Abraham–Minkowski controversy: Difference between revisions
m General Fixes using AWB |
Deleted innapproiate comments on journal of physics |
||
| Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
where <math>h</math> is the [[Planck constant]], <math>\nu</math> is the frequency of the light and <math>c</math> is the [[speed of light]] in vacuum. |
where <math>h</math> is the [[Planck constant]], <math>\nu</math> is the frequency of the light and <math>c</math> is the [[speed of light]] in vacuum. |
||
A 2010 study suggested that ''both'' equations are correct, with the Abraham version being the [[kinetic momentum]] and the Minkowski version being the [[canonical momentum]], and claims to explain the contradicting experimental results using this interpretation.<ref>{{cite journal|doi=10.1103/PhysRevLett.104.070401|title=Resolution of the Abraham-Minkowski Dilemma|first=Stephen|last=Barnett|journal=Phys. Rev. Lett.|date=2010-02-07|volume=104|issue=7|page=070401 |pmid=20366861|bibcode=2010PhRvL.104g0401B}}</ref> However, a recent study shows that in the principle-of-relativity frame the Abraham momentum would break global momentum-energy conservation law in the Einstein-box thought experiment.<ref>{{cite journal|doi=10.4236/jmp.2013.48151|title=Can the Abraham light momentum and energy in a medium constitute a Lorentz four-vector?|first=Changbiao|last=Wang|journal=Journal of Modern Physics|date=2013-08-14|volume=4|issue=8|page=1123}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|url=http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1202/1202.2575.pdf|title=Comment on 'Resolution of the Abraham-Minkowski Dilemma' |first=Changbiao|last=Wang|date=2013-10-13|journal=http://arxiv.org/abs/1202.2575v4}}</ref> |
A 2010 study suggested that ''both'' equations are correct, with the Abraham version being the [[kinetic momentum]] and the Minkowski version being the [[canonical momentum]], and claims to explain the contradicting experimental results using this interpretation.<ref>{{cite journal|doi=10.1103/PhysRevLett.104.070401|title=Resolution of the Abraham-Minkowski Dilemma|first=Stephen|last=Barnett|journal=Phys. Rev. Lett.|date=2010-02-07|volume=104|issue=7|page=070401 |pmid=20366861|bibcode=2010PhRvL.104g0401B}}</ref> However, a recent study shows that in the principle-of-relativity frame the Abraham momentum would break global momentum-energy conservation law in the Einstein-box thought experiment.<ref>{{cite journal|doi=10.4236/jmp.2013.48151|title=Can the Abraham light momentum and energy in a medium constitute a Lorentz four-vector?|first=Changbiao|last=Wang|journal=Journal of Modern Physics|date=2013-08-14|volume=4|issue=8|page=1123}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|url=http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1202/1202.2575.pdf|title=Comment on 'Resolution of the Abraham-Minkowski Dilemma' |first=Changbiao|last=Wang|date=2013-10-13|journal=http://arxiv.org/abs/1202.2575v4}}</ref> |
||
==References== |
==References== |
||
{{reflist}} |
{{reflist}} |
||
Revision as of 15:48, 11 November 2013
The Abraham–Minkowski controversy is a physics debate concerning electromagnetic momentum within dielectric media.
Two equations exist describing momentum transfer between matter and electromagnetic fields.[1] Both seem to be supported by contradicting experimental data. The two existing equations were first suggested by Hermann Minkowski (1908)[2] and Max Abraham (1909), [3] [4] from which the controversy name derives.
Both define the momentum of an electromagnetic field permeating matter. Abraham's equation suggests that in materials through which light travels more slowly, electromagnetic fields should have lower momentum, while Minkowski suggests it should have a greater momentum. It was suggested that Abraham only accounted for the momentum of the electromagnetic fields, and his equation was an attempt to take into account the momentum of the material as well. More recent work suggests that this characterization is incorrect.[5]
At least one report has suggested Minkowski's formulation, if correct, would provide the physical base for a reactionless drive.[6] However, an independent review from the United States Air Force Academy concluded that there would be no expected net propulsive forces, and a NASA report determined that "The signal levels are not sufficiently above the noise as to be conclusive proof of a propulsive effect."[7]
The two equations for the momentum in a dielectric with refractive index are:
- The Minkowski version:
- The Abraham version:
where is the Planck constant, is the frequency of the light and is the speed of light in vacuum.
A 2010 study suggested that both equations are correct, with the Abraham version being the kinetic momentum and the Minkowski version being the canonical momentum, and claims to explain the contradicting experimental results using this interpretation.[8] However, a recent study shows that in the principle-of-relativity frame the Abraham momentum would break global momentum-energy conservation law in the Einstein-box thought experiment.[9][10]
References
- ^ Robert N. C. Pfeifer, Timo A. Nieminen, Norman R. Heckenberg, and Halina Rubinsztein-Dunlop (October–December 2007). "Colloquium: Momentum of an electromagnetic wave in dielectric media" (PDF). Review of Modern Physics. 79 (4): 1197. arXiv:0710.0461. Bibcode:2007RvMP...79.1197P. doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.79.1197.
{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - ^ Minkowski, Hermann (1908), , Nachrichten von der Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen, Mathematisch-Physikalische Klasse: 53–111
- Wikisource translation: The Fundamental Equations for Electromagnetic Processes in Moving Bodies
- ^ Abraham, Max (1909), , Rendiconti del Circolo Matematico di Palermo, 28: 1–28
- Wikisource translation: On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies
- ^ Abraham, Max (1910), "Sull'Elletrodinamica di Minkowski", Rendiconti del Circolo Matematico di Palermo, 30: 33–46
- Wikisource translation: On the Electrodynamics of Minkowski
- ^ James Dacey (9 Jan 2009). "Experiment resolves century-old optics mystery". physicsworld.com. Retrieved 4 Mar 2010.
- ^ Hector Hugo Brito (1999). "Propellantless Propulsion by Electromagnetic Inertia Manipulation: Theory and Experiment". In Space Technology and Applications International Forum – 1999, Mohamed S. El-Genk (editor). American Institute of Physics. ISBN 978-1-56396-846-4.
- ^ Marc G. Millis (2004). "Report on Prospects for Breakthrough Propulsion From Physics". In Proceedings 2004 NASA/DoD Conference on Evolvable Hardware. IEEE Computer Society. ISBN 0-7695-2145-2.
- ^ Barnett, Stephen (2010-02-07). "Resolution of the Abraham-Minkowski Dilemma". Phys. Rev. Lett. 104 (7): 070401. Bibcode:2010PhRvL.104g0401B. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.104.070401. PMID 20366861.
- ^ Wang, Changbiao (2013-08-14). "Can the Abraham light momentum and energy in a medium constitute a Lorentz four-vector?". Journal of Modern Physics. 4 (8): 1123. doi:10.4236/jmp.2013.48151.
{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link) - ^ Wang, Changbiao (2013-10-13). "Comment on 'Resolution of the Abraham-Minkowski Dilemma'" (PDF). http://arxiv.org/abs/1202.2575v4.
{{cite journal}}: External link in|journal=