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

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

It's a yearly task, alright

A Cautionary Suggestion

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

Brexit - No Deal Rejection

If curse and magic is two sides of the same coin, why the former is forbidden?

Min function accepting varying number of arguments in C++17

Recruiter wants very extensive technical details about all of my previous work

Interplanetary conflict, some disease destroys the ability to understand or appreciate music

What should tie a collection of short-stories together?

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

Happy pi day, everyone!

Life insurance that covers only simultaneous/dual deaths

How to deal with taxi scam when on vacation?

Sailing the cryptic seas

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

Gantt Chart like rectangles with log scale

What approach do we need to follow for projects without a test environment?

Why did it take so long to abandon sail after steamships were demonstrated?

What has been your most complicated TikZ drawing?

Is this a real picture of Jordan Peterson in New Zealand with a fan wearing a shirt that says "I'm a Proud Islamaphobe"?

Gravity magic - How does it work?

Do I need life insurance if I can cover my own funeral costs?

how to write formula in word in latex



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?










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
    3 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?










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
    3 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?










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






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited 2 hours 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
    3 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
    3 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
3 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
3 hours ago










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















3












$begingroup$

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
$$
S = int d^4 x mathcalL.
$$

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 $sum_mu fracdd x^mu J^mu = 0$. 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











$endgroup$




















    0












    $begingroup$

    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









      3












      $begingroup$

      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
      $$
      S = int d^4 x mathcalL.
      $$

      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 $sum_mu fracdd x^mu J^mu = 0$. 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











      $endgroup$

















        3












        $begingroup$

        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
        $$
        S = int d^4 x mathcalL.
        $$

        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 $sum_mu fracdd x^mu J^mu = 0$. 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











        $endgroup$















          3












          3








          3





          $begingroup$

          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
          $$
          S = int d^4 x mathcalL.
          $$

          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 $sum_mu fracdd x^mu J^mu = 0$. 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
          $$
          S = int d^4 x mathcalL.
          $$

          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 $sum_mu fracdd x^mu J^mu = 0$. 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 1 hour ago

























          answered 1 hour ago









          user1379857user1379857

          2,332826




          2,332826





















              0












              $begingroup$

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






              share|cite|improve this answer









              $endgroup$

















                0












                $begingroup$

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






                share|cite|improve this answer









                $endgroup$















                  0












                  0








                  0





                  $begingroup$

                  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 2 hours ago









                  QmechanicQmechanic

                  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

                      名間水力發電廠 目录 沿革 設施 鄰近設施 註釋 外部連結 导航菜单23°50′10″N 120°42′41″E / 23.83611°N 120.71139°E / 23.83611; 120.7113923°50′10″N 120°42′41″E / 23.83611°N 120.71139°E / 23.83611; 120.71139計畫概要原始内容臺灣第一座BOT 模式開發的水力發電廠-名間水力電廠名間水力發電廠 水利署首件BOT案原始内容《小檔案》名間電廠 首座BOT水力發電廠原始内容名間電廠BOT - 經濟部水利署中區水資源局

                      Prove that NP is closed under karp reduction?Space(n) not closed under Karp reductions - what about NTime(n)?Class P is closed under rotation?Prove or disprove that $NL$ is closed under polynomial many-one reductions$mathbfNC_2$ is closed under log-space reductionOn Karp reductionwhen can I know if a class (complexity) is closed under reduction (cook/karp)Check if class $PSPACE$ is closed under polyonomially space reductionIs NPSPACE also closed under polynomial-time reduction and under log-space reduction?Prove PSPACE is closed under complement?Prove PSPACE is closed under union?

                      Is my guitar’s action too high? Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 23:30 UTC (7:30pm US/Eastern)Strings too stiff on a recently purchased acoustic guitar | Cort AD880CEIs the action of my guitar really high?Μy little finger is too weak to play guitarWith guitar, how long should I give my fingers to strengthen / callous?When playing a fret the guitar sounds mutedPlaying (Barre) chords up the guitar neckI think my guitar strings are wound too tight and I can't play barre chordsF barre chord on an SG guitarHow to find to the right strings of a barre chord by feel?High action on higher fret on my steel acoustic guitar