What Happens to Euler-Lagrange in Field Theories (ADM)?

nonequilibrium
Messages
1,412
Reaction score
2
Hello,

So in the familiar case of non-relativistic particle Lagrangians/actions, we know the equations of motions are given by \frac{\partial \mathcal L}{\partial x^i} = \frac{\mathrm d }{\mathrm dt} \left( \frac{\partial \mathcal L}{\partial \dot x^i} \right)

In the familiar case of relativistic field theory Lagrangians/actions, we have
\frac{\delta \mathcal L}{\delta \phi} = \partial_\mu \left( \frac{\delta \mathcal L}{\delta ( \partial_\mu \phi )} \right)

However, it seems that if we now choose a time-splitting, like for example in ADM where the essence is to rewrite S = \int \mathrm d^4 x \; \mathcal L(g_{\mu \nu}, \partial_\rho g_{\mu \nu}) as \boxed{ S = \int \mathrm d t \; \mathrm d^3 x \; \mathcal L(g_{i j}, \partial_k g_{i j}, \dot g_{ij}, N, N^i)}

In this case it seems the equation of motion is given by
\frac{\delta \mathcal L}{\delta g_{ij}} = \frac{\mathrm d }{\mathrm dt} \left( \frac{\delta \mathcal L}{\delta ( \dot g_{ij} )} \right)

This seems a bit weird. Is it obvious the latter two equations of motions are compatible?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
In fact, I might be completely wrong about that last equation of motion. I suppose that would resolve my confusion. Can anyone confirm/disconfirm my last equation of motion? Thanks!
 
The equations of motion do not change just because you rewrite the integral. The action is still a four-dimensional integral and the action is what you extremise.
 
I find it more straightforward to write the equations of motion as

$$\frac{\delta S}{\delta \varphi} = 0$$
for any field ##\varphi##. The variation operator ##\delta## behaves very much like a differentiation operator, e.g.

$$\delta (A_\mu A^\mu) = \delta (g^{\mu\nu} A_\mu A_\nu) = A_\mu A_\nu \, \delta g^{\mu\nu} + 2 g^{\mu\nu} A_\mu \, \delta A_\nu.$$
If your action has derivatives in it (as it must to give dynamical equations of motion), then you will have to integrate by parts to move derivatives off of ##\delta## terms and onto the usual fields:

$$\delta (\partial_\mu \varphi \partial^\mu \varphi) = 2 \partial_\mu \varphi \, \delta (\partial^\mu \varphi) \overset{\text{i.b.p.}}{\longrightarrow} - 2 \partial^\mu \partial_\mu \varphi \, \delta \varphi.$$
In such cases, strictly speaking you must take into account boundary terms in your action. Usually the boundary is at infinity and you assume sufficiently fast fall-off of your fields that the boundary terms are zero. But if you do anything that violates these assumptions, take care.
 
  • Like
Likes PWiz and vanhees71
You should view the particle case as a 1-dimensional field theory, whereas GR is in general a D-dim. field theory.
 
Thread 'Can this experiment break Lorentz symmetry?'
1. The Big Idea: According to Einstein’s relativity, all motion is relative. You can’t tell if you’re moving at a constant velocity without looking outside. But what if there is a universal “rest frame” (like the old idea of the “ether”)? This experiment tries to find out by looking for tiny, directional differences in how objects move inside a sealed box. 2. How It Works: The Two-Stage Process Imagine a perfectly isolated spacecraft (our lab) moving through space at some unknown speed V...
Does the speed of light change in a gravitational field depending on whether the direction of travel is parallel to the field, or perpendicular to the field? And is it the same in both directions at each orientation? This question could be answered experimentally to some degree of accuracy. Experiment design: Place two identical clocks A and B on the circumference of a wheel at opposite ends of the diameter of length L. The wheel is positioned upright, i.e., perpendicular to the ground...
According to the General Theory of Relativity, time does not pass on a black hole, which means that processes they don't work either. As the object becomes heavier, the speed of matter falling on it for an observer on Earth will first increase, and then slow down, due to the effect of time dilation. And then it will stop altogether. As a result, we will not get a black hole, since the critical mass will not be reached. Although the object will continue to attract matter, it will not be a...
Back
Top