- #1
Axel Togawa
- 6
- 0
- TL;DR Summary
- I don't understand the role of "drift velocity" in the derivation of the "polarization drift"
When studying a particle in slowly time varying, uniform electric field E, and in a constant, uniform magnetic field [itex]\textbf{B}[/itex], I found many texts where I can't understand the derivation of the "polarization drift" [itex]\textbf{v}_p[/itex], in particular I quote as reference this book I found online ([1], Pag.93) where they take as expression for the "drift velocity ExB" [itex]\textbf{v}_E = \frac{\textbf{E}\times\textbf{B}}{B^2}[/itex], which is the same formula used in the case where [itex]\textbf{E} = cost[/itex], why? The assumption to find this expression is that [itex]\frac{d\textbf{v}_E}{dt} = 0[/itex] but that is not true in this scenario.
I could consider that the variation in time is small, so [itex]\frac{d\textbf{v}_E}{dt} \approx 0[/itex], but then they find the expression for the polarization drift as [itex]\textbf{v}_p = -\frac{m}{q}\frac{\dot{\textbf{v}}_E\times \textbf{B}}{B^2}[/itex] (where [itex]\dot{\textbf{v}}_E = \frac{d\textbf{v}_E}{dt}[/itex]).
So why is [itex]\textbf{v}_E[/itex] sometimes considered constant and sometimes not?
[1] "Introduction to Plasma Physics C17, Lecture Notes, John Howard": https://people.physics.anu.edu.au/~jnh112/AIIM/c17/chap04.pdf
I could consider that the variation in time is small, so [itex]\frac{d\textbf{v}_E}{dt} \approx 0[/itex], but then they find the expression for the polarization drift as [itex]\textbf{v}_p = -\frac{m}{q}\frac{\dot{\textbf{v}}_E\times \textbf{B}}{B^2}[/itex] (where [itex]\dot{\textbf{v}}_E = \frac{d\textbf{v}_E}{dt}[/itex]).
So why is [itex]\textbf{v}_E[/itex] sometimes considered constant and sometimes not?
[1] "Introduction to Plasma Physics C17, Lecture Notes, John Howard": https://people.physics.anu.edu.au/~jnh112/AIIM/c17/chap04.pdf