Vector Calculus Question in Lagrangian Mechanics

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the derivation of the Euler-Lagrange equations of motion for a particle in an electromagnetic field, specifically focusing on the transition from vector notation to index notation and the implications of using different types of derivatives. Participants explore the mathematical expressions involved and clarify their understanding of vector calculus identities in this context.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the validity of the third term in the index notation and whether the summation over the index is implied, expressing confusion over the proper application of vector calculus.
  • Another participant introduces a vector identity related to the gradient of a dot product, suggesting it may help clarify the expressions involved.
  • A different participant attempts to apply the vector identity but expresses uncertainty about the correctness of their manipulation and seeks to understand their misconception regarding the third term.
  • One participant asserts that the original equation presented is incorrect, suggesting that a total time derivative should be used instead of a partial time derivative for the vector potential.
  • A later reply acknowledges a mistake in their understanding and clarifies that the author of the lecture notes skipped a step, leading to confusion about the derivatives involved.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the correctness of the original equation and the appropriate use of derivatives. There is no consensus on the resolution of the mathematical expressions, as some participants acknowledge mistakes while others challenge the initial formulation.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight potential misunderstandings regarding the distinction between total and partial derivatives, as well as the implications of using index notation in vector calculus. The discussion does not resolve these mathematical nuances.

Travis091
Messages
18
Reaction score
0
Hi guys. I hope this isn't a bad place to post my question, which is:

I'm reading some lecture notes on Lagrangian mechanics, and we've just derived the Euler-Lagrange equations of motion for a particle in an electromagnetic field. It reads:

m \ddot{\vec{r}} = -\frac{e}{c} \frac{\partial \vec{A}}{\partial t}-e\nabla \phi(\vec{r})+ \frac{e}{c} \nabla (\dot{\vec{r}}\cdot \vec{A})

(A and phi are the vector and scalar potentials, respectively). Now the author switches to index notation, and I get lost in the process. The author gives:

<br /> m \ddot{r}^a = - \frac{e}{c} \frac{\partial A^a}{\partial t} - e \frac{\partial \phi(\vec{r})}{\partial r^a} + \frac{e}{c} \left( \frac{\partial A^b}{\partial r^a} - \frac{\partial A^a}{\partial r^b}\right) \dot{r}^b<br />

My problem is with the third term above. Is the summation over b implied? I thought that it is bad form to repeat a summation index three or more times. Also, if we are to look at the a-th component of the gradient of the inner product, it should be:

<br /> \left(\nabla (\dot{\vec{r}}.\vec{A})\right)_a = \left(\nabla (\dot{r}_i A^i)\right)_a=\frac{\partial}{\partial r^a} \left ( \dot{r}_i A^i \right) = \dot{r_i}\frac{\partial A^i}{\partial r^a}<br />

which is clearly not equal to the text. I have a feeling I'm doing something stupid, and it would be great if someone can point out my mistake(s).

Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes I tried using the identity which you mention:

\nabla(\mathbf{A} \cdot \mathbf{B}) = (\mathbf{A} \cdot \nabla)\mathbf{B} + (\mathbf{B} \cdot \nabla)\mathbf{A} + \mathbf{A} \times (\nabla \times \mathbf{B}) + \mathbf{B} \times (\nabla \times \mathbf{A})

so:
\nabla(\mathbf{\dot{r}} \cdot \mathbf{A}) = (\mathbf{\dot{r}} \cdot \nabla)\mathbf{A} + (\mathbf{A} \cdot \nabla)\mathbf{\dot{r}} + \mathbf{\dot{r}} \times (\nabla \times \mathbf{A}) + \mathbf{A} \times (\nabla \times \mathbf{\dot{r}})

but I didn't get anywhere. I could have made a mistake while using this identity, I will try again later, but more importantly, why is my expression for the third term incorrect? That is what I would really like to understand. I want to clear out my misconception.
 
Travis091 said:
Hi guys. I hope this isn't a bad place to post my question, which is:

I'm reading some lecture notes on Lagrangian mechanics, and we've just derived the Euler-Lagrange equations of motion for a particle in an electromagnetic field. It reads:

m \ddot{\vec{r}} = -\frac{e}{c} \frac{\partial \vec{A}}{\partial t}-e\nabla \phi(\vec{r})+ \frac{e}{c} \nabla (\dot{\vec{r}}\cdot \vec{A})

Thanks.

This equation is wrong. Instead of the partial time derivative, there should be total time derivative of the vector potential. Then you can use
\frac{d \vec{ A }}{ d t } = \frac{ \partial \vec{ A } }{ \partial t } + ( \vec{ v } \cdot \vec{ \nabla } ) \vec{ A }
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
That's it! Many thanks for your help. It was actually my mistake, the author skipped a step and jumped from the Lagrangian to the second equation above. I filled the missing step incorrectly, mixing up the total and partial derivatives.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
563
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
758
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K