As an example of the book "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics Schrodinger Equation and Path integral" by Harald J. W. Muller. We have to prove Liouville's theorem. Here I show the proof as the text presents it:
Show that $\triangle q \triangle p$ is independent of time $t$, which mean, this has the same value at >a time $to$, as at a time $t_{0}^{\prime} \neq t_{0}$.
Solution: We consider $$\frac{d}{d t} \ln (\triangle q \triangle p)=\frac{d(\triangle q)}{d t} \frac{1}{\triangle q}+\frac{d(\triangle p)}{d t} \frac{1}{\triangle p}\text{.}$$ Here $d(\triangle q) / d t$ is the rate at which the $q$-walls of the phase space element move away from the centre of the element, $$\dot{q}+\frac{\partial \dot{q}}{\partial q} \frac{\Delta q}{2} \quad \text { to the right } \quad \text { and } \quad \dot{q}-\frac{\partial \dot{q}}{\partial q} \frac{\Delta q}{2} \quad \text { to the left. }$$
Hence from the difference:
$$\frac{d(\Delta q)}{d t}=\frac{\partial \dot{q}}{\partial q} \triangle q, \quad \text { and similarly } \quad \frac{d(\Delta p)}{d t}=\frac{\partial \dot{p}}{\partial p} \Delta p$$
and with Hamilton's equations: $$\dot{q}_{i}=\frac{\partial H}{\partial p_{i}}, \quad \dot{p}_{i}=-\frac{\partial H}{\partial q_{i}}$$
we get:
$$\frac{d}{d t} \ln (\triangle q \triangle p)=\frac{\partial \dot{q}}{\partial q}+\frac{\partial \dot{p}}{\partial p}=\frac{\partial^{2} H}{\partial q \partial p}-\frac{\partial^{2} H}{\partial p \partial q}=0$$
My big problem is with the term $\dot{q}+\frac{\partial \dot{q}}{\partial q} \frac{\Delta q}{2}$ I can't be sure how to make sense of it. On the internet I looked at a alternative derivation in which they take the following approach:
For simplicity I will stick to a single particle in one dimension, so the phase space has only two dimensions, but the generalization to more dimensions is trivial. The region consists of all the systems with positions between $x$ and $x+\delta x$ and momentum between $p$ and $p+\delta p$, so its volume is $V=\delta x \delta p$. We can then write:
$$\begin{aligned} \frac{d V}{d t} &=\frac{d}{d t}(\delta x \delta p) \\ &=\delta x \frac{d(\delta p)}{d t}+\delta p \frac{d(\delta x)}{d t} \\ &=\delta x\left(\frac{d(p+\delta p)}{d t}-\frac{d p}{d t}\right)+\delta p\left(\frac{d(x+\delta x)}{d t}-\frac{d x}{d t}\right) \end{aligned}$$
Assume that $\frac{dx}{dt}$ and $\frac{dp}{dt}$ are linear in $x$ and $p$ respectively. This is an approximation for any finite sized region, but it becomes exact in the limit that $\delta x$ and $\delta p$ go to zero. That is,
$$\begin{array}{l} \frac{d(x+\delta x)}{d t}=\frac{d x}{d t}+\delta x \frac{\partial}{\partial x}\left(\frac{d x}{d t}\right) \\ \frac{d(p+\delta p)}{d t}=\frac{d p}{d t}+\delta p \frac{\partial}{\partial p}\left(\frac{d p}{d t}\right) \end{array}$$ [...]
In the second proof, the term is very familiar.I think they right wall is the one changing over time actually, whereas in the first proof both left and right are changing and they are separated by half the width. Now where does the term $\delta x \frac{\partial}{\partial x}\left(\frac{d x}{d t}\right)$ comes from? Are we treating the time derivative as a function that is Taylor expandable? i.e
$$f(x+\delta x)=f(x)+\delta x \frac{\partial f(x)}{\partial x}$$
but instead of $f$ we're treating the time derivative as a function? And is this the right way to think of it in the first proof? The left and right $q$-walls separating at a rate $$\frac{d(q-\frac{\triangle q}{2}) }{d t}= \dot{q}-\frac{\partial \dot{q}}{\partial q} \frac{\Delta q}{2} \quad and \quad \frac{d(q+\frac{\triangle q}{2}) }{d t}= \dot{q}+\frac{\partial \dot{q}}{\partial q} \frac{\Delta q}{2} \text{?}$$