How to Derive the Klein-Gordon Equation from its Lagrangian Density?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on deriving the Klein-Gordon equation from its Lagrangian density, specifically addressing the integration by parts and the treatment of variations. Participants clarify the need to subtract the original function when applying the variation operator and emphasize that the infinitesimal variation is nilpotent. The integration by parts is highlighted as essential for rearranging terms, with a focus on moving derivatives off the variation rather than the field itself. The conversation also touches on the generalized divergence theorem, which is crucial for understanding the boundary conditions in multi-dimensional integrals. Ultimately, the participants work through the mathematical intricacies to ensure the correct application of these principles in the derivation.
waht
Messages
1,499
Reaction score
4

Homework Statement



I'm trying to derive the Klein-Gordon equation from its lagrangian density

\mathcal{L} = - \frac{1}{2} \partial^{\mu} \varphi \partial_{\mu} \varphi - \frac{1}{2} m^2 \varphi^2 + \Omega_0

(Srednicki p.24)


Homework Equations



S = \int d^4x \mathcal{L}

\delta S = 0


The Attempt at a Solution



So here is what I got so far,

\int d^4x \left[ -\frac{1}{2} \partial^{\mu} (\varphi + \delta\varphi) \partial_{\mu} (\varphi + \delta\varphi)- \frac{1}{2} m^2 (\varphi+\delta\varphi)^2 + \Omega_0 \right] = 0


\int d^4x \left[ -\frac{1}{2} \partial^{\mu} \delta\varphi \partial_{\mu} \varphi -\frac{1}{2} \partial^{\mu} \varphi \partial_{\mu} \delta\varphi - m^2 \varphi \delta\varphi \right] + \int d^4x \left[\partial^{\mu}\varphi \partial_{\mu} \varphi + \partial^{\mu}\delta\varphi \partial_{\mu} \delta\varphi + \Omega_0 \right] = 0

The answer in the book is the first integral on the left. But that would mean that the second integral has to vanish. If this is correct why does the second integral is zero?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The variation operator \delta is supposed to act like a derivative operator:

\delta(ab) = (\delta a)b + a \delta b

It looks like what happened is that you forgot two things. First, you need to subtract off the original function:

\delta f(\phi) = f(\phi + \delta \phi) - f(\phi)

and second, you forgot that \delta \phi[/tex], because it is an infinitesimal, is nilpotent:<br /> <br /> \delta \phi \delta \phi = 0
 
I get it now, didn't realize we have to subtract that off, now it works.

The second part requires integration by parts of the first two terms,

\int d^4x \left[ -\frac{1}{2} \partial^{\mu} \delta\varphi \partial_{\mu} \varphi -\frac{1}{2} \partial^{\mu} \varphi \partial_{\mu} \delta\varphi - m^2 \varphi \delta\varphi \right] = 0

to obtain

\int d^4x \left[+\partial^{\mu}\partial_{\mu} \varphi - m^2 \varphi \right] \delta\varphi = 0

If I do this to the first term

u = \partial^{\mu} \delta\varphi and v&#039; = \partial_{\mu} \varphi

du = 2 \partial^{\mu} \partial_{\mu} \delta\varphi and v = \varphi

then

(\partial^{\mu} \delta\varphi)\varphi - \int 2 \partial_{\mu}\partial^{\mu} \delta\varphi

and the same to the second term and add it up, then I guess the constants with \delta\varphi should vanish, but I will get a constant of two in the integrand, which can't seem to get rid off.
 
When integrating by parts, you need to move the derivatives off of \delta \phi, not the other way around.

I'm not sure where you got the factor of 2 from in the first place. Integration by parts doesn't work exactly the same way in multi-dimensional integrals. What you need is a generalized divergence theorem, which you can derive from the product rule:

\partial_{\mu}(uv) = v \partial_{\mu} u + u \partial_{\mu} v

So

\int_R d^4x \; u \partial_{\mu} v = \int_R d^4x \; \partial_{\mu}(uv) - \int_R d^4x \; v \partial_{\mu} u = \int_{\partial R} d^3x \; uv - \int_R d^4x \; v \partial_{\mu} u

where \partial R means the boundary of the region of integration R. Generally the fields are assumed to vanish on the boundary, so the boundary integral also vanishes.
 
That's interesting. So if the boundary integral vanishes, this integral is antisymmetric with respect to u, and v.

\int_R d^4x \; u \partial_{\mu} v = -\int_R d^4x \; v \partial_{\mu} u

So when applying this to the original problem

\int d^4x \left[ -\frac{1}{2} \partial^{\mu} \delta\varphi \partial_{\mu} \varphi -\frac{1}{2} \partial^{\mu} \varphi \partial_{\mu} \delta\varphi - m^2 \varphi \delta\varphi \right] = 0


this kind of works by flipping u and v in the second term of the integral,

but when flipping u and v in the first term of the integral, \delta\varphi is still in front of the derivate,

u = \partial^{\mu} \delta\varphi

v = \varphi
 
Try looking at it again. I think you've confused yourself. You want to move the derivative off of \delta \phi, not the other way around.

u and v are just arbitrary objects.
 
Thread 'Help with Time-Independent Perturbation Theory "Good" States Proof'
(Disclaimer: this is not a HW question. I am self-studying, and this felt like the type of question I've seen in this forum. If there is somewhere better for me to share this doubt, please let me know and I'll transfer it right away.) I am currently reviewing Chapter 7 of Introduction to QM by Griffiths. I have been stuck for an hour or so trying to understand the last paragraph of this proof (pls check the attached file). It claims that we can express Ψ_{γ}(0) as a linear combination of...
Back
Top