Hamilton-Jacobi quantization

of constrained systems *)
D. B~,LEANU

Department of Mathematics and Computer Sciences, Faculty of Arts and Sciences,

University of Cankaya, Ankara 06530, Turkey
and
Institute of Space Sciences, P.O.BOX, MG-23, R 76900, Magurele-Bucharest, Romania

Y. GOLER

Department of Mathematics and Computer Sciences, Faculty of Arts and Sciences,

University of Cankaya, Ankara 06530, Turkey

Received 22 August 2001

The path integral quantization of contrained systems is analysed using Hamilton-

Jacobi formalism. The integrability conditions are investigated and the results are in
agreement with those obtained by Dirac's method.

1 Introduction

The direct way to quantize a system with constraints is to use canonical quanti-
zation based on the Hamiltonian formalism of the classical theory [1-6]. An alterna-
tive method of quantization is the Hamilton-Jacobi formulation initiated by one of
us [7-13]. Using the Carath~odory's equivalent Lagrangians method, we find a set
of Hamilton-Jacobi equations integrated by the method of characteristics [14,15].
Recently this formalism was generalized to the singular systems with higher order
Lagrangians and to systems which have elements of the Berezin algebra [16-18].
Even more recently the quantization of the systems with constraints was investi-
gated using this approach [19-23]. The advantage of using the Hamilton-Jacobi
formalism is that we have no difference between first and second class constraints
and we do not need gauge fixing term because the gauge variables are separated in
the process of constructing an integrable system of total differential equations. In
addition the action provided by the formalism can be used in the process of path
integral quantization method of the constrained systems. However, the quantization
of the systems with second class constraints is problematic for Hamilton-Jacobi for-
malism because the system of equations is not integrable [24]. To solve this problem
we have two basic possibilities, the first one is to enlarge the phase space [25] and
the other one is to keep to the original phase space itself [26,27].

*) Presented at the 10th Colloquium on Quantum Groups: "Quantum Groups and Integrable
Systems", Prague, 21-23 June, 2001.

1260 Czechoslovak Journal of Physics, Vol. 51 (2001), No. 12

 Hamilton-Jacobi quantization of constrained systems

2 Hamilton--Jacobi formalism

Let us consider a singular Lagrangian with Hessian matrix of rank n - r. The

formalism leads us to the following Hamiltonians

H'a=Ha(t~,qa,p~)+pa, a,/3=n-r+l,...,n, a=l,...n-r. (1)

The usual Hamiltonian H0 is defined as

H o = - L ( t , qi, glv,gla=Wa)+pawa +glupvlp~=-Hv , v = O , n - r + l , . . . , n , (2)

which is independent of q~,. Here ~la = dqa/dr, where 7- is a parameter and wa are
obtained from the definition of generalized momenta. The equations of motion are
obtained as total differential equations in many variables as follows

d q a = ~og'~
dt~, og'~ dta, dp,=-Ot---~
dp~=-Oqa og'~ dt,~ ' # = 1 , ""
. , r, (3)

dz = -Ha + p=-~pa ) ate, (4)

where z = S(ta,qa) is the Hamilton-Jacobi function. One should notice that al-
though we have started with n generalized coordinates qi and generalized velocities
qi to pass to canonical formulation, we have to treat some generalized momenta
dependent and corresponding generalized coordinates as free parameters. Thus, we
have a phase space of lower dimension. But this is not sufficient simply because
the equations of motion are total differential equations and we should consider in-
tegrability conditions. In other words Eqs. (3) and (4) are integrable iff dH~' = 0.
Some of these conditions could be satisfied identically and the rest may cause new
constraints. Again using the same test, the additional constraints might arise. As
a result, it may happen that we have a set of constraints which are in involution
and an integrable system. Every new constraint reduces the dimension of the phase
space. In the end we may have constraints in the form
/

Ho = Po + go, g7 = gT(t~, qa,p~) + pT , (5)

and additional constraints which can not be expressed as in (5).

The equations of motion take the form

dqb = -~pb dT -t- -~pb at-y, (6)

dpb-- 0H'°dr OH'7
Oqb - . (7)

Thus, we have an integrable system with some additional constraints. The action
z can be obtained solving the equations by quadratures.

Czech. J. Phys. 51 (2001) 1261

 D. B$.leanu and Y. Gfiler

2.1 Integrability conditions

Let us define the linear operators X~ as [8]

Of OH',~ of -og'~ Of
Xof = Lrf,~v'ol
--J
-
Oq~ Op# Op~ Oq~
- + - -
OX~
(8)

L e m m a . A system of differential equations (3,4) is integrable iff

[.: .;] = o. (9)

Preof. If we suppose that (9) is satisfied, then we have

(x.,x~)f f x° If,.'.]
= - [f,.'o]. (10)
Making use of Jacobi's identity, we obtain

::i>
Using (9) and (11), we find
(X~, X~) -- 0. (12)
Conversely, if the system is complete, then (12) is fulfilled for any a and ~ and we
obtain
[-: -;]
, O. = ( 13)

3 Example

Let us consider a system with Lagrangian

L = :1( x.2 + y2) + lz2(x2 4- y2) _ z(xy - yx) - l(x2 4- y2). (14)

Since the generalized velocity is missing in L, the rank of the Hessian is 2, thus the
system is singular. In fact Pz = 0 represents the primary contraint.
The Hamiltonians described in (1) are

go= ~ + :(px
1 2 +p~) + z(xp, - ypx) + ½(x~ + y~), H:' = pz, (15)

where p= = ~ 4- zy, py = ~) - zx [28]. The total differential equations (3) of the

system are

OH'o dt + ~OH'I d z = (p= - zy) dt,

dx = ~

OH'o dt 4- OH: dz = (p, + z:)dr,

d y = ~-m,
Op----~
dz = dz,

1262 Czech. J. Phys, 51 (2001)

 Harnilton-Jacobi quantization of constrained systems

dpx= OH'° OH'I

cgx dt - ~ dz = ( - x - zp,) dr, (16)

OH'o OH',
dpy = - O---'ydt - -~x dz = ( - y + zpx) dr,

dpz= OoH--~--~
dt- OH'I dz = (xp~ - ypx) dt,
-~z
t

OH'1
dpo = at - --~- dz = O.

As it was explained in the introduction, the integrability conditions

dH'0 = 0 , dH'1 = 0 (17)

should be satisfied. In fact,

d H 0 = dpo + pxdpx + p~dpy + (xp~ - ypx)dz + zxdpy

+ zpydx - zydpz - zp~dy + x d x + ydy. (18)

Using Eqs. (17), we get

dH'o = p ~ ( - x - zpy) dt + p ~ ( - y + zp~) dt + (xpy - yp~) dz + z x ( - y + zpx) dt

+ zpu(pz - zy) dt - z y ( - x - zpy) dt - zpx(pyzx) dt + x(p~ - zy) dt
(19)
+ y(p, + zz) dt = (xp~ - yp~) dz,
dH'1 = dpz = (xp~ - YPx) dt.

Since dH'o and dH'1 are not identically zero, the quantity

H'2 = xp, - yp~ (20)

I

should be introduced as a new constraint in addition to H'0 and H I .

In order to have an integrable system, the variation of H~ should be checked
also. After some calculations we found that dH'2 = 0. In conclusion we have an
integrable system described by three Hamiltonians
Ho'= Po + 5(Px
1 2 + P ,2) + z ( x p , - yp~) + ½(x2 + y2), HI' = pz, //2' = yp~ - x p , . (21)

These are in agreement with the results obtained in [28] by using Dirac's formal-
ism. At this stage our aim is to find the reduced phase-space and to calculate the
corresponding action of the modified system. Solving H'2 = 0, we find

Py =Yp~, x#0. (22)

Taking into account (23), we obtain two Hamiltonians

=Po+~P~ 1+~ + (x 2 + y 2 ) , Hi=Pz. (23)

Czech. J. Phys. 51 (2001) 1263

 D. B~./eanu and Y. Gfiler

The action corresponding to (24) is given by

(24)

One of the authors (D. B.) would like to thank the organizers of this colloquium for
giving him the opportunity to attend this meeting. This paper is partially supported by
the Scientific and Technical Research Council of Turkey.

References

[1] P.A.M. Dira~: Lectures on Quantum Mechanics, Yeshiva University, New York (N.Y.),
1964.
[2] A. Hanson, T.Regge, and C.Teitelboim: Constrained Hamiltonian Systems, Academia
Nationale dei Lincei, Rome, 1976.
[3] K. Sundermeyer: Constrained Dynamics, Lecture Notes in Physics, Vol. 169, Springer-
Verlag, New York, 1982.
[4] M. Henneaux: Phys. Rep. 126 (1985) 1.
[5] M. Henneaux and C. Teitelboim: Quantization of Gauge Systems, Princeton Univer-
sity Press, Princeton (New Jersey), 1992.
[6] S. Shabanov: Phys. Rep. 326 (2000) 1.
[7] Y. Giiler: Nuovo Cimento B 100 (1987) 251; 267.
[8] Y. Giiler: Nuovo Cimento B 107 (1992) 1143; 1389.
[9] Y. Giiler: Nuovo Cimento B 113 (1998) 893.
[10] Y. Giiler: J. Math. Phys. 30 (1989) 785.
[11] E. Rabei and Y. Giiler: Nuovo Cimento B 110 (1995) 893.
[12] E. Rabei and Y. Giiler: Tr. J. Phys. 16 (1992) 297.
[13] N.I. Farahat and Y. Giiler: Phys. Rev.A 51 (1995) 68.
[14] C. Carath~odory: Calculus of Variations and Partial Differential Equations of the
First Order, Part II, Holden-Day, 1967.
[15] H.A. Kastrup: Phys. Rep. 101 (1983) 3.
[16] B.M. Pimentel and R.G. Teixeira: Nuovo Cimento B 111 (1996) 841.
[17] B.M. Pimentel and R.G. Teixeira: Nuovo Cimento B 113 B (1998) 805.
[18] B.M. Pimentel, R.G. Teixeira, and J.L. Tomazelli: Ann. Phys. 267 (1998) 75.
[19] D. Baleanu and Y. Giiler: Nuovo Cimento B 115 (2000) 25.
[20] D. Baleanu and Y. Giiler: Nuovo Cimento B 115 (2000) 291.
[21] D. Baleanu and Y. Giiler: J.Phys. A: Math. Gen. 34 (2001) 73.
[22] D. Baleanu and Y. Giiler: Int. Journ. Mod. Phys. A 16 (2001) 2391.
[23] D. Baleanu and Y. Giiler: Mod. Phys. Lett. A 16 (2001) 873.
[24] D. Dominici, J. Gomis, G. Longhi, and J.M. Pons: J. Math. Phys. 25 (1984) 2439.

1264 Czech. J. Phys. 51 (2001)

 Harnilton-Jacobi quantization of constrained systems

[25] L.D. Faddeev and S.I. Shatashvili: Phys. Lett. B 167 (1986) 225;
I.A. Batalin and E.S. Fradkin: Phys. Lett. B 180 (1986) 156;
M. Henneaux: Phys. Lett. B 315 (1993) 283.
[26] R. Rajaraman and P. Mitra: Ann. Phys. (N. Y.) 203 (1990) 157;
R. Annishetty and A.S. Vytheeswaran: J. Phys. A 26 (1993) 5613.
[27] E. Rabei and Y. Giiler: Phys. Rev. A 46 (1992) 3513.
[28] C.A. Galvao and J.B.T. Boechat: J. Math. Phys. 31 (1989) 448.

Czech. J. Phys. 51 (2001) 1265