Comment on "Classical and Quantum Interaction of the Dipole"

In this paper I have presented Comment on Anandan's paper (J. Anandan, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 1354 (2000)) [hep-th/9910018].Comment: 1 page, revtex; small changes, mainly typos, according to the published version in Phys. Rev. Let

Comment on "R\"{o}ntgen Quantum Phase Shift: A Semiclassical Local Electrodynamical Effect?''

This paper is Comment on the paper: S.A.R. Horsley and M. Babiker, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 010405 (2005).Comment: minor changes in the text, some references are changed, according to the version which is accepted for publication in Phys. Rev. Let

Lorentzove i “prividne” pretvorbe električnih i magnetskih polja

It has recently been proved in the tensor formalism and the Clifford, i.e., geometric, algebra formalism that the usual transformations of the three-dimensional (3D) vectors of the electric and magnetic fields differ from the Lorentz transformations (boosts) of the corresponding 4D quantities that represent the electric and magnetic fields. In this paper, using geometric algebra formalism, this fundamental difference is examined representing the electric and magnetic fields by bivectors and 1-vectors.Primjenom tenzorskog formalizma i Cliffordove, tj. geometrijske, algebre nedavno je utvrđeno da se uobičajene pretvorbe trodimenzijskih (3D) vektora električnih i magnetskih polja razlikuju od Lorentzovih pretvorbi odgovarajućih 4D veličina koje predstavljaju električna i magnetska polja. Primjenom formalizma geometrijske algebre, u ovom se radu istražuje ta osnovna razlika, predstavljajući električna i magnetska polja kao bivektore i 1-vektore

Jacksonov paradoks i njegovo rješenje četiridimenzijskim geometrijskim veličinama

In this paper it is shown that the real cause of Jackson\u27s paradox is the use of three-dimensional (3D) quantities, e.g., E, B, F, L, T, their transformations and relations. The principle of relativity is naturally satisfied and there is no paradox when the physical reality is attributed to the 4D geometric quantities, e.g., to the 4D torque N (bivector) or, equivalently, to the 4D torques Ns and Nt (1-vectors), which together contain the same physical information as the bivector N

About the Simultaneous Co-Existence of Instantaneous and Retarded Interactions in Classical Electrodynamics

In this paper it is proved that, contrary to the results found by A.E. Chubykalo and S.J. Vlaev (Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 14, 3789 (1999)), the retarded electric and magnetic fields for an uniformly accelerated charge exactly satisfy Maxwell equations (ME). Furthermore it is shown that ME are correctly written in the usual form with the partial derivatives and thus not, as proposed by Chubykalo and Vlaev, with the total derivatives.Comment: 7 pages, to be published in Int. J. Mod. Phys.

The 4D geometric quantities versus the usual 3D quantities. The resolution of Jackson's paradox

In this paper we present definitions of different four-dimensional (4D) geometric quantities (Clifford multivectors). New decompositions of the torque N and the angular momentum M (bivectors) into 1-vectors N_{s}, N_{t} and M_{s}, M_{t} respectively are given. The torques N_{s}, N_{t} (the angular momentums M_{s}, M_{t}), taken together, contain the same physical information as the bivector N (the bivector M). The usual approaches that deal with the 3D quantities $\mathbf{E}$, $\mathbf{B}$, $\mathbf{F}$, $\mathbf{L}$, $\mathbf{N}$, etc. and their transformations are objected from the viewpoint of the invariant special relativity (ISR). In the ISR it is considered that 4D geometric quantities are well-defined both theoretically and \emph{experimentally} in the 4D spacetime. This is not the case with the usual 3D quantities. It is shown that there is no apparent electrodynamic paradox with the torque, and that the principle of relativity is naturally satisfied, when the 4D geometric quantities are used instead of the 3D quantities.Comment: 13 pages, revte