| |
 |
|
|
Science Forum Index » Physics - Electromagnetic Forum » Silence of the physicists
Page 1 of 1
|
| Author |
Message |
| Guest |
 Posted: Wed Mar 21, 2007 1:26 pm |
|
|
|
|
I can be wrong. That happened to me before. However, let us check the
facts.
According to my paper "Inevitability of the electrodynamics' spin
tensor" (now see version 2 at www.sciprint.org), theoretical reasons
and results of the works: Phys. Rev. A68 013806 (2003), Opt. Lett. 22
52 (1997), Optics Express 14 6963 (2006), Phys. Rev. Lett. 92 198104
(2004), Phys. Rev. Lett. 91 093602 (2003), Phys. Rev. Lett. 88 053601
(2002) prove that the angular momentum flux carried by a circularly
polarized light beam with plane phase front equals two power of the
beam divided by the frequency. This fact contradicts the standard
electrodynamics, which predicts the beam's angular momentum flux
equals power of the beam divided by frequency, and means the
electrodynamics is incomplete. To correct the electrodynamics, an
electrodynamics' spin tensor must be used.
The paper was submitted to JOSAB, OL, PRA, and PRL, to the 2007 CLEO/
QELS Conference. All submissions were rejected without reviewing.
I sent my paper to the authors. I explained that the authors of the
works (16 persons) seemingly gave theoretical and/or experimental
confirmations of a necessity to modernize the classical
electrodynamics. I have no answer. Only professor Segev, who was not
the author, simply wrote only: "Your paper simply scored low".
According to another my paper "Where is the polarization energy hidden
and where does the force act?", (i) the polarization energy in a
dielectric is caused by an inhomogeneity of the real electric field in
dielectric rather than by the Griffiths' spring energy; (ii) the
standard explanations by Dietz, Utreras-Diaz, Margulies for an origin
of the force acting on dielectric in an electric field are incorrect.
The force, in general, does not act on the bound polarization charge.
The Maxwell stress tensor in dielectric must be used for determining
of a localization of the force.
The paper was submitted to AJP, TPT, and EJP. All submissions were
rejected.
Reviewer of AJP tried to defend Griffiths, but nobody defended Dietz,
Utreras-Diaz, and Margulies. Why the authors keep silence though their
mistakes were taken note of at www.sciprint.org and www.mai.ru?
Radi Khrapko |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
|
Page 1 of 1
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Sat Aug 30, 2008 10:43 am
|
|