Hamilton - Jacobi method for a particle in a magnetic field

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on solving the Hamilton-Jacobi equation for a charged particle in a 2D magnetic field, represented by the Hamiltonian ##H(x,y,p_x,p_y)=\frac{(p_x-ky)^2+(p_y+kx)^2}{2m}##. The user successfully separates the system using the Ansatz ##S=U(x)+W(y)+kxy+S_t(t)## and derives expressions for ##U_x## and ##W_y##. The community confirms the correctness of the user's procedure and suggests evaluating derivatives of the integral ##I(x;a;b)## to find the exact trajectories ##x(t)## and ##y(t)##.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Hamiltonian mechanics
  • Familiarity with the Hamilton-Jacobi equation
  • Knowledge of calculus, particularly integration techniques
  • Concept of charged particles in magnetic fields
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the Hamilton-Jacobi equation in greater detail
  • Learn about the method of separation of variables in differential equations
  • Explore integration techniques, particularly differentiation under the integral sign
  • Investigate the dynamics of charged particles in electromagnetic fields
USEFUL FOR

Students and researchers in physics, particularly those focusing on classical mechanics and electromagnetic theory, will benefit from this discussion.

Vrbic
Messages
400
Reaction score
18

Homework Statement


Hamiltonian of charged particle in magnetic field in 2D is ##H(x,y,p_x,p_y)=\frac{(p_x-ky)^2+(p_y+kx)^2}{2m}## where ##k## and ##m## are constant parameters. For separation of this system use ##S=U(x)+W(y)+kxy+S_t(t)##. Solve Hamilton - Jacobi equation to get ##x(t), y(t)## .

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


When I substitute ##p_i=\frac{dS}{dx_i}## in the assignment and assumptation ##S_t(t)t=a_0t## (hamiltonian don't depend on time) I get
##U_x^2+(W_y+2kx)^2=a (+b-b)##,
where ##a=2ma_0##, ##b## is separation constant and subscript means derivative. I separate it and I get
##W_y=b##
##U_x=\sqrt{a-(2kx+b)^2}##...my first question is, if it is good procedure and is it right?
Then I integrate but second terms is quite...complex, so I denote solution of this integral as ##I(x;a;b)+d##, ##c## and ##d## are constants.
##W=by+c##
##U=I+d##
I suppose that constants ##c## and ##d## are unimportant because of they are just additive. So
##S=I+by+kxy-\frac{a}{2m}t##
and finally ##x(t), y(t)## I get from
##\frac{dS}{da}=e## and ##\frac{dS}{db}=f## where ##e,f## are constants.
Please comment my procedure and also if exist some "better" prcedure when I could get exact ##x(t),y(t)## because from this integral ##I## it is impossible.
Thank you for an advice.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Vrbic said:

The Attempt at a Solution


##S_t(t)t=a_0t##
Did you mean to have the factor of ##t## on the left side? Do you need a negative sign in front of the right side?
##U_x^2+(W_y+2kx)^2=a (+b-b)##,
Doesn't the factor of (b-b) make the right side zero? Maybe just a typo.
I separate it and I get
##W_y=b##
##U_x=\sqrt{a-(2kx+b)^2}##...my first question is, if it is good procedure and is it right?
This looks correct to me.
Then I integrate but second terms is quite...complex, so I denote solution of this integral as ##I(x;a;b)+d##, ##c## and ##d## are constants.
##W=by+c##
##U=I+d##
I suppose that constants ##c## and ##d## are unimportant because of they are just additive.
Yes
So
##S=I+by+kxy-\frac{a}{2m}t##
and finally ##x(t), y(t)## I get from
##\frac{dS}{da}=e## and ##\frac{dS}{db}=f## where ##e,f## are constants.
Please comment my procedure and also if exist some "better" prcedure when I could get exact ##x(t),y(t)## because from this integral ##I## it is impossible.
Thank you for an advice.
This looks good. It should not be hard to evaluate ##\partial I / \partial a## and ##\partial I / \partial b##. [Edit: Differentiate "under the integral sign" and then do the integral.]
 
Last edited:
TSny said:
Did you mean to have the factor of ##t## on the left side? Do you need a negative sign in front of the right side?
Doesn't the factor of (b-b) make the right side zero? Maybe just a typo.
This looks correct to me.
Yes

This looks good. It should not be hard to evaluate ##\partial I / \partial a## and ##\partial I / \partial b##. [Edit: Differentiate "under the integral sign" and then do the integral.]
Ok, thank you very much for comments.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
44
Views
6K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K