Timeline for Lagrangian in presence of an Electromagnetic Field
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
19 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 10 at 3:49 | answer | added | Li-Chung Wang | timeline score: -2 | |
| Mar 18, 2021 at 17:27 | comment | added | Voulkos | Consider that $\:\mathbf A\boldsymbol{=\nabla}\chi\:$. Then you have the contradiction a zero magnetic field $\:\mathbf B\boldsymbol{=\nabla\times}\mathbf A\boldsymbol{=0}\:$ to have non-zero potential energy $\: \mathrm q\boldsymbol{\upsilon\cdot}\mathbf A$. | |
| Mar 17, 2021 at 16:39 | comment | added | Qmechanic♦ | Related: physics.stackexchange.com/q/50075/2451 | |
| Mar 17, 2021 at 16:23 | history | edited | Noumeno |
edited tags
|
|
| Mar 17, 2021 at 15:03 | history | edited | Noumeno | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
The "defined equal" is wrong in this context.
|
| Mar 17, 2021 at 15:01 | history | edited | DanielC | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 10 characters in body
|
| Mar 17, 2021 at 14:57 | history | edited | Noumeno | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 2 characters in body
|
| Mar 17, 2021 at 14:57 | comment | added | mike stone | We use the Lagrangian formalism for non-purely-mechanical systems (for which $L\ne T-V$) mostly because Noether's theorem for constructing conserved quantities makes use of it. | |
| Mar 17, 2021 at 14:55 | history | edited | Noumeno | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
edited body
|
| Mar 17, 2021 at 14:51 | comment | added | Noumeno | @mikestone I have made an edit to my question, explaining my perplexities. If you could give me a complete clarification it would help a lot. | |
| Mar 17, 2021 at 14:50 | history | edited | Noumeno | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 1188 characters in body
|
| Mar 17, 2021 at 12:24 | comment | added | Vladimir Kalitvianski | The vector potential is a kind of magnetic field momentum and the correspondint term in the Lagrangian is of kinetic rather than of potential nature. | |
| Mar 17, 2021 at 12:04 | answer | added | AFG | timeline score: 1 | |
| Mar 17, 2021 at 11:58 | answer | added | Anthony Guillen | timeline score: 2 | |
| Mar 17, 2021 at 11:54 | comment | added | mike stone | The Lagrangian does not have to be $T-V$. It is whatever gives the equations of motion you desire. In particular, there is no special interpretation of the ${\bf v}\cdot {\bf A}$ term | |
| Mar 17, 2021 at 11:45 | comment | added | Qmechanic♦ | More on the velocity-dependent potential for the Lorentz force: physics.stackexchange.com/q/77325/2451 and links therein. | |
| Mar 17, 2021 at 11:42 | history | edited | Qmechanic♦ | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
edited tags
|
| Mar 17, 2021 at 10:33 | history | edited | Noumeno | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 34 characters in body; added 1 character in body
|
| Mar 17, 2021 at 10:26 | history | asked | Noumeno | CC BY-SA 4.0 |