Modifying Euler-Lagrange equation to multivariable function

Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on deriving the multidimensional generalization of the Euler-Lagrange equation for multivariable functions in the context of field theory. The confusion arises around the correct application of rules to derive the equation, particularly regarding the variation of the action and the use of the Einstein summation convention. The action is expressed as an integral over spacetime, with the Lagrangian density depending on the field and its gradient. By performing integration by parts and assuming boundary conditions, the Euler-Lagrange equations are obtained, confirming the relationship between the variations of the action and the Lagrangian density. This process is analogous to point-particle mechanics, with the key difference being the treatment of independent variables as functions of multiple dimensions.
offscene
Messages
7
Reaction score
2
Homework Statement
Not exactly homework but I was reading through the book "QFT for the gifted amateur by Lancaster and Blundell" and I was confused about how the line just above equation 1.33 is derived (Image attached below).
Relevant Equations
Euler Lagrange equation, the principle of least action.
Screen Shot 2023-06-06 at 5.15.42 PM.png


I'm confused on how to derive the multidimensional generalization for a multivariable function. Everything makes sense here except the line,

$$
\frac{\delta S}{\delta \psi} = \frac{\partial L}{\partial \psi} - \frac{d}{dx} \frac{\partial L}{\partial(\frac{\partial \psi}{\partial x})} - \frac{d}{dt} \frac{\partial L}{\partial(\frac{\partial \psi}{\partial t})}
$$ and I'm confused about which rule I can use to derive this form of the Euler-Lagrange equation.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
In field theory your Lagrangian is given by the spaticial integral of the Lagrange density ##\mathcal{L}(\phi,\partial_{\mu} \phi)## and thus the action as an integral over spacetime
$$S[\phi]=\int \mathrm{d}^4 x \mathcal{L}(\phi,\partial_{\mu} \phi).$$
In the above example oviously the author considers a field theory in (1+1)-dimensional spacetime, but that doesn't change much. So for clarity I assume here the full case of a (1+3)-dimensional spacetime.

Now note that the gradient of the field, ##\partial_{\mu} \phi=\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial x^{\mu}}## has four components. Now you take the variation of the action wrt. the field,
$$\delta S[\phi]=S[\phi+\delta \phi]-S[\phi]=\int \mathrm{d}^4 x \left [\delta \phi \frac{\partial \mathcal{L}}{\partial \phi} + \partial_{\mu} \delta \phi \frac{\partial \mathcal{L}}{\partial (\partial_{\mu} \phi)} \right ].$$
Note that here the Einstein summation convention has been used, i.e., in the second term in the bracket you sum over ##\mu## from ##0## to ##3##. That's because the Lagrange density depends on all four components of the field gradient, ##\partial_{\mu} \phi##, and it's just the chain rule of multivariable calculus used here. It's pretty much the same as in point-particle mechanics, only that in this case the independent variables ##q(t)## are functions only of ##t##.

To get the Euler-Lagrange equations you just have to do an integration by parts in this 2nd term, using the assumption that ##\delta \phi## vanishes at the boundaries of the integration domain. Then you get
$$\delta S=\int \mathrm{d}^4 x \delta \phi \left [\frac{\partial \mathcal{L}}{\partial \phi} - \partial_{\mu} \frac{\partial \mathcal{L}}{\partial (\partial_{\mu} \phi)} \right ],$$
i.e.,
$$\frac{\delta S}{\delta \phi} = \frac{\partial \mathcal{L}}{\partial \phi} - \partial_{\mu} \frac{\partial \mathcal{L}}{\partial (\partial_{\mu} \phi)}.$$
If you write this out and restricting yourself to (1+1)D spacetime you get the result given in the book.
 
  • Like
Likes jbergman and offscene
So is there some elegant way to do this or am I just supposed to follow my nose and sub the Taylor expansions for terms in the two boost matrices under the assumption ##v,w\ll 1##, then do three ugly matrix multiplications and get some horrifying kludge for ##R## and show that the product of ##R## and its transpose is the identity matrix with det(R)=1? Without loss of generality I made ##\mathbf{v}## point along the x-axis and since ##\mathbf{v}\cdot\mathbf{w} = 0## I set ##w_1 = 0## to...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K