How can magnetic dipole derivations be solved without using the force equation?

Kolahal Bhattacharya
Messages
133
Reaction score
1
this is not homework help.I want to know.

Hello,can anyone suggest why for a dipole m placed in a magnetic field B
F=grad(m.B)
and N=mxB?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Kolahal Bhattacharya said:
Hello,can anyone suggest why for a dipole m placed in a magnetic field B
F=grad(m.B)
and N=mxB?

Take an infinitesimal current loop of arbitrary shape and use the Lorentz force law.
 
siddharth said:
Take an infinitesimal current loop of arbitrary shape and use the Lorentz force law.
That will work, but the derivation is a bit involved for an arbitrary shape.
If you are satisfied with doing it for a rectangular loop, that is easier for the torque. Once you know the torque, you can show U=-mu.B, and then
use F=-grad U.
If you model the magnetic dipole as two magnetic poles, then the derivations are just the same as for electric dipoles, which are easier.
 
To Siddharth:I found your approach in jackson.However,Griffiths also asks in his exercise to do in the same way.Only Jackson used J while Griffiths prefers I (in his hint).
I got upto:
F=I* closed int{dl x [(r. grad_0)B](r_0)} where dl is infinitesimal loop element; and the right portion is obtained after Taylor series expansion.
Now griffiths and Jackson says to use Levi-Civita symbols...
I was trying to insert the result: vector area a= (1/2)int{ r x I) inside the integral extracting (dl x r) so that I can get 'a' inside the integral and then have dm inside.But got stuck.It appears I am near the way but cannot get it.
Please help.

The other approach ultimately assumes F=grad(m.B).So, I prefer not to use it.
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top