Question about Electromagnetic Energy

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the ambiguity in the expressions for electromagnetic energy density and flux as presented by Feynman, specifically questioning whether there has been any progress in establishing the correctness of the commonly used expressions since the publication of the Feynman Lectures. The scope includes theoretical considerations and interpretations related to electromagnetic energy in the context of Maxwell's Equations.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant references Feynman's assertion that there are infinitely many expressions for electromagnetic energy density and flux consistent with Maxwell's Equations, and questions the validity of the commonly used expressions.
  • Another participant mentions a paper discussing intrinsic spin related to the rotating energy flux of an electron's probability wave function, highlighting a specific choice of energy flux that aligns with relativity theory.
  • A later reply suggests that the location of energy might be determined by its gravitational effects, although the practicality of such an experiment is questioned.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the ambiguity of electromagnetic energy expressions and the implications of recent theoretical developments, indicating that multiple competing perspectives remain without a consensus on the correctness of the commonly used expressions.

Contextual Notes

The discussion reflects limitations in resolving the ambiguity surrounding the definitions of electromagnetic energy density and flux, as well as the dependence on theoretical interpretations and assumptions regarding relativity.

lugita15
Messages
1,553
Reaction score
15
In his Lectures on Physics, Feynman derives the electromagnetic energy density u and the electromagnetic energy flux [tex]\vec{S}[/tex]. However, he states that there is an ambiguity in the field energy: the common expressions given for u and [tex]\vec{S}[/tex] are only the simplest known expressions. There are really an infinite number of possible expressions for u and [tex]\vec{S}[/tex] 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 [tex]\vec{S}[/tex] 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.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
11K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K