Fooling around with Hamilton-Jacobi theory: can this be right?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter pellman
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Theory
Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
2 replies · 2K views
pellman
Messages
683
Reaction score
6
A system with one particle in one dimension x, momentum p, and hamiltonin H(x,p). Hamilton's principal function S(x,t) is a function satisfying.

[tex]H(x,\frac{\partial S}{\partial x})+\frac{\partial S}{\partial t}=0[/tex]

Now when we say that

[tex]p=\frac{\partial S}{\partial x}[/tex]

this is somewhat nonsensical. The LHS, p, is a dynamical variable, independent of x, whereas the RHS is a function of x and t. It makes sense to refer to x(t) and p(t) separately, but not generally of p(x,t).


What [tex]p=\frac{\partial S}{\partial x}[/tex] must mean is that along any particular solution (x(t), p(t)) in the flow of solutions in phase space, it is the case that


[tex]p(t)=\frac{\partial S}{\partial x}|_{x=x(t)}[/tex]


That is, we can speak of a function [tex]\hat{p}(x,t)\equiv\frac{\partial S}{\partial x}[/tex] and then it is true that if x(t),p(t) are solutions to the equations of motions then for all t


[tex]p(t)=\hat{p}(x(t),t)[/tex].


Let me pause here before proceeding to the question proper. Is what I say so far correct?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
You are correct that partial derivative notation is ambiguous (cf. the additional notation which accompanies thermodynamic identities), although it should not normally cause confusion.
 
Thanks, confinement.

Actually, I don't need to post the actual question now. I figured out where I was going wrong. However, I would be interested in any comments about the OP.