2
$\begingroup$

The question is simple: How do I find the function derivative of $$(\delta/\delta \phi(x)) (\partial_\mu \phi(x))~?$$ As far as I can tell, I cannot use any of the standard computational rules for the functional derivative.

$\endgroup$
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ $\frac{\delta}{\delta\phi(x)}$ commutes with $\frac{\partial}{\partial y^\mu}$. $\endgroup$ – AccidentalFourierTransform Nov 9 '17 at 12:34
  • $\begingroup$ So the answer is the Heavyside step function? $\endgroup$ – Mikkel Rev Nov 9 '17 at 12:38
  • $\begingroup$ Nope. ${}{}{}{}$ $\endgroup$ – AccidentalFourierTransform Nov 9 '17 at 12:40
  • $\begingroup$ $\partial_\mu (\delta\phi(x) /\delta \phi(x)) = \partial_\mu \delta^{(4)}(0) = \partial_\mu \infty = \infty$? $\endgroup$ – Mikkel Rev Nov 9 '17 at 12:45
  • $\begingroup$ Hi @Marius Jonsson : Is this taken from some reference? Which page? $\endgroup$ – Qmechanic Nov 9 '17 at 12:45
3
$\begingroup$

The expression $\frac{\delta \partial_\mu\phi(y)}{\delta \phi(y)}$ is mathematically meaningless.

By definition, given a functional $F$ associating reals (or, more generally, complex numbers) $F[\phi]$ to smooth functions $\phi$, we say that the distribution $\frac{\delta F}{\delta \phi(x)}$ is the functional derivative of $F$, if $$\frac{d}{d\alpha}|_{\alpha=0} F[\phi + \alpha f] = \int \frac{\delta F}{\delta \phi(x)} f(x) dx$$ for every compactly-supported smooth function $f$.

In the considered case, one has to compute the functional derivative of the functional $F$ associating $\partial_\mu \phi(y)$ to $\phi$, i.e., $$\partial_\mu \phi(y) := \int \partial_\mu \phi(x) \delta(x-y) dx\:.$$ We have $$\frac{d}{d\alpha}|_{\alpha=0} F[\phi + \alpha f] = \frac{d}{d\alpha}|_{\alpha=0} \int \partial_\mu (\phi(x)+ \alpha f(x)) \delta(x-y) dx = \int \partial_\mu f(x) \delta(x-y) dx$$ $$= -\int f(x) \partial_\mu\delta(x-y) dx\:.$$ We conclude that $$\frac{\delta \partial_\mu\phi(y)}{\delta \phi(x)} = - \partial^{(x)}_\mu\delta(x-y) = \partial^{(y)}_\mu\delta(x-y)\:. $$ So $\frac{\delta }{\delta \phi(x)}$ and $\partial^{(y)}_\mu$ commute as said by @AccidentalFourierTransform.

In summary, $\frac{\delta \partial_\mu\phi(y)}{\delta \phi(y)}$ is not defined because the value at a fixed point of a non-regular distribution has no meaning.

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ +1 I would like to mention the following: if we were to insist that we want that expression evaluated at $x=y$ ("in a formal sense" e.g., with some regularisation scheme in mind), then one may argue that the expression vanishes, inasmuch as the derivative of the Dirac delta is odd. $\endgroup$ – AccidentalFourierTransform Nov 9 '17 at 14:06
  • $\begingroup$ Right, indeed: ex falso quodlibet $\endgroup$ – Valter Moretti Nov 9 '17 at 14:10
0
$\begingroup$
  1. As correctly pointed out in the answer by Valter Moretti, it is mathematically ill-defined to apply (the traditional definition of) the functional/variational derivative (FD) $$ \frac{\delta {\cal L}(x)}{\delta\phi^{\alpha} (x)} \tag{1}$$ to the same spacetime point.

  2. However, it is very common to introduce a 'same-spacetime' FD as $$ \frac{\delta {\cal L}(x)}{\delta\phi^{\alpha} (x)}~:=~ \frac{\partial{\cal L}(x) }{\partial\phi^{\alpha} (x)} - d_{\mu} \left(\frac{\partial{\cal L}(x) }{\partial\partial_{\mu}\phi^{\alpha} (x)} \right)+\ldots. \tag{2} $$ which obscures/betrays its variational origin, but is often used for notational convenience. (The ellipsis $\ldots$ in eq. (2) denotes possible contributions from higher-order spacetime derivatives.) See e.g. this, this, & this Phys.SE posts.

    If we interpret OP's expression via eq. (2), then OP's Lagrangian density ${\cal L}=\partial_{\mu} \phi$ is a total space-time derivative, so that OP's 'same-spacetime' FD vanishes, cf. e.g. this Phys.SE post.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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