2
$\begingroup$

A Hamiltonian system is a dynamical system driven by a Hamiltonian $H$, i.e.

$$ \dot{q}=\nabla_p H,~~~~ \dot{p}=-\nabla_q H. $$

These systems have nice properties like being symplectic as well as the flow being a semigroup.

Recently, after overhearing a conversation, a non-science family member asked me what a Hamiltonian system is. I failed to explain it well. How would you describe a Hamiltonian system to a non-scientist? (p.s. I would like to give them more than just `a type of equation that can be used to study planetary motion or particle dynamics').

$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ "p.s. I would like to give them more than just `a type of equation that can be used to study planetary motion or particle dynamics'" --but this is what it is used for and probably most people have a vague idea about it. $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 12 at 9:01
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I guess you could say that you are studying how the "energy" of some physical systems (as planets or pendulum or whatever else) can predict the evolution in time of this system i.e. you are able to predict how something will evolve or how it was before just by knowing its "energy". (energy is probably much more intuitive and familiar to non scientist than hamiltonians) $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 12 at 9:05
  • $\begingroup$ There is no royal road to geometry. Hamiltonian system is a system described by Hamiltonian formalism, and to explain what that is, one must explain the whole thing - Lagrangian formalism, coordinates, momenta, action. It is a highly technical concept, there is no simpler way to teach it. The best you can do without teaching the whole thing is to give examples, like pendulum, or planetary motions. $\endgroup$ Commented Feb 9 at 18:53

3 Answers 3

5
$\begingroup$

Since I like visual thinking, I would go further by describing the phase-space (q,p) of a harmonic oscillator. Each point is a possible state. The goal is to determine the future behavior of the system from an initial state. Hamilton's equations determines this evolution. I would mention that it is based on a reformulation of Newton's Laws from an "energy" viewpoint.

One could elaborate by next describing a damped oscillator or a pendulum.

You could get some more ideas from an article like this chapter "Geometrical Representations of Dynamical Motion" (Douglas Cline) from the online book "Variational Principles in Classical Mechanics" by Cline.

Update:
From a google search, I found this https://profoundphysics.com/hamiltonian-mechanics-for-dummies/ but I haven't looked at it in detail.

$\endgroup$
0
$\begingroup$

Hamiltonian systems are an abstract formulation of dynamical systems, that have two interdependent degrees of freedom per dimension. In its easiest to describe in an one dimensional case, the two constituting, time dependent variables are position $x$ and momentum $p_x = m v_x = m \frac{d}{dt}\ x $.

Why are these special pairs of two conjugate (lat. married) variables considered as independent, but nevertheless interdependent?

As a preparation of a mechanical experiment, its possible to fix a position of a mass point in space at start time and suddenly boost its velocity, zero in all dimensions, such, that its momentum, product of mass and start velocity, aquires the exactly defined momentum of an other system, a hammer, a tennis racket, a pound of powder in a cannon.

In the moment of preparation of the mechanical experiment, position and momentum are independent at experimentators choice, but during the time evolution, the Newtonian equation of motions produce a trajectory, whose time derivative yields the momentum by Newtons equation of second order, with a conservative field of force $F$.

Force integral along a path yields the work done, called the potentials $-V(x)$.

Newtons equation of motion now say, that the velocity, the time derivative of the positition x, is the 'formal' derivative of what is now called the kinetic energy in terms of the momentum $$T = \frac{p^2}{2m},$$ while the time derivative of momentum is the negative deriviate of the work function V with respect to position

$$\frac{d}{dt} x (t) = \frac{p(t)}{m}\qquad \frac{d}{dt} p(t) = F(x) = - \frac{d}{dx} \left(\frac {p^2}{2m} + V(x) \right)$$

Bottom line: $$ dx = \frac{d}{dp}\ H \ dt \quad dp = - \frac{d}{dx}\ H dt$$ in this single dimension with two degrees of freedom for preparing a trajectory, e.g. the path of projectile.

By a rotation in space (and the rotation in momentum space) its easy to conclude, that this equation is valid for any direction.

By the principle of linear approximations of $x(t), p(t)$ for short time intervalls, Hamiltons equtions for conservative forces are valid for a superpostion of start momentums in different diections in the same place.

Finally, the trajectory at later times can always be considered as a preparation of position and momentum some time later on the trajectory. So Hamilton's equations are governing the whole system for all further times, if the past is given up to time t, but only the current values $x(t1),p(t1)$ enter the calulation of the future $t>t1$.

By the strange fact, that the Newtonian equations for a conservative system of many particles has as total kinetic energy a the sum of the squares of momentums of the single particles, weighted by their inverse masses, Hamilton applies as the central principle of the equations of motion, if the forces can be derived from a potential function of all position variables, too.

Considering the space of momentum and position variables for n-particle system as space with a quadratic norm of momentum variables $T$ and a common potential form $V$, generating the forces by its gradient, one finally comes up with Liouvilles idea, that the Hamiltonian equation describe a 2d- rotation and a dilation in all conjugated momentum-position pairs such that a fluid of particles somhow distibuted in position-momentum discribes the time evolution o Hamiltonian systems a inincompressible flow in phase space.

This view on Hamilton mechanics of big systems generates a model of thermodynamics as statistical physics.

I quantum theroy, that has no paths and no velocities, the Hamiltonian formulation of classical point mechanics finds a surprising analogon if $p$ is a gradient of a function in $x$.

Here the interdependence of the $$x_k,p_k= -i \partial_{x_k}$$ is again a differential equality, but of so different type, and without any notion of time involved, that this 'first quantization of point mechanics' is a working principle, still presenting a mathematical and physical mystery.

$\endgroup$
-3
$\begingroup$

I would say that Newtonian mechanics was developed first for flat spaces. Lagrangian and Hamiltonian mechanics can be understood as Newtonian mechanics done over curved spaces.

Another way of describing the same, is to say that Lagrangian and Hamiltonian mechanics is Newtonian mechanics done covariantly. I dislike this because it means explaining the term covariant. Moreover, it is a coordinate dependent term. It's much more satisfactory to simply give the global notion of a curved space. Since Einstein, most people are acquainted with this idea.

$\endgroup$
7
  • $\begingroup$ Can whoever downvoted my post please give an explanation why? $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 12 at 19:48
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I didn't downvote, but I would assume the downvote is due to your reference to "curved spaces." The correct term is more likely "generalized coordinates." I.e., the space doesn't have to be literally curved to get a benefit from Lagrangian dynamics. $\endgroup$
    – hft
    Commented Jan 12 at 19:50
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @hft: I don't get you - generalised coordinates are simply the local charts that are used to define a manifold. Manifold is a technical term, it's easier to simply say curved space to a popular audience. $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 12 at 19:57
  • $\begingroup$ It may be easier for you to say, but I think it is confusing to at least one person here. $\endgroup$
    – hft
    Commented Jan 12 at 19:58
  • $\begingroup$ @hft: Hmm ... Mechanical systems are usually taken to be a smooth system and hence its configuration space is a smooth manifold. Since it will need notions of angle and distance, it will have a metric. This means that the configuration space is equipped with a notion of connection and hence curvature. Is that understandable? I think its confusing simply because this view is not well known. $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 12 at 20:03

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.