Ascendancy of potentials over fields in electrodynamics

TL;DR

This paper argues that potentials are fundamental in electrodynamics, with fields being secondary, and demonstrates that using potentials avoids misconceptions and errors in classical and quantum phenomena, challenging traditional field-centric views.

Contribution

It introduces a hierarchy where potentials are primary and fields are secondary, providing examples that show the advantages of potential-based analysis over field-based approaches.

Findings

Potentials are more fundamental than fields in electrodynamics.

Gauge-related fields can be physically distinguished using potentials.

Potential-based analysis avoids misconceptions in high-intensity laser physics.

Abstract

Multiple bases are presented for the conclusion that potentials are fundamental in electrodynamics, with electric and magnetic fields as quantities auxiliary to the scalar and vector potentials -- opposite to the conventional ordering. One foundation for the concept of basic potentials and auxiliary fields consists of examples where two sets of gauge-related fields are such that one is physical and the other is erroneous, with the information for the proper choice supplied by the potentials. A major consequence is that a change of gauge is not a unitary transformation in quantum mechanics; a principle heretofore unchallenged. The primacy of potentials over fields leads to the concept of a hierarchy of physical quantities, where potentials and energies are primary, while fields and forces are secondary. Secondary quantities provide less information than do primary quantities. Some criteria by which strong laser fields are judged are based on secondary quantities, making it possible to arrive at inappropriate conclusions. This is exemplified by several field-related misconceptions as diverse as the behavior of charged particles in very low frequency propagating fields, and the fundamental problem of pair production at very high intensities. In each case, an approach based on potentials gives appropriate results, free of ambiguities. The examples encompass classical and quantum phenomena, in relativistic and nonrelativistic conditions. This is a major extension of the quantum-only Aharonov-Bohm effect, both in supporting the primacy of potentials over fields, and also in showing how field-based conceptions can lead to errors in basic applications.