text:
# THE FAINT END OF THE QSO LUMINOSITY FUNCTION AT 𝑧=3Based, in part, on data obtained at the W.M. Keck Observatory, which is operated as a scientific partnership among the California Institute of Technology, the University of California, and NASA, and was made possible by the generous financial support of the W.M. Keck Foundation.

## 1 Introduction

The QSO luminosity function (LF) at high redshifts provides important constraints on the ionizing UV radiation field of the early universe. Until now, however, the faint end of the QSO LF has not been measured at high redshift. Instead, low-redshift measurements of the faint end were combined with high-redshift measurements of the bright end to estimate the entire LF at high redshift. Various models of LF evolution have been proposed; for example, a model proposed by Pei (1995) consists of a double power law (Boyle et al. 1988) whose bright- and faint-end slopes are independent of redshift, and whose power-law break $`L_z(z)`$ comes at a luminosity which is proportional to a Gaussian in $`z`$, with a maximum near $`z_{}=2.75`$ and $`\sigma =0.93`$ redshift. This model is representative of “pure luminosity evolution” models, as the overall normalization and the power-law slopes are independent of redshift. While pure luminosity evolution has been shown to work well at $`z<2.3`$ (Boyle et al. 1988, 2000), there is now evidence that it is insufficient at high redshift; for example, SDSS results demonstrate that the bright-end slope is flatter at $`z>3.6`$ than in the local universe (Fan et al. 2001b). The luminosity of the power law break and the faint-end slope have not been measured at high redshifts prior to the survey presented here.

We have made the first direct measurement of the faint end of the QSO LF at high redshift, using a sample of 11 faint $`z3`$ QSOs discovered in a survey for Lyman break galaxies. Figure 1 illustrates the depth of this survey relative to previous $`z=3`$ QSO surveys and demonstrates that the vast majority of the total QSO UV luminosity arises from QSOs bright enough to be included in this survey.

Throughout this paper, the term “QSO” is used to describe all broad-lined AGN without imposing the traditional $`M_B<23`$ luminosity cutoff. Spectral properties of such objects are essentially the same across at least two decades of luminosity (Steidel et al. 2002), thus we find no reason to impose such a cutoff. In Section 2, we will present an overview of the survey parameters and photometric criteria for candidate selection. In Section 3, we will describe our measurements of photometric and spectroscopic completeness, and our calculation of the survey effective volume. The QSO luminosity function will be presented in Section 4, followed by a discussion of its implications for the UV radiation field in Section 5.

## 2 Survey information

The Lyman break technique has proved to be a successful and efficient means of photometrically identifying star-forming galaxies and AGN at $`z=3`$ (Steidel et al. 2003). Similar multicolor approaches have been used in previous, shallower surveys for high-redshift QSOs with good success (e.g. Koo et al. 1986; Warren et al. 1991; Kennefick et al. 1995). Survey fields were imaged in $`U_n`$ (effective wavelength $`3550\text{Å}`$), $`G`$ ($`4730\text{Å}`$), and $``$ ($`6830\text{Å}`$) filters (Steidel & Hamilton 1993). A star-forming galaxy at $`z=3`$ will have a Lyman break in its SED that falls between the $`U_n`$ and $`G`$ filters, resulting in a $`U_nG`$ color that is substantially redder than its $`G`$ color. Objects meeting the following photometric criteria were selected as candidate $`z=3`$ galaxies:

$``$ $`>`$ $`19`$ (1)
$``$ $`<`$ $`25.5`$ (2)
$`G`$ $`<`$ $`1.2`$ (3)
$`G+1.0`$ $`<`$ $`U_nG`$ (4)
At $`z=3`$, the intergalactic medium provides sufficient opacity to also select many QSOs with this technique even if their intrinsic SED lacks a strong Lyman break. The details are addressed in Section 3.

The LBG survey fields used for this study cover 0.43 $`\mathrm{deg}^2`$ in 17 fields, which are discussed in detail in Steidel et al. (2003). A composite spectrum and other information relating to the 13 QSOs discovered in the survey have already been published (Steidel et al. 2002). Two of these QSOs satisfied earlier versions of the photometric criteria, but do not satisfy the final versions listed above, and have been excluded from this paper’s results. The sample discussed in this paper, therefore, comprises 11 QSOs.

## 3 Sensitivity to QSOs

### 3.1 Photometric completeness

The intrinsic $`U_nG`$ and $`G`$ colors of QSOs depend primarily on the spectral index of their continuum and their Lyman-$`\alpha `$+N V equivalent width. To measure the distribution of intrinsic colors (i.e. without the effects of measurement error), we produced a template QSO spectrum consisting of 59 QSOs studied by Sargent et al. (1989, hereafter SSB). These QSOs were discovered using objective prism techniques and are not expected to have significant selection biases in common with multicolor selection techniques. The SSB QSOs are about 100 times brighter than LBG survey QSOs, but a comparison of the SSB and LBG composite spectra suggests that the two populations are sufficiently similar that using the SSB composite as a template is satisfactory (Steidel et al. 2002). An average intergalactic absorption spectrum was used to absorption-correct the template using the model of Madau (1995), and portions of the spectrum having poor signal-to-noise were replaced with a power-law fit to the continuum.

The template spectrum was repeatedly altered to have continuum slopes and Lyman-$`\alpha `$ equivalent widths drawn from the Gaussian distributions described in Table 1, a compromise between the results of Vanden Berk et al. (2001)Fan et al. (2001a), and our SSB template. Each altered spectrum was redshifted to 40 redshifts spanning $`z=2.0`$ to $`z=4.0`$. Intergalactic absorption was added by simulating a random line-of-sight to each QSO with absorbers distributed according to the MC-NH model of Bershady et al. (1999). (For comparison, an average intergalactic extinction curve (Madau 1995) was also employed. The results were not significantly different.) The spectrum was then multiplied by our filter passbands to produce a distribution of intrinsic colors which reflects the QSO population.

These colors were used to place artificial QSOs into the survey images. 5000 QSOs drawn uniformly from the redshift interval $`2.0<z<4.0`$ and apparent magnitude interval $`18.5<<26`$ were simulated in each of the 17 survey fields. The apparent magnitude interval is 0.5 magnitudes larger than the selection window on each end, in order to allow measurement errors to scatter objects into the selection window. The artificial QSOs added to an image were given radial profiles matching the PSF of that image (i.e. they were assumed to be point sources). This assumption has little practical effect, because even galaxies are barely resolved at $`z=3`$, and no morphological criteria were applied to candidates during the LBG survey. The images were processed using the same modified FOCAS (Jarvis & Tyson 1981) software which was used for the actual candidate selection, and the observed colors of the simulated objects were recorded. The intrinsic QSO color distribution was thus transformed to an observed color distribution. Figure 2 shows the fraction of simulated QSOs that meet the photometric selection criteria as a function of redshift. As a consistency check, the curve shown was multiplied by $`\mathrm{\Phi }(L,z)𝑑L`$ to reflect the underlying redshift distribution of QSOs, and compared to the distribution of QSOs discovered in this survey, using a Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. The result was $`P=0.49`$ using the Pei (1995) LF, and $`P=0.45`$ using the LF shape measured in Section 4, indicating consistency between the expected and actual distribution of QSO redshifts.

### 3.2 Spectroscopic completeness

With the observed color distribution, we can measure the fraction of QSOs which meet the LBG color criteria as a function of absolute magnitude and redshift. In order to determine the effective volume of the survey, it is also necessary to know the probability of a photometric candidate being observed spectroscopically. At faint apparent magnitudes ($`>23`$), there were 2,289 candidates in the 17 fields, enough to measure the spectroscopic observation probability as a function of ($``$, $`G`$). The photometric candidates were divided into bins in ($``$, $`G`$) parameter space, using an adaptive bin size which increases resolution where the parameter space is densely filled with candidates. The probability of spectroscopic observation was measured for each bin.

At $`<23`$, there are too few photometric candidates to obtain an accurate measurement of the selection probability. However, at these apparent magnitudes, candidates with relatively blue $`G`$ were likely to be QSOs and hence were nearly always observed spectroscopically. Candidates with red $`G`$ were likely to be stellar contaminants, and were less likely to be observed. Hence we have estimated the probability of spectroscopic observation to be unity for candidates with observed magnitudes $`<23`$ and $`G<1`$, and 0.5 for candidates with $`<23`$ and $`G>1`$. The results are insensitive to the latter value because the observed colors of QSOs are rarely observed to be so red.

We assume that any spectroscopically observed QSO will be identified as such and a redshift obtained, since our spectroscopic integration times were chosen so that we could often identify faint LBGs using their absorption lines (typically 90 minutes using Keck–LRIS). Because QSOs have strong, distinctive emission lines they are easily identifiable even at the faintest apparent magnitudes in the survey ($`=25.5`$).

### 3.3 Effective volume of the survey

For comparison with other work, e.g. SDSS, we wish to measure the QSO luminosity function with respect to 1450 Å rest frame AB absolute magnitude ($`M_{1450}`$). At any given redshift in this study, we estimate an object’s apparent magnitude $`m_{1450}`$ as a linear combination of its $``$ and $`G`$ magnitudes. A small redshift-dependent correction, derived from our simulations of QSO colors, was then made to the value. This correction, typically of order $`0.25\mathrm{mag}`$, accounts for Ly-$`\alpha `$ emission in $`G`$, Ly-$`\alpha `$ forest absorption, and similar effects. If we denote by $`f_{\mathrm{phot}}(m_{1450},z)`$ the probability that a QSO of apparent 1450 Å rest frame AB magnitude $`m_{1450}`$ and redshift $`z`$ will have observed colors and magnitudes that meet the selection criteria for LBGs, and we denote by $`f_{\mathrm{spec}}(m_{1450},z)`$ the fraction of such candidates that will be observed spectroscopically, we can measure the effective volume of the survey as a function of absolute magnitude,

$$V_{\mathrm{eff}}(M)=_\mathrm{\Omega }_{z=0}^{z=\mathrm{}}f_{\mathrm{phot}}(m_{1450}(M,z),z)f_{\mathrm{spec}}(m_{1450}(M,z),z)\frac{dV}{dzd\mathrm{\Omega }}𝑑z𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }$$
(5)
where $`m_{1450}(M_{1450},z)`$ is the apparent magnitude corresponding to absolute magnitude $`M_{1450}(,G,z)`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is the solid angle of the survey, and $`dV/dzd\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is the co-moving volume element corresponding to a redshift interval $`dz`$ and solid angle $`d\mathrm{\Omega }`$ at a redshift $`z`$ and using an assumed cosmology. This approach is explained in detail by Adelberger (2002). For this measurement of the LF, we averaged $`V_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ over bins 1 mag in width.

## 4 The luminosity function

Having measured the effective volume of the survey as a function of absolute magnitude, we can place points on the QSO luminosity function simply by placing the observed QSOs in absolute magnitude bins and dividing by the effective volume of the survey at that absolute magintude. A plot of the luminosity function is shown in Figure 3. The vertical errorbars indicate 1-sigma confidence intervals reflecting the Poisson statistics due to the number of QSOs in the bin. The uncertainty in $`V_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ is not reflected, as the Poisson statistics dominate (e.g. there is only 1 QSO in the faintest bin, where imprecisions in photometry lead to the greatest $`V_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ uncertainty). The horizontal errorbars indicate the rms width of the bin, weighted according to the effective volume and expected luminosity function (Pei 1995) as a function of absolute magnitude; for a bin centered on $`M=M_0`$ and 1 magnitude wide, the position of the point and its errorbar width are given by

$`M`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{_{M_01/2}^{M_0+1/2}MV_{\mathrm{eff}}(M)\mathrm{\Phi }(M)𝑑M}{_{M_01/2}^{M_0+1/2}V_{\mathrm{eff}}(M)\mathrm{\Phi }(M)𝑑M}}`$ (6)
$`\sigma _M`$ $`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{_{M_01/2}^{M_0+1/2}(MM)^2V_{\mathrm{eff}}(M)\mathrm{\Phi }(M)𝑑M}{_{M_01/2}^{M_0+1/2}V_{\mathrm{eff}}(M)\mathrm{\Phi }(M)𝑑M}}\right)^{1/2}`$ (7)
where $`\mathrm{\Phi }(M)`$ is the $`z=3`$ luminosity function of Pei (1995); as both the Pei LF and the observed points are quite flat at these magnitudes, this calculation is insensitive to the precise slope assumed for $`\mathrm{\Phi }(M)`$, and retroactively trying our fitted value has no significant effect on the results. An $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m=1`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$, $`h=0.5`$ cosmology has been assumed for comparison with previous work.

Comparison with the other points shown in Figure 3 suggests that our results are largely consistent with previous measurements (Wolf et al. 2003; Warren et al. 1994; Fan et al. 2001b) in the region of overlap. The shape of the LF near the power law break is somewhat unclear, and our present sample is unable to resolve this issue. The total luminosity of the LF is quite sensitive to the location of the break. A shallower, wide-field survey using identical LBG techniques is nearing completion (Hunt et al. 2004), and should better constrain the $`27<M_{1450}<24`$ portion of the luminosity function.

The observed faint-end slope appears to be considerably flatter than $`\beta _l=1.64`$ used by Pei (1995). The Pei $`z=3`$ LF is shown as the solid curve in Figure 3. In order to quantify the difference, we have fit the double power law of Boyle et al. (1988), identical in form to that used by Pei,

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(L,z)=\frac{\mathrm{\Phi }_{}/L_z}{(L/L_z)^{\beta _l}+(L/L_z)^{\beta _h}},$$
(8)
where $`\beta _l`$ and $`\beta _h`$ are the faint- and bright-end slopes, respectively, $`L_z(z)`$ is the luminosity of the power-law break, and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{}`$ is the normalization factor. We have combined our data with those of Warren et al. (1994) to fit the entire luminosity function. The SDSS data plotted in Figure 3 were excluded because they were measured at $`z>3.6`$, and the authors have demonstrated redshift evolution in the bright-end slope. Given the relatively small number of data points and large errorbars, fits for the four parameters $`(L_z,\mathrm{\Phi }_{},\beta _l,\beta _h)`$ are degenerate. We have therefore assumed that the Pei (1995) luminosity evolution model still holds, and adopted the same values for $`L_z`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{}`$. A weighted least-squares fit for $`\beta _l`$ and $`\beta _h`$ was performed, and the measured faint-end slope was $`\beta _l=1.24\pm 0.07`$. The measured bright-end slope was $`\beta _h=4.56\pm 0.51`$, but in addition to the large uncertainty, this parameter is highly degenerate with the assumed parameters $`L_z`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{}`$, and is very sensitive to the brightest data point. Likewise, the errorbars for the faint-end slope are smaller than they would be for a general four-parameter fit. The reduced $`\chi ^2`$ for the fit is 1.12. This fit for the luminosity function is shown as a dashed curve in Figure 3.

A possible explanation for the flat faint–end slope is that we have overestimated our completeness at the faint end, by failing to identify the AGN signatures in faint QSOs, perhaps because faint AGN might be overwhelmed by the light from their host galaxies. We do not believe this to be the case, for several reasons. First, in no case have we observed “intermediate” cases of star forming galaxies with broad emission lines superposed. In contrast to virtually all LBG spectra (Shapley et al. 2003), we do not see interstellar absorption lines in any of the spectra of broad-lined objects at $`z3`$. However, perhaps the strongest argument comes from examining the spectral properties of identified $`z>2.5`$ X-ray sources in the 2 Ms catalog for the Chandra Deep Field North and other very deep X-ray surveys. If it were common for AGN to be overwhelmed by their host galaxies, there would be a significant number of faint X-ray sources with spectra that resemble those of ordinary star forming galaxies. To date, virtually all published spectra of objects identified in the redshift range of interest have obvious AGN signatures in their spectra, whether they are broad-lined or narrow-lined AGN.

We can also directly compare the Barger et al. (2003) CDF–N catalog with our own color-selected catalog in their region of overlap, with the following results: There are 2 AGN (1 narrow-lined, 1 QSO) which are detected by Chandra and also discovered in the LBG survey; there are 2 QSOs which are detected by Chandra but did not have LBG colors in our survey (one of which does have LBG colors in more recent photometry); and there is 1 QSO detected by Chandra which has LBG colors but is slightly too faint for inclusion in our survey. These results are consistent with our overall completeness estimates, which are approximately 50% over the range of redshifts considered. In addition, there is a narrow-lined AGN (“HDF–oMD49”) discovered in the LBG survey which is detected in the Chandra exposure (Steidel et al. 2002) at a level below the limit for inclusion in the main catalog (Alexander et al. 2003); another identified narrow-lined AGN at $`z=2.445`$ has no Chandra-detected counterpart. Of the 84 objects with $`2.5z3.5`$ in our current color-selected spectroscopic sample in the GOODS–N field, only 2 are detected in the 2 Ms Chandra catalog, and both are obvious broad-lined QSOs.

Taken together, all of these arguments suggest that optically faint QSOs are unlikely to be missed because of confusion with the UV luminosity of their host galaxies, and thus we believe that our statistics at the faint end are robust.

## 5 Implications for the UV radiation field at $`z=3`$

Having measured the luminosity function of QSOs at $`z=3`$, we can now place constraints on their contribution to the UV radiation field at that redshift. Integrating over the above parametric fit for the QSO luminosity function, in its entirety, yields a specific luminosity density $`ϵ_{1450}=1.5\times 10^{25}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1\mathrm{Hz}^1h\mathrm{Mpc}^3`$. The luminosity density from our parametric fit is 50% of that predicted from the Pei (1995) fit ($`\beta _l=1.64`$, $`\beta _h=3.52`$), and is $`8`$% of the UV luminosity density produced by LBGs at the same redshift based on the luminosity function of Adelberger & Steidel (2000).

Scaling the results of Haardt & Madau (1996), this fit for the LF produces an H I photoionization rate of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{H}\mathrm{I}}8.0\times 10^{13}\mathrm{s}^1`$, which can account for a metagalactic flux of $`J_{912}2.4\times 10^{22}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1\mathrm{cm}^2\mathrm{Hz}^1\mathrm{sr}^1`$. The ionizing background spectrum and He II ionization fraction, which affect this calculation, are the results of models and are discussed in detail by Haardt & Madau (1996). This value should be considered an upper limit, because the ability of ionizing photons produced by faint AGN to escape their host galaxies has not been measured, and may be lower than for the bright QSOs for which self-absorption in the Lyman continuum is rare (see SSB)<sup>1</sup><sup>1</sup>1A propensity to have a higher fraction of Lyman continuum “self-absorbed” QSOs at faint UV luminosities would translate directly into an over-estimate of the completeness correction for a color selected survey such as ours, since an optically thick Lyman limit at the emission redshift makes a QSO more likely to be selected using our color criteria and we are missing fewer than our estimates above would indicate . In this case, we have over-corrected the space density, and the there would be even fewer faint QSOs than we measure above..

The constraints on the ionizing flux from “proximity effect” analyses of the Ly$`\alpha `$ forest are uncertain, but are still consistent with the integrated QSO value $`z3`$ (e.g. Scott et al. 2002). In any case, the ratio of the total non-ionizing UV luminosity density of star forming galaxies relative to that of QSOs at $`z3`$ implies that QSOs must have a luminosity-weighted Lyman continuum escape fraction that is $`10`$ times higher than that of galaxies if they are to dominate the ionizing photon budget.

The detection of the He II Gunn–Peterson effect in $`z3`$ QSO spectra has demonstrated that helium reionization occurs during this epoch. Unlike the reionization of hydrogen, which can be effected by radiation from both massive stars and QSOs, the reionization of helium requires the hard UV radiation produced only by QSOs. The improved measurement of the faint end slope, and hence the total UV luminosity density, will improve simulations of the progress of reionization, which have previously assumed the Pei (1995) value for the faint-end slope (e.g. Sokasian et al. 2002). Miralda-Escudé et al. (2000) have shown that the previously observed bright end of the luminosity function is sufficient to reionize helium by $`z=3`$ under most reasonable assumptions, so the flatter faint-end slope should not dramatically alter the current picture of He II reionization; however, our results may have an effect on the “patchiness” of the reionization as it progresses.

A fortunate consequence of the flat faint-end slope, with implications for IGM simulations, is that the integrated luminosity $`\mathrm{\Phi }(L)L𝑑L`$ converges more rapidly, making the intregral insensitive to the lower limit of integration. Simulations will therefore be more robust, with less dependence on the poorly-understood low-luminosity AGN population at high redshift.

## 6 Conclusions

Using the 11 QSOs discovered in the survey for $`z3`$ Lyman-break galaxies, we have measured the faint end of the $`z=3`$ QSO luminosity function. This represents the first direct measurement of the faint end at high redshift. While the entire luminosity function remains well-fit by a double power law, the faint end slope differs significantly from the low-redshift value of $`\beta _l=1.64`$, being best fit by a slope $`\beta _l=1.24\pm 0.07`$. This results in only half the total QSO UV luminosity compared to previous predictions. As measurements of $`J_{912}`$ from the Ly$`\alpha `$ forest continue to improve, we may find that this diminished luminosity from QSOs requires a substantial contribution from star-forming galaxies.

We believe that the survey described here is successful at detecting the same broad-lined QSOs that could be detected in even the deepest X-ray surveys. While the faint X-ray sources that remain unidentified in the Chandra Deep Fields may be heavily obscured AGN of similar bolometric luminosity at similar redshifts, these objects do not contribute significantly to the UV luminosity density of the $`z3`$ universe. For the first time, we have measured the space density of $`z3`$ QSOs down to luminosities that account for essentially all of the UV photon production from AGN. This measurement is of primary interest for an understanding of the physical state of the IGM at high redshift, and not necessarily the evolution of black hole accretion, which is more difficult to quantify without extensive multi-wavelength campaigns. Nevertheless, the results of this paper can be compared directly with a vast literature observing UV-selected broad-lined AGN. Our results on the QSO luminosity function suggest that either the mass function and accretion efficiency of super-massive black holes at $`z3`$ is very different from that at lower redshift, or there has been significant differential evolution of AGN obscuration as a function of bolometric luminosity and/or redshift. If the results are interpreted as a difference in the mass function of supermassive black holes, then they may be consistent with some theoretical work which predicts that low-mass SMBHs form at smaller redshifts than the most massive black holes (e.g. Small & Blandford 1992).

We wish to extend special thanks to those of Hawaiian ancestry on whose sacred mountain we are privileged to be guests. Without their generous hospitality, most of the observations presented herein would not have been possible. We would also like to thank the staffs at the Keck and Palomar observatories for their invaluable assistance with the observations, and the anonymous referee for helpful suggestions. MPH, CCS, and AES have been supported by grant AST-0070773 from the U.S. National Science Foundation and by the David and Lucile Packard Foundation.


format: text

text:
# Preparing the COROT space mission: Building a photometric and variability database of stars in its field of view

## 1. Introduction

The CNES/European space mission COROT will monitor asteroseismic targets located in selected fields to probe stellar interiors. Therefore, suitable candidate targets have to be searched for in order to optimize the scientific return of the mission. However, to be able to use the asteroseismic tools on the stars, their physical parameters must be known in advance. In this work, we detail the process of building a photometric database of all the stars brighter than $`V=8.0`$ mag in the field of view of COROT and the process of selecting suitable $`\delta `$ Scuti and $`\gamma `$ Dor-type stars for the mission.

For an optimal selection of the seismology targets (for both COROT programs devoted to asteroseismology, i.e., the core and exploratory ones), it is essential to gather as much a priori information as possible on all potential candidates. To this aim, Strömgren-Crawford uvby–H$`\beta `$ and Ca ii H&K photometry was obtained for all of them. These data have been used to derive estimates of their effective temperature, surface gravity and metallicities. These observations, together with high resolution echelle spectroscopy and high angular resolution imaging observations are components of an ambitious ground-based program.

## 2. The observing program

We have used the 1.5m and 0.9m telescopes of the Sierra Nevada Observatory (OSN), managed by the IAA, to obtain $`uvby\beta `$ and Ca ii H&K photometry of all the stars with $`V8.0`$ mag among which will be, to a large extent, the primary and secondary COROT potential targets. At the 1.5m telescope, Ca ii H&K CCD photometry was gathered, while Strömgren and Crawford photoelectric photometry was obtained simultaneously in the $`uvby\beta `$ filters at the 0.9m telescope. The whole dataset was reduced and calibrated to the respective standard systems by using specific software developed by our group (Amado et al. in prep). The GAUDI data server provides access to COROT Archive of the Ground-Based Seismology Program and it is developed and maintained by LAEFF, Spain (Solano et al. 2003). These data has been utilised to determine $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}`$, $`\mathrm{log}g`$ and \[Fe/H\] of all the possible targets of B, A and F spectral types.

## 3. Colour-Magnitude diagrams

The observations mentioned above have, in part, led to the coverage of the Colour-Magnitude diagram (CMD) on and near the main sequence in the region of the Instability Strip (IS). This has helped to enlarge the sample of known $`\delta `$ Sct and $`\gamma `$ Dor stars. In Figs. 1 and 2, we present the diagrams for the stars within the IS in the field of view of COROT (Center and Anticenter directions). The main sequence is taken from Philip & Egret (1980) and the $`\delta `$ Sct instability strip borders from Rodríguez & Breger (2001). The red border of the $`\gamma `$ Dor instability strip is taken from Handler & Shobbrook (2002); the blue border is well inside the $`\delta `$ Sct instability strip. We also added evolutionary tracks, considering five values for the mass in the range from 1.50 to 2.51 $`M_{}`$, and hydrogen and metal content of 0.70 and 0.02, respectively. We calculated two sets of models for two different typical overshooting extension distances, i.e., $`d_{\mathrm{over}}=0.1`$ and $`d_{\mathrm{over}}=0.2`$ (see Claret 1995 for details). The limits of the IS for stars to the left of the $`\delta `$ Sct IS blue edge and right of the $`\gamma `$ Dor IS red edge have been a little relaxed to take into account the errors in the photometric parameters.

## 4. Enlarging the sample of known $`\delta `$ Sct and $`\gamma `$ Dor stars

Once the potential targets to be monitored were selected from their position in the CMD, dedicated observing programs have been carried out to try to make clear variability detections at the 0.005 mag level. The sample of variable stars discovered in the Center direction is quite representative of the phenomenology we meet in the lower part of the instability strip. Figure 3 shows an example of $`\delta `$ Sct variability: beat phenomena are clearly visible. Figure 4 shows an example of the $`\gamma `$ Dor variability, much slower than the previous one. Both stars have been observed during the two last weeks of June 2003. The work is still going on as for some of the stars the variability has not yet been characterized in a precise way. For more examples of newly $`\delta `$ Sct and $`\gamma `$ Dor stars discovered in the COROT ground–based observation program see Poretti, Garrido, Amado et al. (2003).

## References

Claret, A., 1995, A&AS, 109, 441

Handler, G., Shobbrook, R. R., 2002, MNRAS, 333, 251

Philip, A. G. D., Egret, D., 1980, A&A, 40, 199

Poretti, Garrido, Amado et al., 2003, A&A, 406, 203

Rodríguez, E., Breger, M., 2001, A&A, 366, 178

Solano, E., González-Riestra, R., Catala, C., Baglin, A., 2002, in ESA SP-485: Stellar Structure and Habitable Planet Finding, p. 353


text:
# Bose-Einstein Condensation in a CO2-laser Optical Dipole Trap

## 1 Introduction

Since the first observation of Bose-Einstein condensation (BEC) in a dilute atomic gas, we have been witnessing dramatic progress in both theoretical and experimental studies of degenenerate quantum gases cornell ; ketterle . A variety of static and dynamic properties of the condensed, trapped atoms have been exploited stringari . Interference studies with Bose-condensates have experimentally demonstrated the coherence properties expected for such a ‘giant matter wave’ ketterle . More recently, the Mott-insulator phase transition has been observed by loading a magnetically trapped condensate into a steep optical lattice immanuel .

The standard approach to produce a Bose-Einstein condensate involves a laser cooling of the atomic sample to a phase space density of $`10^6`$, after which atoms in weak-field seeking states are transferred into a magnetic trap cornell ; ketterle . Further cooling proceeds by a radiofrequency field selectively transferring the highest energetic atoms into untrapped states, which evaporatively cools the atoms to quantum degeneracy. A drawback of magnetic traps is that they only confine weak field seeking spins states, which e.g. prevents one from studying spinor condensates directly in these traps ketterle . Moreover, atoms in field independent $`m_F=0`$ spin projections, as are of large interest for many precision experiments metrology , cannot be confined in magnetic traps.

Far detuned optical dipole traps can confine atoms in arbitrary spin states. Dipole traps furthermore allow for very variable trapping geometries, as e.g. periodic lattice geometries. Experiments aiming at an achieving of quantum degeneracy in optical dipole traps have been first carried out by the Stanford group chuevap . In far detuned dipole traps, a variety of refined optical and evaporative cooling techniques have been implemented, which has allowed for atomic phase space densities very close to quantum degeneracy longlist . Friebel et al. found that in quasistatic dipole traps, as can be realized with a CO2-laser, polarization gradient cooling alone can accumulated atoms to a phase space density three orders of magnitude above that of a conventional MOT susanne2 . Chapman and coworkers have reported on the observation of Bose-Einstein condensation by direct evaporative cooling in a crossed CO2-laser dipole trap chapman . All-optical cooling techniques have also enabled the first observations of quantum degeneracy of $`{}_{}{}^{6}\text{Li}`$, cesium and ytterbium atoms thomas ; grimm ; Takasu .

We here describe experiments creating rubidium Bose-Einstein condensates by direct evaporative cooling in both a crossed and a single beam quasistatic dipole trapping geometry DPG03 . Due to the choice of a tight trapping laser focus, stable evaporation to a Bose-Einstein condensate is possible in both geometries even with moderate initial number of atoms. Especially the single dipole trapping geometry allows for a considerable experimental simplification of methods to produce Bose-condensed atoms. Note that previous experiments realizing quantum degeneracy in dipole traps have either required a more alignment sensitive crossed beam geometry or Feshbach resonances to enhance the collisional rate chapman ; thomas ; grimm ; Takasu . By applying a magnetic field gradient to the single beam configuration, we realized a trap stable for atoms in a field insensitive $`m_F=0`$ spin projection only. In a recent work, this has enabled us to realize an all-optical atom laser cennini . The chemical potential of the generated condensate is first order insensitive to fluctuations from stray magnetic fields.

## 2 Quasistatic Optical Dipole Taps

Optical dipole traps for atoms are based on the force which arises from the coherent interaction between the induced atomic dipole moment and the laser electric field chu ; cohen . When the laser frequency is tuned to the red side of an atomic resonance, the dipole force pulls atoms towards the intensity maxima of the field. For optical fields with frequency far below all electric dipole resonances of ground state atoms (i.e. ‘quasistatic’ fields), the trapping potential is given by

$$U=\frac{1}{2}\alpha _\mathrm{s}\left|\stackrel{}{E}\right|^2$$
(1)
where $`\alpha _\mathrm{s}`$ denotes the static atomic polarizability of the electronic ground state and $`\stackrel{}{E}`$ is the electric field of the optical wave. For the ground state and the first excited state of the rubidium atom, the scalar static polarizability is $`\alpha _{5S}=5.3\times 10^{39}\mathrm{m}^2\mathrm{C}/\mathrm{V}`$ and $`\alpha _{5P}=1.3\times 10^{38}\mathrm{m}^2\mathrm{C}/\mathrm{V}`$, respectively polarizability . Since the frequency of the CO2-laser radiation ($`\lambda `$ is near $`10.6\text{µm}`$) used in our experiment is approximately one order of magnitude below that of a typical electric dipole transition of ground state alkaline atoms, the photon scattering rate is very small. In particular, the Rayleigh photon scattering rate in this quasistatic regime is given by the expression

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_\mathrm{s}=\frac{16r_0^2P}{3\mathrm{}w_0^2}\left(\frac{m_\mathrm{e}\alpha _\mathrm{s}}{e^2}\right)\omega ^3$$
(2)
where $`w_0`$ is the beam waist of a laser beam with power P, $`r_0`$ the classical electron radius, $`m_\mathrm{e}`$ the electron mass and $`\omega `$ denotes the optical frequency of the laser light. In our experiments, the Rayleigh scattering rate of trapped rubidium atoms is of the order of $`1/600\mathrm{s}`$. This results in a small coupling of the atoms to the environment, so that the effect of decoherence can be kept small. Let us note that for alkali atoms trapped in an extremely far-detuned laser field, the detuning from resonance is much larger than both the hyperfine and fine structure splitting. This condition is met in our quasistatic trapping field. The trapping potential for ground-state alkali atoms here corresponds to that of a $`J=0`$ to $`J^{}=1`$ transition, and the ac Stark shift for all ground-state sublevels is almost identical. This state-independent confinement of extremely far-detuned optical dipole traps for many experiments represent an advantage over magnetic traps. It is however clear that evaporative cooling cannot be achieved by selectively transferring atoms into untrapped states, as usually done in magnetic traps. Such a cooling in optical traps can be achieved by lowering the intensity of the trapping beams in a controlled way, which decreases the depth of trapping potential chuevap .

## 3 Experimental setup and procedure

A scheme of our experimental setup used for direct Bose-Einstein condensation of rubidium atoms in a dipole trap is shown in Fig. 1. A commercial, rf-excited single mode CO2-laser generates up to $`50\mathrm{W}`$ mid-infrared radiation near $`10.6\text{µm}`$. The light passes two acoustooptic modulators (AOMs). The first one allows us to regulate the laser beam intensity via controlling of the rf-drive power. The light diffracted in first order from this modulator passes a second AOM, whose function is that of a beam divider for the crossed beam experiments. Note that the zero’s and first order diffracted beams differ in frequency, which eliminates unwanted standing-wave effects. The mid-infrared beams enter a vacuum chamber through ZnSe windows. For each beam, an adjustable, spherically corrected ZnSe lens ($`f=38.1\mathrm{mm}`$) placed inside the vacuum chamber focuses the laser beams to a minimum waist size of $`20\text{µm}`$. The beam focus can be varied with a telescope located outside of the vacuum chamber. For the crossed trap geometry, a beam waist of $`35\text{µm}`$ is chosen, whereas for a single running wave geometry we use a beam size of $`27\text{µm}`$ in the trapping region. For the former geometry, the trapping beams are directed horizontally and vertically respectively and cross each other with a 90 degree angle. For the single beam trapping geometry, the second AOM is omitted and the transmitted beam travels through the vacuum can in horizontal direction.

Atoms of the isotope $`{}_{}{}^{87}\text{Rb}`$ are initially collected and pre-cooled in a magneto-optical trap (MOT), which is loaded from the thermal gas emitted by heated rubidium dispensers. The measured background gas pressure inside the vacuum chamber is $`1\times 10^{10}\mathrm{mbar}`$. The near-resonant radiation for cooling and trapping atoms in the MOT is generated by grating stabilized diode lasers. A cooling laser operates with variable red detuning from the closed $`5S_{1/2}`$, $`F=2`$ to $`5P_{3/2}`$, $`F^{}=3`$ hyperfine component of rubidium D2-line. Its radiation is amplified by a second injection locked free-running diode laser. In order to repump rubidium atoms into the cooling cycle, a second grating-stabilized diode laser locked to the $`5S_{1/2}`$, $`F=1`$ to $`5P_{3/2}`$, $`F^{}=2`$ transition is employed. Both cooling and repumping light beams pass acoustooptic modulators and are spatially filtered. These near-resonant beams are expanded to a beam diameter of $`20\mathrm{mm}`$, spatially overlapped and then directed to the vacuum chamber to provide three retroreflected MOT beams. The total optical power of the cooling light after spatial filtering is $`42\mathrm{mW}`$, whereas that of the repumping light is $`9\mathrm{mW}`$. We use a pair of magnetic coils oriented in anti-Helmholtz configuration to generate a magnetic quadrupole field with a $`10\mathrm{G}/\mathrm{cm}`$ field gradient, whose center is close to the intersection of the two CO2-laser beams. The coil axes is oriented at an angle of 45 degree with respect to the vertical and horizontal CO2-laser beams. This quadrupole field is e.g. used to operate the MOT.

An experimental cycle begins by loading the magneto-optical trap. During the course of the experiment, we have used different MOT loading times. A typical value for e.g. the earlier crossed beam dipole trapping experiments is $`1\times 10^7`$ trapped atoms in the MOT accumulated during a 5 s loading time. During this MOT loading phase, the cooling laser operates with a red detuning of $`18\mathrm{MHz}`$ to the red of the cycling transition. Subsequently, we increase the detuning of the cooling laser to a value of $`160\mathrm{MHz}`$ and simultaneously reduce the repumping laser intensity by a factor 100 for a $`60\mathrm{ms}`$ long time interval. In this temporal dark MOT phase (d-MOT)DMOT , the atoms are pumped into the lower hyperfine state ($`F=1`$), which reduces hyperfine changing collisions. These quoted parameters are optimized by maximizing the number of atoms transferred to the dipole trap. Throughout this cycle the CO2-laser radiation is left on, allowing for rubidium atoms to accumulate in the dipole trapping region. At the end of the d-MOT phase, the repumping light is extinguished and after a delay of $`2\mathrm{ms}`$ also the cooling light. Simultaneously, the magnetic quadrupole field is switched off. By this time, the atoms are confined by the quasistatic dipole trap alone. All near-resonant beams are carefully extinguished by both AOMs and mechanical shutters. The small delay between the extinguishing of repumping and cooling light minimizes losses in the dipole trap due to hyperfine changing collisions.

To analyze the properties of trapped atomic clouds, we employ the technique of absorption imaging. At the end of an experiment cycle, the trapped atoms are released by switching off the CO2-laser beams. After a variable expansion time (typically 5–$`20\mathrm{ms}`$), cold atoms are irradiated with a pulse of light tuned resonantly to the $`F=2`$, $`F^{}=3`$ component of the rubidium D2 line. For this measurement, we use a spatially filtered laser beam with a $`8\mathrm{mm}`$ beam diameter. The beam is then imaged onto a slow-scan CCD camera, where shadow images of the atomic cloud are recorded. From these images, both number of atoms and atomic temperatures are extracted. The pulse length is $`80\text{µs}`$ and the intensity ($`100\text{µ}\mathrm{W}/\mathrm{cm}^2`$) is chosen to be clearly below saturation intensity. During this detection time, repumping light is provided by the MOT beams.

## 4 Experimental Results

### 4.1 Bose-Einstein condensation in a crossed beam geometry

In initial experiments, we studied BEC in a crossed beam geometry, similarly as done in work by Chapman et al. chapman . To reach Bose-Einstein condensation by direct evaporative cooling in our dipole traps, the initial phase space density of the laser cooled clouds is first optimized. We have characterized the trap lifetime, trap frequencies and the temperature of the trapped atomic cloud. The vibrational frequencies are measured by periodically modulating the optical confining power with the first AOM, which allows us to study parametrically excitation of the trapped atoms susanne1 . Significant trap loss is observed when the modulation frequency is close to twice a trap vibrational frequency. With typical parameters of $`12\mathrm{W}`$ optical power in each of the CO2-laser trapping beams and a $`35\text{µm}`$ waist radius, we observe parametric resonance corresponding to a vibrational frequency of $`\nu =1.7\mathrm{kHz}`$. For this crossed beam geometry, the oscillation frequencies in the central trap region in all three spatial directions are similar. The trap lifetime is extracted by monitoring the number of atoms detected after different trapping times for a constant potential depth. A typical result of such a measurement is shown in Fig. 2a. The data points are taken after a minimum dipole trapping time of 70 ms, since for shorter delay times atoms not being transferred to the dipole trap have not yet been removed completely from the detection region by gravity. The data can be described with a two time constants exponential decay, which involves a fast and a slow decay with time constants near $`100\mathrm{ms}`$ and $`12\mathrm{s}`$ respectively. The fast decay in the beginning of the dipole trapping phase is attributed to a plain atomic evaporation of the highest energetic atoms. In contrast, the slow decay is attributed to losses due to collisions with background gas, which ultimately limit the available trapping time. Fig. 2b shows the dependence of the atomic temperature on trapping time. The temperature clearly decreases with time, which we attribute to the plain evaporation. This process is effective only for small trapping times when the loss rate is large. The measured atomic density after a trapping time of $`500\mathrm{ms}`$ is $`1\times 10^{13}\mathrm{atoms}/\mathrm{cm}^3`$ . Together with the measured temperature of $`60\text{µK}`$ we derive a phase space product $`n\lambda _{\mathrm{dB}}^31/500`$, which corresponding to a $`1/1500`$ phase space density if we assume equal distribution of spin projections. These results are comparable to previous results observed in CO2-laser optical lattice and crossed dipole geometries susanne2 . We also infer a collisional rate of $`7\mathrm{kHz}`$ at this time, clearly representing a favorable starting point for further, forced evaporative cooling to lower temperatures. To induce such a forced evaporation, the optical potential is lowered in a controlled way. Experimentally, this is achieved by reducing the trapping laser beam intensity via a decreasing the rf-drive power of the first AOM. Mandatory for the success of evaporative cooling is to maintain a relatively high atomic collision rate, so that the remaining atoms can rethermalize to a distribution of lower temperature. We reduce the potential depth with time according to the formula

$$U(t)=U_0(1+t/\tau )^\beta ,$$
(3)
where $`U_0`$ denotes the value of the initial potential depth. It was shown in Ref. 10 that this ramp form maintains a nearly constant ratio $`\eta =U/k_\mathrm{B}T`$ between potential depth and the atomic temperature. Following a 100 ms long plain evaporation period, the mid-infrared power is reduced in a $`3.5\mathrm{s}`$ long ramp time from initially $`12\mathrm{W}`$ to a final value of $`75\mathrm{mW}`$ in each of the trapping beams. In these crossed dipole experiments, we find optimum cooling when choosing the parameters of Eq. (3) to be $`\tau =0.3\mathrm{s}`$ and $`\beta =1.5`$. We have experimentally verified that the cutoff parameter $`\eta `$ was nearly constant throughout the evaporation ramp. For a characterization of the cooling, we have analyzed shadow images of the expanded atomic cloud at the end of the evaporation process. Fig. 3a shows a cross-section of such an image for a final trapping power of 150 mW, corresponding to an average trap vibrational frequency of 350 Hz. It is clear that here the ensemble is still purely thermal. The phase space density is further increased when we ramp to lower power values. Fig. 3b shows data recorded for a final beam power of $`100\mathrm{mW}`$, where a typical bimodal distribution corresponding to an atomic cloud near the transition point is observed. The central feature corresponds to atoms in the Bose-condensate, while the wings represent thermal atoms. The critical temperature here is $`T_\mathrm{c}=190\mathrm{nK}`$. For final power of $`75\mathrm{mW}`$, an almost pure condensate is obtained as shown in Fig. 3c. The condensate contains about 10000 atoms distributed among the three $`m_F`$ states of the electronic hyperfine ground state $`F=1`$. In other measurements, we have applied a magnetic quadrupole field during the course of the evaporation by leading on the MOT coils. This leads to a condensate with about 70 percent population in the $`m_F=1`$ and 30 percent in the $`m_F=0`$ spin projection. For these trap parameters, the magnetic field gradient predominantly populates one field-sensitive state. In earlier work in a crossed dipole trap it was demonstrated that with different field gradients also other spin states can be populated, although it was noted that by the time of writing the origin of the obtained magnetization still remained to be determined chapman\_ICAP .

### 4.2 BEC in a single running wave trap

In this chapter, we describe our experiments successfully creating a rubidium Bose-Einstein-condensate in a single beam CO2-laser dipole trap. This is the simplest possible dipole trapping geometry. The use of single running wave allows for a compact setup and a very reliable production of the BEC. Previous experiments creating quantum degeneracy in dipole traps have either required the use of a more alignment-sensitive crossed dipole trap geometry chapman ; Takasu  or Feshbach resonances grimm  to enhance the collisional rate during the course of the forced evaporation.

As in the case of the crossed dipole trap configuration, evaporative cooling towards BEC requires a ramping down of the trapping potential. Since the average of the trap vibrational frequencies for a given power and beam waist is smaller than in the crossed beam geometry, it is a priori not clear that the rethermalization rate is sufficiently high throughout the evaporation ramp. Obviously, the final stages of evaporation here are most critical, since the collisional rate decreases with trap power. It is easy to show that the trap vibrational frequencies in a single dipole trap orthogonal to the beam axis scale as $`\nu _r\sqrt{P}/w_0^2`$, while along the beam axes scale as $`\nu _z\lambda \sqrt{P}/w_0^3`$, where $`\lambda `$ is the laser wavelength. Our experiments demonstrate, that by choosing a sufficiently small beam waist, the collisional rate can be high enough throughout the ramp, and BEC can be reached. For the single beam geometry, the focus of the (horizontally oriented) trapping beam is reduced to a $`27\text{µm}`$ beam waist. In principle, one could work with an even tighter focus to fully compensate for the smaller compression in this geometry. In our experiments, we have instead started with a higher number of atoms and also used a slightly longer evaporation time. The weak confinement along the beam axis of the single dipole trap geometry offers the additional benefit that it allows us to remove atoms in field sensitive spin projections with a moderate magnetic field gradient. We note that an alternative to such a state selection is to achieve field-insensitivity by using of atoms with a spin singlet ground state, as e.g. atomic ytterbium. Very recently in an impressive experiment, evaporative cooling in a crossed dipole trap has allowed for the production of a Bose-Einstein condensate of these atoms Takasu .

For our single dipole trap experiments, we increase the MOT loading time to $`30\mathrm{s}`$, during which $`6\times 10^7`$ are captured. At the end of the MOT loading, we apply a temporal dark-MOT phase as described in the above section. Subsequently, all near-resonant optical beams are extinguished and the atoms are trapped in the quasistatic dipole trapping potential alone. Typically, $`4\times 10^6`$ atoms are captured in the single beam trap. We have characterized the vibrational frequencies of the trap. At full trapping laser power ($`28\mathrm{W}`$), we measure $`\nu _r=4.8\mathrm{kHz}`$ and $`\nu _z=350\mathrm{Hz}`$, corresponding to vibrations orthogonal and collinear respectively to the beam axes. In this single beam geometry, there is no spherical symmetry and the longitudinal trap frequency is about 13 times smaller than the radial one. We again have first analyzed the trapping of atoms while maintaining full CO2-laser trapping power. Following a 100 ms long plain evaporation phase, we measure an atomic temperature of $`140\text{µK}`$ and an atomic density of $`n1.2\times 10^{13}\mathrm{atoms}/\mathrm{cm}^3`$. This corresponds to a product $`n\lambda _{\mathrm{dB}}^31.210^4`$. Although this value is below best values obtained in quasistatic crossed dipole trap configurations or optical lattices, it is clearly above results achieved in magnetic traps prior to forced evaporative cooling. From the above values, we derive a high collision rate of $`6.2\mathrm{kHz}`$. This has encouraged us to proceed with forced evaporative cooling in this single beam dipole trapping geometry.

To cool the atoms towards lower temperatures, we apply a $`7\mathrm{s}`$ long forced evaporation ramp, during which the power of the dipole trapping beam is reduced from its initial value of $`28\mathrm{W}`$ to a final value of $`200\mathrm{mW}`$. This ramp is applied directly after the dark MOT phase, as for this geometry no improved cooling is observed when an initial plain evaporation phase is added. We again use a ramp form as described by Eq. 3. Optimum cooling in the single dipole trap was observed when using parameters $`\tau `$ and $`\beta `$ near $`0.45\mathrm{s}`$ and 1.4 respectively. We have recorded time-of-flight (TOF) shadow images of the atomic cloud for different free expansion times. For this measurement, the MOT quadrupole field was switched off after the d-MOT phase. Fig. 4a shows an image recorded directly after switching of the trap laser, i.e. with no free expansion. The trapped cloud is cigar shaped and strongly elongated along the weakly confining beam axis. Figs. 4b and 4c give time of flight images recorded after a 8 ms and 15 ms respectively long free expansion phase. In the former image the cloud is almost symmetric, while in the latter image the symmetry axis is inverted. We interpret this series of images as a clear evidence for Bose-Einstein condensation in the single beam optical trap. In this asymmetric trap geometry, the cloud expands faster along the radial than along the axial direction due to the anisotropic release of mean field energy. The formed condensate has spinor nature. To analyze the distribution of Zeeman components, we apply a Stern-Gerlach magnetic field gradient during the free expansion phase, which spatially separates the different Zeeman components. Fig. 5a shows a typical measurement, where a separation into clouds with different spin projections is clearly visible. We produce condensates with typically 12000 atoms distributed among the $`m_F=1,0,1`$ Zeeman components of the $`F=1`$ ground state. As stated above, one of the main advantages of optical dipole traps is their state independent trapping, which allows for the formation and confinement of spinor condensates.

In subsequent experiments, we have condensed atoms in the $`m_F=0`$ spin projection only. For this measurement, the magnetic quadrupole field generated by the MOT coils was left on throughout the experimental cycle, i.e. also during both dipole trapping and detection phases. For our experimental parameters, stable trapping of atoms during the final phase of the evaporative cooling is then only possible for the field insensitive ($`m_F=0`$) spin projection. Atoms in spin projections $`m_F=\pm 1`$ are removed during the course of evaporative cooling by the field gradient (note that the dipole trap does in general not exactly overlap with the center of the quadrupole field). Fig. 5b shows a typical obtained time-of-flight shadow image of the condensed cloud. The measurement shows that only the $`m_F=0`$ Zeeman state is populated. We typically obtain 7000 condensed atoms in this first order field-insensitive state. Note that this number is larger than the obtained $`m_F=0`$ fraction of the above discussed spinor condensate, which we attribute to sympathetic cooling with atoms in $`m_F=\pm 1`$ spin projections during condensate formation. The critical temperature of the $`m_F=0`$ condensate is $`T_\mathrm{c}220\mathrm{nK}`$, and the peak-density is $`1.2\times 10^{14}/\mathrm{cm}^3`$. For both the spinor and the $`m_F=0`$ condensate we measure condensate lifetimes near $`5\mathrm{s}`$. This value is shorter than the inverse loss rate due to background gas collisions, and we attribute this lifetime to be mainly limited by three-body losses. Within our experimental uncertainty, we do not observe any difference between the lifetimes of a spinor and the $`m_F=0`$ condensate. Further, we do not observe transfer of atoms from $`m_F=0`$ state into field-sensitive states. To our belief, spin changing collisions here are suppressed by the quadratic Zeeman shift in the inhomogeneous magnetic field greene ; grimmcomm .

## 5 Conclusions and Outlook

We have investigated Bose-Einstein condensation of rubidium atoms by direct evaporative cooling in tightly confining, quasistatic dipole traps. The quantum degenerate regime has been reached both in a crossed beam and a single beam CO2-laser dipole trapping geometry. The former configuration allows cooling to quantum degeneracy with a somewhat larger trap focus. On the other hand, the newly developed single beam approach towards Bose-Einstein condensation provides a simpler setup and is less alignment sensitive. The scheme provides a very stable route towards the achieving of quantum degeneracy. Finally, we demonstrated that in the single beam setup a moderate magnetic field gradient yields a trapping configuration, in which stable confinement is possible only for atoms in a $`m_F=0`$ spin projection. The chemical potential of the produced Bose-Einstein condensate is first order insensitive to stray magnetic fields.

For the future, we believe that the demonstrated single beam method for producing Bose-Einstein condensates due to its technical simplicity opens up wide applications in the physics with quantum gases. Further research could investigate an extension to the Bose-Einstein condensation of other atomic species, as e.g. alkaline-earth atoms.

Further, we anticipate the described method to produce condensates in a field-insensitive spin state can have impact on the application of quantum degenerate atoms to precision measurements, as e.g. atomic clocks or atom interferometry experiments. One can furthermore envision experiments with two-component quantum degenerate gases driven by exciting the microwave clock transition between the hyperfine ground states $`F=1`$, $`m_F=0`$ and $`F=2`$, $`m_F=0`$. It clearly remains important to study the stability of different spin projections against spin changing collisions in more detail.

Quasistatic optical dipole traps are of large interest for quantum computation. In a CO2-laser lattice geometry the lattice spacing is so large that individual sites can be optically resolved, which allows for an individual addressing of qubits rainer . By inducing a Mott insulator phase transition, unity occupation of atoms in lattice sites can be achieved. An entanglement of atoms in the lattice is e.g. possible by cold, controlled collisions jaksch .

This work has been supported in parts by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, the Landesstiftung Baden Württemberg, and the European Community.


text:
# The general boundary approach to quantum gravity

## 1 Introduction

Even after decades of intensive research the problem of reconciling quantum mechanics and genereal relativity remains an elusive one. One of the core difficulties faced by many approaches is the *problem of time* (see Isham’s excellent review ). This may be viewed as arising from the contradiction of a classical time variable underlying standard quantum mechanics and the supposed quantum nature of time emerging out of a quantum theory of general relativity. Another problematic issue is the fact that natural observables in classical general relativity are highly non-local – a consequence of the role of diffeomorphisms as gauge symmetries. Translated into a quantum theory of 3-geometries this would presumably imply that natural observables are at least spatially non-local. Consequently, describing local experiments in the quantum theory would be a priori difficult.

A fundamental reason for these difficulties is arguably the way standard quantum mechanics is formulated. One presumes a classical and fixed space-time to set up the formalism. Even special relativity only enters “through the back door” in quantum field theory and is not manifest in the formalism. The assumption of standard approaches to quantum general relativity is then that the quantization of space and time might be considered in a second step, resting on the formalism thus set up.

The “general boundary” approach is precisely aimed at addressing the abovementioned difficulties. On the one hand it avoids the problem of time and on the other hand it is inherently compatible with general covariance and allows for local descriptions of local experiments. The price to pay is that we need to modify or rather extend the standard formalism of quantum mechanics. The key idea is that transition amplitudes are associated with regions of space-time and states are associated with their boundaries. This reduces in the case of regions that are time intervals extended over all of space essentially to the standard formalism.

This approach was introduced in  and is currently under development. We present some of its basic ideas and motivations in Section 2. In Section 3 we show how the path integral affords a natural guide to quantization in this context. In Section 4 we go a step further and propose a blueprint for defining models of quantum gravity of such a type. The latter incorporates ideas from loop quantum gravity , spin foam models  and renormalization .

## 2 General boundaries

The general boundary formalism is an extension of the standard formalism of quantum mechanics with the aim of natural compatibility with general covariance. It should be applicable in particular to quantum general relativity. The extension as compared to the standard formalism might be sketched as follows. In the standard formalism one associates a Hilbert space of states with each time-slice of a global foliation of space-time. An evolution takes place between two such time-slices and is represented by a unitary operator. Associated with states in the two time-slices is a transition amplitude, whose modulus square determines the probability of finding the final state given that the initial one was prepared.

More explicitly, we have Hilbert spaces $`_1`$ and $`_2`$ of states associated to the initial time $`t_1`$ and final time $`t_2`$. The evolution is described by an operator $`U(t_1,t_2):_1_2`$. The transition amplitude for an initial state $`\psi _1_1`$ to evolve into a final state $`\psi _2_2^{}`$ is written as $`\psi _2|U(t_1,t_2)|\psi _1`$.

In terms of a space-time picture an evolution operator is associated to a region of space-time, namely the product of the time interval with all of space. The states (initial and final) are naturally associated with the boundary components of this region. Indeed, the first step of our our generalization consists of “forgetting” the a priori distinction between initial and final state. Instead we consider a state space which is the tensor product of the two state spaces associated with the time-slices. The new state space is naturally associated with the boundary as a whole. That such a formulation is consistent is a rather non-trivial fact. It crucially relies on a symmetry of quantum field theory coming out of the LSZ reduction that allows to exchange individual particles between the initial and final state without changing the amplitude. (Of course, a CPT transformation must be performed on the particle at the same time and phase space measures do change.)

Formalizing this, we have a generalized state space $`_{[t_1,t_2]}`$ that is the tensor product $`_1_2^{}`$. A state $`\psi `$ in $`_{[t_1,t_2]}`$ is a (linear combination of) tensor product(s) $`\psi _1\psi _2`$ of states in $`_1`$ and $`_2`$. The transition amplitude is then a map $`_{[t_1,t_2]}`$ which we denote by $`\rho _{[t_1,t_2]}`$. In terms of the conventional notation this means

$$\rho _{[t_1,t_2]}(\psi _1\psi _2)=\psi _2|U(t_1,t_2)|\psi _1.$$
(1)
In terms of a measurement process, the initial and final state are both encoded in a state of the generalized state space. The evolution operator becomes a linear map from the generalized state space to the complex numbers, associating transition amplitudes to generalized states. The second step is to generalize from the special regions of space-time that are time intervals extended over all of space to more general regions. For this to be consistent we need to introduce a composition property. This property requires that when we glue two regions of space-time together the evolution map associated with the composite must equal the composition of the evolution maps associated with the original pieces. This generalizes the composition of time evolutions in standard quantum mechanics. More precisely, one demands the properties of a topological quantum field theory .

Given a space-time region (4-manifold) $`M`$ with boundary $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, we write $`_\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ for the state space associated with the boundary. For the evolution map (or amplitude) we write $`\rho _M:_\mathrm{\Sigma }`$. The situation of conventional quantum mechanics is recovered if $`M`$ is the product of all of space $`^3`$ with a time interval $`[t_1,t_2]`$. $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is then the union of two components $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_1\mathrm{\Sigma }_2`$, each being all of space $`^3`$ times a point in time. By the axioms of topological quantum field theory this implies that $`_\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ decomposes into a tensor product of vector spaces associated to the components $`_\mathrm{\Sigma }=_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_1}_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_2}`$. In this way we recover (1). Note that in general (especially if $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is connected) there is no natural decomposition of $`_\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ into a tensor product and thus no longer any natural distinction between preparation and observation in quantum mechanics. This has profound interpretational implications, e.g. with regards to the “collapse of the wave function” .

It might seem that we still suppose an a priori fixed space-time in contrast to the desire of seeing it emerge from the quantization. However, this is not really the case. What we do presume is only the topology, but not the geometry. The geometry and thus the dynamical degrees of freedom of gravity are really to be encoded in the state. Furthermore, we might even introduce sums over topologies in the interior and only fix the topology of the boundary of the space-time region. However, it is unclear whether this is reasonable.

For a sensible interpretation of measurement processes we require the boundary of the space-time regions to be connected. (Note that this is in stark contrast to standard quantum mechanics.) The simplest type of region would be one that has the topology of a 4-ball. Indeed, this type of topology might be sufficient for most practical purposes.

This “general boundary” formulation has several advantages:

* The problem of time disappears. The description of a local measurement involves a local region of space-time. Time durations in the measurement process make sense if the gravitational degrees of freedom of the generalized state are nearly classical. In this case time durations (with possible uncertainties) might be read of from the state by integrating the metric along paths in the boundary, in particular in its time-like parts. The connectedness of the boundary is crucial here.
* Local measurement processes can be described using a local region of space-time only. Neither is recourse made to distant events in the universe nor is any knowledge of its global structure necessary.
* It is not necessary to endorse “realist” interpretations of quantum mechanics for this formulation to make sense. This is in contrast to other approaches which presume for example the existence of a “wave function of the universe”.

Since the proposed approach is still in its infancy many issues have not yet been addressed. Among them is the challenge to supply a completely satisfactory probability interpretation that does not take recourse to the special situation of time intervals. Another issue is that of identifying particle states on general boundaries. For this reason it is desirable to understand the approach first in the context of standard quantum field theory and even non-relativistic quantum mechanics. Although its motivation comes from quantum gravity there is no inherent limitation of the general boundary formulation to this context. To the contrary, it is rather easy to adapt it to the situation where a fixed background metric is given. The suitable modification of the axioms of topological quantum field theory to this case is straightforward.

An interesting consequence of the approach is already exhibited in non-relativistic quantum mechanics . Consistency requires that state spaces contain states for any number of particles, as in quantum field theory. The reason may be seen to be a similar one in the two cases: A Lorentz boost in quantum field theory can be considered as “tilting” the boundary components of a time interval times all of space so that they do no longer (from the point of view of the original frame) correspond to constant times. Along the same lines, indistinguishability of particles in the general boundary approach leads to pair creation and annihilation.

## 3 Path integral quantization

So far we have only described the general formalism that we would like quantum theories to be formulated in. In this section we will consider the issue of quantization. That is, we describe heuristically how to obtain quantum theories of the general boundary type from classical theories. It turns out that the path integral approach is naturally suited for this purpose. Our presentation here is necessarily brief and we refer the interested reader to  for details.

Consider a classical field theory with fields $`\varphi `$ and an action $`𝒮[\varphi ]`$. (For simplicity, we do not write the indices for different fields or field components.) A quantization leading to a general boundary quantum theory may be carried out roughly as follows. For the boundary $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ of some space-time region $`M`$ we consider the space $`K_\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ of field configurations on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$. We then define $`_\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ to be the space $`C(K_\mathrm{\Sigma })`$ of complex valued functions on $`K_\mathrm{\Sigma }`$. This definition has the required property that if $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ decomposes into connected components then $`_\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ decomposes into a tensor product of spaces associated with the components. Explicitly, if $`\mathrm{\Sigma }=\mathrm{\Sigma }_1\mathrm{\Sigma }_2`$, then $`K_\mathrm{\Sigma }=K_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_1}\times K_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_2}`$ and consequently $`C(K_\mathrm{\Sigma })=C(K_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_1})C(K_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_2})`$. The last ingredient is the amplitude $`\rho _M:_\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ which can be given as follows,

$$\rho _M(\psi )=_{K_\mathrm{\Sigma }}𝒟\varphi _0\psi (\varphi _0)_{\varphi |_\mathrm{\Sigma }=\varphi _0}𝒟\varphi e^{\frac{i}{\mathrm{}}𝒮[\varphi ]}.$$
(2)
The outer integral is over field configurations $`\varphi _0`$ on the boundary $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ and the inner integral is over all field configurations in the interior that reduce on the boundary to the given configuration $`\varphi _0`$.

One can now check that these definitions satisfy all the required properties (the topological quantum field theory type axioms). Also one checks that one recovers the usual quantum field theoretic transition amplitudes in the conventional case of $`M`$ being given by a time interval, i.e. $`M=^3\times [t_1,t_2]`$.

## 4 Model of a non-perturbative approach

In this section we present a possible blueprint for formulating a quantum theory of gravity in the general boundary formulation.

Firstly, given suitable variables and an associated action we can formally write down the quantization in the general boundary formulation, given by (2). The most conventional form of this would be to chose the metric field as variable and the Einstein-Hilbert action. However, as is well known, writing down a path integral is more a statement than the solution of a problem. This is particularly true for general relativity, where the standard perturbation approach of quantum field theory fails due to non-renormalizability.

Path integrals of general relativity have been extensively studied in the context of the *Euclidean Quantum Gravity* approach championed by Hawking . The basic idea is there that one can make sense of the path integrals by evaluating them in a euclideanized setting, i.e. with Riemannian metrics. One then relates the result to the physical setting with Lorentzian signature.

The basic quantities of interest in Euclidean Quantum Gravity are indeed very similar to those of interest in the general boundary approach. However, and this is remarkable, their interpretation is rather different. In Euclidean Quantum Gravity one adheres to standard quantum mechanics and wishes to construct transition amplitudes associated with states living on space-like slices of the universe. To make this problem manageable one adds time-like boundary conditions “at spatial infinity” if the universe is not closed. This is essentially equivalent to a compactification of the interior space-time region. Thus, the resulting picture is mathematically close to the situation of a compact space-time region with connected boundary as of interest in the general boundary approach. This leads to the curious situation that what is known in Euclidean Quantum Gravity as the “wave function of the universe”  is formally similar to the amplitude for a generic 4-ball region of space-time in the general boundary approach. Reinterpreting the results of Euclidean Quantum Gravity in the light of the present approach might offer interesting insights. We shall pursue here a different route, however, but before embarking on it let us take a closer look at the boundary.

### 4.1 Boundary and causal structure

We consider the generic case of a smooth 4-ball $`B`$, the boundary being a 3-sphere $`S`$. Suppose we have a solution of the Einstein field equations in the interior that extends to the “outside” (we imagine the 4-ball embedded into some larger space). Necessarily, the boundary $`S`$ has both space-like and time-like parts. In the simplest case there will be two space-like parts (near the poles) and one time-like (near the equator). Separating these parts there are null regions which are generically 2-spheres. In more complicated cases there are several time-like parts and also more space-like parts. This corresponds to more “crumpled” boundaries. We call the separation of the boundary into regions of the three types space-like, time-like and null a *causal structure*.

In order to simplify the physical interpretation in the quantum situation this suggests to restrict the boundary configurations to conform to given causal structures. This really means incorporating the causal structure as a background. We would thus no longer have a “pure” topological quantum field theory, but have the extra datum of causal structure given on the boundaries.

Another interesting aspect of this is that we could consider 4-balls with boundaries that are almost everywhere null except for submanifolds of dimension at most two (double cone shape). This would require giving up smoothness. Indeed, recent work of Reisenberger  shows that general relativity with null boundaries takes a particularly simple form and might thus be particularly suitable for quantization. Note also that giving up smoothness allows for causal structures where the boundary is almost everywhere space-like (lens shape) or time-like (pointed cigar shape).

### 4.2 Quantization of the boundary – “kinematic” state space

We now turn to the “quantization” of the boundary, i.e. the construction of the “kinematic” state space $`_\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ associated with the boundary $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$. Using the metric as variable the configuration space of interest should be that of metrics on the boundary. However, physically significant is really only the *intrinsic* metric on the boundary. This is because the other components of the metric in a solution of the field equations can be arbitrarily modified by diffeomorphisms that leave the boundary invariant. Thus we take the configuration space $`K_\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ to be the space of intrinsic metrics on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$.

The signature of the intrinsic metric on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is determined by the causal structure of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$. More precisely, the metric has signature $`(+,+,+)`$ on space-like parts, $`(+,+,)`$ on time-like parts and $`(+,+,0)`$ on null parts. Considering a causal structure $`C`$ to be a background structure on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ we denote the boundary with background by $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_C`$. Correspondingly, we have a configurations space $`K_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_C}`$ associated with $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_C`$ that contains only the intrinsic metrics on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ respecting $`C`$. The “background-free” configuration space $`K_\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is then simply the union over the configuration spaces with the different causal structures,

$$K_\mathrm{\Sigma }=\underset{C}{}K_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_C}.$$

Taking $`_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_C}`$ to be a suitable space $`C(K_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_C})`$ of functions on $`K_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_C}`$ we obtain,

$$_\mathrm{\Sigma }=\underset{C}{}_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_C}.$$

Spaces of metrics are rather complicated and a path integral over metrics in the interior is rather difficult to make sense of. We shall continue with a different choice of variables to describe general relativity. This is the formulation in terms of a 4-bein (frame field) variable $`E`$ and an associated connection $`A`$ of the Lorentz group. Doing so allows us to establish a relation to *loop quantum gravity* . This is a canonical approach to quantum gravity, i.e. one starts by splitting space-time into time-slices, associates Hilbert spaces with the time slices and then constructs an evolution operator (which is actually a projector) between these Hilbert spaces.

Relevant for us here is the fact that the problem of constructing the Hilbert space of loop quantum gravity is very similar to the problem of finding a suitable state space $``$ in the general boundary approach. Using a suitable Hamiltonian formulation of general relativity (the Ashtekar formulation) one finds roughly that the 3-bein $`E^{}`$ and 3-connection $`A^{}`$ induced in the space-like hypersurface $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ are conjugate variables.222The situation is really somewhat more complicated as $`A^{}`$ is the Ashtekar connection which also includes an extrinsic curvature part. Also $`E^{}`$ is really densitized etc. We disregard these details here as they are not relevant for the present sketchy account. For the quantization it turns out to be advantageous to think of the connection $`A^{}`$ as “position” and of the 3-bein $`E^{}`$ as “momentum”. The configuration space $`K_\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ associated with $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is thus the space of connections $`A^{}`$ on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$. Loop quantum gravity starts by constructing the Hilbert space $`_\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ as a suitable space $`C(K_\mathrm{\Sigma })`$ of functions on $`K_\mathrm{\Sigma }`$.

This is roughly done as follows. Natural gauge invariant functions on the space of connections are Wilson loops, i.e. the holonomy along a closed loop in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ evaluated with the character of some irreducible representation of the gauge group. In turns out that slightly more general functions are more suitable: spin networks. These are graphs in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ whose edges are labeled by irreducible representations and whose vertices are labeled by intertwiners.

The similarity of the problem suggests to construct the state space $`_\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ associated with the boundary $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ of a 4-manifold $`M`$ in a similar way. The main difference to loop quantum gravity is that $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is no longer everywhere space-like. This implies that the gauge group of the connection is no longer everywhere $`SO(3)`$ (or its double cover $`SU(2)`$). Rather, it alternates between $`SO(3)`$ (for space-like parts) and $`SO(2,1)`$ for time-like parts, according to the signature of the associated metric. For null parts (of codimension zero) it should even be $`SO(2)`$. Thus, the above discussion of the decomposition of the configuration space $`K_\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ in terms of different causal structures applies again. The difference is that instead of the signature of the metric now the gauge group changes in the different parts of the causal structure.

For $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ with a given causal structure $`C`$ we would have $`_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_C}`$ spanned by spin networks embedded into $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ where edges carry representations of the gauge group that is associated with the respective causal part of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ into which they are embedded. One would then have to establish suitable matching conditions between the parts of different type.

A simpler approach would be not to restrict the gauge group from the outset but take spin networks of the Lorentz group $`SO(3,1)`$ (or its double cover $`SL(2,)`$) everywhere for $`_\mathrm{\Sigma }`$. This would mean to not restrict to given causal structures. This is also a priori easier to connect to the construction of the path integral in the interior that we shall discuss in the following.

Note that all our discussion here is rather sketchy, imprecise and preliminary. The details would require considerable work.

### 4.3 Quantizing the interior – amplitudes

As already mentioned, the path integral in the interior of the 4-manifold $`M`$ that we want to use to define the amplitude (2) is hard to make sense of. A way to make sense of this path integral is through *spin foam models* . In the present context this might be described as follows.

As above, we use 4-bein $`E`$ and connection $`A`$ variables to describe the degrees of freedom of general relativity. To make sense of the path integral we start by introducing a *discretization* of the space-time $`M`$. That is, we decompose $`M`$ into little pieces (cells) that are 4-balls. Then we draw edges connecting the centers of any two adjacent 4-balls. As in lattice gauge theory we encode the connection $`A`$ by assigning group elements to the edges. What enters the classical action is the curvature of $`F`$ which (again as in lattice gauge theory) we model trough holonomies around faces that are bounded by the edges of the discretization. It turns out that proceeding further along these lines allows to write down a discretized version of the path integral known as a spin foam model. Roughly speaking, the integral over 4-bein and connection fields is transformed to a sum over assignments of irreducible representations to the faces of the discretization and assignments of intertwiners to the edges.

The trouble is that there are many ambiguities in the process of defining such a spin foam model. Perhaps more seriously, all spin foam models of this kind have the property that the value of the path integral thus defined depends on the discretization. We shall come back to these difficulties in a moment.

Usually spin foam models are considered for manifolds without boundary. What is interesting to us here is of course the situation with boundaries. More particularly, we also want a definition of the outer integral in (2). Here it turns out that the spin network description on the boundary and the spin foam description in the interior fit together very well. Indeed one can think of a spin network as obtained by a cut through a spin foam. Moreover the structures (representations and intertwiners) associated with the elements of spin network and spin foam also fit together. Indeed, at least if we take connections on the boundary to be associated with the full gauge group (the Lorentz group) the structures fit naturally together and can be used to provide a definition of the full expression for the amplitude (2). If we restrict to subgroups according to a causal structure on the boundary the situation would become more complicated. Again, we remain rather sketchy here and spelling out the crucial details would require considerable work.

### 4.4 Renormalization

Using a spin foam model to define the amplitude (2) we have the serious problem that the amplitude depends on the unphysical choice of a discretization. This must be eliminated to have a well defined model.

There are two main approaches at achieving this: One is to “sum over spin foams” and the other is renormalization. The underlying idea in the first case is that the discretized theory describes physics directly at a fundamental length scale. Consequently, a summation over quantum geometries of different “sizes” has to be performed to capture the path integral. The problem of this approach is that a “sum over spin foams” is not at all well-defined. Although a proposal for solving this problem exists  it is rather ad hoc and suffers from the appearance of non-topological contributions and potential divergences.

We shall pursue the second approach here, renormalization. The underlying idea here is that the discretization is a kind of cut-off that has to be removed in the full theory. This is in analogy to the situation in lattice gauge theory and in line with our above reasoning for introducing the discretization in the first place. However, unlike for lattice gauge theory there is no immediate notion of continuum limit. As there is no metric there is no quantification of scale that could be used to define this. However, this is not really necessary.

Even in the case of lattice gauge theory the actual evaluation (usually by numerical means) of the theory never takes place in the continuum but always at finite lattice size. The crucial aspect of renormalization that allows for physically well defined predictions is that it relates the theory at different scales. Thus, to compute some physical quantity (like the expectation value of a Wilson loop) it suffices to evaluate the theory at a scale that is sufficiently small with respect to the scale of this particular quantity. When we want to compute a different physical quantity requiring a different scale in the theory the renormalization group flow tells us how to change the coupling constants of the theory so that the result will be physically compatible with the previous one.

Indeed, we can pursue the same idea in the present setting. Renormalization would need to relate the model defined with different discretizations. However, now there are no length scales as we have no background metric. It was proposed in  how to extend renormalization methods to this type of situation. Of course, the model needs to have coupling constants that can be adjusted for compensating a change of discretization. A crucial difference to situations in conventional lattice models is however, that a change of discretization is something much more general than a global change of scale. In particular, a discretization can change locally. It was argued in  that this necessitates *local* coupling constants, i.e. coupling constants associated to elements of the discretization. Furthermore, a concrete model for quantum gravity with such local coupling constants was proposed in , interpolating between the Barrett-Crane model and BF-theory. We will leave the discussion independent of a particular model, however.

Let us spell out details of the renormalization: We have discretizations $`D`$ of the manifold $`M`$ and a spin foam model that assigns values to the path integral (2). Note that we couple to a spin network on the boundary $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ and that it is convenient to think of this as living in a discretization $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ of the boundary that matches the discretization $`D`$ in the interior.

A discretization $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ of the boundary $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ gives rise to a restricted state space $`_{\mathrm{\Sigma },\mathrm{\Delta }}`$ that only carries the spin networks which “fit” into $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$. (Here we leave open the question whether we also fix a causal structure on the boundary from the outset.) We have a natural embedding from $`_{\mathrm{\Sigma },\mathrm{\Delta }}`$ into $`_\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ and also between different discretizations of the boundary $`I_{\mathrm{\Delta },\mathrm{\Delta }^{}}:_{\mathrm{\Sigma },\mathrm{\Delta }}_{\mathrm{\Sigma },\mathrm{\Delta }^{}}`$ if $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$ is a refinement of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$. These maps satisfy the commutative diagram

$$\text{}.$$

Indeed, in the absence of a direct definition of $`_\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ this could be used as a definition through a limit.

A model of the type under consideration provides an amplitude map $`\rho _{M,D,\lambda }:_{\mathrm{\Sigma },\mathrm{\Delta }}`$ for a given discretization $`D`$ of $`M`$ that restricts to a discretization $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ of the boundary $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ and for given values $`\lambda `$ of the local coupling constants. What we are looking for is a map $`\rho _M:_\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ that gives a definition of (2). Thus, we need to get rid of the discretization dependence and of the dependence on the coupling constants. The latter should be fixed by desired physical properties. This fixing is done at a given discretization. The renormalization problem is to determine the dependence of the coupling constants $`\lambda `$ on the discretization $`D`$, so that the physical properties remain the same. This parallels the situation in ordinary quantum field theory. There, coupling constants are determined at a given scale and renormalization is the determination of the scale dependence, so that physical properties remain the same.

In the case at hand the physical properties are encoded in the amplitude map $`\rho `$. An important ingredient here is that for any (spin network) state $`\psi _\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ there exists a discretization $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ such that there is a state $`\psi _\mathrm{\Delta }_\mathrm{\Delta }`$ which is mapped to $`\psi `$ under the inclusion $`_{\mathrm{\Sigma },\mathrm{\Delta }}_\mathrm{\Sigma }`$. We can thus formulate the renormalization problem as follows. Determine for any discretization $`D^{}`$ that reduces to $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}`$ on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ the coupling constants $`\lambda ^{}`$ so that with respect to a given coarser discretization $`D`$ (and $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$) and given coupling constants the following equality holds for any $`\psi _\mathrm{\Delta }_{\mathrm{\Sigma },\mathrm{\Delta }}`$:

$$\rho _{M,D,\lambda }(\psi _\mathrm{\Delta })=\rho _{M,D^{},\lambda ^{}}(I_{\mathrm{\Delta },\mathrm{\Delta }^{}}(\psi _\mathrm{\Delta })).$$
(3)
This requires some explanations and qualifications. Firstly, equation (3) should hold for essentially any pair of discretization $`D`$ and refinement $`D^{}`$. Only in this way is the full state space $`_\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ exhausted. Secondly, we not only looking for solutions of the equation with fixed coupling constants, but rather for solutions for any possible choice of couplings. That is, $`\lambda ^{}`$ in (3) is to arise from $`\lambda `$ through an action associated with the change of discretization $`(D,D^{})`$. More precisely, this is an action of the groupoid of changes of discretizations. It gives rise to the *renormalization groupoid*, see . This parallels the situation in lattice gauge theory where one seeks an action of the group of scale transformations on the space of coupling constants. Thirdly, what we wrote as an equation might be required only to be an approximate equality. The size of deviations would have to be controlled by the relation between the two discretizations $`D`$, $`D^{}`$. However, this is for the moment a rather speculative point which we do not pursue.

Another issue is the fact that changing a discretization changes the number of coupling constants as they are local. In particular, the number of coupling constants might increase. In this case it would not be possible give a well defined value to the new coupling constants on the requirement alone the the physics (encoded in $`\rho `$) of the previous discretization be reproduced. In other words, new physical degrees of freedom appear whose behaviour is not yet fixed. Thus, the action of the renormalization groupoid often goes only in one direction, namely that of coarsening of the discretization. This establishes the direction of the renormalization groupoid flow. Again, this is somewhat similar to situations in ordinary statistical physics.

At first it might seem that solving the system of equations (3) is a rather hopeless endeavour, as the space of discretizations is vast. However, as shown (conjecturally) in  there is a suitable set of generators of the groupoid of changes of discretizations. These are called the *cellular moves*. As any change of discretization (cellular decomposition) can be achieved through a sequence of cellular moves, it is sufficient to establish the system (3) for pairs of discretizations that differ by a cellular move. This vastly simplifies the problem.

There is another aspect to be discussed. How is the discretization required related to a physical property we want to describe? In the absence of a proper continuum limit we need to know what discretization we have to choose to answer a certain physical question. More precisely, the question is how fine the discretization has at least to be. In the present context this is rather clear for states on the boundary. For a given state $`\psi `$ we need to choose a discretization $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ which is sufficiently fine so that there exists a state $`\psi _\mathrm{\Delta }`$ which is mapped to $`\psi `$ under the inclusion $`_{\mathrm{\Sigma },\mathrm{\Delta }}_\mathrm{\Sigma }`$. For the interior of $`M`$ the answer is rather less clear and certainly depends on the model. In any case, one would expect the “fineness” of $`D`$ to be directly related to the required “fineness” of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$. In the other extreme we could envisage models that do not involve any discretization of the interior, but only one of the boundary.

Given a solution of the renormalization problem we could then fix coupling constants at a given discretization through physical properties to obtain the required amplitude map $`\rho _M:_\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ and thus complete the theory.

## 5 Conclusions

In this paper we have presented the general boundary approach  to quantum gravity together with possible steps to a complete theory of quantum gravity. Key advantages of the general boundary formalism are compatibility from the outset with general covariance, locality, and the avoidance of the problem of time. However, many steps remain to be taken to make this formalism complete and a key role should be played here by the application to ordinary quantum field theory. This concerns in particular the probability interpretation and the identification of particle states. For steps in this direction see .

A heuristic guideline for the quantization of a field theory to obtain a quantum field theory in the general boundary formulation was given using the path integral. For more details, see . Complementary to the path integral an operator picture is also developed . This should help in particular to connect to canonical quantization approaches such as loop quantum gravity.

As a more concrete proposal to implement the path integral, spin foam models were proposed as a definition of the path integral and methods of loop quantum gravity for making sense of the boundary state spaces. To deal with the ensuing problem of discretization dependence we suggested a renormalization procedure, adapting the proposal in  to the case at hand. The next step will be to bring this proposal to life, especially with “realistic” models such as the interpolating one of .

### Acknowledgements

This work was supported through a Marie Curie Fellowship of the European Union.