Schwarzschild geodesics: geodesic vs Hamiltonian equations differ

Join the discussion
Registration is free. Ask a follow-up in this thread, or start your own.
31 replies · 4K views
vanhees71 said:
It becomes the same equation, given that for an affine parameter A=constA=constA=\text{const}.

Ah, the missing fact, thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
pervect said:
Possibly I'm confused, but something seems wrong here.

Let's take the flat space case when ##g_{\mu\nu} = \eta_{\mu\nu}## = diag(-1,1,1,1), so we have a -+++ metric signature.

We know that the relativistic Lagrangian for a free particle in the above flat space-time should be ##L = -m\,c^2 \sqrt{1-\beta^2}##, where ##\beta = v/c##. If we use geometric units so that c=1, we can write this as:

##L(t,\textbf{x},\frac{d \textbf{x}}{dt}) = -m \, \sqrt{ -g_{\mu\nu} \frac{dx^\mu}{dt} \frac{dx^\nu}{dt}}##

It's one of those lucky miracles that you get the same equations of motion using:

[itex]L = -m \sqrt{g_{\mu \nu} \frac{dx^\mu}{ds} \frac{dx^\nu}{ds}}[/itex]

or

[itex]L =\frac{m}{2} g_{\mu \nu} \frac{dx^\mu}{ds} \frac{dx^\nu}{ds}[/itex]

(Actually, the first gives more solutions than the second, but every solution to the first can be converted into a solution of the second by reparametrizing [itex]s[/itex])
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71