Symplectic notation

  • Thread starter aaaa202
  • Start date
  • #1
aaaa202
1,170
3
The attached is a section of the derivation of canonical transformation from the symplectic formulation. I tend to get very confused by the subscripts i and j. For me they both run from 1 to 2n and can be used interchangeably. But of course that is not the case since equation (9.53) on the attached picture specifically instructs you to transpose the matrix described by (9.51). Can someone explain what is wrong with just changing the indices in a pedagogic way - an example would be lovely too.
 

Attachments

  • canonical.png
    canonical.png
    76.2 KB · Views: 336

Answers and Replies

  • #2
gabbagabbahey
Homework Helper
Gold Member
5,002
7
The attached is a section of the derivation of canonical transformation from the symplectic formulation. I tend to get very confused by the subscripts i and j. For me they both run from 1 to 2n and can be used interchangeably. But of course that is not the case since equation (9.53) on the attached picture specifically instructs you to transpose the matrix described by (9.51). Can someone explain what is wrong with just changing the indices in a pedagogic way - an example would be lovely too.

I'm not sure exactly what you are asking. Can you give a specific example of the equation where you think you can't transpose i & j?
 
  • #3
Hypersphere
191
8
Well, the indices do run from 1 to 2n, and there is no deep physics hidden in calling the indices i and j, specifically. Could be any letter or symbol, really. However, the order is important.

Changing the order of the indices for a matrix actually is the same as taking the transpose. Think of i as a row index and j as a column index. Just make up some old matrix and try it out.
 
  • #4
aaaa202
1,170
3
perhaps I wasn't clear enough. My frustation is actually due to not being able to see why the order of i and j is important - it's probably trivial but I don't see it.
 
  • #5
gabbagabbahey
Homework Helper
Gold Member
5,002
7
My frustation is actually due to not being able to see why the order of i and j is important

In what term/equation?
 

Suggested for: Symplectic notation

  • Last Post
Replies
2
Views
125
  • Last Post
Replies
7
Views
213
Replies
2
Views
425
Replies
14
Views
593
Replies
22
Views
358
Replies
4
Views
853
Replies
9
Views
571
Replies
8
Views
845
  • Last Post
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
494
Top