Symmetries and Conservation Laws

On Noethers First Theorem and Clarifying the Presentation of

Hamiltons Principle
Jason Saroni
August 10, 2016
The relationship between symmetries and conservation laws captured in
Noethers Theorem is insightful. It shows how mathematical deductive reasoning on matters of physical elegance reaches necessarily true conclusions as
fundametal as the laws of physics. Viewing physics through the preservation
or breaking of symmetries is a powerful probe into the goal of the field as a
general analysis of the physical universe. In the modern literature in high
energy physics, many explorations are done as such. One of the most successful is the 1964 paper by Peter Higgs Broken Symmetries and the Masses
of Gauge Bosons deductively reasoning for the existence of a particle that
gives matter mass, later discovered at CERN. Because it is such an important
physical insight, in this paper we explore the basics: the relationship between
symmetries and conservation laws for infinitesimal transformations that can
be extended to large ones. The goal is nothing less than a comprehensive
approach from accessible basics to far reaching conclusions. Along the way
we clarify Hamiltons principle and present what we think is a statement
most in line with the correct interpretation.

Fundamental Ideas on the Calculus of Variations

The journey begins with the calculus of variations. The idea of functions and
integration is available online.
1

Lemma 0.1. (Fundamental Lemma of the Calculus of Variations) If

b

A(t)(t)dt = 0
a

where A(t) is a continuous function in [a, b], (t) is an arbitrary continuous

function in [a, b], and (a) = (b) = 0. Then A(t) = 0 throughout [a, b].
Proof. This is a proof by contradiction. Suppose that A(c) 6= 0 for some
a < c < b and the integral vanishes. For definiteness assume that A(c) > 0
(the same reasoning can be used with A(t) < 0). Because of the continuity
of A(t), an interval (t1 , t2 ) exists in which A(t) > 0. Since (t) is arbitrary,
we can design it such that it is non-zero in the interval (t1 , t2 ).
For example,
(t) = (t t1 )(t2 t) for t1 < t < t2
(t) = 0 for t < t1 and t > t2
The integral does not vanish with this choice of (t) contradicting the supposition that it vanishes. Therefore A(t) = 0 throughout [a, b]. Q.E.D.
Definition 0.1. A functional is a mapping from a well defined set of functions to real numbers R where the functions map some independent variable
to some number in R. The corresponding action is a definite integral of the
functional with respect to the independent variable. 
For example given the distance element ds2 = dx2 + dy 2 and the function
y(x) in rectangular coordinates, we can construct the following distance funcitonal,
Z s2
D=
ds
s1

(x2 ,y2 )

D=

(dx2 + dy 2 )

(x1 ,y1 )

x2

D=

p
(1 + (y 0 (x))2 )dx

x1

p
f [y(x), y 0 (x); x] = (1 + (y 0 (x))2 ) is a functional and D is the corresponding
action. D here is just the distance between two points s1 and s2 in rectangular
coordinates. It can be seen that an action is also a functional since it meets
the required criteria in the definition.
Suppose we construct an action,
Z b 


J() =
f q()
(t), q()
(t); t dt
a

as follows,
The function q (t) with = 1, 2, 3 is a generalized position function for an orthogonal coordinate system in 3 dimensions. For example, for the Cartesian
coordinate system, q 1 x, q 2 y, q 3 z. For the cylindrical polar coordinate system q 1 r, q 2 z, q 3 . We will use these later. The position
function q (t) specifies a trajectory from point (a, q (a)) to point (b, q (b))
that makes J an extremal (either maximum or minimum). We embed the
extremal q (t) in a family of infinite other paths ( (t) is arbitrary) of the
action from point (a, q (a)) to point (b, q (b)) and represent them as,

q()
(t) = q (t) + (t)

where is a variable continuous parameter and (a)

 = (b) = 0. From

the paths we create a one-dimensional functional f q()

(t), q()
(t); t . The
corresponding action with respect to t defined as J is a function of since
is variable.
Z
J() =

f
a

q()
(t), q()
(t); t

dt

is well defined.
Theorem 0.2. (Euler-Lagrange Equation) Consider an action J whose func
tional f depends on the dependent variable q()
(t) and its first derivative

q() (t), where = 1, 2, 3. Suppose that q() (t) = q (t) + (t) where is
3

a continuous parameter, q (t) make J an extremal, and t is an independent

variable:
Z b 


f q()
(t), q()
(t); t dt
J() =
a

The q (t) that makes J an extremal is a the solution of the Euler-Lagrange

equation
f
d f
=
,
q
dt q
given that

f
q

and

d f
dt q

= 1, 2, 3

are continuous in t.

Proof. J is extremized by q (t) which occurs when = 0. From calculus, we

have that an extremum occurs when dJ/d = 0 so,
 
dJ
=0
d =0
Using the chain rule again from calculus,
#
Z b"

f q()
dJ
f q()
=
+
dt

d
q()

q()
a


dJ
d

Z b


=
=0


f
f
+ dt = 0
q
q

Using the product rule from calculus,



d f
f
d f
= +

dt q
q
dt q


f
d f
d f
=

q
dt q
dt q
Substituting into the integrand,
Z b
a



b
f
d f
f

dt +

=0
q dt q
q
a
4

f
The integrated term vanishes because (a) = (b) = 0. Suppose that q
and
d f
are continuous in t, then the integrated term in brackets is continuous
dt q
in t by the combination theorem for continuous functions. Because (t)
is an arbitrary function in t throughout [a, b] and the integrand quantity
in brackets is continuous in t throughout [a, b] all the conditions for the
f
d f
Fundamental Theorem of the Calculus of Variations are met and q
dt q =
0 throughout [a, b].

f
d f
=

q
dt q
Q.E.D.
Taking,
b

Z
J() =
a




f q()
(t), q()
(t); t dt

We define the unique functional f for which = 0 as the Lagrangian L. That

is, the Lagrangian is the functional constructed from functions or trajectories
that extremize the associated action with respect to t. The Lagrangian is a
unique functional.
d L
L
=

q
dt q

(1)

for the Lagrangian and this is called the Euler-Lagrange equation. Suppose
that the extremum function q (t) represents the trajectory of a particle in a
classical field e.g. the trajectory of a stone in a gravitational field U . From
empirical data, the trajectory the particle follows is a solution to the cause
and effect differential equation,

U
d2 q
=
m
q
dt2

(2)

also known as Newtons second law (the cause is on the left and the effect
on the right side of the equal sign) where U = GMr m with G the gravitational constant, M the mass of the earth, m the mass of an individual stone,

and r its distance from the earths center. For (1) to have physical meaning we apply inspection to the case under consideration and find L such
that (1) is equivalent to the physically observed cause and effect equation
(2). The Lagrangian determined by inspection for (1) to coincide with (2)
 2
1

is L (q (t), q (t); t) = 2 m dqdt(t) U (q (t)) = T (q (t)) U (q (t)) where

T and U are the kinetic and potential energies. The Lagrangian is the functional for which the action J() is minimized with respect to the continuous

parameter that gives different trajectories q()

(t).
The presentation of Hamiltons principle is subject to wrong interpretations
and an example is that in the undergraduate physics textbook Classical Dynamics of Particles and Systems. Hamiltons Principle is stated as follows:
Of all the possible paths along which a dynamical system may move from
one point to another within a specified time interval (consistent with any constraints), the actual path followed is that which minimizes the time integral
of the difference between the kinetic and potential energies.
Rb
The book states that what is minimized is a (T U )dt but in fact this is
the minimum of the functional J() in the case of classical mechanics.

It is worth defining two quantities in terms of the Lagrangian L as we will

see. The first is the canonical momentum p conjugate to q ,
p

L
q

(3)

The second is the Hamiltonian H (q (t), q (t); t) of the particle,

H (q (t), q (t); t) p q L
For the classical case
particle in a gravitational field discussed above,
 of the
2
plugging L = 21 m dqdt(t) U (q (t)) in (3) gives,
p

L
dq (t)
= mq (t)
=
m
q
dt
6

The canonical momentum equals the physical momentum mq . The Hamiltonian becomes,

H (q (t), q (t); t) = m (q )

1
m (q )2 U
2

1
= m (q )2 + U = T + U
2

The result is the total energy of the particle. Because p

d L
,
dt q
L
= p
q

L
q

and

L
q

(4)

In addition, because the Lagrangian L is a function of q , q , and t, taking

the full derivative of L with respect to t we use the chain rule and get,
dL
L dt
L dq
L dq
=
+
+
dt
t dt q dt
q dt
dL
L
L
L
=
+ q + q
dt
t
q
q
but p

L
q

and

L
q

= p so
dL
L
=
+ p q + p q
dt
t

L
dL
p q p q =
dt
t
using the product rule we factorize the left hand side,
d
L
(L p q ) =
dt
t

because H (q (t), q (t); t) p q L we get,

L
H =
(5)
t
where H and L are functions of variables q , q , and t. We now look at the
concept of invariance.
7

Invariance
Invariance should not be confused with conservation law. When we say a
quantity is invariant, we mean that when it is viewed under different frames of
reference, it is the same. Conversely when we say a quantity is conserved, we
mean that when it is viewed under one reference frame, it is never changes but
it may not be the same as measured in another reference frame. The quantity
we will analyze for invariance is the action J (q (t), q (t); t) shorthand J
where L is the Lagrangian,

Z b 
dq (t)

; t dt
L q (t),
J=
dt
a
The transformation from one reference frame to another that we consider is
the following infinitesimal linear transformation,
t0 (t, q ) = t + (t, q )
q 0 (t, q ) = q + (t, q )
where (t, q ), and (t, q ) are the generators of the transformation and is
infinitesimal. The vector components are represented by which ranges from
1 to 3 where ranges from 1 to 3 for each . Next we state a formal definition
of invariance and then state a final definition that implies the former.
Definition 0.2. The functional

Z b 
dq (t)

; t dt
J=
L q (t),
dt
a
is said to be invariant under the infinitesimal transformation
t0 (t, q ) = t + (t, q )
q 0 (t, q ) = q + (t, q )
if and only if
J 0 J = s ,

where s > 1 and s is an integer


Notice that because is infinitesimal, s is always equal to 0 by definition of
an infinitesimal. Then J 0 = J is the invariance.
8

Definition 0.3. The functional


Z b 
dq (t)

J=
L q (t),
; t dt
dt
a
is said to be invariant under the infinitesimal transformation
t0 (t, q ) = t + (t, q )
q 0 (t, q ) = q + (t, q )
if and only if
L0

dt0
L = s ,
dt

where s > 1 and s is an integer


Proof. We prove that the latter definition implies the former. Consider the
functional

Z b 
dq (t)

J=
L q (t),
; t dt
dt
a
make the infinitesimal transformation
t0 (t, q ) = t + (t, q )
q 0 (t, q ) = q + (t, q )
then
b0



0 0
0 0 dq (t ) 0
; t dt0
J =
L q (t ),
0
dt
0
a
 0
Z b0 
0 0
dt
0
0 0 dq (t ) 0
J =
L q (t ),
;t
dt
0
dt
dt
a0
0

integration is now with respect to t so we change the bounds of integration

appropriately. Using shorthand for the primed Lagrangian we get,
Z b
dt0
0
J =
L0 dt
dt
a
it follows in shorthand
9

Z b

J J =

0
0 dt

L
a

dt


L dt

dt0

If L0 dt L = s in the finite range from a to b then L0 dt

L = 0 hence
dt
0
J = J as required.
Theorem 0.3. (The Rund-Trautman Identity) If the functional

Z b 
dq (t)

J=
L q (t),
; t dt
dt
a
is invariant under the infinitesimal transformation
t0 (t, q ) = t + (t, q )
q 0 (t, q ) = q + (t, q )
then the following identity holds
L
L
+ H + p = 0
t
q
Proof. If the functional is invariant under the infinitesimal transformation,
0
then, L0 dt
L = s where s > 1. We differentiate the left and right sides
dt
0
with respect to and set = 0. L0 and dt
are functions of but L is not
dt
and so we use only the product rule and get,


 0
d dt0
dL
L
+
=0
(6)
d dt =0
d =0
because t0 (t, q ) = t + (t, q ),
to t. Then

dt0
dt

d
d

= 1 + , where the dot is with respect

dt0
dt


=

for the second term we begin by using the chain rule for the primed La0
grangian function L0 of variables q 0 , dqdt0 , and t0

10

dq 0
dt0

dL0
L0 dt0
L0 dq
L0 d
= 0
+ 0
+  0 
d
t d q d
d
dqdt0
0

using our infinitesimal transformations



dq 0
dt0

L0
L0
L0 d



+
0
dq 0
t0
d
q
dt0

we then plug this in (4) and set = 0. In doing this we note that the primed
partial derivatives simply become unprimed. The Lagrangian we consider
is a polynomial or quotient function of its variables hence taking the partial
derivative of the primed Lagrangian with respect to a certain primed variable
we get an expression of a form that corresponds to the partial derivative
of the unprimed Lagrangian with respect to the corresponding unprimed
variable. Setting = 0 we simply get the partial derivative of the unprimed
Lagrangian with respect to the corresponding unprimed variable. Because
the last expression contains a full derivative with respect to of a quantity
that contains , we first have to express the quantity in terms of , take the
full derivative with respect to , then only set = 0.
 0 
dq
L L d dt0
L
+ +
=0
(7)
L +
t
q
q
d
0

from the last term, we expand

dq 0
dt0

using differential calculus

dq + d
dq 0
q +
=
=
dt0
dt + d
1 +
then
 0 
"
d dqdt0

= d
d
d
0

q +
1 +



(1 + ) q +
= q
=
(1 + )2

!#
0

(5) becomes
11

L +


L
L
L 
+ + q = 0
t
q
q

rearranging


L
L
L
L
+ + L q + = 0
t
q
q
q
because p
identity

L
q

and H (q (t), q (t); t) p q L we get a Rund-Trautman

L
L
+ H + p = 0
t
q

Q.E.D.
L
Because q
, and L
= H following the Euler-Lagrange Equation
= p
t
(holds if the functional J is an extremal), we substitute and get,

+ p H + p = 0
H
H + p + p = 0
H
using the product rule we factorize,
d
(p H ) = 0
dt
integrating both sides,
p H = const.
where const. is a constant of integration. We present these results formally
as Noethers First Theorem.
Theorem 0.4. (Noethers First Theorem) Suppose we have an extremal
functional
Z b
J=
L(q , q ; t)dt
a

12

If under the infinitesimal transformation

t0 (t, q ) = t + (t, q )
q 0 (t, q ) = q + (t, q )
the functional is invariant according to the definition
dt0
L = s ,
where s > 1 and s is an integer
dt
then the following conservation law holds:
L0

p H = const.
This is a simplified and specific representation to the physical world of a
more general theorem by Emmy Noether.

References
[1] Dwight E. Neuenschwander Emmy Noethers Wonderful Theorem. 2011.
[2] Yvette Kosmann-Schwarzbach The Noether Theorems. July 2010.
[3] James Stewart Calculus. 2012.
[4] Stephen T. Thornton and Jerry B. Marion Classical Dynamics of Particles and Systems. 2004
[5] Peter W. Higgs Broken Symmetries and the Masses of Gauge Bosons.
Phys. Rev. Letters, Vol 13, No. 16, October 1964.

13