Why are generalized momenta cotangent vectors in symplectic manifolds?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter StatusX
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Manifold Symplectic
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the relationship between generalized momenta and cotangent vectors in symplectic manifolds, specifically within the context of Lagrangian mechanics. The generalized momentum, defined as p_i = ∂L/∂dot{q}_i, is established as a cotangent vector due to its dependence on the Lagrangian function L. The participants clarify that while generalized velocities correspond to tangent vectors, the generalized momenta require a covector field defined over the entire tangent bundle, facilitating the transition from Lagrangian to Hamiltonian mechanics.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of symplectic manifolds
  • Familiarity with Lagrangian mechanics and Hamiltonian mechanics
  • Knowledge of tangent and cotangent vectors
  • Basic concepts of differential geometry
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of symplectic manifolds in detail
  • Learn about the transition from Lagrangian to Hamiltonian mechanics
  • Explore the implications of covector fields on tangent bundles
  • Investigate the role of metrics in defining kinetic energy in mechanics
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for theoretical physicists, mathematicians specializing in differential geometry, and students of classical mechanics seeking to deepen their understanding of the mathematical foundations of dynamics.

StatusX
Homework Helper
Messages
2,570
Reaction score
2
I've been reading about the abstract formulation of dynamics in terms of symplectic manifolds, and it's amazing how naturally everything falls out of it. But one thing I can't see is why the generalized momenta should be cotangent vectors. I can see why generalized velocities are tangent vectors, making the Lagrangian a function on the tangent bundle of configuration space. But then the book I'm reading claims that since:

[tex]p_i = \frac{\partial L}{\partial \dot q_i}[/tex]

it follows that pi is clearly a cotangent vector.

To me it seems like what pi is is a function assigning numbers to vectors in the "tangent space of the tangent space of a point in the manifold". Note that by what's in the quotes, I don't mean "the tangent space of the tangent bundle" (which would put the momentum in [itex]T^*(TM)[/itex] ), because it doesn't depend on the change in configuration.

But it also shouldn't be in [itex]T^*M[/itex] unless the Lagrangian is a linear function of velocity, so that its partial derivative with respect to velocity doesn't depend on your location in the tangent space, and so can be taken as a uniform linear functional on the tangent space. What am I missing here?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The [itex]\dot{q}^i[/itex] are, at the point [itex]q[/itex] of [itex]M[/itex] labeled by the generalized coordinates [itex]q^i[/itex], components of the tangent vector

[tex]v = \dot{q}^i \partial_{q^i}[/tex]

of a curve in configuration space [itex]M[/itex].

The [itex]p_i[/itex] are, at [itex]q[/itex], components of a particular covector [itex]\omega[/itex] with respect to a particular basis of covectors. This covector [itex]\omega[/itex] is the covector naturally associated with the tangent vector [itex]v[/itex] by the metric [itex]g[/itex] that comes from the kinetic energy

[tex]T = \frac{1}{2} g_{ij} \dot{q}^i \dot{q}^j.[/tex]

In other words,

[tex]\omega \left( u \right) = g \left(v,u\right) = g_{ij} \dot{q}^i u^j[/itex]<br /> <br /> for all tangent vectors [itex]u[/itex] at [itex]q[/itex].<br /> <br /> Setting [itex]\omega = p_i dq^i[/itex] gives that [itex]\omega_j = g_{ij} \dot{q}^i.[/itex] But, if<br /> <br /> [tex]L = \frac{1}{2} g_{jk} \dot{q}^j \dot{q}^k - U \left( q \right),[/tex]<br /> <br /> then<br /> <br /> [tex]\frac{\partial L}{\partial \dot{q}^j} = g_{jk} \dot{q}^k.[/tex][/tex]
 
Last edited:
Ok, my problem was that, unless the dependence of L on velocity is linear, the covector depends on [itex]\dot q[/itex]. An ordinary covector field is normally defined at each point on the manifold, not on the tangent bundle. But in fact with the momentum you do want a covector field on the entire tangent bundle, or more specifically, a map from the tangent bundle to the cotangent bundle, allowing you to replace the tangent manifold from Lagrangian mechanics with the cotangent manifold from Hamiltonian mechanics. I think I have it now, but please correct me if that sounds wrong. Thanks.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 73 ·
3
Replies
73
Views
9K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K