ecterrab

14837 Reputation

24 Badges

21 years, 88 days

MaplePrimes Activity


These are Posts that have been published by ecterrab


Vectors in Spherical Coordinates using Tensor Notation

Edgardo S. Cheb-Terrab1 and Pascal Szriftgiser2

(2) Laboratoire PhLAM, UMR CNRS 8523, Université de Lille, F-59655, France

(1) Maplesoft

 

The following is a topic that appears frequently in formulations: given a 3D vector in spherical (or any curvilinear) coordinates, how do you represent and relate, in simple terms, the vector and the corresponding vectorial operations Gradient, Divergence, Curl and Laplacian using tensor notation?

 

The core of the answer is in the relation between the - say physical - vector components and the more abstract tensor covariant and contravariant components. Focusing the case of a transformation from Cartesian to spherical coordinates, the presentation below starts establishing that relationship between 3D vector and tensor components in Sec.I. In Sec.II, we verify the transformation formulas for covariant and contravariant components on the computer using TransformCoordinates. In Sec.III, those tensor transformation formulas are used to derive the vectorial form of the Gradient in spherical coordinates. In Sec.IV, we switch to using full tensor notation, a curvilinear metric and covariant derivatives to derive the 3D vector analysis traditional formulas in spherical coordinates for the Divergence, Curl, Gradient and Laplacian. On the way, some useful technics, like changing variables in 3D vectorial expressions, differential operators, using Jacobians, and shortcut notations are shown.

 

The computation below is reproducible in Maple 2020 using the Maplesoft Physics Updates v.640 or newer.

 

Start setting the spacetime to be 3-dimensional, Euclidean, and use Cartesian coordinates

> 

with(Physics); with(Vectors)

> 

Setup(dimension = 3, coordinates = cartesian, g_ = `+`, spacetimeindices = lowercaselatin)

`The dimension and signature of the tensor space are set to `[3, `+ + +`]

 

`Default differentiation variables for d_, D_ and dAlembertian are:`*{X = (x, y, z)}

 

`Systems of spacetime coordinates are:`*{X = (x, y, z)}

 

_______________________________________________________

 

`The Euclidean metric in coordinates `*[x, y, z]

 

_______________________________________________________

 

Physics:-g_[mu, nu] = Matrix(%id = 18446744078312229334)

 

(`Defined Pauli sigma matrices (Psigma): `*sigma[1]*`, `*sigma[2]*`, `)*sigma[3]

 

__________________________________________________

 

_______________________________________________________

(1)

I. The line element in spherical coordinates and the scale-factors

 

 

In vector calculus, at the root of everything there is the line element `#mover(mi("dr"),mo("→"))`, which in Cartesian coordinates has the simple form

> 

dr_ = _i*dx+_j*dy+_k*dz

dr_ = _i*dx+_j*dy+_k*dz

(1.1)

To compute the line element  `#mover(mi("dr"),mo("→"))` in spherical coordinates, the starting point is the transformation

> 

tr := `~`[`=`]([X], ChangeCoordinates([X], spherical))

[x = r*sin(theta)*cos(phi), y = r*sin(theta)*sin(phi), z = r*cos(theta)]

(1.2)
> 

Coordinates(S = [r, theta, phi])

`Systems of spacetime coordinates are:`*{S = (r, theta, phi), X = (x, y, z)}

(1.3)

Since in (dr_ = _i*dx+_j*dy+_k*dz)*[dx, dy, dz] are just symbols with no relationship to "[x,y,z],"start transforming these differentials using the chain rule, computing the Jacobian of the transformation (1.2). In this Jacobian J, the first line is "[(∂x)/(∂r)dr", "(∂x)/(∂theta)"`dθ`, "(∂x)/(∂phi)dphi]"

> 

J := VectorCalculus:-Jacobian(map(rhs, [x = r*sin(theta)*cos(phi), y = r*sin(theta)*sin(phi), z = r*cos(theta)]), [S])

 

So in matrix notation,

> 

Vector([dx, dy, dz]) = J.Vector([dr, dtheta, dphi])

Vector[column](%id = 18446744078518652550) = Vector[column](%id = 18446744078518652790)

(1.4)

To complete the computation of  `#mover(mi("dr"),mo("→"))` in spherical coordinates we can now use ChangeBasis , provided that next we substitute (1.4) in the result, expressing the abstract objects [dx, dy, dz] in terms of [dr, `dθ`, `dφ`].

 

In two steps:

> 

lhs(dr_ = _i*dx+_j*dy+_k*dz) = ChangeBasis(rhs(dr_ = _i*dx+_j*dy+_k*dz), spherical)

dr_ = (dx*sin(theta)*cos(phi)+dy*sin(theta)*sin(phi)+dz*cos(theta))*_r+(dx*cos(phi)*cos(theta)+dy*sin(phi)*cos(theta)-dz*sin(theta))*_theta+(cos(phi)*dy-sin(phi)*dx)*_phi

(1.5)

The line element

> 

"simplify(subs(convert(lhs(?) =~ rhs(?),set),dr_ = (dx*sin(theta)*cos(phi)+dy*sin(theta)*sin(phi)+dz*cos(theta))*_r+(dx*cos(phi)*cos(theta)+dy*sin(phi)*cos(theta)-dz*sin(theta))*_theta+(cos(phi)*dy-sin(phi)*dx)*_phi))"

dr_ = _phi*dphi*r*sin(theta)+_theta*dtheta*r+_r*dr

(1.6)

This result is important: it gives us the so-called scale factors, the key that connect 3D vectors with the related covariant and contravariant tensors in curvilinear coordinates. The scale factors are computed from (1.6) by taking the scalar product with each of the unit vectors [`#mover(mi("r"),mo("∧"))`, `#mover(mi("θ",fontstyle = "normal"),mo("∧"))`, `#mover(mi("φ",fontstyle = "normal"),mo("∧"))`], then taking the coefficients of the differentials [dr, `dθ`, `dφ`] (just substitute them by the number 1)

> 

h := subs(`~`[`=`]([dr, `dθ`, `dφ`], 1), [seq(rhs(dr_ = _phi*dphi*r*sin(theta)+_theta*dtheta*r+_r*dr).q, q = [`#mover(mi("r"),mo("∧"))`, `#mover(mi("θ",fontstyle = "normal"),mo("∧"))`, `#mover(mi("φ",fontstyle = "normal"),mo("∧"))`])])

[1, r, r*sin(theta)]

(1.7)

The scale factors are relevant because the components of the 3D vector and the corresponding tensor are not the same in curvilinear coordinates. For instance, representing the differential of the coordinates as the tensor dS^j = [dr, `dθ`, `dφ`], we see that corresponding vector, the line element in spherical coordinates `#mover(mi("dS"),mo("→"))`, is not  constructed by directly equating its components to the components of dS^j = [dr, `dθ`, `dφ`], so  

 

 `#mover(mi("dS"),mo("&rarr;"))` <> `d&phi;`*`#mover(mi("&phi;",fontstyle = "normal"),mo("&and;"))`+dr*`#mover(mi("r"),mo("&and;"))`+`d&theta;`*`#mover(mi("&theta;",fontstyle = "normal"),mo("&and;"))` 

 

The vector `#mover(mi("dS"),mo("&rarr;"))` is constructed multiplying these contravariant components [dr, `d&theta;`, `d&phi;`] by the scaling factors, as

 

 `#mover(mi("dS"),mo("&rarr;"))` = `d&phi;`*`h__&phi;`*`#mover(mi("&phi;",fontstyle = "normal"),mo("&and;"))`+dr*h__r*`#mover(mi("r"),mo("&and;"))`+`d&theta;`*`h__&theta;`*`#mover(mi("&theta;",fontstyle = "normal"),mo("&and;"))` 

 

This rule applies in general. The vectorial components of a 3D vector in an orthogonal system (curvilinear or not) are always expressed in terms of the contravariant components A^j the same way we did in the line above with the line element, using the scale-factors h__j, so that

 

 `#mover(mi("A"),mo("&rarr;"))` = Sum(h[j]*A^j*`#mover(mi("\`e__j\`"),mo("&circ;"))`, j = 1 .. 3)

 

where on the right-hand side we see the contravariant components "A[]^(j)" and the scale-factors h[j]. Because the system is orthogonal, each vector component `#msub(mi("A",fontstyle = "normal"),mfenced(mi("j")))`satisfies

A__j = h[j]*A[`~j`]

 

The scale-factors h[j] do not constitute a tensor, so on the right-hand side we do not sum over j.  Also, from

 

LinearAlgebra[Norm](`#mover(mi("A"),mo("&rarr;"))`) = A[j]*A[`~j`]

it follows that,

A__j = A__j/h__j

where on the right-hand side we now have the covariant tensor components A__j.

 

• 

This relationship between the components of a 3D vector and the contravariant and covariant components of a tensor representing the vector is key to translate vector-component to corresponding tensor-component formulas.

 

II. Transformation of contravariant and covariant tensors

 

 

Define here two representations for one and the same tensor: A__c will represent A in Cartesian coordinates, while A__s will represent A in spherical coordinates.

> 

Define(A__c[j], A__s[j])

`Defined objects with tensor properties`

 

{A__c[j], A__s[j], Physics:-Dgamma[a], Physics:-Psigma[a], Physics:-d_[a], Physics:-g_[a, b], Physics:-LeviCivita[a, b, c], Physics:-SpaceTimeVector[a](S), Physics:-SpaceTimeVector[a](X)}

(2.1)

Transformation rule for a contravariant tensor

 

We know, by definition, that the transformation rule for the components of a contravariant tensor is `#mrow(msup(mi("A"),mi("&mu;",fontstyle = "normal")),mo("&ApplyFunction;"),mfenced(mi("y")),mo("&equals;"),mfrac(mrow(mo("&PartialD;"),msup(mi("y"),mi("&mu;",fontstyle = "normal"))),mrow(mo("&PartialD;"),msup(mi("x"),mi("&nu;",fontstyle = "normal"))),linethickness = "1"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),msup(mi("A"),mi("&nu;",fontstyle = "normal")),mfenced(mi("x")))`, that is the same as the rule for the differential of the coordinates. Then, the transformation rule from "`A__c`[]^(j)" to "`A__s`[]^(j)"computed using TransformCoordinates should give the same relation (1.4). The application of the command, however, requires attention, because, as in (1.4), we want the Cartesian (not the spherical) components isolated. That is like performing a reversed transformation. So we will use

 

"TensorArray(`A__c`[]^(j))=TransformCoordinates(tr,`A__s`[]^(j),[X],[S])"

where on the left-hand side we get, isolated, the three components of A in Cartesian coordinates, and on the right-hand side we transform the spherical components "`A__c`[]^(j)", from spherical S = (r, theta, phi) (4th argument) to Cartesian X = (x, y, z) (3rd argument), which according to the 5th bullet of TransformCoordinates  will result in a transformation expressed in terms of the old coordinates (here the spherical [S]). Expand things to make the comparison with (1.4) possible by eye

 

> 

Vector[column](TensorArray(A__c[`~j`])) = TransformCoordinates(tr, A__s[`~j`], [X], [S], simplifier = expand)

Vector[column](%id = 18446744078459463070) = Vector[column](%id = 18446744078459463550)

(2.2)

We see that the transformation rule for a contravariant vector "`A__c`[]^(j)"is, indeed, as the transformation (1.4) for the differential of the coordinates.

Transformation rule for a covariant tensor

 

For the transformation rule for the components of a covariant tensor A__c[j], we know, by definition, that it is `#mrow(msub(mi("A"),mi("&mu;",fontstyle = "normal")),mo("&ApplyFunction;"),mfenced(mi("y")),mo("&equals;"),mfrac(mrow(mo("&PartialD;"),msup(mi("x"),mi("&nu;",fontstyle = "normal"))),mrow(mo("&PartialD;"),msup(mi("y"),mi("&mu;",fontstyle = "normal"))),linethickness = "1"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),msub(mi("A"),mi("&nu;",fontstyle = "normal")),mfenced(mi("x")))`, so the same transformation rule for the gradient [`&PartialD;`[x], `&PartialD;`[y], `&PartialD;`[z]], where `&PartialD;`[x] = (proc (u) options operator, arrow; diff(u, x) end proc) and so on. We can experiment this by directly changing variables in the differential operators [`&PartialD;`[x], `&PartialD;`[y], `&PartialD;`[z]], for example

> 

d_[x] = PDEtools:-dchange(tr, proc (u) options operator, arrow; diff(u, x) end proc, simplify)

Physics:-d_[x] = (proc (u) options operator, arrow; ((-r*cos(theta)^2+r)*cos(phi)*(diff(u, r))+sin(theta)*cos(phi)*cos(theta)*(diff(u, theta))-(diff(u, phi))*sin(phi))/(r*sin(theta)) end proc)

(2.3)

This result, and the equivalent ones replacing x by y or z in the input above can be computed in one go, in matricial and simplified form, using the Jacobian of the transformation computed in . We need to take the transpose of the inverse of J (because now we are transforming the components of the gradient   [`&PartialD;`[x], `&PartialD;`[y], `&PartialD;`[z]])

> 

H := simplify(LinearAlgebra:-Transpose(1/J))

> 

Vector([d_[x], d_[y], d_[z]]) = H.Vector([d_[r], d_[theta], d_[phi]])

Vector[column](%id = 18446744078518933014) = Vector[column](%id = 18446744078518933254)

(2.4)

The corresponding transformation equations relating the tensors A__c and A__s in Cartesian and spherical coordinates is computed with TransformCoordinates  as in (2.2), just lowering the indices on the left and right hand sides (i.e., remove the tilde ~)

> 

Vector[column](TensorArray(A__c[j])) = TransformCoordinates(tr, A__s[j], [X], [r, theta, phi], simplifier = expand)

Vector[column](%id = 18446744078557373854) = Vector[column](%id = 18446744078557374334)

(2.5)

We see that the transformation rule for a covariant vector A__c[j] is, indeed, as the transformation rule (2.4) for the gradient.

 

To the side: once it is understood how to compute these transformation rules, we can have the inverse of (2.5) as follows

> 

Vector[column](TensorArray(A__s[j])) = TransformCoordinates(tr, A__c[j], [S], [X], simplifier = expand)

Vector[column](%id = 18446744078557355894) = Vector[column](%id = 18446744078557348198)

(2.6)

III. Deriving the transformation rule for the Gradient using TransformCoordinates

 

 

Turn ON the CompactDisplay  notation for derivatives, so that the differentiation variable is displayed as an index:

> 

ON


The gradient of a function f in Cartesian coordinates and spherical coordinates is respectively given by

> 

(%Nabla = Nabla)(f(X))

%Nabla(f(X)) = (diff(f(X), x))*_i+(diff(f(X), y))*_j+(diff(f(X), z))*_k

(3.1)
> 

(%Nabla = Nabla)(f(S))

%Nabla(f(S)) = (diff(f(S), r))*_r+(diff(f(S), theta))*_theta/r+(diff(f(S), phi))*_phi/(r*sin(theta))

(3.2)

What we want now is to depart from (3.1) in Cartesian coordinates and obtain (3.2) in spherical coordinates using the transformation rule for a covariant tensor computed with TransformCoordinates in (2.5). (An equivalent derivation, simpler and with less steps is done in Sec. IV.)

 

Start changing the vector basis in the gradient (3.1)

> 

lhs(%Nabla(f(X)) = (diff(f(X), x))*_i+(diff(f(X), y))*_j+(diff(f(X), z))*_k) = ChangeBasis(rhs(%Nabla(f(X)) = (diff(f(X), x))*_i+(diff(f(X), y))*_j+(diff(f(X), z))*_k), spherical)

%Nabla(f(X)) = ((diff(f(X), x))*sin(theta)*cos(phi)+(diff(f(X), y))*sin(theta)*sin(phi)+(diff(f(X), z))*cos(theta))*_r+((diff(f(X), x))*cos(phi)*cos(theta)+(diff(f(X), y))*sin(phi)*cos(theta)-(diff(f(X), z))*sin(theta))*_theta+(-(diff(f(X), x))*sin(phi)+cos(phi)*(diff(f(X), y)))*_phi

(3.3)

By eye, we see that in this result the coefficients of [`#mover(mi("r"),mo("&and;"))`, `#mover(mi("&theta;",fontstyle = "normal"),mo("&and;"))`, `#mover(mi("&phi;",fontstyle = "normal"),mo("&and;"))`] are the three lines in the right-hand side of (2.6) after replacing the covariant components A__j by the derivatives of f with respect to the jth coordinate, here displayed using indexed notation due to using CompactDisplay

> 

`~`[`=`]([A__s[1], A__s[2], A__s[3]], [diff(f(S), r), diff(f(S), theta), diff(f(S), phi)])

[A__s[1] = Physics:-Vectors:-diff(f(S), r), A__s[2] = Physics:-Vectors:-diff(f(S), theta), A__s[3] = Physics:-Vectors:-diff(f(S), phi)]

(3.4)
> 

`~`[`=`]([A__c[1], A__c[2], A__c[3]], [diff(f(X), x), diff(f(X), y), diff(f(X), z)])

[A__c[1] = Physics:-Vectors:-diff(f(X), x), A__c[2] = Physics:-Vectors:-diff(f(X), y), A__c[3] = Physics:-Vectors:-diff(f(X), z)]

(3.5)

So since (2.5) is the inverse of (2.6), replace A by ∂ f in (2.5), the formula computed using TransformCoordinates, then insert the result in (3.3) to relate the gradient in Cartesian and spherical coordinates. We expect to arrive at the formula for the gradient in spherical coordinates (3.2) .

> 

"subs([A__s[1] = Physics:-Vectors:-diff(f(S),r), A__s[2] = Physics:-Vectors:-diff(f(S),theta), A__s[3] = Physics:-Vectors:-diff(f(S),phi)],[A__c[1] = Physics:-Vectors:-diff(f(X),x), A__c[2] = Physics:-Vectors:-diff(f(X),y), A__c[3] = Physics:-Vectors:-diff(f(X),z)],?)"

Vector[column](%id = 18446744078344866862) = Vector[column](%id = 18446744078344866742)

(3.6)
> 

"subs(convert(lhs(?) =~ rhs(?),set),%Nabla(f(X)) = (diff(f(X),x)*sin(theta)*cos(phi)+diff(f(X),y)*sin(theta)*sin(phi)+diff(f(X),z)*cos(theta))*_r+(diff(f(X),x)*cos(phi)*cos(theta)+diff(f(X),y)*sin(phi)*cos(theta)-diff(f(X),z)*sin(theta))*_theta+(-diff(f(X),x)*sin(phi)+cos(phi)*diff(f(X),y))*_phi)"

%Nabla(f(X)) = ((sin(theta)*cos(phi)*(diff(f(S), r))+cos(theta)*cos(phi)*(diff(f(S), theta))/r-sin(phi)*(diff(f(S), phi))/(r*sin(theta)))*sin(theta)*cos(phi)+(sin(theta)*sin(phi)*(diff(f(S), r))+cos(theta)*sin(phi)*(diff(f(S), theta))/r+cos(phi)*(diff(f(S), phi))/(r*sin(theta)))*sin(theta)*sin(phi)+(cos(theta)*(diff(f(S), r))-sin(theta)*(diff(f(S), theta))/r)*cos(theta))*_r+((sin(theta)*cos(phi)*(diff(f(S), r))+cos(theta)*cos(phi)*(diff(f(S), theta))/r-sin(phi)*(diff(f(S), phi))/(r*sin(theta)))*cos(phi)*cos(theta)+(sin(theta)*sin(phi)*(diff(f(S), r))+cos(theta)*sin(phi)*(diff(f(S), theta))/r+cos(phi)*(diff(f(S), phi))/(r*sin(theta)))*sin(phi)*cos(theta)-(cos(theta)*(diff(f(S), r))-sin(theta)*(diff(f(S), theta))/r)*sin(theta))*_theta+(-(sin(theta)*cos(phi)*(diff(f(S), r))+cos(theta)*cos(phi)*(diff(f(S), theta))/r-sin(phi)*(diff(f(S), phi))/(r*sin(theta)))*sin(phi)+cos(phi)*(sin(theta)*sin(phi)*(diff(f(S), r))+cos(theta)*sin(phi)*(diff(f(S), theta))/r+cos(phi)*(diff(f(S), phi))/(r*sin(theta))))*_phi

(3.7)

Simplifying, we arrive at (3.2)

> 

(lhs = `@`(`@`(expand, simplify), rhs))(%Nabla(f(X)) = ((sin(theta)*cos(phi)*(diff(f(S), r))+cos(theta)*cos(phi)*(diff(f(S), theta))/r-sin(phi)*(diff(f(S), phi))/(r*sin(theta)))*sin(theta)*cos(phi)+(sin(theta)*sin(phi)*(diff(f(S), r))+cos(theta)*sin(phi)*(diff(f(S), theta))/r+cos(phi)*(diff(f(S), phi))/(r*sin(theta)))*sin(theta)*sin(phi)+(cos(theta)*(diff(f(S), r))-sin(theta)*(diff(f(S), theta))/r)*cos(theta))*_r+((sin(theta)*cos(phi)*(diff(f(S), r))+cos(theta)*cos(phi)*(diff(f(S), theta))/r-sin(phi)*(diff(f(S), phi))/(r*sin(theta)))*cos(phi)*cos(theta)+(sin(theta)*sin(phi)*(diff(f(S), r))+cos(theta)*sin(phi)*(diff(f(S), theta))/r+cos(phi)*(diff(f(S), phi))/(r*sin(theta)))*sin(phi)*cos(theta)-(cos(theta)*(diff(f(S), r))-sin(theta)*(diff(f(S), theta))/r)*sin(theta))*_theta+(-(sin(theta)*cos(phi)*(diff(f(S), r))+cos(theta)*cos(phi)*(diff(f(S), theta))/r-sin(phi)*(diff(f(S), phi))/(r*sin(theta)))*sin(phi)+cos(phi)*(sin(theta)*sin(phi)*(diff(f(S), r))+cos(theta)*sin(phi)*(diff(f(S), theta))/r+cos(phi)*(diff(f(S), phi))/(r*sin(theta))))*_phi)

%Nabla(f(X)) = (diff(f(S), r))*_r+(diff(f(S), theta))*_theta/r+(diff(f(S), phi))*_phi/(r*sin(theta))

(3.8)
> 

%Nabla(f(S)) = (diff(f(S), r))*_r+(diff(f(S), theta))*_theta/r+(diff(f(S), phi))*_phi/(r*sin(theta))

%Nabla(f(S)) = (diff(f(S), r))*_r+(diff(f(S), theta))*_theta/r+(diff(f(S), phi))*_phi/(r*sin(theta))

(3.9)

IV. Deriving the transformation rule for the Divergence, Curl, Gradient and Laplacian, using TransformCoordinates and Covariant derivatives

 

 

• 

The Divergence

 

Introducing the vector A in spherical coordinates, its Divergence is given by

> 

A__s_ := A__r(S)*_r+`A__&theta;`(S)*_theta+`A__&phi;`(S)*_phi

A__r(S)*_r+`A__&theta;`(S)*_theta+`A__&phi;`(S)*_phi

(4.1)
> 

CompactDisplay(%)

` A__r`(S)*`will now be displayed as`*A__r

 

` A__&phi;`(S)*`will now be displayed as`*`A__&phi;`

 

` A__&theta;`(S)*`will now be displayed as`*`A__&theta;`

(4.2)
> 

%Divergence(%A__s_) = Divergence(A__s_)

%Divergence(%A__s_) = ((diff(A__r(S), r))*r+2*A__r(S))/r+((diff(`A__&theta;`(S), theta))*sin(theta)+`A__&theta;`(S)*cos(theta))/(r*sin(theta))+(diff(`A__&phi;`(S), phi))/(r*sin(theta))

(4.3)

We want to see how this result, (4.3), can be obtained using TransformCoordinates and departing from a tensorial representation of the object, this time the covariant derivative "`&dtri;`[j](`A__s`[]^(j))". For that purpose, we first transform the coordinates and the metric introducing nonzero Christoffel symbols

> 

TransformCoordinates(tr, g_[j, k], [S], setmetric)

`Systems of spacetime coordinates are:`*{S = (r, theta, phi), X = (x, y, z)}

 

`Changing the differentiation variables used to compute the Christoffel symbols from `[x, y, z]*` to `[r, theta, phi]*` while the spacetime metric depends on `[r, theta]

 

`Default differentiation variables for d_, D_ and dAlembertian are:`*{S = (r, theta, phi)}

 

_______________________________________________________

 

`Coordinates: `[r, theta, phi]*`. Signature: `(`+ + -`)

 

_______________________________________________________

 

Physics:-g_[a, b] = Matrix(%id = 18446744078312216446)

 

_______________________________________________________

 

`Setting `*greek*` letters to represent `*space*` indices`

(4.4)

To the side: despite having nonzero Christoffel symbols, the space still has no curvature, all the components of the Riemann tensor are equal to zero

> 

Riemann[nonzero]

Physics:-Riemann[a, b, c, d] = {}

(4.5)

Consider now the divergence of the contravariant "`A__s`[]^(j)"tensor, computed in tensor notation

> 

CompactDisplay(A__s(S))

` A__s`(S)*`will now be displayed as`*A__s

(4.6)
> 

D_[j](A__s[`~j`](S))

Physics:-D_[j](A__s[`~j`](S), [S])

(4.7)

To the side: the covariant derivative  expressed using the D_  operator can be rewritten in terms of the non-covariant d_  and Christoffel  symbols as follows

> 

D_[j](A__s[`~j`](S), [S]) = convert(D_[j](A__s[`~j`](S), [S]), d_)

Physics:-D_[j](A__s[`~j`](S), [S]) = Physics:-d_[j](A__s[`~j`](S), [S])+Physics:-Christoffel[`~j`, a, j]*A__s[`~a`](S)

(4.8)

Summing over the repeated indices in (4.7), we have

> 

%D_[j](%A__s[`~j`]) = SumOverRepeatedIndices(D_[j](A__s[`~j`](S), [S]))

%D_[j](%A__s[`~j`]) = diff(A__s[`~1`](S), r)+diff(A__s[`~2`](S), theta)+diff(A__s[`~3`](S), phi)+2*A__s[`~1`](S)/r+cos(theta)*A__s[`~2`](S)/sin(theta)

(4.9)

How is this related to the expression of the VectorCalculus[Nabla].`#mover(mi("\`A__s\`"),mo("&rarr;"))` in (4.3) ? The answer is in the relationship established at the end of Sec I between the components of the tensor "`A__s`[]^(j)"and the components of the vector `#mover(mi("\`A__s\`"),mo("&rarr;"))`, namely that the vector components are obtained multiplying the contravariant tensor components by the scale-factors h__j. So, in the above we need to substitute the contravariant "`A__s`[]^(j)" by the vector components A__j divided by the scale-factors

> 

[seq(A__s[Library:-Contravariant(j)](S) = Component(A__s_, j)/h[j], j = 1 .. 3)]

[A__s[`~1`](S) = A__r(S), A__s[`~2`](S) = `A__&theta;`(S)/r, A__s[`~3`](S) = `A__&phi;`(S)/(r*sin(theta))]

(4.10)
> 

subs[eval]([A__s[`~1`](S) = A__r(S), A__s[`~2`](S) = `A__&theta;`(S)/r, A__s[`~3`](S) = `A__&phi;`(S)/(r*sin(theta))], %D_[j](%A__s[`~j`]) = diff(A__s[`~1`](S), r)+diff(A__s[`~2`](S), theta)+diff(A__s[`~3`](S), phi)+2*A__s[`~1`](S)/r+cos(theta)*A__s[`~2`](S)/sin(theta))

%D_[j](%A__s[`~j`]) = diff(A__r(S), r)+(diff(`A__&theta;`(S), theta))/r+(diff(`A__&phi;`(S), phi))/(r*sin(theta))+2*A__r(S)/r+cos(theta)*`A__&theta;`(S)/(sin(theta)*r)

(4.11)

Comparing with (4.3), we see these two expressions are the same:

> 

expand(%Divergence(%A__s_) = ((diff(A__r(S), r))*r+2*A__r(S))/r+((diff(`A__&theta;`(S), theta))*sin(theta)+`A__&theta;`(S)*cos(theta))/(r*sin(theta))+(diff(`A__&phi;`(S), phi))/(r*sin(theta)))

%Divergence(%A__s_) = diff(A__r(S), r)+(diff(`A__&theta;`(S), theta))/r+(diff(`A__&phi;`(S), phi))/(r*sin(theta))+2*A__r(S)/r+cos(theta)*`A__&theta;`(S)/(sin(theta)*r)

(4.12)
• 

The Curl

 

The Curl of the the vector `#mover(mi("\`A__s\`"),mo("&rarr;"))` in spherical coordinates is given by

> 

%Curl(%A__s_) = Curl(A__s_)

%Curl(%A__s_) = ((diff(`A__&phi;`(S), theta))*sin(theta)+`A__&phi;`(S)*cos(theta)-(diff(`A__&theta;`(S), phi)))*_r/(r*sin(theta))+(diff(A__r(S), phi)-(diff(`A__&phi;`(S), r))*r*sin(theta)-`A__&phi;`(S)*sin(theta))*_theta/(r*sin(theta))+((diff(`A__&theta;`(S), r))*r+`A__&theta;`(S)-(diff(A__r(S), theta)))*_phi/r

(4.13)

 

One could think that the expression for the Curl in tensor notation is as in a non-curvilinear system

 

"`&epsilon;`[i,j,k] `&dtri;`[]^(j)(`A__s`[]^(k))"

 

But in a curvilinear system `&epsilon;`[i, j, k] is not a tensor, we need to use the non-Galilean form Epsilon[i, j, k] = sqrt(%g_[determinant])*`&epsilon;`[i, j, k], where %g_[determinant] is the determinant of the metric. Moreover, since the expression "Epsilon[i,j,k] `&dtri;`[]^(j)(`A__s`[]^(k))"has one free covariant index (the first one), to compare with the vectorial formula (4.12) this index also needs to be rewritten as a vector component as discussed at the end of Sec. I, using

A__j = A__j/h__j

The formula (4.13) for the vectorial Curl is thus expressed using tensor notation as

> 

Setup(levicivita = nongalilean)

[levicivita = nongalilean]

(4.14)
> 

%Curl(%A__s_) = LeviCivita[i, j, k]*D_[`~j`](A__s[`~k`](S))/%h[i]

%Curl(%A__s_) = Physics:-LeviCivita[i, j, k]*Physics:-D_[`~j`](A__s[`~k`](S), [S])/%h[i]

(4.15)

followed by replacing the contravariant tensor components "`A__s`[]^(k)" by the vector components A__k/h__k using (4.10). Proceeding the same way we did with the Divergence, expand this expression. We could use TensorArray , but Library:-TensorComponents places a comma between components making things more readable in this case

> 

lhs(%Curl(%A__s_) = Physics[LeviCivita][i, j, k]*D_[`~j`](A__s[`~k`](S), [S])/%h[i]) = Library:-TensorComponents(rhs(%Curl(%A__s_) = Physics[LeviCivita][i, j, k]*D_[`~j`](A__s[`~k`](S), [S])/%h[i]))

%Curl(%A__s_) = [(sin(theta)^3*(diff(A__s[`~3`](S), theta))*r^2+2*sin(theta)^2*cos(theta)*A__s[`~3`](S)*r^2-(diff(A__s[`~2`](S), phi))*sin(theta)*r^2)/(%h[1]*sin(theta)^2*r^2), (-sin(theta)^3*(diff(A__s[`~3`](S), r))*r^4-2*sin(theta)^3*A__s[`~3`](S)*r^3+(diff(A__s[`~1`](S), phi))*sin(theta)*r^2)/(%h[2]*sin(theta)^2*r^2), (sin(theta)^3*(diff(A__s[`~2`](S), r))*r^4+2*sin(theta)^3*A__s[`~2`](S)*r^3-sin(theta)^3*(diff(A__s[`~1`](S), theta))*r^2)/(%h[3]*sin(theta)^2*r^2)]

(4.16)

Replace now the components of the tensor "`A__s`[]^(j)" by the components of the 3D vector `#mover(mi("\`A__s\`"),mo("&rarr;"))` using (4.10)

> 

lhs(%Curl(%A__s_) = [(sin(theta)^3*(diff(A__s[`~3`](S), theta))*r^2+2*sin(theta)^2*cos(theta)*A__s[`~3`](S)*r^2-(diff(A__s[`~2`](S), phi))*sin(theta)*r^2)/(%h[1]*sin(theta)^2*r^2), (-sin(theta)^3*(diff(A__s[`~3`](S), r))*r^4-2*sin(theta)^3*A__s[`~3`](S)*r^3+(diff(A__s[`~1`](S), phi))*sin(theta)*r^2)/(%h[2]*sin(theta)^2*r^2), (sin(theta)^3*(diff(A__s[`~2`](S), r))*r^4+2*sin(theta)^3*A__s[`~2`](S)*r^3-sin(theta)^3*(diff(A__s[`~1`](S), theta))*r^2)/(%h[3]*sin(theta)^2*r^2)]) = value(subs[eval]([A__s[`~1`](S) = A__r(S), A__s[`~2`](S) = `A__&theta;`(S)/r, A__s[`~3`](S) = `A__&phi;`(S)/(r*sin(theta))], rhs(%Curl(%A__s_) = [(sin(theta)^3*(diff(A__s[`~3`](S), theta))*r^2+2*sin(theta)^2*cos(theta)*A__s[`~3`](S)*r^2-(diff(A__s[`~2`](S), phi))*sin(theta)*r^2)/(%h[1]*sin(theta)^2*r^2), (-sin(theta)^3*(diff(A__s[`~3`](S), r))*r^4-2*sin(theta)^3*A__s[`~3`](S)*r^3+(diff(A__s[`~1`](S), phi))*sin(theta)*r^2)/(%h[2]*sin(theta)^2*r^2), (sin(theta)^3*(diff(A__s[`~2`](S), r))*r^4+2*sin(theta)^3*A__s[`~2`](S)*r^3-sin(theta)^3*(diff(A__s[`~1`](S), theta))*r^2)/(%h[3]*sin(theta)^2*r^2)])))

%Curl(%A__s_) = [(sin(theta)^3*((diff(`A__&phi;`(S), theta))/(r*sin(theta))-`A__&phi;`(S)*cos(theta)/(r*sin(theta)^2))*r^2+2*sin(theta)*cos(theta)*`A__&phi;`(S)*r-(diff(`A__&theta;`(S), phi))*r*sin(theta))/(h[1]*sin(theta)^2*r^2), (-sin(theta)^3*((diff(`A__&phi;`(S), r))/(r*sin(theta))-`A__&phi;`(S)/(r^2*sin(theta)))*r^4-2*sin(theta)^2*`A__&phi;`(S)*r^2+(diff(A__r(S), phi))*sin(theta)*r^2)/(h[2]*sin(theta)^2*r^2), (sin(theta)^3*((diff(`A__&theta;`(S), r))/r-`A__&theta;`(S)/r^2)*r^4+2*sin(theta)^3*`A__&theta;`(S)*r^2-sin(theta)^3*(diff(A__r(S), theta))*r^2)/(h[3]*sin(theta)^2*r^2)]

(4.17)
> 

(lhs = `@`(simplify, rhs))(%Curl(%A__s_) = [(sin(theta)^3*((diff(`A__&phi;`(S), theta))/(r*sin(theta))-`A__&phi;`(S)*cos(theta)/(r*sin(theta)^2))*r^2+2*sin(theta)*cos(theta)*`A__&phi;`(S)*r-(diff(`A__&theta;`(S), phi))*r*sin(theta))/(h[1]*sin(theta)^2*r^2), (-sin(theta)^3*((diff(`A__&phi;`(S), r))/(r*sin(theta))-`A__&phi;`(S)/(r^2*sin(theta)))*r^4-2*sin(theta)^2*`A__&phi;`(S)*r^2+(diff(A__r(S), phi))*sin(theta)*r^2)/(h[2]*sin(theta)^2*r^2), (sin(theta)^3*((diff(`A__&theta;`(S), r))/r-`A__&theta;`(S)/r^2)*r^4+2*sin(theta)^3*`A__&theta;`(S)*r^2-sin(theta)^3*(diff(A__r(S), theta))*r^2)/(h[3]*sin(theta)^2*r^2)])

%Curl(%A__s_) = [((diff(`A__&phi;`(S), theta))*sin(theta)+`A__&phi;`(S)*cos(theta)-(diff(`A__&theta;`(S), phi)))/(r*sin(theta)), (diff(A__r(S), phi)-(diff(`A__&phi;`(S), r))*r*sin(theta)-`A__&phi;`(S)*sin(theta))/(r*sin(theta)), ((diff(`A__&theta;`(S), r))*r+`A__&theta;`(S)-(diff(A__r(S), theta)))/r]

(4.18)

We see these are exactly the components of the Curl (4.13)

> 

%Curl(%A__s_) = ((diff(`A__&phi;`(S), theta))*sin(theta)+`A__&phi;`(S)*cos(theta)-(diff(`A__&theta;`(S), phi)))*_r/(r*sin(theta))+(diff(A__r(S), phi)-(diff(`A__&phi;`(S), r))*r*sin(theta)-`A__&phi;`(S)*sin(theta))*_theta/(r*sin(theta))+((diff(`A__&theta;`(S), r))*r+`A__&theta;`(S)-(diff(A__r(S), theta)))*_phi/r

%Curl(%A__s_) = ((diff(`A__&phi;`(S), theta))*sin(theta)+`A__&phi;`(S)*cos(theta)-(diff(`A__&theta;`(S), phi)))*_r/(r*sin(theta))+(diff(A__r(S), phi)-(diff(`A__&phi;`(S), r))*r*sin(theta)-`A__&phi;`(S)*sin(theta))*_theta/(r*sin(theta))+((diff(`A__&theta;`(S), r))*r+`A__&theta;`(S)-(diff(A__r(S), theta)))*_phi/r

(4.19)
• 

The Gradient

 

Once the problem is fully understood, it is easy to redo the computations of Sec.III for the Gradient, this time using tensor notation and the covariant derivative. In tensor notation, the components of the Gradient are given by the components of the right-hand side

> 

%Nabla(f(S)) = `&dtri;`[j](f(S))/%h[j]

%Nabla(f(S)) = Physics:-d_[j](f(S), [S])/%h[j]

(4.20)

where on the left-hand side we have the vectorial Nabla  differential operator and on the right-hand side, since f(S) is a scalar, the covariant derivative `&dtri;`[j](f) becomes the standard derivative `&PartialD;`[j](f).

> 

lhs(%Nabla(f(S)) = Physics[d_][j](f(S), [S])/%h[j]) = eval(value(Library:-TensorComponents(rhs(%Nabla(f(S)) = Physics[d_][j](f(S), [S])/%h[j]))))

%Nabla(f(S)) = [Physics:-Vectors:-diff(f(S), r), (diff(f(S), theta))/r, (diff(f(S), phi))/(r*sin(theta))]

(4.21)

The above is the expected result (3.2)

> 

%Nabla(f(S)) = (diff(f(S), r))*_r+(diff(f(S), theta))*_theta/r+(diff(f(S), phi))*_phi/(r*sin(theta))

%Nabla(f(S)) = (diff(f(S), r))*_r+(diff(f(S), theta))*_theta/r+(diff(f(S), phi))*_phi/(r*sin(theta))

(4.22)
• 

The Laplacian

 

Likewise we can compute the Laplacian directly as

> 

%Laplacian(f(S)) = D_[j](D_[j](f(S)))

%Laplacian(f(S)) = Physics:-D_[j](Physics:-d_[`~j`](f(S), [S]), [S])

(4.23)

In this case there are no free indices nor tensor components to be rewritten as vector components, so there is no need for scale-factors. Summing over the repeated indices,

> 

SumOverRepeatedIndices(%Laplacian(f(S)) = D_[j](Physics[d_][`~j`](f(S), [S]), [S]))

%Laplacian(f(S)) = Physics:-dAlembertian(f(S), [S])+2*(diff(f(S), r))/r+cos(theta)*(diff(f(S), theta))/(sin(theta)*r^2)

(4.24)

Evaluating the  Vectors:-Laplacian on the left-hand side,

> 

value(%Laplacian(f(S)) = Physics[dAlembertian](f(S), [S])+2*(diff(f(S), r))/r+cos(theta)*(diff(f(S), theta))/(sin(theta)*r^2))

((diff(diff(f(S), r), r))*r+2*(diff(f(S), r)))/r+((diff(diff(f(S), theta), theta))*sin(theta)+cos(theta)*(diff(f(S), theta)))/(r^2*sin(theta))+(diff(diff(f(S), phi), phi))/(r^2*sin(theta)^2) = Physics:-dAlembertian(f(S), [S])+2*(diff(f(S), r))/r+cos(theta)*(diff(f(S), theta))/(sin(theta)*r^2)

(4.25)

On the right-hand side we see the dAlembertian , "`&square;`(f(S)),"in curvilinear coordinates; rewrite it using standard diff  derivatives and expand both sides of the equation for comparison

> 

expand(convert(((diff(diff(f(S), r), r))*r+2*(diff(f(S), r)))/r+((diff(diff(f(S), theta), theta))*sin(theta)+cos(theta)*(diff(f(S), theta)))/(r^2*sin(theta))+(diff(diff(f(S), phi), phi))/(r^2*sin(theta)^2) = Physics[dAlembertian](f(S), [S])+2*(diff(f(S), r))/r+cos(theta)*(diff(f(S), theta))/(sin(theta)*r^2), diff))

diff(diff(f(S), r), r)+(diff(diff(f(S), theta), theta))/r^2+(diff(diff(f(S), phi), phi))/(r^2*sin(theta)^2)+2*(diff(f(S), r))/r+cos(theta)*(diff(f(S), theta))/(sin(theta)*r^2) = diff(diff(f(S), r), r)+(diff(diff(f(S), theta), theta))/r^2+(diff(diff(f(S), phi), phi))/(r^2*sin(theta)^2)+2*(diff(f(S), r))/r+cos(theta)*(diff(f(S), theta))/(sin(theta)*r^2)

(4.26)

This is an identity, the left and right hand sides are equal:

> 

evalb(diff(diff(f(S), r), r)+(diff(diff(f(S), theta), theta))/r^2+(diff(diff(f(S), phi), phi))/(r^2*sin(theta)^2)+2*(diff(f(S), r))/r+cos(theta)*(diff(f(S), theta))/(sin(theta)*r^2) = diff(diff(f(S), r), r)+(diff(diff(f(S), theta), theta))/r^2+(diff(diff(f(S), phi), phi))/(r^2*sin(theta)^2)+2*(diff(f(S), r))/r+cos(theta)*(diff(f(S), theta))/(sin(theta)*r^2))

true

(4.27)


 

Download Vectors_and_Spherical_coordinates_in_tensor_notation.mw

Edgardo S. Cheb-Terrab
Physics, Differential Equations and Mathematical Functions, Maplesoft

 

Feynman Diagrams
The scattering matrix in coordinates and momentum representation

  

Mathematical methods for particle physics was one of the weak spots in the Physics package. There existed a FeynmanDiagrams command, but its capabilities were too minimal. People working in the area asked for more functionality. These diagrams are the cornerstone of calculations in particle physics (collisions involving from the electron to the Higgs boson), for example at the CERN. As an introduction for people curious, not working in the area, see "Why Feynman Diagrams are so important".

  

This post is thus about a new development in Physics: a full rewriting of the FeynmanDiagrams command, now including a myriad of new capabilities (mainly a. b. and c. in the Introduction), reversing the previous status of things entirely. This is work in collaboration with Davide Polvara from Durham University, Centre for Particle Theory.

  


The complexity of this material is high, so the introduction to the presentation below is as brief as it can get, emphasizing the examples instead. This material is reproducible in Maple 2019.2 after installing the Physics Updates, v.598 or higher.

  

 

  

At the end they are attached the worksheet corresponding to this presentation and a PDF version of it, as well as the new FeynmanDiagrams help page with all the explanatory details.

Introduction

  

A scattering matrix S relates the initial and final states, `#mfenced(mrow(mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mi("i"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;")),open = "&verbar;",close = "&rang;")` and `#mfenced(mrow(mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mi("f"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;")),open = "&verbar;",close = "&rang;")`, of an interacting system. In an 4-dimensional spacetime with coordinates X, S can be written as:

S = T(exp(i*`#mrow(mo("&int;"),mi("L"),mo("&ApplyFunction;"),mfenced(mi("X")),mo("&DifferentialD;"),msup(mi("X"),mn("4")))`))

  

where i is the imaginary unit  and L is the interaction Lagrangian, written in terms of quantum fields  depending on the spacetime coordinates  X. The T symbol means time-ordered. For the terminology used in this page, see for instance chapter IV, "The Scattering Matrix", of ref.[1] Bogoliubov, N.N., and Shirkov, D.V. Quantum Fields.

  

This exponential can be expanded as

S = 1+S[1]+S[2]+S[3]+`...`

  

where

S[n] = `#mrow(mo("&ApplyFunction;"),mfrac(msup(mi("i"),mi("n")),mrow(mi("n"),mo("&excl;")),linethickness = "1"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mo("&int;"),mi("&hellip;"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mo("&int;"),mi("T"),mo("&ApplyFunction;"),mfenced(mrow(mi("L"),mo("&ApplyFunction;"),mfenced(mi("\`X__1\`")),mo("&comma;"),mi("&hellip;"),mo("&comma;"),mi("L"),mo("&ApplyFunction;"),mfenced(mi("\`X__n\`")))),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mo("&DifferentialD;"),msup(mi("\`X__1\`"),mn("4")),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mi("&hellip;"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mo("&DifferentialD;"),msup(mi("\`X__n\`"),mn("4")))`

  

and T(L(X[1]), `...`, L(X[n])) is the time-ordered product of n interaction Lagrangians evaluated at different points. The S matrix formulation is at the core of perturbative approaches in relativistic Quantum Field Theory.

  

In connection, the FeynmanDiagrams  command has been rewritten entirely for Maple 2020. In brief, the new functionality includes computing:

a. 

The expansion S = 1+S[1]+S[2]+S[3]+`...` in coordinates representation up to arbitrary order (the limitation is now only your hardware)

b. 

The S-matrix element `#mfenced(mrow(mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mi("f"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mo("&verbar;"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mi("S"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mo("&verbar;"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mi("i"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;")),open = "&lang;",close = "&rang;")` in momentum representation up to arbitrary order for given number of loops and initial and final particles (the contents of the `#mfenced(mrow(mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mi("i"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;")),open = "&verbar;",close = "&rang;")` and `#mfenced(mrow(mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mi("f"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;")),open = "&verbar;",close = "&rang;")` states); optionally, also the transition probability density, constructed using the square of the scattering matrix element abs(`#mfenced(mrow(mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mi("f"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mo("&verbar;"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mi("S"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mo("&verbar;"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mi("i"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;")),open = "&lang;",close = "&rang;")`)^2, as shown in formula (13) of sec. 21.1 of ref.[1].

c. 

The Feynman diagrams (drawings) related to the different terms of the expansion of S or of its matrix elements `#mfenced(mrow(mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mi("f"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mo("&verbar;"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mi("S"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mo("&verbar;"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mi("i"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;")),open = "&lang;",close = "&rang;")`.

  

Interaction Lagrangians involving derivatives of fields, typically appearing in non-Abelian gauge theories, are also handled, and several options are provided enabling restricting the outcome in different ways, regarding the incoming and outgoing particles, the number of loops, vertices or external legs, the propagators and normal products, or whether to compute tadpoles and 1-particle reducible terms.

 

Examples

 

For illustration purposes set three coordinate systems , and set phi to represent a quantum operator

> 

with(Physics)

> 

Setup(mathematicalnotation = true, coordinates = [X, Y, Z], quantumoperators = phi)

`Systems of spacetime coordinates are:`*{X = (x1, x2, x3, x4), Y = (y1, y2, y3, y4), Z = (z1, z2, z3, z4)}

 

_______________________________________________________

 

[coordinatesystems = {X, Y, Z}, mathematicalnotation = true, quantumoperators = {phi}]

(1.1)

Let L be the interaction Lagrangian

> 

L := lambda*phi(X)^4

lambda*Physics:-`^`(phi(X), 4)

(1.2)

The expansion of S in coordinates representation, computed by default up to order = 3 (you can change that using the option order = n), by definition containing all possible configurations of external legs, displaying the related Feynman Diagrams, is given by

> 

%eval(S, `=`(order, 3)) = FeynmanDiagrams(L, diagrams)

 

 

 

%eval(S, order = 3) = 1+%FeynmanIntegral(lambda*_GF(_NP(phi(X), phi(X), phi(X), phi(X))), [[X]])+%FeynmanIntegral(16*lambda^2*_GF(_NP(phi(X), phi(X), phi(X), phi(Y), phi(Y), phi(Y)), [[phi(X), phi(Y)]])+96*lambda^2*_GF(_NP(phi(X), phi(Y)), [[phi(X), phi(Y)], [phi(X), phi(Y)], [phi(X), phi(Y)]])+72*lambda^2*_GF(_NP(phi(X), phi(X), phi(Y), phi(Y)), [[phi(X), phi(Y)], [phi(X), phi(Y)]]), [[X], [Y]])+%FeynmanIntegral(1728*lambda^3*_GF(_NP(phi(X), phi(X), phi(Y), phi(Y), phi(Z), phi(Z)), [[phi(X), phi(Z)], [phi(X), phi(Y)], [phi(Z), phi(Y)]])+2592*lambda^3*_GF(_NP(phi(X), phi(X), phi(Y), phi(Y)), [[phi(X), phi(Z)], [phi(X), phi(Z)], [phi(Z), phi(Y)], [phi(Z), phi(Y)]])+10368*lambda^3*_GF(_NP(phi(X), phi(Y), phi(Z), phi(Z)), [[phi(X), phi(Y)], [phi(X), phi(Y)], [phi(X), phi(Z)], [phi(Y), phi(Z)]])+10368*lambda^3*_GF(_NP(phi(X), phi(Y)), [[phi(X), phi(Y)], [phi(X), phi(Z)], [phi(X), phi(Z)], [phi(Y), phi(Z)], [phi(Y), phi(Z)]])+3456*lambda^3*_GF(_NP(phi(X), phi(X)), [[phi(X), phi(Y)], [phi(X), phi(Z)], [phi(Y), phi(Z)], [phi(Y), phi(Z)], [phi(Y), phi(Z)]])+576*lambda^3*_GF(_NP(phi(X), phi(X), phi(X), phi(Y), phi(Y), phi(Z), phi(Z), phi(Z)), [[phi(X), phi(Y)], [phi(Y), phi(Z)]]), [[X], [Y], [Z]])

(1.3)


The expansion of S  in coordinates representation to a specific order shows in a compact way the topology of the underlying Feynman diagrams. Each integral is represented with a new command, FeynmanIntegral , that works both in coordinates and momentum representation. To each term of the integrands corresponds a diagram, and the correspondence is always clear from the symmetry factors.

In a typical situation, one wants to compute a specific term, or scattering process, instead of the S matrix up to some order with all possible configurations of external legs. For example, to compute only the terms of this result that correspond to diagrams with 1 loop use numberofloops = 1 (for tree-level, use numerofloops = 0)

> 

%eval(S, [`=`(order, 3), `=`(loops, 1)]) = FeynmanDiagrams(L, numberofloops = 1, diagrams)

%eval(S, [order = 3, loops = 1]) = %FeynmanIntegral(72*lambda^2*_GF(_NP(phi(X), phi(X), phi(Y), phi(Y)), [[phi(X), phi(Y)], [phi(X), phi(Y)]]), [[X], [Y]])+%FeynmanIntegral(1728*lambda^3*_GF(_NP(phi(X), phi(X), phi(Y), phi(Y), phi(Z), phi(Z)), [[phi(X), phi(Z)], [phi(X), phi(Y)], [phi(Z), phi(Y)]]), [[X], [Y], [Z]])

(1.4)


In the result above there are two terms, with 4 and 6 external legs respectively.

A scattering process with matrix element `#mfenced(mrow(mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mi("f"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mo("&verbar;"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mi("S"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mo("&verbar;"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mi("i"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;")),open = "&lang;",close = "&rang;")` in momentum representation, corresponding to the term with 4 external legs (symmetry factor = 72), could be any process where the total number of incoming + outgoing parties is equal to 4. For example, one with 2 incoming and 2 outgoing particles. The transition probability for that process is given by

> 

`#mfenced(mrow(mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mi("&phi;",fontstyle = "normal",mathcolor = "olive"),mo("&comma;",mathcolor = "olive"),mi("&phi;",fontstyle = "normal",mathcolor = "olive"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mo("&verbar;"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mi("S"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mo("&verbar;"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mi("&phi;",fontstyle = "normal",mathcolor = "olive"),mo("&comma;",mathcolor = "olive"),mi("&phi;",fontstyle = "normal",mathcolor = "olive"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;",mathcolor = "olive")),open = "&lang;",close = "&rang;")` = FeynmanDiagrams(L, incomingparticles = [phi, phi], outgoingparticles = [phi, phi], numberofloops = 1, diagrams)

 

`#mfenced(mrow(mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mi("&phi;",fontstyle = "normal",mathcolor = "olive"),mo("&comma;",mathcolor = "olive"),mi("&phi;",fontstyle = "normal",mathcolor = "olive"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mo("&verbar;"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mi("S"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mo("&verbar;"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mi("&phi;",fontstyle = "normal",mathcolor = "olive"),mo("&comma;",mathcolor = "olive"),mi("&phi;",fontstyle = "normal",mathcolor = "olive"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;",mathcolor = "olive")),open = "&lang;",close = "&rang;")` = %FeynmanIntegral((9/8)*lambda^2*Dirac(-P__3-P__4+P__1+P__2)/(Pi^6*(E__1*E__2*E__3*E__4)^(1/2)*(p__2^2-m__phi^2+I*Physics:-FeynmanDiagrams:-epsilon)*((-P__1-P__2-p__2)^2-m__phi^2+I*Physics:-FeynmanDiagrams:-epsilon)), [[p__2]])+%FeynmanIntegral((9/8)*lambda^2*Dirac(-P__3-P__4+P__1+P__2)/(Pi^6*(E__1*E__2*E__3*E__4)^(1/2)*(p__2^2-m__phi^2+I*Physics:-FeynmanDiagrams:-epsilon)*((-P__1+P__3-p__2)^2-m__phi^2+I*Physics:-FeynmanDiagrams:-epsilon)), [[p__2]])+%FeynmanIntegral((9/8)*lambda^2*Dirac(-P__3-P__4+P__1+P__2)/(Pi^6*(E__1*E__2*E__3*E__4)^(1/2)*(p__2^2-m__phi^2+I*Physics:-FeynmanDiagrams:-epsilon)*((-P__1+P__4-p__2)^2-m__phi^2+I*Physics:-FeynmanDiagrams:-epsilon)), [[p__2]])

(1.5)

When computing in momentum representation, only the topology of the corresponding Feynman diagrams is shown (i.e. the diagrams associated to the corresponding Feynman integral in coordinates representation).

The transition matrix element `#mfenced(mrow(mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mi("f"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mo("&verbar;"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mi("S"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mo("&verbar;"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mi("i"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;")),open = "&lang;",close = "&rang;")` is related to the transition probability density dw (formula (13) of sec. 21.1 of ref.[1]) by

dw = (2*Pi)^(3*s-4)*n__1*`...`*n__s*abs(F(p[i], p[f]))^2*delta(sum(p[i], i = 1 .. s)-(sum(p[f], f = 1 .. r)))*` d `^3*p[1]*` ...`*`d `^3*p[r]

where n__1*`...`*n__s represent the particle densities of each of the s particles in the initial state `#mfenced(mrow(mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mi("i"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;")),open = "&verbar;",close = "&rang;")`, the delta (Dirac) is the expected singular factor due to the conservation of the energy-momentum and the amplitude F(p[i], p[f])is related to `#mfenced(mrow(mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mi("f"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mo("&verbar;"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mi("S"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mo("&verbar;"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mi("i"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;")),open = "&lang;",close = "&rang;")` via

`#mfenced(mrow(mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mi("f"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mo("&verbar;"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mi("S"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mo("&verbar;"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mi("i"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;")),open = "&lang;",close = "&rang;")` = F(p[i], p[f])*delta(sum(p[i], i = 1 .. s)-(sum(p[f], f = 1 .. r)))

To directly get the probability density dw instead of`#mfenced(mrow(mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mi("f"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mo("&verbar;"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mi("S"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mo("&verbar;"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mi("i"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;")),open = "&lang;",close = "&rang;")`use the option output = probabilitydensity

> 

FeynmanDiagrams(L, incomingparticles = [phi, phi], outgoingparticles = [phi, phi], numberofloops = 1, output = probabilitydensity)

Physics:-FeynmanDiagrams:-ProbabilityDensity(4*Pi^2*%mul(n[i], i = 1 .. 2)*abs(F)^2*Dirac(-P__3-P__4+P__1+P__2)*%mul(dP_[f]^3, f = 1 .. 2), F = %FeynmanIntegral((9/8)*lambda^2/(Pi^6*(E__1*E__2*E__3*E__4)^(1/2)*(p__2^2-m__phi^2+I*Physics:-FeynmanDiagrams:-epsilon)*((-P__1-P__2-p__2)^2-m__phi^2+I*Physics:-FeynmanDiagrams:-epsilon)), [[p__2]])+%FeynmanIntegral((9/8)*lambda^2/(Pi^6*(E__1*E__2*E__3*E__4)^(1/2)*(p__2^2-m__phi^2+I*Physics:-FeynmanDiagrams:-epsilon)*((-P__1+P__3-p__2)^2-m__phi^2+I*Physics:-FeynmanDiagrams:-epsilon)), [[p__2]])+%FeynmanIntegral((9/8)*lambda^2/(Pi^6*(E__1*E__2*E__3*E__4)^(1/2)*(p__2^2-m__phi^2+I*Physics:-FeynmanDiagrams:-epsilon)*((-P__1+P__4-p__2)^2-m__phi^2+I*Physics:-FeynmanDiagrams:-epsilon)), [[p__2]]))

(1.6)

In practice, the most common computations involve processes with 2 or 4 external legs. To restrict the expansion of the scattering matrix in coordinates representation to that kind of processes use the numberofexternallegs option. For example, the following computes the expansion of S up to order = 3, restricting the outcome to the terms corresponding to diagrams with only 2 external legs

> 

%eval(S, [`=`(order, 3), `=`(legs, 2)]) = FeynmanDiagrams(L, numberofexternallegs = 2, diagrams)

%eval(S, [order = 3, legs = 2]) = %FeynmanIntegral(96*lambda^2*_GF(_NP(phi(X), phi(Y)), [[phi(X), phi(Y)], [phi(X), phi(Y)], [phi(X), phi(Y)]]), [[X], [Y]])+%FeynmanIntegral(3456*lambda^3*_GF(_NP(phi(X), phi(X)), [[phi(X), phi(Y)], [phi(X), phi(Z)], [phi(Y), phi(Z)], [phi(Y), phi(Z)], [phi(Y), phi(Z)]])+10368*lambda^3*_GF(_NP(phi(X), phi(Y)), [[phi(X), phi(Y)], [phi(X), phi(Z)], [phi(X), phi(Z)], [phi(Y), phi(Z)], [phi(Y), phi(Z)]]), [[X], [Y], [Z]])

(1.7)


This result shows two Feynman integrals, with respectively 2 and 3 loops, the second integral with two terms. The transition probability density in momentum representation for a process related to the first integral (1 term with symmetry factor = 96) is then

> 

FeynmanDiagrams(L, incomingparticles = [phi], outgoingparticles = [phi], numberofloops = 2, diagrams, output = probabilitydensity)

Physics:-FeynmanDiagrams:-ProbabilityDensity((1/2)*%mul(n[i], i = 1 .. 1)*abs(F)^2*Dirac(-P__2+P__1)*%mul(dP_[f]^3, f = 1 .. 1)/Pi, F = %FeynmanIntegral(%FeynmanIntegral(((3/8)*I)*lambda^2/(Pi^7*(E__1*E__2)^(1/2)*(p__2^2-m__phi^2+I*Physics:-FeynmanDiagrams:-epsilon)*(p__3^2-m__phi^2+I*Physics:-FeynmanDiagrams:-epsilon)*((-P__1-p__2-p__3)^2-m__phi^2+I*Physics:-FeynmanDiagrams:-epsilon)), [[p__2]]), [[p__3]]))

(1.8)

In the above, for readability, the contracted spacetime indices in the square of momenta entering the amplitude F (as denominators of propagators) are implicit. To make those indices explicit, use the option putindicesinsquareofmomentum

> 

F = FeynmanDiagrams(L, incoming = [phi], outgoing = [phi], numberofloops = 2, indices)

`* Partial match of  '`*indices*`' against keyword '`*putindicesinsquareofmomentum*`' `

 

F = %FeynmanIntegral(%FeynmanIntegral(((3/8)*I)*lambda^2*Dirac(-P__2[`~kappa`]+P__1[`~kappa`])/(Pi^7*(E__1*E__2)^(1/2)*(p__2[mu]*p__2[`~mu`]-m__phi^2+I*Physics:-FeynmanDiagrams:-epsilon)*(p__3[nu]*p__3[`~nu`]-m__phi^2+I*Physics:-FeynmanDiagrams:-epsilon)*((-P__1[beta]-p__2[beta]-p__3[beta])*(-P__1[`~beta`]-p__2[`~beta`]-p__3[`~beta`])-m__phi^2+I*Physics:-FeynmanDiagrams:-epsilon)), [[p__2]]), [[p__3]])

(1.9)

This computation can also be performed to higher orders. For example, with 3 loops, in coordinates and momentum representations, corresponding to the other two terms and diagrams in (1.7)

> 

%eval(S[3], [`=`(legs, 2), `=`(loops, 3)]) = FeynmanDiagrams(L, legs = 2, loops = 3)

`* Partial match of  '`*legs*`' against keyword '`*numberoflegs*`' `

 

`* Partial match of  '`*loops*`' against keyword '`*numberofloops*`' `

 

%eval(S[3], [legs = 2, loops = 3]) = %FeynmanIntegral(3456*lambda^3*_GF(_NP(phi(X), phi(X)), [[phi(X), phi(Y)], [phi(X), phi(Z)], [phi(Y), phi(Z)], [phi(Y), phi(Z)], [phi(Y), phi(Z)]])+10368*lambda^3*_GF(_NP(phi(X), phi(Y)), [[phi(X), phi(Y)], [phi(X), phi(Z)], [phi(X), phi(Z)], [phi(Y), phi(Z)], [phi(Y), phi(Z)]]), [[X], [Y], [Z]])

(1.10)

A corresponding S-matrix element in momentum representation:

> 

%eval(%Bracket(phi, S[3], phi), `=`(loops, 3)) = FeynmanDiagrams(L, incomingparticles = [phi], outgoingparticles = [phi], numberofloops = 3)

%eval(%Bracket(phi, S[3], phi), loops = 3) = %FeynmanIntegral(%FeynmanIntegral(%FeynmanIntegral((9/32)*lambda^3*Dirac(-P__2+P__1)/(Pi^11*(E__1*E__2)^(1/2)*(p__3^2-m__phi^2+I*Physics:-FeynmanDiagrams:-epsilon)*(p__4^2-m__phi^2+I*Physics:-FeynmanDiagrams:-epsilon)*(p__5^2-m__phi^2+I*Physics:-FeynmanDiagrams:-epsilon)*((-p__3-p__4-p__5)^2-m__phi^2+I*Physics:-FeynmanDiagrams:-epsilon)*((-P__1+P__2+p__3+p__4+p__5)^2-m__phi^2+I*Physics:-FeynmanDiagrams:-epsilon)), [[p__3]]), [[p__4]]), [[p__5]])+2*%FeynmanIntegral(%FeynmanIntegral(%FeynmanIntegral((9/32)*lambda^3*Dirac(-P__2+P__1)/(Pi^11*(E__1*E__2)^(1/2)*(p__3^2-m__phi^2+I*Physics:-FeynmanDiagrams:-epsilon)*(p__4^2-m__phi^2+I*Physics:-FeynmanDiagrams:-epsilon)*(p__5^2-m__phi^2+I*Physics:-FeynmanDiagrams:-epsilon)*((-p__3-p__4-p__5)^2-m__phi^2+I*Physics:-FeynmanDiagrams:-epsilon)*((-P__1+p__4+p__5)^2-m__phi^2+I*Physics:-FeynmanDiagrams:-epsilon)), [[p__3]]), [[p__4]]), [[p__5]])+%FeynmanIntegral(%FeynmanIntegral((1/2048)*lambda*Dirac(-P__2+P__1)*%FeynmanIntegral(576*lambda^2/((p__2^2-m__phi^2+I*Physics:-FeynmanDiagrams:-epsilon)*((-p__2-p__4-p__5)^2-m__phi^2+I*Physics:-FeynmanDiagrams:-epsilon)), [[p__2]])/(Pi^11*(E__1*E__2)^(1/2)*(p__4^2-m__phi^2+I*Physics:-FeynmanDiagrams:-epsilon)*(p__5^2-m__phi^2+I*Physics:-FeynmanDiagrams:-epsilon)*((-P__1+p__4+p__5)^2-m__phi^2+I*Physics:-FeynmanDiagrams:-epsilon)), [[p__4]]), [[p__5]])

(1.11)

Consider the interaction Lagrangian of Quantum Electrodynamics (QED). To formulate this problem on the worksheet, start defining the vector field A[mu].

> 

Define(A[mu])

`Defined objects with tensor properties`

 

{A[mu], Physics:-Dgamma[mu], P__1[mu], P__2[mu], Physics:-Psigma[mu], Physics:-d_[mu], Physics:-g_[mu, nu], p__1[mu], p__2[mu], p__3[mu], p__4[mu], p__5[mu], Physics:-LeviCivita[alpha, beta, mu, nu], Physics:-SpaceTimeVector[mu](X), Physics:-SpaceTimeVector[mu](Y), Physics:-SpaceTimeVector[mu](Z)}

(1.12)

Set lowercase Latin letters from i to s to represent spinor indices (you can change this setting according to your preference, see Setup ), also the (anticommutative) spinor field will be represented by psi, so set psi as an anticommutativeprefix, and set A and psi as quantum operators

> 

Setup(spinorindices = lowercaselatin_is, anticommutativeprefix = psi, op = {A, psi})

`* Partial match of  '`*op*`' against keyword '`*quantumoperators*`' `

 

_______________________________________________________

 

[anticommutativeprefix = {psi}, quantumoperators = {A, phi, psi}, spinorindices = lowercaselatin_is]

(1.13)

The matrix indices of the Dirac matrices  are written explicitly and use conjugate  to represent the Dirac conjugate conjugate(psi[j])

> 

L__QED := alpha*conjugate(psi[j](X))*Dgamma[mu][j, k]*psi[k](X)*A[mu](X)

alpha*Physics:-`*`(conjugate(psi[j](X)), psi[k](X), A[mu](X))*Physics:-Dgamma[`~mu`][j, k]

(1.14)

Compute S[2], only the terms with 4 external legs, and display the diagrams: all the corresponding graphs have no loops

> 

%eval(S[2], `=`(legs, 4)) = FeynmanDiagrams(L__QED, numberofvertices = 2, numberoflegs = 4, diagrams)

%eval(S[2], legs = 4) = %FeynmanIntegral(-2*alpha^2*Physics:-Dgamma[`~mu`][j, k]*Physics:-Dgamma[`~alpha`][i, l]*_GF(_NP(psi[k](X), A[mu](X), conjugate(psi[i](Y)), A[alpha](Y)), [[psi[l](Y), conjugate(psi[j](X))]])+alpha^2*Physics:-Dgamma[`~mu`][j, k]*Physics:-Dgamma[`~alpha`][i, l]*_GF(_NP(conjugate(psi[j](X)), psi[k](X), conjugate(psi[i](Y)), psi[l](Y)), [[A[mu](X), A[alpha](Y)]]), [[X], [Y]])

(1.15)

The same computation but with only 2 external legs results in the diagrams with 1 loop that correspond to the self-energy of the electron and the photon (page 218 of ref.[1])

> 

%eval(S[2], `=`(legs, 2)) = FeynmanDiagrams(L__QED, numberofvertices = 2, numberoflegs = 2, diagrams)

 

 

%eval(S[2], legs = 2) = %FeynmanIntegral(-2*alpha^2*Physics:-Dgamma[`~mu`][j, k]*Physics:-Dgamma[`~alpha`][i, l]*_GF(_NP(psi[k](X), conjugate(psi[i](Y))), [[A[mu](X), A[alpha](Y)], [psi[l](Y), conjugate(psi[j](X))]])-alpha^2*Physics:-Dgamma[`~mu`][j, k]*Physics:-Dgamma[`~alpha`][i, l]*_GF(_NP(A[mu](X), A[alpha](Y)), [[psi[l](Y), conjugate(psi[j](X))], [psi[k](X), conjugate(psi[i](Y))]]), [[X], [Y]])

(1.16)

where the diagram with two spinor legs is the electron self-energy. To restrict the output furthermore, for example getting only the self-energy of the photon, you can specify the normal products you want:

> 

%eval(S[2], [`=`(legs, 2), `=`(products, _NP(A, A))]) = FeynmanDiagrams(L__QED, numberofvertices = 2, numberoflegs = 2, normalproduct = _NP(A, A))

`* Partial match of  '`*normalproduct*`' against keyword '`*normalproducts*`' `

 

%eval(S[2], [legs = 2, products = _NP(A, A)]) = %FeynmanIntegral(alpha^2*Physics:-Dgamma[`~mu`][j, k]*Physics:-Dgamma[`~alpha`][i, l]*_GF(_NP(A[mu](X), A[alpha](Y)), [[conjugate(psi[j](X)), psi[l](Y)], [psi[k](X), conjugate(psi[i](Y))]]), [[X], [Y]])

(1.17)

The corresponding S-matrix elements in momentum representation

> 

`#mfenced(mrow(mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mi("&psi;",fontstyle = "normal"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mo("&verbar;"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mi("S"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mo("&verbar;"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mi("&psi;",fontstyle = "normal"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;")),open = "&lang;",close = "&rang;")` = FeynmanDiagrams(L__QED, incomingparticles = [psi], outgoing = [psi], numberofloops = 1, diagrams)

 

`#mfenced(mrow(mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mi("&psi;",fontstyle = "normal"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mo("&verbar;"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mi("S"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mo("&verbar;"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mi("&psi;",fontstyle = "normal"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;")),open = "&lang;",close = "&rang;")` = -%FeynmanIntegral((1/8)*Physics:-FeynmanDiagrams:-Uspinor[psi][i](P__1_)*conjugate(Physics:-FeynmanDiagrams:-Uspinor[psi][l](P__2_))*(-Physics:-g_[alpha, nu]+p__2[nu]*p__2[alpha]/m__A^2)*alpha^2*Physics:-Dgamma[`~alpha`][l, m]*Physics:-Dgamma[`~nu`][n, i]*((P__1[beta]+p__2[beta])*Physics:-Dgamma[`~beta`][m, n]+m__psi*Physics:-KroneckerDelta[m, n])*Dirac(-P__2+P__1)/(Pi^3*(p__2^2-m__A^2+I*Physics:-FeynmanDiagrams:-epsilon)*((P__1+p__2)^2-m__psi^2+I*Physics:-FeynmanDiagrams:-epsilon)), [[p__2]])

(1.18)


In this result we see u[psi] spinor (see ref.[2]), and the propagator of the field A[mu] with a mass m[A]. To indicate that this field is massless use

> 

Setup(massless = A)

`* Partial match of  '`*massless*`' against keyword '`*masslessfields*`' `

 

_______________________________________________________

 

[masslessfields = {A}]

(1.19)

Now the propagator for A[mu] is the one of a massless vector field:

> 

FeynmanDiagrams(L__QED, incoming = [psi], outgoing = [psi], numberofloops = 1)

-%FeynmanIntegral(-(1/8)*Physics:-FeynmanDiagrams:-Uspinor[psi][i](P__1_)*conjugate(Physics:-FeynmanDiagrams:-Uspinor[psi][l](P__2_))*Physics:-g_[alpha, nu]*alpha^2*Physics:-Dgamma[`~alpha`][l, m]*Physics:-Dgamma[`~nu`][n, i]*((P__1[beta]+p__2[beta])*Physics:-Dgamma[`~beta`][m, n]+m__psi*Physics:-KroneckerDelta[m, n])*Dirac(-P__2+P__1)/(Pi^3*(p__2^2+I*Physics:-FeynmanDiagrams:-epsilon)*((P__1+p__2)^2-m__psi^2+I*Physics:-FeynmanDiagrams:-epsilon)), [[p__2]])

(1.20)

The self-energy of the photon:

> 

`#mfenced(mrow(mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mi("A"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mo("&verbar;"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mi("S"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mo("&verbar;"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mi("A"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;")),open = "&lang;",close = "&rang;")` = FeynmanDiagrams(L__QED, incomingparticles = [A], outgoing = [A], numberofloops = 1)

`#mfenced(mrow(mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mi("A"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mo("&verbar;"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mi("S"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mo("&verbar;"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;"),mi("A"),mo("&InvisibleTimes;")),open = "&lang;",close = "&rang;")` = -%FeynmanIntegral((1/16)*Physics:-FeynmanDiagrams:-PolarizationVector[A][nu](P__1_)*conjugate(Physics:-FeynmanDiagrams:-PolarizationVector[A][alpha](P__2_))*(m__psi*Physics:-KroneckerDelta[l, n]+p__2[beta]*Physics:-Dgamma[`~beta`][l, n])*alpha^2*Physics:-Dgamma[`~alpha`][n, i]*Physics:-Dgamma[`~nu`][m, l]*((P__1[tau]+p__2[tau])*Physics:-Dgamma[`~tau`][i, m]+m__psi*Physics:-KroneckerDelta[i, m])*Dirac(-P__2+P__1)/(Pi^3*(E__1*E__2)^(1/2)*(p__2^2-m__psi^2+I*Physics:-FeynmanDiagrams:-epsilon)*((P__1+p__2)^2-m__psi^2+I*Physics:-FeynmanDiagrams:-epsilon)), [[p__2]])

(1.21)

where epsilon[A] is the corresponding polarization vector.

When working with non-Abelian gauge fields, the interaction Lagrangian involves derivatives. FeynmanDiagrams  can handle that kind of interaction in momentum representation. Consider for instance a Yang-Mills theory with a massless field B[mu, a] where a is a SU2 index (see eq.(12) of sec. 19.4 of ref.[1]). The interaction Lagrangian can be entered as follows

> 

Setup(su2indices = lowercaselatin_ah, massless = B, op = B)

`* Partial match of  '`*massless*`' against keyword '`*masslessfields*`' `

 

`* Partial match of  '`*op*`' against keyword '`*quantumoperators*`' `

 

_______________________________________________________

 

[masslessfields = {A, B}, quantumoperators = {A, B, phi, psi, psi1}, su2indices = lowercaselatin_ah]

(1.22)
> 

Define(B[mu, a], quiet)

> 

F__B[mu, nu, a] := d_[mu](B[nu, a](X))-d_[nu](B[mu, a](X))

Physics:-d_[mu](B[nu, a](X), [X])-Physics:-d_[nu](B[mu, a](X), [X])

(1.23)
> 

L := (1/2)*g*LeviCivita[a, b, c]*F__B[mu, nu, a]*B[mu, b](X)*B[nu, c](X)+(1/4)*g^2*LeviCivita[a, b, c]*LeviCivita[a, e, f]*B[mu, b](X)*B[nu, c](X)*B[mu, e](X)*B[nu, f](X)

(1/2)*g*Physics:-LeviCivita[a, b, c]*Physics:-`*`(Physics:-d_[mu](B[nu, a](X), [X])-Physics:-d_[nu](B[mu, a](X), [X]), B[`~mu`, b](X), B[`~nu`, c](X))+(1/4)*g^2*Physics:-LeviCivita[a, b, c]*Physics:-LeviCivita[a, e, f]*Physics:-`*`(B[mu, b](X), B[nu, c](X), B[`~mu`, e](X), B[`~nu`, f](X))

(1.24)

The transition probability density at tree-level for a process with two incoming and two outgoing B particles is given by

> 

FeynmanDiagrams(L, incomingparticles = [B, B], outgoingparticles = [B, B], numberofloops = 0, output = probabilitydensity, factor, diagrams)

`* Partial match of  '`*factor*`' against keyword '`*factortreelevel*`' `

(1.25)

 

 

Physics:-FeynmanDiagrams:-ProbabilityDensity(4*Pi^2*%mul(n[i], i = 1 .. 2)*abs(F)^2*Dirac(-P__3[`~sigma`]-P__4[`~sigma`]+P__1[`~sigma`]+P__2[`~sigma`])*%mul(dP_[f]^3, f = 1 .. 2), F = (((1/8)*I)*Physics:-LeviCivita[a1, a3, h]*((-P__1[`~kappa`]-P__2[`~kappa`]-P__4[`~kappa`])*Physics:-g_[`~lambda`, `~tau`]+(P__1[`~lambda`]+P__2[`~lambda`]+P__3[`~lambda`])*Physics:-g_[`~kappa`, `~tau`]-Physics:-g_[`~kappa`, `~lambda`]*(P__3[`~tau`]-P__4[`~tau`]))*Physics:-LeviCivita[a2, d, g]*((P__1[`~beta`]+(1/2)*P__2[`~beta`])*Physics:-g_[`~alpha`, `~sigma`]+(-(1/2)*P__1[`~sigma`]+(1/2)*P__2[`~sigma`])*Physics:-g_[`~alpha`, `~beta`]-(1/2)*Physics:-g_[`~beta`, `~sigma`]*(P__1[`~alpha`]+2*P__2[`~alpha`]))*Physics:-g_[sigma, tau]*Physics:-KroneckerDelta[a2, a3]/((-P__1[chi]-P__2[chi])*(-P__1[`~chi`]-P__2[`~chi`])+I*Physics:-FeynmanDiagrams:-epsilon)-((1/16)*I)*((-P__1[`~beta`]+P__3[`~beta`]-P__4[`~beta`])*Physics:-g_[`~lambda`, `~tau`]+(P__1[`~lambda`]-P__2[`~lambda`]-P__3[`~lambda`])*Physics:-g_[`~beta`, `~tau`]+Physics:-g_[`~beta`, `~lambda`]*(P__2[`~tau`]+P__4[`~tau`]))*Physics:-LeviCivita[a1, a3, g]*((P__1[`~sigma`]+P__3[`~sigma`])*Physics:-g_[`~alpha`, `~kappa`]+(-2*P__1[`~kappa`]+P__3[`~kappa`])*Physics:-g_[`~alpha`, `~sigma`]+Physics:-g_[`~kappa`, `~sigma`]*(P__1[`~alpha`]-2*P__3[`~alpha`]))*Physics:-LeviCivita[a2, d, h]*Physics:-g_[sigma, tau]*Physics:-KroneckerDelta[a2, a3]/((-P__1[chi]+P__3[chi])*(-P__1[`~chi`]+P__3[`~chi`])+I*Physics:-FeynmanDiagrams:-epsilon)-((1/16)*I)*((-P__1[`~beta`]-P__3[`~beta`]+P__4[`~beta`])*Physics:-g_[`~kappa`, `~tau`]+(P__1[`~kappa`]-P__2[`~kappa`]-P__4[`~kappa`])*Physics:-g_[`~beta`, `~tau`]+Physics:-g_[`~beta`, `~kappa`]*(P__2[`~tau`]+P__3[`~tau`]))*Physics:-LeviCivita[a3, g, h]*((P__1[`~sigma`]+P__4[`~sigma`])*Physics:-g_[`~alpha`, `~lambda`]+(P__1[`~alpha`]-2*P__4[`~alpha`])*Physics:-g_[`~lambda`, `~sigma`]-2*Physics:-g_[`~alpha`, `~sigma`]*(P__1[`~lambda`]-(1/2)*P__4[`~lambda`]))*Physics:-LeviCivita[a1, a2, d]*Physics:-g_[sigma, tau]*Physics:-KroneckerDelta[a2, a3]/((-P__1[chi]+P__4[chi])*(-P__1[`~chi`]+P__4[`~chi`])+I*Physics:-FeynmanDiagrams:-epsilon)-((1/16)*I)*(Physics:-KroneckerDelta[g, h]*Physics:-KroneckerDelta[a1, d]*(Physics:-g_[`~alpha`, `~beta`]*Physics:-g_[`~kappa`, `~lambda`]+Physics:-g_[`~alpha`, `~kappa`]*Physics:-g_[`~beta`, `~lambda`]-2*Physics:-g_[`~alpha`, `~lambda`]*Physics:-g_[`~beta`, `~kappa`])+Physics:-KroneckerDelta[d, h]*(Physics:-g_[`~alpha`, `~beta`]*Physics:-g_[`~kappa`, `~lambda`]-2*Physics:-g_[`~alpha`, `~kappa`]*Physics:-g_[`~beta`, `~lambda`]+Physics:-g_[`~alpha`, `~lambda`]*Physics:-g_[`~beta`, `~kappa`])*Physics:-KroneckerDelta[a1, g]-2*(Physics:-g_[`~alpha`, `~beta`]*Physics:-g_[`~kappa`, `~lambda`]-(1/2)*Physics:-g_[`~beta`, `~kappa`]*Physics:-g_[`~alpha`, `~lambda`]-(1/2)*Physics:-g_[`~alpha`, `~kappa`]*Physics:-g_[`~beta`, `~lambda`])*Physics:-KroneckerDelta[d, g]*Physics:-KroneckerDelta[a1, h]))*g^2*conjugate(Physics:-FeynmanDiagrams:-PolarizationVector[B][kappa, h](P__3_))*conjugate(Physics:-FeynmanDiagrams:-PolarizationVector[B][lambda, a1](P__4_))*Physics:-FeynmanDiagrams:-PolarizationVector[B][alpha, d](P__1_)*Physics:-FeynmanDiagrams:-PolarizationVector[B][beta, g](P__2_)/(Pi^2*(E__1*E__2*E__3*E__4)^(1/2)))

(1.26)

To simplify the repeated indices, us the option simplifytensorindices. To check the indices entering a result like this one use Check ; there are no free indices, and regarding the repeated indices:

> 

Check(Physics[FeynmanDiagrams]:-ProbabilityDensity(4*Pi^2*%mul(n[i], i = 1 .. 2)*abs(F)^2*Dirac(-P__3[`~sigma`]-P__4[`~sigma`]+P__1[`~sigma`]+P__2[`~sigma`])*%mul(dP_[f]^3, f = 1 .. 2), F = (((1/8)*I)*Physics[LeviCivita][a1, a3, h]*((-P__1[`~kappa`]-P__2[`~kappa`]-P__4[`~kappa`])*Physics[g_][`~lambda`, `~tau`]+(P__1[`~lambda`]+P__2[`~lambda`]+P__3[`~lambda`])*Physics[g_][`~kappa`, `~tau`]-Physics[g_][`~kappa`, `~lambda`]*(P__3[`~tau`]-P__4[`~tau`]))*Physics[LeviCivita][a2, d, g]*((P__1[`~beta`]+(1/2)*P__2[`~beta`])*Physics[g_][`~alpha`, `~sigma`]+(-(1/2)*P__1[`~sigma`]+(1/2)*P__2[`~sigma`])*Physics[g_][`~alpha`, `~beta`]-(1/2)*Physics[g_][`~beta`, `~sigma`]*(P__1[`~alpha`]+2*P__2[`~alpha`]))*Physics[g_][sigma, tau]*Physics[KroneckerDelta][a2, a3]/((-P__1[chi]-P__2[chi])*(-P__1[`~chi`]-P__2[`~chi`])+I*Physics[FeynmanDiagrams]:-epsilon)-((1/16)*I)*((-P__1[`~beta`]+P__3[`~beta`]-P__4[`~beta`])*Physics[g_][`~lambda`, `~tau`]+(P__1[`~lambda`]-P__2[`~lambda`]-P__3[`~lambda`])*Physics[g_][`~beta`, `~tau`]+Physics[g_][`~beta`, `~lambda`]*(P__2[`~tau`]+P__4[`~tau`]))*Physics[LeviCivita][a1, a3, g]*((P__1[`~sigma`]+P__3[`~sigma`])*Physics[g_][`~alpha`, `~kappa`]+(-2*P__1[`~kappa`]+P__3[`~kappa`])*Physics[g_][`~alpha`, `~sigma`]+Physics[g_][`~kappa`, `~sigma`]*(P__1[`~alpha`]-2*P__3[`~alpha`]))*Physics[LeviCivita][a2, d, h]*Physics[g_][sigma, tau]*Physics[KroneckerDelta][a2, a3]/((-P__1[chi]+P__3[chi])*(-P__1[`~chi`]+P__3[`~chi`])+I*Physics[FeynmanDiagrams]:-epsilon)-((1/16)*I)*((-P__1[`~beta`]-P__3[`~beta`]+P__4[`~beta`])*Physics[g_][`~kappa`, `~tau`]+(P__1[`~kappa`]-P__2[`~kappa`]-P__4[`~kappa`])*Physics[g_][`~beta`, `~tau`]+Physics[g_][`~beta`, `~kappa`]*(P__2[`~tau`]+P__3[`~tau`]))*Physics[LeviCivita][a3, g, h]*((P__1[`~sigma`]+P__4[`~sigma`])*Physics[g_][`~alpha`, `~lambda`]+(P__1[`~alpha`]-2*P__4[`~alpha`])*Physics[g_][`~lambda`, `~sigma`]-2*Physics[g_][`~alpha`, `~sigma`]*(P__1[`~lambda`]-(1/2)*P__4[`~lambda`]))*Physics[LeviCivita][a1, a2, d]*Physics[g_][sigma, tau]*Physics[KroneckerDelta][a2, a3]/((-P__1[chi]+P__4[chi])*(-P__1[`~chi`]+P__4[`~chi`])+I*Physics[FeynmanDiagrams]:-epsilon)-((1/16)*I)*(Physics[KroneckerDelta][g, h]*Physics[KroneckerDelta][a1, d]*(Physics[g_][`~alpha`, `~beta`]*Physics[g_][`~kappa`, `~lambda`]+Physics[g_][`~alpha`, `~kappa`]*Physics[g_][`~beta`, `~lambda`]-2*Physics[g_][`~alpha`, `~lambda`]*Physics[g_][`~beta`, `~kappa`])+Physics[KroneckerDelta][d, h]*(Physics[g_][`~alpha`, `~beta`]*Physics[g_][`~kappa`, `~lambda`]-2*Physics[g_][`~alpha`, `~kappa`]*Physics[g_][`~beta`, `~lambda`]+Physics[g_][`~alpha`, `~lambda`]*Physics[g_][`~beta`, `~kappa`])*Physics[KroneckerDelta][a1, g]-2*(Physics[g_][`~alpha`, `~beta`]*Physics[g_][`~kappa`, `~lambda`]-(1/2)*Physics[g_][`~alpha`, `~lambda`]*Physics[g_][`~beta`, `~kappa`]-(1/2)*Physics[g_][`~alpha`, `~kappa`]*Physics[g_][`~beta`, `~lambda`])*Physics[KroneckerDelta][d, g]*Physics[KroneckerDelta][a1, h]))*g^2*conjugate(Physics[FeynmanDiagrams]:-PolarizationVector[B][kappa, h](P__3_))*conjugate(Physics[FeynmanDiagrams]:-PolarizationVector[B][lambda, a1](P__4_))*Physics[FeynmanDiagrams]:-PolarizationVector[B][alpha, d](P__1_)*Physics[FeynmanDiagrams]:-PolarizationVector[B][beta, g](P__2_)/(Pi^2*(E__1*E__2*E__3*E__4)^(1/2))), all)

`The repeated indices per term are: `[{`...`}, {`...`}, `...`]*`, the free indices are: `*{`...`}

 

[{a1, a2, a3, alpha, beta, chi, d, g, h, kappa, lambda, sigma, tau}], {}

(1.27)


This process can be computed with 1 or more loops, in which case the number of terms increases significantly. As another interesting non-Abelian model, consider the interaction Lagrangian of the electro-weak part of the Standard Model

> 

Coordinates(clear, Z)

`Unaliasing `*{Z}*` previously defined as a system of spacetime coordinates`

(1.28)
> 

Setup(quantumoperators = {W, Z})

[quantumoperators = {A, B, W, Z, phi, psi, psi1}]

(1.29)
> 

Define(W[mu], Z[mu])

`Defined objects with tensor properties`

 

{A[mu], B[mu, a], Physics:-Dgamma[mu], P__1[mu], P__2[mu], P__3[alpha], P__4[alpha], Physics:-Psigma[mu], W[mu], Z[mu], Physics:-d_[mu], Physics:-g_[mu, nu], p__1[mu], p__2[mu], p__3[mu], p__4[mu], p__5[mu], psi[j], Physics:-LeviCivita[alpha, beta, mu, nu], Physics:-SpaceTimeVector[mu](X), Physics:-SpaceTimeVector[mu](Y)}

(1.30)
> 

CompactDisplay((W, Z)(X))

` W`(X)*`will now be displayed as`*W

 

` Z`(X)*`will now be displayed as`*Z

(1.31)
> 

F__W[mu, nu] := d_[mu](W[nu](X))-d_[nu](W[mu](X))

Physics:-d_[mu](W[nu](X), [X])-Physics:-d_[nu](W[mu](X), [X])

(1.32)
> 

F__Z[mu, nu] := d_[mu](Z[nu](X))-d_[nu](Z[mu](X))

Physics:-d_[mu](Z[nu](X), [X])-Physics:-d_[nu](Z[mu](X), [X])

(1.33)
> 

L__WZ := I*g*cos(`&theta;__w`)*((Dagger(F__W[mu, nu])*W[mu](X)-Dagger(W[mu](X))*F__W[mu, nu])*Z[nu](X)+W[nu](X)*Dagger(W[mu](X))*F__Z[mu, nu])

I*g*cos(theta__w)*(Physics:-`*`(Physics:-`*`(Physics:-d_[mu](Physics:-Dagger(W[nu](X)), [X])-Physics:-d_[nu](Physics:-Dagger(W[mu](X)), [X]), W[`~mu`](X))-Physics:-`*`(Physics:-Dagger(W[mu](X)), Physics:-d_[`~mu`](W[nu](X), [X])-Physics:-d_[nu](W[`~mu`](X), [X])), Z[`~nu`](X))+Physics:-`*`(W[nu](X), Physics:-Dagger(W[mu](X)), Physics:-d_[`~mu`](Z[`~nu`](X), [X])-Physics:-d_[`~nu`](Z[`~mu`](X), [X])))

(1.34)

This interaction Lagrangian contains six different terms. The S-matrix element for the tree-level process with two incoming and two outgoing W particles is shown in the help page for FeynmanDiagrams .

> 

NULL

References

 

[1] Bogoliubov, N.N., and Shirkov, D.V. Quantum Fields. Benjamin Cummings, 1982.

[2] Weinberg, S., The Quantum Theory Of Fields. Cambridge University Press, 2005.

 

FeynmanDiagrams_and_the_Scattering_Matrix.PDF

FeynmanDiagrams_and_the_Scattering_Matrix.mw

FeynmanDiagrams_-_help_page.mw


Edgardo S. Cheb-Terrab
Physics, Differential Equations and Mathematical Functions, Maplesoft

Splitting PDE parameterized symmetries

and Parameter-continuous symmetry transformations

The determination of symmetries for partial differential equation systems (PDE) is relevant in several contexts, the most obvious of which is of course the determination of the PDE solutions. For instance, generally speaking, the knowledge of a N-dimensional Lie symmetry group can be used to reduce the number of independent variables of PDE by N. So if PDE depends only on N independent variables, that amounts to completely solving it. If only N-1 symmetries are known or can be successfully used then PDE becomes and ODE; etc., all advantageous situations. In Maple, a complete set of symmetry commands, to perform each step of the symmetry approach or several of them in one go, is part of the PDEtools  package.

 

Besides the dependent and independent variables, PDE frequently depends on some constant parameters, and besides the PDE symmetries for arbitrary values of those parameters, for some particular values of them, PDE transforms into a completely different problem, admitting different symmetries. The question then is: how can you determine those particular values of the parameters and the corresponding different symmetries? That was the underlying subject of a recent question in Mapleprimes. The answer to those questions is relatively simple and yet not entirely obvious for most of us, motivating this post, organized briefly around one example.

 

To reproduce the input/output below you need Maple 2019 and to have installed the Physics Updates v.449 or higher.

 

Consider the family of Korteweg-de Vries equation for u(x, t)involving three constant parameters a, b, q. For convenience (simpler input and more readable output) use the diff_table  and declare  commands

> 

with(PDEtools)

> 

U := diff_table(u(x, t))

> 

pde := b*U[]*U[x]+a*U[x]+q*U[x, x, x]+U[t] = 0

b*u(x, t)*(diff(u(x, t), x))+a*(diff(u(x, t), x))+q*(diff(diff(diff(u(x, t), x), x), x))+diff(u(x, t), t) = 0

(1)
> 

declare(U[])

` u`(x, t)*`will now be displayed as`*u

(2)

This pde admits a 4-dimensional symmetry group, whose infinitesimals - for arbitrary values of the parameters a, b, q- are given by

> 

I__1 := Infinitesimals(pde, [u], specialize_Cn = false)

[_xi[x](x, t, u) = (1/3)*_C1*x+_C3*t+_C4, _xi[t](x, t, u) = _C1*t+_C2, _eta[u](x, t, u) = (1/3)*((-2*b*u-2*a)*_C1+3*_C3)/b]

(3)

Looking at pde (1) as a nonlinear problem in u, a, b and q, it splits into four cases for some particular values of the parameter:

> 

pde__cases := casesplit(b*u(x, t)*(diff(u(x, t), x))+a*(diff(u(x, t), x))+q*(diff(diff(diff(u(x, t), x), x), x))+diff(u(x, t), t) = 0, parameters = {a, b, q}, caseplot)

`========= Pivots Legend =========`

 

p1 = q

 

p2 = b*u(x, t)+a

 

p3 = b

 

 

`casesplit/ans`([diff(diff(diff(u(x, t), x), x), x) = -(b*u(x, t)*(diff(u(x, t), x))+a*(diff(u(x, t), x))+diff(u(x, t), t))/q], [q <> 0]), `casesplit/ans`([diff(u(x, t), x) = -(diff(u(x, t), t))/(b*u(x, t)+a), q = 0], [b*u(x, t)+a <> 0]), `casesplit/ans`([u(x, t) = -a/b, q = 0], [b <> 0]), `casesplit/ans`([diff(u(x, t), t) = 0, a = 0, b = 0, q = 0], [])

(4)

The legend above indicates the pivots and the tree of cases, depending on whether each pivot is equal or different from 0. At the end there is the algebraic sequence of cases. The first case is the general case, for which the symmetry infinitesimals were computed as I__1 above, but clearly the other three cases admit more general symmetries. Consider for instance the second case, pass the ignoreparameterizingequations to ignore the parameterizing equation q = 0, and you get

> 

I__2 := Infinitesimals(pde__cases[2], ignore)

`* Partial match of  'ignore' against keyword 'ignoreparameterizingequations'`

 

[_xi[x](x, t, u) = _F3(x, t, u), _xi[t](x, t, u) = Intat(((b*u+a)*(D[1](_F3))(_a, ((b*u+a)*t-x+_a)/(b*u+a), u)-_F1(u, ((b*u+a)*t-x)/(b*u+a))*b+(D[2](_F3))(_a, ((b*u+a)*t-x+_a)/(b*u+a), u))/(b*u+a)^2, _a = x)+_F2(u, ((b*u+a)*t-x)/(b*u+a)), _eta[u](x, t, u) = _F1(u, ((b*u+a)*t-x)/(b*u+a))]

(5)

These infinitesimals are indeed much more general than I__1, in fact so general that (5) is almost unreadable ... Specialize the three arbitrary functions into something "easy" just to be able follow - e.g. take _F1 to be just the + operator, _F2 the * operator and _F3 = 1

> 

eval(I__2, [_F1 = `+`, _F2 = `*`, _F3 = 1])

[_xi[x](x, t, u) = 1, _xi[t](x, t, u) = Intat(-(u+((b*u+a)*t-x)/(b*u+a))*b/(b*u+a)^2, _a = x)+u*((b*u+a)*t-x)/(b*u+a), _eta[u](x, t, u) = u+((b*u+a)*t-x)/(b*u+a)]

(6)
> 

simplify(value([_xi[x](x, t, u) = 1, _xi[t](x, t, u) = Intat(-(u+((b*u+a)*t-x)/(b*u+a))*b/(b*u+a)^2, _a = x)+u*((b*u+a)*t-x)/(b*u+a), _eta[u](x, t, u) = u+((b*u+a)*t-x)/(b*u+a)]))

[_xi[x](x, t, u) = 1, _xi[t](x, t, u) = (b^3*t*u^4+((3*a*t-x)*u^3-u^2*x-t*x*u)*b^2+((3*a^2*t-2*a*x)*u^2-a*u*x-a*t*x+x^2)*b+a^2*u*(a*t-x))/(b*u+a)^3, _eta[u](x, t, u) = (b*u^2+(b*t+a)*u+a*t-x)/(b*u+a)]

(7)

This symmetry is of course completely different than [_xi[x](x, t, u) = (1/3)*_C1*x+_C3*t+_C4, _xi[t](x, t, u) = _C1*t+_C2, _eta[u](x, t, u) = ((-2*b*u-2*a)*_C1+3*_C3)/(3*b)]computed for the general case.

 

The symmetry (7) can be verified against pde__cases[2] or directly against pde after substituting q = 0.

[_xi[x](x, t, u) = (1/3)*_C1*x+_C3*t+_C4, _xi[t](x, t, u) = _C1*t+_C2, _eta[u](x, t, u) = (1/3)*((-2*b*u-2*a)*_C1+3*_C3)/b]

(8)
> 

SymmetryTest([_xi[x](x, t, u) = 1, _xi[t](x, t, u) = (b^3*t*u^4+((3*a*t-x)*u^3-u^2*x-t*x*u)*b^2+((3*a^2*t-2*a*x)*u^2-a*u*x-a*t*x+x^2)*b+a^2*u*(a*t-x))/(b*u+a)^3, _eta[u](x, t, u) = (b*u^2+(b*t+a)*u+a*t-x)/(b*u+a)], pde__cases[2], ignore)

`* Partial match of  'ignore' against keyword 'ignoreparameterizingequations'`

 

{0}

(9)
> 

SymmetryTest([_xi[x](x, t, u) = 1, _xi[t](x, t, u) = (b^3*t*u^4+((3*a*t-x)*u^3-u^2*x-t*x*u)*b^2+((3*a^2*t-2*a*x)*u^2-a*u*x-a*t*x+x^2)*b+a^2*u*(a*t-x))/(b*u+a)^3, _eta[u](x, t, u) = (b*u^2+(b*t+a)*u+a*t-x)/(b*u+a)], subs(q = 0, pde))

{0}

(10)

Summarizing: "to split PDE symmetries into cases according to the values of the PDE parameters, split the PDE into cases with respect to these parameters (command PDEtools:-casesplit ) then compute the symmetries for each case"

 

Parameter continuous symmetry transformations

 

A different, however closely related question, is whether pde admits "symmetries with respect to the parameters a, b and q", so whether exists continuous transformations of the parameters a, b and q that leave pde invariant in form.

 

Beforehand, note that since the parameters are constants with regards to the dependent and independent variables (here u(x, t)), such continuous symmetry transformations cannot be used directly to compute a solution for pde. They can, however, be used to reduce the number of parameters. And in some contexts, that is exactly what we need, for example to entirely remove the splitting into cases due to their presence, or to proceed applying a solving method that is valid only when there are no parameters (frequently the case when computing exact solutions to "PDE & Boundary Conditions").

 

To compute such "continuous symmetry transformations of the parameters" that leave pde invariant one can always think of these parameters as "additional independent variables of pde". In terms of formulation, that amounts to replacing the dependency in the dependent variable, i.e. replace u(x, t) by u(x, t, a, b, q)

 

> 

pde__xtabq := subs((x, t) = (x, t, a, b, q), pde)

b*u(x, t, a, b, q)*(diff(u(x, t, a, b, q), x))+a*(diff(u(x, t, a, b, q), x))+q*(diff(diff(diff(u(x, t, a, b, q), x), x), x))+diff(u(x, t, a, b, q), t) = 0

(11)

Compute now the infinitesimals: note there are now three additional ones, related to continuous transformations of "a,b,"and q - for readability, avoid displaying the redundant functionality x, t, a, b, q, u on the left-hand sides of these infinitesimals

> 

Infinitesimals(pde__xtabq, displayfunctionality = false)

[_xi[x] = (1/3)*(_F4(a, b, q)*q+_F3(a, b, q))*x/q+_F6(a, b, q)*t+_F7(a, b, q), _xi[t] = _F4(a, b, q)*t+_F5(a, b, q), _xi[a] = _F1(a, b, q), _xi[b] = _F2(a, b, q), _xi[q] = _F3(a, b, q), _eta[u] = (1/3)*((b*u+a)*_F3(a, b, q)-2*((b*u+a)*_F4(a, b, q)+(3/2)*u*_F2(a, b, q)+(3/2)*_F1(a, b, q)-(3/2)*_F6(a, b, q))*q)/(b*q)]

(12)

This result is more general than what is convenient for algebraic manipulations, so specialize the seven arbitrary functions of a, b, q and keep only the first symmetry that result from this specialization: that suffices to illustrate the removal of any of the three parameters a, b, or q

> 

S := Library:-Specialize_Fn([_xi[x] = (1/3)*(_F4(a, b, q)*q+_F3(a, b, q))*x/q+_F6(a, b, q)*t+_F7(a, b, q), _xi[t] = _F4(a, b, q)*t+_F5(a, b, q), _xi[a] = _F1(a, b, q), _xi[b] = _F2(a, b, q), _xi[q] = _F3(a, b, q), _eta[u] = (1/3)*((b*u+a)*_F3(a, b, q)-2*((b*u+a)*_F4(a, b, q)+(3/2)*u*_F2(a, b, q)+(3/2)*_F1(a, b, q)-(3/2)*_F6(a, b, q))*q)/(b*q)])[1 .. 1]

[_xi[x] = 0, _xi[t] = 0, _xi[a] = 1, _xi[b] = 0, _xi[q] = 0, _eta[u] = -1/b]

(13)

To remove the parameters, as it is standard in the symmetry approach, compute a transformation to canonical coordinates, with respect to the parameter a. That means a transformation that changes the list of infinitesimals, or likewise its infinitesimal generator representation,

> 

InfinitesimalGenerator(S, [u(x, t, a, b, q)])

proc (f) options operator, arrow; diff(f, a)-(diff(f, u))/b end proc

(14)

into [_xi[x] = 0, _xi[t] = 0, _xi[a] = 1, _xi[b] = 0, _xi[q] = 0, _eta[u] = 0] or its equivalent generator representation  proc (f) options operator, arrow; diff(f, a) end proc

That same transformation, when applied to pde__xtabq, entirely removes the parameter a.

The transformation is computed using CanonicalCoordinates and the last argument indicates the "independent variable" (in our case a parameter) that the transformation should remove. We choose to remove a

> 

CanonicalCoordinates(S, [u(x, t, a, b, q)], [upsilon(xi, tau, alpha, beta, chi)], a)

{alpha = a, beta = b, chi = q, tau = t, xi = x, upsilon(xi, tau, alpha, beta, chi) = (b*u(x, t, a, b, q)+a)/b}

(15)
> 

declare({alpha = a, beta = b, chi = q, tau = t, xi = x, upsilon(xi, tau, alpha, beta, chi) = (b*u(x, t, a, b, q)+a)/b})

` u`(x, t, a, b, q)*`will now be displayed as`*u

 

` upsilon`(xi, tau, alpha, beta, chi)*`will now be displayed as`*upsilon

(16)

Invert this transformation in order to apply it

> 

solve({alpha = a, beta = b, chi = q, tau = t, xi = x, upsilon(xi, tau, alpha, beta, chi) = (b*u(x, t, a, b, q)+a)/b}, {a, b, q, t, x, u(x, t, a, b, q)})

{a = alpha, b = beta, q = chi, t = tau, x = xi, u(x, t, a, b, q) = (upsilon(xi, tau, alpha, beta, chi)*beta-alpha)/beta}

(17)

The next step is not necessary, but just to understand how all this works, verify its action over the infinitesimal generator proc (f) options operator, arrow; diff(f, a)-(diff(f, u))/b end proc

> 

ChangeSymmetry({a = alpha, b = beta, q = chi, t = tau, x = xi, u(x, t, a, b, q) = (upsilon(xi, tau, alpha, beta, chi)*beta-alpha)/beta}, proc (f) options operator, arrow; diff(f, a)-(diff(f, u))/b end proc, [upsilon(xi, tau, alpha, beta, chi), xi, tau, alpha, beta, chi])

proc (f) options operator, arrow; diff(f, alpha) end proc

(18)

Now that we see the transformation (17) is the one we want, just use it to change variables in pde__xtabq

> 

PDEtools:-dchange({a = alpha, b = beta, q = chi, t = tau, x = xi, u(x, t, a, b, q) = (upsilon(xi, tau, alpha, beta, chi)*beta-alpha)/beta}, pde__xtabq, [upsilon(xi, tau, alpha, beta, chi), xi, tau, alpha, beta, chi], simplify)

upsilon(xi, tau, alpha, beta, chi)*(diff(upsilon(xi, tau, alpha, beta, chi), xi))*beta+chi*(diff(diff(diff(upsilon(xi, tau, alpha, beta, chi), xi), xi), xi))+diff(upsilon(xi, tau, alpha, beta, chi), tau) = 0

(19)

As expected, this result depends only on two parameters, beta, and chi, and the one equivalent to a (that is alpha, see the transformation used (17)), is not present anymore.

To remove b or q we use the same steps, (15), (17) and (19), just changing the parameter to be removed, indicated as the last argument  in the call to CanonicalCoordinates . For example, to eliminate b (represented in the new variables by beta), input

> 

CanonicalCoordinates(S, [u(x, t, a, b, q)], [upsilon(xi, tau, alpha, beta, chi)], b)

{alpha = b, beta = a, chi = q, tau = t, xi = x, upsilon(xi, tau, alpha, beta, chi) = (b*u(x, t, a, b, q)+a)/b}

(20)
> 

solve({alpha = b, beta = a, chi = q, tau = t, xi = x, upsilon(xi, tau, alpha, beta, chi) = (b*u(x, t, a, b, q)+a)/b}, {a, b, q, t, x, u(x, t, a, b, q)})

{a = beta, b = alpha, q = chi, t = tau, x = xi, u(x, t, a, b, q) = (upsilon(xi, tau, alpha, beta, chi)*alpha-beta)/alpha}

(21)
> 

PDEtools:-dchange({a = beta, b = alpha, q = chi, t = tau, x = xi, u(x, t, a, b, q) = (upsilon(xi, tau, alpha, beta, chi)*alpha-beta)/alpha}, pde__xtabq, [upsilon(xi, tau, alpha, beta, chi), xi, tau, alpha, beta, chi], simplify)

upsilon(xi, tau, alpha, beta, chi)*(diff(upsilon(xi, tau, alpha, beta, chi), xi))*alpha+chi*(diff(diff(diff(upsilon(xi, tau, alpha, beta, chi), xi), xi), xi))+diff(upsilon(xi, tau, alpha, beta, chi), tau) = 0

(22)

and as expected this result does not contain "beta. "To remove a second parameter, the whole cycle is repeated starting with computing infinitesimals, for instance for (22). Finally, the case of function parameters is treated analogously, by considering the function parameters as additional dependent variables instead of independent ones.

 


 

Download How_to_split_symmetries_into_cases_(II).mw

Edgardo S. Cheb-Terrab
Physics, Differential Equations and Mathematical Functions, Maplesoft

Integral Transforms (revamped) and PDEs

 

Integral transforms, implemented in Maple as the inttrans  package, are special integrals that appear frequently in mathematical-physics and that have remarkable properties. One of the main uses of integral transforms is for the computation of exact solutions to ordinary and partial differential equations with initial/boundary conditions. In Maple, that functionality is implemented in dsolve/inttrans  and in pdsolve/boundary conditions .

 

During the last months, we have been working heavily on several aspects of these integral transform functions and this post is about that. This is work in progress, in collaboration with Katherina von Bulow. 

 

The integral transforms are represented by the commands of the inttrans  package:

> 

with(inttrans)

[addtable, fourier, fouriercos, fouriersin, hankel, hilbert, invfourier, invhilbert, invlaplace, invmellin, laplace, mellin, savetable, setup]

(1)

Three of these commands, addtable, savetable, and setup (this one is new, only present after installing the Physics Updates) are "administrative" commands while the others are computational representations for integrals. For example,

> 

FunctionAdvisor(integral_form, fourier)

[fourier(a, b, z) = Int(a/exp(I*b*z), b = -infinity .. infinity), MathematicalFunctions:-`with no restrictions on `(a, b, z)]

(2)
> 

FunctionAdvisor(integral_form, mellin)

[mellin(a, b, z) = Int(a*b^(z-1), b = 0 .. infinity), MathematicalFunctions:-`with no restrictions on `(a, b, z)]

(3)

For all the integral transform commands, the first argument is the integrand, the second one is the dummy integration variable of a definite integral and the third one is the evaluation point. (also called transform variable). The integral representation is also visible using the convert network

> 

laplace(f(t), t, s); % = convert(%, Int)

laplace(f(t), t, s) = Int(f(t)*exp(-s*t), t = 0 .. infinity)

(4)

Having in mind the applications of these integral transforms to compute integrals and exact solutions to PDE with boundary conditions, five different aspects of these transforms received further development:

• 

Compute Derivatives: Yes or No

• 

Numerical Evaluation

• 

Two Hankel Transform Definitions

• 

More integral transform results

• 

Mellin and Hankel transform solutions for Partial Differential Equations with boundary conditions


The project includes having all these tranforms available at user level (not ready), say as FourierTransform for inttrans:-fourier, so that we don't need to input with(inttrans) anymore. Related to these changes we also intend to have Heaviside(0) not return undefined anymore, and return itself instead, unevaluated, so that one can set its value according to the problem/preferred convention (typically 0, 1/2 or 1) and have all the Maple library following that choice.

The material presented in the following sections is reproducible already in Maple 2019 by installing the latest Physics Updates (v.435 or higher),

Compute derivatives: Yes or No.

 

For historical reasons, previous implementations of these integral transform commands did not follow a standard paradigm of computer algebra: "Given a function f(x), the input diff(f(x), x) should return the derivative of f(x)". The implementation instead worked in the opposite direction: if you were to input the result of the derivative, you would receive the derivative representation. For example, to the input laplace(-t*f(t), t, s) you would receive d*laplace(f(t), t, s)/ds. This is particularly useful for the purpose of using integral transforms to solve differential equations but it is counter-intuitive and misleading; Maple knows the differentiation rule of these functions, but that rule was not evident anywhere. It was not clear how to compute the derivative (unless you knew the result in advance).

 

To solve this issue, a new command, setup, has been added to the package, so that you can set "whether or not" to compute derivatives, and the default has been changed to computederivatives = true while the old behavior is obtained only if you input setup(computederivatives = false). For example, after having installed the Physics Updates,

> 

Physics:-Version()

`The "Physics Updates" version in the MapleCloud is 435 and is the same as the version installed in this computer, created 2019, October 1, 12:46 hours, found in the directory /Users/ecterrab/maple/toolbox/2019/Physics Updates/lib/`

(1.1)

the current settings can be queried via

> 

setup(computederivatives)

computederivatives = true

(1.2)

and so differentiating returns the derivative computed

> 

(%diff = diff)(laplace(f(t), t, s), s)

%diff(laplace(f(t), t, s), s) = -laplace(f(t)*t, t, s)

(1.3)

while changing this setting to work as in previous releases you have this computation reversed: you input the output (1.3) and you get the corresponding input

> 

setup(computederivatives = false)

computederivatives = false

(1.4)
> 

%diff(laplace(f(t), t, s), s) = -laplace(t*f(t), t, s)

%diff(laplace(f(t), t, s), s) = diff(laplace(f(t), t, s), s)

(1.5)

Reset the value of computederivatives

> 

setup(computederivatives = true)

computederivatives = true

(1.6)
> 

%diff(laplace(f(t), t, s), s) = -laplace(t*f(t), t, s)

%diff(laplace(f(t), t, s), s) = -laplace(f(t)*t, t, s)

(1.7)

In summary: by default, derivatives of integral transforms are now computed; if you need to work with these derivatives as in  previous releases, you can input setup(computederivatives = false). This setting can be changed any time you want within one and the same Maple session, and changing it does not have any impact on the performance of intsolve, dsolve and pdsolve to solve differential equations using integral transforms.

> 

``

Numerical Evaluation

 

In previous releases, integral transforms had no numerical evaluation implemented. This is in the process of changing. So, for example, to numerically evaluate the inverse laplace transform ( invlaplace  command), three different algorithms have been implemented: Gaver-Stehfest, Talbot and Euler, following the presentation by Abate and Whitt, "Unified Framework for Numerically Inverting Laplace Transforms", INFORMS Journal on Computing 18(4), pp. 408–421, 2006.

 

For example, consider the exact solution to this partial differential equation subject to initial and boundary conditions

> 

pde := diff(u(x, t), x) = 4*(diff(u(x, t), t, t))

> 

iv := u(x, 0) = 0, u(0, t) = 1

 

Note that these two conditions are not entirely compatible: the solution returned cannot be valid for x = 0 and t = 0 simultaneously. However, a solution discarding that point does exist and is given by

> 

sol := pdsolve([pde, iv])

u(x, t) = -invlaplace(exp(-(1/2)*s^(1/2)*t)/s, s, x)+1

(2.1)

Verifying the solution, one condition remains to be tested

> 

pdetest(sol, [pde, iv])

[0, 0, -invlaplace(exp(-(1/2)*s^(1/2)*t)/s, s, 0)]

(2.2)

Since we now have numerical evaluation rules, we can test that what looks different from 0 in the above is actually 0.

> 

zero := [0, 0, -invlaplace(exp(-(1/2)*s^(1/2)*t)/s, s, 0)][-1]

-invlaplace(exp(-(1/2)*s^(1/2)*t)/s, s, 0)

(2.3)

Add a small number to the initial value of t to skip the point t = 0

> 

plot(zero, t = 0+10^(-10) .. 1)

 

The default method used is the method of Euler sums and the numerical evaluation is performed as usual using the evalf command. For example, consider

> 

F := sin(sqrt(2*t))

 

The Laplace transform of F is given by

> 

LT := laplace(F, t, s)

(1/2)*2^(1/2)*Pi^(1/2)*exp(-(1/2)/s)/s^(3/2)

(2.4)

and the inverse Laplace transform of LT in inert form is

> 

ILT := %invlaplace(LT, s, t)

%invlaplace((1/2)*2^(1/2)*Pi^(1/2)*exp(-(1/2)/s)/s^(3/2), s, t)

(2.5)

At t = 1 we have

> 

eval(ILT, t = 1)

%invlaplace((1/2)*2^(1/2)*Pi^(1/2)*exp(-(1/2)/s)/s^(3/2), s, 1)

(2.6)
> 

evalf(%invlaplace((1/2)*2^(1/2)*Pi^(1/2)*exp(-(1/2)/s)/s^(3/2), s, 1))

.9877659460

(2.7)

This result is consistent with the one we get if we first compute the exact form of the inverse Laplace transform at t = 1:

> 

%invlaplace((1/2)*2^(1/2)*Pi^(1/2)*exp(-(1/2)/s)/s^(3/2), s, 1) = value(%invlaplace((1/2)*2^(1/2)*Pi^(1/2)*exp(-(1/2)/s)/s^(3/2), s, 1))

%invlaplace((1/2)*2^(1/2)*Pi^(1/2)*exp(-(1/2)/s)/s^(3/2), s, 1) = sin(2^(1/2))

(2.8)
> 

evalf(%invlaplace((1/2)*2^(1/2)*Pi^(1/2)*exp(-(1/2)/s)/s^(3/2), s, 1) = sin(2^(1/2)))

.9877659460 = .9877659459

(2.9)

In addition to the standard use of evalf to numerically evaluate inverse Laplace transforms, one can invoke each of the three different methods implemented using the MathematicalFunctions:-Evalf  command

> 

with(MathematicalFunctions, Evalf)

[Evalf]

(2.10)
> 

Evalf(%invlaplace((1/2)*2^(1/2)*Pi^(1/2)*exp(-(1/2)/s)/s^(3/2), s, 1), method = Talbot)

.9877659460

(2.11)
> 

MF:-Evalf(%invlaplace((1/2)*2^(1/2)*Pi^(1/2)*exp(-(1/2)/s)/s^(3/2), s, 1), method = GaverStehfest)

.9877659460

(2.12)
> 

MF:-Evalf(%invlaplace((1/2)*2^(1/2)*Pi^(1/2)*exp(-(1/2)/s)/s^(3/2), s, 1), method = Euler)

.9877659460

(2.13)

Regarding the method we use by default: from a numerical experiment with varied problems we have concluded that our implementation of the Euler (sums) method is faster and more accurate than the other two.

 

Two Hankel transform definitions

 


In previous Maple releases, the definition of the Hankel transform was given by

hankel(f(t), t, s, nu) = Int(f(t)*sqrt(s*t)*BesselJ(nu, s*t), t = 0 .. infinity)

where BesselJ(nu, s*t) is the BesselJ(nu, s*t) function. This definition, sometimes called alternative definition of the Hankel transform, has the inconvenience of the square root sqrt(s*t) in the integrand, complicating the form of the hankel transform for the Laplacian in cylindrical coordinates. On the other hand, the definition more frequently used in the literature is

 hankel(f(t), t, s, nu) = Int(f(t)*t*BesselJ(nu, s*t), t = 0 .. infinity)

With it, the Hankel transform of diff(u(r, t), r, r)+(diff(u(r, t), r))/r+diff(u(r, t), t, t) is given by the simple ODE form d^2*`&Hopf;`(k, t)/dt^2-k^2*`&Hopf;`(k, t). Not just this transform but several other ones acquire a simpler form with the definition that does not have a square root in the integrand.

So the idea is to align Maple with this simpler definition, while keeping the previous definition as an alternative. Hence, by default, when you load the inttrans package, the new definition in use for the Hankel transform is

> 

hankel(f(t), t, s, nu); % = convert(%, Int)

hankel(f(t), t, s, nu) = Int(f(t)*t*BesselJ(nu, s*t), t = 0 .. infinity)

(3.1)

You can change this default so that Maple works with the alternative definition as in previous releases.  For that purpose, use the new inttrans:-setup command (which you can also use to query about the definition in use at any moment):

> 

setup(alternativehankeldefinition)

alternativehankeldefinition = false

(3.2)

This change in definition is automatically taken into account by other parts of the Maple library using the Hankel transform. For example, the differentiation rule with the new definition is

> 

(%diff = diff)(hankel(f(t), t, z, nu), z)

%diff(hankel(f(t), t, z, nu), z) = -hankel(t*f(t), t, z, nu+1)+nu*hankel(f(t), t, z, nu)/z

(3.3)

This differentiation rule resembles (is connected to) the differentiation rule for BesselJ, and this is another advantage of the new definition.

> 

(%diff = diff)(BesselJ(nu, z), z)

%diff(BesselJ(nu, z), z) = -BesselJ(nu+1, z)+nu*BesselJ(nu, z)/z

(3.4)

Furthermore, several transforms have acquired a simpler form, as for example:

> 

`assuming`([(%hankel = hankel)(exp(I*a*r)/r, r, k, 0)], [a > 0, k < a])

%hankel(exp(I*a*r)/r, r, k, 0) = 1/(-a^2+k^2)^(1/2)

(3.5)

Let's compare: make the definition be as in previous releases.

> 

setup(alternativehankeldefinition = true)

alternativehankeldefinition = true

(3.6)
> 

hankel(f(t), t, s, nu); % = convert(%, Int)

hankel(f(t), t, s, nu) = Int(f(t)*(s*t)^(1/2)*BesselJ(nu, s*t), t = 0 .. infinity)

(3.7)

The differentiation rule with the previous (alternative) definition was not as simple:

> 

(%diff = diff)(hankel(f(t), t, s, nu), s)

%diff(hankel(f(t), t, s, nu), s) = -hankel(t*f(t), t, s, nu+1)+nu*hankel(f(t), t, s, nu)/s+(1/2)*hankel(f(t), t, s, nu)/s

(3.8)

And the transform (3.5) was also not so simple:

> 

`assuming`([(%hankel = hankel)(exp(I*a*r)/r, r, k, 0)], [a > 0, k < a])

%hankel(exp(I*a*r)/r, r, k, 0) = (I*a*hypergeom([3/4, 3/4], [3/2], a^2/k^2)*GAMMA(3/4)^4+Pi^2*k*hypergeom([1/4, 1/4], [1/2], a^2/k^2))/(k*Pi*GAMMA(3/4)^2)

(3.9)

Reset to the new default value of the definition.

> 

setup(alternativehankeldefinition = false)

alternativehankeldefinition = false

(3.10)
> 

hankel(f(t), t, s, nu); % = convert(%, Int)

hankel(f(t), t, s, nu) = Int(f(t)*t*BesselJ(nu, s*t), t = 0 .. infinity)

(3.11)

More integral transform results

 

 

The revision of the integral transforms includes also filling gaps: previous transforms that were not being computed are now computed. Still with the Hankel transform, consider the operators

> 

`D/t` := proc (u) options operator, arrow; (diff(u, t))/t end proc
formula_plus := t^(-nu)*(`D/t`@@m)(t^(m+nu)*u(t))

formula_minus := t^nu*(`D/t`@@m)(t^(m-nu)*u(t))

 

Being able to transform these operators into algebraic expressions or differential equations of lower order is key for solving PDE problems with Boundary Conditions.

 

Consider, for instance, this ODE

> 

setup(computederivatives = false)

computederivatives = false

(4.1)
> 

simplify(eval(formula_minus, [nu = 6, m = 3]))

((diff(diff(diff(u(t), t), t), t))*t^3-12*(diff(diff(u(t), t), t))*t^2+57*(diff(u(t), t))*t-105*u(t))/t^3

(4.2)

Its Hankel transform is a simple algebraic expression

> 

hankel(((diff(diff(diff(u(t), t), t), t))*t^3-12*(diff(diff(u(t), t), t))*t^2+57*(diff(u(t), t))*t-105*u(t))/t^3, t, s, 6)

-s^3*hankel(u(t), t, s, 3)

(4.3)

An example with formula_plus

> 

simplify(eval(formula_plus, [nu = 7, m = 4]))

((diff(diff(diff(diff(u(t), t), t), t), t))*t^4+38*(diff(diff(diff(u(t), t), t), t))*t^3+477*(diff(diff(u(t), t), t))*t^2+2295*(diff(u(t), t))*t+3465*u(t))/t^4

(4.4)
> 

hankel(((diff(diff(diff(diff(u(t), t), t), t), t))*t^4+38*(diff(diff(diff(u(t), t), t), t))*t^3+477*(diff(diff(u(t), t), t))*t^2+2295*(diff(u(t), t))*t+3465*u(t))/t^4, t, s, 7)

s^4*hankel(u(t), t, s, 11)

(4.5)

In the case of hankel , not just differential operators but also several new transforms are now computable

> 

hankel(1, r, k, nu)

piecewise(nu = 0, Dirac(k)/k, nu/k^2)

(4.6)
> 

hankel(r^m, r, k, nu)

piecewise(And(nu = 0, m = 0), Dirac(k)/k, 2^(m+1)*k^(-m-2)*GAMMA(1+(1/2)*m+(1/2)*nu)/GAMMA((1/2)*nu-(1/2)*m))

(4.7)
> 

NULL

Mellin and Hankel transform solutions for Partial Differential Equations with Boundary Conditions

 


In previous Maple releases, the Fourier and Laplace transforms were used to compute exact solutions to PDE problems with boundary conditions. Now, Mellin and Hankel transforms are also used for that same purpose.

 

Example:

> 

pde := x^2*(diff(u(x, y), x, x))+x*(diff(u(x, y), x))+diff(u(x, y), y, y) = 0

iv := u(x, 0) = 0, u(x, 1) = piecewise(0 <= x and x < 1, 1, 1 < x, 0)

> 

sol := pdsolve([pde, iv])

u(x, y) = invmellin(sin(s*y)/(sin(s)*s), s, x)

(5.1)


As usual, you can let pdsolve choose the solving method, or indicate the method yourself:

> 

pde := diff(u(r, t), r, r)+(diff(u(r, t), r))/r+diff(u(r, t), t, t) = -Q__0*q(r)
iv := u(r, 0) = 0

> 

pdsolve([pde, iv])

u(r, t) = Q__0*(-hankel(exp(-s*t)*hankel(q(r), r, s, 0)/s^2, s, r, 0)+hankel(hankel(q(r), r, s, 0)/s^2, s, r, 0))

(5.2)

It is sometimes preferable to see these solutions in terms of more familiar integrals. For that purpose, use

> 

convert(u(r, t) = Q__0*(-hankel(exp(-s*t)*hankel(q(r), r, s, 0)/s^2, s, r, 0)+hankel(hankel(q(r), r, s, 0)/s^2, s, r, 0)), Int, only = hankel)

u(r, t) = Q__0*(-(Int(exp(-s*t)*(Int(q(r)*r*BesselJ(0, r*s), r = 0 .. infinity))*BesselJ(0, r*s)/s, s = 0 .. infinity))+Int((Int(q(r)*r*BesselJ(0, r*s), r = 0 .. infinity))*BesselJ(0, r*s)/s, s = 0 .. infinity))

(5.3)

An example where the hankel transform is computable to the end:

> 

pde := c^2*(diff(u(r, t), r, r)+(diff(u(r, t), r))/r) = diff(u(r, t), t, t)
iv := u(r, 0) = A*a/(a^2+r^2)^(1/2), (D[2](u))(r, 0) = 0
NULL

> 

`assuming`([pdsolve([pde, iv], method = Hankel)], [r > 0, t > 0, a > 0])

u(r, t) = (1/2)*A*a*((-c^2*t^2+(2*I)*a*c*t+a^2+r^2)^(1/2)+(-c^2*t^2-(2*I)*a*c*t+a^2+r^2)^(1/2))/((-c^2*t^2-(2*I)*a*c*t+a^2+r^2)^(1/2)*(-c^2*t^2+(2*I)*a*c*t+a^2+r^2)^(1/2))

(5.4)
> 

``


 

Download Integral_Transforms_(revamped).mw

Edgardo S. Cheb-Terrab
Physics, Differential Equations and Mathematical Functions, Maplesoft

Hi

The Physics Updates for Maple 2019 (current v.331 or higher) is already available for installation via MapleCloud. This version contains further improvements to the Maple 2019 capabilities for solving PDE & BC as well as to the tensor simplifier. To install these Updates,

  • Open Maple,
  • Click the MapleCloud icon in the upper-right corner to open the MapleCloud toolbar 
  • In the MapleCloud toolbar, open Packages
  • Find the Physics Updates package and click the install button, it is the last one under Actions
  • To check for new versions of Physics Updates, click the MapleCloud icon. If the Updates icon has a red dot, click it to install the new version

Note that the first time you install the Updates in Maple 2019 you need to install them from Packages, even if in your copy of Maple 2018 you had already installed these Updates.

Also, at this moment you cannot use the MapleCloud to install the Physics Updates for Maple 2018. So, to install the last version of the Updates for Maple 2018, open Maple 2018 and enter PackageTools:-Install("5137472255164416", version = 329, overwrite)

Edgardo S. Cheb-Terrab
Physics, Differential Equations and Mathematical Functions, Maplesoft

4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Last Page 6 of 18