A How can I take the derivative?

  • A
  • Thread starter Thread starter etotheipi
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Derivative
etotheipi
The action considered is \begin{align*}
S[\Phi] = \int_M dt d^3 x \sqrt{-g} \left( -\frac{1}{2}g^{ab} \partial_a \Phi \partial_b \Phi - \frac{1}{2}m^2 \Phi^2\right)
\end{align*}I can "see" unrigorously that variation with respect to ##\partial_t \Phi(x)## it is going to be\begin{align*}
\frac{\delta S}{\delta(\partial_t \Phi(x))} &= -\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{-g} g^{ab} \frac{\delta}{\delta(\partial_t \Phi(x))} \left( \partial_a \Phi \partial_b \Phi \right) \\

&= -\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{-g} g^{ab} \cdot 2 \partial_a \Phi \delta^t_b \\

&= -\sqrt{-g} g^{at} \partial_a \Phi \\

&= \sqrt{h} n^{a} \partial_a \Phi
\end{align*}How do I do this calculation properly? For instance to find the functional variation with respect to ##\Phi## I could consider ##\lim_{\epsilon \rightarrow 0} \frac{1}{\epsilon}\left( S[\Phi + \epsilon \alpha] - S[\Phi] \right)##. But how do I write it when considering the functional derivative of ##S## with respect to ##\partial_t \Phi##; do I let the action have a second argument ##S = S[\Phi, \partial_a \Phi]## and proceed from there?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Why do you need such a strange derivative? I don't really see how such a derivative would be defined, maybe if you give me some more context I can help
 
##(M, g_{ab})## is a globally hyperbolic spacetime and the metric is here written ##ds^2 = -N^2 dt^2 + h_{ij} (dx^i + N^i dt)(dx^j + N^j dt)## with ##t## a global time coordinate labelling the cauchy surfaces ##\Sigma_t## of normal ##-N(dt)_a## and induced metric ##h_{ab}##, such that ##\sqrt{-g} = N\sqrt{h}##.

The aim is to find the canonical momentum ##\Pi(x)## conjugate to ##\Phi## by varying ##S## with respect to ##\partial_t \Phi(x)##
 
Ok, usually when one has an action of the form
$$S = \int \mathscr{L}(\Phi, \partial_\mu \Phi, t) d^4 x$$
the canonical momentum is defined as
$$\Pi(x)=\frac{\partial \mathscr{L}(\Phi, \partial_\mu \Phi, t)}{\partial(\partial_0\Phi)}$$
This one is almost immediate to compute and indeed gives the answer you have in #1. But, otherwise, I don't know how one is supposed to define something like
$$\frac{\delta S[\Phi]}{\delta (\partial_0 \Phi)}$$
At first, something like that seems nonsensical to me, but maybe there's a way to properly define such a thing...
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71 and etotheipi
Yeah, it's a bit strange. Landau & Lifshitz explained similar sorts of things, e.g. varying the action with respect to the co-ordinates (i.e. considering only admissible trajectories between ##a \longrightarrow b## and keeping ##(\delta x^i)_a = 0## but ##(\delta x^i)_b## variable) then you can show that$$\delta S = -mcu_i \delta x^i \implies p_i = - \frac{\partial S}{\partial x^i}$$so the time-component of the momentum four-vector would just be ##p_t = - \partial S / \partial t##.

I figured the motivation for ##\Pi(x) = \delta S / \delta (\partial_t \Phi)## in the OP would be analogous to that but I don't know how to formalise that at all. I don't know any field theory, really :frown:
 
Indeed, now that I think about it, since functional derivatives have the chain rule, maybe we can write it like
$$\frac{\delta S[\Phi]}{\delta (\partial_0 \Phi)} = \frac{\delta S[\Phi]}{\delta \Phi}\frac{\delta \Phi}{\delta (\partial_0 \Phi)}$$
Then the first derivative is the usual one that is used to derive E-L equations, the problem is the second term.
We know that $$\frac{\delta (\partial_0 \Phi)(y)}{\delta \Phi(x)}=-\partial_0 \delta^{(4)}(x-y),$$ but I don't know if there exists a property for functional derivatives that allow us to invert this, similar to normal derivatives.
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71 and etotheipi
In this video I can see a person walking around lines of curvature on a sphere with an arrow strapped to his waist. His task is to keep the arrow pointed in the same direction How does he do this ? Does he use a reference point like the stars? (that only move very slowly) If that is how he keeps the arrow pointing in the same direction, is that equivalent to saying that he orients the arrow wrt the 3d space that the sphere is embedded in? So ,although one refers to intrinsic curvature...
I started reading a National Geographic article related to the Big Bang. It starts these statements: Gazing up at the stars at night, it’s easy to imagine that space goes on forever. But cosmologists know that the universe actually has limits. First, their best models indicate that space and time had a beginning, a subatomic point called a singularity. This point of intense heat and density rapidly ballooned outward. My first reaction was that this is a layman's approximation to...
So, to calculate a proper time of a worldline in SR using an inertial frame is quite easy. But I struggled a bit using a "rotating frame metric" and now I'm not sure whether I'll do it right. Couls someone point me in the right direction? "What have you tried?" Well, trying to help truly absolute layppl with some variation of a "Circular Twin Paradox" not using an inertial frame of reference for whatevere reason. I thought it would be a bit of a challenge so I made a derivation or...

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
953
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
930
Replies
9
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Back
Top