Is there a higher dimension analogue of Noether's theorem?Small unclarity in proof of Noether's TheoremEasy...

Time travel from stationary position?

Can a druid choose the size of its wild shape beast?

A sequence that has integer values for prime indexes only:

What is a^b and (a&b)<<1?

Who is flying the vertibirds?

Identifying the interval from A♭ to D♯

Most cost effective thermostat setting: consistent temperature vs. lowest temperature possible

Is it possible to upcast ritual spells?

Error in Twin Prime Conjecture

Are ETF trackers fundamentally better than individual stocks?

Could the Saturn V actually have launched astronauts around Venus?

Sailing the cryptic seas

How to write cleanly even if my character uses expletive language?

In a future war, an old lady is trying to raise a boy but one of the weapons has made everyone deaf

How to make healing in an exploration game interesting

Why doesn't the EU now just force the UK to choose between referendum and no-deal?

Happy pi day, everyone!

Bach's Toccata and Fugue in D minor breaks the "no parallel octaves" rule?

Define, (actually define) the "stability" and "energy" of a compound

how to write formula in word in latex

What do Xenomorphs eat in the Alien series?

What are substitutions for coconut in curry?

Welcoming 2019 Pi day: How to draw the letter π?

Are there verbs that are neither telic, or atelic?



Is there a higher dimension analogue of Noether's theorem?


Small unclarity in proof of Noether's TheoremEasy proof of Noether's theorem?Understanding Noether's theorem rigorouslyNoether's theorem for time dependent non-cyclic LagrangianDerivation of Noether's TheoremProve that Noether's Theorem produces generators of the symmetryWhy is Noether's theorem important?Transformation of coordinates in Noether's TheoremNoether's Theorem in Classical Field theory ConfusionOn-shell and off-shell transformations in Noether's theorem













2












$begingroup$


So I have recently read the proof of Noether's theorem from the book variation calculus by Gelfand. Basically, what I have already seen is that for any single integral functional, if we have a transformation that keeps the functional invariant, we can derive a quantity that doesn't change along any solution of the Euler equations of the functional.



My question: Is there an analogue that work for multiple integral functional? That is, the corresponding system of Euler Lagrange equations are not ODEs, but rather PDEs. Can we define a quantity that is invariant on the whole solutions of these PDEs? The same argument used in Gelfand's proof for single integral functional clearly doesn't work. Can we have something that doesn't change not only with respect with one variable t, but is unchanged everywhere on the whole space like $R^n$ as long as we have a killing vector field for the functional?






lagrangian-formalism symmetry field-theory spacetime-dimensions noethers-theorem







share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    The argument goes through exactly the same with more dimensions. Noether's theorem is routinely used in field theory, which takes place in 3+1 dimensions.
    $endgroup$
    – Javier
    2 hours ago
















2












$begingroup$


So I have recently read the proof of Noether's theorem from the book variation calculus by Gelfand. Basically, what I have already seen is that for any single integral functional, if we have a transformation that keeps the functional invariant, we can derive a quantity that doesn't change along any solution of the Euler equations of the functional.



My question: Is there an analogue that work for multiple integral functional? That is, the corresponding system of Euler Lagrange equations are not ODEs, but rather PDEs. Can we define a quantity that is invariant on the whole solutions of these PDEs? The same argument used in Gelfand's proof for single integral functional clearly doesn't work. Can we have something that doesn't change not only with respect with one variable t, but is unchanged everywhere on the whole space like $R^n$ as long as we have a killing vector field for the functional?






lagrangian-formalism symmetry field-theory spacetime-dimensions noethers-theorem







share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    The argument goes through exactly the same with more dimensions. Noether's theorem is routinely used in field theory, which takes place in 3+1 dimensions.
    $endgroup$
    – Javier
    2 hours ago














2












2








2





$begingroup$


So I have recently read the proof of Noether's theorem from the book variation calculus by Gelfand. Basically, what I have already seen is that for any single integral functional, if we have a transformation that keeps the functional invariant, we can derive a quantity that doesn't change along any solution of the Euler equations of the functional.



My question: Is there an analogue that work for multiple integral functional? That is, the corresponding system of Euler Lagrange equations are not ODEs, but rather PDEs. Can we define a quantity that is invariant on the whole solutions of these PDEs? The same argument used in Gelfand's proof for single integral functional clearly doesn't work. Can we have something that doesn't change not only with respect with one variable t, but is unchanged everywhere on the whole space like $R^n$ as long as we have a killing vector field for the functional?






lagrangian-formalism symmetry field-theory spacetime-dimensions noethers-theorem







share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




So I have recently read the proof of Noether's theorem from the book variation calculus by Gelfand. Basically, what I have already seen is that for any single integral functional, if we have a transformation that keeps the functional invariant, we can derive a quantity that doesn't change along any solution of the Euler equations of the functional.



My question: Is there an analogue that work for multiple integral functional? That is, the corresponding system of Euler Lagrange equations are not ODEs, but rather PDEs. Can we define a quantity that is invariant on the whole solutions of these PDEs? The same argument used in Gelfand's proof for single integral functional clearly doesn't work. Can we have something that doesn't change not only with respect with one variable t, but is unchanged everywhere on the whole space like $R^n$ as long as we have a killing vector field for the functional?






lagrangian-formalism symmetry field-theory spacetime-dimensions noethers-theorem




lagrangian-formalism symmetry field-theory spacetime-dimensions noethers-theorem






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited 1 hour ago









Qmechanic♦

106k121941220




106k121941220










asked 6 hours ago









zhongyuan chenzhongyuan chen

232




232








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    The argument goes through exactly the same with more dimensions. Noether's theorem is routinely used in field theory, which takes place in 3+1 dimensions.
    $endgroup$
    – Javier
    2 hours ago














  • 1




    $begingroup$
    The argument goes through exactly the same with more dimensions. Noether's theorem is routinely used in field theory, which takes place in 3+1 dimensions.
    $endgroup$
    – Javier
    2 hours ago








1




1




$begingroup$
The argument goes through exactly the same with more dimensions. Noether's theorem is routinely used in field theory, which takes place in 3+1 dimensions.
$endgroup$
– Javier
2 hours ago




$begingroup$
The argument goes through exactly the same with more dimensions. Noether's theorem is routinely used in field theory, which takes place in 3+1 dimensions.
$endgroup$
– Javier
2 hours ago










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















2












$begingroup$

In field theory, you often consider "Lagrangian densities" which are to be integrated over space-time instead of just over time.



For example, where as in the one dimensional case you would write



$$
S = int dt L
$$
in field theory you would write
$$
S = int d^4 x mathcal{L}.
$$
The equation of motion will be a PDE.



Noether's theorem, instead of giving you a conserved quantity $Q$ which satisfies $dot Q = 0$, would now give you a conserved current $J^mu$ (where $mu = 0, 1, 2, 3$ and $mu = 0$ is the time component and $mu = 1,2,3$ are the space components) which satisfies $sum_mu frac{d}{d x^mu} J^mu = 0$. You can still also find the a conserved quantity $Q$, which satisfies $dot Q = 0$, defined by



$$
Q = int d^3 x J^0
$$
and integrating over any fixed time.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$





















    1












    $begingroup$

    Yes, already Noether herself considered field theory in $n$ dimensions in her seminal 1918 paper.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$













      Your Answer





      StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
      return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
      StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
      StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
      });
      });
      }, "mathjax-editing");

      StackExchange.ready(function() {
      var channelOptions = {
      tags: "".split(" "),
      id: "151"
      };
      initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

      StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
      // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
      if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
      StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
      createEditor();
      });
      }
      else {
      createEditor();
      }
      });

      function createEditor() {
      StackExchange.prepareEditor({
      heartbeatType: 'answer',
      autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
      convertImagesToLinks: false,
      noModals: true,
      showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
      reputationToPostImages: null,
      bindNavPrevention: true,
      postfix: "",
      imageUploader: {
      brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
      contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
      allowUrls: true
      },
      noCode: true, onDemand: true,
      discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
      ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
      });


      }
      });














      draft saved

      draft discarded


















      StackExchange.ready(
      function () {
      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f466705%2fis-there-a-higher-dimension-analogue-of-noethers-theorem%23new-answer', 'question_page');
      }
      );

      Post as a guest















      Required, but never shown

























      2 Answers
      2






      active

      oldest

      votes








      2 Answers
      2






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes









      2












      $begingroup$

      In field theory, you often consider "Lagrangian densities" which are to be integrated over space-time instead of just over time.



      For example, where as in the one dimensional case you would write



      $$
      S = int dt L
      $$
      in field theory you would write
      $$
      S = int d^4 x mathcal{L}.
      $$
      The equation of motion will be a PDE.



      Noether's theorem, instead of giving you a conserved quantity $Q$ which satisfies $dot Q = 0$, would now give you a conserved current $J^mu$ (where $mu = 0, 1, 2, 3$ and $mu = 0$ is the time component and $mu = 1,2,3$ are the space components) which satisfies $sum_mu frac{d}{d x^mu} J^mu = 0$. You can still also find the a conserved quantity $Q$, which satisfies $dot Q = 0$, defined by



      $$
      Q = int d^3 x J^0
      $$
      and integrating over any fixed time.






      share|cite|improve this answer











      $endgroup$


















        2












        $begingroup$

        In field theory, you often consider "Lagrangian densities" which are to be integrated over space-time instead of just over time.



        For example, where as in the one dimensional case you would write



        $$
        S = int dt L
        $$
        in field theory you would write
        $$
        S = int d^4 x mathcal{L}.
        $$
        The equation of motion will be a PDE.



        Noether's theorem, instead of giving you a conserved quantity $Q$ which satisfies $dot Q = 0$, would now give you a conserved current $J^mu$ (where $mu = 0, 1, 2, 3$ and $mu = 0$ is the time component and $mu = 1,2,3$ are the space components) which satisfies $sum_mu frac{d}{d x^mu} J^mu = 0$. You can still also find the a conserved quantity $Q$, which satisfies $dot Q = 0$, defined by



        $$
        Q = int d^3 x J^0
        $$
        and integrating over any fixed time.






        share|cite|improve this answer











        $endgroup$
















          2












          2








          2





          $begingroup$

          In field theory, you often consider "Lagrangian densities" which are to be integrated over space-time instead of just over time.



          For example, where as in the one dimensional case you would write



          $$
          S = int dt L
          $$
          in field theory you would write
          $$
          S = int d^4 x mathcal{L}.
          $$
          The equation of motion will be a PDE.



          Noether's theorem, instead of giving you a conserved quantity $Q$ which satisfies $dot Q = 0$, would now give you a conserved current $J^mu$ (where $mu = 0, 1, 2, 3$ and $mu = 0$ is the time component and $mu = 1,2,3$ are the space components) which satisfies $sum_mu frac{d}{d x^mu} J^mu = 0$. You can still also find the a conserved quantity $Q$, which satisfies $dot Q = 0$, defined by



          $$
          Q = int d^3 x J^0
          $$
          and integrating over any fixed time.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$



          In field theory, you often consider "Lagrangian densities" which are to be integrated over space-time instead of just over time.



          For example, where as in the one dimensional case you would write



          $$
          S = int dt L
          $$
          in field theory you would write
          $$
          S = int d^4 x mathcal{L}.
          $$
          The equation of motion will be a PDE.



          Noether's theorem, instead of giving you a conserved quantity $Q$ which satisfies $dot Q = 0$, would now give you a conserved current $J^mu$ (where $mu = 0, 1, 2, 3$ and $mu = 0$ is the time component and $mu = 1,2,3$ are the space components) which satisfies $sum_mu frac{d}{d x^mu} J^mu = 0$. You can still also find the a conserved quantity $Q$, which satisfies $dot Q = 0$, defined by



          $$
          Q = int d^3 x J^0
          $$
          and integrating over any fixed time.







          share|cite|improve this answer














          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer








          edited 58 mins ago

























          answered 1 hour ago









          user1379857user1379857

          2,322826




          2,322826























              1












              $begingroup$

              Yes, already Noether herself considered field theory in $n$ dimensions in her seminal 1918 paper.






              share|cite|improve this answer









              $endgroup$


















                1












                $begingroup$

                Yes, already Noether herself considered field theory in $n$ dimensions in her seminal 1918 paper.






                share|cite|improve this answer









                $endgroup$
















                  1












                  1








                  1





                  $begingroup$

                  Yes, already Noether herself considered field theory in $n$ dimensions in her seminal 1918 paper.






                  share|cite|improve this answer









                  $endgroup$



                  Yes, already Noether herself considered field theory in $n$ dimensions in her seminal 1918 paper.







                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  share|cite|improve this answer



                  share|cite|improve this answer










                  answered 1 hour ago









                  Qmechanic♦Qmechanic

                  106k121941220




                  106k121941220






























                      draft saved

                      draft discarded




















































                      Thanks for contributing an answer to Physics Stack Exchange!


                      • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                      But avoid …



                      • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                      • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                      Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                      To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                      draft saved


                      draft discarded














                      StackExchange.ready(
                      function () {
                      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f466705%2fis-there-a-higher-dimension-analogue-of-noethers-theorem%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                      }
                      );

                      Post as a guest















                      Required, but never shown





















































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown

































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown







                      -

                      Popular posts from this blog

                      Can't compile dgruyter and caption packagesLaTeX templates/packages for writing a patent specificationLatex...

                      Image
                      Why does Arabsat 6A need a Falcon Heavy to launch Etiquette around loan refinance - decision is going to cost first broker a lot of money What is the PIE reconstruction for word-initial alpha with rough breathing? Is "remove commented out code" correct English? Why do I get two different answers for this counting problem? Blender 2.8 I can't see vertices, edges or faces in edit mode Where does SFDX store details about scratch orgs? 1960's book about a plague that kills all white people How can saying a song's name be a copyright violation? UK: Is there precedent for the governments e-petition site changing the ...
                      Read more

                      Schneeberg (Smreczany) Bibliografia | Menu...

                      Image
                      Szczyty w Niemczech paśmieSmreczanyn.p.m.Ochrza Schneeberg Państwo   Niemcy Położenie Bawaria Pasmo Fichtelgebirge Wysokość 1 051 m n.p.m. Położenie na mapie Bawarii Schneeberg Położenie na mapie Niemiec Schneeberg 50°03′N   11°51′E / 50,050000   11,850000 Multimedia w Wikimedia Commons Schneeberg – szczyt w paśmie Smreczany o wysokości 1051 m n.p.m., na zboczach którego znajdują się źródła rzeki Ochrza. Bibliografia | Rainer H. Schmeisser: Der Schneeberg, Beiträge zur Geschichts- und Landeskunde des Fichtelgebirges Nr. 1, Regensburg 1979 This page is only for reference, If you need detailed information, please check here
                      Read more

                      Hans Bellmer Spis treści Życiorys | Upamiętnienie | Przypisy | Bibliografia | Linki zewnętrzne |...

                      Image
                      Ludzie związani z III Liceum Ogólnokształcącym im. Adama Mickiewicza w KatowicachNiemieccy rzeźbiarzeNiemieccy malarze współcześniNiemieccy graficyLudzie urodzeni w KatowicachUrodzeni w 1902Zmarli w 1975 13 marca1902Katowicach23 lutego1975Paryżumalarzrzeźbiarzgrafikul. A. Mickiewiczaul. T. KościuszkiWyższej Szkole TechnicznejinstalacjiPaula EluardaBerlinie„tableaux vivants”NiemczechnazistówzdegenerowanąBerlinsurrealistówII wojnie światowejCamp des MillesAix-en-ProvenceParyżuUnicę ZürnPère-Lachaiseul. T. KościuszkiDział Grafiki im. Pawła Stellera Muzeum Historii Katowic2008Muzeum Historii KatowicNatalia KruszynaBerlinie Tablica pamiątkowa z 2008 roku na domu, w którym mieszkał artysta przy ul. T. Kościuszki 47 w Katowicach (2017) Grób Bellmera na cmentarzu Père-Lachaise Tablica pamiątkowa przy Ehrenfelsstraße 8a w Berlinie Budynek, w którym mieszkał artysta przy ul. T. Kościuszki 47 w Katowicach (2017) Hans Bellmer (ur. 13 marca 1902 w Katowicach [1] , zm. 23 lut...
                      Read more