What Does Integrability Mean in Physics and Mathematics?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter anthony2005
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Integrability
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of integrability in physics and mathematics, specifically what constitutes an integrable system. Participants explore definitions, implications, and examples related to integrability, touching on both theoretical and practical aspects.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants inquire about the definitions of integrability and integrable systems, referencing Wikipedia articles on integration and integrable systems.
  • One participant suggests that an integrable system is one whose dynamics are exactly solvable due to certain properties, prompting further clarification.
  • Another participant emphasizes the need to define what 'solvable' means, noting that integrability relates to the distinction between regular and chaotic motion in dynamical systems.
  • A participant argues that integrability means determining whether a relationship between derivatives can be integrated to yield a relationship between functions, providing a mathematical example involving partial derivatives.
  • Another contribution discusses the classification of integrability in classical dynamics, particularly in relation to holonomic and non-holonomic systems, citing examples of non-integrable equations.
  • One participant challenges the sufficiency of the integrability conditions mentioned earlier, explaining that they only apply in simply connected regions and providing an example involving a vector field with a singularity.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the definition and implications of integrability, with no consensus reached on a singular definition or understanding of the concept.

Contextual Notes

Some discussions highlight limitations in definitions and the need for clarity regarding terms like 'solvable' and 'integrability conditions,' particularly in relation to singularities and the nature of the systems being discussed.

anthony2005
Messages
24
Reaction score
0
The title is self-explanatory. What is it meant in the physics and maths community by the words integrability and integrable system?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Have you seen an explanation like this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integration_(mathematics )

where they first discuss integrating a smooth function...

or is this what really interests you:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integrable_system

like maybe one of the systems listed at the end of the article??
 
Last edited by a moderator:
So, is it correct to state in general that: "an integrable system is a system which thanks to certain properties its dynamics is exactly solvable" ?
 
You should wait for someone who is more up to date on math and current terminology than I...but I'll give you my 2 cents:

first, you posted this under Quantum Physics,so if you are looking for a specific answer, check here in the Wikipedia article:

Quantum integrable systems

that seems different from you latest post.

second, You may have to define what 'solvable' means to you because the section in Wikipedia says this:

General dynamical systems

...The distinction between integrable and nonintegrable dynamical systems thus has the qualitative implication of regular motion vs. chaotic motion and hence is an intrinsic property, not just a matter of whether a system can be explicitly integrated in exact form.

and under the 'Chaos' link

... the deterministic nature of these systems does not make them predictable.[
 
So, is it correct to state in general that: "an integrable system is a system which thanks to certain properties its dynamics is exactly solvable" ?
No, integrability means: can a given relationship between derivatives be integrated to yield a relationship between functions. For example, given the system

∂f/∂x = F(x,y)
∂f/∂y = G(x,y)

does f(x,y) exist? Answer, only if an integrability condition is satisfied: ∂2f/∂x∂y = ∂2f/∂y∂x,

that is, ∂F/∂y = ∂G/∂x.
 
Last edited:
it is more suited with classical section,integrability of system is classified according to it's holonomicity.In classical dynamics a system which is non holonomic has at least one non-integrable eqn.they look like
Ʃaidqi +atdt=0
this eqn should not be a total differential(or can be converted).there are many examples of it.One simple and particular is rolling of a sphere on a rough surface.Point of contact satisfy a non integrable relation.
 
Bill_K said:
No, integrability means: can a given relationship between derivatives be integrated to yield a relationship between functions. For example, given the system

∂f/∂x = F(x,y)
∂f/∂y = G(x,y)

does f(x,y) exist? Answer, only if an integrability condition is satisfied: ∂2f/∂x∂y = ∂2f/∂y∂x,

that is, ∂F/∂y = ∂G/∂x.

That's only half of the truth! Your integrability conditions are sufficient only for simply connected regions in the (x,y) plane, where F and G are free of singularities and smoothly differentiable.

A simple but eluminating example is the potential curl
\vec{F}(\vec{x})=\frac{-y \vec{e}_x+x \vec{e}_y}{r^2}.
It's everywhere curl free, except in the origin, i.e.,
\partial_x F_y-\partial_y F_x=0,
but it does not have a unique potential in every region in the plane that contains the origin, where the singularity sits.

Indeed, integrating the vector field along any circle around the origin gives 2 \pi.

To make the potential unique, one has to cut the plane by a ray starting from the origin. A standard choice is the negative x-axis. I.e., you take out the points (x,0) with x \leq 0.

It's most easy to find the corresponding potential by introducing polar coordinates. Here, we use
(x,y)=r (\cos \varphi,\sin \varphi)
with \varphi \in (-\pi,\pi),
which automatically excludes the negative x axis. The function \vec{F} then reads
\vec{F}=\frac{\vec{e}_{\varphi}}{r}.
The potential thus can be a function of only \varphi, and the gradient reads
\vec{F} \stackrel{!}{=}-\vec{\nabla} V(\varphi)=-\frac{1}{r} V'(\varphi).
This gives, up to a constant
V(\varphi)=-\varphi.
The potential is indeed unique everywhere except along the negative x axis, along which it has a jump
V(\varphi \rightarrow \pi-0^+)=-\pi, \quad V(\varphi \rightarrow -\pi + 0^+)=+\pi.
In Cartesian Coordinates this potential is given by
V(\vec{x})=-\mathrm{sign} y \arccos \left (\frac{x}{\sqrt{x^2+y^2}} \right ).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
877
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K