Inverse Problem For Lagrangian Mechanics - Background and Statement of The Problem

Background and Statement of The Problem

The usual set-up of Lagrangian mechanics on n-dimensional Euclidean space Rn is as follows. Consider a differentiable path u : → Rn. The action of the path u, denoted S(u), is given by

where L is a function of time, position and velocity known as the Lagrangian. The principle of least action states that, given an initial state x0 in Rn, the trajectory that the system determined by L will actually follow must be a minimizer of the action functional S satisfying the initial condition u(0) = x0. Furthermore, the critical points (and hence minimizers) of S must satisfy the Euler–Lagrange equations for S:

where the upper indices i denote the components of u = (u1, ..., un).

In the classical case

the Euler–Lagrange equations are the second-order ordinary differential equations better known as Newton's laws of motion:

The inverse problem of Lagrangian mechanics is as follows: given a system of second-order ordinary differential equations

that holds for times 0 ≤ tT, does there exist a Lagrangian L : × Rn × RnR for which these ordinary differential equations (E) are the Euler–Lagrange equations? In general, this problem is posed not on Euclidean space Rn, but on an n-dimensional manifold M, and the Lagrangian is a function L : × TMR, where TM denotes the tangent bundle of M.

Read more about this topic:  Inverse Problem For Lagrangian Mechanics

Famous quotes containing the words background and, background, statement and/or problem:

    ... every experience in life enriches one’s background and should teach valuable lessons.
    Mary Barnett Gilson (1877–?)

    I had many problems in my conduct of the office being contrasted with President Kennedy’s conduct in the office, with my manner of dealing with things and his manner, with my accent and his accent, with my background and his background. He was a great public hero, and anything I did that someone didn’t approve of, they would always feel that President Kennedy wouldn’t have done that.
    Lyndon Baines Johnson (1908–1973)

    Children should know there are limits to family finances or they will confuse “we can’t afford that” with “they don’t want me to have it.” The first statement is a realistic and objective assessment of a situation, while the other carries an emotional message.
    Jean Ross Peterson (20th century)

    The government is huge, stupid, greedy and makes nosy, officious and dangerous intrusions into the smallest corners of life—this much we can stand. But the real problem is that government is boring. We could cure or mitigate the other ills Washington visits on us if we could only bring ourselves to pay attention to Washington itself. But we cannot.
    —P.J. (Patrick Jake)