3
$\begingroup$

In my book, it is written that for any vector $\mathbf{v}$, we have

$$\{\mathbf{v},\mathbf{L}\cdot \mathbf{n}\}=\mathbf{n}\times\mathbf{v}.\tag{1}$$

For me it is absurd... For example, if we take $\mathbf{v}=(\cos(x),0,0)$

the Poisson bracket, say we consider $L_z=xp_y-yp_x$:

$$(\{\mathbf{v},\mathbf{L}\cdot \mathbf{n}\})_x=\frac{\partial v_1}{\partial x}\frac{\partial L_z}{\partial p_x}-\frac{\partial L_z}{\partial x}\frac{\partial v_1}{\partial p_x}+\frac{\partial v_1}{\partial y}...=-\sin(x)x.$$ I can see that it already fails sincer the left-hand side is $\mathbf{n}\times\mathbf{v}$ can not contain $\sin(x)$...

Or maybe I misunderstood the proposition?

Screenshot of the book's content:

enter image description here

$\endgroup$
6
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ could you cite the book? $\endgroup$ Jul 16, 2019 at 16:37
  • $\begingroup$ Poisson brackets are normally written with curly braces, not square ones. $\endgroup$
    – G. Smith
    Jul 17, 2019 at 0:43
  • $\begingroup$ @G.Smith isn't curly brackets anticommutator? $\{a,b\}=ab+ba$. $\endgroup$
    – Upc
    Jul 18, 2019 at 0:17
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @Upc Can you still cite the book? A screenshot is not a replacement for a citation. It is more like a replacement for a quotation. $\endgroup$
    – user87745
    Jul 18, 2019 at 0:31
  • $\begingroup$ @Upc en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poisson_bracket $\endgroup$
    – G. Smith
    Jul 18, 2019 at 2:09

1 Answer 1

3
$\begingroup$
  1. Well, there are different notions of vectors in mathematics and physics.

  2. The notion of vectors ${\bf v}$ that seems to be relevant here are maps $$\{\text{phase space}\}\times\{\text{time axis}\}\quad\stackrel{\bf v}{\longrightarrow}\quad \mathbb{R}^3$$ that transform in the vector representation of the 3D rotation group $SO(3)$. Here the angular momentum $L_x$, $L_y$, and $L_z$ belong to the corresponding $so(3)$ Lie algebra. OP's eq. (1) is the characteristic property of such vectors ${\bf v}$. [Here ${\bf n}$ is a so-called rotation vector, although it is not a vector in above sense].

  3. Similarly, scalars $s$ in this context are maps $$\{\text{phase space}\}\times\{\text{time axis}\}\quad\stackrel{s}{\longrightarrow}\quad \mathbb{R}$$ that transform in the trivial representation of $SO(3)$.

  4. OP's example does not fulfill eq. (1) and is hence not a vector in the sense of point 2.

  5. Similarly, a constant 3-tuple ${\bf v}=(1,-5,2)$ is not a vector in the sense of point 2 because it stays constant rather than rotate under 3D rotations.

$\endgroup$

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.