on the localization properties of quantum field theories
play

On the Localization Properties of Quantum Field Theories with - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Jun 06, 2023 •226 likes •1.34k views

Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook On the Localization Properties of Quantum Field Theories with Infinite Spin Christian K ohler Universit at Wien 2015-05-29 LQP 36 Workshop

  1. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Infinite Spin Representations Irreducible representations: Little group construction choose reference momentum q ∈ sp P little group G q := stab q = { R ∈ SL (2 , C ) : q Λ( R ) = q } representation D on Hilbert space H q m > 0: massive representations q m := ( m ,� 0) ∈ H + m (rest frame) stab q m = SU (2) D : spin s representation, H q m = C 2 s +1 m = 0: massless representations q 0 := ( 1 2 , 1 e 3 ) ∈ ∂ V + 2 � stab q 0 = � λ E (2) → E (2) (covering of 2d Euclidean group) � [ ϕ, a ] ∈ SL (2 , C ) : ϕ ∈ R , a ∈ R 2 � � E (2) = � e i ϕ � [ ϕ, a ] = e − i ϕ a D [([ ϕ, a ]) v ]( k ) = e − i k · a v ( k λ ( ϕ )) ∀ v ∈ H q 0 := L 2 ( κ S 1 ) C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 6

  2. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Infinite Spin Representations Irreducible representations: Little group construction choose reference momentum q ∈ sp P little group G q := stab q = { R ∈ SL (2 , C ) : q Λ( R ) = q } representation D on Hilbert space H q m > 0: massive representations q m := ( m ,� 0) ∈ H + m (rest frame) stab q m = SU (2) D : spin s representation, H q m = C 2 s +1 m = 0: massless representations q 0 := ( 1 2 , 1 e 3 ) ∈ ∂ V + 2 � stab q 0 = � λ E (2) → E (2) (covering of 2d Euclidean group) � [ ϕ, a ] ∈ SL (2 , C ) : ϕ ∈ R , a ∈ R 2 � � E (2) = � e i ϕ � [ ϕ, a ] = e − i ϕ a D [([ ϕ, a ]) v ]( k ) = e − i k · a v ( k λ ( ϕ )) ∀ v ∈ H q 0 := L 2 ( κ S 1 ) C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 6

  3. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Infinite Spin Representations Irreducible representations: Little group construction choose reference momentum q ∈ sp P little group G q := stab q = { R ∈ SL (2 , C ) : q Λ( R ) = q } representation D on Hilbert space H q m > 0: massive representations q m := ( m ,� 0) ∈ H + m (rest frame) stab q m = SU (2) D : spin s representation, H q m = C 2 s +1 m = 0: massless representations q 0 := ( 1 2 , 1 e 3 ) ∈ ∂ V + 2 � stab q 0 = � λ E (2) → E (2) (covering of 2d Euclidean group) � [ ϕ, a ] ∈ SL (2 , C ) : ϕ ∈ R , a ∈ R 2 � � E (2) = � e i ϕ � [ ϕ, a ] = e − i ϕ a D [([ ϕ, a ]) v ]( k ) = e − i k · a v ( k λ ( ϕ )) ∀ v ∈ H q 0 := L 2 ( κ S 1 ) C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 6

  4. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Infinite Spin Representations Irreducible representations: Little group construction choose reference momentum q ∈ sp P little group G q := stab q = { R ∈ SL (2 , C ) : q Λ( R ) = q } representation D on Hilbert space H q m > 0: massive representations q m := ( m ,� 0) ∈ H + m (rest frame) stab q m = SU (2) D : spin s representation, H q m = C 2 s +1 m = 0: massless representations q 0 := ( 1 2 , 1 e 3 ) ∈ ∂ V + 2 � stab q 0 = � λ E (2) → E (2) (covering of 2d Euclidean group) � [ ϕ, a ] ∈ SL (2 , C ) : ϕ ∈ R , a ∈ R 2 � � E (2) = � e i ϕ � [ ϕ, a ] = e − i ϕ a D [([ ϕ, a ]) v ]( k ) = e − i k · a v ( k λ ( ϕ )) ∀ v ∈ H q 0 := L 2 ( κ S 1 ) C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 6

  5. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Infinite Spin Representations Irreducible representations: One-particle space Wigner boost B p with q Λ( B p ) = p :  �  p �  m > 0  m � � B p := p − p  1 m = 0  √ p −  1 Wigner rotation R ( A , p ) = B p AB − 1 p Λ( A ) ∈ stab q representation of SL (2 , C ) on H 1 := L 2 ( sp P ) ⊗ H q [ U 1 ( A , a ) ψ ]( p ) = e i pa D ( R ( A , p )) ψ ( p Λ( A )) C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 7

  6. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Infinite Spin Representations Irreducible representations: One-particle space Wigner boost B p with q Λ( B p ) = p :  �  p �  m > 0  m � � B p := p − p  1 m = 0  √ p −  1 Wigner rotation R ( A , p ) = B p AB − 1 p Λ( A ) ∈ stab q representation of SL (2 , C ) on H 1 := L 2 ( sp P ) ⊗ H q [ U 1 ( A , a ) ψ ]( p ) = e i pa D ( R ( A , p )) ψ ( p Λ( A )) C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 7

  7. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Infinite Spin Representations Irreducible representations: One-particle space Wigner boost B p with q Λ( B p ) = p :  �  p �  m > 0  m � � B p := p − p  1 m = 0  √ p −  1 Wigner rotation R ( A , p ) = B p AB − 1 p Λ( A ) ∈ stab q representation of SL (2 , C ) on H 1 := L 2 ( sp P ) ⊗ H q [ U 1 ( A , a ) ψ ]( p ) = e i pa D ( R ( A , p )) ψ ( p Λ( A )) C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 7

  8. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Modular Localization Tomita operator for wedges Standard wedge W 0 := { x ∈ M : ± x ± > 0 } ∆ i t := U 1 ( e − πσ 3 t ) subgroup of boosts preserving W 0 reflection ( R W 0 x ) ± = − x ± , J := U ( R W 0 ) complex conjugation 1 Tomita operator S W 0 := J ∆ 2 (domain restricted by required analytic continuation) real subspace for the standard wedge 1 2 : S W 0 ψ = ψ } K 1 ( W 0 ) := { ψ ∈ dom ∆ extension to arbitrary wedges by covariance: K 1 ( W ) := U 1 ( A , a ) K 1 ( W 0 ) for W = Λ( A ) W 0 + x C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 8

  9. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Modular Localization Tomita operator for wedges Standard wedge W 0 := { x ∈ M : ± x ± > 0 } ∆ i t := U 1 ( e − πσ 3 t ) subgroup of boosts preserving W 0 reflection ( R W 0 x ) ± = − x ± , J := U ( R W 0 ) complex conjugation 1 Tomita operator S W 0 := J ∆ 2 (domain restricted by required analytic continuation) real subspace for the standard wedge 1 2 : S W 0 ψ = ψ } K 1 ( W 0 ) := { ψ ∈ dom ∆ extension to arbitrary wedges by covariance: K 1 ( W ) := U 1 ( A , a ) K 1 ( W 0 ) for W = Λ( A ) W 0 + x C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 8

  10. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Modular Localization Tomita operator for wedges Standard wedge W 0 := { x ∈ M : ± x ± > 0 } ∆ i t := U 1 ( e − πσ 3 t ) subgroup of boosts preserving W 0 reflection ( R W 0 x ) ± = − x ± , J := U ( R W 0 ) complex conjugation 1 Tomita operator S W 0 := J ∆ 2 (domain restricted by required analytic continuation) real subspace for the standard wedge 1 2 : S W 0 ψ = ψ } K 1 ( W 0 ) := { ψ ∈ dom ∆ extension to arbitrary wedges by covariance: K 1 ( W ) := U 1 ( A , a ) K 1 ( W 0 ) for W = Λ( A ) W 0 + x C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 8

  11. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Modular Localization Real subspaces for arbitrary regions subspace for O ⊂ M � K ( O ) := K ( W ) W ⊃O wedge real subspace K ⊂ H 1 is standard iff K ∩ i K = 0 (separating) K + i K = H (cyclic) O ⊂ O ′ := { ˜ x − x ) 2 < 0 ∀ x ∈ O} ˜ x ∈ M : (˜ ⇒ K ( ˜ O ) ⊥K ( O ) wrt. ℑ ◦ �· , ·� K ( C ) is standard for C ⊂ M a spacelike cone [Brunetti, Guido, Longo ’02] C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 9

  12. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Modular Localization Real subspaces for arbitrary regions subspace for O ⊂ M � K ( O ) := K ( W ) W ⊃O wedge real subspace K ⊂ H 1 is standard iff K ∩ i K = 0 (separating) K + i K = H (cyclic) O ⊂ O ′ := { ˜ x − x ) 2 < 0 ∀ x ∈ O} ˜ x ∈ M : (˜ ⇒ K ( ˜ O ) ⊥K ( O ) wrt. ℑ ◦ �· , ·� K ( C ) is standard for C ⊂ M a spacelike cone [Brunetti, Guido, Longo ’02] C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 9

  13. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Modular Localization Real subspaces for arbitrary regions subspace for O ⊂ M � K ( O ) := K ( W ) W ⊃O wedge real subspace K ⊂ H 1 is standard iff K ∩ i K = 0 (separating) K + i K = H (cyclic) O ⊂ O ′ := { ˜ x − x ) 2 < 0 ∀ x ∈ O} ˜ x ∈ M : (˜ ⇒ K ( ˜ O ) ⊥K ( O ) wrt. ℑ ◦ �· , ·� K ( C ) is standard for C ⊂ M a spacelike cone [Brunetti, Guido, Longo ’02] C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 9

  14. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Modular Localization Real subspaces for arbitrary regions subspace for O ⊂ M � K ( O ) := K ( W ) W ⊃O wedge real subspace K ⊂ H 1 is standard iff K ∩ i K = 0 (separating) K + i K = H (cyclic) O ⊂ O ′ := { ˜ x − x ) 2 < 0 ∀ x ∈ O} ˜ x ∈ M : (˜ ⇒ K ( ˜ O ) ⊥K ( O ) wrt. ℑ ◦ �· , ·� K ( C ) is standard for C ⊂ M a spacelike cone [Brunetti, Guido, Longo ’02] C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 9

  15. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Modular Localization Real subspaces for arbitrary regions subspace for O ⊂ M � K ( O ) := K ( W ) W ⊃O wedge real subspace K ⊂ H 1 is standard iff K ∩ i K = 0 (separating) K + i K = H (cyclic) O ⊂ O ′ := { ˜ x − x ) 2 < 0 ∀ x ∈ O} ˜ x ∈ M : (˜ ⇒ K ( ˜ O ) ⊥K ( O ) wrt. ℑ ◦ �· , ·� K ( C ) is standard for C ⊂ M a spacelike cone [Brunetti, Guido, Longo ’02] C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 9

  16. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Modular Localization Real subspaces for arbitrary regions subspace for O ⊂ M � K ( O ) := K ( W ) W ⊃O wedge real subspace K ⊂ H 1 is standard iff K ∩ i K = 0 (separating) K + i K = H (cyclic) O ⊂ O ′ := { ˜ x − x ) 2 < 0 ∀ x ∈ O} ˜ x ∈ M : (˜ ⇒ K ( ˜ O ) ⊥K ( O ) wrt. ℑ ◦ �· , ·� K ( C ) is standard for C ⊂ M a spacelike cone [Brunetti, Guido, Longo ’02] C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 9

  17. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Modular Localization Real subspaces for arbitrary regions subspace for O ⊂ M � K ( O ) := K ( W ) W ⊃O wedge real subspace K ⊂ H 1 is standard iff K ∩ i K = 0 (separating) K + i K = H (cyclic) O ⊂ O ′ := { ˜ x − x ) 2 < 0 ∀ x ∈ O} ˜ x ∈ M : (˜ ⇒ K ( ˜ O ) ⊥K ( O ) wrt. ℑ ◦ �· , ·� K ( C ) is standard for C ⊂ M a spacelike cone [Brunetti, Guido, Longo ’02] C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 9

  18. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook String-Localized Fields Definition Let H ( c ) = { e ∈ M ( c ) | e 2 = − 1 } the manifold of spacelike directions. m /∂ V + × H → H q u : H + is called an intertwiner , if D ( R ( A , p )) u ( p Λ( A ) , e ) = u ( p , Λ( A ) e ) (intertwiner eq) loc & pol. bounded in p , analytic for e ∈ H c with ℑ ( e ) ∈ V + L 2 and bounded by an inverse power at the boundary: || u ( p , e ) || H q ≤ M ( p ) |ℑ ( e ) | − N with M pol., N ∈ N Two ways of constructing intertwiners: 1 pullback representation on G q -orbits [Mund, Schroer, Yngvason ’06] 2 characterization using the intertwiner equation C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 10

  19. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook String-Localized Fields Definition Let H ( c ) = { e ∈ M ( c ) | e 2 = − 1 } the manifold of spacelike directions. m /∂ V + × H → H q u : H + is called an intertwiner , if D ( R ( A , p )) u ( p Λ( A ) , e ) = u ( p , Λ( A ) e ) (intertwiner eq) loc & pol. bounded in p , analytic for e ∈ H c with ℑ ( e ) ∈ V + L 2 and bounded by an inverse power at the boundary: || u ( p , e ) || H q ≤ M ( p ) |ℑ ( e ) | − N with M pol., N ∈ N Two ways of constructing intertwiners: 1 pullback representation on G q -orbits [Mund, Schroer, Yngvason ’06] 2 characterization using the intertwiner equation C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 10

  20. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook String-Localized Fields Definition Let H ( c ) = { e ∈ M ( c ) | e 2 = − 1 } the manifold of spacelike directions. m /∂ V + × H → H q u : H + is called an intertwiner , if D ( R ( A , p )) u ( p Λ( A ) , e ) = u ( p , Λ( A ) e ) (intertwiner eq) loc & pol. bounded in p , analytic for e ∈ H c with ℑ ( e ) ∈ V + L 2 and bounded by an inverse power at the boundary: || u ( p , e ) || H q ≤ M ( p ) |ℑ ( e ) | − N with M pol., N ∈ N Two ways of constructing intertwiners: 1 pullback representation on G q -orbits [Mund, Schroer, Yngvason ’06] 2 characterization using the intertwiner equation C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 10

  21. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook String-Localized Fields Definition Let H ( c ) = { e ∈ M ( c ) | e 2 = − 1 } the manifold of spacelike directions. m /∂ V + × H → H q u : H + is called an intertwiner , if D ( R ( A , p )) u ( p Λ( A ) , e ) = u ( p , Λ( A ) e ) (intertwiner eq) loc & pol. bounded in p , analytic for e ∈ H c with ℑ ( e ) ∈ V + L 2 and bounded by an inverse power at the boundary: || u ( p , e ) || H q ≤ M ( p ) |ℑ ( e ) | − N with M pol., N ∈ N Two ways of constructing intertwiners: 1 pullback representation on G q -orbits [Mund, Schroer, Yngvason ’06] 2 characterization using the intertwiner equation C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 10

  22. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook String-Localized Fields String-localized one-particle states conjugate intertwiner: u c ( p , h ) := Ju ( − pR W 0 , ( R W 0 ) ∗ h ) u has distributional boundary value in e . Single particle vectors ψ ( c ) ( f , h ) ∈ H 1 are defined by ψ ( c ) ( f , h )( p ) = � f ( p ) u ( c ) ( p , h ) for f ∈ S ( M ) , D ( H ). R + supp h x 0 e 0 H supp f supp h � x e � covariance under P c : U ((Λ( A ) , a )) ψ ( c ) ( f , e ) = ψ ( c ) ((Λ( A ) , a ) ∗ f , Λ( A ) ∗ e ) C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 11

  23. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook String-Localized Fields String-localized one-particle states conjugate intertwiner: u c ( p , h ) := Ju ( − pR W 0 , ( R W 0 ) ∗ h ) u has distributional boundary value in e . Single particle vectors ψ ( c ) ( f , h ) ∈ H 1 are defined by ψ ( c ) ( f , h )( p ) = � f ( p ) u ( c ) ( p , h ) for f ∈ S ( M ) , D ( H ). R + supp h x 0 e 0 H supp f supp h � x e � covariance under P c : U ((Λ( A ) , a )) ψ ( c ) ( f , e ) = ψ ( c ) ((Λ( A ) , a ) ∗ f , Λ( A ) ∗ e ) C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 11

  24. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook String-Localized Fields String-localized one-particle states conjugate intertwiner: u c ( p , h ) := Ju ( − pR W 0 , ( R W 0 ) ∗ h ) u has distributional boundary value in e . Single particle vectors ψ ( c ) ( f , h ) ∈ H 1 are defined by ψ ( c ) ( f , h )( p ) = � f ( p ) u ( c ) ( p , h ) for f ∈ S ( M ) , D ( H ). R + supp h x 0 e 0 H supp f supp h � x e � covariance under P c : U ((Λ( A ) , a )) ψ ( c ) ( f , e ) = ψ ( c ) ((Λ( A ) , a ) ∗ f , Λ( A ) ∗ e ) C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 11

  25. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook String-Localized Fields One-particle vectors are localized in spacelike truncated cones ψ ( f , h ) + ψ c ( f , h ) ∈ K 1 ( supp f + R + supp h ) supp f + R + supp h x 0 � x Bosonic Fock space H := � ∞ n =0 Sym ( H ⊗ n 1 ), H 0 = C Ω CCR: [ a ( ϕ ) , a † ( ψ )] = � ϕ, ψ � H 1 1 , [ a ( ϕ ) , a ( ψ )] = [ a † ( ϕ ) , a † ( ψ )] = 0 C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 12

  26. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook String-Localized Fields One-particle vectors are localized in spacelike truncated cones ψ ( f , h ) + ψ c ( f , h ) ∈ K 1 ( supp f + R + supp h ) supp f + R + supp h x 0 � x Bosonic Fock space H := � ∞ n =0 Sym ( H ⊗ n 1 ), H 0 = C Ω CCR: [ a ( ϕ ) , a † ( ψ )] = � ϕ, ψ � H 1 1 , [ a ( ϕ ) , a ( ψ )] = [ a † ( ϕ ) , a † ( ψ )] = 0 C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 12

  27. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook String-Localized Fields Field operators are defined by � � � � ˆ f ( p ) u ( p , h ) ◦ a † ( p ) + ˆ Φ( f , h ) = d p f ( − p ) u c ( p , h ) ◦ a ( p ) for f ∈ S ( M ), h ∈ D ( H ). ( ◦ : scalar product in H q ) cov. U ( A , a )Φ( f , h ) U † ( A , a ) = Φ((Λ( A ) , a ) ∗ f ) , Λ( A ) ∗ h ) and PCT U ( j 0 )Φ( f , h ) U † ( j 0 ) = Φ(( j 0 ) ∗ f , ( j 0 ) ∗ h ) † lead to supp f + R + supp h String-localization: x 0 W ′ [Φ( f , h ) , Φ( f ′ , h ′ ) † ] = 0 if supp f + R + supp h � x and supp f ′ + R + supp h ′ are spacelike separated. W construction possible for all supp f ′ + R + supp h ′ positive energy representations C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 13

  28. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook String-Localized Fields Field operators are defined by � � � � ˆ f ( p ) u ( p , h ) ◦ a † ( p ) + ˆ Φ( f , h ) = d p f ( − p ) u c ( p , h ) ◦ a ( p ) for f ∈ S ( M ), h ∈ D ( H ). ( ◦ : scalar product in H q ) cov. U ( A , a )Φ( f , h ) U † ( A , a ) = Φ((Λ( A ) , a ) ∗ f ) , Λ( A ) ∗ h ) and PCT U ( j 0 )Φ( f , h ) U † ( j 0 ) = Φ(( j 0 ) ∗ f , ( j 0 ) ∗ h ) † lead to supp f + R + supp h String-localization: x 0 W ′ [Φ( f , h ) , Φ( f ′ , h ′ ) † ] = 0 if supp f + R + supp h � x and supp f ′ + R + supp h ′ are spacelike separated. W construction possible for all supp f ′ + R + supp h ′ positive energy representations C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 13

  29. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook String-Localized Fields Field operators are defined by � � � � ˆ f ( p ) u ( p , h ) ◦ a † ( p ) + ˆ Φ( f , h ) = d p f ( − p ) u c ( p , h ) ◦ a ( p ) for f ∈ S ( M ), h ∈ D ( H ). ( ◦ : scalar product in H q ) cov. U ( A , a )Φ( f , h ) U † ( A , a ) = Φ((Λ( A ) , a ) ∗ f ) , Λ( A ) ∗ h ) and PCT U ( j 0 )Φ( f , h ) U † ( j 0 ) = Φ(( j 0 ) ∗ f , ( j 0 ) ∗ h ) † lead to supp f + R + supp h String-localization: x 0 W ′ [Φ( f , h ) , Φ( f ′ , h ′ ) † ] = 0 if supp f + R + supp h � x and supp f ′ + R + supp h ′ are spacelike separated. W construction possible for all supp f ′ + R + supp h ′ positive energy representations C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 13

  30. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook 1 Introduction 2 Compact Localization Two-Particle States Candidates for Two-Particle Observables 3 No-Go Theorem 4 Limit of Representations 5 Summary & Outlook C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 14

  31. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Two-Particle States Dependency on semi-infinite string-direction is intrinsic for infinite spin-case → No-Go Thm. [Yngvason ’70] [Longo, Morinelli, Rehren ’15] Construction of two-particle intertwiners [MSY ’06] Let F ∈ S ( R ) and define u 2 : ( ∂ V + ) × 2 → H ⊗ 2 by q � � z e i ˜ p )( k , ˜ d 2 z e i kz d 2 ˜ k ˜ z F ( A ( p , ˜ u 2 ( p , ˜ k ) := p , z , ˜ z )), z ) := ξ ( z )Λ( B p B − 1 where A ( p , ˜ p , z , ˜ p ) ξ (˜ z ) ˜ and ξ is a parametrization of stab q . u 2 fulfils the two-particle intertwiner equation D ( R ( A , p )) ⊗ D ( R ( A , ˜ p )) u 2 ( p Λ( A ) , ˜ p Λ( A )) = u 2 ( p , ˜ p ). C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 15

  32. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Two-Particle States Dependency on semi-infinite string-direction is intrinsic for infinite spin-case → No-Go Thm. [Yngvason ’70] [Longo, Morinelli, Rehren ’15] Construction of two-particle intertwiners [MSY ’06] Let F ∈ S ( R ) and define u 2 : ( ∂ V + ) × 2 → H ⊗ 2 by q � � z e i ˜ p )( k , ˜ d 2 z e i kz d 2 ˜ k ˜ z F ( A ( p , ˜ u 2 ( p , ˜ k ) := p , z , ˜ z )), z ) := ξ ( z )Λ( B p B − 1 where A ( p , ˜ p , z , ˜ p ) ξ (˜ z ) ˜ and ξ is a parametrization of stab q . u 2 fulfils the two-particle intertwiner equation D ( R ( A , p )) ⊗ D ( R ( A , ˜ p )) u 2 ( p Λ( A ) , ˜ p Λ( A )) = u 2 ( p , ˜ p ). C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 15

  33. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Two-Particle States Dependency on semi-infinite string-direction is intrinsic for infinite spin-case → No-Go Thm. [Yngvason ’70] [Longo, Morinelli, Rehren ’15] Construction of two-particle intertwiners [MSY ’06] Let F ∈ S ( R ) and define u 2 : ( ∂ V + ) × 2 → H ⊗ 2 by q � � z e i ˜ p )( k , ˜ d 2 z e i kz d 2 ˜ k ˜ z F ( A ( p , ˜ u 2 ( p , ˜ k ) := p , z , ˜ z )), z ) := ξ ( z )Λ( B p B − 1 where A ( p , ˜ p , z , ˜ p ) ξ (˜ z ) ˜ and ξ is a parametrization of stab q . u 2 fulfils the two-particle intertwiner equation D ( R ( A , p )) ⊗ D ( R ( A , ˜ p )) u 2 ( p Λ( A ) , ˜ p Λ( A )) = u 2 ( p , ˜ p ). C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 15

  34. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Two-Particle States Localized two-particle wavefunctions (cf. MSY ’06, ) Let O ⊂ M compact and g ∈ S ( M × 2 ) real-valued with loc ⊗ H ⊗ 2 is polynomially bounded, i.e. supp g ⊂ O × 2 . If u 2 ∈ L 2 || u 2 ( p , ˜ p ) || H ⊗ 2 ≤ M ( p , ˜ p ) q with M a polynomial, then the function p , ˜ p )( k , ˜ ψ ( p , k , ˜ k ) := ˜ g ( p , ˜ p ) u 2 ( p , ˜ k ) is modular localized in O , which means ψ ∈ K 2 ( O ) with the two-particle subspace K 2 defined via second quantization of the operators S W . C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 16

  35. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Candidates for Two-Particle Observables Proposed construction of two-particle observables [MSY ’06] Candidate observables are of the form � � � � � � d ν (˜ p )( k , ˜ B ( g ) := d p d ν ( k ) d ˜ p k ) ˆ g ( p , ˜ p ) u 2 ( p , ˜ k ) a † ( p , k ) a † (˜ p , ˜ k ) + . . . such that B ( g )Ω ∈ H 2 is a two-particle wavefunction given by p , k , ˜ p )( k , ˜ ( p , ˜ k ) �→ ˆ g ( p , ˜ p ) u 2 ( p , ˜ k ). Locality in the vacuum expectation value � Ω , [ B ( g ) , B (˜ g )]Ω � = 0 if ( x − x ′ ) 2 < 0 ∀ x ∈ supp g , x ′ ∈ supp ˜ g . Relative locality wrt. string-field Φ( f , h )? C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 17

  36. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Candidates for Two-Particle Observables Proposed construction of two-particle observables [MSY ’06] Candidate observables are of the form � � � � � � d ν (˜ p )( k , ˜ B ( g ) := d p d ν ( k ) d ˜ p k ) ˆ g ( p , ˜ p ) u 2 ( p , ˜ k ) a † ( p , k ) a † (˜ p , ˜ k ) + . . . such that B ( g )Ω ∈ H 2 is a two-particle wavefunction given by p , k , ˜ p )( k , ˜ ( p , ˜ k ) �→ ˆ g ( p , ˜ p ) u 2 ( p , ˜ k ). Locality in the vacuum expectation value � Ω , [ B ( g ) , B (˜ g )]Ω � = 0 if ( x − x ′ ) 2 < 0 ∀ x ∈ supp g , x ′ ∈ supp ˜ g . Relative locality wrt. string-field Φ( f , h )? C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 17

  37. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Candidates for Two-Particle Observables Proposed construction of two-particle observables [MSY ’06] Candidate observables are of the form � � � � � � d ν (˜ p )( k , ˜ B ( g ) := d p d ν ( k ) d ˜ p k ) ˆ g ( p , ˜ p ) u 2 ( p , ˜ k ) a † ( p , k ) a † (˜ p , ˜ k ) + . . . such that B ( g )Ω ∈ H 2 is a two-particle wavefunction given by p , k , ˜ p )( k , ˜ ( p , ˜ k ) �→ ˆ g ( p , ˜ p ) u 2 ( p , ˜ k ). Locality in the vacuum expectation value � Ω , [ B ( g ) , B (˜ g )]Ω � = 0 if ( x − x ′ ) 2 < 0 ∀ x ∈ supp g , x ′ ∈ supp ˜ g . Relative locality wrt. string-field Φ( f , h )? C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 17

  38. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook 1 Introduction 2 Compact Localization 3 No-Go Theorem Assumptions & Statement Characterization of Intertwiners Relative Commutator Restriction of the Integrals Analysis of Singularities 4 Limit of Representations 5 Summary & Outlook C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 18

  39. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Assumptions & Statement Q: Existence of nontriv. operators with compact localization? → Negative result for the following class of operators on F , motivated by the suggestions in [YMS ’06], [Schroer ’08]. Definition An operator-valued distribution B on S ( M × 2 ) of the form � � � � � � d ν (˜ B ( g ) = d p d ˜ p d ν ( k ) k ) p )( k , ˜ k ) a † ( p , k ) a † (˜ p , ˜ g ( p , ˜ ˆ p ) u 2 ( p , ˜ k ) p )( k , ˜ p , ˜ +ˆ g ( − p , − ˜ p ) u 2 c ( p , ˜ k ) a ( p , k ) a (˜ k ) p )( k , ˜ p , ˜ k ) a † ( p , k ) a (˜ +ˆ g ( p , − ˜ p ) u 0 ( p , ˜ k ) p )( k , ˜ p , ˜ k ) a † (˜ +ˆ g ( − p , ˜ p ) u 0 c ( p , ˜ k ) a ( p , k ) with fixed coefficient functions u 2 , u 2 c , u 0 , u 0 c is called a Two-particle observable if... [cf. Streater, Wightman ’64, chap. 3] C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 19

  40. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Assumptions & Statement 1 Domain and Continuity For all g ∈ S ( M × 2 ), B ( g ) is defined on the domain D of vectors which is spanned by products of the String fields Φ( f , h ) applied to the vacuum Ω. By the Reeh-Schlieder Thm., D is dense in the Fock space F . For fixed vectors φ, ψ ∈ H , the assignment g ∈ S ( M × 2 ) �→ � φ | B ( g ) | ψ � ∈ C is a tempered distribution, i.e. g �→ B ( g ) is an operator-valued distribution . B ( g ) = B ( g ) † C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 20

  41. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Assumptions & Statement 2 Transformation Law p ∈ ∂ V + and A ∈ SL (2 , C ), the two-particle intertwiner For p , ˜ equation holds almost everywhere in the sense of d p � � p d ν ( k ) d ν (˜ d ˜ k ): D ( R ( A , p )) ⊗ D ( R ( A , ˜ p )) u 2 ( p Λ( A ) , ˜ p Λ( A )) = u 2 ( p , ˜ p ). u 2 , u 2 c , u 0 , u 0 c are locally square-integrable and polynomially bounded. 3 Relative locality Let f ∈ S ( M ), h ∈ D ( H ) and g ∈ S ( M × 2 ) such, that ( x + λ e − y 1 , 2 ) 2 < 0 ∀ x ∈ supp f , e ∈ supp h , λ ∈ R + , ( y 1 , y 2 ) ∈ supp g . Then the associated fields commute: [Φ( f , h ) , B ( g )] = 0 C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 21

  42. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Characterization of Intertwiners One-particle string-intertwiners Lemma Let u 1 ( p , e )( k ) a solution of the one-particle intertwinereq. Then there is a function F 1 , defined on the interior of the upper half-plane, such that: 1 The intertwiner u 1 is given by e − e − p − p u 1 ( p , e )( k ) = e i k · 2 p · e F 1 ( p · e ). 2 A choice of the function F 1 can be made in such a way that u 1 is polynomially bounded in p , analytic in e for ℑ ( e ) ∈ V + and bounded by an inverse power at the boundary. C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 22

  43. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Characterization of Intertwiners ∂ V + Step 1 e A = B p ∈ SL (2 , C ) p R ( B − 1 p , p ) = 1 k u 1 ( q , Λ( B p ) e ) = u 1 ( p , e ) f := Λ( B p ) e κ S 1 H cf. uniqueness proof for string-localized fields [MSY ’06, Lemma B 3 ii)] C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 23

  44. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Characterization of Intertwiners ∂ V + Step 1 e A = B p ∈ SL (2 , C ) p f R ( B − 1 p , p ) = 1 k q u 1 ( q , Λ( B p ) e ) = u 1 ( p , e ) f := Λ( B p ) e κ S 1 H cf. uniqueness proof for string-localized fields [MSY ’06, Lemma B 3 ii)] C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 23

  45. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Characterization of Intertwiners ∂ V + Step 1 A = B p ∈ SL (2 , C ) f R ( B − 1 p , p ) = 1 k q u 1 ( q , Λ( B p ) e ) = u 1 ( p , e ) f := Λ( B p ) e κ S 1 H cf. uniqueness proof for string-localized fields [MSY ’06, Lemma B 3 ii)] C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 23

  46. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Characterization of Intertwiners ∂ V + Step 2 q · e = cst . A = [0 , f / f + ] ∈ G q f ⇒ R ( A , q ) = A k q − i k · f f + u 1 ( q , f ) = u 1 ( q , f + ) e κ S 1 H cf. uniqueness proof for string-localized fields [MSY ’06, Lemma B 3 ii)] C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 23

  47. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Characterization of Intertwiners ∂ V + Step 2 q · e = cst . A = [0 , f / f + ] ∈ G q f ⇒ R ( A , q ) = A k q f + − i k · f f + u 1 ( q , f ) = u 1 ( q , f + ) e κ S 1 H cf. uniqueness proof for string-localized fields [MSY ’06, Lemma B 3 ii)] C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 23

  48. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Characterization of Intertwiners ∂ V + Step 2 q · e = cst . A = [0 , f / f + ] ∈ G q ⇒ R ( A , q ) = A k q f + − i k · f f + u 1 ( q , f ) = u 1 ( q , f + ) e κ S 1 H cf. uniqueness proof for string-localized fields [MSY ’06, Lemma B 3 ii)] C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 23

  49. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Characterization of Intertwiners ∂ V + Step 3 A = [ ϕ, 0]: q and f + invariant, F 1 ( f + / 2) := u 1 ( q , f + )( k ) k q f + κ S 1 H cf. uniqueness proof for string-localized fields [MSY ’06, Lemma B 3 ii)] C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 23

  50. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Characterization of Intertwiners ∂ V + Step 3 A = [ ϕ, 0]: q and f + invariant, F 1 ( f + / 2) := u 1 ( q , f + )( k ) k q f + l κ S 1 H cf. uniqueness proof for string-localized fields [MSY ’06, Lemma B 3 ii)] C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 23

  51. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Characterization of Intertwiners ∂ V + Step 3 A = [ ϕ, 0]: q and f + invariant, F 1 ( f + / 2) := u 1 ( q , f + )( k ) q f + l κ S 1 H cf. uniqueness proof for string-localized fields [MSY ’06, Lemma B 3 ii)] C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 23

  52. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Characterization of Intertwiners Substitution of the intertwiner equations yields the first part e − e − p − p u 1 ( p , e )( k ) = e i k · 2 p · e F 1 ( p · e ). 2 p · e in exponent produces essential singularities at the boundary ℑ ( e ) = 0. � �� � � � e − e − At any singularity one can show � k · p − p � ≤ κ . u 1 is therefore an intertwiner iff F 1 r in F 1 ( p · e ) = e − i κ 2 p · e F 1 r ( p · e ) is pol. bounded distributional boundary value of analytic function on H + . F 1 r ( p · e ) := 1 yields the candidate � e − e − � p − p k · − κ u 1 ( p , e )( k ) = e i . 2 p · e C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 24

  53. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Characterization of Intertwiners Two-particle scalar intertwiners Similar result for the two-particle intertwiner u 2 : Lemma p )( k , ˜ Let u 2 ( p , ˜ k ) the function given in assumption 2 , which is a solution of D ( R ( A , p )) ⊗ D ( R ( A , ˜ p )) u 2 ( p Λ( A ) , ˜ p Λ( A )) = u 2 ( p , ˜ p ) loc -function F 2 : R 2 → C such, that Then there is a L 2 − i ˜ 1 1 k · − i k · p p − p − p ˜ p − p − ˜ p )( k , ˜ ˜ p − e ˜ u 2 ( p , ˜ k ) = e p − � � � � �� p p − p − p˜ p − ( k ˜ k ) − 1 F 2 p − ˜ ˜ p − ˜ p − C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 25

  54. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Characterization of Intertwiners Extension of the characterization for u 2 to the coefficient functions u 2 c , u 0 and u 0 c : Lemma There are L 2 loc -functions F 0 and F 0 c , such that the following equations hold: + i ˜ 1 1 k · + i k · p p − p − p ˜ p − p )( k , ˜ p − ˜ ˜ p − e u 2 c ( p , ˜ k ) = e ˜ p − � � � � �� p p − p − p˜ p − ( k ˜ k ) − 1 F 2 p − ˜ ˜ p − ˜ p − + i ˜ 1 1 k · − i k · p p − p − p ˜ p − p − ˜ p )( k , ˜ ˜ p − F 0 ( . . . ) p − e u 0 ( p , ˜ k ) = e ˜ − i ˜ 1 1 k · + i k · p p − p − p ˜ p − p − ˜ p )( k , ˜ ˜ p − F 0 c ( . . . ) p − e u 0 c ( p , ˜ k ) = e ˜ C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 26

  55. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Relative Commutator Consider the function γ ( a ) = � φ, [ B ( g ) , Φ( f a , h )]Ω � , where f s := ( 1 , sn ) ∗ f Proof strategy: supp f a + R + supp h γ evaluates nontrivial W ′ matrix elements a B tempered distribution O ⇒ pol. bounded x 0 rel. locality to Φ ⇒ half-sided support x � W supp f + R + supp h dist. FT of γ is S ′ -BV of an analytic function incompatible with singularities in u 2 , u 0 , ... C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 27

  56. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Relative Commutator Consider the function γ ( a ) = � φ, [ B ( g ) , Φ( f a , h )]Ω � , where f s := ( 1 , sn ) ∗ f Proof strategy: supp f a + R + supp h γ evaluates nontrivial W ′ matrix elements a B tempered distribution O ⇒ pol. bounded x 0 rel. locality to Φ ⇒ half-sided support x � W supp f + R + supp h dist. FT of γ is S ′ -BV of an analytic function incompatible with singularities in u 2 , u 0 , ... C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 27

  57. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Relative Commutator Consider the function γ ( a ) = � φ, [ B ( g ) , Φ( f a , h )]Ω � , where f s := ( 1 , sn ) ∗ f Proof strategy: supp f a + R + supp h γ evaluates nontrivial W ′ matrix elements a B tempered distribution O ⇒ pol. bounded x 0 rel. locality to Φ ⇒ half-sided support x � W supp f + R + supp h dist. FT of γ is S ′ -BV of an analytic function incompatible with singularities in u 2 , u 0 , ... C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 27

  58. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Relative Commutator Lemma (regularity of γ ) The function γ has the following properties: 1 Support: supp γ ⊆ ( −∞ , − b ] 2 Boundedness: There are constants C , L > 0 and N ∈ N , such that � 1 � L χ [ − L , 0] − b ( a ) + | a + b | N − 1 | γ ( a ) | ≤ C ∀ a < − b . 3 Continuity: γ is a continuous function. C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 28

  59. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Relative Commutator Lemma (holomorphic FT) The holomorphic Fourier transform of a continuous polynomially bounded function γ : R → C with supp γ ⊆ ( −∞ , − b ] for some b > 0, which is defined by � d a e − i za γ ( a ) ∀ z ∈ H + , ˆ γ ( z ) = where H + := { z ∈ C : ℑ ( z ) > 0 } is the upper half-plane, has the following properties: γ is an analytic function on H + . 1 Analyticity: ˆ 2 Boundedness: There are constants C > 0 , N ∈ N , such that γ ( z ) | ≤ C e − b ℑ ( z ) (1 + ℑ ( z ) − N ) ∀ z ∈ H + | ˆ 3 Distributional boundary value: . . . C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 29

  60. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Relative Commutator Lemma (holomorphic FT) The holomorphic Fourier transform of a continuous polynomially bounded function γ : R → C with supp γ ⊆ ( −∞ , − b ] for some b > 0, which is defined by � d a e − i za γ ( a ) ∀ z ∈ H + , ˆ γ ( z ) = where H + := { z ∈ C : ℑ ( z ) > 0 } is the upper half-plane, has the following properties: γ is an analytic function on H + . 1 Analyticity: ˆ 2 Boundedness: There are constants C > 0 , N ∈ N , such that γ ( z ) | ≤ C e − b ℑ ( z ) (1 + ℑ ( z ) − N ) ∀ z ∈ H + | ˆ 3 Distributional boundary value: . . . C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 29

  61. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Relative Commutator Lemma (holomorphic FT, part II) 3 Distributional boundary value: The sequence of γ t ∈ S ′ ( R ), given by the restrictions of ˆ distributions ˆ γ to horizontal lines of constant imaginary part t > 0, � ˆ γ t : S ( R ) �→ C , ϕ �→ d s γ ( s + i t ) ϕ ( s ), converges for t → 0 to the distributional FT of γ , � γ : S ( R ) → C , ϕ �→ ˆ d a γ ( a ) ˆ ϕ ( a ) � d s e − i sa ϕ ( s ) the FT on S ( R ), with ˆ ϕ ( a ) := in the sense of S ′ ( R ): lim t → 0 ˆ γ t ( ϕ ) = ˆ γ ( ϕ ) ∀ ϕ ∈ S ( R ) C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 30

  62. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Relative Commutator γ ( a ) can be stated in terms of functions of p − ∈ R Ψ( p , k ) := ˆ f ( p )˜ u 1 ( p , h )( k ) with � for p ∈ ∂ V + u 1 ( p , h )( k ) u 1 ( p , h )( k ) := ˜ for p ∈ ∂ V − u 1 c ( − p , h )( k ) − i ˜ 1 1 k · + i k · p p − p − p ˜ p − p , k , ˜ p − ˜ ˜ p − e p − S ( p , ˜ I ( p , ˜ k ) := e ˜ p , ψ ) with p e i ψ /κ 2 ) S ( p , ˜ p , ψ ) := Θ( p ˜ p )[ˆ g (˜ p , − p ) F 0 (2 p ˜ p e i ψ /κ 2 )] +ˆ g ( − p , ˜ p ) F 0 c (2 p ˜ p e i ψ /κ 2 ) +Θ( − p ˜ p )[ˆ g (˜ p , − p ) F 2 (2 p ˜ p e i ψ /κ 2 )], +ˆ g ( − p , ˜ p ) F 2 (2 p ˜ coordinate ψ is stable under k , ˜ k �→ λ k , λ − 1 ˜ k for λ ∈ SO (2) C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 31

  63. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Relative Commutator γ ( a ) can be stated in terms of functions of p − ∈ R Ψ( p , k ) := ˆ f ( p )˜ u 1 ( p , h )( k ) with � for p ∈ ∂ V + u 1 ( p , h )( k ) u 1 ( p , h )( k ) := ˜ for p ∈ ∂ V − u 1 c ( − p , h )( k ) − i ˜ 1 1 k · + i k · p p − p − p ˜ p − p , k , ˜ p − ˜ ˜ p − e p − S ( p , ˜ I ( p , ˜ k ) := e ˜ p , ψ ) with p e i ψ /κ 2 ) S ( p , ˜ p , ψ ) := Θ( p ˜ p )[ˆ g (˜ p , − p ) F 0 (2 p ˜ p e i ψ /κ 2 )] +ˆ g ( − p , ˜ p ) F 0 c (2 p ˜ p e i ψ /κ 2 ) +Θ( − p ˜ p )[ˆ g (˜ p , − p ) F 2 (2 p ˜ p e i ψ /κ 2 )], +ˆ g ( − p , ˜ p ) F 2 (2 p ˜ coordinate ψ is stable under k , ˜ k �→ λ k , λ − 1 ˜ k for λ ∈ SO (2) C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 31

  64. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Restriction of the Integrals p , k , ˜ With abbreviation q := (p , ˜ k ) (measure µ ), one obtains � d p − � p , ˜ p , ˜ e i p − a / 2 γ ( a ) = d µ ( q ) φ (˜ k )Ψ( p , k ) I ( p , k , ˜ k ) p − Singularities contained in I can be exposed: replacing φ and ψ by 1 p , ˜ χ B ǫ (˜ k 0 ) (˜ k ) p 0 , ˜ p , ˜ φ ˜ k 0 ,ǫ (˜ k ) := p 0 , ˜ p 0 , ˜ µ ( B ǫ (˜ k 0 )) → valid choice for φ ∈ H 1 2 � � p − , | p | 2 Ψ p 0 , k 0 ,ǫ := ˆ f δ p 0 ,ǫ ( p ) δ k 0 ,ǫ ( k ) p − → Ψ is determined by Φ( f , h ), limiting procedure necessary. Resulting sequence of functions denoted by ( γ q 0 ,ǫ ) ǫ> 0 . C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 32

  65. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Restriction of the Integrals p , k , ˜ With abbreviation q := (p , ˜ k ) (measure µ ), one obtains � d p − � p , ˜ p , ˜ e i p − a / 2 γ ( a ) = d µ ( q ) φ (˜ k )Ψ( p , k ) I ( p , k , ˜ k ) p − Singularities contained in I can be exposed: replacing φ and ψ by 1 p , ˜ χ B ǫ (˜ k 0 ) (˜ k ) p 0 , ˜ p , ˜ φ ˜ k 0 ,ǫ (˜ k ) := p 0 , ˜ p 0 , ˜ µ ( B ǫ (˜ k 0 )) → valid choice for φ ∈ H 1 2 � � p − , | p | 2 Ψ p 0 , k 0 ,ǫ := ˆ f δ p 0 ,ǫ ( p ) δ k 0 ,ǫ ( k ) p − → Ψ is determined by Φ( f , h ), limiting procedure necessary. Resulting sequence of functions denoted by ( γ q 0 ,ǫ ) ǫ> 0 . C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 32

  66. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Restriction of the Integrals p , k , ˜ With abbreviation q := (p , ˜ k ) (measure µ ), one obtains � d p − � p , ˜ p , ˜ e i p − a / 2 γ ( a ) = d µ ( q ) φ (˜ k )Ψ( p , k ) I ( p , k , ˜ k ) p − Singularities contained in I can be exposed: replacing φ and ψ by 1 p , ˜ χ B ǫ (˜ k 0 ) (˜ k ) p 0 , ˜ p , ˜ φ ˜ k 0 ,ǫ (˜ k ) := p 0 , ˜ p 0 , ˜ µ ( B ǫ (˜ k 0 )) → valid choice for φ ∈ H 1 2 � � p − , | p | 2 Ψ p 0 , k 0 ,ǫ := ˆ f δ p 0 ,ǫ ( p ) δ k 0 ,ǫ ( k ) p − → Ψ is determined by Φ( f , h ), limiting procedure necessary. Resulting sequence of functions denoted by ( γ q 0 ,ǫ ) ǫ> 0 . C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 32

  67. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Restriction of the Integrals Let p 0 ∈ R 2 , k 0 ∈ κ S 1 such, that p 0 ∦ k 0 . For ǫ > 0, consider the function � � p − , | p | 2 Ψ p 0 , k 0 ,ǫ : ∂ V × κ S 1 → C , ( p , k ) �→ ˆ f δ p 0 ,ǫ ( p ) δ k 0 ,ǫ ( k ). p − There is a sequence of sets of finitely many functions � � ( f i ǫ, N , h i ǫ, N ) ∈ S ( M ) × D ( H ) , i = 1 , ..., M ǫ, N N ∈ N which conserve the support properties of Φ( f , h ), i.e. supp f i ǫ, N ⊂ W , supp h i ǫ, N ⊂ W ∩ H ∀ i = 1 , ..., M ǫ, N , N ∈ N , which converge to Ψ p 0 , k 0 ,ǫ in the sense of L 2 up to a continuous function c (p , k ): � � � d p − � � M ǫ, N 2 � � i =1 ˆ | p − | d 2 p f i u 1 ( p , h i d ν ( k ) � ǫ, N ( p )˜ ǫ, N )( k ) − c (p , k )Ψ p 0 , k 0 ,ǫ ( p , k ) � converges to 0. The function c is has the property c (p , k 0 ) = 1. C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 33

  68. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Restriction of the Integrals Let p 0 ∈ R 2 , k 0 ∈ κ S 1 such, that p 0 ∦ k 0 . For ǫ > 0, consider the function � � p − , | p | 2 Ψ p 0 , k 0 ,ǫ : ∂ V × κ S 1 → C , ( p , k ) �→ ˆ f δ p 0 ,ǫ ( p ) δ k 0 ,ǫ ( k ). p − There is a sequence of sets of finitely many functions � � ( f i ǫ, N , h i ǫ, N ) ∈ S ( M ) × D ( H ) , i = 1 , ..., M ǫ, N N ∈ N which conserve the support properties of Φ( f , h ), i.e. supp f i ǫ, N ⊂ W , supp h i ǫ, N ⊂ W ∩ H ∀ i = 1 , ..., M ǫ, N , N ∈ N , which converge to Ψ p 0 , k 0 ,ǫ in the sense of L 2 up to a continuous function c (p , k ): � � � d p − � � M ǫ, N 2 � � i =1 ˆ | p − | d 2 p f i u 1 ( p , h i d ν ( k ) � ǫ, N ( p )˜ ǫ, N )( k ) − c (p , k )Ψ p 0 , k 0 ,ǫ ( p , k ) � converges to 0. The function c is has the property c (p , k 0 ) = 1. C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 33

  69. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Analysis of Singularities The analyticity of each ˆ γ q 0 ,ǫ is preserved in the limit ǫ → 0: Lemma (compact convergence) The set of sequences of functions � γ q 0 ,ǫ : H + → C , z �→ d a e − i za γ q 0 ,ǫ ( a ) ˆ has the following property: For µ -almost all q 0 ∃ analytic function γ q 0 on H + such, that ˆ γ q 0 ( z ) ∀ z ∈ H + ǫ → 0 ˆ lim γ q 0 ,ǫ ( z ) = ˆ in the sense of compact convergence. Consider the difference ˆ γ ( z ) := ˆ γ q 1 ( z ) − P ( z , q 1 , q 0 )ˆ γ q 0 ( z ), with q 0 �→ q 1 by ( k 0 , ˜ k 0 ) �→ ( λ k 0 , λ − 1 ˜ k 0 ), P relative phase C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 34

  70. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Analysis of Singularities Lemma (Uniform convergence) Let ( γ ǫ ) ǫ> 0 a sequence of analytic functions on H + with the following properties: lim ǫ → 0 γ ǫ = γ exists in the sense of compact convergence, 1 with γ an analytic function on H + . The sequence fulfils the uniform bound | γ ǫ ( z ) | < C ℑ ( z ) − 1 ∀ z ∈ H + , ǫ > 0 for some C > 0. 2 For ǫ > 0, the (boundary-) lim t ց 0 γ ǫ ( · + i t ) = g ǫ exists and is given by a function g ǫ ∈ L 1 ( R ), where convergence is understood in the weak-* topology. 3 The corresponding sequence of boundary functions ( g ǫ ) ǫ> 0 fulfils lim ǫ → 0 g ǫ = 0 in L 1 ( R ) . . . . C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 35

  71. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Analysis of Singularities Lemma (Uniform convergence, part II) t ց 0, weak-* g ǫ γ ǫ ( · + i t ) ǫ → 0 +uniform bound ǫ → 0 L 1 t ց 0, weak-* γ ( · + i t ) 0 Then γ = 0 on all of H + . (using [SW ’64, Thm. 2-17]) ⇒ ˆ γ q 1 has a singularity, which is a contradiction! C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 36

  72. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook 1 Introduction 2 Compact Localization 3 No-Go Theorem 4 Limit of Representations Reference Momenta & Little Groups Little Group Representations Construction of Intertwiners 5 Summary & Outlook C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 37

  73. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Reference Momenta & Little Groups Pauli-Lubanski spin-vector S µ = 1 2 ǫ µνλκ M νλ P κ M νλ : Lie-Algebra of generators of L ↑ + m > 0 interpretation: “angular momentum” in particle’s rest frame S 2 = S µµ defines another Casimir operator. C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 38

  74. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Reference Momenta & Little Groups Pauli-Lubanski spin-vector S µ = 1 2 ǫ µνλκ M νλ P κ M νλ : Lie-Algebra of generators of L ↑ + m > 0 interpretation: “angular momentum” in particle’s rest frame S 2 = S µµ defines another Casimir operator. C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 38

  75. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Reference Momenta & Little Groups Comparison of the massive and massless case Important distinction between massive and massless case: m 2 − 1 4 S 2 sp P q B p G q H q � (1 ,� H + C 2 s m 2 s ( s + 1) 1 0) � p / m SU (2) � p − � p (1 ,� e ) � 1 ∂ V + L 2 ( S 1 ) κ 2 0 E (2) √ p − 2 1 Construction of the previous objects is usually done separately for m > 0 and m = 0. Fundamentally different properties in the case m = 0 , κ > 0 How do these difficulties arise in the limit κ = const . , m → 0? Idea: Comparison between massive and massless fields is simplified, if construction is unified. C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 39

  76. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Reference Momenta & Little Groups Comparison of the massive and massless case Important distinction between massive and massless case: m 2 − 1 4 S 2 sp P q B p G q H q � (1 ,� H + C 2 s m 2 s ( s + 1) 1 0) � p / m SU (2) � p − � p (1 ,� e ) � 1 ∂ V + L 2 ( S 1 ) κ 2 0 E (2) √ p − 2 1 Construction of the previous objects is usually done separately for m > 0 and m = 0. Fundamentally different properties in the case m = 0 , κ > 0 How do these difficulties arise in the limit κ = const . , m → 0? Idea: Comparison between massive and massless fields is simplified, if construction is unified. C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 39

  77. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Reference Momenta & Little Groups m -parametrized approach Reference momentum q m is given by H + m q 1 ∂ V + q m q 0 � 1 � ( m ,� 0) � q m = m 2 with q m − independent of m . Usual choice for q is ( m ,� 0), switching between conventions amounts to the Lorentz transform: � √ m � , since q m Λ( B m ) = ( m ,� √ m − 1 B m := 0). C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 40

  78. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Reference Momenta & Little Groups m -parametrized approach Reference momentum q m is given by H + m q 1 ∂ V + q m q 0 � 1 � ( m ,� 0) � q m = m 2 with q m − independent of m . Usual choice for q is ( m ,� 0), switching between conventions amounts to the Lorentz transform: � √ m � , since q m Λ( B m ) = ( m ,� √ m − 1 B m := 0). C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 40

  79. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Reference Momenta & Little Groups m -dependence of Wigner rotations Massless form of the Wigner boost B p is still valid for all m , q m Λ( B p ) = p ∀ p ∈ H + m , result depends on m only via q m . Wigner rotation in m -parametrized form: � a � b B − 1 p Λ( A ) = CB − 1 R = B p A q m Λ( C ) , C =: c d ���� =: C with C independent of m . Explicit form: � � � a − m 2 c 1 ∈ SU (2) m = 1 � R = ∈ � | a | 2 + m 2 | c | 2 c a E (2) m = 0 C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 41

  80. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Reference Momenta & Little Groups m -dependence of Wigner rotations Massless form of the Wigner boost B p is still valid for all m , q m Λ( B p ) = p ∀ p ∈ H + m , result depends on m only via q m . Wigner rotation in m -parametrized form: � a � b B − 1 p Λ( A ) = CB − 1 R = B p A q m Λ( C ) , C =: c d ���� =: C with C independent of m . Explicit form: � � � a − m 2 c 1 ∈ SU (2) m = 1 � R = ∈ � | a | 2 + m 2 | c | 2 c a E (2) m = 0 C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 41

  81. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Reference Momenta & Little Groups Special cases For m = 1, G 1 = SU (2), there is a correspondence between R rotating the sphere and R acting as M¨ obius transform on the complex plane - stereographic projection. � a � . z = az + c b [ D ( R ) f ]( z ) = f ( R − 1 . z ) where c d bz + d For m = 0, G 0 = � E (2), the M¨ obius transforms become rotations/shifts on the plane. C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 42

  82. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Reference Momenta & Little Groups Special cases For m = 1, G 1 = SU (2), there is a correspondence between R rotating the sphere and R acting as M¨ obius transform on the complex plane - stereographic projection. � a � . z = az + c b [ D ( R ) f ]( z ) = f ( R − 1 . z ) where c d bz + d For m = 0, G 0 = � E (2), the M¨ obius transforms become rotations/shifts on the plane. C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 42

  83. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Little Group Representations Stereographic projection: identification between z ∈ C and n ∈ S 2 given by � n 3 = d 2 − | z | 2 2 zd d 2 + | z | 2 , n 1 + i n 2 = d 2 + | z | 2 z C � n S 2 d R corresponding to the usual choice ( m ,� 0) can be obtained by conjugation with B m : � � 1 a − mc R m := B − 1 � m RB m = ∈ SU (2) | a | 2 + m 2 | c | 2 mc a Compatible with stereographic projection if md = 1: R m � n ( z ) = � n ( R . z ) C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 43

  84. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Little Group Representations Stereographic projection: identification between z ∈ C and n ∈ S 2 given by � n 3 = d 2 − | z | 2 2 zd d 2 + | z | 2 , n 1 + i n 2 = d 2 + | z | 2 z C � n S 2 d R corresponding to the usual choice ( m ,� 0) can be obtained by conjugation with B m : � � 1 a − mc R m := B − 1 � m RB m = ∈ SU (2) | a | 2 + m 2 | c | 2 mc a Compatible with stereographic projection if md = 1: R m � n ( z ) = � n ( R . z ) C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 43

  85. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Little Group Representations Representation spaces C 2 l +1 of SU (2) are spanned by spherical harmonics Y l n ( z )) = e i h arg z P l h ( � h ( n 3 ( z )) with � d � h 2 3 ) d (1 − n 2 P l + l ( l + 1) − h ( n 3 ) = 0. 1 − n 2 d n 3 d n 3 3 (Legendre polynomials) Stereographic projection transforms the equation into   � � 2   κ 2 | z | 2  | z | d  � 2 � 2 − h 2  P l + h ( n 3 ( | z | )) = 0 ,   � �  d | z | | z | 1 + d with κ 2 := 4 l ( l + 1) / d 2 . Solutions J h ( κ | z | ) in the limit d → ∞ , κ = const span representation spaces L 2 ( κ S 1 ) of � E (2): (Bessel functions) C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 44

  86. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Construction of Intertwiners Once m is chosen, one can construct the following parametrization of Γ q m : � | z | 2 � d 2 z ξ d : R 2 → Γ q , [ ξ d ( z )] � = d 2 + | z | 2 z 1 Crucial property: ξ d ( R . z ) = ξ d ( z )Λ( R ) Γ 0 H + H + ∂ V + 1 m Γ m q m q 1 ∂ V + Γ 1 ( m , 0) q 0 Parametrization can also be given in terms of the usual choice for m = 1: � = ( B − 1 m ) † ( 1 + � n ) B − 1 [ ξ ( z )] σ · � m Intuition: Lorentz-boosted “celestial sphere” C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 45

  87. Introduction Compact Localization No-Go Theorem Limit of Representations Summary & Outlook Construction of Intertwiners Once m is chosen, one can construct the following parametrization of Γ q m : � | z | 2 � d 2 z ξ d : R 2 → Γ q , [ ξ d ( z )] � = d 2 + | z | 2 z 1 Crucial property: ξ d ( R . z ) = ξ d ( z )Λ( R ) Γ 0 H + H + ∂ V + 1 m Γ m q m q 1 ∂ V + Γ 1 ( m , 0) q 0 Parametrization can also be given in terms of the usual choice for m = 1: � = ( B − 1 m ) † ( 1 + � n ) B − 1 [ ξ ( z )] σ · � m Intuition: Lorentz-boosted “celestial sphere” C. K¨ ohler Localization of QFTs with Infinite Spin 2015-05-29 LQP36 45

Download Presentation
Download Policy: The content available on the website is offered to you 'AS IS' for your personal information and use only. It cannot be commercialized, licensed, or distributed on other websites without prior consent from the author. To download a presentation, simply click this link. If you encounter any difficulties during the download process, it's possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

Recommend

Simulating quantum and classical field theories on a quantum computer Stephen Jordan With: John

Simulating quantum and classical field theories on a quantum computer Stephen Jordan With: John

Simulating quantum and classical field theories on a quantum computer Stephen Jordan With: John Preskill, Keith Lee, Ali Moosavian Pedro Costa, Aaron Ostrander Field Theory Classical Quantum Value at each point in space Qubit(s) at

447 views • 34 slides
Simulating Quantum Field Theories on a Quantum Computer Stephen Jordan C a n q u a n t u m c o m

Simulating Quantum Field Theories on a Quantum Computer Stephen Jordan C a n q u a n t u m c o m

Simulating Quantum Field Theories on a Quantum Computer Stephen Jordan C a n q u a n t u m c o m p u t e r s s i m u l a t e a l l p h y s i c a l processes efficiently? Universality Conjecture: Quantum circuits can simulate all physical

334 views • 30 slides
Quantum Algorithms for Quantum Field Theories Stephen Jordan Joint work with Keith Lee John

Quantum Algorithms for Quantum Field Theories Stephen Jordan Joint work with Keith Lee John

Quantum Algorithms for Quantum Field Theories Stephen Jordan Joint work with Keith Lee John Preskill [arXiv:1111.3633 and 1112.4833] Feb 21, 2012 Quantum Mechanics Each state of the system is a basis vector. | dead i | alive i A general

672 views • 36 slides
Intertheoretic Implications of Intertheoretic Implications of Non-Relativistic Quantum Field

Intertheoretic Implications of Intertheoretic Implications of Non-Relativistic Quantum Field

Intertheoretic Implications of Intertheoretic Implications of Non-Relativistic Quantum Field Theories Non-Relativistic Quantum Field Theories Jonathan Bain Dept. of Humanities and Social Sciences Polytechnic Institute of NYU Brooklyn, New

330 views • 30 slides
Accessing localization properties of many - body systems with quantum Monte Carlo Fabien Alet

Accessing localization properties of many - body systems with quantum Monte Carlo Fabien Alet

Accessing localization properties of many - body systems with quantum Monte Carlo Fabien Alet Laboratoire de Physique Thorique Toulouse In collaboration with : David Luitz, Nicolas Laflorencie Ref. : arXiv:1308.1916 Statistical physics of

1.02k views • 34 slides
A Beginners Guide to Resurgence and Trans-series in Quantum Theories Gerald Dunne University

A Beginners Guide to Resurgence and Trans-series in Quantum Theories Gerald Dunne University

A Beginners Guide to Resurgence and Trans-series in Quantum Theories Gerald Dunne University of Connecticut Recent Developments in Semiclassical Probes of Quantum Field Theories UMass Amherst ACFI, March 17-19, 2016 GD &amp; Mithat nsal,

1.11k views • 100 slides
Constructing Quantum Field Theories Non-perturbatively with Hamiltonian Methods Slava Rychkov

Constructing Quantum Field Theories Non-perturbatively with Hamiltonian Methods Slava Rychkov

Constructing Quantum Field Theories Non-perturbatively with Hamiltonian Methods Slava Rychkov CERN &amp; ENS Paris Rome, Accademia dei Lincei, Sep 22, 2017 Strongly coupled QFT Algorithmic point of view (we understand something when we

491 views • 35 slides
Operator Algebras and Construction of Quantum Field Theories Detlev Buchholz Colloquium

Operator Algebras and Construction of Quantum Field Theories Detlev Buchholz Colloquium

Operator Algebras and Construction of Quantum Field Theories Detlev Buchholz Colloquium LeviCivita Center for Mathematics and Theoretical Physics Rome 15.10.2010 1 / 23 2 / 23 Outline Mathematical approaches to QFT Algebraic formulation

407 views • 23 slides
Gauge Theories from the 11th Dimension Neil Lambert Birmingham 21 November 2018 Plan of Attack

Gauge Theories from the 11th Dimension Neil Lambert Birmingham 21 November 2018 Plan of Attack

Gauge Theories from the 11th Dimension Neil Lambert Birmingham 21 November 2018 Plan of Attack Symmetry and Quantum Field theory Supersymmetry String Theory and Quantum Field theory M-theory Back to Quantum Field theory

453 views • 32 slides
TT-deformed classical and quantum field theories Trieste, October 2018 Tateo Roberto Based

TT-deformed classical and quantum field theories Trieste, October 2018 Tateo Roberto Based

TT-deformed classical and quantum field theories Trieste, October 2018 Tateo Roberto Based on: M. Caselle, D. Fioravanti, F. Gliozzi, RT, JHEP 1307 (2013) 071 A. Cavagli, S. Negro, I. Szcsnyi, RT, JHEP 1610 (2016) 112 R. Conti, L.

271 views • 25 slides
Quantum resource theories of quantum channels Xin Wang Baidu Research TQC 2020 Based on

Quantum resource theories of quantum channels Xin Wang Baidu Research TQC 2020 Based on

Quantum resource theories of quantum channels Xin Wang Baidu Research TQC 2020 Based on arXiv:1807.05354,1809.09592, 1903.04483, 1907.06306 l Brief intro of quantum resource theories Overview l From states to channels l What is the power/cost

767 views • 37 slides
Formal Homotopy Quantum Field Theories and 2-groups. Timothy Porter ex-University of Wales,

Formal Homotopy Quantum Field Theories and 2-groups. Timothy Porter ex-University of Wales,

Crossed Modules, etc TQFTs (over C ) HQFTs Classification results Formal C -maps and formal HQFTs Crossed C -algebras Formal Homotopy Quantum Field Theories and 2-groups. Timothy Porter ex-University of Wales, Bangor; ex-Univertiy of Ottawa;

432 views • 24 slides
Exotic Branes and Exotic Branes and Superconformal Field Theories Superconformal Field Theories

Exotic Branes and Exotic Branes and Superconformal Field Theories Superconformal Field Theories

Exceptional Groups as Symmetries of Nature 17 @ KEK July 18, 2017 Exotic Branes and Exotic Branes and Superconformal Field Theories Superconformal Field Theories Tetsuji KIMURA Tokyo Institute of Technology Contents 1. Exotic branes

761 views • 72 slides
Deformations of Operator Algebras and the Construction of Quantum Field Theories Gandalf Lechner

Deformations of Operator Algebras and the Construction of Quantum Field Theories Gandalf Lechner

Deformations of Operator Algebras and the Construction of Quantum Field Theories Gandalf Lechner Department of Physics, University of Vienna AQFT The first 50 years, Uni G ottingen Gandalf Lechner (Uni Vienna) Deformations AQFT 50th

399 views • 21 slides
Renormalizable Tensorial Field Theories as Models of Quantum Geometry Sylvain Carrozza University

Renormalizable Tensorial Field Theories as Models of Quantum Geometry Sylvain Carrozza University

Renormalizable Tensorial Field Theories as Models of Quantum Geometry Sylvain Carrozza University of Bordeaux, LaBRI Universit at Potsdam, 8/02/2016 Paths to, from and in renormalization Sylvain Carrozza (Uni. Bordeaux) Renormalizable

641 views • 45 slides
Many - body localization edge in the random - field Heisenberg chain Fabien Alet Laboratoire de

Many - body localization edge in the random - field Heisenberg chain Fabien Alet Laboratoire de

Many - body localization edge in the random - field Heisenberg chain Fabien Alet Laboratoire de Physique Thorique Toulouse In collaboration with : David Luitz, Nicolas Laflorencie Ref. : Phys. Rev. B 91 , 081103 ( 2015 ) W orkshop Quantum

556 views • 26 slides
Matter wave vortices: the quantum Spirograph Ricardo Carretero, and Rafael Navarro, P .G.

Matter wave vortices: the quantum Spirograph Ricardo Carretero, and Rafael Navarro, P .G.

Matter wave vortices: the quantum Spirograph Ricardo Carretero, and Rafael Navarro, P .G. Kevrekidis, D. Frantzeskakis, P . Torres, and D.S. Hall Nonlinear Dynamical Systems Group http://nlds.sdsu.edu/ Computational Science Research Center

1.52k views • 112 slides
Database Management Objectives of Lecture 10 Systems Spatial Data Management Spatial Data

Database Management Objectives of Lecture 10 Systems Spatial Data Management Spatial Data

Database Management Objectives of Lecture 10 Systems Spatial Data Management Spatial Data Management Discuss limitations of the relational data model and briefly introduce the Extended- Winter 2004 Relational Model. CMPUT 391: Spatial

552 views • 12 slides
On Direct and Adjoint Lattice Boltzmann Equations Fran cois Dubois Numerical Analysis and

On Direct and Adjoint Lattice Boltzmann Equations Fran cois Dubois Numerical Analysis and

ICMMES Conference, Hong Kong, July 25-29, 2005 On Direct and Adjoint Lattice Boltzmann Equations Fran cois Dubois Numerical Analysis and Partial Differential Equations Department of Mathematics, Universit e Paris Sud conjoint work with

653 views • 44 slides
Introduction to ARM(7) ARM Limited, founded 1990 Acorn Computers Ltd. (Started in 1983)

Introduction to ARM(7) ARM Limited, founded 1990 Acorn Computers Ltd. (Started in 1983)

Introduction to ARM(7) ARM Limited, founded 1990 Acorn Computers Ltd. (Started in 1983) Apple Computer 32-bit RISC 75% of embedded 32-bit RISC CPUs Mobile phones, Calculators, iPod, DS, GBA, ... &quot; ARM720T (ARM7TDMI) 60

591 views • 28 slides
Its a Mathematical World Cristian Rios University of Calgary PIMS Lunchbox Lecture Series

Its a Mathematical World Cristian Rios University of Calgary PIMS Lunchbox Lecture Series

That sounds like math Math and Science Mathematics as the universe Its a Mathematical World Cristian Rios University of Calgary PIMS Lunchbox Lecture Series April 16 2015 Cristian Rios Mathematics 1 / 38 That sounds like math Math and

609 views • 37 slides
5/11/2013 Results- Microbiology Results- Outcomes One Stage Exchange Cohort N=28 54% 46%

5/11/2013 Results- Microbiology Results- Outcomes One Stage Exchange Cohort N=28 54% 46%

5/11/2013 Financial Disclosure Research support Consultant NIH Stryker Orthopaedics OREF Zimmer DOD Biomet Aircast Smith and Nephew AOA Convatech MTF Covidien

363 views • 7 slides
LINER HANGER SYSTEMS Customized system designed to meet the specific customer requirements. 14

LINER HANGER SYSTEMS Customized system designed to meet the specific customer requirements. 14

CONFIDENTIAL LINER HANGER SYSTEMS Customized system designed to meet the specific customer requirements. 14 x 18 5/8 System Liner Hanger Packer Integral System. One trip system. Mechanical set, as per original customer requirements.

205 views • 5 slides
Prr t rt

Prr t rt

Prr t rt s t rts r sttt

447 views • 26 slides

More recommend