arXiv:2012.13709v1 [math-ph] 26 Dec 2020
Generalization of Hamiltonian Mechanics to a Three Dimensional
Phase Space
Naoki Sato
11Graduate School of Frontier Sciences,
The University of Tokyo, Kashiwa, Chiba 277-8561, Japan Email: sato [email protected]
December 29, 2020
Abstract
Classical Hamiltonian mechanics is realized by the action of a Poisson bracket on a Hamiltonian function. The Hamiltonian function is a constant of motion (the energy) of the system. The properties of the Poisson bracket are encapsulated in the symplectic 2-form, a closed second order differential form. Due to closure, the symplectic 2-form is preserved by the Hamiltonian flow, and it assigns an invariant (Liouville) measure on the phase space through the Lie-Darboux theorem. In this paper we propose a generalization of classical Hamiltonian mechanics to a three-dimensional phase space: the classical Poisson bracket is replaced with a generalized Poisson bracket acting on a pair of Hamiltonian functions, while the symplectic 2-form is replaced by a symplectic 3-form. We show that, using the closure of the symplectic 3-form, a result analogous to the classical Lie-Darboux theorem holds: locally, there exist smooth coordinates such that the components of the symplectic 3-form are constants, and the phase space is endowed with a preserved volume element. Furthermore, as in the classical theory, the Jacobi identity for the generalized Poisson bracket mathematically expresses the closure of the associated symplectic form. As a consequence, constant skew-symmetric third order contravariant tensors always define generalized Poisson brackets. This is in contrast with generalizations of Hamiltonian mechanics postulating the fundamental identity as replacement for the Jacobi identity. In particular, we find that the fundamental identity represents a stronger requirement than the closure of the symplectic 3-form.
1
Introduction
In the bracket formalism [1, 2, 3], a classical Hamiltonian system is defined as a pair consisting of a smooth manifold M of dimensionn and a Poisson bracket{◦,◦}: C∞
(M)×C∞
(M)→ C∞
(M) on the ring of real valued smooth functions C∞
(M) on M. The Poisson bracket satisfies the following axioms:
{aF+bG, H}=a{F, H}+b{G, H}, {H, aF+bG}=a{H, F}+b{H, G}, (1a)
{F, F}= 0, (1b)
{F, G}=− {G, F}, (1c)
{F G, H}=F{G, H}+{F, H}G, (1d)
{F,{G, H}}+{G,{H, F}}+{H,{F, G}}= 0, (1e) for all a, b ∈ R and F, G, H ∈ C∞
(M). Equations (1a), (1b), (1c), (1d), and (1e) express bilinearity, alternativity, antisymmetry, Leibniz rule, and Jacobi identity respectively. Bilinearity (1a) guarantees that the Poisson bracket defines an algebra over R. Given an observable F ∈ C∞
(M) and an Hamiltonian (energy)H∈C∞
(M), the time evolution of F is expressed as dF
dt ={F, H}=FiJ
ijH
In this notationJij is a skew-symmetric second order contravariant tensor (the Poisson operator associated
with the Poisson bracket), summation on repeated indexes is used, and lower indexes specify partial deriva-tives, e.g. Fi = ∂F/∂xi with xi the ith coordinate on M, i = 1, ..., n. Then, alternativity (1b) ensures
that energy is conserved, sincedH/dt={H, H}= 0. Antisymmetry (1c) follows from the axioms (1a) and (1b). The Leibniz or derivation rule (1d) implies that the Poisson bracket behaves as a derivation since d(F G)/dt = F(dG/dt) + (dF/dt)G. Finally, the Jacobi identity (1e) is equivalent to the existence of a closed 2-form of even rank 2m=n−s, the symplectic 2-form ω. Here,s is the dimension of the kernel of the Poisson bracket. Due to the Lie-Darboux theorem [4, 5, 6], the closure of the 2-form ω further implies that the phase space is locally spanned by 2m=n−scanonically conjugated variables pi, qi
,i= 1, ..., m, ands=n−2mCasimir invariantsCi,i= 1, ..., s, which fill the center (kernel) of the Poisson bracket:
dCi
dt =
Ci, H = 0 ∀H∈C∞
(M), i= 1, ..., s. (3) The equations of motion therefore take the local canonical form
dpi dt =− ∂H ∂qi, dqi dt = ∂H ∂pi, dCj dt = 0, i= 1, ..., m, j= 1, ..., s. (4) In his 1973 paper [7], Nambu proposed what he calls a ‘possible generalization of classical Hamiltonian dynamics to a three dimensional phase space’. Here, a three dimensional phase space means that the classical canonical pair (p, q) is replaced by a canonical triplet (p, q, r), while the number of generating functions (Hamiltonians) is increased to two. Then, for the basicn= 3 case with HamiltoniansGandH , in place of Hamilton’s canonical equations, Nambu’s canonical equations are introduced as follows:
dp dt = ∂G ∂q ∂H ∂r − ∂G ∂r ∂H ∂q , dq dt = ∂G ∂r ∂H ∂p − ∂G ∂p ∂H ∂r, dr dt = ∂G ∂p ∂H ∂q − ∂G ∂q ∂H ∂p. (5) Setting x1, x2, x3
= (p, q, r), system (5) can be written through a ternary operation (Nambu bracket)
{◦,◦,◦}:C∞ (M)×C∞ (M)×C∞ (M)→C∞ (M) as below: dxi dt = xi, G, H =ǫijkGjHk, i= 1,2,3. (6)
In this equation,ǫijk denotes the three dimensional Levi-Civita symbol. More generally, the evolution of an
observableF ∈C∞
(M) takes the form dF
dt ={F, G, H}=ǫ
ijkF
iGjHk. (7)
Notice that due to the skew-symmetry of ǫijk bothGandH are constant in time.
The generalization of the Nambu bracket occurring in equation (7) to an algebraic framework analogous to the Poisson bracket of classical Hamiltonian mechanics has proven difficult, especially in the context of quantization, because the generalization of the Poisson bracket axioms (1) (in particular, the genralization of the Jacobi identity (1e)) to the Nambu bracket is nontrivial [8]. Several authors [8, 9] have proposed the following set of axioms for the Nambu bracket: trilinearity, skew-symmetry, Leibniz rule, and fundamental identity. Respectively, they are written as
{aF1+bF2, F3, F4}=a{F1, F3, F4}+b{F2, F3, F4}, (8a)
{F1, F2, F3}=ǫijk{Fi, Fj, Fk}, i, j, k= 1,2,3 (not summed), (8b)
{F1F2, F3, F4}=F1{F2, F3, F4}+F2{F1, F3, F4}, (8c)
{{F1, F2, F3}, F4, F5}={{F1, F4, F5}, F2, F3}+{F1,{F2, F4, F5}, F3}+{F1, F2,{F3, F4, F5}}, (8d)
for allF1, F2, F3, F4, F5∈C∞(M) anda, b∈R. Observe that in (8a) the linearity condition on the second
follows from linearity in the first argument and skew-symmetry. Alternativity has been absorbed in the skew-symmetry axiom (8b). In the Leibinz (derivation) rule (8c), the convention is adopted that F1 and
F2 both appear before the Nambu bracket on the right-hand side of the equation. Finally, the fundamental
identity (8d), which replaces the Jacobi identity (1e) for the Poisson bracket, implies distribution of derivatives (a property satisfied by Poisson brackets), i.e. given two HamiltoniansF4 andF5 one has
d dt{F1, F2, F3}= dF1 dt , F2, F3 + F1,dF2 dt , F3 + F1, F2,dF3 dt . (9)
The fundamental identity (8d) leads to the property that the bracket{◦,◦}G ={◦, G,◦}defined by fixing the second entry with a given generating functionGassigns a Poisson algebra. This can be verified by observing that equation (8d) reduces to (1e) when F1 =F4 =G. However, the fundamental identity (8d) also leads
to the result that constant skew-symmetric 3-tensors do not define a Nambu bracket in general, a situation pointing to the fact that the axiom (8d) is more stringent than the Jacobi identity (1e) required for a Poisson bracket (on this point, see [9]).
As discussed in [8, 9, 10], the axioms (8) can be further generalized to theN-ary case (N ≤n) in which the evolution of an observableF ∈C∞
(M) inn-dimensional phase space is determined byN−1 Hamiltonians, H1, ..., HN−1∈C
∞
(M) as
dF
dt ={F, H1, ..., HN−1}. (10) The main case discussed by Nambu corresponds ton=N = 3. More generally, Nambu dynamics withn=N is associated with integrable systems endowed withn−1 constants of motion.
In this paper, we wish to address the following question: ‘How can we generalize Hamiltonian mechanics to allow triplets (and possiblyN-tuples,N ≥2) of variables as the building blocks for the phase space?’. To achieve this goal, we shall not consider the problem of quantization (see [11, 12] on the difficulties encountered in the quantization of Nambu brackets defined by (8)), but instead focus on the minimal differential-geometric structure that should be possessed by a generalized phase space, a closed symplectic form of degree N. We find that, for N > 2, the mathematical identity (Jacobi identity) expressing the closure of the symplectic form ceases to coincide with the fundamental identity (the bracket identity (8d) proposed as generalization of the Jacobi identity (1e) for the classical Poisson bracket). Hence, the fundamental identity represents a stronger condition than what is required for a system to be Hamiltonian in the geometric sense above, and the fundamental identity (8d) is replaced with a weaker condition expressing the closure of the relevant sym-plectic N-form. Here, the bracket formalism is not essential to the definition of the generalized Hamiltonian framework, and all bracket axioms are deducible from the underlying symplectic structure of the phase space. Although the construction of generalized Hamiltonian mechanics presented here does not come with an immediate pathway to quantization, it possesses several merits: any constant skew-symmetric 3-tensor always satisfies the Jacobi identity and therefore represents a generalized Poisson operator, and a theorem, analogous to the classical Lie-Darboux theorem for closed 2-forms, holds, implying that the phase space has a local set of coordinates that define an invariant (Liouville) measure. We also take the view that the applicability of any generalization of Hamiltonian mechanics should not be limited to integrable dynamical systems with n =N. Instead, it should include systems with arbitrary dimensionality n ≥N and a desired number of HamiltoniansH1, ..., HN−1,N−1≥1. The theory discussed here applies ton-dimensional systems (n≥3) withN−1 = 2 Hamiltonians, and the formalism has a potential extension to to the general case withn≥N dimensions andN−1≥1 Hamiltonians.
One may wonder whether such generalizations of Hamiltonian mechanics represent redundant formulations of the classical theory, or whether they bring physical insight into practical problems. The relationship between classical Hamiltonian mechanics and the Nambu bracket defined through the axioms (8) has been studied by several authors [13, 14, 15, 16], who have highlighted the range of interchangeability of the formalisms and suggested applications to statistical mechanics, where the classical Lioville measure is replaced by the invariant measure associated with the volume element of Nambu’s phase space (an invariant measure is needed for the definition of entropy and the applicability of the ergodic ansatz [17, 18]), quantum mechanics, and fluid mechanics [19, 20]. As it will be shown in the following sections, the geometric generalization of
Hamiltonian mechanics presented here has the property that, exception made for the three dimensional case n= 3, the bracket obtained by fixing one of the constants, say G, according to {◦,◦}G ={◦, G,◦} fails to define a Poisson bracket. This fact holds true even when the generalized Poisson operator Jijk generating
the dynamics asdF/dt ={F, G, H}=JijkF
iGjHk can be transformed to a tensor whose components are
given by Levi-Civita symbols (one for each canonical triplet). This suggests that there may be systems that possess a generalized Hamiltonian structure, but that do not exhibit a classical phase space. This fact would make the theory indispensable if such systems were found in the natural world.
The present paper is organized as follows. In section 2 we review the geometric formulation of classical Hamiltonian mechanics. In section 3, based on the same geometric construction, we define a generalization of Hamiltonian mechanics to dynamical systems possessing two Hamiltonians G and H , i.e. N−1 = 2 and n≥3. In section 4 we discuss the relationship between the closure of symplectic forms and the Jacobi identity. In particular, we show that the fundamental identity (8d) appearing in the set of axioms (8) ceases to coincide with the closure of the symplectic form when N ≥3. In section 5, we extend the classical Lie-Darboux theorem, and show that phase space is locally spanned by a set of coordinates defining an invariant measure. In these coordinates, the components of the symplectic 3-form are constants. The conditions for the local existence of canonical triplets are also discussed. Concluding remarks are given in section 6.
Finally, we remark again that, for clarity of exposition, we are concerned only with the generalization of Hamiltonian mechanics to systems with two Hamiltonians. Nevertheless, systems with a higher number of HamiltoniansN−1>2 are expected to admit analogous constructions.
2
Classical Hamiltonian Mechanics
For simplicity, we restrict our attention to Euclidean space, M=Rn. Consider a smooth bounded domain
Ω ⊂ Rn. Let x denote the position vector in Rn, x1, ..., xn
a coordinate system in Ω, (∂1, ..., ∂n) the
associated tangent basis, TΩ the tangent space to Ω, andT∗
Ω the cotangent space to Ω. A bivector fieldJ ∈V2 TΩ with expression J =X i<j Jij∂i∧∂j, (11) where Jij ∈ C∞
(Ω), i, j = 1, ..., n, are the components of a skew-symmetric second order contravariant tensor, is called a Poisson operator provided that the Jacobi identity
JimJmjk+JjmJmki+JkmJmij= 0, i, j, k= 1, ..., n, (12)
is satisfied. Using the Poisson bracket{F, G}=FiJijGj, one can verify that equation (12) is equivalent to
(1e).
Given a smooth vector fieldX =Xi∂
i ∈TΩ, equations of motion are assigned as follows:
dx
dt =X. (13) The vector field X defines a Hamiltonian system whenever there exist a smooth function (Hamiltonian) H ∈C∞
(Ω) and a Poisson operatorJ such that Xi=JijH
j, i= 1, ..., n. (14)
The central result stemming from the Jacobi identity (12) is the so called Lie-Darboux theorem [4, 5, 6], which can be stated as follows:
Theorem 1. LetJ ∈V2
TΩdenote a smooth bivector field of rank2mon a smooth manifoldΩof dimension n = 2m+s, s≥0. Assume that the Jacobi identity (12) holds. Then, for every point x ∈Ω there exists
a neighborhood U ⊂Ωof xand local coordinates p1, ..., pm, q1, ..., qm, C1, ..., Cs∈C∞(U)with associated tangent basis ∂p1, ..., ∂pm, ∂q1, ..., ∂qm, ∂C1, ..., ∂Cssuch that
J =
m
X
i=1
∂qi∧∂pi in U. (15)
Equation (15) implies that, inU,
dpi dt =iXdp i=J dpi, dH = m X k=1 ∂pi ∂qk ∂H ∂pk − ∂pi ∂pk ∂H ∂qk =−∂H ∂qi, (16a) dqi dt =iXdq i=J dqi, dH = m X k=1 ∂qi ∂qk ∂H ∂pk − ∂qi ∂pk ∂H ∂qk =∂H ∂pi, (16b) dCj dt =iXdC j =J dCj, dH = m X k=1 ∂Cj ∂qk ∂H ∂pk − ∂Cj ∂pk ∂H ∂qk = 0, (16c)
where i = 1, ..., mand j = 1, ..., s. In this notationi represents the contraction operator, and the bivector field J acts on arbitrary 1-forms dF and dG according to J(dF) = JijF
j∂i and J(dG, dF) =JijGiFj.
Hence, the equations of motion (14) can be locally written in the canonical form (4). Notice that any differentiable function f C1, ..., Cs
of the coordinates Cj, j = 1, ..., s, is preserved by the Hamiltonian
system (14) regardless of the specific form of the HamiltonianH. Indeed,
J dCj = m X i=1 ∂Cj ∂pi∂qi− ∂Cj ∂qi∂pi = 0, j= 1, ..., s. (17)
The coordinatesCj,j= 1, ..., s, are called Casimir invariants.
Consider the 2m-dimensional submanifold ΩC ⊂Ω defined by ΩC=
x∈Ω|Cj=cj, j= 1, ..., s with cj ∈R, j = 1, ..., s. LetH
C =H p1, ..., pm, q1, ..., qm, c1, ..., cs be the value of the HamiltonianH on ΩC.
Then, in ΩC, the equations of motion (14) can be cast in the form
iXω=−dHC, (18)
where ω∈V2T∗
Ω is the closed 2-form with local expression ω=
m
X
i=1
dpi∧dqi. (19)
Equation (19) represents an alternative statement of the Lie-Darboux theorem. More precisely, one has:
Theorem 2. Given a smooth closed 2-form ω of rank 2m on a smooth manifold Ω of dimension n = 2m+s, s ≥ 0, for every point x ∈ Ω there exists a neighborhood U ⊂ Ω of x and local coordinates
p1, ..., pm, q1, ..., qm, C1, ..., Cs
∈C∞
(U) such that ω=
m
X
i=1
dpi∧dqi in U. (20)
The closure of the 2-form ω, which is called symplectic 2-form, is expressed by the conditiondω= 0. In the coordinate system x1, ..., xn
, the 2-formω has expression
ω=X
i<j
where ωij is a skew-symmetric second order covariant tensor,ωij =−ωji,i, j = 1, ..., n. Then, the closure
condition can be written as
dω= X i<j<k ∂ω ij ∂xk + ∂ωjk ∂xi + ∂ωki ∂xj dxi∧dxj∧dxk = 0. (22)
Using the closure ofω and recalling Cartan’s homotopy formula for the Lie derivative, equation (18) implies that ω is invariant along the vector fieldX,
LXω= 0. (23)
In addition to the conservation of the symplectic 2-formω, Hamilton’s canonical equation (4) imply that the phase space (Liouville) measure
dΠ =dp1∧...∧dpm∧dq1∧...∧dqm∧dC1∧...∧dCs, (24)
is preserved by the flow X, i.e.
LXdΠ = 0. (25) The phase space measuredΠ is the cornerstone of classical statistical mechanics.
To summarize, there are two dual geometrical formulations of classical Hamiltonian mechanics, one based on the Poisson operator J, the other centered on the symplectic 2-formω. The first formulation (14) has the merit that the role of the kernel of J, which is spanned by the Casimir invariants, is made explicit, while to define a Hamiltonian system by (18) one must require that X ⊥ker (ω) and that the Hamiltonian is independent of the Casimirs,∂H/∂Cj= 0,j= 1, ..., s. This is because a non-empty kernel inω results in
ambiguity in the definition ofX (equation (18) is symmetric with respect to transformationsX →X+Y, withY ∈ker (ω)). On the other hand, it should be noted that the proof of theorem 1 ultimately relies on the proof of theorem 2 to find local canonical pairs pi, qi
, i= 1, ..., m, once the Casimir invariants have been identified (see [4]). The duality of the formulations is reflected in the properties ofJ and ω. In particular, notice that the role of the Jacobi identity for the Poisson operatorJ is played by the closure of the symplecitc 2-form in the second formulation. This equivalence can be seen explicitly by considering the case in which the kernels ofJ andωare empty, i.e. n= 2m,s= 0. Since in this situation the skew-symmetric matrixJij
has full rank, it has an inverse. Comparing equations (14) and (18) one sees that the inverse is given by the skew-symmetric matrixωij. Then, multiplying each side of equation (12) byωiuωjvωkw and summing over
i,j, andk, one obtains:
ωiuωjvωkw JimJmjk+JjmJmki+JkmJmij = ∂ωwv ∂xu + ∂ωuw ∂xv + ∂ωvu ∂xw = 0, u, v, w= 1, ..., m, (26)
which is the closure condition (22). Conversely, multiplying each side of (26) byJiuJjvJkw and summing
overu,v, andw, one has:
JiuJjvJkw ∂ω wv ∂xu + ∂ωuw ∂xv + ∂ωvu ∂xw =− JiuJujk+JjvJvki+JkwJwij = 0, i, j, k= 1, ..., m, (27)
which is the Jacobi identity. Hence, the Jacobi identity and the closure of ω are mathematically equivalent. This fact will be the basic principle for the generalization of Hamiltonian mechanics presented in the following sections.
3
Generalized Hamiltonian Mechanics
As anticipated in the introduction, the discussion will be limited to the generalization of Hamiltonian me-chanics to a three dimensional phase space, i.e. N = 3 and n ≥ 3. Nevertheless, the same construction applies toN >3. We conjecture that a generalized Hamiltonian system should have the following properties.
1. Given two HamiltoniansG, H∈C∞
(Ω), the equations of motion are given by Xi=JijkGjHk =
X
j<k
Jijk(GjHk−GkHj), i= 1, ..., n. (28)
Here,Jijk ∈ C∞
(Ω) are the components of a skew-symmetric third order contravariant tensor. The corresponding trivector fieldJ∈V3
TΩ is given by
J= X
i<j<k
Jijk∂i∧∂j∧∂k. (29)
2. The trivector fieldJ(generalized Poisson operator) satisfies a generalized Jacobi identity. This identity expresses the closure of a smooth 3-formw(symplectic 3-form).
3. The symplectic 3-formwis Lie-invariant,
LXw= 0. (30)
4. Given a generalized Poisson operatorJwith associated symplectic 3-formwof rankn(the definition of rank will be given later), there exists a local coordinate system y1, ..., yn
such that system (28) takes the generalized canonical form
dyi dt = X j<k Bijk ∂G ∂yj ∂H ∂yk − ∂G ∂yk ∂H ∂yj , i= 1, ..., n. (31)
Here,Bijk ∈R,i, j, k= 1, ..., n, are constant components of a skew-symmetric third order contravariant
tensor B. Furthermore, the generalized Poisson operator and the symplectic 3-form w have local expressions J= X i<j<k Bijk∂ yi∧∂yj ∧∂yk, w= X i<j<k Aijkdyi∧dyj∧dyk, (32)
where ∂y1, ..., ∂ynare tangent vectors andAis the constant inverse ofBwith skew-symmetric
covari-ant componentsAijk ∈R, i, j, k = 1, ..., n(the definition of inverse and the conditions of invertibility
will be given later). When n = 3, Bijk = bǫijk for some constant b ∈ R, and equation (31) gives
Nambu’s canonical equations (5). 5. The local coordinate system y1, ..., yn
defines a phase space (Liouville) measure
dΞ =dy1∧...∧dyn, (33)
which is Lie invariant, i.e.
LXdΞ = 0. (34) In essence, the geometric construction outlined above can be thought of as a noncanonical formulation of Nambu mechanics. For this construction to be consistent, we must show that the analogous of the Lie-Darboux theorem discussed in the previous section applies to three dimensional phase spaces. The proof of this theorem, which is given in section 5, can be obtained once certain subtleties concerning the notion of inverse and rank for tensors like Jijk are settled. Then, the properties of the generalized formulation follow
automatically.
In the remainder of this section, we describe basic properties of the theory. First, notice that the gener-alized Poisson bracket (Nambu bracket) is defined as
{F, G, H}=JijkFiGjHk, ∀F, G, H ∈C
∞
(Ω). (35)
Observe that, while trilinearity, skew-symmetry, and Leibniz rule are satisfied by construction, the same is not true for the fundamental identity (8d). This aspect will be discussed in detail in section 4.
A Casimir invariantC is characterized by the property that it is a constant of the motion for any choice of HamiltoniansGandH, i.e.
dC
dt ={C, G, H}= 0, ∀G, H∈C ∞
(Ω). (36)
In terms of the generalized Poisson operator, the equation above implies that the 1-form dC belongs to ker (J),J(dC) = 0. In components,
JijkCk= 0, i, j= 1, ..., n. (37)
At this point a remark on null spaces is useful. SinceJ is a trivector field, the following scenario may arise:
J dC1, dC2 = 0, J dC1 6 = 0, J dC2 6 = 0. (38)
Neither C1 or C2 is a Casimir invariant, but they return 0 when combined. For example, consider the
following trivector field onR6,
J=∂1∧(∂2∧∂3+∂4∧∂5). (39)
Clearly,J dx6
= 0. However, we also haveJ dx2−dx4, dx3+dx5
= 0 withJ dx2−dx4
=∂1∧(∂5−∂3)
andJ dx3+dx5
=∂1∧(∂2+∂4). x1behaves as a Casimir invariant, but x2−x4andx3+x5 do not. We
shall refer to quantities like x2−x4 andx3+x5 as semi-Casimir invariants. If one of the Hamiltonians, say
G, happens to be a semi-Casimir invariant, it follows that the other semi-Casimir invariant is a constant of the motion independent ofH.
Suppose that there exists a local coordinate system p1, ..., pm, q1, ..., qm, r1, ..., rm, C1, ..., Cs
with n= 3m+sand tangent vectors ∂p1, ..., ∂∂m, ∂qi, ..., ∂qm, ∂r1, ..., ∂rm, ∂C1, ..., ∂Cssuch that
J=
m
X
i=1
∂pi∧∂qi∧∂ri. (40)
In these coordinates, the equations of motion take Nambu’s canonical form dpi dt = ∂G ∂qi ∂H ∂ri − ∂G ∂ri ∂H ∂qi, dqi dt = ∂G ∂ri ∂H ∂pi − ∂G ∂pi ∂H ∂ri, dri dt = ∂G ∂pi ∂H ∂qi − ∂G ∂qi ∂H ∂pi, dCj dt = 0, (41)
withi= 1, ..., mandj= 1, ..., s. Let ˜Jabc denote the (a, b, c) component ofJ with respect to the coordinate system p1, ..., pm, q1, ..., qm, r1, ..., rm, C1, ..., Cs
. From equation (40), it follows that ˜
Jabc=Eabc, a, b, c= 1, ..., n, (42) where
Eabc=
(
ǫabc ifσ(a, b, c) = (i, m+i,2m+i), i= 1, ..., m
0 otherwise. (43)
In this notation, σ is any rearrangement of the indexes a, b, c. In the next section it will be shown that skew-symmetry third order contravariant tensors with constant entries satisfy the Jacobi identity. Therefore, (40) is a generalized Poisson operator. Observe that when a generalized Poisson operator can be transformed in the form (40), its tensor representation can be written in terms of Levi-Civita symbols. In particular, when there is only one canonical triplet (m= 1), equation (43) reduces to
˜
Jabc=ǫabc, a, b, c= 1,2,3, (44) which is the generalized Poisson operator originally introduced by Nambu. Let {◦,◦,◦}c denote the Nambu bracket defined by a generalized Poisson operator with components given by (42). We shall refer to such bracket as canonical Nambu bracket. Given a generalized Poisson operatorJwith Nambu bracket{◦,◦,◦}, the
local coordinate system p1, ..., pm, q1, ..., qm, r1, ..., rm, C1, ..., Cs
transforms{◦,◦,◦}into{◦,◦,◦}c. Fixing one of the Hamiltonians, sayG, define the bracket
{◦,◦}G={◦, G,◦}c. (45) Let us show that, ifn= 3,{◦,◦}G is a Poisson bracket, and that the same is not true, in general, forn >3. The candidate Poisson operator is
JG = X a<c ˜ JabcGb∂a∧∂c= X a<c EabcG b∂a∧∂c. (46)
When n = 3, we have two cases, m = 0 andm = 1. The case m = 0 is trivial because the dimension of ker (J) iss=n= 3, implyingJ= 0. Ifm= 1, the expression above impliesJac
G =ǫabcGb. Then, the Jacobi
identity (12) reads as
JGamJGmcd +JGcmJGmda +JGdmJGmac
= ǫabmǫced+ǫcbmǫdea+ǫdbmǫaec GbGem
=ǫcad ǫabmG
am+ǫcbmGcm+ǫdbmGdmGb
=∂bǫcad ǫabmGam+ǫcbmGcm+ǫdbmGdmG−4ǫcad ǫabmGamb+ǫcbmGcmb+ǫdbmGdmbG
=∂b
ǫcad ǫabdG
ad+ǫabcGac+ǫcbaGca+ǫcbdGcd+ǫdbaGda+ǫdbcGdc
G
= 0, a, c, d= 1,2,3. (47) Hence, for n= 3, {◦,◦}G is a Poisson bracket. Next, suppose thatn >3. Following similar steps as above withJac
G =EabsGb, one obtains
Jam
G JGmcd +JGcmJGmda +JGdmJGmac =∂b EambEcde+EcmbEdae+EdmbEaceGGem, a, c, d= 1, ..., n.
(48) Due to the skew-symmetry of JG, the indexes a, c, d must be different from each other for the right-hand
side of the equation to be different from zero. In addition, at least one pair of these three indexes must belong to the same canonical triplet due to the terms Ecde, Edae, and Eace. If all three indexes belong to
the same triplet, the corresponding term of the Jacobi identity identically vanishes as in the previous case n= 3. Hence, suppose that aandc, dbelong to two different canonical tripletsm1 andm2. Then, equation
(48) reduces to
JGamJGmcd +JGcmJGmda +JGdmJGmac =EambEcdeGbGem= (GβGǫµ−GµGǫβ), a, c, d= 1, ..., n, (49)
where (a, µ, β) and (c, d, ǫ) are the indexes of the canonical tripletsm1 andm2. The quantity (49) does not
vanish in general. Notice that this result in agreement with the fact that the direct sum of canonical Nambu brackets with operator J=∂1∧∂2∧∂3+∂4∧∂5∧∂6+...+∂3L−2∧∂3L−1∧∂3L on R
3L does not satisfy
the fundamental identity (8d) when L >1 (see [9]). This is because, as mentioned in the introduction, the fundamental identity (8d) for the Nambu bracket{◦,◦,◦}reduces to the Jacobi identity (1e) for the bracket
{◦,◦}G. It is worth observing that, however, the right-hand side of (49) identically vanishes whenever the HamiltonianGis of the type
G= m X i=1 Gi pi, qi, ri, C1, ..., Cs , (50)
where theGi aremfunctions depending only on theith canonical triplet and the Casimir invariants.
Finally, a remark on the quantization of the theory. The definition of Hamiltonian system provided by the present construction is weaker than that resulting from the axioms (8). In particular, the fundamental identity is replaced by a weaker condition, the closure of the symplectic 3-form (see sections 4 and 5 for details). Therefore, we expect additional freedom in the derivation of a quantized bracket.
4
Symplecitc 3-Form and Jacobi identity
The purpose of the present section is to rigorously formulate the generalization of Hamiltonian mechanics introduced above in terms of a closed 3-form, the symplectic 3-form w, and to obtain the Jacobi identity for the generalized Poisson operatorJby using the closure ofw. Consider again a smooth bounded domain Ω⊂Rn. The core of theory lies in the assumption that, given two HamiltoniansG, H∈C∞
(Ω), a vector field X ∈TΩ defines a generalized Hamiltonian system provided that there exists a smooth 3-form w∈V3TΩ with the following properties,
iXw=−dH∧dG, (51)
and
dw= 0. (52) The 3-fromwcan be expressed as
w= X
i<j<k
wijkdxi∧dxj∧dxk, (53)
wherewijk∈C∞(Ω),i, j, k= 1, ..., n, are the components of a skew-symmetric third order covariant tensor.
Using (53), equations (51) becomes X j<k Xiw ijkdxj∧dxk = X j<k (HkGj−HjGk)dxj∧dxk, (54) or, Xiw ijk =HkGj−HjGk, i, j= 1, ..., n. (55)
Similarly, equation (53) gives dw=− X i<j<k<ℓ ∂wijk ∂xℓ + ∂wiℓj ∂xk + ∂wikℓ ∂xj + ∂wjℓk ∂xi dxi∧dxj∧dxk∧dxℓ= 0, (56) or, ∂wijk ∂xℓ + ∂wiℓj ∂xk + ∂wikℓ ∂xj + ∂wjℓk ∂xi = 0, i, j, k, ℓ= 1, ..., n. (57)
At this point, a notion of inverse for third order tensors of the typewijk is needed. Suppose that there exists
a skew-symmetric third order contravariant tensorJwith components Jjkℓ such that
X
j<k
wijkJjkℓ =δℓi, i, ℓ= 1, ..., n. (58)
Then, we say that J is the inverse of w. Multiplying both sides of equation (55) by Jjkℓ, summing over
repeated indexes, and using (58), one obtains Xℓ=X
j<k
Jjkℓ(HkGj−HjGk) =JℓjkGjHk, ℓ= 1, ..., n. (59)
This shows that system (51) leads to the set of equations (28) if the inverse J exists. Let us derive the conditions for the existence of the inverse J. First, observe that tensors like wijk can be thought of as
matrices that have rows, columns, and ‘depth’. For example, the Levi-Civita symbolǫijk can be represented
as 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 −1 0 1 , 0 0 −1 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 , 0 1 0 −1 0 0 0 0 0 3 . (60)
Here, each matrix is numbered by the index i (the depth of the matrix), while rows and columns by the indexes j and k. To the tensorǫijk we can also assign in a unique manner a conventional matrix having n
rows andn2 columns as follows:
0 0 0 0 0 1 0 −1 0 0 0 −1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 −1 0 0 0 0 0 . (61)
Here, the rows are numbered by the index i, while columns by the pairj, k. The components of this n×n2
matrix will be denoted as ǫi(jk). Notice that the same construction applies to arbitrary tensors Aijk, the
associated n×n2 matrix being A
i(jk). Non-square matrices do not have a classical inverse. However, they
may possess a left or right-inverse [21]. In particular, given a n×n2 matrix A with components A
i(jk) of
rankn, the matrixAhas a right inverse, i.e. a matrixB with componentsB(jk)ℓsuch thatAB = 2I
n, where
In is then-dimensional identity matrix [21] (the factor 2 beforeIn is useful when handling skew-symmetric
tensors). As an example, consider the matrix ǫi(jk) above. Evidently, its rank isn= 3 because three of the
columns are linearly independent vectors in R3. Hence,ǫi(jk) has a right-inverse. The components of the
right-inverse are given by B(jk)ℓ=ǫ(jk)ℓbecause
ǫijkǫjkℓ= 2
X
j<k
ǫijkǫjkℓ= 2δiℓ, i, ℓ= 1,2,3. (62)
Therefore, the notion of invertibility (58) for the tensorwijk is equivalent to the existence of a right-inverse
for then×n2 matrixw
i(jk). The right-inverseJ(jk)ℓexists whenwi(jk)has rankn. In such casewi(jk)is the
left-inverse ofJ(jk)ℓ.
Next, we move to the Jacobi identity. In the present construction, the Jacobi identity is nothing but the closure condition (57) for the symplectic 3-form w expressed in terms of the inverse J. If the Jacobi identity is satisfied, we say thatJis a generalized Poisson operator. Although there is no simple way to write (57) in terms of the componentsJijk (except directly substituting the expressions of the componentswijkas
functions of Jijk), a necessary condition for equation (57) to hold where the components wijk are partially
removed can be derived as follows. Multiplying each side of (57) by−JαijJβkℓ and summing over repeated
indexes, we have: 0 =−JαijJβkℓ ∂w ijk ∂xℓ + ∂wiℓj ∂xk + ∂wikℓ ∂xj + ∂wjℓk ∂xi
=wijkJβkℓJαijℓ +wiℓjJβkℓJαijk +wikℓJαijJβkℓj +wjℓkJαijJβkℓi
=2wijkJβkℓJαijℓ + 2wikℓJαijJβkℓj
=2wijk JβkℓJαijℓ +JαiℓJβjkℓ =2X i<j wijk
2JβkℓJαijℓ +JαiℓJβjkℓ −JαjℓJβikℓ
=4 X
i<j<k
wijk
JβkℓJαijℓ +JαiℓJβjkℓ +JαjℓJβkiℓ +JβjℓJαkiℓ +JαkℓJℓβij+JβiℓJαjkℓ ,
(63)
whereα, β= 1, ..., n. Equation (63) is a necessary condition that must be satisfied for the symplectic 3-form w to be closed. Observe that any invertible skew-symmetric third order tensor Jijk with constant entries
automatically satisfies (63), and therefore equation (57) as well. Hence, the generalization of Hamiltonian mechanics following from the present construction is weaker than that resulting from enforcing the axioms (8), since skew-symmetric third order tensors with constant entries do not satisfy the fundamental identity (8d) in general. Equation (63) becomes a sufficient condition when wandJsatisfy the additional property
wijkJkℓµ=f δiℓδjµ−δ µ iδℓj , i, j, ℓ, µ= 1, ..., n, f ∈C∞ (Ω). (64)
Indeed, using (64) one can recover the closure condition (57) by multiplying each side of (63) bywστ αwπρβ
and summing on repeated indexes. Notice that the property (64) is satisfied by the Levi-Civita symbol. Indeed, ǫijkǫkℓµ=δℓiδ µ j −δ µ iδℓj, i, j, ℓ, µ= 1, ...,3. (65)
When (64) holds, the right hand side of equation (63) reduces to 2fδℓ iδ β j −δ β iδjℓ Jαijℓ + 2f δℓ jδkα−δjαδℓk Jβjkℓ = 4fJαℓβℓ +Jβℓαℓ = 0, α, β= 1, ..., n, (66)
This result implies that a smooth invertible 3-formwsatisfying (64) is closed and therefore defines a symplectic 3-form.
A final remark concerns how to identify a generalized Hamiltonian system from a given set of equations X ∈TΩ. While in classical Hamiltonian mechanics the Hamiltonian nature of a dynamical system can be verified by checking the Poisson operator axioms, and, in particular, the Jacobi identity (12), the procedure for the generalized case requires the determination of the symplectic 3-formw. Once the symplectic 3-form w and the Hamiltonians G and H such that (51) holds have been identified, one must check that w is a closed differential form, i.e. that dw = 0. Notice that, in the presence of Casimir invariants, one may need to reduce the dynamics to a Casimir leaf in order to find the Hamiltonian structure.
5
Lie-Darboux and Liouville Theorems in Generalized Phase Space
This section is dedicated to the proof of the Lie-Darboux theorem in the generalized Hamiltonian framework with a three dimensional phase spaceN = 3,n≥3. A direct consequence of the theorem is the local existence of an invariant (Liouville) measure. We have the following:
Theorem 3. Let w∈V3
TΩbe a smooth closed 3-form on a smooth manifold Ωof dimension n. Letwijk,
i, j, k= 1, ..., ndenote the components ofw with respect to a coordinate system x1, ..., xn onΩ, w= X
i<j<k
wijkdxi∧dxj∧dxk. (67)
Suppose that the n×n2 matrixw
i(jk) has rankn. Then, for every point x0 ∈Ω there exist a neighborhood U ⊂Ωof x0 and a local smooth coordinate system y1, ..., ynsuch that
w= X
i<j<k
Aijkdyi∧dyj∧dyk in U, (68)
where Aijk = wijk(x0), i, j, k = 1, ..., n is a skew-symmetric third order covariant tensor with constant entries.
Proof. We follow the steps of the classical proof of the Lie-Darboux theorem based on Moser’s method [6, 22]. Letw0 denote the constant form onRn,
w0=
X
i<j<k
Aijkdyi∧dyj∧dyk, (69)
with Aijk,i, j, k = 1, ..., n, real constants. Consider a family of vector fieldsXt∈TΩ, 0≤t≤1, defined in
a neighborhoodU of a point x0∈Ω that generates a one-parameter group of diffeomorphismsgtas follows, d
dtgt(x0) =Xt(gt(x0)), g0(x0) =x0. (70) Next, define the family of 3-forms
We wish to obtainXt, and thusgt, so that the following property is satisfied
g∗
twt=w0. (72)
Here g∗
twtdenotes the pullback ofwt bygt. Equation (72) implies that
d dtg ∗ twt=g ∗ t dw t dt +diXtwt = 0, (73)
where we used the fact that wt is a closed differential form. By the Poincar´e lemma, in a sufficiently
small neighborhood W of x0, the closed differential form dwt/dt is exact, i.e. there exists a 2-form σt = P
j<kσtjkdxj∧dxk such that
dwt
dt =dσt in W. (74) Hence, equation (73) can be solved inW by finding a vector fieldXt satisfying
σt=−iXtwt. (75)
In components, equation (75) is equivalent to
σtjk =−Xtiwtijk, j, k= 1, ..., n. (76)
Next, observe that by hypothesis the n×n2 matrixw
i(jk)has rank n. Similarly, setting the components of
w0 in the variables y1, ..., ynto be given by the constant tensorAijk=wijk(x0), then×n2 matrixAi(jk) has rankn. Furthermore, at the point x0 we may assumew(x0) =w0(x0) because the matriceswijk and Aijk coincide there. Then, for 0≤t≤1,
wt(x0) =w0(x0). (77) This implies that then×n2matrixw
ti(jk)(x0) has ranknatx0. By continuity of the tensorwtijk it follows that there exists a neighborhoodV ofx0where the rank of then×n2matrixwti(jk)isn. DefineU =W∩V. Then, the matrix wti(jk) has an inverseJ
(jk)ℓ
t giving the solution of equation (76) inU as
Xℓ t =−J
jkℓ
t σtjk, ℓ= 1, ..., n. (78)
The vector field (78) gives the desired local change of coordinates.
Theorem 3 has a number of consequences. First, any generalized Hamiltonian system possesses an invari-ant (Liouville) measure given by the phase space volume
dΞ =dy1∧...∧dyn. (79) To see this observe that, from equation (68), the equations of motion (51) take the local form
Aijkdy i dt = ∂G ∂yj ∂H ∂yk − ∂G ∂yk ∂H ∂yj, i= 1, ..., n. (80)
Multiplying by the inverseBjkℓ=Jjkℓ(x
0) ofAijk, equation (80) becomes
dyℓ dt =B ℓjk∂G ∂yj ∂H ∂yk, ℓ= 1, ..., n. (81) It follows that, LXdΞ = ∂ ∂yi dyi dt dΞ =Bijk ∂2G ∂yi∂yj ∂H ∂yk + ∂G ∂yk ∂2H ∂yi∂yj dΞ = 0. (82)
Notice that, in addition todΞ, the closure condition implies that the symplectic 3-formwis Lie-invariant as well,
LXw=diXw=−d(dH∧dG) = 0. (83)
Therefore, in the generalized Hamiltonian framework developed here both the symplectic form w and the Liouville measuredΞ are preserved as in the classical formulation. However, a difference exists with respect to the existence of canonical variables. Indeed, while in the classical proof of the Lie-Darboux theorem the skew symmetry of the tensor ωij associated with the symplectic 2-formω is sufficient to ensure that there
exists a linear change of basis transforming the skew-symmetric matrixωij(x0) into block diagonal form at any x0 ∈Ω, an analogous result is not available for third order tensors likewijk(x0). For this reason, one cannot guarantee the local invertibility of the tensor ˜wtijk associated with the 3-form ˜w= ˜w0+t(w−w˜0),
with ˜ w= m X i=1 dpi∧dqi∧dri. (84)
Hence, the proof of the theorem breaks down, i.e. local canonical triplets pi, qi, ri
, i = 1, ..., m, are not available in general. Nevertheless, whenevern= 3mwithman integer, we can say that canonical triplets of variables locally exist in the neighborhood of all pointsx0∈Ω such thatwijk(x0) can be transformed by a linear change of basis into the generalized Levi-Civita symbol Eijk (the covariant version of the tensor (43)
introduced in section 3).
6
Concluding Remarks
In this paper, we have formulated a generalization of classical Hamiltonian mechanics to a three dimensional phase space. The generalized theory relies on a symplectic 3-formwand a pair of Hamiltonian functionsG, H. Together with invertibility, the closure of the symplectic 3-formwensures that there exist a local coordinate system y1, ..., yn
such that the components ofw are constants, and the volume formdΞ =dy1∧...∧dyn
is Lie-invariant with respect to the generalized Hamiltonian flow. The invariant volume element can be used to define the phase space measure of statistical mechanics. When the components of w define an n×n2
matrix of rank n, the form w is invertible, with inverse given by the generalized Poisson operator J. In analogy with the classical theory, the Jacobi identity is identified with the closure of the symplectic 3-form wexpressed in terms ofJ. As a consequence, the Jacobi identity is a weaker condition than the fundamental identity, and any skew-symmetric third order contravariant tensor with constant entries defines a generalized Poisson operator. Skew-symmetric third order tensors also exhibit a richer kernel structure. In particular, semi-Casimir invariants produce conservation laws when they appear together in the generalized Poisson bracket.
There are aspects of the theory that deserve further investigation. One one hand it is desirable to identify the mathematical conditions for the existence of a linear change of basis transforming the constant skew-symmetric third order covariant tensor wijk(x0), x0 ∈ Ω, into the generalized Levi-Civita symbol Eijk. Such conditions will provide the sufficient conditions for the local existence of canonical triplets pi, qi, ri
, i= 1, ..., m. On the other hand, it would be useful to identify systems that are Hamiltonian in the generalized sense, but that do not possess a classical Hamiltonian structure. Such systems would give the theory a physical foundation. Finally, the quantization of the generalized Poisson bracket resulting from the present construction has not been investigated.
Acknowledgment
The research of NS was partially supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant No. 17H01177 and by the Osaka City University Advanced Mathematical Institute (MEXT Joint Usage/Research Center on Mathematics and Theoretical Physics JPMXP0619217849).
Data Availability
The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
References
[1] P.J. Morrison and J.M. Greene, Noncanonical Hamiltonian density formulation of hydrodynamics and ideal magnetohydrodynamics, Phys. Rev. Lett.45, pp. 790–794 (1980).
[2] P.J. Morrison, Poisson brackets for fluids and plasmas, in: M. Tabor, Y. Treve (Eds.), Mathematical Methods in Hydrodynamics and Integrability in Dynamical Systems, in: American Institute of Physics Conference Proceedings88, American Institute of Physics, New York, pp. 13–46 (1982).
[3] P.J. Olver, Applications of Lie Groups to Differential Equations, 2nd ed., Springer-Verlag, New York (1993).
[4] R. Littlejohn, Singular Poisson tensors, in: M. Tabor, Y. Treve (Eds.), Mathematical Methods in Hydrodynamics and Integrability in Dynamical Systems, in: American Institute of Physics Conference Proceedings,88, American Institute of Physics, New York, pp. 47–66 (1982).
[5] V.I. Arnold,Mathematical Methods of Classical Mechanics, second ed., Springer, New York, pp. 230–232 (1989).
[6] M. de Le´on,Methods of Differential Geometry in Analytical Mechanics, Elsevier, New York, pp. 250–253 (1989).
[7] Y. Nambu,Generalized Hamiltonian Dynamics, Phys. Rev. D7, 8 (1973).
[8] P. M. Ho and Y. Matsuo, The Nambu bracket and M-theory, Prog. Theor. Exp. Phys.2016, 06A104 (2016).
[9] L. Takhtajan, On Foundation of the Generalized Nambu Mechanics, Commun. Math. Phys. 160, pp. 295-315 (1994).
[10] R. Chatterjee and L. Takhtajan,Aspects of classical and quantum Nambu mechanics, Lett. Math. Phys. 37, pp. 475-482 (1996).
[11] H. Awata, M. Li, D. Minic, and T. Yoneya, On the quantization of Nambu brackets, J. High Energy Phys.2, 13 (2001).
[12] G. Dito, M. Flato, D. Sternheimer, and L. Takhtajan,Deformation Quantization and Nambu Mechanics, Commun. Math. Phys.183, pp. 1-22 (1997).
[13] F. Bayen and M. Flato,Remarks converning Nambu’s generalized mechanics, Phys. Rev. D11, 10 (1975). [14] T. Yoneya, Generalized Hamilton-Jacobi theory of Nambu Mechanics, Prog. Theor. Exp. Phys.2017,
023A01 (2017).
[15] A. Horikoshi and Y. Kawamura, Hidden Nambu mechanics: A variant formulation of Hamiltonian systems, Prog. Theor. Exp. Phys.2013, 073A01 (2013).
[16] A. Horikoshi, Hidden Nambu mechanics: Quantum/semiclassical dynamics, Prog. Theor. Exp. Phys. 2019, 123A02 (2019).
[18] C. C. Moore,Ergodic theorem, ergodic theory, and statistical mechanics, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 112, 7, pp. 1907-1911 (2015).
[19] R. Blender and G. Badin, Hydrodynamic Nambu brackets derived by geometric constraints, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor.48, 105501 (2015).
[20] P. N´evir and R. Blender, A Nambu representation of incompressible hydrodynamics using helicity and enstrophy, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen.26, L1189-L1193 (1993).
[21] C. Radhakrishna Rao and Sujit Kumar Mitra, Generalized inverse of a matrix and its applications, Proceedings of the Sixth Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability, Volume 1: Theory of Statistics, pp. 601-620, University of California Press, Berkeley, Calif. (1972).
