Lagranian:Generalized momentum

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter rayveldkamp
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Momentum
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the physical interpretation of generalized momentum derived from the Euler-Lagrange equations, particularly in the context of a relativistic particle in an electromagnetic field. Participants explore the differences between generalized momentum and actual momentum, as well as the implications of terms like the vector potential in this framework.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Ray questions the physical interpretation of generalized momentum, noting that it differs from actual momentum for a relativistic particle in an electromagnetic field.
  • Daniel suggests that the interaction of a relativistic particle with the electromagnetic field introduces a new term to the momentum, emphasizing the geometric significance of the Lagrangian's derivative with respect to generalized coordinates.
  • Another participant points out a discrepancy between two expressions for generalized momentum, leading to the conclusion that the term qA must equal the negative integral of the Poynting vector over volume.
  • A subsequent post challenges the validity of the previous conclusion and seeks clarification on the physical meaning of the term 'qA'.
  • One participant argues that generalized momentum lacks a definitive meaning and can vary based on the generalized coordinate, which may not always have the same units as length.
  • This participant also raises a question about defining generalized angular momentum in non-orthogonal configuration spaces, suggesting that the arbitrary nature of configuration space may complicate this definition.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the meaning and implications of generalized momentum, with no consensus reached regarding the relationship between generalized momentum and mechanical momentum, or the validity of the proposed equations.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved assumptions regarding the definitions of generalized coordinates and their implications for momentum. The discussion also highlights the complexity of relating generalized momentum to physical quantities in various contexts.

rayveldkamp
Messages
60
Reaction score
0
Hi,
I am wondering how to physically interpret the generalized momentum quantity derived from the Euler-Lagrange equations. For some Lagrangians is it equal to the actual momentum for the particle, however i have noticed that for a relativistic particle moving in an electromagnetic field the generalized momentum is not equal to the actual relatvistic momentum.
Could someone explain why this is so, or maybe explain the physical significance of the extra term in the generalized momentum for this EM field case?
Thanks

Ray
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The relativistic particle "couples" or interacts with the free relativistic field and this coupling generates a new term to the momentum. The idea is that the Lagrangian's derivative wrt to the generalized coordinate doesn't have a physical significance, but it has a geometric one.

Daniel.
 
I have a question on this.
As the OP says, the generalized momentum (P_g) of a charge in an electromagnetic field is different from its *mechanical* momentum (P_m). Specifically we find that:
P_g=P_m - qA [1]
where A is the vector potential. This iis the momentum conserved.
However, if we work differently by starting from the Lorentz force, after some calculations (for example following Griffiths), we find that the conserved momentum is:
P_g=P_m + Integral( S dV) [2]
where:
S: Poynting vector
dV: volume

Equations [1] and [2] must be equal, so we conclude:
qA= - Integral( S dV)


Can this be true??
 
The apove post has probably a mistake.
So, can anyone help me with the question *what is the physical meaning of the 'qA'* term?

Thanks in advance!
 
The generalized momentum have no meaning. Can be the angular momentum, the mechanical momentum or just something. The problem is that the generalized coordinate can have units different from length. Depending the generalized coordinate the generalized momentum change. The generalized momentum can be associated with translation in the configuration space, but the momentum is associated with translation in the actual space of the problem.
qA= - Integral( S dV)?
Is not true. In EM the momentum of the wave is associated with the poynting vector, but the vector potential is associated with the generalized momentum of the charged particle. That's two totally different things. never confuse mechanical momentum and generalized momentum, are two totally different things.

Well i want to ask a question here. If the configuration space is isotropic, with have some quantity that is conserved and we can call it the generalized momentum i suppose. The problem is that the generalized coordinates are not orthogonal in general, then i don't know how to rotate the system in configuration space and also i don't know the form that takes the generalized angular momentum. Normally in the discussion of rotation the different text use orthogonal configuration space, but that not always the case. My question is:

Is possible to define the generalized angular momentum for any configuration space in general?
that mean like a qxp or something like that. Well maybe using forms and tangential space. Maybe is impossible because of the arbitrariness of the configuration space.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 43 ·
2
Replies
43
Views
5K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K