DOCSLIB.ORG

Legendre Transformations Lagrange & Poisson Bracket

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Legendre Transformations Lagrange & Poisson Bracket Chapter 6 Lecture 3 Legendre Transformations Lagrange & Poisson Bracket Dr. Akhlaq Hussain 6.3 Legendre Transformations Lagrangian of the system 퐿 = 퐿 푞푖, 푞푖ሶ , 푡 푑 휕퐿 휕퐿 Lagrange's equation − = 0 푑푡 휕푞푖ሶ 휕푞푖 휕퐿 푞푖, 푞푖ሶ ,푡 Where momentum 푝푖 = 휕푞푖ሶ In Lagrangian to Hamiltonian transition variables changes from 푞, 푞푖ሶ , 푡 to 푞, 푝, 푡 , where p is related to 푞 and 푞푖ሶ by above equation. This transformation process is known as Legendre transformation. Consider a function of only two variable 푓(푥, 푦) 휕푓 휕푓 푑푓 = 푑푥 + 푑푦 휕푥 휕푦 푑푓 = 푢푑푥 + 푣푑푦 2 6.3 Legendre Transformations If we wish to change the basis of description from 푥, 푦 to a new set of variable 푦,푢 Let 푔 푦, 푢 be a function of 푢 and 푦 defined as 푔 = 푓 − 푢푥 (I) Therefore 푑푔 = 푑푓 − 푥푑푢 − 푢푑푥 since 푑푓 = 푢푑푥 + 푣푑푦 So 푑푔 = 푢푑푥 + 푣푑푦 − 푥푑푢 − 푢푑푥 푑푔 = 푣푑푦 − 푥푑푢 And the quantities 푣 and 푥 are function of 푦 and 푢 respectively. 휕푔 휕푔 And 푑푔 = 푑푦 + 푑푢 휕푦 휕푢 휕푔 휕푔 = 푣 & = −푥 휕푦 휕푢 3 6.3 Legendre Transformations Equation I represent Legendre transformation. The Legendre transformation is frequently used in thermodynamics as 푑푈 = 푇푑푆 − 푃푑푉 for 푈(푆, 푉) And 퐻 = 푈 + 푃푉 퐻 푆, 푃 푑퐻 = 푇푑푆 + 푉푑푃 And 퐹 = 푈 − 푇푆 퐹(푇, 푉) 퐺 = 퐻 − 푇푆 퐺 푇, 푃 U = Internal energy T = Temperature S = Entropy P = Pressure V = Volume H = Enthalpy F = Helmholtz Free Energy G=Gibbs free energy 4 6.3 Legendre Transformations The transformation of 푞, 푞ሶ, 푡 to 푞, 푝, 푡 is however different. 휕퐿 휕퐿 휕퐿 Since 푑퐿 = 푑푞 + 푑푞ሶ + 푑푡 휕푞 휕푞ሶ 휕푡 휕퐿 푑 휕퐿 And = 푝 ⇒ = 푝ሶ 휕푞ሶ 푑푡 휕푞ሶ 푑 휕퐿 휕퐿 푑 휕퐿 Therefore, − = 푝 − = 0 푑푡 휕푞ሶ 휕푞 푑푡 휕푞 휕퐿 ⇒ = 푝ሶ 휕푞 휕퐿 휕퐿 휕퐿 Therefore , 푑퐿 = 푑푞 + 푑푞ሶ + 푑푡 휕푞 휕푞ሶ 휕푡 휕퐿 푑퐿 = 푝ሶ푑푞 + 푝푑푞ሶ + 푑푡 휕푡 And 퐻 = 푞ሶ푝 − 퐿 5 6.4 Lagrange’s Bracket Lagrange brackets were introduced by Joseph Louis Lagrange in 1808–1810. ➢ Mathematical formulation of Classical Mechanics. ➢ The Lagrange bracket is not use in modern mechanics ➢ The Lagrange's bracket are defined as if 푢 and 푣 are functions depending on 푞푖 Zand 푝푖 then 휕푞 휕푝 휕푞 휕푝 휕 푞 ,푝 푢, 푣 = σ 푖 푖 − 푖 푖 = σ 푖 푖 푞,푝 푖 휕푢 휕푣 휕푣 휕푢 푖 휕(푢,푣) And invariant under canonical transformation. 6 6.4 Lagrange’s Bracket Some properties i. 푢, 푣 푞,푝 = − 푣, 푢 푞,푝 Lagrange's bracket are anti commutative ii. 푞 , 푞 = 0 = 푝 , 푝 For identical function it is zero 푖 푗 푞,푝 푖 푗 푞,푝 1 푖푓 푖 = 푗 iii. 푞 , 푝 = 훿 ቊ Equal to Kronecker delta function. 푖 푗 푝,푞 푖푗 0 푖푓 푖 ≠ 푗 iv. 푢, 푣 푞,푝 = 푢, 푣 푄,푃 Invariance of Lagrange Bracket 7 6.4 Lagrange’s Bracket Proof: 푢, 푣 푞,푝 = − 푣, 푢 푞,푝 휕푞 휕푝 휕푞 휕푝 푢, 푣 = σ 푖 푖 − 푖 푖 푞,푝 푖 휕푢 휕푣 휕푣 휕푢 휕푞 휕푝 휕푞 휕푝 Taking negative common 푢, 푣 = − σ − 푖 푖 + 푖 푖 푞,푝 푖 휕푢 휕푣 휕푣 휕푢 휕푞 휕푝 휕푞 휕푝 푢, 푣 = − σ 푖 푖 − 푖 푖 푞,푝 푖 휕푣 휕푢 휕푢 휕푣 푢, 푣 푞,푝 = − 푣, 푢 푞,푝 풑풓풐풗풆풅 8 6.4 Lagrange’s Bracket Proof: 푞 , 푞 = 0 = 푝 , 푝 For identical 푖 푗 푝,푞 푖 푗 푞,푝 function it is zero 휕푞푘 휕푝푘 휕푞푘 휕푝푘 푞푖, 푞푗 = σ푘 − 푞,푝 휕푞푖 휕푞푗 휕푞푖 휕푞푗 Here 푝 and 푞 are treated as independent co-ordinates in phase space. So 휕푝 휕푝 푘 = 0 = 푘 휕푞푗 휕푞푖 Therefore 푞 , 푞 = 0 푖 푗 푞,푝 similarly , we can show 푝 , 푝 = 0 푖 푗 9 6.4 Lagrange’s Bracket 1 푖푓 푖 = 푗 푞 , 푝 = 훿 ቊ Equal to Kronecker delta function. 푖 푗 푖푗 0 푖푓 푖 ≠ 푗 ퟎ 휕푞푘 휕푝푘 휕푞푘 휕푝푘 푞푖, 푝푗 = σ푘 − 푞,푝 휕푞푖 휕푝푗 휕푝푗 휕푞푖 휕푞 휕푝 Since 푝, 푞 are independent, we get 푘 = 푘 = 0 휕푝푗 휕푞푖 휕푞푘 휕푝푘 Therefore 푞푖, 푝푗 = σ푘 푞,푝 휕푞푖 휕푝푗 ⇒ 푞 , 푝 = σ 훿 훿 = 훿 푖 푗 푞,푝 푘 푘푖 푘푗 푖푗 Where 훿푖푗 is a Kronecker delta function 1 푖푓 푖 = 푗 Hence 푞 , 푝 = 훿 ቊ Equal to Kronecker delta function. 푖 푗 푖푗 0 푖푓 푖 ≠ 푗 10 6.4 Lagrange’s Bracket 푢, 푣 푞,푝 = 푢, 푣 푄,푃 Invariance of Lagrange Bracket 휕 푞 ,푝 휕 푄 ,푃 0r σ 푖 푖 = σ 푗 푗 푖 휕(푢,푣) 푗 휕(푢,푣) Proof: Let 푞푖 and 푝푖 are function of 푄푗 and 푃푗 휕푞 휕푝 휕푞 휕푝 푢, 푣 = σ 푖 푖 − 푖 푖 (I) 푞,푝 푖 휕푢 휕푣 휕푣 휕푢 휕푝푖 휕푝푖 휕푄푗 휕푝푖 휕푃푗 And for 푝푖 = 푝푖 푄푗, 푃푗 ⇒ = σ푗 + 휕푣 휕푄푗 휕푣 휕푃푗 휕푣 Using Maxwell’s equations 휕푝 휕푄 휕푝 휕푃 푖 = 푗 & 푖 = − 푗 putting in above equation 휕푃푗 휕푞푖 휕푄푗 휕푞푖 휕푝푖 휕푃푗 휕푄푗 휕푄푗 휕푃푗 휕푄푗 휕푃푗 휕푃푗 휕푄푗 = σ푗 − + = σ푗 − = 푞푖, 푣 푄,푃 (II) 휕푣 휕푞푖 휕푣 휕푞푖 휕푣 휕푞푖 휕푣 휕푞푖 휕푣 11 6.4 Lagrange’s Bracket 휕푞푖 휕푞푖 휕푄푗 휕푞푖 휕푃푗 And 푞푖 = 푞푖 푄푗, 푃푗 ⇒ = σ푗 + 휕푣 휕푄푗 휕푣 휕푃푗 휕푣 Using Maxwell’s equations 휕푞 휕푃 휕푞 휕푄 푖 = 푗 & 푖 = − 푗 putting in above equation 휕푄푗 휕푝푖 휕푃푗 휕푝푖 휕푞푖 휕푃푗 휕푄푗 휕푄푗 휕푃푗 = σ푗 − = 푝푖, 푣 푄,푃 (III) 휕푣 휕푝푖 휕푣 휕푝푖 휕푣 휕푞 휕푝 휕푞 휕푝 Putting Eqs (II) &(III) in Eq (I) 푢, 푣 = σ 푖 푖 − 푖 푖 푞,푝 푖 휕푢 휕푣 휕푣 휕푢 휕푞푖 휕푄푗 휕푃푗 휕푃푗 휕푄푗 휕푃푗 휕푄푗 휕푄푗 휕푃푗 휕푝푖 푢, 푣 푞,푝 = σ푖푗 − − − 휕푢 휕푞푖 휕푣 휕푞푖 휕푣 휕푝푖 휕푣 휕푝푖 휕푣 휕푢 휕푃푗 휕푄푗 휕푞푖 휕푄푗 휕푝푖 휕푄푗 휕푃푗 휕푞푖 휕푃푗 휕푝푖 푢, 푣 푞,푝 = σ푖푗 + − + 휕푣 휕푞푖 휕푢 휕푝푖 휕푢 휕푣 휕푞푖 휕푢 휕푝푖 휕푢 12 6.4 Lagrange’s Bracket 휕푃푗 휕푄푗 휕푞푖 휕푄푗 휕푝푖 휕푄푗 휕푃푗 휕푞푖 휕푃푗 휕푝푖 σ σ푖 + − σ푖 + 푢, 푣 푞,푝 = 푗 휕푣 휕푞푖 휕푢 휕푝푖 휕푢 휕푣 휕푞푖 휕푢 휕푝푖 휕푢 휕푃 휕푄 휕푄 휕푃 푢, 푣 = σ 푗 푗 − 푗 푗 푞,푝 푗 휕푣 휕푢 휕푣 휕푢 휕푄 휕푃 휕푃 휕푄 푢, 푣 = σ 푗 푗 − 푗 푗 푞,푝 푗 휕푢 휕푣 휕푢 휕푣 푢, 푣 푞,푝 = 푢, 푣 푄,푃 13 6.5 Poisson’s Brackets Poisson’s bracket: ➢ An important binary operation in Hamiltonian mechanics ➢ Play a central role in Hamilton's equations of motion. ➢ Distinguishes a class of coordinate transformations (canonical transformations) ➢ Very useful tool in quantum mechanics and field theory. The Poisson bracket are defined as 휕푢 휕푣 휕푢 휕푣 푢, 푣 푞,푝= σ푖 − 휕푞푖 휕푝푖 휕푝푖 휕푞푖 휕푢 휕푣 휕푢 휕푣 Or 푢, 푣 푄,푃= σ푖 − 휕푄푖 휕푃푖 휕푃푖 휕푄푖 Where 푢, 푣 are two functions, 푤. 푟. 푡 the canonical variable 푞, 푝 or 푄, 푃 . 14 6.5 Poisson’s Brackets Consider 푓 is a function such that 푓 = 푓 푞푖, 푝푖 푑푓 휕푓 푑푞푖 휕푓 푑푝푖 = σ푖 + σ푖 푑푡 휕푞푖 푑푡 휕푝푖 푑푡 푑푓 휕푓 휕푓 = σ푖 푞푖ሶ + σ푖 푝푖ሶ 푑푡 휕푞푖 휕푝푖 휕퐻 휕퐻 As we know that 푞ሶ = and 푝ሶ = − 푖 휕푝 푖 휕q 푑푓 휕푓 휕퐻 휕푓 휕퐻 Eq 1 can be written as = σ푖 − 푑푡 휕푞푖 휕푝푖 휕푝푖 휕푞푖 푑푓 = 푓, 퐻 푑푡 푞,푝 Where 푓, 퐻 is called Poisson's Brackets. 15 6.5 Poisson’s Brackets Generally u and v are two function their Poisson’s brackt is 푛 휕푢 휕푣 휕푢 휕푣 푢, 푣 = σ푖=1 − 휕푞푖 휕푝푖 휕푝푖 휕푞푖 Properties It is obvious from the definition of the Poisson brackets that i. 푢, 푣 = − 푣, 푢 Poisson bracket are anti-commutative ii. 푢, 푢 = 0 = 푣, 푣 Poisson bracket of identical functions are zero. iii. 푢, 푐 = 0 = 푢, 푐 Where c is independent of 푝 or 푞. iv. 푢 + 푣, 푤 = 푢, 푤 + 푣, 푤 Poisson brackets obeys the distributive law v. 푢, 푣푤 = 푢, 푣 푤 + 푣 푢, 푤 1 푖푓 푖 = 푗 vi. 푞 , 푝 = 훿 ቊ Where 훿 is the Kronecker delta function. 푖 푗 푖푗 0 푖푓 푖 ≠ 푗 푖푓 16 6.5 Poisson’s Brackets 1)Skew symmetric OR anti commutative (OR show that Poisson brackets do not obey commutative law) 푛 휕푢 휕푣 휕푢 휕푣 As we know that 푢, 푣 푞,푝 = σ푖=1 − 휕푞푖 휕푝푖 휕푝푖 휕푞푖 Taking –ve sign out of the bracket 푛 휕푢 휕푣 휕푢 휕푣 푢, 푣 푞,푝 = − σ푖=1 − + 휕푞푖 휕푝푖 휕푝푖 휕푞푖 푛 휕푢 휕푣 휕푢 휕푣 푢, 푣 푞,푝 = − σ푖=1 − 휕푝푖 휕푞푖 휕푞푖 휕푝푖 휕푣 휕푢 휕푣 휕푢 푢, 푣 푞,푝 = − − 휕푞푖 휕푝푖 휕푝푖 휕푞푖 푢, 푣 푞,푝 = − 푣, 푢 푞,푝 proved 17 6.5 Poisson’s Brackets For identical function 푢, 푢 푞,푝 = − 푣, 푣 푞,푝 = 0 푛 휕푢 휕푢 휕푢 휕푢 푢, 푢 푞,푝 = σ푖=1 − 휕푞푖 휕푝푖 휕푝푖 휕푞푖 Similarly 푣, 푣 푞,푝 = 0 Poisson brackets with a-constant Let 퐹 be function of generalized 푞푖 and 푝푖 and 퐶 is any constant quality. 푛 휕퐹 휕퐶 휕퐹 휕퐶 Then 퐹, 퐶 푞,푝 = σ푖=1 − 휕푞푖 휕푝푖 휕푝푖 휕푞푖 휕퐶 휕퐶 Where = = 0 where 푐 does not depend 표푛 푞푖 and 푝푖. 휕푞푖 휕푝푖 18 퐹, 퐶 푞,푝 = 0 6.5 Poisson’s Brackets Poisson Brackets obey the distributive law Consider 퐹1, 퐹2 and G are three functions dependently upon 푞푖 and푝푖.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Covariant Hamiltonian Field Theory 3
    December 16, 2020 2:58 WSPC/INSTRUCTION FILE kfte COVARIANT HAMILTONIAN FIELD THEORY JURGEN¨ STRUCKMEIER and ANDREAS REDELBACH GSI Helmholtzzentrum f¨ur Schwerionenforschung GmbH Planckstr. 1, 64291 Darmstadt, Germany and Johann Wolfgang Goethe-Universit¨at Frankfurt am Main Max-von-Laue-Str. 1, 60438 Frankfurt am Main, Germany [email protected] Received 18 July 2007 Revised 14 December 2020 A consistent, local coordinate formulation of covariant Hamiltonian field theory is pre- sented. Whereas the covariant canonical field equations are equivalent to the Euler- Lagrange field equations, the covariant canonical transformation theory offers more gen- eral means for defining mappings that preserve the form of the field equations than the usual Lagrangian description. It is proved that Poisson brackets, Lagrange brackets, and canonical 2-forms exist that are invariant under canonical transformations of the fields. The technique to derive transformation rules for the fields from generating functions is demonstrated by means of various examples. In particular, it is shown that the infinites- imal canonical transformation furnishes the most general form of Noether’s theorem. We furthermore specify the generating function of an infinitesimal space-time step that conforms to the field equations. Keywords: Field theory; Hamiltonian density; covariant. PACS numbers: 11.10.Ef, 11.15Kc arXiv:0811.0508v6 [math-ph] 15 Dec 2020 1. Introduction Relativistic field theories and gauge theories are commonly formulated on the basis of a Lagrangian density L1,2,3,4. The space-time evolution of the fields is obtained by integrating the Euler-Lagrange field equations that follow from the four-dimensional representation of Hamilton’s action principle.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 the Basic Set-Up 2 Poisson Brackets
    MATHEMATICS 7302 (Analytical Dynamics) YEAR 2016–2017, TERM 2 HANDOUT #12: THE HAMILTONIAN APPROACH TO MECHANICS These notes are intended to be read as a supplement to the handout from Gregory, Classical Mechanics, Chapter 14. 1 The basic set-up I assume that you have already studied Gregory, Sections 14.1–14.4. The following is intended only as a succinct summary. We are considering a system whose equations of motion are written in Hamiltonian form. This means that: 1. The phase space of the system is parametrized by canonical coordinates q =(q1,...,qn) and p =(p1,...,pn). 2. We are given a Hamiltonian function H(q, p, t). 3. The dynamics of the system is given by Hamilton’s equations of motion ∂H q˙i = (1a) ∂pi ∂H p˙i = − (1b) ∂qi for i =1,...,n. In these notes we will consider some deeper aspects of Hamiltonian dynamics. 2 Poisson brackets Let us start by considering an arbitrary function f(q, p, t). Then its time evolution is given by n df ∂f ∂f ∂f = q˙ + p˙ + (2a) dt ∂q i ∂p i ∂t i=1 i i X n ∂f ∂H ∂f ∂H ∂f = − + (2b) ∂q ∂p ∂p ∂q ∂t i=1 i i i i X 1 where the first equality used the definition of total time derivative together with the chain rule, and the second equality used Hamilton’s equations of motion. The formula (2b) suggests that we make a more general definition. Let f(q, p, t) and g(q, p, t) be any two functions; we then define their Poisson bracket {f,g} to be n def ∂f ∂g ∂f ∂g {f,g} = − .
    [Show full text]
  • Hamilton's Equations. Conservation Laws. Reduction. Poisson Brackets
    Hamiltonian Formalism: Hamilton's equations. Conservation laws. Reduction. Poisson Brackets. Physics 6010, Fall 2016 Hamiltonian Formalism: Hamilton's equations. Conservation laws. Reduction. Poisson Brackets. Relevant Sections in Text: 8.1 { 8.3, 9.5 The Hamiltonian Formalism We now return to formal developments: a study of the Hamiltonian formulation of mechanics. This formulation of mechanics is in many ways more powerful than the La- grangian formulation. Among the advantages of Hamiltonian mechanics we note that: it leads to powerful geometric techniques for studying the properties of dynamical systems, it allows for a beautiful expression of the relation between symmetries and conservation laws, and it leads to many structures that can be viewed as the macroscopic (\classical") imprint of quantum mechanics. Although the Hamiltonian form of mechanics is logically independent of the Lagrangian formulation, it is convenient and instructive to introduce the Hamiltonian formalism via transition from the Lagrangian formalism, since we have already developed the latter. (Later I will indicate how to give an ab initio development of the Hamiltonian formal- ism.) The most basic change we encounter when passing from Lagrangian to Hamiltonian methods is that the \arena" we use to describe the equations of motion is no longer the configuration space, or even the velocity phase space, but rather the momentum phase space. Recall that the Lagrangian formalism is defined once one specifies a configuration space Q (coordinates qi) and then the velocity phase space Ω (coordinates (qi; q_i)). The mechanical system is defined by a choice of Lagrangian, L, which is a function on Ω (and possible the time): L = L(qi; q_i; t): Curves in the configuration space Q { or in the velocity phase space Ω { satisfying the Euler-Lagrange (EL) equations, @L d @L − = 0; @qi dt @q_i define the dynamical behavior of the system.
    [Show full text]
  • Poisson Structures and Integrability
    Poisson Structures and Integrability Peter J. Olver University of Minnesota http://www.math.umn.edu/ olver ∼ Hamiltonian Systems M — phase space; dim M = 2n Local coordinates: z = (p, q) = (p1, . , pn, q1, . , qn) Canonical Hamiltonian system: dz O I = J H J = − dt ∇ ! I O " Equivalently: dpi ∂H dqi ∂H = = dt − ∂qi dt ∂pi Lagrange Bracket (1808): n ∂pi ∂qi ∂qi ∂pi [ u , v ] = ∂u ∂v − ∂u ∂v i#= 1 (Canonical) Poisson Bracket (1809): n ∂u ∂v ∂u ∂v u , v = { } ∂pi ∂qi − ∂qi ∂pi i#= 1 Given functions u , . , u , the (2n) (2n) matrices with 1 2n × respective entries [ u , u ] u , u i, j = 1, . , 2n i j { i j } are mutually inverse. Canonical Poisson Bracket n ∂F ∂H ∂F ∂H F, H = F T J H = { } ∇ ∇ ∂pi ∂qi − ∂qi ∂pi i#= 1 = Poisson (1809) ⇒ Hamiltonian flow: dz = z, H = J H dt { } ∇ = Hamilton (1834) ⇒ First integral: dF F, H = 0 = 0 F (z(t)) = const. { } ⇐⇒ dt ⇐⇒ Poisson Brackets , : C∞(M, R) C∞(M, R) C∞(M, R) { · · } × −→ Bilinear: a F + b G, H = a F, H + b G, H { } { } { } F, a G + b H = a F, G + b F, H { } { } { } Skew Symmetric: F, H = H, F { } − { } Jacobi Identity: F, G, H + H, F, G + G, H, F = 0 { { } } { { } } { { } } Derivation: F, G H = F, G H + G F, H { } { } { } F, G, H C∞(M, R), a, b R. ∈ ∈ In coordinates z = (z1, . , zm), F, H = F T J(z) H { } ∇ ∇ where J(z)T = J(z) is a skew symmetric matrix. − The Jacobi identity imposes a system of quadratically nonlinear partial differential equations on its entries: ∂J jk ∂J ki ∂J ij J il + J jl + J kl = 0 ! ∂zl ∂zl ∂zl " #l Given a Poisson structure, the Hamiltonian flow corresponding to H C∞(M, R) is the system of ordinary differential equati∈ons dz = z, H = J(z) H dt { } ∇ Lie’s Theory of Function Groups Used for integration of partial differential equations: F , F = G (F , .
    [Show full text]
  • Advanced Quantum Theory AMATH473/673, PHYS454
    Advanced Quantum Theory AMATH473/673, PHYS454 Achim Kempf Department of Applied Mathematics University of Waterloo Canada c Achim Kempf, September 2017 (Please do not copy: textbook in progress) 2 Contents 1 A brief history of quantum theory 7 1.1 The classical period . 7 1.2 Planck and the \Ultraviolet Catastrophe" . 7 1.3 Discovery of h ................................ 8 1.4 Mounting evidence for the fundamental importance of h . 9 1.5 The discovery of quantum theory . 9 1.6 Relativistic quantum mechanics . 11 1.7 Quantum field theory . 12 1.8 Beyond quantum field theory? . 14 1.9 Experiment and theory . 16 2 Classical mechanics in Hamiltonian form 19 2.1 Newton's laws for classical mechanics cannot be upgraded . 19 2.2 Levels of abstraction . 20 2.3 Classical mechanics in Hamiltonian formulation . 21 2.3.1 The energy function H contains all information . 21 2.3.2 The Poisson bracket . 23 2.3.3 The Hamilton equations . 25 2.3.4 Symmetries and Conservation laws . 27 2.3.5 A representation of the Poisson bracket . 29 2.4 Summary: The laws of classical mechanics . 30 2.5 Classical field theory . 31 3 Quantum mechanics in Hamiltonian form 33 3.1 Reconsidering the nature of observables . 34 3.2 The canonical commutation relations . 35 3.3 From the Hamiltonian to the equations of motion . 38 3.4 From the Hamiltonian to predictions of numbers . 42 3.4.1 Linear maps . 42 3.4.2 Choices of representation . 43 3.4.3 A matrix representation . 44 3 4 CONTENTS 3.4.4 Example: Solving the equations of motion for a free particle with matrix-valued functions .
    [Show full text]
  • Moon-Earth-Sun: the Oldest Three-Body Problem
    Moon-Earth-Sun: The oldest three-body problem Martin C. Gutzwiller IBM Research Center, Yorktown Heights, New York 10598 The daily motion of the Moon through the sky has many unusual features that a careful observer can discover without the help of instruments. The three different frequencies for the three degrees of freedom have been known very accurately for 3000 years, and the geometric explanation of the Greek astronomers was basically correct. Whereas Kepler’s laws are sufficient for describing the motion of the planets around the Sun, even the most obvious facts about the lunar motion cannot be understood without the gravitational attraction of both the Earth and the Sun. Newton discussed this problem at great length, and with mixed success; it was the only testing ground for his Universal Gravitation. This background for today’s many-body theory is discussed in some detail because all the guiding principles for our understanding can be traced to the earliest developments of astronomy. They are the oldest results of scientific inquiry, and they were the first ones to be confirmed by the great physicist-mathematicians of the 18th century. By a variety of methods, Laplace was able to claim complete agreement of celestial mechanics with the astronomical observations. Lagrange initiated a new trend wherein the mathematical problems of mechanics could all be solved by the same uniform process; canonical transformations eventually won the field. They were used for the first time on a large scale by Delaunay to find the ultimate solution of the lunar problem by perturbing the solution of the two-body Earth-Moon problem.
    [Show full text]
  • Hamilton-Poisson Formulation for the Rotational Motion of a Rigid Body In
    Hamilton-Poisson formulation for the rotational motion of a rigid body in the presence of an axisymmetric force field and a gyroscopic torque Petre Birtea,∗ Ioan Ca¸su, Dan Com˘anescu Department of Mathematics, West University of Timi¸soara Bd. V. Pˆarvan, No 4, 300223 Timi¸soara, Romˆania E-mail addresses: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Keywords: Poisson bracket, Casimir function, rigid body, gyroscopic torque. Abstract We give sufficient conditions for the rigid body in the presence of an axisymmetric force field and a gyroscopic torque to admit a Hamilton-Poisson formulation. Even if by adding a gyroscopic torque we initially lose one of the conserved Casimirs, we recover another conservation law as a Casimir function for a modified Poisson structure. We apply this frame to several well known results in the literature. 1 Introduction The generalized Euler-Poisson system, which is a dynamical system for the rotational motion of a rigid body in the presence of an axisymmetric force field, admits a Hamilton-Poisson formulation, where the bracket is the ”−” Kirillov-Kostant-Souriau bracket on the dual Lie algebra e(3)∗. The Hamiltonian function is of the type kinetic energy plus potential energy. The Hamiltonian function and the two Casimir functions for the K-K-S Poisson structure are conservation laws for the dynamic. Adding a certain type of gyroscopic torque the Hamiltonian and one of the Casimirs remain conserved along the solutions of the new dynamical system. In this paper we give a technique for finding a third conservation law in the presence of gyroscopic torque.
    [Show full text]
  • An Introduction to Free Quantum Field Theory Through Klein-Gordon Theory
    AN INTRODUCTION TO FREE QUANTUM FIELD THEORY THROUGH KLEIN-GORDON THEORY JONATHAN EMBERTON Abstract. We provide an introduction to quantum field theory by observing the methods required to quantize the classical form of Klein-Gordon theory. Contents 1. Introduction and Overview 1 2. Klein-Gordon Theory as a Hamiltonian System 2 3. Hamilton's Equations 4 4. Quantization 5 5. Creation and Annihilation Operators and Wick Ordering 9 6. Fock Space 11 7. Maxwell's Equations and Generalized Free QFT 13 References 15 Acknowledgments 16 1. Introduction and Overview The phase space for classical mechanics is R3 × R3, where the first copy of R3 encodes position of an object and the second copy encodes momentum. Observables on this space are simply functions on R3 × R3. The classical dy- namics of the system are then given by Hamilton's equations x_ = fh; xg k_ = fh; kg; where the brackets indicate the canonical Poisson bracket and jkj2 h(x; k) = + V (x) 2m is the classical Hamiltonian. To quantize this classical field theory, we set our quantized phase space to be L2(R3). Then the observables are self-adjoint operators A on this space, and in a state 2 L2(R3), the mean value of A is given by hAi := hA ; i: The dynamics of a quantum system are then described by the quantized Hamil- ton's equations i i x_ = [H; x]_p = [H; p] h h 1 2 JONATHAN EMBERTON where the brackets indicate the commutator and the Hamiltonian operator H is given by jpj2 2 H = h(x; p) = − + V (x) = − ~ ∆ + V (x): 2m 2m A question that naturally arises from this construction is then, how do we quan- tize other classical field theories, and is this quantization as straight-forward as the canonical construction? For instance, how do Maxwell's Equations behave on the quantum scale? This happens to be somewhat of a difficult problem, with many steps involved.
    [Show full text]
  • Physics 550 Problem Set 1: Classical Mechanics
    Problem Set 1: Classical Mechanics Physics 550 Physics 550 Problem Set 1: Classical Mechanics Name: Instructions / Notes / Suggestions: • Each problem is worth five points. • In order to receive credit, you must show your work. • Circle your final answer. • Unless otherwise specified, answers should be given in terms of the variables in the problem and/or physical constants and/or cartesian unit vectors (e^x; e^x; e^z) or radial unit vector ^r. Problem Set 1: Classical Mechanics Physics 550 Problem #1: Consider the pendulum in Fig. 1. Find the equation(s) of motion using: (a) Newtonian mechanics (b) Lagrangian mechanics (c) Hamiltonian mechanics Answer: Not included. Problem Set 1: Classical Mechanics Physics 550 Problem #2: Consider the double pendulum in Fig. 2. Find the equations of motion. Note that you may use any formulation of classical mechanics that you want. Answer: Multiple answers are possible. Problem Set 1: Classical Mechanics Physics 550 Problem #3: In Problem #1, you probably found the Lagrangian: 1 L = ml2θ_2 + mgl cos θ 2 Using the Legendre transformation (explicitly), find the Hamiltonian. Answer: Recall the Legendre transform: X H = q_ipi − L i where: @L pi = @q_i _ In the present problem, q = θ andq _ = θ. Using the expression for pi: 2 _ pi = ml θ We can therefore write: _ 2 _ 1 2 _2 H =θml θ − 2 ml θ − mgl cos θ 1 2 _2 = 2 ml θ − mgl cos θ Problem Set 1: Classical Mechanics Physics 550 Problem #4: Consider a dynamical system with canonical coordinate q and momentum p vectors.
    [Show full text]
  • 2.3. Classical Mechanics in Hamiltonian Formulation
    2.3. CLASSICAL MECHANICS IN HAMILTONIAN FORMULATION 23 expressions that involve all those positions and momentum variables? To this end, we need to define what the Poisson brackets in between positions and momenta of different particles should be. They are defined to be simply zero. Therefore, to summarize, we define the basic Poisson brackets of n masses as (r) (s) {xi , p j } = δi,j δr,s (2.16) (r) (s) {xi , x j } =0 (2.17) (r) (s) {pi , p j } =0 (2.18) where r, s ∈ { 1, 2, ..., n } and i, j ∈ { 1, 2, 3}. The evaluation rules of Eqs.2.9-2.13 are defined to stay just the same. Exercise 2.6 Mathematically, the set of polynomials in positions and momenta is an example of what is called a Poisson algebra. A general Poisson algebra is a vector space with two extra multiplications: One multiplication which makes the vector space into an associative algebra, and one (non-associative) multiplication {, }, called the Lie bracket, which makes the vector space into what is called a Lie algebra. If the two multiplications are in a certain sense compatible then the set is said to be a Poisson algebra. Look up and state the axioms of a) a Lie algebra, b) an associative algebra and c) a Poisson algebra. 2.3.3 The Hamilton equations Let us recall why we introduced the Poisson bracket: A technique that uses the Poisson bracket is supposed to allow us to derive all the differential equations of motion of a system from the just one piece of information, namely from the expression of the total energy of the system, i.e., from its Hamiltonian.
    [Show full text]
  • PHY411 Lecture Notes Part 2
    PHY411 Lecture notes Part 2 Alice Quillen October 2, 2018 Contents 1 Canonical Transformations 2 1.1 Poisson Brackets . 2 1.2 Canonical transformations . 3 1.3 Canonical Transformations are Symplectic . 5 1.4 Generating Functions for Canonical Transformations . 6 1.4.1 Example canonical transformation - action angle coordinates for the harmonic oscillator . 7 2 Some Geometry 9 2.1 The Tangent Bundle . 9 2.1.1 Differential forms and Wedge product . 9 2.2 The Symplectic form . 12 2.3 Generating Functions Geometrically . 13 2.4 Vectors generate Flows and trajectories . 15 2.5 The Hamiltonian flow and the symplectic two-form . 15 2.6 Extended Phase space . 16 2.7 Hamiltonian flows preserve the symplectic two-form . 17 2.8 The symplectic two-form and the Poisson bracket . 19 2.8.1 On connection to the Lagrangian . 21 2.8.2 Discretized Systems and Symplectic integrators . 21 2.8.3 Surfaces of section . 21 2.9 The Hamiltonian following a canonical transformation . 22 2.10 The Lie derivative . 23 3 Examples of Canonical transformations 25 3.1 Orbits in the plane of a galaxy or around a massive body . 25 3.2 Epicyclic motion . 27 3.3 The Jacobi integral . 31 3.4 The Shearing Sheet . 32 1 4 Symmetries and Conserved Quantities 37 4.1 Functions that commute with the Hamiltonian . 37 4.2 Noether's theorem . 38 4.3 Integrability . 39 1 Canonical Transformations It is straightforward to transfer coordinate systems using the Lagrangian formulation as minimization of the action can be done in any coordinate system.
    [Show full text]
  • 7.5 Lagrange Brackets
    Chapter 7 Brackets Module 1 Poisson brackets and Lagrange brackets 1 Brackets are a powerful and sophisticated tool in Classical mechanics particularly in Hamiltonian formalism. It is a way of characterization of canonical transformations by using an operation, known as bracket. It is very useful in mathematical formulation of classical mechanics. It is a powerful geometrical structure on phase space. Basically it is a mapping which maps two functions into a new function. Reformulation of classical mechanics is indeed possible in terms of brackets. It provides a direct link between classical and quantum mechanics. 7.1 Poisson brackets Poisson bracket is an operation which takes two functions of phase space and time and produces a new function. Let us consider two functions F1(,,) qii p t and F2 (,,) qii p t . The Poisson bracket is defined as n FFFF1 2 1 2 FF12,. (7.1) i1 qi p i p i q i For single degree of freedom, Poisson bracket takes the following form FFFF FF,. 1 2 1 2 12 q p p q Basically in Poisson bracket, each term contains one derivative of F1 and one derivative of F2. One derivative is considered with respect to a coordinate q and the other is with respect to the conjugate momentum p. A change of sign occurs in the terms depending on which function is differentiated with respect to the coordinate and which with respect to the momentum. Remark: Some authors use square brackets to represent the Poisson bracket i.e. instead ofFF12, , they prefer to use FF12, . Example 1: Let F12( q , p ) p q , F ( q , p ) sin q .
    [Show full text]