Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Mansuripur's Confusion-a-dox

  1. Apr 12, 2014 #1

    pervect

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    This came up while I was trying to research the interaction of an electromagnetic plane wave with a dielectric slab, though the issues appear to be more fundamental.

    The first confusion: An EE"s claim that there is "trouble with the Lorentz law of Force", published in physics review letters.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1205.0096
    http://arxiv.org/abs/1211.3485 (not PRL, but an EE journal)

    I don't believe this. (But it's published in genuine peer-reviewed print).

    The second confusion: A rebuttal by Griffiths, which however relies heavily on "hidden momentum"

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1205.4646

    I would have believed this, but.....

    The third confusion: A paper by Franklin that debunks hidden momentum (mentioned in another thread).

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1205.4646

    I haven't studied this enough to have a personal opinion yet, but it's a bit dissapointing that there's so much confusion on such basic issues in the literature!

    Also, I don't know what papers to recommend to students at this point regarding the Lorentz force law issue, nor the starting questing about the interaction of a plane wave with a dielectric slab. (for example, Mansuripur's http://arxiv.org/abs/1401.7057 published in Optics Express, which I'm not familiar with).
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Apr 12, 2014 #2

    Meir Achuz

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member

    Those papers are too contradictory for students at the present stage. Everything that Mansuripur writes is wrong, and there is no hidden momentum.
     
  4. Apr 12, 2014 #3
    Well, I think, we have an actual problem with classical electrodynamics description and classical mechanics when discussing setup's involving point charge and changing magnetic field source(or the other way around), and in order to solve the problem by the means of inventions, we first got the static EM momentum(undetectable), but then we soon realized that momentum must be paired to respect conservation theorems, therefore, the hidden momentum(this time mechanical and undetectable).

    But it is apparent that, the NO back reaction force term in Maxwell's Equations on the magnetic field source, is the actual source of problem, since it makes us to attach the other part of momentum to non-moving things.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Similar Discussions: Mansuripur's Confusion-a-dox
  1. Relativity confusion (Replies: 6)

  2. Tensor confusion (Replies: 20)

  3. Muon confusion (Replies: 1)

  4. Time confusion (Replies: 12)

Loading...