Conserved Noether charge and gravity

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the transformation of the Lagrangian for a non-relativistic particle in a gravitational field and the implications for Noether charge conservation. The participant questions why the Noether charge, defined as Q = p_i ξ^i - m ẋ_i ξ^i, is not conserved when using the equations of motion. They note that the variation of the Lagrangian includes an unwanted term related to the potential φ, complicating the conservation of the Noether charge. The participant hints at having found a potential resolution but seeks further clarification on the treatment of this problem. The conversation highlights the complexities of Noether's theorem in the context of gravitational fields and non-dynamical equations.
haushofer
Science Advisor
Insights Author
Messages
3,045
Reaction score
1,579
If one considers the Lagrangian of a non-relativistic particle in a gravitational field,

<br /> L = \frac{m}{2}(\delta_{ij}\dot{x}^i \dot{x}^j + 2 \phi(x^k) )<br />

it transforms under

<br /> \delta x^i = \xi^i (t), \ \ \ \ \delta \phi = \ddot{\xi}^i x_i<br />

as a total derivative:

<br /> \delta L = \frac{d}{dt}(m \dot{\xi}^i x_i)<br />

My question is: why is the corresponding Noether charge

<br /> Q = p_i \xi^i - m \dot{\xi}^i x_i<br />

not conserved if one uses the equations of motion? I'm staring at the problem now for quite some time, missing something obvious, but I can't see it :)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It's confusing, because the EOM for phi is the Poisson equation, which is not dynamical; it could be obtained by adding

<br /> \lambda[\partial_i \partial^i \phi - 4 \pi G \rho]<br />

to the Lagrangian, where lambda is a Lagrange multiplier. But this doesn't change the situation.
 
So I more or less have the answer to my question; the variation \delta L also contains a

<br /> \frac{\partial L}{\partial \phi}\delta \phi = m \ddot{\xi}^i x_i<br />

term, which I don't want. So how to get the corresponding Noether charges?
 
Does somebody know where this problem is treated?
 
I think I have the answer, so nevermind.
 
Thread 'Motional EMF in Faraday disc, co-rotating magnet axial mean flux'
So here is the motional EMF formula. Now I understand the standard Faraday paradox that an axis symmetric field source (like a speaker motor ring magnet) has a magnetic field that is frame invariant under rotation around axis of symmetry. The field is static whether you rotate the magnet or not. So far so good. What puzzles me is this , there is a term average magnetic flux or "azimuthal mean" , this term describes the average magnetic field through the area swept by the rotating Faraday...
Back
Top