Is Routh Function a non-relativistic KK theory?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter arivero
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Function Theory
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the relationship between the Routh function and Kaluza-Klein (KK) theory, particularly whether the Routh function can be considered a non-relativistic limit of KK theory. Participants explore the implications of Routh's ignorable variables and the potential for a purely kinetic theory derived from Routh's techniques.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Technical explanation, Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that the Routh function, which involves extra coordinates interpreted as potential energy, bears similarity to Kaluza-Klein theory, where extra dimensions produce force fields.
  • Another participant questions the analogy, asking for clarification on whether Routh's ignorable variables are being referenced and expressing familiarity with cyclic variables instead.
  • A participant confirms they are referring to ignorable variables but cites limited sources, specifically mentioning Felix Klein's historical work.
  • One participant asserts that the Routh procedure does not lead to a purely kinetic theory, suggesting that this is not a common interpretation in advanced classical mechanics texts.
  • Another participant reflects on their decision to omit Routh from their monograph on analytical mechanics, noting Hertz's work on purely kinetic theory as a related but separate topic.
  • A later reply expresses curiosity about the historical context of extra dimensions, suggesting that Kaluza's use of extra variables was not as surprising as some contemporary views imply.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the validity of the analogy between the Routh function and Kaluza-Klein theory. There are competing views regarding the implications of Routh's techniques and their relation to kinetic theories.

Contextual Notes

Some limitations include the lack of explicit references to a "purely kinetic" theory in standard texts and the dependence on interpretations of Routh's variables and their applications in classical mechanics.

arivero
Gold Member
Messages
3,485
Reaction score
188
I have just read a mention about a variant of Legendre transformation that instead of producing the Hamiltonian produces "Routh function", and that the some of this coordinates in this function are interpreted as extra coordinates producing the potential energy.

It sound very like Kaluza Klein, where the extra coordinates produce the force fields (and thus the potential energy). How valid is this analogy? Will KK theory produce Routh Theory in the non relativistic limit?

Generically, is there some modern information on this formalism?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Do you mean Routh's ignorable variables? If not please provide a reference ... I'm familiar with the removal of cyclic variables, but not the generation of extra variables.
 
Yep, I think I mean that, ignorable variables. Regretly I have only seen, till now, the mention in Felix Klein "history of mathematics in the XIXth century".
 
In that case the answer to your first question is "no".

The Routh procedure is usually taught in an advanced course in classical mechanics; you can find it in most advanced texts like Goldstein's "Classical Mechanics", or most other graduate texts.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
Thanks for the answer. Still... does Goldstein mention explicitly the idea of a "purely kinetic" theory to be obtained from Routh technique?
 
I don't recall. When writing my monograph on analytical mechanics I decided to omit Routh as off the mainline of development. Hertz did develop a purely kinetic theory ...at least he started it prior to his untimely death.
 
Ok, thanks very much. I will try to follow these leads.

It is mostly a curiosity, but at least it tells that Kaluza was not doing a surprising move by using extra variables in his theory. People nowadays believes that extra dimensions are invented in string theory :-D
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
7K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
5K
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
3K