On the definition of canonical coordinates in phase space

  • #1
cianfa72
2,475
255
TL;DR Summary
About the definition of canonical coordinates in phase space (cotangent bundle)
I've a doubt regarding the definition of canonical coordinates in phase space.
As far as I can tell, phase space ##T^*M## is the cotangent bundle of the system configuration space ##M##.

##M## is assumed to be a differential manifold with atlas ##A=\{ U_i, \phi_i \}##. Call ##q_i## the coordinate functions of ##(U_i, \phi_i)##. They define in ##\pi^{-1}(U_i)## the covector basis field ##\{dq_i\}##.

Now at each ##p \in M## any element of the cotangent space ##T^*_pM## can be written as linear combination of ##\{dq_i\}##. Call ##\{ p_i \}## the set of functions defining the components of cotangent element at any point ##p##. Hence any cotangent field (one-form) ##\theta## can be written as
$$\theta = \sum_i p_idq_i$$
Assuming the above is correct, are those ##\{ q_i,p_i \}## the canonical coordinates for phase space (cotangent bundle) ?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Yes.
 
  • #3
Ok, so basically ##\{ p_i \}## are coordinates in any ##\pi^{-1}(p) \cong F## with respect to ##\{ dq_i \}_p## picked as basis for covectors at ##T^*_pM##.
 
  • #4
cianfa72 said:
Ok, so basically ##\{ p_i \}## are coordinates in any ##\pi^{-1}(p) \cong F## with respect to ##\{ dq_i \}_p## picked as basis for covectors at ##T^*_pM##.
Yes, but be careful with the notations. You denote a point in the base manifold ##M## by ##p##, but your coordinates on ##M## are ##\{q_i\}##, and the ##p_i##'s are the components of the one-forms in the basis ##\{dq_i\}##.
 
  • #5
martinbn said:
Yes, but be careful with the notations. You denote a point in the base manifold ##M## by ##p##, but your coordinates on ##M## are ##\{q_i\}##, and the ##p_i##'s are the components of the one-forms in the basis ##\{dq_i\}##.
Ah ok. To avoid confusion let's call ##a## the point in the base manifold ##M##, so that ##\{ p_i \}_a##'s are the components of the one-forms (covector fields) evaluated at ##a## in the coordinates basis ##\{dq_i\}_a##.

Btw, by a diffeomorphism between ##\{p_i\}## and ##\{z_i\}##, in the new coordinates one-forms ##\theta## are no longer written in the form $$\theta = \sum_i z_idq_i$$ right ? As far as I can tell, the above expression for ##\theta## holds true only in canonical coordinates.
 
Last edited:
  • #6
cianfa72 said:
Btw, by a diffeomorphism between ##\{p_i\}## and ##\{z_i\}##, in the new coordinates one-forms ##\theta## are no longer written in the form $$\theta = \sum_i z_idq_i$$ right ? As far as I can tell, the above expression for ##\theta## holds true only in canonical coordinates.
What do you mean by a diffeomorphism? Between what? The contangent bundle and itself or something else? The coordinates of the cotangent bundle are ##(q_i,p_i)##.
 
  • #7
martinbn said:
What do you mean by a diffeomorphism? Between what? The contangent bundle and itself or something else? The coordinates of the cotangent bundle are ##(q_i,p_i)##.
I meant a differentiable one-to-one onto map with inverse differentiable from the ##\{p_i\}## to say the ##\{z_i\}##.

A one-form (covector field) ##\theta## written as ##\theta = \sum_i p_idq_i## in ##\{ q_i,p_i \}## canonical coordinates can no longer be written as ##\sum_i z_idq_i## in the new ##\{q_i,z_i \}## cotangent bundle coordinates.
 
  • #8
cianfa72 said:
I meant a differentiable one-to-one onto map with inverse differentiable from the ##\{p_i\}## to say the ##\{z_i\}##.
My question was about the manifold. A diffeomorphism of which manifold? My guess is the cotangent bundle. But these, that you've written above are not coordinates of the cotangent bundle.
cianfa72 said:
A one-form (covector field) ##\theta## written as ##\theta = \sum_i p_idq_i## in ##\{ q_i,p_i \}## canonical coordinates can no longer be written as ##\sum_i z_idq_i## in the new ##\{q_i,z_i \}## cotangent bundle coordinates.
Why not? What is the relationship between the p's and the z's?
 
  • #9
Sorry, I'm confused a bit. I took a look at Lee - Introduction to Smooth Manifold.

Long story: starting from a ##m##-dimensional smooth manifold ##M## and its maximum atlas, one can define a corresponding atlas for the cotangent bundle ##T^*M## turning it into a differentiable manifold on its own. Said ##q^i## the ##U##'s chart coordinates for ##M##, take as ##p_i## the coordinates that assign to each covector at point ##a \in U## in the fiber its components in the coordinate basis ##\{ dq^i \}_a##. By definition ##(q^i,p_i)## are the canonical coordinates for ##\pi^{-1}(U)##.

Now a covector field (one-form) on ##T^*M## is a section of ##T^*(T^*M)##. The canonical one-form ##\theta## (aka tautological one form) is defined in canonical coordinates as $$\theta = \sum_i p_idq^i$$ Suppose to define a "chart diffeomorphism" ##(q_i,p_i) \mapsto (q_i,z_i)## that leaves untouched the ##q_i## while the ##z_i## depending only from the ##p_i## (i.e. the diffeomorphism's matrix representation in those canonical coordinates is block diagonal). As far as I can tell, this time the canonical one-form ##\theta## is given in the form
$$\theta = \sum_i f_i(z_1, z_2 ... z_m)dq^i$$ and cannot be written as ##\theta = \sum_i z_idq^i##.
 
Last edited:
  • #10
Oh, i see, yes you are right. I thought you meant a general one form and a map that only chages the p's. For example if ##p=z^2## and q stays the same, then ##pdq## becomes ##z^2dq##. But now i see what you meant.
 
Back
Top