Take the 2-minute tour ×
Physics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for active researchers, academics and students of physics. It's 100% free, no registration required.

The canonical momentum is defined as

$p_{i} = \frac {\partial L}{\partial \dot{q_{i}}} $, where $L$ is the Lagrangian.

So actually how does $p_{i}$ transform in one coordinate system $\textbf{q}$ to another coordinate system $\textbf{Q}$ ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamiltonian_mechanics#Charged_particle_in_an_electromagnetic_field

When dealing with the Hamiltonian of the electromagnetic field, the derivation of $p_{j} = m \dot{x_j} + eA_j$ on the above link is usually written as $\textbf{p} = m \textbf{v} + e\textbf{A}$

but the derivation is based on using Cartesian coordinates, does it mean that $\textbf{p}$ is really a vector? If we are using another general coordinates, say, spherical coordinates, can we still have $\textbf{p} = m \textbf{v} + e\textbf{A}$ ? If no, I think the form of Hamiltonian in electromagnetic field

$H = \frac{(\textbf{p} - e\textbf{A})^2}{2m} + e\phi$

will only be valid in Cartesian coordinates. In any other coordinates, $H$ carries a different form!

Any comments are appreciated.

share|improve this question

2 Answers 2

1) In curvilinear coordinates $x^i$, $i=1,2,3$, with metric $g_{ij}=g_{ij}(x)$, the non-relativistic Lagrangian for a charged particle in an electromagnetic field reads

$$ L~=~T-U, \qquad T~=~\frac{m}{2}\dot{x}^i g_{ij} \dot{x}^j , \qquad U ~=~ q(\phi - \dot{x}^i A_i), $$

where $q$ is the charge. The canonical momentum is

$$ p_i ~=~\frac{\partial L}{\partial \dot{x}^i} ~=~ mg_{ij} \dot{x}^j + q A_i, $$

and the Hamiltonian becomes

$$ H ~=~ \frac{(p_i -q A_i) g^{ij} (p_j -q A_j)}{2m} + q\phi, $$

where $g^{ij}$ is the inverse metric.

2) These formulas behave covariantly under change of coordinates $x^i \to x^{\prime j}=x^{\prime j}(x)$ in position space. The generalized velocity

$$ \dot{x}^{\prime j}~=~\frac{\partial x^{\prime j}}{\partial x^i}\dot{x}^i $$

behaves as a vector field, while the magnetic potential

$$A_i~=~A^{\prime}_j ~\frac{\partial x^{\prime j}}{\partial x^i}, $$

and the canonical momentum

$$p_i~=~p^{\prime}_j ~\frac{\partial x^{\prime j}}{\partial x^i} $$

behave as covector fields (or equivalently, as one-forms). The Lagrangian $L$, the Hamiltonian $H$, and the electric potential $\phi$ are scalars (=invariant).

3) Finally, let us mention that the electric field

$$E_i~=-\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial x^i} -\frac{\partial A_i}{\partial t}$$

is a covector field, and the magnetic field

$$B^i~=\sqrt{g} ~\epsilon^{ijk}\frac{\partial A_k}{\partial x^j}, \qquad g~=~\det g_{ij}, \qquad \epsilon^{123}~=~+1,$$

is a vector field wrt. change of coordinates $x^i \to x^{\prime j}=x^{\prime j}(x)$ in position space.

share|improve this answer
    
Thank you for the answer! I am the person asking this question. To Qmechanic, I agree that the canonical momentum transforms like a covector. However, I feel strange that in the expression $\textbf{p} = m\textbf{v} + e\textbf{A}$, suppose we use two different Cartesian coordinates, the canonical momentum transforms like a vector (Right hand side is composed by vectors). Why is it? –  user6161 Nov 15 '11 at 19:36
    
Well, in the flat Euclidean (and also any Lorentzian) space, there is a one-to-one map between vectors and covectors... There's really no difference between them. You may lower and raise indices by the metric tensor. –  Luboš Motl Nov 15 '11 at 20:08
    
@Sirius: I have updated my answer. –  Qmechanic Nov 16 '11 at 8:16
    
Thanks for you guys' answers. By the way, how do you know the vector potential transforms like a covector, I thought it is a vector...Also, I think I don't really know about the vector transformation law, is it restricted to a coordinate transformation but not a change of reference frame? –  user6161 Nov 16 '11 at 14:00

The answer depends on how general a Lagrangian (or, equivalently, Hamiltonian) you want to allow. The most general Lagrangian surely allows arbitrary functions of $q,p$ and their mixing. If that's so, you shouldn't be thinking about the coordinate space for $q$ only. You have to think about the whole phase space and coordinate transformations on the whole space, i.e. reparametrizations of $(q_i,p_i)$. The phase space is a symplectic space i.e. one equipped with a non-singular antisymmetric $\omega_{ab}$ tensor, encoding the Poisson brackets of $\{X_a,X_b\}$ where $X=q$ or $p$.

In more restricted contexts, you may separate the phase space coordinates to the coordinates $q$ and momenta $p$. If you do so, $p_i$ live in a tangent space of the manifold spanned by $q_i$. The whole phase space may be interpreted as a fiber bundle over the $q_i$-generated phase space. The first identity you wrote, $p_i=\partial L / \partial \dot q_i$, gives you a relationship between $\dot q_i$ variables and $p_i$ that may also depend on $q_i$. Because the velocities $\dot q_i$ transform as tangent vectors (including the detailed values of the components) on the $q$ configuration space, you also know how $p_i$ transforms.

At any rate, I think it is a bit misleading to imagine that $p_i$ is a sort of a "field" defined in the $q$ space. In reality, $p_i$ are additional coordinates of the phase space. They may have a special relationship to the $q$'s but the transformations of the numerical values may be complex, act both on $q$ and $p$, and be affected by the Lagrangian or Hamiltonian which may be very nonlinear and complicated.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.