text:
# Some two-step and three-step nilpotent Lie groups with small automorphism groups

## 1 Lie algebras and Lie groups

We recall that a Lie algebra $`𝒢`$ is said to be nilpotent if the central series $`\{𝒢_i\}`$ defined by $`𝒢_0=𝒢`$ and $`𝒢_{i+1}=[𝒢,𝒢_i]`$ for all $`i0`$, terminates, namely there exists $`k1`$ such that $`𝒢_k=0`$; if $`k`$ is the smallest integer for which this holds then $`𝒢`$ is said to be $`k`$-step nilpotent. We say that a connected Lie group $`G`$ is a $`k`$-step nilpotent Lie group if the Lie algebra of $`G`$ is a $`k`$-step nilpotent Lie algebra.

For a Lie group $`G`$ we shall denote by Aut$`(G)`$ the group of all continuous automorphisms of $`G`$, and similarly for a Lie algebra $`𝒢`$ we denote by Aut$`(𝒢)`$ the group of all Lie automorphisms of $`𝒢`$.

Let $`G`$ be a connected nilpotent Lie group. Let $`G^{(1)}=\overline{[G,G]}`$ and $`Z(G)`$ denote the center of $`G`$. Suppose that $`Z(G)`$ is contained in $`G^{(1)}`$; this condition holds for the nilpotent groups discussed in the following sections. Then for any (continuous) homomorphism $`\psi :G/G^{(1)}Z(G)`$ the map $`\tau :GG`$ defined by $`\tau (g)=g\psi (gG^{(1)})`$ for all $`gG`$ is an automorphism of $`G`$; we shall call an automorphism arising in this way a shear automorphism. The class of shear automorphisms forms a normal subgroup of Aut$`(G)`$. Every automorphism $`\tau `$ of $`G`$ factors to an automorphism of $`G/G^{(1)}`$; we denote the factor of $`\tau `$ on $`G/G^{(1)}`$ by $`\overline{\tau }`$. Clearly $`\tau \overline{\tau }`$ is a homomorphism of Aut$`(G)`$ into Aut$`(G/G^{(1)})`$. We denote by $`𝒜(G)`$ the image of the homomorphism, namely,

$$𝒜(G)=\{\overline{\tau }\text{Aut}(G/G^{(1)})\tau \text{Aut}(G)\}.$$

We note that for all shear automorphisms as well as all inner automorphisms of $`G`$ the factor on $`G/G^{(1)}`$ is trivial.

Suppose now that $`G`$ is a simply connected nilpotent Lie group and let $`𝒢`$ be the Lie algebra of $`G`$. Then $`G^{(1)}=[G,G]`$, namely $`[G,G]`$ is closed, and $`G/[G,G]`$ and $`[G,G]`$ are (topologically isomorphic to) vector spaces; they may be identified canonically with $`𝒢/[𝒢,𝒢]`$ and $`[𝒢,𝒢]`$ respectively. Also in this case Aut$`(G)`$ can be realised as Aut$`(𝒢)`$ identifying each automorphism with its derivative on $`𝒢`$. We note also the following:

###### Lemma 1.1.

Let $`G`$ be a simply connected nilpotent Lie group and $`𝒢`$ be the Lie algebra of $`G`$. Let $`\tau \text{Aut}(𝒢)`$ and suppose that $`\overline{\tau }`$ is unipotent (as an element of $`GL(𝒢/[𝒢,𝒢])`$). Then $`\tau `$ is unipotent (as an element of $`GL(𝒢)`$).

Proof: It can be seen that the largest $`\tau `$-invariant subspace, say $`𝒢_0`$, of $`𝒢`$ on which the restriction of $`\tau `$ is unipotent (namely the generalized eigenspace for 1 as the eigenvalue) is a Lie subalgebra of $`𝒢`$. Since $`\overline{\tau }`$ is unipotent $`𝒢_0+[𝒢,𝒢]=𝒢`$. Substituting from the equation for $`𝒢`$ on the left hand side successively and using that $`𝒢`$ is nilpotent we deduce that $`𝒢_0=𝒢`$. Therefore $`\tau `$ is unipotent.

Now let $`V`$ be a (finite dimensional) vector space and let $`W`$ be a subspace of $`^2V`$, the second exterior power of $`V`$. We can associate to these canonically a 2-step nilpotent Lie group as follows. Let $`V^{}=(^2V)/W`$ and $`𝒢=VV^{}`$. We set $`[v_1,v_2]=v_1v_2\text{mod}W`$ for all $`v_1,v_2V`$, and $`[x,y]=0`$ for all $`x𝒢`$ and $`yV^{}`$. These relations extend uniquely to a Lie bracket operation on $`𝒢`$. Furthermore $`𝒢`$ is a 2-step nilpotent Lie algebra, with $`𝒢/[𝒢,𝒢]=V`$. Conversely every 2-step nilpotent Lie algebra $`𝒢`$ can be realised as a Lie algebra associated to a datum as above, with $`V=𝒢/[𝒢,𝒢]`$, and $`W`$ a suitable subspace of $`^2V`$.

Let $`G`$ be the simply connected Lie group corresponding to the Lie algebra $`𝒢`$ associated to a pair $`V,W`$ as above. Then $`G/[G,G]`$ may be realised canonically as $`V`$; this identifies the subgroup $`𝒜(G)`$ with a subgroup of $`GL(V)`$. It is easy to see that $`xGL(V)`$ is of the form $`\overline{\tau }`$ for some $`\tau \text{Aut}(G)`$ if and only if the subspace $`W`$ of $`^2V`$ is invariant under the action induced by $`x`$ on $`^2V`$. It follows in particular that $`𝒜(G)`$ is an algebraic subgroup of $`GL(V)`$.

We note also the following:

###### Proposition 1.2.

Let $`G`$ be a simply connected nilpotent Lie group. Then every orbit of Aut$`(G)`$ on $`G`$ is open in its closure. In particular every dense orbit is open. Consequently, if the $`𝒜(G)`$-action on $`V`$ has no open orbit then the Aut$`(G)`$-action on $`G`$ has no dense orbit.

Proof: Let $`𝒢`$ be the Lie algebra of $`G`$. Then Aut$`(𝒢)`$ is an algebraic subgroup of $`GL(𝒢)`$ and this implies that the orbits of its action on $`𝒢`$ are open in their closures (see ). Since $`G`$ is simply connected and nilpotent the exponential map is a diffeomorphism of $`𝒢`$ to $`G`$ and it is equivariant under the actions of the respective automorphism groups. Therefore for the action of Aut$`(G)`$ on $`G`$ also every orbit is open in its closure. The second assertion is immediate from the first. The last assertion follows from the fact that the $`𝒜(G)`$-action on $`V`$ is a factor of the Aut$`(G)`$-action on $`G`$.

## 2 A representation

In this section we describe a construction of a representation and prove some properties. The results will be used in the later sections to give examples of nilpotent Lie algebras.

Let $`𝒮`$ be the vector space of $`3\times 3`$ symmetric matrices with real entries. For each $`k,l=1,2,3`$ we denote by $`E_{kl}`$ the $`3\times 3`$ matrix in which the $`(k,l)`$-entry (in the $`k`$th row and $`l`$th column) is $`1`$ and all other entries are $`0`$. Let $`V`$ be the subspace of $`𝒮`$ defined by

$$V=\{\mathrm{\Sigma }\sigma _{kl}E_{kl}𝒮\sigma _{22}=\sigma _{13}+\sigma _{31}=2\sigma _{13}\}.$$

Let $`\sigma _1,\mathrm{},\sigma _5`$ be the elements defined as follows, forming a basis of $`V`$:

$$\sigma _1=2E_{11},\sigma _2=E_{12}+E_{21},\sigma _3=E_{13}+2E_{22}+E_{31},\sigma _4=E_{23}+E_{32},\text{ and }\sigma _5=2E_{33}.$$

Let $`W`$ be the subspace of $`^2V`$ spanned by the three elements $`\sigma _1\sigma _4\sigma _2\sigma _3`$, $`\sigma _1\sigma _5\sigma _2\sigma _4`$ and $`\sigma _2\sigma _5\sigma _3\sigma _4`$.

Let $`\delta `$, $`\nu ^+`$ and $`\nu ^{}`$ be the matrices defined by

$$\delta =\left(\begin{array}{ccc}2& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& 2\end{array}\right),\nu ^+=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0& 1& 0\\ 0& 0& 1\\ 0& 0& 0\end{array}\right),\text{ and }\nu ^{}=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0& 0& 0\\ 1& 0& 0\\ 0& 1& 0\end{array}\right).$$

The space spanned by the three matrices is a Lie subalgebra of the Lie algebra of $`3\times 3`$ matrices of trace $`0`$, namely the Lie algebra of $`SL(3,IR)`$. We denote the Lie subalgebra by $``$. We note that it is isomorphic to the Lie algebra of $`SL(2,IR)`$, with $`\delta `$, $`\nu ^+`$ and $`\nu ^{}`$ corresponding to the standard basis of the latter; in particular the subspace spanned by $`\delta `$ is a Cartan subalgebra. Let $`H`$ be the connected Lie subgroup of $`SL(3,IR)`$ corresponding to $``$. Consider the action of $`H`$ on $`IR^3`$ given by restriction of the natural action of $`SL(3,IR)`$ on $`IR^3`$. We see that there is no proper nonzero subspace on $`IR^3`$ invariant under both $`\mathrm{exp}\nu ^+`$ and $`\mathrm{exp}\nu ^{}`$. It follows therefore that the action of $`H`$ on $`IR^3`$ is irreducible. Since $`H`$ contains an element, viz $`\mathrm{exp}\delta `$, with distinct eigenvalues this implies that every element of the center of $`H`$ acts by scalar multiplication by real numbers, and considering the determinant we see that it must be trivial. Thus $`H`$ has trivial center. This shows that $`H`$ is Lie isomorphic to $`PSL(2,IR)`$, the adjoint group of $`SL(2,IR)`$.

Consider the action of $`SL(3,IR)`$ on $`𝒮`$ given by $`(x,\sigma )x\sigma x^𝗍`$ for all $`xSL(3,IR)`$ and $`\sigma 𝒮`$, where $`x^𝗍`$ denotes the transpose of $`x`$. It is straightforward to verify that the subspace $`V`$ is invariant under the action of $`H`$ (obtained by restriction); it suffices to verify that $`V`$ is invariant under the corresponding action of the Lie algebra, given by $`(\xi ,\sigma )\xi \sigma +\sigma \xi ^𝗍`$, for all $`\xi `$ and $`\sigma \mathrm{\Sigma }`$, and furthermore it is enough to consider $`\xi =\delta ,\nu ^+`$ and $`\nu ^{}`$. The elements $`\sigma _1,\mathrm{},\sigma _5`$ are weight vectors with respect to $`\delta `$ with weights $`4,2,0,2`$ and $`4`$ respectively, and the latter being distinct shows that the representation of $`H`$ over $`V`$ is irreducible.

We shall realize $`H`$ as a subgroup of $`GL(V)`$ by identifying each $`h`$ in $`H`$ with its action on $`V`$ (this is indeed an injective correspondence). We denote by $`D`$ the one-parameter subgroup of $`GL(V)`$ corresponding to the one-parameter subgroup $`\{\mathrm{exp}t\delta tIR\}`$. We note that for any nontrivial element of $`D`$, $`\sigma _1,\mathrm{},\sigma _5`$ are eigenvectors with distinct eigenvalues, and hence the centralise of $`D`$ in $`GL(V)`$ consists of diagonal matrices with respect to the basis $`\sigma _1,\mathrm{},\sigma _5`$.

Let $`𝒜`$ be the subgroup of consisting of all $`x`$ in $`GL(V)`$ such that $`W`$ is invariant under the action induced by $`x`$ on $`^2V`$. A straightforward computation shows that $`H`$ (viewed as a subgroup of $`GL(V)`$) is contained in $`𝒜`$. We note that $`𝒜`$ is an algebraic subgroup of $`GL(V)`$. Let $`𝒜_u`$ be the unipotent radical of $`𝒜`$, namely the largest normal subgroup consisting of unipotent elements. Then the set of common fixed points of the action of $`𝒜_u`$ on $`V`$ is a nonzero subspace invariant under $`H`$, and since the $`H`$-action on $`V`$ is irreducible it follows that $`𝒜_u`$ fixes all points of $`V`$, which means that $`𝒜_u`$ is trivial. Therefore $`𝒜`$ is reductive.

###### Theorem 2.1.

$`𝒜=ZH`$, where $`Z`$ is the subgroup of $`GL(V)`$ consisting of scalar multiplications by real numbers. The $`𝒜`$-action on $`V`$ has no open orbit.

Proof: Let $`𝒜^0`$ be the connected component of the identity in $`𝒜`$ and let $`S=[𝒜^0,𝒜^0]`$, the commutator subgroup. As $`𝒜^0`$ is reductive it follows that $`S`$ is a semisimple subgroup of $`GL(V)`$; (see , ). Since $`H`$ is a simple Lie subgroup of $`𝒜^0`$ it follows that it is contained in $`S`$. We shall show that $`S=H`$. Firstly let $`C`$ be the maximal compact connected normal subgroup of $`S`$. Since $`S`$ is semisimple, there exists a closed connected normal subgroup $`S^{}`$ such that $`S=S^{}C`$ and $`S^{}C`$ is a finite subgroup contained in the center of $`S`$; both $`S^{}`$ and $`C`$ being connected subgroups this implies in particular that every element of $`S^{}`$ commutes with every element of $`C`$. Since $`H`$ is a noncompact connected simple Lie group it has no nontrivial homomorphism into a compact Lie group. Applying this to the quotient homomorphism of $`S`$ onto $`S/S^{}=C/(CS^{})`$ we conclude that $`H`$ is contained in $`S^{}`$. Therefore $`C`$ is contained in the centralizer of $`D`$. Since the centralizer is diagonalizable and $`C`$ is a compact connected subgroup it follows that $`C`$ is trivial. Thus $`S`$ has no compact normal subgroups of positive dimension.

Now recall that the subspace $`W`$ of $`^2V`$ is invariant under the action of $`𝒜`$ and in particular that of $`S`$, and let $`\phi :SGL(W)`$ be the representation of $`S`$ induced by the action. Let $`K`$ be the connected component of the identity in the kernel of $`\phi `$. Then $`K`$ is a connected normal subgroup of $`S`$. Let $`A`$ be a maximal subgroup of $`S`$ such that $`D`$ is contained in it and its adjoint action on the Lie algebra of $`S`$ is diagonalisable over $`IR`$. Then $`A`$ intersects (by Aswan decomposition) any noncompact connected normal subgroup nontrivially, and since $`S`$ has no compact normal subgroups it follows that $`AK`$ is nontrivial, unless $`K`$ is trivial. Let $`\alpha AK`$. Then $`\alpha `$ commutes with all elements of $`D`$, and hence $`\sigma _1,\mathrm{},\sigma _5`$ are eigenvectors of $`\alpha `$; let $`\lambda _1,\mathrm{},\lambda _5`$ be the corresponding eigenvalues. Since $`\alpha K`$ the action induced by $`\alpha `$ on $`W`$ is trivial. This means that the vectors $`\sigma _1\sigma _4\sigma _2\sigma _3`$, $`\sigma _1\sigma _5\sigma _2\sigma _4`$ and $`\sigma _2\sigma _5\sigma _3\sigma _4`$ are all fixed under the action of $`\alpha `$. Each $`\sigma _i\sigma _j`$ is an eigenvector of the action of $`\alpha `$ on $`^2V`$ and hence the three vectors as above being fixed implies that the vectors $`\sigma _1\sigma _4`$, $`\sigma _1\sigma _5`$, $`\sigma _2\sigma _3`$, $`\sigma _2\sigma _4`$, $`\sigma _2\sigma _5`$ and $`\sigma _3\sigma _4`$ are fixed individually. Therefore for the eigenvalues we get the relations $`\lambda _1\lambda _4=\lambda _1\lambda _5=\lambda _2\lambda _3=\lambda _2\lambda _4=\lambda _2\lambda _5=\lambda _3\lambda _4=1`$, which is possible only if $`\lambda _i=1`$ for all $`i=1,\mathrm{},5`$. Since $`\alpha `$ is diagonalizable this shows that $`\alpha `$ is the identity. Thus $`AK`$ is trivial and hence, as noted above, $`K`$ is trivial. Therefore the kernel of $`\phi `$ is discrete.

Clearly $`\phi (S)`$ is a connected semisimple Lie subgroup of $`GL(W)`$ containing $`\phi (H)`$. Since $`W`$ is 3-dimensional this implies that $`\phi (S)`$ is either $`\phi (H)`$ or $`SL(W)`$; (inspection of the weights for the action of $`\phi (D)`$ on the Lie algebra of $`SL(W)`$, via the adjoint representation of $`SL(W)`$, shows that the $`\phi (H)`$-action has only two irreducible components, one of them being the Lie subalgebra of $`\phi (H)`$ itself; this means that there is not even a subspace invariant under the $`\phi (H)`$-action lying strictly between the Lie algebras of $`\phi (H)`$ and $`SL(W)`$, which in particular implies the assertion here; the assertion can also be proved in other ways). Since $`\phi `$ has discrete kernel this shows that the Lie algebra of $`S`$ is isomorphic to that of either $`H`$ or $`SL(3,IR)`$. We note that the Lie algebra of $`SL(3,IR)`$ has no irreducible 5-dimensional representation; this can be deduced from the corresponding statement over the field of complex numbers, the latter being easy to see from the classification theory of representations of semisimple Lie algebras; see . Recall that the $`H`$-action on $`V`$ is irreducible. Since $`S`$ contains $`H`$, its action on $`V`$ is irreducible, and since $`V`$ is 5-dimensional the preceding observation implies that the Lie algebra of $`S`$ can not be isomorphic to that of $`SL(3,IR)`$. Therefore from the alternatives above we now get that $`S`$ is locally isomorphic to $`H`$. Since $`S`$ is connected and $`H`$ is a subgroup of $`S`$ this implies that $`S=H`$.

Since $`H=S=[𝒜^0,𝒜^0]`$, in particular $`H`$ is normal in $`𝒜`$. Now let $`\alpha 𝒜`$ be arbitrary and consider the automorphism of $`H`$ induced by the conjugation action of $`\alpha `$. Since $`H`$ is Lie isomorphic to $`PSL(2,IR)`$ every automorphism of $`H`$ is inner. Hence there exists $`h_0H`$ such that $`\alpha h\alpha ^1=h_0hh_0^1`$ for all $`hH`$. Then $`h_0^1\alpha `$ commutes with every element of $`H`$ and particular with all elements of $`D`$. Therefore $`h_0^1\alpha `$ is diagonalisable and in particular all its eigenvalues are real. Since the action of $`H`$ on $`V`$ is irreducible it now follows that $`h_0^1\alpha `$ acts by scalar multiplication by a (nonzero) real number. Thus $`h_0^1\alpha Z`$ in the notation as in the hypothesis. Then $`\alpha HZ=ZH`$, and since $`\alpha 𝒜`$ was arbitrary we get that $`𝒜`$ is contained in $`ZH`$. On the other hand $`H`$ and $`Z`$ are contained in $`𝒜`$ and therefore we have $`𝒜=ZH`$. This proves the first assertion in the theorem. The second assertion follows from the fact that $`ZH`$ is 4-dimensional while $`V`$ is 5-dimensional.

We note also the following simple fact about representations of $`PSL(2,IR)`$:

###### Lemma 2.2.

Let $`\rho :PSL(2,IR)GL(Q)`$ be a representation of $`PSL(2,IR)`$ over a $`IR`$-vector space $`Q`$ of dimension $`n5`$, such that no nonzero point of $`Q`$ is fixed by the image of $`\rho `$. Let $`E`$ be the set of points $`p`$ in $`Q`$ such that $`p`$ is an eigenvector of $`\rho (g)`$ for some nontrivial $`gPSL(2,IR)`$. Then $`E`$ is a union of countably many smooth submanifolds of dimension at most $`(n+4)/2`$. In particular if $`L`$ is a subspace of $`Q`$ of dimension $`m>(n+4)/2`$ and $`\lambda `$ is the Lebesgue measure on $`L`$ then $`\lambda (EL)=0`$.

Proof: We realize $`PSL(2,IR)`$ as the group $`H`$ as above (this is just for notational convenience). For each $`tIR`$ let $`d_t=\mathrm{exp}t\delta `$ and $`u_t=\mathrm{exp}t\nu ^+`$, where $`\delta `$ and $`\nu ^+`$ are the matrices as defined earlier. Let $`\{k_t\}`$ be a periodic one-parameter subgroup of $`H`$, say with period $`2\pi `$. Then every element of $`H`$ is conjugate to one of $`d_t`$, $`u_t`$ or $`k_t`$ for some $`tIR`$. Let $`R`$ be the countable subset of $`H`$ consisting of $`d_1,u_1,k_1`$ and $`k_r`$ for all $`r`$ of the form $`2\pi /m`$ with $`m`$ a positive integer.

For any $`hH`$ let $`E(h)`$ denote the set of points in $`L`$ which are eigenvectors of $`\rho (h)`$. Then $`E(h)`$ is a union of finitely many vector subspaces of $`L`$; we shall denote by $`d(h)`$ the maximum of the dimension of the subspaces contained in $`E(h)`$. Now consider any nontrivial element $`h`$ in $`H`$. We can find a conjugate $`h^{}`$ of $`h`$ such that the subgroup generated by $`h`$ and $`h^{}`$ is dense in $`H=PSL(2,IR)`$. Then every point of $`E(h)E(h^{})`$ is an eigenvector of all elements of $`\rho (H)`$, and since the latter is a simple Lie group the points must be fixed by $`\rho (H)`$. The condition in the hypothesis therefore implies that $`E(h)E(h^{})=0`$. Since $`h`$ and $`h^{}`$ are conjugates $`d(h)=d(h^{})`$ and hence the preceding conclusion implies that $`d(h)n/2`$.

Now let $`pE`$ and $`hH`$ be such that $`p`$ is an eigenvector of $`\rho (h)`$. Suppose first that $`h`$ is of infinite order. There exists $`tIR`$ and $`gH`$ such that $`ghg^1`$ is one of $`d_t`$, $`u_t`$ or $`k_t`$. Then $`\rho (g)(p)`$ is an eigenvector of $`d_t`$, $`u_t`$ or $`k_t`$. This implies that it is an eigenvector of one of the elements $`d_1`$, $`u_1`$ or $`k_1`$ respectively; in respect of the last alternative note that since $`k_t`$ is of infinite order the closure of the cyclic subgroup generated by it contains $`k_1`$. Thus there exists $`xR`$ such that $`\rho (g)(p)E(x)`$, and so $`p\rho (H)E(x)`$. Now suppose that $`h`$ as above is of finite order. Then $`h`$ is conjugate to $`k_r`$ for some $`r`$ of the form $`2\pi /m`$ for a positive integer $`m`$. Therefore in this case also we get that $`\rho (g)(p)E(x)`$ for some $`xR`$. Thus $`E=_{xR}\rho (H)(E(x))`$. Each $`E(x)`$ is a finite union of vector subspaces which are invariant under a one-parameter subgroup of $`H`$ and have dimension at most $`n/2`$. It follows that each $`\rho (H)(E(x))`$ is a finite union smooth submanifolds of dimension at most $`(n/2)+2=(n+4)/2`$. This proves the Lemma.

In respect of the conclusion as in the lemma the situation in low dimensions is as follows. For dimensions 2 and 4 there are no representations of $`PSL(2,IR)`$ with no nonzero common fixed points. In dimension 3 the realization of $`H`$ (as above) as a subgroup of $`SL(3,IR)`$ is (up to equivalence) the only representation with no common fixed points. For this representation the set of points which are eigenvectors of nontrivial elements form a cone in $`IR^3`$ with nonempty interior.

## 3 A 2-step nilpotent Lie group

We now use Theorem 2.1 to give an example of a simply connected 2-step nilpotent Lie group $`G`$ such that the action of Aut$`(G)`$ on $`G`$ has no dense orbit.

Let $`V`$ and $`W^2V`$ be as in the preceding section and let $`𝒢`$ be the 2-step nilpotent Lie algebra associated with the pair $`V`$, $`W`$ as in $`\mathrm{\S }`$1; namely $`𝒢=VV^{}`$, where $`V^{}=(^2V)/W`$ and the Lie bracket operation is determined by the conditions $`[v_1,v_2]=(v_1v_2)`$ (mod $`W`$) for all $`v_1,v_2V`$, and $`[x,y]=0`$ for $`x𝒢`$ and $`yV^{}`$. Let $`G`$ be the simply connected nilpotent Lie group corresponding to $`𝒢`$. Then we have

###### Corollary 3.1.

The action of Aut$`(G)`$ on $`G`$ has no dense orbit.

Proof: For the Lie algebra $`𝒢`$ as above, corresponding to $`G`$, the subgroup $`𝒜(𝒢)`$ as defined in $`\mathrm{\S }`$1 is the same as the subgroup $`𝒜`$ as in Theorem 2.1. Since by Theorem 2.1 the action of $`𝒜`$ on $`V`$ has no open orbit, by Proposition 1.2 the Aut$`(G)`$-action on $`G`$ has no dense orbit.

Using Theorem 2.1 one can also describe Aut$`(G)`$ as follows. To each $`hH`$ corresponds a Lie automorphism of $`𝒢`$ such that the restrictions to $`V`$ and $`V^{}=(^2V)/W`$ are respectively given by the $`h`$-action on $`V`$ and the factor of the $`h`$-action on $`^2V`$. We denote by $`\stackrel{~}{H}`$ the group of automorphisms of $`G`$ for which the associated Lie automorphism corresponds to some $`hH`$ as above. Then $`\stackrel{~}{H}`$ is a Lie subgroup of Aut$`(G)`$, canonically Lie isomorphic $`H`$. Similarly each $`zZ`$ corresponds canonically to an automorphism of $`G`$, and we shall denote by $`\stackrel{~}{Z}`$ the subgroup of Aut$`(G)`$ corresponding to $`Z`$. Also let $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ be the group of shear automorphisms of $`G`$ (see $`\mathrm{\S }`$1).

###### Corollary 3.2.

Aut$`(G)=(\stackrel{~}{Z}\stackrel{~}{H})\mathrm{\Psi }`$, semidirect product (with $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ as the normal subgroup).

Proof: We note that $`(\stackrel{~}{Z}\stackrel{~}{H})\mathrm{\Psi }`$ is a subgroup of Aut$`(G)`$. Now consider the homomorphism $`\tau \overline{\tau }`$ of Aut$`(G)`$ into $`GL(V)`$. It is easy to see that its kernel is $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$, and its image is $`𝒜`$ which by Theorem 2.1 is $`ZH`$. As the subgroup $`(\stackrel{~}{Z}\stackrel{~}{H})\mathrm{\Psi }`$ of Aut$`(G)`$ contains $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$, and its image under the homomorphism as above is $`ZH`$, this shows that it must be the whole. Since the map $`\tau \overline{\tau }`$ is injective on $`\stackrel{~}{Z}\stackrel{~}{H}`$ it follows that $`(\stackrel{~}{Z}\stackrel{~}{H})\mathrm{\Psi }`$ is trivial. This proves the corollary.

###### Remark 3.3.

The action of $`H`$ on $`^2V`$ (notation as before) decomposes into two irreducible components, one being on the subspace $`W`$ as above and another on the subspace, say $`W^{}`$, spanned by the $`H`$-orbit of $`\sigma _1\sigma _2`$; this can be deduced by inspection of the set of weights. Let $`𝒢^{}`$ be the 2-step nilpotent Lie algebra associated to the pair $`V`$ and $`W^{}`$, as described in $`\mathrm{\S }`$1. Then with some modifications in the above argument it can be shown that Aut$`(G^{})`$ has no open orbit on $`G^{}`$; in this respect we note mainly that $`W`$ is also invariant, along with $`W^{}`$, under the action of $`𝒜(G^{})`$ on $`^2V`$. This yields an $`8`$-dimensional example (as against $`12`$ of $`𝒢`$) for which the automorphism group action has no dense orbit. The example as in Theorem 2.1 on the other hand admits a simpler presentation.

## 4 Lie groups with nilpotent automorphism groups

An example of a 6-step simply connected nilpotent Lie group such that Aut$`(G)`$ is nilpotent was given in . Earlier in  an example of a 3-step nilpotent Lie algebra $`𝒢`$ was constructed for which all derivations are nilpotent; the condition implies that Aut$`(𝒢)^0`$, the connected component of the identity in Aut$`(𝒢)`$, consists of unipotent elements (viewed as elements in $`GL(𝒢)`$), and hence is a nilpotent Lie group; Aut$`(𝒢)`$ itself is however not nilpotent for that example, as has been remarked in . In this section we shall describe a class of examples of simply connected 3-step nilpotent Lie groups, related to the results in the preceding sections, for which the all automorphisms are unipotent, and the automorphism groups are nilpotent. The following implication of this to orbits of the automorphism group action may be borne in mind.

###### Remark 4.1.

Let $`𝒢`$ be a nilpotent Lie algebra such that Aut$`(𝒢)^0`$ consists of unipotent elements. Then Aut$`(𝒢)^0`$ is a unipotent algebraic subgroup of $`GL(𝒢)`$ and hence all its orbits on $`𝒢`$ are closed (see ). Since Aut$`(𝒢)`$ is an algebraic group it has only finitely many connected components and hence we get furthermore that all orbits of Aut$`(𝒢)`$ on $`𝒢`$ are closed. As the Aut$`(G)`$-action on $`G`$ and the Aut$`(𝒢)`$-action on $`𝒢`$ are topologically equivalent (via the exponential map) it follows that all orbits of Aut$`(G)`$ on $`G`$ are closed. Thus in this case we have a situation stronger than the orbits not being dense, that was obtained in $`\mathrm{\S }`$3.

We note also the following, which shows that the 3-step condition in the above assertions is optimal.

###### Remark 4.2.

Let $`G`$ be a 2-step simply connected nilpotent Lie group. Then for the action of Aut$`(G)`$ on $`G`$ the closure of every orbit contains the identity element; in particular orbits other than that of the identity element are not closed; (in this case the automorphism group, or even its connected component of the identity, does not consist entirely of unipotent elements (viewed as automorphisms of the Lie algebra). The assertion is immediate from the fact that all scalar transformations of $`V=G/[G,G]`$ belong to $`𝒜(G)`$; this shows that the closure of every orbit of Aut$`(𝒢)`$ on $`𝒢`$, where $`𝒢`$ is the Lie algebra of $`G`$, contains the zero element of $`𝒢`$; this is equivalent to the statement as above.

We now proceed to describe the 3-step nilpotent Lie algebras. We shall follow the notation as in $`\mathrm{\S }`$2. For $`1i<j5`$ let $`p_{ij}=\sigma _i\sigma _j\text{mod}(W)`$. We note that $`p_{14}=p_{23}`$, $`p_{15}=p_{24}`$, and $`p_{25}=p_{34}`$, and that $`\{p_{12},p_{13},p_{14},p_{15},p_{25},p_{35},p_{45}\}`$ is a basis of $`V^{}`$. Let $`L`$ be the subspace of $`V^{}`$ spanned by $`\{p_{13},p_{14},p_{15},p_{25},p_{35},p_{45}\}`$. Then by Lemma 2.2 there exists (a nonzero element) $`pL`$ which is not an eigenvector of the action of any nontrivial element of $`H`$ (under the $`H`$-action on $`V^{}`$). Now we set $`𝒩=VV^{}`$ and we define a Lie bracket operation by the relations $`[\sigma _i,\sigma _j]=\sigma _i\sigma _j`$ (mod $`W`$) for all $`i,j=1,\mathrm{},5`$, $`[x,x^{}]=0`$ for all $`x,x^{}V^{}`$, $`[\sigma _1,p_{12}]=p`$, and $`[\sigma _k,p_{ij}]=0`$ if either $`k1`$ or $`(i,j)(1,2)`$; the product defined on the basis elements extends uniquely to a Lie bracket operation on $`𝒩`$ as above; we note in particular that by definition $`[\sigma _i,[\sigma _j,\sigma _k]]=0`$ if $`i,j`$ and $`k`$ are distinct indices, from which one can see that the Jacobi identity holds for the product. Furthermore, since $`p`$ is contained in the subspace $`L`$ as above it follows that $`p`$ is contained in the center of $`𝒩`$. Since $`p`$ spans $`[𝒩,[𝒩,𝒩]]`$ this shows that $`𝒩`$ is a 3-step nilpotent Lie algebra. Let $`N`$ be the simply connected (nilpotent) Lie group corresponding to $`𝒩`$. We prove the following:

###### Corollary 4.3.

The subgroup $`𝒜(N)`$ consists only of the identity element. In particular Aut$`(N)`$ consists of unipotent elements, when realised (canonically) as a subgroup of $`GL(𝒩)`$.

Proof: Let $`\tau \text{Aut}(𝒩)`$. Then $`\tau `$ factors to a linear transformation $`x=\overline{\tau }GL(V)`$. Since $`[\sigma _i,\sigma _j]=\sigma _i\sigma _j`$ (mod $`W`$) for all $`i,j=1,\mathrm{},5`$, it follows that the action of $`x`$ on $`^2V`$ leaves invariant the subspace $`W`$. Hence by Theorem 2.1 $`xZH`$. Let $`zZ`$ and $`hH`$ be such that $`x=zh`$. Since the subspace spanned by $`p`$ equals $`[𝒩,[𝒩,𝒩]]`$ it is invariant under all automorphisms of $`𝒩`$. Thus $`p`$ is an eigenvector of $`x`$ (for the action on $`V^{}`$). Since the elements of $`Z`$ act as scalars on $`V^{}`$, it follows that $`p`$ is an eigenvector of $`h`$. Since by choice $`p`$ is not an eigenvector of any nontrivial element of $`H`$, we get that $`h`$ is trivial. Thus $`\overline{\tau }=x=z`$, a scalar transformation, say multiplication by $`\lambda `$. Then the action of $`\tau `$ on $`V^{}`$ is given by multiplication by $`\lambda ^2`$. Since $`[\sigma _1,p_{12}]=p`$, we have $`\lambda ^2p=\tau (p)=\tau ([\sigma _1,p_{12}])=[\tau (\sigma _1),\tau (p_{12})]=\lambda ^3[\sigma _1,p_{12}]=\lambda ^3p`$. Since $`p`$ is a nonzero element this implies that $`\lambda =1`$. This means that $`z`$ is trivial, and therefore $`\overline{\tau }`$ is trivial. Thus $`\overline{\tau }`$ is trivial for all $`\tau \text{Aut}(𝒩)`$. This shows that $`𝒜(N)`$ is trivial. The second assertion follows from this, together with Lemma 1.1. Thus proves the corollary.

We deduce also the following, showing that under a slight further condition the automorphism group is ‘minimum possible’.

###### Corollary 4.4.

Let $`N`$ and $`𝒩`$ be as above. Suppose the point $`p`$ in the definition of the Lie algebra structure on $`𝒩`$ is not contained in the subspace spanned by $`\{p_{14},p_{15},p_{25},p_{35},p_{45}\}`$. Let $`N^{}`$ denote subgroup of Aut$`(N)`$ consisting of all inner automorphisms and $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ be the subgroup consisting of all shear automorphisms of $`N`$. Then Aut$`(N)=N^{}\mathrm{\Psi }`$.

Proof: We shall identify Aut$`(N)`$ with Aut$`(𝒩)`$ as before. As an algebraic subgroup consisting of unipotent elements Aut$`(𝒩)`$ is a connected Lie group. The Lie algebra $`𝒟`$ consisting of all derivations of $`𝒩`$ is the Lie algebra of Aut$`(𝒩)`$. The subgroups $`N^{}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ are normal Lie subgroups of Aut$`(𝒩)`$. Therefore to prove the corollary it suffices to show that the Lie subalgebras of $`𝒟`$ corresponding to $`N^{}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ span $`𝒟`$. The Lie subalgebra corresponding to $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ consists of all derivations $`\delta `$ such that $`\delta (𝒩)`$ is contained in $`L`$. We shall show that this Lie subalgebra and ad$`\sigma _1`$ and ad$`\sigma _2`$ together span $`𝒟`$ as a vector space. This would complete the proof.

Let $`\delta `$ be any derivation of $`𝒩`$. In view of Corollary 4.3 its factor on $`𝒩/[𝒩,𝒩]`$ is trivial, and hence $`\delta (𝒩)`$ is contained in $`V^{}`$. Hence there exist $`a_1,a_2IR`$ such that $`\delta (\sigma _i)a_ip_{12}+L`$, $`i=1,2`$. Then $`\delta ^{}=\delta a_2(\text{ad}\sigma _1)+a_1(\text{ad}\sigma _2)`$ is a derivation such that $`\delta ^{}(\sigma _1),\delta ^{}(\sigma _2)L`$. It suffices to show that $`\delta ^{}`$ belongs to the Lie subalgebra of $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$, namely that $`\delta ^{}(𝒩)`$ is contained in $`L`$. Changing notation we shall assume that $`\delta (\sigma _1),\delta (\sigma _2)L`$ and deduce that $`\delta (𝒩)L`$.

As $`\delta (𝒩)V^{}`$, for $`i,j2`$ we have $`\delta (p_{ij})=\delta ([\sigma _i,\sigma _j])=[\delta \sigma _i,\sigma _j]+[\sigma _i,\delta \sigma _j]=0`$. Since $`p_{14}=p_{23}`$ and $`p_{15}=p_{24}`$, it follows that $`\delta (p_{14})=\delta (p_{15})=0`$. We note that $`\delta (p_{12})=\delta ([\sigma _1,\sigma _2])=[\delta \sigma _1,\sigma _2]+[\sigma _1,\delta \sigma _2][𝒩,[𝒩,𝒩]]L`$. Therefore $`\delta (p)=\delta ([\sigma _1,p_{12}])=[\delta \sigma _1,p_{12}]+[\sigma _1,\delta p_{12}]=0`$. Let $`L^{}`$ be the subspace spanned by $`\{p_{14},p_{15},p_{25},p_{35},p_{45}\}`$. Then from what we have seen $`\delta (x)=0`$ for all $`xL^{}`$. By the assumption on $`p`$ there exists $`\lambda 0`$ such that $`p=\lambda p_{13}+x`$ for some $`xL^{}`$. As $`\delta (p)=0`$ and $`\delta (x)=0`$, this implies that $`\delta (p_{13})=0`$. Thus we have $`[\sigma _1,\delta (\sigma _j)]=\delta ([\sigma _1,\sigma _j])=\delta (p_{1j})=0`$ for $`j=3,4,5`$. This shows that $`\delta (\sigma _j)L`$ for $`j=3,4,5`$. Since by assumption $`\delta (\sigma _1),\delta (\sigma _2)L`$, we now have $`\delta (\sigma _i)L`$ for all $`i=1,\mathrm{},5`$. Therefore $`\delta (𝒩)`$ is contained in $`L`$. This completes the proof.

## 5 Non-simply connected Lie groups

In this section we shall discuss the analogous questions for Lie groups which are not necessarily simply connected. We begin with the following observation.

###### Proposition 5.1.

Let $`G`$ be a connected abelian Lie group. Then the action of Aut$`(G)`$ on $`G`$ has a dense orbit if and only if $`G`$ is not (topologically isomorphic to) the circle group.

Proof: It is well known that for $`m2`$ the $`m`$-dimensional torus admits automorphisms with dense orbits (see  for instance). Now let $`G=V\times C`$, where $`V`$ is a vector space of dimension $`n1`$, $`C`$ is the torus of dimension $`m0`$. Let $``$ be the set of all continuous homomorphisms of $`V`$ into $`C`$. For each $`\tau GL(V)`$ and $`\psi `$ we get a continuous automorphism of $`G`$ defined by $`(v,c)(\tau (v),c\psi (v))`$ for all $`vV`$ and $`cC`$. The automorphisms arising in this way form a subgroup of Aut$`(G)`$ (it is in fact the identity component of the latter). We recall that there exist homomorphisms $`\psi :VC`$ such that $`\psi (V)`$ is dense in $`C`$. Using this it is straightforward to verify that under the action of the group of automorphisms as above the orbit of any element of the form $`(v,c)`$ with $`v0`$ is dense in $`G`$. In particular the Aut$`(G)`$-action on $`G`$ has dense orbits. Finally, the circle group has only two automorphisms and hence in this case the Aut$`(G)`$-action has no dense orbit. This proves the proposition.

For Lie groups $`G`$ of the form $`IR^n\times TT^m`$ with $`m1`$ there exist abelian subgroups of Aut$`(G)`$, with finite rank, whose action on $`G`$ has dense orbits; see  for more precise results in this respect.

In the context of the results in the last section and Proposition 5.1 one may ask whether there exist connected 2-step nilpotent Lie groups $`G`$ such that all orbits of the Aut$`(G)`$-action on $`G`$ are closed. By Remark 4.2 such a group is necessarily non-simply connected. The following corollary shows that there are groups with this property among quotients of the group $`G`$ as in $`\mathrm{\S }`$3, by discrete central subgroups.

###### Corollary 5.2.

Let $`G`$ be the simply connected 2-step nilpotent Lie group as in Corollary 3.1. Then there exists a subset of $`E`$ of Lebesgue measure $`0`$ in $`[G,G]`$ such that if $`\theta [G,G]`$, $`\theta E`$ and $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ is the cyclic subgroup of $`G`$ generated by $`\theta `$, then for the Lie group $`G^{}=G/\mathrm{\Theta }`$ the following holds: for any automorphism $`\tau `$ of $`G^{}`$ the factor of $`\tau `$ on $`G^{}/[G^{},G^{}]`$ is $`\pm I`$, where $`I`$ is the identity transformation; furthermore, orbits of the action of Aut$`(G^{})`$ on $`G^{}`$ consist of either one or two cosets of $`[G^{},G^{}]`$ in $`G^{}`$.

Proof: Let $`\stackrel{~}{H}`$ be the group of automorphisms as in $`\mathrm{\S }`$3 and consider the $`\stackrel{~}{H}`$-action on $`[G,G]`$. Recall that the latter may be viewed as a vector space and that the action is irreducible; in particular there is no nonzero point fixed by the whole of $`\stackrel{~}{H}`$. Since $`\stackrel{~}{H}`$ is Lie isomorphic to $`PSL(2,IR)`$ and $`[G,G]`$ is 7-dimensional, by Lemma 2.2 there exists a subset $`E`$ of Lebesgue measure 0 such that points outside $`E`$ are not eigenvectors of any nontrivial element of $`\stackrel{~}{H}`$. Now let $`\theta [G,G]`$, $`\theta E`$ and $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ be the cyclic subgroup generated by $`\theta `$; since $`[G,G]`$ is central in $`G`$, $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ is a normal subgroup. Let $`G^{}=G/\mathrm{\Theta }`$. Since $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ is discrete, the automorphisms of $`G^{}`$ are precisely factors on $`G^{}`$ of automorphisms $`\tau `$ of $`G`$ such that $`\tau (\mathrm{\Theta })=\mathrm{\Theta }`$. We note that the shear automorphisms, namely those from $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ in the notation as in $`\mathrm{\S }`$3, satisfy the condition. Therefore by Corollary 3.2 Aut$`(G^{})`$ is the semidirect product of $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ with the subgroup $`\{\tau \stackrel{~}{Z}\stackrel{~}{H}\tau (\mathrm{\Theta })=\mathrm{\Theta }\}`$. Now let $`\tau =zh\stackrel{~}{Z}\stackrel{~}{H}`$, where $`z\stackrel{~}{Z}`$ and $`h\stackrel{~}{H}`$, be such that $`\tau (\mathrm{\Theta })=\mathrm{\Theta }`$. Since $`z`$ acts by scalar multiplication on $`[G,G]`$, this implies that $`\theta `$ is an eigenvector of $`h`$. Since $`\theta E`$ it follows that $`h`$ is the identity element. Hence $`\tau =z\stackrel{~}{Z}`$, and since $`\tau (\mathrm{\Theta })=\mathrm{\Theta }`$ it follows that the corresponding scalar transformation of $`V=G/[G,G]`$ is $`\pm I`$, where $`I`$ denotes the identity transformation. This implies the first assertion in the Corollary. The second one follows from this together with the fact that automorphisms from $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ factor to $`G^{}`$.

## 6 Anosov automorphisms

As mentioned in the introduction study of the automorphism group can be applied also to the general question of understanding the class of compact nilmanifolds supporting Anosov automorphisms; see , , . In this respect we note the following consequence of Theorem 2.1.

###### Corollary 6.1.

Let $`G`$ be the 2-step simply connected nilpotent Lie group as in Theorem 2.1 and $`V=G/[G,G]`$ (as before, realised as a vector space). If $`\tau \text{Aut}(G)`$ and the factor $`\overline{\tau }`$ on $`V`$ has determinant 1 then $`\overline{\tau }`$ has a nonzero fixed point on $`V`$. Consequently, if $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is a lattice (a discrete cocompact subgroup) in $`G`$ and $`\tau \text{Aut}(G)`$ is such that $`\tau (\mathrm{\Gamma })=\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ then the factor automorphism $`\pi (\tau ):G/\mathrm{\Gamma }G/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is not an Anosov automorphism, and furthermore it is not ergodic.

Proof: We follow the notation as before. By Theorem 2.1 $`\overline{\tau }ZH`$, and furthermore if its determinant is 1 then $`\overline{\tau }H`$. The first assertion therefore follows from the fact that for the $`H`$-action on $`V`$ every element of $`h`$ has a nonzero fixed point in $`V`$; for hyperbolic elements this follows from consideration of weights, for parabolic elements by unipotence, and for elliptic elements by odd-dimensionality of $`V`$ (analogous assertion holds for any irreducible representation of $`H`$ on an odd-dimensional vector space).

If $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is a lattice in $`G`$ then $`[G,G]\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is closed and $`[G,G]\mathrm{\Gamma }/[G,G]`$ is a lattice in $`V=G/[G,G]`$; see . Therefore for any $`\tau \text{Aut}(G)`$ such that $`\tau (\mathrm{\Gamma })=\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, $`\overline{\tau }`$ has determinant $`\pm 1`$. Hence by the first part $`\overline{\tau }^2`$ has nonzero fixed points in $`V`$. This implies that the factor of $`\tau `$ on $`G/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is not an Anosov automorphism, and also that it is not ergodic. This proves the Corollary.

Compact nilmanifolds covered by the 3-step simply connected nilpotent Lie group $`G`$ as in $`\mathrm{\S }`$4 also do not support Anosov automorphisms; this is immediate from the fact that there are no hyperbolic automorphisms, as $`[G,[G,G]]`$ is one-dimensional.

Acknowledgement: The author would like to thank Karel Dekimpe for useful comments on an earlier version of this manuscript.

Erwin Schrödinger Institute, Boltzmanngasse 9, A-1090 Vienna, Austria.

Permanent Address: School of Mathematics, Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, Homi Bhabha Road, Colaba, Mumbai 400 005, India

E-mail: dani@math.tifr.res.in


format: text

text:
# Is Cosmic Acceleration Really Recent?*footnote **footnote *To appear in proceedings of ”Cosmology and Elementary Particle Physics”, Coral Gables Conference, December 2001, B. N. Kursunoglu (Ed.), American Institute of Physics, NY (2002).

## I The Hubble plot of standard cosmology

In a standard pure matter or pure radiation Friedmann cosmology the attractive nature of gravity entails the existence of an initial big bang singularity followed by a subsequent decelerating expansion. Primary evidence in general favor of such a picture is obtained from observational study of three widely separated epochs, viz. early universe nucleosynthesis, the recombination era cosmic microwave background, and the current $`z1`$ era $`(d_L,z)`$ Hubble plot. While it had long been thought that a decelerating expansion was to occur in every epoch, data accumulated only recently  now reveal the presence of an unanticipated additional repulsive component to cosmological gravity, a component most commonly attributed to the presence of a non-vanishing cosmological constant $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, a component whose contribution to cosmic evolution is only found to start to become of consequence at around $`z=1`$ or so where its presence is then central to the elucidation of the $`z1`$ Hubble plot data.While the cosmic microwave background data  are certainly compatible with the presence of a non-vanishing $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, in and of themselves alone they can just as readily support a universe in which $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is absent. Specifically, through use of the standard Einstein-Friedmann cosmological evolution equation

$$\dot{R}^2(t)+kc^2=\dot{R}^2(t)(\mathrm{\Omega }_M(t)+\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }(t))$$
(1)
\[where $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M(t)=8\pi G\rho _M(t)/3c^2H^2(t)`$ is due to ordinary $`\rho _M(t)1/R^n(t)`$ matter and where $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }(t)=8\pi G\mathrm{\Lambda }/3cH^2(t)`$ is due to a cosmological constant $`c\mathrm{\Lambda }`$\] phenomenological data fitting has been found to yield current era values of $`0.3`$ for $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M(t_0)`$ and $`0.7`$ for $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }(t_0)`$, to thus entail that in the current era the deceleration parameter $`q_0=q(t_0)=(n/21)\mathrm{\Omega }_M(t_0)\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }(t_0)`$ has to take the negative value of $`1/2`$, with the current era universe thus not being a decelerating one after all.

While the identifying of such specific values for $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M(t_0)`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }(t_0)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_k(t_0)=kc^2/\dot{R}^2(t_0)=1\mathrm{\Omega }_M(t_0)\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }(t_0)`$ has enabled standard cosmology to ostensibly achieve its primary purpose, namely that of determining the matter, vacuum and curvature content of the universe, and while the obtained values even provide support for the flat $`\mathrm{\Omega }_k(t)=0`$ inflationary universe paradigm , the particular values obtained for these parameters are nonetheless extremely perplexing. Specifically, a priori estimates for $`c\mathrm{\Lambda }\sigma T_V^4`$ would suggest for $`T_V`$ a value of either a typical particle physics temperature scale of order $`10^{16}`$ degrees or so or a quantum-gravitational Planck temperature scale of order $`10^{33}`$ degrees, to thereby yield an $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }(t_0)/\mathrm{\Omega }_M(t_0)`$ ratio of order $`10^{60}`$ to $`10^{120}`$, a ratio not only overwhelmingly larger than the requisite measured value of order one, but one which would (for an $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M(t_0)`$ of order one) entail that $`\mathrm{\Omega }_k(t_0)`$ would have to be of order $`10^{60}`$ and thus be nowhere near flat at all.

To get round this problem the standard paradigm thus proposes that rather than use such a fundamental physics based $`T_V`$ one should instead, and despite the absence of any currently known justification, fine-tune $`T_V`$ down by orders and orders of magnitude so that the value $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }(t_0)=0.7`$ would then ensue. Beyond the difficulty inherent in trying to understand how this might actually be dynamically achieved, even a successful resolution of this issue would still not actually leave cosmology totally free of fine-tuning problems, since in its turn, having a current era $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }(t_0)`$ of order one creates a yet further problem for the standard model, one of then having to have an expressly fine-tuned early universe. Specifically, for an $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }(t_0)`$ of order one the early universe associated with Eq. (1) would need to be one in which $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M(t=t_{PL})`$ would have had to have been incredibly close to one at the Planck time $`t=t_{PL}`$, while $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }(t=t_{PL})`$ itself would have had to have been as small as $`O(10^{120})`$. The early universe thus has only a one in $`10^{120}`$ chance of ever evolving into our current universe unless some explicit dynamical mechanism could be found which would naturally fix these needed initial conditions with incredible precision. In a sense this fine-tuning problem is a new variant of the venerable flatness problem. As we recall, in the pre $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }(t_0)0`$ days it was very difficult to understand why an $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M(t)`$ which had been redshifting for more than 10 billion years would be anywhere near one today rather than being orders and orders of magnitude smaller, with it being inflation which then provided a natural answer to this problem. Specifically, it was shown by Guth  that if there were to be a period of rapid de Sitter inflation (viz. rapid acceleration) prior to the onset of the current Robertson-Walker (RW) era, then such an inflationary era would precisely lead at its end to a set of initial conditions for an ensuing RW phase in which $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M(t)`$ would not merely be close to one but would in fact be identically equal to one in each and every epoch and thus not susceptible to redshifting at all. However, with the advent of a non-zero cosmological constant inflation now only fixes the sum of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M(t)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }(t)`$ to be equal to one in all epochs but does not constrain their ratio. Currently then, standard cosmology stands waiting for the development of some sort of generalized version of early universe inflation which would naturally lead to initial RW era conditions which then would naturally fix the initial values of both $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M(t)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }(t)`$ to the requisite precision. This then is the challenge to the standard cosmology posed by the new $`z1`$ Hubble plot data.

As regards actually fitting these Hubble plot data, we note that when viewed purely as a phenomenology (i.e. without regard to any of the above fine-tuning concerns) an $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M(t_0)=0.3`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }(t_0)=0.7`$ standard model then performs extraordinarily well. Through use of type Ia supernovae as standard candles the authors of  and  were able to extend the Hubble plot of luminosity versus redshift out to redshifts close to one. To illustrate the quality of the fits which then ensue we follow  and fit 38 of their reported 42 data points together with 16 of the 18 earlier lower $`z`$ points of , for a total of 54 data points with reported effective blue apparent magnitude $`m_i`$ and uncertainty $`\sigma _i`$. (While we thus, following , leave out 6 questionable data points for the fitting, nonetheless, for completeness we still include them in the displayed Fig. (1).) For the fitting we calculate the apparent magnitude $`m`$ of each supernova at redshift $`z`$ via $`m=25+M+5log_{10}d_L`$ (the luminosity distance $`d_L`$ being in Mpc) where $`M`$ is their assumed common absolute magnitude, and find for $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M(t_0)=0.3`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }(t_0)=0.7`$ and $`M=19.37`$ that $`\chi ^2=(mm_i)^2/\sigma _i^2`$ takes the value 57.74, with the fit itself being displayed as the lower curve in Fig. (1). §§§The very fact that the data can be fitted so well with a common $`M`$ at all (and even with one of value typical of nearby supernovae) strongly suggests that type Ia supernovae are indeed good standard candles. As the fitting shows, once one allows for the gravitational repulsion associated with a non-vanishing $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }(t_0)`$ the standard model can nicely account for the supernovae data.

With the values of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M(t_0)=0.3`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }(t_0)=0.7`$ thus being established by the $`z1`$ Hubble plot data, we now note that since the matter density $`\rho _M(t)`$ redshifts while $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ of course does not, as we go to higher and higher redshift the $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M(t)/\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }(t)`$ ratio will get bigger and bigger, with the attractive matter density numerically being found to overcome the repulsive $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ contribution to the deceleration parameter at a redshift of only $`z=0.67`$. In the standard model then the universe would be such that it would decelerate ($`q(t)>0`$) continually in all epochs until the matter density contribution finally manages to redshift itself down to the cosmological constant contribution, something which is to occur at the incredibly late $`z=0.67`$ when $`q(t)`$ would at long last finally change sign. Indeed, the particular timing of this change in sign is itself a reflection of the standard model early universe fine-tuning problem we discussed earlier, with initial conditions having to be such that this change over would occur precisely in our own epoch, neither earlier than it nor later. Now while it is very peculiar that such a turn around is to occur just in our own particular epoch, nonetheless, independent of one’s views regarding the merits or otherwise of such an expectation, the prediction itself is actually readily amenable to testing, with just a modest increase in the range of $`z`$ (say to $`z=2`$ or so) in the Hubble plot being able to reveal its possible presence. Moreover, such a study would be a completely kinematic one, one totally independent of dynamical assumptions (such as those for instance required for the extraction of cosmological parameters from the cosmic microwave background) and would thus be completely clear cut. In this sense then study of the $`z>1`$ Hubble plot can provide a completely dynamics independent test of whether or not $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ really is as small as the standard model’s assumed fine-tuning would require. With the $`z>1`$ Hubble plot thus being the ”smoking gun” for a fine-tuned $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, we thus exhibit in Fig. (2) the standard model expectation (the lowest curve) out to $`z=5`$. In and of itself then it would be extremely informative to extend the range of the Hubble plot. However, as we now show, it would be of additional interest since it would allow for a rather unequivocal comparison between standard cosmology and the recently proposed alternate conformal cosmology, a theory which is capable of fitting the very same supernovae data without any fine-tuning at all.

## II The Hubble plot of conformal cosmology

Given both the fine-tuning problems of the standard cosmology and the absence to date of any solution to them, it is thus of value to entertain and explore possible candidate alternate cosmologies to see if any one of them might shed some light on the issue. Now while the choice of possible alternate theories is quite vast (pure metric based theories of gravity require only a general coordinate scalar action, of which there is an infinite number containing derivatives of the Riemann tensor out to arbitrarily high order), one particular such alternative is explicitly singled out. Specifically, since it possesses a symmetry which when unbroken obliges the cosmological constant to vanish identically , conformal gravity (viz. gravity based on the fully covariant, locally conformal invariant Weyl action

$$I_W=\alpha _gd^4x(g)^{1/2}C_{\lambda \mu \nu \kappa }C^{\lambda \mu \nu \kappa }$$
(2)
where $`C^{\lambda \mu \nu \kappa }`$ is the conformal Weyl tensor and where $`\alpha _g`$ is a purely dimensionless gravitational coupling constant) is immediately suggested and motivated. The cosmology associated with the conformal gravity theory was first presented in  where it was shown to both possess no flatness problem (to thereby release conformal cosmology from the need for the copious amounts of cosmological dark matter required of the standard model) and to have an effective cosmological Newton constant, $`G_{eff}`$, which actually turned out to be negative. Thus long in advance of the recent supernovae data it had been noted that conformal cosmology possessed a repulsive gravitational component.In fact, equally in advance of the supernovae data, it had also been noted  that in a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$ conformal cosmology the current era $`q_0`$ would then be identically equal to zero, with a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$ conformal cosmology thus possessing a repulsion not present in a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$ standard cosmology where $`q_0=1/2`$. Subsequently , the cosmology was shown to also possess no horizon problem or universe age problem. And finally, it was shown  that even after the conformal symmetry is spontaneously broken by a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ inducing scale breaking cosmological phase transition, the theory continues to be able to keep the contribution of the induced cosmological constant to cosmic evolution under control even in the event that $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is in fact as big as particle physics suggests, to thereby provide a completely natural solution to the cosmological constant problem without the need for any fine tuning at all. In the present paper we use the results of  to show that conformal gravity not only controls the cosmological constant in principle, in practice it even provides for a completely acceptable accounting of the recent supernovae Hubble plot data as well.

Analysis of the implications of conformal cosmology is greatly facilitated by considering the generic conformal matter action

$$I_M=\mathrm{}d^4x(g)^{1/2}[S^\mu S_\mu /2S^2R_\mu ^\mu /12+\lambda S^4+i\overline{\psi }\gamma ^\mu (x)(_\mu +\mathrm{\Gamma }_\mu (x))\psi gS\overline{\psi }\psi ]$$
(3)
for massless fermions and a conformally coupled order parameter scalar field. When the scalar field breaks the conformal symmetry by acquiring a non-zero expectation value $`S_0`$, the energy-momentum tensor associated with the matter action of Eq. (3) is found (for a perfect matter fluid $`T_{kin}^{\mu \nu }`$ of the fermions) to take the form

$$T^{\mu \nu }=T_{kin}^{\mu \nu }\mathrm{}S_0^2(R^{\mu \nu }g^{\mu \nu }R_\alpha ^\alpha /2)/6g^{\mu \nu }\mathrm{}\lambda S_0^4,$$
(4)
with the complete solution to the scalar, fermionic and gravitational field equations of motion in a background RW geometry (viz. a geometry in which $`C^{\lambda \mu \nu \kappa }=0`$) then reducing  to the remarkably simple equation $`T^{\mu \nu }=0`$, i.e. reducing to

$$\mathrm{}S_0^2(R^{\mu \nu }g^{\mu \nu }R_\alpha ^\alpha /2)/6=T_{kin}^{\mu \nu }g^{\mu \nu }\mathrm{}\lambda S_0^4,$$
(5)
with the vanishing of $`T^{\mu \nu }`$ immediately fixing the zero of energy. As we thus see, the evolution equation of conformal cosmology looks identical to that of standard gravity save only that the quantity $`\mathrm{}S_0^2/12`$ has replaced the familiar $`c^3/16\pi G`$, so that instead of being attractive the effective cosmological $`G_{eff}=3c^3/4\pi \mathrm{}S_0^2`$ is actually negative, and instead of being fixed as the standard low energy Newtonian $`G`$, the cosmological $`G_{eff}`$ is instead fixed by the altogether different scale $`S_0`$, a scale which when large enough would yield an effective cosmological $`G_{eff}`$ which would then be altogether smaller than the standard Cavendish $`G`$.In fact, with the non-relativistic terrestrial and solar system conformal gravity expectations being controlled  by a local $`G`$ whose dynamical generation is totally decoupled  from that of the cosmological $`G_{eff}`$, in conformal gravity cosmology is thus completely freed from the need to be controlled by the Cavendish $`G`$.

Given the equation of motion of Eq. (5), the ensuing conformal cosmology evolution equation is then found (on setting $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=\mathrm{}\lambda S_0^4`$) to take a form remarkably similar to that of Eq. (1), viz.

$`\dot{R}^2(t)+kc^2=\dot{R}^2(t)(\overline{\mathrm{\Omega }}_M(t)+\overline{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\mathrm{\Lambda }(t))`$ (6)
where $`\overline{\mathrm{\Omega }}_M(t)=8\pi G_{eff}\rho _M(t)/3c^2H^2(t)`$, $`\overline{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\mathrm{\Lambda }(t)=8\pi G_{eff}\mathrm{\Lambda }/3cH^2(t)`$. Further, unlike the situation in the standard theory where preferred values for the relevant evolution parameters (such as the magnitude and even the sign of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$) are only determined by the data fitting itself, in conformal gravity essentially everything is already a priori known. With conformal gravity not needing dark matter to account for galactic rotation curve systematics , $`\rho _M(t_0)`$ can be determined directly from luminous matter alone, with galaxy luminosity counts giving a value for it of order $`0.01\times 3c^2H_0^2/8\pi G`$ or so. Further, with $`c\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ being generated by an energy density lowering particle physics vacuum breaking phase transition in an otherwise scaleless theory, $`c\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ (and thus the $`\mathrm{}\lambda S_0^4`$ term which simulates it) must unambiguously be negative, with it thus being typically given by $`\sigma T_V^4`$ where $`T_V`$ is a necessarily particle physics sized scale. Then with $`G_{eff}`$ also being negative, the quantity $`\overline{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\mathrm{\Lambda }(t)`$ itself must thus be positive, just as needed to give cosmic acceleration ($`q(t)=(n/21)\overline{\mathrm{\Omega }}_M(t)\overline{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\mathrm{\Lambda }(t)`$). Similarly, the sign of the spatial 3-curvature $`k`$ is known from theory  to be negative, something which has been independently confirmed from a phenomenological study of galactic rotation curves . Moreover, since $`G_{eff}`$ is negative, the cosmology is singularity free and thus expands from a (negative curvature supported) finite maximum temperature $`T_{max}`$, a temperature which is necessarily greater  (and potentially even much greater ) than $`T_V`$. And finally, with $`G_{eff}`$ being negative, the quantity $`\overline{\mathrm{\Omega }}_M(t)`$ must be negative for ordinary $`\rho _M(t)>0`$ matter, with $`q(t)`$ thus being negative in all epochs.\**\**\**Included in this class of $`q(t)<0`$ universes are the coasting ones in which $`q(t)=0^{}`$. Consequently in the conformal theory we never need to fine tune in order to make any particular epoch such as our own be an accelerating one, with repulsive cosmological gravity thus being completely natural to conformal gravity in each and every epoch.

Given only that $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, $`k`$ and $`G_{eff}`$ are in fact all negative in the conformal theory, the evolution of the theory is then completely determined, with the expansion rate parameters being found  to be given by

$$R^2=k(\beta 1)/2\alpha k\beta \mathrm{sinh}^2(\alpha ^{1/2}ct)/\alpha ,T_{max}^2/T^2=1+2\beta \mathrm{sinh}^2(\alpha ^{1/2}ct)/(\beta 1),$$
(7)
where $`\beta =(116A\lambda /k^2\mathrm{}c)^{1/2}=(1+T_V^4/T_{max}^4)/(1T_V^4/T_{max}^4)`$, $`\alpha c^2=2\lambda S_0^2=8\pi G_{eff}\mathrm{\Lambda }/3c`$. In terms of the parameters $`T_{max}`$ and $`T_V`$ we thus obtain

$`\mathrm{tanh}^2(\alpha ^{1/2}ct)=(1T^2/T_{max}^2)/(T_{max}^2T^2/T_V^4+1),`$ (8)
$`H(t)=\alpha ^{1/2}c(1T^2/T_{max}^2)/\mathrm{tanh}(\alpha ^{1/2}ct),`$ (9)
$`\overline{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\mathrm{\Lambda }(t)=(1T^2/T_{max}^2)^1(1+T^2T_{max}^2/T_V^4)^1,\overline{\mathrm{\Omega }}_M(t)=(T^4/T_V^4)\overline{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\mathrm{\Lambda }(t)`$ (10)
at any $`T(t)`$ without any approximation at all. From Eq. (10) we now see that simply because $`T_{max}`$ is overwhelmingly larger than the current temperature $`T(t_0)`$, i.e. simply because the universe is as old as it is, it automatically follows, without any fine-tuning at all, that the current era $`\overline{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\mathrm{\Lambda }(t_0)`$ has to lie somewhere between zero and one today no matter how big (or small) $`T_V`$ might actually be, with conformal gravity thus having total control over the contribution of the cosmological constant to cosmic evolution. Conformal gravity thus solves the cosmological constant problem by quenching $`\overline{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\mathrm{\Lambda }(t_0)`$ rather than by quenching $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ itself (essentially by having a $`G_{eff}`$ which is altogether smaller than the standard $`G`$), and with it being the quantity $`\overline{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\mathrm{\Lambda }(t_0)`$ which is the one which is actually measured in cosmology, it is only its quenching which is actually needed. With conformal gravity thus being able to naturally accommodate a large $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ we are now actually free to allow $`T_V`$ to be as large as particle physics suggests. Then, for such a large $`T_V/T(t_0)`$ we see that the quantity $`\overline{\mathrm{\Omega }}_M(t_0)`$ has to be completely negligible today††††††$`\overline{\mathrm{\Omega }}_M(t_0)`$ is suppressed by $`G_{eff}`$ being small, and not by $`\rho _M(t_0)`$ itself being small, with $`G_{eff}`$ being made smaller the larger rather than the smaller $`S_0`$ gets to be, to thus enable the $`c\mathrm{\Lambda }/\rho _M(t_0)=\overline{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\mathrm{\Lambda }(t_0)/\overline{\mathrm{\Omega }}_M(t_0)`$ ratio to be as large as particle physics suggests while not leading to any 60 order of magnitude conflict with observation. so that $`q_0`$ must thus, without any fine-tuning at all, necessarily lie between zero and minus one today notwithstanding that $`T_V`$ is huge. The essence of the conformal gravity approach then is not to change the matter and energy content of the universe at all, but rather only to change their effect on cosmic evolution, with $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ itself no longer needing to be quenched.

In order to fit the Hubble plot data we need to determine the dependence of $`d_L`$ on $`z`$ in the conformal theory, something we can readily do now that we have obtained the explicit form of the expansion factor $`R(t)`$. Thus, for temperatures well below $`T_{max}`$ and for the naturally achievable  $`T_VT_{max}`$ case of most practical interest to conformal gravity (viz. a case where $`T_{max}^2T^2(t_0)/T_V^4`$ can be of order one) we may set

$$R(t)=(k/\alpha )^{1/2}\mathrm{sinh}(\alpha ^{1/2}ct),$$
(11)
so that

$$q_0=\mathrm{tanh}^2(\alpha ^{1/2}ct_0)=\alpha c^2/H_0^2,t_0=\mathrm{arctanh}[(q_0)^{1/2}]/(q_0)^{1/2}H_0.$$
(12)
For geodesics $`_{t_1}^{t_0}c𝑑t/R(t)=_0^{r_1}𝑑r/[1kr^2]^{1/2}`$ we thus obtain

$$(k)^{1/2}r_1=\mathrm{coth}(\alpha ^{1/2}ct_0)/\mathrm{sinh}(\alpha ^{1/2}ct_1)\mathrm{coth}(\alpha ^{1/2}ct_1)/\mathrm{sinh}(\alpha ^{1/2}ct_0).$$
(13)
Then, on noting that $`\mathrm{sinh}(\alpha ^{1/2}ct_1)=(q_0)^{1/2}/(1+q_0)^{1/2}(1+z)`$ where $`z=R(t_0)/R(t_1)1`$ and where $`q_0`$ is the current value of $`q(t)`$, we find that we can express the general luminosity distance $`d_L=r_1R(t_0)(1+z)`$ entirely in terms of the current era $`H_0`$ and $`q_0`$ according to the very compact relation

$$H_0d_L/c=(1+z)^2\left\{1[1+q_0q_0/(1+z)^2]^{1/2}\right\}/q_0.$$
(14)
Conformal gravity fits to the luminosity distance can thus be parametrized via the one parameter $`q_0`$, a parameter which must lie somewhere between zero and minus one, with $`d_L`$ thus having to lie somewhere between $`d_L(q_0=0)=cH_0^1(z+z^2/2)`$ and $`d_L(q_0=1)=cH_0^1(z+z^2)`$ at temperatures well below $`T_{max}`$.

Having obtained Eq. (14) we can now turn to a data analysis. On fitting the same 54 supernovae data points as previously, our best fit is obtained for $`q_0=0.37`$, $`M=19.37`$ with $`\chi ^2=58.62`$. We display this fit as the upper curve in Fig. (1), and as we thus see, in the detected region the best fits of the standard and conformal models are completely indistinguishable, only in fact departing from each other at the very highest available redshifts. For comparison purposes we find that for $`q_0=0`$ a best fit value of $`\chi ^2=61.49`$ is obtained with $`M=19.29`$,‡‡‡‡‡‡Such high quality fitting with $`q_0=0`$ has also been noted by other authors  though not within the context of conformal gravity. with fits for other typical values of $`q_0`$ being reported in .\**\**\**If one also takes the $`\mathrm{\Delta }z_i`$ errors in the reported redshifts into consideration, the conformal gravity chi squared values for the 54 points get reduced  to $`\chi ^2(q_0=0.33)=54.13`$ and $`\chi ^2(q_0=0)=56.0`$, while the standard model chi squared becomes $`\chi ^2(\mathrm{\Omega }_M(t_0)=0.3,\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }(t_0)=0.7)=53.27`$. Beyond the purely phenomenological fact that the conformal gravity fits actually provide a good accounting of the supernovae data at all, it is important to stress that as such these fits are the first ones ever obtained in which the cosmological constant is allowed to take a large unquenched particle physics scale value, with the fits thus establishing the empirical fact that it is in fact possible to fit the supernovae data without fine-tuning.

With the standard cosmology requiring deceleration above $`z=1`$ and with the conformal cosmology continuing to accelerate, extension of the Hubble plot beyond $`z=1`$ will actually enable us to discriminate between the two cosmologies. We thus augment Fig. (2) by adding in the $`z>1`$ conformal gravity predictions. The highest curve in Fig. (2) is the conformal gravity prediction for $`q_0=0.37`$, while the middle curve is that for $`q_0=0`$. As we see, these two typical conformal gravity curves start to depart from the standard model expectation fairly rapidly once $`z>1`$, with the three curves in Fig. (2) respectively corresponding to apparent magnitudes $`m=27.17`$, $`m=27.04`$ and $`m=26.75`$ at $`z=2`$, and to $`m=30.40`$, $`m=30.25`$ and $`m=29.14`$ at $`z=5`$. A quite modest extension of the Hubble plot will thus readily enable us to discriminate between standard gravity and its conformal alternative while potentially even being definitive for both.

## III Outlook and challenges

While there has yet to be detailed exploration of the $`z>1`$ Hubble plot using supernovae standard candles, it is of some interest to note that recently a first $`z>1`$ data point was actually established , viz. the supernova SN 1997ff which was found to be at a redshift $`z=1.7_{0.15}^{+0.1}`$. To illustrate the data of  we have augmented Fig. (2) by adding in the 68% and 95% confidence region values for the measured apparent magnitude $`m`$ at redshifts $`z=1.65`$, $`z=1.7`$ and $`z=1.75`$. (In the figure the two inner horizontal bars on the vertical data points represent the extent of the 68% confidence region at each of the chosen redshifts while the two outer bars represent the 95% confidence one.) While one should not read too much into a single data point,\*†\*†\*†Indeed, a shortcoming of these particular data is that SN 1997ff just happens to be gravitationally lensed by two foreground galaxies , with its ”true” apparent magnitude thus likely to be somewhat larger (viz. dimmer) than indicated in the figure. it is interesting to note that the data can accommodate both the standard and conformal theories, with it being necessary to acquire a whole set of $`z>1`$ data points in order to identify any specific trend in the data that there might be, with it as yet being too early to ascertain from available supernovae data whether the $`z>1`$ universe is decelerating or accelerating.

Beyond the standard candle supernovae, it has also been noted by Daly  that the very powerful FRII bridge radio galaxies can serve as standard yardsticks, and can thus also be used to extract cosmological parameters. As such, this technique serves to complement the supernovae analyses, and even to potentially go beyond them since radio galaxies are already being seen out to $`z=2`$ or so. Interestingly, the data presented in  are so far found to be able to accommodate both standard and conformal gravity, with further study of this issue thus having the potential to be quite instructive.

As we noted earlier, that apart from the $`z1`$ region Hubble plot, cosmology can also be tested at a variety of much larger redshifts, and it is thus urgent to test conformal gravity at those redshifts as well. While its predictions for the microwave background await the development of a conformal cosmology galaxy fluctuation theory, its initial predictions for nucleosynthesis have already been worked out . What was found was that while the expanding and thus cooling conformal cosmology can readily generate the requisite amounts of primordial helium and lithium, because the cosmology expands altogether slower than the standard cosmology its predictions for deuterium and for $`{}_{}{}^{9}Be`$ are substantially different from those of the standard model. Specifically, because of the slowness of the expansion very little primordially generated deuterium manages to survive, but because of this same slowness the cosmology is able to get passed the $`A=8`$ nuclear fusion bottleneck (viz. the absence of any stable nuclei with 8 nucleons) and thus primordially produce $`{}_{}{}^{9}Be`$ and elements heavier than it, in fact even producing $`{}_{}{}^{9}Be`$ with its measured abundance, an abundance 8 orders of magnitude greater than that generatable in the standard theory. Now it was noted in  that it would be relatively easy to produce deuterium by spallation once inhomogeneities begin to develop in the universe (i.e. post-primordial but pre-galactic). With an explicit theory for such inhomogeneous deuterium production yet to be developed, conformal gravity thus remains challenged by the deuterium problem just as the standard theory remains challenged by the $`{}_{}{}^{9}Be`$ problem. However, since conformal gravity so capably handles the most vexing problem facing the standard theory, viz. the cosmological constant problem, it would thus appear to merit further consideration.

The author is indebted to Drs. R. A. Daly, G. V. Dunne, K. Horne, D. Lohiya, R. Plaga and B. E. Schaefer for helpful comments. This work has been supported in part by the Department of Energy under grant No. DE-FG02-92ER40716.00.


text:
# Superiority of the Lunar and Planetary Laboratory (LPL) over Steward Observatory (SO) at the University of Arizona

## 1 INTRODUCTION

Both the astronomy department and the planetary sciences department at the University of Arizona, known as Steward Observatory (SO) and the Lunar and Planetary Laboratory (LPL) respectively, have enjoyed scientific success over the past $`50`$ years. In more recent times however, SO has experienced a serious decline in the quality of its graduate students and their education, thus leading to the inevitable conclusion that LPL is the far greater institution for the production of scientifically useful dotoral candidates.

## 2 EVIDENCE

A competitive volleyball tournament was held during 2001 between graduate participants from both LPL and SO. The match terminated in a rout of epic proportion. Steward graduate students were so humiliated so as not to ever return to the game of volleyball. We quit ’cuz we got bored.

*D*epartmental coolness as a function of time over the last decade for both LPL and Steward Observatory. The y-axis is measured in coolombs. Particularly note the divergence in coolness values between the two institutions in 1998 – this is believed to be the result of the defection of Terry Hurford from SO to LPL at that time.

In addition, the above facts are buttressed by the extreme and total humiliation that Astronomy Department graduate students suffered at the hands of the Planetary Science grads on April 1, 2001 (Bieging, private communication). On that date the Steward Observatory email list was informed of the impending annexation of their department by the Lunar and Planetary Laboratory due to budget constraints, and signs attesting to this new status were emplaced around the building. So infinitessimal are/were the intellectual and technical capabilities of SO graduate students that not only did one of these signs remain in position for over 1 week, but that in fact no counter-pranks have been executed for the past 1 year. We argue that these events imply the complete subordination of SO grads to the will of the LPL graduate population.

The evidence presented in this section is summarized in Table 1.

| 10 | Steward grads live in Hawthorne House. |
| --- | --- |
| 9 | Who really cares about high-Z quasars anyway? |
| 8 | Revenge of the Nerds – ’nuff said. |
| 7 | Squirrel-loving, peyote-smoking hippie |
|  | freaks don’t try to break our mirrors. |
| 6 | Bratfest. |
| 5 | Lack of pimply undergraduate majors. |
| 4 | Able to waste $250,000,000 in a single |
|  | botched landing attempt. |
| 3 | LPL professors unafraid to take spectra |
|  | of own urine. |
| 2 | Steward graduate students not nearly |
|  | creative enough to have thought of this. |
| 1 | Field trips. |

The authors wish to acknowledge an anonymous reviewer’s extraordinarily harsh review – no doubt the rest of our careers will seem easy in comparison to what this person made the publication of this paper like for us. DO is funded through the illigitimate sale of ‘crack’ cocaine to Steward Observatory graduate students. JB isn’t really funded at all, he’s just leaching off the rest of the department.


text:
# REFERENCES

STABLE THERMOMAGNETIC WAVES IN HARD SUPERCONDUCTORS

N.A.Taylanov
Institute of Applied Physics, Department of Theoretical Physics, National University of Uzbekistan, Tashkent, Uzbekistan e-mail: taylanov@iaph.tkt.uz

Abstract

The problem of the stability of a nonlinear thermomagnetic wave with respect to small thermal and electromagnetic perturbations in hard superconductors was studied. It is shown that spatially bounded solutions may correspond only to the perturbations decaying with time, which implies stability of the nonlinear thermomagnetic wave.

Previously , it was demonstrated that, depending on the surface conditions, stationary nonlinear thermomagnetic waves of two types, $`E`$ and $`H`$, may exist in a superconductor. However, the problem of stability of the nonlinear waves with respect to small thermal and electromagnetic perturbations in superconductors is insufficiently studied. We will consider the stability of a nonlinear thermomagnetic wave with respect to small thermal and electromagnetic perturbations in a superconductor occurring in the critical state. It will be demonstrated that spatially bounded solutions may correspond only to the perturbations decaying with time. The evolution of the thermal ($`T`$) and electromagnetic ($`E`$ and $`H`$) perturbations in a superconductor is described by a nonlinear thermal conductivity equation

$$\nu (T)\frac{dT}{dt}=\mathrm{\Delta }[\kappa (T)\mathrm{\Delta }T]+\stackrel{}{j}\stackrel{}{E},$$
(1)
in combination with the Maxwell equations

$$rot\stackrel{}{E}=\frac{1}{c}\frac{d\stackrel{}{H}}{dt},rot\stackrel{}{H}=\frac{4\pi }{c}\stackrel{}{j}$$
(2)
and the critical state equation

$$\stackrel{}{j}=\stackrel{}{j}_c(T,\stackrel{}{H})+\stackrel{}{j}_r(\stackrel{}{E}).$$
(3)
where $`\nu =\nu (T)`$ and $`\kappa =\kappa (T)`$ are the heat capacity and thermal conductivity coefficients, respectively; $`\stackrel{}{j}_c`$ is the critical current density; and $`\stackrel{}{j}_r`$ is the resistive current density. Let us consider a plane semiinfinite sample $`(x>0)`$, exposed to an external magnetic field $`\stackrel{}{H}=(0,0,H_e)`$, increasing with the time at a constant rate $`{\displaystyle \frac{d\stackrel{}{H}}{dt}}=0`$. According to the Maxwell equation (2), the sample will feature a vortex electric field $`\stackrel{}{E}=(0,E_e,0)`$ parallel to the current density vector: $`\stackrel{}{j}`$: $`\stackrel{}{E}\stackrel{}{j}`$.

In order to describe the $`j_c(T,H)`$ function, we will use the Bean-London equation of the critical state $`({\displaystyle \frac{dj_c}{dH}}=0)`$ . According to this model, the $`j_c(T)`$ function can be presented as $`j(T)=j_c(T_0)\left[1{\displaystyle \frac{TT_0}{T_cT_0}}\right]`$: where $`j_0=j_c(T_0)`$ is the equilibrium current density, $`T_c`$ is the critical temperature, and $`T_0`$ is the cooler temperature. The characteristic form of $`j_r(E)`$ in the region of sufficiently strong electric fields $`(E>E_f)`$ can be approximated by a piecewise linear function $`j_r\sigma _fE`$. In the region of small field strengths $`E<E_f`$ the $`j_r(E)`$ function exhibits a nonlinear character related to a thermoactivated flux creep . For an automodel solution of the type $`\xi =xvt`$ describing a wave propagating at a constant velocity $`v`$ along the $`x`$ axis, the system of Eqs.( 1 )-(3) acquires the following form:

$$v[N(T)N(T_0)]=\kappa \frac{dT}{d\xi }\frac{c^2}{4\pi v}E^2,$$
(4)
$$\frac{dE}{d\xi }=\frac{4\pi v}{c^2}j,$$
(5)
$$E=\frac{v}{c}H.$$
(6)
where $`N(T)=\underset{0}{\overset{T}{}}\nu (T)𝑑T`$.

Excluding variables $`T`$ and $`H`$ with the aid of expressions (4) and (6) and taking into account the boundary condition $`E(z\mathrm{})=E_e`$, we arrive at a differential equation describing the distribution $`E(z)`$

$$\frac{d^2E}{dz^2}+\beta \tau \frac{dE}{dz}+\frac{4\pi v^2}{c^2E_\kappa }\left[N(T)N(T_0)\right]\frac{E^2}{2E_\kappa }=0$$
(7)
Here $`z={\displaystyle \frac{\xi }{L}}`$ and $`\beta ={\displaystyle \frac{vt_\kappa }{L}}`$ are dimensionless parameters, $`L={\displaystyle \frac{cH_e}{4\pi j_0}}`$ the magnetic field penetration depth into the superconductor, $`\tau ={\displaystyle \frac{D_t}{D_m}}`$ is the ratio of the coefficients of thermal $`D_t={\displaystyle \frac{\kappa }{\nu }}`$ and magnetic $`D_m={\displaystyle \frac{c^2}{4\pi \sigma _f}}`$ diffusion, $`t_\kappa ={\displaystyle \frac{\nu L^2}{\kappa }}`$ is the thermal diffusion time, and $`E_\kappa ={\displaystyle \frac{\kappa }{aL^2}}`$ is a constant parameter.

In the approximation of a weakly heated superconductor $`(TT_0)<<T_0`$, the heat capacity $`\nu `$ and thermal conductivity $`\kappa `$ coefficients are weakly dependent on the temperature profile. As is well known (see, e.g., ), the magnetic flux variations in a hard superconductor occur at a much greater rate as compared to those of the heat transfer, so that $`\tau <<1`$ or $`D_t<<D_m`$. In this approximation, we may neglect the terms related to dissipative effects in Eq. (7), after which a solution to this equation can be presented in the following form  :

$$E(z)=\frac{E_1}{2}\left[1th\frac{\beta \tau }{2}(zz_0)\right].$$
(8)
Relationship (8) describes the profile of a thermomagnetic shock wave propagating into the superconductor. In order to study the stability of a nonlinear wave with respect to small perturbations, it is convenient to write a solution to Eqs. (1)-(3) in the following form:

$$T(z,t)=T(z)+\delta T(z,t)\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{\lambda t}{t_\kappa }\right],E(z,t)=E(z)+\delta E(z,t)\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{\lambda t}{t_\kappa }\right],$$
(9)
where $`T(z)`$ and $`E(z)`$ are the stationary solutions and $`\delta T,\delta E`$ are small perturbations. Substituting expressions (9) into Eqs. (1)- (3), assuming $`\delta T`$, $`\delta E<<T,E`$ in the limit of $`\tau <<1`$ (this corresponds to a ”fast” instability, $`\lambda >>{\displaystyle \frac{\nu v^2}{\kappa }}`$ ), we obtain an equation for determining the eigenvalues of $`\lambda `$

$$\frac{d^2ϵ}{dz^2}+[\frac{2}{ch^2}\mathrm{\Lambda }]ϵ=0$$
(10)
Using the substitution of variables of the type

$`\xi =thy`$, $`1\xi =2s`$, and $`ϵ(\xi )=\left(1\xi ^2\right)^{\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }}{2}}\mathrm{\Phi }(\xi )`$, Eq. (10) can be reduced to a standart hypergeometric equation

$$s(1s)\frac{d^2\mathrm{\Phi }}{ds^2}[\mathrm{\Omega }+12s(\mathrm{\Omega }+1)]\frac{d\mathrm{\Phi }}{ds}[\mathrm{\Omega }(\mathrm{\Omega }1)p(p1)]\mathrm{\Phi }=0$$
(11)
Here, the even and odd integrals can be presented as

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_1=F(ϵ1,ϵ+2,ϵ+1,s),$$
(12)
$$\mathrm{\Phi }_2=s^ϵF(1,2,1ϵ,s),$$
(13)
where F is the hypergeometric function . The function must be finite at the singular point $`s=1`$. The $`ϵ`$ values for which $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1`$ is finite evidently correspond to a discrete spectrum: $`ϵ_i=0,1`$ or $`\lambda _i=\tau ^1,0.`$ The function $`\mathrm{\Phi }_2`$ is finite only for $`ϵ=0`$. Any solution in the form of a running wave is char- acterized by translational symmetry, which implies that a ”perturbed” stationary profile $`E(z)`$ determined by Eq. (8) corresponds to the eigenvalue of the ground state $`\lambda _0=0`$. Differentiating Eq. (7) with respect to $`z`$, one may readily see that $`{\displaystyle \frac{dE_0}{dz}}`$ is an eigenfunction corresponding to $`\lambda _0=0`$. Indeed, the perturbation $`\delta E={\displaystyle \frac{dE_0}{dz}}`$ essentially represents a small wave displacement. Thus, we may suggest that tha function $`{\displaystyle \frac{dE_0}{dz}}`$ exponentially tends to zero for $`z+\mathrm{}`$ and the corresponding eigenvalue is zero. Therefore, the problem cannot possess positive eigenvalues and $`Re\lambda _i<0`$. This result implies that the wave is stable with respect to relatively small thermal $`\delta T`$ and electromagnetic $`\delta E`$ fluctuations. The analysis of the second linearly-independent solution leads to the same conclusion.

REFERENCE


text:
# Interferometric evidence for brane world cosmologies

## Abstract

The hypothesis of brane-embedded matter appears to gain increasing credibility in astrophysics. However, it can only be truly successful if its implications on particle interaction are consistent with existing knowledge. This letter focuses on the issue of optical interference, and shows that at least one brane-world model can offer plausible interpretations for both Young’s double-slit experiment, and the experiments that fit less neatly with it. The basic assumption is that particles can interact at a distance through the vibrations induced by their motion on the brane. The qualitative analysis of this mechanism suggests that fringe visibility in single photon interference depends on the energy levels and the interval between interacting particles. A double-slit experiment, performed with coherent single red photons should reveal the disappearance of interference when the time delay between individual particles is increased over $`2.18`$ seconds. In the case of infrared photons with the frequency of $`910^{13}Hz`$, interference must vanish already at the interval of one second.

Analyses of recent galaxy clustering data and CMB measurements demand special explanations for the apparent flatness of the Universe, as well as for its accelerated expansion. Initial attempts to provide a simple answer in terms of vacuum energy ran into well-known theoretical difficulties. Quantum field theories yielded unrealistic values for the cosmological constant wein ; sahn , while various solutions to the problem required additional explanatory variables. In contrast, many of the most recent brane world cosmologies are offering explanations that appear to be both theoretically promising and empirically testable. Most of these involve scenarios with matter localized on flat domain walls (3-branes), embedded in higher dimensional bulk space-times. Following the successful general formulation of Randall and Sundrum rand ; sund , brane-world cosmologies were applied to many problems, including the cosmological constant stye , cosmological phase-transitions perk , inflation dval ; khou , baryogenesis gaba . Consistency with cosmological observations has also been suggested deff ; alca . It should be also noted, however, that the idea of matter localized on a brane cannot be entirely satisfactory theoretically, unless it is also shown to have plausible implications for small scale phenomena. (How can it be essential for large scale dynamics, and absent on smaller scales?). In other words, it must also have quantum-level implications that would be consistent with existing interpretations in terms of non-classic principles, such as non-locality, uncertainty, complementarity. However, if it were indeed possible to show that a brane model could offer a full explanation of particle interactions, then those mentioned principles would become redundant. The purpose of this letter is to show that at least one such model is possible, and that its implications can be verified with optical interferometric equipment.

Few other tests in physics are as conceptually important as the double-slit experiment. Because it reveals so clearly the non-classical properties of matter, it is one of the cornerstones of quantum mechanics. The essence of the mystery of double-slit interferometry is that individual photons are emitted and detected as particles, yet they seem to pass through the two slits as waves (non-locality). Any attempt to detect the trajectory of photons destroys the interference fringes on the detecting screen. This is the basis for the conclusion that which-path information and fringe visibility are complementary, just like the information about momentum and position of particles pdds ; trif . The evidence in favor of this interpretation is almost overwhelming, and does not need to be listed here. Nevertheless, there are two special cases that do not exactly fit into the mainstream picture. For reasons that will become obvious later on, these exceptions need to be presented here in brief.

One of these odd cases is the interference of particles emitted by independent sources paul . Just like in the double-slit experiment, photons produced by independent sources produce interference fringes, even when only one of them is present in the system at the same time. This phenomenon was initially demonstrated by Pfleegor and Mandel in the 1960’s pfle , and conclusively confirmed by Hariharan et al. in 1993 hari . The problem with this phenomenon is that it provides partial which-path information without destroying interference. Initially, an interlocking mechanism between the two sources was assumed, in the attempt to suggest that which-path information would still be unavailable. Subsequent experiments with optically isolated photon sources ruled out this interpretation otto . However, even if quantum processes washed which-path information away, the fact remains that each photon was only emitted by one source. This clearly shows that individual photons do not need to go through more than one slit at the same time in order to produce interference. Moreover, the fringes were only present when at least two sources were active. This opens up the possibility that photons might not interfere with themselves, as commonly assumed. They could also affect the trajectory of subsequent particles through some hidden mechanism.

The other odd case, related to single-photon interference, refers to the possibility that interference might disappear entirely at extremely low emission rates of photons. It was reported in the 1960’s by Dontsov and Baz dbaz , who obtained reliable evidence in favor of this effect, but had no means to detect its parameters with high precision. This experiment is in clear contradiction with existing theories and seems to stand alone in its field. However, the hypothesis of delayed interaction between photons, suggested in the previous paragraph, also requires the disappearance of interference beyond a certain interval between individual particles. So, either the hypothesis is wrong, or there is something special about the suggested hidden variable that might explain with greater success these findings. Thus, we need a model that could explain not only the classical double-slit experiment, but also its ”anomalies“. In light of the above, the most straightforward way to conceive of such a model is by assuming that the brane itself is the hidden variable.

Recall that the turning point in the development of brane-world cosmologies was the realization that a 3-dimensional domain wall could be embedded in a bulk with extra non-compactified dimensions . But the same reasoning can be applied to a lower level: one dimensional infinite strings with perfect elasticity could be embedded in the domain wall. Accordingly, longitudinal waves propagating on the strings would be expected to leak into the domain wall at a rate that is inversely related to the distance of propagation, while transverse waves would leak according to the inverse square law. The entire brane (actually, a superstructure of such strings) would have to be precisely tuned, so that both s-waves and p-waves would propagate at the speed of light. Correspondingly, particles of matter would be moving through the brane by exciting an infinite number of strings. The collective effect of such excitations would amount to the production of fields that are capable to affect other particles on the same brane. (This provides an alternative to virtual particles).

In conformity with such a model, the elastic collisions of particles and their remote interactions are assumed to be mediated by the oscillating brane. The photons (assumed here to be particles) represent a special case, because they usually appear to produce no forces. This can be explained through the following considerations. First, photons travel in space at the speed of light, which is also the speed of wave propagation in the brane. Hence, their effect on the brane cannot precede them. Second, they must produce equal amounts of symmetric waves in the plane that is perpendicular to their direction of motion. Thus, photons can be neutral, while still having a real effect on the brane. Third, their effect in reverse must correspond to that of a very narrow electrostatic beam, but it should be extremely weak, because of the Doppler effect. Moreover, this force has to decay as it propagates, according to the inverse square law. Consequently, the spatial effect of photons must be temporary, and it can only be effective in deflecting the trajectory of other photons that cross their trails. When the trajectory of a photon is significantly bent under the influence of an external force, its lateral neutrality must be disrupted. Consequently, photons can produce other forces in special environments, as detected e.g. in the case of the photoelectric effect.

Despite the qualitative nature of this description, it can be used to make estimates of the maximum duration of the stipulated delayed photonic effects. Essentially, we need to calculate the distance $`(r)`$ travelled by a transverse wave on a string, until enough of its energy leaks into the brane to disable its effect on other photons. Dividing this distance by the speed of propagation, we could get an idea about the amount of time that it takes for these photonic trails to fade away (r/c=t). Under the assumption that particles always interact through brane waves, the known energy of photons ($`E_{max}=h\nu `$) must be equal to their maximum effect on the spatial strings. Moreover, the impact of photons on strings must have a constant increment value during chosen units of time. This basic unit of action must be equal to $`h`$. Hence, the total energy of the photon comes from the cumulative number of such interactions. This also means that a string will always be able to deflect the trajectory of a photon if its own vibrations have an action potential comparable to $`h`$. Yet, when the waves on a string have already decayed to $`E^{}=\nu ^{}h`$, with $`\nu ^{}=10^3Hz`$, the deflection of the weakest photon cannot exceed $`0.06`$ degrees (small enough to eliminate interference build-up in most experimental settings). Thus, the value of $`r`$ corresponds to the distance travelled by a string wave until its energy $`E_{max}`$ decays to $`E^{}`$. ($`r_0^2E_{max}=r^2E^{}`$, where $`r_0`$ is the unit of distance corresponding to the system of units used to measure $`E`$). The equation for the corresponding time simplifies to $`t=r_0\sqrt{\nu }/c\sqrt{\nu ^{}}`$.

This conclusion enables us to calculate the maximum time delay between individual coherent photons of known frequency, at which interference fringes might still be visible. For the red photons (the most widely used in interferometric experiments), $`t=2.18`$ seconds. Other visible colors can produce interference at even larger intervals. At the same time, infrared photons with $`\nu =910^{13}Hz`$ must loose their fringe visibility at $`t=1`$ second. Hence, it is only normal for the double slit experiment (and for settings with independently emitted coherent photons) to produce interference fringes, even when just one particle passes through the system at the same time, provided the gap ($`t`$) is below its critical values.

Consider the following experimental setting. A strong coherent red laser beam is divided into two jets with a beam splitter. The jets are focused with two mirrors in front of a screen, producing interference fringes visible to the naked eye. A disc, connected to a source of angular motion, is placed in front of the focal point such as to cut off both jets. The disc has just one small hole close to its edge, and is calibrated such as to open the access to the screen of only one jet at a time, when it is spinning. In other words, this is an alternator switch, whose frequency can be adjusted by controlling its angular velocity. When the disc has a very small velocity (less than one revolution per minute), there can be no interference. However, at very high velocities the interference fringes should reappear on the screen, just like in all the other experiments with independent sources. At this point, two video cameras are introduced into the lab. One is used to film the switch; the other is focused on the screen. The two recordings must later be compared frame by frame, in order to link every interference image to its beam, and every blank screen to intermediate states. As a result, the experimenter acquires complete which-path information without destroying interference. The next step is to test the correlation between energy levels and maximum gap admissible for interference. This can be achieved by gradually accelerating the alternator, until the moment of qualitative shift is identified. Note that this moment does not have to correspond to the presence of sharp fringes on the screen. Any sign of interference works for the proposed interpretation. The experiment can be repeated with monochromatic lasers of different colors, in order to verify the suggested variation of maximum gap values with changes of $`\nu `$.

The same findings can also be verified for non-classical states of light, even though at higher expense. A classical Young setting is all that is necessary, but a deterministic source of single photons is preferable. (The development of such sources was first announced in 2000 mich ; sant ; loun , but many others have been reported since). The idea is to perform the double-slit experiment at very large intervals between individual coherent photons (beyond two seconds), in order to verify the equation for $`t`$. It is quite difficult to obtain good fringe visibility at such gaps, given the drift problem. However, as specified above, high image quality is not required in this case. Any sign of interference beyond the specified values of $`t`$ would falsify the theory. However, if the first experiment proposed above turns out to be successful, such falsification becomes highly unlikely.

As a final note, these two experiments should not be perceived as contradictory to existing scientific data, because they are based on non-invasive methods of path detection. Traditionally, which-path information is obtained with filters or detectors, both of which affect the spatio-temporal properties of photons. In other words, these techniques have a real (negative) impact on coherence. It is a well-established fact that coherence is a necessary condition for interference. Therefore, previous experiments are not reliable as tests of locality and/or realism.