Background required for Noether's Theorem?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the background knowledge and topics necessary for understanding Noether's Theorem, a fundamental result in theoretical physics linking symmetries and conservation laws. Participants share their educational experiences and suggest pathways for self-study, touching on various mathematical and physical concepts relevant to the theorem.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Homework-related

Main Points Raised

  • One participant seeks guidance on the topics needed to study Noether's Theorem, expressing a desire to appreciate its significance and beauty.
  • Another participant suggests that a basic understanding of Noether's Theorem can be achieved through intermediate mechanics and that the necessary mathematics may already be within reach.
  • This participant explains that the Lagrangian formulation is key, highlighting how invariance under certain transformations indicates conserved quantities, such as momentum and energy.
  • A third participant mentions Leonard Susskind's video course on Classical Physics, noting that it derives Noether's Theorem using the calculus of variations.
  • A later reply expresses gratitude for the detailed explanation and the resource link provided.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the importance of Lagrangian mechanics for understanding Noether's Theorem, but there is no consensus on the specific prerequisites or the complexity of the theorem at higher levels.

Contextual Notes

Some assumptions about prior knowledge in calculus, mechanics, and linear algebra are present, but the discussion does not resolve the depth of understanding required for Noether's Theorem.

ibkev
Messages
131
Reaction score
61
Can someone please explain the progression of topics I would need to study in order to tackle Noether's Theorem? I keep hearing how important it is and am setting a self-study goal for myself to eventually understand it with enough rigour that I can appreciate it's beauty.

I have a feeling I have a long way to go... :) I've done Calculus 1,2, and 3. The equivalent of 1st year university physics (Halliday/Resnick). Currently, I'm working through linear algebra.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You cover it on a basic level in intermediate mechanics. It's actually not very difficult and you probably have enough math to understand it tonight if you're so inclined. Basically you write down the energy of your system (really the Lagrangian), and then think of things that you might do to the expression. For instance, maybe you want to translate the system in space (so add something to the position coordinates). If you find that the expression remains unchanged after such an operation, then this indicates there is a conserved quantity present. We might find for instance, that the energy is invariant under a spatial translation: this indicates that momentum is conserved. If it's invariant under a rotation, then angular momentum is conserved. If it's invariant under a translation in time, then the energy itself is conserved. These are the basics. You may also discover that the energy is invariant under some more subtle operation, such as varying the z-coordinate by an integer multiple of 2pi. That would also indicate the presence of some kind of conserved quantity, though perhaps not as obvious or intuitive. In general we say that any such invariance of the energy (really the Lagrangian) implies a conservation law.

As an example, the Lagrangian for a free particle is just its kinetic energy, which depends only on its velocity (mv^2/2), not on its position. We can translate the particle in space, or rotate it about some axis without in any way changing the energy. By Noether's theorem this is equivalent to saying that linear and angular momentum are conserved.

Learn Lagrangian mechanics and it will make sense. That said, I'm sure it gets more complicated on a higher level, which I haven't yet been able to understand myself.
 
Leonard Susskind derives using only the calculus of variations it in his video course on Classical Physics. I don't remember which lecture, but all 10 lectures are enjoyable and rewarding.

 
Fantastic - thanks for the thorough answer and the link!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
5K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K