9
$\begingroup$

Special relativity has the following single-particle Lagrangian: $$S = \int_{t_0}^{t_f}\sqrt {\langle \mathrm d\vec{s},\mathrm d\vec{s}\rangle}.$$

Clearly it is based on Euclidean norms; it is in Minkowski or Riemannian-geometry norm, but both norms are only a generalization of the Euclidean norm.

Now I can formulate another Lagrangian that Looks like this:

$$S = \int_{t_0}^{t_f} ({\langle \mathrm d\vec{s},\mathrm d\vec{s},\mathrm d\vec{s}\rangle })^{\frac{1}{3}}\;.$$

I have generalized the Standard Lagrangian of a relativistic particle to the 3-norm and tried to concept a generalized scalar products for 3-norms.

Are such field theories developed now and can such field theories be constructed? Is there any evidence to construct a physical theory based on 3-norms?

$\endgroup$
7
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ What is a "3-norm"? The usual meaning of a "$p$-norm" is $\lvert\lvert x\rvert\rvert_p = \left(\sum_i x_i^p \right)^{1/p}$. How is $\langle ds,ds,ds\rangle$ defined? What physical thing to you expect this to model? $\endgroup$
    – ACuriousMind
    Commented Feb 3, 2016 at 15:12
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Yes, a 3-norm is a p=3-norm. I don't know exactly how to define a triple scalar product; but it is a trilinear form. $\endgroup$
    – kryomaxim
    Commented Feb 3, 2016 at 15:13
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Why the downvote? I think this is an interesting enough question, or at least non-trivial. $\endgroup$
    – Sam Blitz
    Commented Feb 3, 2016 at 15:16
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @Ruslan: Equivalence of norms $\lvert-\rvert_1$ and $\lvert-\rvert_2$ means that there are $c,d$ such that $c \lvert v\rvert_1\leq\lvert v\rvert_2\leq C\lvert v\rvert_1$. So extremizing one of those will also extremize the other. Additionally, it is unclear how to add the Minkowskian nature here - do you just write a minusin front of the first entry? $\endgroup$
    – ACuriousMind
    Commented Feb 3, 2016 at 15:18
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ The title question (v2) Is it useful? seems primarily opinion-based. $\endgroup$
    – Qmechanic
    Commented Feb 3, 2016 at 16:20

1 Answer 1

6
$\begingroup$

OP's proposal (v2) is a special case of Finsler geometry with $n=3$. The main idea is to replace the quadratic metric tensor $g^{(2)}_{\mu_1\mu_2}$ for pseudo-Riemannian manifolds, which defines (infinitesimal, possibly imaginary) distance on the manifold via

$$ds ~=~ \sqrt[2]{g^{(2)}_{\mu_1\mu_2}dx^{\mu_1}dx^{\mu_2}},$$

with (possibly a sequence of) higher metric tensors $g^{(n)}_{\mu_1\ldots\mu_n}$ with a Finsler distance formula $$ds ~=~ \sum_{n\in\mathbb{N}} \sqrt[n]{ g^{(n)}_{\mu_1\ldots\mu_n} dx^{\mu_1}\ldots dx^{\mu_n}}.$$

There exists already a huge literature on Finsler geometry and its applications to physics.

$\endgroup$

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.