I Noether's theorem for point particles

AI Thread Summary
Many textbooks on analytical mechanics lack a thorough discussion of Noether's theorem in relation to point particle Lagrangian mechanics. Recommendations for resources include "Emily Noether's Wonderful Theorem" by Dwight Neuenschwander, though it has been criticized for errors and shaky mathematics. Arnold's classical mechanics book and Marsden's comprehensive text may also cover the theorem, but they are noted for their mathematical complexity. The discussion highlights a gap in accessible literature on this topic. Overall, finding detailed and clear resources on Noether's theorem for point particles remains a challenge.
William Crawford
Messages
41
Reaction score
36
TL;DR Summary
Literature recommendations for Noether's theorem for point particles.
Hi PF,

As I'm delving back into analytical mechanics, I've noticed that many textbooks don't provide an in-depth discussion of Noether's theorem in the context of point particle Lagrangian mechanics. Does anyone have recommendations for resources (books or otherwise) that cover this topic in detail?

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I believe the reason for this is that one can model point particles as Dirac delta-function distributions. Then the continuum results of Noether's theorem carry over directly.
 
William Crawford said:
TL;DR Summary: Literature recommendations for Noether's theorem for point particles.

Hi PF,

As I'm delving back into analytical mechanics, I've noticed that many textbooks don't provide an in-depth discussion of Noether's theorem in the context of point particle Lagrangian mechanics. Does anyone have recommendations for resources (books or otherwise) that cover this topic in detail?

Thanks!
"Emily Noether's Wonderful Theorem" by Dwight Neuenschwander is dedicated to Noether's theorem. I had mixed feelings about it. There were a number of gross errors and I thought the Rund-Trautmann approach was mathematically a bit shaky. That said, I'm not sure there's anything better. Most other textbooks skate through the theorem very quickly.
 
I'm almost certain it is treated in Arnold's classical mechanics book and Marsden's giant tome, but both of those references are very much on the mathematical side of things. I don't have either at hand to be able to verify.
 
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