Physics Asked by Chip on December 26, 2020

I’ve been working on my dynamics homework when I’ve run into confusion with derivatives and could use some help regarding that. The question is as follows:

When varying a functional with respect to a variable, do we consider different derivatives of functions to be independent? For instance, what is the functional derivative of $ddot{x}$ with respect to $dot{x}$?

For instance, I have an equation $L = x + dot{x}+ddot{x}$.

What is the partial derivative of this with respect to $dot{x}$?

Here is the cheat sheet:

On one hand, in a

**partial**differentiation the variable $x,dot{x},ddot{x},ldots$ are**independent.**E.g. the partial derivatives $frac{partial dot{x}}{partial x}=0$ and $frac{partial x}{partial dot{x}}=0$ are zero.On the other hand, in a

**functional**differentiation the variable $x,dot{x},ddot{x},ldots$ are**dependent.**E.g. the functional derivative $frac{delta dot{x}(t)}{delta x(t^{prime})}=delta^{prime}(t!-!t^{prime})$ and $frac{delta ddot{x}(t)}{delta x(t^{prime})}=delta^{primeprime}(t!-!t^{prime})$ are derivatives of the Dirac delta distribution, while $frac{delta x(t)}{delta dot{x}(t^{prime})}$ or $frac{delta ddot{x}(t)}{delta dot{x}(t^{prime})}$ are ill-defined/meaningless.

This is explained further in e.g. this and this related Phys.SE posts.

Answered by Qmechanic on December 26, 2020

This is a fairly common misconception.
The action functional $S$ eats a **function** $q$ and spits out the following number:

$$S[q] := int_{t_1}^{t_2} Lbig(q(t),dot q(t), tbig) dt$$

where the Lagrangian $L: mathbb R^3 rightarrow mathbb R$ is just a function of three variables. One might have, for example,

$$L(a,b,c) = frac{1}{2} mb^2 - frac{1}{2} momega^2 a^2$$

where $m$ and $omega$ are constants. In that case, the action would be

$$S[q] := int_{t_1}^{t_2} Lbig(q(t),dot q(t),tbig) = int_{t_1}^{t_2} left(frac{1}{2}m dot q^2(t) - frac{1}{2}momega^2 q^2(t) right) dt$$

Given some $(a,b,c)$, we can linearize the Lagrangian to find its value at a nearby point $(a+delta a,b+delta b,c+delta c)$:

$$L(a+delta a,b+delta b,c+delta c) = L(a,b,c) + left[ big(partial_1Lbig)cdot delta a+ big(partial_2Lbig)cdot delta b +big(partial_3Lbig)cdot delta cright]$$

where $partial_nL$ is the derivative of $L$ with respect to its $n^{th}$ slot. Therefore, if we add a small $eta$ to $q$, we get

$$S[q+eta]=int_{t_1}^{t_2} Lbig(q(t)+eta(t),dot q(t) + dot eta(t),tbig) dt $$ $$simeq int_{t_1}^{t_2} Lbig(q(t),dot q(t),tbig) dt + int_{t_1}^{t_2} big[(partial_1 L) eta(t) + (partial_2 L) dot eta(t) big] dt$$

Integration by parts then gives

$$S[q+eta]-S[q]simeq int_{t_1}^{t_2} big[(partial_1 L) - frac{d}{dt}(partial_2 L)big]eta dt$$

where we've used the fact that $eta(t_1)=eta(t_2)=0$. If we demand that this vanish for arbitrary (differentiable) $eta$, we must have that

$$frac{d}{dt}left[bigg(partial_2 Lbigg)big(q(t),dot q(t),tbig)right] = bigg(partial_1 Lbigg)big(q(t),dot q(t),tbig)$$

Notation being what it is, it is standard to say something like $$L(x,v,t) = frac{1}{2}m v^2 + frac{1}{2}momega^2x^2$$ $$frac{partial L}{partial x} = momega^2 x$$ $$frac{partial L}{partial v} = mv$$

But this is a bit misleading. What we've written as $frac{partial L}{partial x}$ is really the derivative of $L$ with respect to its first slot, *evaluated at the point* $(x,v,t)$. The same is true when we write $L = L(q,dot q,t)$; the fact that $q$ and $dot q$ are related to each other by differentiation is irrelvant, because $q(t)$ and $dot q(t)$ are the *values* (not functions!) we plug in to the first and second slots *after* we take the partial derivative of $L$.

I have an equation $L=x+dot x+ddot x$. What is the partial derivative of this with respect to $dot x$?

$L$ is a function, not a functional; it doesn't know how to take derivatives. It is a map which eats numerical values and spits out a numerical value. The only way to have a Lagrangian like that is to define $L(a,b,c)=a+b+c$, and then plug $x$ into the first slot, $dot x$ into the second slot, and $ddot x$ into the third slot$^dagger$. If you do this, then $big(partial_2 Lbig)(x,dot x,ddot x)$, which we we would usually write as $frac{partial L}{partial dot x}$ in an abuse of notation, would be equal to $1$.

$^dagger$ Note that an action functional which involves second derivatives is mathematically problematic under most circumstances.

Answered by J. Murray on December 26, 2020

I am going to guess that you are working in the context of a Lagrangian, trying to derive the equation of motion. The Lagrangian for one-dimensional motion along a single direction $x$ is a function $L(dot{x},x)$. (It can also be a function of $t$, but that’s not directly relevant for this discussion.) To derive the Euler-Lagrange equations, you need to take partial derivatives of $L$ with respect to both $x$ and $dot{x}$, and this is done by considering $x$ and $dot{x}$ to be completely independent variables.

Instead of $L(dot{x},x)$, you can think of the Lagrangian as a function of two completely separate variables $L(y,x)$. Then the partial derivate with respect to $dot{x}$ is essentially *defined* to be
$$frac{partial L(dot{x},x)}{partialdot{x}}equivleft.frac{partial L(y,x)}{partial y}right|_{y=dot{x}},$$
taking the derivative of $L$ with respect to its first argument and evaluating it at that argument equal to $dot{x}$.

When dealing with more complicated theories (involving not point particles but fields), defined in terms of an action $S=int dt,L$, the relationship between $partial/partial x$ and $partial/partialdot{x}$ can be made more apparent, but at the at the level you are talking about, what I have described is probably the best way to think about things. This means, by the way, that the partial derivative $partial L/partialdot{x}$ of the $L=x+dot{x}+ddot{x}$ in the question is just 1—as are $partial L/partial x$ and $partial L/partialddot{x}$

Answered by Buzz on December 26, 2020

1 Asked on September 12, 2020

harmonic oscillator hilbert space quantum mechanics quantum states wavefunction

3 Asked on September 12, 2020

2 Asked on September 12, 2020 by batwayne

1 Asked on September 12, 2020 by watw

2 Asked on September 12, 2020 by foolishmuse

1 Asked on September 11, 2020 by larrythelobster

bose einstein condensate bose hubbard model condensed matter quantum optics second quantization

1 Asked on September 11, 2020 by molly-lynn

0 Asked on September 11, 2020 by mohammad-javanshiry

1 Asked on September 11, 2020 by frencho

2 Asked on September 10, 2020 by an-epsilon-of-room

harmonic oscillator hilbert space operators quantum mechanics

0 Asked on September 10, 2020 by vengaq

0 Asked on September 10, 2020

condensed matter symmetry protected topological order topological phase weyl semimetal

1 Asked on September 9, 2020

2 Asked on September 9, 2020 by ses-moh

2 Asked on September 9, 2020 by srs

approximations chemical potential partition function statistical mechanics temperature

1 Asked on September 9, 2020 by sx7

1 Asked on September 9, 2020 by hitech-physics

angular momentum experimental physics quantum mechanics quantum spin

0 Asked on September 9, 2020

0 Asked on September 9, 2020

0 Asked on September 8, 2020 by y-p

Get help from others!

Recent Answers

- Joshua Engel on Why fry rice before boiling?
- haakon.io on Why fry rice before boiling?
- Peter Machado on Why fry rice before boiling?
- Lex on Does Google Analytics track 404 page responses as valid page views?
- Jon Church on Why fry rice before boiling?

© 2022 AnswerBun.com. All rights reserved. Sites we Love: PCI Database, MenuIva, UKBizDB, Menu Kuliner, Sharing RPP