This question is based on a previous question I asked, Q. [1]
In this question, I proposed an example of a non-local Lagrangian (functional), I'm revisiting it here: $$\mathbb{L}=\frac{1}{2}\int^t_0 \left(\dot{q}(\tau)\dot{q}(t-\tau)-q(\tau)q(t-\tau)\right)\,\text{d}\tau \tag{1}$$
Taking the first variation of Eq. (1) with respect to $q$, I get that the functional is stationary with respect to (neglecting boundary terms): $$ \ddot{q}(\tau)-q(\tau)=0 \tag{2} $$
Now, using the approach detailed in the answer to Q. [1] , I formulate a Hamiltonian integral as:
$$ \mathbb{H}=\frac{1}{2}\int^t_0 \left(p(\tau)p(t-\tau)+q(\tau)q(t-\tau)\right)\,\text{d}\tau \tag{3}$$
Now, taking the functional derivatives of (3), we have:
$$ \frac{\delta \mathbb{H}}{\delta p}=p(\tau),\,\frac{\delta \mathbb{H}}{\delta q}=q(\tau) \tag{4}$$
Now, as detailed in the answer to Q. [1] , (4) implies that:
$$ \dot{q}(\tau)-p(\tau)=0,\,\dot{p}(\tau)+q(\tau)=0 \tag{5}$$
Substituting the first equation in (5) into the second yields:
$$ \ddot{q}(\tau)+q(\tau)=0 \tag{6}$$
Eq. (6) contradicts Eq. (2), why?
It seems that the non-local nature of the Lagrangian leads to a different set of Hamilton's equations, namely:
$$ \frac{\delta \mathbb{H}}{\delta p}=\dot{q},\,\frac{\delta \mathbb{H}}{\delta q}=\dot{p} \tag{7}$$
I just assumed this naively (since it would correct the contradiction), is this true, or am I making some mistake in my work?
--
[1] This question deals with the Legendre transform for non-local Lagrangian formulations.