How to understand momentum is the generator of translation ?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the concept that momentum acts as the generator of translation in both classical mechanics (CM) and quantum mechanics (QM). Participants explore the mathematical representation of the translation operator and its connection to momentum, particularly through the lens of canonical transformations and Noether's theorem. They highlight the distinction between active and passive transformations, emphasizing how momentum can be viewed as a generator in both contexts. The conversation also touches on the complexities of relating classical and quantum frameworks, particularly regarding conserved quantities. Overall, the dialogue seeks to clarify the foundational role of momentum in the translation process across different physical theories.
HxWang
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
How to understand "momentum is the generator of translation" ?

"As it is known from classical mechanics, the momentum is the generator of translation", it is from WIKI, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Momentum_operator)
I don't understand its meaning.
T(ε) is translation operator, then T(ε)f(x)=f(x-ε)=f(x)-ε\frac{\partial f}{\partial x}=(1-ε \frac{\partial }{\partial x}) f(x) ,
so T(ε)=1-ε \frac{\partial }{\partial x} = 1 + i ε (i \frac{\partial }{\partial x}),
we can say i \frac{\partial }{\partial x} is the generator of translation, where is momentum ??
 
Physics news on Phys.org
This is an interesting question.
I think you will find the answer by reading about canonical transformations in classical mechanics.
Of course you will have to think about the correspondance CM-QM, and thats' why it will be interesting.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canonical_transformation
 
Last edited:
HxWang said:
"As it is known from classical mechanics, the momentum is the generator of translation", it is from WIKI, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Momentum_operator)
I don't understand its meaning.
T(ε) is translation operator, then T(ε)f(x)=f(x-ε)=f(x)-ε\frac{\partial f}{\partial x}=(1-ε \frac{\partial }{\partial x}) f(x) ,
so T(ε)=1-ε \frac{\partial }{\partial x} = 1 + i ε (i \frac{\partial }{\partial x}),
we can say i \frac{\partial }{\partial x} is the generator of translation, where is momentum ??
You're asking about a generator in classical mechanics, but your calculation involves a translation operator acting on a wavefunction. If CM has taught us to think of momentum as a generator of translations, then your result looks like a good reason to guess that momentum can be represented by -id/dx in QM. (Or +id/dx...I'm a bit puzzled by the sign, but I don't have time to think it through right now).

If we want to argue that momentum is the generator of translations in CM, then we must do a calculation in CM, no wavefunctions involved. I don't remember the reason why momentum is said to be a generator of translations in CB (not sure I ever knew it), so I checked the mechanics books I have at home. They don't explain this, so I decided to try to figure it out. I still don't know what the answer is, but this looks like an answer:

If
$$S[q]=\int_0^t L(q(t),\dot q(t)) \mathrm dt,$$ where L is a Lagrangian and S is an action functional, then ##S[q+\varepsilon]=S[q]+\varepsilon p(t)## to first order in ε. This is perhaps a reason to call p a "generator of translations".

But maybe this isn't it at all. I have a feeling that we should be looking at Noether's theorem. Maybe there's a reason to call the conserved quantities "generators". If someone has a better answer, I would like to hear it.
 
Go to Chapter 2.8 in Shankar's QM text.

Edit: Section attached

He then goes on to apply this theorem to translations, but for some reason I can't clip that part without my computer freezing up.
 

Attachments

  • 214211.PNG
    214211.PNG
    21.4 KB · Views: 1,031
Last edited:
Thanks a lot, maajdl, Fredrik and HomogenousCow.

This is my argument about the question:
The word "generator" appears in "Group Theory" and "CM", this is the reason why we confused.
In Group Theory, ∇ (or \pm i ∇) is the generator of translation, the manner we obtain it is "translating object f(x)". Generally, we call this “active transformation”.
In CM, canonical transformations is "coordinate transformation", that is "passive transformation". In passive infinitesimal canonical transformations,
q'=\hat{T}(ε)(q,p)=q+ε\frac{\partial g}{\partial p}
p'=\hat{T}(ε)(q,p)=p-ε \frac{\partial g}{\partial q}​
where \hat{T}(ε) is "transforming operator", which act on (q,p) simultaneously. we call g=g(q,p) generator of transformation. when g(q,p)=p, corresponding transformation is spatial translation.

Summary:
∇ is the generator of active transformation, g(q,p) is the generator of passive transformation.

What do you think of my argument?

PS:I'm from china, so I'm very grateful for someone pointing out my mistake in Physics and language. :)
Thanks to maajdl, Fredrik and HomogenousCow again.
 
Last edited:
Fredrik said:
I have a feeling that we should be looking at Noether's theorem. Maybe there's a reason to call the conserved quantities "generators".
Yes, it's all about Noether's theorem (or, deeper, Lie transformation theory). For every (continuous) symmetry of the Lagrangian there's a conserved quantity which generates the symmetry.

E.g., for a variation of a canonical coordinate ##q_k \to q_k + \delta q_k##, the conserved quantity turns out to be $$ \frac{\partial L}{\partial \dot q_k}$$which is the canonical momentum.

Note the adjective "canonical". The correspondence with familiar everyday quantities gets trickier when dealing with non-free or relativistic situations.

BTW, this can also be regarded as a form of the general principle that for every continuous symmetry of a (set of) dynamical equation(s) of motion (i.e., a symmetry which takes solutions to solutions), there's necessarily a generator. This is the essence of Lie transformation theory. :wink:
 
Thread 'Is 'Velocity of Transport' a Recognized Term in English Mechanics Literature?'
Here are two fragments from Banach's monograph in Mechanics I have never seen the term <<velocity of transport>> in English texts. Actually I have never seen this term being named somehow in English. This term has a name in Russian books. I looked through the original Banach's text in Polish and there is a Polish name for this term. It is a little bit surprising that the Polish name differs from the Russian one and also differs from this English translation. My question is: Is there...
Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...
Back
Top