# Eucledian formulation of Wightman QFT

David Kazhdan

Lecture 2

with Minkowski space-time V . However it is often desirable to be able to work with Euclidean (Riemannian rather than pseudo-Riemannian) space-time as well. In this lecture we explain what data over the Euclidean space-time E = Rd corresponds to a QFT in Wightman axioms. C More precisely, let VC = V C , Vn = Vn C , and consider the Euclidean a ne space E = iR Rd 1 VC . Going between QFT data on Minkowski space-time V = R (R)d 1 and the one on E = iR (R)d 1 is often called Wick rotation. The plan is to obtain Euclidean counterparts of Wightman functions by analytically continuing Wn to an open domain in VnC and then restricting the obtained analytic functions to E . We need some notations. Let GC be complexi cation of G. We set: T = V iV+ VC C e e (the backward tube); Tn = (T)n VnC (the extended tube); Tn = GC (Tn) Vn (the e permuted extended tube) ; Jn = Tn \ Vn. Recall that we identi ed Vn = V n+1, so we have an action of the symmetric group n+1 on Vn.

2.1 Analytic continuation of Wightman functions. In lecture 1 we were working

Proposition.
a) Assume d > 2. Then for any 2 n+1 the subset Jn \ (Jn) Vn is open and nonempty. e e b) If d > 2 then for any 2 n+1 the subset Tn \ (Tn) is connected. 0 c) Put E = iR Rd 1 VC ; En = E E VnC . Also let En En be 0 the complement to all diagonals, and: E n = En= (E ); E 0 = En= (E ). Then n 0 e (Tn) En+1. 2
n+1
1

Lemma. (Jost's theorem) Jn = f(v1 ; : : : ; vn ) 2 Vn j8 ( 1; : : : ; n) 2 Rn f0g: ( 1 v1 + + + nvn) 2 Vspaceg.
Proof of the Lemma. Assume that (v1 ; : : : ; vn ) 2 Jn. Then for some g 2 GC : g(v1); g(v2 ); : : : ; g(vn ) 2 T, hence g( 1 v1 + + nvn) 2 T for (~ ) 2 Rn f0g. Let + P P us write i , where 2 V+. Then ( k vk )2 = ( )2 ( )2 2i( ; ). The k vk = P L.H.S. is real, hence ( ; ) = 0, and ( )2 0, i.e. ( k vk )2 < 0. Let us prove the converse statement. So assume that the (convex) cone generated by v1; : : : ; vn does not intersect V + V . Then this cone can be separated from V by a hyperplane tangent to V . This means that there exist 2 V + and 2 V such that: ( )2 = ( )2 = 0; ( ; vk ) < 0; ( ; vk ) < 0 for k = 1; : : : ; n and ( ; w) > 0 for w 2 V+; ( ; w) > 0 for w 2 V . Then ( ; ) 6= 0, and it is easy to show that there exists g 2 GC such that g( ) = i , g( ) = i and g is identity on the subspace orthogonal to h ; i. This g satis es the condition g(vk ) 2 T for k = 1; : : : ; n. Proof of the Proposition. a) It is obvious that this subset is open. So we must show it is nonempty, i.e. we are to nd a point v = (v1 ; : : : ; vn ) such that (v1 ; : : : ; vn) and (v (1); : : : ; v (n)) satisfy the conditions of the last lemma. We can choose two linearly independent vectors `1; `2 2 Rd 1 V (since d > 2) and put v = (`1; : : : ; `1) + 1 (`2; : : : ; `2). Then it is immediate to check the conditions.
e b) It is enough to show that (Tn) \ Tn is connected for any . We have a standard

preserves an orthogonal decomposition of VC into sum of subspace of dimension not greater than 2 de ned over R. Here by generic we mean an element belonging to an open (in fact real Zariski open) dense subset.

Lemma. Generic element of GC can be written as g = g0 gR , where gR 2 G and g0

Let us now nish the proof of b). Fix 2 n+1 and consider S = f(g 2 GC ; v 2 VnC ) j g( (v )) 2 Tng. Take a point (g; v) 2 S .
2

Moving (g; v) slightly inside S we can achieve that g is generic as in the last lemma. We can now take g0 , gR as in the Lemma. Obviously (g0 ; gR 1(v)) and (g; v) lie in one connected component of S . Set v0 = gR 1(v). Let V0 V be the unique block in the decomposition corresponding to g0 on which ( ; ) is not negative, and let : VnC ! (V0C )n be the orthogonal projection. One sees immediately that for v 2 Tn the segment connecting v with (v) lies in Tn. Also commutes with g0 and ; it follows that this segment also lies in 1 (g0 1(Tn)), hence (g0 ; v0 ) and (g0 ; (v0 )) are connected inside S . If dim(V0 ) = 1 then g0 jV0 = Id. So in that case we have (v0 ) 2 Tn, ( (v 0 )) 2 Tn, which is only possible if = 1 or = w0 is the \long" permutation (w0(i) = n + 2 i). e But in these two cases (Tn) Tn, so there is nothing to prove anyway. 0 Suppose now that dim(V0) = 2. Set G0 = Spin(V0 ), G0 = Spin(V0 C ), Tn = V0 + C iV0+. Then G0 =G0 is the circle S 1, and one can show that for 6= 1; w0 the set fg 2 C 0 0 0 0 G0 =G0 j g( (Tn)) \ Tn 6= ;g coincides with S 1 f1; 1g. For given g the set g( (Tn)) \ Tn C 0 is convex and hence connected; thus the set SV0 := f(g 2 G0 ; v 2 Tn j g( (v)) 2 Tng C has 2 connected components. It is easily seen that these 2 components are permuted by conjugation by an element of G, hence they lie in the same connected component of S . But we have shown that any point in S is connected to a point in (StabV0 V0 ) \ S , and hence to a point in SV0 S . (Here we use that the action of g0 on V0 has determinant 1, because otherwise it has eigenvalues 1, 1, which does not happen for generic g.) Since G transitively permutes 2-dimensional subspaces of V of signature (1; 1) we see that S is connected, which implies the statement. c) For v 2 VC let us write v = (v0 ;~ ), v0 2 C ; ~ 2 C d 1 . It is clear that for v v 0 (v1 ; : : : ; vn+1) 2 En+1 there exists g 2 SO(n + 1), such that (gvi)0 6= (gvj )0 for i 6= j . Then we can permute (v1 ; : : : ; vn+1) so as to get: (vi )0 > (vj )0 for i > j . But this implies e that the corresponding vector in V n+1 lies in Tn. Now we are ready to prove

Theorem. Let d > 2. Then Wn extends to an analytic function on
3

2 n+1

e (Tn). These

functions are n+1 and GC -equivariant. (The n+1-equivariance is understood as usually in the \super" sense.) Proof. Since F(Wn) is supported in V+ it follows that Wn extends to an analytic function on T (which will be denoted by the same letter). Since Wn is G-equivariant, this analytic function is G-equivariant. e To ensure that Wn extends to a single-valued analytic function on T, which then is automatically GC -equivariant, it is enough to check that Wn(x) = Wn (g(x)) for g 2 GC , x 2 Tn and g(x) 2 Tn. If g 1Tn \ Tn 6= ; then also g 1T \ T 6= ;. Let us take v 2 g 1T \ T. It is easy to see that for v 2 T the set fh 2 GC jh(v) 2 Tg is connected. Hence there exists a neighborhood U Tn \ g 1Tn of the point (v; : : : ; v) such that g 1 lies in the connected component of 1 of fh 2 GC jh(U ) Tg. From G-invariance of Wn it follows that for xed x 2 VnC the function Wn(g(x)) de ned on some open subset of GC is locally constant. Hence Wn(x) = Wn(g(x)) for x 2 U . Since U is open in the connected set g 1Tn \ Tn we e can conclude that Wn(x) = Wn(g(x)) for all x 2 g 1Tn \ Tn, so analyticity of Wn in T is proved. e e Now by Proposition a) for any 2 n+1 the set 1(T) \ T contains an open non-empty subset of Vn . Moreover, from the Jost's theorem it follows that
1 (T ) \ T \ V e e n

(Vspace)n :

But Wn (Vspace)n is n+1 (super)equivariant. Hence Wn and (Wn) agree on a neighbore e e e hood of the set of real points in 1 (T) \ T, and hence on the whole of 1 (T) \ T by Proposition b). So the collection of functions (Wn ) for all 2 n give a well-de ned ane alytic function on 2 (Tn), which is obviously n+1-(super)equivariant. The theorem n+1 is proven.
0 We denote the restriction of these functions to En by Sn. We also put Sn = (Sn) 0 0 where : En ! En is the projection.

De nition. The functions Sn are called Schwinger functions.
4

From the theorem it follows that Sn is a real-analytic SO(n) n E and n equivariant function.
Remark. The theorem (and its proof) relies only on weak Wightman's axioms. Hence Schwinger functions can be constructed from a set of Wn 2 e0n which satisfy weak WightS man axioms. Remark. The assumption that d > 2 is not essential in the Theorem. A method which allows to treat also the case d = 2 and furhter extend the analyticity domain (the so called \edge of the wedge Theorem") is explained e.g. in Streater-Wightman], x3.3. Remark. It was explained that QFT has two formulations: Minkowski and Euclidean. The experience says that it is more convenient to work technically with Euclidean picture, though the basic notions are naturally formulated in Minkowski one.
e Remark. The analytic Schwinger functions on n+1(Tn) seem to be the correct object of consideration. So it is natural to ask whether they can be further extended to some larger domain. e The domain n+1(Tn) is not holomorphically convex. It may be worthwhile to describe its convex hull and look at the extension of Schwinger functions to it.

2.2 Euclidean formulation of Wightman QFT. Recall that decomposition E = (iR) Rd 1 is xed. Let denote re ection at the hyperplane f0g Rd 1; put: E + = + (iR>0) Rd 1; En = E + E + E + En. Let En denote the space of Schwartz 0 sections of RC jEn , and E0 En be the subspace of sections with support in En. n n Claim.
a) Schwinger functions satisfy the following properties:
b " i)" Sn is a real-analytic P -invariant and n (super) invariant real valued function 0 b b b on En where P = G n E , G = Spin(E ); If moreover Sn come from a strong (as opposed to weak) QFT then they satisfy:
5

" ii)" Sn is of moderate growth; i.e. Sn de nes a tempered distribution on E0 . n " iii)" Re ection positivity. + e e Put: E+ = fF 2 E0 jsupp F En g. Also let E+ = E+, E = E0 , and S = Sn 2 (E)0 . n n n e n e Then for F 2 E+ we have: S( (F ) F ) 0. " iv)" Let En be the space of Schwartz sections of RC jEn , and let E+ En be the subn n + + and a di erential space of sections with support in En 1 E n = En 1. For r 2 R operator D consider the seminorm on E+ de ned by: n

jf jr;D =

x2(R >0

sup d
R

1 )n

j(1 + jxj2)r=2 DF(f )(x)j

(here for x 2 V; x = (x0 ; ~ ) we put jxj2 = x2 + j~ 2 j). Then Sn de nes a distribution x 0 x on E+ which is continuous with respect to the seminorms j jr;D . n

b) The construction of x2.1 provides a bijection between Wightman QFT's and collections of functions Sn satisfying the conditions i){iv) above.

It should be mentioned that this theorem is not really useful, because the property iv) of the list is impossible to check in practice. A more useful list is obtained by replacing the property iv) by the following axiom:
Axiom iv0 ). (Linear growth condition) There exist ; ; r 2 R>0 such that

jSn(f )j < (n!) jf jnr
for all f 2 E0 where the seminorm jf jnr is given by jf jnr = sup j(1 x2 )r=2 Df (x)j and n 0 x2En ;D D runs over the set of di erential monomials of degree less then nr. This property is more tractable, but it is more restrictive than iv). Some remarks are in order. For Schwinger functions constructed from a (strong) Wightman QFT the re ection positivity property is equivalent to the positivity property (5) of Wightman axioms. However, to formulate it we do not have to assume anything about the behavior of Sn on diagonals. (Note that if F1; F2 2 E+ then (F1 ) F2 automatically
6

e vanishes on diagonals, so (F1 ) F2 2 E). So it can be formulated for Schwinger functions of weak QFT. It is not clear how to restate this property directly in Minkowski picture (which is more intuitive from the physical point of view) for weak Wightman QFT.

picture should stand behind the formalism of Schwinger functions. Assume we have a (quasi) measure on E0 (where E is the space of Schwartz sections of RC E ), such that if F1; : : : ; Fn 2 E and supp(Fi )\supp(Fj ) = ; for i 6= j then the function ! (F1 ) : : : (Fn ) is measurable. Then we can de ne a distribution in (E0 )0 for any n by requirement that its n R value on F1 : : : Fn equals (F1 ) : : : (Fn ). This distribution should coincide with Sn; E0 thus Sn describes n-th moment of . If the measure exists, it is uniquely determined by its moments Sn . However it does not necessarily exist for given Sn coming from a Wightman QFT. So working with Sn is a way to talk about the properties of a measure when the measure itself is not de ned. The formulation of QFT involving a measure on E0 has another serious drawback. In general one is interested in eld theories where the elds are not sections of a vector bundle, but rather maps from a manifold to another manifold (no linear structure on the target space). Then we can not even say on what space the measure is de ned. Indeed, in the linear case the measure lives on the space of generalized sections of a vector bundle. But there is no notion of a generalized map from a manifold to another manifold. The formalism of Schwinger functions also does not work in this setting: to de ne moments of a measure one needs linear structure on the underlying space. The di culty can be overcome if d = 1. In this case for a linear QFT the measure is actually de ned and is concentrated on the subspace of continuous sections. So one gets a reasonable theory considering the space of continuous maps from V = R to M and introducing a measure on this space. This is illustrated in the next two examples.

2.3 Schwinger functions and measures on the map-spaces. In fact, the following

Example 1. (Wightman QFT for d = 1) In this case QFT is equivalent to usual quantum mechanics. Precisely, let us put: H = L2(R), let A 2 C u; @u ] be a Hamiltonian. Let A be
7

d of the form A = du22 + r(u), where r(u) ! +1 for u ! 1. Then A has the smallest eigenvalue, and the corresponding eigenspace is one dimensional. Assume that the smallest eigenvalue of A is 0. Let be the corresponding eigenfunction. Also put: D = S(R), then 2 D H. Finally, let u 2 End(D) be the operator of multiplication by the function b f (u) = u. We de ne the action of P = R on H by t ! eiAt and put:

(f ) =

Z

f (t)eiAt ue b

iAt dt:

Let us describe the corresponding measure on S0 (R). We start with Gaussian measure 0 d with covariance ( ( dt )2 + m2) 1 , where m2 > 0 is such that r(u) m2u2 > 0 for juj 0. (So for f 2 S we have F( 0)(f ) = e(( (d=dt)2+m2) 1f;f ) .) We look for of the form = a 0 where a is a function. It is enough to de ne a on a set of measure 1. We de ne a by the formula:

a( ) = e

1 R (r( (t)) m2 (t)2 )dt 1

Using Sobolev theorem one can show that 0 is essentially concentrated on the set of such continuous functions that the above integral converges. Hence the measure = a 0 is correctly de ned. The fact that the measure and the eld operators de ned above give the same set of Schwinger functions follows from the so-called Feynman-Kac formula, see Gawedzki's lecture 1, x1.3.

Example 2. (Abstract QFT for d = 1) Let M be an arbitrary compact Riemannian manifold, H = L2(M ), is the Laplacian, A = + r(m). In this case one still can
describe a measure on the space of continuous maps Map(R; M ) (one can get rid of the compactness assumption by introducing requirements on asymptotic behavior of r; Example 1 is a particular case of this situation). The measure can be characterized as follows. Let t1 ; : : : ; tk be points in R, and U1 ; : : : ; Uk t M be open subsets. Put XU11;:::;tkk = ff 2 Hom(R; M )jf (ti) 2 Ui for i = 1; : : : ; kg. Let ;:::;U Kt (m1; m2 ), m1; m2 2 M , t 2 R>0 be the fundamental solution of the di erential equation
8

df = Af . Then dt

is the unique measure, such that:
t (XU11;:::;tkk ) = ;:::;U
Z

k 1 Y

U1 ::: Uk i=1

Kti+1 ti (mi ; mi+1)dm1 : : : dmk :

But there is no easy way to translate it to a Wightman-type picture. We nish by a technical variation on the de nition of Wightman functions which will be used later.

Claim. We have:
b) (

element of G. Hence the analytic continuations of Wn we constructed in section 1 are -invariant, though Wightman functions themselves are not. We will now present a variant of the de nition of Wn which does not have this drawback. Namely, the time-ordered Wightman function WT is given by: WT (v) = "lim0 Sn(v + n n !+ T (v ) = Wn (v ), where pr is the projection Vn ! V n . i"v). For pr(v) 2 Jn 1 we have: Wn The function WT is and n-invariant (unlike Wn). n T Like a usual Wightman function, WT is lifted from a unique function Wn on V n. n Let us describe W2T for the free scalar QFT of mass m; we will denote it by F ( ; m2), + where F stands for Feynman. It can be expressed through functions +( ; m2) = F( m ), and ( ; m2) = F( m ).
a) F (v; m2)=

2 SO(1; d 1) be re ection at the hyperplane Rd 1 V (change of time direction). Then 0 can be lifted to an element 2 GC , but not to an
0

2.4 Time-ordering. Let

(v; m2) for v 2 V ; F (v; m2)= +(v; m2 )=

(v; m2) for v 2 V;

+ m2)( F ( ; m2)) = 2 i 0 , i.e. W2T is the fundamental solution of + m2 ; 1 1 c) F( F ( ; m2)) = 2 i(p2+m2 +i0) def "lim0 2 i(p2+m2 +i") (this is a well-de ned distribu= !+ tion).
1 Just to remind how such things look, we recall that x+i0 and x 1i0 are well-de ned dis1 1 1 tributions on R and we have: 21 i x 1i0 x+i0 = 0 and 1 x+i0 + x 1i0 = x p.v. , where 2

1 R 1 R" 1 1 ; f def "!+0 x f (x)dx + x f (x)dx.] = lim x p.v. " 1
9