Contents

1 Introduction: The Harmonic Oscillator 5
2 The WKB Method 8
2.1 Some Hamilton-Jacobi 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 semi-classical 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 semi-classical 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 physics-oriented 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 semi-classical 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 DMS-90-01089 and 93-01089.
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 second-order ordinary differential equation
into a system of two first-order 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 time-evolution 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 divergence-free, 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 1-dimensional 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 square-norm
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 t-dependent 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 Hamilton-Jacobi 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 1-dimensional 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
,
so-called 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 time-independent 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 square-integrable 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 real-valued 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 first-order approximation attempt will ignore the
last term in brackets; to kill the other two terms, we require that S satisfy the eikonal or
Hamilton-Jacobi 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 Hamilton-Jacobi 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 first-order approximate solu-
tion of Schr¨odinger’s equation.
3
See [55] for a group-theoretic 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 Hamilton-Jacobi 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
first-order approximate solution to the time-independent Schr¨odinger equation.
We will call a phase function S : R
n
→R admissible if it satisfies the Hamilton-Jacobi
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 n-dimensional submanifold of H
−1
(E).
2. The pull-back 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 n-dimensional 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 1-dimensional harmonic oscillator are lagrangian sub-
manifolds in the phase plane. A regular level curve of the hamiltonian is an ellipse L. Since
L is 1-dimensional, the pull-back 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 pull-back 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

n
= −dH,
i.e.

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 2-form 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, skew-symmetric
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 n-dimensional. These remarks imply that X
H
is tangent to L, and
we have the following result.
Hamilton-Jacobi 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 stationary-state 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 second-order solution ϕ = e
iS/
a is called the semi-classical
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 Hamilton-Jacobi 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 non-projectable
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 well-defined
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 semi-classical 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 time-independent 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 Hamilton-Jacobi 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
complex-valued 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 first-order 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 Hamilton-Jacobi 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 semi-classical 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
divergence-free 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 Hamilton-Jacobi theorem, and since the Lie derivative is invariant
under diffeomorphism, this equation is satisfied if and only if the pull-back 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 half-density on L, invariant by X
H
. (See Appendix A for
a discussion of densities of fractional order.)
In other words, a (geometric) semi-classical state should be defined as a lagrangian sub-
manifold L of R
2n
equipped with a half-density 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 1-dimensional 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 semi-classical 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 semi-classical
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 semi-classical 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 half-densities 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
half-densities 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 half-density on L = im(dS) which
is invariant under the flow of the classical hamiltonian, then e
iS/
(dS)

a is a
second-order approximate solution to the time-independent 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 half-density on R
n
half-density
time-evolution Hamilton’s equations Schr¨odinger equation
generator of evolution function H on R
2n
operator
ˆ
H on smooth
half-densities
stationary state lagrangian submanifold in level set eigenvector of
ˆ
H
of H with invariant half-density
Proceeding further, we could attempt to interpret a solution of the recursive system of
inhomogeneous transport equations on R
n
as an asymptotic half-density 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 semi-classical 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” semi-classical 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
half-densities on lagrangian submanifolds. In particular, we will start with an invariant
half-density on a (possibly non-projectable) lagrangian submanifold of R
2n
and attempt to
use this data to construct an explicit semi-classical 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
finite-dimensional 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 n-dimensional 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

n
= −dH.
Finally, our proof of the Hamilton-Jacobi 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 2-forms with certain additional
properties. In this section, we first study such forms pointwise, collecting pertinent facts
about nondegenerate, skew-symmetric bilinear forms. We then turn to the definition of
symplectic manifolds.
Linear symplectic structures
Suppose that V is a real, m-dimensional 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 ω-orthogonal 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 skew-symmetric, 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 n-dimensional 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 skew-symmetric 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 ω-compatible)
if J : V → V is a linear symplectomorphism and g
J
(, ) = ω(, J) defines a symmetric,
positive-definite bilinear form on V .
Theorem 3.2 Every symplectic vector space (V, ω) admits a compatible complex structure.
Proof. Let ' , ` be a symmetric, positive-definite inner product on V , so that ω is represented
by an invertible skew-adjoint 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 skew-symmetry 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 ω-compatible, 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 positive-definite.
2
Corollary 3.3 The collection . of ω-compatible 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, positive-definite 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 ω-compatible, 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 1-parameter 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 self-adjoint. Consequently,
dim(V ) = 2k implies dim(sp(V)) = dim(Sp(V)) = k(2k + 1).
Distinguished subspaces
The ω-orthogonal 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 skew-symmetry 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 1-dimensional, hence isotropic, and W

⊂ W
⊥⊥
= W. In
general, spaces W satisfying the condition W

⊂ W are called coisotropic or involutive.
Finally, if W is self-orthogonal, i.e. W

= W, then the dimension relation above implies that
dimW =
1
2
dimV . Any self-orthogonal 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 self-adjoint.
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 codimension-1 coisotropic subspace ker α of
V whose symplectic orthogonal (ker α)

is the distinguished 1-dimensional subspace of ker α
spanned by ˜ ω
−1
(α).
´
Example 3.5 Suppose that (V, ω) is a 2n-dimensional 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 (finite-dimensional) symplectic vector space V which is not lagrangian, there exists an
isotropic subspace W
t
of V which properly contains W. Beginning with any 1-dimensional
subspace of V , we can apply this remark inductively to conclude that every finite-dimensional
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 ω-compatible 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 n-dimensional vector
space is isomorphic to R
n
, the preceding remarks prove the following linear “normal form”
result:
Theorem 3.8 Every 2n-dimensional 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 ω-compatible 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 inner-product 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 2n-dimensional 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 ω-compatible 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 inner-product and splitting L⊕JL of V induced by J (see
Example 3.1). Thus, a (non-canonical) 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 1-connected 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 ω-compatible 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

V
equals the pull-back 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
)


V
is obtained via pull-back 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

V
= ((T f
1
)

−(T f
2
)


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 skew-symmetry 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

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 1-dimensional harmonic
oscillator is divergence-free.
We now see what is needed to do hamiltonian mechanics on manifolds. A 2-form 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 skew-symmetry 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
2-form 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 Hamilton-Jacobi 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 pull-backs 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 infinite-dimensional 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 1-forms on P; those X which map to exact 1-forms 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 2n-manifold 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 pull-back 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 pull-back 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 1-form,
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 1-form 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 1-form 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

ϕ
(p))(ι
ϕ∗
v) = 'ι
ϕ
(p), π


ϕ∗
v)` = 'ι
ϕ
(p), v`.
2
For this reason, α
M
is often described as the “tautological” 1-form 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

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 1-forms 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 1-form 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 n-manifolds 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 1-form 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.
´
Fiber-preserving symplectomorphisms
On each fiber of the projection π: T

M →M, the pull-back 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 1-form β on M defines a diffeomorphism f
β
of T

M by fiber-wise 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 1-form β on M.
Proof. Fix a point (x
0
, p
0
) ∈ T

M and let ψ be a closed 1-form 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 fiber-derivative 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 1-form on M, then the flow f
t
of the vector field X
β
= −˜ ω
−1
M


β) is
symplectic; since V M ⊂ ker π

β, the Hamilton-Jacobi theorem implies furthermore that the
flow f
t
satisfies the hypotheses of Theorem 3.29.
Corollary 3.30 For any closed 1-form β on M, the time-1 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 fiber-preserving symplectomorphisms
from T

M to T

N.
Corollary 3.31 Any fiber-preserving symplectomorphism F : T

M → T

N can be realized
as the composition of a fiber-translation in T

M with the cotangent lift of a diffeomorphism
N →M.
Proof. By composing F with a fiber-translation 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 fiber-preserving
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 fiber-preserving symplectomorphism F : T

M →T

N
equals the composition of fiber-wise translation by a closed 1-form 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 1-dimensional harmonic oscillator given in the introduction. We then turn to the
semi-classical 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 co-geodesic 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 co-geodesic 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, real-valued 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 Laplace-Beltrami 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 time-independent
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 semi-classical approximation
The basic WKB technique for constructing semi-classical solutions to the Schr¨odinger equa-
tion on M proceeds as in Section 2.2. Specifically, a half-density of the form e
iS/h
a is a
second-order approximate solution of the eigenvector problem (
ˆ
H −E) ϕ = 0 provided that
the phase function S: M →R satisfies the Hamilton-Jacobi equation
H ◦ ι
dS
= E,
and the half-density a satisfies the homogeneous transport equation, which assumes the
coordinate-free 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 Hamilton-Jacobi
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 half-density 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 half-density e
iφ/
a on L can be quantized (i.e.
pulled-back) to yield a second-order 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 semi-classical 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 half-density 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
time-evolution 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 Hamilton-Jacobi and transport equations above make sense for any triple (L, ι, a)
consisting of an arbitrary lagrangian immersion ι : L →T

M and a half-density a on L, it is
tempting to regard (L, ι, a) as a further generalization of the concept of semi-classical 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” semi-classical states can be
used to construct “analytical” semi-classical approximate solutions to the time-independent
Schr¨odinger equation.
35
4 Quantization in Cotangent Bundles
This chapter deals with the problem of constructing semi-classical approximate solutions to
the time-independent 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 half-density 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
semi-classical 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 pulling-back half-densities 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 half-density
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 semi-classical state).
To generalize this procedure, suppose now that ι : L → T

M is a projectable, but not
necessarily exact lagrangian embedding. Since the 1-form 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 half-density a on L, we set
a
j
= a[
L
j
and define a half-density 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

j
/
a
j
.
To quantize (L, ι, a), we must piece together the I
j
to form a well-defined global half-density
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

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 1-form 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 1-form 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 1-form
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 1-form 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
non-projectable immersed lagrangian submanifolds (L, ι) ⊂ T

M, since π
L
cannot be used to
push-forward half-densities 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 half-densities on L to half-densities defined
near non-caustic points of L. Regardless of how this is to be carried out, it is desirable that
quantization be linear with respect to half-densities:
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 semi-classical 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 half-densities, 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 non-caustic 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

−1
L
j
)

e

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 half-densities on L consistently, we must therefore decide how to specify
the relative phases of the oscillatory coefficients e

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 half-density on L, then since

−1
L
)


∂q
= ±2
−1
q
−1/2

∂x
,
the transformation rule for half-densities implies

−1
L
+
)

a = 2
−1/2
q
−1/4
B(q
1/2
) [dq[
1/2

−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 half-density 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 semi-classical 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 well-defined on L, we can treat
certain non-exact 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 half-density on L, we can now quantize (L, ι, φ, a) by summing the pull-backs of e
iφ/
a
to M. In the previous notation, the value of I

(L, ι, φ, a) on U is defined as
¸
j

−1
V
j
)

e
iφ/
a.
Example 4.5 Consider the 1-dimensional 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 1-dimensional 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 non-projectability 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 1-form ϕ = −π

α
M
+ dσ.
Here, σ denotes the multiple-valued 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 mod-Z

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 half-density 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 odd-dimensional 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 1-form 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 1-form
ϕ defines a 2n-dimensional 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
1-dimensional 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 n-dimensional (i.e.
ker(ϕ) is “maximally non-integrable”).
Definition 4.9 A legendrian submanifold of a 2n+1-dimensional strict contact manifold
(Q, ϕ) is an n-dimensional integral submanifold for ϕ.
40
If ϕ is a contact form and f a nowhere-vanishing 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 re-interpreting geometric semi-classical states as
triples (R, , a) consisting of a legendrian immersion (R, ) in a contact manifold together
with a half-density 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 p-axis. If π
p
is a diffeomorphism, then (L, ι) is said to be
p-projectable, 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 p-space.
A simple example of an embedded lagrangian submanifold of T

R which does not project
diffeomorphically onto the q-axis 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 half-density 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 p-space. Using the phase function τ(x) = −q
0
x on
L, we obtain

−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 p-projectable,
so that dτ = ι

(−q dp) for some phase function τ on L. If a is a half-density on L, we define
a function B on p-space 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 half-density
J

(L, ι, τ, a)
def
= T
−1

(B) [dq[
1/2
on q-space, where T

denotes the asymptotic Fourier transform. To relate this procedure to
our earlier quantization by pull-back, we must compare the results in the case of lagrangian
submanifolds L ⊂ R
2
which are bi-projectable, i.e. projectable in both the q- and p-directions.
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 half-density on L, then
the transformation rule for half-densities implies

−1
L
)

a = A[dq[
1/2

−1
p
)

a = [k[
−1/2
A[dp[
1/2
for a real constant A determined by a. Quantization by pull-back 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 half-density obtained from (L, ι, a) by Maslov quantization differs from the simple
pull-back by a constant phase shift.
´
To establish a similar correspondence in somewhat greater generality, consider an arbi-
trary bi-projectable 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 p-space by pull-back:
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 half-density a on L determines functions A(q) and B(p) such that

−1
L
)

a = A[dq[
1/2

−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 half-density
J

(L, ι, τ, a) = (2π)
−1/2

R
e
i(pq+T(p))/
B(p) dp [dq[
1/2
with that obtained by pull-back:
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 bi-projectable (L, ι), we therefore conclude that Maslov’s technique coincides with quan-
tization by pull-back 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 p-projectable lagrangian embedding (L, ι) which is not q-projectable 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 half-density
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 p-dependent 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 non-degenerate in the sense
that if T is a p-dependent phase function for a subset of L, then T
t
has only non-degenerate
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 non-degeneracy 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 figure-eight 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 p-projectable 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 half-density a on L, we quantize each (L
j
, ι, a h
j
) to obtain a half-
density I
j
on R either by pull-back 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 pull-back for any half-density 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 non-caustic points, each half-density I
j
is the sum of the pull-
back of half-densities on each component of L
j
∩π
−1
L
(U). If L
j
is quantized by pull-back, 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 half-densities
are of the form
˜
I
j
= e
−iπs
j
/4
e

j
/
a.
Here, φ is a real-valued 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
q-projectable and is quantized by pull-back; otherwise s
j
equals sgn(T
tt
) for a suitable p-
dependent phase function). For I

(L, ι, a) to be well-defined, we must choose the functions
φ
j
so that
˜
I
j
=
˜
I
k
on each intersection L
j
∩L
k
regardless of the particular half-density 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 Bohr-Sommerfeld 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 half-density locally on L by
means of a slightly more general version of the (inverse) asymptotic Fourier transform. The
result will be a collection of half-densities on M. In order for these half-densities 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 non-projectable 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
fiber-derivative ∂ϕ/∂θ vanishes at ˜ p, the expression for dϕ
˜ p
produces a well-defined 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 non-injective, and thus the image of Σ
ϕ
is a non-projectable 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 q-space.
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 fiber-derivative 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 well-defined 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 fiber-hessian 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 pull-back p

M
T

M, giving rise to a natural
projection E

p
→ T

M. On the fiber-critical 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 fiber-hessian 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 fiber-hessian 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
x-projectable 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 non-surjective) 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 fiber-critical 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 so-called 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 1-1 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 1-forms 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 1-parameter 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 time-dependent 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


t
dt

+ f

t
(L
Xt
ω
t
) = f

t

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 1-form 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 2-form 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 k-form 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 (time-dependent) 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 six-dimensional 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 ω-compatible 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 fiber-hessian Hφ has rank k at a point b ∈ Σ
φ
,
then by the lower-semicontinuity of rank Hφ, there exists an integrable subbundle F

→E =
ker(p
M∗
) such that the fiber-hessian 

◦ ∇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 fiber-hessian
Hφ has rank k at a point b ∈ Σ
φ
. Then there exists a fiber-preserving 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
fiber-hessian 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 1-form 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 fiber-critical 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 fiber-preserving 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 degree-1 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 negative-definite. Since the fiber-hessian 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 figure-eight.
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 self-intersections which has zero Liouville
class, but still admits no global phase function, since its Maslov class is nonzero.
´
55
As a degree-1 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 Z-bundle 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 half-densities 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 half-densities 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 mod-Z

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

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

L,ι,
) is a complex vector
space isomorphic to C. Otherwise, Γ
par

L,ι,
) consists of a single point (the zero section of
Φ
L,ι,
). The product
Γ
L,ι
=
¸
>0
Γ
par

L,ι,
)
then has the structure of a C-module. An element s ∈ Γ
L,ι
is then a (generally discontinuous)
function which assigns to each > 0 an element s

in Γ
par

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 half-densities 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 1-densities on the fibers of p
B
, i.e., σ
x
is a density on each nonempty
p
−1
B
(x). By fiber-integration we pass to a half-density 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 half-density 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
fiber-critical 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
half-density 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

L
φ
,ι,
) defined above). When (L, ι) is
projectable, the symbol s
a
and the half-density 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 half-density 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 half-density 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 fiber-critical 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 well-defined, up to O() terms. Furthermore, we note that Theorem 4.27
asserts that this choice of I

(L, ι, s) coincides with pull-back.
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 semi-classical 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 fiber-hessian 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

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 half-densities 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
half-density 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
half-densities 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


j
, a
j
).
The family I

(L, ι, s) consists of those distributional half-densities 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 half-density 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 fiber-preserving, 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 semi-classical 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


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 semi-classical 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


.
Thus, a symbol on the immersed lagrangian submanifold L is well-defined 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 Hamilton-Jacobi 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 well-defined 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 semi-classical
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 Hamilton-Jacobi 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 half-density
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 semi-classical approximate solution to the time-independent
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 half-density
on M
time-evolution 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 semi-classical state in an arbitrary symplectic manifold (P, ω) to be an
immersed lagrangian submanifold equipped with a half-density 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 skew-symmetric bilinear forms yield symplectic vector spaces in the following
way.
Lemma 5.1 A skew-symmetric bilinear form ω on a vector space Y induces a symplectic
structure on Y/Y

.
Proof. First note that ω gives rise to a skew-symmetric 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 self-orthogonality 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 ω-compatible complex structure on V , and set A = JC

and B =
C∩JC. Then A, B are orthogonal to C, C

with respect to the inner-product 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 self-adjoint 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 finite-dimensional 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 self-adjoint linear map A : V

→ V with the projection V → V/E
restricts to a self-adjoint 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 two-form 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 2-form 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 pull-back
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 well-defined 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 2-dimensional
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 set-up. 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 well-defined 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 fiber-hessian

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 set-up 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

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 positive-definite
quadratic form on λ is induced by a section T of Hom(λ, λ

) comprised of self-adjoint 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 principal-bundle product (see Appendix D for the definition)
M
λ,λ
(E) M
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
(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 pull-back: s

0
µ
T

M,ι
F
= µ
M,z
F
.
´
Example 5.27 We can apply the conclusion of the preceding example to fiber-preserving
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 1-form 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,
finite-dimensional 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 well-defined 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 zero-dimensional 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 well-defined
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 1-forms 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 1-form 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 push-forward 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 fiber-derivative 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 semi-classical states, represented as before by lagrangian submanifolds of P
equipped with half-densities, 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 self-adjoint linear op-
erators on some complex Hilbert space H
P
associated to P. The structure of a commutative,
non-associative 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 time-evolution 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, semi-classical 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 classical-quantum correspondence is given by the symbol calculus of Fourier integral
operators.
6.1 Compositions of semi-classical states
In Section 4.4, we defined a semi-classical 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 semi-classical states.
Reduction of semi-classical 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 half-density 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 well-defined 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 pull-back to I of the Liouville
forms on T

M and T

N coincide, and thus, the pull-back 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 pull-back 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 pull-back 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 pull-back of the Maslov bundle of L
C
to I is canonically isomorphic to
M
λ
C

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 half-density 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 semi-classical states
If L
1
, L
2
are immersed lagrangian submanifolds of T

M, T

N, then their product L
2
L
1
gives
a well-defined 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 semi-classical states (L
1
, s
1
), (L
2
, s
2
) in T

M, T

N is the
semi-classical 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 semi-classical states (L, s) in T

(M N) and (L
t
, s
t
) in T

(N V ) define
a semi-classical 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 half-density 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 semi-classical 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 semi-classical 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 semi-classical
state (L
2
◦ L
1
, s
2
◦ s
1
) in T

(M V ).
2
86
Example 6.5 Consider a semi-classical 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 semi-classical state (L, s) in T

M is transformed by F into the semi-classical 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 half-density [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 complex-valued 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 half-density 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 semi-classical state (L, s) equals the semi-classical state
(L
F
◦ L, (h ◦ ι) s).
Similarly, if β is a closed 1-form 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 semi-classical state of the form
(L
F
, e
iS/
⊗h) with (L, ι, s) yields the semi-classical state (L
F
◦ L, e
i(S◦π
L
)/
(h ◦ ι) s).
´
6.2 WKB quantization and compositions
To define the composition of semi-classical states (L, s) ∈ Hom(T

M, T

N) and (
˜
L, ˜s) ∈
Hom(T

N, T

V ) as a semi-classical 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 half-density on M is then a continuous,
C-linear functional on [Ω[
1/2
0
M. We denote the space of distributional half-densities 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 fiber-critical set Σ
φ
= ¦(x, x, ξ) : 'x, ξ` = 0¦ induces a well-defined 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 pull-back 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 well-defined 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 semi-classical 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 first-order 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 semi-classical 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 time-independent Schr¨odinger equation is then
P

ψ = 0,
where P

=
ˆ
H −E is the zeroth-order 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 first-order approximate solutions to
the time-independent Schr¨odinger equation arise from semi-classical 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 well-defined 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 well-defined
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
half-densities 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 half-densities (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 semi-classical 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 well-defined distributional half-density family
I

(L, s) on M.
It is easy to see that the fiber-critical 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 pull-back:
(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 semi-classical states contained in C quantize to first-order 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 semi-classical 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 simply-connected,
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 n-sphere
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 mod-Z

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, complex-valued functions on the cotangent bundle P = T

M itself, with respect to
the inner-product
'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 1-forms 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 1-forms 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 1-form 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 1-form 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 1-form ϕ having curvature ω.
The upshot of the Kostant-Souriau 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 real-valued 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

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 ϕ-preserving 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 complex-valued functions on Q with the inner-product
'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
).
´
Kostant-Souriau 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 self-adjoint, 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

f
u, v` = −'u, ξ
f
v`
for real-valued functions u, v on Q. Combined with the definition of ρ
k
, conjugate-symmetry
of the inner-product implies that

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
inner-product
'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 self-adjoint 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 Kostant-Souriau 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 p-independent 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
complex-valued symplectic form ω
C
given by the complex-linear extension of ω to T
C
P. In-
tegrability of T means that locally on P there exist complex-valued 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
q-space. 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
free-particle H(q, p) = p
2
/2 is ρ(H) = m
p
2
/2
, and so the p-polarization appears to be better
adapted to this case.
99
´
A real polarization T of a symplectic 2n-manifold P defines a subspace T(P) ⊂ C

(P)
of functions constant along the leaves of T. According to the Hamilton-Jacobi 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 torsion-free connection on TM.
Since any polarization-preserving 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
simply-connected 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 T-parallel 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
2-form 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 pull-back 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 ω-orthogonal, 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 Cauchy-Riemann 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 T-parallel 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 T-parallel 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 square-integrable with
respect to the measure e
−[z[
2
dz, known as the Fock or Bargman-Segal 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 T-parallel 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 finite-dimensional 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 Hirzebruch-Riemann-Roch formula:
dimH
P
k
=

P
e

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 leading-order 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 half-forms
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 T-parallel 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 pre-Hilbert space
structure on H
T
. On P, the square of an T-parallel 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 multiply-connected 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 T-parallel sections
of E whose restrictions to each leaf are smooth. Leaves on which E has trivial holonomy are
then said to comprise the Bohr-Sommerfeld 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 mod-Z

reduction of the area it encloses;
thus the Bohr-Sommerfeld 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 G-bundle 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 G-bundles (
˜
P
1
, Φ
1
), (
˜
P
2
, Φ
2
) over P are considered equivalent if
there exists a
˜
G-equivariant 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 n-manifold 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 Stiefel-Whitney class vanishes.
´
Example 7.14 Since π
1
(Sp(n)) · Z, there exists a unique connected double-covering group
of Sp(n), known as the metaplectic group Mp(n). A symplectic 2n-plane 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
Stiefel-Whitney class vanishes.
A symplectic manifold P whose tangent bundle is equipped with a metaplectic structure
is called a metaplectic manifold. If the Stiefel-Whitney 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 double-cover 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 n-plane 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 Stiefel-Whitney class is zero (see [28]).
´
The importance of the metalinear group for our purposes is that it admits 1-dimensional
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 half-forms
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 square-root of (det ◦ρ)
(A, a) →(det A)
1/2
e
iπa/2
.
A section of Λ
1/2
F then identifies with a complex-valued 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 square-root 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 half-forms on F. Evidently, the product
of two half-forms on F yields an n-form; similarly, a half-form λ and a conjugate half-form
µ can be multiplied to give a 1-density 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 2n-manifold 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 ω-compatible 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 Bohr-Sommerfeld correction in the case of the
1-dimensional 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

),
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

) →(r, θ, a e
2iφ
).
The pull-back 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

) : 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 half-form 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 Bohr-Sommerfeld variety consists of circles of energy E =
(n + 1/2)π, in accordance with the corrected Bohr-Sommerfeld 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 leaf-wise foliation defines a metalinear structure on the leaf space
P
T
in such a way that half-forms on P
T
are in 1-1 correspondence with T-parallel negative
half-forms 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 inner-product
's
1
⊗λ
1
, s
2
⊗λ
2
` =

P
F
's
1
, s
2
` λ
1
λ
2
.
Note that integration is well-defined, since λ
1
λ
2
is a density on P
T
.
107
´
Blattner-Kostant-Sternberg 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 half-forms
on T
2
and the space of conjugate half-forms on T
1
(see [28]). Using this identification, we
can pair a half-form λ
1
on T
1
with a half-form 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 Blattner-Kostant-Sternberg kernel.
Example 7.20 The basic example of a Blattner-Kostant-Sternberg 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 p-independent functions σ
q
(q, p) = u(q) on R
2n
,
which we may identify with the space of smooth functions on q-space. Similarly, if T
p
is the
p =constant polarization, then a smooth function v(p) on p-space 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 q-space to a
function v(p) on p-space 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 1-parameter 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
Blattner-Kostant-Sternberg 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 semi-classical 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 “semi-classical state” in P consisting of a lagrangian
submanifold L ⊂ P with some extra structure, such as a half-density or half-form 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 δ-function
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 anti-Poisson 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 skew-symmetric 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 finite-dimensional 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 Lie-Poisson 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 Lie-Poisson 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 finite-dimensional vector space and π is a skew-symmetric 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 higher-order 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 (1-5) 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 finite-dimensional real vector space and π : V

V

→ R is a
skew-symmetric 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
second-order 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 Moyal-Weyl 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 pull-back
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 pull-back
f ∗

g = ∆

´

(f g)
113
of the Moyal operator defines a ∗-deformation of the Poisson algebra C

(V ) called the
Moyal-Weyl product. In terms of the linear coordinates (y, z) on V V , the operator B
j
in the expansion of the Moyal-Weyl 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 skew-symmetric 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 finite-dimensional 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 anti-symplectic, 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 anti-Poisson. 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 Lie-Poisson 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 δ-functions 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), anti-involution f(g) →f(g
−1
), and
convolution.
There is actually a flaw in the preceding two examples, since geometric quantizaton
produces half-densities 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 finite-dimensional vector space, then a skew-adjoint linear map
π : V

→ V defines a skew-symmetric bilinear form on V

and thus a translation-invariant
Poisson structure on V . If T is a torus equal to the quotient of V by some lattice, then
T inherits a translation-invariant 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 n-form ν on an n-dimensional 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 n-forms 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 complex-valued 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 α-density on V is a map λ : B(V ) →C such that
λ(eA) = λ(e) [ det(A)[
α
.
We denote the vector space of α-densities on V by [Λ[
α
V. Since GL(V ) acts transitively on
B(V ), an α-density is determined by its value on a single basis. As a result, [Λ[
α
V is a
1-dimensional complex vector space.
Operations on densities
1. If σ ∈ [Λ[
α
V and β ∈ C, then σ
β
is a well-defined αβ-density on V .
2. A linear map T : V →V

induces a real-valued 1-density |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 1-density |˜ 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 well-defined 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[

C
given explicitly by
σ →σ ⊗|T|

= [ det
θ
T[
α
σ ⊗θ

,
where θ is any real-valued 1-density 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 α-density 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 density-bundle 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, compactly-supported sections. The density spaces associated to the tangent bundle
of M are denoted [Ω[
α
M. An n-form on an n-manifold M induces an α-density [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 pre-Hilbert space structure on the space [Ω[
1/2
c
M of smooth, compactly-supported
half-densities 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 self-adjoint map associated to Q and D is the second-order
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 n-manifold 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 well-defined self-adjoint
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

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 n-manifold 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 Γ-valued
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
degree-k
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 k-th
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 k-form 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

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 k-cocycle 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, fiber-preserving 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 fiber-product Q
P
Q
t
(which in this case is a T

T

-
bundle over the base), modulo the anti-diagonal 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 1-form 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 1-forms on the U
j
satisfying
ϕ
j
−ϕ
k
= d˜ g
jk
,
where ˜ g
jk
are again R-valued lifts of the transition functions of Q. The curvature of the
connection ϕ is the unique closed 2-form 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 2-form 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 1-form 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 2-chain 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 1-form 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, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1978.
[3] Arnol’d, V.I., On a characteristic class entering into conditions of quantization,
Funct. Anal. Appl. 1 (1967) 1-13.
[4] Arnol’d, V.I., Catastrophe theory (3rd edition), Springer-Verlag, 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,
Springer-Verlag, New York, 1990, pp. 1-136.
[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), 61-151.
[10] Berezin, F.A., Some remarks about the associated envelope of a Lie algebra, Funct.
Anal. Appl. 1, (1967), 91-102.
[11] Berezin, F.A., Quantization, Math USSR Izv. 8 (1974), 1109-1165.
[12] Besse, A. Manifolds All of Whose Geodesics are Closed, Ergebnisse der Math. 93
Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1978.
[13] Bohm, D., Quantum Theory, Prentice-Hall, New York, 1951.
[14] Bott, R. and Tu, L, Differential Forms in Algebraic Topology, Springer-Verlag, 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, Springer-Verlag, 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 star-products. Existence, equivalence, derivations, in
M. Hazewinkel and M. Gerstenhaber, eds., Deformation Theory of Algebras and
Structures and Applications, Kluwer Acad. Pub., Dordrecht (1988), 897-960.
[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. 29-55.
[23] Fedosov, B., A simple geometrical construction of deformation quantization, J. Diff.
Geom. 40 (1994) 213-238.
[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, Springer-Verlag, (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., Semi-classical 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) 79-183.
[32] H¨ormander, L., The Analysis of Linear Partial Differential Operators, Vols. 1-4,
Springer-Verlag, New York, 1983-90.
[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, Springer-Verlag, New
York, 1990, pp. 137-172.
[36] Klingenberg, W., Riemannian Geometry, deGruyter Studies in Math., Berlin, 1982.
[37] Kostant, B., Quantization and unitary representations, Lecture Notes in Math. 170
(1970), 87-208.
[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), 13-36.
[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), 961-972.
[45] Moser, J., On the volume elements on a manifold, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 120
(1965), 280-296.
[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., Infinite-dimensional Lie Transformation Groups, Lecture Notes in Math-
ematics, vol.427, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1975.
[50] Rieffel, M., Deformation quantization of Heisenberg manifolds, Comm. Math. Phys.
122 (1989), 531-562.
132
[51] Robert, D., Autour de l’Approximation Semi-classique, Progress in Mathematics,
vol. 68, Birkh¨auser, Boston, 1987.
[52] Segal, I., Quantization of nonlinear systems, J. Math. Phys. 1 (1960), 468-488.
[53] Sniatycki, J., Geometric Quantization and Quantum Mechanics, Springer-Verlag,
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), 91-128.
[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 pseudo-diff´erentielle, Ann. Sci.
´
Ec. Norm.
Sup. 21 (1988), 133-158.
[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) 119-145.
[62] Weinstein, A., Symplectic manifolds and their lagrangian submanifolds, Advances
in Math. 6 (1971), 329-346.
[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), 705-727.
[66] Weinstein, A., Noncommutative geometry and geometric quantization, in Symplectic
Geometry and Mathematical Physics: actes du colloque in l’honneur de Jean-Marie
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), 159-189
[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

.

.

.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 The 5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 5. . . . . . . . 2. .4 WKB quantization . . . . . . . . . .1 Symplectic structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Symplectic Manifolds 3. . . . . . . 3. . . . . . . . . . 6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Quantization in Cotangent Bundles 4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . The symplectic category . . . . . .2 The Maslov correction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 8 Algebraic Quantization 8. . . . .3 5 8 8 11 17 17 28 32 36 36 41 46 56 64 64 76 79 83 83 87 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 5. . . . . . . .1 Compositions of semi-classical states . .2 The WKB approximation . . . . . . . . . . . Symplectic manifolds and mechanics . . . . 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 . Symplectic Category Symplectic reduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 Prequantization .3 Symplectic groupoids . . . . . . . . . . . 98 7. . . .2 WKB quantization and compositions .1 Some Hamilton-Jacobi preliminaries . . . . . . . . . . 8. . . . . . . . . . . . 4. . . . . .3 Phase functions and lagrangian submanifolds 4. . . . . . . . 93 7. . . . . . . . . . . .2 Deformation quantization . 7 Geometric Quantization 93 7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 Cotangent bundles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Fourier Integral Operators 6. . . 8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 Prequantization . . .2 Polarizations and the metaplectic correction . . 4. . . . . . . . . . . .3 Quantization of semi-classical states . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Contents 1 Introduction: The Harmonic Oscillator 2 The WKB Method 2. . . . . . 3. . . . . . . .1 Poisson algebras and Poisson manifolds . . . .3 Mechanics on manifolds . . . . . . . . .

.

and so on. a topic pretty much ignored in the present notes.). complexification. and [56]. it is also a special way of looking at a very broad part of mathematics and its applications. 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.. As each skylark must display its comb. The book [29] treats further topics in symplectic geometry and mechanics. 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). transversality. symplectisation) there is as yet no axiomatic theory describing them. so every branch of mathematics must finally display symplectisation. For more extensive treatment of the PDE aspects of the subject. one of the first to treat the connections between classical and quantum mechanics from a geometric viewpoint. written at about the same time. is [28]. For classical mechanics and symplectic geometry. we refer to other sources for many details which are omitted here. These notes are still not in final form. In mathematics there exist operations on different levels: functions acting on numbers. [60] or [71]. theorems. but they have already benefitted from the comments 1 We like the following quotation from [4] very much: In recent years. one may consult [35]. and in o turn provides a geometric foundation for the further analysis of this and other formulations of quantum mechanics. functors). [8]. [38]. vector fields. we refer to [43] for a physics-oriented presentation and to the notes [21] and the treatises [32]. we suggest [1]. On the other hand. a much more complete reference on the subject. Although some such highest level operations are presently known (for example. in the fall semester of 1992 and again at the Centre Emile Borel (Institut Henri Poincar´) in the spring semester e of 1994. 3 . and which can be bypassed on a first reading. A previous paper by one of us [64] referred to “the symplectic creed”. [54]. The pamphlet [63] is in some sense a precursor to these notes. superisation. [6].1 In these notes. [46]. operators. we show how symplectic geometry arises from the study of semi-classical solutions to the Schr¨dinger equation. [53]. These notes are meant to function as a guide to the literature. symplectic and contact geometries have encroached on all areas of mathematics. etc. Berkeley. with special attention to the role of symmetry groups. [2]. Finally. is [41]. Although symplectic geometry is like any field of mathematics in having its definitions. algebraisation.Preface These notes are based on a course entitled “Symplectic geometry and geometric quantization” taught by Alan Weinstein at the University of California. but on all the mathematics at once. two basic references on quantum mechanics itself are [13] and [20]. [25]. functors acting on operators. The aim of the course was to give students an introduction to the ideas of microlocal analysis and the related symplectic geometry. An earlier work. For many “symplecticians”. acting not on details (functions. it is almost a religion. etc. Symplectisation belongs to the small set of highest level operations. but most of them provide too much detail for the reader who just wants to find out what the subject is about. There already exist many books on the subjects treated here. For “geometric quantization”. [59]. operators acting on functions. Bourbakisation.

S. Jim Morehead. We welcome further comments.and suggestions of many readers.W. and Dmitry Roytenberg. A. During the preparation of these notes.B. was supported by NSF graduate and postdoctoral fellowships in mathematics. was partially supported by NSF Grants DMS-90-01089 and 93-01089. especially Maurice Garay. We would like to thank the Centre Emile Borel and the Isaac Newton Institute for their hospitality. 4 .

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. are called Hamilton’s equations.2 Hamilton’s equations define a flow on the phase plane representing the time-evolution of the classical system at hand. 2 5 . Specifically. we can convert this second-order ordinary differential equation into a system of two first-order equations.1 Introduction: The Harmonic Oscillator In these notes. p). p) = + 2m 2 then we find ∂H ∂H p=− ˙ q= ˙ ∂p ∂q These simple equations. ˙ If we now introduce the hamiltonian function H : R2 → R representing the sum of kinetic and potential energies. The classical picture The harmonic oscillator in 1 dimension is described by Newton’s differential equation: m¨ = −kx. x By a standard procedure. The derivative of H along a solution curve is dH ∂H ∂H = q+ ˙ p = −pq + q p = 0. beginning with a very concrete example and its proposed solution. ˙ ˙˙ ˙˙ dt ∂q ∂p If we had chosen x rather than mx as the second coordinate of our phase plane. We note two qualitative features of the hamiltonian description of a system: 1. we will take a “spiral” approach toward the quantization problem. we would not have ˙ ˙ arrived at this universal form of the equations. ˙ so that Newton’s equation becomes the pair of equations: q= ˙ p m p = −kq. we set q=x p = mx. and points in the phase plane move clockwise around each ellipse. and then returning to the same kind of problem at progressively higher levels of generality. 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]). solution curves in the case of the harmonic oscillator are ellipses centered at the origin. Introducing the “phase plane” R2 with position and momentum coordinates (q. which can describe a wide variety of classical mechanical systems with appropriate choices of the function H. p2 kq 2 H(q.

Schr¨dinger’s o ∞ equation defines a vector field on C (R. The wave function ψ(x. i.i. t)|2 is interpreted as a probability density for observing the oscillator at the position x at time t. Planck’s constant has the dimensions of action (energy × time). ∂t A solution ψ of this equation does not represent a classical trajectory. 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. or as a path in the function space C ∞ (R. t) satisfying the 1-dimensional Schr¨dinger equation: o 2 ∂ψ ∂2ψ k 2 =− + x ψ. C). p) = ( ∂H . From the latter point of view. ∂q ∂p ∂p ∂q Thus the vector field XH is divergence-free. t) itself may be viewed alternatively as a t-dependent function of x. 6 . if ψ is normalized.e. The divergence of the hamiltonian vector field XH = (q. Interpreting the right hand side of this equation as the result of applying to the wave function ψ the operator i ∂ψ ˆ = Hψ. instead. the motion of the harmonic oscillator is described by a complexvalued wave function ψ(x. 2. we may rewrite the Schr¨dinger equation o ˆ def H = − 2 then its square-norm ρ(x. C) representing the time evolution of the quantum system. the value of H is constant along integral curves of the hamiltonian vector field. 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. a wave function satisfying Schr¨dinger’s equation then corresponds to an integral o curve of the associated flow.e. this property of the flow is interpreted as the law of conservation of energy. The quantum mechanical picture In quantum mechanics. The description of classical hamiltonian mechanics just given is tied to a particular coordinate system. ∂t 2m ∂x2 2 Here. t) = |ψ(x.. 2m ∂x2 2 is the operator of multiplication by x2 . Like Hamilton’s equations in classical mechanics. and its flow preserves area in the phase plane. Since H represents the total energy of the system. i ψ ∗ ψ = 1. − ∂H ) is ˙ ˙ ∂p ∂q · XH = ∂2H ∂2H − = 0.

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. ∂x The classical hamiltonian H(q. velocities. p) = p2 /2m+kq 2 /2 then corresponds naturally to the operator ˆ H. so ˆ ˆ 2 2 that we are forced to choose between (1 + q )ˆ and p2 (1 + q 2 ). the classical motions described by solutions of Hamilton’s equations lead to approximate solutions of Schr¨dinger’s equation. In these notes. we run in to the problem that the operators q and p do not commute with one another. The difference between these choices turns out to become small when → 0. one tenuous connection can be drawn as follows. Based on the present discussion of the harmonic oscillator. p we associate the differential operators q → q = mx ˆ ∂ . but also as a tool for developing approximate solutions to the quantum equations of motion. p → p = −i ˆ 7 . and the classical limit is applicable when divided by this unit is much less than 1. Establishing this relation o between classical and quantum mechanics is important. For any particular mechanical system. we will often regard mathematically as a formal parameter or a variable rather than as a fixed number. 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.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. But how can a constant with physical dimensions be small? Although there remain some unsettled issues connected with the question. But how can a constant approach zero? Besides the problem of “quantization of equations. from which a unit of action appropriate to the system can be derived. “How can become small?” the answer is essentially the following.” we will also treat that of “quantization of solutions. for systems which are in some sense macroscopic. . . To the classical position and momentum observables q. among a number of other ˆ p ˆ ˆ possibilities. As soon as we wish to “quantize” a more complicated energy function.” That is. there are usually characteristic distances. we would like to establish that. such as (1 + q 2 )p2 . masses. .

Eliminating the factor e−iωt above.1 Some Hamilton-Jacobi 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. (Other names. we look for stationary states. where the method is traced all the way back to 1817. o we obtain ˆ ω ϕ(x) e−iωt = (Hϕ)(x) e−iωt . nevertheless. so-called because as time evolves. References [13] and [47] contain a discussion of some of its history. so the following discussion is absolutely central to these notes. For convenience. Substituting this expression for ψ in the Schr¨dinger equation. Schr¨dinger’s equation assumes the form o i ∂ψ ˆ = Hψ. ˙ ∈ R+ . Kramers.) 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. o As a first step toward solving the Schr¨dinger equation. 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. t) = ϕ(x) e−iωt . Also see [5]. Green. o i.e. 2. and Brillouin. ∂t ∂2 + mV 2m ∂x2 2 where ˆ H=− is the Schr¨dinger operator. Consider a 1-dimensional system with hamiltonian H(q. Hamilton’s equations now become q= ˙ For fixed p m p = −V (q).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. p) = p2 + V (q). and Jeffreys are sometimes attached to this method. including Liouville. we arrive at the time-independent Schr¨dinger equao tion: ˆ (H − E) ϕ = 0. 2m where V (x) is a potential (for example the potential kx2 /2 for the harmonic oscillator). solutions of the form ψ(x. after Wentzel. these solutions keep the same form (up to multiplication by a complex scalar of norm 1). we will still refer to the method as WKB. 8 .

if V varies with x. then ξ should vary with x as well. o Such a wave function is not square-integrable and as such is said to be “unnormalizable”. Then S satisfies the Hamilton-Jacobi equation if and only if the image of dS lies in the level manifold H −1 (E). S (x) = ± 2m(E − V (x)). To understand the phase function S geometrically. and in this case we have ˆ (H − E) ϕ = (S (x))2 i + (V − E) − S (x) eiS(x)/ . and one has an abundance of exact solutions of the Schr¨dinger equation which are oscillatory and bounded. but which has a definite momentum (since it is an eigenfunction of the momentum operator p). These two uses of the term “phase” seem to be unrelated! 9 . and so we are dealing with a free particle. a more general solution candidate is then ϕ(x) = eiS(x)/ . 2m See [55] for a group-theoretic interpretation of such states. Suppose for the moment that the potential V is constant. where as usual we set p = S .e. the (real) value of ξ is thus determined up to a choice of sign. the ˆ constant ξ is imaginary. the eigenvalue E represents the energy of the system. S (x)) = i. and there are only real exponential solutions. The basic idea at this stage of the WKB method is that.3 When E < V . which has a “definite value” in this state. For V < E. This equation means that ϕ is to be an eigenfunction of the linear differential ˆ operator H. o 3 4 (S (x))2 + V (x) = E. in which case the force −V (x) is zero. p). for some real-valued function S known as a phase function. 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. Trying a solution of the form ϕ(x) = eixξ for some constant ξ. we consider the classical phase4 plane R2 T ∗ R with coordinates (q. our first-order approximation attempt will ignore the last term in brackets. to kill the other two terms. it represents a particle which is equally likely to be anywhere in space. This proposed form of the solution is the simplest version of the WKB ansatz. which are unbounded and admit no physical interpretation. The differential dS = S dx can be viewed as a mapping dS : R → T ∗ R.where E = ω. we find that ˆ (H − E) ϕ = 0 ⇔ ( ξ)2 = 2m(E − V ). we require that S satisfy the eikonal or Hamilton-Jacobi equation: H(x. 2m 2m Since we will consider to be “small”. the function S may be taken as the phase function of a first-order approximate solution of Schr¨dinger’s equation.

. Since L is 1-dimensional. As before. . 2. L is an n-dimensional submanifold of H −1 (E). p) = is ˆ H=− p2 i + V (q) 2m 2 ∆ + mV . the ansatz ϕ again constitutes a first-order approximate solution to the time-independent Schr¨dinger equation. The pull-back to L of the form αn = j pj dqj on R2n is exact. then ˆ (H − E) ϕ = S 2m 2 + (V − E) − i ∆S eiS/ 2m will be O( ) provided that S satisfies the Hamilton-Jacobi equation: H x1 .The preceding discussion generalizes easily to higher dimensions. 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. in which “exact” is replaced by “closed”. while (H − E) ϕ = O( ). but the integral of p dq around the curve equals the enclosed nonzero area.. 3. . if we consider a WKB ansatz of the form ϕ = eiS/ . In Rn . ∂x1 ∂xn = S(x) 2m 2 + V (x) = E. Such submanifolds are called lagrangian.. the behavior of an oscillator is nevertheless completely described by its trajectory. While many of the basic constructions of microlocal analysis are motivated by operations on these projectable submanifolds of T ∗ Rn R2n . It is also clear that the curve fails to project diffeomorphically onto R. L is projectable. . A regular level curve of the hamiltonian is an ellipse L. so its pull-back to L is not exact. 10 . This idea. ˆ Since ϕ is of order zero in . which we will clarify later. 2m where ∆ denotes the ordinary Laplacian. o n We will call a phase function S : R → R admissible if it satisfies the Hamilton-Jacobi equation. The image L = im(dS) of the differential of an admissible phase function S is characterized by three geometric properties: 1. The restriction of the canonical projection π : T ∗ Rn → Rn to L induces a diffeomorphism L Rn . ∂S ∂S . For example. applications of the theory require us to extend the constructions to more general n-dimensional submanifolds of R2n satisfying only a weakened version of condition (2) above. the pull-back to L of the form p dq is closed. the level sets for the 1-dimensional harmonic oscillator are lagrangian submanifolds in the phase plane. xn . the Schr¨dinger o operator corresponding to the classical hamiltonian H(q. . is the starting point of the geometrical approach to microlocal analysis. From the classical standpoint.. In other words.

2. The restriction of dαn to the tangent space Tp R2n of R2n at any point p defines a nondegenerate. and thus. In quantum mechanics. subspaces of Tp R2n on which dαn vanishes can be at most n-dimensional. the quantity |ϕ(x)|2 represents the probability of the particle being at the position x. then ϕ(x) = eiS(x)/ satisfies ˆ (H − E) ϕ = O( ). There is no way to improve the order of approximation simply by making a better choice of S. and we have the following result.2 The WKB approximation Returning to our WKB ansatz for a stationary-state solution of the Schr¨dinger equation. then T L lies in the kernel of dH at all points of L. the 2-form dαn vanishes on the subspace of Tp R2n generated by Tp L and XH (p) for each p ∈ L. in other words. If L is a lagrangian submanifold of a level set of H. These remarks imply that XH is tangent to L. in fact. ∂pj ∂qj ∂qj ∂pj j A simple computation shows that XH and the form αn are related by the equation XH i. where its potential energy is higher. i. and there is no reason for this to be constant. It is also clear on physical grounds that our ansatz for ϕ is too restrictive because it satisfies |ϕ(x)| = 1 for all x.e. We may therefore hope to find a better approximate solution by multiplying ϕ by an “amplitude function” a ϕ(x) = eiS(x)/ a(x). or.For now. 11 . it is at least intuitively plausible that a particle is more likely to be found where it moves more slowly. o n we recall that if S : R → R is an admissible phase function. Hamilton’s equations associate the vector field XH = q ˙ ∂ ∂ +p ˙ = ∂q ∂p ∂H ∂ ∂H ∂ − . If the lagrangian submanifold L is locally closed. ϕ is an eigenfunction of H with eigenvalue E. 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. Hamilton-Jacobi theorem . we want to note an important relationship between lagrangian submanifolds of R2n and hamiltonian flows. ˆ Up to terms of order . Recall that to a function H : R2n → R. in other words. v) = −dH(v) for every tangent vector v.. skew-symmetric bilinear form. dαn = −dH. dαn (XH .e. as we will see in the next chapter. this theorem implies that L is invariant under the flow of XH .

To generate better approximate solutions to the eigenfunction problem. the function a assumes complex values. This condition on a is known as the homogeneous transport equation: ∂a ∂S a∆S + 2 = 0. Since the expression above for a does not depend explicitly on the phase function S. ∂xj ∂xj j If S is an admissible phase function. and thus c a= 1 . Since S is assumed to satisfy the Hamilton-Jacobi equation. [4(E − V )] 4 If E > V (x) for all x ∈ R. we obtain a2 S + 2aa S = (a2 S ) = 0 c ⇒ a= √ S for some constant c. observe that these occur precisely at the projected image of those points of L where the √ projection itself becomes singular. 12 . however. we can extend the procedure above by adding to the original amplitude a = a0 certain appropriately chosen functions of higher order in . Consider the next approximation ϕ = eiS/ (a0 + a1 ). then the second-order solution ϕ = eiS/ a is called the semi-classical approximation. 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.If S is again an admissible phase function. For |x| < E. Example 2. as our physical reasoning predicted. Outside the interval |x| ≤ E. we have S = 2m(E − V ). Consider. we might naively attempt to use the same formula when im(dS) is replaced by a non-projectable lagrangian submanifold of H −1 (E). Solving this equation directly. for example. and a is an amplitude which satisfies the homogeneous transport equation. then a is a smooth solution to the homogeneous transport equation. a has (asymptotic) singularities. the homogeneous transport equation amounts to aS + 2a S = 0. At |x| = E. Notice that a = |ϕ| is largest where V is largest. the unbounded potential V (x) = √ x2 in the case of the harmonic oscillator. then ϕ will be an eigenfunction of H modulo terms of order O( 2 ). the function a is still well-defined √ up to a multiplicative constant.1 In 1 dimension.

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. its coefficients ak are uniquely determined. 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 . If we consider as equivalent any two -dependent functions whose difference is O( ∞ ). conversely. ∂xj ∂xj n In general. any asymptotic series can be “summed” to yield such a function.e. if.Assuming that eiS/ a0 is a semi-classical approximate solution. It is obvious that any -dependent function which extends smoothly to = 0 is represented by an asymptotic series. we obtain: ˆ (H − E) ϕ = − 1 i 2m 2 a1 ∆S + 2 j ∂a1 ∂S − i∆a0 ∂xj ∂xj + 3 ∆a1 eiS(x)/ . ∂xj ∂xj This situation can be described in the terminology of asymptotic series as follows. ϕ will be a solution of the time-independent 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 . Such a function is said to be represented by a formal asymptotic expansion of the form ∞ ak k . then each asymptotic series determines a unique equivalence class. where S satisfies the Hamilton-Jacobi equation. the difference K f − k=0 ak k is O( K+1 ) locally uniformly in x. Evidently. a0 satisfies the homogeneous transport equation. and a theorem of E. the function ak satisfies the inhomogeneous transport equation: ak ∆S + 2 j ∂ak ∂S = i∆ak−1 . O( k ) for all k. A WKB ˆ “solution” to the eigenfunction problem Hϕ = Eϕ is then an equivalence class of functions of the form ϕ = eiS/ a.Borel (see [28. 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 ). p. The order of a is the index of its principal part. where each coefficient ak is a smooth k=0 complex-valued function on Rn .28]) tells us that. By an -dependent function f on Rn we will mean a function f : Rn × R+ → C. and for each k > 0. When f admits such an expansion. for each K ∈ Z+ . where is viewed as a parameter ranging in R+ . i.

The generalized or ∂x 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 semi-classical approximation with its amplitude included. H 14 .e. ∂S ) = E. ∂xj ∂xj and for k > p. we can lift all of this activity to the lagrangian submanifold L = im(dS).. suppose that a is a function on Rn which satisfies the homogeneous transport equation: ∂a ∂S = 0. and so the homogeneous transport equation says that a2 XH is divergence-free for the canonical density |dx| = |dx1 ∧ · · · ∧ dxn | on Rn . Rather than considering the transport equation as a condition on the vector field a2 S (on Rn ) per se. j which means that the divergence of the vector field a2 S is zero. Notice first that the restriction to L of the hamiltonian vector field associated to H(q. a function S satisfying the Hamilton-Jacobi equation H(x. we can rewrite it as: ∂ ∂xj a2 ∂S ∂xj = 0. the ak satisfy the recursive transport equations: ak ∆S + 2 j ∂ak ∂S = i∆ak−1 . o Geometry of the transport equation In Section 2.1. p) = p2 /2 + V (q) is i XH |L = j (x) ∂S ∂ ∂V ∂ − ∂xj ∂qj ∂qj ∂pj . ∂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( ∞ ). o i. The projection XH of XH |L onto Rn (the (x) reminds us of the coordinate x on Rn ) there(x) fore coincides with S. we saw that a first-order WKB approximate solution ϕ = eiS/ to the timeindependent Schr¨dinger equation depended on the choice of an admissible phase function. To begin. a∆S + 2 ∂xj ∂xj j After multiplying both sides of this equation by a. But it is better to reformulate this condition as: LX (x) (a2 |dx|) = 0.with the property that its principal part ap satisfies the homogeneous transport equation ap ∆S + 2 j ∂ap ∂S = 0.

Another substantial advantage of the geometric interpretation of the semi-classical approximation is that the concept of an invariant halfdensity depends only on the hamiltonian vector field XH and not on the function S. so it makes sense on any lagrangian submanifold of R2n lying in a level set of H. this equation is satisfied if and only if the pull-back of a2 |dx| to L via the projection π is invariant under the flow of XH . There is a unique (up to a constant) invariant volume element for the hamiltonian flow of H on each level curve H. o 15 . This discussion leads us to another change of viewpoint. namely that the quantum states themselves should be represented. (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. elements of the intrinsic Hilbert space HRn (see Appendix A). the semi-classical state described in the preceding example is a perfectly smooth object everywhere on the lagrangian submanifold L. which we will denote o ˆ . which is defined on the space of smooth o half-densities in terms of the old Schr¨dinger operator on functions. Such a state is stationary when L lies in a level set of the classical hamiltonian and a is invariant under its flow. together with the fact that it is the square of a which appears in the density π ∗ (a2 |dx|).that is. Example 2. by the equation momentarily as Hfun ˆ ˆ H(a|dx|1/2 ) = (Hfun a)|dx|1/2 . Any such level curve L. then eiS/ (dS)∗ a is a second-order approximate solution to the time-independent Schr¨dinger equation.2 Recall that in the case of the 1-dimensional harmonic oscillator. not by functions. invariant by XH . Stationary states ˆ are then eigenvectors of the Schr¨dinger operator H. and since the Lie derivative is invariant under diffeomorphism.e. together with a square root of this volume element. The singularities arise only when we try to transfer the halfdensity from L down to configuration space. a (geometric) semi-classical state should be defined as a lagrangian submanifold L of R2n equipped with a half-density a.) In other words. This observation. constitutes a semi-classical stationary state for the harmonic oscillator. Since XH is tangent to L by the Hamilton-Jacobi theorem. p) = (p2 + kq 2 )/2. From this new point of view. stationary classical states are simply those lagrangian submanifolds of R2 which coincide with the regular level sets of the classical hamiltonian H(q. but by half-densities on configuration space Rn .1). we can express the result of our analysis as follows: If S is an admissible phase function and a is a half-density on L = im(dS) which is invariant under the flow of the classical hamiltonian. suggests that a solution of the homogeneous transport equation should be represented geometrically by a half-density on L. (See Appendix A for a discussion of densities of fractional order. i. we transfer the factor of a2 from the vector field XH = S to the density |dx|.

In summary. we will focus on two aspects of the semi-classical approximation. This will require the concept of symplectic manifold. we will start with an invariant half-density on a (possibly non-projectable) lagrangian submanifold of R2n and attempt to use this data to construct an explicit semi-classical approximate solution to Schr¨dinger’s o equation on Rn . we will try to construct a space of quantum states corresponding to a general classical phase space. we could attempt to interpret a solution of the recursive system of inhomogeneous transport equations on Rn as an asymptotic half-density on L in order to arrive at a geometric picture of a complete WKB solution to the Schr¨dinger equation. notably the lack of a geometric interpretation of the inhomogeneous transport equations. In particular. 16 . Then we will try to construct asymptotic quantum states corresponding to half-densities on lagrangian submanifolds. Specifically. which is introduced in the following chapter. First. we will extend the geometric picture presented above to systems with more general phase spaces. 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 half-density on Rn half-density Hamilton’s equations Schr¨dinger equation o ˆ operator H on smooth half-densities ˆ eigenvector of H time-evolution generator of evolution function H on R2n stationary state lagrangian submanifold in level set of H with invariant half-density Proceeding further. involves some additional difficulties. we will “quantize” semi-classical states in these symplectic manifolds. Second. This. which lie beyond the scope of these notes. Instead. o however.

˜ If ω is an isomorphism. These points already indicate the central role played by the form dαn in the study of hamiltonian systems in R2n . then ω is called a linear symplectic structure on V . We refer to [6. then the form ω is said to be nonde˜ generate.1. A linear endomorphism of a symplectic vector space (V. a lagrangian submanifold of R2n was defined as an n-dimensional submanifold L ⊂ R2n on which the exterior derivative of the form αn = pi dqi vanishes. While some discussion will be devoted to certain general properties of symplectic manifolds. 29. to a function 2n H : R → R. Linear symplectic structures Suppose that V is a real. m-dimensional vector space. 3. ω) which preserves the form ω is called a linear symplectic transformation. if in addition ω is skew-symmetric. Finally. our main goal at this point is to develop the tools needed to extend the hamiltonian viewpoint to phase spaces associated to general finite-dimensional configuration spaces. i. the correct generalization of the hamiltonian picture to arbitrary configuration spaces relies similarly on the use of 2-forms with certain additional properties. our proof of the Hamilton-Jacobi theorem relied on the nondegeneracy of the 2form dαn . ˜ The ω-orthogonal to a subspace W ⊂ V is defined as W ⊥ = {x ∈ V : W ⊂ ker ω (x)}. we first study such forms pointwise. collecting pertinent facts about nondegenerate. 17 . We then turn to the definition of symplectic manifolds. we will introduce the notion of a symplectic structure on a manifold. 63] for thorough discussions of the topics in this chapter. we saw that Hamilton’s equations associate a vector field XH on R2n satisfying XH dαn = −dH. More general symplectic manifolds will reappear as the focus of more sophisticated quantization programs in later chapters.1 Symplectic structures In Section 2. y). In this section.e. motivated for the most part by the situation in R2n . A bilinear form ω : V × V → R gives rise to a linear map ω: V → V ∗ ˜ defined by contraction: ω (x)(y) = ω(x. and the group of all such transformations is denoted by Sp(V ). to cotangent bundles. skew-symmetric bilinear forms. or in other words if V ⊥ = {0}.3 Symplectic Manifolds In this chapter.

More generally. positive-definite inner product on V . y) = Kx. (K −1 )∗ λ) defines a linear symplectomorphism between E ⊕ E ∗ and F ⊕ F ∗ equipped with these linear symplectic structures. so that ω is represented by an invertible skew-adjoint operator K : V → V . a linear endomorphism J such that J 2 = −I. ·) = ω(·. 18 .1 If E is any real n-dimensional vector space with dual E ∗ . the form ω is represented by the matrix 0 I ω= . D = (At )−1 . λ). Let . then a linear symplectic structure on V = E ⊕ E ∗ is given by ω((x. and B = C = 0. Since the determinant of a skew-symmetric m × m matrix is zero if m is odd. With respect to a basis {xi } of E and a dual basis {λi } of E ∗ .Example 3. then the association (x. Jy) = ω(x. J is compatible with ω (we also call it ω-compatible) if J : V → V is a linear symplectomorphism and gJ (·. Proof. In other words. Theorem 3. i.e. y ∈ V . then T is symplectic provided that At C. ω) admits a compatible complex structure. be a symmetric. (x .2 Every symplectic vector space (V. y . Note in particular that these conditions are satisfied if A ∈ GL(E).e. the existence of a linear symplectic structure on a vector space V implies that V is necessarily evendimensional and therefore admits a complex structure. and At D − C t B = I. ω(x. Jx) > 0 for all x. i. and so GL(E) is isomorphic to a subgroup Gl(E) of Sp(V ). −I 0 It follows that if a linear operator on V is given by the real 2n × 2n matrix T = A B C D . A complex structure is said to be compatible with a symplectic structure on V if ω(Jx. J·) defines a symmetric. λ) → (Kx. if K : E → F is an isomorphism. y) and ω(x. B t D are symmetric. λ )) = λ (x) − λ(x ). positive-definite bilinear form on V .

2 Corollary 3. For any v. O(V ). Aw). x > 0. ·). Distinguished subspaces The ω-orthogonal to a subspace W of a symplectic vector space (V. ω(x. g. ω) is called the symplectic orthogonal to W . gJ . and ·.. the complex structure J constructed in the preceding proof is continuous. positive-definite bilinear forms on V . Jy = Kx. where R = KK t is positivedefinite symmetric. first note that ω(Jx. this implies the corollary. etA w) = ω(Av. To see that J is ω-compatible. J on V preserves the third and therefore preserves the hermitian structure. and so J 2 = −JJ t = − id. i. Jy) = KJx. Jx = JRx. As is easily checked. By the uniqueness of the polar decomposition. GL(V.e. t=0 and so A ∈ sp(V) if and only if the linear map ω ◦ A : V → V ∗ is self-adjoint. J). and U (V ) of ω. Jx = Rx. and RJ = JR. Proof. Also.√ The operator K admits a polar decomposition K = RJ. since R and . a hermitian structure on V is defined by ·. we have d dt ω(etA v. J = R−1 K is orthogonal. To determine the Lie algebra sp(V) of Sp(V ). Since P is contractible. 2 If J is ω-compatible. this means that the intersection of any two of Sp(V ). Jy = JKx. From the skew-symmetry of K it follows that J t = −J. J is a complex structure on V . it follows that the map which assigns to a form . y = ω(x. · = gJ (·.3 The collection J of ω-compatible complex structures on a symplectic vector space (V. The association J → gJ described above defines a continuous map from J into the space P of symmetric. In terms of the automorphism groups Sp(V ). ω) is contractible. GL(V. w ∈ V . Consequently. Jx) = Kx. ˜ dim(V ) = 2k implies dim(sp(V)) = dim(Sp(V)) = k(2k + 1). J. it follows that W ⊥⊥ = W and dim W ⊥ = dim V − dim W 19 . From the nondegeneracy of the symplectic form. are positive-definite. ·) + iω(·. · . J). w) + ω(v. a linear transformation T ∈ GL(V ) which preserves any two of the structures ω. and the composition J → P → J of these maps equals the identity on J . y). consider a 1-parameter family of maps etA associated to some linear map A : V → V . O(V ) equals U (V ).

we denote by V ⊕V the vector space V ⊕V equipped with the symplectic structure ω ⊕ −ω. hence isotropic. we note that if codim W = 1. Finally. and W ⊥ ⊂ W ⊥⊥ = W . Beginning with any 1-dimensional subspace of V . According to these definitions. Dually. the restriction of ω to certain subspaces Z ⊂ V may again be nondegenerate. Such subspaces are called symplectic. Also. the skew-symmetry of ω implies that W ⊂ W ⊥ . then: 20 . both E and E ∗ are lagrangian subspaces. ω) is a 2n-dimensional symplectic vector space and W ⊂ V is any isotropic subspace with dim(W ) < n. we can apply this remark inductively to conclude that every finite-dimensional symplectic vector space contains a lagrangian subspace. there exists an isotropic subspace W of V which properly contains W . Note that the symplectic orthogonal W ⊥ might not be an algebraic complement to W . For instance. 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 self-adjoint. then the dimension relation above implies that 1 dim W = 2 dim V .5 Suppose that (V. Any self-orthogonal subspace is simultaneously isotropic and coisotropic. Since 2n = dim(W ) + dim(W ⊥ ). W ⊥ = W . If T : V → V is a linear symplectic map. ω) is a symplectic vector space. any subspace contained in its orthogonal will be called isotropic.for any subspace W ⊂ V . The kernel of a nonzero covector α ∈ V ∗ is a codimension-1 coisotropic subspace ker α of V whose symplectic orthogonal (ker α)⊥ is the distinguished 1-dimensional subspace of ker α spanned by ω −1 (α). then W ⊥ is 1-dimensional.6 If L is a lagrangian subspace of a symplectic vector space V . More generally. Example 3. and A ⊂ V is an arbitrary subspace. and is called lagrangian. if dim W = 1. there exists a nonzero vector w ∈ W ⊥ \W . In particular.4 In E ⊕ E ∗ with its usual symplectic structure. B of V . (A + B)⊥ = A⊥ ∩ B ⊥ and (A ∩ B)⊥ = A⊥ + B ⊥ for any pair of subspaces A. Lemma 3. this is equivalent to saying that Z ∩Z ⊥ = {0} or Z + Z ⊥ = V . a subspace W ⊂ V is isotropic if the restriction of the symplectic form to W is identically zero. The subspace W of V spanned by W ∪{w} is then isotropic and dim(W ) = dim(W )+1. From this observation it follows that for every isotropic subspace W of a (finite-dimensional) symplectic vector space V which is not lagrangian. then the graph of T is a lagrangian subspace of V ⊕ V . Various subspaces of a symplectic vector space are related as follows. i.e. ˜ Example 3. In general. if W is self-orthogonal. B ⊥ ⊂ A⊥ whenever A ⊂ B. At the other extreme. spaces W satisfying the condition W ⊥ ⊂ W are called coisotropic or involutive. If (V.

7 Note that statement (1) of Lemma 3. Lε is a lagrangian subspace for all ε > 0. If L. there is a lagrangian subspace L transverse to both L and L. we can choose orthonormal bases 21 . Since I ⊥ ∩ W = 0 by our choice of W . a subspace C ⊂ V is coisotropic if and only if it contains a lagrangian subspace. W ⊥ ∩ I ⊂ I ∩ L = 0. L are any lagrangian subspaces of V .1). Proof.5 implies that there is a lagrangian subspace L with A⊥ ⊂ L.8 Every 2n-dimensional symplectic vector space is linearly symplectomorphic to (R2n . 2. Thus. Statement (1) follows from the properties of the operation ⊥ and the equation L = L⊥ . and so A is a coisotropic subspace. L of transverse lagrangian subspaces of V is said to define a lagrangian splitting of V . For any two lagrangian subspaces L. i. Passing to orthogonals. L + A = V if and only if (L + A)⊥ = L ∩ A⊥ = {0}. it follows that I + W is a symplectic subspace of V . Similarly. if A is coisotropic. Thus.6 implies that if L ⊂ A. If W ⊂ L is any complementary subspace to I ⊥ ∩ L. and since every n-dimensional vector space is isomorphic to Rn . By Example 3. Theorem 3.5. then Lε = Tε (L) is a lagrangian subspace transverse to L for small ε > 0. In this case. Conversely. Thus. A pair L. the map ω defines an isomorphism L ˜ L∗ . Lemma 3. the preceding remarks prove the following linear “normal form” result: Theorem 3. L is transverse to A if and only if L ∩ A⊥ = {0}. then L. an isomorphism of V satisfying ω(Tε x.9 Suppose that V is a symplectic vector space with a ω-compatible complex structure J and let Tε : V → V be given by Tε (x) = x + εJx. then A⊥ ⊂ A. It is easy to check that Tε is a conformal linear symplectic map. 2 Example 3. 2. then A⊥ is isotropic. proving statement (2). ωn ). L ⊂ A if and only if A⊥ ⊂ L.2 also implies the following useful result. every symplectic vector space contains a lagrangian subspace. Tε y) = (1 + ε2 ) ω(x. we have L ⊂ A. Proof.e. and Example 3. 1. Using the inner-product gJ on V induced by J. and so W ⊥ ∩ I ⊂ I ⊥ ∩ L. JL is a lagrangian splitting. L of V . If J is a ω-compatible complex structure on V and L ⊂ V 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. y). then I + L ⊂ W + I ⊥ . which in turn ∗ gives rise to a linear symplectomorphism between V and L ⊕ L equipped with its canonical symplectic structure (see Example 3.1.

{wi } of L and L. the lagrangian subspace Tt (L) is transverse to all Li for almost every t ∈ R. Lemma 3. giving an isomorphism of fundamental groups π1 (L(V )) π1 (S 1 ) Z. wj + εJwj )} = {ω(vi . To prove (2). a (non-canonical) identification of the lagrangian grassmannian with the homogeneous space U (n)/O(n) is obtained from the map L U (V ) → L(V ).{vi }. Then {wi + εJwi } form a basis of Lε . · · · . L by (1). det2 22 . and let Ai . 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 inner-product and splitting L ⊕ JL of V induced by J (see Example 3.1. k. respectively. A natural action of the group Sp(V ) on L(V ). Thus. wj )}n i. we can apply Example 3. the statement of preceding lemma can be improved as follows. Our choice of bases implies that ε · id 0 M= 0 A+ε·B n where A = {ω(vi . L2 ∈ L(V ). wj ) + ε gJ (vi .1). wj )} is nonsingular. so that for i = 1. Proof. observe that for small ε > 0. Setting I = span{vi }i=k+1 and W = span{wi }n i=k+1 . 2 In fact. which in turn 1 2 gives rise to a unitary transformation L1 ⊕ JL1 → L2 ⊕ JL2 mapping L1 onto L2 . denoted  : Sp(V ) × L(V ) → L(V ) is defined by (T. the vectors vi = wi span L ∩ L . Bi be the matrices obtained with respect to L as in the proof above. and assertion (1) follows. L) = L (T ) = T (L). an orthogonal transformation L1 → L2 induces a symplectic transformation L1 ⊕ L∗ → L2 ⊕ L∗ in the manner of Example 3. Lε are transverse precisely when the matrix M = {ω(vi . which induces a fibration L(V ) → S 1 with 1-connected fiber SU (n)/SO(n). For each i.7 to conclude that A is nonsingular. Let {Li } be a countable family of lagrangian subspaces.10 The unitary group associated to an ω-compatible complex structure J on V acts transitively on L(V ). Consequently. and L .  J The choice of J also defines a complex determinant U (V ) → S 1 . the function t → det(Ai + tBi ) is a nonzero polynomial and therefore has finitely many zeros. The lagrangian grassmannian The collection of all unoriented lagrangian subspaces of a 2n-dimensional symplectic vector space V is called the lagrangian grassmannian L(V ) of V . the lagrangian subspace Lε is transverse to L. For arbitrary L1 .j=k+1 and B is some (n−k)×(n−k) matrix.

Z) → H 1 (L(V ). Passing to homology and dualizing. it follows that T is homotopic to a map T : M → U (V ). then ∗ ∗ the definition of the universal Maslov class shows that (f1 − f2 )µV equals the pull-back of 1 1 the canonical generator of H (S . Independence of J follows from the fact that J is connected (Corollary 3. and so ((T · f1 )∗ − (T · f2 )∗ )µV is obtained via pull-back by (mL ◦ (T · f1 ))(mL ◦ (T · f2 ))−1 . Since Sp(V ) deformation retracts onto U (V ). From the first paragraph. ∂pj ∂pk =0 . (Recall that  : Sp(V )×L(V ) → L(V ) denotes the natural action of Sp(V ) on L(V )). we note that j=1 dqj ∧ dpj defines a linear symplectic structure on the tangent space of R2n at each point. ∂qj ∂qk 23 =0 ωn ∂ ∂ .11 If (V. On the other hand. we obtain a natural homomorphism H 1 (S 1 . 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). The result of the following example will be useful when we extend our discussion of the Maslov class from vector spaces to vector bundles. In fact: ωn ∂ ∂ . f2 : M → L(V ) are continuous maps.This isomorphism does not depend on the choices of J and L made above. Symplectic manifolds To motivate the definition of a symplectic manifold. ω) is any symplectic vector space with ω-compatible complex structure J and lagrangian subspace L. n First. µV .10 gives independence of L. L )) = mL (L ) · det2 (T ) J for any T ∈ U (V ) and L ∈ L(V ).3). ∂qj ∂pk = δjk ωn ∂ ∂ . fi ). it follows that this product equals (mL ◦f1 )(mL ◦f2 )−1 . Z). connectedness of the unitary group together with Lemma 3. If T : M → Sp(V ) is any map. The image of the canonical generator of H 1 (S 1 . If f1 . Z) under this map is called the universal Maslov class. we first recall some features of the n differential form −dαn = ωn = j=1 dqj ∧ dpj which appeared in our earlier discussion. Example 3. from which we conclude that ∗ ∗ (f1 − f2 )µV = ((T · f1 )∗ − (T · f2 )∗ )µV . R) by the map (mL ◦ f1 )(mL ◦ f2 )−1 . then a check of the preceding definitions shows that mL ((T. we set (T · fi ) = (T. Now consider any topological space M . (Here we use the fact that when S 1 is identified with the unit complex numbers.

XH = ωn (dH). ˜ −1 so we see that the symplectic form ωn is all that we need to obtain XH from H. A 2-form ω on a manifold P is a smooth family of bilinear forms on the tangent spaces of P . Since ωn is closed.12 A symplectic structure on a manifold P is a closed. implying that XH is tangent to the level sets of H. or in other words. ˜ Next. we also have by Cartan’s formula (see [1]) LXH ωn = d(XH ωn ) + XH dωn = d2 H = 0. from which it is clear that ωn is invertible. By assuming that each of these bilinear forms is nondegenerate. we impose the condition that ω be closed. invariance of ω under the hamiltonian flow is satisfied if LXH ω = d(XH ω) + XH dω = 0. XH ) = 0. Thus we make the following definition: Definition 3. we guarantee that the equation XH = ω −1 (dH) ˜ defines a hamiltonian vector field uniquely for any H. XH ) = 0. the term d(XH ω) = d2 H is automatically zero. Finally. nondegenerate 2-form ω on P . This description of the hamiltonian vector field leads immediately to the following two invariance results. 24 . to guarantee the vanishing of the second term. LXH H = XH · H = ωn (XH . Here. This again reflects the fact that the flow of XH preserves energy.and so ωn ˜ ∂ ∂qj = dpj ωn ˜ ∂ ∂pj = −dqj . First note that by the skew-symmetry of ωn . ˜ we see that the conservation of energy follows from the skew-symmetry of the form ω. 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 1-dimensional harmonic oscillator is divergence-free. Computing the Lie derivative of H with respect to XH LXH H = XH · H = ω (XH )(XH ) = ω(XH . We now see what is needed to do hamiltonian mechanics on manifolds. we recall that the hamiltonian vector field associated via Hamilton’s equations to H : R2n → R satisfies XH ωn = dH.

A useful connection among duals. which are (co-)isotropic submanifolds of dimension 1 dim(P ). In view of the remarks above. that ω defines a linear symplectic structure on each tangent space of P . More generally. ω1 ) to (P2 . or equivalently. ω) consists of the same underlying manifold endowed with the symplectic structure −ω. products. A symplectomorphism from (P1 . then Lemma 3. New symplectic manifolds can be manufactured from known examples by dualizing and by taking products. As is easily verified. The collection Aut(P. then C is a coisotropic submanifold.6 implies that for each p ∈ L. 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). the characteristic subspace Cι(p) ⊂ Tι(p) C is contained in ι∗ Tp L.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 . 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. this assertion generalizes the Hamilton-Jacobi theorem (see the end of Section 2. If (L. the product of (co-)isotropic submanifolds of P1 and P2 is a (co-)isotropic submanifold of P1 × P2 . that the top exterior power of ω is a volume form on P .The condition that ω be nondegenerate means that ω defines an isomorphism of vector ˜ bundles T P → T ∗ P . Darboux’s theorem (Section 4. Generalizing our earlier discussion of distinguished subspaces of a symplectic vector space.3) will tell us that this is the local model for the general case. Example 3. nonsingular vector field XH. More explicitly. or finally. Of particular interest in our discussion will be lagrangian submanifolds of P . In this case. ω1 ) and (P2 . ω2 ) is a smooth diffeomorphism f : P1 → P2 compatible with the symplectic structures: f ∗ ω2 = ω1 . if L is a 2 smooth manifold of dimension 1 dim(P ) and ι : L → P is an immersion such that ι∗ ω = 0. ι) a lagrangian immersion. The symplectic dual of a manifold (P. then the hamiltonian vector field XH is tangent to the characteristic foliation of C. ι) is a lagrangian immersion whose image is contained in C. It is integrable because ω is closed. this form is the sum of the pull-backs of ω1 and ω2 by the projections of P1 × P2 to P1 and P2 . and symplectomorphisms is provided by the following lemma.1) to arbitrary symplectic manifolds and lagrangian immersions. ω) of symplectomorphisms of P becomes an infinite-dimensional Lie group when endowed with the C ∞ topology (see [49]). their product P1 ×P2 admits a symplectic structure given by the sum ω1 ⊕ω2 . and thus XH induces a smooth. When C is coisotropic. A simple check of definitions shows that if H : P → R is a smooth function having C as a regular level set. Evidently P and its dual P share the same (co-)isotropic submanifolds. the corresponding Lie 25 . 2 we will call the pair (L. In the next section. ω2 ). Lemma 3.13 If C ⊂ P is a hypersurface. Given two symplectic manifolds (P1 .ι on L. we will see that the cotangent bundle of any smooth manifold carries a natural symplectic structure.

the proof of Theorem 3.2 can be generalized by a fiberwise construction as follows. ω). Since LX ω = d(X ω). Two symplectic vector bundles E. (See [27] and the numerous earlier references cited therein.16 If F → B is any vector bundle.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 . however. v). Theorem 3.17. and of complex manifolds which are not symplectic. Example 3. defined in analogy with Example 3. there exist examples of symplectic manifolds which are not complex (the almost complex structure coming from the theorem cannot be made integrable). and the Lie algebra sp(V) identifies with the subalgebra of χ(V. sp(V) is canonically identified with the space of such functions via the correspondence 1 A ↔ QA (v) = ω(Av. With the aid of an arbitrary riemannian metric. 26 . Example 3. ω) are called locally hamiltonian vector fields or symplectic vector fields. the frame bundle of P can be reduced to a principal Sp(n) bundle over P .algebra is the space χ(P. i.1. Consequently. More generally. that the K¨hler form of any K¨hler manifold a a is a symplectic form. The symplectic group Sp(V ) then embeds naturally in Aut(V. functions satisfying Q(tv) = t2 Q(v) for all real t. ω) of smooth vector fields X on P satisfying LX ω = 0. ω) consisting of vector fields of the form X(v) = Av for some A ∈ sp(V). 2 Symplectic vector bundles Since a symplectic form on a 2n-manifold P defines a smooth family of linear symplectic forms on the fibers of T P . then the sum F ⊕ F ∗ carries a natural symplectic vector bundle structure. ω) and the space of closed 1-forms on P . the association X → X ω defines an isomorphism between χ(P. F are said to be symplectomorphic if there exists a vector bundle isomorphism E → F which preserves their symplectic structures. Example 3.17 Every symplectic vector bundle admits a compatible complex vector bundle structure. those X which map to exact 1-forms are simply the hamiltonian vector fields on P .) Note. any vector bundle E → B with this structure is called a symplectic vector bundle. The elements of χ(P. Note that these are precisely the hamiltonian vector fields of the homogeneous quadratic polynomials on V .18 Despite Theorem 3.e.

1). Nevertheless. Then there exists a compatible complex structure J on E satisfying JL = L . and the frame bundle of E admits a further reduction to a principal GL(n) bundle over B (compare Example 3. Let J0 be any compatible complex structure on E.6). From Example 3. 27 .19 If L is a lagrangian submanifold of a symplectic manifold P . f (L ) of M × V . Thus µ(L. Assuming first that E admits a symplectic trivialization f : E → M × V for some symplectic vector space V . the automorphism group of a symplectic vector bundle E does not act transitively on the lagrangian subbundles of E.21 If E is a symplectic vector bundle over M . we denote by fL . where µV ∈ H 1 (L(V ). then E is symplectomorphic to L ⊕ L∗ . L ) ∈ H 1 (M . γ ∗ µ(L. Z) is the universal Maslov class. fL : M → L(V ) the maps induced by the lagrangian subbundles f (L).20 Let E → B be a symplectic vector bundle and suppose that L. 2 Example 3.11 it follows that this class is independent of the choice of trivialization f . L ) is welldefined by the requirement that for every smooth loop γ in M . we can find a symplectomorphism T : L ⊕ L → L ⊕ J0 L which preserves the subbundle L and maps L to J0 L. Since L and J0 L are both transverse to L. the pull-back bundle γ ∗ E is trivial. Then ∗ ∗ µ(L. Theorem 3. Example 3. and T L ⊂ TL P is a lagrangian subbundle. Z) as follows.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. For nontrivial E. L of lagrangian subbundles of E define a cohomology class µ(L. we note that since the symplectic group Sp(V ) is connected. Proof. 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 ∗ L ). then C is coisotropic (see Lemma 3. L ) = µ(γ ∗ L. If E admits a lagrangian subbundle. L are lagrangian subbundles such that Lx is transverse to Lx for each x ∈ B. then any pair L. L ) = (fL − fL ) µV . it follows that for any loop γ : S 1 → M . In general. then the restricted tangent bundle TL P is a symplectic vector bundle over L. Also note that if C ⊂ P is any submanifold such that T C contains a lagrangian subbundle of TC P . a pair of transverse lagrangian subbundles can be related as follows.

28 . ι). then the symplectic vector bundle ι∗ T (T ∗ (Rn )) has two lagrangian subbundles. known as the Liouville form.ι = µ(L1 . we set πL = π ◦ ι. and αM = αn . b) = xj (x) imply that n pj (x. Lagrangian immersions and the Liouville class Given a lagrangian immersion ι : L → T ∗ M . we consider the symplectic manifold R2n T ∗ Rn with its standard symplectic structure. A check of these definitions shows that the Maslov class of (L. A nice property of the Liouville 1-form is that it can be used to parametrize the set of projectable lagrangian submanifolds. where π : T ∗ M → M is the natural projection. (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). where π : T ∗ Rn → Rn is the natural projection. To do this. The class µL. from which it follows that the form ωM = −dαM is a symplectic structure on T ∗ M . we use the notation ιϕ to denote a 1-form ϕ on M when we want to think of it as a map from M to T ∗ M .Example 3.21. 3. b) = b ∂ ∂xj αM = j=1 n j=1 pj dqj . b))(v) = b(π∗ v). Note that if M = Rn . pn ) on T ∗ M .22 As a particular case of Example 3. −dαM = dqj ∧ dpj in these coordinates. the image L1 of ι∗ : T L → ι∗ T (T ∗ (Rn )) and L2 = ι∗ V Rn . If ι : L → R2n is a lagrangian immersion. ι) is said to be projectable if πL is a diffeomorphism.2 Cotangent bundles The cotangent bundle T ∗ M of any smooth manifold M is equipped with a natural 1-form. defined by the formula αM ((x. ι) equals the pull-back of the universal Maslov class µn ∈ H 1 (L(R2n ). where π : T ∗ M → M is the canonical projection. xn ) on M and corresponding coordinates (q1 . p1 . then ωM is just the symplectic structure ωn on T ∗ Rn R2n discussed previously. · · · . 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∗ . · · · . Critical points and critical values of πL are called respectively singular points and caustic points of L. (L. Z) is called the Maslov class of (L. Z) by the Gauss map G : L → L(R2n ) defined by G(p) = ι∗ Tp L ⊂ R2n . In local coordinates (x1 . the equations qj (x. · · · . Thus. Finally. qn . L2 ) ∈ H 1 (L.

while the Liouville form of T ∗ M vanishes on N ⊥ for any N . This proves Proposition 3. v . Definition 3. A general class of exact lagrangian submanifolds can be identified as follows. Taking exterior derivatives on both sides of the equation in Lemma 3.19).Lemma 3. ι∗ αM (p)(v) = αM (ιϕ (p))(ιϕ∗ v) = ιϕ (p). it follows that for each v ∈ Tp M . 29 . p) ∈ T ∗ M : x ∈ N. 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. The preceding remarks imply a simple link between phase functions and the Liouville form: Lemma 3. Because ιϕ is a section of T ∗ M . then ι is called an exact lagrangian immersion. we get dϕ = dι∗ αM = ι∗ dαM = −ι∗ ωM .23 Let ϕ ∈ Ω1 (M ). 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. although it is the image of an exact lagrangian immersion of R. Thus. then S : M → R is a phase function for L if and only if d(S ◦ πL ◦ ι) = ι∗ αM . ιϕ ) defines a natural bijective correspondence between the the vector space of closed 1-forms on M and the set of projectable lagrangian submanifolds of T ∗ M . we will call S : M → R a phase function for a projectable lagrangian embedding (L. αM is often described as the “tautological” 1-form on T ∗ M . ι) which lives on the manifold L itself.23. L is the image of an exact 1-form on M if and only if the restriction of the Liouville form to L is itself exact. If ι : L → T ∗ M is an exact lagrangian immersion. Example 3. π∗ (ιϕ∗ v) = ιϕ (p). it satisfies π ◦ ιϕ = idM . Generalizing our WKB terminology. By the definition of αM . ϕ 2 For this reason. ι) ⊂ T ∗ M provided that ι(L) = dS(M ).26 If L. If F is a smooth foliation of M . ϕ Proof. From this definition it follows easily that dim T ∗ M = 2 dim N ⊥ . We will return to this important viewpoint in the next chapter.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.25 If (L. Then ι∗ αM = ϕ.24 The relation ϕ ↔ (M. known as the conormal bundle to N . then Lemma 3. ι) ⊂ T ∗ M is a projectable lagrangian embedding. M are n-manifolds and ι : L → T ∗ M is an immersion such that ι∗ αM is exact. This motivates the following definition.25 suggests that the primitive of ι∗ αM is a sort of generalized phase function for (L. Tx N ⊂ ker(p)}.

Theorem 3. p) = (x. Consequently. Then ⊥ Nβ = {(x.ι ∈ H 1 (L. and the subbundles T ZM and V M define a canonical lagrangian splitting of T (T ∗ M ) over ZM . since dι∗ αM = ι∗ ωM = 0.29 If a symplectomorphism f : T ∗ M → T ∗ M preserves each fiber of the projection π : T ∗ M → M .28 To generalize the picture described in Example 3. so f is a translation on each fiber. Since αM vanishes on the zero section ZM ⊂ T ∗ M . 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 form µ = f ◦ ψ is also closed. p + β(x)). R). the vertical bundle V M = ker π∗ is a lagrangian subbundle of T (T ∗ M ). 30 . Example 3. then f = fβ for a closed 1-form β on M . p0 ) ∈ T ∗ M and let ψ be a closed 1-form on M such that ψ(x0 ) = (x0 .Although many lagrangian immersions ι : L → T ∗ M are not exact. the form ι∗ αM is always closed. we consider a smooth manifold M .27. so fβ is a symplectomorphism of T ∗ M if and only if β is closed. A 1-form β on M defines a diffeomorphism fβ of T ∗ M by fiber-wise affine translation fβ (x. where ⊥ πN : Nβ → N is here the restriction of the natural projection π : T ∗ M → M . we can conclude from Example 3. Fiber-preserving symplectomorphisms On each fiber of the projection π : T ∗ M → M . Fix a point (x0 . together with a submanifold N ⊂ M and a closed 1-form β on N . Defining β(x) = f (x. Proof. p) ∈ T ∗ M : x ∈ N p|Tx N = β(x)} ∗ ⊥ is a lagrangian submanifold of T ∗ M whose Liouville class equals [πN β] ∈ H 1 (Nβ . 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 . we have f = fβ . It is easy to see that this map satisfies ∗ fβ αM = αM + π ∗ β. Thus. the pull-back of αM vanishes. so the fibers are lagrangian submanifolds. ι). Moreover. p0 ). 0). it follows that ZM is lagrangian as well. Since f is symplectic. p0 ) equals the identity. The deRham cohomology class λL. the fiber-derivative of f at the arbitrary point (x0 . since the derivative Dh preserves the lagrangian splitting of T (T ∗ M ) along ZM and equals the identity on T ZM .1 that Dh is the identity at all points of ZM .

2 31 . By composing F with a fiber-translation in T ∗ M we may assume that F maps the zero section of T ∗ M to that of T ∗ N . 0 By Cartan’s formula for the Lie derivative. Another application of Cartan’s formula. and so ft∗ π ∗ β = π ∗ β for all t. we conclude that F = f ∗ . we have LXβ αM = d(Xβ αM ) − Xβ ωM = π ∗ β. the assertion will follow provided that we can show that f ∗ αM = αM + π ∗ β.29. the latter equality following from the fact that Xβ ⊂ V M ⊂ ker αM and dαM = −ωM . Proof. we can furthermore classify all fiber-preserving symplectomorphisms from T ∗ M to T ∗ N . Proof. 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 fiber-preserving symplectomorphism of T ∗ N which fixes the zero section.2 If β is a closed 1-form on M . Inserting these computations into the expression for f ∗ αM above. 2 Using Theorem 3.31 Any fiber-preserving symplectomorphism F : T ∗ M → T ∗ N can be realized as the composition of a fiber-translation in T ∗ M with the cotangent lift of a diffeomorphism N → M. we obtain f ∗ αM = αM + π ∗ β. Corollary 3. By Theorem 3. the Hamilton-Jacobi theorem implies furthermore that the flow ft satisfies the hypotheses of Theorem 3. Corollary 3.30 For any closed 1-form β on M .29. 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. combined with the assumption that β is closed shows that LXβ π ∗ β = 0. To this end. From the preceding theorem.29. the time-1 map f = f1 of the flow of Xβ equals fβ . since V M ⊂ ker π ∗ β. then the flow ft of the vector field Xβ = −˜ M (π ∗ β) is ω −1 symplectic.

32 If M.The Schwartz transform If M. 3.N with the graph ΓF : T ∗ M → T ∗ M × T ∗ N . Thus in the special case of cotangent bundles. SM. (y. largely parallelling the earlier material on the 1-dimensional harmonic oscillator given in the introduction. In particular. y. η)) → (x.31. Example 3. a fiber-preserving symplectomorphism F : T ∗ M → T ∗ N equals the composition of fiber-wise translation by a closed 1-form β on M with the cotangent lift of a diffeomorphism g : N → M . ZM ×N Using the Schwartz transform.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.N : T ∗ M × T ∗ N → T ∗ (M × N ) defined in local coordinates by ((x.28.N induces a diffeomorphism of zero sections ZM × ZN and an isomorphism of vertical bundles VM ⊕VN V (M × N ). ξ).N )∗ αM ×N = αM ⊕ −αN . Finally.33 By Corollary 3. then the map SM.N satisfies (SM.2). if F is the cotangent lift of g. setting the stage for the quantization problem in the next chapter. ιF ) with the Schwartz transform SM. then the Schwartz transform SM. N are smooth manifolds. dualizing and taking products leads to nothing new. 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. but fundamental property of this mapping can be described as follows. Proposition 3. A computation shows that if Γ ⊂ M × N is the graph of g and p : Γ → M is the natural projection. In particular. The name comes from the relation of this construction to the Schwartz kernels of operators (see Section 6.N to arrive at the usual symplectomorphism T ∗ M × T ∗ N T ∗ (M × N ).5 An elementary. We then turn to the semi-classical approximation and its geometric counterpart in this new context. then the image of the composition of the lagrangian embedding (T ∗ M. 5 32 . 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. −ξ. N are smooth manifolds. p then the image of (T ∗ M. Our description begins with a comparison of the classical and quantum viewpoints.N equals the submanifold Γ⊥∗ β ⊂ T ∗ (M × N ) defined in Example 3. ιF ) equals the conormal bundle of Γ. η) is a symplectomorphism which we will call the Schwartz transform.

34 If M is a riemannian manifold. i. 33 .j Γk qi q˙j = 0. That is. real-valued potential V : M → R induces the hamiltonian function H(q. ij ˙ For details.The classical picture The hamiltonian description of classical motions in a configuration space M begins with the classical phase space T ∗ M . Theorem 3. Theorem 3. p) = kM (q. 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. The hamiltonian flow associated to kM is called the co-geodesic flow due to its relation with the riemannian structure of M described in the following theorem. we first define the operator on the function space C ∞ (M ) by ˆ H=− 2 2m ∆ + mV . As before. then integral curves of the co-geodesic flow project via π to geodesics on M . p) = 1 2 g ij (q) pi pj . p) is given by kM (q. 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. and a “kinetic energy” function which in local coordinates (q. H induces a (densely defined) ˆ on the intrinsic Hilbert space HM of M by the equation operator H ˆ ˆ H(a|dx|1/2 ) = (Ha)|dx|1/2 . In physical terms.v ∂g uv pu pv ∂qi to derive the geodesic equation qk + ¨ i. 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 . A riemannian metric g = (gij ) on M induces an inner product on the fibers of the cotangent bundle T ∗ M . ˆ where ∆ denotes the Laplace-Beltrami operator. see [36].34 states that a free particle on a manifold must move along a geodesic.j where g ij is the inverse matrix to gij . Regular level sets of kM are sphere bundles over M . The quantum mechanical picture For the time being. A smooth.

and the half-density a satisfies the homogeneous transport equation.ι a = 0. then (L. this means that πL = π ◦ ι is a diffeomorphism. We can formulate this construction abstractly by considering first a projectable. then the requirement −1 that (πL )∗ a satisfy the homogeneous transport equation on M becomes LXH. a) comprised of a projectable. Now if H : T ∗ M → R is any smooth function. exact lagrangian embedding ι : L → T ∗ M . The dynamics on both objects are determined by the choice of metric on M . φ. ι). where π : T ∗ M → M is the natural projection. the composition S = φ ◦ πL is a phase function for (L. In this case.where |dx| is the natural density associated to the metric on M . If a is a half-density on L. as above. This interpretation of the WKB approximation leads us to consider a semi-classical state as a quadruple (L. By definition. the embedding ι and hamiltonian vector field XH of H induce a nonsingular vector field XH. The semi-classical approximation The basic WKB technique for constructing semi-classical solutions to the Schr¨dinger equao tion on M proceeds as in Section 2.ι on L (see Example 3. a “generalized” phase function φ : L → R satisfying dφ = ι∗ αM .e. exact lagrangian embedding ι : L → T ∗ M . then the half-density eiφ/ a on L can be quantized (i.13).25 implies that for −1 any primitive φ : L → R of ι∗ αM . If these conditions are satisfied. Our correspondence table now assumes the form 34 . which assumes the coordinate-free form a∆S + 2L S a = 0. Specifically. −1 pulled-back) to yield a second-order approximate solution (πL )∗ eiφ/ a to the Schr¨dinger o equation on M . 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 . a half-density of the form eiS/h a is a ˆ second-order approximate solution of the eigenvector problem (H − E) ϕ = 0 provided that the phase function S : M → R satisfies the Hamilton-Jacobi equation H ◦ ιdS = E. and a half-density a on L.2. and Lemma 3. and the time-independent Schr¨dinger equation on M assumes the familiar form o ˆ (H − E)ϕ = 0. ι. ι) satisfies the Hamilton-Jacobi equation provided that E is a regular value of H and H ◦ ι = E.

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 = 0 Since the Hamilton-Jacobi and transport equations above make sense for any triple (L.Object basic space state time-evolution Classical version T ∗M (L. ι. φ. φ. a) consisting of an arbitrary lagrangian immersion ι : L → T ∗ M and a half-density a on L. a) as a further generalization of the concept of semi-classical state in T ∗ M . Our goal in the next chapter will be to determine when and how such “geometric” semi-classical states can be used to construct “analytical” semi-classical approximate solutions to the time-independent Schr¨dinger equation. o 35 . ι. a) such that eigenvector of H H ◦ ι = E and LXH. ι. it is tempting to regard (L. ι. in which we drop the conditions of projectability and exactness.

At this point. (It is. a). we are forced to confront once more the nature of . 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 .4 Quantization in Cotangent Bundles This chapter deals with the problem of constructing semi-classical approximate solutions to the time-independent Schr¨dinger equation from the data contained in a “geometric” semio classical state. we must have def φj − φk ∈ Z = 2π · Z on each Lj ∩ Lk .) As we shall see. The choice of φ is unique only up to an additive constant. ι. an approximate solution to Schr¨dinger’s equation on M . ι. that is. 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) can be quantized is answered largely in terms of the geometry of the lagrangian immersion (L. For this reason. If denotes a number ranging over an interval of the real numbers. suppose now that ι : L → T ∗ M is a projectable. this is precisely the condition that the Liouville class λL. ι. ι).e. we will often speak loosely of “quantizing lagrangian submanifolds” or “quantizable lagrangian submanifolds. If it is a formal variable. a triple (L. which leads to an ambiguity in the overall phase of I (L. in a more or less systematic way. only one of many operations which go by this name. ι. To quantize (L. 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 half-density def −1 I (L. o This process will be referred to as quantization. φj . of course. As seen in Chapter 3. it is locally exact by the Poincar´ lemma.1 Prequantization The simplest quantization procedure consists of pulling-back half-densities from projectable lagrangian embeddings in T ∗ M . (This ambiguity was overcome in Chapter 3 by including the choice of φ in the definition of a semi-classical state). aj ) in the sense above: −1 Ij = (πLj )∗ eiφj / aj . the notion of -integrality is meaningless. then the Liouville class will be 2π times an integral class for all only if it is zero. we set aj = a|Lj and define a half-density on πL (Lj ) by quantizing (Lj . a) on M . the question of whether or not a given semi-classical state (L. According to the discussion in Appendix C. a) = (πL )∗ eiφ/ a on M . ι|Lj . but not necessarily exact lagrangian embedding.ι be -integral. 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 half-density a on L. however. only for an exact lagrangian 36 . we must piece together the Ij to form a well-defined global half-density I (L. Since the 1-form ι∗ αM on L is closed. ι. ι. i. a).” 4. To generalize this procedure. our goal is to use this data in order to construct. Given a half-density a on L which is invariant under the flow induced by H.

ι is -integral for some ∈ R+ . a1 ). ι. consisting of the numbers 0 /k. all > 0 are admissible. The values of for which this condition holds will be called admissible for (L. Thus. the set of all admissible forms a sequence converging to zero. If τ is -integral for some ∈ R+ . and it is reasonable to adopt as a general rule. 37 . a2 )) = I (L1 ∪ L2 . 0) = 0. this interpretation is not acceptable either. a1 ) + I (L2 . a2 ). (A period of a closed 1-form β on M is any number obtained by integrating β around some closed loop in M ). and k runs over the positive integers. and so the admissible values of are the numbers {p/k : k ∈ Z+ }. then a/ and b/ are both integers. but with differing sets of admissible . the class of projectable quantizable lagrangian submanifolds of T ∗ M is rather limited whenever dim(H 1 (M . ι2 . it is desirable that quantization be linear with respect to half-densities: I (L. Example 4. we will focus on the set of regular points of πL in order to pass from half-densities on L to half-densities defined near non-caustic points of L. then by linearity we should have I (L1 ∪ L2 . Instead. (a1 . ι) ⊂ T ∗ M . Since we are specifically trying to go beyond the exact case. Geometrically this means that all horizontal circles in the cylinder T ∗ S 1 are quantizable in the sense defined above. ι1 ∪ ι2 .2 Let M = S 1 and consider the closed 1-form β = p dθ on S 1 .1 A projectable lagrangian submanifold (L. ι). Definition 4. (0. ι. ι. a2 ) of lagrangian submanifolds carrying half-densities. R)) > 1. where 0 is the largest such number. The situation changes as soon as we consider the closed 1-form τ = a dθ1 + b dθ2 on the torus S 1 × S 1 . Regardless of how this is to be carried out. For the time being. (a1 . Certainly this condition holds for the procedure we have been using in the projectable case. ι1 ∪ ι2 . however. (L2 . meaning that a/b is a rational number if b = 0. ι1 ∪ ι2 . ι) ⊂ T ∗ M is quantizable if its Liouville class λL. ι2 . a2 ). since πL cannot be used to push-forward half-densities from L to M . for p ∈ R. 0)) + I (L1 ∪ L2 .submanifold. ι1 . ι1 . we will make the following compromise. If a semi-classical state is represented by the union of a disjoint pair (L1 . The cohomology class represented by this form is -integral provided that p S1 dθ ∈ Z . If L is quantizable but not exact. the condition that closed 1-form β on a manifold M be quantizable is equivalent to the requirement that the ratio of any two nonzero periods of β be rational. The simple quantization technique described above does not generalize immediately to non-projectable immersed lagrangian submanifolds (L. a2 )) = I (L1 . One consequence is I (L. In general. If L is exact. a1 ) + I (L. sa1 + a2 ) = s · I (L. ι.

respectively (these correspond to the upper and lower components of the parabola ι(L)). From the expression above. a half-density a on L is invariant under the flow of XH. If L is exact. the lagrangian embedding ι : L → T ∗ R given by ι(x) = (x2 . then since −1 (πL )∗ ∂ ∂ = ±2−1 q −1/2 . ∂q ∂x the transformation rule for half-densities implies −1 (πL+ )∗ a = 2−1/2 q −1/4 B(q 1/2 ) |dq|1/2 −1 (πL− )∗ a = 2−1/2 q −1/4 B(−q 1/2 ) |dq|1/2 . the quantization of (L. As before. we must therefore decide how to specify the relative phases of the oscillatory coefficients eiφj / . we obtain I (L.ι = (1/2) ∂/∂x.ι on L equals XH. we note that by the preceding remarks. as in the following example. 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 . 2 and it is easy to check that the induced vector field XH. To quantize half-densities on L consistently. a) is given for q > 0 by I (L. p) = (p2 − q). ι|Lj ) is a projectable lagrangian submanifold of T ∗ U . a) should look something like −1 (πLj )∗ eiφj / a j on U . The parabola ι(L) lies in the regular level set H −1 (0) of the hamiltonian for a constant force field 1 H(q.ι if and only if a = B |dx|1/2 for some B ∈ R. Choosing a generalized phase function φj : Lj → R for each Lj . 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 |dq|1/2 . If p ∈ πL (L) is non-caustic and πL is proper. Thus. ι) ⊂ T ∗ M and halfdensity a on L. the requirement that φj be a generalized phase function for Lj determines each φj only up to an additive constant. ι. L− the right and left projectable components of L. and so the meaning of the preceding sum is ambiguous. ι. Thus. ι) is given by φ(x) = 2x3 /3. ι. a) = e2iq 3/2 /3 + e−2iq 38 3/2 /3 2−1/2 q 1/4 B |dq|1/2 .Now consider an arbitrary immersed lagrangian submanifold (L. ι. A phase function φ : L → R for (L. then we may use any function φ : L → R satisfying dφ = ι∗ αM to fix phases. and we denote by L+ . Example 4. x) has a singular point at x = 0.3 For L = R. If a = B(x) |dx|1/2 is any half-density on L. the prequantization of (L.

Definition 4. In fact.4. the value of I (L. H −1 (E) Thus.1. j Example 4. The values of for which this condition holds will again be called admissible for (L. For this purpose. a) by summing the pull-backs of eiφ/ a to M . Consequently.ι is -integral for some ∈ R+ . 39 . we make the following provisional definition. energy levels of the 1-dimensional harmonic oscillator corresponding to level sets for which a particular value of is admissible are given by E = n . The additional 1/2 can be explained geometrically in terms of the non-projectability of the classical energy level curves. we can treat certain non-exact cases in a similar way.5 Consider the 1-dimensional harmonic oscillator with hamiltonian 1 H(q. 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 well-defined on L. If a is a half-density on L. In the previous notation. ι.4 An immersed lagrangian submanfold (L. the actual quantum energy levels are E = (n + 1/2) . ι.as a semi-classical approximate solution to the Schr¨dinger equation o − ∂2ψ x − ψ = Eψ. so we have more work ahead of us. φ. 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 . generalizing Definition 4. ι). ι) ⊂ T ∗ M is said to be prequantizable if its Liouville class λL. a number that ∈ R+ is admissible for the level set H −1 (E) provided α1 = 2πE ∈ Z . as we shall soon see. If is admissible for some prequantizable lagrangian immersion (L. In particular. 2 According to Definition 4. As one can read in any textbook on quantum mechanics. ι). 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. 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. this solution blows up at q = 0 (and is not defined for q < 0). a) on U is defined as −1 (πVj )∗ eiφ/ a. φ. p) = (q 2 + p2 ). we can now quantize (L.

6 For fixed ∈ R+ . This remark proves the following geometric characterization of prequantizability. Definition 4. → T ∗ M is the bundle projection. the prequantum T bundle associated to a cotangent bundle (T ∗ M. Definition 4. If ι : L → T ∗ M is any lagrangian immersion. we have dϕ(ξ. The holonomy of this connection is represented by the mod-Z reduction of the Liouville class λL. η) = ξ · ϕ(η) − η · ϕ(ξ) − ϕ([ξ. σ denotes the multiple-valued linear variable in T and π : QM. 40 . for some > 0. If ξ. means that the kernel of dϕ is 1-dimensional and everywhere transverse to ker(ϕ). ι. ker(ϕ) is “maximally non-integrable”). corresponding to the (inverse of the) oscillatory function eiφ/ on L which appeared in the preceding section. dϕ is a linear symplectic form on ker(ϕ). The condition ϕ ∧ (dϕ)n = 0. then the curvature of the induced connection on ι∗ QM. Definition 4. Here. η]) = −ϕ([ξ. ϕ) is an n-dimensional integral submanifold for ϕ. and a parallel lift φ of L to the T bundle ι∗ QM. by means of the representation x → e−ix/ of T in U (1).ι .e.9 A legendrian submanifold of a 2n+1-dimensional strict contact manifold (Q.8 A contact form on a (2n + 1)-dimensional manifold Q is a 1-form ϕ such that ϕ ∧ (dϕ)n vanishes nowhere on Q.Prequantum bundles and contact manifolds Prequantizability can be described geometrically in terms of principal T bundles with connection over T ∗ M .7 An immersed lagrangian submanifold (L. Theorem 4. Prequantum T bundles and parallel lifts of lagrangian submanfolds constitute our first examples of the fundamental objects of contact geometry. and the “largest” integral submanifolds of ker(ϕ) are n-dimensional (i. the odd-dimensional counterpart of symplectic geometry. we assemble here a few facts about contact manifolds. on the other hand. coincides with ι∗ ωM and therefore vanishes. then φ induces a parallel section of ι∗ EM. a. ι) ⊂ T ∗ M is prequantizable if and only if there exists a nonzero parallel section over L of the line bundle ι∗ EM. = T ∗ M × T together with the connection 1-form ϕ = −π ∗ αM + dσ. the prequantum line bundle EM. If we associate to QM. φ) consisting of a lagrangian immersion ι : L → T ∗ M . η]). To interpret the condition on ϕ we note first that the kernel of any nowhere vanishing 1-form ϕ defines a 2n-dimensional distribution in Q. Consequently. Digressing briefly from quantization. . It is customary to make the following definition. ωM ) consists of the trivial principal bundle QM. a half-density a on L. This says that the distribution is integrable (in the sense of Frobenius) iff dϕ is zero on ker(ϕ). η are (local) vector fields lying in this distribution. the basic geometric object representing a classical state is therefore a quadruple (L. A manifold endowed with a contact form is called a strict contact manifold. From the prequantum standpoint.

Although we will not pursue the idea in these notes. .If ϕ is a contact form and f a nowhere-vanishing function on Q. is an immersed legendrian submanifold of QM. obtained by thinking of R2 as the cotangent bundle of p-space.10 A contact structure on a manifold M is a codimension one subbundle E ⊂ T M which is locally defined by contact forms. When the quotient T M/E is trivial.2 The Maslov correction It turns out that the naive quantization procedure of the preceding section is incorrect. a possible generalization of the quantization procedure described above might therefore begin by re-interpreting geometric semi-classical states as triples (R. To begin. and then quantizing to obtain a function on p-space. x) for x ∈ R. Our basic example of a strict contact manifold is furnished by a prequantum T bundle QM. E is the kernel of a globally defined contact form. since they have the same legendrian submanifolds. a) consisting of a legendrian immersion (R. then f · ϕ is again a contact form which is said to be equivalent to ϕ. If a is a half-density on L. ι) ⊂ T ∗ R is p-projectable. we define a function B on p-space by the equation −1 B |dp|1/2 = (πp )∗ eiτ / a. 41 . ι) is said to be p-projectable. then (L. 4. Since the wave function corresponding to a constant half-density 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. Definition 4. If πp is a diffeomorphism. we obtain −1 (πp )∗ eiτ / |dx|1/2 = e−iq0 p/ q0 |dp|1/2 . of the form ι(x) = (q0 . This factor will be incorporated into our quantization procedure using a procedure due to Maslov. Given a lagrangian immersion ι : L → T ∗ R R2 . since it ignores a certain structure which arises from the relation of L to the fibers of the π projection T ∗ M → M . A simple example of an embedded lagrangian submanifold of T ∗ R which does not project diffeomorphically onto the q-axis is a vertical line. we will illustrate this idea in the case of lagrangian submanifolds of the phase plane. This leads to the following definition. in which case there exists an “alternate” generalized phase function τ : L → R satisfying dτ = ι∗ (−q dp). ) in a contact manifold together with a half-density a on R. we analyze this situation by pretending that p is position and q momentum. it should be a delta function supported at q0 . Using the phase function τ (x) = −q0 x on L. Following an idea of Maslov. or fiber. the image of a parallel lift of a lagrangian immersion ι : L → T ∗ M to QM. Maslov’s technique is to suppose that (L. The result is exactly the asymptotic Fourier transform (see Appendix B) of the delta function which we guessed above! In its simplest form. . over a cotangent bundle T ∗ M . we denote by πp the composition of ι with the projection of R2 onto the p-axis. so that dτ = ι∗ (−q dp) for some phase function τ on L. Such a contact structure is called coorientable.

we begin with the example of linear lagrangian subspaces.e. a). kx). ι) ⊂ R2 with phase functions φ and τ corresponding to p dq and −q dp. φ. for example. ι) for the forms p dq and −q dp are given by φ(x) = kx2 /2 and τ (x) = −kx2 /2.and p-directions. a) is then given by the half-density J (L. we have (πp )∗ τ (p) = −p2 /2k. 6 See. a) = e−iπ·sgn(k)/4 I (L. ι. Example 4. and so Maslov’s technique yields J (L.6. i. On the other hand. then the transformation rule for half-densities implies −1 (πL )∗ a = A |dq|1/2 −1 (πp )∗ a = |k|−1/2 A |dp|1/2 def for a real constant A determined by a. respectively. Generalized phase functions on (L. Thus.1. Vol. For simplicity. φ. projectable in both the q. τ. consider an arbitrary bi-projectable lagrangian embedding (L. ι. and a computation6 shows that −1 F −1 ((πp )∗ eiτ / )(q) = |k|1/2 e−iπ·sgn(k)/4 eikq 2 /2 . 42 . ι.and p-space by pull-back: −1 S = φ ◦ πL −1 T = τ ◦ πp . For simplicity. we will assume that the additive constants in φ and τ are chosen so that φ = τ + ι∗ (qp). a) = eikq 2 /2 A |dq|1/2 . a) by Maslov quantization differs from the simple pull-back by a constant phase shift. ι. respectively. let S(q) and T (p) be the functions defined on q. consider the lagrangian embedding ι : R → T ∗ R given by ι(x) = (x. the half-density obtained from (L. To establish a similar correspondence in somewhat greater generality. so that S and T satisfy the Legendre transform relation (see [2]) S(q) = −p(q) T (p(q)) + T (p(q)). [32. Thm. Next. we must compare the results in the case of lagrangian submanifolds L ⊂ R2 which are bi-projectable. ι. a) = F −1 (B) |dq|1/2 on q-space. Quantization by pull-back therefore gives I (L. τ.The Maslov quantization of (L. If a is a constant half-density on L. where F denotes the asymptotic Fourier transform. To relate this procedure to our earlier quantization by pull-back.1] . τ.11 For real k = 0.7. ι.

τ. For each q. as illustrated by the following example. ι. ι. The critical point of the exponent pq + T (p) occurs where q = −T (p). p) ∈ ι(L). a) + O( ). a) = e−iπ·sgn(k)/4 I (L. i. Thus J (L. i. ι. we set k(q) = T (p(q)) and apply the principle of stationary phase (see Appendix B). Hence. ι. φ.e. we therefore conclude that Maslov’s technique coincides with quantization by pull-back up to a constant phase factor and terms of order . Example 4. when (q. we have J (L. For each q > 0. ι) which is not q-projectable lies in the relative phase constants of the summands of I (L. ι. A half-density a on L determines functions A(q) and B(p) such that −1 (πL )∗ a = A |dq|1/2 −1 (πp )∗ a = B |dp|1/2 and A(q) = |S (q)|1/2 B(p(q)). τ. φ.where p(q) = S (q). a). To this end.e. −1 since (πp )∗ a = B(p) |dp|1/2 . it follows easily that T (p(q)) = −(S (q))−1 . 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 |dq|1/2 + O( ). From this relation. critical points of the function R(p) = pq − p3 /3 occur precisely when q = p2 . 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 ).1 and the Maslov quantization of a p-projectable lagrangian embedding (L. ι. τ. a) = F −1 e−ip 3 /3 B(p) |dq|1/2 .12 A phase function associated to −q dp for the lagrangian embedding ι(x) = (x2 . Specifically. ι). a) = (2π )−1/2 R ei(pq+T (p))/ B(p) dp |dq|1/2 with that obtained by pull-back: I (L. we must now compare the Maslov half-density J (L. τ. x) of L = R into R2 is given by τ (x) = −x3 /3. where p = S (q) = p(q). ι. and an application of the principle of stationary phase therefore yields two terms corresponding to the upper and lower halves of L. For bi-projectable (L. . The Maslov quantization of a half-density a = B(x) |dx|1/2 on L is thus J (L. a) = eiS/ A |dq|1/2 . The essential difference between the naive prequantization of Section 4.

The preceding observation leads us to assign an index to closed. we first choose a good cover {Lj } of L such that the image of each Lj under ι is either q.13 The computation of the Maslov index can be interpreted geometrically if we first observe that the non-degeneracy condition requires L to remain on the same side of a fiber π −1 (q) near a singular point. ι) by summing these changes while traversing L in a prescribed direction. ι) defined in Example 3. suppose that (L. Moreover. In fact. ι. ι. In other words.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. immersed curves in the phase plane. downward motion to the right of the fiber is positive. Given an immersed lagrangian submanifold (L. However. Next. ι). then mL. the situation would be reversed. More precisely. τ. singular at the caustic point q = 0. This smoothness at caustics is a clear advantage of Maslov quantization. the full expression for J (L. ι. With these remarks in mind.ι of (L. The extra phase factors of e iπ/4 make J (L. and we can assign an index to (L. a factor of eiπ/2 arises in passing from the upper to the lower half of the parabola. 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. A p-dependent phase function T for L ⊂ R2 will have inflection points at precisely those p for which (T (p). ι. the sign of T at nearby points depends only on L and not on the choice of T . both of which are positive according our rule when the circle is traversed counterclockwise. Z).ι is the Maslov class of (L. Example 4. ι) is a closed. while the term of order 0 of J (L. ι) ⊂ R2 . a) as an integral is perfectly smooth there.ι equals µL. φ. the same is true of any closed embedded curve traversed counterclockwise. The result is twice an integer known as the Maslov index mL. it follows from Example 4. at least if a has compact support. The Maslov index of the circle therefore equals 2. like I (L.3. The reader is invited to check that if L is a circle with a fixed orientation ν ∈ H1 (L. immersed curve in R2 which is non-degenerate in the sense that if T is a p-dependent phase function for a subset of L. we fix a partition of unity {hj } subordinate 44 . a) is. but not if both are. p) is a singular point of L.Compare this with the result of Example 4. ν . On the other hand. a) essentially different from the prequantization of (L. The basic idea is as follows. ι. if T were concave. τ. (Compare [3]).ι . where µL.or p-projectable and no intersection Lj ∩ Lk contains a critical point of πL . since T is convex. Our goal is now to modify the prequantization procedure for arbitrary lagrangian submanifolds of the phase plane by incorporating the Maslov index. Under this assumption.22. τ. a). while the sign changes if either the direction of motion or the side of the fiber is reversed. then T has only non-degenerate critical points. sgn(T ) changes by ±2 in the vicinity of a critical point of T . a figure-eight has Maslov index zero. Since the index only involves the sign of T . a). A circle in the phase plane has a right and a left singular point.

(More precisely. ι. we require ei(φj −φk )/ e−iπ(sj −sk )/4 = 1 at each point of Lj ∩ Lk . To quantize a half-density a on L. In other words. while sj are integers depending −1 only on the component of Lj ∩ πL (U ) in question. Here. it follows from an application of −1 the principle of stationary phase as in Example 4. if Maslov’s technique is applied to Lj . then this condition implies that the sum of any of the ajk lies in Z . φ is a real-valued function on Lj satisfying dφj = ι∗ α1 . or. we see that the level set H −1 (E) satisfies the Maslov condition provided that for some integer n. For I (L. ι. we quantize each (Lj . ι. ι. If Lj is quantized by pull-back. L This is the simplest version of the Maslov quantization condition. this condition can be fulfilled on any arc of a curve in the phase plane. which actually gives the precise energy levels for the quantum harmonic oscillator. As before. This condition can be precisely formulated in terms of the Maslov index and Liouville class of (L. 45 .12.14 Returning to the harmonic oscillator of Example 4. that the Maslov index mL.to {Lj }. sj is zero if Lj is q-projectable and is quantized by pull-back. Example 4. we would then like to define the quantization of (L. these half-densities are of the form ˜ Ij = e−iπsj /4 eiφj / a. so that our requirement becomes ajk ∈ Z . If L is a circle. this statement is obvious. E = (n + 1/2) . we must choose the functions ˜ ˜ φj so that Ij = Ik on each intersection Lj ∩ Lk regardless of the particular half-density a. a · hj ) to obtain a halfdensity Ij on R either by pull-back or by Maslov’s technique. a) as the sum I (L. ι. we can define ajk as the (constant) value of (φj − φk ) − π (sj − sk )/4 on Lj ∩ Lk .ι + 2 ι∗ α1 ∈ Z . each half-density Ij is the sum of the pull−1 back of half-densities on each component of Lj ∩ πL (U ). otherwise sj equals sgn(T ) for a suitable pdependent phase function). Since φj − φk is constant on Lj ∩ Lk .ι of (L. On Lj ∩ πL (U ). a) = j Ij . in other words. ι) as follows. ι) satisfies π mL. In order to specify the relative phases of the Ij . and to make this definition independent of the choice of cover {Lj } and partition of unity.5. a) coincide up to order with the usual quantization by pull-back for any half-density a supported in a projectable subset of L. a) to be well-defined. we will require that I (L. Allowable energy levels in this case therefore correspond to the Bohr-Sommerfeld condition. Evidently. On an open interval U of non-caustic points.

In general. v) ∈ U ×Rm and attempt to define dϕp ∈ Tp N by dϕp . the expression for dϕp produces a well-defined element ˜ ˜ ∗ of Tp N . ι) ⊂ T ∗ M defined by such phase functions will first enable us to quantize a given half-density locally on L by means of a slightly more general version of the (inverse) asymptotic Fourier transform. our aim in the next sections will be to develop a systematic method for quantizing lagrangian submanifolds of cotangent bundles. however.3 Phase functions and lagrangian submanifolds In this section. 4. we generalize the concept of phase functions to non-projectable lagrangian submanifolds of cotangent bundles. 46 . viewed as a mapping df : U → T ∗ N . this fails. we have dfp . For ∗ each p ∈ U .A general quantization scheme Motivated by the simple results above.θ)/ a(q. θ)|dθ||dq|1/2 . In order for these half-densities to piece together appropriately. the restriction of the projection U × Rm → U to Σϕ is non-injective. the ˜ ˜ fiber-derivative ∂ϕ/∂θ vanishes at p. and thus the image of Σϕ is a non-projectable lagrangian submanifold.q +T (p))/ a(p) dp |dq|1/2 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. this generalization amounts to replacing Maslov’s ansatz (2π )−n/2 ei( p. a projectable lagrangian submanifold of T ∗ N can be locally parametrized by the differential of a function f on U ⊂ N . the idea is the following. 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 . Roughly speaking. If. The result will be a collection of half-densities on M . and the assignment p → dϕp defines a lagrangian ˜ ˜ ∗ immersion of Σϕ into T N . the meaning of dfp as an element of Tp N is that for any smooth curve γ in N satisfying γ(0) = p. γ(0) = (ϕ◦˜ ) (0) ˜ γ ˜ ˜ ˙ m for any lift γ of γ to the product U × R such that γ (0) = p. In general. which we formulate in the next section using the Maslov class. we can begin with a function ϕ : U ×Rm → R together ∗ with a point p = (p. To parametrize more general lagrangian ˙ ∗ submanifolds of T N in a similar way. which relies in this context on the concept of generalized phase functions. γ(0) = (f ◦γ) (0). since ˜ ˜ ˜ the value of the directional derivative (ϕ ◦ γ ) (0) depends on the lift γ . As we shall see. As we saw in Chapter 3. The basis of this method will again be Maslov’s technique. Local parametrizations of an immersed lagrangian submanifold (L. it is necessary and sufficient that L satisfy a general version of the Maslov quantization condition.

and its fiber critical set is defined as Σφ = (dθ φ)−1 ZE ∗ . The function φ is said to be nondegenerate if its fiber derivative is transverse to ZE ∗ . in which case Σφ is a smooth submanifold of B.6(2). giving rise to a natural M p projection E ⊥ → T ∗ M . The fiber-derivative of a function φ : B → R is the composition dθ φ = ι∗ ◦ dφ. the characteristic distribution C ⊥ of E ⊥ is tangent to the fibers of the mapping E ⊥ → T ∗ M . Theorem 4. it follows from Example 3. ι∗ d φ ∗ The fiber-hessian Hφ of φ at p ∈ Σφ is defined as the composition dθ φ ◦ ι : Ep → Ep . then the map λφ : Σφ → T ∗ M is an exact lagrangian immersion. we note that the equality λ∗ αM = dφ|Σφ 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. this implies that the section (dφ)(B)|Σφ = (dφ)(B) ∩ E ⊥ is nowhere tangent to the distribution C ⊥ and therefore immerses into T ∗ M . To begin. the differential dφ defines a section of E ⊥ whose composition with p we denote by λφ : Σφ → T ∗ M . unlike the previous Fourier transform picture.where θ is an auxiliary variable in Rm which may have nothing to do with the variable p dual to q. the section dθ φ has a well-defined intrinsic derivative (see [26]). and ι let pM : B → M be a smooth submersion. By Lemma 3. which induces for nondegenerate φ an exact sequence of vector bundles over Σφ θ 0 → T Σφ → TΣφ B → E ∗ |Σφ → 0. Proof. (We will denote the zero section of a vector bundle F by ZF ). On the fiber-critical set Σφ .19 that E ⊥ is a coisotropic submanifold of T ∗ B. 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. To complete the proof. 2 Some readers may find it instructive to follow the ensuing discussion by writing everything in local coordinates. we fix some notation and terminology. At points of Σφ . which requires linear structures on p. The nondegeneracy assumption on φ is equivalent to the requirement that the lagrangian submanifold (dφ)(B) of T ∗ B be transverse to E ⊥ . denoted dθ φ. Moreover.and q-space. 7 47 . Since E ⊥ is the union of the conormal bundles of the fibers of pM .7 Let M. B be smooth manifolds. The bundle E ⊥ may be identified with the pull-back p∗ T ∗ M .15 If φ is nondegenerate.

This means in particular that the dimension of the fibers of B must be at least k. ·) acquires a degenerate critical point. Addition: For any c ∈ R. pB . Definition 4. ι. To begin. This occurs when its fiber-hessian vanishes at p. p). These operations generate an equivalence relation among Morse families called stable equivalence. φ + c) ∈ M(L. which in turn equals the dimension of the kernel of (π ◦ λφ )∗ on Tp Σφ . φ If (B. (B. Here.17 A triple (B. and φ is a nondegenerate phase function on B such that λφ is an embedding. pB . then the following operations produce further elements of M(L. This is just the value of x for which φ(x. if the fiber dimension of B equals k. pB . ι. p). pB . φ). θ) = xθ + θ3 /3 on B = R × R. p). then the phase function φ is said to be reduced at p. Restriction: If B is any open subset of B containing λ−1 (p). Evidently the fiber-critical set of φ equals the product Σφ × {0}. 0) = λφ (b) for all (b. pB . ˜ ˜ ˜ ˜ 4. Evidently the phase function φ is nondegenerate. ι. then we denote by M(L.From the preceding definitions. 1. 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 . and n λφ (b. dθ φ = θ2 + x. φ ◦ g) ∈ M(L. pB . ι. pB . and its fiber critical set consists of the parabola x = −θ2 . φ) is called a Morse family over a manifold M if pB : B → M is a smooth (possibly non-surjective) submersion. we denote by gφ : U → Σφ the diffeomorphism defined by gφ = λ−1 ◦ ι. Thus (B × R . then the restrictions of φ pB and φ to B define a Morse family on M which belongs to M(L. but it is unique up to “stable equivalence. The central result of this section is the following. A phase function which generates a neighborhood of a point in a lagrangian submanifold is not unique per se. 3. φ) which generate ι(U ) for some neighborhood U ⊂ L of p. 0) ∈ Σφ .” a concept which we now define. ι. p) the class of Morse families (B. together with the phase function ˜ ˜ φ = φ + Q. and (dθ φ) = 2θdθ + dx. p).16 Suppose that M = R and consider the function φ(x. For such Morse families. Composition: If pB : B → M is a second submersion and g : B → B is a fiberpreserving diffeomorphism. it follows that the nullity k of the fiber-hessian at p ∈ Σφ equals dim(Tp Σφ ∩ Ep ). We will say that the lagrangian submanifold im(λφ ) = Lφ is generated by the Morse family (B. pB . Suspension: The suspension of (B. ι. p). which fails to be x-projectable precisely when x = 0. φ) ∈ M(L. φ) ∈ M(L. then (B . we introduce the following terminology. ι. 2. If ι : L → T ∗ M is a lagrangian immersion and p ∈ L. p). Example 4. A Morse family is said to be reduced at p ∈ B if φ is a reduced phase function at p. 48 .

Theorem 4. The class M(L. which states that. The proof of Theorem 4. lagrangian subbundles of ι∗ P complementary to the image of ι∗ : T L → ι∗ T P always exist. f |N = id and T f |TN P = id. Theorem 4. ι. We will prove the following theorem. near any of its lagrangian submanifolds L. ι.24 to yield: Corollary 4.19 Let (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. Let N be a submanifold of a manifold P .19 may be combined with Proposition 3. Theorem 4. a symplectic manifold looks like a neighborhood of the zero section in T ∗ L. by a map which is the identity on L. ω) and a neighborhood of the zero section in the space Z 1 (L) of closed 1-forms on L. all of which more or less rely on the so-called deformation method.Theorem 4. Thus. and let ω0 .19 will rely on the following Relative Darboux theorem [62] . ι : L → P a lagrangian immersion.19 implies the following nonlinear “normal form” result.18. ω) be a symplectic manifold.18 Let ι : L → T ∗ M be a lagrangian immersion.21 The map ψ gives a 1-1 correspondence between a neighborhood of L in the space of all lagrangian submanifolds of (P. f ∗ ω1 = ω0 2. Corollary 4. and let p ∈ L. p) contains a reduced Morse family over M . 49 . Then there are neighborhoods U and V of N and a diffeomorphism f : U → V such that 1. The next two subsections are devoted to the proof of this theorem. As a result of the existence of compatible complex structures on ι∗ P . and E a lagrangian subbundle of ι∗ T P which is complementary to the image of ι∗ : T L → ι∗ T P . Then: 1. p) are stably equivalent. 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]. Any two members of M(L. Symplectic normal forms The purpose of this section is to develop several results needed to prove Theorem 4.20 If L is a lagrangian submanifold of P . ω1 be two symplectic forms on P which coincide on TN P . then a neighborhood of L in P is symplectomorphic to a neighborhood of the zero section in T ∗ L.

Define a 1-parameter family of closed forms on P by ωt = ω0 + t(ω1 − ω0 ). In order to fix N . ∗ then homotopy invariance for deRham cohomology implies that the forms ωt = gt ω lie in the same cohomology class for all t. the last expression is equal to 1 1 h∗ d(Yt t 0 β) dt = d 0 1 0 h∗ (Yt t β) dt. Since all ωt agree on the submanifold N . Then there is a form ϕ on a neighborhood of N such that dϕ = β and which vanishes on TN P . 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 )). ω) is a symplectic manifold and gt : P → P a continuous family of diffeomorphisms. the form ϕ would be easy to find. and let β be a closed k-form on e P which vanishes on T N . 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 . we use a more general version of this lemma: Relative Poincar´ lemma . such that ω −1 dϕ = ω1 − ω0 . Let N be a submanifold of P . since the closed 2-form ω1 − ω0 is locally exact by the classical Poincar´ lemma. By the usual properties of the Lie derivative. then ϕ can be chosen so that its first derivatives vanish along N . Since the statement is local around N . By Cartan’s formula and the fact that β is closed. 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. β = h∗ β − h∗ β = 1 0 0 d ∗ (h β) dt = dt t 1 h∗ (LYt β) dt.Proof. t 0 where Yt is the (time-dependent) vector field which generates the isotopy ht for t > 0. If the submanifold N consisted of a single point. we have 1 h0 = fiberwise projection of P onto N. if β vanishes on TN P . β) dt . we will construct a time-dependent vector field Xt for which the isotopy ft that it generates satisfies ft∗ ωt = ω0 for all t ∈ [0. By the same method of proof as in the relative Darboux theorem. To find f satisfying f ∗ ω1 = ω0 . Our assertion follows if we take ϕ = h∗ (Yt t 2 If (P. 1]. For e more general submanifolds. These conditions will be satisfied if we set Xt = −˜ t (ϕ) for a 1-form ϕ on a neighborhood of N in P . we also want Xt |N = 0. vanishing on N . we can deduce the following converse result: 50 . Proof. Furthermore.

Using Theorem 3. i. Similarly.e. Parametrized Morse lemma .j ˜ f cij gi gj on a neighborhood of N . just for vectors tangent to N .22. t2 . 2 Next. If f is any function such that f and df vanish at all points of N . we ˜ can extend f to obtain an immersion F : U → P which satisfies F∗ = f on TZ (T ∗ L). for intermediate t. 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.Corollary 4. To finish the proof of the normal form theorem. Proof of Theorem 4. a nondegenerate quadratic form Q on Rk . Givental [6] proves an equivalence theorem like the relative Darboux theorem under the weaker hypothesis that ω0 and ω1 coincide on T N . · · · . there exists a neighborhood U of (x0 . where Z is the zero section of T ∗ L and π : T ∗ L → L is the natural projection. the form ωt − ω0 is not exact. w ∈ T Z. In contrast to Corollary 4. we choose a ωL -compatible complex structure J on TZ (T ∗ L) which rotates T Z into VZ L. Lemma 4. Let f : M × Rk → R satisfy the condition that for each x ∈ M . 0) is a nondegenerate critical point for f |{x}×Rk .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 . we let f : Z → P denote the composition ι ◦ π. we turn to two generalizations of the classical Morse lemma (see Appendix B) which require the following version of Taylor’s theorem. (x. 51 .20. then there is a diffeomorphism f : P → P ∗ with f1 ω1 = ω0 . then there exist functions cij such that f= i. we then choose a ω-compatible complex structure J on f ∗ T P which satisfies J(f∗ T Z) = E. Then for each x0 ∈ M . In a neighborhood U ⊂ T ∗ L of Z.19. Of course. 0). By restricting to a neighborhood of a point in N . θ)) = f (x.23 Let N ⊂ B be a submanifold defined by the vanishing of functions g1 . McDuff [40] describes a family ωt of symplectic forms on a compact six-dimensional manifold P such that ω1 − ω0 is exact. Beginning with the lagrangian immersion ι : L → P . and a diffeomorphism u of U fixing M × {0} and preserving fibers of the projection to M such that f (u(x. 0) + Q(θ). gk whose differentials are linearly independent along N . where E is the lagrangian subbundle given in the statement of the theorem. we apply the relative Darboux theorem to the forms ωL and F ∗ (ω) on U .

∂θi for certain smooth functions hi t which vanish on M × {0}. This means that Xt should be of the form Xt = i hi t ∂ . To find the diffeomorphism u we apply the deformation method. Evidently. 1]. The function η is totally degenerate in the sense that its fiber-hessian is identically zero at b. and a nondegenerate quadratic form Q on Rk such that (φ ◦ g)(x. By a preliminary change of coordinates linear on fibers. 1]. If φ is a phase function on M × Rn+k whose fiber-hessian Hφ has rank k at a point b ∈ Σφ . A change of coordinates near b and an application of the parametrized Morse lemma then proves: Thom splitting theorem . Then there exists a fiber-preserving diffeomorphism g of B. θ ) = η(x.Proof. 0) + Q(θ) + a(x. ∂θj 2 which vanishes (to second order) on M × {0}. θ) where the error term a(x. Let φ be a function on B = M × Rn+k whose fiber-hessian Hφ has rank k at a point b ∈ Σφ . there exists an integrable subbundle F → E = ker(pM ∗ ) such that the fiber-hessian ∗ ◦ dθ φ ◦  : F → F ∗ is nondegenerate at each zero of the section ∗ ◦dθ φ in a neighborhood of b. we invoke Lemma 4. 2 52 . we may assume that f (x. To determine Xt . θ) is O(|θ|3 ) for each x. Define ft = f − (1 − t)a. and it should satisfy d (ft ◦ ut ) = u∗ (Xt · ft + a) t dt for all t ∈ [0. θ) = f (x. t ∂θi ∂θj The required condition ∂ft ∂ft ∂ft =− cij hi t t ∂θi ∂θi ∂θj i.  then by the lower-semicontinuity of rank Hφ. θ) + Q(θ ) in a neighborhood of b in B. 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. θ.23 in order to find smooth functions cij which vanish t on M × {0} and satisfy ∂ft ∂ft a= cij . the latter condition will be met if Xt is chosen so that 0= Xt · ft + a = 0.j i will be satisfied if we set hi = − t j cij t ∂ft . a function η : M × Rn → R.

2 Proof of Theorem 4. ˜ ∂φ (x. p) is stably equivalent to a reduced Morse family in M(L. p) is nonempty.24 to show that any two reduced Morse families in M(L. it follows that the images of DFq and DFq coincide in Tp (Rm × Rm ). and so the class M(L. To complete the proof.18. Proof. By an application of the implicit function theorem.24. Combined with the definition of αL . y) . 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 . there exists a Morse family generating a neighborhood of p. ι.24 Any Morse family in M(L. ι. Then L is generated by a Morse family over M .9 we can construct a subbundle F which satisfies the hypotheses of the preceding theorem over a neighborhood of any p in L. By Theorem 4. Since this property is local near p.18. ∂x ˜ ˜ By the assumption that φ. it follows that F and F are −1 −1 embeddings near q = λφ (p) and q = λφ (p) respectively. ∂φ (x. Its restriction to Z is exact because αL is zero on Z. Since the Morse families ˜˜ are reduced. F : Rm × Rk → Rm × Rm defined by F (x. φ are both defined on Rm × Rk . the 1-form ψ ∗ αM − αL is closed on U .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. ι. p). and similarly for F . we can therefore find a fiber-preserving map g 53 . this proves part (1) of Theorem 4. Consider the ˜ mappings F. there e ∗ exists a function φ on U satisfying dφ = ψ αM − αL . Moreover. 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 . ι. φ are nondegenerate phase functions. y) = x. To prove part (2). p) is nonempty. F coincides with the ˜ ˜ ˜ map λφ on the fiber-critical set Σφ near q. it suffices by Theorem 4.18. Since ψ is symplectic. 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. we first note the following reinterpretation of the Thom splitting theorem in the terminology of Morse families. π (ψ(B)). p) are stably equivalent. Theorem 4. y) ∂x ˜ F (x. Combined with Theorem 4. To show that M(L. π ◦ ψ. we first prove Theorem 4. Consequently. Using Lemma 3. a computation (using the transversality hypothesis) now shows that there exists a neighborhood B of Z within U such that (B. By the relative Poincar´ lemma.Existence and stable equivalence of Morse families Returning to the proof of Theorem 4.19. ι. y) = x.

15 that the identity dφ = λ∗ αM φ ˜ holds on the fiber critical set Σφ . In order for g to define an equivalence between φ and ˜ φ.j cij ∂φ0 ∂φ0 ∂θi ∂θj in a neighborhood of Σφ . φ1 = φ ◦ g. Since λφ = λφ ◦ g. While there is no reason to expect this of g itself. we must also require that Xt be of the form ∂φ0 ∂ Xt = hij ∂θi ∂θj i.j for certain functions hij which vanish on Σ. to insure that each ft fixes Σ and preserves fibers. and so there exist functions cij defined near b such that φ1 − φ0 = i.v cuv ∂φ0 ∂φ0 ∂θu ∂θv . This equation holds if 0 = C + H(I + S). Moreover φ1 − φ0 vanishes to second order along Σ. since φ0 is reduced.e. 1]. i. we seek a vector field Xt generating an isotopy ft that satisfies ft∗ φt = φ0 for all t ∈ [0. 0= i. where C = (cij ). This completes the proof. 2 54 . To arrive at an equation for these coefficients. this identity implies that dφ = d(φ ◦ g) ˜ ˜ on Σφ . As before. this property would have to be valid on all of B. we note that the equation 0= will be satisfied provided that 0 = Xt · φt + φ1 − φ0 .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 .j d ∗ (ft φt ) = ft∗ (Xt · φt + φ1 − φ0 ) dt cij ∂φ0 ∂φ0 + ∂θi ∂θj hij i. and S is a matrix function which vanishes at b for all t. H = (hij ). we will construct a similar diffeomorphism with this property by appealing once again to the deformation method: ˜ Let φ0 = φ. Then Σφ0 = Σφ1 = Σ and λφ0 = λφ1 . 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 . ˜ Recall from the proof of Theorem 4.j ∂φ0 ∂ ∂θi ∂θj φ0 + t u. Hence we can solve for H in a neighborhood of b.

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 degree-1 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 negative-definite. Since the fiber-hessian 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 figure-eight. 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 self-intersections which has zero Liouville class, but still admits no global phase function, since its Maslov class is nonzero.

55

As a degree-1 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 Z-bundle 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 half-densities 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 half-densities 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 mod-Z 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 C-module. 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 = |Ω|1/2 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 = |Λ|1/2 B ⊗ |Λ|1/2 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 half-densities 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 |Λ|1/2 B is naturally isomorphic to |Λ|1/2 p∗ T M ⊗ |Λ|1/2 E. This in B turn gives rise to the natural isomorphism Aφ |Λ|1/2 p∗ T M ⊗ |Λ|E. B

The image of an amplitude a on B under this isomorphism can be written as p∗ |dx|1/2 ⊗ σ, B where σ is a family of 1-densities on the fibers of pB , i.e., σx is a density on each nonempty p−1 (x). By fiber-integration we pass to a half-density on M : B I (φ, a)(x) = (2π )−n/2 e−inπ/4
p−1 (x) B

eiφ/ σx

|dx|1/2 ,

57

3 implies that this occurs precisely when ˜ ˜ ˜ | detax Hφ|1/2 e−iφ/ eiπ indφ /2 = | detax Hφ|1/2 e−iφ/ eiπ indφ /2 . pB . If the restriction of a to Σφ corresponds to a half-density a on Σφ under this isomorphism. Also. a) is a smooth half-density on M. ) defined above). a)| = O( ) locally uniformly on V . ˜ ˜ ˜ (∗) Since (L. the associated symbol on Lφ is defined as ∗ sa = gφ a ⊗ sφ . a) are linked by the following theorem. Then sa = s˜ on L if and only if a ˜ ˜ |I (φ. a)(x). To pass geometrically from a to a symbol on Lφ . ˜ where a is the half-density on Σφ induced by the amplitude a. d φ Since |Λ|−1/2 E is naturally isomorphic to |Λ|1/2 E ∗ . we first recall from Section 4.27 Suppose that two Morse families (B.3 that the nondegeneracy of φ gives rise to the following exact sequence of vector bundles over the fiber-critical set Σφ θ 0 → T Σφ → TΣφ B → E ∗ |Σ → 0. B B we may differentiate under the integral to conclude that I (φ. φ) are stably equivalent. Lemma B. we can apply the principle of stationary phase to each fiber of the projection pB : B → M to obtain I (φ. def (Here we recall from the discussion following Definition 4. The theorem follows by comparing these expressions with (∗) above. When a is properly supported. pB . and −1 so there exists a diffeomorphism g : Σφ → Σφ defined as the composition g = gφ ◦ gφ . 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 . φ) generate the same ˜ ˜ projectable lagrangian embedding (L. ι) is projectable. ˜ ˜ ˜ Proof. the section sφ. φ). a) − I (φ. ι). respectively. ι) is projectable. 58 .17 that gφ is a diffeomorphism from a neighborhood of p in L onto Σφ defined by the composition λ−1 ◦ ι. setting I (φ.18. By Theorem 4. is the canonical element of Γpar (ΦLφ . (B. ˜ ˜ ˜ Theorem 4. for each φ . and similarly for a. up to a constant. a be amplitudes on B. φ). (B. B. the Morse families (B. the symbol sa and the half-density I (φ. a)(x) = eiφ/ e−iπ indφ /2 + O( ) | detax Hφ|1/2 ˜ ˜ and similarly for I (φ. pB . this sequence induces an isomorphism of the restriction of Aφ to Σφ with |Λ|1/2 Σφ . pB .where n = dim(p−1 (x)). Since ˜ ˜ φ = φ ◦ g. a)(x) = 0 if p−1 (x) = ∅.ι. and let a. When (L.

φj )..e. φ) is a second Morse family which generates Lφ . equivalently. s). ι. Then there exists a unique half-density a supported in Lφ such that s = sφ ⊗ a. and let U be a tubular neighborhood of N . i. for some ∈ R+ .ι admit nontrivial parallel sections. and so ˜ ˜ |I (φ. Using the remarks above. a)(x). 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 . s) is well-defined. First. Of course. and (gφ )∗ a may be canonically identified with a section of the amplitude bundle of B over the fiber-critical set Σφ . ι. pB . or. ι) be -integral. i. Definition 4. ι. where r = π ◦ ψ −1 is a 59 . it is easy to check that up to O( ) terms. we first fix a locally finite cover {Lj } of L. a) − I (φ. Suppose that (B. then sa = sa = s. The set of for which this condition holds will be called admissible for L. φ) is a Morse family such that the phase function φ generates an open subset Lφ ⊂ L. Note that it is a straightforward generalization of the condition derived in the preceding section. where π : νN → N is the natural projection.e. To quantize an arbitrary symbol s on L.27 asserts that this choice of I (L. s) = I (φ. which we can extend to an amplitude a on B. and choose a partition of unity {hj } subordinate to {Lj }. compactly supported in fibers. Example 4. ι. its phase bundle ΦL. Thus. This definition is known as the Maslov quantization condition.28 An immersed lagrangian submanifold ι : L → T ∗ M is called quantizable if. ι. We then set I (L. such that each Lj is generated by a Morse family (Bj . although the technique above enables us to quantize all symbols on L in a consistent way.ι admits a global parallel section. and consider a symbol s on L supported in Lφ . Furthermore. s) coincides with pull-back. ˜ ˜ and a is an amplitude on B obtained as above.2 Morse families provide a general means for locally quantizing symbols on an immersed lagrangian submanifold (L. s) = j I (L. up to O( ) terms. that the phase class of (L. ι) ⊂ T ∗ M . hj · s). we introduce the following terminology. ι. φ). From Theorem 4. pBj . I (L.27 we draw two conclusions about this tentative definition when Lφ is ˜ ˜ ˜ projectable. this definition depends only on the semi-classical state (L. For this reason. we note that if (B. We then set I (L. pN . pB . Consider the Morse family (r∗ N ⊥ . the existence of nonzero symbols requires that the phase bundle ΦL. we note that Theorem 4.29 Let N be a closed submanifold of a smooth manifold M . if its phase class is -integral. a)| = O( ).

a). since the phase function φ has a degenerate critical point in the fiber p−1 (x). The basic technical difficulty is that the principle of stationary phase (the basic underpinning of Theorem 4. φ) ∈ M(L. Indeed. Quantum states as distributions Unfortunately. s) at regular values of πL is not valid at caustics. B where b = dim(B) and u ∈ |Ω|0 M . The origin is therefore a degenerate critical point for φ. s) then consists of all distributional half-densities I on M obtained by choosing a locally finite open cover {Lj } of L and a 60 .retraction of U onto N . ι. In particular.2 that classical solutions to the transport equation are singular at caustic points. ψ −1 (pN (p)) . pN denotes the natural submersion r∗ N ⊥ → M . the interpretation of I (L. at whose points the fiber-hessian assumes the form ∂ 2 φ/∂θ2 = 2x.27) no longer applies to the integral eiφ/ σx p−1 (x) B when x is a caustic point. s) in the presence of caustic points is as a family of distributional half-densities on M defined as follows. and the map λφ : N ⊥ → T ∗ M equals the inclusion. The family I (L. B Example 4. and therefore both the Liouville and Maslov classes of N ⊥ are zero. θ) dθ. ι. and stationary phase cannot be used to estimate the integral eiθ R 3 /3 a(0. For each Morse family (B. Thus. ι) and compactly supported amplitude a on B. θ) = θ3 /3 + xθ consists of the parabola x = −θ2 . the conormal N bundle of N is a lagrangian submanifold of T ∗ M which admits a global generating function. we define a distributional half-density on M by I (φ. and φ : r∗ N ⊥ → R is defined by φ(p) = p. ι. u = (2π )−b/2 e−iπb/4 B 1/2 eiφ/ a ⊗ p∗ u. Since ψ is an embedding. whereas we saw in Section 2. A more appropriate way to interpret the expression I (L.30 The fiber critical set of the phase function φ(x. s) is smooth. pB . ι. this implies that the conormal bundle of any submanifold of M satisfies the Maslov quantization condition. a computation shows that the fiber critical set of φ is given by Σφ = p−1 (N ) = N ⊥ . this remark is suggested by the fact that I (L.

pB . Proof. and let a. ι. a). and similarly for a. then sa (p) = s˜ (p) if and only if a ˜ ˜ I (φ. If ψ : M → R is a smooth function whose differential intersects ι(L) at exactly one point ι(p) transversely. an application of the principle of stationary phase gives I (φ. Set R = φ − ψ ◦ pB . aj ). pB . 2 61 . ˜ 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. s) may appear very large. a). 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 . we have R(y) − R(˜) = φ(y) − φ(˜). pB . We first prove ˜ ˜ ˜ Theorem 4. Then set k I = j=1 I (φj . a). Moreover. ι. respectively. a). it is easy ˜ ˜ ˜ to check that stable equivalence of the Morse families (B. (B. and so the preceding equation gives ˜ y y y eiR(y)/ e−iπ ind R (y)/2 eiR(˜)/ e−iπ ind R (˜)/2 = . e−iψ/ u . ι). ˜ ˜y ˜ y Since g is fiber-preserving. φ) implies that ˜ y indφ (p) − indφ (˜) = ind R (y) − ind R (˜). e−iψ/ u − I (φ. B. Although the class I (L. In this case. ˜˜ ˜ ˜ where a is the half-density on Σφ induced by the amplitude a. pB . Since ˜ ˜ = R ◦ g. φ). a link among its members can be described as follows. φ) generate the same ˜ ˜ lagrangian embedding (L. e−iψ/ u = O( ). the function R is a phase function having the same fiber critical set as φ.31 Suppose that two Morse families (B. The family I (L. Since ψ ◦ pB is constant on the fibers of pB . As in the proof of Theorem 4. (B.partition of unity {hj } subordinate to {Lj }.27. Lemma B. a be amplitudes on B. e−iψ/ u = eiR(y)/ e−iπ ind R (y)/2 + O( ) | deta R (y)|1/2 ˜ ˜ and similarly for I (φ. up to a constant. φ). Comparing this expression with (∗∗) above completes the proof. s) consists of those distributional half-densities obtained in this way using amplitudes aj such that saj = s over each Lφj .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 .

or. If ι : L → T ∗ M and ι : L → T ∗ M are lagrangian immersions. φ − S) for which Σφ = Σφ−S and λφ = fdS ◦ λφ−S . then. then the Hamilton-Jacobi equation H ◦ι=E 62 f∗ . Example 4. any lagrangian immersion ι : L → T ∗ M defines an equivalence class of lagrangian immersions in T ∗ M which.Now consider a semi-classical state (L. for notational simplicity we will denote by L. Thus. Note in particular that if dS(pB (x)) = λφ (x) for some x ∈ Σφ . pB . up to O( ). φj ) over M . We refer to the equivalence class L as an immersed lagrangian submanifold of T ∗ M . and suppose ˜ that S : V → R is a smooth function. Moreover. 31]. equivalently. aj ). we obtain a new Morse ˜ family (B. ι. s). Equivalent semi-classical states A further important modification of our quantization picture is based on the conceptual distinction between an “immersion” and an “immersed submanifold”. the principal part of I (L. A check of the definitions shows that the main objects in our quantization scheme behave nicely with respect to this notion of equivalence. As before. φ) is a Morse family over a manifold M . For a thorough exposition of this topic. where aj is the amplitude on Bj obtained in the usual way from the symbol hj ·s on Lj . and choose a partition of unity {hj } subordinate to {Lj }. where fdS is the fiberwise ˜ ˜ translation map defined by dS. pBj . a diffeomorphism f : L → L as above induces an isomorphism of symbol spaces SL. This critical point is nondegenerate provided that λφ−S is transverse to the zero ˜ ∗ section of T M near x. We then define I (L. By allowing I (φ. e−iψ/ u = def j I (φj .32 Suppose that (B. pB . ι. if E is a regular value of some hamiltonian function H on T ∗ M . e−iψ/ depends only on the principal part of s. a) to be a distribution. if λφ is transverse to the image of dS near x. this means the following.ι . we can sometimes define it even when a does not have compact support. a symbol on the immersed lagrangian submanifold L is well-defined as an equivalence class of symbols on the members of L. we will say that (L. s). s). ι) and (L . By setting S = S ◦ pB . ι. e−iψ/ u . On the classical level. we let {Lj } be a locally finite cover of L such that each Lj is generated by a Morse family (Bj . then x is a critical point ˜ of φ − S. In this way. In terms of our discussion.ι → SL . When the image of dψ is transverse to L. ι ) are equivalent provided that there exists a diffeomorphism f : L → L such that ι = ι ◦ f . 28. we refer to [21.

s). o Our list of classical and quantum correspondences now assumes the form: Object basic space state Classical version T ∗M (L. s ). the vector fields XH. s). it is easy to check that for any members (L. that it is unclear what the quantum states are which are approximated by these geometric objects. s) which we denote by LXH s = 0. In this case. ι ) by the hamiltonian vector field of H (see Example 3.ι s = 0 is a well-defined condition on (L. and therefore the homogeneous transport equation LXH. we are further led to define a semi-classical state in an arbitrary symplectic manifold (P. s) on M obtained by quantizing any member of (L. The state is stationary with respect to a classical hamiltonian H on T ∗ M provided that (L. however. From these remarks. ι . s) as a semi-classical state in T ∗ M . s) as above Quantum version HM distributional half-density on M Schr¨dinger equation o ˆ operator H on HM time-evolution Hamilton’s equations generator of evolution function H on T ∗ M stationary state ˆ state (L. s) = I (L . (L . ι. and thus we may define the quantization of (L. On the quantum level. s) is a semi-classical approximate solution to the time-independent Schr¨dinger equation on M . ι . as described above. then I (L. s ) of the equivalence class (L.ι . Extending some notion of quantum state to arbitrary symplectic manifolds is one of the central goals of geometric quantization. s). Note. ω) to be an immersed lagrangian submanifold equipped with a half-density and possibly some “phase object” corresponding to a parallel section of the phase bundle in the cotangent bundle case. s) is a stationary semiclassical state. 63 . s) as the (unique) distributional half-density I (L. we are led to view the equivalence class (L.13) satisfy XH. (L . If (L. we have I (L. ι). s) satisfies the associated Hamilton-Jacobi and homogeneous transport equations. since there is no underlying configuration space on which the states can live.ι = f∗ XH. ι.defines a condition on the class L which we denote by H(L) = E.ι and XH.ι induced on (L. s) satisfying eigenvector of H H(L) = E and LXH s = 0 With these correspondences between classical and quantum mechanics in mind.

an important process known as symplectic reduction generates many examples of such manifolds. C ⊂ V a lagrangian and a coisotropic subspace respectively. y). where π is the projection.1 A skew-symmetric bilinear form ω on a vector space Y induces a symplectic structure on Y /Y ⊥ . starting with cotangent bundles. Linear symplectic reduction Degenerate skew-symmetric bilinear forms yield symplectic vector spaces in the following way.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. 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 . 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. [y]) = ω(x. concluding with Dirac’s formulation of the quantization problem. Lagrangian subspaces behave remarkably well with respect to this reduction. 64 . 5. then ω (x) = 0.5 The Symplectic Category There are many symplectic manifolds which are not cotangent bundles. Proof. Lemma 5. ˜ ˜ The symplectic quotient space Y /Y ⊥ described in this lemma is known as the (linear) reduced space associated to Y .2 Let V be a symplectic vector space and L. and LC = (L ∩ C)/(L ∩ C ⊥ ) is a lagrangian subspace of C/C ⊥ . and so x ∈ Y ⊥ and hence [x] = 0. First note that ω gives rise to a skew-symmetric bilinear form ω on Y /Y ⊥ by the equation ω ([x]. Lemma 5. we use the following commutative diagram. To prove the nondegeneracy of ω . Then LC = L ∩ C + C ⊥ is a lagrangian subspace of V contained in C. For instance. π∗ −− Y ∗ ← − (Y /Y ⊥ )∗   ω ˜ ˜ ω Y −− −→ π Y /Y ⊥ 2 If ω ([x]) = 0.

then C ⊥ ⊕V /C also carries a natural symplectic structure induced by ω. L . Observe that if C is a coisotropic subspace of (V. This gives rise to the following decomposition of V . then (E + F ) ∩ G = E ∩ G + F if and only if F ⊂ G. Let J be a ω-compatible complex structure on V . G are any three subspaces of V . then then C = V ⊕ L is a coisotropic subspace of the direct sum V ⊕ V (see Example 3. the self-orthogonality of LC follows from the simple fact that if E.4 If (V. L are lagrangian subspaces of a symplectic vector space V and W ⊂ V is a lagrangian subspace transverse to both L and L . W ) = signature QT These quantities will be useful in our study of the Maslov bundle under reduction. Next. B are orthogonal to C. L . Lemma 5. Since by assumption C ⊥ ⊂ C. the second assertion follows from the equality L⊥ = (LC )⊥ /C ⊥ .Proof. and we collect some useful facts about them in the following examples. The projections V → V /C and C → C/C ⊥ restricted to A. Then A. Note that (LC )⊥ = (L + C ⊥ ) ∩ C. and C ⊥ = 0 ⊕ L. 65 . Now suppose that V and V are of equal dimension and T : V → V is a linear symplectic map. B give rise to an isomorphism V = C ⊥ + A + B → C ⊥ ⊕ V /C ⊕ C/C ⊥ . C 2 Example 5. ω ). ω). and set A = JC ⊥ and B = C ∩ JC. then the reduced lagrangian subspace (ΓT )C of C/C ⊥ equals T (L) ⊂ V . 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 self-adjoint linear map T : L → L∗ . the linear reduced space C/C ⊥ equals (V . Consequently. we observe that since LC = LC /C ⊥ . Proof. ω) is a symplectic vector space with a coisotropic subspace C. (V . we define ind(L. W ) = index QT sgn(L. 2 Recall that if L. F. ω). C ⊥ with respect to the inner-product gJ on V . Denoting by QT the quadratic form QT on L induced by T . ω ) are symplectic vector spaces and L is a lagrangian subspace of V .3 If (V. then there exists a linear symplectomorphism V → C ⊥ ⊕ V /C ⊕ C/C ⊥ .4). If ΓT ⊂ V ⊕ V is the lagrangian subspace defined by the graph of T .

Presymplectic structures and reduction By definition. ω) is integrable. In this case. Y ] ω = LX (Y ω) − Y LX ω. Proof. W ) = − sgn(L. WC . This means that LX ω = 0. WC . If Q∗ denotes the quadratic form on V ∗ defined by A. Y ] lies in (T M )⊥ . L) and sgn(Q∗ |E ⊥ ) = sgn(LC . Evidently. L . p. Theorem 5. i. ω is called a presymplectic structure on M with characteristic subbundle (T M )⊥ . In some sense.7 The characteristic subbundle of a presymplectic manifold (M.e. with the dimension of the orthogonal (Tx M )⊥ the same for all x ∈ M . W .5 To begin. 66 . then LC = (V /E) ⊕ 0 and LC = 0 ⊕ E ⊥ . respectively. L are themselves transverse: sgn(L. Now if we denote by L. this formula gives sgn(L .Example 5. and C ⊥ = E ⊕ 0. the next best structure a manifold M may possess along these lines is a closed two-form ω of constant rank. From [21. and [X. If the vector field Y belongs to (T M )⊥ . we therefore have sgn(Q∗ ) = sgn(L . L ). Example 5. LC ). Leaving for the reader the verification that (T M )⊥ is actually a subbundle of T M . we leave to the reader the job of checking the following elementary identities for the case when the lagrangian subspaces L. then the first term on the right hand side of this equation vanishes identically. Combined with the preceding equations.6 Suppose that V is a finite-dimensional 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.130] we recall that if Q∗ is nondegenerate and Q is the quadratic form it induces on V . W . L the lagrangian subspaces V ⊕ 0 and 0 ⊕ V ∗ .. L. then sgn(Q) = sgn(Q|E ) + sgn(Q∗ |E ⊥ ). the lagrangian subspace W of V ⊕V ∗ given by the graph of A passes under reduction by C to the graph WC of AE . W . we recall that Lie brackets and inner products are related by the formula [X. LC ). a symplectic form is closed and nondegenerate. The composition of a self-adjoint linear map A : V ∗ → V with the projection V → V /E restricts to a self-adjoint linear map AE : E ⊥ → V /E (note that V /E identifies canonically with (E ⊥ )∗ ). W ) = − sgn(L . L) = sgn(Q|E ) + sgn(LC . The reduced symplectic vector space is then C/C ⊥ = (V /E) ⊕ E ⊥ . so the second term vanishes as well. If X belongs to (T M )⊥ . then Cartan’s formula combined with the assumption that ω is closed implies that ω is invariant under the flow of X.

then we say that M is reducible. w) = 0 for all w ∈ Tp C}. ωM ) is called the reduced manifold of M . To begin. and L is a lagrangian submanifold of Q. we can view C as an abstract manifold and note that if ω is the pull-back of the symplectic form ω by the natural inclusion C → P . for each p ∈ C. the tangent space Tp C contains its symplectic orthogonal (Tp C)⊥ = {v ∈ Tp P : ω(v.2. 67 ι r . 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 . If the quotient space M/M⊥ is a smooth manifold. This gives rise to the following commutative diagram N ×V M − − M −M→     rN N −− V −→ where rM . A pointwise application of Lemma 5. Since dω = 0 by hypothesis. in effect. Q are symplectic manifolds. the form ω defines a presymplectic structure on P. nondegenerate 2-form ωM on M/M⊥ . together with the fact that LX ω = 0 for characteristic X. shows that the presymplectic structure ω induces a smooth. In this case. The corresponding reduced symplectic manifold (when it exists) will be the symplectic model for the space of quantum states of energy E. then P × L is a coisotropic submanifold of P × Q whose characteristic foliation consists of leaves of the form {p} × L for p ∈ P . Example 5. The product P × L is therefore reducible. If P. and since the quotient map M → M/M⊥ is a submersion.13. Since dim(T C)⊥ = dim(P ) − dim(C) is constant. we will be interested in presymplectic manifolds which arise as coisotropic submanifolds of some symplectic manifold (P. N to the fiber product N ×V M . Our goal for the remainder of this section is to describe two operations on immersed lagrangian submanifolds defined by a reducible coisotropic submanifold. Recall that a submanifold C ⊂ P is called coisotropic if. For the most part. rN denote the restrictions of the cartesian projections N × M → M. the hamiltonian flow associated to a function H : R2n → R generates the characteristic foliation of any regular energy surface H −1 (E). The symplectic manifold (M/M⊥ .2 The foliation M⊥ defined by the characteristic subbundle of M is known as the characteristic foliation of M . the form ωM is necessarily closed and therefore symplectic. ω).8 As noted in Example 3. where ι ×  : N × M → V × V is the product map and ∆V ⊂ V × V is the diagonal. then ker(ω ) = (T C)⊥ . and the reduction projection coincides with the usual cartesian projection P × L → P . these operations will be nonlinear analogs of the mappings L → LC and L → LC described in the linear setting in Lemma 5.2.

If a lagrangian immersion ι : L → P intersects a coisotropic submanifold C ⊂ P cleanly. if ι is an immersion. as in the following lemma. w) = 0 only if w = 0. w) is tangent to the diagonal in V × V . For brevity. A particular case of this situation occurs when  is a submersion and ι is any smooth map. The usefulness of clean intersection in symplectic geometry lies in its compatibility with symplectic orthogonalization. V are smooth manifolds. In particular. M. w) of N ×V M . then ι and  intersect cleanly. then the maps rN and rM are themselves immersions. 2. 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. Since rM ∗ (v. 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. Then for any tangent vector (v. Example 5. Thus. Lemma 5. the vector (ι × )∗ (v. it follows that rM ∗ (v. in which case ι∗ v = ∗ w = 0. 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 .Definition 5. and so the basic properties of symplectic orthogonalization applied fiberwise to these bundles give ker(pC ◦ rC )∗ = G⊥ ∩ G ∩ F = G⊥ ∩ F = (G + F )⊥ . we can conclude that rM : N ×V M → M is an immersion as well. 68 . w) = w. then the map (pC ◦ rC ) : L ×P C → C/C ⊥ has constant rank. 3. 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.9 If N. and so ι∗ v = ∗ w.10 1.11 Let P be a symplectic manifold. Let F. The kernel of (pC ◦ rC )∗ then equals G⊥ ∩ rC∗ T (L ×P C). ∗ ∗ Proof. If the product ι ×  of two smooth maps ι : N → V and  : M → V is transverse to the diagonal ∆V . 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 .

Hausdorff manifold. 2 If the quotient of L ×P C by the fibers of the map pC ◦ rC is a smooth. Proof. L). and the reduced manifold CM = C/C ⊥ is the space of oriented geodesics on M . A pointwise application of Lemma 5. Moreover. indicating that the dimension of ker(pC ◦ rC )∗ is independent of the base point in L ×P C. In this case. we define LC as the fiber product of ιC and the quotient map pC : C → C/C ⊥ . we have dim(ker(pC ◦ rC )∗ ) = dim(L) + dim(L ×P C) − dim(C). g) is a riemannian manifold. L) in P induces immersed submanifolds LC and LC of C/C ⊥ and P . all of whose geodesics are closed and −1 have the same length. J2 ). then LC and LC are immersed lagrangian submanifolds of C/C ⊥ and P . it is easy to check that for any pair J1 . L) provided that C is reducible. In fact. J2 ) = g(J1 . The tangent space to CM at a point p identifies naturally with the space of Jacobi fields normal to the geodesic represented by p. ι = ι ◦ f . Recall from Chapter 4 that an immersed submanifold N of a manifold V is an equivalence class N of immersions. Example 5. and a pointwise application of Lemma 5. Since ιC : LC → C/C ⊥ is an immersion. L) is a reducible pair in a symplectic manifold P . Evidently. With these remarks in mind. it follows that these are immersed lagrangian submanifolds. and L.2) is reducible. By C : LC → C/C ⊥ we denote the restriction of the cartesian projection LC × C → C to LC . In this case. C intersect cleanly. i. Finally. if a member ι : N → V of the equivalence class N intersects a smooth map  : M → V cleanly. 69 .2 implies that this immersion is lagrangian. J2 of normal Jacobi fields along p. then the same is true of any other member of N . 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 . the constant energy hypersurface C = kM (E) (see Section 3.10(2) implies that the map C : LC → C is a smooth immersion. respectively. then we obtain an induced immersion ιC from the reduced space LC of L ×P C into C/C ⊥ .12 If (C. Since LC is the quotient of L ×P C by the fibers of pC ◦ rC . respectively. since the immersed submanifolds LC and LC are well-defined by the reducible pair (C.13 If (M. Let ι : L → P be a fixed element of L. we will say that the immersed submanifold N and the map  : M → V intersect cleanly. Theorem 5. we will say that a coisotropic submanifold C and an immersed lagrangian submanifold L in a symplectic manifold P form a reducible pair (C. then for each E > 0.Since F ∩ G has constant rank. J2 ) − g(J1 . the internal sum F + G and its orthogonal (F + G)⊥ also have constant rank.2 shows that this immersion is lagrangian. the induced map ιC : LC → C/C ⊥ is a smooth immersion. We leave it to the reader to check that any reducible pair (C. the symplectic form on CM is given in terms of the metric by ω(J1 . 2 Example 5.e.

that is CN = {(x.. the resulting symplectic form on CP n is invariant under transformations induced by unitary transformations. Each oriented geodesic in S n identifies naturally with an oriented 2-dimensional subspace of Rn+1 .For further details.6. Then the natural projection T ∗ M → M maps Z diffeomorphically onto N . Now let Z denote the intersection of CN with the zero section of T ∗ M . TZ CN = T N ⊕ F ⊥ .14 Note that the standard symplectic structure on R2n+2 is equivalent to the imaginary part of the standard hermitian metric on Cn+1 . We begin with the following lemma. Fx ⊂ ker(p)}. a subbundle of T N ⊂ TN M . ωM ). By CN we denote the annihilator of F.12 it therefore follows that the space of geodesics in M normal to N at some point comprises an immersed lagrangian submanifold of CM . i.12. 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 . CN is a subbundle of TN M . Conormal submanifolds A particular example of symplectic reduction which we will use in the next chapter begins with the following set-up. Lemma 5. ∗ By definition. p) ∈ T ∗ M : x ∈ N. and moreover. it follows that the real projective space RP n is a lagrangian submanifold of CP n . If F is integrable. 70 . More precisely. and let N ⊂ M be a smooth submanifold equipped with a tangent distribution F. then we can consider its leaves as submanifolds of M via the inclusion N → M . see [12]. The unit sphere S 2n+1 is a coisotropic submanifold of Cn+1 . this implies that CN is coisotropic.15 In the notation above.e. From Theorem 5. and therefore CS n is represented by the grassmannian Gr+ (2. The conormal bundle N ⊥ to a smooth submanifold N ⊂ M is a lagrangian submanifold of T ∗ M which intersects C cleanly. The conormal bundles of the leaves define a foliation of CN by lagrangian submanifolds. Example 5. Since the symplectic form on Cn+1 is invariant under unitary transformations. the annihilator CN is a coisotropic submanifold of T ∗ M if and only if the distribution F is integrable. we consider the sphere S n equipped with its standard metric. Proof. n + 1). by Lemma 3. N ⊥ ∩ C is a sphere bundle over N transverse to the characteristic foliation of C. but we wish to consider various properties of CN when it is viewed as a smooth submanifold of the symplectic manifold (T ∗ M. To give a concrete case of this example. Suppose that M is a smooth manifold. the reduction of which is complex projective space CP n . From Theorem 5.

16 shows that each such leaf projects diffeomorphically onto F . From the natural lagrangian splitting of T (T ∗ M ) along the zero section of T ∗ M . and it is easy to check that the level sets of this map are the fibers of the projection CN → CN /C ⊥ . it follows that (x. By Lemma 5.6 implies that F ⊥ is foliated by isotropic leaves of CN . p) ∈ CN contains the subspace Fx of Tx N in its kernel.16 If the leaf space N/F is a smooth.e. Hausdorff manifold. φ) is a Morse family over a manifold M . pB . by definition. and let CB ⊂ T ∗ B be the conormal bundle to the fibers of the submersion pB : B → V . Example 5. suppose that (B. This gives a well-defined surjective submersion f : CN → T ∗ (N/F).15 can be reformulated as an application of Theorem 5. Thus we get a diffeomorphism CN /C ⊥ → T ∗ (N/F). Lemma 3. p) defines an element of T ∗ (N/F). This completes the proof. when φ is nondegenerate. Moreover..where F ⊥ is the subbundle of VZ M which annihilates F. each (x. Proof. and thus the intersections of Z with the isotropic leaves of CN are integral manifolds of the distribution 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 F.17 Suppose that F is a foliation of a manifold N .17. 2 Lemma 5. π −1 pC In other words. Theorem 4.12 when the lagrangian submanifold im(dφ) is transverse to E. by definition. 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.18 As a special case of Example 5. Since F ⊥ is a lagrangian submanifold of T ∗ N . then the reduced space CN /C ⊥ is canonically symplectomorphic to T ∗ (N/F). contains the conormal bundle F ⊥ to any leaf F of F. i. 71 . Since.15. 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 . the proof of Lemma 5. The lagrangian immersion λφ : Σφ → T ∗ M equals the composition B Σφ → L ∩ CB → CV /C ⊥ . To prove that the preceding diffeomorphism is symplectic. If L ⊂ T ∗ B is the lagrangian submanifold given by the image of the differential dφ. it follows that the annihilator CN ⊂ T ∗ N of F is a coisotropic submanifold which. ∗ ∗ 2 Example 5. it follows that (TZ CN )⊥ = F ⊕ (T N )⊥ .

6 and 5. W ) + σ(L. so that p = λφ (x) lies in the zero section ZM of T ∗ M . Lemma 5. then σ(L. the cross index of the quadruple (L. and so ind(Q|E ) = ind Hφx . Let let E ⊂ Tx B be the kernel of the linearized projection pB∗ : T B → T M . 2 72 . W. Now suppose that Q is the nondegenerate quadratic form on Tx B defined by the hessian of φ. it is easy to check that the tangent space to the conormal submanifold CV defined in Example 5. so that the last formula in Example 5. Given two lagrangian subspaces L. φ) of the critical point x satisfies ιM (x. 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 . L . we denote by LL. L . we obtain the following “cocycle” property of the cross index. W ∈ LL.5. φ) is a Morse family which generates a lagrangian submanifold in L ⊂ T ∗ M and x ∈ B is a (nondegenerate) critical point of φ. L .18 at x equals the coisotropic subspace C = Tx B ⊕ E ⊥ . W ) is defined as the integer σ(L. On the other hand. pV . W. L . L . For W.L . W ) − ind(L. W . we recall that Tx (T ∗ B) ∗ admits the natural lagrangian splitting Tx B ⊕ Tx B. 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. V. W. the intersection T CN ∩ V M is a (constant rank) subbundle of T CN . L . W . W ) + σ(L. L . W ) = ind(L. Example 5. W ∈ LL. φ) = ind Hφx + ind(Vp M. L of a symplectic vector space V . Tp L. By definition. the restriction of Q to E equals the form induced by the fiber-hessian Hφx of φ at x.6 implies that the Morse index ιM (x. W ) = 0. W ).20 If L.L the subset of the lagrangian grassmannian L(V ) comprised of those lagrangian subspaces which are transverse to both L and L .L . W . Tp ZM ).We remark that since CN is a bundle over N .19 An important special case of Examples 5. Immediately from this definition and Example 5.18 arises when (B. L are lagrangian subspaces of V and W. Denoting by x the point in the zero section of T ∗ B lying over x.

A special case of this set-up 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.5 imply ιM (x. the preceding equation and Example 5. the Maslov bundle ML. From the discussion above.19 it follows that ˜ the Morse index ιM (x. pB . φ − S) = ind Hφx + ind(Vp M. ˜ where p = p − dS(pV (x)) and Lφ−S is the lagrangian submanifold generated by φ − S.L (V ).λ (E). where E is a symplectic vector bundle and λ. Vp M . λ then correspond to smooth sections of L(E).λ (E).L .Vp M → Z is obtained by setting fφ (Y ) = ιM (x. Associated to E is its lagrangian grassmannian bundle L(E) whose fiber over x ∈ M is simply L(Ex ). where S = S ◦ pB . fix a point x in the fiber critical set Σφ . Now if Y is any lagrangian subspace of Tp (T ∗ M ) transverse to Vp M . From Example 5. and we denote by Mλ. Tp ZM ). and Tp ZM to the tangent space Y of the image of dS at p.32.λ (E) by sending the triple (p.ι → Mλ. φ − SY ). ι) × Z → Mλ.λ (E) the principal Z bundle whose fiber over x ∈ M equals Fλx . Y ). λ ). λ are lagrangian subbundles. φ). ˜ Fiberwise translation by dS does not change the index on the right. it follows that this map passes to an isomorphism of principal Z bundles ML. From Example 4.L (V ) the space of functions f : LL. λ. Y. Natural lagrangian subbundles of E are then given by λ = ι∗ T L and λ = ι∗ V M . we define a map L × M(L. then x is a ˜ ˜ nondegenerate critical point of φ − S. L . Thus. then there exists a function S : V → R such that Y = im dS(pV (x)).ι is canonically isomorphic to Mλ. Tp Lφ−S . (B. W ) for all W. The lagrangian subbundles λ. A function fφ : LTp Lφ . Since any such function is determined up to an additive constant by its value at a single point of LL. it follows that Z acts simply and transitively by addition on FL. Now we may assign a principal Z bundle to a triple (E. Let (B. it follows that this function satisfies fφ (Y ) − fφ (Y ) = σ(Tp Lφ . the subspace Vp M to the vertical subspace Vp M at p. pB . Theorem 5. From the preceding paragraph and the definition of Mλ.L . 73 . φ − S) at x is given by ˜ ιM (x. Vp M .L → Z such that f (W ) − f (W ) = σ(L.λx (Ex ).λ (E).We denote by FL. W. S) = ind Hφx + ind(Tp Lφ . φ) be a Morse family over a manifold M . Proof. fφ ). Using these remarks. we recall that if S : M → R is a smooth function such that the image of dS intersects λφ (Σφ ) transversely at p.21 In the notation above. Y ). W ∈ LL. and set p = λφ (x). and moreover it maps Tp Lφ−S to Tp Lφ . n) to the function (p.

λ (E) is canonically isomorphic to Y × Z. 74 . L . ind(L. Moreover. L ⊂ C.24 Suppose that E is a symplectic vector bundle over Y . The starting point of the proof is the following special case of the theorem. then Mλ. we can define the isomorphism Mλ. If L. Thus. 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 )⊥ . LC . If λ. Lemma 5. If λ. Proof.λx . W ) = ind(LC . 2 Lemma 5.λ (E) is canonically isomorphic to Mλη . our goal is to establish the following property of the bundle Mλ. L and a coisotropic subspace C.23 Suppose that E is a symplectic vector bundle with lagrangian subbundles λ.λη (η/η ⊥ ). λ and a coisotropic subbundle η. if W ∈ LL.λη (η/η ⊥ ). then there exists a vector bundle symplectomorphism E → λ ⊕ λ∗ which maps λ onto λ ⊕ 0 and λ onto 0 ⊕ λ∗ .λη (η/η ⊥ ) fiberwise by sending (x. WC ). then Mλ. f ) ∈ Mλ.λ (E) under symplectic reduction. λ are fiberwise transverse. LC and WC /(LC + LC )⊥ maps onto W/(L + L )⊥ under the symplectomorphism above. then Mλ. λ ⊂ η.λ (E) → Mλη . If λ. For the remainder of this section.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. λ∗ ) comprised of self-adjoint maps. If λ ∩ η and λ ∩ η have constant rank. λ are lagrangian subbundles such that λ ∩ λ has constant rank. where fη (Wηx ) = f (W ) for each W ∈ Lλx .L . Theorem 5. Using this remark. then LC is transverse to LC .22 Suppose that E is a symplectic vector bundle over M with lagrangian subbundles λ. First consider a symplectic vector space V with lagrangian subspaces L. fη ).λ (E) to (x. Proof.λ (E) is canonically isomorphic to Mλη . Any choice of a positive-definite quadratic form on λ is induced by a section T of Hom(λ. The proofs are rather technical and can be passed over in a first reading. λ and a coisotropic subbundle η.

λ (E) is canonically isomorphic to the principal-bundle product (see Appendix D for the definition) Mλ. λx ) = 0 for all x ∈ Y . The graph of the section T defines a lagrangian subbundle λΓ(T ) of E ⊕ E.λ (E) × Mλη .λ (E) is canonically isomorphic to Mλη .23 implies that Mλη . and let T be a section of the bundle Homω (E. while the restriction of T to the subbundle λ defines a lagrangian subbundle T (λ) of E . It is easy to check that the lagrangian subbundles λΓ(T ) and λ ⊕λ intersect the coisotropic subbundle E ⊕ λ along constant rank subbundles. Since the lagrangian subbundles λ .λ (E) ˜ 75 . ˜ 2 Example 5.λη (η/η ⊥ ). f ) of Mλ. Applying this remark. λx .λη (E) is in turn canonically isomorphic ˜ to Mλη .L ⊕L (E ⊕ E) and MT (L). it follows that λ∩λη has constant rank.λη (E) is canonically trivial. and thus Mλ. this shows that Mλ.λ (E) is therefore given by f (λx ) = 0.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. completing the proof. By Lemma 5. whereas their reductions by E ⊕ λ are given by T (λ) and λ .λη (E). A natural section s(x) = (x. ˜˜ Combined with the canonical isomorphisms above. we obtain the following canonical isomorphisms: Mλ. the latter bundle has a canonical trivialization. E are trivial symplectic vector bundles over M with lagrangian subbundles λ ⊂ E and λ ⊂ E .22 implies that MLΓ(T ) .λη (E) . Since λη . In general.λη (E) × Mλη . Theorem 5. 2 Proof of Theorem 5. λ .λ (E) ˜ Mλ. Mλ. Similarly. respectively.λη (η/η ⊥ ).23. then Mλ.λη (E) × Mλ.20 shows that if λ.L (E ) are canonically isomorphic.22. Thus.λη (E) is canonically trivial by Lemma 5. An application of the cocycle identity of Lemma 5. E ) of symplectic vector bundle maps. Lemma 5. and the assertion follows.24. our hypotheses imply that η = λ + λ is a coisotropic subbundle of E which contains the lagrangian subbundles λ and λ .λ (E) × Mλ . the bundle Mλ. λ and clearly satisfies ind(λx . λ are lagrangian subbundles of a symplectic vector bundle E.25 Suppose that E. λη are transverse lagrangian subbundles of η/η ⊥ . ˜ ˜ ˜˜ From the assumption that λ∩η has constant rank. Mλ.λ (E) is canonically ˜ η ˜η isomorphic to Mλη .λ (E). λ of E are contained in the ˜ coisotropic subbundle η.

26 Any symplectomorphism F : T ∗ M → T ∗ N induces a lagrangian embedding ιF : T ∗ M → T ∗ (M × N ). 5. E ) defined by the restriction of F∗ to TZ (T ∗ M ). Q) as the element L∗ ∈ Hom(Q. zf ).25. finite-dimensional symplectic manifolds. zF ) identifies with λT ∗ M. where π1 . R) H 1 (T ∗ M .2. Evidently. Moreover. an immersed lagrangian submanifold of Q × P is called a canonical relation from P to Q.Example 5. From Section 3. (T ∗ M. and the lagrangian 0 subbundles λΓ(T ) ⊂ E ⊕ E and T (λ) ⊂ E .zF is 0 canonically isomorphic to MT (λ). The morphism set Hom(P.2 The symplectic category To systematize the geometric aspects of quantization in arbitrary symplectic manifolds. ιF ).ιF under the natural isomorphism H 1 (M .21 shows that s∗ MT ∗ M.zF . it follows from Example 5. ω) (Q. π1 ω + π2 ω ).ιF = µM. More generally. R). −ω). we define ∗ ∗ their product as the symplectic manifold (P × Q.zF of the embedding (M. as described in Example 5. R). zF ) and (T ∗ M. π2 denote the cartesian projections. ∗ consider the symplectic vector bundles E = s∗ T (T ∗ M ) and E = zF T (T ∗ N ) over M . we recall that any such f is equal to a fiberwise translation of T ∗ M by a closed 1-form β on M composed with the cotangent lift of some diffeomorphism N → M . along 0 with the section T of Homω (E. zf ) equals [β] ∈ H 1 (M .λ (E ). we can therefore define the adjoint of a canonical relation L ⊂ Hom(P. Thus. ιf ) if and only if [β] is -integral. R) induced by the projection T ∗ M → M . Since immersed lagrangian submanifolds of the product Q × P coincide with those of its dual. ω ) of S.N : T ∗ N × T ∗ M → T ∗ (M × N ). P ) represented by the same equivalence class L of immersions into the product P × Q. Theorem 5.λ ⊕λ (E ⊕ E) and that MM. Q) and L2 ∈ Hom(Q. Given two objects (P. 0 Example 5. we can describe 76 . 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 . we now introduce the symplectic category S. and thus ∈ R+ is admissible for the lagrangian embeddings (M. A second lagrangian embedding zF : M → T ∗ N is defined by the composition of F with the zero section s0 : M → T ∗ M . the phase class of the induced lagrangian ˇ embedding (M. and so S is therefore not a true category. we ∗ have the lagrangian subbundles λ = s∗ V M of E and λ = zF V N of E . Observe that these definitions imply that the Liouville class λM. ω) is the object (P.14. Composition of morphisms is unfortunately not defined for all L1 ∈ Hom(P. Nevertheless. defined as the composition of the graph ΓF : T ∗ M → T ∗ N × T ∗ M of F with the Schwartz transform SM.25 that the Maslov classes are also related by pull-back: s∗ µT ∗ M. From Lemma 3. The symplectic dual of an object (P. To see that a similar relation holds for the Maslov classes of (M. Q) is then defined to consist of all canonical relations in Q × P . As objects of S we take the class of all smooth.ιF is canonically isomorphic to MλΓT .27 We can apply the conclusion of the preceding example to fiber-preserving symplectomorphisms f : T ∗ M → T ∗ N .

then L2 ◦ L1 is an immersed lagrangian submanifold of R × P . then the composition Hom(P. but rather as the object Q × P in the symplectic category. Dually. L is a monomorphism if L∗ ◦ L = idP .8 A canonical relation L ∈ Hom(P. we then obtain Proposition 5. Q) of morphisms with the “elements” of Q × P for any P.27. i. Morphisms from Z to any other object P ∈ S identify naturally with immersed lagrangian submanifolds of P . R). 8 77 .28 If L2 × L1 is clean. in the usual sense. From these definitions we see that a canonical relation is an isomorphism if and only if it is the graph of a symplectomorphism. this definition generalizes tangent lifts of diffeomorphisms. the product R × ∆Q × P is a reducible coisotropic submanifold of R × Q × Q × P .N : T ∗ N × T ∗ M → T ∗ (M × N ). and we will call L2 × L1 clean if (R × ∆Q × P . Canonical lifts of relations The full subcategory of S consisting of cotangent bundles possesses some special properties due to the Schwartz transform SM. 2 Associativity of compositions holds in the symplectic category in the sense that for canonical relations L1 . Thus. and in particular. Under the Schwartz transform. Equivalently. Applying Theorem 5. Among the members of S.12. N is a smooth submanifold S of the product M × N . one defines an epimorphism in the symplectic category as a canonical relation L for which L ◦ L∗ = idP . The product L2 × L1 of the canonical relations L1 and L2 is a well-defined immersed lagrangian submanifold of R × Q × Q × P . R) → Hom(P. which enables us to identify canonical relations in Hom(T ∗ M. not as a set. R) is the canonical relation which is the product of three diagonals. By Example 5.a sufficient condition for the composability of two canonical relations as follows. the conormal bundle of S identifies with a canonical relation LS ∈ Hom(T ∗N. In view of Example 3. Q) × Hom(Q. Example 5. T ∗ N ) with immersed lagrangian submanifolds in T ∗ (M × N ). Q ∈ S. we may identify the set Hom(P. the “elements” of P are its immersed lagrangian submanifolds.e. the zero-dimensional symplectic manifold consisting of a single point ∗ equipped with the null symplectic structure. Q).29 A smooth relation between two manifolds M. L2 × L1 ) is a reducible pair. the equation L1 ◦ (L2 ◦ L3 ) = (L1 ◦ L2 ) ◦ L3 is valid provided that both sides are defined. T ∗M ) called the cotangent lift of S. Note in particular Another point of view is to define Hom(P. L2 . where ∆Q denotes the diagonal in Q × Q. 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. L3 .8. there is a minimal object Z. L2 ◦ L1 ∈ Hom(P.

that although a smooth map f : M → N does not in general give rise to a well-defined 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 1-forms 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 1-form 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 push-forward 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 fiber-derivative 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 semi-classical states, represented as before by lagrangian submanifolds of P equipped with half-densities, 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 self-adjoint linear operators on some complex Hilbert space HP associated to P . The structure of a commutative, non-associative 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 time-evolution 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(1) = identity. ρ({f. 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. but then relax the criteria by which quantum and classical objects are to correspond. fn in involution. 2. we wish to identify a ∗-algebra A of operators which give the quantum analog of the “system” at hand.e. g}) = [ρ(f ). Based on an idea of Weyl and von Neumann. the operators ρ(f1 ). In these abstract terms.. each canonical relation L ∈ Hom(P.Quantization Although neither an underlying configuration manifold nor its intrinsic Hilbert space is generally available in the context of arbitrary symplectic manifolds. 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 . As was eventually proven by Groenwald and Van Hove (see [1] for a proof). Q) must then be assigned to a linear operator TL ∈ Hom(HP . a quantization of all classical observables in this sense does not exist in general. our classical and quantum correspondences can be expressed as follows. we first enlarge the class of classical objects to be quantized. HQ ) HQ ⊗ H∗ in a way which commutes P with compositions. · · · . regardless of how the algebra A is identified. 81 . ρ(fn ) form a complete commuting set. ρ(g)] 3. i. and HP ×Q is canonically isomorphic to a (completed) tensor product HP ⊗HQ . R). we first replace the classical observables by the groups of which they are the infinitesimal generators. · · · .33 A linear map ρ : C ∞ (P ) → S(HP ) is called a quantization provided that it satisfies 1. To make the basic quantization problem more tractable. which should be represented by unitary operators on quantum Hilbert spaces. For some complete set of functions f1 . Early approaches to this problem were based on the principle that. However this is accomplished. The basic classical objects are then symplectomorphisms. TL◦L = TL ◦ TL ˜ ˜ ˜ for each L ∈ Hom(Q. A general formulation of the quantization problem is then to define a “functor” from the symplectic category to the category of (hermitian) linear spaces. the basic goal of quantization remains the same as in the case of cotangent bundles: starting with a symplectic manifold P .

by powers of or by degree of smoothness). HQ ) C element of HP symmetric operators on HP state space of observables Poisson algebra C ∞ (P ) At this stage. rather than a mapping. As we have already seen.Object basic spaces Classical version symplectic manifold (P. First. it may require more data (such as a symbol) to determine an element of HP in a consistent way. By “correctness” we mean that composition of canonical relations should correspond to composition of operators. Second. the Hilbert space HP may carry some sort of filtration (e.g. 82 . from the classical to the quantum category. it is too much to require that this condition be satisfied exactly. and the quantization may be “correct” only to within a certain degree of accuracy as measured by the filtration. The best we can hope for is a functorial relation. in addition to just a lagrangian submanifold L ⊂ P . two relevant observations are apparent from our earlier study of WKB quantization. ω) Q×P Q×P point ∗ lagrangian submanifold L Quantum version hermitian vector space HP HQ ⊗HP Hom(HP .

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. L) is a properly reducible pair in a symplectic manifold P . First note that if V is a symplectic vector space. Proof.1 Compositions of semi-classical states In Section 4. Our discussion begins by defining a suitable notion of composition for such states. y) → x + y define a second exact sequence 0 → L ∩ C → L ⊕ C → L + C → 0. s) consisting of a quantizable lagrangian submanifold L ⊂ T ∗ M and a symbol s on L. In this context. The linear maps v → (v. A particular concrete case of this classical-quantum correspondence is given by the symbol calculus of Fourier integral operators.1 If (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. then there exists a natural linear map |Ω|1/2 L ⊗ |Ω|1/2 C → |Ω|1/2 LC .4. Lemma 6. we defined a semi-classical state in a cotangent bundle T ∗ M as a pair (L. In this section. together with a lagrangian subspace L and a coisotropic subspace C. s) of the state (L. HN ). semi-classical states are represented by pairs (L. Hausdorff manifold and the map I → LC is proper. then the exact sequence 0 → L ∩ C ⊥ → L ∩ C → LC → 0 gives rise to the isomorphism |Λ|1/2 LC ⊗ |Λ|1/2 (L ∩ C ⊥ ) |Λ|1/2 (L ∩ C). from which we get |Λ|1/2 LC ⊗ |Λ|1/2 (L ∩ C ⊥ ) ⊗ |Λ|1/2 (L + C) |Λ|1/2 L ⊗ |Λ|1/2 C. Reduction of semi-classical states We will say that a reducible pair (C. 83 . s) consisting of an immersed lagrangian submanifold L in T ∗ (M ×N ) equipped with a symbol s. The WKB quantization I (L. we return to WKB quantization in cotangent bundles. s) is then regarded as the Schwartz kernel of the corresponding operator in Hom(HM . −v) and (x. 6. we study certain natural transformations of semi-classical states.

we arrive at |Λ|1/2 LC ⊗ |Λ|(L ∩ C ⊥ ) |Λ|1/2 L ⊗ |Λ|1/2 C.1 we recall that the integrability of F implies that CN = {(x. Since the quotient map I → LC is proper. If L is an immersed lagrangian submanifold of T ∗ M such that (CN .  rC 84 . the exact sequence 0 → (L + C)⊥ → V → (L + C)∗ → 0 combined with the half-density on V induced by the symplectic form defines a natural isomorphism |Λ|1/2 (L + C) |Λ|1/2 (L + C)⊥ . From Section 5. L) in a symplectic manifold P . integration over its fibers is well-defined and gives the desired linear map |Ω|1/2 L ⊗ |Ω|1/2 C → |Ω|1/2 LC . there is a linear map |Ω|1/2 L ⊗ |Ω|1/2 C → |Ω|1/2 LC ⊗ |Ω|(FI ). there is a natural isomorphism ∗ rL ΦL. Lemma 6.Finally. Hausdorff manifold. ω ˜ Now consider a properly reducible pair (C.2 In the notation of the diagram above. . 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 . → π ∗ ΦLC . Fx ⊂ ker(p)} is a coisotropic submanifold of T ∗ M whose reduced space is the cotangent bundle T ∗ NF of the leaf space NF . By the preceding computations. p) ∈ T ∗ M : x ∈ N. L) form a reducible pair. Since L ∩ C ⊥ = (L + C)⊥ . 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.

From Theorem 5. s2 ) in T ∗ M.32. By the fundamental properties of the Schwartz transform described in Proposition 3. 1 2 85 . for each half-density σ on C. . and one must check that the pull-back of the Maslov bundle of LC to I is canonically isomorphic to ∗ MλC . s2 s∗ ) in T ∗ (M × N ).22 we therefore obtain a canonical isomorphism of rL ML with π ∗ MLC . which. we obtain a map (parallel sections of ΦL. pulls back to a parallel section of rL ΦLC . From the proof of Lemma 5.3 The product of semi-classical states (L1 . Lagrangian subbundles λ. then their product L2 ×L1 gives a well-defined immersed lagrangian submanifold of T ∗ (M × N ) via the Schwartz transform SM. Since parallel sections of π ∗ ΦLC . is canonically isomorphic to the external tensor product ΦL2 . 1 Definition 6.Proof. (L2 . We will denote the image of a symbol s on L under this map by sC. Composition of semi-classical states If L1 . we arrive at the desired isomorphism of phase bundles. 2 ∗ A parallel section s of ΦL.λ (E). and thus.σ . By definition. s1 ). the pull-back of the Maslov bundle of L to I is canonically isomorphic to the bundle Mλ. identifies with a parallel section of π ∗ ΦLC . By tensoring with the map of density spaces given above.λC (C/C ⊥ ). a natural map of symbol spaces SL → SLC . let E be the symplectic vector bundle over I given by the pull-back of T (T ∗ M ).N : T ∗ N ×T ∗ M → T ∗ (M ×N ). under the isomorphism of Lemma 6. identify naturally with parallel sections of ΦLC . ). . s2 ) → s2 s∗ . it follows easily that the phase bundle ΦL2 ×L1 .2. T ∗ N is the semi-classical state (L2 × L1 . Now the tangent bundle of CN induces a coisotropic subbundle C of E. . Similarly. T ∗ N .16 it follows easily that the pull-back to I of the Liouville forms on T ∗ M and T ∗ N coincide. Φ−1. λ of E are then induced by the immersed lagrangian submanifold L and the vertical subbundle V M of T (T ∗ M ). we obtain. By tensoring this isomorphism with the isomorphism of prequantum bundles described in the preceding paragraph. the pull-back to I of the prequantum line bundles over T ∗ M and T ∗ N are canonically isomorphic. and thus there is a natural linear map of symbol spaces SL2 ⊗ SL1 → SL2 ×L1 which we denote by (s1 . . ) → (parallel sections of ΦLC . From the discussion in Appendix A L1 we also have a linear isomorphism of density bundles |Λ|1/2 (L2 × L1 ) → |Λ|1/2 L2 |Λ|1/2 L1 . L2 are immersed lagrangian submanifolds of T ∗ M.

s ) in T ∗ (N × V ) define a semi-classical state in T ∗ (M × V ) when L. The left vertical arrow represents the reduction relation defined by the coisotropic submanifold C = T ∗ V × ∆T ∗ N × T ∗ M .M induced by the symplectic forms on T ∗ V.N. We denote the image of s2 s1 under this map by s2 ◦ s1 .N. L are composable as canonical relations in Hom(T ∗ M. s2 ) in T ∗ (N × V ) are composable if the conormal submanifold CV. s) in T ∗ (M × N ) and (L . Definition 6. 2 86 . the Schwartz transform of L2 ×L1 reduces by CV. then the Schwartz transform SM. T ∗ V ) with an immersed lagrangian submanifold in T ∗ (M × V ).N. L2 . T ∗ N . Under the Schwartz transform.N ) of Schwartz tranforms. s1 ) in T ∗ (M × N ) and (L2 . 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. From Lemma 6. while the right vertical arrow is the reduction relation defined by the image of C under the Schwartz transform.V : T ∗ V × T ∗ M → T ∗ (M × V ) identifies each canonical relation in Hom(T ∗ M.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. s2 ◦ s1 ) in T ∗ (M × V ). and T ∗ M .M and immersed lagrangian submanifold L2 × L1 form a properly reducible pair. We will say that semi-classical states (L1 . 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 half-density on CV. s2 ) in T ∗ (N × V ). and the lower horizontal arrow equals the Schwartz transform SM. Our goal is now to describe how semi-classical states (L. we first note that if M.V .V ×SM. then their composition is defined as the semi-classical state (L2 ◦ L1 . T ∗ N ) and Hom(T ∗ N. T ∗ V × T ∗ N × T ∗ N × T ∗ M → T ∗ (M × N × N × V ). 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 . Thus. L ◦ L ∈ Hom(T ∗ M.M to yield the image of L2 ◦L1 under the Schwartz transform T ∗ V ×T ∗ M → T ∗ (V ×M ). T ∗ V ). m) ∈ V ×M .1. V are smooth manifolds.N.Turning to compositions. the submanifold T ∗ V × ∆T ∗ N × T ∗ M maps to the conormal submanifold CV. respectively.4 If a semi-classical state (L1 . s1 ) in T ∗ (M × N ) is composable with a semiclassical state (L2 . it follows that for any properly reducible pair L1 .

C). 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). C). ˜) ∈ ˜ Hom(T ∗ N. We then note that the n natural half-density |ωM |1/2 on LF ≈ T ∗ M enables us to identify the symbol space SLF with the product ΓLF ⊗C C ∞ (LF . then ∈ R+ is admissible for LF if and only if [β] is -integral.4 provides that for each symbol s ∈ SL . A computation then shows that the composition of a semi-classical state of the form (LF . Given a parallel section s and smooth complex-valued function h on LF . an analogous correspondence is furnished by the Schwartz kernel theorem. note that if the symplectomorphism F : T ∗ M → T ∗ N is the cotangent lift of a diffeomorphism M → N . then for each > 0. s) ∈ Hom(T ∗ M. 6.5. if β is a closed 1-form on M and the symplectomorphism F : T ∗ M → T ∗ M equals fiberwise translation by β. On the quantum level. C). 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 ). 1/2 C-linear functional on |Ω|0 M . ˜ ◦ s) in T ∗ N . identifies with an oscillatory function of the form ceiS/ for c ∈ R and some S : M → T satisfying S ∗ dσ = β.4). A distributional half-density on M is then a continuous.5 Consider a semi-classical state (LF . ˜ ◦ s) ∈ Hom(T ∗ M. where a is any half-density on L and s is the unique parallel section of ΦLF ◦L. the phase bundle of of LF admits a canonical parallel section. then Definition 6. s) equals the semi-classical state (LF ◦ L. s To make this correspondence more explicit. each parallel section of the phase bundle ΦLF . We denote the space of distributional half-densities on M 87 . If L is an immersed lagrangian submanifold of T ∗ M . s) yields the semi-classical state (LF ◦ L.6 As a special case of Example 6. 1/2 Let M be a smooth manifold and let |Ω|0 M be equipped with the topology of C ∞ convergence on compact sets. T ∗ V ) as a semi-classical state (L ◦ L. eiS/ ⊗ h) with (L. the semi-classical state (L. ˜ ΦLF ◦L. such that ι∗ s → s ⊗ s−1 under the canonical isomorphism ι∗ ΦLF . h) with a semi-classical state (L. L. and so the symbol space SLF identifies naturally with R+ × C ∞ (LF . Example 6. s) in T ∗ M is transformed by F into the semi-classical state (LF ◦ L. (h ◦ ι) · s). 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. where LF is the Schwartz s transform of the graph of a symplectomorphism F : T ∗ M → T ∗ N . ˜) in T ∗ (M ×N ). T ∗ N ) and (L. then with this identification. For such . If h ∈ C ∞ (LF . ei(S◦πL )/ (h ◦ ι) · s). let us choose a particular lagrangian immersion ι : L → T ∗ M representing L (see the discussion in Section 4. ⊗ Φ−1 .2 WKB quantization and compositions ˜ s To define the composition of semi-classical states (L.Example 6. ι. Similarly. the composition of (LF . T ∗ V ).

the value of the halfdensity Ku at each y ∈ N can be computed in these cases by. ∂xj An -differential operator of asymptotic order9 k ∈ Z is then an asymptotic series of the form ∞ P = m=0 9 Pm m+k . 2 Of course. In practical terms. Note that this order generally differs from the order of a differential operator. and so we can consider K as 1/2 1/2 a continuous linear map |Ω|0 M → |Ω|0 N . each w ∈ |Ω|1/2 N defines an element w ∈ |Ω|−∞ N by the equation ˜ w. to every such linear map. 88 . integrating the product K ⊗ u over the submanifold {y} × M of N × M . and we equip this space with the weak∗ topology. N . v = ˜ N 1/2 v ⊗ w. u ⊗ v 1/2 1/2 def 1/2 (∗) Schwartz kernel theorem . Every K ∈ |Ω|−∞ (M ×N ) defines a linear map K : |Ω|0 M → 1/2 1/2 |Ω|−∞ N by (∗) above. in the same way that the Schwartz transform provides a natural correspondence Hom(T ∗ M. In all of the examples we will consider. thereby giving a (densely defined) operator HM → HN on the intrinsic Hilbert spaces of M. a kernel is any element of |Ω|−∞ (M × N ). HN ) -differential operators With respect to linear coordinates {xj } on Rn . Conversely. which is continuous in the sense that K(φj ) → 0 in |Ω|−∞ N if φj → 0 1/2 in |Ω|0 M . If N is another smooth 1/2 manifold. roughly speaking. there is precisely one distribution K such that (∗) is valid.by |Ω|−∞ M . Thus. the image of the map K will lie within the subspace 1/2 of |Ω|−∞ N represented by elements of |Ω|1/2 N in this way. T ∗ N ) ↔ T ∗ (M × N ). the Schwartz kernel theorem gives the identification |Ω|−∞ (M × N ) ↔ Hom(HM . A kernel K defines a linear map 1/2 1/2 K : |Ω|0 M → |Ω|−∞ N by duality via the equation K(u). we define -dependent operators Dj = −i def 1/2 ∂ . v = K.

where L is the projectable lagrangian submanifold of T ∗ Rn defined by im(dψ). y. The Schwartz kernel for the operator P is given by the distribution family I (L∆ . ξ) u(y) dy dξ. ξ) = x − y. ξ) → x − y. x. sP ◦ s). ξ) : x. x. composition with (L∆ . that is. whose restriction to the fiber-critical set Σφ = {(x. its principal symbol p is a well-defined function on the cotangent bundle T ∗ M . (Later we will drop this assumption to obtain a more symmetric calculus). y. p (x. ξ) m0 +k if Pm = 0 for all m < m0 and Pm0 = 0. ξ = 0} induces a well-defined symbol sP = p (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 . known as the symbol of P . V. By replacing σP by p in the formula above.where each Pm is a polynomial in the operators Dj . e−iψ/ u = I (L. While the symbol of P depends on the choice of local coordinates. the function (y.. ξ on B = Rn × Rn × (Rn )∗ . we obtain (P e−iψ/ u)(x) = (2π )−n ei( x−y. together with V = Rn × Rn and the cartesian projection pV : B → V define a Morse family (B. By Example 6. we first note that the phase function φ(x. s) = (L∆ ◦ L. An application of the principle of stationary phase therefore gives (P e−iψ/ u)(x) = e−iψ(x))/ u(x) · p (x. φ) which generates the conormal bundle to the diagonal ∆ ⊂ Rn × Rn . pV . ξ) = σPm0 (x. we have (P e−iψ/ u)(x) = (2π )−n ei( x−y. ξ) u(y) dy dξ + O( m0 +k+1 ) where p is of course independent of y. ξ) on L∆ . ξ − ψ has a nondegenerate critical point when y = x and ξ = dψ(x).ξ −ψ)/ σP (x. sP ) multiplies the symbol s by the values of the principal symbol p on L Σφ . Combined with the preceding equation. i. dψ(x)) hm0 +k + O( m0 +k+1 ) (∗∗) To interpret this expression in the context of WKB quantization. The principal symbol p . sP ◦ s) · m0 +k + O( m0 +k+1 ).29) and arguing as above. Now. written as a function of the variables (x.6. By formally substituting ξj for Dj in each term of P .e. this gives (P e−iψ/ u)(x) = I (L∆ ◦ L. For fixed x. x. we obtain the following geometric version of (∗∗) above: 89 . s). ξ) defines an amplitude a = p · |dx dy|1/2 |dξ| on B. Using a global generating function for the conormal bundle of ∆ ⊂ M × M (see Example 4. 1/2 An -differential operator on a manifold M is an operator P on |Ω|0 M which coincides in local coordinates with a series of the form P as above. we have (L. and s is obtained from the pull-back of u to L.ξ −ψ)/ p (x. y. 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). sP ).

or. This remark suggests the quantum analog of certain coisotropic submanifolds of T ∗ M . more properly. sP ◦ s) + O( m0 +k+1 ). this correspondence is only asymptotic. where sP is the symbol on L∆ induced by the principal symbol p of P . s)) = O( m0 +k+1 ). then CP = p−1 (0) is a coisotropic submanifold of T ∗ M . corresponds to the kernel of P in HM . then: P (I (L. that I (L.Theorem 6. this theorem asserts that polynomial functions on the identity relation L∆ quantize as the Schwartz kernel of differential operators on M . 2m The characteristic variety of p is simply the level set H −1 (E) of the classical hamiltonian of the system.7.8 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 . projectable semi-classical state in T ∗ M and P is an -differential operator of order k on M . As usual. Roughly speaking. 90 . s)) = I (L∆ ◦ L. and as in previous sections we see that first-order approximate solutions to the time-independent Schr¨dinger equation arise from semi-classical states represented by o quantizable lagrangian submanifolds in CP . and the projection relation KCP quantizes as the orthogonal projection onto this subspace.7 If (L. s) is a first-order approximate solution to the equation P u = 0. A familiar illustration of these concepts is provided by the WKB approximation. In this sense.e. For E > 0. As a particular case of Theorem 6. ˆ where P = H − E is the zeroth-order asymptotic differential operator on M with principal symbol |θ|2 p (x. the time-independent Schr¨dinger equation is then o P ψ = 0. the reduced manifold of CP . the vanishing of the principal symbol p on L implies that P (I (L. and semi-classical states contained in CP represent solutions of the asymptotic differential equation P u = 0. i. Example 6. CP . and their actions on a given function coincide only up to terms of higher order in . many differential operators share the same principal symbol. θ) = − + (V (x) − E).. s) is an exact. If 0 is a regular value of p . The zero set of the principal symbol p is called the characteristic variety of the operator P .

43. we will only be concerned with a few specialized cases. ξ) → x − y. 56]. y. aj (x.ξ)/ a(x. ξ) u(y) dξ dy. θ) u(y) dθ dy. y. θ) ∼ aj (x. the invariance of pseudodifferential operators under coordinate changes enables one to extend this theory to any smooth manifold M .29. Let M be a smooth manifold with a smooth submanifold N . of the form µ+j where the symbol a(x. the theory of Fourier integral operators provides a means for quantizing half-densities on more general lagrangian submanifolds L of T ∗ M by replacing the function (x. As in the special case of differential operators.θ / a (x. ξ in the definition of pseudodifferential operators by a phase function which generates L: (Au)(x) = (2π )n eiφ(x. 28. the class of quantizable half-densities (and canonical relations) is constrained by the necessary conditions for this integral to converge. 31. In this section. i. Weakening this condition while still guaranteeing that the integral converges leads to the definition of pseudodifferential operators. and there is a corresponding version of Theorem 6. the principal symbol of a pseudodifferential operator is a well-defined function on T ∗ M .e. As before. As constructed in Example 4. θ) .y. y. θ) is an asymptotic series in a (x. integration over the phase variables θ was well-defined due to the fact that the symbol of a differential operator has a polynomial growth rate with respect to these variables.7 (see for example [51]). a detailed description of this theory can be found in [21. ξ) u(y) dξ dy.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. Perhaps the simplest generalization of the picture of (pseudo)differential operators given above is provided by quantizing semi-classical states whose underlying lagrangian submanifolds are conormal bundles. θ) for c > 0. cθ) = cµ−j aj (x. In Rn . an -pseudodifferential operator of order µ is given by (Au)(x) = (2π )n ei x−y. For differential operators.. the conormal bundle LN ⊂ T ∗ N is generated by a single 91 . In this case.θ / a(x. Fourier integral operators In its simplest form. Each coefficient aj is a smooth function on Rn × Rn \ {0} and is positively homogeneous of degree µ − j.

quantizing the hamiltonian flow {ϕt } of a hamiltonian ˆ H on T ∗ X gives the solution operators exp(−itH/ ) of the Schr¨dinger equation. these operators map |Ω|0 X to |Ω|0 Y and extend continuously to |Ω|−∞ X. they satisfy the composition law ˜ s ˜ I (L. 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 |Ω|0 X → |Ω|−∞ Y A diffeomorphism f : X → Y induces a unitary operator on intrinsic Hilbert spaces given by pull-back: (f ∗ )−1 : HX → HY . and we can proceed to define I (L. and that the identification LN Σφ defined by λφ is equivariant with respect to the natural R+ action on LN . the distributions I (L. As in the case of (pseudo)differential operators. At the same time.Morse family (B. then the procedure described above can be applied to the graph Γf of f . viewed as a smooth submanifold of X × Y . It is easy to see that the fiber-critical set Σφ is invariant under the R+ action on B. for example. When M = X × Y is a product manifold. s) = I (L ◦ L. s) as before by requiring that s be homogeneous. Under certain additional restrictions on N which are always fulfilled. V. Y are smooth manifolds and f : X → Y is a smooth diffeomorphism. 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 well-defined distributional half-density family I (L. o 92 .9 If X. ˜) ◦ I (L. f gives rise to a symplectomorphism of cotangent bundles: (T ∗ f )−1 : T ∗ X → T ∗ Y. Consequently. Moreover. 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 diffeomorphisms from X to Y . s) on M . For instance. pV . The family I (Lf . s) represent Schwartz 1/2 1/2 kernels for continuous linear operators |Ω|0 X → |Ω|∞ Y . Of course. when N is the graph of a diffeomorphism 1/2 1/2 1/2 X → Y . s Example 6. ˜ ◦ s). 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 . positively homogeneous symbols on LN induce positively homogeneous amplitudes on B of the same order.

f lifts to a continuous map (D. When C is reducible. Each leaf of the characteristic foliation of CE is a circle S which projects diffeomorphically to a great circle in S n .1 Geometric Quantization Prequantization In the preceding chapter. we ask what assumptions on C guarantee that the classical projection operation KC preserves the class of quantizable lagrangian submanifolds in T ∗ M .7 7. For the time being. Z) is represented by a continuous map (D. the Liouville class of S is determined by the number αM = 2π · (2E)1/2 . To interpret this condition in terms of C/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 . In this case. we conclude that KC preserves prequantizable lagrangian submanifolds provided that the reduced symplectic form ωC is itself -integral. By the homotopy lifting property.13 we recall that the standard metric on the unit n-sphere S n induces a kinetic energy function kn whose constant energy surfaces CE are reducible coisotropic submanifolds of T ∗ S n for E > 0. T ∗ M ). Since ˙ αM (Xkn ) = 2E. Before turning to a systematic means for defining HC . Example 7. 93 .2). in the sense that semi-classical states contained in C quantize to first-order approximate solutions of the equation P = 0. the lagrangian submanifolds of M contained in C correspond to lagrangian submanifolds of the reduced manifold C/C ⊥ . If γ parametrizes a such a geodesic. S Thus CE is prequantizable if and only if E = (n )2 /2 (compare Example 4. Specifically. 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 ⊥ . ∂D) → (C. 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. ∂D) → (C/C ⊥ . This suggests that if C is reducible. we then have ωC = [a] ∂D ˜ f f ˜ f ∗ αM ∈ Z by the assumption that the Liouville class of I is -integral. any class [a] ∈ H2 (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 semi-classical states. [I]) for a fixed leaf I of C ⊥ . Applying Stokes’ theorem.1 From Example 5. then its lift to a parametrization of S satisfies γ = (2E)−1/2 Xkn . we will ignore the Maslov correction and assume that C/C ⊥ is simplyconnected. Thus. the reduced manifold C/C ⊥ is said to be prequantizable. first note that if C/C ⊥ is simply-connected. I).

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 1-forms αj on Uj . g = P ∞ n f g ωM . the mod-Z reduction of λI represents the holonomy of QM |I . on C ∞ (Uj ). verification of the second is also straightforward and will be carried out in somewhat more generality below. The mapping C (P ) → S(HP ) is then given explicitly by the formula ρ(f ) = −i Xf + mL(f ) . this condition is equivalent to the existence of a principal T bundle Q over C/C ⊥ . 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 . 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 ). complex-valued functions on the cotangent bundle P = T ∗ M itself. there exists a parallel section of QM over I. with respect to the inner-product f. The connection on Q induced by the connection on QM has curvature equal to the reduced symplectic form ωC . and we arrive at nothing new. More precisely. ω) is not exact.2. The space of sections of E identifies canonically with C ∞ (P ) by means of the constant section s = 1. 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 ⊥ . The basic example of prequantization is that of cotangent bundles due to Segal [52]. Roughly speaking. 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). In this case. if λI is -integral. In order to associate a “global” operator to f . . the idea is the following: Although the symplectic form of an arbitrary symplectic manifold (P. 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 ⊥ . we hope to piece these local operators together. the prequantum Hilbert space is taken to be the completion of the space of smooth. The Segal prequantization is an important first step towards attempts at (pre)-quantizing more general symplectic manifolds. and we have ρ(f ) = −i 94 Xf + mf . where as usual mL(f ) denotes multiplication by the lagrangian L(f ) = f − αM (Xf ). In fact. 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 . This essentially requires that the 1-forms αj agree on overlaps. Koopman. In direct analogy with the Segal prequantization.By Theorem D. we can then associate to a function f ∈ C ∞ (P ) the operator ρ(f )j = −i Xf + mLj (f ) . and Van Hove. Clearly the map ρ is linear and satisfies the first Dirac axiom. If C/C ⊥ is prequantizable.

the requirement that the curvature of ϕ equal the symplectic form ω implies [ξf . this condition can be satisfied if and only if ω is -integral. this is an important first step in our general quantization program. if Lξ ϕ = 0 for some vector field ξ on Q. we will study prequantizable manifolds in somewhat more detail below.g} . according to the discussion in Appendix C. (k) A direct computation shows that the connection form ϕ is invariant under the flow of ξf . where X f denotes the horizontal lift of the hamiltonian vector field of f . Conversely. [ξ. To a function f ∈ C ∞ (P ). then we can decompose ξ into its horizontal and vertical parts: ξ = ξ − gX for some real-valued function g on Q satisfying dg = ξ dϕ. For the remainder of this section. Definition 7. The upshot of the Kostant-Souriau construction is that prequantizable symplectic manifolds have prequantizable Poisson algebras. Xg ] + ω(Xf . and X is the fundamental vector field on Q defined by the equations X ϕ=1 X dϕ = 0. While a direct proof of this fact follows the outline of the preceding paragraph. 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.where denotes the connection on E induced by the connection 1-form ϕ = −αM +dσ on Q. ω) is a principal T bundle Q over P equipped with a connection 1-form ϕ having curvature ω. ξ is the horizontal lift of Xg . X] = 0. From the definition of X it follows that X · g = 0 and [ξ. g}X = ξ{f. ϕ) Let P be a prequantizable symplectic manifold with prequantum T bundle Q and connection ϕ. and so ξ = ξg . and consequently. Moreover. 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. The curvature of such a bundle necessarily coincides with the symplectic form on P . 95 . we find that the operators ρ(f )j enjoy a similar interpretation provided that −αj + dσ defines a local representative of a connection 1-form on a (possibly nontrivial) principal T bundle Q over P . Xg )X − 2{f. we will focus on geometric properties of prequantum circle bundles and prove that their existence coincides with the prequantizability of C ∞ (P ). Returning to the general case. ξg ] = [Xf . we associate an operator on C ∞ (Q): ξf = X f − f X. X] = 0. Automorphisms of (Q. Thus.2 A prequantization of a symplectic manifold (P.

ϕ) of ϕ-preserving vector fields on Q with the standard Lie bracket. ϕ) in Aut(P. ω). ω). ϕ) → Aut(P. and therefore defines a unitary operator UF on C ∞ (Q) by composition: UF (u) = u ◦ F. f ∈ Aut(P. By the definition of X it follows that every F ∈ Aut(Q. 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. Example 7. In particular. ϕ) be a prequantization of (P. ϕ) in χ(P. ω). and the image of χ(Q. ϕ) → Aut(P. this is just the circle T and we have the exact sequence 0 → T → Aut(Q. ϕ) preserves X and is therefore T -equivariant. v = Q u v µ. if P (and hence Q) is connected. from the exact sequence above.e. then each F ∈ Aut(Q. i. A basis for this space is given by the vector fields Xqi = − which assume the form ξqi = − ∂ ∂pi Xpi = ∂ . ϕ). where H 1 (P . This implies that the kernel is isomorphic to H 0 (P. that is.The association f → ξf therefore defines a Lie algebra isomorphism between the Poisson algebra C ∞ (P ) and the space χ(Q. This sequence can be integrated to give an exact sequence of automorphism groups as follows. The association F → f defines a group homomorphism Aut(Q. ϕ) preserves µ. ϕ) is a central extension of Aut(P. Clearly the correspondence F → UF defines a unitary representation of Aut(Q. To determine its kernel. ω) by T . ω). We interpret this observation to mean that an automorphism of Q is determined “up to phase” by an automorphism of P . T ). Aut(Q. Let (Q. This produces the exact sequence of Lie algebras 0 → R → χ(Q. and let Aut(Q. we therefore obtain a projective unitary representation of the image of Aut(Q. this means that F is the lift of a diffeomorphism f of P . R) → 0. from the fact that π ∗ ω = dϕ it follows furthermore that f ∗ ω = ω. ω). ϕ) on L2 (Q). ∂qi ∂ ∂qi ∂ − qi X ∂pi 96 ξpi = . ω) consists precisely of the hamiltonian vector fields on P . R) is assigned the trivial bracket. ϕ) → χ(P. Aut(P. where µ denotes the volume form ϕ ∧ (dϕ)n on Q.3 Translations of R2n are generated by the hamiltonian vector fields associated to linear functionals on R2n . ω) → H 1 (P . ω) denote those groups of diffeomorphisms which preserve ϕ. ω respectively. If we equip the space C ∞ (Q) of complex-valued functions on Q with the inner-product u.

k Since [ξf . is suffices to prove that ρk (f ) acts as a symmetric operator on the real subspace of Ek . Smooth sections of Ek identify with functions on Q satisfying the equivariance condition f (p · a) = e−ika/ f (p) for a ∈ T . Hn is diffeomorphic to R2n × T . and so the vector fields ξqi . The group Hn is known as the Heisenberg group of R2n with its usual symplectic structure. in other words. Kostant-Souriau prequantization To prequantize the Poisson algebra C ∞ (P ). 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. σ) · (Q . P + P . moreover ρk ({f. P + P . the space of sections of Ek is isomorphic to the −ik/ -eigenspace Ek of the fundamental vector field X. P . with group multiplication given by (Q. ϕ) isomorphic to R2n × R with bracket given by [(v. k Evidently the map ρk satisfies the first Dirac axiom. X] = 0. σ ) = (Q + Q . b)] = (0. where again L(f ) = f − αM (Xf ). we note that if the hamiltonian vector field of 97 . (w. Our earlier results show that [ξqi . σ + σ + j Pj · Qj ).pj } = δij X. Under this correspondence. σ ) = (Q + Q . we assign an operator on C ∞ (Q) by ξf = − (k) (k) i ξf .when lifted to Q = R2n × T via the Segal prescription ξf = X f − L(f )X. we first recall that complex line bundles Ek associated to Q arise via representations of T in U (1) of the form x → eikx/ . To verify that ρk (f ) is self-adjoint. ρk (g)] . the operator ξf restricts to an operator on each eigenspace Ek of X having the form i ρk (f ) = − X f + mf . To each f ∈ C ∞ (P ) and integer k. For this purpose. ω(v. ϕ) which comprises a central extension of the translation group: 0 → T → Hn → R2n → 0. In explicit terms. we find that hn corresponds to a subgroup Hn ⊂ Aut(Q. P. w)). ξpj ] = ξ{qi . a). ξpi generate a Lie subalgebra hn ⊂ χ(Q. g}) = k [ρk (f ). By exponentiating.

s2 = P ∞ s1 . equipped with a hermitian metric . v = u. 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. Since the Liouville form αM vanishes π on each fiber of the projection T ∗ M → M . wave functions depend on only half of the phase space variables. if f is compactly supported). conjugate-symmetry of the inner-product implies that ρk (f ) · u. In other 98 . see [53]. s2 ω n . the appropriate quantum state space asso1/2 ciated with a classical configuration space M is (the L2 completion of) |Ω|0 M . the operator ρ−1 (f ) extends to an essentially self-adjoint operator on HP . Indeed. In fact. this difficulty is overcome: on ∞ Cq (R2 ). ∂ . from the general remarks above. From the standpoint of WKB quantization.2 Polarizations and the metaplectic correction The Kostant-Souriau prequantization of symplectic manifolds fails to satisfy the third Dirac axiom and is therefore not a quantization. If we restrict ˆ ∞ to the p-independent subspace Cq (R2 ) C ∞ (R).f is integrable (for example. then the fact that ξf preserves ϕ implies that ξf · u. ξf · v for real-valued functions 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. 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. v = − u. 7. For an interpretation of this argument in terms of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. ρk (f ) · v . in quantum mechanics. and let HP denote the L2 completion of the space of compactly supported sections of E with respect to the inner-product s1 . which we temporarily identify with C ∞ (M ) using a metric on M . According to our earliest concepts of quantization (see the Introduction). We now define the prequantum line bundle associated to Q as E = E−1 . Combined with the definition of ρk . v on Q. the operator corresponding to q should act by multiplication alone. whereas q involves the spurious ∂/∂p term. however. it follows that ρ−1 defines a prequantization of the Poisson algebra C ∞ (P ). compatible with its induced connection. whereas the space of sections of E has the “size” of the space of functions on P . For each f ∈ C (P ).

we have X s = 0. 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. Covariant differentiation along vector fields X tangent to the q=constant polarization Fq is given by the ordinary Lie derivative with respect to X. Note that the Fp representation of the free-particle H(q. 99 . the correct adjustment to the size of the prequantum Hilbert space is determined by the (canonical) foliation of T ∗ M by lagrangian submanifolds. in the sense that f= Rn f (q) δ(q) dq = (2π )−n/2 Rn ˆ eiπ p. meaning that Fp is a totally real subspace of TC. and so the p-polarization appears to be better adapted to this case. That is. 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 ). In this case. Integrability of F means that locally on P there exist complex-valued functions whose hamiltonian vector fields (with respect to ωC ) span F. Example 7.· / bases of L2 (Rn ) respectively. This adjustment is generalized in the framework of geometric quantization by the introduction of the following concept. for each complex vector field X on P lying in F. A Fp -parallel section ψ of E must therefore satisfy ∂ψ − 2πipψ ∂q and is therefore of the form ψ(q.4 A polarization of a symplectic manifold (P. we consider covariant derivatives of the form ∂ ∂q = ∂ ∂ −p ∂q ∂σ . p) = v(p)eiπ p. TC P denotes the complexification of the tangent bundle of P .q / f dp. 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 . For the p=constant polarization Fp . the polarization F satisfies F = F. p) = p2 /2 is ρ(H) = mp2 /2 .5 The most basic examples of real polarizations are given by either the planes q=constant or p=constant in R2n . and so the space of Fq -parallel sections of the prequantum line bundle E identifies with the space of smooth functions on q-space. In general.q / . Definition 7. Here. equipped with the complex-valued symplectic form ωC given by the complex-linear extension of ω to TC P . ω) is an involutive lagrangian subbundle F of TC P .words.p (T ∗ M ) for each p ∈ T ∗ M . These correspond to the δq and eiπ p.

g} = 0 for any f. Thus {f.8 Each leaf of any real polarization carries a natural affine structure. the map ω : T P → T ∗ P sends F to ˜ ⊥ F as well. the hamiltonian vector field of any member of F(P ) is contained in F. this implies that ρ−1 (f ) = mf . 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 . and so p∗ T ∗ PF identifies with the normal bundle F ⊥ ⊂ T ∗ P . it follows that Xf s = 0 for all s ∈ HF . · · · . g ∈ F(P ). 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. Since F is a lagrangian distribution. if E is a prequantum line bundle over P . An affine structure on a manifold M is a curvature. By the definition of ρ−1 .6 Every real polarization is locally isomorphic to the q=constant polarization on R2n . A function H : P → R constant on the leaves of F induces a function HF on PF satisfying dH = p∗ dHF . n.7 For each p ∈ P . The quotient of E by this 100 . we call a polarization F on P fibrating if each leaf of F is simply-connected and the leaf space PF = P/F is a smooth manifold. Example 7. More generally.and torsion-free connection on T M . By modifying the normal form results of Chapter 4.29). we have the following result. one can furthermore prove Theorem 7. From this remark. i..A real polarization F of a symplectic 2n-manifold P defines a subspace F(P ) ⊂ C ∞ (P ) of functions constant along the leaves of F. the quotient map p : P → PF satisfies F = ker p∗ . we may use parallel sections of E over the leaves of F to construct a foliation of the total space of E. By pulling back the position functions qi to P .9 Following [28]. i = 1. we have Corollary 7. F(P ) is an abelian Poisson subalgebra of C ∞ (P ). Since any polarization-preserving symplectic transformation of T ∗ Rn R2n is affine on fibers (see Theorem 3. such that the hamiltonian vector fields Xi span F in a neighborhood of p. the multiplication operator on HF . Corollary 7. Since any f ∈ F(P ) has the property that its hamiltonian vector field Xf lies completely within the polarization F. there exist fi ∈ F(P ). According to the Hamilton-Jacobi theorem. In this case.e. ω Similarly. 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 . thus defining a natural identification F p ∗ T ∗ PF .

is complete. i. From the definition of F.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. The basic geometry of this situation remains the same if the symplectic structure on T ∗ M is perturbed by a form on M . iJv) : v ∈ T P } 101 π . we can “twist” the standard symplectic structure on T ∗ M as follows: ω = ωM + π ∗ η. Complex polarizations Associated to any polarization F are the distributions DC = F ∩ F EC = F + F which arise as the complexifications of distributions D. A check of definitions shows that the standard and twisted symplectic structures on T ∗ M are equivalent precisely when their difference is the pull-back of an exact form on M . given a closed 2-form η on M . R) is -integral. Finally. the distribution D is involutive. The polarization F is called strongly admissible provided that E is involutive. we refer to [53]. For a discussion of quantization in this general setting. Although their dimensions vary in general from point to point. ω is a symplectic form on T ∗ M and ker π∗ is again a polarization. the leaf spaces PD and PE are smooth manifolds. then (P. F = {(v. This general type of symplectic manifold is known as a twisted cotangent bundle.8 proves that if each leaf of a fibrating polarization F on a symplectic manifold (P.foliation defines a hermitian line bundle EF over the leaf space PF whose sections identify with F-parallel sections of E. and the natural projection PD → PE is a submersion. each fiber of π carries a K¨hler structure. Since π ∗ η vanishes on the fibers of the projection. 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 .e. The simplest example of a fibrating polarization is given by the vertical polarization FM of a cotangent bundle T ∗ M . i. ω). E in T P . ⊥ Dx = Ex for all x ∈ P . an application of Corollary 7. In this case. More precisely. Moreover. D and E are pointwise ω-orthogonal.. ωM + π ∗ η) is prequantizable if and only if the cohomology class of η in H 2 (M . the symplectic manifold (T ∗ M.

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 Cauchy-Riemann 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 F-parallel 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 F-parallel 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 square-integrable with 2 respect to the measure e−|z| dz, known as the Fock or Bargman-Segal 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 F-parallel 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 finite-dimensional 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 Hirzebruch-Riemann-Roch 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 leading-order 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 half-forms 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 F-parallel 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 pre-Hilbert space structure on HF . On P , the square of an F-parallel 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 multiply-connected 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 F-parallel sections of E whose restrictions to each leaf are smooth. Leaves on which E has trivial holonomy are then said to comprise the Bohr-Sommerfeld 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 mod-Z reduction of the area it encloses; thus the Bohr-Sommerfeld 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 G-bundle 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 G-bundles (P1 , Φ1 ), (P2 , Φ2 ) over P are considered equivalent if ˜ ˜ ˜ there exists a G-equivariant diffeomorphism ψ : P1 → P2 such that Φ1 = Φ2 ◦ ψ. Example 7.13 A riemannian structure together with an orientation of an n-manifold 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 Stiefel-Whitney class vanishes.

Example 7.14 Since π1 (Sp(n)) Z, there exists a unique connected double-covering group of Sp(n), known as the metaplectic group M p(n). A symplectic 2n-plane 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 Stiefel-Whitney class vanishes. A symplectic manifold P whose tangent bundle is equipped with a metaplectic structure is called a metaplectic manifold. If the Stiefel-Whitney class w2 (P ) is zero, metaplectic 104

. We emphasize that this classification depends on the bundle of metaplectic frames and its covering map to the bundle of symplectic frames. It is trivial as a topological covering. If E is orientable. since both Sp(1) and M p(1) are connected. A metalinear lifting of the frames of an n-plane bundle E is called a metalinear structure on E. s(p) · A) ˜ By the usual homotopy theory for continuous groups. Z2 ) (see [28]). More generally.1) is called the metalinear group M L(n). a) = A · eiπa . its structure group can be reduced to GL+ (n). The double covering of GL(n) then induced by the identification GL(n) Gl(n) (see Example 3. s(p) · ρ(A)) for A ∈ M p(1). More explicitly. To see this explicitly in a special case. 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. The importance of the metalinear group for our purposes is that it admits 1-dimensional representations which are not the lifts of representations of GL(n). but as a group it is not the direct product GL(n) × Z2 . On the other hand. note that up to topological equivalence. the ˙ punctured plane R2 admits only trivial Sp(1) and M p(1) principal bundles. Two such maps s0 . a vector bundle admits a metalinear structure if and only if the square of its first Stiefel-Whitney class is zero (see [28]). which can be interpreted as the identity component of M L(n) in order to give a metalinear structure on E. A) = (p. Bundles associated to metalinear structures via these representations will be the key to the metaplectic correction of the prequantization procedure. Example 7. 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. s1 define equivalent metaplectic structures if and only if (s1 )−1 · s0 admits a continuous lift s : R2 → M p(1).15 Lying within the metaplectic group is a double-cover M l(n) of the subgroup Gl(n) preserving the usual lagrangian splitting of R2n . this occurs precisely when [s0 ] = [s1 ] as elements of π1 (Sp(1))/ρ# π1 (M p(1)) Z2 . First note that by means of the quotient homomorphism M L(n) → M L(n)/GL+ (n) 105 Z4 .structures are classified by the set H 1 (P . in which case an equivalence is given by ˜ ˙ ˙ ˙ the map ψ : R2 × M p(1) → R2 × M p(1) defined as ψ(p. A) = (p.

a metalinear structure on L can be enlarged to a metaplectic structure on T P . ω) be a symplectic 2n-manifold and L ⊂ T P a lagrangian subbundle. while a metaplectic structure on T P reduces to a metalinear structure on L. and thus Λ−1/2 F is defined.we can associate a principal Z4 bundle to any metalinear structure (M B(E). 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). one similarly defines the bundles Λ1/2 F and Λ−1/2 F of conjugate and negative half-forms on F . 106 L⊕L. a half-form λ and a conjugate half-form µ can be multiplied to give a 1-density λµ on the bundle F . we then obtain a complex line bundle Λ1/2 F called the bundle of half-forms associated to the triple (F. the product of two half-forms on F yields an n-form. Φ). a)). By the preceding theorem. 2 Now let P be a metaplectic manifold equipped with a prequantum line bundle E and a real polarization F. .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. Then T P admits a metaplectic structure if and only if L admits a metalinear structure. F inherits a metalinear structure from the metaplectic structure on T P . Proof. and therefore represents. we then have w2 (P ) = w1 (L)2 . From the representation a → eiπa/2 of Z4 in U (1). similarly. M B(F ). The resulting frame bundle is isomorphic to the frame bundle of L.16 Let (P. If J is any ω-compatible almost complex structure on P . Evidently. 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 square-root of (det ◦ρ) (A. An important link between metalinear and metaplectic structures on symplectic manifolds can be described as follows. Φ) on a vector bundle F . it is equipped with a natural flat connection inherited from the one on F. and our assertion follows from the remarks in the preceding examples. A section of Λ1/2 F then identifies with a complex-valued function λ on M B(F ) satisfying λ(e) = (det A)1/2 eiπa/2 · λ(e · (A. By inverting and conjugating the preceding representation of M L(n). then T P = L⊕JL By the Whitney product theorem. loosely speaking. Theorem 7. Definition 7. More explicitly. the square-root of a volume form on F . a) → (det A)1/2 eiπa/2 . and thus.

˙ we will use the trivial metaplectic structure on R2 (see Example 7. θ. the quotient of B(F) by this leaf-wise foliation defines a metalinear structure on the leaf space PF in such a way that half-forms on PF are in 1-1 correspondence with F-parallel negative half-forms on F. c ∈ {0. a · e2iφ ). φ ≤ 2π. Consequently. the subbundle R2 × Gl(1) equal the subset {(r. 1}} ˙ of R2 × M p(1). Example 7. 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. Example 7. the Bott connection on T L described in Example 5. in accordance with the corrected Bohr-Sommerfeld quantization conditions described in Chapter 4. ˙ To quantize the punctured plane R2 with its polarization by circles centered at the origin.19 Over each leaf L of the polarization F. the Bohr-Sommerfeld variety consists of circles of energy E = (n + 1/2)π . 0 ≤ θ ≤ 2π.14). it follows easily that the parallel transport of a negative half-form associated to T Sr0 around Sr0 amounts to multiplication by −1. both the ˙ trivial M p(1) and Sp(1) bundles over R2 can be identified with the set of triples (r. a · ei(θ/2+cπ) ) : r = r0 . s2 ⊗ λ2 = PF s1 . From the expression for the covering map given above. Note that integration is well-defined. a · eiφ ) → (r. a > 0. 107 . and the covering map R2 × M p(1) → R2 × Sp(1) is given by (r. In terms ˙ of the identifications above. a > 0. the quantum state space HF identifies with the space of compactly supported sections of EF ⊗ Λ1/2 PF . That is. As proven in [28]. ˙ ˙ The pull-back 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 .12 to illustrate how the introduction of halfforms also enables us to incorporate the Bohr-Sommerfeld correction in the case of the 1-dimensional harmonic oscillator. θ.18 We first return to Example 7. θ. In this case.17 defines a foliation of the preimage of L in B(F). θ. θ. The latter space is equipped with a natural inner-product s1 ⊗ λ1 . a · eiφ ). a · eiθ ) : r = r0 .In the following examples. In this way. r > 0 and 0 ≤ θ. since λ1 λ2 is a density on PF . ˙ ˙ where a. we will sketch how in certain cases this definition enables us to overcome the difficulties mentioned at the beginning of this section. Note that this is a nontrivial M l(1) bundle over Sr0 . s2 λ1 λ2 . 0 ≤ θ ≤ 2π} ˙ of R2 × Sp(1) while its corresponding metalinear bundle equals the subset {(r.

geometric quantization attempts to represent the Poisson algebra C ∞ (P ) on HF as follows. This construction. p) = u(q) on R2n . is due to Blattner. ˜ dt In particular. which can be extended to more general pairs of polarizations. ρ(f ) acts as pointwise multiplication for any f ∈ F(P ). First. the metaplectic structure on P defines a natural isomorphism between the space of half-forms on F2 and the space of conjugate half-forms on F1 (see [28]). if the hamiltonian flow ϕt of f ∈ C ∞ (P ) preserves F. then the quantum state spaces HF1 and HF2 can be related as follows. From Example 7. then a smooth function v(p) on p-space identifies with an element σp (q. then it lifts to a 1-parameter family ϕt of operators on ˜ 1/2 smooth sections of E ⊗ Λ F.x at each x ∈ P .x is transverse to F2. the space HFq consists of p-independent functions σq (q. σp = 1 (2π )n/2 ei q. λ2 ) on P .p / u(q) v(p) |dq dp|. σ2 = σ1 . σ2 of HF1 and HF2 with Fi -parallel sections si ⊗ λi of E ⊗ Λ1/2 Fi on P . s2 (λ1 . the symplectic form defines an isomorphism of F1 with F2 . which we may identify with the space of smooth functions on q-space. R2n Note that this corresponds to the usual association of a distribution v (q) on q-space to a ˆ function v(p) on p-space via the inverse asymptotic Fourier transform. The quantum operator associated to F is then ρ(f ) σ = i d (ϕt σ)|t=0 . Bσ2 for all σ1 ∈ H1 and σ2 ∈ H2 . Similarly. p) = v(p)ei q. P where dim(P ) = 2n. if Fp is the p =constant polarization. Given a symplectic manifold P with the structures above.Blattner-Kostant-Sternberg kernels If F1 and F2 are fibrating polarizations of P with the property that F1. 108 . ∗ By assumption.5. This pairing is nondegenerate and thus determines a linear operator B : HF2 → HF1 satisfying σ1 . Kostant. we recall that for the q =constant polarization Fq of R2n . Using this identification. σ2 = 1 (2π )n/2 s1 . and Sternberg defines a sesquilinear pairing on the associated quantum state spaces via a Blattner-Kostant-Sternberg kernel. similarly. λ2 ) ω n . then a sesquilinear pairing HF1 × HF2 → C is defined by σ1 . If we identify elements σ1 . we can pair a half-form λ1 on F1 with a half-form λ2 on F2 to obtain a function (λ1 .20 The basic example of a Blattner-Kostant-Sternberg kernel arises from the classical Fourier transform. The sesquilinear pairing described above is therefore given by σq . Example 7.p / of HFp .

we assume that for t ∈ (0. Similarly. each intersection of L with a leaf of F is transverse). ˜ We can generalize this viewpoint by considering a lagrangian submanifold L which has possibly multiple transverse intersections with the leaves of F (that is. d ((Ut ◦ ϕt ) σ)|t=0 . Let (L. then the section s of E ⊗ Λ−1/2 F 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. The meaning of this last statement is made more precise by the fact that if T : R2n → R2n is a linear symplectomorphism. can be considered as a generalized section. thus obtaining a linear functional on HF . we suppose that P is a metaplectic manifold with a prequantum line bundle E and a fibrating polarization F. which. the differential Dϕt maps F into a polarization Ft for which there exists a Blattner-Kostant-Sternberg kernel and a corresponding operator Ut : HFt → HF . Our goal is to comment briefly on how an element of HF can be constructed from a “semi-classical state” in P consisting of a lagrangian submanifold L ⊂ P with some extra structure. More precisely. then the associated quantum operator HFq → HT (Fq ) is 109 . the quantization of ˜ ˜ ˜ (L. we think of L as the union of lagrangian submanifolds Lj . Finally. then we can construct and element of HF by “superposition”. such as a half-density or half-form with coefficients in a prequantum line bundle over P . According to the preceding example.For those f ∈ C ∞ (P ) whose hamiltonian flow does not preserve F. s) is given by an ordinary smooth function on Rn . ˜ dt 7. s|Lj ) and summing the results produces an element of HF as long as this sum converges. If s is again a section of E ⊗ Λ−1/2 F over L. 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.21 If L ⊂ P intersects each leaf of F transversely in at most one point. 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.22 To indicate briefly how “distributional” elements of HF arising as in the preceding example are paired. s) is n “concentrated” at the origin of R . 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. whereas the quantization of (L. Example 7. Applying the procedure above to each (Lj . ε). Example 7. such that each Lj intersects any leaf of F at most once. s). we consider the following situation.3 Quantization of semi-classical states In this brief section. then we can pair it with arbitrary elements of HF by integration over L. and the quantum operator ρ(f ) is defined as ˜ ρ(f ) σ = i We refer to [28] for further details. The flow ϕt defines an operator ϕt : HF → HFt . via the inner product on HF . we can regard s as the quantization of the pair (L.

up to a normalization. In terms of HFq . the quantum state obtained from (L. s) is a Dirac δ-function n concentrated at the origin of R . this means ˜ ˜ that. By choosing T so that both L and L are transverse to T (Fq ). we can ˜ ˜ quantize (L.˜ required to be unitary. s) and (L. s) with respect to this new polarization to obtain smooth functions 2n on the leaf space RT (Fq ) whose pairing is defined by integration. 110 .

g} which satisfy the compatibility condition {f g. a smooth map ψ : P → Q is called a Poisson map provided that it preserves Poisson brackets. h} g. dg). ψ is called an anti-Poisson map if {f.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. The main examples of Poisson manifolds we will be concerned with are the following. 8. which may be interpreted as the algebra of functions on a classical phase space. Similarly.e.1 A Poisson algebra is a real vector space A equipped with a commutative. i. As → 0. g} = π(df. {f. g} = lim (f ∗ g − g ∗ f )/i . On a Poisson manifold. and that most of quantum mechanics can be done without regards for the precise nature of observables. it is assumed that the ∗ -commutator approaches the Poisson bracket in the limit of large quantum numbers: {f. If P. Definition 8. g ∈ C ∞ (Q). h} + {f. the Leibniz identity implies that the Poisson bracket is given by a skew-symmetric contravariant tensor field π via the formula {f. the algebra A approaches a commutative algebra A0 . g) → {f. g) → f g and a Lie algebra structure (f. h} = f {g. g ∈ C ∞ (Q). g} = {f ◦ ψ.1 Poisson algebras and Poisson manifolds The main objects in algebraic quantization theory are Poisson algebras and Poisson manifolds. →0 The abstract goal of algebraic quantization is to construct the family A of noncommutative algebras from a Poisson algebra. In this chapter. Quantum observables comprise a noncommutative algebra A which is assumed to belong to a family A of algebras. Additionally. g} = −{f ◦ ψ. associative algebra structure (f. 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 ◦ ψ} for all f. known as deformation quantization and the method of symplectic groupoids. we sketch two approaches towards this goal. Q are Poisson manifolds. but with an -dependent multiplication ∗ . g ◦ ψ} for all f. all with a common underlying vector space. 111 .

the zeroth and first order terms of this series are determined by the Poisson algebra structure of A. g) j where each Bj : A × A → A is a bilinear map. In accordance with the introductory remarks above. g ∈ C ∞ (g∗ ). where ∆ : g∗ → g∗ × g∗ is the diagonal and f.Example 8. 4. 2 The dual space g∗ is then a Poisson manifold when equipped with the Lie-Poisson bracket {f. Dg : g∗ → g∗∗ g are the differentials of f and g. g} = Xg · f. Any symplectic manifold is a Poisson manifold with respect to its standard Poisson structure {f. More concretely. 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.3 Let A be a complex vector space equipped with a commutative associative algebra structure. Definition 8. Then ∗ is called a ∗-deformation of A if 112 . {f. 8. g} = 0.2 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. the role of the higher-order terms is roughly speaking to give a more precise -dependent path from classical to quantum mechanics. where µ ∈ g∗ . 2. g} = π(df. Let g be a finite-dimensional Lie algebra with dual g∗ . 3. Any smooth manifold M is a Poisson manifold when C ∞ (M ) is given the trivial bracket {f. g} = ∆∗ D(f g). x + y .2 1.y) . If V is a finite-dimensional vector space and π is a skew-symmetric bilinear form on V ∗ . then def {f. and Df. dg) defines a Poisson algebra structure on C ∞ (V ). making V a Poisson manifold. g}(µ) = µ([Df. and let ∗ be a family of associative multiplications on A given by a formal power series ∞ f∗ g= j=0 Bj (f. The Lie-Poisson operator on C ∞ (g∗ × g∗ ) is the differential operator D defined by DF = 1 [DF ](x. Dg]).

We define the Poisson operator associated to π as the second-order differential operator on C ∞ (V × V ) Dπ = A(∂/∂y ∗ . (f ∗ g) ∗ h = f ∗ (g ∗ h) For condition (5) to make sense. = e−i Dπ /2 . g) 2i defines a Poisson algebra structure on A. 5. Pointwise multiplication of functions in f. 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. . z) = f (y) g(z) for f. g ∈ C ∞ (R2n ) can be defined as the pull-back f · g = ∆∗ f g. ∂/∂z ∗ ). g} = def 1 B1 (f.1. a straightforward computation shows that the Poisson operator is related to the Poisson bracket induced by π via the equation {f. Bj (g. z ∗ ) are dual to (y. g) equals the product in A. (∂/∂y. Similarly. f ) = 0 for j ≥ 1 4. We emphasize that the power series above is not in general assumed to converge for = 0. and (f g)(y. B0 (f. z) are linear coordinates on V × V arising from a single set of linear coordinates on V . Bj (1. g ∈ C ∞ (R2n ). z). conditions (1-5) imply that {f. where (y. ∂/∂z) . and manipulations of this series will be purely formal. then the Hessian of π at 0 ∈ V ∗ × V ∗ is a linear map A = Hπ : V ∗ × V ∗ → V × V . g} = ∆∗ D(f The diagonal pull-back f ∗ g = ∆∗ M (f 113 g) g).4 If V is a finite-dimensional real vector space and π : V ∗ × V ∗ → R is a skew-symmetric bilinear form on V ∗ . we must extend the product ∗ in the obvious way from A to the space A[[ ]] of formal power series. Example 8. The Moyal-Weyl operator is then the pseudodifferential operator given by exponentiation: Mπ. g) 3. and (y ∗ . 2. f ) = (−1)j B(f. Bj is a differential operator in each argument. where ∆ : R2n → R2n × R2n is the diagonal embedding. In any case. Instead it should be viewed as an “asymptotic expansion” for the product.

This technique has succeeded. g) = j! i 2 ∂ ∂ πr. Using similar techniques.z−x) f (y) g(z) dy dz. ι2 = id 114 . M´lotte [44] extended their result to arbitrary regular Poisson manifolds.4. r. e A simplified proof of these results has recently been given by Fedosov [23] (see [68] for a survey of deformation quantization. the operator Bj in the expansion of the Moyal-Weyl product is 1 Bj (f. where Q is the skew-symmetric bilinear form on V induced by π. 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.5 A groupoid is a set Γ endowed with a product map (x. 8. emphasizing Fedosov’s construction). To construct a ∗-product on all of C ∞ (P ). A theorem of DeWilde and Lecomte [19] asserts that the Poisson algebra of any finite-dimensional symplectic manifold admits a ∗-deformation. any regular Poisson manifold is locally deformation quantizable.s If π is nondegenerate. and an inverse map ι : Γ → Γ satisfying the conditions 1. y) → xy defined on a subset Γ2 ⊂ Γ × Γ called the set of composable pairs. A Poisson manifold P is called regular if its Poisson tensor π has constant rank. one may therefore attempt to “patch together” the local deformations to arrive at a global ∗-product.s ∂yr ∂zs j f (y)g(z) y=z=x . 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. in which case a theorem of Lie [39] asserts that P is locally isomorphic to a vector space with a constant Poisson structure. 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. however. Unlike deformation quantization. z) on V × V . In terms of the linear coordinates (y. Definition 8.of the Moyal operator defines a ∗-deformation of the Poisson algebra C ∞ (V ) called the Moyal-Weyl product.

β(x) ∈ Γ0 } is a groupoid over Γ0 . (y.2. x). y) and β(x. Example 8. y) ∈ Γ2 . 2.6 1. The pair groupoid associated to a set X consists of Γ = X × X. then (xy. x. Thus Γ0 is the diagonal. (x. z) ∈ Γ2 . 2. any groupoid whose base is a singleton comprises a group. 3. z) = (x. Any group is a groupoid over its identity element. Maintaining the notation above. x) ∈ Γ2 for all x ∈ Γ. y) then belongs to Γ2 if and only if the source of y equals the target of x. Definition 8. the multiplication relation of Γ is the subset m = {(xy. If Γ is a groupoid with base Γ0 and Γ0 ⊂ Γ0 . ι(x)) ∈ Γ2 for all x ∈ Γ. β : Γ → Γ0 are submersions. Combining (1) and (2). The mappings α. The set Γ0 of all sources (and targets) is called the base of Γ. Condition (2) implies that the map α × β is transverse to the diagonal ∆ in Γ0 × Γ0 . 3. We will be interested in groupoids with some geometric structures. y) : (x. y) = (y. a pair (x. (ι(x). 4. y). Finally. and conversely. In abstract terms. and α. y) · (y. A disjoint union of groupoids is a groupoid over the union of their bases. and if (z. The unitary submanifolds form a group under the natural multiplication of subsets. 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). yz) ∈ Γ2 . (x. Elements of Γ0 are units of Γ in the sense that xα(x) = x and β(x)x = x for all x ∈ Γ. a groupoid is a small category in which all morphisms have inverses. we make the following definition. 3. If (x. and if (x. and Γ is said to be a groupoid over Γ0 . 115 ι . then Γ = {x ∈ Γ : α(x). Multiplication Γ2 → Γ and inversion Γ → Γ are smooth. endowed with the multiplication (x. y) ∈ Γ2 } of Γ × Γ × Γ. z). 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. Γ0 is a submanifold of Γ. y) = (x. there is exactly one arrow from any object to another. 4. x) ∈ Γ2 . the map ι is bijective and thus inverses in Γ are unique. In this groupoid.7 A groupoid Γ is called a Lie groupoid if 1. A submanifold L of Γ is called unitary if the restriction of α and β to L are diffeomorphisms L → Γ0 . z). Note that by (3). we see that any vector bundle E defines a groupoid Γ(E) over its zero section. then (zx)ι(x) = z. then ι(x) (xy) = y. and (xy)z = x(yz).

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 .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. Γ) linked by the equation Γ0 = m ◦ Lι . Two immediate consequences of this definition and the calculus of canonical relations are that Γ0 is lagrangian. 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). 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 anti-Poisson. Equipped with these operations and its usual symplectic structure. A simple computation shows that the base of T ∗ G is its fiber at the identity. only discrete Lie groups can be symplectic groupoids. a symplectic groupoid Γ is characterized by the three canonical relations (recall that Z is a point): Γ0 ∈ Hom(Z. then the pair groupoid structure on P × P defines a symplectic groupoid over P . Lι ∈ Hom(Γ. we will say that P is integrable and refer to Γ as a symplectic groupoid over P . equipped with the groupoid structure of a vector bundle and its standard symplectic structure. If P is any symplectic manifold. 2. Example 8. Γ) m ∈ Hom(Γ × Γ..10 1.Definition 8. and ι : Γ → Γ is anti-symplectic. then T ∗ M . then the dual space g∗ with its Lie-Poisson structure is integrable. its graph is a lagrangian submanifold of Γ × Γ. For any Lie group G whose Lie algebra is g. 4. If there exists a groupoid Γ which integrates P . defines a symplectic groupoid over M . A simple example of a Lie groupoid is given by any Lie group. 3. Definition 8. Its unitary lagrangian submanifolds are precisely the graphs of symplectomorphisms of P .. As a consequence of the axioms and the assumption that m is lagrangian. 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. i.e. From the requirement that the base of a symplectic groupoid be a lagrangian submanfold. This Poisson structure gives meaning to the following concept. Thus. If M is any manifold with the zero Poisson structure. Γ) 116 . T ∗ G is a symplectic groupoid over g∗ . If g is any Lie algebra.

Γ and AΓ ⊗ A∗ ⊗ A∗ which define the structure of an associative ∗-algebra on AΓ . If we wish V to be an associative ∗-algebra with unit element. so that the construction of the vector space AΓ follows unambiguously from the procedure defined in the preceding chapter. like the algebras of quantum mechanics. Lι . Example 8. Since Lι and m are the conormal bundles of the diagonals in M × M and M × M × M . and T ∗ (M ×M ×M ) with (completions of) the function spaces C ∞ (M ). and pointwise multiplication in the associative ∗-algebra C ∞ (M. y) and δ(x. and m associated to the groupoid T ∗ G of Example yields the −1 distributions δ(e) on G. Γ Γ it is in this sense that the symplectic groupoid Γ represents a classical model for the quantum algebra AΓ . This is known as the integration problem for Poisson manifolds. we will give several examples illustrating the spirit of the symplectic groupoid method.11 Consider a trivial Poisson manifold M and its associated symplectic groupoid T ∗ M . Example 8. Lι . the natural domain of the 117 .g. under the identifications T ∗ M × T ∗ M T ∗ (M × M ) and T ∗ M × T ∗ M × T ∗ M T ∗ (M × M × M ). the identity relation Γ0 coincides with the zero section of T ∗ M . z) supported on the diagonals ∆2 and ∆3 respectively. g1 . complex conjugation. T ∗ (M × M ). and m quantize as elements of AΓ . C). Thus. we find that the quantization of the canonical relations Γ0 . we may identify the quantum Hilbert spaces associated to T ∗ M. g2 ) on G × G × G. C ∞ (M ×M ) and C ∞ (M ×M ×M ). and δ(g1 g2 . Using the techniques of geometric quantization (prequantizations. after an appropriate normalization. and lagrangian submanifolds correspond to elements in V . anti-involution f (g) → f (g −1 ). our heuristic discussion in Section 7. ι. Throughout. polarizations). we will only deal with groupoids Γ equipped with reasonable (e. the quantization of the groupoid Γ yields the usual identity element. then the underlying symplectic manifold must possess a groupoid structure compatible with its symplectic structure. If the Haar measure on G is used to identify the quantum Hilbert space HG with C ∞ (G. The relation Γ0 then quantizes as the function 1 on M . these relations are quantized by the δ-functions δ(x. AΓ ⊗ A∗ . The first step in the quantization of a Poisson manifold P by the method of symplectic groupoids is to construct a symplectic groupoid (Γ. z)δ(y. and furthermore. C). since geometric quantizaton produces half-densities rather than functions. As described in the preceding example. To conclude this chapter. g1 ) on G × G. we then attempt to associate a vector space AΓ to Γ in such a way that the canonical relations Γ0 .12 Arguing as in the preceding example. Lι and m quantize as evaluation (at e ∈ G). If successful. fibrating) polarizations. we know that certain symplectic manifolds quantize to give vector spaces V .Quantization via symplectic groupoids From our discussion of geometric quantization. then the relations Γ0 . There is actually a flaw in the preceding two examples. Γ0 . and convolution. m) over P . respectively.3 shows that. the relations Lι and m identify with the conormal bundles of the diagonals ∆2 ⊂ M × M and ∆3 ⊂ M × M × M respectively. As in Chapter 7. δ(g1 .

and not just the multiplication. y) → ((x + y)/2. and the groupoid product quantized to the usual pointwise multiplication of functions on T. it is possible to relate them more closely by dualizing one of them. we identify T ∗ T with T × V ∗ and let m ⊂ T ∗ (T × T × T ) consist of all triples 1 (q. If T is a torus equal to the quotient of V by some lattice.convolution operation on a group consists not of functions but of densities. In this way. It appears then that the construction of V itself. 118 . with Γ0 equals the zero section of T ∗ T. y) = f (xy). Example 8. The coproduct satisfies a coassociative law and is related to pointwise multiplication by the simple identity ∆(f g) = ∆(f )∆(g). and the multiplication on V turns out to be the Moyal product (see Example 8. 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. p. should depend on the groupoid structure on Γ. Example 8. which we identify with R2n itself. Although the two multiplications associated with the two groupoid structures on T ∗ G described above live on different spaces. q . When the map T is zero. ωn (y − x)). (The relation between Poisson tori and noncommutative tori was studied from the point of view of deformation quantization in [50]). To describe the multiplication relation. making C ∞ (G) into a Hopf algebra. we get as V the space of smooth functions on the diagonal. The compatibility between the two structures on C ∞ (G) reflects a compatibility between the two groupoid structures on T ∗ G. there is a polarization of P × P which does not depend on any polarization of P but only on the affine structure. In fact. A symplectic groupoid which integrates T is given by the cotangent bundle T ∗ T.14 If V is any finite-dimensional vector space.13 If we take P = R2n with its standard symplectic structure. and Lι equals the conormal bundle of the diagonal in T × T. say convolution. one of the basic examples of noncommutative geometry. ˜ Using this polarization to quantize Γ. Otherwise one gets a noncommutative multiplication on C ∞ (T) which is precisely that of (the functions on) a noncommutative torus. then T inherits a translation-invariant Poisson structure from V . then a skew-adjoint linear map π : V ∗ → V defines a skew-symmetric bilinear form on V ∗ and thus a translation-invariant Poisson structure on V . the polarization comes from the isomorphism of Γ = R2n × R2n with T ∗ R2n given by (x. p . q . the Poisson structure on T is trivial. p ) such that q = q + 2 T (p + p ) and 1 q = q + T (p ) 2 p=p +p .4).

is determined by a choice of bases for W and V /W . an α-density on V is a map λ : B(V ) → C such that λ(eA) = λ(e) · | det(A)|α .A Densities An n-form ν on an n-dimensional 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). · · · . any real bilinear form ω on V induces a 1-density ω on V . if V = V1 ⊕ V2 . A density on a real vector space V of dimension n is a complex-valued function η. Since GL(V ) acts transitively on B(V ). which satisfies η(eA) = η(e) · | det(A)|. where e = (e1 .1 For α ∈ C. As a result. 2. Equivalently. Because the “change of variables” formula for integration involves absolute values of Jacobians. an α-density is determined by its value on a single basis. If W is a subspace of V . Operations on densities 1. then a basis of V . We denote the vector space of α-densities on V by |Λ|α V. ˜ 3. Definition A. then σ β is a well-defined αβ-density on V . A linear map T : V → V ∗ induces a real-valued 1-density T on V given by T e = | det( T ei . 4. ej )|1/2 . there is a natural product |Λ|α W × |Λ|α (V /W ) → |Λ|α V In particular. |Λ|α V is a 1-dimensional complex vector space. unique up to transformation by a matrix of determinant ±1. The collection of such functions is denoted |Λ|V . en ) is any frame in a tangent space of M and A = (aij ) is any invertible n × n matrix. def 119 . Consequently. If σ ∈ |Λ|α V and β ∈ C. 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. This concept can be generalized as follows. The use of densities instead of forms circumvents this need. integration of n-forms on M requires a choice of orientation. defined on the set B(V ) of bases in V . then there is a natural product |Λ|α V1 × |Λ|α V2 → |Λ|α V.

An n-form on an n-manifold M induces an α-density |ν|α in the manner of (4) above. and the positive real number | detθ T | is defined by the equation | detθ T |1/2 θ = T . A natural map B(V ) → B(V ∗ ) is defined by associating to each basis e of V its dual basis e∗ . The remarks above imply that if 0→E→F →G→0 is an exact sequence of vector bundles over M . We denote by |Ω|α E the vector space of smooth sections of |Λ|α E and by |Ω|α E the space of c smooth.2 Suppose that A. It is easy to check that the association V → |Λ|α V defines a differentiable functor. Example A. the map ∗ gives rise to a natural isomorphism |Λ|α V → |Λ|−α V ∗ . there is a well-defined isomorphism T∗ : |Λ|α V → |Λ|α V . By the operations described above. 7. we obtain an isomorphism |Λ|α A |Λ|α A ⊗ |Λ|2α C given explicitly by σ→σ⊗ T 2α F ∗ = | detθ T |α σ ⊗ θ2α . |Λ|α V1 ⊗ |Λ|α V2 → |Λ|α (V1 ⊕ V2 ) 6. If T : V → V is an isomorphism.5. so we can associate the α-density bundle |Λ|α E to any smooth vector bundle E over a manifold M . then there is a natural density-bundle isomorphism |Λ|α E ⊗ |Λ|α G |Λ|α F. compactly-supported sections. where θ is any real-valued 1-density on C. 120 . The density spaces associated to the tangent bundle of M are denoted |Ω|α M . C are vector spaces and 0 → A → A ⊕ C → C∗ → 0 is an exact sequence such that F |C = T . Since (eA)∗ = e∗ (A∗ )−1 for any A ∈ GL(V ). 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.

The completion HM of this space is called the intrinsic Hilbert space of M . As a first step. τ = M σ τ. Let S denote the usual Schwartz space of rapidly decreasing. then I is rapidly decreasing in : 121 . which equals u(x) by the usual Fourier inversion formula.ξ (Rn )∗ / (F u)(ξ) dξ = (2π)−n ei x−y.ξ Rn / u(x) dx / (F −1 v)(x) = (2π )− 2 n ei x. R ∈ C ∞ (Rn ) as → 0. 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.η u(y) dy dη. This observation also verifies the asymptotic inversion formula: u(x) = (2π )−n ei x−y. 1/2 Similarly. A similar check of definitions proves the asymptotic Parseval formula: u v dx = Rn (Rn )∗ F u F v dξ. B The method of stationary phase We begin with a few useful formulas involving the asymptotic Fourier transform. We study next the asymptotic behavior of integrals of the form I = Rn eiR(x)/ a(x) |dx| ∞ a ∈ C0 (Rn ). For u ∈ S. note that the change of variables η = ξ/ gives (2π )− 2 n ei x. we will prove that if the critical point set of R is not contained in the support of a. the asymptotic Fourier transform and its inverse are defined respectively as (F u)(ξ) = (2π )− 2 n e−i x.A natural mapping |Ω|1 M → C is defined by integration c σ→ M σ.ξ / u(y) dy dξ. compactly-supported half-densities on M is defined by σ.ξ (Rn )∗ v(ξ) dξ To see that these transforms are actually inverse to one another. complex valued functions on Rn . a pre-Hilbert space structure on the space |Ω|c M of smooth.

k ∂xj ∂xk Proof. we obtain I = Rn ∗ e iQ/ eiπ·sgn(Q)/4 a |dx| = | det|dx| T |1/2 122 e−iQ (Rn )∗ ∗/ F a (ξ) dξ. then for each nonnegative integer K. ξ /2 and the determinant det|dx| T is defined as in Appendix A.1 If dR = 0 on Supp(a). . | det|dx| T |1/2 Combining this expression with the asymptotic Parseval formula.7. For the general case. we recall that for ξ ∈ (Rn )∗ . Our assertion follows by noting that (a/Qx1 )x1 ∈ C0 (Rn ) and repeating the same argument. ) | det|dx| T |1/2 where Q∗ (ξ) = T −1 ξ. the asymptotic Fourier transform of the function x → eiQ(x)/ equals eiπsgn(Q)/4 e−Q (ξ)/ ξ→ . Vol. From [32. Rx1 ∂x1 and so integration by parts with respect to the x1 -variable gives |I | = Rn eiR/ ∂ ∂x1 a R x1 |dx| . Lemma B.ξ e iQ(x)/ dx = (2π iπsgn(Q)/4 −i Q∗ (ξ) e n/2 e . 2 The upshot of this lemma is that the main (asymptotic) contribution to the integral I must come from the critical points of R. Proof. Then eiR/ a = −i a ∂ iR/ e . 1/2 | det|dx| T | k! Rn k=0 where T : Rn → (Rn )∗ is the self-adjoint map associated to Q and D is the second-order differential operator given by ∂ i −1 ∂ Tjk . Thm.Lemma B. e Rn −i x. Consequently. Suppose for the moment that Rx1 = ∂R/∂x1 = 0 on Supp(a). K eiπ sgn(Q)/4 1 eiQ/ a |dx| = (2π )n/2 (Dk a)(0) k + O K+1+n/2 .1. ∞ implying that I is O( ).2 If the quadratic form Q is nondegenerate. 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.1]. D= 2 j. then I = O( ∞ ) as → 0.6.

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. If p is a nondegenerate critical point of a function R : M → R. In this case. the last expression on the right following from the asymptotic Fourier inversion formula. and R : M → R is a smooth function. To this end. such that g(0) = p and (R ◦ g)(x) = R(p) + Q(x). The critical point p is called nondegenerate if R (p) is an isomorphism. the function R has the following normal form near p. If g : M → M is any diffeomorphism. where M is a smooth n-manifold equipped with a compactly supported density σ. 2 (This theorem is a special case of the Parametrized Morse Lemma. we require the following two lemmas. where U is a neighborhood of 0 in Rn . then there exists a nondegenerate quadratic form Q on Rn and an embedding g : U → M . 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 . The same role in the stationary phase formula will be played by the following lemma.A simple computation shows that F a (ξ) = F a (−ξ).3). Recall that the hessian of R : M → R at a critical point p ∈ M is a well-defined self-adjoint ∗ linear map R (p) : Tp M → Tp M . To deal with the integral on the right. Morse Lemma . 123 . and consequently we have I = eiπ·sgn(Q)/4 | det|dx| T |−1/2 e−iQ (Rn )∗ ∗ (ξ)/ F a (ξ) dξ. proven in Section 4. the change of variables ξ → −ξ doesn’t affect the integral.

Γ) = ZU (M .. Combining these observations. Let M be a smooth n-manifold and σ ∈ |Ω|c M . The groups of ˇ degree-k Cech cocycles and coboundaries are defined respectively by ˇk ZU (M .3 In the notation above.αk the intersection k Uαi . k in Supp(σ). αk+1 ) = j=0 k (−1)j c(α0 . i=0 ˇ If Γ is an abelian group. .Lemma B. Γ) = ker(δ k ) ˇk BU (M .. 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. a Γ-valued Cech cochain with respect to the cover U is then a rule which assigns an element cα0 .. · · · .. Γ). If σ is any density on M such that σp = (g ∗ σ)p . Γ)/BU (M . 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 ). αk+1 ). we obtain Principle of Stationary Phase ... The group of all such cochains is denoted CU (M. then | detσ (R ◦ g) (p )| = | detσ R (p)|. αk ) for which the intersection k Uα0 . αj .αk is nonempty. . where the symbol indicates which member of the list is to be deleted. 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 . Γ). suppose that p ∈ M is a critical point of R and set p = g −1 (p). For ease of notation.. A more general treatment is available in [14]. and a coboundary operator k+1 k δ k : CU (M. 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. j = 1. .. . 2 Finally.αk of Γ to every list (α0 . Γ) → CU (M.. 124 ... If R : M → R has only nondegenerate critical points pj . ˇ and the k-th Cech cohomology group of M with coefficients in Γ and relative to the covering U is the quotient ˇk ˇk ˇk HU (M .. Γ) = im(δ k−1 ). Γ) is defined by k+1 δ (c)(α0 . we will denote by Uα0 ..

R). Of particular interest in these notes is the subgroup Z = 2π Z of R. t)) = x for all (x. f (a · p) = a · f (p) for all a ∈ T and p ∈ Q. D Principal T bundles In this appendix. t + gjk (x)) for all x ∈ Ujk . t) and π(hj (x. 125 . t) = hi (x. defined by the requirement that hj (x. we record some standard facts about principal bundles over paracompact manifolds. and satisfies π = π ◦ f . t + s) = s · hj (x. there exists on each Uα a (k − 1)-form ϕα satisfying dϕα = ω. fiber-preserving action T × Q → Q. γ. we have d(ϕα − ϕβ ) = 0 on Uαβ . These maps give rise to the transition functions gjk : Ujk → T of Q. Throughout this section. Since Uαβ is itself contractible. referring to [17] for more details. For any indices α. t) ∈ Uj × T and s ∈ T . Γ) does not depend on the choice of U. Since each Uα is contractible. Continuing in this way. t) = hk (x. Theorem C. π Local triviality of a T fiber bundle Q → P implies that for any good cover U of P .k Now consider a closed k-form ω ∈ ZDR (M ). t + gij (x) + gjk (x) + gki (x)). Γ ) in the obvious way. This equation implies that for each x ∈ Uijk . π A principal T bundle over a manifold P is a locally trivial T bundle Q → P together π with a nonsingular. 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. denote by Z the group 2π · Z and set T = R/Zh . we see that ω determines a ˇ Cech k-cocycle with coefficients in R. 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.e. This association defines for each k ∈ Z+ a homomorphism w ˇk k ZDR (M ) → HU (M . hi (x. there exist homeomorphisms hj : Uj × T → π −1 (Uj ) such that hj (x. i. β.1 ([61]) The map w induces an isomorphism between the deRham cohomology ˇ of M and the Cech cohomology of M with real coefficients. Γ) → HU (M . ˇk One consequence of this theorem is that HU (M . A group homomorphism Γ → Γ induces a homomorphism ˇk ˇk HU (M . β.

If Q → P is a principal T bundle having transition functions {gjk } with respect to some good cover of P . it follows that the Chern class of Q is the Cech representative of the deRham cohomology class [ω].2. Z). 126 . Z ) are the following operations on principal T bundles. ˇ From the compatibility condition for the ϕj . Q are principal T bundles over P with transition functions {gjk } and {gjk } respectively. −t · p ). Cor. then the product of Q and Q is defined as the principal T bundle Q ×P Q over P having transition functions {gjk + gjk }. 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 ]. The curvature of the ˜ connection ϕ is the unique closed 2-form ω on P such that dϕ = π ∗ ω. The fundamental theorem describing this space is the following (see [17. From the definitions above. Z ) is known as the Chern class of Q. Moreover. Z ). the form ϕ satisfies h∗ ϕ = dσ + π ∗ ϕj . t · (p.1.e.2 A closed 2-form 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.and so the transition functions satisfy the cocycle condition gij + gjk + gki = 0 (mod Z ). i. a ∈ Z for any a ∈ H2 (P . we can describe the product Q ×P Q as the quotient of the usual fiber-product Q ×P Q (which in this case is a T × T bundle over the base). On the level of the bundles themselves. Similarly.1 Two principal T bundles over P are isomorphic if and only if their Chern classes are equal. Theorem D. if Q. X(p) = dt t=0 A connection on Q is a T -invariant 1-form ϕ on Q such that ϕ(X) = 1. then the inverse of Q is defined as the principal T bundle −Q over P obtained from the transition functions {−gjk }. ˇ Corresponding to the abelian group structure on H 2 (P . g where gjk are again R-valued lifts of the transition functions of Q. where dσ denotes the usual form j on T and the ϕj are 1-forms on the Uj satisfying ϕj − ϕk = d˜jk . p ) = (t · p. Theorem D. 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.4] for a proof). The corresponding class 2 ˇ [Q] ∈ H (P . If gjk : Ujk → R is any lift of gjk . modulo the anti-diagonal action of T . then the numbers ˜ cijk = gij + gjk + gki ˜ ˜ ˜ ˇ are therefore elements of Z which define a Cech cocycle [cijk ]. 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 . In terms of a good cover U of P .

1] is contractible. z + τ ]. Z ) which acts naturally on Q by (h. The quotient of A(P. 1] → P such that γ(0) = p0 . see [33] for further details. If Yt is the vector field which generates this contraction. t) ∼ (γ . 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 . p0 ) denote the space of smooth paths γ : [0. γ are homologous and t−t = σ ω. Then dσ + Kω is a connection form on the product A(P. The quotient of Q is the desired principal T bundle Q over P . Z ) into the space of loops based at p0 which assigns a representative to each homology class. where ∂σ = s(h + h ) − (s(h) + s(h )) . then P = P . We prefer to give the following direct proof by P. To complete the proof. p0 ) onto the constant map [0. p0 ) × T . p0 ) × T having curvature e∗ ω. An equivalence relation on the product A(P.Iglesias. For this purpose. Q over P induce a connection ϕ + ϕ on the product Q ×P Q defined locally by dσ + ϕj + ϕj . we call two elements γ. Since the interval [0. p0 ) × T is then defined by the condition that (γ. Since this cocycle is symmetric. and let e : A(P. Z ) = 0.ˇ Proof. [37]) use Cech cohomology and the deRham isomorphism. z] = [s(h) · γ. Z ) on Q which preserves the connection ϕ. p0 ) by 1 Kω = 0 (Yt e∗ ω) dt. The quotient of A(P. Otherwise. p0 ) × T by this equivalence relation is a principal T bundle Q over P with connection ϕ having curvature π ∗ ω. Since T is divisible. let s be any map from H1 (P . connections ϕ and ϕ on the T bundles Q. Most published proofs of this result (e. we will define the T bundle (Q. the extension Γ is isomorphic to the product T × H1 (P . where π : P → P is the natural projection. p0 ) → P be the endpoint map e(γ) = γ(1). Z ) is then defined by φ(h. Z ). A T -valued group cocycle on H1 (P . ϕ) over P with curvature ω as an appropriate quotient of A(P. and the proof is complete. t ) if γ. where ϕ is locally represented by dσ + ϕj . γ ∈ A(P. p0 ) homologous if their difference is the boundary of a singular 2-chain σ in P . If H1 (P . Similarly. 127 π . and any choice of isomorphism defines an action of H1 (P . p0 ) by this equivalence relation is the covering space P of P corresponding to the commutator subgroup of π1 (P ). H1 (P . h ) = σ ω. 1] → p0 . where ∂σ = γ − γ . τ )[γ. it defines a central extension Γ of H1 (P . Let A(P. we define the 1-form Kω on A(P. Z ) = 0. and thus.g. there exists a natural contraction of A(P.

Two principal T bundles with connection (Q. the classification of such bundles reduces to the classification of flat connections on trivial T bundles over P . 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 . Denoting by sj the composition of sj with the projection R → T . k. z) = (t · p. Theorem D. Thus. we have: Corollary D. The cohomology class [β] induced by this form in H 1 (P . π A connection ϕ on a principal T bundle Q → P is said to be flat if dϕ = 0. 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. ϕ). 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. Moreover. In this s case. we find ˜ ˜ that the functions sjk = sj − sk define transition functions for a trivial T principal bundle over P . ϕ) has zero holonomy. A section s of a principal T bundle Q over P with connection ϕ is called parallel provided that s∗ ϕ = 0. ϕ − ϕ ) is isomorphic to the trivial bundle (P × T . It is easy to check that if ϕ0 is the trivial connection on P × T . then ϕ − f ∗ ϕ0 = π ∗ β ˇ for some closed 1-form β on P . ϕ). the local representatives h∗ ϕ = dσ + ϕj have the property that ϕj = d˜j for functions j sj : Uj → R.4 A principal T bundle Q over P with a flat connection admits a parallel section if and only if (Q. ϕ) with the trivial T bundle equipped with the trivial connection ϕ = dσ. and so there exists an isomorphism f : Q → P × T .ϕ on the trivial principal T bundle Q = P ×T over P are isomorphic if and only if they have equal holonomy.3 Two flat connections ϕ. (Q . ρ−1 (t)z). the compatibility condition for the ϕj implies that sjk − gjk is constant for each j. A check of the definition shows that (Q. The map sQ : Q → Q associated to a parallel section defines an isomorphism of (Q. ϕ ) are isomorphic if and only if (Q ×P −Q . T ) is called the holonomy of the (flat) connection ϕ. dS). the map (Q. (Q . The space of functions g : Q → C satisfying the condition g(t · p) = ρ−1 (t)g(p) 128 . T ). Since curvature is obviously invariant under isomorphisms of principal T bundles with connection.

where the section sg : P → E is defined by the requirement that sg (x) = [(p.is identified with the space of sections of E by the assignment g → sG . for any element p of π −1 (x). g(p))]. 129 .

Anal. New York. Berlin. Quantum Theory. Mathematical Methods of Classical Mechanics... Springer-Verlag. V. 107. The Topology of Torus Actions on Symplectic Manifolds. Encyclopedia of Mathematical Sciences. Flato. of Math. 1991. Vol.I.. D.M. V. [7] Atiyah. Appl. Funct.A. 1981. Springer-Verlag. Springer-Verlag. V. Berlin. [3] Arnol’d. D. preprint 1993. A. [10] Berezin. 1951. New York. Funct. 1978. 1 (1967) 1-13..A. F. Annals. pp.. V.B. Appl.I. 60. C. 93 Springer-Verlag.. J. Springer-Verlag. [17] Brylinski. J. F..I. eds. Manifolds All of Whose Geodesics are Closed. Arnol’d and S. [15] Boutet de Monvel.I.. Some remarks about the associated envelope of a Lie algebra. V. The Geometry and Physics of Knots. Ann.. Press. Princeton University Press. Differential Forms in Algebraic Topology. Princeton. Loop Spaces. Progress in Mathematics vol. Phys. New York. [8] Audin. 93. M. [13] Bohm. [14] Bott. 1. V. Quantization.. 1978. vol. Cambridge Univ. 2nd edition. [16] Br¨ning. Prentice-Hall. Math USSR Izv. L. 91-102. Benjamin/Cummings. (1967). Birkh¨user. Symplectic geometry and topology. and Guillemin. J. V.. Mathematics Past and Present: Fourier Integral Opu erators. Basel. R. Catastrophe theory (3rd edition). New York. R.References [1] Abraham. [12] Besse. Birkh¨user.F. Progress in Math. and Givental’. Foundations of Mechanics. 1982. [6] Arnol’d. 111. Characteristic Classes. New York.. Studies 99. Springer-Verlag. L. Novikov. 1992. Dynamical systems IV. and Marsden. A. Symplectic geometry. 4. Ergebnisse der Math.. A.. Anal. On a characteristic class entering into conditions of quantization. V. and Guillemin. 1994.P. and Tu. [4] Arnol’d.. 1992. Deformation theory and quantization.. 1109-1165. (1977). a [9] Bayen.. Boston.E.. [5] Arnol’d. and Geometric Quantization.-L..I. 61-151. F. Graduate Texts in Math. 1990. [11] Berezin. and Sternheimer. I and II. a 130 .I.. 1990. 1978. [2] Arnol’d. Reading.. Lichnerowicz. M. Cambridge. The Spectral Theory of Toeplitz Operators. 1-136. 8 (1974). Fronsdal..

The Analysis of Linear Partial Differential Operators. and Sternberg. J... S. L. 897-960.. Guillemin. (New edition to be published by Birkh¨user Boston in 1995. 1993.. Courant Institute. Formal deformations of the Poisson Lie algebra of a symplectic manifold and star-products.V. Inst. [34] Karasev. vol. A. Math.. Ann. Graduate Texts in Math. M.. Fourier integral operators I. G. 40 (1994) 213-238. Symplectic Geometry. Fourier Integral Operators. Stable Mappings and Their Singularities.P. New York.. o [32] H¨rmander.. A. 127 (1971) 79-183. Existence.. P. Hazewinkel and M. e e e Colloque de Topologie (Espaces Fibr´s) tenu a Bruxelles du 5 au 8 juin. V. [19] De Wilde. New constructions of symplectic manifolds. Amer. Diff.. P. Springer-Verlag. 1977. Li`ge and Masson et Cie. San Diego. Pub. 29-55. C. Annals of mathematics studies 122. 1989. equivalence.. Symplectic Techniques in Physics. pp. M. L. 1950.. Vols. in M. Clarenden Press. M. B.. V. 1951. 131 . Cambridge University Press. 14. Ann. Fourier (to appear). New York. Les connexions infinit´simales dans un espace fibr´ diff´rentiable. 1988. Soc. 1973. and Maslov. [20] Dirac.. [24] Folland. Cambridge. Dordrecht (1988).I. [25] Fomenko. Gerstenhaber... J. Geom. R.T. New York... 119. 1-4.. Providence.. [27] Gompf. NYU. (1973). La trilogie du moment. and Lecomte. e [23] Fedosov. Lecture Notes in Math. A. 1984. to appear. 1995. Harmonic Analysis in Phase Space. B. Academic Press. A simple geometrical construction of deformation quantization. M. 1336 (1988). Geometric Asymptotics. 1983-90. Acta Math. Paris. Nonlinear Poisson Brackets : Geometry and Quantization Translations of mathematical monographs vol. Kluwer Acad. e Georges Thone. Surveys 14. [31] H¨rmander.. American Mathematical Society. derivations. 1930. eds. Oxford. Princeton University Press. o Springer-Verlag. V.. Gordon and Breach. [30] Helffer.. Math.) a [22] Ehresmann. [26] Golubitsky. [21] Duistermaat.. R..B... Semi-classical analysis for the Schrodinger operator and applications.[18] Connes. [33] Iglesias. and Sternberg. J. V. [28] Guillemin. [29] Guillemin. Noncommutative Geometry.. P. Math.. The Principles of Quantum Mechanics. S. Providence. Deformation Theory of Algebras and Structures and Applications.

J. G. Invariant deformations of the Poisson Lie algebra of a symplectic mane ifold and star products. Press. 1975. Reading. [46] Nazaikinskii. V. Arnol’d and S... [50] Rieffel. Gos. Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics. Geometric quantization.. 87-208. [47] Olver. Trans. P. 89 (1987). Springer-Verlag. Symplectic Geometry and Analytical Mechanics.I. eds. Lecture Notes in Math. Moskov. Lectures on Mechanics. [45] Moser. Invent. C. Amer. 122 (1989).. deGruyter Studies in Math. (Zweiter Abschnitt. Vol.. Friedrich Engel). Soc. M. On the volume elements on a manifold. 961-972. Teubner. vol. unter Mitwirkung von Prof. Lecture Note Series 174. Singapore. and Shatalov. Examples of symplectic structures. London Math. Quantization and unitary representations. [43] Maslov. 1986. [36] Klingenberg. Deformation Theory of Algebras and Structures and Applications. J. [49] Omori. Infinite-dimensional Lie Transformation Groups. [42] Marsden. 1987.. Sternin. S. Moscow.. D. Theory of Perturbations and Asymptotic Methods.. Math. F.. V..-M. Dordrecht. Novikov.Benjamin. W.427. V.. Geometric Perturbation Theory in Physics. pp. Theorie der Transformationsgruppen.. [48] Omohundro. New York. Methods of Noncommutative Analysis. in M. Gerstenhaber. Springer-Verlag. eds. 1963.[35] Kirillov. New York. and Marle. 1965. Theory and Applications. Comm... New York. Asymptotics and Special Functions.P. Kluwer Acad. [38] Libermann. 120 (1965). 1974. 1890.. [39] Lie... Encyclopedia of Mathematical Sciences. Cambridge Univ. Lecture Notes in Mathematics. [40] McDuff. Reidel.. Univ.. 13-36. 1992.J.W. Pub.A. Academic Press.. W. Dr. Dordrecht (1988). 280-296. 1990. de Gruyter (to appear). Cambridge. Soc.. Hazewinkel and M. V. 1982.P. Berlin. 132 . Dynamical Systems IV. 531-562.. Berlin. W. [37] Kostant. New York. S. [41] Mackey.. B. Deformation quantization of Heisenberg manifolds. Phys. I. [44] M´lotte. 4. B. Leipzig. 137-172. D. 170 (1970). Riemannian Geometry. World Scientific. Math. Math.

. I. 1991.M. Autour de l’Approximation Semi-classique. e Sup. Symplectic groupoids. ´ [58] Unterberger. A. Math. New York. 329-346. [53] Sniatycki. Brookline. vol. in Symplectic Geometry and Mathematical Physics: actes du colloque in l’honneur de Jean-Marie Souriau.. 468-488. Symplectic Geometry and Fourier Analysis. Inst. J. 1980. A. Sci. Norm. Advances in Math. Helv. W..M. A.Weinstein. Lecture Notes in Math. Plenum Press. [65] Weinstein. 1991. eds.. P. S´minaire Bourbaki. D. a [52] Segal. and Integrable Systems. Sur les th´or`mes de de Rham. Paris.. Math. Basel.. A. 1–13.S. Bulletin A. Ann.. Springer-Verlag.Dazord and A. Quantification et analyse pseudo-diff´rentielle. Math. [63] Weinstein. Symplectic manifolds and their lagrangian submanifolds.. Progress in Mathematics. Poincar´. Birkh¨user.. R. N. [61] Weil.. Symplectic geometry. Press... eds. Phys. Juin 1994.. A. 6 (1971).. [68] Weinstein. Regional conference series in mathematics 29.. 21 (1988). [60] Wallach. J. Birkh¨user. Quantization of nonlinear systems. 26 (1952) 119-145. 836 (1980). Birkh¨user. a Boston. 27 (1977) 101e 114. 91-128. H. [57] Tulczyjew. Soc. Ann. [59] Vaisman. J. Math. Groupes diff´rentiels. and irrational rotation algebras. Structure des Syst`mes Dynamiques. a [67] Weinstein. Soc. Lectures on Symplectic Manifolds. Deformation quantization. Springer. e 133 .. Dunod. Providence.. no. A.M. in Symplectic Geometry.. Math.. Ec. Comm. 1 (1960). Amer. A. Boston.Donato et al. Symplectic Geometry and Secondary Characteristic Classes. Japan 40 (1988).II.[51] Robert. (new series) 5 (1981). e [55] Souriau. 1987. 1977. A. [66] Weinstein. The Legendre transform. e e [62] Weinstein. 1987. geometric quantization. [54] Souriau. Introduction to Pseudodifferential and Fourier Integral Operators. P.. Geometric Quantization and Quantum Mechanics. 68. 1980. Sci. A. Noncommutative geometry and geometric quantization. Coisotropic calculus and Poisson groupoids. Vols I. 789. J. New York. [64] Weinstein. MSRI Publications. 133-158.M. 1977. J. F. 1970. 705-727.. Groupoids. I. New York.. e [56] Treves.

. Math. K.[69] Weinstein. 417 (1991). S. Oxford. Press. [71] Woodhouse. P. J..M. H. A. Dover Publications.J. 159-189 [70] Weyl.. New York. Geometric Quantization. 1950. 1973. N. Extensions of symplectic groupoids and quantization. and Ishihara. 1992. Tangent and Cotangent Bundles. 134 .. The Theory of Groups and Quantum Mechanics.. Reine Angew.. New York. Oxford U. and Xu. 2nd Ed.. [72] Yano. Differential Geometry Dekker.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful