Is the Lorentz force conservative?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Kolahal Bhattacharya
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Lorentz
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on whether the Lorentz force is conservative, highlighting that the force is defined as F=q(E+v cross B). It is noted that if the electric and magnetic fields are time-dependent, the Lorentz force does not derive from a potential, thus being non-conservative. The Coulomb force, however, is conservative in electrostatic conditions. Participants express confusion about the magnetic component of the force and its implications for conservativeness, particularly questioning why magnetic forces cannot be expressed in the same way as conservative forces. The main takeaway is that time-dependence of fields plays a crucial role in determining the conservativeness of the Lorentz force.
Kolahal Bhattacharya
Messages
133
Reaction score
1
Lorentz force is F=q(E+v cross .............(1)
We seem to be interested only in B[=A(q/r^2)(v' cross ].What about E?Is it an electrostatic field?I suppose not.If not,then should be time dependent and del cross E=-(d/dt)B
Taking line integral of (1),W=integral(a to F.dr
=integral(a to E.dr + 0
Does this mean F(mag) is conservative?
if a and b are the same,Will W=0?
in that case will Lorentz force be conservative?
however, i saw in Griffiths's Quantum Mechanics that magnetic forces cannot be expressed like (-dV/dx) like other conservative forces.
what is the physics?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
please don't mind the b's are missing.
 
The Lorentz force

\vec{F}=q\vec{E}+q\vec{v}\times\vec{B} (1)

generalizes the magnetostatics and the electrostatics forces, with the latter being the Coulomb force. If the fields depend on time, which means the electrostatic and magnetostatic regimes are not valid anymore, then (1) is not conservative. It doesn't derive from any potential. But in the electrostatics, it's well known that the Coulomb force is conservative, since it derives from the Coulomb potential.

So the main idea is "time-dependence of fields".

Daniel.
 
Thank you,daniel.I got your point.
But still unclear is that q(v cross B) part.Anyway F(mag)=q(v cross B) is zero even if the field is time dependent.So,can it be conservative?Actually,I am not sure that curl of B(t)=0 in that case.
what about the QM book confusion?Why magnetic forces cannot be expressed as F=-dV/dx like other conservative forces.
 
The book claims the answer is that all the magnitudes are the same because "the gravitational force on the penguin is the same". I'm having trouble understanding this. I thought the buoyant force was equal to the weight of the fluid displaced. Weight depends on mass which depends on density. Therefore, due to the differing densities the buoyant force will be different in each case? Is this incorrect?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
582
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
645