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)
-
I have an hydrogenic atom, knowing that its ground-state wavefunction has the standard form $$ \psi = A e^{-\beta r} $$ 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...
-
I stand up and I look at two parallel railroad tracks. I find that converge away from me. Why? Can someone explain me why parallel lines s...
-
Sorry if this question is a bit broad but I can't find any info on this by just searching. The equation q = neAL where L is the length o...
-
This image from NASA illustrates drag coefficients for several shapes: It is generally accepted that some variation of the teardrop/airfoil...
-
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, ...
-
Literature states neutral pion decay by QED cannot occur directly because the pion is uncharged. However, I cannot see why Photons are not a...
No comments:
Post a Comment