2
$\begingroup$

I was reading Peter Mann's Lagrangian & Hamiltonian Dynamics, and I found this equation (page 115):

$$p_i := \frac{\partial L}{\partial \dot{q}^i}$$

where L is the Lagrangian. I understand this is the definition of conjugate momentum, but I wanted to know if there is a particular reason for the momentum index to be a lower index and the coordinate index to be an upper index. Is it simply the author's preference or there is a deeper reason?

$\endgroup$
4
  • $\begingroup$ Hi there! Maybe this is done because they are conjugate. $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 9, 2021 at 21:35
  • $\begingroup$ it would be very common in covariant notation to write $p_i = \partial_i L$ with the $\partial_i$ denoting your derivative. $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 9, 2021 at 21:42
  • $\begingroup$ so it would be something like the momentum being covariant and the coordinate being contravariant? $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 9, 2021 at 21:44
  • $\begingroup$ I think that you can't compare the both. Both sides are covariant or contravariant. $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 9, 2021 at 22:38

2 Answers 2

1
$\begingroup$
  1. The index of generalized coordinates $q^1, \ldots, q^n$, is conventionally$^1$ a superscript/upper index in physics.

  2. The Lagrangian momenta $p_i:=\frac{\partial L}{\partial \dot{q}^i}$ have a subscript/lower index since they transform under general coordinate transformations $q^i\to q^{\prime j}=f^j(q,t)$ as components of a co-vector/1-form $p=p_i\mathrm{d}q^i$, cf. e.g. this Phys.SE post.

--

$^1$ Be aware that many authors don't bother to make such notational distinctions.

$\endgroup$
0
$\begingroup$

Usually, you would write your Lagrangian in some sort of form like:

$$L = {\dot q}^{i}{\dot q}_{i} = g^{ij}{\dot q}_{i}{\dot q}_{j}$$, because the lagrangian itself is a scalar. Then, if you took a variation with respect to the "downed" version, you'd be left with

$$\frac{\delta L}{\delta {\dot q}_i} = 2 g^{ij}{\dot q}_{j} = 2 {\dot q}^{i}$$

So, variation of a scalar with respect to a "downed" index leaves an "upped" index.

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ Sorry if this is a stupid question, but why are we bringing the metric tensor into the Lagrangian? $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 9, 2021 at 22:00
  • $\begingroup$ @math-ingenue, it's just a shorthand for whatever inner product we're using to span the $q_{i}$'s. It's also how we map from upper indices to lower indices. It is often just the identity matrix, which makes a lot of this formalism seem absurd and overdone. $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 9, 2021 at 22:03

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

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