Solving for Extrema of Proper Time Integral

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Kashmir
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Proper time Time
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion focuses on the problem of extremizing the proper time integral in the context of physics, particularly within the framework of the calculus of variations. Participants explore various methods and approaches to solve the integral, referencing both classical mechanics and general relativity concepts.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents the proper time integral and seeks assistance in extremizing it, drawing parallels to a problem from a mathematical methods book.
  • Another participant suggests parametrizing the worldline with an arbitrary parameter and provides a Lagrangian formulation, leading to the Euler-Lagrange equations.
  • Some participants express difficulty in understanding the terminology and request simplifications of the presented arguments.
  • A later reply references a proof of the Euler-Lagrange equations from a different source and discusses the application of these equations in general relativity, including the use of a dummy parameter.
  • Another participant notes that foundational texts may be necessary for understanding the concepts discussed, indicating that basic calculus of variations may not suffice.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying levels of understanding and agreement on the methods discussed, with some seeking clarification while others provide technical details. No consensus is reached on a single approach to solving the problem.

Contextual Notes

There are indications that some participants may lack familiarity with the necessary mathematical background, which could affect their ability to engage with the technical content. The discussion includes references to specific texts that may not be universally accessible to all participants.

Kashmir
Messages
466
Reaction score
74
The question is to extremize the proper time : ##\begin{aligned}\int d\tau=\int ( dt^{2}-dx^{2}\\ -dy^{2} \\ -dz^2)^{1/2} \end{aligned}##

I've studied calculus of variations somewhat and a can solve a similar problem which I found in the mathematical methods book the author Mary Boas. The way she solves a similar problem is shown below, however I can't use that method for my problem of extremising the proper time above.

I would like to get some help to solve the above integral similar to the way shown below :

Given a problem to find ##y## that makes the integral stationary ##
I=\int_{x_1}^{x_2} F\left(x, y, y^{\prime}\right) d x
##
where ##F## is a given function. The ##y(x)## which makes ##I## stationary is called an extremal whether ##I## is a maximum or minimum or neither. We consider a set of varied curves ##
Y(x)=y(x)+\epsilon \eta(x)
##
just as before. Then we have
##
I(\epsilon)=\int_{x_1}^{x_2} F\left(x, Y, Y^{\prime}\right) d x,
##
and we want ##(d / d \epsilon) I(\epsilon)=0## when ##\epsilon=0##. Remembering that ##Y##and ##Y^{\prime}## are functions of ##\epsilon##, and differentiating under the integral sign with respect to ##\epsilon##, we get
##
\frac{d I}{d \epsilon}=\int_{x_1}^{x_2}\left(\frac{\partial F}{\partial Y} \frac{d Y}{d \epsilon}+\frac{\partial F}{\partial Y^{\prime}} \frac{d Y^{\prime}}{d \epsilon}\right) d x .
##

Substituting (2.1) and (2.5) into (2.11), we have
##\frac{d I}{d \epsilon}=\int_{x_1}^{x_2}\left[\frac{\partial F}{\partial Y} \eta(x)+\frac{\partial F}{\partial Y^{\prime}} \eta^{\prime}(x)\right] d x ##
We want ##d I / d \epsilon=0## at ##\epsilon=0##; recall that ##\epsilon=0## means ##Y=y## Then (2.12) gives
##\left(\frac{d I}{d \epsilon}\right)_{\epsilon=0}=\int_{x_1}^{x_2}\left[\frac{\partial F}{\partial y} \eta(x)+\frac{\partial F}{\partial y^{\prime}} \eta^{\prime}(x)\right] d x=0 ##

Assuming that ##y^{\prime \prime}## is continuous, we can integrate the second term by parts just as in the straight-line problem:
##
\int_{x_1}^{x_2} \frac{\partial F}{\partial y^{\prime}} \eta^{\prime}(x) d x=\left.\frac{\partial F}{\partial y^{\prime}} \eta(x)\right|_{x_1} ^{x_2}-\int_{x_1}^{x_2} \frac{d}{d x}\left(\frac{\partial F}{\partial y^{\prime}}\right) \eta(x) d x .
##
The integrated term is zero as before because ##\eta(x)## is zero at ##x_1## and ##x_2####
\left(\frac{d I}{d \epsilon}\right)_{\epsilon=0}=\int_{x_1}^{x_2}\left[\frac{\partial F}{\partial y}-\frac{d}{d x} \frac{\partial F}{\partial y^{\prime}}\right] \eta(x) d x=0 .
##
since ##\eta(x)## is arbitrary, we must have
##
\frac{d}{d x} \frac{\partial F}{\partial y^{\prime}}-\frac{\partial F}{\partial y}=0 . \quad \text { Euler equation }
##
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You have to parametrize the worldline with an arbitrary parameter ##\lambda##. The Lagrangian then reads
$$L=\sqrt{\dot{x}^{\mu} \dot{x}^{\nu} \eta_{\mu \nu}},$$
where ##\dot{x}^{\mu}=\mathrm{d}_{\lambda} x^{\mu}##. The "canonical momenta" are
$$p_{\mu} = \partial_{\dot{x}^{\mu}} L = \frac{\dot{x}^{\mu}}{\sqrt{\dot{x}^{\rho} \dot{x}^{\sigma} \eta_{\rho \sigma}}}=\mathrm{d}_{\tau} x^{\mu}.$$
Then the Euler-Lagrange equations say
$$\dot{p}_{\mu} = 0.$$
Now
$$\dot{p}_{\mu} = (\mathrm{d}_{\lambda} \tau) \mathrm{d}_{\tau} p_{\mu}=0 \; \Rightarrow \; \mathrm{d}_{\tau} p_{\mu}=0 \; \Rightarrow \; \mathrm{d}_{\tau}^2 x^{\mu}=0 \; \Rightarrow \; x^{\mu}=p_{0}^{\mu} \tau + x_0^{\mu}$$
with ##p_0^{\mu}=\text{const}## and ##x_0^{\mu}=\text{const}##.
 
  • Informative
Likes   Reactions: Dale
Can you please simplify it ? I can't understand the terminology.
 
Kashmir said:
Can you please simplify it ? I can't understand the terminology.
There's a proof of the Euler-Lagrange equations in the more general case in Neuenschwander's book Emmy Noether's Wonderful Theorem. We have a functional:
$$J = \int_a^b L(t, x^{\mu}, \dot x^{\mu}) \ dt$$The ##\{x^{\mu}(t)\}## that make ##J## extremal satisfy:
$$\frac{\partial L}{\partial x^{\mu}} = \frac{d}{dt}\bigg (\frac{\partial L}{\partial \dot x^{\mu}} \bigg )$$Hartle doesn't give a proof of this but obviously uses the result, e.g. in equations (5.56) and later.

Additionally for GR, of course, you have to take ##t = x^0## and use some dummy parameter ##\sigma##. So, you have something like:
$$\tau_{ab} = \int_a^b d\tau = \int_a^b\big [-g_{\alpha \beta}dx^{\alpha}dx^{\beta} \big]^{\frac 1 2}$$$$= \int_0^1\big [-g_{\alpha \beta}\frac{dx^{\alpha}}{d\sigma}\frac{dx^{\beta}}{d\sigma} \big]^{\frac 1 2} \ d\sigma$$Where, without loss of generality, I've assumed ##\sigma \in [0,1]##.

Note that we have $$L = \frac{d\tau}{d\sigma} = \big [-g_{\alpha \beta}\frac{dx^{\alpha}}{d\sigma}\frac{dx^{\beta}}{d\sigma} \big]^{\frac 1 2}$$And, if you have ##g_{\alpha \beta} = \eta_{\alpha \beta}##, then the Euler-Lagrange equations yield:$$\frac{d^2x^{\mu}}{d\tau^2} = 0$$which is equation (5.62) in my edition of Hartle.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71
PS The first few chapters of Neuenschwander's book (or equivalent) are almost essential prerequisites for GR (and, in fact, most advanced modern physics). The basic calculus of variations in Boas may leave too much of a gap.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 48 ·
2
Replies
48
Views
6K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K