Equations of motion and Hamiltonian density of a massive vector field

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the derivation of equations of motion and Hamiltonian density for a massive vector field described by the Lagrangian density ##\mathcal{L}=-\frac{1}{4}F_{\mu\nu}F^{\mu\nu}+\frac{1}{2}m^{2}C_{\mu}C^{\mu}##. It establishes that for ##m \neq 0##, the equations imply ##\partial_{\mu}C^{\mu}=0##, and demonstrates how to eliminate the field ##C_{0}## in terms of the other fields. The canonical momenta ##\Pi_{i}## conjugate to ##C_{i}## are constructed, revealing that the canonical momentum conjugate to ##C_{0}## is vanishing, confirming its non-dynamical nature.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Lagrangian density and field theory concepts
  • Familiarity with the equations of motion derived from the Euler-Lagrange equation
  • Knowledge of canonical momentum in the context of field theory
  • Basic understanding of the properties of the electromagnetic field strength tensor ##F_{\mu\nu}##
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of the Euler-Lagrange equations for field theories
  • Learn about the implications of gauge invariance in massive vector fields
  • Explore the canonical quantization of vector fields
  • Investigate the role of non-dynamical fields in classical field theory
USEFUL FOR

Students and researchers in theoretical physics, particularly those focusing on quantum field theory, classical field theory, and the dynamics of vector fields.

spaghetti3451
Messages
1,311
Reaction score
31

Homework Statement



The Lagrangian density for a massive vector field ##C_{\mu}## is given by ##\mathcal{L}=-\frac{1}{4}F_{\mu\nu}F^{\mu\nu}+\frac{1}{2}m^{2}C_{\mu}C^{\mu}## where ##F_{\mu\nu}=\partial_{\mu}C_{\nu}-\partial_{\nu}C_{\mu}##.

Derive the equations of motion and show that when ##m \neq 0## they imply ##\partial_{\mu}C^{\mu}=0##.

Further show that ##C_{0}## can be eliminated completely in terms of the other fields by ##\partial_{i}\partial^{i}C_{0}+m^{2}C_{0}=\partial^{i}\dot{C}_{i}##.

Construct the canonical momenta ##\Pi_{i}## conjugate to ##C_{i}, i=1,2,3## and show that the canonical momentum conjugate to ##C_{0}## is vanishing.

Construct the Hamiltonian density ##\mathcal{H}## in terms of ##C_{0},C_{i}## and ##\Pi_{i}##.

(Note: Do not be concerned that the canonical momentum for ##C_0## is vanishing. ##C_0## is non-dynamical - it is determined entirely in terms of the other fields using ##\partial_{i}\partial^{i}C_{0}+m^{2}C_{0}=\partial^{i}\dot{C}_{i}##.)

Homework Equations



The Attempt at a Solution



Given the Lagrangian density ##\mathcal{L}=-\frac{1}{4}F_{\mu\nu}F^{\mu\nu}+\frac{1}{2}m^{2}C_{\mu}C^{\mu}##, where ##F_{\mu\nu}=\partial_{\mu}C_{\nu}-\partial_{\nu}C_{\mu}## and ##C_{\mu}## is a massive vector field,

##\frac{\partial \mathcal{L}}{\partial (\partial_{\rho}C_{\sigma})}=\frac{\partial}{\partial (\partial_{\rho}C_{\sigma})}\Big(-\frac{1}{4}F_{\mu\nu}F^{\mu\nu}\Big)##

##\implies \frac{\partial \mathcal{L}}{\partial (\partial_{\rho}C_{\sigma})}=-\frac{1}{4}\frac{\partial}{\partial (\partial_{\rho}C_{\sigma})}[(\partial_{\mu}C_{\nu}-\partial_{\nu}C_{\mu})(\partial^{\mu}C^{\nu}-\partial^{\nu}C^{\mu})]##

##\implies \frac{\partial \mathcal{L}}{\partial (\partial_{\rho}C_{\sigma})}=-\frac{1}{4}[({\eta^{\rho}}_{\mu}{\eta^{\sigma}}_{\nu}-{\eta^{\rho}}_{\nu}{\eta^{\sigma}}_{\mu})(\partial^{\mu}C^{\nu}-\partial^{\nu}C^{\mu})+(\partial_{\mu}C_{\nu}-\partial_{\nu}C_{\mu})(\eta^{\rho\mu}\eta^{\sigma\nu}-\eta^{\rho\nu}\eta^{\sigma\mu})]##

##\implies \frac{\partial \mathcal{L}}{\partial (\partial_{\rho}C_{\sigma})}=-\frac{1}{4}[\partial^{\rho}C^{\sigma}-\partial^{\sigma}C^{\rho}-\partial^{\sigma}C^{\rho}+\partial^{\rho}C^{\sigma}+\partial^{\rho}C^{\sigma}-\partial^{\sigma}C^{\rho}-\partial^{\sigma}C^{\rho}+\partial^{\rho}C^{\sigma}]##

##=-(\partial^{\rho}C^{\sigma}-\partial^{\sigma}C^{\rho})##

##=-F^{\rho\sigma}##

and

##\frac{\partial \mathcal{L}}{\partial C_{\rho}} = \frac{\partial}{\partial C_{\rho}}(\frac{1}{2}m^{2}C_{\mu}C^{\mu})##

##\implies \frac{\partial \mathcal{L}}{\partial C_{\rho}} = \frac{\partial}{\partial C_{\rho}}(\frac{1}{2}m^{2}\eta^{\mu\nu}C_{\mu}C_{\nu})##

##\implies \frac{\partial \mathcal{L}}{\partial C_{\rho}} = \frac{1}{2}m^{2}\eta^{\mu\nu}\frac{\partial}{\partial C_{\rho}}(C_{\mu}C_{\nu})##

##\implies \frac{\partial \mathcal{L}}{\partial C_{\rho}} = \frac{1}{2}m^{2}\eta^{\mu\nu}({\eta^{\rho}}_{\mu}C_{\nu}+{C_{\mu}\eta^{\rho}}_{\nu})##

##\implies \frac{\partial \mathcal{L}}{\partial C_{\rho}} = \frac{1}{2}m^{2}({\eta^{\rho}}_{\mu}\eta^{\mu\nu}C_{\nu}+{\eta^{\nu\mu}C_{\mu}\eta^{\rho}}_{\nu})##

##\implies \frac{\partial \mathcal{L}}{\partial C_{\rho}} = \frac{1}{2}m^{2}({\eta^{\rho}}_{\mu}C^{\mu}+{\eta^{\rho}}_{\nu}C^{\nu})##

##\implies \frac{\partial \mathcal{L}}{\partial C_{\rho}} = \frac{1}{2}m^{2}(C^{\rho}+C^{\rho})##

##\implies \frac{\partial \mathcal{L}}{\partial C_{\rho}} = m^{2}C^{\rho}##

so that

##\frac{\partial \mathcal{L}}{\partial C_{\nu}}-\partial_{\mu}\Big(\frac{\partial \mathcal{L}}{\partial (\partial_{\mu}C_{\nu})}\Big)=0 \implies m^{2}C^{\nu}+\partial_{\mu}F^{\mu\nu}=0##.

So, the equations of motion are ##m^{2}C^{\nu}+\partial_{\mu}F^{\mu\nu}=0##.

Am I correct so far?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes, it's all fine.
 
Thanks!

Next, I need to show that, when ##m\neq 0##, the equations of motion ##m^{2}C^{\nu}+\partial_{\mu}F^{\mu\nu}=0## imply ##\partial_{\mu}C^{\mu}=0##:

##m^{2}C^{\nu}+\partial_{\mu}F^{\mu\nu}=0##

##\implies m^{2}C^{\nu}+\partial_{\mu}(\partial^{\mu}C^{\nu}-\partial^{\nu}C^{\mu})=0##

##\implies m^{2}C^{\nu}+\partial_{\mu}\partial^{\mu}C^{\nu}-\partial_{\mu}\partial^{\nu}C^{\mu}=0##

##\implies m^{2}C^{\nu}+\partial_{\mu}\partial^{\mu}C^{\nu}-\partial^{\nu}\partial_{\mu}C^{\mu}=0##

##\implies (m^{2}+\partial_{\mu}\partial^{\mu})C^{\nu}-\partial^{\nu}(\partial_{\mu}C^{\mu})=0##

So, for ##\partial_{\mu}C^{\mu}=0## to hold when ##m\neq 0##, we must have ##(m^{2}+\partial_{\mu}\partial^{\mu})C^{\nu}=0##.

But why is ##(m^{2}+\partial_{\mu}\partial^{\mu})C^{\nu}=0## when ##m \neq 0##? Surely ##C_{\mu}## is not the Klein-Gordon field, but rather a massive vector field!?
 
failexam said:
Thanks!

Next, I need to show that, when ##m\neq 0##, the equations of motion ##m^{2}C^{\nu}+\partial_{\mu}F^{\mu\nu}=0## imply ##\partial_{\mu}C^{\mu}=0##:

##m^{2}C^{\nu}+\partial_{\mu}F^{\mu\nu}=0##

##\implies m^{2}C^{\nu}+\partial_{\mu}(\partial^{\mu}C^{\nu}-\partial^{\nu}C^{\mu})=0##

##\implies m^{2}C^{\nu}+\partial_{\mu}\partial^{\mu}C^{\nu}-\partial_{\mu}\partial^{\nu}C^{\mu}=0##

##\implies m^{2}C^{\nu}+\partial_{\mu}\partial^{\mu}C^{\nu}-\partial^{\nu}\partial_{\mu}C^{\mu}=0##

##\implies (m^{2}+\partial_{\mu}\partial^{\mu})C^{\nu}-\partial^{\nu}(\partial_{\mu}C^{\mu})=0##

So, for ##\partial_{\mu}C^{\mu}=0## to hold when ##m\neq 0##, we must have ##(m^{2}+\partial_{\mu}\partial^{\mu})C^{\nu}=0##.
That's not the case - instead of multiplying it all out, contract the equation of motion with ##\partial_{\nu}## so that you get $$m^2 \partial_{\nu} C^{\nu} + \partial_{\nu} \partial_{\mu} F^{\mu \nu} = 0$$ Using properties of ##F^{\mu \nu}## deduce this second term is zero.
 
CAF123 said:
That's not the case - instead of multiplying it all out, contract the equation of motion with ##\partial_{\nu}## so that you get $$m^2 \partial_{\nu} C^{\nu} + \partial_{\nu} \partial_{\mu} F^{\mu \nu} = 0$$ Using properties of ##F^{\mu \nu}## deduce this second term is zero.

##m^{2}C^{\nu}+\partial_{\mu}F^{\mu\nu}=0##

##\implies m^{2}C_{\nu}C^{\nu}+\partial_{\nu}\partial_{\mu}F^{\mu\nu}=0##

##\implies m^{2}C_{\nu}C^{\nu}+\partial_{\mu}\partial_{\nu}F^{\nu\mu}=0##, where we have relabeled indices ##\mu## and ##\nu## in the second term

##\implies m^{2}C_{\nu}C^{\nu}-\partial_{\nu}\partial_{\mu}F^{\mu\nu}=0##, where we have used the commutativity ##\partial_{\mu}\partial_{\nu}=\partial_{\nu}\partial_{\mu}## of partial derivatives and the antisymmetry ##F^{\mu\nu}=-F^{\nu\mu}## of the electromagnetic field strength tensor

So, we have both ##m^{2}C_{\nu}C^{\nu}+\partial_{\nu}\partial_{\mu}F^{\mu\nu}=0## and ##m^{2}C_{\nu}C^{\nu}-\partial_{\nu}\partial_{\mu}F^{\mu\nu}=0##.

Adding the equations gives us ##2m^{2}C_{\nu}C^{\nu}=0## so that ##C_{\mu}C^{\mu}=0## when ##m\neq 0##.

Am I correct?
 
Yup, the argument is correct but the term proportional to m^2 should be ##\partial_{\nu} C^{\nu}## not ##C_{\nu}C^{\nu}##. The argument is completely general - whenever you have a symmetric index pair (here ##\partial_{\mu} \partial_{\nu}##) contracting with an antisymmetric one (here ##F^{\mu \nu}##) their contraction always vanishes.
 
Thanks!

Now for the next part of the question.

Further show that ##C_0## can be eliminated completely in terms of the other fields by ##\partial_{i}\partial^{i}C_{0}+m^{2}C_{0}=\partial^{i}C_{i}.##

Starting with the equation of motion ##m^{2}C^{\nu}+\partial_{\mu}F^{\mu\nu}=0## and setting ##\nu=0##, we have

##m^{2}C^{0}+\partial_{\mu}F^{\mu 0}=0##

##\implies m^{2}C^{0}+\partial_{\mu}(\partial^{\mu}C^{0}-\partial^{0}C^{\mu})=0##

##\implies m^{2}C^{0}+\partial_{\mu}\partial^{\mu}C^{0}-\partial_{\mu}\partial^{0}C^{\mu}=0##

##\implies m^{2}C^{0}+\partial_{0}\partial^{0}C^{0}+\partial_{i}\partial^{i}C^{0}-\partial_{0}\partial^{0}C^{0}-\partial_{i}\partial^{0}C^{i}=0##

##\implies m^{2}C^{0}+\partial_{i}\partial^{i}C^{0}-\partial_{i}\partial^{0}C^{i}=0##

##\implies m^{2}C^{0}+\partial_{i}\partial^{i}C^{0}-\partial_{i}\dot{C}^{i}=0##

##\implies \partial_{i}\partial^{i}C^{0}+m^{2}C^{0}=\partial_{i}{\dot{C}}^{i}##

##\implies \partial_{i}\partial^{i}C_{0}+m^{2}C_{0}=\partial_{i}\dot{C}_{i}##.

Are my steps correct?
 
Correct up to the last line - assuming your metric is (1,-1,-1,-1), for the spatial components part of the four vectors ##X^{\mu}## you have ##X_i = -X^i##.
 
CAF123 said:
Correct up to the last line - assuming your metric is (1,-1,-1,-1), for the spatial components part of the four vectors ##X^{\mu}## you have ##X_i = -X^i##.

Thanks! In that case, I have

##\partial_{i}\partial^{i}C^{0}+m^{2}C^{0}=\partial_{i}{\dot{C}}^{i}##

##\implies \partial_{i}\partial^{i}C_{0}+m^{2}C_{0}=\partial^{i}{\dot{C}}_{i}##Let me try to solve the remaining parts of the question.

Construct the canonical momenta ##\Pi_{i}## conjugate to ##C_{i}, i=1,2,3,## and show that the canonical momenta conjugate to ##C_0## is vanishing.

##\Pi_{i}=\frac{\partial \mathcal{L}}{\partial \dot{C}_{i}}=\frac{\partial}{\partial \dot{C}_{i}}\Big(-\frac{1}{4}F_{\mu\nu}F^{\mu\nu}+\frac{1}{2}m^{2}C_{\mu}C^{\mu}\Big)##

##=\frac{\partial}{\partial \dot{C}_{i}}\Big(-\frac{1}{2}(\partial_{\mu}C_{\nu})^{2}+\frac{1}{2}(\partial_{\mu}C^{\mu})^{2}\Big)##, where the two Lagrangians are equivalent upto a total derivative and I left out ##\frac{1}{2}m^{2}C_{\mu}C^{\mu}##

##=\frac{\partial}{\partial \dot{C}_{i}}\Big(-\frac{1}{2}(\partial_{0}C_{\nu})(\partial^{0}C^{\nu})+\frac{1}{2}(\partial_{0}C^{0}+\partial_{j}C^{j})(\partial_{0}C^{0}+\partial_{j}C^{j})\Big)##

##=\frac{\partial}{\partial \dot{C}_{i}}\Big(-\frac{1}{2}(\partial_{0}C_{j})(\partial^{0}C^{j})+(\partial_{0}C^{0})(\partial_{j}C^{j})\Big)##

##=(\partial_{0}C_{i})+\delta_{0i}(\partial_{j}C^{j})##.

What do you think?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
7K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
3K