Arxiv:1604.00227V3 [Quant-Ph] 19 May 2016 Where Cso H Ormmnao Particles

Home , Invariant mass

arXiv:1604.00227v3 [quant-ph] 19 May 2016 where cso h ormmnao particles. of four-momenta the of ucts hs entosaevldfrbt asv bet and objects If massive both particles. for massless valid are definitions These igepoo q 11 ie immediately gives (1.1) Eq. light. photon of single speed the than smaller always is particles and and ε h pe flgt poiey if Oppositely, light. of speed the nryadmmnu fapoo r ie by given are photon a of momentum and energy † ∗ ilsaeadtv ogv [2–5] give to par- additive of momenta are and ticles energies because objects or particles and fayojc skon[]t edfie sissquared its as defined be to [1] known is 4-momentum object any of n h eoiyo nobject an of velocity the and ets3 oetmadenergy, and momentum 3D ject’s lcrncades [email protected] address: Electronic lcrncades [email protected] address: Electronic m = h nw asesprilsaepoosadfra for and photons are particles massless known The h ento 11 sesl eeaie o rusof groups for generalized easily is (1.1) definition The nterltvsi hsc,teLrnzivratmass Lorentz-invariant the physics, relativistic the In 2 c c | c < v ~p | 4 ~p | | = = p and i (4) ..tevlct fmto fmsieobjects massive of motion of velocity the i.e. , ~ X ω/c · i ASnmes 25.v 25.y 03.67.Mn 42.50.Gy, 42.50.Dv, sch numbers: A PACS mass. discussed invariant and pulse stren proposed to the is shown of experimentally direct is increasing related pulses by light be accompanied di of to small the defocusing A found finite, and/or is speed. Focusing is light velocity mass the beam-propagation than found smaller the f the somewhat photons As speed of a manifold vacuum. with this in no of propagating of mass invariant numbers pulses the finite for but large found very are of consisting pulses light v p p m j (4) eso httecneto h oet-nain aso gro of mass Lorentz-invariant the of concept the that show We = ε (4) where , nain asadpoaainsedo ih ussi vacu in pulses light of speed propagation and mass Invariant i .INTRODUCTION 1. 2 1 c c ..PohrvGnrlPyisIsiue usa Academy Russian Institute, Physics General Prokhorov A.M. 2 4 ..temsls atce oewith move particles massless the i.e. , = 2 r h oet-nain clrprod- scalar Lorentz-invariant the are − ocwIsiueo hsc n ehooy ogpun,M Dolgoprudny, Technology, and Physics of Institute Moscow = { /,~pε/c, c c v m 2 ω 2 = p ,Es 11 n 12 give (1.2) and (1.1) Eqs. 0, = (4) stepoo frequency. photon the is X 3 hsc nttt) 1Ksiso hse ocw 115409, Moscow, Shosse, Kashirskoe 31 Institute), Physics c ainlRsac ula nvriyMPI(ocwEngine (Moscow MEPhI University Nuclear Research National i } 2 2 h h ~p ε with = v p i i z ie by given ε i 2 2 . ≡ m − ~p ..Fedorov M.V. c and c ,then 0, 6= 2 2 ~p X i,j 2 ε , en h ob- the being m p i (4) sthe as 0 = Dtd uut1,2018) 16, August (Dated: c · | ε p 1 ~p j (4) , | = 2 (1.3) (1.2) (1.1) , ε < 3 ~ ∗ , ω n ..Vintskevich S.V. and ~ sigeprmnsgv nyteuprbudr fthe of the boundary upper e.g. ex- the mass, (see the single-photon only Nowadays, mass give proved experiments nonzero therein). be isting references a would and has it [6–8] photon par- if papers single and arise a field would that not existing which is the theories, latter in are ticle the there changes nevertheless, of discussing But, Existence works experiments. any photon. by single proved a nonzero hypothetical of a with mass common in nothing has mass ass te ed fivsiain hc r beyond are which investigations of invariant fields nonzero Other having that from masses. assumption photons pre- of not standard groups does which a for vent particles, of massless are frame of photons the single existence in all, remain at we as, and small m extremely is value this au 2 value k ,tevcoilsmo aevcosgives vectors wave of sum vectorial the 0, obesnl-htnwv etr2 vector wave single-photon double igephoton: single .. qa frequencies, equal e.g., r o aall n h nl ewe hmi 2 is them between angle the and parallel, not are ietos h aso uhgopo 2 of group such of mass The directions. os(1.4): tons simply in ihteage2 direc- angle different the a in with propagating tion, photon of number case same the for example, for of generalized, easily is result This cos 2 1 single oeta h endi hswyLorentz-invariant way this in defined the that Note h ipeteapei h aro htn having, photons of pair the is example simplest The N and ω/c ϑ dnia htn oigi n ieto n the and direction one in moving photons identical − clierpoos xlctexpressions Explicit photons. ncollinear ω/c ~ k N te h ffc fplesoigdown slowing pulse of effect the gthen ywt h nain aso pulse. a of mass invariant the with ly 2 rtecs fdvrigGusa light Gaussian diverging of case the or photon r aallt ahohr hi u qasthe equals sum their other, each to parallel are ie agrta hto igepi fpho- of pair single a of that than larger times eec ewe h ih pe and speed light the between fference n q 13 ie h aersl sfra for as result same the gives (1.3) Eq. and , m o esrn hs quantities these measuring for eme 2 6= ih usspoaaei vacuum in propagate pulses light p fprilscnb ple to applied be can particles of ups ω/c svr usinbe eeadbelow and here questionable, very is 0 6= fSciences,Moscow,Russia of m m m 1 1+1 so ein Russia Region, oscow , 2 1+1 n,hne q 13 yields (1.3) Eq. hence, and, N † m + .I oee,tewv vectors wave the however, If 0. = N single ϑ ω = Russia 1 = ewe hs w propagation two these between 2 = ering c ~ − 2 2 ω ω N photon c 2 sin 2 ~ = ω ϑ ω sin fterwv vectors wave their If . < 0 6= ~ k 1 um ϑ. 8 ihteabsolute the with . × 10 N − | ~ 51 k htn is photons 1 9.As [9]. g + ~ k (1.5) (1.4) 2 ϑ | = 6= 2 the scope of this work is gravitational interaction of pho- single mode characterized by the photon wave vector ~k tons and photon beams with other objects [1], and anal- and polarization σ; α~k, σ are arbitrary complex numbers. ysis of gravitational field produced by light beams [10] . Note that, in accordance with the most often used ap- By quoting L.B. Okun [2], “The mass of a relativistically proach [13], the photon modes are defined as plane waves moving body is not a measure of its inertia. The mass of a in the periodicity box with the volume V , which has to be relativistically moving body does not determine its inter- taken infinitely large in the final results to be derived. In action with the gravitational field. Despite these ”noes” this definition the photon wave vectors ~k are discretized the mass of a body is also an extremely important prop- 1/3 so that, for example, kx = 2πnx/V , where nx is an erty in the theory of relativity. A vanishing mass means integer, nx = 0, 1, 2, ..., and the same for the ky and kz. that the ”body” must always move with the speed of The often met sums over modes can be replaced by in- light. A nonvanishing mass characterizes the mechanics tegrals over 3D wave vectors with the help of the rule of a body in a frame of reference in which it is at rest. V d~k. This frame of reference is distinguished compared with ~k → (2π)3 By definition, the state vector Ψ characterizes the other inertial systems. According to the theory of rela- P R | ~k, σi tivity, the mass of a particle is a measure of the energy state with an uncertainly large number of photons, such ”sleeping” in the particle at rest; it is a measure of the that their wave vectors are identical and parallel to each 2 other. The mass of such formation equals zero. Besides, rest energy: ε0 = mc .” Of course in these fundamental statements the word ”body” has to be understood widely, the electric field strength calculated with the help of the including for example groups of particles of any kind or state vector of Eq. (2.1) is a purely plane wave, infinitely groups of bodies. extended in space and time and insufficient for describing Classical light fields are believed generally to consist of light pulses. The states appropriate for this goal are the photons. Usually classical fields are produced in the form multimode coherent states [12, 14] of pulses limited in space and time. Such pulses consist 2 † n~k, σ |α~ | (α~ a ) of large but finite numbers of photons. Moreover because − k, σ k, σ ~k, σ Ψ = e 2 0 . (2.2) of diffraction, wave vectors of photons in such pulses are | i n ! | i n ~k, σ not parallel to each other. For this reason the sets of ~k,Y σ X~k, σ all photons forming light pulses have nonzero invariant masses, which can be considered as the invariant masses Both the single-mode (2.1) and multimode (2.2) states of light pulses. The finiteness of a mass of a diverging obey the normalization condition Ψ Ψ = 1 and, hence, h | i light pulse means automatically that the velocity of its they can be used for calculating average values of all propagation in vacuum v is smaller than the light spewed kinds of operators combined from a† and a . In ~k, σ ~k, σ c, which agrees with the main conclusion of a recent pa- particular, both the single-mode and multimode coher- per [11] . The main goal of this work is finding explicitly ent states can be used for finding the mean number of the mass of photons forming light pulses in terms of such photons per mode parameters of pulses as the electric field strength amplitude, pulse waist and duration, etc. We believe, these † † 2 Ψ~ a a~ Ψ~ = Ψ a a~ Ψ = α~ . tasks are conceptually important. The next two section h k, σ| ~k, σ k, σ| k, σi h | ~k, σ k, σ| i | k, σ| (2.3) provide the relevant quantum-electrodynamical (QED) The total number of photons in the multimode coherent and classical derivations, the mass of classical pulses is state (2.2) is given by the sum over modes found in section 4, the pulse-propagation speed in vacuum is evaluated in section 5, and the existing [11] and V other possible experiments are discussed in section 6. N = α 2 = d~k α 2. (2.4) | ~k, σ| (2π)3 | ~k, σ| X~k, σ Z 2. MULTIMODE COHERENT STATES Evidently, both the number of photons per mode α 2 | ~k, σ| and the total number of photons N are Lorentz-invariant. As known [12], the best QED counterpart of a classical The multimode coherent state (2.2) can be used also field is the so called coherent state for finding the average energy and momentum of the field n~ 2 k, σ |α~ | α − k, σ ~k, σ ~ † ~ 2 Ψ = e 2 n ε = ωk Ψ a~ a~k, σ Ψ = ωk α~k, σ , (2.5) | ~k, σi | ~k, σi h i h | k,σ | i | | n n~ ! ~k σ ~k, σ X~k, σ k, σ X X † † 2 2 q n~k, σ ~p = ~~k Ψ a a Ψ = ~~k α , (2.6) |α~ | (α~ a ) ~ ~k, σ ~k, σ − k, σ k, σ ~k, σ h i h | k,σ | i | | e 2 0 , (2.1) ~ ~ ≡ n ! | i Xk σ Xk, σ n ~k, σ X~k, σ where ωk = c ~k . where 0 is the vacuum, n and a† are the n-photon | | | i | ~k, σi ~k, σ The mass of the state Ψ (2.2) can be defined via ε state vector and the photon creation operator for a given and ~p in the same way| (1.3)i as for groups of classicalh i h i 3 particles where τ and ω0 are the pulse duration and carrier frequency of the field, and the temporal shape of the pulse m2c4 = ε 2 c2 ~p 2 h i − h i is taken Gaussian. As for the dependence of the field ~2 2 (4) ′(4) 2 2 amplitude on transverse coordinates, at this stage it can = c k k α~ α~′ ′ , (2.7) · | k, σ| | k , σ | be left unspecified, though in final results it will be taken ~ ~′ σ,σ′ Xk,k X Gaussian too. But in any case, E (~r ,t) is assumed σ ⊥ |z=0 ω ω to be real. The expression on the right-hand side of Eq. where k(4) = ~k ,~k and k′(4) = ~k′ ,~k′ are the pho- c c (3.1) can be Fourier transformed both with respect to t ~ ton’s 4-momenta (divided by ). Once again, both the and ~r⊥ to be reduced to the form scalar products of 4-momenta and the numbers of pho- iτ ~ tons in modes α 2 and α 2 are Lorentz-invariant, E (~r ,t) = d~k dω eik⊥·~r⊥−iωtE(0)(~k ) | ~k, σ| | ~k′ , σ′ | σ ⊥ |z=0 2(2π)3/2 ⊥ σ ⊥ as well as the expressed via them mass of the state Ψ Z | i −(ω+ω )2τ 2/2 −(ω−ω )2τ 2/2 (4)2 e 0 e 0 , e (3.2) (2.2). As k = 0, evidently, all diagonal terms in × − ~ ~ ′ the sum over k, k in Eq. (2.7) vanish, whereas the off- (0) ~h i diagonal terms determine a nonzero mass of the state Ψ where Eσ (k⊥) is the Fourier transform of the transverse | i (0) (2.2). field envelope at z = 0, Eσ0 (~r⊥) e The electric field strength is defined as the averaged 1 ~ ˆ E(0)(~k )= d~r e−ik⊥·~r⊥ E(0)(~r ) (3.3) value of its operator expression, Ψ Eσ Ψ , where σ ⊥ 2π ⊥ σ ⊥ h | | i Z ∗ 2π~ω e (0) ~ (0) ~ Eˆ = i k such that Eσ ( k⊥)= Eσ (k⊥) . σ V × − ~ r By changing sign of theh integrationi variable ω in the Xk ~ ~ integral containinge the firste term in square brackets in the a ei(k~r−ωkt) a† e−i(k~r−ωkt) , (2.8) ~k, σ − ~k, σ last line of Eq. (3.2), we can reduce the whole integral h i over ω to a more convenient form which gives 2 2 dω e−(ω−ω0) τ /2 eiωt e−iωt . (3.4) ~ − 2π ωk Z E σ (~r, t)= i α~k, σ h i V | |× Now a simple substitution ωt ωt kzz with kz = ~k r → − X ω2 ~ 2 i(~k~r−ω t+ϕ ) −i(~k~r−ω t+ϕ ) c2 k⊥ gives the field distribution in the whole half- e k ~k, σ e k ~k, σ , (2.9) − − spaceq z > 0, with the field obeying Maxwell equations h i τ i~k ·~r (0) where ϕ~k, σ is the phase of α~k, σ. E (~r ,t,z)= i d~k dω e ⊥ ⊥ E (~k ) σ ⊥ 2(2π)3/2 ⊥ σ ⊥ With the sums over ~k in Eqs. (2.5), (2.6) and (2.9) Z Z ω ω 2τ2 − ( − 0) −i(ωt−k z) +i(ωt−k z) transformed into integrals, these equations are reduced e 2 e z e z .e (3.5) to the form × − At last, the integrationh over ω can be substitutedi by in- V ~ ~ 2 ε = 3 dk ωk α~k, σ (2.10) tegration over kz with the integral transformation rule h i (2π) | | 2 σ Z dω = dk c kz , where ω = ck = c k2 + ~k2 . Trans- X z ωk k z ⊥ V ~ ~ 2 ~p = dk ~k α~ , (2.11) formed in this way, the expression forq the field strength h i (2π)3 | k, σ| R R σ (3.5) takes the form X Z 2 and τ c kz 2 2 E (~r, t)= d~k E(0)(~k ) e−(ωk−ω0) τ /2 σ (2π)3/2 σ ⊥ ω 1 Z k E (~r, t)= d~k V ~ωk α~ h iσ 23/2π5/2 | k, σ|× e~ ~ Z sin ωkt k~r ϕσ (k⊥) , (3.6) ~ p × − − sin(ωkt k~r ϕ~k, σ). (2.12) h i (0) − − where ϕσ(~k⊥) is the phase of the function Eσ (~k⊥) (3.3). The next step consists in comparison with the Fourier Note that Eq. (3.6) represents a special case of the well representation of the field describing light pulses. known [1] general rule for the expansion ofe an arbitrary- configuration light field E(~r, t) in a series (integral) of field eigenfunctions obeying Maxwell equations 3. CLASSICAL DESCRIPTION 1 ~ ~ E(~r, t)= d~k E ei(k~r−ωt) + E∗ e−i(k~r−ωt) , (2π)3/2 ~k ~k Let us consider the boundary problem with the field Z h (3.7)i propagating along the z-axis and defined in the half-space with e e z > 0 by its distribution in the (xy) plane at z = 0: −iωkt ∗ iωkt 1 −i~k~r 2 2 E~k e +E ~ e = d~rE(~r, t)e . (3.8) E (~r ,t) = E(0)(~r ) sin(ω t) e−t /2τ , (3.1) −k (2π)3/2 σ ⊥ |z=0 σ ⊥ 0 Z e e 4

2 4. THE MASS OF A LIGHT PULSE and the factor (ckz/ωk) can be approximated by unit to give

By comparing two expressions for the light field 2 2 E0 (cτ) −~k2 w2 −(k −ω /c)2(cτ)2 strength, (2.12) and (3.6), we find that the coherent-state ε c p = d~ke ⊥ e z 0 h i≈ h zi 8π parameters α~k, σ are related directly to the Fourier trans- Z √πcτw2E2 formed classical field strength of a light pulse = 0 (4.7) 8 2 πτ c kz 2 2 (0) ~ −(ωk−ω0) τ /2 α~k, σ = Eσ (k⊥) | |e , (4.1) and | | √V ~ωk | | ωk √πcτw2E2 e 0 with ϕ = ϕ (~k ). By substituting α of Eq. (4.1) ε + c pz . (4.8) ~k, σ σ ⊥ | ~k, σ| h i h i≈ 4 into the QED equations (2.10) and (2.11) we get abso- As for the difference between ε and c p in the defini- lutely classical expressions for the mean (total) energy h i h zi and momentum tion of mass (4.4), there is a rather strong compensation of these two terms because of the arising in this difference 2 2 2 2 factor (cτ) (0) 2 ckz −(ωk−ω0) τ ε = d~k E (~k⊥) e (4.2) h i 8π | | ωk ~ 2 Z ckz k⊥ 1 2 , and e − ωk ≈ 2(ω0/c)

2 ~ 2 2 2 which gives (cτ) (0) 2 k ckz −(ωk−ω0) τ ~p = d~k E (~k⊥) e . h i 8π | | ωk ωk 2 2 Z E0 (cτ) 2 −~k2 w2 −(k −ω /c)2(cτ)2 (4.3) ε c p = d~k ~k e ⊥ e z 0 e h i− h zi 16π(ω /c)2 ⊥ 0 Z 2 Note that the dependence of the electric field strength √πcτE0 on the polarization index σ is determined by projections = 2 . (4.9) 16(ω0/c) eσ on the σ-axes of the field polarization unit vector ~e~k ~ Substituted into the definition of mass (4.4), Eqs. (4.8) (such that ~e~k k). When the squared absolute values ⊥ (0) and (4.9) give the following final result: of the field amplitudes Eσ are summed over σ, their 2 2 polarization parts turn unit: e ~e = 1. This 2 2 σ σ ~k √πτwE 1 E τwλ explains why summations over and| any| ≡ dependencies | | on m = 0 = 0 . (4.10) e 8ω 16√π c σ disappear in Eqs. (4.2), (4.3)P and in all formulas below. 0 The mass of the pulse is defined by a standard relation Comparison with the energy ε (4.7) gives of the type (1.3), which gives h i ε λ ε m = h i h i . (4.11) m2c4 = ε + c ~p ε c ~p . (4.4) 2πc2 w ≪ c2 h i | h i | h i − | h i | Numerically, for example, m = 10−20 g in the case of Let us assume now that both the transverse distribu- a pulse with energy 10 mJ (intensity 1010 W/cm2 and tion of the field in the plane z = 0 and its Fourier trans- pulse duration 1 ps), pulse waist w = 1 cm, and wave form are Gaussian length λ =1µm. (0) −~r2 /2w2 (0) 2 −~k2 w2/2 For the same parameters, the number of photons in a E (~r⊥)= E0e ⊥ , E (~k⊥)= E0w e ⊥ , pulse is where w is the pulse width (waist) at z = 0. Because e ε of the axial symmetry of these distributions, Eq. (4.3) 17 N = ~h i 10 . (4.12) gives immediately p = p = 0, and there is only ω0 ≈ h xi h yi one non-zero z-component of the total pulse momentum, In terms of the photon number N the expression (4.10) pz = 0. Let us assume also that, as usual, the length for the pulse invariant mass takes the form andh i transverse6 size of the pulse exceed significantly its wavelength N~ω λ m = 0 . (4.13) 2πc2 w 2πc w, cτ λ = . (4.5) ≫ ω0 This result is similar to that occurring for two beams of photons with N collinear photons in each beam and angle Under these conditions the exponential factor in Eqs. ϑ between the propagation directions of beams. (1.5). (4.2) and (4.3) takes the form This similarity turns into total coincidence if the angle ϑ is taken equal to the diffraction divergence angle in a 2 2 2 2 e−(ωk−ω0) τ e−(kz−ω0/c) (cτ) , (4.6) beam with appropriately chosen numerical factor, ϑ = ≈ 5

2 λ/4πw 1. This means that the model of two beams termined as v = c pz / ε which gives of photons≪ describes qualitatively, but sufficiently well, h i h i 2 2 2 2 4 features of the diverging classical beam of light. ε c pz m c v = c 1 h i − h i c 1 2 (5.1) Another interesting point is a transition to an infinitely − ε ( ε + c pz )! ≈ − 2 ε ! wide beam, w . The first impression is that in this h i h i h i h i limit the beam→ turns ∞ into a plane wave in which all pho- or tons are collinear and the invariant mass has to turn zero. m2c4 c λ2 But, in fact, this is not as evident as it seems to be. The c v c = . (5.2) − ≈ 2 ε 2 8π2 w2 result depends on what is changing and what remains h i constant when w . If the transverse size of a light This result shows that the propagation speed of light beam w grows at constant→ ∞ values of the field strength am- pulses v in vacuum is smaller than the light speed c, plitude E and pulse duration τ, then, in accordance with 0 which agrees with the conclusion of the recent paper [11]. Eq. (4.10), the mass m grows, m w at E0=const. Moreover, Eq. (5.1) shows that the difference between c w . Oppositely, if w grows at| a given constant∝ → num-∞ and v is determined just by the squared Lorentz-invariant ber→ of ∞ photons N in a pulse-volume (or energy in a pulse mass of pulses. This observation shows that, in princi- ε ), then, as follows from Eqs. (4.11) and (4.13), the ple, the mass of pulses can be measured directly by means massh i of the pulse falls, m 1/w 0 at w . N=const. of measurement of the pulse-propagation speed. Next, as And, of course, there are| many intermediate∝ → cases,→ when ∞ the pulse-propagation speed v (5.1) is less than the speed both E and N are varying in some ways with varying 0 of light, in the inertial frame moving together with the transverse size of a light beam w, and the mass m w→∞ pulse, i.e. with the speed v with respect to the labo- can take any value between 0 and depending on| the ratory frame, the pulse will look as stopped, with com- form of the functions E (w) and N(∞w). 0 pletely eliminated translatory motion. Indeed, as easily As a final remark to this section, it’s worth mentioning checked, in this frame the pulse momentum equals zero that in our recent paper [15] we have introduced the so called Lorentz-invariant density of mass of a light field de- 2 pz v ε /c fined as the squared density of energy minus the squared pz = h i− h i =0, (5.3) h i0 2 2 1 v /c 2 Poynting vector − v=c hpzi/hεi

p 2 2 where the subscript “0” indicates the rest-frame for a E2 + H2 E~ H~ light pulse. In this frame the center of mass of a pulse µ(~r, t)= × = inv., (4.14) 8πc − 4πc does not move, and the only motion remaining in a pulse ! is its spreading. Spreading can be considered as an in- ~ ~ ternal motion in a system consisting of photons forming where E(~r, t) and H(~r, t) are the electric and mag- a light pulse. The distribution of individual wave vectors netic field strengths. Invariance of µ(~r, t) is proved of photons in the pulse in the rest frame is shown on the by its identical expression in terms of the field invari- 1/2 right-hand side of Fig. 1, and it looks rather peculiar. ants, µ = 1 (E2 H2)2 + 4(E~ H~ )2 . Under the If in the laboratory frame orientation of wave vectors is 8πc2 − · name of electromagnetich inertia densityithe same value as µ(~r, t) was introduced earlier and is discussed nowadays by G. Kaiser [16] (see also [18]). Concerning the results of our present investigation, evidently, the invariant mass of a light pulse m (4.10), (4.11), (4.13) cannot be interpreted as the invariant mass density µ(~r, t) in- tegrated over the pulse volume because, clearly, µd~r is not Lorentz-invariant. Thus, these two concepts are different and are not connected directly with each other.R They characterize different features of light pulses: if the Figure 1: Distribution of photon wave vectors of a pulse (a) in mass density µ(~r, t) characterizes local features of the laboratory and (b) rest frames. field in a pulse, the mass m characterizes global features of the pulse as a whole. determined by their angle ϑ with respect to the z-axis, in the rest frame components of wave vectors are given by the usual Lorentz-transformation formulas 5. PROPAGATION SPEED AND THE ”REST kz 0(ϑ)= γω (cos ϑ v/c), kz 0(ϑ)= ω sin ϑ, (5.4) FRAME” FOR LIGHT PULSES − −1/2 where γ = 1 v2/c2 . The solid line in the picture In accordance with the general relativistic formulas on the right-hand− side of Fig. 1 indicates ending of wave (1.1) and (1.2), the propagation speed of a pulse is de- vectors starting from the origin and determined by the 6 angle ϑ as a parameter. As follows from the first formula along the pump-propagation axis was found [11] to be of Eq. (5.4), at ϑ = 0 the z-component of the wave vec- given by tor kz 0 is always positive. This means that there is no inertial frame moving along the z-axis in which the direc- 2 k⊥ tion of the wave vector kz 0(ϑ) could be inverted. This is v = 1 . (6.1)  − 2  possible only for wave vectors with relatively large values 2 ~k of ϑ. As whole, in the rest frame, the sum of positive and     negative z-components of wave vectors compensate each Authors of the work [11] do not interpret their results other to give kz 0 = 0. in terms of the invariant mass of SPDC photons though, In the rest-frame the pulse energy ε equals its in- P h i0 undoubtedly, such interpretation is possible. Moreover, variant mass multiplied by the squared speed of light, by comparing expressions of Eqs. (5.1) and (6.1) we find that there is a very simple one-to-one correspondence be- ε = mc2. (5.5) h i0 tween the invariant mass and momentum (wave vector) This is the main physical meaning of the invariant mass of transverse motion: as a quantity determining internal energy of a system k2 m2c4 h ⊥i . (6.2) under consideration not related to its translatory motion. 2 ≡ 2ε2 In application to light pulses, the definitions of invariant 2 ~k mass and the rest-frame energy are equivalent, and one of them can be used instead of another. On the other hand, As for direct measurements of the slowing down effect a real transition to the frame moving with the pulse speed in the case of real Gaussian laser pulses, the main prob- can be problematic, whereas measurement of the pulse- lem is in a very small value of the invariant mass (4.10), propagation speed itself, in principle, is doable. With (4.11), (4.13) and relatively very small difference of ve- results of such measurement known, one can use Eq. (5.1) locities c v (5.2). But the effect can be significantly for finding the invariant mass (4.10) and, then, Eq. (5.5) strengthened− by means of focusing and defocusing of the for finding a proper energy of the pulse in the rest frame. light pulse. The scheme of an experiment we suggest is As in the laboratory frame the mass is λ/w times smaller shown in Fig. 2. In this scheme some ideas of the ex- than the pulse energy divided by c2 (4.11) , the same is periment [11] are used and adapted to the case of laser true for the rest-frame energy pulses. We assume that the laser beam has originally a

λ ε = ε ε . (5.6) h i0 2πw h ilab ≪ h ilab The pulse energy in the rest-frame is minimal compared to the pulse energy in any other frames, and the pulse energy in the laboratory frame is determined mainly by the pulse propagation or translatory motion rather than by its spreading.

6. EXPERIMENTS

In a very interesting experimental work [11], slowing down of photon propagation in vacuum was observed in a scheme of Spontaneous Parametric Down Conversion Figure 2: A suggested scheme for observation of the light-pulse (SPDC). Pairs of photons were split for two channels. In slowing down owing to its focusing-defocusing. (a) KEP are the one of them photons were propagating in a fiber with a knife edge prisms, δL is the distance between the slowed down and given velocity close to the speed of light in vacuum. In non-slowed pulses, FDR is the focusing-defocusing region, δL is the the second channels photons propagated in a free space. spacing betwee4n the slowd down and non slowed pulses; (b) light Owing to the presence of a transverse component in their pulse in the focusing-defocusing region, L denotes confocal lenses, wave vectors, the velocity of propagation of these pho- f is the focus distance of each of them, w(1/2) is the waist of the tons along the pump-propagation axis was smaller than pulse outside of the focusing- defocusing region. the speed of light. This effect was registered by the measured positions of the minimum in the Hong-Ou-Mandel’s rather large waist, e.g., w 1 cm, which corresponds to a curve of the coincidence signal vs the delay time of the very weak diffraction divergence∼ and a very large diffrac- 2 4 free-space propagating photons [17]. This position of the tion length, LD w /λ 10 cm at λ =1µm. Similarly minimum was found to be dependent on the transverse to the experiment∼ [11], in∼ the scheme of Fig. 2 the laser component ~k⊥ of the total momentum of free-space prop- beam is supposed to be split by a knife edge prism for two agating photons. The velocity of photon propagation parts with two half-pulses propagating one in the upper 7 and one in the lower channels. Let their transverse sizes i.e., if the focal length of lenses f is much shorter than are w(1/2) w/2. The pulse in the upper channel ex- the diffraction length of the original light beam LD. periences no∼ additional changes whereas the the pulse in As the propagation velocity and invariant mass of the lower channel is assumed to be focused by a lens with pulses are related to each other by Eq.(5.2), the described the focal length f and then, at the distance 2f from the decrease of the propagation velocity in the focusing- first lens, it is returned to its original form with the waist defocusing region is accompanied by increase of the in- w(1/2) and with a very weak diffraction divergence. Af- variant mass m which becomes equal to ter the focusing and defocusing in the lower channel both pulses are sent again the knife edge prism to merge into ε w(1/2) a single beam. If the focusing-defocusing region provides mfdr = . (6.6) c2 f any slowing down effect, pulses coming from the lower channel will be delayed with respect to pulses coming from the upper channel. If the delay length is sufficiently Note that in principle, there is another very simple and pronounced to exceed duration of the original laser pulse, trivial way of getting a double-peak structure at exit of at the exit form the set up one will see two well separated set up like that shown in Fig. 2a by means of lengthening pulses instead of a single one. This will be a clear and the pathlength in the lower channel. The method con- direct evidence that the propagation velocity in the lower sidered here is qualitatively different. The pathlength in channel is less than the the speed of light c. the lower channel is not modified in any way and remains Convergence of the pulse before the focus and its di- equal to the pathlength in the upper channel. What is vergence after the focus correspond to appearance of rel- done by the focusing-defocusing region is the temporal atively large transverse components of photon wave vec- spacial restructuring of the lower-channel light pulse, and tors this restructuring is the factor that slows down the pulse w propagation. k k (1/2) ~k , (6.3) | ⊥|∼ ⊥ foc ≈ f | | as long as w(1/2) f. The pulse-propagation velocity in the region between≪ two lenses in Fig. 2 can be defined by Eq. (6.1) with k2 substituted by k2 . If the distribu- 7. CONCLUSION ⊥ h ⊥i tion function F (k⊥) of a focused beam is taken Gaussian, F (k ) exp( k2 /k2 ), the average squared trans- ⊥ ⊥ ⊥ foc To resume, the concept of nonzero invariant mass is verse wave∝ vector− k2 coincides with k2 . As a result, ⊥ ⊥ foc shown to be appropriate for characterizing features of we find the followingh expressioni for the pulse-propagation diffracting light pulses. Its explicit expression is found in velocity in the region between two lenses terms of laser-pulse parameters: pulse energy, duration, waist and wavelength. The invariant mass of pulses is 1 w 2 v = c 1 (1/2) . (6.4) shown to be related directly with the propagation veloc- − 2 f " # ity of pulses in vacuum, which is found to be smaller than the light speed in all cases except an infinitely extended The total spacial delay of the pulse accumulated in the plane wave. It’s shown also that the effects of slowing whole region between two lenses is given by down light pulses and increasing their invariant mass can 2 be strengthened significantly by focusing or defocusing. v w δL =2f 1 = (1/2) . (6.5) Based on this, a scheme with two confocal lenses is pro- − c f posed for measuring directly the pulse-propagation velocity and its deviation from the speed of light. The For example, at w(1/2) =0.5 cm and f = 5 cm, Eq. (6.5) experiment is found to be doable with femto- and even gives δL = 0.05cm = 0.5 mm. This is a rather high picosecond pulses. If measured, the pulse-propagation value exceeding significantly length of laser pulses both of velocity can be used for finding experimentally the in- femto and picosecond durations. This shows that the ef- variant mass of a pulse under consideration. fect of slowing down the propagation speed of laser pulses in vacuum (air) is observable. The difference of velocities c v determined by Eq. (6.4) exceeds significantly the same− difference related to the proper diffraction divergence of the beam (5.2) if Acknowledgement w /f λ/w if (1/2) ≫ (1/2) 2 The work was supported by the grant RFBR 14-02- w(1/2) λ w(1/2) or f 2π LD, 00811. f ≫ 2πw(1/2) ≪ λ ≡ 8

[1] L. D. Landau and E. M. Lifshits. The Classical Theory of [11] D. Giovannini et al. Spatially structured photons that Fields, Fourth Edition. Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford, travel in free space slower than the speed of light. Science, UK, 1980. 347(6224):857–860, 2015. [2] L. B. Okun. The concept of mass (mass,energy, relativ- [12] R. J. Glauber. Coherent and incoherent states of the ity). Sov. Phys.Usp., 32(7):629 – 638, 1989. radiation field. Phys. Rev., 131(6):2766 – 2778, 1963. [3] L. B. Okun. Reply to the letter ’what is mass?’ by R I [13] A. I. Akhiezer and V. B. Berestetski. Quantum Electro- Khrapko. Physics Uspekhi, 43(12):1270 – 1275, 2000. dynamics. John Wiley and Sons Inc, Oxford, UK, 1965. [4] L. B. Okun. Energy and Mass in Relativity Theory. [14] L. Mandel and E. Wolf. Optical Coherence and Quantum World Scientific, Singapore, 2008. Optics. Cambridge University Press, New Jersey, USA, [5] L. V. Rivlin. Is the photon mass zero? Sov. J. Quantum 1995. Electron., 22(8):771 – 773, 1992. [15] S. V. Vintskevich, V. G Veselago, and M V Fedorov. On [6] I. Yu. Kobzarev and L. B. Okun. On the photon mass. a possible definition of the concept of mass density for Sov. Phys. Usp., 11(3):338 –341, 1968. a classical electromagnetic field in vacuum. Laser. Phys. [7] R. Lakes. Experimental limits on the photon mass Lett., 12(12):096201, 2015. and cosmic magnetic vector potential. Phys. Rev. Lett., [16] G. Kaiser. Electromagnetic inertia, reactive energy 80(3):1826–1829, 1998. and energy flow velocity. J. Phys. A: Math. Theor., [8] A. Proca. Free particles, photons and particles of ’pure 44(7):345206, 2011. charge’. Journal de Physique et le Radium, 8(1):23–28, [17] C.K. Hohg, Z.Y. Ou, and L. Mandel. Measurement of 1937. subpicosecond time intervals between two photons by in- [9] Jun Luo et al. Experimental limits on the photon mass terference. Phys. Rev. Lett., 59(18):2044–2046, 1987. and cosmic magnetic vector potential. Phys. Rev. Lett., [18] G. Kaiser, Completing the complex Poynting theo- 90(3):081801, 2003. rem: Conservation of reactive energy in reactive time, [10] D. Ratzel, M. Wilkens, and R. Menzel. Gravitational arXiv:1412.3850v2 [math-ph], 2016 properties of light - the gravitational field of a laser pulse. New J. Phys, 18(2):023009, 2016.