Hamiltons equations of motion in terms of poisson bracket

AI Thread Summary
In the Hamiltonian formulation, the expression df/dt = {f, H} + ∂f/∂t indicates that the function f, which depends on phase-space variables q and p, does not have an explicit time dependence. When f is set to q or p, the partial time derivative ∂f/∂t becomes zero because phase-space variables are defined as independent of time in this context. The Hamilton equations of motion describe the system's trajectory over time but do not imply that q and p are functions of time before solving these equations. The independence of q, p, and t is crucial in this formulation, as shown by the derivatives of these variables. Thus, the lack of explicit time dependence in the phase-space formulation is foundational to understanding Hamilton's equations.
rahulor
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
In Hamiltonian formulation there is an expression
df / dt = { f , H } + ∂f / ∂t
where f is function of q, p and t.
While expressing Hamiltons equations of motion in terms of Poisson Bracket,
i.e if the function f = q of p then its partial time derivative ∂f / ∂t becomes zero..
Please explain why?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
In the Hamilton formalism, by definition, the phase-space variables (q,p) are not explicitly time dependent. Of course, solving the Hamilton equations of motion leads to the trajectory of the system in phase space as function of time, but that's not what's meant in the phase-space formulation before the equations of motion are solved.
 
p, q, and t are independent variables so \frac{\partial p}{\partial p}=1, \frac{\partial p}{\partial q}=0, \frac{\partial p}{\partial t}=0, \frac{\partial q}{\partial p}=0, \frac{\partial q}{\partial q}=1, \frac{\partial q}{\partial t}=0, \frac{\partial t}{\partial p}=0, \frac{\partial t}{\partial q}=0, \frac{\partial t}{\partial t}=1, by definition.
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
Back
Top