Metaplectic-c Quantization Yucong Jiang jiangyc@math.utoronto.ca - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

metaplectic c quantization
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Metaplectic-c Quantization Yucong Jiang jiangyc@math.utoronto.ca - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Metaplectic-c Quantization Yucong Jiang jiangyc@math.utoronto.ca University of Toronto CMS Winter Meeting December 9, 2019 Outline This is an ongoing project with Yael Karshon. Our approach of metaplectic-c quantization is based on Herald


slide-1
SLIDE 1

Metaplectic-c Quantization

Yucong Jiang

jiangyc@math.utoronto.ca

University of Toronto

CMS Winter Meeting December 9, 2019

slide-2
SLIDE 2

Outline

This is an ongoing project with Yael Karshon. Our approach of metaplectic-c quantization is based on Herald Hess [Hess, 1981]. Without using the metaplectic representation, this approach is different from the approach of Robinson and Rawsley [Robinson and Rawnsley, 1989]. The analog of half form bundles in mp-c case Partial connections Pairing maps and Blattner’s formula

slide-3
SLIDE 3

Review of KS theory of geometric quantization

The Konstant-Souriau recipe of geometric quantization: ◮ A prequantizable metaplectic manifold (M, ω). Then one proceeds to define partial connections, inner products and then polarized sections and quantum Hilbert spaces etc. In the mpc quantization, one combines the second and third steps into one:

slide-4
SLIDE 4

Review of KS theory of geometric quantization

The Konstant-Souriau recipe of geometric quantization: ◮ A prequantizable metaplectic manifold (M, ω). ◮ A hermitian line bundle L → M with a hermitian connection whose curvature equals to 1

iω.

Then one proceeds to define partial connections, inner products and then polarized sections and quantum Hilbert spaces etc. In the mpc quantization, one combines the second and third steps into one:

slide-5
SLIDE 5

Review of KS theory of geometric quantization

The Konstant-Souriau recipe of geometric quantization: ◮ A prequantizable metaplectic manifold (M, ω). ◮ A hermitian line bundle L → M with a hermitian connection whose curvature equals to 1

iω.

◮ A polarization F. The metaplecitc structure on M enables us to define the half form bundle δF associated to F: δF ⊗ δF ∼ = det(F). Then one proceeds to define partial connections, inner products and then polarized sections and quantum Hilbert spaces etc. In the mpc quantization, one combines the second and third steps into one:

slide-6
SLIDE 6

Review of KS theory of geometric quantization

The Konstant-Souriau recipe of geometric quantization: ◮ A prequantizable metaplectic manifold (M, ω). ◮ A hermitian line bundle L → M with a hermitian connection whose curvature equals to 1

iω.

◮ A polarization F. The metaplecitc structure on M enables us to define the half form bundle δF associated to F: δF ⊗ δF ∼ = det(F). ◮ The quantization line bundle is defined as L ⊗ δ−1

F

whose sections are L-valued half forms normal to F. Then one proceeds to define partial connections, inner products and then polarized sections and quantum Hilbert spaces etc. In the mpc quantization, one combines the second and third steps into one:

slide-7
SLIDE 7

Quantization line bundle in mpc case

◮ A metaplectic-c manifold (M, ω) equipped with a principal mp-c bundle ( ˜ P, ˜ γ) and a polarization F with typical fiber F. This version of quantization line bundles coincides with the one in KS theory if we start with a metaplectic manifold.

slide-8
SLIDE 8

Quantization line bundle in mpc case

◮ A metaplectic-c manifold (M, ω) equipped with a principal mp-c bundle ( ˜ P, ˜ γ) and a polarization F with typical fiber F. ◮ Reduce the symplectic frame bundle P to PF which is a SpF-principal bundle. Pull it back to ˜ P and denote the pullback by ˜ PF which is a Mpc

F-bundle.

This version of quantization line bundles coincides with the one in KS theory if we start with a metaplectic manifold.

slide-9
SLIDE 9

Quantization line bundle in mpc case

◮ A metaplectic-c manifold (M, ω) equipped with a principal mp-c bundle ( ˜ P, ˜ γ) and a polarization F with typical fiber F. ◮ Reduce the symplectic frame bundle P to PF which is a SpF-principal bundle. Pull it back to ˜ P and denote the pullback by ˜ PF which is a Mpc

F-bundle.

◮ There is a unique homomorphism χF : MpF → C× such that (χF ◦ proj)2 = det ◦res, where res : SpF → GL(F, C) is the restriction map to F. Define χc

F : Mpc F → C× by

χc

F([g, z]) = χF(g)z.

This version of quantization line bundles coincides with the one in KS theory if we start with a metaplectic manifold.

slide-10
SLIDE 10

Quantization line bundle in mpc case

◮ A metaplectic-c manifold (M, ω) equipped with a principal mp-c bundle ( ˜ P, ˜ γ) and a polarization F with typical fiber F. ◮ Reduce the symplectic frame bundle P to PF which is a SpF-principal bundle. Pull it back to ˜ P and denote the pullback by ˜ PF which is a Mpc

F-bundle.

◮ There is a unique homomorphism χF : MpF → C× such that (χF ◦ proj)2 = det ◦res, where res : SpF → GL(F, C) is the restriction map to F. Define χc

F : Mpc F → C× by

χc

F([g, z]) = χF(g)z.

◮ Define the quantization line bundle as the associated line bundle to ˜ PF and χc

F:

QF := ˜ PF ×χc

F C.

This version of quantization line bundles coincides with the one in KS theory if we start with a metaplectic manifold.

slide-11
SLIDE 11

Partial connections

We want to define a F-connection on QF. Let me explain the construction of partial connections in a simplified case: we assume F has a complement polarization G, i.e. F ⊕ G = TMC. The goal is to construct a mpc

F-valued connection one form θ on

˜ PF such that the induced covariant derivative on QF along F does not depend on the choice of G.

slide-12
SLIDE 12

Sketch of the construction

◮ The pullback ˜ γF of ˜ γ to ˜ PF via ˜ PF ֒ → ˜ P serves as the u(1)-component of θ.

Lemma

∇F,G

X

, X ∈ F is independent of the choices of G. Hence we get a well-defined partial connection on QF.

slide-13
SLIDE 13

Sketch of the construction

◮ The pullback ˜ γF of ˜ γ to ˜ PF via ˜ PF ֒ → ˜ P serves as the u(1)-component of θ. ◮ Use the complement G and Bott connetions to define a symplectic connection on TMC such that ∇TMC(Γ(F)) ⊂ Γ(F), ∇TMC(Γ(G)) ⊂ Γ(G). Equivalently, we

  • btain a principal connection on P which can be reduced to
  • PF. Let’s denote its pullback to ˜

PF by AF,G which serves as the spF-component of θ.

Lemma

∇F,G

X

, X ∈ F is independent of the choices of G. Hence we get a well-defined partial connection on QF.

slide-14
SLIDE 14

Sketch of the construction

◮ The pullback ˜ γF of ˜ γ to ˜ PF via ˜ PF ֒ → ˜ P serves as the u(1)-component of θ. ◮ Use the complement G and Bott connetions to define a symplectic connection on TMC such that ∇TMC(Γ(F)) ⊂ Γ(F), ∇TMC(Γ(G)) ⊂ Γ(G). Equivalently, we

  • btain a principal connection on P which can be reduced to
  • PF. Let’s denote its pullback to ˜

PF by AF,G which serves as the spF-component of θ. ◮ θF,G = ˜ γF + AF,G is an ordinary connection one form on ˜ PF. As a result, we obtain a covariant derivative ∇F,G on QF.

Lemma

∇F,G

X

, X ∈ F is independent of the choices of G. Hence we get a well-defined partial connection on QF.

slide-15
SLIDE 15

Pairing maps

The polarization F on M2n we take into account satisfies the following conditions:

  • 1. Positivity: iω(u, ¯

u) ≥ 0 for all u ∈ F.

  • 2. F ∩ ¯

F has constant rank. A pairing of polarizations (F1, F2) we take into account further satisfies F1 ∩ ¯ F2 = DC has a constant rank.

Theorem (Pairing maps)

There is a pairing map QF1 ×M QF2 → D1(TM/D) Note that if F1 = F2 = F, we obtain a pairing of QF itself.

slide-16
SLIDE 16

Sketch of the proof

We consider the further reduced bundle P1,2 = PF1 ∩ PF2 consisting of symplectic frames (e1, · · · , ed, u1, · · · , ur, f1, · · · , fd, iv1, · · · , ivr) such that (e1, · · · , ed) ∈ F(D), (e1, · · · , ed, u1, · · · , ur) ∈ F(F1) and (e1, · · · , ed, v1, · · · , vr) ∈ F(F2). Then QF1 = ˜ P1,2 ×χc

F1 C,

QF2 = ˜ P1,2 ×χc

F2 C.

For (α, β) ∈ Q1 ×M Q2 and e ∈ F(D). Lift e to ˜ e ∈ P1,2. Assume α(˜ e) = λ and β(˜ e) = µ. Then define α, β(e) := λ¯ µ.

slide-17
SLIDE 17

Blattner’s formula

[Blattner, 1977] For X ∈ D, α ∈ Γ(F1), and β ∈ Γ(F2), LXα, β = ∇Xα, β + α, ∇Xβ + κF1+ ¯

F2(X)α, β,

where κ is an invariant defined on a differential system associated to F1 + ¯ F2. As a corollary, we have

Corollary

If F1 + ¯ F2 is integrable, then for polarized sections α ∈ Γ(F1) and β ∈ Γ(F2), the function α, β is constant along leaves of D. As a result, α, β descends to a 1-density on M/D.

slide-18
SLIDE 18

Blattner, R. J. (1977). The metalinear geometry of non-real polarizations. In Differential geometrical methods in mathematical physics, pages 11–45. Springer. Hess, H. (1981). On a geometric quantization scheme generalizing those of kostant-souriau and czyz. In Differential geometric methods in mathematical physics, pages 1–35. Springer. Robinson, P. L. and Rawnsley, J. H. (1989). The Metaplectic Representation, Mpc Structures and Geometric Quantization. Number 410. American Mathematical Soc.