{"title":"任意电荷分布的极化:经典电动力学视角","authors":"Igor Tsukerman","doi":"10.1016/j.revip.2021.100061","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>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.</p><p>The traditional dipole model of polarization is a straightforward special case of the proposed definition. A number of illustrative examples are presented.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":37875,"journal":{"name":"Reviews in Physics","volume":"7 ","pages":"Article 100061"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405428321000083/pdfft?md5=91fb0b9e07b609fab2591631c18165d2&pid=1-s2.0-S2405428321000083-main.pdf","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Polarization of arbitrary charge distributions: The classical electrodynamics perspective\",\"authors\":\"Igor Tsukerman\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.revip.2021.100061\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>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.</p><p>The traditional dipole model of polarization is a straightforward special case of the proposed definition. A number of illustrative examples are presented.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":37875,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Reviews in Physics\",\"volume\":\"7 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100061\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405428321000083/pdfft?md5=91fb0b9e07b609fab2591631c18165d2&pid=1-s2.0-S2405428321000083-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Reviews in Physics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405428321000083\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Physics and Astronomy\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Reviews in Physics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405428321000083","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Physics and Astronomy","Score":null,"Total":0}
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 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.
期刊介绍:
Reviews in Physics is a gold open access Journal, publishing review papers on topics in all areas of (applied) physics. The journal provides a platform for researchers who wish to summarize a field of physics research and share this work as widely as possible. The published papers provide an overview of the main developments on a particular topic, with an emphasis on recent developments, and sketch an outlook on future developments. The journal focuses on short review papers (max 15 pages) and these are freely available after publication. All submitted manuscripts are fully peer-reviewed and after acceptance a publication fee is charged to cover all editorial, production, and archiving costs.