Why is the time integral of the Lagrangian minimal?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the minimization of the time integral of the Lagrangian, specifically the expression F = ∫L(x, y(x), y'(x))dx. It is established that if F is minimal, then the Euler-Lagrange equation dL/dy - d/dx(dL/(dy/dx)) = 0 holds true. The conversation also clarifies that the time integral of T - V is not minimized, as Hamilton's Principle indicates that the action has a stationary value rather than a minimum. The relationship between the Euler-Lagrange equation and Newton's Laws is emphasized, confirming their equivalence.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the Euler-Lagrange equation
  • Familiarity with Hamilton's Principle
  • Basic knowledge of classical mechanics and Newton's Laws
  • Concept of Lagrangian mechanics
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of Hamilton's Principle from Newton's Laws
  • Explore the physical interpretation of the Lagrangian in mechanics
  • Investigate the implications of stationary action in physics
  • Learn about the relationship between energy, Lagrangian, and Hamiltonian formulations
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in physics, particularly those studying classical mechanics, as well as researchers interested in the mathematical foundations of Lagrangian and Hamiltonian dynamics.

ShamelessGit
Messages
38
Reaction score
0
I saw a proof recently that demonstrated that for

F= ∫L(x, y(x), y'(x))dx, if y(x) is such that F is minimal (no other y(x) could produce a smaller F), then dL/dy - d/dx(dL/(dy/dx)) = 0.

I understood the proof, and I was able to see that with a basic definition of Energy = (m/2)(dx/dt)^2 + V(x), that carrying out this calculation for the lagrangian = (m/2)(dx/dt)^2 - V(x), that doing this always results in m(d^2x/dt^2) + dV(x)/dr = ma - ma = 0.

Now however, I'd like to know if this means that the time integral of T - V is minimized. Maybe I'm having a brain fart, but it seems like ∫T + Vdt would be minimized and not ∫T - Vdt because integrating the energy would give you ∫Tdt + ∫Vdt = E(t2 - t1), which would seem to indicate that for any given time interval, the value of the integral of energy is irrelevant of the particular equations for T and V, which would mean that no ∫T + Vdt is any larger than any other, which technically satisfies the requirement that it be minimum. I do not know what ∫T - Vdt looks like.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The Hamilton's Principle states that the the action is NOT MINIMISED but has a stationary value. Think of it like this:

When the derivative of a single-variable function is zero, that doesn't mean that the function is minimized or maximized in that point. A function which has a zero derivative but has not a minimal or maximal value is f(x) = x^3.

Energy is not minimized. Try taking the Euler-Lagrange equation but put the energy instead of the Lagrangian. The Euler-Lagrange equation won't give you the correct Newton's 2nd Law.

To clarify some things: the Euler-Lagrange equation is equivalent to Newton's Laws. That means that:

With Newton's Laws you can derive Hamilton's Principle (see wikipedia for derivation)
and from Hamilton's Principle you can derive Newton's Laws (see Mechanics, Landau Lisfhitz 1st chapter for derivation).

Also, I cannot find any physical meaning for the Lagrangian. If I made any language mistakes, sorry, I'm Greek :P
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K