Calculus of variations with differential formsDifferential forms on a $S^1$-manifoldIdeal generated by...

Do I have to know the General Relativity theory to understand the concept of inertial frame?

PTIJ: Which Dr. Seuss books should one obtain?

How to get directions in deep space?

What the heck is gets(stdin) on site coderbyte?

Review your own paper in Mathematics

What (the heck) is a Super Worm Equinox Moon?

The Digit Triangles

Sigmoid with a slope but no asymptotes?

Giving feedback to someone without sounding prejudiced

Do you waste sorcery points if you try to apply metamagic to a spell from a scroll but fail to cast it?

Quoting Keynes in a lecture

El Dorado Word Puzzle II: Videogame Edition

Why does the Persian emissary display a string of crowned skulls?

Air travel with refrigerated insulin

Overlapping circles covering polygon

Personal or impersonal in a technical resume

Why does a 97 / 92 key piano exist by Bösendorfer?

Did I make a mistake by ccing email to boss to others?

"Oh no!" in Latin

Why is the principal energy of an electron lower for excited electrons in a higher energy state?

Why is the Sun approximated as a black body at ~ 5800 K?

Is there a distance limit for minecart tracks?

What is the meaning of the following sentence?

Difference between shutdown options



Calculus of variations with differential forms


Differential forms on a $S^1$-manifoldIdeal generated by differential formsWriting Integrals using Differential FormsHow should the Calculus of Variations deal with $delta(t-t_0)$ variations?How to use find the Lagrange Multipliers in multidimensional Calculus of VariationsDefinition of complex differential forms of bidegree $(p,q)$Rate of change of a volume integral over a volume formVariations not vanishing at the boundary, Lagrangian.Functional Derivative on Manifold?Variation of a differential form













0












$begingroup$


I want to generalize calculus of variations with differential forms. Or better, I saw it somewhere some time ago, but now I cannot re-build it. Here is what I remember.



Let be $(M, I, Lambda)$ a triplet where $M$ is a manifold, $I$ an ideal of forms and $Lambda in Omega^n(M)$ a differential n-form on M. Let's denote $S^nM$ the set of all $n$-dimensional sub-manifold of $M$ which annihilate $I$. We can define $F: S^nM to mathbb{R}$ such that $F(N) = int_NLambda$. We want to minimize (or maximize) $F$.



Suppose that exists $N in S^nM$ such that minimizes $F.$ We can define a variation with fixed boundary as a map $phi: (-1, 1) to M$ such that:




  • $phi_t: N to N_t$

  • $phi_0 = id_N$

  • $phi_t | _{partial N} = id_{partial N}$


  • $phi_t^*omega = 0$ for every $omega in I$


Now we want to get Euler-Lagrange equation:



$0 = frac{d}{dt}(F(N_t))|_{t=0} = frac{d}{dt}(int_{N_t}Lambda)|_{t=0} = frac{d}{dt}(int_{N}phi_t^*Lambda)|_{t=0} = int_{N}frac{d}{dt}(phi_t^*Lambda)|_{t=0} = int_{N}mathcal{L}_XLambda = int_N(di_XLambda + i_XdLambda ) = int_{partial N}i_XLambda + int_N i_XdLambda$



where $X = frac{dphi_t}{dt}|_{t=0}$



Now I suppose the first term is zero because $phi_t | _{partial N}$ doesn't depend on $t$.




And the second term? How can I manipulate it to delete the variation as in the normal Euler-Lagrange equation? How can I use the ideal $I$?




Next, I would also like recover from this the classical E-L equations with $M = TQ times mathbb{R}$, $I = (dq -dot{q}dt)$ and $Lambda = L(q, dot{q}, t)dt$



Note: I am undergraduate student and I am studying these things by myself



EDIT



My trouble is that I would "easily" conclude that $i_XdLambda = 0 mod I$ for every $X$. But I think that's not correct because if I apply to my example I get



$i_X(frac{partial L}{partial q}dqwedge dt + frac{partial L}{partial dot{q}}ddot{q}wedge dt) = 0$



Then I would try with the basis $X = frac{partial}{partial q},frac{partial}{partial dot q}, frac{partial}{partial t}$ and I get



$
frac{partial L}{partial q}dt = 0 \
frac{partial L}{partial dot q}dt = 0 \
-frac{partial L}{partial q}dq - frac{partial L}{partial dot q}ddot q = 0
$



that doesn't led me to anything...










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    Check out the lovely little book by Phillip Griffiths.
    $endgroup$
    – Ted Shifrin
    Mar 12 at 22:23










  • $begingroup$
    @TedShifrin Thanks for the reply, but that book is not in my library's school... Would you please give to me some hints?... I have edited the question with the point where I got stuck.
    $endgroup$
    – Marco All-in Nervo
    Mar 13 at 18:16










  • $begingroup$
    @MarcoAll-inNervo You can download a preliminary version of this book officially for free here
    $endgroup$
    – Yuri Vyatkin
    Mar 14 at 5:36












  • $begingroup$
    @TedShifrin Okay, I read it. It seems "lagrange multipliers method" but with differential form! Now my example works and also all the generalization. But I cannot understand why it works (except for the similarity with Lagrange multipliers)
    $endgroup$
    – Marco All-in Nervo
    Mar 15 at 17:39
















0












$begingroup$


I want to generalize calculus of variations with differential forms. Or better, I saw it somewhere some time ago, but now I cannot re-build it. Here is what I remember.



Let be $(M, I, Lambda)$ a triplet where $M$ is a manifold, $I$ an ideal of forms and $Lambda in Omega^n(M)$ a differential n-form on M. Let's denote $S^nM$ the set of all $n$-dimensional sub-manifold of $M$ which annihilate $I$. We can define $F: S^nM to mathbb{R}$ such that $F(N) = int_NLambda$. We want to minimize (or maximize) $F$.



Suppose that exists $N in S^nM$ such that minimizes $F.$ We can define a variation with fixed boundary as a map $phi: (-1, 1) to M$ such that:




  • $phi_t: N to N_t$

  • $phi_0 = id_N$

  • $phi_t | _{partial N} = id_{partial N}$


  • $phi_t^*omega = 0$ for every $omega in I$


Now we want to get Euler-Lagrange equation:



$0 = frac{d}{dt}(F(N_t))|_{t=0} = frac{d}{dt}(int_{N_t}Lambda)|_{t=0} = frac{d}{dt}(int_{N}phi_t^*Lambda)|_{t=0} = int_{N}frac{d}{dt}(phi_t^*Lambda)|_{t=0} = int_{N}mathcal{L}_XLambda = int_N(di_XLambda + i_XdLambda ) = int_{partial N}i_XLambda + int_N i_XdLambda$



where $X = frac{dphi_t}{dt}|_{t=0}$



Now I suppose the first term is zero because $phi_t | _{partial N}$ doesn't depend on $t$.




And the second term? How can I manipulate it to delete the variation as in the normal Euler-Lagrange equation? How can I use the ideal $I$?




Next, I would also like recover from this the classical E-L equations with $M = TQ times mathbb{R}$, $I = (dq -dot{q}dt)$ and $Lambda = L(q, dot{q}, t)dt$



Note: I am undergraduate student and I am studying these things by myself



EDIT



My trouble is that I would "easily" conclude that $i_XdLambda = 0 mod I$ for every $X$. But I think that's not correct because if I apply to my example I get



$i_X(frac{partial L}{partial q}dqwedge dt + frac{partial L}{partial dot{q}}ddot{q}wedge dt) = 0$



Then I would try with the basis $X = frac{partial}{partial q},frac{partial}{partial dot q}, frac{partial}{partial t}$ and I get



$
frac{partial L}{partial q}dt = 0 \
frac{partial L}{partial dot q}dt = 0 \
-frac{partial L}{partial q}dq - frac{partial L}{partial dot q}ddot q = 0
$



that doesn't led me to anything...










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    Check out the lovely little book by Phillip Griffiths.
    $endgroup$
    – Ted Shifrin
    Mar 12 at 22:23










  • $begingroup$
    @TedShifrin Thanks for the reply, but that book is not in my library's school... Would you please give to me some hints?... I have edited the question with the point where I got stuck.
    $endgroup$
    – Marco All-in Nervo
    Mar 13 at 18:16










  • $begingroup$
    @MarcoAll-inNervo You can download a preliminary version of this book officially for free here
    $endgroup$
    – Yuri Vyatkin
    Mar 14 at 5:36












  • $begingroup$
    @TedShifrin Okay, I read it. It seems "lagrange multipliers method" but with differential form! Now my example works and also all the generalization. But I cannot understand why it works (except for the similarity with Lagrange multipliers)
    $endgroup$
    – Marco All-in Nervo
    Mar 15 at 17:39














0












0








0





$begingroup$


I want to generalize calculus of variations with differential forms. Or better, I saw it somewhere some time ago, but now I cannot re-build it. Here is what I remember.



Let be $(M, I, Lambda)$ a triplet where $M$ is a manifold, $I$ an ideal of forms and $Lambda in Omega^n(M)$ a differential n-form on M. Let's denote $S^nM$ the set of all $n$-dimensional sub-manifold of $M$ which annihilate $I$. We can define $F: S^nM to mathbb{R}$ such that $F(N) = int_NLambda$. We want to minimize (or maximize) $F$.



Suppose that exists $N in S^nM$ such that minimizes $F.$ We can define a variation with fixed boundary as a map $phi: (-1, 1) to M$ such that:




  • $phi_t: N to N_t$

  • $phi_0 = id_N$

  • $phi_t | _{partial N} = id_{partial N}$


  • $phi_t^*omega = 0$ for every $omega in I$


Now we want to get Euler-Lagrange equation:



$0 = frac{d}{dt}(F(N_t))|_{t=0} = frac{d}{dt}(int_{N_t}Lambda)|_{t=0} = frac{d}{dt}(int_{N}phi_t^*Lambda)|_{t=0} = int_{N}frac{d}{dt}(phi_t^*Lambda)|_{t=0} = int_{N}mathcal{L}_XLambda = int_N(di_XLambda + i_XdLambda ) = int_{partial N}i_XLambda + int_N i_XdLambda$



where $X = frac{dphi_t}{dt}|_{t=0}$



Now I suppose the first term is zero because $phi_t | _{partial N}$ doesn't depend on $t$.




And the second term? How can I manipulate it to delete the variation as in the normal Euler-Lagrange equation? How can I use the ideal $I$?




Next, I would also like recover from this the classical E-L equations with $M = TQ times mathbb{R}$, $I = (dq -dot{q}dt)$ and $Lambda = L(q, dot{q}, t)dt$



Note: I am undergraduate student and I am studying these things by myself



EDIT



My trouble is that I would "easily" conclude that $i_XdLambda = 0 mod I$ for every $X$. But I think that's not correct because if I apply to my example I get



$i_X(frac{partial L}{partial q}dqwedge dt + frac{partial L}{partial dot{q}}ddot{q}wedge dt) = 0$



Then I would try with the basis $X = frac{partial}{partial q},frac{partial}{partial dot q}, frac{partial}{partial t}$ and I get



$
frac{partial L}{partial q}dt = 0 \
frac{partial L}{partial dot q}dt = 0 \
-frac{partial L}{partial q}dq - frac{partial L}{partial dot q}ddot q = 0
$



that doesn't led me to anything...










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




I want to generalize calculus of variations with differential forms. Or better, I saw it somewhere some time ago, but now I cannot re-build it. Here is what I remember.



Let be $(M, I, Lambda)$ a triplet where $M$ is a manifold, $I$ an ideal of forms and $Lambda in Omega^n(M)$ a differential n-form on M. Let's denote $S^nM$ the set of all $n$-dimensional sub-manifold of $M$ which annihilate $I$. We can define $F: S^nM to mathbb{R}$ such that $F(N) = int_NLambda$. We want to minimize (or maximize) $F$.



Suppose that exists $N in S^nM$ such that minimizes $F.$ We can define a variation with fixed boundary as a map $phi: (-1, 1) to M$ such that:




  • $phi_t: N to N_t$

  • $phi_0 = id_N$

  • $phi_t | _{partial N} = id_{partial N}$


  • $phi_t^*omega = 0$ for every $omega in I$


Now we want to get Euler-Lagrange equation:



$0 = frac{d}{dt}(F(N_t))|_{t=0} = frac{d}{dt}(int_{N_t}Lambda)|_{t=0} = frac{d}{dt}(int_{N}phi_t^*Lambda)|_{t=0} = int_{N}frac{d}{dt}(phi_t^*Lambda)|_{t=0} = int_{N}mathcal{L}_XLambda = int_N(di_XLambda + i_XdLambda ) = int_{partial N}i_XLambda + int_N i_XdLambda$



where $X = frac{dphi_t}{dt}|_{t=0}$



Now I suppose the first term is zero because $phi_t | _{partial N}$ doesn't depend on $t$.




And the second term? How can I manipulate it to delete the variation as in the normal Euler-Lagrange equation? How can I use the ideal $I$?




Next, I would also like recover from this the classical E-L equations with $M = TQ times mathbb{R}$, $I = (dq -dot{q}dt)$ and $Lambda = L(q, dot{q}, t)dt$



Note: I am undergraduate student and I am studying these things by myself



EDIT



My trouble is that I would "easily" conclude that $i_XdLambda = 0 mod I$ for every $X$. But I think that's not correct because if I apply to my example I get



$i_X(frac{partial L}{partial q}dqwedge dt + frac{partial L}{partial dot{q}}ddot{q}wedge dt) = 0$



Then I would try with the basis $X = frac{partial}{partial q},frac{partial}{partial dot q}, frac{partial}{partial t}$ and I get



$
frac{partial L}{partial q}dt = 0 \
frac{partial L}{partial dot q}dt = 0 \
-frac{partial L}{partial q}dq - frac{partial L}{partial dot q}ddot q = 0
$



that doesn't led me to anything...







differential-geometry manifolds differential-forms calculus-of-variations euler-lagrange-equation






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Mar 13 at 18:13







Marco All-in Nervo

















asked Mar 12 at 22:08









Marco All-in NervoMarco All-in Nervo

28429




28429












  • $begingroup$
    Check out the lovely little book by Phillip Griffiths.
    $endgroup$
    – Ted Shifrin
    Mar 12 at 22:23










  • $begingroup$
    @TedShifrin Thanks for the reply, but that book is not in my library's school... Would you please give to me some hints?... I have edited the question with the point where I got stuck.
    $endgroup$
    – Marco All-in Nervo
    Mar 13 at 18:16










  • $begingroup$
    @MarcoAll-inNervo You can download a preliminary version of this book officially for free here
    $endgroup$
    – Yuri Vyatkin
    Mar 14 at 5:36












  • $begingroup$
    @TedShifrin Okay, I read it. It seems "lagrange multipliers method" but with differential form! Now my example works and also all the generalization. But I cannot understand why it works (except for the similarity with Lagrange multipliers)
    $endgroup$
    – Marco All-in Nervo
    Mar 15 at 17:39


















  • $begingroup$
    Check out the lovely little book by Phillip Griffiths.
    $endgroup$
    – Ted Shifrin
    Mar 12 at 22:23










  • $begingroup$
    @TedShifrin Thanks for the reply, but that book is not in my library's school... Would you please give to me some hints?... I have edited the question with the point where I got stuck.
    $endgroup$
    – Marco All-in Nervo
    Mar 13 at 18:16










  • $begingroup$
    @MarcoAll-inNervo You can download a preliminary version of this book officially for free here
    $endgroup$
    – Yuri Vyatkin
    Mar 14 at 5:36












  • $begingroup$
    @TedShifrin Okay, I read it. It seems "lagrange multipliers method" but with differential form! Now my example works and also all the generalization. But I cannot understand why it works (except for the similarity with Lagrange multipliers)
    $endgroup$
    – Marco All-in Nervo
    Mar 15 at 17:39
















$begingroup$
Check out the lovely little book by Phillip Griffiths.
$endgroup$
– Ted Shifrin
Mar 12 at 22:23




$begingroup$
Check out the lovely little book by Phillip Griffiths.
$endgroup$
– Ted Shifrin
Mar 12 at 22:23












$begingroup$
@TedShifrin Thanks for the reply, but that book is not in my library's school... Would you please give to me some hints?... I have edited the question with the point where I got stuck.
$endgroup$
– Marco All-in Nervo
Mar 13 at 18:16




$begingroup$
@TedShifrin Thanks for the reply, but that book is not in my library's school... Would you please give to me some hints?... I have edited the question with the point where I got stuck.
$endgroup$
– Marco All-in Nervo
Mar 13 at 18:16












$begingroup$
@MarcoAll-inNervo You can download a preliminary version of this book officially for free here
$endgroup$
– Yuri Vyatkin
Mar 14 at 5:36






$begingroup$
@MarcoAll-inNervo You can download a preliminary version of this book officially for free here
$endgroup$
– Yuri Vyatkin
Mar 14 at 5:36














$begingroup$
@TedShifrin Okay, I read it. It seems "lagrange multipliers method" but with differential form! Now my example works and also all the generalization. But I cannot understand why it works (except for the similarity with Lagrange multipliers)
$endgroup$
– Marco All-in Nervo
Mar 15 at 17:39




$begingroup$
@TedShifrin Okay, I read it. It seems "lagrange multipliers method" but with differential form! Now my example works and also all the generalization. But I cannot understand why it works (except for the similarity with Lagrange multipliers)
$endgroup$
– Marco All-in Nervo
Mar 15 at 17:39










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















0












$begingroup$

For what I have understood





  1. If the ideal is trivial, we have the equation $i_XdLambda = 0$ for every $X$ vector field. For example, this is the case when $M = T^*Q$ with coordinates $(q, p)$ and $Lambda = pdq - H(q, p)dt$ is the Poincaré-Cartan 1-form. The Euler-Lagrange equation is $i_X(dp wedge dq - frac{partial H}{partial q}dqwedge dt - frac{partial H}{partial p}dpwedge dt) = 0$. Taking $X = frac{partial}{partial q},frac{partial}{partial dot q}, frac{partial}{partial t}$ I got




    • $-dp - frac{partial H}{partial q}dt = 0$

    • $dq - frac{partial H}{partial p}dt = 0$

    • $frac{partial H}{partial q}dq + frac{partial H}{partial p}dp = 0$


    that become




    • $dot{q} = frac{partial H}{partial p}$

    • $dot{p} = -frac{partial H}{partial q}$

    • $dot{H} = frac{partial H}{partial t}$




  2. If the ideal is non-trivial, we can use (don't know why) the method of Lagrange multipliers, i.e if $I = (phi^i)$ we can move to another space with trivial ideal with the form $Omega = Lambda + lambda_iphi^i$, where $lambda_i$ are the new extra variables. Now we can do the same of point 1. So the Euler-Lagrange equation is $i_Xd(Lambda + lambda_iphi^i) = 0$. Evaluating it on $X = frac{partial}{partial lambda_i}$ give $phi^i = 0$, so the condition of the ideal. For example, take $M = TQ$ with coordinates $(q, dot{q})$, $I = (dq - dot{q}dt)$ and $Lambda = L(q, dot{q})dt$.The Euler-Lagrange equation is $i_X(frac{partial L}{partial q}dq wedge dt + frac{partial L}{partial dot{q}}ddot{q} wedge dt -lambda ddot{q}wedge dt + dlambda wedge (dq - dot{q}dt)) = 0$. We get




    • $frac{partial L}{partial q} dt - dlambda = 0$

    • $frac{partial L}{partial dot{q}}dt - lambda dt = 0$

    • (The last is linear combination of the first two)


    that become the classical




    • $frac{d}{dt}frac{partial L}{partial dot{q}} = frac{partial L}{partial q} $








share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













    Your Answer





    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
    return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
    StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
    StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
    });
    });
    }, "mathjax-editing");

    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "69"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });














    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3145770%2fcalculus-of-variations-with-differential-forms%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes








    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    0












    $begingroup$

    For what I have understood





    1. If the ideal is trivial, we have the equation $i_XdLambda = 0$ for every $X$ vector field. For example, this is the case when $M = T^*Q$ with coordinates $(q, p)$ and $Lambda = pdq - H(q, p)dt$ is the Poincaré-Cartan 1-form. The Euler-Lagrange equation is $i_X(dp wedge dq - frac{partial H}{partial q}dqwedge dt - frac{partial H}{partial p}dpwedge dt) = 0$. Taking $X = frac{partial}{partial q},frac{partial}{partial dot q}, frac{partial}{partial t}$ I got




      • $-dp - frac{partial H}{partial q}dt = 0$

      • $dq - frac{partial H}{partial p}dt = 0$

      • $frac{partial H}{partial q}dq + frac{partial H}{partial p}dp = 0$


      that become




      • $dot{q} = frac{partial H}{partial p}$

      • $dot{p} = -frac{partial H}{partial q}$

      • $dot{H} = frac{partial H}{partial t}$




    2. If the ideal is non-trivial, we can use (don't know why) the method of Lagrange multipliers, i.e if $I = (phi^i)$ we can move to another space with trivial ideal with the form $Omega = Lambda + lambda_iphi^i$, where $lambda_i$ are the new extra variables. Now we can do the same of point 1. So the Euler-Lagrange equation is $i_Xd(Lambda + lambda_iphi^i) = 0$. Evaluating it on $X = frac{partial}{partial lambda_i}$ give $phi^i = 0$, so the condition of the ideal. For example, take $M = TQ$ with coordinates $(q, dot{q})$, $I = (dq - dot{q}dt)$ and $Lambda = L(q, dot{q})dt$.The Euler-Lagrange equation is $i_X(frac{partial L}{partial q}dq wedge dt + frac{partial L}{partial dot{q}}ddot{q} wedge dt -lambda ddot{q}wedge dt + dlambda wedge (dq - dot{q}dt)) = 0$. We get




      • $frac{partial L}{partial q} dt - dlambda = 0$

      • $frac{partial L}{partial dot{q}}dt - lambda dt = 0$

      • (The last is linear combination of the first two)


      that become the classical




      • $frac{d}{dt}frac{partial L}{partial dot{q}} = frac{partial L}{partial q} $








    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$


















      0












      $begingroup$

      For what I have understood





      1. If the ideal is trivial, we have the equation $i_XdLambda = 0$ for every $X$ vector field. For example, this is the case when $M = T^*Q$ with coordinates $(q, p)$ and $Lambda = pdq - H(q, p)dt$ is the Poincaré-Cartan 1-form. The Euler-Lagrange equation is $i_X(dp wedge dq - frac{partial H}{partial q}dqwedge dt - frac{partial H}{partial p}dpwedge dt) = 0$. Taking $X = frac{partial}{partial q},frac{partial}{partial dot q}, frac{partial}{partial t}$ I got




        • $-dp - frac{partial H}{partial q}dt = 0$

        • $dq - frac{partial H}{partial p}dt = 0$

        • $frac{partial H}{partial q}dq + frac{partial H}{partial p}dp = 0$


        that become




        • $dot{q} = frac{partial H}{partial p}$

        • $dot{p} = -frac{partial H}{partial q}$

        • $dot{H} = frac{partial H}{partial t}$




      2. If the ideal is non-trivial, we can use (don't know why) the method of Lagrange multipliers, i.e if $I = (phi^i)$ we can move to another space with trivial ideal with the form $Omega = Lambda + lambda_iphi^i$, where $lambda_i$ are the new extra variables. Now we can do the same of point 1. So the Euler-Lagrange equation is $i_Xd(Lambda + lambda_iphi^i) = 0$. Evaluating it on $X = frac{partial}{partial lambda_i}$ give $phi^i = 0$, so the condition of the ideal. For example, take $M = TQ$ with coordinates $(q, dot{q})$, $I = (dq - dot{q}dt)$ and $Lambda = L(q, dot{q})dt$.The Euler-Lagrange equation is $i_X(frac{partial L}{partial q}dq wedge dt + frac{partial L}{partial dot{q}}ddot{q} wedge dt -lambda ddot{q}wedge dt + dlambda wedge (dq - dot{q}dt)) = 0$. We get




        • $frac{partial L}{partial q} dt - dlambda = 0$

        • $frac{partial L}{partial dot{q}}dt - lambda dt = 0$

        • (The last is linear combination of the first two)


        that become the classical




        • $frac{d}{dt}frac{partial L}{partial dot{q}} = frac{partial L}{partial q} $








      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$
















        0












        0








        0





        $begingroup$

        For what I have understood





        1. If the ideal is trivial, we have the equation $i_XdLambda = 0$ for every $X$ vector field. For example, this is the case when $M = T^*Q$ with coordinates $(q, p)$ and $Lambda = pdq - H(q, p)dt$ is the Poincaré-Cartan 1-form. The Euler-Lagrange equation is $i_X(dp wedge dq - frac{partial H}{partial q}dqwedge dt - frac{partial H}{partial p}dpwedge dt) = 0$. Taking $X = frac{partial}{partial q},frac{partial}{partial dot q}, frac{partial}{partial t}$ I got




          • $-dp - frac{partial H}{partial q}dt = 0$

          • $dq - frac{partial H}{partial p}dt = 0$

          • $frac{partial H}{partial q}dq + frac{partial H}{partial p}dp = 0$


          that become




          • $dot{q} = frac{partial H}{partial p}$

          • $dot{p} = -frac{partial H}{partial q}$

          • $dot{H} = frac{partial H}{partial t}$




        2. If the ideal is non-trivial, we can use (don't know why) the method of Lagrange multipliers, i.e if $I = (phi^i)$ we can move to another space with trivial ideal with the form $Omega = Lambda + lambda_iphi^i$, where $lambda_i$ are the new extra variables. Now we can do the same of point 1. So the Euler-Lagrange equation is $i_Xd(Lambda + lambda_iphi^i) = 0$. Evaluating it on $X = frac{partial}{partial lambda_i}$ give $phi^i = 0$, so the condition of the ideal. For example, take $M = TQ$ with coordinates $(q, dot{q})$, $I = (dq - dot{q}dt)$ and $Lambda = L(q, dot{q})dt$.The Euler-Lagrange equation is $i_X(frac{partial L}{partial q}dq wedge dt + frac{partial L}{partial dot{q}}ddot{q} wedge dt -lambda ddot{q}wedge dt + dlambda wedge (dq - dot{q}dt)) = 0$. We get




          • $frac{partial L}{partial q} dt - dlambda = 0$

          • $frac{partial L}{partial dot{q}}dt - lambda dt = 0$

          • (The last is linear combination of the first two)


          that become the classical




          • $frac{d}{dt}frac{partial L}{partial dot{q}} = frac{partial L}{partial q} $








        share|cite|improve this answer









        $endgroup$



        For what I have understood





        1. If the ideal is trivial, we have the equation $i_XdLambda = 0$ for every $X$ vector field. For example, this is the case when $M = T^*Q$ with coordinates $(q, p)$ and $Lambda = pdq - H(q, p)dt$ is the Poincaré-Cartan 1-form. The Euler-Lagrange equation is $i_X(dp wedge dq - frac{partial H}{partial q}dqwedge dt - frac{partial H}{partial p}dpwedge dt) = 0$. Taking $X = frac{partial}{partial q},frac{partial}{partial dot q}, frac{partial}{partial t}$ I got




          • $-dp - frac{partial H}{partial q}dt = 0$

          • $dq - frac{partial H}{partial p}dt = 0$

          • $frac{partial H}{partial q}dq + frac{partial H}{partial p}dp = 0$


          that become




          • $dot{q} = frac{partial H}{partial p}$

          • $dot{p} = -frac{partial H}{partial q}$

          • $dot{H} = frac{partial H}{partial t}$




        2. If the ideal is non-trivial, we can use (don't know why) the method of Lagrange multipliers, i.e if $I = (phi^i)$ we can move to another space with trivial ideal with the form $Omega = Lambda + lambda_iphi^i$, where $lambda_i$ are the new extra variables. Now we can do the same of point 1. So the Euler-Lagrange equation is $i_Xd(Lambda + lambda_iphi^i) = 0$. Evaluating it on $X = frac{partial}{partial lambda_i}$ give $phi^i = 0$, so the condition of the ideal. For example, take $M = TQ$ with coordinates $(q, dot{q})$, $I = (dq - dot{q}dt)$ and $Lambda = L(q, dot{q})dt$.The Euler-Lagrange equation is $i_X(frac{partial L}{partial q}dq wedge dt + frac{partial L}{partial dot{q}}ddot{q} wedge dt -lambda ddot{q}wedge dt + dlambda wedge (dq - dot{q}dt)) = 0$. We get




          • $frac{partial L}{partial q} dt - dlambda = 0$

          • $frac{partial L}{partial dot{q}}dt - lambda dt = 0$

          • (The last is linear combination of the first two)


          that become the classical




          • $frac{d}{dt}frac{partial L}{partial dot{q}} = frac{partial L}{partial q} $









        share|cite|improve this answer












        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer










        answered yesterday









        Marco All-in NervoMarco All-in Nervo

        28429




        28429






























            draft saved

            draft discarded




















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3145770%2fcalculus-of-variations-with-differential-forms%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            Nidaros erkebispedøme

            Birsay

            Was Woodrow Wilson really a Liberal?Was World War I a war of liberals against authoritarians?Founding Fathers...