Mechanics

Physics 151
Lecture 18
Hamiltonian Equations of Motion
(Chapter 8)

Whats Ahead

We are starting Hamiltonian formalism

May not cover Hamilton-Jacobi theory

Hamiltonian equation Today and 11/26

Canonical transformation 12/3, 12/5, 12/10
Close link to non-relativistic QM
Cute but not very relevant

What shall we do in the last 2 lectures?

Classical chaos?
Perturbation theory?
Classical field theory?
Send me e-mail if you have preference!

Hamiltonian Formalism

Newtonian Lagrangian Hamiltonian

Describe same physics and produce same results

Difference is in the viewpoints
Symmetries and invariance more apparent
Flexibility of coordinate transformation

Hamiltonian formalism linked to the development of

Hamilton-Jacobi theory
Classical perturbation theory
Quantum mechanics
Statistical mechanics

Lagrange Hamilton

Lagranges equations for n coordinates

d L L
= 0 i = 1, , n

dt qi qi

2nd-order differential
equation of n variables

n equations 2n initial conditions qi (t = 0) qi (t = 0)

Can we do with 1st-order differential equations?

Yes, but youll need 2n equations

We keep qi and replace qi with something similar
L(q j , q j , t )
We take the conjugate momenta pi
qi

Configuration Space

We considered (q1 , , qn ) as a point in an n-dim. space

Called configuration space

Motion of the system
A curve in the config space

qi = qi (t )

When we take variations,

we consider qi and qi as
independent variables

i.e., we have 2n independent variables in n-dim. space

Isnt it more natural to consider the motion in 2n-dim space?

Phase Space

Consider coordinates and momenta as independent

State of the system is given by (q1 , , qn , p1 , , pn )

Consider it a point in the 2n-dimensional phase space

We are switching the

independent variables
(qi , qi , t ) (qi , pi , t )

A bit of mathematical trick

is needed to do this

qi = qi (t )
pi = pi (t )

Legendre Transformation

Start from a function of two variables f ( x, y )

Total derivative is
f
f
df = dx + dy udx + vdy
x
y
Define g f ux and consider its total derivative
dg = df d (ux) = udx + vdy udx xdu = vdy xdu
i.e. g is a function of u and y
g
If f = L and ( x, y ) = ( q, q )
g
= x
=v
u
y
L(q, q ) g ( p, q ) = L pq
This is what
we need

Hamiltonian

Opposite sign from

Legendre transf.

Define Hamiltonian: H (q, p, t ) = qi pi L(q, q, t )

Total derivative is
L
L
L
dH = pi dqi + qi dpi
dqi
dqi
dt
qi
qi
t

L
Lagranges equations say
= pi
qi

L
dH = qi dpi pi dqi
dt
t
This must be equivalent to
H
H
H
dH =
dpi +
dqi +
dt
pi
qi
t

Putting them
together gives

Hamiltons Equations
H
H
H
L
=
= qi
= pi and
We find
t
t
pi
qi
2n equations replacing the n Lagranges equations

1st-order differential instead of 2nd-order

Symmetry between q and p is apparent

There is nothing new We just rearranged equations

First equation links momentum to velocity

This relation is given in Newtonian formalism
Second equation is equivalent to Newtons/Lagranges
equations of motion

Quick Example

Particle under Hookes law force F = kx

L=

m 2 k 2
x x
2
2

p=

L
= mx
x

m 2 k 2
H = xp L = x + x
2
2
p2 k 2
=
+ x
2m 2

Hamiltons equations
H
H p
= kx
p=
x=
=
x
p m

Replace x with

p
m

Usual harmonic
oscillator

Energy Function

Definition of Hamiltonian is identical to the energy

function h(q, q, t ) = qi L L(q, q, t )

qi
Difference is subtle: H is a function of (q, p, t)

This equals to the total energy if

Lagrangian is L = L0 (q, t ) + L1 (q, t )qi + L2 (q, t )q j qk

Constraints are time-independent
This makes T = L2 ( q, t ) q j qk
See Lecture 4, or
Forces are conservative
Goldstein Section 2.7
This makes V = L0 ( q )

Hamiltonian and Total Energy

If the conditions make h to be total energy, we can

skip calculating L and go directly to H

For the particle under Hookes law force

p2 k 2
H = E = T +V =
+ x
2m 2

This works often, but not always

when the coordinate system is time-dependent

e.g., rotating (non-inertial) coordinate system
when the potential is velocity-dependent
e.g., particle in an EM field
Lets look at this

Particle in EM Field

For a particle in an EM field

m 2
L = xi q + qAi xi
2
pi = mxi + qAi

We cant jump on H = E
because of the last term, but

mxi2
H = (mxi + qAi ) xi L =
+ q
This is in fact E
2
Wed be done if we were calculating h

For H, we must rewrite it using pi = mxi + qAi

( pi qAi ) 2
H ( xi , pi ) =
+ q
2m

Particle in EM Field

Hamiltons equations are

H pi qAi
xi =
=
pi
m

( pi qAi ) 2
H ( xi , pi ) =
+ q
2m

p j qAj Aj
H

pi =
=q
q
xi
xi
xi
m

Are they equivalent to the usual Lorentz force?

Check this by eliminating pi
Aj
d

(mxi + qAi ) = qxi

q
xi
xi
dt

A bit of work

d
(mvi ) = qEi + q ( v B)i
dt

Conservation of Hamiltonian

Consider time-derivative of Hamiltonian

dH (q, p, t ) H
H
H
q+
p+
=
q
p
t
dt
H
= pq + qp +
t

Hamiltonian is
conserved if it does not
depend explicitly on t

H may or may not be total energy

If it is, this means energy conservation
Even if it isnt, H is still a constant of motion

Cyclic Coordinates

A cyclic coordinate does not appear in L

By construction, it does not appear in H either

H ( q , p, t ) = qi pi L( q , q, t )
Hamiltons equation says
H
Conjugate momentum of a
=0
p=
cyclic coordinate is conserved
q
Exactly the same as in the Lagrangian formalism

Cyclic Example

Central force problem in 2 dimensions

m 2 2 2
L = (r + r ) V (r )
2
pr = mr p = mr 2

1 2 p2
H=
pr + 2 + V (r )
r
2m
1 2 l2
=
pr + 2 + V (r )
r
2m

is cyclic

p = const = l

Hamiltons equations
pr
l2
V (r )
r=
pr = 3
m
mr
r

Cyclic variable drops off by itself

Going Relativistic

Practical approach

Purist approach

Find a Hamiltonian that works

Does it represent the total energy?
Construct covariant Hamiltonian formalism
For one particle in an EM field

Dont expect miracles

Fundamental difficulties remain the same

Practical Approach

Start from the relativistic Lagrangian that works

L = mc 2 1 2 V (x)

mvi
L
=
pi =
vi
1 2

H =h=

Did this last time

p 2 c 2 + m 2 c 4 + V ( x)

It does equal to the total energy

Hamiltons equations
H
V
pi c 2
pi
H
pi =
=
= Fi
=
=
xi =
xi
xi
pi
p 2 c 2 + m2 c 4 m

Practical Approach w/ EM Field

Consider a particle in an EM field

L = mc 2 1 2 q (x) + q ( v A)
Hamiltonian is still total energy
H = m c 2 + q
Can be easily checked

= m 2 2 v 2 c 2 + m2 c 4 + q

Difference is in the momentum pi = m vi + qAi

H = (p qA) 2 c 2 + m 2 c 4 + q
Not the usual linear momentum!

Practical Approach w/ EM Field

H = (p qA) 2 c 2 + m 2 c 4 + q

Consider H q
( H q ) 2 (p qA)2 c 2 = m2 c 4

constant

It means that ( H q , pc qAc) is a 4-vector,

and so is ( H , pc)
Similar to 4-momentum (E/c, p) of
a relativistic particle
Remember p here is not the linear momentum!

This particular Hamiltonian + canonical momentum

transforms as a 4-vector

True only for well-defined 4-potential such as EM field

Purist Approach

Covariant Lagrangian for a free particle = 12 mu u

= mu
p =
u

H=

We know that p0 is E/c

We also know that x0 is ct

p p

2m

Energy is the conjugate momentum of time

Generally true for any covariant Lagrangian

You know the corresponding relationship in QM

Purist Approach

Value of Hamiltonian is
p p mc 2
=
H=
This is constant!
2m
2
What is important is Hs dependence on p

Hamiltons equations

dx
H p
=
=
d p
m

dp
H
=
=0
d
x

Time components are

d (ct ) E
d ( E c)
=
=c
=0
d
mc
d

4-momentum
conservation

Energy definition
and conservation

Purist Approach w/ EM Field

With EM field, Lagrangian becomes

( x , u ) = 12 mu u + qu A
H=

mu u
2

p = mu + qA

( p qA )( p qA )
2m

Hamiltons equations are

( p qA ) A
H
dx H p qA dp
=
=
=
=
d
x
m
x
d p
m
A bit of work can turn them into
A A
du
= q

m
u = K

4-force
x

d
x

EM Field and Hamiltonian

In Hamiltonian formalism, EM field always modify

the canonical momentum as p A = p0 + qA
With EM field

Without EM field

A handy rule:
Hamiltonian with EM field is given by replacing p
in the field-free Hamiltonian with p qA

Often used in relativistic QM to introduce EM interaction

Summary

Constructed Hamiltonian formalism

Equivalent to Lagrangian formalism

Simpler, but twice as many, equations
Hamiltonian is conserved (unless explicitly t-dependent)
Equals to total energy (unless it isnt) (duh)
Cyclic coordinates drops out quite easily

A few new insights from relativistic Hamiltonians

Conjugate of time = energy

p qA rule for introducing EM interaction