Oscillatory solution for a given Lagrangian

  • Thread starter Thread starter Siberion
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Lagrangian
Siberion
Messages
31
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement



Consider the following Lagrangian:L = \frac{m}{2}(x'^2+y'^2+z'^2) + \frac{q}{2}(xy'-yx')

Where q denotes a charged particle.

a) Find the equations of motion
b) Find the solution for z
c) Find the solution in the x-y plane, and prove that it corresponds to an oscillatory motion along both axes.

The Attempt at a Solution



Considering the Euler-Lagrange equations, the solution for coordinate z is given by:

d/dt (mz') = 0
Thus, a solution for z corresponds to a uniform linear motion along z axis.

For x and y, I get the following systems of dif. equations:

mx'' - qy' = 0
my'' + qx' = 0

I tried solving this system by integrating and substituting,

i.e. mx'' = qy' /integrate
mx' = qy + C
x' = qy/m + C

Substituting, we get
y'' + y(q^2)/(m^2) = C

The inverse process could be done to get an equation for x.

Which I do not think is the right answer, and I don't know how many laws of mathematics I violated while doing that. Could anyone please show me what is the right procedure to solve this system of equations?

Also, I have the impression this Lagrangian corresponds to a charge q interacting with an electromagnetic field. It would be great if anyone could explain me a little bit further about that.Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks a lot.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Siberion said:
mx'' - qy' = 0
my'' - qx' = 0

Should both equations have a negative sign in the left side?
 
TSny said:
Should both equations have a negative sign in the left side?

Sorry, my bad, I missed a minus sign in the second equation, then the system becomes:

mx'' - qy' = 0
my'' + qx' = 0

Following the same process I mentioned before, equation for y becomes:

y'' + y(q^2)/(m^2) = C
 
I'm not sure of your math background. If you've had a course in differential equations, then you know that the general solution to this type of equation is y = yh + yp where yh is the general solution of the homogeneous equation y'' + (q/m)2y = 0 and yp is any particular solution of y'' + (q/m)2y = C.
 
TSny said:
I'm not sure of your math background. If you've had a course in differential equations, then you know that the general solution to this type of equation is y = yh + yp where yh is the general solution of the homogeneous equation y'' + (q/m)2y = 0 and yp is any particular solution of y'' + (q/m)2y = C.

I'm sorry if this becomes too obvious. I've taken Dif. Equations, but my math background is a bit blurry at the moment, because I've just re-taken classes. Once I recall the methods things go easier.

I can see that the solution for the homogeneus equation is indeed an oscillatory motion, both for x and y. I'm having trouble about what to do with the particular solution since I don't have any initial condition.

Would you say that the method I applied to solve the problem is correct?

Thanks for your help.
 
Yes, your method is a correct way to do it. You've found the general solution to y'' + (q/m)2y = 0. Now you just need any particular solution to y'' + (q/m)2y = C. You should be able to this by inspection. You do not need initial conditions here.
 
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