I Derivation of "polarization drift" in a plasma

Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on the derivation of polarization drift in a plasma under the influence of a uniform electric field E and a uniform magnetic field B. The confusion arises regarding the treatment of the drift velocity v_E as constant in some contexts while being variable in others, particularly when considering the Lorentz force equation. Clarification is provided on the nature of the magnetic force, which does not change the speed of a charged particle but only its direction, leading to the conclusion that v_E can be treated as constant under certain conditions. The conversation emphasizes the importance of understanding Maxwell's equations and the relationship between electric and magnetic fields in this context. Overall, the thread highlights the complexities of deriving drift velocities in plasma physics.
Axel Togawa
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
TL;DR
I don't understand the role of "drift velocity" in the derivation of the "polarization drift"
When studying a particle in slowly time varying, uniform electric field E, and in a constant, uniform magnetic field \textbf{B}, I found many texts where I can't understand the derivation of the "polarization drift" \textbf{v}_p, in particular I quote as reference this book I found online ([1], Pag.93) where they take as expression for the "drift velocity ExB" \textbf{v}_E = \frac{\textbf{E}\times\textbf{B}}{B^2}, which is the same formula used in the case where \textbf{E} = cost, why? The assumption to find this expression is that \frac{d\textbf{v}_E}{dt} = 0 but that is not true in this scenario.
I could consider that the variation in time is small, so \frac{d\textbf{v}_E}{dt} \approx 0, but then they find the expression for the polarization drift as \textbf{v}_p = -\frac{m}{q}\frac{\dot{\textbf{v}}_E\times \textbf{B}}{B^2} (where \dot{\textbf{v}}_E = \frac{d\textbf{v}_E}{dt}).

So why is \textbf{v}_E sometimes considered constant and sometimes not?

[1] "Introduction to Plasma Physics C17, Lecture Notes, John Howard": https://people.physics.anu.edu.au/~jnh112/AIIM/c17/chap04.pdf
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Ok first off I assume you know that E×b is the cross product between the E and B fields.

Now are you familiar which field diverges and which field does not ?
If not look closely at Maxwell equations, amperes law and Lorentz force. (,right hand rule)
Also make sure your clear on the difference between the magnetic field and the magnetic moment.
Griffiths Introductory to electrodynamics has an excellent section on this.
It would be good to get a handle on how familiar you are with the two fields as per Maxwell.
 
I think to be somewhat familiar with these concepts, but I'm not sure how they can explain my doubt; I mean, the central point of my query is based on the derivation of \textbf{v}_p starting from the following differential equation (Lorentz force):
<br /> m\frac{d(\textbf{v}_{E}+\textbf{v}_{p})}{dt}=q\textbf{E}+q(\textbf{v}_{E}+\textbf{v}_{p})×\textbf{B} \;\;\; (assuming \textbf{E} \perp \textbf{B} \perp \textbf{v}_E)<br />
but I'm also open to other ways to obtain the same result, thanks
 
Ok so your somewhat familiar with the RH rule. You recognize the cross product as opposed to the dot product between vectors. Now I'm assuming you recognize the E field is perpendicular to the B field. The magnetic force is perpendicular to the B field. So the magnetic force is maximal when the charged particle is moving parallel to the magnetic field and zero when moving parallel to the magnetic field
Lorentz force
##F=q(E+v\times B##

Magnetic force law
##F=qV\times B##

Now magnetic force perpendicular to V cannot change its magnitude it can only change its direction. This relates to the expression magnetic force does no work. As its magnetic force is perpendicular to V.
Motion of a charged particle under the action of a magnetic field alone is always motion with constant speed.
That should help understand when V_e is constant and when it is not.

Also consider what occurs with the magnetic field when You have a charge current as opposed to a static E field ( hint Helical)

I should mention this isn't the best forum for this question. It really is just classical physics thus far.
 
Last edited:
For the quantum state ##|l,m\rangle= |2,0\rangle## the z-component of angular momentum is zero and ##|L^2|=6 \hbar^2##. According to uncertainty it is impossible to determine the values of ##L_x, L_y, L_z## simultaneously. However, we know that ##L_x## and ## L_y##, like ##L_z##, get the values ##(-2,-1,0,1,2) \hbar##. In other words, for the state ##|2,0\rangle## we have ##\vec{L}=(L_x, L_y,0)## with ##L_x## and ## L_y## one of the values ##(-2,-1,0,1,2) \hbar##. But none of these...

Similar threads

Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K