Laplace-Runge-Lenz Vector for Magnetic Monopole

In summary, the conversation discusses the relationship between a magnetic monopole and a particle moving in its field, along with the role of a conserved vector analogous to the Laplace-Runge-Lenz vector. The question arises about the existence of this vector in the Appell problem, where the particle is also subject to a central force. It is determined that the Goldstein exercise is not equivalent to the Appell problem and that an analog of the Laplace-Runge-Lenz vector does not exist in this case.
  • #1
yenchin
544
3
This is related to Goldstein Exercise 3-28. It is not really a homework problem anymore because I have solved them. But there's something bugging me so I shall post here instead of under homework problem. The Exercise reads:

A magnetic monopole has magnetic monopole B = br/r^3 where b is a constant. Suppose a particle of mass m moves in the field of a magnetic monopole and a central force field derived from the potential V(r)=-k/r.
(a) Show that there is a conserved vector D= L - (qb/c)r/r.
(b) Show that for some f(r) there is a conserved vector analogous to the Laplace-Runge-Lenz vector in which D plays the same role as L in the pure Kepler force problem.

If you look at http://arxiv.org/abs/nlin/0504018. There is a comment right before Eq.9 where they remarked that "there is no analogue of the integral A (the LRL vector) in the Poincare and Appell problems".

Poincare problem is the pure magnetic charge case without central force (k=0) while Appell problem seems to be the one in Goldstein's exercise [of a particle moving in the field of a Newtonian center and in the field of a magnetic monopole, assuming that the center and the monopole coincide]. So my question is, did I misunderstood this somehow and Goldstein exercise is not really the Appell problem?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Ok. I *think* I figured out. In Goldstein's exercise, he is actually asking for something easier, i.e. whether there exists a function f(r) such that dp/dt = f(r)r/r and (d/dt)(p x D) = RHS where RHS can be made into a total derivative. However the Appell problem is requiring that dp/dt has two pieces of contribution, one from Lorentz force due to the monopole and the other Keplerian central force. The piece from Lorentz force in the RHS leads to a term of the form (1/r)(d/dt)(r/r) which cannot be made into a total derivative and so an analog of the Laplace-Runge-Lenz Vector does not exist in this case. I think :rolleyes:.
 

1. What is the Laplace-Runge-Lenz Vector for Magnetic Monopole?

The Laplace-Runge-Lenz Vector for Magnetic Monopole is a mathematical quantity that describes the motion of a charged particle in the presence of a magnetic monopole. It takes into account both the force due to the magnetic monopole and the angular momentum of the particle, and can be used to calculate the shape of the particle's orbit.

2. Who discovered the Laplace-Runge-Lenz Vector for Magnetic Monopole?

The Laplace-Runge-Lenz Vector for Magnetic Monopole was first derived by Pierre-Simon Laplace in 1785, but it was later refined and named after Carl Runge and Wilhelm Lenz in the early 20th century.

3. What is the significance of the Laplace-Runge-Lenz Vector in physics?

The Laplace-Runge-Lenz Vector is significant because it provides a complete description of the orbital motion of a charged particle in the presence of a magnetic monopole. It is also a conserved quantity, meaning that it remains constant throughout the particle's motion, making it a useful tool for analyzing and predicting the behavior of particles in this type of system.

4. Are magnetic monopoles real?

While magnetic monopoles have been theorized and studied in depth, there is currently no experimental evidence for their existence. They are predicted by certain theories in physics, but have not been observed in nature.

5. How is the Laplace-Runge-Lenz Vector related to the conservation of energy and angular momentum?

The Laplace-Runge-Lenz Vector is related to the conservation of energy and angular momentum because it is a conserved quantity itself. This means that as long as there are no external forces acting on the system, the magnitude and direction of the vector will remain constant, leading to the conservation of energy and angular momentum in the system.

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
27
Views
3K
Replies
54
Views
3K
  • Electromagnetism
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
8K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
12
Views
203
  • Classical Physics
Replies
15
Views
536
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
873
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
148
Back
Top