Derivatives of the Lagrangian in curved space

rocawear4321
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Follow along at http://star-www.st-and.ac.uk/~hz4/gr/GRlec4+5+6.pdf and go to PDF page 9 or page 44 of the "slides." I'm trying to see how to go from the first to the third line. If we write the free particle Lagrangian and use q^i-dot and q^j-dot as the velocities and metric g_ij, how is it we cancel out the factor of 1/2 when when take the q^l-dot derivative? It looks like more than just a simple change of variables from j to l. If instead we took dL/dq^j-dot I'd expect to get 0.5m x g_ij x q^i-dot . I don't think I can assume I'm only taking derivatives when i=j, so how does this work?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
## \frac{\partial}{\partial \dot{q}^l}(\frac 1 2 g_{ij} \dot{q}^i \dot{q}^j)=[\frac 1 2 g_{ij}(\frac{\partial \dot{q}^i}{\partial \dot{q}^l} \dot{q}^j+\dot{q}^i \frac{\partial \dot{q}^j}{\partial \dot{q}^l})]=[\frac 1 2 g_{ij}(\delta^i_l \dot{q}^j+\dot{q}^i \delta^j_l)] =[\frac 1 2(g_{lj} \dot{q}^j+g_{il}\dot{q}^i)]=[\frac 1 2(g_{il} \dot{q}^i+g_{il}\dot{q}^i)]=g_{il}\dot{q}^i##
 
Last edited:
Shyan said:
## \frac{\partial}{\partial \dot{q}^l}(\frac 1 2 g_{ij} \dot{q}^i \dot{q}^j)=[\frac 1 2 g_{ij}(\frac{\partial \dot{q}^i}{\partial \dot{q}^l} \dot{q}^j+\dot{q}^i \frac{\partial \dot{q}^j}{\partial \dot{q}^l})]=[\frac 1 2 g_{ij}(\delta^i_l \dot{q}^j+\dot{q}^i \delta^j_l)] =[\frac 1 2(g_{lj} \dot{q}^j+g_{il}\dot{q}^i)]=[\frac 1 2(g_{il} \dot{q}^i+g_{il}\dot{q}^i)]=g_{il}\dot{q}^i##
Thank you a ton! That was clear and helpful.
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top