Energy of Scalar Field: Evaluating Rubakov's Expression

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on a mathematical detail regarding Rubakov's expression for energy in scalar field theory. The expression for energy involves a derivative of the Lagrangian, and the poster questions how Rubakov derives the relation between the Lagrangian density and the time derivative of the field. They suggest that the confusion arises from the terminology used, as many texts refer to the Lagrangian density simply as the "Lagrangian," which can lead to misunderstandings. The poster proposes that the integral in the energy expression indicates that the Lagrangian should be interpreted as the Lagrangian density, resolving the issue of units. This highlights the importance of precise language in field theory discussions.
quantum_smile
Messages
21
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


My question is just about a small mathematical detail, but I'll give some context anyways.
(From Rubakov Sec. 2.2)
An expression for energy is given by
E= \int{}d^3x\frac{\delta{}L}{\delta{}\dot{\phi}(\vec{x})}\dot{\phi}(\vec{x}) - L,<br />
where L is the Lagrangian,
<br /> L=\int{}d^3{}x(\frac{1}{2}\dot{\phi}^2-\frac{1}{2}\partial_i\phi\partial_i\phi-\frac{m^2}{2}\phi^2).<br />
To derive the expression for energy, Rubakov says that
<br /> \frac{\delta{}L}{\delta{}\dot{\phi}(\vec{x})}=\dot{\phi}(\vec{x}).<br />
What I want to know is, simply, how does he get this expression for
<br /> \frac{\delta{}L}{\delta{}\dot{\phi}(\vec{x})}<br />?

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


If I evaluate the expression, I just get
<br /> \delta{}L=\int{}d^3x(\dot{\phi}).<br />

Where'd the integral go in Rubakov's expression?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I may be wrong, but I believe what is happening is a confusion between the Lagrangian and the Lagrangian density. Look at the expression for the energy, it has an integral in it, so probably the ##L## which appears in there should actually be the Lagrangian density ##\mathcal{L}## defined by ##L=\int d^3x \mathcal{L}##
 
Ah, that would make a lot of sense (and fix the weird unit problem). Maybe there's a tiny typo in the text.
 
A lot of field theory texts refer to the Lagrangian density as simply the "Lagrangian", so the language might be confusing. Usually the notation is used so that the Lagrangian density is in a calligraphic font though.
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
27
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 59 ·
2
Replies
59
Views
11K