Tuesday, August 5, 2014

field theory - From Lagrangian to Hamiltonian in Fermionic Model



While going from a given Lagrangian to Hamiltonian for a fermionic field, we use the following formula. H=Σiπi˙ϕiL

where πi=L˙ϕi In a Lagrangian involving fermionic fields given by, L=12(¯ψi˙ψj˙¯ψiψj)
a direct computation gives πψj=12¯ψi and π¯ψi=12ψj. But on adding a total derivative 12ddt(¯ψiψj) to the Lagrangian (which can always be done as the action won't change) but π's become different. So the Hamiltonian as well changes. How do we resolve the issue ?



Answer



The canonical momenta don't change if you add a total derivative to the Lagrangian.


The particular total derivative you wanted to add to the Lagrangian as well as the Lagrangian itself has free i,j indices. You surely meant something else because the Lagrangian should have no free indices like that. Let me assume that you meant both expressions to be summed with the sum and prefactor ijcij. Of maybe you really meant the Lagrangian to be a monomial for fixed values of i,j.


But that's not the issue here. The error relevant for your question is that you considered a phase space that has coordinates ψj, ˉψi, πψi, and πˉψj, and you think they're independent coordinates on the phase space. That would be too many phase space coordinates for such a limited system.


Well, they're not independent. The right derivation, using any form of the Lagrangian you want, will give you πψi=ˉψi (without one-half; and equations that may be obtained by simple conjugations from this one!) so it means that the "same" non-differentiated ψ's are their own momenta, too.


If you rewrite the Lagrangian in such a way that the redundant notation is eliminated, i.e. you don't think that coordinates that are dependent are actually independent (this is the error that made you end up with the canonical momenta being 1/2 of their right value; for example, you incorrectly used ˙ˉψi/ψj=0, which is not true, in the first momentum you mentioned), you will see that L˙ψj=ˉψi

if I use your confusing non-summation over i,j. There's no factor of 1/2. Indeed, to derive this thing without problems, it's helpful to first rewrite the Lagrangian as ˉψi˙ψj by adding the appropriate total derivative. This form is unique because it contains no ˙ˉψi and no ψj, so it's only expressed as a function of the independent 1/2 of the degrees of freedom.


Needless to say, the Hamiltonian is zero if the fermionic Lagrangian only contains the kinetic term with the time derivative.


No comments:

Post a Comment

classical mechanics - Moment of a force about a given axis (Torque) - Scalar or vectorial?

I am studying Statics and saw that: The moment of a force about a given axis (or Torque) is defined by the equation: $M_X = (\vec r \times \...