Deriving Commutation of Variation & Derivative Operators in EL Equation

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on justifying the equality δ(dq/dt) = d(δq)/dt in the context of the principle of least action. It explains that if two functions q(t) and q'(t) are related by q'(t) = q(t) + δq(t), then the derivative relationship follows logically. The participant emphasizes that δ is not viewed as an operator but rather as a small function of time. Additionally, it is noted that time and the endpoints of the action integral remain fixed in Hamilton's principle. This clarification aids in understanding the derivations related to the principle of least action.
hideelo
Messages
88
Reaction score
15
I am trying to do go over the derivations for the principle of least action, and there seems to be an implicit assumption that I can't seem to justify. For the simple case of particles it is the following equality

δ(dq/dt) = d(δq)/dt

Where q is some coordinate, and δf is the first variation in f. In general, this can be seen more broadly, given a scalar field ψ

δ(∂ψ/∂x) = ∂(δψ)/∂x

Where x is any independant variable (i.e. x,y,z,t or any other coordinate system)

How are these equalities justified?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
hideelo said:
I am trying to do go over the derivations for the principle of least action, and there seems to be an implicit assumption that I can't seem to justify. For the simple case of particles it is the following equality

δ(dq/dt) = d(δq)/dt

Where q is some coordinate, and δf is the first variation in f. In general, this can be seen more broadly, given a scalar field ψ

δ(∂ψ/∂x) = ∂(δψ)/∂x

Where x is any independant variable (i.e. x,y,z,t or any other coordinate system)

How are these equalities justified?

Well, if you have two functions q(t) and q'(t) that are related by:

q'(t) = q(t) + \delta q(t)

Then clearly:

\dfrac{d q'}{dt} = \dfrac{dq}{dt} + \dfrac{d \delta q}{dt}

So if \delta \dfrac{dq}{dt} is defined to be \dfrac{dq'}{dt} - \dfrac{dq}{dt}, then the conclusion follows.

I suppose there are different ways to think about it, but I don't think of \delta as being an operator. \delta q is just a function of t, that's assumed to be small.
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71 and hideelo
Another important point is that time (and also the endpoints of the action integral) are not varied in Hamilton's principle.
 
Thread 'Gauss' law seems to imply instantaneous electric field propagation'
Imagine a charged sphere at the origin connected through an open switch to a vertical grounded wire. We wish to find an expression for the horizontal component of the electric field at a distance ##\mathbf{r}## from the sphere as it discharges. By using the Lorenz gauge condition: $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A} + \frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=0\tag{1}$$ we find the following retarded solutions to the Maxwell equations If we assume that...
Maxwell’s equations imply the following wave equation for the electric field $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}}{\partial t^2} = \frac{1}{\varepsilon_0}\nabla\rho+\mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf J}{\partial t}.\tag{1}$$ I wonder if eqn.##(1)## can be split into the following transverse part $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}_T-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}_T}{\partial t^2} = \mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf{J}_T}{\partial t}\tag{2}$$ and longitudinal part...
Thread 'Recovering Hamilton's Equations from Poisson brackets'
The issue : Let me start by copying and pasting the relevant passage from the text, thanks to modern day methods of computing. The trouble is, in equation (4.79), it completely ignores the partial derivative of ##q_i## with respect to time, i.e. it puts ##\partial q_i/\partial t=0##. But ##q_i## is a dynamical variable of ##t##, or ##q_i(t)##. In the derivation of Hamilton's equations from the Hamiltonian, viz. ##H = p_i \dot q_i-L##, nowhere did we assume that ##\partial q_i/\partial...

Similar threads

Back
Top