A Local Spectral Condition for Axiomatic Quantum Fields

on the de Sitter Surface

by
Justin Manning
(Under the direction of Dr. Robert Varley)
Abstract
The Wightman axioms provide an intuitive and mathematically rigorous approach to quan-
tum eld construction on at Minkowski space, and much work has been done to extend these
axioms to curved space-time manifolds. A key axiom in the Wightman framework states that
the generator of time translation must be a positive semi-denite operator, which guarantees
non-negative energy for a quantum eld. One of the major diculties in extending these
axioms to curved manifolds arises when the manifold in question has no global time-like
isometry, and hence no global notion of time and energy. I propose a set of Wightman-like
axioms for the de Sitter surface which includes a solution to this problem by introducing
a local non-negative spectrum condition which gives a local meaning to energy, in essence
a local Hamiltonian, and guarantees it to be a non-negative operator. I then construct a
mathematically rigorous free massless scalar eld on two-dimensional de Sitter space and
prove that it satises these axioms.
Index words: quantum eld theory, curved space time, diagonally dominant, local
spectrum, Wightman axioms, innite dimensional matrix
A Local Spectral Condition for
Axiomatic Quantum Fields on the de Sitter Surface
by
Justin Manning
B.S., University of Georgia, 2002
A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty
of The University of Georgia in Partial Fulllment
of the
Requirements for the Degree
Doctor of Philosophy
Athens, Georgia
2011
c (2011
Justin Manning
All Rights Reserved
A Local Spectral Condition for Axiomatic Quantum Fields
on the de Sitter Surface
by
Justin Manning
August 6, 2011
Approved:
Major Professor: Robert Varley
Committee: Ed Azo
Clint McCrory
Mitch Rothstein
Michael Usher
Electronic Version Approved:
Maureen Grasso
Dean of the Graduate School
The University of Georgia
August 2011
Acknowledgments
Foremost, I would like to thank my advisor, Dr. Robert Varley for uncountable hours of work
and support. This thesis would not be possible were it not for his patience and guidance.
I would also like to thank my committee, Dr. Ed Azo, Dr. Clint McCrory, Dr. Mitch
Rothstein, and Dr. Michael Usher for their time and input. Each has provided valuable
insight and feedback during the development and implementation of the ideas of this thesis
through conversations, seminar presentations, and corrections.
Last, I would like to thank my family and friends for their continued support and encour-
agement. In particular, Justine Samawicz has been my greatest supporter and encourager
throughout these studies.
Mathematics is not a careful march down a well-cleared highway, but a journey into a
strange wilderness, where the explorers often get lost. Rigour should be a signal to the
historian that the maps have been made, and the real explorers have gone elsewhere.
-W.S. Anglin
iv
Contents
1 Introduction 1
1.1 Minkowski Space and the Wightman Axioms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2 Segal Quantization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.3 Example: Free Massless Scalar Quantum Field on 2-D Minkowski Space . . . 8
2 Axiomatic Quantum Fields on the de Sitter Surface 14
2.1 The de Sitter Surface and its Axioms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2.2 Example: Free Massless Scalar Quantum Field on the de Sitter Surface . . . 20
2.3 Axioms CW1-CW3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
2.4 Diagonal Dominance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
2.5 CW5, the Local Spectral Condition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
3 Connections and Speculations 43
3.1 Connections to Other Work in the Field . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
3.2 Speculations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
Bibliography 49
v
Chapter 1
Introduction
1.1 Minkowski Space and the Wightman Axioms
The Wightman axioms [11, 21] provide an intuitive and elegant mathematical denition of a
quantum eld on Minkowski space. Each axiom corresponds to a natural physical idea and
gives a mathematical requirement for each that a quantum eld must satisfy. Throughout
this thesis, the quantum elds under discussion are assumed to be scalar, in that they
have no spin. Scalar elds successfully demonstrate the essential structure of the Wightman
quantum eld theory without the added complexity of spin. Before diving into the Wightman
axioms, let us review the underlying structure of Minkowski space on which it is dened.
N-dimensional Minkowski space is the space-time manifold that provides a mathe-
matical model of special relativity. It is dened as M = R
N
with the metric
'v, w` = v
0
w
0
v
1
w
1
v
2
w
2
v
N1
w
N1
1
or in matrix form
=

1 0 0
0 1 0
0 0 1

.
The causal inuence of a vector v is called the light cone of v, denoted C
v
, given by the
set
C
v
= w M['v w, v w` 0.
Two vectors v and w are called space-like separated if w / C
v
, or equivalently v /
C
w
, time-like separated if w Int(C
v
) (or equivalently v Int(C
w
)), and light-like
separated if v C
w
(or equivalently w C
v
). These terms characterize the causal
relationship between v and w. For example, if v and w are space-like separated, then one
cannot be reached from the other without surpassing the speed of light, but if they are
time-like separated, one can be reached from the other by a speed less than the speed of
light.
The Lorentz group / = O(1, N 1) is the group of linear isometries of M. It can be
characterized as
/ = G GL(R
N
)[G
T
G = .
This group has four connected components. Write a matrix in / as
T =

a
00
a
01
a
02

a
10
a
11
a
12

a
20
a
21
a
22

.
2
The four components of / are characterized by
/
0
= T / [ a
00
> 0, det(T) > 0
/
1
= T / [ a
00
< 0, det(T) > 0
/
2
= T / [ a
00
> 0, det(T) < 0
/
3
= T / [ a
00
< 0, det(T) < 0.
For quantum elds on Minkowski space, we will be interested in /
0
, the identity compo-
nent of /. Viewing time as the rst coordinate of M, this subgroup consists of the isometries
of M that preserve both orientation on M and time direction. These are the transformations
that physics requires to preserve any physical measurement.
These, however, are not the only transformations that we need. Translations in M should
also preserve any physical measurements. Well dene the Poincare group as
{ = R
N
/
0
where we use the common abuse of notation and write R
N
for the translations on R
N
. {
will be the group with which we are concerned while building a quantum eld. We will write
an element of { as (a, ) where a R
N
and /
0
.
As in standard treatments of quantum mechanics, the states of a quantum eld will
be modeled by a separable Hilbert space, and the inner product will be used to model
measurements. Thus for a quantum eld, as in standard quantum mechanics, we will require
a unitary representation of { on the Hilbert space of states.
The purpose of a quantum eld is to model changing numbers of particles, so for each
point of M, we would ideally like an operator on the Hilbert space of states that models
creation and annihilation of particles at that point. Such a map on points of M is unfortu-
nately too singular, so instead we use a map on compactly supported functions of M. This
3
corresponds to physics experiments, however, as measurements cannot take place at a point,
but only on an area of M.
To this end, we dene an operator valued distribution on M as a linear map
: C

0
(M) End(T)
where T 1 is a dense linear subspace of a separable Hilbert space 1, and where the map
f '
1
, (f)
2
`
is a continuous linear functional for each
1
,
2
T, using the Schwartz topology on C

0
(M).
We require a dense subspace because in most examples, (f) is unbounded.
In their famous work, Garding and Wightman [11] formulated a set of physically mean-
ingful axioms that these two ingredients of a quantum eld should satisfy. A quantum eld
in the Wightman axioms is a quadruple , U, T, T
0
, where T is a separable Hilbert
space, T
0
a dense linear subspace, is an operator valued distribution on M with values in
End(T
0
), and U is a unitary representation of { on T, where by convention, when we refer
to a unitary representation of a Lie group, we imply that it is strongly continuous. This
quadruple in addition must satisfy the following axioms.
W1: (Symmetry) '
1
, (f)
2
` = '(

f)
1
,
2
` for all f C

0
(M) and
1
,
2
T.
W2: (Vacuum Cyclicity) There is a U-invariant vector T
0
with [[[[ = 1 such
that the linear span of vectors of the form (f
1
) (f
n
) for f
j
C

0
(M), n N is
dense in T
0
W3: (Equivariance) U(g)(f)U(g)
1
= (f g
1
) for all f C

0
(M) and g {
W4: (Causality Commutativity) [(f
1
), (f
2
)] = 0 if supp(f
1
) and supp(f
2
) are space-
4
like separated
W5: (Spectral Condition) The innitesimal generator H of U((t, 0, ), I), the time
translation subgroup, has non-negative spectrum.
A quick note on convention: we will regard N as the positive integers not including 0.
Also, the symbol I will represent the identity map in its context.
These axioms correspond to general physical considerations. W1 models the idea that we
can generate particles from the vaccum by exchange of energy and matter, and create any
state of a nite number of particles. W2 guarantees that transformations of the space-time
M correspond to transformations of measurements of states in 1. W3 gives some control
of the spectrum of operators given by . In particular, if f is real-valued, then (f) has
real spectrum and can be used as an observable operator. W4 is the causality condition
that places of space-time that cannot reach each other by the speed of light cannot aect
measurements in their regions. W5 is the condition that the energy of a conguration of
states should be non-negative.
Note that axiom W5 is stated in a coordinate dependent way. This matches the usual
statements of the spectral axiom, however, because U((t, 0, ), I) is conjugate to any trans-
lation in the forward light cone by elements of /
0
. Thus the generator of any translation in
the forward light cone will have a non-negative spectrum.
1.2 Segal Quantization
One helpful tool for constructing a Wightman quantum eld is Segal quantization [20].
This gives a process by which to turn a one-particle quantum system into a many-particle
system. Let 1 be a separable Hilbert space. Well think of 1 as the space representing the
states of a one particle quantum system.
5
Consider the symmetric projection S
n
: 1
n
1
n
given by
S
n
(h
1
h
n
) =
1
n!

Sym(n)
h
(1)
h
(n)
.
To construct the state space for n of these particles, we use the Hilbert space symmetric
tensor product S
n
1
n
. The tensor is symmetrized because identical particles are indistin-
guishable. The state space for a quantum eld must contain any number of particles, so we
dene the following.
Let T
0
= C (

n=1
S
n
1
n
), extending the inner product of 1 in the natural way over
tensors and sums. T
0
is called the nite particle space, containing nite linear combina-
tions of any number of particles. The Hilbert space closure T = T
0
is called the symmetric
Fock space on 1. The vector = (1, 0, 0, ) is called the vacuum, representing a state
with no particles.
Now we perform a similar construction for self-adjoint operators on 1. If A is a self-
adjoint operator on 1, we dene (A) on the n particle space S
n
1
n
by
(A) = A I I +I A I I + +I I A
and extend to T
0
by linearity. The map is called the second quantization of A.
If U is a unitary operator on 1, then we dene E(U) on S
n
1
n
by
E(U) =
n
k=1
U
and extend by linearity to T. Cleary, then, E(U) is unitary on T.
When constructing a quantum eld by Segal quantization, T will be the Hilbert space of
states of the system, and T
0
will be the dense subspace referenced in the Wightman axioms.
Also, we must model creation and annihilation of particles to represent changes in the eld.
6
This is accomplished through creation and annihilation operators.
The creation operator c : 1 End(T
0
) is most easily dened by its action on each
S
n
1
n
. For f 1, dene
c(f)h
1
h
2
h
n
=
1

n
S
n+1
(f h
1
h
2
h
n
) S
n+1
1
(n+1)
which we can extend by linearity to T
0
. The annihilation operator a : 1 End(T
0
) is
similarly dened. For f 1, dene
a(f)h
1
h
2
h
n
=

n + 1'f, h
1
`h
2
h
n
S
n1
1
(n1)
which we can similarly extend to T
0
.
Note that since each S
n
1
n
is symmetric, c(f) does not need another symmetric projec-
tion in its output. We can heuristically think of c(f) as creating a particle at the support of
f, and a(f) as annihilating one. If the support of f is very small, this models the classical
notion of changing the value of a eld at a point. Also note that c is complex linear, but a is
complex anti-linear. In addition, for a given f 1, c(f) and a(f) are adjoint to each other.
Next we can dene the Segal eld operator
S
: 1 End(T
0
) by

S
(f) =
1

2
(a(f) + c(f)).
Since c(f) and a(f) are adjoint,
S
(f) is a self-adjoint operator on T, but the mapping
f
S
(f) is not complex linear. This mapping of 1 to operators on T is called the Segal
quantization of 1. This construction has some very useful properties illustrated by the
following theorem which is thoroughly treated in [20].
Theorem 1.2.1. The Segal quantization
S
satises the following.
i) (Continuity) For all T
0
, the map f
S
(f) is continuous
7
ii) (Self-adjointness) For all f 1,
S
(f) is essentially self-adjoint
iii) (Cyclicity) T

is generated by vectors of the form

S
(f
1
)
S
(f
2
)
S
(f
n
), where f
1
, , f
n
1
iv) (Equivariance) If U is a unitary operator on 1, then for all f 1 and T
0
,
E(U)
S
(f)E(U)
1
=
S
(Uf)
v) (Commutation Relations) For any f, g 1 and T
0
,
[
S
(f),
S
(g)] = iIm('f, g`)
Segal quantization has many more interesting properties, but these are the ones that
will be of use in this thesis. For more information, see [20]. We can now use the Segal
quantization method to construct an example of a quantum eld in the Wightman axioms.
1.3 Example: Free Massless Scalar Quantum Field on
2-D Minkowski Space
As an example we will now construct a free massless scalar quantum eld satisfying the
Wightman axioms in two dimensions. This will demonstrate the structure of a quantum
eld as well as a common method of construction through Segal quantization.
We begin by constructing the one particle Hilbert space. Dene the forward light cone
C as
C = (E, p) R
2
[E > 0, E
2
p
2
= 0
8
and let
T = C

0
(C),
the compactly supported smooth functions on C. We can view T as the space of functions
in C

0
(R
2
) restricted to C, which we can write as
T = f([p[, p) [ f o(R
2
).
We can put an inner product on T using this restriction by
'f, g` =

f([p[, p)g([p[, p)dp.

The one particle Hilbert space will then be the Hilbert space closure in this inner product
1 = (T, ', `).
We can then take T and T
0
to be the symmetric Fock space and nite particle space on 1.
To construct the unitary representation U : { Aut(T), we can begin by dening what
happens on 1. Writing an element of { as (a, ) where a R
2
and /
0
, dene
U
0
(a, )h([p[, p) = e
i(|p|a
0
pa
1
)
h(
1
([p[, p)).
Since the translation a corresponds to a phase factor, we need only be concerned with

1
([p[, p) to see that U
0
actually maps 1 to 1. Since /
0
consists of the Lorentz trans-
formations that preserve both orientation and time direction, and preserves the condition
E
2
p
2
= 0, we see that for any h 1, U
0
(a, )h 1. To see that U
0
is unitary, note
that the volume measure on M with respect to the metric is still the standard Lebesgue
9
measure. Thus
'U(g)h, U(g)h` =

[h
1
([p[, p)[
2
dp =

[h([p[, p)[
2
dp = 'h, h`.
We can then extend U
0
to T by E.
U(g)h
1
h
2
h
n
= E(U
0
(g))h
1
h
2
h
n
= U
0
(g)h
1
U
0
(g)h
2
U
0
(g)h
n
which remains unitary by the extension of the inner product from 1 to T.
We will also dene the operator-valued distribution by rst dening a map on the one
particle Hilbert space 1. Dene
0
: C

0
(M) 1 by

0
(f)([p[, p) =

f(t, x)e
i(Etpx)
dtdx[
E=|p|
=

f(t, x)e
i(|p|tpx)
dtdx
which is the Lorentzian Fourier transform restricted to C. Then clearly
0
is linear and con-
tinuous by properties of the Fourier transform and restriction. We then dene the operator
valued distribution using the Segal eld operator. If f is real-valued, dene
(f) =
S
(
0
(f))
and if f = u + iv,
(u + iv) = (u) + i(v).
By Theorem 1.2.1 (i), is an operator-valued distribution.
Now to check the axioms.
Proposition 1.3.1. The quadruple , U, T, T
0
satises the Wightman axioms,
W1: (Symmetry) '
1
, (f)
2
` = '(

f)
1
,
2
` for all f C

0
(M) and
1
,
2
T.
10
In particular, if f is real, (f) is self-adjoint, and hence real spectrum
W2: (Vacuum Cyclicity) There is a U-invariant vector T
0
with [[[[ = 1 such
that the linear span of vectors of the form (f
1
) (f
n
) for f
j
C

0
(M), n N is
dense in T
0
W3: (Equivariance) U(g)(f)U(g)
1
= (f g) for all f C

0
(M) and g {
W4: (Causality Commutativity) (f
1
)(f
2
) = (f
2
)(f
1
) if supp(f
1
) and supp(f
2
)
are space-like separated
W5: (Spectral Condition) The innitesimal generator H of U(t), the time translation
subgroup, has non-negative spectrum.
Proof. Axiom W1 is satised by Theorem 1.2.1 (ii) and the linearity of .
For axiom W2, taking = (1, 0, 0, 0, ) T
0
as in the previous section, by Theorem
1.1 (iii) we need only make sure that
0
reaches a dense subspace of T, but this comes from
the fact that the Fourier transform is bijective from o(R
2
) to itself, and C

0
(R
2
) o(R
2
) is
dense.
To check W3, we compute

0
(f (a, )
1
) =

f((a, )
1
(t, x))e
i(|p|tpx)
dtdx
=

f(t, x)e
i((|p|,p),(a,)(t,x))
dtdx
=

f(t, x)e
i((a,)
1
(|p|,p),(t,x))
dtdx
= e
i|p|a

0
(f)(
1
([p[, p)).
By Theorem 1.2.1 (iv), we see that is equivariant with respect to U.
11
For W4, by Theorem 1.2.1 (iv) we see that
[(f), (g)] = iIm'
0
(f),
0
(g)`
where the last inner product is on 1. Suppose supp(f) and supp(g) are space-like separated.
By linearity, we can assume that f and g are real valued. Then
Im('
0
(f),
0
(g)`
H
) =

f(t
0
,
0
)e
i(|p|t
0
px
0
)
g(t
1
,
1
)e
i(|p|t
1
px
1
)
dt
0
dx
0
dt
1
dx
1
dp

f(t
0
,
0
)e
i(|p|t
0
px
0
)
g(t
1
,
1
)e
i(|p|t
1
px
1
)
dt
0
dx
0
dt
1
dx
1
dp
=

f(t
0
,
0
)g(t
1
,
1
)

e
i(|p|(t
0
t
1
)p(x
0
x
1
))
e
i(|p|(t
0
t
1
)p(x
1
x
1
))

dt
0
dx
0
dt
1
dx
1
dp
=

f(t
0
,
0
)g(t
1
,
1
)(
+
(t
0
t
1
, x
0
x
1
)
+
((t
0
t
1
), (x
0
x
1
))dt
0
dx
0
dt
1
dx
1
where the distribution
+
is dened by

+
(t, x) =

e
i(|p|tpx)
dp
By Theorem IX.48 of [20], for t
2
x
2
< 0,

+
(t, x) = f
s
(t
2
x
2
)
for some f
s
C

(C). Thus

+
(t
0
t
1
, x
0
x
1
)
+
((t
0
t
1
), (x
0
x
1
) = 0
if (t
0
, x
0
) and (t
1
, x
1
) are space-like separated. Therefore,
Im(
0
(f),
0
(g)) = 0
12
which implies that
[(f), (g)] = 0.
To show the spectral axiom W5, recall that time translation is given by U((t, 0), I). The
innitesimal generator is then given by
Hh([p[, p) = i
d
dt
[
t=0
e
i|p|t
h([p[, p) = [p[h([p[, p).
for all h 1 on which it is dened, and is self-adjoint by Stones theorem. Thus we see that
for any h T(H),
'h, Hh` =

[p[[h([p[, p)[
2
dp 0.
Thus H is positive semi-denite self-adjoint operator, and hence has a non-negative spec-
trum.
13
Chapter 2
Axiomatic Quantum Fields on the de
Sitter Surface
2.1 The de Sitter Surface and its Axioms
The de Sitter surface of radius r is dened to be the one-sheeted hyperboloid
S
R
= x R
3
[ x
2
0
x
2
1
x
2
2
= r
2
.
It is of interest to physics as a vacuum solution to the Einstein equations in two dimensions,
and can be used as a two-dimensional model of the early universe.
We can think of S
r
as the Lorentzian version of the two-sphere of radius r in R
3
. In true
mathematical style, we will take r = 1 and call it simply S, since this will not change the
structure of any of the following work.
The isometry group of S is the Lorentz group O(1, 2) on three dimensional Minkowski
space. The space S is a symmetric pseudo-Riemannian space [8] and can be written
S = O(1, 2)/O(1, 1). Of particular interest is the fact that the identity component /
0

14
O(1, 2) acts transitively on the points of S. In other words, for any x, y S, there is a
g /
0
so that y = gx.
In addition, a key property of the de Sitter surface is that it admits no global time-like
isometry [15, 14]. Any isometry that acts in a time-like way on part of S acts in a space-like
way on another part. This fact is the prominent diculty in any attempts to extend the
spectral axiom of the Wightman axioms to S. Recall that on Minkowski space, the spectral
axiom states that the innitesimal generator of time translation on the Hilbert space of
quantum states must have a non-negative spectrum. Since de Sitter space admits no global
time translation, this axiom cannot be stated in the same way. Soon we will see that we can
instead get an analogous local condition for S.
We will take coordinates for S as follows.
(t, )

tan t
sec t cos
sec t sin

for t (

2
,

2
) and [, ). Note that tan
2
t sec
2
t cos
2
sec
2
tsin
2
= 1. In these
coordinates, the Lorentz metric induced from R
3
takes the form
= sec
2
t

1 0
0 1

.
The key property of this coordinate metric is that it is conformally at. The dAlembertian
operator then takes the form
= cos
2
t

2
t
2


2

15
which we will use in the construction of a quantum eld on S.
The volume measure on S is given by
dVol(t, ) = sec
2
t dtd.
Since the metric, and hence causal structure, of S is induced from that of R
3
, in these
coordinates we see that for v, w S, w is in the light cone of v if
0 = 'v w, v w` = 'v, v` 2'v, w` +'w, w` = 2 2'v, w`.
Thus w is in the light cone of v if
'v, w` = 1
In coordinates v = (t, ) and w = (t
0
,
0
) we see
tan t tan t
0
sec t sec t
0
cos cos
0
sec t sec t
0
sin sin
0
= 1.
Multiplying through by cos t cos t
0
, which is positive in our range of t and t
0
, we get
sin t sin t
0
cos cos
0
sin sin
0
= cos t cos t
0
which nally gives the equation
cos(t t
0
) = cos(
0
).
Again, given the range of t on S, this implies that the light cone boundary at v = (t, ) on
S is given by the equations
(t t
0
) + (
0
) = 0
16
(t t
0
) (
0
) = 0
or better stated as
(t t
0
)
2
(
0
)
2
= 0
supercially matching Minkowski space. This is not unexpected given that metric in these
coordinates is conformally at. Thus two points of S are space-like separated if t
2

2
< 0,
time-like separated if t
2

2
> 0, and light-like separated if t
2

2
= 0 as in Minkowski
space.
We can also view the homogeneous Lorentz group /
0
in these coordinates. Recall that
/
0
is generated by three one-paramter groups
B
1
() =

cosh sinh 0
sinh cosh 0
0 0 1

B
2
() =

cosh 0 sinh
0 1 0
sinh 0 cosh

R() =

1 0 0
0 cos sin
0 sin cos

.
In (t, ) coordinates, this gives
B
1
()(t, ) =

tan
1
(cosh tan t + sinh sec t cos ),
tan
1
(
sec t sin
sinh tan t + cosh sec t cos
)

17
B
2
()(t, ) =

tan
1
(cosh tan t + sinh sec t sin ),
tan
1
(
sinh tan t + cosh sec t sin
sec t cos
)

R()(t, ) = (t, + ).
Similar to Minkowski space, we will dene an operator valued distribution on S to
be a linear map
: C

0
(S) End(T
0
)
where T
0
T is a dense linear submanifold of a Hilbert space T such that for all
1
,
2
T,
the map
f '
1
, (f)
2
`
is a continuous linear functional using the Schwartz topology on C

0
(S).
We would like to dene a scalar quantum eld on S as a quadruple , U, T, T
0
,
where T is a separable Hilbert space, T
0
a dense linear submanifold,
: C

0
(S) End(T
0
)
an operator valued distribution and
U : /
0
Aut(T)
a unitary representation, which satises axioms similar in spirit to the Wightman axioms.
This provides diculties as shown in [16, 3, 4]. The rst three axioms generalize quite
naturally to S.
CW 1: (Conjugate Hermiticity) For all f C

0
(S) and all
1
,
2
T
0
,
'
1
, (f)
2
` = '(

f)
1
,
2
`.
18
CW 2: (Vacuum Cyclicity) There exists a vector T
0
with [[[[ = 1 such that
the linear span of vectors of the form (f
1
) (f
n
) is dense in T
0
.
CW 3: (Equivariance) For all g /
0
and f C

0
(S),
U(g)(f)U(g)
1
= (f g
1
).
We would like a version of the causal commutativity axiom on S, such as
CW 4: (Causal Commutativity) If f
1
, f
2
C

0
(S) and supp(f
1
) and supp(f
2
) are
space-like separated, then the commutator [(f
1
), (f
2
)] = 0.
The analysis of an axiom of this type, however, will be reserved for a future work.
The Minkowski space positivity axiom W5, which states that the representation U must
give a generator of time translation that has non-negative spectrum, is more dicult. On
Minkowski space, time translation is a global time-like isometry, so this requirement makes
sense. S, however, has no global time-like isometry. Our only hope is to look locally.
CW 5: (Local Positivity) About each x S there is a neighborhood W, a one
parameter group G() /
0
, and a corresponding subspace T
W
T satisfying the
following. Let : T T
W
be orthogonal projection. The innitesimal generator A
of U(G()) U(/
0
) projected to T
W
as A is a non-negative self-adjoint operator,
and the Killing eld corresponding to G() is time-like on W.
With this axiom, we are guaranteed a local representation of time translation, U(G()), and
its innitesimal generator A will act as a local Hamiltonian on W.
19
2.2 Example: Free Massless Scalar Quantum Field on
the de Sitter Surface
In order to demonstrate the consistency of these axioms and get a feel for their structure, we
will now construct an example of such a scalar quantum eld on S. To accomplish this, we
must construct the quadruple , U, T, T
0
discussed in the previous section. Our example
will be constructed by Segal quantization, so we begin by dening a one particle Hilbert space
1 with a dense linear submanifold T. For notational ease, write
n
=
e
in

|n|
for n Z0,
and let T = span(
n

nZ{0}
). Dene an inner product ' , ` on T by
'
n
,
m
` = (n m)
for all n, m Z 0, and extending by complex linearity. Let 1 be the completion of T
in this inner product. Then
1 =

nZ{0}
a
n

n
[

nZ{0}
[a
n
[
2
<

.
Note that in this inner product, 1 = 1
+
1

where
1
+
= span(
n
[ n > 0)
1

= span(
n
[ n < 0).
We can write
'f
1
(), f
2
()` =
i
2

f
1
()

d
d
f
2
()d
where

d
d
denotes
d
d
on 1
+
and
d
d
on 1

.
Now to construct the Hilbert space T by Segal quantization as we did on Minkowski
20
space. Build T and T
0
as the symmetric Fock space and nite particle space on 1. Take
T
0
= C (

n=1
Sym
n
1
n
)
and the Hilbert space completion T = T
0
.
Now we build the eld map : C

0
(S) End(T
0
) also by Segal quantization. Inspired
by de Bi`evre and Renaud [3, 4], we dene
0
: C

0
(S) 1 by

0
(f)() =

nN

f(t
0
,
0
)
1

n
e
in(t
0
+
0
)
dVol(t
0
,
0
)
1

n
e
in
+

nN

f(t
0
,
0
)
1

n
e
in(t
0

0
)
dVol(t
0
,
0
)
1

n
e
in
.
Intuitively, the purpose of this map is to propagate the support of f out into forward and
backward wave equation solutions while compensating for the geometry of S, but only keep
the positive frequency in t parts, and then reduce to t = 0 for the Cauchy data. We can
write
0
(f) more concisely as

0
(f)() =

nZ{0}

f(t
0
,
0
)
1

[n[
e
i|n|t
0
in
0
dVol(t
0
,
0
)
n
To show that this map does actually make sense, we will compare with the functions

+
(f)() =

f(t
0
, t
0
) sec
2
t
0
dt
0
,

(f)() =

f(t
0
, + t
0
) sec
2
t
0
dt
0
.
First note that since f is smooth and has compact support,

(f) C

(S
1
). Indeed,
d
k
d
k

f(t
0
, t
0
) sec
2
t
0
dt
0
=

f
(0,k)
(t
0
, t
0
) sec
2
t
0
dt
0
where f
(0,k)
represents the k
th
order partial derivative of f on the second variable. Since f
(0,k)
21
is also in C

0
(S), we see
+
(f) C

(S
1
), and a similar argument shows

(f) C

(S
1
).
Expanding
+
(f) in the usual basis for L
2
(S
1
), we see

+
(f)() =

nZ

f(t
0
,
0
)e
in(t
0
+
0
)
dVol(t
0
,
0
)e
in
and in in particular, since
+
(f) C

(S
1
), that

nZ
[n
k
[
2
[

f(t
0
,
0
)e
in(t
0
+
0
)
dVol(t
0
,
0
) [
2
<
for all k N. The similar result holds for

(f).
Comparing to
0
(f), we see that

nN
[n
k
[
2
[

f(t
0
,
0
)
1
n
e
in(t
0
+
0
)
dVol(t
0
,
0
)[
2
+

nN
[n
k
[
2
[

f(t
0
,
0
)
1
n
e
in(t
0

0
)
dVol(t
0
,
0
)[
2

nZ
[n
k
[
2
[

f(t
0
,
0
)e
in(t
0
+
0
)
dVol(t
0
,
0
) [
2
+

nZ
[n
k
[
2
[

f(t
0
,
0
)e
in(t
0

0
)
dVol(t
0
,
0
) [
2
<
showing that
0
(f) C

(S
1
). We also see that in particular

nN
[

f(t
0
,
0
)
1

n
e
in(t
0
+
0
)
dVol(t
0
,
0
)[
2
+

nN
[

f(t
0
,
0
)
1

n
e
in(t
0

0
)
dVol(t
0
,
0
)[
2
<
which shows that we can also consider
0
(f) 1. Thus the map
0
: C

0
(S) 1 is
dened.
Now we can dene : C

0
(S) End(T
0
) by using the Segal eld map
S
. For real
22
valued f C

0
(S),
(f) =
S
(
0
(f))
and for f = u + iv,
(f) = (u) + i(v)
Proposition 2.2.1. is an operator valued distribution.
Proof. Suppose f
k
f in the Schwartz topology ([19] pg. 133) for a sequence f
k
C

0
(S).
Then in particular, f
k
f uniformly on any compact set. Without loss of generality, we
can assume there is a compact set K S containing the supports of all f
k
and f. Thus

f
k
(t
0
,
0
)
1

n
e
i(|n|t
0
+n
0
)
dVol(t
0
,
0
)

f(t
0
,
0
)
1

n
e
i(|n|t
0
+n
0
)
dVol(t
0
,
0
)
for each n Z0, and hence
0
(f
n
)
0
(f) in 1. Therefore
0
is continuous. Theorem
1.2.1 (i) then gives that f '
1
,
S
(
0
(f))
2
` is continuous by composition.
Last, we will construct the representation U : /
0
Aut(T). First, we will construct a
representation U
0
: /
0
Aut(1), and then extend to T by E.
23
Dene three operators on 1 by the following. For h =

nZ{0}
h
n

n
1,
A
1
h =

2
2
h
1

2
+

n=2
h
n
2

n(n + 1)
n+1
+

n(n 1)

n1
+

2
2
h
1

2
+

n=2
h
n
2

n(n + 1)
(n+1)
+

n(n 1)

(n1)
A
2
h =i

2
2
h
1

2
+

n=2
h
n
2

n(n + 1)
n+1
i

n(n 1)

n1
+ i

2
2
h
1

2
+

n=2
h
n
2

n(n + 1)
(n+1)
i

n(n 1)

(n1)
A
3
h =

nZ{0}
nh
n

n
when the result is dened. We can write this more concisely as
A
1
= i cos

A
2
= i sin

A
3
= i

with the understanding that constant terms are mapped to zero.

Lemma 2.2.1. A
1
, A
2
, and A
3
are essentially self-adjoint.
Proof. We can show that these operators are self-adjoint by viewing them as matrix operators
24
in the ordered basis =
1
,
1
,
2
,
2
, . Note that
'
n
, A
1

m
` = '
n
, i cos (i[m[
m
)`
= '
n
,
1
2

[m(m + 1)[
m+1
+
1
2

[m(m1)[
m1
`
=
1
2

[m(m + 1)[
0
(m + 1 n) +
1
2

[m(m1)[
0
(m1 n)
'
n
, A
2

m
` = '
n
, i sin (i[m[
m
)`
= '
n
,
i
2

[m(m + 1)[
m+1
+
i
2

[m(m1)[
m1
`
=
i
2

[m(m + 1)[
0
(m + 1 m) +
i
2

[m(m1)[
0
(m1 n)
'
n
, A
3

m
` = '
n
, i(im)
m
`
= m
0
(mn)
which gives innite dimensional matrices
A
1
=

0 0
1

2
0 0
0 0 0
1

2
0
1

2
0 0 0

6
2

0
1

2
0 0 0
0 0

6
2

A
1
=

0 0
i

2
0 0
0 0 0
i

2
0
i

2
0 0 0
i

6
2

0
i

2
0 0 0
0 0
i

6
2

25
A
3
=

1 0 0 0
0 1 0 0
0 0 2 0
0 0 0 2

Clearly each is Hermitian symmetric, and by Theorem 4 of page 104 of [1], since the columns
of each are square summable, each denes a closed operator.
Recall that a vector v 1 is called analytic for an operator A if there is a t > 0 such
that

k=0
[[A
k
v[[
k!
t
k
< .
We will now show that each
n
is an analytic vector for all three A
i
operators. A straight-
forward calculation shows that
[[A
k
1

n
[[ 2
k

n + k(n + 1)(n + 2) (n + k)
noting that the highest index basis vector in A
k
1

n
is
n+k
which attains a multiple of

n + k(n + 1)(n + 2) (n + k). This is the largest coecient expanding A

k
1

n
in the
basis, and applying the triangle inequality, the above result holds. Taking t =
1
2n!
, we see
that
[[A
k
1

n
[[t
k

1
n!

n + k(n + 1)(n + 2) (n + k) 1.
Therefore,

k=0
[[A
k

n
[[
k!
t
k

k=0
1
k!
= e.
Thus
n
is an analytic vector for A
1
. A similar calculation shows that
n
is an analytic vector
for A
2
as well, and a comparatively trivial calculation gives the same result for A
3
. Therefore
each A
i
has a total set of analytic vectors in its domain. By Theorem X.39 (Nelsons analytic
26
vector theorem) of [20], we see that each A
i
is essentially self-adjoint.
From this point on, we will replace each A
i
with its unique self-adjoint extension. By
Theorem VIII.7 of [19], if A is a self-adjoint operator, then e
iA
forms a strongly
continuous one-paramter unitary group. Recall that the basis elements L
i
of the Lie algebra
L
0
of /
0
satisfy the commutation relations
[L
1
, L
2
] = L
3
, [L
1
, L
3
] = L
2
, [L
2
, L
3
] = L
1
.
Also, the A
i
satisfy
[iA
1
, iA
2
] = iA
3
, [iA
1
, iA
3
] = iA
2
, [iA
2
, iA
3
] = iA
1
showing that L
i
iA
i
is a Lie algebra isomorphism.
By a result of Nishikawa [17], we have the fact that the exponential map exp : L
0
/
0
is surjective. Viewing /
0
as the matrix group on R
3
, we can take exp to be the exponential
series. We will dene the unitary representation U
0
: /
0
Aut(1) by
U
0
(e
aL
1
+bL
2
+cL
3
) = e
iaA
1
ibA
2
icA
3
.
In order to show that this map is well-dened, we will rst need some tools. First we will
dene three one-parameter unitary representations
U(B
1
()) = e
iA
1
,
U(B
2
()) = e
iA
2
,
U(R()) = e
iA
3
.
27
Note that B
1
() and B
2
() are one-to-one, and e
iA
3
is translation by , which has period
2 since 1 consists of functions on S
1
. Thus each of these is well-dened.
We begin by pointing out that any element of L
0
, the Lie algebra of /
0
can be written as
L =

0 a b
a 0 c
b c 0

with a, b, c R. Also, we see that the eigenvalues of L are 0,

a
2
+ b
2
c
2
,

a
2
+ b
2
c
2
.
Lemma 2.2.2. Suppose L, L

L
0
take the forms
L =

0 0 0
0 0 c
0 c 0

, L

0 a

0 c

and e
L
= e
L

. Then a

= b

= 0. In particular, if e
L
= I, then
L =

0 0 0
0 0 2n
0 2n 0

for some n Z.
Proof. Suppose L and L

satisfy the hypotheses above. Let

T =

n 0 0
0 1 0
0 0 1

.
28
We see that for any n > 0, T is invertible. Thus e
TLT
1
= e
TL

T
1
for any n > 0. Notice
that
TLT
1
=

0 0 0
0 0 c
0 c 0

, TL

T
1
=

0 na

nb

na

0 c

nb

.
Thus the eigenvalues of TLT
1
are still
0, ic, ic,
but the eigenvalues of TL

T
1
are
0,

n
2
(a
2
+ b
2
) c
2
,

n
2
(a
2
+ b
2
) c
2
.
Hence the eigenvalues of the respective exponentials are
1, e
ic
, e
ic
, 1, e

n
2
(a
2
+b
2
)c
2
, e

n
2
(a
2
+b
2
)c
2
.
We may choose n large enough that

n
2
(a
2
+ b
2
) c
2
is real and greater than 1. Then
e
ic
cannot equal e

n
2
(a
2
+b
2
)c
2
or e

n
2
(a
2
+b
2
)c
2
. Thus e
TLT
1
= e
TL

T
1
, which is a
contradiction. Therefore it must be the case that a

= b

= 0.
Lemma 2.2.3. Suppose L, L

L
0
each have real distinct eigenvalues and e
L
= e
L

. Then
L = L

.
Proof. Suppose L, L

each have distinct real eigenvalues. Then there exists a > 0 such
that L+I and L

+I each have distinct positive eigenvalues. Thus we can take the matrix
logarithm, seeing
ln(e
L+I
) = L + I = ln(e
L

+I
) = L

+ I
29
which implies that L = L

.
Now we can prove the following.
Proposition 2.2.2. The map U
0
: /
0
Aut(1) is well-dened.
Proof. Suppose L, L

L
0
and e
L
= e
L

. Write
L =

0 a b
a 0 c
b c 0

, L

0 a

0 c

.
Case 1: Suppose the nonzero eigenvalues of L are imaginary. Then in particular, [c[ > [a[
and [c[ > [b[. Conjugating L by B
1
(), we see that
B
1
()LB
1
() =

0 a b cosh c sinh
a 0 b sinh c cosh
b cosh c sinh b sinh + c cosh 0

.
Since [
b
c
[ < 1, we can solve b cosh c sinh = 0. Thus we may write
B
1
()LB
1
() =

0 a 0
a 0 c
0 c 0

.
Since conjugating by B
1
() cannot turn the imaginary eigenvalues real, we see that [a[ < [ c[.
Conjugating by B
2
(), we see that B
2
()B
1
()LB
1
()B
2
()
=

0 a cosh c sinh 0
a cosh c sinh 0 a sinh c cosh
0 a sinh + c cosh 0

.
30
Since [
a
c
[ < 1, we can solve a cosh c sinh = 0. Thus we can write
B
2
()B
1
()LB
1
()B
2
() =

0 0 0
0 0 c
0 c 0

.
By Lemma 2.2.2, then, we see that
B
2
()B
1
()L

B
1
()B
2
() =

0 0 0
0 0

0

c

.
for some c R. Thus
e
B
2
()B
1
()LB
1
()B
2
()
= R( c) = R(

) = e
B
2
()B
1
()L

B
1
()B
2
()
,
which implies that
B
2
()B
1
()e
L
B
1
()B
2
()
= B
2
()B
1
()e
L

B
1
()B
2
(),
which means
U
0
(B
2
())U
0
(B
1
())U
0
(e
L
)U
0
(B
1
())U
0
(B
2
())
= U
0
(B
2
())U
0
(B
1
())U
0
(e
L

)U
0
(B
1
())U
0
(B
2
()).
Conjugating back out, we see that
U
0
(e
L
) = U
0
(e
L

).
31
Case 2: Suppose the eigenvalues of L are real. If the eigenvalues of L

are also real, then

either each has distinct real eigenvalues, or all eigenvalues are zero. In the rst case, by
Lemma 2.2.3, L = L

. In the second case, by Lemma 2.2.2, e

L
= e
L

= R(c). In either case,

U
0
(e
L
) = U
0
(e
L

).
If the nonzero eigenvalues of L

are imaginary, then we may apply Case 1 reversing the

roles of L and L

. Therefore we see that U

0
is well-dened.
Since the A
i
have a common dense set of analytic vectors in their domains, we may
view the exponential of any aA
1
+ bA
2
+ cA
3
as its exponential series. Thus U
0
is also a
homorphism, and hence a unitary representation of /
0
on 1.
Extend U to T by applying the map E from Segal quantization, U(g) = E(U
0
(g)). In
other words,
U(g)h
1
h
2
h
n
= U
0
(g)h
1
U
0
(g)h
2
U
0
(g)h
n
extended by linearity. Thus we have our unitary representation U : /
0
Aut(T). The
quadruple , U, T, T
0
will be our quantum eld on S.
Now we may justify the adjectives free and massless for this eld. Since

2
t
2
0

2
0

e
in(t
0

0
)
= 0
we see that

0
(f) =

nZ{0}

f(t
0
,
0
)
1

[n[
e
i|n|t
0
+in
0
dVol(t
0
,
0
)
n
=

nZ{0}

cos
2
t
0

2
t
2
0

2
0

(f(t
0
,
0
))
1

[n[
e
i|n|t
0
+in
0
sec
2
t
0
dt
0
d
0

n
=

nZ{0}

f(t
0
,
0
)
1

[n[

2
t
2
0

2
0

e
i|n|t
0
+in
0
dt
0
d
0

n
= 0.
32
2.3 Axioms CW1-CW3
Now we will check that the quantum eld above satises the axioms CW1-CW3. As men-
tioned previously, the form and analysis of a CW4 axiom for causal commutativity will be
reserved for a future work. The spectral axiom, CW5 is involved enough to deserve a separate
treatment in the following sections.
Proposition 2.3.1. The eld , U, T, T
0
satises the following CW axioms for a quantum
eld on S.
CW 1: (Conjugate Hermiticity) For all f C

0
(S) and all
1
,
2
T,
'
1
, (f)
2
` = '(

f)
1
,
2
`
CW 2: (Vacuum Cyclicity) There exists a vector T
0
with [[[[ = 1 such that
the linear span of vectors of the form (f
1
) (f
n
) is dense in T
0
.
CW 3: (Equivariance) For all g /
0
and f C

0
(S),
U(g)(f)U(g)
1
= (f g
1
)
Proof. CW1 is satsied by Theorem 1.2.1 (ii) of Segal quantization and the complex linearity
of .
To show CW2, rst recall that we can approximate a delta function on (

2
,

2
) by a
sequence of real functions in C

((

2
,

2
)) with increasingly smaller support around zero.
In other words, there exists a sequence h
k
(t) C

((

2
,

2
)) such that for all f
C

((

2
,

2
)),
lim
k

h
k
(t)f(t)dt =

0
(t)f(t)dt = f(0)
Suppose g =

nZ{0}
g
n

n
1, and g is smooth. Dene g =

nZ{0}
|n|
2
g
n

n
, and p
n
(t, ) =
33
h
n
(t) g(). Then
lim
k

0
(p
k
)() = lim
k

nN

h
k
(t
0
)

[n[
2
g(
0
)e
in(t
0
+
0
)
dVol(t
0
,
0
)
n
+

nN

h
k
(t
0
)

[n[
2
g(
0
)e
in(t
0

0
)
dVol(t
0
,
0
)
n
=

nN

0
(t
0
)

[n[
2
g(
0
)e
in(t
0
+
0
)
dVol(t
0
,
0
)
n
+

nN

0
(t
0
)

[n[
2
g(
0
)e
in(t
0

0
)
dVol(t
0
,
0
)
n
=

nZ{0}
i
2

g(
0
)

n
d
0

n
=

nZ{0}
'
n
, g`
n
= g.
Viewing 1as a set in L
2
(S
1
), we see that C

(S
1
)1is dense. Thus we can approximate any
g 1, which means
0
(C

0
(S)) = 1. Then by Theorem 1.2.1 (iii), taking = (1, 0, 0 )
T
0
, we have that the linear span of vectors of the form (f
1
) (f
n
) is dense in T
0
.
For CW3, rst note that since U is dened in terms of innitesimal generators, we need
to check the three equations
i
d
d
[
=0

0
(f B
1
()
1
) = A
1

0
(f)
i
d
d
[
=0

0
(f B
2
()
1
) = A
2

0
(f)
i
d
d
[
=0

0
(f R()
1
) = A
3

0
(f).
Let h

(t, ) = t . We will abuse notation a bit and write h

g(t, ) as g(t ). Using

34
the fact that the volume measure is invariant under /
0
, we calculate
i
d
d
[
=0

0
(f B
1
()
1
)
= i
d
d
[
=0

nN

f B
1
()
1
(t
0
,
0
)
1

n
e
in(t
0
+
0
)
dVol(t
0
,
0
)e
in
+ i
d
d
[
=0

nN

f B
1
()
1
(t
0
,
0
)e
in(t
0

0
)
dVol(t
0
,
0
)e
in
= i
d
d
[
=0

nN

f(t
0
,
0
)
1

n
e
inB
1
()(t
0
+
0
)
dVol(t
0
,
0
)e
in
+ i
d
d
[
=0

nN

f(t
0
,
0
)
1

n
e
inB
1
()(t
0

0
)
dVol(t
0
,
0
)e
in
= i

nN

f(t
0
,
0
)
1

n
cos(t
0
+
0
)

t
0
e
in(t
0
+
0
)
dVol(t
0
,
0
)
1

n
e
in
+ i

nN

f(t
0
,
0
)
1

n
cos(t
0

0
)

t
0
e
in(t
0

0
)
dVol(t
0
,
0
)
1

n
e
in
=

nN

f(t
0
,
0
)

n
2

e
i(n+1)(t
0
+
0
)
+ e
i(n1)(t
0
+
0
)

dVol(t
0
,
0
)
1

n
e
in
+

nN

f(t
0
,
0
)

n
2

e
i(n+1)(t
0

0
)
+ e
i(n1)(t
0

0
)

dVol(t
0
,
0
)
1

n
e
in
Reindexing, we get

m=2

m1

f(t
0
,
0
)
1

m
e
im(t
0
+
0
)
dVol(t
0
,
0
)
1

m1
e
i(m1)
+

m=0

m + 1

f(t
0
,
0
)
1

m
e
im(t
0
+
0
)
dVol(t
0
,
0
)
1

m + 1
e
i(m+1)
+

m=2

m1

f(t
0
,
0
)
1

m
e
im(t
0

0
)
dVol(t
0
,
0
)
1

m1
e
i(m1)
+

m=0

m + 1

f(t
0
,
0
)
1

m
e
im(t
0

0
)
dVol(t
0
,
0
)
1

m + 1
e
i(m+1)
= A
1

0
(f).
Similar calculations show the necessary results for A
2
and A
3
.
35
The last axiom, CW 5, is involved enough to deserve its own section following the next
preliminary result.
2.4 Diagonal Dominance
Our examination of the local spectral axiom CW 5 will require the following results about a
special class of operators.
Let A : 1 1 be a symmetric linear operator with dense domain T(A) on a separable
Hilbert space 1 which is not necessarily bounded, and suppose = e
1
, e
2
, T(A) be
an orthonormal basis for 1. For notational purposes, label A
nm
= 'e
n
, Ae
m
` for m, n N.
Then A is diagonally dominant with respect to if
[A
nn
[

m=n
[A
nm
[
for all n. A is strictly diagonally dominant if the inequality is strict. We will not
explicitly indicate the basis if it is clear. Note that since A is symmetric, there is no need
to specify row or column diagonal dominance. I will refer to the set A
nn
as the diagonal.
The following are some results about diagonally dominant operators that will be useful
in the examination of CW5.
Lemma 2.4.1. Suppose A is strictly diagonally dominant and self-adjoint. Then ker(A) =
0.
Proof. Suppose A is strictly diagonally dominant and self-adjoint, and suppose Ax = 0 for
some x = 0 T(A). Then 'e
n
, Ax` = 0 for all e
n
. Write x =

m=1
x
m
e
m
, and choose k
36
so that [x
k
[ is maximal. Then
['e
k
, Ax`[ = [

m=1
A
kn
x
n
[ = [A
kk
x
k
+

n=k
A
kn
x
n
[
[A
kk
x
k
[

n=k
[A
kn
x
n
[ [A
kk
x
k
[

n=k
[A
kn
x
k
[
by the maximality of [x
k
[. Using strict diagonal dominance, we get the strict inequality
[x
k
[([A
kk
[

n=k
[A
kn
[) > [x
k
[([A
kk
[ [A
kk
[) = 0
which is a contradiction.
The following result will allow us to retreat to a smaller domain for a self-adjoint A.
Lemma 2.4.2. Suppose A is symmetric and diagonally dominant with real diagonal. Then
A is essentially self-adjoint.
Proof. By the corollary of Theorem VIII.3 of [19], a symmetric A is essentially self-adjoint if
and only if ker(A

iI) = 0. Note that since A is symmetric and densely dened, A

is a
self-adjoint operator with the same matrix representation. Thus A

is diagonally dominant
with real diagonal.
Since A
nn
R, [A
nn
i[ > [A
nn
[. Thus A

iI is strictly diagonally dominant. By

Lemma 2.4.1, ker(A

iI) = 0.
This leads us to the following.
Proposition 2.4.1. Suppose A is self-adjoint and diagonally dominant with positive real
diagonal. Then A is positive semi-denite.
37
Proof. Suppose A satises the hypotheses above. Retreat to the dense domain
T(A)

= x 1 [ x =
N

n=1
x
n
e
n
for some N N,
the set of nite sum vectors. Then A

= A[
D(A)
denes a symmetric diagonally dominant
operator with real diagonal. By Lemma 2.4.2, A

is essentially self-adjoint, and hence has a

unique self-adjoint extension (namely A).
Now, note that for any x T(A)

, 'x, A

x` 0 by the positivity of nite dimensional

diagonally dominant matrices with positive diagonal [13].
By Theorem X.23 of [20] (Friedrichs extension), A

has a positive semi-denite self-adjoint

extension, but since A

is essentially self-adjoint, A is the only self-adjoint extension of A

.
Thus A is positive semi-denite.
2.5 CW5, the Local Spectral Condition
Now we will check that the local spectral condition holds for this eld.
Proposition 2.5.1. The eld , U, T, T
0
satises the axiom CW 5 (Local Positivity).
About each x S there is a neighborhood W, a one parameter group G() /
0
, and a
corresponding subspace T
W
T satisfying the following. Let : T T
W
be orthogonal
projection. The innitesimal generator A of U(G()) U(/
0
) projected to T
W
as A is
a non-negative self-adjoint operator, and the Killing eld corresponding to G() is time-like
on W.
Proof. Begin by choosing the base point x
0
= (0, 0) in (t, ) coordinates. Our candidate for
a locally positive operator for x
0
will be the element A = A
1
, with A
1
the innitesimal
generator of U(B
1
()), and : 1 1
W
the projection. First we will nd a suitable W
containing x
0
, and then construct a local one particle subspace 1
W
. Next we will check that
38
A has non-negative spectrum on 1
W
using the diagonal dominance results above. Then we
can construct a local Fock subspace T
W
T and still have a non negative spectrum when
E(A) is restricted to it. Last we will use the homogeneity of the de Sitter space S to get
locally positive operators on such neighborhoods for any other point in S.
Take W S to be the neighborhood
W =

(t, )[t
2

2
<

4

.
Dene 1
W
by
1
W
=

4
,

4
)
e
i4n

[n[

nZ{0}
where the bar signies the completion as a subspace of 1. For notational purposes, take

n
=
(

4
,

4
)
e
i4n

|n|
. We will order this basis as =

1
,

1
,

2
,

2
, . We can now view
A as a matrix operator with the matrix elements
A
nm
= 'A

n
,

m
` =
i
2

4

4
icos()i4[n[
e
i4n

[n[
i4[m[
e
i4m

[m[
d
=
8

2[mn[

4
e
i(4m4n1)
e
i(4m4n+1)
d
=
8

2[mn[

cos((mn))
16(mn)
2
1
Note the symmetry in m and n, showing that A a symmetric operator. Another important
feature of these matrix elements is that the diagonal takes the form
A
nn
=
8

[n[
with is positive and relatively large.
39
We will now show that the matrix operator A is diagonally dominant with respect to .
Note

m=n
[A
nm
[ =
8

m=n

[nm[
16(mn)
2
1

2[n[

m=n

[m[
15(mn)
2
since m, n > 0 and m = n. Replacing k = mn, we see this is

2[n[
15

kZ

[k + n[
k
2

8

2[n[
15
2

kN

k
k
2
+

[n[
k
2
=
8

2[n[
15
(2(
3
2
) +

[n[

2
3
) <
8

[n[
To see that A is self-adjoint, note that for a xed n,

mZ{0}
[A
nm
[
2
=
32

2
([n[
2
+

m=n
[nm[
(16(mn)
2
1)
2
)

32

[n[
2
+[n[

m=n
[m[
225(mn)
4

32

[n[
2
+[n[

k=0
[k + n[
225k
4

32

[n[
2
+ 2[n[

k>0
1
225k
3
+
[n[
225k
4

<
By Theorem 4 of page 104 of [1], since the columns of A are square summable, A is a closed
operator.
By Proposition 2.4.1, since A is a self-adjoint diagonally dominant operator with positive
real diagonal, A is a positive semi-denite operator on 1
W
. Thus A has a non-negative
spectrum.
40
Now we can construct T
W
T as the Fock space built from 1
W
. Then E(A) will be
dened by
E(A)(h
1
h
2
h
n
) = Ah
1
Ah
2
Ah
n
extended by linearity to T. Thus we see that E(A) has a non-negative spectrum.
Next we check that the Killing eld corresponding to B
1
() is time-like on W. Since the
causal structure of S is inherited from its embedding in three dimensional Minkowski space,
we can compute the Killing eld there by
v =
d
d
=0

cosh() sinh() 0
sinh() cosh() 0
0 0 1

tan(t)
sec(t) cos
sec(t) sin

sec(t) cos
tan(t)
0

and see that

'v, v` = cos
2
() sin
2
(t).
The map (t, ) cos
2
() sin
2
(t) is continuous, and cos
2
() sin
2
(t) = 0 when =

2
t
and =

2
+ t. Since cos
2
(0) sin
2
(0) = 1, we see by continuity that 'v, v` > 0 on W is
time-like.
Using the fact that /
0
acts transitively on S, for any x S, there is a g /
0
such that
x = gx
0
. To satisfy the required conditions at x, we take
W

= gW, A

= U(g)AU(g)
1
, B

() = gB
1
()g
1
,
1
W
= U(g)H
W
, T
W
= U(g)T
W
By the equivariance axiom CW3, A

is the innitesimal generator of B

, and A

= U(g)AU(g)
1
.
Since A

is dened as a unitary transformation of A, A

also has a non-negative spectrum

on 1
W
, giving the local positivity condition at x. In addition, since g is an isometry of S,
41
the Killing eld corresponding to B

() is time-like on W

. Thus we can satisfy the required

conditions of CW5 at any point x S.
42
Chapter 3
Connections and Speculations
3.1 Connections to Other Work in the Field
The topics of quantum elds on de Sitter space and innite dimensional diagonally dominant
matrix operators are not new, and many authors have contributed to the literature on these
subjects. I will now discuss links between the results of Chapter 2 and some of these previous
works.
The spectral properties of symmetric universally diagonally dominant matrix operators
on a separable Hilbert space have been studied in [7] and [6]. Universal diagonal dominance,
however, is a dicult condition to attain for unbounded operators, and section 2.4 provides
a slight generalization. The equivariance of the eld map in section 2.2 would on rst glance
seem to contradict de Bievre and Renaud in [3] and [4], but this is not the case. Renaud and
de Bievre point out that the nonconstant modes of the wave equation are not invariant
under the regular representation of /
0
by precomposition. The U in Chapter 2, however, is
not the regular representation, but essentially a projected version of it. There is no claim
that the representation in Chapter 2 meets all physical concerns of de Bievre and Renaud.
43
3.2 Speculations
The work presented in this thesis generates many possibilites for extensions and modica-
tions. The rst of these, of course, is the inclusion of a causal commutativity axiom. While
the statement of the Wightman axiom W4 can be easily modied to make sense on the de
Sitter surface,
CW 4: (Causal Commutativity) If f
1
, f
2
C

0
(S) and supp(f
1
) and supp(f
2
) are
space-like separated, then the commutator [(f
1
), (f
2
)] = 0,
the analysis of such an axiom is a bit subtle. The most common method as used in [3] is to
construct the Greens function as a sum of modes and their conjugates. This does not work
when we give up the constant modes, so another approach will have to be taken. While we
did not examine the causal commutativity of the eld in Chapter 2, we can present a eld
satisfying the above axiom at the cost of equivariance.
If instead of taking
0
as dened previously, dene
c
by simply

c
(f) =

nN

f(t
0
,
0
)e
in(t
0
+
0
)
dVol(t
0
,
0
)e
in
+

nN

f(t
0
,
0
)e
in(t
0

0
)
dVol(t
0
,
0
)e
in
or in more concise terms,

c
(f) =

nZ{0}

f(t
0
,
0
)e
i|n|t
0
+n
dVol(t
0
,
0
)e
in
.
To show CW4 for this eld, suppose f
1
, f
2
C

0
(S) and supp(f
1
), supp(f
2
) are space-like
separated. By Theorem 1.2.1 (v), [(f
1
), (f
2
)] = iIm('
c
(f
1
),
c
(f
2
)`)
H
. By linearity, we
44
can assume f
1
and f
2
are real valued. We see that
'
c
(f
1
),
c
(f
2
)` =

nN
n

f
1
(t
0
,
0
)f
2
(t
1
,
1
)e
in(t
0
+
0
t
1

1
)
dV ol(t
0
,
0
)dV ol(t
1
,
1
)
+

nN
n

f
1
(t
0
,
0
)f
2
(t
1
,
1
)e
in(t
0

0
t
1
+
1
)
dV ol(t
0
,
0
)dV ol(t
1
,
1
)
Thus
2iIm('
c
(f
1
),
c
(f
2
)`) =

nN
n

f
1
(t
0
,
0
)f
2
(t
1
,
1
)e
in(t
0
+
0
t
1

1
)
dV ol(t
0
,
0
)dV ol(t
1
,
1
)
+

nN
n

f
1
(t
0
,
0
)f
2
(t
1
,
1
)e
in(t
0

0
t
1
+
1
)
dV ol(t
0
,
0
)dV ol(t
1
,
1
)

nN
n

f
1
(t
0
,
0
)f
2
(t
1
,
1
)e
in(t
0
+
0
t
1

1
)
dV ol(t
0
,
0
)dV ol(t
1
,
1
)
+

nN
n

f
1
(t
0
,
0
)f
2
(t
1
,
1
)e
in(t
0

0
t
1
+
1
)
dV ol(t
0
,
0
)dV ol(t
1
,
1
)
=

nZ{0}

n(e
in(t
0
+
0
t
1

1
)
e
in(t
0

0
t
1
+
1
)
)f
1
(t
0
,
0
)f
2
(t
1
,
1
)dV ol(t
0
,
0
)dV ol(t
1
,
1
)
We will show that this is zero by comparing it to an inner product on L
2
(S
1
). Notice for
all (t
0
,
0
) supp(f
1
) and all (t
1
,
1
) supp(f
2
),
(t
0
t
1
)
2
(
0

1
)
2
< 0
since the supports are space-like separated. Consider the functions

+
(f)() =

0
( t
0

0
)f(t
0
,
0
)dV ol(t
0
,
0
)

(f)() =

0
( t
0
+
0
)f(t
0
,
0
)dV ol(t
0
,
0
)
45
Suppose is in both supp(
+
(f
1
)()) and supp(
+
(f
2
()). Then there must exist a (t
0
,
0
)
supp(f
1
) and (t
1
,
1
) supp(f
2
) so that
t
0

0
= t
1

1
= 0
Subtracting, we see that then
(t
0
t
1
) + (
0

1
) = 0
which implies
((t
0
t
1
) + (
0

1
))((t
0
t
1
) (
0

1
)) = (t
0
t
1
)
2
(
0

1
)
2
= 0
which is a contradiction. Therefore, supp(
+
(f
1
)()) and supp(
+
(f
2
)()) are disjoint.
Since taking a derivative will not expand the support, this means supp(
+
(f
1
)()) and
supp(
d
d

+
(f
2
)()) are disjoint. A similar argument gives the same result for

(f
1
)() and

(f
2
)(). Recalling our L
2
(S
1
) expansions of

(f)(), we see
0 = '
+
(f
1
)(),
d
d

+
(f
2
)()`
L
2
(S
1
)
+'

(f
1
)(),
d
d

(f
2
)()`
L
2
(S
1
)
=

nZ

f
1
(t
0
,
0
)e
in(t
0
+
0
)
e
in
d
d
(f
2
(t
0
,
0
)e
in(t
0
+
0
)
e
in
dVol(t
0
,
0
) dVol(t
1
,
1
)d
+ f
1
(t
0
,
0
)e
in(t
0

0
)
e
in
d
d
(f
2
(t
0
,
0
)e
in(t
0

0
)
e
in
dVol(t
0
,
0
) dVol(t
1
,
1
)d
=

nZ{0}

inf
1
(t
0
,
0
)e
in(t
0
+
0
)
(f
2
(t
1
,
1
)e
in(t
1
+
1
)
dVol(t
0
,
0
) dVol(t
1
,
1
)
+

inf
1
(t
0
,
0
)e
in(t
0

0
)
f
2
(t
1
,
1
)e
in(t
1

1
)
dVol(t
0
,
0
) dVol(t
1
,
1
)
46
If f
1
and f
2
are real, then this gives us
0 =

nZ{0}

in(e
in(t
0
+
0
t
1

1
)
e
in(t
0

0
t
1
+
1
)
)f
1
(t
0
,
0
)f
2
(t
1
,
1
) dVol(t
0
,
0
) dVol(t
1
,
1
)
= 2Im('
c
(f
1
),
c
(f
2
)`
H
)
as seen above. Thus [(f
1
), (f
2
)] = 0, giving causal commutativity. However,
c
is not
equivariant with respect to U. Thus we have a causal eld map that is not equivariant.
The statements of the CW axioms generalize readily to any symmetric space that admits
a Lorentzian metric in the following way. Suppose M is a Lorentzian symmetric manifold
with isometry group G. Then a quantum eld on M can be taken as a quadruple , U, T, T
0
with the analogous operator-valued distribution and unitary representation U of G
0
, the
identity component of G. The axioms would then make sense replacing S with M and /
0
with G
0
. Due to the symmetric nature of M, we would then be able to move a local spectral
condition from one basepoint to another in the same manner. The challenge is then to
construct interesting examples satisfying these or closely related axioms on other Lorentzian
symmetric spaces.
Another area to explore is the relationship between a quantum eld on de Sitter space
and the corresponding eld on Minkowski space. A possible method of considering the
relationship is to construct the analogous eld from Chapter 2 on a de Sitter surface of
radius r, and investigate the r limit. I have done some work on this topic, and one can
see that the neighborhood W about the basepoint x
0
limits in a sense to the Minkowski plane
and its origin. In addition, the boost B
1
() becomes time translation, and R() becomes
translation in space. Future work will explore what happens to the map in this limit, and
if it corresponds to the free eld map on Minkowski space.
Finally, one would like to explore many of the results of the Wightman axioms in the
context of de Sitter space. It is possible that on the de Sitter surface, some uniqueness
47
condition could be derived from local positivity, as by equivariance, everything is in some
sense determined by a neighborhood about one basepoint. This structure might also allow
a reconstruction theorem and something similar to a
4
self-interaction [12]. These are all
things that I hope to explore in the near future.
48
Bibliography
[1] N. I. Akhiezer and I. M. Glazman. Theory of Linear Operators in Hilbert Space. Dover
Publications, New York, New York, 1993.
[2] N. D. Birrel and P. C. Davies. Quantum Fields in Curved Space. Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge, 1982.
[3] S. De Bi`evre and J. Renaud. Massless Gupta-Bleuler vacuum on the (1+1)-dimensional
de Sitter space-time. Phys. Rev. D, 57(10):62306241, May 1998.
[4] S. de Bi`evre and J. Renaud. Massless QFT on (1 + 1)-de Sitter Space-time. Reports
on Mathematical Physics, 43(1-2):93 100, 1999.
[5] P. Deligne, P. Etingof, D.S. Freed, L. Jerey, D. Kazhdan, J. Morgan, D.R. Morrison,
and E. Witten. Quantum Fields and Strings: A Course For Mathematicians, Two
Volumes. American Mathematical Society, Providence, Rhode Island, 1999.
[6] F. O. Farid.
p
-Diagonally Dominant Symmetric Operators. Positivity, 9:97114, 2005.
[7] F. O. Farid and P. Lancaster. Spectral Properties of Diagonally Dominant Innite
Matrices. II. Linear Algebra and Its Applications, 143:717, 1991.
[8] M. Flensted-Jensen. Analysis on Non-Riemannian Symmetric Spaces. published for the
Conference Board of the Mathematical Sciences by the American Mathematical Society,
Providence, Rhode Island, 1986.
49
[9] S. A. Fulling. Aspects of Quantum Field Theory in Curved Space-Time. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, 1989.
[10] W. Fulton and J. Harris. Representation Theory, A First Course. Springer, New York,
New York, 1991.
[11] L. Garding and A. Wightman. Fields as Operator-Valued Distributions in Relativistic
Quantum Theory. Arkiv for Fysik, 28:129184, 1965.
[12] J. Glimm and A. Jae. Quantum Physics, A Functional Integral Point of View. Springer-
Verlag, New York, New York, 1981.
[13] R. Horn and A. Johnson. Matrix Analysis. Cambridge University Press, New York,
New York, 1985.
[14] C. Isham. Quantum Field Theory in Curved Space-time. Lecture Notes in Math, pages
495512, 1978.
[15] U. Moschella. The de Sitter and Anti-de Sitter Sightseeing Tour. Progress in Mathe-
matical Physics, 47:120133, 2006.
[16] U. Moschella, F. Corbetta, and M. Bertolla. Massless Scalar Field in Two-Dimensional
de Sitter Universe. Preprint 2005.
[17] Mitsuru Nishikawa. On the Exponential Map of the Group O(p, q)
0
. Memoirs of the
Faculty of Science, Kyushu University. Series A, Mathematics, 37(1):6369, 1983.
[18] L. E. Parker and D. J. Toms. Quantum Field Theory in Curved Spacetime. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, 2009.
[19] M. Reed and B. Simon. Methods of Modern Mathematical Physics, Vol. 1: Functional
Analysis. Academic Press, San Diego, California, 1975.
50
[20] M. Reed and B. Simon. Methods of Modern Mathematical Physics, Vol. 2: Fourier
Analysis, Self-Adjointness. Academic Press, San Diego, California, 1975.
[21] R. Streater and A. Wightman. PCT, Spin Statistics, and All That. Princeton University
Press, Princeton, New Jersey, 2000.
[22] R. Wald. Quantum Field Theory in Curved Spacetime and Black Hole Thermodynamics.
Chicago University Press, Chicago, Illinous, 1994.
51