text:
# Dynamic melting of confined vortex matter

## Abstract

We study dynamic melting of confined vortex matter moving in disordered, mesoscopic channels by mode-locking experiments. The dynamic melting transition, characterized by a collapse of the mode-locking effect, strongly depends on the frequency, i.e. on the average velocity of the vortices. The associated dynamic ordering velocity diverges upon approaching the equilibrium melting line $`T_{m,e}(B)`$ as $`v_c(T_{m,e}T)^1`$. The data provide the first direct evidence for velocity dependent melting and show that the phenomenon also takes place in a system under disordered confinement.

An intriguing aspect of periodic media driven through a (random) pinning potential, e.g. vortex lattice (VL’s) in superconductors , charge density waves (CDW’s) , or conventional sliding solids , is the possibility of a dynamic ordering (DO) transition : while at small velocity pinning may disrupt the lattice, causing liquid-like flow  around pinned islands, at large velocity the influence of pinning diminishes and the elastic interactions dominate, favoring a crystalline structure.

The DO phenomenon becomes particularly interesting close to the thermodynamic melting point of the medium, since in addition to fluctuations due to pinning also thermal fluctuations become relevant . Their combined effect was first studied by Koshelev and Vinokur  for 2D VL’s. They introduced the concept of a shaking temperature $`T_{sh}`$, characterizing the fluctuations in the moving frame due to the quenched disorder. This shaking diminishes with increasing velocity as $`k_BT_{sh}=\mathrm{\Gamma }_{p,v}/v`$ ($`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{p,v}`$ reflects the pinning strength and viscous damping). Fluid-like, incoherent motion sets in when the effective ’temperature’ $`T+T_{sh}`$ equals the equilibrium melting temperature $`T_{m,e}`$ of the pure system. Hence, for $`T<T_{m,e}`$ there exists a recrystallization velocity

$$v_c=\mathrm{\Gamma }_{p,v}/[k_B(T_{m,e}T)],$$
(1)
which diverges when temperature approaches $`T_{m,e}`$. Indications for this scenario were found in experiments on superconducting films  by identifying an inflection point in the current-voltage ($`IV`$) curves with DO. This identification seemed justified from simulations  but more direct experimental evidence for the phenomenology in  is still lacking. Simulations of a density gradient driven system  in fact suggest that the inflection point can also be due to changes in large-scale flow morphology while recent experiments on crystals  have shown that for a $`3`$D VL the inflection point is due to macroscopic coexistence of two phases and not due to microscopic DO.

In this Letter we study DO of confined vortex matter flowing in disordered mesoscopic channels using a completely different dynamic probe. In  we showed how a mode-locking (ML) technique can be used to explore the flow configuration in the channels in presence of strong disorder from the vortex arrays in the channel edges. The ML phenomenon occurs due to coupling between, on the one hand, lattice modes of frequency $`f_{int}=qv/a`$, with $`q`$ an integer and $`a`$ the lattice periodicity, which may exist in an array that moves coherently with velocity $`v`$, and, on the other hand, a superimposed rf-drive of frequency $`f`$ at an integer fraction $`1/p`$ of $`f_{int}`$ . This coupling produces plateaus in the dc-transport ($`IV`$) curves or sharp peaks in the differential conductance ($`dI/dV`$) when $`v=(p/q)fa`$. However, these peaks are reduced and can eventually vanish due to incoherent velocity fluctuations in the moving array, arising from both thermal and quenched disorder . Thus, the collapse of the ML peak marks the transition from coherent to incoherent flow. Using this criterion we provide for the first time conclusive evidence for a velocity dependent melting transition at $`v_c`$  and probe the divergence of $`v_c`$ upon approaching the static phase boundary.

The experiments are performed on a superconducting double layer of weak pinning amorphous (a-)Nb1-xGex ($`x0.3`$, $`550`$ nm thickness, $`T_c=2.68`$ K, normal resistivity $`\rho _n=2\mu \mathrm{\Omega }`$m) and strong pinning NbN ($`50`$ nm thickness) on top, containing $`N_{ch}(200)`$ straight channels of width $`w=230`$ nm etched to a depth of $`300`$ nm . Vortices in the channels are confined between channel edges (CE’s) consisting of pinned, disordered VL’s which impose both a periodic and random potential on the confined vortices via their mutual shear interaction, characterized by a shear modulus $`c_{66}`$. This potential determines both the threshold force density $`F_pc_{66}/w`$ and the dynamics of vortices in the channel . We measured dc and dc-rf transport versus magnetic field and temperature using a four probe configuration. The sample was immersed in superfluid 4He. The frequency of the applied rf current was in the range $`1200`$ MHz, its amplitude $`I_{rf}`$ could be as large as $`2`$ mA .

Due to the confinement, the ML condition for channel flow attains a particularly useful form: although the array in the channel may be frustrated, meaning that the average longitudinal periodicity $`aa_0`$ and the row spacing $`bb_0`$ ($`a_0=2b_0/\sqrt{3}1.075\sqrt{\mathrm{\Phi }_0/B}`$ are the equilibrium values), the voltage at which the main interference ($`p=q=1`$) occurs is simply given by

$`V_{1,1}=\mathrm{\Phi }_0fnN_{ch},`$ (2)
with $`n`$ the number of moving rows in each channel.

We first discuss the typical behavior in the solid phase where matching effects between the confined array and the channel width dominate the behavior. In Fig. 1 the thick line shows the dc-depinning force density $`F_p=J_pB`$ ($`I_{rf}=0`$). For fields $`B1.1`$ T two oscillations in $`F_p`$ are seen. The inset shows $`dI/dV`$ curves in presence of an $`85`$ MHz rf-current ($`I_{rf}=0.53`$ mA) versus voltage for fields $`0.9`$ T$`B1.16`$ T. The data for $`0.9`$ T exhibits a peak in $`dI/dV`$ corresponding to ML of $`7`$ vortex rows in each channel. For larger fields the amplitude of this peak decays while another peak, corresponding to $`8`$ rows, appears. The field region where these peaks coexist ($`0.92`$ T $``$ B $`1`$ T) evidently corresponds to the situation of maximum mismatch between the natural width $`nb_0`$ of $`n=7,8`$ vortex rows and the effective channel width (estimated as $`w_{eff}=315`$ nm). In the same field regime $`F_p`$ exhibits a maximum. As shown in , this maximum at mismatch is caused by jamming of the flow at locations in the channel where the number of rows switches from $`n`$ to $`n\pm 1`$. The motion there is partially blocked by dislocations with Burgers vectors that are almost perpendicular to the flow direction. The structural disorder of the fixed VL in the CE’s is responsible for this phenomenon.

We now turn to the behavior in larger magnetic fields, $`B1.1`$ T. At $`B1.15`$ T, $`F_p`$ shows a rapid decrease after a small upturn. This drop coincides with the onset of a measurable zero-bias resistance $`R_0`$ (displayed on the right axis). These two distinct features reflect the loss of shear rigidity of the vortex configuration inside the channel, indicating a transition to a confined vortex liquid . Note that these features occur well below the magnetic field at which the transition from $`n=8`$ to $`9`$ vortex rows is expected from the condition $`8.5b_0=w_{eff}`$, namely $`B_{8,9}=1.27`$ T. In addition, neither $`F_p`$ nor $`R_0`$ show any particular features at $`B_{8,9}`$, which shows that the liquid is insensitive to (mis)matching effects.

The ML experiments provide important new information regarding the coherence and the shear rigidity of the moving array. Figure 2(a) shows $`dI/dV`$ data in the field range $`1.141.3`$ T plotted versus the normalized voltage for a $`6`$ MHz rf-current. The ML peak in the upper curve ($`B=1.14`$ T) corresponds to the coherent motion of $`8`$ rows. For larger field the peak amplitude drops rapidly and vanishes at $`B1.2`$ T. Above $`1.2`$ T the $`dI/dV`$ versus $`V`$ curves remain featureless. The vanishing of the ML signal marks the transition from coherent motion of a vortex solid to incoherent ’liquid’ motion. A similar interpretation of this phenomenon was suggested in  with respect to the VL melting transition in YBCO.

In Fig. 2(b) a $`dI/dV`$ data set for the same field range is shown, but now for a $`140`$ MHz rf-current. The average vortex velocity at mode-locking, $`v=fa`$ is therefore over $`20`$ times larger than in Fig. 2(a). Again a clear ML peak is observed at $`B=1.14`$ T, but in contrast to the $`6`$ MHz data in (a) the field range in which ML takes place is considerably larger, extending up to $`B1.3`$ T. The nature of the moving medium thus depends strongly on its velocity. For example: at $`B=1.24`$ T one observes ’liquid’ motion for $`f=6`$ MHz but coherent motion at $`140`$ Mhz. Interestingly, in the early work of Fiory  it was already mentioned that the vanishing of the ML signal shifts to larger fields when measured at larger frequency.

For a proper determination of the collapse of the ML signal we should take into account its dependence on $`I_{rf}`$ (see e.g. ). Therefore the ML step width $`\mathrm{\Delta }I`$ (defined in the inset to Fig. 3(b)) was determined as function of field for various rf-amplitudes and frequencies. The result is shown in Fig. 3(a) for $`6`$ MHz and $`60`$ Mhz. As observed, $`\mathrm{\Delta }I`$ vanishes linearly with $`B`$ at a dynamic melting field $`B_c(f)`$ which is essentially independent of $`I_{rf}`$.

Next we study the frequency dependence of $`B_c`$. Rather than plotting $`B_c`$ versus $`f`$, we present the results by plotting the frequency at which ML vanishes, denoted by $`f_c`$, versus $`B`$, as done in Fig. 3(b). At low fields $`f_c`$ slowly increases with field, but it starts to diverge at larger field. Such divergence is expected when we identify $`v_c=f_ca`$ as the ordering velocity proposed in . In the present case, the plastic (or ’liquid’) flow for $`v<v_c`$ is controlled by the disordered VL’s in the CE’s, as we concluded from simulations at small drive (as in ). This plastic flow involves frequent slip events and transverse vortex jumps between rows. Such behavior has also been observed in magnetic bubble arrays moving along a rough wall . For $`v>v_c`$ these effects disappear and coherent motion sets in. For $`B1.32`$ T we could no longer resolve the ML effect below $`200`$ MHz. In this field regime thermal fluctuations alone are sufficient to induce incoherent motion, regardless of the dynamic influence of disorder. The $`f_c(B)`$ data can approximately be fitted to $`f_c(B_{m,e}B)^{\nu _B}`$ with $`\nu _B=2`$ and an equilibrium melting field $`B_{m,e}=1.36`$ T. An exponent $`\nu _B=1`$, as expected from Eq.(1) and the behavior of the melting line, yields a rather poor fit. This discrepancy with the data may originate from the fact that with changing field not only the ’distance’ $`B_{m,e}B`$ to the phase boundary varies, but also the commensurability, i.e. the dislocation density and effective disorder in the channel.

To avoid the possible influence of mismatch and provide a more direct test of Eq.(1), we determined $`f_c`$ as a function of temperature for $`B=1.16`$ T (near matching) from an analysis of the ML amplitude $`\mathrm{\Delta }I`$ at several rf-currents similar to that in Fig. 3(a) (details are given in ). The result is shown in Fig. 4(a). Again a clear divergence of $`f_c`$ is observed. In this case the data can be fitted quite well to Eq.(1) written as $`f_c=f_0(1T/T_{m,e})^1`$ with $`f_0=0.174`$ MHz and $`T_{m,e}=2.011`$ K. Interestingly, a comparison with the dc-resistance at various currents (Fig. 4(b)) shows that the equilibrium melting temperature $`T_{m,e}`$ coincides with the temperature where the $`R(T)`$ curves merge, i.e. the $`IV`$ curves become fully linear. This confirms the usual assumption made in dc-transport studies on VL melting . In measurements as function of field we observed the merging of $`R_{I1\mu A}(B)`$ and $`R_{I=100\mu A}(B)`$ at $`B1.34`$ T, in good agreement with $`B_{m,e}`$ determined above. We further note that none of the dc-$`IV`$ curves show an inflection point, implying that such feature is not required for microscopic DO .

It is remarkable that our system, in which ’edge disorder’  is the prime source of pinning, shows DO typical for a VL with bulk disorder. Let us therefore discuss the nature of the DO in more detail. Even for a 2D VL with bulk pinning the DO was under intensive debate . At present, the most likely scenario seems that, on increasing $`v`$, after a crossover from fully plastic to partially layered, smectic flow, finally a transition to a Moving Transverse Solid occurs . At this transverse freezing transition (TFT), inter-chain excursions (so called permeation modes ) are suppressed, but free dislocations with Burgers vector parallel to $`\stackrel{}{v}`$  and only longitudinal short-range order (LSRO) remain. Particularly, it is the TFT which is described by $`T_{sh}`$ . Turning to the channels, we then suggest that our DO boundary $`v_c(T,B)`$ reflects the TFT in which permeation modes due to roughness of the CE arrays are suppressed. Preliminary simulations support this view . Additionally, above $`v_c`$ we observe only incomplete ML, suggesting indeed LSRO  and residual slip between chains.

The shaking effect in the channels is estimated as follows. The characteristic frequency $`f_0=\mathrm{\Gamma }_{p,v}/(k_BT_{m,e}a)`$ obtained from Eq.(1), can be derived from Ref.  as: $`f_0=\sqrt{3/2\pi }\gamma _u\rho _f/(\mathrm{\Phi }_0^2a^2dk_BT_{m,e})`$ with $`\rho _f`$ the flux flow resistivity, $`d`$ the film thickness and $`\gamma _u`$ the pinning energy squared times the 2D pinning range. For the channels, the short wavelength ($`a_0`$) disorder component due to vortex displacements d in the CE acts in a range $`a_0/2`$ from the CE’s and has a strength $`A_sc_{66}`$ with $`A_s(\sqrt{|𝐝|^2}/a_0)/(\pi \sqrt{3})`$ . We thus assume that ’shaking’ of the first vortex layer near each CE dominates the TFT. Hence, $`\gamma _u(A_sc_{66}a_0b_0d)^2(a_0/2)^2`$. Using the melting criterion $`4\pi k_BT_{m,e}c_{66}a_0^2d`$ one obtains $`f_020A_s^2\rho _fk_BT_{m,e}/\mathrm{\Phi }_0^2d`$. Taking $`\rho _f\rho _n/2`$ and $`d=300`$ nm yields $`f_0=A_s^2500`$ MHz. This is in reasonable agreement with the measured value $`f_0=0.174`$ MHz when we assume $`A_s0.02`$, i.e. rms relative displacements in the CE of $`(\sqrt{|𝐝|^2}/a_0)0.1`$.

In conclusion, dynamic melting of vortex matter driven through disordered channels was studied by mode-locking experiments. The melting line strongly depends on the ML frequency, i.e. the average velocity. The associated ordering velocity diverges upon approaching the equilibrium melting line, yielding a dynamic phase diagram with coherent, plastic and fluid flow as predicted theoretically . The ML technique presents a powerful tool to study phase transitions in driven periodic media and we hope our results will stimulate similar investigations in related fields like CDW dynamics and solid friction.

This work was supported by the Nederlandse Stichting voor Fundamenteel Onderzoek der Materie (FOM).


format: text

text:
# LiBC - A prevented superconductor

## Abstract

We have investigated the lattice dynamics of LiBC. Experimental Raman and inelastic neutron scattering results are confronted with density functional calculations. The excellent agreement between experiment and theory indicates that we have attained a high level of understanding for LiBC, which by its structure is closely related to superconducting MgB2. We will show that annealing of the sample is insufficient to cause Li deficiency and thus produce the expected superconductivity.

preprint: APS/123-QED

The simple binary compound MgB2 has attracted considerable attention because of its exceptional superconducting properties. A strong coupling of the electronic system to high-frequency boron in-plane phonon modes meets the BCS requirements for a transition temperature as high as 40 K Kortus ; Bohnen . A most prominent experimental manifestation of this coupling is the extreme broadening of the E2g mode in the Raman spectrum Bohnen ; Renker . Very recently theoretical speculations of transition temperatures as high as 120 K i.e. largely exceeding those of MgB2, have been published for LiBC compounds with Li deficiencies in the range of 25 % Rosner . With respect to structural peculiarities LiBC provides a comparable system to MgB2. B and C atoms alternately occupy the sites within the hexagonal sheets. Charge neutrality is restored by replacing Mg+2 by Li+. A doubling of the unit cell along the hexagonal axis occurs due to an interchange of B and C atom positions in neighboring planesW rle . So far no convincing experimental evidence for superconductivity could be established Bharathi ; Souptel . In this context, it is most interesting to investigate the lattice dynamics of this particular compound and to compare it with our previous results for MgB2 and AlB2.

LiBC has been synthesized following a procedure which is described in detail in Ref. W rle . In view of our neutron scattering experiments we have used isotope pure 7Li metal together with amorphous 11B and graphite powders. The mixed components were pressed into pellets and held in a closed Nb tube at 1500C for 3 h. The final product was homogeneous and consisted of yellow shining crystallites with clean faces and metallic brightness. Stoichiometric LiBC has been shown to be semiconducting and to belong to the space group P63/mmc which was also confirmed by our own $`x`$-ray refinements. Hexagonal shaped platelets with diameters of up to 200 $`\mu `$m and $`20\mu `$m in thickness could be found and were chosen for optical measurements. All of our samples - the as prepared, the annealed and the Na doped ones - proved to be non-superconducting above 4 K. For inelastic neutron measurements the microcrystalline powders were filled into flat pockets of $`2\times \mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3}\times \mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0.3}`$ cm3 made from Al-foil. Measurements were performed at 300 K on the time-of-flight spectrometers IN6 (incoming energy 4.7 meV) and IN4 (incoming energy 39.4 meV) at the HFR in Grenoble (France) in the upscattering mode. A generalized phonon density of states (GDOS) was obtained from the sum of scattering spectra recorded over a large angular range from 10 to about 120. The IN6 and IN4 GDOS conincide well above 10 meV indicating that the incoherent approximation works very well. Only small coherence effects are observed in the IN6 data below 10 meV due to the fact that the $`Q`$-space is less extensively sampled with the longer wavelength neutrons at these small energy transfers. Multi-phonon contributions were removed via a self-consistant calculation procedure.

The factor group analysis yields 2A2u +2B1g \+ B2u \+ 2E1u \+ 2E2g \+ Eu zone center optic modes where only the 2E2g modes are Raman (R) active. The latter modes should be observable for all configurations with polarization vectors of the incoming and the reflected light within the hexagonal plane. Zero intensity is expected if one of these vectors is parallel to the crystallographic $`c`$ axis. The spectra shown in Fig. 1 prove that this is essentially the case. In particular we do not observe additional strong and sharp lines at 546 cm-1 and 830 cm-1 which have been reported by other authors Hlinka  and which have been taken as a reason to propose the lower symmetric space group $`P\overline{3}m1`$ for LiBC.

These authors conclude on a particular “puckering” of hexagonal B-C planes. We have never observed these lines although we have noticed that the background spectrum may depend on details of the sample preparation. A high Li vapor pressure at the synthesis temperature around 1500C and possible small leaks in the container may cause problems in sample preparation. However, a broader contribution around 1270 cm-1 is also observed in our polarized spectra. It is not allowed as a one phonon contribution. Its intensity when compared to the allowed line at 1168 cm-1 is sample dependent and gets weaker on cooling. It is attributed to second order scattering or to structural defects although its origin is not fully understood.

The important hole doping of B $`2p\sigma `$ bands in MgB2 is caused by the relative shift of $`\pi `$ and $`\sigma `$ bands in this particular compound. This does not occur for LiBC. However, there are speculations that a doping could be achieved by Li deficiency. We have annealed samples at 800C, 1000C and 1200C for $`3`$ h in dynamic vacuum in order to reduce the Li content. Structural changes within the Li sheets which provide a coupling between neighboring B-C planes are expected to show up in the sliding frequency at 171 cm-1 (see Tab. 1). However, little changes are observed in the R-spectra up to annealing temperatures of about 800C when Li starts to evaporate. For the sample which was annealed at 1000 K we observe a small but significant downshift of the sliding frequency indicating a possible decrease in the Li concentration. A somewhat larger shift was observed for a sample of nominal Li0.95Na0.05BC. For the B-C stretching mode at 1167 cm-1 we register a still smaller relative shift which let us conclude that the obtained changes in the electronic system are negligible. These results were reproducible on different crystallites and are shown in detail by the inserts in Fig. 1. Thus neither the proposed dramatic softening nor any significant line broadening as observed for MgB2 occur. In view of the high frequency of the E2g in-plane mode LiBC resembles much more the compound AlB2. Indications of sample disintegration, i.e. a decrease in intensity of the two E2g lines and broader contributions at energies $`>`$ 1200 cm-1, are observed for samples with annealing temperatures $`>`$ 1370 K. Since samples which already start to show signatures of disintegration in the R-spectrum still exhibit the correct $`x`$-ray structure it is concluded that disintegration starts on the surface of the crystallites.

Augmenting results are obtained by inelastic neutron scattering which can access all excitations in the entire zone and which investigates the whole volume of the crystallites. In Fig. 2 we show the generalized phonon density-of-states measured at 300 K. The spectrum consists of three main peaks. Hard B and C in-plane and out-of-plane modes are grouped around 150 meV and 100 meV respectively. Modes where neighboring B-C sheets slide against each other as well as vibrations of the weaker bond Li-ions contribute to the lowest peak around 50 meV. Fig. 1 shows that the upper two peaks in LiBC group around the corresponding line of AlB2 which reflects the doubling of the unit cell in $`c`$ direction . A shoulder around 160 meV agrees well to the “forbidden” line at 1270 cm-1 in the R-spectrum. A clear result is that the significant down-shift and broadening of the high energy peak of MgB2 does not occur for our sample of as prepared LiBC. Therefore, the spectrum of undoped LiBC resembles much more the GDOS of AlB2. The exceptional behaviour of MgB2 is besides structural differences the result of strong electron-phonon coupling for the E2g mode (1167 cm-1 for LiBC). Here, both experiments agree that nothing comparable exists for the as prepared sample of LiBC. A hybridization of Li modes with the underlying B(C) partial DOS is however also registered in the GDOS spectra of LiBC.

A crucial question is, whether it is possible to obtain a sufficiently strong doping of LiBC by Li evaporation. In Ref.W rle  the authors were confident that this could be achieved. For superconductivity it would be important to obtain a homogeneous doping of the entire material without damage of the main structure. This however could not be observed in our R-spectra which investigate the surface of the crystallites. With INS we can see the whole volume. In Fig. 3 we show GDOS spectra which have been obtained for samples with different annealing temperatures. It can be seen clearly that no shift in the peak positions occurs. Up to $``$ 1120 K the sample seems stable. Annealing at still higher temperatures damages the whole sample. The initially sharp peaks start to disappear remarkably without any significant shifts in their position. A humb around 20 meV rises up and signalizes the formation of amorphous material. This spectral change is still more pronounced in the original time-of-flight spectra. It is a clear result of our measurements that not enough of the Li ions sandwiched between the hexagonal B,C-planes can be removed in order to cause the desired changes in the electronic system. Dramatic changes due to an unusually strong electron-phonon coupling even more pronounced than those found for MgB2 otherwise should have been observed.

A detailed analysis of our experimental data has been performed by calculations based on density functional theory. This technique provides an accurate and parameter free analysis of the electronic structure and the bonding properties. Our calculations which correspond to those performed for other diborides Bohnen ; Heid  are based on a perturbational approach using the mixed basis pseudopotential method and provide information on the phonon frequencies and electron-phonon coupling within the whole BZ. Pseudopotentials for Li and C Bohnen-Heid  were constructed according to Hamann-Schlüter-Chiang whereas for B a Vanderbilt-type potential was chosen. Our calculations apply to stoichiometric LiBC and the structure P63/mmc which assumes a regular stacking of hexagonal B-C planes and sheets of Li ions sitting on the corner of trigonal prisms. It can be seen from Fig. 2 that a very high level of correspondence to the experimental GDOS is reached. All distinct maxima correspond to similar features in the experimental spectrum. The very high frequency shoulder at 160 meV is not part of the calculated spectrum which suggests an interpretation as a defect induced contribution. Furthermore it can be seen from the partial DOS that the Li modes overlap with B and C vibrations. Thus a scenario similar to MgB2 seems possible for samples with sufficiently high doping. A significant feature of a very strong electron-phonon coupling in MgB2 was the drop of the E2g in-plane mode at $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ well below the B1g out-of-plane mode. In Tab. 1 we have listed all calculated $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-point frequencies ordered according to increasing energies. For the IR-active modes the LO (L) and TO (T) splitting has been calculated. A good correspondence to the measured R-lines is registered. Again with respect to the position of the E2g and B1g modes it can be seen that stoichiometric LiBC is far away from the favourable situation found in MgB2.

In conclusion, it is a success that larger single crystalline specimens of LiBC with the shape of beautiful hexagonal prisms can be prepared. We register that the R-selection rules are fully obeyed for our samples. A small humb near 1270 cm-1 in the (x,x)-spectrum probably originates from disorder. There is no $`x`$-ray evidence of any second phase in the investigated single crystals. Any significant doping by an evaporation of Li in dynamic vacuum was not possible for the investigated single crystals although very small frequency shifts occur for the sliding mode at 171 cm-1. It is also a clear result that in our preparation crystallites with a “puckering” of the hexagonal B-C planes were not obtained.

The generalized phonon density of states (GDOS) has been measured by INS and proves the very high quality of first principals calculations. The experimental spectrum of the undoped compound resembles much more that of AlB2 than MgB2, i.e. signatures of any stronger electron-phonon coupling are fully absent for LiBC.

The preparation of doped LiBC crystals still remains a challenge for sample preparation. Simple annealing in dynamic vacuum however will cause a disintegration of LiBC crystals as demonstrated in these investigations.


text:
# Thermal field theory and generalized light front quantization

## I introduction

### I.1 The light front and thermal field theory

For many years light front quantization has been applied to deep inelastic scattering and the Wilson operator product expansion. More recently it has been used in QCD to compute hadron structure b ; c ; d ; e . Light front quantization brings both conceptual and computational simplifications to certain hadronic processes PD ; rev .

Much of the computational simplification occurs because the mass shell condition expressed in terms of the momentum variables $`p^\pm =(p^0\pm p^3)/\sqrt{2}`$ is

$$p^{}=\frac{𝒑_{}^2+m^2}{2p^+}.$$
(1a)
The operator $`P^{}=(P^0P^3)/\sqrt{2}`$ plays the role of the Hamiltonian in that it generates the evolution of the fields in the coordinate $`x^+=(x^0+x^3)/\sqrt{2}`$
$$[P^{},\varphi (x)]=i\frac{\varphi }{x^+}.$$
(1b)
Recently Brodsky suggested SB2  that the computational advantages of quantizing in light front coordinates might carry over to statistical mechanics and thermal field theory done on the light front and proposed as the appropriate partition function

$$\mathrm{Tr}\left[\mathrm{exp}\left\{P^{}/T_{\mathrm{LC}}\right\}\right].$$
(1c)
The relation of $`T_{LC}`$ to the usual invariant temperature $`T`$ was unspecified.

The suggestion was pursued by Alves, Das, and Perez ADP . For a free field theory they found an immediate problem that comes from the vanishing of the on-shell energy, Eq. (1a), as $`p_+\mathrm{}`$. The breakdown is not specific to the canonical ensemble. In the microcanonical ensemble the entropy is a measure of the multiparticle phase space available to a gas of particles whose total energy is fixed. To any configuration with a fixed value of the total $`P^{}`$ one can add any number of zero-energy particles each having an infinite value of $`p^+`$. The entropy of such a configuration diverges.

Alves, Das, and Perez ADP  showed that a thermal average performed in the rest frame but using light-front variables does work. Using $`P^0=(P^++P^{})/\sqrt{2}`$ the partition function is

$$\mathrm{Tr}\left[\mathrm{exp}\left\{(P^++P^{})/\sqrt{2}T\right\}\right],$$
(2)
instead of Eq. (1c). They performed one-loop calculations of the self-energy in scalar field theories with either a $`\varphi ^4`$ interaction or a $`\varphi ^3`$ interaction. The final results for both calculations were exactly the same as the conventional answers.

### I.2 Thermal field theory in generalized coordinates

In order to explore the various possible options it is most efficient to consider quantization in a general set of space-time coordinates and later examine light front quantization as a special case. The metric signature is $`(+,,,)`$.

The conventional approach is to impose quantization conditions on fields at a fixed value of $`x^0`$. The operator that generates time evolution is $`P_0`$. The partition function is

$$\mathrm{Tr}\left[\mathrm{exp}\left\{P_0/T\right\}\right],$$
(3)
as is appropriate for a heat bath at rest. If this system is viewed from a Lorentz frame with velocity $`v`$ and four-velocity $`u^\alpha =(\gamma ,0,0,\gamma v)`$, then the quantization will be at a fixed value of $`x^\alpha u_\alpha `$; the evolution operator will be $`P_\alpha u^\alpha `$; and the partition function will be $`\mathrm{Tr}[\mathrm{exp}(\beta P_\alpha u^\alpha )]`$. The fact that $`u^\alpha `$ serves as both the vector normal to the surface of quantization and the velocity vector of the heat bath is a unique feature of Lorentz boosted coordinates and is not be true in more general coordinates.

The present paper investigates the dependence of thermal field theory on the surface of quantization and on the velocity of the heat bath. Subsequent analysis will show that for any vector $`n_\alpha `$ that is time-like or light-like, it is possible to quantize at a fixed value of $`n_\alpha x^\alpha `$,

$$[\pi (x),\varphi (0)]\delta (n_\alpha x^\alpha c)=i\delta ^4(x),$$
(4a)
and employ the partition function
$$\mathrm{Tr}\left[\mathrm{exp}\left\{P_\alpha u^\alpha /T\right\}\right],$$
(4b)
appropriate to a heat bath moving with four-velocity $`u^\alpha =(\gamma ,0,0,\gamma v)`$, provided only that $`n_\alpha `$ and $`u^\alpha `$ satisfy
$$u^\alpha n_\alpha >0.$$
(4c)
The conventional rest frame choice is $`n^0=u^0=1`$ and $`n^j=u^j=0`$. A Lorentz boost from the rest frame still gives $`n^\alpha =u^\alpha `$. The equality of these two vectors is not general as various examples will show. One can see that light front quantization using the partition function in Eq. (1c) fails, even apart from the divergence issues mentioned previously, because it requires $`v1`$ in order that $`P_\alpha u^\alpha `$ be proportional to $`P_{}`$. This makes $`T_{\mathrm{LC}}=T\sqrt{1v^2}/\sqrt{2}0`$. In contrast, the successful approach of Alves, Das, and Perez ADP  in Eq. (2) fits into the general framework above with $`n^\alpha =(1,0,0,1)`$ and $`u^\alpha =(1,0,0,0)`$.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate thermal field theory formulated in general coordinates that are arbitrary linear combinations of the Cartesian $`t,x,y,z`$ and see if there are any computational advantages to other formulations. The method is conservative in that the new coordinates are restricted to be linear combinations of the Cartesian coordinates Fub , a restriction which guarantees that physical consequences will be the same for the following reason. The Lagrangians of fundamental field theories are invariant under arbitrary nonlinear coordinate transformations in accord with the principle of equivalence and thus are trivially invariant under the linear coordinate transformations considered here. Physically interesting quantities in thermal field theories are either scalars, spinors, or tensors. Whether calculated in Cartesian coordinates or more general linear coordinates, the scalar quantities should be identical and the spinor and tensor quantities should be simply related by the chosen transformations.

Section II develops the formalism of thermal field theory in the general coordinates in order to determine the possible choices for the surface of quantization and the velocity of the heat bath. Section III treats several examples that are specifically related to light front quantization and it may be read independently of Sec. II. Section IV provides some conclusions.

## II Thermal Field Theory in Oblique Coordinates

### II.1 Transformed coordinates and metric

From the Cartesian coordinates $`x^0=t`$, $`x^1`$, $`x^2`$, $`x^3`$ a new set of coordinates $`x^{\overline{0}}`$, $`x^{\overline{1}}`$, $`x^{\overline{2}}`$, $`x^{\overline{3}}`$ can be formed by taking linear combinations:

$$x^{\overline{\mu }}=A_\alpha ^{\overline{\mu }}x^\alpha ,$$
(5)
where the $`A_\alpha ^{\overline{\mu }}`$ are a set of 16 real constants. The notation used is due to Schouten Sc . It expresses the fact that the space-time point specified by the four-vector $`x`$ does not change under a coordinate transformation; only the labels used to indentify the components change. For example, the light front choice is expressed $`x^{\overline{0}}=(x^0+x^3)/\sqrt{2}`$. It is also convenient that for $`A_\alpha ^{\overline{\mu }}`$ the superscript $`\overline{\mu }`$ is neither a first index nor a second index since $`\overline{\mu }`$ cannot be confused with $`\alpha `$.

It is misleading to refer to the general coordinate transformations as a change in the reference frame. A change in the physical reference frame can only be done by rotations and Lorentz boosts.

The 16 real numbers $`A_\alpha ^{\overline{\mu }}`$ must have a nonzero determinant. To guarantee that $`x^{\overline{0}}`$ be a time coordinate, it is necessary to require that the covariant Lorentz vector $`A_\alpha ^{\overline{0}}`$ be time-like or light-like:

$$A_\alpha ^{\overline{0}}A_\beta ^{\overline{0}}g^{\alpha \beta }0,$$
(6)
where $`g_{\alpha \beta }=\mathrm{diag}(1,1,1,1)`$ is the Minkowski metric. It is sometimes useful to express the transformation matrix in terms of partial derivatives:

$$A_\alpha ^{\overline{\mu }}=\frac{x^{\overline{\mu }}}{x^\alpha }.$$
(7)
The relation (5) can be inverted to find the Cartesian coordinates $`x^\beta `$ as linear combinations of the new coordinates $`x^{\overline{\nu }}`$. These partial derivatives are denoted

$$A_{\overline{\nu }}^\beta =\frac{x^\beta }{x^{\overline{\nu }}}.$$
(8)
The transformations satisfy

$$A_\alpha ^{\overline{\mu }}A_{\overline{\nu }}^\alpha =\delta _{\overline{\nu }}^{\overline{\mu }}A_\alpha ^{\overline{\mu }}A_{\overline{\mu }}^\beta =\delta _\alpha ^\beta .$$
(9)
The differential length element in Cartesian coordinates is $`g_{\alpha \beta }dx^\alpha dx^\beta =(dt)^2(dx)^2(dy)^2(dz)^2`$. In the new coordinates there is a new metric $`g_{\overline{\mu \nu }}`$ given by

$$g_{\overline{\mu }\overline{\nu }}=A_{\overline{\mu }}^\alpha A_{\overline{\nu }}^\beta g_{\alpha \beta },$$
(10)
which satisfies $`g_{\alpha \beta }dx^\alpha dx^\beta =g_{\overline{\mu \nu }}dx^{\overline{\mu }}dx^{\overline{\nu }}`$. If all 12 of the off-diagonal entries in $`g_{\overline{\mu \nu }}`$ vanish, the new coordinates are orthogonal. This occurs, for example, if the $`A`$ are Lorentz transformations. In general the $`g_{\overline{\mu \nu }}`$ are not diagonal and in general the new coordinates are oblique. It will be convenient for later purposes to denote the determinant of the covariant metric by

$$g=\mathrm{Det}\left[g_{\overline{\mu \nu }}\right]<0.$$
(11)
The Jacobian of the coordinate transformation

$$dx^0dx^1dx^2dx^3=Jdx^{\overline{0}}dx^{\overline{1}}dx^{\overline{2}}dx^{\overline{3}},$$

is therefore

$$J=\mathrm{Det}\left[A_{\overline{\mu }}^\alpha \right]=\sqrt{g}.$$
(12)
It will also be necessary to use the contravariant metric $`g^{\overline{\mu \nu }}`$, related to the Minkowski metric by

$$g^{\overline{\mu }\overline{\nu }}=A_\alpha ^{\overline{\mu }}A_\beta ^{\overline{\nu }}g^{\alpha \beta }.$$
(13)
The requirement in Eq. (6) can be stated as

$$g^{\overline{00}}0.$$
(14)
### II.2 Four-momentum operators

In the conventional quantization at fixed $`x^0`$ the momentum operators $`P_\lambda `$ are the generators of space-time translations. For a scalar field operator $`\varphi (x)`$ they satisfy

$$[P_\lambda ,\varphi ]=i\frac{\varphi }{x^\lambda }.$$

The linear combination of these generators defined by

$$P_{\overline{\mu }}=A_{\overline{\mu }}^\lambda P_\lambda ,$$
(15)
with $`A_{\overline{\mu }}^\lambda `$ given in Eq. (8) will satisfy

$$[P_{\overline{\mu }},\varphi ]=i\frac{x^\lambda }{x^{\overline{\mu }}}\frac{\varphi }{x^\lambda }=i\frac{\varphi }{x^{\overline{\mu }}}.$$
(16)
In particular, $`P_{\overline{0}}`$ generates the evolution in the variable $`x^{\overline{0}}`$. Appendix B shows that if one quantizes at fixed $`x^{\overline{0}}`$ then the Hamiltonian is this same operator $`P_{\overline{0}}`$.

Note that the temporal evolution is in the variable $`x^{\overline{0}}=A_\alpha ^{\overline{0}}x^\alpha `$ but the evolution operator is in a different linear combination: $`P_{\overline{0}}=A_{\overline{0}}^\alpha P_\alpha `$. These two vectors are reciprocal in the sense that $`A_\alpha ^{\overline{0}}A_{\overline{0}}^\alpha =1`$. Lorentz transformations are special in that the metrics are the same, $`g_{\overline{\alpha \beta }}=g_{\alpha \beta }`$ and the two vectors are the same, $`A_\alpha ^{\overline{0}}=g_{\alpha \beta }A_{\overline{0}}^\beta `$.

### II.3 Density operator

Field theory at finite temperature requires a density operator and it is not obvious exactly what the density operator should be when using general oblique coordinates. For conventional quantization at fixed $`x^0`$ the density operator has the form

$$\widehat{\varrho }=\mathrm{exp}\left\{\beta P_\alpha u^\alpha \right\},$$
(17)
where $`u^\alpha `$ is some four-velocity. Rewriting this in general coordinates gives $`\widehat{\varrho }=\mathrm{exp}\left\{\beta P_{\overline{\sigma }}u^{\overline{\sigma }}\right\}.`$ The appropriate value of $`u^{\overline{\sigma }}`$ is undetermined but since the Minkowski four-velocity satisfies $`u^\alpha u^\beta g_{\alpha \beta }=1`$, the velocity in oblique coordinates must satisfy

$$u^{\overline{\sigma }}u^{\overline{\mu }}g_{\overline{\sigma \mu }}=1.$$
(18)
#### II.3.1 KMS relation

With a partition function of the above form, the thermal Wightman function is

$$𝒟_>(x)=\mathrm{Tr}\left[\widehat{\varrho }\varphi (x)\varphi (0)\right]/\mathrm{Tr}[\widehat{\varrho }].$$

Consider a shift the oblique time, i.e. $`x^{\overline{0}}x^{\overline{0}}+\delta x^{\overline{0}}`$ with fixed values of $`x^{\overline{1}},x^{\overline{2}},x^{\overline{3}}`$. In terms of the Cartesian coordinates $`x^\alpha x^\alpha +\delta x^\alpha `$ with $`\delta x^\alpha =A_{\overline{0}}^\alpha \delta x^{\overline{0}}`$. Using $`P_\alpha \delta x^\alpha =P_{\overline{0}}\delta x^{\overline{0}}`$ the shifted field operator is

$`\varphi (x+\delta x)=`$ $`\mathrm{exp}(iP_\alpha \delta x^\alpha )\varphi (x)\mathrm{exp}(iP_\alpha \delta x^\alpha )`$
$`=`$ $`\mathrm{exp}(iP_{\overline{0}}\delta x^{\overline{0}})\varphi (x)\mathrm{exp}(iP_{\overline{0}}\delta x^{\overline{0}}).`$
For evolution in imaginary values of $`\delta x^{\overline{0}}`$ to be equivalent to thermal averaging requires that the density operator involve only $`P_{\overline{0}}`$ and not $`P_{\overline{j}}`$. Therefore the spatial components of the contravariant velocity must vanish: $`u^{\overline{1}}=u^{\overline{2}}=u^{\overline{3}}=0`$. This describes a heat bath that is at rest in the oblique coordinates. The normalized velocity vector is

$$u^{\overline{\sigma }}=(\frac{1}{\sqrt{g_{\overline{0}\overline{0}}}},0,0,0).$$
(19)
Note that this imposes a new requirement on the metric,

$$g_{\overline{00}}>0,$$
(20)
that is different than Eq. (14). This condition prevents standard light front quantization since $`g_{\overline{00}}`$ would vanish. In all subsequent discussion it will be assumed that Eq. (20) is satisfied. The density operator is

$$\widehat{\varrho }=\mathrm{exp}\left\{\beta P_{\overline{0}}/\sqrt{g_{\overline{00}}}\right\},$$
(21)
or equivalently Eq. (17) if the velocity vector is expressed in Cartesian coordinates:

$$u^\alpha =A_{\overline{\mu }}^\alpha u^{\overline{\mu }}=A_{\overline{0}}^\alpha /\sqrt{g_{\overline{00}}}.$$
(22)
The vector normal to the quantization surface is $`n_\alpha =A_\alpha ^{\overline{0}}`$ and therefore $`n_\alpha u^\alpha =1/\sqrt{g_{\overline{00}}}>0`$ as stated in Eq. (4c).

The density operator is used to define the thermal averaged Wightman function:

$$𝒟_>(x)=\mathrm{Tr}\left[\mathrm{exp}\left\{\beta P_{\overline{0}}/\sqrt{g_{\overline{00}}}\right\}\varphi (x)\varphi (0)\right]/Z,$$
(23)
where $`Z=\mathrm{Tr}[\widehat{\varrho }]`$ is the partition function. Under imaginary shifts in the oblique time of the form $`\delta x^{\overline{0}}=i\alpha /\sqrt{g_{\overline{00}}}`$, the behavior is

$`𝒟_>(x^{\overline{0}}+i\alpha /\sqrt{g_{\overline{00}}},x^{\overline{j}})`$ (24)
$`=\mathrm{Tr}\left[\mathrm{exp}\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{(\beta +\alpha )P_{\overline{0}}}{\sqrt{g_{\overline{00}}}}}\right\}\varphi (x)\mathrm{exp}\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha P_{\overline{0}}}{\sqrt{g_{\overline{00}}}}}\right\}\varphi (0)\right]/Z.`$
The spectrum of $`P_{\overline{0}}`$ is bounded from below but will always have arbitrarily large positive eigenvalues. If the two exponents are negative then the infinitely large energies will be suppressed. In other words, (24) is analytic for $`\beta \alpha 0`$. For the choice $`\alpha =\beta `$ or equivalently $`\delta x^\alpha =i\beta u^\alpha `$ the result is

$$𝒟_>(x^{\overline{0}}i\beta /\sqrt{g_{\overline{00}}},x^{\overline{j}})=𝒟_>(x^{\overline{0}},x^{\overline{j}}).$$
(25)
This is the Kubo-Martin-Schwinger relation KMS  expressed in oblique coordinates.

#### II.3.2 Tolman’s law

The dependence of the partition function (21) on the combination $`P_{\overline{0}}/T\sqrt{g_{\overline{00}}}`$ merits further discussion. One explanation comes from perturbation theory in which at each order the eigenvalues of the operator $`P_{\overline{0}}`$ are the sum of single particle energies $`p_{\overline{0}}`$, each satisfying a mass shell condition $`g^{\overline{\mu \nu }}p_{\overline{\mu }}p_{\overline{\nu }}=m^2`$, for various masses. Among the allowed coordinate transformations are scale transformations. Rescaling the contravariant time by a factor $`\lambda `$, as in $`x^{\overline{0}}\lambda x^{\overline{0}}`$, would rescale the covariant energy by $`p_{\overline{0}}p_{\overline{0}}/\lambda `$. The combination $`P_{\overline{0}}/T`$ would not be invariant under this transformation. However, the scale transformation changes the covariant metric, $`g_{\overline{00}}g_{\overline{00}}/\lambda ^2`$, and the combination $`P_{\overline{0}}/T\sqrt{g_{\overline{00}}}`$ is invariant.

There is another way to understand why the partition function (21) depends on the combination $`T\sqrt{g_{\overline{00}}}`$. A condition necessary for thermal equilibrium in inertial coordinates is that the temperature should be uniform in space and time. Tolman RCT  investigated the conditions for thermal equilibrium in a gravitational field and showed that a temperature gradient is necessary to prevent the flow of heat from regions of higher gravitational potential to regions of lower gravitational potential. The quantitative result is summarized by the statement that the product $`T\sqrt{g_{\overline{00}}}`$ must be constant and is known at Tolman’s law WI .

An alternative derivation is given by Landau and Lifshitz LL , who discuss how to compute the entropy in the microcanonical ensemble in a general curvilinear coordinate system (with or without gravity). In the microcanonical ensemble, the temperature is computed by differentiating the entropy with respect to the energy and this leads to the result that $`T\sqrt{g_{\overline{00}}}`$ must be constant.

#### II.3.3 Covariant density operator

For later purposes it is convenient to express the density operator (21) in a covariant form in terms of the conserved energy-momentum operator $`T_{\overline{\mu }}^{\overline{\nu }}`$. The generators of translations are

$$P_{\overline{\mu }}=\sqrt{g}𝑑x^{\overline{1}}𝑑x^{\overline{2}}𝑑x^{\overline{3}}T_{\overline{\mu }}^{\overline{0}}.$$

Rewrite this in terms of the energy-momentum operator in Cartesian coordinates, $`T_\lambda ^\alpha `$ as

$$P_{\overline{\mu }}=𝑑S_\alpha T_\lambda ^\alpha A_{\overline{\mu }}^\lambda ,$$
(26)
in accordance with Eq. (15). The three-dimensional, differential surface element is

$$dS_\alpha =\sqrt{g}A_\alpha ^{\overline{0}}dx^{\overline{1}}dx^{\overline{2}}dx^{\overline{3}}.$$
(27)
This surface of quantization is orthogonal to three contravariant: vectors $`A_{\overline{j}}^\alpha dS_\alpha =0`$ for $`\overline{j}=\overline{1},\overline{2},\overline{3}`$. Contracting $`P_{\overline{\mu }}`$ with $`u^{\overline{\mu }}`$ and using Eq. (19) gives the density operator in covariant form:

$$\widehat{\varrho }=\mathrm{exp}\left\{\beta 𝑑S_\alpha T_\lambda ^\alpha u^\lambda \right\}.$$
(28)
### II.4 Thermal field theory in real time

To quantize a field theory at a fixed value of $`x^{\overline{0}}`$ is straightforward but there are some unfamiliar aspects that originate from the oblique metric $`g_{\overline{\mu \nu }}`$ being non-diagonal. Appendix B performs the explicit quantization for a scalar field theory. It is most natural to deal with contravariant space-time coordinates $`x^{\overline{\mu }}`$ and covariant momentum variables $`p_{\overline{\mu }}`$ so that the solutions of the field equations are superpositions of plane waves of the form $`\mathrm{exp}(\pm ip_{\overline{\mu }}x^{\overline{\mu }})`$. For spinor particles the Dirac matrices are $`\gamma ^{\overline{\mu }}=A_\alpha ^{\overline{\mu }}\gamma ^\alpha `$ and satisfy $`\{\gamma ^\mu ,\gamma ^\nu \}=2g^{\overline{\mu \nu }}`$. For gauge boson propagators there are natural generalizations of Coulomb gauge, axial gauge, and covariant gauges. This section will summarize some familiar results but expressed in oblique coordinates. Either canonical quantization or functional integration may be used Das ; LeBellac .

#### II.4.1 Propagators

At zero temperature the free propagator for a scalar field is

$$D(p_{\overline{0}},p_{\overline{j}})=\frac{1}{g^{\overline{\mu \nu }}p_{\overline{\mu }}p_{\overline{\nu }}m^2+iϵ}.$$
(29)
The integration measure over loop momenta is

$$\frac{dp_{\overline{0}}dp_{\overline{1}}dp_{\overline{2}}dp_{\overline{3}}}{\sqrt{g}(2\pi )^4}.$$
(30)
At non-zero temperature the propagator has the usual $`2\times 2`$ matrix structure Das ; LeBellac . The Bose-Einstein or Fermi-Dirac functions become

$$n=\frac{1}{\mathrm{exp}(\beta |p_{\overline{0}}|/\sqrt{g_{\overline{00}}})1}.$$
(31)
As discussed later, the most interesting possibility is to choose a coordinate transformation such that $`g^{\overline{00}}=0`$. This makes the denominator of the propagator linear in $`p_{\overline{0}}`$ and therefore there is only one pole in (29).

If $`g^{\overline{00}}0`$ then the propagator has poles at two values of $`p_{\overline{0}}`$ but the positive and negative values of $`p_{\overline{0}}`$ will have different magnitudes. It is sometimes convenient to express the propagator in a mixed form, in terms of the covariant energy $`p_{\overline{0}}`$ but the contravariant momenta $`p^{\overline{j}}`$. To do this, use the identity

$`g_{\overline{\mu \nu }}p^{\overline{\mu }}p^{\overline{\nu }}=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{g_{\overline{00}}}}\left(g_{\overline{00}}p^{\overline{0}}+g_{\overline{0i}}p^{\overline{i}}\right)^2+\left(g_{\overline{ij}}{\displaystyle \frac{g_{\overline{oi}}g_{\overline{0j}}}{g_{\overline{00}}}}\right)p^{\overline{i}}p^{\overline{j}}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(p_{\overline{0}})^2}{g_{\overline{00}}}}\gamma _{\overline{ij}}p^{\overline{i}}p^{\overline{j}}`$
where $`\gamma _{\overline{ij}}`$ is given by

$$\gamma _{\overline{ij}}=g_{\overline{ij}}+\frac{g_{\overline{oi}}g_{\overline{0j}}}{g_{\overline{00}}}.$$
(32)
The determinant is $`\mathrm{Det}[\gamma _{\overline{ij}}]=g/g_{\overline{00}}>0`$ com1 . Define the effective energy

$$E=\left[m^2+\gamma _{\overline{ij}}p^{\overline{i}}p^{\overline{j}}\right]^{1/2}.$$
(33)
The same propagator in these variables is

$$D(p_{\overline{0}},p^{\overline{j}})=\frac{g_{\overline{00}}}{(p_{\overline{0}})^2g_{\overline{00}}E^2+iϵ}$$
(34)
The poles are now at $`p_0=\pm \sqrt{g_{\overline{00}}}E`$. The Bose-Einstein or Fermi-Dirac functions become

$$n=\frac{1}{\mathrm{exp}(\beta E)1}.$$
(35)
The integration over covariant energy and contravariant three-momenta is

$$\frac{\sqrt{g}}{g_{\overline{00}}}\frac{dp_{\overline{0}}dp^{\overline{1}}dp^{\overline{2}}dp^{\overline{3}}}{(2\pi )^4}.$$
(36)
#### II.4.2 Statistical mechanics

The partition function provides a direct calculation of the thermodynamic functions via the Helmholtz free energy $`F`$:

$$\mathrm{exp}\left\{\beta F/\sqrt{g_{\overline{00}}}\right\}=\mathrm{Tr}\left[\mathrm{exp}\left\{\beta P_{\overline{0}}/\sqrt{g_{\overline{00}}}\right\}\right].$$
(37)
The free energy $`F(T,V)`$ then allows computation of the pressure and entropy:

$`P=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{F}{V}}\right)_T`$ (38a)
$`S=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{F}{T}}\right)_V,`$ (38b)
and the energy is $`U=F+TS`$.

#### II.4.3 Covariant statistical mechanics

The prescriptions in Eq. (38) can be derived rather elegantly from the partition function if it is formulated covariantly WI ; AW . In global thermal equilibrium considered here, the temperature $`T`$ and the velocity $`u^{\overline{\mu }}`$ of the heat bath are independent of space-time and so there is no heat flux or viscosity. The thermal average of the energy-momentum operator has the perfect fluid form:

$$\frac{\mathrm{Tr}\left[\widehat{\varrho }T^{\overline{\nu \mu }}\right]}{\mathrm{Tr}\left[\widehat{\varrho }\right]}=(\rho +P)g^{\overline{\nu \mu }}Pu^{\overline{\nu }}u^{\overline{\mu }},$$
(39)
where $`\rho `$ is the energy density. The first law of thermodynamics guarantees that there is an additional state function, the entropy density $`\sigma `$, related to energy density and pressure by

$$T\sigma =\rho +P.$$
(40)
This relation is equivalent to the more familiar differential relation $`TdS=dU+PdV`$.

It is convenient to express the right hand side of Eq. (37) as the trace of the covariant density operator (28). The left hand side of (37) can be written covariantly in terms of the differential surface element (27) using $`\sqrt{g}dx^{\overline{1}}dx^{\overline{2}}dx^{\overline{3}}/\sqrt{g_{\overline{00}}}=dS_\alpha u^\alpha `$ as an integral over the free energy density $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$:

$$F/\sqrt{g_{\overline{00}}}=𝑑S_\alpha u^\alpha \mathrm{\Phi }.$$

The manifestly covariant statement of Eq. (37) is

$$\mathrm{exp}\left\{\beta 𝑑S_\alpha \mathrm{\Phi }u^\alpha \right\}=\mathrm{Tr}\left[\mathrm{exp}\left\{\beta 𝑑S_\alpha T_\lambda ^\alpha u^\lambda \right\}\right].$$
(41)
Now apply this to two different equilibrium states with infinitessimally different $`\beta `$ and $`u^\alpha `$. The difference gives the differential relation

$$d(\beta \mathrm{\Phi }u^\alpha )=\frac{\mathrm{Tr}\left[\widehat{\varrho }T_\lambda ^\alpha \right]}{\mathrm{Tr}[\widehat{\varrho }]}d(\beta u^\lambda ).$$
(42)
The differential on the left hand side is

$$d(\beta \mathrm{\Phi })u^\alpha +(\beta \mathrm{\Phi })du^\alpha .$$

Using the thermal average of the energy-momentum tensor (39), the right hand side is

$`\left((\rho +P)u^\alpha u_\lambda P\delta _\lambda ^\alpha \right)\left(d\beta u^\lambda +\beta du^\lambda \right)`$
$`=\rho d\beta u^\alpha P\beta du^\alpha ,`$
where $`u_\lambda du^\lambda =0`$ has been used. Equating the left and right hand sides and noting that $`u^\alpha `$ and $`du^\alpha `$ are orthogonal vectors, gives the two relations

$`\mathrm{\Phi }=`$ $`P`$ (43a)
$`d(\beta \mathrm{\Phi })=`$ $`\rho d\beta .`$ (43b)
The first relation is the same as Eq. (38a). The second relation implies $`d\mathrm{\Phi }=(\mathrm{\Phi }\rho )dT/T=(P+\rho )dT/T=\sigma dT`$. Therefore $`\sigma =\mathrm{\Phi }/T`$, which is the same as Eq. (38b) but expressed in terms of densities.

### II.5 Thermal field theory in imaginary time

It is also interesting to quantize in imaginary oblique time by letting $`x^{\overline{0}}=i\tau `$ with $`0\tau \beta /\sqrt{g_{\overline{00}}}`$. As shown in Eq. (24) the thermal Wightman function is analytic for $`\tau `$ in this region. Since the Cartesian coordinates are linear combinations of the oblique coordinates, $`x^\alpha =A_{\overline{\mu }}^\alpha x^{\overline{\mu }}`$, making $`x^{\overline{0}}`$ pure imaginary makes some of the Cartesian coordinates complex. In other words, going to imaginary time does not commute with the coordinate transformations.

The Euclidean propagator comes from the replacement $`p_{\overline{0}}i\omega _n`$ in Eq. (29) where $`\omega _n=2\pi nT\sqrt{g_{\overline{00}}}`$ :

$$D_E(p)=\frac{1}{g^{\overline{00}}\omega _n^2+2ig^{\overline{0j}}\omega _np_{\overline{j}}g^{\overline{ij}}p_{\overline{i}}p_{\overline{j}}+m^2}.$$
(44)
Note that the denominator has an imaginary part because of the non-diagonal metric but the real part of the denominator is positive as always. In perturbation theory the summation/integration over loop momenta is

$$\frac{T\sqrt{g_{\overline{00}}}}{\sqrt{g}}\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{dp_{\overline{1}}dp_{\overline{2}}dp_{\overline{3}}}{(2\pi )^3}.$$

One can canonically quantize in imaginary time, in which case the field operators obey equations of motion. Alternatively one can use a a Euclidean functional integral Das ; LeBellac ; Kapusta  in which case the fields are periodic under $`\tau \tau +\beta /\sqrt{g_{\overline{00}}}`$. The partition function is

$$Z=_{\mathrm{periodic}}[D\varphi ]\mathrm{exp}\left\{d^4x_E\right\},$$
(45)
where the integration element in four-dimensional Euclidean space-time is given by

$$d^4x_E=\sqrt{g}_0^{\beta /\sqrt{g_{\overline{00}}}}𝑑\tau 𝑑x^{\overline{1}}𝑑x^{\overline{2}}𝑑x^{\overline{3}}.$$

Thermodynamics is computed from the Helmholtz free energy $`F(T,V)`$

$$\mathrm{exp}\left\{\beta F/\sqrt{g_{\overline{00}}}\right\}=Z$$
(46)
using Eq. (38).

## III Examples

It is easy to see that time-independent transformations will not give anything new. More specifically, if $`x^0=x^{\overline{0}}`$ then the quantization is at fixed $`x^0`$ and if $`x^1`$, $`x^2`$, and $`x^3`$ are independent of $`x^{\overline{0}}`$ then $`A_{\overline{0}}^j=0`$ so that $`u^j=0`$ and the density operator will be $`\mathrm{exp}\{\beta P_0\}`$.

This section will deal with a general class of examples based on transformations of the form

$`x^{\overline{0}}=`$ $`ax^0+bx^3`$
$`x^{\overline{3}}=`$ $`cx^0+dx^3,`$ (47a)
with $`x^{\overline{1}}=x^1`$ and $`x^{\overline{2}}=x^2`$ always understood. All the examples in this section will result from special choices of $`a,b,c,d`$. If $`|a|>|b|`$ and $`|d|>|c|`$ then $`x^{\overline{0}}`$ is a true time coordinate and $`x^{\overline{3}}`$ is a true space coordinate. Light front coordinates violate this, viz. $`|a|=|b|`$ and $`|c|=|d|`$. The inverse transformation to (47a) is
$`x^0=`$ $`(dx^{\overline{0}}bx^{\overline{3}})/N`$
$`x^3=`$ $`(cx^{\overline{0}}+ax^{\overline{3}})/N,`$ (47b)
where $`N=adbc0`$. The two conditions
$$a>0,\frac{d}{N}>0,$$
(47c)
guarantee that increasing values of $`x^{\overline{0}}`$ corresponds to increasing $`x^0`$.

##### (1) Metric.

The contravariant metric is

$$g^{\overline{\mu }\overline{\nu }}=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}a^2b^2& 0& 0& acbd\\ 0& 1& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& 1& 0\\ acbd& 0& 0& c^2d^2\end{array}\right),$$
(48a)
and the covariant metric is
$$g_{\overline{\mu }\overline{\nu }}=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}d^2c^2& 0& 0& acbd\\ 0& N^2& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& N^2& 0\\ acbd& 0& 0& b^2a^2\end{array}\right)\frac{1}{N^2}.$$
(48b)
The necessary requirement $`g_{\overline{00}}0`$ implies $`|d||c|`$; however, there is nothing wrong with choosing $`|a|=|b|`$. The $`3\times 3`$ matrix defined in Eq. (32) is

$$\gamma _{\overline{ij}}=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}1& 0& 0\\ 0& 1& 0\\ 0& 0& (d^2c^2)^1\end{array}\right).$$
(49)
##### (2) Momenta.

The contravariant form of the oblique momenta are $`p^{\overline{\nu }}=A_\alpha ^{\overline{\nu }}p^\alpha `$ in parallel with Eq. (47a). From this, the covariant momenta are obtained by applying the metric, $`p_{\overline{\mu }}=g_{\overline{\mu \nu }}p^{\overline{\nu }}`$, with the result

$`p_{\overline{0}}=`$ $`(dp^0+cp^3)/N`$
$`p_{\overline{3}}=`$ $`(bp^0+ap^3)/N,`$ (50)
and, of course, $`p_{\overline{1}}=p^1`$, $`p_{\overline{2}}=p^2`$.

##### (3) Density operator.

The time evolution operator is

$$P_{\overline{0}}=\frac{x^\alpha }{x^{\overline{0}}}P_\alpha =\frac{dP_0cP_3}{N},$$

and therefore the density operator is

$$\mathrm{exp}\left\{\beta P_{\overline{0}}/\sqrt{g_{\overline{0}\overline{0}}}\right\}=\mathrm{exp}\left\{\beta \frac{|d|P_0cP_3ϵ(d)}{\sqrt{d^2c^2}}\right\},$$

after using Eq. (47c). Here $`ϵ(d)=\pm 1`$ is the sign function. As expected, $`|d|=|c|`$ is excluded. One can understand the form of the density operator in a more physical way. Since the heat bath is at rest in the $`x^{\overline{3}}`$ coordinate, its laboratory velocity is $`v=dx^3/dx^0=c/d`$ from Eq. (47a). Using $`\gamma =(1v^2)^{1/2}`$ gives the four-velocity

$$U^\alpha =(\gamma ,0,0,\gamma v)=(\frac{|d|}{\sqrt{d^2c^2}},0,0,\frac{cϵ(d)}{\sqrt{d^2c^2}})$$
(51)
Thus the density operator is $`\widehat{\varrho }=\mathrm{exp}(\beta P_\alpha U^\alpha )`$.

### III.1 Lorentz transformations and generalizations

##### (1) Quantization at rest but moving heat bath.

The most intuitive situation physically is to quantize conventionally at fixed $`x^0`$ but for the heat bath to have a velocity $`v`$. This is easily accomplished by the choice $`a=1,b=0,c=\gamma v,d=\gamma `$ so that

$`x^{\overline{0}}=`$ $`x^0`$
$`x^{\overline{3}}=`$ $`\gamma (x^3+vx^0).`$ (52)
The density operator is $`\mathrm{exp}\left\{\beta \gamma (P_0vP_3)\right\}`$.

##### (2) Quantization surface and heat bath moving differently.

A more general option is to give the quantization surface a velocity $`v^{}`$ and the heat bath a velocity $`v`$:

$`x^{\overline{0}}=`$ $`\gamma ^{}(x^0+v^{}x^3)`$
$`x^{\overline{3}}=`$ $`\gamma (x^3+vx^0)`$ (53)
However, only the velocity $`v`$ enters into the density operator: $`\widehat{\varrho }=\mathrm{exp}\left\{\beta \gamma (P_0vP_3)\right\}`$. Note that the metric will depend on $`v`$ and $`v^{}`$.

### III.2 Light front and generalizations

As stated previously, strict light front coordinates in which $`|d|=|c|`$ are forbidden.

##### (1) Front moving at $`v<1`$.

An interesting case is the transformation

$`x^{\overline{0}}=`$ $`x^0\mathrm{cos}(\theta /2)+x^3\mathrm{sin}(\theta /2)`$
$`x^{\overline{3}}=`$ $`x^0\mathrm{sin}(\theta /2)x^3\mathrm{cos}(\theta /2),`$ (54)
where $`\pi /2<\theta <\pi /2`$. These would be light front coordinates if $`\theta `$ were allowed to take the value $`\pm \pi /2`$. The covariant and contravariant metrics are equal:

$$g_{\overline{\mu }\overline{\nu }}=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}\mathrm{cos}\theta & 0& 0& \mathrm{sin}\theta \\ 0& 1& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& 1& 0\\ \mathrm{sin}\theta & 0& 0& \mathrm{cos}\theta \end{array}\right)=g^{\overline{\mu \nu }}.$$
(55)
The density operator is

$$\widehat{\varrho }=\mathrm{exp}\left\{\beta \frac{P_0\mathrm{cos}(\theta /2)+P_3\mathrm{sin}(\theta /2)}{\mathrm{cos}\theta }\right\},$$
(56)
and obviously fails at $`\theta =\pi /2`$. Alternatively, one can use $`v=\mathrm{tan}(\theta /2)`$ and express the transformation as

$`x^{\overline{0}}=`$ $`(x^0+vx^3)/\sqrt{1+v^2}`$
$`x^{\overline{3}}=`$ $`(vx^0x^3)/\sqrt{1+v^2},`$ (57)
so that the density operator is $`\mathrm{exp}\left\{\beta \gamma (P_0+vP_3)\right\}.`$

##### (2) Choice of Alves, Das, & Perez.

The calculations in ADP  can be stated as the choice $`a=b=d=1,c=0`$:

$`x^{\overline{0}}=`$ $`x^0+x^3`$
$`x^{\overline{3}}=`$ $`x^3.`$ (58)
The density operator becomes $`\mathrm{exp}\{\beta P_0\}`$. The covariant metric is

$$g_{\overline{\mu }\overline{\nu }}=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}\hfill 1& \hfill 0& \hfill 0& \hfill 1\\ \hfill 0& \hfill 1& \hfill 0& \hfill 0\\ \hfill 0& \hfill 0& \hfill 1& \hfill 0\\ \hfill 1& \hfill 0& \hfill 0& \hfill 0\end{array}\right),$$
(59)
and so the covariant coordinates are $`x_{\overline{0}}=g_{\overline{0\nu }}x^{\overline{\nu }}=x^0`$ and $`x_{\overline{3}}=g_{\overline{3\nu }}x^{\overline{\nu }}=(x^0+x^3)=\sqrt{2}x^+`$. The corresponding covariant momentum components are

$`p_{\overline{0}}=`$ $`p^0`$
$`p_{\overline{3}}=`$ $`(p^0+p^3)=\sqrt{2}p^+.`$
The contravariant metric is

$$g^{\overline{\mu }\overline{\nu }}=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}\hfill 0& \hfill 0& \hfill 0& \hfill 1\\ \hfill 0& \hfill 1& \hfill 0& \hfill 0\\ \hfill 0& \hfill 0& \hfill 1& \hfill 0\\ \hfill 1& \hfill 0& \hfill 0& \hfill 1\end{array}\right).$$
(60)
Because $`g^{\overline{00}}`$ vanishes, the momentum space propagator is linear in $`p_{\overline{0}}`$:

$`g^{\overline{\mu \nu }}p_{\overline{\mu }}p_{\overline{\nu }}=`$ $`2p_{\overline{0}}p_{\overline{3}}(p_{\overline{1}})^2(p_{\overline{2}})^2(p_{\overline{3}})^2`$
$`=`$ $`2\sqrt{2}p^0p^+(p^1)^2(p^2)^22(p^+)^2.`$
In the Euclidean formulation the contravariant time becomes negative, imaginary: $`x^{\overline{0}}i\tau `$; the covariant energy becomes discrete, imaginary: $`p_{\overline{0}}i\omega _n`$ with $`\omega _n=2\pi nT`$. (Note $`g_{\overline{00}}=1`$.) The Euclidean propagator used in ADP  is

$$\frac{1}{2i\sqrt{2}\omega _np^+(p^1)^2(p^2)^22(p^+)^2m^2}.$$
(61)
##### (3) ADP with moving heat bath.

It is simple to modify the previous case to allow for a moving heat bath. Choose $`a=b=1`$, $`c=\gamma v`$, and $`d=\gamma `$ so that

$`x^{\overline{0}}=`$ $`x^0+x^3`$
$`x^{\overline{3}}=`$ $`\gamma (vx^0+x^3).`$ (62)
The density operator is $`\mathrm{exp}\left\{\beta \gamma (P_0vP_3)\right\}`$, corresponding to a moving heat bath. As before $`g^{\overline{00}}=0`$ but now $`g_{\overline{00}}=\sqrt{1+v}/\sqrt{1v}`$.

## IV Conclusions

In standard light front quantization $`g_{\overline{00}}=g_{++}=0`$ and this makes it impossible to formulate statistical mechanics and thermal field theory. Physically, the problem is the infinite velocity of the light front.

The most interesting possibility is to choose oblique coordinates which satisfy $`g_{\overline{00}}0`$ but $`g^{\overline{00}}=0`$ as in Eq. (58), which is the case studied by Alves, Das, and Perez ADP . The advantage of choosing $`g^{\overline{00}}=0`$ is that the denominator of the propagator, $`g^{\overline{\mu \nu }}p_{\overline{\mu }}p_{\overline{\nu }}m^2`$, will be linear in the energy variable $`p_{\overline{0}}`$. Consequently the propagator will have only one pole and not two. This reduces the computational effort required for multiloop diagrams. Any diagram for which the kinematics allows $`N`$ propagators to be on shell would normally produce $`2^N`$ contributions. However if $`g^{\overline{00}}=0`$, there will be only one contribution.

A very straightforward application would be to compute the quark and gluon propagators in the hard thermal loop approximation using Eq. (58) and verify the rotational invariance of the dispersion relations LeBellac . A more ambitious task would be to compute the vertex functions in the hard thermal loop approximation.

###### Acknowledgements.

It is a pleasure to thank Ashok Das for sending me his paper ADP  and thereby arousing my interest in the subject. This work was supported in part by a grant from the U.S. National Science Foundation under grant PHY-0099380.

## Appendix A Lorentz invariance of $`g_{\overline{\mu \nu }}`$

The general non-diagonal metric $`g_{\overline{\mu \nu }}`$ is always invariant under three rotations and three Lorentz boosts. However the representation of these six transformations depend on the coordinate system $`x^{\overline{\mu }}`$.

The usual representation of a Lorentz transformation from one set of Cartesian coordinates to another, $`x^\alpha ^{}=\mathrm{\Lambda }_\alpha ^\alpha ^{}x^\alpha `$, leaves invariant the Minkowski metric tensor:

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }_\alpha ^\alpha ^{}\mathrm{\Lambda }_\beta ^\beta ^{}g_{\alpha ^{}\beta ^{}}=g_{\alpha \beta }.$$
(63)
As before, the index notation of Schouten Sc  is used. Here $`\alpha ^{}`$ runs over $`0^{},1^{},2^{},3^{}`$. The Minkowski metric is invariant: $`g_{0^{}0^{}}=g_{00}=1`$, $`g_{1^{}1^{}}=g_{11}=1`$, etc.

Each Lorentz transformation of the Cartesian coordinates induces a Lorentz transformation of the oblique coordinates, $`x^{\overline{\mu }}=W_{\overline{\rho }}^{\overline{\mu }}x^{\overline{\rho }}`$, where

$$W_{\overline{\rho }}^{\overline{\mu }}=A_\alpha ^{}^{\overline{\mu }}\mathrm{\Lambda }_\alpha ^\alpha ^{}A_{\overline{\rho }}^\alpha $$
(64)
Because $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ keeps the Cartesian metric invariant, $`W`$ automatically keeps the oblique metric invariant:

$$W_{\overline{\rho }}^{\overline{\mu }}W_{\overline{\sigma }}^{\overline{\nu }}g_{\overline{\mu \nu }}=g_{\overline{\rho \sigma }}.$$
(65)
## Appendix B Quantization in Oblique coordinates

This section will perform the explicit quantization in an arbitrary oblique coordinate system for the free scalar field and then calculate the thermal average of the free energy-momentum tensor.

### B.1 Equation of motion

The action expressed as an integral over contravariant coordinates is $`\sqrt{g}𝑑x^{\overline{0}}𝑑x^{\overline{1}}𝑑x^{\overline{2}}𝑑x^{\overline{3}}`$ with Lagrangian density

$$=\frac{1}{2}g^{\overline{\mu \nu }}\frac{\varphi }{x^{\overline{\mu }}}\frac{\varphi }{x^{\overline{\nu }}}\frac{1}{2}m^2\varphi ^2.$$
(66)
The field equation that follows from the Lagrangian density is

$$g^{\overline{\mu \nu }}\frac{^2\varphi }{x^{\overline{\mu }}x^{\overline{\nu }}}=m^2\varphi .$$
(67)
The solution to this will be a superposition of plane waves of the form $`\mathrm{exp}\left(ip_{\overline{\alpha }}x^{\overline{\alpha }}\right)`$, with the phase expressed in terms of contravariant spatial coordinates and covariant momentum coordinates. The equation of motion gives the mass shell condition

$$g^{\overline{\mu \nu }}p_{\overline{\mu }}p_{\overline{\nu }}=m^2.$$
(68)
This is a quadratic equation for $`p_{\overline{0}}`$ with two solutions

$$p_{\overline{0}\pm }=\frac{g^{\overline{0j}}p_{\overline{j}}}{g^{\overline{0}\overline{0}}}\pm \left[\frac{m^2+p_{\overline{i}}p_{\overline{j}}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\overline{ij}}}{g^{\overline{00}}}\right]^{1/2}$$
(69)
where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\overline{ij}}`$ is the $`3\times 3`$ matrix

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\overline{ij}}=\frac{g^{\overline{0i}}g^{\overline{0j}}}{g^{\overline{00}}}g^{\overline{ij}}.$$
(70)
The two solutions are $`\mathrm{exp}(ip_{\overline{0}\pm }x^{\overline{0}}ip_{\overline{j}}x^{\overline{j}})`$. The energies $`p_{\overline{0}\pm }`$ are not invariant under momentum inversion, but rather $`p_{\overline{0}}p_{\overline{0}+}`$ when $`p_{\overline{j}}`$ changes sign. Therefore one can use for the second plane wave the negative momentum solution $`\mathrm{exp}(ip_{\overline{0}+}x^{\overline{0}}+ip_{\overline{j}}x^{\overline{j}})`$. The solution to the field equation can be expanded as

$$\varphi (x)=\frac{dp_{\overline{1}}dp_{\overline{2}}dp_{\overline{3}}}{\sqrt{g}(2\pi )^32|p^{\overline{0}}|}\left[a(p)e^{ipx}+a(p)^{}e^{ipx}\right].$$
(71)
where $`px=p_{\overline{0}+}x^{\overline{0}}+p_{\overline{j}}x^{\overline{j}}`$. The contravariant energies $`p^{\overline{0}\pm }`$ are equal in magnitude:

$`p^{\overline{0}\pm }=`$ $`g^{\overline{00}}p_{\overline{0}\pm }+g^{\overline{0j}}p_{\overline{j}}`$
$`=`$ $`\pm \sqrt{g^{\overline{00}}}\left[m^2+p_{\overline{i}}p_{\overline{j}}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\overline{ij}}\right]^{1/2},`$ (72)
and $`|p^{\overline{0}}|`$ will be denoted simply by $`p^{\overline{0}}`$ com1 .

### B.2 Canonical quantization

For quantization on the surfaces of constant $`x^{\overline{0}}`$, the canonical momentum is

$$\pi (x)=\frac{}{\left(\varphi /x^{\overline{0}}\right)}=g^{\overline{0\mu }}\frac{\varphi }{x^{\overline{\mu }}}=\frac{\varphi }{x_{\overline{0}}}$$
(73)
The explicit mode expansion is

$$\pi (x)=i\frac{dp_{\overline{1}}dp_{\overline{2}}dp_{\overline{3}}}{\sqrt{g}(2\pi )^32}\left[a(p)e^{ipx}a(p)^{}e^{ipx}\right]$$

If the mode operators are required to satisfy

$$[a(p),a^{}(p^{})]=\sqrt{g}2\overline{p}^0(2\pi )^3\underset{j=1}{\overset{3}{}}\delta (p_{\overline{j}}p_{\overline{j}}^{}),$$
(74)
then equal time commutator has the correct value:

$`[\pi (x),\varphi (x^{})]_{x^{\overline{0}}=x^{\overline{0}}}`$
$`=i{\displaystyle \frac{dp_{\overline{1}}dp_{\overline{2}}dp_{\overline{3}}}{(2\pi )^32}\left[e^{ip_{\overline{j}}(x^{\overline{j}}x^{\overline{j}})}+e^{ip_{\overline{j}}(x^{\overline{j}}x^{\overline{j}})}\right]}`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{i}{\sqrt{g}}}\delta (x^{\overline{1}}x^{\overline{1}})\delta (x^{\overline{2}}x^{\overline{2}})\delta (x^{\overline{3}}x^{\overline{3}}).`$
### B.3 Microcausality

It is easy to verify microcausality. The commutator of two fields is

$$[\varphi (x),\varphi (0)]=\frac{dp_{\overline{1}}dp_{\overline{2}}dp_{\overline{3}}}{\sqrt{g}(2\pi )^32p^{\overline{0}}}\left[e^{ip_{\overline{\alpha }}x^{\overline{\alpha }}}e^{ip_{\overline{\alpha }}x^{\overline{\alpha }}}\right].$$

Change to Minkowski integration variables by defining $`p_{\overline{\alpha }}=p_\lambda x^\lambda /x^{\overline{\lambda }}`$ so that $`p_{\overline{\alpha }}x^{\overline{\alpha }}=p_\lambda x^\lambda `$. The integration measure is invariant and therefore

$$[\varphi (x),\varphi (0)]=\frac{dp_1dp_2dp_3}{(2\pi )^32p^0}\left[e^{ipx}e^{ipx}\right].$$

This is the conventional answer for the commutator. It vanishes for space-like separations $`x_\lambda x^\lambda <0`$. Since $`x_{\overline{\alpha }}x^{\overline{\alpha }}=x_\lambda x^\lambda `$ it vanishes for $`x_{\overline{\alpha }}x^{\overline{\alpha }}<0`$.

### B.4 Hamiltonian

The canonical Hamiltonian density is

$$=\pi \frac{\varphi }{x^{\overline{0}}}$$
(75)
It is convenient to express this in terms of mixed contravariant and covariant derivatives:

$$=\frac{1}{2}\left[\frac{\varphi }{x_{\overline{0}}}\frac{\varphi }{x^{\overline{0}}}\frac{\varphi }{x_{\overline{1}}}\frac{\varphi }{x^{\overline{1}}}\frac{\varphi }{x_{\overline{2}}}\frac{\varphi }{x^{\overline{2}}}\frac{\varphi }{x_{\overline{3}}}\frac{\varphi }{x^{\overline{3}}}+m^2\varphi ^2\right]$$

The Hamiltonian requires integrating over the contravariant three-volume

$$P_{\overline{0}}=\sqrt{g}𝑑x^{\overline{1}}𝑑x^{\overline{2}}𝑑x^{\overline{3}}.$$

Working this out explicitly gives

$$P_{\overline{0}}=\frac{dp_{\overline{1}}dp_{\overline{2}}dp_{\overline{3}}}{\sqrt{g}(2\pi )^32p^{\overline{0}}}\frac{p_{\overline{0}}}{2}\left[a^{}(p)a(p)+a(p)a^{}(p)\right].$$
(76)
Note that the covariant energy $`p_{\overline{0}}`$ in the numerator does not cancel the contravariant energy $`p^{\overline{0}}`$ in the denominator. The commutation relation

$$[P_{\overline{0}},\varphi (x)]=i\frac{\varphi }{x^{\overline{0}}}$$

verifies that the Hamiltonian is the generator of translations in the contravariant time variable $`x^{\overline{0}}`$.

### B.5 Energy and momentum

The canonical energy-momentum tensor is

$$T_{\overline{\mu }}^{\overline{\nu }}=\frac{\varphi }{x_{\overline{\nu }}}\frac{\varphi }{x^{\overline{\mu }}}\delta _{\overline{\mu }}^{\overline{\nu }}$$
(77)
and satisfies the conservation laws $`T_{\overline{\mu }}^{\overline{\nu }}/x^{\overline{\nu }}=0`$. The $`\overline{\mu }=\overline{0}`$ and $`\overline{\mu }=\overline{m}`$ components of this equation are

$`0=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{T_{\overline{0}}^{\overline{0}}}{x^{\overline{0}}}}+{\displaystyle \frac{T_{\overline{0}}^{\overline{n}}}{x^{\overline{n}}}}`$ (78)
$`0=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{T_{\overline{m}}^{\overline{0}}}{x^{\overline{0}}}}+{\displaystyle \frac{T_{\overline{m}}^{\overline{n}}}{x^{\overline{n}}}}`$ (79)
From Eq. (75), $`=T_{\overline{0}}^{\overline{0}}`$ and thus $`T_{\overline{0}}^{\overline{0}}`$ is the energy density. The first of the above equations indentifies $`T_{\overline{0}}^{\overline{n}}`$ as the energy flux. From the second, $`T_{\overline{m}}^{\overline{0}}`$ is the momentum density and $`T_{\overline{m}}^{\overline{n}}`$ is the momentum flux. Integrating the energy and momentum densities over a contravariant three-volume gives

$$P_{\overline{\mu }}=\sqrt{g}𝑑x^{\overline{1}}𝑑x^{\overline{2}}𝑑x^{\overline{3}}T_{\overline{\mu }}^{\overline{0}}.$$
(80)
These integrals are independent of the contravariant time: $`P_{\overline{\mu }}/x^{\overline{0}}=0`$. They generate translations in the contravariant coordinates:

$$[P_{\overline{\mu }},\varphi (x)]=i\frac{\varphi }{x^{\overline{\mu }}}.$$
(81)
The explicit form for the three-momentum operators is

$$P_{\overline{j}}=\frac{dp_{\overline{1}}dp_{\overline{2}}dp_{\overline{3}}}{\sqrt{g}(2\pi )^32p^{\overline{0}}}\frac{p_{\overline{j}}}{2}\left[a^{}(p)a(p)+a(p)a^{}(p)\right].$$
(82)
### B.6 Thermal Averages

This section will show that despite the somewhat complicated dispersion relations in Eqs. (69) and (72), the thermal average of the energy-momentum tensor can be computed directly and gives the conventional answer.

Bose-Einstein statistics gives for the thermal average of the energy-momentum tensor of a free gas of scalar particles

$$T_{\overline{\mu \nu }}=\frac{dp_{\overline{1}}dp_{\overline{2}}dp_{\overline{3}}}{\sqrt{g}(2\pi )^3p^{\overline{0}}}\frac{p_{\overline{\mu }}p_{\overline{\nu }}}{\mathrm{exp}\left(\beta p_{\overline{0}}/\sqrt{g_{\overline{00}}}\right)1}.$$
(83)
To perform this integration, change to Minkowski momenta $`k_\alpha `$, where

$$p_{\overline{\mu }}=A_{\overline{\mu }}^\alpha k_\alpha .$$
(84)
The mass shell condition requires $`k_0=(𝒌^2+m^2)^{1/2}`$. And $`p_{\overline{0}}/\sqrt{g_{\overline{00}}}=k_\lambda u^\lambda `$ with $`u^\lambda =A_{\overline{0}}^\lambda u^{\overline{0}}`$, the oblique velocity given by Eq. (19). The change of variables gives

$$T_{\overline{\mu \nu }}=A_{\overline{\mu }}^\alpha A_{\overline{\nu }}^\beta \frac{dk_1dk_2dk_3}{(2\pi )^3k_0}\frac{k_\alpha k_\beta }{\mathrm{exp}(\beta k_\lambda u^\lambda )1},$$
(85)
whose evaluation is standard:

$`T_{\overline{\mu \nu }}=`$ $`A_{\overline{\mu }}^\alpha A_{\overline{\nu }}^\beta \left((\rho +P)u_\alpha u_\beta Pg_{\alpha \beta }\right)`$
$`=`$ $`(\rho +P)u_{\overline{\mu }}u_{\overline{\nu }}Pg_{\overline{\mu \nu }}.`$ (86)
The final result is expressed in terms of the oblique velocity vector and the oblique metric tensor. The most physical quantity is the mixed tensor

$$T_{\overline{\nu }}^{\overline{\mu }}=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}\rho & 0& 0& 0\\ (\rho +P)g_{\overline{01}}/g_{\overline{00}}& P& 0& 0\\ (\rho +P)g_{\overline{02}}/g_{\overline{00}}& 0& P& 0\\ (\rho +P)g_{\overline{03}}/g_{\overline{00}}& 0& 0& P\end{array}\right),$$
(87)
where Eq. (19) has been used. The off-diagonal entries in the metric give a nonzero momentum density: $`T_{\overline{n}}^{\overline{0}}=(\rho +P)g_{\overline{0n}}/g_{\overline{00}}`$.


text:
# Solid von Neumann Algebras

## 1. Introduction

Recall that a von Neumann algebra is said to be diffuse if it does not contain a minimal projection. We say a von Neumann algebra $``$ is solid if for any diffuse von Neumann subalgebra $`𝒜`$ in $``$, the relative commutant $`𝒜^{}`$ is injective. A solid von Neumann algebra is necessarily finite. We prove the following theorem which answers a question of Ge \[Ge\] that whether the free group factors are solid.

###### Theorem 1.

The group von Neumann algebra $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ of a hyperbolic group $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is solid.

Recall that a factor $``$ is said to be prime if $`_1\overline{}_2`$ implies either $`_1`$ or $`_2`$ is finite dimensional. The existence of such factors was proved by Popa \[Po2\] who showed the group factors of uncountable free groups are prime. The case for countable free groups had remained open for some time, but was settled by Ge \[Ge\]. This was generalized by Ştefan \[Şt\] to their subfactors of finite index. Our theorem gives a further generalization. Indeed, combined with a result of Popa \[Po3\] (Proposition 7 in this paper), we obtain the following proposition.

###### Proposition 2.

A subfactor of a solid factor is again solid and a solid factor is non-$`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and prime unless it is injective.

Notably, this provides infinitely many prime $`\mathrm{II}_1`$-factors (with the property $`(\mathrm{T})`$). Indeed thanks to a theorem of Cowling and Haagerup \[CH\], for lattices $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_n`$ in $`\mathrm{Sp}(1,n)`$, we have $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_m\cong ̸\mathrm{\Gamma }_n`$ whenever $`mn`$. However, we are unaware of any non-injective solid factor with the Haagerup property other than the free group factor(s). This proposition also distinguishes the factor $`(𝔽_{\mathrm{}}\overline{}L_{\mathrm{}}[0,1])𝔽_{\mathrm{}}`$ from the free group factor $`𝔽_{\mathrm{}}`$, which answers a question of Shlyakhtenko.

## 2. Preliminary Results on Reduced Group $`C^{}`$-algebras

For a discrete group $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, we denote by $`\lambda `$ (resp. $`\rho `$) the left (resp. right) regular representation on $`\mathrm{}_2\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and let $`C_\lambda ^{}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ (resp. $`C_\rho ^{}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$) be the $`C^{}`$-algebra generated by $`\lambda (\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ (resp. $`\rho (\mathrm{\Gamma })`$) in $`𝔹(\mathrm{}_2\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=(C_\lambda ^{}\mathrm{\Gamma })^{\prime \prime }`$ be its weak closure. The $`C^{}`$-algebra $`C_\lambda ^{}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ (resp. the von Neumann algebra $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$) is called the reduced group $`C^{}`$-algebra (resp. the group von Neumann algebra).

The study of $`C^{}`$-norms on tensor products was initiated in the 50’s by Turumaru, but the first substantial result was obtained by Takesaki \[Ta\] who showed the minimal tensor norm is the smallest among the possible $`C^{}`$-norms on a tensor product of $`C^{}`$-algebras. He also introduced the notion of nuclearity and found that the reduced group $`C^{}`$-algebra $`C_\lambda ^{}𝔽_2`$ of the free group $`𝔽_2`$ on two generators is not nuclear. Namely, the $``$-homomorphism

$$C_\lambda ^{}𝔽_2C_\rho ^{}𝔽_2\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}a_ix_i\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}a_ix_i𝔹(\mathrm{}_2𝔽_2)$$

is not continuous w.r.t. the minimal tensor norm. Yet, Akemann and Ostrand \[AO\] proved a remarkable theorem that it is continuous if one composes it with the quotient map $`\pi `$ from $`𝔹(\mathrm{}_2𝔽_2)`$ onto the Calkin algebra $`𝔹(\mathrm{}_2𝔽_2)/𝕂(\mathrm{}_2𝔽_2)`$. By a completely different argument, Skandalis (Théorème 4.4 in \[Sk\]) proved the same for all discrete subgroups in connected simple Lie groups of rank one, and Higson and Guentner (Lemma 6.2.8 in \[HG\]) for all hyperbolic groups. In summary,

###### Theorem 3.

Let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ be a hyperbolic group or a discrete subgroup in a connected simple Lie group of rank one. Then, the $``$-homomorphism

$$\nu _\mathrm{\Gamma }:C_\lambda ^{}\mathrm{\Gamma }C_\rho ^{}\mathrm{\Gamma }\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}a_ix_i\pi (\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}a_ix_i)𝔹(\mathrm{}_2\mathrm{\Gamma })/𝕂(\mathrm{}_2\mathrm{\Gamma })$$

is continuous w.r.t. the minimal tensor norm on $`C_\lambda ^{}\mathrm{\Gamma }C_\rho ^{}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.

The crucial ingredient in the proof was the amenability of the action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on a suitable boundary which is ‘small at infinity’. For the information on amenable actions, we refer the reader to the book \[AR\] of Anantharaman-Delaroche and Renault. Since $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ acts amenably on a compact set, $`C_\lambda ^{}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is embeddable into a nuclear $`C^{}`$-algebra and thus has the property (C) of Archbold and Batty (Theorem 3.6 in \[AB\]). Although we do not need this fact, we mention that the property (C) is equivalent to exactness by a deep theorem of Kirchberg \[Ki\]. By Effros and Haagerup’s theorem (Theorem 5.1 in \[EH\]), the property (C) implies the local reflexivity. In summary,

###### Lemma 4.

Let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ be as above. Then, $`C_\lambda ^{}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is locally reflexive, i.e., for any finite dimensional operator system $`E(C_\lambda ^{}\mathrm{\Gamma })^{}`$, there is a net of unital completely positive maps $`\theta _i:EC_\lambda ^{}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ which converges to $`\mathrm{id}_E`$ in the point-weak topology.

## 3. Proof of The Theorem

We recall the following principle \[Ch\]; if $`\mathrm{\Psi }:AB`$ is a unital completely positive map and its restriction to a $`C^{}`$-subalgebra $`A_0A`$ is multiplicative, then we have $`\mathrm{\Psi }(axb)=\mathrm{\Psi }(a)\mathrm{\Psi }(x)\mathrm{\Psi }(b)`$ for any $`a,bA_0`$ and $`xA`$.

Let $`𝒩`$ be finite von Neumann algebras with a faithful trace $`\tau `$ on $``$. Then, there is a normal conditional expectation $`\epsilon _𝒩`$ from $``$ onto $`𝒩`$, which is defined by the relation $`\tau (\epsilon _𝒩(a)x)=\tau (ax)`$ for $`a`$ and $`x𝒩`$. This implies that a von Neumann subalgebra of a finite injective von Neumann algebra is again injective. Moreover, $`\epsilon _𝒩`$ is unique in the sense that any trace preserving conditional expectation from $``$ onto $`𝒩`$ coincides with $`\epsilon _𝒩`$. Indeed, for any $`a`$ and $`x𝒩`$, we have

$$\tau (\epsilon ^{}(a)x)=\tau (\epsilon ^{}(ax))=\tau (ax)=\tau (\epsilon _𝒩(a)x).$$

We say a von Neumann subalgebra $``$ in $`𝔹()`$ satisfies the condition (AO) if

> there are unital ultraweakly dense $`C^{}`$-subalgebras $`B`$ and $`C^{}`$ such that $`B`$ is locally reflexive and the $``$-homomorphism
>
> $$\nu :BC\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}a_ix_i\pi (\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}a_ix_i)𝔹()/𝕂()$$
>
> is continuous w.r.t. the minimal tensor norm on $`BC`$.

We have seen in Section 2 that the group von Neumann algebra $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ satisfies the condition (AO) whenever $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is a hyperbolic group or a discrete subgroup in a connected simple Lie group of rank one.

###### Lemma 5.

Let $`B`$ and $`C^{}`$ be unital ultraweakly dense $`C^{}`$-subalgebras with $`B`$ locally reflexive and let $`𝒩`$ be a von Neumann subalgebra with a normal conditional expectation $`\epsilon _𝒩`$ onto $`𝒩`$. Assume that the unital completely positive map

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_𝒩:BC\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}a_ix_i\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}\epsilon _𝒩(a_i)x_i𝔹()$$

is continuous w.r.t. the minimal tensor norm on $`BC`$. Then $`𝒩`$ is injective.

###### Proof.

Since $`B_{\mathrm{min}}C𝔹()_{\mathrm{min}}C`$ and $`𝔹()`$ is injective, $`\mathrm{\Phi }_𝒩`$ extends to a unital completely positive map $`\mathrm{\Psi }:𝔹()_{\mathrm{min}}C𝔹()`$. Then, $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ is automatically a $`C`$-bimodule map. Put $`\psi (a)=\mathrm{\Psi }(a1)`$ for $`a𝔹()`$. Then, for every $`a𝔹()`$ and $`xC`$, we have

$$x\psi (a)=\mathrm{\Psi }(1x)\mathrm{\Psi }(a1)=\mathrm{\Psi }(ax)=\mathrm{\Psi }(a1)\mathrm{\Psi }(1x)=\psi (a)x.$$

Hence, $`\psi `$ maps $`𝔹()`$ into $`C^{}=`$. It follows that $`\stackrel{~}{\psi }=\epsilon _𝒩\psi :𝔹()𝒩`$ is a unital completely positive map such that $`\stackrel{~}{\psi }|_B=\epsilon _𝒩|_B`$. Let $`I`$ be the set of all triples $`(,,\epsilon )`$, where $`𝒩`$ and $`𝒩_{}`$ are finite subsets and $`\epsilon >0`$ is arbitrary. The set $`I`$ is directed by the order relation $`(_1,_1,\epsilon _1)(_2,_2,\epsilon _2)`$ if and only if $`_1_2`$, $`_1_2`$ and $`\epsilon _1\epsilon _2`$. Let $`i=(,,\epsilon )I`$ and let $`E𝒩`$ be the finite dimensional operator system generated by $``$. We note that $`E=pB^{}`$ and $`\epsilon _𝒩^{}()_{}=pB^{}`$, where $`pB^{}`$ is the central projection supporting the identity representation of $`B`$ on $``$. Since $`B`$ is locally reflexive (cf. Lemma 4), there is a unital completely positive map $`\theta _i:EB`$ such that for $`a`$ and $`f`$, we have

$$|\epsilon _𝒩\theta _i(a),fa,f|=|\theta _i(a),\epsilon _𝒩^{}(f)a,\epsilon _𝒩^{}(f)|<\epsilon .$$

Take a unital completely positive extension $`\overline{\theta }_i:𝔹()𝔹()`$ of $`\theta _i`$ and let $`\sigma _i=\stackrel{~}{\psi }\overline{\theta }_i:𝔹()𝒩`$. It follows that for $`a`$ and $`f`$, we have

$$|\sigma _i(a),fa,f|=|\epsilon _𝒩\theta _i(a),fa,f|<\epsilon .$$

Therefore, any cluster point, in the point-ultraweak topology, of the net $`\{\sigma _i\}_{iI}`$ is a conditional expectation from $`𝔹()`$ onto $`𝒩`$. ∎

We now prove Theorem 1, or more precisely,

###### Theorem 6.

A finite von Neumann algebra $``$ satisfying the condition $`(\mathrm{AO})`$ is solid.

###### Proof.

Let $`𝒜`$ be a diffuse von Neumann subalgebra in $``$. Passing to a subalgebra if necessary, we may assume $`𝒜`$ is abelian and prove the injectivity of $`𝒩=𝒜^{}`$. It suffices to show $`\mathrm{\Phi }_𝒩`$ in Lemma 5 is continuous on $`B_{\mathrm{min}}C`$. Since $`𝒜`$ is diffuse, it is generated by a unitary $`u𝒜`$ such that $`lim_k\mathrm{}u^k=0`$ ultraweakly. Let $`\mathrm{\Psi }_n(a)=n^1_{k=1}^nu^kau^k`$ for $`a𝔹()`$ and let $`\mathrm{\Psi }:𝔹()𝔹()`$ be its cluster point in the point-ultraweak topology. It is not hard to see that $`\mathrm{\Psi }|_{}`$ is a trace preserving conditional expectation onto $`𝒩`$ and hence $`\mathrm{\Psi }|_{}=\epsilon _𝒩`$. It follows that for any $`_{i=1}^na_ix_i^{}`$, we have

$$\mathrm{\Psi }(\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}a_ix_i)=\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}\epsilon _𝒩(a_i)x_i=\mathrm{\Phi }_𝒩(\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}a_ix_i).$$

Since $`lim_k\mathrm{}u^k=0`$ ultraweakly, we have $`𝕂()\mathrm{ker}\mathrm{\Psi }`$. This implies $`\mathrm{\Psi }=\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}\pi `$ for some unital completely positive map $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}:𝔹()/𝕂()𝔹()`$. Since $`\nu `$ in the condition $`(\mathrm{AO})`$ is continuous on $`B_{\mathrm{min}}C`$, so is $`\mathrm{\Phi }_𝒩=\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}\nu `$. ∎

The following proposition was communicated to us by Popa \[Po3\]. We are grateful to him for allowing us to present it here.

###### Proposition 7.

Assume the type $`\mathrm{II}_1`$ factor $``$ (with separable predual) contains a non-injective von Neumann subalgebra $`𝒩_0`$ such that $`𝒩_0^{}^\omega `$ is a diffuse von Neumann algebra, where $`^\omega `$ is an ultrapower algebra of $``$. Then there exists a non-injective von Neumann subalgebra $`𝒩_1`$ such that $`𝒩_1^{}`$ is diffuse.

###### Proof.

Replacing it with a subalgebra if necessary, we may assume the non-injective von Neumann subalgebra $`𝒩_0`$ is generated by a finite set $`\{x_1,x_2,\mathrm{},x_m\}`$. By Connes’ characterizations of injectivity (Theorem 5.1 in \[Co\]), it follows that there exists $`\epsilon >0`$ such that if $`\{x_1^{},\mathrm{},x_m^{}\}`$ are so that $`x_i^{}x_i_2\epsilon `$ then $`\{x_i^{}\}_i`$ generates a non-injective von Neumann subalgebra in $``$. Indeed, if there existed injective von Neumann algebras $`_k`$ such that $`lim_kx_i\epsilon __k(x_i)_2=0,i,`$ then for any $`_{j=1}^na_jy_j𝒩_0^{}`$, we would have

$`{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{n}{}}}a_jy_j_{𝔹()}`$ $`\underset{k\mathrm{}}{lim\; inf}{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{n}{}}}\epsilon __k(a_j)y_j_{𝔹()}`$
$`=\underset{k\mathrm{}}{lim\; inf}{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{n}{}}}\epsilon __k(a_j)y_j_{_k_{\mathrm{min}}^{}}{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{n}{}}}a_jy_j_{𝒩_0_{\mathrm{min}}^{}},`$
which would imply $`C^{}(𝒩_0,^{})𝒩_0_{\mathrm{min}}^{}`$ and the injectivity of $`𝒩_0`$ (cf. the proof of Lemma 5).

Since $`𝒩_0^{}^\omega `$ is diffuse, it follows by induction that there exists a sequence of mutually commuting, $`\tau `$-independent two dimensional abelian $``$-subalgebras $`𝒜_n`$, with minimal projections of trace $`1/2`$, such that

$$\epsilon _{𝒜_{n+1}^{}}(x_i)x_i_2<\epsilon /2^{n+1},i.$$

But if we denote by $`_n=𝒜_1𝒜_2\mathrm{}𝒜_n`$ then we also have

$$\epsilon __n^{}(x_i)\epsilon __n^{}(\epsilon _{𝒜_{n+1}^{}}(x_i))_2<\epsilon /2^{n+1},i.$$

Since $`\epsilon __n^{}\epsilon _{𝒜_{n+1}^{}}=\epsilon _{_{n+1}^{}}`$, if we denote by $`𝒜=_n_n`$ and take into account that $`\epsilon _𝒜^{}=lim_n\epsilon __n^{}`$ (see e.g., \[Po1\]), then by triangle inequalities we get

$$x_i\epsilon _𝒜^{}(x_i)_2\epsilon ,i.$$

Thus, if we take $`𝒩_1`$ to be the von Neumann algebra generated by

$$x_i^{}=\epsilon _𝒜^{}(x_i),1im,$$

then $`𝒩_1`$ satisfies the required conditions. ∎

## 4. Remark

We remark the possibility that, for a hyperbolic group $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, the $``$-homomorphism

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }C_\rho ^{}\mathrm{\Gamma }\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}a_ix_i\pi (\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}a_ix_i)𝔹(\mathrm{}_2\mathrm{\Gamma })/𝕂(\mathrm{}_2\mathrm{\Gamma })$$

may be continuous w.r.t. the minimal tensor norm. If this is the case, then it would follow that a von Neumann subalgebra $`𝒩\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is injective if and only if

$$C^{}(𝒩,C_\rho ^{}\mathrm{\Gamma })𝕂(\mathrm{}_2\mathrm{\Gamma })=\{0\},$$

which would reprove our results (modulo Theorem 2.1 in \[Co\]).

Acknowledgment. The author would like to thank Professor Sorin Popa for showing him Proposition 7, and Professor Nigel Higson for providing him the references \[HG\] and \[Sk\]. This research was carried out while the author was visiting the University of California at Los Angeles under the support of the Japanese Society for the Promotion of Science Postdoctoral Fellowships for Research Abroad. He gratefully acknowledges the kind hospitality of UCLA.