Relativistic Lagrangian and Hamiltonian for a free particle

Join the discussion
Registration is free. Start your own thread to ask a follow-up.
7 replies · 4K views
dyn
Messages
774
Reaction score
64
Hi.
I am working through a QFT book and it gives the relativistic Lagrangian for a free particle as L = -mc2/γ. This doesn't seem consistent with the classical equation L = T - V as it gives a negative kinetic energy ? If L = T - V doesn't apply relativistically then why does the Hamiltonian H = T + V as the total energy still apply ? Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Momentum is the partial of the Lagrangian with respect to ##\dot{x}##, which in this case would be velocity. So if you want positive momentum for a positive mass and a positive velocity, you want the negative sign in the Lagrangian - as v increases, gamma increases, and the Lagrangian becomes less negative as written, meaning the momentum is positive.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: bcrowell
It does not give a negative kinetic energy. In the non-relarivistic limit you have ##-1/\gamma = -\sqrt{1-v^2}\simeq -1+v^2/2## which is just the regular classical Lagrangian up to an additive constant. L = T-V does not hold relativistically, the kinetic term is not quadratic in ##\dot x##.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: bcrowell
The energy function (which is the total energy, the Hamiltonian in different v) is ##v\frac{\partial L}{\partial v} - L##)
dyn said:
Hi.
I am working through a QFT book and it gives the relativistic Lagrangian for a free particle as L = -mc2/γ. This doesn't seem consistent with the classical equation L = T - V as it gives a negative kinetic energy ? If L = T - V doesn't apply relativistically then why does the Hamiltonian H = T + V as the total energy still apply ? Thanks

How are you calculating the energy? Given the Lagrangian, ##L(x,\dot{x},t)## one usually uses the legendre transformation

$$H = v\,\frac{\partial L}{\partial \dot{x}} - L$$

which comes out positive and equal to $$\frac{mc^2}{\sqrt{1-(v/c)^2}}$$
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thanks for your replies. So L = T - V does not apply relativistically. Does H = T + V apply ? If not , does H still give the total energy ?
 
dyn said:
Thanks for your replies. So L = T - V does not apply relativistically. Does H = T + V apply ? If not , does H still give the total energy ?

The general relationships for Lagranian mechanics are these:

[itex]p_\mu = \frac{\partial L}{\partial U^\mu}[/itex]
[itex]H = p_\mu U^\mu - L[/itex]

where [itex]U^\mu = \frac{dx^\mu}{ds}[/itex], for [itex]s[/itex] the "evolution parameter" (not necessarily time--relativistically, it is often proper time). Only in the special case where [itex]L[/itex] is quadratic in [itex]U^\mu[/itex] (that is, [itex]L[/itex] involves only zeroth, first and second powers of [itex]U^\mu[/itex]) does [itex]L = T - V[/itex] or [itex]H = T+V[/itex].
 
Last edited:
dyn said:
Thanks for your replies. So L = T - V does not apply relativistically. Does H = T + V apply ? If not , does H still give the total energy ?

No, H in the relativistic case is given by the Legendre transformation as in my post #4. (Which works for both relativistic and non-relativistic physics).

Basically, the least-action principle when applied relativistically results in the principle of maximal aging, see for instance http://www.eftaylor.com/leastaction.html.

[add]In other words, the expression for L is proportioanl to ##d\tau##, because ##d\tau = dt / \gamma## and ##L = -mc^2 / \gamma## and ##mc^2## is constant for a free particle.
 
Last edited:
Thanks. So neither L = T-V or H = T+V apply relativistically. But does the Hamiltonian always give the total energy ?