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 Tools annual

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 monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

In a recent paper [A. O. Sushkov, S. Eckel and S. K. Lamoreaux, Phys. Rev. A79, 022118 (2009), arXiv:0810.2756 ] the authors measured the EDM-inducedmagnetization M that is given by Eq. (1) in their paper. Such an expression forM is a consequence of the generally accepted opinion that both dipole moments,a MDM m and an EDM d, are proportional to the spin S. Recently [T. Ivezic,Phys. Scr. 81, 025001 (2010)] the Uhlenbeck-Goudsmit hypothesis is generalizedin a Lorentz covariant manner using the four-dimensional (4D) geometricquantities. From the viewpoint of such formulation there is no EDM-inducedmagnetization M; in the 4D spacetime the EDM d^{a} is not proportional toS^{a}. It is argued that the induced M can come from the direct interactionbetween the applied electric field E^{a} and a MDM m^{a}.

Comment on "Prospects for a new search for the electron electric-dipole moment in solid gadolinium-iron-garnet ceramics"