Timeline for Question about canonical transformation and generating functions
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 17 at 8:05 | history | bounty ended | R24698 | ||
| Mar 13 at 18:45 | vote | accept | R24698 | ||
| Mar 12 at 7:48 | history | edited | Qmechanic♦ | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
minor
|
| Mar 12 at 7:38 | history | edited | Qmechanic♦ | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Added explanation
|
| Mar 12 at 7:32 | comment | added | Qmechanic♦ | I updated the answer. | |
| Mar 12 at 5:05 | comment | added | R24698 | Thank you for answering. What bothers me is that they say that we can express F as a function of any two coordinates because of eq. 9.4 and its inverses (which are not known yet explicitly). How can they say that if we don't know the explicit equations of transformation? | |
| Mar 12 at 0:36 | history | answered | Qmechanic♦ | CC BY-SA 4.0 |