PHYSICAL REVIEW D 105, 045009 (2022)

Poynting vector controversy in axion modified electrodynamics

Michael E. Tobar ,* Ben T. McAllister, and Maxim Goryachev
ARC Centre of Excellence for Engineered Quantum Systems and ARC Centre of Excellence for Dark
Matter Particle Physics, Department of Physics, University of Western Australia,
35 Stirling Highway, Crawley, Western Australia 6009, Australia

(Received 9 September 2021; accepted 28 January 2022; published 15 February 2022)

The most sensitive haloscopes that search for axion dark matter through the two photon electromagnetic
anomaly convert axions into photons through the mixing of axions with a large background direct current
(DC) magnetic field. In this work we apply the Poynting theorem to the resulting axion modified
electrodynamics and identify two possible Poynting vectors, one which is similar to the Abraham Poynting
vector in electrodynamics and the other to the Minkowski Poynting vector. Inherently the conversion of
axions to photons is a nonconservative process with respect to the created oscillating photonic degree of
freedom. We show that the Minkowski Poynting theorem picks up the added nonconservative terms while the
Abraham does not. The nonconservative terms may be categorized more generally as “curl forces,” which in
classical physics are nonconservative and nondissipative forces localized in space, not describable by a scalar
potential and exist outside the global conservative physical equations of motion. To understand the source of
energy conversion and power flow in the detection systems, we apply the two different Poynting theorems to
both the resonant cavity haloscope and the broadband low-mass axion haloscope. Our calculations show that
both Poynting theorems give the same sensitivity for a resonant cavity axion haloscope, but predict markedly
different sensitivity for the low-mass broadband capacitive haloscope. Hence we ask the question, can
understanding which one is the relevant one for axion dark matter detection be considered under the
framework of the Abraham-Minkowski controversy? In reality, this should be confirmed by experiment when
the axion is detected. However, many electrodynamic experiments have ruled in favor of the Minkowski
Poynting vector when considering the canonical momentum in dielectric media. In light of this, we show that
the axion modified Minkowski Poynting vector should indeed be taken seriously for sensitivity calculation for
low-mass axion haloscopes in the quasistatic limit, and predict orders of magnitude better sensitivity than the
Abraham Poynting vector equivalent.

DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.105.045009

I. INTRODUCTION DC magnetic field axion haloscope, first proposed by Sikivie

[14,15] and pioneered experimentally by the ADMX
Axions are postulated to exist as neutral spin-zero bosons
Collaboration [16–22]. Recently the scientific case that dark
to solve the strong charge-parity problem in QCD. Such a
matter may include QCD axions or axionlike particles of
particle is predicted to couple very weakly to other known
varied mass and photon coupling has gained momentum
particles and has thus been postulated to be cold dark matter
[23–34], leading to many new ideas and new detector designs
[1–13]. In particular, many experiments rely on the electro-
worldwide, which implement the principle of dark matter
magnetic anomaly, which is a two photon coupling term with
detection through the electromagnetic anomaly [35–76].
the axion. To gain a significant sensitivity, it is widely
Inherently, the conversions of axions among a DC
considered that the best way to search for the axion
magnetic background field into a second photonic degree
is when the first background photonic degree of freedom
of freedom is a nonconservative process with respect to the
is a large direct current (DC) magnetic field, which generates
a second photon that can be detected. This is the basis of the second degree of freedom. In this process, the axion mixes
with the background field to create a source term that drives
the energy of conversion in the second photonic degree of
*
michael.tobar@uwa.edu.au freedom at a frequency corresponding to the axion mass. In
this work, we implement the Poynting theorem to understand
Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the source of energy conversion and flow in the system when
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. considering axion modified electrodynamics.
Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to
the author(s) and the published article’s title, journal citation, In standard electrodynamics, Poynting vector analysis is
and DOI. Funded by SCOAP3. implemented in circuit and antenna theory to understand

2470-0010=2022=105(4)=045009(19) 045009-1 Published by the American Physical Society

TOBAR, MCALLISTER, and GORYACHEV PHYS. REV. D 105, 045009 (2022)

how the input source power is impressed into the system classified as an active bound charge dipole. We may
along with the system power flow and how it relates to the recognize this active dipole term generally as a noncon-
stored energy and losses [77–81]. In this work we undertake servative curl force term, which necessarily modifies
a similar analysis within the framework of axion modified Faraday’s law, and is only present internally to the active
electrodynamics. In other work, the Poynting vector has antenna, voltage source, electret, or ferroelectric domain
been implemented with versions of the stress-energy tensor and not present globally outside the active device. As with
to understand energy and forces in magnetic and dielectric all curl forces, this nonconservative term cannot be char-
matter. For example, forces in systems, such as optical acterized by a scalar potential; on the other hand, it has
tweezers [82–85] and trapping of particles [86,87], where the recently been shown to be characterized via an electric
best way to analyze these systems has been a subject of vector potential [62,98,99,106,111,112].
controversy (known as the Abraham-Minkowski contro- Recently, it was also shown that there exists a similar
versy), is still an active area of debate [88–94]. This debate nonconservative curl force term in axion modified electro-
has led to the general concept of “curl forces,” which are dynamics [62,112]. This occurs when the axion mixes with
abundant in nature, cannot be described from the gradient of a DC background magnetic field, which converts the axion
a scalar potential, and only exist in a localized space mass to the energy of the second photonic degree of
[82,83,86,95]. For example, the force on a particle with freedom [62,112]. In this representation the axion mixing
complex electric polarizability is known not to be derivable with the DC magnetic field adds a similar term to a
from a scalar potential as its curl is nonzero. Such forces are polarization with a nonzero curl [106,111]. In this work
nonconservative and nondissipative, and their inclusion has we apply the Minkowski and Abraham Poynting theorem
been described both classically and quantum mechanically equivalents to axion modified electrodynamics and com-
[96,97], in particular the quantizing of electrodynamics in pare the difference, where the former picks up the extra curl
dielectric and dispersive media [98–100]. Note such non- force term, while the latter does not.
conservative curl forces do not include the most well-known
curl force, which is the magnetic Lorentz force, as it is a II. THE EFFECTIVE AXION CURRENT AND
conservative force that can do no work [96], described by a CHARGE DENSITY
magnetic vector potential. It is well known that axions modify electrodynamics
With this in mind, it has become evident that it is possible through the axion two photon coupling [31,113], which in
to derive alternative versions of Poynting’s theorem (in fact, vacuum leads to the following set of modified Maxwell’s
four versions are possible) [101]. In particular, the equations:
Minkowski Poynting vector [102], S⃗ DB ¼ ϵ01μ0 D ⃗ × B,⃗ has
been shown to be successful to account for experiments in ⃗ ¼ ρe þ cgaγγ B:∇a;
∇·E ⃗
dielectric media, where the field momentum is associated ε0
with the canonical momentum [89,92,94,103]; here the
⃗ ¼ ϵ0 E⃗ þ P,
⃗ is the sum of the electric ∇×B ⃗ − 1 ∂tE ⃗ t a þ ∇a × EÞ;
⃗ ¼ μ0 J⃗ e − gaγγ μ0 ϵ0 cðB∂ ⃗
electric flux density, D c2
⃗ and electric polarization, P,
field, E, ⃗ and the magnetic flux ⃗ ¼ 0;
∇·B
density, B⃗ ¼ μ0 ðH ⃗ þ MÞ,
⃗ is the sum of the magnetic field,
∇×E ⃗ ¼ 0:
⃗ þ ∂ tB ð1Þ
⃗H, and magnetization, M. ⃗ Naturally, when the curl of the
polarization is nonzero (∇ × P ⃗ ≠ 0) the Minkowski Poynting
Here gaγγ is the two-photon coupling to an axion field, aðtÞ
vector will pick up this term, due to an unconventional but is the amplitude of the axion field, ρe is the volume charge
necessary modification to Faraday’s law [98,101], while the
density, and J⃗ e is the volume current density. One common
Abraham Poynting vector [104,105], S⃗ EH ¼ E ⃗ × H,
⃗ will not.
way to set up the equations of motion for the two photon
For the curl of the polarization to be nonzero, an energy interaction is to assume ∇a ¼ 0, so two of the three terms
input is required to separate the bound charge; this go to zero and only one modification to Ampere’s law
describes a permanent electret or energy harvesting remains,
material [106] as well as the properties of ferroelectric
domain walls [107]. This description is also similar to an
⃗ − 1 ⃗
active dipole in antenna theory, a voltage source in circuit ∇×B ∂ t E ¼ μ0 ðJ⃗ e − gaγγ ϵ0 cB∂
⃗ t aÞ; ð2Þ
c2
theory, or an active dipole emitter in quantum theory
[98–100], where an external nonconservative force (some- where the axion current is defined by
times referred as a fictitious or pseudo force) is described
by an impressed electric field (sometimes referred as a ⃗ t a:
J⃗ a ¼ −gaγγ ϵ0 cB∂ ð3Þ
fictitious or pseudo electric field [108–110]) with a nonzero
curl (one could call this a polarization). Furthermore, the This modification is commonly used in the calculation of
electret, energy harvester, or ferroelectric domain may be the sensitivity of haloscope experiments.

045009-2
POYNTING VECTOR CONTROVERSY IN AXION MODIFIED … PHYS. REV. D 105, 045009 (2022)

A more general version of the modifications as source This has been shown to be equivalent to a perturbative
terms can be obtained by substituting the following vector transformation of the electromagnetic fields [112,115,116],
identities: B⃗ · ∇a ¼ ∇ · ðaBÞ
⃗ − að∇ · BÞ
⃗ and ∇a × E ⃗ ¼ given by
⃗ ⃗
∇ × ðaEÞ − að∇ × EÞ into (1). Then, assuming to first
⃗ ¼ 0 and ∇ × E ⃗ ¼ −∂ t B,
⃗ the modified Gauss’ ⃗ 0 ð⃗r; tÞ → cBð⃗
cB ⃗ r; tÞ þ gaγγ aðtÞEð⃗
⃗ r; tÞ and ð8Þ
order ∇ · B
and Ampere’s laws may be written as [31,112]
E ⃗ r; tÞ − gaγγ aðtÞcBð⃗
⃗ 0 ð⃗r; tÞ → Eð⃗ ⃗ r; tÞ; ð9Þ
⃗ ¼ ρe þ ρab ;
ϵ0 ∇ · E where Eqs. (8) and (9) in the quasistatic limit effectively
1 ⃗ − ϵ0 ∂ t E
⃗ ¼ J⃗ e þ J⃗ ab þ J⃗ ae ; represent dual symmetry with respect to a rotation angle,
∇×B ð4Þ θðtÞ ¼ gaγγ aðtÞ where θðtÞ ≪ 1 [117–120]. Here θðtÞ is an
μ0
effective dynamical pseudoscalar field, which in this case is
where the product of the axion pseudoscalar field, aðtÞ, with the
axion photon coupling, gaγγ . For dark matter axions, aðtÞ is
in general a large classical field; however, θðtÞ remains small
⃗ r; tÞÞ;
ρab ¼ gaγγ ϵ0 c∇ · ðaðtÞBð⃗ due to the extremely weak coupling of axions to photons,
⃗ r; tÞÞ;
J⃗ ab ¼ −gaγγ ϵ0 c∂ t ðaðtÞBð⃗ i.e., gaγγ ≪ 1. Note that there is also a duality transformation
between electromagnetic potentials, where the dual 4-vector
⃗ r; tÞÞ:
J⃗ ae ¼ −gaγγ ϵ0 c∇ × ðaðtÞEð⃗ ð5Þ potential contains a magnetic scalar potential and an electric
vector potential. Under this duality transform the electric
Here, J⃗ ab is similar to a polarization current, ρab is similar vector potential manifests [116–120], which potentially adds
to a bound charge, and they are related through the the axion induced curl force to the system under inves-
tigation. This is evident from Eq. (9), as the curl of E ⃗ 01 has a
continuity equation
nonzero spatial term.
∇ · J⃗ ab ¼ −∂ t ρab : ð6Þ Now considering the interaction includes two photons,
we distinguish between a background field (denoted by
subscript 0) and the generated photon field (denoted by
Furthermore, J⃗ ae is similar to a bound current, so the total subscript 1), which is created by the axion pseudoscalar
axion current is thus J⃗ a ¼ J⃗ ab þ J⃗ ae , which is a more field mixing with the background field. To first order we
general form of Eq. (3). Note that setting these terms to zero may assume the background field satisfies Maxwell’s
because ∇a ¼ 0 at the beginning of a calculation that equations, so that
analyzes the sensitivity of an axion-photon coupled system
can result in missing some parts of the solution [62,112], as ⃗ 0 ¼ μ 0 ϵ0 ∂ t E
∇×B ⃗ 0 þ μ0 J⃗ e ;
0
we show in the next section.
⃗ 0 ¼ −∂ t B
∇×E ⃗ 0;

III. AXION MODIFIED ELECTRODYNAMICS ⃗ 0 ¼ 0;

∇·B
A. Time dependent form ⃗ 0 ¼ ϵ−1
∇·E 0 ρe0 : ð10Þ
Rather that write the equation of motion with modified
Note that any axion modification of the background field
source terms, as in (4) and (5), we may include the
will end up second order with respect to the effects on the
modifications in the definitions of the fields themselves in
second generated photonic degree of freedom, so it can be
a similar way to the auxiliary fields in matter [112]. With
ignored [31,114].
some rearrangement of these equations, we can show
Thus for the generated photonic degree of freedom, we
[31,106,114]
may write (7) in a similar way to how the auxiliary fields
⃗ r; tÞ − gaγγ aðtÞcBð⃗
⃗ r; tÞÞ ¼ ρe are included in Maxwell’s equations in matter, and we find
∇ · ðEð⃗ ; axion modified electrodynamics in a familiar form [112],
ϵ0
given by
⃗ r; tÞ þ gaγγ aðtÞEð⃗
∇ × ðcBð⃗ ⃗ r; tÞÞ
1 ⃗ 1 ¼ ρe1 ;
∇·D
⃗ r; tÞ − gaγγ að⃗r; tÞcBð⃗
− ∂ t ðEð⃗ ⃗ r; tÞÞ ¼ cμ0 J⃗ e ;
c ∇×H ⃗ 1 ¼ J⃗ e1 ;
⃗ 1 − ∂tD
⃗ r; tÞ ¼ 0;
∇ · cBð⃗
⃗ 1 ð⃗r; tÞ ¼ 0;
∇·B
⃗ r; tÞ þ 1 ∂ t cBð⃗
∇ × Eð⃗ ⃗ r; tÞ ¼ 0: ð7Þ ⃗ 1 ð⃗r; tÞ ¼ 0;
⃗ 1 ð⃗r; tÞ þ ∂ t B
c ∇×E ð11Þ

045009-3
TOBAR, MCALLISTER, and GORYACHEV PHYS. REV. D 105, 045009 (2022)

where (8) and (9) are akin to the following constitutive what is undertaken with an electret or impressed voltage
relations: source when the curl is nonzero [98,99,101,106], so by taking
⃗ 1 in (12) and combing with (16) we obtain
the curl of D
⃗
⃗ 1 ð⃗r; tÞ ¼ B1 − M
H ⃗ 1−M⃗ 1a and
μ0 1 ⃗ 1 ¼ −∂ t B
⃗ 1 − gaγγ aμ0 cJ⃗ e ;
∇×D ð17Þ
⃗ 1 ð⃗r; tÞ ¼ ϵ0 E
⃗ 1þP⃗ 1þP⃗ 1a : ϵ0 0
D ð12Þ
which is analogous to an electromagnetic system in matter
Here, M⃗ 1 and P⃗ 1 are the nonaxion induced magnetization where the curl of the polarization is nonzero. It has been
and polarization, respectively, while the axion modifica- shown in such systems the fundamental electromagnetic
tions, M⃗ 1a and P ⃗ 1a , are moved to redefinitions of the quantities become the electric D ⃗ and magnetic B ⃗ flux
auxiliary fields rather than source terms and to first order densities [98,101,106], which is compatible with the
with respect to the background field are given by Minkowski Poynting vector.
In this work we apply these more general equations to
⃗ 1a ¼ −gaγγ aðtÞcϵ0 E
M ⃗ 0 ð⃗r; tÞ and low-mass axion haloscopes, which necessarily include the
1 ⃗ impressed current, J⃗ e0 , which creates the background
⃗ 0 ð⃗r; tÞ:
P ¼ −gaγγ aðtÞcB ð13Þ ⃗ 0 ð⃗rÞ. Note that there also exists a dual
ϵ0 1a magnetic field B
symmetry with the source terms in the above Eqs. (15) and
⃗ 1a is nonzero, similar
Here it is clear the divergence of M (17), where an effective impressed magnetic current man-
to what occurs at the boundaries of a permanent magnet, the ifests through the axion interaction with the impressed
curl of P ⃗ 1a is nonzero similar to what occurs at the electrical current, J⃗ e0 , so J⃗ 0m1 ð⃗r; tÞ → gaγγ aðtÞμ0 cJ⃗ e0 ð⃗r; tÞ.
boundaries of a permanent electret, and by combining The fact that this impressed magnetic current exists does
(13) and (10) it can be calculated to be (assuming ∇a ¼ 0) not necessitate the existence of free magnetic monopoles, in
the same way bound currents and polarization currents do
⃗ 1a ¼ −gaγγ aðtÞcϵ0 ∇ · E
∇·M ⃗ 0 ð⃗r; tÞ ¼ −gaγγ aðtÞcρe ; not need the existence of free electrons or any other free
0
charge carrier. For example, bound magnetic monopoles
1 ⃗ 1a ¼ −gaγγ aðtÞc∇ × B ⃗ 0 ð⃗r; tÞ
∇×P exist in nature as permanent magnets consisting of bound
ϵ0 north and south pole pairs, which can be set in motion, with
gaγγ aðtÞ a net bound magnetic current if one pole is kept stationary
¼− ⃗ 0 − gaγγ aðtÞcμ0 J⃗ e :
∂tE ð14Þ
c 0 as the other rotates. Such a rotating magnet converts the
mechanical motion to an electromotive force with nonzero
Note that if we followed the procedure to set ∇a ¼ 0 at the curl (a curl force) [106]. This fact has been recognised as
start of the calculation, then the axion current in (3) would early as 1936 [121], where Schelkunoff from Bell Labs
be the only modification, and the general form of the stated, “It is true that there are no magnetic conductors and
modified constitutive relations in (12) would be missed. no magnetic conduction currents in the same sense as there
This would be akin to falsely setting ∇ × P ⃗ 1a ¼ 0 and ∇ · are electric conductors and electric conduction currents but
⃗M1a ¼ 0 even though they are in general nonzero in the magnetic convection currents are just as real as electric
approximation when ∇a is set to zero. convection currents, although the former exist only in
Assuming only a DC background magnetic field, B ⃗ 0 ð⃗rÞ doublets of oppositely directed currents since magnetic
⃗ ⃗
with no background electric field (E0 ¼ 0 and M1a ¼ 0) as charges themselves are observable only in doublets.”
well as in vacuum (M ⃗ 1 ¼ 0, P⃗ 1 ¼ 0, B
⃗ 1 ¼ μ0 H⃗ 1 ), one can
write the axion modified Ampere’s law from Eq. (11) as B. Harmonic phasor form
For harmonic solutions of the axion-Maxwell equations
⃗ 1 ¼ μ0 ∂ t D
∇×B ⃗ 1 þ μ0 J⃗ e : ð15Þ we write the equations in complex vector-phasor form.
1

For example, we set E ⃗ 1 ð⃗r; tÞ ¼ 1 ðE1 ð⃗rÞe−jω1 t þ

2
In contrast, Faraday’s law with respect to the E ⃗ 1
⃗ 1 and B E1 ð⃗rÞejω1 t Þ ¼ Re½E1 ð⃗rÞe−jω1 t , so we define the vector
fields remains unchanged, phasor (bold) and its complex conjugate by Ẽ1 ð⃗r; tÞ ¼
E1 ð⃗rÞe−jω1 t and Ẽ1 ð⃗r; tÞ ¼ E1 ð⃗rÞejω1 t , respectively. In
∇×E ⃗ 1:
⃗ 1 ¼ −∂ t B ð16Þ contrast, the axion pseudoscalar field, aðtÞ, may be written
as aðtÞ ¼ 12 ðãe−jωa t þ ã ejωa t Þ ¼ Reðãe−jωa t Þ, and thus, in
However, given the fact for the DC case the curl of P ⃗ 1a in
phasor form, à ¼ ãe−jωa t and à ¼ ã ejωa t . Thus, the
1 ⃗ ⃗
Eq. (14) is nonzero [ϵ0 ∇ × P1a ¼ −gaγγ aðtÞcμ0 Je0 ], a modi- phasor form of the modified Ampere’s law in (15)
fied Faraday’s law may be written in a similar fashion as to becomes

045009-4
POYNTING VECTOR CONTROVERSY IN AXION MODIFIED … PHYS. REV. D 105, 045009 (2022)

1 ⃗ 0; In the case that the complex Poynting vector is only real,

∇ × B̃1 ¼ J̃e1 − jω1 ϵ0 Ẽ1 þ jωa gaγγ ϵ0 cÃB
μ0 then the E1 and B1 fields are in phase, which describes a
1 propagating wave with distinct direction and momentum.
⃗ 0;
∇ × B̃1 ¼ J̃e1 þ jω1 ϵ0 Ẽ1 − jωa gaγγ ϵ0 cà B ð18Þ Such a propagating wave can be generated by an antenna in
μ0
the far-field limit, at distances larger than the wavelength of
the emitted photon, and is a source of loss from the antenna.
while the phasor form of Faraday’s law in (16) becomes
Another case where E1 and B1 are in phase is due to
resistive losses: in this case the photon energy is converted
∇ × Ẽ1 ¼ jω1 B̃1 ; to heat and destroyed; however, both are effectively loss
∇ × Ẽ1 ¼ −jω1 B̃1 ; ð19Þ terms with respect to the antenna, the former known as
radiation loss. Conversely, in the near field limit of an
and the phasor form of the modified Faraday’s law in (17) antenna, the Poynting vector is imaginary as E1 and B1 are
becomes out of phase. This represents reactive energy flow between
the antenna power source and the antenna near field, which
1 exists at subwavelength distances from the antenna. In this
∇ × D̃1 ¼ jω1 B̃1 − gaγγ cμ0 ÃJ⃗ e0 ; case the photons do not propagate away from the antenna,
ϵ0
and they exist as quasistatic oscillating E1 and B1 fields
1
∇ × D̃1 ¼ −jω1 B̃1 − gaγγ cμ0 Ã J⃗ e0 : ð20Þ with no net momentum.
ϵ0 A convenient and unambiguous way to calculate the real
and imaginary parts of the Poynting vector is through the
In the following we use these equations to calculate following equations:
energy and power via the Poynting theorem in a DC
magnetic field axion haloscope. 1 1
ReðS1 Þ ¼ ðS1 þ S1 Þ and jImðS1 Þ ¼ ðS1 − S1 Þ: ð23Þ
2 2
IV. CALCULATION OF POWER GENERATED IN A
DC MAGNETIC FIELD AXION HALOSCOPE We use these equations in the following to calculate the real
USING POYNTING THEOREM and imaginary parts of the complex Poynting vector in
We start by considering the instantaneous Poynting axion modified electrodynamics.
vector in its standard physics textbook form of
A. Axion modified Minkowski Poynting theorem
1 ⃗ 1 vector, we may calculate
S⃗ 1 ðtÞ ¼ E⃗ 1 ðtÞ × B⃗ 1 ðtÞ Based on the axion modified D
μ0 the complex axion modified Minkowski Poynting vector in a
1 1 similar way to Eq. (22), which is given by
¼ ðE1 e−jω1 t þ E1 ejω1 t Þ × ðB e−jω1 t þ B1 ejω1 t Þ
2 2μ0 1
1 1
1 1 SDB ¼ D1 × B1 and SDB ¼ D × B1 : ð24Þ
¼ ReðE1 × B1 Þ þ ReðE1 × B1 e−j2ω1 t Þ; ð21Þ 2ϵ0 μ0 2ϵ0 μ0 1
2μ0 2μ0
Taking the divergence of Eq. (24) we find
which consists of a DC term, the first term on the right-hand


side of (21), and a high frequency term, the second term on 1 1 1 
∇ · SDB ¼ ∇ · D × B
the right-hand side of (21). Note that the DC term in (21) is 2 ϵ0 1 μ0 1
equivalent to the time average of the instantaneous

1 1  1 1 1
Poynting vector. ¼ B1 · ∇ × D1 − D1 · ∇ × B1 ð25Þ
Thus, the complex Poynting vector and its complex 2 μ0 ϵ0 ϵ0 μ0
conjugate are defined by
and
1 1 

S1 ¼ E × B1 and S1 ¼ E × B1 ; ð22Þ 1 1  1
2μ0 1 2μ0 1 ∇ · SDB ¼ ∇ · D1 × B1
2 ϵ0 μ0


respectively, where S1 is the complex power density of the 1 1 1  1  1
¼ B · ∇ × D1 − D1 · ∇ × B1 : ð26Þ
harmonic electromagnetic wave or oscillation, with the real 2 μ 0 1 ϵ0 ϵ0 μ0
part equal to the time averaged power density and the
imaginary term equal to the reactive power, which may be Combining (25) and (26) with (20), (18), and (23)
inductive (magnetic energy dominates) or capacitive (elec- along with the divergence theorem (this is a standard
trical energy dominates). technique in microwave engineering and circuit theory

045009-5
TOBAR, MCALLISTER, and GORYACHEV PHYS. REV. D 105, 045009 (2022)

[79,101,122,123]), after some calculation we obtain (see 1

∇ · SEH ¼ ∇ · ðE1 × H1 Þ
Appendix A for details) 2
I 1 1
¼ H1 · ð∇ × E1 Þ − E1 · ð∇ × H1 Þ: ð30Þ
ReðSDB Þ · n̂ds 2 2
Z
Combining (29) and (30) with (19), (18), and (23) along
jðω1 − ωa Þ
¼ ϵ0 gaγγ cB⃗ 0 · ðãE1 − ã E1 Þ with the divergence theorem, we obtain (see Appendix A
4
for details)
1 1
þ gaγγ cB⃗ 0 · ðãJe1 þ ã Je1 Þ − gaγγ J⃗ e0 · ðã cB1 þ ãcB1 Þ I Z

4 4 jωa ⃗
 ReðSEH Þ · n̂ds ¼  
ϵ g cB · ðã E1 − ãE1 Þ
1 4 0 aγγ 0
− ðE1 · Je1 þ E1 · Je1 Þ dV ð27Þ
4 1
− ðE1 · Je1 þ E1 · Je1 ÞÞdV ð31Þ
4
and
I and
jImðSDB Þ · n̂ds I Z

jω1
Z

 jImðSEH Þ · n̂ds ¼ ðμ0 H1 · H1 − ϵ0 E1 · E1 Þ
jω1 1  2
¼ B1 · B1 − ϵ0 E1 · E1
2 μ0 jω ⃗ 0 · ðã E1 þ ãE1 Þ
þ a ϵ0 gaγγ cB
jðω1 þ ωa Þϵ0 gaγγ 4
þ cB⃗ 0 · ðãE1 þ ã E1 Þ 
4 1
− ðE1 · Je1 − E1 · Je1 ÞÞ dV: ð32Þ
1 1 4
þ gaγγ cB⃗ 0 · ðãJe1 − ã Je1 Þ þ gaγγ J⃗ e0 · ðã cB1 − ãcB1 Þ
4 4
 As before, the closed surface integral on the left-hand side
1
− ðE1 · Je1 − E1 · Je1 Þ dV: ð28Þ of (31) and (32) is the time averaged power and reactive
4 power radiated outside the haloscope volume, respectively.
However, the Abraham Poynting vector misses three extra
The closed surface integral on the left-hand side of (27) is terms the Minkowski Poynting vector picks up, due to the
the time averaged power radiated from inside to outside inclusion of the nonconservative and nondissipative source
the haloscope volume, which for a closed system such as term described by Eq. (20).
a cavity will be zero. However, for an open system such as
a radio frequency antenna, real power will radiate in the C. Abraham or Minkowski Poynting theorem in axion
far field. In contrast, the closed surface integral on the modified electrodynamics?
left-hand side of (28) is the reactive power radiated
outside the haloscope volume, which in general does Currently most calculations of haloscope detection sensi-
not have to be zero, in a similar way to how reactive tivity a priori assume the Abraham Poynting vector is valid,
power oscillates to and from the voltage source charging with the exception of one or two [62,112]. However, as shown
and discharging a reactive capacitor in circuit theory, or in the Minkowski-Abraham debate over the past century, this
the reactive power in an antenna, where energy oscillates is not “clear-cut” and in a stationary dielectric media where the
canonical momentum is under consideration, the Minkowski
from the antenna to the near field and then is reabsorbed
form agrees with experimental results [89,92,94]. This may be
by the antenna, due to the antenna’s self-capacitance or
true in axion modified electrodynamics, as we can identify a
inductance.
similar guilty term due to Eq. (14) and hence (17). The nonzero
curl should do active work without adding dissipation and
B. Axion modified Abraham Poynting theorem should not be ignored in calculations of axion detector
The complex Abraham pointing vector is basically the sensitivity. This extra term has all the properties of a curl
same as Eq. (22) for the case we are considering with force [82,83,95], which adds spatial terms to the Poynting
H⃗ 1¼ 1B⃗ vector equations. In the following sections we compare the
μ0 1 . Taking the divergence of Eq. (22) we find
two ways of determining the power of photonic conversion for
1 various axion haloscope topologies.
∇ · SEH ¼ ∇ · ðE1 × H1 Þ
2 V. RESONANT CAVITY HALOSCOPE
1 1
¼ H1 · ð∇ × E1 Þ − E1 · ð∇ × H1 Þ ð29Þ In this section we derive the sensitivity of an ADMX style
2 2
radio frequency haloscope based on a cavity resonator
and [14–22], with a schematic shown in Fig. 1. First, we

045009-6
POYNTING VECTOR CONTROVERSY IN AXION MODIFIED … PHYS. REV. D 105, 045009 (2022)

undertake the calculation using the Abraham Poynting vector, tangential real part of the electric field must be continuous at
as this is the a priori Poynting vector assumed across most of the cavity wall boundary, which for a perfect conductor is
the literature, and then we compare and contrast calculations zero and sets the boundary conditions to calculate the
using the Minkowski Poynting vector. frequency of the electromagnetic modes. Setting the reactive
For a power source, Ps , delivering energy to a resonator as power to zero on resonance, allows us to calculate if there is
shown in Fig. 1, the resonance is defined when the reactive any frequency shift of the bare cavity when excited by axions.
power delivered by the source is zero, and thus when tuned We do find a small second order in the Q-factor effect,
on resonance the circulating energy only oscillates between calculated using Foster’s reactance theorem [124]. However,
the electric and the magnetic energy in the resonator at the there is no major impact on the sensitivity calculation. For
cavity resonance frequency, with no energy oscillating completeness this is detailed in Appendix B and predicts a
between the cavity and the power source (which in this case different value of frequency shift depending on whether we
is the axion mixing with a DC magnetic field). In this case the use the Minkowski or the Abraham Poynting theorem.
power delivered to the cavity is real. This corresponds to the
real part of the Poynting theorem equations, which we use in A. Cavity dissipated power
the next section to calculate the sensitivity of the axion Both Poynting theorems have a dissipative term in the real
haloscope. Internal to the cavity resonator, this circulating components, listed as the final term on the right-hand side of
energy is described by a reactive (or imaginary) Poynting Eqs. (27) and (31) and graphically shown in Fig. 1. For
vector, which causes the power in the resonator to build up, dissipation effects over the volume, the volume current is in
with respect to the source input power, Ps . This buildup is phase with the imaginary part of the electric field and is of the
limited by the dissipation in the resonator and hence Q-factor. form Je1 ¼ σ e E1 , where σ e is the effective conductivity of
The buildup of circulating power is given by Pc ¼ Q1 Ps, the volume, which is related to the loss tangent of the volume
where in the steady state Ps ¼ Pd , which is also related to the by σ e ¼ ωa ϵ0 tan δ and given Q11 ∼ tan δ, then Je1 ∼ ωQa ϵ1 0 E1 ,
stored energy in the resonator, U1 , by Ps ¼ ω1 U1.
substituting these values in the last term on the right-hand
Thus, in such a cavity resonator the electric and magnetic
side of Eq. (27) or (31), the dissipated power in the cavity is
field are out of phase (as opposed to a propagating wave,
calculated to be
which is in phase), and in this paper we represent the lossless
electric field vector phasor as real and the lossless magnetic Z
ω ϵ ω U
field vector phasor as imaginary (and so the cross product is Pd ¼ a 0 E1 · E1 dV ¼ a 1 : ð33Þ
2Q1 Q1
imaginary). Dissipative terms, whether calculated in the
volume or on the surface assume Ohm’s law, dictate that For surface loss, the same volume integrals given by (27)
the dissipative part of the electric field be in phase with and (31) collapse to surface integrals, where the surface
surface or volume currents and hence the magnetic field. current on the cavity walls is represented by the vector
Thus, the electric field effectively gains an imaginary phasor, K1 ¼ n̂ × H1 , of dimensions amps/meter and the
component when losses are included. However, the majority electric field at the surface is nonzero and in phase with the
⃗ 1 Þ ∼ −ReðE
of the electric field is real, with ImðE ⃗ 1 Þ=Q1 . The
surface current, related by E1 ¼ RS K1, where RS is the
surface resistance. Again, substituting these values in the last
term on the right-hand side of Eq. (27) or (31) means the
dissipated power in the cavity is
I I
R R ω U
Pd ¼ S K1 · K1 ds ¼ S H1 · H1 ds ¼ a 1 ; ð34Þ
2 2 Q1

which gives the same relationship with respect to the stored

energy, U1 , and the dissipated power, whether it dissipates
over the volume or over the surface of the cavity resonator.
FIG. 1. Schematic of axion conversion in an ADMX style
haloscope. Such haloscopes are based on radio frequency cavity B. Sensitivity from the Abraham Poynting theorem
resonators, where an external DC magnetic field, B ⃗ 0 , has a
In this calculation we assume the cavity is a closed system
nonzero dot product with the nondissipative electric field of the
so there is no real power radiating outside the cavity volume,
radio frequency mode in the cavity, ReðE1 Þ. For a cylindrical
cavity the sensitive modes are from the TM 0;n;0 mode family, and this means the closed surfaceHintegral on the left-hand
where n is the radial mode number. The axial and azimuthal mode side of (31) should be set to zero [ ReðSEH Þ · n̂ds ¼ 0]. In
numbers must be zero. Finite losses mean part of the electric field, practice power is taken outside the cavity due to the coupling,
ImðE1 Þ, is in phase with the magnetic field, B1 , characterized by which in effect loads the cavity Q-factor, and this phenome-
the loss angle δ, which for a high-Q system is very small and non may be added after the calculation using standard
related by tan δ ∼ Q11. techniques. We also assume that the axion and the resonator

045009-7
TOBAR, MCALLISTER, and GORYACHEV PHYS. REV. D 105, 045009 (2022)

frequency coincide (ω1 ¼ ωa ), and therefore the magnetic ã cB1 Þ ¼ 0], and the axion and the resonator frequency
and electric energy inside the resonator will be equal, where coincide (ω1 ¼ ωa ). Then, in this case Eq. (27) becomes
again the effects of detuning may be added using standard Z
techniques. Under these assumptions Eq. (31) becomes 1 ω U
Ps ¼ g cB⃗ · ðãJe1 þ ã Je1 ÞdV ¼ Pd ¼ a 1 : ð40Þ
Z 4 aγγ 0 Q1
jgaγγ ωa c ω U
Ps ¼ B⃗ 0 · ðã ϵ0 E1 − ãϵ0 E1 ÞdV ¼ Pd ¼ a 1 :
4 Q1 Here, Ps is the axion source power and must be real.
As undertaken in the Abraham technique, we assume a
ð35Þ
lossy volume current in phase with the electric field of the
form Je1 ¼ σ e E1 where σ e ¼ ωQa ϵ10 . Substituting the same
Here, Ps is the axion source power and must be real, note the
value of Je1 into (40) gives
source power is equal to the dissipated power, and as
calculated in the last section it can occur over the volume Z
gaγγ a0 ωa ϵ0 c
and/or over the cavity surface. Ps ¼ ⃗ 0 · ReðE1 ð⃗rÞÞdV;
B ð41Þ
For the source power to be nonzero either E1 or the 2Q1
axion scalar field, ã, has to be imaginary. Since the axion
the same as calculated for the Abraham technique in
scalar field is assumed to be lossless, we consider only the
Eq. (36), which means both Eqs. (38) and (39) are calculable
former to be imaginary, as has been suggested previously
using both the Minkowski and the Abraham Poynting
[114]. The general complex electric field is of the form
vectors, and are consistent with previous sensitivity calcu-
E1 ≈ ð1 − j tan δÞReðE1 Þ in the regime where the loss
lations for a standard ADMX style haloscope.
angle is very small, δ ≪ 1. Hence, the axion source term
in the steady state becomes
VI. LOW-MASS BROADBAND AXION
Z HALOSCOPES UNDER DC MAGNETIC FIELD
gaγγ a0 ωa ϵ0 c
Ps ¼ ⃗ 0 · ReðE1 ð⃗rÞÞdV;
B ð36Þ
2Q1 For a low-mass broadband detector in the quasistatic limit,
a haloscope may be inductive or capacitive and must be
where a0 ¼ 12 ðã þ ã Þ is the peak value of the scalar axion driven by reactive power from the source, so in the first
pffiffiffi approximation any dissipation or radiation loss can be
field, so a0 ¼ 2ha0 i. Equating (36) to Pd ¼ ωQa U1 1 derived
ignored and is thus set to zero. As before, we consider the
in (33) or (34) gives generated electric field to be real (E1 ¼ E1 ) and the out of
Z Z phase magnetic field as imaginary (B1 ¼ −B1 ). Also,
gaγγ a0 ϵ0 c ϵ
U1 ¼ B⃗ 0 · ReðE1 ÞdV ¼ 0 E1 · E1 dV: ð37Þ conduction currents will be in the same phase as the magnetic
2 2 field and hence imaginary (Je1 ¼ −Je1 ). In this case, it is
clear that the real part of the delivered complex Poynting
Now defining the form factor of the cavity haloscope as vector given by (31) and (27) must be zero, and the sensitivity
of the reactive low-mass broadband haloscope will be
R
ð B⃗ · ReðE1 ÞdVÞ2 determined from the imaginary reactive power delivered
C1 ¼ 2 0 R ; ð38Þ by the axion interacting with the background DC magnetic
B0 V 1 E1 · E1 dV
field.
There has been some recent controversy in the calculation
the axion induced circulating power may be calculated to of sensitivity for low mass reactive experiments in the
be quasistatic limit, where the majority of the publications
suggest that the sensitivity to electric field is suppressed
P1 ¼ ωa QU1 ¼ g2aγγ ha0 i2 ωa Q1 ϵ0 c2 B20 V 1 C1 when the Compton wavelength of the axion is larger than the
1 experimental dimensions [40,114,125,126]. These experi-
¼ g2aγγ ρa Q1 ϵ0 c5 B20 V 1 C1 ; ð39Þ
ωa ments assume that the only modification to Maxwell’s
equations is due to the axion current (3), which is equivalent
where ha0 i2 ¼ ρca mℏ 2 and ρa is the axion dark matter
2
to assuming no boundary or spatial effects and thus setting
a
the total derivative to zero. On the other hand, it has been
density. This calculation is consistent with what has been
shown that making these approximations too early in the
derived previously [15,31,36].
calculation can lead to valid solutions being lost [62,112,127]
due to extra spatial or surface terms, which in this case is due
C. Sensitivity from the Minkowski Poynting theorem ⃗ 1a ¼ −gaγγ aðtÞϵ0 cB
⃗ 0 ð⃗rÞ has a nonzero curl,
to the fact that P
As before, assuming the realH power inside the cavity which can also be thought as a connection to the Witten effect
haloscope is a closed system [ ReðSDB Þ · n̂ds ¼ 0], the [128]. Based on this, more sensitive experiments have been
cavity is embedded inside a magnet [J⃗ e0 · ðãcB1 þ proposed using inductive wire loop readouts [62], or

045009-8
POYNTING VECTOR CONTROVERSY IN AXION MODIFIED … PHYS. REV. D 105, 045009 (2022)

capacitive parallel plate readouts [112,129]. In the following, magnetic field phasor within the capacitor volume
as an example, we compare the sensitivity of a parallel plate (V c ¼ πR2c dc ) may be calculated to be
capacitor to low mass axions by implementing both Poynting
vector theorems. r
B1 ¼ −jωa μ0 q̃1 θ̂: ð45Þ
πR2c
A. Capacitor under DC magnetic field
Following this we may calculate the ratio of the magnetic
For a parallel plate capacitor as shown in Fig. 2 the last energy density to electric energy density in the capacitor
terms on the right-hand side of Eqs. (32) and (28) must be given by
zero, since the conduction current must be zero in the lossless
capacitor volume. This also means the third last term on the B1 · B1 r2 ω2a π 2 r2
right-hand side of (28) must be zero. Furthermore, if we ¼ ¼ 2 ; ð46Þ
ϵ0 μ0 E1 · E1 4c2 λa
assume the capacitor is embedded inside a DC magnet, the
second last term in (28) must also be zero (it is possible to where λa is the Compton wavelength of the axion.
make use of this term to make a sensitive low-mass detector Integrating over the volume of the capacitor allows us to
[62]). This means the equations for reactive power flowing calculate the ratio of magnetic to electric energy to be
into and out of the capacitor volume, using the Abraham and (ignoring fringing)
Minkowski forms, are given by
R
I Z

V c B1 · B1 dV R2 ω2 π 2 R2c
1  ϵ R ¼ c 2a ¼ : ð47Þ
jImðSEH Þ · n̂ds ¼ jωa B1 · B1 − 0 E1 · E1 
ϵ0 μ0 V c E1 · E1 dV 8c 2λ2a
2μ0 2

ϵ0 ⃗ 0 · ReðE1 Þ dV ð42Þ
þ gaγγ a0 cB These equations highlight that at DC the parallel plate
2 capacitor is purely capacitive, but at AC the capacitor has a
small but finite inductance in the quasistatic limit, when
and λa > Rc . When λa ∼ Rc , the capacitor could become
I Z
resonant, similar to a TM 0;1;0 mode in a cylindrical cavity;
1  ϵ
jImðSDB Þ · n̂ds ¼ jωa B · B − 0 E · E however, this would not be in the quasistatic limit.
2μ0 1 1 2 1 1 Nevertheless, in a circuit where the direction of the electric

⃗ field E1 in a capacitor is parallel to the applied DC
þ ϵ0 gaγγ a0 cB0 · ReðE1 Þ dV; ð43Þ
magnetic field, B⃗ 0 , Eq. (37) still holds for the capacitor,
with an effective form factor of unity, which can be shown
respectively. by substituting Eq. (44) into (38), and we can use this fact
For the capacitor in Fig. 2 the alternating current (AC) to help calculate the sensitivity of a low-mass capacitor
electric field phasor, ignoring fringing, is of the form experiment.
q̃1
E1 ¼ ẑ; ð44Þ 1. Sensitivity assuming the Abraham Poynting theorem
πR2c ϵ0
Assuming the Abraham Poynting theorem, the reactive
where q̃1 is the complex phasor of electric charge on the power delivered to and from a capacitor under the DC
capacitor plates. Following this, from Ampere’s law the AC magnetic field as shown in Fig. 2 can be calculated by
substituting Eq. (37) into (42), and using (46) we find
I
jPa ¼ jImðSEH Þ · n̂ds
Z 2 2
jωa gaγγ a0 ϵ0 c
¼ ⃗ 0 · ReðE1 ÞÞ π r dV:
ðB ð48Þ
2 λ2a

Now, from the definition of the haloscope form factor (38),

the reactive power delivered to the capacitor given by (48)
becomes

2 2 2
2 2 2 2 π Rc
Pa ¼ ωa Uc ; where U c ¼ gaγγ ha0 i ϵ0 c B0 V 1 :
2λ2a
FIG. 2. Schematic of axion conversion in a capacitive
haloscope. ð49Þ

045009-9
TOBAR, MCALLISTER, and GORYACHEV PHYS. REV. D 105, 045009 (2022)

Thus the magnitude of the voltage phasor across the VII. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
capacitor can be calculated from Uc ¼ 12 Ṽ Ṽ  Ca By applying the Poynting theorem to axion modified
2
(Ca ¼ πRdccϵ0 ) to be electrodynamics, we have shown how the sensitivity of a

 resonant cavity and reactive broadband axion haloscope may
pffiffiffi πRc 2
jṼj ¼ 2gaγγ ha0 icB0 dc pffiffiffi ; ð50Þ be calculated. However, the way we apply the theorem is
2λa dependent on the type of detector. For example, the Poynting
vector analysis had already been undertaken to calculate the
which is consistent with an rms voltage across the capacitor
sensitivity of the MADMAX detector [43–46]. However,
of
MADMAX is in the regime where the Compton wavelength


πR 2 of the axion is much smaller than the detector size, and it is
V rms ¼ gaγγ ha0 icB0 dc pffiffiffi c thus in a different regime from the resonant and reactive
2λa
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
 haloscope discussed in this paper. The MADMAX detector
c 3 p πRc 2 converts energy at a dielectric boundary and is assumed to be
¼ gaγγ dc B0 ρa c ffiffiffi ; ð51Þ
ωa 2λa in the propagating wave (or far field) limit, where the Ẽ and
qffiffiffiffi B̃ vector phasors are in phase, so the Poynting vector is real,
where ha0 i ¼ ρca mℏa and ρa is the axion dark matter represents the physical energy flux leaving a surface,
density. This calculation is consistent with other calcula- propagates through the haloscope [43–45], and in principle
tions based on just the axion current [114,125,126], as can be made broadband.
given by Eq. (3); However, it does not take into account the In contrast, the resonant haloscope is generally the size of
⃗ 1a . The calculation predicts the Compton wavelength of the axion (unless higher order
nonzero value of the curl of P
2 modes are implemented) and thus has an imaginary Poynting
suppressed sensitivity at low mass, proportional to Rλ2c . vector internally within the resonator. This is because the
a
axion induced photon energy produced within the resonator
2. Sensitivity assuming the Minkowski Poynting theorem is reflected at the resonator boundaries, so the energy is
localized in the form of a standing wave, with the Ẽ and B̃
Assuming the Minkowski Poynting theorem, the reactive fields out of phase. In this work we have assumed the electric
power delivered to and from a capacitor under the DC field is real, and thus the magnetic field is imaginary.
magnetic field as shown in Fig. 2 can be calculated by However, on resonance (when ωa ¼ ω1 ), the axion con-
substituting Eq. (37) into (43). Note that in this case the version process within the resonant cavity haloscope does not
magnetic energy is insignificant so ignoring this component need to supply any reactive power, only real power. In this
gives case the real part of the Poynting vector equation has both a
I
source term and a dissipative term within the cavity, which
jPa ¼ jImðSDB Þ · n̂ds are equal in the steady state, allowing the incident source
Z power to escape the volume as heat, through the resistive
jωa gaγγ a0 ϵ0 c
¼ ⃗ 0 · ReðE1 ÞÞdV:
ðB ð52Þ losses. Meanwhile, reactive power flow oscillates between
2 the electric and the magnetic fields within the cavity. The
Now, from the definition of the haloscope energy (37) and higher the Q-factor the more the circulating power builds up
form factor (38), the energy stored in the capacitor (52) within the cavity, meaning the percentage of dissipation per
becomes cycle is smaller, and hence the detector sensitivity is propor-
tional to the Q-factor. The down side is that the technique is
U c ¼ g2aγγ ha0 i2 ϵ0 c2 B20 V 1 : ð53Þ narrow band, which requires complicated tuning mechanisms
to scan for the axion of unknown mass.
Thus the magnitude of the voltage phasor across the capacitor
On the other hand, low-mass broadband experiments are in
can be calculated from U c ¼ 12 Ṽ Ṽ  Ca to be the quasistatic regime, where the Compton wavelength is
pffiffiffi much greater than the dimensions of the detector. In this case
jṼj ¼ 2gaγγ ha0 icB0 dc ; ð54Þ
the sensitivity is determined by the reactive power flow
which is consistent with an rms voltage of within the detector created from the axion-photon conversion.
For the higher frequency resonant cavity haloscope, we have
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
c shown that the implementation of either the Minkowski or the
V rms ¼ gaγγ ha0 icB0 dc ¼ gaγγ dc B ρa c3 ; ð55Þ
ωa 0 Abraham axion modified Poynting vector has no significant
influence on the calculated sensitivity. In contrast, for low-
which is the same as calculated previously [129]. Thus, we mass reactive haloscopes there is a large difference in
may conclude, from the Minkowski Poynting theorem, a sensitivity calculated from the two Poynting theorems.
sensitive low-mass experiment may be undertaken using a Currently, the Minkowski-Abraham controversy in electro-
capacitive haloscope. dynamics interacting with matter is considered to be resolved

045009-10
POYNTING VECTOR CONTROVERSY IN AXION MODIFIED … PHYS. REV. D 105, 045009 (2022)

by identifying the Abraham and Minkowski Poynting vector infinity). In this case the axion current is the only source term,
with the total system kinetic and canonical momentum, which contributes to observable effects. In this work we have
respectively [94,130]. For electrodynamics in matter, the challenged this view through the Abraham-Minkowski con-
Abraham Poynting theorem is the correct one to use when the troversy, while putting forward the idea that the conversion
whole dielectric body is displaced together as a solid entity from the axion scalar field to power in the oscillating
[89]. In contrast, the Minkowski Poynting vector is the photonic degree of freedom is just another way to generate
relevant one to use when considering the canonical momen- photonic power (or electricity) from an external nonphotonic
tum, which acts to spatially translate particles within the degree of freedom. In this case the underlying microscopic
dielectric [103], such as bound charge, which may in some mechanism is the axion-photon anomaly from QCD, where
cases cause the curl of the polarization to be nonzero [98– the surrounding ensemble of axions from dark matter mix
101,106,107]. For example, the conservation law for the with the virtual photons from the DC magnetic field to supply
canonical momentum has been validated through atomic the external energy that will generate power in the oscillating
recoil in spontaneous emission [103]. photonic degree of freedom.
For axion modified electrodynamics the Minkowski sol- In the end, to verify which description gives the correct
ution suggests a similar nonconservative effect under a DC solution will require experimentation, which will only be
background magnetic field, B ⃗ 0 ð⃗rÞ, because from Eq. (14), possible when the axion is discovered.
when ∇a ¼ 0, the curl of P ⃗ 1a is nonzero and is given by
⃗
∇ × P1a ¼ −gaγγ aðtÞcϵ0 ∇ × B ⃗ 0 ð⃗rÞ ¼ −gaγγ aðtÞϵ0 μ0 cJ⃗ e . ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
0
This term is created at the surface defined by the coil winding This work was funded by the ARC Centre of Excellence
where the impressed electric current, J⃗ e0 , flows, which is the for Engineered Quantum Systems, CE170100009, and the
source term that creates B ⃗ 0 ð⃗rÞ. The curl of P ⃗ 1a may also be ARC Centre of Excellence for Dark Matter Particle
described as a fictitious oscillating magnetic current boun- Physics, CE200100008. B. M. was also funded by the
dary source [J⃗ m1 ¼ gaγγ aðtÞμ0 cJ⃗ e0 ], which sources an oscil- Forrest Research Foundation.
lating spatial nonconservative electric curl force (or emf),
with a force per unit charge of −gaγγ aðtÞcB ⃗ 0 , which displaces APPENDIX A: DERIVATION OF POYNTING
the axion charge harmonically in time, creating a polarization THEOREM EQUATIONS
current of J⃗ a ¼ ∂ t P
⃗ 1a ¼ −gaγγ ϵ0 cB ⃗ 0 ∂ t a, which is equiva-
In this Appendix we derive Eqs. (27), (28), (31), and (32)
lent to the axion current given by Eq. (3). Here, the harmonic in the main text.
spatial translation of axion charge creates the oscillating
photonic degree of freedom through the QCD axion-photon
1. Axion modified Minkowski Poynting theorem
anomaly in an analogous way to photons created via
spontaneous emission from dipole emitters in [103]. The To derive Eq. (27) and (28), we begin with writing the
nonconservative boundary source gives an unsuppressed divergence of the real and imaginary parts of SDB as
sensitivity at low mass proportional to gaγγ aðtÞ, whereas
experiments proportional to the axion current are suppressed 1
∇ · ReðSDB Þ ¼ ∇ · ðSDB þ SDB Þ;
through the time derivative. 2
Recently, this effect has also been shown to be apparent in 1
∇ · ImðSDB Þ ¼ ∇ · ðSDB − SDB Þ: ðA1Þ
topological insulators, where a material with a polarization of 2
nonzero curl was shown to be associated with a magnetic
current boundary (or instanton), a Berry phase and nonzero The next step is to calculate ∇ · SDB and ∇ · SDB ,
crystal momentum [131]. Moreover, they showed a nonzero

static θ angle angle was possible because a nonzero mag- 1 1 1 
∇ · SDB ¼ ∇ · D × B
netoelectric angle in 3D, does not obstruct the gauge 2 ϵ0 1 μ0 1
invariance of polarization density, and θ can be interpreted

1 1  1 1 1
as the magnetoelectric polarizability, i.e., a magnetic field ¼ B1 · ∇ × D1 − D1 · ∇ × B1 ðA2Þ
2 μ0 ϵ0 ϵ0 μ0
induces an extra polarization density, ΔP⃗ equivalent to
Eq. (13) with a static value of θ [132,133]. and
For axion modified electrodynamics the Abraham solution
is consistent with the total derivative equal to zero, which is

1 1  1
the prevailing view among the axion dark matter community. ∇ · SDB ¼ ∇· D × B
2 ϵ0 1 μ0 1
For the total derivative to be zero, it is well known that all

surface terms must go to zero as the Compton wavelength 1 1 1  1  1
¼ B · ∇ × D1 − D1 · ∇ × B1 : ðA3Þ
approaches infinity (surfaces are essentially assumed to go to 2 μ0 1 ϵ0 ϵ0 μ0

045009-11
TOBAR, MCALLISTER, and GORYACHEV PHYS. REV. D 105, 045009 (2022)

⃗ 0 ð⃗rÞ, created by an
In harmonic form, the axion modified Ampere’s and Faraday’s laws under a background DC B-field of B
impressed electrical DC current in the magnet coil, J⃗ e0 , may be written as

1 ⃗ 0 ã;
∇ × B1 ¼ Je1 − jω1 ϵ0 E1 þ jωa gaγγ ϵ0 cB
μ0
1 ⃗ 0 ã ;
∇ × B1 ¼ Je1 þ jω1 ϵ0 E1 − jωa gaγγ ϵ0 cB
μ0
1
∇ × D1 ¼ jω1 B1 − gaγγ cμ0 ãJ⃗ e0 ;
ϵ0
1
∇ × D1 ¼ −jω1 B1 − gaγγ cμ0 ã J⃗ e0 : ðA4Þ
ϵ0

Substituting Eq. (A4) into Eqs. (A2) and (A3) leads to

1 
∇ · SDB ¼ B · ðjω1 B1 − gaγγ ãcμ0 J⃗ e0 Þ
2μ0 1
1 ⃗ 0 Þ · ðJe þ jω1 ϵ0 E1 − jωa gaγγ ϵ0 ã cB⃗ 0Þ
− ðE1 − gaγγ ãcB
2 1


jω 1  jω ⃗ 0 · E1
¼ 1 B1 · B1 − ϵ0 E1 · E1 þ 1 ϵ0 gaγγ ãcB
2 μ0 2
jω
þ a gaγγ ϵ0 ã cB ⃗ 0 · E1 − 1 E1 · Je þ 1 gaγγ ãcB ⃗ 0 · Je
2 2 1
2 1

1
− gaγγ ãcB1 · J⃗ e0 ðA5Þ
2
and
1
∇ · SDB ¼ B · ð−jω1 B1 − gaγγ ã cμ0 J⃗ e0 Þ
2μ0 1
1 ⃗ 0 Þ · ðJe − jω1 ϵ0 E1 þ jωa gaγγ ϵ0 ãcB ⃗ 0Þ
− ðE1 − gaγγ ã cB
2 1


jω 1 jω ⃗ 0 · E1
¼ 1 ϵ0 E1 · E1 − B1 · B1 − 1 ϵ0 gaγγ ã cB
2 μ0 2
jω
− a gaγγ ϵ0 ãcB⃗ 0 · E1 − 1 E1 · Je þ 1 gaγγ ã cB
⃗ 0 · Je
2 2 1
2 1

1
− gaγγ ã cB1 · J⃗ e0 : ðA6Þ
2


Now by substituting (A5) and (A6) into (A1) we obtain jω1 1  
∇ · jImðSDB Þ ¼ B · B − ϵ0 E 1 · E 1
2 μ0 1 1
jðω1 − ωa Þ ⃗ 0 · ðãE1 − ã E1 Þ jðω1 þ ωa Þϵ0 gaγγ
∇ · ReðSDB Þ ¼ ϵ0 gaγγ cB þ ⃗ 0 · ðãE1 þ ã E1 Þ
cB
4 4
1 ⃗ 0 · ðãJe þ ã Je Þ 1
þ gaγγ cB þ gaγγ cB ⃗ 0 · ðãJe − ã Je Þ
4 1 1
4 1 1

1 1
− gaγγ J⃗ e0 · ðã cB1 þ ãcB1 Þ þ gaγγ J⃗ e0 · ðã cB1 − ãcB1 Þ
4 4
1 1
− ðE1 · Je1 þ E1 · Je1 Þ ðA7Þ − ðE1 · Je1 − E1 · Je1 Þ: ðA8Þ
4 4

and Then applying the divergence theorem, we arrive at

045009-12
POYNTING VECTOR CONTROVERSY IN AXION MODIFIED … PHYS. REV. D 105, 045009 (2022)
I
ReðSDB Þ · n̂ds electrical DC current in the magnet coil, J⃗ e0 , in harmonic
form, Ampere’s law is modified but Faraday’s law is not,
Z

jðω1 − ωa Þ ⃗ 0 · ðãE1 − ã E1 Þ
and may be written as
¼ ϵ0 gaγγ cB
4
1 1 ⃗ 0 ã;
þ gaγγ cB ⃗ 0 · ðãJe þ ã Je Þ ∇ × B1 ¼ Je1 − jω1 ϵ0 E1 þ jωa gaγγ ϵ0 cB
4 1 1 μ0
1 1 ⃗ 0 ã ;
− gaγγ J⃗ e0 · ðã cB1 þ ãcB1 Þ ∇ × B1 ¼ Je1 þ jω1 ϵ0 E1 − jωa gaγγ ϵ0 cB
4 μ0

1   ∇ × E1 ¼ jω1 B1 ;
− ðE1 · Je1 þ E1 · Je1 Þ dV; ðA9Þ
4 ∇ × E1 ¼ −jω1 B1 : ðA14Þ
the same as Eq. (27) in the main text, and
Substituting Eq. (A14) into Eqs. (A12) and (A13) leads to
I
jImðSDB Þ · n̂ds

jω1 1  
Z

 ∇ · SEH ¼ B · B − ϵ0 E 1 · E 1
jω1 1  2 μ0 1 1

¼ B · B − ϵ0 E 1 · E 1
2 μ0 1 1 jω ⃗ 0 · E1 − 1 E1 · Je
þ a gaγγ ϵ0 ã cB ðA15Þ
jðω1 þ ωa Þϵ0 gaγγ 2 2 1

þ cB⃗ 0 · ðãE1 þ ã E1 Þ

4 and
1 1
þ gaγγ cB⃗ 0 · ðãJe1 − ã Je1 Þ þ gaγγ J⃗ e0 · ðã cB1 − ãcB1 Þ

4 4 1 
 ∇· SEH ¼
jω1 
ϵ0 E1 · E1 − B1 · B1
1 2 μ0
− ðE1 · Je1 − E1 · Je1 Þ dV; ðA10Þ
4
−
jωa
gaγγ ϵ0 ãcB⃗ 0 · E1 − 1 E1 · Je : ðA16Þ
the same as Eq. (28) in the main text. 2 2 1

Now by substituting (A15) and (A16) into (A11) we

2. Axion modified Abraham Poynting theorem obtain
To derive Eqs. (31) and (32), we begin with writing the
divergence of the real and imaginary parts of SEH as jωa ⃗ · ðã E1 − ãE1 Þ
∇ · ReðSEH Þ ¼ ϵ g cB
4 0 aγγ 0
1 1
∇ · ReðSEH Þ ¼ ∇ · ðSEH þ SEH Þ; − ðE1 · Je1 þ E1 · Je1 Þ ðA17Þ
2 4
1
∇ · ImðSEH Þ ¼ ∇ · ðSEH − SEH Þ: ðA11Þ
2 and
The next step is to calculate ∇ · SEH and ∇ · SEH ,

jω1 1  

 ∇ · jImðSEH Þ ¼ B · B − ϵ0 E 1 · E 1
1 1 2 μ0 1 1
∇ · SEH ¼ ∇ · E1 × B1
2 μ0 jω
þ a ϵ0 gaγγ cB⃗ 0 · ðã E1 þ ãE1 Þ

 4
1 1  1 
¼ B · ∇ × E1 − E1 · ∇ × B1 ðA12Þ 1
2 μ0 1 μ0 − ðE1 · Je1 − E1 · Je1 Þ: ðA18Þ
4
and
Then applying the divergence theorem, we arrive at


1 1 I Z

∇ · SEH 
¼ ∇ · E1 × B1 jωa
2 μ0 ReðSEH Þ · n̂ds ¼ ϵ g cB ⃗ · ðã E1 − ãE1 ÞÞ

 4 0 aγγ 0
1 1 1 
¼ B1 · ∇ × E1 − E1 · ∇ × B1 : ðA13Þ 1
2 μ0 μ0 − ðE1 · Je1 þ E1 · Je1 Þ dV; ðA19Þ
4
Considering the Abraham Poynting vector, under a back-
ground DC B-field of B ⃗ 0 ð⃗rÞ, created by an impressed the same as Eq. (31) in the main text, and

045009-13
TOBAR, MCALLISTER, and GORYACHEV PHYS. REV. D 105, 045009 (2022)
I Z

 Z Z
jω1 1  1 ϵ
jImðSEH Þ · n̂ds ¼ B · B − ϵ0 E 1 · E 1  UB1 ¼ B1 · B1 dV and U E1 ¼ 0 E1 · E1 dV:
2 μ0 1 1 4μ0 4
jω ðB2Þ
þ a ϵ0 gaγγ cB⃗ 0 · ðã E1 þ ãE1 Þ
4
 Following this procedure, the axion-photon coupling input
1  
− ðE1 · Je1 − E1 · Je1 ÞÞ dV; ðA20Þ impedances for both the axion modified Abraham Poynting
4
Vector and the axion modified Minkowski Poynting Vector
may be calculated, and this is undertaken in the following
the same as Eq. (32) in the main text. sections.

1. Abraham Poynting theorem

APPENDIX B: CONSIDERATION OF THE
REACTIVE POWER FLOW IN A RESONANT To calculate the parameters for the parallel LCR circuit
HALOSCOPE shown in Fig. 3, Eqs. (B1) and (32) are combined, and
given that the real part of E1 is out of phase with any
In this Appendix we consider the impact of the reactive conduction currents in the volume, and zero at the cavity
part of the Poynting vector on a resonant cavity axion boundary, then the series impedance becomes
haloscope. In general, reactive coupling of power into a
R
resonant cavity may be calculated by implementing Foster’s ⃗ 0 · ðã þ ãÞReðE1 ÞdV
ωa ϵ0 gaγγ cB
reactance theorem [123,124,134]. Foster showed that a jX 1 ¼ −j : ðB3Þ
lossless circuit network made of resonances and antireso- 2 Ĩ Ĩ 
nances could be represented as a combination of inductors Then given that the energy in a LC resonator is given by
and capacitors [124], and following this Beringer and Dicke U1 ¼ 12 Ĩ Ĩ  Lp1 , where ω21 ¼ Lp11Cp1 , and using the result
applied the theorem to high-Q microwave cavities
[123,134], allowing the calculation of the effect of reactive from Eq. (37), Eq. (B3) becomes
coupling to a cavity, based on the complex Poynting theorem a0 ϵ0 gaγγ c R ⃗ 0 · ReðE1 ÞdV
[122]. In general, it has been shown that the reactive ω 2 B ω
jX 1 ¼ 2 a ¼ 2 a ; ðB4Þ
coupling network into a high-Q resonance may be repre- jω1 Cp1 U1 jω1 Cp1
sented by either an impedance, X 1 , in series with a parallel
LC circuit (of elements Lp1 , Cpi , and Rp1 ), or an admittance, ω2
which is equivalent to a capacitance of Ca ¼ Cp1 ω21 . Thus,
B1 , in parallel with a series LC circuit (of elements Ls1 , Cs1 , a
the input impedance, Zp ðωa Þ, of the parallel circuit
and Rs1 ). Applying this technique to axion-photon conver-
representation can be written in normalized form as
sion in a resonant haloscope leads to the following equiv-
alent circuit shown in Fig. 3. Zp ðωa Þ ωa 1
Applying Foster’s reactance theorem to the cavity ¼ þ ; ðB5Þ
resonator allows X 1 and B1 to be calculated from the Rp1 jω1 Q1 1 þ jQ1 ðωωa1 − ωωa1 Þ
following equations [134]:
where Q1 ¼ ω1 Rp1 Cp1 . Defining the detuning as
δω ¼ ωa − ω1 , where δω ≪ ω1 and δa ¼ δω
ω1 , then
4ðU B1 − UE1 Þ 4ðUE1 − UB1 Þ
jX 1 ¼ jω1 
and jB1 ¼ jω1 ;
Ĩ Ĩ Ṽ Ṽ  1
Zp ðδa Þ 1 − j2Q1 ðδa þ 2Q21 Þ
ðB1Þ ≈ : ðB6Þ
Rp1 1 þ 4Q21 δ2a

where Setting the imaginary part to zero allows the calculation of

the frequency shift of the resonant mode due to the axion
coupling, which gives δω 1
ω1 ∼ − 2Q2 a very small frequency
1
1
shift, which to first order does not affect the sensitivity of
the axion haloscope and is the same order as a frequency
shift due to dissipation. Ignoring this term gives the usual
complex response of a resonant LCR circuit.
To calculate the parameters for the series LCR circuit
shown in Fig. 3, we can use a similar procedure given
FIG. 3. Left, equivalent parallel LCR circuit representation of
an axion coupling to a resonant cavity haloscope. Right, the U1 ¼ 12 Ṽ Ṽ  Cs1 , where ω1 ¼ Ls11Cs1 , along with Eqs. (B1)
equivalent series LCR circuit representation. and (32) to show that the parallel input admittance is given by

045009-14
POYNTING VECTOR CONTROVERSY IN AXION MODIFIED … PHYS. REV. D 105, 045009 (2022)

a0 ϵ0 gaγγ c R ⃗ 0 · ReðE1 ÞdV

ω 2 B ω order in gaγγ ). Then it is straightforward to show (given
−jB1 ¼ 2 a ¼ 2 a ; ðB7Þ ⃗ ¼ dsn̂)
jω1 Ls1 U1 jω1 Ls1 ds
Z I
ω2
which is equivalent to an inductance of La ¼ Ls1 ω21 . Thus, ⃗ 0·
B 
ðã Je1 − ãJe1 ÞdV ⃗ 0·
¼ 2a0 B
κ 1 ds
a
the input admittance, Y s ðωa Þ, of the series circuit represen- I Z
tation may be written in normalized form as ⃗ 0 · ds
¼ 2a0 B ⃗ × B1 ¼ −2ja0 ω1 B⃗ 0 · ReðE1 ÞdV;
ωa 1
Rs1 Y s ðωa Þ ¼ þ ; ðB8Þ ðB11Þ
jω1 Q1 1 þ jQ1 ðωωa1 − ωωa1 Þ
for the resonant cavity haloscope. Therefore substituting
where Q1 ¼ ωR1 Ls1s1 , so Eq. (B11) into (B10), the series impedance becomes

1 − j2Q1 ðδa þ 2Q1 2 Þ ωa þ 2ω1

Rs1 Y s ðωa Þ ≈ 1
; ðB9Þ jX 1M ¼ : ðB12Þ
1 þ 4Q21 δ2a jω21 Cp1

which completes the dual representation of the resonant axion So the effective input capacitance represented in Fig. 3
ω1
haloscope as either a parallel LCR in series with a capacitive becomes Ca ¼ Cp1 ω ð2þ ωa , which is about a factor of 3
Þ
a ω1
coupling element or a series LCR circuit in parallel with an smaller than Ca for the Abraham equivalent circuit when
inductive coupling element. ωa ∼ ω1 . The normalized input impedance to first order in
δa can thus be written as
2. Minkowski Poynting theorem
3
Zp ðδa Þ 1 − j2Q1 ðδa þ 2Q21 Þ
The reactive part of the Minkowski Poynting vector as
written in Eq. (28) has extra terms compared to the ≈ : ðB13Þ
Abraham Poynting vector, and by following a similar Rp1 1 þ 4Q21 δ2a
process, the equivalent equation for the series impedance
can be calculated to be Setting the imaginary part to zero allows the calculation of
the frequency shift of the resonant mode due to the axion
ϵ0 gaγγ a0 c R
ω þω ⃗ 0 · ReðE1 ÞdV
B coupling, which gives δω 3
ω1 ∼ − 2Q2 a very small frequency
1

jX 1M ¼ a2 1 2 1
jω1 Cp1 U1 shift but a factor of 3 greater than what the Abraham
R Poynting vector predicts. A precision frequency measure-
1 gaγγ c B⃗ 0 · ðã Je − ãJe ÞdV
þ 2 1 1
: ðB10Þ ment of the axion interacting with a microwave cavity
4ω1 Cp1 U1 haloscope would be needed to determine this fre-
quency shift.
The second term is nonzero due to lossless inductive A similar calculation can be undertaken for the effective
currents at the cavity surface, κe1 , which are in phase with parallel inductance for the series LCR circuit representa-
the magnetic field, B1 , and related by κ e1 ¼ μ10 n̂ × B1, tion, the end result is an inductance of La ¼ Ls1 ω ð2þω1
ωa
Þa ω1
where n̂ is the normal to the cavity surface, and because the leading to similar conclusions and a normalized input
surface current and magnetic field are in imaginary phase, admittance of
then κ e1 ¼ −κe1 . Note Je1 ¼ 0, over the volume, unless
there is loss in the volume, which contributes to the real part
1 − j2Q1 ðδa þ 2Q3 2 Þ
of the Poynting vector, not H the reactive
R part. Next, by Rs1 Y s ðωa Þ ≈ 1
; ðB14Þ
implementing the identity, d⃗s × B1 ¼ ∇ × B1 dV, and 1 þ 4Q21 δ2a
from Eq. (18), to first order we may substitute the
following, ∇ × B1 → −jω1 ϵ0 E1 (ignoring terms second which completes our analysis.

045009-15
TOBAR, MCALLISTER, and GORYACHEV PHYS. REV. D 105, 045009 (2022)

[1] R. D. Peccei and H. R. Quinn, Cp Conservation in the [22] C. Bartram et al. Axion dark matter experiment: Run 1b
Presence of Pseudoparticles, Phys. Rev. Lett. 38, 1440 analysis details, Phys. Rev. D 103, 032002 (2021).
(1977). [23] P. Svrcek and E. Witten, Axions in string theory, J. High
[2] F. Wilczek, Problem of Strong p and t Invariance in Energy Phys. 06 (2006) 051.
the Presence of Instantons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 40, 279 [24] A. Arvanitaki, S. Dimopoulos, S. Dubovsky, N. Kaloper,
(1978). and J. March-Russell, String axiverse, Phys. Rev. D 81,
[3] S. Weinberg, A New Light Boson?, Phys. Rev. Lett. 40, 123530 (2010).
223 (1978). [25] T. Higaki, K. Nakayama, and F. Takahashi, Cosmological
[4] J. Jaeckel and A. Ringwald, The low-energy frontier of constraints on axionic dark radiation from axion-photon
particle physics, Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 60, 405 (2010). conversion in the early universe, J. Cosmol. Astropart.
[5] J. E. Kim, Weak-Interaction Singlet and Strong CP Invari- Phys. 09 (2013) 030.
ance, Phys. Rev. Lett. 43, 103 (1979). [26] D. Baumann, D. Green, and B. Wallisch, New Target for
[6] J. E. Kim and G. Carosi, Axions and the strong cp Cosmic Axion Searches, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 171301
problem, Rev. Mod. Phys. 82, 557 (2010). (2016).
[7] A. R. Zhitnitsky, On possible suppression of the axion [27] R. T. Co, L. J. Hall, and K. Harigaya, Axion Kinetic
hadron interactions (in russian), Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 31, 260 Misalignment Mechanism, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 251802
(1980). (2020).
[8] M. Dine, W. Fischler, and M. Srednicki, A simple solution [28] R. T. Co and K. Harigaya, Axiogenesis, Phys. Rev. Lett.
to the strong {CP} problem with a harmless axion, Phys. 124, 111602 (2020).
Lett. 104B, 199 (1981). [29] R. T. Co, L. J. Hall, and K. Harigaya, Predictions for axion
[9] M. A. Shifman, A. I. Vainshtein, and V. I. Zakharov, Can couplings from ALP cogenesis, J. High Energy Phys. 1
confinement ensure natural {CP} invariance of strong (2021) 172.
interactions?, Nucl. Phys. B166, 493 (1980). [30] V. K. Oikonomou, Unifying inflation with early and late
[10] M. Dine and W. Fischler, The not-so-harmless axion, Phys. dark energy epochs in axion fðrÞ gravity, Phys. Rev. D
Lett. 120B, 137 (1983). 103, 044036 (2021).
[11] J. Preskill, M. B. Wise, and F. Wilczek, Cosmology of the [31] P. Sikivie, Invisible axion search methods, Rev. Mod.
invisible axion, Phys. Lett. 120B, 127 (1983). Phys. 93, 015004 (2021).
[12] L. F. Abbott and P. Sikivie, A cosmological bound on the [32] A. V. Sokolov and A. Ringwald, Photophilic hadronic
invisible axion, Phys. Lett. 120B, 133 (1983). axion from heavy magnetic monopoles, J. High Energy
[13] J. Ipser and P. Sikivie, Can Galactic Halos Be Made of Phys. 6 (2021) 123.
Axions?, Phys. Rev. Lett. 50, 925 (1983). [33] L. Di Luzio, M. Giannotti, E. Nardi, and L. Visinelli, The
[14] P. Sikivie, Experimental Tests of the “Invisible” Axion, landscape of QCD axion models, Phys. Rep. 870, 1 (2020).
Phys. Rev. Lett. 51, 1415 (1983). [34] J. A. Dror, H. Murayama, and N. L. Rodd, Cosmic axion
[15] P. Sikivie, Experimental Tests of the “Invisible” Axion, background, Phys. Rev. D 103, 115004 (2021).
Phys. Rev. Lett. 52, 695 (1984). [35] A. Payez, C. Evoli, T. Fischer, M. Giannotti, A. Mirizzi,
[16] C. Hagmann, P. Sikivie, N. Sullivan, D. B. Tanner, and S.- and A. Ringwald, Revisiting the SN1987a gamma-ray
I. Cho, Cavity design for a cosmic axion detector, Rev. Sci. limit on ultralight axion-like particles, J. Cosmol. Astro-
Instrum. 61, 1076 (1990). part. Phys. 02 (2015) 006.
[17] C. Hagmann, P. Sikivie, N. S. Sullivan, and D. B. Tanner, [36] B. T. McAllister, S. R. Parker, and M. E. Tobar, Axion
Results from a search for cosmic axions, Phys. Rev. D 42, Dark Matter Coupling to Resonant Photons via Magnetic
1297 (1990). Field, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 161804 (2016); Erratum, Phys.
[18] R. Bradley, J. Clarke, D. Kinion, L. J. Rosenberg, K. van Rev. Lett. 117, 159901 (2016).
Bibber, S. Matsuki, M. Muck, and P. Sikivie, Microwave [37] R. Gupta, M. Anerella, A. Ghosh, W. Sampson, J.
cavity searches for dark-matter axions, Rev. Mod. Phys. Schmalzle, D. Konikowska, Y. K. Semertzidis, and Y.
75, 777 (2003). Shin, High-field solenoid development for axion dark
[19] S. J. Asztalos, G. Carosi, C. Hagmann, D. Kinion, matter search at CAPP/IBS, IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond.
K. van Bibber, M. Hotz, L. J. Rosenberg, G. Rybka, J. 2016) 4100705 ,26).
Hoskins, J. Hwang, P. Sikivie, D. B. Tanner, R. Bradley, [38] B. T. McAllister, S. R. Parker, and M. E. Tobar, 3D lumped
and J. Clarke, Squid-Based Microwave Cavity Search for LC resonators as low mass axion haloscopes, Phys. Rev. D
Dark-Matter Axions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 041301 94, 042001 (2016).
(2010). [39] B. T. Mcallister, S. R. Parker, E. N. Ivanov, and M. E.
[20] J. Hoskins, J. Hwang, C. Martin, P. Sikivie, N. S. Sullivan, Tobar, Cross-correlation signal processing for axion and
D. B. Tanner, M. Hotz, L. J Rosenberg, G. Rybka, A. wisp dark matter searches, IEEE Trans. Ultrason. Ferroe-
Wagner, S. J. Asztalos, G. Carosi, C. Hagmann, D. Kinion, lectr. Freq. Control 66, 236 (2019).
K. van Bibber, R. Bradley, and J. Clarke, Search for [40] Y. Kahn, B. R. Safdi, and J. Thaler, Broadband and
nonvirialized axionic dark matter, Phys. Rev. D 84, 121302 Resonant Approaches to Axion Dark Matter Detection,
(2011). Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 141801 (2016).
[21] T. Braine et al., Extended Search for the Invisible Axion [41] C. P. Salemi, J. W. Foster, J. L. Ouellet, A. Gavin, K.
with the Axion Dark Matter Experiment, Phys. Rev. Lett. M. W. Pappas, S. Cheng, K. A. Richardson, R. Henning,
124, 101303 (2020). Y. Kahn, R. Nguyen, N. L. Rodd, B. R. Safdi, and L.

045009-16
POYNTING VECTOR CONTROVERSY IN AXION MODIFIED … PHYS. REV. D 105, 045009 (2022)

Winslow, Search for Low-Mass Axion Dark Matter with [58] M. Lawson, A. J. Millar, M. Pancaldi, E. Vitagliano, and F.
Abracadabra-10 cm, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 081801 Wilczek, Tunable Axion Plasma Haloscopes, Phys. Rev.
(2021). Lett. 123, 141802 (2019).
[42] B. T. McAllister, G. Flower, E. N. Ivanov, M. Goryachev, J. [59] V. Anastassopoulos et al. (CAST Collaboration), New cast
Bourhill, and M. E. Tobar, The organ experiment: An limit on the axion–photon interaction, Nat. Phys. 13, 584
axion haloscope above 15 GHz, Phys. Dark Universe 18, (2017).
67 (2017). [60] L. Zhong et al., Results from phase 1 of the haystac
[43] A. Caldwell, G. Dvali, B. Majorovits, A. Millar, G. Raffelt, microwave cavity axion experiment, Phys. Rev. D 97,
J. Redondo, O. Reimann, F. Simon, and F. Steffen, 092001 (2018).
Dielectric Haloscopes: A New Way to Detect Axion Dark [61] S. Lee, S. Ahn, J. Choi, B. R. Ko, and Y. K. Semertzidis,
Matter, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 091801 (2017). Axion Dark matter Search Around 6.7 μeV, Phys. Rev.
[44] A. J. Millar, G. G. Raffelt, J. Redondo, and F. D. Steffen, Lett. 124, 101802 (2020).
Dielectric haloscopes to search for axion dark matter: [62] M. E. Tobar, B. T. McAllister, and M. Goryachev, Broad-
Theoretical foundations, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 01 band electrical action sensing techniques with conducting
(2017) 061. wires for low-mass dark matter axion detection, Phys. Dark
[45] A. N. Ioannisian, N. Kazarian, A. J. Millar, and G. G. Universe 30, 100624 (2020).
Raffelt, Axion-photon conversion caused by dielectric [63] G. B. Gelmini, A. J. Millar, V. Takhistov, and E. Vita-
interfaces: Quantum field calculation, J. Cosmol. Astro- gliano, Probing dark photons with plasma haloscopes,
part. Phys. 09 (2017) 005. Phys. Rev. D 102, 043003 (2020).
[46] B. Majorovits, MADMAX: A new road to axion dark [64] A. Berlin, R. T. D’Agnolo, S. A. R. Ellis, C. Nantista,
matter detection, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 1342, 012098 (2020). J. Neilson, P. Schuster, S. Tantawi, N. Toro, and K. Zhou,
[47] B. M. Brubaker, L. Zhong, S. K. Lamoreaux, K. W. Leh- Axion dark matter detection by superconducting resonant
nert, and K. A. van Bibber, Haystac axion search analysis frequency conversion, J. High Energy Phys. 7 (2020) 1.
procedure, Phys. Rev. D 96, 123008 (2017). [65] R. Lasenby, Parametrics of electromagnetic searches for
[48] J. Jeong, S. Youn, S. Ahn, J. E. Kim, and Y. K. Semertzi- axion dark matter, Phys. Rev. D 103, 075007 (2021).
dis, Concept of multiple-cell cavity for axion dark matter [66] A. V. Gramolin, D. Aybas, D. Johnson, J. Adam, and A. O.
search, Phys. Lett. B 777, 412 (2018). Sushkov, Search for axion-like dark matter with ferromag-
[49] I. G. Irastorza and J. Redondo, New experimental ap- nets, Nat. Phys. 17, 79 (2021).
proaches in the search for axion-like particles, Prog. Part. [67] A. Abeln et al. (The IAXO Collaboration), Conceptual
Nucl. Phys. 102, 89 (2018). design of babyiaxo, the intermediate stage towards the
[50] J. L. Ouellet, C. P. Salemi, J. W. Foster, R. Henning, Z. international axion observatory, J. High Energy Phys. 5
Bogorad, J. M. Conrad, J. A. Formaggio, Y. Kahn, J. (2021) 137.
Minervini, A. Radovinsky, N. L. Rodd, B. R. Safdi, J. [68] C. A. Thomson, B. T. McAllister, M. Goryachev, E. N.
Thaler, D. Winklehner, and L. Winslow, Design and Ivanov, and M. E. Tobar, Upconversion Loop Oscillator
implementation of the abracadabra-10 cm axion dark Axion Detection Experiment: A Precision Frequency Inter-
matter search, Phys. Rev. D 99, 052012 (2019). ferometric Axion Dark Matter Search with a Cylindrical
[51] K. Nagano, T. Fujita, Y. Michimura, and I. Obata, Axion Microwave Cavity, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 081803 (2021).
Dark Matter Search with Interferometric Gravitational [69] C. Gatti, P. Gianotti, C. Ligi, M. Raggi, and P. Valente,
Wave Detectors, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 111301 (2019). Dark matter searches at LNF, Universe 7, 236 (2021).
[52] M. Goryachev, B. T. McAllister, and M. E. Tobar, Axion [70] Y. Kishimoto, Y. Suzuki, I. Ogawa, Y. Mori, and M.
detection with precision frequency metrology, Phys. Dark Yamashita, Development of a cavity with photonic crystal
Universe 26, 100345 (2019). structure for axion searches, Prog. Theor. Exp. Phys. 2021,
[53] J. Choi, H. Themann, M. J. Lee, B. R. Ko, and Y. K. 063H01 (2021).
Semertzidis, First axion dark matter search with toroidal [71] J. A. Devlin, M. J. Borchert, S. Erlewein, M. Fleck, J. A.
geometry, Phys. Rev. D 96, 061102 (2017). Harrington, B. Latacz, J. Warncke, E. Wursten, M. A.
[54] R. Henning et al., First Results from Abracadabra-10 cm: Bohman, A. H. Mooser, C. Smorra, M. Wiesinger, C. Will,
A Search for Sub-μev Axion Dark Matter, Phys. Rev. Lett. K. Blaum, Y. Matsuda, C. Ospelkaus, W. Quint, J. Walz, Y.
122, 121802 (2019). Yamazaki, and S. Ulmer, Constraints on the Coupling
[55] H. Liu, B. D. Elwood, M. Evans, and J. Thaler, Searching Between Axionlike Dark Matter and Photons Using an
for axion dark matter with birefringent cavities, Phys. Rev. Antiproton Superconducting Tuned Detection Circuit in a
D 100 (2019). Cryogenic Penning Trap, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 041301
[56] D. J. E. Marsh, K. C. Fong, E. W. Lentz, and L. Šmejkal, (2021).
and M. N. Ali, Proposal to Detect Dark Matter Using [72] O. Kwon et al., First Results from an Axion Haloscope at
Axionic Topological Antiferromagnets, Phys. Rev. Lett. Capp Around 10.7 μeV, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 191802
123, 121601 (2019). (2021).
[57] J. Schütte-Engel, D. J. E. Marsh, A. J. Millar, A. Sekine, F. [73] K. M. Backes et al., A quantum enhanced search for dark
Chadha-Day, S. Hoof, M. N. Ali, K. C. Fong, E. Hardy, matter axions, Nature (London) 590, 238 (2021).
and L. Šmejkal, Axion quasiparticles for axion dark matter [74] A. Iwazaki, Axion-radiation conversion by super and
detection, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 08 (2021) 066. normal conductors, Nucl. Phys. B963, 115298 (2021).

045009-17
TOBAR, MCALLISTER, and GORYACHEV PHYS. REV. D 105, 045009 (2022)

[75] S. Chigusa, T. Moroi, and K. Nakayama, Axion/hidden- [95] M. V. Berry and S. Pragya, Hamiltonian curl forces, Proc.
photon dark matter conversion into condensed matter R. Soc. A 471, 20150002 (2015).
axion, J. High Energy Phys. 8 (2021) 74. [96] P. Strange, Quantized hamiltonian curl forces and squeezed
[76] X. Liang, E. Peshkov, L. Van Waerbeke, and A. Zhitnitsky, light, J. Phys. A 51, 335303 (2018).
Proposed network to detect axion quark nugget dark [97] M. V. Berry, Classical and quantum complex hamiltonian
matter, Phys. Rev. D 103, 096001 (2021). curl forces, J. Phys. A 53, 415201 (2020).
[77] D. J. White and P. L. Overfelt, Poynting’s theorems and [98] A. Drezet, Dual-lagrangian description adapted to quan-
their relationship to antenna power, Q, and bandwidth, tum optics in dispersive and dissipative dielectric media,
Office of Naval Research NAWCWPNS Technical Phys. Rev. A 94, 053826 (2016).
Publication, 8419 (Naval Air Warfare Center Weapons [99] A. Drezet, Quantizing polaritons in inhomogeneous dis-
Division China Lake, CA, 1999), https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/ sipative systems, Phys. Rev. A 95, 023831 (2017).
pdfs/ADA367000.pdf. [100] A. Drezet, Equivalence between the hamiltonian and
[78] K. Zhang and D. Li, Electromagnetic Theory for Micro- langevin noise descriptions of plasmon polaritons in a
waves and Optoelectronics, 2nd ed. (Springer, New York, dispersive and lossy inhomogeneous medium, Phys. Rev.
2008). A 96, 033849 (2017).
[79] J. L. Volakis and K. Sertel, Integral Equation Methods for [101] P. Kinsler, A. Favaro, and M. W McCall, Four Poynting
Electromagnetics (Scitech Publishing Inc., Raleigh, NC, theorems, Eur. J. Phys. 30, 983 (2009).
USA, 2012). [102] H. Minkowski, Die grundgleichungen für die elektromag-
[80] C. A. Balanis, Advanced Engineering Electromagnetics netischen vorgänge in bewegten körpern, Mathematische
(John Wiley, New York, 2012). Annalen 68, 472 (1910).
[81] R. E. Harrington, Introduction to Electromagnetic Engi- [103] J. C. Garrison and R. Y. Chiao, Canonical and kinetic
neering, 2nd ed. (Dover Publications, Inc., New York, forms of the electromagnetic momentum in an ad hoc
2012). quantization scheme for a dispersive dielectric, Phys. Rev.
[82] P. Wu, R. Huang, C. Tischer, A. Jonas, and E.-L. Florin, A 70, 053826 (2004).
Direct Measurement of the Nonconservative Force Field [104] M. Abraham, Zur elektrodynamik bewegter körper, Rend.
Generated by Optical Tweezers, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, Circ. Matem. Palermo 28, 1 (2009).
108101 (2009). [105] M. Abraham, Sulľelettrodinamica di minkowski, Rend.
[83] M. V. Berry and P. Shukla, Physical curl forces: Dipole Circ. Matem. Palermo 30, 33 (1910).
dynamics near optical vortices, J. Phys. A 46, 422001 [106] M. E. Tobar, B. T. McAllister, and M. Goryachev, Electro-
(2013). dynamics of Free- and Bound-Charge Electricity Gener-
[84] M. Bethune-Waddell and K. J. Chau, Simulations of ators Using Impressed Sources, Phys. Rev. Applied 15,
radiation pressure experiments narrow down the energy 014007 (2021).
and momentum of light in matter, Rep. Prog. Phys. 78, [107] R. K. Vasudevan, Y. Cao, N. Laanait, A. Ievlev, L. Li, J.-C.
122401 (2015). Yang, Y.-H. Chu, L.-Q. Chen, S. V. Kalinin, and P.
[85] S. Sukhov and A. Dogariu, Non-conservative optical Maksymovych, Field enhancement of electronic conduct-
forces, Rep. Prog. Phys. 80, 112001 (2017). ance at ferroelectric domain walls, Nat. Commun. 8, 1318
[86] I. Liberal, I. Ederra, R. Gonzalo, and R. W. Ziolkowski, (2017).
Near-field electromagnetic trapping through curl-spin [108] D. I. Pikulin, A. Chen, and M. Franz, Chiral Anomaly from
forces, Phys. Rev. A 87, 063807 (2013). Strain-Induced Gauge Fields in Dirac and Weyl Semimet-
[87] P. Guha, Curl forces and their role in optics and ion als, Phys. Rev. X 6, 041021 (2016).
trapping, Eur. Phys. J. D 74, 99 (2020). [109] J. Yu, J. Zang, and C.-X. Liu, Magnetic resonance induced
[88] D. F. Nelson, Momentum, pseudomomentum, and wave pseudoelectric field and giant current response in axion
momentum: Toward resolving the Minkowski-Abraham insulators, Phys. Rev. B 100, 075303 (2019).
controversy, Phys. Rev. A 44, 3985 (1991). [110] R. Ilan, A. G. Grushin, and D. I. Pikulin, Pseudo-electro-
[89] D. J. Griffiths, Resource letter em-1: Electromagnetic magnetic fields in 3D topological semimetals. Nat. Rev.
momentum, Am. J. Phys. 80, 7 (2012). Phys. 2, 29 (2020).
[90] M. Mansuripur, Force, torque, linear momentum, and [111] M. E. Tobar, R. Y. Chiao, and M. Goryachev, Active
angular momentum in classical electrodynamics, Appl. dipoles, electric vector potential and Berry phase,
Phys. A 123, 653 (2017). arXiv:2101.00945.
[91] V. P. Torchigin, Dozen arguments in favor of the [112] M. E. Tobar, B. T. McAllister, and M. Goryachev,
Minkowski form of the momentum of light in matter, Modified axion electrodynamics as impressed electromag-
Optik (Stuttgart) 218, 164986 (2020). netic sources through oscillating background polarization
[92] R. N. C. Pfeifer, T. A. Nieminen, N. R. Heckenberg, and H. and magnetization, Phys. Dark Universe 26, 100339
Rubinsztein-Dunlop, Colloquium: Momentum of an (2019).
electromagnetic wave in dielectric media, Rev. Mod. Phys. [113] F. Wilczek, Two Applications of Axion Electrodynamics,
79, 1197 (2007). Phys. Rev. Lett. 58, 1799 (1987).
[93] U. Leonhardt, Momentum in an uncertain light, Nature [114] Y. Kim, D. Kim, J. Jeong, J. Kim, Y. C. Shin, and Y. K.
(London) 444, 823 (2006). Semertzidis, Effective approximation of electromagnetism
[94] S. M. Barnett, Resolution of the Abraham-Minkowski for axion haloscope searches, Phys. Dark Universe 26,
Dilemma, Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 070401 (2010). 100362 (2019).

045009-18
POYNTING VECTOR CONTROVERSY IN AXION MODIFIED … PHYS. REV. D 105, 045009 (2022)

[115] L. Visinelli, Axion-electromagnetic waves, Mod. Phys. [125] J. Ouellet and Z. Bogorad, Solutions to axion electrodynamics
Lett. A 28, 1350162 (2013). in various geometries, Phys. Rev. D 99, 055010 (2019).
[116] A. Asker, Axion Electrodynamics and Measurable Effects [126] M. Beutter, A. Pargner, T. Schwetz, and E. Todarello,
in Topological Insulators (Kaerstads University, Karlstad, Axion-electrodynamics: A quantum field calculation,
Sweden, 2018). J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 02 (2019) 026.
[117] R. P. Cameron and S. M. Barnett, Electric-magnetic sym- [127] C. Cao and A. Zhitnitsky, Axion detection via topological
metry and noether’s theorem, New J. Phys. 14, 123019 casimir effect, Phys. Rev. D 96, 015013 (2017).
(2012). [128] E. Witten, Dyons of charge eθ=2π, Phys. Lett. 86B, 283
[118] R. P. Cameron, S. M. Barnett, and A. M. Yao, Optical (1979).
helicity, optical spin and related quantities in electromag- [129] B. T. McAllister, M. Goryachev, J. Bourhill, E. N. Ivanov,
netic theory, New J. Phys. 14, 053050 (2012). and M. E. Tobar, Broadband axion dark matter haloscopes
[119] K. Y. Bliokh, A. Y. Bekshaev, and F. Nori, Dual electro- via electric field sensing, arXiv:1803.07755.
magnetism: Helicity, spin, momentum and angular [130] S. M. Barnett and R. Loudon, The enigma of optical
momentum, New J. Phys. 15, 033026 (2013). momentum in a medium, Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A: Math.
[120] K. Y. Bliokh, A. Y. Bekshaev, and F. Nori, Corrigendum: Phys. Eng. Sci. 368, 927 (2010).
Dual electromagnetism: Helicity, spin, momentum, and [131] X.-Y. Song, Y.-C. He, A. Vishwanath, and C. Wang,
angular momentum (2013new j. phys.15033026), New J. Electric polarization as a nonquantized topological re-
Phys. 18, 089503 (2016). sponse and boundary luttinger theorem. Phys. Rev. Re-
[121] S. A. Schelkunoff, Some equivalence theorems of electro- search 3, 023011 (2021).
magnetics and their application to radiation problems, Bell [132] X.-L. Qi, T. L. Hughes, and S.-C. Zhang, Topological field
Syst. Tech. J. 15, 92 (1936). theory of time-reversal invariant insulators, Phys. Rev. B
[122] Principles of Microwave Circuits, edited by C. G. Mont- 78, 195424 (2008).
gomery, R. H. Dicke, and E. M. Purcell (McGraw-Hill, [133] D. Faılde and D. Baldomir, On the inner topological
New York, 1987). pressure within the topological insulators, Ann. Phys.
[123] R. H. Dicke, General Microwave Circuit Theorems, Prin- (Berlin) 534, 2100313 (2022).
ciples of Microwave Circuits (McGraw-Hill, New York, [134] R. Beringer, Resonant Cavities as Microwave Circuit
1987), Chap. 5, pp. 130–161. Elements, Principles of Microwave Circuits (McGraw-
[124] R. M. Foster, A reactance theorem, Bell Syst. Tech. J. 3, Hill, New York, 1987), Chap. 7, pp. 207–239.
259 (1924).

045009-19