Lagrangian of a Force Law, with magnetic monopole

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on deriving a Lagrangian that incorporates the effects of a magnetic monopole into the Lorentz force law. The equation of motion is expressed as m d²x^{μ}/dτ² = (e/c)F^{μν}dxν/dτ + (g/c)G^{μν}dxν/dτ, where G is the dual field tensor and 'g' represents the magnetic charge. The participants explore various approaches to modify the existing Lagrangian, specifically the integral of -mc ds - (e/c)A_{μ}dx^{μ}, to include terms that account for magnetic interactions without reverting to Maxwell's equations. The challenge lies in defining the dual potential 'a' in relation to the electromagnetic potential 'A'.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Lagrangian mechanics and action principles
  • Familiarity with electromagnetic theory, particularly the Lorentz force law
  • Knowledge of dual field tensors and their role in theoretical physics
  • Basic grasp of covariant notation and tensor calculus
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the properties and applications of dual field tensors in electromagnetism
  • Study the derivation of Lagrangians for systems with magnetic monopoles
  • Examine the relationship between electric and magnetic potentials in field theories
  • Explore advanced topics in gauge theory and its implications for magnetic charge
USEFUL FOR

The discussion is beneficial for theoretical physicists, graduate students in physics, and researchers interested in advanced electromagnetism and field theory, particularly those focusing on magnetic monopoles and their interactions with electric fields.

praharmitra
Messages
308
Reaction score
1
We know the covariant Lagrangian of the Lorentz force law. However, in presence of a magnetic monopole, one must add another term to the force law. This term, of course is the Dual Field Tensor, along with the magnetic charge 'g' as follows -


m \frac{d^2 x^{\mu}}{d {\tau}^2} = \frac{e}{c}F^{\mu \nu} \frac{d x_{\nu}}{d \tau} + \frac{g}{c}G^{\mu \nu} \frac{d x_{\nu}}{d \tau}

Where G is the dual field tensor

Could anyone help me with writing the Lagrangian that gives rise to this equation?
Here is what I have tried till now.

1. Solve the original Lagrangian, get the equation of motion. Add the additional term, of G, and work backwards. However, I have realized that the required relation between A (potential) and a (dual potential, if I can call it that) is non-linear and non-local.

G^{ \mu \nu } = \partial_{\mu} a_{\nu} - \partial_{\nu} a_{\mu}


2. So i tried hit and trial, wrote down, using covariance, symmetry, and dimensions as my guides, several possible Lagrangians, and got the corresponding equation of motion, hoping to give the one that i want.

However, I have been unlucky so far. Have been working on it for several hours.

Can such a Lagrangian be written down explicitly in terms of A and a??
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Have you tried adding additional terms to the regular Lagrangian which take the same form as the known terms, but using magnetic charge/current/potential instead of their electric counterparts? e.g. there's a term J^{\mu}A_{\mu}, so try adding j^{\mu}a_{\mu} where j is magnetic 4-current. That's the first thing I would try.
 
no u misunderstood my question. The lagrangian you are talking about will give the Maxwell's Equations. I am not looking for that. I solved that.

What I am looking for is the Lagrangian which will tell me how a magnetic monopole interacts with electric and magnetic fields. I know from texts that the force law for a magnetic monopole is given by the equation as I have written. I want to arrive at a Lagrangian given the force law.

The non-magnetic monopole Lagrangian ( Action) which I am looking to modify is

Integral of -mc ds - e/c A_{\mu} d x^{\mu}

I cannot add terms like magnetic 4-current, because that tells me how charge produces fields.

Also, a_{\mu} hasn't been defined yet. I am yet to calculate a in terms of A, which as I mentioned is non-linear, and non-local. This is what is causing issues

And yes, I am trying to modify th eregular Lagrangian only, but nothing yet :(
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
741
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
700
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
5K