Hamiltonian Mechanics

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Hamiltonian Mechanics The mechanics of Newton and Galileo focused on forces as the principal concept in describing change in a system. In this structure, the principal object is, for a given force field, to solve for the trajectories of particles. The method involved Newton’s equation: F = ma where F is the force (which depends on space and can be temporal), m is the mass, and a is the acceleration. In the latter part of the nineteenth century, the Irish physicist William Rowan Hamilton developed an alternative mathematical structure, which emphasized the energy as a significant determinant of the state of a mechanical system. The central element of this theoretical structure was the Hamiltonian function, a description of the total energy in terms of the momenta (p) and positions (r) of particles. It has the form H(p,r) = E = T (p) + V (r) where T(p) is the kinetic energy expressed in terms of the momentum, and V(r) is the potential expressed in terms of the positions of all particles in the system. Knowing the Hamiltonian function for a conservative system (one having constant energy), one obtains the equations of motion by the use of Hamilton’s canonical equations: ∂H dp = − i ∂r dt i ∂H dr = i ∂pi dt where pi and ri are conjugate variables such as (px, x). The first of the canonical equations is functionally equivalent to Newton’s equation given above. The second is a relationship between a component of the momentum and a component of the velocity. Solving Hamiltonian’s canonical equations is equivalent to solving Newton’s equations of motion, but the connection of the state (trajectory) to the energy is obvious in Hamilton’s formulation. For systems of multiple particles, it is easy to form the Hamiltonian by counting all sources of kinetic energy and all sources of potential energy. Consider a system of two particles (with labels 1 and 2), which interact through a Coulomb potential. The Hamiltonian function for such a system is: p ⋅ p p ⋅ p 1 q q H = 1 1 + 2 2 + 1 2 2m1 2m2 4πε 0 r2 − r1.

Copy Link

Recommended publications

Branched Hamiltonians and Supersymmetry
Branched Hamiltonians and Supersymmetry Thomas Curtright, University of Miami Wigner 111 seminar, 12 November 2013 Some examples of branched Hamiltonians are explored, as recently advo- cated by Shapere and Wilczek. These are actually cases of switchback poten- tials, albeit in momentum space, as previously analyzed for quasi-Hamiltonian dynamical systems in a classical context. A basic model, with a pair of Hamiltonian branches related by supersymmetry, is considered as an inter- esting illustration, and as stimulation. “It is quite possible ... we may discover that in nature the relation of past and future is so intimate ... that no simple representation of a present may exist.” – R P Feynman Based on work with Cosmas Zachos, Argonne National Laboratory Introduction to the problem In quantum mechanics H = p2 + V (x) (1) is neither more nor less diﬃcult than H = x2 + V (p) (2) by reason of x, p duality, i.e. the Fourier transform: ψ (x) φ (p) ⎫ ⎧ x ⎪ ⎪ +i∂/∂p ⎪ ⇐⇒ ⎪ ⎬⎪ ⎨⎪ i∂/∂x p − ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ ⎭⎪ ⎩⎪ This equivalence of (1) and (2) is manifest in the QMPS formalism, as initiated by Wigner (1932), 1 2ipy/ f (x, p)= dy x + y ρ x y e− π | | − 1 = dk p + k ρ p k e2ixk/ π | | − where x and p are on an equal footing, and where even more general H (x, p) can be considered. See CZ to follow, and other talks at this conference. Or even better, in addition to the excellent books cited at the conclusion of Professor Schleich’s talk yesterday morning, please see our new book on the subject ... Even in classical Hamiltonian mechanics, (1) and (2) are equivalent under a classical canonical transformation on phase space: (x, p) (p, x) ⇐⇒ − But upon transitioning to Lagrangian mechanics, the equivalence between the two theories becomes obscure.
[Show full text]
Analogy in William Rowan Hamilton's New Algebra
Technical Communication Quarterly ISSN: 1057-2252 (Print) 1542-7625 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/htcq20 Analogy in William Rowan Hamilton's New Algebra Joseph Little & Maritza M. Branker To cite this article: Joseph Little & Maritza M. Branker (2012) Analogy in William Rowan Hamilton's New Algebra, Technical Communication Quarterly, 21:4, 277-289, DOI: 10.1080/10572252.2012.673955 To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/10572252.2012.673955 Accepted author version posted online: 16 Mar 2012. Published online: 16 Mar 2012. Submit your article to this journal Article views: 158 Citing articles: 1 View citing articles Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=htcq20 Technical Communication Quarterly, 21: 277–289, 2012 Copyright # Association of Teachers of Technical Writing ISSN: 1057-2252 print/1542-7625 online DOI: 10.1080/10572252.2012.673955 Analogy in William Rowan Hamilton’s New Algebra Joseph Little and Maritza M. Branker Niagara University This essay offers the first analysis of analogy in research-level mathematics, taking as its case the 1837 treatise of William Rowan Hamilton. Analogy spatialized Hamilton’s key concepts—knowl- edge and time—in culturally familiar ways, creating an effective landscape for thinking about the new algebra. It also structurally aligned his theory with the real number system so his objects and operations would behave customarily, thus encompassing the old algebra while systematically bringing into existence the new. Keywords: algebra, analogy, mathematics, William Rowan Hamilton INTRODUCTION Studies of analogy in technical discourse have made important strides in the 30 years since Lakoff and Johnson (1980) ushered in the cognitive linguistic turn.
[Show full text]
BRST APPROACH to HAMILTONIAN SYSTEMS Our Starting Point Is the Partition Function
BRST APPROACH TO HAMILTONIAN SYSTEMS A.K.Aringazin1, V.V.Arkhipov2, and A.S.Kudusov3 Department of Theoretical Physics Karaganda State University Karaganda 470074 Kazakstan Preprint KSU-DTP-10/96 Abstract BRST formulation of cohomological Hamiltonian mechanics is presented. In the path integral approach, we use the BRST gauge fixing procedure for the partition func- tion with trivial underlying Lagrangian to fix symplectic diffeomorphism invariance. Resulting Lagrangian is BRST and anti-BRST exact and the Liouvillian of classical mechanics is reproduced in the ghost-free sector. The theory can be thought of as a topological phase of Hamiltonian mechanics and is considered as one-dimensional cohomological field theory with the target space a symplectic manifold. Twisted (anti- )BRST symmetry is related to global N = 2 supersymmetry, which is identified with an exterior algebra. Landau-Ginzburg formulation of the associated d = 1, N = 2 model is presented and Slavnov identity is analyzed. We study deformations and per- turbations of the theory. Physical states of the theory and correlation functions of the BRST invariant observables are studied. This approach provides a powerful tool to investigate the properties of Hamiltonian systems. PACS number(s): 02.40.+m, 03.40.-t,03.65.Db, 11.10.Ef, 11.30.Pb. arXiv:hep-th/9811026v1 2 Nov 1998 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] 1 1 INTRODUCTION Recently, path integral approach to classical mechanics has been developed by Gozzi, Reuter and Thacker in a series of papers[1]-[10]. They used a delta function constraint on phase space variables to satisfy Hamilton’s equation and a sort of Faddeev-Popov representation.
[Show full text]
Antibrackets and Supersymmetric Mechanics
Preprint JINR E2-93-225 Antibrackets and Supersymmetric Mechanics Armen Nersessian 1 Laboratory of Theoretical Physics, JINR Dubna, Head Post Office, P.O.Box 79, 101 000 Moscow, Russia Abstract Using odd symplectic structure constructed over tangent bundle of the symplec- tic manifold, we construct the simple supergeneralization of an arbitrary Hamilto- arXiv:hep-th/9306111v2 29 Jul 1993 nian mechanics on it. In the case, if the initial mechanics defines Killing vector of some Riemannian metric, corresponding supersymmetric mechanics can be refor- mulated in the terms of even symplectic structure on the supermanifold. 1E-MAIL:[email protected] 1 Introduction It is well-known that on supermanifolds M the Poisson brackets of two types can be defined – even and odd ones, in correspondence with their Grassmannian grading 1. That is defined by the expression ∂ f ∂ g {f,g} = r ΩAB(z) l , (1.1) κ ∂zA κ ∂zB which satisfies the conditions p({f,g}κ)= p(f)+ p(g) + 1 (grading condition), (p(f)+κ)(p(g)+κ) {f,g}κ = −(−1) {g, f}κ (”antisymmetrisity”), (1.2) (p(f)+κ)(p(h)+κ) (−1) {f, {g, h}1}1 + cycl.perm.(f, g, h) = 0 (Jacobi id.), (1.3) l A ∂r ∂ where z are the local coordinates on M, ∂zA and ∂zA denote correspondingly the right and the left derivatives, κ = 0, 1 denote correspondingly the even and the odd Poisson brackets. Obviously, the even Poisson brackets can be nondegenerate only if dimM = (2N.M), and the odd one if dimM =(N.N). With nondegenerate Poisson bracket one can associate the symplectic structure A B Ωκ = dz Ω(κ)ABdz , (1.4) BC C where Ω(κ)AB Ωκ = δA .
[Show full text]
Towards Energy Principles in the 18Th and 19Th Century – from D’Alembert to Gauss
Towards Energy Principles in the 18th and 19th Century { From D'Alembert to Gauss Ekkehard Ramm, Universität Stuttgart The present contribution describes the evolution of extremum principles in mechanics in the 18th and the first half of the 19th century. First the development of the 'Principle of Least Action' is recapitulated [1]: Maupertuis' (1698-1759) hypothesis that for any change in nature there is a quantity for this change, denoted as 'action', which is a minimum (1744/46); S. Koenig's contribution in 1750 against Maupertuis, president of the Prussian Academy of Science, delivering a counter example that a maximum may occur as well and most importantly presenting a copy of a letter written by Leibniz already in 1707 which describes Maupertuis' general principle but allowing for a minimum or maximum; Euler (1707-1783) heavily defended Maupertuis in this priority rights although he himself had discovered the principle before him. Next we refer to Jean Le Rond d'Alembert (1717-1783), member of the Paris Academy of Science since 1741. He described his principle of mechanics in his 'Traitéde dynamique' in 1743. It is remarkable that he was considered more a mathematician rather than a physicist; he himself 'believed mechanics to be based on metaphysical principles and not on experimental evidence' [2]. Ne- vertheless D'Alembert's Principle, expressing the dynamic equilibrium as the kinetic extension of the principle of virtual work, became in its Lagrangian ver- sion one of the most powerful contributions in mechanics. Briefly Hamilton's Principle, denoted as 'Law of Varying Action' by Sir William Rowan Hamilton (1805-1865), as the integral counterpart to d'Alembert's differential equation is also mentioned.
[Show full text]
2012 Summer Workshop, College of the Holy Cross Foundational Mathematics Concepts for the High School to College Transition
2012 Summer Workshop, College of the Holy Cross Foundational Mathematics Concepts for the High School to College Transition Day 9 { July 23, 2012 Summary of Graphs: Along the way, you have used several concepts that arise in the area of mathematics known as discrete mathematics or combinatorics. Here is a list of them: • Going from Amherst to the Mass Maritime academy is the equivalent of moving along a collection of edges in order from one vertex to another so that the vertex at the end of one edge is the vertex of the beginning of the next. This is called a path. • Starting at Worcester and ending at Worcester gives a path that starts at one vertex and ends at the same vertex. This is called a circuit or cycle. • A route that allows you to visit every school is called a Hamiltonian path (if it has a diﬀerent start and end points) or a Hamiltonian circuit (if it has the same starting and ending point). These are named after the 19th century British physicist, astronomer, and mathematician William Rowan Hamilton. Among other things, he is known for inventing his own system of numbers (can you imagine that!), called quarternions, which are important in mathematics and physics. Figure 1: The bridges of Konigsberg, Prussia. (Wikipedia, entry for Leonhard Euler.) • A route that allows you to drive every road between schools once is called an Eulerian path (if it has a diﬀerent starting and ending points) or a Eulerian circuit (if it has the same start and end point). These are named after the 18th century German mathematician and physicist Leonhard Euler.
[Show full text]
Leonhard Euler - Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia Page 1 of 14
Leonhard Euler - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Page 1 of 14 Leonhard Euler From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Leonhard Euler ( German pronunciation: [l]; English Leonhard Euler approximation, "Oiler" [1] 15 April 1707 – 18 September 1783) was a pioneering Swiss mathematician and physicist. He made important discoveries in fields as diverse as infinitesimal calculus and graph theory. He also introduced much of the modern mathematical terminology and notation, particularly for mathematical analysis, such as the notion of a mathematical function.[2] He is also renowned for his work in mechanics, fluid dynamics, optics, and astronomy. Euler spent most of his adult life in St. Petersburg, Russia, and in Berlin, Prussia. He is considered to be the preeminent mathematician of the 18th century, and one of the greatest of all time. He is also one of the most prolific mathematicians ever; his collected works fill 60–80 quarto volumes. [3] A statement attributed to Pierre-Simon Laplace expresses Euler's influence on mathematics: "Read Euler, read Euler, he is our teacher in all things," which has also been translated as "Read Portrait by Emanuel Handmann 1756(?) Euler, read Euler, he is the master of us all." [4] Born 15 April 1707 Euler was featured on the sixth series of the Swiss 10- Basel, Switzerland franc banknote and on numerous Swiss, German, and Died Russian postage stamps. The asteroid 2002 Euler was 18 September 1783 (aged 76) named in his honor. He is also commemorated by the [OS: 7 September 1783] Lutheran Church on their Calendar of Saints on 24 St. Petersburg, Russia May – he was a devout Christian (and believer in Residence Prussia, Russia biblical inerrancy) who wrote apologetics and argued Switzerland [5] forcefully against the prominent atheists of his time.
[Show full text]
Classical Hamiltonian Field Theory
Classical Hamiltonian Field Theory Alex Nelson∗ Email: [email protected] August 26, 2009 Abstract This is a set of notes introducing Hamiltonian field theory, with focus on the scalar field. Contents 1 Lagrangian Field Theory1 2 Hamiltonian Field Theory2 1 Lagrangian Field Theory As with Hamiltonian mechanics, wherein one begins by taking the Legendre transform of the Lagrangian, in Hamiltonian field theory we \transform" the Lagrangian field treatment. So lets review the calculations in Lagrangian field theory. Consider the classical fields φa(t; x¯). We use the index a to indicate which field we are talking about. We should think of x¯ as another index, except it is continuous. We will use the confusing short hand notation φ for the column vector φ1; : : : ; φn. Consider the Lagrangian Z 3 L(φ) = L(φ, @µφ)d x¯ (1.1) all space where L is the Lagrangian density. Hamilton's principle of stationary action is still used to determine the equations of motion from the action Z S[φ] = L(φ, @µφ)dt (1.2) where we find the Euler-Lagrange equations of motion for the field d @L @L µ a = a (1.3) dx @(@µφ ) @φ where we note these are evil second order partial differential equations. We also note that we are using Einstein summation convention, so there is an implicit sum over µ but not over a. So that means there are n independent second order partial differential equations we need to solve. But how do we really know these are the correct equations? How do we really know these are the Euler-Lagrange equations for classical fields? We can obtain it directly from the action S by functional differentiation with respect to the field.
[Show full text]
ON THEOREMS of CENTRAL FORCES by William Rowan Hamilton
ON THEOREMS OF CENTRAL FORCES By William Rowan Hamilton (Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy, 3 (1847), pp. 308–309.) Edited by David R. Wilkins 2000 On Theorems of Central Forces. By Sir William R. Hamilton. Communicated November 30, 1846. [Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy, vol. 3 (1847), pp. 308–309.] Sir William R. Hamilton stated the following theorems of central forces, which he had proved by his calculus of quaternions, but which, as he remarked, might be also deduced from principles more elementary. If a body be attracted to a fixed point, with a force which varies directly as the distance from that point, and inversely as the cube of the distance from a fixed plane, the body will describe a conic section, of which the plane intersects the fixed plane in a straight line, which is the polar of the fixed point with respect to the conic section. And in like manner, if a material point be obliged to remain upon the surface of a given sphere, and be acted on by a force, of which the tangential component is constantly directed (along the surface) towards a fixed point or pole upon that surface, and varies directly as the sine of the arcual distance from that pole, and inversely as the cube of the sine of the arcual distance from a fixed great circle; then the material point will describe a spherical conic, with respect to which the fixed great circle will be the polar of the fixed point. Thus, a spherical conic would be described by a heavy point upon a sphere, if the vertical accelerating force were to vary inversely as the cube of the perpendicular and linear distance from a fixed plane passing through the centre.
[Show full text]
Verge 5 Barker.Pdf (420.0Kb)
Verge 5 Barker 1 by Daniel Barker t2 J = ∫ Ldt t1 ∂L ∂L − d = 0 dt & ∂qi ∂qi Verge 5 Barker 2 Finding the path of motion of a particle is a fundamental physical problem. Inside an inertial frame – a coordinate system that moves with constant velocity – the motion of a system is described by Newton’s Second Law: F = p& , where F is the total force acting on the particle and p& is the time derivative of the particle’s momentum. 1 Provided that the particle’s motion is not complicated and rectangular coordinates are used, then the equations of motion are fairly easy to obtain. In this case, the equations of motion are analytically solvable and the path of the particle can be found using matrix techniques. 2 Unfortunately, situations arise where it is difficult or impossible to obtain an explicit expression for all forces acting on a system. Therefore, a different approach to mechanics is desirable in order to circumvent the difficulties encountered when applying Newton’s laws. 3 The primary obstacle to finding equations of motion using the Newtonian technique is the vector nature of F. We would like to use an alternate formulation of mechanics that uses scalar quantities to derive the equations of motion. Lagrangian mechanics is one such formulation, which is based on Hamilton’s variational principle instead on Newton’s Second Law. 4 Hamilton’s principle – published in 1834 by William Rowan Hamilton – is a mathematical statement of the philosophical belief that the laws of nature obey a principle of economy. Under such a principle, particles follow paths that are extrema for some associated physical quantities.
[Show full text]
15. Hamiltonian Mechanics Gerhard Müller University of Rhode Island, [email protected] Creative Commons License
University of Rhode Island DigitalCommons@URI Classical Dynamics Physics Course Materials 2015 15. Hamiltonian Mechanics Gerhard Müller University of Rhode Island, [email protected] Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 4.0 License. Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.uri.edu/classical_dynamics Abstract Part fifteen of course materials for Classical Dynamics (Physics 520), taught by Gerhard Müller at the University of Rhode Island. Documents will be updated periodically as more entries become presentable. Recommended Citation Müller, Gerhard, "15. Hamiltonian Mechanics" (2015). Classical Dynamics. Paper 7. http://digitalcommons.uri.edu/classical_dynamics/7 This Course Material is brought to you for free and open access by the Physics Course Materials at DigitalCommons@URI. It has been accepted for inclusion in Classical Dynamics by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@URI. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Contents of this Document [mtc15] 15. Hamiltonian Mechanics • Legendre transform [tln77] • Hamiltonian and canonical equations [mln82] • Lagrangian from Hamiltonian via Legendre transform [mex188] • Can you find the Hamiltonian of this system? [mex189] • Variational principle in phase space [mln83] • Properties of the Hamiltonian [mln87] • When does the Hamiltonian represent the total energy? [mex81] • Hamiltonian: conserved quantity or total energy? [mex77] • Bead sliding on rotating rod in vertical plane [mex78] • Use of cyclic coordinates in Lagrangian and Hamiltonian mechanics [mln84] • Velocity-dependent potential energy [mln85] • Charged particle in electromagnetic field [mln86] • Velocity-dependent central force [mex76] • Charged particle in a uniform magnetic field [mex190] • Particle with position-dependent mass moving in 1D potential [mex88] • Pendulum with string of slowly increasing length [mex89] • Librations between inclines [mex259] Legendre transform [tln77] Given is a function f(x) with monotonic derivative f 0(x).
[Show full text]
(Limited Distribution) International Atomic Energy Agency And
IC/91/51 ;E INTERNAL REPORT REI (Limited Distribution) International Atomic Energy Agency and United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization INTERNATIONAL CENTRE FOR THEORETICAL PHYSICS N=2, D=4 SUPERSYMMETRIC er-MODELS AND HAMILTONIAN MECHANICS * A. Galperin The Blackett Laboratory, Imperial College, Prince Consort Road, London SW7 2BZ, United Kingdom and V. Ogievetsky ** International Centre for Theoretical Physics, Trieste, Italy. ABSTRACT A deep similarity is established between the Hamiltonian mechanics of point particle and supersymmetric N - 2, D = 4 cx-models formulated within harmonic superspace. An essential pan of the latter, the sphere S2, comes out as a couterpart of the time variable. MIRAMARE - TRIESTE May 1991 * To be submitted for publication. Also appeared as IMPERIAIVTP/9O-91/15. ** Permanent address: Laboratory of Theoretical Physics, Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, Head Post Office P.O. Box 79,101000 Moscow, USSR. 1 Introduction It is well known that customary a-models, i.e. two-derivative self-couplings of scalar fields A m SN=0 = \ j<?x 9AB(4>) dm<t> d <f>» (1) have a profound relationship with Ritmannian geometry, gA.B(<f>) being in- terpreted as the metric tensor. In our language these are N = 0 a models. Adding fermions and requiring supersymmetry leads to restrictions on the metric that have been understood as the existence of complex structures on the target manifolds. For instance, the target manifold of the N = 1 su- persymmetric <7-models in four dimensions should be Kahler (one complex structure) [lj, while for N = 2 supersymmetric a-models it is hyperKahler (three complex structures) [2].
[Show full text]