How is it possible to define the energy for a massless particle in a Freedman-Robertson-Walker metric if the Lagrangian is not invariant under time-translation? I have postulated the simplest Lagrangian for a massless particle (a Lagrange multiplier times the constraint) and it is obviously not time-invariant. Not only: if I work since at the beginning using the proper time as a evolution parameter, the dynamics in the Lagrange parameter and the spatial components is physically inconsistent, giving meaningless results like a scale factor equal to the Lagrange multiplier. Is there something wrong in my assumption for the Lagrangian?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
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...
-
I have an hydrogenic atom, knowing that its ground-state wavefunction has the standard form ψ=Ae−βr with $A = \frac{\bet...
-
At room temperature, play-dough is solid(ish). But if you make a thin strip it cannot just stand up on it's own, so is it still solid? O...
-
Sometimes I am born in silence, Other times, no. I am unseen, But I make my presence known. In time, I fade without a trace. I harm no one, ...
-
I want to know what happens to the space a black hole crosses over as our galaxy travels through space.
-
Small vessels generally lean into a turn, whereas big vessels lean out. Why do ships lean to the outside, but boats lean to the inside of a ...
-
I'm sitting in a room next to some totally unopened cans of carbonated soft drinks (if it matters — the two affected cans are Coke Zero...
-
What exactly are the spikes, or peaks and valleys, caused by in pictures such as these Wikipedia states that "From the point of view of...
No comments:
Post a Comment