text:
# Structure groups and holonomy in infinite dimensions

## Acknowledgements

The first investigations on this subject were held during the author’s PhD thesis with Professor Sylvie Paycha at the University Blaise Pascal, Clermont-Ferrand, France. Most of the results of this paper arose at the begining of a post-doctoral fellowship supported by a Bourse Lavoisier. The author would like to thank Professor Sylvie Paycha, Professor Sergio Albeverio for inviting him for a postdoctoral fellowship at the Institut fur Angewandte mathematik, Bonn, Germany, and also Professor Tilmann Wurzbacher and Professor Claude Roger for inviting him to expose some of these results, once at the séminaire de Physique Mathématique of the Institut Girard Desargues, Univ. Lyon I ,France , and also at the conference “Géométrie en dimension infinie et application á la théorie des champs” held at the CIRM, Marseille, France. The author is also indebted to many persons present at these two talks for stimulating questions that influenced the final presentation of this article.

## Introduction

In the finite dimensional setting, the holonomy group $`H`$ of a fixed connection $`\theta `$ with curvature $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ on a principal bundle $`P`$ with basis $`M`$ and with structure group $`G`$ can be defined from two (equivalent) points of view:

1) $`H`$ is the smaller Lie group for which there is a principal bundle $`Q`$ of basis $`M`$ and with structure group $`H`$ on which the connection $`\theta `$ reduces,

2) $`H`$ is the group of the holonomies of all the horizontal lifts starting at a fixed point in $`P`$ of a loop based at a fixed point in $`M`$.

From the first point of view, it enables one to define all Lie groups $`H_1`$ for which there is a principal bundle $`Q_1`$ where the connection $`\theta `$ reduces. The second point of view then enables to build $`Q_1`$ knowing $`H_1`$. The finite dimensional Ambrose-Singer theorem  states that the Lie algebra of the holonomy group is spanned by the curvature elements. Basic facts about the holonomy in finite dimensions are recalled in section 3.

In a paper of 1988, Freed  claimed that there was no adequate Ambrose-Singer theorem to deal with the Chern form he was defining on loop groups. Ten years before, answering to a question raised by Penot , Vassiliou  showed how far the original proof of Ambrose and Singer could be generalized to Banach bundles. A crucial ingredient of this proof is that the holonomy group defined from the point of view 2) is already a Lie subgroup of $`G`$ in the sense of Bourbaki, and this paper is also based on a careful application to the Frobenius theorem on Banach vector bundles. But this generalization does not fit with Freed’s framework. Our purpose here is to give an infinite-dimensional generalization of the concept of holonomy group, holonomy bundle and of the Ambrose-Singer theorem that fits with Freed’s framework.

Since we want to consider the framework which is as general as possible, we need to take under consideration not only Banach Lie groups, but also some Lie groups $`G`$ modelled on complete locally convex topological spaces. The principal bundle $`P`$ and the basis manifold $`M`$ are assumed to be modelled on locally convex topological spaces.

We remark that there is no adequate Frobenius theorem in this framework. Moreover, to our knowledge, there was no proved theorem of reduction for a fixed connection $`\theta `$. Thus, our approach of the problem of defining the Holonomy group and the Holonomy bundle, which is based on a definition of the holonomy group with respect to the point of view 1), is the following :

\- first, we give a theorem to decide whether a connection can reduce while reducing the structure group of the principal bundle in section 4.

\- Then, we define if it exists the holonomy group $`H^{red}`$ (resp. the restricted holonomy group $`H_0^{red}`$) as the structure group (resp. the connected component of the structure group) of the smaller principal bundle where the connection reduces.

\- Finally, using results from Robart  that we recall in section 1, and remarking that we can restrict the existence of the holonomy group to the problem of enlargeability of a Lie algebra which is minimal for inclusion, we show that we can define the closed restricted holonomy group (section 5) and the closed holonomy group (section 6) when the structure group $`G`$ belongs to the classes defined in .

The Lie groups $`H^{red}`$ and $`H_0^{red}`$ contain the restricted holonomy group and the holonomy group defined by the approach 2), but the approaches 1) and 2) do not seem to be equivalent in infinite dimensions. However, we do not have any example where the approaches 1) and 2) define different holonomy groups. This question remains open, and we make final remarks in chapter 7 that could lead to understand better the relationship between these two approaches.

In another paper , we will show how these constructions fit to the question about the holonomy in infinite dimensions raised by Freed .

## 1. Enlargeable Lie algebras

One great problem in the theory of Lie groups and Lie algebras in infinite dimensions is to decide whether a Lie algebra is the Lie algebra of a Lie group. In this article, all the Lie groups are assumed to be modelled on complete locally convex vector spaces. We recall in this section some results, that can be found in . Recall that, in the sense of Bourbaki , $`H`$ is a Lie subgoup of a Lie group $`G`$ if and only if it is a closed subgroup of $`G`$ and the Lie algebra $`𝔥`$ of $`H`$ splits the Lie algebra $`𝔤`$ topologicaly. It is rarely the case. That is why we prefer the following definition of Lie subgroups that is used e.g. in :

###### Definition 1.1.

Let $`G`$ be a Lie group and $`H`$ be a subgroup of $`G`$. Then, $`H`$ is a Lie subgroup of $`G`$ if and only if

\- $`H`$ is a Lie group

\- the inclusion $`HG`$ is a morphism of Lie groups.

We have the analogous definition for Lie subalgebras:

###### Definition 1.2.

Let $`𝔤`$ be a Lie algebra and $`𝔥`$ be an (algebraic) vector subspace of $`𝔤`$ which is stable under the Lie bracket $`[.,.]`$ of $`𝔤`$. Then, $`𝔥`$ is a Lie subalgebra of $`𝔤`$ if and only if

\- the topology of $`𝔥`$ is stronger that the topology of $`𝔤`$, i.e. the inclusion $`𝔥𝔤`$ is a morphism of topological vector spaces.

\- the Lie bracket $`[.,.]`$ is continuous as a map $`𝔥\times 𝔥𝔥`$ with respect to the topology of $`𝔥`$.

Let us first restrict ourselves to the following class of Lie groups.

###### Definition 1.3.

(, , see e.g. )

A Lie group $`G`$ of Lie algebra $`𝔤`$ is Omori-Milnor regular (or regular for short) if and only if

1) for any $`vC^{\mathrm{}}([0,1],𝔤)`$, the differential equation

$$g^1\frac{dg(t)}{dt}=v(t)$$

has an unique smooth solution $`\gamma _v`$.

2) the map $`v\gamma _v(1)`$ is smooth for the topology of uniform comvergence in $`C^{\mathrm{}}([0,1],𝔤)`$.

3) $`\gamma _v`$ is obtained by product integral in $`G`$ (see  for the definition of the product integral).

Actually, we do not know if there exists a Lie group which is not regular. On a regular Lie group, the exponenial map is defined but there are examples where it is not locally injective nor locally surjective , see e.g. . In this article, we consider only such groups. In this context, the tangent space $`TG`$ is trivial, i.e. $`TGG\times 𝔤`$,

Let us now give some results about the following problem: let $`G`$ be a regular Lie group with Lie algebra $`𝔤`$. Let $`𝔥`$ be a Lie subalgebra of $`𝔤`$. When is there a Lie group $`H`$ of Lie algebra $`𝔥`$ which is a Lie subgroup of $`G`$ ? For this, let us give the following definitions:

###### Definition 1.4.

1) A Lie algebra is called CBH if and only if its Campbell-Baker-Hausdorff serie

$$(v,w)U\times Uh_v(w)=v+w+\frac{1}{2}[v,w]+\frac{1}{12}\left([v,[v,w]][w,[v,w]]\right)+\mathrm{}$$

is analytic on $`U\times U`$, where $`U`$ is a neighborhood of $`0`$ in $`𝔤`$, that is if and only if the Campbell-Baker-Hausdorff serie converges for any $`(v,w)U\times U`$.

A Lie group is called CBH if and only if its Lie algebra is CBH.

2 ) A Lie group $`G`$ is of the first type if and only if the exponential map furnishes a chart at the neighborhood of the identity.

3 ) A Lie group $`G`$ of Lie algebra $`𝔤`$ is of the second type if and only if $`𝔤`$ decomposes as a sum of Lie algebras

$$𝔤=_{i=1}^m𝔤_m$$

and the exponential map furnishes a chart at the neighborhood of the identity by the map

$$(v_1,\mathrm{}v_m)𝔤_1\times \mathrm{}\times 𝔤_m\underset{i=1}{\overset{m}{}}exp(v_i)G.$$

A CBH Lie group is of the first type, and a group of the first type is of the second type. For examples of CBH Lie groups, see  and also .

Let us now give the results of  we shall use in this article. Recall that, if $`𝔥`$ is a Lie subalgebra of $`𝔤`$, we do not assume a priori that $`𝔥`$ is closed in $`𝔤`$, nor the existence of a topological splitting.

###### Theorem 1.5.

Let $`𝔥`$ be a Lie subalgebra of $`𝔤`$, and assume that $`𝔤`$ is the Lie algebra of a Lie group $`G`$. In the following cases:

1) If $`G`$ is CBH and $`𝔥`$ is closed in $`𝔤`$,

2) If $`G`$ is CBH and $`𝔥`$ is CBH,

3) If $`G`$ is of the first type and $`𝔥`$ is closed in $`𝔤`$,

4) If $`G`$ is of the second type and $`𝔥`$ is closed in $`𝔤`$, there is an unique connected Lie subgroup $`H`$ of $`G`$, of the same type as $`G`$, that has $`𝔥`$ as Lie algebra.

Let us now give the following (easy but useful) lemma:

###### Lemma 1.6.

Let $`𝔤`$ be a Lie algebra. Let $`X𝔤`$ be a topological space, with continuous inclusion. Let $`A`$ be a set of the closed subalgebras $`𝔥𝔤`$ such that

$$X𝔥𝔤.$$

Then, $`A`$ has an unique minimal element for the inclusion.

The proof of this lemma is straightforward, taking as minimal element

$$𝔥_0=_{𝔥A}𝔥,$$

which is a closed subalgebra of $`𝔤`$.

## 2. Structure groups

In all the article, $`P`$ is a principal bundle, with basis $`M`$ and with structure Lie group $`G`$, of Lie algebra $`𝔤=T_eG.`$ Let $`\pi `$ be the fiberwise projection from $`P`$ on $`M`$. We do not specify first the model spaces of these manifolds. They can be Hilbert, Banach, Frechet, locally convex topological spaces, or even take place in the ”convenient setting” . All the differentiable structures are assumed to be smooth. We recall that a connection $`\theta `$ on the principal bundle $`P`$ is a vector bundle projection on the vertical bundle $`TPVTP`$, and can also be seen as a 1-form on $`TP`$ with values in $`G`$ which is $`Ad`$-invariant. Its curvature, $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$, can be also viewed from these two points of view. Recall that if we have an Ad-invariant map $`f:P𝔤`$ ( i.e. such that for any $`pP`$ and for any $`gG`$, $`f(p.g)=Ad_{g^1}f(p)`$), then the induced vertical vector field $`pf(p)^{}`$ of $`TP`$ is invariant under the action of $`G`$ on $`TP`$. For basic facts on principal bundles, we refer to .

1) On a principal bundle $`P`$, using a Lie group morphism $`\rho :GG^{}`$, we build the principal bundle $`P\times _\rho G^{}`$. Then, the connection $`\theta `$ defines a connection $`\theta ^{}`$ on $`P\times _\rho G^{}`$, see e.g. , p. 107-108, or  p. 383.

2) The reduction: Let $`G_1`$ be a Lie group with Lie algebra $`𝔤_1`$, and $`\rho :G_1G`$ be an injective morphism of Lie groups. When we write $`\rho (G_1)`$ instead of $`G_1`$, we consider the group endowed with the topology and the differentiable structure induced by $`G`$, which can be weaker than the initial topology and differentiable structure $`G_1`$.

If there exists a family of local trivializations of $`P`$ whose transition functions take their values in $`\rho (G_1)`$, and that are smooth with respect to the topology of $`G_1`$ then we can build a $`G_1`$-bundle $`P_1`$ with respect to these trivializations. $`P_1`$ is called a  reduction of $`P`$ and there is an inclusion $`i:P_1P,`$ which is a morphism of principal bundles. The connection $`\theta `$ reduces to $`P_1`$ if and only if there is a connection $`\theta _1`$ om $`P_1`$ that is the pull-back of the connection $`\theta `$ on $`P`$. This is the case when, on each local trivialization of $`P`$ defined before, the connection $`\theta `$ reads as a smooth local 1-form on $`M`$ with values in $`𝔤_1`$.

As one can easily see, the first way of changing the structure group of $`P`$ is possible in any case. The second one, the reduction, requires more attention, and one of the aims of this article is to provide a tool to decide whether reduction is possible in an infinite dimensional setting, and then to extend the finite dimensional Ambrose-Singer theorem .

In order to prove the Ambrose-Singer theorem, we shall also need to change the basis manifold, which is possible by pull back, see e.g. , p. 377.: Let $`N`$ be a manifold and let $`f:NM`$ be a smooth map. Then, one defines $`f^{}P`$, the pull back of the principal bundle $`P`$ by $`f`$, which is a principal bundle with structure group $`G`$ and of basis $`N`$. Then, a connection $`\theta `$ always defines a connection $`f^{}\theta `$ on $`f^{}P`$. We use this construction when $`f`$ is the projection from the universal covering $`N=\mathrm{\Sigma }M`$ of $`M`$ to $`M`$. In that case, we write $`\stackrel{~}{\theta }`$ instead of $`f^{}\theta `$, and the curvature of $`\stackrel{~}{\theta }`$ is the same as the curvature of $`\theta `$.

## 3. Holonomy groups

Let us fix now a connection $`\theta `$ on the principal bundle $`P`$, with regular structure group $`G`$ modelled on a complete locally convex topological vector space and of basis $`M`$. We assume that there exists in $`M`$ a dense countable subset $`Q`$, that $`M`$ is modelled on a locally convex vector space, and that the fundamental group $`\pi _1(M)`$ is countable.

### 3.1. Holonomy induced by horizontal paths

Let $`pP`$ be a fixed point, and let $`x=\pi (p)`$ be the basepoint of $`p`$. Let $`\gamma `$ be a piecewise smooth path on $`M`$ starting at $`x`$, i.e. $`\gamma :[0,1]M`$. Then, , the differential equation on $`p`$

$`c(0)`$ $`=`$ $`p`$
$`\pi (c(t))`$ $`=`$ $`\gamma (t)\text{ for }t[0,1]`$
$`\theta (dc(t)/dt)`$ $`=`$ $`0`$
has an unique solution called the horizontal lift of $`\gamma `$ in $`P`$, that we note by $`H\gamma `$. We define the Holonomy group from the point of view 2) of the introduction:

$$H^{curv}(p)=\{gG|H\gamma (1)=p.g,\gamma (1)=x\}.$$

Given two points $`p,p^{}P`$, the holonomy groups $`H^{curv}(p)`$ and $`H^{curv}(p^{})`$ are conjugate in $`G`$. If $`p`$ and $`p^{}`$ can be joint by a horizontal path, $`H^{curv}(p)=H^{curv}(p^{})`$, and if $`P`$ is finite dimensional, $`H^{curv}(p)`$ is a Lie group, which appears to be the smaller subgroup with which one can reduce the structure group of $`P`$ and also reduce the connection $`\theta `$. Note that they are often not closed Lie subgroups of $`G`$, as shows this example: Example: Let $`P=S^1\times S^1=^2/^2`$ be the trivial principal bundle over $`S^1`$ with structure group $`S^1`$. We identify each tangent space of $`P`$ with $`^2`$ in the canonical way, the second coordinate being the vertical coordinate. Let us now consider the connection $`\theta `$ defined by $`\theta :(x,y)^2\theta (x,y)=y+x.\pi `$. Then, the corresponding holonomy group is given by $`[\pi ]/`$, which is a countable dense subgroup of $`S^1=/`$. The holonomy group is itself a Lie group (of dimension $`0`$), but not a closed Lie subgroup of $`S^1`$. In order to avoid these problems, one can also consider the restricted holonomy group, the connected component of the neutral element of the holonomy group, which is obtained considering only the loops in $`x`$ that are homotopy trivial. From another point of view, the restricted holonomy group is also the holonomy group of the connection $`\stackrel{~}{\theta }`$ induced by $`\theta `$ on the pull back of $`P`$ on the universal covering $`\mathrm{\Sigma }M`$ of $`M`$. This pull-back can also be done in infinite dimensions.

### 3.2. Holonomy, curvature and Ambrose-Singer theorems: known results

We define the horizontal bundle as $`HTP=Ker(\theta )`$. This bundle gives a decomposition $`TP=HTPVTP`$. The curvature $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ of $`\theta `$ measures the vertical component of the bracket of two sections $`X,Y`$ of the horizontal bundle, that is, given $`pP`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_p(X,Y)=\theta _p([X,Y])`$. One has to be careful because the Lie algebra spanned by the curvature elements needs not to have the same dimension at each point $`pP`$ (see e,g. , p. 141).

Nevertheless, we have the finite dimensional Ambrose-Singer theorem:

###### Theorem 3.1.

 The Lie algebra of the restricted holonomy group at $`pP`$ is spanned by the curvature elements.

Let us precise the following: by “curvature elements”, we understand the curvature elements $`\mathrm{\Omega }_p^{}(X,Y)`$, where $`p^{}P`$ can be joint to $`p`$ by a horizontal path, and $`X,YT_{\pi (p^{})}M`$. The proof of this theorem uses two tools : the first one is that the restricted holonomy group is finite dimensional. The second one is the Frobenius theorem for vector bundles. Such a theorem was not yet proved in infinite dimension, except on a particular case of holonomy group embedded in a Banach Lie group in . In this article, the very strong assumptions on the holonomy group replaces the finite dimensional setting, which leads the author to apply very easily the Frobenius theorem for Banach vector bundles.

In our setting, there is no Frobenius theorem, and we want to consider all the connections that exist on $`P`$. This is the reason why our approach is quite different.

## 4. Reduction of the structure group

Let us first consider the following question: given a Lie subgroup $`G_1`$, with Lie algebra $`𝔤_1`$, of $`G`$, when is it possible to reduce the bundle $`P`$ to a principal bundle $`P_1`$ with structure group $`G_1`$ ? The most famous condition, in finite dimension and if the basis manifold is simply connected, is the existence of a connection with $`𝔤_1`$-valued curvature. This result is of course linked with the finite-dimensional proof of the Ambrose-Singer theorem. We prove here an infinite dimensional version of the theorem of reduction. This allows us, in the next chapter, to deal with an infinite dimensional construction of the holonomy groups from the point of view 1) of the introduction. In the following, $`p`$ is a fixed point in $`P`$ with basepoint $`x`$ in $`M`$.

###### Theorem 4.1.

We assume that $`G_1`$ and $`G`$ are regular Lie groups and that $`G_1`$ is modelled on a complete locally convex topological vector space. Let $`\rho :G_1G`$ be an injective morphism of Lie groups, if there exists $`\theta `$ a connection on $`P`$, with curvature $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$, such that, for any smooth 1-parameter family $`Hc_t`$ of horizontal paths starting at $`p`$, for any smooth vector fields $`X,Y`$ in $`TM`$,

(4.1) $`s,t[0,1]^2`$ $``$ $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{c_t(s)}(X,Y)`$
is a smooth $`𝔤_1`$-valued map, and if $`M`$ is simply connected, then it is possible to reduce the structure group $`G`$ of $`P`$ to $`G_1`$.

We shall of course try to apply this theorem to find an infinite dimensional version of the Ambrose-Singer theorem. Let us first give a remark that makes easier the application of this theorem in concrete situations:

###### Remark 4.2.

If $`𝔤_1`$ is stable under the adjoint action of $`G`$, the map 4.1 is a smooth $`𝔤_1`$-valued map for any 1-parameter family $`Hc_t`$ of horizontal paths if and only if on any local trivialization of $`P`$, the curvature $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ reads as a smooth $`𝔤_1`$-valued 2-form. Otherwise, it is sufficient to find a family of local trivializations of $`P`$ induced by an open covering of $`M`$ for which the curvature $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ reads as a smooth $`𝔤_1`$-valued 2-form.

Before giving the proof of this theorem, we need three lemmas, which are well-known results in finite dimensions (see e.g. ). Following , if $`C_x^{\mathrm{}}([0,1],M)`$ is the set of smooth paths on $`M`$ starting at $`x`$, we note

$$Pt:C_x^{\mathrm{}}([0,1],M)\times [0,1]\times \pi ^1(x)P$$

the parallel transport with respect to $`\theta `$, which is a smooth map.

###### Lemma 4.3.

Let $`pP`$. Let $`x`$ be the basepoint of $`p`$. Let $`U`$ be a star-shaped neighborhood of $`x`$, that we idendify in sake of simplicity for this lemma with a star-shaped neighborhood of 0 in the model space of $`M`$. We assume that $`U`$ is contained in the domain $`V`$ of a smooth trivialization $`\phi :P_{|V}V\times G`$ of $`P`$ Let $`uU`$ and $`t[0,1]`$. We define $`f(u,t)=tuU`$.

Let

$`\psi :U`$ $``$ $`P_{|U}`$
$`u`$ $``$ $`Pt(f(u,.),1,p)`$
Let

$`\mathrm{\Psi }:U\times G`$ $``$ $`P_{|U}`$
$`(u,g)`$ $``$ $`\psi (u).g`$
and

$$\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}=\mathrm{\Psi }(Id_U\times \rho ).$$

Then, $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ is a local trivialization of $`P`$ over $`U`$. Moreover, $`\theta D\psi `$ is a smooth $`𝔤_1`$-valued form on $`U`$.

We need now to know how the horizontal lifts of paths behave in this trivialization.

###### Lemma 4.4.

We use here the notations of the two last lemmas. We assume also that $`U`$ is convex.

(i) Given a path $`\alpha :[0,1]U`$ starting at $`x`$, if $`H\alpha `$ is its horizintal lift starting at $`p`$, we have $`H\alpha (1)\mathrm{\Psi }(U\times \rho (G_1))`$, and there exists a path $`H\alpha _1:[0,1]U\times G_1`$ such that $`H\alpha =\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}H\alpha _1.`$

(ii) Let $`h:[0,1]^2U`$ be an homotopy equivalence between two paths $`h(0,.)`$ and $`h(1,.)`$ starting at $`x`$ and finishing in $`U`$. Let $`Hh(0,.)`$ and $`Hh(1,.)`$ be their horizontal lifts starting at $`p`$. Then, there is $`g_1G_1`$ such that $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}^1(Hh(0,1))=\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}^1(Hh(1,1)).\rho (g_1).`$

Then, the following lemma will be useful when dealing with homotopy:

###### Lemma 4.5.

Let $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ be two paths on $`U`$. Let $`q_\alpha \pi ^1(\alpha (0))`$ and $`q_\beta \pi ^1(\beta (0))`$. Let $`H\alpha `$ and $`H\beta `$ be the horizotal lifts of $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ starting at $`q_\alpha `$ and $`q_\beta `$. We set $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}^1H\alpha =(\alpha ,\gamma _\alpha )`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }^1H\beta =(\beta ,\gamma _\beta )`$.

Let $`g=\gamma _\beta ^1(0).\gamma _\alpha (0)`$, with <sup>-1</sup> as the inverse map in $`G`$. Then, for any $`t[0,1]`$, there exists $`g_1(t),g_1^{}G_1`$ such that $`\gamma _\beta (t)=\gamma _\alpha (t).g_1^1(t).g.g_1^{}(t)`$. Moreover, the maps $`tg_1(t)`$ and $`tg_1^{}(t)`$ are smooth in $`G_1`$.

Let us now give the proofs of the three lemmas, and then the proof of Theorem 4.1: Proof of Lemma 4.3:

We already know that $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ is a smooth map, since $`Pt`$ is smooth. We also know that $`\psi `$ is a smooth injective map, and that $`\pi \psi =Id_U`$. Hence, $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ is a smooth local trivialization of $`P`$ over $`U`$.

Let us calculate $`D\mathrm{\Psi }^1\theta D\psi `$. Let $`c:]ϵ,ϵ[U`$ be a smooth path such that $`c(0)=uU`$. Let $`h(t,s)=f(c(s),t)`$. Let $`\stackrel{~}{\theta }`$ be the pull-back of $`\theta `$ by $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ on $`U`$.

Then, following the proof of the claim of , p.424, with a connection with non vanishing curvature, we have:

$`_s(h^{}\stackrel{~}{\theta })(_t)`$ $`=`$ $`_t(h^{}\stackrel{~}{\theta })(_s)d(h^{}\stackrel{~}{\theta })(_t,_s)(h^{}\stackrel{~}{\theta })([_t,_s])`$
$`=`$ $`_t(h^{}\stackrel{~}{\theta })(_s)d(h^{}\stackrel{~}{\theta })(_t,_s)`$
$`=`$ $`_t(h^{}\stackrel{~}{\theta })(_s)+ad_{(h^{}\stackrel{~}{\theta })(_t)}((h^{}\stackrel{~}{\theta })(_s))(\mathrm{\Psi }^{}\mathrm{\Omega })(h_{}(_s),h_{}(_t))`$
$`=`$ $`_t(h^{}\stackrel{~}{\theta })(_s)(\mathrm{\Psi }^{}\mathrm{\Omega })(h_{}(_s),h_{}(_t))\text{since }(h^{}\stackrel{~}{\theta })(_t)=0.`$
Then,

$$_s(\mathrm{\Psi }\psi c)=(_sc(s),_s\stackrel{~}{\gamma }(1,s)),$$

remarking that $`(u,e)=\mathrm{\Psi }^1\psi (u)`$. We now calculate $`_s\stackrel{~}{\gamma }(1,s)`$,

$`_s\stackrel{~}{\gamma }(1,s)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _0^1}\left(_s(h^{}\stackrel{~}{\theta })(_t)\right)(t)𝑑t`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _0^1}\left(_t(h^{}\stackrel{~}{\theta })(_s)(\mathrm{\Psi }^{}\mathrm{\Omega })(h_{}(_s),h_{}(_t))\right)(t)𝑑t`$
$`=`$ $`(h^{}\stackrel{~}{\theta })(_s)(1,s){\displaystyle _0^1}(\mathrm{\Psi }^{}\mathrm{\Omega })(h_{}(_s),h_{}(_t))(t)𝑑t`$
Finally, we have:

(4.2) $`D\mathrm{\Psi }^1\theta (_s(\psi c))`$ $`=`$ $`(h^{}\stackrel{~}{\theta })(_sh(1,s),_s\gamma (1,s))`$
(4.3) $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _0^1}\left(\mathrm{\Omega }(h_{}(_s),h_{}(_t))(t)\right)𝑑t`$
Since $`𝔤_1`$ is complete, this integral exists and belongs to $`𝔤_1`$. ∎Proof of the Lemma 4.4:

(i) We have that $`\theta (_s(\psi \alpha ))`$ is an integral on the curvature elements (see the proof of the last lemma). Looking at this result more precisely, reparametrizing equation 4.3, setting $`c=\alpha `$, we have that

(4.4) $`\theta (_s(h(s,t))`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _0^t}\left(\mathrm{\Omega }(h_{}(_s),h_{}(_t))(u)\right)𝑑u,`$
and hence that

$$_t(\theta (_s(h(s,t)))=\mathrm{\Omega }(h_{}(_s),h_{}(_t).$$

Recall that $`\rho ^1\mathrm{\Omega }(h_{}(_s),h_{}(_t))`$is smooth. Then, integrating this equality in $`G_1`$ instead of $`G`$, we get a path $`\alpha _1`$ in $`U\times G_1`$. Then we consider the following differential equation, that defines $`H\alpha _1`$:

$$\{\begin{array}{ccc}H\alpha _1(0)& =& e\hfill \\ H\alpha _1(t)& =& (\alpha (t),\gamma (t))U\times G_1\hfill \\ D\rho \left(\gamma (t)^1_t\gamma (t)\right)& =& Ad_{(\rho \gamma ^1)(t)}\left(\theta D\mathrm{\Psi }(Id\times \rho )(_t\alpha _1)(t)\right),\hfill \end{array}$$

setting $`H\alpha =\mathrm{\Psi }(Id_U\times \rho )H\alpha _1,`$ we get (i).

(ii) comes easily from the continuity of the horizontal lift of paths, using the fact that $`U`$ is contractible, and applying (i) to the path

(4.5)
$$c(t)=\{\begin{array}{ccc}Hh(0,3t)& \text{if}& t[0,1/3]\hfill \\ Hh(3t1,1)& \text{if}& t[1/3,2/3]\hfill \\ Hh(1,33t)& \text{if}& t[2/3,1].\hfill \end{array}$$

Proof of Lemma 4.5: Reparametrizing Lemma 4.4, (i), we have that, for $`t[0,1]`$, there exists $`g_1(t),g_1^{}(t)G_1`$ such that $`\gamma _\alpha (t)=\gamma _\alpha (0).g_1(t)`$ and $`\gamma _\beta (t)=\gamma _\beta (0).g_1^{}(t)`$. Then, we get $`\gamma _\beta (t)=\gamma _\alpha (t).g_1^1(t).g.g_1^{}(t)`$. By equation 4.5, we have that the paths $`tg_1(t)`$ and $`tg_1^{}(t)`$ are smooth paths with values in $`G_1`$. ∎Proof of Theorem 4.1: We consider the covering $`\{U_x\}`$ of $`M`$ indexed by the points $`xM`$ such that each $`U_x`$ is star-shaped. Recall that we have assumed that $`M`$ has a countable dense subset $`Q`$.

From the map $`\psi _p`$, we define as in Lemma 4.4 the map $`\mathrm{\Psi }_p:U_x\times GP`$ such that $`\mathrm{\Psi }_p(u,g)=\psi _p(u).g`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}_p:U_x\times G_1P`$ such that $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}_p(u,g_1)=\mathrm{\Psi }_p(u,\rho (g_1))`$. We define $`p_0=p`$

Let us now build by induction a sequence of countable families of local trivilizations of $`P`$.

Rank 0: We have built the map $`\mathrm{\Psi }_0=\mathrm{\Psi }_p`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}_0=\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}_p`$ and set $`U_0=U_x`$. We define $`p_0=p`$.

Assume that we have built the maps at the rank $`n1`$ for some $`n^{}`$. Let us build the family of rank $`n`$: The maps $`\mathrm{\Psi }_a`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}_a`$, the points $`p_a`$ and the sets $`U_a`$ are indexed by the multi-indexes $`a^n`$ such that $`a_1=0`$. Let us fix such a multi-index $`a`$. $`QU_a`$ is countable. Then, we order $`QU_a`$ to get a sequence $`\{q_k\}_k`$. Fixing $`k`$, we define $`b^{n+1}`$, $`p_b`$, $`U_b`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }_b`$ the following way:

\- $`b=(a_1,\mathrm{},a_n,k)`$

\- $`p_b=\mathrm{\Psi }_a(q_k,e)`$

\- $`U_b=U_{q_k}`$

\- $`\mathrm{\Psi }_b\text{is the map }\mathrm{\Psi }\text{ of Lemma }\text{4.4}\text{ centered at }p=q_k`$

\- $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}_b=\mathrm{\Psi }_b(Id_{U_b}\times \rho )`$.

We have built by induction a family of local trivializations indexed on finite sequences of $``$. Now, we have to check that we get the desired family of local trivializations of $`P`$, namely, that the family $`\{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}_b\}`$ has transition maps with values in $`G_1`$.

Let $`a`$ and $`b`$ be two finite sequences of $``$ of order $`m`$ and $`n`$ such that $`U_aU_b\mathrm{}`$, (recall that the transition function $`\tau _{a,b}`$ is defined by

$`\mathrm{\Psi }_b^1\mathrm{\Psi }_a:U_aU_b\times G`$ $``$ $`U_aU_b\times G`$
$`(u,g)`$ $``$ $`(u,\tau _{a,b}.g)).`$
We must check that $`\rho ^1\tau _{a,b}`$ smooth as a $`G_1`$-valued function. We assume that $`mn`$. Let $`z`$ be a fixed point of $`U_aU_b`$. Let us consider the following two paths, starting at $`x=\pi (p_0)`$ and finishing at $`z`$. In order to build then, we need also to define the charts $`\xi _c:U_cF`$ which identify $`U_c`$ with an open convex neighborhood of $`0`$ of $`F`$ for any finite sequence $`c`$ of $``$ (this notation was hidden in the three previous lemmas because we were working on a fixed local chaart where as we need here to precise the chart used). We set

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\beta _a(t)& =& \xi _0^1(mt\xi _0(p_{(0,a_2)})\text{ for }t[0,1/m]\hfill \\ \beta _a(t)& =& \xi _{(0,a_2)}^1((mt1)\xi _{(0,a_2)}(p_{(0,a_2,a_3)})\text{ for }t[1/m,2/m]\hfill \\ & (\mathrm{})& \\ \beta _a(t)& =& \xi _{(0,a_2,\mathrm{}a_{m1})}^1((mtm+2)\xi _{(0,a_1,\mathrm{}a_{m1})}(p_{(0,a_1,\mathrm{}a_m)})\text{ for }t[(m2)/m,(m1)/m]\hfill \\ \beta _a(t)& =& \xi _{(0,a_1,\mathrm{}a_m)}^1((mtm+1)\xi _{(0,a_1,\mathrm{}a_m)}(z)\text{ for }t[(m1)/m,1]\hfill \end{array}$$

and we build the same way $`\beta _b`$, replacing $`m`$ by $`n`$ and $`a`$ by $`b`$. We define also the paths :

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\alpha _a(t)& =& \mathrm{\Psi }_0(\beta _a(t),e)\text{ for }t[0,1/m]\hfill \\ \alpha _a(t)& =& \mathrm{\Psi }_{(0,a_2)}(\beta _a(t),e)\text{ for }t[1/m,2/m]\hfill \\ & (\mathrm{})& \\ \alpha _a(t)& =& \mathrm{\Psi }_{(0,a_2,\mathrm{}a_{m1})}(\beta _a(t),e)\text{ for }t[(m2)/m,(m1)/m]\hfill \\ \alpha _a(t)& =& \mathrm{\Psi }_{(0,a_1,\mathrm{}a_m)}(\beta _a(t),e)\text{ for }t[(m1)/m,1]\hfill \end{array}$$

and $`\alpha _b`$ replacing $`m`$ by $`n`$ and $`a`$ by $`b`$. These are piecewise smooth paths with values in $`p`$, ending at $`p_a`$ and $`p_b`$. Recall that $`M`$ is assumed to be connected and simply connected. Hence, there is an homotopy among piecewise smooth paths $`h:[0,1]^2M`$ such that $`h(0,.)=\beta _a`$, $`h(1,.)=\beta _b`$, $`h(.,0)=\pi (p)`$, $`h(.,1)=z`$. The horizontal lifts of $`\beta _a`$ and $`\beta _b`$ starting at $`p`$ are the paths $`\alpha _a`$ and $`\alpha _b`$. Since $`[0,1]^2`$ is compact, there exists $`M,N`$ such that, for each $`i\{0,\mathrm{},M1\}`$ and $`j\{0,\mathrm{},N1\}`$, there is a multiindex $`c(i,j)`$ (of any order) such that $`h([i/M,(i+1)/M]\times [j/N,(j+1)/N])U_{c(i,j)}`$.

Then, we apply the lemma 4.5 the paths $`t[0,1]Hh(i/M,(j/N)+(t/N))`$ and $`t[0,1]Hh((i+1)/M,(j/N)+(t/N))`$ in $`U_{c(i,j)}`$ for each $`i\{0,\mathrm{},M1\}`$ and $`j\{0,\mathrm{},N1\}`$the following way:

\- We first apply it to $`tHh(0/M,(0/N)+(t/N))`$ and $`tHh(1/M,(0/N)+(t/N))`$, and then successively to each couple of path $`tHh(0/M,(j/N)+(t/N))`$ and $`tHh(1/M,(j/N)+(t/N))`$ for $`j=1,\mathrm{},N1`$ to have that there exists $`g_1^{(0)}G_1`$ such that $`Hh(1/M,1)=p_a.g_1^{(0)}`$. We have also proved that, for any $`j\{1,\mathrm{},N1\}`$, there exists $`g_1^{(0,j)}G_1`$ such that $`Hh(1/M,(j/N))=Hh(0/M,(j/N)).g_1^{(0,j)}`$

\- We assume that, for fixed $`i`$, there exists $`g_1^{(i1)}G_1`$ such that $`Hh(i/M,1)=p_a.\rho (g_1^{(i1)})`$ and that for any $`j\{1,\mathrm{},N1\}`$, there exists $`g_1^{(i1,j)}G_1`$ such that $`Hh(i/M,(j/N))=Hh(0/M,(j/N)).g_1^{(i1,j)}`$.

Then, applying the same procedure as before, we consider each couple of path $`tHh(i/M,(j/N)+(t/N))`$ and $`tHh((i+1)/M,(j/N)+(t/N))`$ for $`j=0,\mathrm{},N1`$, on which we apply Lemma 4.5. Then, there exists $`g_1^{(0,j)}G_1`$ such that $`Hh((i+1)/M,(j/N))=Hh(0/M,(j/N)).g_1^{(i,j)}`$ and $`g_1^{(i)}G_1`$ such that $`Hh((i+1)/M,1)=p_a.g_1^{(i)}`$.

We have proved by induction that

$$p_b=Hh(1,1)=H(0,1).g_1^{(M1,N1)}=p_a.g_1^{(M1,N1)}.$$

From Lemma 4.4, (i), we have also that the map $`z\rho ^1\tau _{a,b}`$ is smooth, remarking that, for $`s<(N1)/N`$, $`Hh(0,s)`$ and $`Hh(1,s)`$ do not depend on the choice of $`z`$. ∎

Let us now deal with the case where $`M`$ is not simply connected.

###### Theorem 4.6.

Let $`G_1`$ a Lie group with Lie algebra $`𝔤_1`$, and a free representation $`\rho _1:G_1G`$. We assume that

\- for any smooth 1-parameter family $`Hc_t`$ of horizontal paths starting at $`p`$, for any smooth vector fields $`X,Y`$ in $`TM`$,

$$s,t[0,1]^2\mathrm{\Omega }_{c_t(s)}(X,Y)$$

is a smooth $`𝔤_1`$-valued map,

\- for any horizontal path $`H\alpha `$ induced by a loop $`\alpha `$ in $`P`$, there is $`g_1G_1`$ such that $`H\alpha (1)=H\alpha (0).\rho _1(g_1)`$. Then, we can reduce the structure group of $`P`$ to $`G_1`$.

Proof of the Theorem 4.6: The proof begins like the one of theorem 4.1, until we build the family of local trivializations $`\mathrm{\Psi }_a`$, where $`a`$ is a finite sequence of elements of $``$ such that $`a_1=0`$. But here, the additional condition that we have, namely, the holonomy of each horizontal path lies in $`\rho _1(G_1)`$, gives us directely the result. ∎

Note that, in these two theorems, the connection $`\theta `$ reduces to the reduced bundle we have obtained. Let us now give the following lemma, which will be useful in what follows, if $`M`$ is not simply connected.

###### Lemma 4.7.

Let $`G_1`$ be a connected regular Lie subgroup of $`G`$ with Lie algebra $`𝔤_1`$ such that there is a connection $`\theta `$ with $`𝔤_1`$-valued curvature. Assume that its Lie algebra $`𝔤_1`$ is stable under the adjoint action of $`H^{curv}`$. Then, there exists a regular Lie group $`G_1^{}`$ with connected component $`G_1`$ for which the theorem of reduction 4.6 can be applied.

Proof of Lemma 4.7: As we already mentioned, if $`\mathrm{\Sigma }M`$ is the universal covering of $`M`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{P}`$ (resp. $`\stackrel{~}{\theta }`$) is the pull back of $`P`$ (resp. $`\theta `$) over $`\mathrm{\Sigma }M`$, $`H_0^{curv}(\theta )=H^{curv}(\stackrel{~}{\theta })`$. Since $`\mathrm{\Sigma }M`$ is simply connected, Theorem 4.1 applies to $`\stackrel{~}{\theta }`$, and as a consequence $`H_0^{curv}(\theta )=H^{curv}(\stackrel{~}{\theta })G_1`$ with continuous inclusion. Thus, in order to show the Lemma, we show that it is possible to make a semi-direct product of $`G_1`$ with $`H^{curv}(\theta )/H_0^{curv}(\theta )`$ with is a Lie subgroup of $`G`$. Recall that, since $`H^{curv}/H_0^{curv}`$ is a group and we have a continuous surjection $`\pi _1(M)H^{curv}/H_0^{curv}`$, and hence $`H^{curv}/H_0^{curv}`$ is discrete. Let $`\{c_i\}`$ be a family of loops generating $`\pi _1(M)`$, and let $`g_i`$ be their holonomies. Let $`gG_1`$, then, there exists a smooth path $`t[0,1]g(t)G_1`$ starting at the neutral element such that $`g=g(1)`$. Let $`v(t)=g^1(t)_tg(t)C^{\mathrm{}}([0,1],𝔤_1)`$ its logarithmic derivative. $`g_i.g.g_i^1`$ is the endpoint of the path $`tg_i.g(t).g_i^1`$, with logarithmic derivative $`tAd_{g_i}.v(t)`$.

$$\begin{array}{cc}t[0,1],& Ad_{g_i}.v(t)𝔤_1\hfill \\ G_1& \text{is regular}\hfill \end{array}\}g_i.g.g_i^1G_1\mathit{}$$

## 5. The restricted holonomy group

The holonomy group $`H_0^{curv}`$ induced by horizontal paths is not actually an infinite dimensional Lie group, principaly because its structure is induced by the structure of the non associative monoid of the loops based at $`x`$. Howver, using the theorem of reduction of the previous chapter, the definition of the resricted holonomy group as a Lie group turns out to be very easy to give. For this, we pull back $`P`$ over the universal covering $`\mathrm{\Sigma }M`$ of $`M`$, which is simply connected. This gives a principal bundle $`\stackrel{~}{P}`$, with structure group $`G`$ and with basis $`\mathrm{\Sigma }M`$, the universal covering of $`M`$, where the connection $`\theta `$ can be pulled back into an unique connection $`\stackrel{~}{\theta }`$.

###### Definition 5.1.

Given a category $`𝔄`$ of Lie groups. Let $`𝔅`$ be the set of objects in $`𝔄`$ such that, for each group $`H𝔅`$ with Lie algebra $`𝔥`$, there is an injective morphism of Lie groups $`\rho :HG`$ such that the connection $`\theta `$ with curvature $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is such that:

for any smooth 1-parameter family $`Hc_t`$ of horizontal paths starting at $`p`$, for any smooth vector fields $`X,Y`$ in $`TM`$,

$$s,t[0,1]^2\mathrm{\Omega }_{c_t(s)}(X,Y)$$

is a smooth $`𝔥`$-valued map, if the set $`𝔅`$ has a minimal element for the inclusion $`H_0^{red}`$, we call it the restricted holonomy group of class $`𝔄`$ of $`\theta `$.

###### Theorem 5.2.

In these three contexts:

1) $`G`$ is CBH and $`𝔄`$ is the set of CBH Lie groups that are closed subgroups in $`G`$,

2) $`G`$ is of the first type and $`𝔄`$ is the set of Lie groups of the first type that are closed subgroups in $`G`$,

3) $`G`$ is of the second type and $`𝔄`$ is the set of Lie groups of the second type that are closed subgroups in $`G`$,

we can define the restricted holonomy group $`H_0^{red}`$ of class $`𝔄`$.Moreover, the Lie algebra of $`H_0^{red}`$ is the closed Lie algebra contained in $`𝔤`$ generated by the curvature elements.

Proof of the theorem 5.2: Since we work on the bundle $`\stackrel{~}{P}`$ that has a simply connected basis, we can restrict ourselves to the Lie groups of the set $`𝔅`$ deduced from $`𝔄`$ that are connected. Then, using Theorem 1.5 and the lemma following, we have that $`𝔅`$ has a minimal element, which is the connected Lie group with algebra spanned by the curvature elements.

The condition of closedness implies the enlargeability in these three cases. Then, since the Lie algebra of $`H_0^{red}`$ needs to contain all the curvature elements, the Lie algebra which is given is clearly the smaller one. ∎

## 6. The holonomy group

The holonomy group $`H^{curv}`$ induced by horizontal paths is not actually an infinite dimensional Lie group, principaly because its structure is induced by the structure of the non associative monoid of the loops based at $`x`$. This is why we need to define a Lie group $`H`$ such that there is morphism of topological group $`H^{curv}H`$. $`H`$ needs to be the smaller as possible.

###### Definition 6.1.

Let $`𝔄`$ be a category of Lie groups. We define the Holonomy group of class $`𝔄`$ as the minimal element of the set $`𝔅^{}`$ of objects $`H`$ with Lie algebra $`𝔥`$ of $`𝔄`$ such that the connection $`\theta `$ with curvature $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is such that

\- for any smooth 1-parameter family $`Hc_t`$ of horizontal paths starting at $`p`$, for any smooth vector fields $`X,Y`$ in $`TM`$,

$$s,t[0,1]^2\mathrm{\Omega }_{c_t(s)}(X,Y)$$

is a smooth $`𝔥`$-valued map,

\- $`𝔥`$ is stable under the action of $`H^{curv}`$.

Then, if $`𝔅^{}`$ has a minimal element $`H^{red}`$, we call it Holonomy group of class $`𝔄`$ of the connection $`\theta `$.

With the conditions imposed to the groups of $`𝔅^{}`$, one can recognize the conditions of Theorem 4.6 and of Lemma 4.7, and hence see that these conditions ensure that $`\theta `$ reduces to the holonomy group if it is defined.

###### Theorem 6.2.

In these three contexts:

1) $`G`$ is CBH and $`𝔄`$ is the set of CBH Lie groups that are closed subgroups in $`G`$,

2) $`G`$ is of the first type and $`𝔄`$ is the set of Lie groups of the first type that are closed subgroups in $`G`$,

3) $`G`$ is of the second type and $`𝔄`$ is the set of Lie groups of the second type that are closed subgroups in $`G`$,

we can define the holonomy group $`H^{red}`$ of class $`𝔄`$. Moreover, the Lie algebra of $`H`$ is spanned by the curvature elements.

Proof of the Theorem 6.2: According to Theorem 5.2 and Lemma 4.7, we have only to show that the Lie algebra spanned by the curvature elements is stable by $`H^{curv}`$. We already know that it is stable by $`H_0^{curv}`$. Let $`\{c_i\}`$ be a family of loops generating $`\pi _1(M)`$, with holonomies $`\{g_i\}`$. Let $`\mathrm{\Omega }(X,Y)`$ be a curvature element. Then, there exists a one parameter family of smooth loops $`c_t`$ based at $`x`$ such that $`Hc_0(1)=Hc_0(0)`$ and if $`Hc_t(1)=Hc_t(0).g_t`$, $`_{t=0}g_t=\mathrm{\Omega }(X,Y)`$. Hence, if $``$ is the monoïd law of the loops based at $`x`$, we have that $`(c_ic_t)c_i^1`$ is a $`0`$-homotopic loop. Hence, its holonomy is in $`H_0^{curv}H_0^{red}`$. Hence, taking the derivative with respect to $`t`$, we have that $`Ad_{g_i}(\mathrm{\Omega }(X,Y))`$ is in the Lie algebra of $`H_0^{red}`$. ∎

## 7. Final remarks: the holonomy group as an invariant of the connection

The holonomy groups $`H^{red}`$ considered here are closed subgroups of the structure group $`G`$. That is, they depend on $`G`$ as well as on $`\theta `$ and on the basis manifold $`M`$. If we change the structure group $`G`$ for another Lie group with weaker structure, we also change the holonomy group.

Conceptually, the holonomy group should depend only on the choice of the connection $`\theta `$ and on the basis manifold $`M`$. It is the case for $`H^{curv}`$, whose topology is the push-forward of the topology of the loops on $`M`$. One could expect to find a wider class of Lie subgroups of $`G`$ than the class of closed Lie subgroups that enables one to define $`H^{red}`$ with a stronger topology than the one of $`G`$. This leads to the following question:

What is the weaker property $`(P)`$ on Lie subalgebras of $`𝔤`$ such that

\- if a totally ordered family $`B`$ of subalgebras of $`𝔤`$ satisfy $`(P)`$, their intesection (equipped with the projective topology of the family $`B`$) also satisfies $`(P)`$,

\- if $`𝔥_1`$ and $`𝔥_2`$ satisties $`(P)`$, then $`𝔥_1𝔥_2`$ satisfies $`(P),`$

\- if $`𝔥`$ satisfies $`(P)`$, there is a Lie subgroup $`H`$ of $`G`$ with Lie algebra $`𝔥`$ ?

Under these assumptions, one could apply Zorn’s lemma to find the holonomy group $`H^{red}`$ of the considered connection with respect to the class of Lie groups defined by $`(P)`$. The topology of this holonomy group should depend less on the choice on the structure group $`G`$.

More generally, a natural question arises on $`H^{curv}`$: when is it a Lie subgroup of $`G`$ ? This question is the same as: when is $`H_0^{curv}`$ a Lie subgroup of $`G`$ ? This question is related to the actual loss of easy criteria to decide whether a topological group is a (regular ?) infinite dimensional Lie group. If $`H^{curv}`$ is a regular infinite dimensional Lie group modelled on a complete locally convex topological space, then the theorem of reduction can be applied, and one can expect to find a category $`𝔄`$ of Lie groups for which $`H^{curv}=H^{red}`$. Otherwise, and especially if $`H^{curv}`$ is only an infinite dimensional Lie group (non regular) or only a topological group, the theorem of reduction cannot be applied and one can expect to have $`H^{curv}H^{red}`$.


format: text

text:
# Brane Gas Cosmology, M-theory and Little String Theory

## I Introduction

The Brane Gas Cosmological scenario (BGC) provides a unification of Cosmology with String Theory. This is acheived by addressing the dimensionality problem present in String theory by a dynamical decompactification mechanism which involves the unwinding of annihilating D-branes. BGC also resolves the initial curvature singularities which plague the standard big bang scenario by implementing T-duality of the space-time as the radius of the Universe tends to zeroThe issue of implementing T-duality for timelike singularities is still under investigation and is not as yet resolved. In our case we assume that for each constant time slice one can map winding states on small radius to momentum states on large radius. .

A key ingredient in BGC is that strings dominate the dynamics of the universe leading to decompactification of 3 large spatial dimensions. The Brandenberger-Vafa (BV) mechanism which is central to BGC, posits that strings see each other most efficiently in $`2(p+1)`$ (p=1 for strings) dimensions. Therefore, their winding modes will annihilate most efficiently in $`3+1`$ dimensions and this leads to a decompactification in those dimensions. The strings moving in higher dimensions eventually cease to interact efficiently and will fall out of equilibrium. Their winding modes will prevent those higher dimensions from further expanding.

The BV mechanism was originally analyzed in the context of perturbative string theory. We know that type II string theories at strong coupling becomes M-theory in 11 dimensions. In this, $`M5`$ and $`M2`$ branes play a fundamental role. It is, therefore, important to reconsider the ubiquity of the BGC mechanism in all corners of moduli space and, in particular, the 11 dimensional corner where strings are not present as fundamental degrees of freedomBrane Gases in 11D Supergravity was recently investigated by .. We are also motivated to see how holography can play a role in describing the thermodynamics of the early universe. What we will discover is that these two motivations are intimately connected and leads to a picture which dovetails the original proposal of Brandenberger and Vafa on string gases in the early universe.

The original paper on BGC examined a cosmological scenario where a gas of strings and branes were wrapped over all cycles of $`T^9`$. While further research has addressed more general background topologies such as orbifolds and inhomogenous space-times , no procedure has yet emerged that generalizes brane gases in which the dynamics of $`M2`$ and $`M5`$ branes play a central role. A related problem is that typical scenarios based on string theory contain a plethora of extended objects. By reducing the dynamics to that of only two fundamental degrees of freedom, one hopes to obtain a clearer picture of the BGC mechanism. In an earlier version of BGC, to evade the complications of dealing with complex configurations and interactions of brane gases, the authors of (ABE) only considered parallel interactions of D-branes with the same $`RR`$ charges.

It is the purpose of this paper to initiate an investigation of some of the above mentioned outstanding issues in BGC. We will show that, by going directly to the fundamental states of M-theory, the BGC scenario simplifies and also generalizes to intersections and a strong coupling regime. In this situation we can use 11D supergravity and the worldvolume actions of $`M2`$ and $`M5`$ branes to analyze BGC.

## II Brane Gases in M-theory:General Setting

Brane Gases have been formulated in the weak string coupling regime in Type IIA where $`g_s<1`$. In this regime BGC was studied using IIA supergravity. The zero mode fluctuation of p-brane winding and momentum states were obtained from linearized fluctuations of the Dira-Born-Infeld (DBI) action. In a toroidal geometry ABE  were able to show that a hierarchy of dimensions decompactify resulting in three large spatial dimensions with two smaller extra dimensions. However, the exact scaling of the hierarchy was not determined. Can we gain more information about the scaling in dimensions by going to strong coupling?

The strong coupling limit of $`IIA`$ is $`11`$ dimensional supergravity($`SUGRA`$), whose fundamental degrees of freedom are $`M2`$ and $`M5`$ branes. We wish to study gases of intersecting $`M2`$ and $`M5`$ branes and generalize the nature of the intersection. While our philosophy is rooted in the standard big bang scenario where the early universe existed in a hot dense state with all degrees of freedom excited, it is not a prediction of M-theory as to how extra spatial dimensions could start off small.

Our starting point closely dovetails the standard hot big bang where all fundamental degrees of freedom are excited and in thermal equilibrium with all dimensions small and compact. While we do not know what the quantum version of M-theory is, 11-D SUGRA is expected to be the classical limit. We shall analyze our cosmology with an interplay between 11-D SUGRA and the effective worldvolume actions of $`M2`$ and $`M5`$ branes. Let us start with the bosonic sector of 11D SUGRA.

$$S=\frac{1}{\kappa ^9}d^{11}x\sqrt{g}(R+F_{[4]}^2+F_{[4]}F_{[4]}A_{[3]})$$
(1)
where $`dA_{[3]}=F_{[4]}`$ is a four form field strength tensor.

The dual of $`F_{[4]}`$ is a seven form which couples to the worldvolume of the fivebrane. This state in 11-D is identified with the $`M5`$ brane, which is the magnetic dual of the $`M2`$ brane. The potential $`A`$ is a threeform and therefore couples to a $`M2`$ brane. Now consider a gas of $`M5`$ and $`M2`$ branes which are not interacting with each other. Since the five branes are heavier they will fall out of equilibrium faster than the $`M2`$ branes and their winding modes will cease to annihilate. Membranes will dominate the dynamics at later times and according to the BV topological arguments, 6 larger space-time dimensions will get big since the membrane winding modes annihilate most efficiently in these dimensions. At this point, it is still not clear to realize three large spatial dimensions directly from M-theory dynamics. To solve this problem we need to take brane intersections in M-theory into account. Indeed these intersections in M-theory are neccessary for consistency, such as local gauge invariance, which we will show later.

The general setting starts with all branes and their intersections wrapping cycles of all dimensions small with respect to the string length scale. In this case all branes wrap $`T^{10,1}`$ §§§ $`T^{10,1}`$ is a ten dimensional torus times the real time line $`T^{10}\times R^1`$. . The equilibrium condition

$$w_p+\overline{w}_ploops,radiation$$
(2)
states that there is an equal number of branes and anti-branes in the system interacting. However, we expect the system to fall out of equilibrium when the winding degrees of freedom cease to interact. Moreover, the breakdown of thermal equlibrium is suggested by exceeding the Hagedorn temperature which is lower for higher dimensional branes, so they are expected to fall out of equilibrium faster than lower dimensional branes. Hence we expect the five-branes to fall out of equilibrium faster than the membranes.

We are working in 11 dimensional supergravity and there is no dilaton which in ten dimensional string theory, plays a key role to dynamically prevent cycles from expanding in the presence of winding modes. Therefore, in the 11 dimensional regime, it is necessary to to show that branes wrapped on cycles will keep the dimensions from expanding; in other words there exists a confining potential for the modulus of the cycle. The most straightforward way to show this is to work in a toroidal coordinate system that is time dependent in an 11-d SUGRA background. For simplicity we shall assume homogeneity of the background and adiabacity of the evolution. We will discover that these assumptions are to weak to explain how membrane winding states can prevent expansion of the cycles they wrap. Nonetheless, one will be able to isolate exactly where the assumptions break down. The issue of the confining nature of wrapping membranes in M-theory was resolved by .

We consider the wrapping of a membrane at rest along a two cycle. We want to find its equation of state which can be obtained from finding the energy-momemtum tensor of the membrane in its wrapped configuration. The relevant bosonic part of the membrane action is described by the Nambu-Goto action

$$T_2d^3\sigma \sqrt{detg_{ab}}$$
(3)
where $`T_2`$ is the tension of the membrane. To find its energy momentum tensor with respect to the 11 dimension space-time we will vary the membrane action with respect to the background metric $`G_{\mu \nu }`$ defined as

$$G_{\mu \nu }=g_{ab}X_{,\mu }^aX_{,\nu }^b$$
(4)
The action is then

$$S_2=d^{11}x(T_2d^3x\delta ^{(11)}(XX(\sigma ))\sqrt{detG_{\mu \nu }X_{,a}^\mu X_{,b}^\nu })$$
(5)
Varying the action with respect to the background metric one obtains see Boehm and Brandenberger for a more general treatment for DBI actions.

$$T^{\mu \nu }=T_2d^3\sigma \delta ^{(11)}(x^\alpha X^\alpha (\sigma ))\sqrt{g}g^{ab}X_{,a}^\mu X_{,b}^\nu .$$
(6)
from this we want to derive the pressure of the system of membranes wrapped on Tori. This is obtained by averaging over the trace $`T^{ii}`$ which is

$$T_i^i(t,x)=T_2d^2\sigma \delta ^{(11)}(x^{11}X^{11}(t,\sigma ^i))[3\dot{X}^i\dot{X}_i3].$$
(7)
where $`\dot{X}^i\dot{X}_i`$ is the squared velocity of a point on the membrane parameterized by the worldvolume coordinates. By defining the mean squared velocity of the gas of membranes by averaging over all $`\sigma ^i`$; i.e. $`v^2=\frac{1}{d}_i(\dot{X}^i\dot{X}_i)`$. It follows that the pressure can be obtained from the averaged trace.

$$𝒫=\frac{1}{\mathrm{d}}\underset{\mathrm{i}}{}\mathrm{T}_\mathrm{i}^\mathrm{i}=[\frac{3}{11}\mathrm{v}^2\frac{\mathrm{p}}{\mathrm{d}}]\rho _\mathrm{p}$$
(8)
where $`p`$ is the WV spatial dimension and $`d`$ is the target space dimension, $`\rho _p`$ is the energy density of the membrane wrapped around a p-cycle.

Since the membranes are at rest we are in the non-relativistic case $`(v^20)`$ and the pressure is,

$$𝒫=\frac{1}{5}\rho _\mathrm{p}$$
(9)
in agreement with the results of . The pressure and the energy density will source the 11d Supergravity equations for the brane gas.

With this result in hand it remains to demonstrate that even in 11d without the dilaton, branes will keep the dimensions from expanding. Similar to  we will assume that the background space is a homogeneous and isotropic ten torus and that membranes and five branes can be wrapped over all of these cycles The authors  have studied the more general anisotropic toroidal cosmological background. But for simplicity we shall focus for now on membranes. The same argument will hold for fivebranes with exception to the difference in the equation of state for their winding modes. Since we are mainly interested in the effects of a gas of membrane winding modes and transverse fluctuations on the evolution of a spatially homogenous Universe we will neglect the antisymmetric tensor fields. We will use the metric of a torus and assume isotropy for simplicity,

$$ds^2=dt^2+a(t)dx_i^2.$$
(10)
After varying the SUGRA action with this background and setting $`\lambda t=log(a(t))`$ the resulting equations of motion are

$$d\dot{\lambda ^2}=\frac{1}{2}e^{d\lambda }P$$
(11)
$$d\ddot{\lambda }=\frac{1}{2}e^{d\lambda }(E+P)$$
(12)
where

$$E=\underset{p}{}E_p^{nw}+E^{nw}$$
(13)
$$P=\underset{p}{}w_pE_p^w+wE^{nw}$$
(14)
where the superscripts $`w`$ and $`nw`$ stand for the winding and nonwinding modes respectively. From eq  the energy $`E_2`$ of a membrane is

$$T_{0w}^0=T_2d^3\sigma \delta ^{10}(x^dX^d)(t,\sigma ))$$
(15)
and the total winding energy is

$$E_{2w}=T_0^0=T_2\rho _2=T_2vol_p$$
(16)
and

$$Vol_p=a(t)^p$$
(17)
we immediately see that the r.h.s of  acts like a potential for the radius of the torus.

$$V_{eff}e^{d\lambda }(E+P)$$
(18)
if the r.h.s is always negative, the potential is confining. In the case of dilaton gravity, the potential which appears instead of (18) determining the acceleration of the scale factor would be confining for negative pressures. This is not the case here (for Einstein gravity). The pressure of membrane winding modes is always negative and will therefore by itself not prevent expansion of the cycle it wraps. Therefore, at first sight it does not appear that wrapping membranes around tori in 11D supergravity will act to prevent expansion. These conclusions, however, are based on the assumption of isotropy. It is important to include anisotropic wrapping of the membranes. Indeed, it was recently shown that eq  is generalzed to having a restoring force term with the inclusion of a wrapping matrix ,$`N_{ij}`$, which indexes the degree to which the membranes wrap the tori anisotropically. The authors of  showed that at late times the anisotropic terms dominate the dynamics and act to confine the wrapped dimensions. A very interesting case of wrapping matrix they considered, demonstrated that when three dimensions are fully unwrapped, four dimensions partially wrapped and three dimensions are fully wrapped, the three unwrapped dimensions will expand most rapidly. The four partially unwrapped dimensions will grow slower than the three ’macroscopic’ dimensions while the three fully wrapped dimensions will grow slowest. Therefore there is a hierarchy of scale between the wrapped and unwrapped dimensions.

We will argue in the next two sections that the inclusion of string like intersections and turning on G-flux leads to the same late time decompactification behavior of a particlular choice of wrapping matrix which gives rise to a hierarchy in scale between 3 macroscopic dimensions and two smaller dimensions.

## III Membrane and Five Brane Intersections

As we pointed out in an earlier section, the mechanism to generate a large four dimensional spacetime would fail in 11 dimension if localized string like excitations were not present. Hence, M-theory must consistently incorparate string like degrees of freedom from the outset. In what will follow we will provide a kinematical consideration for how string like states arise in M-theory in 11 dimensions.

It is well known that $`M2`$ and $`M5`$ branes are not segregate entities and that worldvolume gauge invariance requires their mutual intersections for consistency. From these considerations, we can see how string like states robustly arise.

The $`M5`$ brane action is given by \**\**\**The kinetic term of the M5 WV 3-form, $`h_3`$, is actually zero because of self duality of $`h_3`$. But we will use the $`M5`$ WV action of  and shall impose the self duality condition at the equation of motion level.

$`S=`$ $`T_{M5}{\displaystyle }d\sigma 6[\sqrt{det(G_{ij}}){\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}h_{[3]}h_{[3]}C_{[6]}`$ (20)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}C_{[3]}db_{[2]}].`$
where $`dC_{[6]}=C_{[7]}`$ is the magnetic dual of the G-flux $`G_{[4]}`$, $`b_{[2]}`$ is the $`M5`$ WV 2-form; $`h_{[3]}=db_{[2]}C_{[3]}`$ is the self-dual 3-form living on the M5 WV. Notice that $`C_{[3]}`$ is the pull back of $`A_3`$ from eq 1, which supports the $`M2`$ brane.

Notice the 2-form, $`db_{[2]}`$ in the second term of . This term suggests that a string like configuration couples to the five brane action. How do we confirm this? Let us turn to the membrane world volume action.

In addition to the worldvolume term

$$_{M2}\sqrt{detG_{ij}}$$
(21)
there is the coupling $`_{M2}C_{[3]}`$ to the three form field. The membrane WV action is invariant under a local $`U(1)`$ gauge transformation

$$C_{[3]}C_{[3]}+d\mathrm{\Lambda }_{[2]}$$
(22)
However, this only holds if the membrane has no boundary. If the membrane has a boundary it is no longer invariant under the above gauge tranformation. One then needs an additional field on the boundary whose gauge transformation will cancel the boundary contribution from the above piece. The following modification does the job .

$$_{M2}C_{[3]}_{M2}b_{[2]}$$
(23)
where $`b_{[2]}`$ is a two form field living on the two dimensional boundary of the membrane worldvolume with the gauge transformation

$$b_{[2]}b_{[2]}+\mathrm{\Lambda }_{[2]}$$
(24)
. But notice that this is the same field which lives at a two dimensional boundary on the five brane world volume. One niavely would associate $`db_{[2]}=h_{[3]}`$ where $`h_{[3]}`$ is the five brane self dual field strength. However this is not correct and we further need to make the latter gauge invaraint. This was worked out to be

$$h_{[3]}=db_{[2]}C_{[3|W_6]}$$
(25)
Therefore as implied from the last term of M5 WV action, $`b_{[2]}`$ is the source for the localized string intersection of the $`M2M5`$ branes and it is important that this field is turned on in describing BGC. We shall discuss this issue in the next section. This concludes our general argument as to why membranes will end on five branes on a string like intersection.

Now let us focus on the role of the $`M2`$ and $`M5`$ branes in this compactification in the context of brane gases. Consider a gas of M-branes which can wrap all cycles of this product manifold. Now the crucial ingredient is that $`M2`$ branes will intersect $`M5`$ branes on a string and these strings will also wrap the cycles admitted by the interstection rules. $`M2`$ branes can also embed themselves into the $`M5`$ as well as intersect at a point.

Given these string intersectons in 11D we arrive at a cosmological scenario where $`M5`$ branes will quickly annihilate in 10+1 dimensions. However, the intersecting $`M5M2`$ system will not fully annihilate due to the string intersection which wraps one cycles of $`T^{10}`$. There are $`M2`$ branes with no boundaries and these will allow 5 spatial dimensions, $`T^5`$, to get large. The string intersections that wrap the $`T^5`$ will fully annihilate in 3 spatial dimensions of this $`T^5`$. Once the strings annihilate there will no longer be any obstructions for the fivebranes to fully annihilate. Therefore, we end up with a hierarchy of dimensions where 3 dimensions have decompactified in a five dimensional manifold; which is identical to the conclusions of  in the context of type IIA string theory. In the sections that follow we provide some evidence for our conclusions.

## IV The Role of Fluxes in Cycle Stabilization

Initially we did not include the form fields present in 11D SUGRA, but they are expected to play an important role in the cosmological dynamics. Here we provide an argument which demonstrates that G-flux can stabilize some of the moduli of a four torus. More importantly, we want to show how M-theory encodes the breaking of 11 dimensional Poincare’ invariance by turning on G-flux. This leads dynamically to separation of a six dimensional torus $`T^6`$ from a four dimensional torus $`T^4`$. Furthermore, we will also show in the following calculation that this G-flux is consistent with the initial conditions of BGC in M-theory namely that we have an equal number of membranes and anti-membranes.

G-flux is a four form which couples to the five brane worldvolume via. its magnetic dual, a seven form $`G_{[4]}=C_{[7]}`$. Also, G-flux can couple to the membrane intersection on the $`M5`$ brane as shown in the previous section by turning on the self-dual $`M5`$ three-form $`h_{[3]}=db_{[2]}C_{[3]}`$; therefore membranes, can source G-flux. We will show that membranes transverse to an eight dimensional torus will source G-flux which separates a four dimensional torus from a six dimensional torus, dynamically breaking the 11 dimensional Poincare’ invariance.

In the absence of membrane sources, the G-flux for a supersymmetric eight dimensional manifold (ie. CY4-fold) compactification of M-theory shoud vanish. But since we started with of an equal amount of membrane and anti membrane sources in 11-d we can explicitly show that the G-flux can be supported by the $`T^4`$ manifold even though it is compact. The Lagrangian for a membrane and anti-membrane is

$$=\mathrm{G}_{[4]}^2+\mathrm{n}_{\mathrm{M2}}\mathrm{C}_{[3]}\mathrm{m}_{\overline{\mathrm{M}}2}\mathrm{C}_{[3]}+\mathrm{C}_{[3]}\mathrm{G}_{[4]}\mathrm{G}_{[4]}$$
(26)
where $`m`$ and $`n`$ denote the number of membrane and antimembranes respectively. Varying w.r.t $`C_{[3]}`$ leads to the equation of motion for the membrane source

$$dG=n\delta ^8(x)m\delta ^8(x)+G_{[4]}G_{[4]}$$
(27)
yields the condition

$$mn=G_{[4]}G_{[4]}$$
(28)
whose solution is

$$G_{[4]}G_{[4]}=0$$
(29)
if $`m=n`$, which corresponds to our initial condition in BGC that there are equal amount of membrane and antimembranes. The right hand side of  is easily satisfied provided that we identify a non vanishing $`G_{6789}0`$ with the coordinates on $`T_{6789}^4`$. If the other components of the four form $`G_{ijkl}=0`$ vanishes then the condition in eq  is easily satified. Therefore we can have a non trivial G-flux which factorizes the 11D Tori into a product space

$$T^{10,1}T^{5,1}\times T^4\times S^1$$
(30)
due to the surviving G-flux. From another point of view, we can similarly argue that a gas of $`M5`$ will wrap a $`T^{5,1}`$ manifold and fall out of equilibrium faster than the $`M2`$ branes, leaving behind a $`T^4`$ that is supported by the $`G`$-flux †††††† $`_{T_4}G_4`$ the $`G`$ flux is supported by the four torus.of other $`M5`$ branes which fell out of equilibrium.

## V Little Strings and Dynamical Decompactification

We have argued that the BV mechanism necessitates string-like intersections in order to directly lead to large 4-dimensions. Otherwise, the mechanism will generically predict 6 large dimensions. We provided kinematical reasons which demonstrated that open membranes would lead to string intersections between $`M2`$ and $`M5`$ branes. In the previous section we used the BV arguments to show that a hierarchy in scales between 3 larger space dimensions within 5 dimensions occur when string like intersections are taken in to account in M-theory. This happens when the five branes wrap a $`T^4`$ while the other one dimensional WV direction which includes the stringlike intersection, wraps cycles of a transverse $`T^{5,1}`$. Therefore a gas of five branes can all wrap $`T^4`$ and the string intersections on different five branes can all wrap the cycles of a tranverse $`T^{5,1}`$. In this sections we provide another configuration which can lead to decompactification if the five branes wrap that whole $`T^{5,1}`$. Moreover, this leads us to a handle of the thermodynamics of these string intersections in terms of holography.

We do not have control of the microscopics of M-theory in 11-dimensions, but we want to gain thermodynamic information of the string like intersections between the $`M2M5`$ branes. We now explore a way of doing this i perturbative in the context of reducing M-theory to type IIA. We will show that the string like intersections we are considering in M-theory is related to the Little Strings which occupy the WV of NS5 branes in type IIA when M-theory is compactified on a circle. To summarize, the general picture we are considering at this stage: One has a gas of spacetime filling $`M5`$ branes which have fallen out of equilibrium. In other words we imagine a system of $`N`$ five branes with a gas of $`M2`$ branes ending on the $`M5`$s. The five branes have “condensed” in the sense that they are all parallel and wrapping $`T^{5,1}`$.

Since we expect that these string like excitations in M-theory will dominate the late time dynamics of the universe leading to a decompactification to four space-time dimensions, we want to provide evidence in the type IIA picture which supports this geometrical picture. But first we have to review how Little Strings in type IIA arise from M-theory.

Little strings are the IIA description of the intersection of M5 and M2 branes, where the latter stretches between a stack of five-branes. The string like intersection reduces to little strings propigating on the WV of NS5 branes. These theories (LST) are consistent non-gravitational theories in five and six space-time dimensions. LST can be derived from k $`M5`$ branes with a transverse circle of radius R in the limit of $`R0`$, $`M_p\mathrm{}`$ with $`RM_p^3=M_s^2`$ kept constant. With this connection between string like intersections in M-theory and LST in type IIA, we have a new insight into how type IIA can encode the dynamics of the string like intersection in M-theory. We are specifically interested in understanding the BV argument for decompactification of the cycles that the gas of little strings wrap.

In the M-theory picture we developed in the earlier sections, membranes end on the world volume of the five brane. This WV wraps $`T^{5,1}=𝒜`$, therefore the string intersection will also wrap all cycles of $`𝒜`$. In order for decompactification to occur on $`𝒜`$, the winding states of little strings in manifold $`𝒜`$ have to be lighter compared to fundamental IIA strings in the bulk manifold $`=\mathrm{T}^4`$, $`M_s>\mathrm{M}_{\mathrm{s}𝒜}`$. If this is case then the winding tension of strings will prevent $``$ from expanding at a slower rate than $`𝒜`$. This is reminiscent of the construction of Easson where BGC was analyzed in the case of $`K3`$ compactifications. In that case membranes wrapped both the $`K3`$ and $`T^4`$. Easson conjectured that the membrane states were heavier in the $`K3`$ compared to $`T^4`$ however this was not proven. In our case we have more information to analyze this situation since we have some control of LST at finite temperature.

In order for the little strings to dominate the dynamics of the decompactification their energy per cycle on $`T^{5,1}`$ has to be less than the energy of fundamental strings on the $`T^4`$. The tension of a membrane stretched between two five branes in 11d is

$$T_{M2}=M_{11}^3$$
(31)
where $`M_{11}`$ is the eleven dimensional plank energy scale. The little string which forms at the intersection has a tension

$$T_{ls}=M_{11}^3\times d$$
(32)
where $`d`$ is the distance between the two fivebranes that connect the membrane. We see that as the little strings become heavier as the five branes are further apart. We need to establish the conditon such that the energy of the little string wrapped on the NS5 WV is less than a wrapped string on $`T^4`$; this yields a consistency condition with the gas approximation. The condition is:

$$M_{11}^3\times dM_{11}^3\times R$$
(33)
where R is the scale of a cycle of $`T^4`$. This inequality leads to the condition

$$d<<R$$
(34)
which means that the stack of parallel $`M5`$ branes are coincident compared to the size of the $`T^4`$ radius. This suggests that we can treat the $`M5`$ worldvolume theory as a gas of little strings at finite density. We will establish this in the following section.

## VI Thermodynamics of LST and the BV Mechanism

In a previous paper we analyzed the brane gas scenario in the context of IIA SUGRA which can be related to the states of M-theory by compactifying on a circle. In the last section we provided a consistency condition for the validity of the gas approximation in M-theory and found that there is a thermodynamical realization of the little strings which are localized on a five dimensional submanifold $`𝒜`$. But how is one to know that we can treat this system perturbatively? The answer to this question comes from holography, similar in spirit to the AdS/CFT correspondence.

Holography relates LST to string theory in the near horizon geometry of the fivebranes . In general the theory is difficult to analyze since the near horizon geometry includes a linear dilaton direction, the real line $`R`$ along which the dilaton varies linearly

$$\mathrm{\Phi }=\frac{Q}{2}\varphi ,$$
(35)
where $`Q`$ is a model dependent constant. Therefore the string coupling $`exp\mathrm{\Phi }=exp(Q\varphi /2)`$ vanishes as $`\varphi \mathrm{}`$ which is the region far from the fivebranes and diverges as one approaches the fivebranes. Thus, gaining holographic information of LST involves solving the dual theory at strong coupling. However, there exists a case where LST becomes weakly coupled and tractable by a perturbative holographic analysis; the high energy density regime. This is a key realization because it tells us that we can understand the dynamics of the system of intersecting membranes in M-theory perturbatively via. holography. We are now in a position to use BV arguments for little strings wrapping the $`T^5`$ on the NS5 brane worldvolume. This is possible because we can retrieve the thermodynamic information of little strings wrapped on $`T^{5,1}`$ from the holographic dual. The energy-momentum of this gas, will backreact on the background geometry due to its linear equation of state. In what follows we shall retrieve the equation of state of a gas of little strings, which represent the intersection of $`M2`$ and $`M5`$ branes in the 11 dimensional description.

The authors of  found that LST has a Hagedorn density of states at very high energies which follows from the little string partition sum

$$Z(\beta )=_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑E\rho (E)e^{\beta E}$$
(36)
$$\rho (E)=e^{S(E)}e^{\beta _HE}$$
(37)
Also, finite energy corrections to the density of states were found with interesting high energy behavior

$$\rho (E)=E^\alpha e^{\beta _H}E[1+O(\frac{1}{E})]$$
(38)
where $`\alpha `$ is negative. The density of states yields the temperature energy relation

$$\beta =\frac{\rho }{E}=\beta _H+\frac{\alpha }{E}$$
(39)
Since $`\alpha `$ is negative the temperature is above the Hagedorn temperature $`T_H=\frac{1}{\beta _H}`$ and the specific heat is negative. If one increases the temperature of the system the energy decreases. This behavior has lead the authors to suggest the LST undergoes a phase transition above the Hagedorn transition similar to the case of fundamental strings in 10 D.

Below $`T_H`$, little strings will remain in thermal equilibruim. By the BV arguments, the little strings will cease to interact in $`d>4`$, their winding modes will fall out of equilibrium and those cycles will no longer expand. However, the little strings continue to maintain equilibrium in 3+1 dimensions by the usual topological intersection arguments discussed earlier, as the winding modes continue to annihilate, those 3+1 dimensions on $`𝒜`$ will be selected to grow larger than the other cycles.

The equation of state of the LS living on $`T^{5,1}`$ is

$$p=w_a\rho $$
(40)
where

$$w_a=w_w+w_m$$
(41)
the winding mode w parameter is

$$w_w=\frac{p}{d}=\frac{1}{5}$$
(42)
This pressure and energy density of the little strings on $`𝒜`$ will backreact on the background six dimensional geometry. By the same arguments presented by ABE: The backreaction of the winding modes will generate an effective energy momemtum tensor which will couple to type IIA supergravity. As these modes were shown to be lighter than the bulk string modes they will fall out of equilibrium last and allow 3+1 dimensions of the $`T^5`$ to get large .We outline the process as follows

$$T^{10,1}T_{LST}^{5,1}\times T_G^4\times S^1T_{large}^{3,1}\times T^2\times T^4\times S^1$$
(43)
‡‡‡‡‡‡Note that the decompactification rate of $`T^3`$ within the $`T^5`$ depends on the degree to which the fivebrane winding energy also annihilates. This is plausible since the little strings are sourced by five brane fields, so that when the little strings at high density annihilate, the fivebrane tension decreases on the cycles of $`T^3`$.

This is precisely the late time behavior obtained by  for a specific choice of wrapping matrix.

## VII Discussion

We have provided an 11-dimensional picture of Brane Gas Cosmology which takes into account $`M2`$, $`M5`$ branes and their intersections. By studying their non-perturbative dynamics at finite density, we retrieve two consistent pictures in type IIA string theory. The first picture involves the string intersections annihilating on a $`T^3`$ transverse to four dimensions which fivebranes wrap. The second picture corresponds to the type IIA reduction of M-theory on a circle, where a gas of little strings localized on the worldvolume of k coincident $`NS5`$ branes. The thermodynamics of the (2,0) LST is well described via. holography and one is able to obtain the equation of state of the little string winding modes wrapped on tori. Due to the backreaction of the gas of little string on the six spacetime dimensions that they occupy, the BV arguments leads to decompactification of 3+1 dimensions. There also seems to exist the possibility that 6 dimensions can get large first and then little strings further allow 3+1 to get even larger. It remains for future investigation to show explicitly that the fivebrane winding modes of the $`T^3`$ will decay as the little strings annihilate fully. Nonetleless, the scaling arguments presented in this paper suggests that this expectation is plausible.

Furthermore, our inclusion of G-flux and stringlike intersection complements the investigation of  where anistropic wrappings were included in M-theory to show a hierarchy in scale of decompactified dimensions. In fact a specific choice of wrapping matrix which leads to three large dimensions coincides with our analysis. Recently a detailed description of Hydrodynamics of M-thery and holography was initiated. We believe that these studies will be important for a deeper understanding of BGC in M-theory .

Notice that the final space-time in eq  is the same as the result found by ABE  where there is a hierarchy of sizes of decompactified dimensions. Our result here is an improvement because the dynamics from the M-theory perspective goes directly from 11 D to 6 D by non-perturbave dynamics, namely the inclusion of G-flux. Nontheless, a brane problem still persists but can be solved by having a loitering phase or inflation. Loitering is a phase wherein the Hubble radius becomes larger than the spatial extent of the Universe, then there is no causal obstrustion for the winding modes of the membranes to annihilate. The fact that our assumptions of a gaseous regime in M-theory coincided with a holographic description of strings on NS5 branes deserves more investigation and it will be interesting to revisit and check explicitly some of the assumptions in terms of holography such as the unwinding mechanism of the little strings. Another important question is whether there is a holographic solution of the brane problem. For example, ABE showed that a loitering phase could solve the brane problem. We expect this mechanism to work since we are using the same effective actions for the back reaction of the little strings, nonetheless it is intriguing to understand if this mechanism is encoded in (2,0) holography. We leave this for future investigations.

## VIII Acknowledgments

I would like to thank Damien Easson and Gary Shiu for discussions on this project during its beginning stages. I am especially grateful to Robert Brandenberger, Keshav Dasgupta, Michael Peskin and Mohammad Sheikh-Jabbari for reading and making useful suggestions of a rough draft of this paper. I am also grateful to Ori Ganor, Shamit Kachru, Amir Kashani-Poor and Kelly Stelle for discussions and guidance throughout the project. This research was supported by the DOE under the contract DE-AC03-76SF00515. This paper is dedicated to the memory of Sonia Stanciu.


text:
# Fermiophobic Higgs Bosons at LEP

## 1 Introduction

Photonic final states from the process $`\mathrm{e}^+\mathrm{e}^{}\mathrm{Zh}\mathrm{Z}\gamma \gamma `$ do not occur in the Standard Model at the tree level, but may be present at a low rate due to charged weak boson and top quark loops. Very specific models can lead to an enhancement of the h$`\gamma \gamma `$ rate, such as the fermiophobic 2 Higgs doublet models of type I , where all fermions are assumed to couple to the same scalar field, and the couplings can thus be suppressed simultaneously by appropriate parameter choices.

Since there are several possible models which predict fermiophobic Higgs bosons, the LEP Higgs working group (LHWG) defined the so-called ”benchmark fermiophobic model” where the production cross-section is the same as in the Standard Model, and the couplings of the Standard Model Higgs to fermions are removed, resulting in increased branching fractions into gauge bosons. A fermiophobic Higgs in the benchmark model decays predominantly via the process h$`\gamma \gamma `$ if its mass is below 90 GeV, while at higher masses it decays mostly via the processes h$`\mathrm{WW}^{},\mathrm{ZZ}^{}`$.

## 2 Photonic Higgs decays

A fermiophobic Higgs can be produced in $`\mathrm{e}^+\mathrm{e}^{}`$ collisions at the energies available at LEP by the Higgs-Strahlung mechanism in the s-channel, $`\mathrm{e}^+\mathrm{e}^{}`$ Zh, where the Higgs boson is radiated off an intermediate Z boson. For the case of photonic

decays, this results in three categories of possible final states with different topologies, efficiencies and background rates:

1. the hadronic final state, involving two high energy photons and two jets from the hadronic decay of the Z;
2. the missing energy final state, involving two high energy acoplanar photons and two neutrinos;
3. the dilepton final state, involving two high energy photons and two high energy leptons.

For all the channels, the major background is the double radiative Z production.

The searches used data samples collected in $`\mathrm{e}^+\mathrm{e}^{}`$ collisions at centre-of-mass energies between 88 and 209 GeV. The ALEPH , DELPHI , L3  and OPAL  analyses are described in journal articles or CERN preprints.

The results of the analyses are summarised in Table 1, where we list the number of observed events, the estimated background and the lower mass limit set at 95$`\%`$ confidence level for the benchmark fermiophobic Higgs boson.

The distribution of the di-photon invariant mass is shown in Figure 1 for the combined data from the four LEP experiments. No excess with respect to the Standard Model predictions is observed in the data. In the absence of a signal, the results are given in terms of upper limits on the BR(h$`\gamma \gamma )`$ at 95$`\%`$ confidence level, assuming a Standard Model production cross section for the Higgs boson. The LEP combined limits are shown in Figure 2. In the fermiophobic model, the observed mass limit is 109.7 GeV.

## 3 Decay into weak bosons

In the case Higgs decays via the process h$`\mathrm{WW}^{}`$ or $`\mathrm{ZZ}^{}`$, and considering all the Z and W decay modes, there are nine possible channels. From these the L3  collaboration analysed the following six: Zh$`\mathrm{q}\overline{\mathrm{q}}\mathrm{q}\overline{\mathrm{q}}\mathrm{q}\overline{\mathrm{q}}`$, Zh$`\mathrm{q}\overline{\mathrm{q}}\mathrm{q}\overline{\mathrm{q}}\mathrm{}\nu `$, Zh$`\mathrm{q}\overline{\mathrm{q}}\mathrm{}\nu \mathrm{}\nu `$, Zh$`\nu \nu \mathrm{q}\overline{\mathrm{q}}\mathrm{q}\overline{\mathrm{q}}`$, Zh$`\nu \nu \mathrm{q}\overline{\mathrm{q}}\mathrm{}\nu `$ and Zh$`\mathrm{}^+\mathrm{}^{}\mathrm{q}\overline{\mathrm{q}}\mathrm{q}\overline{\mathrm{q}}`$, covering a total of 92$`\%`$ of the h$`\mathrm{WW}^{}`$ branching fraction. Of these the qqqq$`\mathrm{}\nu `$ final state has the largest sensitivity.

The background in these channels comes from a variety of Standard Model processes, including W pair production, Z pair production and $`\mathrm{q}\overline{\mathrm{q}}`$ events.

The number of selected events in 336.4 pb<sup>-1</sup> of data collected at center-of-mass energies from 199 GeV up to 209 GeV is 566 and 568.3 events are expected from the Standard Model processes. Since no indication for a signal was found in the data, the negative search result is given in terms of upper limits on the branching fraction BR(h$`\mathrm{WW}^{}`$) as a function of the Higgs mass. The limits are shown in Figure 3. A fermiophobic Higgs boson decaying to weak bosons is excluded for 83.8 GeV $`<`$ $`m_\mathrm{h}`$ $`<`$ 104.2 GeV with a region between 88.9 GeV $`<`$ $`m_\mathrm{h}`$ $`<`$ 89.4 GeV which can be excluded only at 93$`\%`$ confidence level.

Model-independent fermiophobic results can be derived by scanning the relative branching fractions of h$`\gamma \gamma `$ and h$`\mathrm{WW}^{}`$, assuming

$$\mathrm{BR}(\mathrm{h}\gamma \gamma )+\mathrm{BR}(\mathrm{h}\mathrm{WW}^{})+\mathrm{BR}(\mathrm{h}\mathrm{ZZ}^{})=1.$$

The search results are presented as excluded regions in the plane \[BR(h$`\gamma \gamma `$),$`m_\mathrm{h}`$\] and are shown in Figure 4. The solid line crossing the excluded area gives the predicted value of BR(h$`\gamma \gamma `$) for the benchmark fermiophobic model. In the benchmark model, the 95$`\%`$ confidence level for a fermiophobic Higgs mass is set at 108.3 GeV, with an expected limit of 110.7 GeV. This result represents a significant extension of the mass limit of 105.3 GeV obtained by the L3 collaboration from the search in the photonic decay mode. The 95$`\%`$ confidence level mass limit, valid for any value of BR(h$`\gamma \gamma `$) and assuming a Standard Model production cross section is set at 107 GeV.

## Acknowledgements

I would like to thank the members of the four LEP collaborations and the LEP Higgs working group for providing me with plots and their help in preparing this talk.