Comment on “Analysis of recent interpretations of the Abraham-Minkowski problem”

Abstract

In a recent paper [I. Brevik, Phys. Rev. A 98, 043847 (2018)], Brevik analyzed the experiment by Kundu et al. [A. Kundu et al., Sci. Rep. 7, 42538 (2017)] reporting deformation of a graphene oxide (GO) film after it has been irradiated by a laser beam. The two-dimensional atomic force microscope (AFM) line scanning of the deformation of the GO film after switching off the laser beam takes by far too much time for any elastic changes to remain in the AFM scans. Thus, the changes in the GO film are irreversible and the optoelastic model used by Brevik is not applicable. The rough estimates of the kinetic energy and displacement of atoms by the optical force of a light pulse calculated by Brevik are correct, but in making a comparison with the corresponding high-precision results for the kinetic energy and displacement of atoms in our work [M. Partanen et al., Phys. Rev. A 95, 063850 (2017)], the kinetic energy of atoms is confused with their rest energy. The atoms and their masses are displaced forward by the field and their displaced rest energies give rise to an energy flux. The difference of arguments between ours and Brevik's culminates on the question whether the flux of rest energy caused by the displacement of the medium moving with light should be included in the total energy flux. We also show that the four-divergence of the stress-energy-momentum tensor of the mass polariton theory of light is zero.

Quantitative in situ measurement of optical force along a strand of cleaved silica optical fiber induced by the light guided therewithin

“…There also exist measurements of the steady-state radiation pressure on mirrors immersed in liquids [14,15]. Experiments on the forces of light in lossless solids have been very scarce and rather qualitative or hindered by the lossy nature of solids [16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23]. From literature, one can conclude that previous works have used neither mechanical resonators nor optical fibers to quantitatively measure optical forces inside materials.…”

Quantitative in situ measurement of optical force along a strand of cleaved silica optical fiber induced by the light guided therewithin

“…Even more generally, quantitative experiments on the momen-tum of light in lossless solids have been very scarce, and previous experiments for light propagation in solids have been either rather qualitative or hindered from the lossy nature of the solids [33,40,41]. Prior works on light momentum in solids, therefore, have raised subsequent debates with confronting interpretations [42][43][44][45].…”

Minkowski tensor in electrodynamics of moving media and three rules for construction of the physical tensors in Einstein's special relativity

“…I would like to emphasize that, whether the MP SEM tensor fulfills Lorentz transformation is the core issue of the whole Partanen-Tulkki theory. For example, Partanen and Tulkki claim in a recent Comment [9] that they have proved the divergence-free of their MP SEM tensor, namely ∂ ν T µν MP = 0. However Partanen-Tulkki proof is not valid, because T µν MP does not fulfill Lorentz transformation so that the holding of ∂ ν T µν MP = 0 in the laboratory frame (namely the medium-rest frame) is no guarantee of the holding of ∂ ν T µν MP = 0 in a general frame.…”