- #1
snoopies622
- 846
- 28
According to this site
http://quantummechanics.ucsd.edu/ph130a/130_notes/node453.html
a good choice of Lagrangian for the electromagnetic field is
[tex]
L = - \frac {1}{4} F_{\mu\nu}F_{\mu\nu} + \frac {1}{c} j_\mu A_\mu
[/tex]
where
[tex]
F_{\mu \nu} = \frac {\partial A_\nu}{\partial x_{\mu}} - \frac {\partial A_\mu}{\partial x_{\nu}}
[/tex]
(I don't know why all the indices are at the bottom, but anyway...)
I take it that the components of [itex] A_\mu [/itex] are the generalized coordinates and their first partial derivatives with respect to space and time can be thought of as their corresponding generalized velocities.
This looks different from the kind of Lagrangian I've seen in classical mechanics in that
- the derivatives are not merely with respect to time
and
- it's not evidently some expression of kinetic energy minus potential energy.
But that's OK, right?
The site says that it's a good choice because the Euler-Lagrange equations that use it turn out to be Maxwell's equations.
Shall I conclude, then, that making good (correct) Euler-Langrange equations is what really defines a Lagrangian, and not the more limited definition I indicated above?
http://quantummechanics.ucsd.edu/ph130a/130_notes/node453.html
a good choice of Lagrangian for the electromagnetic field is
[tex]
L = - \frac {1}{4} F_{\mu\nu}F_{\mu\nu} + \frac {1}{c} j_\mu A_\mu
[/tex]
where
[tex]
F_{\mu \nu} = \frac {\partial A_\nu}{\partial x_{\mu}} - \frac {\partial A_\mu}{\partial x_{\nu}}
[/tex]
(I don't know why all the indices are at the bottom, but anyway...)
I take it that the components of [itex] A_\mu [/itex] are the generalized coordinates and their first partial derivatives with respect to space and time can be thought of as their corresponding generalized velocities.
This looks different from the kind of Lagrangian I've seen in classical mechanics in that
- the derivatives are not merely with respect to time
and
- it's not evidently some expression of kinetic energy minus potential energy.
But that's OK, right?
The site says that it's a good choice because the Euler-Lagrange equations that use it turn out to be Maxwell's equations.
Shall I conclude, then, that making good (correct) Euler-Langrange equations is what really defines a Lagrangian, and not the more limited definition I indicated above?