This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
1 Introduction: The Harmonic Oscillator 5
2 The WKB Method 8
2.1 Some HamiltonJacobi preliminaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2.2 The WKB approximation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
3 Symplectic Manifolds 17
3.1 Symplectic structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
3.2 Cotangent bundles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
3.3 Mechanics on manifolds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
4 Quantization in Cotangent Bundles 36
4.1 Prequantization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
4.2 The Maslov correction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
4.3 Phase functions and lagrangian submanifolds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
4.4 WKB quantization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
5 The Symplectic Category 64
5.1 Symplectic reduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
5.2 The symplectic category . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
5.3 Symplectic manifolds and mechanics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
6 Fourier Integral Operators 83
6.1 Compositions of semiclassical states . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
6.2 WKB quantization and compositions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
7 Geometric Quantization 93
7.1 Prequantization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
7.2 Polarizations and the metaplectic correction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
7.3 Quantization of semiclassical states . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
8 Algebraic Quantization 111
8.1 Poisson algebras and Poisson manifolds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
8.2 Deformation quantization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
8.3 Symplectic groupoids . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
A Densities 119
B The method of stationary phase 121
C
ˇ
Cech cohomology 124
D Principal T
bundles 125
2
Preface
These notes are based on a course entitled “Symplectic geometry and geometric quantization”
taught by Alan Weinstein at the University of California, Berkeley, in the fall semester of
1992 and again at the Centre Emile Borel (Institut Henri Poincar´e) in the spring semester
of 1994. The only prerequisite for the course (and for these notes) was a knowledge of
the basic notions from the theory of diﬀerentiable manifolds (diﬀerential forms, vector ﬁelds,
transversality, etc.). The aim of the course was to give students an introduction to the ideas of
microlocal analysis and the related symplectic geometry, with an emphasis on the role which
these ideas play in formalizing the transition between the mathematics of classical dynamics
(hamiltonian ﬂows on symplectic manifolds) and that of quantum mechanics (unitary ﬂows
on Hilbert spaces).
There already exist many books on the subjects treated here, but most of them provide
too much detail for the reader who just wants to ﬁnd out what the subject is about. These
notes are meant to function as a guide to the literature; we refer to other sources for many
details which are omitted here, and which can be bypassed on a ﬁrst reading.
The pamphlet [63] is in some sense a precursor to these notes. On the other hand, a much
more complete reference on the subject, written at about the same time, is [28]. An earlier
work, one of the ﬁrst to treat the connections between classical and quantum mechanics from
a geometric viewpoint, is [41]. The book [29] treats further topics in symplectic geometry
and mechanics, with special attention to the role of symmetry groups, a topic pretty much
ignored in the present notes. For more extensive treatment of the PDE aspects of the subject,
we refer to [43] for a physicsoriented presentation and to the notes [21] and the treatises
[32], [46], and [56]. For “geometric quantization”, one may consult [35], [53], [54], [60] or
[71]. For classical mechanics and symplectic geometry, we suggest [1], [2], [6], [8], [25], [38],
[59]. Finally, two basic references on quantum mechanics itself are [13] and [20].
Although symplectic geometry is like any ﬁeld of mathematics in having its deﬁnitions,
theorems, etc., it is also a special way of looking at a very broad part of mathematics and
its applications. For many “symplecticians”, it is almost a religion. A previous paper by
one of us [64] referred to “the symplectic creed”.
1
In these notes, we show how symplectic
geometry arises from the study of semiclassical solutions to the Schr¨odinger equation, and in
turn provides a geometric foundation for the further analysis of this and other formulations
of quantum mechanics.
These notes are still not in ﬁnal form, but they have already beneﬁtted from the comments
1
We like the following quotation from [4] very much:
In recent years, symplectic and contact geometries have encroached on all areas of mathemat
ics. As each skylark must display its comb, so every branch of mathematics must ﬁnally display
symplectisation. In mathematics there exist operations on diﬀerent levels: functions acting on
numbers, operators acting on functions, functors acting on operators, and so on. Symplec
tisation belongs to the small set of highest level operations, acting not on details (functions,
operators, functors), but on all the mathematics at once. Although some such highest level
operations are presently known (for example, algebraisation, Bourbakisation, complexiﬁcation,
superisation, symplectisation) there is as yet no axiomatic theory describing them.
3
and suggestions of many readers, especially Maurice Garay, Jim Morehead, and Dmitry
Roytenberg. We welcome further comments. We would like to thank the Centre Emile Borel
and the Isaac Newton Institute for their hospitality. During the preparation of these notes,
S.B. was supported by NSF graduate and postdoctoral fellowships in mathematics. A.W.
was partially supported by NSF Grants DMS9001089 and 9301089.
4
1 Introduction: The Harmonic Oscillator
In these notes, we will take a “spiral” approach toward the quantization problem, beginning
with a very concrete example and its proposed solution, and then returning to the same
kind of problem at progressively higher levels of generality. Speciﬁcally, we will start with
the harmonic oscillator as described classically in the phase plane R
2
and work toward the
problem of quantizing arbitrary symplectic manifolds. The latter problem has taken on a
new interest in view of recent work by Witten and others in the area of topological quantum
ﬁeld theory (see for example [7]).
The classical picture
The harmonic oscillator in 1 dimension is described by Newton’s diﬀerential equation:
m¨ x = −kx.
By a standard procedure, we can convert this secondorder ordinary diﬀerential equation
into a system of two ﬁrstorder equations. Introducing the “phase plane” R
2
with position
and momentum coordinates (q, p), we set
q = x p = m˙ x,
so that Newton’s equation becomes the pair of equations:
˙ q =
p
m
˙ p = −kq.
If we now introduce the hamiltonian function H: R
2
→R representing the sum of kinetic
and potential energies,
H(q, p) =
p
2
2m
+
kq
2
2
then we ﬁnd
˙ q =
∂H
∂p
˙ p = −
∂H
∂q
These simple equations, which can describe a wide variety of classical mechanical systems
with appropriate choices of the function H, are called Hamilton’s equations.
2
Hamilton’s
equations deﬁne a ﬂow on the phase plane representing the timeevolution of the classical
system at hand; solution curves in the case of the harmonic oscillator are ellipses centered
at the origin, and points in the phase plane move clockwise around each ellipse.
We note two qualitative features of the hamiltonian description of a system:
1. The derivative of H along a solution curve is
dH
dt
=
∂H
∂q
˙ q +
∂H
∂p
˙ p = −˙ p ˙ q + ˙ q ˙ p = 0,
2
If we had chosen ˙ x rather than m˙ x as the second coordinate of our phase plane, we would not have
arrived at this universal form of the equations.
5
i.e., the value of H is constant along integral curves of the hamiltonian vector ﬁeld.
Since H represents the total energy of the system, this property of the ﬂow is interpreted
as the law of conservation of energy.
2. The divergence of the hamiltonian vector ﬁeld X
H
= ( ˙ q, ˙ p) = (
∂H
∂p
, −
∂H
∂q
) is
∇ X
H
=
∂
2
H
∂q ∂p
−
∂
2
H
∂p ∂q
= 0.
Thus the vector ﬁeld X
H
is divergencefree, and its ﬂow preserves area in the phase
plane.
The description of classical hamiltonian mechanics just given is tied to a particular coordinate
system. We shall see in Chapter 3 that the use of diﬀerential forms leads to a coordinate
free description and generalization of the hamiltonian viewpoint in the context of symplectic
geometry.
The quantum mechanical picture
In quantum mechanics, the motion of the harmonic oscillator is described by a complex
valued wave function ψ(x, t) satisfying the 1dimensional Schr¨ odinger equation:
i
∂ψ
∂t
= −
2
2m
∂
2
ψ
∂x
2
+
k
2
x
2
ψ.
Here, Planck’s constant has the dimensions of action (energy time). Interpreting the
right hand side of this equation as the result of applying to the wave function ψ the operator
ˆ
H
def
= −
2
2m
∂
2
∂x
2
+
k
2
m
x
2,
where m
x
2 is the operator of multiplication by x
2
, we may rewrite the Schr¨odinger equation
as
i
∂ψ
∂t
=
ˆ
Hψ.
A solution ψ of this equation does not represent a classical trajectory; instead, if ψ is
normalized, i.e.
R
ψ
∗
ψ = 1,
then its squarenorm
ρ(x, t) = [ψ(x, t)[
2
is interpreted as a probability density for observing the oscillator at the position x at time
t. The wave function ψ(x, t) itself may be viewed alternatively as a tdependent function of
x, or as a path in the function space C
∞
(R, C). From the latter point of view, Schr¨odinger’s
equation deﬁnes a vector ﬁeld on C
∞
(R, C) representing the time evolution of the quantum
system; a wave function satisfying Schr¨odinger’s equation then corresponds to an integral
curve of the associated ﬂow.
Like Hamilton’s equations in classical mechanics, the Schr¨odinger equation is a general
form for the quantum mechanical description of a large class of systems.
6
Quantization and the classical limit
The central aim of these notes is to give a geometric interpretation of relationships between
the fundamental equations of classical and quantum mechanics. Based on the present dis
cussion of the harmonic oscillator, one tenuous connection can be drawn as follows. To the
classical position and momentum observables q, p we associate the diﬀerential operators
q → ˆ q = m
x
p → ˆ p = −i
∂
∂x
.
The classical hamiltonian H(q, p) = p
2
/2m+kq
2
/2 then corresponds naturally to the operator
ˆ
H. As soon as we wish to “quantize” a more complicated energy function, such as (1+q
2
)p
2
,
we run in to the problem that the operators ˆ q and ˆ p do not commute with one another, so
that we are forced to choose between (1 + ˆ q
2
)ˆ p
2
and ˆ p
2
(1 + ˆ q
2
), among a number of other
possibilities. The diﬀerence between these choices turns out to become small when → 0.
But how can a constant approach zero?
Besides the problem of “quantization of equations,” we will also treat that of “quan
tization of solutions.” That is, we would like to establish that, for systems which are in
some sense macroscopic, the classical motions described by solutions of Hamilton’s equa
tions lead to approximate solutions of Schr¨odinger’s equation. Establishing this relation
between classical and quantum mechanics is important, not only in verifying that the theo
ries are consistent with the fact that we “see” classical behavior in systems which are “really”
governed by quantum mechanics, but also as a tool for developing approximate solutions to
the quantum equations of motion.
What is the meaning of “macroscopic” in mathematical terms? It turns out that good
approximate solutions of Schr¨odinger’s equation can be generated from classical information
when is small enough. But how can a constant with physical dimensions be small?
Although there remain some unsettled issues connected with the question, “How can
become small?” the answer is essentially the following. For any particular mechanical
system, there are usually characteristic distances, masses, velocities, . . . from which a unit
of action appropriate to the system can be derived, and the classical limit is applicable
when divided by this unit is much less than 1. In these notes, we will often regard
mathematically as a formal parameter or a variable rather than as a ﬁxed number.
7
2 The WKB Method
A basic technique for obtaining approximate solutions to the Schr¨odinger equation from
classical motions is called the WKB method, after Wentzel, Kramers, and Brillouin. (Other
names, including Liouville, Green, and Jeﬀreys are sometimes attached to this method.
References [13] and [47] contain a discussion of some of its history. Also see [5], where the
method is traced all the way back to 1817. For convenience, nevertheless, we will still refer
to the method as WKB.) A good part of what is now called microlocal analysis can be
understood as the extension of the basic WKB idea to more precise approximations and
more general situations, so the following discussion is absolutely central to these notes.
2.1 Some HamiltonJacobi preliminaries
In this section we will carry out the ﬁrst step in the WKB method to obtain an approximate
solution to the “stationary state” eigenvalue problem arising from the Schr¨odinger equation.
The geometric interpretation of this technique will lead to a correspondence between classical
and quantum mechanics which goes beyond the one described in Chapter 1.
Consider a 1dimensional system with hamiltonian
H(q, p) =
p
2
2m
+ V (q),
where V (x) is a potential (for example the potential kx
2
/2 for the harmonic oscillator).
Hamilton’s equations now become
˙ q =
p
m
˙ p = −V
t
(q).
For ﬁxed ∈ R
+
, Schr¨odinger’s equation assumes the form
i
∂ψ
∂t
=
ˆ
Hψ,
where
ˆ
H = −
2
2m
∂
2
∂x
2
+ m
V
is the Schr¨ odinger operator.
As a ﬁrst step toward solving the Schr¨odinger equation, we look for stationary states,
i.e. solutions of the form
ψ(x, t) = ϕ(x) e
−iωt
,
socalled because as time evolves, these solutions keep the same form (up to multiplication by
a complex scalar of norm 1). Substituting this expression for ψ in the Schr¨odinger equation,
we obtain
ω ϕ(x) e
−iωt
= (
ˆ
Hϕ)(x) e
−iωt
.
Eliminating the factor e
−iωt
above, we arrive at the timeindependent Schr¨ odinger equa
tion:
(
ˆ
H −E) ϕ = 0,
8
where E = ω. This equation means that ϕ is to be an eigenfunction of the linear diﬀerential
operator
ˆ
H; the eigenvalue E represents the energy of the system, which has a “deﬁnite value”
in this state.
Suppose for the moment that the potential V is constant, in which case the force −V
t
(x)
is zero, and so we are dealing with a free particle. Trying a solution of the form ϕ(x) = e
ixξ
for some constant ξ, we ﬁnd that
(
ˆ
H −E) ϕ = 0 ⇔ (ξ)
2
= 2m(E −V ).
For V < E, the (real) value of ξ is thus determined up to a choice of sign, and one has an
abundance of exact solutions of the Schr¨odinger equation which are oscillatory and bounded.
Such a wave function is not squareintegrable and as such is said to be “unnormalizable”; it
represents a particle which is equally likely to be anywhere in space, but which has a deﬁnite
momentum (since it is an eigenfunction of the momentum operator ˆ p).
3
When E < V , the
constant ξ is imaginary, and there are only real exponential solutions, which are unbounded
and admit no physical interpretation.
The basic idea at this stage of the WKB method is that, if V varies with x, then ξ should
vary with x as well; a more general solution candidate is then
ϕ(x) = e
iS(x)/
,
for some realvalued function S known as a phase function. This proposed form of the
solution is the simplest version of the WKB ansatz, and in this case we have
(
ˆ
H −E) ϕ =
¸
(S
t
(x))
2
2m
+ (V −E) −
i
2m
S
tt
(x)
e
iS(x)/
.
Since we will consider to be “small”, our ﬁrstorder approximation attempt will ignore the
last term in brackets; to kill the other two terms, we require that S satisfy the eikonal or
HamiltonJacobi equation:
H(x, S
t
(x)) =
(S
t
(x))
2
2m
+ V (x) = E,
i.e.
S
t
(x) = ±
2m(E −V (x)).
To understand the phase function S geometrically, we consider the classical phase
4
plane
R
2
· T
∗
R with coordinates (q, p). The diﬀerential dS = S
t
dx can be viewed as a mapping
dS: R →T
∗
R, where as usual we set p = S
t
. Then S satisﬁes the HamiltonJacobi equation
if and only if the image of dS lies in the level manifold H
−1
(E). This observation establishes
a fundamental link between classical and quantum mechanics:
When the image of dS lies in a level manifold of the classical hamiltonian, the
function S may be taken as the phase function of a ﬁrstorder approximate solu
tion of Schr¨odinger’s equation.
3
See [55] for a grouptheoretic interpretation of such states.
4
These two uses of the term “phase” seem to be unrelated!
9
The preceding discussion generalizes easily to higher dimensions. In R
n
, the Schr¨odinger
operator corresponding to the classical hamiltonian
H(q, p) =
¸
p
2
i
2m
+ V (q)
is
ˆ
H = −
2
2m
∆ + m
V
,
where ∆ denotes the ordinary Laplacian. As before, if we consider a WKB ansatz of the
form ϕ = e
iS/
, then
(
ˆ
H −E) ϕ =
¸
∇S
2
2m
+ (V −E) −
i
2m
∆S
e
iS/
will be O() provided that S satisﬁes the HamiltonJacobi equation:
H
x
1
, . . . , x
n
,
∂S
∂x
1
, . . . ,
∂S
∂x
n
=
∇S(x)
2
2m
+ V (x) = E.
Since ϕ is of order zero in , while (
ˆ
H − E) ϕ = O(), the ansatz ϕ again constitutes a
ﬁrstorder approximate solution to the timeindependent Schr¨odinger equation.
We will call a phase function S : R
n
→R admissible if it satisﬁes the HamiltonJacobi
equation. The image L = im(dS) of the diﬀerential of an admissible phase function S is
characterized by three geometric properties:
1. L is an ndimensional submanifold of H
−1
(E).
2. The pullback to L of the form α
n
=
¸
j
p
j
dq
j
on R
2n
is exact.
3. The restriction of the canonical projection π : T
∗
R
n
→ R
n
to L induces a diﬀeomor
phism L · R
n
. In other words, L is projectable.
While many of the basic constructions of microlocal analysis are motivated by operations
on these projectable submanifolds of T
∗
R
n
· R
2n
, applications of the theory require us to
extend the constructions to more general ndimensional submanifolds of R
2n
satisfying only
a weakened version of condition (2) above, in which “exact” is replaced by “closed”. Such
submanifolds are called lagrangian.
For example, the level sets for the 1dimensional harmonic oscillator are lagrangian sub
manifolds in the phase plane. A regular level curve of the hamiltonian is an ellipse L. Since
L is 1dimensional, the pullback to L of the form p dq is closed, but the integral of p dq
around the curve equals the enclosed nonzero area, so its pullback to L is not exact. It is
also clear that the curve fails to project diﬀeomorphically onto R. From the classical stand
point, the behavior of an oscillator is nevertheless completely described by its trajectory,
suggesting that in general the state of a system should be represented by the submanifold
L (projectable or not) rather than by the phase function S. This idea, which we will clarify
later, is the starting point of the geometrical approach to microlocal analysis.
10
For now, we want to note an important relationship between lagrangian submanifolds of
R
2n
and hamiltonian ﬂows. Recall that to a function H : R
2n
→ R, Hamilton’s equations
associate the vector ﬁeld
X
H
= ˙ q
∂
∂q
+ ˙ p
∂
∂p
=
¸
j
∂H
∂p
j
∂
∂q
j
−
∂H
∂q
j
∂
∂p
j
.
A simple computation shows that X
H
and the form α
n
are related by the equation
X
H
dα
n
= −dH,
i.e.
dα
n
(X
H
, v) = −dH(v)
for every tangent vector v. If L is a lagrangian submanifold of a level set of H, then TL
lies in the kernel of dH at all points of L, or, in other words, the 2form dα
n
vanishes on
the subspace of T
p
R
2n
generated by T
p
L and X
H
(p) for each p ∈ L. The restriction of dα
n
to the tangent space T
p
R
2n
of R
2n
at any point p deﬁnes a nondegenerate, skewsymmetric
bilinear form, and thus, as we will see in the next chapter, subspaces of T
p
R
2n
on which dα
n
vanishes can be at most ndimensional. These remarks imply that X
H
is tangent to L, and
we have the following result.
HamiltonJacobi theorem . A function H: R
2n
→R is locally constant on a lagrangian
submanifold L ⊂ R
2n
if and only if the hamiltonian vector ﬁeld X
H
is tangent to L.
If the lagrangian submanifold L is locally closed, this theorem implies that L is invariant
under the ﬂow of X
H
.
2.2 The WKB approximation
Returning to our WKB ansatz for a stationarystate solution of the Schr¨odinger equation,
we recall that if S: R
n
→R is an admissible phase function, then ϕ(x) = e
iS(x)/
satisﬁes
(
ˆ
H −E) ϕ = O().
Up to terms of order , in other words, ϕ is an eigenfunction of
ˆ
H with eigenvalue E.
There is no way to improve the order of approximation simply by making a better choice
of S. It is also clear on physical grounds that our ansatz for ϕ is too restrictive because
it satisﬁes [ϕ(x)[ = 1 for all x. In quantum mechanics, the quantity [ϕ(x)[
2
represents the
probability of the particle being at the position x, and there is no reason for this to be
constant; in fact, it is at least intuitively plausible that a particle is more likely to be found
where it moves more slowly, i.e., where its potential energy is higher. We may therefore hope
to ﬁnd a better approximate solution by multiplying ϕ by an “amplitude function” a
ϕ(x) = e
iS(x)/
a(x).
11
If S is again an admissible phase function, we now obtain:
(
ˆ
H −E) ϕ = −
1
2m
¸
i
a∆S + 2
¸
j
∂a
∂x
j
∂S
∂x
j
+
2
∆a
¸
e
iS/
.
If a is chosen to kill the coeﬃcient of on the right, then ϕ will be an eigenfunction of
ˆ
H
modulo terms of order O(
2
). This condition on a is known as the homogeneous transport
equation:
a∆S + 2
¸
j
∂a
∂x
j
∂S
∂x
j
= 0.
If S is an admissible phase function, and a is an amplitude which satisﬁes the homogeneous
transport equation, then the secondorder solution ϕ = e
iS/
a is called the semiclassical
approximation.
Example 2.1 In 1 dimension, the homogeneous transport equation amounts to
aS
tt
+ 2a
t
S
t
= 0.
Solving this equation directly, we obtain
a
2
S
tt
+ 2aa
t
S
t
= (a
2
S
t
)
t
= 0
⇒ a =
c
√
S
t
for some constant c. Since S is assumed to satisfy the HamiltonJacobi equation, we have
S
t
=
2m(E −V ), and thus
a =
c
[4(E −V )]
1
4
.
If E > V (x) for all x ∈ R, then a is a smooth solution to the homogeneous transport equation.
Notice that a = [ϕ[ is largest where V is largest, as our physical reasoning predicted.
Since the expression above for a does not depend explicitly on the phase function S, we
might naively attempt to use the same formula when im(dS) is replaced by a nonprojectable
lagrangian submanifold of H
−1
(E). Consider, for example, the unbounded potential V (x) =
x
2
in the case of the harmonic oscillator. For [x[ <
√
E, the function a is still welldeﬁned
up to a multiplicative constant. At [x[ =
√
E, however, a has (asymptotic) singularities;
observe that these occur precisely at the projected image of those points of L where the
projection itself becomes singular. Outside the interval [x[ ≤
√
E, the function a assumes
complex values.
´
To generate better approximate solutions to the eigenfunction problem, we can extend
the procedure above by adding to the original amplitude a = a
0
certain appropriately chosen
functions of higher order in . Consider the next approximation
ϕ = e
iS/
(a
0
+ a
1
).
12
Assuming that e
iS/
a
0
is a semiclassical approximate solution, we obtain:
(
ˆ
H −E) ϕ = −
1
2m
¸
i
2
a
1
∆S + 2
¸
j
∂a
1
∂x
j
∂S
∂x
j
−i∆a
0
+
3
∆a
1
¸
e
iS(x)/
.
Evidently, ϕ will be a solution of the timeindependent Schr¨odinger equation modulo terms
of order O(
3
) provided that a
1
satisﬁes the inhomogeneous transport equation
a
1
∆S + 2
¸
j
∂a
1
∂x
j
∂S
∂x
j
= i∆a
0
.
In general, a solution to the eigenfunction problem modulo terms of order O(
n
) is given
by a WKB ansatz of the form
ϕ = e
iS/
(a
0
+ a
1
+ + a
n
n
),
where S satisﬁes the HamiltonJacobi equation, a
0
satisﬁes the homogeneous transport equa
tion, and for each k > 0, the function a
k
satisﬁes the inhomogeneous transport equation:
a
k
∆S + 2
¸
j
∂a
k
∂x
j
∂S
∂x
j
= i∆a
k−1
.
This situation can be described in the terminology of asymptotic series as follows. By an
dependent function f
on R
n
we will mean a function f : R
n
R
+
→ C, where is
viewed as a parameter ranging in R
+
. Such a function is said to be represented by a
formal asymptotic expansion of the form
¸
∞
k=0
a
k
k
, where each coeﬃcient a
k
is a smooth
complexvalued function on R
n
, if, for each K ∈ Z
+
, the diﬀerence
f
−
K
¸
k=0
a
k
k
is O(
K+1
) locally uniformly in x. When f
admits such an expansion, its coeﬃcients a
k
are
uniquely determined. It is obvious that any dependent function which extends smoothly
to = 0 is represented by an asymptotic series, and a theorem of E.Borel (see [28, p.28])
tells us that, conversely, any asymptotic series can be “summed” to yield such a function.
The principal part of an asymptotic series
¸
∞
k=0
a
k
k
is deﬁned as its ﬁrst term which is
not identically zero as a function of x. The order of a is the index of its principal part.
If we consider as equivalent any two dependent functions whose diﬀerence is O(
∞
), i.e.
O(
k
) for all k, then each asymptotic series determines a unique equivalence class. A WKB
“solution” to the eigenfunction problem
ˆ
Hϕ = Eϕ is then an equivalence class of functions
of the form
ϕ = e
iS/
a,
where S is an admissible phase function and a is an dependent function represented by a
formal asymptotic series
a ∼
∞
¸
k=p
a
k
k
13
with the property that its principal part a
p
satisﬁes the homogeneous transport equation
a
p
∆S + 2
¸
j
∂a
p
∂x
j
∂S
∂x
j
= 0,
and for k > p, the a
k
satisfy the recursive transport equations:
a
k
∆S + 2
¸
j
∂a
k
∂x
j
∂S
∂x
j
= i∆a
k−1
.
This means that the dependent function ϕ (or any function equivalent to it) satisﬁes the
Schr¨odinger equation up to terms of order O(
∞
).
Geometry of the transport equation
In Section 2.1, we saw that a ﬁrstorder WKB approximate solution ϕ = e
iS/
to the time
independent Schr¨odinger equation depended on the choice of an admissible phase function,
i.e., a function S satisfying the HamiltonJacobi equation H(x,
∂S
∂x
) = E. The generalized or
geometric version of such a solution was a lagrangian submanifold of the level set H
−1
(E).
We now wish to interpret and generalize in a similar way the semiclassical approximation
with its amplitude included.
To begin, suppose that a is a function on R
n
which satisﬁes the homogeneous transport
equation:
a∆S + 2
¸
j
∂a
∂x
j
∂S
∂x
j
= 0.
After multiplying both sides of this equation by a, we can rewrite it as:
¸
j
∂
∂x
j
a
2
∂S
∂x
j
= 0,
which means that the divergence of the vector ﬁeld a
2
∇S is zero. Rather than considering
the transport equation as a condition on the vector ﬁeld a
2
∇S (on R
n
) per se, we can lift all
of this activity to the lagrangian submanifold L = im(dS). Notice ﬁrst that the restriction
to L of the hamiltonian vector ﬁeld associated to H(q, p) =
¸
p
2
i
/2 +V (q) is
X
H
[
L
=
¸
j
∂S
∂x
j
∂
∂q
j
−
∂V
∂q
j
∂
∂p
j
.
The projection X
(x)
H
of X
H
[
L
onto R
n
(the (x) reminds us of the coordinate x on R
n
) there
fore coincides with ∇S, and so the homogeneous transport equation says that a
2
X
(x)
H
is
divergencefree for the canonical density [dx[ = [dx
1
∧ ∧ dx
n
[ on R
n
. But it is better to
reformulate this condition as:
L
X
(x)
H
(a
2
[dx[) = 0;
14
that is, we transfer the factor of a
2
from the vector ﬁeld X
(x)
H
= ∇S to the density [dx[. Since
X
H
is tangent to L by the HamiltonJacobi theorem, and since the Lie derivative is invariant
under diﬀeomorphism, this equation is satisﬁed if and only if the pullback of a
2
[dx[ to L
via the projection π is invariant under the ﬂow of X
H
.
This observation, together with the fact that it is the square of a which appears in the
density π
∗
(a
2
[dx[), suggests that a solution of the homogeneous transport equation should
be represented geometrically by a halfdensity on L, invariant by X
H
. (See Appendix A for
a discussion of densities of fractional order.)
In other words, a (geometric) semiclassical state should be deﬁned as a lagrangian sub
manifold L of R
2n
equipped with a halfdensity a. Such a state is stationary when L lies in
a level set of the classical hamiltonian and a is invariant under its ﬂow.
Example 2.2 Recall that in the case of the 1dimensional harmonic oscillator, stationary
classical states are simply those lagrangian submanifolds of R
2
which coincide with the
regular level sets of the classical hamiltonian H(q, p) = (p
2
+ kq
2
)/2. There is a unique (up
to a constant) invariant volume element for the hamiltonian ﬂow of H on each level curve
H. Any such level curve L, together with a square root of this volume element, constitutes
a semiclassical stationary state for the harmonic oscillator.
´
Notice that while a solution to the homogeneous transport equation in the case of the 1
dimensional harmonic oscillator was necessarily singular (see Example 2.1), the semiclassical
state described in the preceding example is a perfectly smooth object everywhere on the
lagrangian submanifold L. The singularities arise only when we try to transfer the half
density from L down to conﬁguration space. Another substantial advantage of the geometric
interpretation of the semiclassical approximation is that the concept of an invariant half
density depends only on the hamiltonian vector ﬁeld X
H
and not on the function S, so it
makes sense on any lagrangian submanifold of R
2n
lying in a level set of H.
This discussion leads us to another change of viewpoint, namely that the quantum states
themselves should be represented, not by functions, but by halfdensities on conﬁguration
space R
n
, i.e. elements of the intrinsic Hilbert space H
R
n (see Appendix A). Stationary states
are then eigenvectors of the Schr¨odinger operator
ˆ
H, which is deﬁned on the space of smooth
halfdensities in terms of the old Schr¨odinger operator on functions, which we will denote
momentarily as
ˆ
H
fun
, by the equation
ˆ
H(a[dx[
1/2
) = (
ˆ
H
fun
a)[dx[
1/2
.
From this new point of view, we can express the result of our analysis as follows:
If S is an admissible phase function and a is a halfdensity on L = im(dS) which
is invariant under the ﬂow of the classical hamiltonian, then e
iS/
(dS)
∗
a is a
secondorder approximate solution to the timeindependent Schr¨odinger equation.
15
In summary, we have noted the following correspondences between classical and quantum
mechanics:
Object Classical version Quantum version
basic space R
2n
H
R
n
state lagrangian submanifold of R
2n
with halfdensity on R
n
halfdensity
timeevolution Hamilton’s equations Schr¨odinger equation
generator of evolution function H on R
2n
operator
ˆ
H on smooth
halfdensities
stationary state lagrangian submanifold in level set eigenvector of
ˆ
H
of H with invariant halfdensity
Proceeding further, we could attempt to interpret a solution of the recursive system of
inhomogeneous transport equations on R
n
as an asymptotic halfdensity on L in order to
arrive at a geometric picture of a complete WKB solution to the Schr¨odinger equation. This,
however, involves some additional diﬃculties, notably the lack of a geometric interpretation
of the inhomogeneous transport equations, which lie beyond the scope of these notes. Instead,
we will focus on two aspects of the semiclassical approximation. First, we will extend the
geometric picture presented above to systems with more general phase spaces. This will
require the concept of symplectic manifold, which is introduced in the following chapter.
Second, we will “quantize” semiclassical states in these symplectic manifolds. Speciﬁcally,
we will try to construct a space of quantum states corresponding to a general classical
phase space. Then we will try to construct asymptotic quantum states corresponding to
halfdensities on lagrangian submanifolds. In particular, we will start with an invariant
halfdensity on a (possibly nonprojectable) lagrangian submanifold of R
2n
and attempt to
use this data to construct an explicit semiclassical approximate solution to Schr¨odinger’s
equation on R
n
.
16
3 Symplectic Manifolds
In this chapter, we will introduce the notion of a symplectic structure on a manifold, moti
vated for the most part by the situation in R
2n
. While some discussion will be devoted to
certain general properties of symplectic manifolds, our main goal at this point is to develop
the tools needed to extend the hamiltonian viewpoint to phase spaces associated to general
ﬁnitedimensional conﬁguration spaces, i.e. to cotangent bundles. More general symplectic
manifolds will reappear as the focus of more sophisticated quantization programs in later
chapters. We refer to [6, 29, 63] for thorough discussions of the topics in this chapter.
3.1 Symplectic structures
In Section 2.1, a lagrangian submanifold of R
2n
was deﬁned as an ndimensional submanifold
L ⊂ R
2n
on which the exterior derivative of the form α
n
=
¸
p
i
dq
i
vanishes; to a function
H: R
2n
→R, we saw that Hamilton’s equations associate a vector ﬁeld X
H
on R
2n
satisfying
X
H
dα
n
= −dH.
Finally, our proof of the HamiltonJacobi theorem relied on the nondegeneracy of the 2
form dα
n
. These points already indicate the central role played by the form dα
n
in the
study of hamiltonian systems in R
2n
; the correct generalization of the hamiltonian picture to
arbitrary conﬁguration spaces relies similarly on the use of 2forms with certain additional
properties. In this section, we ﬁrst study such forms pointwise, collecting pertinent facts
about nondegenerate, skewsymmetric bilinear forms. We then turn to the deﬁnition of
symplectic manifolds.
Linear symplectic structures
Suppose that V is a real, mdimensional vector space. A bilinear form ω: V V →R gives
rise to a linear map
˜ ω: V →V
∗
deﬁned by contraction:
˜ ω(x)(y) = ω(x, y).
The ωorthogonal to a subspace W ⊂ V is deﬁned as
W
⊥
= ¦x ∈ V : W ⊂ ker ˜ ω(x)¦.
If ˜ ω is an isomorphism, or in other words if V
⊥
= ¦0¦, then the form ω is said to be nonde
generate; if in addition ω is skewsymmetric, then ω is called a linear symplectic structure on
V . A linear endomorphism of a symplectic vector space (V, ω) which preserves the form ω
is called a linear symplectic transformation, and the group of all such transformations
is denoted by Sp(V ).
17
Example 3.1 If E is any real ndimensional vector space with dual E
∗
, then a linear sym
plectic structure on V = E ⊕E
∗
is given by
ω((x, λ), (x
t
, λ
t
)) = λ
t
(x) −λ(x
t
).
With respect to a basis ¦x
i
¦ of E and a dual basis ¦λ
i
¦ of E
∗
, the form ω is represented by
the matrix
ω =
0 I
−I 0
.
It follows that if a linear operator on V is given by the real 2n 2n matrix
T =
A B
C D
,
then T is symplectic provided that A
t
C, B
t
D are symmetric, and A
t
D −C
t
B = I. Note in
particular that these conditions are satisﬁed if A ∈ GL(E), D = (A
t
)
−1
, and B = C = 0,
and so GL(E) is isomorphic to a subgroup Gl(E) of Sp(V ). More generally, if K : E → F
is an isomorphism, then the association
(x, λ) →(Kx, (K
−1
)
∗
λ)
deﬁnes a linear symplectomorphism between E ⊕E
∗
and F ⊕F
∗
equipped with these linear
symplectic structures.
´
Since the determinant of a skewsymmetric mm matrix is zero if m is odd, the existence
of a linear symplectic structure on a vector space V implies that V is necessarily even
dimensional and therefore admits a complex structure, i.e. a linear endomorphism J such
that J
2
= −I. A complex structure is said to be compatible with a symplectic structure on
V if
ω(Jx, Jy) = ω(x, y)
and
ω(x, Jx) > 0
for all x, y ∈ V . In other words, J is compatible with ω (we also call it ωcompatible)
if J : V → V is a linear symplectomorphism and g
J
(, ) = ω(, J) deﬁnes a symmetric,
positivedeﬁnite bilinear form on V .
Theorem 3.2 Every symplectic vector space (V, ω) admits a compatible complex structure.
Proof. Let ' , ` be a symmetric, positivedeﬁnite inner product on V , so that ω is represented
by an invertible skewadjoint operator K: V →V ; i.e.
ω(x, y) = 'Kx, y`.
18
The operator K admits a polar decomposition K = RJ, where R =
√
KK
t
is positive
deﬁnite symmetric, J = R
−1
K is orthogonal, and RJ = JR. From the skewsymmetry of K
it follows that J
t
= −J, and so J
2
= −JJ
t
= −id; i.e., J is a complex structure on V .
To see that J is ωcompatible, ﬁrst note that
ω(Jx, Jy) = 'KJx, Jy` = 'JKx, Jy` = 'Kx, y` = ω(x, y).
Also,
ω(x, Jx) = 'Kx, Jx` = 'JRx, Jx` = 'Rx, x` > 0,
since R and ' , ` are positivedeﬁnite.
2
Corollary 3.3 The collection . of ωcompatible complex structures on a symplectic vector
space (V, ω) is contractible.
Proof. The association J → g
J
described above deﬁnes a continuous map from . into the
space { of symmetric, positivedeﬁnite bilinear forms on V . By the uniqueness of the polar
decomposition, it follows that the map which assigns to a form ' , ` the complex structure J
constructed in the preceding proof is continuous, and the composition . →{ →. of these
maps equals the identity on .. Since { is contractible, this implies the corollary.
2
If J is ωcompatible, a hermitian structure on V is deﬁned by
', ` = g
J
(, ) + iω(, ).
As is easily checked, a linear transformation T ∈ GL(V ) which preserves any two of the
structures ω, g
J
, J on V preserves the third and therefore preserves the hermitian structure.
In terms of the automorphism groups Sp(V ), GL(V, J), O(V ), and U(V ) of ω, J, g, and ', `,
this means that the intersection of any two of Sp(V ), GL(V, J), O(V ) equals U(V ).
To determine the Lie algebra sp(V) of Sp(V ), consider a 1parameter family of maps e
tA
associated to some linear map A: V →V . For any v, w ∈ V , we have
d
dt
t=0
ω(e
tA
v, e
tA
w) = ω(Av, w) + ω(v, Aw),
and so A ∈ sp(V) if and only if the linear map ˜ ω ◦ A: V →V
∗
is selfadjoint. Consequently,
dim(V ) = 2k implies dim(sp(V)) = dim(Sp(V)) = k(2k + 1).
Distinguished subspaces
The ωorthogonal to a subspace W of a symplectic vector space (V, ω) is called the symplectic
orthogonal to W. From the nondegeneracy of the symplectic form, it follows that
W
⊥⊥
= W and dimW
⊥
= dimV −dimW
19
for any subspace W ⊂ V . Also,
(A + B)
⊥
= A
⊥
∩ B
⊥
and (A ∩ B)
⊥
= A
⊥
+ B
⊥
for any pair of subspaces A, B of V . In particular, B
⊥
⊂ A
⊥
whenever A ⊂ B.
Note that the symplectic orthogonal W
⊥
might not be an algebraic complement to W.
For instance, if dimW = 1, the skewsymmetry of ω implies that W ⊂ W
⊥
. More generally,
any subspace contained in its orthogonal will be called isotropic. Dually, we note that if
codimW = 1, then W
⊥
is 1dimensional, hence isotropic, and W
⊥
⊂ W
⊥⊥
= W. In
general, spaces W satisfying the condition W
⊥
⊂ W are called coisotropic or involutive.
Finally, if W is selforthogonal, i.e. W
⊥
= W, then the dimension relation above implies that
dimW =
1
2
dimV . Any selforthogonal subspace is simultaneously isotropic and coisotropic,
and is called lagrangian.
According to these deﬁnitions, a subspace W ⊂ V is isotropic if the restriction of the
symplectic form to W is identically zero. At the other extreme, the restriction of ω to certain
subspaces Z ⊂ V may again be nondegenerate; this is equivalent to saying that Z∩Z
⊥
= ¦0¦
or Z + Z
⊥
= V . Such subspaces are called symplectic.
Example 3.4 In E⊕E
∗
with its usual symplectic structure, both E and E
∗
are lagrangian
subspaces. It also follows from the deﬁnition of this structure that the graph of a linear map
B: E →E
∗
is a lagrangian subspace of E ⊕E
∗
if and only if B is selfadjoint.
If (V, ω) is a symplectic vector space, we denote by V ⊕V the vector space V ⊕V equipped
with the symplectic structure ω ⊕ −ω. If T : V → V is a linear symplectic map, then the
graph of T is a lagrangian subspace of V ⊕V .
The kernel of a nonzero covector α ∈ V
∗
is a codimension1 coisotropic subspace ker α of
V whose symplectic orthogonal (ker α)
⊥
is the distinguished 1dimensional subspace of ker α
spanned by ˜ ω
−1
(α).
´
Example 3.5 Suppose that (V, ω) is a 2ndimensional symplectic vector space and W ⊂ V
is any isotropic subspace with dim(W) < n. Since 2n = dim(W) + dim(W
⊥
), there exists a
nonzero vector w ∈ W
⊥
`W. The subspace W
t
of V spanned by W∪¦w¦ is then isotropic and
dim(W
t
) = dim(W)+1. From this observation it follows that for every isotropic subspace W
of a (ﬁnitedimensional) symplectic vector space V which is not lagrangian, there exists an
isotropic subspace W
t
of V which properly contains W. Beginning with any 1dimensional
subspace of V , we can apply this remark inductively to conclude that every ﬁnitedimensional
symplectic vector space contains a lagrangian subspace.
´
Various subspaces of a symplectic vector space are related as follows.
Lemma 3.6 If L is a lagrangian subspace of a symplectic vector space V , and A ⊂ V is an
arbitrary subspace, then:
20
1. L ⊂ A if and only if A
⊥
⊂ L.
2. L is transverse to A if and only if L ∩ A
⊥
= ¦0¦.
Proof. Statement (1) follows from the properties of the operation
⊥
and the equation L = L
⊥
.
Similarly, L + A = V if and only if (L + A)
⊥
= L ∩ A
⊥
= ¦0¦, proving statement (2).
2
Example 3.7 Note that statement (1) of Lemma 3.6 implies that if L ⊂ A, then A
⊥
⊂ A,
and so A is a coisotropic subspace. Conversely, if A is coisotropic, then A
⊥
is isotropic,
and Example 3.5 implies that there is a lagrangian subspace L with A
⊥
⊂ L. Passing to
orthogonals, we have L ⊂ A. Thus, a subspace C ⊂ V is coisotropic if and only if it contains
a lagrangian subspace.
Suppose that V is a symplectic vector space with an isotropic subspace I and a lagrangian
subspace L such that I ∩ L = 0. If W ⊂ L is any complementary subspace to I
⊥
∩ L, then
I + L ⊂ W + I
⊥
, and so W
⊥
∩ I ⊂ I
⊥
∩ L. Thus, W
⊥
∩ I ⊂ I ∩ L = 0. Since I
⊥
∩ W = 0
by our choice of W, it follows that I + W is a symplectic subspace of V .
´
A pair L, L
t
of transverse lagrangian subspaces of V is said to deﬁne a lagrangian
splitting of V . In this case, the map ˜ ω deﬁnes an isomorphism L
t
· L
∗
, which in turn
gives rise to a linear symplectomorphism between V and L⊕L
∗
equipped with its canonical
symplectic structure (see Example 3.1). If J is a ωcompatible complex structure on V and
L ⊂ V a lagrangian subspace, then L, JL is a lagrangian splitting. By Example 3.5, every
symplectic vector space contains a lagrangian subspace, and since every ndimensional vector
space is isomorphic to R
n
, the preceding remarks prove the following linear “normal form”
result:
Theorem 3.8 Every 2ndimensional symplectic vector space is linearly symplectomorphic
to (R
2n
, ω
n
).
Theorem 3.2 also implies the following useful result.
Lemma 3.9 Suppose that V is a symplectic vector space with a ωcompatible complex struc
ture J and let T
ε
: V →V be given by T
ε
(x) = x + εJx.
1. If L, L
t
are any lagrangian subspaces of V , then L
ε
= T
ε
(L) is a lagrangian subspace
transverse to L
t
for small ε > 0.
2. For any two lagrangian subspaces L, L
t
of V , there is a lagrangian subspace L
tt
trans
verse to both L
t
and L.
Proof. It is easy to check that T
ε
is a conformal linear symplectic map, i.e. an isomorphism
of V satisfying ω(T
ε
x, T
ε
y) = (1 + ε
2
) ω(x, y). Thus, L
ε
is a lagrangian subspace for all
ε > 0. Using the innerproduct g
J
on V induced by J, we can choose orthonormal bases
21
¦v
i
¦, ¦w
i
¦ of L
t
and L, respectively, so that for i = 1, , k, the vectors v
i
= w
i
span L∩L
t
.
Then ¦w
i
+ εJw
i
¦ form a basis of L
ε
, and L
t
, L
ε
are transverse precisely when the matrix
M = ¦ω(v
i
, w
j
+ εJw
j
)¦ = ¦ω(v
i
, w
j
) + ε g
J
(v
i
, w
j
)¦ is nonsingular. Our choice of bases
implies that
M =
ε id 0
0 A + ε B
where A = ¦ω(v
i
, w
j
)¦
n
i,j=k+1
and B is some (n−k)(n−k) matrix. Setting I = span¦v
i
¦
n
i=k+1
and W = span¦w
i
¦
n
i=k+1
, we can apply Example 3.7 to conclude that A is nonsingular, and
assertion (1) follows.
To prove (2), observe that for small ε > 0, the lagrangian subspace L
ε
is transverse to
L, L
t
by (1).
2
In fact, the statement of preceding lemma can be improved as follows. Let ¦L
i
¦ be a count
able family of lagrangian subspaces, and let A
i
, B
i
be the matrices obtained with respect to L
as in the proof above. For each i, the function t →det(A
i
+tB
i
) is a nonzero polynomial and
therefore has ﬁnitely many zeros. Consequently, the lagrangian subspace T
t
(L) is transverse
to all L
i
for almost every t ∈ R.
The lagrangian grassmannian
The collection of all unoriented lagrangian subspaces of a 2ndimensional symplectic vector
space V is called the lagrangian grassmannian L(V ) of V . A natural action of the group
Sp(V ) on L(V ), denoted : Sp(V ) L(V ) →L(V ) is deﬁned by (T, L) =
L
(T) = T(L).
Lemma 3.10 The unitary group associated to an ωcompatible complex structure J on V
acts transitively on L(V ).
Proof. For arbitrary L
1
, L
2
∈ L(V ), an orthogonal transformation L
1
→ L
2
induces a
symplectic transformation L
1
⊕L
∗
1
→L
2
⊕L
∗
2
in the manner of Example 3.1, which in turn
gives rise to a unitary transformation L
1
⊕JL
1
→L
2
⊕JL
2
mapping L
1
onto L
2
.
2
The stabilizer of L ∈ L(V ) under the U(V )action is evidently the orthogonal subgroup of
Gl(L) deﬁned with respect to the innerproduct and splitting L⊕JL of V induced by J (see
Example 3.1). Thus, a (noncanonical) identiﬁcation of the lagrangian grassmannian with
the homogeneous space U(n)/O(n) is obtained from the map
U(V )
L
→L(V ).
The choice of J also deﬁnes a complex determinant U(V )
det
2
J
→ S
1
, which induces a ﬁbration
L(V ) → S
1
with 1connected ﬁber SU(n)/SO(n), giving an isomorphism of fundamental
groups
π
1
(L(V )) · π
1
(S
1
) · Z.
22
This isomorphism does not depend on the choices of J and L made above. Independence of J
follows from the fact that . is connected (Corollary 3.3). On the other hand, connectedness
of the unitary group together with Lemma 3.10 gives independence of L.
Passing to homology and dualizing, we obtain a natural homomorphism
H
1
(S
1
; Z) →H
1
(L(V ); Z).
The image of the canonical generator of H
1
(S
1
; Z) under this map is called the universal
Maslov class, µ
V
. The result of the following example will be useful when we extend our
discussion of the Maslov class from vector spaces to vector bundles.
Example 3.11 If (V, ω) is any symplectic vector space with ωcompatible complex structure
J and lagrangian subspace L, then a check of the preceding deﬁnitions shows that
m
L
((T, L
t
)) = m
L
(L
t
) det
2
J
(T)
for any T ∈ U(V ) and L
t
∈ L(V ). (Recall that : Sp(V )L(V ) →L(V ) denotes the natural
action of Sp(V ) on L(V )).
Now consider any topological space M. If f
1
, f
2
: M →L(V ) are continuous maps, then
the deﬁnition of the universal Maslov class shows that (f
∗
1
− f
∗
2
)µ
V
equals the pullback of
the canonical generator of H
1
(S
1
; R) by the map
(m
L
◦ f
1
)(m
L
◦ f
2
)
−1
.
(Here we use the fact that when S
1
is identiﬁed with the unit complex numbers, the mul
tiplication map S
1
S
1
→ S
1
induces the diagonal map H
1
(S
1
) → H
1
(S
1
) ⊕ H
1
(S
1
) ·
H
1
(S
1
S
1
) on cohomology). If T : M → Sp(V ) is any map, we set (T f
i
) = (T, f
i
).
Since Sp(V ) deformation retracts onto U(V ), it follows that T is homotopic to a map
T
t
: M →U(V ), and so ((T f
1
)
∗
−(T f
2
)
∗
)µ
V
is obtained via pullback by
(m
L
◦ (T
t
f
1
))(m
L
◦ (T
t
f
2
))
−1
.
From the ﬁrst paragraph, it follows that this product equals (m
L
◦f
1
)(m
L
◦f
2
)
−1
, from which
we conclude that
(f
∗
1
−f
∗
2
)µ
V
= ((T f
1
)
∗
−(T f
2
)
∗
)µ
V
.
´
Symplectic manifolds
To motivate the deﬁnition of a symplectic manifold, we ﬁrst recall some features of the
diﬀerential form −dα
n
= ω
n
=
¸
n
j=1
dq
j
∧ dp
j
which appeared in our earlier discussion.
First, we note that
¸
n
j=1
dq
j
∧dp
j
deﬁnes a linear symplectic structure on the tangent space
of R
2n
at each point. In fact:
ω
n
∂
∂q
j
,
∂
∂p
k
= δ
jk
ω
n
∂
∂q
j
,
∂
∂q
k
= 0 ω
n
∂
∂p
j
,
∂
∂p
k
= 0
23
and so
˜ ω
n
∂
∂q
j
= dp
j
˜ ω
n
∂
∂p
j
= −dq
j
,
from which it is clear that ˜ ω
n
is invertible.
Next, we recall that the hamiltonian vector ﬁeld associated via Hamilton’s equations to
H : R
2n
→R satisﬁes
X
H
ω
n
= dH,
or in other words,
X
H
= ˜ ω
−1
n
(dH),
so we see that the symplectic form ω
n
is all that we need to obtain X
H
from H. This
description of the hamiltonian vector ﬁeld leads immediately to the following two invariance
results. First note that by the skewsymmetry of ω
n
,
L
X
H
H = X
H
H = ω
n
(X
H
, X
H
) = 0,
implying that X
H
is tangent to the level sets of H. This again reﬂects the fact that the ﬂow
of X
H
preserves energy. Since ω
n
is closed, we also have by Cartan’s formula (see [1])
L
X
H
ω
n
= d(X
H
ω
n
) + X
H
dω
n
= d
2
H = 0.
This equation implies that the ﬂow of X
H
preserves the form ω
n
and therefore generalizes our
earlier remark that the hamiltonian vector ﬁeld associated to the 1dimensional harmonic
oscillator is divergencefree.
We now see what is needed to do hamiltonian mechanics on manifolds. A 2form ω on a
manifold P is a smooth family of bilinear forms on the tangent spaces of P. By assuming that
each of these bilinear forms is nondegenerate, we guarantee that the equation X
H
= ˜ ω
−1
(dH)
deﬁnes a hamiltonian vector ﬁeld uniquely for any H. Computing the Lie derivative of H
with respect to X
H
L
X
H
H = X
H
H = ˜ ω(X
H
)(X
H
) = ω(X
H
, X
H
) = 0,
we see that the conservation of energy follows from the skewsymmetry of the form ω.
Finally, invariance of ω under the hamiltonian ﬂow is satisﬁed if
L
X
H
ω = d(X
H
ω) + X
H
dω = 0.
Here, the term d(X
H
ω) = d
2
H is automatically zero; to guarantee the vanishing of the
second term, we impose the condition that ω be closed.
Thus we make the following deﬁnition:
Deﬁnition 3.12 A symplectic structure on a manifold P is a closed, nondegenerate
2form ω on P.
24
The condition that ω be nondegenerate means that ˜ ω deﬁnes an isomorphism of vector
bundles TP → T
∗
P, or equivalently, that the top exterior power of ω is a volume form on
P, or ﬁnally, that ω deﬁnes a linear symplectic structure on each tangent space of P.
An immediate example of a symplectic manifold is furnished by R
2n
with its standard
structure ω
n
=
¸
n
j=1
dq
j
∧ dp
j
(a diﬀerential form with constant coeﬃcients and not just
a single bilinear form). Darboux’s theorem (Section 4.3) will tell us that this is the local
model for the general case. In the next section, we will see that the cotangent bundle of any
smooth manifold carries a natural symplectic structure.
Generalizing our earlier discussion of distinguished subspaces of a symplectic vector space,
we call a submanifold C ⊂ P (co)isotropic provided that each tangent space T
p
C of C is a
(co)isotropic subspace of T
p
P. When C is coisotropic, the subspaces (
p
= (T
p
C)
⊥
comprise
a subbundle (TC)
⊥
of TC known as the characteristic distribution of C. It is integrable
because ω is closed. Of particular interest in our discussion will be lagrangian submanifolds
of P, which are (co)isotropic submanifolds of dimension
1
2
dim(P). More generally, if L is a
smooth manifold of dimension
1
2
dim(P) and ι : L → P is an immersion such that ι
∗
ω = 0,
we will call the pair (L, ι) a lagrangian immersion.
Example 3.13 If C ⊂ P is a hypersurface, then C is a coisotropic submanifold. A simple
check of deﬁnitions shows that if H: P →R is a smooth function having C as a regular level
set, then the hamiltonian vector ﬁeld X
H
is tangent to the characteristic foliation of C.
If (L, ι) is a lagrangian immersion whose image is contained in C, then Lemma 3.6 implies
that for each p ∈ L, the characteristic subspace (
ι(p)
⊂ T
ι(p)
C is contained in ι
∗
T
p
L, and thus
X
H
induces a smooth, nonsingular vector ﬁeld X
H,ι
on L. In view of the remarks above, this
assertion generalizes the HamiltonJacobi theorem (see the end of Section 2.1) to arbitrary
symplectic manifolds and lagrangian immersions.
´
New symplectic manifolds can be manufactured from known examples by dualizing and by
taking products. The symplectic dual of a manifold (P, ω) consists of the same underlying
manifold endowed with the symplectic structure −ω. Evidently P and its dual P share the
same (co)isotropic submanifolds. Given two symplectic manifolds (P
1
, ω
1
) and (P
2
, ω
2
), their
product P
1
P
2
admits a symplectic structure given by the sum ω
1
⊕ω
2
. More explicitly, this
form is the sum of the pullbacks of ω
1
and ω
2
by the projections of P
1
P
2
to P
1
and P
2
. As
is easily veriﬁed, the product of (co)isotropic submanifolds of P
1
and P
2
is a (co)isotropic
submanifold of P
1
P
2
.
A symplectomorphism from (P
1
, ω
1
) to (P
2
, ω
2
) is a smooth diﬀeomorphism f : P
1
→
P
2
compatible with the symplectic structures: f
∗
ω
2
= ω
1
. A useful connection among duals,
products, and symplectomorphisms is provided by the following lemma.
Lemma 3.14 A diﬀeomorphism f : P
1
→ P
2
between symplectic manifolds is a symplecto
morphism if and only if its graph is a lagrangian submanifold of the product P
2
P
1
.
The collection Aut(P, ω) of symplectomorphisms of P becomes an inﬁnitedimensional Lie
group when endowed with the C
∞
topology (see [49]). In this case, the corresponding Lie
25
algebra is the space χ(P, ω) of smooth vector ﬁelds X on P satisfying
L
X
ω = 0.
Since L
X
ω = d(X ω), the association X →X ω deﬁnes an isomorphism between χ(P, ω)
and the space of closed 1forms on P; those X which map to exact 1forms are simply the
hamiltonian vector ﬁelds on P. The elements of χ(P, ω) are called locally hamiltonian
vector ﬁelds or symplectic vector ﬁelds.
Example 3.15 A linear symplectic form ω on a vector space V induces a symplectic struc
ture (also denoted ω) on V via the canonical identiﬁcation of TV with V V . The symplectic
group Sp(V ) then embeds naturally in Aut(V, ω), and the Lie algebra sp(V) identiﬁes with
the subalgebra of χ(V, ω) consisting of vector ﬁelds of the form
X(v) = Av
for some A ∈ sp(V). Note that these are precisely the hamiltonian vector ﬁelds of the
homogeneous quadratic polynomials on V , i.e. functions satisfying Q(tv) = t
2
Q(v) for all
real t. Consequently, sp(V) is canonically identiﬁed with the space of such functions via the
correspondence
A ↔Q
A
(v) =
1
2
ω(Av, v).
´
Symplectic vector bundles
Since a symplectic form on a 2nmanifold P deﬁnes a smooth family of linear symplectic
forms on the ﬁbers of TP, the frame bundle of P can be reduced to a principal Sp(n) bundle
over P. More generally, any vector bundle E →B with this structure is called a symplectic
vector bundle. Two symplectic vector bundles E, F are said to be symplectomorphic if
there exists a vector bundle isomorphism E →F which preserves their symplectic structures.
Example 3.16 If F → B is any vector bundle, then the sum F ⊕ F
∗
carries a natural
symplectic vector bundle structure, deﬁned in analogy with Example 3.1.
´
With the aid of an arbitrary riemannian metric, the proof of Theorem 3.2 can be gener
alized by a ﬁberwise construction as follows.
Theorem 3.17 Every symplectic vector bundle admits a compatible complex vector bundle
structure.
Example 3.18 Despite Theorem 3.17, there exist examples of symplectic manifolds which
are not complex (the almost complex structure coming from the theorem cannot be made
integrable), and of complex manifolds which are not symplectic. (See [27] and the numerous
earlier references cited therein.) Note, however, that the K¨ahler form of any K¨ahler manifold
is a symplectic form.
26
´
A lagrangian subbundle of a symplectic vector bundle E is a subbundle L ⊂ E such
that L
x
is a lagrangian subspace of E
x
for all x ∈ B. If E admits a lagrangian subbundle,
then E is symplectomorphic to L⊕L
∗
, and the frame bundle of E admits a further reduction
to a principal GL(n) bundle over B (compare Example 3.1).
Example 3.19 If L is a lagrangian submanifold of a symplectic manifold P, then the re
stricted tangent bundle T
L
P is a symplectic vector bundle over L, and TL ⊂ T
L
P is a
lagrangian subbundle. Also note that if C ⊂ P is any submanifold such that TC contains a
lagrangian subbundle of T
C
P, then C is coisotropic (see Lemma 3.6).
´
In general, the automorphism group of a symplectic vector bundle E does not act tran
sitively on the lagrangian subbundles of E. Nevertheless, a pair of transverse lagrangian
subbundles can be related as follows.
Theorem 3.20 Let E → B be a symplectic vector bundle and suppose that L, L
t
are la
grangian subbundles such that L
x
is transverse to L
t
x
for each x ∈ B. Then there exists a
compatible complex structure J on E satisfying JL = L
t
.
Proof. Let J
0
be any compatible complex structure on E. Since L
t
and J
0
L are both
transverse to L, we can ﬁnd a symplectomorphism T : L ⊕ L
t
→ L ⊕ J
0
L which preserves
the subbundle L and maps L
t
to J
0
L. A simple check of the deﬁnition then shows that
J = T
−1
J
0
T is a compatible complex structure on E which satisﬁes JL = L
t
.
2
Example 3.21 If E is a symplectic vector bundle over M, then any pair L, L
t
of lagrangian
subbundles of E deﬁne a cohomology class µ(L, L
t
) ∈ H
1
(M; Z) as follows.
Assuming ﬁrst that E admits a symplectic trivialization f : E → M V for some
symplectic vector space V , we denote by f
L
, f
L
: M → L(V ) the maps induced by the
lagrangian subbundles f(L), f(L
t
) of M V . Then
µ(L, L
t
) = (f
∗
L
−f
∗
L
) µ
V
,
where µ
V
∈ H
1
(L(V ); Z) is the universal Maslov class. From Example 3.11 it follows that
this class is independent of the choice of trivialization f.
For nontrivial E, we note that since the symplectic group Sp(V ) is connected, it follows
that for any loop γ : S
1
→ M, the pullback bundle γ
∗
E is trivial. Thus µ(L, L
t
) is well
deﬁned by the requirement that for every smooth loop γ in M,
γ
∗
µ(L, L
t
) = µ(γ
∗
L, γ
∗
L
t
).
´
27
Example 3.22 As a particular case of Example 3.21, we consider the symplectic manifold
R
2n
· T
∗
R
n
with its standard symplectic structure. Then the tangent bundle T(R
2n
) is
a symplectic vector bundle over R
2n
with a natural “vertical” lagrangian subbundle V R
n
deﬁned as the kernel of π
∗
, where π: T
∗
R
n
→R
n
is the natural projection.
If ι : L →R
2n
is a lagrangian immersion, then the symplectic vector bundle ι
∗
T(T
∗
(R
n
))
has two lagrangian subbundles, the image L
1
of ι
∗
: TL → ι
∗
T(T
∗
(R
n
)) and L
2
= ι
∗
V R
n
.
The class µ
L,ι
= µ(L
1
, L
2
) ∈ H
1
(L; Z) is called the Maslov class of (L, ι).
A check of these deﬁnitions shows that the Maslov class of (L, ι) equals the pullback of
the universal Maslov class µ
n
∈ H
1
(L(R
2n
); Z) by the Gauss map G: L → L(R
2n
) deﬁned
by G(p) = ι
∗
T
p
L ⊂ R
2n
. (See [3] for an interpretation of the Maslov class of a loop γ in
L as an intersection index of the loop G ◦ γ with a singular subvariety in the lagrangian
grassmannian).
´
3.2 Cotangent bundles
The cotangent bundle T
∗
M of any smooth manifold M is equipped with a natural 1form,
known as the Liouville form, deﬁned by the formula
α
M
((x, b))(v) = b(π
∗
v),
where π: T
∗
M →M is the canonical projection. In local coordinates (x
1
, , x
n
) on M and
corresponding coordinates (q
1
, , q
n
, p
1
, , p
n
) on T
∗
M, the equations
q
j
(x, b) = x
j
(x) p
j
(x, b) = b
∂
∂x
j
imply that
α
M
=
n
¸
j=1
p
j
dq
j
.
Thus, −dα
M
=
¸
n
j=1
dq
j
∧ dp
j
in these coordinates, from which it follows that the form
ω
M
= −dα
M
is a symplectic structure on T
∗
M. Note that if M = R
n
, then ω
M
is just the
symplectic structure ω
n
on T
∗
R
n
· R
2n
discussed previously, and α
M
= α
n
.
Lagrangian immersions and the Liouville class
Given a lagrangian immersion ι : L → T
∗
M, we set π
L
= π ◦ ι, where π : T
∗
M → M
is the natural projection. Critical points and critical values of π
L
are called respectively
singular points and caustic points of L. Finally, (L, ι) is said to be projectable if
π
L
is a diﬀeomorphism. A nice property of the Liouville 1form is that it can be used to
parametrize the set of projectable lagrangian submanifolds. To do this, we use the notation
ι
ϕ
to denote a 1form ϕ on M when we want to think of it as a map from M to T
∗
M.
28
Lemma 3.23 Let ϕ ∈ Ω
1
(M). Then
ι
∗
ϕ
α
M
= ϕ.
Proof. Because ι
ϕ
is a section of T
∗
M, it satisﬁes π ◦ ι
ϕ
= id
M
. By the deﬁnition of α
M
, it
follows that for each v ∈ T
p
M,
ι
∗
ϕ
α
M
(p)(v) = α
M
(ι
ϕ
(p))(ι
ϕ∗
v) = 'ι
ϕ
(p), π
∗
(ι
ϕ∗
v)` = 'ι
ϕ
(p), v`.
2
For this reason, α
M
is often described as the “tautological” 1form on T
∗
M. Taking exterior
derivatives on both sides of the equation in Lemma 3.23, we get
dϕ = dι
∗
ϕ
α
M
= ι
∗
ϕ
dα
M
= −ι
∗
ϕ
ω
M
.
From this equation we see that the image of ϕ is a lagrangian submanifold of T
∗
M precisely
when the form ϕ is closed. This proves
Proposition 3.24 The relation ϕ ↔ (M, ι
ϕ
) deﬁnes a natural bijective correspondence be
tween the the vector space of closed 1forms on M and the set of projectable lagrangian
submanifolds of T
∗
M.
Generalizing our WKB terminology, we will call S : M → R a phase function for a
projectable lagrangian embedding (L, ι) ⊂ T
∗
M provided that ι(L) = dS(M). The preceding
remarks imply a simple link between phase functions and the Liouville form:
Lemma 3.25 If (L, ι) ⊂ T
∗
M is a projectable lagrangian embedding, then S : M →R is a
phase function for L if and only if d(S ◦ π
L
◦ ι) = ι
∗
α
M
.
Thus, L is the image of an exact 1form on M if and only if the restriction of the Liouville
form to L is itself exact. This motivates the following deﬁnition.
Deﬁnition 3.26 If L, M are nmanifolds and ι : L →T
∗
M is an immersion such that ι
∗
α
M
is exact, then ι is called an exact lagrangian immersion.
If ι : L → T
∗
M is an exact lagrangian immersion, then Lemma 3.25 suggests that the
primitive of ι
∗
α
M
is a sort of generalized phase function for (L, ι) which lives on the manifold
L itself. We will return to this important viewpoint in the next chapter.
Example 3.27 A simple application of Stokes’ theorem shows that an embedded circle in
the phase plane cannot be exact, although it is the image of an exact lagrangian immersion
of R.
A general class of exact lagrangian submanifolds can be identiﬁed as follows. Associated
to a smooth submanifold N ⊂ M is the submanifold
N
⊥
= ¦(x, p) ∈ T
∗
M : x ∈ N, T
x
N ⊂ ker(p)¦,
known as the conormal bundle to N. From this deﬁnition it follows easily that dimT
∗
M =
2 dimN
⊥
, while the Liouville form of T
∗
M vanishes on N
⊥
for any N.
If T is a smooth foliation of M, then the union of the conormal bundles to the leaves of T
is a smooth submanifold of T
∗
M foliated by lagrangian submanifolds and is thus coisotropic
(see Example 3.19).
29
´
Although many lagrangian immersions ι : L → T
∗
M are not exact, the form ι
∗
α
M
is
always closed, since dι
∗
α
M
= ι
∗
ω
M
= 0. The deRham cohomology class λ
L,ι
∈ H
1
(L; R)
induced by this form will play an important role in the quantization procedures of the next
chapter and is known as the Liouville class of (L, ι).
Example 3.28 To generalize the picture described in Example 3.27, we consider a smooth
manifold M, together with a submanifold N ⊂ M and a closed 1form β on N. Then
N
⊥
β
= ¦(x, p) ∈ T
∗
M : x ∈ N p[
TxN
= β(x)¦
is a lagrangian submanifold of T
∗
M whose Liouville class equals [π
∗
N
β] ∈ H
1
(N
⊥
β
; R), where
π
N
: N
⊥
β
→N is here the restriction of the natural projection π: T
∗
M →M.
´
Fiberpreserving symplectomorphisms
On each ﬁber of the projection π: T
∗
M →M, the pullback of α
M
vanishes, so the ﬁbers are
lagrangian submanifolds. Thus, the vertical bundle V M = ker π
∗
is a lagrangian subbundle
of T(T
∗
M). Since α
M
vanishes on the zero section Z
M
⊂ T
∗
M, it follows that Z
M
is
lagrangian as well, and the subbundles TZ
M
and V M deﬁne a canonical lagrangian splitting
of T(T
∗
M) over Z
M
.
A 1form β on M deﬁnes a diﬀeomorphism f
β
of T
∗
M by ﬁberwise aﬃne translation
f
β
(x, p) = (x, p + β(x)).
It is easy to see that this map satisﬁes
f
∗
β
α
M
= α
M
+ π
∗
β,
so f
β
is a symplectomorphism of T
∗
M if and only if β is closed.
Theorem 3.29 If a symplectomorphism f : T
∗
M → T
∗
M preserves each ﬁber of the pro
jection π: T
∗
M →M, then f = f
β
for a closed 1form β on M.
Proof. Fix a point (x
0
, p
0
) ∈ T
∗
M and let ψ be a closed 1form on M such that ψ(x
0
) =
(x
0
, p
0
). Since f is symplectic, the form µ = f ◦ ψ is also closed, and thus the map
h = f
−1
µ
◦ f ◦ f
ψ
is a symplectomorphism of T
∗
M which preserves ﬁbers and ﬁxes the zero section Z
M
⊂ T
∗
M.
Moreover, since the derivative Dh preserves the lagrangian splitting of T(T
∗
M) along Z
M
and equals the identity on TZ
M
, we can conclude from Example 3.1 that Dh is the identity
at all points of Z
M
. Consequently, the ﬁberderivative of f at the arbitrary point (x
0
, p
0
)
equals the identity, so f is a translation on each ﬁber. Deﬁning β(x) = f(x, 0), we have
f = f
β
.
30
2
If β is a closed 1form on M, then the ﬂow f
t
of the vector ﬁeld X
β
= −˜ ω
−1
M
(π
∗
β) is
symplectic; since V M ⊂ ker π
∗
β, the HamiltonJacobi theorem implies furthermore that the
ﬂow f
t
satisﬁes the hypotheses of Theorem 3.29.
Corollary 3.30 For any closed 1form β on M, the time1 map f = f
1
of the ﬂow of X
β
equals f
β
.
Proof. By Theorem 3.29, the assertion will follow provided that we can show that f
∗
α
M
=
α
M
+ π
∗
β. To this end, note that the deﬁnition of the Lie derivative shows that f satisﬁes
f
∗
α
M
= α
M
+
1
0
d
dt
(f
∗
t
α
M
) dt = α
M
+
1
0
f
∗
t
(L
X
β
α
M
) dt.
By Cartan’s formula for the Lie derivative, we have
L
X
β
α
M
= d(X
β
α
M
) −X
β
ω
M
= π
∗
β,
the latter equality following from the fact that X
β
⊂ V M ⊂ ker α
M
and dα
M
= −ω
M
.
Another application of Cartan’s formula, combined with the assumption that β is closed
shows that
L
X
β
π
∗
β = 0,
and so f
∗
t
π
∗
β = π
∗
β for all t. Inserting these computations into the expression for f
∗
α
M
above, we obtain
f
∗
α
M
= α
M
+ π
∗
β.
2
Using Theorem 3.29, we can furthermore classify all ﬁberpreserving symplectomorphisms
from T
∗
M to T
∗
N.
Corollary 3.31 Any ﬁberpreserving symplectomorphism F : T
∗
M → T
∗
N can be realized
as the composition of a ﬁbertranslation in T
∗
M with the cotangent lift of a diﬀeomorphism
N →M.
Proof. By composing F with a ﬁbertranslation in T
∗
M we may assume that F maps the
zero section of T
∗
M to that of T
∗
N. The restriction of F
−1
to the zero sections then induces
a diﬀeomorphism f : N → M such that the composition F ◦ (f
−1
)
∗
is a ﬁberpreserving
symplectomorphism of T
∗
N which ﬁxes the zero section. From the preceding theorem, we
conclude that F = f
∗
.
2
31
The Schwartz transform
If M, N are smooth manifolds, then the map S
M,N
: T
∗
M T
∗
N → T
∗
(M N) deﬁned in
local coordinates by
((x, ξ), (y, η)) →(x, y, −ξ, η)
is a symplectomorphism which we will call the Schwartz transform.
5
An elementary, but
fundamental property of this mapping can be described as follows.
Proposition 3.32 If M, N are smooth manifolds, then the Schwartz transform S
M,N
satis
ﬁes
(S
M,N
)
∗
α
MN
= α
M
⊕−α
N
.
In particular, S
M,N
induces a diﬀeomorphism of zero sections
Z
M
Z
N
· Z
MN
and an isomorphism of vertical bundles
V M ⊕V N · V (M N).
Using the Schwartz transform, we associate to any symplectomorphism F : T
∗
M →T
∗
N
the lagrangian embedding ι
F
: T
∗
M →T
∗
(M N) deﬁned as the composition of S
M,N
with
the graph Γ
F
: T
∗
M →T
∗
M T
∗
N.
Example 3.33 By Corollary 3.31, a ﬁberpreserving symplectomorphism F : T
∗
M →T
∗
N
equals the composition of ﬁberwise translation by a closed 1form β on M with the cotangent
lift of a diﬀeomorphism g : N →M. A computation shows that if Γ ⊂ M N is the graph
of g and p : Γ → M is the natural projection, then the image of the composition of the
lagrangian embedding (T
∗
M, ι
F
) with the Schwartz transform S
M,N
equals the submanifold
Γ
⊥
p
∗
β
⊂ T
∗
(M N) deﬁned in Example 3.28. In particular, if F is the cotangent lift of g,
then the image of (T
∗
M, ι
F
) equals the conormal bundle of Γ.
´
Finally, we note that multiplying the cotangent vectors in T
∗
M by −1 deﬁnes a sym
plectomorphism T
∗
M → T
∗
M which can be combined with the Schwartz transform S
M,N
to arrive at the usual symplectomorphism T
∗
M T
∗
N · T
∗
(M N). Thus in the special
case of cotangent bundles, dualizing and taking products leads to nothing new.
3.3 Mechanics on manifolds
With the techniques of symplectic geometry at our disposal, we are ready to extend our
discussion of mechanics to more general conﬁguration spaces. Our description begins with a
comparison of the classical and quantum viewpoints, largely parallelling the earlier material
on the 1dimensional harmonic oscillator given in the introduction. We then turn to the
semiclassical approximation and its geometric counterpart in this new context, setting the
stage for the quantization problem in the next chapter.
5
The name comes from the relation of this construction to the Schwartz kernels of operators (see Sec
tion 6.2).
32
The classical picture
The hamiltonian description of classical motions in a conﬁguration space M begins with the
classical phase space T
∗
M. A riemannian metric g = (g
ij
) on M induces an inner product
on the ﬁbers of the cotangent bundle T
∗
M, and a “kinetic energy” function which in local
coordinates (q, p) is given by
k
M
(q, p) =
1
2
¸
i,j
g
ij
(q) p
i
p
j
,
where g
ij
is the inverse matrix to g
ij
. Regular level sets of k
M
are sphere bundles over M.
The hamiltonian ﬂow associated to k
M
is called the cogeodesic ﬂow due to its relation
with the riemannian structure of M described in the following theorem.
Theorem 3.34 If M is a riemannian manifold, then integral curves of the cogeodesic ﬂow
project via π to geodesics on M.
A proof of this theorem can be given in local coordinates by using Hamilton’s equations
˙ q
i
=
∂H
∂p
i
=
¸
j
g
ij
p
j
˙ p
i
= −
∂H
∂q
i
= −
1
2
¸
u,v
∂g
uv
∂q
i
p
u
p
v
to derive the geodesic equation
¨ q
k
+
¸
i,j
Γ
k
ij
˙ q
i
˙ q
j
= 0.
For details, see [36].
In physical terms, Theorem 3.34 states that a free particle on a manifold must move along
a geodesic. A smooth, realvalued potential V : M →R induces the hamiltonian function
H(q, p) = k
M
(q, p) + V (q)
on T
∗
M. Integral curves of the hamiltonian ﬂow of H then project to classical trajectories
of a particle on M subject to the potential V .
The quantum mechanical picture
For the time being, we will assume that the Schr¨odinger operator on a riemannian manifold
M with potential function V is deﬁned in analogy with the ﬂat case of R
n
with its standard
metric. That is, we ﬁrst deﬁne the operator on the function space C
∞
(M) by
ˆ
H = −
2
2m
∆ + m
V
,
where ∆ denotes the LaplaceBeltrami operator. As before,
ˆ
H induces a (densely deﬁned)
operator
ˆ
H on the intrinsic Hilbert space H
M
of M by the equation
ˆ
H(a[dx[
1/2
) = (
ˆ
Ha)[dx[
1/2
,
33
where [dx[ is the natural density associated to the metric on M, and the timeindependent
Schr¨odinger equation on M assumes the familiar form
(
ˆ
H −E)ϕ = 0.
The advantage of this viewpoint is that both the classical state space T
∗
M and the quantum
state space H
M
are objects intrinsically associated to the underlying diﬀerential manifold
M. The dynamics on both objects are determined by the choice of metric on M.
The semiclassical approximation
The basic WKB technique for constructing semiclassical solutions to the Schr¨odinger equa
tion on M proceeds as in Section 2.2. Speciﬁcally, a halfdensity of the form e
iS/h
a is a
secondorder approximate solution of the eigenvector problem (
ˆ
H −E) ϕ = 0 provided that
the phase function S: M →R satisﬁes the HamiltonJacobi equation
H ◦ ι
dS
= E,
and the halfdensity a satisﬁes the homogeneous transport equation, which assumes the
coordinatefree form
a∆S + 2L
∇S
a = 0.
We can formulate this construction abstractly by considering ﬁrst a projectable, exact
lagrangian embedding ι : L → T
∗
M. By deﬁnition, this means that π
L
= π ◦ ι is a diﬀeo
morphism, where π: T
∗
M →M is the natural projection, and Lemma 3.25 implies that for
any primitive φ: L →R of ι
∗
α
M
, the composition S = φ ◦ π
−1
L
is a phase function for (L, ι).
Now if H : T
∗
M → R is any smooth function, then (L, ι) satisﬁes the HamiltonJacobi
equation provided that E is a regular value of H and
H ◦ ι = E.
In this case, the embedding ι and hamiltonian vector ﬁeld X
H
of H induce a nonsingular
vector ﬁeld X
H,ι
on L (see Example 3.13). If a is a halfdensity on L, then the requirement
that (π
−1
L
)
∗
a satisfy the homogeneous transport equation on M becomes
L
X
H,ι
a = 0.
If these conditions are satisﬁed, then the halfdensity e
iφ/
a on L can be quantized (i.e.
pulledback) to yield a secondorder approximate solution (π
−1
L
)
∗
e
iφ/
a to the Schr¨odinger
equation on M, as above.
This interpretation of the WKB approximation leads us to consider a semiclassical state
as a quadruple (L, ι, φ, a) comprised of a projectable, exact lagrangian embedding ι : L →
T
∗
M, a “generalized” phase function φ: L → R satisfying dφ = ι
∗
α
M
, and a halfdensity a
on L. Our correspondence table now assumes the form
34
Object Classical version Quantum version
basic space T
∗
M H
M
state (L, ι, φ, a) as above on M
timeevolution Hamilton’s equations Schr¨odinger equation
generator of evolution function H on T
∗
M operator
ˆ
H on H
M
stationary state state (L, ι, φ, a) such that eigenvector of
ˆ
H
H ◦ ι = E and L
X
H,ι
a = 0
Since the HamiltonJacobi and transport equations above make sense for any triple (L, ι, a)
consisting of an arbitrary lagrangian immersion ι : L →T
∗
M and a halfdensity a on L, it is
tempting to regard (L, ι, a) as a further generalization of the concept of semiclassical state in
T
∗
M, in which we drop the conditions of projectability and exactness. Our goal in the next
chapter will be to determine when and how such “geometric” semiclassical states can be
used to construct “analytical” semiclassical approximate solutions to the timeindependent
Schr¨odinger equation.
35
4 Quantization in Cotangent Bundles
This chapter deals with the problem of constructing semiclassical approximate solutions to
the timeindependent Schr¨odinger equation from the data contained in a “geometric” semi
classical state. The starting point will be a lagrangian immersion ι : L →T
∗
M whose image
in contained in a regular level set of the classical hamiltonian H associated to some metric
and potential on the conﬁguration space M. Given a halfdensity a on L which is invariant
under the ﬂow induced by H, our goal is to use this data in order to construct, in a more or
less systematic way, an approximate solution to Schr¨odinger’s equation on M.
This process will be referred to as quantization. (It is, of course, only one of many
operations which go by this name.) As we shall see, the question of whether or not a given
semiclassical state (L, ι, a) can be quantized is answered largely in terms of the geometry of
the lagrangian immersion (L, ι). For this reason, we will often speak loosely of “quantizing
lagrangian submanifolds” or “quantizable lagrangian submanifolds.”
4.1 Prequantization
The simplest quantization procedure consists of pullingback halfdensities from projectable
lagrangian embeddings in T
∗
M. As seen in Chapter 3, a triple (L, ι, a) for which ι : L →T
∗
M
is a projectable exact lagrangian embedding is quantized by choosing a primitive φ of ι
∗
α
M
and forming the halfdensity
I
(L, ι, a)
def
= (π
−1
L
)
∗
e
iφ/
a
on M. The choice of φ is unique only up to an additive constant, which leads to an ambiguity
in the overall phase of I
(L, ι, a). (This ambiguity was overcome in Chapter 3 by including
the choice of φ in the deﬁnition of a semiclassical state).
To generalize this procedure, suppose now that ι : L → T
∗
M is a projectable, but not
necessarily exact lagrangian embedding. Since the 1form ι
∗
α
M
on L is closed, it is locally
exact by the Poincar´e lemma, and so we can choose a good cover ¦L
j
¦ of L (see Appendix C)
and functions φ
j
: L
j
→ R such that dφ
j
= ι
∗
α
M
[
L
j
. Given a halfdensity a on L, we set
a
j
= a[
L
j
and deﬁne a halfdensity on π
L
(L
j
) by quantizing (L
j
, ι[
L
j
, φ
j
, a
j
) in the sense
above:
I
j
= (π
−1
L
j
)
∗
e
iφ
j
/
a
j
.
To quantize (L, ι, a), we must piece together the I
j
to form a welldeﬁned global halfdensity
I
(L, ι, a) on M. This is possible for arbitrary a provided that the functions φ
j
can be chosen
so that the oscillatory coeﬃcients e
iφ
j
/
agree where their domains overlap; that is, we must
have
φ
j
−φ
k
∈ Z
def
= 2π Z
on each L
j
∩ L
k
. According to the discussion in Appendix C, this is precisely the condition
that the Liouville class λ
L,ι
be integral. At this point, however, we are forced to confront
once more the nature of . If it is a formal variable, the notion of integrality is meaningless.
If denotes a number ranging over an interval of the real numbers, then the Liouville class
will be 2π times an integral class for all only if it is zero, i.e. only for an exact lagrangian
36
submanifold. Since we are speciﬁcally trying to go beyond the exact case, this interpretation
is not acceptable either. Instead, we will make the following compromise.
Deﬁnition 4.1 A projectable lagrangian submanifold (L, ι) ⊂ T
∗
M is quantizable if its
Liouville class λ
L,ι
is integral for some ∈ R
+
. The values of for which this condition
holds will be called admissible for (L, ι).
If L is quantizable but not exact, the set of all admissible forms a sequence converging to
zero, consisting of the numbers
0
/k, where
0
is the largest such number, and k runs over
the positive integers. If L is exact, all > 0 are admissible.
Example 4.2 Let M = S
1
and consider the closed 1form β = p dθ on S
1
, for p ∈ R. The
cohomology class represented by this form is integral provided that
p
S
1
dθ ∈ Z
,
and so the admissible values of are the numbers ¦p/k : k ∈ Z
+
¦. Geometrically this means
that all horizontal circles in the cylinder T
∗
S
1
are quantizable in the sense deﬁned above,
but with diﬀering sets of admissible .
The situation changes as soon as we consider the closed 1form τ = a dθ
1
+ b dθ
2
on the
torus S
1
S
1
. If τ is integral for some ∈ R
+
, then a/ and b/ are both integers,
meaning that a/b is a rational number if b = 0. In general, the condition that closed 1form
β on a manifold M be quantizable is equivalent to the requirement that the ratio of any
two nonzero periods of β be rational. (A period of a closed 1form β on M is any number
obtained by integrating β around some closed loop in M). Thus, the class of projectable
quantizable lagrangian submanifolds of T
∗
M is rather limited whenever dim(H
1
(M; R)) > 1.
´
The simple quantization technique described above does not generalize immediately to
nonprojectable immersed lagrangian submanifolds (L, ι) ⊂ T
∗
M, since π
L
cannot be used to
pushforward halfdensities from L to M. For the time being, however, we will focus on the
set of regular points of π
L
in order to pass from halfdensities on L to halfdensities deﬁned
near noncaustic points of L. Regardless of how this is to be carried out, it is desirable that
quantization be linear with respect to halfdensities:
I
(L, ι, sa
1
+ a
2
) = s I
(L, ι, a
1
) + I
(L, ι, a
2
).
Certainly this condition holds for the procedure we have been using in the projectable case,
and it is reasonable to adopt as a general rule. One consequence is
I
(L, ι, 0) = 0.
If a semiclassical state is represented by the union of a disjoint pair (L
1
, ι
1
, a
1
), (L
2
, ι
2
, a
2
)
of lagrangian submanifolds carrying halfdensities, then by linearity we should have
I
(L
1
∪ L
2
, ι
1
∪ ι
2
, (a
1
, a
2
)) = I
(L
1
∪ L
2
, ι
1
∪ ι
2
, (a
1
, 0)) + I
(L
1
∪ L
2
, ι
1
∪ ι
2
, (0, a
2
))
= I
(L
1
, ι
1
, a
1
) + I
(L
2
, ι
2
, a
2
).
37
Now consider an arbitrary immersed lagrangian submanifold (L, ι) ⊂ T
∗
M and half
density a on L. If p ∈ π
L
(L) is noncaustic and π
L
is proper, then there is a contractible
neighborhood U ⊂ M of p for which π
−1
L
(U) consists of ﬁnitely many disjoint open subsets
L
j
⊂ L such that each (L
j
, ι[
L
j
) is a projectable lagrangian submanifold of T
∗
U. Choosing a
generalized phase function φ
j
: L
j
→R for each L
j
, we note that by the preceding remarks,
the quantization of (L, ι, a) should look something like
¸
j
(π
−1
L
j
)
∗
e
iφ
j
/
a
on U. As before, the requirement that φ
j
be a generalized phase function for L
j
determines
each φ
j
only up to an additive constant, and so the meaning of the preceding sum is ambigu
ous. To quantize halfdensities on L consistently, we must therefore decide how to specify
the relative phases of the oscillatory coeﬃcients e
iφ
j
/
.
If L is exact, then we may use any function φ: L →R satisfying dφ = ι
∗
α
M
to ﬁx phases,
as in the following example.
Example 4.3 For L = R, the lagrangian embedding ι : L → T
∗
R given by ι(x) = (x
2
, x)
has a singular point at x = 0, and we denote by L
+
, L
−
the right and left projectable
components of L, respectively (these correspond to the upper and lower components of the
parabola ι(L)). A phase function φ: L →R for (L, ι) is given by
φ(x) = 2x
3
/3.
If a = B(x) [dx[
1/2
is any halfdensity on L, then since
(π
−1
L
)
∗
∂
∂q
= ±2
−1
q
−1/2
∂
∂x
,
the transformation rule for halfdensities implies
(π
−1
L
+
)
∗
a = 2
−1/2
q
−1/4
B(q
1/2
) [dq[
1/2
(π
−1
L
−
)
∗
a = 2
−1/2
q
−1/4
B(−q
1/2
) [dq[
1/2
.
Thus, the prequantization of (L, ι, a) is given for q > 0 by
I
(L, ι, a)(q) =
e
2iq
3/2
/3
B(q
1/2
) + e
−2iq
3/2
/3
B(−q
1/2
)
2
−1/2
q
−1/4
[dq[
1/2
.
The parabola ι(L) lies in the regular level set H
−1
(0) of the hamiltonian for a constant
force ﬁeld
H(q, p) =
1
2
(p
2
−q),
and it is easy to check that the induced vector ﬁeld X
H,ι
on L equals X
H,ι
= (1/2) ∂/∂x.
Thus, a halfdensity a on L is invariant under the ﬂow of X
H,ι
if and only if a = B[dx[
1/2
for some B ∈ R. From the expression above, we obtain
I
(L, ι, a) =
e
2iq
3/2
/3
+ e
−2iq
3/2
/3
2
−1/2
q
1/4
B[dq[
1/2
38
as a semiclassical approximate solution to the Schr¨odinger equation
−
2
2
∂
2
ψ
∂x
2
−
x
2
ψ = Eψ.
Unfortunately, this solution blows up at q = 0 (and is not deﬁned for q < 0), so we have more
work ahead of us. In particular, we have no way as yet to check that letting φ be continuous
at 0 as a function on L is the right way to assure that we have a good approximation in the
immediate vicinity of q = 0. In fact, we will see later that this is the wrong choice!
´
Since exactness is only used to insure that the function e
iφ/
is welldeﬁned on L, we can treat
certain nonexact cases in a similar way. For this purpose, we make the following provisional
deﬁnition, generalizing Deﬁnition 4.1.
Deﬁnition 4.4 An immersed lagrangian submanfold (L, ι) ⊂ T
∗
M is said to be prequan
tizable if its Liouville class λ
L,ι
is integral for some ∈ R
+
. The values of for which
this condition holds will again be called admissible for (L, ι).
If is admissible for some prequantizable lagrangian immersion (L, ι), then there exists a
good cover ¦V
j
¦ of the manifold L and functions φ
j
: V
j
→ R such that dφ
j
= ι
∗
α
M
[
V
j
and
φ
j
−φ
k
∈ Z
on each V
j
∩ V
k
. Consequently, the φ
j
describe a single function φ: L →T
=
R/Z
which satisﬁes dφ = ι
∗
α
M
and which deﬁnes a global oscillatory function e
iφ/
on L. If
a is a halfdensity on L, we can now quantize (L, ι, φ, a) by summing the pullbacks of e
iφ/
a
to M. In the previous notation, the value of I
(L, ι, φ, a) on U is deﬁned as
¸
j
(π
−1
V
j
)
∗
e
iφ/
a.
Example 4.5 Consider the 1dimensional harmonic oscillator with hamiltonian
H(q, p) =
1
2
(q
2
+ p
2
).
According to Deﬁnition 4.4, a number ∈ R
+
is admissible for the level set H
−1
(E) provided
that
H
−1
(E)
α
1
= 2πE ∈ Z
.
Thus, energy levels of the 1dimensional harmonic oscillator corresponding to level sets for
which a particular value of is admissible are given by E = n. As one can read in any
textbook on quantum mechanics, the actual quantum energy levels are E = (n + 1/2).
The additional 1/2 can be explained geometrically in terms of the nonprojectability of the
classical energy level curves, as we shall soon see.
´
39
Prequantum bundles and contact manifolds
Prequantizability can be described geometrically in terms of principal T
bundles with con
nection over T
∗
M. It is customary to make the following deﬁnition.
Deﬁnition 4.6 For ﬁxed ∈ R
+
, the prequantum T
bundle associated to a cotangent
bundle (T
∗
M, ω
M
) consists of the trivial principal bundle Q
M,
= T
∗
M T
together with
the connection 1form ϕ = −π
∗
α
M
+ dσ.
Here, σ denotes the multiplevalued linear variable in T
and π: Q
M,
→T
∗
M is the bundle
projection. If ι : L → T
∗
M is any lagrangian immersion, then the curvature of the induced
connection on ι
∗
Q
M,
coincides with ι
∗
ω
M
and therefore vanishes. The holonomy of this
connection is represented by the modZ
reduction of the Liouville class λ
L,ι
.
From the prequantum standpoint, the basic geometric object representing a classical
state is therefore a quadruple (L, ι, a, φ) consisting of a lagrangian immersion ι : L →T
∗
M,
a halfdensity a on L, and a parallel lift φ of L to the T
bundle ι
∗
Q
M,
. If we associate
to Q
M,
the prequantum line bundle c
M,
by means of the representation x → e
−ix/
of T
in U(1), then φ induces a parallel section of ι
∗
c
M,
corresponding to the (inverse of the)
oscillatory function e
iφ/
on L which appeared in the preceding section. This remark proves
the following geometric characterization of prequantizability.
Theorem 4.7 An immersed lagrangian submanifold (L, ι) ⊂ T
∗
M is prequantizable if and
only if there exists a nonzero parallel section over L of the line bundle ι
∗
c
M,
for some > 0.
Prequantum T
bundles and parallel lifts of lagrangian submanfolds constitute our ﬁrst
examples of the fundamental objects of contact geometry, the odddimensional counter
part of symplectic geometry. Digressing brieﬂy from quantization, we assemble here a few
facts about contact manifolds.
Deﬁnition 4.8 A contact form on a (2n+1)dimensional manifold Q is a 1form ϕ such
that ϕ ∧ (dϕ)
n
vanishes nowhere on Q. A manifold endowed with a contact form is called a
strict contact manifold.
To interpret the condition on ϕ we note ﬁrst that the kernel of any nowhere vanishing 1form
ϕ deﬁnes a 2ndimensional distribution in Q. If ξ, η are (local) vector ﬁelds lying in this
distribution, we have
dϕ(ξ, η) = ξ ϕ(η) −η ϕ(ξ) −ϕ([ξ, η]) = −ϕ([ξ, η]).
This says that the distribution is integrable (in the sense of Frobenius) iﬀ dϕ is zero on
ker(ϕ). The condition ϕ ∧ (dϕ)
n
= 0, on the other hand, means that the kernel of dϕ is
1dimensional and everywhere transverse to ker(ϕ). Consequently, dϕ is a linear symplectic
form on ker(ϕ), and the “largest” integral submanifolds of ker(ϕ) are ndimensional (i.e.
ker(ϕ) is “maximally nonintegrable”).
Deﬁnition 4.9 A legendrian submanifold of a 2n+1dimensional strict contact manifold
(Q, ϕ) is an ndimensional integral submanifold for ϕ.
40
If ϕ is a contact form and f a nowherevanishing function on Q, then f ϕ is again a contact
form which is said to be equivalent to ϕ, since they have the same legendrian submanifolds.
This leads to the following deﬁnition.
Deﬁnition 4.10 A contact structure on a manifold M is a codimension one subbundle
E ⊂ TM which is locally deﬁned by contact forms, and a manifold endowed with such a
structure is called simply a contact manifold.
When the quotient TM/E is trivial, E is the kernel of a globally deﬁned contact form. Such
a contact structure is called coorientable.
Our basic example of a strict contact manifold is furnished by a prequantum T
bundle
Q
M,
over a cotangent bundle T
∗
M; the image of a parallel lift of a lagrangian immersion
ι : L → T
∗
M to Q
M,
is an immersed legendrian submanifold of Q
M,
. Although we will
not pursue the idea in these notes, a possible generalization of the quantization procedure
described above might therefore begin by reinterpreting geometric semiclassical states as
triples (R, , a) consisting of a legendrian immersion (R, ) in a contact manifold together
with a halfdensity a on R.
4.2 The Maslov correction
It turns out that the naive quantization procedure of the preceding section is incorrect,
since it ignores a certain structure which arises from the relation of L to the ﬁbers of the
projection T
∗
M
π
→M. This factor will be incorporated into our quantization procedure using
a procedure due to Maslov. To begin, we will illustrate this idea in the case of lagrangian
submanifolds of the phase plane.
Given a lagrangian immersion ι : L → T
∗
R · R
2
, we denote by π
p
the composition of ι
with the projection of R
2
onto the paxis. If π
p
is a diﬀeomorphism, then (L, ι) is said to be
pprojectable, in which case there exists an “alternate” generalized phase function τ : L →R
satisfying dτ = ι
∗
(−q dp), obtained by thinking of R
2
as the cotangent bundle of pspace.
A simple example of an embedded lagrangian submanifold of T
∗
R which does not project
diﬀeomorphically onto the qaxis is a vertical line, or ﬁber, of the form ι(x) = (q
0
, x) for x ∈
R. Since the wave function corresponding to a constant halfdensity a on L should correspond
to a probability distribution describing the position of a particle at q
0
with completely
indeterminate momentum, it should be a delta function supported at q
0
. Following an idea
of Maslov, we analyze this situation by pretending that p is position and q momentum, and
then quantizing to obtain a function on pspace. Using the phase function τ(x) = −q
0
x on
L, we obtain
(π
−1
p
)
∗
e
iτ/
[dx[
1/2
= e
−iq
0
p/
q
0
[dp[
1/2
.
The result is exactly the asymptotic Fourier transform (see Appendix B) of the delta function
which we guessed above!
In its simplest form, Maslov’s technique is to suppose that (L, ι) ⊂ T
∗
R is pprojectable,
so that dτ = ι
∗
(−q dp) for some phase function τ on L. If a is a halfdensity on L, we deﬁne
a function B on pspace by the equation
B[dp[
1/2
= (π
−1
p
)
∗
e
iτ/
a.
41
The Maslov quantization of (L, ι, τ, a) is then given by the halfdensity
J
(L, ι, τ, a)
def
= T
−1
(B) [dq[
1/2
on qspace, where T
denotes the asymptotic Fourier transform. To relate this procedure to
our earlier quantization by pullback, we must compare the results in the case of lagrangian
submanifolds L ⊂ R
2
which are biprojectable, i.e. projectable in both the q and pdirections.
For simplicity, we begin with the example of linear lagrangian subspaces.
Example 4.11 For real k = 0, consider the lagrangian embedding ι : R → T
∗
R given by
ι(x) = (x, kx). Generalized phase functions on (L, ι) for the forms p dq and −q dp are given
by φ(x) = kx
2
/2 and τ(x) = −kx
2
/2, respectively. If a is a constant halfdensity on L, then
the transformation rule for halfdensities implies
(π
−1
L
)
∗
a = A[dq[
1/2
(π
−1
p
)
∗
a = [k[
−1/2
A[dp[
1/2
for a real constant A determined by a. Quantization by pullback therefore gives
I
(L, ι, φ, a) = e
ikq
2
/2
A[dq[
1/2
.
On the other hand, we have (π
p
)
∗
τ(p) = −p
2
/2k, and a computation
6
shows that
T
−1
((π
−1
p
)
∗
e
iτ/
)(q) = [k[
1/2
e
−iπsgn(k)/4
e
ikq
2
/2
,
and so Maslov’s technique yields
J
(L, ι, τ, a) = e
−iπsgn(k)/4
I
(L, ι, φ, a).
Thus, the halfdensity obtained from (L, ι, a) by Maslov quantization diﬀers from the simple
pullback by a constant phase shift.
´
To establish a similar correspondence in somewhat greater generality, consider an arbi
trary biprojectable lagrangian embedding (L, ι) ⊂ R
2
with phase functions φ and τ corre
sponding to p dq and −q dp, respectively. For simplicity, we will assume that the additive
constants in φ and τ are chosen so that
φ = τ + ι
∗
(qp).
Next, let S(q) and T(p) be the functions deﬁned on q and pspace by pullback:
S = φ ◦ π
−1
L
T = τ ◦ π
−1
p
,
so that S and T satisfy the Legendre transform relation (see [2])
S(q) = −p(q) T
t
(p(q)) + T(p(q)),
6
See, for example, [32, Vol.1, Thm.7.6.1] .
42
where p(q) = S
t
(q). From this relation, it follows easily that
T
tt
(p(q)) = −(S
tt
(q))
−1
.
A halfdensity a on L determines functions A(q) and B(p) such that
(π
−1
L
)
∗
a = A[dq[
1/2
(π
−1
p
)
∗
a = B[dp[
1/2
and
A(q) = [S
tt
(q)[
1/2
B(p(q)).
For each q, we must now compare the Maslov halfdensity
J
(L, ι, τ, a) = (2π)
−1/2
R
e
i(pq+T(p))/
B(p) dp [dq[
1/2
with that obtained by pullback:
I
(L, ι, φ, a) = e
iS/
A[dq[
1/2
.
To this end, we set k(q) = T
tt
(p(q)) and apply the principle of stationary phase (see Ap
pendix B). The critical point of the exponent pq +T(p) occurs where q = −T
t
(p), i.e. where
p = S
t
(q) = p(q). Hence,
R
e
i(pq+T(p))/
B(p) dp = (2π)
1/2
e
−iπsgn(k)/4
e
iS(q)/
[k(q)[
−1/2
B(p(q)) + O(
3/2
).
Thus
J
(L, ι, τ, a) = e
−iπsgn(k)/4
I
(L, ι, φ, a) +O().
For biprojectable (L, ι), we therefore conclude that Maslov’s technique coincides with quan
tization by pullback up to a constant phase factor and terms of order .
The essential diﬀerence between the naive prequantization of Section 4.1 and the Maslov
quantization of a pprojectable lagrangian embedding (L, ι) which is not qprojectable lies
in the relative phase constants of the summands of I
(L, ι, a), as illustrated by the following
example.
Example 4.12 A phase function associated to −q dp for the lagrangian embedding ι(x) =
(x
2
, x) of L = R into R
2
is given by τ(x) = −x
3
/3. The Maslov quantization of a halfdensity
a = B(x) [dx[
1/2
on L is thus
J
(L, ι, τ, a) = T
−1
e
−ip
3
/3
B(p)
[dq[
1/2
,
since (π
−1
p
)
∗
a = B(p) [dp[
1/2
. For each q > 0, critical points of the function R(p) = pq −p
3
/3
occur precisely when q = p
2
, i.e. when (q, p) ∈ ι(L), and an application of the principle of
stationary phase therefore yields two terms corresponding to the upper and lower halves of
L. Speciﬁcally, we have
J
(L, ι, τ, a) =
e
−iπ/4
e
2iq
3/2
/3
B(−q
1/2
) + e
iπ/4
e
−2iq
3/2
/3
B(q
1/2
)
2
−1/2
q
−1/4
[dq[
1/2
+ O().
43
Compare this with the result of Example 4.3. The extra phase factors of e
∓iπ/4
make
J
(L, ι, τ, a) essentially diﬀerent from the prequantization of (L, ι, a). However, while the
term of order 0 of J
(L, ι, τ, a) is, like I
(L, ι, φ, a), singular at the caustic point q = 0, the
full expression for J
(L, ι, τ, a) as an integral is perfectly smooth there, at least if a has
compact support. This smoothness at caustics is a clear advantage of Maslov quantization.
´
The relative phase factor in the preceding example can be attributed to the fact that the
function T(p) = −p
3
/3 has an inﬂection point at p = 0. More precisely, since T
t
is convex,
a factor of e
iπ/2
arises in passing from the upper to the lower half of the parabola; if T
t
were
concave, the situation would be reversed.
The preceding observation leads us to assign an index to closed, immersed curves in the
phase plane. A pdependent phase function T for L ⊂ R
2
will have inﬂection points at
precisely those p for which (T
t
(p), p) is a singular point of L. Moreover, the sign of T
tt
at
nearby points depends only on L and not on the choice of T. With these remarks in mind,
suppose that (L, ι) is a closed, immersed curve in R
2
which is nondegenerate in the sense
that if T is a pdependent phase function for a subset of L, then T
t
has only nondegenerate
critical points. Under this assumption, sgn(T
tt
) changes by ±2 in the vicinity of a critical
point of T
t
, and we can assign an index to (L, ι) by summing these changes while traversing
L in a prescribed direction. The result is twice an integer known as the Maslov index m
L,ι
of (L, ι). (Compare [3]).
Example 4.13 The computation of the Maslov index can be interpreted geometrically if
we ﬁrst observe that the nondegeneracy condition requires L to remain on the same side of
a ﬁber π
−1
(q) near a singular point. Since the index only involves the sign of T
tt
, it follows
from Example 4.12 that the integer 1 should be assigned to a critical point of π
L
which is
traversed in the −p direction to the right of the ﬁber. In other words, downward motion to
the right of the ﬁber is positive, while the sign changes if either the direction of motion or
the side of the ﬁber is reversed, but not if both are.
A circle in the phase plane has a right and a left singular point, both of which are positive
according our rule when the circle is traversed counterclockwise. The Maslov index of the
circle therefore equals 2. In fact, the same is true of any closed embedded curve traversed
counterclockwise. On the other hand, a ﬁgureeight has Maslov index zero.
The reader is invited to check that if L is a circle with a ﬁxed orientation ν ∈ H
1
(L; Z),
then m
L,ι
equals 'µ
L,ι
, ν`, where µ
L,ι
is the Maslov class of (L, ι) deﬁned in Example 3.22.
´
Our goal is now to modify the prequantization procedure for arbitrary lagrangian sub
manifolds of the phase plane by incorporating the Maslov index. The basic idea is as follows.
Given an immersed lagrangian submanifold (L, ι) ⊂ R
2
, we ﬁrst choose a good cover ¦L
j
¦
of L such that the image of each L
j
under ι is either q or pprojectable and no intersection
L
j
∩ L
k
contains a critical point of π
L
. Next, we ﬁx a partition of unity ¦h
j
¦ subordinate
44
to ¦L
j
¦. To quantize a halfdensity a on L, we quantize each (L
j
, ι, a h
j
) to obtain a half
density I
j
on R either by pullback or by Maslov’s technique. As before, we would then like
to deﬁne the quantization of (L, ι, a) as the sum
I
(L, ι, a) =
¸
j
I
j
.
In order to specify the relative phases of the I
j
, and to make this deﬁnition independent of
the choice of cover ¦L
j
¦ and partition of unity, we will require that I
(L, ι, a) coincide up
to order with the usual quantization by pullback for any halfdensity a supported in a
projectable subset of L. This condition can be precisely formulated in terms of the Maslov
index and Liouville class of (L, ι) as follows.
On an open interval U of noncaustic points, each halfdensity I
j
is the sum of the pull
back of halfdensities on each component of L
j
∩π
−1
L
(U). If L
j
is quantized by pullback, this
statement is obvious; if Maslov’s technique is applied to L
j
, it follows from an application of
the principle of stationary phase as in Example 4.12. On L
j
∩ π
−1
L
(U), these halfdensities
are of the form
˜
I
j
= e
−iπs
j
/4
e
iφ
j
/
a.
Here, φ is a realvalued function on L
j
satisfying dφ
j
= ι
∗
α
1
, while s
j
are integers depending
only on the component of L
j
∩ π
−1
L
(U) in question. (More precisely, s
j
is zero if L
j
is
qprojectable and is quantized by pullback; otherwise s
j
equals sgn(T
tt
) for a suitable p
dependent phase function). For I
(L, ι, a) to be welldeﬁned, we must choose the functions
φ
j
so that
˜
I
j
=
˜
I
k
on each intersection L
j
∩L
k
regardless of the particular halfdensity a. In
other words, we require
e
i(φ
j
−φ
k
)/
e
−iπ(s
j
−s
k
)/4
= 1
at each point of L
j
∩ L
k
. Since φ
j
− φ
k
is constant on L
j
∩ L
k
, we can deﬁne a
jk
as the
(constant) value of (φ
j
−φ
k
) −π(s
j
−s
k
)/4 on L
j
∩ L
k
, so that our requirement becomes
a
jk
∈ Z
.
Evidently, this condition can be fulﬁlled on any arc of a curve in the phase plane. If L is
a circle, then this condition implies that the sum of any of the a
jk
lies in Z
, or, in other
words, that the Maslov index m
L,ι
of (L, ι) satisﬁes
π
2
m
L,ι
+
L
ι
∗
α
1
∈ Z
.
This is the simplest version of the Maslov quantization condition.
Example 4.14 Returning to the harmonic oscillator of Example 4.5, we see that the level
set H
−1
(E) satisﬁes the Maslov condition provided that for some integer n,
E = (n + 1/2).
Allowable energy levels in this case therefore correspond to the BohrSommerfeld condition,
which actually gives the precise energy levels for the quantum harmonic oscillator.
´
45
A general quantization scheme
Motivated by the simple results above, our aim in the next sections will be to develop a
systematic method for quantizing lagrangian submanifolds of cotangent bundles. The basis
of this method will again be Maslov’s technique, which relies in this context on the concept
of generalized phase functions.
Local parametrizations of an immersed lagrangian submanifold (L, ι) ⊂ T
∗
M deﬁned by
such phase functions will ﬁrst enable us to quantize a given halfdensity locally on L by
means of a slightly more general version of the (inverse) asymptotic Fourier transform. The
result will be a collection of halfdensities on M. In order for these halfdensities to piece
together appropriately, it is necessary and suﬃcient that L satisfy a general version of the
Maslov quantization condition, which we formulate in the next section using the Maslov
class.
4.3 Phase functions and lagrangian submanifolds
In this section, we generalize the concept of phase functions to nonprojectable lagrangian
submanifolds of cotangent bundles. Roughly speaking, the idea is the following. As we
saw in Chapter 3, a projectable lagrangian submanifold of T
∗
N can be locally parametrized
by the diﬀerential of a function f on U ⊂ N, viewed as a mapping df : U → T
∗
N. For
each p ∈ U, the meaning of df
p
as an element of T
∗
p
N is that for any smooth curve γ in N
satisfying γ(0) = p, we have 'df
p
, ˙ γ(0)`
def
= (f◦γ)
t
(0). To parametrize more general lagrangian
submanifolds of T
∗
N in a similar way, we can begin with a function ϕ: UR
m
→R together
with a point ˜ p = (p, v) ∈ UR
m
and attempt to deﬁne dϕ
˜ p
∈ T
∗
p
N by 'dϕ
˜ p
, ˙ γ(0)` = (ϕ◦˜ γ)
t
(0)
for any lift ˜ γ of γ to the product U R
m
such that ˜ γ(0) = ˜ p. In general, this fails, since
the value of the directional derivative (ϕ ◦ ˜ γ)
t
(0) depends on the lift ˜ γ. If, however, the
ﬁberderivative ∂ϕ/∂θ vanishes at ˜ p, the expression for dϕ
˜ p
produces a welldeﬁned element
of T
∗
p
N. As we shall see, the assumption that the map ∂ϕ/∂θ : U R
m
→R
m
is transverse
to 0 implies that the ﬁber critical set
Σ
ϕ
=
˜ p ∈ U R
m
:
∂ϕ
∂θ
= 0
is a smooth submanifold of U R
m
, and the assignment ˜ p → dϕ
˜ p
deﬁnes a lagrangian
immersion of Σ
ϕ
into T
∗
N. In general, the restriction of the projection U R
m
→U to Σ
ϕ
is noninjective, and thus the image of Σ
ϕ
is a nonprojectable lagrangian submanifold. From
the point of view of the WKB method, this generalization amounts to replacing Maslov’s
ansatz
(2π)
−n/2
R
n
e
i(/p,q)+T(p))/
a(p) dp [dq[
1/2
for the solution of Schr¨odinger’s equation by the more general form
(2π)
−m/2
R
m
e
iφ(q,θ)/
a(q, θ)[dθ[[dq[
1/2
,
46
where θ is an auxiliary variable in R
m
which may have nothing to do with the variable p dual
to q. An advantage of this generalization will be to allow a calculus which is more clearly
invariant under changes of coordinates, unlike the previous Fourier transform picture, which
requires linear structures on p and qspace.
To begin, we ﬁx some notation and terminology.
7
Let M, B be smooth manifolds, and
let p
M
: B →M be a smooth submersion. Dualizing the inclusion E = ker(p
M∗
)
ι
→TB gives
rise to an exact sequence of vector bundles over B
0 ←E
∗
ι
∗
←T
∗
B ←E
⊥
←0
where E
⊥
⊂ T
∗
B denotes the annihilator of E. The ﬁberderivative of a function φ: B →
R is the composition d
θ
φ = ι
∗
◦ dφ, and its ﬁber critical set is deﬁned as
Σ
φ
= (d
θ
φ)
−1
Z
E
∗.
(We will denote the zero section of a vector bundle F by Z
F
). The function φ is said to
be nondegenerate if its ﬁber derivative is transverse to Z
E
∗, in which case Σ
φ
is a smooth
submanifold of B. At points of Σ
φ
, the section d
θ
φ has a welldeﬁned intrinsic derivative (see
[26]), denoted ∇d
θ
φ, which induces for nondegenerate φ an exact sequence of vector bundles
over Σ
φ
0 →TΣ
φ
→T
Σ
φ
B
∇d
θ
φ
→ E
∗
[
Σ
φ
→0.
The ﬁberhessian Hφ of φ at p ∈ Σ
φ
is deﬁned as the composition ∇d
θ
φ ◦ ι : E
p
→E
∗
p
.
The bundle E
⊥
may be identiﬁed with the pullback p
∗
M
T
∗
M, giving rise to a natural
projection E
⊥
p
→ T
∗
M. On the ﬁbercritical set Σ
φ
, the diﬀerential dφ deﬁnes a section of
E
⊥
whose composition with p we denote by λ
φ
: Σ
φ
→T
∗
M.
Theorem 4.15 If φ is nondegenerate, then the map λ
φ
: Σ
φ
→T
∗
M is an exact lagrangian
immersion.
Proof. Since E
⊥
is the union of the conormal bundles of the ﬁbers of p
M
, it follows from
Example 3.19 that E
⊥
is a coisotropic submanifold of T
∗
B. Moreover, the characteristic
distribution (
⊥
of E
⊥
is tangent to the ﬁbers of the mapping E
⊥
→T
∗
M.
The nondegeneracy assumption on φ is equivalent to the requirement that the lagrangian
submanifold (dφ)(B) of T
∗
B be transverse to E
⊥
. By Lemma 3.6(2), this implies that the
section (dφ)(B)[
Σ
φ
= (dφ)(B) ∩ E
⊥
is nowhere tangent to the distribution (
⊥
and therefore
immerses into T
∗
M. To complete the proof, we note that the equality
λ
∗
φ
α
M
= dφ[
Σ
φ
implies that L
φ
is exact lagrangian.
2
7
Some readers may ﬁnd it instructive to follow the ensuing discussion by writing everything in local
coordinates.
47
From the preceding deﬁnitions, it follows that the nullity k of the ﬁberhessian at p ∈ Σ
φ
equals dim(T
p
Σ
φ
∩E
p
), which in turn equals the dimension of the kernel of (π◦λ
φ
)
∗
on T
p
Σ
φ
.
This means in particular that the dimension of the ﬁbers of B must be at least k; if the ﬁber
dimension of B equals k, then the phase function φ is said to be reduced at p. This occurs
when its ﬁberhessian vanishes at p.
Example 4.16 Suppose that M = R and consider the function φ(x, θ) = xθ + θ
3
/3 on
B = RR. Here, d
θ
φ = θ
2
+x, and ∇(d
θ
φ) = 2θdθ +dx. Evidently the phase function φ is
nondegenerate, and its ﬁber critical set consists of the parabola x = −θ
2
, which fails to be
xprojectable precisely when x = 0. This is just the value of x for which φ(x, ) acquires a
degenerate critical point.
´
A phase function which generates a neighborhood of a point in a lagrangian submanifold
is not unique per se, but it is unique up to “stable equivalence,” a concept which we now
deﬁne. To begin, we introduce the following terminology.
Deﬁnition 4.17 A triple (B, p
B
, φ) is called a Morse family over a manifold M if p
B
:
B → M is a smooth (possibly nonsurjective) submersion, and φ is a nondegenerate phase
function on B such that λ
φ
is an embedding. A Morse family is said to be reduced at p ∈ B
if φ is a reduced phase function at p.
We will say that the lagrangian submanifold im(λ
φ
) = L
φ
is generated by the Morse family
(B, p
B
, φ). If ι : L → T
∗
M is a lagrangian immersion and p ∈ L, then we denote by
M(L, ι, p) the class of Morse families (B, p
B
, φ) which generate ι(U) for some neighborhood
U ⊂ L of p. For such Morse families, we denote by g
φ
: U →Σ
φ
the diﬀeomorphism deﬁned
by g
φ
= λ
−1
φ
◦ ι.
If (B, p
B
, φ) ∈ M(L, ι, p), then the following operations produce further elements of
M(L, ι, p).
1. Addition: For any c ∈ R, (B, p
B
, φ + c) ∈ M(L, ι, p).
2. Composition: If p
B
: B
t
→ M is a second submersion and g : B
t
→ B is a ﬁber
preserving diﬀeomorphism, then (B
t
, p
B
, φ ◦ g) ∈ M(L, ι, p).
3. Suspension: The suspension of (B, p
B
, φ) by a nondegenerate quadratic form Q on
R
n
is deﬁned as the Morse family comprised of the submersion ˜ p
B
: B R
n
→ M
given by composing p
B
with the projection along R
n
, together with the phase function
˜
φ = φ + Q. Evidently the ﬁbercritical set of
˜
φ equals the product Σ
φ
¦0¦, and
λ
˜
φ
(b, 0) = λ
φ
(b) for all (b, 0) ∈ Σ
˜
φ
. Thus (B R
n
, ˜ p
B
,
˜
φ) ∈ M(L, ι, p).
4. Restriction: If B
t
is any open subset of B containing λ
−1
φ
(p), then the restrictions of
p
B
and φ to B
t
deﬁne a Morse family on M which belongs to M(L, ι, p).
These operations generate an equivalence relation among Morse families called stable equiv
alence. The central result of this section is the following.
48
Theorem 4.18 Let ι : L →T
∗
M be a lagrangian immersion, and let p ∈ L. Then:
1. The class M(L, ι, p) contains a reduced Morse family over M.
2. Any two members of M(L, ι, p) are stably equivalent.
The next two subsections are devoted to the proof of this theorem.
Symplectic normal forms
The purpose of this section is to develop several results needed to prove Theorem 4.18, all of
which more or less rely on the socalled deformation method. This method was introduced
by Moser in [45] (it probably has a longer history) and applied to a variety of problems of
symplectic geometry in [62]. We will prove the following theorem.
Theorem 4.19 Let (P, ω) be a symplectic manifold, ι : L →P a lagrangian immersion, and
E a lagrangian subbundle of ι
∗
TP which is complementary to the image of ι
∗
: TL →ι
∗
TP.
Then there is a symplectic immersion ψ of a neighborhood U of the zero section Z ⊂ T
∗
L
into P such that ψ = ι ◦π on Z and which maps the vertical subbundle V
Z
L ⊂ T
Z
(T
∗
L) onto
E.
As a result of the existence of compatible complex structures on ι
∗
P, lagrangian subbundles
of ι
∗
P complementary to the image of ι
∗
: TL → ι
∗
TP always exist. Thus, Theorem 4.19
implies the following nonlinear “normal form” result, which states that, near any of its
lagrangian submanifolds L, a symplectic manifold looks like a neighborhood of the zero
section in T
∗
L.
Corollary 4.20 If L is a lagrangian submanifold of P, then a neighborhood of L in P is
symplectomorphic to a neighborhood of the zero section in T
∗
L, by a map which is the identity
on L.
Theorem 4.19 may be combined with Proposition 3.24 to yield:
Corollary 4.21 The map ψ gives a 11 correspondence between a neighborhood of L in the
space of all lagrangian submanifolds of (P, ω) and a neighborhood of the zero section in the
space Z
1
(L) of closed 1forms on L.
The proof of Theorem 4.19 will rely on the following
Relative Darboux theorem [62] . Let N be a submanifold of a manifold P, and let
ω
0
, ω
1
be two symplectic forms on P which coincide on T
N
P. Then there are neighborhoods
U and V of N and a diﬀeomorphism f : U →V such that
1. f
∗
ω
1
= ω
0
2. f[
N
= id and Tf[
T
N
P
= id.
49
Proof. Deﬁne a 1parameter family of closed forms on P by
ω
t
= ω
0
+ t(ω
1
−ω
0
).
Since all ω
t
agree on the submanifold N, there is a neighborhood of N in P (which for our
purposes we may assume to be P itself) on which all ω
t
are nondegenerate.
To ﬁnd f satisfying f
∗
ω
1
= ω
0
, we will construct a timedependent vector ﬁeld X
t
for
which the isotopy f
t
that it generates satisﬁes f
∗
t
ω
t
= ω
0
for all t ∈ [0, 1]. By the usual
properties of the Lie derivative, it is necessary and suﬃcient that such a vector ﬁeld solve
the equation
0 =
d
dt
(f
∗
t
ω
t
) = f
∗
t
dω
t
dt
+ f
∗
t
(L
Xt
ω
t
) = f
∗
t
(ω
1
−ω
0
+ d(X
t
ω
t
)).
In order to ﬁx N, we also want X
t
[
N
= 0. These conditions will be satisﬁed if we set
X
t
= −˜ ω
−1
t
(ϕ) for a 1form ϕ on a neighborhood of N in P, vanishing on N, such that
dϕ = ω
1
− ω
0
. If the submanifold N consisted of a single point, the form ϕ would be easy
to ﬁnd, since the closed 2form ω
1
−ω
0
is locally exact by the classical Poincar´e lemma. For
more general submanifolds, we use a more general version of this lemma:
Relative Poincar´e lemma . Let N be a submanifold of P, and let β be a closed kform on
P which vanishes on TN. Then there is a form ϕ on a neighborhood of N such that dϕ = β
and which vanishes on T
N
P. Furthermore, if β vanishes on T
N
P, then ϕ can be chosen so
that its ﬁrst derivatives vanish along N.
Proof. Since the statement is local around N, we will identify P with a tubular neighborhood
of N in P and let h
t
: P →P be a smooth isotopy such that
h
1
= id h
0
= ﬁberwise projection of P onto N.
Since β vanishes on N, we have
β = h
∗
1
β −h
∗
0
β =
1
0
d
dt
(h
∗
t
β) dt =
1
0
h
∗
t
(L
Yt
β) dt,
where Y
t
is the (timedependent) vector ﬁeld which generates the isotopy h
t
for t > 0. By
Cartan’s formula and the fact that β is closed, the last expression is equal to
1
0
h
∗
t
d(Y
t
β) dt = d
1
0
h
∗
t
(Y
t
β) dt
.
Our assertion follows if we take ϕ =
1
0
h
∗
t
(Y
t
β) dt.
2
If (P, ω) is a symplectic manifold and g
t
: P →P a continuous family of diﬀeomorphisms,
then homotopy invariance for deRham cohomology implies that the forms ω
t
= g
∗
t
ω lie in
the same cohomology class for all t. By the same method of proof as in the relative Darboux
theorem, we can deduce the following converse result:
50
Corollary 4.22 (Moser [45]) If ¦ω
t
¦ is a family of symplectic structures on a compact
manifold P and ω
t
1
− ω
t
2
is exact for all t
1
, t
2
, then there is a diﬀeomorphism f : P → P
with f
∗
1
ω
1
= ω
0
.
By restricting to a neighborhood of a point in N, Givental [6] proves an equivalence theorem
like the relative Darboux theorem under the weaker hypothesis that ω
0
and ω
1
coincide on
TN, i.e. just for vectors tangent to N. In contrast to Corollary 4.22, McDuﬀ [40] describes
a family ω
t
of symplectic forms on a compact sixdimensional manifold P such that ω
1
−ω
0
is exact, but there is no diﬀeomorphism f : P → P at all satisfying f
∗
ω
1
= ω
0
. Of course,
for intermediate t, the form ω
t
−ω
0
is not exact.
Proof of Theorem 4.19. Beginning with the lagrangian immersion ι : L → P, we let
f : Z →P denote the composition ι ◦ π, where Z is the zero section of T
∗
L and π: T
∗
L →L
is the natural projection. Using Theorem 3.20, we then choose a ωcompatible complex
structure J on f
∗
TP which satisﬁes J(f
∗
TZ) = E, where E is the lagrangian subbundle given
in the statement of the theorem. Similarly, we choose a ω
L
compatible complex structure J
t
on T
Z
(T
∗
L) which rotates TZ into V
Z
L. Now consider the symplectic bundle map
T
Z
(T
∗
L)
˜
f
→f
∗
TP
given by
˜
f(v ⊕ J
t
w) = f
∗
v ⊕ J(f
∗
w) for v, w ∈ TZ. In a neighborhood U ⊂ T
∗
L of Z, we
can extend f to obtain an immersion F : U → P which satisﬁes F
∗
=
˜
f on T
Z
(T
∗
L). To
ﬁnish the proof of the normal form theorem, we apply the relative Darboux theorem to the
forms ω
L
and F
∗
(ω) on U.
2
Next, we turn to two generalizations of the classical Morse lemma (see Appendix B)
which require the following version of Taylor’s theorem.
Lemma 4.23 Let N ⊂ B be a submanifold deﬁned by the vanishing of functions g
1
, , g
k
whose diﬀerentials are linearly independent along N. If f is any function such that f and
df vanish at all points of N, then there exist functions c
ij
such that
f =
¸
i,j
c
ij
g
i
g
j
on a neighborhood of N.
Parametrized Morse lemma . Let f : M R
k
→ R satisfy the condition that for
each x ∈ M, (x, 0) is a nondegenerate critical point for f[
x¦R
k. Then for each x
0
∈ M,
there exists a neighborhood U of (x
0
, 0), a nondegenerate quadratic form Q on R
k
, and a
diﬀeomorphism u of U ﬁxing M¦0¦ and preserving ﬁbers of the projection to M such that
f(u(x, θ)) = f(x, 0) + Q(θ).
51
Proof. By a preliminary change of coordinates linear on ﬁbers, we may assume that
f(x, θ) = f(x, 0) +Q(θ) + a(x, θ)
where the error term a(x, θ) is O([θ[
3
) for each x. To ﬁnd the diﬀeomorphism u we apply
the deformation method. Deﬁne f
t
= f −(1 −t)a. We seek a vector ﬁeld X
t
tangent to the
ﬁbers x = constant which generates an isotopy u
t
ﬁxing M ¦0¦ and satisfying f
t
◦ u
t
= f
0
for all t ∈ [0, 1]. This means that X
t
should be of the form
X
t
=
¸
i
h
i
t
∂
∂θ
i
,
for certain smooth functions h
i
t
which vanish on M ¦0¦, and it should satisfy
0 =
d
dt
(f
t
◦ u
t
) = u
∗
t
(X
t
f
t
+ a)
for all t ∈ [0, 1]. Evidently, the latter condition will be met if X
t
is chosen so that
X
t
f
t
+ a = 0.
To determine X
t
, we invoke Lemma 4.23 in order to ﬁnd smooth functions c
ij
t
which vanish
on M ¦0¦ and satisfy
a =
¸
c
ij
t
∂f
t
∂θ
i
∂f
t
∂θ
j
.
The required condition
¸
i
h
i
t
∂f
t
∂θ
i
= −
¸
i,j
c
ij
t
∂f
t
∂θ
i
∂f
t
∂θ
j
will be satisﬁed if we set
h
i
t
= −
¸
j
c
ij
t
∂f
t
∂θ
j
,
which vanishes (to second order) on M ¦0¦.
2
If φ is a phase function on M R
n+k
whose ﬁberhessian Hφ has rank k at a point b ∈ Σ
φ
,
then by the lowersemicontinuity of rank Hφ, there exists an integrable subbundle F
→E =
ker(p
M∗
) such that the ﬁberhessian
∗
◦ ∇d
θ
φ ◦ : F →F
∗
is nondegenerate at each zero of
the section
∗
◦d
θ
φ in a neighborhood of b. A change of coordinates near b and an application
of the parametrized Morse lemma then proves:
Thom splitting theorem . Let φ be a function on B = M R
n+k
whose ﬁberhessian
Hφ has rank k at a point b ∈ Σ
φ
. Then there exists a ﬁberpreserving diﬀeomorphism g of
B, a function η : M R
n
→R, and a nondegenerate quadratic form Q on R
k
such that
(φ ◦ g)(x, θ, θ
t
) = η(x, θ) + Q(θ
t
)
in a neighborhood of b in B. The function η is totally degenerate in the sense that its
ﬁberhessian is identically zero at b.
2
52
Existence and stable equivalence of Morse families
Returning to the proof of Theorem 4.18, we ﬁrst note the following reinterpretation of the
Thom splitting theorem in the terminology of Morse families.
Theorem 4.24 Any Morse family in M(L, ι, p) is stably equivalent to a reduced Morse
family in M(L, ι, p).
To show that M(L, ι, p) is nonempty, we ﬁrst prove
Theorem 4.25 Suppose that ι : L → T
∗
M is an exact lagrangian immersion such that
ι
∗
T(T
∗
M) admits a lagrangian subbundle F transverse to both ι
∗
V M and ι
∗
TL. Then L is
generated by a Morse family over M.
Proof. By Theorem 4.19, there exists a symplectic immersion ψ from a neighborhood U of
the zero section Z ⊂ T
∗
L into T
∗
M which satisﬁes ψ = ι ◦ π on Z and which maps V
Z
L
onto the subbundle F. Since ψ is symplectic, the 1form ψ
∗
α
M
− α
L
is closed on U. Its
restriction to Z is exact because α
L
is zero on Z. By the relative Poincar´e lemma, there
exists a function φ on U satisfying dφ = ψ
∗
α
M
−α
L
.
To complete the proof, we ﬁrst note that the restriction of dφ to a ﬁber of the compo
sition of ψ with the projection π
t
: T
∗
M → M equals −α
L
. Combined with the deﬁnition
of α
L
, a computation (using the transversality hypothesis) now shows that there exists a
neighborhood B of Z within U such that (B, π
t
(ψ(B)), π
t
◦ ψ, φ) is a Morse family such that
Σ
φ
= Z and λ
φ
= ι ◦ π for the projection π: T
∗
L →L.
2
Proof of Theorem 4.18. Using Lemma 3.9 we can construct a subbundle F which satisﬁes
the hypotheses of the preceding theorem over a neighborhood of any p in L. Consequently,
there exists a Morse family generating a neighborhood of p, and so the class M(L, ι, p) is
nonempty. Combined with Theorem 4.24, this proves part (1) of Theorem 4.18.
To prove part (2), it suﬃces by Theorem 4.24 to show that any two reduced Morse
families in M(L, ι, p) are stably equivalent. Since this property is local near p, we may
assume that M = R
m
and and that φ,
˜
φ are both deﬁned on R
m
R
k
. Consider the
mappings F,
˜
F : R
m
R
k
→R
m
R
m
deﬁned by
F(x, y) =
x,
∂φ
∂x
(x, y)
˜
F(x, y) =
x,
∂
˜
φ
∂x
(x, y)
.
By the assumption that φ,
˜
φ are nondegenerate phase functions, it follows that F and
˜
F are
embeddings near q = λ
−1
φ
(p) and ˜ q = λ
−1
˜
φ
(p) respectively. Moreover, F coincides with the
map λ
φ
on the ﬁbercritical set Σ
φ
near q, and similarly for
˜
F. Since the Morse families
are reduced, it follows that the images of DF
q
and D
˜
F
˜ q
coincide in T
p
(R
m
R
m
). By an
application of the implicit function theorem, we can therefore ﬁnd a ﬁberpreserving map g
53
of R
m
R
m
whose restriction to some neighborhood B of q is a diﬀeomorphism which sends
Σ
φ
to Σ
˜
φ
and in particular g(q) = ˜ q.
Recall from the proof of Theorem 4.15 that the identity
dφ = λ
∗
φ
α
M
holds on the ﬁber critical set Σ
φ
. Since λ
φ
= λ
˜
φ
◦ g, this identity implies that dφ = d(
˜
φ ◦ g)
on Σ
φ
, and so the phase functions φ and
˜
φ ◦ g diﬀer by an additive constant (which we may
assume to be zero) at points of Σ
φ
. In order for g to deﬁne an equivalence between φ and
˜
φ, this property would have to be valid on all of B. While there is no reason to expect this
of g itself, we will construct a similar diﬀeomorphism with this property by appealing once
again to the deformation method:
Let φ
0
= φ, φ
1
=
˜
φ ◦ g. Then Σ
φ
0
= Σ
φ
1
= Σ and λ
φ
0
= λ
φ
1
. Moreover φ
1
−φ
0
vanishes
to second order along Σ, and so there exist functions c
ij
deﬁned near b such that
φ
1
−φ
0
=
¸
i,j
c
ij
∂φ
0
∂θ
i
∂φ
0
∂θ
j
in a neighborhood of Σ
φ
.
As before, we seek a vector ﬁeld X
t
generating an isotopy f
t
that satisﬁes f
∗
t
φ
t
= φ
0
for
all t ∈ [0, 1]; to insure that each f
t
ﬁxes Σ and preserves ﬁbers, we must also require that X
t
be of the form
X
t
=
¸
i,j
h
ij
∂φ
0
∂θ
i
∂
∂θ
j
for certain functions h
ij
which vanish on Σ.
To arrive at an equation for these coeﬃcients, we note that the equation
0 =
d
dt
(f
∗
t
φ
t
) = f
∗
t
(X
t
φ
t
+ φ
1
−φ
0
)
will be satisﬁed provided that
0 = X
t
φ
t
+ φ
1
−φ
0
,
i.e.
0 =
¸
i,j
c
ij
∂φ
0
∂θ
i
∂φ
0
∂θ
j
+
¸
i,j
h
ij
∂φ
0
∂θ
i
∂
∂θ
j
φ
0
+ t
¸
u,v
c
uv
∂φ
0
∂θ
u
∂φ
0
∂θ
v
.
This equation holds if
0 = C + H(I + S),
where C = (c
ij
), H = (h
ij
), and S is a matrix function which vanishes at b for all t, since φ
0
is reduced. Hence we can solve for H in a neighborhood of b. This completes the proof.
2
54
Maslov objects
If ι : L → T
∗
M is any lagrangian immersion, then the symplectic vector bundle ι
∗
T(T
∗
M)
over L has two lagrangian subbundles, L
1
= ι
∗
TL and L
2
= ι
∗
V M. The Maslov class of
(L, ι) is deﬁned as the degree1 cohomology class
µ
L,ι
= µ(L
1
, L
2
) ∈ H
1
(L; R)
described in Example 3.21. From this deﬁnition, it follows that, unlike the Liouville classes,
the Maslov classes of two immersions (L, ι) and (L, ι
t
) are equal whenever ι and ι
t
are
homotopic through lagrangian immersions.
Associated to any Morse family (B, p
B
, φ) over a manifold M is an index function ind
φ
:
L
φ
→Z deﬁned by
ind
φ
(p) = index(Hφ
λ
−1
φ
(p)
),
where the index of a quadratic form is, as usual, the dimension of the largest subspace on
which it is negativedeﬁnite. Since the ﬁberhessian is nondegenerate where L
φ
is projectable
(see the discussion following Theorem 4.15), the index function ind
φ
is constant on any
connected projectable subset of L
φ
. From Theorem 4.18, it follows furthermore that any two
index functions ind
φ
, ind
φ
diﬀer by an integer on each connected component of L
φ
∩ L
φ
.
Example 4.26 Consider φ(x, θ) = θ
3
/3 + θ(x
2
− 1). We have ∂φ/∂θ = θ
2
+ x
2
− 1; thus
the ﬁber critical set Σ
φ
is the circle θ
2
+ x
2
= 1, and its image under λ
φ
is the ﬁgureeight.
The caustic set of the projection L → R consists of the points (−1, 0), (1, 0). To compute
the index function corresponding to φ, we note that
∂
2
φ
∂θ
2
= 2θ;
consequently ind
φ
(x, p) = 0 for (x, p) lying on the upper right part of the curve and
ind(x, p) = 1 for (x, p) on the upper left. Since this loop is generated by a single phase
function, there is a corresponding global index function, and the index of the loop is neces
sarily zero.
A diﬀerent situation occurs in the case of a circle. The circle has two caustics, and the
jump experienced by any index function as one passes through a caustic is given by the
example just computed: passing through the right caustic in the +p direction decreases the
index by 1, while passing through the left caustic in the same direction increases the index
by 1. Traversing the circle in a counterclockwise direction, we see that the total index must
change by −2. Consequently, the circle does not admit a global generating function.
Of course, the Liouville class of the circle is also nonzero. However, it is easy to deform
the circle to a closed curve with two transverse selfintersections which has zero Liouville
class, but still admits no global phase function, since its Maslov class is nonzero.
´
55
As a degree1 cohomology class on L, the Maslov class determines via the exponential
map R → U(1) an isomorphism class of ﬂat hermitian line bundles over L. A canonical
representative of this class can be constructed as follows. First, we consider the union
M(L, ι) =
¸
p∈L
M(L, ι, p)
with the discrete topology. On the subset of LM(L, ι)Z consisting of all (p, (B, p
B
, φ), n)
such that (B, p
B
, φ) ∈ M(L, ι, p), we now introduce an equivalence relation ∼ by setting
(p, (B, p
B
, φ), n) ∼ (˜ p, (
˜
B, p
˜
B
,
˜
φ), ˜ n) provided that p = ˜ p and
n + ind
φ
(p) = ˜ n + ind
˜
φ
(p).
The quotient space with respect to this relation is a principal Zbundle M
L,ι
over L which
we will call the Maslov principal bundle.
Associated to the Maslov principal bundle via the representation n →e
iπn/2
of Z in U(1) is
a complex line bundle ´
L,ι
over L called the Maslov line bundle. Having discrete structure
group, this line bundle carries a natural ﬂat connection with holonomy in ¦e
iπn/2
¦ · Z
4
.
Our main use of the Maslov line bundle will be to modify the halfdensities on L in order to
incorporate the Maslov correction into our quantization scheme.
4.4 WKB quantization
In this section we will combine the tools assembled in the preceding sections into a technique
for quantizing halfdensities on lagrangian submanifolds of arbitrary cotangent bundles.
The phase bundle associated to an immersed lagrangian submanifold ι : L →T
∗
M and
> 0 is deﬁned as the tensor product
Φ
L,ι,
def
= ´
L,ι
⊗ι
∗
c
M,
,
where we recall that c
M,
is the prequantum line bundle over T
∗
M (see Section 4.1). Observe
that the product of the natural ﬂat connections on ´
L,ι
and ι
∗
c
M,
deﬁnes a ﬂat connection
on the phase bundle whose holonomy is represented by the modZ
reduction of the real
cohomology class
λ
L,ι
+ πµ
L,ι
/2 ∈
ˇ
H
1
(L; R),
which we call the phase class of (L, ι). The phase bundle Φ
L,ι,
can be described explicitly
as the collection of all quintuples (p, t, (B, p
B
, φ), n, z) where (p, t, n, z) ∈ L T
Z C
and (B, p
B
, φ) ∈ M(L, ι, p), modulo the equivalence relation ∼ given by
(p, t, (B, p
B
, φ), n, z) ∼ (˜ p,
˜
t, (
˜
B, p
˜
B
,
˜
φ), ˜ n, ˜ z)
whenever p = ˜ p and
z e
−it/
e
iπ(n+ind
φ
(p))/2
= ˜ z e
−i
˜
t/
e
iπ(˜ n+ind
˜
φ
(p))/2
.
56
A Morse family (B, p
B
, φ) which generates an open subset L
φ
of L deﬁnes a nonvanishing
parallel section of Φ
L,ι,
over L
φ
by
s
φ,
(p) = [p, 0, (B, p
B
, φ), 0, e
−iφ(y)/
],
where λ
φ
(y) = p. A check of these deﬁnitions shows that whenever ι(p) = λ
φ
(y) = λ
˜
φ
(˜ y),
s
φ,
(p) e
iφ(y)/
e
−iπ ind
φ
(p)/2
= s
˜
φ,
(p) e
i
˜
φ(˜ y)/
e
−iπ ind
˜
φ
(p)/2
.
For each ∈ R
+
, we denote by Γ
par
(Φ
L,ι,
) the space of parallel sections of Φ
L,ι,
. If, for
a particular , the phase class of (L, ι) is integral, then Γ
par
(Φ
L,ι,
) is a complex vector
space isomorphic to C. Otherwise, Γ
par
(Φ
L,ι,
) consists of a single point (the zero section of
Φ
L,ι,
). The product
Γ
L,ι
=
¸
>0
Γ
par
(Φ
L,ι,
)
then has the structure of a Cmodule. An element s ∈ Γ
L,ι
is then a (generally discontinuous)
function which assigns to each > 0 an element s
in Γ
par
(Φ
L,ι,
), so that the map p →s
(p)
deﬁnes a parallel section of Φ
L,ι,
. The symbol space of (L, ι) is deﬁned as the complex
vector space
o
L,ι
def
= [Ω[
1/2
L ⊗
C
Γ
L,ι
.
The amplitude bundle /
φ
associated to a Morse family (B, p
B
, φ) over a smooth man
ifold M is deﬁned as the complex line bundle
/
φ
= [Λ[
1/2
B ⊗[Λ[
1/2
E
over B, where E again denotes the subbundle ker(p
B∗
) of TB. An amplitude is a section a of
/
φ
. We will say that a is properly supported provided that the restriction of p
B
: B →M
to Supp(a) is a proper map. The purpose of the space of amplitudes is to deﬁne a relation
between halfdensities on M and symbols on the subset L
φ
of L generated by φ. To describe
this relation, we begin by noting that from the exact sequence of vector bundles
0 →E →TB →p
∗
B
TM →0
over B, it follows that [Λ[
1/2
B is naturally isomorphic to [Λ[
1/2
p
∗
B
TM ⊗ [Λ[
1/2
E. This in
turn gives rise to the natural isomorphism
/
φ
· [Λ[
1/2
p
∗
B
TM ⊗[Λ[E.
The image of an amplitude a on B under this isomorphism can be written as p
∗
B
[dx[
1/2
⊗σ,
where σ is a family of 1densities on the ﬁbers of p
B
, i.e., σ
x
is a density on each nonempty
p
−1
B
(x). By ﬁberintegration we pass to a halfdensity on M:
I
(φ, a)(x) = (2π)
−n/2
e
−inπ/4
p
−1
B
(x)
e
iφ/
σ
x
[dx[
1/2
,
57
where n = dim(p
−1
B
(x)), setting I
(φ, a)(x) = 0 if p
−1
B
(x) = ∅. When a is properly supported,
we may diﬀerentiate under the integral to conclude that I
(φ, a) is a smooth halfdensity on
M.
To pass geometrically from a to a symbol on L
φ
, we ﬁrst recall from Section 4.3 that
the nondegeneracy of φ gives rise to the following exact sequence of vector bundles over the
ﬁbercritical set Σ
φ
0 →TΣ
φ
→T
Σ
φ
B
∇d
θ
φ
→ E
∗
[
Σ
→0.
Since [Λ[
−1/2
E is naturally isomorphic to [Λ[
1/2
E
∗
, this sequence induces an isomorphism
of the restriction of /
φ
to Σ
φ
with [Λ[
1/2
Σ
φ
. If the restriction of a to Σ
φ
corresponds to a
halfdensity a on Σ
φ
under this isomorphism, the associated symbol on L
φ
is deﬁned as
s
a
def
= g
∗
φ
a ⊗s
φ
.
(Here we recall from the discussion following Deﬁnition 4.17 that g
φ
is a diﬀeomorphism
from a neighborhood of p in L onto Σ
φ
deﬁned by the composition λ
−1
φ
◦ ι. Also, for each
, the section s
φ,
is the canonical element of Γ
par
(Φ
L
φ
,ι,
) deﬁned above). When (L, ι) is
projectable, the symbol s
a
and the halfdensity I
(φ, a) are linked by the following theorem.
Theorem 4.27 Suppose that two Morse families (B, p
B
, φ), (
˜
B, p
˜
B
,
˜
φ) generate the same
projectable lagrangian embedding (L, ι), and let a, ˜ a be amplitudes on B,
˜
B, respectively.
Then s
a
= s
˜a
on L if and only if
[I
(φ, a) −I
(
˜
φ, ˜ a)[ = O()
locally uniformly on V .
Proof. By Theorem 4.18, the Morse families (B, p
B
, φ), (
˜
B, p
˜
B
,
˜
φ) are stably equivalent, and
so there exists a diﬀeomorphism g : Σ
φ
→ Σ
˜
φ
deﬁned as the composition g = g
˜
φ
◦ g
−1
φ
. A
check of the deﬁnitions shows that the symbols s
a
and s
˜a
are equal precisely when
g
∗
a e
iφ/
e
−iπ ind
φ
/2
= ˜ a e
i
˜
φ/
e
−iπ ind
˜
φ/2
,
where a is the halfdensity on Σ
φ
induced by the amplitude a, and similarly for ˜ a. Since
˜
φ = φ ◦ g, up to a constant, Lemma B.3 implies that this occurs precisely when
[ det
ax
Hφ[
1/2
e
−iφ/
e
iπ ind
φ
/2
= [ det
˜ ax
H
˜
φ[
1/2
e
−i
˜
φ/
e
iπ ind
˜
φ
/2
. (∗)
Since (L, ι) is projectable, we can apply the principle of stationary phase to each ﬁber of
the projection p
B
: B →M to obtain
I
(φ, a)(x) =
e
iφ/
e
−iπ ind
φ
/2
[ det
ax
Hφ[
1/2
+ O()
and similarly for I
(
˜
φ, ˜ a)(x). The theorem follows by comparing these expressions with (∗)
above.
58
2
Morse families provide a general means for locally quantizing symbols on an immersed
lagrangian submanifold (L, ι) ⊂ T
∗
M. Suppose that (B, p
B
, φ) is a Morse family such
that the phase function φ generates an open subset L
φ
⊂ L, and consider a symbol s on
L supported in L
φ
. Then there exists a unique halfdensity a supported in L
φ
such that
s = s
φ
⊗a, and (g
φ
)
∗
a may be canonically identiﬁed with a section of the amplitude bundle
of B over the ﬁbercritical set Σ
φ
, which we can extend to an amplitude a on B, compactly
supported in ﬁbers. We then set
I
(L, ι, s) = I
(φ, a)(x).
From Theorem 4.27 we draw two conclusions about this tentative deﬁnition when L
φ
is
projectable. First, we note that if (
˜
B, p
˜
B
,
˜
φ) is a second Morse family which generates L
φ
,
and ˜ a is an amplitude on
˜
B obtained as above, then s
a
= s
a
= s, and so
[I
(φ, a) −I
(
˜
φ, ˜ a)[ = O().
Thus, I
(L, ι, s) is welldeﬁned, up to O() terms. Furthermore, we note that Theorem 4.27
asserts that this choice of I
(L, ι, s) coincides with pullback.
To quantize an arbitrary symbol s on L, we ﬁrst ﬁx a locally ﬁnite cover ¦L
j
¦ of L, such
that each L
j
is generated by a Morse family (B
j
, p
B
j
, φ
j
), and choose a partition of unity
¦h
j
¦ subordinate to ¦L
j
¦. We then set
I
(L, ι, s) =
¸
j
I
(L, ι, h
j
s).
Using the remarks above, it is easy to check that up to O() terms, this deﬁnition depends
only on the semiclassical state (L, ι, s).
Of course, although the technique above enables us to quantize all symbols on L in a
consistent way, the existence of nonzero symbols requires that the phase bundle Φ
L,ι
admit
nontrivial parallel sections, i.e. that the phase class of (L, ι) be integral. For this reason,
we introduce the following terminology.
Deﬁnition 4.28 An immersed lagrangian submanifold ι : L →T
∗
M is called quantizable
if, for some ∈ R
+
, its phase bundle Φ
L,ι
admits a global parallel section, or, equivalently,
if its phase class is integral. The set of for which this condition holds will be called
admissible for L.
This deﬁnition is known as the Maslov quantization condition. Note that it is a straight
forward generalization of the condition derived in the preceding section.
Example 4.29 Let N be a closed submanifold of a smooth manifold M, and let U be a
tubular neighborhood of N, i.e., U is the image of the normal bundle ν
N
⊂ T
N
M under an
embedding ψ : ν
N
→ M satisfying ψ = π on the zero section of ν
N
, where π : ν
N
→ N is
the natural projection. Consider the Morse family (r
∗
N
⊥
, p
N
, φ), where r = π ◦ ψ
−1
is a
59
retraction of U onto N, p
N
denotes the natural submersion r
∗
N
⊥
→M, and φ: r
∗
N
⊥
→R
is deﬁned by
φ(p) = 'p, ψ
−1
(p
N
(p))`.
Since ψ is an embedding, a computation shows that the ﬁber critical set of φ is given by
Σ
φ
= p
−1
N
(N) = N
⊥
, and the map λ
φ
: N
⊥
→T
∗
M equals the inclusion. Thus, the conormal
bundle of N is a lagrangian submanifold of T
∗
M which admits a global generating function,
and therefore both the Liouville and Maslov classes of N
⊥
are zero. In particular, this
implies that the conormal bundle of any submanifold of M satisﬁes the Maslov quantization
condition.
´
Quantum states as distributions
Unfortunately, the interpretation of I
(L, ι, s) at regular values of π
L
is not valid at caustics.
Indeed, this remark is suggested by the fact that I
(L, ι, s) is smooth, whereas we saw in
Section 2.2 that classical solutions to the transport equation are singular at caustic points.
The basic technical diﬃculty is that the principle of stationary phase (the basic underpinning
of Theorem 4.27) no longer applies to the integral
p
−1
B
(x)
e
iφ/
σ
x
when x is a caustic point, since the phase function φ has a degenerate critical point in the
ﬁber p
−1
B
(x).
Example 4.30 The ﬁber critical set of the phase function φ(x, θ) = θ
3
/3 + xθ consists of
the parabola x = −θ
2
, at whose points the ﬁberhessian assumes the form ∂
2
φ/∂θ
2
= 2x.
The origin is therefore a degenerate critical point for φ, and stationary phase cannot be used
to estimate the integral
R
e
iθ
3
/3
a(0, θ) dθ.
´
A more appropriate way to interpret the expression I
(L, ι, s) in the presence of caustic points
is as a family of distributional halfdensities on M deﬁned as follows. For each Morse family
(B, p
B
, φ) ∈ M(L, ι) and compactly supported amplitude a on B, we deﬁne a distributional
halfdensity on M by
'I
(φ, a), u` = (2π)
−b/2
e
−iπb/4
B
e
iφ/
a ⊗p
∗
B
u,
where b = dim(B) and u ∈ [Ω[
1/2
0
M. The family I
(L, ι, s) then consists of all distributional
halfdensities I
on M obtained by choosing a locally ﬁnite open cover ¦L
j
¦ of L and a
60
partition of unity ¦h
j
¦ subordinate to ¦L
j
¦. Then set
I
=
k
¸
j=1
I
(φ
j
, a
j
).
The family I
(L, ι, s) consists of those distributional halfdensities obtained in this way using
amplitudes a
j
such that s
a
j
= s over each L
φ
j
.
Although the class I
(L, ι, s) may appear very large, a link among its members can be
described as follows. We ﬁrst prove
Theorem 4.31 Suppose that two Morse families (B, p
B
, φ), (
˜
B, p
˜
B
,
˜
φ) generate the same
lagrangian embedding (L, ι), and let a, ˜ a be amplitudes on B,
˜
B, respectively. If ψ: M → R
is a smooth function whose diﬀerential intersects ι(L) at exactly one point ι(p) transversely,
then s
a
(p) = s
˜a
(p) if and only if
'I
(φ, a), e
−iψ/
u` −'I
(
˜
φ, ˜ a), e
−iψ/
u`
= O().
Proof. Set R = φ −ψ ◦ p
B
. Since ψ ◦ p
B
is constant on the ﬁbers of p
B
, the function R is a
phase function having the same ﬁber critical set as φ.
As in the proof of Theorem 4.27, equality of the symbols s
a
and s
˜a
occurs precisely when
the diﬀeomorphism g : Σ
φ
→Σ
˜
φ
satisﬁes
g
∗
a
y
e
iφ(y)/
e
−iπ ind
φ
(p)/2
= ˜ a
˜ y
e
i
˜
φ(˜ y)/
e
−iπ ind
˜
φ(p)/2
,
where a is the halfdensity on Σ
φ
induced by the amplitude a, and similarly for ˜ a. Since
˜
R = R ◦ g, up to a constant, Lemma B.3 shows that this condition is equivalent to
[ det
a
R
tt
(y)[
1/2
e
−iφ(y)/
e
iπ ind
φ
(p)/2
= [ det
˜ a
˜
R
tt
(˜ y)[
1/2
e
−i
˜
φ(˜ y)/
e
iπ ind
˜
φ
(p)/2
.
Since g is ﬁberpreserving, we have R(y) −
˜
R(˜ y) = φ(y) −
˜
φ(˜ y). Moreover, it is easy
to check that stable equivalence of the Morse families (B, p
B
, φ), (
˜
B, p
˜
B
,
˜
φ) implies that
ind
φ
(p) −ind
˜
φ
(˜ y) = ind R
tt
(y) −ind
˜
R
tt
(˜ y), and so the preceding equation gives
e
iR(y)/
e
−iπ ind R
(y)/2
[ det
a
R
tt
(y)[
1/2
=
e
i
˜
R(˜ y)/
e
−iπ ind
˜
R
(˜ y)/2
[ det
˜ a
˜
R
tt
(˜ y)[
1/2
. (∗∗)
The critical point y of R is nondegenerate precisely when the intersection of ι(L) with
im(dψ) is transverse. In this case, an application of the principle of stationary phase gives
'I
(φ, a), e
−iψ/
u` =
e
iR(y)/
e
−iπ ind R
(y)/2
[ det
a
R
tt
(y)[
1/2
+ O()
and similarly for 'I
(
˜
φ, ˜ a), e
−iψ/
u`. Comparing this expression with (∗∗) above completes
the proof.
2
61
Now consider a semiclassical state (L, ι, s). As before, we let ¦L
j
¦ be a locally ﬁnite
cover of L such that each L
j
is generated by a Morse family (B
j
, p
B
j
, φ
j
) over M, and choose
a partition of unity ¦h
j
¦ subordinate to ¦L
j
¦. We then deﬁne
'I
(L, ι, s), e
−iψ/
u`
def
=
¸
j
'I
(φ
j
, a
j
), e
−iψ/
u`,
where a
j
is the amplitude on B
j
obtained in the usual way from the symbol h
j
s on L
j
. When
the image of dψ is transverse to L, then, up to O(), the principal part of 'I
(L, ι, s), e
−iψ/
`
depends only on the principal part of s. For a thorough exposition of this topic, we refer to
[21, 28, 31].
Example 4.32 Suppose that (B, p
B
, φ) is a Morse family over a manifold M, and suppose
that S : V → R is a smooth function. By setting
˜
S = S ◦ p
B
, we obtain a new Morse
family (B, p
B
, φ −
˜
S) for which Σ
φ
= Σ
φ−
˜
S
and λ
φ
= f
dS
◦ λ
φ−
˜
S
, where f
dS
is the ﬁberwise
translation map deﬁned by dS.
Note in particular that if dS(p
B
(x)) = λ
φ
(x) for some x ∈ Σ
φ
, then x is a critical point
of φ −
˜
S. This critical point is nondegenerate provided that λ
φ−
˜
S
is transverse to the zero
section of T
∗
M near x, or, equivalently, if λ
φ
is transverse to the image of dS near x.
´
By allowing I
(φ, a) to be a distribution, we can sometimes deﬁne it even when a does
not have compact support.
Equivalent semiclassical states
A further important modiﬁcation of our quantization picture is based on the conceptual
distinction between an “immersion” and an “immersed submanifold”. In terms of our dis
cussion, this means the following. If ι : L → T
∗
M and ι
t
: L
t
→ T
∗
M are lagrangian
immersions, we will say that (L, ι) and (L
t
, ι
t
) are equivalent provided that there exists a
diﬀeomorphism f : L → L
t
such that ι = ι
t
◦ f. In this way, any lagrangian immersion
ι : L →T
∗
M deﬁnes an equivalence class of lagrangian immersions in T
∗
M which, for nota
tional simplicity we will denote by L. We refer to the equivalence class L as an immersed
lagrangian submanifold of T
∗
M.
A check of the deﬁnitions shows that the main objects in our quantization scheme behave
nicely with respect to this notion of equivalence. On the classical level, a diﬀeomorphism
f : L →L
t
as above induces an isomorphism of symbol spaces
o
L,ι
f∗
→o
L
,ι
.
Thus, a symbol on the immersed lagrangian submanifold L is welldeﬁned as an equivalence
class of symbols on the members of L. Moreover, if E is a regular value of some hamiltonian
function H on T
∗
M, then the HamiltonJacobi equation
H ◦ ι = E
62
deﬁnes a condition on the class L which we denote by H(L) = E. In this case, the vector
ﬁelds X
H,ι
and X
H,ι
induced on (L, ι), (L
t
, ι
t
) by the hamiltonian vector ﬁeld of H (see
Example 3.13) satisfy X
H,ι
= f
∗
X
H,ι
, and therefore the homogeneous transport equation
L
X
H,ι
s = 0
is a welldeﬁned condition on (L, s) which we denote by L
X
H
s = 0.
From these remarks, we are led to view the equivalence class (L, s) as a semiclassical
state in T
∗
M. The state is stationary with respect to a classical hamiltonian H on T
∗
M
provided that (L, s) satisﬁes the associated HamiltonJacobi and homogeneous transport
equations, as described above. On the quantum level, it is easy to check that for any
members (L, ι, s), (L
t
, ι
t
, s
t
) of the equivalence class (L, s), we have
I
(L, ι, s) = I
(L
t
, ι
t
, s
t
),
and thus we may deﬁne the quantization of (L, s) as the (unique) distributional halfdensity
I
(L, s) on M obtained by quantizing any member of (L, s). If (L, s) is a stationary semi
classical state, then I
(L, s) is a semiclassical approximate solution to the timeindependent
Schr¨odinger equation on M.
Our list of classical and quantum correspondences now assumes the form:
Object Classical version Quantum version
basic space T
∗
M H
M
state (L, s) as above distributional halfdensity
on M
timeevolution Hamilton’s equations Schr¨odinger equation
generator of evolution function H on T
∗
M operator
ˆ
H on H
M
stationary state state (L, s) satisfying eigenvector of
ˆ
H
H(L) = E and L
X
H
s = 0
With these correspondences between classical and quantum mechanics in mind, we are fur
ther led to deﬁne a semiclassical state in an arbitrary symplectic manifold (P, ω) to be an
immersed lagrangian submanifold equipped with a halfdensity and possibly some “phase
object” corresponding to a parallel section of the phase bundle in the cotangent bundle case.
Note, however, that it is unclear what the quantum states are which are approximated by
these geometric objects, since there is no underlying conﬁguration space on which the states
can live. Extending some notion of quantum state to arbitrary symplectic manifolds is one
of the central goals of geometric quantization.
63
5 The Symplectic Category
There are many symplectic manifolds which are not cotangent bundles. For instance, an
important process known as symplectic reduction generates many examples of such manifolds,
starting with cotangent bundles. We begin this section with a discussion of reduction and
then turn to the classical and quantum viewpoints in the context of general symplectic
manifolds, concluding with Dirac’s formulation of the quantization problem.
5.1 Symplectic reduction
The technique of symplectic reduction geometrizes the process in mechanics in which ﬁrst
integrals of the hamiltonian are used to eliminate variables in Hamilton’s equations.
Linear symplectic reduction
Degenerate skewsymmetric bilinear forms yield symplectic vector spaces in the following
way.
Lemma 5.1 A skewsymmetric bilinear form ω on a vector space Y induces a symplectic
structure on Y/Y
⊥
.
Proof. First note that ω gives rise to a skewsymmetric bilinear form ω
t
on Y/Y
⊥
by the
equation
ω
t
([x], [y]) = ω(x, y).
To prove the nondegeneracy of ω
t
, we use the following commutative diagram, where π is
the projection.
Y
∗
π
∗
←−−− (Y/Y
⊥
)
∗
˜ ω
¸
¸
˜ ω
Y
π
−−−→ Y/Y
⊥
If ˜ ω
t
([x]) = 0, then ˜ ω(x) = 0, and so x ∈ Y
⊥
and hence [x] = 0.
2
The symplectic quotient space Y/Y
⊥
described in this lemma is known as the (linear) re
duced space associated to Y . A special case of linear reduction arises when Y is a coisotropic
subspace of a symplectic vector space and ω equals the restriction of the symplectic form to
Y . Lagrangian subspaces behave remarkably well with respect to this reduction.
Lemma 5.2 Let V be a symplectic vector space and L, C ⊂ V a lagrangian and a coisotropic
subspace respectively. Then
L
C
= L ∩ C + C
⊥
is a lagrangian subspace of V contained in C, and
L
C
= (L ∩ C)/(L ∩ C
⊥
)
is a lagrangian subspace of C/C
⊥
.
64
Proof. Note that
(L
C
)
⊥
= (L + C
⊥
) ∩ C.
Since by assumption C
⊥
⊂ C, the selforthogonality of L
C
follows from the simple fact that
if E, F, G are any three subspaces of V , then (E+F) ∩G = E∩G+F if and only if F ⊂ G.
Next, we observe that since L
C
= L
C
/C
⊥
, the second assertion follows from the equality
L
⊥
C
= (L
C
)
⊥
/C
⊥
.
2
Example 5.3 If (V, ω), (V
t
, ω
t
) are symplectic vector spaces and L is a lagrangian subspace
of V , then then C = V
t
⊕L is a coisotropic subspace of the direct sum V
t
⊕V (see Exam
ple 3.4), and C
⊥
= 0 ⊕L. Consequently, the linear reduced space C/C
⊥
equals (V
t
, ω
t
).
Now suppose that V and V
t
are of equal dimension and T : V →V
t
is a linear symplectic
map. If Γ
T
⊂ V
t
⊕V is the lagrangian subspace deﬁned by the graph of T, then the reduced
lagrangian subspace (Γ
T
)
C
of C/C
⊥
equals T(L) ⊂ V
t
.
´
Observe that if C is a coisotropic subspace of (V, ω), then C
⊥
⊕V/C also carries a natural
symplectic structure induced by ω. This gives rise to the following decomposition of V .
Lemma 5.4 If (V, ω) is a symplectic vector space with a coisotropic subspace C, then there
exists a linear symplectomorphism
V →C
⊥
⊕ V/C ⊕C/C
⊥
.
Proof. Let J be a ωcompatible complex structure on V , and set A = JC
⊥
and B =
C∩JC. Then A, B are orthogonal to C, C
⊥
with respect to the innerproduct g
J
on V . The
projections V →V/C and C →C/C
⊥
restricted to A, B give rise to an isomorphism
V = C
⊥
+ A + B →C
⊥
⊕ V/C ⊕C/C
⊥
.
2
Recall that if L, L
t
are lagrangian subspaces of a symplectic vector space V and W ⊂ V
is a lagrangian subspace transverse to both L and L
t
, then there exists a natural linear
symplectomorphism from V to L⊕L
∗
which sends W onto the subspace 0 ⊕L
∗
and L
t
onto
the graph of some selfadjoint linear map T : L → L
∗
. Denoting by Q
T
the quadratic form
Q
T
on L induced by T, we deﬁne
ind(L, L
t
; W) = index Q
T
sgn(L, L
t
; W) = signature Q
T
These quantities will be useful in our study of the Maslov bundle under reduction, and we
collect some useful facts about them in the following examples.
65
Example 5.5 To begin, we leave to the reader the job of checking the following elementary
identities for the case when the lagrangian subspaces L, L
t
are themselves transverse:
sgn(L, L
t
; W) = −sgn(L
t
, L; W) = −sgn(L, W; L
t
).
´
Example 5.6 Suppose that V is a ﬁnitedimensional vector space with a subspace E ⊂ V
and its algebraic orthogonal E
⊥
⊂ V
∗
. Then C = V ⊕E
⊥
is a coisotropic subspace of V ⊕V
∗
with its usual symplectic structure, and C
⊥
= E ⊕0. The reduced symplectic vector space
is then
C/C
⊥
= (V/E) ⊕E
⊥
.
The composition of a selfadjoint linear map A : V
∗
→ V with the projection V → V/E
restricts to a selfadjoint linear map A
E
: E
⊥
→ V/E (note that V/E identiﬁes canonically
with (E
⊥
)
∗
). Evidently, the lagrangian subspace W of V ⊕V
∗
given by the graph of A passes
under reduction by C to the graph W
C
of A
E
. Now if we denote by L, L
t
the lagrangian
subspaces V ⊕ 0 and 0 ⊕ V
∗
, respectively, then L
C
= (V/E) ⊕ 0 and L
t
C
= 0 ⊕ E
⊥
. If Q
∗
denotes the quadratic form on V
∗
deﬁned by A, we therefore have
sgn(Q
∗
) = sgn(L
t
, W; L) and sgn(Q
∗
[
E
⊥) = sgn(L
t
C
, W
C
; L
C
).
From [21, p.130] we recall that if Q
∗
is nondegenerate and Q is the quadratic form it induces
on V , then
sgn(Q) = sgn(Q[
E
) + sgn(Q
∗
[
E
⊥).
Combined with the preceding equations, this formula gives
sgn(L
t
, W; L) = sgn(Q[
E
) + sgn(L
t
C
, W
C
; L
C
).
´
Presymplectic structures and reduction
By deﬁnition, a symplectic form is closed and nondegenerate. In some sense, the next best
structure a manifold M may possess along these lines is a closed twoform ω of constant
rank, i.e., with the dimension of the orthogonal (T
x
M)
⊥
the same for all x ∈ M. In this
case, ω is called a presymplectic structure on M with characteristic subbundle (TM)
⊥
.
Theorem 5.7 The characteristic subbundle of a presymplectic manifold (M, ω) is integrable.
Proof. Leaving for the reader the veriﬁcation that (TM)
⊥
is actually a subbundle of TM,
we recall that Lie brackets and inner products are related by the formula
[X, Y ] ω = L
X
(Y ω) −Y L
X
ω.
If the vector ﬁeld Y belongs to (TM)
⊥
, then the ﬁrst term on the right hand side of this
equation vanishes identically. If X belongs to (TM)
⊥
, then Cartan’s formula combined with
the assumption that ω is closed implies that ω is invariant under the ﬂow of X. This means
that L
X
ω = 0, so the second term vanishes as well, and [X, Y ] lies in (TM)
⊥
.
66
2
The foliation ´
⊥
deﬁned by the characteristic subbundle of M is known as the characteris
tic foliation of M. If the quotient space M/´
⊥
is a smooth manifold, then we say that M
is reducible. A pointwise application of Lemma 5.2, together with the fact that L
X
ω = 0
for characteristic X, shows that the presymplectic structure ω induces a smooth, nonde
generate 2form ω
/
on M/´
⊥
. Since dω = 0 by hypothesis, and since the quotient map
M → M/´
⊥
is a submersion, the form ω
/
is necessarily closed and therefore symplectic.
The symplectic manifold (M/´
⊥
, ω
/
) is called the reduced manifold of M.
For the most part, we will be interested in presymplectic manifolds which arise as
coisotropic submanifolds of some symplectic manifold (P, ω). Recall that a submanifold
C ⊂ P is called coisotropic if, for each p ∈ C, the tangent space T
p
C contains its symplectic
orthogonal
(T
p
C)
⊥
= ¦v ∈ T
p
P : ω(v, w) = 0 for all w ∈ T
p
C¦.
In this case, we can view C as an abstract manifold and note that if ω
t
is the pullback
of the symplectic form ω by the natural inclusion C → P, then ker(ω
t
) = (TC)
⊥
. Since
dim(TC)
⊥
= dim(P) −dim(C) is constant, the form ω
t
deﬁnes a presymplectic structure on
P.
Example 5.8 As noted in Example 3.13, the hamiltonian ﬂow associated to a function
H : R
2n
→ R generates the characteristic foliation of any regular energy surface H
−1
(E).
The corresponding reduced symplectic manifold (when it exists) will be the symplectic model
for the space of quantum states of energy E.
If P, Q are symplectic manifolds, and L is a lagrangian submanifold of Q, then P L is a
coisotropic submanifold of P Q whose characteristic foliation consists of leaves of the form
¦p¦ L for p ∈ P. The product P L is therefore reducible, and the reduction projection
coincides with the usual cartesian projection P L →P.
´
Our goal for the remainder of this section is to describe two operations on immersed
lagrangian submanifolds deﬁned by a reducible coisotropic submanifold; in eﬀect, these op
erations will be nonlinear analogs of the mappings L → L
C
and L → L
C
described in the
linear setting in Lemma 5.2. To begin, we recall that the ﬁber product of two maps
ι : N →V and : M →V is deﬁned as the subset
N
V
M = (ι )
−1
∆
V
of N M, where ι : N M → V V is the product map and ∆
V
⊂ V V is the
diagonal. This gives rise to the following commutative diagram
N
V
M
r
M
−−−→ M
r
N
N
ι
−−−→ V
where r
M
, r
N
denote the restrictions of the cartesian projections NM →M, N to the ﬁber
product N
V
M.
67
Deﬁnition 5.9 If N, M, V are smooth manifolds, then two smooth maps ι : N → V and
: M → V are said to intersect cleanly provided that their ﬁber product N
V
M is a
submanifold of N M and
ι
∗
TN ∩
∗
TM = ( ◦ r
M
)
∗
T(N
V
M)
as subbundles of ( ◦ r
M
)
∗
TV .
For brevity, we will say that a map ι : N → V intersects a submanifold W ⊂ V cleanly if ι
and the inclusion map W →V intersect cleanly.
Example 5.10 1. If the product ι of two smooth maps ι : N → V and : M → V
is transverse to the diagonal ∆
V
, then ι and intersect cleanly. A particular case of this
situation occurs when is a submersion and ι is any smooth map.
2. Suppose that ι : N →V and : M →V are any smooth maps whose ﬁber product N
V
M
is a smooth submanifold of NM. Then for any tangent vector (v, w) of N
V
M, the vector
(ι )
∗
(v, w) is tangent to the diagonal in V V , and so ι
∗
v =
∗
w. Since r
M∗
(v, w) = w,
it follows that r
M∗
(v, w) = 0 only if w = 0, in which case ι
∗
v =
∗
w = 0. Thus, if ι is an
immersion, we can conclude that r
M
: N
V
M →M is an immersion as well.
In particular, if ι and are cleanly intersecting immersions, then the maps r
N
and r
M
are themselves immersions.
3. A basic example of two maps which do not intersect cleanly is provided by two embedded
curves in the plane which intersect tangentially at a single point.
´
The usefulness of clean intersection in symplectic geometry lies in its compatibility with
symplectic orthogonalization, as in the following lemma.
Lemma 5.11 Let P be a symplectic manifold. If a lagrangian immersion ι : L → P inter
sects a coisotropic submanifold C ⊂ P cleanly, then the map (p
C
◦ r
C
): L
P
C →C/(
⊥
has
constant rank.
Proof. Let F, G denote the lagrangian and coisotropic subbundles r
∗
L
TL and r
∗
C
TC of the
symplectic vector bundle r
∗
C
TP over the ﬁber product L
P
C. The kernel of (p
C
◦r
C
)
∗
then
equals
G
⊥
∩ r
C∗
T(L
P
C).
The clean intersection hypothesis implies that r
C∗
T(L
P
C) = F ∩ G, and so the basic
properties of symplectic orthogonalization applied ﬁberwise to these bundles give
ker(p
C
◦ r
C
)
∗
= G
⊥
∩ G∩ F
= G
⊥
∩ F
= (G+ F)
⊥
.
68
Since F ∩ G has constant rank, the internal sum F + G and its orthogonal (F + G)
⊥
also
have constant rank, indicating that the dimension of ker(p
C
◦r
C
)
∗
is independent of the base
point in L
P
C. In fact, we have dim(ker(p
C
◦ r
C
)
∗
) = dim(L) + dim(L
P
C) −dim(C).
2
If the quotient of L
P
C by the ﬁbers of the map p
C
◦ r
C
is a smooth, Hausdorﬀ manifold,
then we obtain an induced immersion ι
C
from the reduced space L
C
of L
P
C into C/(
⊥
.
In this case, we deﬁne L
C
as the ﬁber product of ι
C
and the quotient map p
C
: C →C/(
⊥
.
By
C
: L
C
→ C/(
⊥
we denote the restriction of the cartesian projection L
C
C → C to
L
C
.
Recall from Chapter 4 that an immersed submanifold N of a manifold V is an equivalence
class N of immersions, where ι : N →V is considered equivalent to ι
t
: N
t
→V provided that
there exists a diﬀeomorphism f : N →N
t
which intertwines ι and ι
t
, i.e. ι = ι
t
◦f. Evidently,
if a member ι : N →V of the equivalence class N intersects a smooth map : M →V cleanly,
then the same is true of any other member of N. In this case, we will say that the immersed
submanifold N and the map : M →V intersect cleanly.
With these remarks in mind, we will say that a coisotropic submanifold C and an im
mersed lagrangian submanifold L in a symplectic manifold P form a reducible pair (C, L)
provided that C is reducible, and L, C intersect cleanly. We leave it to the reader to check
that any reducible pair (C, L) in P induces immersed submanifolds L
C
and L
C
of C/(
⊥
and
P, respectively.
Theorem 5.12 If (C, L) is a reducible pair in a symplectic manifold P, then L
C
and L
C
are immersed lagrangian submanifolds of C/(
⊥
and P, respectively.
Proof. Let ι : L → P be a ﬁxed element of L. Since L
C
is the quotient of L
P
C by the
ﬁbers of p
C
◦ r
C
, the induced map ι
C
: L
C
→ C/(
⊥
is a smooth immersion. A pointwise
application of Lemma 5.2 shows that this immersion is lagrangian.
Since ι
C
: L
C
→ C/(
⊥
is an immersion, Example 5.10(2) implies that the map
C
:
L
C
→C is a smooth immersion, and a pointwise application of Lemma 5.2 implies that this
immersion is lagrangian.
Finally, since the immersed submanifolds L
C
and L
C
are welldeﬁned by the reducible
pair (C, L), it follows that these are immersed lagrangian submanifolds.
2
Example 5.13 If (M, g) is a riemannian manifold, all of whose geodesics are closed and
have the same length, then for each E > 0, the constant energy hypersurface C = k
−1
M
(E)
(see Section 3.2) is reducible, and the reduced manifold CM = C/(
⊥
is the space of oriented
geodesics on M. The tangent space to CM at a point p identiﬁes naturally with the space
of Jacobi ﬁelds normal to the geodesic represented by p. Moreover, it is easy to check that
for any pair J
1
, J
2
of normal Jacobi ﬁelds along p, the symplectic form on CM is given in
terms of the metric by
ω(J
1
, J
2
) = g(J
1
, J
t
2
) −g(J
t
1
, J
2
).
69
For further details, see [12].
The conormal bundle N
⊥
to a smooth submanifold N ⊂ M is a lagrangian submanifold
of T
∗
M which intersects C cleanly. More precisely, N
⊥
∩ C is a sphere bundle over N
transverse to the characteristic foliation of C. From Theorem 5.12 it therefore follows that
the space of geodesics in M normal to N at some point comprises an immersed lagrangian
submanifold of CM.
To give a concrete case of this example, we consider the sphere S
n
equipped with its stan
dard metric. Each oriented geodesic in S
n
identiﬁes naturally with an oriented 2dimensional
subspace of R
n+1
, and therefore CS
n
is represented by the grassmannian Gr
+
(2, n + 1).
´
Example 5.14 Note that the standard symplectic structure on R
2n+2
is equivalent to the
imaginary part of the standard hermitian metric on C
n+1
. The unit sphere S
2n+1
is a
coisotropic submanifold of C
n+1
, the reduction of which is complex projective space CP
n
.
Since the symplectic form on C
n+1
is invariant under unitary transformations, the resulting
symplectic form on CP
n
is invariant under transformations induced by unitary transforma
tions.
The maximal real subspace R
n+1
⊂ C
n+1
is a lagrangian submanifold of C
n+1
whose inter
section with S
2n+1
is clean and coincides with the real unit sphere S
n
. From Theorem 5.12,
it follows that the real projective space RP
n
is a lagrangian submanifold of CP
n
.
´
Conormal submanifolds
A particular example of symplectic reduction which we will use in the next chapter begins
with the following setup. Suppose that M is a smooth manifold, and let N ⊂ M be a smooth
submanifold equipped with a tangent distribution T, i.e., a subbundle of TN ⊂ T
N
M. By
C
N
we denote the annihilator of T, that is
C
N
= ¦(x, p) ∈ T
∗
M : x ∈ N, T
x
⊂ ker(p)¦.
By deﬁnition, C
N
is a subbundle of T
∗
N
M, but we wish to consider various properties of C
N
when it is viewed as a smooth submanifold of the symplectic manifold (T
∗
M, ω
M
). We begin
with the following lemma.
Lemma 5.15 In the notation above, the annihilator C
N
is a coisotropic submanifold of T
∗
M
if and only if the distribution T is integrable.
Proof. If T is integrable, then we can consider its leaves as submanifolds of M via the
inclusion N →M. The conormal bundles of the leaves deﬁne a foliation of C
N
by lagrangian
submanifolds; by Lemma 3.6, this implies that C
N
is coisotropic.
Now let Z denote the intersection of C
N
with the zero section of T
∗
M. Then the natural
projection T
∗
M →M maps Z diﬀeomorphically onto N, and moreover, T
Z
C
N
= TN ⊕T
⊥
,
70
where T
⊥
is the subbundle of V
Z
M which annihilates T. From the natural lagrangian
splitting of T(T
∗
M) along the zero section of T
∗
M, it follows that
(T
Z
C
N
)
⊥
= T ⊕(TN)
⊥
,
and thus the intersections of Z with the isotropic leaves of C
N
are integral manifolds of the
distribution T. This completes the proof.
2
Lemma 5.16 If the leaf space N/T is a smooth, Hausdorﬀ manifold, then the reduced space
C
N
/(
⊥
is canonically symplectomorphic to T
∗
(N/T).
Proof. Since, by deﬁnition, each (x, p) ∈ C
N
contains the subspace T
x
of T
x
N in its kernel,
it follows that (x, p) deﬁnes an element of T
∗
(N/T). This gives a welldeﬁned surjective
submersion f : C
N
→T
∗
(N/T), and it is easy to check that the level sets of this map are the
ﬁbers of the projection C
N
→C
N
/(
⊥
. Thus we get a diﬀeomorphism C
N
/(
⊥
→T
∗
(N/T).
To prove that the preceding diﬀeomorphism is symplectic, it suﬃces to note that by the
commutative diagram
C
N
f
−−−→ T
∗
(N/T)
N −−−→ N/T
the Liouville forms of T
∗
M and T
∗
(N/T) are related by α
M
[
C
N
= f
∗
α
N/T
.
2
Example 5.17 Suppose that T is a foliation of a manifold N. By Lemma 5.15, it follows
that the annihilator C
N
⊂ T
∗
N of T is a coisotropic submanifold which, by deﬁnition,
contains the conormal bundle F
⊥
to any leaf F of T. Since F
⊥
is a lagrangian submanifold
of T
∗
N, Lemma 3.6 implies that F
⊥
is foliated by isotropic leaves of C
N
. Moreover, the
proof of Lemma 5.16 shows that each such leaf projects diﬀeomorphically onto F, and so the
bundle F
⊥
is equipped in this way with a ﬂat Ehresmann connection (see Ehresmann [22])
known as the Bott connection associated to the foliation T.
´
Example 5.18 As a special case of Example 5.17, suppose that (B, p
B
, φ) is a Morse family
over a manifold M, and let C
B
⊂ T
∗
B be the conormal bundle to the ﬁbers of the submersion
p
B
: B →V . If L ⊂ T
∗
B is the lagrangian submanifold given by the image of the diﬀerential
dφ, then the nondegeneracy condition on φ implies that L intersects C
B
transversally along a
submanifold I which maps diﬀeomorphically onto the ﬁber critical set Σ
φ
under the natural
projection π: T
∗
B →B. The lagrangian immersion λ
φ
: Σ
φ
→T
∗
M equals the composition
Σ
φ
π
−1
→ L ∩ C
B
p
C
B
→ C
V
/(
⊥
.
In other words, Theorem 4.15 can be reformulated as an application of Theorem 5.12 when
the lagrangian submanifold im(dφ) is transverse to E, i.e., when φ is nondegenerate.
71
´
We remark that since C
N
is a bundle over N, the intersection TC
N
∩ V M is a (constant
rank) subbundle of TC
N
. A check of the deﬁnitions shows that this subbundle is mapped
onto V (N/T) under the quotient map C
N
→T
∗
(N/T) described above.
Example 5.19 An important special case of Examples 5.6 and 5.18 arises when (B, V, p
V
, φ)
is a Morse family which generates a lagrangian submanifold in L ⊂ T
∗
M and x ∈ B is a
(nondegenerate) critical point of φ, so that p = λ
φ
(x) lies in the zero section Z
M
of T
∗
M.
Denoting by x
t
the point in the zero section of T
∗
B lying over x, we recall that T
x
(T
∗
B)
admits the natural lagrangian splitting T
x
B ⊕ T
∗
x
B. Let let E ⊂ T
x
B be the kernel of the
linearized projection p
B∗
: TB →TM.
Now suppose that Q is the nondegenerate quadratic form on T
x
B deﬁned by the hessian
of φ. By deﬁnition, the restriction of Q to E equals the form induced by the ﬁberhessian
Hφ
x
of φ at x, and so
ind(Q[
E
) = ind Hφ
x
.
On the other hand, it is easy to check that the tangent space to the conormal submanifold
C
V
deﬁned in Example 5.18 at x equals the coisotropic subspace C = T
x
B ⊕ E
⊥
, so that
the last formula in Example 5.6 implies that the Morse index ι
M
(x, φ) of the critical point
x satisﬁes
ι
M
(x, φ) = ind Hφ
x
+ ind(V
p
M, T
p
L; T
p
Z
M
).
´
Reduction and the Maslov bundle
Using linear reduction we can give a useful alternative description of the Maslov bundle of
an immersed lagrangian submanifold L in T
∗
M. Given two lagrangian subspaces L, L
t
of a
symplectic vector space V , we denote by L
L,L
the subset of the lagrangian grassmannian
L(V ) comprised of those lagrangian subspaces which are transverse to both L and L
t
. For
W, W
t
∈ L
L,L
, the cross index of the quadruple (L, L
t
; W, W
t
) is deﬁned as the integer
σ(L, L
t
; W, W
t
) = ind(L, L
t
; W) −ind(L, L
t
; W
t
).
Immediately from this deﬁnition and Example 5.5, we obtain the following “cocycle” property
of the cross index.
Lemma 5.20 If L, L
t
are lagrangian subspaces of V and W, W
t
, W
tt
∈ L
L,L
, then
σ(L, L
t
; W, W
t
) + σ(L, L
t
; W
t
, W
tt
) + σ(L, L
t
; W
tt
, W) = 0.
2
72
We denote by T
L,L
(V ) the space of functions f : L
L,L
→Z such that
f(W) −f(W
t
) = σ(L, L
t
; W, W
t
)
for all W, W
t
∈ L
L,L
. Since any such function is determined up to an additive constant by
its value at a single point of L
L,L
, it follows that Z acts simply and transitively by addition
on T
L,L
(V ).
Now we may assign a principal Z bundle to a triple (E, λ, λ
t
), where E is a symplectic
vector bundle and λ, λ
t
are lagrangian subbundles. Associated to E is its lagrangian grass
mannian bundle L(E) whose ﬁber over x ∈ M is simply L(E
x
). The lagrangian subbundles
λ, λ
t
then correspond to smooth sections of L(E), and we denote by M
λ,λ
(E) the principal
Z bundle whose ﬁber over x ∈ M equals T
λx,λ
x
(E
x
).
A special case of this setup occurs when L is an immersed lagrangian submanifold of
T
∗
M so that E = ι
∗
T(T
∗
M) is a symplectic vector bundle over L. Natural lagrangian
subbundles of E are then given by λ = ι
∗
TL and λ
t
= ι
∗
V M.
Theorem 5.21 In the notation above, the Maslov bundle M
L,ι
is canonically isomorphic to
M
λ,λ
(E).
Proof. Let (B, p
B
, φ) be a Morse family over a manifold M, ﬁx a point x in the ﬁber
critical set Σ
φ
, and set p = λ
φ
(x). From Example 4.32, we recall that if S : M → R is a
smooth function such that the image of dS intersects λ
φ
(Σ
φ
) transversely at p, then x is a
nondegenerate critical point of φ −
˜
S, where
˜
S = S ◦ p
B
. From Example 5.19 it follows that
the Morse index ι
M
(x, φ −
˜
S) at x is given by
ι
M
(x, φ −
˜
S) = ind Hφ
x
+ ind(V
p
M, T
p
L
φ−S
; T
p
Z
M
),
where p
t
= p − dS(p
V
(x)) and L
φ−
˜
S
is the lagrangian submanifold generated by φ −
˜
S.
Fiberwise translation by dS does not change the index on the right, and moreover it maps
T
p
L
φ−S
to T
p
L
φ
, the subspace V
p
M to the vertical subspace V
p
M at p, and T
p
Z
M
to the
tangent space Y of the image of dS at p. Thus, the preceding equation and Example 5.5
imply
ι
M
(x, S) = ind Hφ
x
+ ind(T
p
L
φ
, V
p
M; Y ).
Now if Y is any lagrangian subspace of T
p
(T
∗
M) transverse to V
p
M, then there exists a
function S: V →R such that Y = imdS(p
V
(x)). A function f
φ
: L
TpL
φ
,VpM
→Z is obtained
by setting
f
φ
(Y ) = ι
M
(x, φ −S
Y
).
From the discussion above, it follows that this function satisﬁes
f
φ
(Y ) −f
φ
(Y
t
) = σ(T
p
L
φ
, V
p
M; Y, Y
t
).
Using these remarks, we deﬁne a map LM(L, ι) Z →M
λ,λ
(E) by sending the triple
(p, (B, p
B
, φ), n) to the function (p, f
φ
). From the preceding paragraph and the deﬁnition of
M
λ,λ
(E), it follows that this map passes to an isomorphism of principal Z bundles M
L,ι
→
M
λ,λ
(E).
73
2
We refer to [3] and [31] for a proof that the Maslov bundle described above is equivalent
to the Maslov bundle constructed using index functions in Chapter 4. For the remainder
of this section, our goal is to establish the following property of the bundle M
λ,λ
(E) under
symplectic reduction. The proofs are rather technical and can be passed over in a ﬁrst
reading.
Theorem 5.22 Suppose that E is a symplectic vector bundle over M with lagrangian sub
bundles λ, λ
t
and a coisotropic subbundle η. If λ ∩ η and λ
t
∩ η have constant rank, then
M
λ,λ
(E) is canonically isomorphic to M
λη,λ
η
(η/η
⊥
).
The starting point of the proof is the following special case of the theorem.
Lemma 5.23 Suppose that E is a symplectic vector bundle with lagrangian subbundles λ, λ
t
and a coisotropic subbundle η. If λ, λ
t
⊂ η, then M
λ,λ
(E) is canonically isomorphic to
M
λη,λ
η
(η/η
⊥
).
Proof. First consider a symplectic vector space V with lagrangian subspaces L, L
t
and a
coisotropic subspace C. If L, L
t
⊂ C, then there exists a natural linear symplectomorphism
of reduced spaces
(L
C
+ L
t
C
)/(L
C
+ L
t
C
)
⊥
→(L + L
t
)/(L + L
t
)
⊥
which maps L
C
/(L
C
+ L
t
C
)
⊥
onto L/(L + L
t
)
⊥
and L
t
C
/(L
C
+ L
t
C
)
⊥
onto L
t
/(L + L
t
)
⊥
.
Moreover, if W ∈ L
L,L
, then L
C
is transverse to L
C
, L
t
C
and W
C
/(L
C
+ L
t
C
)
⊥
maps onto
W/(L + L
t
)
⊥
under the symplectomorphism above. Thus,
ind(L, L
t
; W) = ind(L
C
, L
t
C
; W
C
).
Using this remark, we can deﬁne the isomorphism M
λ,λ
(E) → M
λη,λ
η
(η/η
⊥
) ﬁberwise
by sending (x, f) ∈ M
λ,λ
(E) to (x, f
η
), where
f
η
(W
ηx
) = f(W)
for each W ∈ L
λx,λ
x
.
2
Lemma 5.24 Suppose that E is a symplectic vector bundle over Y . If λ, λ
t
are lagrangian
subbundles such that λ ∩ λ
t
has constant rank, then M
λ,λ
(E) is canonically isomorphic to
Y Z.
Proof. If λ, λ
t
are ﬁberwise transverse, then there exists a vector bundle symplectomorphism
E → λ ⊕λ
∗
which maps λ onto λ ⊕0 and λ
t
onto 0 ⊕λ
∗
. Any choice of a positivedeﬁnite
quadratic form on λ is induced by a section T of Hom(λ, λ
∗
) comprised of selfadjoint maps.
74
The lagrangian subbundle λ
tt
of E which maps to the subbundle of λ ⊕ λ
∗
deﬁned by the
graph of T is then transverse to λ, λ
t
and clearly satisﬁes
ind(λ
x
, λ
t
x
; λ
tt
x
) = 0
for all x ∈ Y . A natural section s(x) = (x, f) of M
λ,λ
(E) is therefore given by
f(λ
tt
x
) = 0.
In general, our hypotheses imply that η = λ + λ
t
is a coisotropic subbundle of E which
contains the lagrangian subbundles λ and λ
t
. By Lemma 5.23, the bundle M
λ,λ
(E) is
canonically isomorphic to M
λη,λ
η
(η/η
⊥
). Since λ
η
, λ
t
η
are transverse lagrangian subbundles
of η/η
⊥
, the latter bundle has a canonical trivialization, and the assertion follows.
2
Proof of Theorem 5.22. An application of the cocycle identity of Lemma 5.20 shows
that if λ, λ
t
, λ
tt
are lagrangian subbundles of a symplectic vector bundle E, then M
λ,λ
(E) is
canonically isomorphic to the principalbundle product (see Appendix D for the deﬁnition)
M
λ,λ
(E) M
λ
,λ
(E). Applying this remark, we obtain the following canonical isomor
phisms:
M
λ,
˜
λ
(E) · M
λ,λ
η (E) M
λ
η
,
˜
λ
(E)
· M
λ,
˜
λ
(E)
M
λ
η
,
˜
λ
η
(E) M
˜
λ,
˜
λ
η
(E)
.
From the assumption that λ∩η has constant rank, it follows that λ∩λ
η
has constant rank, and
thus M
λ,λ
η (E) is canonically trivial by Lemma 5.24. Similarly, M
˜
λ,
˜
λ
η
(E) is canonically trivial.
Combined with the canonical isomorphisms above, this shows that M
λ,
˜
λ
(E) is canonically
isomorphic to M
λ
η
,
˜
λ
η
(E). Since the lagrangian subbundles λ
η
,
˜
λ
η
of E are contained in the
coisotropic subbundle η, Lemma 5.23 implies that M
λ
η
,
˜
λ
η
(E) is in turn canonically isomorphic
to M
λη,
˜
λη
(η/η
⊥
), completing the proof.
2
Example 5.25 Suppose that E, E
t
are trivial symplectic vector bundles over M with la
grangian subbundles λ ⊂ E and λ
t
⊂ E
t
, and let T be a section of the bundle Hom
ω
(E, E
t
)
of symplectic vector bundle maps. The graph of the section T deﬁnes a lagrangian subbundle
λ
Γ(T)
of E
t
⊕E, while the restriction of T to the subbundle λ deﬁnes a lagrangian subbundle
T(λ) of E
t
.
It is easy to check that the lagrangian subbundles λ
Γ(T)
and λ
t
⊕λ intersect the coisotropic
subbundle E
t
⊕ λ along constant rank subbundles, whereas their reductions by E
t
⊕ λ are
given by T(λ) and λ
t
, respectively. Thus, Theorem 5.22 implies that M
L
Γ(T)
,L
⊕L
(E
t
⊕ E)
and M
T(L),L
(E
t
) are canonically isomorphic.
´
75
Example 5.26 Any symplectomorphism F : T
∗
M →T
∗
N induces a lagrangian embedding
ι
F
: T
∗
M →T
∗
(M N), deﬁned as the composition of the graph Γ
F
: T
∗
M →T
∗
N T
∗
M
of F with the Schwartz transform S
M,N
: T
∗
N T
∗
M →T
∗
(M N). A second lagrangian
embedding z
F
: M →T
∗
N is deﬁned by the composition of F with the zero section s
0
: M →
T
∗
M. Observe that these deﬁnitions imply that the Liouville class λ
M,z
F
of the embedding
(M, z
F
) identiﬁes with λ
T
∗
M,ι
F
under the natural isomorphism H
1
(M; R) · H
1
(T
∗
M; R)
induced by the projection T
∗
M →M.
To see that a similar relation holds for the Maslov classes of (M, z
F
) and (T
∗
M, ι
F
),
consider the symplectic vector bundles E = s
∗
0
T(T
∗
M) and E
t
= z
∗
F
T(T
∗
N) over M, along
with the section T of Hom
ω
(E, E
t
) deﬁned by the restriction of F
∗
to T
Z
(T
∗
M). Moreover, we
have the lagrangian subbundles λ = s
∗
0
V M of E and λ
t
= z
∗
F
V N of E
t
, and the lagrangian
subbundles λ
Γ(T)
⊂ E
t
⊕ E and T(λ) ⊂ E
t
, as described in Example 5.25. Theorem 5.21
shows that s
∗
0
M
T
∗
M,ι
F
is canonically isomorphic to M
λ
Γ
T
,λ
⊕λ
(E
t
⊕ E) and that M
M,z
F
is
canonically isomorphic to M
T(λ),λ
(E
t
). Thus, it follows from Example 5.25 that the Maslov
classes are also related by pullback: s
∗
0
µ
T
∗
M,ι
F
= µ
M,z
F
.
´
Example 5.27 We can apply the conclusion of the preceding example to ﬁberpreserving
symplectomorphisms f : T
∗
M →T
∗
N. From Section 3.2, we recall that any such f is equal
to a ﬁberwise translation of T
∗
M by a closed 1form β on M composed with the cotangent
lift of some diﬀeomorphism N → M. Evidently, the phase class of the induced lagrangian
embedding (M, z
f
) equals [β] ∈
ˇ
H
1
(M; R), and thus ∈ R
+
is admissible for the lagrangian
embeddings (M, z
f
), (T
∗
M, ι
f
) if and only if [β] is integral.
´
5.2 The symplectic category
To systematize the geometric aspects of quantization in arbitrary symplectic manifolds, we
now introduce the symplectic category S. As objects of S we take the class of all smooth,
ﬁnitedimensional symplectic manifolds. Given two objects (P, ω) (Q, ω
t
) of S, we deﬁne
their product as the symplectic manifold (P Q, π
∗
1
ω + π
∗
2
ω
t
), where π
1
, π
2
denote the
cartesian projections. The symplectic dual of an object (P, ω) is the object (P, −ω).
From Lemma 3.14, we recall that a smooth diﬀeomorphism from a symplectic manifold
P to a symplectic manfold Q is a symplectomorphism if and only if its graph is a lagrangian
submanifold of Q P. More generally, an immersed lagrangian submanifold of Q P is
called a canonical relation from P to Q. The morphism set Hom(P, Q) is then deﬁned
to consist of all canonical relations in Q P. Since immersed lagrangian submanifolds of
the product QP coincide with those of its dual, we can therefore deﬁne the adjoint of a
canonical relation L ⊂ Hom(P, Q) as the element L
∗
∈ Hom(Q, P) represented by the same
equivalence class L of immersions into the product P Q.
Composition of morphisms is unfortunately not deﬁned for all L
1
∈ Hom(P, Q) and
L
2
∈ Hom(Q, R), and so S is therefore not a true category. Nevertheless, we can describe
76
a suﬃcient condition for the composability of two canonical relations as follows. By Exam
ple 5.8, the product R ∆
Q
P is a reducible coisotropic submanifold of R QQP,
where ∆
Q
denotes the diagonal in QQ. The product L
2
L
1
of the canonical relations L
1
and L
2
is a welldeﬁned immersed lagrangian submanifold of R Q Q P, and we will
call L
2
L
1
clean if (R∆
Q
P, L
2
L
1
) is a reducible pair. Applying Theorem 5.12, we
then obtain
Proposition 5.28 If L
2
L
1
is clean, then L
2
◦ L
1
is an immersed lagrangian submanifold
of R P, i.e. L
2
◦ L
1
∈ Hom(P, R).
2
Associativity of compositions holds in the symplectic category in the sense that for canonical
relations L
1
, L
2
, L
3
, the equation
L
1
◦ (L
2
◦ L
3
) = (L
1
◦ L
2
) ◦ L
3
is valid provided that both sides are deﬁned.
Among the members of S, there is a minimal object Z, the zerodimensional symplectic
manifold consisting of a single point ∗ equipped with the null symplectic structure. Mor
phisms from Z to any other object P ∈ S identify naturally with immersed lagrangian
submanifolds of P. Thus, the “elements” of P are its immersed lagrangian submanifolds,
and in particular, we may identify the set Hom(P, Q) of morphisms with the “elements” of
QP for any P, Q ∈ S.
8
A canonical relation L ∈ Hom(P, Q) is said to be a monomorphism if the projection
of L onto P is surjective and the projection of L onto Q is injective, in the usual sense.
Equivalently, L is a monomorphism if L
∗
◦ L = id
P
. Dually, one deﬁnes an epimorphism
in the symplectic category as a canonical relation L for which L ◦ L
∗
= id
P
. From these
deﬁnitions we see that a canonical relation is an isomorphism if and only if it is the graph
of a symplectomorphism.
Canonical lifts of relations
The full subcategory of S consisting of cotangent bundles possesses some special properties
due to the Schwartz transform S
M,N
: T
∗
N T
∗
M → T
∗
(M N), which enables us to
identify canonical relations in Hom(T
∗
M, T
∗
N) with immersed lagrangian submanifolds in
T
∗
(M N).
Example 5.29 A smooth relation between two manifolds M, N is a smooth submanifold S
of the product M N. Under the Schwartz transform, the conormal bundle of S identiﬁes
with a canonical relation L
S
∈ Hom(T
∗
N, T
∗
M) called the cotangent lift of S. In view of
Example 3.27, this deﬁnition generalizes tangent lifts of diﬀeomorphisms. Note in particular
8
Another point of view is to deﬁne Hom(P, Q), not as a set, but rather as the object Q P in the
symplectic category; then the composition Hom(P, Q) Hom(Q, R) → Hom(P, R) is the canonical relation
which is the product of three diagonals.
77
that although a smooth map f : M → N does not in general give rise to a welldeﬁned
transformation T
∗
N →T
∗
M, its graph in MN nevertheless generates a canonical relation
L
f
∈ Hom(T
∗
N, T
∗
M).
Example 5.30 The diagonal embedding ∆ : M → M M induces a canonical relation
L
∆
∈ Hom(T
∗
(M M), T
∗
M) which in local coordinates assumes the form
L
∆
= ¦((x, α), (x, x, β, γ)) : x ∈ M and α, β, γ ∈ T
∗
x
M satisfy α = β + γ¦.
In other words, L
∆
is the graph of addition in the cotangent bundle. If L
1
, L
2
∈ Hom(∗, T
∗
M)
and L
2
L
1
is identiﬁed with an element of Hom(∗, T
∗
(M M)) by the usual symplecto
morphism T
∗
M T
∗
M → T
∗
(M M), then the sum L
1
+ L
2
∈ Hom(∗, T
∗
M) is deﬁned
as
L
1
+ L
2
= L
∆
◦ (L
2
L
1
).
Note that if L
1
, L
2
coincide with the images of closed 1forms ϕ
1
, ϕ
2
on M, then L
1
+ L
2
equals the image of ϕ
1
+ ϕ
2
.
The dual of the isomorphism T
∗
M T
∗
M →T
∗
(M M) identiﬁes L
∆
with an element
L
t
∆
∈ Hom(T
∗
M, Hom(T
∗
M, T
∗
M)). This canonical relation satisﬁes L
1
+L
2
= L
t
∆
(L
1
)(L
2
),
and if L is the image of a closed 1form ϕ on M, then
L
t
∆
(L) = f
ϕ
,
where f
ϕ
is the ﬁberwise translation mapping introduced in Section 3.2.
´
Example 5.31 (The Legendre transform) As a particular example of this situation, let
V be a smooth manifold, and consider the ﬁber product TV
V
T
∗
V along with its natural
inclusion ι : TV
V
T
∗
V →TV T
∗
V and “evaluation” function ev : TV
V
T
∗
V →R given
by
ev((x, v), (x, p)) = 'p, v`.
If L ⊂ T
∗
(TV
V
T
∗
V ) is the lagrangian submanifold given by the image of the diﬀerential
d(ev), then the pushforward L
leg
= ι
∗
L deﬁnes an isomorphism in Hom(T
∗
(TM), T
∗
(T
∗
M))
given in local coordinates by
((x, v), (ξ, η)) →((x, η), (ξ, −v)).
As noted in [57], this canonical relation can be viewed as a geometric representative of the
Legendre transform in the following sense: If L: TM → R is a hyperregular Lagrangian
function, in the sense that its ﬁberderivative deﬁnes a diﬀeomorphism TM → T
∗
M, then
the composition of L
leg
with the image of dL equals the image of dH, where H: T
∗
M → R
is the classical Legendre transform of L.
´
78
Morphisms associated with coisotropic submanifolds
If C ⊂ P is a reducible coisotropic submanifold, then the reduction relation R
C
∈
Hom(P, C/(
⊥
) is deﬁned as the composition of the quotient map C →C/(
⊥
and the inclu
sion C/(
⊥
→P. Somewhat more concretely, the relation R
C
is the subset
¦([x], x) : x ∈ C¦
of C/(
⊥
P, where [x] is the leaf of the characteristic foliation passing through x ∈ C.
Evidently R
C
is an epimorphism, and so R
C
◦ R
∗
C
= id
P
. On the other hand, R
C
is not a
monomorphism unless C = P, and we deﬁne the projection relation K
C
∈ Hom(P, P) as
the composition R
∗
C
◦ R
C
, i.e.
K
C
= ¦(x, y) : x, y ∈ C, [x] = [y]¦.
By associativity, we have K
C
= K
C
◦ K
C
, and K
∗
C
= K
C
. Thus, K
C
is like an orthogonal
projection operator.
These relations give a simple interpretation of Theorem 5.12 in the symplectic category.
If L is an immersed lagrangian submanifold of P, i.e. L ∈ Hom(Z, P), then L is composable
with both R
C
and K
C
, provided that it intersects C cleanly. In this case, we have
L
C
= R
C
◦ L L
C
= K
C
◦ L.
In particular, K
C
ﬁxes any lagrangian submanifold of C.
Example 5.32 Suppose that T is a foliation on a manifold B whose leaf space B
T
is smooth.
In the notation of Example 5.17, we then ﬁnd that if T
∗
(B/T) is canonically identiﬁed with
the reduced space E/(
⊥
, then the reduction relation R
E
is the Schwartz transform of the
conormal bundle to the graph of the projection B →B/T.
´
5.3 Symplectic manifolds and mechanics
In general, an arbitrary symplectic manifold has no associated “conﬁguration space,” and
therefore the classical and quantum mechanical viewpoints must be adapted to this new
context based on the available structure.
The classical picture
The central objects in the classical picture of mechanics on an arbitrary symplectic manifold
(P, ω) are the semiclassical states, represented as before by lagrangian submanifolds of P
equipped with halfdensities, and the vector space of observables C
∞
(P).
With respect to pointwise multiplication, C
∞
(P) forms a commutative associative alge
bra. Additionally, the symplectic form on P induces a Lie algebra structure on C
∞
(P) given
by the Poisson bracket
¦f, g¦ = X
g
f,
79
where X
g
= ˜ ω
−1
(dg) denotes the hamiltonian vector ﬁeld associated to g. These structures
satisfy the compatibility condition
¦fh, g¦ = f ¦h, g¦ +¦f, g¦ h,
and are referred to collectively by calling C
∞
(P) the Poisson algebra of P.
The classical system evolves along the trajectories of the vector ﬁeld X
H
associated to
the choice of a hamiltonian H : P → R. If f is any observable, then Hamilton’s equations
assume the form
˙
f = ¦H, f¦.
Note that in local Darboux coordinates, the Poisson bracket is given by
¦f, g¦ =
¸
j
∂f
∂q
j
∂g
∂p
j
−
∂f
∂p
j
∂g
∂q
j
.
Setting f = q
j
or f = p
j
in the Poisson bracket form of Hamilton’s equations above yields
their familiar form, as in Section 3.3.
Two functions f, g ∈ C
∞
(P) are said to be in involution if ¦f, g¦ = 0, in which case the
hamiltonian ﬂows of f and g commute. An observable in involution with the hamiltonian
H is called a ﬁrst integral or constant of the motion of the system. A collection f
i
of functions in involution on P is said to be complete if the vanishing of ¦f
i
, g¦ for all i
implies that g is a function of the form g(x) = h(f
1
(x), , f
n
(x)).
The quantum mechanical picture
Quantum mechanical observables should be the vector space /(H
P
) of selfadjoint linear op
erators on some complex Hilbert space H
P
associated to P. The structure of a commutative,
nonassociative algebra is deﬁned on / by Jordan multiplication:
A ◦ B =
1
2
(AB + BA),
representing the quantum analog of pointwise multiplication in the Poisson algebra of P.
Similarly, the dependent commutator
[A, B]
=
i
(AB −BA)
deﬁnes a Lie algebra structure on / analogous to the Poisson bracket on C
∞
(P).
Quantum mechanical states are vectors in H
P
. The timeevolution of the quantum system
is determined by a choice of energy operator
ˆ
H, which acts on states via the Schr¨odinger
equation:
˙
ψ =
i
ˆ
Hψ.
A collection ¦A
j
¦ of quantum observables is said to be complete if any operator B which
commutes with each A
j
is a multiple of the identity. This condition is equivalent to the
irreducibility of ¦A
j
¦, in other words, no nontrivial subspace of H
P
is invariant with respect
to each j.
80
Quantization
Although neither an underlying conﬁguration manifold nor its intrinsic Hilbert space is
generally available in the context of arbitrary symplectic manifolds, the basic goal of quan
tization remains the same as in the case of cotangent bundles: starting with a symplectic
manifold P, we wish to identify a ∗algebra / of operators which give the quantum analog
of the “system” at hand. Early approaches to this problem were based on the principle
that, regardless of how the algebra / is identiﬁed, the correspondence between classical and
quantum observables should be described by a linear map from the Poisson algebra C
∞
(P)
to / which satisﬁes the following criteria known as the Dirac axioms
Deﬁnition 5.33 A linear map ρ : C
∞
(P) →S(H
P
) is called a quantization provided that
it satisﬁes
1. ρ(1) = identity.
2. ρ(¦f, g¦) = [ρ(f), ρ(g)]
3. For some complete set of functions f
1
, , f
n
in involution, the operators
ρ(f
1
), , ρ(f
n
) form a complete commuting set.
As was eventually proven by Groenwald and Van Hove (see [1] for a proof), a quantization
of all classical observables in this sense does not exist in general.
To make the basic quantization problem more tractable, we ﬁrst enlarge the class of
classical objects to be quantized, but then relax the criteria by which quantum and classical
objects are to correspond. Based on an idea of Weyl and von Neumann, we ﬁrst replace
the classical observables by the groups of which they are the inﬁnitesimal generators. The
basic classical objects are then symplectomorphisms, which should be represented by unitary
operators on quantum Hilbert spaces.
A general formulation of the quantization problem is then to deﬁne a “functor” from
the symplectic category to the category of (hermitian) linear spaces. This means that to
each symplectic manifold P we should try to assign a Hilbert space H
P
in such a way that
H
P
is dual to H
P
, and H
PQ
is canonically isomorphic to a (completed) tensor product
H
P
´
⊗H
Q
. However this is accomplished, each canonical relation L ∈ Hom(P, Q) must then
be assigned to a linear operator T
L
∈ Hom(H
P
, H
Q
) · H
Q
⊗ H
∗
P
in a way which commutes
with compositions, i.e.,
T
˜
L◦L
= T
˜
L
◦ T
L
for each
˜
L ∈ Hom(Q, R). In these abstract terms, our classical and quantum correspondences
can be expressed as follows.
81
Object Classical version Quantum version
basic spaces symplectic manifold (P, ω) hermitian vector space H
P
QP H
Q
´
⊗H
P
QP Hom(H
P
, H
Q
)
point ∗ C
state lagrangian submanifold L element of H
P
space of observables Poisson algebra C
∞
(P) symmetric operators on H
P
At this stage, two relevant observations are apparent from our earlier study of WKB
quantization. First, in addition to just a lagrangian submanifold L ⊂ P, it may require
more data (such as a symbol) to determine an element of H
P
in a consistent way. Second,
the Hilbert space H
P
may carry some sort of ﬁltration (e.g. by powers of or by degree
of smoothness), and the quantization may be “correct” only to within a certain degree of
accuracy as measured by the ﬁltration. By “correctness” we mean that composition of
canonical relations should correspond to composition of operators. As we have already seen,
it is too much to require that this condition be satisﬁed exactly. The best we can hope for
is a functorial relation, rather than a mapping, from the classical to the quantum category.
82
6 Fourier Integral Operators
For our ﬁrst examples of a quantization theory which gives a functorial relation between
the classical (symplectic) category and the quantum category of hermitian vector spaces, we
return to WKB quantization in cotangent bundles. In this context, semiclassical states are
represented by pairs (L, s) consisting of an immersed lagrangian submanifold L in T
∗
(MN)
equipped with a symbol s. Our discussion begins by deﬁning a suitable notion of composition
for such states. The WKB quantization I
(L, s) of the state (L, s) is then regarded as the
Schwartz kernel of the corresponding operator in Hom(H
M
, H
N
). A particular concrete case
of this classicalquantum correspondence is given by the symbol calculus of Fourier integral
operators.
6.1 Compositions of semiclassical states
In Section 4.4, we deﬁned a semiclassical state in a cotangent bundle T
∗
M as a pair (L, s)
consisting of a quantizable lagrangian submanifold L ⊂ T
∗
M and a symbol s on L. In this
section, we study certain natural transformations of semiclassical states.
Reduction of semiclassical states
We will say that a reducible pair (C, L) in a symplectic manifold P is properly reducible
if the quotient of I = L
P
C by its characteristic foliation is a smooth, Hausdorﬀ manifold
and the map I →L
C
is proper.
Lemma 6.1 If (C, L) is a properly reducible pair in a symplectic manifold P, then there
exists a natural linear map
[Ω[
1/2
L ⊗[Ω[
1/2
C →[Ω[
1/2
L
C
.
Proof. First note that if V is a symplectic vector space, together with a lagrangian subspace
L and a coisotropic subspace C, then the exact sequence
0 →L ∩ C
⊥
→L ∩ C →L
C
→0
gives rise to the isomorphism
[Λ[
1/2
L
C
⊗[Λ[
1/2
(L ∩ C
⊥
) · [Λ[
1/2
(L ∩ C).
The linear maps v →(v, −v) and (x, y) →x + y deﬁne a second exact sequence
0 →L ∩ C →L ⊕C →L + C →0,
from which we get
[Λ[
1/2
L
C
⊗[Λ[
1/2
(L ∩ C
⊥
) ⊗[Λ[
1/2
(L + C) · [Λ[
1/2
L ⊗[Λ[
1/2
C.
83
Finally, the exact sequence
0 →(L + C)
⊥
→V
˜ ω
→(L + C)
∗
→0
combined with the halfdensity on V induced by the symplectic form deﬁnes a natural
isomorphism
[Λ[
1/2
(L + C) · [Λ[
1/2
(L + C)
⊥
.
Since L ∩ C
⊥
= (L + C)
⊥
, we arrive at
[Λ[
1/2
L
C
⊗[Λ[(L ∩ C
⊥
) · [Λ[
1/2
L ⊗[Λ[
1/2
C.
Now consider a properly reducible pair (C, L) in a symplectic manifold P. By the pre
ceding computations, there is a linear map
[Ω[
1/2
L ⊗[Ω[
1/2
C →[Ω[
1/2
L
C
⊗[Ω[(T
I
).
Since the quotient map I →L
C
is proper, integration over its ﬁbers is welldeﬁned and gives
the desired linear map
[Ω[
1/2
L ⊗[Ω[
1/2
C →[Ω[
1/2
L
C
.
2
Let M be a smooth manifold and consider a submanifold N ⊂ M equipped with a
foliation T such that the leaf space N
T
is a smooth, Hausdorﬀ manifold. From Section 5.1
we recall that the integrability of T implies that
C
N
= ¦(x, p) ∈ T
∗
M : x ∈ N, T
x
⊂ ker(p)¦
is a coisotropic submanifold of T
∗
M whose reduced space is the cotangent bundle T
∗
N
T
of
the leaf space N
T
. If L is an immersed lagrangian submanifold of T
∗
M such that (C
N
, L)
form a reducible pair, then we denote by I the ﬁber product L
T
∗
M
C
N
of L and C
N
and
consider the following commutative diagram
L −−−→ T
∗
M
r
L
¸
ι
¸
I
r
C
N
−−−→ C
N
π
p
C
L
C
−−−→ T
∗
N
Our goal is describe how a symbol s on L naturally induces a symbol s
C
on L
C
.
Lemma 6.2 In the notation of the diagram above, there is a natural isomorphism
r
∗
L
Φ
L,
→π
∗
Φ
L
C
,
.
84
Proof. From the proof of Lemma 5.16 it follows easily that the pullback to I of the Liouville
forms on T
∗
M and T
∗
N coincide, and thus, the pullback to I of the prequantum line bundles
over T
∗
M and T
∗
N are canonically isomorphic.
Similarly, let E be the symplectic vector bundle over I given by the pullback of T(T
∗
M).
Lagrangian subbundles λ, λ
t
of E are then induced by the immersed lagrangian submanifold
L and the vertical subbundle V M of T(T
∗
M). By deﬁnition, the pullback of the Maslov
bundle of L to I is canonically isomorphic to the bundle M
λ,λ
(E).
Now the tangent bundle of C
N
induces a coisotropic subbundle C of E, and one must
check that the pullback of the Maslov bundle of L
C
to I is canonically isomorphic to
M
λ
C
,λ
C
(C/C
⊥
). From Theorem 5.22 we therefore obtain a canonical isomorphism of r
∗
L
M
L
with π
∗
M
L
C
. By tensoring this isomorphism with the isomorphism of prequantum bundles
described in the preceding paragraph, we arrive at the desired isomorphism of phase bundles.
2
A parallel section s of Φ
L,
pulls back to a parallel section of r
∗
L
Φ
L
C
,
, which, under the
isomorphism of Lemma 6.2, identiﬁes with a parallel section of π
∗
Φ
L
C
,
. Since parallel
sections of π
∗
Φ
L
C
,
identify naturally with parallel sections of Φ
L
C
,
, we obtain a map
(parallel sections of Φ
L,
) →(parallel sections of Φ
L
C
,
).
By tensoring with the map of density spaces given above, we obtain, for each halfdensity σ
on C, a natural map of symbol spaces
S
L
→S
L
C
.
We will denote the image of a symbol s on L under this map by s
C,σ
.
Composition of semiclassical states
If L
1
, L
2
are immersed lagrangian submanifolds of T
∗
M, T
∗
N, then their product L
2
L
1
gives
a welldeﬁned immersed lagrangian submanifold of T
∗
(M N) via the Schwartz transform
S
M,N
: T
∗
NT
∗
M →T
∗
(MN). By the fundamental properties of the Schwartz transform
described in Proposition 3.32, it follows easily that the phase bundle Φ
L
2
L
1
,
is canonically
isomorphic to the external tensor product Φ
L
2
,
Φ
−1
L
1
,
. From the discussion in Appendix A
we also have a linear isomorphism of density bundles [Λ[
1/2
(L
2
L
1
) →[Λ[
1/2
L
2
[Λ[
1/2
L
1
,
and thus there is a natural linear map of symbol spaces
o
L
2
⊗o
L
1
→o
L
2
L
1
which we denote by (s
1
, s
2
) →s
2
s
∗
1
.
Deﬁnition 6.3 The product of semiclassical states (L
1
, s
1
), (L
2
, s
2
) in T
∗
M, T
∗
N is the
semiclassical state (L
2
L
1
, s
2
s
∗
1
) in T
∗
(M N).
2
85
Turning to compositions, we ﬁrst note that if M, V are smooth manifolds, then the
Schwartz transform S
M,V
: T
∗
V T
∗
M → T
∗
(M V ) identiﬁes each canonical relation in
Hom(T
∗
M, T
∗
V ) with an immersed lagrangian submanifold in T
∗
(M V ). Our goal is now
to describe how semiclassical states (L, s) in T
∗
(M N) and (L
t
, s
t
) in T
∗
(N V ) deﬁne
a semiclassical state in T
∗
(M V ) when L, L
t
are composable as canonical relations in
Hom(T
∗
M, T
∗
N) and Hom(T
∗
N, T
∗
V ), respectively.
We begin with the following commutative diagram
T
∗
V T
∗
N T
∗
N T
∗
M −−−→ T
∗
(M N N V )
T
∗
V T
∗
M −−−→ T
∗
(M V )
where the upper horizontal arrow denotes the composition S
MN
◦(S
N,V
S
M,N
) of Schwartz
tranforms, and the lower horizontal arrow equals the Schwartz transform S
M,V
. The left
vertical arrow represents the reduction relation deﬁned by the coisotropic submanifold C =
T
∗
V ∆
T
∗
N
T
∗
M, while the right vertical arrow is the reduction relation deﬁned by
the image of C under the Schwartz transform. L
t
◦ L ∈ Hom(T
∗
M, T
∗
V ) is deﬁned as the
reduction of L
2
L
1
by the coisotropic submanifold T
∗
V ∆
T
∗
N
T
∗
M of T
∗
V T
∗
N
T
∗
N T
∗
M. Under the Schwartz transform,
T
∗
V T
∗
N T
∗
N T
∗
M →T
∗
(M N N V ),
the submanifold T
∗
V ∆
T
∗
N
T
∗
M maps to the conormal submanifold C
V,N,M
of T
∗
(V
NNM) deﬁned by V ∆
N
M ⊂ V NNM and its product foliation by subsets of
the form v∆
N
m for (v, m) ∈ V M. Thus, the Schwartz transform of L
2
L
1
reduces by
C
V,N,M
to yield the image of L
2
◦L
1
under the Schwartz transform T
∗
V T
∗
M →T
∗
(V M).
From Lemma 6.1, it follows that for any properly reducible pair L
1
, L
2
, we obtain a
natural linear map of symbol spaces
o
L
2
⊗o
L
1
→o
L
2
◦L
1
given by the composition of the product map above and the reduction map o
L
2
L
1
→o
L
2
◦L
1
deﬁned by the natural halfdensity on C
V,N,M
induced by the symplectic forms on T
∗
V, T
∗
N,
and T
∗
M. We denote the image of s
2
s
1
under this map by s
2
◦ s
1
.
We will say that semiclassical states (L
1
, s
1
) in T
∗
(M N) and (L
2
, s
2
) in T
∗
(N V )
are composable if the conormal submanifold C
V,N,M
and immersed lagrangian submanifold
L
2
L
1
form a properly reducible pair.
Deﬁnition 6.4 If a semiclassical state (L
1
, s
1
) in T
∗
(M N) is composable with a semi
classical state (L
2
, s
2
) in T
∗
(N V ), then their composition is deﬁned as the semiclassical
state (L
2
◦ L
1
, s
2
◦ s
1
) in T
∗
(M V ).
2
86
Example 6.5 Consider a semiclassical state (L
F
, ˜s) in T
∗
(MN), where L
F
is the Schwartz
transform of the graph of a symplectomorphism F : T
∗
M → T
∗
N. If L is an immersed la
grangian submanifold of T
∗
M, then Deﬁnition 6.4 provides that for each symbol s ∈ o
L
,
the semiclassical state (L, s) in T
∗
M is transformed by F into the semiclassical state
(L
F
◦ L, ˜s ◦ s) in T
∗
N.
To make this correspondence more explicit, let us choose a particular lagrangian immer
sion ι : L →T
∗
M representing L (see the discussion in Section 4.4). We then note that the
natural halfdensity [ω
n
M
[
1/2
on L
F
≈ T
∗
M enables us to identify the symbol space o
L
F
with
the product
Γ
L
F
⊗
C
C
∞
(L
F
, C).
Given a parallel section ˜ s and smooth complexvalued function h on L
F
, we ﬁnd by a com
putation that the isomorphism o
L
→o
L
F
◦L
determined by the symbol ˜s = ˜ s ⊗h is given by
s ⊗a →s
t
⊗(a ι
∗
h), where a is any halfdensity on L and s
t
is the unique parallel section of
Φ
L
F
◦L,
such that ι
∗
˜ s →s
t
⊗s
−1
under the canonical isomorphism ι
∗
Φ
L
F
,
· Φ
L
F
◦L,
⊗Φ
−1
L,
.
´
Example 6.6 As a special case of Example 6.5, note that if the symplectomorphism F :
T
∗
M → T
∗
N is the cotangent lift of a diﬀeomorphism M → N, then for each > 0, the
phase bundle of of L
F
admits a canonical parallel section, and so the symbol space o
L
F
identiﬁes naturally with R
+
C
∞
(L
F
, C). If h ∈ C
∞
(L
F
, C), then with this identiﬁcation,
the composition of (L
F
, h) with a semiclassical state (L, s) equals the semiclassical state
(L
F
◦ L, (h ◦ ι) s).
Similarly, if β is a closed 1form on M and the symplectomorphism F : T
∗
M → T
∗
M
equals ﬁberwise translation by β, then ∈ R
+
is admissible for L
F
if and only if [β] is
integral. For such , each parallel section of the phase bundle Φ
L
F
,
identiﬁes with an
oscillatory function of the form ce
iS/
for c ∈ R and some S : M → T
satisfying S
∗
dσ =
β. A computation then shows that the composition of a semiclassical state of the form
(L
F
, e
iS/
⊗h) with (L, ι, s) yields the semiclassical state (L
F
◦ L, e
i(S◦π
L
)/
(h ◦ ι) s).
´
6.2 WKB quantization and compositions
To deﬁne the composition of semiclassical states (L, s) ∈ Hom(T
∗
M, T
∗
N) and (
˜
L, ˜s) ∈
Hom(T
∗
N, T
∗
V ) as a semiclassical state (
˜
L ◦ L, ˜s ◦ s) ∈ Hom(T
∗
M, T
∗
V ), we used the
Schwartz transform to identify the immersed lagrangian submanifold
˜
L ◦ L ∈ T
∗
V T
∗
M
with an immersed lagrangian submanifold in T
∗
(M V ), since it is the cotangent bundle
structure of the latter space which gives meaning to “symbols” (in the sense of Chapter 4)
on
˜
L ◦ L. On the quantum level, an analogous correspondence is furnished by the Schwartz
kernel theorem.
Let M be a smooth manifold and let [Ω[
1/2
0
M be equipped with the topology of C
∞
convergence on compact sets. A distributional halfdensity on M is then a continuous,
Clinear functional on [Ω[
1/2
0
M. We denote the space of distributional halfdensities on M
87
by [Ω[
1/2
−∞
M, and we equip this space with the weak
∗
topology. If N is another smooth
manifold, a kernel is any element of [Ω[
1/2
−∞
(M N). A kernel K deﬁnes a linear map
/: [Ω[
1/2
0
M →[Ω[
1/2
−∞
N by duality via the equation
'/(u), v`
def
= 'K, u ⊗v` (∗)
Schwartz kernel theorem . Every K ∈ [Ω[
1/2
−∞
(MN) deﬁnes a linear map /: [Ω[
1/2
0
M →
[Ω[
1/2
−∞
N by (∗) above, which is continuous in the sense that /(φ
j
) →0 in [Ω[
1/2
−∞
N if φ
j
→0
in [Ω[
1/2
0
M. Conversely, to every such linear map, there is precisely one distribution K such
that (∗) is valid.
2
Of course, each w ∈ [Ω[
1/2
N deﬁnes an element ˜ w ∈ [Ω[
1/2
−∞
N by the equation
' ˜ w, v` =
N
v ⊗w.
In all of the examples we will consider, the image of the map / will lie within the subspace
of [Ω[
1/2
−∞
N represented by elements of [Ω[
1/2
N in this way, and so we can consider / as
a continuous linear map [Ω[
1/2
0
M → [Ω[
1/2
0
N, thereby giving a (densely deﬁned) operator
H
M
→H
N
on the intrinsic Hilbert spaces of M, N. In practical terms, the value of the half
density Ku at each y ∈ N can be computed in these cases by, roughly speaking, integrating
the product K ⊗ u over the submanifold ¦y¦ M of N M. Thus, in the same way that
the Schwartz transform provides a natural correspondence
Hom(T
∗
M, T
∗
N) ↔T
∗
(M N),
the Schwartz kernel theorem gives the identiﬁcation
[Ω[
1/2
−∞
(M N) ↔Hom(H
M
, H
N
)
diﬀerential operators
With respect to linear coordinates ¦x
j
¦ on R
n
, we deﬁne dependent operators
D
j
def
= −i
∂
∂x
j
.
An diﬀerential operator of asymptotic order
9
k ∈ Z is then an asymptotic series of the
form
P
=
∞
¸
m=0
P
m
m+k
,
9
Note that this order generally diﬀers from the order of a diﬀerential operator.
88
where each P
m
is a polynomial in the operators D
j
. By formally substituting ξ
j
for D
j
in
each term of P
, we obtain an dependent function σ
P
on T
∗
R
n
, known as the symbol of
P
, which is related to P
by the asymptotic Fourier inversion formula: for any compactly
supported oscillatory test function e
−iψ/
u (we permit ψ = 0), we have
(P
e
−iψ/
u)(x) = (2π)
−n
e
i(/x−y,ξ)−ψ)/
σ
P
(x, ξ) u(y) dy dξ.
The principal symbol p
of the operator P
is deﬁned as the symbol of the ﬁrst nonvanishing
term in its series expansion, i.e.,
p
(x, ξ) = σ
Pm
0
(x, ξ)
m
0
+k
if P
m
= 0 for all m < m
0
and P
m
0
= 0. By replacing σ
P
by p
in the formula above, we
obtain
(P
e
−iψ/
u)(x) = (2π)
−n
e
i(/x−y,ξ)−ψ)/
p
(x, y, ξ) u(y) dy dξ + O(
m
0
+k+1
)
where p
is of course independent of y. (Later we will drop this assumption to obtain a more
symmetric calculus). For ﬁxed x, the function (y, ξ) → 'x − y, ξ` − ψ has a nondegenerate
critical point when y = x and ξ = dψ(x). An application of the principle of stationary phase
therefore gives
(P
e
−iψ/
u)(x) = e
−iψ(x))/
u(x) p
(x, x, dψ(x)) h
m
0
+k
+ O(
m
0
+k+1
) (∗∗)
To interpret this expression in the context of WKB quantization, we ﬁrst note that the phase
function φ(x, y, ξ) = 'x − y, ξ` on B = R
n
R
n
(R
n
)
∗
, together with V = R
n
R
n
and
the cartesian projection p
V
: B → V deﬁne a Morse family (B, V, p
V
, φ) which generates
the conormal bundle to the diagonal ∆ ⊂ R
n
R
n
. The principal symbol p
, written as a
function of the variables (x, y, ξ) deﬁnes an amplitude a = p
[dx dy[
1/2
[dξ[ on B, whose
restriction to the ﬁbercritical set Σ
φ
= ¦(x, x, ξ) : 'x, ξ` = 0¦ induces a welldeﬁned symbol
s
P
= p
(x, x, ξ) on L
∆
.
Now, e
−iψ/
u = I
(L, s), where L is the projectable lagrangian submanifold of T
∗
R
n
deﬁned by im(dψ), and s is obtained from the pullback of u to L. By Example 6.6, we have
(L, s) = (L
∆
◦ L, s
P
◦ s), that is, composition with (L
∆
, s
P
) multiplies the symbol s by the
values of the principal symbol p
on L · Σ
φ
. Combined with the preceding equation, this
gives
(P
e
−iψ/
u)(x) = I
(L
∆
◦ L, s
P
◦ s)
m
0
+k
+ O(
m
0
+k+1
).
The Schwartz kernel for the operator P
is given by the distribution family I
(L
∆
, s
P
).
An diﬀerential operator on a manifold M is an operator P
on [Ω[
1/2
0
M which coincides
in local coordinates with a series of the form P
as above. While the symbol of P
depends
on the choice of local coordinates, its principal symbol p
is a welldeﬁned function on the
cotangent bundle T
∗
M. Using a global generating function for the conormal bundle of
∆ ⊂ M M (see Example 4.29) and arguing as above, we obtain the following geometric
version of (∗∗) above:
89
Theorem 6.7 If (L, s) is an exact, projectable semiclassical state in T
∗
M and P
is an
diﬀerential operator of order k on M, then:
P
(I
(L, s)) = I
(L
∆
◦ L, s
P
◦ s) + O(
m
0
+k+1
),
where s
P
is the symbol on L
∆
induced by the principal symbol p
of P
.
Roughly speaking, this theorem asserts that polynomial functions on the identity relation L
∆
quantize as the Schwartz kernel of diﬀerential operators on M. As usual, this correspondence
is only asymptotic; many diﬀerential operators share the same principal symbol, and their
actions on a given function coincide only up to terms of higher order in .
As a particular case of Theorem 6.7, the vanishing of the principal symbol p
on L implies
that
P
(I
(L, s)) = O(
m
0
+k+1
),
i.e., that I
(L, s) is a ﬁrstorder approximate solution to the equation P
u = 0. This remark
suggests the quantum analog of certain coisotropic submanifolds of T
∗
M. The zero set of the
principal symbol p
is called the characteristic variety of the operator P
. If 0 is a regular
value of p
, then C
P
= p
−1
(0) is a coisotropic submanifold of T
∗
M, and semiclassical states
contained in C
P
represent solutions of the asymptotic diﬀerential equation P
u = 0. In this
sense, C
P
, or, more properly, the reduced manifold of C
P
, corresponds to the kernel of P
in H
M
, and the projection relation K
C
P
quantizes as the orthogonal projection onto this
subspace.
A familiar illustration of these concepts is provided by the WKB approximation.
Example 6.8 Recall that the Schr¨odinger operator associated to a given potential V on a
riemannian manifold M is given by
ˆ
H = −
2
2m
∆ + m
V
.
For E > 0, the timeindependent Schr¨odinger equation is then
P
ψ = 0,
where P
=
ˆ
H −E is the zerothorder asymptotic diﬀerential operator on M with principal
symbol
p
(x, θ) = −
[θ[
2
2m
+ (V (x) −E).
The characteristic variety of p
is simply the level set H
−1
(E) of the classical hamiltonian
of the system, and as in previous sections we see that ﬁrstorder approximate solutions to
the timeindependent Schr¨odinger equation arise from semiclassical states represented by
quantizable lagrangian submanifolds in C
P
.
´
90
The diﬃculty of quantizing more general symbols on the identity relation L
∆
lies in the
convergence of the integral
(P
u)(x) = (2π)
n
e
i/x−y,θ)/
a(x, y, ξ) u(y) dξ dy.
For diﬀerential operators, integration over the phase variables θ was welldeﬁned due to the
fact that the symbol of a diﬀerential operator has a polynomial growth rate with respect to
these variables. Weakening this condition while still guaranteeing that the integral converges
leads to the deﬁnition of pseudodiﬀerential operators.
In R
n
, an pseudodiﬀerential operator of order µ is given by
(Au)(x) = (2π)
n
e
i/x−y,θ)/
a
(x, θ) u(y) dθ dy,
where the symbol a(x, θ) is an asymptotic series in of the form
a
(x, θ) ∼
¸
a
j
(x, θ)
µ+j
.
Each coeﬃcient a
j
is a smooth function on R
n
R
n
` ¦0¦ and is positively homogeneous of
degree µ −j, i.e.,
a
j
(x, cθ) = c
µ−j
a
j
(x, θ)
for c > 0. As in the special case of diﬀerential operators, the invariance of pseudodiﬀerential
operators under coordinate changes enables one to extend this theory to any smooth manifold
M. In this case, the principal symbol of a pseudodiﬀerential operator is a welldeﬁned
function on T
∗
M, and there is a corresponding version of Theorem 6.7 (see for example
[51]).
Fourier integral operators
In its simplest form, the theory of Fourier integral operators provides a means for quantizing
halfdensities on more general lagrangian submanifolds L of T
∗
M by replacing the function
(x, y, ξ) → 'x − y, ξ` in the deﬁnition of pseudodiﬀerential operators by a phase function
which generates L:
(Au)(x) = (2π)
n
e
iφ(x,y,ξ)/
a(x, y, ξ) u(y) dξ dy.
As before, the class of quantizable halfdensities (and canonical relations) is constrained
by the necessary conditions for this integral to converge. In this section, we will only be
concerned with a few specialized cases; a detailed description of this theory can be found in
[21, 28, 31, 43, 56].
Perhaps the simplest generalization of the picture of (pseudo)diﬀerential operators given
above is provided by quantizing semiclassical states whose underlying lagrangian subman
ifolds are conormal bundles. Let M be a smooth manifold with a smooth submanifold N.
As constructed in Example 4.29, the conormal bundle L
N
⊂ T
∗
N is generated by a single
91
Morse family (B, V, p
V
, φ) with the properties that V is a tubular neighborhood of N in M
and B is a vector bundle over V with ﬁber dimension equal to the codimension of N in M.
As in the case of (pseudo)diﬀerential operators, an amplitude a on B having an asymptotic
expansion in terms which are positively homogeneous with respect to the natural R
+
action
on the ﬁbers of p
V
: B → V gives rise to a welldeﬁned distributional halfdensity family
I
(L, s) on M.
It is easy to see that the ﬁbercritical set Σ
φ
is invariant under the R
+
action on B, and
that the identiﬁcation L
N
· Σ
φ
deﬁned by λ
φ
is equivariant with respect to the natural
R
+
action on L
N
. Consequently, positively homogeneous symbols on L
N
induce positively
homogeneous amplitudes on B of the same order, and we can proceed to deﬁne I
(L, s) as
before by requiring that s be homogeneous.
When M = X Y is a product manifold, the distributions I
(L, s) represent Schwartz
kernels for continuous linear operators [Ω[
1/2
0
X →[Ω[
1/2
∞
Y . Under certain additional restric
tions on N which are always fulﬁlled, for example, when N is the graph of a diﬀeomorphism
X →Y , these operators map [Ω[
1/2
0
X to [Ω[
1/2
0
Y and extend continuously to [Ω[
1/2
−∞
X. More
over, they satisfy the composition law
I
(
˜
L, ˜s) ◦ I
(L, s) = I
(
˜
L ◦ L, ˜s ◦ s).
Example 6.9 If X, Y are smooth manifolds and f : X → Y is a smooth diﬀeomorphism,
then the procedure described above can be applied to the graph Γ
f
of f, viewed as a
smooth submanifold of X Y . The family I
(L
f
, s) of distributions on X Y deﬁned
above corresponds via the Schwartz kernel theorem to a family of continuous linear maps
[Ω[
1/2
0
X →[Ω[
1/2
−∞
Y
A diﬀeomorphism f : X →Y induces a unitary operator on intrinsic Hilbert spaces given
by pullback:
(f
∗
)
−1
: H
X
→H
Y
.
At the same time, f gives rise to a symplectomorphism of cotangent bundles:
(T
∗
f)
−1
: T
∗
X →T
∗
Y.
Of course, the more interesting Fourier integral operators from [Ω[
1/2
X to [Ω[
1/2
Y come
from quantizing canonical relations from T
∗
X to T
∗
Y which do not arise from diﬀeomor
phisms from X to Y . For instance, quantizing the hamiltonian ﬂow ¦ϕ
t
¦ of a hamiltonian
H on T
∗
X gives the solution operators exp(−it
ˆ
H/) of the Schr¨odinger equation.
´
92
7 Geometric Quantization
7.1 Prequantization
In the preceding chapter, we observed that the characteristic variety C = C
P
of a diﬀerential
operator P
on a riemannian manifold M represents the classical analog of the kernel of P
in
H
M
, in the sense that semiclassical states contained in C quantize to ﬁrstorder approximate
solutions of the equation P
= 0. When C is reducible, the lagrangian submanifolds of M
contained in C correspond to lagrangian submanifolds of the reduced manifold C/(
⊥
. This
suggests that if C is reducible, then a quantum Hilbert space H
C
somehow associated to the
reduced manifold C/(
⊥
should map isometrically onto the kernel of P
via an appropriate
quantization of the adjoint reduction relation R
∗
C
∈ Hom(C/(
⊥
, T
∗
M). Before turning to a
systematic means for deﬁning H
C
, let us consider what conditions the reduced manifold C/(
⊥
must satisfy in order that quantizations of the reduction and projection relations be well
deﬁned for arbitrary quantizable semiclassical states. Speciﬁcally, we ask what assumptions
on C guarantee that the classical projection operation K
C
preserves the class of quantizable
lagrangian submanifolds in T
∗
M.
For the time being, we will ignore the Maslov correction and assume that C/(
⊥
is simply
connected. A simple argument then shows that K
C
preserves the class of prequantizable
lagrangian submanifolds provided that the Liouville class of each (
⊥
leaf is integral.
To interpret this condition in terms of C/(
⊥
, ﬁrst note that if C/(
⊥
is simplyconnected,
any class [a] ∈ H
2
(C/(
⊥
; Z) is represented by a continuous map
(D, ∂D)
f
→(C/(
⊥
, [I])
for a ﬁxed leaf I of (
⊥
. By the homotopy lifting property, f lifts to a continuous map
(D, ∂D)
˜
f
→(C, I).
Applying Stokes’ theorem, we then have
[a]
ω
C
=
∂D
˜
f
∗
α
M
∈ Z
by the assumption that the Liouville class of I is integral. Thus, we conclude that K
C
preserves prequantizable lagrangian submanifolds provided that the reduced symplectic form
ω
C
is itself integral. In this case, the reduced manifold C/(
⊥
is said to be prequantizable.
Example 7.1 From Example 5.13 we recall that the standard metric on the unit nsphere
S
n
induces a kinetic energy function k
n
whose constant energy surfaces C
E
are reducible
coisotropic submanifolds of T
∗
S
n
for E > 0. Each leaf of the characteristic foliation of C
E
is a circle S which projects diﬀeomorphically to a great circle in S
n
. If γ parametrizes a
such a geodesic, then its lift to a parametrization of S satisﬁes ˙ γ = (2E)
−1/2
X
kn
. Since
α
M
(X
kn
) = 2E, the Liouville class of S is determined by the number
S
α
M
= 2π (2E)
1/2
.
Thus C
E
is prequantizable if and only if E = (n)
2
/2 (compare Example 4.2).
93
´
By Theorem D.2, this condition is equivalent to the existence of a principal T
bundle
Q over C/(
⊥
. In fact, the bundle Q can be constructed explicitly from the prequantum
T
bundle Q
M
over T
∗
M by noting that for any leaf I of (
⊥
, the modZ
reduction of λ
I
represents the holonomy of Q
M
[
I
; if λ
I
is integral, there exists a parallel section of Q
M
over I. If C/(
⊥
is prequantizable, parallel sections over the leaves of (
⊥
deﬁne a foliation
O of Q
M
[
L
whose leaf space is a principal T
bundle Q over C/(
⊥
. The connection on Q
induced by the connection on Q
M
has curvature equal to the reduced symplectic form ω
C
.
A linear mapping ρ : C
∞
(P) → S(H
P
) satisfying the ﬁrst two Dirac axioms will be
called a prequantization of the classical system represented by P. The basic example of
prequantization is that of cotangent bundles due to Segal [52], Koopman, and Van Hove.
In this case, the prequantum Hilbert space is taken to be the completion of the space of
smooth, complexvalued functions on the cotangent bundle P = T
∗
M itself, with respect to
the innerproduct
'f, g` =
P
f g ω
n
M
.
The mapping C
∞
(P) →S(H
P
) is then given explicitly by the formula
ρ(f) = −i X
f
+ m
L(f)
,
where as usual m
L(f)
denotes multiplication by the lagrangian L(f) = f −α
M
(X
f
). Clearly
the map ρ is linear and satisﬁes the ﬁrst Dirac axiom; veriﬁcation of the second is also
straightforward and will be carried out in somewhat more generality below.
The Segal prequantization is an important ﬁrst step towards attempts at (pre)quantizing
more general symplectic manifolds. Roughly speaking, the idea is the following: Although
the symplectic form of an arbitrary symplectic manifold (P, ω) is not exact, we can choose
a covering of P by open sets U
j
on which the restriction of the symplectic form satisﬁes
ω = −dα
j
for appropriately chosen 1forms α
j
on U
j
. In direct analogy with the Segal
prequantization, we can then associate to a function f ∈ C
∞
(P) the operator
ρ(f)
j
= −iX
f
+ m
L
j
(f)
,
on C
∞
(U
j
). In order to associate a “global” operator to f, we hope to piece these local
operators together. One way of doing this would be to impose the condition that each ρ(f)
j
and ρ(f)
k
coincide as operators on the function space C
∞
(U
j
∩U
k
). This essentially requires
that the 1forms α
j
agree on overlaps, and we arrive at nothing new.
A true generalization of the Segal construction due to Kostant and Souriau is achieved
by ﬁrst reinterpreting ρ(f) as an operator on sections of a line bundle over P = T
∗
M. More
precisely, let E be the complex line bundle over P associated to the trivial principal T
bundle Q = P T
via the representation x → e
−ix/
of T
in U(1). The space of sections
of E identiﬁes canonically with C
∞
(P) by means of the constant section s = 1, and we have
ρ(f) = −i∇
X
f
+ m
f
,
94
where ∇ denotes the connection on E induced by the connection 1form ϕ = −α
M
+dσ on Q.
Returning to the general case, we ﬁnd that the operators ρ(f)
j
enjoy a similar interpretation
provided that −α
j
+ dσ deﬁnes a local representative of a connection 1form on a (possi
bly nontrivial) principal T
bundle Q over P. The curvature of such a bundle necessarily
coincides with the symplectic form on P; according to the discussion in Appendix C, this
condition can be satisﬁed if and only if ω is integral.
Deﬁnition 7.2 A prequantization of a symplectic manifold (P, ω) is a principal T
bundle
Q over P equipped with a connection 1form ϕ having curvature ω.
The upshot of the KostantSouriau construction is that prequantizable symplectic manifolds
have prequantizable Poisson algebras. While a direct proof of this fact follows the outline of
the preceding paragraph, we will study prequantizable manifolds in somewhat more detail
below. The prequantum Hilbert space in this case will be the completion of the vector
space of smooth sections of a hermitian line bundle associated to Q. Although several more
modiﬁcations of this choice must be made in order to arrive at a reasonable substitute for
the intrinsic Hilbert space of the base of a cotangent bundle, this is an important ﬁrst step
in our general quantization program.
For the remainder of this section, we will focus on geometric properties of prequantum
circle bundles and prove that their existence coincides with the prequantizability of C
∞
(P).
Automorphisms of (Q, ϕ)
Let P be a prequantizable symplectic manifold with prequantumT
bundle Q and connection
ϕ. To a function f ∈ C
∞
(P), we associate an operator on C
∞
(Q):
ξ
f
= X
f
−fX,
where X
f
denotes the horizontal lift of the hamiltonian vector ﬁeld of f, and X is the
fundamental vector ﬁeld on Q deﬁned by the equations
X ϕ = 1 X dϕ = 0.
A direct computation shows that the connection form ϕ is invariant under the ﬂow of ξ
(k)
f
.
Conversely, if L
ξ
ϕ = 0 for some vector ﬁeld ξ on Q, then we can decompose ξ into its
horizontal and vertical parts:
ξ = ξ −gX
for some realvalued function g on Q satisfying dg = ξ dϕ. From the deﬁnition of X it
follows that X g = 0 and [ξ, X] = 0, and consequently, [ξ, X] = 0. Thus, ξ is the horizontal
lift of X
g
, and so ξ = ξ
g
. Moreover, the requirement that the curvature of ϕ equal the
symplectic form ω implies
[ξ
f
, ξ
g
] = [X
f
, X
g
] + ω(X
f
, X
g
)X −2¦f, g¦X = ξ
f,g¦
.
95
The association f → ξ
f
therefore deﬁnes a Lie algebra isomorphism between the Poisson
algebra C
∞
(P) and the space χ(Q, ϕ) of ϕpreserving vector ﬁelds on Q with the standard
Lie bracket. This produces the exact sequence of Lie algebras
0 →R →χ(Q, ϕ) →χ(P, ω) →H
1
(P; R) →0,
where H
1
(P; R) is assigned the trivial bracket, and the image of χ(Q, ϕ) in χ(P, ω) consists
precisely of the hamiltonian vector ﬁelds on P. This sequence can be integrated to give
an exact sequence of automorphism groups as follows. Let (Q, ϕ) be a prequantization of
(P, ω), and let Aut(Q, ϕ), Aut(P, ω) denote those groups of diﬀeomorphisms which preserve
ϕ, ω respectively. By the deﬁnition of X it follows that every F ∈ Aut(Q, ϕ) preserves X and
is therefore T
equivariant. In particular, this means that F is the lift of a diﬀeomorphism f
of P; from the fact that π
∗
ω = dϕ it follows furthermore that f
∗
ω = ω, that is, f ∈ Aut(P, ω).
The association F →f deﬁnes a group homomorphism
Aut(Q, ϕ) →Aut(P, ω).
To determine its kernel, we simply note that the identity map on P is covered by precisely
those automorphisms of Q given by the action of elements of T
on its connected components.
This implies that the kernel is isomorphic to H
0
(P, T
); if P (and hence Q) is connected,
this is just the circle T
and we have the exact sequence
0 →T
→Aut(Q, ϕ) →Aut(P, ω),
i.e. Aut(Q, ϕ) is a central extension of Aut(P, ω) by T
. We interpret this observation to
mean that an automorphism of Q is determined “up to phase” by an automorphism of P.
If we equip the space C
∞
(Q) of complexvalued functions on Q with the innerproduct
'u, v` =
Q
uv µ,
where µ denotes the volume form ϕ∧(dϕ)
n
on Q, then each F ∈ Aut(Q, ϕ) preserves µ, and
therefore deﬁnes a unitary operator U
F
on C
∞
(Q) by composition:
U
F
(u) = u ◦ F.
Clearly the correspondence F →U
F
deﬁnes a unitary representation of Aut(Q, ϕ) on L
2
(Q);
from the exact sequence above, we therefore obtain a projective unitary representation of the
image of Aut(Q, ϕ) in Aut(P, ω).
Example 7.3 Translations of R
2n
are generated by the hamiltonian vector ﬁelds associated
to linear functionals on R
2n
. A basis for this space is given by the vector ﬁelds
X
q
i
= −
∂
∂p
i
X
p
i
=
∂
∂q
i
,
which assume the form
ξ
q
i
= −
∂
∂p
i
−q
i
X ξ
p
i
=
∂
∂q
i
96
when lifted to Q = R
2n
T
via the Segal prescription ξ
f
= X
f
− L(f)X, where again
L(f) = f − α
M
(X
f
). Our earlier results show that [ξ
q
i
, ξ
p
j
] = ξ
q
i
,p
j
¦
= δ
ij
X, and so the
vector ﬁelds ξ
q
i
, ξ
p
i
generate a Lie subalgebra h
n
⊂ χ(Q, ϕ) isomorphic to R
2n
R with
bracket given by
[(v, a), (w, b)] = (0, ω(v, w)).
By exponentiating, we ﬁnd that h
n
corresponds to a subgroup H
n
⊂ Aut(Q, ϕ) which
comprises a central extension of the translation group:
0 →T
→H
n
→R
2n
→0.
The group H
n
is known as the Heisenberg group of R
2n
with its usual symplectic structure.
In explicit terms, H
n
is diﬀeomorphic to R
2n
T
, with group multiplication given by
(Q, P, σ) (Q
t
, P
t
, σ
t
) = (Q + Q
t
, P + P
t
, σ
t
) = (Q + Q
t
, P + P
t
, σ + σ
t
+
¸
j
P
j
Q
t
j
).
´
KostantSouriau prequantization
To prequantize the Poisson algebra C
∞
(P), we ﬁrst recall that complex line bundles E
k
associated to Q arise via representations of T
in U(1) of the form x → e
ikx/
. Smooth
sections of E
k
identify with functions on Q satisfying the equivariance condition
f(p a) = e
−ika/
f(p)
for a ∈ T
; in other words, the space of sections of E
k
is isomorphic to the −ik/eigenspace
c
k
of the fundamental vector ﬁeld X. Under this correspondence, covariant diﬀerentiation
by a vector ﬁeld η on P is given simply by the Lie derivative with respect to the horizontal
lift η of η to Q.
To each f ∈ C
∞
(P) and integer k, we assign an operator on C
∞
(Q) by
ξ
(k)
f
= −
i
k
ξ
f
.
Since [ξ
f
, X] = 0, the operator ξ
(k)
f
restricts to an operator on each eigenspace c
k
of X having
the form
ρ
k
(f) = −
i
k
X
f
+ m
f
.
Evidently the map ρ
k
satisﬁes the ﬁrst Dirac axiom; moreover
ρ
k
(¦f, g¦) = k [ρ
k
(f), ρ
k
(g)]
.
To verify that ρ
k
(f) is selfadjoint, is suﬃces to prove that ρ
k
(f) acts as a symmetric operator
on the real subspace of c
k
. For this purpose, we note that if the hamiltonian vector ﬁeld of
97
f is integrable (for example, if f is compactly supported), then the fact that ξ
f
preserves ϕ
implies that
'ξ
f
u, v` = −'u, ξ
f
v`
for realvalued functions u, v on Q. Combined with the deﬁnition of ρ
k
, conjugatesymmetry
of the innerproduct implies that
'ρ
k
(f) u, v` = 'u, ρ
k
(f) v`.
We now deﬁne the prequantum line bundle associated to Q as E = E
−1
, equipped
with a hermitian metric ' , ` compatible with its induced connection, and let H
P
denote
the L
2
completion of the space of compactly supported sections of E with respect to the
innerproduct
's
1
, s
2
` =
P
's
1
, s
2
` ω
n
.
For each f ∈ C
∞
(P), the operator ρ
−1
(f) extends to an essentially selfadjoint operator on
H
P
; from the general remarks above, it follows that ρ
−1
deﬁnes a prequantization of the
Poisson algebra C
∞
(P).
7.2 Polarizations and the metaplectic correction
The KostantSouriau prequantization of symplectic manifolds fails to satisfy the third Dirac
axiom and is therefore not a quantization. In fact, the position and momentum operators
ρ(q) = −i
∂
∂p
+ m
q
ρ(p) = −i
∂
∂q
on T
∗
R both commute with ∂/∂p and therefore do not form a complete set. According to
our earliest concepts of quantization (see the Introduction), the operator corresponding to q
should act by multiplication alone, whereas ˆ q involves the spurious ∂/∂p term. If we restrict
to the pindependent subspace C
∞
q
(R
2
) · C
∞
(R), however, this diﬃculty is overcome: on
C
∞
q
(R
2
),
ρ(q) = m
q
ρ(p) = −i
∂
∂q
.
This association agrees with our earlier heuristic quantization of the classical position and
momentum observables and suggests in general that the space of sections of a prequantum
line bundle E is too “large” for the third Dirac axiom to be satisﬁed. Indeed, in quantum
mechanics, wave functions depend on only half of the phase space variables, whereas the
space of sections of E has the “size” of the space of functions on P. For an interpretation of
this argument in terms of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, see [53].
From the standpoint of WKB quantization, the appropriate quantum state space asso
ciated with a classical conﬁguration space M is (the L
2
completion of) [Ω[
1/2
0
M, which we
temporarily identify with C
∞
(M) using a metric on M. Since the Liouville form α
M
vanishes
on each ﬁber of the projection T
∗
M
π
→M, we can interpret C
∞
(M) as the space of sections
of the prequantum line bundle E over T
∗
M which are parallel along each ﬁber of π. In other
98
words, the correct adjustment to the size of the prequantum Hilbert space is determined by
the (canonical) foliation of T
∗
M by lagrangian submanifolds.
This adjustment is generalized in the framework of geometric quantization by the intro
duction of the following concept.
Deﬁnition 7.4 A polarization of a symplectic manifold (P, ω) is an involutive lagrangian
subbundle T of T
C
P.
Here, T
C
P denotes the complexiﬁcation of the tangent bundle of P, equipped with the
complexvalued symplectic form ω
C
given by the complexlinear extension of ω to T
C
P. In
tegrability of T means that locally on P there exist complexvalued functions whose hamil
tonian vector ﬁelds (with respect to ω
C
) span T. The quantum state space associated to P
is then given by the space of sections s of a prequantum line bundle E over P which are
covariantly constant along T. That is, for each complex vector ﬁeld X on P lying in T, we
have ∇
X
s = 0.
Real polarizations
The standard polarization of a classical phase space T
∗
M is given by the complexiﬁcation
T = V M ⊕ iV M of the vertical subbundle of T(T
∗
M). In this case, the polarization T
satisﬁes T = T, meaning that T
p
is a totally real subspace of T
C,p
(T
∗
M) for each p ∈
T
∗
M. In general, any polarization T of a symplectic manifold P which satisﬁes T = T
is the complexiﬁcation of an integrable lagrangian subbundle of TP and is called a real
polarization of P.
Example 7.5 The most basic examples of real polarizations are given by either the planes
q=constant or p=constant in R
2n
. These correspond to the δ
q
and e
iπ/p,)/
bases of L
2
(R
n
)
respectively, in the sense that
f =
R
n
f(q) δ(q) dq = (2π)
−n/2
R
n
e
iπ/p,q)/
ˆ
f dp.
Covariant diﬀerentiation along vector ﬁelds X tangent to the q=constant polarization T
q
is given by the ordinary Lie derivative with respect to X, and so the space of T
q
parallel
sections of the prequantum line bundle E identiﬁes with the space of smooth functions on
qspace. For the p=constant polarization T
p
, we consider covariant derivatives of the form
∇ ∂
∂q
=
∂
∂q
−p
∂
∂σ
.
A T
p
parallel section ψ of E must therefore satisfy
∂ψ
∂q
−2πipψ
and is therefore of the form ψ(q, p) = v(p)e
iπ/p,q)/
. Note that the T
p
representation of the
freeparticle H(q, p) = p
2
/2 is ρ(H) = m
p
2
/2
, and so the ppolarization appears to be better
adapted to this case.
99
´
A real polarization T of a symplectic 2nmanifold P deﬁnes a subspace T(P) ⊂ C
∞
(P)
of functions constant along the leaves of T. According to the HamiltonJacobi theorem, the
hamiltonian vector ﬁeld of any member of T(P) is contained in T. Thus ¦f, g¦ = 0 for
any f, g ∈ T(P), i.e., T(P) is an abelian Poisson subalgebra of C
∞
(P). By modifying the
normal form results of Chapter 4, one can furthermore prove
Theorem 7.6 Every real polarization is locally isomorphic to the q=constant polarization
on R
2n
.
By pulling back the position functions q
i
to P, we have
Corollary 7.7 For each p ∈ P, there exist f
i
∈ T(P), i = 1, , n, such that the hamilto
nian vector ﬁelds X
i
span T in a neighborhood of p.
An aﬃne structure on a manifold M is a curvature and torsionfree connection on TM.
Since any polarizationpreserving symplectic transformation of T
∗
R
n
· R
2n
is aﬃne on ﬁbers
(see Theorem 3.29), we have the following result.
Corollary 7.8 Each leaf of any real polarization carries a natural aﬃne structure.
The main remark we wish to make for the moment is that our earlier prequantization ρ
−1
of C
∞
(P) now represents the subalgebra T(P) ⊂ C
∞
(P) as multiplication operators on H
T
.
Since any f ∈ T(P) has the property that its hamiltonian vector ﬁeld X
f
lies completely
within the polarization T, it follows that ∇
X
f
s = 0 for all s ∈ H
T
. By the deﬁnition of ρ
−1
,
this implies that ρ
−1
(f) = m
f
, the multiplication operator on H
T
. More generally, those
functions whose hamiltonian vector ﬁelds have ﬂows which leave the polarization invariant
(not necessarily leaf by leaf) are those which are “aﬃne” along the leaves.
Example 7.9 Following [28], we call a polarization T on P ﬁbrating if each leaf of T is
simplyconnected and the leaf space P
T
= P/T is a smooth manifold. In this case, the
quotient map p : P → P
T
satisﬁes T = ker p
∗
, and so p
∗
T
∗
P
T
identiﬁes with the normal
bundle T
⊥
⊂ T
∗
P. Since T is a lagrangian distribution, the map ˜ ω: TP →T
∗
P sends T to
T
⊥
as well, thus deﬁning a natural identiﬁcation
T · p
∗
T
∗
P
T
.
A function H: P →R constant on the leaves of T induces a function H
T
on P
T
satisfying
dH = p
∗
dH
T
.
From this remark, it follows that a section s of T over a leaf L is parallel with respect to
the connection described above if and only if (˜ ω ◦ s) deﬁnes a ﬁxed element of T
∗
L¦
P
T
.
Similarly, if E is a prequantum line bundle over P, we may use parallel sections of E over
the leaves of T to construct a foliation of the total space of E. The quotient of E by this
100
foliation deﬁnes a hermitian line bundle E
T
over the leaf space P
T
whose sections identify
with Tparallel sections of E.
The simplest example of a ﬁbrating polarization is given by the vertical polarization T
M
of a cotangent bundle T
∗
M. The basic geometry of this situation remains the same if the
symplectic structure on T
∗
M is perturbed by a form on M. More precisely, given a closed
2form η on M, we can “twist” the standard symplectic structure on T
∗
M as follows:
ω = ω
M
+ π
∗
η.
Since π
∗
η vanishes on the ﬁbers of the projection, ω is a symplectic form on T
∗
M and ker π
∗
is again a polarization. This general type of symplectic manifold is known as a twisted
cotangent bundle. A check of deﬁnitions shows that the standard and twisted symplectic
structures on T
∗
M are equivalent precisely when their diﬀerence is the pullback of an exact
form on M. Moreover, the symplectic manifold (T
∗
M, ω
M
+ π
∗
η) is prequantizable if and
only if the cohomology class of η in H
2
(M; R) is integral. Finally, an application of
Corollary 7.8 proves that if each leaf of a ﬁbrating polarization T on a symplectic manifold
(P, ω), is complete, then (P, ω) is symplectomorphic to a twisted symplectic structure on
T
∗
P
T
.
´
Complex polarizations
Associated to any polarization T are the distributions
D
C
= T ∩ T E
C
= T +T
which arise as the complexiﬁcations of distributions D, E in TP. Although their dimensions
vary in general from point to point, D and E are pointwise ωorthogonal, i.e.
D
⊥
x
= E
x
for all x ∈ P. From the deﬁnition of T, the distribution D is involutive. The polarization
T is called strongly admissible provided that E is involutive, the leaf spaces P
D
and P
E
are smooth manifolds, and the natural projection
P
D
π
→P
E
is a submersion. In this case, each ﬁber of π carries a K¨ahler structure, and geometric quan
tization attempts to construct a quantum state space for P from sections of an appropriate
line bundle over P which are parallel along D and holomorphic along the ﬁbers of π. For a
discussion of quantization in this general setting, we refer to [53].
A polarization satisfying T ∩T = ¦0¦ is called totally complex and identiﬁes with the
graph of a complex structure J on P, i.e.,
T = ¦(v, iJv) : v ∈ TP¦
101
under the identiﬁcation T
C
P · TP ⊕ iTP. We emphasize that J is a genuine complex
structure on P due to the integrability condition on the polarization T. Moreover, J is
compatible in the usual sense with the symplectic form ω on P, so the hermitian metric
' , ` = g
J
+ iω is a K¨ahler structure on P. In this section, we will only cite two examples
involving totally complex T, in which case P
D
= P is K¨ahler, and P
E
= ¦pt¦.
Example 7.10 Consider the complex plane C with its usual complex and symplectic struc
tures. With respect to Darboux coordinates (q, p), the CauchyRiemann operator is deﬁned
as
∂
∂z
=
1
2
∂
∂q
+ i
∂
∂p
.
A function f : C →C is holomorphic if ∂f/∂z = 0.
If we identify sections of the (trivial) prequantum line bundle E with smooth, complex
valued functions on C, then Tparallel sections correspond to those functions annihilated by
the covariant derivative
∇ ∂
∂z
= 2
∂
∂z
+ m
z
.
To determine the general form of these sections, we note that ∇ ∂
∂z
ψ = 0 if and only if for
some branch of the logarithm,
∂
∂z
log ψ = −
z
2
,
or
log ψ = −
zz
2
+ h
for some holomorphic function h. Hence
ψ(z) = ϕe
−[z[
2
/2
with ϕ holomorphic is the general form for Tparallel sections of E. The space H
C
thus
identiﬁes with the space of holomorphic ϕ: C →C satisfying
ϕ =
C
[ϕ(z)[
2
e
−[z[
2
dz < ∞,
or, in other words, the space of holomorphic functions which are squareintegrable with
respect to the measure e
−[z[
2
dz, known as the Fock or BargmanSegal space. For a func
tion to be quantizable in this picture, its hamiltonian ﬂow must preserve both the metric
and symplectic structure of C and therefore consist solely of euclidean motions. Among
such functions are the usual position and momentum observables, as well as the harmonic
oscillator.
´
Example 7.11 If (P, ω) is any prequantizable symplectic manifold with a totally complex
polarization T, then the prequantum line bundle E associated to ω can be given the structure
of a holomorphic line bundle by taking the (0, 1) component of the connection on E with
102
respect to the complex structure J arising from T. The space H
T
of Tparallel sections of E
then equals the space of holomorphic sections of E and is therefore completely determined
by the complex geometry of P.
Using some machinery from algebraic geometry (see [15]), it can be shown that for com
pact P, the space H
P
is ﬁnitedimensional and that its dimension is given asymptotically by
the symplectic volume of P. More precisely, we note that for k ∈ Z
+
, the line bundle E
⊗k
deﬁnes a holomorphic prequantum line bundle associated with (P, kω). For suﬃciently large
k, the dimension of the quantum state space H
P
k
of holomorphic sections of E
⊗k
is given by
the HirzebruchRiemannRoch formula:
dimH
P
k
=
P
e
kω
Td(P),
where Td denotes the Todd polynomial in the total Chern class of P. The ﬁrst conclusion
to be drawn from this fact is that for k large, dimH
P
k
is a symplectic invariant of P inde
pendent of its complex structure. Roughly speaking, k plays the role of
−1
, and so “large
k” means that we are approaching the classical limit. A second point to note is that dimH
P
k
is a polynomial in k (or
−1
) whose leadingorder term is
P
(kω)
n
n!
= k
n
vol P.
Consequently the number of quantum states is determined asymptotically by the volume of
P.
´
Metalinear structures and halfforms
For the remainder of this chapter, we will focus on the quantization of symplectic manifolds
P equipped with a prequantum line bundle E and a “suﬃciently nice” real polarization T.
Although the space H
T
of Tparallel sections of E appears to have the right “size” in the
simplest examples, there are still several problems to be resolved before we have a suitable
quantum state space. The ﬁrst arises as soon as we attempt to deﬁne a preHilbert space
structure on H
T
. On P, the square of an Tparallel section s is constant along the leaves of
T, and thus the integral
s
2
=
P
's, s` ω
n
diverges in general. On the other hand, there is no canonical measure on the leaf space P
T
with which to integrate the induced function 's, s`.
Regardless of how this ﬁrst diﬃculty is resolved, we will again try to quantize the Poisson
algebra C
∞
(P) by representing elements of Aut(P, ω) as (projective) unitary operators on
H
T
. The most obvious quantization of a symplectomorphism f : P → P (or more general
canonical relation), however, is an operator from H
T
to H
f(T)
. If f does not preserve the
polarization T, then these spaces are distinct. Thus, we will need some means for canonically
identifying the quantum state spaces H
T
associated to diﬀerent polarizations of P.
103
Finally, the polarization T may have multiplyconnected leaves, over most of which the
prequantum line bundle may admit only the trivial parallel section. A preliminary solution
to this problem is to admit “distributional” states, such as are given by Tparallel sections
of E whose restrictions to each leaf are smooth. Leaves on which E has trivial holonomy are
then said to comprise the BohrSommerfeld subvariety of the pair (P, T).
Example 7.12 Consider the punctured phase plane
˙
R
2
= R
2
` ¦0¦ polarized by level sets
of the harmonic oscillator H(q, p) = (q
2
+ p
2
)/2. The holonomy of the usual prequantum
line bundle on the level set H
−1
(E) is given by the modZ
reduction of the area it encloses;
thus the BohrSommerfeld variety consists of those circles of energy E = n. As in the
case of WKB prequantization, these energy levels do not correspond to actual physical
measurements, and so we will again need to incorporate a sort of Maslov correction.
´
The solution to manhy of these diﬃculties relies on the use of a metaplectic structure on
P, a concept which we now introduce. Let P be a principal G bundle over a manifold M.
A meta Gbundle associated to P and a central extension
1 →K →
˜
G
ρ
→G →1
of G is a principal
˜
G bundle
˜
P over M together with a map Φ :
˜
P → P satisfying the
equivariance condition
Φ(p a) = Φ(p) ρ(a)
for all a ∈
˜
G. Two meta Gbundles (
˜
P
1
, Φ
1
), (
˜
P
2
, Φ
2
) over P are considered equivalent if
there exists a
˜
Gequivariant diﬀeomorphism ψ:
˜
P
1
→
˜
P
2
such that Φ
1
= Φ
2
◦ ψ.
Example 7.13 A riemannian structure together with an orientation of an nmanifold M
deﬁnes a bundle of oriented orthonormal frames in TM, i.e. an SO(n)structure on M. A
spin structure on M is then a meta SO(n)bundle corresponding to the extension
1 →K →Spin(n) →SO(n) →1
given by the double cover Spin(n) of SO(n). An orientable manifold admits a spin structure
if and only if its second StiefelWhitney class vanishes.
´
Example 7.14 Since π
1
(Sp(n)) · Z, there exists a unique connected doublecovering group
of Sp(n), known as the metaplectic group Mp(n). A symplectic 2nplane bundle F admits
a reduction of its structure group from GL(2n) to Sp(n); a metaplectic structure on F
then corresponds to a lifting of the symplectic frame bundle to a principal Mp(n) bundle. In
general, a symplectic vector bundle admits a metaplectic structure if and only if its second
StiefelWhitney class vanishes.
A symplectic manifold P whose tangent bundle is equipped with a metaplectic structure
is called a metaplectic manifold. If the StiefelWhitney class w
2
(P) is zero, metaplectic
104
structures are classiﬁed by the set H
1
(P; Z
2
) (see [28]). We emphasize that this classiﬁcation
depends on the bundle of metaplectic frames and its covering map to the bundle of symplectic
frames. To see this explicitly in a special case, note that up to topological equivalence, the
punctured plane
˙
R
2
admits only trivial Sp(1) and Mp(1) principal bundles, since both Sp(1)
and Mp(1) are connected. On the other hand, a metaplectic structure
Φ:
˙
R
2
Mp(1) →
˙
R
2
Sp(1)
is deﬁned for any choice of continuous map s:
˙
R
2
→Sp(1) by
Φ(p, A) = (p, s(p) ρ(A))
for A ∈ Mp(1). Two such maps s
0
, s
1
deﬁne equivalent metaplectic structures if and only if
(s
1
)
−1
s
0
admits a continuous lift ˜ s:
˙
R
2
→Mp(1), in which case an equivalence is given by
the map ψ:
˙
R
2
Mp(1) →
˙
R
2
Mp(1) deﬁned as
ψ(p, A) = (p, ˜ s(p) A)
By the usual homotopy theory for continuous groups, this occurs precisely when [s
0
] = [s
1
]
as elements of π
1
(Sp(1))/ρ
#
π
1
(Mp(1)) · Z
2
.
´
Example 7.15 Lying within the metaplectic group is a doublecover Ml(n) of the subgroup
Gl(n) preserving the usual lagrangian splitting of R
2n
. The double covering of GL(n) then
induced by the identiﬁcation GL(n) · Gl(n) (see Example 3.1) is called the metalinear
group ML(n). It is trivial as a topological covering, but as a group it is not the direct
product GL(n) Z
2
. More explicitly, the group ML(n) is isomorphic to the direct product
GL
+
(n) Z
4
with the covering map ML(n)
ρ
→GL(n) given by
ρ(A, a) = A e
iπa
.
A metalinear lifting of the frames of an nplane bundle E is called a metalinear structure
on E. If E is orientable, its structure group can be reduced to GL
+
(n), which can be
interpreted as the identity component of ML(n) in order to give a metalinear structure on
E. More generally, a vector bundle admits a metalinear structure if and only if the square
of its ﬁrst StiefelWhitney class is zero (see [28]).
´
The importance of the metalinear group for our purposes is that it admits 1dimensional
representations which are not the lifts of representations of GL(n). Bundles associated to
metalinear structures via these representations will be the key to the metaplectic correction
of the prequantization procedure. First note that by means of the quotient homomorphism
ML(n) →ML(n)/GL
+
(n) · Z
4
,
105
we can associate a principal Z
4
bundle to any metalinear structure (MB(E), Φ) on a vector
bundle F. From the representation
a →e
iπa/2
of Z
4
in U(1), we then obtain a complex line bundle Λ
1/2
F called the bundle of halfforms
associated to the triple (F, MB(F), Φ). The reason for this terminology is that the bundle
Λ
1/2
F can be constructed directly from the metalinear frame bundle via the representation
ML(n) →C
∗
given by the squareroot of (det ◦ρ)
(A, a) →(det A)
1/2
e
iπa/2
.
A section of Λ
1/2
F then identiﬁes with a complexvalued function λ on MB(F) satisfying
λ(e) = (det A)
1/2
e
iπa/2
λ(e (A, a)),
and therefore represents, loosely speaking, the squareroot of a volume form on F. By
inverting and conjugating the preceding representation of ML(n), one similarly deﬁnes the
bundles Λ
1/2
F and Λ
−1/2
F of conjugate and negative halfforms on F. Evidently, the product
of two halfforms on F yields an nform; similarly, a halfform λ and a conjugate halfform
µ can be multiplied to give a 1density λµ on the bundle F.
An important link between metalinear and metaplectic structures on symplectic mani
folds can be described as follows.
Theorem 7.16 Let (P, ω) be a symplectic 2nmanifold and L ⊂ TP a lagrangian subbundle.
Then TP admits a metaplectic structure if and only if L admits a metalinear structure.
Proof. If J is any ωcompatible almost complex structure on P, then TP = L⊕JL · L⊕L.
By the Whitney product theorem, we then have
w
2
(P) = w
1
(L)
2
,
and our assertion follows from the remarks in the preceding examples.
More explicitly, we may use L and J to reduce the structure group of TP to the subgroup
Gl(n) ⊂ Sp(n) corresponding to GL(n). The resulting frame bundle is isomorphic to the
frame bundle of L, and thus, a metalinear structure on L can be enlarged to a metaplectic
structure on TP, while a metaplectic structure on TP reduces to a metalinear structure on
L.
2
Now let P be a metaplectic manifold equipped with a prequantum line bundle E and a
real polarization T. By the preceding theorem, T inherits a metalinear structure from the
metaplectic structure on TP, and thus Λ
−1/2
T is deﬁned; it is equipped with a natural ﬂat
connection inherited from the one on T.
Deﬁnition 7.17 The quantum state space H
T
associated to P is the space of sections of
E ⊗Λ
−1/2
T which are covariantly constant and along each leaf of T.
106
In the following examples, we will sketch how in certain cases this deﬁnition enables us to
overcome the diﬃculties mentioned at the beginning of this section.
Example 7.18 We ﬁrst return to Example 7.12 to illustrate how the introduction of half
forms also enables us to incorporate the BohrSommerfeld correction in the case of the
1dimensional harmonic oscillator.
To quantize the punctured plane
˙
R
2
with its polarization by circles centered at the origin,
we will use the trivial metaplectic structure on
˙
R
2
(see Example 7.14). In this case, both the
trivial Mp(1) and Sp(1) bundles over
˙
R
2
can be identiﬁed with the set of triples (r, θ, a e
iφ
),
where a, r > 0 and 0 ≤ θ, φ ≤ 2π, and the covering map
˙
R
2
Mp(1) →
˙
R
2
Sp(1) is given
by
(r, θ, a e
iφ
) →(r, θ, a e
2iφ
).
The pullback of
˙
R
2
Sp(1) of T
˙
R
2
to the circle S
r
of radius r can be reduced to the trivial
Gl(1) principal bundle over S
r
0
by means of the lagrangian splitting TS
r
0
⊕JTS
r
0
. In terms
of the identiﬁcations above, the subbundle
˙
R
2
Gl(1) equal the subset
¦(r, θ, a e
iθ
) : r = r
0
, a > 0, 0 ≤ θ ≤ 2π¦
of
˙
R
2
Sp(1) while its corresponding metalinear bundle equals the subset
¦(r, θ, a e
i(θ/2+cπ)
) : r = r
0
, a > 0, 0 ≤ θ ≤ 2π, c ∈ ¦0, 1¦¦
of
˙
R
2
Mp(1). Note that this is a nontrivial Ml(1) bundle over S
r
0
.
From the expression for the covering map given above, it follows easily that the parallel
transport of a negative halfform associated to TS
r
0
around S
r
0
amounts to multiplication
by −1. Consequently, the bundle E ⊗ Λ
−1/2
T admits a parallel section over S
r
0
precisely
when
πr
2
0
=
Sr
0
p dq = π(2n + 1)
for some integer n. That is, the BohrSommerfeld variety consists of circles of energy E =
(n + 1/2)π, in accordance with the corrected BohrSommerfeld quantization conditions
described in Chapter 4.
´
Example 7.19 Over each leaf L of the polarization T, the Bott connection on TL described
in Example 5.17 deﬁnes a foliation of the preimage of L in B(T). As proven in [28], the
quotient of B(T) by this leafwise foliation deﬁnes a metalinear structure on the leaf space
P
T
in such a way that halfforms on P
T
are in 11 correspondence with Tparallel negative
halfforms on T. In this way, the quantum state space H
T
identiﬁes with the space of
compactly supported sections of
E
T
⊗Λ
1/2
P
T
.
The latter space is equipped with a natural innerproduct
's
1
⊗λ
1
, s
2
⊗λ
2
` =
P
F
's
1
, s
2
` λ
1
λ
2
.
Note that integration is welldeﬁned, since λ
1
λ
2
is a density on P
T
.
107
´
BlattnerKostantSternberg kernels
If T
1
and T
2
are ﬁbrating polarizations of P with the property that T
1,x
is transverse to
T
2,x
at each x ∈ P, then the quantum state spaces H
T
1
and H
T
2
can be related as follows.
By assumption, the symplectic form deﬁnes an isomorphism of T
1
with T
∗
2
; similarly, the
metaplectic structure on P deﬁnes a natural isomorphism between the space of halfforms
on T
2
and the space of conjugate halfforms on T
1
(see [28]). Using this identiﬁcation, we
can pair a halfform λ
1
on T
1
with a halfform λ
2
on T
2
to obtain a function (λ
1
, λ
2
) on P.
If we identify elements σ
1
, σ
2
of H
T
1
and H
T
2
with T
i
parallel sections s
i
⊗λ
i
of E ⊗Λ
1/2
T
i
on P, then a sesquilinear pairing H
T
1
H
T
2
→C is deﬁned by
''σ
1
, σ
2
`` =
1
(2π)
n/2
P
's
1
, s
2
` (λ
1
, λ
2
) ω
n
,
where dim(P) = 2n. This pairing is nondegenerate and thus determines a linear operator
B: H
T
2
→H
T
1
satisfying
''σ
1
, σ
2
`` = 'σ
1
, Bσ
2
`
for all σ
1
∈ H
1
and σ
2
∈ H
2
. This construction, which can be extended to more general pairs
of polarizations, is due to Blattner, Kostant, and Sternberg deﬁnes a sesquilinear pairing on
the associated quantum state spaces via a BlattnerKostantSternberg kernel.
Example 7.20 The basic example of a BlattnerKostantSternberg kernel arises from the
classical Fourier transform. From Example 7.5, we recall that for the q =constant polariza
tion T
q
of R
2n
, the space H
Tq
consists of pindependent functions σ
q
(q, p) = u(q) on R
2n
,
which we may identify with the space of smooth functions on qspace. Similarly, if T
p
is the
p =constant polarization, then a smooth function v(p) on pspace identiﬁes with an element
σ
p
(q, p) = v(p)e
i/q,p)/
of H
Tp
. The sesquilinear pairing described above is therefore given by
''σ
q
, σ
p
`` =
1
(2π)
n/2
R
2n
e
i/q,p)/
u(q) v(p) [dq dp[.
Note that this corresponds to the usual association of a distribution ˆ v(q) on qspace to a
function v(p) on pspace via the inverse asymptotic Fourier transform.
´
Given a symplectic manifold P with the structures above, geometric quantization at
tempts to represent the Poisson algebra C
∞
(P) on H
T
as follows. First, if the hamiltonian
ﬂow ϕ
t
of f ∈ C
∞
(P) preserves T, then it lifts to a 1parameter family ˜ ϕ
t
of operators on
smooth sections of E ⊗Λ
1/2
T. The quantum operator associated to T is then
ρ(f) σ = i
d
dt
( ˜ ϕ
t
σ)[
t=0
.
In particular, ρ(f) acts as pointwise multiplication for any f ∈ T(P).
108
For those f ∈ C
∞
(P) whose hamiltonian ﬂow does not preserve T, we assume that
for t ∈ (0, ε), the diﬀerential Dϕ
t
maps T into a polarization T
t
for which there exists a
BlattnerKostantSternberg kernel and a corresponding operator U
t
: H
Tt
→ H
T
. The ﬂow
ϕ
t
deﬁnes an operator ˜ ϕ
t
: H
T
→H
Tt
, and the quantum operator ρ(f) is deﬁned as
ρ(f) σ = i
d
dt
((U
t
◦ ˜ ϕ
t
) σ)[
t=0
.
We refer to [28] for further details.
7.3 Quantization of semiclassical states
In this brief section, we suppose that P is a metaplectic manifold with a prequantum line
bundle E and a ﬁbrating polarization T. Our goal is to comment brieﬂy on how an ele
ment of H
T
can be constructed from a “semiclassical state” in P consisting of a lagrangian
submanifold L ⊂ P with some extra structure, such as a halfdensity or halfform with
coeﬃcients in a prequantum line bundle over P.
Example 7.21 If L ⊂ P intersects each leaf of T transversely in at most one point, then
the section s of E⊗Λ
−1/2
T over L corresponding to a section of E⊗[Λ[
1/2
L can be extended
to a section ˜ s over P which is covariantly constant on each leaf and which vanishes on leaves
which are disjoint from L. In this way, we can regard ˜ s as the quantization of the pair (L, s).
We can generalize this viewpoint by considering a lagrangian submanifold L which has
possibly multiple transverse intersections with the leaves of T (that is, each intersection of
L with a leaf of T is transverse). If s is again a section of E ⊗ Λ
−1/2
T over L, then we
can construct and element of H
T
by “superposition”. More precisely, we think of L as the
union of lagrangian submanifolds L
j
, such that each L
j
intersects any leaf of T at most
once. Applying the procedure above to each (L
j
, s[
L
j
) and summing the results produces an
element of H
T
as long as this sum converges.
Finally, if L is a union of leaves of T and s is a section of E ⊗ Λ
−1/2
T over L which is
covariantly constant along each leaf of T, then we can pair it with arbitrary elements of H
T
by integration over L, thus obtaining a linear functional on H
T
, which, via the inner product
on H
T
, can be considered as a generalized section.
´
Example 7.22 To indicate brieﬂy how “distributional” elements of H
T
arising as in the
preceding example are paired, we consider the following situation. Let (L, s) be a semi
classical state in R
2n
such that L equals the zero section of R
2n
· T
∗
R
n
and s is any section
of E⊗Λ
−1/2
T
q
over L. Similarly, let
˜
L be the ﬁber of T
∗
R
n
over 0 ∈ R
n
along with a constant
section ˜ s of E ⊗ Λ
−1/2
T
q
over
˜
L. According to the preceding example, the quantization of
(L, s) is given by an ordinary smooth function on R
n
, whereas the quantization of (
˜
L, ˜ s) is
“concentrated” at the origin of R
n
.
The meaning of this last statement is made more precise by the fact that if T : R
2n
→R
2n
is a linear symplectomorphism, then the associated quantum operator H
Tq
→ H
T(Tq)
is
109
required to be unitary. By choosing T so that both L and
˜
L are transverse to T(T
q
), we can
quantize (L, s) and (
˜
L, ˜ s) with respect to this new polarization to obtain smooth functions
on the leaf space R
2n
T(Tq)
whose pairing is deﬁned by integration. In terms of H
Tq
, this means
that, up to a normalization, the quantum state obtained from (
˜
L, ˜ s) is a Dirac δfunction
concentrated at the origin of R
n
.
´
110
8 Algebraic Quantization
An approach to quantization going back to Dirac and recently revived in [9][10][11] is based
on the idea that the multiplicative structure of the ∗algebra of quantum observables is more
central to quantization than the representation of observables as operators on Hilbert space,
and that most of quantum mechanics can be done without regards for the precise nature of
observables. Quantum observables comprise a noncommutative algebra / which is assumed
to belong to a family /
of algebras, all with a common underlying vector space, but with
an dependent multiplication ∗
. As → 0, the algebra /
approaches a commutative
algebra /
0
, which may be interpreted as the algebra of functions on a classical phase space.
Additionally, it is assumed that the ∗
commutator approaches the Poisson bracket in the
limit of large quantum numbers:
¦f, g¦ = lim
→0
(f ∗
g −g ∗
f)/i.
The abstract goal of algebraic quantization is to construct the family /
of noncommutative
algebras from a Poisson algebra. In this chapter, we sketch two approaches towards this
goal, known as deformation quantization and the method of symplectic groupoids.
8.1 Poisson algebras and Poisson manifolds
The main objects in algebraic quantization theory are Poisson algebras and Poisson mani
folds.
Deﬁnition 8.1 A Poisson algebra is a real vector space / equipped with a commutative,
associative algebra structure
(f, g) →fg
and a Lie algebra structure
(f, g) →¦f, g¦
which satisfy the compatibility condition
¦fg, h¦ = f ¦g, h¦ +¦f, h¦ g.
A Poisson manifold is a manifold P whose function space C
∞
(P) is a Poisson algebra
with respect to the usual pointwise multiplication of functions and a prescribed Lie algebra
structure.
If P, Q are Poisson manifolds, a smooth map ψ: P →Q is called a Poisson map provided
that it preserves Poisson brackets, i.e. ¦f, g¦ = ¦f ◦ψ, g ◦ψ¦ for all f, g ∈ C
∞
(Q). Similarly,
ψ is called an antiPoisson map if ¦f, g¦ = −¦f ◦ ψ, g ◦ ψ¦ for all f, g ∈ C
∞
(Q).
On a Poisson manifold, the Leibniz identity implies that the Poisson bracket is given by
a skewsymmetric contravariant tensor ﬁeld π via the formula
¦f, g¦ = π(df, dg).
The main examples of Poisson manifolds we will be concerned with are the following.
111
Example 8.2 1. Any smooth manifold M is a Poisson manifold when C
∞
(M) is given the
trivial bracket ¦f, g¦ = 0.
2. Any symplectic manifold is a Poisson manifold with respect to its standard Poisson
structure
¦f, g¦ = X
g
f.
3. Let g be a ﬁnitedimensional Lie algebra with dual g
∗
. The diﬀerential of a smooth
function F : g
∗
g
∗
→ R is a map DF : g
∗
g
∗
→ g g whose composition with the Lie
bracket on g deﬁnes a smooth map [DF] : g
∗
g
∗
→ g. The LiePoisson operator on
C
∞
(g
∗
g
∗
) is the diﬀerential operator T deﬁned by
TF =
1
2
'[DF]
(x,y)
, x + y`.
The dual space g
∗
is then a Poisson manifold when equipped with the LiePoisson bracket
¦f, g¦ = ∆
∗
T(f g),
where ∆: g
∗
→g
∗
g
∗
is the diagonal and f, g ∈ C
∞
(g
∗
). More concretely,
¦f, g¦(µ) = µ([Df, Dg]),
where µ ∈ g
∗
, and Df, Dg : g
∗
→g
∗∗
· g are the diﬀerentials of f and g.
4. If V is a ﬁnitedimensional vector space and π is a skewsymmetric bilinear form on V
∗
,
then
¦f, g¦
def
= π(df, dg)
deﬁnes a Poisson algebra structure on C
∞
(V ), making V a Poisson manifold.
´
8.2 Deformation quantization
The aim of deformation quantization is to describe the family ∗
of quantum products on a
Poisson algebra / as an asymptotic series (in ) of products on /. In accordance with the
introductory remarks above, the zeroth and ﬁrst order terms of this series are determined
by the Poisson algebra structure of /; the role of the higherorder terms is roughly speaking
to give a more precise dependent path from classical to quantum mechanics.
Deﬁnition 8.3 Let / be a complex vector space equipped with a commutative associative
algebra structure, and let ∗
be a family of associative multiplications on / given by a formal
power series
f ∗
g =
∞
¸
j=0
B
j
(f, g)
j
where each B
j
: // →/ is a bilinear map. Then ∗
is called a ∗deformation of / if
112
1. B
0
(f, g) equals the product in /.
2. B
j
(g, f) = (−1)
j
B(f, g)
3. B
j
(1, f) = 0 for j ≥ 1
4. B
j
is a diﬀerential operator in each argument.
5. (f ∗
g) ∗
h = f ∗
(g ∗
h)
For condition (5) to make sense, we must extend the product ∗
in the obvious way from /
to the space /[[]] of formal power series. We emphasize that the power series above is not
in general assumed to converge for = 0. Instead it should be viewed as an “asymptotic
expansion” for the product, and manipulations of this series will be purely formal.
In any case, conditions (15) imply that
¦f, g¦
def
=
1
2i
B
1
(f, g)
deﬁnes a Poisson algebra structure on /. This observation suggests the question of whether
every Poisson structure on a function algebra C
∞
(P) can be realized as the ﬁrst order term
in a ∗deformation of /.
Example 8.4 If V is a ﬁnitedimensional real vector space and π : V
∗
V
∗
→ R is a
skewsymmetric bilinear form on V
∗
, then the Hessian of π at 0 ∈ V
∗
V
∗
is a linear map
A = Hπ : V
∗
V
∗
→ V V . We deﬁne the Poisson operator associated to π as the
secondorder diﬀerential operator on C
∞
(V V )
T
π
= 'A(∂/∂y
∗
, ∂/∂z
∗
), (∂/∂y, ∂/∂z)`,
where (y, z) are linear coordinates on V V arising from a single set of linear coordinates on
V , and (y
∗
, z
∗
) are dual to (y, z). The MoyalWeyl operator is then the pseudodiﬀerential
operator given by exponentiation:
´
π,
= e
−iTπ/2
.
Pointwise multiplication of functions in f, g ∈ C
∞
(R
2n
) can be deﬁned as the pullback
f g = ∆
∗
f g,
where ∆ : R
2n
→ R
2n
R
2n
is the diagonal embedding, and (f g)(y, z) = f(y) g(z) for
f, g ∈ C
∞
(R
2n
). Similarly, a straightforward computation shows that the Poisson operator
is related to the Poisson bracket induced by π via the equation
¦f, g¦ = ∆
∗
T(f g).
The diagonal pullback
f ∗
g = ∆
∗
´
(f g)
113
of the Moyal operator deﬁnes a ∗deformation of the Poisson algebra C
∞
(V ) called the
MoyalWeyl product. In terms of the linear coordinates (y, z) on V V , the operator B
j
in the expansion of the MoyalWeyl product is
B
j
(f, g) =
1
j!
i
2
¸
r,s
π
r,s
∂
∂y
r
∂
∂z
s
j
f(y)g(z)
y=z=x
.
If π is nondegenerate, then an application of the principle of stationary phase shows that
an integral expression for f ∗
g is given by
(f ∗
g)(x) =
e
iQ(y−x,z−x)
f(y) g(z) dy dz,
where Q is the skewsymmetric bilinear form on V induced by π.
´
A Poisson manifold P is called regular if its Poisson tensor π has constant rank, in
which case a theorem of Lie [39] asserts that P is locally isomorphic to a vector space with a
constant Poisson structure. In view of Example 8.4, any regular Poisson manifold is locally
deformation quantizable. To construct a ∗product on all of C
∞
(P), one may therefore
attempt to “patch together” the local deformations to arrive at a global ∗product.
This technique has succeeded. A theorem of DeWilde and Lecomte [19] asserts that the
Poisson algebra of any ﬁnitedimensional symplectic manifold admits a ∗deformation. Using
similar techniques, M´elotte [44] extended their result to arbitrary regular Poisson manifolds.
A simpliﬁed proof of these results has recently been given by Fedosov [23] (see [68] for a
survey of deformation quantization, emphasizing Fedosov’s construction).
8.3 Symplectic groupoids
The method of symplectic groupoids also attempts to directly construct a noncommutative
algebra /
of quantum observables without explicitly identifying a quantum state space.
Unlike deformation quantization, however, this approach involves a geometric procedure
which attempts to construct /
for a particular value of and in particular incorporates
geometric objects with certain quantum properties.
Groupoids
In this section we collect some basic deﬁnitions and examples of groupoids and their coun
terparts in symplectic geometry.
Deﬁnition 8.5 A groupoid is a set Γ endowed with a product map (x, y) → xy deﬁned
on a subset Γ
2
⊂ Γ Γ called the set of composable pairs, and an inverse map ι : Γ → Γ
satisfying the conditions
1. ι
2
= id
114
2. If (x, y), (y, z) ∈ Γ
2
, then (xy, z), (x, yz) ∈ Γ
2
, and (xy)z = x(yz).
3. (ι(x), x) ∈ Γ
2
for all x ∈ Γ, and if (x, y) ∈ Γ
2
, then ι(x) (xy) = y.
4. (x, ι(x)) ∈ Γ
2
for all x ∈ Γ, and if (z, x) ∈ Γ
2
, then (zx)ι(x) = z.
Note that by (3), the map ι is bijective and thus inverses in Γ are unique. An element x
of Γ can be thought of as an arrow with source α(x) = ι(x)x and target β(x) = xι(x); a
pair (x, y) then belongs to Γ
2
if and only if the source of y equals the target of x. The set
Γ
0
of all sources (and targets) is called the base of Γ, and Γ is said to be a groupoid over
Γ
0
. Elements of Γ
0
are units of Γ in the sense that xα(x) = x and β(x)x = x for all x ∈ Γ.
Finally, the multiplication relation of Γ is the subset
m = ¦(xy, x, y) : (x, y) ∈ Γ
2
¦
of Γ Γ Γ. In abstract terms, a groupoid is a small category in which all morphisms have
inverses.
Example 8.6 1. Any group is a groupoid over its identity element, and conversely, any
groupoid whose base is a singleton comprises a group.
2. A disjoint union of groupoids is a groupoid over the union of their bases. If Γ is a groupoid
with base Γ
0
and Γ
t
0
⊂ Γ
0
, then Γ
t
= ¦x ∈ Γ : α(x), β(x) ∈ Γ
t
0
¦ is a groupoid over Γ
t
0
.
3. Combining (1) and (2), we see that any vector bundle E deﬁnes a groupoid Γ(E) over its
zero section.
4. The pair groupoid associated to a set X consists of Γ = X X, endowed with the
multiplication (x, y) (y, z) = (x, z). Thus Γ
0
is the diagonal, and α, β are the projections
α(x, y) = (y, y) and β(x, y) = (x, x). In this groupoid, there is exactly one arrow from any
object to another.
´
We will be interested in groupoids with some geometric structures. Maintaining the notation
above, we make the following deﬁnition.
Deﬁnition 8.7 A groupoid Γ is called a Lie groupoid if
1. Γ
0
is a submanifold of Γ.
2. The mappings α, β : Γ →Γ
0
are submersions.
3. Multiplication Γ
2
→Γ and inversion Γ
ι
→Γ are smooth.
Condition (2) implies that the map α β is transverse to the diagonal ∆ in Γ
0
Γ
0
, and so
both Γ
2
= (α β)
−1
(∆) ⊂ Γ Γ and the multiplication relation m ⊂ Γ Γ Γ are smooth
submanifolds.
A submanifold L of Γ is called unitary if the restriction of α and β to L are diﬀeomor
phisms L →Γ
0
. The unitary submanifolds form a group under the natural multiplication of
subsets.
115
Deﬁnition 8.8 A Lie groupoid Γ is called a symplectic groupoid if Γ is a symplectic
manifold and the multiplication relation m is a lagrangian submanifold of Γ Γ Γ.
Two immediate consequences of this deﬁnition and the calculus of canonical relations are that
Γ
0
is lagrangian, and ι : Γ →Γ is antisymplectic, i.e., its graph is a lagrangian submanifold
of Γ Γ. Thus, a symplectic groupoid Γ is characterized by the three canonical relations
(recall that Z is a point):
Γ
0
∈ Hom(Z, Γ) L
ι
∈ Hom(Γ, Γ) m ∈ Hom(Γ Γ, Γ)
linked by the equation
Γ
0
= m◦ L
ι
.
As a consequence of the axioms and the assumption that m is lagrangian, there is a unique
Poisson structure on the base Γ
0
of a symplectic groupoid Γ such that α: Γ →Γ
0
is a Poisson
map and β : Γ → Γ
0
is antiPoisson. This Poisson structure gives meaning to the following
concept.
Deﬁnition 8.9 A symplectic groupoid Γ is said to integrate a Poisson manifold P if there
exists a Poisson isomorphism from the base Γ
0
of Γ onto P.
If there exists a groupoid Γ which integrates P, we will say that P is integrable and refer
to Γ as a symplectic groupoid over P.
Example 8.10 1. A simple example of a Lie groupoid is given by any Lie group. From
the requirement that the base of a symplectic groupoid be a lagrangian submanfold, only
discrete Lie groups can be symplectic groupoids.
2. If M is any manifold with the zero Poisson structure, then T
∗
M, equipped with the group
oid structure of a vector bundle and its standard symplectic structure, deﬁnes a symplectic
groupoid over M.
3. If P is any symplectic manifold, then the pair groupoid structure on P P deﬁnes a
symplectic groupoid over P. Its unitary lagrangian submanifolds are precisely the graphs of
symplectomorphisms of P.
4. If g is any Lie algebra, then the dual space g
∗
with its LiePoisson structure is integrable.
For any Lie group G whose Lie algebra is g, we deﬁne a groupoid structure on T
∗
G by taking
α and β to be the right and left translations of covectors to the ﬁber at the identity e ∈ G..
A simple computation shows that the base of T
∗
G is its ﬁber at the identity, while L
ι
and m
identify with the conormal bundles to the inversion and multiplication relations of G under
the identiﬁcations T
∗
GT
∗
G · T
∗
(GG) T
∗
GT
∗
GT
∗
G · T
∗
(GGG). Equipped
with these operations and its usual symplectic structure, T
∗
G is a symplectic groupoid over
g
∗
.
´
116
Quantization via symplectic groupoids
From our discussion of geometric quantization, we know that certain symplectic manifolds
quantize to give vector spaces V , and lagrangian submanifolds correspond to elements in V .
If we wish V to be an associative ∗algebra with unit element, like the algebras of quan
tum mechanics, then the underlying symplectic manifold must possess a groupoid structure
compatible with its symplectic structure.
The ﬁrst step in the quantization of a Poisson manifold P by the method of symplectic
groupoids is to construct a symplectic groupoid (Γ, Γ
0
, ι, m) over P. This is known as the
integration problem for Poisson manifolds. Using the techniques of geometric quantization
(prequantizations, polarizations), we then attempt to associate a vector space /
Γ
to Γ in
such a way that the canonical relations Γ
0
, L
ι
, and m quantize as elements of /
Γ
, /
Γ
⊗/
∗
Γ
,
and /
Γ
⊗/
∗
Γ
⊗/
∗
Γ
which deﬁne the structure of an associative ∗algebra on /
Γ
. If successful,
it is in this sense that the symplectic groupoid Γ represents a classical model for the quantum
algebra /
Γ
.
To conclude this chapter, we will give several examples illustrating the spirit of the
symplectic groupoid method. Throughout, we will only deal with groupoids Γ equipped
with reasonable (e.g. ﬁbrating) polarizations, so that the construction of the vector space
/
Γ
follows unambiguously from the procedure deﬁned in the preceding chapter.
Example 8.11 Consider a trivial Poisson manifold M and its associated symplectic group
oid T
∗
M. As described in the preceding example, the identity relation Γ
0
coincides with
the zero section of T
∗
M; under the identiﬁcations T
∗
M T
∗
M · T
∗
(M M) and T
∗
M
T
∗
MT
∗
M · T
∗
(MMM), the relations L
ι
and m identify with the conormal bundles
of the diagonals ∆
2
⊂ M M and ∆
3
⊂ M M M respectively.
As in Chapter 7, we may identify the quantum Hilbert spaces associated to T
∗
M, T
∗
(M
M), and T
∗
(MMM) with (completions of) the function spaces C
∞
(M), C
∞
(MM) and
C
∞
(MMM). The relation Γ
0
then quantizes as the function 1 on M. Since L
ι
and m are
the conormal bundles of the diagonals in MM and MMM, respectively, our heuristic
discussion in Section 7.3 shows that, after an appropriate normalization, these relations are
quantized by the δfunctions δ(x, y) and δ(x, z)δ(y, z) supported on the diagonals ∆
2
and
∆
3
respectively. Thus, the quantization of the groupoid Γ yields the usual identity element,
complex conjugation, and pointwise multiplication in the associative ∗algebra C
∞
(M, C).
´
Example 8.12 Arguing as in the preceding example, we ﬁnd that the quantization of the
canonical relations Γ
0
, L
ι
, and m associated to the groupoid T
∗
G of Example yields the
distributions δ(e) on G, δ(g
1
, g
−1
1
) on GG, and δ(g
1
g
2
, g
1
, g
2
) on GGG. If the Haar
measure on G is used to identify the quantum Hilbert space H
G
with C
∞
(G, C), then the
relations Γ
0
, L
ι
and m quantize as evaluation (at e ∈ G), antiinvolution f(g) →f(g
−1
), and
convolution.
There is actually a ﬂaw in the preceding two examples, since geometric quantizaton
produces halfdensities rather than functions, and furthermore, the natural domain of the
117
convolution operation on a group consists not of functions but of densities. It appears then
that the construction of V itself, and not just the multiplication, should depend on the
groupoid structure on Γ.
Although the two multiplications associated with the two groupoid structures on T
∗
G
described above live on diﬀerent spaces, it is possible to relate them more closely by dualizing
one of them, say convolution. In this way, we obtain the coproduct ∆ on C
∞
(G) deﬁned as
a map from C
∞
(G) to C
∞
(G) ⊗C
∞
(G) = C
∞
(GG) by the formula (∆f)(x, y) = f(xy).
The coproduct satisﬁes a coassociative law and is related to pointwise multiplication by the
simple identity ∆(fg) = ∆(f)∆(g), making C
∞
(G) into a Hopf algebra. The compatibility
between the two structures on C
∞
(G) reﬂects a compatibility between the two groupoid
structures on T
∗
G.
´
Example 8.13 If we take P = R
2n
with its standard symplectic structure, there is a po
larization of P P which does not depend on any polarization of P but only on the aﬃne
structure. In fact, the polarization comes from the isomorphism of Γ = R
2n
R
2n
with
T
∗
R
2n
given by
(x, y) →((x + y)/2, ˜ ω
n
(y −x)).
Using this polarization to quantize Γ, we get as V the space of smooth functions on the
diagonal, which we identify with R
2n
itself, and the multiplication on V turns out to be the
Moyal product (see Example 8.4).
´
Example 8.14 If V is any ﬁnitedimensional vector space, then a skewadjoint linear map
π : V
∗
→ V deﬁnes a skewsymmetric bilinear form on V
∗
and thus a translationinvariant
Poisson structure on V . If T is a torus equal to the quotient of V by some lattice, then
T inherits a translationinvariant Poisson structure from V . A symplectic groupoid which
integrates T is given by the cotangent bundle T
∗
T, with Γ
0
equals the zero section of T
∗
T,
and L
ι
equals the conormal bundle of the diagonal in T T. To describe the multiplication
relation, we identify T
∗
T with T V
∗
and let m ⊂ T
∗
(T T T) consist of all triples
(q, q
t
, q
tt
, p, p
t
, p
tt
) such that q
tt
= q
t
+
1
2
T(p
t
+ p
tt
) and
q = q
t
+
1
2
T(p
tt
) p = p
t
+ p
tt
.
When the map T is zero, the Poisson structure on T is trivial, and the groupoid product
quantized to the usual pointwise multiplication of functions on T. Otherwise one gets a
noncommutative multiplication on C
∞
(T) which is precisely that of (the functions on) a
noncommutative torus, one of the basic examples of noncommutative geometry. (The
relation between Poisson tori and noncommutative tori was studied from the point of view
of deformation quantization in [50]).
´
118
A Densities
An nform ν on an ndimensional manifold M can be viewed as a scalar function on the
space of bases in the tangent bundle which satisﬁes
ν(eA) = ν(e) det(A),
where e = (e
1
, , e
n
) is any frame in a tangent space of M and A = (a
ij
) is any invertible
n n matrix. Because the “change of variables” formula for integration involves absolute
values of Jacobians, integration of nforms on M requires a choice of orientation. The use of
densities instead of forms circumvents this need.
A density on a real vector space V of dimension n is a complexvalued function η, deﬁned
on the set B(V ) of bases in V , which satisﬁes η(eA) = η(e) [ det(A)[. The collection of such
functions is denoted [Λ[V . This concept can be generalized as follows.
Deﬁnition A.1 For α ∈ C, an αdensity on V is a map λ : B(V ) →C such that
λ(eA) = λ(e) [ det(A)[
α
.
We denote the vector space of αdensities on V by [Λ[
α
V. Since GL(V ) acts transitively on
B(V ), an αdensity is determined by its value on a single basis. As a result, [Λ[
α
V is a
1dimensional complex vector space.
Operations on densities
1. If σ ∈ [Λ[
α
V and β ∈ C, then σ
β
is a welldeﬁned αβdensity on V .
2. A linear map T : V →V
∗
induces a realvalued 1density T on V given by
T e
def
= [ det('Te
i
, e
j
`)[
1/2
.
Equivalently, any real bilinear form ω on V induces a 1density ˜ ω on V .
3. Multiplication of densities is deﬁned by multiplication of their values and gives rise to a
bilinear map:
[Λ[
α
V [Λ[
β
V →[Λ[
α+β
V.
4. If W is a subspace of V , then a basis of V , unique up to transformation by a matrix of
determinant ±1, is determined by a choice of bases for W and V/W. Consequently, there is
a natural product
[Λ[
α
W [Λ[
α
(V/W) →[Λ[
α
V
In particular, if V = V
1
⊕V
2
, then there is a natural product
[Λ[
α
V
1
[Λ[
α
V
2
→[Λ[
α
V.
119
5. Operations 3 and 4 induce natural isomorphisms
[Λ[
α
V ⊗[Λ[
β
V →[Λ[
α+β
V
[Λ[
α
W ⊗[Λ[
α
(V/W) →[Λ[
α
V.
[Λ[
α
V
1
⊗[Λ[
α
V
2
→[Λ[
α
(V
1
⊕V
2
)
6. If T : V →V
t
is an isomorphism, there is a welldeﬁned isomorphism
T
∗
: [Λ[
α
V →[Λ[
α
V
t
.
7. A natural map B(V )
∗
→ B(V
∗
) is deﬁned by associating to each basis e of V its dual
basis e
∗
. Since (eA)
∗
= e
∗
(A
∗
)
−1
for any A ∈ GL(V ), the map ∗ gives rise to a natural
isomorphism
[Λ[
α
V →[Λ[
−α
V
∗
.
Example A.2 Suppose that A, C are vector spaces and
0 →A →A ⊕C
F
→C
∗
→0
is an exact sequence such that F[
C
= T. By the operations described above, we obtain an
isomorphism
[Λ[
α
A · [Λ[
α
A ⊗[Λ[
2α
C
given explicitly by
σ →σ ⊗T
2α
= [ det
θ
T[
α
σ ⊗θ
2α
,
where θ is any realvalued 1density on C, and the positive real number [ det
θ
T[ is deﬁned
by the equation
[ det
θ
T[
1/2
θ = T.
´
It is easy to check that the association V →[Λ[
α
V deﬁnes a diﬀerentiable functor, so we
can associate the αdensity bundle [Λ[
α
E to any smooth vector bundle E over a manifold
M. The remarks above imply that if
0 →E →F →G →0
is an exact sequence of vector bundles over M, then there is a natural densitybundle iso
morphism
[Λ[
α
E ⊗[Λ[
α
G · [Λ[
α
F.
We denote by [Ω[
α
E the vector space of smooth sections of [Λ[
α
E and by [Ω[
α
c
E the space of
smooth, compactlysupported sections. The density spaces associated to the tangent bundle
of M are denoted [Ω[
α
M. An nform on an nmanifold M induces an αdensity [ν[
α
in the
manner of (4) above.
120
A natural mapping [Ω[
1
c
M →C is deﬁned by integration
σ →
M
σ.
Similarly, a preHilbert space structure on the space [Ω[
1/2
c
M of smooth, compactlysupported
halfdensities on M is deﬁned by
'σ, τ` =
M
σ τ.
The completion H
M
of this space is called the intrinsic Hilbert space of M.
B The method of stationary phase
We begin with a few useful formulas involving the asymptotic Fourier transform. Let o
denote the usual Schwartz space of rapidly decreasing, complex valued functions on R
n
. For
u ∈ o, the asymptotic Fourier transform and its inverse are deﬁned respectively as
(T
u)(ξ) = (2π)
−
n
2
R
n
e
−i/x,ξ)/
u(x) dx
(T
−1
v)(x) = (2π)
−
n
2
(R
n
)
∗
e
i/x,ξ)/
v(ξ) dξ
To see that these transforms are actually inverse to one another, note that the change of
variables η = ξ/ gives
(2π)
−
n
2
(R
n
)
∗
e
i/x,ξ)/
(T
u)(ξ) dξ = (2π)
−n
e
i/x−y,η)
u(y) dy dη,
which equals u(x) by the usual Fourier inversion formula. This observation also veriﬁes the
asymptotic inversion formula:
u(x) = (2π)
−n
e
i/x−y,ξ)/
u(y) dy dξ.
A simple application of this formula shows that the asymptotic diﬀerential operator D
j
=
−i∂
j
satisﬁes the familiar equations
T
(D
j
u) = ξ
j
T
u T
(x
j
u) = −D
j
T
u.
A similar check of deﬁnitions proves the asymptotic Parseval formula:
R
n
uv dx =
(R
n
)
∗
T
uT
v dξ.
We study next the asymptotic behavior of integrals of the form
I
=
R
n
e
iR(x)/
a(x) [dx[ a ∈ C
∞
0
(R
n
), R ∈ C
∞
(R
n
)
as →0. As a ﬁrst step, we will prove that if the critical point set of R is not contained in
the support of a, then I
is rapidly decreasing in :
121
Lemma B.1 If dR = 0 on Supp(a), then I
= O(
∞
) as →0.
Proof. Suppose for the moment that R
x
1
= ∂R/∂x
1
= 0 on Supp(a). Then
e
iR/
a = −i
a
R
x
1
∂
∂x
1
e
iR/
,
and so integration by parts with respect to the x
1
variable gives
[I
[ =
R
n
e
iR/
∂
∂x
1
a
R
x
1
[dx[
,
implying that I
is O(). Our assertion follows by noting that (a/Q
x
1
)
x
1
∈ C
∞
0
(R
n
) and
repeating the same argument.
For the general case, we can use a partition of unity to break up Supp(a) into ﬁnitely
many domains as above and then applying the same argument (with x
1
possibly replaced by
another coordinate) to each piece.
2
The upshot of this lemma is that the main (asymptotic) contribution to the integral I
must come from the critical points of R.
Lemma B.2 If the quadratic form Q is nondegenerate, then for each nonnegative integer
K,
R
n
e
iQ/
a [dx[ = (2π)
n/2
e
iπ sgn(Q)/4
[ det
[dx[
T[
1/2
K
¸
k=0
1
k!
(D
k
a)(0)
k
+ O
K+1+n/2
,
where T : R
n
→ (R
n
)
∗
is the selfadjoint map associated to Q and D is the secondorder
diﬀerential operator given by
D =
i
2
¸
j,k
T
−1
jk
∂
∂x
j
∂
∂x
k
.
Proof. From [32, Vol.1, Thm.7.6.1], we recall that for ξ ∈ (R
n
)
∗
,
R
n
e
−i/x,ξ)
e
iQ(x)/
dx = (2π)
n/2
e
iπsgn(Q)/4
e
−iQ
∗
(ξ)
[ det
[dx[
T[
1/2
,
where Q
∗
(ξ) = 'T
−1
ξ, ξ`/2 and the determinant det
[dx[
T is deﬁned as in Appendix A. Con
sequently, the asymptotic Fourier transform of the function x →e
iQ(x)/
equals
ξ →
e
iπsgn(Q)/4
e
−Q
∗
(ξ)/
[ det
[dx[
T[
1/2
.
Combining this expression with the asymptotic Parseval formula, we obtain
I
=
R
n
e
iQ/
a [dx[ =
e
iπsgn(Q)/4
[ det
[dx[
T[
1/2
(R
n
)
∗
e
−iQ
∗
/
T
a (ξ) dξ.
122
A simple computation shows that T
a (ξ) = T
a (−ξ); the change of variables ξ → −ξ
doesn’t aﬀect the integral, and consequently we have
I
=
e
iπsgn(Q)/4
[ det
[dx[
T[
−1/2
(R
n
)
∗
e
−iQ
∗
(ξ)/
T
a (ξ) dξ.
To deal with the integral on the right, we use the the Taylor series expansion (with remainder)
of e
−iQ
∗
/
to write
(R
n
)
∗
e
−iQ
∗
/
T
a(ξ) dξ =
∞
¸
k=0
1
k!
−i
k
(R
n
)
∗
(Q
∗
(ξ))
k
T
a(ξ) dξ
= (2π)
n/2
K
¸
k=0
1
k!
−i
k
T
−1
((Q
∗
)
k
T
a)(0) + O
K+1+
n
2
= (2π)
n/2
K
¸
k=0
1
k!
(D
k
a)(0)
k
+ O
K+1+
n
2
,
the last expression on the right following from the asymptotic Fourier inversion formula.
2
We now wish to apply this lemma to evaluate integrals of the form
I
=
M
e
iR/
σ,
where M is a smooth nmanifold equipped with a compactly supported density σ, and
R: M →R is a smooth function. To this end, we require the following two lemmas. Recall
that the hessian of R : M → R at a critical point p ∈ M is a welldeﬁned selfadjoint
linear map R
tt
(p) : T
p
M →T
∗
p
M. The critical point p is called nondegenerate if R
tt
(p) is an
isomorphism. In this case, the function R has the following normal form near p.
Morse Lemma . If p is a nondegenerate critical point of a function R : M → R, then
there exists a nondegenerate quadratic form Q on R
n
and an embedding g : U → M, where
U is a neighborhood of 0 in R
n
, such that g(0) = p and
(R ◦ g)(x) = R(p) + Q(x).
2
(This theorem is a special case of the Parametrized Morse Lemma, proven in Section 4.3).
If g : M
t
→M is any diﬀeomorphism, then the “change of variables” formula states that
M
g
∗
e
iR/
σ
=
M
e
iR/
σ.
The same role in the stationary phase formula will be played by the following lemma.
123
Lemma B.3 In the notation above, suppose that p ∈ M is a critical point of R and set
p
t
= g
−1
(p). If σ
t
is any density on M
t
such that σ
t
p
= (g
∗
σ)
p
, then
[ det
σ
(R ◦ g)
tt
(p
t
)[ = [ det
σ
R
tt
(p)[.
2
Finally, we mention that deﬁnition of [ det
σ
(R)
tt
(p)[ implies furthermore that
f(p) [ det
fσ
R
tt
(p)[
1/2
= [ det
σ
R
tt
(p)[
1/2
for any function f on M. Combining these observations, we obtain
Principle of Stationary Phase . Let M be a smooth nmanifold and σ ∈ [Ω[
c
M. If
R: M →R has only nondegenerate critical points p
j
, j = 1, , k in Supp(σ), then
M
e
iR/
σ = (2π)
n/2
k
¸
j=1
e
iR(p
j
)/
e
iπsgn(R
(p
j
))/4
[ det
σ
(R
tt
(p
j
))[
1/2
+ O(
1+n/2
).
2
C
ˇ
Cech cohomology
This appendix will give some of the basic deﬁnitions of
ˇ
Cech cohomology for manifolds and
describe its relation to deRham cohomology. A more general treatment is available in [14].
An open cover U = ¦U
α
¦
α∈I
of a manifold M is said to be good if every intersection of
ﬁnitely many members of U is either contractible or empty. For ease of notation, we will
denote by U
α
0
..α
k
the intersection
¸
k
i=0
U
α
i
.
If Γ is an abelian group, a Γvalued
ˇ
Cech cochain with respect to the cover U is then a
rule which assigns an element c
α
0
,..,α
k
of Γ to every list (α
0
, .., α
k
) for which the intersection
U
α
0
..α
k
is nonempty. The group of all such cochains is denoted C
k
U
(M, Γ), and a coboundary
operator
δ
k
: C
k
U
(M, Γ) →C
k+1
U
(M, Γ)
is deﬁned by
δ
k
(c)(α
0
, .., α
k+1
) =
k+1
¸
j=0
(−1)
j
c(α
0
, .., ´ α
j
, .., α
k+1
).
where the symbol ´ indicates which member of the list is to be deleted. The groups of
degreek
ˇ
Cech cocycles and coboundaries are deﬁned respectively by
ˇ
Z
k
U
(M; Γ) = ker(δ
k
)
ˇ
B
k
U
(M; Γ) = im(δ
k−1
),
and the kth
ˇ
Cech cohomology group of M with coeﬃcients in Γ and relative to the covering
U is the quotient
ˇ
H
k
U
(M; Γ) =
ˇ
Z
k
U
(M; Γ)/
ˇ
B
k
U
(M; Γ).
124
Now consider a closed kform ω ∈ Z
k
DR
(M). Since each U
α
is contractible, there exists
on each U
α
a (k −1)form ϕ
α
satisfying dϕ
α
= ω. For any indices α, β, we have
d(ϕ
α
−ϕ
β
) = 0
on U
αβ
. Since U
αβ
is itself contractible, there exist (k − 2)forms ψ
αβ
deﬁned on U
αβ
such
that
dψ
αβ
= ϕ
α
−ϕ
β
and
d(ψ
αβ
+ ψ
βγ
−ψ
αγ
) = 0
on the set U
αβγ
for any indices α, β, γ. Continuing in this way, we see that ω determines a
ˇ
Cech kcocycle with coeﬃcients in R. This association deﬁnes for each k ∈ Z
+
a homomor
phism
Z
k
DR
(M)
w
→
ˇ
H
k
U
(M; R).
Theorem C.1 ([61]) The map w induces an isomorphism between the deRham cohomology
of M and the
ˇ
Cech cohomology of M with real coeﬃcients.
One consequence of this theorem is that
ˇ
H
k
U
(M; Γ) does not depend on the choice of U.
A group homomorphism Γ →Γ
t
induces a homomorphism
ˇ
H
k
U
(M; Γ) →
ˇ
H
k
U
(M; Γ
t
)
in the obvious way. Of particular interest in these notes is the subgroup Z
= 2π Z of R.
D Principal T
bundles
In this appendix, we record some standard facts about principal bundles over paracompact
manifolds, referring to [17] for more details. Throughout this section, denote by Z
the group
2π Z and set T
= R/Z
h
.
A principal T
bundle over a manifold P is a locally trivial T
bundle Q
π
→P together
with a nonsingular, ﬁberpreserving action T
Q →Q. Two principal T
bundles Q
π
→P
and Q
t
π
→ P are said to be isomorphic if there exists a smooth map f : Q → Q
t
which is
equivariant with respect to the T
actions, i.e. f(a p) = a f(p) for all a ∈ T
and p ∈ Q,
and satisﬁes π = π
t
◦ f.
Local triviality of a T
ﬁber bundle Q
π
→ P implies that for any good cover U of P,
there exist homeomorphisms h
j
: U
j
T
→π
−1
(U
j
) such that h
j
(x, t +s) = s h
j
(x, t) and
π(h
j
(x, t)) = x for all (x, t) ∈ U
j
T
and s ∈ T
. These maps give rise to the transition
functions g
jk
: U
jk
→T
of Q, deﬁned by the requirement that
h
j
(x, t) = h
k
(x, t + g
jk
(x))
for all x ∈ U
jk
. This equation implies that for each x ∈ U
ijk
,
h
i
(x, t) = h
i
(x, t + g
ij
(x) + g
jk
(x) + g
ki
(x)),
125
and so the transition functions satisfy the cocycle condition g
ij
+g
jk
+g
ki
= 0 (mod Z
). If
˜ g
jk
: U
jk
→R is any lift of g
jk
, then the numbers
c
ijk
= ˜ g
ij
+ ˜ g
jk
+ ˜ g
ki
are therefore elements of Z
which deﬁne a
ˇ
Cech cocycle [c
ijk
]. The corresponding class
[Q] ∈
ˇ
H
2
(P; Z
) is known as the Chern class of Q. The fundamental theorem describing
this space is the following (see [17, Cor.2.1.4] for a proof).
Theorem D.1 Two principal T
bundles over P are isomorphic if and only if their Chern
classes are equal. Moreover, the assignment Q →[Q] induces a bijective map from the space
of isomorphism classes of principal T
bundles over P to
ˇ
H
2
(P; Z
).
Corresponding to the abelian group structure on
ˇ
H
2
(P; Z
) are the following operations on
principal T
bundles. If Q → P is a principal T
bundle having transition functions ¦g
jk
¦
with respect to some good cover of P, then the inverse of Q is deﬁned as the principal
T
bundle −Q over P obtained from the transition functions ¦−g
jk
¦. Similarly, if Q, Q
t
are principal T
bundles over P with transition functions ¦g
jk
¦ and ¦g
t
jk
¦ respectively, then
the product of Q and Q
t
is deﬁned as the principal T
bundle Q
P
Q
t
over P having
transition functions ¦g
jk
+g
t
jk
¦. From the deﬁnitions above, it follows easily that the Chern
classes of inverses and products of principal T
bundles are given by [−Q] = −[Q] and
[Q
P
Q
t
] = [Q] +[Q
t
]. On the level of the bundles themselves, we can describe the product
Q
P
Q
t
as the quotient of the usual ﬁberproduct Q
P
Q
t
(which in this case is a T
T

bundle over the base), modulo the antidiagonal action of T
, i.e. t (p, p
t
) = (t p, −t p
t
).
T
bundles with connection
The inﬁnitesimal generator of the T
action on a principal bundle Q is a vector ﬁeld X on
Q deﬁned by the equation
X(p) =
d
dt
t=0
t p.
A connection on Q is a T
invariant 1form ϕ on Q such that ϕ(X) = 1. In terms of a
good cover U of P, the form ϕ satisﬁes h
∗
j
ϕ = dσ + π
∗
ϕ
j
, where dσ denotes the usual form
on T
and the ϕ
j
are 1forms on the U
j
satisfying
ϕ
j
−ϕ
k
= d˜ g
jk
,
where ˜ g
jk
are again Rvalued lifts of the transition functions of Q. The curvature of the
connection ϕ is the unique closed 2form ω on P such that
dϕ = π
∗
ω.
From the compatibility condition for the ϕ
j
, it follows that the Chern class of Q is the
ˇ
Cech
representative of the deRham cohomology class [ω].
Theorem D.2 A closed 2form ω on a manifold P is the curvature form of a connection
on a principal T
bundle Q over P if and only if 'ω, a` ∈ Z
for any a ∈ H
2
(P; Z).
126
Proof. Most published proofs of this result (e.g. [37]) use
ˇ
Cech cohomology and the deRham
isomorphism. We prefer to give the following direct proof by P.Iglesias; see [33] for further
details. Let A(P, p
0
) denote the space of smooth paths γ : [0, 1] →P such that γ(0) = p
0
, and
let e: A(P, p
0
) →P be the endpoint map e(γ) = γ(1). Since the interval [0, 1] is contractible,
there exists a natural contraction of A(P, p
0
) onto the constant map [0, 1] →p
0
. If Y
t
is the
vector ﬁeld which generates this contraction, we deﬁne the 1form Kω on A(P, p
0
) by
Kω =
1
0
(Y
t
e
∗
ω) dt.
Then dσ + Kω is a connection form on the product A(P, p
0
) T
having curvature e
∗
ω.
To complete the proof, we will deﬁne the T
bundle (Q, ϕ) over P with curvature ω as an
appropriate quotient of A(P, p
0
)T
. For this purpose, we call two elements γ, γ
t
∈ A(P, p
0
)
homologous if their diﬀerence is the boundary of a singular 2chain σ in P. The quotient
of A(P, p
0
) by this equivalence relation is the covering space
´
P of P corresponding to the
commutator subgroup of π
1
(P), and thus, H
1
(
´
P, Z
) = 0. An equivalence relation on the
product A(P, p
0
) T
is then deﬁned by the condition that (γ, t) ∼ (γ
t
, t
t
) if γ, γ
t
are
homologous and
t −t
t
=
σ
ω,
where ∂σ = γ −γ
t
. The quotient of A(P, p
0
) T
by this equivalence relation is a principal
T
bundle
´
Q over
´
P with connection ´ ϕ having curvature π
∗
ω, where π:
´
P →P is the natural
projection.
If H
1
(P; Z
) = 0, then
´
P = P, and the proof is complete. Otherwise, let s be any map
from H
1
(P; Z
) into the space of loops based at p
0
which assigns a representative to each
homology class. A T
valued group cocycle on H
1
(P; Z
) is then deﬁned by
φ(h, h
t
) =
σ
ω,
where ∂σ = s(h + h
t
) −(s(h) + s(h
t
)) . Since this cocycle is symmetric, it deﬁnes a central
extension Γ of H
1
(P; Z
) which acts naturally on
´
Q by
(h, τ)[γ, z] = [s(h) γ, z + τ].
Since T
is divisible, the extension Γ is isomorphic to the product T
H
1
(P; Z
), and any
choice of isomorphism deﬁnes an action of H
1
(P; Z
) on
´
Q which preserves the connection
´ ϕ. The quotient of
´
Q is the desired principal T
bundle Q over P.
2
A connection ϕ on a principal T
bundle Q
π
→ P induces a connection on the inverse −Q
of Q whose local representatives are of the form dσ − ϕ
j
, where ϕ is locally represented by
dσ+ϕ
j
. Similarly, connections ϕ and ϕ
t
on the T
bundles Q, Q
t
over P induce a connection
ϕ + ϕ
t
on the product Q
P
Q
t
deﬁned locally by dσ + ϕ
j
+ ϕ
t
j
.
127
Two principal T
bundles with connection (Q, ϕ), (Q
t
, ϕ
t
) over P are said to be isomorphic
provided that there exists an isomorphism f : Q → Q
t
of the underlying principal bundles
which satisﬁes f
∗
ϕ
t
= ϕ. A check of the deﬁnition shows that (Q, ϕ), (Q
t
, ϕ
t
) are isomorphic
if and only if (Q
P
−Q
t
, ϕ − ϕ
t
) is isomorphic to the trivial bundle (P T
, dS). Since
curvature is obviously invariant under isomorphisms of principal T
bundles with connection,
the classiﬁcation of such bundles reduces to the classiﬁcation of ﬂat connections on trivial
T
bundles over P.
A connection ϕ on a principal T
bundle Q
π
→ P is said to be ﬂat if dϕ = 0. In this
case, the local representatives h
∗
j
ϕ = dσ + ϕ
j
have the property that ϕ
j
= d˜ s
j
for functions
˜ s
j
: U
j
→ R. Denoting by s
j
the composition of ˜ s
j
with the projection R → T
, we ﬁnd
that the functions s
jk
= s
j
−s
k
deﬁne transition functions for a trivial T
principal bundle
over P. On the other hand, the compatibility condition for the ϕ
j
implies that s
jk
− g
jk
is
constant for each j, k, and so there exists an isomorphism f : Q → P T
. It is easy to
check that if ϕ
0
is the trivial connection on P T
, then
ϕ −f
∗
ϕ
0
= π
∗
β
for some closed 1form β on P. The cohomology class [β] induced by this form in
ˇ
H
1
(P; T
)
is called the holonomy of the (ﬂat) connection ϕ.
Theorem D.3 Two ﬂat connections ϕ,ϕ
t
on the trivial principal T
bundle Q = P T
over
P are isomorphic if and only if they have equal holonomy. Moreover, the map (Q, ϕ) →[β
ϕ
]
induces a bijection from the space of isomorphism classes of ﬂat connections on the trivial
T
bundle with
ˇ
H
1
(P; T
).
A section s of a principal T
bundle Q over P with connection ϕ is called parallel provided
that s
∗
ϕ = 0. The map s
Q
: Q →Q associated to a parallel section deﬁnes an isomorphism
of (Q, ϕ) with the trivial T
bundle equipped with the trivial connection ϕ = dσ. Thus, we
have:
Corollary D.4 A principal T
bundle Q over P with a ﬂat connection admits a parallel
section if and only if (Q, ϕ) has zero holonomy.
2
Associated line bundles
A representation ρ: T
→U(1) enables us to associate to any principal T
bundle Q →P a
complex line bundle E →P deﬁned explicitly as the quotient of QC by the T
action
t (p, z) = (t p, ρ
−1
(t)z).
The space of functions g : Q →C satisfying the condition
g(t p) = ρ
−1
(t)g(p)
128
is identiﬁed with the space of sections of E by the assignment g → s
G
, where the section
s
g
: P →E is deﬁned by the requirement that
s
g
(x) = [(p, g(p))],
for any element p of π
−1
(x).
129
References
[1] Abraham, R., and Marsden, J.E., Foundations of Mechanics, 2nd edition, Ben
jamin/Cummings, Reading, 1978.
[2] Arnol’d, V.I., Mathematical Methods of Classical Mechanics, Graduate Texts in
Math. 60, SpringerVerlag, New York, 1978.
[3] Arnol’d, V.I., On a characteristic class entering into conditions of quantization,
Funct. Anal. Appl. 1 (1967) 113.
[4] Arnol’d, V.I., Catastrophe theory (3rd edition), SpringerVerlag, New York, 1992.
[5] Arnol’d, V.I., Symplectic geometry and topology, preprint 1993.
[6] Arnol’d, V.I., and Givental’, A.B., Symplectic geometry, Dynamical systems IV,
V.I. Arnol’d and S.P. Novikov, eds., Encyclopedia of Mathematical Sciences, Vol. 4,
SpringerVerlag, New York, 1990, pp. 1136.
[7] Atiyah, M.F., The Geometry and Physics of Knots, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cam
bridge, 1990.
[8] Audin,M., The Topology of Torus Actions on Symplectic Manifolds, Progress in
Math. vol. 93, Birkh¨auser, Basel, 1991.
[9] Bayen, F., Flato, M., Fronsdal, C., Lichnerowicz, A., and Sternheimer, D., Defor
mation theory and quantization, I and II, Ann. Phys. 111, (1977), 61151.
[10] Berezin, F.A., Some remarks about the associated envelope of a Lie algebra, Funct.
Anal. Appl. 1, (1967), 91102.
[11] Berezin, F.A., Quantization, Math USSR Izv. 8 (1974), 11091165.
[12] Besse, A. Manifolds All of Whose Geodesics are Closed, Ergebnisse der Math. 93
SpringerVerlag, Berlin, 1978.
[13] Bohm, D., Quantum Theory, PrenticeHall, New York, 1951.
[14] Bott, R. and Tu, L, Diﬀerential Forms in Algebraic Topology, SpringerVerlag, New
York, 1982.
[15] Boutet de Monvel, L., and Guillemin, V., The Spectral Theory of Toeplitz Operators,
Annals. of Math. Studies 99, Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1981.
[16] Br¨ uning, J. and Guillemin, V, Mathematics Past and Present: Fourier Integral Op
erators, SpringerVerlag, Berlin, 1994.
[17] Brylinski, J.L., Loop Spaces, Characteristic Classes, and Geometric Quantization,
Progress in Mathematics vol. 107, Birkh¨auser, Boston, 1992.
130
[18] Connes, A., Noncommutative Geometry, Academic Press, San Diego, 1995.
[19] De Wilde, M., and Lecomte, P., Formal deformations of the Poisson Lie algebra
of a symplectic manifold and starproducts. Existence, equivalence, derivations, in
M. Hazewinkel and M. Gerstenhaber, eds., Deformation Theory of Algebras and
Structures and Applications, Kluwer Acad. Pub., Dordrecht (1988), 897960.
[20] Dirac, P. A. M., The Principles of Quantum Mechanics, Clarenden Press, Oxford,
1930.
[21] Duistermaat, J. J., Fourier Integral Operators, Courant Institute, NYU, New York,
1973. (New edition to be published by Birkh¨auser Boston in 1995.)
[22] Ehresmann, C., Les connexions inﬁnit´esimales dans un espace ﬁbr´e diﬀ´erentiable,
Colloque de Topologie (Espaces Fibr´es) tenu a Bruxelles du 5 au 8 juin, 1950,
Georges Thone, Li`ege and Masson et Cie., Paris, 1951, pp. 2955.
[23] Fedosov, B., A simple geometrical construction of deformation quantization, J. Diﬀ.
Geom. 40 (1994) 213238.
[24] Folland, G.B., Harmonic Analysis in Phase Space, Annals of mathematics studies
122, Princeton University Press, 1989.
[25] Fomenko, A.T., Symplectic Geometry, Gordon and Breach, New York, 1988.
[26] Golubitsky, M., Guillemin, V., Stable Mappings and Their Singularities, Graduate
Texts in Math., vol. 14, SpringerVerlag, (1973).
[27] Gompf, R., New constructions of symplectic manifolds, Ann. Math., to appear.
[28] Guillemin, V., and Sternberg, S., Geometric Asymptotics, Math. Surveys 14, Amer.
Math. Soc., Providence, 1977.
[29] Guillemin, V., and Sternberg, S., Symplectic Techniques in Physics, Cambridge Uni
versity Press, Cambridge, 1984.
[30] Helﬀer, B., Semiclassical analysis for the Schrodinger operator and applications,
Lecture Notes in Math. 1336 (1988).
[31] H¨ormander, L., Fourier integral operators I., Acta Math. 127 (1971) 79183.
[32] H¨ormander, L., The Analysis of Linear Partial Diﬀerential Operators, Vols. 14,
SpringerVerlag, New York, 198390.
[33] Iglesias, P., La trilogie du moment, Ann. Inst. Fourier (to appear).
[34] Karasev, M.V. and Maslov, V.P., Nonlinear Poisson Brackets : Geometry and Quan
tization Translations of mathematical monographs vol. 119, American Mathematical
Society, Providence, R.I., 1993.
131
[35] Kirillov, Geometric quantization, Dynamical Systems IV, V.I. Arnol’d and S.P.
Novikov, eds., Encyclopedia of Mathematical Sciences, Vol. 4, SpringerVerlag, New
York, 1990, pp. 137172.
[36] Klingenberg, W., Riemannian Geometry, deGruyter Studies in Math., Berlin, 1982.
[37] Kostant, B., Quantization and unitary representations, Lecture Notes in Math. 170
(1970), 87208.
[38] Libermann, P., and Marle, C.M., Symplectic Geometry and Analytical Mechanics,
Reidel, Dordrecht, 1987.
[39] Lie, S., Theorie der Transformationsgruppen, (Zweiter Abschnitt, unter Mitwirkung
von Prof. Dr. Friedrich Engel), Leipzig, Teubner, 1890.
[40] McDuﬀ, D., Examples of symplectic structures, Invent. Math. 89 (1987), 1336.
[41] Mackey, G., Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, W.A.Benjamin,
Reading, 1963.
[42] Marsden, J., Lectures on Mechanics, London Math. Soc. Lecture Note Series 174,
Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1992.
[43] Maslov, V.P., Theory of Perturbations and Asymptotic Methods, Moskov. Gos. Univ.,
Moscow, 1965.
[44] M´elotte, D., Invariant deformations of the Poisson Lie algebra of a symplectic man
ifold and star products, in M. Hazewinkel and M. Gerstenhaber, eds., Deformation
Theory of Algebras and Structures and Applications, Kluwer Acad. Pub., Dordrecht
(1988), 961972.
[45] Moser, J., On the volume elements on a manifold, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 120
(1965), 280296.
[46] Nazaikinskii, V., Sternin, B., and Shatalov, V., Methods of Noncommutative Analy
sis, Theory and Applications, Berlin, New York, W. de Gruyter (to appear).
[47] Olver, F.W.J., Asymptotics and Special Functions, Academic Press, New York, 1974.
[48] Omohundro, S., Geometric Perturbation Theory in Physics, World Scientiﬁc, Singa
pore, 1986.
[49] Omori, I., Inﬁnitedimensional Lie Transformation Groups, Lecture Notes in Math
ematics, vol.427, SpringerVerlag, New York, 1975.
[50] Rieﬀel, M., Deformation quantization of Heisenberg manifolds, Comm. Math. Phys.
122 (1989), 531562.
132
[51] Robert, D., Autour de l’Approximation Semiclassique, Progress in Mathematics,
vol. 68, Birkh¨auser, Boston, 1987.
[52] Segal, I., Quantization of nonlinear systems, J. Math. Phys. 1 (1960), 468488.
[53] Sniatycki, J., Geometric Quantization and Quantum Mechanics, SpringerVerlag,
New York, 1980.
[54] Souriau, J.M., Structure des Syst`emes Dynamiques, Dunod, Paris, 1970.
[55] Souriau, J.M., Groupes diﬀ´erentiels, Lecture Notes in Math. 836 (1980), 91128.
[56] Treves, F., Introduction to Pseudodiﬀerential and Fourier Integral Operators.. Vols
I,II. Plenum Press, New York, 1980.
[57] Tulczyjew, W.M., The Legendre transform, Ann. Inst. H. Poincar´e, 27 (1977) 101
114.
[58] Unterberger, A., Quantiﬁcation et analyse pseudodiﬀ´erentielle, Ann. Sci.
´
Ec. Norm.
Sup. 21 (1988), 133158.
[59] Vaisman, I., Symplectic Geometry and Secondary Characteristic Classes, Birkh¨ auser,
Boston, 1987.
[60] Wallach, N. R., Symplectic Geometry and Fourier Analysis, Math. Sci. Press, Brook
line, 1977.
[61] Weil, A., Sur les th´eor`emes de de Rham, Comm. Math. Helv. 26 (1952) 119145.
[62] Weinstein, A., Symplectic manifolds and their lagrangian submanifolds, Advances
in Math. 6 (1971), 329346.
[63] Weinstein, A., Lectures on Symplectic Manifolds, Regional conference series in math
ematics 29, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, 1977.
[64] Weinstein, A., Symplectic geometry, Bulletin A.M.S. (new series) 5 (1981), 1–13.
[65] Weinstein, A., Coisotropic calculus and Poisson groupoids, J. Math. Soc. Japan 40
(1988), 705727.
[66] Weinstein, A., Noncommutative geometry and geometric quantization, in Symplectic
Geometry and Mathematical Physics: actes du colloque in l’honneur de JeanMarie
Souriau, P.Donato et al. eds., Birkh¨auser, Basel, 1991.
[67] Weinstein, A., Symplectic groupoids, geometric quantization, and irrational rotation
algebras, in Symplectic Geometry, Groupoids, and Integrable Systems, P.Dazord and
A.Weinstein, eds., MSRI Publications, Springer, New York, 1991.
[68] Weinstein, A., Deformation quantization, S´eminaire Bourbaki, no. 789, Juin 1994.
133
[69] Weinstein, A., and Xu, P., Extensions of symplectic groupoids and quantization, J.
Reine Angew. Math. 417 (1991), 159189
[70] Weyl, H., The Theory of Groups and Quantum Mechanics, Dover Publications, New
York, 1950.
[71] Woodhouse, N.M.J., Geometric Quantization, 2nd Ed., Oxford U. Press, Oxford,
1992.
[72] Yano, K., and Ishihara, S., Tangent and Cotangent Bundles; Diﬀerential Geometry
Dekker, New York, 1973.
134
.
.
.
.1 Compositions of semiclassical states . . . . . .2 Cotangent bundles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Quantization in Cotangent Bundles 4.1 Poisson algebras and Poisson manifolds . . . . . . . . .1 Prequantization . . . . . . . . . . 8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The symplectic category . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8. . .4 WKB quantization . . . . . . . . . .2 5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . 98 7.3 Symplectic groupoids . . . . . . . . . . . A Densities B The method of stationary phase ˇ C Cech cohomology D Principal T bundles 111 111 112 114 119 121 124 125 2 . .3 Quantization of semiclassical states . . . . . . .2 Deformation quantization .1 Prequantization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Contents 1 Introduction: The Harmonic Oscillator 2 The WKB Method 2. . 7 Geometric Quantization 93 7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Symplectic manifolds and mechanics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Symplectic Category Symplectic reduction . . . . .2 WKB quantization and compositions . . . . 109 8 Algebraic Quantization 8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 Polarizations and the metaplectic correction .2 The WKB approximation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 5 8 8 11 17 17 28 32 36 36 41 46 56 64 64 76 79 83 83 87 . . . .1 5. . . . . . . . . . . . 93 7. . . 6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Symplectic Manifolds 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Fourier Integral Operators 6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 Symplectic structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 Some HamiltonJacobi preliminaries . . . . . . . 5 The 5. . . . . .3 Phase functions and lagrangian submanifolds 4. . . . . . . .3 Mechanics on manifolds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 The Maslov correction . . . . . . . . . . . 3. . .
.
but most of them provide too much detail for the reader who just wants to ﬁnd out what the subject is about. The book [29] treats further topics in symplectic geometry and mechanics. but they have already beneﬁtted from the comments 1 We like the following quotation from [4] very much: In recent years. we suggest [1]. There already exist many books on the subjects treated here. one may consult [35]. [54]. The pamphlet [63] is in some sense a precursor to these notes. is [28]. vector ﬁelds. superisation. For classical mechanics and symplectic geometry. operators. two basic references on quantum mechanics itself are [13] and [20]. with special attention to the role of symmetry groups. The only prerequisite for the course (and for these notes) was a knowledge of the basic notions from the theory of diﬀerentiable manifolds (diﬀerential forms. symplectic and contact geometries have encroached on all areas of mathematics. Although symplectic geometry is like any ﬁeld of mathematics in having its deﬁnitions. These notes are still not in ﬁnal form. [53]. we refer to [43] for a physicsoriented presentation and to the notes [21] and the treatises [32]. we show how symplectic geometry arises from the study of semiclassical solutions to the Schr¨dinger equation. [46]. [38]. and so on. written at about the same time.). in the fall semester of 1992 and again at the Centre Emile Borel (Institut Henri Poincar´) in the spring semester e of 1994. The aim of the course was to give students an introduction to the ideas of microlocal analysis and the related symplectic geometry. and which can be bypassed on a ﬁrst reading. symplectisation) there is as yet no axiomatic theory describing them. These notes are meant to function as a guide to the literature. [60] or [71]. In mathematics there exist operations on diﬀerent levels: functions acting on numbers. [6]. functors acting on operators. it is almost a religion. Finally. and [56]. we refer to other sources for many details which are omitted here. Bourbakisation. [2]. and in o turn provides a geometric foundation for the further analysis of this and other formulations of quantum mechanics. [59]. theorems. etc. A previous paper by one of us [64] referred to “the symplectic creed”. complexiﬁcation. a topic pretty much ignored in the present notes. [25]. is [41]. Berkeley. operators acting on functions. a much more complete reference on the subject. On the other hand. acting not on details (functions. it is also a special way of looking at a very broad part of mathematics and its applications.Preface These notes are based on a course entitled “Symplectic geometry and geometric quantization” taught by Alan Weinstein at the University of California. For “geometric quantization”. one of the ﬁrst to treat the connections between classical and quantum mechanics from a geometric viewpoint. An earlier work. functors). As each skylark must display its comb. Symplectisation belongs to the small set of highest level operations.1 In these notes. For more extensive treatment of the PDE aspects of the subject. algebraisation. but on all the mathematics at once. 3 . [8]. so every branch of mathematics must ﬁnally display symplectisation. For many “symplecticians”. with an emphasis on the role which these ideas play in formalizing the transition between the mathematics of classical dynamics (hamiltonian ﬂows on symplectic manifolds) and that of quantum mechanics (unitary ﬂows on Hilbert spaces). etc. Although some such highest level operations are presently known (for example.. transversality.
S. was supported by NSF graduate and postdoctoral fellowships in mathematics.and suggestions of many readers. and Dmitry Roytenberg. especially Maurice Garay. We would like to thank the Centre Emile Borel and the Isaac Newton Institute for their hospitality. 4 . A. During the preparation of these notes. Jim Morehead.B.W. We welcome further comments. was partially supported by NSF Grants DMS9001089 and 9301089.
beginning with a very concrete example and its proposed solution. p) = + 2m 2 then we ﬁnd ∂H ∂H p=− ˙ q= ˙ ∂p ∂q These simple equations. ˙ ˙˙ ˙˙ dt ∂q ∂p If we had chosen x rather than mx as the second coordinate of our phase plane. The classical picture The harmonic oscillator in 1 dimension is described by Newton’s diﬀerential equation: m¨ = −kx. Introducing the “phase plane” R2 with position and momentum coordinates (q. we will take a “spiral” approach toward the quantization problem. 2 5 . We note two qualitative features of the hamiltonian description of a system: 1.1 Introduction: The Harmonic Oscillator In these notes. Speciﬁcally. The derivative of H along a solution curve is dH ∂H ∂H = q+ ˙ p = −pq + q p = 0. and then returning to the same kind of problem at progressively higher levels of generality. x By a standard procedure. we set q=x p = mx. ˙ If we now introduce the hamiltonian function H : R2 → R representing the sum of kinetic and potential energies. The latter problem has taken on a new interest in view of recent work by Witten and others in the area of topological quantum ﬁeld theory (see for example [7]). are called Hamilton’s equations. p2 kq 2 H(q. solution curves in the case of the harmonic oscillator are ellipses centered at the origin.2 Hamilton’s equations deﬁne a ﬂow on the phase plane representing the timeevolution of the classical system at hand. which can describe a wide variety of classical mechanical systems with appropriate choices of the function H. p). we can convert this secondorder ordinary diﬀerential equation into a system of two ﬁrstorder equations. we will start with the harmonic oscillator as described classically in the phase plane R2 and work toward the problem of quantizing arbitrary symplectic manifolds. ˙ so that Newton’s equation becomes the pair of equations: q= ˙ p m p = −kq. we would not have ˙ ˙ arrived at this universal form of the equations. and points in the phase plane move clockwise around each ellipse.
i. The wave function ψ(x. and its ﬂow preserves area in the phase plane. the value of H is constant along integral curves of the hamiltonian vector ﬁeld. C). ∂t A solution ψ of this equation does not represent a classical trajectory. i. Interpreting the right hand side of this equation as the result of applying to the wave function ψ the operator i ∂ψ ˆ = Hψ. The quantum mechanical picture In quantum mechanics. − ∂H ) is ˙ ˙ ∂p ∂q · XH = ∂2H ∂2H − = 0. R where mx2 as k ∂2 + m x2 . the Schr¨dinger equation is a general o form for the quantum mechanical description of a large class of systems. t) itself may be viewed alternatively as a tdependent function of x. From the latter point of view. The description of classical hamiltonian mechanics just given is tied to a particular coordinate system. ∂t 2m ∂x2 2 Here. p) = ( ∂H . We shall see in Chapter 3 that the use of diﬀerential forms leads to a coordinatefree description and generalization of the hamiltonian viewpoint in the context of symplectic geometry. the motion of the harmonic oscillator is described by a complexvalued wave function ψ(x. or as a path in the function space C ∞ (R. t)2 is interpreted as a probability density for observing the oscillator at the position x at time t. t) satisfying the 1dimensional Schr¨dinger equation: o 2 ∂ψ ∂2ψ k 2 =− + x ψ. The divergence of the hamiltonian vector ﬁeld XH = (q. if ψ is normalized. Schr¨dinger’s o ∞ equation deﬁnes a vector ﬁeld on C (R. i ψ ∗ ψ = 1.. 6 . a wave function satisfying Schr¨dinger’s equation then corresponds to an integral o curve of the associated ﬂow. C) representing the time evolution of the quantum system. Planck’s constant has the dimensions of action (energy × time). we may rewrite the Schr¨dinger equation o ˆ def H = − 2 then its squarenorm ρ(x. Like Hamilton’s equations in classical mechanics.e. 2m ∂x2 2 is the operator of multiplication by x2 . Since H represents the total energy of the system. ∂q ∂p ∂p ∂q Thus the vector ﬁeld XH is divergencefree. instead.e. this property of the ﬂow is interpreted as the law of conservation of energy. 2. t) = ψ(x.
. for systems which are in some sense macroscopic. such as (1 + q 2 )p2 . and the classical limit is applicable when divided by this unit is much less than 1. so ˆ ˆ 2 2 that we are forced to choose between (1 + q )ˆ and p2 (1 + q 2 ). from which a unit of action appropriate to the system can be derived. . In these notes. we run in to the problem that the operators q and p do not commute with one another. not only in verifying that the theories are consistent with the fact that we “see” classical behavior in systems which are “really” governed by quantum mechanics. As soon as we wish to “quantize” a more complicated energy function. What is the meaning of “macroscopic” in mathematical terms? It turns out that good approximate solutions of Schr¨dinger’s equation can be generated from classical information o when is small enough. But how can a constant with physical dimensions be small? Although there remain some unsettled issues connected with the question. The diﬀerence between these choices turns out to become small when → 0. p we associate the diﬀerential operators q → q = mx ˆ ∂ . “How can become small?” the answer is essentially the following. Based on the present discussion of the harmonic oscillator.” we will also treat that of “quantization of solutions. among a number of other ˆ p ˆ ˆ possibilities. but also as a tool for developing approximate solutions to the quantum equations of motion.” That is. we will often regard mathematically as a formal parameter or a variable rather than as a ﬁxed number. Establishing this relation o between classical and quantum mechanics is important. But how can a constant approach zero? Besides the problem of “quantization of equations. we would like to establish that. . ∂x The classical hamiltonian H(q. the classical motions described by solutions of Hamilton’s equations lead to approximate solutions of Schr¨dinger’s equation. there are usually characteristic distances. p → p = −i ˆ 7 .Quantization and the classical limit The central aim of these notes is to give a geometric interpretation of relationships between the fundamental equations of classical and quantum mechanics. one tenuous connection can be drawn as follows. velocities. p) = p2 /2m+kq 2 /2 then corresponds naturally to the operator ˆ H. For any particular mechanical system. To the classical position and momentum observables q. masses.
8 . we arrive at the timeindependent Schr¨dinger equao tion: ˆ (H − E) ϕ = 0. ˙ ∈ R+ . after Wentzel. o As a ﬁrst step toward solving the Schr¨dinger equation. Consider a 1dimensional system with hamiltonian H(q. nevertheless. including Liouville. socalled because as time evolves. where the method is traced all the way back to 1817. (Other names. References [13] and [47] contain a discussion of some of its history. and Jeﬀreys are sometimes attached to this method. Substituting this expression for ψ in the Schr¨dinger equation. so the following discussion is absolutely central to these notes. solutions of the form ψ(x. p) = p2 + V (q). Schr¨dinger’s equation assumes the form o i ∂ψ ˆ = Hψ.1 Some HamiltonJacobi preliminaries In this section we will carry out the ﬁrst step in the WKB method to obtain an approximate solution to the “stationary state” eigenvalue problem arising from the Schr¨dinger equation. Also see [5]. these solutions keep the same form (up to multiplication by a complex scalar of norm 1). o i.2 The WKB Method A basic technique for obtaining approximate solutions to the Schr¨dinger equation from o classical motions is called the WKB method. and Brillouin. Eliminating the factor e−iωt above. 2. Hamilton’s equations now become q= ˙ For ﬁxed p m p = −V (q). 2m where V (x) is a potential (for example the potential kx2 /2 for the harmonic oscillator). t) = ϕ(x) e−iωt . we will still refer to the method as WKB.) A good part of what is now called microlocal analysis can be understood as the extension of the basic WKB idea to more precise approximations and more general situations. ∂t ∂2 + mV 2m ∂x2 2 where ˆ H=− is the Schr¨dinger operator. we look for stationary states. Green. o The geometric interpretation of this technique will lead to a correspondence between classical and quantum mechanics which goes beyond the one described in Chapter 1. For convenience. Kramers.e. o we obtain ˆ ω ϕ(x) e−iωt = (Hϕ)(x) e−iωt .
we require that S satisfy the eikonal or HamiltonJacobi equation: H(x. the ˆ constant ξ is imaginary. to kill the other two terms. These two uses of the term “phase” seem to be unrelated! 9 . Suppose for the moment that the potential V is constant.3 When E < V . in which case the force −V (x) is zero. This equation means that ϕ is to be an eigenfunction of the linear diﬀerential ˆ operator H. which are unbounded and admit no physical interpretation. S (x) = ± 2m(E − V (x)).e. o Such a wave function is not squareintegrable and as such is said to be “unnormalizable”. p). for some realvalued function S known as a phase function. it represents a particle which is equally likely to be anywhere in space. S (x)) = i. the function S may be taken as the phase function of a ﬁrstorder approximate solution of Schr¨dinger’s equation. and one has an abundance of exact solutions of the Schr¨dinger equation which are oscillatory and bounded.where E = ω. and in this case we have ˆ (H − E) ϕ = (S (x))2 i + (V − E) − S (x) eiS(x)/ . the eigenvalue E represents the energy of the system. then ξ should vary with x as well. Trying a solution of the form ϕ(x) = eixξ for some constant ξ. and there are only real exponential solutions. and so we are dealing with a free particle. To understand the phase function S geometrically. For V < E. a more general solution candidate is then ϕ(x) = eiS(x)/ . our ﬁrstorder approximation attempt will ignore the last term in brackets. which has a “deﬁnite value” in this state. we consider the classical phase4 plane R2 T ∗ R with coordinates (q. if V varies with x. This proposed form of the solution is the simplest version of the WKB ansatz. where as usual we set p = S . This observation establishes a fundamental link between classical and quantum mechanics: When the image of dS lies in a level manifold of the classical hamiltonian. The diﬀerential dS = S dx can be viewed as a mapping dS : R → T ∗ R. o 3 4 (S (x))2 + V (x) = E. we ﬁnd that ˆ (H − E) ϕ = 0 ⇔ ( ξ)2 = 2m(E − V ). 2m 2m Since we will consider to be “small”. but which has a deﬁnite momentum (since it is an eigenfunction of the momentum operator p). Then S satisﬁes the HamiltonJacobi equation if and only if the image of dS lies in the level manifold H −1 (E). 2m See [55] for a grouptheoretic interpretation of such states. The basic idea at this stage of the WKB method is that. the (real) value of ξ is thus determined up to a choice of sign.
in which “exact” is replaced by “closed”. then ˆ (H − E) ϕ = S 2m 2 + (V − E) − i ∆S eiS/ 2m will be O( ) provided that S satisﬁes the HamiltonJacobi equation: H x1 . the Schr¨dinger o operator corresponding to the classical hamiltonian H(q. the level sets for the 1dimensional harmonic oscillator are lagrangian submanifolds in the phase plane. so its pullback to L is not exact. From the classical standpoint. This idea. 10 .. ˆ Since ϕ is of order zero in .The preceding discussion generalizes easily to higher dimensions. ∂S ∂S . . 2. The restriction of the canonical projection π : T ∗ Rn → Rn to L induces a diﬀeomorphism L Rn . Such submanifolds are called lagrangian. but the integral of p dq around the curve equals the enclosed nonzero area. o n We will call a phase function S : R → R admissible if it satisﬁes the HamiltonJacobi equation. For example. 2m where ∆ denotes the ordinary Laplacian. if we consider a WKB ansatz of the form ϕ = eiS/ . suggesting that in general the state of a system should be represented by the submanifold L (projectable or not) rather than by the phase function S. 3. . While many of the basic constructions of microlocal analysis are motivated by operations on these projectable submanifolds of T ∗ Rn R2n .. In other words. the behavior of an oscillator is nevertheless completely described by its trajectory. As before. The image L = im(dS) of the diﬀerential of an admissible phase function S is characterized by three geometric properties: 1. Since L is 1dimensional. The pullback to L of the form αn = j pj dqj on R2n is exact. . the pullback to L of the form p dq is closed. L is projectable. It is also clear that the curve fails to project diﬀeomorphically onto R. the ansatz ϕ again constitutes a ﬁrstorder approximate solution to the timeindependent Schr¨dinger equation. . A regular level curve of the hamiltonian is an ellipse L. xn . while (H − E) ϕ = O( ). L is an ndimensional submanifold of H −1 (E). In Rn . which we will clarify later. .. applications of the theory require us to extend the constructions to more general ndimensional submanifolds of R2n satisfying only a weakened version of condition (2) above. p) = is ˆ H=− p2 i + V (q) 2m 2 ∆ + mV . ∂x1 ∂xn = S(x) 2m 2 + V (x) = E. is the starting point of the geometrical approach to microlocal analysis.
For now. dαn (XH . and thus. Recall that to a function H : R2n → R. 2. If the lagrangian submanifold L is locally closed. in fact. o n we recall that if S : R → R is an admissible phase function. If L is a lagrangian submanifold of a level set of H. ϕ is an eigenfunction of H with eigenvalue E. and we have the following result. In quantum mechanics.2 The WKB approximation Returning to our WKB ansatz for a stationarystate solution of the Schr¨dinger equation. skewsymmetric bilinear form. in other words. where its potential energy is higher. ∂pj ∂qj ∂qj ∂pj j A simple computation shows that XH and the form αn are related by the equation XH i. in other words. the 2form dαn vanishes on the subspace of Tp R2n generated by Tp L and XH (p) for each p ∈ L. ˆ Up to terms of order .e. It is also clear on physical grounds that our ansatz for ϕ is too restrictive because it satisﬁes ϕ(x) = 1 for all x. subspaces of Tp R2n on which dαn vanishes can be at most ndimensional. dαn = −dH. HamiltonJacobi theorem . this theorem implies that L is invariant under the ﬂow of XH . Hamilton’s equations associate the vector ﬁeld XH = q ˙ ∂ ∂ +p ˙ = ∂q ∂p ∂H ∂ ∂H ∂ − . the quantity ϕ(x)2 represents the probability of the particle being at the position x. i. A function H : R2n → R is locally constant on a lagrangian submanifold L ⊂ R2n if and only if the hamiltonian vector ﬁeld XH is tangent to L. we want to note an important relationship between lagrangian submanifolds of R2n and hamiltonian ﬂows. it is at least intuitively plausible that a particle is more likely to be found where it moves more slowly. 11 . The restriction of dαn to the tangent space Tp R2n of R2n at any point p deﬁnes a nondegenerate. These remarks imply that XH is tangent to L.. v) = −dH(v) for every tangent vector v. There is no way to improve the order of approximation simply by making a better choice of S. and there is no reason for this to be constant.e. then ϕ(x) = eiS(x)/ satisﬁes ˆ (H − E) ϕ = O( ). We may therefore hope to ﬁnd a better approximate solution by multiplying ϕ by an “amplitude function” a ϕ(x) = eiS(x)/ a(x). then T L lies in the kernel of dH at all points of L. as we will see in the next chapter. or.
This condition on a is known as the homogeneous transport equation: ∂a ∂S a∆S + 2 = 0. then ϕ will be an eigenfunction of H modulo terms of order O( 2 ). 12 . as our physical reasoning predicted. the homogeneous transport equation amounts to aS + 2a S = 0. the function a assumes complex values. Solving this equation directly. we obtain a2 S + 2aa S = (a2 S ) = 0 c ⇒ a= √ S for some constant c. Since S is assumed to satisfy the HamiltonJacobi equation. For x < E. however.If S is again an admissible phase function. for example. Consider. a has (asymptotic) singularities. then the secondorder solution ϕ = eiS/ a is called the semiclassical approximation. observe that these occur precisely at the projected image of those points of L where the √ projection itself becomes singular. ∂xj ∂xj j If S is an admissible phase function.1 In 1 dimension. we now obtain: ˆ (H − E) ϕ = − 1 i 2m a∆S + 2 j ∂a ∂S ∂xj ∂xj + 2 ∆a eiS/ . ˆ If a is chosen to kill the coeﬃcient of on the right. and thus c a= 1 . [4(E − V )] 4 If E > V (x) for all x ∈ R. At x = E. we can extend the procedure above by adding to the original amplitude a = a0 certain appropriately chosen functions of higher order in . Notice that a = ϕ is largest where V is largest. To generate better approximate solutions to the eigenfunction problem. we have S = 2m(E − V ). the unbounded potential V (x) = √ x2 in the case of the harmonic oscillator. the function a is still welldeﬁned √ up to a multiplicative constant. Outside the interval x ≤ E. Example 2. then a is a smooth solution to the homogeneous transport equation. we might naively attempt to use the same formula when im(dS) is replaced by a nonprojectable lagrangian submanifold of H −1 (E). Since the expression above for a does not depend explicitly on the phase function S. and a is an amplitude which satisﬁes the homogeneous transport equation. Consider the next approximation ϕ = eiS/ (a0 + a1 ).
By an dependent function f on Rn we will mean a function f : Rn × R+ → C. conversely. It is obvious that any dependent function which extends smoothly to = 0 is represented by an asymptotic series. then each asymptotic series determines a unique equivalence class. p. A WKB ˆ “solution” to the eigenfunction problem Hϕ = Eϕ is then an equivalence class of functions of the form ϕ = eiS/ a. we obtain: ˆ (H − E) ϕ = − 1 i 2m 2 a1 ∆S + 2 j ∂a1 ∂S − i∆a0 ∂xj ∂xj + 3 ∆a1 eiS(x)/ .Borel (see [28. its coeﬃcients ak are uniquely determined. Such a function is said to be represented by a formal asymptotic expansion of the form ∞ ak k . the diﬀerence K f − k=0 ak k is O( K+1 ) locally uniformly in x. ∂xj ∂xj n In general. The principal part of an asymptotic series ∞ ak k is deﬁned as its ﬁrst term which is k=0 not identically zero as a function of x. and for each k > 0. where S satisﬁes the HamiltonJacobi equation. If we consider as equivalent any two dependent functions whose diﬀerence is O( ∞ ).28]) tells us that. a solution to the eigenfunction problem modulo terms of order O( by a WKB ansatz of the form ϕ = eiS/ (a0 + a1 + · · · + an n ) is given ).Assuming that eiS/ a0 is a semiclassical approximate solution. where each coeﬃcient ak is a smooth k=0 complexvalued function on Rn . any asymptotic series can be “summed” to yield such a function. O( k ) for all k. and a theorem of E. if. a0 satisﬁes the homogeneous transport equation. where is viewed as a parameter ranging in R+ . where S is an admissible phase function and a is an dependent function represented by a formal asymptotic series ∞ a∼ k=p ak k 13 .e. ∂xj ∂xj This situation can be described in the terminology of asymptotic series as follows. i. the function ak satisﬁes the inhomogeneous transport equation: ak ∆S + 2 j ∂ak ∂S = i∆ak−1 . When f admits such an expansion. Evidently. The order of a is the index of its principal part. ϕ will be a solution of the timeindependent Schr¨dinger equation modulo terms o of order O( 3 ) provided that a1 satisﬁes the inhomogeneous transport equation a1 ∆S + 2 j ∂a1 ∂S = i∆a0 . for each K ∈ Z+ .
To begin. o Geometry of the transport equation In Section 2. The generalized or ∂x geometric version of such a solution was a lagrangian submanifold of the level set H −1 (E). j which means that the divergence of the vector ﬁeld a2 S is zero. we can rewrite it as: ∂ ∂xj a2 ∂S ∂xj = 0. a∆S + 2 ∂xj ∂xj j After multiplying both sides of this equation by a. a function S satisfying the HamiltonJacobi equation H(x. But it is better to reformulate this condition as: LX (x) (a2 dx) = 0. We now wish to interpret and generalize in a similar way the semiclassical approximation with its amplitude included. The projection XH of XH L onto Rn (the (x) reminds us of the coordinate x on Rn ) there(x) fore coincides with S. the ak satisfy the recursive transport equations: ak ∆S + 2 j ∂ak ∂S = i∆ak−1 .with the property that its principal part ap satisﬁes the homogeneous transport equation ap ∆S + 2 j ∂ap ∂S = 0. p) = p2 /2 + V (q) is i XH L = j (x) ∂S ∂ ∂V ∂ − ∂xj ∂qj ∂qj ∂pj . o i. suppose that a is a function on Rn which satisﬁes the homogeneous transport equation: ∂a ∂S = 0. Rather than considering the transport equation as a condition on the vector ﬁeld a2 S (on Rn ) per se. ∂S ) = E. and so the homogeneous transport equation says that a2 XH is divergencefree for the canonical density dx = dx1 ∧ · · · ∧ dxn  on Rn . ∂xj ∂xj This means that the dependent function ϕ (or any function equivalent to it) satisﬁes the Schr¨dinger equation up to terms of order O( ∞ ).. Notice ﬁrst that the restriction to L of the hamiltonian vector ﬁeld associated to H(q.1. we can lift all of this activity to the lagrangian submanifold L = im(dS). we saw that a ﬁrstorder WKB approximate solution ϕ = eiS/ to the timeindependent Schr¨dinger equation depended on the choice of an admissible phase function. ∂xj ∂xj and for k > p.e. H 14 .
This observation.) In other words. not by functions. invariant by XH . we transfer the factor of a2 from the vector ﬁeld XH = S to the density dx. From this new point of view. (x) Notice that while a solution to the homogeneous transport equation in the case of the 1dimensional harmonic oscillator was necessarily singular (see Example 2. (See Appendix A for a discussion of densities of fractional order. so it makes sense on any lagrangian submanifold of R2n lying in a level set of H. i. The singularities arise only when we try to transfer the halfdensity from L down to conﬁguration space. the semiclassical state described in the preceding example is a perfectly smooth object everywhere on the lagrangian submanifold L. Since XH is tangent to L by the HamiltonJacobi theorem. we can express the result of our analysis as follows: If S is an admissible phase function and a is a halfdensity on L = im(dS) which is invariant under the ﬂow of the classical hamiltonian.2 Recall that in the case of the 1dimensional harmonic oscillator. namely that the quantum states themselves should be represented. stationary classical states are simply those lagrangian submanifolds of R2 which coincide with the regular level sets of the classical hamiltonian H(q.e. Example 2. together with the fact that it is the square of a which appears in the density π ∗ (a2 dx). elements of the intrinsic Hilbert space HRn (see Appendix A). o 15 . but by halfdensities on conﬁguration space Rn . p) = (p2 + kq 2 )/2. this equation is satisﬁed if and only if the pullback of a2 dx to L via the projection π is invariant under the ﬂow of XH .that is. constitutes a semiclassical stationary state for the harmonic oscillator. by the equation momentarily as Hfun ˆ ˆ H(adx1/2 ) = (Hfun a)dx1/2 . and since the Lie derivative is invariant under diﬀeomorphism. Such a state is stationary when L lies in a level set of the classical hamiltonian and a is invariant under its ﬂow. then eiS/ (dS)∗ a is a secondorder approximate solution to the timeindependent Schr¨dinger equation. which we will denote o ˆ . This discussion leads us to another change of viewpoint. a (geometric) semiclassical state should be deﬁned as a lagrangian submanifold L of R2n equipped with a halfdensity a. Stationary states ˆ are then eigenvectors of the Schr¨dinger operator H. together with a square root of this volume element.1). which is deﬁned on the space of smooth o halfdensities in terms of the old Schr¨dinger operator on functions. There is a unique (up to a constant) invariant volume element for the hamiltonian ﬂow of H on each level curve H. Any such level curve L. suggests that a solution of the homogeneous transport equation should be represented geometrically by a halfdensity on L. Another substantial advantage of the geometric interpretation of the semiclassical approximation is that the concept of an invariant halfdensity depends only on the hamiltonian vector ﬁeld XH and not on the function S.
we will “quantize” semiclassical states in these symplectic manifolds. This will require the concept of symplectic manifold. Speciﬁcally. we could attempt to interpret a solution of the recursive system of inhomogeneous transport equations on Rn as an asymptotic halfdensity on L in order to arrive at a geometric picture of a complete WKB solution to the Schr¨dinger equation. we have noted the following correspondences between classical and quantum mechanics: Object basic space state Classical version R2n Quantum version H Rn lagrangian submanifold of R2n with halfdensity on Rn halfdensity Hamilton’s equations Schr¨dinger equation o ˆ operator H on smooth halfdensities ˆ eigenvector of H timeevolution generator of evolution function H on R2n stationary state lagrangian submanifold in level set of H with invariant halfdensity Proceeding further. This.In summary. we will start with an invariant halfdensity on a (possibly nonprojectable) lagrangian submanifold of R2n and attempt to use this data to construct an explicit semiclassical approximate solution to Schr¨dinger’s o equation on Rn . involves some additional diﬃculties. Second. we will try to construct a space of quantum states corresponding to a general classical phase space. notably the lack of a geometric interpretation of the inhomogeneous transport equations. we will focus on two aspects of the semiclassical approximation. First. 16 . we will extend the geometric picture presented above to systems with more general phase spaces. which lie beyond the scope of these notes. Then we will try to construct asymptotic quantum states corresponding to halfdensities on lagrangian submanifolds. which is introduced in the following chapter. o however. In particular. Instead.
or in other words if V ⊥ = {0}. 29. collecting pertinent facts about nondegenerate. to cotangent bundles. i. we will introduce the notion of a symplectic structure on a manifold. our proof of the HamiltonJacobi theorem relied on the nondegeneracy of the 2form dαn . A bilinear form ω : V × V → R gives rise to a linear map ω: V → V ∗ ˜ deﬁned by contraction: ω (x)(y) = ω(x. mdimensional vector space.1. y). We then turn to the deﬁnition of symplectic manifolds. we saw that Hamilton’s equations associate a vector ﬁeld XH on R2n satisfying XH dαn = −dH. the correct generalization of the hamiltonian picture to arbitrary conﬁguration spaces relies similarly on the use of 2forms with certain additional properties. a lagrangian submanifold of R2n was deﬁned as an ndimensional submanifold L ⊂ R2n on which the exterior derivative of the form αn = pi dqi vanishes. ˜ If ω is an isomorphism. ˜ The ωorthogonal to a subspace W ⊂ V is deﬁned as W ⊥ = {x ∈ V : W ⊂ ker ω (x)}. ω) which preserves the form ω is called a linear symplectic transformation. In this section. We refer to [6. our main goal at this point is to develop the tools needed to extend the hamiltonian viewpoint to phase spaces associated to general ﬁnitedimensional conﬁguration spaces. then the form ω is said to be nonde˜ generate. and the group of all such transformations is denoted by Sp(V ). if in addition ω is skewsymmetric. 63] for thorough discussions of the topics in this chapter. Linear symplectic structures Suppose that V is a real. then ω is called a linear symplectic structure on V . These points already indicate the central role played by the form dαn in the study of hamiltonian systems in R2n . Finally. motivated for the most part by the situation in R2n . skewsymmetric bilinear forms.e. While some discussion will be devoted to certain general properties of symplectic manifolds. to a function 2n H : R → R. 17 . we ﬁrst study such forms pointwise. 3.1 Symplectic structures In Section 2.3 Symplectic Manifolds In this chapter. More general symplectic manifolds will reappear as the focus of more sophisticated quantization programs in later chapters. A linear endomorphism of a symplectic vector space (V.
then T is symplectic provided that At C. positivedeﬁnite inner product on V . positivedeﬁnite bilinear form on V . λ )) = λ (x) − λ(x ).Example 3. i. More generally. 18 . be a symmetric.2 Every symplectic vector space (V. the existence of a linear symplectic structure on a vector space V implies that V is necessarily evendimensional and therefore admits a complex structure. so that ω is represented by an invertible skewadjoint operator K : V → V . Jy) = ω(x. then the association (x. ·) = ω(·. Let . −I 0 It follows that if a linear operator on V is given by the real 2n × 2n matrix T = A B C D . D = (At )−1 . In other words. Theorem 3.1 If E is any real ndimensional vector space with dual E ∗ . y) and ω(x. and At D − C t B = I. y) = Kx. Note in particular that these conditions are satisﬁed if A ∈ GL(E). Proof. ω) admits a compatible complex structure.e. (x . y ∈ V . a linear endomorphism J such that J 2 = −I. if K : E → F is an isomorphism. the form ω is represented by the matrix 0 I ω= . and so GL(E) is isomorphic to a subgroup Gl(E) of Sp(V ). (K −1 )∗ λ) deﬁnes a linear symplectomorphism between E ⊕ E ∗ and F ⊕ F ∗ equipped with these linear symplectic structures. and B = C = 0. λ). λ) → (Kx. then a linear symplectic structure on V = E ⊕ E ∗ is given by ω((x. A complex structure is said to be compatible with a symplectic structure on V if ω(Jx. y . Since the determinant of a skewsymmetric m × m matrix is zero if m is odd. With respect to a basis {xi } of E and a dual basis {λi } of E ∗ . i. B t D are symmetric. J·) deﬁnes a symmetric. Jx) > 0 for all x. J is compatible with ω (we also call it ωcompatible) if J : V → V is a linear symplectomorphism and gJ (·. ω(x.e.
Jy = Kx. From the nondegeneracy of the symplectic form. GL(V. By the uniqueness of the polar decomposition. Consequently. this means that the intersection of any two of Sp(V ). Proof. · = gJ (·.3 The collection J of ωcompatible complex structures on a symplectic vector space (V. J). a hermitian structure on V is deﬁned by ·. J is a complex structure on V .. w ∈ V . To see that J is ωcompatible. As is easily checked. GL(V. Also. O(V ) equals U (V ). From the skewsymmetry of K it follows that J t = −J. etA w) = ω(Av. Since P is contractible. ω) is contractible. 2 If J is ωcompatible. For any v. ω) is called the symplectic orthogonal to W . The association J → gJ described above deﬁnes a continuous map from J into the space P of symmetric. we have d dt ω(etA v. ·) + iω(·.e. consider a 1parameter family of maps etA associated to some linear map A : V → V . ﬁrst note that ω(Jx. y = ω(x. and U (V ) of ω. and RJ = JR. it follows that W ⊥⊥ = W and dim W ⊥ = dim V − dim W 19 . J on V preserves the third and therefore preserves the hermitian structure. since R and . 2 Corollary 3. Jx = JRx. and the composition J → P → J of these maps equals the identity on J . x > 0. this implies the corollary. · . ˜ dim(V ) = 2k implies dim(sp(V)) = dim(Sp(V)) = k(2k + 1). ·). y). gJ . g. w) + ω(v. Jy) = KJx. a linear transformation T ∈ GL(V ) which preserves any two of the structures ω. it follows that the map which assigns to a form . Jx = Rx. and so J 2 = −JJ t = − id. where R = KK t is positivedeﬁnite symmetric. the complex structure J constructed in the preceding proof is continuous. To determine the Lie algebra sp(V) of Sp(V ). Jx) = Kx. O(V ). positivedeﬁnite bilinear forms on V . t=0 and so A ∈ sp(V) if and only if the linear map ω ◦ A : V → V ∗ is selfadjoint. i. J. J = R−1 K is orthogonal. Distinguished subspaces The ωorthogonal to a subspace W of a symplectic vector space (V. and ·. Aw). In terms of the automorphism groups Sp(V ). are positivedeﬁnite.√ The operator K admits a polar decomposition K = RJ. ω(x. Jy = JKx. J).
According to these deﬁnitions. In general. if dim W = 1. W ⊥ = W . if W is selforthogonal.4 In E ⊕ E ∗ with its usual symplectic structure.5 Suppose that (V.for any subspace W ⊂ V . From this observation it follows that for every isotropic subspace W of a (ﬁnitedimensional) symplectic vector space V which is not lagrangian. the skewsymmetry of ω implies that W ⊂ W ⊥ . If (V. Also.e. a subspace W ⊂ V is isotropic if the restriction of the symplectic form to W is identically zero. B of V . this is equivalent to saying that Z ∩Z ⊥ = {0} or Z + Z ⊥ = V . any subspace contained in its orthogonal will be called isotropic. Note that the symplectic orthogonal W ⊥ might not be an algebraic complement to W . there exists an isotropic subspace W of V which properly contains W . For instance. Various subspaces of a symplectic vector space are related as follows. then the dimension relation above implies that 1 dim W = 2 dim V . It also follows from the deﬁnition of this structure that the graph of a linear map B : E → E ∗ is a lagrangian subspace of E ⊕ E ∗ if and only if B is selfadjoint. ω) is a 2ndimensional symplectic vector space and W ⊂ V is any isotropic subspace with dim(W ) < n. Beginning with any 1dimensional subspace of V . ω) is a symplectic vector space. More generally. both E and E ∗ are lagrangian subspaces. we note that if codim W = 1. Example 3. and is called lagrangian. the restriction of ω to certain subspaces Z ⊂ V may again be nondegenerate. then W ⊥ is 1dimensional. i. there exists a nonzero vector w ∈ W ⊥ \W . Dually. then: 20 . If T : V → V is a linear symplectic map. B ⊥ ⊂ A⊥ whenever A ⊂ B. we can apply this remark inductively to conclude that every ﬁnitedimensional symplectic vector space contains a lagrangian subspace. The subspace W of V spanned by W ∪{w} is then isotropic and dim(W ) = dim(W )+1. Finally. (A + B)⊥ = A⊥ ∩ B ⊥ and (A ∩ B)⊥ = A⊥ + B ⊥ for any pair of subspaces A. hence isotropic. Since 2n = dim(W ) + dim(W ⊥ ).6 If L is a lagrangian subspace of a symplectic vector space V . and A ⊂ V is an arbitrary subspace. The kernel of a nonzero covector α ∈ V ∗ is a codimension1 coisotropic subspace ker α of V whose symplectic orthogonal (ker α)⊥ is the distinguished 1dimensional subspace of ker α spanned by ω −1 (α). At the other extreme. ˜ Example 3. then the graph of T is a lagrangian subspace of V ⊕ V . we denote by V ⊕V the vector space V ⊕V equipped with the symplectic structure ω ⊕ −ω. spaces W satisfying the condition W ⊥ ⊂ W are called coisotropic or involutive. Any selforthogonal subspace is simultaneously isotropic and coisotropic. In particular. and W ⊥ ⊂ W ⊥⊥ = W . Such subspaces are called symplectic. Lemma 3.
Theorem 3. i. JL is a lagrangian splitting. L is transverse to A if and only if L ∩ A⊥ = {0}. every symplectic vector space contains a lagrangian subspace. there is a lagrangian subspace L transverse to both L and L. and so W ⊥ ∩ I ⊂ I ⊥ ∩ L. L of V .e. y).5.7 Note that statement (1) of Lemma 3. then A⊥ ⊂ A. then A⊥ is isotropic. then L. 2 Example 3. 2. which in turn ∗ gives rise to a linear symplectomorphism between V and L ⊕ L equipped with its canonical symplectic structure (see Example 3. A pair L.5 implies that there is a lagrangian subspace L with A⊥ ⊂ L. if A is coisotropic.8 Every 2ndimensional symplectic vector space is linearly symplectomorphic to (R2n . For any two lagrangian subspaces L. 1. ωn ). it follows that I + W is a symplectic subspace of V . L ⊂ A if and only if A⊥ ⊂ L. Tε y) = (1 + ε2 ) ω(x. Passing to orthogonals. Proof. Lε is a lagrangian subspace for all ε > 0. then I + L ⊂ W + I ⊥ . If J is a ωcompatible complex structure on V and L ⊂ V a lagrangian subspace. Thus. we can choose orthonormal bases 21 . Proof. the preceding remarks prove the following linear “normal form” result: Theorem 3. Thus. Similarly.6 implies that if L ⊂ A.9 Suppose that V is a symplectic vector space with a ωcompatible complex structure J and let Tε : V → V be given by Tε (x) = x + εJx. It is easy to check that Tε is a conformal linear symplectic map. In this case. Since I ⊥ ∩ W = 0 by our choice of W . proving statement (2). Lemma 3.1). L + A = V if and only if (L + A)⊥ = L ∩ A⊥ = {0}. L of transverse lagrangian subspaces of V is said to deﬁne a lagrangian splitting of V . we have L ⊂ A. Using the innerproduct gJ on V induced by J. 2. and so A is a coisotropic subspace. If W ⊂ L is any complementary subspace to I ⊥ ∩ L. the map ω deﬁnes an isomorphism L ˜ L∗ .2 also implies the following useful result. then Lε = Tε (L) is a lagrangian subspace transverse to L for small ε > 0. and Example 3. and since every ndimensional vector space is isomorphic to Rn . If L. Conversely.1. By Example 3. L are any lagrangian subspaces of V . Statement (1) follows from the properties of the operation ⊥ and the equation L = L⊥ . Suppose that V is a symplectic vector space with an isotropic subspace I and a lagrangian subspace L such that I ∩ L = 0. a subspace C ⊂ V is coisotropic if and only if it contains a lagrangian subspace. W ⊥ ∩ I ⊂ I ∩ L = 0. an isomorphism of V satisfying ω(Tε x. Thus.
Let {Li } be a countable family of lagrangian subspaces. A natural action of the group Sp(V ) on L(V ). the lagrangian subspace Lε is transverse to L. L) = L (T ) = T (L). L2 ∈ L(V ). L by (1). For arbitrary L1 . The lagrangian grassmannian The collection of all unoriented lagrangian subspaces of a 2ndimensional symplectic vector space V is called the lagrangian grassmannian L(V ) of V . which induces a ﬁbration L(V ) → S 1 with 1connected ﬁber SU (n)/SO(n). wj + εJwj )} = {ω(vi . Consequently. wj )} is nonsingular. an orthogonal transformation L1 → L2 induces a symplectic transformation L1 ⊕ L∗ → L2 ⊕ L∗ in the manner of Example 3. the function t → det(Ai + tBi ) is a nonzero polynomial and therefore has ﬁnitely many zeros.10 The unitary group associated to an ωcompatible complex structure J on V acts transitively on L(V ). the lagrangian subspace Tt (L) is transverse to all Li for almost every t ∈ R. so that for i = 1. and let Ai . the statement of preceding lemma can be improved as follows. which in turn 1 2 gives rise to a unitary transformation L1 ⊕ JL1 → L2 ⊕ JL2 mapping L1 onto L2 . 2 In fact. Lε are transverse precisely when the matrix M = {ω(vi . wj ) + ε gJ (vi . wj )}n i. we can apply Example 3. Setting I = span{vi }i=k+1 and W = span{wi }n i=k+1 . Bi be the matrices obtained with respect to L as in the proof above. · · · .1. giving an isomorphism of fundamental groups π1 (L(V )) π1 (S 1 ) Z. Thus. Then {wi + εJwi } form a basis of Lε . Lemma 3. respectively. To prove (2). det2 22 . {wi } of L and L.j=k+1 and B is some (n−k)×(n−k) matrix.1). the vectors vi = wi span L ∩ L . Proof.{vi }. denoted : Sp(V ) × L(V ) → L(V ) is deﬁned by (T.7 to conclude that A is nonsingular. J The choice of J also deﬁnes a complex determinant U (V ) → S 1 . For each i. 2 The stabilizer of L ∈ L(V ) under the U (V )action is evidently the orthogonal subgroup of Gl(L) deﬁned with respect to the innerproduct and splitting L ⊕ JL of V induced by J (see Example 3. k. and L . Our choice of bases implies that ε · id 0 M= 0 A+ε·B n where A = {ω(vi . and assertion (1) follows. a (noncanonical) identiﬁcation of the lagrangian grassmannian with the homogeneous space U (n)/O(n) is obtained from the map L U (V ) → L(V ). observe that for small ε > 0.
The result of the following example will be useful when we extend our discussion of the Maslov class from vector spaces to vector bundles. ω) is any symplectic vector space with ωcompatible complex structure J and lagrangian subspace L. Z) → H 1 (L(V ). ∂qj ∂pk = δjk ωn ∂ ∂ .10 gives independence of L. L )) = mL (L ) · det2 (T ) J for any T ∈ U (V ) and L ∈ L(V ). In fact: ωn ∂ ∂ . On the other hand. then ∗ ∗ the deﬁnition of the universal Maslov class shows that (f1 − f2 )µV equals the pullback of 1 1 the canonical generator of H (S . n First. the multiplication map S 1 × S 1 → S 1 induces the diagonal map H 1 (S 1 ) → H 1 (S 1 ) ⊕ H 1 (S 1 ) H 1 (S 1 × S 1 ) on cohomology). ∂pj ∂pk =0 . we note that j=1 dqj ∧ dpj deﬁnes a linear symplectic structure on the tangent space of R2n at each point. If f1 . (Recall that : Sp(V )×L(V ) → L(V ) denotes the natural action of Sp(V ) on L(V )). connectedness of the unitary group together with Lemma 3. Now consider any topological space M . If T : M → Sp(V ) is any map. ∂qj ∂qk 23 =0 ωn ∂ ∂ . R) by the map (mL ◦ f1 )(mL ◦ f2 )−1 . µV . Symplectic manifolds To motivate the deﬁnition of a symplectic manifold. it follows that T is homotopic to a map T : M → U (V ).11 If (V. we obtain a natural homomorphism H 1 (S 1 . From the ﬁrst paragraph. we ﬁrst recall some features of the n diﬀerential form −dαn = ωn = j=1 dqj ∧ dpj which appeared in our earlier discussion. we set (T · fi ) = (T.3). and so ((T · f1 )∗ − (T · f2 )∗ )µV is obtained via pullback by (mL ◦ (T · f1 ))(mL ◦ (T · f2 ))−1 .This isomorphism does not depend on the choices of J and L made above. Passing to homology and dualizing. The image of the canonical generator of H 1 (S 1 . (Here we use the fact that when S 1 is identiﬁed with the unit complex numbers. then a check of the preceding deﬁnitions shows that mL ((T. from which we conclude that ∗ ∗ (f1 − f2 )µV = ((T · f1 )∗ − (T · f2 )∗ )µV . it follows that this product equals (mL ◦f1 )(mL ◦f2 )−1 . Z). Z) under this map is called the universal Maslov class. Since Sp(V ) deformation retracts onto U (V ). f2 : M → L(V ) are continuous maps. fi ). Independence of J follows from the fact that J is connected (Corollary 3. Example 3.
the term d(XH ω) = d2 H is automatically zero. we impose the condition that ω be closed. XH ) = 0. from which it is clear that ωn is invertible. Computing the Lie derivative of H with respect to XH LXH H = XH · H = ω (XH )(XH ) = ω(XH . This description of the hamiltonian vector ﬁeld leads immediately to the following two invariance results. By assuming that each of these bilinear forms is nondegenerate. implying that XH is tangent to the level sets of H. or in other words. A 2form ω on a manifold P is a smooth family of bilinear forms on the tangent spaces of P . to guarantee the vanishing of the second term. nondegenerate 2form ω on P . Finally. This equation implies that the ﬂow of XH preserves the form ωn and therefore generalizes our earlier remark that the hamiltonian vector ﬁeld associated to the 1dimensional harmonic oscillator is divergencefree. Since ωn is closed. we also have by Cartan’s formula (see [1]) LXH ωn = d(XH ωn ) + XH dωn = d2 H = 0. First note that by the skewsymmetry of ωn . LXH H = XH · H = ωn (XH .and so ωn ˜ ∂ ∂qj = dpj ωn ˜ ∂ ∂pj = −dqj . ˜ we see that the conservation of energy follows from the skewsymmetry of the form ω. 24 . we recall that the hamiltonian vector ﬁeld associated via Hamilton’s equations to H : R2n → R satisﬁes XH ωn = dH. ˜ −1 so we see that the symplectic form ωn is all that we need to obtain XH from H. Thus we make the following deﬁnition: Deﬁnition 3. This again reﬂects the fact that the ﬂow of XH preserves energy.12 A symplectic structure on a manifold P is a closed. we guarantee that the equation XH = ω −1 (dH) ˜ deﬁnes a hamiltonian vector ﬁeld uniquely for any H. Here. We now see what is needed to do hamiltonian mechanics on manifolds. XH = ωn (dH). invariance of ω under the hamiltonian ﬂow is satisﬁed if LXH ω = d(XH ω) + XH dω = 0. XH ) = 0. ˜ Next.
ω1 ) to (P2 .The condition that ω be nondegenerate means that ω deﬁnes an isomorphism of vector ˜ bundles T P → T ∗ P . The symplectic dual of a manifold (P. which are (co)isotropic submanifolds of dimension 1 dim(P ). the product of (co)isotropic submanifolds of P1 and P2 is a (co)isotropic submanifold of P1 × P2 . products. ι) is a lagrangian immersion whose image is contained in C. New symplectic manifolds can be manufactured from known examples by dualizing and by taking products. we will see that the cotangent bundle of any smooth manifold carries a natural symplectic structure. Generalizing our earlier discussion of distinguished subspaces of a symplectic vector space. the corresponding Lie 25 . A symplectomorphism from (P1 . The collection Aut(P. In view of the remarks above. that ω deﬁnes a linear symplectic structure on each tangent space of P . In this case. 2 we will call the pair (L. More generally. if L is a 2 smooth manifold of dimension 1 dim(P ) and ι : L → P is an immersion such that ι∗ ω = 0. Example 3. and thus XH induces a smooth. then Lemma 3.13 If C ⊂ P is a hypersurface.ι on L. and symplectomorphisms is provided by the following lemma.6 implies that for each p ∈ L. nonsingular vector ﬁeld XH. ω) of symplectomorphisms of P becomes an inﬁnitedimensional Lie group when endowed with the C ∞ topology (see [49]). ω2 ) is a smooth diﬀeomorphism f : P1 → P2 compatible with the symplectic structures: f ∗ ω2 = ω1 . A useful connection among duals. Darboux’s theorem (Section 4. An immediate example of a symplectic manifold is furnished by R2n with its standard structure ωn = n dqj ∧ dpj (a diﬀerential form with constant coeﬃcients and not just j=1 a single bilinear form). this assertion generalizes the HamiltonJacobi theorem (see the end of Section 2. Lemma 3. When C is coisotropic.3) will tell us that this is the local model for the general case. A simple check of deﬁnitions shows that if H : P → R is a smooth function having C as a regular level set. we call a submanifold C ⊂ P (co)isotropic provided that each tangent space Tp C of C is a (co)isotropic subspace of Tp P . the subspaces Cp = (Tp C)⊥ comprise a subbundle (T C)⊥ of T C known as the characteristic distribution of C. that the top exterior power of ω is a volume form on P . this form is the sum of the pullbacks of ω1 and ω2 by the projections of P1 × P2 to P1 and P2 .1) to arbitrary symplectic manifolds and lagrangian immersions. or equivalently. ω2 ). or ﬁnally. If (L. ω) consists of the same underlying manifold endowed with the symplectic structure −ω. Of particular interest in our discussion will be lagrangian submanifolds of P . ω1 ) and (P2 . More explicitly. the characteristic subspace Cι(p) ⊂ Tι(p) C is contained in ι∗ Tp L. It is integrable because ω is closed. Evidently P and its dual P share the same (co)isotropic submanifolds.14 A diﬀeomorphism f : P1 → P2 between symplectic manifolds is a symplectomorphism if and only if its graph is a lagrangian submanifold of the product P2 × P 1 . ι) a lagrangian immersion. then the hamiltonian vector ﬁeld XH is tangent to the characteristic foliation of C. Given two symplectic manifolds (P1 . As is easily veriﬁed. then C is a coisotropic submanifold. their product P1 ×P2 admits a symplectic structure given by the sum ω1 ⊕ω2 . In the next section.
Example 3. that the K¨hler form of any K¨hler manifold a a is a symplectic form.16 If F → B is any vector bundle.17. functions satisfying Q(tv) = t2 Q(v) for all real t. then the sum F ⊕ F ∗ carries a natural symplectic vector bundle structure. the association X → X ω deﬁnes an isomorphism between χ(P. deﬁned in analogy with Example 3. 26 . ω) and the space of closed 1forms on P .15 A linear symplectic form ω on a vector space V induces a symplectic structure (also denoted ω) on V via the canonical identiﬁcation of T V with V ×V . ω) are called locally hamiltonian vector ﬁelds or symplectic vector ﬁelds. Since LX ω = d(X ω). Example 3.1. ω) consisting of vector ﬁelds of the form X(v) = Av for some A ∈ sp(V). The symplectic group Sp(V ) then embeds naturally in Aut(V. Consequently. i. those X which map to exact 1forms are simply the hamiltonian vector ﬁelds on P . Theorem 3. 2 Symplectic vector bundles Since a symplectic form on a 2nmanifold P deﬁnes a smooth family of linear symplectic forms on the ﬁbers of T P .e. ω). v). The elements of χ(P. sp(V) is canonically identiﬁed with the space of such functions via the correspondence 1 A ↔ QA (v) = ω(Av.2 can be generalized by a ﬁberwise construction as follows. the proof of Theorem 3. Note that these are precisely the hamiltonian vector ﬁelds of the homogeneous quadratic polynomials on V . and of complex manifolds which are not symplectic. F are said to be symplectomorphic if there exists a vector bundle isomorphism E → F which preserves their symplectic structures.algebra is the space χ(P. With the aid of an arbitrary riemannian metric. the frame bundle of P can be reduced to a principal Sp(n) bundle over P . ω) of smooth vector ﬁelds X on P satisfying LX ω = 0. any vector bundle E → B with this structure is called a symplectic vector bundle. there exist examples of symplectic manifolds which are not complex (the almost complex structure coming from the theorem cannot be made integrable).18 Despite Theorem 3.17 Every symplectic vector bundle admits a compatible complex vector bundle structure. however. and the Lie algebra sp(V) identiﬁes with the subalgebra of χ(V. (See [27] and the numerous earlier references cited therein.) Note. Example 3. Two symplectic vector bundles E. More generally.
A lagrangian subbundle of a symplectic vector bundle E is a subbundle L ⊂ E such that Lx is a lagrangian subspace of Ex for all x ∈ B. we note that since the symplectic group Sp(V ) is connected. 2 Example 3. then any pair L. Since L and J0 L are both transverse to L. Let J0 be any compatible complex structure on E. the automorphism group of a symplectic vector bundle E does not act transitively on the lagrangian subbundles of E. Nevertheless. L ) = (fL − fL ) µV . Also note that if C ⊂ P is any submanifold such that T C contains a lagrangian subbundle of TC P .19 If L is a lagrangian submanifold of a symplectic manifold P .20 Let E → B be a symplectic vector bundle and suppose that L. Assuming ﬁrst that E admits a symplectic trivialization f : E → M × V for some symplectic vector space V . fL : M → L(V ) the maps induced by the lagrangian subbundles f (L). Thus µ(L. a pair of transverse lagrangian subbundles can be related as follows.21 If E is a symplectic vector bundle over M . Z) is the universal Maslov class. where µV ∈ H 1 (L(V ). Theorem 3. f (L ) of M × V . then the restricted tangent bundle TL P is a symplectic vector bundle over L. Example 3. γ ∗ L ). Proof. Then ∗ ∗ µ(L. Z) as follows. the pullback bundle γ ∗ E is trivial. and the frame bundle of E admits a further reduction to a principal GL(n) bundle over B (compare Example 3. In general. then E is symplectomorphic to L ⊕ L∗ . 27 . we can ﬁnd a symplectomorphism T : L ⊕ L → L ⊕ J0 L which preserves the subbundle L and maps L to J0 L. we denote by fL . L ) ∈ H 1 (M . then C is coisotropic (see Lemma 3.11 it follows that this class is independent of the choice of trivialization f . and T L ⊂ TL P is a lagrangian subbundle. L of lagrangian subbundles of E deﬁne a cohomology class µ(L. Then there exists a compatible complex structure J on E satisfying JL = L . L ) is welldeﬁned by the requirement that for every smooth loop γ in M . L are lagrangian subbundles such that Lx is transverse to Lx for each x ∈ B. For nontrivial E. L ) = µ(γ ∗ L. From Example 3.1).6). it follows that for any loop γ : S 1 → M . A simple check of the deﬁnition then shows that J = T −1 J0 T is a compatible complex structure on E which satisﬁes JL = L . γ ∗ µ(L. If E admits a lagrangian subbundle.
3. Z) by the Gauss map G : L → L(R2n ) deﬁned by G(p) = ι∗ Tp L ⊂ R2n .ι = µ(L1 . p1 . A check of these deﬁnitions shows that the Maslov class of (L. The class µL. b) = xj (x) imply that n pj (x. the image L1 of ι∗ : T L → ι∗ T (T ∗ (Rn )) and L2 = ι∗ V Rn .22 As a particular case of Example 3. A nice property of the Liouville 1form is that it can be used to parametrize the set of projectable lagrangian submanifolds. (L. Then the tangent bundle T (R2n ) is a symplectic vector bundle over R2n with a natural “vertical” lagrangian subbundle V Rn deﬁned as the kernel of π∗ . b))(v) = b(π∗ v). Note that if M = Rn . ι). (See [3] for an interpretation of the Maslov class of a loop γ in L as an intersection index of the loop G ◦ γ with a singular subvariety in the lagrangian grassmannian). the equations qj (x. qn . L2 ) ∈ H 1 (L. we use the notation ιϕ to denote a 1form ϕ on M when we want to think of it as a map from M to T ∗ M . ι) equals the pullback of the universal Maslov class µn ∈ H 1 (L(R2n ).21. then ωM is just the symplectic structure ωn on T ∗ Rn R2n discussed previously. from which it follows that the form ωM = −dαM is a symplectic structure on T ∗ M . b) = b ∂ ∂xj αM = j=1 n j=1 pj dqj . then the symplectic vector bundle ι∗ T (T ∗ (Rn )) has two lagrangian subbundles. Critical points and critical values of πL are called respectively singular points and caustic points of L. xn ) on M and corresponding coordinates (q1 . deﬁned by the formula αM ((x. Z) is called the Maslov class of (L. and αM = αn . To do this. In local coordinates (x1 .Example 3. 28 . If ι : L → R2n is a lagrangian immersion. · · · . Lagrangian immersions and the Liouville class Given a lagrangian immersion ι : L → T ∗ M . · · · . we set πL = π ◦ ι. we consider the symplectic manifold R2n T ∗ Rn with its standard symplectic structure. ι) is said to be projectable if πL is a diﬀeomorphism. Finally. −dαM = dqj ∧ dpj in these coordinates. where π : T ∗ Rn → Rn is the natural projection. pn ) on T ∗ M . where π : T ∗ M → M is the natural projection. Thus. · · · .2 Cotangent bundles The cotangent bundle T ∗ M of any smooth manifold M is equipped with a natural 1form. known as the Liouville form. where π : T ∗ M → M is the canonical projection.
ι) which lives on the manifold L itself. By the deﬁnition of αM . Thus.23 Let ϕ ∈ Ω1 (M ). ϕ 2 For this reason. p) ∈ T ∗ M : x ∈ N. If ι : L → T ∗ M is an exact lagrangian immersion. Taking exterior derivatives on both sides of the equation in Lemma 3. ι) ⊂ T ∗ M is a projectable lagrangian embedding. Generalizing our WKB terminology.25 If (L. ι) ⊂ T ∗ M provided that ι(L) = dS(M ). ι∗ αM (p)(v) = αM (ιϕ (p))(ιϕ∗ v) = ιϕ (p). we will call S : M → R a phase function for a projectable lagrangian embedding (L. known as the conormal bundle to N . A general class of exact lagrangian submanifolds can be identiﬁed as follows.26 If L. it follows that for each v ∈ Tp M . This motivates the following deﬁnition.27 A simple application of Stokes’ theorem shows that an embedded circle in the phase plane cannot be exact. Associated to a smooth submanifold N ⊂ M is the submanifold N ⊥ = {(x. Because ιϕ is a section of T ∗ M . L is the image of an exact 1form on M if and only if the restriction of the Liouville form to L is itself exact.25 suggests that the primitive of ι∗ αM is a sort of generalized phase function for (L. The preceding remarks imply a simple link between phase functions and the Liouville form: Lemma 3.24 The relation ϕ ↔ (M. Example 3. while the Liouville form of T ∗ M vanishes on N ⊥ for any N . then S : M → R is a phase function for L if and only if d(S ◦ πL ◦ ι) = ι∗ αM . If F is a smooth foliation of M . although it is the image of an exact lagrangian immersion of R. then ι is called an exact lagrangian immersion. we get dϕ = dι∗ αM = ι∗ dαM = −ι∗ ωM . ϕ Proof. it satisﬁes π ◦ ιϕ = idM . ιϕ ) deﬁnes a natural bijective correspondence between the the vector space of closed 1forms on M and the set of projectable lagrangian submanifolds of T ∗ M . π∗ (ιϕ∗ v) = ιϕ (p). then Lemma 3. Then ι∗ αM = ϕ. This proves Proposition 3.Lemma 3. αM is often described as the “tautological” 1form on T ∗ M . 29 . Tx N ⊂ ker(p)}.23. Deﬁnition 3. ϕ ϕ ϕ From this equation we see that the image of ϕ is a lagrangian submanifold of T ∗ M precisely when the form ϕ is closed. then the union of the conormal bundles to the leaves of F is a smooth submanifold of T ∗ M foliated by lagrangian submanifolds and is thus coisotropic (see Example 3. v .19). We will return to this important viewpoint in the next chapter. From this deﬁnition it follows easily that dim T ∗ M = 2 dim N ⊥ . M are nmanifolds and ι : L → T ∗ M is an immersion such that ι∗ αM is exact.
the form µ = f ◦ ψ is also closed. R). p) ∈ T ∗ M : x ∈ N pTx N = β(x)} ∗ ⊥ is a lagrangian submanifold of T ∗ M whose Liouville class equals [πN β] ∈ H 1 (Nβ . p0 ) equals the identity. since the derivative Dh preserves the lagrangian splitting of T (T ∗ M ) along ZM and equals the identity on T ZM . where ⊥ πN : Nβ → N is here the restriction of the natural projection π : T ∗ M → M . it follows that ZM is lagrangian as well. 0). ι).27. p0 ). we can conclude from Example 3. Fiberpreserving symplectomorphisms On each ﬁber of the projection π : T ∗ M → M . Proof. the pullback of αM vanishes. and thus the map −1 h = fµ ◦ f ◦ fψ is a symplectomorphism of T ∗ M which preserves ﬁbers and ﬁxes the zero section ZM ⊂ T ∗ M . A 1form β on M deﬁnes a diﬀeomorphism fβ of T ∗ M by ﬁberwise aﬃne translation fβ (x. Since f is symplectic. the ﬁberderivative of f at the arbitrary point (x0 . Deﬁning β(x) = f (x. Moreover. R) induced by this form will play an important role in the quantization procedures of the next chapter and is known as the Liouville class of (L. the vertical bundle V M = ker π∗ is a lagrangian subbundle of T (T ∗ M ). Thus.ι ∈ H 1 (L. so f is a translation on each ﬁber. Example 3. the form ι∗ αM is always closed. p + β(x)). Fix a point (x0 . so the ﬁbers are lagrangian submanifolds. The deRham cohomology class λL. Since αM vanishes on the zero section ZM ⊂ T ∗ M . since dι∗ αM = ι∗ ωM = 0. Consequently.Although many lagrangian immersions ι : L → T ∗ M are not exact.29 If a symplectomorphism f : T ∗ M → T ∗ M preserves each ﬁber of the projection π : T ∗ M → M . p) = (x. p0 ) ∈ T ∗ M and let ψ be a closed 1form on M such that ψ(x0 ) = (x0 .28 To generalize the picture described in Example 3. Then ⊥ Nβ = {(x. then f = fβ for a closed 1form β on M . 30 .1 that Dh is the identity at all points of ZM . we consider a smooth manifold M . and the subbundles T ZM and V M deﬁne a canonical lagrangian splitting of T (T ∗ M ) over ZM . Theorem 3. It is easy to see that this map satisﬁes ∗ fβ αM = αM + π ∗ β. so fβ is a symplectomorphism of T ∗ M if and only if β is closed. together with a submanifold N ⊂ M and a closed 1form β on N . we have f = fβ .
29. the latter equality following from the fact that Xβ ⊂ V M ⊂ ker αM and dαM = −ωM . combined with the assumption that β is closed shows that LXβ π ∗ β = 0. and so ft∗ π ∗ β = π ∗ β for all t.29.31 Any ﬁberpreserving symplectomorphism F : T ∗ M → T ∗ N can be realized as the composition of a ﬁbertranslation in T ∗ M with the cotangent lift of a diﬀeomorphism N → M.29. Proof. then the ﬂow ft of the vector ﬁeld Xβ = −˜ M (π ∗ β) is ω −1 symplectic. since V M ⊂ ker π ∗ β. The restriction of F −1 to the zero sections then induces a diﬀeomorphism f : N → M such that the composition F ◦ (f −1 )∗ is a ﬁberpreserving symplectomorphism of T ∗ N which ﬁxes the zero section. 2 Using Theorem 3. Corollary 3. we have LXβ αM = d(Xβ αM ) − Xβ ωM = π ∗ β. By composing F with a ﬁbertranslation in T ∗ M we may assume that F maps the zero section of T ∗ M to that of T ∗ N . 2 31 . we can furthermore classify all ﬁberpreserving symplectomorphisms from T ∗ M to T ∗ N . we obtain f ∗ αM = αM + π ∗ β. Proof. From the preceding theorem. note that the deﬁnition of the Lie derivative shows that f satisﬁes 1 f αM = αM + 0 ∗ d ∗ (f αM ) dt = αM + dt t 1 ft∗ (LXβ αM ) dt. 0 By Cartan’s formula for the Lie derivative. the time1 map f = f1 of the ﬂow of Xβ equals fβ . By Theorem 3.30 For any closed 1form β on M . Inserting these computations into the expression for f ∗ αM above. Another application of Cartan’s formula. the assertion will follow provided that we can show that f ∗ αM = αM + π ∗ β. To this end. we conclude that F = f ∗ . the HamiltonJacobi theorem implies furthermore that the ﬂow ft satisﬁes the hypotheses of Theorem 3. Corollary 3.2 If β is a closed 1form on M .
3. N are smooth manifolds. η)) → (x.3 Mechanics on manifolds With the techniques of symplectic geometry at our disposal. −ξ. we note that multiplying the cotangent vectors in T ∗ M by −1 deﬁnes a symplectomorphism T ∗ M → T ∗ M which can be combined with the Schwartz transform SM.32 If M.N equals the submanifold Γ⊥∗ β ⊂ T ∗ (M × N ) deﬁned in Example 3.5 An elementary. then the map SM.N to arrive at the usual symplectomorphism T ∗ M × T ∗ N T ∗ (M × N ). A computation shows that if Γ ⊂ M × N is the graph of g and p : Γ → M is the natural projection. 5 32 . then the Schwartz transform SM.N induces a diﬀeomorphism of zero sections ZM × ZN and an isomorphism of vertical bundles VM ⊕VN V (M × N ). We then turn to the semiclassical approximation and its geometric counterpart in this new context. In particular. we associate to any symplectomorphism F : T ∗ M → T ∗ N the lagrangian embedding ιF : T ∗ M → T ∗ (M × N ) deﬁned as the composition of SM. η) is a symplectomorphism which we will call the Schwartz transform. The name comes from the relation of this construction to the Schwartz kernels of operators (see Section 6. Finally. p then the image of (T ∗ M. Proposition 3. we are ready to extend our discussion of mechanics to more general conﬁguration spaces. N are smooth manifolds. dualizing and taking products leads to nothing new.2). if F is the cotangent lift of g.33 By Corollary 3. then the image of the composition of the lagrangian embedding (T ∗ M.28. In particular. Our description begins with a comparison of the classical and quantum viewpoints. ZM ×N Using the Schwartz transform. ιF ) equals the conormal bundle of Γ.N with the graph ΓF : T ∗ M → T ∗ M × T ∗ N .N satisﬁes (SM.N )∗ αM ×N = αM ⊕ −αN . but fundamental property of this mapping can be described as follows.The Schwartz transform If M. setting the stage for the quantization problem in the next chapter. SM. Thus in the special case of cotangent bundles. y. largely parallelling the earlier material on the 1dimensional harmonic oscillator given in the introduction. (y. ιF ) with the Schwartz transform SM. Example 3. ξ). a ﬁberpreserving symplectomorphism F : T ∗ M → T ∗ N equals the composition of ﬁberwise translation by a closed 1form β on M with the cotangent lift of a diﬀeomorphism g : N → M .31.N : T ∗ M × T ∗ N → T ∗ (M × N ) deﬁned in local coordinates by ((x.
Integral curves of the hamiltonian ﬂow of H then project to classical trajectories of a particle on M subject to the potential V . In physical terms. The hamiltonian ﬂow associated to kM is called the cogeodesic ﬂow due to its relation with the riemannian structure of M described in the following theorem. As before. p) = kM (q.The classical picture The hamiltonian description of classical motions in a conﬁguration space M begins with the classical phase space T ∗ M . we will assume that the Schr¨dinger operator on a riemannian manifold o M with potential function V is deﬁned in analogy with the ﬂat case of Rn with its standard metric. we ﬁrst deﬁne the operator on the function space C ∞ (M ) by ˆ H=− 2 2m ∆ + mV . p) + V (q) on T ∗ M . and a “kinetic energy” function which in local coordinates (q. p) is given by kM (q.34 states that a free particle on a manifold must move along a geodesic. Theorem 3. A smooth.34 If M is a riemannian manifold. 33 . Theorem 3. i. ij ˙ For details. A riemannian metric g = (gij ) on M induces an inner product on the ﬁbers of the cotangent bundle T ∗ M .j where g ij is the inverse matrix to gij . The quantum mechanical picture For the time being. see [36]. ˆ where ∆ denotes the LaplaceBeltrami operator. H induces a (densely deﬁned) ˆ on the intrinsic Hilbert space HM of M by the equation operator H ˆ ˆ H(adx1/2 ) = (Ha)dx1/2 . p) = 1 2 g ij (q) pi pj . then integral curves of the cogeodesic ﬂow project via π to geodesics on M . realvalued potential V : M → R induces the hamiltonian function H(q. Regular level sets of kM are sphere bundles over M .j Γk qi q˙j = 0. A proof of this theorem can be given in local coordinates by using Hamilton’s equations qi = ˙ ∂H = ∂pi g ij pj j pi = − ˙ ∂H 1 =− ∂qi 2 u. That is.v ∂g uv pu pv ∂qi to derive the geodesic equation qk + ¨ i.
ι. The semiclassical approximation The basic WKB technique for constructing semiclassical solutions to the Schr¨dinger equao tion on M proceeds as in Section 2.2. In this case. and a halfdensity a on L. then (L. The advantage of this viewpoint is that both the classical state space T ∗ M and the quantum state space HM are objects intrinsically associated to the underlying diﬀerential manifold M . the embedding ι and hamiltonian vector ﬁeld XH of H induce a nonsingular vector ﬁeld XH. If these conditions are satisﬁed.13). and Lemma 3. Our correspondence table now assumes the form 34 . We can formulate this construction abstractly by considering ﬁrst a projectable. Now if H : T ∗ M → R is any smooth function. The dynamics on both objects are determined by the choice of metric on M . the composition S = φ ◦ πL is a phase function for (L.ι a = 0. a “generalized” phase function φ : L → R satisfying dφ = ι∗ αM . then the requirement −1 that (πL )∗ a satisfy the homogeneous transport equation on M becomes LXH. then the halfdensity eiφ/ a on L can be quantized (i. ι). where π : T ∗ M → M is the natural projection.e. By deﬁnition. a) comprised of a projectable. which assumes the coordinatefree form a∆S + 2L S a = 0. exact lagrangian embedding ι : L → T ∗ M . Speciﬁcally.25 implies that for −1 any primitive φ : L → R of ι∗ αM . ι) satisﬁes the HamiltonJacobi equation provided that E is a regular value of H and H ◦ ι = E. this means that πL = π ◦ ι is a diﬀeomorphism. exact lagrangian embedding ι : L → T ∗ M . −1 pulledback) to yield a secondorder approximate solution (πL )∗ eiφ/ a to the Schr¨dinger o equation on M . and the timeindependent Schr¨dinger equation on M assumes the familiar form o ˆ (H − E)ϕ = 0. φ. If a is a halfdensity on L. as above.where dx is the natural density associated to the metric on M . and the halfdensity a satisﬁes the homogeneous transport equation. a halfdensity of the form eiS/h a is a ˆ secondorder approximate solution of the eigenvector problem (H − E) ϕ = 0 provided that the phase function S : M → R satisﬁes the HamiltonJacobi equation H ◦ ιdS = E. This interpretation of the WKB approximation leads us to consider a semiclassical state as a quadruple (L.ι on L (see Example 3.
ι a = 0 Since the HamiltonJacobi and transport equations above make sense for any triple (L. a) as a further generalization of the concept of semiclassical state in T ∗ M . φ. ι.Object basic space state timeevolution Classical version T ∗M (L. it is tempting to regard (L. o 35 . φ. ι. ι. a) as above Hamilton’s equations Quantum version HM on M Schr¨dinger equation o ˆ operator H on HM generator of evolution function H on T ∗ M stationary state ˆ state (L. ι. a) consisting of an arbitrary lagrangian immersion ι : L → T ∗ M and a halfdensity a on L. a) such that eigenvector of H H ◦ ι = E and LXH. in which we drop the conditions of projectability and exactness. Our goal in the next chapter will be to determine when and how such “geometric” semiclassical states can be used to construct “analytical” semiclassical approximate solutions to the timeindependent Schr¨dinger equation.
This is possible for arbitrary a provided that the functions φj can be chosen so that the oscillatory coeﬃcients eiφj / agree where their domains overlap. a) for which ι : L → T ∗ M is a projectable exact lagrangian embedding is quantized by choosing a primitive φ of ι∗ αM and forming the halfdensity def −1 I (L. and so we can choose a good cover {Lj } of L (see Appendix C) e and functions φj : Lj → R such that dφj = ι∗ αM Lj . a) on M . According to the discussion in Appendix C. ι. (This ambiguity was overcome in Chapter 3 by including the choice of φ in the deﬁnition of a semiclassical state). (It is. The starting point will be a lagrangian immersion ι : L → T ∗ M whose image in contained in a regular level set of the classical hamiltonian H associated to some metric and potential on the conﬁguration space M . an approximate solution to Schr¨dinger’s equation on M .ι be integral. ι. ι. ι. that is. a triple (L. If it is a formal variable. this is precisely the condition that the Liouville class λL. then the Liouville class will be 2π times an integral class for all only if it is zero. in a more or less systematic way. Since the 1form ι∗ αM on L is closed. Given a halfdensity a on L which is invariant under the ﬂow induced by H. but not necessarily exact lagrangian embedding. ι).” 4. aj ) in the sense above: −1 Ij = (πLj )∗ eiφj / aj . The choice of φ is unique only up to an additive constant. of course. As seen in Chapter 3. we must piece together the Ij to form a welldeﬁned global halfdensity I (L.4 Quantization in Cotangent Bundles This chapter deals with the problem of constructing semiclassical approximate solutions to the timeindependent Schr¨dinger equation from the data contained in a “geometric” semio classical state. o This process will be referred to as quantization. ι. To quantize (L. Given a halfdensity a on L. a) can be quantized is answered largely in terms of the geometry of the lagrangian immersion (L. To generalize this procedure. our goal is to use this data in order to construct. it is locally exact by the Poincar´ lemma. we will often speak loosely of “quantizing lagrangian submanifolds” or “quantizable lagrangian submanifolds. ι. For this reason. the notion of integrality is meaningless. a). the question of whether or not a given semiclassical state (L. At this point.e. we must have def φj − φk ∈ Z = 2π · Z on each Lj ∩ Lk . we are forced to confront once more the nature of .) As we shall see. φj . a) = (πL )∗ eiφ/ a on M . i. we set aj = aLj and deﬁne a halfdensity on πL (Lj ) by quantizing (Lj . only one of many operations which go by this name. a). suppose now that ι : L → T ∗ M is a projectable.1 Prequantization The simplest quantization procedure consists of pullingback halfdensities from projectable lagrangian embeddings in T ∗ M . If denotes a number ranging over an interval of the real numbers. which leads to an ambiguity in the overall phase of I (L. however. ιLj . only for an exact lagrangian 36 .
ι. the class of projectable quantizable lagrangian submanifolds of T ∗ M is rather limited whenever dim(H 1 (M . Example 4. the set of all admissible forms a sequence converging to zero. ι1 . the condition that closed 1form β on a manifold M be quantizable is equivalent to the requirement that the ratio of any two nonzero periods of β be rational. a2 ). this interpretation is not acceptable either. If L is quantizable but not exact.submanifold. Geometrically this means that all horizontal circles in the cylinder T ∗ S 1 are quantizable in the sense deﬁned above. then by linearity we should have I (L1 ∪ L2 . a2 )) = I (L1 ∪ L2 . ι2 . Instead. ι2 .1 A projectable lagrangian submanifold (L. ι. (a1 . a2 ). The situation changes as soon as we consider the closed 1form τ = a dθ1 + b dθ2 on the torus S 1 × S 1 . a1 ) + I (L. For the time being. it is desirable that quantization be linear with respect to halfdensities: I (L. ι1 . 37 . If τ is integral for some ∈ R+ . 0)) + I (L1 ∪ L2 . Thus. where 0 is the largest such number. Deﬁnition 4. The values of for which this condition holds will be called admissible for (L. The cohomology class represented by this form is integral provided that p S1 dθ ∈ Z . all > 0 are admissible. we will make the following compromise.2 Let M = S 1 and consider the closed 1form β = p dθ on S 1 . ι). One consequence is I (L. however. we will focus on the set of regular points of πL in order to pass from halfdensities on L to halfdensities deﬁned near noncaustic points of L. sa1 + a2 ) = s · I (L.ι is integral for some ∈ R+ . and so the admissible values of are the numbers {p/k : k ∈ Z+ }. (0. a2 ) of lagrangian submanifolds carrying halfdensities. a1 ) + I (L2 . If L is exact. ι) ⊂ T ∗ M . Certainly this condition holds for the procedure we have been using in the projectable case. In general. Since we are speciﬁcally trying to go beyond the exact case. (L2 . a1 ). and k runs over the positive integers. then a/ and b/ are both integers. ι. If a semiclassical state is represented by the union of a disjoint pair (L1 . ι1 ∪ ι2 . The simple quantization technique described above does not generalize immediately to nonprojectable immersed lagrangian submanifolds (L. ι1 ∪ ι2 . ι1 ∪ ι2 . since πL cannot be used to pushforward halfdensities from L to M . (A period of a closed 1form β on M is any number obtained by integrating β around some closed loop in M ). consisting of the numbers 0 /k. a2 )) = I (L1 . R)) > 1. meaning that a/b is a rational number if b = 0. but with diﬀering sets of admissible . ι. (a1 . ι) ⊂ T ∗ M is quantizable if its Liouville class λL. Regardless of how this is to be carried out. 0) = 0. and it is reasonable to adopt as a general rule. for p ∈ R.
Thus. ιLj ) is a projectable lagrangian submanifold of T ∗ U . ι) ⊂ T ∗ M and halfdensity a on L. x) has a singular point at x = 0. then there is a contractible −1 neighborhood U ⊂ M of p for which πL (U ) consists of ﬁnitely many disjoint open subsets Lj ⊂ L such that each (Lj . Thus. the requirement that φj be a generalized phase function for Lj determines each φj only up to an additive constant. and we denote by L+ . 2 and it is easy to check that the induced vector ﬁeld XH. Choosing a generalized phase function φj : Lj → R for each Lj . A phase function φ : L → R for (L. ι. the lagrangian embedding ι : L → T ∗ R given by ι(x) = (x2 . a)(q) = e2iq 3/2 /3 B(q 1/2 ) + e−2iq 3/2 /3 B(−q 1/2 ) 2−1/2 q −1/4 dq1/2 . a halfdensity a on L is invariant under the ﬂow of XH. p) = (p2 − q). a) should look something like −1 (πLj )∗ eiφj / a j on U . If p ∈ πL (L) is noncaustic and πL is proper. To quantize halfdensities on L consistently. ι) is given by φ(x) = 2x3 /3. we note that by the preceding remarks. ∂q ∂x the transformation rule for halfdensities implies −1 (πL+ )∗ a = 2−1/2 q −1/4 B(q 1/2 ) dq1/2 −1 (πL− )∗ a = 2−1/2 q −1/4 B(−q 1/2 ) dq1/2 .Now consider an arbitrary immersed lagrangian submanifold (L. ι. then we may use any function φ : L → R satisfying dφ = ι∗ αM to ﬁx phases. the prequantization of (L. a) is given for q > 0 by I (L.ι = (1/2) ∂/∂x. L− the right and left projectable components of L.ι if and only if a = B dx1/2 for some B ∈ R. The parabola ι(L) lies in the regular level set H −1 (0) of the hamiltonian for a constant force ﬁeld 1 H(q. the quantization of (L. we must therefore decide how to specify the relative phases of the oscillatory coeﬃcients eiφj / . From the expression above. Example 4. as in the following example. respectively (these correspond to the upper and lower components of the parabola ι(L)). If L is exact. If a = B(x) dx1/2 is any halfdensity on L. ι.ι on L equals XH. we obtain I (L.3 For L = R. a) = e2iq 3/2 /3 + e−2iq 38 3/2 /3 2−1/2 q 1/4 B dq1/2 . then since −1 (πL )∗ ∂ ∂ = ±2−1 q −1/2 . ι. As before. and so the meaning of the preceding sum is ambiguous.
then there exists a good cover {Vj } of the manifold L and functions φj : Vj → R such that dφj = ι∗ αM Vj and φj − φk ∈ Z on each Vj ∩ Vk .ι is integral for some ∈ R+ . ι). we can now quantize (L. the φj describe a single function φ : L → T = R/Z which satisﬁes dφ = ι∗ αM and which deﬁnes a global oscillatory function eiφ/ on L. In the previous notation. In particular. Deﬁnition 4. the value of I (L. If is admissible for some prequantizable lagrangian immersion (L. 2 According to Deﬁnition 4.1. ι. The values of for which this condition holds will again be called admissible for (L.4. φ. so we have more work ahead of us. If a is a halfdensity on L. generalizing Deﬁnition 4. The additional 1/2 can be explained geometrically in terms of the nonprojectability of the classical energy level curves. For this purpose. this solution blows up at q = 0 (and is not deﬁned for q < 0). p) = (q 2 + p2 ). energy levels of the 1dimensional harmonic oscillator corresponding to level sets for which a particular value of is admissible are given by E = n . 39 . we have no way as yet to check that letting φ be continuous at 0 as a function on L is the right way to assure that we have a good approximation in the immediate vicinity of q = 0. a) by summing the pullbacks of eiφ/ a to M . ι. H −1 (E) Thus. As one can read in any textbook on quantum mechanics.as a semiclassical approximate solution to the Schr¨dinger equation o − ∂2ψ x − ψ = Eψ. j Example 4. we make the following provisional deﬁnition. as we shall soon see. a number that ∈ R+ is admissible for the level set H −1 (E) provided α1 = 2πE ∈ Z . ι). In fact. a) on U is deﬁned as −1 (πVj )∗ eiφ/ a. ι) ⊂ T ∗ M is said to be prequantizable if its Liouville class λL. 2 ∂x2 2 2 Unfortunately. we will see later that this is the wrong choice! Since exactness is only used to insure that the function eiφ/ is welldeﬁned on L.4 An immersed lagrangian submanfold (L. the actual quantum energy levels are E = (n + 1/2) . Consequently. φ.5 Consider the 1dimensional harmonic oscillator with hamiltonian 1 H(q. we can treat certain nonexact cases in a similar way.
Consequently. Digressing brieﬂy from quantization. ι) ⊂ T ∗ M is prequantizable if and only if there exists a nonzero parallel section over L of the line bundle ι∗ EM. corresponding to the (inverse of the) oscillatory function eiφ/ on L which appeared in the preceding section. The holonomy of this connection is represented by the modZ reduction of the Liouville class λL. To interpret the condition on ϕ we note ﬁrst that the kernel of any nowhere vanishing 1form ϕ deﬁnes a 2ndimensional distribution in Q. and a parallel lift φ of L to the T bundle ι∗ QM. a halfdensity a on L. Deﬁnition 4. η]) = −ϕ([ξ. ι. This remark proves the following geometric characterization of prequantizability. the prequantum T bundle associated to a cotangent bundle (T ∗ M. From the prequantum standpoint. Deﬁnition 4.7 An immersed lagrangian submanifold (L.ι . we have dϕ(ξ. The condition ϕ ∧ (dϕ)n = 0. we assemble here a few facts about contact manifolds. η are (local) vector ﬁelds lying in this distribution. by means of the representation x → e−ix/ of T in U (1). η) = ξ · ϕ(η) − η · ϕ(ξ) − ϕ([ξ. and the “largest” integral submanifolds of ker(ϕ) are ndimensional (i. σ denotes the multiplevalued linear variable in T and π : QM. then φ induces a parallel section of ι∗ EM. φ) consisting of a lagrangian immersion ι : L → T ∗ M . If ι : L → T ∗ M is any lagrangian immersion. This says that the distribution is integrable (in the sense of Frobenius) iﬀ dϕ is zero on ker(ϕ). a.9 A legendrian submanifold of a 2n+1dimensional strict contact manifold (Q. the basic geometric object representing a classical state is therefore a quadruple (L. coincides with ι∗ ωM and therefore vanishes. ϕ) is an ndimensional integral submanifold for ϕ. Here. the odddimensional counterpart of symplectic geometry. then the curvature of the induced connection on ι∗ QM.8 A contact form on a (2n + 1)dimensional manifold Q is a 1form ϕ such that ϕ ∧ (dϕ)n vanishes nowhere on Q. If ξ.6 For ﬁxed ∈ R+ . η]).Prequantum bundles and contact manifolds Prequantizability can be described geometrically in terms of principal T bundles with connection over T ∗ M .e. ωM ) consists of the trivial principal bundle QM. Prequantum T bundles and parallel lifts of lagrangian submanfolds constitute our ﬁrst examples of the fundamental objects of contact geometry. Theorem 4. for some > 0. It is customary to make the following deﬁnition. → T ∗ M is the bundle projection. . the prequantum line bundle EM. Deﬁnition 4. = T ∗ M × T together with the connection 1form ϕ = −π ∗ αM + dσ. on the other hand. ker(ϕ) is “maximally nonintegrable”). dϕ is a linear symplectic form on ker(ϕ). If we associate to QM. 40 . means that the kernel of dϕ is 1dimensional and everywhere transverse to ker(ϕ). A manifold endowed with a contact form is called a strict contact manifold.
since they have the same legendrian submanifolds. . obtained by thinking of R2 as the cotangent bundle of pspace. ι) ⊂ T ∗ R is pprojectable. and then quantizing to obtain a function on pspace. When the quotient T M/E is trivial.If ϕ is a contact form and f a nowherevanishing function on Q. This leads to the following deﬁnition. over a cotangent bundle T ∗ M . . then f · ϕ is again a contact form which is said to be equivalent to ϕ. Such a contact structure is called coorientable. Using the phase function τ (x) = −q0 x on L. a possible generalization of the quantization procedure described above might therefore begin by reinterpreting geometric semiclassical states as triples (R. or ﬁber. in which case there exists an “alternate” generalized phase function τ : L → R satisfying dτ = ι∗ (−q dp). x) for x ∈ R. ι) is said to be pprojectable. we will illustrate this idea in the case of lagrangian submanifolds of the phase plane. Following an idea of Maslov. ) in a contact manifold together with a halfdensity a on R. Given a lagrangian immersion ι : L → T ∗ R R2 .2 The Maslov correction It turns out that the naive quantization procedure of the preceding section is incorrect. E is the kernel of a globally deﬁned contact form. A simple example of an embedded lagrangian submanifold of T ∗ R which does not project diﬀeomorphically onto the qaxis is a vertical line. Our basic example of a strict contact manifold is furnished by a prequantum T bundle QM. a) consisting of a legendrian immersion (R. so that dτ = ι∗ (−q dp) for some phase function τ on L. 4. The result is exactly the asymptotic Fourier transform (see Appendix B) of the delta function which we guessed above! In its simplest form. then (L. is an immersed legendrian submanifold of QM. This factor will be incorporated into our quantization procedure using a procedure due to Maslov. we deﬁne a function B on pspace by the equation −1 B dp1/2 = (πp )∗ eiτ / a. 41 . since it ignores a certain structure which arises from the relation of L to the ﬁbers of the π projection T ∗ M → M . we analyze this situation by pretending that p is position and q momentum. Although we will not pursue the idea in these notes. Maslov’s technique is to suppose that (L. the image of a parallel lift of a lagrangian immersion ι : L → T ∗ M to QM.10 A contact structure on a manifold M is a codimension one subbundle E ⊂ T M which is locally deﬁned by contact forms. If πp is a diﬀeomorphism. of the form ι(x) = (q0 . Deﬁnition 4. Since the wave function corresponding to a constant halfdensity a on L should correspond to a probability distribution describing the position of a particle at q0 with completely indeterminate momentum. and a manifold endowed with such a structure is called simply a contact manifold. If a is a halfdensity on L. To begin. we denote by πp the composition of ι with the projection of R2 onto the paxis. we obtain −1 (πp )∗ eiτ / dx1/2 = e−iq0 p/ q0 dp1/2 . it should be a delta function supported at q0 .
To relate this procedure to our earlier quantization by pullback. a) is then given by the halfdensity J (L. Generalized phase functions on (L. we begin with the example of linear lagrangian subspaces. a) = F −1 (B) dq1/2 on qspace. For simplicity. the halfdensity obtained from (L.e.and pdirections. ι. 6 See. 42 . a) = e−iπ·sgn(k)/4 I (L. ι) ⊂ R2 with phase functions φ and τ corresponding to p dq and −q dp. consider the lagrangian embedding ι : R → T ∗ R given by ι(x) = (x. a) = eikq 2 /2 A dq1/2 . kx). ι. respectively.11 For real k = 0. i. τ.7. Quantization by pullback therefore gives I (L. Next.1] . so that S and T satisfy the Legendre transform relation (see [2]) S(q) = −p(q) T (p(q)) + T (p(q)). ι. ι) for the forms p dq and −q dp are given by φ(x) = kx2 /2 and τ (x) = −kx2 /2. a) by Maslov quantization diﬀers from the simple pullback by a constant phase shift. for example.6.and pspace by pullback: −1 S = φ ◦ πL −1 T = τ ◦ πp . On the other hand. Example 4. consider an arbitrary biprojectable lagrangian embedding (L.1. we must compare the results in the case of lagrangian submanifolds L ⊂ R2 which are biprojectable. [32. Thm. τ. respectively. then the transformation rule for halfdensities implies −1 (πL )∗ a = A dq1/2 −1 (πp )∗ a = k−1/2 A dp1/2 def for a real constant A determined by a. φ. To establish a similar correspondence in somewhat greater generality. and so Maslov’s technique yields J (L. For simplicity. projectable in both the q. Thus. τ. Vol. where F denotes the asymptotic Fourier transform. ι. ι. a). ι. and a computation6 shows that −1 F −1 ((πp )∗ eiτ / )(q) = k1/2 e−iπ·sgn(k)/4 eikq 2 /2 . let S(q) and T (p) be the functions deﬁned on q. we have (πp )∗ τ (p) = −p2 /2k.The Maslov quantization of (L. If a is a constant halfdensity on L. φ. we will assume that the additive constants in φ and τ are chosen so that φ = τ + ι∗ (qp).
τ. we set k(q) = T (p(q)) and apply the principle of stationary phase (see Appendix B). a) = eiS/ A dq1/2 . −1 since (πp )∗ a = B(p) dp1/2 . φ. ι. a) = e−iπ/4 e2iq 3/2 /3 B(−q 1/2 ) + eiπ/4 e−2iq 43 3/2 /3 B(q 1/2 ) 2−1/2 q −1/4 dq1/2 + O( ). The essential diﬀerence between the naive prequantization of Section 4. The critical point of the exponent pq + T (p) occurs where q = −T (p). we must now compare the Maslov halfdensity J (L. when (q.1 and the Maslov quantization of a pprojectable lagrangian embedding (L.12 A phase function associated to −q dp for the lagrangian embedding ι(x) = (x2 . i. φ. x) of L = R into R2 is given by τ (x) = −x3 /3. ι. it follows easily that T (p(q)) = −(S (q))−1 . For biprojectable (L. a) + O( ). From this relation. a). τ. The Maslov quantization of a halfdensity a = B(x) dx1/2 on L is thus J (L.e. ι. p) ∈ ι(L). we therefore conclude that Maslov’s technique coincides with quantization by pullback up to a constant phase factor and terms of order . Example 4.e. Thus J (L. as illustrated by the following example. where p = S (q) = p(q). To this end. i. τ. Speciﬁcally. For each q > 0. ι) which is not qprojectable lies in the relative phase constants of the summands of I (L. a) = (2π )−1/2 R ei(pq+T (p))/ B(p) dp dq1/2 with that obtained by pullback: I (L. we have J (L. a) = e−iπ·sgn(k)/4 I (L. ι. critical points of the function R(p) = pq − p3 /3 occur precisely when q = p2 . For each q. ι. ι. a) = F −1 e−ip 3 /3 B(p) dq1/2 . τ. . and an application of the principle of stationary phase therefore yields two terms corresponding to the upper and lower halves of L.where p(q) = S (q). ι. Hence. A halfdensity a on L determines functions A(q) and B(p) such that −1 (πL )∗ a = A dq1/2 −1 (πp )∗ a = B dp1/2 and A(q) = S (q)1/2 B(p(q)). ei(pq+T (p))/ B(p) dp = (2π )1/2 e−iπ·sgn(k)/4 eiS(q)/ k(q)−1/2 B(p(q)) + O( R 3/2 ). ι).
Z). a ﬁgureeight has Maslov index zero. while the sign changes if either the direction of motion or the side of the ﬁber is reversed. ι). we ﬁrst choose a good cover {Lj } of L such that the image of each Lj under ι is either q. The relative phase factor in the preceding example can be attributed to the fact that the function T (p) = −p3 /3 has an inﬂection point at p = 0. (Compare [3]). while the term of order 0 of J (L. The preceding observation leads us to assign an index to closed. it follows from Example 4. downward motion to the right of the ﬁber is positive. Under this assumption. τ. we ﬁx a partition of unity {hj } subordinate 44 . but not if both are. ι) by summing these changes while traversing L in a prescribed direction. at least if a has compact support. ι) deﬁned in Example 3. the sign of T at nearby points depends only on L and not on the choice of T . then T has only nondegenerate critical points. τ. singular at the caustic point q = 0. ι. a) is. ι) ⊂ R2 . ι. p) is a singular point of L. and we can assign an index to (L. if T were concave. With these remarks in mind. the situation would be reversed. suppose that (L. like I (L. This smoothness at caustics is a clear advantage of Maslov quantization.ι equals µL.ι . both of which are positive according our rule when the circle is traversed counterclockwise. a). where µL.22. a) essentially diﬀerent from the prequantization of (L. a) as an integral is perfectly smooth there. since T is convex. ι.ι of (L. φ. the full expression for J (L.or pprojectable and no intersection Lj ∩ Lk contains a critical point of πL . However. The Maslov index of the circle therefore equals 2. The extra phase factors of e iπ/4 make J (L.3. Given an immersed lagrangian submanifold (L. then mL. Next. In other words. The basic idea is as follows. Our goal is now to modify the prequantization procedure for arbitrary lagrangian submanifolds of the phase plane by incorporating the Maslov index. The result is twice an integer known as the Maslov index mL. Example 4. Moreover. The reader is invited to check that if L is a circle with a ﬁxed orientation ν ∈ H1 (L. A circle in the phase plane has a right and a left singular point.12 that the integer 1 should be assigned to a critical point of πL which is traversed in the −p direction to the right of the ﬁber. A pdependent phase function T for L ⊂ R2 will have inﬂection points at precisely those p for which (T (p). τ. ι) is a closed. the same is true of any closed embedded curve traversed counterclockwise. On the other hand. sgn(T ) changes by ±2 in the vicinity of a critical point of T . Since the index only involves the sign of T . In fact. ι. ι. More precisely. a). immersed curves in the phase plane. immersed curve in R2 which is nondegenerate in the sense that if T is a pdependent phase function for a subset of L. a factor of eiπ/2 arises in passing from the upper to the lower half of the parabola.13 The computation of the Maslov index can be interpreted geometrically if we ﬁrst observe that the nondegeneracy condition requires L to remain on the same side of a ﬁber π −1 (q) near a singular point. ν .ι is the Maslov class of (L.Compare this with the result of Example 4.
that the Maslov index mL.14 Returning to the harmonic oscillator of Example 4. ι) satisﬁes π mL. we must choose the functions ˜ ˜ φj so that Ij = Ik on each intersection Lj ∩ Lk regardless of the particular halfdensity a. a) to be welldeﬁned. sj is zero if Lj is qprojectable and is quantized by pullback. so that our requirement becomes ajk ∈ Z . Allowable energy levels in this case therefore correspond to the BohrSommerfeld condition. In order to specify the relative phases of the Ij .12. As before. this statement is obvious.ι + 2 ι∗ α1 ∈ Z . Here. φ is a realvalued function on Lj satisfying dφj = ι∗ α1 . Evidently. L This is the simplest version of the Maslov quantization condition. ι. a) = j Ij . and to make this deﬁnition independent of the choice of cover {Lj } and partition of unity. a) as the sum I (L. we would then like to deﬁne the quantization of (L.5. while sj are integers depending −1 only on the component of Lj ∩ πL (U ) in question. we require ei(φj −φk )/ e−iπ(sj −sk )/4 = 1 at each point of Lj ∩ Lk . Since φj − φk is constant on Lj ∩ Lk . or. this condition can be fulﬁlled on any arc of a curve in the phase plane. each halfdensity Ij is the sum of the pull−1 back of halfdensities on each component of Lj ∩ πL (U ). For I (L. we see that the level set H −1 (E) satisﬁes the Maslov condition provided that for some integer n. which actually gives the precise energy levels for the quantum harmonic oscillator. we quantize each (Lj . in other words. ι. ι) as follows. otherwise sj equals sgn(T ) for a suitable pdependent phase function). If Lj is quantized by pullback.to {Lj }. If L is a circle.ι of (L. In other words. To quantize a halfdensity a on L. (More precisely. a · hj ) to obtain a halfdensity Ij on R either by pullback or by Maslov’s technique. This condition can be precisely formulated in terms of the Maslov index and Liouville class of (L. we can deﬁne ajk as the (constant) value of (φj − φk ) − π (sj − sk )/4 on Lj ∩ Lk . a) coincide up to order with the usual quantization by pullback for any halfdensity a supported in a projectable subset of L. these halfdensities are of the form ˜ Ij = e−iπsj /4 eiφj / a. E = (n + 1/2) . 45 . On Lj ∩ πL (U ). ι. if Maslov’s technique is applied to Lj . ι. then this condition implies that the sum of any of the ajk lies in Z . ι. we will require that I (L. Example 4. On an open interval U of noncaustic points. it follows from an application of −1 the principle of stationary phase as in Example 4.
The basis of this method will again be Maslov’s technique.θ)/ a(q. Local parametrizations of an immersed lagrangian submanifold (L. our aim in the next sections will be to develop a systematic method for quantizing lagrangian submanifolds of cotangent bundles. θ)dθdq1/2 . the idea is the following. As we shall see. this generalization amounts to replacing Maslov’s ansatz (2π )−n/2 ei( p. and thus the image of Σϕ is a nonprojectable lagrangian submanifold. the restriction of the projection U × Rm → U to Σϕ is noninjective. which we formulate in the next section using the Maslov class. ι) ⊂ T ∗ M deﬁned by such phase functions will ﬁrst enable us to quantize a given halfdensity locally on L by means of a slightly more general version of the (inverse) asymptotic Fourier transform. Roughly speaking. we have dfp . As we saw in Chapter 3.A general quantization scheme Motivated by the simple results above. the expression for dϕp produces a welldeﬁned element ˜ ˜ ∗ of Tp N . For ∗ each p ∈ U . γ(0) = (f ◦γ) (0). v) ∈ U ×Rm and attempt to deﬁne dϕp ∈ Tp N by dϕp . In general. In general.q +T (p))/ a(p) dp dq1/2 Rn for the solution of Schr¨dinger’s equation by the more general form o (2π )−m/2 Rm eiφ(q. From the point of view of the WKB method. To parametrize more general lagrangian ˙ ∗ submanifolds of T N in a similar way. γ(0) = (ϕ◦˜ ) (0) ˜ γ ˜ ˜ ˙ m for any lift γ of γ to the product U × R such that γ (0) = p. which relies in this context on the concept of generalized phase functions. the assumption that the map ∂ϕ/∂θ : U × Rm → Rm is transverse to 0 implies that the ﬁber critical set Σϕ = p ∈ U × Rm : ˜ ∂ϕ =0 ∂θ def is a smooth submanifold of U × Rm . viewed as a mapping df : U → T ∗ N . and the assignment p → dϕp deﬁnes a lagrangian ˜ ˜ ∗ immersion of Σϕ into T N . this fails. the ˜ ˜ ﬁberderivative ∂ϕ/∂θ vanishes at p. If.3 Phase functions and lagrangian submanifolds In this section. The result will be a collection of halfdensities on M . a projectable lagrangian submanifold of T ∗ N can be locally parametrized by the diﬀerential of a function f on U ⊂ N . however. since ˜ ˜ ˜ the value of the directional derivative (ϕ ◦ γ ) (0) depends on the lift γ . the meaning of dfp as an element of Tp N is that for any smooth curve γ in N satisfying γ(0) = p. we can begin with a function ϕ : U ×Rm → R together ∗ with a point p = (p. 4. In order for these halfdensities to piece together appropriately. 46 . it is necessary and suﬃcient that L satisfy a general version of the Maslov quantization condition. we generalize the concept of phase functions to nonprojectable lagrangian submanifolds of cotangent bundles.
15 If φ is nondegenerate. giving rise to a natural M p projection E ⊥ → T ∗ M . we note that the equality λ∗ αM = dφΣφ φ implies that Lφ is exact lagrangian. An advantage of this generalization will be to allow a calculus which is more clearly invariant under changes of coordinates. Since E ⊥ is the union of the conormal bundles of the ﬁbers of pM . On the ﬁbercritical set Σφ . the section dθ φ has a welldeﬁned intrinsic derivative (see [26]). which requires linear structures on p. the characteristic distribution C ⊥ of E ⊥ is tangent to the ﬁbers of the mapping E ⊥ → T ∗ M . B be smooth manifolds. To begin.7 Let M. 2 Some readers may ﬁnd it instructive to follow the ensuing discussion by writing everything in local coordinates.19 that E ⊥ is a coisotropic submanifold of T ∗ B. At points of Σφ . The function φ is said to be nondegenerate if its ﬁber derivative is transverse to ZE ∗ .where θ is an auxiliary variable in Rm which may have nothing to do with the variable p dual to q. this implies that the section (dφ)(B)Σφ = (dφ)(B) ∩ E ⊥ is nowhere tangent to the distribution C ⊥ and therefore immerses into T ∗ M .6(2).and qspace. unlike the previous Fourier transform picture. Dualizing the inclusion E = ker(pM ∗ ) → T B gives rise to an exact sequence of vector bundles over B 0 ← E ∗ ← T ∗B ← E ⊥ ← 0 where E ⊥ ⊂ T ∗ B denotes the annihilator of E. (We will denote the zero section of a vector bundle F by ZF ). and its ﬁber critical set is deﬁned as Σφ = (dθ φ)−1 ZE ∗ . and ι let pM : B → M be a smooth submersion. Theorem 4. Proof. The bundle E ⊥ may be identiﬁed with the pullback p∗ T ∗ M . denoted dθ φ. which induces for nondegenerate φ an exact sequence of vector bundles over Σφ θ 0 → T Σφ → TΣφ B → E ∗ Σφ → 0. Moreover. we ﬁx some notation and terminology. By Lemma 3. then the map λφ : Σφ → T ∗ M is an exact lagrangian immersion. in which case Σφ is a smooth submanifold of B. To complete the proof. 7 47 . The nondegeneracy assumption on φ is equivalent to the requirement that the lagrangian submanifold (dφ)(B) of T ∗ B be transverse to E ⊥ . the diﬀerential dφ deﬁnes a section of E ⊥ whose composition with p we denote by λφ : Σφ → T ∗ M . ι∗ d φ ∗ The ﬁberhessian Hφ of φ at p ∈ Σφ is deﬁned as the composition dθ φ ◦ ι : Ep → Ep . it follows from Example 3. The ﬁberderivative of a function φ : B → R is the composition dθ φ = ι∗ ◦ dφ.
This means in particular that the dimension of the ﬁbers of B must be at least k. then (B . 0) = λφ (b) for all (b. Restriction: If B is any open subset of B containing λ−1 (p). together with the phase function ˜ ˜ φ = φ + Q. These operations generate an equivalence relation among Morse families called stable equivalence. if the ﬁber dimension of B equals k. pB . A phase function which generates a neighborhood of a point in a lagrangian submanifold is not unique per se. p). φ). then the following operations produce further elements of M(L. This occurs when its ﬁberhessian vanishes at p.16 Suppose that M = R and consider the function φ(x. The central result of this section is the following. Thus (B × R . 2. pB . φ ◦ g) ∈ M(L. pB . φ) is called a Morse family over a manifold M if pB : B → M is a smooth (possibly nonsurjective) submersion. ι. ι. p). and φ is a nondegenerate phase function on B such that λφ is an embedding. Composition: If pB : B → M is a second submersion and g : B → B is a ﬁberpreserving diﬀeomorphism. We will say that the lagrangian submanifold im(λφ ) = Lφ is generated by the Morse family (B. and n λφ (b.” a concept which we now deﬁne. ·) acquires a degenerate critical point. φ) ∈ M(L. 1. ˜ ˜ ˜ ˜ 4. ι. dθ φ = θ2 + x. p). Evidently the ﬁbercritical set of φ equals the product Σφ × {0}. pB . p). If ι : L → T ∗ M is a lagrangian immersion and p ∈ L. 0) ∈ Σφ . we denote by gφ : U → Σφ the diﬀeomorphism deﬁned by gφ = λ−1 ◦ ι. φ) by a nondegenerate quadratic form Q on Rn is deﬁned as the Morse family comprised of the submersion pB : B × Rn → M ˜ n given by composing pB with the projection along R . which in turn equals the dimension of the kernel of (π ◦ λφ )∗ on Tp Σφ . pB . ι. and (dθ φ) = 2θdθ + dx. 48 . To begin. (B. θ) = xθ + θ3 /3 on B = R × R. pB . Here. which fails to be xprojectable precisely when x = 0. φ + c) ∈ M(L. p) the class of Morse families (B. p).From the preceding deﬁnitions. p). φ If (B. ι. Evidently the phase function φ is nondegenerate. ι. A Morse family is said to be reduced at p ∈ B if φ is a reduced phase function at p. Suspension: The suspension of (B. then we denote by M(L. φ) ∈ M(L. Example 4. it follows that the nullity k of the ﬁberhessian at p ∈ Σφ equals dim(Tp Σφ ∩ Ep ). ι. but it is unique up to “stable equivalence. pB . This is just the value of x for which φ(x. For such Morse families. and its ﬁber critical set consists of the parabola x = −θ2 . then the restrictions of φ pB and φ to B deﬁne a Morse family on M which belongs to M(L. then the phase function φ is said to be reduced at p. 3. Deﬁnition 4.17 A triple (B. pB . Addition: For any c ∈ R. φ) which generate ι(U ) for some neighborhood U ⊂ L of p. we introduce the following terminology.
Theorem 4.Theorem 4. ι.19 Let (P. Symplectic normal forms The purpose of this section is to develop several results needed to prove Theorem 4.19 will rely on the following Relative Darboux theorem [62] . a symplectic manifold looks like a neighborhood of the zero section in T ∗ L. ω1 be two symplectic forms on P which coincide on TN P . We will prove the following theorem. Any two members of M(L. The class M(L. Then there are neighborhoods U and V of N and a diﬀeomorphism f : U → V such that 1. ι.19 may be combined with Proposition 3. by a map which is the identity on L. and let ω0 . The next two subsections are devoted to the proof of this theorem. The proof of Theorem 4. Let N be a submanifold of a manifold P . Corollary 4. near any of its lagrangian submanifolds L. and let p ∈ L. all of which more or less rely on the socalled deformation method. 2. As a result of the existence of compatible complex structures on ι∗ P . f N = id and T f TN P = id. Thus.21 The map ψ gives a 11 correspondence between a neighborhood of L in the space of all lagrangian submanifolds of (P. Theorem 4. ι : L → P a lagrangian immersion.19 implies the following nonlinear “normal form” result. p) contains a reduced Morse family over M . Theorem 4. Then: 1. which states that. and E a lagrangian subbundle of ι∗ T P which is complementary to the image of ι∗ : T L → ι∗ T P .18. ω) be a symplectic manifold. 49 . f ∗ ω1 = ω0 2. This method was introduced by Moser in [45] (it probably has a longer history) and applied to a variety of problems of symplectic geometry in [62]. lagrangian subbundles of ι∗ P complementary to the image of ι∗ : T L → ι∗ T P always exist.20 If L is a lagrangian submanifold of P . Then there is a symplectic immersion ψ of a neighborhood U of the zero section Z ⊂ T ∗ L into P such that ψ = ι ◦ π on Z and which maps the vertical subbundle VZ L ⊂ TZ (T ∗ L) onto E. ω) and a neighborhood of the zero section in the space Z 1 (L) of closed 1forms on L. then a neighborhood of L in P is symplectomorphic to a neighborhood of the zero section in T ∗ L.24 to yield: Corollary 4. p) are stably equivalent.18 Let ι : L → T ∗ M be a lagrangian immersion.
If the submanifold N consisted of a single point. In order to ﬁx N . it is necessary and suﬃcient that such a vector ﬁeld solve the equation 0= d ∗ (f ωt ) = ft∗ dt t dωt dt + ft∗ (LXt ωt ) = ft∗ (ω1 − ω0 + d(Xt ωt )). there is a neighborhood of N in P (which for our purposes we may assume to be P itself) on which all ωt are nondegenerate. To ﬁnd f satisfying f ∗ ω1 = ω0 . Our assertion follows if we take ϕ = h∗ (Yt t 2 If (P. Let N be a submanifold of P . we will identify P with a tubular neighborhood of N in P and let ht : P → P be a smooth isotopy such that h1 = id Since β vanishes on N . such that ω −1 dϕ = ω1 − ω0 . t 0 where Yt is the (timedependent) vector ﬁeld which generates the isotopy ht for t > 0. Since the statement is local around N . By Cartan’s formula and the fact that β is closed. ω) is a symplectic manifold and gt : P → P a continuous family of diﬀeomorphisms. β = h∗ β − h∗ β = 1 0 0 d ∗ (h β) dt = dt t 1 h∗ (LYt β) dt. then ϕ can be chosen so that its ﬁrst derivatives vanish along N . By the same method of proof as in the relative Darboux theorem. Deﬁne a 1parameter family of closed forms on P by ωt = ω0 + t(ω1 − ω0 ). Furthermore. Then there is a form ϕ on a neighborhood of N such that dϕ = β and which vanishes on TN P . vanishing on N . and let β be a closed kform on e P which vanishes on T N . the last expression is equal to 1 1 h∗ d(Yt t 0 β) dt = d 0 1 0 h∗ (Yt t β) dt.Proof. we can deduce the following converse result: 50 . since the closed 2form ω1 − ω0 is locally exact by the classical Poincar´ lemma. 1]. if β vanishes on TN P . the form ϕ would be easy to ﬁnd. Proof. β) dt . ∗ then homotopy invariance for deRham cohomology implies that the forms ωt = gt ω lie in the same cohomology class for all t. These conditions will be satisﬁed if we set Xt = −˜ t (ϕ) for a 1form ϕ on a neighborhood of N in P . For e more general submanifolds. we have 1 h0 = ﬁberwise projection of P onto N. we use a more general version of this lemma: Relative Poincar´ lemma . we also want Xt N = 0. Since all ωt agree on the submanifold N . we will construct a timedependent vector ﬁeld Xt for which the isotopy ft that it generates satisﬁes ft∗ ωt = ω0 for all t ∈ [0. By the usual properties of the Lie derivative.
Of course. just for vectors tangent to N . · · · . where E is the lagrangian subbundle given in the statement of the theorem. and a diﬀeomorphism u of U ﬁxing M × {0} and preserving ﬁbers of the projection to M such that f (u(x.Corollary 4. there exists a neighborhood U of (x0 . To ﬁnish the proof of the normal form theorem. i.19.j ˜ f cij gi gj on a neighborhood of N . In a neighborhood U ⊂ T ∗ L of Z. a nondegenerate quadratic form Q on Rk . then there exist functions cij such that f= i. the form ωt − ω0 is not exact. Lemma 4. gk whose diﬀerentials are linearly independent along N . Givental [6] proves an equivalence theorem like the relative Darboux theorem under the weaker hypothesis that ω0 and ω1 coincide on T N . we turn to two generalizations of the classical Morse lemma (see Appendix B) which require the following version of Taylor’s theorem. If f is any function such that f and df vanish at all points of N . (x. 0) is a nondegenerate critical point for f {x}×Rk . Then for each x0 ∈ M . t2 . Beginning with the lagrangian immersion ι : L → P . Now consider the symplectic bundle map TZ (T ∗ L) → f ∗ T P ˜ given by f (v ⊕ J w) = f∗ v ⊕ J(f∗ w) for v. we let f : Z → P denote the composition ι ◦ π. Similarly.22 (Moser [45]) If {ωt } is a family of symplectic structures on a compact manifold P and ωt1 − ωt2 is exact for all t1 . but there is no diﬀeomorphism f : P → P at all satisfying f ∗ ω1 = ω0 .e. 51 . we apply the relative Darboux theorem to the forms ωL and F ∗ (ω) on U . 0). we ˜ can extend f to obtain an immersion F : U → P which satisﬁes F∗ = f on TZ (T ∗ L). θ)) = f (x. By restricting to a neighborhood of a point in N .22. where Z is the zero section of T ∗ L and π : T ∗ L → L is the natural projection. Proof of Theorem 4. for intermediate t. Parametrized Morse lemma . w ∈ T Z. 2 Next. 0) + Q(θ). In contrast to Corollary 4.20. Using Theorem 3. then there is a diﬀeomorphism f : P → P ∗ with f1 ω1 = ω0 . we then choose a ωcompatible complex structure J on f ∗ T P which satisﬁes J(f∗ T Z) = E.23 Let N ⊂ B be a submanifold deﬁned by the vanishing of functions g1 . Let f : M × Rk → R satisfy the condition that for each x ∈ M . we choose a ωL compatible complex structure J on TZ (T ∗ L) which rotates T Z into VZ L. McDuﬀ [40] describes a family ωt of symplectic forms on a compact sixdimensional manifold P such that ω1 − ω0 is exact.
Let φ be a function on B = M × Rn+k whose ﬁberhessian Hφ has rank k at a point b ∈ Σφ . 1]. Deﬁne ft = f − (1 − t)a. t ∂θi ∂θj The required condition ∂ft ∂ft ∂ft =− cij hi t t ∂θi ∂θi ∂θj i.j i will be satisﬁed if we set hi = − t j cij t ∂ft . To ﬁnd the diﬀeomorphism u we apply the deformation method. we may assume that f (x. a function η : M × Rn → R. θ ) = η(x. θ) is O(θ3 ) for each x. To determine Xt . This means that Xt should be of the form Xt = i hi t ∂ . ∂θi for certain smooth functions hi t which vanish on M × {0}. and a nondegenerate quadratic form Q on Rk such that (φ ◦ g)(x. θ) + Q(θ ) in a neighborhood of b in B. 1].Proof. Evidently. A change of coordinates near b and an application of the parametrized Morse lemma then proves: Thom splitting theorem . 0) + Q(θ) + a(x. then by the lowersemicontinuity of rank Hφ. and it should satisfy d (ft ◦ ut ) = u∗ (Xt · ft + a) t dt for all t ∈ [0. ∂θj 2 which vanishes (to second order) on M × {0}. If φ is a phase function on M × Rn+k whose ﬁberhessian Hφ has rank k at a point b ∈ Σφ . We seek a vector ﬁeld Xt tangent to the ﬁbers x = constant which generates an isotopy ut ﬁxing M × {0} and satisfying ft ◦ ut = f0 for all t ∈ [0.23 in order to ﬁnd smooth functions cij which vanish t on M × {0} and satisfy ∂ft ∂ft a= cij . there exists an integrable subbundle F → E = ker(pM ∗ ) such that the ﬁberhessian ∗ ◦ dθ φ ◦ : F → F ∗ is nondegenerate at each zero of the section ∗ ◦dθ φ in a neighborhood of b. 2 52 . By a preliminary change of coordinates linear on ﬁbers. we invoke Lemma 4. The function η is totally degenerate in the sense that its ﬁberhessian is identically zero at b. θ. the latter condition will be met if Xt is chosen so that 0= Xt · ft + a = 0. θ) = f (x. Then there exists a ﬁberpreserving diﬀeomorphism g of B. θ) where the error term a(x.
18. we may ˜ assume that M = Rm and and that φ. φ) is a Morse family such that Σφ = Z and λφ = ι ◦ π for the projection π : T ∗ L → L. this proves part (1) of Theorem 4. y) = x. p) is nonempty. we ﬁrst prove Theorem 4. and so the class M(L. By an application of the implicit function theorem. φ are both deﬁned on Rm × Rk . To prove part (2).18.25 Suppose that ι : L → T ∗ M is an exact lagrangian immersion such that ι∗ T (T ∗ M ) admits a lagrangian subbundle F transverse to both ι∗ V M and ι∗ T L. F : Rm × Rk → Rm × Rm deﬁned by F (x.Existence and stable equivalence of Morse families Returning to the proof of Theorem 4. we ﬁrst note that the restriction of dφ to a ﬁber of the composition of ψ with the projection π : T ∗ M → M equals −αL . φ are nondegenerate phase functions. ∂φ (x. ι. y) .18. Consequently. and similarly for F . p) are stably equivalent. y) ∂x ˜ F (x. p) is stably equivalent to a reduced Morse family in M(L. there exists a Morse family generating a neighborhood of p. the 1form ψ ∗ αM − αL is closed on U . π (ψ(B)). we ﬁrst note the following reinterpretation of the Thom splitting theorem in the terminology of Morse families. we can therefore ﬁnd a ﬁberpreserving map g 53 . there exists a symplectic immersion ψ from a neighborhood U of the zero section Z ⊂ T ∗ L into T ∗ M which satisﬁes ψ = ι ◦ π on Z and which maps VZ L onto the subbundle F . ˜ ∂φ (x. π ◦ ψ. it follows that F and F are −1 −1 embeddings near q = λφ (p) and q = λφ (p) respectively. ι. there e ∗ exists a function φ on U satisfying dφ = ψ αM − αL . it follows that the images of DFq and DFq coincide in Tp (Rm × Rm ). Its restriction to Z is exact because αL is zero on Z.24 to show that any two reduced Morse families in M(L. Using Lemma 3. Consider the ˜ mappings F. ι. Moreover. Since this property is local near p. Since the Morse families ˜˜ are reduced.19. Proof. F coincides with the ˜ ˜ ˜ map λφ on the ﬁbercritical set Σφ near q. it suﬃces by Theorem 4. ι.24. By Theorem 4. Combined with the deﬁnition of αL . To show that M(L. a computation (using the transversality hypothesis) now shows that there exists a neighborhood B of Z within U such that (B. Since ψ is symplectic. By the relative Poincar´ lemma.24 Any Morse family in M(L. Combined with Theorem 4. To complete the proof. Then L is generated by a Morse family over M . y) = x. p). Theorem 4. 2 Proof of Theorem 4. ι.9 we can construct a subbundle F which satisﬁes the hypotheses of the preceding theorem over a neighborhood of any p in L. ∂x ˜ ˜ By the assumption that φ. p) is nonempty.
of Rm × Rm whose restriction to some neighborhood B of q is a diﬀeomorphism which sends ˜ Σφ to Σφ and in particular g(q) = q . and so there exist functions cij deﬁned near b such that φ1 − φ0 = i. i. we note that the equation 0= will be satisﬁed provided that 0 = Xt · φt + φ1 − φ0 . this identity implies that dφ = d(φ ◦ g) ˜ ˜ on Σφ . 1]. we will construct a similar diﬀeomorphism with this property by appealing once again to the deformation method: ˜ Let φ0 = φ. we seek a vector ﬁeld Xt generating an isotopy ft that satisﬁes ft∗ φt = φ0 for all t ∈ [0. where C = (cij ). and so the phase functions φ and φ ◦ g diﬀer by an additive constant (which we may assume to be zero) at points of Σφ . To arrive at an equation for these coeﬃcients. this property would have to be valid on all of B. While there is no reason to expect this of g itself.v cuv ∂φ0 ∂φ0 ∂θu ∂θv . H = (hij ). 0= i.15 that the identity dφ = λ∗ αM φ ˜ holds on the ﬁber critical set Σφ . Since λφ = λφ ◦ g. since φ0 is reduced.e. 2 54 . and S is a matrix function which vanishes at b for all t. we must also require that Xt be of the form ∂φ0 ∂ Xt = hij ∂θi ∂θj i. Then Σφ0 = Σφ1 = Σ and λφ0 = λφ1 . to insure that each ft ﬁxes Σ and preserves ﬁbers. ˜ Recall from the proof of Theorem 4. Moreover φ1 − φ0 vanishes to second order along Σ.j cij ∂φ0 ∂φ0 ∂θi ∂θj in a neighborhood of Σφ . φ1 = φ ◦ g. In order for g to deﬁne an equivalence between φ and ˜ φ.j d ∗ (ft φt ) = ft∗ (Xt · φt + φ1 − φ0 ) dt cij ∂φ0 ∂φ0 + ∂θi ∂θj hij i. As before.j ∂φ0 ∂ ∂θi ∂θj φ0 + t u. This completes the proof. Hence we can solve for H in a neighborhood of b. This equation holds if 0 = C + H(I + S).j for certain functions hij which vanish on Σ.
Maslov objects If ι : L → T ∗ M is any lagrangian immersion, then the symplectic vector bundle ι∗ T (T ∗ M ) over L has two lagrangian subbundles, L1 = ι∗ T L and L2 = ι∗ V M . The Maslov class of (L, ι) is deﬁned as the degree1 cohomology class µL,ι = µ(L1 , L2 ) ∈ H 1 (L; R) described in Example 3.21. From this deﬁnition, it follows that, unlike the Liouville classes, the Maslov classes of two immersions (L, ι) and (L, ι ) are equal whenever ι and ι are homotopic through lagrangian immersions. Associated to any Morse family (B, pB , φ) over a manifold M is an index function indφ : Lφ → Z deﬁned by indφ (p) = index(Hφλ−1 (p) ),
φ
where the index of a quadratic form is, as usual, the dimension of the largest subspace on which it is negativedeﬁnite. Since the ﬁberhessian is nondegenerate where Lφ is projectable (see the discussion following Theorem 4.15), the index function indφ is constant on any connected projectable subset of Lφ . From Theorem 4.18, it follows furthermore that any two index functions indφ , indφ diﬀer by an integer on each connected component of Lφ ∩ Lφ . Example 4.26 Consider φ(x, θ) = θ3 /3 + θ(x2 − 1). We have ∂φ/∂θ = θ2 + x2 − 1; thus the ﬁber critical set Σφ is the circle θ2 + x2 = 1, and its image under λφ is the ﬁgureeight. The caustic set of the projection L → R consists of the points (−1, 0), (1, 0). To compute the index function corresponding to φ, we note that ∂2φ = 2θ; ∂θ2 consequently indφ (x, p) = 0 for (x, p) lying on the upper right part of the curve and ind(x, p) = 1 for (x, p) on the upper left. Since this loop is generated by a single phase function, there is a corresponding global index function, and the index of the loop is necessarily zero. A diﬀerent situation occurs in the case of a circle. The circle has two caustics, and the jump experienced by any index function as one passes through a caustic is given by the example just computed: passing through the right caustic in the +p direction decreases the index by 1, while passing through the left caustic in the same direction increases the index by 1. Traversing the circle in a counterclockwise direction, we see that the total index must change by −2. Consequently, the circle does not admit a global generating function. Of course, the Liouville class of the circle is also nonzero. However, it is easy to deform the circle to a closed curve with two transverse selfintersections which has zero Liouville class, but still admits no global phase function, since its Maslov class is nonzero.
55
As a degree1 cohomology class on L, the Maslov class determines via the exponential map R → U (1) an isomorphism class of ﬂat hermitian line bundles over L. A canonical representative of this class can be constructed as follows. First, we consider the union M(L, ι) =
p∈L
M(L, ι, p)
with the discrete topology. On the subset of L×M(L, ι)×Z consisting of all (p, (B, pB , φ), n) such that (B, pB , φ) ∈ M(L, ι, p), we now introduce an equivalence relation ∼ by setting (p, (B, pB , φ), n) ∼ (˜, (B, pB , φ), n) provided that p = p and p ˜ ˜ ˜ ˜ ˜ n + indφ (p) = n + indφ (p). ˜ ˜ The quotient space with respect to this relation is a principal Zbundle ML,ι over L which we will call the Maslov principal bundle. Associated to the Maslov principal bundle via the representation n → eiπn/2 of Z in U (1) is a complex line bundle ML,ι over L called the Maslov line bundle. Having discrete structure group, this line bundle carries a natural ﬂat connection with holonomy in {eiπn/2 } Z4 . Our main use of the Maslov line bundle will be to modify the halfdensities on L in order to incorporate the Maslov correction into our quantization scheme.
4.4
WKB quantization
In this section we will combine the tools assembled in the preceding sections into a technique for quantizing halfdensities on lagrangian submanifolds of arbitrary cotangent bundles. The phase bundle associated to an immersed lagrangian submanifold ι : L → T ∗ M and > 0 is deﬁned as the tensor product ΦL,ι, = ML,ι ⊗ ι∗ EM, , where we recall that EM, is the prequantum line bundle over T ∗ M (see Section 4.1). Observe that the product of the natural ﬂat connections on ML,ι and ι∗ EM, deﬁnes a ﬂat connection on the phase bundle whose holonomy is represented by the modZ reduction of the real cohomology class ˇ λL,ι + π µL,ι /2 ∈ H 1 (L; R), which we call the phase class of (L, ι). The phase bundle ΦL,ι, can be described explicitly as the collection of all quintuples (p, t, (B, pB , φ), n, z) where (p, t, n, z) ∈ L × T × Z × C and (B, pB , φ) ∈ M(L, ι, p), modulo the equivalence relation ∼ given by (p, t, (B, pB , φ), n, z) ∼ (˜, t, (B, pB , φ), n, z ) p ˜ ˜ ˜ ˜ ˜ ˜ whenever p = p and ˜
n ˜ z · e−it/ eiπ(n+indφ (p))/2 = z · e−it/ eiπ(˜ +indφ (p))/2 . ˜ ˜ def
56
A Morse family (B, pB , φ) which generates an open subset Lφ of L deﬁnes a nonvanishing parallel section of ΦL,ι, over Lφ by sφ, (p) = [p, 0, (B, pB , φ), 0, e−iφ(y)/ ], where λφ (y) = p. A check of these deﬁnitions shows that whenever ι(p) = λφ (y) = λφ (˜), ˜ y
y ˜ sφ, (p) eiφ(y)/ e−iπ indφ (p)/2 = sφ, (p) eiφ(˜)/ e−iπ indφ (p)/2 . ˜ ˜
For each ∈ R+ , we denote by Γpar (ΦL,ι, ) the space of parallel sections of ΦL,ι, . If, for a particular , the phase class of (L, ι) is integral, then Γpar (ΦL,ι, ) is a complex vector space isomorphic to C. Otherwise, Γpar (ΦL,ι, ) consists of a single point (the zero section of ΦL,ι, ). The product ΓL,ι = Γpar (ΦL,ι, )
>0
then has the structure of a Cmodule. An element s ∈ ΓL,ι is then a (generally discontinuous) function which assigns to each > 0 an element s in Γpar (ΦL,ι, ), so that the map p → s (p) deﬁnes a parallel section of ΦL,ι, . The symbol space of (L, ι) is deﬁned as the complex vector space def SL,ι = Ω1/2 L ⊗C ΓL,ι . The amplitude bundle Aφ associated to a Morse family (B, pB , φ) over a smooth manifold M is deﬁned as the complex line bundle Aφ = Λ1/2 B ⊗ Λ1/2 E over B, where E again denotes the subbundle ker(pB∗ ) of T B. An amplitude is a section a of Aφ . We will say that a is properly supported provided that the restriction of pB : B → M to Supp(a) is a proper map. The purpose of the space of amplitudes is to deﬁne a relation between halfdensities on M and symbols on the subset Lφ of L generated by φ. To describe this relation, we begin by noting that from the exact sequence of vector bundles 0 → E → T B → p∗ T M → 0 B over B, it follows that Λ1/2 B is naturally isomorphic to Λ1/2 p∗ T M ⊗ Λ1/2 E. This in B turn gives rise to the natural isomorphism Aφ Λ1/2 p∗ T M ⊗ ΛE. B
The image of an amplitude a on B under this isomorphism can be written as p∗ dx1/2 ⊗ σ, B where σ is a family of 1densities on the ﬁbers of pB , i.e., σx is a density on each nonempty p−1 (x). By ﬁberintegration we pass to a halfdensity on M : B I (φ, a)(x) = (2π )−n/2 e−inπ/4
p−1 (x) B
eiφ/ σx
dx1/2 ,
57
the Morse families (B. Since ˜ ˜ φ = φ ◦ g. ι) is projectable. When a is properly supported. a) = O( ) locally uniformly on V .where n = dim(p−1 (x)). ι).ι. B. a)(x) = 0 if p−1 (x) = ∅. the symbol sa and the halfdensity I (φ. 58 . φ). is the canonical element of Γpar (ΦLφ . pB . ι) is projectable. ˜ ˜ ˜ Theorem 4. pB . a) − I (φ. d φ Since Λ−1/2 E is naturally isomorphic to Λ1/2 E ∗ . and let a.3 that the nondegeneracy of φ gives rise to the following exact sequence of vector bundles over the ﬁbercritical set Σφ θ 0 → T Σφ → TΣφ B → E ∗ Σ → 0. pB . a be amplitudes on B. we ﬁrst recall from Section 4. Lemma B. Also. (B. a)(x). φ) are stably equivalent. respectively.27 Suppose that two Morse families (B. this sequence induces an isomorphism of the restriction of Aφ to Σφ with Λ1/2 Σφ . To pass geometrically from a to a symbol on Lφ . a) is a smooth halfdensity on M. When (L. the associated symbol on Lφ is deﬁned as ∗ sa = gφ a ⊗ sφ .18. ˜ ˜ ˜ Proof. (B. The theorem follows by comparing these expressions with (∗) above. If the restriction of a to Σφ corresponds to a halfdensity a on Σφ under this isomorphism. A ˜ ˜ check of the deﬁnitions shows that the symbols sa and s˜ are equal precisely when a g ∗ a · eiφ/ e−iπ indφ /2 = a · eiφ/ e−iπ ind φ/2 .17 that gφ is a diﬀeomorphism from a neighborhood of p in L onto Σφ deﬁned by the composition λ−1 ◦ ι. By Theorem 4.3 implies that this occurs precisely when ˜ ˜ ˜  detax Hφ1/2 e−iφ/ eiπ indφ /2 =  detax Hφ1/2 e−iφ/ eiπ indφ /2 . φ) generate the same ˜ ˜ projectable lagrangian embedding (L. up to a constant. a)(x) = eiφ/ e−iπ indφ /2 + O( )  detax Hφ1/2 ˜ ˜ and similarly for I (φ. ) deﬁned above). pB . for each φ . ˜ where a is the halfdensity on Σφ induced by the amplitude a. and similarly for a. B B we may diﬀerentiate under the integral to conclude that I (φ. def (Here we recall from the discussion following Deﬁnition 4. ˜ ˜ ˜ (∗) Since (L. and −1 so there exists a diﬀeomorphism g : Σφ → Σφ deﬁned as the composition g = gφ ◦ gφ . φ). a) are linked by the following theorem. setting I (φ. we can apply the principle of stationary phase to each ﬁber of the projection pB : B → M to obtain I (φ. Then sa = s˜ on L if and only if a ˜ ˜ I (φ. the section sφ.
. although the technique above enables us to quantize all symbols on L in a consistent way. we introduce the following terminology. ι. where π : νN → N is the natural projection. s). Thus. up to O( ) terms.28 An immersed lagrangian submanifold ι : L → T ∗ M is called quantizable if. φ) is a second Morse family which generates Lφ .2 Morse families provide a general means for locally quantizing symbols on an immersed lagrangian submanifold (L.29 Let N be a closed submanifold of a smooth manifold M .ι admit nontrivial parallel sections. compactly supported in ﬁbers. the existence of nonzero symbols requires that the phase bundle ΦL. hj · s). s) coincides with pullback. φ). We then set I (L. This deﬁnition is known as the Maslov quantization condition. such that each Lj is generated by a Morse family (Bj . U is the image of the normal bundle νN ⊂ TN M under an embedding ψ : νN → M satisfying ψ = π on the zero section of νN . i.e. ι) be integral. Suppose that (B. The set of for which this condition holds will be called admissible for L. Deﬁnition 4. and so ˜ ˜ I (φ. pBj . s) = j I (L. ι. and consider a symbol s on L supported in Lφ . and choose a partition of unity {hj } subordinate to {Lj }. ι. s) = I (φ. then sa = sa = s. Then there exists a unique halfdensity a supported in Lφ such that s = sφ ⊗ a. which we can extend to an amplitude a on B. we note that if (B. its phase bundle ΦL. a)(x). pB .27 we draw two conclusions about this tentative deﬁnition when Lφ is ˜ ˜ ˜ projectable. where r = π ◦ ψ −1 is a 59 . First. pB . it is easy to check that up to O( ) terms. Example 4. Consider the Morse family (r∗ N ⊥ . equivalently. s) is welldeﬁned. ˜ ˜ and a is an amplitude on B obtained as above. a) − I (φ. From Theorem 4. Note that it is a straightforward generalization of the condition derived in the preceding section. I (L. pN . ι.e. that the phase class of (L. ι. Of course.ι admits a global parallel section. φ) is a Morse family such that the phase function φ generates an open subset Lφ ⊂ L. and let U be a tubular neighborhood of N . Furthermore. ι. and (gφ )∗ a may be canonically identiﬁed with a section of the amplitude bundle of B over the ﬁbercritical set Σφ . ι) ⊂ T ∗ M . For this reason. this deﬁnition depends only on the semiclassical state (L. for some ∈ R+ . Using the remarks above. a) = O( ). we note that Theorem 4. We then set I (L. To quantize an arbitrary symbol s on L. φj ). if its phase class is integral. i.27 asserts that this choice of I (L. or. we ﬁrst ﬁx a locally ﬁnite cover {Lj } of L.
and φ : r∗ N ⊥ → R is deﬁned by φ(p) = p. Thus. The family I (L. The basic technical diﬃculty is that the principle of stationary phase (the basic underpinning of Theorem 4. this remark is suggested by the fact that I (L. ι. B Example 4.retraction of U onto N . ι) and compactly supported amplitude a on B.27) no longer applies to the integral eiφ/ σx p−1 (x) B when x is a caustic point. ι. and therefore both the Liouville and Maslov classes of N ⊥ are zero. the conormal N bundle of N is a lagrangian submanifold of T ∗ M which admits a global generating function. and the map λφ : N ⊥ → T ∗ M equals the inclusion. u = (2π )−b/2 e−iπb/4 B 1/2 eiφ/ a ⊗ p∗ u. a). a computation shows that the ﬁber critical set of φ is given by Σφ = p−1 (N ) = N ⊥ . s) at regular values of πL is not valid at caustics. Quantum states as distributions Unfortunately. Indeed. pN denotes the natural submersion r∗ N ⊥ → M . ι.30 The ﬁber critical set of the phase function φ(x. ψ −1 (pN (p)) . θ) = θ3 /3 + xθ consists of the parabola x = −θ2 . s) is smooth. the interpretation of I (L. In particular. For each Morse family (B. ι. B where b = dim(B) and u ∈ Ω0 M . and stationary phase cannot be used to estimate the integral eiθ R 3 /3 a(0. A more appropriate way to interpret the expression I (L. s) then consists of all distributional halfdensities I on M obtained by choosing a locally ﬁnite open cover {Lj } of L and a 60 . Since ψ is an embedding. since the phase function φ has a degenerate critical point in the ﬁber p−1 (x). θ) dθ. we deﬁne a distributional halfdensity on M by I (φ. this implies that the conormal bundle of any submanifold of M satisﬁes the Maslov quantization condition. s) in the presence of caustic points is as a family of distributional halfdensities on M deﬁned as follows. pB . The origin is therefore a degenerate critical point for φ. φ) ∈ M(L. at whose points the ﬁberhessian assumes the form ∂ 2 φ/∂θ2 = 2x.2 that classical solutions to the transport equation are singular at caustic points. whereas we saw in Section 2.
Proof.3 shows that this condition is equivalent to R ˜y ˜ ˜ y  deta R (y)1/2 e−iφ(y)/ eiπ indφ (p)/2 =  deta R (˜)1/2 e−iφ(˜)/ eiπ indφ (p)/2 . e−iψ/ u = eiR(y)/ e−iπ ind R (y)/2 + O( )  deta R (y)1/2 ˜ ˜ and similarly for I (φ. a). ι). the function R is a phase function having the same ﬁber critical set as φ. a). a link among its members can be described as follows. respectively. Lemma B. 2 61 . Set R = φ − ψ ◦ pB . ˜ ˜y ˜ y Since g is ﬁberpreserving. Moreover. a). pB . a be amplitudes on B. and similarly for a. it is easy ˜ ˜ ˜ to check that stable equivalence of the Morse families (B. e−iψ/ u . and so the preceding equation gives ˜ y y y eiR(y)/ e−iπ ind R (y)/2 eiR(˜)/ e−iπ ind R (˜)/2 = . we have R(y) − R(˜) = φ(y) − φ(˜). aj ).partition of unity {hj } subordinate to {Lj }. s) may appear very large. We ﬁrst prove ˜ ˜ ˜ Theorem 4. s) consists of those distributional halfdensities obtained in this way using amplitudes aj such that saj = s over each Lφj . e−iψ/ u − I (φ. e−iψ/ u = O( ). If ψ : M → R is a smooth function whose diﬀerential intersects ι(L) at exactly one point ι(p) transversely.31 Suppose that two Morse families (B. then sa (p) = s˜ (p) if and only if a ˜ ˜ I (φ. ι. φ) implies that ˜ y indφ (p) − indφ (˜) = ind R (y) − ind R (˜). φ). Since ˜ ˜ = R ◦ g. ι. The family I (L. pB . Comparing this expression with (∗∗) above completes the proof. equality of the symbols sa and s˜ occurs precisely when a the diﬀeomorphism g : Σφ → Σφ satisﬁes ˜ y g ∗ ay · eiφ(y)/ e−iπ indφ (p)/2 = ay · eiφ(˜)/ e−iπ ind φ(p)/2 . pB . Although the class I (L. an application of the principle of stationary phase gives I (φ. a). (B. Since ψ ◦ pB is constant on the ﬁbers of pB . φ). φ) generate the same ˜ ˜ lagrangian embedding (L. and let a. up to a constant. B. In this case. (B. ˜˜ ˜ ˜ where a is the halfdensity on Σφ induced by the amplitude a. pB . As in the proof of Theorem 4. Then set k I = j=1 I (φj .27. ˜ y  deta R (y)1/2  deta R (˜)1/2 ˜ ˜ ˜ (∗∗) The critical point y of R is nondegenerate precisely when the intersection of ι(L) with im(dψ) is transverse.
equivalently. a diﬀeomorphism f : L → L as above induces an isomorphism of symbol spaces SL. ι. A check of the deﬁnitions shows that the main objects in our quantization scheme behave nicely with respect to this notion of equivalence.ι . a) to be a distribution. the principal part of I (L.Now consider a semiclassical state (L. ι. We then deﬁne I (L. then. e−iψ/ depends only on the principal part of s. φ − S) for which Σφ = Σφ−S and λφ = fdS ◦ λφ−S . a symbol on the immersed lagrangian submanifold L is welldeﬁned as an equivalence class of symbols on the members of L. then x is a critical point ˜ of φ − S. if λφ is transverse to the image of dS near x. For a thorough exposition of this topic. pB . Example 4. Moreover. e−iψ/ u = def j I (φj . On the classical level. φj ) over M . we let {Lj } be a locally ﬁnite cover of L such that each Lj is generated by a Morse family (Bj . As before. for notational simplicity we will denote by L. 28. By setting S = S ◦ pB . In terms of our discussion. If ι : L → T ∗ M and ι : L → T ∗ M are lagrangian immersions. and suppose ˜ that S : V → R is a smooth function. e−iψ/ u . ι ) are equivalent provided that there exists a diﬀeomorphism f : L → L such that ι = ι ◦ f . this means the following. where fdS is the ﬁberwise ˜ ˜ translation map deﬁned by dS. aj ). ι) and (L . we can sometimes deﬁne it even when a does not have compact support. Equivalent semiclassical states A further important modiﬁcation of our quantization picture is based on the conceptual distinction between an “immersion” and an “immersed submanifold”. By allowing I (φ. We refer to the equivalence class L as an immersed lagrangian submanifold of T ∗ M .ι → SL . and choose a partition of unity {hj } subordinate to {Lj }. In this way.32 Suppose that (B. then the HamiltonJacobi equation H ◦ι=E 62 f∗ . any lagrangian immersion ι : L → T ∗ M deﬁnes an equivalence class of lagrangian immersions in T ∗ M which. ι. we refer to [21. s). Thus. 31]. up to O( ). s). where aj is the amplitude on Bj obtained in the usual way from the symbol hj ·s on Lj . pB . pBj . φ) is a Morse family over a manifold M . s). When the image of dψ is transverse to L. if E is a regular value of some hamiltonian function H on T ∗ M . we obtain a new Morse ˜ family (B. or. we will say that (L. Note in particular that if dS(pB (x)) = λφ (x) for some x ∈ Σφ . This critical point is nondegenerate provided that λφ−S is transverse to the zero ˜ ∗ section of T M near x.
Extending some notion of quantum state to arbitrary symplectic manifolds is one of the central goals of geometric quantization. ι). s ) of the equivalence class (L. From these remarks. ι ) by the hamiltonian vector ﬁeld of H (see Example 3. however. as described above.13) satisfy XH. (L . s) on M obtained by quantizing any member of (L. Note. since there is no underlying conﬁguration space on which the states can live. ι.ι and XH.ι s = 0 is a welldeﬁned condition on (L. ι .ι . If (L. s) satisfying eigenvector of H H(L) = E and LXH s = 0 With these correspondences between classical and quantum mechanics in mind. s). o Our list of classical and quantum correspondences now assumes the form: Object basic space state Classical version T ∗M (L. we are further led to deﬁne a semiclassical state in an arbitrary symplectic manifold (P.ι = f∗ XH. s) = I (L . that it is unclear what the quantum states are which are approximated by these geometric objects.ι induced on (L. (L . The state is stationary with respect to a classical hamiltonian H on T ∗ M provided that (L. s). we are led to view the equivalence class (L. s) is a stationary semiclassical state. ι . we have I (L.deﬁnes a condition on the class L which we denote by H(L) = E. it is easy to check that for any members (L. ω) to be an immersed lagrangian submanifold equipped with a halfdensity and possibly some “phase object” corresponding to a parallel section of the phase bundle in the cotangent bundle case. s) as above Quantum version HM distributional halfdensity on M Schr¨dinger equation o ˆ operator H on HM timeevolution Hamilton’s equations generator of evolution function H on T ∗ M stationary state ˆ state (L. s ). the vector ﬁelds XH. s) as a semiclassical state in T ∗ M . 63 . On the quantum level. s) as the (unique) distributional halfdensity I (L. s). In this case. s) satisﬁes the associated HamiltonJacobi and homogeneous transport equations. s) is a semiclassical approximate solution to the timeindependent Schr¨dinger equation on M . s) which we denote by LXH s = 0. ι. and therefore the homogeneous transport equation LXH. then I (L. and thus we may deﬁne the quantization of (L.
π∗ −− Y ∗ ← − (Y /Y ⊥ )∗ ω ˜ ˜ ω Y −− −→ π Y /Y ⊥ 2 If ω ([x]) = 0. Linear symplectic reduction Degenerate skewsymmetric bilinear forms yield symplectic vector spaces in the following way. and LC = (L ∩ C)/(L ∩ C ⊥ ) is a lagrangian subspace of C/C ⊥ . To prove the nondegeneracy of ω . For instance. we use the following commutative diagram. y). an important process known as symplectic reduction generates many examples of such manifolds.1 A skewsymmetric bilinear form ω on a vector space Y induces a symplectic structure on Y /Y ⊥ . 64 .1 Symplectic reduction The technique of symplectic reduction geometrizes the process in mechanics in which ﬁrst integrals of the hamiltonian are used to eliminate variables in Hamilton’s equations. We begin this section with a discussion of reduction and then turn to the classical and quantum viewpoints in the context of general symplectic manifolds.5 The Symplectic Category There are many symplectic manifolds which are not cotangent bundles. Lemma 5. where π is the projection. Proof. First note that ω gives rise to a skewsymmetric bilinear form ω on Y /Y ⊥ by the equation ω ([x]. C ⊂ V a lagrangian and a coisotropic subspace respectively. concluding with Dirac’s formulation of the quantization problem. then ω (x) = 0. [y]) = ω(x. Then LC = L ∩ C + C ⊥ is a lagrangian subspace of V contained in C. A special case of linear reduction arises when Y is a coisotropic subspace of a symplectic vector space and ω equals the restriction of the symplectic form to Y .2 Let V be a symplectic vector space and L. 5. starting with cotangent bundles. Lemma 5. ˜ ˜ The symplectic quotient space Y /Y ⊥ described in this lemma is known as the (linear) reduced space associated to Y . and so x ∈ Y ⊥ and hence [x] = 0. Lagrangian subspaces behave remarkably well with respect to this reduction.
ω ). L . Since by assumption C ⊥ ⊂ C. Proof. G are any three subspaces of V . (V . L are lagrangian subspaces of a symplectic vector space V and W ⊂ V is a lagrangian subspace transverse to both L and L . ω ) are symplectic vector spaces and L is a lagrangian subspace of V . 65 . Consequently.3 If (V. L .4). Next. we observe that since LC = LC /C ⊥ . then there exists a linear symplectomorphism V → C ⊥ ⊕ V /C ⊕ C/C ⊥ . C ⊥ with respect to the innerproduct gJ on V .4 If (V. B are orthogonal to C. 2 Recall that if L. Lemma 5. ω). then the reduced lagrangian subspace (ΓT )C of C/C ⊥ equals T (L) ⊂ V . If ΓT ⊂ V ⊕ V is the lagrangian subspace deﬁned by the graph of T . C 2 Example 5. we deﬁne ind(L. then there exists a natural linear symplectomorphism from V to L ⊕ L∗ which sends W onto the subspace 0 ⊕ L∗ and L onto the graph of some selfadjoint linear map T : L → L∗ . Then A. then (E + F ) ∩ G = E ∩ G + F if and only if F ⊂ G. Now suppose that V and V are of equal dimension and T : V → V is a linear symplectic map. and we collect some useful facts about them in the following examples. and set A = JC ⊥ and B = C ∩ JC. Note that (LC )⊥ = (L + C ⊥ ) ∩ C. Observe that if C is a coisotropic subspace of (V. W ) = signature QT These quantities will be useful in our study of the Maslov bundle under reduction. F. and C ⊥ = 0 ⊕ L. ω) is a symplectic vector space with a coisotropic subspace C. The projections V → V /C and C → C/C ⊥ restricted to A. then then C = V ⊕ L is a coisotropic subspace of the direct sum V ⊕ V (see Example 3. the second assertion follows from the equality L⊥ = (LC )⊥ /C ⊥ .Proof. This gives rise to the following decomposition of V . Denoting by QT the quadratic form QT on L induced by T . then C ⊥ ⊕V /C also carries a natural symplectic structure induced by ω. the linear reduced space C/C ⊥ equals (V . Let J be a ωcompatible complex structure on V . ω). W ) = index QT sgn(L. B give rise to an isomorphism V = C ⊥ + A + B → C ⊥ ⊕ V /C ⊕ C/C ⊥ . the selforthogonality of LC follows from the simple fact that if E.
The reduced symplectic vector space is then C/C ⊥ = (V /E) ⊕ E ⊥ .e.Example 5. and [X. this formula gives sgn(L .. Evidently. and C ⊥ = E ⊕ 0. If the vector ﬁeld Y belongs to (T M )⊥ . ω is called a presymplectic structure on M with characteristic subbundle (T M )⊥ . Combined with the preceding equations. L) = sgn(QE ) + sgn(LC .5 To begin. This means that LX ω = 0. then LC = (V /E) ⊕ 0 and LC = 0 ⊕ E ⊥ . then sgn(Q) = sgn(QE ) + sgn(Q∗ E ⊥ ). then the ﬁrst term on the right hand side of this equation vanishes identically.130] we recall that if Q∗ is nondegenerate and Q is the quadratic form it induces on V . LC ). we leave to the reader the job of checking the following elementary identities for the case when the lagrangian subspaces L. so the second term vanishes as well. L the lagrangian subspaces V ⊕ 0 and 0 ⊕ V ∗ . ω) is integrable. Now if we denote by L. W . From [21. then Cartan’s formula combined with the assumption that ω is closed implies that ω is invariant under the ﬂow of X. Then C = V ⊕E ⊥ is a coisotropic subspace of V ⊕V ∗ with its usual symplectic structure. Example 5. W . W ) = − sgn(L . p. with the dimension of the orthogonal (Tx M )⊥ the same for all x ∈ M . WC . Y ] ω = LX (Y ω) − Y LX ω. Presymplectic structures and reduction By deﬁnition. WC . the lagrangian subspace W of V ⊕V ∗ given by the graph of A passes under reduction by C to the graph WC of AE . L . W . The composition of a selfadjoint linear map A : V ∗ → V with the projection V → V /E restricts to a selfadjoint linear map AE : E ⊥ → V /E (note that V /E identiﬁes canonically with (E ⊥ )∗ ). L are themselves transverse: sgn(L. 66 . i. If Q∗ denotes the quadratic form on V ∗ deﬁned by A. L) and sgn(Q∗ E ⊥ ) = sgn(LC . the next best structure a manifold M may possess along these lines is a closed twoform ω of constant rank. LC ). W ) = − sgn(L. If X belongs to (T M )⊥ . In some sense. Leaving for the reader the veriﬁcation that (T M )⊥ is actually a subbundle of T M . Proof. we recall that Lie brackets and inner products are related by the formula [X. Y ] lies in (T M )⊥ . a symplectic form is closed and nondegenerate. In this case. Theorem 5. respectively. L. L ). we therefore have sgn(Q∗ ) = sgn(L .7 The characteristic subbundle of a presymplectic manifold (M.6 Suppose that V is a ﬁnitedimensional vector space with a subspace E ⊂ V and its algebraic orthogonal E ⊥ ⊂ V ∗ .
rN denote the restrictions of the cartesian projections N × M → M. Example 5.2. we recall that the ﬁber product of two maps ι : N → V and : M → V is deﬁned as the subset N ×V M = (ι × )−1 ∆V of N × M . the hamiltonian ﬂow associated to a function H : R2n → R generates the characteristic foliation of any regular energy surface H −1 (E). This gives rise to the following commutative diagram N ×V M − − M −M→ rN N −− V −→ where rM . and the reduction projection coincides with the usual cartesian projection P × L → P . the form ω deﬁnes a presymplectic structure on P.2. and since the quotient map M → M/M⊥ is a submersion. and L is a lagrangian submanifold of Q. then we say that M is reducible. Our goal for the remainder of this section is to describe two operations on immersed lagrangian submanifolds deﬁned by a reducible coisotropic submanifold. for each p ∈ C.2 The foliation M⊥ deﬁned by the characteristic subbundle of M is known as the characteristic foliation of M . If P. ωM ) is called the reduced manifold of M . If the quotient space M/M⊥ is a smooth manifold. For the most part. Recall that a submanifold C ⊂ P is called coisotropic if. A pointwise application of Lemma 5. we can view C as an abstract manifold and note that if ω is the pullback of the symplectic form ω by the natural inclusion C → P . To begin. these operations will be nonlinear analogs of the mappings L → LC and L → LC described in the linear setting in Lemma 5. ω). nondegenerate 2form ωM on M/M⊥ . we will be interested in presymplectic manifolds which arise as coisotropic submanifolds of some symplectic manifold (P. In this case. 67 ι r . then ker(ω ) = (T C)⊥ . The symplectic manifold (M/M⊥ . Q are symplectic manifolds. Since dω = 0 by hypothesis. N to the ﬁber product N ×V M . the form ωM is necessarily closed and therefore symplectic. the tangent space Tp C contains its symplectic orthogonal (Tp C)⊥ = {v ∈ Tp P : ω(v. The corresponding reduced symplectic manifold (when it exists) will be the symplectic model for the space of quantum states of energy E.13. Since dim(T C)⊥ = dim(P ) − dim(C) is constant. shows that the presymplectic structure ω induces a smooth. in eﬀect. then P × L is a coisotropic submanifold of P × Q whose characteristic foliation consists of leaves of the form {p} × L for p ∈ P . where ι × : N × M → V × V is the product map and ∆V ⊂ V × V is the diagonal.8 As noted in Example 3. together with the fact that LX ω = 0 for characteristic X. w) = 0 for all w ∈ Tp C}. The product P × L is therefore reducible.
as in the following lemma.9 If N.Deﬁnition 5. then two smooth maps ι : N → V and : M → V are said to intersect cleanly provided that their ﬁber product N ×V M is a submanifold of N × M and ι∗ T N ∩ ∗ T M = ( ◦ rM )∗ T (N ×V M ) as subbundles of ( ◦ rM )∗ T V . M. 3.10 1. the vector (ι × )∗ (v. w) of N ×V M . w) = w. 68 . Then for any tangent vector (v. The usefulness of clean intersection in symplectic geometry lies in its compatibility with symplectic orthogonalization. then the maps rN and rM are themselves immersions. 2. Example 5. w) is tangent to the diagonal in V × V . For brevity. and so the basic properties of symplectic orthogonalization applied ﬁberwise to these bundles give ker(pC ◦ rC )∗ = G⊥ ∩ G ∩ F = G⊥ ∩ F = (G + F )⊥ . Suppose that ι : N → V and : M → V are any smooth maps whose ﬁber product N ×V M is a smooth submanifold of N ×M . ∗ ∗ Proof. if ι and are cleanly intersecting immersions. The clean intersection hypothesis implies that rC∗ T (L ×P C) = F ∩ G. A basic example of two maps which do not intersect cleanly is provided by two embedded curves in the plane which intersect tangentially at a single point. The kernel of (pC ◦ rC )∗ then equals G⊥ ∩ rC∗ T (L ×P C). Lemma 5.11 Let P be a symplectic manifold. G denote the lagrangian and coisotropic subbundles rL T L and rC T C of the ∗ symplectic vector bundle rC T P over the ﬁber product L ×P C. V are smooth manifolds. it follows that rM ∗ (v. A particular case of this situation occurs when is a submersion and ι is any smooth map. if ι is an immersion. Let F. If a lagrangian immersion ι : L → P intersects a coisotropic submanifold C ⊂ P cleanly. we can conclude that rM : N ×V M → M is an immersion as well. then the map (pC ◦ rC ) : L ×P C → C/C ⊥ has constant rank. w) = 0 only if w = 0. then ι and intersect cleanly. In particular. we will say that a map ι : N → V intersects a submanifold W ⊂ V cleanly if ι and the inclusion map W → V intersect cleanly. Thus. Since rM ∗ (v. and so ι∗ v = ∗ w. If the product ι × of two smooth maps ι : N → V and : M → V is transverse to the diagonal ∆V . in which case ι∗ v = ∗ w = 0.
69 .2) is reducible. we will say that the immersed submanifold N and the map : M → V intersect cleanly. i. C intersect cleanly. In this case. all of whose geodesics are closed and −1 have the same length. then the same is true of any other member of N . Hausdorﬀ manifold. By C : LC → C/C ⊥ we denote the restriction of the cartesian projection LC × C → C to LC .2 shows that this immersion is lagrangian. 2 Example 5. the constant energy hypersurface C = kM (E) (see Section 3.e. Example 5. We leave it to the reader to check that any reducible pair (C. J2 ). we have dim(ker(pC ◦ rC )∗ ) = dim(L) + dim(L ×P C) − dim(C). the induced map ιC : LC → C/C ⊥ is a smooth immersion. With these remarks in mind. respectively. Proof. we deﬁne LC as the ﬁber product of ιC and the quotient map pC : C → C/C ⊥ .10(2) implies that the map C : LC → C is a smooth immersion. then LC and LC are immersed lagrangian submanifolds of C/C ⊥ and P . where ι : N → V is considered equivalent to ι : N → V provided that there exists a diﬀeomorphism f : N → N which intertwines ι and ι . J2 of normal Jacobi ﬁelds along p. the internal sum F + G and its orthogonal (F + G)⊥ also have constant rank.12 If (C. A pointwise application of Lemma 5. since the immersed submanifolds LC and LC are welldeﬁned by the reducible pair (C. respectively. Evidently. Finally. g) is a riemannian manifold. Theorem 5. J2 ) = g(J1 . Let ι : L → P be a ﬁxed element of L. it follows that these are immersed lagrangian submanifolds. L) in P induces immersed submanifolds LC and LC of C/C ⊥ and P . In this case.Since F ∩ G has constant rank. we will say that a coisotropic submanifold C and an immersed lagrangian submanifold L in a symplectic manifold P form a reducible pair (C. The tangent space to CM at a point p identiﬁes naturally with the space of Jacobi ﬁelds normal to the geodesic represented by p. L). J2 ) − g(J1 .13 If (M. ι = ι ◦ f . Since LC is the quotient of L ×P C by the ﬁbers of pC ◦ rC . then for each E > 0. and the reduced manifold CM = C/C ⊥ is the space of oriented geodesics on M . if a member ι : N → V of the equivalence class N intersects a smooth map : M → V cleanly. Moreover. L) provided that C is reducible. L) is a reducible pair in a symplectic manifold P .2 implies that this immersion is lagrangian. In fact. Since ιC : LC → C/C ⊥ is an immersion. then we obtain an induced immersion ιC from the reduced space LC of L ×P C into C/C ⊥ . the symplectic form on CM is given in terms of the metric by ω(J1 . 2 If the quotient of L ×P C by the ﬁbers of the map pC ◦ rC is a smooth. Recall from Chapter 4 that an immersed submanifold N of a manifold V is an equivalence class N of immersions. and L. and a pointwise application of Lemma 5. indicating that the dimension of ker(pC ◦ rC )∗ is independent of the base point in L ×P C. it is easy to check that for any pair J1 .
but we wish to consider various properties of CN when it is viewed as a smooth submanifold of the symplectic manifold (T ∗ M. the annihilator CN is a coisotropic submanifold of T ∗ M if and only if the distribution F is integrable. that is CN = {(x. The unit sphere S 2n+1 is a coisotropic submanifold of Cn+1 . Proof. and let N ⊂ M be a smooth submanifold equipped with a tangent distribution F. and therefore CS n is represented by the grassmannian Gr+ (2. Then the natural projection T ∗ M → M maps Z diﬀeomorphically onto N . by Lemma 3. Since the symplectic form on Cn+1 is invariant under unitary transformations.12 it therefore follows that the space of geodesics in M normal to N at some point comprises an immersed lagrangian submanifold of CM . CN is a subbundle of TN M . n + 1). More precisely. The conormal bundles of the leaves deﬁne a foliation of CN by lagrangian submanifolds. the reduction of which is complex projective space CP n .12. The conormal bundle N ⊥ to a smooth submanifold N ⊂ M is a lagrangian submanifold of T ∗ M which intersects C cleanly. To give a concrete case of this example. We begin with the following lemma. a subbundle of T N ⊂ TN M . the resulting symplectic form on CP n is invariant under transformations induced by unitary transformations. By CN we denote the annihilator of F. Fx ⊂ ker(p)}. From Theorem 5. ωM ).. and moreover. 70 . we consider the sphere S n equipped with its standard metric.For further details.14 Note that the standard symplectic structure on R2n+2 is equivalent to the imaginary part of the standard hermitian metric on Cn+1 . Lemma 5.15 In the notation above. Conormal submanifolds A particular example of symplectic reduction which we will use in the next chapter begins with the following setup. ∗ By deﬁnition. see [12]. Now let Z denote the intersection of CN with the zero section of T ∗ M . this implies that CN is coisotropic. Suppose that M is a smooth manifold. p) ∈ T ∗ M : x ∈ N. From Theorem 5.6. The maximal real subspace Rn+1 ⊂ Cn+1 is a lagrangian submanifold of Cn+1 whose intersection with S 2n+1 is clean and coincides with the real unit sphere S n . If F is integrable. i. then we can consider its leaves as submanifolds of M via the inclusion N → M . N ⊥ ∩ C is a sphere bundle over N transverse to the characteristic foliation of C. Example 5. TZ CN = T N ⊕ F ⊥ .e. Each oriented geodesic in S n identiﬁes naturally with an oriented 2dimensional subspace of Rn+1 . it follows that the real projective space RP n is a lagrangian submanifold of CP n .
Proof. Since. Moreover. and it is easy to check that the level sets of this map are the ﬁbers of the projection CN → CN /C ⊥ .16 If the leaf space N/F is a smooth. the proof of Lemma 5. Theorem 4..16 shows that each such leaf projects diﬀeomorphically onto F . If L ⊂ T ∗ B is the lagrangian submanifold given by the image of the diﬀerential dφ. and thus the intersections of Z with the isotropic leaves of CN are integral manifolds of the distribution F.18 As a special case of Example 5. by deﬁnition. it follows that the annihilator CN ⊂ T ∗ N of F is a coisotropic submanifold which. i.e. By Lemma 5. p) ∈ CN contains the subspace Fx of Tx N in its kernel. p) deﬁnes an element of T ∗ (N/F).6 implies that F ⊥ is foliated by isotropic leaves of CN . Lemma 3. when φ is nondegenerate. Thus we get a diﬀeomorphism CN /C ⊥ → T ∗ (N/F).15. 71 . To prove that the preceding diﬀeomorphism is symplectic. pB . From the natural lagrangian splitting of T (T ∗ M ) along the zero section of T ∗ M . Example 5. and so the bundle F ⊥ is equipped in this way with a ﬂat Ehresmann connection (see Ehresmann [22]) known as the Bott connection associated to the foliation F.17. by deﬁnition.15 can be reformulated as an application of Theorem 5. Since F ⊥ is a lagrangian submanifold of T ∗ N .17 Suppose that F is a foliation of a manifold N . each (x. π −1 pC In other words. it suﬃces to note that by the commutative diagram f CN − − T ∗ (N/F) −→ N −− − → N/F the Liouville forms of T M and T (N/F) are related by αM CN = f ∗ αN/F . then the nondegeneracy condition on φ implies that L intersects CB transversally along a submanifold I which maps diﬀeomorphically onto the ﬁber critical set Σφ under the natural projection π : T ∗ B → B. This gives a welldeﬁned surjective submersion f : CN → T ∗ (N/F). ∗ ∗ 2 Example 5. This completes the proof. suppose that (B.where F ⊥ is the subbundle of VZ M which annihilates F. contains the conormal bundle F ⊥ to any leaf F of F. Hausdorﬀ manifold. then the reduced space CN /C ⊥ is canonically symplectomorphic to T ∗ (N/F). The lagrangian immersion λφ : Σφ → T ∗ M equals the composition B Σφ → L ∩ CB → CV /C ⊥ . φ) is a Morse family over a manifold M . and let CB ⊂ T ∗ B be the conormal bundle to the ﬁbers of the submersion pB : B → V . it follows that (TZ CN )⊥ = F ⊕ (T N )⊥ . 2 Lemma 5. it follows that (x.12 when the lagrangian submanifold im(dφ) is transverse to E.
L . so that p = λφ (x) lies in the zero section ZM of T ∗ M . Immediately from this deﬁnition and Example 5.6 implies that the Morse index ιM (x. φ) of the critical point x satisﬁes ιM (x. 2 72 . Denoting by x the point in the zero section of T ∗ B lying over x. L . φ) is a Morse family which generates a lagrangian submanifold in L ⊂ T ∗ M and x ∈ B is a (nondegenerate) critical point of φ. the cross index of the quadruple (L. so that the last formula in Example 5. For W. W ) − ind(L. W ) = ind(L. W . V. Lemma 5. we obtain the following “cocycle” property of the cross index.6 and 5. On the other hand. L . the restriction of Q to E equals the form induced by the ﬁberhessian Hφx of φ at x. then σ(L. and so ind(QE ) = ind Hφx .20 If L. W. Reduction and the Maslov bundle Using linear reduction we can give a useful alternative description of the Maslov bundle of an immersed lagrangian submanifold L in T ∗ M . we recall that Tx (T ∗ B) ∗ admits the natural lagrangian splitting Tx B ⊕ Tx B. Given two lagrangian subspaces L. W ∈ LL. the intersection T CN ∩ V M is a (constant rank) subbundle of T CN . L . W ) + σ(L. it is easy to check that the tangent space to the conormal submanifold CV deﬁned in Example 5. Let let E ⊂ Tx B be the kernel of the linearized projection pB∗ : T B → T M . φ) = ind Hφx + ind(Vp M. W ). L . Tp L.L the subset of the lagrangian grassmannian L(V ) comprised of those lagrangian subspaces which are transverse to both L and L . we denote by LL. W ) is deﬁned as the integer σ(L. W . L .18 at x equals the coisotropic subspace C = Tx B ⊕ E ⊥ . W ) = 0. L . pV . Tp ZM ).18 arises when (B.L . W. L are lagrangian subspaces of V and W. W. Example 5. By deﬁnition. W .5.19 An important special case of Examples 5. A check of the deﬁnitions shows that this subbundle is mapped onto V (N/F) under the quotient map CN → T ∗ (N/F) described above. L of a symplectic vector space V . Now suppose that Q is the nondegenerate quadratic form on Tx B deﬁned by the hessian of φ. L . W ∈ LL.We remark that since CN is a bundle over N . W ) + σ(L.
˜ where p = p − dS(pV (x)) and Lφ−S is the lagrangian submanifold generated by φ − S. W ) for all W. Now we may assign a principal Z bundle to a triple (E.ι → Mλ.λ (E). Y.We denote by FL.λ (E). fφ ). Associated to E is its lagrangian grassmannian bundle L(E) whose ﬁber over x ∈ M is simply L(Ex ). A function fφ : LTp Lφ . λ ). φ − S) = ind Hφx + ind(Vp M. Let (B.21 In the notation above.Vp M → Z is obtained by setting fφ (Y ) = ιM (x. and we denote by Mλ. Vp M .19 it follows that ˜ the Morse index ιM (x.λ (E) the principal Z bundle whose ﬁber over x ∈ M equals Fλx . λ.ι is canonically isomorphic to Mλ.L (V ) the space of functions f : LL. From Example 4. φ) be a Morse family over a manifold M . Now if Y is any lagrangian subspace of Tp (T ∗ M ) transverse to Vp M . it follows that this map passes to an isomorphism of principal Z bundles ML. Theorem 5. W ∈ LL.32. Thus.λ (E). n) to the function (p. ﬁx a point x in the ﬁber critical set Σφ . Since any such function is determined up to an additive constant by its value at a single point of LL. ι) × Z → Mλ.L . and Tp ZM to the tangent space Y of the image of dS at p. λ are lagrangian subbundles. then there exists a function S : V → R such that Y = im dS(pV (x)). pB . we deﬁne a map L × M(L.5 imply ιM (x. Using these remarks. Natural lagrangian subbundles of E are then given by λ = ι∗ T L and λ = ι∗ V M . From Example 5. φ). it follows that this function satisﬁes fφ (Y ) − fφ (Y ) = σ(Tp Lφ . L . it follows that Z acts simply and transitively by addition on FL. Tp Lφ−S . where E is a symplectic vector bundle and λ. λ then correspond to smooth sections of L(E). φ − S) at x is given by ˜ ιM (x. φ − SY ). Proof.λ (E) by sending the triple (p. From the discussion above. the Maslov bundle ML.L . S) = ind Hφx + ind(Tp Lφ .λx (Ex ). (B. ˜ Fiberwise translation by dS does not change the index on the right. we recall that if S : M → R is a smooth function such that the image of dS intersects λφ (Σφ ) transversely at p. the preceding equation and Example 5. the subspace Vp M to the vertical subspace Vp M at p. and moreover it maps Tp Lφ−S to Tp Lφ . W. where S = S ◦ pB . Y ). pB . 73 . Vp M . A special case of this setup occurs when L is an immersed lagrangian submanifold of ∗ T M so that E = ι∗ T (T ∗ M ) is a symplectic vector bundle over L. Y ). The lagrangian subbundles λ. Tp ZM ).L (V ). From the preceding paragraph and the deﬁnition of Mλ.L → Z such that f (W ) − f (W ) = σ(L. then x is a ˜ ˜ nondegenerate critical point of φ − S. and set p = λφ (x).
L . First consider a symplectic vector space V with lagrangian subspaces L. λ∗ ) comprised of selfadjoint maps. where fη (Wηx ) = f (W ) for each W ∈ Lλx .λ (E) is canonically isomorphic to Mλη . 74 .λ (E) is canonically isomorphic to Mλη . If λ. then Mλ. then LC is transverse to LC . our goal is to establish the following property of the bundle Mλ.λη (η/η ⊥ ) ﬁberwise by sending (x. L ⊂ C. then Mλ. LC and WC /(LC + LC )⊥ maps onto W/(L + L )⊥ under the symplectomorphism above.λ (E) to (x. WC ). λ are ﬁberwise transverse. Moreover. if W ∈ LL. Theorem 5.λη (η/η ⊥ ). If λ. The proofs are rather technical and can be passed over in a ﬁrst reading.23 Suppose that E is a symplectic vector bundle with lagrangian subbundles λ. λ and a coisotropic subbundle η. then Mλ. L and a coisotropic subspace C. f ) ∈ Mλ. L . λ and a coisotropic subbundle η. 2 Lemma 5. λ ⊂ η. If λ ∩ η and λ ∩ η have constant rank. fη ). then there exists a natural linear symplectomorphism of reduced spaces (LC + LC )/(LC + LC )⊥ → (L + L )/(L + L )⊥ which maps LC /(LC + LC )⊥ onto L/(L + L )⊥ and LC /(LC + LC )⊥ onto L /(L + L )⊥ .λx . Lemma 5. If λ. Thus.λ (E) under symplectic reduction. Using this remark.24 Suppose that E is a symplectic vector bundle over Y . Proof.λ (E) → Mλη . If L. Any choice of a positivedeﬁnite quadratic form on λ is induced by a section T of Hom(λ. then there exists a vector bundle symplectomorphism E → λ ⊕ λ∗ which maps λ onto λ ⊕ 0 and λ onto 0 ⊕ λ∗ .2 We refer to [3] and [31] for a proof that the Maslov bundle described above is equivalent to the Maslov bundle constructed using index functions in Chapter 4. Proof. LC .λη (η/η ⊥ ).λ (E) is canonically isomorphic to Y × Z. λ are lagrangian subbundles such that λ ∩ λ has constant rank. The starting point of the proof is the following special case of the theorem. we can deﬁne the isomorphism Mλ. ind(L.22 Suppose that E is a symplectic vector bundle over M with lagrangian subbundles λ. For the remainder of this section. W ) = ind(LC .
λ and clearly satisﬁes ind(λx . Mλ. the bundle Mλ. It is easy to check that the lagrangian subbundles λΓ(T ) and λ ⊕λ intersect the coisotropic subbundle E ⊕ λ along constant rank subbundles. 2 Proof of Theorem 5.L ⊕L (E ⊕ E) and MT (L). our hypotheses imply that η = λ + λ is a coisotropic subbundle of E which contains the lagrangian subbundles λ and λ . E ) of symplectic vector bundle maps.λ (E) is therefore given by f (λx ) = 0.L (E ) are canonically isomorphic.λη (E) is canonically trivial. and thus Mλ.22. E are trivial symplectic vector bundles over M with lagrangian subbundles λ ⊂ E and λ ⊂ E . ˜˜ Combined with the canonical isomorphisms above. Mλ.λ (E) is canonically isomorphic to the principalbundle product (see Appendix D for the deﬁnition) Mλ.λη (η/η ⊥ ). λ are lagrangian subbundles of a symplectic vector bundle E. Applying this remark. Theorem 5.25 Suppose that E. λ of E are contained in the ˜ coisotropic subbundle η. and the assertion follows. this shows that Mλ. An application of the cocycle identity of Lemma 5.λη (E) is in turn canonically isomorphic ˜ to Mλη . In general.The lagrangian subbundle λ of E which maps to the subbundle of λ ⊕ λ∗ deﬁned by the graph of T is then transverse to λ.23.λη (E) is canonically trivial by Lemma 5. ˜ 2 Example 5. whereas their reductions by E ⊕ λ are given by T (λ) and λ . λ . completing the proof.λη (η/η ⊥ ).λ (E) ˜ 75 . then Mλ. f ) of Mλ.23 implies that Mλη .λ (E) ˜ Mλ. Similarly.λη (E). By Lemma 5.λη (E) × Mλ.λ (E) × Mλ . the latter bundle has a canonical trivialization. λx ) = 0 for all x ∈ Y . ˜ ˜ ˜˜ From the assumption that λ∩η has constant rank. Since the lagrangian subbundles λ .22 implies that MLΓ(T ) . Lemma 5. λη are transverse lagrangian subbundles of η/η ⊥ . and let T be a section of the bundle Homω (E. it follows that λ∩λη has constant rank. while the restriction of T to the subbundle λ deﬁnes a lagrangian subbundle T (λ) of E . The graph of the section T deﬁnes a lagrangian subbundle λΓ(T ) of E ⊕ E. Thus.λ (E) is canonically ˜ η ˜η isomorphic to Mλη .λ (E). respectively.λ (E) × Mλη .λ (E) is canonically isomorphic to Mλη .24.λη (E) × Mλη .λη (E) . Since λη . λx . A natural section s(x) = (x.20 shows that if λ. we obtain the following canonical isomorphisms: Mλ.
zF of the embedding (M. ω ) of S. ﬁnitedimensional symplectic manifolds. Since immersed lagrangian submanifolds of the product Q × P coincide with those of its dual.21 shows that s∗ MT ∗ M.ιF is canonically isomorphic to MλΓT . zF ) and (T ∗ M. −ω). Moreover.25. we recall that any such f is equal to a ﬁberwise translation of T ∗ M by a closed 1form β on M composed with the cotangent lift of some diﬀeomorphism N → M . Nevertheless. as described in Example 5.zF is 0 canonically isomorphic to MT (λ).λ (E ).25 that the Maslov classes are also related by pullback: s∗ µT ∗ M. and the lagrangian 0 subbundles λΓ(T ) ⊂ E ⊕ E and T (λ) ⊂ E . The morphism set Hom(P. it follows from Example 5. From Section 3. R) induced by the projection T ∗ M → M . ∗ consider the symplectic vector bundles E = s∗ T (T ∗ M ) and E = zF T (T ∗ N ) over M . (T ∗ M. zF ) identiﬁes with λT ∗ M. zf ) equals [β] ∈ H 1 (M .27 We can apply the conclusion of the preceding example to ﬁberpreserving symplectomorphisms f : T ∗ M → T ∗ N .2 The symplectic category To systematize the geometric aspects of quantization in arbitrary symplectic manifolds.14.N : T ∗ N × T ∗ M → T ∗ (M × N ). R) H 1 (T ∗ M . zf ). we ∗ have the lagrangian subbundles λ = s∗ V M of E and λ = zF V N of E . and thus ∈ R+ is admissible for the lagrangian embeddings (M. Evidently. P ) represented by the same equivalence class L of immersions into the product P × Q. deﬁned as the composition of the graph ΓF : T ∗ M → T ∗ N × T ∗ M of F with the Schwartz transform SM. ω) (Q. More generally. Q) and L2 ∈ Hom(Q. Thus.zF . we recall that a smooth diﬀeomorphism from a symplectic manifold P to a symplectic manfold Q is a symplectomorphism if and only if its graph is a lagrangian submanifold of Q × P . the phase class of the induced lagrangian ˇ embedding (M. π2 denote the cartesian projections. and so S is therefore not a true category.2. ιF ). Theorem 5. As objects of S we take the class of all smooth. we now introduce the symplectic category S. ιf ) if and only if [β] is integral. 5. an immersed lagrangian submanifold of Q × P is called a canonical relation from P to Q. along 0 with the section T of Homω (E.λ ⊕λ (E ⊕ E) and that MM. Q) is then deﬁned to consist of all canonical relations in Q × P .ιF under the natural isomorphism H 1 (M . From Lemma 3. E ) deﬁned by the restriction of F∗ to TZ (T ∗ M ). The symplectic dual of an object (P. R). A second lagrangian embedding zF : M → T ∗ N is deﬁned by the composition of F with the zero section s0 : M → T ∗ M . R). Observe that these deﬁnitions imply that the Liouville class λM. we can describe 76 . Given two objects (P. we deﬁne ∗ ∗ their product as the symplectic manifold (P × Q. where π1 . ω) is the object (P. π1 ω + π2 ω ).ιF = µM. 0 Example 5. we can therefore deﬁne the adjoint of a canonical relation L ⊂ Hom(P.Example 5. Q) as the element L∗ ∈ Hom(Q. Composition of morphisms is unfortunately not deﬁned for all L1 ∈ Hom(P. To see that a similar relation holds for the Maslov classes of (M.26 Any symplectomorphism F : T ∗ M → T ∗ N induces a lagrangian embedding ιF : T ∗ M → T ∗ (M × N ).
12. then the composition Hom(P. i. From these deﬁnitions we see that a canonical relation is an isomorphism if and only if it is the graph of a symplectomorphism. Q ∈ S. L2 ◦ L1 ∈ Hom(P. R) is the canonical relation which is the product of three diagonals.a suﬃcient condition for the composability of two canonical relations as follows. L2 .e.8 A canonical relation L ∈ Hom(P. Thus. the conormal bundle of S identiﬁes with a canonical relation LS ∈ Hom(T ∗N. Among the members of S. where ∆Q denotes the diagonal in Q × Q.8. not as a set. Under the Schwartz transform. In view of Example 3. and in particular. one deﬁnes an epimorphism in the symplectic category as a canonical relation L for which L ◦ L∗ = idP . there is a minimal object Z. R) → Hom(P.N : T ∗ N × T ∗ M → T ∗ (M × N ). this deﬁnition generalizes tangent lifts of diﬀeomorphisms.27. Morphisms from Z to any other object P ∈ S identify naturally with immersed lagrangian submanifolds of P . Dually. By Example 5. T ∗M ) called the cotangent lift of S. L3 . Equivalently. which enables us to identify canonical relations in Hom(T ∗ M. T ∗ N ) with immersed lagrangian submanifolds in T ∗ (M × N ). The product L2 × L1 of the canonical relations L1 and L2 is a welldeﬁned immersed lagrangian submanifold of R × Q × Q × P . Applying Theorem 5.29 A smooth relation between two manifolds M. the zerodimensional symplectic manifold consisting of a single point ∗ equipped with the null symplectic structure. but rather as the object Q × P in the symplectic category. 8 77 . Q) × Hom(Q. L is a monomorphism if L∗ ◦ L = idP . we then obtain Proposition 5. Q) of morphisms with the “elements” of Q × P for any P. Q) is said to be a monomorphism if the projection of L onto P is surjective and the projection of L onto Q is injective. N is a smooth submanifold S of the product M × N . R). 2 Associativity of compositions holds in the symplectic category in the sense that for canonical relations L1 . Note in particular Another point of view is to deﬁne Hom(P. the equation L1 ◦ (L2 ◦ L3 ) = (L1 ◦ L2 ) ◦ L3 is valid provided that both sides are deﬁned. the “elements” of P are its immersed lagrangian submanifolds. Canonical lifts of relations The full subcategory of S consisting of cotangent bundles possesses some special properties due to the Schwartz transform SM. in the usual sense. L2 × L1 ) is a reducible pair. and we will call L2 × L1 clean if (R × ∆Q × P . Q). the product R × ∆Q × P is a reducible coisotropic submanifold of R × Q × Q × P . Example 5. we may identify the set Hom(P.28 If L2 × L1 is clean. then L2 ◦ L1 is an immersed lagrangian submanifold of R × P .
that although a smooth map f : M → N does not in general give rise to a welldeﬁned transformation T ∗N → T ∗M , its graph in M × N nevertheless generates a canonical relation Lf ∈ Hom(T ∗N, T ∗M ). Example 5.30 The diagonal embedding ∆ : M → M × M induces a canonical relation L∆ ∈ Hom(T ∗ (M × M ), T ∗ M ) which in local coordinates assumes the form
∗ L∆ = {((x, α), (x, x, β, γ)) : x ∈ M and α, β, γ ∈ Tx M satisfy α = β + γ}.
In other words, L∆ is the graph of addition in the cotangent bundle. If L1 , L2 ∈ Hom(∗, T ∗ M ) and L2 × L1 is identiﬁed with an element of Hom(∗, T ∗ (M × M )) by the usual symplectomorphism T ∗ M × T ∗ M → T ∗ (M × M ), then the sum L1 + L2 ∈ Hom(∗, T ∗ M ) is deﬁned as L1 + L2 = L∆ ◦ (L2 × L1 ). Note that if L1 , L2 coincide with the images of closed 1forms ϕ1 , ϕ2 on M , then L1 + L2 equals the image of ϕ1 + ϕ2 . The dual of the isomorphism T ∗ M × T ∗ M → T ∗ (M × M ) identiﬁes L∆ with an element L∆ ∈ Hom(T ∗ M, Hom(T ∗ M, T ∗ M )). This canonical relation satisﬁes L1 +L2 = L∆ (L1 )(L2 ), and if L is the image of a closed 1form ϕ on M , then L∆ (L) = fϕ , where fϕ is the ﬁberwise translation mapping introduced in Section 3.2.
Example 5.31 (The Legendre transform) As a particular example of this situation, let V be a smooth manifold, and consider the ﬁber product TV ×V T ∗V along with its natural inclusion ι : TV ×V T ∗V → TV × T ∗V and “evaluation” function ev : TV ×V T ∗V → R given by ev((x, v), (x, p)) = p, v . If L ⊂ T ∗(TV ×V T ∗V ) is the lagrangian submanifold given by the image of the diﬀerential d(ev), then the pushforward Lleg = ι∗ L deﬁnes an isomorphism in Hom(T ∗(TM ), T ∗(T ∗M )) given in local coordinates by ((x, v), (ξ, η)) → ((x, η), (ξ, −v)). As noted in [57], this canonical relation can be viewed as a geometric representative of the Legendre transform in the following sense: If L : TM → R is a hyperregular Lagrangian function, in the sense that its ﬁberderivative deﬁnes a diﬀeomorphism TM → T ∗M , then the composition of Lleg with the image of dL equals the image of dH, where H : T ∗M → R is the classical Legendre transform of L.
78
Morphisms associated with coisotropic submanifolds If C ⊂ P is a reducible coisotropic submanifold, then the reduction relation RC ∈ Hom(P, C/C ⊥ ) is deﬁned as the composition of the quotient map C → C/C ⊥ and the inclusion C/C ⊥ → P . Somewhat more concretely, the relation RC is the subset {([x], x) : x ∈ C} of C/C ⊥ × P , where [x] is the leaf of the characteristic foliation passing through x ∈ C. ∗ Evidently RC is an epimorphism, and so RC ◦ RC = idP . On the other hand, RC is not a monomorphism unless C = P , and we deﬁne the projection relation KC ∈ Hom(P, P ) as ∗ the composition RC ◦ RC , i.e. KC = {(x, y) : x, y ∈ C, [x] = [y]}.
∗ By associativity, we have KC = KC ◦ KC , and KC = KC . Thus, KC is like an orthogonal projection operator. These relations give a simple interpretation of Theorem 5.12 in the symplectic category. If L is an immersed lagrangian submanifold of P , i.e. L ∈ Hom(Z, P ), then L is composable with both RC and KC , provided that it intersects C cleanly. In this case, we have
LC = R C ◦ L
LC = KC ◦ L.
In particular, KC ﬁxes any lagrangian submanifold of C. Example 5.32 Suppose that F is a foliation on a manifold B whose leaf space BF is smooth. In the notation of Example 5.17, we then ﬁnd that if T ∗ (B/F) is canonically identiﬁed with the reduced space E/C ⊥ , then the reduction relation RE is the Schwartz transform of the conormal bundle to the graph of the projection B → B/F.
5.3
Symplectic manifolds and mechanics
In general, an arbitrary symplectic manifold has no associated “conﬁguration space,” and therefore the classical and quantum mechanical viewpoints must be adapted to this new context based on the available structure. The classical picture The central objects in the classical picture of mechanics on an arbitrary symplectic manifold (P, ω) are the semiclassical states, represented as before by lagrangian submanifolds of P equipped with halfdensities, and the vector space of observables C ∞ (P ). With respect to pointwise multiplication, C ∞ (P ) forms a commutative associative algebra. Additionally, the symplectic form on P induces a Lie algebra structure on C ∞ (P ) given by the Poisson bracket {f, g} = Xg · f, 79
where Xg = ω −1 (dg) denotes the hamiltonian vector ﬁeld associated to g. These structures ˜ satisfy the compatibility condition {f h, g} = f {h, g} + {f, g} h, and are referred to collectively by calling C ∞ (P ) the Poisson algebra of P . The classical system evolves along the trajectories of the vector ﬁeld XH associated to the choice of a hamiltonian H : P → R. If f is any observable, then Hamilton’s equations assume the form f˙ = {H, f }. Note that in local Darboux coordinates, the Poisson bracket is given by {f, g} =
j
∂f ∂g ∂f ∂g · − · ∂qj ∂pj ∂pj ∂qj
.
Setting f = qj or f = pj in the Poisson bracket form of Hamilton’s equations above yields their familiar form, as in Section 3.3. Two functions f, g ∈ C ∞ (P ) are said to be in involution if {f, g} = 0, in which case the hamiltonian ﬂows of f and g commute. An observable in involution with the hamiltonian H is called a ﬁrst integral or constant of the motion of the system. A collection fi of functions in involution on P is said to be complete if the vanishing of {fi , g} for all i implies that g is a function of the form g(x) = h(f1 (x), · · · , fn (x)). The quantum mechanical picture Quantum mechanical observables should be the vector space A(HP ) of selfadjoint linear operators on some complex Hilbert space HP associated to P . The structure of a commutative, nonassociative algebra is deﬁned on A by Jordan multiplication: 1 A ◦ B = (AB + BA), 2 representing the quantum analog of pointwise multiplication in the Poisson algebra of P . Similarly, the dependent commutator [A, B] = i (AB − BA)
deﬁnes a Lie algebra structure on A analogous to the Poisson bracket on C ∞ (P ). Quantum mechanical states are vectors in HP . The timeevolution of the quantum system ˆ is determined by a choice of energy operator H, which acts on states via the Schr¨dinger o equation: i ˆ ˙ ψ = Hψ. A collection {Aj } of quantum observables is said to be complete if any operator B which commutes with each Aj is a multiple of the identity. This condition is equivalent to the irreducibility of {Aj }, in other words, no nontrivial subspace of HP is invariant with respect to each j. 80
· · · . ρ(fn ) form a complete commuting set. As was eventually proven by Groenwald and Van Hove (see [1] for a proof). TL◦L = TL ◦ TL ˜ ˜ ˜ for each L ∈ Hom(Q. a quantization of all classical observables in this sense does not exist in general. 81 . Early approaches to this problem were based on the principle that. we ﬁrst replace the classical observables by the groups of which they are the inﬁnitesimal generators. g}) = [ρ(f ). Based on an idea of Weyl and von Neumann. ρ({f. which should be represented by unitary operators on quantum Hilbert spaces.. The basic classical objects are then symplectomorphisms.Quantization Although neither an underlying conﬁguration manifold nor its intrinsic Hilbert space is generally available in the context of arbitrary symplectic manifolds. In these abstract terms. 2. the basic goal of quantization remains the same as in the case of cotangent bundles: starting with a symplectic manifold P . A general formulation of the quantization problem is then to deﬁne a “functor” from the symplectic category to the category of (hermitian) linear spaces.e.33 A linear map ρ : C ∞ (P ) → S(HP ) is called a quantization provided that it satisﬁes 1. our classical and quantum correspondences can be expressed as follows. · · · . R). ρ(g)] 3. but then relax the criteria by which quantum and classical objects are to correspond. Q) must then be assigned to a linear operator TL ∈ Hom(HP . regardless of how the algebra A is identiﬁed. and HP ×Q is canonically isomorphic to a (completed) tensor product HP ⊗HQ . fn in involution. HQ ) HQ ⊗ H∗ in a way which commutes P with compositions. we ﬁrst enlarge the class of classical objects to be quantized. i. For some complete set of functions f1 . the operators ρ(f1 ). ρ(1) = identity. However this is accomplished. we wish to identify a ∗algebra A of operators which give the quantum analog of the “system” at hand. To make the basic quantization problem more tractable. This means that to each symplectic manifold P we should try to assign a Hilbert space HP in such a way that HP is dual to HP . the correspondence between classical and quantum observables should be described by a linear map from the Poisson algebra C ∞ (P ) to A which satisﬁes the following criteria known as the Dirac axioms Deﬁnition 5. each canonical relation L ∈ Hom(P.
First. in addition to just a lagrangian submanifold L ⊂ P . two relevant observations are apparent from our earlier study of WKB quantization. The best we can hope for is a functorial relation. ω) Q×P Q×P point ∗ lagrangian submanifold L Quantum version hermitian vector space HP HQ ⊗HP Hom(HP . Second.g. it may require more data (such as a symbol) to determine an element of HP in a consistent way. rather than a mapping. HQ ) C element of HP symmetric operators on HP state space of observables Poisson algebra C ∞ (P ) At this stage. from the classical to the quantum category. As we have already seen. 82 .Object basic spaces Classical version symplectic manifold (P. and the quantization may be “correct” only to within a certain degree of accuracy as measured by the ﬁltration. the Hilbert space HP may carry some sort of ﬁltration (e. by powers of or by degree of smoothness). By “correctness” we mean that composition of canonical relations should correspond to composition of operators. it is too much to require that this condition be satisﬁed exactly.
Reduction of semiclassical states We will say that a reducible pair (C. Our discussion begins by deﬁning a suitable notion of composition for such states. from which we get Λ1/2 LC ⊗ Λ1/2 (L ∩ C ⊥ ) ⊗ Λ1/2 (L + C) Λ1/2 L ⊗ Λ1/2 C.6 Fourier Integral Operators For our ﬁrst examples of a quantization theory which gives a functorial relation between the classical (symplectic) category and the quantum category of hermitian vector spaces. then the exact sequence 0 → L ∩ C ⊥ → L ∩ C → LC → 0 gives rise to the isomorphism Λ1/2 LC ⊗ Λ1/2 (L ∩ C ⊥ ) Λ1/2 (L ∩ C). y) → x + y deﬁne a second exact sequence 0 → L ∩ C → L ⊕ C → L + C → 0. L) is a properly reducible pair in a symplectic manifold P . First note that if V is a symplectic vector space. s) is then regarded as the Schwartz kernel of the corresponding operator in Hom(HM . In this section. Lemma 6. −v) and (x. we deﬁned a semiclassical state in a cotangent bundle T ∗ M as a pair (L. In this context. L) in a symplectic manifold P is properly reducible if the quotient of I = L ×P C by its characteristic foliation is a smooth. we return to WKB quantization in cotangent bundles. then there exists a natural linear map Ω1/2 L ⊗ Ω1/2 C → Ω1/2 LC .1 Compositions of semiclassical states In Section 4. The linear maps v → (v. together with a lagrangian subspace L and a coisotropic subspace C. s) consisting of an immersed lagrangian submanifold L in T ∗ (M ×N ) equipped with a symbol s. Proof. 6. semiclassical states are represented by pairs (L. The WKB quantization I (L. A particular concrete case of this classicalquantum correspondence is given by the symbol calculus of Fourier integral operators.1 If (C. s) of the state (L. 83 . s) consisting of a quantizable lagrangian submanifold L ⊂ T ∗ M and a symbol s on L. we study certain natural transformations of semiclassical states. HN ).4. Hausdorﬀ manifold and the map I → LC is proper.
L) form a reducible pair. Since the quotient map I → LC is proper. there is a natural isomorphism ∗ rL ΦL. From Section 5. By the preceding computations. Hausdorﬀ manifold. If L is an immersed lagrangian submanifold of T ∗ M such that (CN . Lemma 6. p) ∈ T ∗ M : x ∈ N. the exact sequence 0 → (L + C)⊥ → V → (L + C)∗ → 0 combined with the halfdensity on V induced by the symplectic form deﬁnes a natural isomorphism Λ1/2 (L + C) Λ1/2 (L + C)⊥ .2 In the notation of the diagram above.Finally. integration over its ﬁbers is welldeﬁned and gives the desired linear map Ω1/2 L ⊗ Ω1/2 C → Ω1/2 LC . L) in a symplectic manifold P . there is a linear map Ω1/2 L ⊗ Ω1/2 C → Ω1/2 LC ⊗ Ω(FI ). ω ˜ Now consider a properly reducible pair (C.1 we recall that the integrability of F implies that CN = {(x. we arrive at Λ1/2 LC ⊗ Λ(L ∩ C ⊥ ) Λ1/2 L ⊗ Λ1/2 C. Fx ⊂ ker(p)} is a coisotropic submanifold of T ∗ M whose reduced space is the cotangent bundle T ∗ NF of the leaf space NF . then we denote by I the ﬁber product L ×T ∗ M CN of L and CN and consider the following commutative diagram L − − T ∗M −→ rL ι I −− −N → CN pC π LC − − T ∗ N −→ Our goal is describe how a symbol s on L naturally induces a symbol sC on LC . Since L ∩ C ⊥ = (L + C)⊥ . . → π ∗ ΦLC . rC 84 . 2 Let M be a smooth manifold and consider a submanifold N ⊂ M equipped with a foliation F such that the leaf space NF is a smooth.
. ). and thus. which. the pullback to I of the prequantum line bundles over T ∗ M and T ∗ N are canonically isomorphic. then their product L2 ×L1 gives a welldeﬁned immersed lagrangian submanifold of T ∗ (M × N ) via the Schwartz transform SM.16 it follows easily that the pullback to I of the Liouville forms on T ∗ M and T ∗ N coincide.σ .3 The product of semiclassical states (L1 . . . 2 ∗ A parallel section s of ΦL. T ∗ N . s2 ) in T ∗ M. is canonically isomorphic to the external tensor product ΦL2 .32. Lagrangian subbundles λ. s2 ) → s2 s∗ .λ (E). ) → (parallel sections of ΦLC . Similarly. pulls back to a parallel section of rL ΦLC . it follows easily that the phase bundle ΦL2 ×L1 . From Theorem 5. under the isomorphism of Lemma 6. the pullback of the Maslov bundle of L to I is canonically isomorphic to the bundle Mλ. L2 are immersed lagrangian submanifolds of T ∗ M. we obtain a map (parallel sections of ΦL.N : T ∗ N ×T ∗ M → T ∗ (M ×N ). Now the tangent bundle of CN induces a coisotropic subbundle C of E.22 we therefore obtain a canonical isomorphism of rL ML with π ∗ MLC . From the discussion in Appendix A L1 we also have a linear isomorphism of density bundles Λ1/2 (L2 × L1 ) → Λ1/2 L2 Λ1/2 L1 . T ∗ N is the semiclassical state (L2 × L1 . we arrive at the desired isomorphism of phase bundles. s2 s∗ ) in T ∗ (M × N ). λ of E are then induced by the immersed lagrangian submanifold L and the vertical subbundle V M of T (T ∗ M ). and one must check that the pullback of the Maslov bundle of LC to I is canonically isomorphic to ∗ MλC . From the proof of Lemma 5.λC (C/C ⊥ ). By deﬁnition. Since parallel sections of π ∗ ΦLC . By tensoring this isomorphism with the isomorphism of prequantum bundles described in the preceding paragraph. (L2 . let E be the symplectic vector bundle over I given by the pullback of T (T ∗ M ). we obtain. and thus there is a natural linear map of symbol spaces SL2 ⊗ SL1 → SL2 ×L1 which we denote by (s1 . a natural map of symbol spaces SL → SLC .2. . 1 Deﬁnition 6. for each halfdensity σ on C. Composition of semiclassical states If L1 . identiﬁes with a parallel section of π ∗ ΦLC . Φ−1. By the fundamental properties of the Schwartz transform described in Proposition 3. By tensoring with the map of density spaces given above. We will denote the image of a symbol s on L under this map by sC. identify naturally with parallel sections of ΦLC . 1 2 85 .Proof. s1 ).
2 86 .Turning to compositions. we obtain a natural linear map of symbol spaces SL2 ⊗ SL1 → SL2 ◦L1 given by the composition of the product map above and the reduction map SL2 ×L1 → SL2 ◦L1 deﬁned by the natural halfdensity on CV.4 If a semiclassical state (L1 . We will say that semiclassical states (L1 . Our goal is now to describe how semiclassical states (L.M to yield the image of L2 ◦L1 under the Schwartz transform T ∗ V ×T ∗ M → T ∗ (V ×M ).V ×SM.M induced by the symplectic forms on T ∗ V. s2 ) in T ∗ (N × V ) are composable if the conormal submanifold CV.N.N ) of Schwartz tranforms. L2 .V : T ∗ V × T ∗ M → T ∗ (M × V ) identiﬁes each canonical relation in Hom(T ∗ M. T ∗ V ) is deﬁned as the reduction of L2 × L1 by the coisotropic submanifold T ∗ V × ∆T ∗ N × T ∗ M of T ∗ V × T ∗ N × T ∗ N × T ∗ M . and the lower horizontal arrow equals the Schwartz transform SM. s2 ) in T ∗ (N × V ). s ) in T ∗ (N × V ) deﬁne a semiclassical state in T ∗ (M × V ) when L. then their composition is deﬁned as the semiclassical state (L2 ◦ L1 . Deﬁnition 6.N. m) ∈ V ×M . We denote the image of s2 s1 under this map by s2 ◦ s1 . s1 ) in T ∗ (M × N ) is composable with a semiclassical state (L2 . s1 ) in T ∗ (M × N ) and (L2 . the Schwartz transform of L2 ×L1 reduces by CV. and T ∗ M .N. L are composable as canonical relations in Hom(T ∗ M. T ∗ V ). Under the Schwartz transform. s2 ◦ s1 ) in T ∗ (M × V ).1. From Lemma 6.M of T ∗ (V × N ×N ×M ) deﬁned by V ×∆N ×M ⊂ V ×N ×N ×M and its product foliation by subsets of the form v ×∆N ×m for (v. V are smooth manifolds. s) in T ∗ (M × N ) and (L . it follows that for any properly reducible pair L1 . respectively. The left vertical arrow represents the reduction relation deﬁned by the coisotropic submanifold C = T ∗ V × ∆T ∗ N × T ∗ M . while the right vertical arrow is the reduction relation deﬁned by the image of C under the Schwartz transform.M and immersed lagrangian submanifold L2 × L1 form a properly reducible pair. T ∗ V ) with an immersed lagrangian submanifold in T ∗ (M × V ). T ∗ N ) and Hom(T ∗ N. T ∗ N . L ◦ L ∈ Hom(T ∗ M. Thus. We begin with the following commutative diagram T ∗ V × T ∗ N × T ∗ N × T ∗ M − − T ∗ (M × N × N × V ) −→ T ∗V × T ∗M −− −→ T ∗ (M × V ) where the upper horizontal arrow denotes the composition SM ×N ◦(SN.N. the submanifold T ∗ V × ∆T ∗ N × T ∗ M maps to the conormal submanifold CV. then the Schwartz transform SM. we ﬁrst note that if M.V . T ∗ V × T ∗ N × T ∗ N × T ∗ M → T ∗ (M × N × N × V ).
If h ∈ C ∞ (LF . s To make this correspondence more explicit. the composition of (LF . the phase bundle of of LF admits a canonical parallel section.6 As a special case of Example 6. C). s) in T ∗ M is transformed by F into the semiclassical state (LF ◦ L.5. (h ◦ ι) · s).4 provides that for each symbol s ∈ SL . s) ∈ Hom(T ∗ M. T ∗ V ). and so the symbol space SLF identiﬁes naturally with R+ × C ∞ (LF . we ﬁnd by a com˜ putation that the isomorphism SL → SLF ◦L determined by the symbol ˜ = s ⊗ h is given by s ˜ ∗ s ⊗ a → s ⊗ (a · ι h). ˜ ◦ s) ∈ Hom(T ∗ M. We denote the space of distributional halfdensities on M 87 . an analogous correspondence is furnished by the Schwartz kernel theorem. For such . if β is a closed 1form on M and the symplectomorphism F : T ∗ M → T ∗ M equals ﬁberwise translation by β. h) with a semiclassical state (L. then with this identiﬁcation. C). eiS/ ⊗ h) with (L. A computation then shows that the composition of a semiclassical state of the form (LF . ˜ ΦLF ◦L. such that ι∗ s → s ⊗ s−1 under the canonical isomorphism ι∗ ΦLF . 1/2 Let M be a smooth manifold and let Ω0 M be equipped with the topology of C ∞ convergence on compact sets. L.2 WKB quantization and compositions ˜ s To deﬁne the composition of semiclassical states (L. s) yields the semiclassical state (LF ◦ L. Given a parallel section s and smooth complexvalued function h on LF . ι.5 Consider a semiclassical state (LF . If L is an immersed lagrangian submanifold of T ∗ M . C). ˜ ◦ s) in T ∗ N . since it is the cotangent bundle structure of the latter space which gives meaning to “symbols” (in the sense of Chapter 4) ˜ on L ◦ L. each parallel section of the phase bundle ΦLF . Example 6. ˜) in T ∗ (M ×N ). then ∈ R+ is admissible for LF if and only if [β] is integral. A distributional halfdensity on M is then a continuous. identiﬁes with an oscillatory function of the form ceiS/ for c ∈ R and some S : M → T satisfying S ∗ dσ = β. ˜) ∈ ˜ Hom(T ∗ N. s) equals the semiclassical state (LF ◦ L. the semiclassical state (L. 6. We then note that the n natural halfdensity ωM 1/2 on LF ≈ T ∗ M enables us to identify the symbol space SLF with the product ΓLF ⊗C C ∞ (LF . where LF is the Schwartz s transform of the graph of a symplectomorphism F : T ∗ M → T ∗ N . ⊗ Φ−1 . note that if the symplectomorphism F : T ∗ M → T ∗ N is the cotangent lift of a diﬀeomorphism M → N . then for each > 0. then Deﬁnition 6. T ∗ V ) as a semiclassical state (L ◦ L. we used the s ˜ Schwartz transform to identify the immersed lagrangian submanifold L ◦ L ∈ T ∗ V × T ∗ M ∗ with an immersed lagrangian submanifold in T (M × V ). let us choose a particular lagrangian immersion ι : L → T ∗ M representing L (see the discussion in Section 4. On the quantum level. Similarly. where a is any halfdensity on L and s is the unique parallel section of ΦLF ◦L. ei(S◦πL )/ (h ◦ ι) · s).4). 1/2 Clinear functional on Ω0 M .Example 6. T ∗ N ) and (L.
Every K ∈ Ω−∞ (M ×N ) deﬁnes a linear map K : Ω0 M → 1/2 1/2 Ω−∞ N by (∗) above. N . Thus. 88 . and so we can consider K as 1/2 1/2 a continuous linear map Ω0 M → Ω0 N . integrating the product K ⊗ u over the submanifold {y} × M of N × M .by Ω−∞ M . the image of the map K will lie within the subspace 1/2 of Ω−∞ N represented by elements of Ω1/2 N in this way. In practical terms. which is continuous in the sense that K(φj ) → 0 in Ω−∞ N if φj → 0 1/2 in Ω0 M . we deﬁne dependent operators Dj = −i def 1/2 ∂ . to every such linear map. the Schwartz kernel theorem gives the identiﬁcation Ω−∞ (M × N ) ↔ Hom(HM . each w ∈ Ω1/2 N deﬁnes an element w ∈ Ω−∞ N by the equation ˜ w. HN ) diﬀerential operators With respect to linear coordinates {xj } on Rn . T ∗ N ) ↔ T ∗ (M × N ). in the same way that the Schwartz transform provides a natural correspondence Hom(T ∗ M. thereby giving a (densely deﬁned) operator HM → HN on the intrinsic Hilbert spaces of M. u ⊗ v 1/2 1/2 def 1/2 (∗) Schwartz kernel theorem . Conversely. and we equip this space with the weak∗ topology. ∂xj An diﬀerential operator of asymptotic order9 k ∈ Z is then an asymptotic series of the form ∞ P = m=0 9 Pm m+k . roughly speaking. In all of the examples we will consider. 2 Of course. there is precisely one distribution K such that (∗) is valid. the value of the halfdensity Ku at each y ∈ N can be computed in these cases by. Note that this order generally diﬀers from the order of a diﬀerential operator. A kernel K deﬁnes a linear map 1/2 1/2 K : Ω0 M → Ω−∞ N by duality via the equation K(u). v = ˜ N 1/2 v ⊗ w. v = K. a kernel is any element of Ω−∞ (M × N ). If N is another smooth 1/2 manifold.
ξ) = x − y.where each Pm is a polynomial in the operators Dj . Combined with the preceding equation. sP ◦ s) · m0 +k + O( m0 +k+1 ). ξ) deﬁnes an amplitude a = p · dx dy1/2 dξ on B. x. we obtain the following geometric version of (∗∗) above: 89 . y. we have (P e−iψ/ u)(x) = (2π )−n ei( x−y. ξ) u(y) dy dξ. Now. V. y. e−iψ/ u = I (L. where L is the projectable lagrangian submanifold of T ∗ Rn deﬁned by im(dψ). While the symbol of P depends on the choice of local coordinates. which is related to P by the asymptotic Fourier inversion formula: for any compactly supported oscillatory test function e−iψ/ u (we permit ψ = 0). its principal symbol p is a welldeﬁned function on the cotangent bundle T ∗ M . sP ).ξ −ψ)/ σP (x. we obtain (P e−iψ/ u)(x) = (2π )−n ei( x−y.e. ξ on B = Rn × Rn × (Rn )∗ . By Example 6. and s is obtained from the pullback of u to L. Using a global generating function for the conormal bundle of ∆ ⊂ M × M (see Example 4. ξ) u(y) dy dξ + O( m0 +k+1 ) where p is of course independent of y. For ﬁxed x. ξ − ψ has a nondegenerate critical point when y = x and ξ = dψ(x). that is. written as a function of the variables (x. the function (y. pV . ξ) : x. The principal symbol p of the operator P is deﬁned as the symbol of the ﬁrst nonvanishing term in its series expansion. we obtain an dependent function σP on T ∗ Rn . s).. together with V = Rn × Rn and the cartesian projection pV : B → V deﬁne a Morse family (B. ξ) m0 +k if Pm = 0 for all m < m0 and Pm0 = 0. φ) which generates the conormal bundle to the diagonal ∆ ⊂ Rn × Rn . By replacing σP by p in the formula above. s) = (L∆ ◦ L. we ﬁrst note that the phase function φ(x. we have (L. x. whose restriction to the ﬁbercritical set Σφ = {(x. y. An application of the principle of stationary phase therefore gives (P e−iψ/ u)(x) = e−iψ(x))/ u(x) · p (x.29) and arguing as above. ξ) on L∆ . 1/2 An diﬀerential operator on a manifold M is an operator P on Ω0 M which coincides in local coordinates with a series of the form P as above. composition with (L∆ . (Later we will drop this assumption to obtain a more symmetric calculus). dψ(x)) hm0 +k + O( m0 +k+1 ) (∗∗) To interpret this expression in the context of WKB quantization. ξ) = σPm0 (x. ξ) → x − y. By formally substituting ξj for Dj in each term of P . sP ) multiplies the symbol s by the values of the principal symbol p on L Σφ . sP ◦ s). known as the symbol of P . The principal symbol p .6. x. The Schwartz kernel for the operator P is given by the distribution family I (L∆ . i. ξ = 0} induces a welldeﬁned symbol sP = p (x.ξ −ψ)/ p (x. this gives (P e−iψ/ u)(x) = I (L∆ ◦ L. p (x.
A familiar illustration of these concepts is provided by the WKB approximation. then CP = p−1 (0) is a coisotropic submanifold of T ∗ M . or. 90 . the reduced manifold of CP . the vanishing of the principal symbol p on L implies that P (I (L. more properly. For E > 0. i. the timeindependent Schr¨dinger equation is then o P ψ = 0. In this sense. 2m The characteristic variety of p is simply the level set H −1 (E) of the classical hamiltonian of the system. The zero set of the principal symbol p is called the characteristic variety of the operator P . this correspondence is only asymptotic. then: P (I (L. where sP is the symbol on L∆ induced by the principal symbol p of P . projectable semiclassical state in T ∗ M and P is an diﬀerential operator of order k on M . This remark suggests the quantum analog of certain coisotropic submanifolds of T ∗ M . s)) = O( m0 +k+1 ). Roughly speaking.. s)) = I (L∆ ◦ L.e.Theorem 6. and as in previous sections we see that ﬁrstorder approximate solutions to the timeindependent Schr¨dinger equation arise from semiclassical states represented by o quantizable lagrangian submanifolds in CP . CP . and semiclassical states contained in CP represent solutions of the asymptotic diﬀerential equation P u = 0. corresponds to the kernel of P in HM . As usual. s) is a ﬁrstorder approximate solution to the equation P u = 0. sP ◦ s) + O( m0 +k+1 ). As a particular case of Theorem 6.7 If (L. this theorem asserts that polynomial functions on the identity relation L∆ quantize as the Schwartz kernel of diﬀerential operators on M . θ) = − + (V (x) − E). and their actions on a given function coincide only up to terms of higher order in . If 0 is a regular value of p .8 Recall that the Schr¨dinger operator associated to a given potential V on a o riemannian manifold M is given by ˆ H=− 2 2m ∆ + mV . Example 6. many diﬀerential operators share the same principal symbol. ˆ where P = H − E is the zerothorder asymptotic diﬀerential operator on M with principal symbol θ2 p (x.7. and the projection relation KCP quantizes as the orthogonal projection onto this subspace. s) is an exact. that I (L.
7 (see for example [51]). θ) . 43. cθ) = cµ−j aj (x. an pseudodiﬀerential operator of order µ is given by (Au)(x) = (2π )n ei x−y. In this case. Let M be a smooth manifold with a smooth submanifold N . integration over the phase variables θ was welldeﬁned due to the fact that the symbol of a diﬀerential operator has a polynomial growth rate with respect to these variables. As before.θ / a (x. ξ) → x − y.ξ)/ a(x. the theory of Fourier integral operators provides a means for quantizing halfdensities on more general lagrangian submanifolds L of T ∗ M by replacing the function (x. a detailed description of this theory can be found in [21. ξ) u(y) dξ dy. As constructed in Example 4.. 56]. 31. For diﬀerential operators. the invariance of pseudodiﬀerential operators under coordinate changes enables one to extend this theory to any smooth manifold M . θ) for c > 0. y. i. aj (x. y. the class of quantizable halfdensities (and canonical relations) is constrained by the necessary conditions for this integral to converge. and there is a corresponding version of Theorem 6.θ / a(x. Perhaps the simplest generalization of the picture of (pseudo)diﬀerential operators given above is provided by quantizing semiclassical states whose underlying lagrangian submanifolds are conormal bundles. the conormal bundle LN ⊂ T ∗ N is generated by a single 91 . we will only be concerned with a few specialized cases. ξ in the deﬁnition of pseudodiﬀerential operators by a phase function which generates L: (Au)(x) = (2π )n eiφ(x. As in the special case of diﬀerential operators. Fourier integral operators In its simplest form. ξ) u(y) dξ dy. θ) ∼ aj (x. the principal symbol of a pseudodiﬀerential operator is a welldeﬁned function on T ∗ M .29. 28.y. y. of the form µ+j where the symbol a(x. θ) u(y) dθ dy.e.The diﬃculty of quantizing more general symbols on the identity relation L∆ lies in the convergence of the integral (P u)(x) = (2π )n ei x−y. Weakening this condition while still guaranteeing that the integral converges leads to the deﬁnition of pseudodiﬀerential operators. In this section. θ) is an asymptotic series in a (x. Each coeﬃcient aj is a smooth function on Rn × Rn \ {0} and is positively homogeneous of degree µ − j. In Rn .
pV . they satisfy the composition law ˜ s ˜ I (L. s) represent Schwartz 1/2 1/2 kernels for continuous linear operators Ω0 X → Ω∞ Y . and we can proceed to deﬁne I (L. Under certain additional restrictions on N which are always fulﬁlled. o 92 . viewed as a smooth submanifold of X × Y . ˜ ◦ s). s) as before by requiring that s be homogeneous. then the procedure described above can be applied to the graph Γf of f . the distributions I (L. V. an amplitude a on B having an asymptotic expansion in terms which are positively homogeneous with respect to the natural R+ action on the ﬁbers of pV : B → V gives rise to a welldeﬁned distributional halfdensity family I (L. As in the case of (pseudo)diﬀerential operators. s) = I (L ◦ L. For instance. When M = X × Y is a product manifold. ˜) ◦ I (L. the more interesting Fourier integral operators from Ω1/2 X to Ω1/2 Y come from quantizing canonical relations from T ∗ X to T ∗ Y which do not arise from diﬀeomorphisms from X to Y . when N is the graph of a diﬀeomorphism 1/2 1/2 1/2 X → Y . quantizing the hamiltonian ﬂow {ϕt } of a hamiltonian ˆ H on T ∗ X gives the solution operators exp(−itH/ ) of the Schr¨dinger equation. Of course.9 If X. Moreover. for example. Y are smooth manifolds and f : X → Y is a smooth diﬀeomorphism. At the same time. f gives rise to a symplectomorphism of cotangent bundles: (T ∗ f )−1 : T ∗ X → T ∗ Y. The family I (Lf . positively homogeneous symbols on LN induce positively homogeneous amplitudes on B of the same order. s Example 6. φ) with the properties that V is a tubular neighborhood of N in M and B is a vector bundle over V with ﬁber dimension equal to the codimension of N in M . It is easy to see that the ﬁbercritical set Σφ is invariant under the R+ action on B.Morse family (B. s) of distributions on X × Y deﬁned above corresponds via the Schwartz kernel theorem to a family of continuous linear maps 1/2 1/2 Ω0 X → Ω−∞ Y A diﬀeomorphism f : X → Y induces a unitary operator on intrinsic Hilbert spaces given by pullback: (f ∗ )−1 : HX → HY . Consequently. s) on M . and that the identiﬁcation LN Σφ deﬁned by λφ is equivariant with respect to the natural R+ action on LN . these operators map Ω0 X to Ω0 Y and extend continuously to Ω−∞ X.
Speciﬁcally. When C is reducible.2). we then have ωC = [a] ∂D ˜ f f ˜ f ∗ αM ∈ Z by the assumption that the Liouville class of I is integral. T ∗ M ). any class [a] ∈ H2 (C/C ⊥ . By the homotopy lifting property. in the sense that semiclassical states contained in C quantize to ﬁrstorder approximate solutions of the equation P = 0. Each leaf of the characteristic foliation of CE is a circle S which projects diﬀeomorphically to a great circle in S n . If γ parametrizes a such a geodesic. ∂D) → (C/C ⊥ . let us consider what conditions the reduced manifold C/C ⊥ must satisfy in order that quantizations of the reduction and projection relations be welldeﬁned for arbitrary quantizable semiclassical states. Before turning to a systematic means for deﬁning HC . Applying Stokes’ theorem. then a quantum Hilbert space HC somehow associated to the reduced manifold C/C ⊥ should map isometrically onto the kernel of P via an appropriate ∗ quantization of the adjoint reduction relation RC ∈ Hom(C/C ⊥ .1 From Example 5. I). A simple argument then shows that KC preserves the class of prequantizable lagrangian submanifolds provided that the Liouville class of each C ⊥ leaf is integral.1 Geometric Quantization Prequantization In the preceding chapter. S Thus CE is prequantizable if and only if E = (n )2 /2 (compare Example 4. ∂D) → (C. we observed that the characteristic variety C = CP of a diﬀerential operator P on a riemannian manifold M represents the classical analog of the kernel of P in HM . then its lift to a parametrization of S satisﬁes γ = (2E)−1/2 Xkn . the lagrangian submanifolds of M contained in C correspond to lagrangian submanifolds of the reduced manifold C/C ⊥ . Since ˙ αM (Xkn ) = 2E. To interpret this condition in terms of C/C ⊥ . we will ignore the Maslov correction and assume that C/C ⊥ is simplyconnected. This suggests that if C is reducible. the reduced manifold C/C ⊥ is said to be prequantizable.7 7.13 we recall that the standard metric on the unit nsphere S n induces a kinetic energy function kn whose constant energy surfaces CE are reducible coisotropic submanifolds of T ∗ S n for E > 0. we conclude that KC preserves prequantizable lagrangian submanifolds provided that the reduced symplectic form ωC is itself integral. Z) is represented by a continuous map (D. ﬁrst note that if C/C ⊥ is simplyconnected. For the time being. the Liouville class of S is determined by the number αM = 2π · (2E)1/2 . Example 7. f lifts to a continuous map (D. 93 . In this case. Thus. [I]) for a ﬁxed leaf I of C ⊥ . we ask what assumptions on C guarantee that the classical projection operation KC preserves the class of quantizable lagrangian submanifolds in T ∗ M .
if λI is integral. complexvalued functions on the cotangent bundle P = T ∗ M itself. there exists a parallel section of QM over I. and we arrive at nothing new. One way of doing this would be to impose the condition that each ρ(f )j and ρ(f )k coincide as operators on the function space C ∞ (Uj ∩ Uk ). and we have ρ(f ) = −i 94 Xf + mf . A true generalization of the Segal construction due to Kostant and Souriau is achieved by ﬁrst reinterpreting ρ(f ) as an operator on sections of a line bundle over P = T ∗ M . we can then associate to a function f ∈ C ∞ (P ) the operator ρ(f )j = −i Xf + mLj (f ) . the idea is the following: Although the symplectic form of an arbitrary symplectic manifold (P. Koopman. A linear mapping ρ : C ∞ (P ) → S(HP ) satisfying the ﬁrst two Dirac axioms will be called a prequantization of the classical system represented by P . the modZ reduction of λI represents the holonomy of QM I . with respect to the innerproduct f. . where as usual mL(f ) denotes multiplication by the lagrangian L(f ) = f − αM (Xf ). we hope to piece these local operators together. More precisely. The connection on Q induced by the connection on QM has curvature equal to the reduced symplectic form ωC . we can choose a covering of P by open sets Uj on which the restriction of the symplectic form satisﬁes ω = −dαj for appropriately chosen 1forms αj on Uj . If C/C ⊥ is prequantizable. on C ∞ (Uj ). In this case. The Segal prequantization is an important ﬁrst step towards attempts at (pre)quantizing more general symplectic manifolds.2. let E be the complex line bundle over P associated to the trivial principal T bundle Q = P × T via the representation x → e−ix/ of T in U (1). veriﬁcation of the second is also straightforward and will be carried out in somewhat more generality below. the bundle Q can be constructed explicitly from the prequantum T bundle QM over T ∗ M by noting that for any leaf I of C ⊥ . g = P ∞ n f g ωM . Clearly the map ρ is linear and satisﬁes the ﬁrst Dirac axiom. The space of sections of E identiﬁes canonically with C ∞ (P ) by means of the constant section s = 1. Roughly speaking. In order to associate a “global” operator to f . parallel sections over the leaves of C ⊥ deﬁne a foliation Q of QM L whose leaf space is a principal T bundle Q over C/C ⊥ . This essentially requires that the 1forms αj agree on overlaps. The basic example of prequantization is that of cotangent bundles due to Segal [52]. the prequantum Hilbert space is taken to be the completion of the space of smooth. In direct analogy with the Segal prequantization. this condition is equivalent to the existence of a principal T bundle Q over C/C ⊥ .By Theorem D. and Van Hove. ω) is not exact. In fact. The mapping C (P ) → S(HP ) is then given explicitly by the formula ρ(f ) = −i Xf + mL(f ) .
To a function f ∈ C ∞ (P ). and consequently. where X f denotes the horizontal lift of the hamiltonian vector ﬁeld of f . Conversely. While a direct proof of this fact follows the outline of the preceding paragraph. this is an important ﬁrst step in our general quantization program. ξ is the horizontal lift of Xg . Returning to the general case. then we can decompose ξ into its horizontal and vertical parts: ξ = ξ − gX for some realvalued function g on Q satisfying dg = ξ dϕ. Automorphisms of (Q. For the remainder of this section. and so ξ = ξg . ξg ] = [Xf . The prequantum Hilbert space in this case will be the completion of the vector space of smooth sections of a hermitian line bundle associated to Q. ϕ) Let P be a prequantizable symplectic manifold with prequantum T bundle Q and connection ϕ. we will study prequantizable manifolds in somewhat more detail below. [ξ. Deﬁnition 7. From the deﬁnition of X it follows that X · g = 0 and [ξ.where denotes the connection on E induced by the connection 1form ϕ = −αM +dσ on Q. Moreover. according to the discussion in Appendix C.g} . g}X = ξ{f. Although several more modiﬁcations of this choice must be made in order to arrive at a reasonable substitute for the intrinsic Hilbert space of the base of a cotangent bundle.2 A prequantization of a symplectic manifold (P. we associate an operator on C ∞ (Q): ξf = X f − f X. and X is the fundamental vector ﬁeld on Q deﬁned by the equations X ϕ=1 X dϕ = 0. X] = 0. The upshot of the KostantSouriau construction is that prequantizable symplectic manifolds have prequantizable Poisson algebras. we will focus on geometric properties of prequantum circle bundles and prove that their existence coincides with the prequantizability of C ∞ (P ). Thus. (k) A direct computation shows that the connection form ϕ is invariant under the ﬂow of ξf . The curvature of such a bundle necessarily coincides with the symplectic form on P . 95 . Xg )X − 2{f. Xg ] + ω(Xf . X] = 0. this condition can be satisﬁed if and only if ω is integral. the requirement that the curvature of ϕ equal the symplectic form ω implies [ξf . ω) is a principal T bundle Q over P equipped with a connection 1form ϕ having curvature ω. if Lξ ϕ = 0 for some vector ﬁeld ξ on Q. we ﬁnd that the operators ρ(f )j enjoy a similar interpretation provided that −αj + dσ deﬁnes a local representative of a connection 1form on a (possibly nontrivial) principal T bundle Q over P .
ϕ) → Aut(P. Let (Q. from the fact that π ∗ ω = dϕ it follows furthermore that f ∗ ω = ω. if P (and hence Q) is connected. ω). ϕ) in Aut(P. from the exact sequence above. and the image of χ(Q. By the deﬁnition of X it follows that every F ∈ Aut(Q. ∂qi ∂ ∂qi ∂ − qi X ∂pi 96 ξpi = . A basis for this space is given by the vector ﬁelds Xqi = − which assume the form ξqi = − ∂ ∂pi Xpi = ∂ . this is just the circle T and we have the exact sequence 0 → T → Aut(Q. If we equip the space C ∞ (Q) of complexvalued functions on Q with the innerproduct u. Clearly the correspondence F → UF deﬁnes a unitary representation of Aut(Q. ϕ) preserves X and is therefore T equivariant. R) is assigned the trivial bracket. where H 1 (P . ω) denote those groups of diﬀeomorphisms which preserve ϕ. and therefore deﬁnes a unitary operator UF on C ∞ (Q) by composition: UF (u) = u ◦ F. ϕ) be a prequantization of (P. this means that F is the lift of a diﬀeomorphism f of P . then each F ∈ Aut(Q. ϕ) of ϕpreserving vector ﬁelds on Q with the standard Lie bracket. and let Aut(Q. ϕ) → Aut(P. ω) consists precisely of the hamiltonian vector ﬁelds on P .3 Translations of R2n are generated by the hamiltonian vector ﬁelds associated to linear functionals on R2n . The association F → f deﬁnes a group homomorphism Aut(Q. This sequence can be integrated to give an exact sequence of automorphism groups as follows. We interpret this observation to mean that an automorphism of Q is determined “up to phase” by an automorphism of P . ϕ) → χ(P. This implies that the kernel is isomorphic to H 0 (P. Aut(Q. v = Q u v µ. ω respectively. Example 7. ω). ϕ) on L2 (Q). This produces the exact sequence of Lie algebras 0 → R → χ(Q. f ∈ Aut(P. ϕ) preserves µ. where µ denotes the volume form ϕ ∧ (dϕ)n on Q. In particular. ω) → H 1 (P . R) → 0. To determine its kernel. i. we therefore obtain a projective unitary representation of the image of Aut(Q. ϕ) is a central extension of Aut(P. ω) by T . that is. ω). T ). ω). ϕ) in χ(P.e. ω). ϕ). we simply note that the identity map on P is covered by precisely those automorphisms of Q given by the action of elements of T on its connected components.The association f → ξf therefore deﬁnes a Lie algebra isomorphism between the Poisson algebra C ∞ (P ) and the space χ(Q. Aut(P.
To verify that ρk (f ) is selfadjoint. In explicit terms. k Evidently the map ρk satisﬁes the ﬁrst Dirac axiom. σ) · (Q . Smooth sections of Ek identify with functions on Q satisfying the equivariance condition f (p · a) = e−ika/ f (p) for a ∈ T . covariant diﬀerentiation by a vector ﬁeld η on P is given simply by the Lie derivative with respect to the horizontal lift η of η to Q. w)). σ + σ + j Pj · Qj ). k Since [ξf . P. To each f ∈ C ∞ (P ) and integer k. we assign an operator on C ∞ (Q) by ξf = − (k) (k) i ξf . ρk (g)] . P + P . moreover ρk ({f. and so the vector ﬁelds ξqi .when lifted to Q = R2n × T via the Segal prescription ξf = X f − L(f )X. P + P . ξpj ] = ξ{qi . we ﬁnd that hn corresponds to a subgroup Hn ⊂ Aut(Q. By exponentiating. b)] = (0. For this purpose. Under this correspondence. ω(v. ϕ) isomorphic to R2n × R with bracket given by [(v. ξpi generate a Lie subalgebra hn ⊂ χ(Q. Hn is diﬀeomorphic to R2n × T . The group Hn is known as the Heisenberg group of R2n with its usual symplectic structure.pj } = δij X. a). the operator ξf restricts to an operator on each eigenspace Ek of X having the form i ρk (f ) = − X f + mf . is suﬃces to prove that ρk (f ) acts as a symmetric operator on the real subspace of Ek . P . g}) = k [ρk (f ). Our earlier results show that [ξqi . where again L(f ) = f − αM (Xf ). σ ) = (Q + Q . the space of sections of Ek is isomorphic to the −ik/ eigenspace Ek of the fundamental vector ﬁeld X. KostantSouriau prequantization To prequantize the Poisson algebra C ∞ (P ). (w. we note that if the hamiltonian vector ﬁeld of 97 . σ ) = (Q + Q . with group multiplication given by (Q. ϕ) which comprises a central extension of the translation group: 0 → T → Hn → R2n → 0. X] = 0. in other words. we ﬁrst recall that complex line bundles Ek associated to Q arise via representations of T in U (1) of the form x → eikx/ .
the operator corresponding to q should act by multiplication alone. ξf · v for realvalued functions u. According to our earliest concepts of quantization (see the Introduction). equipped with a hermitian metric .f is integrable (for example. For each f ∈ C (P ). Combined with the deﬁnition of ρk . from the general remarks above. For an interpretation of this argument in terms of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. it follows that ρ−1 deﬁnes a prequantization of the Poisson algebra C ∞ (P ).2 Polarizations and the metaplectic correction The KostantSouriau prequantization of symplectic manifolds fails to satisfy the third Dirac axiom and is therefore not a quantization. whereas the space of sections of E has the “size” of the space of functions on P . In other 98 . see [53]. however. Since the Liouville form αM vanishes π on each ﬁber of the projection T ∗ M → M . we can interpret C ∞ (M ) as the space of sections of the prequantum line bundle E over T ∗ M which are parallel along each ﬁber of π. wave functions depend on only half of the phase space variables. In fact. Indeed. compatible with its induced connection. if f is compactly supported). v = u. this diﬃculty is overcome: on ∞ Cq (R2 ). whereas q involves the spurious ∂/∂p term. the appropriate quantum state space asso1/2 ciated with a classical conﬁguration space M is (the L2 completion of) Ω0 M . then the fact that ξf preserves ϕ implies that ξf · u. ρ(q) = mq ρ(p) = −i ∂q This association agrees with our earlier heuristic quantization of the classical position and momentum observables and suggests in general that the space of sections of a prequantum line bundle E is too “large” for the third Dirac axiom to be satisﬁed. conjugatesymmetry of the innerproduct implies that ρk (f ) · u. and let HP denote the L2 completion of the space of compactly supported sections of E with respect to the innerproduct s1 . s2 ω n . v = − u. v on Q. 7. From the standpoint of WKB quantization. the operator ρ−1 (f ) extends to an essentially selfadjoint operator on HP . We now deﬁne the prequantum line bundle associated to Q as E = E−1 . ρk (f ) · v . the position and momentum operators ρ(q) = −i ∂ + mq ∂p ρ(p) = −i ∂ ∂q on T ∗ R both commute with ∂/∂p and therefore do not form a complete set. which we temporarily identify with C ∞ (M ) using a metric on M . If we restrict ˆ ∞ to the pindependent subspace Cq (R2 ) C ∞ (R). in quantum mechanics. ∂ . s2 = P ∞ s1 .
That is. ω) is an involutive lagrangian subbundle F of TC P .words.q / f dp. we consider covariant derivatives of the form ∂ ∂q = ∂ ∂ −p ∂q ∂σ . TC P denotes the complexiﬁcation of the tangent bundle of P .5 The most basic examples of real polarizations are given by either the planes q=constant or p=constant in R2n . and so the ppolarization appears to be better adapted to this case. Deﬁnition 7. in the sense that f= Rn f (q) δ(q) dq = (2π )−n/2 Rn ˆ eiπ p. Note that the Fp representation of the freeparticle H(q. p) = v(p)eiπ p. Integrability of F means that locally on P there exist complexvalued functions whose hamiltonian vector ﬁelds (with respect to ωC ) span F.q / . we have X s = 0. the polarization F satisﬁes F = F.4 A polarization of a symplectic manifold (P. Example 7. meaning that Fp is a totally real subspace of TC. In general. any polarization F of a symplectic manifold P which satisﬁes F = F is the complexiﬁcation of an integrable lagrangian subbundle of T P and is called a real polarization of P . equipped with the complexvalued symplectic form ωC given by the complexlinear extension of ω to TC P . Real polarizations The standard polarization of a classical phase space T ∗ M is given by the complexiﬁcation F = V M ⊕ iV M of the vertical subbundle of T (T ∗ M ). 99 . and so the space of Fq parallel sections of the prequantum line bundle E identiﬁes with the space of smooth functions on qspace. In this case. p) = p2 /2 is ρ(H) = mp2 /2 .· / bases of L2 (Rn ) respectively. A Fp parallel section ψ of E must therefore satisfy ∂ψ − 2πipψ ∂q and is therefore of the form ψ(q. for each complex vector ﬁeld X on P lying in F. Covariant diﬀerentiation along vector ﬁelds X tangent to the q=constant polarization Fq is given by the ordinary Lie derivative with respect to X.p (T ∗ M ) for each p ∈ T ∗ M . The quantum state space associated to P is then given by the space of sections s of a prequantum line bundle E over P which are covariantly constant along F. the correct adjustment to the size of the prequantum Hilbert space is determined by the (canonical) foliation of T ∗ M by lagrangian submanifolds. Here. These correspond to the δq and eiπ p. This adjustment is generalized in the framework of geometric quantization by the introduction of the following concept. For the p=constant polarization Fp .
A function H : P → R constant on the leaves of F induces a function HF on PF satisfying dH = p∗ dHF .9 Following [28]. Corollary 7. there exist fi ∈ F(P ). In this case. the map ω : T P → T ∗ P sends F to ˜ ⊥ F as well. An aﬃne structure on a manifold M is a curvature. By modifying the normal form results of Chapter 4. we have Corollary 7.29). the quotient map p : P → PF satisﬁes F = ker p∗ .6 Every real polarization is locally isomorphic to the q=constant polarization on R2n .7 For each p ∈ P .A real polarization F of a symplectic 2nmanifold P deﬁnes a subspace F(P ) ⊂ C ∞ (P ) of functions constant along the leaves of F. g} = 0 for any f. those functions whose hamiltonian vector ﬁelds have ﬂows which leave the polarization invariant (not necessarily leaf by leaf) are those which are “aﬃne” along the leaves. such that the hamiltonian vector ﬁelds Xi span F in a neighborhood of p. it follows that a section s of F over a leaf L is parallel with respect to ∗ the connection described above if and only if (˜ ◦ s) deﬁnes a ﬁxed element of T{L} PF . we may use parallel sections of E over the leaves of F to construct a foliation of the total space of E. g ∈ F(P ).8 Each leaf of any real polarization carries a natural aﬃne structure. From this remark. Since any f ∈ F(P ) has the property that its hamiltonian vector ﬁeld Xf lies completely within the polarization F. Thus {f. ω Similarly. · · · . Since any polarizationpreserving symplectic transformation of T ∗ Rn R2n is aﬃne on ﬁbers (see Theorem 3. this implies that ρ−1 (f ) = mf . i = 1. and so p∗ T ∗ PF identiﬁes with the normal bundle F ⊥ ⊂ T ∗ P . i. By pulling back the position functions qi to P . if E is a prequantum line bundle over P . n. the multiplication operator on HF . we call a polarization F on P ﬁbrating if each leaf of F is simplyconnected and the leaf space PF = P/F is a smooth manifold. The main remark we wish to make for the moment is that our earlier prequantization ρ−1 of C ∞ (P ) now represents the subalgebra F(P ) ⊂ C ∞ (P ) as multiplication operators on HF . one can furthermore prove Theorem 7.and torsionfree connection on T M ..e. Example 7. the hamiltonian vector ﬁeld of any member of F(P ) is contained in F. By the deﬁnition of ρ−1 . The quotient of E by this 100 . Since F is a lagrangian distribution. More generally. it follows that Xf s = 0 for all s ∈ HF . we have the following result. F(P ) is an abelian Poisson subalgebra of C ∞ (P ). According to the HamiltonJacobi theorem. thus deﬁning a natural identiﬁcation F p ∗ T ∗ PF .
and the natural projection PD → PE is a submersion. i. given a closed 2form η on M . F = {(v.e. A check of deﬁnitions shows that the standard and twisted symplectic structures on T ∗ M are equivalent precisely when their diﬀerence is the pullback of an exact form on M . For a discussion of quantization in this general setting. From the deﬁnition of F. ωM + π ∗ η) is prequantizable if and only if the cohomology class of η in H 2 (M . an application of Corollary 7. Although their dimensions vary in general from point to point. we refer to [53]. More precisely.e. and geometric quana tization attempts to construct a quantum state space for P from sections of an appropriate line bundle over P which are parallel along D and holomorphic along the ﬁbers of π. is complete. D and E are pointwise ωorthogonal. the symplectic manifold (T ∗ M. The basic geometry of this situation remains the same if the symplectic structure on T ∗ M is perturbed by a form on M . This general type of symplectic manifold is known as a twisted cotangent bundle. i. the distribution D is involutive. each ﬁber of π carries a K¨hler structure. Complex polarizations Associated to any polarization F are the distributions DC = F ∩ F EC = F + F which arise as the complexiﬁcations of distributions D. In this case. ω). Since π ∗ η vanishes on the ﬁbers of the projection. Moreover. E in T P . the leaf spaces PD and PE are smooth manifolds.. then (P.8 proves that if each leaf of a ﬁbrating polarization F on a symplectic manifold (P. we can “twist” the standard symplectic structure on T ∗ M as follows: ω = ωM + π ∗ η. A polarization satisfying F ∩ F = {0} is called totally complex and identiﬁes with the graph of a complex structure J on P . ω) is symplectomorphic to a twisted symplectic structure on T ∗ PF . iJv) : v ∈ T P } 101 π . ⊥ Dx = Ex for all x ∈ P . The polarization F is called strongly admissible provided that E is involutive. R) is integral. ω is a symplectic form on T ∗ M and ker π∗ is again a polarization. Finally. The simplest example of a ﬁbrating polarization is given by the vertical polarization FM of a cotangent bundle T ∗ M .foliation deﬁnes a hermitian line bundle EF over the leaf space PF whose sections identify with Fparallel sections of E.
under the identiﬁcation TC P T P ⊕ iT P . We emphasize that J is a genuine complex structure on P due to the integrability condition on the polarization F. Moreover, J is compatible in the usual sense with the symplectic form ω on P , so the hermitian metric , = gJ + iω is a K¨hler structure on P . In this section, we will only cite two examples a involving totally complex F, in which case PD = P is K¨hler, and PE = {pt}. a Example 7.10 Consider the complex plane C with its usual complex and symplectic structures. With respect to Darboux coordinates (q, p), the CauchyRiemann operator is deﬁned as ∂ 1 ∂ ∂ = +i . ∂z 2 ∂q ∂p A function f : C → C is holomorphic if ∂f /∂z = 0. If we identify sections of the (trivial) prequantum line bundle E with smooth, complexvalued functions on C, then Fparallel sections correspond to those functions annihilated by the covariant derivative ∂ + mz . ∂ = 2 ∂z ∂z To determine the general form of these sections, we note that ∂ ψ = 0 if and only if for ∂z some branch of the logarithm, z ∂ log ψ = − , ∂z 2 or zz log ψ = − + h 2 for some holomorphic function h. Hence ψ(z) = ϕe−z
2 /2
with ϕ holomorphic is the general form for Fparallel sections of E. The space HC thus identiﬁes with the space of holomorphic ϕ : C → C satisfying ϕ =
C
ϕ(z)2 e−z dz < ∞,
2
or, in other words, the space of holomorphic functions which are squareintegrable with 2 respect to the measure e−z dz, known as the Fock or BargmanSegal space. For a function to be quantizable in this picture, its hamiltonian ﬂow must preserve both the metric and symplectic structure of C and therefore consist solely of euclidean motions. Among such functions are the usual position and momentum observables, as well as the harmonic oscillator.
Example 7.11 If (P, ω) is any prequantizable symplectic manifold with a totally complex polarization F, then the prequantum line bundle E associated to ω can be given the structure of a holomorphic line bundle by taking the (0, 1) component of the connection on E with 102
respect to the complex structure J arising from F. The space HF of Fparallel sections of E then equals the space of holomorphic sections of E and is therefore completely determined by the complex geometry of P . Using some machinery from algebraic geometry (see [15]), it can be shown that for compact P , the space HP is ﬁnitedimensional and that its dimension is given asymptotically by the symplectic volume of P . More precisely, we note that for k ∈ Z+ , the line bundle E ⊗k deﬁnes a holomorphic prequantum line bundle associated with (P, kω). For suﬃciently large k, the dimension of the quantum state space HPk of holomorphic sections of E ⊗k is given by the HirzebruchRiemannRoch formula: dim HPk =
P
ekω T d(P ),
where T d denotes the Todd polynomial in the total Chern class of P . The ﬁrst conclusion to be drawn from this fact is that for k large, dim HPk is a symplectic invariant of P independent of its complex structure. Roughly speaking, k plays the role of −1 , and so “large k” means that we are approaching the classical limit. A second point to note is that dim HPk is a polynomial in k (or −1 ) whose leadingorder term is (kω)n = k n vol P. n!
P
Consequently the number of quantum states is determined asymptotically by the volume of P.
Metalinear structures and halfforms For the remainder of this chapter, we will focus on the quantization of symplectic manifolds P equipped with a prequantum line bundle E and a “suﬃciently nice” real polarization F. Although the space HF of Fparallel sections of E appears to have the right “size” in the simplest examples, there are still several problems to be resolved before we have a suitable quantum state space. The ﬁrst arises as soon as we attempt to deﬁne a preHilbert space structure on HF . On P , the square of an Fparallel section s is constant along the leaves of F, and thus the integral s
2
=
P
s, s ω n
diverges in general. On the other hand, there is no canonical measure on the leaf space PF with which to integrate the induced function s, s . Regardless of how this ﬁrst diﬃculty is resolved, we will again try to quantize the Poisson algebra C ∞ (P ) by representing elements of Aut(P, ω) as (projective) unitary operators on HF . The most obvious quantization of a symplectomorphism f : P → P (or more general canonical relation), however, is an operator from HF to Hf (F ) . If f does not preserve the polarization F, then these spaces are distinct. Thus, we will need some means for canonically identifying the quantum state spaces HF associated to diﬀerent polarizations of P . 103
Finally, the polarization F may have multiplyconnected leaves, over most of which the prequantum line bundle may admit only the trivial parallel section. A preliminary solution to this problem is to admit “distributional” states, such as are given by Fparallel sections of E whose restrictions to each leaf are smooth. Leaves on which E has trivial holonomy are then said to comprise the BohrSommerfeld subvariety of the pair (P, F). ˙ Example 7.12 Consider the punctured phase plane R2 = R2 \ {0} polarized by level sets of the harmonic oscillator H(q, p) = (q 2 + p2 )/2. The holonomy of the usual prequantum line bundle on the level set H −1 (E) is given by the modZ reduction of the area it encloses; thus the BohrSommerfeld variety consists of those circles of energy E = n . As in the case of WKB prequantization, these energy levels do not correspond to actual physical measurements, and so we will again need to incorporate a sort of Maslov correction.
The solution to manhy of these diﬃculties relies on the use of a metaplectic structure on P , a concept which we now introduce. Let P be a principal G bundle over a manifold M . A meta Gbundle associated to P and a central extension ˜ ρ 1→K→G→G→1 ˜ ˜ ˜ of G is a principal G bundle P over M together with a map Φ : P → P satisfying the equivariance condition Φ(p · a) = Φ(p) · ρ(a) ˜ ˜ ˜ for all a ∈ G. Two meta Gbundles (P1 , Φ1 ), (P2 , Φ2 ) over P are considered equivalent if ˜ ˜ ˜ there exists a Gequivariant diﬀeomorphism ψ : P1 → P2 such that Φ1 = Φ2 ◦ ψ. Example 7.13 A riemannian structure together with an orientation of an nmanifold M deﬁnes a bundle of oriented orthonormal frames in T M , i.e. an SO(n)structure on M . A spin structure on M is then a meta SO(n)bundle corresponding to the extension 1 → K → Spin(n) → SO(n) → 1 given by the double cover Spin(n) of SO(n). An orientable manifold admits a spin structure if and only if its second StiefelWhitney class vanishes.
Example 7.14 Since π1 (Sp(n)) Z, there exists a unique connected doublecovering group of Sp(n), known as the metaplectic group M p(n). A symplectic 2nplane bundle F admits a reduction of its structure group from GL(2n) to Sp(n); a metaplectic structure on F then corresponds to a lifting of the symplectic frame bundle to a principal M p(n) bundle. In general, a symplectic vector bundle admits a metaplectic structure if and only if its second StiefelWhitney class vanishes. A symplectic manifold P whose tangent bundle is equipped with a metaplectic structure is called a metaplectic manifold. If the StiefelWhitney class w2 (P ) is zero, metaplectic 104
1) is called the metalinear group M L(n). its structure group can be reduced to GL+ (n).15 Lying within the metaplectic group is a doublecover M l(n) of the subgroup Gl(n) preserving the usual lagrangian splitting of R2n . Example 7. To see this explicitly in a special case. the ˙ punctured plane R2 admits only trivial Sp(1) and M p(1) principal bundles. On the other hand. which can be interpreted as the identity component of M L(n) in order to give a metalinear structure on E. More generally. a metaplectic structure ˙ ˙ Φ : R2 × M p(1) → R2 × Sp(1) ˙ is deﬁned for any choice of continuous map s : R2 → Sp(1) by Φ(p. More explicitly. . the group M L(n) is isomorphic to the direct product ρ GL+ (n) × Z4 with the covering map M L(n) → GL(n) given by ρ(A.structures are classiﬁed by the set H 1 (P . If E is orientable. First note that by means of the quotient homomorphism M L(n) → M L(n)/GL+ (n) 105 Z4 . A) = (p. since both Sp(1) and M p(1) are connected. A metalinear lifting of the frames of an nplane bundle E is called a metalinear structure on E. in which case an equivalence is given by ˜ ˙ ˙ ˙ the map ψ : R2 × M p(1) → R2 × M p(1) deﬁned as ψ(p. Bundles associated to metalinear structures via these representations will be the key to the metaplectic correction of the prequantization procedure. The importance of the metalinear group for our purposes is that it admits 1dimensional representations which are not the lifts of representations of GL(n). Z2 ) (see [28]). note that up to topological equivalence. a) = A · eiπa . a vector bundle admits a metalinear structure if and only if the square of its ﬁrst StiefelWhitney class is zero (see [28]). The double covering of GL(n) then induced by the identiﬁcation GL(n) Gl(n) (see Example 3. A) = (p. s1 deﬁne equivalent metaplectic structures if and only if (s1 )−1 · s0 admits a continuous lift s : R2 → M p(1). It is trivial as a topological covering. but as a group it is not the direct product GL(n) × Z2 . We emphasize that this classiﬁcation depends on the bundle of metaplectic frames and its covering map to the bundle of symplectic frames. this occurs precisely when [s0 ] = [s1 ] as elements of π1 (Sp(1))/ρ# π1 (M p(1)) Z2 . Two such maps s0 . s(p) · A) ˜ By the usual homotopy theory for continuous groups. s(p) · ρ(A)) for A ∈ M p(1).
similarly. A section of Λ1/2 F then identiﬁes with a complexvalued function λ on M B(F ) satisfying λ(e) = (det A)1/2 eiπa/2 · λ(e · (A. From the representation a → eiπa/2 of Z4 in U (1).we can associate a principal Z4 bundle to any metalinear structure (M B(E). Φ). An important link between metalinear and metaplectic structures on symplectic manifolds can be described as follows. 2 Now let P be a metaplectic manifold equipped with a prequantum line bundle E and a real polarization F. The reason for this terminology is that the bundle Λ1/2 F can be constructed directly from the metalinear frame bundle via the representation M L(n) → C∗ given by the squareroot of (det ◦ρ) (A. and therefore represents. a) → (det A)1/2 eiπa/2 . and thus. 106 L⊕L. Φ) on a vector bundle F . while a metaplectic structure on T P reduces to a metalinear structure on L. a metalinear structure on L can be enlarged to a metaplectic structure on T P . Proof. the product of two halfforms on F yields an nform.17 The quantum state space HF associated to P is the space of sections of E ⊗ Λ−1/2 F which are covariantly constant and along each leaf of F.16 Let (P. By inverting and conjugating the preceding representation of M L(n). the squareroot of a volume form on F . The resulting frame bundle is isomorphic to the frame bundle of L. Evidently. If J is any ωcompatible almost complex structure on P . it is equipped with a natural ﬂat connection inherited from the one on F. loosely speaking. By the preceding theorem. Theorem 7. ω) be a symplectic 2nmanifold and L ⊂ T P a lagrangian subbundle. we may use L and J to reduce the structure group of T P to the subgroup Gl(n) ⊂ Sp(n) corresponding to GL(n). Deﬁnition 7. More explicitly. . a halfform λ and a conjugate halfform µ can be multiplied to give a 1density λµ on the bundle F . then T P = L⊕JL By the Whitney product theorem. we then have w2 (P ) = w1 (L)2 . M B(F ). one similarly deﬁnes the bundles Λ1/2 F and Λ−1/2 F of conjugate and negative halfforms on F . a)). F inherits a metalinear structure from the metaplectic structure on T P . Then T P admits a metaplectic structure if and only if L admits a metalinear structure. and our assertion follows from the remarks in the preceding examples. we then obtain a complex line bundle Λ1/2 F called the bundle of halfforms associated to the triple (F. and thus Λ−1/2 F is deﬁned.
Note that integration is welldeﬁned. s2 λ1 λ2 . c ∈ {0. φ ≤ 2π. In terms ˙ of the identiﬁcations above. 0 ≤ θ ≤ 2π} ˙ of R2 × Sp(1) while its corresponding metalinear bundle equals the subset {(r. The latter space is equipped with a natural innerproduct s1 ⊗ λ1 . a · e2iφ ). the quantum state space HF identiﬁes with the space of compactly supported sections of EF ⊗ Λ1/2 PF . a · eiθ ) : r = r0 . a > 0. both the ˙ trivial M p(1) and Sp(1) bundles over R2 can be identiﬁed with the set of triples (r.19 Over each leaf L of the polarization F. ˙ ˙ The pullback of R2 × Sp(1) of T R2 to the circle Sr of radius r can be reduced to the trivial Gl(1) principal bundle over Sr0 by means of the lagrangian splitting T Sr0 ⊕ JT Sr0 . Consequently. Example 7. θ. a · eiφ ). the subbundle R2 × Gl(1) equal the subset {(r. the Bott connection on T L described in Example 5. From the expression for the covering map given above. r > 0 and 0 ≤ θ. θ. a · ei(θ/2+cπ) ) : r = r0 . ˙ ˙ where a. As proven in [28]. Example 7. θ.14).In the following examples. the BohrSommerfeld variety consists of circles of energy E = (n + 1/2)π . we will sketch how in certain cases this deﬁnition enables us to overcome the diﬃculties mentioned at the beginning of this section. ˙ To quantize the punctured plane R2 with its polarization by circles centered at the origin. a > 0. it follows easily that the parallel transport of a negative halfform associated to T Sr0 around Sr0 amounts to multiplication by −1. the quotient of B(F) by this leafwise foliation deﬁnes a metalinear structure on the leaf space PF in such a way that halfforms on PF are in 11 correspondence with Fparallel negative halfforms on F.17 deﬁnes a foliation of the preimage of L in B(F). since λ1 λ2 is a density on PF . 1}} ˙ of R2 × M p(1).18 We ﬁrst return to Example 7. ˙ we will use the trivial metaplectic structure on R2 (see Example 7. a · eiφ ) → (r. in accordance with the corrected BohrSommerfeld quantization conditions described in Chapter 4. the bundle E ⊗ Λ−1/2 F admits a parallel section over Sr0 precisely when 2 p dq = π (2n + 1) πr0 = Sr0 for some integer n. s2 ⊗ λ2 = PF s1 . 107 . In this case. 0 ≤ θ ≤ 2π. θ. In this way. Note that this is a nontrivial M l(1) bundle over Sr0 . and the covering map R2 × M p(1) → R2 × Sp(1) is given by (r. θ.12 to illustrate how the introduction of halfforms also enables us to incorporate the BohrSommerfeld correction in the case of the 1dimensional harmonic oscillator. That is.
First. then a smooth function v(p) on pspace identiﬁes with an element σp (q. λ2 ) on P . Example 7. the metaplectic structure on P deﬁnes a natural isomorphism between the space of halfforms on F2 and the space of conjugate halfforms on F1 (see [28]). Using this identiﬁcation. then it lifts to a 1parameter family ϕt of operators on ˜ 1/2 smooth sections of E ⊗ Λ F.p / u(q) v(p) dq dp. and Sternberg deﬁnes a sesquilinear pairing on the associated quantum state spaces via a BlattnerKostantSternberg kernel. if the hamiltonian ﬂow ϕt of f ∈ C ∞ (P ) preserves F. similarly. if Fp is the p =constant polarization. λ2 ) ω n . σ2 = σ1 . σp = 1 (2π )n/2 ei q. s2 (λ1 . geometric quantization attempts to represent the Poisson algebra C ∞ (P ) on HF as follows. is due to Blattner. ˜ dt In particular. p) = v(p)ei q. the symplectic form deﬁnes an isomorphism of F1 with F2 . then a sesquilinear pairing HF1 × HF2 → C is deﬁned by σ1 .p / of HFp .20 The basic example of a BlattnerKostantSternberg kernel arises from the classical Fourier transform. P where dim(P ) = 2n. The sesquilinear pairing described above is therefore given by σq . R2n Note that this corresponds to the usual association of a distribution v (q) on qspace to a ˆ function v(p) on pspace via the inverse asymptotic Fourier transform. which we may identify with the space of smooth functions on qspace. The quantum operator associated to F is then ρ(f ) σ = i d (ϕt σ)t=0 . we recall that for the q =constant polarization Fq of R2n . This pairing is nondegenerate and thus determines a linear operator B : HF2 → HF1 satisfying σ1 . 108 . Given a symplectic manifold P with the structures above.5. σ2 = 1 (2π )n/2 s1 . ρ(f ) acts as pointwise multiplication for any f ∈ F(P ). p) = u(q) on R2n . Kostant. which can be extended to more general pairs of polarizations. ∗ By assumption. σ2 of HF1 and HF2 with Fi parallel sections si ⊗ λi of E ⊗ Λ1/2 Fi on P . Similarly.BlattnerKostantSternberg kernels If F1 and F2 are ﬁbrating polarizations of P with the property that F1. the space HFq consists of pindependent functions σq (q. If we identify elements σ1 .x is transverse to F2.x at each x ∈ P . From Example 7. Bσ2 for all σ1 ∈ H1 and σ2 ∈ H2 . then the quantum state spaces HF1 and HF2 can be related as follows. we can pair a halfform λ1 on F1 with a halfform λ2 on F2 to obtain a function (λ1 . This construction.
21 If L ⊂ P intersects each leaf of F transversely in at most one point. such that each Lj intersects any leaf of F at most once. If s is again a section of E ⊗ Λ−1/2 F over L. we suppose that P is a metaplectic manifold with a prequantum line bundle E and a ﬁbrating polarization F. thus obtaining a linear functional on HF .22 To indicate brieﬂy how “distributional” elements of HF arising as in the preceding example are paired. and the quantum operator ρ(f ) is deﬁned as ˜ ρ(f ) σ = i We refer to [28] for further details. then the section s of E ⊗ Λ−1/2 F over L corresponding to a section of E ⊗ Λ1/2 L can be extended to a section s over P which is covariantly constant on each leaf and which vanishes on leaves ˜ which are disjoint from L.For those f ∈ C ∞ (P ) whose hamiltonian ﬂow does not preserve F. Similarly. s) is given by an ordinary smooth function on Rn . then we can construct and element of HF by “superposition”. we can regard s as the quantization of the pair (L. In this way. d ((Ut ◦ ϕt ) σ)t=0 . each intersection of L with a leaf of F is transverse). Our goal is to comment brieﬂy on how an element of HF can be constructed from a “semiclassical state” in P consisting of a lagrangian submanifold L ⊂ P with some extra structure. can be considered as a generalized section.3 Quantization of semiclassical states In this brief section. if L is a union of leaves of F and s is a section of E ⊗ Λ−1/2 F over L which is covariantly constant along each leaf of F. s). Applying the procedure above to each (Lj . According to the preceding example. we assume that for t ∈ (0. let L be the ﬁber of T ∗ Rn over 0 ∈ Rn along with a constant ˜ section s of E ⊗ Λ−1/2 Fq over L. then the associated quantum operator HFq → HT (Fq ) is 109 . Finally. Example 7. which. ˜ dt 7. Let (L. via the inner product on HF . sLj ) and summing the results produces an element of HF as long as this sum converges. the quantization of ˜ ˜ ˜ (L. then we can pair it with arbitrary elements of HF by integration over L. ε). whereas the quantization of (L. s) be a semiclassical state in R2n such that L equals the zero section of R2n T ∗ Rn and s is any section ˜ of E ⊗Λ−1/2 Fq over L. More precisely. such as a halfdensity or halfform with coeﬃcients in a prequantum line bundle over P . The ﬂow ϕt deﬁnes an operator ϕt : HF → HFt . s) is n “concentrated” at the origin of R . The meaning of this last statement is made more precise by the fact that if T : R2n → R2n is a linear symplectomorphism. the diﬀerential Dϕt maps F into a polarization Ft for which there exists a BlattnerKostantSternberg kernel and a corresponding operator Ut : HFt → HF . we consider the following situation. we think of L as the union of lagrangian submanifolds Lj . Example 7. ˜ We can generalize this viewpoint by considering a lagrangian submanifold L which has possibly multiple transverse intersections with the leaves of F (that is.
110 . we can ˜ ˜ quantize (L.˜ required to be unitary. this means ˜ ˜ that. s) is a Dirac δfunction n concentrated at the origin of R . In terms of HFq . s) with respect to this new polarization to obtain smooth functions 2n on the leaf space RT (Fq ) whose pairing is deﬁned by integration. up to a normalization. By choosing T so that both L and L are transverse to T (Fq ). the quantum state obtained from (L. s) and (L.
g} = {f ◦ ψ. In this chapter. On a Poisson manifold. known as deformation quantization and the method of symplectic groupoids. →0 The abstract goal of algebraic quantization is to construct the family A of noncommutative algebras from a Poisson algebra. Additionally. 111 . g) → f g and a Lie algebra structure (f. As → 0. Similarly. Q are Poisson manifolds.1 Poisson algebras and Poisson manifolds The main objects in algebraic quantization theory are Poisson algebras and Poisson manifolds. g} = π(df. Quantum observables comprise a noncommutative algebra A which is assumed to belong to a family A of algebras. which may be interpreted as the algebra of functions on a classical phase space. it is assumed that the ∗ commutator approaches the Poisson bracket in the limit of large quantum numbers: {f. and that most of quantum mechanics can be done without regards for the precise nature of observables. but with an dependent multiplication ∗ . we sketch two approaches towards this goal. g} which satisfy the compatibility condition {f g. A Poisson manifold is a manifold P whose function space C ∞ (P ) is a Poisson algebra with respect to the usual pointwise multiplication of functions and a prescribed Lie algebra structure. g ∈ C ∞ (Q). g ◦ ψ} for all f. g} = lim (f ∗ g − g ∗ f )/i . the Leibniz identity implies that the Poisson bracket is given by a skewsymmetric contravariant tensor ﬁeld π via the formula {f. {f. all with a common underlying vector space. i. If P.e.1 A Poisson algebra is a real vector space A equipped with a commutative. h} g. a smooth map ψ : P → Q is called a Poisson map provided that it preserves Poisson brackets. g ◦ ψ} for all f. The main examples of Poisson manifolds we will be concerned with are the following. associative algebra structure (f. ψ is called an antiPoisson map if {f. g ∈ C ∞ (Q). 8. dg). g) → {f. g} = −{f ◦ ψ. h} + {f. the algebra A approaches a commutative algebra A0 .8 Algebraic Quantization An approach to quantization going back to Dirac and recently revived in [9][10][11] is based on the idea that the multiplicative structure of the ∗algebra of quantum observables is more central to quantization than the representation of observables as operators on Hilbert space. h} = f {g. Deﬁnition 8.
then def {f. {f. g ∈ C ∞ (g∗ ).Example 8. g}(µ) = µ([Df. 4. Dg : g∗ → g∗∗ g are the diﬀerentials of f and g. Any symplectic manifold is a Poisson manifold with respect to its standard Poisson structure {f.2 Deformation quantization The aim of deformation quantization is to describe the family ∗ of quantum products on a Poisson algebra A as an asymptotic series (in ) of products on A. x + y . g} = 0. 8. Deﬁnition 8. and let ∗ be a family of associative multiplications on A given by a formal power series ∞ f∗ g= j=0 Bj (f. The diﬀerential of a smooth function F : g∗ × g∗ → R is a map DF : g∗ × g∗ → g × g whose composition with the Lie bracket on g deﬁnes a smooth map [DF ] : g∗ × g∗ → g. g} = π(df.2 1. The LiePoisson operator on C ∞ (g∗ × g∗ ) is the diﬀerential operator D deﬁned by DF = 1 [DF ](x. If V is a ﬁnitedimensional vector space and π is a skewsymmetric bilinear form on V ∗ . making V a Poisson manifold. Then ∗ is called a ∗deformation of A if 112 . In accordance with the introductory remarks above. dg) deﬁnes a Poisson algebra structure on C ∞ (V ). 2 The dual space g∗ is then a Poisson manifold when equipped with the LiePoisson bracket {f. Any smooth manifold M is a Poisson manifold when C ∞ (M ) is given the trivial bracket {f. 2. More concretely. Let g be a ﬁnitedimensional Lie algebra with dual g∗ . 3. g) j where each Bj : A × A → A is a bilinear map.y) . the zeroth and ﬁrst order terms of this series are determined by the Poisson algebra structure of A. where µ ∈ g∗ . g} = ∆∗ D(f g). the role of the higherorder terms is roughly speaking to give a more precise dependent path from classical to quantum mechanics. Dg]). g} = Xg · f.3 Let A be a complex vector space equipped with a commutative associative algebra structure. and Df. where ∆ : g∗ → g∗ × g∗ is the diagonal and f.
2. g} = ∆∗ D(f The diagonal pullback f ∗ g = ∆∗ M (f 113 g) g). g) 2i deﬁnes a Poisson algebra structure on A. z) are linear coordinates on V × V arising from a single set of linear coordinates on V . g ∈ C ∞ (R2n ). This observation suggests the question of whether every Poisson structure on a function algebra C ∞ (P ) can be realized as the ﬁrst order term in a ∗deformation of A. g} = def 1 B1 (f. z) = f (y) g(z) for f. Bj (g. and (f g)(y. B0 (f. a straightforward computation shows that the Poisson operator is related to the Poisson bracket induced by π via the equation {f. f ) = (−1)j B(f. z). g) equals the product in A. where (y. Pointwise multiplication of functions in f. g ∈ C ∞ (R2n ) can be deﬁned as the pullback f · g = ∆∗ f g. g) 3. Instead it should be viewed as an “asymptotic expansion” for the product. conditions (15) imply that {f. We emphasize that the power series above is not in general assumed to converge for = 0. Bj is a diﬀerential operator in each argument. then the Hessian of π at 0 ∈ V ∗ × V ∗ is a linear map A = Hπ : V ∗ × V ∗ → V × V . ∂/∂z) . and (y ∗ . (∂/∂y. 5. In any case. z ∗ ) are dual to (y.1.4 If V is a ﬁnitedimensional real vector space and π : V ∗ × V ∗ → R is a skewsymmetric bilinear form on V ∗ . We deﬁne the Poisson operator associated to π as the secondorder diﬀerential operator on C ∞ (V × V ) Dπ = A(∂/∂y ∗ . The MoyalWeyl operator is then the pseudodiﬀerential operator given by exponentiation: Mπ. we must extend the product ∗ in the obvious way from A to the space A[[ ]] of formal power series. Similarly. and manipulations of this series will be purely formal. . = e−i Dπ /2 . Bj (1. Example 8. where ∆ : R2n → R2n × R2n is the diagonal embedding. ∂/∂z ∗ ). (f ∗ g) ∗ h = f ∗ (g ∗ h) For condition (5) to make sense. f ) = 0 for j ≥ 1 4.
4. To construct a ∗product on all of C ∞ (P ). This technique has succeeded.s ∂yr ∂zs j f (y)g(z) y=z=x .s If π is nondegenerate. A theorem of DeWilde and Lecomte [19] asserts that the Poisson algebra of any ﬁnitedimensional symplectic manifold admits a ∗deformation. any regular Poisson manifold is locally deformation quantizable. y) → xy deﬁned on a subset Γ2 ⊂ Γ × Γ called the set of composable pairs.5 A groupoid is a set Γ endowed with a product map (x. one may therefore attempt to “patch together” the local deformations to arrive at a global ∗product.z−x) f (y) g(z) dy dz. M´lotte [44] extended their result to arbitrary regular Poisson manifolds. In terms of the linear coordinates (y. Using similar techniques. however. the operator Bj in the expansion of the MoyalWeyl product is 1 Bj (f. z) on V × V . g) = j! i 2 ∂ ∂ πr. where Q is the skewsymmetric bilinear form on V induced by π. A Poisson manifold P is called regular if its Poisson tensor π has constant rank. In view of Example 8.3 Symplectic groupoids The method of symplectic groupoids also attempts to directly construct a noncommutative algebra A of quantum observables without explicitly identifying a quantum state space. this approach involves a geometric procedure which attempts to construct A for a particular value of and in particular incorporates geometric objects with certain quantum properties.of the Moyal operator deﬁnes a ∗deformation of the Poisson algebra C ∞ (V ) called the MoyalWeyl product. and an inverse map ι : Γ → Γ satisfying the conditions 1. Deﬁnition 8. ι2 = id 114 . 8. Unlike deformation quantization. e A simpliﬁed proof of these results has recently been given by Fedosov [23] (see [68] for a survey of deformation quantization. in which case a theorem of Lie [39] asserts that P is locally isomorphic to a vector space with a constant Poisson structure. r. emphasizing Fedosov’s construction). Groupoids In this section we collect some basic deﬁnitions and examples of groupoids and their counterparts in symplectic geometry. then an application of the principle of stationary phase shows that an integral expression for f ∗ g is given by (f ∗ g)(x) = ei Q(y−x.
The unitary submanifolds form a group under the natural multiplication of subsets. yz) ∈ Γ2 . y) = (y. and conversely. The set Γ0 of all sources (and targets) is called the base of Γ. 2. (y. 2. endowed with the multiplication (x.2. An element x of Γ can be thought of as an arrow with source α(x) = ι(x)x and target β(x) = xι(x). In abstract terms. Finally. Condition (2) implies that the map α × β is transverse to the diagonal ∆ in Γ0 × Γ0 . then (xy. the multiplication relation of Γ is the subset m = {(xy. z). If Γ is a groupoid with base Γ0 and Γ0 ⊂ Γ0 . 4. z). Multiplication Γ2 → Γ and inversion Γ → Γ are smooth. y) then belongs to Γ2 if and only if the source of y equals the target of x. and Γ is said to be a groupoid over Γ0 . (x. 4. a groupoid is a small category in which all morphisms have inverses. (ι(x). (x. then Γ = {x ∈ Γ : α(x). 3. A disjoint union of groupoids is a groupoid over the union of their bases. 3. y) · (y. y) ∈ Γ2 } of Γ × Γ × Γ. 115 ι . y) and β(x. Deﬁnition 8. Example 8. ι(x)) ∈ Γ2 for all x ∈ Γ. A submanifold L of Γ is called unitary if the restriction of α and β to L are diﬀeomorphisms L → Γ0 . and if (z. z) ∈ Γ2 . x). then ι(x) (xy) = y. and (xy)z = x(yz). In this groupoid. Thus Γ0 is the diagonal. x) ∈ Γ2 .7 A groupoid Γ is called a Lie groupoid if 1. and if (x. β are the projections α(x. and so both Γ2 = (α × β)−1 (∆) ⊂ Γ × Γ and the multiplication relation m ⊂ Γ × Γ × Γ are smooth submanifolds. the map ι is bijective and thus inverses in Γ are unique. Any group is a groupoid over its identity element. y). x) ∈ Γ2 for all x ∈ Γ. a pair (x. z) = (x. Combining (1) and (2). We will be interested in groupoids with some geometric structures. If (x. β : Γ → Γ0 are submersions. The pair groupoid associated to a set X consists of Γ = X × X. Elements of Γ0 are units of Γ in the sense that xα(x) = x and β(x)x = x for all x ∈ Γ. β(x) ∈ Γ0 } is a groupoid over Γ0 . y) ∈ Γ2 . Note that by (3). and α. y) = (x. then (zx)ι(x) = z. any groupoid whose base is a singleton comprises a group. The mappings α. x. there is exactly one arrow from any object to another. y) : (x. Γ0 is a submanifold of Γ. we make the following deﬁnition. Maintaining the notation above.6 1. 3. we see that any vector bundle E deﬁnes a groupoid Γ(E) over its zero section.
a symplectic groupoid Γ is characterized by the three canonical relations (recall that Z is a point): Γ0 ∈ Hom(Z. and ι : Γ → Γ is antisymplectic. Thus. Two immediate consequences of this deﬁnition and the calculus of canonical relations are that Γ0 is lagrangian. i. Deﬁnition 8. If P is any symplectic manifold. equipped with the groupoid structure of a vector bundle and its standard symplectic structure. 3. This Poisson structure gives meaning to the following concept. Example 8. Γ) linked by the equation Γ0 = m ◦ Lι . If M is any manifold with the zero Poisson structure. 2. then T ∗ M . For any Lie group G whose Lie algebra is g. only discrete Lie groups can be symplectic groupoids. deﬁnes a symplectic groupoid over M . while Lι and m identify with the conormal bundles to the inversion and multiplication relations of G under the identiﬁcations T ∗ G × T ∗ G T ∗ (G × G) T ∗ G × T ∗ G × T ∗ G T ∗ (G × G × G). Lι ∈ Hom(Γ.e. A simple example of a Lie groupoid is given by any Lie group. If there exists a groupoid Γ which integrates P . there is a unique Poisson structure on the base Γ0 of a symplectic groupoid Γ such that α : Γ → Γ0 is a Poisson map and β : Γ → Γ0 is antiPoisson. 4. then the dual space g∗ with its LiePoisson structure is integrable. A simple computation shows that the base of T ∗ G is its ﬁber at the identity. If g is any Lie algebra. Its unitary lagrangian submanifolds are precisely the graphs of symplectomorphisms of P .. its graph is a lagrangian submanifold of Γ × Γ.8 A Lie groupoid Γ is called a symplectic groupoid if Γ is a symplectic manifold and the multiplication relation m is a lagrangian submanifold of Γ × Γ × Γ. T ∗ G is a symplectic groupoid over g∗ .10 1. we deﬁne a groupoid structure on T ∗ G by taking α and β to be the right and left translations of covectors to the ﬁber at the identity e ∈ G. Γ) m ∈ Hom(Γ × Γ. From the requirement that the base of a symplectic groupoid be a lagrangian submanfold. Equipped with these operations and its usual symplectic structure. then the pair groupoid structure on P × P deﬁnes a symplectic groupoid over P .9 A symplectic groupoid Γ is said to integrate a Poisson manifold P if there exists a Poisson isomorphism from the base Γ0 of Γ onto P .Deﬁnition 8.. As a consequence of the axioms and the assumption that m is lagrangian. we will say that P is integrable and refer to Γ as a symplectic groupoid over P . Γ) 116 .
so that the construction of the vector space AΓ follows unambiguously from the procedure deﬁned in the preceding chapter. we will give several examples illustrating the spirit of the symplectic groupoid method.g. This is known as the integration problem for Poisson manifolds. Example 8.Quantization via symplectic groupoids From our discussion of geometric quantization. y) and δ(x. we may identify the quantum Hilbert spaces associated to T ∗ M. δ(g1 . and m associated to the groupoid T ∗ G of Example yields the −1 distributions δ(e) on G. then the underlying symplectic manifold must possess a groupoid structure compatible with its symplectic structure. m) over P . and T ∗ (M ×M ×M ) with (completions of) the function spaces C ∞ (M ). Γ Γ it is in this sense that the symplectic groupoid Γ represents a classical model for the quantum algebra AΓ . we know that certain symplectic manifolds quantize to give vector spaces V . As described in the preceding example. since geometric quantizaton produces halfdensities rather than functions. To conclude this chapter. Example 8. z) supported on the diagonals ∆2 and ∆3 respectively. like the algebras of quantum mechanics. ι. As in Chapter 7. There is actually a ﬂaw in the preceding two examples. and lagrangian submanifolds correspond to elements in V . we ﬁnd that the quantization of the canonical relations Γ0 . Γ and AΓ ⊗ A∗ ⊗ A∗ which deﬁne the structure of an associative ∗algebra on AΓ . complex conjugation. respectively. T ∗ (M × M ). antiinvolution f (g) → f (g −1 ).12 Arguing as in the preceding example. the relations Lι and m identify with the conormal bundles of the diagonals ∆2 ⊂ M × M and ∆3 ⊂ M × M × M respectively.11 Consider a trivial Poisson manifold M and its associated symplectic groupoid T ∗ M . z)δ(y. Since Lι and m are the conormal bundles of the diagonals in M × M and M × M × M . g2 ) on G × G × G. If the Haar measure on G is used to identify the quantum Hilbert space HG with C ∞ (G. after an appropriate normalization. the quantization of the groupoid Γ yields the usual identity element. Lι and m quantize as evaluation (at e ∈ G). g1 . our heuristic discussion in Section 7. and m quantize as elements of AΓ . under the identiﬁcations T ∗ M × T ∗ M T ∗ (M × M ) and T ∗ M × T ∗ M × T ∗ M T ∗ (M × M × M ). If we wish V to be an associative ∗algebra with unit element. If successful. we will only deal with groupoids Γ equipped with reasonable (e. Throughout. Thus. the identity relation Γ0 coincides with the zero section of T ∗ M . Lι . g1 ) on G × G. then the relations Γ0 .3 shows that. the natural domain of the 117 . C). Lι . ﬁbrating) polarizations. and pointwise multiplication in the associative ∗algebra C ∞ (M. Γ0 . C ∞ (M ×M ) and C ∞ (M ×M ×M ). and furthermore. The relation Γ0 then quantizes as the function 1 on M . Using the techniques of geometric quantization (prequantizations. we then attempt to associate a vector space AΓ to Γ in such a way that the canonical relations Γ0 . polarizations). and convolution. and δ(g1 g2 . The ﬁrst step in the quantization of a Poisson manifold P by the method of symplectic groupoids is to construct a symplectic groupoid (Γ. these relations are quantized by the δfunctions δ(x. AΓ ⊗ A∗ . C).
making C ∞ (G) into a Hopf algebra. then T inherits a translationinvariant Poisson structure from V . and not just the multiplication. we get as V the space of smooth functions on the diagonal. If T is a torus equal to the quotient of V by some lattice. p. ˜ Using this polarization to quantize Γ. there is a polarization of P × P which does not depend on any polarization of P but only on the aﬃne structure.14 If V is any ﬁnitedimensional vector space. ωn (y − x)). one of the basic examples of noncommutative geometry. The compatibility between the two structures on C ∞ (G) reﬂects a compatibility between the two groupoid structures on T ∗ G. Although the two multiplications associated with the two groupoid structures on T ∗ G described above live on diﬀerent spaces. the polarization comes from the isomorphism of Γ = R2n × R2n with T ∗ R2n given by (x. q .4). which we identify with R2n itself. A symplectic groupoid which integrates T is given by the cotangent bundle T ∗ T. and the groupoid product quantized to the usual pointwise multiplication of functions on T. with Γ0 equals the zero section of T ∗ T. Example 8. and the multiplication on V turns out to be the Moyal product (see Example 8. In this way. p . Otherwise one gets a noncommutative multiplication on C ∞ (T) which is precisely that of (the functions on) a noncommutative torus.13 If we take P = R2n with its standard symplectic structure. say convolution. we identify T ∗ T with T × V ∗ and let m ⊂ T ∗ (T × T × T ) consist of all triples 1 (q. we obtain the coproduct ∆ on C ∞ (G) deﬁned as a map from C ∞ (G) to C ∞ (G) ⊗ C ∞ (G) = C ∞ (G × G) by the formula (∆f )(x. it is possible to relate them more closely by dualizing one of them. Example 8. y) = f (xy). The coproduct satisﬁes a coassociative law and is related to pointwise multiplication by the simple identity ∆(f g) = ∆(f )∆(g). should depend on the groupoid structure on Γ. It appears then that the construction of V itself. 118 . q . and Lι equals the conormal bundle of the diagonal in T × T.convolution operation on a group consists not of functions but of densities. When the map T is zero. then a skewadjoint linear map π : V ∗ → V deﬁnes a skewsymmetric bilinear form on V ∗ and thus a translationinvariant Poisson structure on V . (The relation between Poisson tori and noncommutative tori was studied from the point of view of deformation quantization in [50]). In fact. y) → ((x + y)/2. To describe the multiplication relation. p ) such that q = q + 2 T (p + p ) and 1 q = q + T (p ) 2 p=p +p . the Poisson structure on T is trivial.
deﬁned on the set B(V ) of bases in V . Multiplication of densities is deﬁned by multiplication of their values and gives rise to a bilinear map: Λα V × Λβ V → Λα+β V. Deﬁnition A. en ) is any frame in a tangent space of M and A = (aij ) is any invertible n × n matrix. Λα V is a 1dimensional complex vector space. As a result. Operations on densities 1. 4. The use of densities instead of forms circumvents this need. ej )1/2 . there is a natural product Λα W × Λα (V /W ) → Λα V In particular. A density on a real vector space V of dimension n is a complexvalued function η. 2. A linear map T : V → V ∗ induces a realvalued 1density T on V given by T e =  det( T ei . def 119 . If W is a subspace of V . ˜ 3. an αdensity on V is a map λ : B(V ) → C such that λ(eA) = λ(e) ·  det(A)α . This concept can be generalized as follows. Equivalently. · · · .A Densities An nform ν on an ndimensional manifold M can be viewed as a scalar function on the space of bases in the tangent bundle which satisﬁes ν(eA) = ν(e) · det(A). The collection of such functions is denoted ΛV . then a basis of V . if V = V1 ⊕ V2 . which satisﬁes η(eA) = η(e) ·  det(A). Consequently. Since GL(V ) acts transitively on B(V ). any real bilinear form ω on V induces a 1density ω on V . where e = (e1 . unique up to transformation by a matrix of determinant ±1. Because the “change of variables” formula for integration involves absolute values of Jacobians. then there is a natural product Λα V1 × Λα V2 → Λα V. then σ β is a welldeﬁned αβdensity on V .1 For α ∈ C. integration of nforms on M requires a choice of orientation. We denote the vector space of αdensities on V by Λα V. If σ ∈ Λα V and β ∈ C. is determined by a choice of bases for W and V /W . an αdensity is determined by its value on a single basis.
The remarks above imply that if 0→E→F →G→0 is an exact sequence of vector bundles over M . 120 . The density spaces associated to the tangent bundle of M are denoted Ωα M .2 Suppose that A. Since (eA)∗ = e∗ (A∗ )−1 for any A ∈ GL(V ). compactlysupported sections. then there is a natural densitybundle isomorphism Λα E ⊗ Λα G Λα F. We denote by Ωα E the vector space of smooth sections of Λα E and by Ωα E the space of c smooth. C are vector spaces and 0 → A → A ⊕ C → C∗ → 0 is an exact sequence such that F C = T . there is a welldeﬁned isomorphism T∗ : Λα V → Λα V . By the operations described above. Operations 3 and 4 induce natural isomorphisms Λα V ⊗ Λβ V → Λα+β V Λα W ⊗ Λα (V /W ) → Λα V. A natural map B(V ) → B(V ∗ ) is deﬁned by associating to each basis e of V its dual basis e∗ . so we can associate the αdensity bundle Λα E to any smooth vector bundle E over a manifold M . Λα V1 ⊗ Λα V2 → Λα (V1 ⊕ V2 ) 6. 7. and the positive real number  detθ T  is deﬁned by the equation  detθ T 1/2 θ = T . An nform on an nmanifold M induces an αdensity να in the manner of (4) above. Example A. the map ∗ gives rise to a natural isomorphism Λα V → Λ−α V ∗ . It is easy to check that the association V → Λα V deﬁnes a diﬀerentiable functor. we obtain an isomorphism Λα A Λα A ⊗ Λ2α C given explicitly by σ→σ⊗ T 2α F ∗ =  detθ T α σ ⊗ θ2α . where θ is any realvalued 1density on C. If T : V → V is an isomorphism.5.
we will prove that if the critical point set of R is not contained in the support of a. note that the change of variables η = ξ/ gives (2π )− 2 n ei x. complex valued functions on Rn .ξ / u(y) dy dξ. 1/2 Similarly. which equals u(x) by the usual Fourier inversion formula. a preHilbert space structure on the space Ωc M of smooth. A simple application of this formula shows that the asymptotic diﬀerential operator Dj = −i ∂j satisﬁes the familiar equations F (Dj u) = ξj F u F (xj u) = −Dj F u. τ = M σ τ. As a ﬁrst step. For u ∈ S. the asymptotic Fourier transform and its inverse are deﬁned respectively as (F u)(ξ) = (2π )− 2 n e−i x. This observation also veriﬁes the asymptotic inversion formula: u(x) = (2π )−n ei x−y. Let S denote the usual Schwartz space of rapidly decreasing. We study next the asymptotic behavior of integrals of the form I = Rn eiR(x)/ a(x) dx ∞ a ∈ C0 (Rn ). B The method of stationary phase We begin with a few useful formulas involving the asymptotic Fourier transform.η u(y) dy dη.A natural mapping Ω1 M → C is deﬁned by integration c σ→ M σ.ξ (Rn )∗ v(ξ) dξ To see that these transforms are actually inverse to one another.ξ Rn / u(x) dx / (F −1 v)(x) = (2π )− 2 n ei x. then I is rapidly decreasing in : 121 . R ∈ C ∞ (Rn ) as → 0. A similar check of deﬁnitions proves the asymptotic Parseval formula: u v dx = Rn (Rn )∗ F u F v dξ. compactlysupported halfdensities on M is deﬁned by σ. The completion HM of this space is called the intrinsic Hilbert space of M .ξ (Rn )∗ / (F u)(ξ) dξ = (2π)−n ei x−y.
Consequently.k ∂xj ∂xk Proof. we recall that for ξ ∈ (Rn )∗ . . we can use a partition of unity to break up Supp(a) into ﬁnitely many domains as above and then applying the same argument (with x1 possibly replaced by another coordinate) to each piece. Lemma B.2 If the quadratic form Q is nondegenerate. 2 The upshot of this lemma is that the main (asymptotic) contribution to the integral I must come from the critical points of R.ξ e iQ(x)/ dx = (2π iπsgn(Q)/4 −i Q∗ (ξ) e n/2 e .1]. 1/2  detdx T  k! Rn k=0 where T : Rn → (Rn )∗ is the selfadjoint map associated to Q and D is the secondorder diﬀerential operator given by ∂ i −1 ∂ Tjk . then for each nonnegative integer K. ξ /2 and the determinant detdx T is deﬁned as in Appendix A. Rx1 ∂x1 and so integration by parts with respect to the x1 variable gives I  = Rn eiR/ ∂ ∂x1 a R x1 dx .1.  detdx T 1/2 Combining this expression with the asymptotic Parseval formula. Our assertion follows by noting that (a/Qx1 )x1 ∈ C0 (Rn ) and repeating the same argument. Then eiR/ a = −i a ∂ iR/ e . we obtain I = Rn ∗ e iQ/ eiπ·sgn(Q)/4 a dx =  detdx T 1/2 122 e−iQ (Rn )∗ ∗/ F a (ξ) dξ. ∞ implying that I is O( ). then I = O( ∞ ) as → 0. e Rn −i x.7. )  detdx T 1/2 where Q∗ (ξ) = T −1 ξ.1 If dR = 0 on Supp(a). Suppose for the moment that Rx1 = ∂R/∂x1 = 0 on Supp(a).Lemma B. Proof.6. Vol. From [32. For the general case. the asymptotic Fourier transform of the function x → eiQ(x)/ equals eiπsgn(Q)/4 e−Q (ξ)/ ξ→ . Thm. D= 2 j. K eiπ sgn(Q)/4 1 eiQ/ a dx = (2π )n/2 (Dk a)(0) k + O K+1+n/2 .
123 . we use the the Taylor series expansion (with remainder) ∗ of e−iQ / to write ∞ e−iQ (Rn )∗ ∗/ F a(ξ) dξ = k=0 1 k! n/2 −i K k (Q∗ (ξ))k F a(ξ) dξ (Rn )∗ = (2π ) k=0 K 1 k! −i k F −1 ((Q∗ )k F a)(0) + O k K+1+ n 2 K+1+ n 2 = (2π )n/2 k=0 1 k (D a)(0) k! +O .A simple computation shows that F a (ξ) = F a (−ξ). such that g(0) = p and (R ◦ g)(x) = R(p) + Q(x). In this case. To this end. we require the following two lemmas. The critical point p is called nondegenerate if R (p) is an isomorphism. and consequently we have I = eiπ·sgn(Q)/4  detdx T −1/2 e−iQ (Rn )∗ ∗ (ξ)/ F a (ξ) dξ. where M is a smooth nmanifold equipped with a compactly supported density σ. 2 We now wish to apply this lemma to evaluate integrals of the form I = M eiR/ σ. then the “change of variables” formula states that g ∗ eiR/ σ = M M eiR/ σ. and R : M → R is a smooth function. Morse Lemma . the last expression on the right following from the asymptotic Fourier inversion formula. the function R has the following normal form near p. To deal with the integral on the right. then there exists a nondegenerate quadratic form Q on Rn and an embedding g : U → M . The same role in the stationary phase formula will be played by the following lemma. the change of variables ξ → −ξ doesn’t aﬀect the integral. If p is a nondegenerate critical point of a function R : M → R. where U is a neighborhood of 0 in Rn . Recall that the hessian of R : M → R at a critical point p ∈ M is a welldeﬁned selfadjoint ∗ linear map R (p) : Tp M → Tp M . 2 (This theorem is a special case of the Parametrized Morse Lemma. If g : M → M is any diﬀeomorphism. proven in Section 4.3).
suppose that p ∈ M is a critical point of R and set p = g −1 (p). we mention that deﬁnition of  detσ (R) (p) implies furthermore that f (p) ·  detf σ R (p)1/2 =  detσ R (p)1/2 for any function f on M .αk of Γ to every list (α0 . Γ) is deﬁned by k+1 δ (c)(α0 . αk+1 ).. and a coboundary operator k+1 k δ k : CU (M. 2 Finally. 124 .. Γ) = ZU (M ..Lemma B... we will denote by Uα0 . k in Supp(σ). αk ) for which the intersection k Uα0 . · · · .αk is nonempty... we obtain Principle of Stationary Phase . Γ) = ker(δ k ) ˇk BU (M . A more general treatment is available in [14]. The group of all such cochains is denoted CU (M. j = 1. Let M be a smooth nmanifold and σ ∈ Ωc M . αk+1 ) = j=0 k (−1)j c(α0 . For ease of notation. . . Combining these observations.3 In the notation above. An open cover U = {Uα }α∈I of a manifold M is said to be good if every intersection of ﬁnitely many members of U is either contractible or empty. ˇ and the kth Cech cohomology group of M with coeﬃcients in Γ and relative to the covering U is the quotient ˇk ˇk ˇk HU (M .. Γ)/BU (M .. . Γ) = im(δ k−1 ). then  detσ (R ◦ g) (p ) =  detσ R (p). Γ).αk the intersection k Uαi . i=0 ˇ If Γ is an abelian group. Γ). 2 C ˇ Cech cohomology ˇ This appendix will give some of the basic deﬁnitions of Cech cohomology for manifolds and describe its relation to deRham cohomology... The groups of ˇ degreek Cech cocycles and coboundaries are deﬁned respectively by ˇk ZU (M . a Γvalued Cech cochain with respect to the cover U is then a rule which assigns an element cα0 . If R : M → R has only nondegenerate critical points pj .. .. If σ is any density on M such that σp = (g ∗ σ)p . Γ) → CU (M. where the symbol indicates which member of the list is to be deleted. then k e M iR/ σ = (2π ) n/2 j=1 eiR(pj )/ eiπ·sgn(R (pj ))/4 + O(  detσ (R (pj ))1/2 1+n/2 ). αj .
Γ) → HU (M . π Local triviality of a T ﬁber bundle Q → P implies that for any good cover U of P . referring to [17] for more details. deﬁned by the requirement that hj (x. t + gjk (x)) for all x ∈ Ujk . ﬁberpreserving action T × Q → Q. there exists on each Uα a (k − 1)form ϕα satisfying dϕα = ω. D Principal T bundles In this appendix. Two principal T bundles Q → P π and Q → P are said to be isomorphic if there exists a smooth map f : Q → Q which is equivariant with respect to the T actions. This association deﬁnes for each k ∈ Z+ a homomorphism w ˇk k ZDR (M ) → HU (M . 125 . Of particular interest in these notes is the subgroup Z = 2π Z of R. β. t) and π(hj (x. we record some standard facts about principal bundles over paracompact manifolds. Γ ) in the obvious way.1 ([61]) The map w induces an isomorphism between the deRham cohomology ˇ of M and the Cech cohomology of M with real coeﬃcients.e. For any indices α. β. A group homomorphism Γ → Γ induces a homomorphism ˇk ˇk HU (M . Since each Uα is contractible. there exist (k − 2)forms ψαβ deﬁned on Uαβ such that dψαβ = ϕα − ϕβ and d(ψαβ + ψβγ − ψαγ ) = 0 on the set Uαβγ for any indices α. t) = hk (x. i. π A principal T bundle over a manifold P is a locally trivial T bundle Q → P together π with a nonsingular. denote by Z the group 2π · Z and set T = R/Zh . Since Uαβ is itself contractible. ˇk One consequence of this theorem is that HU (M . R). t)) = x for all (x. t + s) = s · hj (x. t) = hi (x. we have d(ϕα − ϕβ ) = 0 on Uαβ . Γ) does not depend on the choice of U. Throughout this section. These maps give rise to the transition functions gjk : Ujk → T of Q. f (a · p) = a · f (p) for all a ∈ T and p ∈ Q. we see that ω determines a ˇ Cech kcocycle with coeﬃcients in R. hi (x. there exist homeomorphisms hj : Uj × T → π −1 (Uj ) such that hj (x. This equation implies that for each x ∈ Uijk . Continuing in this way.k Now consider a closed kform ω ∈ ZDR (M ). and satisﬁes π = π ◦ f . γ. Theorem C. t + gij (x) + gjk (x) + gki (x)). t) ∈ Uj × T and s ∈ T .
Z ) is known as the Chern class of Q. a ∈ Z for any a ∈ H2 (P .e. then the numbers ˜ cijk = gij + gjk + gki ˜ ˜ ˜ ˇ are therefore elements of Z which deﬁne a Cech cocycle [cijk ]. 126 . Cor. the assignment Q → [Q] induces a bijective map from the space ˇ of isomorphism classes of principal T bundles over P to H 2 (P . Z ) are the following operations on principal T bundles.2.4] for a proof). Z ).1 Two principal T bundles over P are isomorphic if and only if their Chern classes are equal. The fundamental theorem describing this space is the following (see [17. ˇ From the compatibility condition for the ϕj . Moreover.1.and so the transition functions satisfy the cocycle condition gij + gjk + gki = 0 (mod Z ). −t · p ). T bundles with connection The inﬁnitesimal generator of the T action on a principal bundle Q is a vector ﬁeld X on Q deﬁned by the equation d t · p. Similarly. it follows that the Chern class of Q is the Cech representative of the deRham cohomology class [ω]. X(p) = dt t=0 A connection on Q is a T invariant 1form ϕ on Q such that ϕ(X) = 1. p ) = (t · p. If gjk : Ujk → R is any lift of gjk . Theorem D. t · (p. it follows easily that the Chern classes of inverses and products of principal T bundles are given by [−Q] = −[Q] and [Q ×P Q ] = [Q] + [Q ]. From the deﬁnitions above. modulo the antidiagonal action of T . On the level of the bundles themselves. Z). If Q → P is a principal T bundle having transition functions {gjk } with respect to some good cover of P . then the inverse of Q is deﬁned as the principal T bundle −Q over P obtained from the transition functions {−gjk }. Theorem D. The curvature of the ˜ connection ϕ is the unique closed 2form ω on P such that dϕ = π ∗ ω. if Q. i. In terms of a good cover U of P . Q are principal T bundles over P with transition functions {gjk } and {gjk } respectively. ˇ Corresponding to the abelian group structure on H 2 (P . we can describe the product Q ×P Q as the quotient of the usual ﬁberproduct Q ×P Q (which in this case is a T × T bundle over the base). where dσ denotes the usual form j on T and the ϕj are 1forms on the Uj satisfying ϕj − ϕk = d˜jk . then the product of Q and Q is deﬁned as the principal T bundle Q ×P Q over P having transition functions {gjk + gjk }. The corresponding class 2 ˇ [Q] ∈ H (P . g where gjk are again Rvalued lifts of the transition functions of Q.2 A closed 2form ω on a manifold P is the curvature form of a connection on a principal T bundle Q over P if and only if ω. the form ϕ satisﬁes h∗ ϕ = dσ + π ∗ ϕj .
γ are homologous and t−t = σ ω. Z ) on Q which preserves the connection ϕ. p0 ) onto the constant map [0. Q over P induce a connection ϕ + ϕ on the product Q ×P Q deﬁned locally by dσ + ϕj + ϕj . If H1 (P . the extension Γ is isomorphic to the product T × H1 (P . 127 π . p0 ) × T having curvature e∗ ω.ˇ Proof. we deﬁne the 1form Kω on A(P. Similarly. it deﬁnes a central extension Γ of H1 (P . t) ∼ (γ . p0 ) denote the space of smooth paths γ : [0. and thus. The quotient of Q is the desired principal T bundle Q over P . p0 ) × T .Iglesias. ϕ) over P with curvature ω as an appropriate quotient of A(P. we will deﬁne the T bundle (Q. h ) = σ ω. Since T is divisible. Since the interval [0. we call two elements γ. there exists a natural contraction of A(P. z + τ ]. Then dσ + Kω is a connection form on the product A(P. Z ) = 0. 1] → P such that γ(0) = p0 . An equivalence relation on the product A(P. where π : P → P is the natural projection. where ∂σ = γ − γ . and let e : A(P. The quotient of A(P. Otherwise.g. Z ) = 0. p0 ) by 1 Kω = 0 (Yt e∗ ω) dt. Z ) which acts naturally on Q by (h. and the proof is complete. where ϕ is locally represented by dσ + ϕj . We prefer to give the following direct proof by P. Most published proofs of this result (e. p0 ) × T is then deﬁned by the condition that (γ. Z ) into the space of loops based at p0 which assigns a representative to each homology class. γ ∈ A(P. let s be any map from H1 (P . then P = P . and any choice of isomorphism deﬁnes an action of H1 (P . p0 ) → P be the endpoint map e(γ) = γ(1). p0 ) homologous if their diﬀerence is the boundary of a singular 2chain σ in P . 1] → p0 . Since this cocycle is symmetric. p0 ) × T by this equivalence relation is a principal T bundle Q over P with connection ϕ having curvature π ∗ ω. t ) if γ. H1 (P . A T valued group cocycle on H1 (P . connections ϕ and ϕ on the T bundles Q. 1] is contractible. Let A(P. z] = [s(h) · γ. The quotient of A(P. If Yt is the vector ﬁeld which generates this contraction. [37]) use Cech cohomology and the deRham isomorphism. To complete the proof. Z ). For this purpose. 2 A connection ϕ on a principal T bundle Q → P induces a connection on the inverse −Q of Q whose local representatives are of the form dσ − ϕj . Z ) is then deﬁned by φ(h. τ )[γ. p0 ) by this equivalence relation is the covering space P of P corresponding to the commutator subgroup of π1 (P ). see [33] for further details. where ∂σ = s(h + h ) − (s(h) + s(h )) .
4 A principal T bundle Q over P with a ﬂat connection admits a parallel section if and only if (Q. ϕ ) over P are said to be isomorphic provided that there exists an isomorphism f : Q → Q of the underlying principal bundles which satisﬁes f ∗ ϕ = ϕ. A section s of a principal T bundle Q over P with connection ϕ is called parallel provided that s∗ ϕ = 0. we ﬁnd ˜ ˜ that the functions sjk = sj − sk deﬁne transition functions for a trivial T principal bundle over P . (Q . ϕ − ϕ ) is isomorphic to the trivial bundle (P × T . T ) is called the holonomy of the (ﬂat) connection ϕ. The map sQ : Q → Q associated to a parallel section deﬁnes an isomorphism of (Q.ϕ on the trivial principal T bundle Q = P ×T over P are isomorphic if and only if they have equal holonomy. we have: Corollary D. The cohomology class [β] induced by this form in H 1 (P . the map (Q. k.3 Two ﬂat connections ϕ. dS). the local representatives h∗ ϕ = dσ + ϕj have the property that ϕj = d˜j for functions j sj : Uj → R. (Q . the compatibility condition for the ϕj implies that sjk − gjk is constant for each j.Two principal T bundles with connection (Q. Since curvature is obviously invariant under isomorphisms of principal T bundles with connection. On the other hand. ϕ) → [βϕ ] induces a bijection from the space of isomorphism classes of ﬂat connections on the trivial ˇ T bundle with H 1 (P . Theorem D. ϕ). and so there exists an isomorphism f : Q → P × T . The space of functions g : Q → C satisfying the condition g(t · p) = ρ−1 (t)g(p) 128 . In this s case. ϕ). z) = (t · p. A check of the deﬁnition shows that (Q. ϕ ) are isomorphic if and only if (Q ×P −Q . ρ−1 (t)z). ϕ) with the trivial T bundle equipped with the trivial connection ϕ = dσ. 2 Associated line bundles A representation ρ : T → U (1) enables us to associate to any principal T bundle Q → P a complex line bundle E → P deﬁned explicitly as the quotient of Q × C by the T action t · (p. Denoting by sj the composition of sj with the projection R → T . Moreover. the classiﬁcation of such bundles reduces to the classiﬁcation of ﬂat connections on trivial T bundles over P . T ). Thus. then ϕ − f ∗ ϕ0 = π ∗ β ˇ for some closed 1form β on P . It is easy to check that if ϕ0 is the trivial connection on P × T . ϕ) has zero holonomy. π A connection ϕ on a principal T bundle Q → P is said to be ﬂat if dϕ = 0.
129 . where the section sg : P → E is deﬁned by the requirement that sg (x) = [(p. g(p))].is identiﬁed with the space of sections of E by the assignment g → sG . for any element p of π −1 (x).
. The Spectral Theory of Toeplitz Operators. V. Anal.. Manifolds All of Whose Geodesics are Closed. [6] Arnol’d. V. 1. 2nd edition. pp. On a characteristic class entering into conditions of quantization. M. Vol. [3] Arnol’d.. SpringerVerlag. Press. Progress in Math. V. [12] Besse.A. Novikov. 1951. J. [8] Audin. Math USSR Izv. F. Lichnerowicz. 60. 1992. V. The Topology of Torus Actions on Symplectic Manifolds.. Quantization. [15] Boutet de Monvel. SpringerVerlag. Ergebnisse der Math. Graduate Texts in Math. 4.. Flato. New York. Fronsdal. Dynamical systems IV. F.. 8 (1974). Cambridge Univ. [7] Atiyah. and Givental’. 91102.I. Princeton University Press.I. V. Benjamin/Cummings. A. C. and Guillemin. [16] Br¨ning. (1977). Annals. Quantum Theory. 93. and Marsden. Phys. 11091165. PrenticeHall..References [1] Abraham. SpringerVerlag. of Math..F.. V. 1978. Loop Spaces. [14] Bott. Princeton.I. Funct..P. [17] Brylinski. Ann. 1981. J. eds. Characteristic Classes. [11] Berezin. 1992. D. SpringerVerlag.M. Diﬀerential Forms in Algebraic Topology.B. Boston. a 130 . Symplectic geometry. F. [4] Arnol’d. 111. and Guillemin. R.I. 1136. A. Basel. (1967).. 1994. I and II. Reading.. D. [2] Arnol’d.E. 107. New York. Berlin. vol. 1978.L. Birkh¨user. [13] Bohm. preprint 1993. 1991. 1978. Arnol’d and S..... Berlin.I. Anal. R. Mathematical Methods of Classical Mechanics. 1 (1967) 113. Appl. Mathematics Past and Present: Fourier Integral Opu erators. New York. A. Encyclopedia of Mathematical Sciences. Symplectic geometry and topology. The Geometry and Physics of Knots.. Catastrophe theory (3rd edition). New York.A. Deformation theory and quantization. L. M. Studies 99. Progress in Mathematics vol. and Tu. [10] Berezin. a [9] Bayen. Foundations of Mechanics. 93 SpringerVerlag. Cambridge. 1990. 1990. Some remarks about the associated envelope of a Lie algebra. New York. V. 61151... and Sternheimer. V. Birkh¨user. SpringerVerlag. L... Appl. [5] Arnol’d.I. 1982. and Geometric Quantization. Funct.. J.
Symplectic Techniques in Physics. 14. New York. J. The Principles of Quantum Mechanics.. Geom. (New edition to be published by Birkh¨user Boston in 1995. Amer.. 119... Oxford. Diﬀ. o [32] H¨rmander. Deformation Theory of Algebras and Structures and Applications. A.I. [33] Iglesias. 2955. J. 1973. M. R. R. Courant Institute... 1951. M. Vols. Providence. Math. e [23] Fedosov. The Analysis of Linear Partial Diﬀerential Operators. 127 (1971) 79183... 198390.. V. and Lecomte. Inst.. [31] H¨rmander. Stable Mappings and Their Singularities. L. [26] Golubitsky. A. Soc. Gordon and Breach. Lecture Notes in Math..T.. P. J. Cambridge. Hazewinkel and M. 1988. New York. o SpringerVerlag. Paris. [34] Karasev. Graduate Texts in Math. Academic Press. S. A simple geometrical construction of deformation quantization. Math. Les connexions inﬁnit´simales dans un espace ﬁbr´ diﬀ´rentiable. A. M. V. [24] Folland. Guillemin. 1993. P. V. American Mathematical Society. and Sternberg. New constructions of symplectic manifolds.. C.. to appear. G. equivalence. Noncommutative Geometry. New York. Math. [20] Dirac. Providence. 1950. 1336 (1988). SpringerVerlag. Harmonic Analysis in Phase Space. Annals of mathematics studies 122. Fourier integral operators I.. Pub.. Princeton University Press.. Symplectic Geometry. and Maslov. Existence. Dordrecht (1988).[18] Connes.. Gerstenhaber. NYU. e e e Colloque de Topologie (Espaces Fibr´s) tenu a Bruxelles du 5 au 8 juin. Surveys 14. 14... e Georges Thone. [21] Duistermaat. [28] Guillemin. Acta Math. Fourier (to appear). 897960.. [27] Gompf. (1973). V. Kluwer Acad. La trilogie du moment.V. S. P. 1989. Clarenden Press. and Sternberg. [25] Fomenko. derivations. L. 1977. Nonlinear Poisson Brackets : Geometry and Quantization Translations of mathematical monographs vol. Ann...) a [22] Ehresmann. 131 . vol. Li`ge and Masson et Cie. M. Geometric Asymptotics.P. San Diego. Cambridge University Press. Ann. [19] De Wilde.. 40 (1994) 213238. 1995. pp. Formal deformations of the Poisson Lie algebra of a symplectic manifold and starproducts.. B. 1930..B. eds. in M. [30] Helﬀer.... Semiclassical analysis for the Schrodinger operator and applications. [29] Guillemin. B. Fourier Integral Operators. 1984.
Cambridge.. Singapore. J. New York. Encyclopedia of Mathematical Sciences. Univ. Novikov. [47] Olver. 961972. F. Berlin. 1974. 1963. deGruyter Studies in Math. eds. [43] Maslov. Pub. [37] Kostant. [45] Moser. 132 . Gos. vol. London Math. de Gruyter (to appear). Phys. V.. V.. [44] M´lotte. Dr. Moscow. Invariant deformations of the Poisson Lie algebra of a symplectic mane ifold and star products. Teubner. SpringerVerlag. 1992. Lecture Notes in Mathematics.. S. Reidel. Quantization and unitary representations. 122 (1989). Soc. 1890. New York..J. Lecture Note Series 174. Press. Theory and Applications. Dordrecht (1988). SpringerVerlag. [40] McDuﬀ. 87208.. Lectures on Mechanics. [39] Lie.427. Vol. 4. [49] Omori. 280296. W. V. Theorie der Transformationsgruppen.P.[35] Kirillov. 120 (1965).. Inﬁnitedimensional Lie Transformation Groups.. W. Academic Press. Deformation Theory of Algebras and Structures and Applications.. New York.M. Dynamical Systems IV. in M. and Marle. V. M. Math. [41] Mackey.. [36] Klingenberg.. unter Mitwirkung von Prof. [38] Libermann. Theory of Perturbations and Asymptotic Methods. [48] Omohundro. Reading. B. [42] Marsden. B. Deformation quantization of Heisenberg manifolds. Asymptotics and Special Functions. [50] Rieﬀel. 1975. Berlin.. I. Geometric quantization.. Friedrich Engel). Kluwer Acad. Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics.Benjamin. Leipzig.. On the volume elements on a manifold. Cambridge Univ. P. Math. pp.. 1990. Gerstenhaber.A. 137172. 1986. (Zweiter Abschnitt. Riemannian Geometry.W. Symplectic Geometry and Analytical Mechanics.. Geometric Perturbation Theory in Physics. [46] Nazaikinskii. 1965. 1987. G.. World Scientiﬁc. C. New York... Examples of symplectic structures. 1336. Lecture Notes in Math. Trans. Dordrecht.. J. Amer. and Shatalov. Sternin..I. Moskov.. 170 (1970). eds. 89 (1987). 1982. D..P. 531562. Hazewinkel and M. Comm. Math. Arnol’d and S. Soc. S. Methods of Noncommutative Analysis. W. Invent. D.
New York.M. 91128. 1980. J. J. Geometric Quantization and Quantum Mechanics. 6 (1971).. Deformation quantization. 1987. [68] Weinstein. Soc. MSRI Publications. no... 1970. I. W. Quantization of nonlinear systems. [57] Tulczyjew. ´ [58] Unterberger. Groupoids. Ann.. 1991.M. [54] Souriau.. J. Symplectic Geometry and Secondary Characteristic Classes...M. Japan 40 (1988). Symplectic manifolds and their lagrangian submanifolds.. 836 (1980)..Donato et al. e 133 .Dazord and A. 1977. 1977. Math. Comm. 68. Dunod.. 1980. Paris. (new series) 5 (1981). Birkh¨user. 27 (1977) 101e 114. A. A. N. in Symplectic Geometry and Mathematical Physics: actes du colloque in l’honneur de JeanMarie Souriau.. geometric quantization. New York. [59] Vaisman. 21 (1988). Symplectic groupoids. e [55] Souriau. Basel. Vols I. Structure des Syst`mes Dynamiques. Providence. Amer. New York. F. a Boston. [64] Weinstein.M. Birkh¨user.. I. Math. 1–13.. 789. 705727.Weinstein. A. [63] Weinstein. Math. The Legendre transform. Math. 1991. S´minaire Bourbaki. R. Sur les th´or`mes de de Rham. A. Quantiﬁcation et analyse pseudodiﬀ´rentielle.II.. A. Phys. A.. [60] Wallach. vol. and irrational rotation algebras. A. P. Plenum Press.. 468488. 329346... Regional conference series in mathematics 29.. 1987. eds. and Integrable Systems. 1 (1960). SpringerVerlag. a [67] Weinstein. H. Ec. in Symplectic Geometry. Sci.. 26 (1952) 119145. Poincar´. [65] Weinstein. a [52] Segal. Ann. Soc. 133158. Inst. Symplectic geometry. Norm. eds.S. P. e [56] Treves.[51] Robert. Press. J.. Springer. Bulletin A. J. [61] Weil. Introduction to Pseudodiﬀerential and Fourier Integral Operators. Juin 1994. Math. Lecture Notes in Math. [53] Sniatycki. Advances in Math. A. Birkh¨user. A. D. Brookline. Progress in Mathematics. [66] Weinstein. Sci. Groupes diﬀ´rentiels. Autour de l’Approximation Semiclassique. Noncommutative geometry and geometric quantization. Symplectic Geometry and Fourier Analysis.. Boston. Helv. e Sup. Coisotropic calculus and Poisson groupoids. e e [62] Weinstein. Lectures on Symplectic Manifolds.
New York. and Xu. 1950. P. Extensions of symplectic groupoids and quantization. Oxford. K. H. Geometric Quantization. Oxford U. Diﬀerential Geometry Dekker.. and Ishihara. Tangent and Cotangent Bundles..J. N. 159189 [70] Weyl.. [72] Yano.M.. J. 134 .. New York. Reine Angew. Press. 1992.. 2nd Ed. Math. A.. 417 (1991). S. Dover Publications.[69] Weinstein. [71] Woodhouse. 1973. The Theory of Groups and Quantum Mechanics.