I How to picture the vector potential?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Rick16
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on understanding the vector potential in the context of the Lagrangian for magnetic fields as presented by Susskind. A key point is the realization that the vector potential components depend on all spatial coordinates and time, necessitating the use of the full total derivative. Participants highlight the importance of recognizing that vector fields generally vary with multiple variables, rather than simplifying them to depend solely on one coordinate. Concrete examples, such as wires and solenoids, are suggested for better visualization of vector fields. Ultimately, the conversation emphasizes the need to treat vector potentials as multi-variable functions in physics.
Rick16
Messages
156
Reaction score
46
TL;DR
developing the Lorentz force law from the Lagrangian for the magnetic field
Susskind (in The Theoretical Minimum, volume 1, pages 203-205) writes the Lagrangian for the magnetic field as ##L=\frac m 2(\dot x^2+\dot y^2 + \dot z^2)+ \frac e c (\dot x A_x +\dot y A_y +\dot z A_z)## and then calculates ##\dot p_x =ma_x + \frac e c \frac d {dt} A_x=ma_x + \frac e c(\frac {\partial A_x} {\partial x}\dot x + \frac {\partial A_x} {\partial y}\dot y + \frac {\partial A_x} {\partial z}\dot z)##.

I have problems with the last step. I might have written ##\frac {dA_x} {dt} =\frac {dA_x} {dx} \frac {dx} {dt}##, ignoring the other terms. How can I know that each component of the vector potential depends on all the coordinates? I would have to somehow picture the vector potential in order to come to this conclusion, but the vector potential seems to be a purely theoretical construct. How can I know how to treat it in situations like this one?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes, in the general case ##\mathbf{A} = \mathbf{A}(x,y,z,t)## is some vector field that depends on position (and time), and you'll need to use the full total derivative, e.g.

##\dot{A}_x = (\partial_x A_x) \dot{x} + (\partial_y A_x) \dot{y} + (\partial_z A_x) \dot{z} + (\partial_t A_x)##

If the field changes with time, then ##\partial_t \mathbf{A}## will also be non-zero.

Why don't you have a look at a few concrete examples, e.g. wires, solenoids...:
https://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/II_14.html
 
  • Like
Likes Dale and PeroK
Thank you, I think I got it. If I have any vector field ##\vec v=\vec v(x,y,z)##, then in general the componentes would be ##v_x =v_x(x,y,z), v_y=v_y(x,y,z), v_z=v_z(x,y,z)##, and only in a special case would I have ##v_x=v_x(x), v_y=v_y(y), v_z=v_z(z)##. If I don't know what a vector field actually looks like, I have to assume the general case. For some reason, I assumed ##v_x=v_x(x), v_y=v_y(y), v_z=v_z(z)##, and it already seems strange to me why I assumed that. Sorry to have bothered you with this.
 
  • Like
Likes Dale and ergospherical

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
382
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
365
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
300
Replies
13
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K