0% found this document useful (0 votes)
155 views71 pages

1976 - (Isham) An Introduction To Quantum Gravity

Uploaded by

faudzi5505
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
155 views71 pages

1976 - (Isham) An Introduction To Quantum Gravity

Uploaded by

faudzi5505
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 71

I

AH INTRODUCTION TO QUANTUM GRAVITY

C.J. Isham*

0. PREFACK

The purpose of my t a l k a t t h e Oxford Conference was t o p r o v i d e a

g e n e r a l i n t r o d u c t i o n t o some of t h e i d e a s and methods o f quantum g r a v i t y

as a p r e c u r s o r t o t h e r a t h e r t e c h n i c a l l c c t u r e s which f o l l o w e d . This i s

r e f l e c t e d i n t h e s e l e c t u r e n o t e s which a r e concerned mainly with broud

a t t i t u d e s r a t h e r t h a n with s p e c i f i c , up t o d a t e , t e c h n i c a l t o o l s . The

scheme of t h e p a p e r i s as f o l l o w s . The f i r s t s e c t i o n i s a s h o r t

i n t r o d u c t i o n which emphasises t h e d u a l p a r t i c l e / f i e l d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of

c o n v e n t i o n a l quantum f i e l d t h e o r y . The l a t t e r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n i s used

e x t e n s i v e l y i n quantum g r a v i t y a n d , because o f i t s r e l a t i v e unfamiliarity,

i s the s u b j e c t of repeated discussion throughout t h e s e n o t e s . The n e x t

two s e c t i o n s d e a l w i t h t h e problem o f d e f i n i n g a q u a n t i s e d f i e l d on an

u n q u a n t i s e d g r a v i t a t i o n a l background. There h a s r e c e n t l y been

c o n s i d e r a b l e i n v e s t i g a t i o n on t h i s t o p i c (which i s a p r e l i m i n a r y to

quantum g r a v i t y p r o p e r ) and i t promises t o be o f some r e l e v a n c e t o

a s t r o p h y s i c a l problems i n v o l v i n g g r a v i t a t i o n a l c o l l a p s e ( s e e t h e c h a p t e r

by S . Hawking). The f o u r t h s e c t i o n i s concerned w i t h c o v a r i a n t

q u a n t i s a t i o n ( s e e t h e c h a p t e r by M. D u f f ) w h i l e in t h e n e x t two s e c t i o n s

c a n o n i c a l q u a n t i s a t i o n i s d i s c u s s e d in some t e c h n i c a l d e t a i l s i n c e t h i s

was n o t t h e s u b j e c t o f any o t h e r s p e c i f i c l e c t u r e a t t h e c o n f e r e n c e .

The f i n a l s e c t i o n c o n s i d e r s t h e c u r r e n t l y p o p u l a r quantum model/quantum

cosmology approach t o q u a n t i s i n g t h e g r a v i t a t i o n a l f i e l d , although

again s i n c e a l e c t u r e was devoted t o t h i s t o p i c ( s e e t h e c h a p t e r by

* I am g r a t e f u l t o NATO f o r t h e i r s u p p o r t by NATO Research Grant No.815.


M.MacCollum) t h e t r e a t m e n t h e r e i s concerned w i t h t h e g e n e r a l i d e a s

r a t h e r than with s p e c i f i c details.

1. INTRODUCTION

The problem o f q u a n t i s i n g t h e g r a v i t a t i o n a l f i e l d h a s e x e r c i s e d

t h e minds o f a number o f p e o p l e o v e r t h e l a s t f o r t y y e a r s and w i l l

d o u b t l e s s c o n t i n u e t o do so f o r t h e n e x t f o r t y ' 1 ^ 3
^ ^ 5
^. The

importance and i n t e r e s t of t h i s s u b j e c t of s t u d y , which i s r e f l e c t e d i n

t h e very c o n s i d e r a b l e i n c r e a s e in a t t e n t i o n which i t has r e c e i v e d d u r i n g

the l a s t decade, d e r i v e from a number of d i f f e r e n t s o u r c e s . General

r e l a t i v i t y and quantum t h e o r y a r e w i t h o u t doubt two o f t h e greatest

i n t e l l e c t u a l achievements o f t h i s c e n t u r y . T h i s i s in i t s e l f sufficient

t o g u a r a n t e e a c o n t i n u e d i n t e r e s t i n t h e problem o f u n i f y i n g then.; an

i n t e r e s t which i s h e i g h t e n e d by c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f t h e very s p e c i a l role

p l a y e d by g e n e r a l r e l a t i v i t y w i t h i n t h e framework of c l a s s i c a l (viz.

non-quantum) p h y s i c s . In any c o n v e n t i o n a l f i e l d t h e o r y t h e s p a c e - t i m e

s t r u c t u r e i s f i x e d and t h e f i e l d p r o p a g a t e s i n t i m e on t h i s background.

In g e n e r a l r e l a t i v i t y however t h e k i n e m a t i c a l and dynamical a s p e c t s of

t h e t h e o r y a r e t i g h t l y i n t e r l a c e d t h r o u g h t h e medium o f t h e gravitational

f i e l d , w h i c h , on t h e one h a n d , s p e c i f i e s t h e g e o m e t r i c a l p r o p e r t i e s of

s p a c e - t i m e , and on t h e o t h e r f u l f i l l s t h e c l a s s i c a l t a s k of a f i e l d by

propagating a physical force. C o n v e n t i o n a l quantum t h e o r y , however, i s

f o r m u l a t e d on a r i g i d l y f i x e d s p a c e - t i m e b a c k g r o u n d , Euclidean t h r e e -

space i n t h e c a s e o f non r e l a t i v i s t i c quantum mechanics and Minkowskian

s p a c e - t i m e in t h e cose o f r e l a t i v i s t i c quantum f i e l d t h e o r y . From t h i s

viewpoint i t can be e x p e c t e d t h a t any a t t e m p t t o u n i f y g e n e r a l relativity

and quantum mechanics w i l l i n e v i t a b l y l e a d t o t e c h n i c a l and c o n c e p t u a l


3

problem:!. One o f t h e main m o t i v a t i o n s f o r s t u d y i n g quantum g r a v i t y hoo

always been t h a t t h e r e s o l u t i o n of t h e s e problems w i l l l e a d t o u

f u n d a m e n t a l l y new i n s i g h t i n t o p h y s i c s .

I t i s n o t a p r i o r i c l e a r p r e c i s e l y what would be r e g a r d e d au a

q u a n t i s a t i o n of g e n e r a l r e l a t i v i t y . The m a t h e m a t i c a l s t r u c t u r e o f t h e

c l a s s i c a l t h e o r y c o n t a i n s a number of f e a t u r e s any o f which might

perhaps be e x p e c t e d t o become s u b j e c t t o quantum l a w s . The p r i m o r d i a l

concept i s t h a t of a p o i n t s e t whose m a t h e m a t i c a l p o i n t s a r e t o be

r e l a t e d i n some way w i t h p h y s i c a l s p a c e - t i m e e v e n t s . This s e t is then

equipped w i t h a t o p o l o g y and t h e n with a d i f f e r e n t i a b l e s t r u c t u r e which

makes i t i n t o a f o u r - d i m e n s i o n a l m a n i f o l d . Finally a metric tensor is

c o n s t r u c t e d on t h i s m a n i f o l d i n such a way as t o s a t i s f y t h e E i n s t e i n

equations. One might a t t e m p t t o i n t r o d u c e q u a n t i s a t i o n a t any one of

these l e v e l s . In p r a c t i c e most of t h e work which has been done t a k e s

t h e e a s i e s t r o u t e and f i x e s e v e r y t h i n g but t h e m e t r i c . Thus a

d i f f e r e n t i a b l e m a n i f o l d i s s p e c i f i e d once and f o r a l l and t h e m e t r i c

t e n s o r i s r e g a r d e d as an o p e r a t o r d e f i n e d on t h i s s p a c e . (Actually if

c a n o n i c a l q u a n t i s a t i o n i s b e i n g used t h e n t h e r e l e v a n t m a n i f o l d may be

t h r e e , r a t h e r than f o u r , dimensional). This i s c l e a r l y the a t t i t u d e to

q u a n t i s a t i o n which i s c l o s e s t t o t h a t p r e v a l e n t in c o n v e n t i o n a l quantum

field theories, n e v e r t h e l e s s when one c o n s i d e r s t h e r o l e played by t h e

l i g h t c o n e s t r u c t u r e i n t h e s e t h e o r i e s i t i s c l e a r t h a t a l r e a d y a major

d i f f e r e n c e has emerged - t h e l i g h t c o n e s t r u c t u r e of g e n e r a l relativity

i s i n d i s p u t a b l y dynamical and not p a r t of t h e f i x e d background.

However, t h e o p i n i o n i s f r e q u e n t l y v o i c e d t h a t t h e q u a n t i s a t i o n

p r o c e d u r e s h o u l d t a k e p l a c e a t a more f u n d a m e n t a l l e v e l . Two of t h e
p r i n c i p a l a d v o c a t e s o f t h i s l i n e have been P r o f e s s o r s J . Wheeler and

R< P e n r o s e . Vfheeler has f o r many y e a r s emphasised t h e need t o q u a n t i s e

t h e t o p o l o g i c a l as v e i l as t h e m e t r i c s t r u c t u r e of s p a c e - t i m e a n d , w i t h

h i s r e c e n t t h o u g h t s on t h e r o l e played by formal l o g i c i n quantum

g r a v i t y , has t a k e n t h e q u a n t i s a t i o n l e v e l r i g h t back t o t h e b a s i c

e l e m e n t s of m a t h e m a t i c s . S i m i l a r l y Penrose has f r e q u e n t l y a r g u e d t h a t

s p a c e - t i m e i t s e l f , r a t h e r t h a n j u s t t h e m e t r i c f i e l d , s h o u l d be

i n t i m a t e l y l i n k e d w i t h quantum t h e o r y . I t was t h i s p o i n t o f view which


(7)
p a r t l y m o t i v a t e d h i s c o m b i n a t o r i a l s p i n network t h e o r y a s w e l l as
(8)

h i s r e c e n t work on t w i s t o r s . Most p e o p l e would a g r e e t h a t a d e e p e r

look a t t h e problem of quantum g r a v i t y a t t h i s t y p e of very b a s i c l e v e l

i s p r o b a b l y mandatory i f any r e a l l y m a j o r advance i s t o be a c h i e v e d .

However, i t i s a l s o i m p o r t a n t t o u n d e r s t a n d how f a r c o n v e n t i o n a l

q u a n t i s a t i o n (by which i s meant m e t r i c f i e l d q u a n t i s a t i o n ) can be pushed.

In p a r t i c u l a r , i t i s e s s e n t i a l t o d i s t i n g u i s h c a r e f u l l y between t h o s e

problems which a r e p e c u l i a r t o quantum g r a v i t y and t h o s e which a r e s h a r e d

by a l l quantum f i e l d t h e o r i e s . Hand in g l o v e w i t h t h i s must go an

a p p r e c i a t i o n of t h e p r a c t i c a l a p p l i c a t i o n s o f t h i s t y p e o f q u a n t i s a t i o n

and t h e i r i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r r e a l i s t i c physical systems. In t h i s article

I s h a l l c o n c e n t r a t e mainly on t h e m e t r i c q u a n t i s a t i o n schemes and r e f e r

t h e r e a d e r t o t h e b i b l i o g r a p h y f o r m a t e r i a l on some of t h e o t h e r a s p e c t s

o f quantum g r a v i t y .

Many d i f f e r e n t approaches t o q u a n t i s i n g t h e g r a v i t a t i o n a l field

have e v o l v e d s i n c e t h e s u b j e c t was f i r s t c o n s i d e r e d in t h e e a r l y 1930's.

These t e n d t o be c l a s s i f i e d u n d e r two h e a d i n g s , ' c o v a r i a n t ' (§'<) and

'canonical' (§5, 56). These t i t l e s c a n , from a t e c h n i c a l s t a n d p o i n t , be


5

a l i t t l e m i s l e a d i n g b u t s i n c e t h e y a r e widely used t h e y w i l l be r e t a i n e d

here. C a n o n i c a l q u a n t i s a t i o n i t s e l f w i l l be s p l i t up i n t o 'true'

c a n o n i c a l q u a n t i s a t i o n (§5) and s u p e r s p a c e - b a s e d q u a n t i s a t i o n (§6).

There i s a t e n d e n c y , a t l e a s t among p a r t i c l e p h y s i c i s t s , t o suppose t h a t

t h e whole o f quantum g r a v i t y can be n e a t l y accommodated by t h e n o t i o n of

the graviton. T h i s h e l i c i t y two, m a s s l e s s p a r t i c l e i s t h e n t h o u g h t of

as i n t e r a c t i n g with i t s e l f in a way which i s more o r l e s s conventional

a l t h o u g h i t l e a d s t o a t h e o r y which i s probably h i g h l y nonrenormalisable.

This i s t h e p r i n c i p l e concept which a r i s e s from t h e c o v a r i a n t quantisation

scheme b u t i t l e a d s t o a r a t h e r r e s t r i c t e d view of quantum g r a v i t y and

indeed of quantum f i e l d t h e o r y in g e n e r a l .

The p a r t i c l e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , w i t h i t s c o r r e s p o n d i n g s e t of particle-

based o b s e r v a b l e s , o f a quantum f i e l d t h e o r y , which t h e n o t i o n o f a

g r a v i t o n e p i t o m i s e s , may n o t always be t h e most a p p r o p r i a t e one. There

i s i n f a c t an i m p o r t a n t a l t e r n a t i v e p h y s i c a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of what i s

e s s e n t i a l l y t h e same m a t h e m a t i c s , even i n t h e c a s e of an o r d i n a r y flat-

s p a c e quantum f i e l d t h e o r y . As t h i s a l t e r n a t i v e view i s t h e one which

i s most commonly used in quantum g r a v i t y (mainly i n t h e c a n o n i c a l

approaches) i t i s worth d i s c u s s i n g i t h e r e , at l e a s t in a h e u r i s t i c

manner. For t h e sake of s i m p l i c i t y c o n s i d e r a f r e e n e u t r a l s c a l a r field

$(x) i n o r d i n a r y f l a t Minkowski s p a c e - t i m e . The c o n v e n t i o n a l

q u a n t i s a t i o n of t h i s s y s t e m u s i n g Fock s p a c e , with t h e c o r r e s p o n d i n g

p a r t i c l e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , i s w e l l known ( s e e §2 f o r more d e t a i l s ) . On

t h e one hand i t can be o b t a i n e d by q u a n t i s i n g t h e s c a l a r f i e l d $(x) p e r

se and l o o k i n g f o r a s u i t a b l e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n ( i n t h e S c h r o d i n g e r p i c t u r e

say) o f t h e c a n o n i c a l commutation relations


[•(x), = i K 6(3)(x - i) (1.1)

On t h e o t h e r hand one can b e g i n v i t h o n e - p a r t i c l e s t a t e s , two-particle

s t a t e s e t c . d e s c r i b e d i n terms of o r d i n a r y quantum mechanics and c o n s t r u c t

a l a r g e s t a t e - s p a c e which accommodates them a l l , namely Fock s p a c e .

'Annihilation' and ' c r e a t i o n ' o p e r a t o r s can t h e n be d e f i n e d which connect

t o g e t h e r t h e s e v a r i o u s f i n i t e p a r t i c l e s u b s p a c e s and from which a quantum

f i e l d $(x) can be r e c o n s t r u c t e d . However, i t i s i n t e r e s t i n g t o ask how

t h i s s i m p l e problem of q u a n t i s i n g a f r e e f i e l d l o o k s from t h e v i e w p o i n t

of c o n v e n t i o n a l quantum m e c h a n i c s . I f a c l a s s i c a l s y s t e m has a

E u c l i d e a n c o n f i g u r a t i o n space Q w i t h g l o b a l c a r t e s i a n c o o r d i n a t e s q^.-.q^

c o r r e s p o n d i n g t o n d e g r e e s of f r e e d o m , t h e n t h e b a s i c problem of quantum

t h e o r y ( i n t h e S c h r c d i n g e r p i c t u r e ) i s t o f i n d a r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of t h e

c a n o n i c a l commutation relations

[q. , ¿.] = i K 6. . x,4-l...a

[q. , = 0 (1.2)

[Pi • P j ] = o

w i t h s e l f - a d j o i n t o p e r a t o r s on a H i l b e r t space of s t a t e s . Then t h e

dynamical e q u a t i o n

H ( (1
W - a n ; P,.P2-"Pn) *t = i " J T "3)

must be s o l v e d f o r t h e t i m e e v o l u t i o n o f t h e s t a t e v e c t o r ^ i n terms

of t h e q u a n t i s e d Hamiltonian o p e r a t o r H.
7

By v i r t u e o f t h e Stone-Von Neumann t h e o r e m , t h e unique solution

(up t o u n i t a r y t r a n s f o r m a t i o n s ) i s t h a t in vnich t h e s t a t e space in the

s e t o f a l l complex v a l u e d f u n c t i o n s of Q which a r e s q u a r e i n t e g r a b l e w i t h

r e s p e c t t o t h e Lebesgue measure d q j d q ? . . . d q ^ . The o p e r a t o r s q . , P j a r e

t h e n r e p r e s e n t e d by

(4. (q^.-qj = ^ . . . q j (1.1»)

and any o t h e r r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of eqn ( 1 . 2 ) ( o r more p r e c i s e l y o f the

e x p o n e n t i a t e d Weyl form) i s u n i t a r i l y e q u i v a l e n t t o t h i s o n e . The wave

f u n c t i o n h a s t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n t h a t i f B i s any B o r e l s e t i n ¡R.n t h e n

PB = j l^q^.-qjl* dq1...dqn (1.6)


'B

i s t h e p r o b a b i l i t y t h a t i f t h e s y s t e m i s i n t h e s t a t e ty and a

measurement i s made on t h e s y s t e m o f t h e v a l u e s o f q . . . q^ ( i . e . o f t h e

c l a s s i c a l c o n f i g u r a t i o n o f t h e s y s t e m ) t h e n t h e y l i e i n B. Now a

classical f i e l d t h e o r y can b e r e g a r d e d as a c l a s s i c a l m e c h a n i c a l system

w i t h i n f i n i t e l y many d e g r e e s o f f r e e d o m . E s s e n t i a l l y , an o r t h o n o r m a l

b a s i s s e t o f f u n c t i o n s on / f t 3 , { e ^ ( j c ) } s a y , i s chosen ( t y p i c a l l y w i t h

p r o p e r t i e s i n r e l a t i o n t o t h e H a m i l t o n i a n which s i m p l i f y t h e d y n a m i c a l

e v o l u t i o n p r o b l e m ) and t h e f i e l d s a r e expanded as

<>(x,t) = I q (t) e,(x) (1.7)


1
i=l
oo

Tt(x,t) = I p^t) e.(x) (1.8)


i=l

in which ( q j . . • ; P J . P , . . . ) c o r r e s p o n d t o t h e i n f i n i t e number of modes

o r d e g r e e s of freedom o f t h e system. Thus t h e commutation r e l a t i o n s i n

eqn ( 1 . 2 ) would s t i l l be e x p e c t e d t o be t r u e b u t now with i , j ranging

from 1 t o <°. I f one were t o c o n t i n u e t o f o l l o w t h e s t a n d a r d p r o c e d u r e

f o r f i n i t e numbers of degrees of freedom t h e end r e s u l t would be wave

functions

of i n f i n i t e l y many v a r i a b l e s ( b u t n e v e r t h e l e s s s t i l l f u n c t i o n s on t h e

c l a s s i c a l c o n f i g u r a t i o n s p a c e ) and t h e t i m e e v o l u t i o n e q u a t i o n (1.3)

would be c o r r e s p o n d i n g l y an i n f i n i t e o r d e r p a r t i a l d i f f e r e n t i a l e q u a t i o n .

K q u i v a l e n t l y an obvious r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of eqn ( l . l ) i s o b t a i n e d by

c h o o s i n g s t a t e v e c t o r s as f u n c t i o n a l s o f t h e c l a s s i c a l configuration

space Q ( i n t h i s c a s e a l l ( ? ) f u n c t i o n s on IR.3) and t h e f i e l d o p e r a t o r s

as

(1.10)

« »[•(•)]
(1.11)

with t h e S c h r o d i n g e r e q u a t i o n now r e a d i n g :

HU, - i S «/ ) vfr(-);tj = i K U OCht] . (1.12)


9

In a d d i t i o n , i f d n ( • ) d e n o t e s t h e a n a l o g u e of dq ^ . . . dq^ and t h e system

i s in a quantum s t a t e Y, t h e n i f a measurement i s made of t h e classical

f i e l d configuration, the quantity

(1.13)

i s t h e p r o b a b i l i t y t h a t t h e r e s u l t w i l l l i e in t h e ( i n f i n i t e dimensional)

s e t B. This i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e s t a t e v e c t o r i s c l e a r l y d i f f e r e n t from

t h e u s u a l p a r t i c l e one and i s e v i d e n t l y w e l l s u i t e d t o s i t u a t i o n s where

c l a s s i c a l l y t h e f i e l d has some n a t u r a l meaning. (The two i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s

a r e p a r t i a l l y l i n k e d through t h e t h e o r y o f c o h e r e n t s t a t e s ) . I t must be

emphasised t h a t t h e t r e a t m e n t above i s very crude and i n f a c t as i t stands

is mathematically i l l - d e f i n e d . For a s t a r t i t i s n o t c l e a r e x a c t l y what

t h e c l a s s i c a l c o n f i g u r a t i o n space Q s h o u l d b e . Should i t be a l l C
3 3
f u n c t i o n s on UL , all C f u n c t i o n s on IK with compact s u p p o r t . . . ?

N o t i c e t h a t i n terms of t h e ( q j . q , , . . . ) v a r i a b l e s t h e e x a c t way in which

t h e q ^ ' s behave f o r l a r g e i d e t e r m i n e s t h e t y p e o f o b j e c t t o which t h e

sum in eqn ( 1 . 7 ) c o n v e r g e s . Hot u n r e l a t e d t o t h i s i s t h e f a c t t h a t

u n f o r t u n a t e l y an i n f i n i t e d i m e n s i o n a l analogue o f Lebesgue measure does

not e x i s t . However, a l l t h e s e problems can be r e s o l v e d and Fock s p a c e

i t s e l f can be shown t o be u n i t a r i l y e q u i v a l e n t t o a c e r t a i n L 2 (Q,dy)

s p a c e i n which p i s a g a u s s i a n measure (which does g e n e r a l i s e t o i n f i n i t e

dimensions) and Q i n c l u d e s not only f u n c t i o n s on IR.5 b u t also


(9)(10)

distributions! I t would n o t be a p p r o p r i a t e h e r e t o dwell any

f u r t h e r on t h i s t o p i c e x c e p t t o r e - e m p h a s i s e t h a t m a t h e m a t i c a l Fock

space admits of two complementary p h y s i c a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s : the usual


10

p a r t i c l e one and t h e one b a s e d on f u n c t i o n spaces which h i n g e s round

eqns ( 1 . 1 2 ) and ( 1 . 1 3 ) .

The m o t i v a t i o n f o r t h i s d i s c u s s i o n was t h a t much o f t h e l i t e r a t u r e

on quantum g r a v i t y uses t h e s e c o n d , p o s s i b l y more u n f a m i l i a r , p i c t u r e .

C e r t a i n l y i n s i t u a t i o n s in which p o t e n t i a l g r a v i t a t i o n a l c o l l a p s e i s

i n v o l v e d i t i s t h e more immediately a p p r o p r i a t e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . Indeed

assuming t h a t t h e quantum g r a v i t y analogue o f t h e d i s c u s s i o n above

involves I ^ C s ^ f * )J I 2 as t h e a p p r o p r i a t e p r o b a b i l i t y density

( t h i s i s a c t u a l l y n o t q u i t e c o r r e c t , s e e 5U.55). t h e n t h e b e h a v i o u r of

t h e s t a t e f u n c t i o n a l i n t h e v i c i n i t y o f m e t r i c s which classically

c o r r e s p o n d t o s i n g u l a r i t i e s would have a d i r e c t b e a r i n g on t h e gravitationa

c o l l a p s e o r o t h e r w i s e o f t h e quantum s y s t e m . Also of c o u r s e t h e n o t i o n of

p a r t i c l e in conventional f i e l d theory i s closely linked with t h e Poincare

group. The absence of such a group i n t h e c a s e of t h e gravitational

f i e l d i s a n o t h e r good reason f o r l o o k i n g c h a r i t a b l y a t non-particle

interpretations. There i s one f u r t h e r remark t o make i n t h i s context.

As emphasised above t h e d i f f e r e n c e between t h e p a r t i c l e and f i e l d p i c t u r e s

of a c o n v e n t i o n a l f i e l d t h e o r y r e a l l y i s only a d i f f e r e n c e i n inter-

p r e t a t i o n o f e s s e n t i a l l y t h e same m a t h e m a t i c a l s t r u c t u r e . Which

i n t e r p r e t a t i o n i s r e l e v a n t t o any given s i t u a t i o n i s d e t e r m i n e d b a s i c a l l y

by what o b s e r v a b l e s a r e b e i n g measured. However, t h e s i t u a t i o n in

quantum g r a v i t y i s s l i g h t l y d i f f e r e n t . In t h e c o v a r i o n t approaches

( 5'<) t h e p a r t i c l e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n i s dominant and t h e l a n g u a g e i s

p r i m a r i l y one of Keynman g r a p h s . However, b e c a u s e t h e gravitational

system i s gauge i n v a r i a n t ( i . e . c o o r d i n a t e i n v a r i a n t ) n o t a l l components


11

of t h e m e t r i c t e n s o r a r e genuine c a n o n i c a l v a r i a b l e s and b e c a u s e o f

t h i n t h e c o v a r i a n t q u a n t i s a t i o n of a l l t e n components o f t h e m e t r i c

t e n o o r ( c f . G u p t a - B l e u l e r in quantum e l e c t r o d y n a m i c s ) l e a d s t o a

p a r t i c l e p i c t u r e which i s s l i g h t l y d i f f e r e n t from t h e one above. On t h e

o t h e r hand i n t h e ' t r u e ' c a n o n i c a l q u a n t i s a t i o n scheme (55) two e q u i v a l e n t

i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s could be r e a s o n a b l y e x p e c t e d t o e x i s t (assuming t h a t the

p a r t i c l e n o t i o n makes s e n s e a t a l l , which i n a h i g h l y curved space i t may

n o t ) b u t w h e t h e r t h e y a r e b a s e d in some s e n s e on t h e same u n d e r l y i n g

m a t h e m a t i c a l s t r u c t u r e as t h e c o v a r i a n t scheme i s n o t c l e a r . In t h e

'superspace' c a n o n i c a l q u a n t i s a t i o n scheme (§6) t h e f i e l d p i c t u r e is

c e r t a i n l y dominant. Indeed s u p e r s p a c e i t s e l f i s a t y p e o f gravitational

analogue of t h e Q-space i n t r o d u c e d above b u t , however, not i n t h e s t r i c t

canonical sense. S u p e r s p a c e c o n t a i n s a d d i t i o n a l d e g r e e s o f freedom o v e r

and above t h e t r u e c a n o n i c a l ones and us a r e s u l t t h e e q u i v a l e n c e of t h i s

m a t h e m a t i c a l scheme t o e i t h e r t h a t o f t r u e c a n o n i c a l q u a n t i s a t i o n o r o f

c o v a r i a n t q u a n t i s a t i o n i s not a t a l l clear.

F i n a l l y l e t us n o t e t h a t even a t t h i s s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d l e v e l of

metric quantisation only, t h e r e e x i s t problems of a very d e e p , and

largely unresolved, conceptual nature. The Copenhagen i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f

quantum mechanics i s founded f i r m l y on t h e concept of an e x t e r n a l

observer. I f one a t t e m p t s t o e x t e n d quantum g r a v i t y t o i n c l u d e t h e whole

u n i v e r s e (as i s f r e q u e n t l y done) r a t h e r t h a n j u s t c o n s i d e r i n g some s m a l l

l o c a l quantum e f f e c t , t h e n i t i s i n e v i t a b l e t h a t many t r a d i t i o n a l (and

c h e r i s h e d ) views on quantum t h e o r y must be o v e r h a u l e d . One famous


11
example of such a r e t h i n k i s t h e E v e r e t t - W h e e l e r ' ' i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of
quantum mechanics which a t t e m p t s t o i n t r i n s i c a l l y i n c o r p o r a t e t h e

observer in the system, a s t e p which i s o b v i o u s l y n e c e s s a r y i f the

system i s t h e u n i v e r s e !

I t has become u n f a s h i o n a b l e t h e s e days f o r much n o t i c e t o be t a k e n

of t h e s e c o n c e p t u a l p r o b l e m s , most p e o p l e p r e f e r r i n g t o work on t h e more

'respectable' technical difficulties. However, i n quantum g r a v i t y t h e

c o n c e p t u a l and t e c h n i c a l problems f r e q u e n t l y go hand i n hand and i t is

p o s s i b l e t h a t by n e g l e c t i n g t h e f o r m e r one i s r e n d e r i n g i r r e l e v a n t the

latter.

2. QUANTUM FIELD THEORY ON A FIXED BACKGROUND

I t i s l o g i c a l l y compelling t o precede the i n v e s t i g a t i o n of the

f u l l quantum g r a v i t y problem w i t h a d i s c u s s i o n o f f i e l d q u a n t i s a t i o n on

a f i x e d background. The s i m p l e s t example (which i s t h e one c o n s i d e r e d

h e r e ) i s o f a s c a l a r f i e l d $ d e f i n e d on a f i x e d f o u r - d i m e n s i o n a l p s e u d o -

Riemannian m a n i f o l d and s a t i s f y i n g t h e c l a s s i c a l e q u a t i o n s o f motion

3 ( ( - d e t g ) J g UU • ) - m 2 * ( - d e t g)> = 0 (2.1)

d e r i v e d from t h e l a g r a n g i a n density

L(x) = | ( g , 1 V ( x ) 3 • ( * ) 3 y * ( x ) - m2 $ 2 ( x ) ) ( - d e t g ) * . (2.2)

The q u a n t i s a t i o n of t h i s s c a l a r f i e l d c o n s t i t u t e s a t h e o r y w h i c h , from

t h e quantum g r a v i t y p o i n t o f view, i s d e f i c i e n t i n t h e f o l l o w i n g two


13

ronpect3.

i) The q u a n t i s a t i o n of t h e m e t r i c t e n s o r i t s e l f i s completely

negle c t e d .

ii) Even i f t h e m e t r i c were u n q u a n t i s e d t h e r e s h o u l d be a

r e a c t i o n back on i t v i a E i n s t e i n ' s e q u a t i o n s , from quantum

e f f e c t s in $ (such as p a r t i c l e p r o d u c t i o n by a time v a r y i n g

N e v e r t h e l e s s , t h e model above has c o n s i d e r a b l e i n t e r e s t . From a p r a c t i c a l

s t a n d p o i n t t h e r e a r e v a r i o u s s i t u a t i o n s in a s t r o p h y s i c s and 'early

u n i v e r s e ' cosmology i n which t h e r o l e of an u n q u a n t i s e d gravitational

f i e l d p r o d u c i n g r e a l p a r t i c l e s would be of g r e a t i m p o r t a n c e . From a

t h e o r e t i c a l p o i n t o f view a thorough u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h i s simple rtodel

would seem a n a t u r a l p r e r e q u i s i t e t o a t t e m p t i n g t o q u a n t i s e t h e m e t r i c

tensor i t s e l f . I t i s t h e r e f o r e perhaps s u r p r i s i n g t h a t , whereas u

c o n s i d e r a b l e amount o f e f f o r t has been expanded o v e r t h e l a s t twenty

f i v e y e a r s on t h e f u l l quantum g r a v i t y t h e o r y , only a r e l a t i v e l y s m a l l
• • (12)(13>
amount of work has appeared d e a l i n g with t h i s s i m p l i f i e d problem.

The f i r s t q u e s t i o n t o ask i s w h a t , from a p h y s i c a l p o i n t of view,

t h e l a g r u n g i a n i n eqn ( 2 . 1 ) could be e x p e c t e d t o d e s c r i b e ? In t h e flut

s p a c e c a s e , in which t h e m e t r i c t e n s o r i s simply t h e c o n s t a n t

Minkowski t e n s o r 1 » t h e answer i s w e l l known. Indeed t h e t h e o r y

d e g e n e r a t e s i n t o a f r e e massive s c a l a r f i e l d ( i n t h e c o n v e n t i o n a l s e n s e )

w i t h t h e two m a j o r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s - f i e l d and p a r t i c l e - which were

o u t l i n e d i n 51. I t i s r e a s o n a b l e t o suppose t h a t f o r f i e l d s g which

do n o t ' d e v i a t e t o o v i o l e n t l y ' from f l a t space two such interpretations

w i l l again be p o s s i b l e . In p a r t i c u l a r from t h e p a r t i c l e p o i n t o f view i t


It

i s n a t u r a l t o expect t h a t the e f f e c t of the metric f i e l d g w i l l be


uv
s i m i l a r t o t h a t o f , f o r example, an o r d i n a r y e x t e r n a l electromagnetic
1 1J
f i e l d , leading t o the production of ^ - p a r t i c l e s . ' ** " ' However,

extreme c a r e needs t o be e x e r c i s e d in c o n v e r t i n g t h i s plausible-sounding

s t a t e m e n t i n t o an unambiguous p i e c e of t h e o r y . The p a r t i c l e inter-

p r e t a t i o n o f s t a n d a r d quantum ( f r e e ) f i e l d t h e o r y a r i s e s from two main

s o u r c e s , t h e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e c a n o n i c a l conmutation r e l a t i o n s (CCR)

and t h e i n v a r i a n t a c t i o n o f t h e P o i n c a r e group. The s t e p s l e a d i n g t o ,

and a s s o c i a t e d w i t h , t h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n a r e b r i e f l y :

1) Choose an i n e r t i a l frame of r e f e r e n c e (and hence a c h o i c e o f t i m e )

in Minkowski s p a c e . C o n s t r u c t t h e momentum n ( x , t ) which i s

c o n j u g a t e t o $ ( x , t ) i n t h i s frame and p o s t u l a t e t h a t t h e resulting

quantum f i e l d s s a t i s f y t h e e q u a l t i m e CCR

[¿(x,t), «(i,t)J = i K a(3) (x - jr.) (2.3)

which a r e f o r m a l l y c o n s i s t e n t with t h e dynamical e q u a t i o n s for

$(x,t):

' ¿ ( x , t ) - (V2 - m 2 ) ¿ ( x . t ) = 0 . (2.It)

(N.B. In a g e n e r a l quantum f i e l d t h e o r y t h e f i e l d s must be smeared i n

x and t i n o r d e r t o c o r r e s p o n d t o genuine o p e r a t o r s . Thus e q u a t i o n (2.3)

(which i m p l i e s s m e a r i n g in £ o n l y ) would be m e a n i n g l e s s . However, f o r

t h e f r e e f i e l d , and i t i s e x p e c t e d a l s o f o r t h e f i e l d on t h e f i x e d

background, t h e procedure i s j u s t i f i e d . )
15

Kind i»n e x p l i c i t r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f eqn ( 2 . 3 ) ( a t some i n i t i n l time

t = 0 s a y ) by s e l l ' - a d j o i n t o p e r a t o r s ( a f t e r s u i t a b l e smearing) on a

H i l b e r t s p a c e in which t h e H a m i l t o n i a n i s a genuine s e l f - a d j o i n t

o p e r a t o r which g e n e r a t e s time e v o l u t i o n i n t h e s e n s e t h a t

i / j j Ht - i / f i Ht
$(x,t) = e $(x,0) e
(2.5)
i / K Ht - i / j . Ht
n(2ç,t) = e n(jç,0) e

The s t a n d a r d p r o c e d u r e i s t o s e p a r a t e t h e s o l u t i o n s t o t h e o p e r a t o r

e q u a t i o n (2.It) in t h e form (fi = l )

f - i EJ. t „ iE . t . Ä
x,t) = du( j ) [e b ( j ) 4,.(x) + e J b T ( j ) ^ . ( x ) ] (2.6)
J J J

where <J/.(x) a r e a s e t o f ( p o s s i b l y g e n e r a l i s e d ) e i gen f u n c t i o n s , w i t h


J
2
eigenvalues , of t h e s e l f - a d j o i n t o p e r a t o r (-V2 + m2 ) , which s a t i s f y

t h e completeness relations

( 3 )
j d p ( j ) *"(x) = ô (x-x) (2.7)

and

j d3x ^ ( x ) ^(x) = 6(i,j), (2.8)

where

J dp(i) 6 ( i , j ) F(j) = F(i) • (2.9)

A t y n i c a l c h o i c e would be
16

(2i,)

« ( i , j ) = 6 ( 3 ) ( k - k'>

d p ( i ) = d3k . (2.10)

( I f t h e system were b e i n g q u a n t i s e d in a box with p e r i o d i c boundary

c o n d i t i o n s t h e n t h e s p a t i a l i n t e g r a l would become an i n f i n i t e sum.) In

p a r t i c u l a r eqn ( 2 . 6 ) l e a d s t o an expansion of t h e Cauchy d a t a $(.x,0)

and n ( x , 0 ) i n terms of t h e normal modes (x_) w i t h o p e r a t o r c o e f f i c i e n t s .


J
The t = 0 CCR eqns ( 2 . 3 ) a r e e q u i v a l e n t to

I"
[ a . , a^J = el'
5 ( j , k )\ (2.11)

where

a . = >£e7 b . . (2.12)
0 J O

The u s u a l s t e p new i s t o choose t h e Fock r e p r e s e n t a t i o n which i s

c h a r a c t e r i s e d by t h e e x i s t e n c e o f a unique c y c l i c s t a t e t h a t is

a n n i h i l a t e d by a l l t h e a..
0
3) The o p e r a t o r s N. H a . ' a . have i n t e g e r e i g e n v a l u e s and t h e
J J J
c o r r e s p o n d i n g e i g e n v e c t o r s a r e mapped ' u p - o n e ' o r 'down-one'

by a . ^ and a . . The l a t t e r a r e t h e r e f o r e i d e n t i f i e d as o p e r a t o r s
J J
which c r e a t e o r a n n i h i l a t e q u a n t a whose wave f u n c t i o n s in t h e

c o n v e n t i o n a l o n e - p a r t i c l e quantum-mechanical s e n s e a r e t h e normal

modes i^.(x). In so f a r as t h e s e q u a n t a con be i d e n t i f i e d as


0
17

p h y s i c a l p a r t i c l e s t h i s i s t h e s t a g e a t which t h e p a r t i c l e

concept f i r s t a p p e a r s . In p a r t i c u l a r t h e c y c l i c s t a t e mentioned

above i s c a l l e d t h e 'vacuum' o r ' n o - p a r t i c l e ' state,

'i) H i s shown t o be a w e l l - d e f i n e d o p e r a t o r on Fock s p a c e , a f t e r

normal o r d e r i n g , w i t h t h e p r o p e r t y of

i) a n n i h i l a t i n g t h e vacuum s t a t e ( i n t h e S c h r o d i n g e r

p i c t u r e t h i s means t h a t t h e vacuum s t a t e does not

change w i t h t i m e i . e . t h e r e i s no p a r t i c l e

production).

ii) commuting w i t h t h e 'number' o p e r a t o r s H . , which a r e


J
t h e r e f o r e c o n s t a n t s o f t h e motion. In p a r t i c u l a r an

n - p a r t i c l e s t a t e always e v o l v e s i n t h e S c h r o d i n g e r

p i c t u r e i n t o an n - p a r t i c l e s t a t e ( a g a i n no p a r t i c l e

production or annihilation).

The d i s c u s s i o n so f a r has been f o r a f i x e d c h o i c e o f t i m e c o o r d i n a t e

and by v i r t u e o f t h e s e p a r a t i o n of v a r i a b l e s in eqn ( 2 . 6 ) f o r a d e f i n i t e

c h o i c e of p o s i t i v e and n e g a t i v e f r e q u e n c i e s . However, c l e a r l y , one should

ask what happens i f a d i f f e r e n t c h o i c e of time ( i . e . , a d i f f e r e n t

i n e r t i a l frame) i s made. S i n c e any two i n e r t i a l r e f e r e n c e frames a r e

r e l a t e d by a P o i n c a r é group a c t i o n t h e q u e s t i o n i s r e a l l y now t h e

P o i n c a r é group a c t s on t h e o r i g i n a l Fock s p a c e . The answer i s t h a t Fock

s p a c e c a r r i e s a u n i t a r y r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of t h e P o i n c a r é group P which has

the property that

i) The c r e a t i o n o p e r a t o r s t r a n s f o r m c o v a r i a n t l y anorigst

t h e m s e l v e s as do t h e a n n i h i l a t i o n ooerators.
30

ii) t h e vacuum s t a t e i s i n v a r i a n t under t h e group ( i t

i s a n n i h i l a t e d by a l l t h e g e n e r a t o r s o f P ) . In f a c t

t h e time t r a n s l a t i o n group g e n e r a t o r i s p r e c i s e l y t h e

Hamiltonian c o n s i d e r e d a l r e a d y , i . e . , t i m e

t r a n s l a t i o n i s time e v o l u t i o n ,

and iii) any n - p a r t i c l e s t a t e i s mapped i n t o a n o t h e r n-particle

s t a t e by t h e group.

These t h r e e p r o p e r t i e s (which a r e c l o s e l y l i n k e d ) imply i n e f f e c t t h a t

t h e n o t i o n of p a r t i c l e o r q u a n t a i s e s s e n t i a l l y i n d e p e n d e n t o f inertial

o b s e r v e r and t h a t t h e n - p a r t i c l e s t a t e s behave t h e same, as f a r as t h e

P o i n c a r e group i s c o n c e r n e d , as t h e y do in t h e u s u a l r e l a t i v i s t i c n-

p a r t i c l e quantum t h e o r y . At t h i s s t a g e in t h e c o n v e n t i o n a l textbook

t r e a t m e n t o f quantum f i e l d t h e o r y i t i s t a c i t l y assumed t h a t t h e p u r e l y

mathematical 'quanta' d i s c u s s e d so f a r c o r r e s p o n d t o r e a l physical

p a r t i c l e s which could be measured w i t h an a p p r o p r i a t e p i e c e o f equipment

and which accord in some way w i t h o u r i n t u i t i v e f e e l i n g s o f what a

' p a r t i c l e should b e ' . T h i s c o n n e c t i o n between m a t h e m a t i c s and p h y s i c s

i s one o f t h e v i t a l s t e p 3 in t h e p h y s i c a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f a q u a n t i s e d

f i e l d but i s frequently glossed over. The i n v e s t i g a t i o n of t h i s

c o n n e c t i o n t u r n s o u t t o be o f paramount importance in t h e c a s e of an

a r b i t r a r y background.

S i n c e t h e u l t i m a t e aim i s t o q u a n t i s e t h e s c a l a r f i e l d i n eqn ( 2 . 2 )

t h e next o b v i o u s s t e p i s t o couple an e x t e r n a l s o u r c e t o t h e f r e e

scalar f i e l d j u s t considered. The a p p r o p r i a t e l a g r a n g i a n is

L(x) = | (n WU 4>(x) 3 v * ( x ) - m V ( x ) ) + j ( x ) <>2(x) (2.13)


19

« h e r e j ( x ) d e s c r i b e s t h e e x t e r n a l u n q u a n t i s e d s o u r c e w h i c h , by

v i r t u e ol' t h e form of i t s i n t e r a c t i o n , might be e x p e c t e d t o produce

p a i r s o f ijr-mesons. Indeed one obvious way of t r e a t i n g eqn ( 2 . 1 3 ) i s t o


2
n o p a r a t e o f f j ( x ) $ ( x ) and view i t as an i n t e r a c t i o n term which we

hope cun be d e f i n e d as on o p e r a t o r on t h e o r i g i n a l Fock space w i t h i t n maim

in q u a n t a . I f t h i 3 t e c h n i c a l s t e p can be performed t h e n t h i s interaction

term can c e r t a i n l y l e a d t o t h e p r o d u c t i o n of p a i r s of 'particles' of t h e

original type. ( I n o t h e r words t h e Fock vacuum i s no l o n g e r a n n i h i l a t e d by

the f u l l Hamiltonian). I t i s , however, q u i t e p o s s i b l e t h a t t h e

Hamiltonian cannot be d e f i n e d as an o p e r a t o r on t h e o r i g i n a l Fock s p a c e a t

all. This s i t u a t i o n might be r e c o g n i s e d h e u r i s t i c a l l y by t h e p r o d u c t i o n

in time o f on i n f i n i t e number of q u a n t a . In t h i s c a s e t h e S c h r o d i n g e r

p i c t u r e i s n o t very a p p r o p r i a t e ; however, a H e i s e n b e r g - t y p e p i c t u r e

might s t i l l e x i s t b u t w i t h t h e dynamical e v o l u t i o n b e i n g d e s c r i b e d by a

n o n - u n i t a r i l y implementable automorphism of t h e o p e r a t o r o b s e r v a b l c s

r a t h e r t h a n by eqns (2.5).

In g e n e r a l t e r m s i t i s not c l e a r t h a t t h e q u a n t a which o c c u r can be

r e g a r d e d as h a v i n g t h e same p h y s i c a l s i g n i f i c a n c e as b e f o r e . The whole

problem o f r e n o r m a l i s a t i o n and t h e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of p h y s i c a l observable3

r e a r s i t s head a t t h i s s t a g e . As an extreme example, i f j ( x ) were a


2
U

constant - ^ , t h e n t h e p r o d u c t i o n o f t h e mass m q u a n t a would have t o

be such as t o g i v e a f i n a l t h e o r y which i s a f r e e f i e l d w i t h mass

vm2 + u 2 . In t h i s c a s e i t i s c l e a r t h a t t h e 'wrong' Fock space has been

chosen i n i t i a l l y b u t t h e s i t u a t i o n f o r g e n e r a l s o u r c e s i s considerably

more c o m p l i c a t e d t h a n t h i s and t h e problem o f t h e c o r r e c t physical


2 0

interpretation is non-trivinl. In f a c t t h e r e i s no u n i v e r s a l l y

agreed p a r t i c l e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n for a general external f i e l d . One major

c o n t r i b u t o r y f a c t o r i s t h a t in g e n e r a l t h e t h e o r y i s no l o n g e r invariant

under t h e P o i n c a r e group. T h i s o f c o u r s e i s a f e a t u r e s h a r e d by t h e

s c a l a r f i e l d d e f i n e d on an a r b i t r a r y background ( w h i c h , generically,

w i l l have no group of symmetries) and f o r t h i s reason i f f o r no o t h e r

t h e system d e s c r i b e d by eqn ( 2 . 1 3 ) i s worth s t u d y i n g c a r e f u l l y . Certain

problems remain even i f t h e c u r r e n t j ( x ) i s s t a t i c (when a t l e a s t t h e

time t r a n s l a t i o n group e x i s t s ) .

With t h e s e c a u t i o n a r y remarks i n mind l e t us now t u r n t o t h e

s i t u a t i o n d e s c r i b e d by eqn ( 2 . 1 ) . Numerous d i f f i c u l t i e s can be

a n t i c i p a t e d in p r o c e e d i n g with t h e analogue of any o f t h e s t e p s sketched

above f o r t h e f r e e , f l a t - 3 p a c e f i e l d . One n a t u r a l approach p e r h a p s i s

t o s e p a r a t e o u t t h e Minkowski m e t r i c n and w r i t e
yv

g (x) = n + h (x) (2.114)


yv yv yv

where h ) y ( x ) d e s c r i b e s t h e d e v i a t i o n o f t h e geometry from f l a t n e s s . The

b i g advantage of t h i s scheme i s t h a t i t r e d u c e s s u p e r f i c i a l l y t h e problem

t o one s i m i l a r t o t h a t posed by t h e e x t e r n a l s o u r c e i n eqn ( 2 . 1 3 ) . In

p a r t i c u l a r t h e e x i s t e n c e o f t h e f l a t background w i t h i t s P o i n c a r e group

of motions and p r e f e r r e d c l a s s of i n e r t i a l r e f e r e n c e f r a m e s should l e n d

t o t h e same s o r t o f p a r t i c l e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . However, t h e r e a r e a number

of o b j e c t i o n s t o t h i s p o i n t of view. For example:

i) The a c t u a l background m a n i f o l d may not b e r e m o t e l y


21

Minkownkian in e i t h e r i t s t o p o l o g i c a l or

m e t r i c a l p r o p e r t i e s , i n which case t h e s e p a r a t i o n

in eqn ( 2 . l U ) (with i t s c o r r e s p o n d i n g s e p a r a t i o n

o f t h e H a m i l t o n i a n i n t o f r e e and i n t e r a c t i o n terms)

i s completely inappropriate,

ii) Even i f eqn ( 2 . l i t ) i s j u s t i f i e d (from t h e p o i n t o f

view of i ) ) t h e p r o c e d u r e i s s t i l l dubious because

t h e l i g h t c o n e s t r u c t u r e of t h e p h y s i c a l s p a c e t i m e i s

d i f f e r e n t from t h a t of Minkowski s p a c e . For example

i f t h e f i e l d cj> has some s o r t o f m i c r o c a u s a l i t y

p r o p e r t y with r e s p e c t t o t h e m e t r i c then t h i s is

not e q u i v a l e n t t o m i c r o c a u s a l i t y w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e

f i c t i t i o u s Minkowski background.

Thus i t i s very d e s i r a b l e t o avoid any f i e l d s e p a r a t i o n and,

c o r r e s p o n d i n g l y , t o c o n s i d e r t h e l a g r a n g i a n in eqn ( 2 . 1 ) as a s i n g l e

entity. However, w i t h i n t h e framework o f c o n v e n t i o n a l quantum f i e l d

t h e o r y t h i s p o s e s a number o f problems. F i r s t l y t h e r e i s now, in

g e n e r a l , no symmetry group of t h e m e t r i c which can p l a y t h e r o l e o f

t h e P o i n c a r e group. In p a r t i c u l a r t h e r e a r e no p r e f e r r e d c l a s s e s of

t i m e and one would e x p e c t a p r i o r i t o have t o c o n s i d e r t h e CCR o f eqn

( 2 . 2 ) d e f i n e d o v e r an a r b i t r a r y s p a t i a l t h r e e - s u r f a c e . There i s no

n a t u r a l d e f i n i t i o n of n e g a t i v e and p o s i t i v e f r e q u e n c i e s and even i f

some analogue o f eqn ( 2 . 6 ) i s c o n s t r u c t e d t h e r e i s no reason why t h e

r e s u l t i n g c r e a t i o n and a n n i h i l a t i o n o p e r a t o r s which c o r r e s p o n d t o

d i f f e r e n t choices of t h r e e - s u r f a c e should l e a d t o equivalent notions

of p a r t i c l e . In g e n e r a l any p u r e a n n i h i l a t i o n ( o r c r e a t i o n ) operator
2?

w i l l e v o l v e i n time i n t o a m i x t u r e o f such o p e r a t o r s , a s i n d e e d i t

does f o r t h e s i m p l e e x t e r n a l s o u r c e c a s e in eqn ( 2 . 1 3 ) . This i s not

in i t s e l f s u r p r i s i n g as i t c o r r e s p o n d s t o t h e e x p e c t e d phenomenon of

particle production, b u t t h e problem o f d e c i d i n g i n what s e n s e t h e

r e s u l t i n g quanta a c t u a l l y correspond t o p h y s i c a l l y measurable particles

is non-trivial. Another d i f f i c u l t y i s t h a t t h e H a m i l t o n i a n h a s t o be

normally o r d e r e d and t h i s depends on t h e exact r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of t h e

CCR which i s chosen. Two d i f f e r e n t c h o i c e s can e a s i l y l e a d t o

Hamiltonian o p e r a t o r s which d i f f e r from each o t h e r by an i n f i n i t e constant.

T h i s might mean t h a t in some r e a l p h y s i c a l s e n s e an i n f i n i t e amount o f

energy i s produced by t h e background i n t h e form o f p h y s i c a l ¿-particles

b u t i t c o u l d a l s o simply be t h e r e s u l t of c h o o s i n g a p h y s i c a l l y

i n a p p r o p r i a t e CCR r e p r e s e n t a t i o n , i n which c a s e t h e i n f i n i t e answer

would n o t n e c e s s a r i l y have any more s i g n i f i c a n c e t h a n t h e renormalisable

u l t r a v i o l e t d i v e r g e n c e s o f some c o n v e n t i o n a l quantum f i e l d t h e o r i e s .

If the metric is s t a t i c or stationary, s o t h a t t h e r e e x i s t s sort»

g l o b a l t i m e l i k e K i l l i n g v e c t o r w i t h i t s a s s o c i a t e d group o f symmetries,

some p r o g r e s s can be made. Similarly, if the metric i s asymptotically

f l a t ( o r , remembering t h a t i t need n o t s a t i s f y E i n s t e i n ' s e q u a t i o n s in

any s e n s e , f l a t o u t s i d e o f some f i n i t e r e g i o n ) t h e n t h e f r e e ' i n ' and

'out' f i e l d s can be u s e d t o g i v e some s o r t of p r e f e r r e d p a r t i c l e

i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , w i t h a c o r r e s p o n d i n g s e t of p h y s i c a l o b s e r v a b l e s (which
15
i n c l u d e in p a r t i c u l a r , e n e r g y ) . ' ' I t i s tempting to speculate t h a t

i t may be in t h e r o l e o f c o n s o l i d a t i n g t h e concept o f a p a r t i c l e that

t h e BMS group (whose r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s have r e c e n t l y been worked o u t ) ' 1 6 '


inivy f i n a l l y come i n t o i t o own. Even i n t h e s e s i t u a t i o n s however, a

luimlinr of problems remain and t h e i n t e r e s t e d r e a d e r i s r e f e r r e d t o t h e

ox«:»Uont t h e s i s und p a p e r s of S. F u l l i n g ' 1 2 " 1 3 ' f o r d e t a i l s of t h e s e .

I t nhould be emphasised t h a t t h i s problem i s not merely o f p u r e

thoorctical interest. I t i s p e r f e c t l y p o s s i b l e t h a t the production of

p a r t i c l c o by a g r a v i t a t i o n a l f i e l d c o u l d p r o v i d e a fundamental

i'-"iolution o f t h e whole problem of g r a v i t a t i o n a l c o l l a p s e . This is


17
• •lctnrly shown i n t h e e x c i t i n g r e s u l t s o f S.W. H a w k i n g ' ' which a r e

imported i n t h e p r e s e n t volume. He c o n s i d e r s an a s y m p t o t i c a l l y flat

g r a v i t a t i o n o l l y collapsomg system and shows t h a t i t can l o s e an i n f i n i t e

iimount o f energy by t h e mechanism o f p a r t i c l e p r o d u c t i o n . (Note t h a t

t h e amount o f energy r a d i a t e d could be p e r f e c t l y w e l l d e f i n e d even i f

t h e r e i s no unambiguous i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of t h e p r e c i s e form i n which

it is radiated). This i s n o t a c o m p l e t e r e s u l t in t h e p h y s i c a l s e n s e

because i t i g n o r e s t h e r e a c t i o n back o f t h e p a r t i c l e s on t h e gravitational

f i e l d a n d , as might be e x p e c t e d from t h e remarks a b o v e , the precise

choice o f t i m e and hence p a r t i c l e o p e r a t o r s i s a d e l i c a t e one.

N e v e r t h e l e s s Hawking 1 s work i s of g r e a t i n t e r e s t and one can a n t i c i p a t e

t h a t a c o n s i d e r a b l e amount o f e f f o r t w i l l be expended i n t h e f u t u r e on

pursuing t h i s approach.

There w i l l c e r t a i n l y be some i n s t a n c e s when b h e ' £ i - e j d r a t h e r t h a n

t h e p a r t i c l e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of t h e t h e o r y i s m, a n y , c a s e more l i k e l y t o
; or -• <s>",\
be t h e a p p r o p r i a t e one. However, one can c o n f''l d S h ? r f' • •w '
t l y p r e d i c t t h a t most
.... _ ,
of t h e problems which a r i s e in t h e p a r t i c l e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n w i l l r e a p p e a rtliL
in d i f f e r e n t g u i s e s . At a d e e p e r l e v e l i t i s p o s s i b l e t h a t "-the t)ieory

s h o u l d be modelled on t h e C - a l g e b r a approach t o c o n v e n t i o n a l quantum


f i e l d t h e o r y in which t h e l o c a l o b s e r v a b l e s play a dominant r o l e , rather

than t h e more u s u a l approach used above i n which a H i l b e r t s p a c e o f s t a t e s

i s chosen as t h e b a s i c e n t i t y . Indeed even t h e s i m p l e problem o f an

e x t e r n a l s o u r c e coupled t o a s c a l a r f i e l d can be u s e f u l l y t r e a t e d i n t h i s

way. In s o f a r as a m a n i f o l d l o c a l l y r e s e m b l e s Minkowski-space (by v i r t u e

o f i t s very d e f i n i t i o n ) , t h e i d e a o f c o n c e n t r a t i n g on l o c a l observables

i s an a t t r a c t i v e one.

Of c o u r s e one can always t a k e r e f u g e i n t h e a s s e r t i o n t h a t t h e

problem stems b a s i c a l l y from n o t q u a n t i s i n g t h e m e t r i c t e n s o r f i e l d and

can only be r e s o l v e d by a f u l l quantum g r a v i t y t h e o r y . It is difficult

however t o b e l i e v e t h a t quantum g r a v i t y i t s e l f could r e a l l y b e r e l e v a n t


(17) (18) (19)
t o t h e t y p e o f c a l c u l a t i o n s which Hawking , Unruh and Ford

have been making and t h e problem o f s u c c e s s f u l l y and unambiguously

q u a n t i s i n g a 3 c a l a r f i e l d i n an a r b i t r a r y b u t f i x e d background must

remain an i m p o r t a n t challenge.

3. QUAHTUM FIELD THEORY ON A BACKGROUND WITH BACK REACTION

One p o s s i b l e t h e o r e t i c a l development of t h e scheme d i s c u s s e d in

§2 i s t h a t i n which t h e quantum ( s c a l a r ) f i e l d a c t s as t h e a c t u a l

s o u r c e of t h e ( s t i l l c l a s s i c a l ) background. In o t h e r words t h e reaction

back on t h e g r a v i t a t i o n a l f i e l d caused by t h e p r o d u c t i o n o f s c a l a r

p a r t i c l e s i s i n c o r p o r a t e d as p a r t o f t h e dynamics. To a c h i e v e t h i s it

i s n e c e s s a r y t o i n c l u d e i n some way t h e energy-momentum of t h e q u a n t i s e d

s c a l a r m a t t e r - f i e l d as t h e r i g h t - h a n d s i d e of E i n s t e i n ' s e q u a t i o n s . The

equation
G
.Je) = T ( m a t t e r , g) (3.1)

In not s u i t a b l e as i t s t a n d s s i n c e i t e q u a t e s an o p e r a t o r and a

(¡-number. The obvious m o d i f i c a t i o n i s t o w r i t e

G y v ( g ) = <T yv ( m a t t e r , g)> (3.2)

where < > d e n o t e s t h e e x p e c t a t i o n v a l u e of t h e q u a n t i s e d system i n some


•-v., ^ ^ (20)

nuitable state.

This i s t h e system o f e q u a t i o n s which w i l l be d i s c u s s e d i n t h e

present section. The s i t u a t i o n i s c l e a r l y a t l e a s t as c o m p l i c a t e d as

t h a t d i s c u s s e d i n §2 b u t w i t h t h e a d d i t i o n a l f e a t u r e t h a t t h e g r a v i t a t i o n a l

f i e l d i s now i n t r o d u c e d as a dynamical v a r i a b l e r a t h e r t h a n as a f i x e d

background.

The obvious q u e s t i o n which a r i s e s i s what p r e c i s e l y i s meant by

a 'suitable state'? There i s no r e a s o n t o suppose t h a t , f o r example,

a r e a l i s t i c c o l l a p s i n g system would be d e s c r i b e d simply by a p u r e s t a t e

and i n g e n e r a l one must allow f o r < > t o c o r r e s p o n d t o a mixed,

s t a t i s t i c a l ( p r o b a b l y n o n - e q u i l i b r i u m ) s t a t e of t h e s y s t e m . This,

however, r a i s e s t h e immediate p o i n t t h a t such a s t a t e w i l l almost

c e r t a i n l y i t s e l f depend on t h e m e t r i c t e n s o r g ^ ( t h i n k f o r example of

any g e n e r a l l y c o v a r i a n t - l o o k i n g v e r s i o n of t h e Gibbs e n s e m b l e ) . Clearly

t h e t h e o r y i s a good d e a l more non l i n e a r thun i s e v i d e n t from a

c u r s o r y g l a n c e a t eqn ( 3 . 2 ) and t h e f u l l i m p l i c a t i o n s o f t h i s approach


a r e n o t y e t. known.
, ( 2 l ) ( 2 2 ) ( 2 3 } ( 2 < < ) ( 2 5')v( 2 6 )'

I t s h o u l d be emphasised t h a t t h e d i f f i c u l t i e s c o n c e r n i n g c h o i c e o f
6

a n n i h i l a t i o n and c r e a t i o n o p e r a t o r s , normal o r d e r i n g e t c , which were

d i s c u s s e d in 52 s t i l l apply h e r e . In p a r t i c u l a r t h e normal o r d e r i n g o f

t h e energy momentum t e n s o r w i l l e v i d e n t l y p l a y a m a j o r r o l e in t h e

c o r r e c t use of eqn ( 3 . 2 ) . N o t i c e t h a t t h e a d d i t i o n of a c o n s t a n t t o

t h e energy momentum t e n s o r has a r e a l p h y s i c a l e f f e c t on t h e gravitational

field. Thus t h e fundamental f e a t u r e o f g e n e r a l r e l a t i v i t y , t h a t t h e

a b s o l u t e r a t h e r t h a n r e l a t i v e v a l u e o f t h e energy-momentum t e n s o r has a

meaning, i s s h a r p l y r e f l e c t e d in t h i s quantum t h e o r y . T h i s p r o v i d e s an

a d d i t i o n a l f a c e t t o t h e p r e v i o u s l y mentioned problem o f t h e CCR

r e p r e s e n t a t i o n dependence o f normal o r d e r i n g .

The most i n t e r e s t i n g r e s u l t s which have been a c h i e v e d so f a r u s i n g


(27)

t h i s approach a r e p r o b a b l y t h o s e of L. P a r k e r and S. F u l l i n g . They

c o n s i d e r a massive s c a l a r f i e l d q u a n t i s e d in t h i s way v i a eqn ( 3 . 2 ) b u t

in which t h e m e t r i c t e n s o r i s r e s t r i c t e d t o be o f t h e Robertson-Walker

form
3
ds2 = d t 2 - R ( t ) 2 I S.. ( x 1 , x 2 , x 3 ) d x i d x j (3-3)
1J
i,j=l

where S• . (x 1 , x 2 , x 3 ) i s t h e ( f i x e d ) m e t r i c o f a t h r e e - s p h e r e .

E v i d e n t l y a very s p e c i a l c h o i c e of s t a t e > i n eqn ( 3 . 2 ) must be

made t o r e n d e r t h i s system o f e q u a t i o n s s e l f c o n s i s t e n t . A general state

would n o t be c o m p a t i b l e w i t h t h e s i m p l e m e t r i c t e n s o r i n eqn ( 3 - 3 ) and

t h e main s t e p i n P a r k e r and F u l l i n g ' s work i s t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n of a

suitable state. The r e s u l t of t h e i r c a l c u l a t i o n s i s an e x p l i c i t form

f o r t h e f u n c t i o n R ( t ) which p o s s e s s e s t h e r e m a r k a b l e f e a t u r e t h a t t h e
27

»ygtom docs not e x h i b i t t h e c l a s s i c a l g r a v i t a t i o n a l c o l l a p s e b u t

r a t h e r 'bounces o f f the s i n g u l a r i t y at R = 0 with the radiu3 R(t)

a c h i e v i n g a minimum of t h e Compton wavelength of t h e massive s c a l a r

particles.

T h i s r e s u l t i s p o t e n t i a l l y of f u n d a m e n t a l importance t o t h e s u b j e c t

of g r a v i t a t i o n a l c o l l a p s e . I f t h e s c a l a r f i e l d d e s c r i b e d say p i o n s , it

would mean t h a t t h e quantum e f f e c t s on t h e c o l l a p s e s t a r t e d a t a d i s t a n c e

of 10 cms r a t h e r t h a n t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c Planck l e n g t h •v 10 cms


C
-13 . .
of pure quantum g r a v i t y . The 10 cms r e s u l t i m p l i e s of c o u r s e t h a t the

f i n e d e t a i l s of t h e b e h a v i o u r o f t h e system a t t h e t u r n - a r o u n d p o i n t

depend s i g n i f i c a n t l y on t h e s t r o n g i n t e r a c t i o n s . However t h e t h o u g h t -

p r o v o k i n g p o s s i b i l i t y remains t h a t i t may n o t be n e c e s s a r y t o q u a n t i s e

t h e g r a v i t a t i o n a l f i e l d i t s e l f i n o r d e r t o avoid g r a v i t a t i o n a l collapse.

In e f f e c t t h e v i o l a t i o n of t h e Hawking-Penrose energy c o n d i t i o n s by t h e

e x p e c t a t i o n v a l u e of t h e q u a n t i s e d m a t t e r ' s momentum t e n s o r may be

sufficient.

There a r e many t e c h n i c a l problems remaining in t h e P a r k e r - F u l l i n g

work ( a s t h e a u t h o r s t h e m s e l v e s p o i n t o u t ) c o n c e r n i n g t h e c h o i c e of t h e

3tate > and t h e r e n o r m a l i s a t i o n of t h e t h e o r y , which a r e , t o some e x t e n t ,

connected w i t h t h o s e of t h e s i m p l e r t y p e of system d i s c u s s e d in §2.

However, from a p r a c t i c a l ( a s t r o p h y s i c a l ) p o i n t o f view t h i s approach t o

'quantum g r a v i t y ' i s very p r o m i s i n g und w i l l undoubtedly be t h e s u b j e c t

of a f a i r l y s u b s t a n t i a l r e s e a r c h e f f o r t i n t h e f u t u r e .
so

It. COVARIANT QUANTISATION

We new t u r n o u r a t t e n t i o n t o t h e problem of q u a n t i s i n g t h e

gravitational field i t s e l f . H i s t o r i c a l l y t h e various approaches t o t h i s

have t e n d e d t o be c l a s s i f i e d as e i t h e r ' c a n o n i c a l ' or ' c o v a r i a n t ' and i t

i s t h e l a t t e r approach which i s c o n s i d e r e d i n t h i s s e c t i o n . Two s l i g h t l y

d i f f e r e n t p o i n t s of view have emerged o v e r t h e l a s t f i f t e e n y e a r s . Both

of them s t a r t by f i x i n g in advance t h e f o u r - d i m e n s i o n a l s p a c e - t i m e

m a n i f o l d upon which t h e m e t r i c t e n s o r g i s r e g a r d e d as b e i n g d e f i n e d as

an o p e r a t o r - v a l u e d d i s t r i b u t i o n . The o p e r a t o r i s s e p a r a t e d i n t o a

c l a s s i c a l background p l u s a quantum c o r r e c t i o n i n t h e form

g p v = 6°Uv + J UV (fc.l)

which i s t h e n i n s e r t e d i n t o t h e E i n s t e i n a c t i o n S = j J-% R(g) d^x

(assuming f o r s i m p l i c i t y t h a t no m a t t e r f i e l d s a r e p r e s e n t ) . The f a c t

t h a t a l l t e n components of are afforded operator s t a t u s (as

opposed t o j u s t t h e two c a n o n i c a l v a r i a b l e s ) means t h a t t h e approach

b e i n g f o l l o w e d h a s something in common w i t h t h e G u p t a - B l e u l e r

q u a n t i s a t i o n of t h e e l e c t r o m a g n e t i c f i e l d , as opposed t o , say,

r a d i a t i o n gauge c a n o n i c a l q u a n t i s a t i o n . In t h e p i o n e e r i n g work o f
(2 8}

De W i t t , Schwinger's action p r i n c i p l e is modified t o give Green's

f u n c t i o n s by v a r y i n g t h e a c t i o n w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e background field.

(The e x t e r n a l s o u r c e s of S c h w i n g e r ' s o r i g i n a l t h e o r y a r e d i f f i c u l t t o

use when a n o n - a b e l i a n group i s p r e s e n t . ) De W i t t ' s work i s very


29

comprehensive and i n c l u d e s a d i s c u s s i o n of what c o n s t i t u t e s on

olinnrvobXo in t h e t h e o r y and t h e problem o f i t s measurement. The key

I r c l i n i c a l t o o l i n t h i s i s t h e P e i e r l s - P o i s 3 o n b r a c k e t which e n a b l e s a

m l u t i o n t o be s e t up between t h e quantum commutator o f o b s e r v a b l e s

tuid t h e G r e e n ' s f u n c t i o n s . Do Witt works e x c l u s i v e l y in c o n f i g u r a t i o n

npuce and h i s formalism i s , a t l e a s t a t t h e h e u r i s t i c l e v e l , manifestly

c o v a r i a n t under t h e v a r i o u s gauge groups which a c t i n t h e t h e o r y . The

absence of a momentum s p a c e i n h i s approach ( t h e r e i s of c o u r s e no

n a t u r a l d e f i n i t i o n o f F o u r i e r t r a n s f o r m i n an a r b i t r a r y Riemannian

m a n i f o l d w i t h m e t r i c gjj^ ) means t h a t some o f h i s t e c h n i q u e s s e e n

u n f a m i l i a r t o anyone who i s p r i m a r i l y t r a i n e d in c o n v e n t i o n a l particle

physics. P a r t l y f o r t h i s reason a s l i g h t l y d i f f e r e n t p o i n t o f view h a s

a r i s e n in which t h e s e p a r a t i o n i n C i . l ) i s performed always w i t h r e s p e c t

t o t h e Minkowski s p a c e background. When t h e r e s u l t i n g f i e l d i s

substituted into the Einstein lagrangian, a very non l i n e a r (typically

n o n - p o l y n o m i a l ) i n t e r a c t i o n i s o b t a i n e d between m a s s l e s s s p i n two

g r a v i t o n s ( i . e . r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s o f t h e P o i n c a r c group) p r o p a g a t i n g i n

t h i s Minkowski s p a c e . The d u b i o u s n e s s of such a s e p a r a t i o n has a l r e a d y

been d i s c u s s e d in 52 in t h e c o n t e x t o f an e x t e r n a l g r a v i t a t i o n a l field

and t h e comments made t h e r e apply h e r e . However, i t does have t h e

advantage o f r e d u c i n g t h e t e c h n i c a l p r o b l e m , a t l e a s t superficially,

t o t h e s o r t o f s i t u a t i o n which has been e n c o u n t e r e d b e f o r e in p a r t i c l e -

p h y s i c s - o r i e n t e d quantum f i e l d t h e o r y . T h i s approach was i n i t i a t e d by


(29) (30)(37)
R. Feynman and S. Gupta and has been enthusiastically

adopted by a number of (mainly European) p a r t i c l e p h y s i c i s t s in r e c e n t


( 3 ' i ) ( 35 )
years. ' The s t r u c t u r e i s s i m i l a r i n many r e s p e c t s t o t h a t o f t h e
Yong-Millo t h e o r y in t h a t t h e g e n e r a l c o o r d i n a t e i n v a r i a n c e m a n i f e s t a

i t s e l f t h r o u g h t h e e x i s t e n c e of a n o n - a b e l i a n gauge group. The main

t a s k s t o be performed a r e indeed t h e same i n b o t h c a s e s . Namely:

i) C o n s t r u c t t h e c o r r e c t Feynman r u l e s which l e a d t o a

unitary S-matrix.

ii) C o n s t r u c t t h e analogue o f t h e Ward-Takahashi identities

which s h o u l d r e f l e c t t h e gauge invariance,

iii) Find an a p p r o p r i a t e ( i . e . gauge i n v a r i a n t ) régularisation

scheme.

iv) I n v e s t i g a t e t h e re normal i s a t i o n of t h e t h e o r y ,

v) Find t e c h n i q u e s f o r summing up u s e f u l s e t s of Feynman

graphs.

These q u e s t i o n s a r e a l l connected and w i l l be d i s c u s s e d a t l e n g t h in

K.J. Duff's chapter. I t i s t h e r e f o r e s u f f i c i e n t t o remark h e r e

t h a t t h e t e c h n i q u e which i s u n i v e r s a l l y used t h e s e days t o g e n e r a t e a

p e r t u r b a t i v e e x p a n s i o n of t h e G r e e n ' s f u n c t i o n s and hence t o c o n s t r u c t


(38)

t h e Feynman r u l e s , i s t h a t of a f u n c t i o n a l p a t h i n t e g r a l . In a

simple s c a l a r f i e l d theory t h e b a s i c n - p o i n t time ordered product (which

g i v e s t h e n - p a r t i c l e S - m a t r i x v i a t h e LSZ formalism) can be e x p r e s s e d by

a f u n c t i o n a l i n t e g r a l as

r i/ K f IU)d*X
<0 | T ^ ( x 1 ) . . . « ( x n ) | 0 > = H | (d$) « ( x , ) . . . $ ( x n ) e " '

(U.2)

J=0

where t h e vacuum-vacuum a m p l i t u d e in t h e p r e s e n c e of t h e e x t e r n a l
31

nource J ( x ) in

OUt
<0|0>i" = N | (d*) e (It.3)

nnd II is some normalisation constant. I f the lagrangian I($) is

noparated into the sum o f a f r e e part Lq plu3 an i n t e r a c t i o n part

XV (X in a coupling constant), i . e .

LU) = Lo(*) + XV(t), (k.k)

then the basic amplitude (¡».3) can be written as

i/K f [Lq(4)+ XV(<j>) + <fj] d^x


out
:0|0>^ = N j (d*)

N e
•i
. (d$) e
Ct.5)

Now t h e f u n c t i o n a l i n t e g r a l

•f
Z o ( J ) = I (d*) e (It.6)

i s in Gaussian form ( s i n c e i-Q(<>) i s b i l i n e a r i n <J> and i t s d e r i v a t i v e ) and

can be e x p l i c i t l y computed t o be

- \ j d"x d V J ( x ) AF(x-y)J(y)
ZQ(J) = e (It.7)
32

where Ap(x - y ) i s t h e a p p r o p r i a t e Feynman p r o p a g a t o r f o r t h e f r e e $


i / K | XV(K/. 6/6J)d*x
field. If the operator e in eqn (U. 5) i s now

expanded i n term3 o f powers of X t h e n a p e r t u r b a t i v e form f o r ~ ! 1 < 0 | 0 > ° u t

i s o b t a i n e d in which each power o f X i s m u l t i p l i e d by v a r i o u s space-time

i n t e g r a l s o v e r p r o d u c t s of t h e Aj,(x - y) p r o p a g a t o r s . In f a c t this

expansion i s e x a c t l y t h e same as t h a t o b t a i n e d from t h e Feynman-pyson

i n t e r a c t i o n p i c t u r e and i s t h e modern way of o b t a i n i n g t h e corresponding

Feynman r u l e s . The u l t r a v i o l e t d i v e r g e n c e problem i s o f c o u r s e t h e same

in b o t h a p p r o a c h e s .

The s i t u a t i o n f o r a t h e o r y which a d m i t s a gauge group i s more

complicated. Not a l l components of t h e f i e l d a r e t r u e dynamical v a r i a b l e s

and so t h e v a l i d i t y of t h e i r use as v a r i a b l e s t o be i n c l u d e d i n t h e Feynman

i n t e g r a l over physical paths i s not a p r i o r i c l e a r . In t h e c a s e of

e l e c t r o m a g n e t i s u t h e r e a r e in f a c t no major p r o b l e m s , p r i m a r i l y b e c a u s e

t h e gauge group i s a b e l i a n . However, f o r t h e Yang-Mills o r gravitational

t h e o r i e s , which a r e d i s t i n g u i s h e d by p o s s e s s i n g n o n - a b e l i a n gauge g r o u p s ,

t h e s i t u a t i o n i s more complex. The a c t u a l form of t h e f u n c t i o n a l integral


(31)

was f i r s t e x h i b i t e d by De Witt and t h e n by Fadeev and Popov and h a s

been e x t e n s i v e l y i n v e s t i g a t e d s i n c e t h e n . The main s u r p r i s e i s that,

when e x p r e s s e d i n Feynman diagram l a n g u a g e , l o o p s of ' f i c t i t i o u s ' quanta

a p p e a r which do n o t o c c u r i n t h e o r i e s w i t h o u t non a b e l i a n gauge g r o u p s .

The n e c e s s i t y f o r such f i c t i t i o u s l o o p s was f i r s t d e m o n s t r a t e d by Feynman

who found t h a t t h e n a i v e p e r t u r b a t i v e r u l e s l e a d t o n o n - u n i t a r y (and non-

gauge-invariant) S-matrix elements.

The r é g u l a r i s a t i o n which i s mainly i n use a t p r e s e n t i s t h a t o f


33

dimensional r e g u l a r i a a t i o n . This i s mo3t a p p r o p r i a t e f o r t h e momentiim

npaco approaches b u t i s c u r r e n t l y b e i n g adapted by De Witt t o h i s

con f i g u r a t i o n s p a c e - b a s e d t r e a t m e n t .

The c u r r e n t s t a t e o f t h e c o m p u t a t i o n a l a r t i s t h a t v a r i o u s tree

graphs and one loop graph have been computed and have been covariantly

r e g u l a r i s e d in the sense t h a t t h e f i n i t e remainders s a t i s f y the


(32)
a p p r o p r i a t e Ward i d e n t i t i e s . The main q u e s t i o n which has t o be

d i s c u s s e d i s whether o r n o t t h e t h e o r y i s r e n o r m u l i s a b l e . Certainly a

s u p e r f i c i a l power count l e a d s t o a h i g h l y d i v e r g e n t t h e o r y , a result

which seems t o be borne out by e x p l i c i t c a l c u l a t i o n f o r t h e combined

Einstein plus m a t t e r - f i e l d l a g r a n g i a n s . The s i t u a t i o n i s n o t c o m p l e t e l y

w a t e r t i g h t because i t i s p o s s i b l e t h a t m i r a c u l o u s c a n c e l l a t i o n s nay s t i l l

occur ( p o s s i b l y only f o r c e r t a i n c h o i c e s o f m a t t e r lagrangian).

U n f o r t u n a t e l y t h e extreme complexity of t h e n e c e s s a r y c a l c u l a t i o n s (a

two loop graph would be very h e l p f u l ) means t h a t a d e f i n i t i v e answer i s

not l i k e l y t o be f o r t h c o m i n g in t h e i n m e d i a t e f u t u r e . The r e a d e r i s

r e f e r r e d t o M.J. D u f f ' s c h a p t e r f o r f u r t h e r e n l i g h t e n m e n t on t h i s p o i n t

but perhaps i t i s worth commenting a l i t t l e on t h e s i g n i f i c a n c e of t h e

probable n o n - r e n o r m a l i s a b i l i t y of the theory. It is possible to turn

such a s i t u a t i o n t o p o s i t i v e a d v a n t a g e . The problem o f q u a n t i s i n g non-

polynomial l a g r a n g i a n s (which by c o n v e n t i o n a l r e c k o n i n g a r e certainly

n o n - r e n o r m o l i s a b l e ) r e c e i v e d c o n s i d e r a b l e a t t e n t i o n a few y e a r s ago w i t h

t h e use o f a method which i n e f f e c t f i x e d , s i m u l t a n e o u s l y , t h e v a l u e s o f


i n f i n i t e l y many s u b t r a c t i o n c o n s t a n t s i n an S - m a t r i x e l e m e n t . Abdus Solum,

J . S t r a t h d e e and I ( 33) a p p l i e d t h e s e t e c h n i q u e s t o t h e i n t e r a c t i o n of t h e
31.

combined g r a v i t a t i o n a l , e l e c t r o m a g n e t i c and e l e c t r o n f i e l d s und

s u c c e e d e d in o b t a i n i n g f i n i t e answers f o r c e r t a i n i n f i n i t e s e t s of

Feynman d i a g r a m s , t h a t would i n d i v i d u a l l y be r e g a r d e d as h i g h l y divergent.

The c o n v e n t i o n a l quantum f i e l d t h e o r y s i t u a t i o n i s s i m i l a r t o expanding


-1/x -1/x 1
e around x = O a s e = 1 - '/ + taking the limit
X
2!x2
as x 0 from p o s i t i v e v a l u e s and t h e n announcing t h a t t h e r e s u l t is

1 - <o + co . . . , = ; T h i s r e s u l t can be r e g a r d e d as a p a r t i a l

r e a l i s a t i o n o f t h e o f t e n - q u o t e d e x p e c t a t i o n t h a t g r a v i t y can a c t as a

u n i v e r s a l r e g u l a t o r due t o quantum s m e a r i n g of t h e l i g h t cone. In e f f e c t

t h e Feynman loop i n t e g r a l s a r e t r u n c a t e d a t 102® eV('v. 10 cms.) and

hence y i e l d f i n i t e numbers. However, b e c a u s e of t h e very considerable

t e c h n i c a l complexity of t h e p r o b l e m , t h e a p p l i c a t i o n of t h e s e techniques

t o t h e p u r e s e l f - i n t e r a c t i n g g r a v i t a t i o n a l f i e l d was n e v e r a c h i e v e d .

Some f u r t h e r t h o u g h t s on t h i s t o p i c w i l l be found in t h e c h a p t e r by

P r o f e s s o r Salara.

From t h e c o n v e n t i o n a l p o i n t of view t h e n o n - r e n o r m a l i s a b i l i t y of

a quantum f i e l d t h e o r y i s f r e q u e n t l y r e g a r d e d as b e i n g s u f f i c i e n t l y

d i s a s t r o u s t o j u s t i f y t h r o w i n g away t h e u n d e r l y i n g c l a s s i c a l field

t h e o r y and r e p l a c i n g i t by a r e n o r m a l i s a b l e o n e . A good example of

t h i s i s a f f o r d e d by t h e c u r r e n t l y p o p u l a r w e a k - i n t e r a c t i o n models which

successfully replace the old non-renormalisable four-fermion theory. In

t h e c a s e of g e n e r a l r e l a t i v i t y t h e s i t u a t i o n i s s l i g h t l y d i f f e r e n t . The

f o u r - f e r m i o n w e a k - i n t e r a c t i o n t h e o r y was only i n v e n t e d in t h e f i r s t p l a c e

f o r p u r e l y quantum f i e l d t h e o r e t i c use and no-one can complain i f t h e


35

demands ol' quantum f i e l d t h e o r y e v e n t u a l l y l e a d t o i t s demioe. However,

t.ho t h e o r y o f g e n e r a l r e l a t i v i t y has a s i g n i f i c a n c e and v a l i d i t y quite

a p a r t from t h e quantum t h e o r y and many r e l a t i v i s t s would very

r e a s o n a b l y o b j e c t i f E i n s t e i n ' s s t r u c t u r e was t o be j e t t i s o n e d purely

on t h e grounds of n o n - r e n o r m a l i s a b i l i t y . Indeed t h e y a r e more l i k e l y

t o i n s i s t t h a t t h e n o n - r e n o r m a l i s a b i l i t y i m p l i e s t h e r e j e c t i o n of quantum

f i e l d theory! N e v e r t h e l e s s i t i s c l e a r t h a t a f a i r l y l a r g e amount of

e f f o r t w i l l be s p e n t in t h e n e a r f u t u r e i n t r y i n g t o f i n d a r e n o r m a l i s a b l e

t h e o r y of g r a v i t y which could p o s s i b l y s t i l l be g e n e r a l l y c o v a r i a n t and

a c h i e v e i t s ends by t h e s u b t l e i n t r o d u c t i o n of c e r t a i n m a t t e r - f i e l d t e r m s .

A t h i r d r e a c t i o n t o t h e n o n - r e n o r m a l i s a b i l i t y of t h e covariant

t h e o r y i s t h a t t h e t r o u b l e has i t s o r i g i n i n t h e s e p a r a t i o n o f t h e

g r a v i t a t i o n a l f i e l d i n t o a c l a s s i c a l background p l u s a quantum c o r r e c t i o n .

Such s p l i t s a r e very u n n a t u r a l w i t h i n t h e c o n t e n t of t h e c l a s s i c a l theory

and i t i s on a t t r a c t i v e c o n j e c t u r e t h a t t h e problems o f quantum g r a v i t y

can be r e s o l v e d by a v o i d i n g them. T h i s i s one of t h e p o i n t s i n f a v o u r of

t h e c a n o n i c a l approaches w h i c h , b e c a u s e o f t h e i r r a t h e r s t r o n g e r

geometrical flavour, c e r t a i n l y do not n a t u r a l l y admit such d e c o m p o s i t i o n s .

I t would be misguided however, t o t a k e t h e r e n o r m a l i s a t i o n problem t o o

l i g h t l y and i t i s f a i r t o say t h a t t h e n o n - a p p e a r a n c e of t h a t particular

problem i n c a n o n i c a l q u a n t i s a t i o n i s due p r i m a r i l y t o t h e f a c t t h a t the

a p p r o p r i a t e c a l c u l a t i o n a l t e c h n i q u e s have not y e t been developed t o t h e

p o i n t where a c t u a l numbers a r e o b t a i n e d , r a t h e r than t h a t t h e formalism

is intrinsically trouble-free.
36

5. TRUE CANONICAL QUANTISATION

We now d i s c u s s t h e approach t o q u a n t i s a t i o n which i s c l o s e s t to

the standard canonical procedure. The e s s e n t i a l i d e a i s t o e x t r a c t from

t h e m e t r i c t e n s o r t h o s e components which c o r r e s p o n d t o genuine dynamical

( r a t h e r t h a n gauge) d e g r e e s of freedom and t h e n t o impose c a n o n i c a l

commutation r e l a t i o n s upon them and t h e i r c a n o n i c a l c o n j u g a t e s . This

approach i s o f t e n known in t h e l i t e r a t u r e as ' n o n - c o v a r i a n t 1 canonical

quantisation. The a l t e r n a t i v e s u p e r s p a c e - b a s e d t e c h n i q u e (sometimes

called 'covariant' c a n o n i c a l q u a n t i s a t i o n ) w i l l be c o n s i d e r e d i n §6. As

t h e r e a r e no o t h e r a r t i c l e s in t h i s volume which d e a l s p e c i f i c a l l y w i t h

t h e s e t o p i c s ( u n l i k e f o r example c o v a r i a n t q u a n t i s a t i o n ) t h e y w i l l be

d i s c u s s e d i n some d e t a i l here.

The f i r s t problem t h a t must be i n v e s t i g a t e d i s t h e c l a s s i c a l

d e c o m p o s i t i o n of t h e E i n s t e i n t h e o r y i n t o c a n o n i c a l form. The a p p r o p r i a t e
(39)
t e c h n i q u e i s w e l l known f o l l o w i n g t h e work of Dirac and A r n o w i t t , Deser

and Misner (ADM)' 1 1 0 '. In o r d e r t o i l l u s t r a t e t h e p r i n c i p l e involved,

c o n s i d e r t h e simple example of a m a s s l e s s s c a l a r f i e l d t h e o r y in a f l a t

space-time with the lagrangian

(5-1)

The c o r r e s p o n d i n g a c t i o n is

(5.2)
37

which when v a r i e d w i t h r e o p e c t t o <p y i e l d s t h e Euler-I.agrange e q u a t i o n s

of motion

+
X$3 = 0 , (5.3)

or, equivalently,

- V2« - = 0 (5.It)

where <J ==
3x

The momentum c o n j u g a t e t o <J. i s

=
% \ = • (5-5)
3$

which can o b v i o u s l y be i n v e r t e d in t h e form

= ) = it . (5.6)

The Hamiltonian d e n s i t y is

tfU.n) = n ) - Li • , < f r ( . ) > (5-7)

= - i 2 t V 2 2* • 2« + x/i, 4." (5.8)


z cj>

and t h e Hamiltonian e q u a t i o n s of motion a r e simply


(5-9)

(5-10)

where H<t) = J d 3 x H)

ind t h e s e , as e x p e c t e d , have p r e c i s e l y t h e same dynamical c o n t e n t as t h e

¡ u l e r - L a g r a n g e eqns (5. 1 »).

I t i s f r e q u e n t l y c o n v e n i e n t t o be a b l e t o d e r i v e t h e f i r s t order

:qns ( 5 . 9 ) and ( 5 . 1 0 ) from an a c t i o n p r i n c i p l e . An a p p r o p r i a t e such

i r i n c i p l e in t h i s c a s e i s simply

(5.11)

fliich, i f t h e f i e l d s and it a r e v a r i e d as independent v a r i a b l e s , yields


$
j r e c i s e l y t h e Hamilton e q u a t i o n s . C l e a r l y t h e e x p r e s s i o n in b r a c k e t s i n

>qn ( 5 - 1 1 ) i s j u s t t h e Hamiltonian density.

C l a s s i c a l l y , i f t h e c a n o n i c a l v a r i a b l e s 1(1 and tr a r e s p e c i f i e d on t h e

;pacelike hypersurface t = t , t h e n eqns ( 5 - 9 ) and ( 5 - 1 0 ) a r e integrated

.0 g i v e t h e v a l u e s on any l a t e r ( o r e a r l i e r ) t = t^ h y p e r s u r f a c e . The

luantum analogue i s t h e H e i s e n b e r g p i c t u r e formalism in which t h e quantum

f i e l d s $ and 71 s a t i s f y e q u a l t i m e commutation relations

(5.12)

md t h e f i e l d s a t t i m e t a r e e x p r e s s e d in terms o f t h o s e a t t i m e t by
39

-i/ K llU,*) (t.-t) H(i,n)(t.-t )


n • o „ n l o
• (x,t ) = e «(i»to) e (5.13)

-i/K H U . w H t j - ^ ) i/K H($,Tr)(t1-to)


nfx.tj) = c *(x,tQ) e (5. ill)

A l t e r n a t i v e l y o f c o u r s e one can use t h e S c h r o d i n g e r p i c t u r e i n which t h e

o p e r a t o r s have no t i m e dependence and s a t i s f y

[•(x), ;<*)] = i « « ( 3 ) ( x - x ) (5.15)

and t h e t i m e e v o l u t i o n i s c a r r i e d by t h e s t a t e vector:

- i / K HU.it) (tj-to)
<i>t • (5-16)
o

The main problem i s t o r e p r o d u c e t h i s t y p e of a n a l y s i s f o r t h e

e q u a t i o n s of motion of g e n e r a l r e l a t i v i t y . Even a t t h e c l a s s i c a l level

a number o f d i f f i c u l t i e s can be a n t i c i p a t e d i n any a t t e m p t t o reduce t h e

second o r d e r E u l e r - L a g r a n g e equations

G u V (g, 3g) = 0 (5.17)

( f o r convenience suppose we a r e d e a l i n g with t h e m a t t e r - f r e e system) to

c a n o n i c a l form. Mainely:

i) There a r e no l o n g e r any p r e f e r r e d r e f e r e n c e frames as


1)0

t h e r e were i n t h e Minkowski spuce c a s e . Thus one i s more

o r l e s s o b l i g e d t o c o n s i d e r t h e Cauchy problem o v e r an

arbitrary spacelike hypersurface.

ii) The E i n s t e i n e q u a t i o n s G^1' = 0 do n o t i n v o l v e t h e second-order

time d e r i v a t i v e s of t h e metric t e n s o r g , thus anticipating


cxB
that, as in eqn ( 5 - 5 ) , " „ ^ 6 „i these equations will
dp ats

reduce t o c o n s t r a i n t e q u a t i o n s which t h e i n i t i a l d a t a must

satisfy, r a t h e r t h a n t o genuine e q u a t i o n s o f m o t i o n .

iii) The r e m a i n i n g e q u a t i o n s G^J = 0 do n o t d e t e r m i n e t h e t i m e

e v o l u t i o n of a l l of t h e components of g ^ even i f t h e
11
constraints G = 0 have been s a t i s f i e d ,
o
To i n v e s t i g a t e t h e s e p o i n t s f u r t h e r i t i s u s e f u l t o apply t h e s t a n d a r d

ADM t e c h n i q u e and decompose t h e m e t r i c t e n s o r as

- H 2 + W.1 N . ' 3
^ , N.
J 0

V, = ( I '5.18)
N g
i ' ij

where w,v = 0 . . . 3 ; i , j = 1 , 2 , 3 . To s e e why t h i s p a r t i c u l a r form i s

chosen c o n s i d e r t h e ' 3 + 1 ' decomposition of s p a c e - t i m e i n t o a f a m i l y o f

t h r e e - d i m e n s i o n a l s p a c e - l i k e h y p e r s u r f a c e s p a r a m e t e r i s e d by t h e v a l u e o f

an a r b i t r a r i l y chosen t i m e c o o r d i n a t e x ° . The n a t u r a l m e t r i c induced on

a t y p i c a l e q u a l - t i m e h y p e r s u r f a c e i s simply g . . (x,x°) and i t s inverse


^J
(3) i " o

i s w r i t t e n as g1J ( x , x ° ) . The p r o p e r time dx between two s u r f a c e s

l a b e l l e d with t h e p a r a m e t e r s x° and x° + dx° w i l l ( f o r i n f i n i t e s i m a l dx°)

be p r o p o r t i o n a l t o dx°. Thus we w r i t e
1.1

dT = N ( x , x ° ) dx° (5.19)

where t h e f u n c t i o n N i s kncwn as t h e l a p s e f u n c t i o n . Now c o n s i d e r t h e

c o r r e s p o n d i n g normal v e c t o r , whose b a s e has c o o r d i n a t e s (x',x2,x3)

l y i n g in t h e f i r s t h y p e r s u r f a c e . The t i p of t h i s v e c t o r can be connected

t o t h e p o i n t in t h e second s u r f a c e with t h e same s p a t i a l coordinates


2 3
(x',x ,x ), by a v e c t o r O y i n g in t h e second h y p e r s u r f a c e x

whose components can be w r i t t e n in t h e form ( N ' d x 0 , N 2 d x ° , N 3 d x ° ) . The


1
quantities H (x,x°) a r e known as s h i f t f u n c t i o n s and t h e s i t u a t i o n is

s k e t c h e d in F i g . 1.1.

Fig. 1.1
^ ^ >>

The s p a c e - l i k e v e c t o r AC = AB + BC = (N'dx° + d x 1 , N 2 dx° + d x 2 , N 3 dx° + dx 3 )

and t h e r e f o r e t h e l e n g t h of DC i s :
1(2

ds 2 = g dx P dxV = - N 2 ( d x ° ) 2 + g. . (N 1 dx° + d x 1 ) (tH dx° + dx"')


pv lj

= ( - N2 + N. N 1 ) ( d x ° ) Z + 2 N. dx° d x j + g. . dx 1 d x . (5-20)
l J J

which, b e a r i n g i n mind t h a t t h e Roman i , j i n d i c e s a r e t o be r a i s e d and

lowered by t h e induced m e t r i c on t h e t h r e e - s u r f a c e x ° , i s p r e c i s e l y eqn

(5-18).

The i n v e r s e m e t r i c t e n s o r can r e a d i l y be shown t o be

1 HJ

=
^ I I (5.21)
hi -

A r n o w i t t , Deser and Misner found t h a t t h e s e c o n d - o r d e r E i n s t e i n action

could be w r i t t e n i n terms of t h e s e f i e l d v a r i a b l e s as

I = f d"x ( d e t ( l , ) g ) ' 2 R(g) = f d"x {(det{3)g) /2


N[(K.. Kij - K 1 K.j)
J J -^J ^ J

[( 3I)
+ Rj + a four-divergence) (5.22)

where K.. s (N.,. + N.,. - g.. ) . (5-23)


ij 2N llj jli l j ,o

In eqn ( 5 - 2 2 ) t h e s u p e r s c r i p t s and r e f e r t o q u a n t i t i e s computed with

t h e induced t h r e e - s p a c e m e t r i c and t h e o r i g i n a l f o u r - s p a c e m e t r i c
U3

( 3 ^
v
respectively. In p a r t i c u l a r ' R(x,x ) i s t h e curvature t e n s o r of the

h y p e r s u r f a c e l a b e l l e d by t h e p a r a m e t e r x° and hence d e s c r i b e s t h e

i n t r i n s i c c u r v a t u r e of t h i s s u r f a c e . On t h e o t h e r hand t h e t e n s o r K . .
ij
i n eqn ( 5 . 2 3 ) ( i n which 1 r e f e r s t o c o v a r i a n t d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n w i t h respect

t o t h e t h r e e - m e t r i c ) i s , g e o m e t r i c a l l y , t h e e x t r i n s i c c u r v a t u r e of t h e

h y p e r s u r f a c e and as such d e s c r i b e s t h e manner i n which t h a t s u r f a c e i s

embedded i n t h e s u r r o u n d i n g foui—dimensional geometry.

The main a d v a n t a g e o f t h i s form i s t h a t t h e t i m e d e r i v a t i v e is

i s o l a t e d and one can compute t h e ' c o n j u g a t e momentum' t o g. J. as

j i s _«_ = - ( d e t 3g)J r0 ,i»j + Njli - gik gj* ^ 0)


6g
ij

- ^ ¿ i (2Nklk- ( 3 )
6kigk,s0)> . (5.2.,)

N o t i c e t h a t t h e r e i s no N o r H. term in t h e l a g r a n g i a n and as a r e s u l t a

formal c a l c u l a t i o n gives

(5 25)
'
6N

1
n - 61
= = n0 (5.26)
6N.
l

The f i n a l r e s u l t o f a l l t h i s t h e o r y i s t h a t t h e E i n s t e i n a c t i o n principle

can be w r i t t e n ( a n a l o g o u s l y t o eqn ( 5 . 1 1 ) ) i n f i r s t - o r d e r variational

form as
lili

= | d*x { » i j ¿ y - H u C" U i j
, g^)} (5.27)

where N = U and
o

C° ; ( d e t ( 3 ) 6 ) " J ( , i j „.. - 1 b.1 w.j) - ( d e t ( 3 ) g ) J (3)


R (5-28)
J. J i. J

These t h r e e e q u a t i o n s form t h e s t a r t i n g p o i n t f o r a l l modern t r e a t m e n t s

of c a n o n i c a l q u a n t i s a t i o n . I f we vary t h e a c t i o n w i t h r e s p e c t t o it 1 J we

o b t a i n g. . = g^ . ( g ^ » n1""> which may be s o l v e d as

(5
= ¿rs' V -30)

which i n f a c t i s e x a c t l y eqn ( 5 - 2 l i ) . On t h e o t h e r hand v a r i a t i o n w i t h

respect t o l e a d s t o an e q u a t i o n of t h e form

= it , « ) (5.3i)
rs u

and e q u a t i o n s ( 5 . 3 0 ) and ( 5 . 3 1 ) a r e , t o g e t h e r , e x a c t l y t h e G. J = 0

Einstein equations.

F i n a l l y i f H i s v a r i e d we o b t a i n
U

= 0 (5.32)
1,5

which t u r n out ( u s i n g eqn ( 5 - 3 0 ) ) t o be t h e r e m a i n i n g C^1' = 0 E i n s t e i n

equations. There a r e a number o f p o i n t s worth m e n t i o n i n g about t h e

r e s u l t s a c h i e v e d so f a r a t t h e c l a s s i c a l level:

a) The n o n - a p p e a r a n c e o f U^ (and hence t h e v a n i s h i n g o f t h e

c o r r e s p o n d i n g c o n j u g a t e q u a n t i t i e s i n eqns ( 5 . 2 5 ) ( 5 . 2 6 ) ) is

e s p e c i a l l y c l e a r i n eqn ( 5 . 2 7 ) . Indeed N^ p l a y s t h e role,

from t h e c a n o n i c a l v i e w p o i n t , o f a Lagrange m u l t i p l i e r and

c e r t a i n l y does n o t count as a t r u e c a n o n i c a l v a r i a b l e . It

i s t h e g r a v i t a t i o n a l analogue of A^ in t h e Maxwell

electromagnetic theory.

b) In s p i t e o f i t s n o n - c o v a r i a n t - l o o k i n g form, the theory is

s t i l l generally covariant. In o t h e r words eqn ( 5 - 2 7 ) is

a p p l i c a b l e t o any choice o f space o r t i m e c o o r d i n a t e s .

T h i s means t h a t t h e t h e o r y i s n o t y e t i n t r u e canonical

form b e c a u s e ( a s we s h a l l s e e l a t e r ) f o u r o u t o f t h e s i x <5* •
iJ
components can be e l i m i n a t e d by c h o o s i n g a s e t o f s p a c e -

time c o o r d i n a t e s . T h i s i s analogous t o t h e way in which

one o f t h e A components d i s a p p e a r s in e l e c t r o m a g n e t i c

t h e o r y when, f o r example, t h e r a d i a t i o n gauge d i v A = 0

is specified.

c) The e q u a t i o n s C ^ n . g ) = 0 (eqn ( 5 . 3 2 ) ) show c l e a r l y that

the twelve q u a n t i t i e s (g. . , it ) cannot be arbitrarily


J
s p e c i f i e d on an i n i t i a l h y p e r s u r f a c e b u t must s a t i s f y f o u r

constraints.

d) The dynamical e q u a t i o n s a r e i n f a c t c o n t a i n e d t w i c e i n t h e

s y s t e m of eqns (5-30) ( 5 . 3 1 ) ( 5 - 3 2 ) in t h e f o l l o w i n g s e n s e :
) I f C l ' ( n , g ) = 0 on an i n i t i a l h y p e r s u r f a c e and eqns

( 5 . 3 0 ) ( 5 . 3 1 ) a r e s a t i s f i e d , t h e n C u ( n , g ) = on any l a t e r

hypersurface. In o t h e r words t h e c o n s t r a i n t s are

c o n s e r v e d i n time - i n f a c t by v i r t u e of t h e B i a n c h i

identities.

) The c o n v e r s e i s a l s o t r u e . Namely i f n 1 J and g^ are

chosen s o t h a t C^t tt , g ) = 0 on a l l h y p e r s u r f a c e s t h e n t h e

= 0 e q u a t i o n s ( 5 . 3 0 ) and (5-31) a r e automatically

satisfied. In t h i s s e n s e t h e dynamical G..J = 0 e q u a t i o n s

can be r e g a r d e d as o c c u r r i n g t w i c e .
ki.
I f a t t h e c l a s s i c a l l e v e l g.^ and it a r e r e g a r d e d as b e i n g

c o n j u g a t e v a r i a b l e s , so t h a t a t some f i x e d t i m e we have t h e

Poisson bracket relations

{g. . ( x ) , - '(x)), (x " i ) , (5-33)


P.B.

then

(5-3IO

(5.35)

which shew t h a t j is the generator (in the canonical

t r a n s f o r m a t i o n sense) of t h e i n f i n i t e s i m a l coordinate t r a n s f o r m a t i o n

xU xp + Çp(x). The q u a n t i t i e s C1' s a t i s f y a P o i s s o n b r a c k e t


It 7

a l g e b r a which i s a r e f l e c t i o n o f t h i s fact.

I t i s at t h i s stage that the ' c o v a r i a n t ' and 'non-covariant'

approaches t o c a n o n i c a l q u a n t i s a t i o n go t h e i r s e p a r a t e ways. In t h e

c o v a r i a n t approach ( s e e §6) t h e v a r i a b l e s i n t h e a c t i o n p r i n c i p l e eqn

(5.27), which as emphasised above i s s t i l l g e n e r a l l y c o v a r i a n t , are

q u a n t i s e d as t h e y s t a n d . On t h e o t h e r hand i n t h e n o n - c o v a r i a n t approach

that is being discussed here, t h e s y s t e m i s reduced f u r t h e r c l a s s i c a l l y

before quantisation. There a r e v a r i o u s ways of d o i n g t h i s but t h e b a s i c


(i.0)('il)

ideas i s to perform t h e following s t e p s :

1) S o l v e t h e e q u a t i o n s C u (7i,g) = 0 e x p l i c i t l y f o r f o u r of t h e

twelve ( g ^ j , " ) variables. This i s p o s s i b l e in p r i n c i p l e ,

b u t , i n p r a c t i c e , has o n l y been a c h i e v e d perturbatively.

T h i s l e a v e s e i g h t v a r i a b l e s i n t h e s t r u c t u r e whose t i m e

dependence i s d e s c r i b e d by e i g h t of t h e t w e l v e = 0

e q u a t i o n s ( 5 - 3 0 ) and ( 5 - 3 1 ) , t h e r e m a i n i n g ones b e i n g

i d e n t i c a l l y t r u e (they are in f a c t the Bianchi identities


U
i n t h e form C (ir,g) = 0 .

2) Choose a system of c o o r d i n a t e s . There a r e a number of

almost e q u i v a l e n t ways of doing t h i s . A sample s e l e c t i o n

is:

a) Impose any f o u r ' g a u g e ' c o n d i t i o n s of t h e form

F 1 J (n,g) = 0 . Thi3 removes f o u r of t h e e i g h t


11
(g— > ) v a r i a b l e s which a r e l e f t a f t e r s t e p 1 .

The e q u a t i o n s F l '(7i,g) = 0 , plus equations (5-30)

and ( 5 - 3 1 ) , can be u s e d t o f i n d f o u r e l l i p t i c
1.8

d i f f e r e n t i a l e q u a t i o n s f o r N which can a l s o in
M
p r i n c i p l e be s o l v e d , t h u s e l i m i n a t i n g t h e l a g r a n g e

m u l t i p l i e r s ti ^ from t h e t h e o r y . There i s on e x a c t

analogue of t h i s in t h e Maxwell t h e o r y where t h e

equations are D A - 3 ( 3 Av) = j . If the


U V v v
r a d i a t i o n gauge d i v A = 0 i s chosen t h e n c l e a r l y one

of t h e t h r e e A v a r i a b l e s i s e l i m i n a t e d . However, t h e
3
time component of t h e Maxwell e q u a t i o n s p l u s Tr-
ot
( d i v A) = 0 y i e l d s t h e e l l i p t i c e q u a t i o n - V2 A = j

which can be s o l v e d a t once u s i n g t h e a p p r o p r i a t e

t h r e e dimensional Green's f u n c t i o n , as Ao = — j o.

A t y p i c a l example i n t h e g r a v i t a t i o n a l c a s e would be

the conditions

6 i . /o = 0

((det^g)* gij) . = 0
>J

which l e a d t o t h e e l l i p t i c equations

(3)
N,./ " R(g) =0

{<det(3)g)J (Nilj + NjU - ( 3


y j N*) + 2N*ij} . = 0
IK 1J

which c a n , i n p r i n c i p l e , be s o l v e d . However, i f t h e t h r e e -

s p a c e i s non-compact t h e s e e q u a t i o n s w i l l need t o be
'•9

supplemented w i t h s u i t a b l e boundary conditions,

such a s , f o r example N •* 1 and N. 0, at spatial

infinity.

b) A l t e r n a t i v e l y p i c k any f o u r f u n c t i o n s X l '(n,g) und

d e f i n e t h e c o o r d i n a t e system i n t h e form:

x1' = X l ' ( i t , g ) . T h i s i s on i n t r i n s i c d e f i n i t i o n which

s a y s t h a t one must f i n d t h e c o o r d i n a t e system such

t h a t t h e f u n c t i o n s X ,J , which w i l l t y p i c a l l y be

e x p r e s s e d i n terms of t h e v a r i o u s components o f it

and g . . in t h a t c o o r d i n a t e s y s t e m , are precisely the


J
v a l u e s of t h e c o o r d i n a t e . I f these equations are

d i f f e r e n t i a t e d with r e s p e c t t o the coordinates to


l P
y i e l d 6 ' v = 3^ X (7i,g) t h e n t h e r e s u l t i n g system

t u r n s o u t t o have a s i m i l a r c o n t e n t t o t h a t

discussed in a) and t h e r e d u c t i o n p r o c e e d s from

hereon i n t h e same way.

c) A l t e r n a t i v e l y choose N1' = H " ( i , g ) t o be any a r b i t r a r y

s e t of f o u r f u n c t i o n s . Then eqns ( 5 . 3 0 ) and ( 5 . 3 1 )

y i e l d f o u r e q u a t i o n s of t h e form F^Tt.g) = 0 which

c a n , i n p a r t i c u l a r , be s o l v e d i n t h e form F p (iT,g) = 0

t h u s t a k i n g us back t o s t e p a) a g a i n . The a n a l o g u e i n

t h e Maxwell t h e o r y would be t o s p e c i f y A^ as A^ = -

which when s u b s t i t u t e d i n t o t h e Maxwell e q u a t i o n s y i e l d s

(div
It =
The n e t r e s u l t o f f o l l o w i n g any o f t h e s e t h r e e a l t e r n a t i v e steps

( o r any o f t h e n u n i e r of p o s s i b l e m i x t u r e s of them) i s t h a t t h e H
5 0

v a r i a b l e s and f o u r of t h e ( g . . , * ) v a r i a b l e s d r o p o u t of t h e s y s t e m
-t J
kA
of equations leaving d i f f e r e n t i a l equations for just four ( g . . , i )
^J

v a r i a b l e s in t e r m s o f t h e chosen c o o r d i n a t e s . The f i n a l c o u n t i s correct

s i n c e t h e e x p e c t e d two i n t r i n s i c d e g r e e s o f f r e e d o m o f t h e radiation

components o f t h e g r a v i t a t i o n a l f i e l d w i l l i n v o l v e two p a i r s o f canonical

variables.

The n e x t s t e p i s t o c o n s t r u c t a ' r e d u c e d ' action principle which,

when v a r i e d , w i l l r e p r o d u c e e x a c t l y t h e s e e q u a t i o n s of m o t i o n and which

i n a d d i t i o n can be r e a d i l y w r i t t e n i n f i r s t - o r d e r H a m i l t o n i a n form. One

might b e t e m p t e d s i m p l y t o t a k e t h e a c t i o n i n eqn ( 5 - 2 7 ) and substitute

i n i t t h e s o l u t i o n s of C u ( n , g ) = 0 and t h e c h o s e n coordinates.

U n f o r t u n a t e l y t h e r e i s no g u a r a n t e e t h a t t h e r e s u l t i n g s y s t e m i s in t h e

d e s i r e d c a n o n i c a l form. I t seems t o b e n e c e s s a r y t o l i n k s t e p s l ) and

2 ) above by f o r e x a m p l e , making s u r e t h a t t h e v a r i a b l e which i3

e l i m i n a t e d i n s t e p l ) i s t h e momentum which i s c o n j u g a t e ( i n t h e s e n s e o f

t h e a c t i o n i n ( 5 . 2 7 ) ) t o t h e c o o r d i n a t e s which a r e e l i m i n a t e d i n s t e p 2 ) .

A v e r y n i c e d i s c u s s i o n o f t h i s p o i n t and i n d e e d o f t h e whole s u b j e c t o f
. . . . v, (i»l)
c a n o n i c a l d e c o m p o s i t i o n i s c o n t a i n e d i n K. Kuchar s p a p e r s .

Once t h e s y s t e m i s i n c a n o n i c a l f o r m w i t h , s a y , c a n o n i c a l variables

w r i t t e n s y m b o l i c a l l y as ) A.B = 1 , 2 , one p r o c e e d s i n a n a l o g y w i t h

t h e simple s c a l a r f i e l d d i s c u s s e d i n t h e opening of t h i s s e c t i o n . In

p a r t i c u l a r e q u a l - t i m e commutation r e l a t i o n s o f t h e form

CiA(x.t), nB(x,t)] = ih' 6® 5 ( 3 ) ( X - ¿r) (5.30)

a r e imposed, s u p p l e m e n t e d w i t h t h e a p p r o p r i a t e H e i s e n b e r g e q u a t i o n s o f

motion, o r i f p r e f e r r e d a S c h r o d i n g e r p i c t u r e f o r m a l i s m can b e u s e d .
51

(Romcmbcr again t h a t t h e b a s i c c a n o n i c a l v a r i a b l e s a r e d e f i n e d on u

fixed three-muni f o l d ) .

An i m p o r t a n t a d v a n t a g e o f t h i s q u a n t i s a t i o n scheme i s t h a t i t is

very much an o p e r a t o r - o r i e n t e d one and as such i s c l o s e l y r e l a t e d t o t h e

s t a n d a r d examples of c l a s s i c a l s y s t e m q u a n t i s a t i o n . There i s c l e a r l y no

need t o s u b t r a c t o u t any background ( a s t h e r e i s i n c o v a r i a n t quantisation)

b u t i f t h e background space were i n some sense E u c l i d e a n t h e n one would

have a c o n v e n t i o n a l ( L o r e n t z n o n - c o v a r i a n t ) quantum f i e l d t h e o r y w i t h a

w e l l d e f i n e d concept of m i c r o c a u s a l i t y , in which g r a v i t o n s a p p e a r a s

m n s s l e s s h e l e c i t y - t w o q u a n t a of t h e P o i n c a r e g r o u p . In p a r t i c u l a r the

t h e o r y would have a u n i t a r y S - m a t r i x w i t h o u t any ' f a c t i t i o u s quanta'.

Perhaps t h e main a d v a n t a g e o f t h i s c a n o n i c a l approach however, is

t h a t i t i s t h e one in which t h e d i f f i c u l t i e s appear most h o n e s t l y ! Some

of t h e w o r s t of t h e s e a r e :

a) The c h o i c e of g . . as a ' c a n o n i c a l ' v a r i a b l e i n t h e a c t i o n


iJ
in ( 5 . 2 ' i ) i s by no means s a c r o s a n c t . In a f l a t - s p a c e

quantum f i e l d t h e o r y t h e r e i s u s u a l l y a f a i r l y natural

choice of the canonical v a r i a b l e s but t h i s i s c e r t a i n l y not

true here. Since a c l a s s i c a l canonical transformation w i l l

n o t i n g e n e r a l be implementable in t h e quantum t h e o r y by a

unitary operator, i t f o l l o w s t h a t d i f f e r e n t such c h o i c e s

w i l l l e a d t o g e n u i n e l y i n e q u i v a l e n t quantum t h e o r i e s . Much

c o n s i d e r a t i o n has been g i v e n t o t h i s problem i n r e c e n t years.


(1,2)

In p a r t i c u l a r York has g i v e n good r e a s o n s why a d i f f e r e n t

s e t o f v a r i a b l e s from t h a t chosen above may be u s e f u l i n

some c a s e s .

b) A c l o s e l y r e l a t e d problem i s t h e i n v a r i a n c e o r o t h e r w i s e of
111.

t h e quantum t h e o r y , under a change o f t h e v a r i a b l e s

which a r e e l i m i n a t e d i n s t e p l ) above or u n d e r a change

o f t h e c o o r d i n a t e s chosen i n s t e p 2 ) .

P o i n t s a) and b) t o g e t h e r r e a l l y q u e s t i o n t h e s i g n i f i c a n c e f o r t h e

quantum t h e o r y of t h e f i n a l p a i r of v a r i a b l e s (g^» 71 ) A,B = 1 , 2 which

a r e used as t r u e c a n o n i c a l v a r i a b l e s . T h i s q u e s t i o n , which c l e a r l y

i n c l u d e s t h e problem of t h e g e n e r a l c o v a r i a n c e of t h e t h e o r y , i s one

o f t h e h a r d e s t t o answer. Indeed no comprehensive s o l u t i o n i s known a t

present. ( C o n c e p t u a l as w e l l as t e c h n i c a l problems a r e i n v o l v e d . For

example two d i f f e r e n t c o o r d i n a t e systems may be r e l a t e d t o g e t h e r by

f u n c t i o n s which become o p e r a t o r s when t h e t h e o r y i s quantised!)

c) The c l a s s i c a l H a m i l t o n i a n which emerges a t t h e end of t h e


g
canonical reduction involves complicated g ^ / " coupling terras.

Thus t h e o p e r a t o r o r d e r i n g problem i s s e v e r e and t h e given

c l a s s i c a l form may admit many quantum v e r s i o n s ( o r p o s s i b l y

none a t a l l ) . One s u s p e c t s t h a t t h i s problem cannot be

r e s o l v e d in i s o l a t i o n from a) and b ) .

d) I t i s always n o t o r i o u s l y d i f f i c u l t t o do any c a l c u l a t i o n s in

a genuine c a n o n i c a l framework l i k e t h e p r e s e n t o n e . If a

f l a t - s p a c e d e c o m p o s i t i o n i s performed t h e n non ( L o r e n t z )

c o v a r i a n t H e i s e n b e r g p e r t u r b a t i o n t h e o r y can be used but

i t i s very messy and l i t t l e a c t u a l c a l c u l a t i o n u s i n g t h e

n o n - c o v a r i a n t c a n o n i c a l approach has been p o s s i b l e . A few


. (3)

y e a r s ago Russo and A r n o w i t t computed t h e t r e e graph

( i . e . n o n - c o v a r i a n t Feynman g r a p h s ) c o n t r i b u t i o n s t o p i o n -

g r a v i t o n s c a t t e r i n g shown in F i g . 1.2.
53

t /
> grnvitonn /
\

Pions

Fig. 1.2

unci i t i s c o m f o r t i n g t o f i n d t h a t t h e f i n a l r e s u l t i s t h e same as t h a t
(28)

o b t a i n e d by De Witt f o r t h e same p r o c e s s u s i n g h i s c o v a r i a n t approach.

However, no-one has e v e r a t t e m p t e d t o p e r f o r m any l o o p c a l c u l a t i o n s and

indeed t h e r e seems l i t t l e p o i n t i n doing s o . I f a f l a t - s p a c e expansion i s

going t o be used a t a l l i t i s much more s e n s i b l e t o u s e i t w i t h i n the

framework o f c o v a r i a n t quantisation.

6. SUPERSPACE-BASED CANONICAL QUANTISATION

The approach t o c a n o n i c a l q u a n t i s a t i o n sketched out i n §5 has many

u n a t t r a c t i v e f e a t u r e s , n o t t h e l e a s t of which i s i t s n o n - c o v a r i a n c e . An

a l t e r n a t i v e form which ha3 become very p o p u l a r in t h e l a s t few years

a v o i d s t h i s by q u a n t i s i n g t h e system b e f o r e s o l v i n g t h e c o n s t r a i n t s o r

choosing t h e coordinates.

Once a g a i n t h e s t a r t i n g p o i n t i s t h e a c t i o n p r i n c i p l e in eqn ( 5 - 2 7 ) :
5li

1= J d"x <«ij ¿.J - c"(n,6)} (6.1)

w i t h C11 b e i n g given by eqns ( 5 . 2 8 ) and ( 5 . 2 9 ) , b u t a t t e n t i o n i s now

f o c u s s e d on t h e c o n s t r a i n t equations

C^U.g) = 0 . (6.2)

As n o t e d in §5 t h e s e e q u a t i o n s , i f t r u e f o r a l l t i m e s , are

c l a s s i c a l l y e q u i v a l e n t t o a l l of t h e E i n s t e i n e q u a t i o n s and t h e r e f o r e it

seems r e a s o n a b l e t o a t t e m p t t o b u i l d up a quantum t h e o r y b a s e d p u r e l y on
(6) ( 1 ) ( ) .
them a l o n e . The f i r s t s t e p i s t o assign operator s t a t u s t o
kt
a l l components o f g. . and u and assume t h a t t h e y s a t i s f y t h e S c h r o d i n g e r
^J
p i c t u r e c a n o n i c a l commutation r e l a t i o n s

£..(x), n k J L ( X )] = iK « [ k 6 ( 3 ) ( X - jr) (6.3)


iJ i J

in w h i c h , i t s h o u l d be emphasised once a g a i n , a t h r e e - d i m e n s i o n a l m a n i f o l d

has been f i x e d , once and f o r a l l , upon which t h e o p e r a t o r s g . . ( x ) and


^J
ki
it (x) a r e d e f i n e d . We w i l l assume ( s i n c e t h i s i s t h e c a s e f o r which

s u p e r s p a c e q u a n t i s a t i o n i s normally c o n s i d e r e d ) u n l e s s t h e c o n t r a r y is

s t a t e d , t h a t t h i s i s a compact s p a c e . I t i s then hypothesised t h a t t h e

c o n s t r a i n t e q u a t i o n s ( 6 . 2 ) a r e t o be imposed in t h e form of operator

c o n s t r a i n t s on t h e allowed s t a t e v e c t o r ty

= 0
(6.10
111.

which i t i a hoped (by analogue with t h e c l a s s i c a l t h e o r y ) w i l l d e t e r m i n e

tlio quantum t h e o r y c o m p l e t e l y . N o t i c e t h a t t h e t h e o r y has d e l i b e r a t e l y

been s e t up in a S c h r o d i n g e r p i c t u r e way. A c t u a l l y i f one were t o r e g a r d

g. . and n as b e i n g t r u e c a n o n i c a l v a r i a b l e s ( a s i s s u g g e s t e d - f a l s e l y -

by eqn ( 6 . 3 ) ) t h e n t h e c o r r e s p o n d i n g Hamiltonian d e n s i t y would be

C " ( * , g ) which by v i r t u e of eqn (6.U) always v a n i s h e s on any s t a t e s o f

interest. T h i s would mean, i n e f f e c t , t h a t t h e r e i s no way o f g e t t i n g from

t h e S c h r o d i n g e r p i c t u r e t o t h e H e i s e n b e r g p i c t u r e and indeed e v e r y t h i n g

a p p e a r s t o be s t a t i c with no change in t i m e ! This f a c t lead originally

t o t h i s approach b e i n g known as t h e ' f r o z e n f o r m a l i s m ' . However, a l t h o u g h

t h e m a t h e m a t i c a l s t a t e m e n t s a r e c o r r e c t t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of them in t e r m s

of s t a t i o n a r i n e s s i s i n c o r r e c t . The a p p a r e n t t i m e - i n d e p e n d e n c e s h o u l d be

regarded not as un independence of p h y s i c a l dynamics w i t h r e s p e c t t o some

physical time but r a t h e r t h e independence, of t h e formalism with r e s p e c t to

t h e choice o f t i m e c o o r d i n a t e , which i s i n i t s e l f merely a m a n i f e s t a t i o n

of t h e g e n e r a l c o v a r i a n c e of t h e t h e o r y . A t r u e Hamiltonian can only

be d e f i n e d a f t e r a d e f i n i t e c h o i c e o f t i m e has been made, as f o r example

i n t h e c a n o n i c a l f o r m a l i s m d i s c u s s e d i n §5- (These comments do n o t

n e c e s s a r i l y h o l d i f t h e t h r e e - s p a c e b e i n g c o n s i d e r e d i s non-compact. The

p o s s i b i l i t y o f f i x i n g r e f e r e n c e frames a t s p a t i a l i n f i n i t y a l t e r s the

situation). I n summary t h e n , t h e p r e s e n t approach t o quantisation

hypothesises the equations

(6.5)

and c u (i k \ =0 (6.6)
56

from which a l l d y n a m i c a l i n f o r m a t i o n i s t o be e x t r a c t e d a f t e r s p e c i f y i n g

t i m e i n some way. N o t i c e t h a t no mention of s u p e r s p a c e h a s been made y e t

and none i s n e c e s s a r y a t t h i s s t a g e . The r e a l e s s e n c e o f t h i s approach

t o q u a n t i s a t i o n i s c o n v e y e d by eqns (6.5) and (6.6). S u p e r s p a c e comes i n

o n l y when an a t t e m p t i s made t o f i n d a c o n c r e t e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e CCR

o f eqn ( 6 . 5 ) . However, even i n t h e ' a b s t r a c t ' form a b o v e , a m a j o r problem


11
confronts the theory. As m e n t i o n e d i n 55 t h e C are, classically, the

g e n e r a t o r s o f c o o r d i n a t e t r a n s f o r m a t i o n s and as such s a t i s f y a P o i s s o n

b r a c k e t a l g e b r a which c l o s e s on i t s e l f . This l a t t e r f e a t u r e l e a d s t o the

d e s i r a b l e p r o p e r t y t h a t no new c o n s t r a i n t s can b e i n t r o d u c e d i n t o t h e

t h e o r y by t a l c i n g P o i s s o n b r a c k e t s o f t h e o l d o n e s . C l e a r l y one r e q u i r e s

t h e same t h i n g t o happen i n t h e quantum t h e o r y i n r e l a t i o n t o t h e operator

commutators o f t h e C U . I n d e e d i f t h e s e commutators do n o t c l o s e upon

t h e m s e l v e s i t i s d i f f i c u l t t o s e e how t h e quantum t h e o r y c o u l d e v e r be

generally covariant. However, u n f o r t u n a t e l y , t h e C1J functions involve

t e r m s i n which t h e c a n o n i c a l v a r i a b l e s a p p e a r m u l t i p l i e d t o g e t h e r and t h e
. C* 6 )

o p e r a t o r o r d e r i n g p r o b l e m looms t o t h e f o r e once a g a i n . This problem

s h o u l d r e a l l y b e d i s c u s s e d a t t h e 3ame t i m e a s t h a t o f t h e e f f e c t o f

c h a n g i n g t h e v a r i a b l e s which a r e chosen i n t h e f i r s t p l a c e t o b e c a n o n i c a l .

To t h e b e s t of my knowledge n o - o n e h a s y e t d e m o n s t r a t e d t h e e x i s t e n c e o f

a c h o i c e of c a n o n i c a l v a r i a b l e s and o p e r a t o r o r d e r i n g s i n which t h e

c o n s t r a i n t e q u a t i o n s behave themselves i n t h e sense above!

I t i s a l s o w o r t h n o t i n g t h a t , c l a s s i c a l l y , t h e m e t r i c t e n s o r obeys

the positivity condition

det(g.j) > 0. (6.7)

I f s o m e t h i n g l i k e t h i s were t o b e c a r r i e d a c r o s s i n t o t h e quantum t h e o r y
111.

then i t would mean t h a t i t i s d i f f i c u l t f o r b o t h g. . ( x ) and it (y.) t o


iJ
be lie I f - a d j o i n t o p e r a t o r s . Tliis i s t h e u s u a l problem t h a t i f two s e l f -

a d j o i n t o p e r a t o r s obey a H e i s e n b e r g - t y p e u n c e r t a i n t y r e l a t i o n , then t h e

5poet rum o f n e i t h e r o f them i s l i k e l y t o be bounded below. One c o u l d perhaps

d e r i n e g. . and r e g a r d t h e 3 x
3 m a t r i x $ as t h e c a n o n i c a l variable
l J i J

but i t i s not obvious t h a t t h i s i s n e c e s s a r i l y t h e c o r r e c t t h i n g t o do.

T h i s problem i s , in f a c t p a r t o f t h e g e n e r a l and r a t h e r s u b t l e one t h a t

some of t h e components o f t h e m e t r i c t e n s o r c o r r e s p o n d c l a s s i c a l l y to

c h o i c e s of c o o r d i n a t e s ( a s we saw in 55) r a t h e r t h a n t r u e dynamical

v a r i a b l e s and i t i s by no means o b v i o u s t h a t t h e c o r r e s p o n d i n g o p e r a t o r s

should be s e l f - a d j o i n t anyway. I t s h o u l d be c l e a r by now t h a t the

q u a n t i s a t i o n scheme b e i n g d i s c u s s e d i s not by any means an example o f

c o n v e n t i o n a l q u a n t i s a t i o n and one s h o u l d be c a u t i o u s about insisting

t o o r i g i d l y on e n f o r c i n g a l l t h e canons of t h e c o n v e n t i o n a l approach in

this situation.

In o r d e r t o p r o c e e d f u r t h e r i t i s n e c e s s a r y t o f i n d a c o n c r e t e

representation of t h e m a t h e m a t i c a l s t r u c t u r e embodied in eqns ( 6 . 5 ) and


5 0
(6.6). The f o r m ' ' which has been s t r o n g l y a d v o c a t e d i n
5 1
t h e p a s t , i n p a r t i c u l a r by W h e e l e r ' ', i s t h a t in which t h e state

v e c t o r s and o p e r a t o r s a r e d e f i n e d as f u n c t i o n a l s of t h e m e t r i c t e n s o r

f i e l d and f u n c t i o n a l d e r i v a t i v e s r e s p e c t i v e l y , a c c o r d i n g t o t h e scheme

(6.8)

UyteM) G^O - B y W »fr^-a (6.9)

c^a-f (6.10)
111.

T h i s i s c l e a r l y c l o s e l y r e l a t e d t o t h e f u n c t i o n a l r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s of t h e

c a n o n i c a l commutation r e l a t i o n s c o n s i d e r e d i n t h e I n t r o d u c t i o n (§1).

However, t h e r e i s an i m p o r t a n t d i f f e r e n c e in t h a t in t h e u s u a l c a s e t h e r e

i s a genuine H i l b e r t s p a c e t2 (Q,dy) upon which t h e f i e l d s a r e d e f i n e d as

o p e r a t o r s in a r i g o r o u s way. On t h e o t h e r hand t h e a s s i g n m e n t s i n eqns

( 6 . 9 ) and ( 6 . 1 0 ) a r e only t o be r e g a r d e d as f o r m a l . In p a r t i c u l a r t h e

s t a t e vectors do not y e t c a r r y a H i l b e r t s p a c e s t r u c t u r e and so q u e s t i o n s

o f t h e s e l f - a d j o i n t n e s s in p a r t i c u l a r , have no meaning. The d i s c u s s i o n

above c o n c e r n i n g t h e p o s i t i v i t y o f g. . has t o be viewed i n t h e some l i g h t .


^J

P r o c e e d i n g f o r m a l l y i t may be shown t h a t t h e c o n t e n t o f t h e t h r e e

constraints:

(6.11)

i s simply t h a t ? i s independent of t h e s p a t i a l c o o r d i n a t e system used t o

d e s c r i b e t h e t h r e e - m e t r i c g^ . T h e r e f o r e t h e s t a t e - f u n c t i o n a l ¥ depends

o n l y on t h e c o o r d i n a t e - i n d e p e n d e n t , i n t r i n s i c geometry o f t h e t h r e e - s p a c e

and, t o emphasise t h i s , i s u s u a l l y w r i t t e n as V= .

The s e t of a l l such g e o m e t r i e s (on t h e given t h r e e - m a n i f o l d ) is

c a l l e d s u p e r s p a c e and i s t h u s t h e domain s p a c e of t h e s t a t e functionals

in t h i s theory. D i a g r a m m a t i c a l l y we can r e p r e s e n t s u p e r s p a c e as i n

Fig. 1-3.
59

G transversally.

Fig. 1.3

E v i d e n t l y one m a j o r problem i s t o d i s c o v e r t h e f u l l m a t h e m a t i c a l
(514)

s t r u c t u r e of s u p e r s p a c e i t s e l f . I t i s worth remarking t h a t i n t h e
1
analogous Q - s p a c e ' t r e a t m e n t of a c o n v e n t i o n a l quantum f i e l d t h e o r y it

i s n e c e s s a r y t o i n c l u d e d i s t r i b u t i o n s as w e l l a s smooth J u n c t i o n s i n t h e

domain s p a c e of t h e s t a t e f u n c t i o n a l s . The same comment i s l i k e l y t o b e

e q u a l l y v a l i d h e r e and s u p e r s p a c e s h o u l d probably i n c l u d e distribution-

metrics.

Returning t o the equations of motion, the f i n a l c o n s t r a i n t is


6o

C ° ( , g) *[3g] = 0 (6.12)

which i s t h e famous Wheeler-DeWitt e q u a t i o n and which i n p r i n c i p l e , if

p r o p e r l y i n t e r p r e t e d , s h o u l d c o n t a i n a l l of t h e i n f o r m a t i o n c a r r i e d by
(55)

t h e quantum t h e o r y . Gerlach has shown t h a t t h e e q u a t i o n s above a r e

at l e a s t p a r t i a l l y c o n s i s t e n t . He s t a r t e d w i t h t h e semi-classical
3
a p p r o x i m a t i o n y[ G] <v> e which when i n s e r t e d i n t o eqn ( 6 . 1 2 )
(t^ 7) ( I+R) (149)

leads t o t h e Hamilton-Jacobi equation f o r S, the solutions


1 2 1 2
o f which a r e of t h e form S = S ^ G . a , a J where a , a are arbitrary

'integration functions'. I f the associated s t a t e vectors are super-

imposed t o form a wave p a c k e t t h e n c o n s t r u c t i v e i n t e r f e r e n c e o c c u r s on a


3
geometry G i f ¿JiC®''-*] = q# Gerlach showed t h a t a l l such t h r e e -
oa
g e o m e t r i e s f i t i n t o a f o u r - g e o m e t r y (which would n o t be t h e c a s e f o r an

a r b i t r a r y f a m i l y o f t h r e e - g e o m e t r i e s ) which s a t i s f i e s E i n s t e i n ' s equations.

The f u r t h e r development and i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of eqn ( 6 . 1 2 ) requires

great care. The main o b s e r v a t i o n s t o be made a r e :

i) The concept of t i m e and i t s a s s o c i a t e d n o t i o n o f dynamical

e v o l u t i o n 3 t i l l have n o t been introduced,

ii) There seems t o be one s p u r i o u s degree o f freedom l e f t i n


3
the theory since a G depends on t h r e e numbers p e r s p a c e -

p o i n t whereas we e x p e c t t o have only two p e r s p a c e - p o i n t

in a t r u e c a n o n i c a l t h e o r y ,

iii) There i s as y e t no H i l b e r t space s t r u c t u r e on t h e s t a t e

v e c t o r s and t h e r e f o r e no p r o b a b i l i t y i n t e r p r e t a t i o n is

possible. Indeed w i t h o u t a H i l b e r t s p a c e i t i s not p o s s i b l e


6 1

t o t a l k ubout o b s e r v u b l e s ua o p e r a t o r s in t h e u3ual

aenae.

These t h r e e problems a r e mutually dependent and have t o be c o n s i d e r e d

t o g e t h e r as a b l o c k . The c r u c i a l o b s e r v a t i o n i s t h a t i n g e n e r a l relativity,

p a r t i c u l a r l y «hen t h e s p a t i a l c r o s s - s e c t i o n s a r e compact, t i m e s h o u l d n o t be

r e g a r d e d as b e i n g e x t e r n a l t o t h e t h e o r y b u t r a t h e r as something v h i c h i o

t o be d e t e r m i n e d i n t r i n s i c a l l y in t e r m s of t h e geometry i t s e l f . The

s i m p l e s t way t o s e e t h i s i s t o c o n s i d e r t h a t i n an expanding u n i v e r s e

( e x p a n d i n g t h a t i s w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e p r o p e r time o f a h y p o t h e t i c a l

observer) a n a t u r a l d e f i n i t i o n of global time i s

t = f d 3 x (aet<3)g)i (6.13)
>v

in which t h e i n t e g r a l i s over t h e t h r e e - v o l u m e o f t h e u n i v e r s e . This

shows c l e a r l y t h a t t h i s p a r t i c u l a r t i m e i s d e s c r i b e d i n t e r m s of t h e

i n t r i n s i c three-geometry. This i s a l s o t h e answer t o problem i i ) above.

That i s , two of t h e t h r e e d e g r e e s of freedom p e r s p a c e - p o i n t in

sa
(Ej» 6 2 y) c o r r e s p o n d t o dynamical v a r i a b l e s b u t t h e t h i r d (g^ s a y )

is really time. I f we w r i t e s u g g e s t i v e l y g 3 ( x ) = T(jc) t h e n t h e fundamental

eqn ( 6 . 1 2 ) can be w r i t t e n as

c ( T
° fc; . ^ . f r - ' V V > e2;T] -0. (6.1«.)

This can be i n t e r p r e t e d as a Tomanaga-type m u l t i - t i m e - f o r m a l i s m v e r s i o n of

a dynamical e q u a t i o n f o r t h e s t a t e v e c t o r . This i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , in e f f e c t ,
answers problem i ) above by s u y i n g t h a t t h e dynamics was p r e s e n t a l l the

t i m e i n t h e Wheeler-DeWitt e q u a t i o n , i n t h e form o f a c o r r e l a t i o n between

two o f t h e geometry v a r i a b l e s and t h e r e m a i n i n g t h i r d o n e . The answer t o

problem i i i ) i s now, a t l e a s t i n p r i n c i p l e , c l e a r . One s h o u l d form a

H i l b e r t s p a c e by c o n s t r u c t i n g a measure o f t h e h e u r i s t i c form d y t g ^ g ^ )

( b u t n o t e n o t d y ( 3 G ) ) and u s e i t t o d i s c u s s p r o b a b i l i t y e t c . We hope t h a t

i t w i l l have t h e p r o p e r t y t h a t t h e o b s e r v a b l e q u a n t i t i e s w i l l correspond

t o proper s e i r - a d j o i n t operators. T h i s p r o p e r t y depends on t h e explicit

form o f t h e q u a n t i s a t i o n eqn ( 6 . 1 0 ) . I f t h i s e q u a t i o n i s changed t o

e n s u r e s e l f - a d j o i n t n e s s t h e n t h e Wheeler-DeWitt e q u a t i o n c h a n g e s and h e n c e

t h e c h o i c e o f measure and t h e n o t i o n o f s e l f a d j o i n t n e s s a l s o c h a n g e ! This

whole s i t u a t i o n i s c l e a r l y an e x t r e m e l y d e l i c a t e one which i s cro3s-coupled

in every r e s p e c t . In a d d i t i o n t h e r e i s no a p r i o r i r e a s o n why t h e t i m e

e v o l u t i o n e q u a t i o n (6.1U) s h o u l d i n any way r e s e m b l e t h e conventional

Schrodinger equation, and i n f a c t w i t h t h e c h o i c e s o f c a n o n i c a l variable

which have been u s e d h e r e a K l e i n - G o r d o n t y p e o f e q u a t i o n a p p e a r s (i.e.


52 &

i t i n v o l v e s ¿ijyp r a t h e r than ^ ). This r a i s e s the question of whether

o r n o t t h e m e a s u r e c o n s t r u c t e d above l e a d s t o a c o n s e r v e d probability

density. A c o m p l e t e r e s o l u t i o n of t h i s c o m p l i c a t e d and i n t r i g u i n g problem

has n o t y e t been a c h i e v e d . Any f u r t h e r t e c h n i c a l d i s c u s s i o n h e r e is

i n a p p r o p r i a t e ( i f t h i s i n t r o d u c t o r y c h a p t e r i s not t o become a whole b o o k ) ,

b u t t h e i n t e r e s t e d r e a d e r i s s t r o n( g5 l6y) a d v i s e d t o c o n s u l t some o f t h e

e x c e l l e n t p a p e r s on t h i s problem.

However, t h i s s e c t i o n would n o t b e c o m p l e t e w i t h o u t some remarks

concerning t h e i n v e s t i g a t i o n of g r a v i t a t i o n a l collapse within t h e context


63

• if e i t h e r o f t h e s e two c a n o n i c a l q u a n t i s a t i o n s c h e m e s . For example i n

the nuperspuce approach, s u p e r s p a c e i t s e l l ' would be e x p e c t e d t o c o n t a i n

c e r t a i n b o u n d a r i e s which c o r r e a p o n d t o s i n g u l a r t h r e e g e o m e t r i e s . In s o

f u r a« |^[ 3 G>J| 2 has some s o r t of p r o b a b i l i t y i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , t h e b e h a v i o u r

or the s t a t e f u n c t i o n a l in the v i c i n i t y of t h e s e s i n g u l a r geometries w i l l

pretiuniably d e t e r m i n e w h e t h e r o r n o t t h e c o l l a p s e d geometry e v e r o c c u r s .

I t h a s become customary i n t h e l i t e r a t u r e t o say t h a t t h e r e i s no c o l l a p s e

i f t h e wave f u n c t i o n a c t u a l l y v a n i s h e s on t h e boundary o f singularities

but t h i s s t a t e m e n t n e e d s t o be i n t e r p r e t e d p r o p e r l y . To i n v e s t i g a t e thÍ3

f u r t h e r i t i s c o n v e n i e n t t o g e n e r a l i s e t h e d i s c u s s i o n i n a way which is

v a l i d f o r e i t h e r of t h e two c a n o n i c a l q u a n t i s a t i o n schemes which have

been d i s c u s s e d . In any c a n o n i c a l a p p r o a c h which b e a r s t h e slightest

r e s e m b l a n c e t o c o n v e n t i o n a l quantum t h e o r y t h e r e w i l l b e o b s e r v a b l e s

which a r e r e p r e s e n t e d by s e l f - a d j o i n t o p e r a t o r s d e f i n e d on t h e H i l b e r t

«pace o f s t a t e s . C l a s s i c a l l y t h e s e o b s e r v a b l e s w i l l t a k e on c e r t a i n

v a l u e s f o r t h e c o n f i g u r a t i o n o f t h e s y s t e m which c o r r e s p o n d s t o t h e

gravitationally collapsed s t a t e . Indeed, f o r some o f t h e observables,

t h o s e v a l u e s (which may be i n f i n i t e ) w i l l p r o b a b l y be r e g a r d e d as b e i n g

the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of collapse. Let us c o n s i d e r one such o b s e r v a b l e ,

which we w i l l c a l l f . By v i r t u e o f t h e s p e c t r a l t h e o r e m f o r s e l f -

a d j o i n t o p e r a t o r s we can s e t up an isomorphism between t h e original

H i l b e r t s p a c e and a c e r t a i n s p a c e o f f u n c t i o n s {i(r(x)|x c a ) which a r e

d e f i n e d on t h e s p e c t r u m a^ o f J* . This function space i s equipped with

a H i l b e r t - s p a c e s t r u c t u r e by means o f a c e r t a i n measure y(A) (which is

d e t e r m i n e d by ¡f ) . S t r i c t l y speaking, unless p i s i t s e l f a complete


61»

s e t of commuting o b s e r v a b l e s , t h e f u n c t i o n s a r e n o t r e a l v a l u e d , but

r a t h e r , elements of a general d i r e c t i n t e g r a l , and as such t a k e t h e i r

v a l u e s in a l a r g e r 3 p a c e . However, n e g l e c t i n g t h i s r e l a t i v e l y unimportant

technical point, t h e i n t e g r a l o v e r a Borel s e t

(6.15)

i s t h e p r o b a b i l i t y t h a t i f a measurement i s made on t h e system of t h e

observable P t h e n t h e r e s u l t i n g v a l u e w i l l l i e i n B. (In t h e g e n e r a l

c a s e t h e i n t e g r a l w i l l be o v e r t h e s p e c t r a o f a complete commuting s e t of

variables.) We a r e p a r t i c u l a r l y i n t e r e s t e d in t h e c a s e in which B c o n t a i n s

t h e p o i n t o f t h e s p e c t r u m of P which c o r r e s p o n d s , c l a s s i c a l l y , t o t h e

singularity. I f t h e s i n g u l a r p o i n t i s an i s o l a t e d , d i s c r e t e p a r t of t h e

s p e c t r u m t h e n i t seems r e a s o n a b l e t o say t h a t t h e v a n i s h i n g o f t h e wave

f u n c t i o n a t t h a t p o i n t means t h a t t h e system does n o t experience

g r a v i t a t i o n a l c o l l a p s e when i t i s in t h a t s t a t e . (Or t o be more p r e c i s e ,

that p a r t i c u l a r observable d o e s n ' t ; presumably t h e s t a t e m e n t would have

t o be t r u e f o r a complete commuting s e t of o b s e r v a b l e s b e f o r e one c o u l d

say t h a t t h e whole system was s i n g u l a r i t y - f r e e ) . However, i f t h e

s i n g u l a r p o i n t b e l o n g s t o t h e c o n t i n u o u s p a r t of t h e spectrum t h e n t h e

v a n i s h i n g o f t h e wave f u n c t i o n a t t h a t p o i n t would n o t n e c e s s a r i l y have

any g r e a t s i g n i f i c a n c e . What i s more l i k e l y t o be r e l e v a n t i s t h e way i n

which P_ i n eqn ( 6 . 1 5 ) approaches z e r o as B s h r i n k s t o t h e s i n g u l a r point.


13
The v a n i s h i n g ( o r o t h e r w i s e ) of t h e s t a t e f u n c t i o n a l on t h e singular

g e o m e t r i e s (which in p r i n c i p l e could a r i s e e i t h e r as an a c t u a l prediction


65

of t h e t h e o r y o r merely as a c o n s i s t e n t boundary c o n d i t i o n ) certainly

a f f e c t s t h i s b e h a v i o u r b u t i s c l e a r l y n o t t h e whole s t o r y . This p r o b l e m ,

which can be seen e s p e c i a l l y c l e a r l y w i t h i n t h e c o n t e x t o f t h e quantum

models d i s c u s s e d in 57. has as y e t no complete answer and i s e v i d e n t l y an

i m p o r t a n t one f o r r e s e a r c h .

7. QUANTUM 140 DELS

The use o f quantum models ( o r quantum cosmologies as t h e y a r e o f t e n

c a l l e d ) t o i n v e s t i g a t e t h e q u a n t i s a t i o n of t h e g r a v i t a t i o n a l f i e l d ha3

become i n c r e a s i n g l y p o p u l a r over t h e l a s t t e n y e a r s . I t i s important t o

a p p r e c i a t e t h a t t h e t e c h n i q u e i s , i n p r i n c i p l e , a p p l i c a b l e t o any quantum

field theory. To f o c u s a t t e n t i o n l e t us c o n s i d e r a s c a l a r f i e l d b e i n g

q u a n t i s e d in t h e f u n c t i o n a l r e p r e s e n t a t i o n and hence s a t i s f y i n g t h e

Schrodinger equation (see 51)

•[•(•>; t] (7.1)

or e q u i v a l e n t l y (see §1)

;t
H (
a a r- ^
i K
«1, • 0 (7
V V ' ^ " at -2>

with t h e a p p r o p r i a t e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f as t h e p r o b a b i l i t y

distribution f o r t h e measured v a l u e s of

Now i n c l a s s i c a l g e n e r a l r e l a t i v i t y a well-known t e c h n i q u e f o r
f i n d i n g e x a c t s o l u t i o n s of t h e E i n 3 t e i n e q u a t i o n s i s t o impose 3ome

symmetry on t h e m e t r i c . A s i m i l a r p r o c e d u r e could b e f o l l o w e d t o f i n d

c l a s s i c a l s o l u t i o n s o f t h e s c a l a r f i e l d t h e o r y and would c o r r e s p o n d t o

s e t t i n g c e r t a i n of t h e modes q^ ( p o s s i b l y i n f i n i t e l y many) e q u a l t o z e r o .

The q u e s t i o n a r i s e s as t o w h e t h e r a s i m i l a r i d e a would work in t h e

case of t h e quantised t h e o r y . In o t h e r words, what happens i f we

' f r e e z e o u t ' some of t h e d e g r e e s o f freedom of t h e f i e l d and q u a n t i s e t h e

rest? In p a r t i c u l a r i f we remove a l l b u t t h e f i r s t n modes, s a y , t h e n

e q u a t i o n ( 7 . 2 ) becomes

< t )
a 3 3 ^ < V V ' - V
t ) = i 1 2
» ' v v v ^ ' t ; - ^ * < v v v " *
(7.3)

which i s a genuine p a r t i a l d i f f e r e n t i a l , r a t h e r t h a n f u n c t i o n a l e q u a t i o n .

U n f o r t u n a t e l y an e x a c t s o l u t i o n of t h e quantum f i e l d t h e o r y i s n o t o b t a i n e d

i n t h i s way b e c a u s e i n r e a l i t y t h e s u p p r e s s e d modes w i l l , a t t h e very

least, undergo z e r o - p o i n t f l u c t u a t i o n s . As a r e s u l t t h e above s t r u c t u r e

i s a 'quantum model' o r a p p r o x i m a t i o n t o t h e f u l l t h e o r y (hence t h e title

of t h i s s e c t i o n ) . There a r e two d i f f e r e n t a t t i t u d e s which one can t a k e t o

t h e s e models. Namely:

i) I t may be p o s s i b l e t o show t h a t in c e r t a i n physical

s i t u a t i o n s , c e r t a i n of t h e modes do dominate t h e o t h e r s

and as such eqn ( 7 - 3 ) i s a genuine a p p r o x i m a t i o n t o

reality. In e f f e c t we a r e p e r t u r b i n g t h e number o f

d e g r e e s o f freedom n ( r a t h e r t h a n any c o u p l i n g c o n s t a n t s )

and a r e s a y i n g t h a t i n some s i t u a t i o n s t h i s i 3 a u s e f u l

t h i n g t o do. Note t h a t t a k i n g t h e l i m i t n •• » i n (7.3)


67

13 a h i g h l y n o n - t r i v i a l t a s k . Q u i t e a p a r t from t h e

t e c h n i c a l d i f f i c u l t i e s of s o l v i n g an n ' t h o r d e r p a r t i a l

d i f f e r e n t i a l e q u a t i o n , t h e d e l i c a t e problem of

inequivalent representations of the canonical commutation

r e l a t i o n s o f i n f i n i t e l y many v a r i a b l e s w i l l appear,

b r i n g i n g with i t the usual ' u l t r a v i o l e t divergence'

d i f f i c u l t i e s o f quantum f i e l d t h e o r y ,

ii) A more r e s t r i c t i v e view i s t h a t t h e v a l u e of t h e s e models

i s in s e r v i n g as a t e s t i n g ground f o r p r o b i n g c e r t a i n

c o n c e p t u a l o r t e c h n i c a l d i f f i c u l t i e s of t h e f u l l t h e o r y .

For example, in the case of general r e l a t i v i t y , i f we

q u a n t i s e i n t h e n o n - c o v a r i a n t c a n o n i c a l scheme (§5) t h e n

t h e o p e r a t o r o r d e r i n g problems can be d i s c u s s e d in a

s i m p l i f i e d form u s i n g one o f t h e s e m o d e l s , a s can t h e

q u e s t i o n o f t h e dependence of t h e quantum t h e o r y answers

on c h o i c e o f c a n o n i c a l v a r i a b l e s , c h o i c e of coordinates

etc. (A c a u t i o n a r y remark however - t h e r e s o l u t i o n of a

p a r t i c u l a r problem f o r f i n i t e n , even f o r a l l f i n i t e n ,

may n o t be r e l e v a n t when t h e l i m i t as n » is taken. )

As emphasised i n i t i a l l y t h e s e t e c h n i q u e s a r e in p r i n c i p l e

a p p l i c a b l e t o any f i e l d t h e o r y , b u t in p r a c t i c e t h e y only seem t o have

been used t o any e x t e n t in quantum g r a v i t y . Each o f t h e d i f f e r e n t

approaches t o q u a n t i s i n g t h e g r a v i t a t i o n a l f i e l d has a c o r r e s p o n d i n g

quantum model. For example:

i) True ( n o n - c o v a r i a n t ) c a n o n i c a l q u a n t i s a t i o n (55) finishe3


with a g e n u i n e S c h r o d i n g e r e q u a t i o n ( 7 . 1 ) and as such

has a model p r e c i s e l y o f t h e form of eqn ( 7 - 3 ) .

In ' c o v a r i a n t ' c a n o n i c a l q u a n t i s a t i o n (§6) t h e m a j o r

r e s u l t i s t h e Wheelei—DeWitt e q u a t i o n

(7.M

which would admit a model of t h e form

(7-5)

in which q ^ . - . q ^ form a c o o r d i n a t e system f o r a s m a l l

f i n i t e d i m e n s i o n a l p i e c e of superspace.

The a n a l o g u e of a quantum model f o r t h e covariant

q u a n t i s a t i o n scheme would b e t o r e p l a c e t h e Feynman

f u n c t i o n a l i n t e g r a l o v e r t h e f i e l d p a t h s by a f u n c t i o n a l

i n t e g r a l o v e r n d e g r e e s of freedom. That is,

Although t h e words quantum model/cosmology o r e used

e x c l u s i v e l y in quantum g r a v i t y t o r e f e r t o t h e c a n o n i c a l

approaches i t i s i n t e r e s t i n g t o n o t e t h a t modern E u c l i d e a n -
69

space-based axiomatic f i e l d t h e o r y , u s e s quantum

models , under t h e t i t l e of ' c o n d i t i o n e d fields',

roughly in t h e s e n s e of eqn ( 7 . 6 ) .

As t h e r e i s a c h a p t e r by M.MacCallum on t h e s u b j e c t of quantum

imology I w i l l n o t g i v e any d e t a i l s o f a c t u a l models h e r e . It

" ' i r r i c c s t o soy t h a t t h e s u b j e c t s t a r t e d i n 1967 w i t h t h e p u b l i c a t i o n o f

|)«Witt's p a p e r ' d e a l i n g with a Friedmann Universe model i n which a l l

hut one degree o f freedom ( t h e r a d i u s i n t h e Robertson Walker m e t r i c ) are

frozen out and which i s f i l l e d w i t h a homogeneous c l o u d of d u s t . The


(57) .
imliject was t a k e n up by Misner i n t h e form of h i s Mixmaster model and

has f l o u r i s h e d s i n c e t h e n i n t h e hands of h i m s e l f , h i s c o l l a b o r a t o r s and


(58)

mimy o t h e r s .

Let us conclude t h i s s e c t i o n by l i s t i n g some of t h e t y p e s of

problem which can be i n v e s t i g a t e d u s i n g quantum models.

1) Conceptual problems a r e :

i) t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e s t a t e v e c t o r and t h e d e f i n i t i o n

of o b s e r v a b l e s ;

ii) t h e n o t i o n of p r o b a b i l i t y i n a c l o s e d u n i v e r s e ( t h i s is

c l o s e l y l i n k e d t o t h e t e c h n i c a l problem o f d e f i n i n g a

Hilbert space s t r u c t u r e f o r t h e s t a t e vectors);

and

iii) t h e s i g n i f i c a n c e o f t h e p o s s i b i l i t y of t i m e b e i n g an

o p e r a t o r i n t h e s u p e r s p a c e approach o r e q u i v a l e n t l y of

d i f f e r e n t c l a s s i c a l l y chosen t i m e s b e i n g r e l a t e d by

q-number gauge t r a n s f o r m a t i o n s in t h e non c o v a r i a n t

c a n o n i c a l scheme.
7 0

2) T e c h n i c a l problems a r e :

i) t h e v a r i o u s o p e r a t o r o r d e r i n g problems which o c c u r ;

ii) t h e dependence o f t h e quantum t h e o r y r e s u l t s on t h e

c h o i c e of c a n o n i c a l v a r i a b l e s a n d , i n t h e c a s e o f t h e

n o n - c o v a r i a n t c a n o n i c a l t h e o r y , on t h e v a r i a b l e s which

a r e e l i m i n a t e d from t h e c o n s t r a i n t e q u a t i o n s and t h e

c o o r d i n a t e c o n d i t i o n s which a r e imposed;

iii) t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n of s e n s i b l e c r i t e r i a f o r t h e existence

o r o t h e r w i s e of g r a v i t a t i o n a l c o l l a p s e in t h e quantum

t h e o r y ( c . f . t h e remarks a t t h e end of §6);

iv) t h e n a t u r e of t h e t i m e - e v o l u t i o n e q u a t i o n (viz.

Schrodinger, Klein-Gordon e t c . ) which f i n a l l y emerges

from t h e s u p e r s p a c e t e c h n i q u e .

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I am f o r t u n a t e in h a v i n g many f r i e n d s and c o l l e a g u e s and

a c q u a i n t a n c e s working i n t h e f i e l d o f quantum g r a v i t y from whom I have

learnt a great deal. In p a r t i c u l a r my views on t h e s u b j e c t have been

c o n s i d e r a b l y broadened by r e c e n t l e n g t h y d i s c u s s i o n s w i t h Bryce DeWitt

and K a r e l Kuchar.
Y.1

HKFKKKHCKS FOR 51.

Dome r e c e n t review a r t i c l e s o f a g e n e r a l n a t u r e a r e :

(1) D. B r i l l , R. Gowdy Rep. Prog. Phys. 2 1 l»13 (1970)

(2) C . J . Isham Quantum G r a v i t y ICTP/72/8. Imperial

C o l l e g e p r e p r i n t l e c t u r e n o t e s of t h e

1972 Boston c o n f e r e n c e . An e a r l i e r

v e r s i o n appeared in t h e ' P r o c e e d i n g s of

t h e Seventh F i n n i s h Summer School i n

Physics 1972'. Ed. R. P e l l i n e n

(3) B.S. DeWitt Gen. R e l . and Grav. 1 2 l 8 l (1970)

(li) A. A s h t e k a r , R.P. Geroch U n i v e r s i t y of Chicago p r e p r i n t 1971»

Some e a r l i e r , b u t very r e l e v a n t , review t y p e a r t i c l e s ( b u t mainly on

canonical quantisation) are:

(5) J . A . Wheeler i n 'Les Houche l e c t u r e s 1963' Ed. C. DeWitt

and B. DeWitt B l a c k i e 1963

' B a t t e l l e Rencontres 1967' Ed. C. DeWitt,

J . Wheeler. Benjamin N.Y. 1968

(6) P.G. Bergpiann, A. Komar in ' R e c e n t Developments i n General

R e l a t i v i t y ' Pergamon 1962

(7) R. P e n r o s e i n 'Magic w i t h o u t Magic' W.H. Freeman 1972

(8) See t h e c h a p t e r s i n t h i s book by R. P e n r o s e and G. S p a r l i n g f o r a

f u l l b i b l i o g r a p h y on t w i s t o r t h e o r y .

The L 2 ( Q , d y ) v e r s i o n o f Fock s p a c e has been used mainly by a x i o m a t i c

field theorists. A s i m p l e b u t e l e g a n t d i s c u s s i o n f o r t h e two-

d i m e n s i o n a l c a s e i s given i n :

You might also like