text:
# References

Nonequivalent representations of nuclear algebras of canonical commutation relations. Quantum fields

Gennadi Sardanashvily111Electronic mail: sard@grav.phys.msu.su

Department of Theoretical Physics, Physics Faculty, Moscow State University, 117234 Moscow, Russia

Non-Fock representations of the canonical commutation relations modeled over an infinite-dimensional nuclear space are constructed in an explicit form. The example of the nuclear space of smooth real functions of rapid decrease results in nonequivalent quantizations of scalar fields.

I. INTRODUCTION

By virtue of the well-known Stone–von Neumann uniqueness theorem, all irreducible representations of the canonical commutation relations (henceforth the CCR) for finite degrees of freedom are equivalent. On the contrary, the CCR for infinite degrees of freedom admit infinitely many nonequivalent irreducible representations (see Ref.  for a survey).

Ref.  provides the comprehensive description of representations of the CCR modeled over an infinite-dimensional nuclear space $`Q`$. These representations are associated to translationally quasi-invariant measures on the (topological) dual $`Q^{}`$ of $`Q`$ and, due to the well-known Bochner theorem, are characterized by continuous positive-definite functions on $`Q`$. In Section IV-V of this work, operators of these representations are written in an explicit form. For instance, the Fock representation is associated to a certain Gaussian measure on $`Q^{}`$. If $`Q`$ is not a nuclear space, the Fock representation need not exist (see Remark 1 below).

Nuclear (non-Banach) involutive algebras are widely studied in algebraic quantum field theory since the well-known GNS construction for $`C^{}`$-algebras can be generalized to these algebras too.3-5 A Banach space is not nuclear, unless it is finite-dimensional (see Remark 1 below). A physically relevant example of an infinite-dimensional nuclear space is the space $`RS^4`$ of smooth real functions of rapid decrease on $`R^4`$. It is the real subspace of the space $`S(R^4)`$ of smooth complex functions of rapid decrease on $`R^4`$ (see Remark 1 below). Its (topological) dual is the space $`S^{}(R^4)`$ of tempered distributions (generalized functions).6 Of course, elements of $`RS^4`$ by no means are physical fields, but test functions. Continuous positive forms $`f`$ on the tensor Borchers algebra

$$A_{RS^4}=RRS^4RS^8\mathrm{}$$
(1)
of $`RS^4`$ are expressed as

$$f(\psi _n)=W_n(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n)\psi _n(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n)d^4x_1\mathrm{}d^4x_n,\psi _nRS^{4n},$$
(2)
into the tempered distributions $`W_nS^{}(R^{4n})`$ whose Fourier transform is regarded as the vacuum expectations of the plane wave operators of quantum scalar fields.

Of course, quantum fields do not constitute any CCR algebra, but there is a morphism of $`RS^4`$ to the CCR algebra over the nuclear space $`RS^3`$. It is treated as the instantaneous CCR algebra of scalar fields. Its Fock representation provides the familiar vacuum expectations of free quantum scalar fields on the Minkowski space $`R^4`$, while the non-Fock ones lead to nonstandard quantizations of these fields (see Section VI).

In order to characterize interacting quantum fields created at some instant and annihilated at another one, one should turn to the causal forms $`f^c`$ on the Borchers algebra $`A_{RS^4}`$ (1). They are given by the functionals

$`f^c(\psi _n)={\displaystyle W_n^c(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n)\psi _n(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n)d^4x_1\mathrm{}d^4x_n},\psi _nRS^{4n},`$ (3)
$`W_n^c(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n)={\displaystyle \underset{(i_1\mathrm{}i_n)}{}}\theta (x_{i_1}^0x_{i_2}^0)\mathrm{}\theta (x_{i_{n1}}^0x_{i_n}^0)W_n(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n),`$ (4)
where $`W_nS^{}(R^{4n})`$ are tempered distributions, $`\theta `$ is the step function, and the sum runs through all permutations $`(i_1\mathrm{}i_n)`$ of the tuple of numbers $`1,\mathrm{},n`$.7 The problem is that the functionals $`W_n^c`$ (4) need not be tempered distributions and, therefore, the causal forms $`f^c`$ (3) are neither positive nor continuous forms on the Borchers algebra $`A_{RS^4}`$.

At the same time, the causal forms issue from the Wick rotation of Euclidean states of the Borchers algebra $`A_{RS^4}`$ which describe particles in the interaction zone (see Section VII). The key point is that, since the causal forms (4) are symmetric, the Euclidean states of the Borchers algebra $`A_{RS^4}`$ can be obtained as states of the corresponding commutative tensor algebra $`B_{RS^4}`$.8-10 They characterize different representations of the Abelian subgroup of the CCR group modeled over the nuclear space $`SR^4`$, and are associated to different positive measures on the space of generalized functions $`S^{}(R^4)`$. From the physical viewpoint, these states are Euclidean Green’s functions whose Wick rotation gives complete Green’s functions of interacting quantum scalar fields on the Minkowski space. Some nonperturbative phenomena, e.g., the Higgs vacuum can be studied in this manner.9

For the sake of simplicity, our consideration here is restricted to scalar fields. In order to describe nonscalar fields on $`R^4`$ with values in a vector space $`V`$, one can consider the Borchers algebra of the tensor product space $`VSR^4`$.10 Difficulties arise if nonscalar fields are defined on a noncontractible manifold $`X`$, i.e. they are sections of a vector bundle $`YX`$. If this is a trivial bundle, the space $`Y_K(X)`$ of its sections of compact support equipped with the Schwartz topology is a nuclear space. In the general case, $`YX`$ is a Whitney summand of a trivial bundle, and the vector space $`Y_K(X)`$ of its sections of compact support is provided with the relative Schwartz topology, which makes it to a nuclear Schwartz manifold. However, the extension of the Bochner theorem for this nuclear manifold remains under question. Note that quantum gauge theory on compact manifolds usually deals with Sobolev spaces of gauge potentials.11,12 To dispose of the compactness assumption, the technique of nuclear Schwartz manifolds also has been applied to gauge theory.13,14 However, it meets serious inconsistencies because of the lack of the inverse function theorem.

II. THE NUCLEAR CCR

Let us recall the notion of a nuclear space.2,15 Let a complex vector space $`Q`$ have a countable set of nondegenerate Hermitian forms $`.|._k`$, $`=1,\mathrm{}`$, such that

$`q|q_1\mathrm{}q|q_k\mathrm{}`$
for all $`qQ`$. If $`Q`$ is complete with respect to the (Hausdorff) topology defined by the set of norms

$$._k=.|._k^{1/2},k=1,\mathrm{},$$
(5)
it is called a countably Hilbert space. The dual $`Q^{}`$ of $`Q`$ is provided with the weak and strong topologies.

Let $`Q_k`$ denote the completion of $`Q`$ with respect to the norm $`._k`$ (5). We have the chain of injections

$`Q_1Q_2\mathrm{}Q_k\mathrm{}`$
together with the homeomorphism $`Q=\underset{k}{}Q_k`$. Let $`T_m^n`$, $`mn`$, be a prolongation of the map

$`Q_nQqqQQ_m`$
to the continuous map of $`Q_n`$ onto the dense subset of $`Q_m`$. A countably Hilbert space $`Q`$ is called a nuclear space if, for any $`m`$, there exists $`n`$ such that $`T_n^m`$ is a nuclear map, i.e.,

$`T_m^n(q)={\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}\lambda _iq|q_n^i_{Q_n}q_m^i,`$
where: (i) $`\{q_n^i\}`$ and $`\{q_m^i\}`$ are bases for the Hilbert spaces $`Q_n`$ and $`Q_m`$, respectively, (ii) $`\lambda _i0`$, and (iii) the series $`\lambda _i`$ converges.

Remark 1: A nuclear space is perfect, i.e., every bounded closed set in a nuclear space is compact. It follows that a Hilbert space is not nuclear, unless it is finite-dimensional. Furthermore, a nuclear space is separable, and the weak and strong topologies both on this space and its dual coincide.

Let a nuclear space $`Q`$ be provided with still another nondegenerate Hermitian form $`.|.`$ which is separately continuous. It follows that there exist numbers $`M`$ and $`m`$ such that

$$q|qMq_m,qQ.$$
(6)
Let $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$ denote the completion of $`Q`$ with respect to this form. There are the injections

$$Q\stackrel{~}{Q}Q^{},$$
(7)
where $`Q`$ is dense in $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$, and so is $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$ in $`Q^{}`$. The triple (7) is called the rigged Hilbert space.

Given a real nuclear space $`Q`$ together with a nondegenerate separately continuous Hermitian form $`.|.`$, let us consider the group $`G(Q)`$ of triples $`g=(q_1,q_2,\lambda )`$ of elements $`q_1`$, $`q_2`$ of $`Q`$ and complex numbers $`\lambda `$ of unit modulus which are subject to multiplications

$$(q_1,q_2,\lambda )(q_1^{},q_2^{},\lambda ^{})=(q_1+q_1^{},q_2+q_2^{},\mathrm{exp}[iq_2,q_1^{}]\lambda \lambda ^{}).$$
(8)
It is a Lie group whose group space is a nuclear manifold modeled over $`QQR`$. Let us denote

$`T(q)=(q,0,0),P(q)=(0,q,0).`$
Then the multiplication law (8) takes the form

$`T(q)T(q^{})=T(q+q^{}),P(q)P(q^{})=P(q+q^{}),`$
$`P(q)T(q^{})=\mathrm{exp}[iq|q^{}]T(q^{})P(q).`$ (9)
Written in this form, $`G(Q)`$ is called the nuclear Weyl CCR group.

The complexified Lie algebra of the nuclear Lie group $`G(Q)`$ is the Heisenberg CCR algebra $`𝒢(Q)`$. It is generated by the elements $`\varphi (q)`$, $`\pi (q)`$, $`qQ`$, and $`I`$ which obey the Heisenberg CCR commutation relations

$`[\varphi (q),I]=[\pi (q),I]=0,`$
$`[\varphi (q),\varphi (q^{})]=[\pi (q),\pi (q^{})]=0,[\pi (q),\varphi (q^{})]=iq|q^{}I.`$ (10)
There is the exponential map

$`T(q)=\mathrm{exp}[i\varphi (q)],P(q)=\mathrm{exp}[i\pi (q)].`$
Due to the relation (6), the normed topology on the pre-Hilbert space $`Q`$ defined by the Hermitian form $`.|.`$ is coarser than the nuclear space topology. The latter is metric, separable and, consequently, second-countable. Hence, the pre-Hilbert space $`Q`$ is also second-countable and, therefore, admits a countable orthonormal basis. Given such a basis $`\{q_i\}`$ for $`Q`$, the Heisenberg CCR (10) take the form

$`[\varphi (q_j),\varphi (q_k)]=[\pi (q_k),\pi (q_j)]=0,[\pi (q_j),\varphi (q_k)]=i\delta _{jk}I.`$
III. REPRESENTATIONS OF THE NUCLEAR CCR GROUP

The CCR group $`G(Q)`$ contains two nuclear Abelian subgroups $`T(Q)`$ and $`P(Q)`$. Following the representation algorithm in Ref. , we first construct representations of the nuclear Abelian group $`T(Q)`$. These representations under certain conditions can be extended to representations of the whole CCR group $`G(Q)`$.

One can think of the nuclear Abelian group $`T(Q)`$ as being the group of translations in the nuclear space $`Q`$. Its cyclic strongly continuous unitary representation $`\pi `$ in a Hilbert space $`(E,.|._E)`$ with a (normed) cyclic vector $`\theta E`$ defines the complex function

$`Z(q)=\pi (T(q))\theta |\theta _E`$
on $`Q`$. This function is proved to be continuous and positive-definite, i.e., $`Z(0)=1`$ and

$`{\displaystyle \underset{i,j}{}}Z(q_iq_j)\overline{c}_ic_j0`$
for any finite set $`q_1,\mathrm{},q_m`$ of elements of $`Q`$ and arbitrary complex numbers $`c_1,\mathrm{},c_m`$.

In accordance with the well-known Bochner theorem for nuclear spaces, any continuous positive-definite function $`Z(q)`$ on a nuclear space $`Q`$ is the Fourier transform

$$Z(q)=\mathrm{exp}[iq,u]\mu (u)$$
(11)
of a positive measure $`\mu `$ of total mass 1 on the dual $`Q^{}`$ of $`Q`$.2 Then the above mentioned representation $`\pi `$ of $`T(Q)`$ can be given by the operators

$$T_Z(q)\rho (u)=\mathrm{exp}[iq,u]\rho (u)$$
(12)
in the Hilbert space $`L_C^2(Q^{},\mu )`$ of classes of $`\mu `$-equivalent square integrable complex functions $`\rho (u)`$ on $`Q^{}`$. The cyclic vector $`\theta `$ of this representation is the $`\mu `$-equivalence class $`\theta _\mu 1`$ of the constant function $`\rho (u)=1`$. Then we have

$$Z(q)=T_Z(q)\theta |\theta _\mu =\mathrm{exp}[iq,u]\mu .$$
(13)
Conversely, every positive measure $`\mu `$ of total mass 1 on the dual $`Q^{}`$ of $`Q`$ defines the cyclic strongly continuous unitary representation (12) of the group $`T(Q)`$. By virtue of the above mentioned Bochner theorem, it follows that every continuous positive-definite function $`Z(q)`$ on $`Q`$ characterizes a cyclic strongly continuous unitary representation (12) of the nuclear Abelian group $`T(Q)`$. We agree to call $`Z(q)`$ a generating function of this representation.

It should be emphasized that the representation (12) need not be (topologically) irreducible. For instance, let $`\rho (u)`$ be a function on $`Q^{}`$ such that the set where it vanishes is not a $`\mu `$-null subset of $`Q^{}`$. Then the closure of the set $`T_Z(Q)\rho `$ is a $`T(Q)`$-invariant closed subspace of $`L_C^2(Q^{},\mu )`$.

One can show that distinct generating functions $`Z(q)`$ and $`Z^{}(q)`$ determine equivalent representations $`T_Z`$ and $`T_Z^{}`$ (12) of $`T(Q)`$ in the Hilbert spaces $`L_C^2(Q^{},\mu )`$ and $`L_C^2(Q^{},\mu ^{})`$ iff they are the Fourier transform of equivalent measures $`Q^{}`$.2 Indeed, let

$$\mu ^{}=s^2\mu ,$$
(14)
where a function $`s(u)`$ is strictly positive almost everywhere on $`Q^{}`$, and $`\mu (s^2)=1`$. Then the map

$$L_C^2(Q^{},\mu ^{})\rho (u)s(u)\rho (u)L_C^2(Q^{},\mu )$$
(15)
provides an isomorphism between the representations $`T_Z^{}`$ and $`T_Z`$.

The representation $`T_Z`$ (12) of the nuclear Abelian group $`T(Q)`$ in the Hilbert space $`L_C^2(Q^{},\mu )`$ determined by the generating function $`Z`$ (11) can be extended to the CCR group $`G(Q)`$ if the measure $`\mu `$ possesses the following property.

Let $`u_q`$, $`qQ`$, be an element of $`Q^{}`$ given by the condition

$$q^{},u_q=q^{}|q,q^{}Q.$$
(16)
These elements form the image of the monomorphism $`QQ^{}`$ determined by the Hermitian form $`.|.`$ on $`Q`$. Let the measure $`\mu `$ in (11) remains equivalent under translations

$`Q^{}uu+u_qQ^{},u_qQQ^{},`$
in $`Q^{}`$, i.e.,

$$\mu (u+u_q)=a^2(q,u)\mu (u),u_qQQ^{},$$
(17)
where a function $`a(q,u)`$ is square $`\mu `$-integrable and strictly positive almost everywhere on $`Q^{}`$. This function fulfils the relations

$$a(0,u)=1,a(q+q^{},u)=a(q,u)a(q^{},u+u_q).$$
(18)
A measure on $`Q^{}`$ obeying the condition (17) is called translationally quasi-invariant, but it does not remains equivalent under any translation in $`Q^{}`$, unless $`Q`$ is finite-dimensional.

Let a generating function $`Z`$ of a cyclic strongly continuous unitary representation of the nuclear group $`T(Q)`$ be the Fourier transform (11) of a translationally quasi-invariant measure $`\mu `$ on $`Q^{}`$. Then one can extend the representation (12) of this group to the representation of the CCR group in the Hilbert space $`L_C^2(Q^{},\mu )`$ by operators

$$P_Z(q)\rho (u)=a(q,u)\rho (u+u_q).$$
(19)
Indeed, it is easily justified that the Weyl CCR (9) hold, while the equalities

$`\rho _\mu ={\displaystyle |\rho (u)|^2\mu (u)}={\displaystyle |\rho (u+u_q)|^2\mu (u+u_q)}=`$ (20)
$`{\displaystyle a^2(q,u)|\rho (u+u_q)|^2\mu (u)}=P_Z(q)\rho _\mu ^2,`$
show that the operators (19) are unitary.

Let $`\mu ^{}`$ (14) be a $`\mu `$-equivalent positive measure of total mass 1 on $`Q^{}`$. The equality

$`\mu ^{}(u+u_q)=s^2(u)a^2(q,u)s^2(u+u_q)\mu ^{}(u)`$
shows that it is also translationally quasi-invariant. Then the isomorphism (15) between representations $`T_Z`$ and $`T_Z^{}`$ of the nuclear Abelian group $`T(Q)`$ is extended to the isomorphism

$`P_Z^{}(q)=s^1P_Z(q)s:\rho (u)s^1(u)a(q,u)s(u+u_q)\rho (u+u_q)`$
of the corresponding representations of the CCR group $`G(Q)`$.

IV. REPRESENTATIONS OF THE CCR ALGEBRA

Similarly to the case of a finite-dimensional Lie group, any strongly continuous unitary representation $`T_Z`$ (12), $`P_Z`$ (19) of the nuclear CCR group $`G(Q)`$ implies a representation of its Lie algebra $`𝒢(Q)`$ by (unbounded) operators in the same Hilbert space $`L_C^2(Q^{},\mu )`$. This representation reads16,17

$`I=\mathrm{𝟏},\varphi (q)\rho (u)=q,u\rho (u),\pi (q)\rho (u)=i(\delta _q+\eta (q,u))\rho (u),`$ (21)
$`\delta _q\rho (u)=\underset{\alpha 0}{lim}\alpha ^1[\rho (u+\alpha u_q)\rho (u)],\alpha R,`$
$`\eta (q,u)=\underset{\alpha 0}{lim}\alpha ^1[a(\alpha q,u)1].`$ (22)
One at once derives from the relations (18) that

$`\delta _q\delta _q^{}=\delta _q^{}\delta _q,\delta _q(\eta (q^{},u))=\delta _q^{}(\eta (q,u)),`$
$`\delta _q=\delta _q,\delta _q(q^{},u)=q^{}|q,`$
$`\eta (0,u)=0,uQ^{},\delta _q\theta =0,qQ.`$
With the aid of these relations, it is easily justified that the operators (21) fulfil the Heisenberg CCR (10). The unitarity condition (20) implies the conjugation rule

$`q,u^{}=q,u,\delta _q^{}=\delta _q2\eta (q,u).`$
Hence, the operators (21) are Hermitian.

Let us further restrict our consideration to representations with generating functions $`Z(q)`$ such that

$$RtZ(tq)$$
(23)
is an analytic function on $`R`$ at $`t=0`$ for all $`qQ`$. Then one can show that the function $`q|u`$ on $`Q^{}`$ is square $`\mu `$-integrable for all $`qQ`$ and that, consequently, the operators $`\varphi (q)`$ (21) are bounded everywhere in the Hilbert space $`L_C^2(Q^{},\mu )`$. Moreover, the mean values of operators $`\varphi (q)`$ can be computed by the formula

$$\varphi (q_1)\mathrm{}\varphi (q_n)=i^n\frac{}{\alpha ^1}\mathrm{}\frac{}{\alpha ^n}Z(\alpha ^iq_i)|_{\alpha ^i=0}=q_1,u\mathrm{}q_n,u\mu (u).$$
(24)
The operators $`\pi (q)`$ (21) act in the subspace $`E_{\mathrm{}}`$ of all smooth complex functions in $`L_C^2(Q^{},\mu )`$ whose derivatives of any order also belongs to $`L_C^2(Q^{},\mu )`$. However, $`E_{\mathrm{}}`$ need not be dense in the Hilbert space $`L_C^2(Q^{},\mu )`$, unless $`Q`$ is finite-dimensional. The space $`E_{\mathrm{}}`$ is also the carrier space of a representation of the enveloping algebra $`\overline{𝒢}(Q)`$ of the CCR algebra $`𝒢(Q)`$. The representations of $`𝒢(Q)`$ and $`\overline{𝒢}(Q)`$ in $`E_{\mathrm{}}`$ need not be irreducible. Therefore, let us consider the subspace $`E_\theta =\overline{𝒢}(Q)\theta `$ of $`E_{\mathrm{}}`$, where $`\theta `$ is a cyclic vector for the representation of the CCR group in $`L_C^2(Q^{},\mu )`$. Obviously, the representation of the CCR algebra $`𝒢(Q)`$ in $`E_\theta `$ is (algebraically) irreducible. If $`\theta ^{}`$ is another cyclic vector in $`L_C^2(Q^{},\mu )`$, the representations of $`𝒢(Q)`$ in $`E_\theta `$ and $`E_\theta ^{}`$ are equivalent.

One also introduces creation and annihilation operators

$$a^\pm (q)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}[\varphi (q)i\pi (q)]=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}[\delta _q\eta (q,u)+q,u].$$
(25)
They obey the conjugation rule $`(a^\pm (q))^{}=a^{}(q)`$ and the commutation relations

$`[a^{}(q),a^+(q^{})]=q|q^{}\mathrm{𝟏},[a^+(q),a^+(q^{})]=[a^{}(q),a^{}(q^{})]=0.`$
The particle number operator $`N`$ in the carrier space $`E_\theta `$ is defined by the conditions

$`[N,a^\pm (q)]=\pm a^\pm (q)`$
up to a summand $`\lambda \mathrm{𝟏}`$. With respect to a countable orthonormal basis $`\{q_k\}`$, this operator $`N`$ is given by the sum

$$N=\underset{k}{}a^+(q_k)a^{}(q_k),$$
(26)
but need not be defined everywhere in $`E_\theta `$, unless $`Q`$ is finite dimensional.

V. NON-FOCK REPRESENTATIONS OF THE NUCLEAR CCR

Gaussian measures exemplifies the physically relevant class of translationally quasi-invariant measures on the dual $`Q^{}`$ of a nuclear space $`Q`$. The Fourier transform of a Gaussian measure reads

$$Z(y)=\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{1}{2}B(y)\right],$$
(27)
where $`B(q)`$ is a seminorm on $`Q^{}`$ called the covariance form.

Remark 2: If $`Q`$ is a Banach space provided with the norm $`.`$, there exists a Gaussian quasi-measure on its dual $`Q^{}`$ with the covariance form $`.`$, but it is not a measure unless $`Q`$ is finite-dimensional. Let $`T`$ be a continuous operator in $`Q`$. The Gaussian quasi-measure on $`Q^{}`$ with the covariance form $`qTq`$ is proved to be a measure iff $`T`$ is a Hilbert–Schmidt operator. Let $`Q=R^n`$ be a finite-dimensional vector space and $`B`$ a norm on $`Q`$. Let its dual $`Q^{}`$ be coordinated by $`(x_i)`$. The Gaussian measure on $`Q^{}`$ with the covariance form $`B`$ is equivalent to the Lebesgue measure $`d^nx`$ on $`Q^{}`$. It reads

$`\mu _B={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{det}[B]^{1/2}}{(2\pi )^{n/2}}}\mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(B^1)^{ij}x_ix_j\right]d^nx.`$
Let $`\mu _K`$ denote a Gaussian measure on $`Q^{}`$ whose Fourier transform is the generating function

$$Z_K=\mathrm{exp}[\frac{1}{2}B_K(q)]$$
(28)
with the covariance form

$$B_K(q)=K^1q|K^1q,$$
(29)
where $`K`$ is a bounded invertible operator in the Hilbert completion $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$ of $`Q`$ with respect to the Hermitian form $`.|.`$. The Gaussian measure $`\mu _K`$ is translationally quasi-invariant, i.e.,

$`\mu _K(u+u_q)=a_K^2(q,u)\mu _K(u).`$
Using the formula (24), one can show that

$$a_K(q,u)=\mathrm{exp}[\frac{1}{4}B_K(Sq)\frac{1}{2}Sq,u],$$
(30)
where $`S=KK^{}`$ is a bounded Hermitian operator in $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$.

Let us construct the representation of the CCR algebra $`𝒢(Q)`$ determined by generating the function $`Z_K`$ (28). Substituting the function (30) into the formula (22), we find

$`\eta (q,u)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}Sq,u.`$
Hence, the operators $`\varphi (q)`$ and $`\pi (q)`$ (21) take the form

$$\varphi (q)=q,u,\pi (q)=i(\delta _q\frac{1}{2}Sq,u).$$
(31)
Accordingly, the creation and annihilation operators (25) read

$$a^\pm (q)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}[\delta _q\pm \frac{1}{2}Sq,u+q,u].$$
(32)
They act on the subspace $`E_\theta `$, $`\theta _{\mu _K}1`$, of the Hilbert space $`L_C^2(Q^{},\mu _K)`$, and are Hermitian with respect to the Hermitian form $`.|._{\mu _K}`$ on $`L_C^2(Q^{},\mu _K)`$.

Remark 3: If a representation of the CCR is characterized by the Gaussian generating function (28), it is convenient for a computation to express all operator into the operators $`\delta _q`$ and $`\varphi (q)`$, which obey the commutation relation

$`[\delta _q,\varphi (q^{})]=q^{}|q.`$
For instance, we have

$`\pi (q)=i\delta _q{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}\varphi (Sq).`$
The mean values $`\varphi (q_1)\mathrm{}\varphi (q_n)\delta _q`$ vanishes, while the meanvalues $`\varphi (q_1)\mathrm{}\varphi (q_n)\delta _q`$, defined by the formula (24), obey the Wick theorem relations

$$\varphi (q_1)\mathrm{}\varphi (q_n)\delta _q=\varphi (q_{i_1})\varphi (q_{i_2})\mathrm{}\varphi (q_{i_{n1}})\varphi (q_{i_n}),$$
(33)
where the sum runs through all partitions of the set $`1,\mathrm{},n`$ in ordered pairs $`(i_1<i_2),\mathrm{}(i_{n1}<i_n)`$, and where

$`\varphi (q)\varphi (q^{})=K^1q|K^1q^{}.`$
In particular, put $`K=\sqrt{2}\mathrm{𝟏}`$. Then the generating function (28) takes the form

$$Z_\mathrm{F}(q)=\mathrm{exp}[\frac{1}{4}q|q],$$
(34)
and determines the Fock representation of the CCR algebra $`𝒢(Q)`$. It is given by the operators

$`\varphi (q)=q,u,\pi (q)=i(\delta _qq,u),`$
$`a^+(q)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}[\delta _q+2q,u],a^{}(q)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}\delta _q.`$
Its carrier space is the subspace $`E_\theta `$, $`\theta _{\mu _\mathrm{F}}1`$ of the Hilbert space $`L_C^2(Q^{},\mu _\mathrm{F})`$, where $`\mu _\mathrm{F}`$ denotes the Gaussian measure whose Fourier transform is (34). We agree to call it the Fock measure.

The Fock representation up to an equivalence is characterized by the existence of a cyclic vector $`\theta `$ such that

$$a^{}(q)\theta =0,qQ.$$
(35)
For the representation in question, this is $`\theta _{\mu _\mathrm{F}}1`$. An equivalent condition is that the particle number operator $`N`$ (26) exists and its spectrum is lower bounded. The corresponding eigenvector of $`N`$ in $`E_\theta `$ is $`\theta `$ itself so that $`N\theta =0`$. Therefore, one often interprets this eigenvector as a vacuum state.

A glance at the expression (32) shows that the condition (35) does not hold, unless $`Z_K`$ is $`Z_\mathrm{F}`$ (34). For instance, the particle number operator in the representation (32) reads

$`N={\displaystyle \underset{j}{}}a^+(q_j)a^{}(q_j)={\displaystyle \underset{j}{}}[\delta _{q_j}\delta _{q_j}+S_k^jq_k,u_{q_j}+`$
$`(\delta _{km}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}S_k^jS_m^jq_k,uq_m,u(\delta _{jj}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}S_j^j)],`$
where $`\{q_k\}`$ is the orthonormal basis for the pre-Hilbert space $`Q`$. One can show that this operator is defined everywhere on $`E_\theta `$ and is lower bounded only if the operator $`S`$ is a sum of the scalar operator $`2\mathrm{𝟏}`$ and a nuclear operator in $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$, in particular, if

$`\mathrm{Tr}(\mathrm{𝟏}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}S)<\mathrm{}.`$
This condition is also sufficient for the measures $`\mu _K`$ and $`\mu _F`$ (and, consequently, the corresponding representations) to be equivalent.2 For instance, the generating function

$`Z_c(q)=\mathrm{exp}[{\displaystyle \frac{c^2}{2}}q|q],c^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}},`$
determines a non-Fock representation of the nuclear CCR.

Remark 4: The non-Fock representation (31) of the CCR algebra (10) in the Hilbert space $`L_C^2(Q^{},\mu _K)`$ is the Fock representation

$`\varphi _K(q)=\varphi (q)=q,u,`$
$`\pi _K(q)=\pi (S^1q)=i(\delta _q^K{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}q,u),\delta _q^K=\delta _{S^1q},`$
of the CCR algebra $`\{\varphi _K(q),\pi _K(q),I\}`$, where

$`[\varphi _K(q),\pi _K(q)]=iK^1q|K^1q^{}I.`$
This fact motivates somebody to regard representations of the CCR group (9) as representation of two mutually commutative Abelian groups $`T(Q)`$ and $`(P(Q)`$ up to phase multipliers.18

Since the Fock measure $`\mu _\mathrm{F}`$ on $`Q^{}`$ remains equivalent only under translations by vectors $`u_qQQ^{}`$, the measure

$`\mu _\sigma =\mu _\mathrm{F}(u\sigma ),\sigma Q^{}Q,`$
on $`Q^{}`$ determines a non-Fock representation of the nuclear CCR. Indeed, this measure is translationally quasi-invariant:

$`\mu _\sigma (u+u_q)=a_\sigma ^2(q,u)\mu _\sigma (u),a_\sigma (q,u)=a_\mathrm{F}(q,u\sigma ),`$
and its Fourier transform

$`Z_\sigma (q)=\mathrm{exp}[iq,\sigma ]Z_\mathrm{F}(q)`$
is a positive-definite continuous function on $`Q`$. Then the corresponding representation of the CCR algebra is given by operators

$$a^+(q)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\delta _q+2q,uq,\sigma ),a^{}(q)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\delta _q+q,\sigma ).$$
(36)
In comparison with all the above representations, these operators possess nonvanishing vacuum mean values

$`a^\pm (q)\theta |\theta _{\mu _\mathrm{F}}=q,\sigma .`$
If $`\sigma QQ^{}`$, the representation (36) becomes equivalent to the Fock representation (32) due to the morphism

$`\rho (u)\mathrm{exp}[q^{},u]\rho (u+u_q^{}).`$
VI. FREE QUANTUM FIELDS

In this Section, representations of the nuclear CCR are utilized in order to describe free quantum fields. In the framework of algebraic quantum field theory, quantum fields are characterized by a unital involutive topological algebra $`A`$ and a (continuous positive) state $`f`$ of $`A`$. The key point is that a quantum field algebra is never normed.

With reference to the field-particle dualism, realistic quantum field models are described by tensor algebras, as a rule. Let $`Q`$ be a real (locally convex) topological vector space, endowed with an involution operation $`qq^{}`$, $`qQ`$. Let us consider the tensor algebra

$$A_Q=RQQ^2\mathrm{},Q^n=\stackrel{n}{}Q,$$
(37)
of $`Q`$. It is a $``$-algebra with respect to the involution

$`(q^1\mathrm{}q^n)^{}=(q^n)^{}\mathrm{}(q^1)^{}.`$
The direct sum topology makes $`A_Q`$ to a topological involutive algebra. A state $`f`$ of this algebra is given by a tuple $`\{f_n\}`$ of continuous forms on the tensor products $`Q^n`$. Its value $`f(q^1\mathrm{}q^n)`$ are interpreted as the vacuum expectation of the system of fields $`q^1,\mathrm{},q^n`$. Further, we choose by $`Q`$ the real subspace $`SR^4`$ of the nuclear space of smooth complex functions of rapid decrease on $`R^4`$.

Remark 5: By functions of rapid decrease on an Euclidean space $`R^n`$ are called complex smooth functions $`\psi (x)`$ such that the quantities

$$\psi _{k,m}=\underset{|\alpha |k}{max}\underset{x}{sup}(1+x^2)^m|D^\alpha \psi (x)|$$
(38)
are finite for all $`k,mN`$. Here, we follow the standard notation

$`D^\alpha ={\displaystyle \frac{^{|\alpha |}}{^{\alpha _1}x^1\mathrm{}^{\alpha _n}x^n}},|\alpha |=\alpha _1+\mathrm{}+\alpha _n,`$
for an $`n`$-tuple of natural numbers $`\alpha =(\alpha _1,\mathrm{},\alpha _n)`$. The functions of rapid decrease constitute the nuclear space $`S(R^n)`$ with respect to the topology determined by the seminorms (38). Its dual is the space $`S^{}(R^n)`$ of tempered distributions.2,6,15 The corresponding contraction form is written as

$`\psi ,h=\psi (x)h(x)d^nx,\psi S(R^n),hS^{}(R^n).`$
The space $`S(R^n)`$ is provided with the nondegenerate separately continuous Hermitian form

$`\psi |h={\displaystyle \psi (x)\overline{h(x)}d^nx}.`$
The completion of $`S(R^n)`$ with respect to this form is the space $`L_C^2(R^n)`$ of square integrable complex functions on $`R^n`$. We have the rigged Hilbert space

$`S(R^n)L_C^2(R^n)S^{}(R^n).`$
Let $`R_n`$ denote the dual of $`R^n`$ coordinated by $`(p_\lambda )`$. The Fourier transform

$`\psi ^F(p)={\displaystyle \psi (x)e^{ipx}d^nx},px=p_\lambda x^\lambda ,`$ (39)
$`\psi (x)={\displaystyle \psi ^F(p)e^{ipx}d_np},d_np=(2\pi )^nd^np,`$ (40)
defines an isomorphism between the spaces $`S(R^n)`$ and $`S(R_n)`$. The Fourier transform of tempered distributions is defined by the condition

$`{\displaystyle h(x)\psi (x)d^nx}={\displaystyle h^F(p)\psi ^F(p)d_np},`$
and is written in the form (39) – (40). It provides an isomorphism between the spaces of tempered distributions $`S^{}(R^n)`$ and $`S^{}(R_n)`$.

The tensor algebra $`A_{RS^4}`$ of the nuclear space $`RS^4`$ is called the Borchers algebra.3,4 Since the subset $`\stackrel{n}{}S(R^k)`$ is dense in $`S(R^{kn})`$, we henceforth identify $`A_{RS^4}`$ with the algebra (1). Then any state $`f`$ of $`A_{RS^4}`$ is represented by a collection of tempered distributions $`\{W_nS^{}(R^{4n})\}`$ by the formula (2). Let us focus on the states of the Borchers algebra $`A_{RS^4}`$ which describe free real scalar fields of mass $`m`$.

Let us provide the nuclear space $`RS^4`$ with the positive complex bilinear form

$`(\psi |\psi ^{})={\displaystyle \frac{2}{i}}{\displaystyle \psi (x)D^{}(xy)\psi ^{}(y)d^4xd^4y}={\displaystyle \psi ^F(\omega ,\stackrel{}{𝑝})\psi ^F(\omega ,\stackrel{}{𝑝})\frac{d_3p}{\omega }},`$ (41)
$`D^{}(x)=i(2\pi )^3{\displaystyle \mathrm{exp}[ipx]\theta (p_0)\delta (p^2m^2)d^4p},`$
where $`D^{}(x)`$ is the negative frequency part of the Pauli–Jordan function, $`p^2`$ is the Minkowski square, and

$`\omega =(\stackrel{}{𝑝}^2+m^2)^{1/2}.`$
Since the function $`\psi (x)`$ is real, its Fourier transform satisfies the equality $`\psi ^F(p)=\overline{\psi }^F(p)`$.

The bilinear form (41) is degenerate because the Pauli–Jordan function $`D^{}(x)`$ obeys the mass shell equation

$`(\mathrm{}+m^2)D^{}(x)=0.`$
It takes nonzero values only at elements $`\psi ^FRS_4`$ which are not zero on the mass shell $`p^2=m^2`$. Therefore, let us consider the quotient space $`\gamma :RS^4RS^4/J`$, where $`J=\{\psi RS^4:(\psi |\psi )=0\}`$ is the kernel of the square form (41). The map $`\gamma `$ assigns to each element $`\psi RS^4`$ with the Fourier transform $`\psi ^F(p_0,\stackrel{}{𝑝})RS_4`$ the couple of functions $`(\psi ^F(\omega ,\stackrel{}{𝑝}),\psi ^F(\omega ,\stackrel{}{𝑝}))`$. Let us equip the factor space $`RS^4/J`$ with the real bilinear form

$`(\gamma \psi |\gamma \psi ^{})_L=\mathrm{Re}(\psi |\psi ^{})=`$ (42)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle [\psi ^F(\omega ,\stackrel{}{𝑝})\psi ^F(\omega ,\stackrel{}{𝑝})+\psi ^F(\omega ,\stackrel{}{𝑝})\psi ^F(\omega ,\stackrel{}{𝑝})]\frac{d_3\stackrel{}{𝑝}}{\omega }}.`$
Then it is decomposed into the direct sum $`RS^4/𝒥=L^+L^{}`$ of the subspaces

$`L^\pm =\{\psi _\pm ^F(\omega ,\stackrel{}{𝑝})={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\psi ^F(\omega ,\stackrel{}{𝑝})\pm \psi ^F(\omega ,\stackrel{}{𝑝}))\},`$
which are mutually orthogonal with respect to the bilinear form (42).

There exist continuous isometric morphisms

$`\gamma _+:\psi _+^F(\omega ,\stackrel{}{𝑝})q^F(\stackrel{}{𝑝})=\omega ^{1/2}\psi _+^F(\omega ,\stackrel{}{𝑝}),`$
$`\gamma _{}:\psi _{}^F(\omega ,\stackrel{}{𝑝})q^F(\stackrel{}{𝑝})=i\omega ^{1/2}\psi _{}^F(\omega ,\stackrel{}{𝑝})`$
of spaces $`L^+`$ and $`L^{}`$ to the nuclear space $`RS^3`$ endowed with the nondegenerate separately continuous Hermitian form

$$q|q^{}=q^F(\stackrel{}{𝑝})q^F(\stackrel{}{𝑝})d_3p.$$
(43)
It should be emphasized that the images $`\gamma _+(L^+)`$ and $`\gamma _{}(L^{})`$ in $`RS^3`$ are not orthogonal with respect to the scalar form (43). Combining $`\gamma `$ and $`\gamma _\pm `$, we obtain the continuous morphisms $`\tau _\pm :RS^4RS^3`$ given by the expressions

$`\tau _+(\psi )=\gamma _+(\gamma \psi )_+={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\omega ^{1/2}}}{\displaystyle [\psi ^F(\omega ,\stackrel{}{𝑝})+\psi ^F(\omega ,\stackrel{}{𝑝})]\mathrm{exp}[i\stackrel{}{𝑝}\stackrel{}{𝑥}]d_3p},`$
$`\tau _{}(\psi )=\gamma _{}(\gamma \psi )_{}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2i\omega ^{1/2}}}{\displaystyle [\psi ^F(\omega ,\stackrel{}{𝑝})\psi ^F(\omega ,\stackrel{}{𝑝})]\mathrm{exp}[i\stackrel{}{𝑝}\stackrel{}{𝑥}]d_3p}.`$
Now let us consider the CCR algebra

$$𝒢(RS^3)=\{(\varphi (q),\pi (q),I),qRS^3\}$$
(44)
modeled over the nuclear space $`RS^3`$, which is equipped with the Hermitian form (43). Using the morphisms $`\tau _\pm `$, let us define the map

$$RS^4\psi \varphi (\tau _+(\psi ))\pi (\tau _{}(\psi ))𝒢(RS^3).$$
(45)
With this map, one can think of (44) as being the algebra of the instantaneous CCR of scalar fields on the Minkowski space $`R^4`$. Owing to the map (45), any representation of the nuclear CCR algebra $`𝒢(RS^3)`$ determined by a translationally quasi-invariant measure $`\mu `$ on $`S^{}(R^3)`$ induces a state

$$f(\psi ^1\mathrm{}\psi ^n)=\varphi (\tau _+(\psi ^1))+\pi (\tau _{}(\psi ^1))]\mathrm{}[\varphi (\tau _+(\psi ^n))+\pi (\tau _{}(\psi ^n))]$$
(46)
on the Borchers algebra $`A_{RS^4}`$ of scalar fields. Furthermore, one can justify that the corresponding distributions $`W_n`$ fulfil the mass shell equation and that the following commutation relation holds:

$`W_2(x,y)W_2(y,x)=iD(xy),`$
where

$`D(x)=i(2\pi )^3{\displaystyle \mathrm{exp}[ipx](\theta (p_0)\theta (p_0))\delta (p^2m^2)d^4p},`$
is the Pauli–Jordan commutation function. Thus, the states (46) describe real scalar fields of mass $`m`$.

For instance, let us take the Fock representation (31) of the CCR algebra $`𝒢(RS^3)`$. Using the formulae in Remark 1 where the form $`q|q^{}`$ is given by the expression (43), one observes that the states $`f_\mathrm{F}`$ (46) satisfy the Wick theorem relations

$$f_\mathrm{F}(\psi ^1\mathrm{}\psi ^n)=f_2(\psi ^{i_1}\psi ^{i_2})\mathrm{}f_2(\psi ^{i_{n1}}\psi ^{i_n}),$$
(47)
while the state $`f_2`$ is given by the Wightman function

$$W_2(x,y)=\frac{1}{i}D^{}(xy).$$
(48)
Thus, the state $`f_\mathrm{F}`$ describe standard quantum free scalar fields of mass $`m`$.

Similarly, one can obtain states of the Borchers algebra $`A_{RS^4}`$ generated by non-Fock representations of the instantaneous CCR algebra $`𝒢(RS^3)`$, e.g., if $`K^1=c\mathrm{𝟏}2^{1/2}\mathrm{𝟏}`$. These states fail to be given by Wightman functions. In particular, they are not covariant under time translations.

VII. EUCLIDEAN SCALAR FIELDS

As was mentioned above, the causal forms (3) on the Borchers algebra $`A_{RS^4}`$ are neither positive nor continuous. At the same time, they issue from the Wick rotation of Euclidean states of the commutative tensor algebra $`B_{RS^4}`$. These states play the role of Green’s functions in Euclidean quantum field theory. It should be emphasized that they do not coincide with the Schwinger functions in axiomatic quantum field theory whose Minkowski partners are the Wightman functions, but not causal forms (see Section VIII).

Let $`Q`$ be a real nuclear space as above and $`A_Q`$ its tensor algebra (37). We abbreviate with $`B_Q`$ the complexified quotient of $`A_Q`$ with respect to the ideal generated by the elements $`qq^{}q^{}q`$ for all $`q,q^{}Q`$. It is the commutative tensor algebra of $`Q`$. Provided with the direct sum topology, $`B_Q`$ becomes a topological involutive algebra. It coincides with the enveloping algebra of the Lie algebra of the additive Lie group $`T(Q)`$ of translations in $`Q`$. Therefore, we can obtain the states of the algebra $`B_Q`$ by constructing cyclic strongly continuous unitary representations of the nuclear Abelian group $`T(Q)`$. As was stated in Section III, such a representation is characterized by a positive-definite continuous generating function $`Z`$ on $`Q`$ which is the Fourier transform (11) of a bounded positive measure $`\mu `$ of total mass 1 on the (topological) dual $`Q^{}`$ of $`Q`$. The corresponding cyclic strongly continuous unitary representation of the nuclear Abelian group $`T(Q)`$ is given by the operators (12) in the Hilbert space $`L_C^2(Q^{},\mu )`$ of square $`\mu `$-integrable complex functions $`\rho (u)`$ on $`Q`$. If the function (23) is analytic at $`\alpha =0`$ for all $`\varphi \mathrm{\Phi }`$, a state $`F(q_1\mathrm{}q_n)`$ of $`B_Q`$ is given by the expression (24).

A glance at this expression shows that, in applications to quantum field theory where $`Q=RS^4`$, the generating function $`Z`$ plays the role of a generating functional represented by the functional integral (11), while the values (24) of the state $`F`$ are vacuum expectations of Euclidean fields.

For instance, let $`\mu `$ be a Gaussian measure on $`Q^{}`$ whose Fourier transform reads

$`Z(\phi )=\mathrm{exp}[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}M(\phi )],`$
where the covariance form $`M(\varphi _1,\varphi _2)`$ is a nondegenerate separately continuous Hermitian form on $`RS^4`$. This generating function defines a Gaussian state $`F`$ of the algebra $`B_{RS^4}`$ such that

$`F_1(\varphi )=0,F_2(\varphi _1\varphi _2)=M(\varphi _1,\varphi _2),`$
while $`F_{n>2}`$ obey the Wick relations (33). Furthermore, a covariance form $`M`$ on $`RS^4`$ is uniquely determined as

$$M(\varphi _1,\varphi _2)=W_2(x_1,x_2)\varphi _1(x_1)\varphi _2(x_2)d^nx_1d^nx_2.$$
(49)
by a tempered distribution $`W_2S^{}(R^8)`$.

In particular, let a tempered distribution $`M(\varphi ,\varphi ^{})`$ in the expression (49) be Green’s function of some positive elliptic differential operator $``$, i.e.,

$`_{y_1}W_2(y_1,y_2)=\delta (y_1y_2),`$
where $`\delta `$ is Dirac’s $`\delta `$-function. Then the distribution $`W_2`$ reads

$$W_2(y_1,y_2)=w(y_1y_2),$$
(50)
and we obtain the form

$`F_2(\varphi _1\varphi _2)=M(\varphi _1,\varphi _2)={\displaystyle w(y_1y_2)\varphi _1(y_1)\varphi _2(y_2)d^4y_1d^4y_2}=`$
$`{\displaystyle w(y)\varphi _1(y_1)\varphi _2(y_1y)d^4yd^4y_1}={\displaystyle w(y)\phi (y)d^4y}={\displaystyle w^F(q)\phi ^F(q)d_4q},`$
$`y=y_1y_2,\phi (y)={\displaystyle \varphi _1(y_1)\varphi _2(y_1y)d^4y_1}.`$
For instance, if

$`_{y_1}=\mathrm{\Delta }_{y_1}+m^2,`$
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is the Laplacian, then

$$w(y_1y_2)=\frac{\mathrm{exp}(iq(y_1y_2))}{q^2+m^2},$$
(51)
where $`q^2`$ is the Euclidean square, is the propagator of a massive Euclidean scalar field.

Let the Fourier transform $`w^F`$ of the distribution $`w`$ (50) satisfy the condition (62) below. Then its Wick rotation (66) is the functional

$`\widehat{w}(x)=\theta (x){\displaystyle \underset{\overline{Q}_+}{}}w^F(q)\mathrm{exp}(qx)dq+\theta (x){\displaystyle \underset{\overline{Q}_{}}{}}w^F(q)\mathrm{exp}(qx)dq`$
on scalar fields on the Minkowski space. For instance, let $`w(y)`$ be the Euclidean propagator (51) of a massive scalar field. Then due to the analyticity of

$`w^F(q)=(q^2+m^2)^1`$
on the domain $`\mathrm{Im}q\mathrm{Re}q>0`$, one can show that $`\widehat{w}(x)=iD^c(x)`$ where $`D^c(x)`$ is familiar causal Green’s function.

VIII. APPENDIX. THE WICK ROTATION

Let us describe the above mentioned Wick rotation of Euclidean states in the previous Section, and compare it with the transition between Wightman and Schwinger functions.

We start from the basic formulae of the Fourier–Laplace transform.6 It is defined on Schwartz distributions, but we focus on the tempered ones.

Throughout, $`R_+^n`$ and $`\overline{}R_+^n`$ denote the subset of points of $`R^n`$ with strictly positive Cartesian coordinates and its closure, respectively. Let $`fS^{}(R^n)`$ be a tempered distribution and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(f)`$ the convex subset of points $`qR_n`$ such that

$$e^{qx}f(x)S^{}(R^n).$$
(52)
In particular, $`0\mathrm{\Gamma }(f)`$. Let $`\mathrm{Int}\mathrm{\Gamma }(f)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(f)`$ denote the interior and the boundary of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(f)`$, respectively.

The Fourier–Laplace (henceforth FL) transform of a tempered distribution $`fS^{}(R^n)`$ is said to be the tempered distribution

$$f^{FL}(p+iq)=(e^{qx}f(x))^F(p)=f(x)e^{i(p+iq)x}d^nxS^{}(R_n),$$
(53)
which is the Fourier transform of the distribution (52) depending on $`q`$ as parameters. One can also think of the FL transform (53) as being the Fourier transform with respect to the complex arguments $`k=p+iq`$.

If $`\mathrm{Int}\mathrm{\Gamma }(f)\mathrm{}`$, the FL transform $`f^{FL}(k)`$ is a holomorphic function of complex arguments $`k=p+iq`$ on the open tube $`R_n+i\mathrm{Int}\mathrm{\Gamma }(f)C_n`$ over $`\mathrm{Int}\mathrm{\Gamma }(f)`$. Moreover, for any compact subset $`Q\mathrm{Int}\mathrm{\Gamma }(f)`$, there exist strictly positive numbers $`A`$ and $`m`$, depending of $`Q`$ and $`f`$, such that

$$|f^{FL}(p+iq)|A(1+|p|)^m,pR_n,qQ.$$
(54)
The evaluation (54) is equivalent to the fact that the function $`h(p+iq)`$ defines a family of tempered distributions $`h_q(p)S^{}(R_n)`$ of the variables $`p`$ depending continuously on parameters $`qS`$.

Let us notice that, if $`0\mathrm{Int}\mathrm{\Gamma }(f)`$, then

$`f^{FL}(p+i0)=\underset{q0}{lim}f^{FL}(p+iq)`$
coincides with the Fourier transform $`f^F(p)`$ of $`f`$. The case of $`0\mathrm{Int}\mathrm{\Gamma }(f)`$ is more intricate. Let $`S`$ be a convex domain in $`R^n`$ such that $`0S`$, and let $`h(p+iq)`$ be a holomorphic function on the tube $`T^S`$ which defines a family of tempered distributions $`h_q(p)S^{}(R_n)`$, depending on parameters $`q`$. One says that $`h(p+iq)`$ has a generalized boundary value $`h_0(p)S^{}(R_n)`$ if, for any frustum $`K^rS\{0\}`$ of the cone $`KR_n`$ (i.e., $`K^r=\{qK:|q|r\}`$), one has

$`h_0(\psi (p))=\underset{|q|0,qK^r\{0\}}{lim}h_q(\psi (p))`$
for all functions $`\psi S(R_n)`$ of rapid decrease. Then the following assertion holds.

Proposition 1: Let $`fS^{}(R^n)`$, $`\mathrm{Int}\mathrm{\Gamma }(f)\mathrm{}`$ and $`0\mathrm{Int}\mathrm{\Gamma }(f)`$. Then a generalized boundary value of the FL transform $`f^{FL}(k)`$ in $`S^{}(R_n)`$ exists and coincides with the Fourier transform $`f^F(p)`$ of the distribution $`f`$.

Let us apply this result to the following important case. The support of a tempered distribution $`f`$ is defined as the complement of the maximal open subset $`U`$ where $`f`$ vanishes, i.e., $`f(\psi )=0`$ for all $`\psi S(R^n)`$ of support in $`U`$. Let $`fS^{}(R^n)`$ is of support in $`\overline{}R_+^n`$. Then $`\overline{}R_{n+}\mathrm{\Gamma }(f)`$, and the FL transform $`f^{FL}`$ is a holomorphic function on the tube over $`R_{n+}`$, while its generalized boundary value in $`S^{}(R_n)`$ is given by the equality

$`h_0(\psi (p))=\underset{|q|0,qR_{n+}}{lim}f_q^{FL}(\psi (p))=f^F(\psi (p)),\psi S(R_n).`$
Conversely, one can restore a tempered distribution $`f`$ of support in $`\overline{}R_+^n`$ from its FL transform $`h(k)=f^{FL}(k)`$ even if this function is known only on $`iR_{n+}`$. Indeed, the formulae

$`\stackrel{~}{h}(\varphi )={\displaystyle \underset{R_{n+}}{}}h(iq)\varphi (q)d_nq={\displaystyle \underset{R_{n+}}{}}d_nq{\displaystyle \underset{\overline{}R_+^n}{}}e^{qx}f(x)\varphi (q)d^nx=`$ (55)
$`{\displaystyle \underset{\overline{}R_+^n}{}}f(x)\widehat{\varphi }(x)d^nx,\varphi S(R_{n+}),`$
$`\widehat{\varphi }(x)={\displaystyle \underset{R_{n+}}{}}e^{qx}\varphi (q)d_nq,x\overline{}R_+^n,\widehat{\varphi }S(\overline{}R_+^n),`$ (56)
define a linear continuous functional $`\stackrel{~}{h}(q)=h(iq)`$ on the space $`S(R_{n+})`$. It is called the Laplace transform $`f^L(q)=f^{FL}(iq)`$ of a tempered distribution $`f`$.

Remark 6: Let us illustrate the restoration of a tempered distribution from the functional (55) in the case of $`n=1`$. Let $`fS^{}(\overline{}R_+)`$. Its FL transform reads

$$h(p+iq)=\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}e^{i(p+iq)x}f(x)dx,q>0.$$
(57)
Since $`h(p+iq)`$ (57) has the generalized boundary value $`h(p+i0)`$, the $`f`$ is reconstructed from $`\widehat{h}(z)=h(iz)`$ by the formulae

$$f(x)=\frac{1}{2\pi i}\underset{0i\mathrm{}}{\overset{0+i\mathrm{}}{}}e^{zx}\stackrel{~}{h}(z)dz,\stackrel{~}{h}(0ip)=f^F(p).$$
(58)
where

$`\stackrel{~}{h}(q)=h(iq)={\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}e^{qx}f(x)dx,q>0,`$
is the Laplace transform $`f^L`$ of $`f`$.

The image of the space $`S(R_{n+})`$ with respect to the mapping $`\varphi (q)\widehat{\varphi }(x)`$ (54) is dense in $`S(\overline{}R_+^n)`$. Then the family of seminorms $`\varphi _{k,m}^{}=\widehat{\varphi }_{k,m}`$, where $`._{k,m}`$ are seminorms (38) on $`S(R^n)`$, determines new coarsen topology on $`S(R_{n+})`$ such that the functional (55) remains continuous with respect to this topology. Then the following is proved.6

Theorem 2: The mappings (55) and (56) provide one-to-one correspondence between the Laplace transforms $`f^L(q)=f^{FL}(iq)`$ of tempered distributions $`fS^{}(\overline{}R_+^n)`$ and the elements of $`S^{}(R_{n+})`$ which are continuous with respect to the coarsen topology on $`S(R_{n+})`$.

This Theorem enables one both to establish the relation between Wightman and Schwinger functions and to define the above mentioned Wick rotation of Euclidean states

We here address Wightman and Schwinger functions in axiomatic field theory in order to show the difference between Schwinger functions and the above states of Euclidean fields.

Recall that Wightman functions are defined as tempered distributions $`W_nS^{}(R^{4n})`$ on the Minkowski space which obey the Garding–Wightman axioms of axiomatic field theory.6,19,20 Let us mention the Poincaré covariance axiom, the spectrum condition and the locality condition.

Due to the translation covariance of Wightman functions $`W_n`$, there exist tempered distributions $`w_nS^{}(R^{4n4})`$ such that

$$W_n(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n)=w_n(x_1x_2,\mathrm{},x_{n1}x_n).$$
(59)
The spectrum condition implies that the Fourier transform $`w_n^F`$ of the distributions $`w_n`$ (59) are of support in the closed forward light cone $`\overline{V}_+`$ in the momentum Minkowski space $`R_4`$. It follows that the Wightman function $`w_n`$ is a generalized boundary value in $`S^{}(R^{4n4})`$ of the function $`(w_n^F)^{FL}`$, which is the FL transform of the function $`w_n^F`$ with respect to variables $`p_0^i`$ and which is holomorphic on the tube $`(R^4+iV_{})^{n1}C^{4n}`$. Accordingly, $`W_n(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n)`$ is a generalized boundary value in $`S^{}(R^{4n})`$ of a function $`W_n(z_1,\mathrm{},z_n)`$, holomorphic on the tube

$`\{z_i:\mathrm{Im}(z_{i+1}z_i)V_{},\mathrm{Re}z_iR^4\}.`$
In accordance with the Lorentz covariance, the Wightman functions admit an analytic continuation onto a wider domain in $`C^{4n}`$, called the extended forward tube. Furthermore, the locality condition implies that they are symmetric on this domain.

From now on, let us denote by $`X`$ the space $`R^4`$ associated to the real subspace of $`C^4`$ and by $`Y`$ the space $`R^4`$, coordinated by $`(y^0,y^{1,2,3})`$ and associated to the subspace $`\stackrel{~}{Y}`$ of $`C^4`$ whose points possess the coordinates $`(iy^0,y^{1,2,3})`$. If $`X`$ is the Minkowski space, then one can think of $`Y`$ as being its Euclidean partner.

Let us consider the subset $`\stackrel{~}{Y}_{}^n\stackrel{~}{Y}C^{4n}`$ which consists of the points $`(z_1,\mathrm{},z_n)`$ such that $`z_iz_j`$. It belongs the domain of analiticity of the Wightman function $`W_n(z_1,\mathrm{},z_n)`$, whose restriction to $`\stackrel{~}{Y}_{}^n`$ defines the symmetric function

$`S_n(y_1,\mathrm{},y_n)=W_n(z_1,\mathrm{},z_n),z_i=(iy_i^0,y_i^{1,2,3}),`$
on $`Y_{}^n`$. It is called the Schwinger function. On the domain $`Y_<^n`$ of points $`(y_1,\mathrm{},y_n)`$ such that $`0<y_1^0<\mathrm{}<y_n^0`$, the Schwinger function takes the form

$$S_n(y_1,\mathrm{},y_n)=s_n(y_1y_2,\mathrm{},y_{n1}y_n),$$
(60)
where $`s_n`$ is an element of the space $`S^{}(Y_{}^{n1})`$ which is continuous with respect to the coarsen topology on $`S(Y_{}^{n1})`$. Consequently, in accordance with Theorem 1 and by virtue of the formula (55), the Schwinger function $`s_n`$ (60) can be represented as

$`s_n(y_1y_2,\mathrm{},y_{n1}y_n)=`$ (61)
$`{\displaystyle \mathrm{exp}[p_0^j(y_j^0y_{j+1}^0)i\underset{k=1}{\overset{3}{}}p_k^j(y_j^ky_{j+1}^k)]w_n^F(p^1,\mathrm{},p^n)d_4p^1\mathrm{}d_4p^{n1}},`$
where $`w_n^FS^{}(\overline{}R_{n+})`$ is the Fourier transform of the Wightman function $`w_n`$, seen as an element of $`S^{}(R_{n+})`$ of support in the subset $`p_0^i0`$. The formula (61) enables one to restore the Wightman functions on the Minkowski from the Schwinger functions on the Euclidean space.19,20

For instance, let us consider Wightman and Schwinger functions $`w_2`$ and $`s_2`$ for a massive scalar field. The Schwinger one reads

$`s_2(y_1y_2)={\displaystyle \frac{e^{ip(y_1y_2)}}{q^2+m^2}d_4q},`$
where $`q^2`$ is the Euclidean square and $`(y_1^0y_2^0)<0`$. It coincides with the distribution $`w(y_1y_2)`$ (51) restricted to the domain $`(y_1^0y_2^0)<0`$. Let us omit a computation under the sign of spatial integrals, and let us introduce the notation $`y^0=y_1^0y_2^0`$ and

$`M=(\stackrel{}{𝑞}^2+m^2)^{1/2}.`$
Then bearing in mind the formula (58), we obtain

$`s_2(y^0)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{e^{iq_0y^0}}{p_0^2+M^2}}dp_0={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2M}}e^{My^0},y^0<0,`$
$`w_2(p_0)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi i}}{\displaystyle \underset{0i\mathrm{}}{\overset{0+i\mathrm{}}{}}}e^{p_0y^0}s_2(y^0)dy^0={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi i}}{\displaystyle \underset{0i\mathrm{}}{\overset{0+i\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2M}}e^{y^0(Mp_0)}dy^0=`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2M}}e^{ix(Mp_0)}dx={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2M}}\delta (p_0M)=\delta (p_0^2M^2),p_0<0,x=iy^0.`$
It follows that $`w_2(p)`$ is the Fourier transform of the Wightman function (48).

Turn now to the above mentioned Wick rotation of Green’s functions of Euclidean quantum fields to causal forms on the Minkowski space.

Since the Minkowski space $`X`$ and its Euclidean partner $`Y`$ in $`C^4`$ have the same spatial subspace, we further omit the dependence on spatial coordinates. Therefore, let us consider the complex plane $`C^1=XiZ`$ of the time $`x`$ and the Euclidean time $`z`$ and the complex plane $`C_1=PiQ`$ of the associated momentum coordinates $`p`$ and $`q`$.

Let $`W(q)S^{}(Q)`$ be a tempered distribution such that

$$W=W_++W_{},W_+S^{}(\overline{Q}_+),W_{}S^{}(\overline{Q}_{}).$$
(62)
For instance, $`W(q)`$ is an ordinary function at $`0`$. For every test function $`\psi _+S(X_+)`$, we have

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle \underset{\overline{Q}_+}{}}W(q)\widehat{\psi }_+(q)dq={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle \underset{\overline{Q}_+}{}}dq{\displaystyle \underset{X_+}{}}dx[W(q)\mathrm{exp}(qx)\psi _+(x)]=`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(2\pi )^2}}{\displaystyle \underset{\overline{Q}_+}{}}dq{\displaystyle \underset{P}{}}dp{\displaystyle \underset{X_+}{}}dx[W(q)\psi _+^F(p)\mathrm{exp}(ipxqx)]=`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{i}{(2\pi )^2}}{\displaystyle \underset{\overline{Q}_+}{}}dq{\displaystyle \underset{P}{}}dp[W(q){\displaystyle \frac{\psi _+^F(p)}{piq}}]={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle \underset{\overline{Q}_+}{}}W(q)\psi _+^L(iq)dq,`$ (63)
due to the fact that the FL transform $`\psi _+^{FL}(p+iq)`$ of the function $`\psi _+S(X_+)S^{}(X_+)`$ exists and that it is holomorphic on the tube $`P+iQ_+,Q_+Q_{\varphi _+}`$. Moreover, $`\psi _+^{FL}(p+i0)=\varphi _+^F(k)`$, and the function $`\widehat{\psi }_+(q)=\psi _+^{FL}(q)`$ can be regarded as the Wick rotation of the test function $`\psi _+(x)`$. The equality (63) can be brought into the form

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle \underset{\overline{Q}_+}{}}W(q)\widehat{\psi }_+(q)dq={\displaystyle \underset{X_+}{}}\widehat{W}_+(x)\psi _+(x)dx,`$ (64)
$`\widehat{W}_+(x)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle \underset{\overline{Q}_+}{}}\mathrm{exp}(qx)W(q)dq,xX_+.`$
It associates to a distribution $`W(q)S^{}(Q)`$ the distribution $`\widehat{W}_+(x)S^{}(X_+)`$, continuous with respect to the coarsen topology on $`S(X_+)`$.

For every test function $`\psi _{}S(X_{})`$, the similar relations

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle \underset{\overline{Q}_{}}{}}W(q)\widehat{\varphi }_{}(q)dq={\displaystyle \underset{X_{}}{}}\widehat{W}_{}(x)\varphi _{}(x)dx,`$ (65)
$`\widehat{W}_{}(x)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle \underset{\overline{Q}_{}}{}}\mathrm{exp}(qx)W(q)dq,xX_{},`$
hold. Combining (64) and (65), we obtain

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle \underset{Q}{}}W(q)\widehat{\psi }(q)dq={\displaystyle \underset{X}{}}\widehat{W}(x)\psi (x)dx,`$ (66)
$`\widehat{\psi }=\widehat{\psi }_++\widehat{\psi }_{},\psi =\psi _++\psi _{},`$
where $`\widehat{W}(x)`$ is a linear functional on functions $`\psi S(X)`$, which together with all derivatives vanish at $`x=0`$. One can think of $`\widehat{W}(x)`$ as being the Wick rotation of the distribution (62). One should additionally define $`\widehat{W}`$ at the point $`x=0`$ in order to make it to a functional on the whole space $`S(X)`$. This is the well-known ambiguity of chronological forms in quantum field theory.


format: text

text:
# Dark breathers in Klein-Gordon lattices. Band analysis of their stability properties.

## 1 Introduction

It is well known that intrinsic localized modes (also called *discrete breathers*) are exact, periodic and localized solutions that can be obtained in a large variety of nonlinear discrete systems. They are becoming a new paradigm for understanding many aspects of the behaviour of discrete systems (for a review, see, e.g., ). Mackay and Aubry  proved analytically their existence and the conditions for their stability , under rather general hypotheses. Since then, many accurate numerical methods have been used to obtain breathers as exact numerical solutions up to machine precision , which permits the analysis of breathers properties. Thus, for a given model, it is possible to perform a numerical study of the ranges of existence and stability in the parameters space.

The term discrete breather is usually understood as a localized, periodic solution in a discrete system, but with a small number of excited oscillators. When only one oscillator has large amplitude it is known as *one–site breather*. When more than one oscillator have large amplitude, the term *multibreather* is used. ¿Hereafter, we will use the term *bright breather* when there are one or a few oscillators vibrating with large amplitude whereas the rest of them oscillate with small amplitude.

However, localization can be manifested in a different way, which consists of all the oscillators vibrating with large amplitude except one or a few of them oscillating with very small amplitude. The natural name for these entities is dark breathers, analogously to the well known term dark solitons. For the nonlinear Schrödinger equations, which governs both nonlinear optical modes in fibers and dilute Bose–Einstein condensates, two different kinds of scalar soliton solutions, bright and dark, are known . Thus, a dark soliton is a solution which has a point with zero amplitude, that is, a soliton defining the absence of matter or energy. Since then, many papers have appeared referring to theoretical and experimental results referred to this entities. The effects of discreteness on the properties and propagation dynamics of dark solitons has been analyzed in the discrete nonlinear Schrödinger equation (DNLS), which is thought to be a good approximation for frequencies close to the linear frequency , the last one, also with numerics on actual Klein–Gordon systems. It is worth remarking that some examples of dark localization have been observed experimentally , and some structural properties have been analyzed in .

In this paper, we perform an analysis of the existence and stability of dark breathers for different models based on the properties of the band structure of the Newton operator. We have found that there exist stable dark breathers for a variety of one-dimensional Klein-Gordon lattices. For soft on-site potentials, dark breathers are stable only for repulsive dispersive interaction and for hard on–site potentials the stability founded is for attractive interaction. This results agree with the ones that have been found for the DNLS approximation in  as a consequence of the modulational instability of the constant amplitude background.

It is not clear in which physical systems dark breathers can play a significant role. A possibility is DNA, we conjecture that dark breathers can occur in DNA chains at high temperature, close to thermal denaturation . In this situation, a great number of molecules are vibrating with high amplitude, whereas a few of them could be almost at rest.

This paper is organized as follows: In section 2, we describe the proposed Klein-Gordon models and the resulting evolution equations. In Section 3, we expose the tools for calculating dark breathers, and we explicitly show that the theorem of existence of Mackay and Aubry gives an affirmative answer to the question of existence of dark breathers. In section 4, we expose the method for the analysis of the linear stability of breather solutions using both the Floquet multipliers and Aubry band’s theory. In Section 5, we investigate the stability of dark breathers for chains with soft on-site potential and attractive interactions between the particles. We show that it is not possible to obtain stable dark breathers for every value of the coupling parameter. This negative result suggested us to consider the study of chains with repulsive interactions between particles. Our results confirm that in this case there exist stable dark breathers up to significant values of the coupling. In Section 6, lattices with hard on-site potentials are considered. For these cases, dark breathers are stable provided that particles interact through an attractive potential. Dark breathers become unstable through subharmonic, harmonic and oscillatory bifurcations depending on the type of the on–site potential. In section 7, we show that both subharmonic and oscillatory bifurcations do not disappear in infinite systems. The paper concludes with a short summary of the main results and some prospective in Section 9.

## 2 Models

We study one–dimensional, anharmonic, Hamiltonian lattices of the Klein–Gordon type. The Hamiltonian is given by

$$H=\underset{n}{}(\frac{1}{2}\dot{u}_n^2+V(u_n))+\epsilon W(u)$$
(1)
where $`u_n`$ are the coordinates of the oscillators referred to their equilibrium positions; $`V(u_n)`$ represents the on–site potential; $`u`$ represents the set of variables $`\{u_n\}`$; and $`\epsilon W(u)`$ represents the coupling potential, with $`\epsilon `$ being a parameter that describes the strength of the coupling. We suppose initially that $`\epsilon `$ is positive and $`W(u)`$ is given by

$$W(u)=\frac{1}{2}\underset{n}{}(u_{n+1}u_n)^2.$$
(2)
This interaction is attractive because a nonzero value of a variable tends to increase the values of the neighbouring variables with the same sign. The on–site potential is given by

$$V(u_n)=\frac{1}{2}\omega _0^2u_n^2+\varphi (u_n)$$
(3)
with $`\varphi (u_n)`$ being the anharmonic part of the potential. The variables are scaled so that all the particles in the lattice have mass unity and the linear frequency $`\omega _0=1`$. The dynamical equations for this system are

$$\ddot{u}_n+\omega _0^2u_n+\varphi ^{}(u_n)+\epsilon (2u_nu_{n1}u_{n+1})=0.$$
(4)
These equations do not have analytical solutions and must be solved numerically. The solutions depend obviously on the chosen potentials $`V(u_n)`$ and $`W(u)`$. We will analyze the system for several $`V(u_n)`$ and coupling interactions $`W(u)`$. These models appear in many physical systems, a known example, with a suitable on-site potential $`V(u_n)`$ is the Peyrard–Bishop model for DNA , where the variables $`u_n`$ represent the stretching of the base pairs.

## 3 Dark breathers existence

We look for spatially localized, time–reversible and time–periodic solutions of equations (4) with a given frequency $`\omega _b`$ and a continuous second derivative. Therefore, the functions $`u_n(t)`$ can be obtained up to machine precision by truncated Fourier series of the form

$$u_n(t)=z_0+\underset{k=1}{\overset{k=k_m}{}}2z_n^k\mathrm{cos}(k\omega _\mathrm{b}t).$$
(5)
We distinguish three types of solutions of the isolated oscillators that can be coded in the following way: $`\sigma _n=0`$ for an oscillator at rest $`(u_n(t)=0,t)`$; $`\sigma _n=+1`$ for an excited oscillator with frequency $`\omega _\mathrm{b}`$ and $`u_n(0)>0`$; finally, $`\sigma _n=1`$ for an excited oscillator with frequency $`\omega _\mathrm{b}`$ and $`u_n(0)<0`$. Time–reversible solutions of the whole system at $`\epsilon =0`$ (anticontinuous limit), can be referred to by a coding sequence $`\sigma =\{\sigma _n\}`$. Therefore, $`\sigma =\{0,\mathrm{},0,1,0,\mathrm{},0\}`$ corresponds to a one–site breather. Other codes can be $`\sigma =\{0,\mathrm{},0,1,1,0,\mathrm{},0\}`$ for a symmetric two–site breather, and $`\sigma =\{1,\mathrm{},1,0,1,\mathrm{},1\}`$ for a one–site dark breather (this case correspond to the background in phase).

The method for calculating dark breathers is based on the general methods for obtaining breathers .

The existence theorem by MacKay and Aubry  establishes that every solution at the anticontinuous limit, corresponding to a code sequence can be continued up to a certain value of the coupling parameter $`\epsilon _c0`$, as long as the following two hypotheses are fulfilled:

* The orbits of the uncoupled excited oscillators with the chosen frequency have to be such that $`\frac{\omega _\mathrm{b}}{I}0`$, where $`I=p𝑑q`$ is the action variable of the oscillator. That is, the oscillator is truly nonlinear at that frequency.
* The frequency of the orbit must be such that $`p\omega _b\omega _0`$ for any integer $`p`$. That is, none of the breather harmonics coincide with the linear frequency $`\omega _0`$.

Therefore, this theorem gives an immediate answer to the question of the existence of dark breathers as they are obtained by continuation of the configuration mentioned above $`\sigma =\{1,\mathrm{},1,0,1,\mathrm{},1\}`$ . However, the theorem does not give an estimate for the value of the coupling $`\epsilon _c`$ where the dark breather ceases to exist. Dark breathers have to be calculated numerically for each value of the coupling parameter, also it is worth investigating whether dark breathers are stable or not, and if they are stable, up to which value of the coupling parameter.

## 4 Dark breathers stability

The stability analysis of a given breather solution can be performed numerically . The linearized equations corresponding to perturbations of this solution are

$$\ddot{\xi }_n+\omega _0^2\xi _n+\varphi ^{\prime \prime }(u_n)\xi _n+\epsilon (2\xi _n\xi _{n1}\xi _{n+1})=0$$
(6)
where $`\xi =\{\xi _n(t)\}`$ represents a small perturbation of the solution of the dynamical equations, $`u(t)=\{u_n(t)\}`$. The linear stability of these solutions can be studied by finding the eigenvalues of the Floquet matrix $`_0`$, called Floquet multipliers. The Floquet matrix transforms the column matrix with elements given by $`\xi _n(0)`$ and $`\pi (0)\dot{\xi }_n(0)`$ into the corresponding column matrix with elements $`\xi _n(T_b)`$ and $`\pi (T_b)\dot{\xi }_n(T_b)`$ for $`n=1\mathrm{}m`$ and $`T_b=2\pi /\omega _\mathrm{b}`$, that is

$$\left(\begin{array}{c}\{\xi _n(T_b)\}\\ \{\pi _n(T_b)\}\end{array}\right)=_0\left(\begin{array}{c}\{\xi _n(0)\}\\ \{\pi _n(0)\}\end{array}\right)$$
(7)
The Floquet matrix $`_0`$ can be obtained numerically by integrating equations (6) a breather period. In order to get accurate results , we have used a symplectic integrator. Equation (6) can be written as an eigenvalue equation

$$(𝒩(u(t),\epsilon )\xi )_n=E\xi _n$$
(8)
where $`𝒩(u(t),\epsilon )\}`$ is called the Newton operator. The solutions of equation (6) can be described as the eigenfunctions of $`𝒩`$ for $`E=0`$. The fact that the linearized system is Hamiltonian and real implies that the Floquet operator is a real and symplectic operator. The consequence is that if $`\lambda `$ is an eigenvalue, then $`1/\lambda `$, $`\lambda ^{}`$ and $`1/\lambda ^{}`$ are also eigenvalues, and therefore a necessary condition for linear stability is that every eigenvalue has modulus one, that is, they are located at the unit circle in the complex plane. Besides, there is always a double eigenvalue at $`1+0i`$ from the fact that the derivative $`\{\dot{u}_n(t)\}`$ is always a solution of (8) with $`E=0`$.

The Floquet multipliers at the anticontinuous limit $`(\epsilon =0)`$ can be easily obtained for bright and dark breathers. If an oscillator at rest is considered, equation (6) becomes

$$\ddot{\xi }_n+\omega _0^2\xi _n=0$$
(9)
with solution $`\xi (t)=\xi _0e^{i\omega _0t}`$, and therefore, the corresponding eigenvalue of $`_0`$ is $`\lambda =\mathrm{exp}(\mathrm{i2}\pi \omega _0/\omega _b)`$. If an oscillator is excited, equation (6) becomes

$$\ddot{\xi }_n+\omega _0^2\xi _n+\varphi ^{\prime \prime }(u_n)\xi _n=0.$$
(10)
This equation has $`\dot{u}_n(t)`$ as a solution, which is periodic and therefore with Floquet multiplier $`\lambda =1`$. Thus, for a bright breather, we have, taking into account their multiplicity, $`2(N1)`$ eigenvalues corresponding to the rest oscillators at $`\mathrm{exp}(\pm \mathrm{i2}\pi \omega _0/\omega _b)`$ and two at $`+1`$ corresponding to the excited one. For a dark breather at the anticontinuous limit there are $`2(N1)`$ eigenvalues at $`+1`$, and a couple of conjugate eigenvalues at $`\mathrm{exp}(\pm \mathrm{i2}\pi \omega _0/\omega _b)`$.

Figure 1 shows the Floquet multipliers for both a bright and a dark breather at the anti-continuous limit $`\epsilon =0`$.

When the coupling $`\epsilon `$ is switched on, these eigenvalues move on the complex plane as continuous functions of $`\epsilon `$, and an instability can be produced only in three different ways  : (a) a couple of conjugate eigenvalues reaches the value $`1+0\mathrm{i}`$ $`(\theta =0)`$ and leaves the unit circle along the real line (harmonic bifurcation); (b) a couple of conjugate eigenvalues reaches $`1`$ $`(\theta =\pm \pi )`$ and leaves the unit circle along the real line (subharmonic bifurcation); (c) two pairs of conjugate eigenvalues collide at two conjugate points on the unit circle and leave it (Krein crunch or oscillatory bifurcation). It must be remembered that a bifurcation involving two eigenvalues with the same sign of the Krein signature $`\kappa (\theta )=\mathrm{sign}(\mathrm{i}(\dot{\xi }\xi ^{}\dot{\xi }^{}\xi ))`$ is not possible .

The basic features of the Floquet multipliers at the anti-continuous limit for bright and dark breathers are the following:

* For bright breathers, there are $`N1`$ Floquet multipliers corresponding to the oscillators at rest. They are degenerated at $`\theta =\pm 2\pi \omega _0/\omega _\mathrm{b})`$. The eigenvalues at $`0<\theta <\pi `$ have $`\kappa >0`$ while the ones at $`\pi <\theta <0`$ have $`\kappa <0`$. If $`\theta =0`$ or $`\pi `$ $`\kappa =0`$. In addition, there are two eigenvalues at $`1+0\mathrm{i}`$, corresponding to the excited oscillator.
* For dark breathers, there are two eigenvalues at $`\theta =\pm 2\pi \omega _0/\omega _\mathrm{b}`$ corresponding to the oscillator at rest, and there are $`2(N1)`$ eigenvalues at $`1+0\mathrm{i}`$ corresponding to the excited oscillators.

When the coupling is switched on, the evolution of the Floquet multipliers for bright breathers is rather different from the case of dark breathers:

* For a bright breather, the Floquet eigenvalues corresponding to the oscillators at rest lose their degeneracy and expand on two bands of eigenvalues, called the phonon bands. Their corresponding eigenmodes are extended. These two bands move on the unit circle and eventually cross each other. In this case, eigenvalues of different Krein signature can collide and abandon the unit circle through subharmonic or oscillatory bifurcations. In addition, some eigenvalues can abandon the bands and become localized . A pair of complex conjugate eigenvalues can collide at $`1+0\mathrm{i}`$ leading to a harmonic bifurcation or collide with the phonon band through a oscillatory bifurcation.
* For a dark breather, the eigenvalues corresponding to the excited oscillators, with extended phonon eigenmodes, can either depart from the unit circle along the real axis (harmonic bifurcation) or move along the unit circle. In the last case, they can collide with the eigenvalue corresponding to the rest oscillator (with localized eigenmode) through a Krein crunch. Eventually, if the on-site potential is non-symmetric, the eigenvalues collide at $`1+0\mathrm{i}`$, leading to a cascade of subharmonic bifurcations.

The study of breather stability can be complemented by means of Aubry’s band theory . It consists in studying the linearized system (8) for $`E0`$, with the corresponding family of Floquet operators $`_E`$. For each operator $`_E`$ there are $`2\times N`$ Floquet multipliers. A Floquet multiplier can be written as $`\lambda =\mathrm{exp}(\mathrm{i}\theta )`$. $`\theta `$ is called the Floquet argument. If $`\theta `$ is real then $`|\mathrm{exp}(\mathrm{i}\theta )|=1`$ and the corresponding eigenfunction of (8) is bounded and corresponds to a stability mode; if $`\theta `$ is complex, it corresponds to an instability mode. The set of points $`(\theta ,E)`$, with $`\theta `$ real, has a band structure. The breather is stable if there are $`2\times N`$ band intersections (including tangent points with their multiplicity) with the axis $`E=0`$. The bands are reduced to the first Brillouin zone $`(\pi ,\pi ]`$ and are symmetric with respect to the axis $`\theta =0`$. The fact that $`_0`$ has always a double $`+1`$ eigenvalue corresponding to the phase mode $`\dot{u}(t)`$ manifests as a band which is tangent to the $`E=0`$ axis.

For the uncoupled system, the structure of the stable and unstable bands is completely explained by the theory (although it has to be calculated numerically). For the coupled system, such structure is expected to change in a continuous way in terms of the parameter $`\epsilon `$. We will use band theory, to predict the evolution of the eigenvalues of $`_0`$, with a model parameter is changed.

At zero coupling, the bands corresponding to the oscillators at rest can be analytically calculated from the equation:

$$\ddot{\xi }_n+\omega _0^2\xi _n=E\xi _n,$$
(11)
they are given by $`E=\omega _0^2\omega _b^2\theta ^2/(2\pi )^2`$. The bands corresponding to the $`N1`$ excited oscillators are a deformation of the band corresponding to the oscillator at rest (which will be called *rest bands*) and one of them must be tangent to $`E=0`$ axis at $`(\theta ,E)=(0,0)`$ . The bands are bounded from above and numbered starting from the top, being the 0th band the first one. If the on–site potential is soft the 1st band will be tangent to the $`E=0`$ axis at $`(0,0)`$ with positive curvature. If the on–site potential is hard, the tangent band at $`(0,0)`$ will be the 2nd one, and will have negative curvature . At the anticontinuous limit the band scheme of a bright and a dark breather are similar, differing only in the number of bands that corresponds to the oscillators at rest or to the excited oscillators (*excited bands*) as it is shown in Figures 2 and 3.

The bright breather has only one band tangent to the axis $`E=0`$ and that band cannot leave this position because, when the coupling is switched on, there must be a tangent band corresponding to the phase mode. The situation is totally different for a dark breather: there are $`N1`$ bands tangent to the $`E=0`$ axis and $`N2`$ of them can move without any restriction. If some of them move upwards, the intersection points disappear, which implies that some Floquet arguments become complex or, equivalently, that some Floquet multipliers abandon the unit circle and the breather becomes unstable.

## 5 Dark breathers with soft on–site potentials

Let us consider a model with a cubic on–site potential given by

$$V(u_n)=\frac{1}{2}\omega _0^2u_n^2\frac{1}{3}u_n^3,$$
(12)
that is, $`\varphi ^{}(u_n)=u_n^2`$ in the dynamical equations (4). Figure 4 represents the Floquet multipliers for $`\epsilon 0`$. The left side of the figure shows the Floquet multipliers of a stable bright breather for a coupling $`\epsilon =0.1`$. However, as can be seen at the right side of the figure, the dark breather experiences a multiple harmonic bifurcation as soon as the coupling is switched on. Therefore, for a lattice with a cubic on–site potential and attractive interaction, dark breathers exist but they are unstable for every value of the coupling.

This problem can be investigated by means of Aubry’s band analysis. It has given us an explanation for the previous behaviour and also a guide for modifying the model in order to obtain stable dark breathers. The bands at zero coupling can be seen in Figure 5.

As it is explained above and shown in Figure 4, the cubic dark breather becomes unstable for any attractive coupling $`\epsilon >0`$ through harmonic bifurcations. This is easily understood in terms of the band structure: $`N2`$ tangent bands move upwards, which is mathematically demonstrated in Ref. . They lose the tangent points with the $`E=0`$ axis as Figure 6 shows. Therefore, in order that the breather can be stable all the excited bands except one have to move downwards, transforming the points tangent to the $`E=0`$ axis into intersection points. A straightforward alternative is to change the sign of the parameter $`\epsilon `$ in (1). This is equivalent to using a dipole-dipole coupling potential $`W(u)=_nu_{n+1}u_n`$, i.e., the Hamiltonian can be written as:

$$H=\underset{n}{}\left(\frac{1}{2}\dot{u}_n^2+\frac{1}{2}\omega _0^2u_n^2\frac{1}{3}u_n^3+\frac{1}{2}\epsilon (u_{n+1}u_n)\right)$$
(13)
with $`\epsilon >0`$. This repulsive interaction has been used recently to model DNA–related models . The dynamical equations with repulsive interaction and cubic on–site potential become:

$$\ddot{u}_n+\omega _0^2u_nu_n^2+\epsilon (u_{n1}+u_{n+1})=0,$$
(14)
and the linear stability equations become:

$$\ddot{\xi }_n+\omega _0^2\xi _n\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}u_n\xi _n+\epsilon (\xi _{n1}+\xi _{n+1})=0.$$
(15)
Figure 7 displays the band structure at $`\epsilon =0.015`$ for this system. The $`N2`$ bands that are allowed to move will perform a downwards movement and therefore the breather is stable.

A further increase of $`\epsilon `$ leads to Krein crunches. They are caused by the mixing of the rest bands and the excited bands, that produces “wiggles” in the excited bands and gaps appears between them . When these bands move downwards and the “wiggles” cross the $`E=0`$ axis, intersection points are lost but recovered when the coupling increases. It manifests as the appearance of “instability bubbles”. These instabilities depend on the size of the system, as will be shown in section 7. The system will eventually become unstable through a cascade of subharmonic bifurcations when the lower excited band goes below the $`E=0`$ axis, losing the intersection points at $`\theta =\pm \pi `$ (see figure 8).

We have obtained dark breathers for systems with cubic on–site potential and attractive or repulsive interaction even though dark breathers with attractive coupling are not stable. Figure 9 shows two different examples of dark breathers for this two types of coupling. Notice that the oscillator with small amplitude is in phase with its neighbours when the system is unstable (left) while is in anti–phase when it is stable (right).

This type of behaviour is general for other soft on–site potentials as it can be obtained using, for example, the Morse potential given by

$$V(u_n)=D(\mathrm{exp}(bu_n)1)^2.$$
(16)
For this system, dark breathers maintain their stability until the coupling parameter reaches the value $`\epsilon =0.024`$. From this value Krein bifurcations appear. These bifurcation are harmless in the sense that they preserve the dark localization, but the breather becomes quasiperiodic with a superimposed frequency to the breather one. For $`\epsilon >0.033`$, the system becomes unstable due to subharmonic bifurcations. Figure 10 shows this behaviour in terms of the corresponding Floquet multipliers for two different values of the coupling. With this potential, it has been described  that for values of the $`\omega _\mathrm{b}`$ close to the linear frequency $`\omega _0`$ (in fact, slightly above it), oscillatory instabilities can bring about the movement of dark breathers, when the corresponding eigenvalue is asymmetric and localized. It does not happen for frequencies far enough of $`\omega _0`$ as the ones of the order we present here.

An interesting variation of this scheme occurs if we consider symmetric on–site potentials as the quartic soft potential given by

$$V(u_n)=\frac{1}{2}\omega _0^2u_n^2\frac{1}{4}u_n^4.$$
(17)
In this case the potential is symmetric and no subharmonic bifurcations at $`\lambda =\pm 1`$ occur because the bands are gapless at $`\theta =\pm \pi `$. This characteristic enlarges the stability range (see Figure 11). The system eventually becomes unstable (apart from the reentrant instabilities due to Krein crunches) through harmonic bifurcations.

## 6 Dark breathers with hard on–site potentials

The band scheme of a system with hard on–site potential at $`\epsilon =0`$ is shown in Figure 3. There are $`N1`$ bands tangent to the axis $`E=0`$. It is clear that the breather will remain stable provided that the tangent bands keep the intersection points when the degeneracy is raised with $`\epsilon 0`$. In this system it means that the $`N2`$ bands that can move will perform an upwards movement. Therefore, the dark breather will be stable with an attractive coupling potential. We have used for the numerics the quartic hard on–site potential, that is

$$V(u_n)=\frac{1}{2}\omega _0^2u_n^2+\frac{1}{4}u_n^4.$$
(18)
The Hamiltonian is then

$$H=\underset{n}{}\left(\frac{1}{2}\dot{u}_n^2+\frac{1}{2}\omega _0^2u_n^2+\frac{1}{3}u_n^3+\frac{1}{2}\epsilon (u_{n+1}u_n)^2\right)$$
(19)
Figure 12 shows that at $`\epsilon =0.01`$ the tangent bands have moved upwards and, therefore, the stability of the system is maintained. The system loses its stability at $`\epsilon =0.022`$ where a harmonic bifurcation appears. The instability mode, shown in 14 with its multipliers, is an asymmetric extended one. Simulations done perturbing with it the dark breather give rise to an small oscillation with both sides of the chain out off phase, superimposed to the dark breather one, but the darkness is preserved. After that, there are Krein crunches due to the bands mixing with the usual properties.

## 7 Finite size effects

This final section is dedicated to comment some preliminary results relative to the finite size effects on instability of dark breathers. Important differences appear with respect to the case of bright breathers .

In the case of bright breathers, there are two kinds of size–dependent bifurcations. The origin of them relies on the nature of the localization of the colliding eigenvalues. If the colliding eigenvalues are extended, there appear “instability bubbles”, i.e. the Floquet eigenvalues abandon the unit circle after the collision but return afterwards. These bifurcations disappear when the system is infinite. Alternatively, a localized eigenvalues can collide with a band of extended eigenvalues. In this case, the instability bubbles also occur but they persist even though the system is infinite.

In order to study the case of dark breathers, we have chosen a Morse on–site potential with repulsive interaction. As a result of this analysis, the collision of extended eigenvalues always implies a cascade of subharmonic bifurcations (see section 4) independently of the size of the system. It is due to the fact that they are due to excited bands, whose Floquet arguments belong to the first Brillouin zone, losing intersections at $`\theta =\pi `$. It is different from the case of bright breathers where this kind of instabilities are due to modes corresponding to oscillators at rest and the bands must be reduced to the first Brillouin zone.

Also, an eigenvalue corresponding to an extended mode can collide with a localized mode. In this case, the rest (localized mode) band and the excited (extended modes) bands mix (see Figures 15). There appear “wiggles” that imply the opening of gaps in the band scheme, which are the origin of the instability bubbles. However, when the size of the system is increased, the wiggles widen until they occupy almost the width of the quasi-continuous extended mode bands. This fact implies that, although the instability bubbles disappear, the Krein crunches are unavoidable (see Figure 16). Nevertheless, the breathers are robust despite of the existence of these instabilities.

## 8 Dark breathers stability in dissipative systems

There appear some important differences in the study of the stability of dark breathers in dissipative systems with respect to the Hamiltonian case.

In order to perform this study, we start from the dissipative Frenkel–Kontorova model :

$$\ddot{u}_n+\gamma \dot{u}_n+V^{}(u_n)+\epsilon (2u_nu_{n+1}u_{n1})=F\mathrm{sin}\omega _\mathrm{b}t.$$
(20)
where $`\gamma `$ is a damping parameter and $`F`$ the amplitude of an external force.

In the anticontinuous limit, there are no band tangent to the $`E=0`$-axis (figure 17a). It implies that, when the coupling is introduced, there are no losing of intersections of the bands with independence of the sign of the coupling constant ($`\epsilon `$). Furthermore, the band corresponding to the oscillator at rest do not mix with the band of the background and oscillatory instabilities do not appear. These phenomena are shown in figure 17.

## 9 Conclusions

In this paper we have explored the existence and stability of dark breathers in one–dimensional Klein–Gordon models, for frequencies far enough from the linear frequencies to the DNLS approximation be justified . We have found stable dark breathers in several types of them. For systems with soft on–site potential, there are no stable dark breathers if the coupling between particles is attractive, but with a repulsive coupling the stability is assured for fairly high values of the coupling parameter $`\epsilon `$. As $`\epsilon `$ increases instability bifurcations due to Krein crunches take place as a consequence of the band mixing between the rest oscillator band and the dark background. Eventually, the system experiences subharmonic bifurcations at $`1`$ that make the breather unstable. If the soft on–site potential is symmetric the subharmonic bifurcations are avoided and the final instability is caused by harmonic bifurcations. For systems with hard on–site potentials, the situation is reversed and the dark breathers are stable with attractive coupling and unstable with repulsive one. They experience harmonic bifurcations at $`+1`$ apart from the Krein crunches. An analysis of larger systems shows that these bifurcations persist even though the system is infinite. Dissipative systems are, however, stable for both types of coupling.

We are now on the project of performing a wider study of dark breathers in dissipative systems. Another interesting aspect is to study the relationship of the vibration pattern of dark breathers with the hardness of the on–site potential and the type of coupling. The ansatz $`u_n(1)^nu_n`$, which transforms repulsive coupling into attractive one and vice versa, for symmetric potentials, suggests, and it has been shown for the DNLS equations, and we also have checked numerically, that the stability conditions are reversed are low coupling, but the bifurcations for $`|\omega _\mathrm{b}\omega _0|`$ large enough, highly asymmetric potentials as found in chemical and biological systems, and larger coupling are worth studying.

## Acknowledgments

This work has been supported by the European Union under the RTN project, LOCNET, HPRN–CT–1999–00163.

JFR Archilla acknowledges Informatics and Mathematical Modelling at DTU for hospitality, while this work was started and Yu B Gaididei for valuable suggestions.

J Cuevas acknowledges an FPDI grant from ‘La Junta de Andalucía’.


text:
# Capture and release of a conditional state of a cavity QED system by quantum feedback.

## Abstract

Detection of a single photon escaping an optical cavity QED system prepares a non-classical state of the electromagnetic field. The evolution of the state can be modified by changing the drive of the cavity. For the appropriate feedback, the conditional state can be captured (stabilized) and then released. This is observed by a conditional intensity measurement that shows suppression of vacuum Rabi oscillations for the length of the feedback pulse and their subsequent return.

Feedback control of quantum systems was first studied about fifteen years ago , in the field of quantum optics. In these approaches, the feedback could be understood in an essentially classical way, with quantum field theory entering only to dictate the magnitude of the fluctuations. This is possible if fluctuations are small compared to the mean fields being detected. More recently, a different approach to quantum optical feedback has been developed , based on quantum trajectories , which specify the stochastic evolution of a quantum state conditioned on continuous monitoring (such as by photodetection). This theory allows the treatment of feedback in the deep quantum regime, where quantum fluctuations are not small compared to the mean. It is also arguably the best way to approach feedback, as the conditioned state by definition comprises all of the knowledge of the experimenter on which feedback could be based .

So far, experiments in quantum feedback, such as Refs. , have all been in the regime of small fluctuations . Cavity QED is able to explore the opposite regime, where fluctuations in the conditional state are large. Furthermore, using the theory of quantum trajectories, Carmichael and coworkers  showed that such conditional quantum fluctuations are intrinsically related to the production of squeezing and antibunching. In this letter we present experimental results for the application of feedback in this regime. Following a photodetection, the conditioned quantum state of the system is $`|\psi _\mathrm{c}(\tau )`$. Given our knowledge of this evolution, we can, for certain times $`\tau `$, change the parameters of the system dynamics so as to capture the system in that conditioned state. When the parameters are later restored to their usual values, the released system state resumes its interrupted evolution. This directly demonstrates both the reality of the conditioned state and its usefulness for quantum feedback.

A Cavity quantum electrodynamical (QED) system consists of a single mode of the electromagnetic field of a cavity interacting with one or a collection of $`N`$ two-level atoms . Microwave Cavity QED systems have been used recently to prepare multiparticle entanglement , and to produce photon number states of the electromagnetic field . Operated at optical frequencies, cavity QED systems can now trap single atoms in the electric field of the cavity when its average occupation is about one photon . The system size and dynamics are characterized by two dimensionless numbers: The saturation photon number $`n_0`$ and the single atom cooperativity $`C_1`$. They scale the influence of a photon and the influence of an atom in cavity QED. These two numbers relate the reversible dipole coupling of a single atom with the cavity mode ($`g`$) with the irreversible coupling to the reservoirs through cavity ($`\kappa `$) and atomic radiative ($`\gamma `$) decays: $`C_1=g^2/\kappa \gamma `$ and $`n_0=\gamma ^2/3g^2`$. The strong coupling regime of cavity QED requires $`n_01`$, and $`C_11`$. Strictly speaking, the coupling constant ($`g`$) is spatially dependent and together with the $`N`$ moving atoms may be described by effective constants.

With weak driving, the system can be accurately modelled as having either zero, one, or two excitations of the coupled normal modes of the field and the atoms. In this regime, photodetections are very infrequent and the state before a detection can be taken to be the steady state, which is almost pure:

$`|\psi _{\mathrm{ss}}`$ $`=`$ $`|0,G+\lambda \left(|1,G{\displaystyle \frac{2g\sqrt{N}}{\gamma }}|0,E\right)`$ (2)
$`+\lambda ^2\left(\zeta _0{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}|2,G\theta _0{\displaystyle \frac{2g\sqrt{N}}{\gamma }}|1,E\right)+\mathrm{}.`$
Here $`|n,G`$ represents $`n`$ photons with all $`(N)`$ atoms in their ground state, $`|n,E`$ represents $`n`$ photons with one atom in the excited state with the rest $`(N1)`$ in their ground state. The small parameter is $`\lambda =\widehat{a}=ϵ/\kappa (1+C_1N)`$, which depends on the input driving field $`ϵ`$, while $`\zeta _0`$ and $`\theta _0`$ are coefficients of order unity for the two-excitation component of the state that can give rise to a photon detection, and depend on $`g`$, $`\kappa `$, and $`\gamma `$ . After the photodetection occurs $`|\psi _{\mathrm{ss}}`$ collapses to $`\widehat{a}|\psi _{\mathrm{ss}}/\sqrt{\widehat{a}^{}\widehat{a}_{\mathrm{ss}}}`$. This evolves as the conditioned state:

$`|\psi _\mathrm{c}(\tau )`$ $`=`$ $`|0,G+\lambda \left(\zeta (\tau )|1,G\theta (\tau ){\displaystyle \frac{2g\sqrt{N}}{\gamma }}|0,E\right)`$ (4)
$`+O(\lambda ^2)`$
This is different from the initial state because $`\zeta `$ (the “field” evolution) and $`\theta `$ (the “atomic polarization” evolution) oscillate coherently at the vacuum Rabi frequency $`(g\sqrt{N}`$) over time as the system re-equilibrates exchanging energy between the atomic polarization and the cavity field .

If we choose a time $`\tau =T`$ for Eq. (4) such that $`\zeta (T)=\theta (T)`$ then, to order $`\lambda `$ we obtain

$$|\psi _\mathrm{c}(T)|0,G+\lambda ^{}\left(|1,G\frac{2g\sqrt{N}}{\gamma }|0,E\right),$$
(5)
This is of the form of $`|\psi _{\mathrm{ss}}`$ in Eq. (2) but with a different mean field $`\lambda ^{}=\zeta (T)\lambda .`$ This conditional state can be stabilized if, at time $`T`$, we change the driving amplitude by a factor $`\zeta (T)`$. Given the almost $`90^{}`$ out of phase oscillations between the field $`(\zeta )`$ and the atomic polarization $`(\theta )`$  the time $`T`$ is close to the time when the field is crossing zero.

Conditional quantum states such as Eq. 4 can be measured using high order quantum optical correlations . When the light transmitted through the cavity (with annihilation operator $`\widehat{a}`$) is split the photons enter two detectors. The normalized correlation function of the two photocurrents is the time-and normally ordered average

$`g^{(2)}(\tau )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\widehat{a}^{}(t)\widehat{a}^{}(t+\tau )\widehat{a}(t+\tau )\widehat{a}(t)_{\mathrm{ss}}}{\widehat{a}^{}(t)\widehat{a}(t)_{\mathrm{ss}}^2}}`$ (6)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\widehat{n}(t+\tau )_\mathrm{c}}{\widehat{n}(t)_{\mathrm{ss}}}},`$ (7)
where $`\widehat{n}=\widehat{a}^{}\widehat{a}`$, and c means “conditioned on a detection at time $`t`$ in steady state”. If a detection at one detector is used to trigger a feedback pulse on the system, the correlation function will no longer be time symmetric. However, for $`\tau >0`$ the expression (7) still measures the conditional state in the presence of feedback:

$$g^{(2)}(\tau )\frac{|1,G|\psi _\mathrm{c}(\tau )|^2}{|1,G|\psi _{\mathrm{ss}}|^2}=[\zeta (\tau )]^2$$
(8)
Fig. 1 shows the conditional evolution of the state of the cavity QED system, as given by Eq. 8. We start with the quantum theory valid for $`N`$ two level atoms identically coupled to the cavity in the weak field regime . We find $`g_{\mathrm{eff}}<g`$ and $`N_{\mathrm{eff}}`$  using our experimentally determined values for $`g^{(2)}(0)`$ such that $`g\sqrt{N}=g_{\mathrm{eff}}\sqrt{N_{\mathrm{eff}}}`$. All broadening effects are incorporated by the modification of the atomic decay rate, $`\gamma \gamma ^{}`$. We numerically solve the time evolution with the driving step incorporated. This simplified approach agrees with our previous work for $`g^{(2)}(\tau )`$ . The dashed line is the free evolution of the system, and shows the time symmetry of the correlation function. The application of a feedback pulse at time $`T`$ alters the evolution of the system. The continuous lines shows the evolution when the step change in the driving intensity $`ϵ`$ satisfies the conditions necessary to reach a new steady state described by Eq. 5. The parameters of the calculation are those of our experiment: $`g\sqrt{N}/2\pi =37.3`$ MHz, $`\gamma ^{}/2\pi =9.1`$ MHz and $`\kappa /2\pi =3.7`$ MHz. The change in the intensity is small (0.2 %) and here we assume that its rise and fall are instantaneous. The new state reached by the system after the change of driving intensity no longer shows the vacuum Rabi oscillations and instead has a new value for the steady state slightly lower than the original one. The duration of the pulse that changes the steady state is finite and our model shows the reappearance of the oscillation delayed by the length of the pulse.

Our cavity QED apparatus, described in detail in Ref. , consists of the cavity, the atomic beam, an excitation laser, and the detector system. Two high reflectivity curved mirrors (input transmission mirror 10 ppm, output transmission mirror 285 ppm, and separation $`l=880\mu `$m) form the optical cavity (waist of the TEM00 mode $`w_0=34\mu `$m). A Pound-Drever-Hall stabilization technique keeps the cavity locked to the appropriate atomic resonance. An effusive oven produces a thermal (440 K) beam of Rb atoms with an angular spread of 2.8 mrads at the cavity mode. A laser beam intersects the atomic beam before the atoms enter the cavity in a region with 2.5 Gauss uniform magnetic field. It optically pumps all the 85Rb atoms of the $`F=3`$ ground state the magnetic sublevel $`F=3,m_F=3`$. The three rates that characterize our cavity QED system are $`(g,\kappa ,\gamma /2)/2\pi =(5.1,3.7,3.0)`$ MHz.

Fig. 2 shows a schematic of our apparatus. Light from a Ti:Sapph, locked to the $`5S_{1/2},F=35P_{3/2},F=4`$ transition of 85Rb at 780 nm, drives the cavity QED system. The signal escaping the cavity creates photodetections at the “Start”and “Stop” avalanche photodiodes (APD). The output pulse of the “Start” detector is split and one part sent to the start channel of the correlator \[time to digital converter (TDC) with 0.5 ns per bin, histograming memory, and computer\] while the other goes to a variable time delay, and after pulse shaping and lengthening, drives an Electro Optical Modulator (EOM) in front of a polarizer to produce a pulse of 8 ns risetime and 120 ns length in the driving intensity of the cavity. The delay between the detection of a photon at APD1 and the arrival of the pulse at the cavity can be as short as 45 ns. The other APD sends its pulses to the correlator to stop the TDC that measures the time interval between the two events.

We operate the cavity QED system in a non-classical regime where the size of the vacuum Rabi oscillations is large enough to permit their rapid identification during data taking. We begin by measuring the antibunched second order correlation function of the intensity escaping our cavity QED system. We then apply the step change in the driving intensity at time $`T`$ to fulfill the conditions of Eq. (5) and obtain a new steady state.

Fig. 3 shows measurements of the correlation function in the absence (i) and presence (ii, iii) of feedback. Traces i and ii have the same oscillating frequency while for trace iii we have a smaller number of atoms. $`\tau ^{}`$ marks the position where the oscillation we want to suppress reaches a maximum. The steady state for $`\tau `$ large corresponds to an intracavity intensity of $`n/n_0=0.07`$. Fig. 3 ii shows the correlation function with step down feedback (- 2.6 %) for 120 ns, beginning at $`\tau =T=57`$ ns, when the oscillation crosses unity and is growing. The oscillation that has a maximum in trace i at the point marked by $`\tau ^{}`$ has disappeared, the steady state is lower that marked by the dashed line, and the oscillation reappears after the pulse is turned off with approximately the same size of the amplitude as the suppressed one. Trace iii shows step up feedback (+ 3.9 %) at $`T=46`$ ns when the phase is opposite from trace ii.

Reversing the sign of the step produces an enhancement of the oscillations. If the time $`T`$ for the application of the pulse is not correct, it is not possible to achieve good suppression. There is qualitative agreement between the traces i and ii with those of the theory in Fig. 1. They show the suppression and the delayed return of the oscillation by the application of a feedback pulse to the driving intensity. Although the theoretical model does not include all the experimental details that give rise to broadening the main features of the response are clearly explained.

We have followed the size of the amplitude of the oscillation immediately after we apply the feedback pulse, at the time $`\tau ^{}`$ defined in Fig. 3, to make a quantitative comparison with theory. Fig. 4 shows the results for a series of measurements that include steps up (positive) and steps down (negative). The theory (dashed line) incorporates the measured shape of the pulse (at the point -4.6%), all sources of dephasing present in the system are modelled by the polarization decay rate $`\gamma ^{}/2\pi =9.1`$ MHz. The plot shows both enhancement and suppression with quantitative agreement.

The quantum feedback in this system is triggered by a fluctuation (detection of a photon) that is large enough to significantly modify the system, because of the strong coupling. This detection prepares the system in an evolving conditional state. We then change the drive of the system and are able to freeze its evolution to a new time-independent steady state. The suppressed oscillations return once the pulse turns off, with the same phase and amplitude information. This sort of quantum feedback is a novel way to manipulate the fragile conditional states that come from strongly coupled systems.

We would like to thank J. Gripp and J. Wang for their interest and help with this project. This work has been supported by the NSF, NIST, DAAD, and the Australian Research Council.