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

bundle over the base), modulo the antidiagonal action of T
, i.e. t (p, p
t
) = (t p, −t p
t
).
T
bundles with connection
The inﬁnitesimal generator of the T
action on a principal bundle Q is a vector ﬁeld X on
Q deﬁned by the equation
X(p) =
d
dt
t=0
t p.
A connection on Q is a T
invariant 1form ϕ on Q such that ϕ(X) = 1. In terms of a
good cover U of P, the form ϕ satisﬁes h
∗
j
ϕ = dσ + π
∗
ϕ
j
, where dσ denotes the usual form
on T
and the ϕ
j
are 1forms on the U
j
satisfying
ϕ
j
−ϕ
k
= d˜ g
jk
,
where ˜ g
jk
are again Rvalued lifts of the transition functions of Q. The curvature of the
connection ϕ is the unique closed 2form ω on P such that
dϕ = π
∗
ω.
From the compatibility condition for the ϕ
j
, it follows that the Chern class of Q is the
ˇ
Cech
representative of the deRham cohomology class [ω].
Theorem D.2 A closed 2form ω on a manifold P is the curvature form of a connection
on a principal T
bundle Q over P if and only if 'ω, a` ∈ Z
for any a ∈ H
2
(P; Z).
126
Proof. Most published proofs of this result (e.g. [37]) use
ˇ
Cech cohomology and the deRham
isomorphism. We prefer to give the following direct proof by P.Iglesias; see [33] for further
details. Let A(P, p
0
) denote the space of smooth paths γ : [0, 1] →P such that γ(0) = p
0
, and
let e: A(P, p
0
) →P be the endpoint map e(γ) = γ(1). Since the interval [0, 1] is contractible,
there exists a natural contraction of A(P, p
0
) onto the constant map [0, 1] →p
0
. If Y
t
is the
vector ﬁeld which generates this contraction, we deﬁne the 1form Kω on A(P, p
0
) by
Kω =
1
0
(Y
t
e
∗
ω) dt.
Then dσ + Kω is a connection form on the product A(P, p
0
) T
having curvature e
∗
ω.
To complete the proof, we will deﬁne the T
bundle (Q, ϕ) over P with curvature ω as an
appropriate quotient of A(P, p
0
)T
. For this purpose, we call two elements γ, γ
t
∈ A(P, p
0
)
homologous if their diﬀerence is the boundary of a singular 2chain σ in P. The quotient
of A(P, p
0
) by this equivalence relation is the covering space
´
P of P corresponding to the
commutator subgroup of π
1
(P), and thus, H
1
(
´
P, Z
) = 0. An equivalence relation on the
product A(P, p
0
) T
is then deﬁned by the condition that (γ, t) ∼ (γ
t
, t
t
) if γ, γ
t
are
homologous and
t −t
t
=
σ
ω,
where ∂σ = γ −γ
t
. The quotient of A(P, p
0
) T
by this equivalence relation is a principal
T
bundle
´
Q over
´
P with connection ´ ϕ having curvature π
∗
ω, where π:
´
P →P is the natural
projection.
If H
1
(P; Z
) = 0, then
´
P = P, and the proof is complete. Otherwise, let s be any map
from H
1
(P; Z
) into the space of loops based at p
0
which assigns a representative to each
homology class. A T
valued group cocycle on H
1
(P; Z
) is then deﬁned by
φ(h, h
t
) =
σ
ω,
where ∂σ = s(h + h
t
) −(s(h) + s(h
t
)) . Since this cocycle is symmetric, it deﬁnes a central
extension Γ of H
1
(P; Z
) which acts naturally on
´
Q by
(h, τ)[γ, z] = [s(h) γ, z + τ].
Since T
is divisible, the extension Γ is isomorphic to the product T
H
1
(P; Z
), and any
choice of isomorphism deﬁnes an action of H
1
(P; Z
) on
´
Q which preserves the connection
´ ϕ. The quotient of
´
Q is the desired principal T
bundle Q over P.
2
A connection ϕ on a principal T
bundle Q
π
→ P induces a connection on the inverse −Q
of Q whose local representatives are of the form dσ − ϕ
j
, where ϕ is locally represented by
dσ+ϕ
j
. Similarly, connections ϕ and ϕ
t
on the T
bundles Q, Q
t
over P induce a connection
ϕ + ϕ
t
on the product Q
P
Q
t
deﬁned locally by dσ + ϕ
j
+ ϕ
t
j
.
127
Two principal T
bundles with connection (Q, ϕ), (Q
t
, ϕ
t
) over P are said to be isomorphic
provided that there exists an isomorphism f : Q → Q
t
of the underlying principal bundles
which satisﬁes f
∗
ϕ
t
= ϕ. A check of the deﬁnition shows that (Q, ϕ), (Q
t
, ϕ
t
) are isomorphic
if and only if (Q
P
−Q
t
, ϕ − ϕ
t
) is isomorphic to the trivial bundle (P T
, dS). Since
curvature is obviously invariant under isomorphisms of principal T
bundles with connection,
the classiﬁcation of such bundles reduces to the classiﬁcation of ﬂat connections on trivial
T
bundles over P.
A connection ϕ on a principal T
bundle Q
π
→ P is said to be ﬂat if dϕ = 0. In this
case, the local representatives h
∗
j
ϕ = dσ + ϕ
j
have the property that ϕ
j
= d˜ s
j
for functions
˜ s
j
: U
j
→ R. Denoting by s
j
the composition of ˜ s
j
with the projection R → T
, we ﬁnd
that the functions s
jk
= s
j
−s
k
deﬁne transition functions for a trivial T
principal bundle
over P. On the other hand, the compatibility condition for the ϕ
j
implies that s
jk
− g
jk
is
constant for each j, k, and so there exists an isomorphism f : Q → P T
. It is easy to
check that if ϕ
0
is the trivial connection on P T
, then
ϕ −f
∗
ϕ
0
= π
∗
β
for some closed 1form β on P. The cohomology class [β] induced by this form in
ˇ
H
1
(P; T
)
is called the holonomy of the (ﬂat) connection ϕ.
Theorem D.3 Two ﬂat connections ϕ,ϕ
t
on the trivial principal T
bundle Q = P T
over
P are isomorphic if and only if they have equal holonomy. Moreover, the map (Q, ϕ) →[β
ϕ
]
induces a bijection from the space of isomorphism classes of ﬂat connections on the trivial
T
bundle with
ˇ
H
1
(P; T
).
A section s of a principal T
bundle Q over P with connection ϕ is called parallel provided
that s
∗
ϕ = 0. The map s
Q
: Q →Q associated to a parallel section deﬁnes an isomorphism
of (Q, ϕ) with the trivial T
bundle equipped with the trivial connection ϕ = dσ. Thus, we
have:
Corollary D.4 A principal T
bundle Q over P with a ﬂat connection admits a parallel
section if and only if (Q, ϕ) has zero holonomy.
2
Associated line bundles
A representation ρ: T
→U(1) enables us to associate to any principal T
bundle Q →P a
complex line bundle E →P deﬁned explicitly as the quotient of QC by the T
action
t (p, z) = (t p, ρ
−1
(t)z).
The space of functions g : Q →C satisfying the condition
g(t p) = ρ
−1
(t)g(p)
128
is identiﬁed with the space of sections of E by the assignment g → s
G
, where the section
s
g
: P →E is deﬁned by the requirement that
s
g
(x) = [(p, g(p))],
for any element p of π
−1
(x).
129
References
[1] Abraham, R., and Marsden, J.E., Foundations of Mechanics, 2nd edition, Ben
jamin/Cummings, Reading, 1978.
[2] Arnol’d, V.I., Mathematical Methods of Classical Mechanics, Graduate Texts in
Math. 60, SpringerVerlag, New York, 1978.
[3] Arnol’d, V.I., On a characteristic class entering into conditions of quantization,
Funct. Anal. Appl. 1 (1967) 113.
[4] Arnol’d, V.I., Catastrophe theory (3rd edition), SpringerVerlag, New York, 1992.
[5] Arnol’d, V.I., Symplectic geometry and topology, preprint 1993.
[6] Arnol’d, V.I., and Givental’, A.B., Symplectic geometry, Dynamical systems IV,
V.I. Arnol’d and S.P. Novikov, eds., Encyclopedia of Mathematical Sciences, Vol. 4,
SpringerVerlag, New York, 1990, pp. 1136.
[7] Atiyah, M.F., The Geometry and Physics of Knots, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cam
bridge, 1990.
[8] Audin,M., The Topology of Torus Actions on Symplectic Manifolds, Progress in
Math. vol. 93, Birkh¨auser, Basel, 1991.
[9] Bayen, F., Flato, M., Fronsdal, C., Lichnerowicz, A., and Sternheimer, D., Defor
mation theory and quantization, I and II, Ann. Phys. 111, (1977), 61151.
[10] Berezin, F.A., Some remarks about the associated envelope of a Lie algebra, Funct.
Anal. Appl. 1, (1967), 91102.
[11] Berezin, F.A., Quantization, Math USSR Izv. 8 (1974), 11091165.
[12] Besse, A. Manifolds All of Whose Geodesics are Closed, Ergebnisse der Math. 93
SpringerVerlag, Berlin, 1978.
[13] Bohm, D., Quantum Theory, PrenticeHall, New York, 1951.
[14] Bott, R. and Tu, L, Diﬀerential Forms in Algebraic Topology, SpringerVerlag, New
York, 1982.
[15] Boutet de Monvel, L., and Guillemin, V., The Spectral Theory of Toeplitz Operators,
Annals. of Math. Studies 99, Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1981.
[16] Br¨ uning, J. and Guillemin, V, Mathematics Past and Present: Fourier Integral Op
erators, SpringerVerlag, Berlin, 1994.
[17] Brylinski, J.L., Loop Spaces, Characteristic Classes, and Geometric Quantization,
Progress in Mathematics vol. 107, Birkh¨auser, Boston, 1992.
130
[18] Connes, A., Noncommutative Geometry, Academic Press, San Diego, 1995.
[19] De Wilde, M., and Lecomte, P., Formal deformations of the Poisson Lie algebra
of a symplectic manifold and starproducts. Existence, equivalence, derivations, in
M. Hazewinkel and M. Gerstenhaber, eds., Deformation Theory of Algebras and
Structures and Applications, Kluwer Acad. Pub., Dordrecht (1988), 897960.
[20] Dirac, P. A. M., The Principles of Quantum Mechanics, Clarenden Press, Oxford,
1930.
[21] Duistermaat, J. J., Fourier Integral Operators, Courant Institute, NYU, New York,
1973. (New edition to be published by Birkh¨auser Boston in 1995.)
[22] Ehresmann, C., Les connexions inﬁnit´esimales dans un espace ﬁbr´e diﬀ´erentiable,
Colloque de Topologie (Espaces Fibr´es) tenu a Bruxelles du 5 au 8 juin, 1950,
Georges Thone, Li`ege and Masson et Cie., Paris, 1951, pp. 2955.
[23] Fedosov, B., A simple geometrical construction of deformation quantization, J. Diﬀ.
Geom. 40 (1994) 213238.
[24] Folland, G.B., Harmonic Analysis in Phase Space, Annals of mathematics studies
122, Princeton University Press, 1989.
[25] Fomenko, A.T., Symplectic Geometry, Gordon and Breach, New York, 1988.
[26] Golubitsky, M., Guillemin, V., Stable Mappings and Their Singularities, Graduate
Texts in Math., vol. 14, SpringerVerlag, (1973).
[27] Gompf, R., New constructions of symplectic manifolds, Ann. Math., to appear.
[28] Guillemin, V., and Sternberg, S., Geometric Asymptotics, Math. Surveys 14, Amer.
Math. Soc., Providence, 1977.
[29] Guillemin, V., and Sternberg, S., Symplectic Techniques in Physics, Cambridge Uni
versity Press, Cambridge, 1984.
[30] Helﬀer, B., Semiclassical analysis for the Schrodinger operator and applications,
Lecture Notes in Math. 1336 (1988).
[31] H¨ormander, L., Fourier integral operators I., Acta Math. 127 (1971) 79183.
[32] H¨ormander, L., The Analysis of Linear Partial Diﬀerential Operators, Vols. 14,
SpringerVerlag, New York, 198390.
[33] Iglesias, P., La trilogie du moment, Ann. Inst. Fourier (to appear).
[34] Karasev, M.V. and Maslov, V.P., Nonlinear Poisson Brackets : Geometry and Quan
tization Translations of mathematical monographs vol. 119, American Mathematical
Society, Providence, R.I., 1993.
131
[35] Kirillov, Geometric quantization, Dynamical Systems IV, V.I. Arnol’d and S.P.
Novikov, eds., Encyclopedia of Mathematical Sciences, Vol. 4, SpringerVerlag, New
York, 1990, pp. 137172.
[36] Klingenberg, W., Riemannian Geometry, deGruyter Studies in Math., Berlin, 1982.
[37] Kostant, B., Quantization and unitary representations, Lecture Notes in Math. 170
(1970), 87208.
[38] Libermann, P., and Marle, C.M., Symplectic Geometry and Analytical Mechanics,
Reidel, Dordrecht, 1987.
[39] Lie, S., Theorie der Transformationsgruppen, (Zweiter Abschnitt, unter Mitwirkung
von Prof. Dr. Friedrich Engel), Leipzig, Teubner, 1890.
[40] McDuﬀ, D., Examples of symplectic structures, Invent. Math. 89 (1987), 1336.
[41] Mackey, G., Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, W.A.Benjamin,
Reading, 1963.
[42] Marsden, J., Lectures on Mechanics, London Math. Soc. Lecture Note Series 174,
Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1992.
[43] Maslov, V.P., Theory of Perturbations and Asymptotic Methods, Moskov. Gos. Univ.,
Moscow, 1965.
[44] M´elotte, D., Invariant deformations of the Poisson Lie algebra of a symplectic man
ifold and star products, in M. Hazewinkel and M. Gerstenhaber, eds., Deformation
Theory of Algebras and Structures and Applications, Kluwer Acad. Pub., Dordrecht
(1988), 961972.
[45] Moser, J., On the volume elements on a manifold, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 120
(1965), 280296.
[46] Nazaikinskii, V., Sternin, B., and Shatalov, V., Methods of Noncommutative Analy
sis, Theory and Applications, Berlin, New York, W. de Gruyter (to appear).
[47] Olver, F.W.J., Asymptotics and Special Functions, Academic Press, New York, 1974.
[48] Omohundro, S., Geometric Perturbation Theory in Physics, World Scientiﬁc, Singa
pore, 1986.
[49] Omori, I., Inﬁnitedimensional Lie Transformation Groups, Lecture Notes in Math
ematics, vol.427, SpringerVerlag, New York, 1975.
[50] Rieﬀel, M., Deformation quantization of Heisenberg manifolds, Comm. Math. Phys.
122 (1989), 531562.
132
[51] Robert, D., Autour de l’Approximation Semiclassique, Progress in Mathematics,
vol. 68, Birkh¨auser, Boston, 1987.
[52] Segal, I., Quantization of nonlinear systems, J. Math. Phys. 1 (1960), 468488.
[53] Sniatycki, J., Geometric Quantization and Quantum Mechanics, SpringerVerlag,
New York, 1980.
[54] Souriau, J.M., Structure des Syst`emes Dynamiques, Dunod, Paris, 1970.
[55] Souriau, J.M., Groupes diﬀ´erentiels, Lecture Notes in Math. 836 (1980), 91128.
[56] Treves, F., Introduction to Pseudodiﬀerential and Fourier Integral Operators.. Vols
I,II. Plenum Press, New York, 1980.
[57] Tulczyjew, W.M., The Legendre transform, Ann. Inst. H. Poincar´e, 27 (1977) 101
114.
[58] Unterberger, A., Quantiﬁcation et analyse pseudodiﬀ´erentielle, Ann. Sci.
´
Ec. Norm.
Sup. 21 (1988), 133158.
[59] Vaisman, I., Symplectic Geometry and Secondary Characteristic Classes, Birkh¨ auser,
Boston, 1987.
[60] Wallach, N. R., Symplectic Geometry and Fourier Analysis, Math. Sci. Press, Brook
line, 1977.
[61] Weil, A., Sur les th´eor`emes de de Rham, Comm. Math. Helv. 26 (1952) 119145.
[62] Weinstein, A., Symplectic manifolds and their lagrangian submanifolds, Advances
in Math. 6 (1971), 329346.
[63] Weinstein, A., Lectures on Symplectic Manifolds, Regional conference series in math
ematics 29, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, 1977.
[64] Weinstein, A., Symplectic geometry, Bulletin A.M.S. (new series) 5 (1981), 1–13.
[65] Weinstein, A., Coisotropic calculus and Poisson groupoids, J. Math. Soc. Japan 40
(1988), 705727.
[66] Weinstein, A., Noncommutative geometry and geometric quantization, in Symplectic
Geometry and Mathematical Physics: actes du colloque in l’honneur de JeanMarie
Souriau, P.Donato et al. eds., Birkh¨auser, Basel, 1991.
[67] Weinstein, A., Symplectic groupoids, geometric quantization, and irrational rotation
algebras, in Symplectic Geometry, Groupoids, and Integrable Systems, P.Dazord and
A.Weinstein, eds., MSRI Publications, Springer, New York, 1991.
[68] Weinstein, A., Deformation quantization, S´eminaire Bourbaki, no. 789, Juin 1994.
133
[69] Weinstein, A., and Xu, P., Extensions of symplectic groupoids and quantization, J.
Reine Angew. Math. 417 (1991), 159189
[70] Weyl, H., The Theory of Groups and Quantum Mechanics, Dover Publications, New
York, 1950.
[71] Woodhouse, N.M.J., Geometric Quantization, 2nd Ed., Oxford U. Press, Oxford,
1992.
[72] Yano, K., and Ishihara, S., Tangent and Cotangent Bundles; Diﬀerential Geometry
Dekker, New York, 1973.
134
.
.
.
. .2 The Maslov correction . .1 Symplectic structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Contents 1 Introduction: The Harmonic Oscillator 2 The WKB Method 2. . . . 4 Quantization in Cotangent Bundles 4. . . . . . . . . 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 . . . . . . . . . .1 Poisson algebras and Poisson manifolds . . . . . . . . . . .3 Symplectic groupoids . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 Mechanics on manifolds . . . . . . .1 5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 5. . . . . . . . . . .3 5 8 8 11 17 17 28 32 36 36 41 46 56 64 64 76 79 83 83 87 . . . . . . . . . . . Symplectic manifolds and mechanics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Symplectic Manifolds 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Geometric Quantization 93 7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Symplectic Category Symplectic reduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.1 Compositions of semiclassical states . . 2. 5 The 5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 Prequantization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4. . .2 Deformation quantization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8. . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 Polarizations and the metaplectic correction . . 3.2 The WKB approximation . . . . . . .4 WKB quantization . . . . . . . . The symplectic category . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98 7. . . . .3 Phase functions and lagrangian submanifolds 4. . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Fourier Integral Operators 6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 Prequantization . . . . . . . . . . . .1 Some HamiltonJacobi preliminaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 8 Algebraic Quantization 8. . . . 93 7. . . . . .2 WKB quantization and compositions . . . . . . 8. . . . . . .3 Quantization of semiclassical states . . . . . . . .2 Cotangent bundles . . . . 6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.
we suggest [1]. one of the ﬁrst to treat the connections between classical and quantum mechanics from a geometric viewpoint. acting not on details (functions. and [56]. complexiﬁcation. written at about the same time. two basic references on quantum mechanics itself are [13] and [20]. For more extensive treatment of the PDE aspects of the subject. On the other hand. [54]. is [41]. Symplectisation belongs to the small set of highest level operations. with special attention to the role of symmetry groups. and in o turn provides a geometric foundation for the further analysis of this and other formulations of quantum mechanics. The book [29] treats further topics in symplectic geometry and mechanics. 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. [46]. etc. a much more complete reference on the subject. we refer to other sources for many details which are omitted here. [60] or [71]. symplectisation) there is as yet no axiomatic theory describing them. but most of them provide too much detail for the reader who just wants to ﬁnd out what the subject is about. in the fall semester of 1992 and again at the Centre Emile Borel (Institut Henri Poincar´) in the spring semester e of 1994. vector ﬁelds. is [28]. Bourbakisation. [8]. A previous paper by one of us [64] referred to “the symplectic creed”. For “geometric quantization”. a topic pretty much ignored in the present notes.. symplectic and contact geometries have encroached on all areas of mathematics. 3 . we show how symplectic geometry arises from the study of semiclassical solutions to the Schr¨dinger equation. [53]. These notes are meant to function as a guide to the literature. but on all the mathematics at once. In mathematics there exist operations on diﬀerent levels: functions acting on numbers. functors). transversality. The pamphlet [63] is in some sense a precursor to these notes. etc. algebraisation. Finally. so every branch of mathematics must ﬁnally display symplectisation. These notes are still not in ﬁnal form. and which can be bypassed on a ﬁrst reading. one may consult [35]. [25]. superisation. As each skylark must display its comb. functors acting on operators.). [2]. operators. it is almost a religion. theorems. it is also a special way of looking at a very broad part of mathematics and its applications. [6]. we refer to [43] for a physicsoriented presentation and to the notes [21] and the treatises [32]. An earlier work. but they have already beneﬁtted from the comments 1 We like the following quotation from [4] very much: In recent years. Although symplectic geometry is like any ﬁeld of mathematics in having its deﬁnitions. 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.Preface These notes are based on a course entitled “Symplectic geometry and geometric quantization” taught by Alan Weinstein at the University of California. For many “symplecticians”. Berkeley. The aim of the course was to give students an introduction to the ideas of microlocal analysis and the related symplectic geometry. For classical mechanics and symplectic geometry. and so on. [38]. [59]. Although some such highest level operations are presently known (for example.1 In these notes. operators acting on functions.
was supported by NSF graduate and postdoctoral fellowships in mathematics. A. We would like to thank the Centre Emile Borel and the Isaac Newton Institute for their hospitality.W. S. was partially supported by NSF Grants DMS9001089 and 9301089.B. During the preparation of these notes. especially Maurice Garay. We welcome further comments.and suggestions of many readers. 4 . and Dmitry Roytenberg. Jim Morehead.
are called Hamilton’s equations. solution curves in the case of the harmonic oscillator are ellipses centered at the origin. 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]). p2 kq 2 H(q. The classical picture The harmonic oscillator in 1 dimension is described by Newton’s diﬀerential equation: m¨ = −kx. ˙ so that Newton’s equation becomes the pair of equations: q= ˙ p m p = −kq. 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. and points in the phase plane move clockwise around each ellipse. we can convert this secondorder ordinary diﬀerential equation into a system of two ﬁrstorder equations. The derivative of H along a solution curve is dH ∂H ∂H = q+ ˙ p = −pq + q p = 0. we set q=x p = mx. which can describe a wide variety of classical mechanical systems with appropriate choices of the function H. p).2 Hamilton’s equations deﬁne a ﬂow on the phase plane representing the timeevolution of the classical system at hand. We note two qualitative features of the hamiltonian description of a system: 1. Introducing the “phase plane” R2 with position and momentum coordinates (q. we will take a “spiral” approach toward the quantization problem. p) = + 2m 2 then we ﬁnd ∂H ∂H p=− ˙ q= ˙ ∂p ∂q These simple equations. we would not have ˙ ˙ arrived at this universal form of the equations. x By a standard procedure. 2 5 .1 Introduction: The Harmonic Oscillator In these notes. Speciﬁcally. 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. ˙ If we now introduce the hamiltonian function H : R2 → R representing the sum of kinetic and potential energies.
Since H represents the total energy of the system. 2m ∂x2 2 is the operator of multiplication by x2 . t) itself may be viewed alternatively as a tdependent function of x. i. a wave function satisfying Schr¨dinger’s equation then corresponds to an integral o curve of the associated ﬂow. R where mx2 as k ∂2 + m x2 . instead. C) representing the time evolution of the quantum system. i ψ ∗ ψ = 1. and its ﬂow preserves area in the phase plane. we may rewrite the Schr¨dinger equation o ˆ def H = − 2 then its squarenorm ρ(x. t) = ψ(x. The quantum mechanical picture In quantum mechanics. ∂q ∂p ∂p ∂q Thus the vector ﬁeld XH is divergencefree. Like Hamilton’s equations in classical mechanics. ∂t A solution ψ of this equation does not represent a classical trajectory. t) satisfying the 1dimensional Schr¨dinger equation: o 2 ∂ψ ∂2ψ k 2 =− + x ψ. Schr¨dinger’s o ∞ equation deﬁnes a vector ﬁeld on C (R. 2. Interpreting the right hand side of this equation as the result of applying to the wave function ψ the operator i ∂ψ ˆ = Hψ. 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.e. the value of H is constant along integral curves of the hamiltonian vector ﬁeld. the motion of the harmonic oscillator is described by a complexvalued wave function ψ(x.i. The description of classical hamiltonian mechanics just given is tied to a particular coordinate system. The divergence of the hamiltonian vector ﬁeld XH = (q. From the latter point of view. p) = ( ∂H . Planck’s constant has the dimensions of action (energy × time). or as a path in the function space C ∞ (R. The wave function ψ(x. C).e. 6 . the Schr¨dinger equation is a general o form for the quantum mechanical description of a large class of systems. ∂t 2m ∂x2 2 Here.. t)2 is interpreted as a probability density for observing the oscillator at the position x at time t. − ∂H ) is ˙ ˙ ∂p ∂q · XH = ∂2H ∂2H − = 0. this property of the ﬂow is interpreted as the law of conservation of energy. if ψ is normalized.
But how can a constant approach zero? Besides the problem of “quantization of equations. we would like to establish that. p) = p2 /2m+kq 2 /2 then corresponds naturally to the operator ˆ H. . The diﬀerence between these choices turns out to become small when → 0. As soon as we wish to “quantize” a more complicated energy function.” we will also treat that of “quantization of solutions. velocities. we will often regard mathematically as a formal parameter or a variable rather than as a ﬁxed number. among a number of other ˆ p ˆ ˆ possibilities. In these notes. Based on the present discussion of the harmonic oscillator. p we associate the diﬀerential operators q → q = mx ˆ ∂ . . and the classical limit is applicable when divided by this unit is much less than 1.” That is. p → p = −i ˆ 7 . But how can a constant with physical dimensions be small? Although there remain some unsettled issues connected with the question. ∂x The classical hamiltonian H(q. but also as a tool for developing approximate solutions to the quantum equations of motion. . For any particular mechanical system. there are usually characteristic distances. for systems which are in some sense macroscopic. one tenuous connection can be drawn as follows. 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. the classical motions described by solutions of Hamilton’s equations lead to approximate solutions of Schr¨dinger’s equation. 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. we run in to the problem that the operators q and p do not commute with one another. such as (1 + q 2 )p2 . Establishing this relation o between classical and quantum mechanics is important. masses. from which a unit of action appropriate to the system can be derived. so ˆ ˆ 2 2 that we are forced to choose between (1 + q )ˆ and p2 (1 + q 2 ). “How can become small?” the answer is essentially the following. To the classical position and momentum observables q.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.
Hamilton’s equations now become q= ˙ For ﬁxed p m p = −V (q). Consider a 1dimensional system with hamiltonian H(q. ˙ ∈ R+ . o As a ﬁrst step toward solving the Schr¨dinger equation. we arrive at the timeindependent Schr¨dinger equao tion: ˆ (H − E) ϕ = 0. o i. 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. and Brillouin. where the method is traced all the way back to 1817. 2m where V (x) is a potential (for example the potential kx2 /2 for the harmonic oscillator). ∂t ∂2 + mV 2m ∂x2 2 where ˆ H=− is the Schr¨dinger operator. including Liouville. (Other names. References [13] and [47] contain a discussion of some of its history. these solutions keep the same form (up to multiplication by a complex scalar of norm 1).e. 2. and Jeﬀreys are sometimes attached to this method.) 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. Green. o we obtain ˆ ω ϕ(x) e−iωt = (Hϕ)(x) e−iωt . nevertheless.1 Some HamiltonJacobi preliminaries In this section we will carry out the ﬁrst step in the WKB method to obtain an approximate solution to the “stationary state” eigenvalue problem arising from the Schr¨dinger equation. Schr¨dinger’s equation assumes the form o i ∂ψ ˆ = Hψ. Substituting this expression for ψ in the Schr¨dinger equation. socalled because as time evolves. Kramers. For convenience. so the following discussion is absolutely central to these notes. 8 . p) = p2 + V (q). we look for stationary states. solutions of the form ψ(x.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. t) = ϕ(x) e−iωt . after Wentzel. we will still refer to the method as WKB. Eliminating the factor e−iωt above. Also see [5].
to kill the other two terms. and one has an abundance of exact solutions of the Schr¨dinger equation which are oscillatory and bounded. 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. we ﬁnd that ˆ (H − E) ϕ = 0 ⇔ ( ξ)2 = 2m(E − V ). o Such a wave function is not squareintegrable and as such is said to be “unnormalizable”. which has a “deﬁnite value” in this state. where as usual we set p = S . The basic idea at this stage of the WKB method is that. This proposed form of the solution is the simplest version of the WKB ansatz. but which has a deﬁnite momentum (since it is an eigenfunction of the momentum operator p). This equation means that ϕ is to be an eigenfunction of the linear diﬀerential ˆ operator H. for some realvalued function S known as a phase function. To understand the phase function S geometrically. which are unbounded and admit no physical interpretation. it represents a particle which is equally likely to be anywhere in space. and there are only real exponential solutions. the eigenvalue E represents the energy of the system. and so we are dealing with a free particle. our ﬁrstorder approximation attempt will ignore the last term in brackets.3 When E < V . These two uses of the term “phase” seem to be unrelated! 9 . we consider the classical phase4 plane R2 T ∗ R with coordinates (q. and in this case we have ˆ (H − E) ϕ = (S (x))2 i + (V − E) − S (x) eiS(x)/ . the (real) value of ξ is thus determined up to a choice of sign.e. Suppose for the moment that the potential V is constant.where E = ω. if V varies with x. a more general solution candidate is then ϕ(x) = eiS(x)/ . o 3 4 (S (x))2 + V (x) = E. Trying a solution of the form ϕ(x) = eixξ for some constant ξ. 2m See [55] for a grouptheoretic interpretation of such states. The diﬀerential dS = S dx can be viewed as a mapping dS : R → T ∗ R. in which case the force −V (x) is zero. S (x) = ± 2m(E − V (x)). the function S may be taken as the phase function of a ﬁrstorder approximate solution of Schr¨dinger’s equation. we require that S satisfy the eikonal or HamiltonJacobi equation: H(x. For V < E. S (x)) = i. p). then ξ should vary with x as well. Then S satisﬁes the HamiltonJacobi equation if and only if the image of dS lies in the level manifold H −1 (E). 2m 2m Since we will consider to be “small”. the ˆ constant ξ is imaginary.
10 . the behavior of an oscillator is nevertheless completely described by its trajectory. is the starting point of the geometrical approach to microlocal analysis. As before. 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. the ansatz ϕ again constitutes a ﬁrstorder approximate solution to the timeindependent Schr¨dinger equation. Such submanifolds are called lagrangian. 3. It is also clear that the curve fails to project diﬀeomorphically onto R.. if we consider a WKB ansatz of the form ϕ = eiS/ . . but the integral of p dq around the curve equals the enclosed nonzero area. Since L is 1dimensional. p) = is ˆ H=− p2 i + V (q) 2m 2 ∆ + mV . L is projectable. which we will clarify later. 2m where ∆ denotes the ordinary Laplacian. A regular level curve of the hamiltonian is an ellipse L. 2. the Schr¨dinger o operator corresponding to the classical hamiltonian H(q.The preceding discussion generalizes easily to higher dimensions. xn . . This idea. then ˆ (H − E) ϕ = S 2m 2 + (V − E) − i ∆S eiS/ 2m will be O( ) provided that S satisﬁes the HamiltonJacobi equation: H x1 . ∂S ∂S . the pullback to L of the form p dq is closed. The image L = im(dS) of the diﬀerential of an admissible phase function S is characterized by three geometric properties: 1. in which “exact” is replaced by “closed”.. For example. the level sets for the 1dimensional harmonic oscillator are lagrangian submanifolds in the phase plane. L is an ndimensional submanifold of H −1 (E).. In Rn . o n We will call a phase function S : R → R admissible if it satisﬁes the HamiltonJacobi equation. While many of the basic constructions of microlocal analysis are motivated by operations on these projectable submanifolds of T ∗ Rn R2n . In other words. applications of the theory require us to extend the constructions to more general ndimensional submanifolds of R2n satisfying only a weakened version of condition (2) above. . so its pullback to L is not exact. . . The restriction of the canonical projection π : T ∗ Rn → Rn to L induces a diﬀeomorphism L Rn . while (H − E) ϕ = O( ). From the classical standpoint. ∂x1 ∂xn = S(x) 2m 2 + V (x) = E. The pullback to L of the form αn = j pj dqj on R2n is exact. ˆ Since ϕ is of order zero in .
v) = −dH(v) for every tangent vector v. and thus.e. 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. i. 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. If L is a lagrangian submanifold of a level set of H.For now.2 The WKB approximation Returning to our WKB ansatz for a stationarystate solution of the Schr¨dinger equation. then T L lies in the kernel of dH at all points of L. If the lagrangian submanifold L is locally closed. in other words. and there is no reason for this to be constant. 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. skewsymmetric bilinear form. 2. dαn = −dH. HamiltonJacobi theorem . ϕ is an eigenfunction of H with eigenvalue E. or. subspaces of Tp R2n on which dαn vanishes can be at most ndimensional. the quantity ϕ(x)2 represents the probability of the particle being at the position x. in fact. The restriction of dαn to the tangent space Tp R2n of R2n at any point p deﬁnes a nondegenerate. ∂pj ∂qj ∂qj ∂pj j A simple computation shows that XH and the form αn are related by the equation XH i. the 2form dαn vanishes on the subspace of Tp R2n generated by Tp L and XH (p) for each p ∈ L. as we will see in the next chapter. this theorem implies that L is invariant under the ﬂow of XH . we want to note an important relationship between lagrangian submanifolds of R2n and hamiltonian ﬂows. We may therefore hope to ﬁnd a better approximate solution by multiplying ϕ by an “amplitude function” a ϕ(x) = eiS(x)/ a(x). In quantum mechanics. Hamilton’s equations associate the vector ﬁeld XH = q ˙ ∂ ∂ +p ˙ = ∂q ∂p ∂H ∂ ∂H ∂ − . dαn (XH . where its potential energy is higher.. 11 . in other words. it is at least intuitively plausible that a particle is more likely to be found where it moves more slowly. Recall that to a function H : R2n → R. o n we recall that if S : R → R is an admissible phase function. ˆ Up to terms of order . and we have the following result. These remarks imply that XH is tangent to L.
we might naively attempt to use the same formula when im(dS) is replaced by a nonprojectable lagrangian submanifold of H −1 (E). 12 . For x < E. This condition on a is known as the homogeneous transport equation: ∂a ∂S a∆S + 2 = 0.If S is again an admissible phase function. ∂xj ∂xj j If S is an admissible phase function. then a is a smooth solution to the homogeneous transport equation. Consider the next approximation ϕ = eiS/ (a0 + a1 ). as our physical reasoning predicted. the unbounded potential V (x) = √ x2 in the case of the harmonic oscillator. we now obtain: ˆ (H − E) ϕ = − 1 i 2m a∆S + 2 j ∂a ∂S ∂xj ∂xj + 2 ∆a eiS/ . Solving this equation directly. Notice that a = ϕ is largest where V is largest. the homogeneous transport equation amounts to aS + 2a S = 0. for example. observe that these occur precisely at the projected image of those points of L where the √ projection itself becomes singular. and a is an amplitude which satisﬁes the homogeneous transport equation. however. Since S is assumed to satisfy the HamiltonJacobi equation. we have S = 2m(E − V ). Example 2. we obtain a2 S + 2aa S = (a2 S ) = 0 c ⇒ a= √ S for some constant c. ˆ If a is chosen to kill the coeﬃcient of on the right. To generate better approximate solutions to the eigenfunction problem. Outside the interval x ≤ E. then ϕ will be an eigenfunction of H modulo terms of order O( 2 ). a has (asymptotic) singularities. the function a assumes complex values. Since the expression above for a does not depend explicitly on the phase function S. we can extend the procedure above by adding to the original amplitude a = a0 certain appropriately chosen functions of higher order in . [4(E − V )] 4 If E > V (x) for all x ∈ R. and thus c a= 1 . the function a is still welldeﬁned √ up to a multiplicative constant. Consider. then the secondorder solution ϕ = eiS/ a is called the semiclassical approximation.1 In 1 dimension. At x = E.
conversely. we obtain: ˆ (H − E) ϕ = − 1 i 2m 2 a1 ∆S + 2 j ∂a1 ∂S − i∆a0 ∂xj ∂xj + 3 ∆a1 eiS(x)/ . p. The order of a is the index of its principal part. A WKB ˆ “solution” to the eigenfunction problem Hϕ = Eϕ is then an equivalence class of functions of the form ϕ = eiS/ a. Evidently. Such a function is said to be represented by a formal asymptotic expansion of the form ∞ ak k . It is obvious that any dependent function which extends smoothly to = 0 is represented by an asymptotic series. By an dependent function f on Rn we will mean a function f : Rn × R+ → C. the diﬀerence K f − k=0 ak k is O( K+1 ) locally uniformly in x. 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 ). where S satisﬁes the HamiltonJacobi equation. and a theorem of E. ∂xj ∂xj n In general. its coeﬃcients ak are uniquely determined. then each asymptotic series determines a unique equivalence class. for each K ∈ Z+ . If we consider as equivalent any two dependent functions whose diﬀerence is O( ∞ ).Borel (see [28. ∂xj ∂xj This situation can be described in the terminology of asymptotic series as follows. ϕ will be a solution of the timeindependent Schr¨dinger equation modulo terms o of order O( 3 ) provided that a1 satisﬁes the inhomogeneous transport equation a1 ∆S + 2 j ∂a1 ∂S = i∆a0 . any asymptotic series can be “summed” to yield such a function. O( k ) for all k.Assuming that eiS/ a0 is a semiclassical approximate solution. where each coeﬃcient ak is a smooth k=0 complexvalued function on Rn .e. where is viewed as a parameter ranging in R+ . 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. i.28]) tells us that. the function ak satisﬁes the inhomogeneous transport equation: ak ∆S + 2 j ∂ak ∂S = i∆ak−1 . 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. a0 satisﬁes the homogeneous transport equation. and for each k > 0. When f admits such an expansion.
∂S ) = E.with the property that its principal part ap satisﬁes the homogeneous transport equation ap ∆S + 2 j ∂ap ∂S = 0. H 14 . a function S satisfying the HamiltonJacobi equation H(x. we saw that a ﬁrstorder WKB approximate solution ϕ = eiS/ to the timeindependent Schr¨dinger equation depended on the choice of an admissible phase function.1. suppose that a is a function on Rn which satisﬁes the homogeneous transport equation: ∂a ∂S = 0. o Geometry of the transport equation In Section 2. j which means that the divergence of the vector ﬁeld a2 S is zero. To begin. The projection XH of XH L onto Rn (the (x) reminds us of the coordinate x on Rn ) there(x) fore coincides with S. and so the homogeneous transport equation says that a2 XH is divergencefree for the canonical density dx = dx1 ∧ · · · ∧ dxn  on Rn . ∂xj ∂xj and for k > p. Notice ﬁrst that the restriction to L of the hamiltonian vector ﬁeld associated to H(q. p) = p2 /2 + V (q) is i XH L = j (x) ∂S ∂ ∂V ∂ − ∂xj ∂qj ∂qj ∂pj . we can rewrite it as: ∂ ∂xj a2 ∂S ∂xj = 0. a∆S + 2 ∂xj ∂xj j After multiplying both sides of this equation by a. But it is better to reformulate this condition as: LX (x) (a2 dx) = 0. We now wish to interpret and generalize in a similar way the semiclassical approximation with its amplitude included. o i. Rather than considering the transport equation as a condition on the vector ﬁeld a2 S (on Rn ) per se. we can lift all of this activity to the lagrangian submanifold L = im(dS).. The generalized or ∂x geometric version of such a solution was a lagrangian submanifold of the level set H −1 (E). the ak satisfy the recursive transport equations: ak ∆S + 2 j ∂ak ∂S = i∆ak−1 .e. ∂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( ∞ ).
which we will denote o ˆ .e. stationary classical states are simply those lagrangian submanifolds of R2 which coincide with the regular level sets of the classical hamiltonian H(q. (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. Stationary states ˆ are then eigenvectors of the Schr¨dinger operator H. From this new point of view. together with a square root of this volume element. There is a unique (up to a constant) invariant volume element for the hamiltonian ﬂow of H on each level curve H. by the equation momentarily as Hfun ˆ ˆ H(adx1/2 ) = (Hfun a)dx1/2 . Another substantial advantage of the geometric interpretation of the semiclassical approximation is that the concept of an invariant halfdensity depends only on the hamiltonian vector ﬁeld XH and not on the function S. constitutes a semiclassical stationary state for the harmonic oscillator. o 15 . Such a state is stationary when L lies in a level set of the classical hamiltonian and a is invariant under its ﬂow. a (geometric) semiclassical state should be deﬁned as a lagrangian submanifold L of R2n equipped with a halfdensity a. Example 2. this equation is satisﬁed if and only if the pullback of a2 dx to L via the projection π is invariant under the ﬂow of XH . This discussion leads us to another change of viewpoint. then eiS/ (dS)∗ a is a secondorder approximate solution to the timeindependent Schr¨dinger equation. i. and since the Lie derivative is invariant under diﬀeomorphism. Any such level curve L. invariant by XH .1). but by halfdensities on conﬁguration space Rn . p) = (p2 + kq 2 )/2. This observation. namely that the quantum states themselves should be represented. which is deﬁned on the space of smooth o halfdensities in terms of the old Schr¨dinger operator on functions. so it makes sense on any lagrangian submanifold of R2n lying in a level set of H. not by functions.2 Recall that in the case of the 1dimensional harmonic oscillator.that is. (See Appendix A for a discussion of densities of fractional order.) In other words. we can express the result of our analysis as follows: If S is an admissible phase function and a is a halfdensity on L = im(dS) which is invariant under the ﬂow of the classical hamiltonian. The singularities arise only when we try to transfer the halfdensity from L down to conﬁguration space. together with the fact that it is the square of a which appears in the density π ∗ (a2 dx). we transfer the factor of a2 from the vector ﬁeld XH = S to the density dx. elements of the intrinsic Hilbert space HRn (see Appendix A). the semiclassical state described in the preceding example is a perfectly smooth object everywhere on the lagrangian submanifold L. suggests that a solution of the homogeneous transport equation should be represented geometrically by a halfdensity on L. Since XH is tangent to L by the HamiltonJacobi theorem.
which lie beyond the scope of these notes. This will require the concept of symplectic manifold. we have noted the following correspondences between classical and quantum mechanics: Object basic space state Classical version R2n Quantum version H Rn lagrangian submanifold of R2n with halfdensity on Rn halfdensity Hamilton’s equations Schr¨dinger equation o ˆ operator H on smooth halfdensities ˆ eigenvector of H timeevolution generator of evolution function H on R2n stationary state lagrangian submanifold in level set of H with invariant halfdensity Proceeding further. we will focus on two aspects of the semiclassical approximation. o however. we will start with an invariant halfdensity on a (possibly nonprojectable) lagrangian submanifold of R2n and attempt to use this data to construct an explicit semiclassical approximate solution to Schr¨dinger’s o equation on Rn . involves some additional diﬃculties. we will extend the geometric picture presented above to systems with more general phase spaces. we will “quantize” semiclassical states in these symplectic manifolds. we will try to construct a space of quantum states corresponding to a general classical phase space. 16 . First. Second. Then we will try to construct asymptotic quantum states corresponding to halfdensities on lagrangian submanifolds. we could attempt to interpret a solution of the recursive system of inhomogeneous transport equations on Rn as an asymptotic halfdensity on L in order to arrive at a geometric picture of a complete WKB solution to the Schr¨dinger equation. This. which is introduced in the following chapter. Speciﬁcally. Instead.In summary. notably the lack of a geometric interpretation of the inhomogeneous transport equations. In particular.
y). our main goal at this point is to develop the tools needed to extend the hamiltonian viewpoint to phase spaces associated to general ﬁnitedimensional conﬁguration spaces. we ﬁrst study such forms pointwise. skewsymmetric bilinear forms. mdimensional vector space. Linear symplectic structures Suppose that V is a real. i. A linear endomorphism of a symplectic vector space (V. then the form ω is said to be nonde˜ generate. we will introduce the notion of a symplectic structure on a manifold. we saw that Hamilton’s equations associate a vector ﬁeld XH on R2n satisfying XH dαn = −dH. In this section. then ω is called a linear symplectic structure on V . collecting pertinent facts about nondegenerate. 3. 63] for thorough discussions of the topics in this chapter. or in other words if V ⊥ = {0}. if in addition ω is skewsymmetric.3 Symplectic Manifolds In this chapter. a lagrangian submanifold of R2n was deﬁned as an ndimensional submanifold L ⊂ R2n on which the exterior derivative of the form αn = pi dqi vanishes. ˜ The ωorthogonal to a subspace W ⊂ V is deﬁned as W ⊥ = {x ∈ V : W ⊂ ker ω (x)}. While some discussion will be devoted to certain general properties of symplectic manifolds. Finally. 29. We then turn to the deﬁnition of symplectic manifolds. These points already indicate the central role played by the form dαn in the study of hamiltonian systems in R2n . motivated for the most part by the situation in R2n . More general symplectic manifolds will reappear as the focus of more sophisticated quantization programs in later chapters. to a function 2n H : R → R.e.1 Symplectic structures In Section 2. ˜ If ω is an isomorphism.1. our proof of the HamiltonJacobi theorem relied on the nondegeneracy of the 2form dαn . We refer to [6. to cotangent bundles. 17 . ω) which preserves the form ω is called a linear symplectic transformation. and the group of all such transformations is denoted by Sp(V ). A bilinear form ω : V × V → R gives rise to a linear map ω: V → V ∗ ˜ deﬁned by contraction: ω (x)(y) = ω(x. the correct generalization of the hamiltonian picture to arbitrary conﬁguration spaces relies similarly on the use of 2forms with certain additional properties.
With respect to a basis {xi } of E and a dual basis {λi } of E ∗ . so that ω is represented by an invertible skewadjoint operator K : V → V .e.Example 3. i. positivedeﬁnite bilinear form on V . then T is symplectic provided that At C. B t D are symmetric. ω) admits a compatible complex structure. y) = Kx. 18 . the form ω is represented by the matrix 0 I ω= . if K : E → F is an isomorphism.e.1 If E is any real ndimensional vector space with dual E ∗ . J·) deﬁnes a symmetric. y) and ω(x. Since the determinant of a skewsymmetric m × m matrix is zero if m is odd. D = (At )−1 . the existence of a linear symplectic structure on a vector space V implies that V is necessarily evendimensional and therefore admits a complex structure. Jx) > 0 for all x. Let . In other words. and so GL(E) is isomorphic to a subgroup Gl(E) of Sp(V ). i. λ) → (Kx. Proof. be a symmetric. y . then a linear symplectic structure on V = E ⊕ E ∗ is given by ω((x. and At D − C t B = I. ω(x.2 Every symplectic vector space (V. J is compatible with ω (we also call it ωcompatible) if J : V → V is a linear symplectomorphism and gJ (·. λ )) = λ (x) − λ(x ). A complex structure is said to be compatible with a symplectic structure on V if ω(Jx. −I 0 It follows that if a linear operator on V is given by the real 2n × 2n matrix T = A B C D . Theorem 3. a linear endomorphism J such that J 2 = −I. (x . Note in particular that these conditions are satisﬁed if A ∈ GL(E). Jy) = ω(x. ·) = ω(·. (K −1 )∗ λ) deﬁnes a linear symplectomorphism between E ⊕ E ∗ and F ⊕ F ∗ equipped with these linear symplectic structures. y ∈ V . λ). positivedeﬁnite inner product on V . and B = C = 0. More generally. then the association (x.
and so J 2 = −JJ t = − id. are positivedeﬁnite. 2 Corollary 3. ﬁrst note that ω(Jx. O(V ). ·).3 The collection J of ωcompatible complex structures on a symplectic vector space (V. ·) + iω(·. Also. · = gJ (·.√ The operator K admits a polar decomposition K = RJ. ω) is called the symplectic orthogonal to W . J = R−1 K is orthogonal. w) + ω(v. where R = KK t is positivedeﬁnite symmetric. g. O(V ) equals U (V ). Jx) = Kx. Jy = JKx. it follows that W ⊥⊥ = W and dim W ⊥ = dim V − dim W 19 . Proof. ˜ dim(V ) = 2k implies dim(sp(V)) = dim(Sp(V)) = k(2k + 1). y = ω(x. Distinguished subspaces The ωorthogonal to a subspace W of a symplectic vector space (V. Aw). J). this implies the corollary. gJ . this means that the intersection of any two of Sp(V ). Jy = Kx. GL(V.e. In terms of the automorphism groups Sp(V ). J). the complex structure J constructed in the preceding proof is continuous. To see that J is ωcompatible. · . consider a 1parameter family of maps etA associated to some linear map A : V → V . From the skewsymmetry of K it follows that J t = −J. x > 0. GL(V. and the composition J → P → J of these maps equals the identity on J . and U (V ) of ω. since R and . etA w) = ω(Av. ω(x. 2 If J is ωcompatible. Consequently. it follows that the map which assigns to a form . For any v. Since P is contractible. ω) is contractible. a hermitian structure on V is deﬁned by ·. y). t=0 and so A ∈ sp(V) if and only if the linear map ω ◦ A : V → V ∗ is selfadjoint. By the uniqueness of the polar decomposition. Jx = Rx. i. J is a complex structure on V . and ·. As is easily checked. positivedeﬁnite bilinear forms on V . The association J → gJ described above deﬁnes a continuous map from J into the space P of symmetric. Jx = JRx. a linear transformation T ∈ GL(V ) which preserves any two of the structures ω. we have d dt ω(etA v. J.. and RJ = JR. J on V preserves the third and therefore preserves the hermitian structure. From the nondegeneracy of the symplectic form. To determine the Lie algebra sp(V) of Sp(V ). w ∈ V . Jy) = KJx.
any subspace contained in its orthogonal will be called isotropic. In general. we note that if codim W = 1. the skewsymmetry of ω implies that W ⊂ W ⊥ . W ⊥ = W . and is called lagrangian. hence isotropic. Any selforthogonal subspace is simultaneously isotropic and coisotropic. If (V. i. we can apply this remark inductively to conclude that every ﬁnitedimensional symplectic vector space contains a lagrangian subspace. B of V . the restriction of ω to certain subspaces Z ⊂ V may again be nondegenerate. ω) is a 2ndimensional symplectic vector space and W ⊂ V is any isotropic subspace with dim(W ) < n. this is equivalent to saying that Z ∩Z ⊥ = {0} or Z + Z ⊥ = V . Dually. ω) is a symplectic vector space. then: 20 . If T : V → V is a linear symplectic map. then W ⊥ is 1dimensional.4 In E ⊕ E ∗ with its usual symplectic structure. and W ⊥ ⊂ W ⊥⊥ = W .e. Such subspaces are called symplectic. B ⊥ ⊂ A⊥ whenever A ⊂ B. and A ⊂ V is an arbitrary subspace. Beginning with any 1dimensional subspace of V .5 Suppose that (V. both E and E ∗ are lagrangian subspaces. More generally. It also follows from the deﬁnition of this structure that the graph of a linear map B : E → E ∗ is a lagrangian subspace of E ⊕ E ∗ if and only if B is selfadjoint. then the dimension relation above implies that 1 dim W = 2 dim V . The subspace W of V spanned by W ∪{w} is then isotropic and dim(W ) = dim(W )+1. Finally. From this observation it follows that for every isotropic subspace W of a (ﬁnitedimensional) symplectic vector space V which is not lagrangian. Various subspaces of a symplectic vector space are related as follows. According to these deﬁnitions. At the other extreme. there exists an isotropic subspace W of V which properly contains W . there exists a nonzero vector w ∈ W ⊥ \W . For instance. if W is selforthogonal.for any subspace W ⊂ V . ˜ Example 3. Example 3. a subspace W ⊂ V is isotropic if the restriction of the symplectic form to W is identically zero. The kernel of a nonzero covector α ∈ V ∗ is a codimension1 coisotropic subspace ker α of V whose symplectic orthogonal (ker α)⊥ is the distinguished 1dimensional subspace of ker α spanned by ω −1 (α). we denote by V ⊕V the vector space V ⊕V equipped with the symplectic structure ω ⊕ −ω. Also. Since 2n = dim(W ) + dim(W ⊥ ). Lemma 3. (A + B)⊥ = A⊥ ∩ B ⊥ and (A ∩ B)⊥ = A⊥ + B ⊥ for any pair of subspaces A. spaces W satisfying the condition W ⊥ ⊂ W are called coisotropic or involutive. then the graph of T is a lagrangian subspace of V ⊕ V . Note that the symplectic orthogonal W ⊥ might not be an algebraic complement to W . if dim W = 1.6 If L is a lagrangian subspace of a symplectic vector space V . In particular.
2 Example 3.8 Every 2ndimensional symplectic vector space is linearly symplectomorphic to (R2n . Tε y) = (1 + ε2 ) ω(x. if A is coisotropic.9 Suppose that V is a symplectic vector space with a ωcompatible complex structure J and let Tε : V → V be given by Tε (x) = x + εJx. For any two lagrangian subspaces L. we can choose orthonormal bases 21 .1). ωn ).e. and so A is a coisotropic subspace. then L. and since every ndimensional vector space is isomorphic to Rn . If J is a ωcompatible complex structure on V and L ⊂ V a lagrangian subspace. 2. y). A pair L.2 also implies the following useful result. If W ⊂ L is any complementary subspace to I ⊥ ∩ L. then A⊥ ⊂ A.5 implies that there is a lagrangian subspace L with A⊥ ⊂ L.1. Lemma 3. then I + L ⊂ W + I ⊥ . L is transverse to A if and only if L ∩ A⊥ = {0}. Passing to orthogonals. 1. Proof. L ⊂ A if and only if A⊥ ⊂ L. Statement (1) follows from the properties of the operation ⊥ and the equation L = L⊥ . If L. L of V . Lε is a lagrangian subspace for all ε > 0. Using the innerproduct gJ on V induced by J. Thus. L are any lagrangian subspaces of V . L + A = V if and only if (L + A)⊥ = L ∩ A⊥ = {0}.5. then A⊥ is isotropic. W ⊥ ∩ I ⊂ I ∩ L = 0.7 Note that statement (1) of Lemma 3. JL is a lagrangian splitting. we have L ⊂ A. and so W ⊥ ∩ I ⊂ I ⊥ ∩ L. 2. there is a lagrangian subspace L transverse to both L and L. In this case.6 implies that if L ⊂ A. Conversely. Proof. Similarly. Suppose that V is a symplectic vector space with an isotropic subspace I and a lagrangian subspace L such that I ∩ L = 0. Theorem 3. Since I ⊥ ∩ W = 0 by our choice of W . every symplectic vector space contains a lagrangian subspace. By Example 3. a subspace C ⊂ V is coisotropic if and only if it contains a lagrangian subspace. i. the preceding remarks prove the following linear “normal form” result: Theorem 3. which in turn ∗ gives rise to a linear symplectomorphism between V and L ⊕ L equipped with its canonical symplectic structure (see Example 3. and Example 3. Thus. it follows that I + W is a symplectic subspace of V . proving statement (2). It is easy to check that Tε is a conformal linear symplectic map. then Lε = Tε (L) is a lagrangian subspace transverse to L for small ε > 0. L of transverse lagrangian subspaces of V is said to deﬁne a lagrangian splitting of V . Thus. an isomorphism of V satisfying ω(Tε x. the map ω deﬁnes an isomorphism L ˜ L∗ .
7 to conclude that A is nonsingular. Bi be the matrices obtained with respect to L as in the proof above. Setting I = span{vi }i=k+1 and W = span{wi }n i=k+1 . Thus. the function t → det(Ai + tBi ) is a nonzero polynomial and therefore has ﬁnitely many zeros.10 The unitary group associated to an ωcompatible complex structure J on V acts transitively on L(V ). det2 22 . we can apply Example 3.j=k+1 and B is some (n−k)×(n−k) matrix. Lemma 3. the lagrangian subspace Lε is transverse to L. J The choice of J also deﬁnes a complex determinant U (V ) → S 1 . {wi } of L and L. the lagrangian subspace Tt (L) is transverse to all Li for almost every t ∈ R. so that for i = 1. which in turn 1 2 gives rise to a unitary transformation L1 ⊕ JL1 → L2 ⊕ JL2 mapping L1 onto L2 . To prove (2). Let {Li } be a countable family of lagrangian subspaces. 2 In fact. which induces a ﬁbration L(V ) → S 1 with 1connected ﬁber SU (n)/SO(n). the statement of preceding lemma can be improved as follows. Consequently. wj )}n i. and assertion (1) follows. giving an isomorphism of fundamental groups π1 (L(V )) π1 (S 1 ) Z. Our choice of bases implies that ε · id 0 M= 0 A+ε·B n where A = {ω(vi . For arbitrary L1 . L) = L (T ) = T (L).1. denoted : Sp(V ) × L(V ) → L(V ) is deﬁned by (T. L by (1). · · · . wj ) + ε gJ (vi . an orthogonal transformation L1 → L2 induces a symplectic transformation L1 ⊕ L∗ → L2 ⊕ L∗ in the manner of Example 3. a (noncanonical) identiﬁcation of the lagrangian grassmannian with the homogeneous space U (n)/O(n) is obtained from the map L U (V ) → L(V ). Lε are transverse precisely when the matrix M = {ω(vi . 2 The stabilizer of L ∈ L(V ) under the U (V )action is evidently the orthogonal subgroup of Gl(L) deﬁned with respect to the innerproduct and splitting L ⊕ JL of V induced by J (see Example 3. wj + εJwj )} = {ω(vi . For each i. observe that for small ε > 0. L2 ∈ L(V ). and let Ai . Proof. the vectors vi = wi span L ∩ L . respectively. The lagrangian grassmannian The collection of all unoriented lagrangian subspaces of a 2ndimensional symplectic vector space V is called the lagrangian grassmannian L(V ) of V .1). Then {wi + εJwi } form a basis of Lε .{vi }. and L . k. wj )} is nonsingular. A natural action of the group Sp(V ) on L(V ).
If f1 . and so ((T · f1 )∗ − (T · f2 )∗ )µV is obtained via pullback by (mL ◦ (T · f1 ))(mL ◦ (T · f2 ))−1 . The image of the canonical generator of H 1 (S 1 . we ﬁrst recall some features of the n diﬀerential form −dαn = ωn = j=1 dqj ∧ dpj which appeared in our earlier discussion. µV . we note that j=1 dqj ∧ dpj deﬁnes a linear symplectic structure on the tangent space of R2n at each point. R) by the map (mL ◦ f1 )(mL ◦ f2 )−1 . connectedness of the unitary group together with Lemma 3. ∂pj ∂pk =0 . Independence of J follows from the fact that J is connected (Corollary 3. L )) = mL (L ) · det2 (T ) J for any T ∈ U (V ) and L ∈ L(V ). then a check of the preceding deﬁnitions shows that mL ((T. Since Sp(V ) deformation retracts onto U (V ). it follows that T is homotopic to a map T : M → U (V ). (Here we use the fact that when S 1 is identiﬁed with the unit complex numbers. Now consider any topological space M . ∂qj ∂pk = δjk ωn ∂ ∂ .3). On the other hand. fi ). ∂qj ∂qk 23 =0 ωn ∂ ∂ . Z) → H 1 (L(V ). 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). n First. In fact: ωn ∂ ∂ . Symplectic manifolds To motivate the deﬁnition of a symplectic manifold. it follows that this product equals (mL ◦f1 )(mL ◦f2 )−1 .10 gives independence of L. Z). Passing to homology and dualizing.11 If (V.This isomorphism does not depend on the choices of J and L made above. If T : M → Sp(V ) is any map. then ∗ ∗ the deﬁnition of the universal Maslov class shows that (f1 − f2 )µV equals the pullback of 1 1 the canonical generator of H (S . Z) under this map is called the universal Maslov class. The result of the following example will be useful when we extend our discussion of the Maslov class from vector spaces to vector bundles. (Recall that : Sp(V )×L(V ) → L(V ) denotes the natural action of Sp(V ) on L(V )). from which we conclude that ∗ ∗ (f1 − f2 )µV = ((T · f1 )∗ − (T · f2 )∗ )µV . From the ﬁrst paragraph. Example 3. we set (T · fi ) = (T. we obtain a natural homomorphism H 1 (S 1 . ω) is any symplectic vector space with ωcompatible complex structure J and lagrangian subspace L. f2 : M → L(V ) are continuous maps.
we impose the condition that ω be closed. from which it is clear that ωn is invertible. XH ) = 0. Here. Since ωn is closed. ˜ −1 so we see that the symplectic form ωn is all that we need to obtain XH from H. This again reﬂects the fact that the ﬂow of XH preserves energy. LXH H = XH · H = ωn (XH . This equation implies that the ﬂow of XH preserves the form ωn and therefore generalizes our earlier remark that the hamiltonian vector ﬁeld associated to the 1dimensional harmonic oscillator is divergencefree. ˜ we see that the conservation of energy follows from the skewsymmetry of the form ω. XH ) = 0. A 2form ω on a manifold P is a smooth family of bilinear forms on the tangent spaces of P . to guarantee the vanishing of the second term. we also have by Cartan’s formula (see [1]) LXH ωn = d(XH ωn ) + XH dωn = d2 H = 0. First note that by the skewsymmetry of ωn . nondegenerate 2form ω on P . 24 .12 A symplectic structure on a manifold P is a closed. we guarantee that the equation XH = ω −1 (dH) ˜ deﬁnes a hamiltonian vector ﬁeld uniquely for any H. we recall that the hamiltonian vector ﬁeld associated via Hamilton’s equations to H : R2n → R satisﬁes XH ωn = dH. ˜ Next.and so ωn ˜ ∂ ∂qj = dpj ωn ˜ ∂ ∂pj = −dqj . XH = ωn (dH). Thus we make the following deﬁnition: Deﬁnition 3. Finally. or in other words. the term d(XH ω) = d2 H is automatically zero. Computing the Lie derivative of H with respect to XH LXH H = XH · H = ω (XH )(XH ) = ω(XH . implying that XH is tangent to the level sets of H. This description of the hamiltonian vector ﬁeld leads immediately to the following two invariance results. invariance of ω under the hamiltonian ﬂow is satisﬁed if LXH ω = d(XH ω) + XH dω = 0. We now see what is needed to do hamiltonian mechanics on manifolds. By assuming that each of these bilinear forms is nondegenerate.
or equivalently. this assertion generalizes the HamiltonJacobi theorem (see the end of Section 2. if L is a 2 smooth manifold of dimension 1 dim(P ) and ι : L → P is an immersion such that ι∗ ω = 0. the subspaces Cp = (Tp C)⊥ comprise a subbundle (T C)⊥ of T C known as the characteristic distribution of C. Lemma 3. 2 we will call the pair (L. nonsingular vector ﬁeld XH. A symplectomorphism from (P1 . In view of the remarks above. ω2 ) is a smooth diﬀeomorphism f : P1 → P2 compatible with the symplectic structures: f ∗ ω2 = ω1 . that the top exterior power of ω is a volume form on P .1) to arbitrary symplectic manifolds and lagrangian immersions. A simple check of deﬁnitions shows that if H : P → R is a smooth function having C as a regular level set. In this case. If (L. More explicitly. Generalizing our earlier discussion of distinguished subspaces of a symplectic vector space. ω1 ) to (P2 . ω) of symplectomorphisms of P becomes an inﬁnitedimensional Lie group when endowed with the C ∞ topology (see [49]). or ﬁnally. Of particular interest in our discussion will be lagrangian submanifolds of P . ι) is a lagrangian immersion whose image is contained in C. 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 . More generally. ω) consists of the same underlying manifold endowed with the symplectic structure −ω. When C is coisotropic. which are (co)isotropic submanifolds of dimension 1 dim(P ). It is integrable because ω is closed. then the hamiltonian vector ﬁeld XH is tangent to the characteristic foliation of C. Darboux’s theorem (Section 4. the product of (co)isotropic submanifolds of P1 and P2 is a (co)isotropic submanifold of P1 × P2 . The collection Aut(P.13 If C ⊂ P is a hypersurface.The condition that ω be nondegenerate means that ω deﬁnes an isomorphism of vector ˜ bundles T P → T ∗ P . then C is a coisotropic submanifold. Example 3. New symplectic manifolds can be manufactured from known examples by dualizing and by taking products. In the next section. Evidently P and its dual P share the same (co)isotropic submanifolds. Given two symplectic manifolds (P1 . The symplectic dual of a manifold (P. the corresponding Lie 25 . the characteristic subspace Cι(p) ⊂ Tι(p) C is contained in ι∗ Tp L. ι) a lagrangian immersion. products. 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).3) will tell us that this is the local model for the general case. this form is the sum of the pullbacks of ω1 and ω2 by the projections of P1 × P2 to P1 and P2 . and symplectomorphisms is provided by the following lemma. As is easily veriﬁed. ω1 ) and (P2 . A useful connection among duals. and thus XH induces a smooth. that ω deﬁnes a linear symplectic structure on each tangent space of P . their product P1 ×P2 admits a symplectic structure given by the sum ω1 ⊕ω2 . then Lemma 3.14 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 .6 implies that for each p ∈ L.ι on L. ω2 ). we will see that the cotangent bundle of any smooth manifold carries a natural symplectic structure.
More generally. and of complex manifolds which are not symplectic.1. F are said to be symplectomorphic if there exists a vector bundle isomorphism E → F which preserves their symplectic structures. functions satisfying Q(tv) = t2 Q(v) for all real t. (See [27] and the numerous earlier references cited therein. and the Lie algebra sp(V) identiﬁes with the subalgebra of χ(V. the frame bundle of P can be reduced to a principal Sp(n) bundle over P . ω) of smooth vector ﬁelds X on P satisfying LX ω = 0. that the K¨hler form of any K¨hler manifold a a is a symplectic form. any vector bundle E → B with this structure is called a symplectic vector bundle. Theorem 3.17. Consequently. Example 3. ω). v).15 A linear symplectic form ω on a vector space V induces a symplectic structure (also denoted ω) on V via the canonical identiﬁcation of T V with V ×V . ω) are called locally hamiltonian vector ﬁelds or symplectic vector ﬁelds. Example 3. the proof of Theorem 3. With the aid of an arbitrary riemannian metric. 2 Symplectic vector bundles Since a symplectic form on a 2nmanifold P deﬁnes a smooth family of linear symplectic forms on the ﬁbers of T P .e. Example 3. there exist examples of symplectic manifolds which are not complex (the almost complex structure coming from the theorem cannot be made integrable). deﬁned in analogy with Example 3. however. The symplectic group Sp(V ) then embeds naturally in Aut(V. 26 . i. then the sum F ⊕ F ∗ carries a natural symplectic vector bundle structure. those X which map to exact 1forms are simply the hamiltonian vector ﬁelds on P .2 can be generalized by a ﬁberwise construction as follows. Since LX ω = d(X ω). The elements of χ(P.18 Despite Theorem 3.algebra is the space χ(P. Note that these are precisely the hamiltonian vector ﬁelds of the homogeneous quadratic polynomials on V . ω) and the space of closed 1forms on P .17 Every symplectic vector bundle admits a compatible complex vector bundle structure.16 If F → B is any vector bundle. ω) consisting of vector ﬁelds of the form X(v) = Av for some A ∈ sp(V). sp(V) is canonically identiﬁed with the space of such functions via the correspondence 1 A ↔ QA (v) = ω(Av.) Note. Two symplectic vector bundles E. the association X → X ω deﬁnes an isomorphism between χ(P.
6). A simple check of the deﬁnition then shows that J = T −1 J0 T is a compatible complex structure on E which satisﬁes JL = L . γ ∗ µ(L. L are lagrangian subbundles such that Lx is transverse to Lx for each x ∈ B. Since L and J0 L are both transverse to L. Proof. Then ∗ ∗ µ(L.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. and the frame bundle of E admits a further reduction to a principal GL(n) bundle over B (compare Example 3. 2 Example 3. γ ∗ L ). then C is coisotropic (see Lemma 3. L ) = (fL − fL ) µV . In general. If E admits a lagrangian subbundle. the automorphism group of a symplectic vector bundle E does not act transitively on the lagrangian subbundles of E. and T L ⊂ TL P is a lagrangian subbundle. Let J0 be any compatible complex structure on E. From Example 3. L ) = µ(γ ∗ L. 27 . L ) ∈ H 1 (M . we note that since the symplectic group Sp(V ) is connected. Nevertheless. Then there exists a compatible complex structure J on E satisfying JL = L .19 If L is a lagrangian submanifold of a symplectic manifold P . Z) is the universal Maslov class. Theorem 3. then E is symplectomorphic to L ⊕ L∗ . For nontrivial E. we can ﬁnd a symplectomorphism T : L ⊕ L → L ⊕ J0 L which preserves the subbundle L and maps L to J0 L. L ) is welldeﬁned by the requirement that for every smooth loop γ in M . fL : M → L(V ) the maps induced by the lagrangian subbundles f (L). the pullback bundle γ ∗ E is trivial. then any pair L. we denote by fL .1). a pair of transverse lagrangian subbundles can be related as follows. Thus µ(L.21 If E is a symplectic vector bundle over M . Z) as follows. then the restricted tangent bundle TL P is a symplectic vector bundle over L. it follows that for any loop γ : S 1 → M . Example 3. L of lagrangian subbundles of E deﬁne a cohomology class µ(L.11 it follows that this class is independent of the choice of trivialization f . Also note that if C ⊂ P is any submanifold such that T C contains a lagrangian subbundle of TC P . where µV ∈ H 1 (L(V ). Assuming ﬁrst that E admits a symplectic trivialization f : E → M × V for some symplectic vector space V .20 Let E → B be a symplectic vector bundle and suppose that L. f (L ) of M × V .
b) = xj (x) imply that n pj (x. The class µL. L2 ) ∈ H 1 (L. p1 . b) = b ∂ ∂xj αM = j=1 n j=1 pj dqj . ι) is said to be projectable if πL is a diﬀeomorphism. 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∗ . known as the Liouville form. Z) by the Gauss map G : L → L(R2n ) deﬁned by G(p) = ι∗ Tp L ⊂ R2n . −dαM = dqj ∧ dpj in these coordinates. (L. · · · . xn ) on M and corresponding coordinates (q1 . where π : T ∗ M → M is the natural projection. 3. where π : T ∗ M → M is the canonical projection. Z) is called the Maslov class of (L. · · · . qn . Lagrangian immersions and the Liouville class Given a lagrangian immersion ι : L → T ∗ M . A nice property of the Liouville 1form is that it can be used to parametrize the set of projectable lagrangian submanifolds. (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).Example 3. To do this. the image L1 of ι∗ : T L → ι∗ T (T ∗ (Rn )) and L2 = ι∗ V Rn . Finally. we use the notation ιϕ to denote a 1form ϕ on M when we want to think of it as a map from M to T ∗ M . ι) equals the pullback of the universal Maslov class µn ∈ H 1 (L(R2n ). ι).22 As a particular case of Example 3.21. we set πL = π ◦ ι.2 Cotangent bundles The cotangent bundle T ∗ M of any smooth manifold M is equipped with a natural 1form. where π : T ∗ Rn → Rn is the natural projection. · · · . A check of these deﬁnitions shows that the Maslov class of (L. Thus. we consider the symplectic manifold R2n T ∗ Rn with its standard symplectic structure. Note that if M = Rn . Critical points and critical values of πL are called respectively singular points and caustic points of L. the equations qj (x. If ι : L → R2n is a lagrangian immersion. deﬁned by the formula αM ((x. pn ) on T ∗ M . then ωM is just the symplectic structure ωn on T ∗ Rn R2n discussed previously. then the symplectic vector bundle ι∗ T (T ∗ (Rn )) has two lagrangian subbundles. from which it follows that the form ωM = −dαM is a symplectic structure on T ∗ M .ι = µ(L1 . In local coordinates (x1 . and αM = αn . b))(v) = b(π∗ v). 28 .
By the deﬁnition of αM . Because ιϕ is a section of T ∗ M . Then ι∗ αM = ϕ. ϕ 2 For this reason. αM is often described as the “tautological” 1form on T ∗ M . Associated to a smooth submanifold N ⊂ M is the submanifold N ⊥ = {(x.24 The relation ϕ ↔ (M. Tx N ⊂ ker(p)}. 29 .27 A simple application of Stokes’ theorem shows that an embedded circle in the phase plane cannot be exact. Taking exterior derivatives on both sides of the equation in Lemma 3. while the Liouville form of T ∗ M vanishes on N ⊥ for any N . then S : M → R is a phase function for L if and only if d(S ◦ πL ◦ ι) = ι∗ αM . v . This motivates the following deﬁnition. it satisﬁes π ◦ ιϕ = idM . we get dϕ = dι∗ αM = ι∗ dαM = −ι∗ ωM . 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. This proves Proposition 3. ϕ Proof. We will return to this important viewpoint in the next chapter. ι) ⊂ T ∗ M is a projectable lagrangian embedding. ι) which lives on the manifold L itself.23. From this deﬁnition it follows easily that dim T ∗ M = 2 dim N ⊥ . π∗ (ιϕ∗ v) = ιϕ (p). M are nmanifolds and ι : L → T ∗ M is an immersion such that ι∗ αM is exact. ι) ⊂ T ∗ M provided that ι(L) = dS(M ).23 Let ϕ ∈ Ω1 (M ). Deﬁnition 3.19). then ι is called an exact lagrangian immersion. although it is the image of an exact lagrangian immersion of R. If ι : L → T ∗ M is an exact lagrangian immersion. ιϕ ) deﬁnes a natural bijective correspondence between the the vector space of closed 1forms on M and the set of projectable lagrangian submanifolds of T ∗ M . we will call S : M → R a phase function for a projectable lagrangian embedding (L.26 If L. 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. A general class of exact lagrangian submanifolds can be identiﬁed as follows.25 If (L. If F is a smooth foliation of M . known as the conormal bundle to N . ι∗ αM (p)(v) = αM (ιϕ (p))(ιϕ∗ v) = ιϕ (p). Example 3. it follows that for each v ∈ Tp M . Thus.25 suggests that the primitive of ι∗ αM is a sort of generalized phase function for (L. L is the image of an exact 1form on M if and only if the restriction of the Liouville form to L is itself exact. p) ∈ T ∗ M : x ∈ N.Lemma 3. Generalizing our WKB terminology. then Lemma 3.
the vertical bundle V M = ker π∗ is a lagrangian subbundle of T (T ∗ M ).27. the form ι∗ αM is always closed. then f = fβ for a closed 1form β on M . 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 . Thus. p0 ) equals the identity.28 To generalize the picture described in Example 3.1 that Dh is the identity at all points of ZM .29 If a symplectomorphism f : T ∗ M → T ∗ M preserves each ﬁber of the projection π : T ∗ M → M . since the derivative Dh preserves the lagrangian splitting of T (T ∗ M ) along ZM and equals the identity on T ZM . so the ﬁbers are lagrangian submanifolds. 30 . 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. we consider a smooth manifold M . Proof. p) ∈ T ∗ M : x ∈ N pTx N = β(x)} ∗ ⊥ is a lagrangian submanifold of T ∗ M whose Liouville class equals [πN β] ∈ H 1 (Nβ . since dι∗ αM = ι∗ ωM = 0. A 1form β on M deﬁnes a diﬀeomorphism fβ of T ∗ M by ﬁberwise aﬃne translation fβ (x. Then ⊥ Nβ = {(x. Fiberpreserving symplectomorphisms On each ﬁber of the projection π : T ∗ M → M . p0 ). Moreover. we have f = fβ . the form µ = f ◦ ψ is also closed. together with a submanifold N ⊂ M and a closed 1form β on N . Theorem 3. p + β(x)).ι ∈ H 1 (L. where ⊥ πN : Nβ → N is here the restriction of the natural projection π : T ∗ M → M . Since αM vanishes on the zero section ZM ⊂ T ∗ M . we can conclude from Example 3. p0 ) ∈ T ∗ M and let ψ be a closed 1form on M such that ψ(x0 ) = (x0 . the pullback of αM vanishes. Fix a point (x0 . Consequently. it follows that ZM is lagrangian as well. so f is a translation on each ﬁber. It is easy to see that this map satisﬁes ∗ fβ αM = αM + π ∗ β. p) = (x. 0). ι). Since f is symplectic. Example 3. the ﬁberderivative of f at the arbitrary point (x0 . R). so fβ is a symplectomorphism of T ∗ M if and only if β is closed. Deﬁning β(x) = f (x. and the subbundles T ZM and V M deﬁne a canonical lagrangian splitting of T (T ∗ M ) over ZM .Although many lagrangian immersions ι : L → T ∗ M are not exact. The deRham cohomology class λL.
we obtain f ∗ αM = αM + π ∗ β. 2 Using Theorem 3.2 If β is a closed 1form on M . we conclude that F = f ∗ . the assertion will follow provided that we can show that f ∗ αM = αM + π ∗ β. 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 ﬁberpreserving symplectomorphism of T ∗ N which ﬁxes the zero section. To this end. since V M ⊂ ker π ∗ β. 2 31 .29. By Theorem 3. and so ft∗ π ∗ β = π ∗ β for all t.29. the time1 map f = f1 of the ﬂow of Xβ equals fβ . 0 By Cartan’s formula for the Lie derivative.31 Any ﬁberpreserving symplectomorphism F : T ∗ M → T ∗ N can be realized as the composition of a ﬁbertranslation in T ∗ M with the cotangent lift of a diﬀeomorphism N → M. Another application of Cartan’s formula. Corollary 3.30 For any closed 1form β on M . 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. From the preceding theorem. we have LXβ αM = d(Xβ αM ) − Xβ ωM = π ∗ β. the latter equality following from the fact that Xβ ⊂ V M ⊂ ker αM and dαM = −ωM . By composing F with a ﬁbertranslation in T ∗ M we may assume that F maps the zero section of T ∗ M to that of T ∗ N . the HamiltonJacobi theorem implies furthermore that the ﬂow ft satisﬁes the hypotheses of Theorem 3. Proof. we can furthermore classify all ﬁberpreserving symplectomorphisms from T ∗ M to T ∗ N . Inserting these computations into the expression for f ∗ αM above.29. combined with the assumption that β is closed shows that LXβ π ∗ β = 0. then the ﬂow ft of the vector ﬁeld Xβ = −˜ M (π ∗ β) is ω −1 symplectic. Corollary 3.
Thus in the special case of cotangent bundles. we are ready to extend our discussion of mechanics to more general conﬁguration spaces. SM. 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. dualizing and taking products leads to nothing new.32 If M. then the image of the composition of the lagrangian embedding (T ∗ M.N to arrive at the usual symplectomorphism T ∗ M × T ∗ N T ∗ (M × N ). In particular. ιF ) equals the conormal bundle of Γ. N are smooth manifolds. then the Schwartz transform SM. Proposition 3. 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.N : T ∗ M × T ∗ N → T ∗ (M × N ) deﬁned in local coordinates by ((x. ZM ×N Using the Schwartz transform.5 An elementary. The name comes from the relation of this construction to the Schwartz kernels of operators (see Section 6. (y.N equals the submanifold Γ⊥∗ β ⊂ T ∗ (M × N ) deﬁned in Example 3. N are smooth manifolds.33 By Corollary 3. η) is a symplectomorphism which we will call the Schwartz transform.N satisﬁes (SM. but fundamental property of this mapping can be described as follows.28. Finally. y.N )∗ αM ×N = αM ⊕ −αN . In particular. largely parallelling the earlier material on the 1dimensional harmonic oscillator given in the introduction. 5 32 . η)) → (x. then the map SM. ιF ) with the Schwartz transform SM.N induces a diﬀeomorphism of zero sections ZM × ZN and an isomorphism of vertical bundles VM ⊕VN V (M × N ).31. Our description begins with a comparison of the classical and quantum viewpoints.3 Mechanics on manifolds With the techniques of symplectic geometry at our disposal.N with the graph ΓF : T ∗ M → T ∗ M × T ∗ N .2). if F is the cotangent lift of g. −ξ. 3. setting the stage for the quantization problem in the next chapter. ξ). A computation shows that if Γ ⊂ M × N is the graph of g and p : Γ → M is the natural projection. Example 3. p then the image of (T ∗ M. We then turn to the semiclassical approximation and its geometric counterpart in this new context. a ﬁberpreserving symplectomorphism F : T ∗ M → T ∗ N equals the composition of ﬁberwise translation by a closed 1form β on M with the cotangent lift of a diﬀeomorphism g : N → M .The Schwartz transform If M.
As before. 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. p) = 1 2 g ij (q) pi pj . Theorem 3. The quantum mechanical picture For the time being. The hamiltonian ﬂow associated to kM is called the cogeodesic ﬂow due to its relation with the riemannian structure of M described in the following theorem. Regular level sets of kM are sphere bundles over M . see [36]. and a “kinetic energy” function which in local coordinates (q. then integral curves of the cogeodesic ﬂow project via π to geodesics on M .The classical picture The hamiltonian description of classical motions in a conﬁguration space M begins with the classical phase space T ∗ M . 33 . i. ij ˙ For details. p) is given by 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. Integral curves of the hamiltonian ﬂow of H then project to classical trajectories of a particle on M subject to the potential V . we ﬁrst deﬁne the operator on the function space C ∞ (M ) by ˆ H=− 2 2m ∆ + mV .34 If M is a riemannian manifold.j where g ij is the inverse matrix to gij . p) = kM (q. Theorem 3.v ∂g uv pu pv ∂qi to derive the geodesic equation qk + ¨ i. realvalued potential V : M → R induces the hamiltonian function H(q. H induces a (densely deﬁned) ˆ on the intrinsic Hilbert space HM of M by the equation operator H ˆ ˆ H(adx1/2 ) = (Ha)dx1/2 . p) + V (q) on T ∗ M . That is. In physical terms. A smooth. ˆ where ∆ denotes the LaplaceBeltrami operator.j Γk qi q˙j = 0.34 states that a free particle on a manifold must move along a geodesic. A riemannian metric g = (gij ) on M induces an inner product on the ﬁbers of the cotangent bundle T ∗ M .
ι) satisﬁes the HamiltonJacobi equation provided that E is a regular value of H and H ◦ ι = E. and the timeindependent Schr¨dinger equation on M assumes the familiar form o ˆ (H − E)ϕ = 0.e. a halfdensity of the form eiS/h a is a ˆ secondorder approximate solution of the eigenvector problem (H − E) ϕ = 0 provided that the phase function S : M → R satisﬁes the HamiltonJacobi equation H ◦ ιdS = E. If a is a halfdensity on L.ι a = 0. this means that πL = π ◦ ι is a diﬀeomorphism. a “generalized” phase function φ : L → R satisfying dφ = ι∗ αM . Our correspondence table now assumes the form 34 . then (L.2. This interpretation of the WKB approximation leads us to consider a semiclassical state as a quadruple (L.where dx is the natural density associated to the metric on M . exact lagrangian embedding ι : L → T ∗ M . φ. the embedding ι and hamiltonian vector ﬁeld XH of H induce a nonsingular vector ﬁeld XH.25 implies that for −1 any primitive φ : L → R of ι∗ αM . and Lemma 3. a) comprised of a projectable. exact lagrangian embedding ι : L → T ∗ M . −1 pulledback) to yield a secondorder approximate solution (πL )∗ eiφ/ a to the Schr¨dinger o equation on M . and a halfdensity a on L. The dynamics on both objects are determined by the choice of metric on M . The semiclassical approximation The basic WKB technique for constructing semiclassical solutions to the Schr¨dinger equao tion on M proceeds as in Section 2. We can formulate this construction abstractly by considering ﬁrst a projectable.ι on L (see Example 3. and the halfdensity a satisﬁes the homogeneous transport equation. then the halfdensity eiφ/ a on L can be quantized (i. 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 . ι. where π : T ∗ M → M is the natural projection. If these conditions are satisﬁed. By deﬁnition. then the requirement −1 that (πL )∗ a satisfy the homogeneous transport equation on M becomes LXH. ι).13). Speciﬁcally. as above. which assumes the coordinatefree form a∆S + 2L S a = 0. the composition S = φ ◦ πL is a phase function for (L. In this case. Now if H : T ∗ M → R is any smooth function.
a) such that eigenvector of H H ◦ ι = E and LXH. ι. a) consisting of an arbitrary lagrangian immersion ι : L → T ∗ M and a halfdensity a on L. φ. it is tempting to regard (L. a) as a further generalization of the concept of semiclassical state in T ∗ M . Our goal in the next chapter will be to determine when and how such “geometric” semiclassical states can be used to construct “analytical” semiclassical approximate solutions to the timeindependent Schr¨dinger equation. ι.ι a = 0 Since the HamiltonJacobi and transport equations above make sense for any triple (L.Object basic space state timeevolution Classical version T ∗M (L. ι. ι. a) as above Hamilton’s equations Quantum version HM on M Schr¨dinger equation o ˆ operator H on HM generator of evolution function H on T ∗ M stationary state ˆ state (L. in which we drop the conditions of projectability and exactness. o 35 . φ.
ι). a) = (πL )∗ eiφ/ a on M . As seen in Chapter 3.4 Quantization in Cotangent Bundles This chapter deals with the problem of constructing semiclassical approximate solutions to the timeindependent Schr¨dinger equation from the data contained in a “geometric” semio classical state. we set aj = aLj and deﬁne a halfdensity on πL (Lj ) by quantizing (Lj . of course. At this point. a) on M . o This process will be referred to as quantization. the question of whether or not a given semiclassical state (L. (It is. which leads to an ambiguity in the overall phase of I (L. that is. we must have def φj − φk ∈ Z = 2π · Z on each Lj ∩ Lk . For this reason. To generalize this procedure. then the Liouville class will be 2π times an integral class for all only if it is zero. ι.e. aj ) in the sense above: −1 Ij = (πLj )∗ eiφj / aj . ι. Given a halfdensity a on L.” 4. φj . 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 .ι be integral. in a more or less systematic way. a triple (L. it is locally exact by the Poincar´ lemma. ι.1 Prequantization The simplest quantization procedure consists of pullingback halfdensities from projectable lagrangian embeddings in T ∗ M . the notion of integrality is meaningless. an approximate solution to Schr¨dinger’s equation on M . a) for which ι : L → T ∗ M is a projectable exact lagrangian embedding is quantized by choosing a primitive φ of ι∗ αM and forming the halfdensity def −1 I (L. Since the 1form ι∗ αM on L is closed. this is precisely the condition that the Liouville class λL. (This ambiguity was overcome in Chapter 3 by including the choice of φ in the deﬁnition of a semiclassical state). 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. however. i. but not necessarily exact lagrangian embedding. Given a halfdensity a on L which is invariant under the ﬂow induced by H. suppose now that ι : L → T ∗ M is a projectable. our goal is to use this data in order to construct. If denotes a number ranging over an interval of the real numbers. we must piece together the Ij to form a welldeﬁned global halfdensity I (L. ιLj . The choice of φ is unique only up to an additive constant. 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 . ι. To quantize (L. According to the discussion in Appendix C. only one of many operations which go by this name. ι.) As we shall see. ι. we will often speak loosely of “quantizing lagrangian submanifolds” or “quantizable lagrangian submanifolds. a) can be quantized is answered largely in terms of the geometry of the lagrangian immersion (L. we are forced to confront once more the nature of . If it is a formal variable. a). a). only for an exact lagrangian 36 .
If L is exact. ι). One consequence is I (L. ι. ι2 . Thus. consisting of the numbers 0 /k. If τ is integral for some ∈ R+ . (A period of a closed 1form β on M is any number obtained by integrating β around some closed loop in M ). a2 ) of lagrangian submanifolds carrying halfdensities.2 Let M = S 1 and consider the closed 1form β = p dθ on S 1 . Deﬁnition 4. then by linearity we should have I (L1 ∪ L2 . (0. we will make the following compromise. the class of projectable quantizable lagrangian submanifolds of T ∗ M is rather limited whenever dim(H 1 (M . ι) ⊂ T ∗ M . a1 ) + I (L2 . 0) = 0. Certainly this condition holds for the procedure we have been using in the projectable case. Example 4. a2 ). a1 ). If L is quantizable but not exact. and so the admissible values of are the numbers {p/k : k ∈ Z+ }. a2 )) = I (L1 . Instead. we will focus on the set of regular points of πL in order to pass from halfdensities on L to halfdensities deﬁned near noncaustic points of L. for p ∈ R. but with diﬀering sets of admissible . R)) > 1. and it is reasonable to adopt as a general rule. however. In general. ι1 . then a/ and b/ are both integers. sa1 + a2 ) = s · I (L. the set of all admissible forms a sequence converging to zero. (a1 .submanifold. For the time being. ι1 ∪ ι2 .1 A projectable lagrangian submanifold (L. If a semiclassical state is represented by the union of a disjoint pair (L1 . ι1 ∪ ι2 . Since we are speciﬁcally trying to go beyond the exact case. ι. ι) ⊂ T ∗ M is quantizable if its Liouville class λL. The situation changes as soon as we consider the closed 1form τ = a dθ1 + b dθ2 on the torus S 1 × S 1 . 37 . since πL cannot be used to pushforward halfdensities from L to M . The cohomology class represented by this form is integral provided that p S1 dθ ∈ Z . 0)) + I (L1 ∪ L2 . all > 0 are admissible. this interpretation is not acceptable either. (a1 . ι. ι. (L2 . Regardless of how this is to be carried out. ι1 ∪ ι2 . where 0 is the largest such number. ι2 . a2 ). and k runs over the positive integers. the condition that closed 1form β on a manifold M be quantizable is equivalent to the requirement that the ratio of any two nonzero periods of β be rational.ι is integral for some ∈ R+ . The simple quantization technique described above does not generalize immediately to nonprojectable immersed lagrangian submanifolds (L. meaning that a/b is a rational number if b = 0. a2 )) = I (L1 ∪ L2 . The values of for which this condition holds will be called admissible for (L. ι1 . Geometrically this means that all horizontal circles in the cylinder T ∗ S 1 are quantizable in the sense deﬁned above. it is desirable that quantization be linear with respect to halfdensities: I (L. a1 ) + I (L.
x) has a singular point at x = 0. ι. the prequantization of (L. If L is exact. and so the meaning of the preceding sum is ambiguous. If a = B(x) dx1/2 is any halfdensity on L.ι on L equals XH. we note that by the preceding remarks. a) should look something like −1 (πLj )∗ eiφj / a j on U . ∂q ∂x the transformation rule for halfdensities implies −1 (πL+ )∗ a = 2−1/2 q −1/4 B(q 1/2 ) dq1/2 −1 (πL− )∗ a = 2−1/2 q −1/4 B(−q 1/2 ) dq1/2 . Thus.ι if and only if a = B dx1/2 for some B ∈ R. the requirement that φj be a generalized phase function for Lj determines each φj only up to an additive constant. ι.ι = (1/2) ∂/∂x. 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) is given by φ(x) = 2x3 /3. ιLj ) is a projectable lagrangian submanifold of T ∗ U . we obtain I (L. If p ∈ πL (L) is noncaustic and πL is proper. ι) ⊂ T ∗ M and halfdensity a on L. a) is given for q > 0 by I (L.Now consider an arbitrary immersed lagrangian submanifold (L. the lagrangian embedding ι : L → T ∗ R given by ι(x) = (x2 . as in the following example. Choosing a generalized phase function φj : Lj → R for each Lj . As before. we must therefore decide how to specify the relative phases of the oscillatory coeﬃcients eiφj / . To quantize halfdensities on L consistently. then we may use any function φ : L → R satisfying dφ = ι∗ αM to ﬁx phases.3 For L = R. the quantization of (L. a) = e2iq 3/2 /3 + e−2iq 38 3/2 /3 2−1/2 q 1/4 B dq1/2 . p) = (p2 − q). and we denote by L+ . ι. a halfdensity a on L is invariant under the ﬂow of XH. Thus. A phase function φ : L → R for (L. 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 . From the expression above. 2 and it is easy to check that the induced vector ﬁeld XH. then since −1 (πL )∗ ∂ ∂ = ±2−1 q −1/2 . ι. a)(q) = e2iq 3/2 /3 B(q 1/2 ) + e−2iq 3/2 /3 B(−q 1/2 ) 2−1/2 q −1/4 dq1/2 . Example 4. respectively (these correspond to the upper and lower components of the parabola ι(L)). L− the right and left projectable components of L.
ι is integral for some ∈ R+ . 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 . For this purpose. If is admissible for some prequantizable lagrangian immersion (L. If a is a halfdensity on L. a number that ∈ R+ is admissible for the level set H −1 (E) provided α1 = 2πE ∈ Z .5 Consider the 1dimensional harmonic oscillator with hamiltonian 1 H(q. 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. energy levels of the 1dimensional harmonic oscillator corresponding to level sets for which a particular value of is admissible are given by E = n . 39 .1. generalizing Deﬁnition 4. j Example 4. so we have more work ahead of us. this solution blows up at q = 0 (and is not deﬁned for q < 0).4. In particular. Deﬁnition 4. Consequently. 2 According to Deﬁnition 4. 2 ∂x2 2 2 Unfortunately. φ. ι). we can now quantize (L. ι). ι. the actual quantum energy levels are E = (n + 1/2) . As one can read in any textbook on quantum mechanics. ι. the value of I (L. we will see later that this is the wrong choice! Since exactness is only used to insure that the function eiφ/ is welldeﬁned on L. a) by summing the pullbacks of eiφ/ a to M . ι) ⊂ T ∗ M is said to be prequantizable if its Liouville class λL. The values of for which this condition holds will again be called admissible for (L. φ. In fact. we can treat certain nonexact cases in a similar way. In the previous notation. a) on U is deﬁned as −1 (πVj )∗ eiφ/ a.4 An immersed lagrangian submanfold (L. 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. we make the following provisional deﬁnition.as a semiclassical approximate solution to the Schr¨dinger equation o − ∂2ψ x − ψ = Eψ. as we shall soon see. p) = (q 2 + p2 ). H −1 (E) Thus. The additional 1/2 can be explained geometrically in terms of the nonprojectability of the classical energy level curves.
η) = ξ · ϕ(η) − η · ϕ(ξ) − ϕ([ξ. η are (local) vector ﬁelds lying in this distribution. From the prequantum standpoint. Here. ι. Deﬁnition 4. ker(ϕ) is “maximally nonintegrable”). a. If we associate to QM. ι) ⊂ T ∗ M is prequantizable if and only if there exists a nonzero parallel section over L of the line bundle ι∗ EM.ι .Prequantum bundles and contact manifolds Prequantizability can be described geometrically in terms of principal T bundles with connection over T ∗ M . the prequantum line bundle EM. It is customary to make the following deﬁnition. ϕ) is an ndimensional integral submanifold for ϕ. The condition ϕ ∧ (dϕ)n = 0.8 A contact form on a (2n + 1)dimensional manifold Q is a 1form ϕ such that ϕ ∧ (dϕ)n vanishes nowhere on Q. Theorem 4. η]). the prequantum T bundle associated to a cotangent bundle (T ∗ M. η]) = −ϕ([ξ. . coincides with ι∗ ωM and therefore vanishes. Deﬁnition 4.7 An immersed lagrangian submanifold (L. a halfdensity a on L. A manifold endowed with a contact form is called a strict contact manifold. Digressing brieﬂy from quantization. The holonomy of this connection is represented by the modZ reduction of the Liouville class λL. then φ induces a parallel section of ι∗ EM. Consequently. we have dϕ(ξ. σ denotes the multiplevalued linear variable in T and π : QM. on the other hand. This says that the distribution is integrable (in the sense of Frobenius) iﬀ dϕ is zero on ker(ϕ). To interpret the condition on ϕ we note ﬁrst that the kernel of any nowhere vanishing 1form ϕ deﬁnes a 2ndimensional distribution in Q. Deﬁnition 4. Prequantum T bundles and parallel lifts of lagrangian submanfolds constitute our ﬁrst examples of the fundamental objects of contact geometry. by means of the representation x → e−ix/ of T in U (1). then the curvature of the induced connection on ι∗ QM. and the “largest” integral submanifolds of ker(ϕ) are ndimensional (i. and a parallel lift φ of L to the T bundle ι∗ QM. we assemble here a few facts about contact manifolds. means that the kernel of dϕ is 1dimensional and everywhere transverse to ker(ϕ).9 A legendrian submanifold of a 2n+1dimensional strict contact manifold (Q. = T ∗ M × T together with the connection 1form ϕ = −π ∗ αM + dσ.6 For ﬁxed ∈ R+ .e. If ξ. corresponding to the (inverse of the) oscillatory function eiφ/ on L which appeared in the preceding section. the basic geometric object representing a classical state is therefore a quadruple (L. for some > 0. This remark proves the following geometric characterization of prequantizability. ωM ) consists of the trivial principal bundle QM. φ) consisting of a lagrangian immersion ι : L → T ∗ M . 40 . If ι : L → T ∗ M is any lagrangian immersion. → T ∗ M is the bundle projection. dϕ is a linear symplectic form on ker(ϕ). the odddimensional counterpart of symplectic geometry.
If a is a halfdensity on L. we will illustrate this idea in the case of lagrangian submanifolds of the phase plane. a) consisting of a legendrian immersion (R. Such a contact structure is called coorientable. since it ignores a certain structure which arises from the relation of L to the ﬁbers of the π projection T ∗ M → M . Although we will not pursue the idea in these notes. Following an idea of Maslov. A simple example of an embedded lagrangian submanifold of T ∗ R which does not project diﬀeomorphically onto the qaxis is a vertical line. over a cotangent bundle T ∗ M . we obtain −1 (πp )∗ eiτ / dx1/2 = e−iq0 p/ q0 dp1/2 . Deﬁnition 4. obtained by thinking of R2 as the cotangent bundle of pspace. a possible generalization of the quantization procedure described above might therefore begin by reinterpreting geometric semiclassical states as triples (R. is an immersed legendrian submanifold of QM. and then quantizing to obtain a function on pspace. so that dτ = ι∗ (−q dp) for some phase function τ on L. we denote by πp the composition of ι with the projection of R2 onto the paxis. Since the wave function corresponding to a constant halfdensity a on L should correspond to a probability distribution describing the position of a particle at q0 with completely indeterminate momentum. If πp is a diﬀeomorphism. ι) is said to be pprojectable. we deﬁne a function B on pspace by the equation −1 B dp1/2 = (πp )∗ eiτ / a. or ﬁber. The result is exactly the asymptotic Fourier transform (see Appendix B) of the delta function which we guessed above! In its simplest form. and a manifold endowed with such a structure is called simply a contact manifold. Our basic example of a strict contact manifold is furnished by a prequantum T bundle QM. . This factor will be incorporated into our quantization procedure using a procedure due to Maslov. Given a lagrangian immersion ι : L → T ∗ R R2 . in which case there exists an “alternate” generalized phase function τ : L → R satisfying dτ = ι∗ (−q dp). Maslov’s technique is to suppose that (L. . then f · ϕ is again a contact form which is said to be equivalent to ϕ. This leads to the following deﬁnition.If ϕ is a contact form and f a nowherevanishing function on Q. of the form ι(x) = (q0 . ι) ⊂ T ∗ R is pprojectable. since they have the same legendrian submanifolds. then (L. the image of a parallel lift of a lagrangian immersion ι : L → T ∗ M to QM. Using the phase function τ (x) = −q0 x on L. E is the kernel of a globally deﬁned contact form. To begin. it should be a delta function supported at q0 .2 The Maslov correction It turns out that the naive quantization procedure of the preceding section is incorrect. 4. we analyze this situation by pretending that p is position and q momentum. 41 .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. ) in a contact manifold together with a halfdensity a on R. x) for x ∈ R.
[32. φ. Example 4. Vol. τ. If a is a constant halfdensity on L. a) by Maslov quantization diﬀers from the simple pullback by a constant phase shift. consider an arbitrary biprojectable lagrangian embedding (L. ι. τ. where F denotes the asymptotic Fourier transform. τ. and a computation6 shows that −1 F −1 ((πp )∗ eiτ / )(q) = k1/2 e−iπ·sgn(k)/4 eikq 2 /2 .e. the halfdensity obtained from (L. To relate this procedure to our earlier quantization by pullback. respectively. ι) for the forms p dq and −q dp are given by φ(x) = kx2 /2 and τ (x) = −kx2 /2.1.and pdirections. we must compare the results in the case of lagrangian submanifolds L ⊂ R2 which are biprojectable. For simplicity. i.6. respectively.11 For real k = 0. On the other hand. a). 6 See.1] .and pspace by pullback: −1 S = φ ◦ πL −1 T = τ ◦ πp . so that S and T satisfy the Legendre transform relation (see [2]) S(q) = −p(q) T (p(q)) + T (p(q)). and so Maslov’s technique yields J (L. For simplicity. Thus. projectable in both the q. ι. consider the lagrangian embedding ι : R → T ∗ R given by ι(x) = (x. 42 . Next.7. a) is then given by the halfdensity J (L. we have (πp )∗ τ (p) = −p2 /2k. Thm. ι. a) = e−iπ·sgn(k)/4 I (L. kx). then the transformation rule for halfdensities implies −1 (πL )∗ a = A dq1/2 −1 (πp )∗ a = k−1/2 A dp1/2 def for a real constant A determined by a. Generalized phase functions on (L. ι. we will assume that the additive constants in φ and τ are chosen so that φ = τ + ι∗ (qp). ι) ⊂ R2 with phase functions φ and τ corresponding to p dq and −q dp. let S(q) and T (p) be the functions deﬁned on q. Quantization by pullback therefore gives I (L. ι. we begin with the example of linear lagrangian subspaces.The Maslov quantization of (L. φ. To establish a similar correspondence in somewhat greater generality. ι. a) = F −1 (B) dq1/2 on qspace. for example. a) = eikq 2 /2 A dq1/2 .
when (q. we set k(q) = T (p(q)) and apply the principle of stationary phase (see Appendix B). a) = e−iπ·sgn(k)/4 I (L. ι) which is not qprojectable lies in the relative phase constants of the summands of I (L. The critical point of the exponent pq + T (p) occurs where q = −T (p). τ. ι. a) + O( ). a) = e−iπ/4 e2iq 3/2 /3 B(−q 1/2 ) + eiπ/4 e−2iq 43 3/2 /3 B(q 1/2 ) 2−1/2 q −1/4 dq1/2 + O( ). A halfdensity a on L determines functions A(q) and B(p) such that −1 (πL )∗ a = A dq1/2 −1 (πp )∗ a = B dp1/2 and A(q) = S (q)1/2 B(p(q)). a) = (2π )−1/2 R ei(pq+T (p))/ B(p) dp dq1/2 with that obtained by pullback: I (L. . φ. a).1 and the Maslov quantization of a pprojectable lagrangian embedding (L. a) = F −1 e−ip 3 /3 B(p) dq1/2 . critical points of the function R(p) = pq − p3 /3 occur precisely when q = p2 . ι). where p = S (q) = p(q). −1 since (πp )∗ a = B(p) dp1/2 .12 A phase function associated to −q dp for the lagrangian embedding ι(x) = (x2 . p) ∈ ι(L). ι. i. For each q. τ. a) = eiS/ A dq1/2 .e. To this end. Hence. as illustrated by the following example. we therefore conclude that Maslov’s technique coincides with quantization by pullback up to a constant phase factor and terms of order .e. For biprojectable (L. τ. it follows easily that T (p(q)) = −(S (q))−1 . we have J (L. ι. Speciﬁcally. φ. Thus J (L.where p(q) = S (q). ι. 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 ). The Maslov quantization of a halfdensity a = B(x) dx1/2 on L is thus J (L. τ. ι. ι. Example 4. we must now compare the Maslov halfdensity J (L. For each q > 0. x) of L = R into R2 is given by τ (x) = −x3 /3. The essential diﬀerence between the naive prequantization of Section 4. i. From this relation. ι. and an application of the principle of stationary phase therefore yields two terms corresponding to the upper and lower halves of L.
we ﬁx a partition of unity {hj } subordinate 44 .3. a) is. then T has only nondegenerate critical points. like I (L. the situation would be reversed. at least if a has compact support. downward motion to the right of the ﬁber is positive. sgn(T ) changes by ±2 in the vicinity of a critical point of T . More precisely. However. a factor of eiπ/2 arises in passing from the upper to the lower half of the parabola. ι) by summing these changes while traversing L in a prescribed direction. The extra phase factors of e iπ/4 make J (L. A pdependent phase function T for L ⊂ R2 will have inﬂection points at precisely those p for which (T (p). suppose that (L. On the other hand. a) as an integral is perfectly smooth there.22. Moreover. Example 4. ι. The preceding observation leads us to assign an index to closed. the sign of T at nearby points depends only on L and not on the choice of T . ν . In other words. The reader is invited to check that if L is a circle with a ﬁxed orientation ν ∈ H1 (L. singular at the caustic point q = 0. immersed curves in the phase plane. if T were concave. Under this assumption.ι equals µL. This smoothness at caustics is a clear advantage of Maslov quantization.ι of (L. The result is twice an integer known as the Maslov index mL. a). where µL. ι. ι) deﬁned in Example 3. a) essentially diﬀerent from the prequantization of (L. but not if both are. The Maslov index of the circle therefore equals 2.ι is the Maslov class of (L. Our goal is now to modify the prequantization procedure for arbitrary lagrangian submanifolds of the phase plane by incorporating the Maslov index. With these remarks in mind. Given an immersed lagrangian submanifold (L. τ. ι) is a closed. (Compare [3]). then mL. and we can assign an index to (L. φ.ι . immersed curve in R2 which is nondegenerate in the sense that if T is a pdependent phase function for a subset of L.or pprojectable and no intersection Lj ∩ Lk contains a critical point of πL . we ﬁrst choose a good cover {Lj } of L such that the image of each Lj under ι is either q. Z). τ. ι).Compare this with the result of Example 4. the same is true of any closed embedded curve traversed counterclockwise. 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. the full expression for J (L. since T is convex. while the sign changes if either the direction of motion or the side of the ﬁber is reversed. while the term of order 0 of J (L. ι. 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.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. Next. p) is a singular point of L. ι. a ﬁgureeight has Maslov index zero. The basic idea is as follows. ι) ⊂ R2 . a). τ. ι. Since the index only involves the sign of T . In fact. it follows from Example 4.13 The computation of the Maslov index can be interpreted geometrically if we ﬁrst observe that the nondegeneracy condition requires L to remain on the same side of a ﬁber π −1 (q) near a singular point.
we require ei(φj −φk )/ e−iπ(sj −sk )/4 = 1 at each point of Lj ∩ Lk . If L is a circle. in other words. ι. each halfdensity Ij is the sum of the pull−1 back of halfdensities on each component of Lj ∩ πL (U ). we see that the level set H −1 (E) satisﬁes the Maslov condition provided that for some integer n. If Lj is quantized by pullback. In order to specify the relative phases of the Ij . For I (L. ι) satisﬁes π mL. 45 . As before. a · hj ) to obtain a halfdensity Ij on R either by pullback or by Maslov’s technique. this condition can be fulﬁlled on any arc of a curve in the phase plane. L This is the simplest version of the Maslov quantization condition. otherwise sj equals sgn(T ) for a suitable pdependent phase function). To quantize a halfdensity a on L. ι. we can deﬁne ajk as the (constant) value of (φj − φk ) − π (sj − sk )/4 on Lj ∩ Lk . Example 4.14 Returning to the harmonic oscillator of Example 4. This condition can be precisely formulated in terms of the Maslov index and Liouville class of (L. it follows from an application of −1 the principle of stationary phase as in Example 4. On Lj ∩ πL (U ). Allowable energy levels in this case therefore correspond to the BohrSommerfeld condition. a) coincide up to order with the usual quantization by pullback for any halfdensity a supported in a projectable subset of L. and to make this deﬁnition independent of the choice of cover {Lj } and partition of unity. we will require that I (L.12. a) = j Ij . or. which actually gives the precise energy levels for the quantum harmonic oscillator. ι. then this condition implies that the sum of any of the ajk lies in Z . ι. if Maslov’s technique is applied to Lj .ι of (L. On an open interval U of noncaustic points. we would then like to deﬁne the quantization of (L. a) as the sum I (L.5. we must choose the functions ˜ ˜ φj so that Ij = Ik on each intersection Lj ∩ Lk regardless of the particular halfdensity a. we quantize each (Lj . these halfdensities are of the form ˜ Ij = e−iπsj /4 eiφj / a. a) to be welldeﬁned. Here. (More precisely. so that our requirement becomes ajk ∈ Z . ι) as follows.ι + 2 ι∗ α1 ∈ Z . Evidently. that the Maslov index mL. φ is a realvalued function on Lj satisfying dφj = ι∗ α1 . ι. Since φj − φk is constant on Lj ∩ Lk . while sj are integers depending −1 only on the component of Lj ∩ πL (U ) in question. sj is zero if Lj is qprojectable and is quantized by pullback. In other words. this statement is obvious. E = (n + 1/2) .to {Lj }.
this fails. the ˜ ˜ ﬁberderivative ∂ϕ/∂θ vanishes at p. we generalize the concept of phase functions to nonprojectable lagrangian submanifolds of cotangent bundles. the meaning of dfp as an element of Tp N is that for any smooth curve γ in N satisfying γ(0) = p. To parametrize more general lagrangian ˙ ∗ submanifolds of T N in a similar way. The basis of this method will again be Maslov’s technique. v) ∈ U ×Rm and attempt to deﬁne dϕp ∈ Tp N by dϕp . 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 . For ∗ each p ∈ U . From the point of view of the WKB method. the restriction of the projection U × Rm → U to Σϕ is noninjective.3 Phase functions and lagrangian submanifolds In this section. θ)dθdq1/2 . Local parametrizations of an immersed lagrangian submanifold (L. ι) ⊂ T ∗ M deﬁned by such phase functions will ﬁrst enable us to quantize a given halfdensity locally on L by means of a slightly more general version of the (inverse) asymptotic Fourier transform. In general. The result will be a collection of halfdensities on M . it is necessary and suﬃcient that L satisfy a general version of the Maslov quantization condition. this generalization amounts to replacing Maslov’s ansatz (2π )−n/2 ei( p. 46 . the expression for dϕp produces a welldeﬁned element ˜ ˜ ∗ of Tp N . viewed as a mapping df : U → T ∗ N . our aim in the next sections will be to develop a systematic method for quantizing lagrangian submanifolds of cotangent bundles. a projectable lagrangian submanifold of T ∗ N can be locally parametrized by the diﬀerential of a function f on U ⊂ N . which we formulate in the next section using the Maslov class. the idea is the following. Roughly speaking. we have dfp . we can begin with a function ϕ : U ×Rm → R together ∗ with a point p = (p. γ(0) = (f ◦γ) (0). since ˜ ˜ ˜ the value of the directional derivative (ϕ ◦ γ ) (0) depends on the lift γ . If. which relies in this context on the concept of generalized phase functions. In order for these halfdensities to piece together appropriately. and thus the image of Σϕ is a nonprojectable lagrangian submanifold. γ(0) = (ϕ◦˜ ) (0) ˜ γ ˜ ˜ ˙ m for any lift γ of γ to the product U × R such that γ (0) = p. As we saw in Chapter 3.q +T (p))/ a(p) dp dq1/2 Rn for the solution of Schr¨dinger’s equation by the more general form o (2π )−m/2 Rm eiφ(q. In general.θ)/ a(q. As we shall see. however. and the assignment p → dϕp deﬁnes a lagrangian ˜ ˜ ∗ immersion of Σϕ into T N .A general quantization scheme Motivated by the simple results above. 4.
and its ﬁber critical set is deﬁned as Σφ = (dθ φ)−1 ZE ∗ . To begin. At points of Σφ . 7 47 . which induces for nondegenerate φ an exact sequence of vector bundles over Σφ θ 0 → T Σφ → TΣφ B → E ∗ Σφ → 0.7 Let M. The ﬁberderivative of a function φ : B → R is the composition dθ φ = ι∗ ◦ dφ. 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. B be smooth manifolds. and ι let pM : B → M be a smooth submersion.6(2). this implies that the section (dφ)(B)Σφ = (dφ)(B) ∩ E ⊥ is nowhere tangent to the distribution C ⊥ and therefore immerses into T ∗ M .and qspace. Theorem 4. An advantage of this generalization will be to allow a calculus which is more clearly invariant under changes of coordinates. denoted dθ φ. it follows from Example 3. The function φ is said to be nondegenerate if its ﬁber derivative is transverse to ZE ∗ . we ﬁx some notation and terminology. then the map λφ : Σφ → T ∗ M is an exact lagrangian immersion. we note that the equality λ∗ αM = dφΣφ φ implies that Lφ is exact lagrangian. 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 ⊥ . Moreover. the characteristic distribution C ⊥ of E ⊥ is tangent to the ﬁbers of the mapping E ⊥ → T ∗ M . The bundle E ⊥ may be identiﬁed with the pullback p∗ T ∗ M .15 If φ is nondegenerate. 2 Some readers may ﬁnd it instructive to follow the ensuing discussion by writing everything in local coordinates. (We will denote the zero section of a vector bundle F by ZF ). the section dθ φ has a welldeﬁned intrinsic derivative (see [26]). Since E ⊥ is the union of the conormal bundles of the ﬁbers of pM .19 that E ⊥ is a coisotropic submanifold of T ∗ B. in which case Σφ is a smooth submanifold of B. Proof. On the ﬁbercritical set Σφ . unlike the previous Fourier transform picture. To complete the proof.where θ is an auxiliary variable in Rm which may have nothing to do with the variable p dual to q. giving rise to a natural M p projection E ⊥ → T ∗ M . By Lemma 3. ι∗ d φ ∗ The ﬁberhessian Hφ of φ at p ∈ Σφ is deﬁned as the composition dθ φ ◦ ι : Ep → Ep . the diﬀerential dφ deﬁnes a section of E ⊥ whose composition with p we denote by λφ : Σφ → T ∗ M .
and its ﬁber critical set consists of the parabola x = −θ2 . These operations generate an equivalence relation among Morse families called stable equivalence. This is just the value of x for which φ(x. 2. then (B . Example 4. Addition: For any c ∈ R. Composition: If pB : B → M is a second submersion and g : B → B is a ﬁberpreserving diﬀeomorphism. but it is unique up to “stable equivalence. (B. we introduce the following terminology. 1. If ι : L → T ∗ M is a lagrangian immersion and p ∈ L. φ) ∈ M(L. dθ φ = θ2 + x. ι. φ If (B. pB . then we denote by M(L. This occurs when its ﬁberhessian vanishes at p. φ) is called a Morse family over a manifold M if pB : B → M is a smooth (possibly nonsurjective) submersion. A phase function which generates a neighborhood of a point in a lagrangian submanifold is not unique per se. Here. ι. φ ◦ g) ∈ M(L. p). 3.17 A triple (B. p). Thus (B × R . Suspension: The suspension of (B. pB . The central result of this section is the following. ι. ι. θ) = xθ + θ3 /3 on B = R × R. 0) ∈ Σφ . pB . together with the phase function ˜ ˜ φ = φ + Q.16 Suppose that M = R and consider the function φ(x. pB . 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 . Restriction: If B is any open subset of B containing λ−1 (p). and (dθ φ) = 2θdθ + dx. we denote by gφ : U → Σφ the diﬀeomorphism deﬁned by gφ = λ−1 ◦ ι. pB . ·) acquires a degenerate critical point. then the following operations produce further elements of M(L. p). 0) = λφ (b) for all (b. pB . ˜ ˜ ˜ ˜ 4. which fails to be xprojectable precisely when x = 0. Evidently the phase function φ is nondegenerate. For such Morse families. then the restrictions of φ pB and φ to B deﬁne a Morse family on M which belongs to M(L. 48 . A Morse family is said to be reduced at p ∈ B if φ is a reduced phase function at p. p) the class of Morse families (B.From the preceding deﬁnitions. This means in particular that the dimension of the ﬁbers of B must be at least k. p). Evidently the ﬁbercritical set of φ equals the product Σφ × {0}. which in turn equals the dimension of the kernel of (π ◦ λφ )∗ on Tp Σφ . if the ﬁber dimension of B equals k. pB . Deﬁnition 4. ι. φ + c) ∈ M(L. φ) ∈ M(L. p). ι. φ) which generate ι(U ) for some neighborhood U ⊂ L of p. and φ is a nondegenerate phase function on B such that λφ is an embedding. p). pB . it follows that the nullity k of the ﬁberhessian 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. φ).” a concept which we now deﬁne. then the phase function φ is said to be reduced at p. ι. and n λφ (b. To begin.
and let ω0 . f N = id and T f TN P = id.19 implies the following nonlinear “normal form” result. 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].19 will rely on the following Relative Darboux theorem [62] . then a neighborhood of L in P is symplectomorphic to a neighborhood of the zero section in T ∗ L. ι. Any two members of M(L.19 Let (P.Theorem 4. Theorem 4. We will prove the following theorem. As a result of the existence of compatible complex structures on ι∗ P . ω1 be two symplectic forms on P which coincide on TN P . lagrangian subbundles of ι∗ P complementary to the image of ι∗ : T L → ι∗ T P always exist. and E a lagrangian subbundle of ι∗ T P which is complementary to the image of ι∗ : T L → ι∗ T P . a symplectic manifold looks like a neighborhood of the zero section in T ∗ L.21 The map ψ gives a 11 correspondence between a neighborhood of L in the space of all lagrangian submanifolds of (P. f ∗ ω1 = ω0 2. Let N be a submanifold of a manifold P . Theorem 4. ι : L → P a lagrangian immersion. 49 . which states that. p) are stably equivalent. by a map which is the identity on L. Symplectic normal forms The purpose of this section is to develop several results needed to prove Theorem 4. The class M(L. Theorem 4. ω) be a symplectic manifold. ι. Corollary 4. The next two subsections are devoted to the proof of this theorem. ω) and a neighborhood of the zero section in the space Z 1 (L) of closed 1forms on L.19 may be combined with Proposition 3. 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. Then: 1. all of which more or less rely on the socalled deformation method.20 If L is a lagrangian submanifold of P . p) contains a reduced Morse family over M .18 Let ι : L → T ∗ M be a lagrangian immersion. near any of its lagrangian submanifolds L. Thus.18. Then there are neighborhoods U and V of N and a diﬀeomorphism f : U → V such that 1. and let p ∈ L.24 to yield: Corollary 4. The proof of Theorem 4.
Proof. By the usual properties of the Lie derivative. 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 )). Furthermore. we use a more general version of this lemma: Relative Poincar´ lemma . By Cartan’s formula and the fact that β is closed. such that ω −1 dϕ = ω1 − ω0 . Since the statement is local around N . Proof. For e more general submanifolds. the last expression is equal to 1 1 h∗ d(Yt t 0 β) dt = d 0 1 0 h∗ (Yt t β) dt. t 0 where Yt is the (timedependent) vector ﬁeld which generates the isotopy ht for t > 0. ω) is a symplectic manifold and gt : P → P a continuous family of diﬀeomorphisms. 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. since the closed 2form ω1 − ω0 is locally exact by the classical Poincar´ lemma. we will construct a timedependent vector ﬁeld Xt for which the isotopy ft that it generates satisﬁes ft∗ ωt = ω0 for all t ∈ [0. we can deduce the following converse result: 50 . Then there is a form ϕ on a neighborhood of N such that dϕ = β and which vanishes on TN P . Deﬁne a 1parameter family of closed forms on P by ωt = ω0 + t(ω1 − ω0 ). Since all ωt agree on the submanifold N . If the submanifold N consisted of a single point. 1]. These conditions will be satisﬁed if we set Xt = −˜ t (ϕ) for a 1form ϕ on a neighborhood of N in P . then ϕ can be chosen so that its ﬁrst derivatives vanish along N . Our assertion follows if we take ϕ = h∗ (Yt t 2 If (P. To ﬁnd f satisfying f ∗ ω1 = ω0 . β) dt . the form ϕ would be easy to ﬁnd. β = h∗ β − h∗ β = 1 0 0 d ∗ (h β) dt = dt t 1 h∗ (LYt β) dt. vanishing on N . 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. and let β be a closed kform on e P which vanishes on T N . we have 1 h0 = ﬁberwise projection of P onto N. By the same method of proof as in the relative Darboux theorem. we also want Xt N = 0. 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 . Let N be a submanifold of P . if β vanishes on TN P .
23 Let N ⊂ B be a submanifold deﬁned by the vanishing of functions g1 . but there is no diﬀeomorphism f : P → P at all satisfying f ∗ ω1 = ω0 . we turn to two generalizations of the classical Morse lemma (see Appendix B) which require the following version of Taylor’s theorem. Lemma 4. Using Theorem 3. McDuﬀ [40] describes a family ωt of symplectic forms on a compact sixdimensional manifold P such that ω1 − ω0 is exact. θ)) = f (x. a nondegenerate quadratic form Q on Rk .j ˜ f cij gi gj on a neighborhood of N . and a diﬀeomorphism u of U ﬁxing M × {0} and preserving ﬁbers of the projection to M such that f (u(x. 0) is a nondegenerate critical point for f {x}×Rk . we ˜ can extend f to obtain an immersion F : U → P which satisﬁes F∗ = f on TZ (T ∗ L). i. then there exist functions cij such that f= i. Similarly. In contrast to Corollary 4. where E is the lagrangian subbundle given in the statement of the theorem. we choose a ωL compatible complex structure J on TZ (T ∗ L) which rotates T Z into VZ L. In a neighborhood U ⊂ T ∗ L of Z. Then for each x0 ∈ M . Of course. gk whose diﬀerentials are linearly independent along N . 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. 0). then there is a diﬀeomorphism f : P → P ∗ with f1 ω1 = ω0 . Proof of Theorem 4. the form ωt − ω0 is not exact. there exists a neighborhood U of (x0 . Parametrized Morse lemma .e. where Z is the zero section of T ∗ L and π : T ∗ L → L is the natural projection.22 (Moser [45]) If {ωt } is a family of symplectic structures on a compact manifold P and ωt1 − ωt2 is exact for all t1 . we let f : Z → P denote the composition ι ◦ π. 0) + Q(θ). t2 .22.20. By restricting to a neighborhood of a point in N . just for vectors tangent to N .Corollary 4. we apply the relative Darboux theorem to the forms ωL and F ∗ (ω) on U . 51 . we then choose a ωcompatible complex structure J on f ∗ T P which satisﬁes J(f∗ T Z) = E. w ∈ T Z.19. for intermediate t. Let f : M × Rk → R satisfy the condition that for each x ∈ M . Givental [6] proves an equivalence theorem like the relative Darboux theorem under the weaker hypothesis that ω0 and ω1 coincide on T N . Beginning with the lagrangian immersion ι : L → P . 2 Next. If f is any function such that f and df vanish at all points of N . · · · . (x. To ﬁnish the proof of the normal form theorem.
The function η is totally degenerate in the sense that its ﬁberhessian is identically zero at b.j i will be satisﬁed if we set hi = − t j cij t ∂ft . then by the lowersemicontinuity of rank Hφ. and a nondegenerate quadratic form Q on Rk such that (φ ◦ g)(x. If φ is a phase function on M × Rn+k whose ﬁberhessian Hφ has rank k at a point b ∈ Σφ . By a preliminary change of coordinates linear on ﬁbers. θ) + Q(θ ) in a neighborhood of b in B. Let φ be a function on B = M × Rn+k whose ﬁberhessian Hφ has rank k at a point b ∈ Σφ . there exists an integrable subbundle F → E = ker(pM ∗ ) such that the ﬁberhessian ∗ ◦ dθ φ ◦ : F → F ∗ is nondegenerate at each zero of the section ∗ ◦dθ φ in a neighborhood of b. To determine Xt . the latter condition will be met if Xt is chosen so that 0= Xt · ft + a = 0. θ ) = η(x. 0) + Q(θ) + a(x. we invoke Lemma 4. and it should satisfy d (ft ◦ ut ) = u∗ (Xt · ft + a) t dt for all t ∈ [0.23 in order to ﬁnd smooth functions cij which vanish t on M × {0} and satisfy ∂ft ∂ft a= cij . θ) = f (x. Evidently. 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. 1]. Deﬁne ft = f − (1 − t)a. θ) is O(θ3 ) for each x. 1]. Then there exists a ﬁberpreserving diﬀeomorphism g of B. This means that Xt should be of the form Xt = i hi t ∂ . A change of coordinates near b and an application of the parametrized Morse lemma then proves: Thom splitting theorem . ∂θj 2 which vanishes (to second order) on M × {0}. we may assume that f (x.Proof. t ∂θi ∂θj The required condition ∂ft ∂ft ∂ft =− cij hi t t ∂θi ∂θi ∂θj i. θ) where the error term a(x. 2 52 . a function η : M × Rn → R. θ. To ﬁnd the diﬀeomorphism u we apply the deformation method. ∂θi for certain smooth functions hi t which vanish on M × {0}.
y) = x. Theorem 4. it follows that F and F are −1 −1 embeddings near q = λφ (p) and q = λφ (p) respectively. 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 .18. ι. 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 . By the relative Poincar´ lemma. Its restriction to Z is exact because αL is zero on Z.24 Any Morse family in M(L. and so the class M(L. 2 Proof of Theorem 4. Combined with the deﬁnition of αL . To complete the proof. Consider the ˜ mappings F. π (ψ(B)).18. we can therefore ﬁnd a ﬁberpreserving map g 53 . To show that M(L.9 we can construct a subbundle F which satisﬁes the hypotheses of the preceding theorem over a neighborhood of any p in L. we may ˜ assume that M = Rm and and that φ. ˜ ∂φ (x. y) = x. p). Since this property is local near p. p) is nonempty. it follows that the images of DFq and DFq coincide in Tp (Rm × Rm ). y) ∂x ˜ F (x. Since the Morse families ˜˜ are reduced. π ◦ ψ. we ﬁrst note the following reinterpretation of the Thom splitting theorem in the terminology of Morse families. Moreover. it suﬃces by Theorem 4. and similarly for F . p) is stably equivalent to a reduced Morse family in M(L. we ﬁrst prove Theorem 4. By an application of the implicit function theorem. this proves part (1) of Theorem 4.24 to show that any two reduced Morse families in M(L.19. ι. Consequently. a computation (using the transversality hypothesis) now shows that there exists a neighborhood B of Z within U such that (B. Combined with Theorem 4.18. By Theorem 4. Since ψ is symplectic. ∂x ˜ ˜ By the assumption that φ. there exists a Morse family generating a neighborhood of p. Then L is generated by a Morse family over M . ι. φ are both deﬁned on Rm × Rk . p) is nonempty. Proof.Existence and stable equivalence of Morse families Returning to the proof of Theorem 4. there e ∗ exists a function φ on U satisfying dφ = ψ αM − αL .25 Suppose that ι : L → T ∗ M is an exact lagrangian immersion such that ι∗ T (T ∗ M ) admits a lagrangian subbundle F transverse to both ι∗ V M and ι∗ T L. F coincides with the ˜ ˜ ˜ map λφ on the ﬁbercritical set Σφ near q. φ are nondegenerate phase functions. p) are stably equivalent. the 1form ψ ∗ αM − αL is closed on U . ι. F : Rm × Rk → Rm × Rm deﬁned by F (x.24. To prove part (2). y) . Using Lemma 3. ι. ∂φ (x. φ) is a Morse family such that Σφ = Z and λφ = ι ◦ π for the projection π : T ∗ L → L.
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 . we must also require that Xt be of the form ∂φ0 ∂ Xt = hij ∂θi ∂θj i. This completes the proof.j d ∗ (ft φt ) = ft∗ (Xt · φt + φ1 − φ0 ) dt cij ∂φ0 ∂φ0 + ∂θi ∂θj hij i. this identity implies that dφ = d(φ ◦ g) ˜ ˜ on Σφ . Hence we can solve for H in a neighborhood of b. we seek a vector ﬁeld Xt generating an isotopy ft that satisﬁes ft∗ φt = φ0 for all t ∈ [0.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 . 0= i. φ1 = φ ◦ g. As before. While there is no reason to expect this of g itself. To arrive at an equation for these coeﬃcients. i. to insure that each ft ﬁxes Σ and preserves ﬁbers. and so there exist functions cij deﬁned near b such that φ1 − φ0 = i. 1].15 that the identity dφ = λ∗ αM φ ˜ holds on the ﬁber critical set Σφ .e. Since λφ = λφ ◦ g. 2 54 . ˜ Recall from the proof of Theorem 4.v cuv ∂φ0 ∂φ0 ∂θu ∂θv . since φ0 is reduced. where C = (cij ).j for certain functions hij which vanish on Σ. Moreover φ1 − φ0 vanishes to second order along Σ. H = (hij ). Then Σφ0 = Σφ1 = Σ and λφ0 = λφ1 .j cij ∂φ0 ∂φ0 ∂θi ∂θj in a neighborhood of Σφ . and S is a matrix function which vanishes at b for all t. In order for g to deﬁne an equivalence between φ and ˜ φ. we will construct a similar diﬀeomorphism with this property by appealing once again to the deformation method: ˜ Let φ0 = φ. This equation holds if 0 = C + H(I + S).j ∂φ0 ∂ ∂θi ∂θj φ0 + t u. 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 .
Maslov objects If ι : L → T ∗ M is any lagrangian immersion, then the symplectic vector bundle ι∗ T (T ∗ M ) over L has two lagrangian subbundles, L1 = ι∗ T L and L2 = ι∗ V M . The Maslov class of (L, ι) is deﬁned as the degree1 cohomology class µL,ι = µ(L1 , L2 ) ∈ H 1 (L; R) described in Example 3.21. From this deﬁnition, it follows that, unlike the Liouville classes, the Maslov classes of two immersions (L, ι) and (L, ι ) are equal whenever ι and ι are homotopic through lagrangian immersions. Associated to any Morse family (B, pB , φ) over a manifold M is an index function indφ : Lφ → Z deﬁned by indφ (p) = index(Hφλ−1 (p) ),
φ
where the index of a quadratic form is, as usual, the dimension of the largest subspace on which it is negativedeﬁnite. Since the ﬁberhessian is nondegenerate where Lφ is projectable (see the discussion following Theorem 4.15), the index function indφ is constant on any connected projectable subset of Lφ . From Theorem 4.18, it follows furthermore that any two index functions indφ , indφ diﬀer by an integer on each connected component of Lφ ∩ Lφ . Example 4.26 Consider φ(x, θ) = θ3 /3 + θ(x2 − 1). We have ∂φ/∂θ = θ2 + x2 − 1; thus the ﬁber critical set Σφ is the circle θ2 + x2 = 1, and its image under λφ is the ﬁgureeight. The caustic set of the projection L → R consists of the points (−1, 0), (1, 0). To compute the index function corresponding to φ, we note that ∂2φ = 2θ; ∂θ2 consequently indφ (x, p) = 0 for (x, p) lying on the upper right part of the curve and ind(x, p) = 1 for (x, p) on the upper left. Since this loop is generated by a single phase function, there is a corresponding global index function, and the index of the loop is necessarily zero. A diﬀerent situation occurs in the case of a circle. The circle has two caustics, and the jump experienced by any index function as one passes through a caustic is given by the example just computed: passing through the right caustic in the +p direction decreases the index by 1, while passing through the left caustic in the same direction increases the index by 1. Traversing the circle in a counterclockwise direction, we see that the total index must change by −2. Consequently, the circle does not admit a global generating function. Of course, the Liouville class of the circle is also nonzero. However, it is easy to deform the circle to a closed curve with two transverse selfintersections which has zero Liouville class, but still admits no global phase function, since its Maslov class is nonzero.
55
As a degree1 cohomology class on L, the Maslov class determines via the exponential map R → U (1) an isomorphism class of ﬂat hermitian line bundles over L. A canonical representative of this class can be constructed as follows. First, we consider the union M(L, ι) =
p∈L
M(L, ι, p)
with the discrete topology. On the subset of L×M(L, ι)×Z consisting of all (p, (B, pB , φ), n) such that (B, pB , φ) ∈ M(L, ι, p), we now introduce an equivalence relation ∼ by setting (p, (B, pB , φ), n) ∼ (˜, (B, pB , φ), n) provided that p = p and p ˜ ˜ ˜ ˜ ˜ n + indφ (p) = n + indφ (p). ˜ ˜ The quotient space with respect to this relation is a principal Zbundle ML,ι over L which we will call the Maslov principal bundle. Associated to the Maslov principal bundle via the representation n → eiπn/2 of Z in U (1) is a complex line bundle ML,ι over L called the Maslov line bundle. Having discrete structure group, this line bundle carries a natural ﬂat connection with holonomy in {eiπn/2 } Z4 . Our main use of the Maslov line bundle will be to modify the halfdensities on L in order to incorporate the Maslov correction into our quantization scheme.
4.4
WKB quantization
In this section we will combine the tools assembled in the preceding sections into a technique for quantizing halfdensities on lagrangian submanifolds of arbitrary cotangent bundles. The phase bundle associated to an immersed lagrangian submanifold ι : L → T ∗ M and > 0 is deﬁned as the tensor product ΦL,ι, = ML,ι ⊗ ι∗ EM, , where we recall that EM, is the prequantum line bundle over T ∗ M (see Section 4.1). Observe that the product of the natural ﬂat connections on ML,ι and ι∗ EM, deﬁnes a ﬂat connection on the phase bundle whose holonomy is represented by the modZ reduction of the real cohomology class ˇ λL,ι + π µL,ι /2 ∈ H 1 (L; R), which we call the phase class of (L, ι). The phase bundle ΦL,ι, can be described explicitly as the collection of all quintuples (p, t, (B, pB , φ), n, z) where (p, t, n, z) ∈ L × T × Z × C and (B, pB , φ) ∈ M(L, ι, p), modulo the equivalence relation ∼ given by (p, t, (B, pB , φ), n, z) ∼ (˜, t, (B, pB , φ), n, z ) p ˜ ˜ ˜ ˜ ˜ ˜ whenever p = p and ˜
n ˜ z · e−it/ eiπ(n+indφ (p))/2 = z · e−it/ eiπ(˜ +indφ (p))/2 . ˜ ˜ def
56
A Morse family (B, pB , φ) which generates an open subset Lφ of L deﬁnes a nonvanishing parallel section of ΦL,ι, over Lφ by sφ, (p) = [p, 0, (B, pB , φ), 0, e−iφ(y)/ ], where λφ (y) = p. A check of these deﬁnitions shows that whenever ι(p) = λφ (y) = λφ (˜), ˜ y
y ˜ sφ, (p) eiφ(y)/ e−iπ indφ (p)/2 = sφ, (p) eiφ(˜)/ e−iπ indφ (p)/2 . ˜ ˜
For each ∈ R+ , we denote by Γpar (ΦL,ι, ) the space of parallel sections of ΦL,ι, . If, for a particular , the phase class of (L, ι) is integral, then Γpar (ΦL,ι, ) is a complex vector space isomorphic to C. Otherwise, Γpar (ΦL,ι, ) consists of a single point (the zero section of ΦL,ι, ). The product ΓL,ι = Γpar (ΦL,ι, )
>0
then has the structure of a Cmodule. An element s ∈ ΓL,ι is then a (generally discontinuous) function which assigns to each > 0 an element s in Γpar (ΦL,ι, ), so that the map p → s (p) deﬁnes a parallel section of ΦL,ι, . The symbol space of (L, ι) is deﬁned as the complex vector space def SL,ι = Ω1/2 L ⊗C ΓL,ι . The amplitude bundle Aφ associated to a Morse family (B, pB , φ) over a smooth manifold M is deﬁned as the complex line bundle Aφ = Λ1/2 B ⊗ Λ1/2 E over B, where E again denotes the subbundle ker(pB∗ ) of T B. An amplitude is a section a of Aφ . We will say that a is properly supported provided that the restriction of pB : B → M to Supp(a) is a proper map. The purpose of the space of amplitudes is to deﬁne a relation between halfdensities on M and symbols on the subset Lφ of L generated by φ. To describe this relation, we begin by noting that from the exact sequence of vector bundles 0 → E → T B → p∗ T M → 0 B over B, it follows that Λ1/2 B is naturally isomorphic to Λ1/2 p∗ T M ⊗ Λ1/2 E. This in B turn gives rise to the natural isomorphism Aφ Λ1/2 p∗ T M ⊗ ΛE. B
The image of an amplitude a on B under this isomorphism can be written as p∗ dx1/2 ⊗ σ, B where σ is a family of 1densities on the ﬁbers of pB , i.e., σx is a density on each nonempty p−1 (x). By ﬁberintegration we pass to a halfdensity on M : B I (φ, a)(x) = (2π )−n/2 e−inπ/4
p−1 (x) B
eiφ/ σx
dx1/2 ,
57
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 . When a is properly supported. To pass geometrically from a to a symbol on Lφ . a)(x). Then sa = s˜ on L if and only if a ˜ ˜ I (φ. ι). The theorem follows by comparing these expressions with (∗) above.3 that the nondegeneracy of φ gives rise to the following exact sequence of vector bundles over the ﬁbercritical set Σφ θ 0 → T Σφ → TΣφ B → E ∗ Σ → 0. ι) is projectable. φ) are stably equivalent. the associated symbol on Lφ is deﬁned as ∗ sa = gφ a ⊗ sφ .17 that gφ is a diﬀeomorphism from a neighborhood of p in L onto Σφ deﬁned by the composition λ−1 ◦ ι. respectively. By Theorem 4. we ﬁrst recall from Section 4. and similarly for a. a)(x) = eiφ/ e−iπ indφ /2 + O( )  detax Hφ1/2 ˜ ˜ and similarly for I (φ. ˜ where a is the halfdensity on Σφ induced by the amplitude a. φ). a) = O( ) locally uniformly on V . a) are linked by the following theorem. pB . the symbol sa and the halfdensity I (φ. Since ˜ ˜ φ = φ ◦ g. a be amplitudes on B. a)(x) = 0 if p−1 (x) = ∅. pB .3 implies that this occurs precisely when ˜ ˜ ˜  detax Hφ1/2 e−iφ/ eiπ indφ /2 =  detax Hφ1/2 e−iφ/ eiπ indφ /2 . and −1 so there exists a diﬀeomorphism g : Σφ → Σφ deﬁned as the composition g = gφ ◦ gφ . If the restriction of a to Σφ corresponds to a halfdensity a on Σφ under this isomorphism. ˜ ˜ ˜ Proof.ι.27 Suppose that two Morse families (B. is the canonical element of Γpar (ΦLφ . ι) is projectable. Lemma B. the section sφ. 58 . B. pB . for each φ . def (Here we recall from the discussion following Deﬁnition 4.where n = dim(p−1 (x)). up to a constant. ˜ ˜ ˜ (∗) Since (L. a) is a smooth halfdensity on M. setting I (φ. d φ Since Λ−1/2 E is naturally isomorphic to Λ1/2 E ∗ . we can apply the principle of stationary phase to each ﬁber of the projection pB : B → M to obtain I (φ. ) deﬁned above). ˜ ˜ ˜ Theorem 4. Also. (B. (B. B B we may diﬀerentiate under the integral to conclude that I (φ. When (L. the Morse families (B. φ) generate the same ˜ ˜ projectable lagrangian embedding (L. and let a.18. φ). this sequence induces an isomorphism of the restriction of Aφ to Σφ with Λ1/2 Σφ . a) − I (φ. pB .
Then there exists a unique halfdensity a supported in Lφ such that s = sφ ⊗ a. s) = I (φ. and let U be a tubular neighborhood of N . The set of for which this condition holds will be called admissible for L.28 An immersed lagrangian submanifold ι : L → T ∗ M is called quantizable if. Note that it is a straightforward generalization of the condition derived in the preceding section. where π : νN → N is the natural projection. which we can extend to an amplitude a on B. Furthermore. the existence of nonzero symbols requires that the phase bundle ΦL. s) coincides with pullback. pN . ι. and consider a symbol s on L supported in Lφ . ι. such that each Lj is generated by a Morse family (Bj . I (L. Example 4. ι. φ) is a Morse family such that the phase function φ generates an open subset Lφ ⊂ L. a)(x). φ) is a second Morse family which generates Lφ .e. ι. for some ∈ R+ . φ). Thus. and choose a partition of unity {hj } subordinate to {Lj }. hj · s). ι. 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 .29 Let N be a closed submanifold of a smooth manifold M . ι) ⊂ T ∗ M . s) = j I (L. pB .27 asserts that this choice of I (L. or. we note that if (B. φj ). pB . up to O( ) terms. we introduce the following terminology. First.e.ι admit nontrivial parallel sections. We then set I (L. For this reason. that the phase class of (L. ι) be integral.. This deﬁnition is known as the Maslov quantization condition. Deﬁnition 4. Using the remarks above. equivalently. where r = π ◦ ψ −1 is a 59 . s) is welldeﬁned. a) − I (φ. i.27 we draw two conclusions about this tentative deﬁnition when Lφ is ˜ ˜ ˜ projectable. although the technique above enables us to quantize all symbols on L in a consistent way. it is easy to check that up to O( ) terms. ˜ ˜ and a is an amplitude on B obtained as above. Of course. Consider the Morse family (r∗ N ⊥ . From Theorem 4.ι admits a global parallel section.2 Morse families provide a general means for locally quantizing symbols on an immersed lagrangian submanifold (L. then sa = sa = s. this deﬁnition depends only on the semiclassical state (L. its phase bundle ΦL. s). and so ˜ ˜ I (φ. a) = O( ). ι. we note that Theorem 4. i. To quantize an arbitrary symbol s on L. pBj . Suppose that (B. compactly supported in ﬁbers. we ﬁrst ﬁx a locally ﬁnite cover {Lj } of L. We then set I (L. if its phase class is integral. and (gφ )∗ a may be canonically identiﬁed with a section of the amplitude bundle of B over the ﬁbercritical set Σφ .
30 The ﬁber critical set of the phase function φ(x. since the phase function φ has a degenerate critical point in the ﬁber p−1 (x). B where b = dim(B) and u ∈ Ω0 M . A more appropriate way to interpret the expression I (L.retraction of U onto N . φ) ∈ M(L. ι. ψ −1 (pN (p)) . pN denotes the natural submersion r∗ N ⊥ → M .2 that classical solutions to the transport equation are singular at caustic points. Quantum states as distributions Unfortunately. s) then consists of all distributional halfdensities I on M obtained by choosing a locally ﬁnite open cover {Lj } of L and a 60 . s) is smooth. u = (2π )−b/2 e−iπb/4 B 1/2 eiφ/ a ⊗ p∗ u. whereas we saw in Section 2. The basic technical diﬃculty is that the principle of stationary phase (the basic underpinning of Theorem 4. the interpretation of I (L.27) no longer applies to the integral eiφ/ σx p−1 (x) B when x is a caustic point. and the map λφ : N ⊥ → T ∗ M equals the inclusion. and φ : r∗ N ⊥ → R is deﬁned by φ(p) = p. s) in the presence of caustic points is as a family of distributional halfdensities on M deﬁned as follows. B Example 4. In particular. The family I (L. this implies that the conormal bundle of any submanifold of M satisﬁes the Maslov quantization condition. we deﬁne a distributional halfdensity on M by I (φ. The origin is therefore a degenerate critical point for φ. 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. ι) and compactly supported amplitude a on B. a). Thus. ι. θ) dθ. Indeed. ι. and stationary phase cannot be used to estimate the integral eiθ R 3 /3 a(0. For each Morse family (B. s) at regular values of πL is not valid at caustics. and therefore both the Liouville and Maslov classes of N ⊥ are zero. at whose points the ﬁberhessian assumes the form ∂ 2 φ/∂θ2 = 2x. ι. pB . Since ψ is an embedding. 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.
The family I (L. a). (B. and similarly for a. then sa (p) = s˜ (p) if and only if a ˜ ˜ I (φ. ˜˜ ˜ ˜ where a is the halfdensity on Σφ induced by the amplitude a. φ). and so the preceding equation gives ˜ y y y eiR(y)/ e−iπ ind R (y)/2 eiR(˜)/ e−iπ ind R (˜)/2 = . we have R(y) − R(˜) = φ(y) − φ(˜). pB . In this case. Set R = φ − ψ ◦ pB . As in the proof of Theorem 4. ι). respectively. s) may appear very large. e−iψ/ u = O( ). a be amplitudes on B. up to a constant. pB . φ). φ) generate the same ˜ ˜ lagrangian embedding (L.27. a). Proof. If ψ : M → R is a smooth function whose diﬀerential intersects ι(L) at exactly one point ι(p) transversely. e−iψ/ u − I (φ.partition of unity {hj } subordinate to {Lj }. s) consists of those distributional halfdensities obtained in this way using amplitudes aj such that saj = s over each Lφj . ι. ι. φ) implies that ˜ y indφ (p) − indφ (˜) = ind R (y) − ind R (˜). 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 . a). pB . aj ). Comparing this expression with (∗∗) above completes the proof.31 Suppose that two Morse families (B. (B. Moreover. 2 61 . We ﬁrst prove ˜ ˜ ˜ Theorem 4. e−iψ/ u = eiR(y)/ e−iπ ind R (y)/2 + O( )  deta R (y)1/2 ˜ ˜ and similarly for I (φ. e−iψ/ u . Then set k I = j=1 I (φj . Although the class I (L. Since ˜ ˜ = R ◦ g. ˜ 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. the function R is a phase function having the same ﬁber critical set as φ. it is easy ˜ ˜ ˜ to check that stable equivalence of the Morse families (B. Since ψ ◦ pB is constant on the ﬁbers of pB . B. pB .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 . an application of the principle of stationary phase gives I (φ. Lemma B. ˜ ˜y ˜ y Since g is ﬁberpreserving. and let a. a link among its members can be described as follows.
φ) is a Morse family over a manifold M . A check of the deﬁnitions shows that the main objects in our quantization scheme behave nicely with respect to this notion of equivalence. When the image of dψ is transverse to L.ι → SL . This critical point is nondegenerate provided that λφ−S is transverse to the zero ˜ ∗ section of T M near x. In terms of our discussion. ι. we obtain a new Morse ˜ family (B.Now consider a semiclassical state (L. e−iψ/ u = def j I (φj . ι. s). By setting S = S ◦ pB . up to O( ). pB . then. e−iψ/ u . ι ) are equivalent provided that there exists a diﬀeomorphism f : L → L such that ι = ι ◦ f . e−iψ/ depends only on the principal part of s. then x is a critical point ˜ of φ − S. or. Note in particular that if dS(pB (x)) = λφ (x) for some x ∈ Σφ . we let {Lj } be a locally ﬁnite cover of L such that each Lj is generated by a Morse family (Bj . if E is a regular value of some hamiltonian function H on T ∗ M . Example 4. a) to be a distribution. pBj . φ − S) for which Σφ = Σφ−S and λφ = fdS ◦ λφ−S . we will say that (L. where aj is the amplitude on Bj obtained in the usual way from the symbol hj ·s on Lj . a diﬀeomorphism f : L → L as above induces an isomorphism of symbol spaces SL. We then deﬁne I (L. this means the following. In this way. φj ) over M . aj ). if λφ is transverse to the image of dS near x. the principal part of I (L. s). If ι : L → T ∗ M and ι : L → T ∗ M are lagrangian immersions. equivalently. where fdS is the ﬁberwise ˜ ˜ translation map deﬁned by dS.32 Suppose that (B. On the classical level. a symbol on the immersed lagrangian submanifold L is welldeﬁned as an equivalence class of symbols on the members of L. then the HamiltonJacobi equation H ◦ι=E 62 f∗ . Thus. pB . 28. For a thorough exposition of this topic. any lagrangian immersion ι : L → T ∗ M deﬁnes an equivalence class of lagrangian immersions in T ∗ M which. we refer to [21. we can sometimes deﬁne it even when a does not have compact support. s). Equivalent semiclassical states A further important modiﬁcation of our quantization picture is based on the conceptual distinction between an “immersion” and an “immersed submanifold”. Moreover. 31]. As before. ι) and (L . and choose a partition of unity {hj } subordinate to {Lj }.ι . and suppose ˜ that S : V → R is a smooth function. ι. for notational simplicity we will denote by L. By allowing I (φ. We refer to the equivalence class L as an immersed lagrangian submanifold of T ∗ M .
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. o Our list of classical and quantum correspondences now assumes the form: Object basic space state Classical version T ∗M (L. s) as above Quantum version HM distributional halfdensity on M Schr¨dinger equation o ˆ operator H on HM timeevolution Hamilton’s equations generator of evolution function H on T ∗ M stationary state ˆ state (L. the vector ﬁelds XH. s) as the (unique) distributional halfdensity I (L. as described above. (L . ι .ι = f∗ XH. s) is a semiclassical approximate solution to the timeindependent Schr¨dinger equation on M . s ). ι). s) which we denote by LXH s = 0.deﬁnes a condition on the class L which we denote by H(L) = E. we are further led to deﬁne a semiclassical state in an arbitrary symplectic manifold (P.ι s = 0 is a welldeﬁned condition on (L. On the quantum level. we are led to view the equivalence class (L. ω) to be an immersed lagrangian submanifold equipped with a halfdensity and possibly some “phase object” corresponding to a parallel section of the phase bundle in the cotangent bundle case. and therefore the homogeneous transport equation LXH. If (L.13) satisfy XH.ι induced on (L. s) satisﬁes the associated HamiltonJacobi and homogeneous transport equations. Note. s) = I (L . s). The state is stationary with respect to a classical hamiltonian H on T ∗ M provided that (L. s).ι and XH. ι ) by the hamiltonian vector ﬁeld of H (see Example 3. 63 . From these remarks. s) on M obtained by quantizing any member of (L. however. then I (L. ι . s) is a stationary semiclassical state. that it is unclear what the quantum states are which are approximated by these geometric objects. it is easy to check that for any members (L. (L . s) as a semiclassical state in T ∗ M . ι. In this case. s). we have I (L. ι. s ) of the equivalence class (L.ι . and thus we may deﬁne the quantization of (L. s) satisfying eigenvector of H H(L) = E and LXH s = 0 With these correspondences between classical and quantum mechanics in mind.
Lemma 5. Linear symplectic reduction Degenerate skewsymmetric bilinear forms yield symplectic vector spaces in the following way. π∗ −− Y ∗ ← − (Y /Y ⊥ )∗ ω ˜ ˜ ω Y −− −→ π Y /Y ⊥ 2 If ω ([x]) = 0. First note that ω gives rise to a skewsymmetric bilinear form ω on Y /Y ⊥ by the equation ω ([x].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.5 The Symplectic Category There are many symplectic manifolds which are not cotangent bundles. 5. and so x ∈ Y ⊥ and hence [x] = 0. Proof. Then LC = L ∩ C + C ⊥ is a lagrangian subspace of V contained in C. where π is the projection. To prove the nondegeneracy of ω . starting with cotangent bundles. ˜ ˜ The symplectic quotient space Y /Y ⊥ described in this lemma is known as the (linear) reduced space associated to Y . concluding with Dirac’s formulation of the quantization problem. and LC = (L ∩ C)/(L ∩ C ⊥ ) is a lagrangian subspace of C/C ⊥ . A special case of linear reduction arises when Y is a coisotropic subspace of a symplectic vector space and ω equals the restriction of the symplectic form to Y . 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. Lagrangian subspaces behave remarkably well with respect to this reduction. Lemma 5. 64 . then ω (x) = 0. y).1 A skewsymmetric bilinear form ω on a vector space Y induces a symplectic structure on Y /Y ⊥ . C ⊂ V a lagrangian and a coisotropic subspace respectively. [y]) = ω(x. an important process known as symplectic reduction generates many examples of such manifolds. we use the following commutative diagram. For instance.2 Let V be a symplectic vector space and L.
65 . then there exists a linear symplectomorphism V → C ⊥ ⊕ V /C ⊕ C/C ⊥ . and we collect some useful facts about them in the following examples. L . G are any three subspaces of V . The projections V → V /C and C → C/C ⊥ restricted to A. the linear reduced space C/C ⊥ equals (V . W ) = index QT sgn(L. ω ) are symplectic vector spaces and L is a lagrangian subspace of V . Then A. Now suppose that V and V are of equal dimension and T : V → V is a linear symplectic map.Proof. C ⊥ with respect to the innerproduct gJ on V . ω ). Let J be a ωcompatible complex structure on V . we observe that since LC = LC /C ⊥ . we deﬁne ind(L. B are orthogonal to C. and set A = JC ⊥ and B = C ∩ JC. and C ⊥ = 0 ⊕ L. Lemma 5. Proof. (V . then (E + F ) ∩ G = E ∩ G + F if and only if F ⊂ G. the selforthogonality of LC follows from the simple fact that if E. Consequently. then then C = V ⊕ L is a coisotropic subspace of the direct sum V ⊕ V (see Example 3. Note that (LC )⊥ = (L + C ⊥ ) ∩ C. then C ⊥ ⊕V /C also carries a natural symplectic structure induced by ω. F.4). Observe that if C is a coisotropic subspace of (V. ω) is a symplectic vector space with a coisotropic subspace C. If ΓT ⊂ V ⊕ V is the lagrangian subspace deﬁned by the graph of T . This gives rise to the following decomposition of V . then the reduced lagrangian subspace (ΓT )C of C/C ⊥ equals T (L) ⊂ V .4 If (V. W ) = signature QT These quantities will be useful in our study of the Maslov bundle under reduction. the second assertion follows from the equality L⊥ = (LC )⊥ /C ⊥ .3 If (V. Next. ω). Denoting by QT the quadratic form QT on L induced by T . L . C 2 Example 5. B give rise to an isomorphism V = C ⊥ + A + B → C ⊥ ⊕ V /C ⊕ C/C ⊥ . ω). Since by assumption C ⊥ ⊂ C. L are lagrangian subspaces of a symplectic vector space V and W ⊂ V is a lagrangian subspace transverse to both L and L . 2 Recall that if L. then there exists a natural linear symplectomorphism from V to L ⊕ L∗ which sends W onto the subspace 0 ⊕ L∗ and L onto the graph of some selfadjoint linear map T : L → L∗ .
W ) = − sgn(L. The composition of a selfadjoint linear map A : V ∗ → V with the projection V → V /E restricts to a selfadjoint linear map AE : E ⊥ → V /E (note that V /E identiﬁes canonically with (E ⊥ )∗ ).Example 5. L) = sgn(QE ) + sgn(LC . From [21. i. This means that LX ω = 0. ω) is integrable. If the vector ﬁeld Y belongs to (T M )⊥ . then LC = (V /E) ⊕ 0 and LC = 0 ⊕ E ⊥ . LC ). Evidently. and [X. L the lagrangian subspaces V ⊕ 0 and 0 ⊕ V ∗ . Theorem 5. p.e. we leave to the reader the job of checking the following elementary identities for the case when the lagrangian subspaces L.7 The characteristic subbundle of a presymplectic manifold (M.5 To begin. a symplectic form is closed and nondegenerate. The reduced symplectic vector space is then C/C ⊥ = (V /E) ⊕ E ⊥ . If X belongs to (T M )⊥ . Y ] ω = LX (Y ω) − Y LX ω. Presymplectic structures and reduction By deﬁnition. then the ﬁrst term on the right hand side of this equation vanishes identically. W ) = − sgn(L . Y ] lies in (T M )⊥ . W .. Proof. then Cartan’s formula combined with the assumption that ω is closed implies that ω is invariant under the ﬂow of X.6 Suppose that V is a ﬁnitedimensional vector space with a subspace E ⊂ V and its algebraic orthogonal E ⊥ ⊂ V ∗ . L) and sgn(Q∗ E ⊥ ) = sgn(LC . and C ⊥ = E ⊕ 0. Now if we denote by L. In some sense. L ). 66 . then sgn(Q) = sgn(QE ) + sgn(Q∗ E ⊥ ). Leaving for the reader the veriﬁcation that (T M )⊥ is actually a subbundle of T M . L . WC . with the dimension of the orthogonal (Tx M )⊥ the same for all x ∈ M . If Q∗ denotes the quadratic form on V ∗ deﬁned by A. Then C = V ⊕E ⊥ is a coisotropic subspace of V ⊕V ∗ with its usual symplectic structure. we therefore have sgn(Q∗ ) = sgn(L . WC . Combined with the preceding equations. W . the lagrangian subspace W of V ⊕V ∗ given by the graph of A passes under reduction by C to the graph WC of AE . so the second term vanishes as well. W . L. ω is called a presymplectic structure on M with characteristic subbundle (T M )⊥ .130] we recall that if Q∗ is nondegenerate and Q is the quadratic form it induces on V . the next best structure a manifold M may possess along these lines is a closed twoform ω of constant rank. In this case. LC ). this formula gives sgn(L . we recall that Lie brackets and inner products are related by the formula [X. respectively. Example 5. L are themselves transverse: sgn(L.
A pointwise application of Lemma 5.2 The foliation M⊥ deﬁned by the characteristic subbundle of M is known as the characteristic foliation of M . The symplectic manifold (M/M⊥ . nondegenerate 2form ωM on M/M⊥ . N to the ﬁber product N ×V M . then ker(ω ) = (T C)⊥ . The product P × L is therefore reducible. and L is a lagrangian submanifold of Q. Example 5. the form ωM is necessarily closed and therefore symplectic.2.2. Q are symplectic manifolds. the tangent space Tp C contains its symplectic orthogonal (Tp C)⊥ = {v ∈ Tp P : ω(v. then we say that M is reducible. ω). and since the quotient map M → M/M⊥ is a submersion. the hamiltonian ﬂow associated to a function H : R2n → R generates the characteristic foliation of any regular energy surface H −1 (E). 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 5.8 As noted in Example 3. together with the fact that LX ω = 0 for characteristic X. If P. The corresponding reduced symplectic manifold (when it exists) will be the symplectic model for the space of quantum states of energy E. for each p ∈ C. in eﬀect. Recall that a submanifold C ⊂ P is called coisotropic if. To begin. In this case. we will be interested in presymplectic manifolds which arise as coisotropic submanifolds of some symplectic manifold (P. If the quotient space M/M⊥ is a smooth manifold. Our goal for the remainder of this section is to describe two operations on immersed lagrangian submanifolds deﬁned by a reducible coisotropic submanifold. shows that the presymplectic structure ω induces a smooth. the form ω deﬁnes a presymplectic structure on P. 67 ι r . where ι × : N × M → V × V is the product map and ∆V ⊂ V × V is the diagonal.13. ωM ) is called the reduced manifold of M . rN denote the restrictions of the cartesian projections N × M → M. then P × L is a coisotropic submanifold of P × Q whose characteristic foliation consists of leaves of the form {p} × L for p ∈ P . Since dω = 0 by hypothesis. Since dim(T C)⊥ = dim(P ) − dim(C) is constant. we can view C as an abstract manifold and note that if ω is the pullback of the symplectic form ω by the natural inclusion C → P . This gives rise to the following commutative diagram N ×V M − − M −M→ rN N −− V −→ where rM . For the most part. w) = 0 for all w ∈ Tp C}. 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 .
then ι and intersect cleanly. if ι is an immersion. 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. 3. ∗ ∗ Proof. w) = w. Thus. then the map (pC ◦ rC ) : L ×P C → C/C ⊥ has constant rank. Lemma 5. w) = 0 only if w = 0. 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 . w) of N ×V M . and so the basic properties of symplectic orthogonalization applied ﬁberwise to these bundles give ker(pC ◦ rC )∗ = G⊥ ∩ G ∩ F = G⊥ ∩ F = (G + F )⊥ . 2. 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 . the vector (ι × )∗ (v.Deﬁnition 5. if ι and are cleanly intersecting immersions. Let F. If a lagrangian immersion ι : L → P intersects a coisotropic submanifold C ⊂ P cleanly. 68 . Since rM ∗ (v.9 If N.10 1. The clean intersection hypothesis implies that rC∗ T (L ×P C) = F ∩ G. In particular. The usefulness of clean intersection in symplectic geometry lies in its compatibility with symplectic orthogonalization. For brevity. we can conclude that rM : N ×V M → M is an immersion as well. as in the following lemma. If the product ι × of two smooth maps ι : N → V and : M → V is transverse to the diagonal ∆V . and so ι∗ v = ∗ w. The kernel of (pC ◦ rC )∗ then equals G⊥ ∩ rC∗ T (L ×P C). M. Then for any tangent vector (v.11 Let P be a symplectic manifold. it follows that rM ∗ (v. w) is tangent to the diagonal in V × V . G denote the lagrangian and coisotropic subbundles rL T L and rC T C of the ∗ symplectic vector bundle rC T P over the ﬁber product L ×P C. V are smooth manifolds. 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. then the maps rN and rM are themselves immersions. Example 5. A particular case of this situation occurs when is a submersion and ι is any smooth map. in which case ι∗ v = ∗ w = 0.
ι = ι ◦ f . 69 . L) provided that C is reducible. we will say that the immersed submanifold N and the map : M → V intersect cleanly. Since LC is the quotient of L ×P C by the ﬁbers of pC ◦ rC . then LC and LC are immersed lagrangian submanifolds of C/C ⊥ and P . L). With these remarks in mind. Finally. then the same is true of any other member of N .10(2) implies that the map C : LC → C is a smooth immersion. J2 ) = g(J1 . Proof. L) in P induces immersed submanifolds LC and LC of C/C ⊥ and P . it is easy to check that for any pair J1 .2) is reducible. 2 If the quotient of L ×P C by the ﬁbers of the map pC ◦ rC is a smooth. A pointwise application of Lemma 5. J2 ) − g(J1 .e. we deﬁne LC as the ﬁber product of ιC and the quotient map pC : C → C/C ⊥ . The tangent space to CM at a point p identiﬁes naturally with the space of Jacobi ﬁelds normal to the geodesic represented by p. In this case.13 If (M.2 implies that this immersion is lagrangian. we have dim(ker(pC ◦ rC )∗ ) = dim(L) + dim(L ×P C) − dim(C). and the reduced manifold CM = C/C ⊥ is the space of oriented geodesics on M . we will say that a coisotropic submanifold C and an immersed lagrangian submanifold L in a symplectic manifold P form a reducible pair (C. the internal sum F + G and its orthogonal (F + G)⊥ also have constant rank. In this case. J2 ). it follows that these are immersed lagrangian submanifolds. Evidently. L) is a reducible pair in a symplectic manifold P . Hausdorﬀ manifold. all of whose geodesics are closed and −1 have the same length. In fact. and a pointwise application of Lemma 5. Example 5. i. then we obtain an induced immersion ιC from the reduced space LC of L ×P C into C/C ⊥ . then for each E > 0. if a member ι : N → V of the equivalence class N intersects a smooth map : M → V cleanly. Since ιC : LC → C/C ⊥ is an immersion. the symplectic form on CM is given in terms of the metric by ω(J1 . C intersect cleanly. the constant energy hypersurface C = kM (E) (see Section 3. Theorem 5.Since F ∩ G has constant rank. Let ι : L → P be a ﬁxed element of L. J2 of normal Jacobi ﬁelds along p. We leave it to the reader to check that any reducible pair (C. since the immersed submanifolds LC and LC are welldeﬁned by the reducible pair (C. g) is a riemannian manifold. indicating that the dimension of ker(pC ◦ rC )∗ is independent of the base point in L ×P C. 2 Example 5. Moreover. Recall from Chapter 4 that an immersed submanifold N of a manifold V is an equivalence class N of immersions.2 shows that this immersion is lagrangian.12 If (C. By C : LC → C/C ⊥ we denote the restriction of the cartesian projection LC × C → C to LC . respectively. and L. respectively. 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 induced map ιC : LC → C/C ⊥ is a smooth immersion.
that is CN = {(x. From Theorem 5. If F is integrable.15 In the notation above. the reduction of which is complex projective space CP n . this implies that CN is coisotropic. and therefore CS n is represented by the grassmannian Gr+ (2. Lemma 5. n + 1).e. Since the symplectic form on Cn+1 is invariant under unitary transformations. we consider the sphere S n equipped with its standard metric. p) ∈ T ∗ M : x ∈ N.12. The conormal bundles of the leaves deﬁne a foliation of CN by lagrangian submanifolds. Now let Z denote the intersection of CN with the zero section of T ∗ M . The unit sphere S 2n+1 is a coisotropic submanifold of Cn+1 . More precisely. 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 . ∗ By deﬁnition. and let N ⊂ M be a smooth submanifold equipped with a tangent distribution F. by Lemma 3. a subbundle of T N ⊂ TN M .14 Note that the standard symplectic structure on R2n+2 is equivalent to the imaginary part of the standard hermitian metric on Cn+1 . and moreover. CN is a subbundle of TN M . Proof. it follows that the real projective space RP n is a lagrangian submanifold of CP n . 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.For further details.6. ωM ). Suppose that M is a smooth manifold. Then the natural projection T ∗ M → M maps Z diﬀeomorphically onto N . the resulting symplectic form on CP n is invariant under transformations induced by unitary transformations. but we wish to consider various properties of CN when it is viewed as a smooth submanifold of the symplectic manifold (T ∗ M. 70 .. i. TZ CN = T N ⊕ F ⊥ . Fx ⊂ ker(p)}. then we can consider its leaves as submanifolds of M via the inclusion N → M . see [12]. The conormal bundle N ⊥ to a smooth submanifold N ⊂ M is a lagrangian submanifold of T ∗ M which intersects C cleanly. Conormal submanifolds A particular example of symplectic reduction which we will use in the next chapter begins with the following setup. Example 5. the annihilator CN is a coisotropic submanifold of T ∗ M if and only if the distribution F is integrable. By CN we denote the annihilator of F. We begin with the following lemma. N ⊥ ∩ C is a sphere bundle over N transverse to the characteristic foliation of C. Each oriented geodesic in S n identiﬁes naturally with an oriented 2dimensional subspace of Rn+1 .
.16 If the leaf space N/F is a smooth.6 implies that F ⊥ is foliated by isotropic leaves of CN . i.where F ⊥ is the subbundle of VZ M which annihilates F. π −1 pC In other words. it follows that the annihilator CN ⊂ T ∗ N of F is a coisotropic submanifold which. contains the conormal bundle F ⊥ to any leaf F of F. ∗ ∗ 2 Example 5. and let CB ⊂ T ∗ B be the conormal bundle to the ﬁbers of the submersion pB : B → V . 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. This completes the proof. By Lemma 5. The lagrangian immersion λφ : Σφ → T ∗ M equals the composition B Σφ → L ∩ CB → CV /C ⊥ . 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. p) ∈ CN contains the subspace Fx of Tx N in its kernel.17 Suppose that F is a foliation of a manifold N . Lemma 3. and it is easy to check that the level sets of this map are the ﬁbers of the projection CN → CN /C ⊥ . Hausdorﬀ manifold. when φ is nondegenerate. suppose that (B. it follows that (TZ CN )⊥ = F ⊕ (T N )⊥ . Example 5. Since F ⊥ is a lagrangian submanifold of T ∗ N . 71 . Since. pB . φ) is a Morse family over a manifold M .15. p) deﬁnes an element of T ∗ (N/F).16 shows that each such leaf projects diﬀeomorphically onto F . Proof. This gives a welldeﬁned surjective submersion f : CN → T ∗ (N/F). If L ⊂ T ∗ B is the lagrangian submanifold given by the image of the diﬀerential dφ. 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 . by deﬁnition. by deﬁnition. the proof of Lemma 5.15 can be reformulated as an application of Theorem 5. Theorem 4. Thus we get a diﬀeomorphism CN /C ⊥ → T ∗ (N/F).17. From the natural lagrangian splitting of T (T ∗ M ) along the zero section of T ∗ M . and thus the intersections of Z with the isotropic leaves of CN are integral manifolds of the distribution F. it follows that (x. Moreover.12 when the lagrangian submanifold im(dφ) is transverse to E. 2 Lemma 5. then the reduced space CN /C ⊥ is canonically symplectomorphic to T ∗ (N/F). each (x. To prove that the preceding diﬀeomorphism is symplectic.e.
Lemma 5. φ) = ind Hφx + ind(Vp M. W ) = 0. W ) = ind(L. so that p = λφ (x) lies in the zero section ZM of T ∗ M . L . and so ind(QE ) = ind Hφx . 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. φ) is a Morse family which generates a lagrangian submanifold in L ⊂ T ∗ M and x ∈ B is a (nondegenerate) critical point of φ. W ) − ind(L. L of a symplectic vector space V . L are lagrangian subspaces of V and W. W ∈ LL. we denote by LL. W. then σ(L.5. Tp ZM ). For W. Reduction and the Maslov bundle Using linear reduction we can give a useful alternative description of the Maslov bundle of an immersed lagrangian submanifold L in T ∗ M . W. the cross index of the quadruple (L. Immediately from this deﬁnition and Example 5. W. W . L . W ) + σ(L. W . By deﬁnition. Tp L.6 implies that the Morse index ιM (x. L . L .We remark that since CN is a bundle over N . W ) + σ(L. W ∈ LL. pV .L .20 If L. Now suppose that Q is the nondegenerate quadratic form on Tx B deﬁned by the hessian of φ. Given two lagrangian subspaces L. φ) of the critical point x satisﬁes ιM (x. we obtain the following “cocycle” property of the cross index. On the other hand. W ). L . Let let E ⊂ Tx B be the kernel of the linearized projection pB∗ : T B → T M .L . so that the last formula in Example 5. W . L .18 at x equals the coisotropic subspace C = Tx B ⊕ E ⊥ . 2 72 . Denoting by x the point in the zero section of T ∗ B lying over x. it is easy to check that the tangent space to the conormal submanifold CV deﬁned in Example 5. V.L the subset of the lagrangian grassmannian L(V ) comprised of those lagrangian subspaces which are transverse to both L and L .18 arises when (B. the intersection T CN ∩ V M is a (constant rank) subbundle of T CN .6 and 5. the restriction of Q to E equals the form induced by the ﬁberhessian Hφx of φ at x. Example 5.19 An important special case of Examples 5. we recall that Tx (T ∗ B) ∗ admits the natural lagrangian splitting Tx B ⊕ Tx B. L . W ) is deﬁned as the integer σ(L.
ι → Mλ. φ − S) = ind Hφx + ind(Vp M. n) to the function (p. and moreover it maps Tp Lφ−S to Tp 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. ﬁx a point x in the ﬁber critical set Σφ . The lagrangian subbundles λ. Natural lagrangian subbundles of E are then given by λ = ι∗ T L and λ = ι∗ V M . λ are lagrangian subbundles. Theorem 5. pB . ˜ where p = p − dS(pV (x)) and Lφ−S is the lagrangian submanifold generated by φ − S.19 it follows that ˜ the Morse index ιM (x.ι is canonically isomorphic to Mλ. where E is a symplectic vector bundle and λ. we deﬁne a map L × M(L. pB . φ). Thus. Vp M . A function fφ : LTp Lφ . From Example 4. then x is a ˜ ˜ nondegenerate critical point of φ − S. A special case of this setup occurs when L is an immersed lagrangian submanifold of ∗ T M so that E = ι∗ T (T ∗ M ) is a symplectic vector bundle over L. ι) × Z → Mλ. λ then correspond to smooth sections of L(E). Associated to E is its lagrangian grassmannian bundle L(E) whose ﬁber over x ∈ M is simply L(Ex ).Vp M → Z is obtained by setting fφ (Y ) = ιM (x. L . 73 . Now if Y is any lagrangian subspace of Tp (T ∗ M ) transverse to Vp M . Now we may assign a principal Z bundle to a triple (E. it follows that this function satisﬁes fφ (Y ) − fφ (Y ) = σ(Tp Lφ .L . the Maslov bundle ML. λ ). Y. Y ).λ (E). λ. φ) be a Morse family over a manifold M . the subspace Vp M to the vertical subspace Vp M at p.λx (Ex ).21 In the notation above. φ − SY ).L (V ).L (V ) the space of functions f : LL. the preceding equation and Example 5. From the preceding paragraph and the deﬁnition of Mλ. Using these remarks. fφ ).We denote by FL. W ∈ LL.L → Z such that f (W ) − f (W ) = σ(L. Vp M . S) = ind Hφx + ind(Tp Lφ . where S = S ◦ pB . and we denote by Mλ. and Tp ZM to the tangent space Y of the image of dS at p. and set p = λφ (x). From Example 5. ˜ Fiberwise translation by dS does not change the index on the right. Y ).λ (E). Tp Lφ−S .λ (E) the principal Z bundle whose ﬁber over x ∈ M equals Fλx . it follows that this map passes to an isomorphism of principal Z bundles ML. we recall that if S : M → R is a smooth function such that the image of dS intersects λφ (Σφ ) transversely at p.L . W.λ (E) by sending the triple (p. Tp ZM ). (B. Let (B.32. Proof. then there exists a function S : V → R such that Y = im dS(pV (x)).5 imply ιM (x. φ − S) at x is given by ˜ ιM (x. From the discussion above.λ (E). W ) for all W.
λη (η/η ⊥ ). our goal is to establish the following property of the bundle Mλ. L and a coisotropic subspace C. Moreover. First consider a symplectic vector space V with lagrangian subspaces L.λ (E) to (x.L .24 Suppose that E is a symplectic vector bundle over Y . For the remainder of this section. Thus. LC . Proof. The starting point of the proof is the following special case of the theorem. then Mλ.22 Suppose that E is a symplectic vector bundle over M with lagrangian subbundles λ. LC and WC /(LC + LC )⊥ maps onto W/(L + L )⊥ under the symplectomorphism above. L ⊂ C. then Mλ. if W ∈ LL. fη ). 2 Lemma 5. then there exists a vector bundle symplectomorphism E → λ ⊕ λ∗ which maps λ onto λ ⊕ 0 and λ onto 0 ⊕ λ∗ . The proofs are rather technical and can be passed over in a ﬁrst reading. L . ind(L. λ and a coisotropic subbundle η. Lemma 5. If L. λ and a coisotropic subbundle η. we can deﬁne the isomorphism Mλ.λη (η/η ⊥ ). where fη (Wηx ) = f (W ) for each W ∈ Lλx . λ are ﬁberwise transverse.λ (E) is canonically isomorphic to Mλη . 74 .λ (E) → Mλη . Using this remark.λ (E) is canonically isomorphic to Y × Z.λx . then Mλ. WC ). λ ⊂ η. Proof. f ) ∈ Mλ. then LC is transverse to LC . Any choice of a positivedeﬁnite quadratic form on λ is induced by a section T of Hom(λ. If λ. 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 )⊥ . Theorem 5. W ) = ind(LC . If λ ∩ η and λ ∩ η have constant rank. λ∗ ) comprised of selfadjoint maps. If λ.λ (E) is canonically isomorphic to Mλη .λ (E) under symplectic reduction.23 Suppose that E is a symplectic vector bundle with lagrangian subbundles λ.λη (η/η ⊥ ) ﬁberwise by sending (x.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. If λ. λ are lagrangian subbundles such that λ ∩ λ has constant rank.
λ (E) × Mλ . λx ) = 0 for all x ∈ Y . 2 Proof of Theorem 5.λη (η/η ⊥ ).λ (E) × Mλη . A natural section s(x) = (x. Thus. In general. λ of E are contained in the ˜ coisotropic subbundle η. Lemma 5. λ are lagrangian subbundles of a symplectic vector bundle E.λ (E) is therefore given by f (λx ) = 0. Mλ. it follows that λ∩λη has constant rank.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.λ (E).25 Suppose that E. whereas their reductions by E ⊕ λ are given by T (λ) and λ .λη (E) × Mλη .λη (η/η ⊥ ). ˜ ˜ ˜˜ From the assumption that λ∩η has constant rank.λ (E) is canonically isomorphic to the principalbundle product (see Appendix D for the deﬁnition) Mλ.L (E ) are canonically isomorphic. the bundle Mλ. we obtain the following canonical isomorphisms: Mλ. λη are transverse lagrangian subbundles of η/η ⊥ . Applying this remark. and thus Mλ.23 implies that Mλη . Similarly. E ) of symplectic vector bundle maps.λ (E) ˜ Mλ.λη (E) is canonically trivial. respectively. Since λη . E are trivial symplectic vector bundles over M with lagrangian subbundles λ ⊂ E and λ ⊂ E . and let T be a section of the bundle Homω (E. completing the proof.λη (E).λ (E) ˜ 75 .22 implies that MLΓ(T ) .24. λ . λ and clearly satisﬁes ind(λx .λ (E) is canonically ˜ η ˜η isomorphic to Mλη . while the restriction of T to the subbundle λ deﬁnes a lagrangian subbundle T (λ) of E . f ) of Mλ. Theorem 5. The graph of the section T deﬁnes a lagrangian subbundle λΓ(T ) of E ⊕ E. our hypotheses imply that η = λ + λ is a coisotropic subbundle of E which contains the lagrangian subbundles λ and λ . and the assertion follows. then Mλ.22.20 shows that if λ. this shows that Mλ.λη (E) × Mλ.L ⊕L (E ⊕ E) and MT (L).λη (E) is canonically trivial by Lemma 5. ˜ 2 Example 5. ˜˜ Combined with the canonical isomorphisms above. λx .λη (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. By Lemma 5.23. Since the lagrangian subbundles λ .λ (E) is canonically isomorphic to Mλη . An application of the cocycle identity of Lemma 5. Mλ. the latter bundle has a canonical trivialization.λη (E) is in turn canonically isomorphic ˜ to Mλη .
2. π2 denote the cartesian projections. where π1 . we can therefore deﬁne the adjoint of a canonical relation L ⊂ Hom(P. More generally.27 We can apply the conclusion of the preceding example to ﬁberpreserving symplectomorphisms f : T ∗ M → T ∗ N .26 Any symplectomorphism F : T ∗ M → T ∗ N induces a lagrangian embedding ιF : T ∗ M → T ∗ (M × N ). R) H 1 (T ∗ M . and so S is therefore not a true category. and thus ∈ R+ is admissible for the lagrangian embeddings (M. Nevertheless. ﬁnitedimensional symplectic manifolds. (T ∗ M. Q) as the element L∗ ∈ Hom(Q. A second lagrangian embedding zF : M → T ∗ N is deﬁned by the composition of F with the zero section s0 : M → T ∗ M .N : T ∗ N × T ∗ M → T ∗ (M × N ).zF of the embedding (M. As objects of S we take the class of all smooth.ιF under the natural isomorphism H 1 (M . we deﬁne ∗ ∗ their product as the symplectic manifold (P × Q. 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 . Theorem 5. zF ) identiﬁes with λT ∗ M. deﬁned as the composition of the graph ΓF : T ∗ M → T ∗ N × T ∗ M of F with the Schwartz transform SM. ω) is the object (P. along 0 with the section T of Homω (E. ∗ consider the symplectic vector bundles E = s∗ T (T ∗ M ) and E = zF T (T ∗ N ) over M . an immersed lagrangian submanifold of Q × P is called a canonical relation from P to Q. it follows from Example 5.zF is 0 canonically isomorphic to MT (λ). Observe that these deﬁnitions imply that the Liouville class λM. ω ) of S. zF ) and (T ∗ M. ω) (Q.2 The symplectic category To systematize the geometric aspects of quantization in arbitrary symplectic manifolds. 5. ιF ). 0 Example 5. E ) deﬁned by the restriction of F∗ to TZ (T ∗ M ). we can describe 76 . Given two objects (P. From Section 3. we now introduce the symplectic category S. The symplectic dual of an object (P. the phase class of the induced lagrangian ˇ embedding (M. Q) and L2 ∈ Hom(Q. as described in Example 5.25 that the Maslov classes are also related by pullback: s∗ µT ∗ M.Example 5. −ω). The morphism set Hom(P. Evidently. we ∗ have the lagrangian subbundles λ = s∗ V M of E and λ = zF V N of E . zf ) equals [β] ∈ H 1 (M .21 shows that s∗ MT ∗ M.zF . R). R).14. and the lagrangian 0 subbundles λΓ(T ) ⊂ E ⊕ E and T (λ) ⊂ E . zf ).25. To see that a similar relation holds for the Maslov classes of (M.λ ⊕λ (E ⊕ E) and that MM.λ (E ). we recall that any such f is equal to a ﬁberwise translation of T ∗ M by a closed 1form β on M composed with the cotangent lift of some diﬀeomorphism N → M . From Lemma 3. P ) represented by the same equivalence class L of immersions into the product P × Q. Q) is then deﬁned to consist of all canonical relations in Q × P .ιF is canonically isomorphic to MλΓT . ιf ) if and only if [β] is integral. Since immersed lagrangian submanifolds of the product Q × P coincide with those of its dual. Moreover.ιF = µM. R) induced by the projection T ∗ M → M . Composition of morphisms is unfortunately not deﬁned for all L1 ∈ Hom(P. Thus. π1 ω + π2 ω ).
R). and we will call L2 × L1 clean if (R × ∆Q × P . Q ∈ S.12. In view of Example 3. the conormal bundle of S identiﬁes with a canonical relation LS ∈ Hom(T ∗N. L3 . Note in particular Another point of view is to deﬁne Hom(P. Morphisms from Z to any other object P ∈ S identify naturally with immersed lagrangian submanifolds of P . T ∗ N ) with immersed lagrangian submanifolds in T ∗ (M × N ). the equation L1 ◦ (L2 ◦ L3 ) = (L1 ◦ L2 ) ◦ L3 is valid provided that both sides are deﬁned. one deﬁnes an epimorphism in the symplectic category as a canonical relation L for which L ◦ L∗ = idP .28 If L2 × L1 is clean.8 A canonical relation L ∈ Hom(P. N is a smooth submanifold S of the product M × N . Example 5. the product R × ∆Q × P is a reducible coisotropic submanifold of R × Q × Q × P . the zerodimensional symplectic manifold consisting of a single point ∗ equipped with the null symplectic structure.N : T ∗ N × T ∗ M → T ∗ (M × N ). T ∗M ) called the cotangent lift of S. L is a monomorphism if L∗ ◦ L = idP . in the usual sense. R) is the canonical relation which is the product of three diagonals. Canonical lifts of relations The full subcategory of S consisting of cotangent bundles possesses some special properties due to the Schwartz transform SM. Q).e. not as a set. By Example 5. and in particular. Under the Schwartz transform. Q) × Hom(Q. there is a minimal object Z. 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. then the composition Hom(P. we then obtain Proposition 5. we may identify the set Hom(P. Among the members of S. Thus. then L2 ◦ L1 is an immersed lagrangian submanifold of R × P . 2 Associativity of compositions holds in the symplectic category in the sense that for canonical relations L1 . L2 ◦ L1 ∈ Hom(P. i. but rather as the object Q × P in the symplectic category. Equivalently.27. R) → Hom(P. this deﬁnition generalizes tangent lifts of diﬀeomorphisms. the “elements” of P are its immersed lagrangian submanifolds. Q) of morphisms with the “elements” of Q × P for any P. From these deﬁnitions we see that a canonical relation is an isomorphism if and only if it is the graph of a symplectomorphism.a suﬃcient condition for the composability of two canonical relations as follows. Applying Theorem 5. L2 × L1 ) is a reducible pair. which enables us to identify canonical relations in Hom(T ∗ M.29 A smooth relation between two manifolds M. 8 77 . where ∆Q denotes the diagonal in Q × Q.8. Dually. L2 . The product L2 × L1 of the canonical relations L1 and L2 is a welldeﬁned immersed lagrangian submanifold of R × Q × Q × P .
that although a smooth map f : M → N does not in general give rise to a welldeﬁned transformation T ∗N → T ∗M , its graph in M × N nevertheless generates a canonical relation Lf ∈ Hom(T ∗N, T ∗M ). Example 5.30 The diagonal embedding ∆ : M → M × M induces a canonical relation L∆ ∈ Hom(T ∗ (M × M ), T ∗ M ) which in local coordinates assumes the form
∗ L∆ = {((x, α), (x, x, β, γ)) : x ∈ M and α, β, γ ∈ Tx M satisfy α = β + γ}.
In other words, L∆ is the graph of addition in the cotangent bundle. If L1 , L2 ∈ Hom(∗, T ∗ M ) and L2 × L1 is identiﬁed with an element of Hom(∗, T ∗ (M × M )) by the usual symplectomorphism T ∗ M × T ∗ M → T ∗ (M × M ), then the sum L1 + L2 ∈ Hom(∗, T ∗ M ) is deﬁned as L1 + L2 = L∆ ◦ (L2 × L1 ). Note that if L1 , L2 coincide with the images of closed 1forms ϕ1 , ϕ2 on M , then L1 + L2 equals the image of ϕ1 + ϕ2 . The dual of the isomorphism T ∗ M × T ∗ M → T ∗ (M × M ) identiﬁes L∆ with an element L∆ ∈ Hom(T ∗ M, Hom(T ∗ M, T ∗ M )). This canonical relation satisﬁes L1 +L2 = L∆ (L1 )(L2 ), and if L is the image of a closed 1form ϕ on M , then L∆ (L) = fϕ , where fϕ is the ﬁberwise translation mapping introduced in Section 3.2.
Example 5.31 (The Legendre transform) As a particular example of this situation, let V be a smooth manifold, and consider the ﬁber product TV ×V T ∗V along with its natural inclusion ι : TV ×V T ∗V → TV × T ∗V and “evaluation” function ev : TV ×V T ∗V → R given by ev((x, v), (x, p)) = p, v . If L ⊂ T ∗(TV ×V T ∗V ) is the lagrangian submanifold given by the image of the diﬀerential d(ev), then the pushforward Lleg = ι∗ L deﬁnes an isomorphism in Hom(T ∗(TM ), T ∗(T ∗M )) given in local coordinates by ((x, v), (ξ, η)) → ((x, η), (ξ, −v)). As noted in [57], this canonical relation can be viewed as a geometric representative of the Legendre transform in the following sense: If L : TM → R is a hyperregular Lagrangian function, in the sense that its ﬁberderivative deﬁnes a diﬀeomorphism TM → T ∗M , then the composition of Lleg with the image of dL equals the image of dH, where H : T ∗M → R is the classical Legendre transform of L.
78
Morphisms associated with coisotropic submanifolds If C ⊂ P is a reducible coisotropic submanifold, then the reduction relation RC ∈ Hom(P, C/C ⊥ ) is deﬁned as the composition of the quotient map C → C/C ⊥ and the inclusion C/C ⊥ → P . Somewhat more concretely, the relation RC is the subset {([x], x) : x ∈ C} of C/C ⊥ × P , where [x] is the leaf of the characteristic foliation passing through x ∈ C. ∗ Evidently RC is an epimorphism, and so RC ◦ RC = idP . On the other hand, RC is not a monomorphism unless C = P , and we deﬁne the projection relation KC ∈ Hom(P, P ) as ∗ the composition RC ◦ RC , i.e. KC = {(x, y) : x, y ∈ C, [x] = [y]}.
∗ By associativity, we have KC = KC ◦ KC , and KC = KC . Thus, KC is like an orthogonal projection operator. These relations give a simple interpretation of Theorem 5.12 in the symplectic category. If L is an immersed lagrangian submanifold of P , i.e. L ∈ Hom(Z, P ), then L is composable with both RC and KC , provided that it intersects C cleanly. In this case, we have
LC = R C ◦ L
LC = KC ◦ L.
In particular, KC ﬁxes any lagrangian submanifold of C. Example 5.32 Suppose that F is a foliation on a manifold B whose leaf space BF is smooth. In the notation of Example 5.17, we then ﬁnd that if T ∗ (B/F) is canonically identiﬁed with the reduced space E/C ⊥ , then the reduction relation RE is the Schwartz transform of the conormal bundle to the graph of the projection B → B/F.
5.3
Symplectic manifolds and mechanics
In general, an arbitrary symplectic manifold has no associated “conﬁguration space,” and therefore the classical and quantum mechanical viewpoints must be adapted to this new context based on the available structure. The classical picture The central objects in the classical picture of mechanics on an arbitrary symplectic manifold (P, ω) are the semiclassical states, represented as before by lagrangian submanifolds of P equipped with halfdensities, and the vector space of observables C ∞ (P ). With respect to pointwise multiplication, C ∞ (P ) forms a commutative associative algebra. Additionally, the symplectic form on P induces a Lie algebra structure on C ∞ (P ) given by the Poisson bracket {f, g} = Xg · f, 79
where Xg = ω −1 (dg) denotes the hamiltonian vector ﬁeld associated to g. These structures ˜ satisfy the compatibility condition {f h, g} = f {h, g} + {f, g} h, and are referred to collectively by calling C ∞ (P ) the Poisson algebra of P . The classical system evolves along the trajectories of the vector ﬁeld XH associated to the choice of a hamiltonian H : P → R. If f is any observable, then Hamilton’s equations assume the form f˙ = {H, f }. Note that in local Darboux coordinates, the Poisson bracket is given by {f, g} =
j
∂f ∂g ∂f ∂g · − · ∂qj ∂pj ∂pj ∂qj
.
Setting f = qj or f = pj in the Poisson bracket form of Hamilton’s equations above yields their familiar form, as in Section 3.3. Two functions f, g ∈ C ∞ (P ) are said to be in involution if {f, g} = 0, in which case the hamiltonian ﬂows of f and g commute. An observable in involution with the hamiltonian H is called a ﬁrst integral or constant of the motion of the system. A collection fi of functions in involution on P is said to be complete if the vanishing of {fi , g} for all i implies that g is a function of the form g(x) = h(f1 (x), · · · , fn (x)). The quantum mechanical picture Quantum mechanical observables should be the vector space A(HP ) of selfadjoint linear operators on some complex Hilbert space HP associated to P . The structure of a commutative, nonassociative algebra is deﬁned on A by Jordan multiplication: 1 A ◦ B = (AB + BA), 2 representing the quantum analog of pointwise multiplication in the Poisson algebra of P . Similarly, the dependent commutator [A, B] = i (AB − BA)
deﬁnes a Lie algebra structure on A analogous to the Poisson bracket on C ∞ (P ). Quantum mechanical states are vectors in HP . The timeevolution of the quantum system ˆ is determined by a choice of energy operator H, which acts on states via the Schr¨dinger o equation: i ˆ ˙ ψ = Hψ. A collection {Aj } of quantum observables is said to be complete if any operator B which commutes with each Aj is a multiple of the identity. This condition is equivalent to the irreducibility of {Aj }, in other words, no nontrivial subspace of HP is invariant with respect to each j. 80
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. g}) = [ρ(f ). we ﬁrst replace the classical observables by the groups of which they are the inﬁnitesimal generators. ρ(g)] 3.e. R). · · · . we wish to identify a ∗algebra A of operators which give the quantum analog of the “system” at hand. ρ({f.. 81 . For some complete set of functions f1 . A general formulation of the quantization problem is then to deﬁne a “functor” from the symplectic category to the category of (hermitian) linear spaces. but then relax the criteria by which quantum and classical objects are to correspond. Based on an idea of Weyl and von Neumann. our classical and quantum correspondences can be expressed as follows. each canonical relation L ∈ Hom(P. i. fn in involution. ρ(fn ) form a complete commuting set. Early approaches to this problem were based on the principle that. HQ ) HQ ⊗ H∗ in a way which commutes P with compositions.Quantization Although neither an underlying conﬁguration manifold nor its intrinsic Hilbert space is generally available in the context of arbitrary symplectic manifolds. and HP ×Q is canonically isomorphic to a (completed) tensor product HP ⊗HQ . which should be represented by unitary operators on quantum Hilbert spaces. To make the basic quantization problem more tractable. the basic goal of quantization remains the same as in the case of cotangent bundles: starting with a symplectic manifold P . · · · . In these abstract terms. As was eventually proven by Groenwald and Van Hove (see [1] for a proof). The basic classical objects are then symplectomorphisms.33 A linear map ρ : C ∞ (P ) → S(HP ) is called a quantization provided that it satisﬁes 1. a quantization of all classical observables in this sense does not exist in general. 2. ρ(1) = identity. 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 . TL◦L = TL ◦ TL ˜ ˜ ˜ for each L ∈ Hom(Q. we ﬁrst enlarge the class of classical objects to be quantized. regardless of how the algebra A is identiﬁed. Q) must then be assigned to a linear operator TL ∈ Hom(HP . However this is accomplished. the operators ρ(f1 ).
HQ ) C element of HP symmetric operators on HP state space of observables Poisson algebra C ∞ (P ) At this stage. by powers of or by degree of smoothness). in addition to just a lagrangian submanifold L ⊂ P . As we have already seen. and the quantization may be “correct” only to within a certain degree of accuracy as measured by the ﬁltration. it is too much to require that this condition be satisﬁed exactly. Second. it may require more data (such as a symbol) to determine an element of HP in a consistent way.g. First. from the classical to the quantum category. the Hilbert space HP may carry some sort of ﬁltration (e. two relevant observations are apparent from our earlier study of WKB quantization. 82 . rather than a mapping. ω) Q×P Q×P point ∗ lagrangian submanifold L Quantum version hermitian vector space HP HQ ⊗HP Hom(HP . The best we can hope for is a functorial relation. By “correctness” we mean that composition of canonical relations should correspond to composition of operators.Object basic spaces Classical version symplectic manifold (P.
The WKB quantization I (L. Our discussion begins by deﬁning a suitable notion of composition for such states. s) is then regarded as the Schwartz kernel of the corresponding operator in Hom(HM . s) of the state (L. HN ). we return to WKB quantization in cotangent bundles. s) consisting of a quantizable lagrangian submanifold L ⊂ T ∗ M and a symbol s on L.1 If (C. Reduction of semiclassical states We will say that a reducible pair (C. semiclassical states are represented by pairs (L. y) → x + y deﬁne a second exact sequence 0 → L ∩ C → L ⊕ C → L + C → 0. In this context. −v) and (x. Lemma 6. s) consisting of an immersed lagrangian submanifold L in T ∗ (M ×N ) equipped with a symbol s. The linear maps v → (v. then there exists a natural linear map Ω1/2 L ⊗ Ω1/2 C → Ω1/2 LC . 6. together with a lagrangian subspace L and a coisotropic subspace C. First note that if V is a symplectic vector space.1 Compositions of semiclassical states In Section 4. Proof. In this section. 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 → LC is proper. then the exact sequence 0 → L ∩ C ⊥ → L ∩ C → LC → 0 gives rise to the isomorphism Λ1/2 LC ⊗ Λ1/2 (L ∩ C ⊥ ) Λ1/2 (L ∩ C). from which we get Λ1/2 LC ⊗ Λ1/2 (L ∩ C ⊥ ) ⊗ Λ1/2 (L + C) Λ1/2 L ⊗ Λ1/2 C. we deﬁned a semiclassical state in a cotangent bundle T ∗ M as a pair (L.4. we study certain natural transformations of semiclassical states. L) is a properly reducible pair in a symplectic manifold P . 83 . A particular concrete case of this classicalquantum correspondence is given by the symbol calculus of Fourier integral operators.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.
Since L ∩ C ⊥ = (L + C)⊥ . 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 . p) ∈ T ∗ M : x ∈ N. we arrive at Λ1/2 LC ⊗ Λ(L ∩ C ⊥ ) Λ1/2 L ⊗ Λ1/2 C. L) in a symplectic manifold P . integration over its ﬁbers is welldeﬁned and gives the desired linear map Ω1/2 L ⊗ Ω1/2 C → Ω1/2 LC . . Fx ⊂ ker(p)} is a coisotropic submanifold of T ∗ M whose reduced space is the cotangent bundle T ∗ NF of the leaf space NF . the exact sequence 0 → (L + C)⊥ → V → (L + C)∗ → 0 combined with the halfdensity on V induced by the symplectic form deﬁnes a natural isomorphism Λ1/2 (L + C) Λ1/2 (L + C)⊥ . ω ˜ Now consider a properly reducible pair (C. By the preceding computations. → π ∗ ΦLC .1 we recall that the integrability of F implies that CN = {(x. Lemma 6. Hausdorﬀ manifold. L) form a reducible pair.Finally. From Section 5. rC 84 . Since the quotient map I → LC is proper. there is a linear map Ω1/2 L ⊗ Ω1/2 C → Ω1/2 LC ⊗ Ω(FI ). 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. there is a natural isomorphism ∗ rL ΦL. If L is an immersed lagrangian submanifold of T ∗ M such that (CN .2 In the notation of the diagram above.
). T ∗ N . . Since parallel sections of π ∗ ΦLC . Similarly. under the isomorphism of Lemma 6. s2 ) in T ∗ M. the pullback to I of the prequantum line bundles over T ∗ M and T ∗ N are canonically isomorphic.Proof. the pullback of the Maslov bundle of L to I is canonically isomorphic to the bundle Mλ. we arrive at the desired isomorphism of phase bundles. and thus. identiﬁes with a parallel section of π ∗ ΦLC . Composition of semiclassical states If L1 .32. a natural map of symbol spaces SL → SLC . s1 ).σ . .λC (C/C ⊥ ).16 it follows easily that the pullback to I of the Liouville forms on T ∗ M and T ∗ N coincide. 1 2 85 . s2 s∗ ) in T ∗ (M × N ).3 The product of semiclassical states (L1 . and one must check that the pullback of the Maslov bundle of LC to I is canonically isomorphic to ∗ MλC . By deﬁnition. (L2 . We will denote the image of a symbol s on L under this map by sC. and thus there is a natural linear map of symbol spaces SL2 ⊗ SL1 → SL2 ×L1 which we denote by (s1 . λ of E are then induced by the immersed lagrangian submanifold L and the vertical subbundle V M of T (T ∗ M ). which. identify naturally with parallel sections of ΦLC . From the proof of Lemma 5. T ∗ N is the semiclassical state (L2 × L1 . . From Theorem 5. Lagrangian subbundles λ. then their product L2 ×L1 gives a welldeﬁned immersed lagrangian submanifold of T ∗ (M × N ) via the Schwartz transform SM. 1 Deﬁnition 6. Φ−1. By tensoring with the map of density spaces given above. we obtain. L2 are immersed lagrangian submanifolds of T ∗ M. let E be the symplectic vector bundle over I given by the pullback of T (T ∗ M ).22 we therefore obtain a canonical isomorphism of rL ML with π ∗ MLC . From the discussion in Appendix A L1 we also have a linear isomorphism of density bundles Λ1/2 (L2 × L1 ) → Λ1/2 L2 Λ1/2 L1 . is canonically isomorphic to the external tensor product ΦL2 . Now the tangent bundle of CN induces a coisotropic subbundle C of E.λ (E). it follows easily that the phase bundle ΦL2 ×L1 . ) → (parallel sections of ΦLC . pulls back to a parallel section of rL ΦLC . s2 ) → s2 s∗ . 2 ∗ A parallel section s of ΦL. for each halfdensity σ on C.N : T ∗ N ×T ∗ M → T ∗ (M ×N ). By tensoring this isomorphism with the isomorphism of prequantum bundles described in the preceding paragraph. we obtain a map (parallel sections of ΦL. By the fundamental properties of the Schwartz transform described in Proposition 3. .2.
N. the Schwartz transform of L2 ×L1 reduces by CV.M to yield the image of L2 ◦L1 under the Schwartz transform T ∗ V ×T ∗ M → T ∗ (V ×M ). s2 ◦ s1 ) in T ∗ (M × V ). Under the Schwartz transform. V are smooth manifolds. s1 ) in T ∗ (M × N ) and (L2 .M induced by the symplectic forms on T ∗ V. s2 ) in T ∗ (N × V ).N. then their composition is deﬁned as the semiclassical state (L2 ◦ L1 . T ∗ N .Turning to compositions. respectively. We will say that semiclassical states (L1 .1. 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. s1 ) in T ∗ (M × N ) is composable with a semiclassical state (L2 . T ∗ V ) with an immersed lagrangian submanifold in T ∗ (M × V ). 2 86 .V ×SM. From Lemma 6. m) ∈ V ×M . L ◦ L ∈ Hom(T ∗ M. We denote the image of s2 s1 under this map by s2 ◦ s1 .V .N ) of Schwartz tranforms.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. and T ∗ M . The left vertical arrow represents the reduction relation deﬁned by the coisotropic submanifold C = T ∗ V × ∆T ∗ N × T ∗ M . Deﬁnition 6.4 If a semiclassical state (L1 . T ∗ 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 . and the lower horizontal arrow equals the Schwartz transform SM.N. then the Schwartz transform SM. Thus.V : T ∗ V × T ∗ M → T ∗ (M × V ) identiﬁes each canonical relation in Hom(T ∗ M. T ∗ N ) and Hom(T ∗ N. s2 ) in T ∗ (N × V ) are composable if the conormal submanifold CV. it follows that for any properly reducible pair L1 . Our goal is now to describe how semiclassical states (L. L are composable as canonical relations in Hom(T ∗ M. T ∗ V × T ∗ N × T ∗ N × T ∗ M → T ∗ (M × N × N × V ). we obtain a natural linear map of symbol spaces SL2 ⊗ SL1 → SL2 ◦L1 given by the composition of the product map above and the reduction map SL2 ×L1 → SL2 ◦L1 deﬁned by the natural halfdensity on CV. the submanifold T ∗ V × ∆T ∗ N × T ∗ M maps to the conormal submanifold CV. we ﬁrst note that if M.N.M and immersed lagrangian submanifold L2 × L1 form a properly reducible pair. s) in T ∗ (M × N ) and (L . s ) in T ∗ (N × V ) deﬁne a semiclassical state in T ∗ (M × V ) when L. while the right vertical arrow is the reduction relation deﬁned by the image of C under the Schwartz transform.
We denote the space of distributional halfdensities on M 87 . where LF is the Schwartz s transform of the graph of a symplectomorphism F : T ∗ M → T ∗ N . ˜ ◦ s) ∈ Hom(T ∗ M. For such . C). ei(S◦πL )/ (h ◦ ι) · s). A computation then shows that the composition of a semiclassical state of the form (LF . s) in T ∗ M is transformed by F into the semiclassical state (LF ◦ L. ˜ ◦ s) in T ∗ N . let us choose a particular lagrangian immersion ι : L → T ∗ M representing L (see the discussion in Section 4. Example 6. then ∈ R+ is admissible for LF if and only if [β] is integral. T ∗ V ).6 As a special case of Example 6. if β is a closed 1form on M and the symplectomorphism F : T ∗ M → T ∗ M equals ﬁberwise translation by β. 1/2 Let M be a smooth manifold and let Ω0 M be equipped with the topology of C ∞ convergence on compact sets.5 Consider a semiclassical state (LF . h) with a semiclassical state (L.4). T ∗ V ) as a semiclassical state (L ◦ L. L. Similarly. 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. 6. A distributional halfdensity on M is then a continuous. s) ∈ Hom(T ∗ M. such that ι∗ s → s ⊗ s−1 under the canonical isomorphism ι∗ ΦLF . then with this identiﬁcation. an analogous correspondence is furnished by the Schwartz kernel theorem. identiﬁes with an oscillatory function of the form ceiS/ for c ∈ R and some S : M → T satisfying S ∗ dσ = β. the composition of (LF .5. then Deﬁnition 6. ˜) in T ∗ (M ×N ). (h ◦ ι) · s). On the quantum level. ⊗ Φ−1 . then for each > 0. s) yields the semiclassical state (LF ◦ L. T ∗ N ) and (L. C).4 provides that for each symbol s ∈ SL . Given a parallel section s and smooth complexvalued function h on LF . ι. eiS/ ⊗ h) with (L. each parallel section of the phase bundle ΦLF . ˜) ∈ ˜ Hom(T ∗ N. s To make this correspondence more explicit. 1/2 Clinear functional on Ω0 M .2 WKB quantization and compositions ˜ s To deﬁne the composition of semiclassical states (L. the phase bundle of of LF admits a canonical parallel section.Example 6. the semiclassical state (L. C). If h ∈ C ∞ (LF . ˜ ΦLF ◦L. If L is an immersed lagrangian submanifold of T ∗ M . 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 ). s) equals the semiclassical state (LF ◦ L. We then note that the n natural halfdensity ωM 1/2 on LF ≈ T ∗ M enables us to identify the symbol space SLF with the product ΓLF ⊗C C ∞ (LF . 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). note that if the symplectomorphism F : T ∗ M → T ∗ N is the cotangent lift of a diﬀeomorphism M → N . where a is any halfdensity on L and s is the unique parallel section of ΦLF ◦L. and so the symbol space SLF identiﬁes naturally with R+ × C ∞ (LF .
in the same way that the Schwartz transform provides a natural correspondence Hom(T ∗ M. T ∗ N ) ↔ T ∗ (M × N ).by Ω−∞ M . integrating the product K ⊗ u over the submanifold {y} × M of N × M . the image of the map K will lie within the subspace 1/2 of Ω−∞ N represented by elements of Ω1/2 N in this way. which is continuous in the sense that K(φj ) → 0 in Ω−∞ N if φj → 0 1/2 in Ω0 M . 2 Of course. thereby giving a (densely deﬁned) operator HM → HN on the intrinsic Hilbert spaces of M. u ⊗ v 1/2 1/2 def 1/2 (∗) Schwartz kernel theorem . the Schwartz kernel theorem gives the identiﬁcation Ω−∞ (M × N ) ↔ Hom(HM . 88 . the value of the halfdensity Ku at each y ∈ N can be computed in these cases by. we deﬁne dependent operators Dj = −i def 1/2 ∂ . Note that this order generally diﬀers from the order of a diﬀerential operator. In all of the examples we will consider. and we equip this space with the weak∗ topology. Conversely. to every such linear map. HN ) diﬀerential operators With respect to linear coordinates {xj } on Rn . ∂xj An diﬀerential operator of asymptotic order9 k ∈ Z is then an asymptotic series of the form ∞ P = m=0 9 Pm m+k . a kernel is any element of Ω−∞ (M × N ). If N is another smooth 1/2 manifold. v = ˜ N 1/2 v ⊗ w. Every K ∈ Ω−∞ (M ×N ) deﬁnes a linear map K : Ω0 M → 1/2 1/2 Ω−∞ N by (∗) above. each w ∈ Ω1/2 N deﬁnes an element w ∈ Ω−∞ N by the equation ˜ w. there is precisely one distribution K such that (∗) is valid. A kernel K deﬁnes a linear map 1/2 1/2 K : Ω0 M → Ω−∞ N by duality via the equation K(u). v = K. and so we can consider K as 1/2 1/2 a continuous linear map Ω0 M → Ω0 N . Thus. N . In practical terms. roughly speaking.
By Example 6. For ﬁxed x.ξ −ψ)/ σP (x. we obtain (P e−iψ/ u)(x) = (2π )−n ei( x−y. p (x. By replacing σP by p in the formula above. sP ◦ s) · m0 +k + O( m0 +k+1 ). ξ) deﬁnes an amplitude a = p · dx dy1/2 dξ on B. x. ξ) = σPm0 (x. we obtain the following geometric version of (∗∗) above: 89 . ξ) m0 +k if Pm = 0 for all m < m0 and Pm0 = 0. dψ(x)) hm0 +k + O( m0 +k+1 ) (∗∗) To interpret this expression in the context of WKB quantization. ξ) → x − y. sP ) multiplies the symbol s by the values of the principal symbol p on L Σφ . ξ) : x. known as the symbol of P . composition with (L∆ . e−iψ/ u = I (L. we have (P e−iψ/ u)(x) = (2π )−n ei( x−y. V. i. ξ − ψ has a nondegenerate critical point when y = x and ξ = dψ(x). that is. The Schwartz kernel for the operator P is given by the distribution family I (L∆ . By formally substituting ξj for Dj in each term of P .29) and arguing as above. φ) which generates the conormal bundle to the diagonal ∆ ⊂ Rn × Rn . where L is the projectable lagrangian submanifold of T ∗ Rn deﬁned by im(dψ). ξ on B = Rn × Rn × (Rn )∗ . The principal symbol p . ξ) on L∆ . ξ) = x − y. this gives (P e−iψ/ u)(x) = I (L∆ ◦ L. written as a function of the variables (x. sP ◦ s).ξ −ψ)/ p (x. and s is obtained from the pullback of u to L. the function (y. whose restriction to the ﬁbercritical set Σφ = {(x. we ﬁrst note that the phase function φ(x. The principal symbol p of the operator P is deﬁned as the symbol of the ﬁrst nonvanishing term in its series expansion. y. An application of the principle of stationary phase therefore gives (P e−iψ/ u)(x) = e−iψ(x))/ u(x) · p (x. Now. ξ) u(y) dy dξ + O( m0 +k+1 ) where p is of course independent of y. its principal symbol p is a welldeﬁned function on the cotangent bundle T ∗ M . x. we obtain an dependent function σP on T ∗ Rn . ξ = 0} induces a welldeﬁned symbol sP = p (x. y.where each Pm is a polynomial in the operators Dj .6.e. s). s) = (L∆ ◦ L. While the symbol of P depends on the choice of local coordinates. 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). Using a global generating function for the conormal bundle of ∆ ⊂ M × M (see Example 4. ξ) u(y) dy dξ. (Later we will drop this assumption to obtain a more symmetric calculus). sP ). pV . x. 1/2 An diﬀerential operator on a manifold M is an operator P on Ω0 M which coincides in local coordinates with a series of the form P as above. together with V = Rn × Rn and the cartesian projection pV : B → V deﬁne a Morse family (B. we have (L.. Combined with the preceding equation.
then CP = p−1 (0) is a coisotropic submanifold of T ∗ M . projectable semiclassical state in T ∗ M and P is an diﬀerential operator of order k on M .Theorem 6. This remark suggests the quantum analog of certain coisotropic submanifolds of T ∗ M . the timeindependent Schr¨dinger equation is then o P ψ = 0.8 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 . the vanishing of the principal symbol p on L implies that P (I (L.7. many diﬀerential operators share the same principal symbol. s) is a ﬁrstorder approximate solution to the equation P u = 0. The zero set of the principal symbol p is called the characteristic variety of the operator P . more properly. s)) = I (L∆ ◦ L. and their actions on a given function coincide only up to terms of higher order in . that I (L. If 0 is a regular value of p . θ) = − + (V (x) − E). where sP is the symbol on L∆ induced by the principal symbol p of P . Roughly speaking.e. CP . Example 6. 2m The characteristic variety of p is simply the level set H −1 (E) of the classical hamiltonian of the system. s) is an exact. In this sense. and semiclassical states contained in CP represent solutions of the asymptotic diﬀerential equation P u = 0.7 If (L.. As a particular case of Theorem 6. As usual. this correspondence is only asymptotic. 90 . A familiar illustration of these concepts is provided by the WKB approximation. and as in previous sections we see that ﬁrstorder approximate solutions to the timeindependent Schr¨dinger equation arise from semiclassical states represented by o quantizable lagrangian submanifolds in CP . sP ◦ s) + O( m0 +k+1 ). then: P (I (L. this theorem asserts that polynomial functions on the identity relation L∆ quantize as the Schwartz kernel of diﬀerential operators on M . corresponds to the kernel of P in HM . ˆ where P = H − E is the zerothorder asymptotic diﬀerential operator on M with principal symbol θ2 p (x. i. and the projection relation KCP quantizes as the orthogonal projection onto this subspace. For E > 0. the reduced manifold of CP . or. s)) = O( m0 +k+1 ).
an pseudodiﬀerential operator of order µ is given by (Au)(x) = (2π )n ei x−y. of the form µ+j where the symbol a(x. θ) is an asymptotic series in a (x. Let M be a smooth manifold with a smooth submanifold N . ξ) u(y) dξ dy. In this case. ξ in the deﬁnition of pseudodiﬀerential operators by a phase function which generates L: (Au)(x) = (2π )n eiφ(x. and there is a corresponding version of Theorem 6.e.. θ) ∼ aj (x. In Rn . As constructed in Example 4. Fourier integral operators In its simplest form. 31. As in the special case of diﬀerential operators. ξ) → x − y. we will only be concerned with a few specialized cases. θ) u(y) dθ dy.θ / a(x. the principal symbol of a pseudodiﬀerential operator is a welldeﬁned function on T ∗ M . y.7 (see for example [51]). the invariance of pseudodiﬀerential operators under coordinate changes enables one to extend this theory to any smooth manifold M . 43. ξ) u(y) dξ dy.y. Perhaps the simplest generalization of the picture of (pseudo)diﬀerential operators given above is provided by quantizing semiclassical states whose underlying lagrangian submanifolds are conormal bundles. y. y. 56]. Each coeﬃcient aj is a smooth function on Rn × Rn \ {0} and is positively homogeneous of degree µ − j. i. 28.ξ)/ a(x. As before. integration over the phase variables θ was welldeﬁned due to the fact that the symbol of a diﬀerential operator has a polynomial growth rate with respect to these variables. For diﬀerential operators. θ) . cθ) = cµ−j aj (x.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. a detailed description of this theory can be found in [21. In this section. the conormal bundle LN ⊂ T ∗ N is generated by a single 91 . θ) for c > 0. Weakening this condition while still guaranteeing that the integral converges leads to the deﬁnition of pseudodiﬀerential operators. the theory of Fourier integral operators provides a means for quantizing halfdensities on more general lagrangian submanifolds L of T ∗ M by replacing the function (x. the class of quantizable halfdensities (and canonical relations) is constrained by the necessary conditions for this integral to converge.29.θ / a (x. aj (x.
s) on M . For instance. o 92 . the more interesting Fourier integral operators from Ω1/2 X to Ω1/2 Y come from quantizing canonical relations from T ∗ X to T ∗ Y which do not arise from diﬀeomorphisms from X to Y .9 If X. positively homogeneous symbols on LN induce positively homogeneous amplitudes on B of the same order.Morse family (B. pV . It is easy to see that the ﬁbercritical set Σφ is invariant under the R+ action on B. f gives rise to a symplectomorphism of cotangent bundles: (T ∗ f )−1 : T ∗ X → T ∗ Y. s) = I (L ◦ L. When M = X × Y is a product manifold. s) as before by requiring that s be homogeneous. then the procedure described above can be applied to the graph Γf of f . s) represent Schwartz 1/2 1/2 kernels for continuous linear operators Ω0 X → Ω∞ Y . The family I (Lf . and we can proceed to deﬁne I (L. Of course. Moreover. Y are smooth manifolds and f : X → Y is a smooth diﬀeomorphism. these operators map Ω0 X to Ω0 Y and extend continuously to Ω−∞ X. viewed as a smooth submanifold of X × Y . quantizing the hamiltonian ﬂow {ϕt } of a hamiltonian ˆ H on T ∗ X gives the solution operators exp(−itH/ ) of the Schr¨dinger equation. and that the identiﬁcation LN Σφ deﬁned by λφ is equivariant with respect to the natural R+ action on LN . Under certain additional restrictions on N which are always fulﬁlled. for example. At the same time. 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. Consequently. they satisfy the composition law ˜ s ˜ I (L. ˜ ◦ s). s Example 6. the distributions I (L. when N is the graph of a diﬀeomorphism 1/2 1/2 1/2 X → Y . an amplitude a on B having an asymptotic expansion in terms which are positively homogeneous with respect to the natural R+ action on the ﬁbers of pV : B → V gives rise to a welldeﬁned distributional halfdensity family I (L. V. ˜) ◦ 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 Ω0 X → Ω−∞ Y A diﬀeomorphism f : X → Y induces a unitary operator on intrinsic Hilbert spaces given by pullback: (f ∗ )−1 : HX → HY .
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 ⊥ . we then have ωC = [a] ∂D ˜ f f ˜ f ∗ αM ∈ Z by the assumption that the Liouville class of I is integral. in the sense that semiclassical states contained in C quantize to ﬁrstorder approximate solutions of the equation P = 0. any class [a] ∈ H2 (C/C ⊥ . the lagrangian submanifolds of M contained in C correspond to lagrangian submanifolds of the reduced manifold C/C ⊥ .7 7.1 Geometric Quantization Prequantization In the preceding chapter. Each leaf of the characteristic foliation of CE is a circle S which projects diﬀeomorphically to a great circle in S n . Speciﬁcally. we conclude that KC preserves prequantizable lagrangian submanifolds provided that the reduced symplectic form ωC is itself integral. In this case. let us consider what conditions the reduced manifold C/C ⊥ must satisfy in order that quantizations of the reduction and projection relations be welldeﬁned for arbitrary quantizable semiclassical states. S Thus CE is prequantizable if and only if E = (n )2 /2 (compare Example 4. ﬁrst note that if C/C ⊥ is simplyconnected. If γ parametrizes a such a geodesic.1 From Example 5. To interpret this condition in terms of C/C ⊥ . Applying Stokes’ theorem.2). ∂D) → (C/C ⊥ . ∂D) → (C. f lifts to a continuous map (D. Z) is represented by a continuous map (D. By the homotopy lifting property. then its lift to a parametrization of S satisﬁes γ = (2E)−1/2 Xkn . This suggests that if C is reducible. 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. When C is reducible. T ∗ M ).13 we recall that the standard metric on the unit nsphere S n induces a kinetic energy function kn whose constant energy surfaces CE are reducible coisotropic submanifolds of T ∗ S n for E > 0. the Liouville class of S is determined by the number αM = 2π · (2E)1/2 . For the time being. 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 . we ask what assumptions on C guarantee that the classical projection operation KC preserves the class of quantizable lagrangian submanifolds in T ∗ M . Thus. Before turning to a systematic means for deﬁning HC . Example 7. the reduced manifold C/C ⊥ is said to be prequantizable. we will ignore the Maslov correction and assume that C/C ⊥ is simplyconnected. [I]) for a ﬁxed leaf I of C ⊥ . Since ˙ αM (Xkn ) = 2E. 93 . I).
this condition is equivalent to the existence of a principal T bundle Q over C/C ⊥ . Roughly speaking. 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 . the modZ reduction of λI represents the holonomy of QM I . the prequantum Hilbert space is taken to be the completion of the space of smooth. The basic example of prequantization is that of cotangent bundles due to Segal [52]. 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 connection on Q induced by the connection on QM has curvature equal to the reduced symplectic form ωC . 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 . if λI is integral. we hope to piece these local operators together. parallel sections over the leaves of C ⊥ deﬁne a foliation Q of QM L whose leaf space is a principal T bundle Q over C/C ⊥ . This essentially requires that the 1forms αj agree on overlaps. In this case. with respect to the innerproduct f. complexvalued functions on the cotangent bundle P = T ∗ M itself. The Segal prequantization is an important ﬁrst step towards attempts at (pre)quantizing more general symplectic manifolds. In direct analogy with the Segal prequantization. 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 idea is the following: Although the symplectic form of an arbitrary symplectic manifold (P. and Van Hove. there exists a parallel section of QM over I. ω) is not exact. The space of sections of E identiﬁes canonically with C ∞ (P ) by means of the constant section s = 1. 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 ).2. . we can choose a covering of P by open sets Uj on which the restriction of the symplectic form satisﬁes ω = −dαj for appropriately chosen 1forms αj on Uj . where as usual mL(f ) denotes multiplication by the lagrangian L(f ) = f − αM (Xf ). g = P ∞ n f g ωM . and we have ρ(f ) = −i 94 Xf + mf . If C/C ⊥ is prequantizable. on C ∞ (Uj ). The mapping C (P ) → S(HP ) is then given explicitly by the formula ρ(f ) = −i Xf + mL(f ) . and we arrive at nothing new. Koopman. veriﬁcation of the second is also straightforward and will be carried out in somewhat more generality below. Clearly the map ρ is linear and satisﬁes the ﬁrst Dirac axiom. In fact. In order to associate a “global” operator to f .By Theorem D. More precisely. we can then associate to a function f ∈ C ∞ (P ) the operator ρ(f )j = −i Xf + mLj (f ) .
this is an important ﬁrst step in our general quantization program. g}X = ξ{f. and consequently. While a direct proof of this fact follows the outline of the preceding paragraph. Xg ] + ω(Xf . where X f denotes the horizontal lift of the hamiltonian vector ﬁeld of f . ξg ] = [Xf . To a function f ∈ C ∞ (P ). 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. then we can decompose ξ into its horizontal and vertical parts: ξ = ξ − gX for some realvalued function g on Q satisfying dg = ξ dϕ. Conversely. this condition can be satisﬁed if and only if ω is integral. we will focus on geometric properties of prequantum circle bundles and prove that their existence coincides with the prequantizability of C ∞ (P ). according to the discussion in Appendix C. Xg )X − 2{f. The upshot of the KostantSouriau construction is that prequantizable symplectic manifolds have prequantizable Poisson algebras. 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. we ﬁnd that the operators ρ(f )j enjoy a similar interpretation provided that −αj + dσ deﬁnes a local representative of a connection 1form on a (possibly nontrivial) principal T bundle Q over P . The curvature of such a bundle necessarily coincides with the symplectic form on P . the requirement that the curvature of ϕ equal the symplectic form ω implies [ξf . and X is the fundamental vector ﬁeld on Q deﬁned by the equations X ϕ=1 X dϕ = 0. X] = 0. if Lξ ϕ = 0 for some vector ﬁeld ξ on Q. Moreover. From the deﬁnition of X it follows that X · g = 0 and [ξ. Automorphisms of (Q. For the remainder of this section.2 A prequantization of a symplectic manifold (P. we will study prequantizable manifolds in somewhat more detail below. ω) is a principal T bundle Q over P equipped with a connection 1form ϕ having curvature ω. (k) A direct computation shows that the connection form ϕ is invariant under the ﬂow of ξf . ϕ) Let P be a prequantizable symplectic manifold with prequantum T bundle Q and connection ϕ.where denotes the connection on E induced by the connection 1form ϕ = −αM +dσ on Q. Returning to the general case. Deﬁnition 7. [ξ. Thus. and so ξ = ξg . we associate an operator on C ∞ (Q): ξf = X f − f X. X] = 0. 95 . ξ is the horizontal lift of Xg .g} .
ϕ) be a prequantization of (P. This produces the exact sequence of Lie algebras 0 → R → χ(Q. T ). from the exact sequence above. If we equip the space C ∞ (Q) of complexvalued functions on Q with the innerproduct u. R) is assigned the trivial bracket. ω). that is.The association f → ξf therefore deﬁnes a Lie algebra isomorphism between the Poisson algebra C ∞ (P ) and the space χ(Q. ω respectively. ω) denote those groups of diﬀeomorphisms which preserve ϕ. this is just the circle T and we have the exact sequence 0 → T → Aut(Q. ϕ) → χ(P. Aut(P. this means that F is the lift of a diﬀeomorphism f of P . ω). ϕ) → Aut(P. and therefore deﬁnes a unitary operator UF on C ∞ (Q) by composition: UF (u) = u ◦ F. then each F ∈ Aut(Q. v = Q u v µ. ϕ). Let (Q.e. ω) by T . ∂qi ∂ ∂qi ∂ − qi X ∂pi 96 ξpi = . ϕ) is a central extension of Aut(P. ϕ) in Aut(P. if P (and hence Q) is connected. The association F → f deﬁnes a group homomorphism Aut(Q. ω) consists precisely of the hamiltonian vector ﬁelds on P . ϕ) on L2 (Q).3 Translations of R2n are generated by the hamiltonian vector ﬁelds associated to linear functionals on R2n . A basis for this space is given by the vector ﬁelds Xqi = − which assume the form ξqi = − ∂ ∂pi Xpi = ∂ . ϕ) of ϕpreserving vector ﬁelds on Q with the standard Lie bracket. ϕ) preserves X and is therefore T equivariant. This sequence can be integrated to give an exact sequence of automorphism groups as follows. ω). ω). 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. where H 1 (P . from the fact that π ∗ ω = dϕ it follows furthermore that f ∗ ω = ω. Example 7. ω). and let Aut(Q. ϕ) → Aut(P. ω) → H 1 (P . We interpret this observation to mean that an automorphism of Q is determined “up to phase” by an automorphism of P . R) → 0. and the image of χ(Q. i. ϕ) preserves µ. we therefore obtain a projective unitary representation of the image of Aut(Q. Aut(Q. ϕ) in χ(P. To determine its kernel. f ∈ Aut(P. In particular. This implies that the kernel is isomorphic to H 0 (P. Clearly the correspondence F → UF deﬁnes a unitary representation of Aut(Q. By the deﬁnition of X it follows that every F ∈ Aut(Q. where µ denotes the volume form ϕ ∧ (dϕ)n on Q.
By exponentiating. Our earlier results show that [ξqi . Smooth sections of Ek identify with functions on Q satisfying the equivariance condition f (p · a) = e−ika/ f (p) for a ∈ T . Under this correspondence.when lifted to Q = R2n × T via the Segal prescription ξf = X f − L(f )X. Hn is diﬀeomorphic to R2n × T . P + P . in other words. KostantSouriau prequantization To prequantize the Poisson algebra C ∞ (P ). the operator ξf restricts to an operator on each eigenspace Ek of X having the form i ρk (f ) = − X f + mf . ρk (g)] . For this purpose. ξpi generate a Lie subalgebra hn ⊂ χ(Q. In explicit terms. k Evidently the map ρk satisﬁes the ﬁrst Dirac axiom. we ﬁrst recall that complex line bundles Ek associated to Q arise via representations of T in U (1) of the form x → eikx/ . b)] = (0. moreover ρk ({f. is suﬃces to prove that ρk (f ) acts as a symmetric operator on the real subspace of Ek . the space of sections of Ek is isomorphic to the −ik/ eigenspace Ek of the fundamental vector ﬁeld X. we ﬁnd that hn corresponds to a subgroup Hn ⊂ Aut(Q. P. where again L(f ) = f − αM (Xf ). w)). σ) · (Q . g}) = k [ρk (f ). σ + σ + j Pj · Qj ). (w.pj } = δij X. we assign an operator on C ∞ (Q) by ξf = − (k) (k) i ξf . X] = 0. we note that if the hamiltonian vector ﬁeld of 97 . The group Hn is known as the Heisenberg group of R2n with its usual symplectic structure. To verify that ρk (f ) is selfadjoint. To each f ∈ C ∞ (P ) and integer k. ϕ) which comprises a central extension of the translation group: 0 → T → Hn → R2n → 0. P . a). σ ) = (Q + Q . ϕ) isomorphic to R2n × R with bracket given by [(v. with group multiplication given by (Q. P + P . ω(v. and so the vector ﬁelds ξqi . σ ) = (Q + Q . ξpj ] = ξ{qi . 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. k Since [ξf .
and let HP denote the L2 completion of the space of compactly supported sections of E with respect to the innerproduct s1 . the appropriate quantum state space asso1/2 ciated with a classical conﬁguration space M is (the L2 completion of) Ω0 M . wave functions depend on only half of the phase space variables. If we restrict ˆ ∞ to the pindependent subspace Cq (R2 ) C ∞ (R). it follows that ρ−1 deﬁnes a prequantization of the Poisson algebra C ∞ (P ). which we temporarily identify with C ∞ (M ) using a metric on M .2 Polarizations and the metaplectic correction The KostantSouriau prequantization of symplectic manifolds fails to satisfy the third Dirac axiom and is therefore not a quantization. s2 = P ∞ s1 . then the fact that ξf preserves ϕ implies that ξf · u. v = − u. In fact. ρk (f ) · v . s2 ω n . Indeed. compatible with its induced connection. 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. ∂ . whereas the space of sections of E has the “size” of the space of functions on P . 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.f is integrable (for example. For each f ∈ C (P ). see [53]. equipped with a hermitian metric . the operator ρ−1 (f ) extends to an essentially selfadjoint operator on HP . From the standpoint of WKB quantization. conjugatesymmetry of the innerproduct implies that ρk (f ) · u. if f is compactly supported). In other 98 . ξf · v for realvalued functions u. from the general remarks above. 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. this diﬃculty is overcome: on ∞ Cq (R2 ). in quantum mechanics. however. For an interpretation of this argument in terms of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. the operator corresponding to q should act by multiplication alone. whereas q involves the spurious ∂/∂p term. 7. We now deﬁne the prequantum line bundle associated to Q as E = E−1 . Combined with the deﬁnition of ρk . According to our earliest concepts of quantization (see the Introduction). v on Q. Since the Liouville form αM vanishes π on each ﬁber of the projection T ∗ M → M . v = u.
These correspond to the δq and eiπ p. Deﬁnition 7. equipped with the complexvalued symplectic form ωC given by the complexlinear extension of ω to TC P .p (T ∗ M ) for each p ∈ T ∗ M . the polarization F satisﬁes F = F.q / . meaning that Fp is a totally real subspace of TC.· / bases of L2 (Rn ) respectively. in the sense that f= Rn f (q) δ(q) dq = (2π )−n/2 Rn ˆ eiπ p. we consider covariant derivatives of the form ∂ ∂q = ∂ ∂ −p ∂q ∂σ . A Fp parallel section ψ of E must therefore satisfy ∂ψ − 2πipψ ∂q and is therefore of the form ψ(q. TC P denotes the complexiﬁcation of the tangent bundle of P . 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. Example 7. In this case. we have X s = 0. and so the ppolarization appears to be better adapted to this case.4 A polarization of a symplectic manifold (P. the correct adjustment to the size of the prequantum Hilbert space is determined by the (canonical) foliation of T ∗ M by lagrangian submanifolds. Covariant diﬀerentiation along vector ﬁelds X tangent to the q=constant polarization Fq is given by the ordinary Lie derivative with respect to X. and so the space of Fq parallel sections of the prequantum line bundle E identiﬁes with the space of smooth functions on qspace.words.q / f dp. Here. 99 .5 The most basic examples of real polarizations are given by either the planes q=constant or p=constant in R2n . for each complex vector ﬁeld X on P lying in F. Note that the Fp representation of the freeparticle H(q. This adjustment is generalized in the framework of geometric quantization by the introduction of the following concept. 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 ). p) = p2 /2 is ρ(H) = mp2 /2 . 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 . ω) is an involutive lagrangian subbundle F of TC P . Integrability of F means that locally on P there exist complexvalued functions whose hamiltonian vector ﬁelds (with respect to ωC ) span F. p) = v(p)eiπ p. For the p=constant polarization Fp . In general. That is.
i = 1. the map ω : T P → T ∗ P sends F to ˜ ⊥ F as well. By the deﬁnition of ρ−1 .8 Each leaf of any real polarization carries a natural aﬃne structure. Since F is a lagrangian distribution. there exist fi ∈ F(P ). An aﬃne structure on a manifold M is a curvature. Since any f ∈ F(P ) has the property that its hamiltonian vector ﬁeld Xf lies completely within the polarization F. Thus {f.9 Following [28]. thus deﬁning a natural identiﬁcation F p ∗ T ∗ PF .6 Every real polarization is locally isomorphic to the q=constant polarization on R2n . The quotient of E by this 100 .and torsionfree connection on T M . this implies that ρ−1 (f ) = mf . it follows that Xf s = 0 for all s ∈ HF .29). if E is a prequantum line bundle over P . we may use parallel sections of E over the leaves of F to construct a foliation of the total space of E. 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. we have the following result. According to the HamiltonJacobi theorem. g} = 0 for any f. In this case. g ∈ F(P ).A real polarization F of a symplectic 2nmanifold P deﬁnes a subspace F(P ) ⊂ C ∞ (P ) of functions constant along the leaves of F. the hamiltonian vector ﬁeld of any member of F(P ) is contained in F. one can furthermore prove Theorem 7. Corollary 7. 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 . ω Similarly. and so p∗ T ∗ PF identiﬁes with the normal bundle F ⊥ ⊂ T ∗ P . More generally. the quotient map p : P → PF satisﬁes F = ker p∗ . By pulling back the position functions qi to P . i. · · · . F(P ) is an abelian Poisson subalgebra of C ∞ (P ).7 For each p ∈ P . we call a polarization F on P ﬁbrating if each leaf of F is simplyconnected and the leaf space PF = P/F is a smooth manifold. we have Corollary 7. the multiplication operator on HF . Example 7. n. By modifying the normal form results of Chapter 4. From this remark. 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 . Since any polarizationpreserving symplectic transformation of T ∗ Rn R2n is aﬃne on ﬁbers (see Theorem 3.e.. A function H : P → R constant on the leaves of F induces a function HF on PF satisfying dH = p∗ dHF . such that the hamiltonian vector ﬁelds Xi span F in a neighborhood of p.
ωM + π ∗ η) is prequantizable if and only if the cohomology class of η in H 2 (M . The simplest example of a ﬁbrating polarization is given by the vertical polarization FM of a cotangent bundle T ∗ M .e. the symplectic manifold (T ∗ M. F = {(v. the leaf spaces PD and PE are smooth manifolds. E in T P . and geometric quana tization attempts to construct a quantum state space for P from sections of an appropriate line bundle over P which are parallel along D and holomorphic along the ﬁbers of π. is complete. we refer to [53]. and the natural projection PD → PE is a submersion. More precisely. then (P. A check of deﬁnitions shows that the standard and twisted symplectic structures on T ∗ M are equivalent precisely when their diﬀerence is the pullback of an exact form on M . The polarization F is called strongly admissible provided that E is involutive. Complex polarizations Associated to any polarization F are the distributions DC = F ∩ F EC = F + F which arise as the complexiﬁcations of distributions D. Moreover. each ﬁber of π carries a K¨hler structure.. ⊥ Dx = Ex for all x ∈ P . iJv) : v ∈ T P } 101 π . Since π ∗ η vanishes on the ﬁbers of the projection. In this case. ω). ω) is symplectomorphic to a twisted symplectic structure on T ∗ PF .e. The basic geometry of this situation remains the same if the symplectic structure on T ∗ M is perturbed by a form on M . D and E are pointwise ωorthogonal. given a closed 2form η on M . Finally. i.foliation deﬁnes a hermitian line bundle EF over the leaf space PF whose sections identify with Fparallel sections of E. ω is a symplectic form on T ∗ M and ker π∗ is again a polarization. we can “twist” the standard symplectic structure on T ∗ M as follows: ω = ωM + π ∗ η. the distribution D is involutive. R) is integral.8 proves that if each leaf of a ﬁbrating polarization F on a symplectic manifold (P. For a discussion of quantization in this general setting. A polarization satisfying F ∩ F = {0} is called totally complex and identiﬁes with the graph of a complex structure J on P . This general type of symplectic manifold is known as a twisted cotangent bundle. From the deﬁnition of F. Although their dimensions vary in general from point to point. an application of Corollary 7. i.
under the identiﬁcation TC P T P ⊕ iT P . We emphasize that J is a genuine complex structure on P due to the integrability condition on the polarization F. Moreover, J is compatible in the usual sense with the symplectic form ω on P , so the hermitian metric , = gJ + iω is a K¨hler structure on P . In this section, we will only cite two examples a involving totally complex F, in which case PD = P is K¨hler, and PE = {pt}. a Example 7.10 Consider the complex plane C with its usual complex and symplectic structures. With respect to Darboux coordinates (q, p), the CauchyRiemann operator is deﬁned as ∂ 1 ∂ ∂ = +i . ∂z 2 ∂q ∂p A function f : C → C is holomorphic if ∂f /∂z = 0. If we identify sections of the (trivial) prequantum line bundle E with smooth, complexvalued functions on C, then Fparallel sections correspond to those functions annihilated by the covariant derivative ∂ + mz . ∂ = 2 ∂z ∂z To determine the general form of these sections, we note that ∂ ψ = 0 if and only if for ∂z some branch of the logarithm, z ∂ log ψ = − , ∂z 2 or zz log ψ = − + h 2 for some holomorphic function h. Hence ψ(z) = ϕe−z
2 /2
with ϕ holomorphic is the general form for Fparallel sections of E. The space HC thus identiﬁes with the space of holomorphic ϕ : C → C satisfying ϕ =
C
ϕ(z)2 e−z dz < ∞,
2
or, in other words, the space of holomorphic functions which are squareintegrable with 2 respect to the measure e−z dz, known as the Fock or BargmanSegal space. For a function to be quantizable in this picture, its hamiltonian ﬂow must preserve both the metric and symplectic structure of C and therefore consist solely of euclidean motions. Among such functions are the usual position and momentum observables, as well as the harmonic oscillator.
Example 7.11 If (P, ω) is any prequantizable symplectic manifold with a totally complex polarization F, then the prequantum line bundle E associated to ω can be given the structure of a holomorphic line bundle by taking the (0, 1) component of the connection on E with 102
respect to the complex structure J arising from F. The space HF of Fparallel sections of E then equals the space of holomorphic sections of E and is therefore completely determined by the complex geometry of P . Using some machinery from algebraic geometry (see [15]), it can be shown that for compact P , the space HP is ﬁnitedimensional and that its dimension is given asymptotically by the symplectic volume of P . More precisely, we note that for k ∈ Z+ , the line bundle E ⊗k deﬁnes a holomorphic prequantum line bundle associated with (P, kω). For suﬃciently large k, the dimension of the quantum state space HPk of holomorphic sections of E ⊗k is given by the HirzebruchRiemannRoch formula: dim HPk =
P
ekω T d(P ),
where T d denotes the Todd polynomial in the total Chern class of P . The ﬁrst conclusion to be drawn from this fact is that for k large, dim HPk is a symplectic invariant of P independent of its complex structure. Roughly speaking, k plays the role of −1 , and so “large k” means that we are approaching the classical limit. A second point to note is that dim HPk is a polynomial in k (or −1 ) whose leadingorder term is (kω)n = k n vol P. n!
P
Consequently the number of quantum states is determined asymptotically by the volume of P.
Metalinear structures and halfforms For the remainder of this chapter, we will focus on the quantization of symplectic manifolds P equipped with a prequantum line bundle E and a “suﬃciently nice” real polarization F. Although the space HF of Fparallel sections of E appears to have the right “size” in the simplest examples, there are still several problems to be resolved before we have a suitable quantum state space. The ﬁrst arises as soon as we attempt to deﬁne a preHilbert space structure on HF . On P , the square of an Fparallel section s is constant along the leaves of F, and thus the integral s
2
=
P
s, s ω n
diverges in general. On the other hand, there is no canonical measure on the leaf space PF with which to integrate the induced function s, s . Regardless of how this ﬁrst diﬃculty is resolved, we will again try to quantize the Poisson algebra C ∞ (P ) by representing elements of Aut(P, ω) as (projective) unitary operators on HF . The most obvious quantization of a symplectomorphism f : P → P (or more general canonical relation), however, is an operator from HF to Hf (F ) . If f does not preserve the polarization F, then these spaces are distinct. Thus, we will need some means for canonically identifying the quantum state spaces HF associated to diﬀerent polarizations of P . 103
Finally, the polarization F may have multiplyconnected leaves, over most of which the prequantum line bundle may admit only the trivial parallel section. A preliminary solution to this problem is to admit “distributional” states, such as are given by Fparallel sections of E whose restrictions to each leaf are smooth. Leaves on which E has trivial holonomy are then said to comprise the BohrSommerfeld subvariety of the pair (P, F). ˙ Example 7.12 Consider the punctured phase plane R2 = R2 \ {0} polarized by level sets of the harmonic oscillator H(q, p) = (q 2 + p2 )/2. The holonomy of the usual prequantum line bundle on the level set H −1 (E) is given by the modZ reduction of the area it encloses; thus the BohrSommerfeld variety consists of those circles of energy E = n . As in the case of WKB prequantization, these energy levels do not correspond to actual physical measurements, and so we will again need to incorporate a sort of Maslov correction.
The solution to manhy of these diﬃculties relies on the use of a metaplectic structure on P , a concept which we now introduce. Let P be a principal G bundle over a manifold M . A meta Gbundle associated to P and a central extension ˜ ρ 1→K→G→G→1 ˜ ˜ ˜ of G is a principal G bundle P over M together with a map Φ : P → P satisfying the equivariance condition Φ(p · a) = Φ(p) · ρ(a) ˜ ˜ ˜ for all a ∈ G. Two meta Gbundles (P1 , Φ1 ), (P2 , Φ2 ) over P are considered equivalent if ˜ ˜ ˜ there exists a Gequivariant diﬀeomorphism ψ : P1 → P2 such that Φ1 = Φ2 ◦ ψ. Example 7.13 A riemannian structure together with an orientation of an nmanifold M deﬁnes a bundle of oriented orthonormal frames in T M , i.e. an SO(n)structure on M . A spin structure on M is then a meta SO(n)bundle corresponding to the extension 1 → K → Spin(n) → SO(n) → 1 given by the double cover Spin(n) of SO(n). An orientable manifold admits a spin structure if and only if its second StiefelWhitney class vanishes.
Example 7.14 Since π1 (Sp(n)) Z, there exists a unique connected doublecovering group of Sp(n), known as the metaplectic group M p(n). A symplectic 2nplane bundle F admits a reduction of its structure group from GL(2n) to Sp(n); a metaplectic structure on F then corresponds to a lifting of the symplectic frame bundle to a principal M p(n) bundle. In general, a symplectic vector bundle admits a metaplectic structure if and only if its second StiefelWhitney class vanishes. A symplectic manifold P whose tangent bundle is equipped with a metaplectic structure is called a metaplectic manifold. If the StiefelWhitney class w2 (P ) is zero, metaplectic 104
It is trivial as a topological covering. s1 deﬁne equivalent metaplectic structures if and only if (s1 )−1 · s0 admits a continuous lift s : R2 → M p(1). note that up to topological equivalence. which can be interpreted as the identity component of M L(n) in order to give a metalinear structure on E. s(p) · ρ(A)) for A ∈ M p(1). The double covering of GL(n) then induced by the identiﬁcation GL(n) Gl(n) (see Example 3. A) = (p. a) = A · eiπa . 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 1dimensional representations which are not the lifts of representations of GL(n). the ˙ punctured plane R2 admits only trivial Sp(1) and M p(1) principal bundles. s(p) · A) ˜ By the usual homotopy theory for continuous groups. Bundles associated to metalinear structures via these representations will be the key to the metaplectic correction of the prequantization procedure. More explicitly.15 Lying within the metaplectic group is a doublecover M l(n) of the subgroup Gl(n) preserving the usual lagrangian splitting of R2n . Example 7. If E is orientable. Z2 ) (see [28]). 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. . A) = (p. since both Sp(1) and M p(1) are connected. On the other hand. this occurs precisely when [s0 ] = [s1 ] as elements of π1 (Sp(1))/ρ# π1 (M p(1)) Z2 . a vector bundle admits a metalinear structure if and only if the square of its ﬁrst StiefelWhitney class is zero (see [28]).1) is called the metalinear group M L(n). Two such maps s0 . its structure group can be reduced to GL+ (n). To see this explicitly in a special case. More generally. but as a group it is not the direct product GL(n) × Z2 . A metalinear lifting of the frames of an nplane bundle E is called a metalinear structure on E. 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. We emphasize that this classiﬁcation depends on the bundle of metaplectic frames and its covering map to the bundle of symplectic frames.
From the representation a → eiπa/2 of Z4 in U (1). we then have w2 (P ) = w1 (L)2 . M B(F ). If J is any ωcompatible almost complex structure on P . Φ) on a vector bundle F . An important link between metalinear and metaplectic structures on symplectic manifolds can be described as follows. we then obtain a complex line bundle Λ1/2 F called the bundle of halfforms associated to the triple (F. while a metaplectic structure on T P reduces to a metalinear structure on L. loosely speaking. Theorem 7. Proof. and thus.16 Let (P. A section of Λ1/2 F then identiﬁes with a complexvalued function λ on M B(F ) satisfying λ(e) = (det A)1/2 eiπa/2 · λ(e · (A. and our assertion follows from the remarks in the preceding examples. the product of two halfforms on F yields an nform. then T P = L⊕JL By the Whitney product theorem. the squareroot of a volume form on F . similarly. The resulting frame bundle is isomorphic to the frame bundle of L. The reason for this terminology is that the bundle Λ1/2 F can be constructed directly from the metalinear frame bundle via the representation M L(n) → C∗ given by the squareroot of (det ◦ρ) (A. More explicitly. one similarly deﬁnes the bundles Λ1/2 F and Λ−1/2 F of conjugate and negative halfforms on F . By inverting and conjugating the preceding representation of M L(n). Then T P admits a metaplectic structure if and only if L admits a metalinear structure. 106 L⊕L. 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. Φ). By the preceding theorem. a halfform λ and a conjugate halfform µ can be multiplied to give a 1density λµ on the bundle F . it is equipped with a natural ﬂat connection inherited from the one on F. a) → (det A)1/2 eiπa/2 . ω) be a symplectic 2nmanifold and L ⊂ T P a lagrangian subbundle.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). F inherits a metalinear structure from the metaplectic structure on T P . and thus Λ−1/2 F is deﬁned. . and therefore represents. a metalinear structure on L can be enlarged to a metaplectic structure on T P . Deﬁnition 7. Evidently. a)).
In terms ˙ of the identiﬁcations above. in accordance with the corrected BohrSommerfeld quantization conditions described in Chapter 4.12 to illustrate how the introduction of halfforms also enables us to incorporate the BohrSommerfeld correction in the case of the 1dimensional harmonic oscillator. Example 7. s2 ⊗ λ2 = PF s1 . a > 0. In this way. 107 . As proven in [28]. and the covering map R2 × M p(1) → R2 × Sp(1) is given by (r. a · eiφ ) → (r. θ. θ. That is. 0 ≤ θ ≤ 2π} ˙ of R2 × Sp(1) while its corresponding metalinear bundle equals the subset {(r. a > 0. a · eiθ ) : r = r0 . θ. ˙ we will use the trivial metaplectic structure on R2 (see Example 7. 0 ≤ θ ≤ 2π. φ ≤ 2π. Note that this is a nontrivial M l(1) bundle over Sr0 . the subbundle R2 × Gl(1) equal the subset {(r. The latter space is equipped with a natural innerproduct s1 ⊗ λ1 . the Bott connection on T L described in Example 5. the quantum state space HF identiﬁes with the space of compactly supported sections of EF ⊗ Λ1/2 PF . c ∈ {0. ˙ ˙ where a.19 Over each leaf L of the polarization F. ˙ To quantize the punctured plane R2 with its polarization by circles centered at the origin. it follows easily that the parallel transport of a negative halfform associated to T Sr0 around Sr0 amounts to multiplication by −1. In this case. r > 0 and 0 ≤ θ. a · eiφ ). the quotient of B(F) by this leafwise foliation deﬁnes a metalinear structure on the leaf space PF in such a way that halfforms on PF are in 11 correspondence with Fparallel negative halfforms on F. Note that integration is welldeﬁned.14).In the following examples. From the expression for the covering map given above. Example 7. Consequently. a · ei(θ/2+cπ) ) : r = r0 . 1}} ˙ of R2 × M p(1). θ. since λ1 λ2 is a density on PF . ˙ ˙ The pullback of R2 × Sp(1) of T R2 to the circle Sr of radius r can be reduced to the trivial Gl(1) principal bundle over Sr0 by means of the lagrangian splitting T Sr0 ⊕ JT Sr0 . θ. we will sketch how in certain cases this deﬁnition enables us to overcome the diﬃculties mentioned at the beginning of this section.17 deﬁnes a foliation of the preimage of L in B(F). a · e2iφ ). 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.18 We ﬁrst return to Example 7. s2 λ1 λ2 . both the ˙ trivial M p(1) and Sp(1) bundles over R2 can be identiﬁed with the set of triples (r. the BohrSommerfeld variety consists of circles of energy E = (n + 1/2)π .
similarly. ρ(f ) acts as pointwise multiplication for any f ∈ F(P ). Given a symplectic manifold P with the structures above. Bσ2 for all σ1 ∈ H1 and σ2 ∈ H2 . First. then a smooth function v(p) on pspace identiﬁes with an element σp (q.x is transverse to F2. we recall that for the q =constant polarization Fq of R2n . σ2 = 1 (2π )n/2 s1 . If we identify elements σ1 . the space HFq consists of pindependent functions σq (q.BlattnerKostantSternberg kernels If F1 and F2 are ﬁbrating polarizations of P with the property that F1.p / of HFp . σp = 1 (2π )n/2 ei q. λ2 ) ω n . then the quantum state spaces HF1 and HF2 can be related as follows. is due to Blattner. the symplectic form deﬁnes an isomorphism of F1 with F2 . Similarly. which we may identify with the space of smooth functions on qspace. P where dim(P ) = 2n. and Sternberg deﬁnes a sesquilinear pairing on the associated quantum state spaces via a BlattnerKostantSternberg kernel. The quantum operator associated to F is then ρ(f ) σ = i d (ϕt σ)t=0 . σ2 of HF1 and HF2 with Fi parallel sections si ⊗ λi of E ⊗ Λ1/2 Fi on P . then it lifts to a 1parameter family ϕt of operators on ˜ 1/2 smooth sections of E ⊗ Λ F.20 The basic example of a BlattnerKostantSternberg kernel arises from the classical Fourier transform. Using this identiﬁcation. if Fp is the p =constant polarization. which can be extended to more general pairs of polarizations. the metaplectic structure on P deﬁnes a natural isomorphism between the space of halfforms on F2 and the space of conjugate halfforms on F1 (see [28]). ∗ By assumption. if the hamiltonian ﬂow ϕt of f ∈ C ∞ (P ) preserves F. 108 . geometric quantization attempts to represent the Poisson algebra C ∞ (P ) on HF as follows. λ2 ) on P .x at each x ∈ P . This construction.5. Kostant. s2 (λ1 . Example 7. p) = u(q) on R2n . σ2 = σ1 . then a sesquilinear pairing HF1 × HF2 → C is deﬁned by σ1 . we can pair a halfform λ1 on F1 with a halfform λ2 on F2 to obtain a function (λ1 . From Example 7. R2n Note that this corresponds to the usual association of a distribution v (q) on qspace to a ˆ function v(p) on pspace via the inverse asymptotic Fourier transform.p / u(q) v(p) dq dp. p) = v(p)ei q. This pairing is nondegenerate and thus determines a linear operator B : HF2 → HF1 satisfying σ1 . The sesquilinear pairing described above is therefore given by σq . ˜ dt In particular.
s) is n “concentrated” at the origin of R . Example 7. the diﬀerential Dϕt maps F into a polarization Ft for which there exists a BlattnerKostantSternberg kernel and a corresponding operator Ut : HFt → HF . we consider the following situation. then the section s of E ⊗ Λ−1/2 F over L corresponding to a section of E ⊗ Λ1/2 L can be extended to a section s over P which is covariantly constant on each leaf and which vanishes on leaves ˜ which are disjoint from L. Let (L. More precisely. sLj ) and summing the results produces an element of HF as long as this sum converges. According to the preceding example. In this way. we assume that for t ∈ (0. let L be the ﬁber of T ∗ Rn over 0 ∈ Rn along with a constant ˜ section s of E ⊗ Λ−1/2 Fq over L. The ﬂow ϕt deﬁnes an operator ϕt : HF → HFt . such as a halfdensity or halfform with coeﬃcients in a prequantum line bundle over P . can be considered as a generalized section. If s is again a section of E ⊗ Λ−1/2 F over L. then we can pair it with arbitrary elements of HF by integration over L. then we can construct and element of HF by “superposition”.For those f ∈ C ∞ (P ) whose hamiltonian ﬂow does not preserve F.3 Quantization of semiclassical states In this brief section. ε). Applying the procedure above to each (Lj . we suppose that P is a metaplectic manifold with a prequantum line bundle E and a ﬁbrating polarization F. such that each Lj intersects any leaf of F at most once. Similarly. The meaning of this last statement is made more precise by the fact that if T : R2n → R2n is a linear symplectomorphism. the quantization of ˜ ˜ ˜ (L. Example 7. via the inner product on HF . ˜ dt 7. whereas the quantization of (L. and the quantum operator ρ(f ) is deﬁned as ˜ ρ(f ) σ = i We refer to [28] for further details. then the associated quantum operator HFq → HT (Fq ) is 109 . Our goal is to comment brieﬂy on how an element of HF can be constructed from a “semiclassical state” in P consisting of a lagrangian submanifold L ⊂ P with some extra structure. s). which. d ((Ut ◦ ϕt ) σ)t=0 . 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.22 To indicate brieﬂy how “distributional” elements of HF arising as in the preceding example are paired. s) is given by an ordinary smooth function on Rn . 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. we think of L as the union of lagrangian submanifolds Lj .21 If L ⊂ P intersects each leaf of F transversely in at most one point. Finally. we can regard s as the quantization of the pair (L. 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. thus obtaining a linear functional on HF .
s) is a Dirac δfunction n concentrated at the origin of R . up to a normalization. we can ˜ ˜ quantize (L. the quantum state obtained from (L. this means ˜ ˜ that.˜ required to be unitary. In terms of HFq . By choosing T so that both L and L are transverse to T (Fq ). 110 . 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.
111 . known as deformation quantization and the method of symplectic groupoids. which may be interpreted as the algebra of functions on a classical phase space. Additionally. g ∈ C ∞ (Q). 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. Q are Poisson manifolds. g ◦ ψ} for all f. h} g. 8. Quantum observables comprise a noncommutative algebra A which is assumed to belong to a family A of algebras. →0 The abstract goal of algebraic quantization is to construct the family A of noncommutative algebras from a Poisson algebra. g} = {f ◦ ψ. i. and that most of quantum mechanics can be done without regards for the precise nature of observables. g ∈ C ∞ (Q). Similarly. The main examples of Poisson manifolds we will be concerned with are the following. but with an dependent multiplication ∗ .1 A Poisson algebra is a real vector space A equipped with a commutative. As → 0. g} = lim (f ∗ g − g ∗ f )/i . h} = f {g. g} which satisfy the compatibility condition {f g. all with a common underlying vector space. g) → {f. g} = −{f ◦ ψ. g) → f g and a Lie algebra structure (f. g ◦ ψ} for all f. we sketch two approaches towards this goal. associative algebra structure (f. the Leibniz identity implies that the Poisson bracket is given by a skewsymmetric contravariant tensor ﬁeld π via the formula {f. h} + {f. dg).e. On a Poisson manifold. If P.1 Poisson algebras and Poisson manifolds The main objects in algebraic quantization theory are Poisson algebras and Poisson manifolds. ψ is called an antiPoisson map if {f. it is assumed that the ∗ commutator approaches the Poisson bracket in the limit of large quantum numbers: {f. the algebra A approaches a commutative algebra A0 . In this chapter. Deﬁnition 8. {f. g} = π(df.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. a smooth map ψ : P → Q is called a Poisson map provided that it preserves Poisson brackets.
2. Deﬁnition 8. Any symplectic manifold is a Poisson manifold with respect to its standard Poisson structure {f. g} = π(df. where ∆ : g∗ → g∗ × g∗ is the diagonal and f. 4. Let g be a ﬁnitedimensional Lie algebra with dual g∗ . the zeroth and ﬁrst order terms of this series are determined by the Poisson algebra structure of A. then def {f. and let ∗ be a family of associative multiplications on A given by a formal power series ∞ f∗ g= j=0 Bj (f. 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 A as an asymptotic series (in ) of products on A. Any smooth manifold M is a Poisson manifold when C ∞ (M ) is given the trivial bracket {f. Dg : g∗ → g∗∗ g are the diﬀerentials of f and g. In accordance with the introductory remarks above. dg) deﬁnes a Poisson algebra structure on C ∞ (V ).3 Let A be a complex vector space equipped with a commutative associative algebra structure. {f. where µ ∈ g∗ . Dg]). the role of the higherorder terms is roughly speaking to give a more precise dependent path from classical to quantum mechanics. x + y .Example 8. g} = 0. Then ∗ is called a ∗deformation of A if 112 .y) . 2 The dual space g∗ is then a Poisson manifold when equipped with the LiePoisson bracket {f. g) j where each Bj : A × A → A is a bilinear map. and Df. g ∈ C ∞ (g∗ ). The LiePoisson operator on C ∞ (g∗ × g∗ ) is the diﬀerential operator D deﬁned by DF = 1 [DF ](x. g} = ∆∗ D(f g).2 1. 3. g} = Xg · f. More concretely. If V is a ﬁnitedimensional vector space and π is a skewsymmetric bilinear form on V ∗ . g}(µ) = µ([Df. The diﬀerential of a smooth function F : g∗ × g∗ → R is a map DF : g∗ × g∗ → g × g whose composition with the Lie bracket on g deﬁnes a smooth map [DF ] : g∗ × g∗ → g.
g) equals the product in A. a straightforward computation shows that the Poisson operator is related to the Poisson bracket induced by π via the equation {f. where ∆ : R2n → R2n × R2n is the diagonal embedding. Bj (1. Bj is a diﬀerential operator in each argument. (f ∗ g) ∗ h = f ∗ (g ∗ h) For condition (5) to make sense. Instead it should be viewed as an “asymptotic expansion” for the product. In any case. Similarly. Pointwise multiplication of functions in f. = e−i Dπ /2 . ∂/∂z) . then the Hessian of π at 0 ∈ V ∗ × V ∗ is a linear map A = Hπ : V ∗ × V ∗ → V × V .1. (∂/∂y. z). and manipulations of this series will be purely formal. and (y ∗ . g ∈ C ∞ (R2n ). g ∈ C ∞ (R2n ) can be deﬁned as the pullback f · g = ∆∗ f g. 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. We emphasize that the power series above is not in general assumed to converge for = 0. 5. Example 8. Bj (g. The MoyalWeyl operator is then the pseudodiﬀerential operator given by exponentiation: Mπ. z) = f (y) g(z) for f. g) 3. conditions (15) imply that {f. f ) = (−1)j B(f. where (y. . z ∗ ) are dual to (y. g} = def 1 B1 (f. 2.4 If V is a ﬁnitedimensional real vector space and π : V ∗ × V ∗ → R is a skewsymmetric bilinear form on V ∗ . and (f g)(y. z) are linear coordinates on V × V arising from a single set of linear coordinates on V . ∂/∂z ∗ ). we must extend the product ∗ in the obvious way from A to the space A[[ ]] of formal power series. We deﬁne the Poisson operator associated to π as the secondorder diﬀerential operator on C ∞ (V × V ) Dπ = A(∂/∂y ∗ . f ) = 0 for j ≥ 1 4. g) 2i deﬁnes a Poisson algebra structure on A. g} = ∆∗ D(f The diagonal pullback f ∗ g = ∆∗ M (f 113 g) g). B0 (f.
In terms of the linear coordinates (y. one may therefore attempt to “patch together” the local deformations to arrive at a global ∗product. emphasizing Fedosov’s construction). e A simpliﬁed proof of these results has recently been given by Fedosov [23] (see [68] for a survey of deformation quantization.4. Unlike deformation quantization.5 A groupoid is a set Γ endowed with a product map (x.s ∂yr ∂zs j f (y)g(z) y=z=x . To construct a ∗product on all of C ∞ (P ). r.of the Moyal operator deﬁnes a ∗deformation of the Poisson algebra C ∞ (V ) called the MoyalWeyl product. 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. Deﬁnition 8. the operator Bj in the expansion of the MoyalWeyl product is 1 Bj (f. A Poisson manifold P is called regular if its Poisson tensor π has constant rank. Groupoids In this section we collect some basic deﬁnitions and examples of groupoids and their counterparts in symplectic geometry. In view of Example 8. g) = j! i 2 ∂ ∂ πr. any regular Poisson manifold is locally deformation quantizable. where Q is the skewsymmetric bilinear form on V induced by π. A theorem of DeWilde and Lecomte [19] asserts that the Poisson algebra of any ﬁnitedimensional symplectic manifold admits a ∗deformation. y) → xy deﬁned on a subset Γ2 ⊂ Γ × Γ called the set of composable pairs. Using similar techniques. and an inverse map ι : Γ → Γ satisfying the conditions 1. z) on V × V . M´lotte [44] extended their result to arbitrary regular Poisson manifolds. ι2 = id 114 . however. 8.z−x) f (y) g(z) dy dz. 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.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. in which case a theorem of Lie [39] asserts that P is locally isomorphic to a vector space with a constant Poisson structure.s If π is nondegenerate. This technique has succeeded.
The mappings α. The set Γ0 of all sources (and targets) is called the base of Γ. and α. 4. If (x. The pair groupoid associated to a set X consists of Γ = X × X. there is exactly one arrow from any object to another.7 A groupoid Γ is called a Lie groupoid if 1. y) = (x. y) · (y. we make the following deﬁnition. Maintaining the notation above. y) = (y. the multiplication relation of Γ is the subset m = {(xy. 2. y) ∈ Γ2 } of Γ × Γ × Γ. endowed with the multiplication (x. x). y) ∈ Γ2 . z). Example 8. 2. and if (x.6 1. z) = (x. Combining (1) and (2). 3. 3. A submanifold L of Γ is called unitary if the restriction of α and β to L are diﬀeomorphisms L → Γ0 . x. (y. yz) ∈ Γ2 . 115 ι . ι(x)) ∈ Γ2 for all x ∈ Γ. 4. x) ∈ Γ2 for all x ∈ Γ. The unitary submanifolds form a group under the natural multiplication of subsets. Note that by (3). a groupoid is a small category in which all morphisms have inverses. If Γ is a groupoid with base Γ0 and Γ0 ⊂ Γ0 . y) : (x. y) then belongs to Γ2 if and only if the source of y equals the target of x. and conversely. Finally. 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). then Γ = {x ∈ Γ : α(x). y) and β(x. then (zx)ι(x) = z. A disjoint union of groupoids is a groupoid over the union of their bases. and Γ is said to be a groupoid over Γ0 . Γ0 is a submanifold of Γ. and so both Γ2 = (α × β)−1 (∆) ⊂ Γ × Γ and the multiplication relation m ⊂ Γ × Γ × Γ are smooth submanifolds. and if (z. we see that any vector bundle E deﬁnes a groupoid Γ(E) over its zero section. Condition (2) implies that the map α × β is transverse to the diagonal ∆ in Γ0 × Γ0 . z). (x. Multiplication Γ2 → Γ and inversion Γ → Γ are smooth. then ι(x) (xy) = y. β(x) ∈ Γ0 } is a groupoid over Γ0 . a pair (x. (ι(x). the map ι is bijective and thus inverses in Γ are unique. We will be interested in groupoids with some geometric structures. x) ∈ 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. Deﬁnition 8. 3. In this groupoid. β : Γ → Γ0 are submersions. In abstract terms. β are the projections α(x. y). any groupoid whose base is a singleton comprises a group. Thus Γ0 is the diagonal. Any group is a groupoid over its identity element. and (xy)z = x(yz). z) ∈ Γ2 . then (xy.2.
a symplectic groupoid Γ is characterized by the three canonical relations (recall that Z is a point): Γ0 ∈ Hom(Z. we will say that P is integrable and refer to Γ as a symplectic groupoid over P . Γ) m ∈ Hom(Γ × Γ.10 1. From the requirement that the base of a symplectic groupoid be a lagrangian submanfold.Deﬁnition 8. A simple computation shows that the base of T ∗ G is its ﬁber at the identity. 3. deﬁnes a symplectic groupoid over M . Two immediate consequences of this deﬁnition and the calculus of canonical relations are that Γ0 is lagrangian. Its unitary lagrangian submanifolds are precisely the graphs of symplectomorphisms of P .. Thus. Γ) 116 . If P is any symplectic manifold. Γ) linked by the equation Γ0 = m ◦ Lι . then the dual space g∗ with its LiePoisson structure is integrable. 4. T ∗ G is a symplectic groupoid over g∗ .e. Example 8. equipped with the groupoid structure of a vector bundle and its standard symplectic structure. its graph is a lagrangian submanifold of Γ × Γ. only discrete Lie groups can be symplectic groupoids. As a consequence of the axioms and the assumption that m 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). i. then the pair groupoid structure on P × P deﬁnes a symplectic groupoid over P . 2. Deﬁnition 8. A simple example of a Lie groupoid is given by any Lie group. 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. If M is any manifold with the zero Poisson structure. then T ∗ M ..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. Equipped with these operations and its usual symplectic structure.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 . Lι ∈ Hom(Γ. there is a unique Poisson structure on the base Γ0 of a symplectic groupoid Γ such that α : Γ → Γ0 is a Poisson map and β : Γ → Γ0 is antiPoisson. and ι : Γ → Γ is antisymplectic. If g is any Lie algebra. This Poisson structure gives meaning to the following concept. If there exists a groupoid Γ which integrates P . For any Lie group G whose Lie algebra is g.
If the Haar measure on G is used to identify the quantum Hilbert space HG with C ∞ (G. As in Chapter 7. ι. and m quantize as elements of AΓ . g1 ) on G × G. There is actually a ﬂaw in the preceding two examples. the identity relation Γ0 coincides with the zero section of T ∗ M .12 Arguing as in the preceding example.3 shows that. and m associated to the groupoid T ∗ G of Example yields the −1 distributions δ(e) on G. and T ∗ (M ×M ×M ) with (completions of) the function spaces C ∞ (M ). the relations Lι and m identify with the conormal bundles of the diagonals ∆2 ⊂ M × M and ∆3 ⊂ M × M × M respectively. antiinvolution f (g) → f (g −1 ). The relation Γ0 then quantizes as the function 1 on M . since geometric quantizaton produces halfdensities rather than functions. 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. Γ0 . we then attempt to associate a vector space AΓ to Γ in such a way that the canonical relations Γ0 .Quantization via symplectic groupoids From our discussion of geometric quantization. then the underlying symplectic manifold must possess a groupoid structure compatible with its symplectic structure. Lι and m quantize as evaluation (at e ∈ G). these relations are quantized by the δfunctions δ(x. z) supported on the diagonals ∆2 and ∆3 respectively. δ(g1 . This is known as the integration problem for Poisson manifolds. AΓ ⊗ A∗ . polarizations). and lagrangian submanifolds correspond to elements in V . T ∗ (M × M ). like the algebras of quantum mechanics. Γ and AΓ ⊗ A∗ ⊗ A∗ which deﬁne the structure of an associative ∗algebra on AΓ . As described in the preceding example. ﬁbrating) polarizations. To conclude this chapter. Example 8. our heuristic discussion in Section 7. C). Using the techniques of geometric quantization (prequantizations. the quantization of the groupoid Γ yields the usual identity element. The ﬁrst step in the quantization of a Poisson manifold P by the method of symplectic groupoids is to construct a symplectic groupoid (Γ. we may identify the quantum Hilbert spaces associated to T ∗ M. we know that certain symplectic manifolds quantize to give vector spaces V . and furthermore. Thus. respectively. m) over P . g2 ) on G × G × G. C). Lι . we ﬁnd that the quantization of the canonical relations Γ0 . Since Lι and m are the conormal bundles of the diagonals in M × M and M × M × M . the natural domain of the 117 . C ∞ (M ×M ) and C ∞ (M ×M ×M ). under the identiﬁcations T ∗ M × T ∗ M T ∗ (M × M ) and T ∗ M × T ∗ M × T ∗ M T ∗ (M × M × M ). Lι . we will only deal with groupoids Γ equipped with reasonable (e. Γ Γ it is in this sense that the symplectic groupoid Γ represents a classical model for the quantum algebra AΓ . and pointwise multiplication in the associative ∗algebra C ∞ (M. Throughout. complex conjugation.11 Consider a trivial Poisson manifold M and its associated symplectic groupoid T ∗ M . z)δ(y. g1 . we will give several examples illustrating the spirit of the symplectic groupoid method. and convolution. Example 8. If successful. y) and δ(x.g. after an appropriate normalization. then the relations Γ0 . and δ(g1 g2 .
say convolution. y) = f (xy). Example 8. p. q . the polarization comes from the isomorphism of Γ = R2n × R2n with T ∗ R2n given by (x. then T inherits a translationinvariant Poisson structure from V . and not just the multiplication. When the map T is zero.4). 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. To describe the multiplication relation. should depend on the groupoid structure on Γ. we get as V the space of smooth functions on the diagonal.13 If we take P = R2n with its standard symplectic structure. ˜ Using this polarization to quantize Γ. The coproduct satisﬁes a coassociative law and is related to pointwise multiplication by the simple identity ∆(f g) = ∆(f )∆(g). It appears then that the construction of V itself. and the multiplication on V turns out to be the Moyal product (see Example 8. and the groupoid product quantized to the usual pointwise multiplication of functions on T. A symplectic groupoid which integrates T is given by the cotangent bundle T ∗ T. and Lι equals the conormal bundle of the diagonal in T × T. In this way. The compatibility between the two structures on C ∞ (G) reﬂects a compatibility between the two groupoid structures on T ∗ G. 118 . with Γ0 equals the zero section of T ∗ T. the Poisson structure on T is trivial. one of the basic examples of noncommutative geometry. we identify T ∗ T with T × V ∗ and let m ⊂ T ∗ (T × T × T ) consist of all triples 1 (q. Otherwise one gets a noncommutative multiplication on C ∞ (T) which is precisely that of (the functions on) a noncommutative torus. there is a polarization of P × P which does not depend on any polarization of P but only on the aﬃne structure. In fact. then a skewadjoint linear map π : V ∗ → V deﬁnes a skewsymmetric bilinear form on V ∗ and thus a translationinvariant Poisson structure on V . making C ∞ (G) into a Hopf algebra. ωn (y − x)). it is possible to relate them more closely by dualizing one of them.convolution operation on a group consists not of functions but of densities. y) → ((x + y)/2.14 If V is any ﬁnitedimensional vector space. Example 8. If T is a torus equal to the quotient of V by some lattice. Although the two multiplications associated with the two groupoid structures on T ∗ G described above live on diﬀerent spaces. p . (The relation between Poisson tori and noncommutative tori was studied from the point of view of deformation quantization in [50]). which we identify with R2n itself. q . p ) such that q = q + 2 T (p + p ) and 1 q = q + T (p ) 2 p=p +p .
an αdensity on V is a map λ : B(V ) → C such that λ(eA) = λ(e) ·  det(A)α . This concept can be generalized as follows. Since GL(V ) acts transitively on B(V ). ej )1/2 . Consequently. then σ β is a welldeﬁned αβdensity on V . deﬁned on the set B(V ) of bases in V . · · · .A Densities An nform ν on an ndimensional manifold M can be viewed as a scalar function on the space of bases in the tangent bundle which satisﬁes ν(eA) = ν(e) · det(A). then a basis of V . which satisﬁes η(eA) = η(e) ·  det(A). en ) is any frame in a tangent space of M and A = (aij ) is any invertible n × n matrix. We denote the vector space of αdensities on V by Λα V. ˜ 3. any real bilinear form ω on V induces a 1density ω on V . where e = (e1 . then there is a natural product Λα V1 × Λα V2 → Λα V. The use of densities instead of forms circumvents this need. Λα V is a 1dimensional complex vector space. def 119 . Equivalently. is determined by a choice of bases for W and V /W . 2. Deﬁnition A. an αdensity is determined by its value on a single basis. The collection of such functions is denoted ΛV . If σ ∈ Λα V and β ∈ C. A linear map T : V → V ∗ induces a realvalued 1density T on V given by T e =  det( T ei . If W is a subspace of V . there is a natural product Λα W × Λα (V /W ) → Λα V In particular. As a result. Because the “change of variables” formula for integration involves absolute values of Jacobians.1 For α ∈ C. integration of nforms on M requires a choice of orientation. if V = V1 ⊕ V2 . Multiplication of densities is deﬁned by multiplication of their values and gives rise to a bilinear map: Λα V × Λβ V → Λα+β V. unique up to transformation by a matrix of determinant ±1. A density on a real vector space V of dimension n is a complexvalued function η. Operations on densities 1. 4.
By the operations described above.2 Suppose that A. and the positive real number  detθ T  is deﬁned by the equation  detθ T 1/2 θ = T . C are vector spaces and 0 → A → A ⊕ C → C∗ → 0 is an exact sequence such that F C = T . where θ is any realvalued 1density on C. 120 . A natural map B(V ) → B(V ∗ ) is deﬁned by associating to each basis e of V its dual basis e∗ .5. We denote by Ωα E the vector space of smooth sections of Λα E and by Ωα E the space of c smooth. If T : V → V is an isomorphism. An nform on an nmanifold M induces an αdensity να in the manner of (4) above. we obtain an isomorphism Λα A Λα A ⊗ Λ2α C given explicitly by σ→σ⊗ T 2α F ∗ =  detθ T α σ ⊗ θ2α . there is a welldeﬁned isomorphism T∗ : Λα V → Λα V . Operations 3 and 4 induce natural isomorphisms Λα V ⊗ Λβ V → Λα+β V Λα W ⊗ Λα (V /W ) → Λα V. so we can associate the αdensity bundle Λα E to any smooth vector bundle E over a manifold M . The density spaces associated to the tangent bundle of M are denoted Ωα M . the map ∗ gives rise to a natural isomorphism Λα V → Λ−α V ∗ . Example A. compactlysupported sections. 7. Since (eA)∗ = e∗ (A∗ )−1 for any A ∈ GL(V ). Λα V1 ⊗ Λα V2 → Λα (V1 ⊕ V2 ) 6. It is easy to check that the association V → Λα V deﬁnes a diﬀerentiable functor. The remarks above imply that if 0→E→F →G→0 is an exact sequence of vector bundles over M . then there is a natural densitybundle isomorphism Λα E ⊗ Λα G Λα F.
B The method of stationary phase We begin with a few useful formulas involving the asymptotic Fourier transform. the asymptotic Fourier transform and its inverse are deﬁned respectively as (F u)(ξ) = (2π )− 2 n e−i x. which equals u(x) by the usual Fourier inversion formula. We study next the asymptotic behavior of integrals of the form I = Rn eiR(x)/ a(x) dx ∞ a ∈ C0 (Rn ).ξ / u(y) dy dξ. complex valued functions on Rn . then I is rapidly decreasing in : 121 . compactlysupported halfdensities on M is deﬁned by σ. 1/2 Similarly. R ∈ C ∞ (Rn ) as → 0.ξ Rn / u(x) dx / (F −1 v)(x) = (2π )− 2 n ei x.ξ (Rn )∗ / (F u)(ξ) dξ = (2π)−n ei x−y.ξ (Rn )∗ v(ξ) dξ To see that these transforms are actually inverse to one another. For u ∈ S. τ = M σ τ. Let S denote the usual Schwartz space of rapidly decreasing. a preHilbert space structure on the space Ωc M of smooth. we will prove that if the critical point set of R is not contained in the support of a. 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. note that the change of variables η = ξ/ gives (2π )− 2 n ei x. This observation also veriﬁes the asymptotic inversion formula: u(x) = (2π )−n ei x−y.A natural mapping Ω1 M → C is deﬁned by integration c σ→ M σ.η u(y) dy dη. As a ﬁrst step. The completion HM of this space is called the intrinsic Hilbert space of M . A similar check of deﬁnitions proves the asymptotic Parseval formula: u v dx = Rn (Rn )∗ F u F v dξ.
1/2  detdx T  k! Rn k=0 where T : Rn → (Rn )∗ is the selfadjoint map associated to Q and D is the secondorder diﬀerential operator given by ∂ i −1 ∂ Tjk . Consequently.1. then I = O( ∞ ) as → 0. ξ /2 and the determinant detdx T is deﬁned as in Appendix A. From [32.6. For the general case. the asymptotic Fourier transform of the function x → eiQ(x)/ equals eiπsgn(Q)/4 e−Q (ξ)/ ξ→ .7. 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. Proof. then for each nonnegative integer K. Lemma B.ξ e iQ(x)/ dx = (2π iπsgn(Q)/4 −i Q∗ (ξ) e n/2 e .2 If the quadratic form Q is nondegenerate. D= 2 j. Rx1 ∂x1 and so integration by parts with respect to the x1 variable gives I  = Rn eiR/ ∂ ∂x1 a R x1 dx . )  detdx T 1/2 where Q∗ (ξ) = T −1 ξ. . we recall that for ξ ∈ (Rn )∗ . we obtain I = Rn ∗ e iQ/ eiπ·sgn(Q)/4 a dx =  detdx T 1/2 122 e−iQ (Rn )∗ ∗/ F a (ξ) dξ. Suppose for the moment that Rx1 = ∂R/∂x1 = 0 on Supp(a). Our assertion follows by noting that (a/Qx1 )x1 ∈ C0 (Rn ) and repeating the same argument. Then eiR/ a = −i a ∂ iR/ e .  detdx T 1/2 Combining this expression with the asymptotic Parseval formula. e Rn −i x.k ∂xj ∂xk Proof. 2 The upshot of this lemma is that the main (asymptotic) contribution to the integral I must come from the critical points of R. K eiπ sgn(Q)/4 1 eiQ/ a dx = (2π )n/2 (Dk a)(0) k + O K+1+n/2 . Vol.1].Lemma B. ∞ implying that I is O( ). Thm.1 If dR = 0 on Supp(a).
A simple computation shows that F a (ξ) = F a (−ξ). 123 . we require the following two lemmas. 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 . and R : M → R is a smooth function. To this end. where U is a neighborhood of 0 in Rn . the change of variables ξ → −ξ doesn’t aﬀect the integral. If g : M → M is any diﬀeomorphism. 2 We now wish to apply this lemma to evaluate integrals of the form I = M eiR/ σ. Recall that the hessian of R : M → R at a critical point p ∈ M is a welldeﬁned selfadjoint ∗ linear map R (p) : Tp M → Tp M . then there exists a nondegenerate quadratic form Q on Rn and an embedding g : U → M . the last expression on the right following from the asymptotic Fourier inversion formula. where M is a smooth nmanifold equipped with a compactly supported density σ. To deal with the integral on the right. The same role in the stationary phase formula will be played by the following lemma. The critical point p is called nondegenerate if R (p) is an isomorphism. In this case. proven in Section 4. and consequently we have I = eiπ·sgn(Q)/4  detdx T −1/2 e−iQ (Rn )∗ ∗ (ξ)/ F a (ξ) dξ. the function R has the following normal form near p. If p is a nondegenerate critical point of a function R : M → R. 2 (This theorem is a special case of the Parametrized Morse Lemma. then the “change of variables” formula states that g ∗ eiR/ σ = M M eiR/ σ. Morse Lemma .3). such that g(0) = p and (R ◦ g)(x) = R(p) + Q(x).
. k in Supp(σ).. αk ) for which the intersection k Uα0 . Let M be a smooth nmanifold and σ ∈ Ωc M . ˇ and the kth Cech cohomology group of M with coeﬃcients in Γ and relative to the covering U is the quotient ˇk ˇk ˇk HU (M . Γ). The group of all such cochains is denoted CU (M. Γ) = im(δ k−1 ). suppose that p ∈ M is a critical point of R and set p = g −1 (p)... Γ) = ker(δ k ) ˇk BU (M ...Lemma B. · · · .αk the intersection k Uαi . a Γvalued Cech cochain with respect to the cover U is then a rule which assigns an element cα0 . αj . If R : M → R has only nondegenerate critical points pj . 124 . For ease of notation. j = 1. Γ)/BU (M .αk of Γ to every list (α0 . αk+1 ). .αk is nonempty. αk+1 ) = j=0 k (−1)j c(α0 . Γ) = ZU (M . The groups of ˇ degreek Cech cocycles and coboundaries are deﬁned respectively by ˇk ZU (M .. A more general treatment is available in [14]. . 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) is deﬁned by k+1 δ (c)(α0 .3 In the notation above. 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 ).. then  detσ (R ◦ g) (p ) =  detσ R (p).. Combining these observations. 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.. Γ) → CU (M. Γ). and a coboundary operator k+1 k δ k : CU (M.. . . If σ is any density on M such that σp = (g ∗ σ)p . 2 Finally.. we obtain Principle of Stationary Phase . 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.. we will denote by Uα0 . i=0 ˇ If Γ is an abelian group.
t) = hk (x. These maps give rise to the transition functions gjk : Ujk → T of Q. there exists on each Uα a (k − 1)form ϕα satisfying dϕα = ω. Γ) → HU (M . A group homomorphism Γ → Γ induces a homomorphism ˇk ˇk HU (M . t + gjk (x)) for all x ∈ Ujk . denote by Z the group 2π · Z and set T = R/Zh . f (a · p) = a · f (p) for all a ∈ T and p ∈ Q. 125 . This association deﬁnes for each k ∈ Z+ a homomorphism w ˇk k ZDR (M ) → HU (M .e. t) and π(hj (x. we have d(ϕα − ϕβ ) = 0 on Uαβ . ﬁberpreserving action T × Q → Q. t) = hi (x. ˇk One consequence of this theorem is that HU (M . Since Uαβ is itself contractible. we see that ω determines a ˇ Cech kcocycle with coeﬃcients in R. R). t + s) = s · hj (x. This equation implies that for each x ∈ Uijk . Γ ) in the obvious way. Theorem C. t + gij (x) + gjk (x) + gki (x)). deﬁned by the requirement that hj (x. there exist homeomorphisms hj : Uj × T → π −1 (Uj ) such that hj (x. Of particular interest in these notes is the subgroup Z = 2π Z of R. Γ) does not depend on the choice of U. i. β. β. 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. Continuing in this way. 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. and satisﬁes π = π ◦ f . referring to [17] for more details. t)) = x for all (x. hi (x. γ. Since each Uα is contractible. t) ∈ Uj × T and s ∈ T .1 ([61]) The map w induces an isomorphism between the deRham cohomology ˇ of M and the Cech cohomology of M with real coeﬃcients. Throughout this section. π Local triviality of a T ﬁber bundle Q → P implies that for any good cover U of P . we record some standard facts about principal bundles over paracompact manifolds. For any indices α.k Now consider a closed kform ω ∈ ZDR (M ). π A principal T bundle over a manifold P is a locally trivial T bundle Q → P together π with a nonsingular. D Principal T bundles In this appendix.
The fundamental theorem describing this space is the following (see [17. Z ) is known as the Chern class of Q. Z ) are the following operations on principal T bundles. then the numbers ˜ cijk = gij + gjk + gki ˜ ˜ ˜ ˇ are therefore elements of Z which deﬁne a Cech cocycle [cijk ].and so the transition functions satisfy the cocycle condition gij + gjk + gki = 0 (mod Z ). In terms of a good cover U of P . modulo the antidiagonal action of T . where dσ denotes the usual form j on T and the ϕj are 1forms on the Uj satisfying ϕj − ϕk = d˜jk .2 A closed 2form ω on a manifold P is the curvature form of a connection on a principal T bundle Q over P if and only if ω. 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. a ∈ Z for any a ∈ H2 (P . ˇ From the compatibility condition for the ϕj . if Q. ˇ Corresponding to the abelian group structure on H 2 (P . g where gjk are again Rvalued lifts of the transition functions of Q.4] for a proof).1.2. Similarly. The curvature of the ˜ connection ϕ is the unique closed 2form ω on P such that dϕ = π ∗ ω. we can describe the product Q ×P Q as the quotient of the usual ﬁberproduct Q ×P Q (which in this case is a T × T bundle over the base). then the inverse of Q is deﬁned as the principal T bundle −Q over P obtained from the transition functions {−gjk }. i. Z). Cor. On the level of the bundles themselves. Theorem D. Moreover. the form ϕ satisﬁes h∗ ϕ = dσ + π ∗ ϕj .1 Two principal T bundles over P are isomorphic if and only if their Chern classes are equal. Q are principal T bundles over P with transition functions {gjk } and {gjk } respectively. From the deﬁnitions above. −t · p ). The corresponding class 2 ˇ [Q] ∈ H (P . 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 . t · (p.e. X(p) = dt t=0 A connection on Q is a T invariant 1form ϕ on Q such that ϕ(X) = 1. If gjk : Ujk → R is any lift of gjk . then the product of Q and Q is deﬁned as the principal T bundle Q ×P Q over P having transition functions {gjk + gjk }. If Q → P is a principal T bundle having transition functions {gjk } with respect to some good cover of P . Z ). 126 . it follows that the Chern class of Q is the Cech representative of the deRham cohomology class [ω]. p ) = (t · p. Theorem D. 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 ].
where π : P → P is the natural projection. ϕ) over P with curvature ω as an appropriate quotient of A(P. where ∂σ = γ − γ . we deﬁne the 1form Kω on A(P. Since T is divisible. and thus. For this purpose. Similarly. p0 ) × T by this equivalence relation is a principal T bundle Q over P with connection ϕ having curvature π ∗ ω. If Yt is the vector ﬁeld which generates this contraction. p0 ) × T . Since the interval [0. Z ) which acts naturally on Q by (h. Z ). p0 ) denote the space of smooth paths γ : [0. We prefer to give the following direct proof by P. 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 . H1 (P . Z ) = 0. To complete the proof. and the proof is complete. and any choice of isomorphism deﬁnes an action of H1 (P . connections ϕ and ϕ on the T bundles Q. An equivalence relation on the product A(P. Z ) on Q which preserves the connection ϕ. Let A(P. and let e : A(P. there exists a natural contraction of A(P. p0 ) onto the constant map [0. p0 ) → P be the endpoint map e(γ) = γ(1).Iglesias. it deﬁnes a central extension Γ of H1 (P . If H1 (P . then P = P . γ ∈ A(P. Z ) into the space of loops based at p0 which assigns a representative to each homology class. A T valued group cocycle on H1 (P . γ are homologous and t−t = σ ω. p0 ) by 1 Kω = 0 (Yt e∗ ω) dt. h ) = σ ω. The quotient of Q is the desired principal T bundle Q over P . let s be any map from H1 (P .g. 127 π . z + τ ]. τ )[γ. [37]) use Cech cohomology and the deRham isomorphism. Then dσ + Kω is a connection form on the product A(P. 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.ˇ Proof. p0 ) by this equivalence relation is the covering space P of P corresponding to the commutator subgroup of π1 (P ). p0 ) × T is then deﬁned by the condition that (γ. Since this cocycle is symmetric. p0 ) homologous if their diﬀerence is the boundary of a singular 2chain σ in P . where ∂σ = s(h + h ) − (s(h) + s(h )) . t ) if γ. Z ) = 0. where ϕ is locally represented by dσ + ϕj . 1] → P such that γ(0) = p0 . Z ) is then deﬁned by φ(h. t) ∼ (γ . Most published proofs of this result (e. p0 ) × T having curvature e∗ ω. the extension Γ is isomorphic to the product T × H1 (P . Otherwise. 1] is contractible. we will deﬁne the T bundle (Q. see [33] for further details. 1] → p0 . The quotient of A(P. The quotient of A(P. z] = [s(h) · γ.
The space of functions g : Q → C satisfying the condition g(t · p) = ρ−1 (t)g(p) 128 . The cohomology class [β] induced by this form in H 1 (P . we have: Corollary D. k. ϕ − ϕ ) is isomorphic to the trivial bundle (P × T . T ) is called the holonomy of the (ﬂat) connection ϕ. In this s case. we ﬁnd ˜ ˜ that the functions sjk = sj − sk deﬁne transition functions for a trivial T principal bundle over P . Thus. 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 . the local representatives h∗ ϕ = dσ + ϕj have the property that ϕj = d˜j for functions j sj : Uj → R. A section s of a principal T bundle Q over P with connection ϕ is called parallel provided that s∗ ϕ = 0. ϕ) with the trivial T bundle equipped with the trivial connection ϕ = dσ. and so there exists an isomorphism f : Q → P × T . Denoting by sj the composition of sj with the projection R → T . dS). Moreover. Theorem D. (Q . 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. It is easy to check that if ϕ0 is the trivial connection on P × T . The map sQ : Q → Q associated to a parallel section deﬁnes an isomorphism of (Q. then ϕ − f ∗ ϕ0 = π ∗ β ˇ for some closed 1form β on P . π A connection ϕ on a principal T bundle Q → P is said to be ﬂat if dϕ = 0. T ). the compatibility condition for the ϕj implies that sjk − gjk is constant for each j. ϕ ) are isomorphic if and only if (Q ×P −Q .4 A principal T bundle Q over P with a ﬂat connection admits a parallel section if and only if (Q. ϕ). the map (Q.3 Two ﬂat connections ϕ. ρ−1 (t)z).Two principal T bundles with connection (Q. ϕ ) over P are said to be isomorphic provided that there exists an isomorphism f : Q → Q of the underlying principal bundles which satisﬁes f ∗ ϕ = ϕ. ϕ) → [βϕ ] induces a bijection from the space of isomorphism classes of ﬂat connections on the trivial ˇ T bundle with H 1 (P . z) = (t · p. ϕ) has zero holonomy. (Q . ϕ).ϕ on the trivial principal T bundle Q = P ×T over P are isomorphic if and only if they have equal holonomy. On the other hand. A check of the deﬁnition shows that (Q.
g(p))]. 129 .is identiﬁed with the space of sections of E by the assignment g → sG . for any element p of π −1 (x). where the section sg : P → E is deﬁned by the requirement that sg (x) = [(p.
C. of Math. Boston. D. 1982. eds. [13] Bohm. 91102. 1992.. [6] Arnol’d. Appl. and Sternheimer. Birkh¨user.. (1967). 1992. Dynamical systems IV. Progress in Mathematics vol. 111. The Topology of Torus Actions on Symplectic Manifolds. preprint 1993. 1136. SpringerVerlag. [3] Arnol’d. Graduate Texts in Math. J. New York. Princeton University Press. 93 SpringerVerlag. Mathematics Past and Present: Fourier Integral Opu erators. I and II. D. New York. [16] Br¨ning. New York. Arnol’d and S.. A. R. Cambridge Univ. Berlin. Birkh¨user.... Lichnerowicz. Deformation theory and quantization. 1978. J. F. and Guillemin. Progress in Math. Berlin. 1.L.. vol. Some remarks about the associated envelope of a Lie algebra. Novikov. [2] Arnol’d. (1977). Press. a [9] Bayen.. PrenticeHall. Princeton.. Math USSR Izv. Symplectic geometry and topology.P. Cambridge. V. V. Symplectic geometry.A. M. V.I. SpringerVerlag. Studies 99..I.I.. [15] Boutet de Monvel. SpringerVerlag. 61151. The Spectral Theory of Toeplitz Operators. 60.. V. 4. Funct. 1978. Anal. [11] Berezin. Reading. On a characteristic class entering into conditions of quantization. Quantum Theory. 11091165. a 130 . Encyclopedia of Mathematical Sciences. A. [4] Arnol’d. Quantization.I.. Catastrophe theory (3rd edition).. 1990.F. Diﬀerential Forms in Algebraic Topology.References [1] Abraham. pp.. Basel. Annals. Manifolds All of Whose Geodesics are Closed... V. [10] Berezin. New York.E. Anal. SpringerVerlag. Funct. [5] Arnol’d. Phys. Ergebnisse der Math. SpringerVerlag.A. Loop Spaces. 1990. J.M. and Tu. 1978. 2nd edition. 93. 8 (1974).. and Geometric Quantization. 107. and Guillemin. A. [12] Besse..I. Appl. Characteristic Classes. Mathematical Methods of Classical Mechanics. [17] Brylinski. V. Vol. 1981.B.I. [14] Bott.. The Geometry and Physics of Knots. [8] Audin.. 1 (1967) 113. Ann. 1951. M. L. F. [7] Atiyah. Foundations of Mechanics. Fronsdal. F. and Givental’. New York. and Marsden. Benjamin/Cummings. 1994. V. V. Flato. 1991. L. R..
14. Oxford. M. o SpringerVerlag. P.. [24] Folland. e e e Colloque de Topologie (Espaces Fibr´s) tenu a Bruxelles du 5 au 8 juin. Ann. San Diego. C. Clarenden Press. [31] H¨rmander. Academic Press. pp.. to appear. Stable Mappings and Their Singularities. (New edition to be published by Birkh¨user Boston in 1995. [28] Guillemin. Geometric Asymptotics. [30] Helﬀer. Princeton University Press. and Lecomte. [27] Gompf. [29] Guillemin. New York. V... La trilogie du moment.. M. Math. SpringerVerlag. Geom.. Gordon and Breach. 1977. 14. G. Vols. Math. A. A.. M. Providence.. [26] Golubitsky. Noncommutative Geometry.. [20] Dirac. 1989. A. Fourier integral operators I. 1988.V. and Maslov. 1951. in M. Kluwer Acad.I. J.. L... 1995. Annals of mathematics studies 122.. Paris. Ann. Hazewinkel and M. M. A simple geometrical construction of deformation quantization. S. eds.. P.B. 119..T. B.. 198390. R. R. Guillemin. Surveys 14. The Analysis of Linear Partial Diﬀerential Operators.. e [23] Fedosov. Acta Math. 2955. 40 (1994) 213238. e Georges Thone. Li`ge and Masson et Cie. S... and Sternberg. 1950. [21] Duistermaat... Harmonic Analysis in Phase Space.. Cambridge University Press. equivalence. V. American Mathematical Society. Symplectic Geometry. and Sternberg.) a [22] Ehresmann... Graduate Texts in Math. Symplectic Techniques in Physics. Soc. Fourier (to appear). [33] Iglesias. Deformation Theory of Algebras and Structures and Applications. Providence. 1993. Existence.. Les connexions inﬁnit´simales dans un espace ﬁbr´ diﬀ´rentiable.. 897960. [34] Karasev. P. Lecture Notes in Math. Fourier Integral Operators. derivations. Math. Gerstenhaber. B. 1973. Dordrecht (1988). L. 127 (1971) 79183. NYU. Cambridge. Semiclassical analysis for the Schrodinger operator and applications. New York. (1973). Amer. vol. [19] De Wilde. Pub. V. 1930.. New constructions of symplectic manifolds. New York. 131 .[18] Connes. o [32] H¨rmander. The Principles of Quantum Mechanics. J. V.. J.P. Courant Institute. Inst. 1336 (1988). Nonlinear Poisson Brackets : Geometry and Quantization Translations of mathematical monographs vol. 1984. [25] Fomenko. Diﬀ.. Formal deformations of the Poisson Lie algebra of a symplectic manifold and starproducts.
[45] Moser. New York. Pub. 1975. Berlin. [38] Libermann..P.I. Reading. [41] Mackey.M. Theory and Applications. vol. Dr. Comm. 120 (1965). Deformation quantization of Heisenberg manifolds. Theorie der Transformationsgruppen. Press. 89 (1987).. Sternin. V. de Gruyter (to appear). S. Novikov. B. Asymptotics and Special Functions. Cambridge. Gerstenhaber. New York. Leipzig. W. Examples of symplectic structures. [47] Olver... J. 122 (1989). 1992. Univ. Cambridge Univ.. 961972. deGruyter Studies in Math. [50] Rieﬀel. G.. Riemannian Geometry.P. eds. Invent... Academic Press. Trans.W. (Zweiter Abschnitt. Friedrich Engel). Dordrecht. C. Dordrecht (1988). 132 . Lecture Note Series 174. SpringerVerlag. Moscow. [43] Maslov. Singapore... Dynamical Systems IV. pp. Arnol’d and S. Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics. On the volume elements on a manifold.. 1963. 1890. Phys. Vol. Encyclopedia of Mathematical Sciences. 531562. London Math. World Scientiﬁc. [37] Kostant... Deformation Theory of Algebras and Structures and Applications. V. 1987.. D.. [49] Omori. Lecture Notes in Math. 1986. Math. V.Benjamin. 137172. I.. New York. Teubner. Geometric Perturbation Theory in Physics. 1982. in M.[35] Kirillov. Math. Lectures on Mechanics.. Kluwer Acad.. [40] McDuﬀ. 4.J. [48] Omohundro. P. D. 280296. Soc. Quantization and unitary representations. Hazewinkel and M. W. 170 (1970).A. [42] Marsden. M. [39] Lie. 87208. Theory of Perturbations and Asymptotic Methods. 1336.. Symplectic Geometry and Analytical Mechanics. Berlin. 1974. J.. Geometric quantization. Gos.. unter Mitwirkung von Prof. and Marle. Reidel. W. [44] M´lotte. F. eds. Amer. SpringerVerlag. and Shatalov. [46] Nazaikinskii.. New York.. [36] Klingenberg. B. 1990.427. Math. Invariant deformations of the Poisson Lie algebra of a symplectic mane ifold and star products. Soc. Methods of Noncommutative Analysis. V. Moskov. Lecture Notes in Mathematics. Inﬁnitedimensional Lie Transformation Groups. S. 1965.
.. Norm. J. Groupes diﬀ´rentiels. e 133 .. 133158. e [56] Treves. Autour de l’Approximation Semiclassique. a [52] Segal. and Integrable Systems. New York. A. N. Sur les th´or`mes de de Rham. 468488.. 1991. 836 (1980). 1987.. Ann. e [55] Souriau. J. Providence. 21 (1988). A. [59] Vaisman. I. New York.. Quantization of nonlinear systems. A. a Boston. W. Ec. Basel. Press. Noncommutative geometry and geometric quantization. Symplectic Geometry and Fourier Analysis. Deformation quantization. SpringerVerlag. 329346. J. [57] Tulczyjew.Weinstein. eds. Soc.. 26 (1952) 119145. [53] Sniatycki. eds.. Structure des Syst`mes Dynamiques. Coisotropic calculus and Poisson groupoids.S. A. [61] Weil. 1970. Lectures on Symplectic Manifolds.. Quantiﬁcation et analyse pseudodiﬀ´rentielle. (new series) 5 (1981). P.M. e Sup. 1977. Sci. D. Dunod. Math.. Birkh¨user. Plenum Press. Math. Juin 1994. Japan 40 (1988). [66] Weinstein. [63] Weinstein. vol. A. Bulletin A. 1991. A. Boston. Birkh¨user. Symplectic manifolds and their lagrangian submanifolds. and irrational rotation algebras. Comm. A. 1980. Helv. in Symplectic Geometry and Mathematical Physics: actes du colloque in l’honneur de JeanMarie Souriau. 789. Ann. Regional conference series in mathematics 29.. Soc.. I. Groupoids.. MSRI Publications... F. geometric quantization. 27 (1977) 101e 114. in Symplectic Geometry. 1–13. Birkh¨user. [54] Souriau. ´ [58] Unterberger. [65] Weinstein..Donato et al. [68] Weinstein. [60] Wallach.. R. a [67] Weinstein. [64] Weinstein. 1987. Sci. Brookline. Symplectic Geometry and Secondary Characteristic Classes. no. Paris. Phys.M..II. 68..M. A. Lecture Notes in Math. 1977. A. Amer. 1 (1960).M. Inst. Math. 91128. Symplectic geometry.. Geometric Quantization and Quantum Mechanics. Introduction to Pseudodiﬀerential and Fourier Integral Operators. J. 1980. H. S´minaire Bourbaki.[51] Robert. New York. 6 (1971). The Legendre transform.. Advances in Math. P. Math. Poincar´. e e [62] Weinstein.. 705727. J. Math. Vols I. Progress in Mathematics. Symplectic groupoids. Springer.Dazord and A.
S. A.J. [71] Woodhouse. H.. Tangent and Cotangent Bundles. 1973.[69] Weinstein. Math. New York. and Xu. 159189 [70] Weyl. The Theory of Groups and Quantum Mechanics. [72] Yano.. 2nd Ed. Reine Angew.. Oxford U. Press. K. 134 . P. Oxford. Dover Publications. Geometric Quantization. and Ishihara. 1992. New York. N. Extensions of symplectic groupoids and quantization.. J.... 1950.M. 417 (1991). Diﬀerential Geometry Dekker.