Why Does the Integral of Legendre Polynomials Yield a Kronecker Delta?

AI Thread Summary
The integral of Legendre polynomials results in a Kronecker delta function due to their orthogonality, yielding zero when L ≠ L' and 2/(2L+1) when L = L'. The integral for L = L' simplifies to the square of the Legendre polynomial, which can be evaluated using Rodrigues' formula or the generating function. The normalization factor is derived from integrating the generating function squared, leading to a series expansion that confirms the relationship between the coefficients and the integral. This discussion highlights the mathematical properties and methods for evaluating integrals involving Legendre polynomials.
Don'tKnowMuch
Messages
21
Reaction score
0
I am doing a Laplace's equation in spherical coordinates and have come to a part of the problem that has the integral...

∫ P(sub L)*(x) * P(sub L')*(x) dx (-1<x<1)

The answer to this integral is given by a Kronecker delta function (δ)...

= 0 if L ≠ L'

OR...
= 2/(2L+1)*δ if L = L' (where δ = 1)

I believe the reason why the integral is equal to zero when L ≠ L' is because of the orthogonality of Legendre polynomials, however i cannot figure out how the integral is equal 2/(2L+1). If L = L' then the integral would equal...

∫ [P(sub L)*(x)]^2 dx

I tried to use a simple power rule of integration to solve the above integral, but i am afraid my method is flawed. Any suggestions?

Pre-emptive thanks to whomever takes the time to help!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
For clarity i should add that...

P(sub L)(x)

is a Legendre polynomial
 
I think i have to use Rodrigues' formula
 
This is one possibility. Another is to use the generating function, which is used to define in the msot convenient way the Legendre polynomials.

It's given by
\Phi(r,u)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{1-2u r+r^2}}=\sum_{l=0}^{\infty} P_l(u) r^l.
From this you find
P_l(u)=\frac{1}{l!} \left .\frac{\partial^l}{\partial r^l} \Phi(r,u) \right|_{r=0}.
This series expansion is obviously valid for |r|&lt;1 if |u|&lt;1.

We know that the Legendre Polynomials are orthogonal to each other since they are solutions of the eigen-value equation
\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d} u} \left [(1-u^2) \frac{\mathrm{d} P_l}{\mathrm{d} u} \right ]=-l(l+1) P_l,
where the differential operator is self-adjoint on L^2([-1,1]). Thus we have
\int_{-1}^{1} \mathrm{d} u P_l(u) P_{l&#039;}(u)=N_l \delta_{ll&#039;}.
To evaluate the normalization factor we take the following integral:
I(r)=\int_{-1}^{1} \mathrm{d} u \Phi^2(r,u)=\int_{-1}^{1} \mathrm{d} u \frac{1}{1-2 u r +r^2}=-\left [\frac{1}{2r} \ln(1-2 u r+r^2) \right]_{u=-1}^{u=1}=\frac{1}{r} \ln \left (\frac{1+r}{1-r} \right ).
Expanding this into a power series in r yields
I(r)=\sum_{l=0}^{\infty} \frac{2}{2l+1} r^{2l}.
On the other hand from the definition of the Legendre Polynomials by the above given series expansion you get
\Phi^2(r,u)=\sum_{l,l&#039;=0}^{\infty} P_l(u) P_{l&#039;}(u) r^{l+l&#039;}.
Integrating over u leads to
I(r)=\sum_{l,l&#039;=0}^{\infty} N_l \delta_{ll&#039;} r^{2l}=\sum_{l=0}^{\infty} N_l r^{2l}.
Comparing the coefficients in both expansions of I(r) yields
N_l=\frac{2}{2l+1}.
QED.
 
Thread 'Gauss' law seems to imply instantaneous electric field'
Imagine a charged sphere at the origin connected through an open switch to a vertical grounded wire. We wish to find an expression for the horizontal component of the electric field at a distance ##\mathbf{r}## from the sphere as it discharges. By using the Lorenz gauge condition: $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A} + \frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=0\tag{1}$$ we find the following retarded solutions to the Maxwell equations If we assume that...
Maxwell’s equations imply the following wave equation for the electric field $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}}{\partial t^2} = \frac{1}{\varepsilon_0}\nabla\rho+\mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf J}{\partial t}.\tag{1}$$ I wonder if eqn.##(1)## can be split into the following transverse part $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}_T-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}_T}{\partial t^2} = \mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf{J}_T}{\partial t}\tag{2}$$ and longitudinal part...
Thread 'Recovering Hamilton's Equations from Poisson brackets'
The issue : Let me start by copying and pasting the relevant passage from the text, thanks to modern day methods of computing. The trouble is, in equation (4.79), it completely ignores the partial derivative of ##q_i## with respect to time, i.e. it puts ##\partial q_i/\partial t=0##. But ##q_i## is a dynamical variable of ##t##, or ##q_i(t)##. In the derivation of Hamilton's equations from the Hamiltonian, viz. ##H = p_i \dot q_i-L##, nowhere did we assume that ##\partial q_i/\partial...

Similar threads

Back
Top