Undergrad Interpretations of phase space in Dynamical Systems Theory

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the interpretation of phase space in Dynamical Systems Theory, specifically regarding the mapping of points in phase space to locations in other spaces, such as 3D space. It establishes that a point, denoted as ##p##, can represent a state of a system, and explores the implications of defining additional dimensions, ##x^c(p)##, within the context of classical mechanics and cotangent bundles. The conversation raises questions about the mathematical soundness of these definitions and their implications for understanding fields that change over time.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Dynamical Systems Theory
  • Familiarity with phase space concepts
  • Knowledge of cotangent bundles in classical mechanics
  • Basic understanding of vector mathematics and mappings
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the mathematical properties of cotangent bundles in classical mechanics
  • Study the implications of Liouville's theorem in Hamiltonian mechanics
  • Explore the concept of 1-to-1 mappings in phase space
  • Investigate the relationship between phase space and field theory
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for mathematicians, physicists, and students of Dynamical Systems Theory who are exploring the complexities of phase space and its applications in classical mechanics and field theory.

Stephen Tashi
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Education Advisor
Messages
7,864
Reaction score
1,602
TL;DR
Can some phase spaces be interpreted as fields as well as a set of non-simultaneous states of a single system?
In Dynamical Systems Theory, a point in phase space is interpreted as the state of some system and the system does not exist in two states simultaneously. Can some phase spaces be given an additional interpretation as describing a field of values at different locations that exist simultaenously in a different space?

If ##p## is a point in a phase space and ##p## is a vector or more complicated mathematical object then there can be cases where there exists a 1-to-1 mapping that maps ##p## to a location in some other space (e.g. 3D space or a general metric space). Denote that location by ##x(p)##. Denote the other information contained in ##p## by ##x^c(p)##.

Let the dynamics of a system be given by the set of transformations ##\mathbb{T}## and use the notation that ##T_{\Delta t} \in \mathbb{T}## is the transformation that transforms ##p## to a new state ##T_{\Delta t}(p)## after an interval of time ##\Delta T## passes.

To regard the phase space as a field, consider the values ##( x(p), x^c(p))## to give information about the values of a field at locations ##x(p)## at time ##t = 0##. At time ##\Delta t##, define the value at location ##x(p)## to be ##(x(p), x^c( T_{\Delta t}(p))##.

Is this a mathematically sound definition that describes a field changing in time?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Stephen Tashi said:
If ##p## is a point in a phase space and ##p## is a vector or more complicated mathematical object then there can be cases where there exists a 1-to-1 mapping that maps ##p## to a location in some other space (e.g. 3D space or a general metric space). Denote that location by ##x(p)##. Denote the other information contained in ##p## by ##x^c(p)##.
For classical mechanics, isn't ##x^c(p)## additional dimension of the phase space? Isn't it just additional dimensions to the cotangent bundle of configuration space?
 
Fred Wright said:
For classical mechanics, isn't ##x^c(p)## additional dimension of the phase space?

The definition doesn't specify a unique way to define ##x(p)## and ##x^c(p)## in terms of the phase space used by classical mechanics.

A "natural" way to do this for the phase space of a single particle would be to let ##x(p)## be the 3-D position information in ##p## at time ##t=0## and let ##x^c(p)## be the remaining components of ##p##. However, for this to define a 1-to-1 mapping between a point ##p## and 3-D space, we can't have a phase space where the particle can be at the same location in 3-D space and have two possible states ##p_1, p_2## at that location. If such a thing is possible in a phase space, then finding spaces where ##x(p)## can defined will require an abstract viewpoint of what a space is.

Isn't it just additional dimensions to the cotangent bundle of configuration space?

I don't know because I haven't studied the physical interpretation of a "cotangent bundle".
 
Stephen Tashi said:
I don't know because I haven't studied the physical interpretation of a "cotangent bundle".

Cotangent bundle is the phase space in mechanics.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
1K