How to prove Momentum = Gradient of Action?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Alexandre
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Gradient Momentum
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the relationship between momentum and the gradient of the action for a free particle, specifically in the context of classical mechanics. Participants explore the derivation of this relationship, examine the role of the Lagrangian, and discuss the implications of treating velocity and position as independent variables.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant attempts to derive momentum as the gradient of action using a one-dimensional case, expressing uncertainty about the correctness of their steps, particularly regarding the use of velocity.
  • Another participant notes that the Lagrangian should be treated as a function of time, position, and velocity, emphasizing that position and velocity are distinct variables.
  • There is a suggestion that differentiating the potential energy part of the Lagrangian is necessary, although the context of a free particle with no potential is also discussed.
  • A participant introduces the concept of abbreviated action and its distinction from ordinary action, expressing confusion about its implications.
  • One participant highlights the importance of treating variations in path as independent, reinforcing the independence of momentum and position in partial derivatives.
  • A later reply provides a more detailed derivation, showing how to calculate the action and its partial derivatives, leading to the conclusion that momentum can be expressed as a gradient of the action.
  • Another participant acknowledges a misunderstanding regarding the dependence of velocity on time, clarifying their earlier confusion about the derivation.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the treatment of variables in the derivation, the meaning of "gradient of the action," and the necessity of differentiating potential energy. The discussion remains unresolved, with multiple competing perspectives on the correct approach to the problem.

Contextual Notes

Some participants express uncertainty about the definitions and implications of terms like "abbreviated action" and the treatment of velocity as an independent variable, indicating potential limitations in their understanding of the concepts involved.

Alexandre
Messages
29
Reaction score
0
How can show that momentum is the gradient of the action for the free particle? I tried it like this for one dimensional case:

[tex]s=\int Ldt[/tex]
[tex]ds=Ldt[/tex]
[tex]ds=\frac{mv^2}{2}dt\:[/tex]
Velocity is constant right? So I should be able to to this:
[tex]\frac{ds}{dx}=\frac{mv^2}{2}\frac{dt}{dx}[/tex]
I'm not sure about the following step where I use: [tex]\frac{dt}{dx}=\frac{1}{v}[/tex] is this correct?
[tex]\frac{ds}{dx}=\frac{mv^2}{2}\frac{1}{v}[/tex]
And finally I get:
[tex]\frac{ds}{dx}=\frac{mv}{2}[/tex]
It differs from momentum by the factor of 1/2, where did I make the mistake?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
The Lagrangian is to be written as a function of t, q, and qdot (, or t, x, and v in your 1D example). The weird thing about it is that x and v are supposed to be treated as formally distinct independent variables, and v cannot be replaced by dx/dt.

I'm actually not sure what "gradient of the action" means, since action is a functional, depending on the path, rather than depending on the position like a normal function.
 
Last edited:
Right. You need to differentiate the potential energy part of the Lagrangian
 
thierrykauf said:
Right. You need to differentiate the potential energy part of the Lagrangian
Suppose I have no potential, just the kinetic energy of a free particle wandering around (actually moving at a straight line with a constant velocity), the Lagrangian will be equal to kinetic energy only. I've found out a hint why my derivation might be wrong, there's a thing called abbreviated action and it differs from ordinary action which is just an integral of Lagrangian (if it's in units of energy) with time. But I'm clueless what does that mean and how or why it differs from action.

Khashishi said:
I'm actually not sure what "gradient of the action" means, since action is a functional, depending on the path, rather than depending on the position like a normal function.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Action_(physics)#Abbreviated_action_.28functional.29

[tex]S_0=\int pdq[/tex]
[tex]dS_0=pdq[/tex]
[tex]\frac{dS_0}{dq}=p[/tex]
For more general case I see it's a gradient but what the hell is abbreviated action? I came across this thing in quantum mechanics textbook (in introductory chapter, where classical mechanics was discussed)
 
Last edited:
Alexandre said:
How can show that momentum is the gradient of the action for the free particle? I tried it like this for one dimensional case:

[tex]s=\int Ldt[/tex]
[tex]ds=Ldt[/tex]
[tex]ds=\frac{mv^2}{2}dt\:[/tex]
Velocity is constant right? So I should be able to to this:
[tex]\frac{ds}{dx}=\frac{mv^2}{2}\frac{dt}{dx}[/tex]
I'm not sure about the following step where I use: [tex]\frac{dt}{dx}=\frac{1}{v}[/tex] is this correct?
[tex]\frac{ds}{dx}=\frac{mv^2}{2}\frac{1}{v}[/tex]
And finally I get:
[tex]\frac{ds}{dx}=\frac{mv}{2}[/tex]
It differs from momentum by the factor of 1/2, where did I make the mistake?
Free particle moves with constant velocity [tex]v = \frac{x - x_{0}}{t - t_{0}} = \mbox{const.}[/tex] So the action is [tex]S = \frac{m}{2} ( \frac{x - x_{0}}{t - t_{0}} )^{2} \int^{t}_{t_{0}} d t = \frac{m}{2} \frac{(x - x_{0})^{2}}{t - t_{0}} .[/tex] Now, you can calculate its partial derivative with respect to [itex]x[/itex] [tex]\frac{\partial S}{\partial x} = m \frac{x - x_{0}}{t - t_{0}} = m v = p.[/tex] Notice, you also get the Hamiltonian from [tex]\frac{\partial S}{\partial t} = - \frac{m}{2} ( \frac{x - x_{0}}{t - t_{0}} )^{2} = - H.[/tex] Now you can back check as follow [tex]S = \int d S = \int \left( \frac{\partial S}{\partial x} d x + \frac{\partial S}{\partial t} d t \right) = \int \left( p \dot{x} - H \right) \ d t = \int L d t .[/tex] Of course, to be accurate you must think of the action as function of the end points [itex]S = S ( x , t ; x_{0} , t_{0} )[/itex]. For the general case, you can use the variation principle to show that [tex]\delta S = \int_{0}^{t} \frac{d}{dt} \left( \frac{\partial L}{\partial \dot{q}} \delta q \right) = p \delta q |_{0}^{t} .[/tex] Assuming [itex]\delta q (0) = 0[/itex] we find [tex]\delta S = p(t) \delta q , \ \ \Rightarrow \ p(t) = \frac{\partial S}{\partial q} .[/tex]

Sam
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Alexandre and vanhees71
samalkhaiat said:
Sam

Oh, thanks, now I understand. I didn't realize that velocity doesn't depend on time and so Lagrangian goes out of the integral here
[tex]S = \frac{m}{2} ( \frac{x - x_{0}}{t - t_{0}} )^{2} \int^{t}_{t_{0}} d t[/tex]
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
4K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 67 ·
3
Replies
67
Views
6K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K