How do you explkain the difference of labels and dynamical variable?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter kof9595995
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Difference Variable
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the distinction between labels and dynamical variables in the context of fluid theory and quantum mechanics. Participants explore how these concepts are represented in different frameworks and seek clarity on their definitions and interrelations.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that in fluid theory, Eulerian coordinates function as labels while Lagrangian coordinates represent dynamical variables.
  • Another participant references quantum mechanics, noting that in the treatment of electromagnetic interactions, the field is expressed as A(âx), where âx denotes a position observable (a dynamical variable), contrasting with quantum field theory where x is treated as a label.
  • A different participant questions whether defining a position as a dynamical variable necessitates the prior establishment of coordinate labels, pondering if dynamical variables are a "subconcept" of coordinate labels.
  • Some participants express confusion regarding the initial question and the need for more context to clarify the discussion.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not appear to reach a consensus, as there are varying interpretations of the relationship between labels and dynamical variables, and some express confusion about the concepts being discussed.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge ambiguity in their questions and definitions, indicating potential limitations in the clarity of the concepts being explored.

kof9595995
Messages
676
Reaction score
2
I think I understand this, but when I tried to explain it to a friend I couldn't phrase it in a nice and clear way. How would you guys explain it to others?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I don't understand what you even mean. You need more context I think.
 
Like in fluid theory, Eulerian coordinate is (sort of?) labels and Lagrangian coordinate is dynamical variables?
Or in old quantum mechanics, when treating EM interation with particle, we write the field as [itex]A(\hat {x})[/itex], where [itex]\hat {x}[/itex] denote the position observable of the particle(so it's a dynamical varible), whereas in QFT we write the field as [itex]\hat{A}(x)[/itex] where x is just a spatial coordinate(a label),as said in http://press.princeton.edu/chapters/s7573.pdf : In quantum field theory, x is a label, not a dynamical variable. The x appearing in ϕ(t, x) corresponds to the label a in qa(t) in quantum mechanics. ...
 
Emm, it's a bit hard to even express my question clearly, but I'll give it a try: say position x, in order to specify a partcle's postion, which is a dynamical variable(DM for short), we must have a coordinate system, which has all possible values of x, and this coordinate system works like labels, so is it correct to say in order to define a position as a DM it's inevitable to define position labels first? Or is DM is a "subconcept" of coordinate labels?...
I realize my question is ambiguious, please bear with me...
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 80 ·
3
Replies
80
Views
8K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 65 ·
3
Replies
65
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K