Lagrangian for a particle in a uniform magnetic field

AbigailM
Messages
46
Reaction score
0
Any advice on deriving the lagrangian for a particle in a magnetic field?

L=\frac{1}{2}mv^{2} + \frac{q}{c}\mathbf{v}\mathbf{.} \mathbf{A}

I've been searching through Griffith's, Jackson, and google to no avail.
Can we start from the lorentz force and work backwards?

Thanks for the help.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
AbigailM said:
Any advice on deriving the lagrangian for a particle in a magnetic field?

L=\frac{1}{2}mv^{2} + \frac{q}{c}\mathbf{v}\mathbf{.} \mathbf{A}

I've been searching through Griffith's, Jackson, and google to no avail.
Can we start from the lorentz force and work backwards?

Thanks for the help.

The closest I've seen to a strict derivation of the E-M Lagrangian is to use a little vector calculus to rewrite the Lorentz Force Law (in Gaussian units) as

\mathbf{F} = -\nabla\left[qV - \frac{q}{c}\mathbf{v}\cdot\mathbf{A}\right] -q\frac{d\mathbf{A}}{dt}

And from there, postulate a generalized potential of U(q,\dot{q},t) = qV - \frac{q}{c}\mathbf{v}\cdot\mathbf{A} and then (and this is very important!) check that the Euler-Lagrange equations result in the correct force law, regardless of your gauge choice.
 
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