I Energy and momentum of a photon in a medium

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the differing views regarding the energy and momentum of photons in a medium, referencing two contrasting papers. One paper claims that a photon's energy depends on the medium while its momentum does not, while the other suggests the opposite. The debate is linked to the classical Abraham-Minkowski controversy, which involves differing interpretations of how electromagnetic wave momentum changes in a medium. The resolution of this controversy requires considering both the momentum of the medium and the electromagnetic wave, leading to a more complete understanding. The conversation also hints at the complexity of resolving these issues in quantum mechanics, suggesting that similar principles may apply but with more intricate mathematics involved.
weafq
Messages
2
Reaction score
2
TL;DR
Does energy and / or momentum of a photon change in a medium
Physics news on Phys.org
However I have not read the articles, I would say the third statement : neither energy nor momentum depend on medium. Medium is made of atoms or ions in vacuum. There photons mostly travel in vacuum and rarely interact with distributed atoms or ions. We may think of moving in vacuum and interaction with atoms separetely.
 
I don’t know for single photons, but this particular dilemma is part of classical EM.

For classical EM it is called the Abraham Minkowski controversy. The controversy is basically just that both Abraham and Minkowski have plausible arguments but Minkowski argued that the momentum of an EM wave increases as it enters a transparent medium while Abraham argued that it decreases.

The classical controversy is resolved by considering the momentum of the medium also. The energy and momentum tensor of the EM wave and the material are each individually incomplete. Only the total tensor is well defined.

For details on the resolution of the classical controversy see Peiffer et al https://arxiv.org/abs/0710.0461

I imagine that the essence of the quantum version of this will be resolved similarly, albeit with a bunch more complicated math.
 
  • Like
Likes pines-demon
weafq said:
According to this paper: ht
Which is nonsense in a predatory journal.
 
For the quantum state ##|l,m\rangle= |2,0\rangle## the z-component of angular momentum is zero and ##|L^2|=6 \hbar^2##. According to uncertainty it is impossible to determine the values of ##L_x, L_y, L_z## simultaneously. However, we know that ##L_x## and ## L_y##, like ##L_z##, get the values ##(-2,-1,0,1,2) \hbar##. In other words, for the state ##|2,0\rangle## we have ##\vec{L}=(L_x, L_y,0)## with ##L_x## and ## L_y## one of the values ##(-2,-1,0,1,2) \hbar##. But none of these...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
58
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 47 ·
2
Replies
47
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K