Where did cotQ come from in canonical transformation?

  • Thread starter Thread starter M. next
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the origin of the cotangent function (cotQ) in the context of canonical transformations in classical mechanics. The user questions how the expression for the generating function F(q,Q) leads to the equation involving cotQ and its relevance to the transformation. There is confusion regarding the derivation of the terms and the importance of explicitly knowing the generator of the transformation. The user expresses a struggle with understanding classical mechanics concepts. Clarification on these points is sought to enhance comprehension of the topic.
M. next
Messages
380
Reaction score
0
I won't write the whole thing(unless asked for from you guys), but I just want to ask where did cotQ come from in canonical transformation.

For instance, F(q,Q) = 1/2p_{(q,Q)}q => \partialF/\partialq=1/2p+1/2*\partialp/\partialq=1/2(p+qcotQ)=p.
What is this? How did the last things come from??
 
Physics news on Phys.org
How should we know, if you don't give the generator of the transformation explicitly?
 
Sorry my bad, I didn't know why this was important (if u may also clear that) but it is F=1/2*p*q, and this was at the end of an exercise, and what I posted in my original question, was a remark under the question! But I guess related to it
 
Last edited:
I am struggling alone in understanding classical mechanics!
 
Thread 'Gauss' law seems to imply instantaneous electric field'
Imagine a charged sphere at the origin connected through an open switch to a vertical grounded wire. We wish to find an expression for the horizontal component of the electric field at a distance ##\mathbf{r}## from the sphere as it discharges. By using the Lorenz gauge condition: $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A} + \frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=0\tag{1}$$ we find the following retarded solutions to the Maxwell equations If we assume that...
I passed a motorcycle on the highway going the opposite direction. I know I was doing 125/km/h. I estimated that the frequency of his motor dropped by an entire octave, so that's a doubling of the wavelength. My intuition is telling me that's extremely unlikely. I can't actually calculate how fast he was going with just that information, can I? It seems to me, I have to know the absolute frequency of one of those tones, either shifted up or down or unshifted, yes? I tried to mimic the...
Back
Top