3 ms·
Indeed, it is at the start of the book. It also relies on the assumption that the Lagrangian is invariant up to a total time derivative under Galilean transform
by fferen 7y ago
Indeed, it is at the start of the book. It also relies on the assumption that the Lagrangian is invariant up to a total time derivative under Galilean transformations, which leads to `dL/d(v^2)` being a constant (1/2 m). This is, I believe, the most fundamental way to look at it. Otherwise you could ask why the Lagrangian can't have other terms like v^4.