A Unifying Lagrangians in Electrodynamics: Fμν, Aμ Jμ, & Lorentz Force

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on unifying the two Lagrangians in electrodynamics: the field Lagrangian and the particle Lagrangian. It suggests that the terms -q Aμ vμ and -Aμ Jμ represent similar concepts, leading to a proposed combined Lagrangian that incorporates both kinetic and field terms. The resulting equations of motion raise concerns about their ill-defined nature when evaluating the field due to a particle at its own location. The conversation emphasizes the complexity of formulating a coherent Lagrangian for charged particles in electromagnetic fields, particularly regarding the interaction terms and their implications for the Lorentz force. Overall, the challenge lies in reconciling the dynamics of point particles with the electromagnetic field in a mathematically consistent framework.
DuckAmuck
Messages
238
Reaction score
40
How would you unify the two Lagrangians you see in electrodynamics?
Namely the field Lagrangian:
Lem = -1/4 Fμν Fμν - Aμ Jμ
and the particle Lagrangian:
Lp = -m/γ - q Aμ vμ
The latter here gives you the Lorentz force equation.
fμ = q Fμν vν

It seems the terms - q Aμ vμ and - Aμ Jμ account for the same thing. So if you were to add in the kinetic term from Lem to Lp, you get:
L+ = -m/γ - q Aμ vμ -1/4 Fμν Fμν
The subsequent Lorentz force equation is:
fμ = q Fμν vν + 1/4 ∂μ(Fαβ Fαβ)

This looks weird and makes me think I am missing something. What do you all think? Thanks in advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I don't understand your last paragraph. Obviously you consider point-particle mechanics of charged particles and the electromagnetic field as a dynamical system, which is more complicated (and in a sense still ill-defined after more than 100 years of struggle since Lorentz) than you might think. Formally it's as follows:

Your Lagrangian consists of 3 parts: the free matter Lagrangian (where "matter" here means a single particle)
$$L_0^{(\text{matter})}=-m \sqrt{\dot{y}_{\mu} \dot{y}^{\mu}},$$
where the dot means the derivative wrt. an arbitrary world-line parameter (which can in this form of the Lagrangian NOT be proper time); ##y^{\mu}(\lambda)## is the parametrization of the point-particle worldline.

Then the Lagrangian of the free electromagnetic field,
$$L_0^{(\text{field})}=\int_{\mathbb{R}^3} \mathrm{d}^3 x [-\frac{1}{4} F_{\mu \nu} F^{\mu \nu}],$$
where
$$F_{\mu \nu} =\partial_{\mu} A_{\nu} -\partial_{\nu} A_{\mu}.$$

Finally you have the interaction Lagrangian
$$L_{\text{int}}=-q A_{\mu}(y) \dot{y}^{\mu}.$$
This you can formally write also in the other form you have in mind
$$L_{\text{int}}=-\int \mathrm{d}^3 \vec{x} A_{\mu}(x) J^{\mu},$$
where for a point particle
$$J^{\mu}=q \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \mathrm{d} \lambda \dot{y}^{\mu} \delta^{(4)}[x-y(\lambda)].$$
The equations of motion are very problematic since for the equation of motion of the particle you evaluate the field due to this particle at the space-time point of this same particle, which is ill-defined.

For a discussion of this, see Sects. 4.7 and 4.8 (the former is about the Lagrangian in the continuum-theoretical case, which is well-defined, the latter about point particles and the radiation-reaction problem) in

https://itp.uni-frankfurt.de/~hees/pf-faq/srt.pdf

For a discussion of the Landau-Lifshitz approximation of the LAD equation, see the paper by Nakleh quoted in my manuscript (which is still far from being in final form, particularly concerning this "poin-particle enigma").
 
The last paragraph is basically asking, how do I write the full Lagrangian of a massive charged particle in an electromagnetic field?

From what you've said, I gathered that it would be written like:
$$ L = -m\sqrt{\dot{y}_\mu \dot{y}^\mu} - q A_\mu (y) \dot{y}^\mu - \frac{1}{4} \int d^3 x F_{\mu\nu} F^{\mu\nu} $$
You can derive the Lorentz force from this, but the term containing the field tensor F seems like it would add an extra term to the force equation due to its dependence on position.
Evaluate the Euler-Lagrange equation:
$$ \frac{\partial L}{\partial \dot{y}^\nu} = -\frac{m}{\sqrt{\dot{y}_\mu \dot{y}^\mu}}\dot{y}_\nu - q A_\nu (y) $$
$$\frac{d}{d\tau} \frac{\partial L}{\partial \dot{y}^\nu} = - f_\nu - q A_{\nu,\mu} \dot{y}^\mu $$
$$ \frac{\partial L}{\partial y^\nu} = -q A_{\mu,\nu} \dot{y}^\mu - \frac{1}{4} \frac{\partial}{\partial y^\nu} \int d^3 x F_{\rho\sigma} F^{\rho\sigma} $$
Put together to get the Lorentz force:
$$ f_\nu = q F_{\nu\mu} \dot{y}^\mu + \frac{1}{4} \frac{\partial}{\partial y^\nu} \int d^3 x F_{\rho\sigma} F^{\rho\sigma} $$
I want to say the last term vanishes, but it seems like there could be a condition where it doesn't. For example, if the limits on the integral depend on y.
 
But the last term is 0, because nothing depends on ##y##!
 
vanhees71 said:
But the last term is 0, because nothing depends on ##y##!
Okay so the Lagrangian behavior is straightforward then. What about the Lagrangian density? Where rho is the mass density of a particle cloud.
$$ \mathcal{L} = -\rho(y) \sqrt{\dot{y}_\mu \dot{y}^\mu} - A_\mu J^\mu -\frac{1}{4} F_{\rho\sigma} F^{\rho\sigma}$$
$$ \frac{\partial \mathcal{L}}{\partial y^\nu} = -\partial_\nu \rho \sqrt{\dot{y}_\mu \dot{y}^\mu} -\partial_\nu (A_\mu J^\mu)- \frac{1}{4} \partial_\nu (F_{\rho\sigma} F^{\rho\sigma}) $$
$$ \frac{\partial \mathcal{L}}{\partial \dot{y}^\nu} = -\rho \frac{\dot{y}_\nu}{\sqrt{\dot{y}_\mu \dot{y}^\mu}} $$
Put together to get:
$$ \partial_\nu \rho \sqrt{\dot{y}_\mu \dot{y}^\mu} + \partial_\nu (A_\mu J^\mu) + \frac{1}{4} \partial_\nu (F_{\rho\sigma} F^{\rho\sigma}) = \frac{d}{d\tau} \left( \rho \frac{\dot{y}_\nu}{\sqrt{\dot{y}_\mu \dot{y}^\mu}} \right)$$
 
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