Velocities as function of canonical momenta

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter jostpuur
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Function
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the relationship between velocities and canonical momenta in classical mechanics, specifically using the equation for canonical momenta, p_k = \frac{\partial L}{\partial \dot{q}_k}. It is established that velocities can be expressed as functions of generalized coordinates and canonical momenta, \dot{q}_k(q_1,\ldots,q_n,p_1,\ldots,p_n), provided that the determinant of the Hessian matrix, det\Big(\Big(\frac{\partial^2 L}{\partial \dot{q}_k\partial\dot{q}_{k'}}\Big)_{k,k'\in\{1,\ldots,n\}}\Big), is non-zero. This condition ensures the applicability of the implicit function theorem, confirming that the Hessian must be invertible for the solution to exist.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Lagrangian mechanics
  • Familiarity with canonical momenta
  • Knowledge of the implicit function theorem
  • Basic concepts of determinants and Hessian matrices
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the implications of the implicit function theorem in mechanics
  • Explore the properties of Hessian matrices in multivariable calculus
  • Learn about the derivation and applications of canonical momenta in Lagrangian systems
  • Investigate examples of non-invertible Hessians and their physical interpretations
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in physics, particularly those focusing on classical mechanics, Lagrangian dynamics, and mathematical methods in physics.

jostpuur
Messages
2,112
Reaction score
19
Assuming I've understood some claims correctly, having defined the canonical momenta with equation

[tex] p_k = \frac{\partial L}{\partial \dot{q}_k},[/tex]

we can solve the velocities as functions

[tex] \dot{q}_k(q_1,\ldots,q_n,p_1,\ldots, p_n)[/tex]

precisely when the determinant

[tex] \textrm{det}\Big(\Big(\frac{\partial^2 L}{\partial \dot{q}_k\partial\dot{q}_{k'}}\Big)_{k,k'\in\{1,\ldots,n\}}\Big)[/tex]

is non-zero. Why is this the case? The result looks reasonable, but I have difficulty seeing where this is coming from.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Basically, to solve the velocities, you will want to use the implicit function theorem, from which it follows that the Hessian must be invertible. Also see the exact statement in the link.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
595