Path-Integral Approach to Classical Mechanics

Part of the NATO ASI Series book series (NSSB, volume 224)


In this talk we review the path-integral approach to classical Hamiltonian dynamics (CM) recently proposed. This formulation brings to light a set of hidden (BRS-like) symmetries connected with the symplectic geometry of CM. We also explore some further universal hidden symmetries related to the dynamics of the system. These new invariances have the character of a genuine supersymmetry. We show that dynamical systems with this supersymmetry unbroken are ergodic. KAM systems and systems with few constants of motion beside the energy (and even integrable ones) have this supersymmetry spontaneously broken. In the conclusion we present a new derivation of the KMS conditions based on this hidden supersymmetry.


Classical Mechanic Classical Mechanic Gibbs State Algebraic Characterization Hamiltonian Vector Field 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    B.O.Koopman, Operatorenbehandlung der Klassischen Mechanik, Proc.Nat.Acad.Sc.USA 17: 315 (1931)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    J. von Neumann, Zur Operatorenmethode in der Klassischen Mechanik, Ann. Math. 33: 587 (1932)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    E. Gozzi, Hidden BRS invariance in classical mechanics, Phys.Lett. B 201: 525 (1988)MathSciNetADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    E.Gozzi, M. Reuter and W.D.Thacker, Hidden BRS invariance in classical mechanics:II. CERN-TH.5271/89 Phys. Rev.D 40 (10) (1989) 3363MathSciNetADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    B.S. Schulman, “Techniques and applications of path-integration”, J.Wiley, New York (1981).zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    V.I. Arnold and A. Avez,”Ergodic problems of classical mechanics”, W.A. Benjamin Inc. (1968).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    E. Witten, Supersymmetry and Morse theory, J. Diff. Geom. 17: 661 (1982).MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    V.I. Arnold, “Mathematical methods of classical mechanics”, Springer Verlag, New York, 1978.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    M.De Crombrugghe and V.Rittenberg, Supersymmetric quantum mechanics, Ann.Phys. 151: 99 (1983).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    E. Witten, Constraints on supersymmetry breaking, Nucl.Phys. B202: 253 (1982).MathSciNetADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    R.Haag et al., On the equilibrium states in quantum statistical mechanics, Comm. Math. Phys. 5:215 (1967); R.Haag et al., Stability and equilibrium states, Comm. Math. Phys. 38:173 (1974); M. Aizenman et al., Stability and equilibrium of infinite classical systems, Comm.Math.Phys. 48:1 (1976); D. Kastler, Equilibrium states of matter and operator algebra, Symposia Mathematica Vol XX (1976), Istituto Nazionale di Alta Matematica.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    E. Gozzi and M. Reuter, Algebraic Characterization of ergodicity, CERN-TH.5421/89 Phys.Lett.B 233 (3,4) 1989 in pressGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    G. Gallavotti and E. Verboven, On the KMS boundary condition, Nuovo Cimento. 28: 274 (1975).MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.CERNGenevaSwitzerland
  2. 2.Inst. for Theoretical PhysicsHannover UniversityHannover 1Germany

Personalised recommendations