2
$\begingroup$

In plasma physics, particularly in magnetic mirros a very well-known result is the invariance of the magnetic moment of the particles: $\dfrac{d\mu}{dt}=0$.

I've been looking into some ways of proving this important result. As a naive glance, I thought about using Bohr–Van Leeuwen theorem: $\langle u\rangle = 0$, that is, the thermal average of the density of the magnetic moments is zero. But I'm struggling at how to relate this fact to the invariance of the magnetic moment, if that approach is possible.

If anyone can point some directions out to me, I'll be grateful.

$\endgroup$
5
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Related: physics.stackexchange.com/q/670465/59023 $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 8, 2021 at 13:43
  • $\begingroup$ I took a look there. I have a question, is it correct to say that the Van Allen's belts are only possible because of the adiabatic invariance of the magnetic moment? Or because of all the adiabatic invariants? $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 9, 2021 at 0:15
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @AdrienMarieDeschamps - The radiation belts are quasi-stable because of these adiabatic invariants, yes. Would there still be energetic particles if these did not hold? Probably yes, but transiently so not so consistently present... $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 9, 2021 at 18:38
  • $\begingroup$ What does it mean for something to be quasi-stable? $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 10, 2021 at 21:17
  • $\begingroup$ @AdrienMarieDeschamps - It means they can exist for periods of time longer than the relevant gyration/bounce/drift periods discussed in the answer I linked to above or they can be disrupted on shorter time scales. Some parts last longer than others and the lifetimes are dependent upon the energy of the particles and where they are located. For instance, the protons in the inner belt have lifetimes on the order of years but electrons in the outer belt typically don't last longer than a week. $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 11, 2021 at 12:44

1 Answer 1

1
$\begingroup$

The Bohr-Van Leeuwen theorem I don't think is relevant here since it is a thermodynamic statement and really $\mu$ is conserved for individual particles . The derivation I would do is specific to the case of converging magnetic fields, such as in a magnetic mirror.

Assume the particle is gyrating with velocity $v_L$ around some $B_\parallel$, additionally with some parallel velocity $v_\parallel$. The $B$ does no work, so $$\frac{1}{2}m\frac{d}{dt}(v_\perp^2 + v_\parallel^2)=0$$ Then we simplify $\frac{d}{dt}(v_\parallel^2)=2v_\parallel \frac{d}{dt}v_\parallel$. The $B$ is divergence free, so roughly one must have a $B_\perp$ pointing inwards, $B_\perp=\frac{r}{2}\frac{d}{dz}B_\parallel$. The Lorentz force averages to $$F_\parallel=\frac{d}{dt}v_\parallel=-\frac{e v_\perp B_\perp}{m}$$ $$\frac{d}{dt}v_\parallel=-\frac{e v_\perp r}{2m}\frac{d}{dz}B_\parallel$$ Multiplying by $v_\parallel$ (the velocity along the z axis), $$v_\parallel \frac{d}{dt}v_\parallel=-\frac{e v_\perp r}{2m}v_\parallel\frac{d}{dz}B_\parallel$$ Or $$2v_\parallel \frac{d}{dt}v_\parallel=-\frac{e v_\perp r}{m}\frac{d}{dt}B_\parallel$$

We can insert this into our energy equation. Recall $r=v_\perp/\Omega$ where $\Omega$ is the gyration frequency $eB/m$. Simplifying gives $$0=\frac{d}{dt}v_\perp^2 -\frac{ v^2_\perp }{ B_\parallel}\frac{d}{dt}B_\parallel,$$ $$0=B_\parallel\frac{d}{dt}\frac{v_\perp^2}{B_\parallel}. $$ Inserting constants gives $$0=\frac{d}{dt}\frac{1/2 m v_\perp^2}{B_\parallel}=\frac{d}{dt}\mu.$$

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.