arXiv:2012.14170v1 [math-ph] 28 Dec 2020
scattering of classical Dirac field
Andrzej Herdegen
Abstract. We consider the Dirac equation for the classical spinor field placed in an external, time-dependent electromagnetic field of the form typical for scattering settings:F“Fret`Fin“Fadv`Fout, where the current producingFret{advhas past and future asymptotes homogeneous of degree´3, and the free fieldsFin{outare radiation fields produced by currents with similar asymptotic behavior. We show the existence of the electromagnetic gauges in which the particle has ‘in’ and ‘out’ asymp-totic states approaching free field states, with no long-time corrections of the free dynamics. Using a special Cauchy foliation of the spacetime we show in this context the existence and asymptotic completeness of the wave operators. Moreover, we define a special ‘evolution picture’ in which the free evolution operator has well-defined limits fortÑ ˘8, thus the scattering wave operators do not need the free evolution coun-teraction.
Mathematics Subject Classification (2010).Primary 81U99; Sec-ondary 81V10.
Keywords.scattering, asymptotic completeness, electromagnetic field, Dirac equation.
1. Introduction
This article is a further step in a program of investigation of the infrared problems in electrodynamics. Among them, the long-time asymptotic behav-ior of the charged matter fields is one of the key issues. Such questions as understanding what is a charged particle, or how to define scattering operator in quantum electrodynamics, are correlated to this problem.
It is well-known that the long-time asymptotics poses problems in theo-ries with long-range interactions. Standard way to deal with that is to modify the asymptotic dynamics of charged particles or fields, by Dollard or similar methods, augmented by some ‘dressing’ of charged particles. The cost is the
loss of a clear interpretation of the asymptotic dynamics. Moreover, in phys-ically realistic quantum field theory models this procedure has not resulted, up to now, in a non-perturbational understanding of the issue.1
In a series of articles I have put forward the idea, that the long-time asymptotics problem may be relieved by an appropriate choice of gauge of the electromagnetic potential. In a recent article [11] a Schrödinger (nonrel-ativistic) particle was considered in a time-dependent electromagnetic field, of the form typical for scattering situations. It was found that an appropri-ate choice of gauge allows the existence of the asymptotic dynamics, with no need for dressing.2We also refer the reader to this article for more extensive
description of the context and our motivation.
Here we implement the idea in the case of the classical Dirac field evolving in the external electromagnetic field. The system is not fully self-interacting, but the form of the external electromagnetic field mimics the expected properties of this field in fully interacting system. We consider the evolution of the Dirac field as a unitary evolution in a Hilbert space. How-ever, similarly as in the previously considered nonrelativistic case, the evo-lution does not take place in standard time, over flat pure space sheets. It turns out, that for our purpose it is convenient to consider a Cauchy foliation supplied by constant τ surfaces, where pτ,zq form the coordinate system3
defined by:
x0“τp|z|2`1q12, x“ pτ2`1q 1
2z. (1)
1
For (generalized) Dollard methods see the monograph [2]. Recent examples of the use of ‘dressing’ in construction of simplified quantum field models include [13] and [5]. A recent attempt at a precise implementation of the Dollard idea in general quantum field theory (in the form proposed much earlier in rather imprecise terms by Kulish and Faddeev) may be found in [4].
2
What remains an open question for this system is the asymptotic completeness. In the article we expressed the view that the clash between the symmetry groups of the two parts of the system: Lorentz for the Maxwell and Galilean for the Schrödinger equations, might make the issue more problematic. Our present discussion seems to confirm this.
3
I have first proposed the use of these coordinates in the present context in 1999, as a natu-ral extension of the hyperbolic foliation of the inside of the lightcone, to a Cauchy foliation of the whole spacetime. The evolution of the Dirac field over the hyperbolic foliation, and its large hyperbolic time asymptotics, was analysed in [8] in terms of a Fourier-like trans-formation, which transformed this evolution to a unitary evolution in the Hilbert space of spinors on the hyperboloid of4-velocities. The existence of the wave operators for the Dirac
field in external electromagnetic field was established (in appropriate gauge, see below), but no results on asymptotic completeness were obtained. The idea now was to formulate the evolution over the foliation (1) in similar Fourier terms. Piotr Marecki, my student at that time, carried out in his MSc Thesis [12] calculations of this programme for the free Dirac field (scattering was only briefly mentioned in this thesis). This method has its assets, but it is inconvenient for the analysis of many further questions like self-adjointness of the generators, the analysis of the domain of validity of the Dirac equation in the dif-ferential form, or asymptotic completeness of the interacting case, the questions that have not been considered. Here we use another method, which could be developed much further, and enabled the solution of all these questions.
This poses technical complication even at the free Dirac equation level, as the unitary evolution is not a unitary one-parameter group (Hamiltonian de-pends onτ).4This is to be contrasted with the nonrelativistic case considered
earlier, where the Niederer transformation introducing suitable coordinates leads from the free particle Hamiltonian to that of the harmonic oscillator (a kind of beautiful miracle). Nevertheless, the Schrödinger operator case be-comes steeply difficult when the potential with space part is introduced, as then the term A¨p prevents the application of the Dyson series method. To deal with that case we have applied the Kato theorem. Here, for the free Dirac equation we proceed differently, and our method may be of indepen-dent interest. The addition of the interaction with the electromagnetic field may be then treated, in contrast to the nonrelativistic Schrödinger case, by a variation of the Dyson method combined with the relativistic causality. For this system we show that an appropriate choice of gauge removes the asymptotic problem. We show the existence and asymptotic completeness of the wave operators, with no need for any modification of the asymptotic free Dirac evolution.5
This result will show that the choice of a gaugeApxq in this classical field setting has a decisive importance for the asymptotic identification of the incoming/outgoing charged fields. The main qualitative feature of gauges in this appropriate class is that the product x¨Apxq vanishes in timelike directions, see remarks in Section 8 (a property already identified in [8]). We would like to stress that the theory is formulated from the outset in such chosen gauge. Whether such formulation may be carried over to the quantum field theory is a subject for future research.6 This prospective investigation
should also find contact with the asymptotic algebra of fields in quantum electrodynamics postulated by the author [9] (see also [10]).
Here let us only mention, that the use of a gauge in the class anticipated above could lead to some broadening of the scope of external classical, time-dependent electromagnetic fields for which the scattering operator for the
4
One should also mention that the use of more general, than the flat equal time hyper-surfaces, places our problem as a special case of the problem of hyperbolic equations on Lorentzian manifolds, a question intensively studied in the past, see a recent monograph [1]. However, our more specific system allows us to apply more specific Hilbert space methods, and obtain stronger results.
5
The Cauchy problem and the asymptotic completeness of the interacting Maxwell-Dirac system were considered by Flato et al. in [7]. However, their analysis needs strong smooth-ness and smallsmooth-ness assumptions, the latter not under well-determined control, and uses methods rather not well suited for an application in quantum case (‘nonlinear represen-tation of the Poincaré group’). Also, the authors modify the asymptotic dynamics by a variation of the Dollard method. Our aims are different, as explained above.
6
We postpone to such prospective publication a comparison with the existing discussions of the relevance of gauge choice in QED. Here counts the idea, originated by Dirac [3], of an a posteriori transformation to a ‘gauge-independent gauge’, developed by many authors, most exhaustively by Steinmann, see his monograph [18], Chapter 12. Also, the expectation (not shared by everyone) that formulations of QED in differing gauges need not be equivalent received a recent support from a mathematical analysis of a simplified model [6] (where literature account may also be found).
classical Dirac field may be lifted to the case of the respective quantum field. As is well-known the mixing of electrons/positrons leads to rather severe restrictions in this respect7(see e.g. the monograph [17], Sections 2.4 and 2.5).
Precisely what gain would be possible is an open question.
The outline of the article is as follows. In Section 2 we formulate the Dirac evolution as a unitary evolution, with time-dependent self-adjoint gen-erators, over a rather general family of Cauchy surfaces. Section 3 gives the formulation of the external field problem with the Dyson series method, but with the important use of the relativistic causality. In both free and interact-ing case the self-adjointness is achieved with the use of the commutator theo-rem (see Appendix B) and the harmonic oscillator Hamiltonian. In Section 4 we specify our choice of coordinates to those mentioned above and transform the evolution to a new ‘picture’. In this picture the free Dirac evolution on our foliation has well-defined limits as unitary operators. Section 5 specifies the general external problem to the electromagnetic case and discusses the gauge transformation. Section 6 contains our central results formulated for a wide class of electromagnetic fields: the existence and asymptotic completeness of the wave operators. Section 7 gives a theorem showing that the electromag-netic fields typical for scattering contexts described above admit potentials in gauges satisfying the demands of the main theorems of Section 6. Sec-tion 8 offers some remarks on the implicaSec-tions of our results and on further physically motivated restriction in the class of the obtained electromagnetic gauges.
Large parts of the material are shifted to Appendix. In Appendix A we discuss a spinor transformation needed in Section 2. Appendix B describes our method to deal with a class of time dependent Hamiltonians. A lemma needed for the application of this method to the system considered here is discussed in Appendix C. In Appendix D we gather geometrical facts and relations in our special coordinate system. Appendices E and F recapitulate some properties of the solutions of the free Dirac and wave equations, respec-tively. Appendix G contains some estimates of the decay of the advanced and retarded solutions of the inhomogeneous wave equation and their differences (radiation fields). The results of Appendices E–G are applied next in Appen-dix H to the case of the electromagnetic fields typical for scattering contexts. Finally, the necessary decay properties of the special gauge introduced in Section 7 are obtained in Appendix I.
7
This is a standard example of the fact that classical external interaction problems for quantum fields create problems of their own, which are not expected to propagate into full closed quantum theory. An even more restrictive question in the case of the quantum Dirac field in an external classical field is whether a unitary evolution operator exists for this system. As shown in [16] (for standard evolution over the flat foliation of the spacetime), this may be possible only if the magnetic field vanishes. This brings to sharp light a rather restricted physical relevance of such questions and models (note that this condition is not even inertial observer-independent; anyway, this problem is not related to infrared questions).
2. Free Dirac evolution
Throughout the article we set~“1,c“1. We choose a reference point, and then the flat spacetime is identified with the Minkowski vector space. Letm
be the mass parameter in the free Dirac equation. To simplify notation we rescale Minkowski vectors by multiplying them bym, and denote the result-ing space by M, and its dimensionless vectors by xa. The flat (covariant)
derivative in the rescaled Minkowski space is denoted by∇a. Also, the elec-tromagnetic interaction to appear later will be introduced by the interaction term Aaψγaψ, so to recover the physical units and quantities one should
replaceAÑ pe{mqA, withethe elementary charge.
Letτ :M ÞÑRbe a smooth surjective function such that the
hypersur-facesΣτ of constantτ form a Cauchy foliation of the Minkowski spacetime, withτincreasing into the future. Consider the Dirac equation, which we write in the form
p1 2rγ
a, i∇
as`´1qψ“0 (2)
in our dimensionless coordinates, whereγa are the Dirac matrices andr., .s`
symbolizes the anticommutator. As is well-known, the Cauchy problem for this equation with the initial data ψ|Στ0 “ f is explicitly solved by the
formula
ψpxq “i´1
ż
Στ0
Spx´yqγafpyqdσapyq,
where dσa is the dual integration element onΣτ0 and Spxq is the standard
Green function of the free Dirac field, in the dimensionless coordinates
Spxq “ piγ¨∇`1qD1pxq, D1pxq “ i p2πq3
ż
sgnpv0qδpv2´1qe´iv¨xdv .
Iffis a smooth bi-spinor function onΣτ0, with a compact support, thenψpxq
is a smooth function in M, with compact support on each Cauchy surface
Στ. Therefore, we obtain a bijective evolution mapping between the spaces of smooth, compactly supported bi-spinor functions on our family of Cauchy surfaces. Moreover, if on eachΣτ one defines the scalar product
pψ1, ψ2qτ“
ż
Στ
ψ1γaψ2dσa, (3)
then the evolution is isometric.
Let now pζµq “ pζ0, ζiq “ pτ, ziq ” pτ,zq P R4 (i “ 1,2,3), with τ
described above, be a smooth curvilinear coordinate system, mapping M
diffeomorphically ontoR4. Denote byηab and Ca...b... the Minkowski
space-time metric tensor, and any other tensor, respectively. Then the geometrical components in the coordinate systempξµqwill be denoted by
Bµ“ B Bζµ “ Bxa Bζµ∇a, Bτ“ B Bτ, Bi“ B Bzi , ˆ 㵓 p∇ aζµqγa, Cˆµ...ν...“ p∇aζµq. . . Ca...b...B xb Bζν. . . , gµν “ B xa Bζµ Bxb
Bζνηab, g“detpgµνq, gpzq“detrpgijqi,jď3s,
(4)
Coordinates restricted to the indices 1,2,3 will be written as ˆγi, g ij and ˆ
Ci...
j..., and the zeroth coordinate will be indicated byτ; thus for instance:
Aaγa“Aˆ
µˆγµ“Aˆτγˆτ`Aˆiˆγi.
In these coordinates the Dirac equation (2) and the product (3) take the form ´ i 2 ” |g|12ˆγµ,|g|´ 1 2B µ ı `´1 ¯ ψ“0, (5) pψ1, ψ2qτ“ ż ψ1γˆτψ2|g| 1 2d3z . (6)
We now choose a Minkowski reference systempe0, . . . , e3q. Let us denote n“ rgτ τs´1
2∇τ (7)
and letKbe the Lorentz rotation of Dirac spinors in the hyperplane spanned by the pair of timelike unit vectorspe0, nq, such that
K´1γanaK“γ0, K:“γ0K´1γ0, (8)
where dagger:denotes the hermitian conjugation of matrices. The form and further properties ofKare discussed in Appendix A. We define the following transformation: ψ“Tτχ , Tτ“ p|g|gτ τq´ 1 4K“ |g pzq|´ 1 4K .
The product (6) then takes the standardC4bL2pR3qform
pψ1, ψ2qτ “
ż
χ:1χ2d3z .
Settingψinto (5) and applying from the left the transformationpgτ τq´1 2T´1
τ
we obtain an equivalent form of the Dirac equation ´ i 2 ” pgτ τq´12γˆµ K,Bµ ı `´ pg τ τq´1 2 ¯ χ `i 2pg τ τq´1 2 ” ˆ γKµ,pK´1BµKq ı `χ“0, (9)
where we have introduced notation
γK “K´1γK . (10)
We now make an additional assumption:Στ is rotationally symmetric in the
chosen Minkowski system, that isτ“τpx0,|x|q. We show in Appendix A that
note that pgτ τq´1 2ˆγτ
K “γ0 ”β. This allows us to write the Dirac equation
in the form iBτχ“ ´ ´ i 2 “ pgτ τq´1 2βˆγi K,Bi ‰ `` pg τ τq´1 2β ¯ χ .
We summarize the above discussion.
Theorem 1.(i) Let the smooth function on the Minkowski spaceτ“τpx0,|x|q determine its foliation by Cauchy surfaces Στ, withτ increasing into the fu-ture. Denote byC08pΣτ,C4q the space of smooth, compactly supported func-tions onΣτ with values inC4.
Then the free Dirac evolution of initial data inC8
0 pΣσ,C4qis determined
by a family of bijective linear evolution operators
U0Σpτ, σq:C08pΣσ,C4q ÞÑC08pΣτ,C4q
isometric with respect to the products (3). The size of the support in Στ is
restricted by the size of the support inΣσ and the relativistic causality. By
continuity,UΣ
0pτ, σqextend to unitary operators U0Σpτ, σq:HpΣσq ÞÑHpΣτq,
where HpΣτq is the Hilbert space of spinor functions on Στ with the pro-duct (3).
(ii) Letpτ, ziq:M ÞÑR4be a smooth diffeomorphism, with notation(4), such thatτ satisfies the assumptions of (i). Denote
H“C4bL2pR3, d3zq, H0pτq “ 12rλipτq, pis``µpτq, h0“ 21pp2`z2q, pi“ ´iB{Bzi, µpτq “ pgτ τq´ 1 2β , λipτq “µpτqˆγi K. (11)
Then the transformation
Tτ:HÞÑHpΣτq, Tτ “ |gpzq|´1{4K ,
with operatorKdiscussed in Appendix A, is a unitary operator and the family
U0pτ, σq “Tτ´1U0Σpτ, σqTσ, U0pτ, σq:HÞÑH (12) formes a unitary, strongly continuous evolution system, such that the follow-ing holds:
(A) U0pτ, σqC08pR3,C4q “ C08pR3,C4q and the relativistic causality is re-spected.
(B) For ϕ P C08pR3,C4q the maps pτ, σq ÞÑ H0pτqU0pτ, σqϕ and pτ, σq ÞÑ
h0U0pτ, σqϕ are strongly continuous, the map pτ, σq ÞÑ U0pτ, σqϕ is in the classC1in the strong sense, and the following equations are satisfied
iBτU0pτ, σqϕ“H0pτqU0pτ, σqϕ , iBσU0pτ, σqϕ“ ´U0pτ, σqH0pσqϕ . (C) The operators H0pτqare symmetric on C08pR3,C4q.
Proof. The symmetry ofH0pτqfollows from the symmetry of the operators λipτq, µpτqandp
i, and invariance ofC08pR3,C4qwith respect to them. The
other statements of the theorem follow easily from the discussion preceding
the theorem. ˝
We now add assumptions which will be satisfied in the context of our application, and which alow us to significantly extend the domains of validity of the results in the last theorem. We use the abbreviation
xzy “ p|z|2`1q12.
Also, the usual multi-index notation will be used.
Theorem 2. Let all the assumptions of Theorem 1 be satisfied. Suppose in addition that the following bounds of matrix norms hold:
|λipτ,zq| ďCpτqxzy, |Bzαλipτ,zq| ďCpτq, 1ď |α| ď3, (13)
|Bβ
zµpτ,zq| ďCpτqxzy2´|β|, |β| ď2,
whereCpτqis a continuous function. Denoteh0“ 12pp2`z2), the self-adjoint harmonic oscillator Hamiltonian.
Then the following holds:
(A) H0pτqare essentially self-adjoint onC08pR3,C4qand on each core ofh0, and Dph0q Ď DpH0pτqq. Moreover, h´10 H0pτq and Hpτqh´10 extend to bounded operators, and as functions of τ are strongly continuous. (B) The operator h0U0pτ, σqh´10 is bounded, with the norm
}h0U0pτ, σqh´10 } ďexp ” const żτ σ Cpρqdρı, so in particular U0pτ, σqDph0q “Dph0q,
and the map pτ, σq ÞÑh0Upτ, σqh´10 is strongly continuous.
(C) For ϕ P Dph0q the vector functions h0U0pτ, σqϕ, H0pτqU0pτ, σqϕ and U0pτ, σqH0pσqϕ are strongly continuous with respect to parameters, the vector function U0pτ, σqϕ is of the class C1 with respect to parameters in the strong sense and the following equations hold
iBτU0pτ, σqϕ“H0pτqU0pτ, σqϕ , iBσU0pτ, σqϕ“ ´U0pτ, σqH0pσqϕ .
(D) Relativistic causality is respected byU0pτ, σq. Therefore, if we denote HĄHc –the subspace of functions with compact essential support,
Dcpp2q “HcXDpp2q,
then
Proof. It follows from the assumptions on λi and µ that H
0pτq fulfill all
the conditions imposed on the operator h in Lemma 14 in Appendix C. In Theorems 12 and 13 in Appendix B we now put
D“C08pR3,C4q, hpτq “H0pτq, upτ, σq “U0pτ, σq
and h0 as defined in the present assumptions. Then by the results of
The-orem 1 all the assumptions of these theThe-orems are satisfied and the present
thesis follows. ˝
3. Evolution in external field
We now consider the Dirac equation in an external field, of the form
p1 2rγ
a, i∇
as`´1´Vqψ“0,
whereVpxqis a matrix function satisfying the condition
Vpxq:“γ0Vpxqγ0, (14)
which guarantees the reality of the interaction term´ψV ψin the lagrangian and the conservation of the current ψγaψ. The addition of this interaction
term leads to the modification of the free curvilinear version to the equation of the form
iBτϕ“ p12rλi, pis``µ`Wqϕ , (15)
where
Wpτ,zq “µK´1VpxqK“Wpτ,zq:,
hermicity being equivalent to the property (14) (see (8)).
Using the interaction picture technique we shall obtain the evolution operators for which equation (15) is satisfied. However, thanks to the rel-ativistic causality we can extend the applicability of the technique to the following setting, in which the operatorsWpτqdo not need to be bounded.
Theorem 3. Let all the assumptions of Theorems 1 and 2 be satisfied. Sup-pose in addition that Wpτ,zq is a hermitian matrix function such that the mappings RQτÞÑ Bα zWpτ,zq ( PC0pR, L8 locpR3qq, |α| ď2, (16) and }xzy´2`|α|Bα zWpτ,zq}8 ďCpτq, |α| ď1, (17) whereCpτq is a continuous function. Denote
Hpτq “H0pτq `Wpτq, with the initial domainC8
Upτ, σq “ 8 ÿ n“0 Upnqpτ, σq, Up0qpτ, σq “1, Upnqpτ, σq “ p´iqn ż τěτně...ěτ1ěσ U0pτ, τnqWpτnqU0pτn, τn´1q. . . . . . Wpτ1qU0pτ1, σqdτn. . . dτ1 “ ´i τ ż σ U0pτ, ρqWpρqUpn´1qpρ, σqdρ “ ´i τ ż σ Upn´1qpτ, ρqWpρqU0pρ, σqdρ , ně1. (18)
Then the following is true:
(A) Hpτqare essentially self-adjoint onC08pR3,C4qand on each core ofh 0, andDph0q ĎDpHpτqq.
(B) SeriesUpτ, σqand its conjugation converge strongly onHc, and the limit
operator extends to a unitary propagator on H, strongly continuous in its parameters.
(C) Upτ, σqrespects relativistic causality and
Upτ, σqDcpp2q “Dcpp2q.
(D) For ϕ P Dcpp2q the vector functions h0Upτ, σqϕ, HpτqUpτ, σqϕ and Upτ, σqHpσqϕ are strongly continuous with respect to parameters, the function Upτ, σqϕ is of the class C1 with respect to parameters in the strong sense and the following equations hold
iBτUpτ, σqϕ“HpτqUpτ, σqϕ ,
iBσUpτ, σqϕ“ ´Upτ, σqHpσqϕ .
(19)
(E) Unitary operators satisfying (D), withUpσ, σq “1, are unique.
Proof. The proof of (A) is similar as the proof in the free case, statement (A) in Theorem 2. One has to note that the assumption (17) ensures the validity of items (i) and (ii) in Lemma 14; the result of item (iii) is not needed.
Consider the series (18). As each of the operatorsU0pτ, τnq,U0pτk, τk´1q
andU0pτ1, σqin the definition of Upnqpτ, σqrespects causality, and
multipli-cation byWpτk,zqdoes not enlarge the support of the function, each of the
operatorsUpnqpτ, σqrespects causality. Let, for chosenT andr, τ, σP r´T, Ts, ϕPH, ess suppϕĎ tz| |z| ďru,
which is assumed for the rest of this proof. Then there exists RpT, rq such that the essential support of all functions Upnqpτ, σqϕ is contained in |z| ď RpT, rq (uniformly with respect to τ, σ and ϕ in the assumed range). Let
Jpzqbe a smooth function such that Jpzq “1 for|z| ďR andJpzq “ 0for
|z| ěR`1. Denote byUJpτ, σqandUJpnqpτ, σqthe series (18) and its terms
by assumption (16)WJpρqis a bounded, strongly continuous operator, with
}WJpρq} ďd1for some constantd1, uniformly onρP r´T, Ts. Using the first
of the recursive relations in (18) it is now easy to see that in the given setting
Upnqpτ, σqϕ“UJpnqpτ, σqϕ .
Arguing as in the proof of the Dyson expansion (see Thm. X.69 in [15]) one shows that UJpτ, σq converges uniformly to a strongly continuous unitary
propagator. As the space Hc is dense in H, the statement (B) is proved.
Also, the causality is respected.
To prove (C) (the invariance of the subspace) and (D) we write
h0WJpρqh´10 “ rh0, WJpρqsh´10 `WJpρq
and note that by Theorem 12 applied to hpτq “ WJpτq (with Lemma 14)
the first term on the rhs is a bounded operator, strongly continuous by the assumption (16). Therefore, the operatorh0WJpρqh´10 is also bounded and
strongly continuous, and}h0WJpρqh´10 } ďd2for some constantd2, uniformly
onρP r´T, Ts. Taking also into account statement (B) in Theorem 2 we con-clude that h0UJpnqpτ, σqh´10 is bounded, strongly continuous, with the norm
estimated by }h0UJpnqpτ, σqh´10 } ď pn!q´1pd1`d2qnexp ” const żτ σ Cpρqdρı,
This implies that the seriesř
nh0U
pnq
J pτ, σqh´10 converges uniformly to the
strongly continuous functionh0UJpτ, σqh´10 . Let us now impose onϕa
stron-ger assumption thatϕPDcpp2q. Then
h0Upτ, σqϕ“h0UJpτ, σqϕ“h0UJpτ, σqh´10 h0ϕ .
This proves (C), and also the strong continuity of h0Upτ, σqϕ in (D). The
strong continuity of HpτqUpτ, σqϕ and Upτ, σqHpσqϕ follows now from the strong continuity ofHpτqh´10 , similarly as in Theorem 2, basing on Theorem 12 and assumptions (16) and (17).
Next, we note that
U0p0, τqUpnqpτ, σqϕ“ ´i
żτ
σ
U0p0, ρqWpρqUpn´1qpρ, σqϕ dρ ,
so this vector function is continuously differentiable inτ in the strong sense and
iBτrU0p0, τqUpnqpτ, σqsϕ“U0p0, τqWpτqUpn´1qpτ, σqϕ
(remember that on the rhs W may be replaced by WJ). Again, using the
uniform convergence ofUJpτ, σqwe obtain
iBτrU0p0, τqUpτ, σqsϕ“U0p0, τqWpτqUpτ, σqϕ ,
and the rhs is strongly continuous inpτ, σq. Finally, differentiating
Upτ, σqϕ“U0pτ,0qrU0p0, τqUpτ, σqsϕ
by the Leibnitz rule and using (C) from Theorem 2 we arrive at the first equation in (19). The uniqueness (E) follows easily from this equation. The
proof of the second equation in (19) is similar, with the use of the second of the recursive relations in (18); we omit the details. ˝
The most general matrix field Vpxq satisfying condition (14) may be concisely represented in the form
V “ 4 ÿ k“0 i12kpk´1qCk a1...akγ a1 . . . γak ,
where the tensor fieldsCk
a1...akare real and antisymmetric. The corresponding
form of the hermitian matrix functionW is
W “µ 4 ÿ k“0 i21kpk´1qCˆk µ1...µkˆγ µ1 K . . .ˆγ µk K .
This form encompasses the scalar (k “ 0) and pseudoscalar (k “ 4) po-tentials, the electromagnetic vector potential (k “1) and the pseudovector potential (k“3), the interactions characteristic for anomalous magnetic and electric moments, as well as the linearized gravitation (k“2).
4. Special foliation, new picture and free asymptotics
We now choose the foliationτ and the variableszby
x0“τxzy ”τp|z|2`1q12, x“ xτyz” pτ2`1q 1
2z, (20)
and we also denote
xτ|zy “ pτ2` |z|2`1q12.
The idea behind this choice is that forτ tending to˘8the Cauchy surfaces should tend, for timelike directions in the spacetime, to the hyperboloids
x2 “ τ2. All geometrical facts on these curvilinear coordinates needed for
our purposes are gathered in Appendix D.
From now on we adopt the coordinate system (20). Using the properties of this system it is then easy to see that all the conditions of Theorems 1 and 2 are satisfied. Also, a convenient property of these coordinates is that
gτ i“0. Therefore, we find rˆγi K, βs`“ pgτ τq´ 1 2K´1rˆγi,ˆγτs `K“2pgτ τq´ 1 2giτ “0, and then rλi, βs`“0“ rλi, µs`, (21) 1 2rλ i, λj s`“ ´gτ τgij1”ρij1; (22)
the symmetric formρis positive definite.
The free evolution U0pτ, σq may be easily expressed in the coordinate
representation of the Dirac solution (103) in Appendix E and the defini-tion (12), forϕPSpR3,C4qwe obtain
rU0pτ,0qϕspzq “ ´ xτ|zy xτyxzy ¯ 1 2 Kpτ,zq´1ˆ ˆ´xτy 2π ¯32ż “ e´ixpτ,zq¨v P`pvq ´eixpτ, zq¨v P´pvq ‰ rF´1ϕspvqdµpvq, (23) wherexpτ,zq “ pτxzy,xτyzq. We consider the asymptotic form of this evolu-tion forτÑ ˘8. LetϕPFC08pR3,C4qand restrictzto a compact set. Then
bothv(the space part ofv) andzare restricted to bounded sets and by the stationary phase method (see e.g. [19]) the leading asymptotic behavior of the second line in (23) is given by
¯i“ e´ipτ˘π 4qP `pz0,˘zq `eipτ˘ π 4qP ´pz0,˘zq‰rF´1ϕspz0,˘zq `Opxτy´1q, (24) where z0 “ xzy, the upper/lower signs ¯ and ˘ correspond to the limits τ Ñ ˘8, respectively, and the rest is bounded uniformly forzin the given set. The limit of the term on the rhs of (23) in the first line is equal to
xzy´1 2Kp˘8,zq´1, with Kp˘8,zq “2´12“p1` xzyq 1 2 ˘ p1` xzyq´ 1 2γ0z¨ ㉓Kp8,˘zq, (25)
and again the rest is bounded byconstxτy´1, uniformly in the given set. We
now note two facts:
Kp8,vq´1v¨γ Kp8,vq “β , e´iσ1 2p1`βq `e iσ1 2p1´βq “e ´iσβ.
The first identity is the limit form of the first of relations in (8), but it may also be checked directly. The second identity is most easily evaluated on the two complementary eigenspaces ofβ (with eigenvalues˘1).
Setting the asymptotic forms (24) and (25) into the formula (23), and using the above identities (the second one withσ“τ˘π
4), we obtain rU0pτ,0qϕspzq “ ¯ie´ipτ˘ π 4qβxzy´ 1 2Kp8,˘zq´1rF´1ϕspz0,˘zq `Opxτy´1q. (26)
The last formula suggests the definition of the following unitary trans-formation:
Φpτq “expr´iτ βs,
and the associated change of the evolution ‘picture’ (also in the interacting case):
U0Φpτ, σq “Φpτq˚U0pτ, σqΦpσq, UΦpτ, σq “Φpτq˚Upτ, σqΦpσq, H0Φpτq “Φpτq˚H0pτqΦpτq ´β ,
HΦpτq “H0φpτq `WΦpτq, WΦpτq “Φpτq˚WpτqΦpτq.
Remark 4. Under the conditions of Theorem 3 all statements of its thesis remain valid with the replacements defined by the equations(27).
This follows quite trivially, asΦpτqacts only on the factorC4 in the Hilbert
spaceH“C4bL2pR3q.
After that, we go back to the asymptotics of the free evolution, where we shall need the parity operator
rPϕspzq “ϕp´zq.
Moreover, we observe that the map
rKϕspzq “ xzy12Kp8,zqϕpzq
is a unitary operatorHÞÑL2
γpHq(with the latter space defined in
Appen-dix E).
Theorem 5. The following strong limits exist as unitary operators inH:
U0Φp`8,0q “ s-lim τÑ`8U0Φpτ,0q “ ´ie ´iπ 4βK´1F´1, U0Φp´8,0q “ s-lim τÑ´8U0Φpτ,0q “ie `iπ 4βP K´1F´1, U0Φp0,`8q “ s-lim τÑ`8U0Φp0, τq “iF Ke `iπ 4β, U0Φp0,´8q “ s-lim τÑ´8U0Φp0, τq “ ´iF KPe ´iπ 4β, U0Φp0,˘8q “U0Φp˘8,0q˚. Therefore,8 U0Φp`8,´8q “iβP. Proof. ForψPC08pR3,C4qandϕPFC8
0 pR3,C4qthe formula (26) gives
lim τÑ`8pψ, U0Φpτ,0qϕq “ pψ,p´iqe ´iπ 4βK´1F´1ϕq, lim τÑ´8pψ, U0Φpτ,0qϕq “ pψ, ie `iπ 4βP K´1F´1ϕq.
Both subspaces are dense inH, so the weak operator limits result. But the limit operators are evidently unitary, so the weak limits imply the strong limits ofU0Φpτ,0q, as well as its conjugate. ˝
5. Electromagnetic interaction and gauge
transformation
In the rest of this article we are interested in the standard, minimal coupling electromagnetic interaction. For the electromagnetic fieldFab, we reserve
no-tationAa for the Lorenz gauge potential (fully specified in what follows). We
write Aa for the potential in a general gauge to be used in the Dirac
equa-tion. Also, we recall our conventions defined in formulas (4) and the following
8
remarks, soFˆµν,Aˆµ andAˆµ are components of these fields in our coordinate
system, and forµ, ν “i, j etc. the range is restricted to values1,2,3. Therefore, in the electromagnetic case the field V and its transformed versionW are
Vpxq “Aapxqγa, Wpτ,zq “Aˆτpτ,zq `Aˆipτ,zqλipτ,zq, (28) and we write the Hamiltonian as
H “1 2rλ
i, π
is``µ`Aˆτ, πi“pi`Aˆi.
Theorem 6. The coordinate systempτ,zqgiven by (20)is assumed. (i) Let the electromagnetic potential Apxq have components Aˆµpτ,zq
such that for all indicesµ“τ,1,2,3the mappings RQτÞÑ Bα zAˆµpτ,zq(PC0pR, L8locpR3qq, |α| ď2, (29) and }xzy´2`|α|Bα zAˆτpτ,zq}8 }xzy´1`|α|Bα zAˆipτ,zq}8 + ďCpτq, |α| ď1, (30)
whereCpτqis a continuous function. Then the conditions of Theorem 3 are fulfilled and the unitary propagator Upτ, σq with the listed properties is ob-tained.
(ii) Let the potentialApxqand the corresponding propagatorUpτ, σqbe as in (i). Define a new gauge
AG“A´∇G,
where Gpxq is a gauge function such that for all indices µ “ τ,1,2,3 the mappings RQτÞÑ Bα zBµGpτ,zq ( PC0pR, L8 locpR3qq, |α| ď1, (31) and }xzy´2`|α|Bα zBτGpτ,zq}8 }xzy´1`|α|BzαBiGpτ,zq}8 + ďCpτq, |α| ď1, (32)
whereCpτqis a continuous function. Denote byHGpτqthe interacting
Hamil-tonian withAˆreplaced by AˆG, and
UGpτ, σq “eiGpτqUpτ, σqe´iGpσq.
Then for such modified operators the statements (A) and (C)–(E) of Theo-rem 3 are satisfied.
Proof. (i) The bounds (13) are satisfied in our coordinate system. Together with the assumed properties ofAˆµthis ensures that the interaction term (28)
satisfies the assumptions of Theorem 3, so the thesis follows.
(ii) For (A) we note that the assumption (32) implies that the interaction term WG
“AˆG
τ `AˆGiλi satisfies assumptions imposed on M in Lemma 14
(i) and (ii) (not necessarily (iii)). This is sufficient for the conclusion on self-adjointness ofHG obtained as in Theorem 3. Moreover, it follows from (31)
that eiGpτqD
cpp2q “ Dcpp2q, so (C) is satisfied. Finally, for ϕ P Dcpp2q we
have
iBτeiGpτqϕ“ ´eiGpτqBτGpτqϕ ,
eiGpτqHpτqe´iGpτqϕ“ rHpτq ´λipτqBiGpτqsϕ ,
so the remaining statements easily follow with the use of (31). ˝
6. Scattering
We come here to our main objective in this article, scattering of the Dirac field in an external time-dependent electromagnetic field. With the assumptions of Theorem 6, augmented by some decay conditions formulated in the two assumptions below, we shall obtain the complete description of scattering in terms of the Cauchy surfaces of constant τ, as to be found in Theorem 7. The existence of the wave operators needs only a rather simple additional Assumption I, but their unitarity and completeness are more demanding, and they follow from Assumption II. It is with regard to this latter question that we need to discuss some further notation and properties.
It is easy to see that the operators
˜
H “1 2rλ
i, π
is`“H´µ´Aˆτ, H˜0“12rλi, pis`“H0´µ (33)
have similar properties asH and H0, in particular they are essentially
self-adjoint onC08pR3,C4q, soD
cppq “HcXDppqis contained in their domains.
Therefore,Dcpp2qis contained in the domains ofH˜2 andH˜02 (as well asH2
andH2
0). Moreover, we note for later use that
rH, β˜ s`“ rH˜0, βs`“0, (34)
which is a consequence of (21).
We shall need a more explicit form ofH˜2 below. We calculate (with ρ
defined in (22))
˜
H2“ pπiλi`2iB ¨λqpλjπj´2iB ¨λq
“πiρijπj`12πirλi, λjsπj`2ipB ¨λqλjπj´2iπjλjpB ¨λq `14pB ¨λq2. (35)
The second term on the rhs above may be written in two alternative ways:
1 2πirλ i, λj sπj “ ´2ipBirλi, λjsqπj`12rλi, λjsπiπj “ i 2πipBjrλ i, λjsq `1 2πiπjrλ i, λjs. (36)
Taking into account that rλi, λjs is antisymmetric in the indices, one can
replace the product πiπj by 12rπi, πjs “ ´2iFˆij, and then replace rλi, λjs
multiplying this expression by2λiλj. Taking now one half of the sum of the
two expressions in (36), we find
1 2πirλi, λjsπj“ 4i “ πj,Birλj, λis ‰ `´ i 2λ iλjFˆ ij. (37)
For the next two terms on the rhs of (35) we note i 2pB ¨λqλ jπ j´2iπjλjpB ¨λq “ ´4irπj,rλj,B ¨λss`´14BjrB ¨λ, λ js `, (38)
which is shown in a somewhat similar way as the former identity. The sum of the first terms on the rhs of (37) and (38) gives i
4rπj,rBiλ j, λiss `. In this way we obtain ˜ H2“π iρijπj`i4rBiλj, λisπj`4iπjrBiλj, λis ´1 4Bjprλ j,B ¨λs `q `14pB ¨λq 2´ i 2λ iλjFˆ ij.
With the use of further notation
Λj“ i4pρ´1qjkrBiλk, λis, πΛi“πi`Λi, (39) Q“ 1 4Bjprλ j,B ¨λs `q ´14pB ¨λq 2, N “Q`ΛiρijΛj, (40) B“ i 2λ iλjFˆ ij, we can write ˜ H2“πΛρπΛ´N´B, (41)
where in the first term on the rhs a symbolic notation for summation over indices is used. A straightforward calculation shows that bothQandN are positive numerical functions (times the unit matrix; see Appendix D, formula (96) forQ, and then forN this is obvious). Therefore, if we further denote
s“?ρ , (42)
then forϕPDcpp2qwe have
}Hϕ˜ } ď` }sπΛϕ}2´ pϕ,Bϕq˘ 1 2 ď }sπΛϕ} ` |pϕ,Bϕq| 1 2 (43) Next denote X“ 1 2µ ´1Aˆ iλi“ 12βaiλi, ai“ pgτ τq 1 2Aˆ i. (44)
Below we shall need the following identity valid, with our assumptions onAˆi,
onDcppq:
βrX,H˜s “aiρijπΛj´2iλiλjBiaj´2ipBiρijqaj. (45)
To show this we note thatrX,H˜s “ 1 2βrλ
ia
i,H˜s`, write H˜ “λjπj´2iB ¨λ,
and then the lhs of (45) takes the form
1 2airλ i, λjs `πj´2iλjBjpλiaiq ´4iairλi,Bjλjs` “aiρijπΛj´2iλjλiBjai´2iai`λjBjλi`12rλi,Bjλjs``12rBjλ i, λjs˘ ,
where after the equality sign we have added and subtracted the termaiρijΛj.
It is now easy to show that the terms in parentheses multiplying ai sum up
to 1 2Bjrλ
j, λis
`, which ends the proof of (45).
The spreading of the past and future is characterized in our coordinate system by Lemma 15 in Appendix D. Denote
so that
Dcpp2q “ ď
rą0
Dpr,p2q.
We setτ0“0in this lemma, and replacer0andrbyrandrpτq, respectively,
so that
rpτq “ xry|τ| `rxτy.
Then according to this lemma, and statement (C) of Theorem 3, we have
ψPDpr,p2q ùñ Upτ,0qψPDprpτq,p2q. (46) For a measurable functionfpτ,zqwe define a semi-norm function
τ ÞÑ }f}r,τ “ess sup
|z|ďrpτq
|fpτ,zq|,
and then forψas in (46) we find
}fpτ, .qUpτ,0qψ} ď }f}r,τ}ψ}. (47)
Note that according to Lemma 15 we have
|z| ďrpτq ùñ xzy ď xryxτy `r|τ|,
so in that case
|z| ď xzy ď2xryxτy.
For any measurable functionkpzqandrą0 we shall denote
}k}r“ess sup
|z|ďr
|kpzq|.
For a functionfpτ,zqwe obviously have}fpτ, .q}rď }fpτ, .q}r,τ.
Our scattering theorem will apply to potentials satisfying the following conditions of increasing restrictiveness.
Assumption I. Potential Aˆµpτ,zq satisfies the assumptions of Theorem 6,
and in addition the mapping τ ÞÑ Aˆipτ,zq is in C1pR, L8
locpR3qq. For each rą0 the following expressions are integrable onRwith respect toτ:
}Aˆτ}r, xτy´2}Aˆi}2r, xτy´2}BiAˆj}r, xτy´1}BτAˆi}r.
Assumption II. PotentialAˆµpτ,zqsatisfies the assumptions of Theorem 6, and in addition the mapping τ ÞÑ Aˆipτ,zq is in C1pR, L8
locpR3qq. For each rą0 the following expressions are integrable onRwith respect toτ:
}Aˆτ}r,τ, xτy´2` }Aˆi}2r,τ` }ziAˆi}2r,τ˘ , xτy´2` }BiAˆj}r,τ ` }ziBiAˆj}r,τ ` }zjBiAˆj}r,τ` }zizjBiAˆj}r,τ ˘ , xτy´1` }BτAˆi}r,τ` }ziBτAˆi}r,τ˘.
Moreover, let ξ : r1,8q ÞÑ R be an appropriately chosen smooth, positive, nondecreasing function, such thatξp1q “1and
ξ1puq ď κ uξpuq, κP p0, 1 2q, |ξ2puq| ď const u ξpuq, (48)
where in the second bound the constant is arbitrary. The following bounds are satisfied }Fˆij}r,τ` }ziFˆij}r,τ ďconstprq x τy ξpxτyq, }Fˆiτ}r,τ` }ziFˆiτ}r,τ ď constprq ξpxτyq ,
and for eachrą0 the following expressions are integrable onR
}ξpxzyqAˆi}r,τ
xτyξpxτyq ,
}ξpxzyqziAˆi}r,τ
xτyξpxτyq .
Before stating the theorem we make a comment on the function ξand consider some additional consequences of Assumption II.
If one setsξpuq “uκξ0puq, then the first bound in (48) is equivalent to ξ1
0puq ď0. It follows that
ξpuq ďuκ. (49)
Therefore,ξis a slowly increasing, non-oscillating function. Examples include:
ξ1puq “uκ, ξ2puq “ ” 1` κ mlogpuq ım , mą0,
where κis as assumed in (48). A particular choice of ξ must guarantee the validity of the assumptions (if this is possible).
By the Schwarz inequality also the following integral is finite: ż R }Aˆi}r,τ xτy2 dτ ď ? π´ ż R }Aˆi}2r,τ xτy2 dτ ¯ 1 2 ă 8
and similarly forziAˆ
i. Moreover, forτ2ěτ1 we have
ˆ Aipτ2,zq xτ2y ´ ˆ Aipτ1,zq xτ1y “ żτ2 τ1 ´BσAˆipσ,zq xσy ´ σAˆipσ,zq xσy3 ¯ dσ ,
and similarly forziAˆ
i. Therefore, by Assumption II the functions
xτy´1}Aˆi}r,τ and xτy´1}ziAˆi}r,τ
have limits forτ Ñ ˘8. Limits different from zero would contradict other assumptions, so lim τÑ˘8 }Aˆi}r,τ xτy “τÑ˘8lim }ziAˆ i}r,τ xτy “0.
For the sake of the proof of the coming theorem we note the following estimates easily obtained with the use of formula (89):
|λiAˆ i| ď const xτy ˆ xτ|zy xτy |Aˆi| ` |z iAˆ i| ˙ , (50) |λiλjBiAˆj| ď const xτy2 ”xτ|zy2 xτy2 |BiAˆj| ` xτ|zy xτy ` |ziBiAˆj| ` |zjBiAˆj| ˘ ` |zizjBiAˆj| ı . (51)
Theorem 7. (i) Let Aˆµ satisfy Assumption I. Then the following strong limits exist: s-lim τÑ˘8Up0, τqU0pτ,0q “Ω¯, (52) s-lim τÑ˘8UΦp0, τq “UΦp0,˘8q “Ω¯U0Φp0,˘8q. (53) (ii) Let Aˆµ satisfy Assumption II. Then the operators Ω¯ are unitary and also the following strong limits exist:
s-lim τÑ˘8U0p0, τqUpτ,0q “Ω ˚ ¯, (54) s-lim τÑ˘8UΦpτ,0q “UΦp˘8,0q “U0Φp˘8,0qΩ ˚ ¯. (55)
Proof. For the sake of the whole proof we assume that ψ P Dpr,p2q and }ψ} “1.
(i) ForτÑ 8, we prove the existence of the limit (53), from which the limit (52) follows with the use of Theorem 5. The caseτÑ ´8is analogous.
We note the identity ` 1´1 2βH˜ ˘ β´H` 1´1 2βH˜ ˘ “ pµ´β`Aˆτq`12βH˜ ´1˘´12βH˜2,
whereH˜ is as defined in (33) (to show this one eliminatesH with the use of (33) and takes into account the anticommutation relation (34)). Using it, we obtain the evolution equation
iBτ “ Up0, τq` 1´12βH˜˘ Φpτq‰ ψ “Up0, τq“ ´i 2βpBτH˜q ` pµ´β`Aˆτq `1 2βH˜ ´1 ˘ ´1 2βH˜ 2‰ Φpτqψ .
Taking into account the anticommutation relation (34) we can write this in the form iBτ“UΦp0, τq ´12Up0, τqΦpτq˚βH˜‰ψ “ ´Up0, τqΦpτq“ µ´β`Aˆτ`1 2βH˜ 2‰ ψ `1 2Up0, τqΦpτq˚β “ ´iH˜9 ` pµ´β`AˆτqH˜‰ψ . (56)
We estimate the terms in this equation, starting with the second term in brackets on the lhs, and then going to the successive terms on the rhs. As
|z| ďron the support ofψ, eachλi,B
iλj andBiBjλk give a bounding factor constprqxτy´1, and each B
τλi a factor constprqxτy´2, which leads to an easy
straightforward estimation: }Hψ˜ } ď constprq xτy ` }piψ} ` }Aˆi}r`1˘, }pµ´βqψ} ď r 2 2xτy2, }Aˆτψ} ď }Aˆτ}r, }H˜2ψ} ď constprq xτy2 ” }pipjψ} ` ` }Aˆi}r`1˘` }Aˆi}r`1` }piψ} ˘ı ,
}Hψ˜9 } ď constprq xτy2 ` }piψ} ` }Aˆi}r`1˘` constprq xτy }BτAˆi}r, }pµ´β`AˆτqHψ˜ } ď constprq xτy ´ r2 xτy2 ` }Aˆτ}r ¯` }piψ} ` }Aˆi}r`1 ˘ .
Therefore, with the conditions of Assumption I all the terms on the rhs of (56) are integrable onR, so the strong limit of UΦp0, τqψ´ 1
2Up0, τqΦpτq˚βH ψ˜
exists. But the second term vanishes in the limit, so the thesis follows for
ψ P Dcpp2q, and then by isometry for all ψ P H. (For the integrability of
xτy´2}Aˆ
i}r and for vanishing ofxτy´1}Aˆi}r one argues similarly as in the
remarks following Assumption II.)
(ii) We prove the existence of the limit (54) forτ Ñ 8, from which the limit (55) follows. Combined with the existence of the limit (52), this also leads to unitarity and the conjugation relation. The caseτ Ñ ´8is similar.
We note the identity
p1`XqH´H0p1`Xq “Aˆτ`W X` rX,H˜s,
whereW andX are defined in (28) and (44), respectively, and we used the fact that rX, H´H˜s “ rX, µs “ ´2µX “ ´Aˆiλi. Thus iBτ “ U0p0, τqp1`XqUpτ,0q ‰ ψ “U0p0, τq ´ iBτX`Aˆτ`W X` rX,H˜s ¯ Upτ,0qψ . (57) If we can show that the norm of the rhs of (57) is integrable overr0,`8q, then the strong limit ofU0p0, τqp1`XqUpτ,0qψforτ Ñ 8exists. But with
the use of formula (47), and taking into account (50) and the value ofgτ τ to
be found in Appendix D, we obtain
}XpτqUpτ,0qψ} ď }X}r,τ ď const xτy ´ }Aˆi}r,τ ` }ziAˆi}r,τ ¯ , (58) so this norm vanishes in the limit, which then implies the desired result.
We estimate the norms of the successive terms on the rhs of (57), again with the use of (47). Differentiating formula (90) with respect toτ we find
}pBτXqUpτ,0qψ} ď }BτX}r,τ ď const xτy2 ´ }Aˆi}r,τ ` }ziAˆi}r,τ ¯ `const xτy ´ }BτAˆi}r,τ ` }ziBτAˆi}r,τ ¯ ,
which is integrable. The norm of the second term is bounded by}Aˆτpτq}r,τ,
which is integrable by assumption. Next we note that
βW X“AˆτβX´1 2pg
τ τ
q12Aˆ
so using the explicit form ofpgτ τq1
2ρij, see (91), we estimate the norm of the
third term on the rhs of (57) by
}W X}r,τ ďconst}Aˆτ}r,τ}X}r,τ` constxry xτy2 ´ }Aˆi}2 r,τ` }ziAˆi}2r,τ ¯ ,
which ensures integrability.
To estimate the norm of the fourth term we use (45), (51) and (93) to find }λiλjB iaj` pBiρijqaj}r,τ ďconst x ry xτy2}BiAˆj}r,τ `const xτy2 ´ }Aˆi}r,τ` }ziAˆi}r,τ` }ziBiAˆj}r,τ` }zjBiAˆj}r,τ` }zizjBiAˆj}r,τ ¯ ,
which again is integrable.
We are now left with the single termaρπΛUpτ,0qψ. As it turns out, in
this case the methods applied up to now are insufficient and it is here that we make use of the functionξ. We writeψτ “Upτ,0qψ and note that
}aρπΛψτ} ď }saξpxzyq}r,τ}ξpxzyq´1sπΛψτ}
ď xτy´1´}ξpxzyqAˆi}r,τ` }ξpxzyqziAˆi}r,τ
¯
}ξpxzyq´1sπΛψτ}.
Now, the estimation of }ξpxzyq´1sπ
Λψτ} is the most difficult part of the
proof and we shift it to the lemma below. Substituting its result in the above estimate and using Assumption II one completes the proof of the existence
of the limitτ Ñ `8. ˝
Lemma 8. Under the conditions of Assumption II, for ψPDcpp2q the
fol-lowing estimate holds
}ξpxzyq´1sπΛUpτ,0qψ} ďconstpψqξpxτyq´1.
Proof. We assume again thatψPDpr,p2qand}ψ} “1. We observe that the
lhs of the inequality may be equivalently replaced by}sπΛξpxzyq´1Upτ,0qψ}.
Indeed, we have › › “ sπΛ, ξpxzyq´1 ‰› › 8“ › › › zξ1pxzyq xτyξpxzyq2 › › ›8ď › › › κz xτyxzyξpxzyq › › ›8ď κ xτy.
Now we shall estimate the norm squared
}sπΛξpxzyq´1ψτ}2“ pπΛξpxzyq´1ψτ, ρπΛξpxzyq´1ψτq
by first finding a differential inequality, and then integrating. Preparing for that, we denote ν “iξpxzyq´1rH, ξpxzyqs “ λiBiξpxzyq ξpxzyq “ ξ1pxzyq xτyξpxzyqz iαi, (59)
with the standard notationαi“βγi, and observe that
To shorten notation we shall writeψξ
τ“ξpxzyq´1ψτ. Looking at the explicit
form ofΛi (94) we note that
rΛi, µs “0, rΛi, νs`“0.
Now calculate
BτrπΛψξτs “ ´iπΛξpxzyq´1Hψτ` pBτΛ` BτAˆqψξτ
“ ´iπΛHψ˜ τξ` pΛ9 `Fˆτ.` Bpiν´µq `2νΛqψτξ´ pν`iAˆτ`iµqπΛψτξ,
and
BτpπΛψτξ, ρπΛψτξq ´ pπΛψξτ,ρπ9 Λψξτq “ ´2pπΛψτξ, ρνπΛψτξq
´ipπΛρπΛψτξ,Hψ˜ τξq `ipHψ˜ τξ, πΛρπΛψξτq
`2 RepπΛψτξ, ρrΛ9 `Fˆτ.` Bpiν´µq `2νΛsψτξq,
(61)
where in both identitiesFˆτ. denotesFˆτ i with the index isuppressed (in the
second identity summation over this index is implied). In the first identity we have used (60) and commutedπΛ with the termpAˆτ`µ´iνq.
From now on we continue the proof forτ ě 0; for τ ď0 the proof is analogous, but equation (61) has to be multiplied by´1 before continuing. The first term on the rhs of (61) is bounded in absolute value by
2}ν}8pπΛψξτ, ρπΛψξτq ď2κxτy´1}sπΛψξτ}2,
where we used the estimate given in (99). With the use of formula (41) the second line of equation (61) takes the form 2 ReipHψ˜ ξ
τ,pN `Bqψξτq, and
thanks to the estimate (43) is bounded in absolute value by
2`
}sπΛψτξ} ` |pψξτ,Bψτξq|
1
2˘}pN`Bqψξ
τ}.
The third line in (61) is bounded by
2}sπΛψτξ}}spΛ9 `Fˆτ .` Bpiν´µq `2νΛqψτξ}.
Finally, we observe that forτą0 we have (see (92))
9
ρď ´ 2τ xτy2ρ ,
which allows us to use (61) for the following estimate:
Bτ}sπΛψξτ}2ď ´b}sπΛψξτ}2`2c}sπΛψξτ} `d , (62) where b“ 2τ xτy2 ´ 2κ xτy, c“ }pN`Bqψξτ} ` }spΛ9 `Fˆτ .` Bpiν´µq `2νΛqψξτ}, (63) d“2|pψξτ,Bψτξq|12}pN`Bqψξ τ}.
The second term on the rhs of (62) may be estimated as follows 2c}sπΛψτξ} “2 ”1´2κ xτy ı12 }sπΛψξτ} ” xτy 1´2κ ı12 c ď 1´2κ xτy }sπΛψ ξ τ}2` xτyc2 1´2κ,
which results in the inequality
Bτ}sπΛψτξ}2ď ´b0}sπΛψτξ}2`d0, (64) where b0“ 2τ xτy2´ 1 xτy, d0“ xτyc2 1´2κ`d . (65) We set }sπΛψξτ}2“exp ´ ´ żτ 0 b0pσqdσ ¯ fpτq “ τ` xτy xτy2 fpτq
and then (64) takes the form
Bτf ď x
τy2
τ` xτyd0pτq ď xτyd0pτq.
We note thatfp0q “ }rsπΛψτξsτ“0}2 and find }sπΛψτξ}2ď 2 xτy „ }rsπΛψτξsτ“0}2` żτ 0 x σyd0pσqdσ (66) We have to estimate d0 defined in (65). We start by estimating c. For the
terms depending on the electromagnetic field we have (we use the form ofs
and estimates ofλi given in Appendix D)
}B}r,τ ďconstxry 2 xτy2 ` }Fˆij}r,τ ` }ziFˆij}r,τ ˘ ď constprq xτyξpxτyq, (67) }sFˆτ .}r,τ ď constxry xτy ` }Fˆτ i}r,τ` }ziFˆτ i}r,τ ˘ ď constprq xτyξpxτyq.
For the termsijB
jpiν´µq, using the estimates (98) and (100) in Appendix
D we find9 }sBpiν´µqψξτ} ď›› › sBpiν´µq ξpxzyq › › › r,τ ď const xτy2 › › › xzy ξpxzyq › › › r,τ ď constprq xτyξpxτyq, (68)
where we used the fact, that bothu{ξpuqas well asξpuqare increasing, so
xzy ξpxzyq ď 2xryxτy ξp2xryxτyq ď2xry xτy ξpxτyq.
The estimation of the other terms in (63) uses the bounds (95), (97) and (99) and gives }N ψξ τ} ` }sΛ9ψτξ} ` }2νΛψτξ} ď const xτy2 , (69) 9
The problem of estimation of the termsijB
jµis the ultimate reason for our introduction
of the functionξ. Without it, the bound in (68) would have the formconstprqxτy´1 , which would be insufficient for our application.
so summing up we have cď constprq xτyξpxτyq, xτyc 2 ď constprq xτyξpxτyq2.
The use of (67) and (69) shows that also
dpτq ď constprq rxτyξpxτyqs32 ď
constprq xτyξpxτyq2,
where we used the boundu12 ěξpuq ě1, see (49). Summing up, we obtain d0pτq ď
constprq xτyξpxτyq2.
Now, it follows from (48) thatuκ{ξpuqis an increasing function. Therefore, żτ 0 xσyd0pσqdσ ďconstprq żτ 0 dσ ξpxσyq2 ďconstprq xτy2κ ξpxτyq2 żτ 0 dσ xσy2κ ďconstprq xτy ξpxτyq2 .
This, when used in (66), gives
}sπΛψξτ}2ď 2}rsπΛψξτsτ“0}2 xτy ` constprq ξpxτyq2 ď constpψq ξpxτyq2 ,
where for the second inequality we used (49). ˝
7. Typical electromagnetic field and its special gauges
Assumption II, on which our main theorem on scattering 7 is based, is rather technical and not easy for interpretation. Here we formulate a rather typi-cal situation met in scattering processes.10We show that the electromagnetic
field thus identified admits a gauge in which Assumption II is satisfied. More-over, there is a class of gauges which need not satisfy this assumption, but still assure a similar asymptotic structure.
The retarded and advanced potentials are defined in terms of the source current J in standard way (as ϕret{adv is defined in terms of ρ in (118) in Appendix G). Also, the radiated field of the currentJ is defined in standard way,Arad“Aret´Aadv. The Heaviside step function is denoted byθ. Assumption III. The Lorenz potential Aa of the electromagnetic fieldFab
is given by
A“Aret`Ain“Aadv`Aout,
whereAretis the retarded potential of a currentJ satisfying the assumptions listed below, andAinis the radiated potential of another currentJinwith simi-lar properties asJ. Then alsoAadvis the advanced potential of the currentJ, 10
Possible oscillating terms in the asymptotic behavior of charged currents are not taken into account. One can expect that fields produced by such terms decay more rapidly than those considered here; see also Discussion.
and Aout is the radiated potential of the current Jout “J `Jin, which has similar properties asJ andJin.
The conserved current Jpxq is of class C3 and for some 0 ă ε ă 1 2 satisfies the following estimates:
|∇αJpxq| ď const p|x| `1q3`|α| „ θpx2q ` 1 p|x| `1qε , for |α| ď3, (70) |∇αpx¨∇`3qJpxq| ď const p|x| `1q3`|α|`ε, for |α| ď2. (71)
The same is assumed forJin, and then the same follows forJout. The potential Ais then of class C3 on the Minkowski spacetime.
Note thatAis a linear combination of retarded and advanced potentials of currents satisfying (70). Therefore, the last statement of Assumption III is a consequence of Lemma 20 (i) in Appendix G.
Theorem 9. Let the electromagnetic field F and its Lorenz potentialA sat-isfy Assumption III. Define a new gauge by
Apxq “Apxq ´∇Spxq. (72)
Then the following holds. (i) For the choice
Spxq “Sℓpxq ”logpxτyxzyqx¨Apxq, (73)
the potential (72)fulfills Assumption II, so Theorems 6 and 7 are satisfied. (ii) LetSpxqbe another gauge function, such that the difference
Gpxq “Spxq ´Sℓpxq
satisfies the assumptions of Theorem 6 (ii), so that the thesis of this theorem is true. Suppose, in addition, that there exist point-wise limits
lim
τÑ˘8Gpτ,zq ”G˘pzq.
Then the potential(72)satisfies the thesis of Theorem 7 (but not necessarily the assumption of this theorem).
(iii) In particular, the gauges defined by:
(a) Slogpxq “logxτyx¨Apxq, (b) Strpxq “
żτ
0 B
σxpσ,zq ¨Apσ,zqdσ ,
are in the class defined in (ii). In case (b) one hasAˆτ “0and ˆ Aipτ,zq “Aˆip0,zq ´ żτ 0 ˆ Fiσpσ,zqdσ .
Remark 10. Assumption III, and consequently the validity of Theorem 9, is independent of the choice of the time axis for the definition of the folia-tion(20).
Proof of Thm. 9. (i) This potential obeys Theorem 23 in Appendix I. As
A is of class C2 on the Minkowski spacetime, so the assumption (29) of Theorem 6 and the assumption on continuous differentiability of the mapping
τÞÑAˆipτ,zqin Assumption II are clearly satisfied. Denote
ξpuq “uκ, κăεă1 2.
The estimates of Theorem 23 imply then the following norm bounds:
}Fˆiτ}8, }ziFˆiτ}8ď const xτy , }Fˆij}8, }ziFˆij}8ďconst, }Aˆτ}r,τ ďconst ´1`logxτy xτy1`ε ` logxry xτy3 ¯ , }p1`logxzyq´1Aˆτ}8` }BiAˆτ}8` }ziBiAˆτ}8ďconst 1`logxτy xτy1`ε , }BiBjAˆτ}8ďconstp1`logxτyq, }Aˆi}8` }ziAˆi}8ď }ξpxzyqAˆi}8` }ξpxzyqziAˆi}8ďconstp1`logxτyq, }BτAˆi}8` }ziBτAˆi}8ď const xτy , }BiAˆj}8` }ziBiAˆj}8` }zjBiAˆj}8` }zizjBiAˆj}8 ďconstp1`logxτyq.
It is now easily checked that the potential satisfies assumption (30) in Theo-rem 6 and all the Theo-remaining bounds in Assumption II, from which the thesis follows. (Note that in this case all expressions are bounded inL8-norm, ex-cept forAˆτ.)
(ii) Let the evolution operator Upτ, σq refer to the potential defined in (i), and denote the new potential now considered byAˆG. Following further
notation used in Theorem 6 we have
lim τÑ˘8U G Φpτ,0q “τlim˘8Φ˚pτqei GpτqUpτ,0qe´iGp0q “ lim τÑ˘8e iGpτqU Φpτ,0qe´iGp0q“eiG˘UΦp˘8,0qe´iGp0q, so s-lim τÑ˘8U0p0, τqU G pτ,0q “U0Φp0,˘8qUΦGp˘8,0q “U0Φp0,˘8qeiG˘UΦp˘8,0qΩ¯e´iGp0q”ΩG¯.
Similarly for the limits of the conjugated operators.
(iii) Both gauges are easily seen to satisfy condition (31) of Theorem 6; we turn to the estimates (32). In the case (a), withCpxq “x¨Apxq, we have
and the estimates are easily checked with the use of the results of the proof of Theorem 23. Also, it follows from the estimate of |BτC| given there that
Cpτ,zqhas limits forτÑ ˘8.
In the case (b), it is now sufficient to investigate the difference of the gauge functionStrpxqas compared to the gauge function of case (a):
G1pxq “Strpxq ´Slogpxq.
Differentiating and using the form of Bτxgiven in the proof of Theorem 23
we find BτG1pτ,zq “ xτy´2xzyA0´logxτyBτC , BiBτG1pτ,zq “ 1 xτy2 ” zi xzyA0` xzyBiA0 ı ´logxτyBiBτC ,
Now noting that BiGp0,zq “ 0, integrating (the last term by parts) and
applying the derivativeBj we obtain (fields in the integrand depend onpσ,zq)
BiBjG1pτ,zq “ żτ 0 ”dij xzyA0` 1 xzypz iB jA0`zjBiA0q`xzyBiBjA0`σBiBjC ı dσ xσy2 ´logxτyBiBjC ,
withdij defined in (133). With the use of the estimates listed in the proof of
Theorem 23 one finds
|BτG1| ďconst
1`logxτy
xτy1`ε , |BiBτG
1| ďconst1`logxτy xτy1`ε ,
|BiBjG1| ďconstp1`logxτyq, |BiG1| ďconst,
the fourth estimate by the integration of the second one. Thus the estimates (32) are satisfied. Finally,BτG1 is integrable onR, so the thesis follows. ˝
8. Discussion
There are three questions we want to address in this section:
(i) How far is the present analysis from a complete treatment of the Max-well-Dirac system?
(ii) Is there a further physical selection criterion to choose a gauge from the class of gauges obtained in Theorem 9?
(iii) Open problems.
With regard to the first of these questions we note that the form of the charged currents producing electromagnetic fields in Assumption III mimics what one should expect in fully interacting theory. A possible shortage of this assumption rests in the estimates of derivatives of the currents, which would not be satisfied for oscillating terms in asymptotic behavior. The Dirac field current does have such asymptotic terms, but it is quite plausible to predict that oscillations dump the asymptotic behavior of fields produced by them. What would be needed is an appropriately fast vanishing of the leading os-cillating asymptotic terms in the neighborhood of the lightcone (which is