Euler Lagrange Derivation (Taylor Series)

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the derivation of the Euler-Lagrange equation, specifically focusing on the Taylor expansion of the Lagrangian function \( L \) in terms of its variables. Participants express confusion about treating the functions \( y \) and \( \dot{y} \) as independent when performing the expansion, questioning the implications of their interdependence.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses discomfort with the Taylor expansion of \( L \) and questions the assumption that \( y \) and \( \dot{y} \) can be treated as independent variables, suggesting that their dependence should be accounted for.
  • Another participant confirms that the expansion is valid and notes that the term involving the partial derivative with respect to \( x \) is zero due to the nature of the Taylor expansion.
  • Further clarification is provided that the symbols \( y, \dot{y}, x \) are being used in multiple contexts, and a hypothetical function \( L(X,Y,Z) \) is introduced to illustrate the Taylor expansion process with dummy variables.
  • A participant emphasizes that the partial derivative \( \frac{\partial L}{\partial y} \) should be viewed as a function of its first argument, rather than as a derivative in the traditional sense.
  • Another participant discusses the geometric interpretation of \( y(x) \) and \( \dot{y}(x) \), suggesting they exist in different spaces, which may justify treating them independently in the context of the Taylor expansion.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the treatment of \( y \) and \( \dot{y} \) as independent variables. While some affirm the validity of the Taylor expansion, others remain concerned about the implications of their interdependence.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the complexity of treating functions as independent in the context of Taylor expansions, with participants acknowledging the potential for ambiguity in definitions and assumptions.

bananabandana
Messages
112
Reaction score
5
Mod note: Moved from Homework section
1. Homework Statement

Understand most of the derivation of the E-L just fine, but am confused about the fact that we can somehow Taylor expand ##L## in this way:

$$ L\bigg[ y+\alpha\eta(x),y'+\alpha \eta^{'}(x),x\bigg] = L \bigg[ y, y',x\bigg] + \frac{\partial L}{\partial y} \alpha \eta(x) + \frac{\partial L}{\partial y'} \alpha \eta^{'} + O^{2}(\alpha \eta) $$

I'm really uncomfortable with the idea that you can treat whole functions as independent of each other (when they are clearly not). I've looked up a lot of derivations online & from textbooks and none of them seem to bother to explain this. Am I missing something obvious? Surely the fact that ## y=f(x,t,\alpha )## should be taken into account somewhere?

Thanks in advance for the help!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
The expansion looks ok. What dependence are you concerned about?
 
Yes, it is exactly the Taylor expansion of ##L\left[y+\alpha\eta(x),y'+\alpha\eta'(x),x\right]## at the point ##(y,y',x)##, obviously the term with the partial derivative of ##x## there isn't because ##\frac{\partial L}{\partial x}\cdot(x-x)=0##...
 
Ssnow said:
Yes, it is exactly the Taylor expansion of ##L\left[y+\alpha\eta(x),y'+\alpha\eta'(x),x\right]## at the point ##(y,y',x)##, obviously the term with the partial derivative of ##x## there isn't because ##\frac{\partial L}{\partial x}\cdot(x-x)=0##...

Yes, I know, but why are we allowed to treat ##y(x)## and ##\dot{y}(x)## as independent variables? (as we are required to do for the Taylor series?) They clearly aren't independent.
 
bananabandana said:
Yes, I know, but why are we allowed to treat ##y(x)## and ##\dot{y}(x)## as independent variables? (as we are required to do for the Taylor series?) They clearly aren't independent.

What's happening is that the symbols ##y, \dot{y}, x## are being used for two purposes. I'm only on my phone so it's difficult to type a lot of latex. Consider ##L## as any function of three variables. To be clear we will define ##L## using dummy variables ##X,Y,Z##

E.g we could define ##L(X,Y,Z) = X^2 + XYZ##

Now, we have three more functions by taking the partial derivatives of ##L##:

##L_X, L_Y, L_Z##

Using this notation for simplicity.

Finally, we can do the following Taylor expansion for ##L##

##L(X_0 + a, Y_0 + b, Z_0 + c) = L(X_0, Y_0, Z_0) + aL_X + bL_Y + cL_Z + \dots##

And that hold for any numerical values we choose for ##X_0, Y_0, Z_0, a, b, c##. In other words, that equation holds for whatever expressions we plug into replace the dummy variables we've used.

In this case, the expressions happen to be expressions in ##x,y, \dot{y}, \eta##.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Fervent Freyja
PS I forgot to mention:
## \frac{\partial L}{\partial y}##

Think of this not as the partial derivative of ##L## with respect to ##y##, but the function formed by taking the partial derivative of ##L## with respect to its first argument.
 
Geometrically ##y(x)## is a function of ##x## and you can think this as subset of the euclidean space, as the graph of a function on the plane for example. The derivative ##\dot{y}(x)## represent the tangent direction of the graph of the function at the point ##x##. So ##\dot{y}(x)## generate the tangent space of ##y(x)## at ##x##. In general they lives in two different spaces...
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K