Insight needed into electromagnetism problem

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around a problem from electromagnetism involving a stationary charge interacting with an electromagnetic wave characterized by a vector potential in the y-direction. The main inquiry is why the y-velocity of the charge, influenced by the vector potential, remains a simple function despite the expectation that motion in the y-direction would complicate the dynamics due to magnetic field interactions. The equations of motion derived show that while the x-velocity is affected by the y-velocity, the y-velocity does not seem to depend on the x-motion, leading to confusion. Corrections were made regarding the direction of the vector potential and the use of partial versus full derivatives, suggesting that the charge's movement in the x-direction alters its experience of the field, which may explain the observed simplicity in the y-velocity. Overall, the discussion emphasizes the complexities of electromagnetism and the nuances of vector potential interactions.
Finestructure
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
The problem (From Electromagnetism by Pollack and Stump, exercise 11.34)
A stationary charge of charge e and mass m encounters a electromagnetic wave with vector potential

\vec{A}=\vec{j}f(x-ct)

where
\vec{j}

is the unit vector in the y-direction. The scalar potential is zero.
What are the components of the velocity, as a function of time,

v_{x}, v_{y},v_{z} ?

What I´m asking for is some insight into why the y-velocity is not a more complicated function. The y-velocity is:

v_{y}=\frac{e}{m}f(x-ct)

More specifically, when the charge is stationary, it will begin to move in the y-direction because of the changing vector potential but the motion in the y-direction will result in the magnetic field causing a motion in the x-direction which in turn should (?) effect the y-velocity, but apparently it does not. Why?
I wrote the equations of motion but they don´t seem to give any insight into the y-motion. I determined the equations of motion by starting with the following equations:

\vec{E}=-\frac{\partial A}{\partial t}

(In the equation above, A is a vector)

\vec{B}=\nabla X \vec{A}

\vec{F}=e(\vec{E}+\vec{v}X\vec{B})

The function f(x-ct) isn´t a problem if we use the chain rule

w = x -ct

\frac{\partial f}{\partial t}=\frac{df}{dw}\frac{\partial w}{\partial t}=-c\frac{df}{dw}

likewise,

\frac{\partial f}{\partial x}=\frac{df}{dw}\frac{\partial w}{\partial x}=\frac{df}{dw}

Note, I´ve been a little sloppy about notation regarding partials and full derivatives.
The resulting equations of motion are:

\frac{dv_{x}}{dt}=\frac{e}{m}v_{y}\frac{df}{dw}

\frac{dv_{y}}{dt}=\frac{e}{m}(c\frac{df}{dw}-v_{x}\frac{df}{dw})

\frac{dv_{z}}{dt}=0

Thus the z-component of the velocity is zero since it started at rest.

The equations do give the right answer for the x-velocity if I assume the value of the y-velocity. But they aren´t helpful in giving me the y-velocity. Note that the two equations involving vy and vx have an additional unknown df/dw. I´ve tried everything, even eliminating df/dw and getting an equation that appears to have just x-dependence on one side and y-dependence on the other which one could solve by setting each to a constant but that doesn´t seem to work either.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
You have your vector potential pointing in the z direction so the electric field points in the z direction also, yes? How is the acceleration in the z direction zero then? Also, the magnetic field is in the y direction, so the y velocity can't be affected by either the electric or magnetic field, right?

I think you have some confusion about which way everything is pointing though I suspect this is just a typographical error.

Here is a hint for when you sort it all out: what is \frac{d}{dt} f(x(t)-ct)?
 
Last edited:
Thank you so much for your reply, Physics Monkey.

You are correct about the direction of the vector potential, I made a mistake in its direction. It should be in the y-direction and I've edited my original post to correct it.

I've also gone back and replaced full derivatives which should have been partial derivatives. I think the derivatives for the velocity components should be full derivatives.

I have a feeling that you may be right about considering the x-dependence of time because when the charge does move in the x-direction, it no longer "feels" the same field and this might account for the charge not experiencing further effects in the y-direction due to motion in the x-direction.

Thanks again.
 
Thread 'Help with Time-Independent Perturbation Theory "Good" States Proof'
(Disclaimer: this is not a HW question. I am self-studying, and this felt like the type of question I've seen in this forum. If there is somewhere better for me to share this doubt, please let me know and I'll transfer it right away.) I am currently reviewing Chapter 7 of Introduction to QM by Griffiths. I have been stuck for an hour or so trying to understand the last paragraph of this proof (pls check the attached file). It claims that we can express Ψ_{γ}(0) as a linear combination of...
Back
Top