Equations of motion and Hamiltonian density of a massive vector field

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the Lagrangian density for a massive vector field, specifically focusing on deriving the equations of motion and exploring the implications of these equations when the mass is non-zero. Participants are examining the relationships between the components of the vector field and the resulting equations, as well as the implications of the canonical momentum and Hamiltonian density.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are attempting to derive the equations of motion from the given Lagrangian density and are questioning the implications of these equations, particularly regarding the condition ##\partial_{\mu}C^{\mu}=0## when ##m \neq 0##. There is also discussion on how to eliminate the component ##C_0## in terms of the other fields.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active with participants validating each other's reasoning and exploring different approaches to the problem. Some have provided guidance on contracting the equations of motion to derive further implications, while others are clarifying the relationships between the components of the vector field and the equations derived from the Lagrangian.

Contextual Notes

Participants are working under the constraints of not providing complete solutions and are focused on understanding the implications of the equations derived from the Lagrangian density. The discussion includes assumptions about the nature of the vector field and its components, particularly in the context of mass and dynamics.

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
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
8K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
4K