Are All Canonical Transformations Governed by the Generating Function Relation?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter A_B
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Transformations
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the nature of canonical transformations in Hamiltonian mechanics, specifically whether all such transformations are governed by a specific generating function relation as described in Goldstein's text. Participants explore the implications of this relation and question the necessity of certain conditions for its validity.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions whether there are canonical transformations that do not conform to the relation λ(pq' - H) = PQ' - K + dF/dt and their significance.
  • Another participant presents a derived relation and queries the necessity of the conditions that lead to p = ∂F/∂q and P = -∂F/∂Q for the relation to hold.
  • A later reply clarifies that the definition of canonical transformation typically assumes λ=1, referring to other values of λ as "extended canonical transformations," and asserts that this relation is very general to maintain the stationary action principle.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the generality and necessity of the conditions related to the generating function relation, indicating that multiple competing perspectives remain unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Some assumptions about the independence of coordinates and the implications of the variational principle are not fully explored, leaving open questions about the completeness of the arguments presented.

A_B
Messages
87
Reaction score
1
Hi,

Im working through some chapters of Goldstein and I'm up to canonical transformations now. On page 370 it says that the variational principle for the hamiltonians K and H are both satisfied if H and K are connected by a relation of the form

λ(pq' - H) = PQ' - K + dF/dt

And I can see this. My question is, are there canonical transformations that do not fit this relation? And if so are they impportant? Is this relation a very general one, or does it simply turn out to give good tranformations in many problems?

A_B
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Also if we obtain a relation

pq' - H = PQ' - K + ∂F/∂t + (∂F/∂q)q' + (∂F/∂Q)Q'

Goldstein says (p 372 eq 9.13)

"Since the old and the new coordinates, q and Q, ere separately independent, the above equation can hold identically only if the coefficients of q' and Q' each vanish:"

leading to

p = ∂F/∂q,

P = -∂F/∂Q

I don't see why this is necessary for the relation to hold.
 
A_B said:
Hi,

Im working through some chapters of Goldstein and I'm up to canonical transformations now. On page 370 it says that the variational principle for the hamiltonians K and H are both satisfied if H and K are connected by a relation of the form

λ(pq' - H) = PQ' - K + dF/dt

And I can see this. My question is, are there canonical transformations that do not fit this relation? And if so are they impportant? Is this relation a very general one, or does it simply turn out to give good tranformations in many problems?

A_B

Actually the definition of canonical transformation usually stipulates that λ=1 in the above requirement. For any other λ, we call these "extended canonical transformations".

This is very general because otherwise the action would not remain stationary for the actual motion. This is because the freedom in the Lagrangian is only in the total time derivative term.
 
can someone answer my question in the second post?

thanks!
A_B
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
26
Views
9K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K