How Is the Equation of Motion Derived from the Classical String Model?

Join the discussion
Registration is free. Ask a follow-up in this thread, or start your own.
8 replies · 2K views
Phymath
Messages
183
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



I'm starting QFT and many books I've started to read start with the introduction of a field in a classical string model

with a Lagrange equation

[tex]L(q,\dot{q}) = \sum[\frac{m}{2}\dot{q}_{j}^{2}-\frac{k}{2}(q_{j}-q_{j+1})^{2}][/tex]

the equation of motion becomes

[tex]m \ddot{q_j}-k(q_{j+1}-2q_j + q_{j-1}) = 0[/tex]

my question is how do we get this equation of motion its a discrete derivative but I recognize this as the 3 point second derivative formula, but Lagrange formulation is only first order for the potential part

[tex]f'' = \frac{f(x+h)-2f(x)+f(x-h)}{h^2}[/tex]

any help?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If you remember from classical mechanics, the equations of motion formed from the Lagrangian will always give you [itex]n[/itex] second order differential equations for a system with [itex]n[/itex] degrees of freedom.

[tex]\frac{d}{dt}\left(\frac{\partial L}{\partial\dot{q}_i}\right) = \frac{\partial L}{\partial q_i}[/tex]
 
I agree with you on that however the second order only appears on the

[tex]\frac{d}{dt}(\frac{\partial L}{\partial \dot{q_i}})[/tex]

the potential term is only first order so how do I evaluate

[tex]\frac{\partial L}{\partial q_i}[/tex] to give

[tex] \frac{\partial}{\partial q_i}(-\frac{k}{2}(q_{j}-q_{j+1})^{2}) = k(q_{j+1}-2q_j + q_{j-1})[/tex]
 
Phymath said:
how do I evaluate

[tex]\frac{\partial L}{\partial q_i}[/tex] to give

[tex] \frac{\partial}{\partial q_i}(-\frac{k}{2}(q_{j}-q_{j+1})^{2}) = k(q_{j+1}-2q_j + q_{j-1})[/tex]

What do you get for

[tex]\frac{\partial L}{\partial q_i}[/tex]

when

[tex] L = \sum_j \left[\frac{m}{2}\dot{q}_{j}^{2}-\frac{k}{2} \left(q_{j}-q_{j+1} \right)^{2} \right] ?[/tex]
 
i don't know that's exactly what I'm asking...

[tex] <br /> \frac{\partial L}{\partial q_j} = -k(q_j-q_{j+1}) (1-\frac{\partial}{\partial q_j}q_{j+1})<br /> [/tex]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
There are two terms that have [tex]q_j[/tex] in them because of the sum. You are taking the derivative of:
[tex]\frac{\partial}{\partial q_i}(-\frac{k}{2}(q_{j}-q_{j+1})^{2}-\frac{k}{2}(q_{j-1}-q_{j})^{2})\equiv -k(q_{j}-q_{j+1})+k(q_{j-1}-q_{j}) \equiv k(q_{j-1}-2q_{j}+q_{j+1})[/tex].
I hope that helps
 
Phymath said:
i don't know that's exactly what I'm asking...

[tex] <br /> \frac{\partial L}{\partial q_j} = -k(q_j-q_{j+1}) (1-\frac{\partial}{\partial q_j}q_{j+1})<br /> [/tex]

Careful; in my post the derivative was with respect to [itex]i[/itex] and the sum is over [itex]j[/itex]. Let me expand on what badphysicist wrote. Use

[tex]\frac{\partial q_j}{\partial q_i} = \delta_{ij}.[/tex]

For example, [itex]\partial x / \partial x = 1[/itex] and [itex]\partial y / \partial x = 0.[/itex]

After differentiating, there is still a sum over [itex]j[/itex], i.e.,

[tex]\frac{\partial}{\partial q_i} \sum_j = \sum_j \frac{\partial}{\partial q_i},[/tex]

but, because of the [itex]\delta[/itex]'s, all but a few terms will be zero.
 
Oh yeah, I see the typo I made. Here's the corrected version..
[tex]\frac{\partial}{\partial q_i}(-\frac{k}{2}(q_{i}-q_{i+1})^{2}-\frac{k}{2}(q_{i-1}-q_{i})^{2})\equiv -k(q_{i}-q_{i+1})+k(q_{i-1}-q_{j}) \equiv k(q_{i-1}-2q_{i}+q_{i+1})[/tex]
 
thanks that definitely helps I didn't think of the sum thanks again