Cited by 112History of Science and MedicineQuantum and Classical ElectrodynamicsHistorical Studies and Socio-cultural Analysis

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 11 of the 11 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

What did Kramers and Kronig do and how did they do it?

Open access
Bohren, Craig F·2010·European Journal of Physics

Abstract

Over time the account of how the Kramers–Kronig (dispersion) relations between the real and imaginary parts of response functions were derived in 1926 and 1927 has been transmogrified into anecdotes about what might have been done but was not. Although Kramers obtained both members of a pair of relations, Kronig obtained only one. Both authors appealed to specific models of an atomic gas rather than to the general arguments about linearity, causality and analyticity in modern model-independent derivations. Kramers merely speculated on whether the specific results he obtained might have a more general validity. Neither author showed that a signal cannot travel faster than c in any medium for which the dispersion relations are satisfied. Indeed, they did not mention, even obliquely, signal speeds and causality. Despite their magical aura, Kramers–Kronig relations are translations into somewhat cryptic frequency language of statements clearer in time language.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1088/0143-0807/31/3/014

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 11 references

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Smith D Y, 1998, Handbook of Optical Constants of Solids I, 35
  2. Kramers H A, 1927, Atti del Congresso Internazionale dei Fisici, Como-Pavia-Roma, 2, 545
  3. de L Kronig R, 1942, Ned. Tijdschr. Natuurkd., 9, 402

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Bohren, C. F.
Affiliations
Pennsylvania State University (US)
Corresponding author
Bohren, Craig F
Venue
European Journal of Physics
Published
2010-03-30
Volume
31
Issue
3
Pages
573-577
ISSN
  • 0143-0807 (ISSN-L)
  • 1361-6404
OpenAlex
W2026692979
Cited by
112
References
11
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 34 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 3
FWCI
17.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
European Journal of Physics (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › History of Science and Medicine
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Quantum and Classical Electrodynamics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Historical Studies and Socio-cultural Analysis
Keywords
Kramers-Kronig relations, dispersion relation, response functions, causality, analyticity, signal propagation speed, history of physics, Kramer

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review