Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

arXiv:0705.0744

Classical and Quantum Interaction of the Dipole Revisited

Tomislav Ivezić

Published May 5, 2007• 0 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

The interaction of the electric and magnetic dipole moments of a particle with the electromagnetic field is investigated in an approach that deals with four-dimensional (4D) geometric quantities. The new commutation relations for the 4D orbital and intrinsic angular momentums and also for the 4D dipole moments are introduced. The expectation value of the quantum 4-force, which holds in any frame, is worked out in terms of them. In contrast to it the whole calculation in [1] ([1] J. Anandan, Phys. Rev. Lett. \textbf{85}, 1354 (2000)) has been made only in the rest frame of the dipole. It is proved that, e.g., the expression for the 3D force $\mathbf{f}%_{S}$ in [1] is not relativistically correct and that the quantum 4-force is not zero in the experiments proposed in [1]. This means that the phase shifts that could be observed in such experiments are not topological phase shifts.

DOI
10.48550/arxiv.0705.0744

Related papers

Dynamics of dipoles and quantum phases in noncommutative coordinates

Ö. F. Dayi

The dynamics of a spin-(1/2) neutral particle possessing electric- and magnetic-dipole moments interacting with external electric and magnetic fields in noncommutative coordinates is obtained. Noncommutativity of space is interposed in terms of a semiclassical constrained Hamiltonian system. The relation between the quantum phase acquired by a particle interacting with an electromagnetic field and the (semi)classical force acting on the system is examined and generalized to establish a formulation of the quantum phases in noncommutative coordinates. The general formalism is applied to physical systems yielding the Aharonov-Bohm, Aharonov-Casher, He-McKellar-Wilkens and Anandan phases in noncommutative coordinates. Bounds for the noncommutativity parameter θ are derived comparing the deformed phases with the experimental data on the Aharonov-Bohm and Aharonov-Casher phases.

arXiv:0810.5468•Europhysics Letters (EPL)•Feb 1, 2009•9 citations

Quantum Effect of the Aharonov-Bohm Type for Particles with an Electric Dipole Moment

Gianfranco Spavieri

In the effects of the Aharonov-Bohm type the topological properties of the phase shift are directly related to those of the linear and angular momentum of the electromagnetic fields. This interpretation leads to the formulation of a nonlocal topological effect for particles possessing an electric dipole moment. The experimental observation of this effect is within reach of atom or molecular interferometry.

Physical Review Letters•May 17, 1999•57 citations

The geometric phase and dynamics of electric and magnetic dipoles

Reinaldo da Conceição

In this work, we study the geometric phase and the dynamics of electric and magnetic dipoles. We present your origins, some relevant works in this area as well as your results. The appearance of a geometric phase is explained when a study of quantum dynamics of the particle is made, during a complete cycle and that is subject to cyclic adiabatic processes. The present study begins with an introduction about the geometric phase, where we present examples used to illustrate it. Next, the adiabatic theorem was presented in both classical and quantum systems and a discourse on adiabatic invariants. After this, we present its final mathematical formulation and also its obtaining for a spin 1/2 particle. Soon after, we obtained the Lagrangian and its Hamiltonian, we find the quantum phase that the particle acquired in the efect Aharonov- Bohm and Aharonov - Casher. We have also seen the quantum dynamics of both electric and magnetic dipoles, where we start from the Lagrangian and study its field configurations, we reach the Ananda phase, where in the next step we obtain phases for some of the Field configurations in the Ananda phase from phase of Aharonov - Casher where we made the electric dipole moment equal to zero, as well as the He - Mckellar - Welkens phase with magnetic dipole moment equal to zero, and the Casella efect thus obtaining a particle case of the Ananda phase.

•Jun 27, 2019•0 citations

Speculation on Quantum Spin, Intrinsic Force and Special Relativity Part 2

Francesco R. Ruggeri

In Part 1, we tried to understand why spin arises. The basic conclusion was that it is linked with an intrinsic force which in turn is associated with E,p (energy momentum) and geometry (rotational symmetry and other symmetries). In practical terms, this means finding an equation linear in intrinsic force (as force appears linearly in nature), but still tied to E,p and geometry. Interestingly, this leads to two very different results for particles with rest mass (spin ½) and photons, although both satisfy the same special relativistic equations (albeit the photon with rest mass mo=0) and both have exp(-iEt+ipx) free wavefunctions. In the photon case, the Electric field El is the intrinsic force (together with the magnetic B) which gives rise to both energy and momentum density. Specifically, energy density= .5eo El dot El + .5/uo B dot B and momentum density = 1/uo El x B. In the photon case, however, there is no rest frame and so the classical vector El is directly associated with E (energy) and p (momentum) without one needing to consider special relativity. Instead one directly uses Maxwell’s electromagnetic equations in order to find a linear equation describing the classical vector El. This equation involves d/dt partial and grad partial which are linked to the quantum operators for E and p (id/dt, -igrad) and El itself is proportional on exp(-iEt+ipx) (actually cos(-wt+kx)), also from Maxwell’s equations. Given this scenario, one has a classical vector El which is perpendicular to B and both lie in a plane perpendicular to motion. For circular polarization, El moves in a circle and given that it gives rise to energy, this energy circulates like classical angular momentum. For the 3-vector for El, one says that one has spin 1, but for circular polarized light, this is classical angular momentum. As a result, spin in the photon case follows from the behaviour of the intrinsic force (a linear equation in this force as shown in Part 1), but one must also have a clear link between the intrinsic force and the consequential energy and force, because it is the energy which actually has to rotate. It is not enough to have El rotate. In the case of a particle with rest mass, we argued in Part 1 that mo (Newton’s inertia) is the intrinsic force which together with velocity gives rise to the consequential energy E and momentum p. The situation is that one actually has two physical frames, the rest frame with the intrinsic force mo and the moving frame in which one has E,p. In order to link the intrinsic force mo to E, p, one must use a Lorentz invariant. We suggested in Part 1 that -Et+px = -mocc t1 is associated with -E dt + p dx = -mocc dt1 + (p=0) * (dx1->inifite) =0. Then dx=hbar/p, dt=hbar/E and E/dx and p/dt are average forces as is mocc/dt1. Tthe idea of force is very much the cornerstone of exp(-iEt+ipx) we argue. In order to see spin arise, one needs an equation linear in mo (the intrinsic force), but linked to E,p and showing geometrical invariances, according to the recipe of Part 1. -EE + cc p dot p = -momocc ((1)) links E,p, mo and shows invariances, but is not linear in mo. One must then linearize it. This means that one compares to Lorentz frames, the rest frame containing mo and the moving containing E,p. Both mo and p are linked to forces, but mo is the intrinsic force and p, the consequential. As a result, they must somehow be separated as they are in ((1)), in particular they are perpendicular if one considers: EE = pz pz + momo (c=1, p->px). In order to linearize without using unit vectors, one cannot use numbers, but must use matrices (as Dirac showed). The operator linked with pz must anticommute with that linked with mo. The operators associated with the consequential and intrinsic forces differ and in fact anticommute in the rest mass case. One may show that one requires at least a 2x2 matrix (the full Dirac treatment uses a 4-vector made of 2 spinors), which means that there is a two vector state. This is presumably associated with motion, if exp(ipz z) is linked to motion as well. In order to analyze this 2 vector state (spinor), we first compare the situation with the photon case. There, one had a 3-vector El which means that one knows an exact position in the plane. The second piece of information must be the direction in which this vector is moving in a circle (for circularly polarized light). There are two a priori given pieces of information which together with the link between El and energy density yields classical angular motion. In the rest mass case, one again expects rotational motion in a plane perpendicular to the z axis (because pz describes all motion along z). (1,0) and (0,1), however, describe classical rotational direction, clockwise and counterclockwise, but this spin ½ case cannot be classical rotation because the physical vector in the plane is not given (as it is by El the intrinsic force). Thus, one has only the direction of rotation. We argue that if exp(ipx) means that one has p hits at different x within hbar/p with probability exp(ipx), one may imagine different x,y positions of energy in the plane (with probabilities) as long as the rotation for (1,0) for each is in the clockwise direction (for example). This means that a physical vector may appear at some x,y in the plane and then at an x1,t1 which would be considered a classical time in the past as long as the motion is clockwise. In this way, one may have an angle of 720 degrees (instead of 360 degrees) describe the motion. In terms of interaction with a B field, one has the clear two directions (spin up clockwise and spin down counterclockwise as examples). Thus, spin must exist in the rest mass case, because one must have mo perpendicular to p if special relativity is to hold. If one does not want to have spin, then one must disregard the equivalence of frames moving at constant speeds with respect to each other and that seems unphysical. (Note: There are spin 0 objects (Higgs particle), but we do not consider that here.

•Feb 7, 2026•0 citations

Force law in material media and quantum phases

Alexander Kholmetskii, Oleg Missevitch, Tolga Yarman

We show that the known expressions for the force on a point-like dipole are incompatible with the relativistic transformation of force, and in this respect we apply the Lagrangian approach to the derivation of the correct equation for force on a small electric/magnetic dipole. The obtained expression for the generalized momentum of a moving dipole predicts two novel quantum effects with non-topological and non-dynamic phases, when an electric dipole is moving in an electric field, and when a magnetic dipole is moving in a magnetic field, respectively.

arXiv:1511.04341•Europhysics Letters (EPL)•Jan 1, 2016•20 citations

Classical Interaction of a Magnet and a Point Charge: The Classical Electromagnetic Forces Responsible for the Aharonov-Bohm Phase Shift

Timothy H. Boyer

A new classical electromagnetic analysis is presented suggesting that the Aharonov-Bohm phase shift is overwhelmingly likely to arise from a classical lag effect based upon classical electromagnetic forces. The analysis makes use of several aspects of classical electromagnetic theory which are unfamiliar to most physicists, including the Darwin Lagrangian, acceleration-based electric fields, internal electromagnetic momentum in a magnet, and a magnet model involving at least three mutually-interacting particles. Only when the acceleration-based electric forces acting on the passing charge are included do we find consistency with all the relativistic conservation laws: energy, linear momentum, angular momentum, and constant center-of-mass velocity. The electric forces on the passing charge lead to a lag effect which accounts quantitatively for the Aharonov-Bohm phase shift. Thus the classical analysis strongly suggests that the Aharonov-Bohm phase shift (observed when electrons pass a long solenoid which corresponds to a line of magnetic dipoles) is the analogue of the Matteucci-Pozzi phase shift (observed when electrons pass a line of electric dipoles). The classical electromagnetic analysis suggests experiments to distinguish the proposed classical-based lag effect from the presently accepted view that the Aharonov-Bohm phase shift is a quantum topological effect arising from magnetic fluxes in the absence of classical electromagnetic forces.

arXiv:1408.3745•Aug 16, 2014•4 citations
The interaction of the electric and magnetic dipole moments of a particle with the electromagnetic field is investigated in an approach that deals with four-dimensional (4D) geometric quantities. The new commutation relations for the 4D orbital and intrinsic angular momentums and also for the 4D dipole moments are introduced. The expectation value of the quantum 4-force, which holds in any frame, is worked out in terms of them. In contrast to it the whole calculation in [1] ([1] J. Anandan, Phys. Rev. Lett. \textbf{85}, 1354 (2000)) has been made only in the rest frame of the dipole. It is proved that, e.g., the expression for the 3D force f\mathbf{f}%_{S}f in [1] is not relativistically correct and that the quantum 4-force is not zero in the experiments proposed in [1]. This means that the phase shifts that could be observed in such experiments are not topological phase shifts.
The dynamics of a spin-(1/2) neutral particle possessing electric- and magnetic-dipole moments interacting with external electric and magnetic fields in noncommutative coordinates is obtained. Noncommutativity of space is interposed in terms of a semiclassical constrained Hamiltonian system. The relation between the quantum phase acquired by a particle interacting with an electromagnetic field and the (semi)classical force acting on the system is examined and generalized to establish a formulation of the quantum phases in noncommutative coordinates. The general formalism is applied to physical systems yielding the Aharonov-Bohm, Aharonov-Casher, He-McKellar-Wilkens and Anandan phases in noncommutative coordinates. Bounds for the noncommutativity parameter θ are derived comparing the deformed phases with the experimental data on the Aharonov-Bohm and Aharonov-Casher phases.
In this work, we study the geometric phase and the dynamics of electric and magnetic dipoles. We present your origins, some relevant works in this area as well as your results. The appearance of a geometric phase is explained when a study of quantum dynamics of the particle is made, during a complete cycle and that is subject to cyclic adiabatic processes. The present study begins with an introduction about the geometric phase, where we present examples used to illustrate it. Next, the adiabatic theorem was presented in both classical and quantum systems and a discourse on adiabatic invariants. After this, we present its final mathematical formulation and also its obtaining for a spin 1/2 particle. Soon after, we obtained the Lagrangian and its Hamiltonian, we find the quantum phase that the particle acquired in the efect Aharonov- Bohm and Aharonov - Casher. We have also seen the quantum dynamics of both electric and magnetic dipoles, where we start from the Lagrangian and study its field configurations, we reach the Ananda phase, where in the next step we obtain phases for some of the Field configurations in the Ananda phase from phase of Aharonov - Casher where we made the electric dipole moment equal to zero, as well as the He - Mckellar - Welkens phase with magnetic dipole moment equal to zero, and the Casella efect thus obtaining a particle case of the Ananda phase.
In Part 1, we tried to understand why spin arises. The basic conclusion was that it is linked with an intrinsic force which in turn is associated with E,p (energy momentum) and geometry (rotational symmetry and other symmetries). In practical terms, this means finding an equation linear in intrinsic force (as force appears linearly in nature), but still tied to E,p and geometry. Interestingly, this leads to two very different results for particles with rest mass (spin ½) and photons, although both satisfy the same special relativistic equations (albeit the photon with rest mass mo=0) and both have exp(-iEt+ipx) free wavefunctions. In the photon case, the Electric field El is the intrinsic force (together with the magnetic B) which gives rise to both energy and momentum density. Specifically, energy density= .5eo El dot El + .5/uo B dot B and momentum density = 1/uo El x B. In the photon case, however, there is no rest frame and so the classical vector El is directly associated with E (energy) and p (momentum) without one needing to consider special relativity. Instead one directly uses Maxwell’s electromagnetic equations in order to find a linear equation describing the classical vector El. This equation involves d/dt partial and grad partial which are linked to the quantum operators for E and p (id/dt, -igrad) and El itself is proportional on exp(-iEt+ipx) (actually cos(-wt+kx)), also from Maxwell’s equations. Given this scenario, one has a classical vector El which is perpendicular to B and both lie in a plane perpendicular to motion. For circular polarization, El moves in a circle and given that it gives rise to energy, this energy circulates like classical angular momentum. For the 3-vector for El, one says that one has spin 1, but for circular polarized light, this is classical angular momentum. As a result, spin in the photon case follows from the behaviour of the intrinsic force (a linear equation in this force as shown in Part 1), but one must also have a clear link between the intrinsic force and the consequential energy and force, because it is the energy which actually has to rotate. It is not enough to have El rotate. In the case of a particle with rest mass, we argued in Part 1 that mo (Newton’s inertia) is the intrinsic force which together with velocity gives rise to the consequential energy E and momentum p. The situation is that one actually has two physical frames, the rest frame with the intrinsic force mo and the moving frame in which one has E,p. In order to link the intrinsic force mo to E, p, one must use a Lorentz invariant. We suggested in Part 1 that -Et+px = -mocc t1 is associated with -E dt + p dx = -mocc dt1 + (p=0) * (dx1->inifite) =0. Then dx=hbar/p, dt=hbar/E and E/dx and p/dt are average forces as is mocc/dt1. Tthe idea of force is very much the cornerstone of exp(-iEt+ipx) we argue. In order to see spin arise, one needs an equation linear in mo (the intrinsic force), but linked to E,p and showing geometrical invariances, according to the recipe of Part 1. -EE + cc p dot p = -momocc ((1)) links E,p, mo and shows invariances, but is not linear in mo. One must then linearize it. This means that one compares to Lorentz frames, the rest frame containing mo and the moving containing E,p. Both mo and p are linked to forces, but mo is the intrinsic force and p, the consequential. As a result, they must somehow be separated as they are in ((1)), in particular they are perpendicular if one considers: EE = pz pz + momo (c=1, p->px). In order to linearize without using unit vectors, one cannot use numbers, but must use matrices (as Dirac showed). The operator linked with pz must anticommute with that linked with mo. The operators associated with the consequential and intrinsic forces differ and in fact anticommute in the rest mass case. One may show that one requires at least a 2x2 matrix (the full Dirac treatment uses a 4-vector made of 2 spinors), which means that there is a two vector state. This is presumably associated with motion, if exp(ipz z) is linked to motion as well. In order to analyze this 2 vector state (spinor), we first compare the situation with the photon case. There, one had a 3-vector El which means that one knows an exact position in the plane. The second piece of information must be the direction in which this vector is moving in a circle (for circularly polarized light). There are two a priori given pieces of information which together with the link between El and energy density yields classical angular motion. In the rest mass case, one again expects rotational motion in a plane perpendicular to the z axis (because pz describes all motion along z). (1,0) and (0,1), however, describe classical rotational direction, clockwise and counterclockwise, but this spin ½ case cannot be classical rotation because the physical vector in the plane is not given (as it is by El the intrinsic force). Thus, one has only the direction of rotation. We argue that if exp(ipx) means that one has p hits at different x within hbar/p with probability exp(ipx), one may imagine different x,y positions of energy in the plane (with probabilities) as long as the rotation for (1,0) for each is in the clockwise direction (for example). This means that a physical vector may appear at some x,y in the plane and then at an x1,t1 which would be considered a classical time in the past as long as the motion is clockwise. In this way, one may have an angle of 720 degrees (instead of 360 degrees) describe the motion. In terms of interaction with a B field, one has the clear two directions (spin up clockwise and spin down counterclockwise as examples). Thus, spin must exist in the rest mass case, because one must have mo perpendicular to p if special relativity is to hold. If one does not want to have spin, then one must disregard the equivalence of frames moving at constant speeds with respect to each other and that seems unphysical. (Note: There are spin 0 objects (Higgs particle), but we do not consider that here.
We show that the known expressions for the force on a point-like dipole are incompatible with the relativistic transformation of force, and in this respect we apply the Lagrangian approach to the derivation of the correct equation for force on a small electric/magnetic dipole. The obtained expression for the generalized momentum of a moving dipole predicts two novel quantum effects with non-topological and non-dynamic phases, when an electric dipole is moving in an electric field, and when a magnetic dipole is moving in a magnetic field, respectively.
A new classical electromagnetic analysis is presented suggesting that the Aharonov-Bohm phase shift is overwhelmingly likely to arise from a classical lag effect based upon classical electromagnetic forces. The analysis makes use of several aspects of classical electromagnetic theory which are unfamiliar to most physicists, including the Darwin Lagrangian, acceleration-based electric fields, internal electromagnetic momentum in a magnet, and a magnet model involving at least three mutually-interacting particles. Only when the acceleration-based electric forces acting on the passing charge are included do we find consistency with all the relativistic conservation laws: energy, linear momentum, angular momentum, and constant center-of-mass velocity. The electric forces on the passing charge lead to a lag effect which accounts quantitatively for the Aharonov-Bohm phase shift. Thus the classical analysis strongly suggests that the Aharonov-Bohm phase shift (observed when electrons pass a long solenoid which corresponds to a line of magnetic dipoles) is the analogue of the Matteucci-Pozzi phase shift (observed when electrons pass a line of electric dipoles). The classical electromagnetic analysis suggests experiments to distinguish the proposed classical-based lag effect from the presently accepted view that the Aharonov-Bohm phase shift is a quantum topological effect arising from magnetic fluxes in the absence of classical electromagnetic forces.