Where Does the Equation E=p_x+\frac{p_y^2}{2m}+\frac{p_z^2}{2m} Come From?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Piano man
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around deriving the equation E = p_x + (p_y^2)/(2m) + (p_z^2)/(2m) from the Hamilton-Jacobi equation in the context of a particle moving in a potential U(r) = -Fx. Participants clarify that the Hamiltonian is time-independent, leading to energy being a conserved quantity, which is represented as -E in the action. The time-dependent Hamilton-Jacobi equation simplifies to the time-independent form, where the Hamiltonian equals E. The confusion arises from the relationship between the Hamiltonian and the energy expression, with emphasis on the role of cyclic coordinates and their conjugate momenta. Ultimately, the integration of the derived equations leads to the complete integral, incorporating the arbitrary constants p_y, p_z, and E.
Piano man
Messages
73
Reaction score
0
I'm having a bit of difficulty understanding part of this problem:

Using the Hamilton-Jacobi equation find the trajectory and the motion of a particle in the
potential U(r)=-Fx

The Hamilton-Jacobi Equation: \frac{\partial S}{\partial t}+H(q_1,...,q_s;\frac{\partial S}{\partial q_1},...,\frac{\partial S}{\partial q_s};t)=0

Starting off with the Hamiltonian:
<br /> H(p_x,p_y,p_z,x,y,z)=\frac{p_x^2}{2m}-Fx+\frac{p_y^2}{2m}+\frac{p_z^2}{2m}

From HJE, since y and z are cyclic,
<br /> S(x,y,z;p_x,p_y,p_z;t)=-Et+p_yy+p_zz+S(x,p_x)

All this is grand, but the next step in the solutions I have say that we can now say that <br /> E=p_x+\frac{p_y^2}{2m}+\frac{p_z^2}{2m}

I don't see where this comes from.

Any ideas?
Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The action is not a function of the momenta explicitly. The conserved momenta (those that are conjugate to the cyclic coordinates, i.e. the coordinates that do not enter in the Hamiltonian explicitly) take the role of the arbitrary constants in finding the complete integral of the HJ eqn by the method of separation of variables.
 
Ok, but how does that explain where E comes from?
 
If the Hamiltonian is time-indpendent, then energy is a sonserved quantity and -E is the corresponding "conjugate variable". By writing the action as:

<br /> S(q, t) = S_{0}(q) - E \, t<br />

the time-dependent HJ eqn:

<br /> \frac{\partial S}{\partial t} + H(q, \frac{\partial S}{\partial q}) = 0<br />

becomes:

<br /> \frac{\partial S}{\partial t} = -E, \; \frac{\partial S}{\partial q_{j}} = \frac{\partial S_{0}}{\partial q_{j}}<br />

<br /> H(q, \frac{\partial S_{0}}{\partial q}) = E<br />

This is the time-independent HJ eqn.
 
Right, but surely then, in the example above, E should equal H, since the Hamiltonian is time independent anyway.

But the Hamiltonian is <br /> H(p_x,p_y,p_z,x,y,z)=\frac{p_x^2}{2m}-Fx+\frac{p_y^2}{2m}+\frac{p_z^2}{2m}

and the required value for E is
<br /> E=p_x+\frac{p_y^2}{2m}+\frac{p_z^2}{2m}

Why is that?
 
I don't know what you are talking about. After you had substituted:

<br /> S_{0}(x, y, z) = f(x) + p_{y} \, y + p_{z} \, z<br />

into the time independent HJ eqn, you should get:

<br /> f&#039;(x) = \left(2 m \, E - p^{2}_{y} - p^{2}_{z} + 2 m \, F \, x\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}<br />

Then, you should integrate this and you will get the complete integral. The arbitrary constants are p_{y}, p_{z} and E.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K