MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4299795790 · doi:10.1002/andp.200952102-309

The momentum of electromagnetic waves in dielectric materials<sup>*</sup>

2009· article· en· W4299795790 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnalen der Physik · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicQuantum and Classical Electrodynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsMinkowski spacePoynting vectorCovariant transformationMomentum (technical analysis)Quantum electrodynamicsElectromagnetic tensorTensor (intrinsic definition)PhotonMetric tensorElectromagnetic fieldElectromagnetic radiationEnergy–momentum relationMaxwell's equationsMathematical physicsQuantum mechanicsMagnetic field

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Variation of the generally covariant version of Minkowski's Lagrangian of macroscopic Maxwell theory with respect to the metric yields a symmetric tensor T μν which reproduces the Poynting vector 𝒮 i = cT 0i , and therefore would seem to favor Abraham's proposal 𝒫 A i = 𝒮 i /c 2 for the momentum density in a macroscopic electromagnetic wave. However, the T 00 component does not reproduce the standard energy density in the rest frame in the flat limit. The difference between the energy density and T 00 has the same structure as the difference between the Minkowski momentum density 𝒫 M i = n 2 𝒮 i /c 2 and the Abraham momentum density. The result therefore adds further credibility to Minkowski's original energy‐momentum tensor and his proposal for the total momentum density of electromagnetic waves in dielectric materials. We draw attention to the facts that the covariant formulation of macroscopic Maxwell theory of dielectric materials requires a field strength‐velocity coupling term which could only be inferred in a long wavelength limit from quantum electrodynamics, and that the theory is clearly limited to interactions of sub‐UV photons with matter. Therefore, in spite of the fact that macroscopic Maxwell theory can formally be written in generally covariant terms, the theory for n ≠ 1 should be considered as inherently non‐relativistic, with non‐relativistic corrections of order n ‐ 1. The difference 𝒫 M ‐ c ‐2 𝒮 between Minkowski's momentum density and the rescaled Poynting vector is an example of an order n ‐ 1 correction.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.125
Threshold uncertainty score0.533

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.004
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.217 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it