Saturday, 4 October 2014

hamiltonian formalism - Why do such different Lagrangians give the same ELEs?


The Lagrangians $L_\pm:=\frac{1}{2}\left( \dot{q}_1^2\pm\dot{q}_2^2\right)-\frac{1}{2}m^2\left( q_1^2\pm q_2^2\right)$ each have Euler-Lagrange equations $\ddot{q}_i=-m^2q_i,\,i\in\left\{ 1,\,2\right\}$. The obvious reason is that these equations are uncoupled, so any linear combination of "one-equation" Lagrangians, including these $\pm$ choices, will give the same pair.


The Lagrangian $L_0:=\dot{q}_1\dot{q}_2-m^2q_1q_2$ has the same ELEs as well, so it doesn't couple the $q_i$ even though it looks like it might. What's the physical interpretation of $L_0$ obtaining the same ELEs as $L_+$? It doesn't seem to be of the form $aL_++b+\dot{f}$.


Thinking in terms of Hamiltonians doesn't make it any clearer. With $L_0$ as our choice of Lagrangian, the Hamiltonian is $H_0:=p_1p_2+m^2q_1q_2$, which bears no obvious equivalence to $H_\pm:=\frac{1}{2}\left( p_1^2\pm p_2^2\right)+\frac{1}{2}m^2\left( q_1^2\pm q_2^2\right)$. (The momenta have different definitions in terms of the $\dot{q}_i$ in the two cases, but of course we still get the same equations of motion in all cases.)



So is there a more general principle that explains why $L_\pm$ is equivalent to $L_0$, or $H_\pm$ to $H_0$?



Answer



Having thought about this, I think I've found the key point. A Lagrangian of the form $\frac{1}{2}A\dot{q}^2-\frac{1}{2}Bq^2$ with $1$-dimensional $q$ and numbers $A,\,B$ with $A\ne 0$ has equations of motion that depend only on $A^{-1}B$, as scaling the Lagrangian is physically irrelevant. In particular, scaling the Lagrangian can be thought of as a scaling of the coefficients. For multi-dimensional $\mathbf{q}$, we can generalise this result. In a Lagrangian $L_{AB}:=\frac{1}{2}\dot{\mathbf{q}}^TA\dot{\mathbf{q}}-\frac{1}{2}\mathbf{q}^TB\mathbf{q}$ we can assume without loss of generality that $A,\,B$ are symmetric, in which case $\mathbf{p}=A\dot{\mathbf{q}}$ so the equation of motion is $A\ddot{\mathbf{q}}=-B\mathbf{q}$. If $A$ is invertible this simplifies to $\ddot{\mathbf{q}}=-A^{-1}B\mathbf{q}$, which is invariant under a "scaling" of the matrix coefficients of the form $A,\,B\to KA,\,KB$, with $K$ an arbitrary invertible square matrix conformable with $A,\,B$. We can find the same result in the Hamiltonian formalism, viz $H_{AB}:=\frac{1}{2}\mathbf{p}^TA^{-1}\mathbf{p}+\frac{1}{2}\mathbf{q}^TB\mathbf{q}$.


No comments:

Post a Comment

Understanding Stagnation point in pitot fluid

What is stagnation point in fluid mechanics. At the open end of the pitot tube the velocity of the fluid becomes zero.But that should result...