1
$\begingroup$

After the tremendous help from @hft on my previous question, after thinking, new question popped up.

I want to compare how things behave when we do: $\frac{\partial S}{\partial t_2}$ and $\frac{\partial S}{\partial x_2}$. One is with respect to position and one with time.

It's easy to see that changing $\delta t_2$ results in new classical path, from which I understand the derivation. The more interesting question is, what happens when changing $x_2$? It should still cause a path change - even though time endpoints is the same, if $x_2$ changed, then in the same time, object should cover different distance - definitely path changing.

So by following the logic I said, I got:

$$S_2 - S_1 = \delta S = \delta x_b \frac{\partial L}{\partial x}(t_b) = p_2.$$

This was derived by $S1$ (original action) - $S2$ (new resulting path action). ofc, in this way, $t2$ was fixed.

Now, I wonder, how do I derive $\frac{\partial S}{\partial x} = p$? This is different since this is the formula for any point of $x$. The difficulty I have is if we change any $x$ on our path, ofc, this results in a new classical path, but I can't do anymore:

$$S_2 - S_1 = \delta S = \int_{t_1}^{t_2} [L(r, r') - L(r - \eta, r' - \eta')] dt$$

and I seem to be struggling now, I could solve it when for change of $x2$, but for change of any $x$, I'm stuck.

Also, my second question would be that feynman says that changing time endpoint results in a new classical path, but doesn't say the same when changing position endpoint. Why? changing position endpoint still results in a new classical path even though time endpoint is fixed.

$\endgroup$

1 Answer 1

0
$\begingroup$
  1. On one hand, the variation of the on-shell action $S(q_f,t_f;q_i,t_i)$ wrt. the endpoint positions $q_i$ and $q_f$ is actually the simplest as the proof only involves vertical variation $\delta q$ with no horizontal variation $\delta t=0$, cf. eq. (11) in my Phys.SE answer here.

  2. On the other hand, the variation of the on-shell action $S(q_f,t_f;q_i,t_i)$ wrt. the endpoint times $t_i$ and $t_f$ is more challenging as the proof involves both vertical and horizontal variations, cf. eq. (12) in my Phys.SE answer here.

The classical path is typically changed in both cases.

$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ so I am right that even position endpoint causes classical path to change. While I get that, I need to see why dS/dx= p for all points(not just for position endpoint variantions). physics.stackexchange.com/a/773015/366606 This kind of answers it, but @hft means i think that it does not result in new classical path, but it does. I understand endpoint differentiation result but I again repeat - i dont get how dS/dx = p for all points $\endgroup$
    – Giorgi
    Commented Jul 25, 2023 at 11:14
  • $\begingroup$ I agree: Variations other than endpoint variations of the on-shell action do not make sense. $\endgroup$
    – Qmechanic
    Commented Jul 25, 2023 at 12:15
  • $\begingroup$ The book actually mentions it without derivation and I'm having a hard time deriving it. you also agree that even if we change position endpoint, we still get left with a new classical path, right ? if so, do you have any idea what @hft means here - physics.stackexchange.com/a/773015/366606 ? I thought I had understood it, but clearly, don't get it $\endgroup$
    – Giorgi
    Commented Jul 25, 2023 at 12:20

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.