

1. Analysis Scope: Primarily addresses suddenly accelerated moving charge systems
2. Mathematical Complexity: Complete integrals in the velocity gauge cannot be solved analytically
3. Experimental Verification: Lacks direct experimental verification

Future Directions

1. Numerical Verification: Numerical simulations of complex systems for verification
2. Quantum Effects: Investigation of gauge choice issues in quantum electrodynamics
3. Experimental Design: Design experiments to verify physical consequences of gauge choice

In-Depth Evaluation

Strengths

1. Theoretical Rigor: Provides detailed mathematical derivations and physical analysis
2. Problem Significance: Questions fundamental assumptions in electromagnetism
3. Practical Value: Provides clear guidance for applied calculations
4. Logical Clarity: Argumentation is logically sound with clear conclusions

Weaknesses

1. Controversial Nature: Challenges widely accepted gauge equivalence principle
2. Experimental Absence: Primarily based on theoretical analysis, lacks experimental support
3. Limited Scope: May only apply to specific types of electromagnetic systems
4. Peer Review: As a preprint, has not undergone rigorous peer review

Impact Assessment

Positive Impact

1. Theoretical Contribution: May promote re-examination of electromagnetic theory
2. Educational Value: Helps clarify physical meaning of gauge choice
3. Computational Guidance: Provides theoretical foundation for numerical electromagnetism

Potential Controversy

1. Theoretical Challenge: Diverges from mainstream viewpoint
2. Requires Verification: Conclusions need more independent research verification
3. Practical Impact: Extent of impact on existing computational methods awaits assessment

Applicable Scenarios

1. Theoretical Research: Fundamental electromagnetic theory research
2. Numerical Computation: Gauge selection in large-scale electromagnetic simulations
3. Educational Application: Gauge theory teaching in advanced electromagnetism courses
4. Engineering Application: Method selection in high-precision electromagnetic field calculations

References

1. J.D Jackson and L.B. Okun, Historical roots of gauge invariance, Rev. Mod. Phys. 73, 663–680 (2001)
2. W.K.H. Panofsky and M. Phillips, Classical Electricity and Magnetism, 2nd ed. (Addison-Wesley, 1962)
3. K.-H. Yang, Gauge transformations and quantum mechanics: II. Physical interpretation of classical gauge transformations. Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 101, 97–118 (1976)
4. G. J. N. Brown and D. S. F. Crothers, Generalised gauge invariance of electromagnetism, J. Phys. A 22, 2939–2959 (1989)
5. J. D. Jackson. From Lorenz to Coulomb and other explicit gauge transformations. Am. J. Phys. 70(9), 912, (2002)

Overall Assessment: This is a challenging theoretical physics paper that questions the conventional view of gauge equivalence in electromagnetism. Although the conclusions are controversial, its rigorous mathematical analysis and clear physical argumentation merit serious consideration. The paper's core contribution lies in revealing that certain gauge choices may lead to non-physical results, providing important theoretical guidance for applied electromagnetic calculations. However, these conclusions require more independent verification and experimental support.