Quantcast
  • Register
PhysicsOverflow is a next-generation academic platform for physicists and astronomers, including a community peer review system and a postgraduate-level discussion forum analogous to MathOverflow.

Welcome to PhysicsOverflow! PhysicsOverflow is an open platform for community peer review and graduate-level Physics discussion.

Please help promote PhysicsOverflow ads elsewhere if you like it.

News

New printer friendly PO pages!

Migration to Bielefeld University was successful!

Please vote for this year's PhysicsOverflow ads!

Please do help out in categorising submissions. Submit a paper to PhysicsOverflow!

... see more

Tools for paper authors

Submit paper
Claim Paper Authorship

Tools for SE users

Search User
Reclaim SE Account
Request Account Merger
Nativise imported posts
Claim post (deleted users)
Import SE post

Users whose questions have been imported from Physics Stack Exchange, Theoretical Physics Stack Exchange, or any other Stack Exchange site are kindly requested to reclaim their account and not to register as a new user.

Public \(\beta\) tools

Report a bug with a feature
Request a new functionality
404 page design
Send feedback

Attributions

(propose a free ad)

Site Statistics

145 submissions , 122 unreviewed
3,930 questions , 1,398 unanswered
4,851 answers , 20,616 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
501 active unimported users
More ...

Formulating a symplectic (or variational) integrator for a non-local Hamiltonian

+ 2 like - 0 dislike
300 views

Disclaimer: this is a wholesale copy of a question I asked on a different site (Physics.SE). I'll be linking to some posts I made on that site here as well, for the sake of brevity (and since they don't directly relate to the question at hand). I read the posting rules here just to make sure I'm not doing anything wrong, I don't think I am. If yes, let me know.

Now, the question: 

I recently asked two questions, Q. [1] and Q. [2], regarding reformulating non-local Lagrangians as Hamiltonians. 

In these questions, the Hamiltonian is formulated as an integral because of it's non-local nature. Additionally, all of the partial derivatives must be replaced by functional derivatives, for the same reason. 

My question is, how does one formulate a symplectic integrator for such a Hamiltonian? 

In all symplectic integrator derivations I've seen, the Hamiltonian function is used, not the integral. Is there a more generalized approach one can take in this case?

Take for example the case where:


$$
\mathbb{H}=\frac{1}{2}\int^t_0 \left(p(\tau)p(t-\tau)+q(\tau)q(t-\tau)\right)\,\text{d}\tau
\tag{1}$$

This Hamiltonian has the associated Hamilton's equations of (as per Q. [2]) :

$$
\dot{q}(\tau)=p(\tau),\,\dot{p}(\tau)=q(\tau)
\tag{2}$$

 How would one formulate a symplectic (or variational) integrator for such a Hamiltonian?
--

[1]  This question deals with the Legendre transform for non-local Lagrangian formulations.  

[2]  This question (and answer) deals the derivation of the Euler-Lagrange equations and Hamilton's equations for non-local Lagrangians.

asked Mar 31, 2015 in Computational Physics by Ron (25 points) [ revision history ]
edited May 27, 2015 by Dilaton

I can't seem to get your link to Q. [2] to work, but the link to Q. [1] is OK. Could you confirm that your link to Q. [2] is correct?

@JoshBurby thanks for the catch, I have fixed the second link.

I'm curious where this kind of Lagrangian shows up in what you're studying. Or are you just studying it for fun?

@JoshBurby: I don't know about this one, but nonlocal Lagrangians appear whenever one integrates out quadratic variables from an originally bigger Lagrangian model.

1 Answer

+ 3 like - 0 dislike

You may proceed in analogy with the derivation of the variational integrators in a paper by Marsden and West, Discrete mechanics and variational integrators, 2002. The basic recipe (starting from the lagrangian formulation) is outlined in the introduction. 

You need to figure out the details by yourself as the problem of variational integration of nonlocal problems hasn't been discussed in the literature so far. This means that you need to work harder, but you'll be able to publish your findings once you arrive at a working algorithm.

answered Apr 1, 2015 by Arnold Neumaier (12,355 points) [ revision history ]

This definitely looks like a good place to start, thank you! (And thanks for the help on Physics.SE too!)

Your answer

Please use answers only to (at least partly) answer questions. To comment, discuss, or ask for clarification, leave a comment instead.
To mask links under text, please type your text, highlight it, and click the "link" button. You can then enter your link URL.
Please consult the FAQ for as to how to format your post.
This is the answer box; if you want to write a comment instead, please use the 'add comment' button.
Live preview (may slow down editor)   Preview
Your name to display (optional):
Privacy: Your email address will only be used for sending these notifications.
Anti-spam verification:
If you are a human please identify the position of the character covered by the symbol $\varnothing$ in the following word:
p$\hbar$ysicsOv$\varnothing$rflow
Then drag the red bullet below over the corresponding character of our banner. When you drop it there, the bullet changes to green (on slow internet connections after a few seconds).
To avoid this verification in future, please log in or register.




user contributions licensed under cc by-sa 3.0 with attribution required

Your rights
...