1. Limited time only! Sign up for a free 30min personal tutor trial with Chegg Tutors
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

I Derivation of Euler-Lagrange equation with change of coordinates

  1. Jul 28, 2016 #1
    Why isn't ##\frac{\partial L}{\partial t}\frac{\partial t}{\partial \dot{q_m}}## included in (5.41), given that ##L## could depend on ##t## explicitly?

    image.png
     
    Last edited: Jul 28, 2016
  2. jcsd
  3. Jul 28, 2016 #2

    Orodruin

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member

    ##t## does not depend on the coordinates.
     
  4. Jul 28, 2016 #3

    vanhees71

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    2016 Award

    And also ##t## is not varied in Hamilton's principle of least action.
     
  5. Jul 28, 2016 #4
    Suppose ##(\frac{\partial x}{\partial t})_{y,z}\neq0##. Doesn't that imply ##(\frac{\partial t}{\partial x})_{y,z}=((\frac{\partial x}{\partial t})_{y,z})^{-1}\neq0##?
     
  6. Jul 28, 2016 #5

    ShayanJ

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    "##t## does not depend on the coordinates" ## \Leftrightarrow (\frac{\partial x}{\partial t})_{y,z}=0##!
     
  7. Jul 28, 2016 #6
    Suppose a particle travels at constant velocity, i.e., ##x=vt##. Then ##\frac{\partial x}{\partial t}=v\neq0##. So does ##t## depends on ##x##? I'm confused.
     
  8. Jul 28, 2016 #7

    Orodruin

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member

    You are considering a transformation taking x to q and t to t. Regardless of what transformation you have done, t only depends on t.
     
  9. Jul 28, 2016 #8

    vanhees71

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    2016 Award

    Well, of course you can have transformations from one set of generalized coordinates to another that depends explicitly on time. That's, e.g., useful if you want to describe the motion in non-inertial frames starting from the physics in an inertial frame. Still this has nothing to do with the variation, because by definition in Hamilton's principle time is not varied.

    It turns out immidiately that the Euler-Lagrange equations are forminvariant under arbitrary diffeomorphisms
    $$q^{\prime k}=Q^k(q,t).$$
     
  10. Jul 28, 2016 #9
    Indeed, the new coordinates may depend explicitly on time by (5.38) below.

    In that case, should ##\frac{\partial L}{\partial t}\frac{\partial t}{\partial\dot{q_m}}## be included in (5.41)?

    Screen Shot 2016-07-28 at 10.38.56 pm.png
     
  11. Jul 28, 2016 #10

    Orodruin

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member

    No, t still does not depend on the coordinates.
     
  12. Jul 28, 2016 #11

    vanhees71

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    2016 Award

    I don't know what Eq. (5.41) is, but you should get the form-invariant Euler-Lagrange equations also in the new coordinates, i.e., you have given
    $$L'(q,\dot{q},t)=L[x(q,t);\dot{x}(q,t),t].$$
    where
    $$\dot{x}^i=\dot{q}^k \frac{\partial x^i}{\partial q^k}+\partial_t x^i.$$
    In this equation the ##\partial_t x^i## means the derivative of the explicit time dependence of ##x^i(q,t)##.

    Then the equations of motion in the new coordinates read
    $$\frac{\partial L'}{\partial q^k}-\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d} t} \frac{\partial L'}{\partial \dot{q}^k}=0.$$
     
  13. Jul 28, 2016 #12
    Does that mean ##\frac{\partial t}{\partial\dot{q_m}}=0## and ##\frac{\partial t}{\partial q_m}=0##? Why?

    Clearly, ##\frac{\partial q_m}{\partial t}\neq0##.
     
  14. Jul 28, 2016 #13
    What you wrote is claim 5.2, where (5.41) is found. But the proof seems to omit the term ##\frac{\partial L}{\partial t}\frac{\partial t}{\partial\dot{q_m}}## in (5.41).

    Screen Shot 2016-07-28 at 11.00.16 pm.png
     
  15. Jul 28, 2016 #14

    Orodruin

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member

    In general, for partial derivatives, ##\partial x^i/\partial y^j## is not equal to the reciprocal of ##\partial y^j/\partial x^i##. You need to consider what these functions actually are functions of and what variable change you are considering. In this case you are keeping t as an independent variable and its parial derivative wrt anything else is zero.
     
  16. Jul 28, 2016 #15

    vanhees71

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    2016 Award

    There is no such term! It doesn't even make any sense, or how do you define it?
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?
Draft saved Draft deleted



Similar Discussions: Derivation of Euler-Lagrange equation with change of coordinates
Loading...