Freethought & Rationalism ArchiveThe archives are read only. |
03-07-2003, 05:38 AM | #1 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Singapore
Posts: 3,956
|
The principle of least action-questions
Hi guys, I'm been disturbed by the principle of least action lately. I know how the "action integal" is mathematically defined but what I really want to know is that whether the "action integal" has any physical interpretation or representation and also the disturbing question of why for most physical frames, we had to take the minimum value(that is the least action)?
So, anyone? |
03-07-2003, 02:52 PM | #2 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: arse-end of the world
Posts: 2,305
|
Answerer, have you read the chapter in Feynman's lectures which talks about the principle of least action? It might be helpful.
|
03-07-2003, 09:06 PM | #3 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Singapore
Posts: 3,956
|
Quote:
Acutally, no because his explanation always seem to be quite brief to me. Anyway, where could the principle of least action could be found? In his "six easy pieces" or "six not so easy pieces" or "six hard pieces"? |
|
03-08-2003, 01:06 AM | #4 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: arse-end of the world
Posts: 2,305
|
In Chapter 19 of Volume 2 of the Feynman Lectures on Physics.
|
03-08-2003, 04:48 AM | #5 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Singapore
Posts: 3,956
|
Thanks, anyway, before I go and search for that book, I hope to know whether Noether's theorem is derived from the principle of least action or not?
|
03-08-2003, 05:08 AM | #6 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Gainesville, FL
Posts: 1,827
|
Noether's theorem is related to the action integral in that they both pertain to the Hamiltonian of a system. But Noether's Theorem (as I've used/seen it, anyway) is used mainly for finding constants of the motion, whereas the canonical equations (derivatives of the Hamiltonian) are/can actually be derived by invoking the principle of least action.
Feynmann's Lectures is a good place to get just about any interpretation of stock physics concepts that were around before or during his time. So it's probably a lot clearer than what I just wrote. More accurate, likely, as well. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|