Laplace-Runge-Lenz Vector for Magnetic Monopole

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the Laplace-Runge-Lenz vector in the context of a particle moving in the field of a magnetic monopole and a central force field. The original exercise from Goldstein asks to demonstrate the existence of a conserved vector D and an analogous conserved vector to the Laplace-Runge-Lenz vector. The participant clarifies that the Goldstein exercise simplifies the problem compared to the Appell problem, which involves more complex interactions between forces. They conclude that while Goldstein's exercise can yield a total derivative, the Appell problem's contributions from the Lorentz force prevent the existence of an analogous LRL vector. This distinction highlights the differences in complexity between the two problems.
yenchin
Messages
543
Reaction score
3
This is related to Goldstein Exercise 3-28. It is not really a homework problem anymore because I have solved them. But there's something bugging me so I shall post here instead of under homework problem. The Exercise reads:

A magnetic monopole has magnetic monopole B = br/r^3 where b is a constant. Suppose a particle of mass m moves in the field of a magnetic monopole and a central force field derived from the potential V(r)=-k/r.
(a) Show that there is a conserved vector D= L - (qb/c)r/r.
(b) Show that for some f(r) there is a conserved vector analogous to the Laplace-Runge-Lenz vector in which D plays the same role as L in the pure Kepler force problem.

If you look at http://arxiv.org/abs/nlin/0504018. There is a comment right before Eq.9 where they remarked that "there is no analogue of the integral A (the LRL vector) in the Poincare and Appell problems".

Poincare problem is the pure magnetic charge case without central force (k=0) while Appell problem seems to be the one in Goldstein's exercise [of a particle moving in the field of a Newtonian center and in the field of a magnetic monopole, assuming that the center and the monopole coincide]. So my question is, did I misunderstood this somehow and Goldstein exercise is not really the Appell problem?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Ok. I *think* I figured out. In Goldstein's exercise, he is actually asking for something easier, i.e. whether there exists a function f(r) such that dp/dt = f(r)r/r and (d/dt)(p x D) = RHS where RHS can be made into a total derivative. However the Appell problem is requiring that dp/dt has two pieces of contribution, one from Lorentz force due to the monopole and the other Keplerian central force. The piece from Lorentz force in the RHS leads to a term of the form (1/r)(d/dt)(r/r) which cannot be made into a total derivative and so an analog of the Laplace-Runge-Lenz Vector does not exist in this case. I think :rolleyes:.
 
Thread 'Motional EMF in Faraday disc, co-rotating magnet axial mean flux'
So here is the motional EMF formula. Now I understand the standard Faraday paradox that an axis symmetric field source (like a speaker motor ring magnet) has a magnetic field that is frame invariant under rotation around axis of symmetry. The field is static whether you rotate the magnet or not. So far so good. What puzzles me is this , there is a term average magnetic flux or "azimuthal mean" , this term describes the average magnetic field through the area swept by the rotating Faraday...
Back
Top