Commuting derivative/Integral (not FTC or Leibniz)

  • Thread starter Thread starter nickthequick
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Leibniz
nickthequick
Messages
39
Reaction score
0
Hi,

I'm concerned with finding the Euler-Lagrange equations for slowly modulated surface gravity waves and, as is custom in this type of physical problem, I would like to consider the averaged Lagrangian defined as

\mathcal{L}=\frac{1}{2\pi}\int_0^{2\pi}Ld\theta

where \theta is defined as \theta_x=k and \theta_t=-\omega where k and $\omega$ represent wave number and frequency respectively, which can also be functions of space and time. My Lagrangian, which comes from the physics of the problem, is L=L(\theta;x,t) and the Euler-Lagrange equation then becomes

\frac{\partial L}{\partial \theta}-\frac{\partial }{\partial x }\frac{\partial L}{\partial \theta_x}-\frac{\partial }{\partial t}\frac{\partial L}{\partial \theta_t}=0

If I integrate the above equation over \theta from 0 to 2\pi and normalize, I know the first term goes to 0 because L is periodic (which again comes from the physics). So I'm trying to see if I can write the rest of equation in terms of the averaged Lagrangian, \mathcal{L}. So my question is this, how does the term

\frac{1}{2\pi}\int_0^{2\pi}\frac{\partial }{\partial x }\frac{\partial L}{\partial \theta_x} \ d\theta

relate to

\frac{\partial }{\partial x }\frac{\partial }{\partial \theta_x} \mathcal{L}

Thanks!
Nick
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I don't see any simple relation between the two.Although L is periodic, its second order derivatives may not be so.
 
What if we make the additional assumption that L and all of its derivatives are periodic?
 
Back
Top