Invariance of Action: Lagrangian Transformation

  • I
  • Thread starter kent davidge
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Invariance
In summary: Now, if the infinitesimal transformation is \bar{\tau} = \tau + \epsilon (\tau), then to first order in \epsilon we have \bar{e}(\tau) = e (\tau ) - \epsilon (\tau) \frac{d}{d \tau} e (\tau) . So, the Lie derivative of e is \delta e (\tau) = \bar{e}(\tau) - e (\tau) = - \epsilon (\tau) \ \frac{d}{d \tau} \bar{e} (\tau) - e (\tau) \ \frac{d}{d \tau} \epsilon (\tau) = - \frac{d}{d \tau} \left
  • #1
kent davidge
933
56
The Lagragian ##\mathcal L_e = e(\lambda)^{-1} \mathcal L - \frac{1}{2}m^2 e(\lambda)##, with ##\mathcal L## not depending on ##\lambda##, transform as ##\delta L_e = \frac{d}{d\lambda} (\epsilon (\lambda) \mathcal L_e)##* under the reparametrization ##\lambda \rightarrow \lambda + \epsilon(\lambda)##, according to a paper that I'm reading.

Above I reproduced the expressions exactly how they are given in the paper. However, I think there's a mistake in *. Shouldn't the right-hand-side be ##\delta (\epsilon (\lambda) \mathcal L_e)## instead?

Also, I was able to derive * myself only for the second term in ##\mathcal L_e##. Does anyone know how to derive for the first term?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
kent davidge said:
The Lagragian ##\mathcal L_e = e(\lambda)^{-1} \mathcal L - \frac{1}{2}m^2 e(\lambda)##, with ##\mathcal L## not depending on ##\lambda##, transform as ##\delta L_e = \frac{d}{d\lambda} (\epsilon (\lambda) \mathcal L_e)##* under the reparametrization ##\lambda \rightarrow \lambda + \epsilon(\lambda)##, according to a paper that I'm reading.
I will assuming that you know that under [itex]\tau \to \tau + \epsilon (\tau)[/itex], we have [itex]\delta x (\tau) = - \epsilon (\tau) \ \dot{x} (\tau)[/itex] , [itex]\delta e (\tau ) = - \frac{d}{d \tau} ( \epsilon (\tau ) \ e (\tau) )[/itex] and [itex]\delta \dot{x} (\tau) = - \frac{d}{d \tau} ( \epsilon (\tau) \ \dot{x}(\tau) )[/itex].
Now,
[tex]\delta \mathcal{L}_{e} = e^{-1} \ \delta \mathcal{L}(x , \dot{x}) - e^{-2} \ \mathcal{L} (x , \dot{x}) \ \delta e - \frac{1}{2}m^{2} \ \delta e ,[/tex] or
[tex]\delta \mathcal{L}_{e} = e^{-1} \ \frac{\partial \mathcal{L}}{\partial x} \ \delta x + e^{-1} \ \frac{\partial \mathcal{L}}{\partial \dot{x}} \ \delta \dot{x} - e^{-2} \ \mathcal{L} \ \delta e - \frac{1}{2}m^{2} \ \delta e .[/tex] Next, if you substitute the above transformations, then with a bit of algebra you obtain
[tex]\delta \mathcal{L}_{e} = - \frac{d}{d \tau} \left( \epsilon \ ( e^{-1} \ \mathcal{L} - \frac{1}{2}m^{2} \ e ) \right) + e^{-1} \ \frac{d \epsilon}{d \tau} \left( 2 \mathcal{L} - \frac{\partial \mathcal{L}}{\partial \dot{x}} \ \dot{x} \right) .[/tex] That is
[tex]\delta \mathcal{L}_{e} + \frac{d}{d \tau} \left( \epsilon \ \mathcal{L}_{e}\right) = e^{-1} \ \frac{d \epsilon}{d \tau}\left( 2 \mathcal{L} - \frac{\partial \mathcal{L}}{\partial \dot{x}} \ \dot{x} \right) .[/tex] The RHS vanishes if and only if [itex]\mathcal{L}(x , \dot{x})[/itex] is a homogeneous function of degree two in [itex]\dot{x}[/itex]. That is
[tex]\delta \mathcal{L}_{e} + \frac{d}{d \tau} (\epsilon \ \mathcal{L}_{e}) = 0 \ \ \Leftrightarrow \ \ \frac{\partial \mathcal{L}}{\partial \dot{x}} \ \dot{x} - 2 \mathcal{L} = 0.[/tex] This is the case when [itex]\mathcal{L} = \frac{1}{2} \dot{x}^{2}[/itex].
 
  • Like
Likes kent davidge
  • #3
Thanks @samalkhaiat, I understood your solution, but I have two questions:

1 - is ##\delta e^{-1} = (\partial e^{-1}/ \partial e) (\partial e / \partial \tau) \delta \tau##?

2 - are the form of the variations you give in the beggining of your post obtained by requiring invariance of the action?
 
  • #4
kent davidge said:
Thanks @samalkhaiat,
1 - is ##\delta e^{-1} = (\partial e^{-1}/ \partial e) (\partial e / \partial \tau) \delta \tau##?
No, the variation symbol [itex]\delta[/itex] is a Lie derivative, i.e., it is a derivation but not a differential. So [tex]\delta e^{-1} = \left( \frac{d}{d e} e^{-1} \right) \delta e ,[/tex] but (as we will see below), [tex]\delta e \neq \frac{d e}{d \tau} \delta \tau = \frac{d e}{d \tau} \epsilon (\tau) .[/tex]

2 - are the form of the variations you give in the beggining of your post obtained by requiring invariance of the action?
Yes, you can show that the invariance of the action [itex]S[x , e][/itex] under the diffeomorphism [itex]\tau \to \bar{\tau} = \bar{\tau} (\tau)[/itex] implies (and is implied by) the following:

1) The coordinates behave like scalar fields, i.e., [tex]x (\tau) \to \bar{x} (\bar{\tau}) = x (\tau).[/tex] So, for the infinitesimal diffeomorphism [itex]\bar{\tau} = \tau + \epsilon (\tau)[/itex], we have, to first order in [itex]\epsilon[/itex], [tex]\bar{x}(\tau) = x ( \tau - \epsilon ) = x (\tau ) - \epsilon (\tau) \ \frac{d}{d \tau}x(\tau) = x (\tau) - \epsilon (\tau) \dot{x} (\tau) .[/tex] The variation (or the Lie derivative) [itex]\delta x (\tau)[/itex] is defined by [tex]\delta x (\tau) \equiv \bar{x}(\tau) - x (\tau).[/tex] This clearly leads to [itex]\delta x (\tau) = - \epsilon (\tau) \dot{x}(\tau)[/itex].

2) The [itex]e (\tau)[/itex] field behaves as scalar density[*]: [tex]e (\tau) \to \bar{e}(\bar{\tau}) = \left( \frac{d \bar{\tau}}{d \tau} \right)^{-1} e ( \tau ) .[/tex] Again, infinitesimally, we have [tex]\bar{e} (\tau + \epsilon ) = \left( 1 + \frac{d \epsilon}{d \tau} \right)^{-1} e ( \tau ) .[/tex] Expanding both sides to first order in [itex]\epsilon[/itex], we get [tex]\bar{e} (\tau) + \epsilon \ \frac{d}{d \tau} e ( \tau ) = \left( 1 - \frac{d \epsilon}{d \tau} \right) e ( \tau ) .[/tex] Note that in the second term on the left hand side we replaced [itex]\bar{e}( \tau )[/itex] by [itex]e ( \tau )[/itex] which is allowed by our first order approximations. Indeed [tex]\epsilon \ \frac{d}{d \tau} \bar{e}( \tau ) = \epsilon \ \frac{d}{d \tau} e ( \tau ) + \mathcal{O} (\epsilon^{2}).[/tex] So, as usual, the Lie derivative of [itex]e[/itex] is given by [tex]\delta e (\tau) \equiv \bar{e}(\tau) - e (\tau) = - \epsilon (\tau) \ \frac{d}{d \tau} \bar{e} (\tau) - e (\tau) \ \frac{d}{d \tau} \epsilon (\tau) = - \frac{d}{d \tau} \left( \epsilon (\tau) e (\tau)\right) .[/tex]

------------------------

[*] Imagine a one-dimensional manifold with symmetric metric “tensor” [itex]g_{\tau \tau}(\tau)[/itex]. The square of distances on such manifold is given by [tex]ds^{2} = g_{\tau \tau} (\tau) \ d \tau d \tau , \ \ \Rightarrow \ \ ds = \sqrt{g_{\tau \tau}(\tau)} \ d \tau \equiv e (\tau) \ d \tau ,[/tex] where we have defined the (frame) field [itex]e (\tau) \equiv \sqrt{g_{\tau \tau}(\tau)}[/itex] Now, the invariance of the distance [itex]ds = d \bar{s}[/itex] under arbitrary general coordinate transformations [itex]\tau \to \bar{\tau} = \bar{\tau}(\tau)[/itex], implies that the frame field [itex]e (\tau)[/itex] transforms as scalar density: [tex]\bar{e}( \bar{\tau} ) \ d \bar{\tau} = e ( \tau ) \ d \tau \ \ \Rightarrow \ \ \bar{e}(\bar{\tau}) = \left( \frac{d \bar{\tau}}{d \tau} \right)^{-1} e ( \tau ) .[/tex]
 
  • Like
Likes kent davidge, strangerep and Greg Bernhardt

1. What is the concept of invariance of action in Lagrangian transformation?

The invariance of action refers to the principle that the action of a physical system remains unchanged under certain transformations. In the context of Lagrangian transformation, this means that the equations of motion derived from the Lagrangian of a system remain the same even when the coordinates used to describe the system are transformed.

2. What is the significance of invariance of action in physics?

The invariance of action is a fundamental principle in physics that helps us understand the behavior of physical systems. It allows us to derive the equations of motion for a system without having to know the specific forces acting on it, making it a powerful tool for solving complex problems.

3. What transformations are considered to be invariance of action in Lagrangian transformation?

The most common transformations that are considered to be invariance of action in Lagrangian transformation are time translation, space translation, and rotation. These transformations leave the Lagrangian and the equations of motion unchanged.

4. How does the principle of invariance of action relate to other fundamental principles in physics?

The principle of invariance of action is closely related to other fundamental principles in physics, such as the principle of least action and the principle of conservation of energy. In fact, the principle of least action can be derived from the principle of invariance of action.

5. Are there any limitations to the principle of invariance of action in Lagrangian transformation?

While the principle of invariance of action is a powerful tool in physics, it does have some limitations. It only applies to systems that can be described using a Lagrangian, and it does not take into account the effects of external forces or constraints. Additionally, it may not hold true in certain situations, such as in systems with non-conservative forces or in systems described by non-linear equations.

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
42
Views
3K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
8
Views
988
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
16
Views
932
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
831
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
9
Views
1K
Back
Top