Can Lagrange function solve general differential equations?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the applicability of the Lagrange function in solving general differential equations. Participants explore whether all differential equations can be derived from a variational principle and how to formulate an appropriate Lagrange function for various scenarios.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question whether every differential equation can be derived from a variational principle, noting that it has not been proven impossible for certain cases.
  • Others argue that there is no reason to expect a variational basis for every differential equation, citing examples like population dynamics that do not have a comparable variational principle.
  • A participant mentions the use of calculus of variations for the Schrödinger equation, highlighting the conditions under which a Lagrange function can be formulated and the practical limitations of this approach.
  • Another viewpoint suggests that the principle of extremal action could potentially apply to any physical problem, referencing Noether's Theorem and its implications for conservation laws derived from symmetries in the Lagrangian.
  • One participant proposes a method of interpreting solutions of differential equations as trajectories of particles, suggesting a transformation to a coordinate system where a free particle's Lagrangian can be applied.
  • A later reply notes complications arising from nonholonomic coordinates in the proposed transformation approach.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the universality of the variational approach to differential equations, with no consensus reached on whether all differential equations can be derived from a Lagrangian framework.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the lack of clarity on the existence of a corresponding variational problem for every differential equation and the complexities introduced by nonholonomic coordinates in transformations.

enricfemi
Messages
195
Reaction score
0
for Newton's equation, we have Lagrange function which can give the solution while its variation equates 0.

however, what about the situation for a general differential equation.
is this method can deal with such general situation? and how can we find out the corresponding "Lagrange function".

thanks for any reply and links.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It is not known if every diff.eq can be derived in a variational manner, but I am not aware of that it has been proven to be impossible in certain cases.
 
There is no reason to expect a variational basis for every differential equation. The equations of motion, equivalent to Newton's equations, come about out of Hamilton's Principle which is a statement of the laws of physics. There is no known comparable statement governing, for example, population dynamics, but differential equations can be written for population dynamics.

There is no reason to expect the generalization to extend nearly so far as you propose.
 
Differential equations can describe such a vast array of phenomena. If this were true, it would be a very very powerful statement.
 
I'm really out of my depth on most math questions, so I try to avoid them. But I do know something about using calculus of variations for the Schrödinger equation via the Ritz variational method, so I'll say what I know coming from that standpoint:

Obviously the criteria for being able to use the method depends on having an inequality such that some parameter is minimized for the solution you're looking for, and second, that you can formulate a Lagrange function for it. And third, which is probably the big caveat, the practicality of doing so: That the corresponding variational problem is, in fact, simpler than solving the problem by other methods. (As for proving the existence of a corresponding variational problem for any D.E., I have no idea. My hunch is: No, probably not.)

In the case of the S.E. calculating ground-state energies is naturally an important subset of problems, minimizing <E> while varying Ψ. And the most-used quantum chemical methods for ground states all do this. But if you want excited states, then there's no easy Lagrangian or parameter unless you make approximations, which get worse with increasingly excited states.

So in practice, the variational method is almost always used for ground state energies and almost never used for excited states. Which goes to show how the usefulness of the method can vary greatly for same problem, with different conditions.
 
it would be very disappointing that calculus of variations turn into a special method, since I would rather considered it as a kind of philosophy.
 
I always thought that the principle of extremal action could be used to cast any physical problem into D.E. form.

What made me think that was that Noether's Theorem was such a fundamental result. Briefly it states that the reason there are conservations of energy, momentum, angular momentum are due to symmetries in the Lagrangian.

Since with any physical problem we are dealing with energy, I thought that the Lagrangian could be found for the problem at hand. Whether we can solve it or not is another matter entirely.

Does anyone know of a counter example, a physical DE that cannot be derived using Lagrangians?
 
Why not reason as follows:

The differential equation has some solutions. We interpret these solutions as possible trajectories of a particle in an abstract space. I then take the integral curves to define a nonlinear coordinate transformation, so that in the new coordinates the world lines of the particle is that of a "free particle".

Then the Lagrangian of a free particle will correctly describe the motion in the new coordianate system. If you then transform the Lagrangian back to the old coordinates, you get a Lagrangian that will yield the differential equations.
 
Eidos, it gets pretty messy when the coordinates are nonholonomic.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K