More rigorous Euler-Lagrange derivation

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the derivation of the Euler-Lagrange equations from variational principles, specifically focusing on the meaning and implications of the variation operator (##\delta##) in the context of action and path variations in mechanics. Participants explore the mathematical foundations and conceptual understanding of these principles, including the treatment of paths in configuration space and the role of boundary conditions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses uncertainty about the concept of variation (##\delta##) and its justification in the context of the calculus of variations, questioning its treatment similar to derivatives.
  • Another participant clarifies that ##\delta q## represents a deviation of the path in configuration space from the stationary path of the action, linking it to Hamilton's principle.
  • A further elaboration is provided on how variations are defined over paths with fixed endpoints, leading to the relationship ##\delta \dot{q} = \mathrm{d}_t \delta q##.
  • One participant presents a detailed derivation of the variation of the action, showing how it leads to the Euler-Lagrange equations, emphasizing the role of boundary terms and their vanishing under certain conditions.
  • Another participant introduces a geometrical viewpoint of mechanics through references to academic papers, suggesting additional reading for a deeper understanding.
  • There is a mention of non-holonomic constraints and a caution regarding the use of specific editions of a textbook, indicating potential discrepancies in the treatment of the subject matter.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying levels of understanding regarding the concept of variation and its implications in the derivation of the Euler-Lagrange equations. While some points are clarified, the discussion remains unresolved on certain aspects of the foundational concepts, particularly the interpretation of ##\delta##.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the importance of boundary conditions in the derivation process and the implications of different paths in configuration space. There is also mention of potential limitations in certain textbooks regarding the treatment of non-holonomic constraints.

romsofia
Gold Member
Messages
600
Reaction score
330
TL;DR
What really is the “variation”?
Sorry if there are other threads on this, but after a discussion with a friend on this (im in the mountains, so no books, and my googlefu isn't helping), I realize that my understanding of the variational principles arent exactly... great! So, maybe some one can help.

Start with a functional defined by: ##S= \int L(q(t), \dot{q}(t), t) dt## where ##\dot{q} = \frac{dq}{dt} ## we “vary” the functional, in the following manner: ##\delta S = \int (\frac{\partial L}{\partial q} \delta q + \frac{\partial L}{\partial \dot{q}} \delta \dot{q})dt##

And so, from there i know how to get the EL to pop out from integration and some arguments about boundary conditions. The issue he had, and where I am also lacking is, what REALLY is that ##\delta##?

I've always treated it similar to a derivative, and essentially all we are doing is taking a chain rule when doing ##\delta S##, but then i can't really justify the ##\delta q## since the chain rule in that spot would be ##\frac{dq}{dt}##.

Basic question that I should know(it is just calculus of variations), but better to finally learn it properly, than go off by handwaving because my muscle memory can write it down properly!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
##\delta q## is simply a deviation of the path in configuration space from the trajectory of the particle, which is defined as the stationary path of the action.

In Hamilton's principle the variation is over all paths with fixed endpoints ##q(t_1)## and ##q(t_2)##, and time is not varied. From this you get
$$\delta \dot{q}=\mathrm{d}_t \delta q.$$
Then you have
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\delta S &= \delta \int_{t_1}^{t_2} \mathrm{d} t L(q,\dot{q},t)\\
&=\int_{t_1}^{t_2} \mathrm{d} t \left (\delta q \cdot \frac{\partial L}{\partial q} + \delta \dot{q} \cdot \frac{\partial L}{\partial \dot{q}} \right) \\
&=\int_{t_1}^{t_2} \mathrm{d} t \delta q \cdot \left ( \cdot \frac{\partial L}{\partial q} - \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d} t} \frac{\partial L}{\partial \dot{q}} \right) + \delta q(t_2) \cdot \left . \frac{\partial L}{\partial \dot{q}}\right|_{t=t_2} - \delta q(t_1) \cdot \left . \frac{\partial L}{\partial \dot{q}} \right |_{t=t_1}.
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
Since by definition ##\delta q(t_1)=\delta q(t_2)=0## the boundary terms vanish and you finally get
$$\delta S=\int_{t_1}^{t_2} \mathrm{d} t \delta q \cdot \left ( \frac{\partial L}{\partial q} - \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d} t} \frac{\partial L}{\partial \dot{q}} \right).$$
Since this must hold for all functions ##\delta q(t)## the term in the parentheses must vanish, which leads to the Euler-Lagrange Equations,
$$\frac{\partial L}{\partial q} = \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d} t} \frac{\partial L}{\partial \dot{q}}.$$
For a mathematically rigorous treatment of analytical mechanics, see

V. I. Arnold, Mathematical Methods of Classical Mechanics, Springer (1989)
 
  • Informative
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: romsofia and Delta2
romsofia said:
And so, from there i know how to get the EL to pop out from integration and some arguments about boundary conditions. The issue he had, and where I am also lacking is, what REALLY is that ##\delta##?

So, as you pointed out, the action is a functional of paths in the ##(q,\dot{q})## space, the tangent bundle of configuration space.

A path is a function from the real numbers to this tangent bundle ##\mathbb{R}\ni t\rightarrow(q(t),\dot{q}(t))##.
We can define a slightly different path by ##q^{'}(t)=q(t)+\varepsilon\eta(t)## so that ##\dot{q}^{'}(t)=\dot{q}(t)+\varepsilon\dot{\eta}(t)##. Notice that ##\delta q=\varepsilon\eta(t)## and ##\delta\dot{q}=\varepsilon\dot{\eta}(t)## represents how far away is the new path from the old one i.e., how much we have deformed the original path.

We can now ask, what is the value of the action for this new path? We can find it by a Taylor expansion of the Lagrangian
$$
S' =\int_{t_{1}}^{t_{2}}L(q^{'}(t),\dot{q}^{'}(t))dt=\int_{t_{1}}^{t_{2}}L(q(t)+\varepsilon\eta(t),\dot{q}(t)+\varepsilon\dot{\eta}(t))dt
\approx\int_{t_{1}}^{t_{2}}dt\left[L(q(t),\dot{q}(t))+\varepsilon\eta(t)\frac{\partial L}{\partial q}+\varepsilon\dot{\eta}(t))\frac{\partial L}{\partial\dot{q}}\right]dt$$

So, we can conclude that the first order variation of the action is
$$\delta S=\int_{t_{1}}^{t_{2}}\left(\varepsilon\eta(t)\frac{\partial L}{\partial q}+\varepsilon\dot{\eta}(t))\frac{\partial L}{\partial\dot{q}}\right)dt=\int_{t_{1}}^{t_{2}}\left(\frac{\partial L}{\partial q}\delta q+\frac{\partial L}{\partial\dot{q}}\delta\dot{q}\right)dt$$
 
Last edited:
  • Love
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71 and romsofia
Thanks for your help, I'll read them in more detail, and see if I have any questions! The discussion of configuration spaces is bringing back memories of non-holonomic constraints for some reason!
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71
If it comes to non-holonomic constraints, don't use the distorted 3rd edition of Goldstein's textbook. The 2nd edition is fine though.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: PhDeezNutz

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
954
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K