Deriving Equation of Motion for Quintessence Scalar Field?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around deriving the equation of motion for a quintessence scalar field, specifically aiming to reach the form φ'' + 3Hφ' + dV/dφ = 0. Participants explore the application of the Euler-Lagrange equation with a generic potential V(φ) and address issues related to the derivation process and unit consistency.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses difficulty in deriving the correct equation of motion and presents their current result, which includes terms that do not match the expected form.
  • Another participant points out that the units of the terms in the equation must match, suggesting that each term should have units of 1/time².
  • There are discussions about identifying errors in the derivation, particularly concerning the treatment of partial derivatives and the total derivative with respect to time.
  • Some participants indicate that mistakes in the derivation process are present but do not provide explicit solutions, instead encouraging others to find the errors themselves.
  • There is a question about the units of φ and a, with a participant suggesting that if they are unitless, then φ'' would also be unitless, which raises further discussion about unit consistency.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that there are mistakes in the derivation and that unit consistency is crucial. However, there is no consensus on the specific errors or how to resolve them, as multiple viewpoints and uncertainties remain regarding the derivation process.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include unresolved mathematical steps in the derivation and the dependence on the definitions of the variables involved. The discussion does not clarify the exact nature of the potential V(φ) or the specific form of the Lagrangian used.

HashKetchum
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
Hello, I am having trouble deriving the equation of motion for the quintessence field.
The equation of motion which I am meant to get at the end point is: (with ' denoting derivative w.r.t time)

φ'' + 3Hφ' + dV/dφ = 0

Using the inflaton lagrangian:

lagra101.gif
(although with a generic potential V(φ) as opposed to m2φ^2.

with the euler-lagrange equation. However the best I have managed to achieve through this is:

φ'' + dV/dφ + (1/2)(φ')^2 + (H^3)φ'= 0

I effectively have the potential term and the φ'' term correct but the φ' terms are clearly wrong. I am unsure how I would ever get 3H as the prefix for the φ' term as I always get (a'/a)^3 which = H^3.

There is a lot of information online but it all seems to state that you just use the lagrangian with the euler-lagrange equations and get the equation of motion out but nothing has the full derivation!

Thank you for any help!
 
Space news on Phys.org
HashKetchum said:
φ'' + dV/dφ + (1/2)(φ')^2 + (H^3)φ'= 0

I effectively have the potential term and the φ'' term correct but the φ' terms are clearly wrong. I am unsure how I would ever get 3H as the prefix for the φ' term as I always get (a'/a)^3 which = H^3.
I am unsure what precisely went wrong, but your answer definitely isn't right, as the units don't match (each term should have units of 1/time^2).

You might be able to find the error by looking at the units of the terms at each step, and see where the extra powers of time came in.
 
This is my working, if anyone could point out where I've gone wrong id be really grateful!
 

Attachments

  • 20160419_203815.jpg
    20160419_203815.jpg
    19.1 KB · Views: 796
Chalnoth said:
I am unsure what precisely went wrong, but your answer definitely isn't right, as the units don't match (each term should have units of 1/time^2).

You might be able to find the error by looking at the units of the terms at each step, and see where the extra powers of time came in.
Do you mean the units of the phi'', the phi' and the dv/dphi terms should all be 1/time^2?
 
HashKetchum said:
Do you mean the units of the phi'', the phi' and the dv/dphi terms should all be 1/time^2?
Yes. Otherwise it would be impossible to add the terms together.
 
HashKetchum said:
This is my working, if anyone could point out where I've gone wrong id be really grateful!
Yeah, there are a few mistakes here. Without just laying out the answer, your partial derivatives are off.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: HashKetchum
Chalnoth said:
Yeah, there are a few mistakes here. Without just laying out the answer, your partial derivatives are off.

Thanks, i spotted the wrong partial derivative at the start but still get this? I wish H was a log :(
 

Attachments

  • 20160420_015605.jpg
    20160420_015605.jpg
    15.7 KB · Views: 532
HashKetchum said:
Thanks, i spotted the wrong partial derivative at the start but still get this? I wish H was a log :(
The total derivative with respect to time (your third derivative there) isn't right.
 
Chalnoth said:
Yeah, there are a few mistakes here. Without just laying out the answer, your partial derivatives are off.
Thank you! Managed to crack it :) slightly stuck for the units all being 1/time^2 though, do φ and a just have units of time? If so then surely φ'' is unitless?
 
  • #10
HashKetchum said:
Thank you! Managed to crack it :) slightly stuck for the units all being 1/time^2 though, do φ and a just have units of time? If so then surely φ'' is unitless?
Both \phi and a are unitless.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K