# References

THE SECRET LIFE OF THE DIPOLE

Jeeva S. Anandan

Department of Physics and Astronomy

University of South Carolina

Columbia, SC 29208, USA.

E-mail: jeeva@sc.edu

and

Department of Theoretical Physics

University of Oxford

1 Keble Road, Oxford OX1 3NP, U.K.

## Abstract

A new force on the magnetic dipole, which exists in the presence of both electric and magnetic fields, is described. Its origin due to the ‘hidden momentum’, implications and possible experimental tests are discussed.

We are familiar with the acceleration of charged particles, such as protons and electrons, by uniform electromagnetic fields. But neutral particles can be accelerated by uniform fields too, if they possess a magnetic dipole<sup>1,2</sup>. Some consequences and the possibility of observing this force are the focus of a new study<sup>3</sup>.

The force on a magnetic dipole in an electromagnetic field has been studied for more than 100 years. The expression found in textbooks depends on the spatial gradient of the applied magnetic field: $`𝐅=(\mu 𝐁)`$ where $`\mu `$ is the magnetic moment and $`𝐁`$ is the magnetic field. If we imagine the magnetic dipole to be an infinitesimal current loop, then $`\mu `$ is proportional to the angular momentum or the spin of the circulating current. Then $`𝐅`$ may be understood as the net force resulting from the different Lorentz forces acting on different parts of the current loop due to the variation of the magnetic field over the loop.

It therefore came as a surprise to me to find, nine years ago, that there is an additional force on the dipole given by<sup>1,2</sup>

$$𝐟=\tau (𝐁^{}\times \mu )\times 𝐄$$
(1)   
where $`𝐄`$ is the electric field, $`𝐁^{}=𝐁𝐯\times 𝐄`$ is the magnetic field in the rest frame of the dipole that is moving with velocity $`𝐯`$ relative to the laboratory, and $`\tau `$ is the ratio of $`\mu `$ to the spin $`𝐒`$ of the dipole (using units in which the velocity of light is 1).

This force was surprising because it exists even when the fields do not vary in position. It cannot therefore be obtained from the above intuitive picture. It was surprising also because of its dependence on the electric field: as the current loop representing the dipole may have no net electric charge it may be expected not to couple to an electric field. Also, (1) is doubly non linear; it does not reverse in direction if either the electromagnetic field strength or the magnetic moment is reversed (without reversing the spin). I know no other force that is non linear in the field strength (as opposed to the potential). But after four separate derivations<sup>1,2</sup> of (1), in quantum and classical physics, I was convinced that it does exist.

A key to understanding the new force is that for this dipole the kinetic momentum (classically $`m𝐯`$) differs from the canonical momentum $`𝐩`$. The canonical momentum is conserved if there is translational symmetry in space, as when the dipole interacts with a uniform electromagnetic field. In fact,

$$m𝐯=𝐩\mu \times 𝐄$$
(2)   
The rate of change of (2) is the total force by Newton’s second law. The time derivative of $`𝐩`$ is $`𝐅`$, while the time derivative of the last term is $`𝐟`$ (assuming that $`𝐄`$ is time independent).

The last term in (2), which is due to relativistic effects, is called the hidden momentum. This explains the title of this article. The hidden momentum is like the potential for the dipole interacting with an appropriate $`SU(2)`$ Yang-Mills gauge field, because $`\mu `$ is proportional to the spin vector whose components generate the $`SU(2)`$ group. Then (2) corresponds to the non linear term in the Yang-Mills field strength which determines the force.

An example of a neutral particle with a magnetic dipole is the neutron. As in the above example of a current loop, the magnetic moment of the neutron is proportional to its spin of magnitude $`s=\mathrm{}/2`$, where $`\mathrm{}`$ is Planck’s constant divided by $`2\pi `$. Hence, $`\tau =\mu /s=2\mu /\mathrm{}`$. It turns out that when $`B=1`$ Tesla and $`E=10^7Vm^1`$, which can be realistically achieved in the laboratory, the acceleration caused by the new force (1) is of the order of $`12`$ cm/sec<sup>2</sup>. On the face of it this is a large acceleration. But the problem in actually detecting it is that the spin precesses about $`𝐁^{}`$, due to the torque it experiences. With a precession frequency of $`1.8\times 10^8`$ radians $`s^1`$, $`𝐟`$ averages to zero very quickly. That is why it has not already been observed in the large number of experiments in which a dipole interacts with an electromagnetic field. I suggested that to make the effect of the force accumulate, instead of cancel out, $`𝐁`$ may be kept constant while $`𝐄`$ alternates in space<sup>1,2</sup>.

Recently, in a beautiful and clearly written paper, Wagh and Rakhecha<sup>3</sup> have carefully studied this proposal in detail. The neutron is assumed to pass through a sequence of cells each having length $`l`$ and containing transverse uniform electric fields $`𝐄,𝐄,𝐄,𝐄`$…. such that $`𝐄`$ is parallel to a uniform magnetic field $`𝐁`$. The length $`l`$ is chosen so that the time taken for the neutron to travel each cell is half the Larmor period $`T`$ \- that is, the time for its spin to rotate around the magnetic field $`𝐁^{}`$. Suppose that Cartesian axes are chosen such that the $`x`$ axis is along the direction of motion of the neutron and the $`z`$ axis is along the common direction of $`𝐄`$ and $`𝐁`$. To lowest order, $`𝐁^{}=𝐁`$. Then (1) in this approximation is

$$𝐟=\frac{4\mu ^2}{\mathrm{}^2}BE(S_x,S_y,0)$$
(3)   
If originally $`𝐒`$ was in the $`y`$ direction then in this approximation it will rotate in the $`xy`$ plane with constant frequency $`2\pi /T`$. As the neutron traverses the first cell, $`S_x`$ is negative while $`S_y`$ is both positive and negative for sucessive equal durations and averages to zero. Since $`E`$ is negative in the first cell, $`f_x`$ is therefore positive. In the next cell, $`S_x`$ is positive while $`S_y`$ is negative and positive for successive equal durations. But owing to the reversal of $`𝐄`$ in the second cell, $`f_x`$ is positive in the second cell also. Hence $`mv_x`$ steadily increases, whereas $`mv_y`$ fluctuates. More exactly, because $`𝐒`$ rotates about $`𝐁^{}`$ which slightly tilts from the $`z`$ axis to its two sides in the $`yz`$ plane alternatively in successive cells, $`𝐒`$ actually spirals towards the $`z`$ axis. The spin $`𝐒`$ points in the $`z`$ direction after the neutron traverses through $`2n`$ cells, where $`n`$ is a suitably chosen positive integer. Therefore, $`f_x`$ and $`f_y`$ gradually decrease, according to (3), which is reflected in a corresponding tapering off of the changes in $`v_x`$ and $`v_y`$.

In the absence of the new force $`𝐟`$, the change in velocity is entirely due to $`𝐅`$ with $`𝐁^{}`$ substituted for $`𝐁`$. As the neutron enters each cell, owing to the change in $`𝐄`$ and therefore $`𝐁^{}`$, there would be a sudden change in its velocity. Only the $`x`$ component of the velocity changes due to $`𝐅`$ because of the translational symmetry in the $`y`$ and $`z`$ directions. This component varies as a step function of the number of cells traversed. (The splitting of the wave packets due to the longitudinal Stern-Gerlach effect, which has been experimentally observed<sup>4</sup>, appears to be negligible in the present case.)

The cumulative effect could be detected by allowing the accelerated beam of neutrons to interfere with an unaccelerated beam. Now in a neutron interferometry experiment the fringe contrast is greatest when both interfering beams are in the same spin state. So, Wagh and Rakhecha have considered a cyclic evolution of the spin state by letting the neutron go through another series of $`2n`$ cells which amounts to a time reversal of the evolution that it underwent during its journey through the first series of cells. Then the dynamical phase<sup>5,6</sup> acquired, which can in principle be observed in neutron interferometry, depends on the momentum gained by the neutron as it passed through the first $`2n`$ cells. However, since the phase shift is due to the change in canonical momentum only, we cannot ambiguously conclude that its detection is a verification of the new force.

A direct, unambiguous way of observing $`𝐟`$ is from the deviation of the neutron beam due to the $`y`$component of its kinetic momentum which it acquires<sup>7</sup> as it passes through a sequence of these cells. This component would be zero in the absence of the new force $`𝐟`$ because of the translational symmetry in this direction. In the presence of it, $`v_y`$ is negative in each of the cells, and therefore the beam deviates increasingly towards the negative $`y`$ direction as it passes through the cells. The detection of this deviation would constitute definitive evidence of $`𝐟`$. Another way of observing $`𝐟`$ is to have neutrons incident with spin in the $`x`$direction and measure the time of flight through a large number of cells, which would be modified by the change in the $`x`$component of velocity due to $`𝐟`$.

The observation $`𝐟`$ would provide direct evidence of the hidden momentum. If that is the only objective, it can be achieved more simply by passing the neutron into a region of uniform $`𝐄`$-field, with no $`𝐁`$, such as the space between two capacitor plates, and measuring the velocity change due to the change in te hidden momentum $`\mu \times 𝐄`$. For example, if $`𝐄`$ is in the $`z`$ direction and the neutron spin is polarized along the x- direction then, according to (2), the change of velocity is in the $`y`$ direction equal to $`\frac{\mu E}{m}`$. But the earlier proposal has the advantage that it would detect $`𝐟`$, which has never been observed before. Also, Yang-Mills fields are used for describing the weak and strong interactions which are short range, whereas, as mentioned, the magnetic dipole sees the electromagnetic field as a long range $`SU(2)`$ Yang-Mills field<sup>1,2</sup>. So, observing $`𝐟`$ would demonstrate this important non abelian gauge field interaction, in addition to revealing a hitherto hidden aspect of the neutron or more generally a magnetic dipole.

I thank Apoorva Wagh for useful discussions.

A shorter version of this article, but with two figures, appeared in Nature, 387, 558-559 (5 June 1997).