Langevin equation - derivative of random force?

In summary, the student is trying to solve an equation for a particle's momentum. They first rewrite the equation as a differential equation with a lack of rigor. They then try to calculate the solution by taking the time derivative and integrate over dummy variable. However, they run into trouble when they try to use Leibniz rule to obtain the exponential. They are then able to solve the equation by using the Green's function of the operator on the left-hand-side.
  • #1
SchroedingersLion
215
57
TL;DR Summary
calculation exercise, problems with Ito calculus?
Greetings,

I am struggling with an exercise to the Langevin equation.

Suppose we are given the following differential equation for a particle's 1D time-dependent momentum ##p(t)##:
$$\text{d}p = -\gamma p \text{d}t + F(r)\text{d}t + \sqrt{C\gamma}\text{d}W $$
with a constant ##C##, a position-dependent function ##F(r)##, a friction parameter ##\gamma## and a Wiener process ##W##.
Moreover:
$$ \text{d}r = \frac {p}{m}\text{d}t $$

I am interested in the solution in the limit ##\gamma \rightarrow \infty ##.

In a first step, I am to show that ##p(t)## is given by:
$$p(t)=p(0)e^{-\gamma t} + \int_0^t e^{-\gamma(t-s)}(F(r)+\sqrt{C\gamma}f(t)) \, ds $$

The hint was to first rewrite the differential equation (with a lack of rigor) as ##\frac {dp}{dt} + \gamma p = F(r) + \sqrt{C\gamma}f(t) ##, so apparently ##f(t) = \frac{dW}{dt}##, a random force.

My naive try was now to simply take the time derivative of the given ##p(t)## and show that it suffices the differential equation of the hint. The integral can be calculated analytically, but I don't know what I have to do about the time derivatives of the function ##f(t)##. I get the correct result, aside from terms ~##\frac {d}{dt} f(t)##. Can I assume that these are zero? If the random force is 0 aside from discrete points in time, this might or might not be legit. I might be missing some Ito calculus basics here, so would be happy for a hint.
SL
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Usually you take the "Green's function" of the non-stochastic part and express the solution as an integral over the fluctuating force. Then you never need to take the derivative of the stochastic force, which is ill-defined.
 
  • Like
Likes SchroedingersLion
  • #3
Thank you Vanhees.

Is there a way to do it without Green's function? We did not cover it in that lecture. The exercise also says that the proof does not need to be entirely rigorous.
 
  • #4
Maybe, there is another way, but Green's functions are always good to learn about. Another way is of course to derive the Fokker-Planck equation from the Langevin equation and analyse the phase-space distribution function describing the stochastic motion of the Brownian particle statistically. You find a simple (non-rigorous) derivation for the most simple relativistic case in Sect. 3.1 of

https://arxiv.org/abs/0903.1096
 
  • Like
Likes SchroedingersLion
  • #5
Thank you Vanhees, but I would like to follow the lined out hints. Maybe you can say something to the stuff below?

I made progress:
If I take the equation from the hint
##\frac {dp}{dt} + \gamma p = F(r) + \sqrt{C\gamma}f(t) ##, replace ##t## with dummy variable ##s##, multiply both sides with ##e^{-\gamma(t-s)}## and integrate over ##s## from ##0## to ##t##, I obtain
$$p(t)=p(0)e^{-\gamma t} + \int_0^t e^{-\gamma(t-s)}(F(r)+\sqrt{C\gamma}f(s)) \, ds $$
This is what I need (aside from the fact that the ##f(s)## was an ##f(t)## in the exercise description in my first post, so I assume that was a misprint - otherwise one could calculate the integral analytically immediately).

In the next step, I should show that
$$ r(t)=r(0) + \frac{1}{m\gamma}p(0)(1-e^{-\gamma t}) +\frac 1 m \int_0^t \int_0^{s'}e^{-\gamma (s'-s)}(F(r)+\sqrt{C\gamma}f(t))\, ds \, ds' $$
This can be done by writing ##\frac{dr(s')}{ds'} = \frac {p(s')}{m}## and integrating over ##s## from ##0## to ##t## (only that I have ##f(s)## under the integral again).

The next step is to make use of Leibniz integral rule to rewrite ##r(t)## as
$$ r(t)=r(0) + \frac{1}{m\gamma}p(0)(1-e^{-\gamma t}) +\frac 1 m \int_0^t (1-e^{-\gamma(t-s)})(F(r)+\sqrt{C\gamma}f(t))\, ds $$
where I don't know whether it really is an ##f(t)## this time or not.

I have no idea how to use Leibniz rule here to obtain the desired equation.
If one tries to take the the time derivative of the double integral (assuming ##f## to be ##f(s)##) and uses Leibniz rule, one obtains the correct exponential ##e^{-\gamma(t-s)}## under the integral, but the ##1-## is missing.
 
Last edited:
  • #6
The problem is that ##F(r)## is not known but contains the variable ##r##. The technique of the Green's function only works for the harmonic oscillator, of course, i.e., for ##F(r)=-k r##. Then you have to look at the complete system of equations of motion,
$$p(t)=m \dot{r}(t), \quad \dot{p}(t)=-\gamma p + F(r) +\sqrt{C \gamma} f(t).$$
Now you can of cours write
$$m \ddot{r}+m \gamma \dot{r} + k r =\sqrt{C \gamma} f(t),$$
which you can rewrite using the Green's function of the operator on the left-hand-side, i.e.,
$$m \partial_t^2 G(t,t') + m \gamma \partial_t G(t,t') + k G(t,t')=\delta(t-t').$$
Using the retarded Green's function ##G(t,t') \propto \Theta(t-t')## leads to
$$r(t)=r_0 (t) + \int_0^t \mathrm{d} t G(t,t') \sqrt{C \gamma} f(t'),$$
where ##r_0(t)## is an arbitrary solution of the homogeneous equation,
$$m \ddot{r}+m \gamma \dot{r} + k r=0.$$
 
  • #7
You keep speaking about Green's function, but as it was not part of the lecture, I do not intend to make use of it.
The function ##F(r)## is not specified in the exercise.

There must be some calculational trick to go from

$$ r(t)=r(0) + \frac{1}{m\gamma}p(0)(1-e^{-\gamma t}) +\frac 1 m \int_0^t \int_0^{s'}e^{-\gamma (s'-s)}(F(r)+\sqrt{C\gamma}f(s))\, ds \, ds' $$
over to
$$ r(t)=r(0) + \frac{1}{m\gamma}p(0)(1-e^{-\gamma t}) +\frac 1 m \int_0^t (1-e^{-\gamma(t-s)})(F(r)+\sqrt{C\gamma}f(t))\, ds $$
using Leibniz rule.
 
  • #8
Just flip the integration order (be careful with the boundaries). The expression you are using is still implicit though. BTW: What you are using is nothing else than the "free" Green's function.
 
  • Like
Likes SchroedingersLion
  • #9
Thanks Vanhees, I got it now. Flipping order of integration leads to the result even without Leibniz rule. Don't get why they gave that rule as a hint.
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71

1. What is the Langevin equation?

The Langevin equation is a stochastic differential equation that describes the motion of a particle in a random environment. It takes into account both deterministic forces, such as gravity or friction, and random forces, such as thermal fluctuations.

2. What is the derivative of the random force in the Langevin equation?

The derivative of the random force in the Langevin equation is a term that accounts for the random fluctuations in the system. It is typically denoted as dW/dt and represents the rate of change of the random force over time.

3. How is the Langevin equation used in scientific research?

The Langevin equation is used in a variety of scientific research fields, including physics, chemistry, and biology. It is often used to model the behavior of particles in complex systems, such as Brownian motion or diffusion processes.

4. What is the significance of the Langevin equation in statistical mechanics?

The Langevin equation plays a crucial role in statistical mechanics, as it provides a way to describe the behavior of a system that is subject to both deterministic and random forces. It is also used to derive important equations, such as the Fokker-Planck equation, which describes the time evolution of a probability distribution.

5. Are there any limitations to the Langevin equation?

While the Langevin equation is a useful tool in many scientific fields, it does have some limitations. It assumes that the random forces acting on a particle are uncorrelated and that the system is in thermal equilibrium. These assumptions may not hold in certain systems, such as highly non-equilibrium or non-stationary systems.

Similar threads

  • Classical Physics
Replies
0
Views
151
  • Classical Physics
Replies
17
Views
1K
Replies
19
Views
1K
Replies
10
Views
698
Replies
2
Views
803
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
849
  • Classical Physics
Replies
21
Views
1K
  • Classical Physics
Replies
15
Views
546
  • Classical Physics
Replies
4
Views
726
Back
Top