Particle movement in inhomogeneous magnetic field

Dishsoap
Messages
1,016
Reaction score
308
Homework Statement

Show that for the case of a general inhomogeneous magnetic field, $$\dot{\vec{v}}=\frac{e}{2mc} (\vec{v} \times \vec{B} - \vec{B} \times {v})$$

The attempt at a solution

I think I am oversimplifying things. I used that, for an electron in a magnetic field, m \frac{d \vec{v}}{dt}=e \vec{v} \times \vec{B}, and that \vec{v} \times \vec{B} = - \vec{B} \times \vec{v}

Doing this, I find that RHS = \frac{1}{c} \dot{\vec{v}}
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The presence of ##c## in the equation is just due to the choice of units.

May I ask where this problem came from?
 
TSny said:
The presence of ##c## in the equation is just due to the choice of units.

May I ask where this problem came from?

I figured as such, but units for what? B? v? e?

This problem was not out of a book but was just on a homework sheet, and I was unable to find it elsewhere.
 
Dishsoap said:
I figured as such, but units for what? B? v? e?
Compare the Gaussian system of units with the SI units here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaussian_units#Maxwell.27s_equations
The units for B, v, and e are all different in the two systems: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaussian_units#Electromagnetic_unit_names

This problem was not out of a book but was just on a homework sheet, and I was unable to find it elsewhere.
OK. It seems odd since, as you say, you can always just rewrite ##\bf{B} \times \bf{v}## as ##-\bf{v} \times \bf{B}## .
 
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