I

AH INTRODUCTION TO QUANTUM GRAVITY

C.J. Isham*

0. PREFACK

The purpose of my t a l k a t t h e Oxford Conference was t o p r o v i d e a

g e n e r a l i n t r o d u c t i o n t o some of t h e i d e a s and methods o f quantum g r a v i t y

as a p r e c u r s o r t o t h e r a t h e r t e c h n i c a l l c c t u r e s which f o l l o w e d . This i s

r e f l e c t e d i n t h e s e l e c t u r e n o t e s which a r e concerned mainly with broud

a t t i t u d e s r a t h e r t h a n with s p e c i f i c , up t o d a t e , t e c h n i c a l t o o l s . The

scheme of t h e p a p e r i s as f o l l o w s . The f i r s t s e c t i o n i s a s h o r t

i n t r o d u c t i o n which emphasises t h e d u a l p a r t i c l e / f i e l d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of

c o n v e n t i o n a l quantum f i e l d t h e o r y . The l a t t e r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n i s used

e x t e n s i v e l y i n quantum g r a v i t y a n d , because o f i t s r e l a t i v e unfamiliarity,

i s the s u b j e c t of repeated discussion throughout t h e s e n o t e s . The n e x t

two s e c t i o n s d e a l w i t h t h e problem o f d e f i n i n g a q u a n t i s e d f i e l d on an

u n q u a n t i s e d g r a v i t a t i o n a l background. There h a s r e c e n t l y been

c o n s i d e r a b l e i n v e s t i g a t i o n on t h i s t o p i c (which i s a p r e l i m i n a r y to

quantum g r a v i t y p r o p e r ) and i t promises t o be o f some r e l e v a n c e t o

a s t r o p h y s i c a l problems i n v o l v i n g g r a v i t a t i o n a l c o l l a p s e ( s e e t h e c h a p t e r

by S . Hawking). The f o u r t h s e c t i o n i s concerned w i t h c o v a r i a n t

q u a n t i s a t i o n ( s e e t h e c h a p t e r by M. D u f f ) w h i l e in t h e n e x t two s e c t i o n s

c a n o n i c a l q u a n t i s a t i o n i s d i s c u s s e d in some t e c h n i c a l d e t a i l s i n c e t h i s

was n o t t h e s u b j e c t o f any o t h e r s p e c i f i c l e c t u r e a t t h e c o n f e r e n c e .

The f i n a l s e c t i o n c o n s i d e r s t h e c u r r e n t l y p o p u l a r quantum model/quantum

cosmology approach t o q u a n t i s i n g t h e g r a v i t a t i o n a l f i e l d , although

again s i n c e a l e c t u r e was devoted t o t h i s t o p i c ( s e e t h e c h a p t e r by

* I am g r a t e f u l t o NATO f o r t h e i r s u p p o r t by NATO Research Grant No.815.

M.MacCollum) t h e t r e a t m e n t h e r e i s concerned w i t h t h e g e n e r a l i d e a s

r a t h e r than with s p e c i f i c details.

1. INTRODUCTION

The problem o f q u a n t i s i n g t h e g r a v i t a t i o n a l f i e l d h a s e x e r c i s e d

t h e minds o f a number o f p e o p l e o v e r t h e l a s t f o r t y y e a r s and w i l l

d o u b t l e s s c o n t i n u e t o do so f o r t h e n e x t f o r t y ' 1 ^ 3
^ ^ 5
^. The

importance and i n t e r e s t of t h i s s u b j e c t of s t u d y , which i s r e f l e c t e d i n

t h e very c o n s i d e r a b l e i n c r e a s e in a t t e n t i o n which i t has r e c e i v e d d u r i n g

the l a s t decade, d e r i v e from a number of d i f f e r e n t s o u r c e s . General

r e l a t i v i t y and quantum t h e o r y a r e w i t h o u t doubt two o f t h e greatest

i n t e l l e c t u a l achievements o f t h i s c e n t u r y . T h i s i s in i t s e l f sufficient

t o g u a r a n t e e a c o n t i n u e d i n t e r e s t i n t h e problem o f u n i f y i n g then.; an

i n t e r e s t which i s h e i g h t e n e d by c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f t h e very s p e c i a l role

p l a y e d by g e n e r a l r e l a t i v i t y w i t h i n t h e framework of c l a s s i c a l (viz.

non-quantum) p h y s i c s . In any c o n v e n t i o n a l f i e l d t h e o r y t h e s p a c e - t i m e

s t r u c t u r e i s f i x e d and t h e f i e l d p r o p a g a t e s i n t i m e on t h i s background.

In g e n e r a l r e l a t i v i t y however t h e k i n e m a t i c a l and dynamical a s p e c t s of

t h e t h e o r y a r e t i g h t l y i n t e r l a c e d t h r o u g h t h e medium o f t h e gravitational

f i e l d , w h i c h , on t h e one h a n d , s p e c i f i e s t h e g e o m e t r i c a l p r o p e r t i e s of

s p a c e - t i m e , and on t h e o t h e r f u l f i l l s t h e c l a s s i c a l t a s k of a f i e l d by

propagating a physical force. C o n v e n t i o n a l quantum t h e o r y , however, i s

f o r m u l a t e d on a r i g i d l y f i x e d s p a c e - t i m e b a c k g r o u n d , Euclidean t h r e e -

space i n t h e c a s e o f non r e l a t i v i s t i c quantum mechanics and Minkowskian

s p a c e - t i m e in t h e cose o f r e l a t i v i s t i c quantum f i e l d t h e o r y . From t h i s

viewpoint i t can be e x p e c t e d t h a t any a t t e m p t t o u n i f y g e n e r a l relativity

and quantum mechanics w i l l i n e v i t a b l y l e a d t o t e c h n i c a l and c o n c e p t u a l

 3

problem:!. One o f t h e main m o t i v a t i o n s f o r s t u d y i n g quantum g r a v i t y hoo

always been t h a t t h e r e s o l u t i o n of t h e s e problems w i l l l e a d t o u

f u n d a m e n t a l l y new i n s i g h t i n t o p h y s i c s .

I t i s n o t a p r i o r i c l e a r p r e c i s e l y what would be r e g a r d e d au a

q u a n t i s a t i o n of g e n e r a l r e l a t i v i t y . The m a t h e m a t i c a l s t r u c t u r e o f t h e

c l a s s i c a l t h e o r y c o n t a i n s a number of f e a t u r e s any o f which might

perhaps be e x p e c t e d t o become s u b j e c t t o quantum l a w s . The p r i m o r d i a l

concept i s t h a t of a p o i n t s e t whose m a t h e m a t i c a l p o i n t s a r e t o be

r e l a t e d i n some way w i t h p h y s i c a l s p a c e - t i m e e v e n t s . This s e t is then

equipped w i t h a t o p o l o g y and t h e n with a d i f f e r e n t i a b l e s t r u c t u r e which

makes i t i n t o a f o u r - d i m e n s i o n a l m a n i f o l d . Finally a metric tensor is

c o n s t r u c t e d on t h i s m a n i f o l d i n such a way as t o s a t i s f y t h e E i n s t e i n

equations. One might a t t e m p t t o i n t r o d u c e q u a n t i s a t i o n a t any one of

these l e v e l s . In p r a c t i c e most of t h e work which has been done t a k e s

t h e e a s i e s t r o u t e and f i x e s e v e r y t h i n g but t h e m e t r i c . Thus a

d i f f e r e n t i a b l e m a n i f o l d i s s p e c i f i e d once and f o r a l l and t h e m e t r i c

t e n s o r i s r e g a r d e d as an o p e r a t o r d e f i n e d on t h i s s p a c e . (Actually if

c a n o n i c a l q u a n t i s a t i o n i s b e i n g used t h e n t h e r e l e v a n t m a n i f o l d may be

t h r e e , r a t h e r than f o u r , dimensional). This i s c l e a r l y the a t t i t u d e to

q u a n t i s a t i o n which i s c l o s e s t t o t h a t p r e v a l e n t in c o n v e n t i o n a l quantum

field theories, n e v e r t h e l e s s when one c o n s i d e r s t h e r o l e played by t h e

l i g h t c o n e s t r u c t u r e i n t h e s e t h e o r i e s i t i s c l e a r t h a t a l r e a d y a major

d i f f e r e n c e has emerged - t h e l i g h t c o n e s t r u c t u r e of g e n e r a l relativity

i s i n d i s p u t a b l y dynamical and not p a r t of t h e f i x e d background.

However, t h e o p i n i o n i s f r e q u e n t l y v o i c e d t h a t t h e q u a n t i s a t i o n

p r o c e d u r e s h o u l d t a k e p l a c e a t a more f u n d a m e n t a l l e v e l . Two of t h e
p r i n c i p a l a d v o c a t e s o f t h i s l i n e have been P r o f e s s o r s J . Wheeler and

R< P e n r o s e . Vfheeler has f o r many y e a r s emphasised t h e need t o q u a n t i s e

t h e t o p o l o g i c a l as v e i l as t h e m e t r i c s t r u c t u r e of s p a c e - t i m e a n d , w i t h

h i s r e c e n t t h o u g h t s on t h e r o l e played by formal l o g i c i n quantum

g r a v i t y , has t a k e n t h e q u a n t i s a t i o n l e v e l r i g h t back t o t h e b a s i c

e l e m e n t s of m a t h e m a t i c s . S i m i l a r l y Penrose has f r e q u e n t l y a r g u e d t h a t

s p a c e - t i m e i t s e l f , r a t h e r t h a n j u s t t h e m e t r i c f i e l d , s h o u l d be

i n t i m a t e l y l i n k e d w i t h quantum t h e o r y . I t was t h i s p o i n t o f view which

(7)
p a r t l y m o t i v a t e d h i s c o m b i n a t o r i a l s p i n network t h e o r y a s w e l l as
(8)

h i s r e c e n t work on t w i s t o r s . Most p e o p l e would a g r e e t h a t a d e e p e r

look a t t h e problem of quantum g r a v i t y a t t h i s t y p e of very b a s i c l e v e l

i s p r o b a b l y mandatory i f any r e a l l y m a j o r advance i s t o be a c h i e v e d .

However, i t i s a l s o i m p o r t a n t t o u n d e r s t a n d how f a r c o n v e n t i o n a l

q u a n t i s a t i o n (by which i s meant m e t r i c f i e l d q u a n t i s a t i o n ) can be pushed.

In p a r t i c u l a r , i t i s e s s e n t i a l t o d i s t i n g u i s h c a r e f u l l y between t h o s e

problems which a r e p e c u l i a r t o quantum g r a v i t y and t h o s e which a r e s h a r e d

by a l l quantum f i e l d t h e o r i e s . Hand in g l o v e w i t h t h i s must go an

a p p r e c i a t i o n of t h e p r a c t i c a l a p p l i c a t i o n s o f t h i s t y p e o f q u a n t i s a t i o n

and t h e i r i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r r e a l i s t i c physical systems. In t h i s article

I s h a l l c o n c e n t r a t e mainly on t h e m e t r i c q u a n t i s a t i o n schemes and r e f e r

t h e r e a d e r t o t h e b i b l i o g r a p h y f o r m a t e r i a l on some of t h e o t h e r a s p e c t s

o f quantum g r a v i t y .

Many d i f f e r e n t approaches t o q u a n t i s i n g t h e g r a v i t a t i o n a l field

have e v o l v e d s i n c e t h e s u b j e c t was f i r s t c o n s i d e r e d in t h e e a r l y 1930's.

These t e n d t o be c l a s s i f i e d u n d e r two h e a d i n g s , ' c o v a r i a n t ' (§'<) and

'canonical' (§5, 56). These t i t l e s c a n , from a t e c h n i c a l s t a n d p o i n t , be

 5

a l i t t l e m i s l e a d i n g b u t s i n c e t h e y a r e widely used t h e y w i l l be r e t a i n e d

here. C a n o n i c a l q u a n t i s a t i o n i t s e l f w i l l be s p l i t up i n t o 'true'

c a n o n i c a l q u a n t i s a t i o n (§5) and s u p e r s p a c e - b a s e d q u a n t i s a t i o n (§6).

There i s a t e n d e n c y , a t l e a s t among p a r t i c l e p h y s i c i s t s , t o suppose t h a t

t h e whole o f quantum g r a v i t y can be n e a t l y accommodated by t h e n o t i o n of

the graviton. T h i s h e l i c i t y two, m a s s l e s s p a r t i c l e i s t h e n t h o u g h t of

as i n t e r a c t i n g with i t s e l f in a way which i s more o r l e s s conventional

a l t h o u g h i t l e a d s t o a t h e o r y which i s probably h i g h l y nonrenormalisable.

This i s t h e p r i n c i p l e concept which a r i s e s from t h e c o v a r i a n t quantisation

scheme b u t i t l e a d s t o a r a t h e r r e s t r i c t e d view of quantum g r a v i t y and

indeed of quantum f i e l d t h e o r y in g e n e r a l .

The p a r t i c l e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , w i t h i t s c o r r e s p o n d i n g s e t of particle-

based o b s e r v a b l e s , o f a quantum f i e l d t h e o r y , which t h e n o t i o n o f a

g r a v i t o n e p i t o m i s e s , may n o t always be t h e most a p p r o p r i a t e one. There

i s i n f a c t an i m p o r t a n t a l t e r n a t i v e p h y s i c a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of what i s

e s s e n t i a l l y t h e same m a t h e m a t i c s , even i n t h e c a s e of an o r d i n a r y flat-

s p a c e quantum f i e l d t h e o r y . As t h i s a l t e r n a t i v e view i s t h e one which

i s most commonly used in quantum g r a v i t y (mainly i n t h e c a n o n i c a l

approaches) i t i s worth d i s c u s s i n g i t h e r e , at l e a s t in a h e u r i s t i c

manner. For t h e sake of s i m p l i c i t y c o n s i d e r a f r e e n e u t r a l s c a l a r field

$(x) i n o r d i n a r y f l a t Minkowski s p a c e - t i m e . The c o n v e n t i o n a l

q u a n t i s a t i o n of t h i s s y s t e m u s i n g Fock s p a c e , with t h e c o r r e s p o n d i n g

p a r t i c l e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , i s w e l l known ( s e e §2 f o r more d e t a i l s ) . On

t h e one hand i t can be o b t a i n e d by q u a n t i s i n g t h e s c a l a r f i e l d $(x) p e r

se and l o o k i n g f o r a s u i t a b l e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n ( i n t h e S c h r o d i n g e r p i c t u r e

say) o f t h e c a n o n i c a l commutation relations

 [•(x), = i K 6(3)(x - i) (1.1)

On t h e o t h e r hand one can b e g i n v i t h o n e - p a r t i c l e s t a t e s , two-particle

s t a t e s e t c . d e s c r i b e d i n terms of o r d i n a r y quantum mechanics and c o n s t r u c t

a l a r g e s t a t e - s p a c e which accommodates them a l l , namely Fock s p a c e .

'Annihilation' and ' c r e a t i o n ' o p e r a t o r s can t h e n be d e f i n e d which connect

t o g e t h e r t h e s e v a r i o u s f i n i t e p a r t i c l e s u b s p a c e s and from which a quantum

f i e l d $(x) can be r e c o n s t r u c t e d . However, i t i s i n t e r e s t i n g t o ask how

t h i s s i m p l e problem of q u a n t i s i n g a f r e e f i e l d l o o k s from t h e v i e w p o i n t

of c o n v e n t i o n a l quantum m e c h a n i c s . I f a c l a s s i c a l s y s t e m has a

E u c l i d e a n c o n f i g u r a t i o n space Q w i t h g l o b a l c a r t e s i a n c o o r d i n a t e s q^.-.q^

c o r r e s p o n d i n g t o n d e g r e e s of f r e e d o m , t h e n t h e b a s i c problem of quantum

t h e o r y ( i n t h e S c h r c d i n g e r p i c t u r e ) i s t o f i n d a r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of t h e

c a n o n i c a l commutation relations

[q. , ¿.] = i K 6. . x,4-l...a

[q. , = 0 (1.2)

[Pi • P j ] = o

w i t h s e l f - a d j o i n t o p e r a t o r s on a H i l b e r t space of s t a t e s . Then t h e

dynamical e q u a t i o n

H ( (1
W - a n ; P,.P2-"Pn) *t = i " J T "3)

must be s o l v e d f o r t h e t i m e e v o l u t i o n o f t h e s t a t e v e c t o r ^ i n terms

of t h e q u a n t i s e d Hamiltonian o p e r a t o r H.
 7

By v i r t u e o f t h e Stone-Von Neumann t h e o r e m , t h e unique solution

(up t o u n i t a r y t r a n s f o r m a t i o n s ) i s t h a t in vnich t h e s t a t e space in the

s e t o f a l l complex v a l u e d f u n c t i o n s of Q which a r e s q u a r e i n t e g r a b l e w i t h

r e s p e c t t o t h e Lebesgue measure d q j d q ? . . . d q ^ . The o p e r a t o r s q . , P j a r e

t h e n r e p r e s e n t e d by

(4. (q^.-qj = ^ . . . q j (1.1»)

and any o t h e r r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of eqn ( 1 . 2 ) ( o r more p r e c i s e l y o f the

e x p o n e n t i a t e d Weyl form) i s u n i t a r i l y e q u i v a l e n t t o t h i s o n e . The wave

f u n c t i o n h a s t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n t h a t i f B i s any B o r e l s e t i n ¡R.n t h e n

PB = j l^q^.-qjl* dq1...dqn (1.6)

'B

i s t h e p r o b a b i l i t y t h a t i f t h e s y s t e m i s i n t h e s t a t e ty and a

measurement i s made on t h e s y s t e m o f t h e v a l u e s o f q . . . q^ ( i . e . o f t h e

c l a s s i c a l c o n f i g u r a t i o n o f t h e s y s t e m ) t h e n t h e y l i e i n B. Now a

classical f i e l d t h e o r y can b e r e g a r d e d as a c l a s s i c a l m e c h a n i c a l system

w i t h i n f i n i t e l y many d e g r e e s o f f r e e d o m . E s s e n t i a l l y , an o r t h o n o r m a l

b a s i s s e t o f f u n c t i o n s on / f t 3 , { e ^ ( j c ) } s a y , i s chosen ( t y p i c a l l y w i t h

p r o p e r t i e s i n r e l a t i o n t o t h e H a m i l t o n i a n which s i m p l i f y t h e d y n a m i c a l

e v o l u t i o n p r o b l e m ) and t h e f i e l d s a r e expanded as

<>(x,t) = I q (t) e,(x) (1.7)

1
i=l
 oo

Tt(x,t) = I p^t) e.(x) (1.8)

i=l

in which ( q j . . • ; P J . P , . . . ) c o r r e s p o n d t o t h e i n f i n i t e number of modes

o r d e g r e e s of freedom o f t h e system. Thus t h e commutation r e l a t i o n s i n

eqn ( 1 . 2 ) would s t i l l be e x p e c t e d t o be t r u e b u t now with i , j ranging

from 1 t o <°. I f one were t o c o n t i n u e t o f o l l o w t h e s t a n d a r d p r o c e d u r e

f o r f i n i t e numbers of degrees of freedom t h e end r e s u l t would be wave

functions

of i n f i n i t e l y many v a r i a b l e s ( b u t n e v e r t h e l e s s s t i l l f u n c t i o n s on t h e

c l a s s i c a l c o n f i g u r a t i o n s p a c e ) and t h e t i m e e v o l u t i o n e q u a t i o n (1.3)

would be c o r r e s p o n d i n g l y an i n f i n i t e o r d e r p a r t i a l d i f f e r e n t i a l e q u a t i o n .

K q u i v a l e n t l y an obvious r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of eqn ( l . l ) i s o b t a i n e d by

c h o o s i n g s t a t e v e c t o r s as f u n c t i o n a l s o f t h e c l a s s i c a l configuration

space Q ( i n t h i s c a s e a l l ( ? ) f u n c t i o n s on IR.3) and t h e f i e l d o p e r a t o r s

as

(1.10)

« »[•(•)]
(1.11)

with t h e S c h r o d i n g e r e q u a t i o n now r e a d i n g :

HU, - i S «/ ) vfr(-);tj = i K U OCht] . (1.12)

 9

In a d d i t i o n , i f d n ( • ) d e n o t e s t h e a n a l o g u e of dq ^ . . . dq^ and t h e system

i s in a quantum s t a t e Y, t h e n i f a measurement i s made of t h e classical

f i e l d configuration, the quantity

(1.13)

i s t h e p r o b a b i l i t y t h a t t h e r e s u l t w i l l l i e in t h e ( i n f i n i t e dimensional)

s e t B. This i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e s t a t e v e c t o r i s c l e a r l y d i f f e r e n t from

t h e u s u a l p a r t i c l e one and i s e v i d e n t l y w e l l s u i t e d t o s i t u a t i o n s where

c l a s s i c a l l y t h e f i e l d has some n a t u r a l meaning. (The two i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s

a r e p a r t i a l l y l i n k e d through t h e t h e o r y o f c o h e r e n t s t a t e s ) . I t must be

emphasised t h a t t h e t r e a t m e n t above i s very crude and i n f a c t as i t stands

is mathematically i l l - d e f i n e d . For a s t a r t i t i s n o t c l e a r e x a c t l y what

t h e c l a s s i c a l c o n f i g u r a t i o n space Q s h o u l d b e . Should i t be a l l C
3 3
f u n c t i o n s on UL , all C f u n c t i o n s on IK with compact s u p p o r t . . . ?

N o t i c e t h a t i n terms of t h e ( q j . q , , . . . ) v a r i a b l e s t h e e x a c t way in which

t h e q ^ ' s behave f o r l a r g e i d e t e r m i n e s t h e t y p e o f o b j e c t t o which t h e

sum in eqn ( 1 . 7 ) c o n v e r g e s . Hot u n r e l a t e d t o t h i s i s t h e f a c t t h a t

u n f o r t u n a t e l y an i n f i n i t e d i m e n s i o n a l analogue o f Lebesgue measure does

not e x i s t . However, a l l t h e s e problems can be r e s o l v e d and Fock s p a c e

i t s e l f can be shown t o be u n i t a r i l y e q u i v a l e n t t o a c e r t a i n L 2 (Q,dy)

s p a c e i n which p i s a g a u s s i a n measure (which does g e n e r a l i s e t o i n f i n i t e

dimensions) and Q i n c l u d e s not only f u n c t i o n s on IR.5 b u t also

(9)(10)

distributions! I t would n o t be a p p r o p r i a t e h e r e t o dwell any

f u r t h e r on t h i s t o p i c e x c e p t t o r e - e m p h a s i s e t h a t m a t h e m a t i c a l Fock

space admits of two complementary p h y s i c a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s : the usual

10

p a r t i c l e one and t h e one b a s e d on f u n c t i o n spaces which h i n g e s round

eqns ( 1 . 1 2 ) and ( 1 . 1 3 ) .

The m o t i v a t i o n f o r t h i s d i s c u s s i o n was t h a t much o f t h e l i t e r a t u r e

on quantum g r a v i t y uses t h e s e c o n d , p o s s i b l y more u n f a m i l i a r , p i c t u r e .

C e r t a i n l y i n s i t u a t i o n s in which p o t e n t i a l g r a v i t a t i o n a l c o l l a p s e i s

i n v o l v e d i t i s t h e more immediately a p p r o p r i a t e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . Indeed

assuming t h a t t h e quantum g r a v i t y analogue o f t h e d i s c u s s i o n above

involves I ^ C s ^ f * )J I 2 as t h e a p p r o p r i a t e p r o b a b i l i t y density

( t h i s i s a c t u a l l y n o t q u i t e c o r r e c t , s e e 5U.55). t h e n t h e b e h a v i o u r of

t h e s t a t e f u n c t i o n a l i n t h e v i c i n i t y o f m e t r i c s which classically

c o r r e s p o n d t o s i n g u l a r i t i e s would have a d i r e c t b e a r i n g on t h e gravitationa

c o l l a p s e o r o t h e r w i s e o f t h e quantum s y s t e m . Also of c o u r s e t h e n o t i o n of

p a r t i c l e in conventional f i e l d theory i s closely linked with t h e Poincare

group. The absence of such a group i n t h e c a s e of t h e gravitational

f i e l d i s a n o t h e r good reason f o r l o o k i n g c h a r i t a b l y a t non-particle

interpretations. There i s one f u r t h e r remark t o make i n t h i s context.

As emphasised above t h e d i f f e r e n c e between t h e p a r t i c l e and f i e l d p i c t u r e s

of a c o n v e n t i o n a l f i e l d t h e o r y r e a l l y i s only a d i f f e r e n c e i n inter-

p r e t a t i o n o f e s s e n t i a l l y t h e same m a t h e m a t i c a l s t r u c t u r e . Which

i n t e r p r e t a t i o n i s r e l e v a n t t o any given s i t u a t i o n i s d e t e r m i n e d b a s i c a l l y

by what o b s e r v a b l e s a r e b e i n g measured. However, t h e s i t u a t i o n in

quantum g r a v i t y i s s l i g h t l y d i f f e r e n t . In t h e c o v a r i o n t approaches

( 5'<) t h e p a r t i c l e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n i s dominant and t h e l a n g u a g e i s

p r i m a r i l y one of Keynman g r a p h s . However, b e c a u s e t h e gravitational

system i s gauge i n v a r i a n t ( i . e . c o o r d i n a t e i n v a r i a n t ) n o t a l l components

 11

of t h e m e t r i c t e n s o r a r e genuine c a n o n i c a l v a r i a b l e s and b e c a u s e o f

t h i n t h e c o v a r i a n t q u a n t i s a t i o n of a l l t e n components o f t h e m e t r i c

t e n o o r ( c f . G u p t a - B l e u l e r in quantum e l e c t r o d y n a m i c s ) l e a d s t o a

p a r t i c l e p i c t u r e which i s s l i g h t l y d i f f e r e n t from t h e one above. On t h e

o t h e r hand i n t h e ' t r u e ' c a n o n i c a l q u a n t i s a t i o n scheme (55) two e q u i v a l e n t

i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s could be r e a s o n a b l y e x p e c t e d t o e x i s t (assuming t h a t the

p a r t i c l e n o t i o n makes s e n s e a t a l l , which i n a h i g h l y curved space i t may

n o t ) b u t w h e t h e r t h e y a r e b a s e d in some s e n s e on t h e same u n d e r l y i n g

m a t h e m a t i c a l s t r u c t u r e as t h e c o v a r i a n t scheme i s n o t c l e a r . In t h e

'superspace' c a n o n i c a l q u a n t i s a t i o n scheme (§6) t h e f i e l d p i c t u r e is

c e r t a i n l y dominant. Indeed s u p e r s p a c e i t s e l f i s a t y p e o f gravitational

analogue of t h e Q-space i n t r o d u c e d above b u t , however, not i n t h e s t r i c t

canonical sense. S u p e r s p a c e c o n t a i n s a d d i t i o n a l d e g r e e s o f freedom o v e r

and above t h e t r u e c a n o n i c a l ones and us a r e s u l t t h e e q u i v a l e n c e of t h i s

m a t h e m a t i c a l scheme t o e i t h e r t h a t o f t r u e c a n o n i c a l q u a n t i s a t i o n o r o f

c o v a r i a n t q u a n t i s a t i o n i s not a t a l l clear.

F i n a l l y l e t us n o t e t h a t even a t t h i s s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d l e v e l of

metric quantisation only, t h e r e e x i s t problems of a very d e e p , and

largely unresolved, conceptual nature. The Copenhagen i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f

quantum mechanics i s founded f i r m l y on t h e concept of an e x t e r n a l

observer. I f one a t t e m p t s t o e x t e n d quantum g r a v i t y t o i n c l u d e t h e whole

u n i v e r s e (as i s f r e q u e n t l y done) r a t h e r t h a n j u s t c o n s i d e r i n g some s m a l l

l o c a l quantum e f f e c t , t h e n i t i s i n e v i t a b l e t h a t many t r a d i t i o n a l (and

c h e r i s h e d ) views on quantum t h e o r y must be o v e r h a u l e d . One famous

11
example of such a r e t h i n k i s t h e E v e r e t t - W h e e l e r ' ' i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of
quantum mechanics which a t t e m p t s t o i n t r i n s i c a l l y i n c o r p o r a t e t h e

observer in the system, a s t e p which i s o b v i o u s l y n e c e s s a r y i f the

system i s t h e u n i v e r s e !

I t has become u n f a s h i o n a b l e t h e s e days f o r much n o t i c e t o be t a k e n

of t h e s e c o n c e p t u a l p r o b l e m s , most p e o p l e p r e f e r r i n g t o work on t h e more

'respectable' technical difficulties. However, i n quantum g r a v i t y t h e

c o n c e p t u a l and t e c h n i c a l problems f r e q u e n t l y go hand i n hand and i t is

p o s s i b l e t h a t by n e g l e c t i n g t h e f o r m e r one i s r e n d e r i n g i r r e l e v a n t the

latter.

2. QUANTUM FIELD THEORY ON A FIXED BACKGROUND

I t i s l o g i c a l l y compelling t o precede the i n v e s t i g a t i o n of the

f u l l quantum g r a v i t y problem w i t h a d i s c u s s i o n o f f i e l d q u a n t i s a t i o n on

a f i x e d background. The s i m p l e s t example (which i s t h e one c o n s i d e r e d

h e r e ) i s o f a s c a l a r f i e l d $ d e f i n e d on a f i x e d f o u r - d i m e n s i o n a l p s e u d o -

Riemannian m a n i f o l d and s a t i s f y i n g t h e c l a s s i c a l e q u a t i o n s o f motion

3 ( ( - d e t g ) J g UU • ) - m 2 * ( - d e t g)> = 0 (2.1)

d e r i v e d from t h e l a g r a n g i a n density

L(x) = | ( g , 1 V ( x ) 3 • ( * ) 3 y * ( x ) - m2 $ 2 ( x ) ) ( - d e t g ) * . (2.2)

The q u a n t i s a t i o n of t h i s s c a l a r f i e l d c o n s t i t u t e s a t h e o r y w h i c h , from

t h e quantum g r a v i t y p o i n t o f view, i s d e f i c i e n t i n t h e f o l l o w i n g two

 13

ronpect3.

i) The q u a n t i s a t i o n of t h e m e t r i c t e n s o r i t s e l f i s completely

negle c t e d .

ii) Even i f t h e m e t r i c were u n q u a n t i s e d t h e r e s h o u l d be a

r e a c t i o n back on i t v i a E i n s t e i n ' s e q u a t i o n s , from quantum

e f f e c t s in $ (such as p a r t i c l e p r o d u c t i o n by a time v a r y i n g

N e v e r t h e l e s s , t h e model above has c o n s i d e r a b l e i n t e r e s t . From a p r a c t i c a l

s t a n d p o i n t t h e r e a r e v a r i o u s s i t u a t i o n s in a s t r o p h y s i c s and 'early

u n i v e r s e ' cosmology i n which t h e r o l e of an u n q u a n t i s e d gravitational

f i e l d p r o d u c i n g r e a l p a r t i c l e s would be of g r e a t i m p o r t a n c e . From a

t h e o r e t i c a l p o i n t o f view a thorough u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h i s simple rtodel

would seem a n a t u r a l p r e r e q u i s i t e t o a t t e m p t i n g t o q u a n t i s e t h e m e t r i c

tensor i t s e l f . I t i s t h e r e f o r e perhaps s u r p r i s i n g t h a t , whereas u

c o n s i d e r a b l e amount o f e f f o r t has been expanded o v e r t h e l a s t twenty

f i v e y e a r s on t h e f u l l quantum g r a v i t y t h e o r y , only a r e l a t i v e l y s m a l l
• • (12)(13>
amount of work has appeared d e a l i n g with t h i s s i m p l i f i e d problem.

The f i r s t q u e s t i o n t o ask i s w h a t , from a p h y s i c a l p o i n t of view,

t h e l a g r u n g i a n i n eqn ( 2 . 1 ) could be e x p e c t e d t o d e s c r i b e ? In t h e flut

s p a c e c a s e , in which t h e m e t r i c t e n s o r i s simply t h e c o n s t a n t

Minkowski t e n s o r 1 » t h e answer i s w e l l known. Indeed t h e t h e o r y

d e g e n e r a t e s i n t o a f r e e massive s c a l a r f i e l d ( i n t h e c o n v e n t i o n a l s e n s e )

w i t h t h e two m a j o r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s - f i e l d and p a r t i c l e - which were

o u t l i n e d i n 51. I t i s r e a s o n a b l e t o suppose t h a t f o r f i e l d s g which

do n o t ' d e v i a t e t o o v i o l e n t l y ' from f l a t space two such interpretations

w i l l again be p o s s i b l e . In p a r t i c u l a r from t h e p a r t i c l e p o i n t o f view i t

It

i s n a t u r a l t o expect t h a t the e f f e c t of the metric f i e l d g w i l l be

uv
s i m i l a r t o t h a t o f , f o r example, an o r d i n a r y e x t e r n a l electromagnetic
1 1J
f i e l d , leading t o the production of ^ - p a r t i c l e s . ' ** " ' However,

extreme c a r e needs t o be e x e r c i s e d in c o n v e r t i n g t h i s plausible-sounding

s t a t e m e n t i n t o an unambiguous p i e c e of t h e o r y . The p a r t i c l e inter-

p r e t a t i o n o f s t a n d a r d quantum ( f r e e ) f i e l d t h e o r y a r i s e s from two main

s o u r c e s , t h e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e c a n o n i c a l conmutation r e l a t i o n s (CCR)

and t h e i n v a r i a n t a c t i o n o f t h e P o i n c a r e group. The s t e p s l e a d i n g t o ,

and a s s o c i a t e d w i t h , t h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n a r e b r i e f l y :

1) Choose an i n e r t i a l frame of r e f e r e n c e (and hence a c h o i c e o f t i m e )

in Minkowski s p a c e . C o n s t r u c t t h e momentum n ( x , t ) which i s

c o n j u g a t e t o $ ( x , t ) i n t h i s frame and p o s t u l a t e t h a t t h e resulting

quantum f i e l d s s a t i s f y t h e e q u a l t i m e CCR

[¿(x,t), «(i,t)J = i K a(3) (x - jr.) (2.3)

which a r e f o r m a l l y c o n s i s t e n t with t h e dynamical e q u a t i o n s for

$(x,t):

' ¿ ( x , t ) - (V2 - m 2 ) ¿ ( x . t ) = 0 . (2.It)

(N.B. In a g e n e r a l quantum f i e l d t h e o r y t h e f i e l d s must be smeared i n

x and t i n o r d e r t o c o r r e s p o n d t o genuine o p e r a t o r s . Thus e q u a t i o n (2.3)

(which i m p l i e s s m e a r i n g in £ o n l y ) would be m e a n i n g l e s s . However, f o r

t h e f r e e f i e l d , and i t i s e x p e c t e d a l s o f o r t h e f i e l d on t h e f i x e d

background, t h e procedure i s j u s t i f i e d . )
 15

Kind i»n e x p l i c i t r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f eqn ( 2 . 3 ) ( a t some i n i t i n l time

t = 0 s a y ) by s e l l ' - a d j o i n t o p e r a t o r s ( a f t e r s u i t a b l e smearing) on a

H i l b e r t s p a c e in which t h e H a m i l t o n i a n i s a genuine s e l f - a d j o i n t

o p e r a t o r which g e n e r a t e s time e v o l u t i o n i n t h e s e n s e t h a t

i / j j Ht - i / f i Ht
$(x,t) = e $(x,0) e
(2.5)
i / K Ht - i / j . Ht
n(2ç,t) = e n(jç,0) e

The s t a n d a r d p r o c e d u r e i s t o s e p a r a t e t h e s o l u t i o n s t o t h e o p e r a t o r

e q u a t i o n (2.It) in t h e form (fi = l )

f - i EJ. t „ iE . t . Ä
x,t) = du( j ) [e b ( j ) 4,.(x) + e J b T ( j ) ^ . ( x ) ] (2.6)
J J J

where <J/.(x) a r e a s e t o f ( p o s s i b l y g e n e r a l i s e d ) e i gen f u n c t i o n s , w i t h

J
2
eigenvalues , of t h e s e l f - a d j o i n t o p e r a t o r (-V2 + m2 ) , which s a t i s f y

t h e completeness relations

( 3 )
j d p ( j ) *"(x) = ô (x-x) (2.7)

and

j d3x ^ ( x ) ^(x) = 6(i,j), (2.8)

where

J dp(i) 6 ( i , j ) F(j) = F(i) • (2.9)

A t y n i c a l c h o i c e would be
16

(2i,)

« ( i , j ) = 6 ( 3 ) ( k - k'>

d p ( i ) = d3k . (2.10)

( I f t h e system were b e i n g q u a n t i s e d in a box with p e r i o d i c boundary

c o n d i t i o n s t h e n t h e s p a t i a l i n t e g r a l would become an i n f i n i t e sum.) In

p a r t i c u l a r eqn ( 2 . 6 ) l e a d s t o an expansion of t h e Cauchy d a t a $(.x,0)

and n ( x , 0 ) i n terms of t h e normal modes (x_) w i t h o p e r a t o r c o e f f i c i e n t s .

J
The t = 0 CCR eqns ( 2 . 3 ) a r e e q u i v a l e n t to

I"
[ a . , a^J = el'
5 ( j , k )\ (2.11)

where

a . = >£e7 b . . (2.12)
0 J O

The u s u a l s t e p new i s t o choose t h e Fock r e p r e s e n t a t i o n which i s

c h a r a c t e r i s e d by t h e e x i s t e n c e o f a unique c y c l i c s t a t e t h a t is

a n n i h i l a t e d by a l l t h e a..
0
3) The o p e r a t o r s N. H a . ' a . have i n t e g e r e i g e n v a l u e s and t h e
J J J
c o r r e s p o n d i n g e i g e n v e c t o r s a r e mapped ' u p - o n e ' o r 'down-one'

by a . ^ and a . . The l a t t e r a r e t h e r e f o r e i d e n t i f i e d as o p e r a t o r s
J J
which c r e a t e o r a n n i h i l a t e q u a n t a whose wave f u n c t i o n s in t h e

c o n v e n t i o n a l o n e - p a r t i c l e quantum-mechanical s e n s e a r e t h e normal

modes i^.(x). In so f a r as t h e s e q u a n t a con be i d e n t i f i e d as

0
 17

p h y s i c a l p a r t i c l e s t h i s i s t h e s t a g e a t which t h e p a r t i c l e

concept f i r s t a p p e a r s . In p a r t i c u l a r t h e c y c l i c s t a t e mentioned

above i s c a l l e d t h e 'vacuum' o r ' n o - p a r t i c l e ' state,

'i) H i s shown t o be a w e l l - d e f i n e d o p e r a t o r on Fock s p a c e , a f t e r

normal o r d e r i n g , w i t h t h e p r o p e r t y of

i) a n n i h i l a t i n g t h e vacuum s t a t e ( i n t h e S c h r o d i n g e r

p i c t u r e t h i s means t h a t t h e vacuum s t a t e does not

change w i t h t i m e i . e . t h e r e i s no p a r t i c l e

production).

ii) commuting w i t h t h e 'number' o p e r a t o r s H . , which a r e

J
t h e r e f o r e c o n s t a n t s o f t h e motion. In p a r t i c u l a r an

n - p a r t i c l e s t a t e always e v o l v e s i n t h e S c h r o d i n g e r

p i c t u r e i n t o an n - p a r t i c l e s t a t e ( a g a i n no p a r t i c l e

production or annihilation).

The d i s c u s s i o n so f a r has been f o r a f i x e d c h o i c e o f t i m e c o o r d i n a t e

and by v i r t u e o f t h e s e p a r a t i o n of v a r i a b l e s in eqn ( 2 . 6 ) f o r a d e f i n i t e

c h o i c e of p o s i t i v e and n e g a t i v e f r e q u e n c i e s . However, c l e a r l y , one should

ask what happens i f a d i f f e r e n t c h o i c e of time ( i . e . , a d i f f e r e n t

i n e r t i a l frame) i s made. S i n c e any two i n e r t i a l r e f e r e n c e frames a r e

r e l a t e d by a P o i n c a r é group a c t i o n t h e q u e s t i o n i s r e a l l y now t h e

P o i n c a r é group a c t s on t h e o r i g i n a l Fock s p a c e . The answer i s t h a t Fock

s p a c e c a r r i e s a u n i t a r y r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of t h e P o i n c a r é group P which has

the property that

i) The c r e a t i o n o p e r a t o r s t r a n s f o r m c o v a r i a n t l y anorigst

t h e m s e l v e s as do t h e a n n i h i l a t i o n ooerators.
30

ii) t h e vacuum s t a t e i s i n v a r i a n t under t h e group ( i t

i s a n n i h i l a t e d by a l l t h e g e n e r a t o r s o f P ) . In f a c t

t h e time t r a n s l a t i o n group g e n e r a t o r i s p r e c i s e l y t h e

Hamiltonian c o n s i d e r e d a l r e a d y , i . e . , t i m e

t r a n s l a t i o n i s time e v o l u t i o n ,

and iii) any n - p a r t i c l e s t a t e i s mapped i n t o a n o t h e r n-particle

s t a t e by t h e group.

These t h r e e p r o p e r t i e s (which a r e c l o s e l y l i n k e d ) imply i n e f f e c t t h a t

t h e n o t i o n of p a r t i c l e o r q u a n t a i s e s s e n t i a l l y i n d e p e n d e n t o f inertial

o b s e r v e r and t h a t t h e n - p a r t i c l e s t a t e s behave t h e same, as f a r as t h e

P o i n c a r e group i s c o n c e r n e d , as t h e y do in t h e u s u a l r e l a t i v i s t i c n-

p a r t i c l e quantum t h e o r y . At t h i s s t a g e in t h e c o n v e n t i o n a l textbook

t r e a t m e n t o f quantum f i e l d t h e o r y i t i s t a c i t l y assumed t h a t t h e p u r e l y

mathematical 'quanta' d i s c u s s e d so f a r c o r r e s p o n d t o r e a l physical

p a r t i c l e s which could be measured w i t h an a p p r o p r i a t e p i e c e o f equipment

and which accord in some way w i t h o u r i n t u i t i v e f e e l i n g s o f what a

' p a r t i c l e should b e ' . T h i s c o n n e c t i o n between m a t h e m a t i c s and p h y s i c s

i s one o f t h e v i t a l s t e p 3 in t h e p h y s i c a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f a q u a n t i s e d

f i e l d but i s frequently glossed over. The i n v e s t i g a t i o n of t h i s

c o n n e c t i o n t u r n s o u t t o be o f paramount importance in t h e c a s e of an

a r b i t r a r y background.

S i n c e t h e u l t i m a t e aim i s t o q u a n t i s e t h e s c a l a r f i e l d i n eqn ( 2 . 2 )

t h e next o b v i o u s s t e p i s t o couple an e x t e r n a l s o u r c e t o t h e f r e e

scalar f i e l d j u s t considered. The a p p r o p r i a t e l a g r a n g i a n is

L(x) = | (n WU 4>(x) 3 v * ( x ) - m V ( x ) ) + j ( x ) <>2(x) (2.13)

 19

« h e r e j ( x ) d e s c r i b e s t h e e x t e r n a l u n q u a n t i s e d s o u r c e w h i c h , by

v i r t u e ol' t h e form of i t s i n t e r a c t i o n , might be e x p e c t e d t o produce

p a i r s o f ijr-mesons. Indeed one obvious way of t r e a t i n g eqn ( 2 . 1 3 ) i s t o

2
n o p a r a t e o f f j ( x ) $ ( x ) and view i t as an i n t e r a c t i o n term which we

hope cun be d e f i n e d as on o p e r a t o r on t h e o r i g i n a l Fock space w i t h i t n maim

in q u a n t a . I f t h i 3 t e c h n i c a l s t e p can be performed t h e n t h i s interaction

term can c e r t a i n l y l e a d t o t h e p r o d u c t i o n of p a i r s of 'particles' of t h e

original type. ( I n o t h e r words t h e Fock vacuum i s no l o n g e r a n n i h i l a t e d by

the f u l l Hamiltonian). I t i s , however, q u i t e p o s s i b l e t h a t t h e

Hamiltonian cannot be d e f i n e d as an o p e r a t o r on t h e o r i g i n a l Fock s p a c e a t

all. This s i t u a t i o n might be r e c o g n i s e d h e u r i s t i c a l l y by t h e p r o d u c t i o n

in time o f on i n f i n i t e number of q u a n t a . In t h i s c a s e t h e S c h r o d i n g e r

p i c t u r e i s n o t very a p p r o p r i a t e ; however, a H e i s e n b e r g - t y p e p i c t u r e

might s t i l l e x i s t b u t w i t h t h e dynamical e v o l u t i o n b e i n g d e s c r i b e d by a

n o n - u n i t a r i l y implementable automorphism of t h e o p e r a t o r o b s e r v a b l c s

r a t h e r t h a n by eqns (2.5).

In g e n e r a l t e r m s i t i s not c l e a r t h a t t h e q u a n t a which o c c u r can be

r e g a r d e d as h a v i n g t h e same p h y s i c a l s i g n i f i c a n c e as b e f o r e . The whole

problem o f r e n o r m a l i s a t i o n and t h e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of p h y s i c a l observable3

r e a r s i t s head a t t h i s s t a g e . As an extreme example, i f j ( x ) were a

2
U

constant - ^ , t h e n t h e p r o d u c t i o n o f t h e mass m q u a n t a would have t o

be such as t o g i v e a f i n a l t h e o r y which i s a f r e e f i e l d w i t h mass

vm2 + u 2 . In t h i s c a s e i t i s c l e a r t h a t t h e 'wrong' Fock space has been

chosen i n i t i a l l y b u t t h e s i t u a t i o n f o r g e n e r a l s o u r c e s i s considerably

more c o m p l i c a t e d t h a n t h i s and t h e problem o f t h e c o r r e c t physical

2 0

interpretation is non-trivinl. In f a c t t h e r e i s no u n i v e r s a l l y

agreed p a r t i c l e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n for a general external f i e l d . One major

c o n t r i b u t o r y f a c t o r i s t h a t in g e n e r a l t h e t h e o r y i s no l o n g e r invariant

under t h e P o i n c a r e group. T h i s o f c o u r s e i s a f e a t u r e s h a r e d by t h e

s c a l a r f i e l d d e f i n e d on an a r b i t r a r y background ( w h i c h , generically,

w i l l have no group of symmetries) and f o r t h i s reason i f f o r no o t h e r

t h e system d e s c r i b e d by eqn ( 2 . 1 3 ) i s worth s t u d y i n g c a r e f u l l y . Certain

problems remain even i f t h e c u r r e n t j ( x ) i s s t a t i c (when a t l e a s t t h e

time t r a n s l a t i o n group e x i s t s ) .

With t h e s e c a u t i o n a r y remarks i n mind l e t us now t u r n t o t h e

s i t u a t i o n d e s c r i b e d by eqn ( 2 . 1 ) . Numerous d i f f i c u l t i e s can be

a n t i c i p a t e d in p r o c e e d i n g with t h e analogue of any o f t h e s t e p s sketched

above f o r t h e f r e e , f l a t - 3 p a c e f i e l d . One n a t u r a l approach p e r h a p s i s

t o s e p a r a t e o u t t h e Minkowski m e t r i c n and w r i t e
yv

g (x) = n + h (x) (2.114)

yv yv yv

where h ) y ( x ) d e s c r i b e s t h e d e v i a t i o n o f t h e geometry from f l a t n e s s . The

b i g advantage of t h i s scheme i s t h a t i t r e d u c e s s u p e r f i c i a l l y t h e problem

t o one s i m i l a r t o t h a t posed by t h e e x t e r n a l s o u r c e i n eqn ( 2 . 1 3 ) . In

p a r t i c u l a r t h e e x i s t e n c e o f t h e f l a t background w i t h i t s P o i n c a r e group

of motions and p r e f e r r e d c l a s s of i n e r t i a l r e f e r e n c e f r a m e s should l e n d

t o t h e same s o r t o f p a r t i c l e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . However, t h e r e a r e a number

of o b j e c t i o n s t o t h i s p o i n t of view. For example:

i) The a c t u a l background m a n i f o l d may not b e r e m o t e l y

 21

Minkownkian in e i t h e r i t s t o p o l o g i c a l or

m e t r i c a l p r o p e r t i e s , i n which case t h e s e p a r a t i o n

in eqn ( 2 . l U ) (with i t s c o r r e s p o n d i n g s e p a r a t i o n

o f t h e H a m i l t o n i a n i n t o f r e e and i n t e r a c t i o n terms)

i s completely inappropriate,

ii) Even i f eqn ( 2 . l i t ) i s j u s t i f i e d (from t h e p o i n t o f

view of i ) ) t h e p r o c e d u r e i s s t i l l dubious because

t h e l i g h t c o n e s t r u c t u r e of t h e p h y s i c a l s p a c e t i m e i s

d i f f e r e n t from t h a t of Minkowski s p a c e . For example

i f t h e f i e l d cj> has some s o r t o f m i c r o c a u s a l i t y

p r o p e r t y with r e s p e c t t o t h e m e t r i c then t h i s is

not e q u i v a l e n t t o m i c r o c a u s a l i t y w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e

f i c t i t i o u s Minkowski background.

Thus i t i s very d e s i r a b l e t o avoid any f i e l d s e p a r a t i o n and,

c o r r e s p o n d i n g l y , t o c o n s i d e r t h e l a g r a n g i a n in eqn ( 2 . 1 ) as a s i n g l e

entity. However, w i t h i n t h e framework o f c o n v e n t i o n a l quantum f i e l d

t h e o r y t h i s p o s e s a number o f problems. F i r s t l y t h e r e i s now, in

g e n e r a l , no symmetry group of t h e m e t r i c which can p l a y t h e r o l e o f

t h e P o i n c a r e group. In p a r t i c u l a r t h e r e a r e no p r e f e r r e d c l a s s e s of

t i m e and one would e x p e c t a p r i o r i t o have t o c o n s i d e r t h e CCR o f eqn

( 2 . 2 ) d e f i n e d o v e r an a r b i t r a r y s p a t i a l t h r e e - s u r f a c e . There i s no

n a t u r a l d e f i n i t i o n of n e g a t i v e and p o s i t i v e f r e q u e n c i e s and even i f

some analogue o f eqn ( 2 . 6 ) i s c o n s t r u c t e d t h e r e i s no reason why t h e

r e s u l t i n g c r e a t i o n and a n n i h i l a t i o n o p e r a t o r s which c o r r e s p o n d t o

d i f f e r e n t choices of t h r e e - s u r f a c e should l e a d t o equivalent notions

of p a r t i c l e . In g e n e r a l any p u r e a n n i h i l a t i o n ( o r c r e a t i o n ) operator
2?

w i l l e v o l v e i n time i n t o a m i x t u r e o f such o p e r a t o r s , a s i n d e e d i t

does f o r t h e s i m p l e e x t e r n a l s o u r c e c a s e in eqn ( 2 . 1 3 ) . This i s not

in i t s e l f s u r p r i s i n g as i t c o r r e s p o n d s t o t h e e x p e c t e d phenomenon of

particle production, b u t t h e problem o f d e c i d i n g i n what s e n s e t h e

r e s u l t i n g quanta a c t u a l l y correspond t o p h y s i c a l l y measurable particles

is non-trivial. Another d i f f i c u l t y i s t h a t t h e H a m i l t o n i a n h a s t o be

normally o r d e r e d and t h i s depends on t h e exact r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of t h e

CCR which i s chosen. Two d i f f e r e n t c h o i c e s can e a s i l y l e a d t o

Hamiltonian o p e r a t o r s which d i f f e r from each o t h e r by an i n f i n i t e constant.

T h i s might mean t h a t in some r e a l p h y s i c a l s e n s e an i n f i n i t e amount o f

energy i s produced by t h e background i n t h e form o f p h y s i c a l ¿-particles

b u t i t c o u l d a l s o simply be t h e r e s u l t of c h o o s i n g a p h y s i c a l l y

i n a p p r o p r i a t e CCR r e p r e s e n t a t i o n , i n which c a s e t h e i n f i n i t e answer

would n o t n e c e s s a r i l y have any more s i g n i f i c a n c e t h a n t h e renormalisable

u l t r a v i o l e t d i v e r g e n c e s o f some c o n v e n t i o n a l quantum f i e l d t h e o r i e s .

If the metric is s t a t i c or stationary, s o t h a t t h e r e e x i s t s sort»

g l o b a l t i m e l i k e K i l l i n g v e c t o r w i t h i t s a s s o c i a t e d group o f symmetries,

some p r o g r e s s can be made. Similarly, if the metric i s asymptotically

f l a t ( o r , remembering t h a t i t need n o t s a t i s f y E i n s t e i n ' s e q u a t i o n s in

any s e n s e , f l a t o u t s i d e o f some f i n i t e r e g i o n ) t h e n t h e f r e e ' i n ' and

'out' f i e l d s can be u s e d t o g i v e some s o r t of p r e f e r r e d p a r t i c l e

i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , w i t h a c o r r e s p o n d i n g s e t of p h y s i c a l o b s e r v a b l e s (which
15
i n c l u d e in p a r t i c u l a r , e n e r g y ) . ' ' I t i s tempting to speculate t h a t

i t may be in t h e r o l e o f c o n s o l i d a t i n g t h e concept o f a p a r t i c l e that

t h e BMS group (whose r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s have r e c e n t l y been worked o u t ) ' 1 6 '

inivy f i n a l l y come i n t o i t o own. Even i n t h e s e s i t u a t i o n s however, a

luimlinr of problems remain and t h e i n t e r e s t e d r e a d e r i s r e f e r r e d t o t h e

ox«:»Uont t h e s i s und p a p e r s of S. F u l l i n g ' 1 2 " 1 3 ' f o r d e t a i l s of t h e s e .

I t nhould be emphasised t h a t t h i s problem i s not merely o f p u r e

thoorctical interest. I t i s p e r f e c t l y p o s s i b l e t h a t the production of

p a r t i c l c o by a g r a v i t a t i o n a l f i e l d c o u l d p r o v i d e a fundamental

i'-"iolution o f t h e whole problem of g r a v i t a t i o n a l c o l l a p s e . This is

17
• •lctnrly shown i n t h e e x c i t i n g r e s u l t s o f S.W. H a w k i n g ' ' which a r e

imported i n t h e p r e s e n t volume. He c o n s i d e r s an a s y m p t o t i c a l l y flat

g r a v i t a t i o n o l l y collapsomg system and shows t h a t i t can l o s e an i n f i n i t e

iimount o f energy by t h e mechanism o f p a r t i c l e p r o d u c t i o n . (Note t h a t

t h e amount o f energy r a d i a t e d could be p e r f e c t l y w e l l d e f i n e d even i f

t h e r e i s no unambiguous i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of t h e p r e c i s e form i n which

it is radiated). This i s n o t a c o m p l e t e r e s u l t in t h e p h y s i c a l s e n s e

because i t i g n o r e s t h e r e a c t i o n back o f t h e p a r t i c l e s on t h e gravitational

f i e l d a n d , as might be e x p e c t e d from t h e remarks a b o v e , the precise

choice o f t i m e and hence p a r t i c l e o p e r a t o r s i s a d e l i c a t e one.

N e v e r t h e l e s s Hawking 1 s work i s of g r e a t i n t e r e s t and one can a n t i c i p a t e

t h a t a c o n s i d e r a b l e amount o f e f f o r t w i l l be expended i n t h e f u t u r e on

pursuing t h i s approach.

There w i l l c e r t a i n l y be some i n s t a n c e s when b h e ' £ i - e j d r a t h e r t h a n

t h e p a r t i c l e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of t h e t h e o r y i s m, a n y , c a s e more l i k e l y t o
; or -• <s>",\
be t h e a p p r o p r i a t e one. However, one can c o n f''l d S h ? r f' • •w '
t l y p r e d i c t t h a t most
.... _ ,
of t h e problems which a r i s e in t h e p a r t i c l e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n w i l l r e a p p e a rtliL
in d i f f e r e n t g u i s e s . At a d e e p e r l e v e l i t i s p o s s i b l e t h a t "-the t)ieory

s h o u l d be modelled on t h e C - a l g e b r a approach t o c o n v e n t i o n a l quantum

f i e l d t h e o r y in which t h e l o c a l o b s e r v a b l e s play a dominant r o l e , rather

than t h e more u s u a l approach used above i n which a H i l b e r t s p a c e o f s t a t e s

i s chosen as t h e b a s i c e n t i t y . Indeed even t h e s i m p l e problem o f an

e x t e r n a l s o u r c e coupled t o a s c a l a r f i e l d can be u s e f u l l y t r e a t e d i n t h i s

way. In s o f a r as a m a n i f o l d l o c a l l y r e s e m b l e s Minkowski-space (by v i r t u e

o f i t s very d e f i n i t i o n ) , t h e i d e a o f c o n c e n t r a t i n g on l o c a l observables

i s an a t t r a c t i v e one.

Of c o u r s e one can always t a k e r e f u g e i n t h e a s s e r t i o n t h a t t h e

problem stems b a s i c a l l y from n o t q u a n t i s i n g t h e m e t r i c t e n s o r f i e l d and

can only be r e s o l v e d by a f u l l quantum g r a v i t y t h e o r y . It is difficult

however t o b e l i e v e t h a t quantum g r a v i t y i t s e l f could r e a l l y b e r e l e v a n t

(17) (18) (19)
t o t h e t y p e o f c a l c u l a t i o n s which Hawking , Unruh and Ford

have been making and t h e problem o f s u c c e s s f u l l y and unambiguously

q u a n t i s i n g a 3 c a l a r f i e l d i n an a r b i t r a r y b u t f i x e d background must

remain an i m p o r t a n t challenge.

3. QUAHTUM FIELD THEORY ON A BACKGROUND WITH BACK REACTION

One p o s s i b l e t h e o r e t i c a l development of t h e scheme d i s c u s s e d in

§2 i s t h a t i n which t h e quantum ( s c a l a r ) f i e l d a c t s as t h e a c t u a l

s o u r c e of t h e ( s t i l l c l a s s i c a l ) background. In o t h e r words t h e reaction

back on t h e g r a v i t a t i o n a l f i e l d caused by t h e p r o d u c t i o n o f s c a l a r

p a r t i c l e s i s i n c o r p o r a t e d as p a r t o f t h e dynamics. To a c h i e v e t h i s it

i s n e c e s s a r y t o i n c l u d e i n some way t h e energy-momentum of t h e q u a n t i s e d

s c a l a r m a t t e r - f i e l d as t h e r i g h t - h a n d s i d e of E i n s t e i n ' s e q u a t i o n s . The

equation
 G
.Je) = T ( m a t t e r , g) (3.1)

In not s u i t a b l e as i t s t a n d s s i n c e i t e q u a t e s an o p e r a t o r and a

(¡-number. The obvious m o d i f i c a t i o n i s t o w r i t e

G y v ( g ) = <T yv ( m a t t e r , g)> (3.2)

where < > d e n o t e s t h e e x p e c t a t i o n v a l u e of t h e q u a n t i s e d system i n some

•-v., ^ ^ (20)

nuitable state.

This i s t h e system o f e q u a t i o n s which w i l l be d i s c u s s e d i n t h e

present section. The s i t u a t i o n i s c l e a r l y a t l e a s t as c o m p l i c a t e d as

t h a t d i s c u s s e d i n §2 b u t w i t h t h e a d d i t i o n a l f e a t u r e t h a t t h e g r a v i t a t i o n a l

f i e l d i s now i n t r o d u c e d as a dynamical v a r i a b l e r a t h e r t h a n as a f i x e d

background.

The obvious q u e s t i o n which a r i s e s i s what p r e c i s e l y i s meant by

a 'suitable state'? There i s no r e a s o n t o suppose t h a t , f o r example,

a r e a l i s t i c c o l l a p s i n g system would be d e s c r i b e d simply by a p u r e s t a t e

and i n g e n e r a l one must allow f o r < > t o c o r r e s p o n d t o a mixed,

s t a t i s t i c a l ( p r o b a b l y n o n - e q u i l i b r i u m ) s t a t e of t h e s y s t e m . This,

however, r a i s e s t h e immediate p o i n t t h a t such a s t a t e w i l l almost

c e r t a i n l y i t s e l f depend on t h e m e t r i c t e n s o r g ^ ( t h i n k f o r example of

any g e n e r a l l y c o v a r i a n t - l o o k i n g v e r s i o n of t h e Gibbs e n s e m b l e ) . Clearly

t h e t h e o r y i s a good d e a l more non l i n e a r thun i s e v i d e n t from a

c u r s o r y g l a n c e a t eqn ( 3 . 2 ) and t h e f u l l i m p l i c a t i o n s o f t h i s approach

a r e n o t y e t. known.
, ( 2 l ) ( 2 2 ) ( 2 3 } ( 2 < < ) ( 2 5')v( 2 6 )'

I t s h o u l d be emphasised t h a t t h e d i f f i c u l t i e s c o n c e r n i n g c h o i c e o f
6

a n n i h i l a t i o n and c r e a t i o n o p e r a t o r s , normal o r d e r i n g e t c , which were

d i s c u s s e d in 52 s t i l l apply h e r e . In p a r t i c u l a r t h e normal o r d e r i n g o f

t h e energy momentum t e n s o r w i l l e v i d e n t l y p l a y a m a j o r r o l e in t h e

c o r r e c t use of eqn ( 3 . 2 ) . N o t i c e t h a t t h e a d d i t i o n of a c o n s t a n t t o

t h e energy momentum t e n s o r has a r e a l p h y s i c a l e f f e c t on t h e gravitational

field. Thus t h e fundamental f e a t u r e o f g e n e r a l r e l a t i v i t y , t h a t t h e

a b s o l u t e r a t h e r t h a n r e l a t i v e v a l u e o f t h e energy-momentum t e n s o r has a

meaning, i s s h a r p l y r e f l e c t e d in t h i s quantum t h e o r y . T h i s p r o v i d e s an

a d d i t i o n a l f a c e t t o t h e p r e v i o u s l y mentioned problem o f t h e CCR

r e p r e s e n t a t i o n dependence o f normal o r d e r i n g .

The most i n t e r e s t i n g r e s u l t s which have been a c h i e v e d so f a r u s i n g

(27)

t h i s approach a r e p r o b a b l y t h o s e of L. P a r k e r and S. F u l l i n g . They

c o n s i d e r a massive s c a l a r f i e l d q u a n t i s e d in t h i s way v i a eqn ( 3 . 2 ) b u t

in which t h e m e t r i c t e n s o r i s r e s t r i c t e d t o be o f t h e Robertson-Walker

form
3
ds2 = d t 2 - R ( t ) 2 I S.. ( x 1 , x 2 , x 3 ) d x i d x j (3-3)
1J
i,j=l

where S• . (x 1 , x 2 , x 3 ) i s t h e ( f i x e d ) m e t r i c o f a t h r e e - s p h e r e .

E v i d e n t l y a very s p e c i a l c h o i c e of s t a t e > i n eqn ( 3 . 2 ) must be

made t o r e n d e r t h i s system o f e q u a t i o n s s e l f c o n s i s t e n t . A general state

would n o t be c o m p a t i b l e w i t h t h e s i m p l e m e t r i c t e n s o r i n eqn ( 3 - 3 ) and

t h e main s t e p i n P a r k e r and F u l l i n g ' s work i s t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n of a

suitable state. The r e s u l t of t h e i r c a l c u l a t i o n s i s an e x p l i c i t form

f o r t h e f u n c t i o n R ( t ) which p o s s e s s e s t h e r e m a r k a b l e f e a t u r e t h a t t h e
 27

»ygtom docs not e x h i b i t t h e c l a s s i c a l g r a v i t a t i o n a l c o l l a p s e b u t

r a t h e r 'bounces o f f the s i n g u l a r i t y at R = 0 with the radiu3 R(t)

a c h i e v i n g a minimum of t h e Compton wavelength of t h e massive s c a l a r

particles.

T h i s r e s u l t i s p o t e n t i a l l y of f u n d a m e n t a l importance t o t h e s u b j e c t

of g r a v i t a t i o n a l c o l l a p s e . I f t h e s c a l a r f i e l d d e s c r i b e d say p i o n s , it

would mean t h a t t h e quantum e f f e c t s on t h e c o l l a p s e s t a r t e d a t a d i s t a n c e

of 10 cms r a t h e r t h a n t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c Planck l e n g t h •v 10 cms

C
-13 . .
of pure quantum g r a v i t y . The 10 cms r e s u l t i m p l i e s of c o u r s e t h a t the

f i n e d e t a i l s of t h e b e h a v i o u r o f t h e system a t t h e t u r n - a r o u n d p o i n t

depend s i g n i f i c a n t l y on t h e s t r o n g i n t e r a c t i o n s . However t h e t h o u g h t -

p r o v o k i n g p o s s i b i l i t y remains t h a t i t may n o t be n e c e s s a r y t o q u a n t i s e

t h e g r a v i t a t i o n a l f i e l d i t s e l f i n o r d e r t o avoid g r a v i t a t i o n a l collapse.

In e f f e c t t h e v i o l a t i o n of t h e Hawking-Penrose energy c o n d i t i o n s by t h e

e x p e c t a t i o n v a l u e of t h e q u a n t i s e d m a t t e r ' s momentum t e n s o r may be

sufficient.

There a r e many t e c h n i c a l problems remaining in t h e P a r k e r - F u l l i n g

work ( a s t h e a u t h o r s t h e m s e l v e s p o i n t o u t ) c o n c e r n i n g t h e c h o i c e of t h e

3tate > and t h e r e n o r m a l i s a t i o n of t h e t h e o r y , which a r e , t o some e x t e n t ,

connected w i t h t h o s e of t h e s i m p l e r t y p e of system d i s c u s s e d in §2.

However, from a p r a c t i c a l ( a s t r o p h y s i c a l ) p o i n t o f view t h i s approach t o

'quantum g r a v i t y ' i s very p r o m i s i n g und w i l l undoubtedly be t h e s u b j e c t

of a f a i r l y s u b s t a n t i a l r e s e a r c h e f f o r t i n t h e f u t u r e .
so

It. COVARIANT QUANTISATION

We new t u r n o u r a t t e n t i o n t o t h e problem of q u a n t i s i n g t h e

gravitational field i t s e l f . H i s t o r i c a l l y t h e various approaches t o t h i s

have t e n d e d t o be c l a s s i f i e d as e i t h e r ' c a n o n i c a l ' or ' c o v a r i a n t ' and i t

i s t h e l a t t e r approach which i s c o n s i d e r e d i n t h i s s e c t i o n . Two s l i g h t l y

d i f f e r e n t p o i n t s of view have emerged o v e r t h e l a s t f i f t e e n y e a r s . Both

of them s t a r t by f i x i n g in advance t h e f o u r - d i m e n s i o n a l s p a c e - t i m e

m a n i f o l d upon which t h e m e t r i c t e n s o r g i s r e g a r d e d as b e i n g d e f i n e d as

an o p e r a t o r - v a l u e d d i s t r i b u t i o n . The o p e r a t o r i s s e p a r a t e d i n t o a

c l a s s i c a l background p l u s a quantum c o r r e c t i o n i n t h e form

g p v = 6°Uv + J UV (fc.l)

which i s t h e n i n s e r t e d i n t o t h e E i n s t e i n a c t i o n S = j J-% R(g) d^x

(assuming f o r s i m p l i c i t y t h a t no m a t t e r f i e l d s a r e p r e s e n t ) . The f a c t

t h a t a l l t e n components of are afforded operator s t a t u s (as

opposed t o j u s t t h e two c a n o n i c a l v a r i a b l e s ) means t h a t t h e approach

b e i n g f o l l o w e d h a s something in common w i t h t h e G u p t a - B l e u l e r

q u a n t i s a t i o n of t h e e l e c t r o m a g n e t i c f i e l d , as opposed t o , say,

r a d i a t i o n gauge c a n o n i c a l q u a n t i s a t i o n . In t h e p i o n e e r i n g work o f
(2 8}

De W i t t , Schwinger's action p r i n c i p l e is modified t o give Green's

f u n c t i o n s by v a r y i n g t h e a c t i o n w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e background field.

(The e x t e r n a l s o u r c e s of S c h w i n g e r ' s o r i g i n a l t h e o r y a r e d i f f i c u l t t o

use when a n o n - a b e l i a n group i s p r e s e n t . ) De W i t t ' s work i s very

 29

comprehensive and i n c l u d e s a d i s c u s s i o n of what c o n s t i t u t e s on

olinnrvobXo in t h e t h e o r y and t h e problem o f i t s measurement. The key

I r c l i n i c a l t o o l i n t h i s i s t h e P e i e r l s - P o i s 3 o n b r a c k e t which e n a b l e s a

m l u t i o n t o be s e t up between t h e quantum commutator o f o b s e r v a b l e s

tuid t h e G r e e n ' s f u n c t i o n s . Do Witt works e x c l u s i v e l y in c o n f i g u r a t i o n

npuce and h i s formalism i s , a t l e a s t a t t h e h e u r i s t i c l e v e l , manifestly

c o v a r i a n t under t h e v a r i o u s gauge groups which a c t i n t h e t h e o r y . The

absence of a momentum s p a c e i n h i s approach ( t h e r e i s of c o u r s e no

n a t u r a l d e f i n i t i o n o f F o u r i e r t r a n s f o r m i n an a r b i t r a r y Riemannian

m a n i f o l d w i t h m e t r i c gjj^ ) means t h a t some o f h i s t e c h n i q u e s s e e n

u n f a m i l i a r t o anyone who i s p r i m a r i l y t r a i n e d in c o n v e n t i o n a l particle

physics. P a r t l y f o r t h i s reason a s l i g h t l y d i f f e r e n t p o i n t o f view h a s

a r i s e n in which t h e s e p a r a t i o n i n C i . l ) i s performed always w i t h r e s p e c t

t o t h e Minkowski s p a c e background. When t h e r e s u l t i n g f i e l d i s

substituted into the Einstein lagrangian, a very non l i n e a r (typically

n o n - p o l y n o m i a l ) i n t e r a c t i o n i s o b t a i n e d between m a s s l e s s s p i n two

g r a v i t o n s ( i . e . r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s o f t h e P o i n c a r c group) p r o p a g a t i n g i n

t h i s Minkowski s p a c e . The d u b i o u s n e s s of such a s e p a r a t i o n has a l r e a d y

been d i s c u s s e d in 52 in t h e c o n t e x t o f an e x t e r n a l g r a v i t a t i o n a l field

and t h e comments made t h e r e apply h e r e . However, i t does have t h e

advantage o f r e d u c i n g t h e t e c h n i c a l p r o b l e m , a t l e a s t superficially,

t o t h e s o r t o f s i t u a t i o n which has been e n c o u n t e r e d b e f o r e in p a r t i c l e -

p h y s i c s - o r i e n t e d quantum f i e l d t h e o r y . T h i s approach was i n i t i a t e d by

(29) (30)(37)
R. Feynman and S. Gupta and has been enthusiastically

adopted by a number of (mainly European) p a r t i c l e p h y s i c i s t s in r e c e n t

( 3 ' i ) ( 35 )
years. ' The s t r u c t u r e i s s i m i l a r i n many r e s p e c t s t o t h a t o f t h e
Yong-Millo t h e o r y in t h a t t h e g e n e r a l c o o r d i n a t e i n v a r i a n c e m a n i f e s t a

i t s e l f t h r o u g h t h e e x i s t e n c e of a n o n - a b e l i a n gauge group. The main

t a s k s t o be performed a r e indeed t h e same i n b o t h c a s e s . Namely:

i) C o n s t r u c t t h e c o r r e c t Feynman r u l e s which l e a d t o a

unitary S-matrix.

ii) C o n s t r u c t t h e analogue o f t h e Ward-Takahashi identities

which s h o u l d r e f l e c t t h e gauge invariance,

iii) Find an a p p r o p r i a t e ( i . e . gauge i n v a r i a n t ) régularisation

scheme.

iv) I n v e s t i g a t e t h e re normal i s a t i o n of t h e t h e o r y ,

v) Find t e c h n i q u e s f o r summing up u s e f u l s e t s of Feynman

graphs.

These q u e s t i o n s a r e a l l connected and w i l l be d i s c u s s e d a t l e n g t h in

K.J. Duff's chapter. I t i s t h e r e f o r e s u f f i c i e n t t o remark h e r e

t h a t t h e t e c h n i q u e which i s u n i v e r s a l l y used t h e s e days t o g e n e r a t e a

p e r t u r b a t i v e e x p a n s i o n of t h e G r e e n ' s f u n c t i o n s and hence t o c o n s t r u c t

(38)

t h e Feynman r u l e s , i s t h a t of a f u n c t i o n a l p a t h i n t e g r a l . In a

simple s c a l a r f i e l d theory t h e b a s i c n - p o i n t time ordered product (which

g i v e s t h e n - p a r t i c l e S - m a t r i x v i a t h e LSZ formalism) can be e x p r e s s e d by

a f u n c t i o n a l i n t e g r a l as

r i/ K f IU)d*X
<0 | T ^ ( x 1 ) . . . « ( x n ) | 0 > = H | (d$) « ( x , ) . . . $ ( x n ) e " '

(U.2)

J=0

where t h e vacuum-vacuum a m p l i t u d e in t h e p r e s e n c e of t h e e x t e r n a l
 31

nource J ( x ) in

OUt
<0|0>i" = N | (d*) e (It.3)

nnd II is some normalisation constant. I f the lagrangian I($) is

noparated into the sum o f a f r e e part Lq plu3 an i n t e r a c t i o n part

XV (X in a coupling constant), i . e .

LU) = Lo(*) + XV(t), (k.k)

then the basic amplitude (¡».3) can be written as

i/K f [Lq(4)+ XV(<j>) + <fj] d^x

out
:0|0>^ = N j (d*)

N e
•i
. (d$) e
Ct.5)

Now t h e f u n c t i o n a l i n t e g r a l

•f
Z o ( J ) = I (d*) e (It.6)

i s in Gaussian form ( s i n c e i-Q(<>) i s b i l i n e a r i n <J> and i t s d e r i v a t i v e ) and

can be e x p l i c i t l y computed t o be

- \ j d"x d V J ( x ) AF(x-y)J(y)
ZQ(J) = e (It.7)
32

where Ap(x - y ) i s t h e a p p r o p r i a t e Feynman p r o p a g a t o r f o r t h e f r e e $

i / K | XV(K/. 6/6J)d*x
field. If the operator e in eqn (U. 5) i s now

expanded i n term3 o f powers of X t h e n a p e r t u r b a t i v e form f o r ~ ! 1 < 0 | 0 > ° u t

i s o b t a i n e d in which each power o f X i s m u l t i p l i e d by v a r i o u s space-time

i n t e g r a l s o v e r p r o d u c t s of t h e Aj,(x - y) p r o p a g a t o r s . In f a c t this

expansion i s e x a c t l y t h e same as t h a t o b t a i n e d from t h e Feynman-pyson

i n t e r a c t i o n p i c t u r e and i s t h e modern way of o b t a i n i n g t h e corresponding

Feynman r u l e s . The u l t r a v i o l e t d i v e r g e n c e problem i s o f c o u r s e t h e same

in b o t h a p p r o a c h e s .

The s i t u a t i o n f o r a t h e o r y which a d m i t s a gauge group i s more

complicated. Not a l l components of t h e f i e l d a r e t r u e dynamical v a r i a b l e s

and so t h e v a l i d i t y of t h e i r use as v a r i a b l e s t o be i n c l u d e d i n t h e Feynman

i n t e g r a l over physical paths i s not a p r i o r i c l e a r . In t h e c a s e of

e l e c t r o m a g n e t i s u t h e r e a r e in f a c t no major p r o b l e m s , p r i m a r i l y b e c a u s e

t h e gauge group i s a b e l i a n . However, f o r t h e Yang-Mills o r gravitational

t h e o r i e s , which a r e d i s t i n g u i s h e d by p o s s e s s i n g n o n - a b e l i a n gauge g r o u p s ,

t h e s i t u a t i o n i s more complex. The a c t u a l form of t h e f u n c t i o n a l integral

(31)

was f i r s t e x h i b i t e d by De Witt and t h e n by Fadeev and Popov and h a s

been e x t e n s i v e l y i n v e s t i g a t e d s i n c e t h e n . The main s u r p r i s e i s that,

when e x p r e s s e d i n Feynman diagram l a n g u a g e , l o o p s of ' f i c t i t i o u s ' quanta

a p p e a r which do n o t o c c u r i n t h e o r i e s w i t h o u t non a b e l i a n gauge g r o u p s .

The n e c e s s i t y f o r such f i c t i t i o u s l o o p s was f i r s t d e m o n s t r a t e d by Feynman

who found t h a t t h e n a i v e p e r t u r b a t i v e r u l e s l e a d t o n o n - u n i t a r y (and non-

gauge-invariant) S-matrix elements.

The r é g u l a r i s a t i o n which i s mainly i n use a t p r e s e n t i s t h a t o f

 33

dimensional r e g u l a r i a a t i o n . This i s mo3t a p p r o p r i a t e f o r t h e momentiim

npaco approaches b u t i s c u r r e n t l y b e i n g adapted by De Witt t o h i s

con f i g u r a t i o n s p a c e - b a s e d t r e a t m e n t .

The c u r r e n t s t a t e o f t h e c o m p u t a t i o n a l a r t i s t h a t v a r i o u s tree

graphs and one loop graph have been computed and have been covariantly

r e g u l a r i s e d in the sense t h a t t h e f i n i t e remainders s a t i s f y the

(32)
a p p r o p r i a t e Ward i d e n t i t i e s . The main q u e s t i o n which has t o be

d i s c u s s e d i s whether o r n o t t h e t h e o r y i s r e n o r m u l i s a b l e . Certainly a

s u p e r f i c i a l power count l e a d s t o a h i g h l y d i v e r g e n t t h e o r y , a result

which seems t o be borne out by e x p l i c i t c a l c u l a t i o n f o r t h e combined

Einstein plus m a t t e r - f i e l d l a g r a n g i a n s . The s i t u a t i o n i s n o t c o m p l e t e l y

w a t e r t i g h t because i t i s p o s s i b l e t h a t m i r a c u l o u s c a n c e l l a t i o n s nay s t i l l

occur ( p o s s i b l y only f o r c e r t a i n c h o i c e s o f m a t t e r lagrangian).

U n f o r t u n a t e l y t h e extreme complexity of t h e n e c e s s a r y c a l c u l a t i o n s (a

two loop graph would be very h e l p f u l ) means t h a t a d e f i n i t i v e answer i s

not l i k e l y t o be f o r t h c o m i n g in t h e i n m e d i a t e f u t u r e . The r e a d e r i s

r e f e r r e d t o M.J. D u f f ' s c h a p t e r f o r f u r t h e r e n l i g h t e n m e n t on t h i s p o i n t

but perhaps i t i s worth commenting a l i t t l e on t h e s i g n i f i c a n c e of t h e

probable n o n - r e n o r m a l i s a b i l i t y of the theory. It is possible to turn

such a s i t u a t i o n t o p o s i t i v e a d v a n t a g e . The problem o f q u a n t i s i n g non-

polynomial l a g r a n g i a n s (which by c o n v e n t i o n a l r e c k o n i n g a r e certainly

n o n - r e n o r m o l i s a b l e ) r e c e i v e d c o n s i d e r a b l e a t t e n t i o n a few y e a r s ago w i t h

t h e use o f a method which i n e f f e c t f i x e d , s i m u l t a n e o u s l y , t h e v a l u e s o f

i n f i n i t e l y many s u b t r a c t i o n c o n s t a n t s i n an S - m a t r i x e l e m e n t . Abdus Solum,

J . S t r a t h d e e and I ( 33) a p p l i e d t h e s e t e c h n i q u e s t o t h e i n t e r a c t i o n of t h e
31.

combined g r a v i t a t i o n a l , e l e c t r o m a g n e t i c and e l e c t r o n f i e l d s und

s u c c e e d e d in o b t a i n i n g f i n i t e answers f o r c e r t a i n i n f i n i t e s e t s of

Feynman d i a g r a m s , t h a t would i n d i v i d u a l l y be r e g a r d e d as h i g h l y divergent.

The c o n v e n t i o n a l quantum f i e l d t h e o r y s i t u a t i o n i s s i m i l a r t o expanding

-1/x -1/x 1
e around x = O a s e = 1 - '/ + taking the limit
X
2!x2
as x 0 from p o s i t i v e v a l u e s and t h e n announcing t h a t t h e r e s u l t is

1 - <o + co . . . , = ; T h i s r e s u l t can be r e g a r d e d as a p a r t i a l

r e a l i s a t i o n o f t h e o f t e n - q u o t e d e x p e c t a t i o n t h a t g r a v i t y can a c t as a

u n i v e r s a l r e g u l a t o r due t o quantum s m e a r i n g of t h e l i g h t cone. In e f f e c t

t h e Feynman loop i n t e g r a l s a r e t r u n c a t e d a t 102® eV('v. 10 cms.) and

hence y i e l d f i n i t e numbers. However, b e c a u s e of t h e very considerable

t e c h n i c a l complexity of t h e p r o b l e m , t h e a p p l i c a t i o n of t h e s e techniques

t o t h e p u r e s e l f - i n t e r a c t i n g g r a v i t a t i o n a l f i e l d was n e v e r a c h i e v e d .

Some f u r t h e r t h o u g h t s on t h i s t o p i c w i l l be found in t h e c h a p t e r by

P r o f e s s o r Salara.

From t h e c o n v e n t i o n a l p o i n t of view t h e n o n - r e n o r m a l i s a b i l i t y of

a quantum f i e l d t h e o r y i s f r e q u e n t l y r e g a r d e d as b e i n g s u f f i c i e n t l y

d i s a s t r o u s t o j u s t i f y t h r o w i n g away t h e u n d e r l y i n g c l a s s i c a l field

t h e o r y and r e p l a c i n g i t by a r e n o r m a l i s a b l e o n e . A good example of

t h i s i s a f f o r d e d by t h e c u r r e n t l y p o p u l a r w e a k - i n t e r a c t i o n models which

successfully replace the old non-renormalisable four-fermion theory. In

t h e c a s e of g e n e r a l r e l a t i v i t y t h e s i t u a t i o n i s s l i g h t l y d i f f e r e n t . The

f o u r - f e r m i o n w e a k - i n t e r a c t i o n t h e o r y was only i n v e n t e d in t h e f i r s t p l a c e

f o r p u r e l y quantum f i e l d t h e o r e t i c use and no-one can complain i f t h e

 35

demands ol' quantum f i e l d t h e o r y e v e n t u a l l y l e a d t o i t s demioe. However,

t.ho t h e o r y o f g e n e r a l r e l a t i v i t y has a s i g n i f i c a n c e and v a l i d i t y quite

a p a r t from t h e quantum t h e o r y and many r e l a t i v i s t s would very

r e a s o n a b l y o b j e c t i f E i n s t e i n ' s s t r u c t u r e was t o be j e t t i s o n e d purely

on t h e grounds of n o n - r e n o r m a l i s a b i l i t y . Indeed t h e y a r e more l i k e l y

t o i n s i s t t h a t t h e n o n - r e n o r m a l i s a b i l i t y i m p l i e s t h e r e j e c t i o n of quantum

f i e l d theory! N e v e r t h e l e s s i t i s c l e a r t h a t a f a i r l y l a r g e amount of

e f f o r t w i l l be s p e n t in t h e n e a r f u t u r e i n t r y i n g t o f i n d a r e n o r m a l i s a b l e

t h e o r y of g r a v i t y which could p o s s i b l y s t i l l be g e n e r a l l y c o v a r i a n t and

a c h i e v e i t s ends by t h e s u b t l e i n t r o d u c t i o n of c e r t a i n m a t t e r - f i e l d t e r m s .

A t h i r d r e a c t i o n t o t h e n o n - r e n o r m a l i s a b i l i t y of t h e covariant

t h e o r y i s t h a t t h e t r o u b l e has i t s o r i g i n i n t h e s e p a r a t i o n o f t h e

g r a v i t a t i o n a l f i e l d i n t o a c l a s s i c a l background p l u s a quantum c o r r e c t i o n .

Such s p l i t s a r e very u n n a t u r a l w i t h i n t h e c o n t e n t of t h e c l a s s i c a l theory

and i t i s on a t t r a c t i v e c o n j e c t u r e t h a t t h e problems o f quantum g r a v i t y

can be r e s o l v e d by a v o i d i n g them. T h i s i s one of t h e p o i n t s i n f a v o u r of

t h e c a n o n i c a l approaches w h i c h , b e c a u s e o f t h e i r r a t h e r s t r o n g e r

geometrical flavour, c e r t a i n l y do not n a t u r a l l y admit such d e c o m p o s i t i o n s .

I t would be misguided however, t o t a k e t h e r e n o r m a l i s a t i o n problem t o o

l i g h t l y and i t i s f a i r t o say t h a t t h e n o n - a p p e a r a n c e of t h a t particular

problem i n c a n o n i c a l q u a n t i s a t i o n i s due p r i m a r i l y t o t h e f a c t t h a t the

a p p r o p r i a t e c a l c u l a t i o n a l t e c h n i q u e s have not y e t been developed t o t h e

p o i n t where a c t u a l numbers a r e o b t a i n e d , r a t h e r than t h a t t h e formalism

is intrinsically trouble-free.
36

5. TRUE CANONICAL QUANTISATION

We now d i s c u s s t h e approach t o q u a n t i s a t i o n which i s c l o s e s t to

the standard canonical procedure. The e s s e n t i a l i d e a i s t o e x t r a c t from

t h e m e t r i c t e n s o r t h o s e components which c o r r e s p o n d t o genuine dynamical

( r a t h e r t h a n gauge) d e g r e e s of freedom and t h e n t o impose c a n o n i c a l

commutation r e l a t i o n s upon them and t h e i r c a n o n i c a l c o n j u g a t e s . This

approach i s o f t e n known in t h e l i t e r a t u r e as ' n o n - c o v a r i a n t 1 canonical

quantisation. The a l t e r n a t i v e s u p e r s p a c e - b a s e d t e c h n i q u e (sometimes

called 'covariant' c a n o n i c a l q u a n t i s a t i o n ) w i l l be c o n s i d e r e d i n §6. As

t h e r e a r e no o t h e r a r t i c l e s in t h i s volume which d e a l s p e c i f i c a l l y w i t h

t h e s e t o p i c s ( u n l i k e f o r example c o v a r i a n t q u a n t i s a t i o n ) t h e y w i l l be

d i s c u s s e d i n some d e t a i l here.

The f i r s t problem t h a t must be i n v e s t i g a t e d i s t h e c l a s s i c a l

d e c o m p o s i t i o n of t h e E i n s t e i n t h e o r y i n t o c a n o n i c a l form. The a p p r o p r i a t e
(39)
t e c h n i q u e i s w e l l known f o l l o w i n g t h e work of Dirac and A r n o w i t t , Deser

and Misner (ADM)' 1 1 0 '. In o r d e r t o i l l u s t r a t e t h e p r i n c i p l e involved,

c o n s i d e r t h e simple example of a m a s s l e s s s c a l a r f i e l d t h e o r y in a f l a t

space-time with the lagrangian

(5-1)

The c o r r e s p o n d i n g a c t i o n is

(5.2)
 37

which when v a r i e d w i t h r e o p e c t t o <p y i e l d s t h e Euler-I.agrange e q u a t i o n s

of motion

+
X$3 = 0 , (5.3)

or, equivalently,

- V2« - = 0 (5.It)

where <J ==
3x

The momentum c o n j u g a t e t o <J. i s

=
% \ = • (5-5)
3$

which can o b v i o u s l y be i n v e r t e d in t h e form

= ) = it . (5.6)

The Hamiltonian d e n s i t y is

tfU.n) = n ) - Li • , < f r ( . ) > (5-7)

= - i 2 t V 2 2* • 2« + x/i, 4." (5.8)

z cj>

and t h e Hamiltonian e q u a t i o n s of motion a r e simply

 (5-9)

(5-10)

where H<t) = J d 3 x H)

ind t h e s e , as e x p e c t e d , have p r e c i s e l y t h e same dynamical c o n t e n t as t h e

¡ u l e r - L a g r a n g e eqns (5. 1 »).

I t i s f r e q u e n t l y c o n v e n i e n t t o be a b l e t o d e r i v e t h e f i r s t order

:qns ( 5 . 9 ) and ( 5 . 1 0 ) from an a c t i o n p r i n c i p l e . An a p p r o p r i a t e such

i r i n c i p l e in t h i s c a s e i s simply

(5.11)

fliich, i f t h e f i e l d s and it a r e v a r i e d as independent v a r i a b l e s , yields

$
j r e c i s e l y t h e Hamilton e q u a t i o n s . C l e a r l y t h e e x p r e s s i o n in b r a c k e t s i n

>qn ( 5 - 1 1 ) i s j u s t t h e Hamiltonian density.

C l a s s i c a l l y , i f t h e c a n o n i c a l v a r i a b l e s 1(1 and tr a r e s p e c i f i e d on t h e

;pacelike hypersurface t = t , t h e n eqns ( 5 - 9 ) and ( 5 - 1 0 ) a r e integrated

.0 g i v e t h e v a l u e s on any l a t e r ( o r e a r l i e r ) t = t^ h y p e r s u r f a c e . The

luantum analogue i s t h e H e i s e n b e r g p i c t u r e formalism in which t h e quantum

f i e l d s $ and 71 s a t i s f y e q u a l t i m e commutation relations

(5.12)

md t h e f i e l d s a t t i m e t a r e e x p r e s s e d in terms o f t h o s e a t t i m e t by
 39

-i/ K llU,*) (t.-t) H(i,n)(t.-t )

n • o „ n l o
• (x,t ) = e «(i»to) e (5.13)

-i/K H U . w H t j - ^ ) i/K H($,Tr)(t1-to)

nfx.tj) = c *(x,tQ) e (5. ill)

A l t e r n a t i v e l y o f c o u r s e one can use t h e S c h r o d i n g e r p i c t u r e i n which t h e

o p e r a t o r s have no t i m e dependence and s a t i s f y

[•(x), ;<*)] = i « « ( 3 ) ( x - x ) (5.15)

and t h e t i m e e v o l u t i o n i s c a r r i e d by t h e s t a t e vector:

- i / K HU.it) (tj-to)
<i>t • (5-16)
o

The main problem i s t o r e p r o d u c e t h i s t y p e of a n a l y s i s f o r t h e

e q u a t i o n s of motion of g e n e r a l r e l a t i v i t y . Even a t t h e c l a s s i c a l level

a number o f d i f f i c u l t i e s can be a n t i c i p a t e d i n any a t t e m p t t o reduce t h e

second o r d e r E u l e r - L a g r a n g e equations

G u V (g, 3g) = 0 (5.17)

( f o r convenience suppose we a r e d e a l i n g with t h e m a t t e r - f r e e system) to

c a n o n i c a l form. Mainely:

i) There a r e no l o n g e r any p r e f e r r e d r e f e r e n c e frames as

1)0

t h e r e were i n t h e Minkowski spuce c a s e . Thus one i s more

o r l e s s o b l i g e d t o c o n s i d e r t h e Cauchy problem o v e r an

arbitrary spacelike hypersurface.

ii) The E i n s t e i n e q u a t i o n s G^1' = 0 do n o t i n v o l v e t h e second-order

time d e r i v a t i v e s of t h e metric t e n s o r g , thus anticipating

cxB
that, as in eqn ( 5 - 5 ) , " „ ^ 6 „i these equations will
dp ats

reduce t o c o n s t r a i n t e q u a t i o n s which t h e i n i t i a l d a t a must

satisfy, r a t h e r t h a n t o genuine e q u a t i o n s o f m o t i o n .

iii) The r e m a i n i n g e q u a t i o n s G^J = 0 do n o t d e t e r m i n e t h e t i m e

e v o l u t i o n of a l l of t h e components of g ^ even i f t h e
11
constraints G = 0 have been s a t i s f i e d ,
o
To i n v e s t i g a t e t h e s e p o i n t s f u r t h e r i t i s u s e f u l t o apply t h e s t a n d a r d

ADM t e c h n i q u e and decompose t h e m e t r i c t e n s o r as

- H 2 + W.1 N . ' 3
^ , N.
J 0

V, = ( I '5.18)
N g
i ' ij

where w,v = 0 . . . 3 ; i , j = 1 , 2 , 3 . To s e e why t h i s p a r t i c u l a r form i s

chosen c o n s i d e r t h e ' 3 + 1 ' decomposition of s p a c e - t i m e i n t o a f a m i l y o f

t h r e e - d i m e n s i o n a l s p a c e - l i k e h y p e r s u r f a c e s p a r a m e t e r i s e d by t h e v a l u e o f

an a r b i t r a r i l y chosen t i m e c o o r d i n a t e x ° . The n a t u r a l m e t r i c induced on

a t y p i c a l e q u a l - t i m e h y p e r s u r f a c e i s simply g . . (x,x°) and i t s inverse

^J
(3) i " o

i s w r i t t e n as g1J ( x , x ° ) . The p r o p e r time dx between two s u r f a c e s

l a b e l l e d with t h e p a r a m e t e r s x° and x° + dx° w i l l ( f o r i n f i n i t e s i m a l dx°)

be p r o p o r t i o n a l t o dx°. Thus we w r i t e
 1.1

dT = N ( x , x ° ) dx° (5.19)

where t h e f u n c t i o n N i s kncwn as t h e l a p s e f u n c t i o n . Now c o n s i d e r t h e

c o r r e s p o n d i n g normal v e c t o r , whose b a s e has c o o r d i n a t e s (x',x2,x3)

l y i n g in t h e f i r s t h y p e r s u r f a c e . The t i p of t h i s v e c t o r can be connected

t o t h e p o i n t in t h e second s u r f a c e with t h e same s p a t i a l coordinates

2 3
(x',x ,x ), by a v e c t o r O y i n g in t h e second h y p e r s u r f a c e x

whose components can be w r i t t e n in t h e form ( N ' d x 0 , N 2 d x ° , N 3 d x ° ) . The

1
quantities H (x,x°) a r e known as s h i f t f u n c t i o n s and t h e s i t u a t i o n is

s k e t c h e d in F i g . 1.1.

Fig. 1.1
^ ^ >>

The s p a c e - l i k e v e c t o r AC = AB + BC = (N'dx° + d x 1 , N 2 dx° + d x 2 , N 3 dx° + dx 3 )

and t h e r e f o r e t h e l e n g t h of DC i s :
1(2

ds 2 = g dx P dxV = - N 2 ( d x ° ) 2 + g. . (N 1 dx° + d x 1 ) (tH dx° + dx"')

pv lj

= ( - N2 + N. N 1 ) ( d x ° ) Z + 2 N. dx° d x j + g. . dx 1 d x . (5-20)
l J J

which, b e a r i n g i n mind t h a t t h e Roman i , j i n d i c e s a r e t o be r a i s e d and

lowered by t h e induced m e t r i c on t h e t h r e e - s u r f a c e x ° , i s p r e c i s e l y eqn

(5-18).

The i n v e r s e m e t r i c t e n s o r can r e a d i l y be shown t o be

1 HJ

=
^ I I (5.21)
hi -

A r n o w i t t , Deser and Misner found t h a t t h e s e c o n d - o r d e r E i n s t e i n action

could be w r i t t e n i n terms of t h e s e f i e l d v a r i a b l e s as

I = f d"x ( d e t ( l , ) g ) ' 2 R(g) = f d"x {(det{3)g) /2

N[(K.. Kij - K 1 K.j)
J J -^J ^ J

[( 3I)
+ Rj + a four-divergence) (5.22)

where K.. s (N.,. + N.,. - g.. ) . (5-23)

ij 2N llj jli l j ,o

In eqn ( 5 - 2 2 ) t h e s u p e r s c r i p t s and r e f e r t o q u a n t i t i e s computed with

t h e induced t h r e e - s p a c e m e t r i c and t h e o r i g i n a l f o u r - s p a c e m e t r i c
 U3

( 3 ^
v
respectively. In p a r t i c u l a r ' R(x,x ) i s t h e curvature t e n s o r of the

h y p e r s u r f a c e l a b e l l e d by t h e p a r a m e t e r x° and hence d e s c r i b e s t h e

i n t r i n s i c c u r v a t u r e of t h i s s u r f a c e . On t h e o t h e r hand t h e t e n s o r K . .
ij
i n eqn ( 5 . 2 3 ) ( i n which 1 r e f e r s t o c o v a r i a n t d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n w i t h respect

t o t h e t h r e e - m e t r i c ) i s , g e o m e t r i c a l l y , t h e e x t r i n s i c c u r v a t u r e of t h e

h y p e r s u r f a c e and as such d e s c r i b e s t h e manner i n which t h a t s u r f a c e i s

embedded i n t h e s u r r o u n d i n g foui—dimensional geometry.

The main a d v a n t a g e o f t h i s form i s t h a t t h e t i m e d e r i v a t i v e is

i s o l a t e d and one can compute t h e ' c o n j u g a t e momentum' t o g. J. as

j i s _«_ = - ( d e t 3g)J r0 ,i»j + Njli - gik gj* ^ 0)

6g
ij

- ^ ¿ i (2Nklk- ( 3 )
6kigk,s0)> . (5.2.,)

N o t i c e t h a t t h e r e i s no N o r H. term in t h e l a g r a n g i a n and as a r e s u l t a

formal c a l c u l a t i o n gives

(5 25)
'
6N

1
n - 61
= = n0 (5.26)
6N.
l

The f i n a l r e s u l t o f a l l t h i s t h e o r y i s t h a t t h e E i n s t e i n a c t i o n principle

can be w r i t t e n ( a n a l o g o u s l y t o eqn ( 5 . 1 1 ) ) i n f i r s t - o r d e r variational

form as
lili

= | d*x { » i j ¿ y - H u C" U i j
, g^)} (5.27)

where N = U and
o

C° ; ( d e t ( 3 ) 6 ) " J ( , i j „.. - 1 b.1 w.j) - ( d e t ( 3 ) g ) J (3)

R (5-28)
J. J i. J

These t h r e e e q u a t i o n s form t h e s t a r t i n g p o i n t f o r a l l modern t r e a t m e n t s

of c a n o n i c a l q u a n t i s a t i o n . I f we vary t h e a c t i o n w i t h r e s p e c t t o it 1 J we

o b t a i n g. . = g^ . ( g ^ » n1""> which may be s o l v e d as

(5
= ¿rs' V -30)

which i n f a c t i s e x a c t l y eqn ( 5 - 2 l i ) . On t h e o t h e r hand v a r i a t i o n w i t h

respect t o l e a d s t o an e q u a t i o n of t h e form

= it , « ) (5.3i)
rs u

and e q u a t i o n s ( 5 . 3 0 ) and ( 5 . 3 1 ) a r e , t o g e t h e r , e x a c t l y t h e G. J = 0

Einstein equations.

F i n a l l y i f H i s v a r i e d we o b t a i n
U

= 0 (5.32)
 1,5

which t u r n out ( u s i n g eqn ( 5 - 3 0 ) ) t o be t h e r e m a i n i n g C^1' = 0 E i n s t e i n

equations. There a r e a number o f p o i n t s worth m e n t i o n i n g about t h e

r e s u l t s a c h i e v e d so f a r a t t h e c l a s s i c a l level:

a) The n o n - a p p e a r a n c e o f U^ (and hence t h e v a n i s h i n g o f t h e

c o r r e s p o n d i n g c o n j u g a t e q u a n t i t i e s i n eqns ( 5 . 2 5 ) ( 5 . 2 6 ) ) is

e s p e c i a l l y c l e a r i n eqn ( 5 . 2 7 ) . Indeed N^ p l a y s t h e role,

from t h e c a n o n i c a l v i e w p o i n t , o f a Lagrange m u l t i p l i e r and

c e r t a i n l y does n o t count as a t r u e c a n o n i c a l v a r i a b l e . It

i s t h e g r a v i t a t i o n a l analogue of A^ in t h e Maxwell

electromagnetic theory.

b) In s p i t e o f i t s n o n - c o v a r i a n t - l o o k i n g form, the theory is

s t i l l generally covariant. In o t h e r words eqn ( 5 - 2 7 ) is

a p p l i c a b l e t o any choice o f space o r t i m e c o o r d i n a t e s .

T h i s means t h a t t h e t h e o r y i s n o t y e t i n t r u e canonical

form b e c a u s e ( a s we s h a l l s e e l a t e r ) f o u r o u t o f t h e s i x <5* •
iJ
components can be e l i m i n a t e d by c h o o s i n g a s e t o f s p a c e -

time c o o r d i n a t e s . T h i s i s analogous t o t h e way in which

one o f t h e A components d i s a p p e a r s in e l e c t r o m a g n e t i c

t h e o r y when, f o r example, t h e r a d i a t i o n gauge d i v A = 0

is specified.

c) The e q u a t i o n s C ^ n . g ) = 0 (eqn ( 5 . 3 2 ) ) show c l e a r l y that

the twelve q u a n t i t i e s (g. . , it ) cannot be arbitrarily

J
s p e c i f i e d on an i n i t i a l h y p e r s u r f a c e b u t must s a t i s f y f o u r

constraints.

d) The dynamical e q u a t i o n s a r e i n f a c t c o n t a i n e d t w i c e i n t h e

s y s t e m of eqns (5-30) ( 5 . 3 1 ) ( 5 - 3 2 ) in t h e f o l l o w i n g s e n s e :
) I f C l ' ( n , g ) = 0 on an i n i t i a l h y p e r s u r f a c e and eqns

( 5 . 3 0 ) ( 5 . 3 1 ) a r e s a t i s f i e d , t h e n C u ( n , g ) = on any l a t e r

hypersurface. In o t h e r words t h e c o n s t r a i n t s are

c o n s e r v e d i n time - i n f a c t by v i r t u e of t h e B i a n c h i

identities.

) The c o n v e r s e i s a l s o t r u e . Namely i f n 1 J and g^ are

chosen s o t h a t C^t tt , g ) = 0 on a l l h y p e r s u r f a c e s t h e n t h e

= 0 e q u a t i o n s ( 5 . 3 0 ) and (5-31) a r e automatically

satisfied. In t h i s s e n s e t h e dynamical G..J = 0 e q u a t i o n s

can be r e g a r d e d as o c c u r r i n g t w i c e .
ki.
I f a t t h e c l a s s i c a l l e v e l g.^ and it a r e r e g a r d e d as b e i n g

c o n j u g a t e v a r i a b l e s , so t h a t a t some f i x e d t i m e we have t h e

Poisson bracket relations

{g. . ( x ) , - '(x)), (x " i ) , (5-33)

P.B.

then

(5-3IO

(5.35)

which shew t h a t j is the generator (in the canonical

t r a n s f o r m a t i o n sense) of t h e i n f i n i t e s i m a l coordinate t r a n s f o r m a t i o n

xU xp + Çp(x). The q u a n t i t i e s C1' s a t i s f y a P o i s s o n b r a c k e t

 It 7

a l g e b r a which i s a r e f l e c t i o n o f t h i s fact.

I t i s at t h i s stage that the ' c o v a r i a n t ' and 'non-covariant'

approaches t o c a n o n i c a l q u a n t i s a t i o n go t h e i r s e p a r a t e ways. In t h e

c o v a r i a n t approach ( s e e §6) t h e v a r i a b l e s i n t h e a c t i o n p r i n c i p l e eqn

(5.27), which as emphasised above i s s t i l l g e n e r a l l y c o v a r i a n t , are

q u a n t i s e d as t h e y s t a n d . On t h e o t h e r hand i n t h e n o n - c o v a r i a n t approach

that is being discussed here, t h e s y s t e m i s reduced f u r t h e r c l a s s i c a l l y

before quantisation. There a r e v a r i o u s ways of d o i n g t h i s but t h e b a s i c

(i.0)('il)

ideas i s to perform t h e following s t e p s :

1) S o l v e t h e e q u a t i o n s C u (7i,g) = 0 e x p l i c i t l y f o r f o u r of t h e

twelve ( g ^ j , " ) variables. This i s p o s s i b l e in p r i n c i p l e ,

b u t , i n p r a c t i c e , has o n l y been a c h i e v e d perturbatively.

T h i s l e a v e s e i g h t v a r i a b l e s i n t h e s t r u c t u r e whose t i m e

dependence i s d e s c r i b e d by e i g h t of t h e t w e l v e = 0

e q u a t i o n s ( 5 - 3 0 ) and ( 5 - 3 1 ) , t h e r e m a i n i n g ones b e i n g

i d e n t i c a l l y t r u e (they are in f a c t the Bianchi identities

U
i n t h e form C (ir,g) = 0 .

2) Choose a system of c o o r d i n a t e s . There a r e a number of

almost e q u i v a l e n t ways of doing t h i s . A sample s e l e c t i o n

is:

a) Impose any f o u r ' g a u g e ' c o n d i t i o n s of t h e form

F 1 J (n,g) = 0 . Thi3 removes f o u r of t h e e i g h t

11
(g— > ) v a r i a b l e s which a r e l e f t a f t e r s t e p 1 .

The e q u a t i o n s F l '(7i,g) = 0 , plus equations (5-30)

and ( 5 - 3 1 ) , can be u s e d t o f i n d f o u r e l l i p t i c
1.8

d i f f e r e n t i a l e q u a t i o n s f o r N which can a l s o in
M
p r i n c i p l e be s o l v e d , t h u s e l i m i n a t i n g t h e l a g r a n g e

m u l t i p l i e r s ti ^ from t h e t h e o r y . There i s on e x a c t

analogue of t h i s in t h e Maxwell t h e o r y where t h e

equations are D A - 3 ( 3 Av) = j . If the

U V v v
r a d i a t i o n gauge d i v A = 0 i s chosen t h e n c l e a r l y one

of t h e t h r e e A v a r i a b l e s i s e l i m i n a t e d . However, t h e
3
time component of t h e Maxwell e q u a t i o n s p l u s Tr-
ot
( d i v A) = 0 y i e l d s t h e e l l i p t i c e q u a t i o n - V2 A = j

which can be s o l v e d a t once u s i n g t h e a p p r o p r i a t e

t h r e e dimensional Green's f u n c t i o n , as Ao = — j o.

A t y p i c a l example i n t h e g r a v i t a t i o n a l c a s e would be

the conditions

6 i . /o = 0

((det^g)* gij) . = 0
>J

which l e a d t o t h e e l l i p t i c equations

(3)
N,./ " R(g) =0

{<det(3)g)J (Nilj + NjU - ( 3

y j N*) + 2N*ij} . = 0
IK 1J

which c a n , i n p r i n c i p l e , be s o l v e d . However, i f t h e t h r e e -

s p a c e i s non-compact t h e s e e q u a t i o n s w i l l need t o be
 '•9

supplemented w i t h s u i t a b l e boundary conditions,

such a s , f o r example N •* 1 and N. 0, at spatial

infinity.

b) A l t e r n a t i v e l y p i c k any f o u r f u n c t i o n s X l '(n,g) und

d e f i n e t h e c o o r d i n a t e system i n t h e form:

x1' = X l ' ( i t , g ) . T h i s i s on i n t r i n s i c d e f i n i t i o n which

s a y s t h a t one must f i n d t h e c o o r d i n a t e system such

t h a t t h e f u n c t i o n s X ,J , which w i l l t y p i c a l l y be
k£
e x p r e s s e d i n terms of t h e v a r i o u s components o f it

and g . . in t h a t c o o r d i n a t e s y s t e m , are precisely the

J
v a l u e s of t h e c o o r d i n a t e . I f these equations are

d i f f e r e n t i a t e d with r e s p e c t t o the coordinates to

l P
y i e l d 6 ' v = 3^ X (7i,g) t h e n t h e r e s u l t i n g system

t u r n s o u t t o have a s i m i l a r c o n t e n t t o t h a t

discussed in a) and t h e r e d u c t i o n p r o c e e d s from

hereon i n t h e same way.

c) A l t e r n a t i v e l y choose N1' = H " ( i , g ) t o be any a r b i t r a r y

s e t of f o u r f u n c t i o n s . Then eqns ( 5 . 3 0 ) and ( 5 . 3 1 )

y i e l d f o u r e q u a t i o n s of t h e form F^Tt.g) = 0 which

c a n , i n p a r t i c u l a r , be s o l v e d i n t h e form F p (iT,g) = 0

t h u s t a k i n g us back t o s t e p a) a g a i n . The a n a l o g u e i n

t h e Maxwell t h e o r y would be t o s p e c i f y A^ as A^ = -

which when s u b s t i t u t e d i n t o t h e Maxwell e q u a t i o n s y i e l d s

(div
It =
The n e t r e s u l t o f f o l l o w i n g any o f t h e s e t h r e e a l t e r n a t i v e steps

( o r any o f t h e n u n i e r of p o s s i b l e m i x t u r e s of them) i s t h a t t h e H
5 0

v a r i a b l e s and f o u r of t h e ( g . . , * ) v a r i a b l e s d r o p o u t of t h e s y s t e m
-t J
kA
of equations leaving d i f f e r e n t i a l equations for just four ( g . . , i )
^J

v a r i a b l e s in t e r m s o f t h e chosen c o o r d i n a t e s . The f i n a l c o u n t i s correct

s i n c e t h e e x p e c t e d two i n t r i n s i c d e g r e e s o f f r e e d o m o f t h e radiation

components o f t h e g r a v i t a t i o n a l f i e l d w i l l i n v o l v e two p a i r s o f canonical

variables.

The n e x t s t e p i s t o c o n s t r u c t a ' r e d u c e d ' action principle which,

when v a r i e d , w i l l r e p r o d u c e e x a c t l y t h e s e e q u a t i o n s of m o t i o n and which

i n a d d i t i o n can be r e a d i l y w r i t t e n i n f i r s t - o r d e r H a m i l t o n i a n form. One

might b e t e m p t e d s i m p l y t o t a k e t h e a c t i o n i n eqn ( 5 - 2 7 ) and substitute

i n i t t h e s o l u t i o n s of C u ( n , g ) = 0 and t h e c h o s e n coordinates.

U n f o r t u n a t e l y t h e r e i s no g u a r a n t e e t h a t t h e r e s u l t i n g s y s t e m i s in t h e

d e s i r e d c a n o n i c a l form. I t seems t o b e n e c e s s a r y t o l i n k s t e p s l ) and

2 ) above by f o r e x a m p l e , making s u r e t h a t t h e v a r i a b l e which i3

e l i m i n a t e d i n s t e p l ) i s t h e momentum which i s c o n j u g a t e ( i n t h e s e n s e o f

t h e a c t i o n i n ( 5 . 2 7 ) ) t o t h e c o o r d i n a t e s which a r e e l i m i n a t e d i n s t e p 2 ) .

A v e r y n i c e d i s c u s s i o n o f t h i s p o i n t and i n d e e d o f t h e whole s u b j e c t o f
. . . . v, (i»l)
c a n o n i c a l d e c o m p o s i t i o n i s c o n t a i n e d i n K. Kuchar s p a p e r s .

Once t h e s y s t e m i s i n c a n o n i c a l f o r m w i t h , s a y , c a n o n i c a l variables

w r i t t e n s y m b o l i c a l l y as ) A.B = 1 , 2 , one p r o c e e d s i n a n a l o g y w i t h

t h e simple s c a l a r f i e l d d i s c u s s e d i n t h e opening of t h i s s e c t i o n . In

p a r t i c u l a r e q u a l - t i m e commutation r e l a t i o n s o f t h e form

CiA(x.t), nB(x,t)] = ih' 6® 5 ( 3 ) ( X - ¿r) (5.30)

a r e imposed, s u p p l e m e n t e d w i t h t h e a p p r o p r i a t e H e i s e n b e r g e q u a t i o n s o f

motion, o r i f p r e f e r r e d a S c h r o d i n g e r p i c t u r e f o r m a l i s m can b e u s e d .
 51

(Romcmbcr again t h a t t h e b a s i c c a n o n i c a l v a r i a b l e s a r e d e f i n e d on u

fixed three-muni f o l d ) .

An i m p o r t a n t a d v a n t a g e o f t h i s q u a n t i s a t i o n scheme i s t h a t i t is

very much an o p e r a t o r - o r i e n t e d one and as such i s c l o s e l y r e l a t e d t o t h e

s t a n d a r d examples of c l a s s i c a l s y s t e m q u a n t i s a t i o n . There i s c l e a r l y no

need t o s u b t r a c t o u t any background ( a s t h e r e i s i n c o v a r i a n t quantisation)

b u t i f t h e background space were i n some sense E u c l i d e a n t h e n one would

have a c o n v e n t i o n a l ( L o r e n t z n o n - c o v a r i a n t ) quantum f i e l d t h e o r y w i t h a

w e l l d e f i n e d concept of m i c r o c a u s a l i t y , in which g r a v i t o n s a p p e a r a s

m n s s l e s s h e l e c i t y - t w o q u a n t a of t h e P o i n c a r e g r o u p . In p a r t i c u l a r the

t h e o r y would have a u n i t a r y S - m a t r i x w i t h o u t any ' f a c t i t i o u s quanta'.

Perhaps t h e main a d v a n t a g e o f t h i s c a n o n i c a l approach however, is

t h a t i t i s t h e one in which t h e d i f f i c u l t i e s appear most h o n e s t l y ! Some

of t h e w o r s t of t h e s e a r e :

a) The c h o i c e of g . . as a ' c a n o n i c a l ' v a r i a b l e i n t h e a c t i o n

iJ
in ( 5 . 2 ' i ) i s by no means s a c r o s a n c t . In a f l a t - s p a c e

quantum f i e l d t h e o r y t h e r e i s u s u a l l y a f a i r l y natural

choice of the canonical v a r i a b l e s but t h i s i s c e r t a i n l y not

true here. Since a c l a s s i c a l canonical transformation w i l l

n o t i n g e n e r a l be implementable in t h e quantum t h e o r y by a

unitary operator, i t f o l l o w s t h a t d i f f e r e n t such c h o i c e s

w i l l l e a d t o g e n u i n e l y i n e q u i v a l e n t quantum t h e o r i e s . Much

c o n s i d e r a t i o n has been g i v e n t o t h i s problem i n r e c e n t years.

(1,2)

In p a r t i c u l a r York has g i v e n good r e a s o n s why a d i f f e r e n t

s e t o f v a r i a b l e s from t h a t chosen above may be u s e f u l i n

some c a s e s .

b) A c l o s e l y r e l a t e d problem i s t h e i n v a r i a n c e o r o t h e r w i s e of
111.

t h e quantum t h e o r y , under a change o f t h e v a r i a b l e s

which a r e e l i m i n a t e d i n s t e p l ) above or u n d e r a change

o f t h e c o o r d i n a t e s chosen i n s t e p 2 ) .

P o i n t s a) and b) t o g e t h e r r e a l l y q u e s t i o n t h e s i g n i f i c a n c e f o r t h e

quantum t h e o r y of t h e f i n a l p a i r of v a r i a b l e s (g^» 71 ) A,B = 1 , 2 which

a r e used as t r u e c a n o n i c a l v a r i a b l e s . T h i s q u e s t i o n , which c l e a r l y

i n c l u d e s t h e problem of t h e g e n e r a l c o v a r i a n c e of t h e t h e o r y , i s one

o f t h e h a r d e s t t o answer. Indeed no comprehensive s o l u t i o n i s known a t

present. ( C o n c e p t u a l as w e l l as t e c h n i c a l problems a r e i n v o l v e d . For

example two d i f f e r e n t c o o r d i n a t e systems may be r e l a t e d t o g e t h e r by

f u n c t i o n s which become o p e r a t o r s when t h e t h e o r y i s quantised!)

c) The c l a s s i c a l H a m i l t o n i a n which emerges a t t h e end of t h e

g
canonical reduction involves complicated g ^ / " coupling terras.

Thus t h e o p e r a t o r o r d e r i n g problem i s s e v e r e and t h e given

c l a s s i c a l form may admit many quantum v e r s i o n s ( o r p o s s i b l y

none a t a l l ) . One s u s p e c t s t h a t t h i s problem cannot be

r e s o l v e d in i s o l a t i o n from a) and b ) .

d) I t i s always n o t o r i o u s l y d i f f i c u l t t o do any c a l c u l a t i o n s in

a genuine c a n o n i c a l framework l i k e t h e p r e s e n t o n e . If a

f l a t - s p a c e d e c o m p o s i t i o n i s performed t h e n non ( L o r e n t z )

c o v a r i a n t H e i s e n b e r g p e r t u r b a t i o n t h e o r y can be used but

i t i s very messy and l i t t l e a c t u a l c a l c u l a t i o n u s i n g t h e

n o n - c o v a r i a n t c a n o n i c a l approach has been p o s s i b l e . A few

. (3)

y e a r s ago Russo and A r n o w i t t computed t h e t r e e graph

( i . e . n o n - c o v a r i a n t Feynman g r a p h s ) c o n t r i b u t i o n s t o p i o n -

g r a v i t o n s c a t t e r i n g shown in F i g . 1.2.
 53

t /
> grnvitonn /
\

Pions

Fig. 1.2

unci i t i s c o m f o r t i n g t o f i n d t h a t t h e f i n a l r e s u l t i s t h e same as t h a t
(28)

o b t a i n e d by De Witt f o r t h e same p r o c e s s u s i n g h i s c o v a r i a n t approach.

However, no-one has e v e r a t t e m p t e d t o p e r f o r m any l o o p c a l c u l a t i o n s and

indeed t h e r e seems l i t t l e p o i n t i n doing s o . I f a f l a t - s p a c e expansion i s

going t o be used a t a l l i t i s much more s e n s i b l e t o u s e i t w i t h i n the

framework o f c o v a r i a n t quantisation.

6. SUPERSPACE-BASED CANONICAL QUANTISATION

The approach t o c a n o n i c a l q u a n t i s a t i o n sketched out i n §5 has many

u n a t t r a c t i v e f e a t u r e s , n o t t h e l e a s t of which i s i t s n o n - c o v a r i a n c e . An

a l t e r n a t i v e form which ha3 become very p o p u l a r in t h e l a s t few years

a v o i d s t h i s by q u a n t i s i n g t h e system b e f o r e s o l v i n g t h e c o n s t r a i n t s o r

choosing t h e coordinates.

Once a g a i n t h e s t a r t i n g p o i n t i s t h e a c t i o n p r i n c i p l e in eqn ( 5 - 2 7 ) :
5li

1= J d"x <«ij ¿.J - c"(n,6)} (6.1)

w i t h C11 b e i n g given by eqns ( 5 . 2 8 ) and ( 5 . 2 9 ) , b u t a t t e n t i o n i s now

f o c u s s e d on t h e c o n s t r a i n t equations

C^U.g) = 0 . (6.2)

As n o t e d in §5 t h e s e e q u a t i o n s , i f t r u e f o r a l l t i m e s , are

c l a s s i c a l l y e q u i v a l e n t t o a l l of t h e E i n s t e i n e q u a t i o n s and t h e r e f o r e it

seems r e a s o n a b l e t o a t t e m p t t o b u i l d up a quantum t h e o r y b a s e d p u r e l y on
(6) ( 1 ) ( ) .
them a l o n e . The f i r s t s t e p i s t o assign operator s t a t u s t o
kt
a l l components o f g. . and u and assume t h a t t h e y s a t i s f y t h e S c h r o d i n g e r
^J
p i c t u r e c a n o n i c a l commutation r e l a t i o n s

£..(x), n k J L ( X )] = iK « [ k 6 ( 3 ) ( X - jr) (6.3)

iJ i J

in w h i c h , i t s h o u l d be emphasised once a g a i n , a t h r e e - d i m e n s i o n a l m a n i f o l d

has been f i x e d , once and f o r a l l , upon which t h e o p e r a t o r s g . . ( x ) and

^J
ki
it (x) a r e d e f i n e d . We w i l l assume ( s i n c e t h i s i s t h e c a s e f o r which

s u p e r s p a c e q u a n t i s a t i o n i s normally c o n s i d e r e d ) u n l e s s t h e c o n t r a r y is

s t a t e d , t h a t t h i s i s a compact s p a c e . I t i s then hypothesised t h a t t h e

c o n s t r a i n t e q u a t i o n s ( 6 . 2 ) a r e t o be imposed in t h e form of operator

c o n s t r a i n t s on t h e allowed s t a t e v e c t o r ty

= 0
(6.10
 111.

which i t i a hoped (by analogue with t h e c l a s s i c a l t h e o r y ) w i l l d e t e r m i n e

tlio quantum t h e o r y c o m p l e t e l y . N o t i c e t h a t t h e t h e o r y has d e l i b e r a t e l y

been s e t up in a S c h r o d i n g e r p i c t u r e way. A c t u a l l y i f one were t o r e g a r d

g. . and n as b e i n g t r u e c a n o n i c a l v a r i a b l e s ( a s i s s u g g e s t e d - f a l s e l y -

by eqn ( 6 . 3 ) ) t h e n t h e c o r r e s p o n d i n g Hamiltonian d e n s i t y would be

C " ( * , g ) which by v i r t u e of eqn (6.U) always v a n i s h e s on any s t a t e s o f

interest. T h i s would mean, i n e f f e c t , t h a t t h e r e i s no way o f g e t t i n g from

t h e S c h r o d i n g e r p i c t u r e t o t h e H e i s e n b e r g p i c t u r e and indeed e v e r y t h i n g

a p p e a r s t o be s t a t i c with no change in t i m e ! This f a c t lead originally

t o t h i s approach b e i n g known as t h e ' f r o z e n f o r m a l i s m ' . However, a l t h o u g h

t h e m a t h e m a t i c a l s t a t e m e n t s a r e c o r r e c t t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of them in t e r m s

of s t a t i o n a r i n e s s i s i n c o r r e c t . The a p p a r e n t t i m e - i n d e p e n d e n c e s h o u l d be

regarded not as un independence of p h y s i c a l dynamics w i t h r e s p e c t t o some

physical time but r a t h e r t h e independence, of t h e formalism with r e s p e c t to

t h e choice o f t i m e c o o r d i n a t e , which i s i n i t s e l f merely a m a n i f e s t a t i o n

of t h e g e n e r a l c o v a r i a n c e of t h e t h e o r y . A t r u e Hamiltonian can only

be d e f i n e d a f t e r a d e f i n i t e c h o i c e o f t i m e has been made, as f o r example

i n t h e c a n o n i c a l f o r m a l i s m d i s c u s s e d i n §5- (These comments do n o t

n e c e s s a r i l y h o l d i f t h e t h r e e - s p a c e b e i n g c o n s i d e r e d i s non-compact. The

p o s s i b i l i t y o f f i x i n g r e f e r e n c e frames a t s p a t i a l i n f i n i t y a l t e r s the

situation). I n summary t h e n , t h e p r e s e n t approach t o quantisation

hypothesises the equations

(6.5)

and c u (i k \ =0 (6.6)
56

from which a l l d y n a m i c a l i n f o r m a t i o n i s t o be e x t r a c t e d a f t e r s p e c i f y i n g

t i m e i n some way. N o t i c e t h a t no mention of s u p e r s p a c e h a s been made y e t

and none i s n e c e s s a r y a t t h i s s t a g e . The r e a l e s s e n c e o f t h i s approach

t o q u a n t i s a t i o n i s c o n v e y e d by eqns (6.5) and (6.6). S u p e r s p a c e comes i n

o n l y when an a t t e m p t i s made t o f i n d a c o n c r e t e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e CCR

o f eqn ( 6 . 5 ) . However, even i n t h e ' a b s t r a c t ' form a b o v e , a m a j o r problem

11
confronts the theory. As m e n t i o n e d i n 55 t h e C are, classically, the

g e n e r a t o r s o f c o o r d i n a t e t r a n s f o r m a t i o n s and as such s a t i s f y a P o i s s o n

b r a c k e t a l g e b r a which c l o s e s on i t s e l f . This l a t t e r f e a t u r e l e a d s t o the

d e s i r a b l e p r o p e r t y t h a t no new c o n s t r a i n t s can b e i n t r o d u c e d i n t o t h e

t h e o r y by t a l c i n g P o i s s o n b r a c k e t s o f t h e o l d o n e s . C l e a r l y one r e q u i r e s

t h e same t h i n g t o happen i n t h e quantum t h e o r y i n r e l a t i o n t o t h e operator

commutators o f t h e C U . I n d e e d i f t h e s e commutators do n o t c l o s e upon

t h e m s e l v e s i t i s d i f f i c u l t t o s e e how t h e quantum t h e o r y c o u l d e v e r be

generally covariant. However, u n f o r t u n a t e l y , t h e C1J functions involve

t e r m s i n which t h e c a n o n i c a l v a r i a b l e s a p p e a r m u l t i p l i e d t o g e t h e r and t h e
. C* 6 )

o p e r a t o r o r d e r i n g p r o b l e m looms t o t h e f o r e once a g a i n . This problem

s h o u l d r e a l l y b e d i s c u s s e d a t t h e 3ame t i m e a s t h a t o f t h e e f f e c t o f

c h a n g i n g t h e v a r i a b l e s which a r e chosen i n t h e f i r s t p l a c e t o b e c a n o n i c a l .

To t h e b e s t of my knowledge n o - o n e h a s y e t d e m o n s t r a t e d t h e e x i s t e n c e o f

a c h o i c e of c a n o n i c a l v a r i a b l e s and o p e r a t o r o r d e r i n g s i n which t h e

c o n s t r a i n t e q u a t i o n s behave themselves i n t h e sense above!

I t i s a l s o w o r t h n o t i n g t h a t , c l a s s i c a l l y , t h e m e t r i c t e n s o r obeys

the positivity condition

det(g.j) > 0. (6.7)

I f s o m e t h i n g l i k e t h i s were t o b e c a r r i e d a c r o s s i n t o t h e quantum t h e o r y
 111.

then i t would mean t h a t i t i s d i f f i c u l t f o r b o t h g. . ( x ) and it (y.) t o

iJ
be lie I f - a d j o i n t o p e r a t o r s . Tliis i s t h e u s u a l problem t h a t i f two s e l f -

a d j o i n t o p e r a t o r s obey a H e i s e n b e r g - t y p e u n c e r t a i n t y r e l a t i o n , then t h e

5poet rum o f n e i t h e r o f them i s l i k e l y t o be bounded below. One c o u l d perhaps

d e r i n e g. . and r e g a r d t h e 3 x
3 m a t r i x $ as t h e c a n o n i c a l variable
l J i J

but i t i s not obvious t h a t t h i s i s n e c e s s a r i l y t h e c o r r e c t t h i n g t o do.

T h i s problem i s , in f a c t p a r t o f t h e g e n e r a l and r a t h e r s u b t l e one t h a t

some of t h e components o f t h e m e t r i c t e n s o r c o r r e s p o n d c l a s s i c a l l y to

c h o i c e s of c o o r d i n a t e s ( a s we saw in 55) r a t h e r t h a n t r u e dynamical

v a r i a b l e s and i t i s by no means o b v i o u s t h a t t h e c o r r e s p o n d i n g o p e r a t o r s

should be s e l f - a d j o i n t anyway. I t s h o u l d be c l e a r by now t h a t the

q u a n t i s a t i o n scheme b e i n g d i s c u s s e d i s not by any means an example o f

c o n v e n t i o n a l q u a n t i s a t i o n and one s h o u l d be c a u t i o u s about insisting

t o o r i g i d l y on e n f o r c i n g a l l t h e canons of t h e c o n v e n t i o n a l approach in

this situation.

In o r d e r t o p r o c e e d f u r t h e r i t i s n e c e s s a r y t o f i n d a c o n c r e t e

representation of t h e m a t h e m a t i c a l s t r u c t u r e embodied in eqns ( 6 . 5 ) and

5 0
(6.6). The f o r m ' ' which has been s t r o n g l y a d v o c a t e d i n
5 1
t h e p a s t , i n p a r t i c u l a r by W h e e l e r ' ', i s t h a t in which t h e state

v e c t o r s and o p e r a t o r s a r e d e f i n e d as f u n c t i o n a l s of t h e m e t r i c t e n s o r

f i e l d and f u n c t i o n a l d e r i v a t i v e s r e s p e c t i v e l y , a c c o r d i n g t o t h e scheme

(6.8)

UyteM) G^O - B y W »fr^-a (6.9)

c^a-f (6.10)
111.

T h i s i s c l e a r l y c l o s e l y r e l a t e d t o t h e f u n c t i o n a l r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s of t h e

c a n o n i c a l commutation r e l a t i o n s c o n s i d e r e d i n t h e I n t r o d u c t i o n (§1).

However, t h e r e i s an i m p o r t a n t d i f f e r e n c e in t h a t in t h e u s u a l c a s e t h e r e

i s a genuine H i l b e r t s p a c e t2 (Q,dy) upon which t h e f i e l d s a r e d e f i n e d as

o p e r a t o r s in a r i g o r o u s way. On t h e o t h e r hand t h e a s s i g n m e n t s i n eqns

( 6 . 9 ) and ( 6 . 1 0 ) a r e only t o be r e g a r d e d as f o r m a l . In p a r t i c u l a r t h e

s t a t e vectors do not y e t c a r r y a H i l b e r t s p a c e s t r u c t u r e and so q u e s t i o n s

o f t h e s e l f - a d j o i n t n e s s in p a r t i c u l a r , have no meaning. The d i s c u s s i o n

above c o n c e r n i n g t h e p o s i t i v i t y o f g. . has t o be viewed i n t h e some l i g h t .

^J

P r o c e e d i n g f o r m a l l y i t may be shown t h a t t h e c o n t e n t o f t h e t h r e e

constraints:

(6.11)

i s simply t h a t ? i s independent of t h e s p a t i a l c o o r d i n a t e system used t o

d e s c r i b e t h e t h r e e - m e t r i c g^ . T h e r e f o r e t h e s t a t e - f u n c t i o n a l ¥ depends

o n l y on t h e c o o r d i n a t e - i n d e p e n d e n t , i n t r i n s i c geometry o f t h e t h r e e - s p a c e

and, t o emphasise t h i s , i s u s u a l l y w r i t t e n as V= .

The s e t of a l l such g e o m e t r i e s (on t h e given t h r e e - m a n i f o l d ) is

c a l l e d s u p e r s p a c e and i s t h u s t h e domain s p a c e of t h e s t a t e functionals

in t h i s theory. D i a g r a m m a t i c a l l y we can r e p r e s e n t s u p e r s p a c e as i n

Fig. 1-3.
 59

G transversally.

Fig. 1.3

E v i d e n t l y one m a j o r problem i s t o d i s c o v e r t h e f u l l m a t h e m a t i c a l
(514)

s t r u c t u r e of s u p e r s p a c e i t s e l f . I t i s worth remarking t h a t i n t h e
1
analogous Q - s p a c e ' t r e a t m e n t of a c o n v e n t i o n a l quantum f i e l d t h e o r y it

i s n e c e s s a r y t o i n c l u d e d i s t r i b u t i o n s as w e l l a s smooth J u n c t i o n s i n t h e

domain s p a c e of t h e s t a t e f u n c t i o n a l s . The same comment i s l i k e l y t o b e

e q u a l l y v a l i d h e r e and s u p e r s p a c e s h o u l d probably i n c l u d e distribution-

metrics.

Returning t o the equations of motion, the f i n a l c o n s t r a i n t is

6o

C ° ( , g) *[3g] = 0 (6.12)

which i s t h e famous Wheeler-DeWitt e q u a t i o n and which i n p r i n c i p l e , if

p r o p e r l y i n t e r p r e t e d , s h o u l d c o n t a i n a l l of t h e i n f o r m a t i o n c a r r i e d by
(55)

t h e quantum t h e o r y . Gerlach has shown t h a t t h e e q u a t i o n s above a r e

at l e a s t p a r t i a l l y c o n s i s t e n t . He s t a r t e d w i t h t h e semi-classical
3
a p p r o x i m a t i o n y[ G] <v> e which when i n s e r t e d i n t o eqn ( 6 . 1 2 )
(t^ 7) ( I+R) (149)

leads t o t h e Hamilton-Jacobi equation f o r S, the solutions

1 2 1 2
o f which a r e of t h e form S = S ^ G . a , a J where a , a are arbitrary

'integration functions'. I f the associated s t a t e vectors are super-

imposed t o form a wave p a c k e t t h e n c o n s t r u c t i v e i n t e r f e r e n c e o c c u r s on a

3
geometry G i f ¿JiC®''-*] = q# Gerlach showed t h a t a l l such t h r e e -
oa
g e o m e t r i e s f i t i n t o a f o u r - g e o m e t r y (which would n o t be t h e c a s e f o r an

a r b i t r a r y f a m i l y o f t h r e e - g e o m e t r i e s ) which s a t i s f i e s E i n s t e i n ' s equations.

The f u r t h e r development and i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of eqn ( 6 . 1 2 ) requires

great care. The main o b s e r v a t i o n s t o be made a r e :

i) The concept of t i m e and i t s a s s o c i a t e d n o t i o n o f dynamical

e v o l u t i o n 3 t i l l have n o t been introduced,

ii) There seems t o be one s p u r i o u s degree o f freedom l e f t i n

3
the theory since a G depends on t h r e e numbers p e r s p a c e -

p o i n t whereas we e x p e c t t o have only two p e r s p a c e - p o i n t

in a t r u e c a n o n i c a l t h e o r y ,

iii) There i s as y e t no H i l b e r t space s t r u c t u r e on t h e s t a t e

v e c t o r s and t h e r e f o r e no p r o b a b i l i t y i n t e r p r e t a t i o n is

possible. Indeed w i t h o u t a H i l b e r t s p a c e i t i s not p o s s i b l e

 6 1

t o t a l k ubout o b s e r v u b l e s ua o p e r a t o r s in t h e u3ual

aenae.

These t h r e e problems a r e mutually dependent and have t o be c o n s i d e r e d

t o g e t h e r as a b l o c k . The c r u c i a l o b s e r v a t i o n i s t h a t i n g e n e r a l relativity,

p a r t i c u l a r l y «hen t h e s p a t i a l c r o s s - s e c t i o n s a r e compact, t i m e s h o u l d n o t be

r e g a r d e d as b e i n g e x t e r n a l t o t h e t h e o r y b u t r a t h e r as something v h i c h i o

t o be d e t e r m i n e d i n t r i n s i c a l l y in t e r m s of t h e geometry i t s e l f . The

s i m p l e s t way t o s e e t h i s i s t o c o n s i d e r t h a t i n an expanding u n i v e r s e

( e x p a n d i n g t h a t i s w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e p r o p e r time o f a h y p o t h e t i c a l

observer) a n a t u r a l d e f i n i t i o n of global time i s

t = f d 3 x (aet<3)g)i (6.13)
>v

in which t h e i n t e g r a l i s over t h e t h r e e - v o l u m e o f t h e u n i v e r s e . This

shows c l e a r l y t h a t t h i s p a r t i c u l a r t i m e i s d e s c r i b e d i n t e r m s of t h e

i n t r i n s i c three-geometry. This i s a l s o t h e answer t o problem i i ) above.

That i s , two of t h e t h r e e d e g r e e s of freedom p e r s p a c e - p o i n t in

sa
(Ej» 6 2 y) c o r r e s p o n d t o dynamical v a r i a b l e s b u t t h e t h i r d (g^ s a y )

is really time. I f we w r i t e s u g g e s t i v e l y g 3 ( x ) = T(jc) t h e n t h e fundamental

eqn ( 6 . 1 2 ) can be w r i t t e n as

c ( T
° fc; . ^ . f r - ' V V > e2;T] -0. (6.1«.)

This can be i n t e r p r e t e d as a Tomanaga-type m u l t i - t i m e - f o r m a l i s m v e r s i o n of

a dynamical e q u a t i o n f o r t h e s t a t e v e c t o r . This i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , in e f f e c t ,
answers problem i ) above by s u y i n g t h a t t h e dynamics was p r e s e n t a l l the

t i m e i n t h e Wheeler-DeWitt e q u a t i o n , i n t h e form o f a c o r r e l a t i o n between

two o f t h e geometry v a r i a b l e s and t h e r e m a i n i n g t h i r d o n e . The answer t o

problem i i i ) i s now, a t l e a s t i n p r i n c i p l e , c l e a r . One s h o u l d form a

H i l b e r t s p a c e by c o n s t r u c t i n g a measure o f t h e h e u r i s t i c form d y t g ^ g ^ )

( b u t n o t e n o t d y ( 3 G ) ) and u s e i t t o d i s c u s s p r o b a b i l i t y e t c . We hope t h a t

i t w i l l have t h e p r o p e r t y t h a t t h e o b s e r v a b l e q u a n t i t i e s w i l l correspond

t o proper s e i r - a d j o i n t operators. T h i s p r o p e r t y depends on t h e explicit

form o f t h e q u a n t i s a t i o n eqn ( 6 . 1 0 ) . I f t h i s e q u a t i o n i s changed t o

e n s u r e s e l f - a d j o i n t n e s s t h e n t h e Wheeler-DeWitt e q u a t i o n c h a n g e s and h e n c e

t h e c h o i c e o f measure and t h e n o t i o n o f s e l f a d j o i n t n e s s a l s o c h a n g e ! This

whole s i t u a t i o n i s c l e a r l y an e x t r e m e l y d e l i c a t e one which i s cro3s-coupled

in every r e s p e c t . In a d d i t i o n t h e r e i s no a p r i o r i r e a s o n why t h e t i m e

e v o l u t i o n e q u a t i o n (6.1U) s h o u l d i n any way r e s e m b l e t h e conventional

Schrodinger equation, and i n f a c t w i t h t h e c h o i c e s o f c a n o n i c a l variable

which have been u s e d h e r e a K l e i n - G o r d o n t y p e o f e q u a t i o n a p p e a r s (i.e.

52 &

i t i n v o l v e s ¿ijyp r a t h e r than ^ ). This r a i s e s the question of whether

o r n o t t h e m e a s u r e c o n s t r u c t e d above l e a d s t o a c o n s e r v e d probability

density. A c o m p l e t e r e s o l u t i o n of t h i s c o m p l i c a t e d and i n t r i g u i n g problem

has n o t y e t been a c h i e v e d . Any f u r t h e r t e c h n i c a l d i s c u s s i o n h e r e is

i n a p p r o p r i a t e ( i f t h i s i n t r o d u c t o r y c h a p t e r i s not t o become a whole b o o k ) ,

b u t t h e i n t e r e s t e d r e a d e r i s s t r o n( g5 l6y) a d v i s e d t o c o n s u l t some o f t h e

e x c e l l e n t p a p e r s on t h i s problem.

However, t h i s s e c t i o n would n o t b e c o m p l e t e w i t h o u t some remarks

concerning t h e i n v e s t i g a t i o n of g r a v i t a t i o n a l collapse within t h e context

 63

• if e i t h e r o f t h e s e two c a n o n i c a l q u a n t i s a t i o n s c h e m e s . For example i n

the nuperspuce approach, s u p e r s p a c e i t s e l l ' would be e x p e c t e d t o c o n t a i n

c e r t a i n b o u n d a r i e s which c o r r e a p o n d t o s i n g u l a r t h r e e g e o m e t r i e s . In s o

f u r a« |^[ 3 G>J| 2 has some s o r t of p r o b a b i l i t y i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , t h e b e h a v i o u r

or the s t a t e f u n c t i o n a l in the v i c i n i t y of t h e s e s i n g u l a r geometries w i l l

pretiuniably d e t e r m i n e w h e t h e r o r n o t t h e c o l l a p s e d geometry e v e r o c c u r s .

I t h a s become customary i n t h e l i t e r a t u r e t o say t h a t t h e r e i s no c o l l a p s e

i f t h e wave f u n c t i o n a c t u a l l y v a n i s h e s on t h e boundary o f singularities

but t h i s s t a t e m e n t n e e d s t o be i n t e r p r e t e d p r o p e r l y . To i n v e s t i g a t e thÍ3

f u r t h e r i t i s c o n v e n i e n t t o g e n e r a l i s e t h e d i s c u s s i o n i n a way which is

v a l i d f o r e i t h e r of t h e two c a n o n i c a l q u a n t i s a t i o n schemes which have

been d i s c u s s e d . In any c a n o n i c a l a p p r o a c h which b e a r s t h e slightest

r e s e m b l a n c e t o c o n v e n t i o n a l quantum t h e o r y t h e r e w i l l b e o b s e r v a b l e s

which a r e r e p r e s e n t e d by s e l f - a d j o i n t o p e r a t o r s d e f i n e d on t h e H i l b e r t

«pace o f s t a t e s . C l a s s i c a l l y t h e s e o b s e r v a b l e s w i l l t a k e on c e r t a i n

v a l u e s f o r t h e c o n f i g u r a t i o n o f t h e s y s t e m which c o r r e s p o n d s t o t h e

gravitationally collapsed s t a t e . Indeed, f o r some o f t h e observables,

t h o s e v a l u e s (which may be i n f i n i t e ) w i l l p r o b a b l y be r e g a r d e d as b e i n g

the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of collapse. Let us c o n s i d e r one such o b s e r v a b l e ,

which we w i l l c a l l f . By v i r t u e o f t h e s p e c t r a l t h e o r e m f o r s e l f -

a d j o i n t o p e r a t o r s we can s e t up an isomorphism between t h e original

H i l b e r t s p a c e and a c e r t a i n s p a c e o f f u n c t i o n s {i(r(x)|x c a ) which a r e

d e f i n e d on t h e s p e c t r u m a^ o f J* . This function space i s equipped with

a H i l b e r t - s p a c e s t r u c t u r e by means o f a c e r t a i n measure y(A) (which is

d e t e r m i n e d by ¡f ) . S t r i c t l y speaking, unless p i s i t s e l f a complete

61»

s e t of commuting o b s e r v a b l e s , t h e f u n c t i o n s a r e n o t r e a l v a l u e d , but

r a t h e r , elements of a general d i r e c t i n t e g r a l , and as such t a k e t h e i r

v a l u e s in a l a r g e r 3 p a c e . However, n e g l e c t i n g t h i s r e l a t i v e l y unimportant

technical point, t h e i n t e g r a l o v e r a Borel s e t

(6.15)

i s t h e p r o b a b i l i t y t h a t i f a measurement i s made on t h e system of t h e

observable P t h e n t h e r e s u l t i n g v a l u e w i l l l i e i n B. (In t h e g e n e r a l

c a s e t h e i n t e g r a l w i l l be o v e r t h e s p e c t r a o f a complete commuting s e t of

variables.) We a r e p a r t i c u l a r l y i n t e r e s t e d in t h e c a s e in which B c o n t a i n s

t h e p o i n t o f t h e s p e c t r u m of P which c o r r e s p o n d s , c l a s s i c a l l y , t o t h e

singularity. I f t h e s i n g u l a r p o i n t i s an i s o l a t e d , d i s c r e t e p a r t of t h e

s p e c t r u m t h e n i t seems r e a s o n a b l e t o say t h a t t h e v a n i s h i n g o f t h e wave

f u n c t i o n a t t h a t p o i n t means t h a t t h e system does n o t experience

g r a v i t a t i o n a l c o l l a p s e when i t i s in t h a t s t a t e . (Or t o be more p r e c i s e ,

that p a r t i c u l a r observable d o e s n ' t ; presumably t h e s t a t e m e n t would have

t o be t r u e f o r a complete commuting s e t of o b s e r v a b l e s b e f o r e one c o u l d

say t h a t t h e whole system was s i n g u l a r i t y - f r e e ) . However, i f t h e

s i n g u l a r p o i n t b e l o n g s t o t h e c o n t i n u o u s p a r t of t h e spectrum t h e n t h e

v a n i s h i n g o f t h e wave f u n c t i o n a t t h a t p o i n t would n o t n e c e s s a r i l y have

any g r e a t s i g n i f i c a n c e . What i s more l i k e l y t o be r e l e v a n t i s t h e way i n

which P_ i n eqn ( 6 . 1 5 ) approaches z e r o as B s h r i n k s t o t h e s i n g u l a r point.

13
The v a n i s h i n g ( o r o t h e r w i s e ) of t h e s t a t e f u n c t i o n a l on t h e singular

g e o m e t r i e s (which in p r i n c i p l e could a r i s e e i t h e r as an a c t u a l prediction

 65

of t h e t h e o r y o r merely as a c o n s i s t e n t boundary c o n d i t i o n ) certainly

a f f e c t s t h i s b e h a v i o u r b u t i s c l e a r l y n o t t h e whole s t o r y . This p r o b l e m ,

which can be seen e s p e c i a l l y c l e a r l y w i t h i n t h e c o n t e x t o f t h e quantum

models d i s c u s s e d in 57. has as y e t no complete answer and i s e v i d e n t l y an

i m p o r t a n t one f o r r e s e a r c h .

7. QUANTUM 140 DELS

The use o f quantum models ( o r quantum cosmologies as t h e y a r e o f t e n

c a l l e d ) t o i n v e s t i g a t e t h e q u a n t i s a t i o n of t h e g r a v i t a t i o n a l f i e l d ha3

become i n c r e a s i n g l y p o p u l a r over t h e l a s t t e n y e a r s . I t i s important t o

a p p r e c i a t e t h a t t h e t e c h n i q u e i s , i n p r i n c i p l e , a p p l i c a b l e t o any quantum

field theory. To f o c u s a t t e n t i o n l e t us c o n s i d e r a s c a l a r f i e l d b e i n g

q u a n t i s e d in t h e f u n c t i o n a l r e p r e s e n t a t i o n and hence s a t i s f y i n g t h e

Schrodinger equation (see 51)

•[•(•>; t] (7.1)

or e q u i v a l e n t l y (see §1)

;t
H (
a a r- ^
i K
«1, • 0 (7
V V ' ^ " at -2>

with t h e a p p r o p r i a t e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f as t h e p r o b a b i l i t y

distribution f o r t h e measured v a l u e s of

Now i n c l a s s i c a l g e n e r a l r e l a t i v i t y a well-known t e c h n i q u e f o r
f i n d i n g e x a c t s o l u t i o n s of t h e E i n 3 t e i n e q u a t i o n s i s t o impose 3ome

symmetry on t h e m e t r i c . A s i m i l a r p r o c e d u r e could b e f o l l o w e d t o f i n d

c l a s s i c a l s o l u t i o n s o f t h e s c a l a r f i e l d t h e o r y and would c o r r e s p o n d t o

s e t t i n g c e r t a i n of t h e modes q^ ( p o s s i b l y i n f i n i t e l y many) e q u a l t o z e r o .

The q u e s t i o n a r i s e s as t o w h e t h e r a s i m i l a r i d e a would work in t h e

case of t h e quantised t h e o r y . In o t h e r words, what happens i f we

' f r e e z e o u t ' some of t h e d e g r e e s o f freedom of t h e f i e l d and q u a n t i s e t h e

rest? In p a r t i c u l a r i f we remove a l l b u t t h e f i r s t n modes, s a y , t h e n

e q u a t i o n ( 7 . 2 ) becomes

< t )
a 3 3 ^ < V V ' - V
t ) = i 1 2
» ' v v v ^ ' t ; - ^ * < v v v " *
(7.3)

which i s a genuine p a r t i a l d i f f e r e n t i a l , r a t h e r t h a n f u n c t i o n a l e q u a t i o n .

U n f o r t u n a t e l y an e x a c t s o l u t i o n of t h e quantum f i e l d t h e o r y i s n o t o b t a i n e d

i n t h i s way b e c a u s e i n r e a l i t y t h e s u p p r e s s e d modes w i l l , a t t h e very

least, undergo z e r o - p o i n t f l u c t u a t i o n s . As a r e s u l t t h e above s t r u c t u r e

i s a 'quantum model' o r a p p r o x i m a t i o n t o t h e f u l l t h e o r y (hence t h e title

of t h i s s e c t i o n ) . There a r e two d i f f e r e n t a t t i t u d e s which one can t a k e t o

t h e s e models. Namely:

i) I t may be p o s s i b l e t o show t h a t in c e r t a i n physical

s i t u a t i o n s , c e r t a i n of t h e modes do dominate t h e o t h e r s

and as such eqn ( 7 - 3 ) i s a genuine a p p r o x i m a t i o n t o

reality. In e f f e c t we a r e p e r t u r b i n g t h e number o f

d e g r e e s o f freedom n ( r a t h e r t h a n any c o u p l i n g c o n s t a n t s )

and a r e s a y i n g t h a t i n some s i t u a t i o n s t h i s i 3 a u s e f u l

t h i n g t o do. Note t h a t t a k i n g t h e l i m i t n •• » i n (7.3)

 67

13 a h i g h l y n o n - t r i v i a l t a s k . Q u i t e a p a r t from t h e

t e c h n i c a l d i f f i c u l t i e s of s o l v i n g an n ' t h o r d e r p a r t i a l

d i f f e r e n t i a l e q u a t i o n , t h e d e l i c a t e problem of

inequivalent representations of the canonical commutation

r e l a t i o n s o f i n f i n i t e l y many v a r i a b l e s w i l l appear,

b r i n g i n g with i t the usual ' u l t r a v i o l e t divergence'

d i f f i c u l t i e s o f quantum f i e l d t h e o r y ,

ii) A more r e s t r i c t i v e view i s t h a t t h e v a l u e of t h e s e models

i s in s e r v i n g as a t e s t i n g ground f o r p r o b i n g c e r t a i n

c o n c e p t u a l o r t e c h n i c a l d i f f i c u l t i e s of t h e f u l l t h e o r y .

For example, in the case of general r e l a t i v i t y , i f we

q u a n t i s e i n t h e n o n - c o v a r i a n t c a n o n i c a l scheme (§5) t h e n

t h e o p e r a t o r o r d e r i n g problems can be d i s c u s s e d in a

s i m p l i f i e d form u s i n g one o f t h e s e m o d e l s , a s can t h e

q u e s t i o n o f t h e dependence of t h e quantum t h e o r y answers

on c h o i c e o f c a n o n i c a l v a r i a b l e s , c h o i c e of coordinates

etc. (A c a u t i o n a r y remark however - t h e r e s o l u t i o n of a

p a r t i c u l a r problem f o r f i n i t e n , even f o r a l l f i n i t e n ,

may n o t be r e l e v a n t when t h e l i m i t as n » is taken. )

As emphasised i n i t i a l l y t h e s e t e c h n i q u e s a r e in p r i n c i p l e

a p p l i c a b l e t o any f i e l d t h e o r y , b u t in p r a c t i c e t h e y only seem t o have

been used t o any e x t e n t in quantum g r a v i t y . Each o f t h e d i f f e r e n t

approaches t o q u a n t i s i n g t h e g r a v i t a t i o n a l f i e l d has a c o r r e s p o n d i n g

quantum model. For example:

i) True ( n o n - c o v a r i a n t ) c a n o n i c a l q u a n t i s a t i o n (55) finishe3

with a g e n u i n e S c h r o d i n g e r e q u a t i o n ( 7 . 1 ) and as such

has a model p r e c i s e l y o f t h e form of eqn ( 7 - 3 ) .

In ' c o v a r i a n t ' c a n o n i c a l q u a n t i s a t i o n (§6) t h e m a j o r

r e s u l t i s t h e Wheelei—DeWitt e q u a t i o n

(7.M

which would admit a model of t h e form

(7-5)

in which q ^ . - . q ^ form a c o o r d i n a t e system f o r a s m a l l

f i n i t e d i m e n s i o n a l p i e c e of superspace.

The a n a l o g u e of a quantum model f o r t h e covariant

q u a n t i s a t i o n scheme would b e t o r e p l a c e t h e Feynman

f u n c t i o n a l i n t e g r a l o v e r t h e f i e l d p a t h s by a f u n c t i o n a l

i n t e g r a l o v e r n d e g r e e s of freedom. That is,

Although t h e words quantum model/cosmology o r e used

e x c l u s i v e l y in quantum g r a v i t y t o r e f e r t o t h e c a n o n i c a l

approaches i t i s i n t e r e s t i n g t o n o t e t h a t modern E u c l i d e a n -
 69

space-based axiomatic f i e l d t h e o r y , u s e s quantum

models , under t h e t i t l e of ' c o n d i t i o n e d fields',

roughly in t h e s e n s e of eqn ( 7 . 6 ) .

As t h e r e i s a c h a p t e r by M.MacCallum on t h e s u b j e c t of quantum

imology I w i l l n o t g i v e any d e t a i l s o f a c t u a l models h e r e . It

" ' i r r i c c s t o soy t h a t t h e s u b j e c t s t a r t e d i n 1967 w i t h t h e p u b l i c a t i o n o f

|)«Witt's p a p e r ' d e a l i n g with a Friedmann Universe model i n which a l l

hut one degree o f freedom ( t h e r a d i u s i n t h e Robertson Walker m e t r i c ) are

frozen out and which i s f i l l e d w i t h a homogeneous c l o u d of d u s t . The

(57) .
imliject was t a k e n up by Misner i n t h e form of h i s Mixmaster model and

has f l o u r i s h e d s i n c e t h e n i n t h e hands of h i m s e l f , h i s c o l l a b o r a t o r s and

(58)

mimy o t h e r s .

Let us conclude t h i s s e c t i o n by l i s t i n g some of t h e t y p e s of

problem which can be i n v e s t i g a t e d u s i n g quantum models.

1) Conceptual problems a r e :

i) t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e s t a t e v e c t o r and t h e d e f i n i t i o n

of o b s e r v a b l e s ;

ii) t h e n o t i o n of p r o b a b i l i t y i n a c l o s e d u n i v e r s e ( t h i s is

c l o s e l y l i n k e d t o t h e t e c h n i c a l problem o f d e f i n i n g a

Hilbert space s t r u c t u r e f o r t h e s t a t e vectors);

and

iii) t h e s i g n i f i c a n c e o f t h e p o s s i b i l i t y of t i m e b e i n g an

o p e r a t o r i n t h e s u p e r s p a c e approach o r e q u i v a l e n t l y of

d i f f e r e n t c l a s s i c a l l y chosen t i m e s b e i n g r e l a t e d by

q-number gauge t r a n s f o r m a t i o n s in t h e non c o v a r i a n t

c a n o n i c a l scheme.
7 0

2) T e c h n i c a l problems a r e :

i) t h e v a r i o u s o p e r a t o r o r d e r i n g problems which o c c u r ;

ii) t h e dependence o f t h e quantum t h e o r y r e s u l t s on t h e

c h o i c e of c a n o n i c a l v a r i a b l e s a n d , i n t h e c a s e o f t h e

n o n - c o v a r i a n t c a n o n i c a l t h e o r y , on t h e v a r i a b l e s which

a r e e l i m i n a t e d from t h e c o n s t r a i n t e q u a t i o n s and t h e

c o o r d i n a t e c o n d i t i o n s which a r e imposed;

iii) t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n of s e n s i b l e c r i t e r i a f o r t h e existence

o r o t h e r w i s e of g r a v i t a t i o n a l c o l l a p s e in t h e quantum

t h e o r y ( c . f . t h e remarks a t t h e end of §6);

iv) t h e n a t u r e of t h e t i m e - e v o l u t i o n e q u a t i o n (viz.

Schrodinger, Klein-Gordon e t c . ) which f i n a l l y emerges

from t h e s u p e r s p a c e t e c h n i q u e .

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I am f o r t u n a t e in h a v i n g many f r i e n d s and c o l l e a g u e s and

a c q u a i n t a n c e s working i n t h e f i e l d o f quantum g r a v i t y from whom I have

learnt a great deal. In p a r t i c u l a r my views on t h e s u b j e c t have been

c o n s i d e r a b l y broadened by r e c e n t l e n g t h y d i s c u s s i o n s w i t h Bryce DeWitt

and K a r e l Kuchar.
 Y.1

HKFKKKHCKS FOR 51.

Dome r e c e n t review a r t i c l e s o f a g e n e r a l n a t u r e a r e :

(1) D. B r i l l , R. Gowdy Rep. Prog. Phys. 2 1 l»13 (1970)

(2) C . J . Isham Quantum G r a v i t y ICTP/72/8. Imperial

C o l l e g e p r e p r i n t l e c t u r e n o t e s of t h e

1972 Boston c o n f e r e n c e . An e a r l i e r

v e r s i o n appeared in t h e ' P r o c e e d i n g s of

t h e Seventh F i n n i s h Summer School i n

Physics 1972'. Ed. R. P e l l i n e n

(3) B.S. DeWitt Gen. R e l . and Grav. 1 2 l 8 l (1970)

(li) A. A s h t e k a r , R.P. Geroch U n i v e r s i t y of Chicago p r e p r i n t 1971»

Some e a r l i e r , b u t very r e l e v a n t , review t y p e a r t i c l e s ( b u t mainly on

canonical quantisation) are:

(5) J . A . Wheeler i n 'Les Houche l e c t u r e s 1963' Ed. C. DeWitt

and B. DeWitt B l a c k i e 1963

' B a t t e l l e Rencontres 1967' Ed. C. DeWitt,

J . Wheeler. Benjamin N.Y. 1968

(6) P.G. Bergpiann, A. Komar in ' R e c e n t Developments i n General

R e l a t i v i t y ' Pergamon 1962

(7) R. P e n r o s e i n 'Magic w i t h o u t Magic' W.H. Freeman 1972

(8) See t h e c h a p t e r s i n t h i s book by R. P e n r o s e and G. S p a r l i n g f o r a

f u l l b i b l i o g r a p h y on t w i s t o r t h e o r y .

The L 2 ( Q , d y ) v e r s i o n o f Fock s p a c e has been used mainly by a x i o m a t i c

field theorists. A s i m p l e b u t e l e g a n t d i s c u s s i o n f o r t h e two-

d i m e n s i o n a l c a s e i s given i n :