text:
# Multiple reflection expansion and heat kernel coefficients

## 1 Introduction

Heat kernel coefficients play an important role in many areas of theoretical physics. They govern the short-distance behavior of the propagator and the small-time asymptotics of the Schrödinger equation. In quantum field theory, heat kernel coefficients define the one-loop counter-terms and quantum anomalies, as well as the large mass expansion of the effective action. It is clear, therefore, that it is important to have an effective method of calculation of these coefficients.

To the best of our knowledge, heat kernel methods were first applied to quantum physics by Fock in 1937 ; then, they were re-introduced by Schwinger in the 50’s (see ). Due to De Witt , these methods became standard in quantum field theory. The De Witt iteration procedure proved to work quite well on manifolds without boundaries and (after certain improvements) allowed to calculate many terms in the asymptotic expansion of the heat kernel . On manifolds with boundaries, the methods based on functorial properties of the heat kernel  appeared to be more appropriate. These methods allowed to calculate some higher terms of the heat kernel expansion, e.g, for local boundary conditions  and for a transmittal problem . The functorial methods being the most general and the most powerful ones, they still have their limitations. They work particularly well for most general operators in a certain category. However, the number of independent invariants which can enter a heat kernel coefficient grows very fast with the order of the asymptotic expansion, so that combinatorics becomes unmanageable. Alternatively, the general Seeley calculus, which is applicable for general boundaries, may be used. But this method becomes unwieldy beyond low orders.

The methods mentioned above are analytical, i.e., they produce local formulae for the heat kernel coefficients in terms of the relevant geometric invariants. An alternative to such methods are special case calculations (see e.g.  and references therein). In this case, the complexity of the calculations is almost independent from the order of the asymptotic expansion, but the method can only be applied to those problems where a sufficiently high symmetry allows for the separation of variables.

Another alternative is provided by iterative, resp., recursive methods. Well known is the DeWitt iteration method. Less known are re-formulations in terms of integral equations. For example, in , the Lipmann-Schwinger equation for the scattering problem was used to determine the asymptotic expansion of the Jost function entering the regularized ground state energy. While the known iterative methods work well for sufficiently smooth background fields, an effective method working for singular background fields or for boundary conditions is missing.

It is an aim of the present paper to suggest the multiple reflection expansion as such method. In fact, it is based on an integral equation whose kernel is located on the boundary. The iteration of this equation gives rise to the multiple reflection expansion. The important point is that only a finite number of reflections contribute to a given heat kernel coefficient.

The use of the multiple reflection expansion in connection with vacuum energy is not new. In  it was employed to investigate the asymptotic density of eigenvalues which, in the modern language, is equivalent to the calculation of heat kernel coefficients. In  the possibility of using the multiple reflection expansion was mentioned, but found to be too complicated for a general boundary. As far as we know, the method has never been used as a tool for the calculation of the heat kernel coefficients. In this paper, we demonstrate its effectiveness with a recalculation of the heat kernel coefficients on a sphere. As a nice byproduct, we re-obtain a representation of the coefficients as finite sums where the difference between Dirichlet and Neumann boundary conditions resides in certain signs only.

In general, the multiple reflection expansion can be viewed as some kind of perturbative expansion. For instance, for imaginary frequencies it provides a well convergent series for the propagator. It should be mentioned that, in certain cases (for instance, with Dirichlet boundary conditions ), this is so despite the absence of a small expansion parameter. So, the question is whether this convergent behaviour is a general feature. The answer is no, and we provide a counterexample by considering the most general matching conditions on the surface of a sphere. They are described by a four-parameter family and correspond, for instance, to the presence of a delta function or its derivative on the surface. It turns out that there is no expansion in powers of the parameter in front of the derivative of the delta function but, instead, a nice expansion in the inverse of this parameter, which cannot be at all obtained by a multiple reflection expansion.

We would like to note that a Green function with a $`\delta ^{}`$-function potential has been considered before, for example, by path integral methods in . There, it was noticed that a perturbative expansion similar to that for a $`\delta `$-function potential yields some unsolvable relations, a fact that is not surprising in view of the non-analyticity found by us.

The paper is organized as follows: In Sec. 2 we collect the necessary formulas on spectral functions and their relations to the heat kernel coefficients. We write down the multiple reflection expansion in terms of integral equations for the propagator as well as for the heat kernel. In Sec. 3 we use the multiple reflection expansion in order to re-obtain the heat kernel coefficient for the classical boundary conditions on the sphere. In Sec. 4 we consider the most general matching conditions on a sphere, and calculate the corresponding heat kernel coefficients. Sec. 5 contains a discussion of our results and the conclusions. Some useful formulas are banned into Appendix 1, while Appendix 2 contains the study of matching conditions in higher dimensional spaces.

## 2 Spectral functions

In this section, we define the spectral functions to be used in the rest of the present paper, and give a short introduction to perturbative methods, supplemented with some examples of application.

Let us consider the Laplace operator on a domain $`\mathrm{\Omega }^D`$. Let $`\mathrm{\Phi }_n(\stackrel{}{x})`$ be its eigenfunctions, fulfilling Dirichlet or Neumann (or, more generally, Robin) boundary conditions on $`S=\mathrm{\Omega }`$, $`\lambda _n`$ being the corresponding eigenvalues :

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Phi }_n(\stackrel{}{x})=\lambda _n\mathrm{\Phi }_n(\stackrel{}{x}).$$
(1)
(In Sec. 4 we will consider the more complicated case of matching conditions on a surface in $`^D`$). We consider three local spectral functions. The first one is the resolvent (propagator) $`D_\omega (\stackrel{}{x},\stackrel{}{y})`$ (at imaginary frequency), obeying the equation

$$(\omega ^2\mathrm{\Delta })D_\omega (\stackrel{}{x},\stackrel{}{y})=\delta (\stackrel{}{x}\stackrel{}{y}).$$
(2)
It can be represented as

$$D_\omega (\stackrel{}{x},\stackrel{}{y})=\underset{n}{}\frac{\mathrm{\Phi }_n(\stackrel{}{x})\mathrm{\Phi }_n(\stackrel{}{y})}{\omega ^2+\lambda _n}.$$
(3)
The second spectral function is the zeta function, given by

$$\zeta (\stackrel{}{x},\stackrel{}{y};s)=\underset{n}{}\lambda _n^s\mathrm{\Phi }_n(\stackrel{}{x})\mathrm{\Phi }_n(\stackrel{}{y})$$
(4)
and, finally, the third is the heat kernel

$$K(\stackrel{}{x},\stackrel{}{y}|t)=\underset{n}{}\mathrm{\Phi }_n(\stackrel{}{x})\mathrm{\Phi }_n(\stackrel{}{y})e^{t\lambda _n}.$$
(5)
These functions are related by means of

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }(s)\zeta (\stackrel{}{x},\stackrel{}{y};s)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑tt^{s1}K(\stackrel{}{x},\stackrel{}{y}|t)`$ (6)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1s)}}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑\omega \omega ^{12s}D_\omega (\stackrel{}{x},\stackrel{}{y}).`$
In addition, we consider the corresponding global quantities, which appear as integrals over $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ of the local ones in the coincidence limit. Because of the distributional character of the heat kernel coefficients $`a_n(\stackrel{}{x},\stackrel{}{x})`$, it is useful to introduce a test function $`f(\stackrel{}{x})`$ into this integration. So, let

$$\zeta [f](s)=_\mathrm{\Omega }𝑑xf(x)\zeta (\stackrel{}{x},\stackrel{}{x};s)\text{resp.}K[f](t)=_\mathrm{\Omega }𝑑xf(x)K(\stackrel{}{x},\stackrel{}{x}t)$$
(7)
be the global zeta function (resp. heat kernel). In many cases (as, e.g., for manifolds with boundaries and local boundary conditions) the latter has an asymptotic expansion as $`t0`$

$$K[f](t)\frac{1}{(4\pi t)^{D/2}}\underset{n=0,\frac{1}{2},1,\mathrm{}}{}a_n[f]t^n.$$
(8)
We should warn the reader that the existence of the expansion (8) cannot be taken for granted. For example, in the case of some pseudo-differential operators or non-local boundary conditions, $`\mathrm{ln}t`$ terms appear.

If the expansion (8) exists, one can take $`f=1`$ to define the global heat kernel coefficients:

$$a_n=a_n[1]$$
(9)
If, apart from an appropriate behavior at large $`t`$, the heat kernel has a power law asymptotics at small $`t`$, the zeta function $`\zeta [f](s)`$ is a meromorphic function of $`s`$. From Eqs. (7) and (8), the coefficients $`a_n`$ can be represented by the corresponding residua:

$$a_n[f]=\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{Res}\\ s=\frac{D}{2}n\end{array}(4\pi )^{D/2}\mathrm{\Gamma }(s)\zeta [f](s)(n=0,\frac{1}{2},1,\mathrm{}).$$
(10)
Furthermore, we remind the reader that, in general, the coefficients consist of a bulk and a surface contribution

$$a_n[f]=_\mathrm{\Omega }𝑑xf(x)b_n(\stackrel{}{x})+_\mathrm{\Omega }𝑑\mu (\stackrel{}{a})f(\stackrel{}{a})c_n(\stackrel{}{a}),$$
(11)
where we have used $`\stackrel{}{a}\mathrm{\Omega }`$ as a notation for a point on the boundary, as opposite to the genuine notation $`\stackrel{}{x}\mathrm{\Omega }`$ for a point in the bulk.

Now, we integrate Eq. (6) over the domain $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ and insert the result into Eq. (10). We thus arrive at

$$a_n[f]=\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{Res}\\ s=\frac{D}{2}n\end{array}\frac{2(4\pi )^{D/2}}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1s)}_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑\omega \omega ^{12s}_\mathrm{\Omega }𝑑\stackrel{}{x}f(\stackrel{}{x})D_\omega (\stackrel{}{x},\stackrel{}{x})$$
(12)
as the basic equation for calculating the coefficients out of the propagator.

Having briefly reviewed some basic definitions and well-known facts, we proceed now to a brief presentation of perturbative methods.

The perturbative expansion for the resolvent is constructed in the following way: Let $`D^0(\stackrel{}{x},\stackrel{}{y})`$ be a zeroth order resolvent. Usually, $`D^0`$ is taken to be the free propagator in a flat space without boundaries. Consider the Dyson equation

$$D(\stackrel{}{x},\stackrel{}{y})=D^0(\stackrel{}{x},\stackrel{}{y})+_\mathrm{\Sigma }𝑑\stackrel{}{z}D^0(\stackrel{}{x},\stackrel{}{z})LD(\stackrel{}{z},\stackrel{}{y}),$$
(13)
where the integration goes over a sub-manifold $`\mathrm{\Sigma }\mathrm{\Omega }`$, and $`L`$ is some operator associated with the perturbation (see examples below). Equation (13) has the formal solution:

$$D(\stackrel{}{x},\stackrel{}{y})=D^0(\stackrel{}{x},\stackrel{}{y})+\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\underset{\mathrm{\Sigma }}{}𝑑\stackrel{}{z}_1\mathrm{}\underset{\mathrm{\Sigma }}{}𝑑\stackrel{}{z}_nD^0(\stackrel{}{x},\stackrel{}{z}_1)LD^0(\stackrel{}{z}_1)\mathrm{}LD^0(\stackrel{}{z}_n,\stackrel{}{y}).$$
(14)
In  it was shown that the heat kernel has a similar representation,

$`K(\stackrel{}{x},\stackrel{}{y};t)=K_0(\stackrel{}{x},\stackrel{}{y};t)+{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}(1)^n{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{t}{}}}𝑑s_n{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{s_n}{}}}𝑑s_{n1}\mathrm{}{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{s_2}{}}}𝑑s_1{\displaystyle \underset{M}{}}𝑑\stackrel{}{z}_n\mathrm{}{\displaystyle \underset{M}{}}𝑑\stackrel{}{z}_1`$
$`\times K_0(\stackrel{}{x},\stackrel{}{z}_n;ts_n)LK_0(\stackrel{}{z}_n,\stackrel{}{z}_{n1};s_ns_{n1})\mathrm{}LK_0(\stackrel{}{z}_1,\stackrel{}{y};s_1),`$ (15)
where $`K_0`$ is a suitable chosen “zeroth order” heat kernel.

In order to clarify these definitions we consider, in what follows, some examples. Let $`D^0=(𝒟)^1`$ be the propagator for a second order differential operator $`𝒟`$. Let $`\mathrm{\Sigma }=\mathrm{\Omega }`$ and let $`L`$ be multiplication by a potential $`V(\stackrel{}{x})`$. This is the standard situation of the DeWitt expansion with a smooth background potential written in form of an iterated integral equation. Then the equations (13) - (15) follow from the formal expansion of $`D=(𝒟+V)^1`$ and $`K=\mathrm{exp}(t(𝒟+V))`$ respectively, so that $`D(\stackrel{}{x},\stackrel{}{y})`$ and $`K(\stackrel{}{x},\stackrel{}{y}|t)`$ are the propagator and the heat kernel of the operator $`(𝒟+V)`$. If the potential $`V`$ is smooth and falls off sufficiently fast at infinity, all integrals in (15) exist. From dimensional considerations, it is clear that the highest power of $`V`$ which may contribute to the heat kernel coefficient $`a_n`$ is $`V^n`$. Therefore, only the first $`n`$ terms of the expansion (15) must be taken into account.

In our next example, let the operator $`L`$ be again the multiplication by a potential $`V`$, but now, let $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ be a subsurface of co-dimension 1 in $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$111This problem is a particular case of a more general transmittal problem (see Sec. 4).. In , it was shown that all terms in the expansion (15) exist and give a power-law asymptotics of the heat kernel. Later, this expansion was used in actual calculations of the heat kernel coefficients .

The Dyson equation is useful also for rather general perturbations of boundary conditions as, e.g., for the case where more derivative terms are added to the usual Neumann one (see ). In this case, however, dimensional arguments do not work and an infinite number of terms contribute to any given heat kernel coefficient $`a_n`$.

These examples demonstrate that the “common sense” arguments work rather well. If there is a parameter $`ϵ`$ in the theory such that there is a smooth limit $`ϵ0`$ of the heat kernel coefficients (such as $`V0`$ above), then the formal expansions (14), (15) in that parameter usually give a good approximation for the spectral functions. If such parameter is of positive mass dimension, only a finite number of terms contribute to each $`a_n`$.

This is, however, not the end of the story. In the next section we will see that one can construct a perturbative expansion, the so called multiple reflection expansion, even when no parameter or limiting procedure exist. Moreover, also in this case, only a finite number of terms contribute to each heat kernel coefficient - a result which is hard to predict on the basis of “common sense” arguments.

## 3 Multiple reflection expansion applied to the heat kernel coefficients for the sphere

This section contains a short overview of one particular perturbative method, which is particularly well-suited for the treatment of boundary problems, i.e., the multiple reflection expansion for Dirichlet and Robin boundary conditions. Balian and Bloch  applied this expansion, in the boundary value problem context, to calculate the density of eigenvalues, which is related to the heat kernel by a simple integral transformation. In their work , they pointed out that the divergent part of the Casimir energy is given by a few first reflection contributions. This fact, however, has not been fully appreciated. Therefore, we find it useful to repeat some basic facts, translating them to a more modern language, and to supply the reader with a simple example. In doing so, we omit many details which can be found in the original literature .

The multiple reflection expansion is based on simple formulas known from electrostatics: Having in mind the application to Dirichlet boundary conditions, let $`\mu (\stackrel{}{a})`$ be the density of a double layer (dipole layer) on a surface $`S`$. The corresponding potential is

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(\stackrel{}{x})=_Sd^2a_1\mathrm{\Delta }_\omega (\stackrel{}{x}\stackrel{}{a}_1)\stackrel{}{}_{\stackrel{}{a}_1}\mu (\stackrel{}{a}_1),$$
(16)
where $`\stackrel{}{}_{\stackrel{}{a}_1}`$ is the normal derivative, restricted to the surface $`S`$ and acting to the left. Explicitly written, it reads $`\mathrm{\Delta }_\omega (\stackrel{}{x}\stackrel{}{a})\stackrel{}{}_\stackrel{}{a}=\stackrel{}{n}(y)\stackrel{}{}_y\mathrm{\Delta }_\omega (\stackrel{}{x}\stackrel{}{y})_{|_{\stackrel{}{y}=\stackrel{}{a}}}`$, where $`\stackrel{}{n}`$ is the normal vector. The measure on $`S`$ is $`d^2a_1=du_1du_2\sqrt{g}`$ where $`(u_1,u_2)`$ are the coordinates of a point $`\stackrel{}{a}(u_1,u_2)`$ on $`S`$ and $`g_{ij}=\frac{\stackrel{}{a}}{u_i}\frac{\stackrel{}{a}}{u_j}`$ is the metric. In Eq. (16), the propagator $`\mathrm{\Delta }_\omega (\stackrel{}{x}\stackrel{}{y})`$ is the free one, i.e., without boundary conditions. In three dimensions it is simply the Yukawa potential

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_\omega (\stackrel{}{x}\stackrel{}{y})=\frac{e^{\omega r}}{4\pi r}(r=|\stackrel{}{x}\stackrel{}{y}|).$$
(17)
The potential $`\mathrm{\Phi }(\stackrel{}{x})`$ is discontinuous for $`\stackrel{}{x}`$ approaching the surface $`S`$ ($`\stackrel{}{x}\stackrel{}{a}`$) and the equation

$$lim_{\stackrel{}{x}\stackrel{}{a}}\mathrm{\Phi }(\stackrel{}{x})=_Sd^2a_1\mathrm{\Delta }_\omega (\stackrel{}{a}\stackrel{}{a}_1)\stackrel{}{}_{\stackrel{}{a}_1}\mu (\stackrel{}{a}_1)+\frac{1}{2}\mu (\alpha )$$
(18)
holds. The additional contribution (last term) appears due to the fact that limit and integration do not commute.

In a similar fashion, having in mind the application to Neumann boundary conditions, the potential $`\chi (\stackrel{}{x})`$ of a charged surface with charge density $`\rho (\stackrel{}{a})`$

$$\chi (\stackrel{}{x})=_Sd^2a_1\mathrm{\Delta }_\omega (\stackrel{}{x}\stackrel{}{a}_1)\rho (\stackrel{}{a}_1)$$
(19)
has a discontinuous derivative,

$$\underset{\stackrel{}{x}\stackrel{}{a}}{lim}\stackrel{}{n}\stackrel{}{}_x\chi (\stackrel{}{x})=_Sd^2a_1\stackrel{}{}_\stackrel{}{a}\mathrm{\Delta }_\omega (\stackrel{}{a}\stackrel{}{a}_1)\rho (\stackrel{}{a}_1)\frac{1}{2}\rho (\alpha ).$$
(20)
In general, the multiple reflection expansion for the resolvent reads

$`D_\omega (\stackrel{}{x},\stackrel{}{y})`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Delta }_\omega (\stackrel{}{x}\stackrel{}{y})+\kappa {\displaystyle _S}d^2a_1\mathrm{\Delta }_\omega (\stackrel{}{x}\stackrel{}{a}_1)\underset{\stackrel{}{a}_1}{\overset{}{}}\mathrm{\Delta }_\omega (\stackrel{}{a}_1\stackrel{}{y})`$
$`+\kappa ^2{\displaystyle _S}d^2a_1{\displaystyle _S}d^2a_2\mathrm{\Delta }_\omega (\stackrel{}{x}\stackrel{}{a}_1)\underset{\stackrel{}{a}_1}{\overset{}{}}\mathrm{\Delta }_\omega (\stackrel{}{a}_1\stackrel{}{a}_2)\underset{\stackrel{}{a}_2}{\overset{}{}}\mathrm{\Delta }_\omega (\stackrel{}{a}_2\stackrel{}{y})`$
$`+\mathrm{}`$
with the notation $`\stackrel{}{}=\stackrel{}{}+\stackrel{}{}`$. For $`\kappa =1`$ this propagator obeys Dirichlet and, for $`\kappa =1`$, Neumann boundary conditions. The validity of this expression can be verified by noting that it fulfills the differential equation for $`\stackrel{}{x}S`$. Moreover, boundary conditions can be checked using (18) and (20), whereby the additional contributions give rise to cancellations between successive orders of reflections. The expansion (3) is called multiple reflection expansion because it can be interpreted as a motion described by the free propagator from $`\stackrel{}{x}`$ to $`\stackrel{}{a}_1`$, being reflected (however under any angle due to the integration over $`\stackrel{}{a}_1`$), further moving to $`\stackrel{}{a}_2`$ and so forth. More details can be found in  and related papers222It must be stressed that despite its simple form, the derivation of equation (3) contains several subtle points, which are explained in the Appendix of ..

A simple example for the multiple reflection expansion appears if the surface $`S`$ is a sphere. In this case, the expansion becomes an algebraic one. It can be obtained from (3) by turning to spherical coordinates. It is, however, easier to use the known expression for the exact propagator with given boundary conditions,

$$D_\omega (\stackrel{}{x},\stackrel{}{x}^{})=\underset{l,m}{}Y_{l,m}(\theta ,\phi )Y_{l,m}^{}(\theta ^{},\phi ^{})D_l(r,r^{}),$$
(22)
with

$$D_l(r,r^{})=\frac{1}{\sqrt{rr^{}}}\left(I_\nu (\omega r_<)K_\nu (\omega r_>)I_\nu (\omega r)I_\nu (\omega r^{})K_{D,R}\right)$$
(23)
and $`\nu l+\frac{1}{2}`$. Here, $`I_\nu (x)`$ and $`K_\nu (x)`$ are the modified Bessel functions, and we have introduced the notations

$$K_D=\frac{K_\nu (\omega R)}{I_\nu (\omega R)},$$
(24)
for Dirichlet boundary conditions , and

$$K_R=\frac{\frac{}{R}\left(R^uK_\nu (\omega R)\right)}{\frac{}{R}\left(R^uI_\nu (\omega R)\right)}$$
(25)
for Robin boundary conditions, where the solutions of Eq. (1) have to fulfill $`\frac{}{r}\left(r^{u+\frac{1}{2}}\varphi _n(r)\right)_{|_{r=R}}=0`$. For $`u=\frac{1}{2}`$, these reduce to Neumann boundary conditions on the 2-dimensional sphere.

The multiple reflection expansion appears in the following way . Represent

$$K_D=\frac{K_\nu (\omega R)K_\nu ^{}(\omega R)}{I_\nu (\omega R)K_\nu ^{}(\omega R)},$$
(26)
and use the Wronskian $`I_\nu ^{}(x)K_\nu (x)I_\nu (x)K_\nu ^{}(x)=1/x`$ to rewrite the denominator in (26) as

$$I_\nu (\omega R)K_\nu ^{}(\omega R)=\frac{1}{2\omega R}\left(1\omega R\frac{}{\omega R}\left(I_\nu (\omega R)K_\nu (\omega R)\right)\right).$$
(27)
Next, expand this denominator so that one obtains for $`K_D`$ the representation

$$K_D=2\omega RK_\nu (\omega R)K_\nu ^{}(\omega R)\underset{k=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\left(\omega R\frac{}{\omega R}\left(I_\nu (\omega R)K_\nu (\omega R)\right)\right)^k.$$
(28)
In a similar way, one obtains

$`K_R`$ $`=`$ $`2\omega RK_\nu (\omega R)\left(K_\nu ^{}(\omega R)+{\displaystyle \frac{u}{\omega R}}K(\omega R)\right)`$
$`\times {\displaystyle \underset{k=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}(1)^k\left(\omega R({\displaystyle \frac{\left(I_\nu (\omega R)K_\nu (\omega R)\right)}{\omega R}}+{\displaystyle \frac{2u}{\omega R}}I_\nu (\omega R)K_\nu (\omega R))\right)^k.`$
This formal expansion has been shown  to be equivalent to the multiple reflection expansion (3), where the number of reflections is $`k+1`$.

In view of Eq. (12), we perform the integration over the surface of the sphere and define

$$D_\omega (r)=_\mathrm{\Omega }𝑑\mu (\stackrel{}{a})D_\omega (\stackrel{}{x},\stackrel{}{x})=\underset{l=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}(2l+1)D_l(r,r)$$
(30)
so that the coefficients $`a_n`$, Eq. (9), turn out to be given by

$$a_n=\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{Res}\\ s=\frac{3}{2}n\end{array}\frac{16\pi ^{3/2}}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1s)}_0^R𝑑rr^2\underset{l=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}(2l+1)_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑\omega \omega ^{12s}D_l(r,r).$$
(31)
The procedure to calculate the coefficients from this representation is as follows: First, we remark that the poles in $`s`$ result from large, both $`\omega `$ and $`l`$, in the Bessel functions. The poles corresponding to boundary contributions (the $`c_n`$ in Eq. (11)) appear, in addition, from the upper limit of the integration over $`r`$. So, we use the uniform asymptotic expansion of the Bessel functions (it is given in the Appendix), together with the multiple reflection expansion (28) or (3), and insert them into Eq. (31).

Let us start with the first contribution in the rhs. of Eq. (23). It corresponds to the free space propagator and, thus, it doesn’t know about the boundary. Consequently, it gives the volume contribution, which is $`a_0=\frac{4\pi }{3}R^3`$.

In order to calculate the higher coefficients, we consider the second term in the rhs. of Eq. (23). According to the sum in the rhs. of Eq. (28) resp. Eq. (3) we represent the coefficients as a sum over reflections,

$$a_n=\underset{k=0}{\overset{2n}{}}a_n^{(k)}.$$
(32)
Using the uniform asymptotic expansion of the Bessel functions these coefficients can be calculated (for details, see Appendix 1). As a result, for Dirichlet boundary conditions, the first $`a_n^{(k)}`$’s are:

| k= | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | $`a_n`$ |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| $`n=\frac{1}{2}`$ | $`2\pi ^{3/2}`$ |  |  |  |  |  | $`2\pi ^{3/2}`$ |
| $`n=1`$ | $`2\pi `$ | $`\frac{2}{3}\pi `$ |  |  |  |  | $`\frac{8}{3}\pi `$ |
| $`n=\frac{3}{2}`$ | 0 | 0 | $`\frac{1}{6}\pi ^{3/2}`$ |  |  |  | $`\frac{1}{6}\pi ^{3/2}`$ |
| $`n=2`$ | 0 | $`\frac{4}{35}\pi `$ | $`\frac{1}{21}\pi `$ | $`\frac{1}{9}\pi `$ |  |  | $`\frac{16}{315}\pi `$ |
| $`n=\frac{5}{2}`$ | 0 | 0 | 0 | $`\frac{1}{80}\pi ^{3/2}`$ | $`\frac{1}{48}\pi ^{3/2}`$ | $`\frac{1}{12}\pi ^{3/2}`$ | $`\frac{1}{120}\pi ^{3/2}`$ |
| $`n=3`$ | 0 | $`\frac{40}{3003}\pi `$ | $`\frac{2}{143}\pi `$ | $`\frac{12}{715}\pi `$ | $`\frac{1}{130}\pi `$ | $`\frac{1}{90}\pi `$ | $`\frac{64}{9009}\pi `$ |

.

The coefficients $`a_n`$ are proportional to $`R^{32n}`$. In this table we have taken $`R=1`$. When replaced in Eq. (32), they sum up to the known values (shown in the last column) as can be checked, for example, by comparing them with the results in appendix B of ). It is interesting to note that the corresponding heat kernel coefficients for Robin boundary conditions with $`u=0`$ can be obtained through the replacement $`a_n^{(k)}(1)^ka_n^{(k)}`$.

As a last example in this section, we give some reflection contributions to the heat kernel coefficient $`a_2`$ for Robin boundary conditions. They read ($`R=1`$)

$`a_2^{(0)}`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$
$`a_2^{(1)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4\pi }{105}}(3+12u28u^2),`$
$`a_2^{(2)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{105}}(542u+140u^2280u^3),`$
$`a_2^{(3)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{315}}(35270u+756u^2840u^3).`$
The sum (32) gives the known result $`a_2=\frac{2\pi }{45R}(118u+60u^2120u^3)`$. In particular, Neumann boundary conditions on a sphere follow by choosing $`u=\frac{1}{2}`$.

## 4 Singular potentials on a spherical shell

In this section we will study the heat kernel expansion for the free Laplacian in $`\mathrm{I}\mathrm{R}^D`$, acting on the space of functions obeying on a $`D1`$-dimensional sphere, $`S^{D1}`$, certain matching conditions relating the values of the functions and their first derivatives on different sides of the sphere. If one assumes that the matching conditions are ultra-local in angular coordinates (they do not contain tangential derivatives), the most general choice is the following four-parameter family :

$`\varphi _+=\omega a\varphi _{}+\omega b\varphi _{}^{},`$
$`\varphi _+^{}=\omega c\varphi _{}+\omega d\varphi _{}^{},`$ (33)
where

$$\varphi _\pm =\underset{rR\pm 0}{lim}\varphi (r),\varphi _\pm ^{}=\underset{rR\pm 0}{lim}_r\varphi (r).$$
(34)
Here, $`\omega `$ is a complex phase factor, which we include for completeness only. We consider real fields and put $`\omega =1`$. The other parameters obey the restriction $`adbc=1`$.

There are two important special cases of the conditions (33). Take

$$a=d=1,b=0.$$
(35)
This requires the functions to be continuous across the surface and their derivatives to have a jump. This is equivalent to having a delta function potential $`V(x)=c\delta (rR)`$ on $`S^{D1}`$, which can be viewed as a singular background potential concentrated on the surface. The formal limit $`c\mathrm{}`$ turns this matching condition into Dirichlet boundary conditions ($`\varphi _\pm =0`$).

The other special case is

$$a=d=1,c=0,$$
(36)
requiring the derivatives to be continuous, and the functions themselves to have a jump. This is usually attributed to the presence of a background potential in the form of the derivative of the delta function. The formal limit $`b\mathrm{}`$ turns this condition into Robin boundary conditions ($`\frac{a}{b}\varphi _\pm +\varphi _\pm ^{}=0`$).

In general, the parameters $`a,b,c,d,\omega `$ may depend on the angular coordinates on $`S^{D1}`$. In this paper we restrict ourselves to the case where there is not such dependence. Then, variables can be easily separated by making the ansatz

$$\varphi _{(n)}(x)=r^{\frac{2D}{2}}\varphi _{n,l}(r)Y_{(l)}(\mathrm{\Omega }),$$
(37)
where $`Y_{(l)}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$ are spherical harmonics depending on the angular coordinates $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$. Once such ansatz is adopted, the radial functions $`\varphi _{n,l}`$ must satisfy the equation

$$\left[\frac{d^2}{dr^2}+\frac{1}{r}\frac{d}{dr}\frac{\nu ^2}{r^2}+\lambda _{n,l}^2\right]\varphi _{n,l}=0$$
(38)
with $`\nu =l+\frac{D2}{2}`$, and the matching conditions (33) at $`r=R`$ with shifted values of the constants:

$$a\overline{a}=a+\frac{2D}{2R}b,c\overline{c}=c+\frac{2D}{2R}d.$$
(39)
The degeneracy of each eigenvalue $`\lambda _{n,l}^2`$ is

$$d_l(D)=\frac{(2l+D2)(l+D3)!}{l!(D2)!}.$$
(40)
In what follows, we will determine the corresponding zeta function and, from it, the corresponding heat kernel coefficients. Because we have a continuous spectrum, we must separate the translational invariant part (it does not depend on the background). We use the procedure described in Ref.  using the setup of a scattering off the background potential. We have to define the so-called regular solutions $`\varphi _{p,l}`$ which have the same behavior at $`r0`$ as the free solution

$$\varphi _{p,l}(r)J_\nu (pr).$$
(41)
The behavior of this regular solution for $`r\mathrm{}`$ defines the Jost function $`f_l(p)`$:

$$\varphi _{p,l}(r)=f_l(p)H^{(2)}(pr)+f_l^{}(p)H^{(1)}(pr).$$
(42)
In the present case, the eigenfunctions of the Laplace operator can be found exactly and they give, for the problem at hand, the Jost function

$`f(p)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\pi pR}{4i}}[aJ_\nu (pR)H_\nu ^{(1)}(pR)^{}+bpJ_\nu (pR)^{}H_\nu ^{(1)}(pR)^{}`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{c}}{p}}J_\nu (pR)H_\nu ^{(1)}(pR)dJ_\nu (pR)^{}H_\nu ^{(1)}(pR)].`$
Now, in order to use a formula like Eq. (4) we need to have discrete eigenvalues. So we suppose for a moment that our system is placed inside a sphere of larger radius $`R^{}`$. Imposing Dirichlet boundary conditions at $`r=R^{}`$, we obtain the following equation for the eigenvalues $`p=\lambda _{n,l}`$:

$$f_l(p)H^{(2)}(pR^{})+f_l^{}(p)H^{(1)}(pR^{})=0.$$
(44)
Then, the $`\zeta `$-function can be represented as a contour integral:

$$\zeta (s)=\underset{l=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}d_l(D)\underset{\gamma }{}\frac{dp}{2\pi i}(p^2+m^2)^s\frac{}{p}\mathrm{ln}\left[f_l(p)H^{(2)}(pR^{})+f_l^{}(p)H^{(1)}(pR^{})\right].$$
(45)
The contour $`\gamma `$ is chosen counterclockwise, enclosing all solutions of Eq. (44) on the positive real semi-axis and the positive imaginary semi-axis. For convenience, we have introduced an auxiliary mass, which we will later put to zero. There is a cut in the complex plane, which goes from $`im`$ to $`i\mathrm{}`$. Since the number of negative modes of the Laplacian is finite, we can always choose $`m`$ to be sufficiently large so that all poles of the integrand (45) are below $`im`$. Next, we may deform the integration contour as described in  to go along the two sides of the cut. We perform the limit $`R^{}\mathrm{}`$, and drop some contributions which are exponentially small in this limit and a term which does not depend on the matching conditions (i.e. the “empty space” contribution). The procedure sketched above is a quite general one, and not specific of this example, since it uses only some general properties of the scattering problem, as Hermiticity and ellipticity of the Laplacian.

Next, we take the limit $`m0`$, which is smooth at least for the heat kernel asymptotics, and obtain:

$$\zeta (s)=\frac{\mathrm{sin}(\pi s)}{\pi }\underset{l=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}d_l(D)\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}𝑑kk^{2s}_k(\mathrm{ln}f_l(ik)).$$
(46)
In the Jost function, we can drop any constant factor since it does not contribute to (46) and redefine

$$f_l(ik)=1+\gamma k(IK)^{}+\beta k^2I^{}K^{}+\alpha IK$$
(47)
with new parameters $`\gamma =(d\overline{a})R/(d+\overline{a})`$, $`\beta =2bR/(d+\overline{a})`$ and $`\alpha =2\overline{c}R/(d+\overline{a})`$ as well as the short-hand notations $`I=I_\nu (kR)`$, $`K=K_\nu (kR)`$.

In order to get the poles of the zeta function (46), thus determining the heat kernel coefficients by means of Eq. (10), we insert into this Jost function the uniform asymptotic expansion, Eq. (54), of the modified Bessel functions and obtain

$$\mathrm{ln}f_l(ik)=\mathrm{ln}\left(1\beta \frac{\nu }{2t}i_\nu ^d(t)k_\nu ^d(t)+\alpha \frac{t}{2\nu }i_\nu (t)k_\nu (t)+\frac{\gamma }{2}(i_\nu ^d(t)k_\nu (t)i_\nu (t)k_\nu ^d(t))\right).$$
(48)
Now, because all functions, $`i_\nu (t),i_\nu ^d(t),k_\nu (t)k_\nu ^d(t)=1+O\left(\frac{1}{\nu }\right)`$ are of order one for $`\nu \mathrm{}`$, the leading contribution in the argument of the logarithm is the one proportional to $`\beta `$. As this term grows with $`\nu `$, two cases must be treated separately, i.e., $`\beta =0`$ and $`\beta 0`$.

For $`\beta =0`$ we obtain, by means of Eqs. (55), an expansion similar to Eq. (56), where the $`Y_{kpi}`$ are polynomials in the coefficients $`\alpha `$ and $`\gamma `$. The remaining calculations run in the same manner as in the preceding section and we obtain, in $`D=3`$ dimensions,

$`a_1`$ $`=`$ $`4\left(\alpha \gamma \right)\pi `$ (49)
$`a_{3/2}`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\alpha \gamma \right)^2\pi ^{\frac{3}{2}}`$
$`a_2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{15}}\left(5\alpha ^3120\gamma 5\alpha ^2\gamma +3\alpha \gamma ^23\gamma ^3\right)\pi `$
$`a_{5/2}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{8}}\left(\alpha ^420\alpha \gamma 2\alpha ^3\gamma +36\gamma ^2+2\alpha ^2\gamma ^22\alpha \gamma ^3+\gamma ^4\right)\pi ^{\frac{3}{2}}.`$
The corresponding results for higher dimensions are given in Appendix 2.

Next, we turn to the case $`\beta 0`$, which corresponds to the presence of a $`\delta ^{^{}}`$ potential. Here, we rewrite the logarithm of the Jost function (47) in the form

$`\mathrm{ln}f_l(ik)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{ln}\beta +\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{\nu }{2t}}`$
$`+\mathrm{ln}\left(1+\left(i_\nu ^dk_\nu ^d1\right){\displaystyle \frac{2t}{\beta \nu }}{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{\beta }}{\displaystyle \frac{t^2}{\nu ^2}}i_\nu k_\nu {\displaystyle \frac{\gamma }{\beta }}{\displaystyle \frac{t}{\nu }}\left(i_\nu ^dk_\nu i_\nu k_\nu ^d\right)\right).`$
The first term in the rhs, $`\mathrm{ln}\beta `$, drops out due to the derivative in (46). The contributions surviving in the limit $`\beta \mathrm{}`$ in (4) are just the same as those one obtains for Neumann boundary conditions. Inserting now the asymptotic expressions (55) and proceeding as above, one arrives at the following coefficients in $`D=3`$ dimensions,

$`a_1`$ $`=`$ $`16{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\beta }}\pi `$
$`a_{3/2}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}\left(1+24{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{\beta }}+16{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\beta ^2}}\right)\pi ^{\frac{3}{2}}`$
$`a_2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{8}{15}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{3}{\beta }}+60{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{\beta ^2}}+20{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma }{\beta ^2}}+80{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\beta ^3}}\right)\pi `$
$`a_{5/2}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{30}}(2+40{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{\beta }}+15{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma }{\beta }}+{\displaystyle \frac{80}{\beta ^2}}+120{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha ^2}{\beta ^2}}+120{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha \gamma }{\beta ^2}}+40{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma ^2}{\beta ^2}}`$ (51)
$`+960{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{\beta ^3}}+480{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma }{\beta ^3}}+{\displaystyle \frac{960}{\beta ^4}})\pi ^{\frac{3}{2}}.`$
Again, the corresponding results for higher dimension are given in Appendix 2. As already pointed out in the Introduction, the coefficients present, in this case, a dependence on inverse powers of $`\beta `$.

## 5 Conclusions

In the foregoing sections we used the multiple reflection expansion as a method for the calculation of heat kernel coefficient. As a simple example, we considered boundary conditions on a sphere and obtained the heat kernel coefficients as a finite sum over reflections, Eq. (32). An interesting point is a connection between Dirichlet and Neumann boundary conditions following from this representation: The contributions from the reflections are the same in both cases except for the sign for odd number of reflections. This can be clearly seen already from Eq. (3) and, hence, holds in general. It occurs that this seemingly simple observation had not been spelled out before.

The multiple reflection expansion, as well as the equivalent integral equations, Eq. (14) for the propagator and Eq. (15) for the heat kernel, provide a perturbative expansion. For the propagator, this expansion is convergent for imaginary frequency (as used in this paper), as was already observed in . For real frequencies it may diverge. The same holds, presumably, for the heat kernel: The corresponding perturbative expansion can be expected to converge. It is interesting to note that the convergence of these expansions does not follow from a small expansion parameter. For instance, with Dirichlet boundary conditions there is no such parameter whereas for matching conditions corresponding to a delta function potential on the surface there is one, cf.  and Sec. 4. The corresponding quantities in the expansion may be numbers which turn out to be sufficiently small. In the example with Dirichlet boundary conditions, in Eq. (28)

$$\omega R\frac{}{\omega R}\left(I_\nu (\omega R)K_\nu (\omega R)\right)<1$$
(52)
holds ensuring the convergence of the geometric series there.

In general, the convergence issue is not trivial. As an example, we considered in Sec. 4 the most general background potential concentrated on a spherical surface. It is given by the matching conditions in Eq. (33), which include a delta function potential and its derivative as special cases (Eqs. (35) and (36)). Using the techniques introduced in , we calculated for the first time the corresponding heat kernel coefficients. The lesson with respect to the multiple reflection expansion is that, for $`\beta 0`$ (in Eq. (47) (or, equivalently, for $`b0`$ in ((33))), i.e., in the presence of the derivative of the delta function, the coefficients are not analytic in $`\beta `$. In fact, they are polynomials in $`\frac{1}{\beta }`$. Hence, the multiple reflection expansion cannot converge for $`\beta 0`$.

To summarize, we have stressed the convenience of using the multiple reflection expansion for the calculation of heat kernel coefficients, while showing, at the same time, some limitations of the method. In general, this method provides, after the general Seeley’s calculus, the only systematic way to calculate heat kernel coefficients for manifolds with boundary, and we expect that it will be useful in future applications.

## Acknowledgment

We thank K. Kirsten for helpful discussions. The work was supported by Antorchas-DAAD (grant A-13740/1-85) and by the DFG (grant Bo 1112/11-1).

## Appendix 1

In order to calculate the coefficients $`a_n^{(k)}`$ for $`n\frac{1}{2}`$ in Eq. (32) it is useful to carry out the integration over $`r`$ in (31) using the known formula $`𝑑xxI_\nu (x)^2=`$ $`\frac{x^2}{2}\left(I_\nu (x)^2\left(1+\frac{\nu ^2}{x^2}\right)I_\nu ^{}(x)^2\right)`$. Inserting the second term in the rhs. of Eq. (23) results in the representation

$$a_n=\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{Res}\\ s=\frac{D}{2}n\end{array}\frac{16\pi ^{3/2}R^{2s}}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1s)}\underset{l=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\nu ^{32s}_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑zz^{12s}\left(I^2\left(1+\frac{1}{z^2}\right)I_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}\right)K_{D,R},$$
(53)
where $`II_\nu (\nu z)`$, $`KK_\nu (\nu z)`$ and we introduced a new variable $`z=\frac{\omega R}{\nu }`$.

Next, we substitute the uniform asymptotic expansions of the modified Bessel functions for $`\nu \mathrm{}`$, $`z`$ fixed:

| $`I_\nu (\nu z)`$ | = | $`\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi \nu }}\frac{e^{\nu \eta }}{(1+z^2)^{1/4}}i_\nu (t),`$ | $`K_\nu (\nu z)`$ | = | $`\sqrt{\frac{\pi }{2\nu }}\frac{e^{\nu \eta }}{(1+z^2)^{1/4}}k_\nu (t),`$ |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| $`I_\nu ^{}(\nu z)`$ | = | $`\frac{e^{\nu \eta }}{\sqrt{2\pi \nu }}\frac{(1+z^2)^{1/4}}{z}i_\nu ^d(t),`$ | $`K_\nu ^{}(\nu z)`$ | = | $`\sqrt{\frac{\pi }{2\nu }}\frac{(1+z^2)^{1/4}}{z}e^{\nu \eta }k_\nu ^d(t),`$ |

(54)
with

$`i_\nu (t)={\displaystyle \underset{r0}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{u_r(t)}{\nu ^r}},`$ $`k_\nu ^d(t)={\displaystyle \underset{r0}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{(1)^ru_r(t)}{\nu ^r}},`$ (55)
$`i_\nu (t)={\displaystyle \underset{r0}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{v_r(t)}{\nu ^r}},`$ $`k_\nu ^d(t)={\displaystyle \underset{r0}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{(1)^rv_r(t)}{\nu ^r}}.`$
Here, the notation $`t=1/\sqrt{1+z^2}`$ is used. The Debye polynomials $`u_r(t)`$ and $`v_r(t)`$ can be found in , they contain powers of $`t`$ from $`r`$ to $`3r`$. We don t need the function $`\eta `$, since it cancels out in our case.

We can thus write

$$\left(I^2(1+\frac{1}{z^2})I^2\right)K_{D,R}=\frac{\mu ^k2^k}{2\nu z^2}\underset{k=0}{\overset{2n}{}}\underset{p=k+1}{\overset{2n+1}{}}\underset{i=0}{\overset{p}{}}Y_{kpi}\frac{t^{p+2i1}}{\nu ^p}+\mathrm{},$$
(56)
where the coefficients $`Y_{kpi}`$ can be calculated easily using a simple computer program. In fact, Eq. (56) is the definition of the $`Y_{kpi}`$. For Dirichlet ($`\mu =+1`$, $`u=0`$) and Neumann ($`\mu =1`$, $`u=0`$) boundary conditions they are pure numbers; for Robin boundary conditions ($`\mu =1`$, $`u0`$) they are polynomials in $`u`$. In Eq. (56) the dots denote higher order terms which do not contribute to the considered heat kernel coefficients.

For the integration over $`z`$, we use the formula

$$_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑zz^{12s}t^{1+i}=\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(s)\mathrm{\Gamma }(s+\frac{i1}{2})}{2\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{i1}{2})}.$$
(57)
One can easily check that the terms with $`t^0`$ from the asymptotic expansions (55) are cancelled after substitution inside the brackets in $`K_{D,R}`$ (see eqs. (28) and (3)). This means that any new reflection contributes at least one power of $`t`$ to the integrand in (53). Therefore, according to (57), only several first terms of the multiple reflection expansion contribute to any given heat kernel coefficient. This explains the finite range of the summations in (56).

The sum over $`l`$ produces Hurwitz zeta functions. When taking this into account, we obtain for the contribution of $`k`$ reflections to $`a_n`$ (see (32)):

$`a_n^{(k)}`$ $`=`$ $`\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{Res}\\ s=\frac{3}{2}n\end{array}{\displaystyle \frac{16\pi ^{3/2}}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1s)}}{\displaystyle \underset{p=k+1}{\overset{2n+1}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=0}{\overset{p}{}}}Y_{kpi}{\displaystyle \frac{R^{2s}\mu ^{k+1}}{2^{k+1}}}`$
$`\zeta (2s+p2,{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}){\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(s)\mathrm{\Gamma }(s+i+\frac{p1}{2})}{2\mathrm{\Gamma }(i+\frac{p1}{2})}}.`$
The calculation of the residua can be carried out, again, using standard computer algebra programs, which leads to the coefficients $`a_n^{(k)}`$ in Eq. (32).

## Appendix 2

Here we present the results for the heat kernel coefficients corresponding to the matching conditions in Sec. 4, in the cases of some higher dimensional spaces. For $`\beta =0`$ we obtain, instead of Eq. (49)
in $`D=4`$ dimensions,

$`a_1`$ $`=`$ $`2\left(\alpha \gamma \right)\pi ^2`$
$`a_{3/2}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(\alpha \gamma \right)^2\pi ^{\frac{5}{2}}`$
$`a_2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}\left(2\alpha ^3105\gamma 2\gamma ^3\right)\pi ^2`$
$`a_{5/2}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{64}}\left(3\alpha ^2+4\alpha ^4172\alpha \gamma 4\alpha ^3\gamma +298\gamma ^2+3\alpha ^2\gamma ^210\alpha \gamma ^3+7\gamma ^4\right)\pi ^{\frac{5}{2}}`$
in $`D=5`$ dimensions,

$`a_1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{8}{3}}\left(\alpha \gamma \right)\pi ^2`$
$`a_{3/2}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}\left(\alpha \gamma \right)^2\pi ^{\frac{5}{2}}`$
$`a_2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4}{45}}\left(5\alpha ^3465\gamma +5\alpha ^2\gamma \alpha \gamma ^29\gamma ^3\right)\pi ^2`$
$`a_{5/2}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{12}}\left(2\alpha ^2+\alpha ^476\alpha \gamma +128\gamma ^24\alpha \gamma ^3+3\gamma ^4\right)\pi ^{\frac{5}{2}}`$
in $`D=6`$ dimensions,

$`a_1`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\alpha \gamma \right)\pi ^3`$
$`a_{3/2}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\left(\alpha \gamma \right)^2\pi ^{\frac{7}{2}}`$
$`a_2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{12}}\left(6\alpha +2\alpha ^3297\gamma +4\alpha ^2\gamma 6\gamma ^3\right)\pi ^3`$
$`a_{5/2}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{128}}\left(\alpha ^2+4\alpha ^4508\alpha \gamma +4\alpha ^3\gamma +802\gamma ^2\alpha ^2\gamma ^226\alpha \gamma ^3+19\gamma ^4\right)\pi ^{\frac{7}{2}}`$
and in $`D=7`$ dimensions,

$`a_1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{16}{15}}\left(\alpha \gamma \right)\pi ^3`$
$`a_{3/2}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4}{15}}\left(\alpha \gamma \right)^2\pi ^{\frac{7}{2}}`$
$`a_2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{8}{225}}\left(5\alpha ^31050\gamma +15\alpha ^2\gamma +3\alpha \gamma ^223\gamma ^3\right)\pi ^3`$
$`a_{5/2}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{30}}\left(6\alpha ^2+\alpha ^4172\alpha \gamma +2\alpha ^3\gamma +280\gamma ^210\alpha \gamma ^3+7\gamma ^4\right)\pi ^{\frac{7}{2}}.`$
For $`\beta 0`$ we obtain, instead of Eq. (51),
in $`D=4`$ dimensions,

$`a_1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{8}{\beta }}\pi ^2`$
$`a_{3/2}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{16}}\left(9+64{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{\beta }}32{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma }{\beta }}+{\displaystyle \frac{128}{\beta ^2}}\right)\pi ^{\frac{5}{2}}`$
$`a_2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{16}{3}}\left(3{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{\beta ^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{4}{\beta ^3}}\right)\pi ^2`$
$`a_{5/2}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2048}}(59512{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{\beta }}224{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma }{\beta }}512{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\beta ^2}}+4096{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha ^2}{\beta ^2}}+2048{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha \gamma }{\beta ^2}}+512{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma ^2}{\beta ^2}}`$
$`+32768{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{\beta ^3}}+8192{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma }{\beta ^3}}+32768{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\beta ^4}})\pi ^{\frac{5}{2}}`$
in $`D=5`$ dimensions,

$`a_1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{32}{3}}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi ^2}{\beta }}`$
$`a_{3/2}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}\left(3+2{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{\beta }}2{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma }{\beta }}+{\displaystyle \frac{4}{\beta ^2}}\right)\pi ^{\frac{5}{2}}`$
$`a_2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{16}{45}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{\beta }}+60{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{\beta ^2}}20{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma }{\beta ^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{80}{\beta ^3}}\right)\pi ^2`$
$`a_{5/2}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4}{3}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{17}{240}}{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{\beta }}{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\beta ^2}}+2{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha ^2}{\beta ^2}}+16{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{\beta ^3}}+{\displaystyle \frac{16}{\beta ^4}}\right)\pi ^{\frac{5}{2}}`$
in $`D=6`$ dimensions,

$`a_1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4}{\beta }}\pi ^3`$
$`a_{3/2}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{32}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{191}{3}}+64{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{\beta }}96{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma }{\beta }}+{\displaystyle \frac{128}{\beta ^2}}\right)\pi ^{\frac{7}{2}}`$
$`a_2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{3}{\beta }}+12{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{\beta ^2}}8{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma }{\beta ^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{16}{\beta ^3}}\right)\pi ^3`$
$`a_{5/2}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{12288}}(103+512{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{\beta }}480{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma }{\beta }}+{\displaystyle \frac{512}{\beta ^2}}+12288{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha ^2}{\beta ^2}}6144{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha \gamma }{\beta ^2}}512{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma ^2}{\beta ^2}}`$
$`+98304{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{\beta ^3}}24576{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma }{\beta ^3}}+{\displaystyle \frac{98304}{\beta ^4}})\pi ^{\frac{7}{2}}`$
and in $`D=7`$ dimensions,

$`a_1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{64}{15}}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi ^3}{\beta }}`$
$`a_{3/2}`$ $`=`$ $`4\left(10+8{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{\beta }}16{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma }{\beta }}+{\displaystyle \frac{16}{\beta ^2}}\right)\pi ^{\frac{7}{2}}`$
$`a_2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{32}{225}}\left(3+60{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{\beta ^2}}60{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma }{\beta ^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{80}{\beta ^3}}\right)\pi ^3`$
$`a_{5/2}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4}{15}}({\displaystyle \frac{15}{8}}6{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{\beta }}+6{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma }{\beta }}{\displaystyle \frac{12}{\beta ^2}}+4{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha ^2}{\beta ^2}}4{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha \gamma }{\beta ^2}}`$
$`+32{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{\beta ^3}}16{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma }{\beta ^3}}+{\displaystyle \frac{32}{\beta ^4}})\pi ^{\frac{7}{2}}.`$


format: text

text:
# Massive fields in AdS(3) and compactification in AdS spacetimeBased on talk given at the International Conference “Supersymmetry and Quantum Field Theory” (Kharkov, July 25-29, 2000)

## 1 Introduction

Motivated by a desire to understand stringy version of AdS/CFT correspondence a light-cone gauge formulation of string in $`AdS_5\times S^5`$ Ramond Ramond background was recently developed. Brief review of this theme may be found in . Discussion of alternative gauges for $`AdS`$ string may be found in . Various aspects of $`kappa`$-invariant action of AdS string were investigated in . In contrast to flat string the light-cone action of AdS string  is not quadratical in physical string coordinates - it is still to be nonlinear in bosonic coordinates and involves terms of fourth degree in fermionic coordinates. Understanding in which terms AdS string dynamics should be formulated is still to be challenging problem. Anyway, since AdS superstring with RR charge is available only in the light-cone gauge it seems that from the stringy perspective of AdS/CFT correspondence the light-cone approach is the only fruitful direction to go. Alternative approach which might open up new interesting possibilities is based on twistor like variables .

In this work we develop light-cone gauge formulation of massive arbitrary spin fields in $`AdS_3`$. This formulation may be useful for the various reasons. On one hand it might be helpful to understand string dynamics in $`AdS_3`$. Note that massless modes of $`AdS_3`$ string have already been described in  where the light-cone formulation of string in $`AdS_3\times S^3`$ background was developed. So, our results may be relevant for discussion of massive modes of $`AdS_3`$ string. On the other hand by now due to  consistent equations for interacting massless higher spin field theory in $`AdS_4`$ are known. Because upon compactification on $`AdS_3`$ all massless higher spin modes turn out to be massive one can expect that equations suggested in  upon compactification on $`AdS_3`$ will describe selfconsistent dynamics of massive arbitrary spin fields there. It is not unlikely then that this compactified theory is related with $`AdS_3`$ string theory or some subsector of the latter theory. Another application of compactification we have in mind is a derivation of dynamics of $`AdS`$ massive arbitrary spin field from the covariant formulations of massless fields given in . To our knowledge compactification in AdS spacetime has not been discussed previously in the literature and this is the second theme we study in this work.

FIAN/TD/01-02

OHSTPY-HEP-T-01-004

hep-th/0103088

## 2 Massive fields in $`AdS_3`$

Let $`\varphi `$ be arbitrary spin massive field propagating in $`AdS_3`$ space-time. Light-cone gauge action for this field can be cast into the following ‘nonrelativistic form’

$$S_{l.c.}=d^3x^+\varphi (^{}+P^{})\varphi ,$$
(1)
$$P^{}=\frac{_z^2}{2^+}+\frac{1}{2z^2^+}A,$$
(2)
where $`P^{}`$ is the (minus) Hamiltonian111 We use parametrization of $`AdS_3`$ space in which $`ds^2=R^2(dx_0^2+dx_1^2+dz^2)/z^2`$, where $`R`$ is radius of $`AdS`$ geometry. $`\pm `$ directions are defined as $`x^\pm =(x^1\pm x^0)/\sqrt{2}`$ and $`x^+`$ is taken to be a light-cone time. We adopt the conventions: $`_z/z`$, $`^\pm =_{}/x^{}`$. while $`A`$ is an operator acting only on spin indices of field $`\varphi `$ and does not depending on space-time coordinates and their derivatives. We shall call the operator $`A`$ an $`AdS`$ mass operator222 $`A`$ is equal to zero only for those massless representations of AdS algebra $`so(d1,2)`$ which can be realized as irreducible representations for conformal algebra $`so(d,2)`$ .. By now this operator is known for (i) massive fields of arbitrary spin and arbitrary type of Young symmetry for $`d>3`$ ; (ii) massless fields of arbitrary spin in totally (anti)symmetric representations of $`so(d2)`$ algebra; (iii) type IIB supergravity in $`AdS_5\times S^5`$ and $`AdS_3\times S^3`$ backgrounds. So in order to fix light-cone action we should find $`AdS`$ mass operator.

Massive spin $`s1`$ field in $`AdS_3`$ has two physical degrees of freedom $`\varphi _1`$, $`\varphi _2`$ which we combine into a 2-vector

$$\varphi =\left(\begin{array}{c}\varphi _1\\ \varphi _2\end{array}\right).$$
(3)
The field $`\varphi `$ can be labeled by spin $`s`$ and by either mass parameter $`m`$ or by lowest eigenvalue of energy operator which we shall denote by $`E_0`$. We prefer to formulate our result in terms of $`E_0`$. So all that ones needs is to express $`AdS`$ mass operator in terms of $`E_0`$ and $`s`$. This operator is found to be

$$A=(E_0s\sigma _31)^2\frac{1}{4},$$
(4)
where $`\sigma _3`$ is the usual Pauli matrix. See Appendix for some details.

As is well known an energy spectrum of spin $`s1`$ massive representation (see e.g. ) corresponding to lowest weight unitary representation of $`so(2,2)`$ algebra is bounded from below

$$E_0s+1.$$
(5)
As an illustration we would like to demonstrate how this bound can be derived in framework of approach we discuss here. By product we will also explore how the discrete spectrum of energy operators is obtainable in the framework of light-cone. To this end we use momentum basis of $`p^+`$ instead of coordinate basis of $`x^{}`$ and make the following transformation of wave function

$$\varphi =U\stackrel{~}{\varphi },U(p^+)^{\frac{1}{2}(z_z1)},$$
(6)
The representation of energy operator in $`\stackrel{~}{\varphi }`$ takes then the form

$$\widehat{E}=\frac{1}{2}(H_1+H_2),$$
(7)
where Hamiltonians $`H_1`$ and $`H_2`$ are given by

$$H_1=\frac{1}{2}_z^2+\frac{1}{2z^2}A+\frac{1}{2}z^2,$$
(8)
$$H_2=p^+_{p^+}^2\frac{1}{2}_{p^+}+\frac{1}{4p^+}(A4B)+p^+,$$
(9)
and operator $`B`$ is given by (66). See Appendix for details. Introducing instead of momentum $`p^+`$ new variable $`y`$ by relation $`2p^+=y^2`$ we find the following representations for the Hamiltonians

$$H_1=\frac{1}{2}_z^2+\frac{1}{2z^2}(\kappa _1^2\frac{1}{4})+\frac{1}{2}z^2,$$
(10)
$$H_2=\frac{1}{2}_y^2+\frac{1}{2y^2}(\kappa _2^2\frac{1}{4})+\frac{1}{2}y^2,$$
(11)
where

$$\kappa _1E_0s1,\kappa _2E_0+s1,$$
(12)
and we restricted action of all operators to $`\stackrel{~}{\varphi }_1`$ (see (3),(6)). Spectra of the above Hamiltonians are well known

$$E_1=2n_1+|\kappa _1|+1,E_2=2n_2+|\kappa _2|+1,$$
(13)
$`n_1,n_2=0,1,\mathrm{}`$, so taking into account (7) we find an energy spectrum

$$E=n_1+n_2+\frac{|\kappa _1|+|\kappa _2|}{2}+1.$$
(14)
From formulas (12) we see that the energy spectrum (14), provided the inequality (5) holds true, takes the form

$$E=E_0+n_1+n_2,$$
(15)
i.e. $`E_0`$ is indeed lowest eigenvalue of energy operator. The $`\varphi _2`$ has the same energy spectrum. Note that helicity operator $`\widehat{J}`$ being restricted to $`\stackrel{~}{\varphi }_1`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\varphi }_2`$ takes the forms

$$\widehat{J}=\frac{1}{2}(H_2H_1),\widehat{J}=\frac{1}{2}(H_1H_2)$$
(16)
respectively. If (5) is satisfied the $`\widehat{J}`$ has the following spectra

$$J=s+n_2n_1,J=s+n_1n_2$$
(17)
for $`\varphi _1`$ and $`\varphi _2`$ respectively. So ground states of $`\varphi _1`$ and $`\varphi _2`$ have helicities $`+s`$ and $`s`$ respectively as it should be by construction.

Let us make comment on interrelation of light-cone fields $`\varphi _{1,2}`$ with the ones of covariant approach. For simplicity consider spin $`s=1`$. In covariant approach spin one massive field can be described by vector field $`\varphi ^A`$ and Stueckelberg scalar field $`\varphi `$333 To our knowledge covariant description of massive spin $`s>2`$ fields in $`AdS`$ has not been worked out so far. Recent discussion of related issues may be found in .. They satisfy well known massive spin one gauge invariant equations of motion in $`AdS`$ background which respect gauge transformations $`\delta \varphi ^M=e^{\mu M}_\mu \alpha `$, $`\delta \varphi =m\alpha `$, where $`e_\mu ^M`$ is a vielbein of $`AdS`$ background. Upon imposing light-cone gauge only scalar field $`\varphi `$ and component of $`\varphi ^M`$ in $`z`$ direction, $`\varphi ^z`$, survive. They are related with our light-cone fields (3) as follows $`\varphi _{1,2}=(\varphi ^z\pm \varphi )/\sqrt{2}`$. For the case of $`s=1`$ a comparison of covariant and light-cone approaches gives relationship between mass parameter $`m`$ and $`E_0`$: $`E_0=m+1`$. It seems highly likely that this relationship is valid for arbitrary spin $`s1`$.

As a side remark let us point out that all transformations of $`AdS_3`$ algebra do not mix field $`\varphi _1`$ with $`\varphi _2`$ (3). Therefore we can make (anti)self dual projection either on $`\varphi _1`$ or $`\varphi _2`$ by simply taking one of these fields equal to zero. This gives light-cone description of self dual arbitrary spin massive fields in $`AdS_3`$ space. Discussion of such fields in $`3d`$ flat space at the level of covariant action may be found in .

## 3 Compactification in $`AdS`$ spacetime

In contrast to flat space a compactification in $`AdS`$ spacetime cannot be achieved simply by taking wave function to be periodic with respect to one of flat coordinates. To illustrate what has just been said we consider equation of motion of massive scalar field in $`AdS_d`$ and try to derive its mass term via compactification from $`AdS_{d+1}`$. Let us use Poincaré parametrization of $`AdS_d`$

$$ds_{AdS_d}^2=\frac{1}{z^2}(dx^adx_a+dz^2).$$
(18)
Here and below $`x^a`$, $`a=0,1,\mathrm{}d2`$, are flat coordinates along boundary of $`AdS_d`$. In this parametrization an action for field propagating in $`AdS_d`$ takes a form

$$S=\frac{1}{2}d^dx\varphi \left(\mathrm{}_{d1}+_z^2\frac{1}{z^2}A\right)\varphi ,$$
(19)
where from now on we use the notation

$$\mathrm{}_{d1}_0^2+_1^2+\mathrm{}+_{d2}^2.$$
(20)
This action gives the following equation of motion

$$(\mathrm{}_{d1}+_z^2\frac{1}{z^2}A)\varphi (x,z)=0.$$
(21)
For the case of massive scalar field the AdS mass operator is expressible in terms of usual mass parameter $`m`$ as follows

$$A=(mR)^2+\frac{d(d2)}{4}.$$
(22)
For the case of massless (conformal invariant) scalar field in $`AdS_d`$ one has $`m^2=\frac{d(d2)}{4R^2}`$ and this gives $`A=0`$. Now we want to generate the mass-like term in (21) starting with massless field in $`AdS_{d+1}`$ whose line element is taken to be

$$ds_{AdS_{d+1}}^2=\frac{1}{z^2}(dx^adx_a+dX^2+dz^2),$$
(23)
where $`X`$ is a coordinate of $`AdS_{d+1}`$ we are going to compactify. Equation of motion of conformal invariant (massless) field is

$$(\mathrm{}_{d1}+_z^2+_X^2)\varphi (x,z,X)=0.$$
(24)
From this it is easy to see that if we take the wavefunction $`\varphi (x,z,X)`$ to be periodic in $`X`$ and make Fourier expansion then we get the following equation $`(\mathrm{}n^2)\varphi _n(x,z)=0`$ for $`n`$th mode. For $`n=/\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}`$ this equation however does not describe massive field dynamics in $`AdS_d`$ as in the equation for massive field (see (21)) the $`AdS`$ mass term $`A=n^2`$ should be accompanied by factor $`z^2`$. This is the reason why naive compactifaction does not work in $`AdS`$ spacetime. It turns out that in order to get proper mass term one needs to include radial coordinate $`z`$ in a procedure of compactifaction. To demonstrate this let us consider the simplest case of compactifaction.

### 3.1  Compactification $`AdS_{d+1}AdS_d\times S^1`$. Scalar field

As before we start with Poincaré parametrization of $`AdS_{d+1}`$

$$ds_{AdS_{d+1}}^2=\frac{1}{Z^2}(dx^adx_a+dX^2+dZ^2).$$
(25)
Now instead of radial coordinate $`Z>0`$ and coordinate $`X`$ which we want to compactify we introduce new radial coordinate $`z>0`$ and angle coordinate $`\phi `$ on semi-circle $`S^1`$

$$Z=z\mathrm{sin}\phi ,X=z\mathrm{cos}\phi ,0\phi \pi .$$
(26)
It is straightforward to see that line element of $`AdS_{d+1}`$ takes then the form

$$ds_{AdS_{d+1}}^2=\frac{1}{\mathrm{sin}^2\phi }(ds_{AdS_d}^2+d\phi ^2),$$
(27)
where line element of $`AdS_d`$ is as in (18) i.e. $`z`$ is a usual radial coordinate of $`AdS_d`$. Now we consider equation of motion for massless scalar field in $`AdS_{d+1}`$

$$(\mathrm{}_{d1}+_X^2+_Z^2)\mathrm{\Phi }(x,X,Z)=0.$$
(28)
Plugging Fourier expansion

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(x,X,Z)=\underset{n𝐙}{}\frac{e^{\mathrm{i}n\phi }}{\sqrt{z}}\varphi _n(x,z)$$
(29)
in (28) and using the textbook formula

$$_X^2+_Z^2=\frac{1}{z}_zz_z+\frac{1}{z^2}_\phi ^2$$
(30)
we get then the following equation for $`n`$th mode

$$(\mathrm{}_{d1}+_z^2\frac{1}{z^2}(n^2\frac{1}{4}))\varphi _n(x,z)=0.$$
(31)
This equation consists of properly normalized mass term (21) and therefore describes dynamics of field propagating in $`AdS_d`$. Comparison with (21) gives the following value of $`AdS`$ mass operator for $`n`$th mode $`\varphi _n`$

$$A_n=n^2\frac{1}{4}.$$
(32)
Taking into account the relation (22) we find a mass spectrum

$$m_n^2=n^2\frac{(d1)^2}{4},$$
(33)
where the AdS radius $`R`$ is set equal to unity. Corresponding lowest energy spectrum is

$$E_{0n}=n+\frac{d1}{2}.$$
(34)
Note that since $`n`$ takes integer values $`A_n`$ (32) are never equal to zero. This implies that upon compactification of $`one`$ dimension fields of compactification $`\varphi _n`$ do not satisfy conformal equations of motion in $`AdS_d`$. Below we will demonstrate that conformal mode survives only upon compactification of two spatial dimensions.

### 3.2  Compactification $`AdS_{d+d^{}}AdS_d\times S^d^{}`$. Scalar field

Discussion of previous section can be generalized to spherical compactification in a rather straightforward way. In this section we study mass spectra of massless and massive fields upon such a compactification. To this end we start as before with Poincaré parametrization of line element of $`AdS_{d+d^{}}`$

$$ds_{AdS_{d+d^{}}}^2=\frac{1}{Z^2}(dx^adx_a+dZ^2+dX^\alpha dX^\alpha ),$$
(35)
where $`\alpha =1,\mathrm{},d^{}`$, and $`d`$ is dimension of $`AdS_d`$ on which we make reduction of field dynamics while $`d^{}`$ is a number of coordinates we are going to compactify. Instead of $`Z`$ and $`X^\alpha `$ we introduce new coordinates by relations

$$Z=z\mathrm{sin}\phi ,X^\alpha =zu^\alpha \mathrm{cos}\phi ,0\phi \pi ,$$
(36)
where $`u^\alpha `$ is a unit vector $`u^\alpha u^\alpha =1`$. In terms of the new coordinates $`z`$, $`\phi `$, $`u^\alpha `$ the line element of $`AdS_{d+d^{}}`$ takes the form

$$ds_{AdS_{d+d^{}}}^2=\frac{1}{\mathrm{sin}^2\phi }(ds_{AdS_d}^2+ds_{S^d^{}}^2),$$
(37)
where line element of $`AdS_d`$ is as in (18) while line element of $`S^d^{}`$ takes the form

$$ds_{S^d^{}}^2=d\phi ^2+\mathrm{cos}^2\phi (du^\alpha )^2.$$
(38)
As in previous case $`z`$ becomes radial coordinate of $`AdS_d`$. Now let us consider mass spectra of fields obtainable upon this compactification. To this end we start with equation of motion in $`AdS_{d+d^{}}`$

$$\left(\mathrm{}_{d1}+_{X^\alpha }^2+_Z^2\frac{1}{Z^2}\widehat{A}\right)\widehat{\mathrm{\Phi }}(x,X,Z)=0,$$
(39)
where $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Phi }}`$ is a field propagating $`AdS_{d+d^{}}`$ while $`\widehat{A}`$ is its $`AdS`$ mass operator. Taking into account the textbook formula

$$_{X^\alpha }^2+_Z^2=\frac{1}{z^d^{}}_zz^d^{}_z+\frac{1}{z^2}\mathrm{\Delta }_{S^d^{}},$$
(40)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{S^d^{}}`$ is Laplace operator on $`S^d^{}`$ we find that in terms of new field defined by

$$\widehat{\mathrm{\Phi }}(x,X,Z)=z^{d^{}/2}\mathrm{\Phi }(x,z,u,\phi )$$
(41)
the equation (39) takes desired form

$$(\mathrm{}_{d1}+_z^2\frac{1}{z^2}A)\mathrm{\Phi }(x,z,u,\phi )=0,$$
(42)
where $`A`$ is $`AdS`$ mass operator of the new field $`\mathrm{\Phi }(x,z,u,\phi )`$. This field describes collection of fields in $`AdS_d`$ which are obtainable by expanding in $`u^\alpha `$ and $`\phi `$. From the expressions above it is straightforward to see that $`A`$ is expressible in terms of $`\widehat{A}`$ as follows

$$A=\frac{1}{\mathrm{sin}^2\phi }\widehat{A}\mathrm{\Delta }_{S^d^{}}+\frac{(d^{}1)^2}{4}\frac{1}{4}.$$
(43)
Let us first consider the case of massless (conformal invariant) field in $`AdS_{d+d^{}}`$, i.e.

$$\widehat{A}=0.$$
(44)
Decomposing the field $`\mathrm{\Phi }(x,z,u,\phi )`$ into harmonics of Laplace operator $`Y_l(u,\phi )`$

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(x,z,u,\phi )=\underset{l=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}Y_l(u,\phi )\varphi _l(x,z)$$
(45)
and taking into account spectrum of Laplace operator $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{S^d^{}}`$

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_{S^d^{}}=l(l+d^{}1)$$
(46)
we get then the following value of $`AdS`$ mass operator for mode $`\varphi _l(x,z)`$

$$A_l=(l+\frac{d^{}1}{2})^2\frac{1}{4}.$$
(47)
We are able now to learn when conformal invariant mode survives compactification. From (47) we see that $`A_l=0`$ iff $`d^{}=2`$, $`l=0`$. Thus we conclude that upon compactification $`AdS_{d+d^{}}AdS_d\times S^d^{}`$ conformal massless modes survives if and only if we compactify two coordinates.

Now let us consider the case of massive field, i.e. when $`\widehat{A}`$ takes the form given in (22). To find mass spectrum one needs to use concrete form of Laplace operator $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{S^d^{}}`$ in coordinates $`u^\alpha `$, $`\phi `$

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_{S^d^{}}=\frac{1}{\mathrm{cos}^2\phi }\mathrm{\Delta }_{S^{d^{}1}}+_\phi ^2(d^{}1)\text{tg}\phi _\phi ,$$
(48)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{S^{d^{}1}}`$ is a Laplace operator on unit $`S^{d^{}1}`$ sphere defined by $`u^\alpha u^\alpha =1`$. Making a rescaling

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(x,z,u,\phi )=(\mathrm{cos}\phi )^{(d^{}1)/2}\varphi (x,z,u,\phi )$$
(49)
we find the following representation for $`A`$ in $`\varphi `$

$`A`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{sin}^2\phi }}\widehat{A}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}`$
$``$ $`_\phi ^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{cos}^2\phi }}\left(\mathrm{\Delta }_{S^{d^{}1}}+{\displaystyle \frac{(d^{}2)^21}{4}}\right).`$
Now decomposing the field $`\varphi (x,z,u,\phi )`$ into harmonics of Laplace operator $`Y_l(u)`$

$$\varphi (x,z,u,\phi )=\underset{l=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}Y_l(u)\varphi _l(x,z,\phi )$$
(51)
we find the following $`AdS`$ mass operator for $`\varphi _l(x,z,\phi )`$

$$A_l=_\phi ^2+\frac{\kappa ^2\frac{1}{4}}{\mathrm{sin}^2\phi }+\frac{(l+\frac{d^{}2}{2})^2\frac{1}{4}}{\mathrm{cos}^2\phi }\frac{1}{4},$$
(52)
where we have used the following representation for $`\widehat{A}`$ (cf. (22))

$$\widehat{A}=\kappa ^2\frac{1}{4},\kappa \sqrt{m^2+\frac{(d+d^{}1)^2}{4}}.$$
(53)
The operator $`A`$ given by (52) is nothing but Hamiltonian for Pöschl-Teller potential and its spectrum is given by

$$A_{L,l}=(2L+l+\kappa +\frac{d^{}}{2})^2\frac{1}{4},L=0,1,\mathrm{}$$
(54)
Note that this formula is valid for values of $`\kappa `$, $`d^{}`$ and $`l`$ which satisfy the inequalities

$$\kappa >\frac{1}{2},l+\frac{d^{}2}{2}>\frac{1}{2}.$$
(55)
Using formula (22) we get then corresponding mass spectrum.

The above analysis can be generalized to arbitrary spin $`s>0`$ field in a straightforward way. For instance arbitrary spin field in $`AdS_4`$ taken in light-cone gauge satisfies an equation like (28). Therefore in this case one gets a mass spectrum like (33). For the case of spin field one needs however to analyse some details of $`AdS`$ transformations. This will be done elsewhere. As a side remark let us point out that mass spectra of compactification in $`AdS`$ spacetime can also be studied in the framework of oscillator method .

## Appendix

In this Appendix we present some details of deriving $`AdS`$ mass operator given in (4). Representation for AdS algebra generators on the space of arbitrary spin fields taken in light-cone gauge and propagating in $`AdS_d`$ was derived in  where the light-cone form of AdS field dynamics was discovered. $`AdS_3`$ algebra $`so(2,2)`$ taken in conformal algebra notation consists of generators $`P^\pm `$, $`K^\pm `$, $`J^+`$, $`D`$. They have the following representation444Normalization of commutators of $`so(2,2)`$ algebra we use is given by formula (B.10) in .

$`P^+=^+,`$ (57)
$`D=x^+P^{}+x^{}^++z_z+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}},`$
$`J^+=x^+P^{}x^{}^+,`$ (59)
$`K^+={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(2x^+x^{}+z^2)^++x^+D,`$
$$K^{}=\frac{1}{2}(2x^+x^{}+z^2)P^{}+x^{}D+\frac{1}{^+}B$$
(60)
where $`P^{}`$ is given by (2) and operator $`B`$ acts only on spin degrees of freedom, i.e. it does not depend on spacetime coordinates and their derivatives. As was mentioned above each massive representation can be labeled by $`E_0`$ and $`s`$. So, all that one needs is to express the operators $`A`$ and $`B`$ in terms of $`E_0`$ and $`s`$. This can easily be done by using technique of Casimir operators. In conformal algebra notation Casimir operators of $`so(2,2)`$ algebra take the form

$$Q_1=2\{P^{},K^+\}(D+J^+)^2$$
(61)
$$Q_2=2\{P^+,K^{}\}(DJ^+)^2.$$
(62)
Plugging in these expressions representation for generators given in (2),(57)-(60) we find

$$Q_1=A+\frac{3}{4},Q_2=A+4B+\frac{3}{4}.$$
(63)
On the other hand the values of these operators for representations of $`so(2,2)`$ algebra labeled by $`E_0`$ and $`\pm s`$ are given by

$`Q_1=(E_0s\sigma _3)(E_0s\sigma _32),`$ (64)
$`Q_2=(E_0+s\sigma _3)(E_0+s\sigma _32).`$ (65)
where we collected representations corresponding to helicites $`+s`$ and $`s`$ into 2-vector in the same way as in (3). Comparison of these expressions with (63) gives $`AdS`$ mass operator (4) and operator $`B`$

$$B=(1E_0)s\sigma _3.$$
(66)
This completes light-cone description of massive field in $`AdS_3`$.

Note that to derive (64),(65) we re-express generators in light-cone basis in terms of ones in energy basis

$`P^+={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{i}}{2}}(J^{w\overline{w}}+J^{y\overline{y}}+J^{w\overline{y}}J^{\overline{w}y}),`$ (67)
$`P^{}={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{i}}{2}}(J^{w\overline{w}}+J^{y\overline{y}}J^{wy}+J^{\overline{w}\overline{y}}),`$ (68)
$`K^+={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{i}}{2}}(J^{w\overline{w}}+J^{y\overline{y}}+J^{wy}J^{\overline{w}\overline{y}}),`$ (69)
$`K^{}={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{i}}{2}}(J^{w\overline{w}}+J^{y\overline{y}}J^{w\overline{y}}+J^{\overline{w}y}),`$ (70)
$`D={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(J^{w\overline{y}}J^{wy}J^{\overline{w}\overline{y}}J^{\overline{w}y}),`$ (71)
$`J^+={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(J^{w\overline{y}}J^{wy}J^{\overline{w}\overline{y}}+J^{\overline{w}y}).`$ (72)
The $`\widehat{E}J^{w\overline{w}}`$ is nothing but energy operator, $`\widehat{J}J^{y\overline{y}}`$ is a helicity operator, $`J^{wy}`$, $`J^{w\overline{y}}`$ are helicity de-boost operators while $`J^{\overline{w}y}`$, $`J^{\overline{w}\overline{y}}`$ are helicity boost operators. In energy basis Casimir operators take the form

$$Q_1=(J^{w\overline{w}}J^{y\overline{y}})^22\{J^{wy},J^{\overline{w}\overline{y}}\},$$
(73)
$$Q_2=(J^{w\overline{w}}+J^{y\overline{y}})^22\{J^{w\overline{y}},J^{\overline{w}y}\}.$$
(74)
Using then a definition of ground state

$$\widehat{E}|\text{vac}=E_0|\text{vac},\widehat{J}|\text{vac}=s\sigma _3|\text{vac},$$
(75)
$$J^{wy}|\text{vac}=0,J^{w\overline{y}}|\text{vac}=0,$$
(76)
where the ground state $`|\text{vac}`$ is a 2-vector (see (3)), we find eigenvalues of $`Q_1`$ and $`Q_2`$ (64),(65). Energy basis commutators of $`so(2,2)`$ we use are

$$[J^{AB},J^{CE}]=\eta ^{BC}J^{AE}+3\text{ terms},$$
(77)
with nonvanishing $`\eta ^{y\overline{y}}=\eta ^{w\overline{w}}=1`$.

In order to derive representation for $`\widehat{E}`$ (7) we use relations (67)-(70) to re-express $`\widehat{E}`$ in terms of $`P^\pm `$ and $`K^\pm `$ given in (2),(57)-(60), restrict all expressions to surface of initial data $`x^+=0`$ and use momentum representation in which $`x^{}=\mathrm{i}_{p^+}`$, $`^+=\mathrm{i}p^+`$. Doing this we find $`\widehat{E}=(H_1+H_2)/2`$ where

$$H_1=\frac{1}{2p^+}_z^2+\frac{1}{2p^+z^2}A+\frac{1}{2}p^+z^2,$$
(78)
$$H_2=\frac{z^2}{4p^+}(_z^2\frac{1}{z^2}A)+p^+$$
(79)
$$+_{p^+}(_{p^+}p^++z_z+\frac{1}{2})\frac{1}{p^+}B.$$

In basis of $`\stackrel{~}{\varphi }`$ (6) these $`H_1`$ and $`H_2`$ take the form given in (8),(9). In a similar way one can obtain the representation for $`\widehat{J}`$ given in (16).