text:
# On the ground state of a free massless (pseudo)scalar field in two dimensions

## 1 Introduction

The problem which we study in this paper is related to our investigations of the massless Thirring model, where we have found a new phase with a wave function of the BCS–type and massive quasiparticles. The (pseudo)scalar collective excitations $`\vartheta (x)`$ of these massive quasiparticles are bound by a Mexican hat potential and described by the Lagrangian

$`(x)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}_\mu \vartheta (x)^\mu \vartheta (x),`$ (1.1)
invariant under field translations

$`\vartheta (x)\vartheta ^{}(x)=\vartheta (x)+\alpha ,`$ (1.2)
where $`\alpha `$ is an arbitrary parameter $`\alpha ^1`$. The parameter $`\alpha `$ is related to the chiral phase $`\alpha _\mathrm{A}`$ of chiral rotations of the massless Thirring fermion fields $`\alpha =2\alpha _\mathrm{A}`$ .

The continuous symmetry (1.2) can be described in terms of the total charge operator $`Q(x^0)`$ defined by

$`Q(x^0)={\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}}𝑑x^1j_0(x^0,x^1)={\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}}𝑑x^1{\displaystyle \frac{\vartheta (x)}{x^0}}={\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}}𝑑x^1\mathrm{\Pi }(x^0,x^1),`$ (1.3)
where $`j_0(x)`$ is the time–component of the conserved current $`j_\mu (x)=_\mu \vartheta (x)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Pi }(x)=j_0(x)`$ is the conjugate momentum of the $`\vartheta `$–field obeying the canonical commutation relation

$`[\mathrm{\Pi }(x^0,x^1),\vartheta (x^0,y^1)]=i\delta (x^1y^1).`$ (1.4)
From this canonical commutation relation follows

$`\vartheta ^{}(x)=e^{+i\alpha Q\left(x^0\right)}\vartheta (x)e^{i\alpha Q\left(x^0\right)}=\vartheta (x)+\alpha .`$ (1.5)
Acting with the operator $`e^{i\alpha Q\left(0\right)}`$ on the vacuum wave function $`|\mathrm{\Psi }_0`$ we get the wave function

$`|\alpha =e^{i\alpha Q\left(0\right)}|\mathrm{\Psi }_0.`$ (1.6)
This wave function is normalized to unity and possesses all properties of the vacuum state .

The average value of the $`\vartheta `$–field calculated for the wave functions $`|\alpha `$ is equal to

$`\alpha |\vartheta (x)|\alpha =\alpha .`$ (1.7)
The same result can be obtained for the vacuum expectation value of the $`\vartheta ^{}`$–field (1.2)

$`\mathrm{\Psi }_0|\vartheta ^{}(x)|\mathrm{\Psi }_0=\mathrm{\Psi }_0|\vartheta (x)|\mathrm{\Psi }_0+\alpha =\alpha .`$ (1.8)
This testifies that the parameter $`\alpha `$ describes the position of the “center of mass”. Hence, it is related to the collective zero–mode of the free massless (pseudo)scalar field $`\vartheta (x)`$ .

The quantum field theory of the free massless (pseudo)scalar field $`\vartheta (x)`$ with the Lagrangian (1.1) is well–defined if the collective zero–mode, describing the motion of the “center of mass” of the field $`\vartheta (x)`$, is removed from the states which can be excited by an external source $`J(x)`$ in the generating functional of Green functions

$`Z[J]`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Psi }_0\left|\mathrm{T}\left(e^{i{\scriptscriptstyle d^2x\vartheta \left(x\right)J\left(x\right)}}\right)\right|\mathrm{\Psi }_0=`$ (1.9)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle 𝒟\vartheta e^{i{\scriptscriptstyle d^2x\left[\frac{1}{2}_\mu \vartheta \left(x\right)^\mu \vartheta \left(x\right)+\vartheta \left(x\right)J\left(x\right)\right]}}},`$
where $`\mathrm{T}`$ is the time–ordering operator. According to the analysis  the collective zero–mode cannot be excited by any perturbation of the external source $`J(x)`$ if the external source obeys the constraint

$`{\displaystyle d^2xJ(x)}=\stackrel{~}{J}(0)=0.`$ (1.10)
The same constraint one needs for the perturbative renormalization of the sine–Gordon model . It has been shown that the sine–Gordon model is the bosonized version of the massive Thirring model with fermion fields quantized in the chirally broken phase .

As has been shown in the existence of the chirally broken phase for the massless Thirring model with a non–vanishing fermion condensate  and the spontaneously broken field–shift symmetry (1.2) of the free massless (pseudo)scalar field $`\vartheta (x)`$, characterized by a non–vanishing spontaneous magnetization , does not contradict both the Mermin–Wagner–Hohenberg theorem  and Coleman’s theorem . The irrelevance of the Mermin–Wagner–Hohenberg theorem  to the problem of the existence of the chirally broken phase in the massless Thirring model is rather straightforward. Indeed, the Mermin–Wagner–Hohenberg theorem , proved for non–zero temperature, tells nothing about spontaneous breaking of continuous symmetry in 1+1–dimensional quantum field theories at temperature zero. Since the chirally broken phase of the massless Thirring model  has been found at temperature zero, the Mermin–Wagner–Hohenberg theorem  does not suppress this phase.

The absence of spontaneous breaking of continuous symmetry and Goldstone bosons in 1+1–dimensional quantum field theories at zero–temperature one connects with Coleman’s theorem . Following Wightman’s axioms , demanding the definition of Wightman’s observables on test functions from the Schwartz class $`𝒮(^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}})`$, Coleman has argued that there are no Goldstone bosons, massless (pseudo)scalar fields . In turn, the absence of Goldstone bosons  can be interpreted as the absence of spontaneous breaking of continuous symmetry . Coleman’s assertion is an extension of the well–known statement of Wightman  that a non–trivial quantum field theory of a free massless (pseudo)scalar field does not exist in 1+1–dimensional space–time in terms of Wightman’s observables defined on the test functions from $`𝒮(^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}})`$.

Such a strict conclusion concerning the non–existence of a 1+1–dimensional quantum field theory of a free massless (pseudo)scalar field $`\vartheta (x)`$ has been drawn from the logarithmic divergences of the two–point Wightman functions .

The massless (pseudo)scalar field $`\vartheta (x)`$ has the following expansion into plane waves

$`\vartheta (x)={\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}}{\displaystyle \frac{dk^1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2k^0}}\left(a(k^1)e^{ikx}+a^{}(k^1)e^{ikx}\right),`$ (1.11)
where $`a(k^1)`$ and $`a^{}(k^1)`$ are annihilation and creation operators and obey the standard commutation relation

$`[a(k^1),a^{}(q^1)]=(2\pi )\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}k^0\delta (k^1q^1).`$ (1.12)
For the free massless (pseudo)scalar field (1.11) one can define the Wightman function

$`D^{(+)}(x;\mu )`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Psi }_0|\vartheta (x)\vartheta (0)|\mathrm{\Psi }_0=`$ (1.13)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}}{\displaystyle \frac{dk^1}{2k^0}}e^{ikx}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{4\pi }}\mathrm{}n[\mu ^2x^2+i\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}\epsilon (x^0)],`$
where $`\epsilon (x^0)`$ is the sign function, $`x^2=(x^0)^2(x^1)^2`$, $`kx=k^0x^0k^1x^1`$, $`k^0=|k^1|`$ is the energy of free massless (pseudo)scalar quantum with a momentum $`k^1`$ and $`\mu `$ is the infrared cut–off reflecting the infrared divergences of the Wightman functions (1.13).

According to Wightman’s axioms  a well–defined quantum field theory of a free massless (pseudo)scalar field $`\vartheta (x)`$ should be formulated in terms of Wightman’s observables

$`\vartheta (h)={\displaystyle d^2xh(x)\vartheta (x)}`$ (1.14)
determined on the test functions $`h(x)`$ from the Schwartz class $`𝒮(^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}})`$ . In terms of Wightman’s observables (1.14) one can define a quantum state $`|h`$

$`|h=\vartheta (h)|\mathrm{\Psi }_0={\displaystyle d^2xh(x)\vartheta (x)|\mathrm{\Psi }_0},`$ (1.15)
where $`|\mathrm{\Psi }_0`$ is the wave function of the ground state. The squared norm of this quantum state is equal to

$`h^2=h|h={\displaystyle d^2xd^2yh^{}(x)D^{(+)}(xy;\mu )h(y)}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}}{\displaystyle \frac{dk^1}{2k^0}}|\stackrel{~}{h}(k^0,k^1)|^2=`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle _0^+\mathrm{}}{\displaystyle \frac{dk^1}{k^1}}|\stackrel{~}{h}(k^1,k^1)|^2={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}\underset{\mu 0}{lim}{\displaystyle _\mu ^+\mathrm{}}{\displaystyle \frac{dk^1}{k^1}}|\stackrel{~}{h}(k^1,k^1)|^2={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}|\stackrel{~}{h}(0,0)|^2\underset{\mu 0}{lim}\mathrm{}n\mu `$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle _0^+\mathrm{}}𝑑k^1\mathrm{}nk^1{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dk^1}}|\stackrel{~}{h}(k^1,k^1)|^2={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}|\stackrel{~}{h}(0,0)|^2\underset{\mu 0}{lim}\mathrm{}n\mu `$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}}𝑑k^1{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dk^1}}[\theta (k^1)\mathrm{}nk^1]|\stackrel{~}{h}(k^1,k^1)|^2,`$ (1.16)
where we have used Wightman’s formula

$$\underset{\delta 0+}{lim}_\delta ^{\mathrm{}}\frac{\phi (x)}{x}𝑑x=\underset{\delta 0+}{lim}\mathrm{}n\delta \phi (0)_0^{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{}nx\frac{d\phi (x)}{dx}𝑑x=$$

$$=\underset{\delta 0+}{lim}\mathrm{}n\delta \phi (0)+_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}\frac{d}{dx}[\theta (x)\mathrm{}nx]\phi (x)𝑑x$$

(see Ref. of Carg$`\stackrel{`}{\mathrm{e}}`$se Lectures ).

Since the Fourier transform $`\stackrel{~}{h}(k^0,k^1)`$ of the test function $`h(x)`$ from the Schwartz class $`𝒮(^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}})`$ has a support at $`k^0=k^1=0`$, i.e $`\stackrel{~}{h}(0,0)0`$, the momentum integral is logarithmically divergent in the infrared region at $`\mu 0`$. The convergence of the momentum integral in the infrared region can be provided only for the test functions from the Schwartz class $`𝒮_0(^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}})=\{h(x)𝒮(^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}});\stackrel{~}{h}(0,0)=0\}`$ .

Recently  we have analysed the physical meaning of the test functions $`h(x)`$ in Wightman’s observables (1.14). We have shown that the test functions can be interpreted as apparatus functions characterizing the device used by the observer for detecting quanta of the free massless (pseudo)scalar field. This interpretation of test functions agrees with our results obtained in Ref., where we have shown that a quantum field theory of a free massless (pseudo)scalar field $`\vartheta (x)`$ can be constructed without infrared divergences if one removes from the $`\vartheta `$–field the collective zero–mode, describing the motion of the “center of mass”. We have shown that the collective zero–mode does not affect the evolution of the other modes of the free massless (pseudo)scalar field $`\vartheta (x)`$. The removal of the collective zero–mode has been carried out within the path–integral approach in terms of the generating functional of Green functions defined by (1.9). As has been shown in  the generating functional of Green functions (1.9) with $`\stackrel{~}{J}(0)0`$ vanishes identically, $`Z[J]=0`$. This agrees well with Wightman’s statement  about the non–existence of a quantum field theory of a free massless (pseudo)scalar field defined on test functions $`h(x)`$ from $`𝒮(^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}})`$ with $`\stackrel{~}{h}(0,0)0`$.

Hence, the removal of the collective zero–mode of the $`\vartheta (x)`$-field implies the immeasurability of this state in terms of Wightman’s observables. The insensitivity of the detectors to the collective zero–mode can be obtained by the constraint $`\stackrel{~}{h}(0,0)=0`$ . Mathematically this means that the test functions $`h(x)`$ should belong to the Schwartz class $`𝒮_0(^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}})=\{h(x)𝒮(^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}});\stackrel{~}{h}(0,0)=0\}`$ . As has been shown in  the quantum field theory of a free massless (pseudo)scalar field $`\vartheta (x)`$ defined on the test functions from $`𝒮_0(^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}})`$ is unstable under spontaneous breaking of the continuous symmetry (1.2). Quantitatively the symmetry broken phase is characterized by a non–vanishing spontaneous magnetization $`=1`$ . Goldstone bosons are the quanta of a free massless (pseudo)scalar field . Coleman’s theorem reformulated for the test functions from $`𝒮_0(^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}})=\{h(x)𝒮(^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}});\stackrel{~}{h}(0,0)=0\}`$ does not refute this statement.

The paper is organized as follows. In Section 2 we describe the collective zero–mode by a rigid rotor. In Section 3 we calculate the generating functional of Green functions and show that the infrared divergences of the free massless (pseudo)scalar field are due to the classical evolution of the collective zero–mode from infinite past to infinite future. In Section 4 we construct the wave function of the ground state of the free massless (pseudo)scalar field for the bosonized version of the massless Thirring model which is of the BCS–type. In the Conclusion we discuss the obtained results.

## 2 Collective zero–mode

The collective zero–mode of the free massless (pseudo)scalar field $`\vartheta (x)=\vartheta (x^0,x^1)`$, describing the “center of mass” motion, is a mode orthogonal to all vibrational modes. Due to this we can treat the field $`\vartheta (x)`$ in the form of the following decomposition

$`\vartheta (x)=\vartheta _0(x^0)+\vartheta _\mathrm{v}(x),`$ (2.1)
where $`\vartheta _\mathrm{v}(x)`$ is the field of all vibrational modes. This decomposition can be very well justified for the free massless (pseudo)scalar field in the finite volume $`L`$ (see Eq.(2.7)). The Lagrangian of the $`\vartheta _\mathrm{v}(x)`$–field is given by

$`_\mathrm{v}(x)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\vartheta _\mathrm{v}(x)}{x^0}}\right)^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\vartheta _\mathrm{v}(x)}{x^1}}\right)^2.`$ (2.2)
Unlike the oscillator modes of a free massless (pseudo)scalar field the collective zero–mode $`\vartheta _0(x^0)`$ is defined by the Lagrangian

$`_0(x^0)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\dot{\vartheta }_0^2(x^0),`$ (2.3)
which does not have the form of the Lagrangian of a vibrational mode with a pair of squared terms $`(\dot{\vartheta }_0^2\vartheta _0^{}_{}{}^{}2)/2`$, where $`\vartheta _0^{^{}}`$ is a spatial derivative of the $`\vartheta _0`$–field. The Lagrangian of the “center of mass” motion (2.3) does not contain a “potential energy”, i.e. $`\vartheta _0^{}_{}{}^{}2/2`$, responsible for a restoring force as in the vibrational modes. Hence, the collective zero–mode cannot be quantized in terms of annihilation and creation operators $`a(0)`$ and $`a^{}(0)`$.

Our assertion concerning the decomposition of the free massless (pseudo)scalar field $`\vartheta (x)`$ into a collective zero–mode $`\vartheta _0(x^0)`$ and vibrational modes $`\vartheta _\mathrm{v}(x)`$ can be justified as follows. As has been shown in  a free massless (pseudo)scalar field $`\vartheta (x)`$ described by the Lagrangian (1.1) is equivalent to a one–dimensional linear chain of $`N`$ oscillators with equal masses, equal equilibrium separations and a potential energy taking into account only nearest neighbors. Their motion can be described in terms of displacements $`q_i(x^0)(i=1,\mathrm{},N)`$. The Lagrange function can be written as

$`L(x^0)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\dot{q}_i^2(x^0)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{i>j}{\overset{N}{}}}(q_i(x^0)q_j(x^0))^2.`$ (2.4)
In normal coordinates $`Q_n(x^0)(n=0,1,\mathrm{},N1)`$ the Lagrange function (2.4) reads

$`L(x^0)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\dot{Q}_0^2(x^0)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{N1}{}}}(\dot{Q}_n^2(x^0)\omega _n^2Q_n^2(x^0)),`$ (2.5)
where $`Q_0(x^0)`$ is the collective zero–mode, describing the motion of the “center of mass” of the system , $`Q_n(x^0)`$ are vibrational normal modes with frequencies $`\omega _n`$. In the limit $`N\mathrm{}`$ the Lagrange function (2.5) reduces to the form

$`L(x^0)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _{L/2}^{L/2}}𝑑x^1{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\dot{\vartheta }_0^2(x^0)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle _{L/2}^{L/2}}𝑑x^1_\mu \vartheta _\mathrm{v}(x)^\mu \vartheta _\mathrm{v}(x)=`$ (2.6)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{L}{2}}\dot{\vartheta }_0^2(x^0)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle _{L/2}^{L/2}}𝑑x^1_\mu \vartheta _\mathrm{v}(x)^\mu \vartheta _\mathrm{v}(x).`$
This is exactly the continuum limit of a one–dimensional chain of $`N`$ oscillators with nearest neighbour coupling .

For finite volume $`L`$ the discretized form of the $`\vartheta `$–field with the expansion of the $`\vartheta _\mathrm{v}`$–field into plane waves reads

$`\vartheta (x)=\vartheta _0(x^0)+{\displaystyle \underset{n,n0}{}}\left(a_ne^{ik_n^0x^0+ik_n^1x^1}+a_n^{}e^{+ik_n^0x^0ik_n^1x^1}\right).`$ (2.7)
The creation and annihilation operators $`a_n^{}`$ and $`a_n`$ obey the commutation relations

$`[a_n,a_n^{^{}}^{}]`$ $`=`$ $`\delta _{nn^{^{}}},`$
$`[a_n^{},a_n^{^{}}^{}]`$ $`=`$ $`[a_n,a_n^{^{}}]=0,`$ (2.8)
where $`k_n=(k_n^0,k_n^1)`$ is the 2–dimensional momentum defined by $`k_n=(2\pi |n|/L,2\pi n/L)`$ for $`n`$ and $`0x^1L`$. The annihilation operators act on the vacuum state as $`a_n|\mathrm{\Psi }_0=0`$.

The Lagrange function of the collective zero–mode $`\vartheta _0(x^0)`$ is equal to

$`L_0(\vartheta _0,\dot{\vartheta }_0)={\displaystyle _{L/2}^{L/2}}𝑑x^1_0(x)={\displaystyle \frac{L}{2}}\dot{\vartheta }_0^2(x^0).`$ (2.9)
Such a Lagrange function(2.9) can be used to describe a mechanical system, a rigid rotor, for which $`\vartheta _0(x^0)`$ is a periodic angle $`\vartheta _0(x^0)=\vartheta _0(x^0)+2\pi (\mathrm{mod}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}\pi )`$, $`\dot{\vartheta }_0(x^0)`$ is the angular velocity and $`L`$ can be interpreted as the moment of inertia.

The classical equation of motion $`\ddot{\vartheta }_0(x^0)=0`$ has the general solution

$`\vartheta _0(x^0)=\mathrm{\Omega }_0x^0+\alpha ,`$ (2.10)
where $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0`$ is the angular velocity or the frequency of the rotation of the rigid rotor. Setting $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0=0`$ we get $`\vartheta _0(x^0)=\alpha `$.

The classical conjugate momentum of the collective zero–mode $`\vartheta _0(x^0)`$ is equal to

$`\pi _0(x^0)={\displaystyle \frac{L_0(\vartheta _0,\dot{\vartheta }_0)}{\dot{\vartheta }_0}}=L\dot{\vartheta }_0`$ (2.11)
and the Hamilton function is defined by

$`h_0(\vartheta _0,\pi _0)={\displaystyle \frac{\pi _0^2(x^0)}{2L}}.`$ (2.12)
Substituting (2.7) in (1.3) one can show that the conjugate momentum $`\pi _0(x^0)`$ coincides with the total charge operator $`Q(x^0)`$, i.e. $`Q(x^0)=\pi _0(x^0)`$. This agrees with the analysis of the ground state of the massive Schwinger model by Kogut and Susskind .

For the quantum mechanical description of the rigid rotor we use the $`\vartheta _0`$–representation. In this case the conjugate momentum is defined by $`\widehat{\pi }_0=id/d\vartheta _0`$ and the Hamilton operator reads

$`\widehat{h}_0(\vartheta _0,\widehat{\pi }_0)={\displaystyle \frac{\widehat{\pi }_0^2(x^0)}{2L}}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2L}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^2}{d\vartheta _0^2}}.`$ (2.13)
The wave function $`\psi (\vartheta _0)`$ of the collective zero–mode in the $`\vartheta _0`$–representation is the solution of the Schrödinger equation

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2L}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^2\psi (\vartheta _0)}{d\vartheta _0^2}}=E_0\psi (\vartheta _0).`$ (2.14)
Imposing periodic boundary conditions $`\psi (\vartheta _0)=\psi (\vartheta _0+2\pi )`$ the normalized solutions of this equation read

$`\psi _m(\vartheta _0)=\vartheta _0m={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi }}}e^{+im\vartheta _0},m=0,\pm 1,\pm 2,\mathrm{},`$ (2.15)
where $`m`$ is the “magnetic” quantum number, $`m`$. The wave functions $`\psi _m(\vartheta _0)`$ are also eigenfunctions of the conjugate momentum $`\widehat{\pi }_0`$ and the total charge operator $`\widehat{Q}=\widehat{\pi }_0=id/d\vartheta _0`$ with the eigenvalues $`m`$

$`Q\psi _m(\vartheta _0)=m\psi _m(\vartheta _0)\widehat{Q}|m=m|m.`$ (2.16)
The energy spectrum is defined by

$`E_0^{(m)}={\displaystyle \frac{m^2}{2L}}.`$ (2.17)
The wave function of the free massless (pseudo)scalar field $`\vartheta (x)`$ can be represented in the form of direct product of the collective zero–mode and vibrational modes

$`|\mathrm{\Psi }=|m|n_1__1|n_2__2\mathrm{}|n_k__k\mathrm{},`$ (2.18)
where $`|m`$ is the state of the zero–mode and $`|n_k__k`$ is the wave function for the $`k`$-th vibrational mode with $`n_k`$ quanta.

The total Hamilton and momentum operators of the free massless (pseudo)scalar field $`\vartheta (x)`$, defined by (2.7), is equal to

$`\widehat{h}[\vartheta ]`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\widehat{\pi }_0^2}{2L}}+{\displaystyle \frac{2\pi }{L}}{\displaystyle \underset{n}{}}|n|a_n^{}a_n,`$
$`\widehat{\pi }[\vartheta ]`$ $`=`$ $`\widehat{\pi }_0+{\displaystyle \frac{2\pi }{L}}{\displaystyle \underset{n}{}}na_n^{}a_n.`$ (2.19)
It is well–known that the wave function of the ground state should be eigenfunction of the total Hamilton and momentum operators with eigenvalue zero. For finite $`L`$ this requirement is fulfilled only for the wave function

$`|\mathrm{\Omega }_0=|0_0|\mathrm{\Psi }_0,|\mathrm{\Psi }_0=|0__1\mathrm{}|0__k\mathrm{}`$ (2.20)
where $`|0`$ is the eigenfunction of the operator (2.13) with eigenvalue $`m=0`$. In the $`\vartheta _0`$–representation the wave function $`|0`$ is equal to $`\vartheta _00=\psi _0(\vartheta _0)=1/\sqrt{2\pi }`$.

Now we can show that the infrared divergences of the free massless (pseudo)scalar field theory are the quantum field theoretical problem and they are not the problem at all. Indeed, in reality these quantum field theoretic divergences are related to the classical motion of the collective zero–mode from the infinite past at $`x^0=\mathrm{}`$ to the infinite future at $`x^0=+\mathrm{}`$.

## 3 Generating functional of Green functions and the nature of infrared divergences

The generating functional of Green functions for the free massless (pseudo)scalar field is defined by (2) and reads

$`𝒵[J]`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0|\mathrm{T}\left(e^{i{\scriptscriptstyle d^2x\vartheta \left(x\right)J\left(x\right)}}\right)|\mathrm{\Omega }_0=\underset{L,T\mathrm{}}{lim}Z_0[J_0;L,T]`$ (3.1)
$`\times \mathrm{\Psi }_0|\mathrm{T}\left(e^{i{\scriptscriptstyle d^2x\vartheta _\mathrm{v}\left(x\right)J\left(x\right)}}\right)|\mathrm{\Psi }_0=\underset{L,T\mathrm{}}{lim}Z_0[J_0;L,T]Z[J].`$
The factor $`Z[J]`$ in this product concerns the vibrational modes and coincides with (1.9). The other factor

$`Z_0[J_0;L,T]`$ $`=`$ $`e^{iW_0[J_0;L,T]}=`$ (3.2)
$`=`$ $`N^1(L,T){\displaystyle 𝒟\vartheta _0\mathrm{exp}\left\{i_T^T𝑑x^0\left[\frac{L}{2}\dot{\vartheta }_0^2(x^0)+\vartheta _0(x^0)J_0(x^0)\right]\right\}}`$
is the generating functional for the collective zero–mode, which we describe as the motion of a rigid rotor; the external source $`J_0(x^0)`$ is the integral of the external source $`J(x)=J(x^0,x^1)`$ over $`x^1^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}}`$. The normalization factor $`N(L,T)`$ is the inverse of the path integral without external sources

$`N(L,T)={\displaystyle 𝒟\vartheta _0\mathrm{exp}\left\{i\frac{L}{2}_T^{+T}𝑑x^0\dot{\vartheta }_0^2(x^0)\right\}}`$ (3.3)
Let us perform a Fourier transformation

$`\vartheta _0(x^0)={\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}}{\displaystyle \frac{d\omega }{2\pi }}\stackrel{~}{\vartheta }_0(\omega )e^{i\omega x^0}`$ (3.4)
and get

$`Z_0[J_0;L,T]`$ $`=`$ $`N^1(L){\displaystyle }𝒟\stackrel{~}{\vartheta }_0\mathrm{exp}\{iL{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}}{\displaystyle \frac{d\omega }{2\pi }}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}}{\displaystyle \frac{d\omega ^{}}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}((\omega +\omega ^{})T)}{(\omega +\omega ^{})}}`$ (3.5)
$`\times [\omega \omega ^{}\stackrel{~}{\vartheta }_0(\omega )\stackrel{~}{\vartheta }_0(\omega ^{})+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{L}}\stackrel{~}{\vartheta }_0(\omega )\stackrel{~}{J}_0(\omega ^{})]\}.`$
By quadratic extension $`\stackrel{~}{\vartheta }_0(\omega )=\stackrel{~}{\phi }(\omega )\stackrel{~}{J}(\omega )/\omega ^2L`$ we reduce this to the form

$`Z_0[J_0;L,T]`$ $`=`$ $`e^{iW_0[J_0;L,T]}=`$ (3.6)
$`=`$ $`\mathrm{exp}\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{i}{L}}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}}{\displaystyle \frac{d\omega }{2\pi }}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}}{\displaystyle \frac{d\omega ^{}}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}((\omega +\omega ^{})T)}{(\omega +\omega ^{})}}{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{J}_0(\omega )\stackrel{~}{J}_0(\omega ^{})}{\omega \omega ^{}}}\right\}.`$
At finite $`T`$ the functional $`W_0[J_0;L,T]`$ has a superficial infrared divergence (1.1). It seems that due to the infrared divergence $`𝒲[J_0;L,T]`$ becomes infinite and $`Z_0[J_0;L,T]`$ vanishes. This should agree with Wightman’s assertion concerning the non–existence of a well–defined quantum field theory of a free massless (pseudo)scalar field in 1+1–dimensional space–time which we discussed above. In our treatment of the collective zero–mode of the free massless (pseudo)scalar field the infrared divergence appears at the quantum mechanical level and admits a simple physical interpretation, as we will discuss below. The divergence does not appear due to unbounded quantum fluctuations. It is just the opposite, there is only one contribution to the generating functional $`Z_0[J_0;L,T]`$, the classical trajectory which is defined by the initial conditions. The correlation functions gets unbounded due to the laws of classical mechanics.

In order to show that the functional $`W_0[J_0;L,T]`$ tends to infinity at $`T\mathrm{}`$ and that this is related to a classical motion we suggest to determine the path–integral (3.2), decomposing $`\vartheta _0(x^0)`$ into a classical part $`\overline{\vartheta }_0(x^0)`$ and a fluctuating part $`\phi (x^0)`$, $`\vartheta _0(x^0)=\overline{\vartheta }_0(x^0)+\phi (x^0)`$. With the standard conditions $`\phi (T)=\phi (+T)=0`$ and choosing the classical field $`\overline{\vartheta }_0(x^0)`$ as a special solution of the “2nd axiom of Newton”

$`\ddot{\overline{\vartheta }}_0(x^0)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{L}}J_0(x^0)`$ (3.7)
we get a decoupling of the quantum fluctuations $`\phi (x^0)`$. The rigid rotor behaves completely classical, the generating functional depends only on the classical field $`\overline{\vartheta }_0(x^0)`$ and the action has the same shape as in (3.2) for the original field $`\vartheta _0`$

$`Z_0[J_0;L,T]=e^{iW_0[J_0;L,T]}=\mathrm{exp}\left\{i{\displaystyle _T^T}dx^0[{\displaystyle \frac{L}{2}}\dot{\overline{\vartheta }}_0^2(x^0)+\overline{\vartheta }_0(x^0)J_0(x^0))\right]\}.`$ (3.8)
It is important to emphasize that due to this decoupling of quantum and classical degrees of freedom the external source $`J_0(x^0)`$ can excite the classical degrees of freedom $`\vartheta _0`$ only.

Integrating by parts in the exponent of (3.8) and using (3.7) we get for the action integral

$`W_0[J_0;L,T]={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle _T^{+T}}𝑑x^0\overline{\vartheta }_0(x^0)J_0(x^0)+{\displaystyle \frac{L}{2}}\left[\overline{\vartheta }_0(x^0)\dot{\overline{\vartheta }}_0(x^0)\right]_T^{+T}.`$ (3.9)
Obviously, this integral and therefore the generating functional (3.2) depends on the initial condition. This is the usual situation for classical systems. Now we insert in Eq. (3.9) a solution of Eq. (3.7). The general solution of (3.7) reads

$`\overline{\vartheta }_0(x^0)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2L}}{\displaystyle _T^{+T}}𝑑y^0|x^0y^0|J_0(y^0)+C_1x^0+C_2.`$ (3.10)
For the initial conditions $`\overline{\vartheta }_0(T)=\dot{\overline{\vartheta }}_0(T)=0`$ the integration constants are

$`C_1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2L}}{\displaystyle _T^{+T}}𝑑y^0J_0(y^0),`$
$`C_2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2L}}{\displaystyle _T^{+T}}𝑑y^0y^0J_0(y^0),`$ (3.11)
which lead to a special solution of (3.9)

$`\overline{\vartheta }_0(x^0)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2L}}{\displaystyle _T^{+T}}𝑑y^0(|x^0y^0|+(x^0y^0))J_0(y^0)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{L}}{\displaystyle _T^{x^0}}𝑑y^0(x^0y^0)J_0(y^0).`$ (3.12)
Substituting this expression into (3.9) we get

$`W_0[J_0;L,T]`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4L}}{\displaystyle _T^{+T}}𝑑x^0{\displaystyle _T^{+T}}𝑑y^0J_0(x^0)|x^0y^0|J_0(y^0)`$ (3.13)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2L}}{\displaystyle _T^{+T}}𝑑y^0(Ty^0)J_0(y^0){\displaystyle _T^{+T}}𝑑x^0J_0(x^0).`$
For $`\stackrel{~}{J}(0)0`$ the functional $`W_0[J_0;L,T]`$ increases with the time $`T`$. This gives a strongly oscillating phase of the generating functional $`Z_0[J_0;L,T]`$ providing its vanishing in the limit $`T\mathrm{}`$. This occurs even if the external source generates an arbitrary small fluctuation of the collective zero–mode.

This can also be seen defining the classical field $`\vartheta _0(x^0)`$ in terms of the generating functional $`Z_0[J_0;L,T]`$. According to the standard definition the classical field $`\vartheta _0(x^0)`$ is given by

$`\vartheta _0(x^0)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{i}}{\displaystyle \frac{\delta \mathrm{}nZ_0[J_0;L,T]}{\delta J_0(x^0)}}={\displaystyle \frac{\delta W_0[J_0;L,T]}{\delta J_0(x^0)}}.`$ (3.14)
This defines the linear response of the system to an external force

$`\vartheta _0(x^0)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2L}}{\displaystyle _T^{+T}}𝑑y^0[|x^0y^0|+(Tx^0)+(Ty^0)]J_0(y^0),`$ (3.15)
but the response is quadratic

$`W_0[J_0;L,T]={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle _T^{+T}}𝑑x^0J_0(x^0)\vartheta _0(x^0),`$ (3.16)
as it is well-known for free motion.

In the limit $`T\mathrm{}`$ the response $`\vartheta _0(x^0)`$ does not vanish for infinitesimally small external perturbation. From this behaviour we can conclude that the divergence prohibiting a quantum field theoretic description of a free massless (pseudo)scalar field , corresponds to a quite natural motion which is well–known in classical and quantum mechanics of free particles and rigid rotors. An infinitely small kick at $`T=\mathrm{}`$ can lead to finite translations or rotational angles at $`T`$ as shown by (3.14).

The correlation

$`\vartheta _0(x^0)\vartheta _0(y^0)={\displaystyle \frac{\delta ^2W_0[J_0;L,T]}{\delta J_0(x^0)\delta J_0(y^0)}}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2L}}[|x^0y^0|+(Tx^0)+(Ty^0)]`$ (3.17)
diverges also with $`T`$ indicating that the system is not stabilized by any potential. Only under the constraint $`\stackrel{~}{J}(0,0)=0`$, agreeing well with the definition of the quantum field theory of the free massless (pseudo)scalar field on the Schwartz class $`𝒮_0`$, the correlation (3.17) remains finite at $`\stackrel{~}{J}_0(0)=0`$

$`\vartheta _0(x^0)\vartheta _0(y^0)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2L}}|x^0y^0|`$ (3.18)
Since at $`\stackrel{~}{J}_0(0)=0`$

$`\vartheta _0(x^0)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2L}}{\displaystyle _T^{+T}}𝑑y^0|x^0y^0|J_0(y^0),`$ (3.19)
the response $`\vartheta _0(x^0)`$ vanishes for $`J_0(y^0)=0`$ and Eq. (3.18) shows that the center of mass motion does not decorrelate for large time differences $`|x^0y^0|`$.

The above discussion demonstrates that the divergence of the correlation (3.17) is not due to large quantum fluctuations, it is due to the the sensitivity of a free system for external perturbations. The center of mass motion does not show any fluctuations, it evolves along the classical trajectory only, see Eq. (3.8). This explains also why the correlation does not vanish for large time intervals.

In the Schwinger formulation of the quantum field theory  the generating functional $`Z_0[J_0;L,T=\mathrm{}]`$ defines the amplitude for the transition from the ground state of the center of mass motion at $`x^0=\mathrm{}`$ to the ground state at $`x^0=+\mathrm{}`$ caused by the external force $`J_0(x^0)`$. For vanishing perturbation this amplitude does not converge to unity and gives the impression that the evolution of the system is ill defined. But this is not the case. Let the state of the center of mass at $`x^0=0`$ be described by $`\vartheta _0=\alpha `$ and $`\dot{\vartheta }_0=0`$. Then the classical evolution of the system guarantees that the system will remain in this state for any finite time and the corresponding transition amplitude is unity.

Due to the quadratic extension of the exponent $`\vartheta _0(x^0)=\overline{\vartheta }_0(x^0)+\phi (x^0)`$ in the generating functional of Green functions $`Z_0[J_0;L,T]`$ and the condition (3.7), the vibrational degrees of freedom do not couple to the external source $`J_0(x^0)`$ which excites the collective zero–mode. As a result, the generating functional of Green functions $`Z_0[J_0;L,T]`$ is defined by one classical trajectory (3.8) and for $`J_0(x^0)=0`$ depends on the temporal boundary conditions only

$`W_0[J_0;L,T]={\displaystyle \frac{L}{2}}\left[\overline{\vartheta }_0(x^0)\dot{\overline{\vartheta }}_0(x^0)\right]_T^{+T}.`$ (3.20)
We can take into account $`2\pi `$-periodicity of $`\vartheta _0`$ assuming that the paths $`\overline{\vartheta }_0(+T)\overline{\vartheta }_0(T)=\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and $`\overline{\vartheta }_0(+T)\overline{\vartheta }_0(T)=\mathrm{\Delta }+2\pi m`$, where $`m`$, are equivalent and indistinguishable. Then, we obtain the generating functional $`Z_0[0;L,T]`$ in the following form

$`Z_0[0;L,T]`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{L}{4\pi iT}}}{\displaystyle \underset{m}{}}\mathrm{exp}\left(i{\displaystyle \frac{L}{4T}}[\mathrm{\Delta }+2\pi m]^2\right)=`$ (3.21)
$`=`$ $`\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{L}{4\pi iT}}}\mathrm{exp}\left(i{\displaystyle \frac{L\mathrm{\Delta }^2}{4T}}\right)\theta _3({\displaystyle \frac{\pi L\mathrm{\Delta }}{2T}},{\displaystyle \frac{\pi L}{T}}),`$
where $`\theta _3(z,t)`$ is the Jacobi theta–function defined by

$`\theta _3(z,t)={\displaystyle \underset{m}{}}e^{i\pi tm^2+i\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}mz}`$ (3.22)
with $`z=\pi L\mathrm{\Delta }/2T`$ and $`t=\pi L/T`$. The normalization factor  in front of the sum over equivalent paths is chosen in such a way that the path integral for given initial position $`\vartheta _0(T)`$ and arbitrary final position $`\vartheta _0(+T)`$ gives unity. Using the property of the Jacobi theta–function

$`\theta _3(z,t)=\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{i}{t}}}\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle \frac{iz^2}{\pi t}}\right)\theta _3({\displaystyle \frac{z}{t}},{\displaystyle \frac{1}{t}})`$ (3.23)
we transcribe the functional $`Z_0[0;L,T]`$ into the form

$`Z_0[0;L,T]`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}\theta _3({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }}{2}},{\displaystyle \frac{T}{\pi L}})={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle \underset{m}{}}\mathrm{exp}\left(im\mathrm{\Delta }i{\displaystyle \frac{T}{L}}m^2\right)=`$ (3.24)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle \underset{m}{}}e^{im\left[\vartheta _0\left(+T\right)\vartheta _0\left(T\right)\right]iE_m\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}T}.`$
The r.h.s. contains a sum over the stationary quantum states of the rigid rotor

$`Z_0[0;L,T]={\displaystyle \underset{m}{}}\vartheta _0(+T)|mm|\vartheta _0(T)=\vartheta _0(+T)|\vartheta _0(T)`$ (3.25)
describing the amplitude for the transition $`\vartheta _0(T)\vartheta _0(+T)`$. For the reduction of the r.h.s. of (3.25) we have used the notations

$`\vartheta _0(+T)|m`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi }}}e^{+im\vartheta _0\left(+T\right)iE_mT},`$
$`m|\vartheta _0(T)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi }}}e^{im\vartheta _0\left(T\right)+iE_m\left(T\right)}`$ (3.26)
with $`E_m=m^2/2L`$ and $`|\vartheta _0(x^0)`$ as eigenstate of the Heisenberg operator $`\widehat{\vartheta }_0(x^0)`$ and the completeness condition

$`{\displaystyle \underset{m}{}}|mm|=1.`$ (3.27)
In the limit $`T\mathrm{}`$ the excited stated with $`m0`$ in the sum (3.24) are dying out and only the ground state with $`m=0`$ survives. This yields $`Z_0[0;L,\mathrm{}]=1`$.

## 4 Wave function of the ground state of the free massless (pseudo)scalar field

As has been shown in  the wave function of the ground state of the free massless (pseudo)scalar field, describing the bosonized version of the massless Thirring model, quantized in the chirally broken phase with the BCS wave function of the ground state, takes the form

$`|\mathrm{\Omega }(0)_{BCS}=\mathrm{exp}\left(i{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{M}{g}}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}}𝑑x^1\mathrm{sin}(\beta \widehat{\vartheta }(0,x^1))\right)|\mathrm{\Psi }_0.`$ (4.1)
where $`M`$ is the dynamical mass of the massless Thirring fermion field quantized in the chiral broken phase, and $`g`$ is the Thirring coupling constant . The parameter $`\beta `$ in the definition of the wave function (4.1), used in , $`\mathrm{sin}\beta \vartheta (0,x^1)`$, can be removed rescaling the $`\vartheta `$–field. Indeed, the Lagrangian (2) can be transcribed as follows

$`L_0(\vartheta _0,\dot{\vartheta }_0)={\displaystyle \frac{L}{2\beta ^2}}(\beta \dot{\vartheta }_0(x^0))^2.`$ (4.2)
The moment of inertia is now defined as $`L/\beta ^2`$. The Hamilton operator reads

$`\widehat{h}_0(\vartheta _0,\widehat{\pi }_0)={\displaystyle \frac{\beta ^2}{2L}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^2}{d\vartheta _0^2}}.`$ (4.3)
The energy spectrum $`E_0^{(m)}`$ is given by

$`E_0^{(m)}={\displaystyle \frac{\beta ^2}{2L}}m^2.`$ (4.4)
For the $`\vartheta _0`$–field with the moment of inertia $`L/\beta ^2`$ the total Hamilton and momentum operators are defined by

$`\widehat{h}[\vartheta ]`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\beta ^2}{2L}}\widehat{\pi }_0^2+{\displaystyle \frac{2\pi }{L}}{\displaystyle \underset{n}{}}|n|a_n^{}a_n,`$
$`\widehat{\pi }[\vartheta ]`$ $`=`$ $`\widehat{\pi }_0+{\displaystyle \frac{2\pi }{L}}{\displaystyle \underset{n}{}}na_n^{}a_n.`$ (4.5)
Using the discretized form for the $`\vartheta `$–field (2.7) the wave function (4.1) can be transcribed into the form

$`|\mathrm{\Omega }(0)_{BCS}=e^{+i\lambda \mathrm{sin}\widehat{\vartheta }_0}|\mathrm{\Omega }_0=e^{+i\lambda \mathrm{sin}\widehat{\vartheta }_0}|0|\mathrm{\Psi }_0.`$ (4.6)
where we have denoted $`\lambda =\pi ML/2g`$. The r.h.s. of (4.6) should be taken in the limit $`\lambda \mathrm{}`$ that corresponds to $`L\mathrm{}`$. It is obvious that the wave function (4.6) is not invariant under the symmetry transformations (1.2). Hence, it should describe the ground state of the free massless (pseudo)scalar field $`\vartheta (x)`$ in the symmetry broken phase. The contribution of the $`\vartheta _\mathrm{v}`$–field is of order of $`O(1/L)`$ and smaller compared with the contribution of the zero–mode. It can be dropped in the limit $`L\mathrm{}`$. In the $`\vartheta _0`$–representation the wave function (4.6) reads

$`\vartheta _0|\mathrm{\Omega }(0)_{BCS}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi }}}e^{+i\lambda \mathrm{sin}\vartheta _0}|\mathrm{\Psi }_0.`$ (4.7)
The wave function (4.7) can be expanded into the eigenfunctions (2.15) of the Hamilton operator (2.14). The result reads

$`|\mathrm{\Omega }(0)_{BCS}={\displaystyle \underset{m=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}J_m(\lambda )|m|\mathrm{\Psi }_0,`$ (4.8)
where $`J_m(\lambda )`$ are Bessel functions  and the limit $`\lambda \mathrm{}`$ is assumed. The normalization of the wave function (4.8) to unity is caused by

$`{\displaystyle \underset{m=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}J_m^2(\lambda )=1.`$ (4.9)
Under field–shifts (1.2) the wave function (4.8) transforms into the wave function

$`|\mathrm{\Omega }(\alpha )_{BCS}={\displaystyle \underset{m=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}J_m(\lambda )e^{im\alpha }|m|\mathrm{\Psi }_0`$ (4.10)
at $`\lambda \mathrm{}`$. The orthogonality relation for $`\alpha ^{}\alpha `$ is defined by

$`{}_{BCS}{}^{}\mathrm{\Omega }(\alpha ^{})|\mathrm{\Omega }(\alpha )_{BCS}^{}`$ $`=`$ $`\underset{\lambda \mathrm{}}{lim}{\displaystyle \underset{m=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}J_m^2(\lambda )e^{im\left(\alpha ^{}\alpha \right)}=`$ (4.11)
$`=`$ $`\underset{\lambda \mathrm{}}{lim}J_0\left(2\lambda \mathrm{sin}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\alpha ^{}\alpha }{2}}\right)\right)=\delta _{\alpha ^{}\alpha },`$
where we used the formula

$`{\displaystyle \underset{m=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}J_m^2(\lambda )e^{im\left(\alpha ^{}\alpha \right)}=J_0\left(2\lambda \mathrm{sin}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\alpha ^{}\alpha }{2}}\right)\right).`$ (4.12)
Now let us show that the BCS wave function (4.7) describes a quantum state with energy zero.

For this aim we notice that the wave–function (4.7) is not an eigenfunction of the Hamilton operator (4.3) and the momentum operator $`\widehat{\pi }_0=id/d\vartheta _0`$. It is well–known that the wave–function of the ground state should be the eigenfunction of the Hamilton operator of the quantum field under consideration with eigenvalue zero . Let us show that this requirement can be satisfied for the BCS wave function (4.7) by a canonical transformation . First, we act with the operator $`\widehat{\pi }_0=id/d\vartheta _0`$ on the wave function (4.7) and get

$`\left(i{\displaystyle \frac{d}{d\vartheta _0}}\lambda \mathrm{cos}\vartheta _0\right)\vartheta _0|\mathrm{\Omega }(0)_{BCS}=0.`$ (4.13)
The operator in the l.h.s. of (4.13) is the conjugate momentum operator $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Pi }}_0`$ in the $`\vartheta _0`$–representation related to the conjugate momentum $`\widehat{\pi }_0=id/d\vartheta _0`$ by the unitary transformation

$`\widehat{\mathrm{\Pi }}_0=U\widehat{\pi }_0U^{},`$ (4.14)
where $`U`$ is defined by

$`U=e^{+i\lambda \mathrm{sin}\widehat{\vartheta }_0}.`$ (4.15)
The unitary operator $`U`$ relates the wave functions $`|\mathrm{\Omega }_0`$ and $`|\mathrm{\Omega }(0)_{BCS}`$

$`|\mathrm{\Omega }(0)_{BCS}=U|\mathrm{\Omega }_0.`$ (4.16)
The operator $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Pi }}_0`$ is equal to

$`\widehat{\mathrm{\Pi }}_0=\widehat{\pi }_0+i\lambda [\mathrm{sin}\widehat{\vartheta }_0,\widehat{\pi }_0]=\widehat{\pi }_0\lambda \mathrm{cos}\widehat{\vartheta }_0,`$ (4.17)
where we have used the canonical commutation relation $`[\widehat{\vartheta }_0,\widehat{\pi }_0]=i`$. The operator $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Pi }}_0`$, given by (4.17), coincides with the differential operator in the l.h.s. of (4.13) in the $`\vartheta _0`$–representation.

The unitary transformation (4.16) is canonical, since it retains the canonical commutation relations

$`[\widehat{\vartheta }_0,\widehat{\mathrm{\Pi }}_0]=[U\widehat{\vartheta }_0U^{},U\widehat{\pi }_0U^{}]=[\widehat{\vartheta }_0,\widehat{\pi }_0]=i,`$
$`[\widehat{\mathrm{\Pi }}_0,\widehat{\mathrm{\Pi }}_0]=[U\widehat{\pi }_0U^{},U\widehat{\pi }_0U^{}]=[\widehat{\pi }_0,\widehat{\pi }_0]=0.`$ (4.18)
According to Anderson  the transformations (4.15) can be called similarity (gauge) transformations.

Due to the canonical transformation (4.14) the field operator $`\widehat{\vartheta }_0`$ does not change but the Hamilton operator transforms as follows

$`\widehat{h}_0(\widehat{\vartheta }_0,\widehat{\pi }_0)\widehat{H}_0(\widehat{\vartheta }_0,\widehat{\mathrm{\Pi }}_0)=U\widehat{h}_0(\widehat{\vartheta }_0,\widehat{\pi }_0)U^{}={\displaystyle \frac{\beta ^2}{2L}}\widehat{\mathrm{\Pi }}_0^2.`$ (4.19)
Equation (4.13) can be rewritten as

$`\widehat{\mathrm{\Pi }}_0\vartheta _0|\mathrm{\Omega }(0)_{BCS}=0.`$ (4.20)
This means that the wave function (4.7) is the eigenfunction of the momentum operator $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Pi }}_0`$ and the Hamilton operator $`\widehat{H}_0`$ with eigenvalue zero.

The same result can be obtained using

$`\widehat{h}[\vartheta ]|\mathrm{\Omega }_0`$ $`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{\beta ^2}{2L}}\widehat{\pi }_0^2+{\displaystyle \frac{2\pi }{L}}{\displaystyle \underset{n}{}}|n|a_n^{}a_n\right)|\mathrm{\Omega }_0=0,`$
$`\widehat{\pi }[\vartheta ]|\mathrm{\Omega }_0`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\widehat{\pi }_0+{\displaystyle \frac{2\pi }{L}}{\displaystyle \underset{n}{}}na_n^{}a_n\right)|\mathrm{\Omega }_0=0.`$ (4.21)
By the canonical transformation (4.16) we transcribe (4) as follows

$`U\widehat{h}[\vartheta ]U^{}|\mathrm{\Omega }(0)_{BCS}`$ $`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{\beta ^2}{2L}}\widehat{\mathrm{\Pi }}_0^2+{\displaystyle \frac{2\pi }{L}}{\displaystyle \underset{n}{}}|n|a_n^{}a_n\right)|\mathrm{\Omega }(0)_{BCS}=0,`$
$`U\widehat{\pi }[\vartheta ]U^{}|\mathrm{\Omega }(0)_{BCS}`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\widehat{\mathrm{\Pi }}_0+{\displaystyle \frac{2\pi }{L}}{\displaystyle \underset{n}{}}na_n^{}a_n\right)|\mathrm{\Omega }(0)_{BCS}=0.`$ (4.22)
This proves that the wave function $`|\mathrm{\Omega }(0)_{BCS}`$ describes the ground state of the free massless (pseudo)scalar field $`\vartheta (x)`$ defined by the Lagrangian (1.1). This is the non–perturbative ground state describing the phase of the spontaneously broken continuous symmetry (1.2) related to the chiral symmetry of the massless Thirring model . The wave functions (4.10) obey the same equations (4)

$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{\beta ^2}{2L}}\widehat{\mathrm{\Pi }}_0^2+{\displaystyle \frac{2\pi }{L}}{\displaystyle \underset{n}{}}|n|a_n^{}a_n\right)|\mathrm{\Omega }(\alpha )_{BCS}=0,`$
$`\left(\widehat{\mathrm{\Pi }}_0+{\displaystyle \frac{2\pi }{L}}{\displaystyle \underset{n}{}}na_n^{}a_n\right)|\mathrm{\Omega }(\alpha )_{BCS}=0.`$ (4.23)
Finally, we would like to show that the “magnetic” quantum number $`m`$ defines the chirality of the fermionic state. In order to prove this we suggest to use the results obtained by Nambu and Jona–Lasinio . This concerns the analysis of the BCS wave function in terms of the wave functions with a certain chirality $`X`$, the eigenvalue of the $`\gamma ^5`$ operator, $`X=0,\pm 1,\pm 2,\mathrm{}`$. The BCS wave function of the ground state of the massless Thirring model is defined by

$`|\mathrm{\Omega }(0)_{BCS}={\displaystyle \underset{k^1}{}}[u_{k^1}+v_{k^1}a^{}(k^1)b^{}(k^1)]|\mathrm{\Psi }_0,`$ (4.24)
where the coefficients $`u_{k^1}`$ and $`v_{k^1}`$ have the properties: (i) $`u_{k^1}^2+v_{k^1}^2=1`$ and (ii) $`u_{k^1}=u_{k^1}`$ and $`v_{k^1}=v_{k^1}`$ , $`a^{}(k^1)`$ and $`b^{}(k^1)`$ are creation operators of fermions and antifermions with momentum $`k^1`$. According to Nambu and Jona–Lasinio  the wave function (4.24) should be a linear superposition of the eigenfunctions $`|\mathrm{\Omega }_{2n}`$ with eigenvalues $`X_n=2n,n`$, i.e.

$`|\mathrm{\Omega }(0)_{BCS}={\displaystyle \underset{n}{}}C_{2n}|\mathrm{\Omega }_{2n}.`$ (4.25)
For chiral rotations of fermion fields with a chiral phase $`\alpha _\mathrm{A}`$ the wave function (4.24) changes as follows

$`|\mathrm{\Omega }(\alpha _A)_{BCS}={\displaystyle \underset{k^1}{}}[u_{k^1}+v_{k^1}e^{2i\epsilon \left(k^1\right)\alpha _A}a^{}(k^1)b^{}(k^1)]|\mathrm{\Psi }_0,`$ (4.26)
where $`\epsilon (k^1)`$ is a sign function. In terms of $`|\mathrm{\Omega }(\alpha _A)`$ the products $`C_{2n}|\mathrm{\Omega }_{2n}`$ are defined by

$`C_{2n}|\mathrm{\Omega }_{2n}={\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{d\alpha _A}{2\pi }}e^{+2in\alpha _\mathrm{A}}|\mathrm{\Omega }(\alpha _A)_{BCS}.`$ (4.27)
Substituting (4.27) in (4.25) and using the identity

$`{\displaystyle \underset{n}{}}e^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}in\alpha _\mathrm{A}}=\pi {\displaystyle \underset{k}{}}\delta (\alpha _\mathrm{A}2k\pi )`$ (4.28)
one arrives at the BCS wave function (4.24).

The bosonized version of the eigenfunctions $`C_{2n}|\mathrm{\Omega }_{2n}`$ can be found in analogy with (4.8) and reads

$`C_{2n}|\mathrm{\Omega }_{2n}{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{d\alpha _A}{2\pi }}e^{+2in\alpha _\mathrm{A}}e^{i\lambda \mathrm{sin}\left(\widehat{\vartheta }_02\alpha _\mathrm{A}\right)}|\mathrm{\Omega }_0=`$ (4.29)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{m}{}}J_m(\lambda )|m|\mathrm{\Psi }_0{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{d\alpha _A}{2\pi }}e^{+2i\left(nm\right)\alpha _\mathrm{A}}=J_n(\lambda )|n|\mathrm{\Psi }_0.`$
This completes the proof. Hence, in the treatment of the collective zero–mode as a rigid rotor the “magnetic” quantum number $`m`$ defines the chirality $`X_m=2m`$ of the fermionic state in the massless Thirring model.

The fact that the BCS wave function is not an eigenstate of chirality testifies that chiral symmetry is spontaneously broken. In order to clarify this assertion we would like to draw a similarity between chirality in the massless Thirring model with triality in QCD. In QCD there exist no triality changing transitions, this means a dynamical change of triality is impossible. It is well–known that the confined phase in QCD is $`Z(3)`$ symmetric. Triality zero states are screened, and triality non–zero states are confined. This means that states with different triality behave differently. Whereas in the high–temperature phase of QCD all triality states behave in the same way, they get screened. This is guaranteed by the spontaneous breaking of $`Z(3)`$ symmetry. In our case the situation is similar to the deconfined phase. In the massless Thirring model there are no chirality changing transitions. The ground state is of BCS-type, defining a condensate of fermion-antifermion pairs with different chiralities. In order to get a ground state with properties independent on the exact value of the total chirality of all fermion–antifermion pairs, we need spontaneous breaking of chiral symmetry similar to the the spontaneous breaking of $`Z(3)`$ symmetry in QCD. Such a spontaneous breaking of chiral symmetry is realized by the BCS wave function.

## 5 Conclusion

We have shown that the ground state of the free massless (pseudo)scalar field, the bosonized version of the massless Thirring model in the non–trivial phase, can be defined by a direct product of the fiducial vacuum $`|\mathrm{\Psi }_0`$ and a BCS–type wave function (4.1). We have demonstrated that the BCS wave function is related to the collective zero–mode described by a rigid rotor (4.8). BCS wave functions differing in the values of the field–shifts (1.2) are orthogonal $`{}_{BCS}{}^{}\mathrm{\Omega }(\alpha ^{})|\mathrm{\Omega }(\alpha )_{BCS}^{}=\delta _{\alpha \alpha }`$.

We have analysed the generating functional of Green functions $`Z[J]`$. We have shown that for $`\stackrel{~}{J}(0)0`$ the infrared divergences have a simple physical interpretation in terms of a classically moving rigid rotor acquiring an infinite angle for an infinite interim even if its motion has been initiated by an infinitesimal external perturbation. These divergences can be removed by the constraint on the external source $`\stackrel{~}{J}(0)=0`$. As a result the collective zero–mode cannot be excited and the correlation functions are determined by the contribution of the vibrational modes $`\vartheta _\mathrm{v}(x)`$ only. These modes are quantized relative to the fiducial vacuum $`|\mathrm{\Psi }_0`$. According to  this testifies that the quantum field theory of the free massless (pseudo)scalar field $`\vartheta _\mathrm{v}(x)`$, in the Wightman sense , deals with Wightman’s observables defined on the test functions from $`𝒮_0(^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}})`$.

The BCS type wave function (4.8) of the ground state is not invariant under the continuous symmetry (1.2) and behaves as (4.10). Hence, according to the Goldstone theorem  the continuous symmetry (1.2) is spontaneously broken. As has been shown in  the phase of spontaneously broken continuous symmetry (1.2) is characterized quantitatively by the non–vanishing spontaneous magnetization $`=\mathrm{\Psi }_0|\mathrm{cos}\beta \vartheta _\mathrm{v}(x)|\mathrm{\Psi }_0=1`$. This confirms the non–vanishing value of the fermion condensate in the massless Thirring model with fermion fields quantized in the chirally broken phase . Hence, the massless Thirring model possesses a chirally broken phase as has been pointed out in .

In the rigid rotor treatment of the collective zero–mode the variation $`\delta \vartheta (x)`$ of the free massless (pseudo)scalar field $`\vartheta (x)`$, caused by the field–shift transformation (1.2), is defined by a canonical quantum mechanical commutator

$$\delta \vartheta (x)=\alpha i[Q(x^0),\vartheta (x)]=\alpha i[\pi _0,\vartheta _0]=\alpha ,$$

which can never be equal to zero . This result does not depend on whether the ground state of the free massless (pseudo)scalar field is invariant or non–invariant under symmetry transformations (1.2).

Since the removal of the collective zero–mode from the observable modes of the free massless (pseudo)scalar field $`\vartheta (x)`$ agrees with the definition of Wightman’s observable on the test functions from $`𝒮_0(^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}})`$ the obtained non–vanishing of the variation $`\delta \vartheta (x)`$ does not contradict Coleman’s theorem valid only for Wightman’s observables defined on the test functions from $`𝒮(^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}})`$ .