I Is the Action Always a Minimum in the Principle of Least Action?

AI Thread Summary
The principle of least action requires that the action S be an extremum, typically interpreted as a minimum for physical paths. However, some argue that it could also represent a maximum, as both interpretations yield valid results. The terminology stems from historical parallels with Fermat's principle of least time, which influenced the development of mechanics. The term "stationary" is suggested as a more accurate descriptor of the action's nature. Overall, the discussion emphasizes the conventional use of "minimum" while acknowledging alternative perspectives.
BookWei
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
Hello, When we applying the principle of least action, we require ##\delta S=0##, which corresponding to the action S being an extremum. I am just wondering why do we say that the action is a minimum instead of a maximum for a physical path? Can I use the path integral to explain this problem?
Thanks for all responses.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think that long ago, when Fermat's principle of least time came about, that people so liked the idea that they asked themselves why couldn't such a thing work for mechanics. The principle of least action was then made intentionally analogous to Fermat's principle. These optical considerations would then inspire others to develop wave mechanics.
 
If S is minimum , -S is maximum and anyway the both work. Stationary is more appropriate word to say.
 
Thread 'Question about pressure of a liquid'
I am looking at pressure in liquids and I am testing my idea. The vertical tube is 100m, the contraption is filled with water. The vertical tube is very thin(maybe 1mm^2 cross section). The area of the base is ~100m^2. Will he top half be launched in the air if suddenly it cracked?- assuming its light enough. I want to test my idea that if I had a thin long ruber tube that I lifted up, then the pressure at "red lines" will be high and that the $force = pressure * area$ would be massive...
I feel it should be solvable we just need to find a perfect pattern, and there will be a general pattern since the forces acting are based on a single function, so..... you can't actually say it is unsolvable right? Cause imaging 3 bodies actually existed somwhere in this universe then nature isn't gonna wait till we predict it! And yea I have checked in many places that tiny changes cause large changes so it becomes chaos........ but still I just can't accept that it is impossible to solve...
Back
Top