science forum Guru Wannabe
Joined: 04 May 2005
|Posted: Sun Jul 16, 2006 10:38 am Post subject:
Marasmus of "Optics Connumications" editors
Dr. Kawata rejected my paper "A rotating electric dipole radiates spin
and orbital angular momentum" on July 14, 2006.
His message is short:
"The paper under consideration is erroneous. The spin of an
electromagnetic field is a well known concept (e.g., see M. SUFFCZYNSKI
"ELEKTRODYNAMIKA", Warszawa, 1965, page 381) but the ratio of
energy to spin is equal to angular frequency for the circular polarized
plane wave ONLY. So the formula (1.2) of the R.I. Khrapko paper is
wrong because according to this formula E/L=omega for the radiation of
rotating electric dipole but this radiation is not the circular
polarized plane wave."
Meanwhile, Dr. Kawata must know that, according to the scientific
"A plane wave traveling in the z-direction and with infinite extension
in the xy-directions can have no angular momentum about the z-axis,
because ExH is in the z-direction and [r x(ExH)]_z = 0" (W. Heitler,
"The Quantum Theory of Radiation", Clarendon, Oxford, 1954, p. 401).
All today's physicists insist that a circularly polarized plane wave
has no angular momentum. These are: J. D. Jackson, F. Rohrlich, D. E.
Soper, J. M. Jauch, L. H. Ryder, L. Allen, M. J. Padgett, R. Loudon, R.
Zambrini, S. M. Barnett, J. W. Simmons, M. J. Guttmann, A. M. Stewart,
H. C. Ohanian, J. H. Crichton, P. L. Marston, etc.
At the same time all today's physicists insist "this is no longer the
case for a wave with finite extension in the xy-plane" (W. Heitler).
All today's physicists insist that a circularly polarized BEAM "can
always be considered to be carrying a spin angular momentum of h per
photon" (L. Allen and M. J. Padgett, AJP, 70, 568).
Thus the statement "the ratio of energy to spin is equal to angular
frequency for the circular polarized plane wave only" can be considered
as a display of marasmus if we take account of my correspondence with
OC since September 2002.
Note, Optics Communications excludes objections: "The rejection of an
article by one of the Editors should generally be regarded as a final
decision and the conclusion of the review process". Optics
Communications does not want to hear and to see.