Polarization of arbitrary charge distributions: The classical electrodynamics perspective

The conventional definition of electric polarization as the “dipole moment per unit volume” is valid only for the special case of well-separated dipoles. An alternative general approach is to view polarization as a characteristic not of a single charge distribution but rather of an adiabatic transit...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal:	Igor Tsukerman
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Elsevier 2021
Materias:	Polarization Classical electrodynamics Electrostatics Macroscopic fields Physics QC1-999
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/3226f51512454b39b124209e7af53364
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:3226f51512454b39b124209e7af53364
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:3226f51512454b39b124209e7af533642021-11-24T04:32:26ZPolarization of arbitrary charge distributions: The classical electrodynamics perspective2405-428310.1016/j.revip.2021.100061https://doaj.org/article/3226f51512454b39b124209e7af533642021-12-01T00:00:00Zhttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405428321000083https://doaj.org/toc/2405-4283The conventional definition of electric polarization as the “dipole moment per unit volume” is valid only for the special case of well-separated dipoles. An alternative general approach is to view polarization as a characteristic not of a single charge distribution but rather of an adiabatic transition between two nearby states. Polarization can then be rigorously defined as the integral of the current density over that transition. In contrast with the “Modern Theory of Polarization,” which is fully quantum-mechanical, in this paper polarization is considered from the classical perspective. Such treatment is less fundamental but simpler, has pedagogical advantages and, importantly, is subject to fewer constraints. Polarization can be rigorously and unambiguously defined for periodic or nonperiodic charge distributions, finite or infinite, microscale or macroscale, electrically neutral or non-neutral, continuous or discrete, at any temperature; polarization can be spontaneous or induced. A previous classical (non-quantum) analysis by Russakoff (Am J Phys 1970) was (i) limited to the Clausius–Mossotti/Lorenz–Lorentz model of molecular dipoles, and (ii) involves multipole expansions, which the analysis of this paper shows to be redundant.The traditional dipole model of polarization is a straightforward special case of the proposed definition. A number of illustrative examples are presented.Igor TsukermanElsevierarticlePolarizationClassical electrodynamicsElectrostaticsMacroscopic fieldsPhysicsQC1-999ENReviews in Physics, Vol 7, Iss , Pp 100061- (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Polarization Classical electrodynamics Electrostatics Macroscopic fields Physics QC1-999
spellingShingle	Polarization Classical electrodynamics Electrostatics Macroscopic fields Physics QC1-999 Igor Tsukerman Polarization of arbitrary charge distributions: The classical electrodynamics perspective
description	The conventional definition of electric polarization as the “dipole moment per unit volume” is valid only for the special case of well-separated dipoles. An alternative general approach is to view polarization as a characteristic not of a single charge distribution but rather of an adiabatic transition between two nearby states. Polarization can then be rigorously defined as the integral of the current density over that transition. In contrast with the “Modern Theory of Polarization,” which is fully quantum-mechanical, in this paper polarization is considered from the classical perspective. Such treatment is less fundamental but simpler, has pedagogical advantages and, importantly, is subject to fewer constraints. Polarization can be rigorously and unambiguously defined for periodic or nonperiodic charge distributions, finite or infinite, microscale or macroscale, electrically neutral or non-neutral, continuous or discrete, at any temperature; polarization can be spontaneous or induced. A previous classical (non-quantum) analysis by Russakoff (Am J Phys 1970) was (i) limited to the Clausius–Mossotti/Lorenz–Lorentz model of molecular dipoles, and (ii) involves multipole expansions, which the analysis of this paper shows to be redundant.The traditional dipole model of polarization is a straightforward special case of the proposed definition. A number of illustrative examples are presented.
format	article
author	Igor Tsukerman
author_facet	Igor Tsukerman
author_sort	Igor Tsukerman
title	Polarization of arbitrary charge distributions: The classical electrodynamics perspective
title_short	Polarization of arbitrary charge distributions: The classical electrodynamics perspective
title_full	Polarization of arbitrary charge distributions: The classical electrodynamics perspective
title_fullStr	Polarization of arbitrary charge distributions: The classical electrodynamics perspective
title_full_unstemmed	Polarization of arbitrary charge distributions: The classical electrodynamics perspective
title_sort	polarization of arbitrary charge distributions: the classical electrodynamics perspective
publisher	Elsevier
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/3226f51512454b39b124209e7af53364
work_keys_str_mv	AT igortsukerman polarizationofarbitrarychargedistributionstheclassicalelectrodynamicsperspective
_version_	1718415967510331392

Polarization of arbitrary charge distributions: The classical electrodynamics perspective

Ejemplares similares