Physics Notes: About the action integral
This has given me an inordinate amount of grief, I must admit.
The action S of a mechanical system is defined by the integral,
S = ∫ L dt, where L is the system's Lagrange
function. In turn, if you know the action, you can compute stuff like energy and
momenta, using the equations H = –∂S/∂t, and
p = ∂S/∂q. Sounds easy alright, until you plug
in the numbers.
Take the simplest mechanical system, a freely moving point particle in one
dimension. Its
kinetic energy is defined by K = mv²/2, and the
potential energy is always zero, so L = mv²/2. This
is a "correct" expression in the sense that L is defined as a function of
positions, velocities, and time. Integrating this by t we get S
= mtv²/2. Now before we take its partial derivatives, we must
express S as a function of the coordinates and time, right? That means
S = mq²/2t. Partial differentiation by t gives
us –H = –mq²/2t² = –mv²/2, while partial
differentiation by q gives p = mq/t = mv,
which is precisely the momentum.
Encouraged by the success so far, you may want to move on to the next
problem: motion in a field characterized by a potential that is a linear
function of distance. This will be like falling a homogeneous gravitational
field. The potential energy of a falling particle will be proportional to the
particle's height, i.e., it will decrease as the particle travels downward:
V = –amq. The kinetic energy is the same as before,
thus E = mv²/2 – amq. The Lagrangian,
therefore, is L = mv²/2 + amq.
To make a long story short, no matter how you integrate the darn thing,
chances are you'll never get it right: you'll never get back the expected values
for the energy and momentum.
Why? The reason is simple: as we reconstruct L, and then S,
from a known solution, it is not at all clear what we should express as a
function of time, the coordinates, or the velocities. Since we already know the
formulae, we can convert them back and forth, but what principle should guide us
to choose, say, between v or at, or between q or at²/2?
Needless to say, depending on what choices we make, the partial derivatives will
be quite different, resulting in values for the energy and momentum that have
nothing to do with the real thing.
Fortunately, there's a way around it, by analyzing the problem a little. Let
us express the Lagrangian
of the system as L = 2K – E
(no tricks, just some simple arithmetic here.) Integrating by t (remember, E
is constant) we get S = ∫ 2K dt – ∫ E dt.
Now when we partially differentiate with respect to t, we want to get
–E back. But this means that the first part, ∫ 2K
dt, must not be a function of time! Similarly, the momentum should
be a function of the "K part" only, i.e., the first part of the equation; that means
that ∫ E dt must be expressed in such a way that the coordinates do not
appear in the expression.
In other words, the prescription goes like this: Write up L as 2K
– E, expressed as a function of t. Integrate by t. Now rewrite the 2K
part, eliminating time. Partial
differentiation with respect to t will give back the total energy (times
minus one), while partial differentiation with respect to q will give the
momentum.
Let's work it out in some practical cases:
First, a point particle moving freely in space. Once again, its kinetic
energy is K = mv²/2, so following our prescription,
we take L = 2K – E = mv² – mv²/2
(v constant)
and integrate by t, to get S = mtv² – mtv²/2.
In the first part, we substitute (from q = vt)
t = q/v, to get S = mqv – mtv²/2.
Differentiating with respect to q gives mv which is the correct
value for the momentum; differentiating with respect to t gives back –mv²/2,
which is the correct value for –H.
Next, let us again try the particle falling in a gravitational field:
K = mv²/2, V = –amq. (This means
v = at and q = at²/2,
which is what we're verifying.) Thus, L = 2K – E =
mv² – mv²/2 + amq =
ma²t² –
ma²t²/2 +
ma²t²/2, since v is not constant in this case. Integrating by t we get
S = ma2t3/3. (Only the 2K
part remained in our equation, which is not at all a surprise; our initial
conditions mean that the total energy in this case is zero.) To eliminate t, we must use
q = at²/2 again, from which t = √2q/a.
Substituting into S, we get S = 2m√2a/3
· q3/2. Differentiation by q
gives m√2aq;
noticing that 2aq = 2a²t²/2 = v², we
get mv, which is the momentum.
Which leads us to the final problem: let's do this exercise again, but this
time using initial values, so that v = v0 + at
and q = q0 + v0t + at²/2.
Well, you know what? I did the exercise on paper, and that's enough for me. The
momentum works out to mv (correct), and the energy works out to –maq0
+ mv0²/2, which is also the correct value.
There is, I must admit, a bit of a dirty secret behind this analysis,
however. All this time, I pretended that S is a function (of
variables such as time or the coordinates) as opposed to a functional,
which maps functions to numbers. The functions, in this case, would be the
possible paths of the particle in spacetime, along which we integrate the
Lagrangian: S = ∫ L dt, where the integral
must be performed along a path parameterized by the time t, between t1
and t2. What we vary is the path, as we seek to find the
"right" path for which S is minimal (or extremal.) But it is also
possible to view S as a "proper" function: once L is known, and
t1 = t0, S is a function
of time and coordinates as we vary t2, i.e., the second
integration endpoint. It is in this sense that S was seen as a function
in the analysis above.