text:
# Untitled Document

CANONICAL QUANTIZATION of TWO-DIMENSIONAL GRAVITY

S.N.Vergeles

Landau Institute of Theoretical Physics, Russian Academy of Sciences

Chernogolovka, Moscow Region, 142432 Russia. e-mail: vergeles@itp.ac.ru

A canonical quantization of two-dimensional gravity minimally coupled to real scalar and spinor Majorana fields is presented. The physical state space of the theory is completely described and calculations are also made of the average value of the metric tensor relative to states close to the ground state.

1. Introduction

The quantum theory of gravity in four-dimensional Minkowski space-time encounters fundamental difficulties which have not yet been surmounted. These difficulties can be conditionally divided into conceptual and computational. The main conceptual problem is that the Hamiltonian is a linear combination of first-class constraints. This fact makes the role of time in gravity unclear. The main computational problem is the nonrenormalizability of the theory. The indicated difficulties are closely bound. For example, depending on the computational procedure, the constraint algebra may or may not contain an anomalous contribution (central charge). The presence or absence of an anomaly in the first-class constraint algebra has a decisive influence on the quantization procedure and the ensuing physical picture.

These fundamental problems can be successfully resolved using relatively simple models of generally covariant theories in two-dimensional space-time. These models particularly include two-dimensional gravity models, both pure and interacting with matter, and also two-dimensional string models (see, for example \[1-6\] and the literature cited therein).

In the present paper we spend a canonical quantization of two-dimensional gravity minimally coupled to real scalar and spinor Majorana fields. All the constructions and calculations are given before the final result is obtained. The physical states of the theory are completely described. The complete state space has similar properties to the multidimensional Fock space in which boson and fermion operators are acting. The average values of the metric tensor relative to states close to the ground state are calculated.

The progress reached at the construction of a two-dimensional quantum theory of gravity is based on two ideas. These ideas will be formulated below after the introduction of the necessary notations.

Let’s guess that the space-time is topologically equivalent to a two-dimensional cylinder. The time coordinate $`t`$ varies between minus infinity and plus infinity while the spatial coordinate $`\sigma `$ varies between $`0`$ and $`2\pi `$. All the functions are periodic with respect to the coordinate $`\sigma `$. The set of coordinates $`(t,\sigma )`$ is designated also as $`\{x^\mu \}`$. The metric tensor in space-time is denoted by $`g_{\mu \nu }`$, so that the square of the interval is written as

$$ds^2=g_{00}dt^2+g_{11}d\sigma ^2+2g_{01}dtd\sigma .$$
$`(1.1)`$
Most of the formulas and notations in the Introduction are taken from . The metric tensor is then parameterized as follows:

$$g_{\mu \nu }=e^{2\rho }\left(\begin{array}{cc}u^2v^2& v\\ v& 1\end{array}\right),gdetg_{\mu \nu }=u^2e^{4\rho }.$$
$`(1.2)`$
Let $`i,j=0,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}`$ and $`\eta _{ij}=diag(1,1)`$. Let’s introduce the orthonormalized basis $`\{e_i^\mu \}`$ so that

$$g_{\mu \nu }e_i^\mu e_j^\nu =\eta _{ij}.$$
$`(1.3)`$
To be specific we take

$$e_0^\mu =\frac{1}{u}e^\rho \left(\begin{array}{c}1\\ v\end{array}\right),e_1^\mu =\left(\begin{array}{c}0\\ e^\rho \end{array}\right).$$
$`(1.4)`$
The dyad (zweibein) $`\{e_\mu ^i\}`$ is uniquely determinated by the equations $`e_\mu ^ie_i^\nu =`$ $`\delta _\mu ^\nu `$ $`e_\mu ^ie_j^\mu =\delta _j^i`$. Taking into account (1.4), we have

$$e_\mu ^0=\left(\begin{array}{c}ue^\rho \\ 0\end{array}\right),e_\mu ^1=e^\rho \left(\begin{array}{c}v\\ 1\end{array}\right).$$
$`(1.5)`$
Let’s consider the action

$$S=𝑑t_0^{2\pi }𝑑\sigma \sqrt{g}\left\{\frac{1}{4\pi G}(\eta R2\lambda )+\frac{1}{2}g^{\mu \nu }_\mu f_\nu f+\frac{i}{2}e_j^\mu \overline{\psi }\gamma ^j𝒟_\mu \psi \right\}.$$
$`(1.6)`$
Here $`G`$ is the gravitational constant, $`\lambda `$ is the cosmological constant, $`R`$ is the scalar space-time curvature, $`\eta `$ and $`f`$ are the real scalar fields, $`\psi `$ is the two-component spinor Majorana field and $`\{\gamma ^i\}`$ are two-dimensional Dirac matrices. Further we assume that

$$\gamma ^0=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& 1\\ 1& 0\end{array}\right),\gamma ^1=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& 1\\ 1& 0\end{array}\right),\gamma ^5\gamma ^0\gamma ^1=\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 0\\ 0& 1\end{array}\right).$$
$`(1.7)`$
The Majorana nature of the spinor field means that $`\psi =\gamma ^0\overline{\psi }^t`$. The superscript $`t`$ means transposition. In our case we have:

$$\psi =\left(\begin{array}{c}\varphi \\ \chi \end{array}\right),\varphi =\varphi ^{},\chi =\chi ^{}.$$
$`(1.8)`$
The covariant differentiation operation of a spinor field is defined according to the formula

$$𝒟_\mu \psi =\left(\frac{}{x^\mu }+\frac{1}{2}\omega _{ij\mu }\sigma ^{ij}\right)\psi ,\sigma ^{ij}=\frac{1}{4}[\gamma ^i,\gamma ^j].$$
$`(1.9)`$
The connection form $`\omega _{ij\mu }`$ is obtained uniquely from the equation

$$d\omega ^i+\omega _j^i\omega ^j=0$$

where $`\omega ^ie_\mu ^idx^\mu `$. Thus we find

$$\omega _{01}=\left[u^{}+u\rho ^{}\frac{v}{u}(\dot{\rho }+\rho ^{}v+v^{})\right]dt+\frac{1}{u}(\dot{\rho }+\rho ^{}v+v^{})d\sigma .$$
$`(1.10)`$
Hereinafter the dot and prime above denote the partial derivatives $`(/t)`$ and $`(/\sigma )`$, respectively. Using the Cartan structure equation, we easily establish the formula

$$\sqrt{g}Rdtd\sigma =2d\omega ^{01}.$$
$`(1.11)`$
As the fields $`\varphi `$ and $`\chi `$ in (1.8) are real and belong to Grassmann algebra, we have

$$\varphi (x)\varphi (x)=0,\chi (x)\chi (x)=0.$$
$`(1.12)`$
Using (1.12), we can make the substitution $`𝒟_\mu \psi (/x^\mu )\psi `$ in (1.6). Therefore the fermion part of the action is proportional to the expression

$$e^\rho \{\varphi \dot{\varphi }+(u+v)\varphi \varphi ^{}+\chi \dot{\chi }(uv)\chi \chi ^{}\}.$$

In this last expression the factor $`e^\rho `$ may be absorbed by substituting

$$\varphi e^{\rho /2}\varphi ,\chi e^{\rho /2}\chi .$$

On account of (1.12), no additional derivative of the field $`\rho `$ appear in the action when this substitution is made. Thus, the Lagrangian of the considered system has the form

$$=d\sigma \{\frac{1}{2\pi G}[u^1\dot{\eta }(\dot{\rho }+v\rho ^{}+v^{})+\eta ^{}(\frac{v}{u}(\dot{\rho }+v\rho ^{}+v^{})u^{}u\rho ^{})\lambda ue^{2\rho }]+$$

$$+\frac{1}{2u}[\dot{f}^2+2v\dot{f}f^{}(u^2v^2)f^2]+\frac{i}{2}[\varphi \dot{\varphi }+(u+v)\varphi \varphi ^{}+\chi \dot{\chi }(uv)\chi \chi ^{}]\}.$$
$`(1.13)`$
Let’s denote by $`\pi _\eta \pi _\rho `$ and $`\pi `$ the fields canonically conjugate to the fields $`\eta ,\rho `$ and $`f`$, respectively. The fields $`u`$ and $`v`$ in (1.12) are Lagrange multipliers. We obtain the Hamiltonian of the system (1.13) by a standard procedure:

$$=𝑑\sigma (u+v𝒫),$$

$$=2\pi G\pi _\eta \pi _\rho +\frac{1}{2\pi G}[(\eta ^{\prime \prime }\eta ^{}\rho ^{})+\lambda e^{2\rho }]+\frac{1}{2}(\pi ^2+f^2)+\frac{i}{2}(\varphi \varphi ^{}+\chi \chi ^{}),$$

$$𝒫=\left(\pi _\eta \eta ^{}+\pi _\rho \rho ^{}+\pi f^{}+\frac{i}{2}\varphi \varphi ^{}+\frac{i}{2}\chi \chi ^{}\right).$$
$`(1.14)`$
Let’s make the following canonical transformation of variables:

$$\lambda r^0=\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{\frac{\lambda }{4\pi G}}e^\rho (2\eta ^{}ch4\pi G\pi _\rho sh),$$

$$\lambda r^1=\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{\frac{\lambda }{4\pi G}}e^\rho (4\pi G\pi _\rho ch2\eta ^{}sh),$$

$$\pi _0r_{}^{1}{}_{}{}^{}=\sqrt{\frac{\lambda }{\pi G}}e^\rho sh,\pi _1+r_{}^{0}{}_{}{}^{}=\sqrt{\frac{\lambda }{\pi G}}e^\rho ch.$$
$`(1.15)`$
Here

$$(\sigma )=2\pi G_0^\sigma 𝑑\stackrel{~}{\sigma }\pi _\eta (\stackrel{~}{\sigma }).$$

The variables describing the matter remain unchanged. In the new variables the Hamiltonian (1.14) becomes

$$=\frac{1}{2}[(\pi _0^2+(r_{}^{0}{}_{}{}^{})^2)+(\pi _1^2+(r_{}^{1}{}_{}{}^{})^2)]+\frac{1}{2}[\pi ^2+f^2+i(\varphi \varphi ^{}+\chi \chi ^{})],$$

$$𝒫=(\pi _0r_{}^{0}{}_{}{}^{}+\pi _1r_{}^{1}{}_{}{}^{})(\pi f^{}+\frac{i}{2}\varphi \varphi ^{}+\frac{i}{2}\chi \chi ^{}).$$
$`(1.16)`$
So far the analysis was classical. To start quantization of the system we must first begin by defining the simultaneous permutation relations for canonically conjugate variables. In our case, we have:

$$[r^0(\sigma ),\pi _0(\sigma ^{})]=[r^1(\sigma ),\pi _1(\sigma ^{})]=[f(\sigma ),\pi (\sigma ^{})]=i\delta (\sigma \sigma ^{}).$$
$`(1.17)`$
For the fermion degrees of freedom we have the anticommutation relations

$$\{\varphi (\sigma ),\varphi (\sigma ^{})\}=\{\chi (\sigma ),\chi (\sigma ^{})\}=\delta (\sigma \sigma ^{}).$$
$`(1.18)`$
All the other commutators or anticommutators of the fundamental fields $`r^a,\pi _a,f,\pi ,\psi `$ are equal to zero. It is easy to check the Heisenberg equations $`i\dot{𝒪}=[𝒪,]`$, obtained using commutation relations (1.17), (1.18) are the same as the Lagrange equations. Here $`𝒪`$ is any operator.

Since the fields $`u`$ and $`v`$ in (1.14) are Lagrange multipliers, the quantities (1.16) are constraints. Within the framework of classical consideration they are the first-class constraints. However, it is well known that as a result of quantization, anomaly or central charge may appear in this system: the algebra of simultaneous commutators of $``$ and $`𝒫`$ contains a central charge. The existence of a central charge in the constraint algebra radically complicates the quantization problem. In particular, the system (1.16) - (1.18) can appear inconsistent.

Recently an anomaly-free approach to the quantization of the system (1.16)-(1.18) has been proposed in various studies \[1-4, 6\]. In this approach no central charge is present in the quantum algebra of the quantities (1.16). It means, that all the operators (1.16) can be treated as first-class constraints in the Dirac sense. This new approach is applied in the present study.

The idea of a new approach to quantization has arisen when studying a model of pure gravity. This model is obtained from the model (1.16) by eliminating the second terms on the right-hand sides of the system (1.16). In \[1-4, 6\] it was shown that in pure gravity theory the central charge is zero if the scalar product is positively defined in the entire state space. The reason for this phenomenon is that in the new approach the operator ordering procedure in the values $``$ and $`𝒫`$ differs radically from the ordering in traditional quantization.

Now we shall formulate the assumptions on the basis of which the new quantization method is developed.

1) The entire state space $`H_C`$, in which the fundamental operator fields $`r^a,\pi _a,f,\pi ,\psi `$ act, is supplied with a positively defined scalar product. No indefinite metric is present in the $`H_C`$ space.

To formulate the next assumption, we denote the set of operators (1.16) by $`L`$ and the set of all the material fields $`f,\psi `$ by $`\psi `$. Let’s eliminate from the operators $`L`$ the degrees of freedom describing the material fields and denote the set of operators thus obtained by $`L^{(0)}`$. Hence the operators $`L^{(0)}`$ only determine the dynamics of the gravitational degrees of freedom and

$$[L^{(0)},\psi ]=0.$$
$`(1.19)`$
2) In the theory (1.16) there exists a unitary transformation $`U`$ such that

$$UL^{(0)}U^{}=L.$$
$`(1.20)`$
As a result of (1.19) and (1.20) the fields

$$\mathrm{\Psi }=U\psi U^{}$$
$`(1.21)`$
commute with all the operators $`L`$.

Let’s explain the important role of the last assumption in the quantization of the considered system. Let’s postulate that in the theory (1.16) there is a state $`|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}`$ which annuls all operators $`L^{(0)}`$ and all the annihilation operators of the fields $`\psi `$. According to the reasoning put forward above this is possible. Then the state $`U|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}`$ is annulled by all the operators $`L`$ and all the annihilation operators of the fields $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$. The physical space of the states annulling all the operators $`L`$, is created from the ground state $`U|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}`$ using the creation operators of the fields $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$. Thus the problem of quantization of the system (1.16) - (1.18) is solved completely.

In the second assumption, the properties of the unitary transformation $`U`$ of interest to us are only described in broad the contour. Subsequently this unitary transformation is constructed explicitly for the model of two-dimensional gravity studied here. The equivalent of the formula (1.20) then has a more complex form. Nevertheless, fairly good progress can be made in the calculations by using the constructed unitary transformation.

2. Quantization of pure gravity

The problem of quantization of two-dimensional pure gravity was studied in \[1-4\]. In  the author described an anomaly-free quantization of a two-dimensional string whose constraint system is the same as the constraint system of two-dimensional pure gravity in the representation (1.16). It gives us the possibility to apply here the methods developed in .

Let $`a=0,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}`$ and $`\eta _{ab}=diag(1,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1})`$. In the gauge $`u=1v=0`$ the Heisenberg equations for the fields $`r^a,\pi ^a=\eta ^{ab}\pi _b`$ look like

$$\left(\frac{^2}{t^2}\frac{^2}{\sigma ^2}\right)r^a=0,\left(\frac{^2}{t^2}\frac{^2}{\sigma ^2}\right)\pi ^a=0.$$
$`(2.1)`$
Therefore, the fields $`r^a`$ and $`\pi ^a`$ contain both positive and negative-frequency modes:

$$r^a(\sigma )=\frac{x^a}{\sqrt{4\pi }}+\frac{i}{\sqrt{4\pi }}\underset{n0}{}\frac{1}{n}(\alpha _n^ae^{in\sigma }+\overline{\alpha }_n^ae^{in\sigma }),$$

$$\pi ^a(\sigma )=\frac{p^a}{\sqrt{\pi }}+\frac{1}{\sqrt{4\pi }}\underset{n0}{}(\alpha _n^ae^{in\sigma }+\overline{\alpha }_n^ae^{in\sigma }).$$
$`(2.2)`$
We assume that $`\alpha _0^a\overline{\alpha }_0^ap^a`$. From the reality conditions for the fields (2.2) it follows that

$$x^a=x^a,\alpha _n^a=\alpha _n^a,\overline{\alpha }_n^a=\overline{\alpha }_n^a.$$
$`(2.3)`$
The commutation relations (1.17) are equivalent to the following commutation relations of new variables:

$$[\alpha _m^a,\alpha _n^b]=[\overline{\alpha }_m^a,\overline{\alpha }_n^b]=m\eta ^{ab}\delta _{m+n},[x^a,p^b]=i\eta ^{ab}.$$
$`(2.4)`$
The set of operators (1.16) is equivalent to the two series of operators

$$L_n=\frac{1}{2}_0^{2\pi }𝑑\sigma e^{in\sigma }(+𝒫),$$

$$\overline{L}_n=\frac{1}{2}_0^{2\pi }𝑑\sigma e^{in\sigma }(𝒫),n=0,\pm 1,\mathrm{}$$
$`(2.5)`$
Using (2.2) we find:

$$L_n=\frac{1}{2}:\underset{m}{}\alpha _{nm}^a\alpha _{am}:,\overline{L}_n=\frac{1}{2}:\underset{m}{}\overline{\alpha }_{nm}^a\overline{\alpha }_{am}:.$$
$`(2.6)`$
The ordering of the operators in (2.6) is determined according to the general conditions of quantization and plays a main role. The purpose of quantization is searching such space of physical states on which all the operators (2.6) go to zero and in which there is a mathematically correct and positive definite scalar product.

In the present article we adopt two approaches to the quantization of the investigated system.

The first approach is well-known. It was formulated by Dirac and is described by the following scheme. Let us assume that $`\{\chi _n\}`$ is a complete set of first-class constraints. Then the physical states satisfy the conditions

$$\chi _n|_{PD}=0.$$
$`(2.7)`$
From (2.7) the consistency conditions of the theory follow:

$$[\chi _m,\chi _n]=c_{mn}^l\chi _l.$$
$`(2.8)`$
In (2.8) the coefficients $`c_{mn}^l`$ may be operator quantities and should be located to the left of the constraints $`\chi _l`$.

Under quantization (2.7)-(2.8) there is the following difficulty (for further detail see ). It follows from the conditions (2.7) that all the physical states do not depend on certain initial dynamic variables. For this reason the following problems arise:

a) Determining the scalar product on the physical state space;

b) Calculating the matrix elements relative to the physical states.

This is because not all the initial dynamic variables are operators in the physical state space. Therefore the matrix elements of these variables are not defined in physical space. Though the observable values do not depend on the indicated dynamic variables, nevertheless, serious difficulties may arise when the matrix elements of the observable quantities are calculated in physical space.

Further quantization (2.7)-(2.8) we shall name by the first method of quantization.

In  a different method of quantization was applied to the system (2.4),(2.6). The idea of this method of quantization consists in some weakening of the Dirac conditions (2.7) by replacing them with the conditions

$$P|\chi _m|P_G=0.$$
$`(2.9)`$
Here index $`P`$ numbers the physical states. In (2.9) there is an averaging in all gauge degrees of freedom but not in physical degrees of freedom.

The quantization conditions (2.9) are similar to the Gupta-Bleuler conditions in electrodynamics when the equality $`_\mu A^\mu =0`$ is only satisfied in the sense of the mean value, and also to the quantization conditions in the usual string theory when the Virasoro algebra generators also only satisfy the conditions $`L_n=0`$ in the sense of the mean value. In this case, averaging is performed relative to the physical states.

The fundamental difference between the quantization method proposed here and the Gupta-Bleuler quantization and the generally accepted string quantization is that in our approach the complete state space has a positive definite scalar product. Below it is shown that this fact can be used to make an anomaly-free quantization of a two-dimensional string.

The conditions for consistency of the theory, which replace the Dirac conditions (2.8), now have the form

$$P|[\chi _m,\chi _n]|P_G=0.$$
$`(2.10)`$
The physical sense of the conditions (2.10) is as follows. Let us assume that the Hamiltonian of the system has the form used in the generally covariant theories: $`_T=v_m\chi _m`$. We assume that at time $`t`$ the conditions (2.9) are satisfied. At an infinitesimally close time $`t+\delta t`$ the constraint $`\chi _n`$ is given by

$$\chi _n(t+\delta t)=\chi _n(t)+i\delta t\underset{m}{}v_m[\chi _m,\chi _n](t).$$

Therefore the self-consistency conditions (2.10) yield the equalities (2.9) at any time.

The quantization method (2.9)-(2.10) is subsequently called as the second method of quantization.

We initially apply the first quantization method to the model (2.6).

Let’s introduce the notations

$$x_\pm =x^0\pm x^1,\alpha _m^{(\pm )}=\alpha _m^0\pm \alpha _m^1,\overline{\alpha }_m^{(\pm )}=\overline{\alpha }_m^{(0)}\pm \overline{\alpha }_m^{(1)}.$$
$`(2.11)`$
The nonzero commutation relations of the new variables are obtained using (2.4):

$$[\alpha _m^{(+)},\alpha _n^{()}]=[\overline{\alpha }_m^{(+)},\overline{\alpha }_n^{()}]=2m\delta _{m+n},$$

$$[x_+,\alpha _n^{()}]=[x_{},\alpha _n^{(+)}]=2i\delta _n.$$
$`(2.12)`$
Let’s write operators (2.6) in the new variables:

$$L_n=\frac{1}{2}\underset{m}{}\alpha _{nm}^{(+)}\alpha _m^{()}=\frac{1}{2}\underset{m}{}\alpha _{nm}^{()}\alpha _m^{(+)}.$$
$`(2.13)`$
Whenever possible subsequently, for the operators with a bar we do not write those relations which are exactly the same as those for the operators without a bare. By definition, in (2.13) the ordering operation implies that either the elements $`\alpha ^{(+)}`$ are placed to the left of all the operators $`\alpha ^{()}`$, or the converse is true. Both these orderings are equivalent (see ).

Let’s make the canonical transformation

$$\alpha U_M\alpha U_M^{},\overline{\alpha }U_M\overline{\alpha }U_M^{},xU_MxU_M^{},$$

$$U_M=\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{iM^2x_+}{2p_+}\right).$$

At this canonical transformation only the variables $`\alpha _0^{()}`$ and $`x_{}`$ change, as given by the formulas

$$\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_0^{()}=U_M\alpha _0^{()}U_M^{}=\alpha _0^{()}\frac{M^2}{p_+},$$

$$\stackrel{~}{x}_{}=U_Mx_{}U_M^{}=x_{}+M^2\frac{x_+}{p_+}.$$
$`(2.14)`$
For monotony, in this section we introduce the notation $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_m^{()}=\alpha _m^{()}`$ for $`m0`$.

Subsequently, instead of the operators (2.13) we use the operators

$$L_n=\frac{1}{2}\underset{m}{}\alpha _{nm}^{(+)}\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_m^{()}.$$
$`(2.15)`$
The reason for this substitution will become clear in the following sections.

Let’s define the vector state space in which the dynamic variables of the system act, as linear operators. We present the complete state space $`H_{CD}`$ as the tensor product of the gauge state space $`H_G`$ and the physical state space $`H_{PD}`$:

$$H_{CD}=H_GH_{PD}.$$
$`(2.16)`$
The space $`H_G`$ is generated by its vacuum vector $`|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0};G`$, which is determined by the following properties:

$$\alpha _m^0|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0};G=0,\alpha _m^1|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0};G=0,m>0,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0};G|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0};G=1.$$
$`(2.17)`$
The basis of the space $`H_G`$ consists of vectors of the tipe

$$\alpha _m^0\mathrm{}\overline{\alpha }_n^0\mathrm{}\alpha _l^1\mathrm{}\overline{\alpha }_r^1|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0};G,m,n,l,r>0.$$
$`(2.18)`$
Thus, $`H_G`$ is a Fock space with a positive-definite scalar product.

The basis in the physical Dirac state space $`H_{PD}`$ consists of two series of states $`|k_D,k=(k^0,k^1)`$, possessing the following properties:

$$\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_m^{()}|k_D=\stackrel{~}{\overline{\alpha }}_m^{()}|k_D=0,m=0,\pm 1,\mathrm{}$$
$`(2.19)`$
The relations (2.12) with $`m=0`$ are rewritten in the form

$$(p_a^2+M^2)|k_D=0.$$
$`(2.20)`$
From here it is seen that vectors of the basis set $`|k_D`$ are split into two series of vectors $`|k\pm _D`$ each parametrized by a single continuous real parameter. For example,

$$p^1|k\pm _D=\pm k|k\pm _D,p^0|k\pm _D=\pm \sqrt{k^2+M^2}|k\pm _D,\mathrm{}<k<+\mathrm{}.$$
$`(2.21)`$
Since the operators $`p^a`$ are Hermitian, the scalar products

$$k\pm |k^{}\pm _D=\delta (kk^{}),k|k^{}+_D=0$$
$`(2.22)`$
are self-consistent.

Quantization conditions similar to (2.19) were used in  and much earlier by Dirac in electrodynamics .

Note. We shall emphasize that the variables $`\alpha _n^a`$, $`\overline{\alpha }_n^a,n0`$, being linear operators in the space $`H_G`$, are not generally operators in the space $`H_{PD}`$. Really, as a result of the action of the operators $`\alpha _n^{(+)}`$ and $`\overline{\alpha }_n^{(+)}`$ on the vector $`|k\pm _D`$ we obtain vectors which do not belong to the physical space $`H_{PD}`$.

Due to (2.13) and (2.19) the following equalities hold:

$$L_n|p_D=\overline{L}_n|p_D=0,|p_DH_{PD}.$$
$`(2.23)`$
Thus, the model (2.6) is quantized using the first method.

Now we quantize this model using the second method. Let’s postulate that the complete state space $`H_C`$, in which the initial variables act, is represented as the tensor product

$$H_C=H_GH_P.$$
$`(2.24)`$
Here the space $`H_G`$ is defined according to (2.17), (2.18). The space $`H_P`$ has a basis with the properties (2.20)-(2.22). If the vector is $`|pH_P`$, it satisfies the conditions (2.19) with $`m=0`$.

We draw attention to that fact that the operators $`\alpha _n^{(+)}`$ and $`\overline{\alpha }_n^{(+)}`$ with $`n0`$ (or combinations of these) act in the space $`H_G`$, but their action is not determined on any one vector from the space $`H_P`$. This distinguishes $`H_P`$ from $`H_{PD}`$ (see (2.19)). Thus, the complete state space (2.24) is the tensor product of the spaces in which the corresponding operators act. It is obvious that the space (2.24) has a positive definite scalar product.

For further calculations it is necessary to determine the ordering of the operators. The ordering (2.15) is equivalent to the ordering

$$L_0=\frac{1}{2}(p_a^2+M^2)\underset{m>0}{}(\alpha _m^0\alpha _m^0\alpha _m^1\alpha _m^1),$$
$`(2.25)`$
which we shall use subsequently.

In our opinion, in this particular model the most convenient physical states satisfying the conditions (2.9) are the states which are coherent in gauge degrees of freedom. Let’s consider in space $`H_G`$ the coherent state

$$|z,\overline{z};G=_{m>0}\mathrm{exp}\{\frac{1}{2m}(|z_m^0|^2+|z_m^1|^2+|\overline{z}_m^0|^2+|\overline{z}_m^1|^2)+$$

$$+\frac{1}{m}(z_m^0\alpha _m^0+z_m^1\alpha _m^1+\overline{z}_m^0\overline{\alpha }_m^0+\overline{z}_m^1\overline{\alpha }_m^1)\}|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0};G.$$
$`(2.26)`$
Here $`z_m^a`$ and $`\overline{z}_m^a`$ are complex numbers. Further let’s assume that $`z_0^a=\overline{z}_0^a`$ and $`z_m^a=z_m^a`$. The asterisk from above means complex conjugation. By definition we have

$$z_m^{(\pm )}=z_m^0\pm z_m^1,\overline{z}_m^{(\pm )}=\overline{z}_m^0\pm \overline{z}_m^1.$$

Let’s also introduce the notation

$$\stackrel{~}{z}_m^{()}=z_m^{()},\stackrel{~}{\overline{z}}_m^{()}=\overline{z}_m^{()},m0,$$

$$\stackrel{~}{z}_0^{()}=z_0^{()}\frac{M^2}{z_0^{(+)}}.$$
$`(2.27)`$
Everywhere in this article it is assumed that $`z_0^0>0`$.

We denote the basis vectors in space $`H_P`$ as $`|z_0\pm _P,z_0^ak^a`$. We have:

$$p^a|z_0\pm _P=\pm z_0^a|z_0\pm _P,\stackrel{~}{z}_0^{()}=0.$$
$`(2.28)`$
The last equality in (2.28) is a consequence of the relation (2.19) with $`m=0`$.

Let us assume that the sets of complex numbers $`\{z,\overline{z}\}`$ satisfy the equations (2.28) with the upper sign and

$$L_n(z)\frac{1}{2}\underset{m}{}z_{nm}^{(+)}\stackrel{~}{z}_m^{()}=0,L_n(\overline{z})=0,n=0,\pm 1,\mathrm{}$$
$`(2.29)`$
These equations are rewritten in the more convenient form if we use the following notations:

$$z^{(+)}(\sigma )\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi }}\underset{n}{}e^{in\sigma }z_n^{(+)},\overline{z}^{(+)}(\sigma )\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi }}\underset{n}{}e^{in\sigma }\overline{z}_n^{(+)},$$

$$z^{(+)}(\sigma )\stackrel{~}{z}^{()}(\sigma )=0,\overline{z}^{(+)}(\sigma )\stackrel{~}{\overline{z}}^{()}(\sigma )=0.$$
$`(2.29^{})`$
The functions $`z^{(+)}(\sigma ),\stackrel{~}{z}^{()}(\sigma )`$, $`\overline{z}^{(+)}(\sigma )`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\overline{z}}^{()}(\sigma )`$ are real and periodic and their zero harmonics satisfy (2.27) and (2.28).

The states

$$|z,\overline{z}\pm _P|\pm z,\pm \overline{z};G|z_0\pm _P$$
$`(2.30)`$
are called basic physical states if the conditions (2.28) and (2. $`29^{}`$) are satisfied.

According to the given definitions the basic physical states have the following properties:

$$\alpha _m^0|z,\overline{z}\pm _P=\pm z_m^0|z,\overline{z}\pm _P,$$

$$\alpha _m^1|z,\overline{z}\pm _P=\pm z_m^1|z,\overline{z}\pm _P,m0.$$
$`(2.31)`$
From the formulas (2.25), (2.29) and (2.31) it immediately follows, that in our case the conditions (2.9) are satisfied:

$$z,\overline{z}\pm |L_n|z,\overline{z}\pm _P=0,z,\overline{z}\pm |\overline{L}_n|z,\overline{z}\pm _P=0.$$
$`(2.32)`$
Let’s check whether the self-consistency conditions (2.10) are satisfied. For this it is enough to be convinced that

$$z,\overline{z}\pm |(L_nL_nL_nL_n)|z,\overline{z}\pm _P=0.$$
$`(2.33)`$
The simple calculation shows that

$$L_nL_n=\frac{1}{2}\underset{m=1}{\overset{n}{}}m(nm)+n(\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_0^1)^2+2n\underset{m=1}{\overset{n}{}}\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_m^1\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_m^1+$$

$$+\underset{m=n+1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}(n+m)\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_m^1\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_m^1+\underset{m=n+1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}(mn)\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_m^0\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_m^0+:L_nL_n:.$$
$`(2.34)`$
Similarly

$$L_nL_n=\frac{1}{2}\underset{m=1}{\overset{n}{}}m(nm)+n(\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_0^0)^2+2n\underset{m=1}{\overset{n}{}}\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_m^0\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_m^0+$$

$$+\underset{m=n+1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}(n+m)\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_m^0\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_m^0+\underset{m=n+1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}(mn)\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_m^1\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_m^1+:L_nL_n:.$$
$`(2.35)`$
Here the operators $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^a`$ are expressed in terms of the operators $`\alpha ^{(+)}\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{()}`$ in the same way that the operators $`\alpha ^a`$ are expressed in terms of the operators $`\alpha ^{(+)}\alpha ^{()}`$.

Since, $`:L_nL_n::L_nL_n:`$, from the last two equalities we have

$$L_nL_nL_nL_n=2nL_0.$$
$`(2.36)`$
The ordering on the right-hand side of equality (2.36) is defined in accordance with (2.25). From (2.36) it can be seen that the equations (2.33) are satisfied, that is, the self-consistency conditions (2.10) are satisfied.

Note that generally

$$z,\overline{z}\pm |L_nL_n|z,\overline{z}\pm _P0.$$
$`(2.37)`$
We see that the second method also results in a self-consistent quantum theory of the model (2.6).

Shortly we shall discuss the superposition principle in the second quantization method.

Let’s assume that the states $`|z,\overline{z}\pm _P`$ and $`|z^{},\overline{z}^{}\pm _P`$ are physical. Is the state

$$|z,\overline{z}\pm _P+|z^{},\overline{z}^{}\pm _P$$
$`(2.38)`$
physical?

In our view, the superposition principle need not necessarily be extended to nonphysical gauge degrees of freedom. Therefore, if in the more complex theories using the second quantization method, the superposition principle in the space $`H_G`$ will appear restricted, in our opinion this does not invalidate the method. In physical state space the superposition principle is fully obeyed.

3. Inclusion of matter

It can be seen from the (anti)commutation relations (1.17-18) that boson and fermion fields have the following expansions in terms of modes (cf. (2.2)-(2.4)):

$$f(\sigma )=\frac{x}{\sqrt{4\pi }}+\frac{i}{\sqrt{4\pi }}\underset{n0}{}\frac{1}{n}(\alpha _ne^{in\sigma }+\overline{\alpha }_ne^{in\sigma }),$$

$$\pi (\sigma )=\frac{p}{\sqrt{\pi }}+\frac{1}{\sqrt{4\pi }}\underset{n0}{}(\alpha _ne^{in\sigma }+\overline{\alpha }_ne^{in\sigma }),$$
$`(3.1)`$
$$\varphi (\sigma )=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi }}\underset{n}{}\beta _ne^{in\sigma },\chi (\sigma )=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi }}\underset{n}{}\overline{\beta }_ne^{in\sigma }.$$
$`(3.2)`$
Further we suppose $`p\alpha _0\overline{\alpha }_0`$. Since the fields (3.1) and (3.2) are real, we have:

$$x^{}=x,\alpha _n^{}=\alpha _n\overline{\alpha }_n^{}=\overline{\alpha }_n\beta _n^{}=\beta _n\overline{\beta }_n^{}=\overline{\beta }_n.$$
$`(3.3)`$
The (anti)commutation relations (1.17-18) are equivalent to

$$[\alpha _m,\alpha _n]=[\overline{\alpha }_m,\overline{\alpha }_n]=m\delta _{m+n},[x,p]=i,$$
$`(3.4)`$
$$\{\beta _m,\beta _n\}=\{\overline{\beta }_m,\overline{\beta }_n\}=\delta _{m+n}.$$
$`(3.5)`$
We write out only non-zero commutation relations. The operators (2.6) we shall denote further by $`L_n^{(0)}`$ and $`\overline{L}_n^{(0)}`$ respectively. Taking into account the contribution of the material degrees of freedom, we write out the Fourier components of(2.5):

$$L_n=L_n^{(0)}+\frac{1}{2}\underset{m}{}\left[\alpha _{nm}\alpha _m+\left(m\frac{n}{2}\right)\beta _{nm}\beta _m\right]$$
$`(3.6)`$
It is convenient to begin constructing the unitary transformation indicated at the end of the Introduction, which solves the quantization problem, by defining the creation and annihilation operators of the field (1.21). In other words, our first task is to construct both boson and fermion creation and annihilation operators of matter which commute with all the operators (3.6). We can see that the problem with slightly weaker conditions has a solution. This is sufficient for our purposes.

Let’s consider the ”gravitationally dressed” operators of the material fields:

$$A_m=\underset{n}{}_{m,n}\alpha _n,\overline{A}_m=\underset{n}{}\overline{}_{m,n}\overline{\alpha }_n,$$
$`(3.7)`$
$$B_m=\underset{n}{}{}_{}{}^{F}_{m,n}^{}\beta _n,\overline{B}_m=\underset{n}{}{}_{}{}^{F}\overline{}_{m,n}^{}\overline{\beta }_n.$$
$`(3.8)`$
The infinite-dimensional matrices $`_{m,n}\overline{}_{m,n}`$, $`{}_{}{}^{F}_{m,n}^{}`$ and $`{}_{}{}^{F}\overline{}_{m,n}^{}`$ in (3.7) and (3.8) are determined in the Appendix. The elements of these matrixes depend on the operators $`(x_+/p_+,\alpha _m^{(+)}/p_+`$, $`\overline{\alpha }_m^{(+)}/p_+)`$, whose relative commutators are equal to zero. Therefore all the matrix elements in (3.7), (3.8) mutually commute.

It is easy to check by means of direct calculations that the nonzero commutators of the operators (3.7) and (3.8) have the following form:

$$[A_m,A_n]=[\overline{A}_m,\overline{A}_n]=m\delta _{m+n},$$
$`(3.9a)`$
$$\{B_m,B_n\}=\{\overline{B}_m,\overline{B}_n\}=\delta _{m+n}.$$
$`(3.9b)`$
Using (3.4),(3.7), and (A.14) we find:

$$[A_m,A_n]=\underset{l}{}l_{m,l}_{n,l}=n\underset{l}{}_{m,l}_{l,n}^1=m\delta _{m+n}.$$
$`(3.10)`$
The equalities (3.9a) are thereby established. As a result of (3.5), (3.8) and (A.$`14^{}`$) we have:

$$\{B_m,B_n\}=\underset{l}{}{}_{}{}^{F}_{m,l}^{}{}_{}{}^{F}_{n,l}^{}=\underset{l}{}{}_{}{}^{F}_{m,l}^{}{}_{}{}^{F}_{l,n}^{1}.$$
$`(3.11)`$
From this it follows that the commutation relations (3.9b) are valid.

The operators (3.7) and (3.8) introduced here differ only negligibly from the DDF-operators used in the string theory (see ).

From the given definitions it is easy to see that:

$$[\alpha _m^{(+)},A_n]=[\alpha _m^{(+)},\overline{A}_n]=[\alpha _m^{(+)},B_n]=[\alpha _m^{(+)},\overline{B}_n]=0.$$
$`(3.12)`$
The relations (3.12) remain valid if instead of $`\alpha _m^{(+)}`$ we substitute $`\overline{\alpha }_m^{(+)}`$ or $`x_+`$.

Now, instead of $`\alpha _m^{()}`$ we must introduce the variables $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_m^{()}`$ into the theory, which conserve the previous form of the commutation relations with the variables $`\alpha _m^{(+)}`$ and have zero commutators with the new variables (3.7), (3.8).

From the definition (3.7) we find:

$$[\alpha _m^{()},A_n]=\underset{l}{}[\alpha _m^{()},_{n,l}]\alpha _l.$$

We use (A.16) and also reverse equalities (3.7). As a result, we obtain

$$[\alpha _m^{()},A_n]=\frac{2n}{p_+}\underset{p}{}\left(\underset{l}{}_{n,lm}_{l,p}^1\right)A_p,m0.$$

Here the sum in brackets is calculated using formulas (A.3), (A.10) and (A.12). Thus, we find

$$[\alpha _m^{()},A_n]=\frac{2n}{p_+}\underset{p}{}_{m,pn}^1A_p,m0,$$

$$[\alpha _0^{()},A_n]=\frac{n}{p_+}A_n.$$
$`(3.13)`$
Equality (3.11) here was taken into account. The following relations also hold:

$$[\alpha _0^{()},\overline{A}_n]=\frac{n}{p_+}\overline{A}_n,[\alpha _m^{()},\overline{A}_n]=0,m0.$$
$`(3.14)`$
Similarly, using formulas (3.8), (A.4), (A.11), (A.12) and (A.14) we obtain:

$$[\alpha _m^{()},B_n]=\frac{1}{p_+}\underset{p}{}(n+p)_{m,pn}^1B_p,[\alpha _m^{()},\overline{B}_n]=0,m0,$$

$$[\alpha _0^{()},B_n]=\frac{n}{p_+}B_n,[\alpha _0^{()},\overline{B}_n]=\frac{n}{p_+}\overline{B}_n.$$
$`(3.15)`$
It follows directly from formulas (3.13)-(3.15) and also (3.9) and (3.12) that variables

$$\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_m^{()}=\alpha _m^{()}\frac{1}{p_+}\underset{p}{}\underset{q}{}_{m,p+q}^1\left(A_pA_q\frac{pq}{2}B_pB_q\right),m0,$$

$$\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_0^{()}\stackrel{~}{\overline{\alpha }}_0^{()}=\alpha _0^{()}\frac{1}{2p_+}\underset{p}{}\{A_pA_p+\overline{A}_p\overline{A}_p+p(B_pB_p+\overline{B}_p\overline{B}_p)+2M^2\}$$
$`(3.16)`$
commute with all the operators $`A_n,\overline{A}_n,`$ $`B_n`$ and $`\overline{B}_n`$ :

$$[\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_m^{()},A_n]=[\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_m^{()},\overline{A}_n]=[\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_m^{()},B_n]=[\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_m^{()},\overline{B}_n]=0.$$
$`(3.17)`$
The number $`M^2`$ in (3.16) can also be regarded as the result of normal ordering (compare with (2.14)).

If in the formulas (3.13)-(3.17) all quantities without a bar are replaced by the same quantities with a bar and simultaneously all quantities with a bar are replaced by the same quantities without a bar, these formulas remain valid.

Now we shall define the normal ordering of the creation and annihilation operators (3.7) and (3.8). These operators are by definition assumed to be normally ordered if all the creation operators $`A_{|n|},\overline{A}_{|n|},`$ $`B_{|n|},\overline{B}_{|n|}`$ are placed to the left of all annihilation operators $`A_{|n|},\overline{A}_{|n|},`$ $`B_{|n|},\overline{B}_{|n|}`$.

The right-hand sides of the equalities (3.16) contain quadratic forms of the operators (3.7) and (3.8). These quadratic forms are represented as sums which are not normally ordered. However, it is easy to see, that the right-hand side of the equalities (3.16) can in fact be considered to be normally ordered, since the following equalities are satisfied

$$\underset{p}{}\underset{q}{}_{m,p+q}^1(A_pA_q\frac{pq}{2}B_pB_q)=:\underset{p}{}\underset{q}{}_{m,p+q}^1(A_pA_q\frac{pq}{2}B_pB_q):.$$
$`(3.18)`$
In order to prove the equalities (3.18) it is sufficient to establish that

$$\underset{p}{}(A_pA_p+pB_pB_p)=\underset{p}{}:(A_pA_p+pB_pB_p):=$$

$$=:\underset{p}{}(A_pA_p+pB_pB_p):.$$
$`(3.19)`$
The first equality in (3.19) follows directly from the definition of orderings and the commutation relations (3.9). In order to prove the second equality in (3.19), it is necessary to take into account that formally $`_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}n=\zeta (1)`$, where $`\zeta (s)`$ is a Riemann zeta function:

$$\zeta (s)=\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}n^s$$
$`(3.20)`$
The zeta function has a unique analytic continuation to the point $`s=1`$ where $`\zeta (1)=1/12`$. This regularization of the divergent sum $`_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}n`$ is now generally accepted. Therefore it is possible to put that

$$\left(\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}n\right)\left(\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}n\right)=\zeta (1)\zeta (1).$$

Here the first divergent sum arises as a result of the ordering of the boson operators and the second appears as a result of the ordering of the fermion operators. From here the second equality in (3.19) follows.

Thus, the right-hand sides of the equalities (3.16) can equally well be taken to be normally ordered relative to the operators (3.7) and (3.8) ore disordered and written in the form of sums contained in (3.16). For some calculations the disordered variant of the right-hand sides of (3.16) is more convenient.

Now we shall prove the following commutation relations:

$$[\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_m^{()},\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_n^{()}]=[\stackrel{~}{\overline{\alpha }}_m^{()},\stackrel{~}{\overline{\alpha }}_n^{()}]=[\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_m^{()},\stackrel{~}{\overline{\alpha }}_n^{()}]=0.$$
$`(3.21)`$
Let $`m0`$ and $`n0`$. We take the variables $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_m^{()}`$ in the form (3.16). We then have

$$[\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_m^{()},\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_n^{()}]=[\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_m^{()},\alpha _n^{()}]\frac{1}{p_+}\underset{p,q}{}[\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_m^{()},_{n,p+q}^1]\left(A_pA_q\frac{pq}{2}B_pB_q\right).$$
$`(3.22)`$
Here we have used the definition (3.16) for $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_n^{()}`$ and the commutation relations (3.17). On the right-hand side of (3.22) we replace $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_m^{()}`$ by its value as given by (3.16):

$$[\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_m^{()},\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_n^{()}]=\frac{1}{p_+}\underset{p,q}{}\{[\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_n^{()},_{m,p+q}^1][\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_m^{()},_{n,p+q}^1]\}\left(A_pA_q\frac{pq}{2}B_pB_q\right)+$$

$$+\frac{1}{p_+}\underset{p,q}{}_{m,p+q}^1\left\{[\alpha _n^{()},A_pA_q]\frac{pq}{2}[\alpha _n^{()},B_pB_q]\right\}.$$

Using formulas (A.17) and (3.13),(3.15), after redefining the notation of the indices in some sums we transform this last expression to give

$$\frac{1}{p_+^2}\{\underset{p,q}{}[2m_{(p+q),(m+n)}(A_pA_q\frac{pq}{2}B_pB_q)2\underset{r}{}r_{m,q+r}^1_{n,pr}^1A_pA_q+$$

$$+\frac{1}{2}\underset{r}{}(r+p)(rq)_{m,q+r}^1_{n,pr}^1B_pB_q]\}\frac{1}{p_+^2}\{mn\}.$$
$`(3.23)`$
Here the parts of the sums over $`r`$ which are antisymmetric in terms of the indices $`m`$ and $`n`$ are obtained using the relations (A.18). As a result, all the terms in (3.23) are mutually reduced. Thus, we have proven that the commutator (3.22) is equal to zero. The relations

$$[\stackrel{~}{\overline{\alpha }}_m^{()},\stackrel{~}{\overline{\alpha }}_n^{()}]=0,m0,n0$$

are proved by exactly repeating these procedure.

Similarly, it is established that

$$[\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_0^{()},\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_m^{()}]=[\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_0^{()},\stackrel{~}{\overline{\alpha }}_m^{()}]=0.$$

The equalities

$$[\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_m^{()},\stackrel{~}{\overline{\alpha }}_n^{()}]=0,m0,n0$$

follow trivially from the fundamental commutation relations (3.4), (3.5) and the definitions (3.16). The validity of the commutation relations (3.21) is thus completely proven.

From the definitions (3.16) and the commutation relations (3.12) we have also:

$$[\alpha _m^{(+)},\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_n^{()}]=[\overline{\alpha }_m^{(+)},\stackrel{~}{\overline{\alpha }}_n^{()}]=2m\delta _{m+n},[x_+,\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_n^{()}]=[\stackrel{~}{x}_{},\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_n^{(+)}]=2i\delta _n.$$
$`(3.24)`$
The explicit form of the new variable $`\stackrel{~}{x}_{}`$ is not given here since this variable is not used below.

The initial variables $`\{x_\pm ,\alpha _m^{(\pm )},`$ $`\overline{\alpha }_m^{(\pm )},\alpha _m,\overline{\alpha }_m,`$ $`\beta _m,\overline{\beta }_m\}`$ (or more accurately their linear combination) are canonical one. It follows from the commutation relations (3.9),(3.12), (3.17) and (3.21) that the set of variables

$$\{x_+,\stackrel{~}{x}_{},\alpha _m^{(+)},\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_m^{},\overline{\alpha }_m^{(+)},\stackrel{~}{\overline{\alpha }}_m^{()},A_m,\overline{A}_m,B_m,\overline{B}_m\}$$
$`(3.25)`$
is also canonical.

Now we can determine the unitary transformation appearing in (1.21). Let’s define the unitary operator $`U`$ using the following equalities:

$$Ux_+=x_+U,Ux_{}=\stackrel{~}{x}_{}U,U\alpha _m^{(+)}=\alpha _m^{(+)}U,U\alpha _m^{()}=\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_m^{()}U,$$

$$U\alpha _m=A_mU,U\beta _m=B_mU,U\overline{\alpha }_m^{(+)}=\overline{\alpha }_m^{(+)}U,\mathrm{},$$
$`(3.26)`$
and so on for the remaining operators with a bar. It is known, that equalities of the type (3.26) uniquely determine the linear operator $`U`$ and this operator is unitary .

We must express the operators (3.6) in terms of the new variables. To do this we represent the operators $`L_n^{(0)}`$ from (3.6) in the form (2.13) and express the operators $`\alpha _m^{()},\alpha _m`$ and $`\beta _m`$ in terms of the operators $`x_+,\alpha _m^{(+)},\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_m^{()},`$ $`A_m,B_m`$ using formulas (3.7), (3.8) and (3.16). As a result of simple calculations using the sum rules (A.20) and (A.21) we come to the following formulas:

$$L_n=\frac{1}{2}\underset{m}{}\alpha _{nm}^{(+)}\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_m^{()}+\frac{1}{4p_+}\alpha _n^{(+)}𝒩,$$

$$\overline{L}_n=\frac{1}{2}\underset{m}{}\overline{\alpha }_{nm}^{(+)}\stackrel{~}{\overline{\alpha }}_m^{()}\frac{1}{4p_+}\overline{\alpha }_n^{(+)}𝒩,$$

$$𝒩=\underset{l}{}\{A_lA_l\overline{A}_l\overline{A}_l+l(B_lB_l\overline{B}_l\overline{B}_l)\}.$$
$`(3.27)`$
For the same reason as in (3.19) the equality

$$𝒩=:𝒩:$$
$`(3.28)`$
takes place.

It is possible to be convinced of the validity of the equalities (3.27) by a more simple way. For this it is necessary to calculate the commutators of the operators (3.7), (3.8), (3.16) with the operators $`L_n`$ in the representation (3.6) and (3.27). The results of these calculations coincide.

Using (3.26) and (3.27), we find that

$$L_n=U\left\{L_n^{(0)}+\frac{1}{2p_+}\alpha _n^{(+)}𝒩_0\right\}U^{},$$

$$\overline{L}_n=U\left\{\overline{L}_n^{(0)}\frac{1}{2p_+}\overline{\alpha }_n^{(+)}𝒩_0\right\}U^{},$$

$$𝒩_0=\underset{l>0}{}[\alpha _l\alpha _l\overline{\alpha }_l\overline{\alpha }_l+l(\beta _l\beta _l\overline{\beta }_l\overline{\beta }_l)].$$
$`(3.29)`$
The relations (3.29) are an exact variant of (1.20). Though the formulas (3.29) have a little more complex form than (1.20), nevertheless there is a possibility of essential further promoting on the path which was indicated in Introduction.

We note that the operators (3.7),(3.8) used here differ essentially from gravitationally dressed operators in . For the operators (3.7), (3.8) we have:

$$[A_m,L_n]=\frac{m}{2p_+}\alpha _n^{(+)}A_m$$
$`(3.30)`$
and so on. We stress that it is impossible to construct a set of operators which are expressed linearly in terms of material field operators and also commuting with all operators $`L_n`$ and $`\overline{L}_n`$. (A similar situation is encountered in theory of closed string when the transverse degrees of freedom are described by DDF-operators.) A different approach to the investigated model was applied in : the authors introduced new operators $`L_n^{}`$ and $`\overline{L}_n^{}`$, which differ from the operators $`L_n`$ and $`\overline{L}_n`$ by values proportional to Planck constant. The operators $`L_n^{}`$ and $`\overline{L}_n^{}`$ have the same algebra as $`L_n`$ and $`\overline{L}_n`$. At the same time there is a complete set of gravitationally dressed operators $`\{C_n,\overline{C}_n\}`$, describing the degrees of freedom of the material fields and expressed linearly in terms of material field operators, and also commuting with all operators $`L_n^{}`$ and $`\overline{L}_n^{}`$. This fact simplifies the formal quantization procedure. However, essential difficulties are encountered when we attempt to express the initial dynamic variables in terms of those operators used for quantization.

In the present paper, unlike , we give explicit formulas expressing the initial variables in terms of the new variables (see (3.16)). It enables the calculations of matrix elements of the metric tensor (1.2) (see Section 5).

4. Physical state space

The formulas obtained in Sections 2 and 3 can be used to quantize the investigated model.

As a result of the existence of a unitary transformation having the properties (3.26) and (3.29), we can confirm that the state space of the system (3.6) is isomorphic to the state space of the two noninteracting systems: pure gravity and free fields (3.1), (3.2). Bearing in mind this unitary transformation, we shall construct the physical state space directly in the theory with interaction.

We first apply the first quantization method.

Let’s define two families of states using the formulas (cf. (2.19)):

$$\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_m^{()}|k\pm _D=\stackrel{~}{\overline{\alpha }}_m^{()}|k\pm _D=0,m=0,\pm 1,\mathrm{},$$
$`(4.1)`$
$$A_n|k\pm _D=\overline{A}_n|k\pm _D=B_n|k\pm _D=\overline{B}_n|k\pm _D=0,n>0.$$
$`(4.2)`$
Let’s impose also the constraints

$$A_0|k\pm _D=\overline{A}_0|k\pm _D=0,$$

which are not necessary and are imposed only for simplification of the formulas. In addition, we assume that relations (2.21) and (2.22) are satisfied.

The reason why the quantity $`M^2>0`$ was introduced into the formulas (2.14) and (3.16) now becomes clear: as a result of this introduction and condition (4.1) with $`m=0`$ the operator $`p_+`$ has no zero eigenvalues in the physical space $`H_{PD}`$. Therefore the unitary transformation (3.26) is defined correctly and the operators $`A_n`$ and so on can act on the states $`|k\pm _D`$.

All the physical states are linear combinations of basic states having the form

$$|k\pm ;n_i,\overline{n}_i,m_i,\overline{m}_i_D=(A_{n_1}\mathrm{}\overline{A}_{\overline{n}_1}\mathrm{}B_{m_1}\mathrm{}\overline{B}_{\overline{m}_1}\mathrm{})|k\pm _DH_{PD}^{(\pm )},$$

$$n_i,\overline{n}_i,m_i,\overline{m}_i>0,$$
$`(4.3)`$
$$\left(\underset{i}{}n_i+\underset{i}{}m_i\underset{i}{}\overline{n}_i\underset{i}{}\overline{m}_i\right)=0.$$
$`(4.4)`$
The complete physical state space is represented as a direct sum

$$H_{PD}=H_{PD}^{(+)}H_{PD}^{()}.$$
$`(4.5)`$
As a result of relations (4.1),(4.4) and (3.9), we have:

$$𝒩|_P=0,|_PH_{PD}.$$
$`(4.6)`$
Now using (3.27),(4.1),(4.2) and (4.6) we obtain

$$L_n|_P=\overline{L}_n|_P=0.$$
$`(4.7)`$
It follows from the commutation relations (3.9) and equalities (4.2), (2.22) that the scalar product in the spaces $`H_{PD}^{(+)}`$ and $`H_{PD}^{()}`$ is positive definite, and also these spaces are mutually orthogonal.

This implies that an anomaly-free quantization of the system (3.6) has been performed using the first method.

Now we apply the second method of quantization.

By definition, the state space is generated by two series of states $`|z,\overline{z}\pm _P`$ having the following properties. The states $`|z,\overline{z}\pm _P`$ satisfy the equations (2.28),(4.2) and also (cf. (2.31)) the equalities

$$\frac{1}{2}(\alpha _m^{(+)}+\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_m^{()})|z,\overline{z}\pm _P=\pm z_m^0|z,\overline{z}\pm _P,$$

$$\frac{1}{2}(\alpha _m^{(+)}\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_m^{()})|z,\overline{z}\pm _P=\pm z_m^1|z,\overline{z}\pm _P,m>0,$$
$`(4.8)`$
and similarly for the quantities with a bar.

From (2.28) it follows that

$$\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_0^{()}|z,\overline{z}\pm _P=0.$$
$`(4.9)`$
The basic states in he physical space are denoted by $`|z,\overline{z}\pm ;`$ $`n_i,\overline{n}_i,m_i,\overline{m}_i_P`$. They are constructed using the operators $`A_m,\mathrm{},m>0`$ in accordance with (4.3) and (4.4). The physical state space $`H_P`$ is decomposed in the direct sum of the orthogonal subspaces $`H_P^{(+)}`$ and $`H_P^{()}`$. The scalar product in the space $`H_P`$ is positive definite.

As a result of the commutation relations (3.12) and (3.17), equations (4.8) and (4.9) remain valid also for physical states if the physical states are ”pure” relative to gauge degree of freedoms. Here we understand under the ”purity” that all physical states have the same set of parameters $`\{z_m^a,\overline{z}_m^a\}`$.

We shall not demonstrate in detail that in this case quantization conditions (2.9) and (2.10) are satisfied. It follows directly from all above-stated. Here we merely stress the following important fact: Averaging in (2.9) and (2.10) needs to be spent only in space of gauge degree of freedoms $`H_G`$ (see (2.17),(2.18)). Averaging in (2.9) and (2.10) need not be performed over variables described by the operators $`A_m,\overline{A}_m,`$ $`B_m,\overline{B}_m`$.

5. Calculation of averages

In the investigated model the most interesting quantity is the average value of the metric tensor (1.2) relative to the physical states. For this purpose, in accordance with (1.2), it is necessary to calculate the average of the expression $`\mathrm{exp}(2\rho )`$ as the parameters $`u`$ and $`v`$ are the numerical Lagrange multiplies.

To begin calculations, suppose that the formulas (1.15) valid in classical theory also hold in quantum theory. This assumption allows us to express the unknown quantity in terms of the quantum fields $`\pi ^a,r^a`$ (2.2) as follows:

$$\frac{\lambda }{\pi G}e^{2\rho }=\pi _a\pi ^ar_a^{}r_{}^{a}{}_{}{}^{}+2(\pi ^0r_{}^{1}{}_{}{}^{}\pi ^1r_{}^{0}{}_{}{}^{}).$$

With the help of (2.2) this equality is rewritten in the convenient form for us:

$$e^{2\rho (\sigma )}=\frac{G}{\lambda }\left(\underset{m}{}\alpha _m^{(+)}e^{im\sigma }\right)\left(\underset{n}{}\overline{\alpha }_n^{()}e^{in\sigma }\right).$$
$`(5.1)`$
In (5.1) the variables $`\overline{\alpha }_n^{()}`$ should be expressed in terms of the new variables $`\overline{\alpha }_n^{(+)}`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\overline{\alpha }}_n^{()}`$ and $`\overline{A}_m,\overline{B}_m,`$ $`A_m,B_m`$ in accordance with (3.16). Then we can calculate the average values of the expression (5.1) using the results of the previous Section.

On the right-hand side of (5.1) all the variables inside the first brackets commute with all the variables inside the second brackets. Taking into account this fact and also the results of Section 4, we can confirm that the following formula is valid to calculate the averages relative to the basis vectors:

$$e^{2\rho }=\frac{G}{\lambda }\underset{m}{}\alpha _m^{(+)}e^{im\sigma }\underset{n}{}\overline{\alpha }_n^{()}e^{in\sigma }.$$
$`(5.2)`$
For calculation of averages in (5.2) the second method of quantization is used.

We first calculate the average relative to the ground state $`|z,\overline{z}+_P`$.

Let’s express the variables $`\alpha _m^{(+)}`$ in the form

$$\alpha _m^{(+)}=a_m^0+a_m^1,a_m^0=\frac{1}{2}(\alpha _m^{(+)}+\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_m^{()}),a_m^1=\frac{1}{2}(\alpha _m^{(+)}\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_m^{()}).$$
$`(5.3)`$
and use the formulas (4.8) and (2.28). Thus we obtain

$$z,\overline{z}+|\underset{m}{}\alpha _m^{(+)}e^{im\sigma }|z,\overline{z}+_P=\underset{m}{}z_m^{(+)}e^{im\sigma }.$$
$`(5.4)`$
Similarly we find

$$z,\overline{z}+|\underset{n}{}\stackrel{~}{\overline{\alpha }}_n^{()}e^{in\sigma }|z,\overline{z}+_P=\underset{n}{}\stackrel{~}{\overline{z}}_n^{()}e^{in\sigma }.$$
$`(5.5)`$
It follows from (3.16),(3.18) and (4.2) that

$$z,\overline{z}+|(\overline{\alpha }_n^{()}\stackrel{~}{\overline{\alpha }}_n^{()})|z,\overline{z}+_P=0.$$
$`(5.6)`$
Combining formulas (5.2),(5.4),(5.5),(5.6) and (2. $`29^{}`$), we obtain:

$$z,\overline{z}+|e^{2\rho (\sigma )}|z,\overline{z}+_P=\frac{2\pi G}{\lambda }z^{(+)}(\sigma )\stackrel{~}{\overline{z}}^{()}(\sigma )$$
$`(5.7)`$
To find more complex matrix elements it is necessary to make additional calculations.

As a result of (A.2), we have

$$u^l=z^l\mathrm{exp}\left(il\frac{x_+}{2p_+}\right)\mathrm{exp}(\xi _++\xi _{}),$$

$$\xi _+=\frac{l}{p_+}\underset{m>0}{}\frac{1}{m}(z^ma_m^0+z^ma_m^1),\xi _{}=\frac{l}{p_+}\underset{m>0}{}\frac{1}{m}(z^ma_m^0z^ma_m^1).$$
$`(5.8)`$
Here $`a_m^0`$ and $`a_m^1`$ are defined according to (5.3). As a result of the relations (4.8), when calculating the matrix elements we need to order the operators in (5.8) so that the functions of the value $`\xi _+`$ are to the left of the functions of the value $`\xi _{}`$. It is easy for achieving since the commutator

$$\frac{1}{2}[\xi _+,\xi _{}]=\left(\frac{l}{p_+}\right)^2\underset{m>0}{}\frac{1}{m}$$
$`(5.9)`$
is a c-number commuting with $`\xi _+`$ and $`\xi _{}`$. Then using the well-known Baker-Hausdorff formula we obtain

$$u^l=\left\{\mathrm{exp}\left[\left(\frac{l}{p_+}\right)^2\underset{m>0}{}\frac{1}{m}\right]\right\}z^l\mathrm{exp}\left(il\frac{x_+}{2p_+}\right)e^{\xi _+}e^\xi _{}.$$
$`(5.10)`$
Now the averages of expression (5.10) are calculated using relations (4.8):

$$z,\overline{z}+|u^l|z,\overline{z}+_P\left\{\mathrm{exp}\left[\left(\frac{l}{p_+}\right)^2\underset{m>0}{}\frac{1}{m}\right]\right\}\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{l}{p_+}\underset{n0}{}\frac{z_n^{(+)}}{n}z^n\right).$$
$`(5.11)`$
Since the argument of the first exponential function on the right-hand side of (5.11) is an infinitely large negative number, the average of (5.11) is equal to zero. It means that in calculations of the matrix elements under the average sign the elements of the matrix $`_{n,l}^1`$ are in fact only nonzero for $`l=0`$. The indicated fact which applies equally to the elements of the matrix $`\overline{}_{n,l}^1`$, essentially simplifies the calculations. Using (A.9) and (A.10) we obtain:

$$\overline{}_{n,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}}^1=\frac{\overline{\alpha }_n^{(+)}}{p_+}.$$
$`(5.12)`$
Bearing this observation in mind and also formula (A.12) we note that the matrix elements should be calculated using the following relations:

$$\overline{\alpha }_m^{()}=\stackrel{~}{\overline{\alpha }}_m^{()}+\frac{\overline{\alpha }_m^{(+)}}{p_+^2}:\underset{p}{}(\overline{A}_p\overline{A}_p+p\overline{B}_p\overline{B}_p):,m0,$$
$`(5.13)`$
and also the second formula (3.16) (for $`m=0`$). Using (5.2),(5.4), and (5.13), we can calculate the diagonal matrix element of the metric tensor relative to the basis state like (4.3), (4.4) $`|p=`$ $`|z,\overline{z}+;n_i,\overline{n}_i,m_i,\overline{m}_i`$:

$$p|e^{2\rho (\sigma )}|p=\frac{2\pi G}{\lambda }z^{(+)}(\sigma )\left\{\stackrel{~}{\overline{z}}^{()}(\sigma )+\frac{\overline{z}^{(+)}(\sigma )}{(z_0^{(+)})^2}(\underset{i}{}n_i+\underset{i}{}m_i)\right\}.$$
$`(5.14)`$
The functions $`z^{(+)}(\sigma )`$, $`\overline{z}^{(+)}(\sigma )`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\overline{z}}^{()}(\sigma )`$ satisfy (2. $`29^{}`$). To derive formula (5.14) we used equality (4.4) and assumed that the basis vector is normalized.

Further calculation of averages, their study and interpretation are outside the scope of the present work.

The calculation of matrix elements of the metric tensor using the first method encounters serious difficulties. Really, the variables $`\alpha _m^{(+)}`$ are not operators in the physical state space $`H_{PD}`$. Therefore averages having the form

$$\underset{m}{}\alpha _m^{(+)}e^{im\sigma }_{PD},\underset{m}{}\overline{\alpha }_m^{(+)}e^{im\sigma }_{PD}$$
$`(5.15)`$
are not determined. As a result of the quantization conditions (4.1) and (4.2) it would be possible to accept that the average (5.2) is equal to zero if the matrix element is calculated relative to generating states $`|k\pm _D`$. However, it does not rescue a general situation since at calculating the matrix elements relative to the excited states it is necessary to calculate the averages from the expressions of the tipe (5.15) (see (5.12) and (5.14)).

6. Conclusions

In the present paper we have applied two methods of quantization to the theory of two-dimensional gravity. The first method using the Dirac prescription allows us to achieve complete quantization. It implies

a) constructing a physical state space with a positive definite scalar product;

b) the obvious expressing physically meaningful quantities in terms of those operators used to construct the physical state space.

However the averages of the metric tensor cannot be calculated using the first method. This statement is fair at least in that case when the space of physical states is constructed using the operators, $`A_n,B_n,\mathrm{},`$ determined in Section 3.

In addition to the problems (a) and (b) the second method of quantization can also solve the following problems:

c) calculating the averages of the metric tensor relative to the physical states.

On the basis of these results we can conclude that the second method of quantization should be used subsequently to study other models.

To conclude we make the following remark.

The model (3.6) can easily be quantized in a ”light cone” gauge. In the terms used in the present study using this gauge implies imposing the second-class constraints:

$$\alpha _m^{(+)}=0,\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_m^{()}=0,\overline{\alpha }_m^{(+)}=0,\stackrel{~}{\overline{\alpha }}_m^{()}=0,m0.$$
$`(6.1)`$
Thus in accordance with (5.2) and (5.6), the average of the metric tensor relative to the ground state is zero. On the other hand, in the second method of quantization, in accordance with (5.7) and (2.$`29^{}`$), the average of the metric tensor relative to the ground state is generally nonzero. From here we see that if the quantization method based on obvious resolution of the first-class constraints by imposing the special gauges is equivalent to the first method of quantization, then it is not equivalent to the second method of quantization. Under the second quantization method the structure the physical state space appears essentially richer than under the first quantization method (ore under the obvious resolution of the first-class constraints).

Appendix

Let $`\tau `$ be some ”time-like” parameter and $`z=e^{i\tau }`$. We introduce the following operator functions:

$$q(\tau )q(z)=\frac{x_+}{2p_+}+\frac{1}{i}\mathrm{ln}z+\frac{i}{p_+}\underset{n0}{}\frac{1}{n}\alpha _n^{(+)}z^n,$$

$$\overline{q}(\tau )\overline{q}(z)=\frac{x_+}{2p_+}+\frac{1}{i}\mathrm{ln}z+\frac{i}{p_+}\underset{n0}{}\frac{1}{n}\overline{\alpha }_n^{(+)}z^n.$$
$`(A.1)`$
By definition we have

$$u(z)e^{iq(z)}=z\mathrm{exp}\left(i\frac{x_+}{2p_+}\right)\mathrm{exp}\left(\underset{n0}{}\frac{\alpha _n^{(+)}}{np_+}z^n\right),\overline{u}(z)e^{i\overline{q}(z)}.$$
$`(A.2)`$
Let the contour $`C`$ in the $`z`$-plane go counterclockwise once around the point $`z=0`$ . Let’s define four infinite-dimensional matrixes according to the formulas:

$$_{m,n}=\frac{1}{2\pi i}_C\frac{dz}{z}z^nu^m,$$
$`(A.3)`$
$${}_{}{}^{F}_{m,n}^{}=\frac{1}{2\pi i}_C\frac{dz}{z}z^nu^m\sqrt{\dot{q}}.$$
$`(A.4)`$
The definitions of the matrixes $`\overline{}_{m,n}`$ and $`{}_{}{}^{F}\overline{}_{m,n}^{}`$ are obtained from (A.3) and (A.4) by substituting $`q\overline{q}`$, and $`u\overline{u}`$. Hereinafter we have:

$$\dot{q}=\frac{d}{d\tau }q=iz\frac{d}{dz}q=1+\frac{1}{p_+}\underset{n0}{}\alpha _n^{(+)}z^n.$$
$`(A.5)`$
We draw attention to the fact that all the quantities (A.1)-(A.5) should be considered to be formal series in the elements of free associative commutative involutive algebra $`𝒜^{(+)}`$ with generator $`\{x_+/p_+,\alpha _m^{(+)}/p_+,`$ $`\overline{\alpha }_m^{(+)}/p_+\}`$. This assumption holds until any averages are calculated relative to physical states. The coefficients at the monomials relative to the generator of the algebra $`𝒜^{(+)}`$ in the expansions of (A.1)-(A.5) are final polynomials in $`z`$ and $`z^1`$. Therefore, the integrals in (A.3) and (A.4) are defined correctly. Thereby the matrix elements of the matrixes (A.3) and (A.4) belong to the algebra $`𝒜^{(+)}`$.

From (A.2) we have:

$$\underset{C}{var}\mathrm{ln}u(z)=\underset{C}{var}\mathrm{ln}z\underset{C}{var}\left(\underset{n0}{}\frac{1}{n}\frac{\alpha _n^{(+)}}{p_+}z^n\right).$$

Here $`var_CF(z)`$ means the change of the function $`F(z)`$ (generally ambiguous around the contour $`C`$) for a single counterclockwise circuit around the contour $`C`$ . For this definition the second term on the right-hand side of the last equality makes no contribution, and we have

$$\underset{C}{var}\mathrm{ln}u(z)=\underset{C}{var}\mathrm{ln}z=2\pi i.$$
$`(A.6)`$
From (A.2) and (A.5) we find:

$$\frac{du(z)}{dz}=\frac{u(z)}{z}\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{\alpha _n^{(+)}}{p_+}z^n0.$$
$`(A.7)`$
The last inequality is a corollary of the fact that in algebra $`𝒜^{(+)}`$ there are no relations except for what follow from its commutativeness.

Image of the contour $`C`$ in algebra $`𝒜^{(+)}`$ under the mapping (A.2) is denoted by $`C^{}`$.

The mapping (A.2) can be inverted. This is a consequence of inequality (A.7). This inversion implies that there is an analytic function $`z(u)`$ of the variable $`u`$ which inverts the equation (A.2) into an identity. The function $`z(u)`$ is a formal series of the variables $`\{\alpha ^{(+)}/p_+\}`$. Equation (A.2) may be inverted by an iterative method in powers of the variables $`\alpha ^{(+)}/p_+`$. Let us assume that

$$z(u)=z^{(0)}(u)+z^{(1)}(u)+\mathrm{}$$

where

$$z^{(i)}(u)=\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}z_n^{(i)}u^n$$

and $`z_n^{(i)}`$ are homogeneous functions of the variables $`\alpha ^{(+)}/p_+`$ to the power $`i`$. Using equation (A.2) we obtain:

$$z^{(0)}(u)=ue^{i\delta },\delta =\frac{x_+}{2p_+},$$

$$z^{(1)}(u)=ue^{i\delta }\underset{n0}{}\frac{\alpha _n^{(+)}}{np_+}(e^{i\delta }u)^n,$$

$$z^{(2)}(u)=ue^{i\delta }\{\frac{1}{2}\left[\underset{n0}{}\frac{\alpha _n^{(+)}}{np_+}(e^{i\delta }u)^n\right]^2$$

$$\left[\underset{n0}{}\frac{\alpha _n^{(+)}}{p_+}(e^{i\delta }u)^n\right]\left[\underset{m0}{}\frac{\alpha _m^{(+)}}{mp_+}(e^{i\delta }u)^m\right]\},$$
$`(A.8)`$
and so on. Equation (A.2) uniquely determines each successive term $`z^{(i)}(u)`$ in terms of the previous ones.

From (A.6) it follows also that for a single counterclockwise circuit of the variable $`u`$ around the circuit $`C^{}`$ the variable $`z`$ goes once counterclockwise around the contour $`C`$ . From this it follows that a closed integral over the variable $`z`$ along the circuit $`C`$ may be converted into a closed integral over the variable $`u`$ along the circuit $`C^{}`$ and conversely. In accordance with (A.7) and (A.5) we have

$$\frac{du}{u}=\frac{dz}{z}\left\{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}+\underset{n0}{}\frac{\alpha _n^{(+)}}{p_+}z^n\right\}=\frac{dz}{z}\dot{q}.$$
$`(A.9)`$
The matrices which are inverse of (A.3) and (A.4) are represented most simply in the form

$$_{n,l}^1=\frac{1}{2\pi i}_C^{}\frac{du}{u}u^lz^n,$$
$`(A.10)`$
$${}_{}{}^{F}_{n,l}^{1}=\frac{1}{2\pi i}_C^{}\frac{du}{u}u^lz^n(\dot{q})^{1/2}.$$
$`(A.11)`$
In order to prove the equalities $`^1=^1=1`$, $`{}_{}{}^{F}{}_{}{}^{F}_{}^{1}=`$ $`{}_{}{}^{F}_{}^{1}{}_{}{}^{F}=1,`$ we use the identities

$$\left(z\frac{d}{dz}\right)^sf(z,u(z))=\frac{1}{2\pi i}_C\frac{dz_1}{z_1}f(z_1,u(z_1))\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}n^s\left(\frac{z}{z_1}\right)^n,$$

$$\left(u\frac{d}{du}\right)^sf(u,z(u))=\frac{1}{2\pi i}_C^{}\frac{du_1}{u_1}f(u_1,z(u_1))\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}n^s\left(\frac{u}{u_1}\right)^n,s=0,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1},\mathrm{}$$
$`(A.12)`$
In (A.12) the function $`f(z,u)`$ is expanded in a Laurent series in terms of its arguments and the integration goes in the counterclockwise direction. The identities (A.12) are based on the obvious equalities

$$_C\frac{dz}{z}z^n=_C^{}\frac{du}{u}u^n=2\pi i\delta _n.$$

As a result of (A.6) and (A.12) for $`s=0`$ we have:

$$\underset{l=\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}_{m,l}_{l,n}^1=\frac{1}{2\pi i}_C^{}\frac{du_1}{u_1}u_1^n\frac{1}{2\pi i}_C\frac{dz}{z}u^m\underset{l=\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}\left(\frac{z_1}{z}\right)^l=$$

$$=\frac{1}{2\pi i}_C^{}\frac{du_1}{u_1}u_1^{mn}=\delta _{mn}.$$
$`(A.13)`$
In (A.13) it is meant that $`u=u(z)`$ and $`z_1=z(u_1)`$. Thus, the equality $`^1=1`$ is established. The relations $`^1=1`$, $`{}_{}{}^{F}{}_{}{}^{F}_{}^{1}=1`$, and $`{}_{}{}^{F}_{}^{1}{}_{}{}^{F}=1`$. are established similarly.

Formulas (A.3) and (A.10) directly yield the relation

$$l_{n,l}^1=n_{l,n},$$
$`(A.14)`$
which is valid for all $`l`$ and $`n`$. From (A.4),(A.9) and (A.11) we also obtain:

$${}_{}{}^{F}_{n,l}^{1}={}_{}{}^{F}_{l,n}^{}.$$
$`(A.14^{})`$
The nonzero commutators of $`\alpha _m^{()}`$ and $`\overline{\alpha }_m^{()}`$ with $`u(z)`$ and $`\overline{u}(z)`$ are obtained using (A.2) and (2.12):

$$[\alpha _m^{()},u(z)]=\frac{2}{p_+}z^mu(z),m0,[\alpha _0^{()},u(z)]=\frac{1}{p_+}z^mu(z)$$
$`(A.15)`$
and similarly for barred quantities.

From the definitions (A.3) and (A.4) and relations (A.15) it follows that

$$[\alpha _m^{()},_{n,l}]=\frac{2n}{p_+}_{n,lm},$$

$$[\alpha _m^{()},{}_{}{}^{F}_{n,l}^{}]=\frac{1}{2\pi ip_+}_C\frac{dz}{z}z^{l+m}u^n(2n(\dot{q})^{1/2}+m(\dot{q})^{1/2}),m0,$$

$$[\alpha _0^{()},_{n,l}]=\frac{n}{p_+}_{n,l},[\alpha _0^{()},{}_{}{}^{F}_{n,l}^{}]=\frac{n}{p_+},^F_{n,l}.$$
$`(A.16)`$
The commutation relations (A.16) conserve their form if barred quantities are substituted everywhere in (A.16). The relations (A.16) exhaust all the nonzero commutators between the values $`\alpha ^{()},\overline{\alpha }^{()},`$ $`,\overline{},`$ $`{}_{}{}^{F}`$, and $`{}_{}{}^{F}\overline{},`$.

Now with the help of (A.14) and (A.16) we obtain:

$$[\alpha _m^{()},_{n,l}^1]=\frac{2n}{p_+}_{l,(m+n)},m0,$$

$$[\alpha _0^{()},_{n,l}^1]=\frac{n}{p_+}_{l,n}=\frac{l}{p_+}_{n,l}^1.$$
$`(A.17)`$
In Section 3 the following formulas are used:

$$\underset{q}{}_{m,l+q}^1_{n,pq}^1=_{(m+n),(l+p)}^1,$$
$`(A.18a)`$
$$\underset{q}{}q\left(_{m,l+q}^1_{n,pq}^1_{n,l+q}^1_{m,pq}^1\right)=(mn)_{(l+p),(m+n)},$$
$`(A.18b)`$
$$\underset{q}{}q^2\left(_{m,l+q}^1_{n,pq}^1_{n,l+q}^1_{m,pq}^1\right)=(mn)(pl)_{(l+p),(m+n)}.$$
$`(A.18c)`$
Using the formulas (A.10) and (A.12) for $`s=1`$ we can obtain the following relation:

$$\underset{q=\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}q_{m,l+q}^1_{n,pq}^1=\frac{1}{2\pi i}_C^{}𝑑uu^pz^n\frac{d}{du}(u^lz^m).$$
$`(A.19)`$
Since we are interests only in the antisymmetric component of the relation (A.19) in terms of the indices $`m`$ and $`n`$ on the right-hand side it is possible to remove $`u^l`$ from beneath the derivation sign. Taking into account also that $`(dz/du)du=dz`$ we obtain (A.18b). The remaining formulas (A.18) are proved similarly.

Let’s indicate also the following formulas:

$$\underset{m=\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}_{m,s}^1_{nm,r}^1=\frac{1}{p_+}\underset{m=\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}\alpha _{nm}^{(+)}_{m,r+s}^1,$$
$`(A.20)`$
$$\underset{l}{}l\left({}_{}{}^{F}_{nl,p}^{1}{}_{}{}^{F}_{l,q}^{1}{}_{}{}^{F}_{nl,q}^{1}{}_{}{}^{F}_{l,p}^{1}\right)=\frac{(qp)}{p_+}\underset{l}{}\alpha _l^{(+)}_{(nl),(p+q)}^1$$
$`(A.21)`$
which are derived using the relations (A.9),(A.10), and (A.12).

References

* . R. Jackiw, E-print archive, gr-qc/9612052.

* . E. Benedict, R. Jackiw, H.-J. Lee, Phys. Rev. D54 (1996) 6213.

* . D. Cangemi, R. Jackiw, B. Zwiebach, Ann. Phys. (N.Y). 245 (1996) 408; D. Gangemi and R. Jackiw, Phys. Lett. B337, 271 (1994); Phys. Rev. D50, 3913 (1994); D. Amati, S. Elitzur and E. Rabinovici, Nucl. Phys. B418, 45 (1994); D. Louis-Martinez, J Gegenberg and G. Kunstatter, Phys. Lett. B321, 193 (1994); E. Benedict, Phys. Lett. B340, 43 (1994); T. Strobl, Phys. Rev. D50, 7346 (1994).

* . S.N.Vergeles, Zh.Eksp.Teor.Fiz. 113, (1998)1566.

* . O. Andreev, Phys.Rev. D57 (1998) 3725.

* . S.N. Vergeles, E-print archive hep-th/9906024.

* . P.A.M. Dirac, Lectures on quantum mechanics. Yeshiva University New York. 1964.

* . P.A.M. Dirac. Lectures on quantum field theory. Yeshiva University, New York, 1967.

* . E. Del Giudice, P.Di Vecchia, S. Fubini. Ann. Phys. 70 (1972) 378.

* . M.B.Green, J.H. Schwarz, E. Witten. Superstring Theory. Cambridge University Press, 1987.

* . P.A.M. Dirac. The principles of quantum mechanics. Oxford 1958.