Path integral for a particle coupled to a magnetic field

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on deriving the propagator for a particle coupled to a magnetic field using two methods based on the Lagrangian formulation. The Lagrangian is defined as L_A(𝑥, 𝑑𝑥/𝑑𝑡) = (𝑚/2)𝑑𝑥² + 𝑒𝑨·𝑑𝑥, and participants suggest rewriting it by completing the square and expressing it in terms of derivatives. The two forms proposed are L = (1/2𝑚)(𝑚𝑑𝑥 + 𝑒𝑨)² - (𝑒²/2𝑚)𝑨² and L = (𝑚/2)𝑑𝑥² - 𝑒𝑑𝑥/𝑑𝑡·𝑨 + 𝑒(∂/∂𝑡)(𝑨𝑥). The discussion emphasizes the importance of setting 𝑑𝑨/𝑑𝑡 = 0 to eliminate the electric field component.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Lagrangian mechanics
  • Familiarity with vector calculus and magnetic fields
  • Knowledge of classical mechanics, specifically particle dynamics
  • Basic proficiency in calculus, particularly derivatives and integrals
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of the propagator in quantum mechanics
  • Explore the implications of gauge invariance in electromagnetic theory
  • Learn about the role of the vector potential in classical and quantum mechanics
  • Investigate the mathematical techniques for completing the square in Lagrangians
USEFUL FOR

Students and researchers in theoretical physics, particularly those focusing on quantum mechanics and electromagnetism, as well as educators teaching advanced mechanics concepts.

IRobot
Messages
86
Reaction score
0
Hi all,

I am currently having trouble with an exercise: writing the propagator of a particle coupled to a magnetic field.

So the lagrangian is [itex]L_A (\vec{x},\dot{\vec{x}}^2) = \frac{m}{2}\dot{\vec{x}} + e\vec{A}.\dot{\vec{x}}[/itex]
And it says that I should solve it in two different ways:
-by writing [itex]e\vec{A}.\dot{\vec{x}}[/itex] has a derivative relative to t
-by completing the square in the Lagrangian, ie something like [itex]L_A (\vec{x},\dot{\vec{x}}) = \frac{m}{2}(\dot{\vec{x}}+\frac{e}{m}\vec{A})^2 - \frac{e^2}{2m}\vec{A}^2[/itex] I guess.

But still, I develop a few lines more of calculus but I am stuck. I would be really happy if someone could explain how to proceed.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I think I'm going to try and solve this with you :)

I can't do it tonight cause I have a test tomorrow that I have to study for, but this looks cool and full of learning.

let me get this straight we have
[tex] L=\frac{m}{2}\dot{x}^{2}_{i} +eA_j \dot{x}_j[/tex]
and we should put this in two different forms:
[tex] L=\frac{1}{2m}(m\dot{x}_j+e A_i )^2-e^2 A_{i}^2[/tex]
and
[tex] L=\frac{m}{2}\dot{x}_{i}^2-e\dot{A}_j x_j +e\frac{\partial}{\partial t}(A_i x_i)[/tex]
Do those look ok to you?
 
Yes, it does look good. But in the second lagrangian, because we don't want to have an electrical field, we have [itex]\dot{\vec{A}}=0[/itex] so the second terms vanishes.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K