How do I set up this Legendre Transform for Hamiltonian

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around understanding the Legendre transform as it applies to transitioning from the Lagrangian to the Hamiltonian formulation in classical mechanics. The original poster expresses confusion regarding the relationships between the variables in the formulas presented in different sources, particularly concerning the signs and definitions of the Hamiltonian and Lagrangian.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the identification of variables in the Lagrangian and Hamiltonian, questioning how one variable is replaced by another in the transformation process. There is also exploration of the implications of the negative sign in the Hamiltonian and its relation to energy.

Discussion Status

Some participants provide guidance on identifying independent variables and conjugate pairs, while others seek clarification on the relationships between the definitions from different sources. The discussion reflects a mix of understanding and confusion, with no explicit consensus reached on the equivalency of the formulations.

Contextual Notes

There is mention of potential inconsistencies between different sources, specifically a PDF and Wolfram Alpha, regarding the definitions and signs of the Hamiltonian and Lagrangian. Participants are navigating these discrepancies while adhering to homework constraints.

13Nike
Messages
44
Reaction score
5

Homework Statement


Im trying to understand the Legendre transform from Lagrange to Hamiltonian but I don't get it. This pdf was good but when compared to wolfram alphas example they're slightly different even when accounting for variables. I think one of them is wrong. I trust wolfram over the pdf but I like the pdf approach better. How does the wolfram formula relate to Lagrange formula given by wolfram? for example

  • f = L
  • x = ?
  • y = ?
  • u = (p maybe ?)
  • v = ?
  • g = H
also in the original pdf it states H is negative when H = L - p qdot. Why? Mathematically and physically why is this, and why does the Hamiltonian equations H = p qdot- L (in one dimension) equal to just the derivative of H in respect to q and p?

Homework Equations


Equation 6 in the pdf says that its negative? It likes like they're saying g(arbitrary) is -H = (L-p qdot) therefore H = (p qdot - L) I am confused as to why it can be -H.

The Attempt at a Solution


I attempted to do the matching above but I don't think I'm doing it right.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Why don't you first identify what variables the Lagrangian and Hamiltonian depend on. Then you can identify which variable is being replaced by the another.

Both the PDF and MathWorld are saying the same thing. I'm not sure why you think there's an inconsistency.

As far as the sign of H goes, if you do the plain old Legendre transformation on the Lagrangian, you end up with a quantity that's equal to the negative of the total energy. We define H to be the negative of that quantity so we can identify it with the energy of the system rather than keeping the pesky negative sign around.
 
vela said:
Why don't you first identify what variables the Lagrangian and Hamiltonian depend on. Then you can identify which variable is being replaced by the another.

Both the PDF and MathWorld are saying the same thing. I'm not sure why you think there's an inconsistency.

As far as the sign of H goes, if you do the plain old Legendre transformation on the Lagrangian, you end up with a quantity that's equal to the negative of the total energy. We define H to be the negative of that quantity so we can identify it with the energy of the system rather than keeping the pesky negative sign around.

Okay thanks I understand the negative part but in terms of deriving it I would like to wolfram's formal definition but I don't get how it relates to Lagrangian. Can you help me where I'm wrong. L is a function of q and qdot, H is a function of q and p. Therefor qdot is being replaced with p. In other words, q and qdot are the independent variables. Meaning that qdot and p are the conjugate pairs? The equivalent table using the wolfram definition would be
  • f = L
  • x = q
  • y = qdot
  • u = u
  • v = p
  • g = H
?
 
I think you meant ##u=q##. Yes, ##q## and ##\dot{q}## are independent variables, and ##\dot{q}## and ##p##, which is defined as ##p=\partial{L}/\partial{\dot{q}}##, are the conjugate pair.
 
vela said:
I think you meant ##u=q##. Yes, ##q## and ##\dot{q}## are independent variables, and ##\dot{q}## and ##p##, which is defined as ##p=\partial{L}/\partial{\dot{q}}##, are the conjugate pair.
I don't think that's correct for the equivalency? What is x then?
 
##x## is ##q##. It's the variable that remains. That's why ##u=q## as well.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
12K
Replies
7
Views
6K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K