Proposed Experimental Test for the Paradoxical Forces Associated with the Aharonov-Bohm Phase Shift
- 100 Downloads
The classical electromagnetic lag associated with the Aharonov-Bohm phase shift can be obtained by using a Darwin-Lagrangian analysis similar to that given by Coleman and Van Vleck to identify the puzzling forces of the Shockley-James paradox. The classical forces cause changes in particle velocities and so produce a relative lag leading to the same phase shift as predicted by Aharonov and Bohm and observed in experiments. An experiment is proposed to test for this lag aspect implied by the classical analysis but not present in the currently-accepted quantum topological description of the phase shift.
Key words:Aharonov-Bohm effect particle interference effects electromagnetic vector potential
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 4.4. B. Liebowitz, “Significance of the Aharonov-Bohm effect,” Nuovo Cimento 38, 932–950 (1965); “Significance of the Aharonov-Bohm effect. Rebuttal of a criticism,” 46B, 125–127 (1966). T. H. Boyer, “Classical electromagnetic deflections and lag effects associated with quantum interference pattern shifts: Considerations related to the Aharonov-Bohm effect,” Phys. Rev. D 8, 1679–1693 (1973); “The Aharonov-Bohm effect as a classical electromagnetic-lag effect: An electrostatic analogue and possible experimental test,” Nuovo Cimento 100B, 685–701 (1987); “Semiclassical explanation of the Matteucci-Pozzi and Aharonov-Bohm phase shifts,” Found. Phys. 32, 41–49 (2002). The work by B. Liebowitz sees a need for new non-Lorentzian forces in order to explain the Aharonov-Bohm phase shift. My own work is entirely within the context of conventional classical electromagnetic theory.Google Scholar
- 10.10. R. G. Chambers, “Shift of an electron interference pattern by enclosed magnetic flux,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 5, 3–5 (1960), first observed the phase shift. M. Peshkin and A. Tonomura, The Aharonov-Bohm Effect (Lecture Notes in Physics, Vol. 340) (Springer, New York, 1989), give extensive references to the experimental tests.CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
- 11.11. T. H. Boyer, “Misinterpretation of the Aharonov-Bohm effect,” Am. J. Phys. 40, 56–59 (1972). R. J. Cook, H. Fearn, and P. W. Milonni, “Fizeau's experiment and the Aharonov-Bohm effect,” Am. J. Phys. 63, 705–710 (1995). These articles point out that the from taken by the phase shift is sometimes presented incorrectly as, for example, in The Feynman Lectures on Physics, Vol. II (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 1964), Sec. 15-5y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 12.12. See G. Matteucci and G. Pozzi, “New diffraction experiment on the electrostatic Aharonov-Bohm effect,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 54, 2469–2470 (1985), and T. H. Boyer, “Semiclassical explanation of the Matteucci-Pozzi and Aharonov-Bohm phase shifts,” Found. Phys. 32, 41–49 (2002).CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar