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

It is shown that the generally accepted definition of the Poynting vector andthe energy flux vector defined by means of the energy density of theelectromagnetic field (Umov vector) lead to the prediction of the differentresults touching electromagnetic energy flux. The experiment shows that withinthe framework of the mentioned generally accepted definitions the Poyntingvector adequately describes the electromagnetic energy flux unlike the Umovvector. Therefore one can conclude that a generally accepted definitions of theelectromagnetic energy density and the Poynting vector, in general, are notalways compatible.Comment: Revtex-file vithout figures. To get the journal-pdf-file with  figures, please, contact with achubykalo@yahoo.com.m

the european physical journal. d, atomic, molecular and optical physics/the european physical journal. d, atomic, molecular, optical and plasma physics

Experimental test of the compatibility of the definitions of the electromagnetic energy density and the Poynting vector