Variational calculus in particle dynamics

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on the Principle of Least Action and the process of finding the function y(x) that minimizes the functional J. Participants clarify that the goal is to derive the Euler-Lagrange equation, which transforms a complex functional integral into a more manageable differential equation. Questions raised about the necessity of differentiating the functional highlight a misunderstanding of the method's purpose, as the objective is to discover y(x), not merely to find an extremum of J. The conversation emphasizes the importance of grasping multivariable calculus concepts to fully understand variational calculus. Overall, the exchange underscores the complexity of deriving solutions in particle dynamics through variational principles.
Lillensassi
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
I'm reading about the Principle of Least Action.
As a prelude to it, we look at the functional

J(x)=\int f(y(x),y'(x);x) dx
where the limits of integration are x_1 and x_2.
We want to find the function y(x) that gives the functional an extremum.
Now, to do this, we write any possible function y(x) as the sum of the sought function y_0(x) and another function η(x) times a constant α, that is:
y(x)=y_0(x)+αη(x)
so our aim is then to minimize the functional J as a functional of α,
J(α)=\int f(y(α,x),y'(α,x);x) dx
and the book says "The condition that the integral have a stationary value, (i.e. that an extremum results) is that J be independent of α in the first order along the path giving the extremum (α=0), or, equivalenty, that
\frac{\partial J}{\partial α}=0 at α=0".

Now I have two questions:
1. Why not just take the derivative of the functional and put it equal to zero, like we've done when maximizing/minimizing things in Calculus class? and
2. If we know how to make α=0, why do we have to go to the trouble of differentiating the function at all? Isn't the conclusion just stating an obvious fact and not bringing any solution to the table?

I hope my reasoning is understandable, I haven't really completely grasped what I'm doing yet...!

p.s. the text is taken from the book Classical Dynamics of Particles and Systems of Marion and Thornton
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Q1: You're not trying to find an extreme value for J. You're trying to find the function y(x) which minimises it. Finding y(x) means determining a recipe for y values for all x values in the specified interval. That's why a special procedure is needed.

Q2: I humbly suggest that you should try now to get to grips with the actual derivation of the E-L equation, and at least one example of its use. You may well find that Q2 then loses its cogency.
 
1. That is exactly what you are doing. The functional derivative is defined as:

$$\int_{x_1}^{x^2}\frac{\delta J[y(x)]}{\delta y(x)}dx\equiv\left.\frac{dJ[y(x)+\alpha h(x)]}{d\alpha}\right|_{\alpha=0}$$

I don't exactly understand what you mean by this question...

2. We don't know y_0(x). That's exactly what we are trying to find out! If we knew it, obviously we wouldn't waste our time doing this dance. What we are doing with this method of solutions is using the fundamental lemma of the calculus of variations to turn a functional integral equation (very hard to solve otherwise!) into a much more analysis friendly differential equation (the Euler-Lagrange equation).
 
Thank you!
Looks like the problem is lack of knowledge of multivariable calculus from my part. Thank you for pointing me in the right direction - sometimes asking the right questions can be as hard as finding the right answer!
 
I'm currently reading the classic by Cornelius Lanczos; 'The Variational Principles of Mechanics'. It has a good section on the E-L equation,, and is especially helpful ob boundary conditions.It's an old book, but Dover now publish it, so it doesn't cost the earth.
 
Thread 'Is 'Velocity of Transport' a Recognized Term in English Mechanics Literature?'
Here are two fragments from Banach's monograph in Mechanics I have never seen the term <<velocity of transport>> in English texts. Actually I have never seen this term being named somehow in English. This term has a name in Russian books. I looked through the original Banach's text in Polish and there is a Polish name for this term. It is a little bit surprising that the Polish name differs from the Russian one and also differs from this English translation. My question is: Is there...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Back
Top