1

Mathematical reference to least action

George Mpantes

Abstract

Classical mechanics concerns itself initially with describing the motions of

entities known as particles. Particles are held to move in accordance with the well-
known three Newton’s laws. In the 18th century, two great developments took place
in the heart of natural philosophy: the Lagrangian mechanics and the calculus of
variations. Lagrange reformulated the Newtonian edifice through the ideas and
principles of D' Alembert, giving an alternative prescription to Newton’s laws for the
writing down the equations of motion. Euler extended the differential calculus to the
calculus of variations, -a branch of mathematics that is a sort of generalization
of calculus- and expressed in mathematical language the evolution of a physical
system (i.e., how the system actually progresses from one state to another) that
corresponds to a stationary point (usually, a minimum) of the action.
The two paths met in 1850s, generating the big Euler-Lagrange theorem,
with the aim to show that the Newton’s laws can be replaced by a single postulate
(the variation principle) which is , for many purposes , more convenient to handle:
The Euler-Lagrange equation, is a consequence of requiring that the action of the
system is at a stationary value.
But did the stationary action characterized the changes of nature? Yes, it
was Hamilton’s Principle of Stationary Action: The path of a particle is the one that
yields a stationary value of the action.
Now the analytical mechanics of Lagrange, and the Hamiltonian principle was
the deep preparation of the 18th century for the great advances of physics in the 19th
and 20th century, from electromagnetism, relativity, to quantum mechanics and string
theory.
 2

Lagrangian mechanics .

Lagrangian mechanics is a reformulation of Newton’s mechanics. In the

mechanics of solids, introduced by the Italian-French mathematician and
astronomer Joseph-Louis Lagrange in 1788. Lagrange equations are equations used to
study the motion of a mechanical system in which independent parameters, called
generalized coordinates, are chosen as variables that determine the position of the
system. These equations were first obtained by J. Lagrange in 1760.
The motion of a mechanical system can be studied either using equations
given directly by the second Newton’s law of dynamics or using general theorems
derived from the laws of dynamics. In the first method, it is necessary to solve a large
number of equations, depending on the number of points and bodies of the system.
These equations also contain extra unknown data in the form of superimposed
constraints. As a result, enormous mathematical difficulties arise. The second method
requires the use of different theorems for each case and thus for complex systems
ultimately leads to the same difficulties.
For a large class of mechanical systems, Lagrange equations provide a
unique and sufficiently simple method of constructing motion equations that are
independent of the (complexity) nature of the actual system. The main advantage of
Lagrange equations is that their number is equal to the number of degrees of freedom
of the system and is independent of the number of points and bodies of the system.
For example, motors and engines consist of many bodies (accessories) and
usually have one or two degrees of freedom (generalized coordinates). Consequently,
the study of their motion requires the creation of only one or two Lagrangian
equations (in addition, under ideal conditions, all unknown limitations are
automatically excluded by the Lagrangian equations.) For these reasons, Lagrangian
 3

equations are widely used in solving many engineering problems , in particular in

motor and engine dynamics and vibration theory, gyroscope theory1 and other areas
. In addition, the Lagrange equations are reduced to a form that allows them to
be used (corresponding to generalized concepts) not only in mechanical but also in
other branches of physics.
When the forces produced in the system are only of potential, the Lagrangian
equations take the form (in generalized coordinates)

( ̇
) (1)

where L = T - V is the Lagrangian function, with T the kinetic energy, V the

dynamic energy of the system. These equations are also used in other branches of
physics, qi are generali ed coordinates and q i generalized velocities.
To set equations (2), it is necessary to find the expression for L and then
the equations will contain the qi coordinates, and their first and second derivatives
with respect to time, i.e they will be second order differential equations qi. The
functions qi (t), i.e. the law of system motion in generalized coordinates, can be found
by integrating these equations, and by determining the integration constants from the
original conditions.
The Lagrangian method has the advantage that once you’ve written down L ≡
T−V you don’t have to think anymore. All you have to do is blindly take some
derivatives. Well, you eventually have to solve the resulting equations of motion, but
you have to do that with the F = ma method, too. In this sense, in Lagrangian
mechanics, we have no shapes, vectors, and so on, only analytical relations (analytical
mechanics). We can therefore consider Lagrange as the Weierstrass of Mechanics.

What if we look at the general problem of a particle that arbitrarily moves to a

̇
V (x) potential. Lagrangean is then L =

1
Kochin, N. E., I. A. Kibel’ and N. V. Roze. Teoreticheskaia gidrome-
khanika, 6th ed., part 1. Moscow, 1963.
 4

and the Lagrange equation gives ̈ But -dV / dx is the force in the particle.
So we have the same conclusion that F = ma states when using Cartesian coordinates
in one dimension, but this result is actually quite general. The two conclusions are
equivalent:

( ̇) F=m.a (2)

So the Euler-Lagrangian equations are not more fundamental than Newton's laws -
actually they are equivalent. However in many cases the Euler-Lagrange equation
end up much simpler to work with than Newton's laws. They really are a genius of
abstraction, and an abstraction which ends up being easier to work with than the
concrete. The next level of abstraction is Hamiltonian mechanics.
But beyond the ease of calculation, is there a fundamental difference
between the two methods? Is there some deep logic behind relationship Newton’s and
Lagrange’s equations? Indeed, there is. . is the principle of least action.

Example .

At this point, we will see a whole new way of looking at things. Consider the
system of a harmonic oscillator in one dimension. We can analyze this, of course,
using F = ma to record
mẍ= -kx
The solutions of this equation are the sinusoidal functions, as we know. We
can, however, calculate things using another method that does not explicitly refer to
the use of F = ma. In many (in fact, probably more) physical situations, this new
method is superior to using F = ma.
In the problem of a mass m at the end of a spring, T = mx2/2 V = kx2/ 2
̇
so

now we write ( ̇
)

This equation is the Lagrange motion equation. For this problem we have
̇
̇
̇ so the Lagrange equation of motion gives

which is exactly the result resulting from the use of F = ma.

 5

The calculus of variations .

The history of the calculus of variations is tightly interwoven with the history of
mathematics. The field has drawn the attention of a remarkable range of mathematical
luminaries, beginning with Newton and Leibniz, then initiated as a subject in its own right by
the Bernoulli brothers Jakob and Johann. The first major developments appeared in the work
of Euler, Lagrange, and Laplace. In the nineteenth century, Hamilton, Jacobi, Dirichlet, and
Hilbert are but a few of the outstanding contributors. In modern times, the calculus of
variations has continued to occupy center stage, witnessing major theoretical advances,
along with wide-ranging applications in physics, engineering and all branches of
mathematics.

Classical mechanics after about 150 years of Newton, was reformed by the
next generations of the giants of mathematical physics, people like Euler, Lagrange,
Hamilton. The new way of interpreting things has other mathematics, other elegance,
other methods to solve the problems, The new interpretation is global, it gives us a
skeleton for all phenomena, offering the emergence of symmetry in nature so
gradually the physics to be founded on fundamental symmetry principles. As we
know if we see only one piece of a butterfly, we do not notice any symmetry. Today
we use the lagrangian method to describe all physics and not just mechanics.

Lagrangian mechanics also reveals a deep link to quantum mechanics, which

is perhaps the real reason for the importance of this new mechanics. Its driving idea
has a name: it is called the principle of least action (PLA).

Along with finding the extremes (maximum and minimum) of a given

function 𝑧 = ( ), it often results in the need to calculate the extreme values of
mathematical entities called functionals. A functional is not a function it is a function
of a function, it is considered to be a representation of a function space in the field of
real numbers.

In classic physical problems of calculus of variations is used to find functions

which make stationary the value of an integral (minimum , maximum, or point of
 6

reflection). The nature of the stationary point is usually determined by the physical
problem. How this calculus is negotiating this theme?

The purely mathematical problem of determining the conditions under which a

certain type of integral assumes a stationary value is the following:

Consider the integral

∫ ( )

The number I depends not on x but on the function y (x). So we want to find
the appropriate y (x) (the exact path) to make the value of I (the functional) stationary
Let APB be the path for which I is stationary and consider the neighbouring path
AΡ΄B with the same end points A,B. Τhe correspondence between the points of the
two paths is that P→P´ with P(x,y) →P΄ (x, y+δy). This defines a so-called δ
variation of the path. and it may otherwise be expressed as δy = αη(x)…. (2) where α
is a parameter common to all points and η
is any function of x subject to the
condition η(x1) = η(x2) = 0 As the path we
started with, is an extremum for y(x) we
have

Derivating inside the integral we

have finally

for every function η(x). Hence from the fundamental lemma of variational

calculus we have and it is the analogous necessary condition in

calculus, for an extremum of a function f(x) in a point x0 (Fermat theorem f ΄

(x0)=0).
 7

This in turn implies the Euler-Lagrange theorem developed by the Swiss

mathematician Leonhard Euler and the Italian-French mathematician Joseph-Louis
Lagrange in the 1750s, :

If the function y(t) assigns a stationary value to integral (I), then applies

Euler-Lagrange equations ( ) Of course we are considering the

class of functions whose endpoints are stable.

It can further be shown that they are sufficient ones so that if the conditions
hold then it follows that the variation of the integral must be zero. So

Finding where the functional is stationary is equivalent to finding solutions

to the Euler-Lagrange equation.

δ∫ ̇ ( ̇) …….(3)

Example

One of the simplest problems is figuring out what type of function minimizes
the distance between two points on a plane. This will be our guide of comprehension
It’s obviously the straight line, and it can be proven by minimizing an arc-length
functional, describing the whole process of variation calculus. Here F(x,y,y΄) is

F(x,y,y΄)=√ the distance between the two points, from geometry.

∫ √

The function y(x) that minimizes the I(y) are the solutions of the Euler-
Lagrange equations

( ) =0, where
√
 8

( ) x1<x<x2
√

, it is our known straight line.

√

Hamilton’s principle .

Hamilton’s principle is a mathematical principle.

The equations of motion of a system described by a Lagrangian function have

been shown to take the form

( ̇
)

According to last paragraph of the previous section these are equivalent

with δ∫ ̇ ….(4)

This form (4) is the most familiar version of Hamilton’s principle for
conservative systems. It can be interpreted as stating that the actual path taken by the
system through configuration space is such that the value of the integral is stationary
with respect to all possible variations of the path between the two instants t1 and t2,
provided that the variation of the path at those two instants is zero. In our derivation
Hamilton’s principle of least action represents a deduction ultimately from
Newton’s laws.

An alternative view is to regard it as a true principle in which case

Lagrange’s equations of motion and the rest of mechanics stem from it. It states
that the dynamics of a physical system is determined by a variational problem for
a functional based on a single function, the Lagrangian, which contains all physical
information concerning the system and the forces acting on it. The variational
 9

problem is equivalent to and allows for the derivation of the differential equations of
motion of the physical system. Although formulated originally for classical mechanics,
Hamilton's principle also applies to classical fields such as
the electromagnetic and gravitational fields, and plays an important role in quantum
mechanics, and quantum field theory .So we have the equivalence

From the previous analysis it is clear that the Hamilton principle is equivalent to
F = m.a since equations E-L are equivalent to F = ma (as we have shown for Cartesian
coordinates). Thus Newton’s law, Hamilton's principle and Lagrange's equations are
equivalent, because they can mutually be derived from each other. However, these
equivalences might be restricted to certain conditions, like, e.g., assumption of
conservative forces derived from a potential while the validity of the Lagrange
equations or Hamilton's principle might be more general, and the equivalence is in the
results of the equations! They are different stories of nature, they have not do not
apply to the same area of nature so they are equivalent descriptions only for the
common place of Newtonian particles.

The action

In physics, action is an attribute of the dynamics of a physical system from

which the equations of motion of the system can be derived. It is a mathematical
functional which takes the trajectory, also called path or history, of the system as its
argument and has a real number as its result. Generally, the action takes different
values for different paths. It is something like the system's effort, the transport cost
(fuel), the production cost e.t.c, all these for physical changes.

Action has the dimensions of [energy]⋅[time] or [momentum]⋅[length]

Expressed in mathematical language, using the calculus of variations,

the evolution of a physical system (i.e., how the system actually progresses from one
state to another) corresponds to a stationary point (usually, a minimum) of the action.

Several different definitions of "the action" are in common use in physics. The
action is usually an integral over time, taken along the path of the system between the
 10

initial time and the final time of the development of the system: ∫ where
the integrand L is our known Lagrangian. For the action integral to be well-defined,
the trajectory has to be bounded in time and space. However, when the action pertains
to fields, it may be integrated over spatial variables as well.

The principle of least action – or, more accurately, the principle of stationary
action – is a variational principle that, when applied to the action of a mechanical
system, can be used to obtain the equations of motion for that system. In relativity, a
different action must be minimized or maximized. The principle can be used to
derive Newtonian, Lagrangian, Hamiltonian equations of motion, and even
General Relativity. It was historically called "least" because its solution requires
finding the path that has the least change from nearby paths. Its classical mechanics
and electromagnetic expressions are a consequence of quantum mechanics, but the
stationary action method helped in the development of quantum mechanics.

The principle of least action is the basic principle of the action of particle and
continuous systems. In Hamilton's formalism, a real dynamic trajectory of a system
between an initial and a final configuration over a given period of time is by
imagining all the possible trajectories that the system can get by calculating the
energy (trajectory function) for each of these trajectories, and choosing one that
makes the action locally stationary (traditionally called "least"). The actual orbits are
those that have least action:

It should be emphasi ed that Hamilton’s principle contains no more information

than is already available. It merely provides a more elegant and consice formulation
than the alternative postulates. It does have the advantage that it can be applied to
non-mechanical systems in which Newton’s laws have no obvious meaning.

But here we have some philosophical paradoxes:

So finally.. “.. it is possible that the construction of the theoretical mechanics

is based on a new principle, the Hamilton principle, instead of the laws of Newton.
This principle derives from the laws of Newton, and vice versa, the Hamilton
principle may also arise by applying Newton's laws. So this principle is not a new
 11

theory of mechanics, but it is more elegant than the laws of Newton, and it can also be
applied in other fields than theoretical engineering, and especially where there are
fields where Newton's laws have no direct relationship…Xatzidimitriou”

But Hamilton's movement minimizes the integral of action, that is, the action
throughout the path, so the whole path is involved in interpretation, is a holistic law.
The Newtonian interpretation of differential equations is, as we have seen,
descriptions of relations of quantities located at a separate point in space, at a special
moment in time. The movement is 'carried out' from moment to moment by causes
that act simultaneously. It is the deterministic interpretation.

Holistic interpretation is easy to describe, but difficult to understand,

deterministic vice versa. How the particle knows the end of the trip just to choose the
path of least action?

This will only be possible by redefining the phenomenon of movement. At

Hamilton's principle, we have to mean that the movement is not the change of
position, but something deeper. Hamilton's movement minimizes the integral of
action, that is, action throughout the path, the whole path involved in interpretation, is
a holistic law. Movement is the phenomenon of minimizing action through a position
change.

The Newtonian interpretation of differential equations is, as we have seen,

descriptions of relations of quantities located at a separate point in space, at a special
moment in time. The movement is 'carried out' from moment to moment by causes
that act simultaneously, piece to piece. It is the differential interpretation.

This will only be possible by redefining the movement phenomenon. At

Hamilton's start, we have to mean that the move is not the change of position, but
something deeper. After all, we proved that the two ways of doing things are
completely equivalent. This changes when we go beyond classical mechanics and
discuss quantum mechanics (Feynman). There we find that the particle really does
smell out every possible path!
 12

But this is the theme of another story, where we watch how classical physics
emerge from quantum physics. It is totally bizarre but it is really the way the world
works.

Comment

The PLA is a mathematical principle that it’s physical meaning is only that it
actually "works" in the study of physical systems. So when we say that Hamilton
principle is valid in dynamics, we mean that the principle is a mere consequence of
the tested equations of mechanics, this is an equivalent expression for these equations
or laws.

Further insight is obtained when we examine the problem from the standpoint
of the mathematician. The presence of laws and principles in dynamics which are so
different in appearance, and yet equivalent, merely exhibits the possibility of
transforming mathematical expression into forms that differ in appearance and yet
are basically equivalent. Many examples of this short of equivalence have been
mentioned on various occasions. For instance, we have seen that functions may
equivalently be expressed by different types of series. We must not be surprised,
therefore, at different mathematical principles furnishing equivalent expressions of
the same fundamental law, or equations, of dynamics. These considerations prompt us
to suspect that many others physical laws may be expressible in different equivalent
forms, some of which may have the aspect of stationary principles. This surmise is
correct. Thus the dynamical equations of the theory of relativity may be given the
form of Hamilton’s principles; but of course the two actions in the relativity theory
will not be quite the same as in classical dynamics. Einstein’s gravitational equations
Maxwell electromagnetic equations , and Schrödinger wave equation may likewise be
expressed by stationary, or extremum principles.

The mathematical construction of the physical stationary principles, removes

the metaphysical ideas of teleology, the “purpose of nature”, something like
consciousness of nature, something like the consciousness of the particle. With the
calculus of the variations, we began to be released from the hard mechanical
philosophy of nature, treating it more ... spiritually. Nowadays mathematical models
 13

precede physical observations, we saw it in the 19th century with the Maxwell field.
Physics ignores the "unseen", non-observable in the foundations of physical
developments, systems in the very small, very fast, etc., and studies mathematical
foundations that are captured only by the thought (e.g. functional, quark ...). By
studying their mathematical only behavior as a natural development, it takes them
step by step (mathematical step) into the physical reality of laboratory and
observation, where it seems if these thoughts are working, if these thoughts are
realities or not. “logic confirms phenomena and phenomena confirm logic” said Aristotle
that is the biggest problem of philosophy.

And here really it seems that nature prefers the version of the action. The
(PLA) has invaded physics to the point where all physics can be rewritten in terms of
the easiest or of the least. Light finds the shortest path to an optical system, the orbit
of a body in a gravitational field is a geodesic, that is, a path with the smallest "space-
time" length. Thomson’s theorem states that the relative motion of electrically
charged particles happens as if they had the least energy, yet, we can use (PLA) in
relativity, if we find the right form for action, a similar easy and successful principle
of variation has been applied to the general relativity by Taylor and Wheeler for the
exploration of black holes .... (M. Hancova). Larmor applied the calculus of
variations in electromagnetic phenomena and showed that Maxwell's laws can arise
from a suitable mathematical expression L of electromagnetic function of the action,
through PLA.

Well if we urgently want-need a metaphysical perfume in things, we must

finally accept that the true metaphysics is mathematics (Lord Kelvin).

References

Classical mechanics J.W.LEECH Methuen&Co.LTD and science

Paperbacks1965

The rise of new physicsA.d’ABRO dover publications New York1952

Theoretical mechanics XATZIDIMITRIOU University of Thessaloniki1971

 14

An introduction to Lagrangian mechanics ALAIN J. BRIZART World

scientific 2015

The principle of least action ALBERTO ROJO, ANTHONY BLOCH

Cambridge University Press

George Mpantes mathematics teacher, Serres,

www.mpantes.gr