Weird problem with a Lagrangian

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter ShayanJ
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Lagrangian Weird
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion revolves around a discrepancy in calculating entanglement entropy using the Ryu-Takayanagi prescription, specifically in section 2 of a referenced paper. The user encounters an issue where their calculations yield results that do not align with equation 13, which fails to satisfy the Euler-Lagrange equations for the action. Despite multiple verifications of their work, the user remains uncertain about the correctness of their equations of motion. Additionally, there is a suggestion that the power of α in equation 10 should be 2 instead of d, although this does not affect the main issue at hand.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the Ryu-Takayanagi prescription for entanglement entropy
  • Familiarity with Euler-Lagrange equations in the context of action principles
  • Knowledge of equations of motion in theoretical physics
  • Basic proficiency in LaTeX for typesetting mathematical expressions
NEXT STEPS
  • Review the Ryu-Takayanagi prescription in detail to clarify its application
  • Study the derivation and implications of Euler-Lagrange equations
  • Investigate the conditions under which the on-shell value of an action can be zero
  • Examine the role of parameters like α in theoretical models and their implications
USEFUL FOR

The discussion is beneficial for theoretical physicists, particularly those working on quantum gravity, entanglement entropy, and the application of variational principles in physics.

ShayanJ
Science Advisor
Insights Author
Messages
2,802
Reaction score
605
I'm trying to follow the calculations in this paper. But I have a weird problem in section 2.
To calculate the entanglement entropy using the Ryu-Takayanagi prescription, you have to extremize the area of a surface. So you have to use Euler-Lagrange equations for some kind of an action. The authors don't do all the calculations and just point out that the result is eq. 13.
But when I do the calculations I get something else. Actually eq. 13 doesn't even satisfy the Euler-Lagrange equation of the action but my solution does. So it makes me think that I may have done something wrong in getting the equations of motion but I'm pretty sure about my calculations, I've done and checked them more than a dozen times!
So I just have no idea what is wrong here. My calculations are attached.(Sorry if I don't write them here, but I made this pdf for my advisor so I just attach it here!)
Thanks

P.S.
I also think that in eq.10, the power of ##\alpha## should be 2 instead of d. But its irrelevant here because ##H(U)## is just assumed to be some known function.
 

Attachments

  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Kninfinite
Physics news on Phys.org
Another weird thing that I just realized. If you put ##U_x=\sqrt{-\frac 1 \beta}## in the action, you get zero!

EDIT: Or maybe there is nothing wrong with it. The on-shell value of the action can be anything and now its zero.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 49 ·
2
Replies
49
Views
7K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K