Question about Electromagnetic Energy

AI Thread Summary
Feynman highlighted the ambiguity in electromagnetic energy density and flux, indicating that multiple expressions consistent with Maxwell's Equations exist, yet none have been definitively proven correct. Since the publication of the Feynman Lectures, discussions continue regarding the validity of common expressions for electromagnetic energy. A recent paper suggests that intrinsic spin can be attributed to the rotating energy flux of an electron's probability wave function, emphasizing the freedom in defining energy flux. The authors argue that a covariant choice of energy flux aligns with relativity, providing a framework for interpretation. Despite theoretical advancements, practical experiments to determine the exact location of electromagnetic energy remain challenging.
lugita15
Messages
1,553
Reaction score
15
In his Lectures on Physics, Feynman derives the electromagnetic energy density u and the electromagnetic energy flux \vec{S}. However, he states that there is an ambiguity in the field energy: the common expressions given for u and \vec{S} are only the simplest known expressions. There are really an infinite number of possible expressions for u and \vec{S} which are consistent with Maxwell's Equations, and as of the publication of the Feynman lectures, no one could figure out which one is correct.
Feynman even says, "People have guessed that the simplest one is probably the correct one, but we must say that we do not know for certain what is the actual location in space of the electromagnetic field energy." He later says, "It is interesting that there seems to be no unique way to resolve the indefiniteness in the location of the field energy."

My question is, since the publication of the Feynman Lectures, has there been any progress in proving that the commonly given expressions for u and \vec{S} are ultimately correct?

Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Thank You in Advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I was recently reading a paper that attributes intrinsic spin to the rotating energy flux of an electron's probability wave function. It also noted a freedom in the definition of energy flux (and pointed out that only one choice cleanly gave rise to the elegant interpretation they were interested in), but said that their choice was the only covariant one (i.e., that basic consistency with relativity theory provides a suitable constraint to choose the expression).
 
arXiv:0707.3421
 
At any rate, in principle it seems to me that it should be possible to determine the location of energy by the fact that energy gravitates. I just don't imagine that such an experiment is practical.
 
Thread 'Motional EMF in Faraday disc, co-rotating magnet axial mean flux'
So here is the motional EMF formula. Now I understand the standard Faraday paradox that an axis symmetric field source (like a speaker motor ring magnet) has a magnetic field that is frame invariant under rotation around axis of symmetry. The field is static whether you rotate the magnet or not. So far so good. What puzzles me is this , there is a term average magnetic flux or "azimuthal mean" , this term describes the average magnetic field through the area swept by the rotating Faraday...
Back
Top