arxiv:gr-qc/ v1 31 Jan 2006

Transcription

1 Hamilton-Jacobi theory for Hamiltonian systems with non-canonical symplectic structures Aldo A. Martínez-Merino and Merced Montesinos Departamento de Física, Cinvestav, Av. Instituto Politécnico Nacional 508, San Pedro Zacatenco, 07360, Gustavo A. Madero, Ciudad de México, México. arxiv:gr-c/06040v 3 Jan 006 (Dated: June 7, 08) Abstract A proposal for the Hamilton-Jacobi theory in the context of the covariant formulation of Hamiltonian systems is done. The current approach consists in applying Dirac s method to the corresponding action which implies the inclusion of second-class constraints in the formalism which are handled using the procedure of Rothe and Scholtz recently reported. The current method is applied to the nonrelativistic two-dimensional isotropic harmonic oscillator employing the various symplectic structures for this dynamical system recently reported. PACS numbers: 45.0.Jj Associate Member of the Abdus Salam International Centre for Theoretical Physics, Trieste, Italy. Electronic address: amerino@fis.cinvestav.mx Electronic address: merced@fis.cinvestav.mx

2 I. INTRODUCTION To set down the issue analyzed in this paper, we begin first with a brief discussion of the standard treatment of Hamiltonian systems and after that with a brief summary of what we call a genuine covariant description of Hamiltonian dynamics. A. Canonical formulation of Hamiltonian systems In the standard treatment of Hamiltonian dynamics, the euations of motion are written in the form [] i = H, ṗ i = H, i =,,...,n, () p i i where H is the Hamiltonian of the system, the variables ( i,p i ) are canonically conjugate to each other in the sense that { i, j } = 0, { i,p j } = δ i j, {p i,p j } = 0, () where {,} is the Poisson bracket defined by (summation convention is used) {f,g} = f i g p i f p i g i. (3) B. Covariant formulation of Hamiltonian systems The symplectic geometry involved in the Hamiltonian description of mechanics can clearly be appreciated if E. () are written in the form ẋ µ = ω µν H x ν, (4) with (x µ ) = (,..., n ;p,...,p n ) and (ω µν ) = 0 I I 0, (5) where 0 is the zero n n matrix and I is the unity n n matrix. Moreover, E. (3) acuires the form {f,g} = f g x µωµν x, (6) ν

3 from which E. () can be rewritten as {x µ,x ν } = ω µν. (7) From this viewpoint, the coordinates (x µ ) locally label the points x of the phase space Γ associated to the dynamical system on which the symplectic structure ω = ω µν(x)dx µ dx ν is defined. The two-form ω is closed, i.e., dω = 0 which is euivalent to the fact that the Poisson bracket satisfies the Jacobi identity []. Also ω is non-degenerate, i.e., ω µν v ν = 0 implies v µ = 0 which means that there exists the inverse matrix (ω µν ). The euations of motion of E. (4) are covariant in the sense that they maintain their form if the canonical coordinates are replaced by a completely arbitrary set of coordinates in terms of which (ω µν ) need not be given by E. (5). Similarly, it is possible to retain the original coordinates ( i,p i ) and still write the original euations of motion () in the Hamiltonian form (4), but now employing alternative symplectic structures ω µν (x), distinct to that given in E. (5), and taking as Hamiltonian any real function on Γ which is a constant of motion for the system. This means that the writing of the euations of motion of a dynamical system in Hamiltonian form is not uniue [, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7]. More precisely, from the covariant viewpoint of Hamiltonian dynamics, what is relevant in the Hamiltonian formalism is the fact that the phase space Γ is endowed with a symplectic structure ω and a Hamiltonian H, not the fact of singling out coordinates s and momenta p s to label the points of Γ (see Refs. [, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7] where various symplectic structures with respect to the same set of coordinates and for the same dynamical system are discussed). Before going on, it is convenient to remind the reader that the term covariant is also used in the context of the covariant canonical formalism of Ref. [8] to refer precisely to the fact that what is relevant in the Hamiltonian description of dynamics is the fact of having a symplectic two-form on the phase space Γ and not the fact of picking out coordinates s and momenta p s on it, as already mentioned. Even though this observation is correct, the authors of Ref. [8] obtain the symplectic structure for a particular dynamical system using only its euations of motion. This fact has generated the belief that the euations of motion uniuely determine the symplectic geometry associated with any Hamiltonian system, which is not true. In particular, the space of solutions can be endowed with more thanonesymplectic structure andno oneismorenatural thantheothers(seerefs. [5, 6, 9]). 3

4 On the other hand, in the same sense that the action S[ i,p i ] = t t dt [ i p i H(,p,t) ], (8) provides the usual euations of motion (), the covariant form of Hamilton s euations (4) can be obtained from the action [7] S[x µ ] = t t dt ] [θ µ (x) dxµ dt H(x,t), (9) provided δs = 0 and δx µ (t ) = 0 = δx µ (t ) under the arbitrary configurational (or form) variation of the variables x µ at t fixed, δx µ. In fact, t ( δs = dt ω νµ (x)ẋ µ H ) ) δx ν + (θ t x ν µ (x) δx µ where ω is the symplectic two-form t t, (0) ω = ω µν(x)dx µ dx ν, ω µν = µ θ ν ν θ µ. () Euivalently, ω = dθ where θ = θ µ dx µ is the symplectic potential. It is convenient to make clear some aspects involved with the boundary conditions δx µ (t ) = 0 = δx µ (t ) employed in Hamilton s principle. Due to the fact that there are n coordinates x µ, one must fix only n conditions at the time boundary (which might be n conditions at t = t and n conditions at t = t ), otherwise the system might be over-determined, in which case the system might not evolve from t to t. For instance, in the case when θ = p i d i, it is clear that one can arbitrarily choose δ i (t ) = 0 and δ i (t ) = 0. However, in the generic case, namely, when θ = θ µ (x)dx µ one can still arbitrarily choose δx µ (t ) = 0 at t = t. Nevertheless, even though δx µ (t ) = 0 still holds, x µ (t ) cannot be arbitrarily chosen, but it is fixed by the conditions on x µ at t in order for the system to evolve from t to t. Up to here the description of both the canonical and the covariant description of Hamiltonian systems. Now, in the framework of the canonical description of Hamiltonian systems the Hamilton-Jacobi theory of these type of systems is built following the usual procedure (see, for instance, Ref. []). Nevertheless, suppose that one wants to remain in the framework of the covariant description of Hamiltonian dynamics. The uestion is, is there a well-defined Hamilton-Jacobi theory if symplectic structures alternative to the usual ones are used? The answer is in the affirmative and the corresponding formalism is developed in next section (see also Ref. [0] for more details). 4

5 II. HAMILTON-JACOBI THEORY The starting point is the action of E. (9). Using Dirac s method [], all the variables x µ of which the action (9) depends functionally on are taken as configuration variables. The next step is to define the momenta π µ canonically conjugate to the x µ. By definition which lead to the primary constraints π µ := θ µ (x), µ =,,...,n, () χ µ := π µ θ µ (x) = 0, µ =,,...,n. (3) In this way, the points of the extended phase space Γ ext are labelled with the coordinates (x µ,π ν ) and the symplectic structure in these coordinates is given by {x µ,x ν } = 0, {x µ,π ν } = δ µ ν, {π µ,π ν } = 0, (4) or, euivalently Ω = dπ µ dx µ. Performing the Legendre transformation, the canonical Hamiltonian H c is simply H, H c = π µ ẋ µ L = π µ ẋ µ (θ µ ẋ µ H) = H. Therefore, following Dirac s procedure, the action principle is promoted to S[x µ,π µ,λ µ ] = t t dt[ẋ µ π µ H(x,t) Λ µ χ µ ], (5) where Λ µ are Lagrange multipliers. From the action of E. (5), the dynamical euations ẋ µ = Λ µ, together with the constraint (3) are obtained. π µ = H x µ +Λν θ ν x µ, (6) By using E. (6), the evolution of the constraints χ µ is computed χ µ = π µ θ µ = π µ θ µ x νẋν = H x µ +ω µνλ ν, (7) where ω µν (x) in last euality is the same one given in E. (). Therefore, χ µ 0 fixes the Lagrange multipliers Λ ν ω νµ H x µ, (8) 5

6 and no more constraints arise. Moreover, the constraints χ µ are second class. In fact, using the symplectic structure on Γ ext given in E. (4) one has {χ µ,χ ν } = ω µν (x), (9) which, by hypothesis, has non-vanishing determinant (see E. ()). Furthermore, by inserting the expressions of the Lagrange multipliers (8) into the Hamiltonian H c +Λ µ χ µ one gets the first-class Hamiltonian H µν H = H +χ µ ω. In fact, one readily verifies that x ν {H,χ µ } = χ α {ω αβ H x β,χ µ} 0, (0) so the usual structure between the first-class Hamiltonian and second-class constraints is satisfied []. Finally, the action principle acuires the form S[x µ,π µ,λ µ ] = where λ µ are new Lagrange multipliers. t t dt[ẋ µ π µ H λ µ χ µ ], () In summary, the application of Dirac s method to the action (9) which is associated with an unconstrained Hamiltonian system and described with non-canonical symplectic structures implies the introduction of second-class constraints in the extended phase space Γ ext which isendowed with acanonical symplectic structure. Therefore, theoriginal problem of building the Hamilton-Jacobi theory for unconstrained Hamiltonian systems described by non-canonical symplectic structures has been transformed into the one of building the Hamilton-Jacobi theory for systems with second-class constraints with respect to a canonical symplectic structure. Fortunately, there is a proposal to build the Hamilton-Jacobi theory when second class are involved [3]. In such a paper, the analysis is restricted to secondclass constraints linear in the coordinates and in the momenta. However, there is no need to restrict the analysis to this particular kind of second-class constraints if the analysis is locally carried out (see pages 46 and 64 of Ref. []). The procedure of Ref. [3] consists, essentially, in making a t-independent canonical transformation from the original canonical variables (x µ,π ν ) which label the point of Γ ext to new canonical variables (X µ,π ν ) in terms of which the original second-class constraints χ µ become canonically conjugate pairs (Q a,p b ) which form part of the new set of canonical variables (X µ ;Π ν ) ( r,q a ;p s,p b ). Once this is done, the original first-class Hamiltonian H is rewritten in terms of the new canonical 6

7 variables H(,Q,p,P) := H (x(,q,p,p),π(,q,p,p),t) () By setting the second-class constraints strongly eual to zero, Q a = 0 and P b = 0, in the Hamiltonian H, H(,Q = 0,p,P = 0) =: Ĥ(,p,t), the corresponding Hamilton-Jacobi euation arises ( S t +Ĥ, S ),t = 0. (3) III. EXAMPLES Now, the implementation of the procedure developed in the Section II is carried out. The starting point is the euations of motion ẋ = p x m, ẏ = p y m, ṗ x = m x, ṗ y = m y, (4) for the two-dimensional isotropic non-relativistic harmonic oscillator. Here, the dot stands for the total derivative with respect to the Newtonian time t, m is the mass of the particle and the angular freuency. The canonical formulation of the euations of motion (4) consists intaking (x µ ) = (x,x,x 3,x 4 ) = (x,y,p x,p y ) ascoordinates to label the points x of the phase space Γ = R 4 of the system together with the symplectic structure (5) and Hamiltonian H = m ((p x) +m x +(p y ) +m y ). A. first case Alternatively, according to the covariant formulation of Hamiltonian systems, the euations of motion (4) can be written in Hamiltonian form by taking (x µ ) = (x,x,x 3,x 4 ) = (x,y,p x,p y ) as coordinates to label the points x of the phase space Γ = R 4 of the system together with the symplectic structure and Hamiltonian [4] (ω µν ) = , H = p xp y m +m xy. (5) 7

8 In fact, one easily verifies that by inserting the symplectic structure and Hamiltonian given in E. (5) into E. (4), the euations of motion (4) are obtained. Moreover, the symplectic structure of E. (5) can be obtained from the potential -form θ, ω = dθ = d(p y dx+p x dy) = dp y dx+dp x dy, so it is possible to give the action principle [9] S[x,y,p x,p y ] = t t dt which provides this Hamiltonian formulation. [ ( px p y p y ẋ+p x ẏ +m xy )], (6) m Following the procedure described in the Section II, all the variables (x µ ) = (x,y,p x,p y ) are taken as configuration variables. Then, Dirac s method calls for the definition of the momenta (π µ ) = (π,π,π 3,π 4 ) canonically conjugate to (x µ ); respectively. So, the points of the extended phase space Γ ext = R 8 are labelled with (x µ,π ν ). From the definition of the momenta, one has χ := π p y = 0, χ := π p x = 0, χ 3 := π 3 = 0, χ 4 := π 4 = 0, (7) which are second-class constraints. The systematic implementation of the procedure leads to the action principle () with first-class Hamiltonian H In fact, H = m xy p xp y m + m (p xπ +p y π ) m (xπ 3 +yπ 4 ). (8) {χ,h } = m χ 3, {χ,h } = m χ 4, {χ 3,H } = m χ, Next, a canonical transformation in Γ ext {χ 4,H } = m χ. (9) = R 8 from (x,y,p x,p y ;π,π,π 3,π 4 ) to (,,Q,Q ;p,p,p,p ) such that the original second-class constraints (7) form canonical pairs of the new set of canonical variables is performed. The new canonical pairs are 8

9 (,p ), (,p ), (Q,P ), and (Q,P ). The relationship between these canonical variables and the original ones is = x π 4, p = π, = y π 3, p 4 = π, Q = χ 3, P = χ, Q = χ 4, P = χ. (30) Hence, the inverse transformation is given by x = +Q, π = p, y = +Q, π = p, p x = p P, π 3 = Q, p y = p P, π 4 = Q. (3) Then, in terms of the new set of canonical variables the Hamiltonian (8) acuires the form H = H (x µ (,p,q,p),π µ (,p,q,p)) = m [(p P )p +(p P )p (p P )(p p )] +m [( +Q)( +Q) ( +Q) Q ( +Q) Q ]. (3) By applying the procedure of Ref. [3], which means to set Q a = 0,P a = 0, a =,, together with p r = S, r =,, the Hamilton-Jacobi euation is obtained r S t + S S m +m A complete solution of last euation is given by = 0. (33) S = m (( ) ( )) sin t cos t 0 + 0, (34) where 0 and 0 are integration constants. Therefore, the momenta p r and p r0 canonically conjugate to r and r 0 are obtained from p r = S r p = m sin t p = m sin t p 0 = m sin t p 0 = m sin t and p r0 = S ; respectively 0 r ), ( cos t 0 ( ) cos t 0, ( ) 0 cos t, ( ) 0 cos t. (35) By plugging these euations together with the constraints Q = 0, Q = 0, P = 0, and P = 0 into (3) the solution to the original euations of motion is obtained x = x 0 cos t+ p x0 m sin t, p x = m x 0 sin t+p x0 cos t, y = y 0 cos t+ p y0 m sin t, p y = m y 0 sin t+p y0 cos t. (36) 9

10 B. Second case Similarly, according to the covariant viewpoint of Hamiltonian dynamics, the euations of motion (4) can be written in Hamiltonian form by taking as symplectic structure and Hamiltonian [4] (ω µν ) = ,H = ( (py ) (p x ) ) m ( + y x ), (37) m keeping the same coordinates (x µ ) = (x,x,x 3,x 4 ) = (x,y,p x,p y ) to label the points x of the phase space Γ = R 4. The symplectic structure of E. (37) can be obtained from the potential -form θ, ω = dθ = d(xdp x +p y dy) = dp x dx+dp y dy, so it is possible to give the action principle S[x,y,p x,p y ] = t dt[xṗ x +p y ẏ t ( ( (py ) (p x ) ) m ( + y x ))]. (38) m The definition of the momenta (π µ ) = (π,π,π,π 4 ) canonically conjugate to (x µ ) = (x,y,p x,p y ) implies the inclusion of second-class constraints and the first-class Hamiltonian H = m χ := π = 0, χ := π p y = 0, χ 3 := π 3 x = 0, χ 4 := π 4 = 0, (39) ( x +y ) ( (px ) +(p y ) ) m + m (p xπ +p y π ) m (xπ 3 +yπ 4 ). (40) The Poisson brackets between the second-class constraints and H are {χ,h } = m χ 3, {χ,h } = m χ 4, 0

11 {χ 3,H } = m χ, {χ 4,H } = m χ, (4) which have the usual structure []. So, the coordinates (x µ,π ν ) label the points of the extended phase space Γ ext = R 8 which is endowed with the symplectic structure Ω = dπ µ dx µ. Next, a canonical transformation in Γ ext = R 8 from (x,y,p x,p y ;π,π,π 3,π 4 ) to (,,Q,Q ;p,p,p,p ) such that the original second-class constraints (39) form canonical pairs of the new set of canonical variables is performed. The new canonical pairs are (,p ), (,p ), (Q,P ), and (Q,P ). The relationship between these canonical variables and the original ones is = p x π, p = π 3, = y π 4, p = π, Q = χ, P = χ 3, Q = χ 4, P = χ, (4) with the corresponding inverse transformation x = p P, π = Q, y = +Q, π = p, p x = +Q, π 3 = π, p y = p P, π 4 = Q. (43) Inserting these into the first-class Hamiltonian (40) H m [ ( = +Q) +(p P ) ] [(p m P ) + ( ] +Q) + [( m +Q ) Q +(p P )p] m [ (p P )p +( +Q) Q ]. (44) By inserting Q a = 0, P a = 0, a =, and p r = S, r =, into last expression, the r Hamilton-Jacobi euation arises S t + m [ ( S ) ( ) ] m [ ( S ) ( ) ] = 0. (45) A complete solution of this euation is given by S = m ) [(( sin t ) +( 0 ) ( ) m ( 0 ) cos t m ( )] 0 0, (46) m

12 where 0 and 0 are integration constants. Therefore, the momenta p r and p r0 canonically conjugate to r and r 0 are obtained from p r = S r and p r0 = S ; respectively 0 r p ( ) = m sin t cos t 0, p = m ( ) sin t cos t 0, p ( ) 0 = m sin t 0 cos t, p 0 = m ( ) sin t 0 cos t. (47) By using these euations and inserting Q a = 0, P a = 0, a =, into (43) the solution (36) is obtained. C. Third case The euations of motion (4) can be written in Hamiltonian form by taking as symplectic structure and Hamiltonian [4] m (ω µν m ) =, H = (xp y yp x ), (48) m 0 0 m 0 where (x µ ) = (x,x,x 3,x 4 ) = (x,y,p x,p y ) label the points of the phase space Γ = R 4. The symplectic structure (48) can be obtained from the potential -form θ, ω = dθ = d ( m ydx+ m pxdp y ) = m dx dy + m dp x dp y, so it is possible to give the action principle S[x,y,p x,p y ] = t [ dt m yẋ+ p ] x (xp y yp x ). (49) t m ṗy From the definition of the momenta (π µ ) = (π,π,π 3,π 4 ) canonically conjugate to (x µ ) one has that Ω = dπ µ dx µ is the symplectic structure on the extended phase space Γ ext = R 8 and that the second-class constraints χ := π +y = 0, m χ := π = 0, χ 3 := π 3 = 0, χ 4 := m π 4 p x = 0, (50)

13 arise together with the first-class Hamiltonian H which satisfy as expected []. H = (xp y +yp x )+ m (p xπ +p y π ) m (xπ 3 +yπ 4 ), (5) {χ,h } = m χ 3, {χ,h } = m χ 4, {χ 3,H } = m χ, {χ 4,H } = m χ, (5) Next, a canonical transformation in Γ ext = R 8 from (x,y,p x,p y ;π,π,π 3,π 4 ) to (,,Q,Q ;p,p,p,p ) such that the original second-class constraints (50) form canonical pairs of the new set of canonical variables is performed. The new canonical pairs are (,p ), (,p ), (Q,P ), and (Q,P ). The relationship between these canonical variables and the original ones is = m x+π, p = π m, = p y m π 3, p = m π 4, Q = χ, P = χ, Q = χ 3, P = χ 4, (53) with inverse transformation x = ( ) m P,π = m p, y = Q p, π = P, p x = p P, π 3 = Q, p y = m ( +Q ),π 4 = p m. (54) Then, in terms of the new set of canonical variables the first-class Hamiltonian H (5) acuires the form H = [( )( P +Q ) + ( ) Q p (p p )+(p P )p + ( +Q) P ( P ) Q ( Q p ) p ]. (55) By applying the procedure of Ref. [3], which means to set Q a = 0, P a = 0, a =, and p r = S, r =,, the Hamilton-Jacobi euation arises r ( ) S S t + S + 3 = 0. (56)

14 A complete solution of this euation is S = [( ) ( )] sin t cos t 0 + 0, (57) where 0 and 0 are integration constants. Hence, the momenta p r and p r0 canonically conjugate to r and r 0, are obtained from p r = S r p = sin t p = sin t p 0 = sin t p 0 = sin t and p r0 = S ; respectively 0 r ( ) cos t 0, ( ) cos t 0, ( ) 0 cos t, ( ) 0 cos t, (58) from which, together with (54) and Q a = 0, P a = 0, a =,, the solution (36) is obtained. IV. PARAMETRIZING THE SYSTEM If the Newtonian time t is considered as configuration variable then one has S[x µ,t] = τ τ dτ [ θ µ (x)ẋ µ H(x,t)ṫ ], (59) where the dot stands for the time derivative with respect to the unphysical parameter τ. The next step is to define the momenta π x µ canonically conjugate to x µ and π t canonically conjugate to t; respectively. By definition, π x µ := θ µ (x), µ =,,...,n, (60) π t := H(x,t), (6) which lead to the primary constraints χ µ := π x µ θ µ (x) = 0, µ =,,...,n, (6) γ := π t +H(x,t) = 0. (63) The next step is to compute the canonical Hamiltonian H c H c := π x µẋ µ +p t ṫ L = π x µẋ µ +p t ṫ ( θ µ (x)ẋ µ H(x,t)ṫ ) = 0, (64) 4

15 in agreement with the fact that the system has been parametrized. Therefore, S[x µ,t,π x µ,π t,λ µ,λ] = τ The evolution with respect to τ of the primary constraint χ µ is from which Similarly, the evolution with respect to τ of γ is τ dτ [ ẋ µ π x µ +ṫπ t Λγ Λ µ χ µ ]. (65) χ µ = π x µ θ µ x νẋν 0 = Λ H x µ +ω µν(x)λ ν 0, (66) Λ µ Λω µν H x ν. (67) γ = π t +Ḣ = π t + H + H x νẋν t ṫ = Λ H t + H + H x νλν t Λ 0, (68) because of E. (67). No more constraints arise. Therefore, the constraints χ µ are secondclass while γ is related with the first-class constraint In fact, G := γ +χ µ ω µν (x) H x ν. (69) {G,χ µ } = χ α {ω αβ H x β,χ µ} 0, (70) which has the usual structure between first-class and second-class constraints []. In this case, one has a dynamical system described by first-class and second-class constraints. Due to the fact, one is dealing essentially with the same physical situation, the Hamilton-Jacobi theory of the this case must lead to the Hamilton-Jacobi euation given in E. (3). This is indeed the case [0]. V. CONCLUSIONS In this paper we have made a proposal for the Hamilton-Jacobi theory for unconstrained Hamiltonian systems described by symplectic structures and Hamiltonians alternative to 5

16 the usual ones. Our strategy consists in the systematic application of Dirac s method to the action associated with such a unconstrained Hamiltonian systems which leads to dynamical systems whose extended phase space is endowed with a canonical symplectic structure and second-class constraints. To handle the second-class constraints, we follow essentially the procedure of Ref. [3] to build the Hamilton-Jacobi theory. It is important to emphasize that there exists another way, alternative to the procedure of Ref. [3], of handling the secondclass constraints which consists in replacing the second-class constraints by an euivalent set of first-class constraints enlarging the phase space of the system following the Batalin- Tyutin procedure [4, 5]. Once this has been achieved, the problem consists in building the Hamilton-Jacobi theory for systems with first-class constraints, which is well-known []. Finally, it is also important to mention that the original problem of building the Hamilton- Jacobi theory for unconstrained Hamiltonian systems described by symplectic structures and Hamiltonians alternative to the usual ones can be solved by means of Darboux s theorem []. In this framework, one simply rewrites the original Hamiltonian system in terms of canonical variables. Once this has been achieved, the Hamilton-Jacobi theory is the usual one []. In this paper, however, we have avoided such a procedure because the systematic application of Dirac s method seems to be the natural procedure. Acknowledgements The authors wish to thank G. F. Torres del Castillo and J. D. Vergara for very fruitful discussions. This work was supported in part by the CONACyT grant SEP-003-C [] R. Berndt, An Introduction to Symplectic Geometry, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 00. [] G. F. Torres del Castillo and E. Galindo Linares, Rev. Mex. Fís. 49 (003) 344. [3] G. F. Torres del Castillo and G. Mendoza Torres, Rev. Mex. Fís. 49 (003) 445. [4] G. F. Torres del Castillo and M. P. Velázuez Quesada, Rev. Mex. Fís. 50 (004) 608. [5] M. Montesinos, Phys. Rev. A 68 (003) 040. [6] M. Montesinos and G. F. Torres del Castillo, Phys. Rev. A (004) 0304; uant-ph/

17 [7] M. Montesinos, Genuine covariant description of Hamiltonian dynamics, in: M. Alcubierre, J.L. Cervantes-Cota, and M. Montesinos (Eds.) VI Mexican School on Gravitation and Mathematical Physics Journal of Physics: Conference Series 4, Institute of Physics Publishing, Bristol and Philadelphia, 005, pp [8] C. Crnkovic and E. Witten, Covariant description of canonical formalism in geometrical theories, in: S. W. Hawking and W. Israel Three Hundred Years of Gravitation, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA, 987, pp [9] M. Mondragón and M. Montesinos, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 9 (004) 473; gr-c/ [0] A. A. Martínez-Merino, Teoría de Hamilton-Jacobi para sistemas hamiltonianos genuinamente covariantes, M.Sc. Thesis Cinvestav, Mexico, 005. [] P. A. M. Dirac, Lectures on Quantum Mechanics, Dover Publications, Mineola, 00. [] M. Henneaux and C. Teitelboim, Quantization of Gauge Systems, Princeton University Press, Princeton, 99. [3] K. D. Rothe and F. G. Scholtz, Ann. Phys. 308 (003) 639. [4] I. A. Batalin and I. V. Tyutin, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A. 6 (99) 355. [5] R. Amorin and A. Das, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 9 (994)