Hostname: page-component-cb9f654ff-65tv2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-08-18T16:19:21.476Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Double refraction phenomena in quantum field theory

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 October 2008

M. J. Stephen
M. J. Stephen
Affiliation:
Mathematical InstituteOxford
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

It is shown that the phenomena of double refraction—optical activity, Faraday rotation, Kerr effect, etc.—may be treated as scattering problems in quantum field theory. An expression for the scattering cross-section of an atom or molecule for photons may be easily obtained and from this expression using the idea of Stokes operators, equating their expectation values to the classical Stokes parameters, the usual quantum mechanical expressions for optical activity, etc. may be obtained. This approach does not require the ideas of refractive index or polarization of the medium, and emphasizes what are the actual observables in these experiments.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Mathematical Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society , Volume 54 , Issue 1 , January 1958 , pp. 81 - 88
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge Philosophical Society 1958

References

REFERENCES

(1)Darwin, C. G.Trans. Camb. Phil. Soc. 23 (1924), 137.Google Scholar
(2)Born, M. and Jordan, P.Elementare Quantenmechanik (Berlin, 1930).Google Scholar
(3)Condon, E. U.Rev. Mod. Phys. 9 (1937), 434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(4)Heitler, W.Quantum theory of radiation (Oxford, 1954).Google Scholar
(5)Jauch, J. M. and Rohrlich, F.Electrons and photons (New York, 1955).Google Scholar
(6)Fano, U.J. Opt. Soc. Amer. 39 (1949), 859.Google Scholar
(7)Araki, G.Progr. Theor. Phys., Osaka, 1 (1946), 125.Google Scholar
(8)Condon, E. U. and Shortley, G. H.Theory of atomic spectra (Cambridge, 1953).Google Scholar
(9)Beth, R. A.Phys. Rev. 50 (1936), 115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar