Noether's theorem Guide, Meaning , Facts, Information and Description
Noether's theorem is a central result in theoretical physics that expresses the equivalence of two different properties of physical laws for models based upon the action principle (i.e. there are models which aren't). It is named after the early 20th century mathematician Emmy Noether. There is also a corresponding form of the theorem for Hamiltonian dynamics over a symplectic space.Noether's theorem relates pairs of basic ideas of physics, one being the covariance of the form that a physical law takes with respect to a one-dimensional Lie group of transformations which satisfies certain technical criteria and the other being a conservation law of a physical quantity (expressed as a continuity equation).
| Table of contents |
|
2 Proof 3 External links |
Informally, Noether's theorem can be stated as (technical fine prints aside):
The formal statement of the theorem derives an expression for the physical quantity that is conserved -- and hence also defines it (actually, its current) -- from the condition of invariance alone. Actually, this conserved current is not uniquely defined. In the formulation given in the proof below, for example, fμ is only defined up to a divergenceless vector field. But if you think about it, any two conserved currents differ by a divergenceless vector field - for example:
Mathematical statement of the theorem
The vice versa part is actually harder to prove and the proof of it is omitted in this article (unless someone wants to volunteer).
When it comes to quantum field theory, the invariance with respect to general gauge transformations also gives the law of conservation of quantities such as electric charge, though there are some subtleties here; the conservation law here is based on the Ward-Takahashi identities for the BRST symmetry. Thus, the result is a very important contribution to physics in general, as it helps to provide powerful insights into any general theory in physics, by just analyzing the various transformations that would make the form of the laws involved invariant.
Proof
Suppose we have an n-dimensional manifold, M and a target manifold T. Let be the configuration space of smooth functions from M to T.
Before we go on, let's give some examples:
- In classical mechanics, in the Hamiltonian formulation, M is the one-dimensional manifold R, representing time and the target space is the cotangent bundle of space of generalized positions.
- In field theory, M is the spacetime manifold and the target space is the set of values the fields can take at any given point. For example, if there are m real-valued scalar fields, φ1,...,φm, then the target manifold is R. If the field is a real vector field, then the target manifold is isomorphic to R. There's actually a much more elegant way using tangent bundles over M, but for the purposes of this proof, we'd just stick to this version.
- ,
To get to the usual version of Noether's theorem, we need additional restrictions on the action. We assume S[φ] is the integral over M of a function
- )
Now, suppose we have an infinitesimal transformation on , generated by a functional derivation, Q such that
If this holds on shell and off shell, we say Q generates an off-shell symmetry. If this only holds on shell, we say Q generates an on-shell symmetry.
Then, we say Q is a generator of a 1-parameter symmetry Lie group.
Now, for any N, because of the Euler-Lagrange theorem, on shell (and only on-shell), we have
This is not generally well-known, but Noether's theorem is really a reflection of the relation between the boundary conditions and the variational principle. Assuming no boundary terms in the action, Noether's theorem implies that
Noether's theorem is an on shell theorem. The quantum analog of Noether's theorem are the Ward-Takahashi identities.
Let's say we have two symmetry derivations Q1 and Q2. Then, [Q1,Q2] is also a symmetry derivation. Let's see this explicitly. Let's say
- .
A more general and elegant proof
This applies to ANY derivation Q, not just symmetry derivations and also to more general functional differentiable actions, including ones where the Lagrangian depends on higher derivatives of the fields and nonlocal actions. Let ε be any arbitrary smooth function of the spacetime (or time) manifold such that the closure of its support is disjoint from the boundary. ε is a test function. Then, because of the variational principle (which does NOT apply to the boundary, by the way!), the derivation distribution q generated by q[ε][φ(x)]=ε(x)Q[φ(x)] satisfies q[ε][S]=0 for any ε on shell, or more compactly, q(x)[S] for all x not on the boundary (but remember that q(x) is a shorthand for a derivation DISTRIBUTION, not a derivation parametrized by x in general). THIS is the generalization of Noether's theorem.
How is this related to the version given above? Simple. Assume the action is the spacetime integral of a Lagrangian which only depends on φ and its first derivatives. Also, assume
More generally, if the Lagrangian depends on higher derivatives,
An example
OK, that was a general proof. Let's look at a specific case. Let's work with a one dimensional manifold with the topology of R (time) coordinatized by t. Let's assume
For Q, let's consider the generator of time translations. In other words, . (Quantum field) physicists would often put a factor of i on the right hand side, but what the heck. Note that
- .
- .
More generally, if the Lagrangian does not depend explicitly on time, the quantity (called the energy)
For , let's consider the generator of Galilean transformations (i.e. a change in the frame of reference). In other words,
If you try to find the Ward-Takahashi analog of this equation, you'd run into a problem because of anomalies.Another example
Let's still work with one dimensional time. This time, let
i.e. N Newtonian particles where the potential only depends pairwise upon the relative displacement.
Note that
This has the form of so we can set
Then,
where is the total momentum, M is the total mass and is the center of mass. Noether's theorem states that (i.e. ).Yet another example
Both examples above are over a one dimensional manifold (time). How about spacetime? Well, we'd have Noether currents. Let's see how this goes for the case of a conformal transformation of a massless real scalar field with a quartic potential in 3+1 Minkowski spacetime.
For Q, let's consider the generator of a spacetime rescaling. In other words, :.
The second term on the right hand side is due to the "conformal weight" of φ. Note that
This has the form of
(where we have performed a change of dummy indices) so we can set
Then,
Noether's theorem states that (as you may explicitly check by substituting the EL equations into the left hand side).
