Hamiltonian Function thru new Variables Q,P -- Show that Q is cyclic

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on deriving the Hamiltonian function using new variables Q and P for a particle in a gravitational field. The user successfully determined the constant A as -1/2m^2g but struggles to express the Hamiltonian without the variable Q. Participants suggest that the user can eliminate Q by correctly formulating the Hamiltonian in terms of P and Q. A sign error in the user's calculation is pointed out, indicating the need for correction. The conversation emphasizes the importance of accurately expressing the Hamiltonian to achieve the desired cyclic nature of Q.
ardaoymakas
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Homework Statement
3b) Print out the Hamilton function using the new variables Q and P. Show that by choosing the appropriate constant A, the variable Q becomes cyclic and therefore the Hamilton function can be written down without Q.
Relevant Equations
H = (p^2/2m) + mgq
q = P - AQ^2 , p = - Q
I took the derviative of the Hamiltonian function with respect to Q and assumed that it was equal to 0 in order to find the Konstant A. I did find the Konstant A as -1/2m^2g but I still cant write the Hamiltonian equation without having the Q as a variable. Can someone please help?

Translation:
The Hamilton function for a particle moving vertically in a homogeneous gravitational field with gravitational constant g is given by
----
We introduced new variables Q and P. The variables q and p can be expressed by Q and P using the following transformation formulas:
-----
a)Evaluate the Poisson bracket {Q ,P}q,p. Is the transformation canonical?

b)Print out the Hamilton function through the new variables Q and P. Show that by choosing a suitable constant A, the variable Q becomes cyclic and therefore the Hamilton function can be written down without Q.
Screenshot 2024-01-18 at 23.57.59.png
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Welcome to PF!
But posting attachments as pdf that have to be downloaded will hurt your response rate, particularly from those using iPads etc. Can you imbed the image?
 
haruspex said:
Welcome to PF!
But posting attachments as pdf that have to be downloaded will hurt your response rate, particularly from those using iPads etc. Can you imbed the image?
Hey,
Thanks! Is this better?
 
Much better, thanks.
ardaoymakas said:
I did find the Konstant A as -1/2m^2g but I still cant write the Hamiltonian equation without having the Q as a variable.
I've never worked with Hamiltonians, so not usually able to answer such a question, but it seems to me it is trivial to find the A which eliminates Q (and yes, it is the A you found). Just write out H in terms of P and Q. What does the Q term look like?

Edit: I see you have a sign error.
 
haruspex said:
Much better, thanks.

I've never worked with Hamiltonians, so not usually able to answer such a question, but it seems to me it is trivial to find the A which eliminates Q (and yes, it is the A you found). Just write out H in terms of P and Q. What does the Q term look like?

Edit: I see you have a sign error.
When I write it in terms of Q I get H = (-Q)^2 / 2m) + mgP + (Q^2)/2m which isnt the formula without Q
 
ardaoymakas said:
When I write it in terms of Q I get H = (-Q)^2 / 2m) + mgP + (Q^2)/2m which isnt the formula without Q
Did you note my edit? It says your expression for A has the wrong sign.
 

Thread 'Rolling without slipping on a curved surface'

Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
View full post »
Thread 'Correct statement about a reservoir with an outlet pipe'

Thread 'Correct statement about a reservoir with an outlet pipe'

The answer to this question is statements (ii) and (iv) are correct. (i) This is FALSE because the speed of water in the tap is greater than speed at the water surface (ii) I don't even understand this statement. What does the "seal" part have to do with water flowing out? Won't the water still flow out through the tap until the tank is empty whether the reservoir is sealed or not? (iii) In my opinion, this statement would be correct. Increasing the gravitational potential energy of the...
View full post »
Thread 'A bead-mass oscillatory system problem'

Thread 'A bead-mass oscillatory system problem'

I can't figure out how to find the velocity of the particle at 37 degrees. Basically the bead moves with velocity towards right let's call it v1. The particle moves with some velocity v2. In frame of the bead, the particle is performing circular motion. So v of particle wrt bead would be perpendicular to the string. But how would I find the velocity of particle in ground frame? I tried using vectors to figure it out and the angle is coming out to be extremely long. One equation is by work...
View full post »

Similar threads

I Question on derivation of a property of Poisson brackets
Replies
0
Views
1K
I Adding total time derivative to Lagrangian/Canonical Transformations
Replies
2
Views
294
Hamiltonian mechanics - the independence of p and q
Replies
6
Views
3K
A Recover Hamilton equation from 2-form defined on phase space
Replies
3
Views
1K
I Can Any Quantifiable Variable Serve as a Coordinate in Euler-Lagrange Equations?
Replies
5
Views
2K
Given a set of equations, show if it is a Hamiltonian system
Replies
9
Views
2K
Canonical transformations of a quantized Hamiltonian?
Replies
3
Views
1K
How Does Adding Derivatives to the Lagrangian Affect Hamiltonian Equations?
Replies
7
Views
6K
Hamiltonian conjugate dynamic variables
Replies
3
Views
2K
I Canonical transformations and generating functions
Replies
6
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top