text:
# QUANTUM MATRIX BALL: THE CAUCHI-SZEGÖ KERNEL AND THE SHILOV BOUNDARY

## 1 Introduction

Bounded symmetric domains form a favorite subject of research in geometry, function theory of several complex variable, and non-commutative harmonic analysis. The point is that they are simplest among non-compact homogeneous spaces of real semi-simple Lie groups.

Quantum analogues (q-analogues) of bounded symmetric domains were introduced in  via replacement of the ordinary Lie groups with their quantum analogues . A simple example of classical bounded symmetric domain is the unit ball $`𝕌=\left\{𝐳\mathrm{Mat}_n\right|\mathrm{𝐳𝐳}^{}<I\}`$ in the space of complex $`n\times n`$ matrices. The present work studies a q-analogue of this matrix ball. The notions of Shilov boundary and Cauchi-Szegö kernel are associated to this subject. Just as in the case $`q=1`$, a holomorphic function in the quantum matrix ball is determined unambiguously by its restriction onto the Shilov boundary and could be retrieved via the Cauchi-Szegö integral representation.

The proof of the latter result involves some properties of an invariant integral on the Shilov boundary. We also use these properties to produce the principal degenerate series of unitary representations of the quantum group $`SU_{n,n}`$. The appendix contains a discussion of generalizations of the main result onto the case of rectangular matrices.

In what follows we assume $``$ to be the ground field, all the algebras are unital, and $`q(0,1)`$.

The author is grateful to S. Sinel’shchikov for pointing out a gap in a previous version of the proof of proposition 6.1 and an assistance with translating this text into English.

## 2 A construction of the Shilov boundary

Among the best known ’quantum’ algebras one should mention the q-analogue $`\left[\mathrm{Mat}_n\right]_q`$ of the algebra of holomorphic polynomials on the space of matrices $`\mathrm{Mat}_n`$. This algebra is given by its generators $`z_a^\alpha `$, $`a,\alpha =1,2,\mathrm{},n`$, and the following relations:

$`z_a^\alpha z_b^\beta qz_b^\beta z_a^\alpha `$ $`=0,`$ $`a=b`$ $`\&\alpha <\beta `$ $`\mathrm{or}a<b\&\alpha =\beta `$ (2.1)
$`z_a^\alpha z_b^\beta z_b^\beta z_a^\alpha `$ $`=0,`$ $`\alpha <\beta `$ $`\&a>b`$ (2.2)
$`z_a^\alpha z_b^\beta z_b^\beta z_a^\alpha `$ $`=\left(qq^1\right)z_a^\beta z_b^\alpha ,`$ $`\alpha <\beta `$ $`\&a<b.`$ (2.3)
The work  presents a definition of the $``$-algebra $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(\mathrm{Mat}_n\right)_q`$, which is a q-analogue of the polynomial algebra on the vector space $`\mathrm{Mat}_n`$. Its generators are $`z_a^\alpha `$, $`\left(z_a^\alpha \right)^{}`$, $`a,\alpha =1,2,\mathrm{},n`$, and the list of relations consists of (2.1), (2.2), (2.3), together with the commutation relations

$$\left(z_b^\beta \right)^{}z_a^\alpha =q^2\underset{a^{},b^{},\alpha ^{},\beta ^{}=1}{\overset{n}{}}R_{ba}^{b^{}a^{}}R_{\beta \alpha }^{\beta ^{}\alpha ^{}}z_a^{}^\alpha ^{}\left(z_b^{}^\beta ^{}\right)^{}+\left(1q^2\right)\delta _{ab}\delta ^{\alpha \beta },$$
(2.4)
where $`\delta _{ab}`$, $`\delta ^{\alpha \beta }`$ being the Kronecker symbols and

$$R_{ij}^{kl}=\{\begin{array}{cc}q^1,\hfill & ij\&i=k\&j=l,\hfill \\ 1,\hfill & i=j=k=l,\hfill \\ \left(q^21\right),\hfill & i=j\&k=l\&l>j,\hfill \\ 0\hfill & \text{otherwise}.\hfill \end{array}$$

It is well known that the Shilov boundary of the matrix ball $`𝕌`$ is just the set $`S\left(𝕌\right)`$ of all unitary matrices. Our intention is to produce a q-analogue of the Shilov boundary for the quantum matrix ball. Introduce the notation for the quantum minors of the matrix $`𝐳=\left(z_a^\alpha \right)`$:

$$\left(z^k\right)_{\{a_1,a_2,\mathrm{},a_k\}}^{\{\alpha _1,\alpha _2,\mathrm{},\alpha _k\}}\stackrel{\mathrm{def}}{=}\underset{sS_k}{}\left(q\right)^{l\left(s\right)}z_{a_1}^{\alpha _{s\left(1\right)}}z_{a_2}^{\alpha _{s\left(2\right)}}\mathrm{}z_{a_k}^{\alpha _{s\left(k\right)}},$$

with $`\alpha _1<\alpha _2<\mathrm{}<\alpha _k`$ and $`l\left(s\right)`$, $`a_1<a_2<\mathrm{}<a_k`$, and $`l\left(s\right)`$ being the number of inversion in $`sS_k`$.

It is well known that the quantum determinant

$$det_q𝐳=\left(z^n\right)_{\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}}^{\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}}$$

is in the center of $`\left[\mathrm{Mat}_n\right]_q`$. The localization of $`\left[\mathrm{Mat}_n\right]_q`$ with respect to the multiplicative system $`\left(det_q𝐳\right)^{}`$ is called the algebra of regular functions on the quantum $`GL_n`$ and is denoted by $`\left[GL_n\right]_q`$.

###### Lemma 2.1

i) There exists a unique involution $``$ in $`[GL_n]_q`$ such that

$$\left(z_a^\alpha \right)^{}=\left(q\right)^{a+\alpha 2n}\left(det_q𝐳\right)^1det_q𝐳_a^\alpha ,$$

with $`𝐳_a^\alpha `$ being the matrix derived from $`𝐳`$ via deleting the line $`\alpha `$ and the column $`a`$.

ii) $`(det_q𝐳)(det_q𝐳)^{}=(det_q𝐳)^{}(det_q𝐳)=q^{n(n1)}`$.

Proof. The uniqueness of the involution $``$ is obvious. To prove the existence, consider the $``$-algebra $`\left[U_n\right]_q=(\left[GL_n\right]_q,)`$ of regular functions on the quantum $`U_n`$ (see ) and the automorphism $`i:\left[GL_n\right]_q\left[GL_n\right]_q`$ given by $`i:z_a^\alpha q^{\alpha n}z_a^\alpha `$, $`a,\alpha =1,2,\mathrm{},n`$. Obviously, $`i^1i`$ is an involution. What remains is to demonstrate that

$$i^1i:z_a^\alpha \left(q\right)^{a+\alpha 2n}\left(det_q𝐳\right)^1det_q𝐳_a^\alpha .$$

This follows from the definition of $``$ :

$$\left(z_a^\alpha \right)^{}=\left(q\right)^{a\alpha }\left(det_q𝐳\right)^1det_q𝐳_a^\alpha .$$

The statement ii) of the lemma follows from a similar statement for the involution $``$. $`\mathrm{}`$

The $``$-algebra $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(S\left(𝕌\right)\right)_q=(\left[GL_n\right]_q,)`$ is a q-analogue of the polynomial algebra on the Shilov boundary of the matrix ball $`𝕌`$, as one can see from

###### Theorem 2.2

There exists a unique homomorphism of $``$-algebras $`\psi :\mathrm{Pol}(\mathrm{Mat}_n)_q\mathrm{Pol}(S(𝕌))_q`$ such that $`\psi :z_a^\alpha z_a^\alpha `$, $`a,\alpha =1,2,\mathrm{},n`$.

We premise the proof of the theorem with two remarks. Firstly, the homomorphism $`\psi `$ is a q-analogue of the operator which restricts the polynomial onto the Shilov boundary. Secondly, we use in this work a purely algebraic approach to producing the Shilov boundary; we do not try to compare it to the analytic approach of the well known work by W. Arveson .

Proof. The uniqueness of the $``$-homomorphism $`\psi `$ is obvious. Turn to the proof of its existence. To produce $`\psi `$, we need auxiliary $``$-algebras $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(\mathrm{Pl}_{n,2n}\right)_{q,x}`$ and $`_x`$, together with the embeddings of algebras $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(\mathrm{Mat}_n\right)_q\mathrm{Pol}\left(\mathrm{Pl}_{n,2n}\right)_{q,x}`$, $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(S\left(𝕌\right)\right)_q_x`$. The crucial point in the proof is a construction of a homomorphism of $``$-algebras $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(\mathrm{Pl}_{n,2n}\right)_{q,x}_x`$ which leads to the commutative diagram

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\mathrm{Pol}\left(\mathrm{Pl}_{n,2n}\right)_{q,x}& & _x\\ & & & & \\ \mathrm{Pol}\left(\mathrm{Mat}_n\right)_q& & \mathrm{Pol}\left(S\left(𝕌\right)\right)_q.\end{array}$$

To begin with, introduce the $``$-algebra $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(\mathrm{Pl}_{n,2n}\right)_{q,x}`$ ’of polynomials on the quantum Plücker manifold’.

Let $`\left[\mathrm{Mat}_{2n}\right]_q`$ be the $``$-algebra of functions on the quantum space of matrices $`\mathrm{Mat}_{2n}`$ determined by its generators $`\left\{t_{ij}\right\}_{i,j=1,2,\mathrm{},2n}`$ and commutation relations similar to those listed in (2.1) – (2.3). Introduce the quantum minors

$$t_{IJ}^n=\underset{sS_n}{}\left(q\right)^{l\left(s\right)}t_{i_1j_{s\left(1\right)}}t_{i_2j_{s\left(2\right)}}\mathrm{}t_{i_nj_{s\left(n\right)}}$$

determined by pairs of $`n`$-element subsets of the form

$$I=\left\{(i_1,i_2,\mathrm{},i_n)\right|\mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}1}i_1<\mathrm{}<i_n2n\},$$

$$J=\left\{(j_1,j_2,\mathrm{},j_n)\right|\mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}1}j_1<\mathrm{}<j_n2n\}.$$

Consider the subalgebra in $`\left[\mathrm{Mat}_{2n}\right]_q`$ generated by the elements $`t_{\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}J}^n`$, $`t_{\{n+1,n+2,\mathrm{},2n\}J}^n`$, with $`\mathrm{card}\left(J\right)=n`$. It is easy to present a full list of relations between these generators. We follow  in equipping this algebra with the involution

$$\left(t_{\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}J}^n\right)^{}=\left(1\right)^{\mathrm{card}\left(\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}J\right)}\left(q\right)^{l(J,J^c)}t_{\{n+1,n+2,\mathrm{},2n\}J^c}^n,$$
(2.5)
where $`J^c=\{1,2,\mathrm{},2n\}J`$ and $`l(J,J^c)=\mathrm{card}\left\{(j^{},j^{\prime \prime })J\times J^c\right|j^{}>j^{\prime \prime }\}`$. The $``$-algebra arising this way is denoted by $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(\mathrm{Pl}_{n,2n}\right)_q`$. Let $`t=t_{\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}\{n+1,n+2,\mathrm{},2n\}}^n`$ and $`x=tt^{}`$. Obviously, $`x`$ quasi-commutes with all the generators of $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(\mathrm{Pl}_{n,2n}\right)_q`$.

Let $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(\mathrm{Pl}_{n,2n}\right)_{q,x}`$ be the localization of the $``$-algebra $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(\mathrm{Pl}_{n,2n}\right)_q`$ with respect to the multiplicative system $`x^{}`$. The results of section 2 of  can be used to prove the following statement intended to shed some light to the way the $``$-algebra $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(\mathrm{Pl}_{n,2n}\right)_q`$ works in our constructions.

###### Lemma 2.3

Let $`J_{\alpha a}=\{a\}\{n+1,n+2,\mathrm{},2n\}\{2n+1\alpha \}`$. The map $`:z_a^\alpha t^1t_{\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}J_a^\alpha }^n`$ admits an extension up to an embedding of the $``$-algebras $`:\mathrm{Pol}(\mathrm{Mat}_n)_q\mathrm{Pol}(\mathrm{Pl}_{n,2n})_{q,x}`$

The next step in proving theorem 2.2 is in producing an auxiliary $``$-algebra $``$, together with a homomorphism of $``$-algebras $`\phi :\mathrm{Pol}\left(\mathrm{Pl}_{n,2n}\right)_q`$. Let $`\left[\mathrm{Pl}_{n,2n}\right]_q\mathrm{Pol}\left(\mathrm{Pl}_{n,2n}\right)_q`$ be the subalgebra generated by the quantum minors $`t_{\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}J}^n`$, $`\mathrm{card}\left(J\right)=n`$, and $`\left[\overline{\mathrm{Pl}_{n,2n}}\right]_q\mathrm{Pol}\left(\mathrm{Pl}_{n,2n}\right)_q`$ the subalgebra generated by the quantum minors $`t_{\{n+1,n+2,\mathrm{},2n\}J}^n`$, $`\mathrm{card}\left(J\right)=n`$.

$``$ appears to be an extension of $`\left[\mathrm{Pl}_{n,2n}\right]_q`$; it is given by adding the elements $`\eta `$, $`\eta ^1`$ to the list of generators and the relations

$$\eta \eta ^1=\eta ^1\eta =1,\eta t_{\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}J}^n=q^nt_{\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}J}^n\eta ,\mathrm{card}\left(J\right)=n$$

to the list of relations. (As it is well known, this list is exhausted by the commutation relations and q-analogues of Plücker relations).

###### Lemma 2.4

The map

$$\phi :t_{\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}J}^nt_{\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}J}^n$$
(2.6)
$$\phi :t_{\{n+1,n+2,\mathrm{},2n\}J}^n\eta t_{\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}J}^n$$
(2.7)
admits an extension up to a homomorphism of algebras $`\phi :\mathrm{Pol}(\mathrm{Pl}_{n,2n})_q`$.

Proof. The definitions imply the existence of a homomorphism $`\left[\mathrm{Pl}_{n,2n}\right]_q`$ which satisfies (2.6) and a homomorphism $`\left[\overline{\mathrm{Pl}}_{n,2n}\right]_q`$ which satisfies (2.7). The rest of the relations between the generators of $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(\mathrm{Pl}_{n,2n}\right)_q`$ are commutation relations. What remains is to establish that the same commutation relations are also valid for images of the elements $`t_{\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}J}^n`$, $`t_{\{n+1,n+2,\mathrm{},2n\}I}^n`$ with respect to $`\phi `$. For that, we use the R-matrix form of commutation relations between the matrix elements of the corresponding fundamental representation of the Hopf algebra $`U_q𝔰𝔩_{2n}`$.

$$\mathrm{const}^{}(q,n)t_{\{n+1,n+2,\mathrm{},2n\}I}^nt_{\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}J}^n=\underset{\left\{I^{},J^{}\right|\mathrm{card}\left(I^{}\right)=\mathrm{card}\left(\mathrm{J}^{}\right)=\mathrm{n}\}}{}R_{IJ}^{I^{}J^{}}t_{\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}J^{}}^nt_{\{n+1,n+2,\mathrm{},2n\}I^{}}^n,$$

$$\mathrm{const}^{\prime \prime }(q,n)t_{\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}I}^nt_{\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}J}^n=\underset{\left\{I^{},J^{}\right|\mathrm{card}\left(I^{}\right)=\mathrm{card}\left(\mathrm{J}^{}\right)=\mathrm{n}\}}{}R_{IJ}^{I^{}J^{}}t_{\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}J^{}}^nt_{\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}I^{}}^n.$$

Here $`\left(R_{IJ}^{I^{}J^{}}\right)`$ is the R-matrix from the right hand side of the well known relation $`RTT=TTR`$ , and the constants $`\mathrm{const}^{}(q,n)`$, $`\mathrm{const}^{\prime \prime }(q,n)`$ describe the action of the R-matrix in the left hand side of that relation. We are to prove now that $`\mathrm{const}^{\prime \prime }(q,n)=q^n\mathrm{const}^{}(q,n)`$. This follows from

$$t_{JI}^nt_{IJ}^n=t_{IJ}^nt_{JI}^n,t_{II}^nt_{IJ}^n=q^nt_{IJ}^nt_{II}^n,$$

with $`I=\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}`$, $`J=\{n+1,n+2,\mathrm{},2n\}`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

Equip $``$ with an involution.

###### Lemma 2.5

i) There exists a unique involution $``$ in $``$ such that

$$\eta ^{}=q^{n\left(n1\right)}\eta ^1,$$

$$\left(t_{\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}J}^n\right)^{}=\left(1\right)^{\mathrm{card}\left(\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}J\right)}\left(q\right)^{l(J,J^c)}\eta t_{\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}J^c}^n.$$

ii) The above homomorphism $`\phi :\mathrm{Pol}(\mathrm{Pl}_{n,2n})_q`$ is a homomorphism of $``$-algebras.

Remark. The motives to deduce the latter equality are as follows:

$$\begin{array}{c}\left(t_{\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}J}^n\right)^{}=\left(\phi \left(t_{\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}J}^n\right)\right)^{}=\phi \left(\left(t_{\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}J}^n\right)^{}\right)=\hfill \\ \hfill =\left(1\right)^{\mathrm{card}\left(\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}J\right)}\left(q\right)^{l(J,J^c)}\phi \left(t_{\{n+1,n+2,\mathrm{},2n\}J^c}^n\right)=\\ \hfill =\left(1\right)^{\mathrm{card}\left(\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}J\right)}\left(q\right)^{l(J,J^c)}\eta t_{\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}J^c}^n.\end{array}$$

Proof. The uniqueness of the involution $``$ is straightforward, and its existence follows from (2.5). More precisely, (2.5) and the isomorphism $`\left[\mathrm{Pl}_{n,2n}\right]\stackrel{~}{}\left[\overline{\mathrm{Pl}_{n,2n}}\right]`$, $`t_{\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}J}^nt_{\{n+1,n+2,\mathrm{},2n\}J}^n`$, $`\mathrm{card}\left(J\right)=n`$, imply the existence of an antilinear antiautomorphism $`:`$ with the required properties. The property $`=\mathrm{id}`$ is to be verified separately:

$$\left(t_{\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}J}^n\right)^{}=q^{l(J,J^c)+l(J^c,J)}\eta t_{\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}J}^n\eta ^{}=q^{n^2n}t_{\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}J}^n\eta \eta ^{}=t_{\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}J}^n.$$

Now the definition of the involution and (2.5) imply that $`\phi `$ is a $``$-homomorphism. $`\mathrm{}`$

Note that $`\phi `$ admits a unique extension up to a homomorphism $`\phi _x:\mathrm{Pol}\left(\mathrm{Pl}_{n,2n}\right)_{q,x}_x`$ of the localizations of $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(\mathrm{Pl}_{n,2n}\right)_q`$ and $``$ with respect to the multiplicative system $`x^{}`$, $`x=tt^{}`$.

Here is the last element of our construction.

###### Lemma 2.6

The map $`z_a^\alpha t^1t_{\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}J_{a\alpha }}^n`$, $`a,\alpha =1,2,\mathrm{},n`$, admits a unique extension up to an embedding of $``$-algebras $`\mathrm{Pol}(S(𝕌))_q_x`$.

Proof. Note first that $`l(J_{\alpha a},J_{\alpha a}^c)=a+\alpha +\left(n1\right)^22`$. Hence

$$\begin{array}{c}\left(t^1t_{\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}J_{a\alpha }}^n\right)^{}=\hfill \\ \hfill =\left(q\right)^{a+\alpha +\left(n1\right)^22}\eta t_{\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}J_{\alpha a}^c}^n\left(\left(q\right)^{n^2}\eta t_{\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}}^n\right)^1=\\ \hfill =\left(q\right)^{a+\alpha 2n1}t_{\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}J_{\alpha a}^c}^n\left(t_{\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}}^n\right)^1=\\ \hfill =\left(q\right)^{a+\alpha 2n}\left(t_{\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}}^n\right)^1t_{\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}J_{\alpha a}^c}^n=\\ \hfill =\left(q\right)^{a+\alpha 2n}\left(t^1t_{\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}}^n\right)^1\left(t^1t_{\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}J_{\alpha a}^c}^n\right).\end{array}$$

On the other hand, in the algebra $`\left[\mathrm{Pl}_{n,2n}\right]_{q,t}`$ defined as a localization of $`\left[\mathrm{Pl}_{n,2n}\right]_q`$ with respect to the multiplicative system $`t^{}`$, one has the following relations, established in :

$$t^1t_{\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}}^n=det_q𝐳,$$

$$t^1t_{\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}J_{a\alpha }^c}^n=det_q𝐳_a^\alpha .$$

What remains is to use the natural embedding $`\left[\mathrm{Pl}_{n,2n}\right]_{q,t}_x`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

To complete the proof of theorem 2.2, one has to observe that the $``$-homomorphism $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(\mathrm{Pl}_{n,2n}\right)_{q,x}_x`$ takes the images of $`z_a^\alpha \mathrm{Pol}\left(\mathrm{Mat}_n\right)_q`$ with respect to the embedding $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(\mathrm{Mat}_n\right)_q\mathrm{Pol}\left(\mathrm{Pl}_{n,2n}\right)_q`$ to the images of the corresponding elements $`z_a^\alpha \mathrm{Pol}\left(S\left(𝕌\right)\right)_q`$ with respect to the embedding $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(S\left(𝕌\right)\right)_q_x`$. Now theorem 2.2 is proved. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Proposition 2.7

i) $`\mathrm{Im}\psi =\mathrm{Pol}(S(𝕌))_q`$.

ii) $`\mathrm{ker}\psi \mathrm{Pol}(\mathrm{Mat}_n)_q`$ constitutes a $`U_q𝔰𝔩_{2n}`$-submodule.

Proof. The first statement follows from $`\left(det_q𝐳\right)^1=q^{n\left(n1\right)}\left(det_q𝐳\right)^{}`$, since $`z_a^\alpha \mathrm{Im}\psi `$ for all $`a,\alpha =1,2,\mathrm{},n`$ and $`\left(det_q𝐳\right)^{}\mathrm{Im}\psi `$. The second statement involves the structures of $`U_q𝔰𝔩_{2n}`$-module algebras in $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(\mathrm{Mat}_n\right)_{q,x}`$, $`_x`$, which are imposed in an obvious way (the elements $`\eta ,\eta ^1_x`$ are $`U_q𝔰𝔩_{2n}`$-invariants). The statement to be proved follows now from the fact that the homomorphisms $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(\mathrm{Mat}_n\right)_q\mathrm{Pol}\left(\mathrm{Pl}_{n,2n}\right)_{q,x}`$, $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(\mathrm{Pl}_{n,2n}\right)_{q,x}_x`$ are morphisms of $`U_q𝔰𝔩_{2n}`$-modules. $`\mathrm{}`$

Recall the notation $`E_i`$, $`F_i`$, $`K_i^{\pm 1}`$ for the standard generators of the Hopf algebra $`U_q𝔰𝔩_{2n}`$ and the notation $`U_q𝔰𝔲_{n,n}`$ for the Hopf $``$-algebra $`(U_q𝔰𝔩_{2n},)`$, with

$`E_n^{}`$ $`=K_nF_n,`$ $`F_n^{}`$ $`=E_nK_n^1,`$ $`\left(K_n^{\pm 1}\right)^{}`$ $`=K_n^{\pm 1},`$
$`E_j^{}`$ $`=K_jF_j,`$ $`F_j^{}`$ $`=E_jK_j^1,`$ $`\left(K_j^{\pm 1}\right)^{}`$ $`=K_j^{\pm 1},`$ $`\text{for}jn.`$
Equip $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(S\left(𝕌\right)\right)_q`$ with a structure of $`U_q𝔰𝔲_{n,n}`$-module algebra via the canonical isomorphism $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(S\left(𝕌\right)\right)_q\mathrm{Pol}\left(\mathrm{Mat}_n\right)_q/\mathrm{ker}\psi `$. Thus, $`S\left(𝕌\right)_q`$ is a homogeneous space of the quantum group $`SU_{n,n}`$.

To conclude, introduce one more $`U_q𝔰𝔲_{n,n}`$-module algebra.

It was noted earlier that $`z_a^\alpha `$, $`a,\alpha =1,2,\mathrm{},n`$, generate the $``$-algebra $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(S\left(𝕌\right)\right)_q`$. Consider its extension in the class of $``$-algebras given by adding generator $`t`$, together with the additional relations

$$tt^{}=t^{}t,tz_a^\alpha =q^1z_a^\alpha t,t^{}z_a^\alpha =q^1z_a^\alpha t^{},a,\alpha =1,2,\mathrm{},n.$$

This algebra will be denoted by $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(\widehat{S}\left(𝕌\right)\right)_q`$. Our intention is to extend the structure of $`U_q𝔰𝔲_{n,n}`$-module algebra from $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(S\left(𝕌\right)\right)_q`$ onto $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(\widehat{S}\left(𝕌\right)\right)_q`$. This is accessible via embedding the $``$-algebra $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(\widehat{S}\left(𝕌\right)\right)_q`$ into the $``$-algebra $`_x`$: $`i:tt`$, $`i:z_a^\alpha t^1t_{\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}J_{\alpha a}}^n`$, $`a,\alpha =1,2,\mathrm{},n`$. In fact, the $``$-subalgebra $`i\left(\mathrm{Pol}\left(\widehat{S}\left(𝕌\right)\right)_q\right)`$ contains all the elements $`t`$, $`t^1t_{\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}J}^n`$, $`\mathrm{card}\left(J\right)=n`$, and hence is a $`U_q𝔰𝔲_{n,n}`$-module subalgebra. What remains is to transfer this structure onto $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(\widehat{S}\left(𝕌\right)\right)_q`$. It follows, as, in , that

$$E_jt=F_jt=\left(K_j^{\pm 1}1\right)t=0,jn,$$

$$F_nt=\left(K_n^{\pm 1}1\right)t=0,E_nt=q^{1/2}tz_n^n.$$

The $`U_q𝔰𝔲_{n,n}`$-module algebra $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(\widehat{S}\left(𝕌\right)\right)_q`$ will be an essential tool in producing the principal degenerate series of representations of the quantum group $`SU_{n,n}`$.

## 3 A $`𝐔_𝐪𝔰𝔩_{\mathrm{𝟐}𝐧}`$-invariant integral

There exists a unique invariant integral on the quantum group $`U_n`$ normalized in such a way that $`{\displaystyle \underset{\left(U_n\right)_q}{}}1𝑑\nu =1`$. Use the natural isomorphism of $``$-algebras $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(S\left(𝕌\right)\right)_q\left[U_n\right]_q`$, $`z_a^\alpha q^{\alpha n}z_a^\alpha `$, $`a,\alpha =1,2,\mathrm{},n`$, to transfer this integral onto $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(S\left(𝕌\right)\right)_q`$. It is easy to demonstrate that the linear functional we get this way

$$\mathrm{Pol}\left(S\left(𝕌\right)\right)_q,f\underset{S\left(𝕌\right)_q}{}f𝑑\nu ,$$

is not $`U_q𝔰𝔩_{2n}`$-invariant provided $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(S\left(𝕌\right)\right)_q`$ is equipped with the ordinary structure of $`U_q𝔰𝔩_{2n}`$-module. This section is intended to prove the $`U_q𝔰𝔩_{2n}`$-invariance of this integral with respect to a ’twisted’ structure of $`U_q𝔰𝔩_{2n}`$-module in $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(S\left(𝕌\right)\right)_q`$. It is custom to say ’these are not functions that should be integrated, but highest order differential forms’. The change of the structure of $`U_q𝔰𝔩_{2n}`$-module in $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(S\left(𝕌\right)\right)_q`$ is nothing more than a passage from functions to highest order forms.

Recall the notation $`E_i`$, $`F_i`$, $`K_i^{\pm 1}`$ for the standard generators of the Hopf algebra $`U_q𝔰𝔩_{2n}`$, and $`U_q𝔰\left(𝔤𝔩_n\times 𝔤𝔩_n\right)`$ stands for its subalgebra, generated by $`K_n^{\pm 1}`$, $`E_j`$, $`F_j`$, $`K_j^{\pm 1}`$, $`jn`$. It is easy to prove the $`U_q𝔰\left(𝔤𝔩_n\times 𝔤𝔩_n\right)`$-invariance of the above integral $`f{\displaystyle \underset{S\left(𝕌\right)_q}{}}f𝑑\nu `$.

We use the notation $`U_q𝔰\left(𝔲_n\times 𝔲_n\right)=(U_q𝔰\left(𝔤𝔩_n\times 𝔤𝔩_n\right),)`$

###### Proposition 3.1

There exists such a structure of $`U_q𝔰𝔩_{2n}`$-module in $`\mathrm{Pol}(S(𝕌))_q`$ that

i) its restriction to the subalgebra $`U_q𝔰(𝔤𝔩_n\times 𝔤𝔩_n)`$ coincides with the restriction of the standard structure of $`U_q𝔰(𝔤𝔩_n\times 𝔤𝔩_n)`$-module in $`\mathrm{Pol}(S(𝕌))_q`$,

ii) the integral $`\mathrm{Pol}(S(𝕌))_q`$, $`f{\displaystyle \underset{S(𝕌)_q}{}}f𝑑\nu `$, is a morphism of $`U_q𝔰𝔩_{2n}`$-modules.

Proof. We first produce some structure of $`U_q𝔰𝔩_{2n}`$-module in $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(S\left(𝕌\right)\right)_q`$, and then prove that it satisfies i) and ii).

Consider the $`U_q𝔰𝔲_{n,n}`$-module $``$-algebra $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(\widehat{S}\left(𝕌\right)\right)_q`$ introduced in the previous section. The construction implies that the $``$-algebra $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(\widehat{S}\left(𝕌\right)\right)_q`$ is generated by $`t`$, $`t^{}`$, and the elements of its $`U_q𝔰𝔲_{n,n}`$-module subalgebra $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(S\left(𝕌\right)\right)_q`$. Consult  for explicit formulae which describe the action of the standard generators $`E_j`$, $`F_j`$, $`K_j^{\pm 1}`$, $`j=1,2,\mathrm{},2n1`$; the action on the conjugate elements is easily derivable from those formulae since

$$\left(\xi f\right)^{}=\left(S\left(\xi \right)\right)^{}f^{},\xi U_q𝔰𝔲_{n,n},f\mathrm{Pol}\left(\widehat{S}\left(𝕌\right)\right)_q.$$

The elements $`t`$, $`t^{}`$, $`x`$ quasi-commute with all the generators $`t`$, $`z_a^\alpha `$, $`a,\alpha =1,2,\mathrm{},n`$, of the $``$-algebra $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(\widehat{S}\left(𝕌\right)\right)_q`$. This allows one to consider the localization $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(\widehat{S}\left(𝕌\right)\right)_{q,x}`$ of this $``$-algebra with respect to the multiplicative system $`x^{}`$ and then to extend the structure of $`U_q𝔰𝔲_{n,n}`$-module algebra onto it. Equip $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(\widehat{S}\left(𝕌\right)\right)_{q,x}`$ with a bigrading:

$$\mathrm{deg}t=(1,0),\mathrm{deg}t^{}=(0,1),\mathrm{deg}\left(z_a^\alpha \right)=\mathrm{deg}\left(z_a^\alpha \right)^{}=(0,0),a,\alpha =1,2,\mathrm{},n.$$

Obviously, the homogeneous components

$$\mathrm{Pol}\left(\widehat{S}\left(𝕌\right)\right)_{q,x}^{(i,j)}=\left\{f\mathrm{Pol}\left(\widehat{S}\left(𝕌\right)\right)_{q,x}\right|\mathrm{deg}f=(i,j)\}=t^i\mathrm{Pol}\left(S\left(𝕌\right)\right)_qt^j$$

form submodules of the $`U_q𝔰𝔩_{2n}`$-module $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(\widehat{S}\left(𝕌\right)\right)_{q,x}`$. Equip $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(S\left(𝕌\right)\right)_q`$ with a structure of $`U_q𝔰𝔲_{n,n}`$-module via the vector space isomorphism

$$\mathrm{Pol}\left(S\left(𝕌\right)\right)_q\mathrm{Pol}\left(\widehat{S}\left(𝕌\right)\right)_{q,x}^{(n,n)},f\left(t^{}\right)^nft^n.$$

It follows from the $`U_q𝔰\left(𝔤𝔩_n\times 𝔤𝔩_n\right)`$-invariance of $`t`$, $`t^{}`$ that the new $`U_q𝔰𝔩_{2n}`$-module structure in $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(S\left(𝕌\right)\right)_q`$ coincides with the previous one on the subalgebra $`U_q𝔰\left(𝔤𝔩_n\times 𝔤𝔩_n\right)U_q𝔰𝔩_{2n}`$. So, our integral is again $`U_q𝔰\left(𝔤𝔩_n\times 𝔤𝔩_n\right)`$-invariant. What remains is to prove that

$`{\displaystyle \underset{S\left(𝕌\right)_q}{}}\left(t^{}\right)^nF_n\left(\left(t^{}\right)^nft^n\right)t^n𝑑\nu `$ $`=0,`$
$`{\displaystyle \underset{S\left(𝕌\right)_q}{}}\left(t^{}\right)^nE_n\left(\left(t^{}\right)^nft^n\right)t^n𝑑\nu `$ $`=0,`$ $`f\mathrm{Pol}\left(S\left(𝕌\right)\right)_q.`$
Observe that the integral in question is a real linear functional $`{\displaystyle \underset{S\left(𝕌\right)_q}{}}f^{}𝑑\nu =\overline{{\displaystyle \underset{S\left(𝕌\right)_q}{}}f𝑑\nu }`$, and $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(\widehat{S}\left(𝕌\right)\right)_{q,x}`$ is a $`U_q𝔰𝔲_{n,n}`$-module $``$-algebra. Thus, it suffices to prove the following

###### Lemma 3.2

For all $`f\mathrm{Pol}(S(𝕌))_q\mathrm{Pol}(\widehat{S}(𝕌))_{q,x}^{(0,0)}`$ one has

$$\underset{S\left(𝕌\right)_q}{}\left(t^{}\right)^nF_n\left(\left(t^{}\right)^nft^n\right)t^n𝑑\nu =0.$$
(3.1)
Proof. Identify the subalgebra $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(S\left(𝕌\right)\right)_q`$ with its image under the embedding into $`_x`$ to note that $`F_nt=F_n\eta =0`$, $`t^{}=\left(q\right)^{n^2}\eta tdet_q𝐳`$. Hence (3.1) is equivalent to

$$\underset{S\left(𝕌\right)_q}{}\left(det_q𝐳\right)^nF_n\left(\left(det_q𝐳\right)^nf\right)𝑑\nu =0.$$
(3.2)
On the other hand, $`K_ndet_q𝐳=q^2det_q𝐳`$, as one can see from an explicit form for $`K_nz_a^\alpha `$, $`a,\alpha =1,2,\mathrm{},n`$. Hence, by a virtue of the $`U_q𝔰\left(𝔲_n\times 𝔲_n\right)`$-invariance of the integral in question (3.2) is also equivalent to

$$\underset{S\left(𝕌\right)_q}{}\left(det_q𝐳\right)^n\stackrel{~}{F}_n\left(\left(det_q𝐳\right)^nf\right)𝑑\nu =0,$$
(3.3)
with $`\stackrel{~}{F}_n=K_nF_n`$.

We start with proving (3.2), (3.3) in the special case $`f=z_n^n`$. In view of the relation $`F_nz_n^n=q^{1/2}`$ one has

$$\left(det_q𝐳\right)^nF_n\left(\left(det_q𝐳\right)^nz_n^n\right)=\left(det_q𝐳\right)^nF_n\left(\left(det_q𝐳\right)^nK_n^1z_n^n\right)+q^{1/2}.$$

Apply the explicit form for $`F_nz_a^\alpha `$, $`K_n^{\pm 1}z_a^\alpha `$, $`a,\alpha =1,2,\mathrm{},n`$, found in  to establish that $`K_n^1z_n^n=q^2z_n^n`$,

$$\left(det_q𝐳\right)^nF_n\left(\left(det_q𝐳\right)^n\right)=q^{1/2}\frac{q^{2n}1}{q^21}\left(det_q𝐳\right)^1det_q\left(𝐳_n^n\right).$$

Hence

$$\left(det_q𝐳\right)^nF_n\left(\left(det_q𝐳\right)^nz_n^n\right)=q^{1/2}\frac{q^{2n}1}{q^21}\left(det_q𝐳\right)^1det_q\left(𝐳_n^n\right)q^2z_n^n+q^{1/2}.$$

On the other hand, $`\left(det_q𝐳\right)^1det_q\left(𝐳_n^n\right)=\left(z_n^n\right)^{}`$. Thus to prove (3.2) in the special case $`f=z_n^n`$, we need only to verify that

$$\underset{S\left(𝕌\right)_q}{}\left(z_n^n\right)^{}z_n^n𝑑\nu =\frac{1q^2}{1q^{2n}}.$$

For that, it suffices to elaborate the following relations:

$`{\displaystyle \underset{S\left(𝕌_n\right)_q}{}}\left(z_n^n\right)^{}z_n^n𝑑\nu `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\left(U_n\right)_q}{}}\left(z_n^n\right)^{}z_n^n𝑑\nu ,`$
$`{\displaystyle \underset{\left(U_n\right)_q}{}}\left(z_n^n\right)^{}z_n^n𝑑\nu `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{q^{\left(n1\right)}}{q^{n1}+q^{n3}+\mathrm{}+q^{\left(n3\right)}+q^{\left(n1\right)}}}={\displaystyle \frac{1q^2}{1q^{2n}}}.`$
The first relation follows from the explicit form for the natural isomorphism of $``$-algebras $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(S\left(𝕌\right)\right)_q\left[U_n\right]_q`$, and the second one is a consequence of the orthogonality relations for the quantum group $`SU_n`$ (see \[2, p. 457\]).

In the special case $`f=z_n^n`$, (3.2), and hence (3.3) are proved.

Turn to the general case $`f\mathrm{Pol}\left(S\left(𝕌\right)\right)_q`$.

Normally we work with admissible (see ) modules over quantum enveloping algebras. We also use the standard basis $`H_1,\mathrm{},H_{2n1}`$ of the Cartan subalgebra of $`𝔰𝔩_{2n}`$.

Let $`H_0=\underset{j=1}{\overset{n1}{}}jH_j+nH_n+\underset{j=1}{\overset{n1}{}}jH_{2nj}`$ be the element of the Cartan subalgebra of the Lie algebra $`𝔰\left(𝔤𝔩_n\times 𝔤𝔩_n\right)𝔰𝔩_{2n}`$, which is in its center and is normalized so that $`[H_0,E_n]=2E_n`$, $`[H_0,F_n]=2F_n`$. Associate to every admissible simple finite dimensional $`U_q𝔰\left(𝔤𝔩_n\times 𝔤𝔩_n\right)`$-module $`V`$ a pair $`(𝝀,k)`$, with $`𝝀`$ being the highest weight of the corresponding $`U_q𝔰𝔩_nU_q𝔰𝔩_n`$-module, and the number $`k`$ is determined by $`H_0v=2kv`$, $`vV`$. It is easy to obtain the following decomposition of the $`U_q𝔰\left(𝔤𝔩_n\times 𝔤𝔩_n\right)`$-module $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(S\left(𝕌\right)\right)_q`$ into a sum of simple finite dimensional pairwise non-isomorphic $`U_q𝔰\left(𝔤𝔩_n\times 𝔤𝔩_n\right)`$-modules:

$$\mathrm{Pol}\left(S\left(𝕌\right)\right)_q=\underset{(𝝀,k)}{}V_{(𝝀,k)}.$$

Assume that for some $`f\mathrm{Pol}\left(S\left(𝕌\right)\right)_q`$ (3.3) fails. Our immediate intention is to prove that $`f`$ belongs to some component $`V_{(𝝀^{},k^{})}`$, and to find the corresponding pair $`(𝝀^{},k^{})`$.

The presence of the structure of $`U_q𝔰\left(𝔤𝔩_n\times 𝔤𝔩_n\right)`$-module in $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(S\left(𝕌\right)\right)_q`$ leads to a structure of $`U_q𝔰\left(𝔤𝔩_n\times 𝔤𝔩_n\right)`$-module in $`\mathrm{End}_{}\mathrm{Pol}\left(S\left(𝕌\right)\right)_q`$ and a morphism of $`U_q𝔰\left(𝔤𝔩_n\times 𝔤𝔩_n\right)`$-module algebras $`U_q𝔰𝔩_{2n}\mathrm{End}_{}\mathrm{Pol}\left(S\left(𝕌\right)\right)_q`$. Consider the linear operator in $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(S\left(𝕌\right)\right)_q`$:

$$L:\psi \left(det_q𝐳\right)^n\stackrel{~}{F}_n\left(\left(det_q𝐳\right)^n\psi \right).$$

Prove that the $`U_q𝔰\left(𝔤𝔩_n\times 𝔤𝔩_n\right)`$-submodule of the $`U_q𝔰\left(𝔤𝔩_n\times 𝔤𝔩_n\right)`$-module $`\mathrm{End}_{}\mathrm{Pol}\left(S\left(𝕌\right)\right)_q`$ generated by $`L`$ is isomorphic to $`V_{(𝝀^{\prime \prime },k^{\prime \prime })}`$, with $`𝝀^{\prime \prime }=(0,\mathrm{},0,1,,1,0,\mathrm{},0)`$, $`k^{\prime \prime }=1`$. In fact, $`\stackrel{~}{F}_n`$ generates a finite dimensional simple $`U_q𝔰\left(𝔤𝔩_n\times 𝔤𝔩_n\right)`$-submodule of the $`U_q𝔰\left(𝔤𝔩_n\times 𝔤𝔩_n\right)`$-module $`U_q𝔰𝔩_{2n}`$ in view of the Serre relations for $`F_1,F_2,\mathrm{},F_{2n1}`$ and the relation

$$\mathrm{ad}_q\left(E_j\right)\stackrel{~}{F}_n=0,jn.$$

What remains is to apply the commutation relations between $`K_j^{\pm 1}`$, $`j=11,2,\mathrm{},2n1`$, and $`\stackrel{~}{F}_n`$.

Now we are in a position to finish the proof that $`fV_{(𝝀^{},k^{})}`$ and to find $`𝝀^{}`$, $`k^{}`$. Use the natural embedding $`\mathrm{End}_{}\mathrm{Pol}\left(S\left(𝕌\right)\right)_q\mathrm{Pol}\left(S\left(𝕌\right)\right)_q\mathrm{Pol}\left(S\left(𝕌\right)\right)_q`$ and the fact that $`LV_{(𝝀^{\prime \prime },k^{\prime \prime })}`$, $`Lf1`$, to get a non-zero morphism of $`U_q𝔰\left(𝔤𝔩_n\times 𝔤𝔩_n\right)`$-modules $`V_{(𝝀^{\prime \prime },k^{\prime \prime })}\left(\underset{(𝝀,k)}{}V_{(𝝀,k)}\right)`$. This means that $`k^{}=k^{\prime \prime }`$ and $`𝝀^{}`$ is the highest weight of the dual representation of $`U_q𝔰𝔩_nU_q𝔰𝔩_n`$. Finally, $`𝝀^{}=(1,0,\mathrm{},0,,0,\mathrm{},0,1)`$, $`k^{}=1`$. Furthermore, $`f`$ is the lowest weight vector in $`V_{(𝝀^{},k^{})}`$ since $`L`$ is the highest weight vector in $`V_{(𝝀^{\prime \prime },k^{\prime \prime })}`$. It follows that $`f=\mathrm{const}z_n^n`$, which contradicts to the relation (3.3) proved earlier for $`z_n^n`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

## 4 On certain irreducible $`\mathbf{}`$-representation of $`𝑼_𝒒𝖘𝖚_{𝒏\mathbf{,}𝒏}`$

Consider the embedding $`:\left[\mathrm{Mat}_n\right]_q\left[\mathrm{Pl}_{n,2n}\right]_{q,t}`$ described in Lemma 2.3 and another embedding

$$𝒥:\left[\mathrm{Mat}_n\right]_q\left[\mathrm{Pl}_{n,2n}\right]_{q,t},𝒥:f\left(f\right)t^n.$$

It is easy to verify that $`𝒥\left[\mathrm{Mat}_n\right]_q`$ is a submodule of the $`U_q𝔰𝔩_{2n}`$-module $`\left[\mathrm{Pl}_{n,2n}\right]_{q,t}`$. Hence, there exists a unique representation $`\pi `$ of $`U_q𝔰𝔩_{2n}`$ in the vector space $`\left[\mathrm{Mat}_n\right]_q`$ such that

$$\pi \left(\xi \right)f=𝒥^1\xi \left(𝒥f\right),f\left[\mathrm{Mat}_n\right]_q,\xi U_q𝔰𝔩_{2n}.$$

We refer to the previous sections for constructions of a $``$-homomorphism

$$\psi :\mathrm{Pol}\left(\mathrm{Mat}_n\right)_q\mathrm{Pol}\left(S\left(𝕌\right)\right)_q,\psi :ff|_{S\left(𝕌\right)_q},$$

and an invariant integral

$$\mathrm{Pol}\left(S\left(𝕌\right)\right)_q,f\underset{S\left(𝕌\right)_q}{}f𝑑\nu .$$

These are to be used to equip the vector space $`\left[\mathrm{Mat}_n\right]_q`$ with a Hermitian scalar product

$$(f_1,f_2)\stackrel{\mathrm{def}}{=}\underset{S\left(𝕌\right)_q}{}\left(f_2|_{S\left(𝕌\right)_q}\right)^{}f_1|_{S\left(𝕌\right)_q}d\nu .$$

The following lemma is a consequence of the definitions of $`U_q𝔰𝔩_{2n}`$-module structures and invariance of the integral.

###### Lemma 4.1

For all $`\xi U_q𝔰𝔲_{n,n}`$, $`f_1,f_2[\mathrm{Mat}_n]_q`$ one has

$$(\pi \left(\xi \right)f_1,f_2)=(f_1,\pi \left(\xi ^{}\right)f_2).$$

To rephrase, $`\pi `$ is a $``$-representation of $`U_q𝔰𝔲_{n,n}`$ in the pre-Hilbert space $`\left[\mathrm{Mat}_n\right]_q`$. The proof of irreducibility for this representation uses the following

###### Lemma 4.2

If for some $`f[\mathrm{Mat}_n]_q`$ and some $`m_1,m_2,\mathrm{},m_{2n1}`$ one has

$$F_jf=0,K_j^{\pm 1}f=q^{\pm m_j}f,j=1,2,\mathrm{},2n1,$$
(4.1)
then $`f1`$.

Proof. Due to $`F_if=0`$, $`in`$, $`K_j^{\pm 1}f=q^{\pm m_j}f`$, $`j=1,2,\mathrm{},2n1`$, it follows that, up to a constant complex multiple

$$f=\left(z_n^n\right)^{k_n}\left(det_q𝐳_{\{n1,n\}}^{2\{n1,n\}}\right)^{k_{n1}}\left(det_q𝐳_{\{n2,n1,n\}}^{3\{n2,n1,n\}}\right)^{k_{n2}}\mathrm{}\left(det_q𝐳\right)^{k_1}$$

for some $`k_1,k_2,\mathrm{},k_n_+`$. Prove that $`F_nf=0`$ implies $`k_1=k_2=\mathrm{}=k_n=0`$. Let $`J`$ be the two-sided ideal of $`\left[\mathrm{Mat}_n\right]_q`$, determined by the ’non-diagonal’ generators $`z_a^\alpha `$, $`a\alpha `$. Obviously, $`K_n^1JJ`$, $`F_nJJ`$. This allows one to arrange computations modulo the ideal $`J`$:

$$F_nf=\mathrm{const}\underset{a=1}{\overset{n1}{}}\left(z_a^\alpha \right)^{\underset{i=1}{\overset{a}{}}k_i}\left(z_n^n\right)^{\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}k_i1}\left(\mathrm{mod}J\right)$$

$$\mathrm{const}=q^{1/2}\underset{j=1}{\overset{n}{}}q^{2\underset{i=j+1}{\overset{n}{}}k_i}\frac{q^{2k_j}1}{q^21}.$$

Now the isomorphism $`\left[\mathrm{Mat}_n\right]_q/J[z_1^1,z_2^2,\mathrm{},z_n^n]`$ implies the relation $`\mathrm{const}=0`$, that is, $`k_1=k_2=\mathrm{}=k_n=0`$, which is just our statement. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Proposition 4.3

The representation $`\pi `$ is irreducible.

Proof. Suppose $`\pi `$ is reducible. Then by lemma 4.1 it is a sum of two non-trivial admissible subrepresentations in the subspaces $`L_1`$, $`L_2`$: $`\left[\mathrm{Mat}_n\right]_q=L_1L_2`$. Each of those further decomposes as a sum of weight subspaces and, in particular, possesses a lowest weight vector. This vector $`f0`$ satisfies the relations

$$\pi \left(F_j\right)f=0,\pi \left(K_j^{\pm 1}\right)f=q^{\pm m_j}f,j=1,2,\mathrm{},2n1.$$

On the other hand, in $`\left[\mathrm{Pl}_{n,2n}\right]_{q,t}`$ one has:

$$\pi \left(K_j^{\pm 1}\right)t=\{\begin{array}{cc}q^1t,\hfill & j=n\hfill \\ t,\hfill & jn\hfill \end{array},\pi \left(F_j\right)t=0,j=1,2,\mathrm{},2n1.$$

We conclude that $`f`$ is a solution of the equation system (4.1), so, by a virtue of lemma 4.2, $`f1`$. Hence, $`L_11`$, $`L_21`$, $`L_1L_20`$. This is a contradiction coming from our assumption on reducibility of $`\pi `$. The proposition is proved. $`\mathrm{}`$

## 5 The Cauchi-Szegö integral representation

Recall that $`\left[\overline{\mathrm{Mat}}_n\right]_q\mathrm{Pol}\left(\mathrm{Mat}_n\right)_q`$ stands for the subalgebra generated by $`\left(z_a^\alpha \right)^{}`$, $`a,\alpha =1,2,\mathrm{},n`$. We follow  in introducing the algebra

$$\left[\mathrm{Mat}_n\times \overline{\mathrm{Mat}}_n\right]_q=\left[\mathrm{Mat}_n\right]_q^{\mathrm{op}}\left[\overline{\mathrm{Mat}}_n\right]_q,$$

with $`\mathrm{op}`$ indicating the change of a multiplication law to the opposite one. This algebra is bigraded:

$$\mathrm{deg}\left(z_a^\alpha 1\right)=(1,0),\mathrm{deg}\left(1\left(z_a^\alpha \right)^{}\right)=(0,1).$$

Its completion with respect to this bigrading is denoted by $`\left[\left[\mathrm{Mat}_n\times \overline{\mathrm{Mat}}_n\right]\right]_q`$. The elements of $`\left[\left[\mathrm{Mat}_n\times \overline{\mathrm{Mat}}_n\right]\right]_q`$ are q-analogues for kernels of integral operators, while the elements of the subalgebra $`\left[\mathrm{Mat}_n\times \overline{\mathrm{Mat}}_n\right]_q`$ are q-analogues of polynomial kernels.

We refer to  for a definition of the pairwise commuting ’kernels’

$$\chi _k=\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0.0pt}{}{J^{},J^{\prime \prime }\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}}{\mathrm{card}\left(J^{}\right)=\mathrm{card}\left(J^{\prime \prime }\right)=k}}{}z_{}^{k}{}_{J^{\prime \prime }}{}^{J^{}}\left(z_{}^{k}{}_{J^{\prime \prime }}{}^{J^{}}\right)^{}\left[\mathrm{Mat}_n\times \overline{\mathrm{Mat}}_n\right]_q$$

and a one-parameter family of the elements of $`\left[\left[\mathrm{Mat}_n\times \overline{\mathrm{Mat}}_n\right]\right]_q`$ which includes the kernel

$$C_q=\underset{j=0}{\overset{n1}{}}\left(1+\underset{k=1}{\overset{n}{}}\left(q^{2j}\right)^k\chi _k\right)^1.$$

We write $`C_q(𝐳,𝜻^{})`$ instead of $`C_q`$, $`C_q(𝐳,𝜻^{})f\left(𝜻\right)`$ instead of $`C_q\left(1f\right)`$, and $`{\displaystyle \underset{S\left(𝕌\right)_q}{}}f\left(𝜻\right)𝑑\nu \left(𝜻\right)`$ instead of $`{\displaystyle \underset{S\left(𝕌\right)_q}{}}f|_{S\left(𝕌\right)_q}d\nu `$, as it is custom in the classical analysis. It is easy to demonstrate \[8, proposition 2.11\] that in the formal passage to a limit $`q1`$ one has $`C_q(𝐳,𝜻^{})det\left(1𝐳𝜻^{}\right)^n`$.

We call $`C_q\left[\left[\mathrm{Mat}_n\times \overline{\mathrm{Mat}}_n\right]\right]_q`$ the Cauchi-Szegö kernel for the quantum matrix ball.

The following result provides a motivation for this definition.

###### Theorem 5.1

For any element $`f[\mathrm{Mat}_n]_q`$ one has

$$f\left(𝐳\right)=\underset{S\left(𝕌\right)_q}{}C_q(𝐳,𝜻^{})f\left(𝜻\right)𝑑\nu \left(𝜻\right).$$

Proof. Equip $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(\mathrm{Mat}_n\right)_q`$ with a grading: $`\mathrm{deg}\left(z_a^\alpha \right)=1`$, $`\mathrm{deg}\left(z_a^\alpha \right)^{}=1`$, $`a,\alpha =1,2,\mathrm{},n`$. It is easy to show that $`{\displaystyle \underset{S\left(𝕌\right)_q}{}}f|_{S\left(𝕌\right)_q}d\nu =0`$ for all $`f`$ with $`\mathrm{deg}\left(f\right)0`$. Hence the integral operator

$$T:\left[\mathrm{Mat}_n\right]_q\left[\mathrm{Mat}_n\right]_q,T:f\left(z\right)\underset{S\left(𝕌\right)_q}{}C_q(𝐳,𝜻^{})f\left(𝜻\right)𝑑\nu \left(𝜻\right)$$

is well defined. It follows from the invariance of the integral on the Shilov boundary and the results of \[8, section 8\] that $`\pi \left(\xi \right)T=T\pi \left(\xi \right)`$ for all $`\xi U_q𝔰𝔩_{2n}`$. Furthermore, $`T1=1`$. Hence $`Tf=f`$ for all $`f\left[\mathrm{Mat}_n\right]_q`$ in view of proposition 4.3. The theorem is proved. $`\mathrm{}`$

Note that there exists another proof of theorem 5.1 which uses only the orthogonality relations for the quantum group $`U_n`$ and one of the Milne’s relations for Schur’s functions . We intend to publish this proof in a future work.

## 6 Appendix. Another description of the $``$-algebra $`\mathrm{𝐏𝐨𝐥}\mathbf{(}𝑺\mathbf{(}𝕌\mathbf{)}\mathbf{)}_𝒒`$ and its generalization onto the case of rectangular matrices

We produce a system of equations which distinguish the quantum Shilov boundary from the quantum matrix space. This is certainly equivalent to describing the $``$-algebra $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(S\left(𝕌\right)\right)_q`$ in terms of generators and relations.

###### Proposition 6.1

In $`\mathrm{Pol}(S(𝕌))_q`$ the following relations are valid:

$$\underset{j=1}{\overset{n}{}}q^{2n\alpha \beta }z_j^\alpha \left(z_j^\beta \right)^{}\delta ^{\alpha \beta }=0,\alpha ,\beta =1,2,\mathrm{},n.$$
(6.1)
The left hand sides of these equations generate the kernel of the canonical homomorphism $`\psi :\mathrm{Pol}(\mathrm{Mat}_n)_q\mathrm{Pol}(S(𝕌))_q`$.

Proof. The first statement is due to the fact that in $`\left[U_n\right]_q`$

$$\underset{j=1}{\overset{n}{}}z_j^\alpha \left(z_j^\beta \right)^{}\delta ^{\alpha \beta }=0,\alpha ,\beta =1,2,\mathrm{},n,$$

Let $``$ be the two-sided ideal of $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(\mathrm{Mat}_n\right)_q`$ generated by the left hand sides of (6.1) and $`A=\mathrm{Pol}\left(\mathrm{Mat}_n\right)_q/`$. One has to prove that the canonical onto map $`j:A\mathrm{Pol}\left(S\left(𝕌\right)\right)_q`$ is in fact an isomorphism.

First prove that in $`A`$

$$det_q𝒛\left(det_q𝒛\right)^{}=q^{n\left(n1\right)}.$$
(6.2)
Equip $`A`$ with a $``$-grading as follows:

$$\mathrm{deg}\left(z_a^\alpha \right)=1,\mathrm{deg}\left(\left(z_a^\alpha \right)^{}\right)=1,a,\alpha =1,2,\mathrm{},n$$

It was demonstrated in section 2 that the relation (6.2) is valid in $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(S\left(𝕌\right)\right)_q`$. What remains is to use the fact that the algebra $`A`$ is a $`U_q𝔰𝔩_n`$-module algebra, together with the following statement:

###### Lemma 6.2

i) $`det_q𝐳(det_q𝐳)^{}A`$ is a $`U_q𝔰𝔩_n`$-invariant of degree zero.
ii) The subalgebra of $`U_q𝔰𝔩_n`$-invariants of degree zero in $`A`$ is one-dimensional.

Proof of lemma 6.2. The first statement is obvious. Turn to the second statement. For any $`U_q𝔰𝔩_n`$-invariant of degree zero $`fA`$ there exists such $`U_q𝔰𝔩_n`$-invariant of degree zero $`\widehat{f}\mathrm{Pol}\left(\mathrm{Mat}_n\right)_q`$ that $`f=j\widehat{f}`$.<sup>1</sup><sup>1</sup>1Due to local finiteness of the $`U_q𝔰𝔩_n`$-modules $``$, $`\mathrm{Pol}(\mathrm{Mat}_n)_q`$, $`A`$. On the other hand, $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(\mathrm{Mat}_n\right)_q`$ is a free $`\left[\mathrm{Mat}_n\times \overline{\mathrm{Mat}}_n\right]`$-module generated by $`1\mathrm{Pol}\left(\mathrm{Mat}_n\right)_q`$:

$$f_1f_2:g_1g_2g_1f_1f_2g_2.$$

Consider $`\stackrel{~}{f}\left[\mathrm{Mat}_n\times \overline{\mathrm{Mat}}_n\right]`$ such that $`\widehat{f}=\stackrel{~}{f}1`$. It suffices to prove that $`\stackrel{~}{f}`$ is in the subalgebra generated by $`\underset{j=1}{\overset{n}{}}q^{2n\alpha \beta }z_j^\alpha \left(z_j^\beta \right)^{}`$, $`\alpha ,\beta =1,2,\mathrm{},n`$. This is a consequence of the fact that $`\stackrel{~}{f}`$ is a $`U_q𝔰𝔩_n`$-invariant of degree zero, and a q-analogue of the first main theorem of the theory of invariants . $`\mathrm{}`$

It follows from (6.2) that $`det_q𝒛A`$ is invertible. Hence one has a well defined homomorphism of algebras $`j^{}:\mathrm{Pol}\left(S\left(𝕌\right)\right)_qA`$, $`j^{}:z_a^\alpha z_a^\alpha `$, $`a,\alpha =1,2,\mathrm{},n`$. Obviously, $`jj^{}=\mathrm{id}`$. What remains is to prove that $`j^{}`$ is onto, that is the elements $`\left(det_q𝒛\right)^1`$, $`z_a^\alpha `$, $`a,\alpha =1,2,\mathrm{},n`$, generate the algebra $`A`$. It follows from (6.1) and well known properties of quantum determinants that in $`A`$ one has

$$\left(z_a^\alpha \right)^{}=\left(q\right)^{a+\alpha 2n}\left(det_q𝒛\right)^1det_q𝒛_a^\alpha ,a,\alpha =1,2,\mathrm{},n.$$

So, $`j`$ is invertible. The proof of proposition 6.1 is complete. $`\mathrm{}`$

Thus we get another description of the $``$-algebra $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(S\left(𝕌\right)\right)_q`$. It is to be used for producing a q-analogue for the Shilov boundary of a unit ball in the space of rectangular matrices $`\mathrm{Mat}_{m,n}`$, $`m<n`$.

The classical theory of Cartan domains  provides a well known procedure of producing the Shilov boundary $`S\left(𝕌^{}\right)`$ of the unit ball $`𝕌^{}\mathrm{Mat}_{m,n}`$, together with the associated Cauchi-Szegö kernel for the unit ball $`𝕌\mathrm{Mat}_n`$. We are going to apply exactly this method in the quantum case.

Consider the $``$-subalgebra $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(\mathrm{Mat}_{m,n}\right)_q\mathrm{Pol}\left(\mathrm{Mat}_n\right)_q`$ generated by $`z_a^\alpha `$, $`\alpha >nm`$, and the $``$-Hopf algebra $`U_q𝔰𝔲_{m,n}U_q𝔰𝔲_{n,n}`$ generated by $`E_j`$, $`F_j`$, $`K_j^{\pm 1}`$, $`j<m+n`$. It is easy to demonstrate that $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(\mathrm{Mat}_{m,n}\right)_q`$ is a $`U_q𝔰𝔲_{m,n}`$-module subalgebra of the $`U_q𝔰𝔲_{m,n}`$-module algebra $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(\mathrm{Mat}_n\right)_q`$. Up to relabeling the generators, this $`U_q𝔰𝔲_{m,n}`$-module algebra coincides with the $``$-algebra of polynomials in the quantum matrix space considered in .

Introduce the notation $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(S\left(𝕌^{}\right)\right)_q`$ for the $``$-algebra determined by its generators

$$z_a^\alpha ,a=1,2,\mathrm{},n;\alpha =nm+1,nm+2,\mathrm{},n,$$

the commutation relations loan from $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(\mathrm{Mat}_{m,n}\right)_q`$ and the additional relations

$$\underset{j=1}{\overset{n}{}}q^{2n\alpha \beta }z_j^\alpha \left(z_j^\beta \right)^{}=\delta ^{\alpha ,\beta },\alpha ,\beta =nm+1,nm+2,\mathrm{},n.$$

Our construction implies a commutative diagram

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\mathrm{Pol}\left(\mathrm{Mat}_{m,n}\right)_q& & \mathrm{Pol}\left(\mathrm{Mat}_n\right)_q\\ & & & & \\ \mathrm{Pol}\left(S\left(𝕌^{}\right)\right)_q& & \mathrm{Pol}\left(S\left(𝕌\right)\right)_q.\end{array}$$

where the vertical arrows stand for the homomorphisms of restriction of ’polynomials’ onto the Shilov boundaries of the corresponding quantum balls. The homomorphism $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(S\left(𝕌^{}\right)\right)_q\mathrm{Pol}\left(S\left(𝕌\right)\right)_q`$ allows one to transfer an invariant integral from $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(S\left(𝕌\right)\right)_q`$ onto $`\mathrm{Pol}\left(S\left(𝕌^{}\right)\right)_q`$. The Cauchi-Szegö kernel is defined as in section 5 except that in the expression for $`\chi _k`$, the summing up in $`J^{}\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}`$ is replaced with summing up in $`J^{}\{nm+1,nm+2,\mathrm{},n\}`$. Another result of section 5, a q-analogue of the integral Cauch-Szegö representation for the matrix ball $`𝕌^{}`$, implies a similar integral representation for the quantum matrix ball in the space of rectangular matrices.


format: text

text:
# Acknowledgements

## Acknowledgements

We thank Albert De Roeck for discussions which prompted this study, and Yuri Kovchegov and Genya Levin for illuminating correspondence. We are also grateful to Krzysztof Golec-Biernat for critically reading the manuscript and important comments, and to Michal Praszalowicz for illuminating discussions. JK thanks the Grey College and the Department of Physics of the University of Durham for their warm hospitality. This work was supported by the UK Particle Physics and Astronomy Research Council (PPARC), and also supported by the EU Framework TMR programme, contract FMRX-CT98-0194 (DG 12-MIHT), and the British Council – Polish KBN Joint Collaborative Programme.


text:
# Radiative corrections to the Casimir energy and effective field theory

## 1 Introduction

Although the Casimir effect  has been known for more than 50 years, the question of what are the leading quantum corrections to this effect is surprisingly still a subject of debate. The corrections we have in mind here are those that are caused by the coupling of the electromagnetic field to the electron field. These are first of all important for theoretical reasons, but recent improvements in experimental techniques  may lead to interesting confrontations between theory and experiment in the near future.

The first attempts to determine the quantum corrections to the Casimir energy $`E_0`$ were reported in a paper by Bordag, Robaschik, and Wieczorek  (BRW). These authors considered the quantum vacuum within the usual set-up with two perfectly conducting parallel plates using full QED. The electromagnetic field satisfies metallic boundary conditions, while the electron field does not feel the presence of the metallic plates. They found the correction $`E_0^{(1)}=\pi ^2\alpha /2560mL^4`$ to the well-known leading term $`E_0^{(0)}=\pi ^2/720L^3`$, where $`L`$ is the separation between the plates and $`m`$ is the electron mass. This correction emerges as an effect of vacuum polarization. Three years ago, one of us and Kong  (KR) studied the Casimir effect from an effective field theory  point of view. In that work it was argued that vacuum polarization does not have any effect on the Casimir energy. This would be just like for effective QED in free space where it is known that vacuum polarization has no physical consequence in the absence of external electrons. The leading corrections would then come from the Euler–Heisenberg effective Lagrangian and have the value $`E_0^{(1)}=11\pi ^4\alpha ^2/2^73^55^3m^4L^7`$, in disagreement with the result of BRW. Subsequently, the use of effective QED in KR was criticized in Ref. . The authors of  pointed out that even though the Casimir effect is a low energy phenomenon, a derivative expansion, as is typical of effective theories, could not be used in this case. The reason for this is that the evaluation of the corrections to the Casimir energy in the full theory involves an integral along the cut of the vacuum polarization tensor $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{\mu \nu }(k^2)`$, and this information is lost if $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{\mu \nu }`$ is expanded in powers of $`k^2`$. This might then “explain” why the results in KR were incorrect and indicate that the result of BRW was correct in the first place.

Thus, Ref.  gave the impression that effective field theory methods could not be used on the Casimir problem. However, effective field theory is not just a derivative expansion of the underlying theory but something more general. Indeed, effective field theory always works when the physical degrees of freedom are fields. This is because the effective theory is by definition constructed to give the same results as the underlying theory in a given situation, usually at low energies. There is therefore no reason to dismiss the results from KR on the grounds that they are based on effective field theory methods. We are in fact left with the following possibilities: (a) The full QED result of BRW is correct and the effective QED discussion in KR is incomplete and for this reason gives the wrong answer. (b) The full QED calculation in BRW is incorrect and the results from effective QED in KR are correct. (c) Both the full and the effective QED results are wrong.

In this paper, we show that it is possibility (a) above that is correct by explicitly constructing the effective theory. We start in Sec. 2 by recalling how perturbation theory works in the presence of boundary conditions, as first discussed in BRW. We also sketch the calculation of the radiative corrections to the Casimir energy.

In Sec. 3 we turn to the construction of the effective theory. All possible terms of the Lagrangian that respect the symmetries must be written down. In this process we realize that there is a class of terms that were left out in the previous treatment of effective QED in KR. These are surface terms, where the contributions to the action live only on the two plates. We then establish the counting rules of the effective theory, and it is seen that the surface terms provide the leading correction to the Casimir energy.

In Sec. 4 we use this effective theory to calculate the Casimir energy corrections in terms of the low energy constant of the leading surface term in the effective Lagrangian. We are then able to determine this constant by matching to the BRW result of the full theory. This calculation demonstrates that effective field theory can be applied to the Casimir effect. However, more constants must be determined by matching before we can claim to have a workable effective theory with predictive power.

Sec. 5 contains a brief discussion of our results. In particular, we demonstrate one possible way of understanding the relevant surface terms as being “generated” from the full theory in the low energy approximation.

## 2 Functional derivation of the Casimir energy

In this section we make some general remarks and recall how the photon propagator is modified in the presence of the two plates, which allows perturbation theory to work the usual way. We also briefly sketch the calculation of the radiative corrections to the Casimir energy. There are no new results in this section.

The starting point is the path integral over the photon field $`A_\mu `$,

$`Z`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle 𝒟Ae^{iS}},`$ (1)
with the Maxwell action $`S=d^4x(\frac{1}{4}F_{\mu \nu }F^{\mu \nu })`$. It is to be understood that only configurations respecting the boundary conditions are integrated over. The system we consider will always be the standard geometry of two perfectly conducting parallel plates positioned at $`z=0`$ and $`z=L`$. Hence the electromagnetic field respects the usual metallic boundary conditions $`𝐧\times 𝐄=𝐧𝐁=0`$ at the plates, where $`𝐧=(0,0,1)`$ is the normal vector to the plates in the positive $`z`$-direction. In four-vector notation the boundary condition reads $`n^\mu \stackrel{~}{F}_{\mu \nu }|_{z=0,L}=0`$, where $`\stackrel{~}{F}_{\mu \nu }=\frac{1}{2}ϵ_{\mu \nu \rho \sigma }F^{\rho \sigma }`$ is the dual field strength tensor.

In order to make the boundary conditions explicit in the path integral, we may introduce a product of two delta functions enforcing these boundary conditions. At the same time we extend the integrations to all configurations of $`A_\mu `$:

$`Z`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle 𝒟A\delta (n^\mu \stackrel{~}{F}_{\mu \nu }|_{z=0})\delta (n^\mu \stackrel{~}{F}_{\mu \nu }|_{z=L})e^{iS}}.`$ (2)
We then represent the delta functions by path integrals over two external fields $`B_\mu ^i(x_{})`$, $`i=1,2`$, $`x_{}^\mu =(x^0,x^1,x^2)`$, that lives only on the two plates at $`z=a_i`$ with $`a_1=0`$, $`a_2=L`$. The complete path integral thus becomes

$`Z`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle 𝒟A𝒟Be^{iS^{}}},`$ (3)
with the modified action

$`S^{}`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{1}{4}{\displaystyle d^4xF_{\mu \nu }(x)F^{\mu \nu }(x)}{\displaystyle d^3x_{}B_i^\mu (x_{})n^\mu \stackrel{~}{F}_{\mu \nu }(x_{},a_i)}.`$ (4)
A summation over $`i`$ is understood in this expression.

Apart from these constraints, the fields are assumed to exist both outside as well as in between the plates. This set-up is of course highly idealized, and in order to make the description more realistic we need, at least, to take into account the physical nature of the plates and the coupling of $`A_\mu `$ to the electron field. In this paper we will consider corrections from the electron field, but where this electron field does not feel any boundary conditions at the plates. This is the same situation as in BRW and , and can be considered as a first step on the way to a more realistic treatment of corrections to the Casimir energy.

In BRW it was pointed out that standard Feynman perturbation theory can be used even in the presence of the metallic boundary conditions provided the correct modified photon propagator is used. An expression for this propagator may be obtained by first coupling external sources to the photon field in the action (3). Integrating out the photon field and the Lagrange multiplier fields $`B_\mu ^i`$ thus produces a functional of the external sources from which the propagator can be read off. The result is

$`0|TA_\mu (x)A_\nu (x^{})|0`$ $`=`$ $`iD_{\mu \nu }(xx^{})i\overline{D}_{\mu \nu }(x,x^{}),`$ (5)
where $`D_{\mu \nu }(xx^{})`$ is the free propagator and $`\overline{D}_{\mu \nu }(x,x^{})`$ is

$`\overline{D}_{\mu \nu }(x,x^{})`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{d^3k_{}}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{P_{\mu \nu }^{}}{4\gamma \mathrm{sin}\gamma L}e^{ik_{}(x_{}x_{}^{})}}`$ (6)
$`\times [e^{i\gamma L}(e^{i\gamma |z|}e^{i\gamma |z^{}|}+e^{i\gamma |zL|}e^{i\gamma |z^{}L|})`$
$`(e^{i\gamma |z|}e^{i\gamma |z^{}L|}+e^{i\gamma |zL|}e^{i\gamma |z^{}|})].`$
The notation here is $`k_{}^\mu =(k^0,k^1,k^2)`$, $`\gamma =\sqrt{k_{}^2}=\sqrt{k_0^2k_1^2k_2^2}`$, and $`P_{\mu \nu }^{}`$ is the projection operator

$`P_{\mu \nu }^{}`$ $`=`$ $`\{\begin{array}{cc}g_{\mu \nu }\frac{k_\mu k_\nu }{k_{}^2}\hfill & \text{for }\mu ,\nu 3\text{,}\hfill \\ 0\hfill & \text{for }\mu =3\text{ or }\nu =3\text{.}\hfill \end{array}`$ (9)
This modified propagator can then be used for calculating diagrams in perturbation theory when the interactions with the electrons are turned on. The correction to the Casimir energy can be found in this way by computing the relevant diagrams.

For later convenience we now briefly sketch how the corrections may be calculated. Our approach is essentially that of , which is an improved calculation compared to the original one in BRW. We are also inspired by the discussion in  which is another approach based on the functional formalism. The general idea is to make use of the field theory identity

$`Z`$ $`=`$ $`e^{iE_{\mathrm{vac}}T},`$ (10)
where $`E_{\mathrm{vac}}`$ is the vacuum energy and $`T`$ is the total time. The Casimir energy $`E_0`$ is defined to be $`E_0=E_{\mathrm{vac}}/A`$ where $`A`$ is the area of the plates. We may thus extract $`E_0`$ by evaluating a path integral.

We will first consider the simpler case of the plain Casimir effect without radiative corrections before we consider the full complexity of the problem. If we define a new field $`C_\mu ^in^\alpha ϵ_{\alpha \mu \nu \beta }^\beta B_i^\nu `$, we can write the second term in the action (4) as $`d^3x_{}A_\mu P_{}^{\mu \nu }C_\nu ^i`$, where we also use the projection operator $`P_{\mu \nu }^{}`$. Now, since the photon field $`A_\mu `$ couples directly to this field, we can without loss of generality change path integration variables from $`B_i^\mu `$ to $`C_i^\mu `$ as long as we make sure that $`C_i^\mu `$ has the properties $`_\mu C_i^\mu =0`$ and $`C_i^3=0`$. The new path integral over $`C_i^\mu `$ still imposes the same boundary conditions on $`A_\mu `$. The two conditions on $`C_i^\mu `$ means that this field has only two independent components, which implies that only two components of $`A_\mu `$ couples to $`C_i^\mu `$. The other two components thus decouples from the problem and has no physical consequence. On the other hand $`A_\mu `$, or more generally any vector field, can be decomposed into $`A_\mu =P_{\mu \nu }^{}A_\nu +A_\mu ^{}`$, where the two terms are orthogonal to each other. We can use this to rewrite the kinetic term of the photons: $`\frac{1}{4}F_{\mu \nu }F^{\mu \nu }=\frac{1}{2}A_\mu \mathrm{}P_{}^{\mu \nu }A_\nu +\text{(terms with }A_\mu ^{}\text{)}`$, where we have used partial integration and the fact that $`P_{\mu \nu }^{}(g^{\nu \rho }^\nu ^\rho /\mathrm{})P_{\rho \sigma }^{}=P_{\mu \sigma }^{}`$. The result of all this is that we are allowed to write the path integral over $`A_\mu `$ and $`C_\mu ^i`$ with the action

$`S^{\prime \prime }`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{1}{2}{\displaystyle d^4xA_\mu (x)\mathrm{}P_{}^{\mu \nu }A_\nu (x)}{\displaystyle d^3x_{}A_\mu (x_{},a_i)P_{}^{\mu \nu }C_\nu ^i(x_{})}.`$ (11)
The terms depending on $`A_\mu ^{}`$ have been omitted since they decouple from $`A_\mu `$ and $`C_\mu ^i`$ and are therefore irrelevant to the Casimir energy. Note also that it has not been necessary to consider any specific gauge in order to arrive at this.

This path integral is Gaussian in $`A_\mu `$ and may be evaluated to give a path integral over $`C_\mu ^i`$ alone with the new action

$`S`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{1}{2}{\displaystyle d^3x_{}C_\mu ^iM_{ij}P_{}^{\mu \nu }C_\nu ^j},`$ (12)
where $`M_{ij}`$ is the operator whose form in momentum space is

$`M_{ij}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2\gamma }}e^{i\gamma |a_ia_j|}={\displaystyle \frac{i}{2\gamma }}\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& e^{i\gamma L}\\ e^{i\gamma L}& 1\end{array}\right).`$ (15)
The path integral then becomes

$`Z`$ $`=`$ $`(\mathrm{Det}P_{}^{\mu \nu }M_{ij})^{1/2}=(\mathrm{Det}M)^1=e^{\mathrm{Tr}\mathrm{ln}detM},`$ (16)
where ’$`\mathrm{Det}M`$’ means determinant with respect to both $`k`$-space and $`\mathrm{𝑖𝑗}`$-indices, while ’$`detM`$’ means determinant with respect to the $`\mathrm{𝑖𝑗}`$-structure only. We have also used that $`P_{}^{\mu \nu }`$ is a projection operator onto a two-dimensional space and thereby gives a multiplicity $`2`$. Therefore,

$`E_0`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{i}{AT}}\text{Tr}\mathrm{ln}detM.`$ (17)
It is straightforward to evaluate this expression in momentum space, where $`\text{Tr}ATd^3k_{}/(2\pi )^3`$, and

$`detM`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4\gamma ^2}}\left(1e^{2i\gamma L}\right).`$ (18)
When we take the logarithm of this, the term with $`\mathrm{ln}(1/4\gamma ^2)`$ does not depend on $`L`$ and can be ignored in this context. Thus we find that the Casimir energy is

$`E_0`$ $`=`$ $`i{\displaystyle \frac{d^3k_{}}{(2\pi )^3}\mathrm{ln}\left(1e^{2i\gamma L}\right)}={\displaystyle \frac{\pi ^2}{720L^3}},`$
as it should be.

Let us now turn to the quantum corrections to this result. As is well-known, the full effect that the electrons have on the vacuum polarization to order $`\alpha `$ can be summarized by replacing the kinetic term of free photons with a modified Lagrangian: $`\frac{1}{4}F_{\mu \nu }F^{\mu \nu }\frac{1}{4}F_{\mu \nu }[1+\mathrm{\Pi }(\mathrm{})]F^{\mu \nu }`$, where $`\mathrm{\Pi }(\mathrm{})`$ is the usual renormalized vacuum polarization modulo the gauge invariant projection operator $`\mathrm{}g_{\mu \nu }_\mu _\nu `$.

This leads to a modification of the photon propagator and in turn this leads to a modification of $`M_{ij}`$ and thereby its determinant, which now becomes

$`detM`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4\gamma ^2}}\left(1e^{2i\gamma L}\right)\left(14i{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dk_z}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Pi }(k^2)}{k^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma (1e^{i\gamma L}\mathrm{cos}k_zL)}{1e^{2i\gamma L}}}\right).`$ (19)
When the logarithm of this expression is inserted in formula (17) for the Casimir energy we recognize the first parenthesis as the contribution giving the leading term $`E_0^{(0)}=\pi ^2/720L^3`$ calculated above. The second parenthesis then gives the correction:

$`E_0^{(1)}`$ $`=`$ $`2i{\displaystyle \frac{d^4k}{(2\pi )^4}\frac{\gamma }{\mathrm{sin}\gamma L}\left(e^{i\gamma L}\mathrm{cos}k_zL\right)\frac{\mathrm{\Pi }(k^2)}{k^2}},`$ (20)
which is identical to Eq. (45) in , apart from a difference in sign due to different sign conventions for $`\mathrm{\Pi }(k^2)`$. It was evaluated there in the physically interesting limit where $`mL1`$:

$`E_0^{(1)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\pi ^2\alpha }{2560mL^4}}.`$ (21)
This is the result that was first obtained by BRW.

## 3 Effective QED with two conducting plates

We now turn to effective field theory . An effective field theory calculation starts with writing down the most general effective Lagrangian respecting the symmetries of the problem. Next, one assigns counting rules to each term in the effective Lagrangian, which allows us to calculate physical quantities from the effective theory in a systematic way. The free coefficients that multiplies each term in the effective Lagrangian – the “low energy constants” – are then determined by matching the results with the corresponding quantities calculated in the full theory. The result is a theory that in principle may be used to perform calculations to any desired order in the effective counting rules. This program is applied here to the Casimir energy which enables us to explicitly demonstrate that effective field theory works in this case.

Let us begin our investigations by writing down the effective Lagrangian, and then discuss it afterwards. It has the form

$`_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ $`=`$ $`_{\mathrm{eff}}^{\mathrm{bulk}}+_{\mathrm{eff}}^{\mathrm{surf}},`$
$`_{\mathrm{eff}}^{\mathrm{bulk}}`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{1}{4}F_{\mu \nu }F^{\mu \nu }+{\displaystyle \frac{c_1}{m^2}}F_{\mu \nu }n^\rho _\rho n^\sigma _\sigma F^{\mu \nu }+{\displaystyle \frac{c_2}{m^2}}F_{\mu \nu }n^\mu ^\nu n^\rho ^\sigma F_{\rho \sigma }`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{c_3}{m^2}}F_{\mu \nu }\mathrm{}F^{\mu \nu }+\text{higher orders},`$
$`_{\mathrm{eff}}^{\mathrm{surf}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{d_1}{4m}}F_{\mu \nu }F^{\mu \nu }[\delta (z)+\delta (zL)]+\text{higher orders}.`$
The terms fall into two categories, a “bulk” contribution where field values from the whole of space-time are used and a “surface” contribution where only field values at the two plates at $`z=0`$ and $`z=L`$ are used. It is to be understood that the metallic boundary conditions at the plates are accounted for by inserting delta functions in the path integral where $`d^4x_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ is the action.

But let us first comment on the symmetries of the problem. In free space, these would be gauge symmetry, Lorentz symmetry, translation symmetry and the discrete symmetries. In the presence of the two plates, however, parts of the Lorentz and translation symmetries are broken. Hence more terms are allowed in the effective Lagrangian. We can include some of these terms in a mock Lorentz invariant form by making use of the four-vector $`n^\mu `$ from the last Section. Due to gauge invariance we are required to build the effective theory from $`F_{\mu \nu }`$ rather than from $`A_\mu `$. Thus, using $`F_{\mu \nu }`$’s, $`n`$’s and derivatives we get an effective Lagrangian of the form (3). Note that there can be no terms with an odd number of $`n`$’s. The reason for this is that $`n^\mu `$ also appears in the delta function that enforce the proper boundary conditions in the full theory in the previous Section. It is then evident that there is an additional symmetry, $`n^\mu n^\mu `$, which rules out odd numbers of $`n`$’s.

The surface terms in $`_{\mathrm{eff}}^{\mathrm{surf}}`$ deserves special mention. They must a priori be present in the action because they respect the symmetries. Let us also remember that surface terms are not unknown in the world of effective theories. The Wess–Zumino–Witten term in chiral perturbation theory has such an interpretation . There is also a relation to the hyperfine splitting term, proportional to a delta function, in the effective Hamiltonian that is often used in the discussion of hydrogen-like atoms .

The effective Lagrangian in this problem is given in a natural way in terms of two derivative expansions – one in the bulk and one on the plates. The coefficient in front of each term has been scaled with the electron mass $`m`$ so that the parameters $`c_i`$ and $`d_i`$ are dimensionless. The other scale in the theory, $`L`$, is not expected to have any influence on a local quantity like the effective Lagrangian. Only terms up to mass dimension six for the bulk part, and up to dimension five for the surface part, are displayed in Eq. (3). It may appear that a third term with two $`n`$’s could be written down in $`_{\mathrm{eff}}^{\mathrm{bulk}}`$, proportional to $`F_{\mu \nu }n^\mu ^\rho n^\sigma _\sigma F_{\rho }^{}{}_{}{}^{\nu }`$. However, since the boundary conditions are taken care of by two delta functions inserted in the path integral, we are allowed to freely perform partial integrations. One may then check that this interaction is equivalent to the term with $`c_1`$ in (3). It may also appear that another term proportional to $`n_\mu F^{\mu \rho }n^\nu F_{\nu \rho }[\delta (z)+\delta (zL)]`$ could be written down in $`_{\mathrm{eff}}^{\mathrm{surf}}`$, but due to the boundary conditions this term is equivalent to the one already given.

In order to assign counting rules for the effective theory we start with the “free” term $`\frac{1}{4}F_{\mu \nu }^2`$. We may arbitrarily assign the order $`p^2`$ to this, where $`p`$ is a “small” momentum. Then $`F_{\mu \nu }`$ is of order $`p`$. Likewise we assign a factor $`p`$ for each derivative, so that the displayed terms with $`c_i`$ in $`_{\mathrm{eff}}^{\mathrm{bulk}}`$ are of order $`p^4`$. Furthermore, it is natural to assign a factor of $`p`$ to the $`\delta `$-functions in $`_{\mathrm{eff}}^{\mathrm{surf}}`$ in agreement with dimensional analysis. Thus, the leading surface term, proportional to $`d_1`$, is of order $`p^3`$. This means that unless $`d_1`$ accidentally vanishes or is unnaturally small, the leading corrections to the Casimir energy in the effective theory comes from this term.

The order $`p^4`$ operators we have written in the effective Lagrangian (3) are all terms that vanish in free space. Indeed, it is well-known in free space effective field theory that terms in the action which vanishes due to the free field equations of motion can be removed by a field redefinition in the path integral . This would remove the term proportional to $`c_2`$ in Eq. (3). On the other hand, the Uehling term proportional to $`c_3`$ may be removed by the transformation

$`A_\mu `$ $``$ $`A_\mu {\displaystyle \frac{2c_3}{m^2}}\mathrm{}A_\mu .`$ (22)
However, this possibility is no longer open to us in the present case due to the nontrivial boundary conditions. The point is that even though one field configuration satisfies the required condition on the plates, this will in general not be true for the transformed configuration because of the presence of derivatives in the transformation law. This is not a problem in free space, since it is always implicitly understood that both the fields and their derivatives go to zero at infinity. Therefore, the Uehling term and other terms in the same situation must be kept and may a priori give rise to real physical effects.

The contribution to the Casimir energy from the various correction terms in (3) can be obtained from the field theory identity (10). From this we find the correction

$`E_0^{(1)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{AT}}S^{(1)},`$ (23)
where $`S^{(1)}`$ is a small perturbation of the leading order Maxwell action $`S^{(0)}`$. The expectation values in $`\mathrm{}`$ refers to the theory described by $`S^{(0)}`$ under the further restriction that the usual metallic boundary conditions $`n^\mu \stackrel{~}{F}_{\mu \nu }=0`$ hold on the plates. This means that the contractions that appear in $`\mathrm{}`$ should be calculated using the modified photon propagator (5) of BRW, as discussed in Sec. 2.

## 4 Corrections to the Casimir energy in the effective theory

The leading order correction is expected to result from the lowest dimension operator in the Lagrangian (3), i.e.

$`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{d_1}{4m}}F_{\mu \nu }F^{\mu \nu }[\delta (z)+\delta (zL)].`$ (24)
In order to make the contractions involved in calculating $`\mathrm{\Delta }S`$, it is appropriate to write $`\mathrm{\Delta }S`$ so that it depends directly on $`A_\mu `$ instead of $`F_{\mu \nu }`$. For the plate at $`z=a`$, with $`a`$ either $`0`$ or $`L`$, we have

$`\mathrm{\Delta }S_a`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{d_1}{4m}}{\displaystyle d^4xF_{\mu \nu }F^{\mu \nu }\delta (za)}.`$ (25)
We may perform partial integration which gives

$`\mathrm{\Delta }S_a`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{d_1}{2m}}{\displaystyle d^4xA_\mu \left[\delta (za)\mathrm{}+\frac{1}{2}\delta ^{\prime \prime }(za)\right]A^\mu },`$ (26)
where $`\delta ^{\prime \prime }(za)=(d^2/dz^2)\delta (za)`$. In this expression we have omitted terms that do not contribute to the result. Indeed, when (26) is contracted with the modified photon propagator, only the part with $`\overline{D}_{\mu \nu }(x,x^{})`$ carries $`L`$-dependence. This term involves the projection operator $`P_{\mu \nu }^{}`$ so that, without loss of generality, we may make the replacement

$`\frac{1}{2}A_\mu [\mathrm{}]A^\mu `$ $``$ $`\frac{1}{2}P_{}^{\mu \nu }A_\mu [\mathrm{}]A_\nu .`$ (27)
The correction then becomes

$`E_0^{(1)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{AT}}{\displaystyle \frac{d_1}{2m}}{\displaystyle d^4x\underset{i=1}{\overset{2}{}}P_{}^{\mu \nu }A_\mu (x)[\delta (za_i)\mathrm{}+\frac{1}{2}\delta ^{\prime \prime }(za_i)]A_\nu (x)}.`$ (28)
Let us first consider the term involving $`\delta ^{\prime \prime }`$ and set $`i=1`$. From Eq. (5) it then follows

$`A_\mu (x)\delta ^{\prime \prime }(z)A_\nu (x)`$ $`=`$ $`\delta ^{\prime \prime }(z)i(D_{\mu \nu }(x,x)\overline{D}_{\mu \nu }(x,x)).`$ (29)
Since only $`\overline{D}_{\mu \nu }`$ contains dependence on $`L`$ we can disregard the part involving $`D_{\mu \nu }`$. The right-hand side of (29) then becomes

$`i{\displaystyle \frac{d^3k_{}}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{P_{\mu \nu }^{}\delta ^{\prime \prime }(z)}{4\gamma \mathrm{sin}\gamma L}\left[e^{i\gamma L}(e^{2i\gamma |z|}+e^{2i\gamma |zL|})2e^{i\gamma (|z|+|zL|)}\right]},`$ (30)
which appears under a space-time integral. We may therefore partially integrate to remove the two $`z`$-derivatives on the $`\delta `$-function. Making use of identities such as

$`_ze^{i\gamma |za|}`$ $`=`$ $`i\gamma ϵ(za)e^{i\gamma |za|},`$
$`_z^2e^{i\gamma |za|}`$ $`=`$ $`2i\gamma \delta (za)\gamma ^2e^{i\gamma |za|},`$ (31)
where $`ϵ(x)`$ is the sign function, this leads to

$`A_\mu (x)\delta ^{\prime \prime }(z)A_\nu (x)`$ $`=`$ $`iP_{\mu \nu }^{}\delta (z){\displaystyle \frac{d^3k_{}}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{\gamma e^{i\gamma L}}{\mathrm{sin}\gamma L}}.`$ (32)
Similarly, the term with $`i=2`$ gives

$`A_\mu (x)\delta ^{\prime \prime }(zL)A_\nu (x)`$ $`=`$ $`iP_{\mu \nu }^{}\delta (zL){\displaystyle \frac{d^3k_{}}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{\gamma e^{i\gamma L}}{\mathrm{sin}\gamma L}}.`$ (33)
On the other hand, the terms in (28) involving $`\delta \mathrm{}`$ are found to be equal to

$`A_\mu (x)\delta (za_i)\mathrm{}A_\nu (x)`$ $`=`$ $`iP_{\mu \nu }^{}\delta ^4(0)\delta (za_i),`$ (34)
which do not give any $`L`$-dependent contribution to the correction $`E_0^{(1)}`$.

Collecting this information we find that the contribution to the Casimir energy is

$`E_0^{(1)}`$ $`=`$ $`2{\displaystyle \frac{d_1}{2m}}P_{}^{\mu \nu }\frac{1}{2}(iP_{\mu \nu }^{}){\displaystyle \frac{d^3k_{}}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{\gamma e^{i\gamma L}}{\mathrm{sin}\gamma L}}`$ (35)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{d_1}{m}}i{\displaystyle \frac{d^3k_{}}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{\gamma e^{i\gamma L}}{\mathrm{sin}\gamma L}}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{d_1}{2\pi ^2mL^4}}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑k{\displaystyle \frac{k^3e^k}{\mathrm{sinh}k}}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\pi ^2d_1}{240mL^4}},`$
where we have used that $`P_{\mu \nu }^{}P_{}^{\mu \nu }=2`$. Thus, by choosing the numerical value

$`d_1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3\alpha }{32}}`$ (36)
we are able to reproduce the full QED result $`E_0^{(1)}=\pi ^2\alpha /2560mL^4`$. This is a reasonable magnitude for a constant that represents radiative corrections from virtual electron-positron pairs.

## 5 Discussion

To summarize, we have constructed an effective field theory satisfying the appropriate boundary conditions, and have been able to reproduce the full QED result to next-to-leading order of the low energy expansion. This demonstrates that effective field theory works for the Casimir effect – as it does for any other field theoretical problem.

The Lagrangian of an effective field theory is constructed by writing down all possible terms that respect the symmetries and the coefficients that multiplies them are determined by a matching procedure. The question therefore never arises in an effective field theory calculation how the various terms in the effective Lagrangian “comes about”. Nevertheless, it may be interesting in the present case to see if we can gain some insight into the nature of the surface terms that are so important for our results. Referring back to Eq. (20) we have the following expression for the energy correction ,

$`E_0^{(1)}`$ $`=`$ $`2i{\displaystyle \frac{d^4k}{(2\pi )^4}\frac{\gamma }{\mathrm{sin}\gamma L}\left(e^{i\gamma L}\mathrm{cos}k_zL\right)\frac{\mathrm{\Pi }(k^2)}{k^2}},`$ (37)
in the underlying theory. If now we are interested in the low energy content of this expression, we may try to simplify it by taking the low energy limit of $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$:

$`\mathrm{\Pi }(k^2)`$ $`=`$ $`c{\displaystyle \frac{k^2}{m^2}}+𝒪(k^4),\text{for }k^2m^2,`$ (38)
with $`c`$ some unimportant constant. Inserting this in Eq. (37), we find that the term proportional to $`\mathrm{cos}k_zL`$ vanishes from the $`k_z`$-integration, and we get

$`E_0^{(1)}`$ $`=`$ $`2i{\displaystyle \frac{c}{m^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^4k}{(2\pi )^2}\frac{\gamma e^{i\gamma L}}{\mathrm{sin}\gamma L}}+𝒪(k^4).`$ (39)
Here we have used that $`e^{i\gamma L}=e^{i\gamma L}2i\mathrm{sin}\gamma L`$ and that the $`\mathrm{sin}\gamma L`$-part of this leads to an $`L`$-independent contribution. The $`k_z`$-integration here is divergent. However, we should remember that this form is valid only for $`k^2m^2`$. We can repair the situation by choosing a cutoff for the $`k_z`$-integration of the order $`m`$. We then get

$`E_0^{(1)}`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{i}{m}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^3k_{}}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{\gamma e^{i\gamma L}}{\mathrm{sin}\gamma L}}+\mathrm{}`$ (40)
for the energy correction. On comparison, we see that this has the same form as the expression in the second line of Eq. (35), which is precisely the contribution from the surface term.

It is also possible to understand how the cut of the vacuum polarization tensor, with modes of relatively high momentum, $`k^24m^2`$, may contribute to the full QED energy correction. At first sight it would appear that the effects of virtual electron-positron pairs with high energies are unimportant to the Casimir problem. After all, such pairs are sharply localized while the Casimir effect is controlled by the macroscopically large scale $`L`$, the distance between the plates. However, it is known from the literature on the Casimir effect that the fluctuations of the electromagnetic field are large near the plates and diverge as we approach them. In this region with violent fluctuations there will be an increase in the production of pairs. Thus, even sharply localized pairs may be expected to contribute significantly to the correction. This picture of what is going on means that part of the physics is localized on the plates and agrees very well with the presence of surface terms in the effective theory.

As mentioned in Sec. 3, the calculations we have done in this paper are only the first steps in a full-fledged effective field theory calculation. At higher orders of the counting rules more terms with their corresponding low energy constants enters the description and these constants must also be determined by matching. It will then be necessary to consider other quantities than the Casimir energy like, for example, the Green’s functions of the system. This would then allow us to perform more detailed calculations in the effective theory to any desired order of precision in the low energy expansion.

Finally, let us comment on the fact that we are using highly idealized plates which provides perfect metallic boundary conditions. More realistic plates would be associated with some cutoff $`C<m`$ representing the physical nature of the plates. More precisely, this means that modes of the electromagnetic field with momenta $`pC`$ are able to penetrate the plates and are not confined by them. This situation was investigated in . The effective theory discussed in this paper can be viewed as a special case of this more general situation with the external momenta $`p`$ restricted by $`1/LpC`$. It is clear that effective field theory is powerful enough to provide a description of this more realistic case too. That, however, is beyond the scope of this paper.

Note: After this work was completed there appeared a paper by K. Melnikov on the archives  which also deals with radiative corrections to the Casimir energy and effective field theory. Melnikov also finds an effective Lagrangian that reproduces the BRW result. However, the term that is responsible for the corrections in his Lagrangian is a bulk term proportional to $`n_\mu F^{\mu \rho }n^\nu F_{\nu \rho }`$ (in our notation) with a coefficient involving the plate separation $`L`$. To our minds, it would be surprising if this term would be present in the correct effective Lagrangian. There are two reasons for this: First, the operator dimension of this term is $`4`$ which is the same as the leading Maxwell term, and second, the parameter $`L`$ is a global property of the system and is not a priori expected to occur in a local quantity like the Lagrangian. To truly resolve the question of which effective Lagrangian is correct it is necessary to calculate some other quantity than the Casimir energy like for instance the propagator to order $`\alpha `$ in both the full and effective theories. One should then be able to determine which effective theory reproduces the result from the full theory.

### Acknowledgments

One of us (F.R.) wants to thank C.P. Burgess for many useful discussions.