Relativistic particle in non-uniform magnetic field (math)

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around simulating the behavior of a relativistic particle in a non-uniform magnetic field using a 3D vector field model. Participants explore the mathematical and computational challenges involved in accurately modeling the particle's trajectory and interactions with the magnetic field, including considerations of relativistic effects and the structure of the simulation code.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant describes their project involving a 3D magnetic field simulation and seeks help with the equations governing a particle's motion through this field, expressing uncertainty about incorporating relativity correctly.
  • Another participant suggests starting with a non-relativistic model to gain experience before tackling the relativistic case, pointing out potential errors in the participant's velocity components and equations.
  • A participant clarifies that the relativistic velocity symbol represents the relative velocity between two frames and introduces a differential equation for the particle's motion in a magnetic field.
  • Some participants discuss the validity of representing the particle's trajectory with a radius in Cartesian coordinates and the need to determine intersections with the boundaries of the defined boxes.
  • There are suggestions to simplify the approach by focusing on the particle's trajectory rather than the box structure, with some arguing that tracking the particle's path could be more effective.
  • One participant reflects on the effectiveness of the box method for approximations but acknowledges that calculating the magnetic field at each time step based on the particle's position could be more efficient.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing opinions on the best approach to modeling the particle's motion, with some advocating for the box method and others suggesting a more direct tracking of the particle's trajectory. There is no consensus on the optimal method or the correctness of the equations presented.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight various assumptions and limitations in their approaches, including the dependence on the definitions of velocity in relativistic contexts and the challenges of accurately modeling interactions in a non-uniform magnetic field.

msailer1234
Messages
13
Reaction score
1
Hi everyone,
I am currently working on a project in Physics analyzing the possibility of magnetic fields protecting against radiation particles such as fully ionized nuclei or electrons. I wrote a code in Matlab that simulates a 3-D magnetic field based on a combination of wires and wire loops. The code produces a 3D vector field of 11x11x11. So I have Bx,By, and Bz for every point in the 11x11x11 box. I am now attempting to create a code which sends a virtual particle into the magnetic field so I can see what happens.

What I am doing is treating each point as a box with a uniform magnetic field which the particle travels through. I want to find an equation that can take the point and velocity the particle enters into a box and calculates the point and velocity it leaves the box. I am tripping over the calculations. I have attached my hand written calculations (I hope they are clearly written enough), but I don't know if I am incorporating relativity correctly. I also don't think I am approaching it correctly because the equation gives me Radius_x, Radius_y, and Radius_z which doesn't make sense to me. If anyone has any corrections or ideas, please let me know! Thanks!
 

Attachments

  • img20180117_20264237.jpg
    img20180117_20264237.jpg
    27.6 KB · Views: 679
Physics news on Phys.org
Do you already have code for a virtual non-relativistic particle entering your box? If not, I would think that you need to write that first to gain the experience. Then you can attempt the more complicated relativistic case and check it by making sure that it reduces to the non-relativistic results for small speeds. I should also point out that you got the components of v wrong, if that's what you have under "given". You write the x-component as ##\frac{v_x}{\sqrt{1-v^2/c^2}}.## It should be just ##v_x.## There are other problems with your equations even in the non-relativistic limit. The equation ##r=mv^2/(q\vec{v}\times \vec B )## is nonsense.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: msailer1234
kuruman said:
Do you already have code for a virtual non-relativistic particle entering your box? If not, I would think that you need to write that first to gain the experience. Then you can attempt the more complicated relativistic case and check it by making sure that it reduces to the non-relativistic results for small speeds. I should also point out that you got the components of v wrong, if that's what you have under "given". You write the x-component as ##\frac{v_x}{\sqrt{1-v^2/c^2}}.## It should be just ##v_x.## There are other problems with your equations even in the non-relativistic limit. The equation ##r=mv^2/(q\vec{v}\times \vec B )## is nonsense.
Thank you for responding! Okay, so that looks like one of my problems. I got that equation by combining the force equations F=mv^2/r and F=qvxB. So am I correct in saying that that reasoning only works if used with the velocity being perpendicular to the B field making the equation r = mv/qB? Also, if this is a relativistic velocity, shouldn't it be relativistic in each spatial dimension?
 
To begin with the symbol for v in relativistic equation stands for the relative velocity between two frames, O and O'. If Observer O sees observer O' move with velocity ##\vec{v}##, observer O' will see observer O move with velocity ##-\vec{v}##. That's all there is to that. You need the solve the following differential equation in 3D:
$$\frac{d\vec{v}}{dt}=\vec{\omega}\times \vec{v}$$ where $$\vec{\omega}_B=\frac{q\vec{B}}{\gamma m c};~~~\left( \gamma =\frac{1}{\sqrt{1-v^2/c^2}} \right)$$
Note that ##\omega_B## is velocity-dependent. Do you see why it is easier to do the non-relativistic calculation with ##\gamma = 1##?
 
A radius with x,y,z coordinates is a perfectly valid thing. In addition to the curvature radius it also gives you the direction of the curvature.
You'll have to find a way to determine where your curved track (or circle) intersects the boundary of the cubes unless the deflection is very small.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: msailer1234
Since you are working with Cartesian coordinates, why are you trying to move to "r" (spherical?) ... it's only going to make things more complicated... I think you have 11x11x11 boxes (aka regions with a given Bx,By,Bz)...
if you assume that the particle in each box (i) it transcends gets a kick to its velocity in the x,y,z-direction (given by the relevant force), I think it's pretty simple.
for example if in box 0 it has a velocity (v_x, v_y, v_z), and use that to determine the box1 (next step), in box1 it would have (v_x+ F_x/m , v_y + F_y/m , v_z+ F_z/m)... ok that was for classical mechanics... for relativistic, the acceleration kick (F/m's) should be changed appropriately (see eg. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relativistic_mechanics#Force)
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: msailer1234
Do you have to work with boxes? Following the track of particles could be easier.
Knowing some key parameters of the system would help to see which approximations work how well.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: msailer1234
mfb said:
Do you have to work with boxes? Following the track of particles could be easier.
Well by saying we have cubic spaces of known magnetic field, I think that's the best way to deal with the problem ?
The track of the particles is supposed to be emulated based on how the particle interacts with the field [at each point the velocity should be updated to get the next point the particle will be in].
Or maybe I haven't understood the problem.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: msailer1234
The approach so far looks more like OP wants to model the trajectory inside the cubes as circle and then let that intersect the cube boundaries to do the same again in the next cube.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: msailer1234
  • #10
mfb said:
The approach so far looks more like OP wants to model the trajectory inside the cubes as circle and then let that intersect the cube boundaries to do the same again in the next cube.
From what my code gives me, I do think having uniform magnetic fields in several boxes is the best approach for me to model this. Thank you everyone for the replies. I am still looking into it, and I am consulting some professors at my college.
 
  • #11
Hi everyone,
I thought I would update you on how the project went. I apologize for taking so long to respond, but the box method did work great for an approximation. In hindsight, calculating the new magnetic field at each time step based on the particle's position would have been more efficient and practical, but it was a great learning experience. Thank you for your help!
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: mfb

Similar threads

  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
7K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
1K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
Replies
14
Views
3K