# Poisson Bracket for the angular momentum and Runge-Lenz vector [closed]

Given the Runge-Lenz vector

$$\vec{A}=\vec{p}\times\vec{L}-mk\frac{\vec{r}}{r}$$

and the angular momentum

$$\vec{L}=\vec{r}\times\vec{p}$$

We can get

$$\{L^i,A^j\}=\epsilon^{ijk}A^k.$$

I think it is useful to write both as

$A^j=\epsilon^{abc}p_bL_c-mk\frac{r_n}{\sqrt{r^{\alpha}r_{\alpha}}}$ (maybe I'm wrong with the notation)

and

$L^{i}=\epsilon^{ijk}r_{j}p_{k}$

So the Poisson Bracket is expressed by {$L^{i},A^{j}$}$=${$\epsilon^{ijk}r_{j}p_{k},\epsilon^{abc}p_bL_c-mk\frac{r_n}{\sqrt{r^{\alpha}r_{\alpha}}}$}

and using the properties, I can distribute the components such that

{$L^i,A^j$}={$\epsilon^{ijk}r_{j}p_{k},\epsilon^{abc}p_bL_c$}$-${$\epsilon^{ijk}r_{j}p_{k},mk\frac{r_n}{\sqrt{r^{\alpha}r_{\alpha}}}$}

Doing so, I'm getting for the first bracket

$\epsilon^{ijk}\epsilon^{abc}${$r_jp_k,p_bL_c$}=$\epsilon^{ijk}\epsilon^{abc}\epsilon^{c\mu\nu}(-r_jp_bp_{\nu}\delta^{k\mu}+p_kr_{\mu}p_{\nu}\delta^{jb}+p_kp_br_{\mu}\delta^{j\nu})$ (by defining $L_c=\epsilon^{c\mu\nu}r_{\mu}p_{\nu}$)

but for the second one, I have

$\epsilon^{ijk}mk${$r_jp_k,\frac{r_n}{\sqrt{r^{\alpha}r_{\alpha}}}$}=$-r_nr_k(r^{\alpha}r_{\alpha})^{-3/2}-(r^{\alpha}r_{\alpha})^{-1/2}\delta^{kn}$

I'd appreciate if you can tell me what I'm doing wrong and help me to do the math!

## closed as off-topic by Emilio Pisanty, ZeroTheHero, Kyle Kanos, AccidentalFourierTransform, Cosmas ZachosApr 29 '18 at 0:24

This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:

• "Homework-like questions should ask about a specific physics concept and show some effort to work through the problem. We want our questions to be useful to the broader community, and to future users. See our meta site for more guidance on how to edit your question to make it better" – Emilio Pisanty, ZeroTheHero, Kyle Kanos, AccidentalFourierTransform, Cosmas Zachos
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

• What happens to the second term of $A^j$ when $\alpha\neq\beta$? – probably_someone Apr 27 '18 at 19:29
• I'm using Einstein notation, which implies a summation over the indices. So, if $\alpha\neq\beta$ the term wouldn't be added. So we have, for example in 3 dimensions, $mk\frac{r_n}{\sqrt{{r_{1}}^2+{r_2}^2+{r_3}^2}}$ – Kali Apr 27 '18 at 23:32
• When $\alpha\neq\beta$, we have that $\frac{r_n}{\sqrt{\delta^{\alpha\beta}r_\alpha r_\beta}}=\frac{r_n}{0}$. You're adding a bunch of infinities to each other. – probably_someone Apr 27 '18 at 23:35
• And if that's not, in fact, what you're doing, then you need to fix your notation, as the summation over indices occurs at the term level, not within the square root. – probably_someone Apr 27 '18 at 23:37
• I need to express $\frac{1}{\sqrt{{r_1}^2+{r_2}^2+{r_3}^2}}$ in terms of indices, how should I write it then? – Kali Apr 27 '18 at 23:37