English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Fundamental errors in the Chubykalo et al paper [Found. of Phys. Lett, 19,37-46 (2006)] are highlighted. Contrary to their claim that "... theirrotational component of the electric field has a physical meaning and canpropagate exclusively instantaneously," it is shown that this instantaneouscomponent is physically irrelevant because it is always canceled by a termcontained into the solenoidal component. This result follows directly from thesolution of the wave equation that satisfies the solenoidal component.Therefore the subsequent inference of these authors that there are twomechanisms of transmission of energy and momentum in classical electrodynamics,one retarded and the other one instantaneous, has no basis. The example givenby these authors in which the full electric field of an oscillating chargeequals its instantaneous irrotational component on the axis of oscillations isproved to be false.Comment: An alternative discussion can be found in the paper: Jose A. Heras,  "How potentials in different gauges yield the same retarded electric and  magnetic fields," Am. J. Phys. 75, 176-183 (2007

foundations of physics letters

Comment on “Helmholtz Theorem and the V-Gauge in the Problem of Superluminal and Instantaneous Signals in Classical Electrodynamics,” by A. Chubykalo et al.