Can the Total Time Derivative Function in the Lagrangian Depend on Velocities?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter kent davidge
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Lagrangian Term
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the conditions under which the total time derivative of a function can be added to the Lagrangian in classical mechanics. Participants explore whether this function can depend on velocities, coordinates, or other variables, and the implications of such dependencies on the invariance of the Lagrangian and the resulting equations of motion.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions if the function added to the Lagrangian can depend on coordinates, velocities, and a parameter, suggesting that the variation of the integral might allow for such dependencies.
  • Another participant asserts that the Lagrangian is invariant under the addition of a total time derivative, emphasizing that the equations of motion remain unchanged regardless of the function's form.
  • A different viewpoint argues that the function cannot depend on velocities, stating that for the modified Lagrangian to reproduce the same Euler-Lagrange equations, the added function must satisfy certain conditions independent of the specific time dependence of the coordinates.
  • One participant contends that a total time derivative can include dependencies on velocities, but this leads to complications in the Euler-Lagrange equations if higher derivatives are involved.
  • Another participant clarifies that adding a total time derivative does not affect the action apart from boundary terms, reinforcing that the internal variations yield the same Euler-Lagrange equations.
  • There is a discussion about the implications of allowing second derivatives in the Lagrangian, with some arguing that it complicates the situation and others maintaining that the mathematical framework supports the addition of such terms without affecting the equations of motion.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on whether the function added to the Lagrangian can depend on velocities or higher derivatives. There is no consensus on this issue, and the discussion remains unresolved regarding the implications of these dependencies on the invariance of the Lagrangian and the resulting equations of motion.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the importance of the specific form of the function added to the Lagrangian and its implications for the Euler-Lagrange equations. There are unresolved questions about the role of higher derivatives and the conditions under which the invariance holds.

kent davidge
Messages
931
Reaction score
56
It's known that the Lagragian is invariant when one adds to it a total time derivative of a function. I was thinking about the possible forms of this function. Could it be a function of ##x,\dot x, \lambda##? Or it should be a function of ##x## only?

Here ##x: \ \{x^\mu (\lambda) \}## are the coordinates, ##\dot x: \ \{ dx^\mu/d\lambda \}## the corresponding "velocities" and ##\lambda## the parameter.

I think my question is due to my lack of knowledge on variation, because:
if one considers ##\delta \int (df / d\lambda) d\lambda = \delta (f|_{\lambda_f} - f|_{\lambda_i})## then it seems that ##f## can be a function of the three quantities I mentioned above, because the variation will be zero anyways. But if the correct way is to put the ##\delta## symbol inside the integral first, then the variation would vanish only if ##f = f(x)##.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
kent davidge said:
It's known that the Lagragian is invariant when one adds to it a total time derivative of a function.
The Lagrangian is not invariant. The equations of motion are.

It does not matter what the function is a function of because it will be directly integrable and only give a boundary contribution that does not affect the variations inside your time interval.
 
  • Love
Likes   Reactions: kent davidge
Orodruin said:
It does not matter what the function is a function of
That is not correct. It cannot depend on the velocities. Given L_{1}(x_{a} , \dot{x}_{a} , t), then in order for L_{2}(x_{a} , \dot{x}_{a} , t) = L_{1}(x_{a} , \dot{x}_{a} , t) + F (x_{a} , \dot{x}_{a} ,t) to reproduce the same E-L equations, the function F must satisfies E-L equations identically (independent of the specific time dependence of x_{a}, i.e., independent of the solutions x_{a}(t)). Indeed, we prove the following: A function of x_{a}(t), \ \dot{x}_{a}(t) and t satisfies E-L equations identically (i.e., off-shell) if, and only if, it is the total time derivative dG/dt of some continuous function G(x_{a}(t) , t ).
Proof
The “if” part: Let F = \frac{d}{dt} G(x , t) = \frac{\partial G}{\partial x_{c}} \dot{x}_{c} + \frac{\partial G}{\partial t} . (repeated indices are summed over). Now \frac{\partial F}{\partial \dot{x}_{a}} = \frac{\partial G}{\partial x_{a}}, \ \ \frac{d}{dt} \left( \frac{\partial F}{\partial \dot{x}_{a}} \right) = \frac{\partial^{2}G}{\partial x_{c}\partial x_{a}} \dot{x}_{c} + \frac{\partial^{2}G}{\partial t \partial x_{a}} , and \frac{\partial F}{\partial x_{a}} = \frac{\partial^{2}G}{\partial x_{a}\partial x_{c}} \dot{x}_{c} + \frac{\partial^{2}G}{\partial x_{a} \partial t}. Thus, from the continuity of G( x, t), we see that F satisfies E-L’s equations \frac{d}{dt} \left( \frac{\partial F}{\partial \dot{x}_{a}} \right) = \frac{\partial F}{\partial x_{a}}, identically (i.e., independent of the functional form of G(x ,t) and of the specific time dependence of x_{a}).
The “only if” part: Let F be some function of x_{a}, \dot{x}_{a} and t, which satisfies the E-L’s equations identically. These can be rewritten as \frac{\partial^{2}F}{\partial \dot{x}_{c}\partial \dot{x}_{a}} \ddot{x}_{c} + \frac{\partial^{2}F}{\partial x_{c}\partial \dot{x}_{a}}\dot{x}_{c} + \frac{\partial^{2}F}{\partial t \partial \dot{x}_{a}} = \frac{\partial F}{\partial x_{a}} . The \ddot{x}’s appear only in the first term on the left. Since we want the equations to be satisfied independent of the x’s, the coefficients of each of the \ddot{x}’s must be zero \frac{\partial^{2}F}{\partial \dot{x}_{a}\partial \dot{x}_{c}} = 0 . This means that F is a linear function of the velocities \dot{x}’s. We may write F(x , \dot{x} , t) = f_{c}(x , t) \dot{x}_{c} + g(x , t), for some functions f_{a}(x,t) and g(x,t) to be determined. From this we get \frac{d}{dt}\left( \frac{\partial F}{\partial \dot{x}_{a}} \right) = \frac{\partial f_{a}}{\partial x_{c}} \dot{x}_{c} + \frac{\partial f_{a}}{\partial t} , and \frac{\partial F}{\partial x_{a}} = \frac{\partial f_{c}}{\partial x_{a}} \dot{x}_{c} + \frac{\partial g}{\partial x_{a}} . Thus, the E-L equations for F becomes \left( \frac{\partial f_{a}}{\partial x_{c}} - \frac{\partial f_{c}}{\partial x_{a}} \right) \dot{x}_{c} + \frac{\partial f_{a}}{\partial t} = \frac{\partial g}{\partial x_{a}} . \ \ \ (1) Again, we want these equations to be satisfied independent of the x’s. Thus the coefficients of each of the \dot{x}’s must vanish: \frac{\partial f_{a}}{\partial x_{c}} = \frac{\partial f_{c}}{\partial x_{a}}. Thus, there exists some continuous function G(x,t) such that f_{a}(x,t) = \frac{\partial}{\partial x_{a}}G(x,t) . Substituting this in (1), we find \frac{\partial^{2}G}{\partial t \partial x_{a}} = \frac{\partial g}{\partial x_{a}}, \ \ \Rightarrow \ \ g = \frac{\partial G}{\partial t} . Thus, in order to satisfy E-L’s equation off shell, a function F(x , \dot{x} , t) must have the form F = \frac{\partial G}{\partial x_{c}} \dot{x}_{c} + \frac{\partial G}{\partial t} = \frac{d}{dt} G(x , t).
 
samalkhaiat said:
That is not correct.
Yes, it most certainly is. A total time derivative of a function that depends on velocities still satisfies the Euler-Lagrange equations, but it does not depend only on ##x## and ##\dot x##. It also depends on ##\ddot x##, which breaks your assumption that the function added to the Lagrangian can only depend on ##x## and ##\dot x##.

Sure, you can go ahead and have a discussion about including second derivatives in the Lagrangian, but mathematically it is absolutely clear that adding any total time derivative does not affect the equations of motion (see below), because such a term satisfies the EL equations off shell by design.

samalkhaiat said:
These can be rewritten as
No they generally cannot, not if ##F## depends on ##\ddot x## (or any higher order derivatives), which it will if the function you are taking the time derivative of depends on velocities. There is an additional term in the EL equations for integrands that depend on the second derivatives. In general in variational calculus where the integrand ##\mathcal L## depends on derivatives up to ##x^{(n)}##, you have
$$
\sum_{k = 0}^n (-1)^k \frac{d^k}{dt^k}\frac{\partial \mathcal L}{\partial x^{(k)}} = 0.
$$
(This does appear, e.g., (for the spatial derivatives) in deriving the equations of motion for a beam with some stiffness (where the potential energy per unit length is proportional to the curvature of the beam, which can be expressed using the second spatial derivatives).)

To see that a total derivative does not affect the action apart from a boundary term is trivial. Let ##\mathcal L_2 = \mathcal L_1 + dG/dt## with ##G## being an arbitrary function, containing as many time derivatives as you want of ##x##. You then have
$$
S_2 = \int_{t_1}^{t_2} \mathcal L_2 dt = \int_{t_1}^{t_2} (\mathcal L_1 + dG/dt) dt.
$$
The second term can be integrated directly to yield
$$
S_2 = S_1 + [G|_{t_2} - G|_{t_1}].
$$
Taking the variation of this will not introduce terms depending on anything other than ##t_1## and ##t_2## in the boundary terms so if you look at only internal variations, you immediately end up with the same Euler-Lagrange equations.

Note that, if you assume that ##G## is a function of ##x## and ##\dot x##, then ##dG/dt## will generally be a function of ##x##, ##\dot x##, and ##\ddot x##. Then you can go on and argue about whether you should allow second derivatives in the Lagrangian, but the math is clear. You can add any function on the form ##dG/dt## without affecting the Euler-Lagrange equations because any function of the form ##dG/dt## satisfies the Euler-Lagrange equations off shell.

samalkhaiat said:
Thus, in order to satisfy E-L’s equation off shell, a function F(x , \dot{x} , t) must have the form F = \frac{\partial G}{\partial x_{c}} \dot{x}_{c} + \frac{\partial G}{\partial t} = \frac{d}{dt} G(x , t).
This is correct for a function ##F## that is only a function of ##x##, ##\dot x##, and ##t##. It is not true for an arbitrary function ##F##. For example, it certainly is not true if you allow ##F## to depend on ##\ddot x##, which it will if it is the total derivative of a function that depends on ##\dot x##. Generally, for a ##G## that depends on derivatives up to ##x^{(n-1)}##, you would have
$$
F = \frac{\partial G}{\partial t} + \sum_{k=0}^{n-1} \frac{\partial G}{\partial x^{(k)}} x^{(k+1)}
= \frac{dG}{dt}.
$$
 
Last edited:
Orodruin said:
Yes, it most certainly is.
Then you should be able to answer this: I give you L_{1} = \frac{1}{2}\dot{x}^{2}, find for me a function G(x,\dot{x},t) such that L_{2} \equiv L_{1} + dG/dt is another equivalent Lagrangian.

Sure, you can go ahead and have a discussion about including second derivatives in the Lagrangian
Yes, it is obviously clear that my post was about Lagrangians that are at most quadratic in the velocities, i.e., those which describe wide range of mechanical systems.
 
samalkhaiat said:
Yes, it is obviously clear that my post was about Lagrangians that are at most quadratic in the velocities, i.e., those which describe wide range of mechanical systems
Sorry, but this is not the point. The point is not depending on accelerations. This was your assumption and it is obvious that if you place this restriction you cannot have G depend on velocities. However, this does not change the fact that you get the same equations of motion if you let G depend on velocities. I suggest you try it.

As an example, you can always add ##t_0 d\mathcal L/dt## to your Lagrangian and recover the same equations of motion. In your proposed case this would be ##t_0 \dot x \ddot x##. This will give you the same equations of motion unless you make arithmetic errors. This leads to:
\begin{align*}
\delta S &= \int \delta L dt = \int \left(\frac{1}{2}(\dot x + \delta \dot x)^2 + t_0 (\dot x + \delta \dot x)(\ddot x + \delta \ddot x) - \frac{\dot x^2}{2} - t_0 \dot x \ddot x\right)dt \\
&\simeq \int (\dot x\, \delta \dot x + t_0 \dot x \, \delta\ddot x + t_0 \ddot x \, \delta\dot x) dt
\simeq \int (- \ddot x + t_0 \dddot x - t_0 \dddot x)\delta x\, dt = - \int \ddot x \, \delta x\, dt,
\end{align*}
which is the same variation as that of ##\mathcal L = \dot x^2/2## up to boundary terms and have the same EL equations (i.e., ##\ddot x = 0##).
 
Last edited:
Orodruin said:
Sorry, but this is not the point. The point is not depending on accelerations. This was your assumption and it is obvious that if you place this restriction you cannot have G depend on velocities.
Yes, sorry, I meant to say “at most quadratic in velocities and not depending on accelerations”.
However, this does not change the fact that you get the same equations of motion if you let G depend on velocities.
Of course, by going from the variation problem for L_{1}(x, \dot{x}) with \frac{\partial L_{1}}{\partial x} = \frac{d}{dt} \frac{\partial L_{1}}{\partial \dot{x}}, to another variation problem for L_{2}(x, \dot{x}, \ddot{x}, \cdots ) with \frac{\partial L_{2}}{\partial x} = \frac{d}{dt} \frac{\partial L_{2}}{\partial \dot{x}} - \frac{d^{2}}{dt^{2}} \frac{\partial L_{2}}{\partial \ddot{x}} + \cdots , then G = G(x, \dot{x} , \cdots )
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K