1007/s0022001215606
Commun. Math. Phys. 315, 465–488 (2012)
Communications in
Mathematical
Physics
Braid Group Statistics Implies Scattering
in ThreeDimensional Local Quantum Physics
Jacques Bros
1
, Jens Mund
2.
1
Institut de Physique Théorique, CEA, Saclay, France
2
Departamento de Física, Universidade Federal de Juiz de Fora, 36036900 Juiz de Fora,
MG, Brazil. Email: mund@ﬁsica.ufjf.br
Received: 19 January 2012 / Accepted: 22 February 2012
Published online: 31 August 2012 – © SpringerVerlag 2012
Dedicated to the memory of HansJürgen Borchers
Abstract: It is shown that quantum ﬁelds for massive particles with braid group sta
tistics (Plektons) in threedimensional spacetime cannot be free, in a quite elementary
sense: They must exhibit elastic twoparticle scattering into every solid angle, and at
every energy. This also implies that for such particles there cannot be any operators
localized in wedge regions which create only single particle states from the vacuum and
which are wellbehaved under the spacetime translations (socalled temperate polariza
tionfree generators). These results considerably strengthen an earlier “NoGotheorem
for ’free’ relativistic Anyons”.
As a byproduct we extend a fact which is wellknown in quantum ﬁeld theory to
the case of topological charges (i.e., charges localized in spacelike cones) in d ≥ 4,
namely: If there is no elastic twoparticle scattering into some arbitrarily small open
solid angle element, then the 2particle Smatrix is trivial.
1. Introduction
In relativistic quantum ﬁeld theory in d > 2 spacetime dimensions it is a wellestab
lished fact [1, 6] that if there is some arbitrarily small open solid angle element into
which there is no elastic twoparticle scattering, then the 2 → 2 particle Smatrix is
trivial, and then there is also no particle production. We show that the same holds, for
purely massive theories, in the quite general setting of local quantum physics admitting
topological charges in d ≥ 4. Our main result, however, is that the hypothesis cannot
be satisﬁed for Plektons in d = 3, namely: Braid group statistics implies elastic two
particle scattering. This also implies that for Plektons there cannot be a model which
has temperate polarizationfree generators in the sense of Borchers et al. [4]. (These are
operators localized in wedge regions which create only single particle states from the
vacuum and which are wellbehaved under the spacetime translations.) These results

Supported by CNPq.
466 J. Bros, J. Mund
considerably strengthen an earlier “NoGotheorem for ’free’ relativistic Anyons” by the
one of the authors [31].
In view of our ﬁnding that there are no free Plektons, the Lagrangian approach does
not seem appropriate for the construction of relativistic quantum ﬁelds with braid group
statistics, since its underlying strategy is the coupling of free ﬁelds to other ﬁelds or
among themselves. In fact, the situation with respect to Lagrangian relativistic model
building is quite unsatisfactory. Lagrangian local gauge theories have been proposed
(for more than 20 years) where the matter ﬁelds assume anyonic properties by coupling
to a ChernSimons type gauge ﬁeld [2, 24, 29, 40, 41]. However, except for lattice mod
els [3, 27, 30], these models have not been made completely explicit. Consequently, as
S. Forte put it [15, p. 235], different and contradictory conclusions have been drawn
from the same starting point (Lagrangian).
We consider the scattering of two massive charged particles, assuming that the respec
tive masses are isolated values in the mass spectra within the respective charge sectors.
We admit that the particles carry topological charges, that is, charges which are localiz
able not in compact regions but only in spacelike cones,
1
which is the worst possible
dislocality in the purely massive case [9]. For simplicity, we assume that the masses of
the two particles coincide. Given two single particle states ψ
1
. ψ
2
in respective charge
sectors π
1
. π
2
having disjoint energymomentum supports, HaagRuelle scattering the
ory associates an outgoing and an incoming 2particle scattering state
ψ
1
out
× ψ
2
. ψ
1
in
× ψ
2
.
In the case of permutation group statistics, these scattering states depend only on the
single particle states ψ
k
, as indicated by the notation. However, in the case of braid
group statistics they also depend on the spacetime localization regions in which the
charged states ψ
k
have been “created from the vacuum”. Now suppose that there are
sets of incoming momenta U
1
. U
2
and of outgoing momenta V
1
. V
2
on the mass shell,
mutually disjoint:
U
1
∩ U
2
= V
1
∩ V
2
= U
i
∩ V
j
= ∅. (1)
for which all scattering amplitudes in the channel π
1
× π
2
→ π
1
× π
2
are trivial —
even though the corresponding process is admitted by energymomentum conservation,
namely
(U
1
+ U
2
) ∩ (V
1
+ V
2
) = ∅. (2)
More precisely, for all singleparticle states φ
i
in the sectors π
i
with respective spectral
supports in U
i
and ψ
i
in the same sectors π
i
and with supports in V
i
and for some
admissible spacetime localization regions there holds
2
φ
1
in
× φ
2
. ψ
1
out
× ψ
2
= 0. (3)
We then say that there is no elastic twoparticle scattering from U
1
×U
2
into V
1
× V
2
in the channel π
1
×π
2
→ π
1
×π
2
.
3
1
A spacelike cone is a region in Minkowski space of the form C = a + ∪
λ>0
λO. where a ∈ R
4
is the
apex of C and O is a double cone whose closure is causally separate from the origin.
2
Only relevant in the case of braid group statistics.
3
Contrapositively, we say that there is elastic twoparticle scattering from U
1
× U
2
into V
1
× V
2
if for
every admissible spacetime localization region there are some φ
i
. ψ
i
such that the above scattering amplitude
is nonzero.
Braid Group Statistics Implies Scattering in 3D Local Quantum Physics 467
Our ﬁrst result is that, in spacetime dimension d ≥ 4, this hypothesis implies triv
iality of the twoparticle Smatrix. For simplicity of the argument, we suppose that a
pair of disjoint sets of incoming and outgoing momenta for which there is no scattering
exists for every total momentum.
Theorem 1 (Triviality of the 2particle Smatrix in d ≥ 4). Suppose that for every
total momentum P. P
2
≥ 4m
2
, there are nonempty open subsets U
1
. U
2
. V
1
. V
2
of the
mass shell, mutually disjoint, such that P ∈ (U
1
+ U
2
) ∩ (V
1
+ V
2
), and such that
there is no elastic twoparticle scattering from U
1
× U
2
into V
1
× V
2
in the channel
π
1
×π
2
→ π
1
×π
2
. Then the 2particle Smatrix in this channel is trivial, i.e. for every
pair of single particle states ψ
1
. ψ
2
in the respective sectors π
1
. π
2
the incoming and
outgoing scattering states coincide:
ψ
1
in
× ψ
2
= ψ
1
out
× ψ
2
. (4)
This extends a wellestablished fact from the case of compactly localized charges to
the case of topological charges. We consider this result of interest in its own right in view
of the various recent constructions of “nonlocal” quantumﬁeld theories [11, 20, 26]. For
example, the deformation approach constructs theories with nontrivial Smatrices satis
fying the hypothesis. Our theorem then gives a structural argument that in these models
the spacelikeconealgebras are too small as to satisfy the ReehSchlieder property —
which otherwise has to be (and of course has been) checked by explicit calculations. The
theorem is also needed in a recent algebraic version of the JostSchroer theorem [34].
Our main result concerns models with topological charges in threedimensional
spacetime, where braid group statistics may occur. Here we consider the case where
π
1
and π
2
are conjugate charges or, in the Abelian case, coincide. It turns out that the
hypothesis (3) implies that the statistics parameter of the corresponding sector is real,
thereby excluding braid group statistics. In other words, we show:
Theorem 2 (Braid group statistics implies scattering). Let π be a massive single particle
representation with braid group statistics
4
, and let ¯ π be the conjugate sector. Then for
any nonempty open sets of energymomenta U
1
. U
2
. V
1
. V
2
admitted by energymomen
tum conservation (2) there is elastic twoparticle scattering from U
1
×U
2
into V
1
×V
2
in the channel π × ¯ π → π × ¯ π. In the case of Anyons
5
, the same holds for the channel
π ×π → π ×π.
Now Borchers et al. [4] show that the existence of temperate wedgelocalized polar
izationfree generators (PFG’s) implies that there are nonempty subsets U
i
. V
i
of the
mass shell for which there is no elastic twoparticle scattering even though admitted by
energymomentum conservation, see Eq. (3.27) in [4], which can be derived also in the
braid group statistics case. We therefore conclude from the above theorem:
Corollary 3 (Nonexistence of PFG’s for Plektons). The existence of temperate wedge
localized polarization free generators excludes braid group statistics.
We shall prove these theorems along the following standard lines. Due to the assumed
disjointness of the energymomentum supports, the state ψ
1
in
× ψ
2
also has vanishing
4
That is to say, with nonreal statistics parameter, see Sect. 2.
5
See Sect. 2.
468 J. Bros, J. Mund
scalar product with φ
1
in
× φ
2
, and Eq. (3) can be rephrased by saying that the corre
sponding Smatrix element is trivial,
( φ
1
in
× φ
2
. ψ
1
in
× ψ
2
−ψ
1
out
× ψ
2
) = 0. (5)
The ﬁrst step is now to establish in the present setting the relevant LSZ relations, which
relate the lefthand side of the above equation with the amputated timeordered func
tion (35). The second step is to establish onshell analyticity properties of the amputated
timeordered function. These analyticity properties are weaker [5] than in the case of
compact localization but, as it turns out, still sufﬁcient for the present purpose: To extend
Eq. (5) to other particle conﬁgurations ψ
i
(for ﬁxed φ
i
). Namely, in d ≥ 4 Eq. (5) extends
to all ψ
i
, which leads to Theorem 1. In d = 3, it extends to such ψ
i
which have com
mon supports with the states φ
i
, so that the states ψ
1
in
× ψ
2
no longer have necessarily
vanishing scalar products with φ
in
× φ
2
. Then a careful analysis of the dependence of the
scattering states ψ
1
out
× ψ
2
. ψ
1
in
× ψ
2
on the spacetime localization regions shows that
Eq. (5) is incompatible with braid group statistics.
The article is organized as follows. Section 2 is devoted to a more detailed account of
the general setting, and of some known facts on the scattering of Plektons. In Sect. 3 we
show that certain LSZ relations hold true in the case of topological charges, eventually
with braid group statistics, under certain hypothesis on the momentum supports and
spacetime localization regions. In Sect. 4 we give a detailed account of the analyticity
domain of the relevant amputated timeordered (or advanced, or retarded) functions, see
also [5]. Finally, we prove the two theorems in Sect. 5.
2. General Setting
An analysis of the Smatrix is most conveniently done in terms of charge carrying local
ﬁeld operators. In fourdimensional spacetime, these comprise an algebra F which con
tains the observables Aas the subalgebra of invariants under a global gauge symmetry.
However such a frame, the socalled WickWightmanWigner scenario, does not exist in
the presence of nonAbelian braid group statistics in d = 3. As a uniﬁed minimal frame
work for both cases (permutation and braid group statistics), we shall use the ﬁeld bundle
formalism [9, 13, 17], which is quite rudimentary but sufﬁces for the present purpose.
Particles and topological charges. We consider a collection Lof superselection sectors,
namely, mutually inequivalent representations of the observable algebra. To each π ∈ L
there is associated a Hilbert space H
π
describing the corresponding charged states. Each
H
π
carries a unitary continuous representation U
π
of the translation group R
d
satisfying
the relativistic spectrum condition (positivity of the energy). (In the proof of Thm. 1 we
shall also use Lorentz covariance, but only in order not to burden the hypothesis.) The
Hilbert space of the vacuum representation π
0
contains a unique (up to a factor) trans
lation invariant vector O. We are particularly interested in the socalled massive single
particle sectors, describing the states of massive charged particles. These are sectors π
whose energy momentum spectrum has an isolated mass shell as the lower boundary.
6
The charge described by π is then localizable with respect to the vacuum in spacelike
cones [9]. Namely, the representation π is equivalent to the vacuumrepresentation when
6
We thus assume implicitly that the vacuum representation does not contain massless particles.
Braid Group Statistics Implies Scattering in 3D Local Quantum Physics 469
restricted to the causal complement of any spacelike cone
7
. Within the set Lof sectors
one has intrinsic notions of charge composition π
1
× π
2
, and of charge conjugation,
namely, every charge π ∈ L has a conjugate charge ¯ π ∈ L, characterized by the fact
that the composition π × ¯ π contains the vacuum representation. If π is a massive single
particle representation, then so is ¯ π, and it describes the corresponding antiparticles
which have the same mass [16] and spin [8, 32]. There is also an intrinsic notion of
exchange statistics relating π ×σ and σ ×π. Namely, for every pair of representations
π. σ in L there is a unitary operator
ε
πσ
: H
π×σ
→H
σ×π
. (6)
the socalled statistics operator. The family of statistics operators satisﬁes the braid rela
tions [18, Eq. (2.3)] and in fourdimensional spacetime furnishes a representation of the
permutation group due to the fact that here the monodromy operators (ε
ππ
)
2
are triv
ial. In threedimensional spacetime, there may be nontrivial monodromy operators in
which case the statistics operators furnish a representation of the braid group. Then one
speaks of Plektons or, if the corresponding representation of the braid group is Abelian,
of Anyons. Associated with each irreducible sector π is the statistics parameter λ
π
and
the statistics phase ω
π
, deﬁned by the relations
ϕ
π
(ε
ππ
) = λ
π
1. ω
π
=
λ
π
λ
π

. (7)
where ϕ
π
is a left inverse for π [21]. The statistics parameter is nonreal precisely in
the case of braid group statistics. In the Abelian case, ε
ππ
is already trivial, namely, ω
π
times the unit operator.
Charge carrying ﬁelds. For every π ∈ Lthere is a Banach space F
π
of charge carrying
ﬁeld operators, which act on the hermitian vector bundle H
.
=
¸
σ∈L
H
σ
in such a way
that for every σ ∈ L,
F
π
: H
σ
→H
σ×π
(8)
acts as a space of linear operators. Fields are localizable to the same extent to which the
charges are localizable which they carry, namely in spacelike cones. In the presence of
braid group statistics in d = 3, the ﬁelds can have definite spacelike commutation rela
tions only if they carry some supplementary information in addition to the localization
region. The possibility we choose is to consider paths in the set of spacelike cones.
8
(The following considerations are only relevant in the presence of braid group statistics
in d = 3.) Let H be the manifold of spacelike directions,
H := {e ∈ R
3
. e · e = −1}. (9)
Every spacelike cone C is of the form C = a + R
+
C
H
, where a is the apex of C and
C
H
.
= (C −a) ∩ H is the set of spacelike directions contained in C. We now look upon
the spacelike cone C as the union of all “strings” contained in it, a + R
+
e. e ∈ C
H
,
and further identify such a string with the pair (a. e) ∈ R
3
× H, quite in the sense of
“stringlocalized quantum ﬁelds” [28, 35]. Then C is identiﬁed with a subset of R
3
×H:
7
The representations in L can then be identiﬁed with localized endomorphisms of the observable algebra
[9].
8
Two other possibilities are: To introduce a reference spacelike cone from which all allowed localization
cones have to keep spacelike separated (this cone playing the role of a “cut” in the context of multivalued
functions) [9]; or a cohomology theory of nets of operator algebras as introduced by Roberts [37–39].
470 J. Bros, J. Mund
C ↔ {a} ×C
H
. (10)
where C
H
is a double cone in H [33]. The region C
H
is simply connected, whereas
H itself has fundamental group Z. Thus the portion of the universal covering space of
R
3
×H over a region C
∼
= {a} ×C
H
consists of a countable inﬁnity of copies (“sheets”)
of C. As usual, we identify the universal covering space of H with homotopy classes of
paths in H starting at some ﬁxed reference direction (the “base point” in H). We shall
generically denote a sheet over C by
˜
C and call it a “path ending at C”. (It is canonically
homeomorphic to C, but contains in addition the information of a winding number dis
tinguishing it from the other sheets over C.) These paths serve to label the localization
regions of charged ﬁelds. Namely, for each path
˜
C there is a linear subspace F
π
(
˜
C) of
F
π
, called the ﬁelds carrying charge π localized in
˜
C. This family is isotonous in the
sense that
F
π
(
˜
C
1
) ⊂ F
π
(
˜
C
2
) if
˜
C
1
⊂
˜
C
2
. (11)
(We say that
˜
C
1
⊂
˜
C
2
if C
1
⊂ C
2
and the corresponding paths
˜
C
1
.
˜
C
2
differ by a path
in C
2
.) The vacuum O has the ReehSchlieder property for the ﬁelds, i.e. for any path
of spacelike cones
˜
C there holds
F
π
(
˜
C) O
–
= H
π
. (12)
where the bar denotes the closure.
(Braid group) statistics. The statistics operators determine the commutation relations
of causally separated ﬁelds, as follows. Let dθ be the angle oneform in some ﬁxed
Lorentz frame, and for a path
˜
C let θ(
˜
C) be the set of corresponding “accumulated
angles”, namely the interval
θ(
˜
C)
.
=
¸
˜ e
dθ : ˜ e ∈
˜
C
H
¸
(13)
on the real line. Given two paths
˜
C
1
.
˜
C
2
with C
1
causally separate from C
2
, deﬁne the
relative winding number N(
˜
C
1
.
˜
C
2
) of
˜
C
2
w.r.t.
˜
C
1
to be the unique integer n such that
θ(
˜
C
2
) + 2πn  θ(
˜
C
1
)  θ(
˜
C
2
) + 2π(n + 1).
(Note that this number n is independent of the Lorentz frame in which dθ is deﬁned, and
of the choice of reference direction.) Then for every F
1
∈ F
π
1
(
˜
C
1
) and F
2
∈ F
π
1
(
˜
C
2
)
there holds the commutation relation
F
1
F
2
= ε
π
1
π
2
(
˜
C
1
.
˜
C
2
) F
2
F
1
. (14)
where
9
ε
π
1
π
2
(
˜
C
1
.
˜
C
2
) =
ε
π
1
π
2
ε
π
2
π
1
n
ε
π
1
π
2
. n = N(
˜
C
1
.
˜
C
2
). (15)
We shall use below only two special cases, namely winding number 0 and −1.
N(
˜
C
1
.
˜
C
2
) = 0 means that for ˜ e
i
∈
˜
C
H
i
the path ˜ e
1
∗ ˜ e
−1
2
is homotopic to a path
which goes “directly” from C
2
to C
1
in the mathematically positive sense. (Fig. 1 shows
an example of this situation.) In this case ε
π
1
π
2
(
˜
C
1
.
˜
C
2
) = ε
π
1
π
2
. N(
˜
C
1
.
˜
C
2
) = −1
means that the path ˜ e
1
∗ ˜ e
−1
2
is homotopic to a path which goes directly from C
2
to C
1
9
This follows from Prop. 5.9 in [17], together with the fact that π
0
(V
o
2
) = 1 and π
0
o
1
(V
o
2
) =
π
0
ε
o
2
o
1
ε
o
1
o
2
, see [17, Eq. (5.2.3)].
Braid Group Statistics Implies Scattering in 3D Local Quantum Physics 471
Fig. 1. The relative winding number N(
˜
C
1
.
˜
C
2
) of
˜
C
2
w.r.t.
˜
C
1
is zero. (e
0
is the base point where the paths
start)
in the mathematically negative sense (i.e., the roles of
˜
C
1
and
˜
C
2
in Fig. 1 are inter
changed), and in this case ε
π
1
π
2
(
˜
C
1
.
˜
C
2
) = ε
−1
π
2
π
1
. (Of course, this is a consequence of
the case N(
˜
C
1
.
˜
C
2
) = 0 if Eq. (14) is to be consistent.)
Translation covariance. There is an action x → α
x
of the translation group R
d
on
the ﬁelds, under which these are covariant: Namely, for all π ∈ L and all localization
paths
˜
C there holds
α
x
: F
π
(
˜
C) →F
π
(x +
˜
C). (16)
(Using the identiﬁcation (10), the translation x does not act on the spacelike directions
C
H
contained in C and hence not on
˜
C
H
. It only translates the apex.) It is determined
by the unitary representations U
π
acting on the Hilbert spaces H
π
via
α
x
(F)ψ = U
σ×π
(x)FU
σ
(−x)ψ. F ∈ F
π
. ψ ∈ H
σ
. (17)
Scattering states. HaagRuelle scattering theory has been developed in [22, 25], adapted
to the setting of algebraic quantumﬁeld theory in [9, 12], and to theories with braid group
statistics in [17]. This theory associates to n single particle states ψ
k
∈ H
π
k
an outgoing
and an incoming scattering state,
ψ
1
out
× · · ·
out
× ψ
n
. ψ
1
in
× · · ·
in
× ψ
n
living in the Hilbert space of the composite sector π
1
×· · · ×π
n
. In the case of permu
tation group statistics, these scattering states depend only on the single particle states
ψ
k
, as indicated by the notation. However, in the case of braid group statistics they
also depend on the localization regions
˜
C
k
in which the charged states ψ
k
have been
created from the vacuum. Since our argument relies crucially on this fact, we recall the
construction.
First one constructs quasilocal creation operators as follows. Let π ∈ Lbe a massive
single particle sector with mass m and let F ∈ F
π
(
˜
C) be a ﬁeld operator which creates
from the vacuum a single particle state with nonzero probability, i.e., the spectral sup
port of FOhas non–vanishing intersection with the mass hyperboloid H
+
m
.
= { p : p
2
=
m
2
. p
0
> 0}. Further, let f ∈ S(R
4
) be a Schwartz function whose Fourier transform
10
ˆ
f has compact support contained in the open forward light cone intersecting the energy
momentum spectrum only in the mass shell H
+
m
. If this intersection is contained in some
V ⊂ H
+
m
, namely if
10
The Fourier transform of a test function f is here
ˆ
f ( p)
.
=
d
4
x f (x)e
i p·x
.
472 J. Bros, J. Mund
supp
ˆ
f ∩ spec P
π
⊂ H
+
m
. supp
ˆ
f ∩ H
+
m
⊂ V.
we shall say that f has momentum support in V. We shall use a ﬁxed reference frame
u ≡ (1. 0) and consider the set of velocities corresponding to V in this frame,
I(V)
.
= {
1.
p
ω( p)
. p = ( p
0
. p) ∈ V } . (18)
where ω( p)
.
=
p
2
+ m
2
. For t ∈ R, let the function f
t
be deﬁned by multiplying
the Fourier transform with the factor e
i ( p
0
−ω( p))t
. For large t , its support is essentially
contained in the region t I(V). More precisely [4, 22], for any ε > 0 there is a Schwartz
function f
ε
t
with support in t I(V)
ε
. where I
ε
denotes an ε–neighborhood of I, such
that f
t
− f
ε
t
converges to zero in the Schwartz topology for t  → ∞. Consider now
the quasilocal operator,
F( f
t
)
.
=
d
4
x f
t
(x) F(x) .
where F(x)
.
= α
x
(F). For large t . this operator is essentially localized in
˜
C + t I(V).
Namely, for any ε > 0. it can be approximated by the operator
F( f
ε
t
) ∈ F
π
˜
C + t I(V)
ε
(19)
in the sense that F( f
ε
t
) −F( f
t
) is of fast decrease in t. This operator creates from the
vacuum a single particle vector F( f
t
) O =
ˆ
f (P
π
) F O, independent of t . (P
π
denotes
the generator of the translations U
π
(x).)
Consider now n massive single particle sectors π
k
. k = 1. . . . . n, with mass m.
11
To construct an outgoing scattering state from n corresponding single particle vectors,
pick n localization regions
˜
C
k
and compact sets V
k
on the mass shell, such that the
regions C
k
+ t I(V
k
) are mutually spacelike separated for large t .
12
We then say that
C
1
. . . . . C
n
are futureadmissible for V
1
× · · · × V
n
. Next, choose F
k
∈ F
π
k
(
˜
C
k
). and
Schwartz functions f
k
with momentum supports in V
k
. Then the standard lemma of
scattering theory, adapted to braid group statistics [17], asserts the following: The limit
lim
t →∞
F
1
( f
1.t
) · · · F
n
( f
n.t
) O
.
= (ψ
1
.
˜
C
1
)
out
× · · ·
out
× (ψ
n
.
˜
C
n
) (20)
exists and depends only on the single particle vectors ψ
k
.
= F
k
( f
k
) Oand, in the case of
braid group statistics, on the localization regions
˜
C
k
. Similarly, we say that C
1
. . . . . C
n
are pastadmissible for V
1
×· · · × V
n
if the regions C
k
+ t I(V
k
) are mutually causally
separated for large t  with t  0. In this case, the incoming scattering state
lim
t →−∞
F
1
( f
1.t
) · · · F
n
( f
n.t
) O
.
= (ψ
1
.
˜
C
1
)
in
× · · ·
in
× (ψ
n
.
˜
C
n
) (21)
exists, and the above statements also hold. The limit vectors depend (linearly and) con
tinuously on the single particle states, as a consequence of the following fact:
11
For notational simplicity we consider coinciding masses.
12
C denotes the closure of C. Taking the closure makes sure that for suitable open neighborhoods I
ε
k
of
I(V
k
) in R
d
the regions C
k
+ t I
ε
k
are still mutually spacelike separated for large t .
Braid Group Statistics Implies Scattering in 3D Local Quantum Physics 473
Lemma 4 (Scalar product of scattering states [17]). Let φ
k
be single particle vectors as
above with the same charges π
k
and spectral supports as ψ
k
. k = 1. . . . . n. Let further
T be a selfintertwiner of π
1
×· · · ×π
n
. Then there holds
(φ
1
.
˜
C
1
)
in
× · · ·
in
× (φ
n
.
˜
C
n
). T(ψ
1
.
˜
C
1
)
in
× · · ·
in
× (ψ
n
.
˜
C
n
)
= χ
1
· · · χ
n
(T)
n
¸
k=1
( φ
k
. ψ
k
). (22)
where χ
k
is the standard right inverse of π
k
. k = 1. . . . . n.
Note that by the ReehSchlieder property (12), every singleparticle state ψ ∈ H
π
with spectral support in some given V ⊂ H
+
m
can be approximated by a sequence of the
form F
ν
( f )O, where the ﬁeld operators F
ν
are localized in some ﬁxed (arbitrary) region
˜
C. This allows the construction, by continuous extension, of scattering states
(ψ
1
.
˜
C
1
)
out
× · · ·
out
× (ψ
n
.
˜
C
n
) (23)
for any single particle vectors ψ
1
. . . . . ψ
n
with compact mutually disjoint spectral sup
ports and localization regions
˜
C
k
which are futureadmissible for the supports of the ψ
k
.
The scattering states inherit the commutation relations of the ﬁelds, for example [17]
(ψ
1
.
˜
C
1
)
out
× (ψ
2
.
˜
C
2
) = ε
π
1
π
2
(
˜
C
1
.
˜
C
2
) (ψ
2
.
˜
C
2
)
out
× (ψ
1
.
˜
C
1
). (24)
The dependence of the scattering states on the spacetime localization regions is well
known [17]. But since our argument relies on an explicit formula in the case n = 2, we
shall exhibit this formula, together with the proof.
Lemma 5 (Change of localization regions). Let ψ
1
. ψ
2
be single particle states with
spectral supports in V
1
. V
2
, respectively. Suppose that all the pairs (K
1
. K
2
). (K
1
. C
2
),
and (C
1
. C
2
) are futureadmissible for V
1
× V
2
. Then
(ψ
1
.
˜
K
1
)
out
× (ψ
2
.
˜
K
2
) = (ψ
1
.
˜
K
1
)
out
× (ψ
2
.
˜
C
2
) (25)
= ε
π
1
π
2
(
˜
K
1
.
˜
C
2
)ε
π
2
π
1
(
˜
C
2
.
˜
C
1
) (ψ
1
.
˜
C
1
)
out
× (ψ
2
.
˜
C
2
). (26)
The same holds for the respective incoming scattering states if (K
1
. K
2
). (K
1
. C
2
), and
(C
1
. C
2
) are pastadmissible for V
1
× V
2
.
Proof. In a ﬁrst step, suppose that the vectors ψ
i
are at the same time of the form
ψ
i
= F
i
( f
i
)O and ψ
i
= G
i
(g
i
)O, with F
i
∈ F
π
i
(
˜
C
i
) and G
i
∈ F
π
i
(
˜
K
i
). i = 1. 2.
Then Eq. (25) holds obviously. In order to describe the dependence on the ﬁrst localiza
tion region
˜
K
1
, we use Eq. (24) to commute the orders, then use Eq. (25) to replace
˜
K
1
by
˜
C
1
, and commute back:
(ψ
1
.
˜
K
1
)
out
× (ψ
2
.
˜
C
2
) = ε
π
1
π
2
(
˜
K
1
.
˜
C
2
) (ψ
2
.
˜
C
2
)
out
× (ψ
1
.
˜
K
1
)
= ε
π
1
π
2
(
˜
K
1
.
˜
C
2
) (ψ
2
.
˜
C
2
)
out
× (ψ
1
.
˜
C
1
)
= ε
π
1
π
2
(
˜
K
1
.
˜
C
2
)ε
π
2
π
1
(
˜
C
2
.
˜
C
1
) (ψ
1
.
˜
C
1
)
out
× (ψ
2
.
˜
C
2
).
Thus Eq. (26) holds in this special case. Now in general the ψ
i
will not be exactly of the
form ψ
i
= F
i
( f
i
)O = G
i
(g
i
)O, but they can be approximated by such vectors. Then
the above Eqs. (25) and (26) hold by continuity.
474 J. Bros, J. Mund
We shall henceforth call a spacelike cone C
1
future (past) admissible for a pair
V
1
× V
2
of compact sets on the mass shell if the regions C
1
+ t I(V
1
) and t I(V
2
) are
spacelike separated for large positive (negative) t . (For then there exists a cone C
2
such that C
1
. C
2
are admissible for V
1
×V
2
in the sense of the earlier definition.) Since
the scattering state is independent of the localization region C
2
of ψ
2
, we shall write
(ψ
1
.
˜
C
1
)
out
× ψ
2
instead of (ψ
1
.
˜
C
1
)
out
× (ψ
2
.
˜
C
2
).
We shall consider special spacelike cones in the sense of Bros and Epstein [5], refer
ring to the reference frame u and its rest space Y
.
= u
⊥
. Let C be an open, salient cone
in Y with apex at the origin. Then its causal completion C = C
is a special spacelike
cone. We shall make use of the following simple observations.
Lemma 6. i) Let C
1
. C
2
be spacelike cones with apices at the origin, and let I
1
. I
2
be compact disjoint sets in velocity space. If the statement “C
1
+t I
1
and C
2
+t I
2
are causally separated” holds for some t > 0 then it holds for all t > 0. (The
same is true for negative t .)
ii) Let C
1
. C
2
be special spacelike cones and let p
1
= p
2
∈ H
+
m
. C
1
. C
2
are future
and past admissible for { p
1
} ×{ p
2
} if, and only if, the span of { p
1
. p
2
} has trivial
intersection with the closure of the difference cone C
.
= C
2
−C
1
,
span{ p
1
. p
2
} ∩ C = {0}. (27)
Proof. Let t. t
> 0 with t
= λt . C
1
+ t I
1
and C
2
+ t I
2
are causally separated if and
only if
0 >
x + t (:
2
−:
1
)
2
≡ λ
−2
λx + t
(:
2
−:
1
)
2
for all :
i
∈ I
i
and x ∈ C, where C
.
= C
2
−C
1
. If this condition holds for t then it also
holds for t
since x ∈ C iff λx ∈ C. λ > 0. This proves i ). To prove i i ), let :
i
be the
velocities in the given reference frame corresponding to p
i
, namely
:
i
.
=
1.
p
i
ω( p
i
)
. (28)
Note that for special spacelike cones, C
i
= (C
i
)
. C
1
+ t :
1
is causally separated from
C
2
+ t :
2
if and only if C
1
+ t :
1
is disjoint from C
2
+ t :
2
. Thus, by part i ). C
i
are future
and pastadmissible for ( p
1
. p
2
) iff C
1
+ t :
1
is disjoint from C
2
+ t :
2
for all t > 0 and
for all t  0, that is, iff
R(:
1
−:
2
) ∩ C = {0}. (29)
Since C is contained in Y = (1. 0)
⊥
, and the span of :
1
. :
2
is a timelike hyperplane
whose intersection with Y is just R(:
1
−:
2
), the above equation is equivalent with
{0} = span{:
1
. :
2
} ∩ C = span{:
1
. :
2
} ∩ C.
But the span of :
1
. :
2
obviously coincides with the span of p
1
. p
2
, and the proof is
complete.
Braid Group Statistics Implies Scattering in 3D Local Quantum Physics 475
3. TwoParticle LSZ Formulae
The LSZrelations, which relate Smatrix elements with timeordered products of ﬁelds,
have been derived by Hepp within HaagRuelle theory [22], see [10] for a review. Using
the arguments of [10], we verify here that certain LSZrelations are valid in the case of
localization in spacelike cones and of braid group statistics, under certain hypothesis
on the spacetime localization regions and momentum supports. Let π
1
. π
2
∈ L, let C
1
and C
2
be causally separated special spacelike cones and
˜
C
i
be paths ending at C
i
,
and let
ε
.
= ε
π
1
π
2
(
˜
C
1
.
˜
C
2
). (30)
For F
1
∈ F
π
1
(
˜
C
1
) and F
2
∈ F
π
2
(
˜
C
2
) let T F
1
(x)F
2
(y) be the timeorderd product:
T F
1
(x)F
2
(y) = θ(x
0
− y
0
)F
1
(x)F
2
(y) + θ(y
0
− x
0
)ε F
2
(y)F
1
(x). (31)
(Here, θ is the Heaviside function, θ(t ) = 0 if t  0 and θ(t ) = 1 if t ≥ 0.) Let
now V
1
. V
2
be compact subsets of the mass shell such that C
1
. C
2
is both future and
pastadmissible for V
1
×V
2
, let f
1
. f
2
be test functions with momentum supports in V
1
and V
2
, respectively, and denote g
i.t
(x)
.
= f
i.t
(x) − f
i.−t
(x). i = 1. 2. Then for ﬁxed
s > 0 and sufﬁciently large t > 0 one has
d
4
xd
4
y g
1.s
(x) g
2.t
(y) T(F
1
(x)F
2
(y))O
≡
d
4
x g
1.s
(x)
d
4
y
¸
f
2.t
(y) T(F
1
(x)F
2
(y)) − f
2.−t
(y) T(F
1
(x)F
2
(y))
¸
O
d
4
x g
1.s
(x)
d
4
y
¸
f
2.t
(y) εF
2
(y)F
1
(x) − f
2.−t
(y) F
1
(x)F
2
(y)
¸
O
= ε F
2
( f
2.t
)F
1
(g
1.s
)O− F
1
(g
1.s
)F
2
( f
2.t
)O
= F
1
( f
1.−s
)F
2
( f
2
)O− F
1
( f
1.s
)F
2
( f
2
)O. (32)
In the third line (“” means equality up to terms which vanish in the limit t → ∞)
we have used the fact that the supports of g
1.s
and f
2.±t
are essentially contained in
the regions sI(V
1
) ∪ −sI(V
1
) and ±t I(V
2
), respectively, which are chronologically
ordered as
−t :
0
2
 s:
0
1
  t :
0
2
. :
i
∈ I(V
i
).
for ﬁxed s and sufﬁciently large t > 0. In the last equation we have used that F
1
(g
1.s
)O ≡
F
1
( f
1.s
)O− F
1
( f
1.−s
)O = 0, since F
1
( f
1.s
)O is independent of s. The last expression
in Eq. (32) converges for s → ∞to
F
1
( f
1
)O
in
× F
2
( f
2
)O− F
1
( f
1
)O
out
× F
2
( f
2
)O.
On the other hand, the limit of the ﬁrst line in Eq. (32) can be calculated in Fourier space,
noting that
¨
f
t
( p) −
¨
f
−t
( p)
p
2
−m
2
→ 2πi δ
m
( p)
ˆ
f ( p). δ
m
( p)
.
= δ( p
2
−m
2
)θ( p
0
). (33)
476 J. Bros, J. Mund
for t → ∞. Let φ be a state vector in H
π
1
×π
2
with compact spectral support, and let
t (x
1
. x
2
) be the “timeordered function”
t (x
1
. x
2
)
.
=
φ. T(F
1
(x
1
)F
2
(x
2
))O
. (34)
Deﬁne the amputated timeordered function
ˇ
t
amp
by
ˇ
t
amp
( p
1
. p
2
)
.
= ( p
2
1
−m
2
)( p
2
2
−m
2
)
ˇ
t ( p
1
. p
2
). (35)
where
ˇ
t is the inverse Fourier transform of t .
13
Then the scalar product of the ﬁrst line
in Eq. (32) with φ is
t (g
1.s
⊗ g
2.t
) ≡
ˇ
t
amp
ˆ g
1.s
p
2
1
−m
2
⊗
ˆ g
2.t
p
2
2
−m
2
and the limit in s. t is formally, by Eq. (33),
(2πi )
2
(δ
m
⊗δ
m
·
ˇ
t
amp
)(
ˆ
f
1
⊗
ˆ
f
2
)
≡ (2πi )
2
H
+
m
×H
+
m
dμ( p
1
. p
2
)
ˆ
f
1
( p
1
)
ˆ
f
2
( p
2
)
ˇ
t
amp
( p
1
. p
2
).
As we see in Lemma 7 below, this can be justiﬁed under the stated hypothesis on C
i
and
V
i
. We then conclude from Eq. (32):
(2πi )
2
H
+
m
×H
+
m
dμ( p
1
. p
2
)
ˆ
f
1
( p
1
)
ˆ
f
2
( p
2
)
ˇ
t
amp
( p
1
. p
2
)
H
+
m
×H
+
m
=
φ . F
1
( f
1
)O
in
× F
2
( f
2
)O− F
1
( f
1
)O
out
× F
2
( f
2
)O
. (36)
This is the relevant LSZ relation. (See [1, Cor. 5.10] and [10] in the case of compact
localization.)
It remains to show that
ˇ
t
amp
can be multiplied with the distribution δ
m
⊗ δ
m
or,
equivalently, can be restricted to the twofold mass shell
H
2
m
.
= H
+
m
× H
+
m
.
To this end it sufﬁces to show that, over H
2
m
, the wave front set of
ˇ
t
amp
is disjoint from
the conormal bundle of H
2
m
(in which the wave front set of δ
m
⊗δ
m
is contained), see
[23, Thm. 8.2.10]. In order to determine the wave front set, we use a standard argument
involving the “twopoint”, commutator, advanced and retarded functions
n(x
1
. x
2
)
.
=
φ. F
1
(x
1
)F
2
(x
2
)O
.
c(x
1
. x
2
)
.
=
φ. F
1
(x
1
)F
2
(x
2
) −εF
2
(x
2
)F
1
(x
1
)O
.
a(x
1
. x
2
)
.
= θ(x
0
1
− x
0
2
) c(x
1
. x
2
).
r(x
1
. x
2
)
.
= −θ(x
0
2
− x
0
1
) c(x
1
. x
2
).
Obviously c = a −r and t = r + n. The amputated twopoint, advanced and retarded
functions ˇ n
amp
. ˇ a
amp
. ˇ r
amp
are deﬁned analogously as
ˇ
t
amp
. Now the inverse Fourier
13
The inverse Fourier transform of a distribution t is given by
ˇ
t (
ˆ
f ) = t ( f ).
Braid Group Statistics Implies Scattering in 3D Local Quantum Physics 477
transform of n is a measure in the second variable which has support in the energy
momentum spectrum, namely
ˇ n(
ˆ
f
1
⊗
ˆ
f
2
) =
ˆ
f
2
( p) d
φ. F
1
( f
1
)E
p
F
2
O
.
where dE
p
is the energymomentumspectral measure. Hence by the mass gap condition,
the amputated twopoint function vanishes in a neighborhood of the mass shell (which
contains no offshell spectral points). Since t ≡ r + n, this implies that the amputated
timeordered function
ˇ
t
amp
coincides in that neighborhood with the amputated retarded
function ˇ r
amp
. By the same token, the amputated commutator function vanishes on a
neighborhood of H
2
m
, which implies that the amputated advanced and retarded functions
coincide on that neighborhood. Thus,
ˇ
t
amp
= ˇ a
amp
= ˇ r
amp
on a neighborhood of H
2
m
. (37)
Hence the wave front sets over H
2
m
of these distributions coincide. Now the wave front
sets of ˇ a
amp
. ˇ r
amp
are related with the supports of a. r. We shall use total and relative
momenta (P. p) as well as the centerofmass and relative variables (X. x)
14
P
.
= p
1
+ p
2
. p
.
=
1
2
( p
1
− p
2
). X
.
=
1
2
(x
1
+ x
2
). x
.
= x
1
− x
2
. (38)
By locality, the commutator function vanishes if x ∈ C
, where
C
.
= C
2
−C
1
. (39)
i.e., it has support in (X. x) ∈ R
4
×C + (V
+
∪ V
−
). Therefore the advanced and retarded
functions have their supports in the closed cones R
4
×C + V
±
, respectively. The same
holds of course after applying the differential operator (
1
+ m
2
)(
2
+ m
2
). Therefore
the wave front sets of the amputated advanced and retarded products are contained in the
same cones, see [23, Lem. 8.1.7] and [36, Thm. IX.44]. Over the neighborhood where
ˇ
t
amp
coincides with the amputated retarded and advanced products, the wave front set of
ˇ
t
amp
is thus contained in the intersection of these cones, which is
R
4
×C. (40)
Now the conormal bundle of H
2
m
over a point ( p
1
. p
2
) ∈ H
2
m
is, in terms of the corre
sponding total and relative momentum (P. p),
T
(P. p)
H
2
m
⊥
= R
4
×span{P. p}. (41)
It has trivial intersection with the wave front set (40) over (P. p) if C has trivial inter
section with span{P. p} ≡ span{ p
1
. p
2
}. Part i i ) of Lemma 6 now implies:
Lemma 7 (Mass shell restriction of
ˇ
t
amp
). If C
1
and C
2
are special spacelike cones
such that C
1
. C
2
is future and past admissible for V
1
× V
2
⊂ H
2
m
, then
ˇ
t
amp
can be
restricted to V
1
× V
2
.
We have now veriﬁed that the LSZrelation (36) is valid in the case of localization in
spacelike cones and of braid group statistics, given that the localization regions of F
1
and F
2
are causally separated and are future and past admissible for the momentum
supports of f
1
and f
2
.
14
Recall that P · X + p· x = p
1
· x
1
+ p
2
· x
2
, hence the Fourier transformintertwines the respective variable
transformations.
478 J. Bros, J. Mund
4. Analyticity of the Amputated TimeOrdered Function
The next step is to show that the amputated timeordered function on the lefthand side
of Eq. (36) is the boundary value of an analytic function in the relative momentum. We
adapt the standard arguments to verify that this holds also in the case of spacelike cone
localization and of braid group statistics.
Let
˜
C
i
and let F
i
∈ F
π
i
(
˜
C
i
) be as in the last section, i = 1. 2, and suppose that the
difference cone C
.
= C
2
− C
1
is salient (which is the case if C
2
= −C
1
). Recall from
above that the corresponding advanced and retarded functions have their supports in the
closed cones (X. x) ∈ R
4
×C + V
±
, respectively. It follows [36, Thm. IX.16] that the
inverse Fourier transforms ˇ a(P. p). ˇ r(P. p) are, in the pvariable, boundary values of
two functions which are analytic in R
4
+ i (V
±
∩C
∗
) respectively, where C
∗
is the dual
cone, namely the set of all q ∈ R
4
such that q · x > 0 for all x in C \ {0}. The same
holds of course for the amputated advanced and retarded functions. But these coincide
by Eq. (37) on a neighborhood of the twofold mass shell H
2
m
. Recalling that H
2
m
corre
sponds under the transformation (38) to the set of (P. p) such that P
2
≥ 4m
4
. p · P = 0
and p
2
+
1
4
P
2
= m
2
, this means that ˇ a
amp
and ˇ r
amp
coincide for ﬁxed P with P
2
≥ 4m
4
on a neighborhood U of the spacelike twosphere consisting of the onshell relative
momenta p for the given P,
M
P
.
= { p ∈ R
4
: p · P = 0. p
2
= m
2
−
1
4
P
2
 0}. (42)
The edgeofthewedge theorem for oblique tubes [7, 14] then asserts that the distribu
tions ˇ a
amp
and ˇ r
amp
in fact are boundary values of a single function which is analytic in
an open set O
C
(a “local tube”) which contains all points p + i q such that p ∈ U and q
is contained in the convex hull of V
+
∩ C
∗
and V
−
∩ C
∗
, namely in
C
†
.
= (V
+
∩ C
∗
) + (V
−
∩ C
∗
). (43)
and satisﬁes a certain bound in norm, q  ρ( p). Since the amputated timeordered
function
ˇ
t
amp
coincides with ˇ a
amp
and ˇ r
amp
on U, cf. Eq. (37), it shares this analyticity
property. Analyticity in O
C
is, however, not sufﬁcient for our later purpose: We shall
wish to conclude from the vanishing of
ˇ
t
amp
on a small open set in M
P
that it vanishes
on a larger set in M
P
. We therefore have to consider the complexiﬁcation of M
P
. By the
above considerations, we know that
ˇ
t
amp
(P. p) has, for ﬁxed P, an analytic extension
in p into the intersection of O
C
with the complexiﬁcation of M
P
, which we denote by
O
P.C
.
ˇ
t
amp
(P. p) is the boundary value of this analytic function for all p ∈ M
P
which lie at
the real boundary of O
P.C
. Let us denote this set by
M
P.C
.
Now as a consequence of the fact that C
†
is a salient cone which does not contain the
origin, M
P.C
does not cover all of M
P
. (This contrasts the case of compact localization.)
However, depending on C, it can be made to cover a large part of M
P
. The following
proposition characterizes the real boundary M
P.C
of the domain of analyticity of the
amputated timeordered function, see also [5, Lem. 5.1].
Braid Group Statistics Implies Scattering in 3D Local Quantum Physics 479
Proposition 8 (Analyticity domain of
ˇ
t
amp
). i) An onshell relative momentum p ∈
M
P
is in M
P.C
if, and only if, the span of {P. p} has trivial intersection with the
closure of C,
span{P. p} ∩ C = {0}. (44)
ii) M
P.C
covers M
P
up to two antipodal neighborhoods U
P.C
∪−U
P.C
, where U
P.C
is the intersection of M
P
with the projection of C onto P
⊥
,
U
P.C
= M
P
∩ E
⊥
P
C. (45)
Note that by part i i ) of Lemma 6 the condition (44) is satisﬁed for all ( p
1
. p
2
) ∈
V
1
× V
2
if C
1
. C
2
is future and past admissible for V
1
× V
2
. Note also that in d ≥ 4
the set M
P.C
is connected, whereas in d = 3 it has two connected components.
Proof. The complexiﬁcation of M
P
consists of all p + i q ∈ C
4
with p. q ∈ P
⊥
and
p · q = 0. p
2
−q
2
= m
2
−
1
4
P
2
. The real boundary of O
P.C
therefore consists of all
points p ∈ M
P
for which there is some q ∈ P
⊥
∩ C
†
orthogonal to p. (For then
μ
2
−λ
2
q
2
μ
p + i λq
converges to p within O
C
if λ → 0. Here, μ
2
.
=
1
4
P
2
−m
2
.) In other words, p belongs
to the real boundary if, and only if,
H
⊥
∩ C
†
= ∅. (46)
where H is the timelike plane spanned by P. p. Since C
†
⊂ C
∗
, it is obvious that
(46) implies (44). To prove that (44) implies (46), namely the “if” statement of part i ),
we show in a ﬁrst step that the condition (44) allows for the construction of a wedge
which contains C \ {0} and whose edge has nontrivial intersection with H. The hypoth
esis (44) implies that the intersection of H with the closure of the base C of our special
spacelike cone is trivial. Thus, the intersection of H with the spacelike hypersurface
Y ⊃ C, which is a onedimensional spacelike subspace L, has trivial intersection with
C. Since C is a salient cone in the (d − 1)dimensional hyperplane Y, there exists a
(d − 2)dimensional linear hyperplane E of Y which contains the line L and still has
trivial intersection with C. Then E divides Y into two connected components and C
is contained in one of them. Let W be the causal completion of this halfspace of Y.
Then W is a wedge region
15
which contains C\{0} and whose edge, E, has nontrivial
intersection with H, namely, H∩ E = L. Our second step is to show that the existence
of such a wedge implies the claimed Eq. (46). The upper and lower boundaries of W
contain two lightlike rays R
+
l
±
⊂ ∂V
±
. They lie in the orthogonal complement of E
and characterize W as follows:
W = {x ∈ R
d
: x · l
+
 0. x · l
−
 0}. (47)
15
A wedge is a region in Minkowski space which arises from the standard wedge
W
1
.
= { x ∈ R
d
: x
0
  x
1
} .
by a Poincaré transformation. Its edge is the intersection of the upper and lower bordering lightlike halfplanes.
480 J. Bros, J. Mund
Now by construction, H and E span a d − 1dimensional timelike hyperplane and
H
⊥
∩ E
⊥
is a onedimensional spacelike subspace. Let q be in the component of this
line which is contained in the opposite wedge −W. Then
q = −l
+
−l
−
∈ H
⊥
∩ E
⊥
.
where l
±
∈ ∂V
±
are suitable positive multiples of l
±
. The vectors −l
±
are in the dual
of C by Eq. (47). Thus, the timelike vectors
q
±
.
= −l
∓
±ε(l
+
−l
−
) ∈ V
±
.
are still contained in the dual of C for sufﬁciently small ε > 0. We have thus found
q ∈ H
⊥
which can be written as q = q
+
+ q
−
with q
±
in V
±
∩ C
∗
= C
†
, i.e., Eq. (46)
holds. This completes the proof of i ). Now Eq. (44) is equivalent with
Rp ∩ E
⊥
P
C = {0}.
which proves i i ).
5. Proof of the Theorems
5.1. The four (and higher) dimensional case. Recalling the situation of Theorem 1,
suppose there are sets of incoming momenta U
1
. U
2
⊂ H
+
m
and of outgoing momenta
V
1
. V
2
⊂ H
+
m
, all mutually disjoint, cf. Eq. (1), and compatible with energymomentum
conservation: Namely, U
1
+ U
2
and V
1
+ V
2
are neighborhoods of some P ∈ V
+
. P
2
≥
4m
2
. The hypothesis is that there is no elastic twoparticle scattering from U
1
×U
2
into
V
1
× V
2
in the channel π
1
×π
2
→ π
1
×π
2
, namely:
φ
1
in
× φ
2
. ψ
1
out
× ψ
2
= 0 (48)
for all singleparticle states φ
i
in the sectors π
i
with respective spectral supports in U
i
,
and all ψ
i
in the same sectors π
i
and with supports in V
i
. Due to the assumed disjointness
of the energymomentum supports, the state ψ
1
in
× ψ
2
has vanishing scalar product with
φ
in
.
= φ
1
in
× φ
2
, and the hypothesis can be rephrased as
φ
in
. ψ
1
.
in
× ψ
2
−ψ
1
out
× ψ
2
= 0 (49)
for all ψ
i
with spectral supports in V
i
. We wish to show that Eq. (49) also holds if the
spectral supports of the ψ
i
are contained in other subsets V
i
of the mass shell, with φ
in
ﬁxed. We shall assume that the sets V
i
and V
i
are small neighborhoods of 4 onshell
momenta p
1
= p
2
and p
1
= p
2
, and that
V
1
+ V
2
⊂ V
.
= V
1
+ V
2
.
We then choose special spacelike cones C
1
. C
2
.
= −C
1
such that the pair C
1
. C
2
is
future and past admissible both for V
1
× V
2
and for V
1
× V
2
.
Lemma 9. There exists such a special spacelike cone C
1
.
Braid Group Statistics Implies Scattering in 3D Local Quantum Physics 481
Proof. Let :
i
and :
i
be the velocities corresponding to p
i
and p
i
, respectively, as
in Eq. (28). Choose a unit vector e in Y which is disjoint from R(:
1
− :
2
) and from
R(:
1
− :
2
), and let C
1
be a cone in Y centered at e, with sufﬁciently small opening
angle such that C
1
still has trivial intersection both with R(:
1
− :
2
) and R(:
1
− :
2
).
Let C
1
be its causal completion and let C
2
.
= −C
1
. Then C
1
. C
2
are future and past
admissible for {(:
1
. :
2
)} and for {(:
1
. :
2
)}, see Eq. (29) in the proof of Lemma 6. The
same holds for the set V
1
× V
2
and V
1
× V
2
if these are small enough.
The difference cone C
.
= C
2
− C
1
is now just C ≡ −C
1
. Let us denote by M
V.C
the
set of pairs of onshell momenta whose total momentum is contained in V and whose
relative momenta are contained in the real boundary of the analyticity domain of the
corresponding amputated timeordered functions. By virtue of Proposition 8 this set is
given by
M
V.C
.
=
¸
( p
1
. p
2
) ∈ H
+
m
× H
+
m
: p
1
+ p
2
∈ V. span{ p
1
. p
2
} ∩ C = {0}
¸
. (50)
NowEq. (49) holds for all ψ
i
of the formψ
i
= F
i
( f
i
)O, where F
i
∈ F
π
i
(C
i
) and where
f
i
are test functions with respective momentum supports in V
i
. The LSZ relation (36)
then implies that
ˇ
t
amp
( p
1
. p
2
) = 0 (51)
for all p
i
∈ V
i
. Here,
ˇ
t
amp
is the amputated timeordered function, with t (x
1
. x
2
) being
deﬁned as in Eq. (34) with φ = φ
in
and F
i
as above. Since our pair of cones C
1
. C
2
is future and past admissible for V
1
× V
2
, the remark after Proposition 8 implies that
the relative momenta corresponding to V
1
× V
2
are, for all P
∈ V, contained in the
boundary M
P
.C
of the domain of analyticity of
ˇ
t
amp
(P
. ·). Now in four (and higher)
dimensional spacetime, M
P
.C
is connected and therefore Eq. (51) and analyticity of
ˇ
t
amp
imply that
ˇ
t
amp
(P
. p
) vanishes for all P
∈ V and p
∈ M
P
.C
, that is to say,
ˇ
t
amp
vanishes on M
V.C
. Since our cones C
1
. C
2
are future and past admissible also for the
set V
1
× V
2
, the latter is also contained in the set M
V.C
, where we have just shown that
ˇ
t
amp
vanishes. Again by the LSZ relation (36), we conclude that Eq. (49) holds for all ψ
i
of the form ψ
i
= F
i
( f
i
)O, where F
i
∈ F
π
i
(C
i
) and the momentum supports of
ˆ
f
i
are
contained in V
i
. By continuity of the scattering states and the ReehSchlieder property,
we arrive at the following result:
Proposition 10 (Triviality of the Smatrix element in d ≥ 4). Let V
i
and U
i
be as in
Theorem 1, i = 1. 2, and let V
1
. V
2
be disjoint, sufﬁciently small, subsets of the mass
shell such that V
1
+ V
2
⊂ V = V
1
+ V
2
. Then
φ
1
in
× φ
2
. ψ
1
in
× ψ
2
=
φ
1
in
× φ
2
. ψ
1
out
× ψ
2
(52)
holds for all singleparticle states ψ
i
with spectral supports in V
i
and for all φ
i
with
spectral supports contained in the sets U
i
. i = 1. 2.
By Lorentz covariance, the same holds if U
1
and U
2
are subject to a common Lorentz
transformation. Since V was arbitrary in Theorem 1, it follows by linearity and conti
nuity that Eq. (52) holds for all singleparticle states φ
i
. ψ
i
. In other words, we have
shown that E
(2)
in
SE
(2)
in
= E
(2)
in
, where E
(2)
in
is the projection onto the closed subspace of
incoming twoparticle scattering states, and S is the Smatrix,
S : ψ
1
in
× ψ
2
→ ψ
1
out
× ψ
2
.
482 J. Bros, J. Mund
But then the assumption that SE
(2)
in
has other components than in E
(2)
in
H contradicts
the isometry of the Smatrix. It then follows that SE
(2)
in
= E
(2)
in
, i.e. Eq. (4) holds. This
concludes the proof of Theorem 1.
5.2. The threedimensional case. In three spacetime dimensions two complications
arise: Firstly, the scattering states may depend on the spacetime localization regions,
and secondly, the set of analyticity M
V.C
has two connected components and the above
argument only leads to the conclusion that
ˇ
t
amp
vanishes on the component which con
tains V
1
× V
2
.
The hypothesis of Theorem 2 is: There are sets of incoming momenta U
1
. U
2
⊂ H
+
m
and of outgoing momenta V
1
. V
2
⊂ H
+
m
, all mutually disjoint, cf. Eq. (1), and com
patible with energymomentum conservation, cf. Eq. (1), and there is some path
˜
C
0
,
futureadmissible for V
1
× V
2
, such that
φ
1
in
× φ
2
. (ψ
1
.
˜
C
0
)
out
× ψ
2
= 0 (53)
holds for all singleparticle states φ
i
in the sectors π
i
with respective spectral supports
in U
i
,
16
and all ψ
i
in the same sectors π
i
and with supports in V
i
. i = 1. 2. We may
assume that the spectral supports U
i
are small enough as to satisfy
U
1
+ U
2
⊂ V ≡ V
1
+ V
2
. (54)
Suppose that
˜
C
1
is a path ending at a special spacelike cone C
1
such that
(a) C
1
is future and past admissible both for V
1
×V
2
and for U
1
×U
2
. (Then V
1
×V
2
and U
2
×U
2
are contained in M
V.C
. C
.
= −C
1
, by the remark after Prop. 8.)
(b) V
1
× V
2
and U
1
×U
2
are in one and the same connected component of M
V.C
.
(c) The path
˜
C
1
is equivalent with
˜
C
0
for outgoing scattering states with momentum
supports in V
1
× V
2
, namely,
(ψ
1
.
˜
C
1
)
out
× ψ
2
= (ψ
1
.
˜
C
0
)
out
× ψ
2
(55)
holds for all ψ
i
with spectral supports in V
i
. i = 1. 2.
Due to (c), we may substitute
˜
C
1
for
˜
C
0
right at the beginning of our discussion,
namely in Eq. (53), and as in the last section we conclude that
φ
in
. (ψ
1
.
˜
C
1
)
in
× ψ
2
−(ψ
1
.
˜
C
1
)
out
× ψ
2
= 0 (56)
holds for all ψ
i
of the form ψ
i
= F
i
( f
i
)O, where F
i
∈ F
π
i
(
˜
C
i
) with C
2
.
= −C
1
and
˜
C
2
arbitrary, and where the momentum supports of f
i
are contained in U
i
. Continuity
and the ReehSchlieder property then imply:
Proposition 11 (Local triviality of the Smatrix element in d = 3). Suppose the spectral
supports U
i
are small enough as to satisfy U
1
+ U
2
⊂ V. Then Eq. (56) holds for all
singleparticle states ψ
i
with momentum supports in U
i
. i = 1. 2, and for all paths
˜
C
1
with the above properties (a), (b), (c).
16
The spacetime localization regions for the state φ
1
in
× φ
2
will not play any significant role.
Braid Group Statistics Implies Scattering in 3D Local Quantum Physics 483
We now show that this result is incompatible with braid group statistics, the idea
being as follows. We construct two paths
˜
C
1
and
˜
K
1
which both satisfy the proper
ties (a) through (c), and such that for all ψ
i
with spectral supports in U
i
the outgoing
scattering states are invariant under a change of localization regions from
˜
C
1
to
˜
K
1
,
whereas the corresponding incoming scattering states differ by a monodromy operator
ε
M
, that is
(ψ
1
.
˜
C
1
)
out
× ψ
2
= (ψ
1
.
˜
K
1
)
out
× ψ
2
. (ψ
1
.
˜
C
1
)
in
× ψ
2
= ε
M
(ψ
1
.
˜
K
1
)
in
× ψ
2
. (57)
Together with the relations asserted by Proposition 11, namely
φ
in
. (ψ
1
.
˜
C
1
)
in
× ψ
2
=
φ
in
. (ψ
1
.
˜
C
1
)
out
× ψ
2
and (58)
φ
in
. (ψ
1
.
˜
K
1
)
in
× ψ
2
=
φ
in
. (ψ
1
.
˜
K
1
)
out
× ψ
2
. (59)
it follows that
( φ
in
. (1 −ε
M
) (ψ
1
.
˜
K
1
)
in
× ψ
2
= 0. (60)
This is in conﬂict with braid group statistics.
In a ﬁrst step, we show that there exists a path
˜
C
1
with the properties (a) through (c).
Consider the set J of normalized velocity differences contained in V
1
× V
2
,
J
.
=
¸
:( p
2
) −:( p
1
)
:( p
2
) −:( p
1
)
: p
i
∈ V
i
¸
.
where :( p)
.
= (1. p¡ω( p)) is the velocity corresponding to p. Similarly, let I be the set
of normalized velocity differences contained in U
1
×U
2
. I and J are closed intervals
in the unit circle of the rest space Y,
S
1
.
= Y ∩ H.
If the sets U
i
and V
i
are sufﬁciently small and V ≡ V
1
+ V
2
is a small neighborhood
of some P ∈ V
+
, then U
i
and V
i
are disjoint neighborhoods of points on the circle M
P
in P
⊥
. Therefore I. −I. J and −J are all disjoint. By Lemma A.1, we may assume
that C
0
is a special spacelike cone, C
0
= C
0
, with small opening angle, centered at
some ray R
+
e
0
. e
0
∈ S
1
. The path
˜
C
0
then corresponds, with the identiﬁcation (10), to
a path ˜ e
0
in S
1
ending at e
0
. Now C
0
is futureadmissible for V
1
× V
2
(as assumed) if
and only if e
0
is in S
1
\J, see Eq. (A.1). We wish to construct a special spacelike cone
C
1
, centered at some unit vector e ∈ S
1
, satisfying properties (a) through (c). Again by
Eq. (A.1), C
1
satisﬁes property (a) iff e is in one of the four connected components of
S
1
\
¸
I ∪ −I ∪ J ∪ −J
¸
, and property (b) iff e is contained in the open interval either
between I and −J or between −I and J. To be speciﬁc, we choose e in the interval
between I and −J. Deﬁne nowthe path ˜ e corresponding to
˜
C
1
by appending to ˜ e
0
a path
from e
0
to e which is contained in S
1
\J. Then according to Lemma A.1,
˜
C
1
satisﬁes
property (c), too.
We now deﬁne a second path
˜
K
1
as follows. Let K
1
be the special spacelike cone
K
1
.
= −C
1
. It is centered at −e, located in the open interval between −I and J, and
also satisﬁes properties (a) and (b). Deﬁne the path corresponding to
˜
K
1
by appending
to ˜ e a path γ from e to −e which neither crosses I nor J, see Fig. 2. (This is possible
484 J. Bros, J. Mund
Fig. 2. The unit circle in the hyperplane Y. C
1
is centered at e and K
1
is centered at −e.
˜
C
1
and
˜
K
1
differ
by the path γ
Fig. 3. The spacelike hyperplane Y −t u. t > 0, with I
i
.
= I(U
i
). (C
1
. K
2
) and (K
1
. K
2
) are pastadmis
sible for U
1
×U
2
since I and J are in the same connected component of S
1
\ {e. −e}.) Then according to
Lemma A.1,
(ψ
1
.
˜
C
1
)
out
× ψ
2
= (ψ
1
.
˜
K
1
)
out
× ψ
2
(61)
holds for all ψ
i
with spectral supports in V
i
, as well as for all ψ
i
with spectral supports
in U
i
. i = 1. 2. (See Fig. 4 in the Appendix.) In particular,
˜
K
1
satisﬁes property (c), and
therefore Prop. 11 applies. But the path γ , which connects
˜
C
1
and
˜
K
1
, must inevitably
cross the interval −I . This implies that for ψ
i
with spectral supports in U
i
the incoming
scattering states (ψ
1
.
˜
K
1
)
in
× ψ
2
and (ψ
1
.
˜
C
1
)
in
× ψ
2
differ by some monodromy opera
tor. To calculate this operator let us assume, to be speciﬁc, that the intervals I. J. −I. −J
are neighbors in the mathematically positive sense, as in Fig. 2. Then our path from C
1
(centered at e) to K
1
(centered a −e) must be such that θ(
˜
K
1
) = θ(
˜
C
1
) −π in order not
to cross I or J.
To calculate the behavior of the incoming scattering state under this change, choose
a path
˜
K
2
such that (C
1
. K
2
) and (K
1
. K
2
) are pastadmissible for U
1
× U
2
and such
that
θ(
˜
K
1
)  θ(
˜
K
2
)  θ(
˜
C
1
) ≡ θ(
˜
K
1
) + π.
see Fig. 3. Then ε
π
1
π
2
(
˜
C
1
.
˜
K
2
) = ε
π
1
π
2
and ε
π
2
π
1
(
˜
K
2
.
˜
K
1
) = ε
π
2
π
1
, hence
Braid Group Statistics Implies Scattering in 3D Local Quantum Physics 485
(ψ
1
.
˜
C
1
)
in
× ψ
2
≡ (ψ
1
.
˜
C
1
)
in
× (ψ
2
.
˜
K
2
)
= ε
π
1
π
2
(
˜
C
1
.
˜
K
2
) ε
π
2
π
1
(
˜
K
2
.
˜
K
1
) (ψ
1
.
˜
K
1
)
in
× (ψ
2
.
˜
K
2
)
= ε
π
1
π
2
ε
π
2
π
1
(ψ
1
.
˜
K
1
)
in
× ψ
2
.
That is, the incoming scattering state in fact picks up the monodromy operator
ε
M
.
= ε
π
1
π
2
ε
π
2
π
1
(62)
under a change from
˜
C
1
to
˜
K
1
. So Eq. (60) in fact holds, with ε
M
as above.
We now show that this is in conﬂict with braid group statistics. First consider π
1
=
π
2
= π, where π is an Anyonic sector. Then the monodromy operator equals ω
2
π
times
the unit operator, and Eq. (60) implies ω
2
π
= 1, since
φ
in
. (ψ
1
.
˜
K
1
)
in
× ψ
2
= 0 for
suitable φ
in
. This proves Theorem 2 in the Abelian case. In the nonAbelian case, where
ε
M
acts nontrivially, recall that the sector π
1
×π
2
contains a ﬁnite number of irreduc
ible sectors, each with ﬁnite multiplicity [18]. For every subrepresentation σ contained
in π
1
× π
2
, let E
σ
be the corresponding projection.
17
By Lemma 3.3 in [18], these
projections diagonalize the monodromy operator:
E
σ
ε
M
=
ω
σ
ω
1
ω
2
E
σ
.
where we have written ω
i
.
= ω
π
i
. Now
¸
σ
E
σ
, where the ﬁnite sum goes over all
irreducible subrepresentations of π
1
×π
2
, is the unit operator in H
π
1
×π
2
(and also is a
selfintertwiner for π
1
×π
2
). Denoting ψ
in
.
= (ψ
1
.
˜
K
1
)
in
× ψ
2
, Eq. (60) then implies
0 =
¸
σ
( φ
in
. E
σ
(1 −ε
M
) ψ
in
) =
¸
σ
1 −
ω
σ
ω
1
ω
2
χ(E
σ
)( φ
in
. ψ
in
).
We have used Lemma 4 and have written χ
.
= χ
1
χ
2
. Nowψ
in
is certainly not orthogonal
to all allowed φ
in
, and therefore the above equation yields
¸
σ
χ(E
σ
) =
¸
σ
ω
σ
ω
1
ω
2
χ(E
σ
).
But χ(E
σ
) is positive, while
ω
σ
ω
1
ω
2
has modulus one. Therefore all factors
ω
σ
ω
1
ω
2
must
equal one, and we conclude:
Proposition 12. For every irreducible subrepresentation σ ∈ L of π
1
×π
2
there holds
ω
σ
= ω
π
1
ω
π
2
.
Let us consider the case π
1
= π and π
2
= ¯ π, and recall that the representation π × ¯ π
contains the vacuum representation π
0
, which has statistics parameter 1. Since ω
¯ π
and
ω
π
coincide [19], we conclude that ω
2
π
= 1. This concludes the proof of Theorem 2.
Acknowledgements. It is a pleasure for J.M. to thank Detlev Buchholz for having taught him, among other
things, to be sceptical against any adhoc assumptions (concerning in particular the Smatrix for Plektons).
Further, J.M. gratefully acknowledges ﬁnancial support by the Brazilian Research Council CNPq.
17
Choose an orthonormal basis T
σ.i
. i = 1. . . . . N
σ
, in the Hilbert space of intertwiners fromσ to π
1
×π
2
;
Then E
σ
.
=
¸
N
σ
i =1
T
σ.i
T
∗
σ.i
.
486 J. Bros, J. Mund
A. Local Independence on the Localization Regions of Scattering States
For completeness sake, we verify here the wellknown fact that the scattering states
are locally independent of the spacetime localization regions
˜
C in threedimensional
spacetime. Let V
1
. V
2
be compact disjoint subsets of the mass shell, and let J be the
set of normalized velocity differences contained in V
1
× V
2
,
J
.
=
¸
:( p
2
) −:( p
1
)
:( p
2
) −:( p
1
)
: p
i
∈ V
i
¸
.
where :( p)
.
= (1. p¡ω( p)) is the velocity corresponding to p. Assuming that V
i
are
sufﬁciently small, J is a closed, simply connected, interval in the intersection of the
spacelike directions H with the rest space Y,
S
1
.
= Y ∩ H.
Let now C
1
be a spacelike cone with apex at the origin which is futureadmissible for
V
1
× V
2
. By part i ) of Lemma 6, this is the case if, and only if, the closure of its set of
spacelike directions C
H
1
≡ C
1
∩ H is contained in the causal complement of J in H,
18
which we shall denote by J
and which is also simply connected. Recall from Eq. (10)
and thereafter that we have identiﬁed a path
˜
C
1
of spacelike cones ending at C
1
with a
sheet in the universal covering space of H over C
H
1
∼
= C, that is, with a set of (homotopy
classes of) paths in H ending at C
H
1
.
Lemma A.1. Let
˜
C
1
and
˜
K
1
be paths ending at respective spacelike cones C
1
and K
1
which have their apices at the origin and are futureadmissible for V
1
×V
2
. If the sheets
˜
C
H
1
and
˜
K
H
1
differ by a path in J
, then for all ψ
i
with spectral supports in V
i
there
holds
(ψ
1
.
˜
C
1
)
out
× ψ
2
= (ψ
1
.
˜
K
1
)
out
× ψ
2
. (A.2)
Proof. We ﬁrst deﬁne a localization region C
2
for the state ψ
2
, namely: Let C
2
be a
spacelike cone with apex at the origin such that C
H
2
is contained in the causal com
pletion of J. Then the pairs C
1
. C
2
and K
1
. C
2
both are futureadmissible for V
1
× V
2
.
Now for any path
˜
C
2
ending at C
2
the relative winding number of
˜
C
2
with respect to
˜
C
1
coincides with that of
˜
C
2
w.r.t.
˜
K
1
, i.e., N(
˜
C
1
.
˜
C
2
) = N(
˜
K
1
.
˜
C
2
). Take for example
˜
C
2
such that this winding number is −1, see Fig. 4.
Then N(
˜
C
2
.
˜
K
1
) = 0 and therefore by Eq. (15) ε
π
1
π
2
(
˜
C
1
.
˜
C
2
) = ε
−1
π
2
π
1
and
ε
π
2
π
1
(
˜
C
2
.
˜
K
1
) = ε
π
2
π
1
. Hence Lemma 5 implies that for ψ
i
∈ H
π
i
there holds
(ψ
1
.
˜
C
1
)
out
× ψ
2
≡ (ψ
1
.
˜
C
1
)
out
× (ψ
2
.
˜
C
2
)
= ε
π
1
π
2
(
˜
C
1
.
˜
C
2
)ε
π
2
π
1
(
˜
C
2
.
˜
K
1
) (ψ
1
.
˜
K
1
)
out
× (ψ
2
.
˜
C
2
)
= (ψ
1
.
˜
K
1
)
out
× (ψ
2
.
˜
C
2
) ≡ (ψ
1
.
˜
K
1
)
out
× ψ
2
.
18
Note that if C
1
is a special spacelike cone, C
1
= (C
1
)
with C
1
⊂ Y, then this condition is equivalent
to
C
1
∩ J = ∅. (A.1)
Braid Group Statistics Implies Scattering in 3D Local Quantum Physics 487
˜
C
1
˜
C
2
˜
C
2
˜
K
1
tΓ
1
tΓ
1
tΓ
2
tΓ
2
Fig. 4. The spacelike hyperplane Y+t u. t > 0, with I
i
.
= I(U
i
). (C
1
. C
2
) and (K
1
. C
2
) are futureadmis
sible for U
1
×U
2
That is, the outgoing scattering state is in fact invariant under a change of localization
region from
˜
C
1
to
˜
K
1
, as claimed.
References
1. Araki, H.: Mathematical theory of quantumﬁelds. Int. Series of Monographs in Physics, no. 101, Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 1999
2. Banerjee, R., Chatterjee, A., Sreedhar, V.V.: Canonical quantization and gauge invariant anyon operators
in ChernSimons scalar electrodynamics. Ann. Phys. 222, 254–290 (1993)
3. Barata, J., Nill, F.: Electrically and magnetically charged states and particles in the 2+1dimensional
Z
N
Higgs gauge model. Commun. Math. Phys. 171, 27–86 (1995)
4. Borchers, H.J., Buchholz, D., Schroer, B.: Polarizationfree generators and the Smatrix. Commun. Math.
Phys. 219, 125–140 (2001)
5. Bros, J., Epstein, H.: Charged physical states and analyticity of scattering amplitutdes in the Buch
holz Fredenhagen framework. In: 11
t h
International Conference on Mathematical Physics, July 1994,
Cambridge, MA: Intl. Press, 1995, pp. 330–341
6. Bros, J., Epstein, H., Glaser, V.: Some rigorous analyticity properties of the fourpoint function in momen
tum space. Nuovo Cim. 31, 1265–1302 (1964)
7. Bros, J., Iagolnitzer, D.: Causality and local analyticity: Mathematical study. Ann. H. Poic. A18, 147–184
(1975)
8. Buchholz, D., Epstein, H.: Spin and statistics of quantumtopological charges. Fysica 17, 329–343 (1985)
9. Buchholz, D., Fredenhagen, K.: Locality and the structure of particle states. Commun. Math. Phys. 84,
1–54 (1982)
10. Buchholz, D., Summers, S J.: Scattering in relativistic quantum ﬁeld theory: Fundamental concepts
and tools. In: Encyclopedia of Mathematical Physics J.P. Françoise, G. Naber, T.S. Tsun, eds., Vol. 5,
Elsevier, 2006
11. Buchholz, D., Summers, S. J.: Warped convolutions: A novel tool in the construction of quantum ﬁeld
theories. In: Quantum Field Theory and Beyond E. Seiler, K. Sibold, eds., Singapore: World Scientiﬁc,
2008, pp. 107–121
12. Doplicher, S., Haag, R., Roberts, J.E.: Local observables and particle statistics I. Commun. Math.
Phys. 23, 199 (1971)
13. Doplicher, S., Haag, R., Roberts, J.E.: Local observables and particle statistics II. Commun. Math.
Phys. 35, 49–85 (1974)
14. Epstein, H.: Generalization of the “edgeofthewedge” theorem. J. Math. Phys. 1, 524–531 (1960)
15. Forte, S.: Quantummechanics and ﬁeld theory with fractional spin and statistics. Rev. Mod. Phys. 64, 193–
236 (1992)
16. Fredenhagen, K.: On the existence of antiparticles. Commun. Math. Phys. 79, 141–151 (1981)
17. Fredenhagen, K., Gaberdiel, M., Rüger, S.M.: Scattering states of plektons (particles with braid group
statistics) in 2+1 dimensional ﬁeld theory. Commun. Math. Phys. 175, 319–355 (1996)
18. Fredenhagen, K., Rehren, K.H., Schroer, B.: Superselection sectors with braid group statistics and
exchange algebras II: Geometric aspects and conformal covariance. Rev. Math. Phys. SI1, 113–157 (1992)
19. Fröhlich, J., Marchetti, P.A.: Spinstatistics theorem and scattering in planar quantum ﬁeld theories with
braid statistics. Nucl. Phys. B 356, 533–573 (1991)
488 J. Bros, J. Mund
20. Grosse, H., Lechner, G.: Noncommutative deformations of Wightman quantum ﬁeld theories. JHEP
0809, 131 (2008)
21. Haag, R.: Local quantum physics. Second ed., Texts and Monographs in Physics, BerlinHeidelberg:
Springer, 1996
22. Hepp, K.: On the connection between the LSZ and Wightman quantum ﬁeld theory. Commun. Math.
Phys. 1, 95–111 (1965)
23. Hörmander, L.: The analysis of linear partial differential operators I. Berlin: Springer, 1983
24. Jackiw, R., Weinberg, E.J.: Selfdual ChernSimons vortices. Phys. Rev. Lett. 64, 2234 (1990)
25. Jost, R.: The general theory of quantized ﬁelds. Providence, RI: Amer. Math. Soc., 1965
26. Lechner, G.: Deformations of quantum ﬁeld theories and integrable models. Commun. Math. Phys. 312,
265–302 (2012)
27. Lüscher, M.: Bosonization in 2+1 dimensions. Nucl. Phys. B 326, 557–582 (1989)
28. Mandelstam, S.: Quantum electrodynamics without potentials. Ann. Phys. 19, 1–24 (1962)
29. Mintchev, M., Rossi, M.: Gauss law and charged ﬁelds in the presence of a Chern Simons term. Phys.
Lett. B 271, 187–195 (1991)
30. Müller, V.F.: Intermediate statistics in two space dimensions in a latticeregularized Hamiltonian quantum
ﬁeld theory. Z. Phys. C 47, 301–310 (1990)
31. Mund, J.: Nogo theorem for ‘free’ relativistic anyons in d = 2+1. Lett. Math. Phys. 43, 319–328 (1998)
32. Mund, J.: The spin statistics theorem for anyons and plektons in d = 2 + 1. Commun. Math.
Phys. 286, 1159–1180 (2009)
33. Mund, J.: The CPT and BisognanoWichmann theorems for anyons and plektons in d=2+1. Commun.
Math. Phys. 294, 505–538 (2010)
34. Mund, J. An algebraic JostSchroer theorem. Commun. Math. Phys. (to appear)
35. Mund, J., Schroer, B., Yngvason, J.: String–localized quantumﬁelds and modular localization. Commun.
Math. Phys. 268, 621–672 (2006)
36. Reed, M., Simon, B.: Methods of modern mathematical physics I, II. New York: Academic Press,
1975/1980
37. Roberts, J.E.: Local cohomology and superselection structure. Commun. Math. Phys. 51, 107–119 (1976)
38. Roberts, J.E.: Net cohomology and its applications to ﬁeld theory. In: Quantum Fields – Algebras, Pro
cesses, L. Streit, ed., WienNew York: Springer, 1980, pp. 239–268
39. Roberts, J.E.: Lectures on algebraic quantum ﬁeld theory. In: The Algebraic Theory of Superselection
Sectors. Introduction and Recent Results, D. Kastler, ed., SingaporeNew JerseyLondonHong Kong:
World Scientiﬁc, 1990, pp. 1–112
40. Semenoff, G.W.: Canonical quantumﬁeld theory with exotic statistics. Phys. Rev. Lett. 61(5), 517 (1988)
41. Swanson, M.S.: FockSpace representations of coupled Abelian ChernSimons theory. Phys. Rev. 42(2),
552 (1990)
Communicated by Y. Kawahigashi