Professional Documents
Culture Documents
f = E
( + m
2
) f = f
We dene E E
E
+
and the complex-linear symbols ( f )
satisfying
( f ) =
_
d
4
x
_
g (x) f (x)
_
( f ), (q)
_
= i
_
^
d
4
x
_
g f (x)(Eq)(x) i( f, q)
(( + m
2
) f ) = 0
This generates the so-called CCR-algebra F(^).
Using suitable coordinates:
We write the metric for Expanding Spacetimes as
ds
2
= dt
2
c(t)
2
h
i j
(x)dx
i
dx
j
On spacetimes with compact Cauchy hypersurfaces, the
laplacian is self-adjoint.
(t, x) =
j
_
T
j
(t)Y
j
(x) + T
j
(t)Y
j
(x)
_
Freedom of the solution of the KG equation:
T
j
(t) =
j
S
j
(t) +
j
S
j
(t) ;
j
2
2
j
= 1
States and the Hadamard condition
States are positive, linear functionals on F(^).
Bymeans of the GNS construction, to any state is associated
a unique representation (H, ,
).
w
(n)
( f
1
. . . fn) (F( f
1
) . . . F( fn)) .
We will restrict attention to Quasifree States. The singular
structure of their two-point functions is required to satisfy
the Hadamard Condition:
WF(w
(2)
) =
_
(x
1
, k
1
; x
2
, k
2
) (x
i
, k
i
) T
xi
^0;
(x
1
, k
1
) (x
2
, k
2
); k
1
V+
_
C
+
Physically, Hadamard states are those whose singularity struc-
ture concides withthat of the vacuumstate inMinkowski space-
time. Besides, these states yield a sensible renormalization of
the energy-momentum tensor in curved spacetimes.
Using suitable coordinates:
w
(2)
_
( f )(q)
_
= (( f )(q))
=
_
d
4
x
_
g(x)d
4
x
_
g(x
) f (t, x)q(s, x
j
T
j
(t)T
j
(s)Y
j
(x)Y
j
(x
j
w
(2)
j
(x, x
)
States of Low Energy
In the absence of spatial symmetries, the smearing must be
performed over a timelike slab of spacetime;
We will treat only spacetimes whose Cauchy hypersurfaces
are compact without boundary f (t, x) = f (t);
The energy density will be measured by geodesic observers
which are orthogonal to the hypersurfaces,
a
= (1,
0).
E
j
_
R
dt f
2
(t)
_
d
3
x
_
h (
T
reg
)j
(t, x)
= (1 + 2
2
j
)c
1j
+ 2
j
_
1 +
2
j
Re(e
ij
c
2j
)
where
c
1j
=
1
2
_
dt f
2
(t)
_
S
j
(t)
2
+
2
j
(t)S
j
(t)
2
_
c
2j
=
1
2
_
dt f
2
(t)
_
(
S
j
(t))
2
+
2
j
(t)S
j
(t)
2
_
.
The minimization problem is solved by
j
=
_
c
1j
2
_
c
2
1j
c
2j
1
2
and
j
= Argc
2j
+
States of Low Energy are Hadamard States
We will prove the Hadamard property of the States of Low
Energy by means of a comparison of their singular structure
with the one from Adiabatic States. These are dened in terms
of their Sobolev Wavefront set. A quasifree state
N
is an Adia-
batic State of order N if, s < N + 3/2,
WF
s
(w
(2)
N
) = C
+
.
For a general Hadamard state,
WF
s
(w
(2)
H
) =
_
, s < 1/2
C
+
, s 1/2
.
The Adiabatic solution was constructed as an iterative solution
to the KG equation whose initial condition is of the WKB form.
The asymptotic behavior of the adiabatic solution S
(N)
j
(t) and of
the SLE (given by
(N)
j
), are given by
(k)
t
S
(N)
j
(t) = O(
k/21/4
j
) ;
(N)
j
= O(
N1/2
j
) .
The eigenfunctions, respectively eigenvalues, of the laplacian
on a compact Riemannian manifold of dimension 3 behave
asymptotically as
k
Y
j
(x)
2
C
3,k
3+2k
j
+ O(
2+2k
j
) ,
j
= O( j
2/3
) .
By analysing the smoothness of w
(2)
SLE
w
(2)
N
, we nd
WF
s
(w
(2)
SLE
w
(2)
N
) = for s <
N
2
29
4
,
what means that
WF
s
(w
(2)
SLE
w
(2)
H
) = s .
Modied Sorkin-Johnston States
Let A = R and ^ = I , I = (t
0
, t
0
), with : ^
A, (t, x) (t, x) an isometric embedding, preserving orienta-
tion and causal orientation, and (^) a causally convex and
relatively compact subset of A. From the uniqueness of E
A
, it
follows that
E
^
=
E
A
.
It was shown in [4] that E
^
is bounded.
For f a real valued test function on A such that f
^
1, we
dene the self-adjoint operator
A(x, x
) i f (x)E(x, x
) f (x
) .
A state can then be constructed by taking the positive part A
+
of A (in the sense of the spectral calculus).
A
+
= P
+
A,
where P
+
is the spectral projection on the interval [0, A].
The modied S-J state
SJ
is now dened as the quasifree state
on the spacetime ^ with the smeared two-point function
w
(2)
SJ
(q, r) (q, A
+
r) .
for real valued test functions q, r on ^. Note that the antisym-
metric part of the two-point function coincides with iE
^
.
Expanding Spacetimes
The advanced-minus-retarded-operator is
E(t, x; t
, x
) =
j
(T
j
(t)T
j
(t
) T
j
(t)T
j
(t
))
2i
Y
j
(x)Y
j
(x
) .
We therefore write
A =
j
A
j
(t
, t)Y
j
(x)Y
j
(x
) .
We decompose f T
j
into its real and imaginary parts, f T
j
=
B
j
iD
j
, and choose its phase such that
_
B
j
, D
j
_
0 .
Then,
A
j
(t, t
) = i
_
D
j
(t
)B
j
(t) B
j
(t
)D
j
(t)
_
.
Setting
j
= 1
B
j
D
j
,
we nd for the 2-point function of the modied S-J state on ^
w
(2)
SJ
(t, x; t
, x
) =
j
1
2
_
_
1
1
j
B
j
(t
) iD
j
(t
)
_
_
_
B
j
(t) + i(1
j
)D
j
(t)
_
Y
j
(x)Y
j
(x
) .
This state is a pure state.
To prove that this state is a Hadamard state on the spacetime
^ we take T
j
as being initially equal do the adiabatic solution
and compare the singular structure of w
(2)
SJ
s
j
(A
+
j
1
2
f T
j
)( f T
j
) Y
j
)(Y
j
(1)
is Hilbert-Schmidt. We obtain for the Hilbert-Schmidt norm of
Rs
Rs
2
2
j
(1 +
j
)
2s2N2
(2)
For the Laplacian on a compact Riemannian space of dimen-
sion m we know that
j
is bounded by some constant times j
2
m.
Hence the Hilbert-Schmidt norm of Rs is nite if s < N + 1
m
4
.
Since s , N Rs
2
2
is bounded,
WF
s
(w
(2)
SJ
w
(2)
H
) = s .
Conclusions
The generalization of the SLE for spacetimes without spatial
symmetries requires the smearing of the energy density also
over Cauchy hypersurfaces;
Hadamard states can be constructed fromthe positive part of
the advanced-minus-retarded-operator, but only if this ope-
rator is multiplied by a smooth test function. This spoils the
uniqueness which motivated the original construction.
Although it is known that it is not possible to nd a unique
prescription for the construction of Hadamard states, valid
for any Globally Hyperbolic spacetime [7, 8], it is yet inter-
esting to investigate under which conditions may the above
constructions be generalized.
References
[1] K. Them and M. Brum, arxiv:1302.3174.
[2] M. Brum and K. Fredenhagen, arxiv:1307.0482.
[3] N. Afshordi, S. Aslanbeigi and R. Sorkin, JHEP08(2012), 137.
[4] C. Fewster and R. Verch, CQG 29, 205017(2012).
[5] H. Olbermann, CQG 24, 5011 (2007).
[6] C. Fewster and C. Smith, Ann. Henri Poincar e 9, 425 (2008).
[7] C. Fewster and R. Verch, Ann. Henri Poincar e 13, 1613 (2012).
[8] C. Fewster and R. Verch, Ann. Henri Poincar e 13, 1675 (2012).
[9] C. L uders and J. E. Roberts, CMP 134, 29 (1990).
[10] W. Junker and E. Schrohe, Ann. Henri Poincar e 3, 1113 (2002).