Suppose the Lagrangian was given as:

$$L = \frac{1}{2}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \underbrace{\left(\dot{A(}z)^2-A(z)^2\right)+\left(\dot{Q(}z)^2\delta(z)-Q(z)^2\delta(z)\right)+2\dot{Q(}z)\cdot A(z) \delta(z)}_{= \mathcal{L}} \,\,\,dz\tag{1}$$

where Q is localized at $0$. The above are basically two harmonic oscillators that are coupled to each other in the last term. Now, if I wanted to Legendre-transform this in order to get the Hamiltonian, I wouldn't know what to do with the Dirac-delta function.

The conjugate momentum for A(z) is fairly straight forward:

$$P_A = \frac{\partial \mathcal{L}}{\partial \dot{A\,}(z)} = \dot{A\,}(z)\tag{2}$$

but how should I deal with the other conjugate momentum $P_Q$? Would it be

$$P_Q = \frac{\partial \mathcal{L}}{\partial \dot{Q\,}(z)} = \dot{Q\,}(z)\delta(z)+A(z)\delta(z)\tag{3}$$


$$P_Q = \frac{\partial \mathcal{L}}{\partial (\dot{Q\,}(z)\delta(z))} = \dot{Q\,}(z)+A(z).\tag{4}$$

I run into problems using the former, but the latter does not seem correct.

  • $\begingroup$ 3 is basically correct, and you are running into trouble because for z=0 PQ(z) is zero, and the velocity cannot be expressed in terms of the momenta. This is called a first class constraint. You have to check if the constraint is compatible with thr hamiltonian $\endgroup$ – lalala Jul 26 '19 at 18:37
  1. Lagrangian formulation. The trick is to appreciate that OP's Lagrangian $$ L ~=~ \frac{1}{2}\int_{\mathbb{R}} \! dz ( \dot{A}(z)^2 -A(z)^2) ~+~ \frac{1}{2}( \dot{Q}(0)^2 -Q(0)^2)~+~ \dot{Q}(0) A(0) \tag{A}$$ is a combination of a bulk theory in the $A$-sector and a boundary theory in the $Q$-sector (say, living on a brane located at $z=0$).

  2. Euler-Lagrange (EL) equations. The bulk EL eq. is $$ \ddot{A}(z)+A(z)~\approx~+\delta(z)\dot{Q}(0), \tag{B}$$ while the boundary EL eq. is $$ \ddot{Q}(0)+Q(0)~\approx~-\dot{A}(0). \tag{C}$$ If we assume that the bulk field $A(z)$ is continuous without $\delta(z)$-contributions, then eq. (B) implies that $\dot{Q}(0)\approx 0$. Eq. (C) then implies that $\ddot{A}(0)\approx 0$. Eq. (B) then implies that $A(0)\approx 0$. Eq. (C) then implies that $Q(0)\approx 0$. In conclusion: The two harmonic oscillators $A$ and $Q$ decouple, and the amplitudes vanish at $z=0$.

  3. Momenta. The bulk momentum is $$ P_A(z)~=~\frac{\delta L}{\delta \dot{A}(z)}~=~\dot{A}(z), \tag{D}$$ while the boundary momentum is $$ P_Q(0)~=~\frac{\partial L}{\partial \dot{Q}(0)}~=~ \dot{Q}(0)+A(0).\tag{E} $$

  4. Hamiltonian formulation. The Hamiltonian gains a bulk and a boundary part $$\begin{align} H ~&=~ \int_{\mathbb{R}} \! dz ~ P_{A}(z)\dot{A}(z)~+~P_Q(0)\dot{Q}(0)~-~L\cr~&=~\frac{1}{2}\int_{\mathbb{R}} \! dz ( P_{A}(z)^2 +A(z)^2) ~+~ \frac{1}{2}( (P_Q(0)-A(0))^2 +Q(0)^2). \end{align}\tag{F}$$

| cite | improve this answer | |
  • $\begingroup$ The problem that I am working on explicitly asks to diagonalize the above Hamiltonian. The idea is to expand the $(P_Q(0)-A(0))^2$ term and get two harm. oscill. and one coupling term: $$\frac{1}{2}\int_{\mathbb{R}} \! dz \left[P_{A}(z)^2 +A(z)^2+A(z)^2\delta(z)\right] ~+~ \frac{1}{2}( P_Q(0)^2 +Q(0)^2) ~+~ P_Q(0)\cdot A(0)$$ I know how to diagonalize the two h.o. and the coupling term. The problem, though, is $A(z)^2+A(z)^2\delta(z)$. I would like to somehow add them up and redefine A(z). Could I do this by defining A(z) with something that cancels the delta-function from the beginning? $\endgroup$ – xabdax Jul 26 '19 at 19:45

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.