format: text

text:
# Sur les Algèbres Vertex Attachées aux Variétés Algébriques

## 1. Introduction

Le but de cette note est de presenter une classification de certaines algèbres vertex, qui peuvent être associées à des variétés algébriques lisses; ceci est l’occasion de rencontrer des classes caractéristiques “style Pontryagin-Atiyah-Chern-Simons”. Ceci a été obtenu dans \[GMS\] dont la presente note est un complément. On propose ici une définition plus simple d’une algébroïde vertex (infra, 2.4, 2.6), un énoncé plus précis et une démonstration courte du résultat principal de op. cit. (infra, 3.4, 3.6, 3.7). À la fin on propose une construction directe des algèbres vertex associées aux courbes, à l’aide des algèbres de Virasoro introduites par A.Beilinson. Le point de départ de cette note était une tentative de comprendre le complexe de de Rham chiral découvert par F.Malikov, \[MSV\]. Je remercie vivement mes amis et collaborateurs Arkady Vaintrob, Fyodor Malikov et Vassily Gorbounov.

## 2. Algébroïdes vertex

2.1. On fixe un corps de base $`k`$ de caractéristique $`0`$. Rappelons qu’une algèbre vertex est un $`k`$-espace vectoriel $`V`$ muni d’un vecteur distingué $`\text{1}V`$ (dit vacuum) et d’une famille d’applications $`k`$-linéaires $`{}_{(i)}{}^{}:V_kVV(i)`$ telles que $`x_{(i)}y=0`$ pour $`i`$ assez grand. Si l’on pose $`x:=x_{(2)}\text{1}`$, on obtient un opérateur $`:VV`$. Les axiomes de \[B\] doivent être vérifiés. On n’est interessé que par les algèbres vertex $`_0`$\- graduées, ce qui signifie que l’espace $`V`$ est muni d’une $`_0`$-graduation (dite poids conforme), $`V=_{n0}V_n`$, $`\text{1}V_0`$ et $`V_{n(i)}V_mV_{n+mi1}`$. En particulier $`V_nV_{n+1}`$. Les morphismes de telles algèbres étant définis de manière évidente, on obtient la catégorie $`𝒱ert`$ des algèbres vertex $`_0`$-graduées.

2.2. “Données classiques” associées à une algèbre vertex. Soit $`V𝒱ert`$. Pour être bref on écrira $`xy`$ au lieu de $`x_{(1)}y`$; c’est une opération non commutative et non associative en général. On a $`V_nV_mV_{n+m}`$. Posons $`A(V)=V_0`$; l’opération $`xy`$ est commutative et associative sur $`V_0`$; donc $`A(V)`$ devient une $`k`$-algèbre commutative avec unité 1. Posons $`𝒜(V)=V_1`$. Soit $`\mathrm{\Omega }(V)`$ le sous-$`k`$-vectoriel de $`𝒜(V)`$ engendré par les éléments $`ab,a,bA(V)`$. Alors $`\mathrm{\Omega }(V)`$ devient un $`A(V)`$-module et $`:A(V)\mathrm{\Omega }(V)`$ est une dérivation. En outre, si l’on pose $`T(V):=𝒜(V)/\mathrm{\Omega }(V)`$, l’opération $`ax`$ induit une structure de $`A(V)`$-module sur $`T(V)`$. (Par contre, $`𝒜(V)`$ n’est pas un $`A(V)`$-module en général, à cause de la non associativité de l’opération $`ax`$.) L’opération $`{}_{(0)}{}^{}:𝒜(V)\times 𝒜(V)𝒜(V)`$ induit l’application $`[,]:T(A)\times T(A)T(A)`$ qui est un crochet de Lie; l’opération $`{}_{(0)}{}^{}:𝒜(V)\times A(V)A(V)`$ induit une action de $`T(V)`$ sur $`A(V)`$ par dérivations; on a $`[\tau ,a\tau ^{}]=a[\tau ,\tau ^{}]+\tau (a)[\tau ,\tau ^{}]`$, i.e. $`T(V)`$ devient une $`A(V)`$-algébroïde de Lie. La première opération induit aussi une action de l’algèbre de Lie $`T(V)`$ sur $`\mathrm{\Omega }(V)`$ telle que $``$ est un morphisme de $`T(V)`$-modules, et $`\tau (a\omega )=\tau (a)\omega +a\tau (\omega )`$. Enfin, l’opération $`{}_{(1)}{}^{}:𝒜(V)\times 𝒜(V)A`$ est symétrique et induit un accouplement $`A(V)`$-bilinéaire $`,:T(V)\times \mathrm{\Omega }(V)A(V)`$ telle que $`\tau (\tau ^{},\omega )=[\tau ,\tau ^{}],\omega +\tau ^{},\tau (\omega )`$ et $`(a\tau )(\omega )=a\tau (\omega )+\tau ,\omega a`$.

2.3. “Données quantiques.” Les propriétés (Alg1) — (Alg3) ci-dessous sont vérifiées, où $`aA(V),x,y,z𝒜(V)`$, $`\pi :A(V)T(A)`$ étant la projection canonique.

(Alg1) $`(ax)_{(1)}y=a(x_{(1)}y)\pi (x)\pi (y)(a).`$

(Alg2) $`x_{(0)}y+y_{(0)}x=(x_{(1)}y);(x)_{(0)}y=0.`$

(Alg3) $`x_{(0)}(y_{(i)}z)=(x_{(0)}y)_{(i)}z+y_{(i)}(x_{(0)}z),i=0,1.`$

2.4. Soit $`A`$ une $`k`$-algèbre commutative de type fini, lisse sur $`k`$. Posons $`\mathrm{\Omega }(A)=\mathrm{\Omega }_{A/k}^1,T(A)=Der_k(A,A)`$ (l’algèbre de Lie de $`k`$-dérivations de $`A`$). Soit $`=_{DR}:A\mathrm{\Omega }(A)`$ la dérivation universelle. On a l’accouplement non degenéré $`A`$-bilinéaire $`,:T(A)\times \mathrm{\Omega }(A)A`$; l’algèbre de Lie $`T(A)`$ agit sur $`\mathrm{\Omega }(A)`$ par la dérivée de Lie. Ces données vérifient toutes les propriétés de 2.2.

Une $`A`$-algébroïde vertex est un $`k`$-espace vectoriel $`𝒜`$ muni d’un sous-espace $`F^1𝒜𝒜`$ avec les identifications de $`k`$-vectoriels $`F^1𝒜=\mathrm{\Omega }(A),𝒜/F^1𝒜=T(𝒜)`$ et des opérations $`k`$-bilinéaires $`{}_{(1)}{}^{}:A\times 𝒜𝒜,(a,x)ax=a_{(1)}x`$, $`{}_{(1)}{}^{}:𝒜\times 𝒜A`$ symétrique, $`{}_{(0)}{}^{}:𝒜\times 𝒜𝒜`$. On demande que (i) $`A_{(1)}\mathrm{\Omega }(A)\mathrm{\Omega }(A)`$ et que l’action de $`A`$ sur $`\mathrm{\Omega }(A)`$ et sur $`T(A)`$ induite par (-1) coïncide avec l’action canonique; (ii) $`\mathrm{\Omega }(A)_{(i)}\mathrm{\Omega }(A)=0(i=0,1)`$; $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{(0)}𝒜\mathrm{\Omega }(A)`$, l’opération $`T(A)\times T(A)T(A)`$ induite par (0) coïncide avec le crochet de Lie, et l’action induite $`T(A)\times \mathrm{\Omega }(A)\mathrm{\Omega }(A)`$ coïncide avec la derivée de Lie; (iii) l’acccouplement $`,:T(A)\times \mathrm{\Omega }(A)A`$ induit par (1) coïncide avec l’accouplement canonique. Enfin, les propriétés (Alg1) — (Alg3) doivent être vérifiées. Dans (Alg3) pour $`i=1`$ on interprète la partie de gauche comme $`\pi (x)(y_{(1)}z)`$.

Soit $`T^{}(A)`$ une algébre de Lie dg concentrée en degrés $`1,0`$, avec $`T^1(A)=T^0(A)=T(A)`$, $`d:T^1(A)T^0(A)`$ l’identité, le crochet $`[,]_{0,1}`$ l’action adjointe. Soit $`\mathrm{\Omega }^{}(A):0A\stackrel{}{}\mathrm{\Omega }(A)\mathrm{\Omega }(A)/A0`$ le complexe concentré en degrés $`2,1,0`$ avec les différentielles évidentes. Ce complexe est un module dg sur $`T^{}(A)`$ (l’action de $`T^0(A)`$ est par la dérivée de Lie, la composante $`[,]_{1,1}:T^1(A)\times \mathrm{\Omega }^1(A)\mathrm{\Omega }^2(A)`$ étant l’accouplement canonique, et la composante $`[,]_{1,0}`$ étant définie par $`[\tau ,\overline{\omega }]=i_\tau (d\omega )`$, où $`\overline{\omega }\mathrm{\Omega }(A)/A`$ est l’image de $`\omega \mathrm{\Omega }(A)`$, $`d:\mathrm{\Omega }_{A/k}^1\mathrm{\Omega }_{A/k}^2`$ est la différentielle de de Rham, $`i_\tau :\mathrm{\Omega }_{A/k}^2\mathrm{\Omega }_{A/k}^1`$ est la convolution avec $`\tau `$). On peut exprimer les axiomes (Alg2) et (Alg3) en disant que l’on a une algèbre de Lie dg $`𝒜^{}:0A𝒜𝒜/A0`$, concentrée en degrés $`2,1,0`$, extension de $`T^{}(A)`$ par $`\mathrm{\Omega }^{}(A)`$ (considérée comme une sous-algèbre de Lie abélienne), telle que l’action de $`T^{}(A)`$ sur $`\mathrm{\Omega }^{}(A)`$ induite coïncide avec celle décrite ci-dessus. Un morphisme $`g:𝒜𝒜^{}`$ est une application $`k`$-linéaire respectant les opérations (i) et les filtrations, qui induit l’identité sur $`\mathrm{\Omega }(A),T(A)`$. D’où la catégorie $`𝒜lg_A`$ des $`A`$-algébroïdes vertex, qui est un groupoïde (chaque morphisme est un isomorphisme).

2.5. Soit $`A`$ comme dans 2.4. On définit la catégorie $`𝒱ert_A`$ dont les objets sont $`V𝒱ert`$ munies d’un isomorphisme de $`k`$-algèbres $`A(V)\stackrel{}{}A`$, cet isomorphisme identifiant les données classiques $`(T(V),\mathrm{\Omega }(V),,,)`$ correspondantes avec les données standardes $`(T(A),\mathrm{\Omega }(A),_{DR},,)`$ décrites dans 2.4. Les morphismes sont les morphismes des algèbres vertex induisants l’identité sur les données classiques.

La construction 2.2, 2.3 donne lieu au foncteur $`Alg:𝒱ert_A𝒜lg_A,V𝒜(V)`$. Ce foncteur admet l’adjoint à gauche $`U:𝒜lg_A𝒱ert_A`$, l’algèbre vertex $`U𝒜`$ étant appelée l’algèbre enveloppante d’un algébroïde vertex $`𝒜`$. Pour chaque $`𝒜𝒜lg_A`$ le morphisme d’adjonction $`𝒜Alg(U𝒜)`$ est un isomorphisme.

2.6. Le langage suivant est un peu plus explicite et est parfois commode. Appelons $`A`$-algébroïde vertex scindée un couple $`=(,,c)`$, où $`,:T(A)\times T(A)A`$ (resp. $`c:T(A)\times T(A)\mathrm{\Omega }(A)`$) est une application $`k`$-bilinéaire symétrique (resp. antisymétrique). On demande que les propriétés (AlgScind1)–(AlgScind3) ci-dessous soient vérifiées.

(AlgScind1) $`a\tau ,b\tau ^{}a\tau ,b\tau ^{}ba\tau ,\tau ^{}+ab\tau ,\tau ^{}=\tau ^{}(a)\tau (b).`$

(AlgScind2) $`\tau ^{\prime \prime },c(\tau ,\tau ^{})+\tau ^{},c(\tau ,\tau ^{\prime \prime })=[\tau ,\tau ^{}],\tau ^{\prime \prime }+\tau ^{},[\tau ,\tau ^{\prime \prime }]\tau (\tau ^{},\tau ^{\prime \prime })`$ $`+\tau ^{}(\tau ,\tau ^{\prime \prime })/2+\tau ^{\prime \prime }(\tau ,\tau ^{})/2.`$

(AlgScind3) $`3\{\tau (c(\tau ^{},\tau ^{\prime \prime }))+\tau ^{}(c(\tau ^{\prime \prime },\tau ))+\tau ^{\prime \prime }(c(\tau ,\tau ^{}))c([\tau ,\tau ^{}],\tau ^{\prime \prime })`$ $`c([\tau ^{},\tau ^{\prime \prime }],\tau )c([\tau ^{\prime \prime },\tau ],\tau ^{})\}=\{\tau ,\frac{1}{2}[\tau ^{},\tau ^{\prime \prime }]+c(\tau ^{},\tau ^{\prime \prime })+\tau ^{},\frac{1}{2}[\tau ^{\prime \prime },\tau ]+c(\tau ^{\prime \prime },\tau )+\tau ^{\prime \prime },\frac{1}{2}[\tau ,\tau ^{}]+c(\tau ,\tau ^{})\}.`$

Ses propriétés entraînent que $`,`$ et $`c`$ sont des opérateurs différentiels, d’ordres $`2`$ et $`3`$ respectivement.

Étant donnés deux $`A`$-algébroïdes vertex scindées $`=(,,c)`$ et $`^{}=(,^{},c^{})`$, un morphisme $`f:^{}`$ est par définition une application $`k`$-linéaire $`h=h_f:T(A)\mathrm{\Omega }(A)`$ satisfaisant les propriétés (Mor1)–(Mor3) ci-dessous (dont la première implique que $`h`$ est un opérateur différentiel d’ordre $`2`$).

(Mor1) $`\tau ^{},h(a\tau )a\tau ,\tau ^{}+a\tau ,\tau ^{}^{}=a\left\{\tau ^{},h(\tau )\tau ,\tau ^{}+\tau ^{},\tau ^{}\right\}.`$

(Mor2) $`\tau ,\tau ^{}\tau ,\tau ^{}^{}=\tau ,h(\tau ^{})+\tau ^{},h(\tau ).`$

(Mor3)

$`c(\tau ,\tau ^{})c^{}(\tau ,\tau ^{})=\tau ^{}(h(\tau ))\tau (h(\tau ^{}))+h([\tau ,\tau ^{}])+\{\tau ,h(\tau ^{})\tau ^{},h(\tau )\}/2.`$

La composition est définie par $`h_{ff^{}}=h_f+h_f^{}`$; l’identité est $`h_{id}=0`$. D’où on obtient le groupoïde $`𝒜lg𝒮cind_A`$ des $`A`$-algébroïdes vertex scindées. Étant donné $``$ comme ci-dessus, on pose $`𝒜()=T(A)\mathrm{\Omega }(A)`$ et définit les opérations $`{}_{(i)}{}^{},i=1,0,1`$ par les formules $`a_{(1)}\tau =(a\tau ,\gamma (a,\tau ))`$, où $`\gamma (a,\tau )\mathrm{\Omega }(A)`$ est défini par

$$\tau ^{},\gamma (a,\tau )=a\tau ,\tau ^{}a\tau ^{},\tau +\tau \tau ^{}(a)$$

(l’axiome (AlgScind1) signifie que cette expression est $`A`$-linéaire en $`\tau ^{}`$); $`\tau _{(0)}\tau ^{}=([\tau ,\tau ^{}],c(\tau ,\tau ^{})+\frac{1}{2}\tau ,\tau ^{}`$, $`\tau _{(1)}\tau ^{}=\tau ,\tau ^{}`$. Ceci définit $`𝒜()𝒜lg_A`$. Si $`f:^{}`$ est comme ci-dessus, on définit le morphisme $`g(f):𝒜()𝒜(^{})`$ par $`g(f)(\tau )=(\tau ,h_f(\tau ))`$. Ceci définit un foncteur $`𝒜lg𝒮cind_A𝒜lg_A`$ qui est une équivalence des catégories.

2.7. Exemple. Supposons que $`A`$ est telle que $`T(A)`$ soit un $`A`$-module libre et il existe une $`A`$-base $`𝔟=\{\tau _1,\mathrm{},\tau _n\}`$ de $`T(A)`$ telle que $`[\tau _i,\tau _j]=0`$ pour tous $`i,j`$. Nous appelerons telles algèbres petites est les bases $`𝔟`$ abéliennes. On pose

$$a\tau _i,b\tau _j_𝔟=b\tau _i\tau _j(a)a\tau _j\tau _i(b)\tau _i(b)\tau _j(a),$$
$`(2.7)_,`$
$$c_𝔟(a\tau _i,b\tau _j)=\frac{1}{2}\{\tau _i(b)\tau _j(a)\tau _j(a)\tau _i(b)\}+\frac{1}{2}\{b\tau _i\tau _j(a)a\tau _j\tau _i(b)\}.$$
$`(2.7)_c`$
Alors $`_𝔟=(,_𝔟,c_𝔟)`$ est une $`A`$-algébroïde vertex scindée.

## 3. Classification

3.1. Une algèbre $`A`$ étant toujours comme dans 2.4, on définit un groupoïde $`𝒢r(\mathrm{\Omega }_A^{[2,3})`$ dont les objets sont les formes différentielles fermées $`\omega \mathrm{\Omega }_{A/k}^{3,fer}`$, avec

$$Hom_{𝒢r(\mathrm{\Omega }_A^{[2,3})}(\omega ,\omega ^{})=\{\eta \mathrm{\Omega }_{A/k}^2|d\eta =\omega \omega ^{}\}.$$

La composition des morphismes est l’addition de $`2`$-formes. L’addition des $`3`$-formes induit une structure d’un groupe abélien en catégories sur ce groupoïde.

On remarque que si $`𝒜,𝒜^{}`$ sont deux $`A`$-algébroïdes vertex avec le même espace sous-jacent la même opération (1), alors $`x_{(0)}yx_{(0)^{}}y\mathrm{\Omega }(A)`$; cet élément ne dépend que des $`\pi (x),\pi (y)`$, où $`\pi :𝒜T(A)`$ est l’application canonique, d’où l’application $`c_{𝒜,𝒜^{}}:T(A)\times T(A)\mathrm{\Omega }(A)`$. De plus, cette application est $`A`$-bilinéaire, et $`\omega _{𝒜,𝒜^{}}(\tau ,\tau ^{},\tau ^{\prime \prime }):=\tau ,c_{𝒜,𝒜^{}}(\tau ^{},\tau ^{\prime \prime })`$ est antisymétrique en $`\tau ,\tau ^{},\tau ^{\prime \prime }`$, donc $`\omega _{𝒜,𝒜^{}}`$ peut être considerée comme une $`3`$-forme différentielle, et cette forme est fermée.

Réciproquement, étant donné $`𝒜=𝒜lg_A`$ et $`\omega \mathrm{\Omega }_{A/k}^{3,fer}`$, on définit $`𝒜^{}=𝒜\stackrel{.}{+}\omega 𝒜lg_A`$ ayant le même espace sous-jacent que $`𝒜`$ et la même opération (1), avec $`{}_{(0)^{}}{}^{}=_{(0)}^{}\omega `$.

Si $`g:𝒜\stackrel{.}{+}\omega 𝒜\stackrel{.}{+}\omega ^{}`$ est un morphisme, alors $`(gid)(𝒜)\mathrm{\Omega }(A),(gid)|_{\mathrm{\Omega }(A)}=0`$, donc $`gid`$ induit une application $`h_g:T(A)\mathrm{\Omega }(A)`$. La fonction, $`\eta _g(\tau ,\tau ^{}):=\tau ,h_g(\tau )`$ est antisymétrique en $`\tau ,\tau ^{}`$ et $`A`$-bilinéaire, donc peut être considerée comme une $`2`$-forme différentielle; on a $`d\eta =\omega \omega ^{}`$. Ceci induit une bijection $`Hom_{𝒜lg_A}(𝒜\stackrel{.}{+}\omega ,𝒜\stackrel{.}{+}\omega ^{})=\{\eta \mathrm{\Omega }_{A/k}^2|d\eta =\omega \omega ^{}\}`$. On a $`Hom_{𝒜lg_A}(𝒜,𝒜^{})=Hom_{𝒜lg_A}(𝒜\stackrel{.}{+}\omega ,𝒜^{}\stackrel{.}{+}\omega )`$. Cela définit une Action

$$\stackrel{.}{+}:𝒜lg_A\times 𝒢r(\mathrm{\Omega }_A^{[2,3})𝒜lg_A.$$
$`(\mathrm{3.1.1})`$
3.2. Théorème. Si $`A`$ est petite (voir 2.7), alors le groupoïde $`𝒜lg_A`$ est un Torseur sous $`𝒢r(\mathrm{\Omega }_A^{[2,3})`$ par rapport à l’Action (3.1.1), c’est à dire, pour chaque $`𝒜𝒜lg_A`$ le foncteur $`𝒜\stackrel{.}{+}\mathrm{?}:𝒢r(\mathrm{\Omega }_A^{[2,3})𝒜lg_A`$ est une équivalence.

Par exemple, l’ensemble $`\pi _0(𝒜lg_A)`$ des classes d’isomorphisme de $`𝒜lg_A`$ est un torseur sous $`H_{DR}^3(A)`$. Grace à 2.6 le Torseur $`𝒜lg_A`$ est non-vide pour $`A`$ petite.

3.3. Soient $`A`$ petite, et $`𝔟=\{\tau _i\},𝔟^{}=\{\tau _i^{}\}`$ deux bases abéliennes, d’où les algébroïdes scindées $`_𝔟,_𝔟^{}`$; on a $`\tau _i^{}=\varphi ^{ij}\tau _j`$ (la règle de Einstein est sous-entendue), $`\varphi =(\varphi ^{ij})GL_n(A)`$ (pour être bref, on écrit $`𝔟^{}=\varphi 𝔟`$). On définit une application $`h_{𝔟^{},𝔟}:T(A)\mathrm{\Omega }(A)`$, comme étant l’unique opérateur satisfaisant (Mor1), tel que $`\tau _i^{},h_{𝔟^{},𝔟}(\tau _j^{})=\frac{1}{2}\tau _i^{},\tau _j^{}_𝔟`$. De plus, on définit une application $`c_{𝔟^{},𝔟}:T(A)\times T(A)\mathrm{\Omega }(A)`$ comme étant l’unique opérateur tel que $`_{𝔟^{},𝔟}:=(,_𝔟,c_{𝔟^{},𝔟})`$ soit une algébroïde vertex scindée, et $`h_{𝔟^{},𝔟}`$ soit un morphisme d’algébroïdes scindées $`_𝔟^{}_{𝔟^{},𝔟}`$. D’où la $`3`$-forme $`\alpha _{𝔟^{},𝔟}\mathrm{\Omega }_{A/k}^{3,fer}`$ telle que $`_𝔟=_{𝔟^{},𝔟}\stackrel{.}{+}\alpha _{𝔟^{},𝔟}`$. Si $`𝔟^{\prime \prime }=\{\tau _i^{\prime \prime }\}`$ est la troisième base abélienne, avec $`\tau _i^{\prime \prime }=\psi ^{ij}\tau _j^{}`$, on définit la $`2`$-forme $`\beta _{𝔟^{\prime \prime },𝔟^{},𝔟}:=h_{𝔟^{\prime \prime },𝔟^{}}+h_{𝔟^{},𝔟}h_{𝔟^{\prime \prime },𝔟}\mathrm{\Omega }_{A/k}^2`$.

3.4. Théorème. $`\beta _{𝔟^{\prime \prime },𝔟^{},𝔟}=\frac{1}{2}tr\{\varphi ^1\psi ^1d\psi d\varphi \},\alpha _{𝔟^{},𝔟}=\frac{1}{6}tr\{(\varphi ^1d\varphi )^3\}`$.

Démonstration. Il resulte de (2.7) que

$$c_𝔟(\tau _i^{},\tau _j^{})=\frac{1}{2}tr\{\varphi ^1\tau _j^{}(\varphi )\varphi ^1\tau _i^{}(\varphi )\varphi ^1\tau _i^{}(\varphi )\varphi ^1\tau _j^{}(\varphi )\varphi ^1\varphi (ij)\},$$
$`(3.4)_c`$
$$\tau _i^{},\tau _j^{}_𝔟=tr\left\{2\varphi ^1\tau _i^{}\tau _j^{}(\varphi )+\varphi ^1\tau _i^{}(\varphi )\varphi ^1\tau _j^{}(\varphi )\right\}$$
$`(3.4)_,`$
d’où, en utilisant (Mor1),

$$h_{𝔟^{},𝔟}(\tau _i^{\prime \prime })=tr\left\{\varphi ^1\tau _i^{\prime \prime }(\varphi )\frac{1}{2}\varphi ^1\tau _i^{\prime \prime }(\varphi )\varphi ^1\varphi +\varphi ^1\psi ^1\tau _i^{\prime \prime }(\psi )\varphi \right\}.$$
$`(3.4)_h`$
Par définition, $`c_{𝔟^{},𝔟}(\tau _i^{},\tau _j^{})=\tau _i^{}(h(\tau _j^{}))\tau _j^{}(h(\tau _i^{}));\alpha _{𝔟^{},𝔟}=c_𝔟c_{𝔟^{},𝔟}`$, d’où;

$$\alpha _{𝔟^{},𝔟}(\tau _i^{},\tau _j^{})=\frac{1}{2}tr\{\varphi ^1\tau _i^{}(\varphi )\varphi ^1\tau _j^{}(\varphi )\varphi ^1\varphi (ij)\}.$$
$`(3.4)_\alpha `$
En outre, $`(3.4)_h`$ entraîne

$$\beta _{𝔟^{\prime \prime },𝔟^{},𝔟}(\tau _i^{\prime \prime })=\frac{1}{2}tr\left\{\varphi ^1\psi ^1\tau _i^{\prime \prime }(\psi )\varphi \tau _i^{\prime \prime }(\varphi )\varphi ^1\psi ^1\psi \right\}$$
$`(3.4)_\beta `$
d’où le théorème. Ici l’on identifie une $`3`$-forme $`\alpha `$ avec une application antisymétrique $`T(A)\times T(A)\mathrm{\Omega }(A)`$ définie par $`\alpha (\tau ,\tau ^{})=i_\tau i_\tau ^{}\alpha `$. $``$

3.5. Classe de Pontryagin. Soit $`X`$ une variété algébrique lisse sur $`k`$, $`E`$ un fibré vectoriel sur $`X`$. Choisissons une recouvrement affine $`𝔘=\{U_i\}`$ de $`X`$, et des bases $`𝔟^i`$ des $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(U_i,𝒪_X)`$-modules $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(U_i,E)`$, d’où le cocycle de $`\stackrel{}{C}`$ech $`\varphi =(\varphi _{ij}),\varphi _{ij}\mathrm{\Gamma }(U_{ij},GL_n(𝒪_X))`$, $`𝔟^i=\varphi _{ij}𝔟^j`$ sur $`U_{ij}`$, $`\varphi _{ij}\varphi _{jk}=\varphi _{ik}`$ sur $`U_{ijk}`$. Considérons les cochaînes de $`\stackrel{}{C}`$ech $`p_2(\varphi )=\left(\frac{1}{2}tr\{\varphi _{jk}^1\varphi _{ij}^1d\varphi _{ij}d\varphi _{jk}\}\right)C^2(𝔘,\mathrm{\Omega }_X^2)`$, $`p_3(\varphi )=\left(\frac{1}{6}tr\{(\varphi _{ij}^1d\varphi _{ij})^3\}\right)C^1(𝔘,\mathrm{\Omega }_X^3)`$; on a $`d_{\stackrel{}{C}ech}p_2(\varphi )=0`$, $`d_{DR}p_2(\varphi )=d_{\stackrel{}{C}ech}p_3(\varphi ),d_{DR}p_3(\varphi )=0`$. Il en résulte que $`p(\varphi ):=(p_2(\varphi ),p_3(\varphi ))Z^2(𝔘,\mathrm{\Omega }_X^{[2,3})`$$`\mathrm{\Omega }_X^{[2,3}:=\left(\mathrm{\Omega }_X^2\mathrm{\Omega }_X^{3,fer}\right)`$, la différentielle totale dans le bicomplexe de $`\stackrel{}{C}`$ech à coefficients dans ce complexe étant $`d=d_{DR}+(1)^{|DR|}d_{\stackrel{}{C}ech}`$. De plus, si l’on choisit des autres bases $`{}_{}{}^{}𝔟_{}^{i}=g_i𝔟^i`$, d’ù $`g=(g_i)C^0(𝔘,GL_n(𝒪_X))`$, le cocycle correspondant est $`\varphi ^{}=^g\varphi `$, où $`{}_{}{}^{g}\varphi _{ij}^{}=g_i\varphi _{ij}g_j^1`$. On définit

$$p_2(\varphi ,g):=\left(\frac{1}{2}tr\left\{\varphi _{ij}^1g_i^1dg_i\varphi _{ij}g_j^1dg_j+\varphi _{ij}^1d\varphi _{ij}g_j^1dg_jg_i^1dg_id\varphi _{ij}\varphi _{ij}^1\right\}\right),$$

$$p_3(g):=\left(\frac{1}{6}tr\left\{(g_i^1dg_i)^3\right\}\right);p(\varphi ,g)=(p_2(\varphi ,g),p_3(g))C^1(𝔘,\mathrm{\Omega }_X^{[2,3}).$$

Alors $`p_3(^g\varphi )=p_3(\varphi )+d_{\stackrel{}{C}ech}p_3(g)+d_{DR}p_2(\varphi ,g),p_2(\varphi ^g)=p_2(\varphi )+d_{\stackrel{}{C}ech}p_2(\varphi ,g)`$, d’où $`p(^g\varphi )=p(\varphi )+dp(\varphi ,g)`$. Donc la classe $`p(E)`$ de $`p(\varphi )`$ dans $`H^2(X,\mathrm{\Omega }_X^{[2,3})`$ qu’on peut appeler la classe de Pontryagin-Atyiah-Chern-Simons (pacs), ne depend que de $`E`$. On remarque que $`p(\varphi )=p(\varphi ^{1t})`$, donc $`p(E)=p(E^{})`$.

3.6. Les groupoïdes $`𝒜lg_{\mathrm{\Gamma }(U,𝒪_X)},UX,`$ forment un champ $`𝔄𝔩𝔤_X`$ sur la topologie de Zariski (même étale), parsque les opérations (i) sont des opérateurs différentiels qui se localisent. D’après 3.2, $`𝔄lg_X`$ est une gerbe sous $`\mathrm{\Omega }_X^{[2,3}`$ (localement non-vide, mais pas localement connexe). Donc la classe caractéristique $`c(𝔄𝔩𝔤_X)H^2(X,\mathrm{\Omega }_X^{[2,3})`$ est définie, telle que $`c(𝔄𝔩𝔤_X)=0`$ ssi $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(X,𝔄lg_X)`$ est non-vide. Rappelons sa définition. On choisit un recouvrement affine $`𝔘=\{U_i\}`$ de $`X`$ avec $`U_i`$ petites; on choisit les objets $`𝒜_i\mathrm{\Gamma }(U_i,𝔄𝔩𝔤_X)`$. Sur les doubles intersections, il existe les isomorphismes $`h_{ij}:𝒜_j|_{U_{ij}}\stackrel{}{}𝒜_i|_{U_{ij}}\stackrel{.}{+}\alpha _{ij}`$, $`\alpha _{ij}\mathrm{\Omega }^{3,fer}(U_{ij})`$. Si l’on pose $`\beta _{ijk}:=h_{ij}|_{U_{ijk}}h_{ik}|_{U_{ijk}}+h_{jk}|_{U_{ijk}}\mathrm{\Omega }^2(U_{ijk})`$, on a $`c(\{𝒜_i\},\{h_{ij}\}):=((\alpha _{ij}),(\beta _{ijk}))Z^2(𝔘,\mathrm{\Omega }_X^{[2,3})`$. Pour une autre famille $`(\{𝒜_i^{}\},\{h_{ij}^{}\})`$ il existent $`h_i:𝒜_i\stackrel{}{}𝒜_i^{}\stackrel{.}{+}\alpha _i,\alpha _i\mathrm{\Omega }_{A/k}^{3,fer}`$; alors $`(h_j\stackrel{.}{+}\alpha _{ij})h_{ij}:𝒜_i\stackrel{}{}𝒜_j^{}\stackrel{.}{+}(\alpha _j+\alpha _{ij})`$ et $`(h_{ij}^{}\stackrel{.}{+}\alpha _i)h_i:𝒜_i\stackrel{}{}𝒜_j^{}\stackrel{.}{+}(\alpha _{ij}^{}+\alpha _i)`$, donc il existe l’unique $`\beta _{ij}\mathrm{\Omega }_{A/k}^2`$ telle que $`d\beta _{ij}=\alpha _{ij}^{}\alpha _{ij}+\alpha _i\alpha _j`$. Alors $`d((\alpha _i),(\beta _{ij}))=c(\{𝒜_i^{}\},\{h_{ij}^{}\})c(\{𝒜_i\},\{h_{ij}\})`$; par définition $`c(𝔄𝔩𝔤_X)`$ est la classe de $`c(\{𝒜_i\},\{h_{ij}\})`$ dans la cohomologie.

Soit $`𝒯_X`$ le fibré tangent de $`X`$. Choisissons des bases bonnes $`𝔟^i`$ de $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(U_i,𝒯_X)`$, avec $`𝔟^i=\varphi _{ij}𝔟^j`$, $`\varphi =(\varphi _{ij})Z^1(𝔘,GL_n(𝒪_X))`$. Alors, d’après 3.4, $`\alpha _{𝔟^i𝔟^j}=p_3(\varphi )_{ij}`$ et $`\beta _{𝔟^i𝔟^j𝔟^l}:=h_{𝔟^j𝔟^l}h_{𝔟^i𝔟^l}+h_{𝔟^i𝔟^j}=p_2(\varphi )_{ijl}`$. De plus, si $`\{^{}𝔟^i\}`$ est une autre famille des bases bonnes, avec $`{}_{}{}^{}𝔟_{}^{i}=g_i𝔟^i,g=(g_i)`$, alors $`\alpha _{{}_{}{}^{}𝔟_{}^{i}𝔟^i}=p_3(g)_i`$ et $`h_{{}_{}{}^{}𝔟_{}^{i}{}_{}{}^{}𝔟_{}^{j}}h_{𝔟^i𝔟^j}+h_{{}_{}{}^{}𝔟_{}^{i}𝔟^i}h_{{}_{}{}^{}𝔟_{}^{j}𝔟^j}=p_2(\varphi ,g)_{ij}`$. En particulier, on a

3.7. Théorème. $`c(𝔄𝔩𝔤_X)=p(𝒯_X)`$, où $`𝒯_X`$ est le fibré tangent de $`X`$. $``$

Soit $`\varphi `$ comme dans 3.6, $`p=p(\varphi )`$; soit $`𝒢r_p`$ le groupoïde dont les objets sont les $`1`$-cochaînes de Cech $`\omega C^1(𝔘,\mathrm{\Omega }_X^{[2,3})`$ telles que $`d\omega =p`$, avec $`Hom_{𝒢r_p}(\omega ,\omega ^{})=\{\eta C^0(𝔘,\mathrm{\Omega }_X^{[2,3})|d\eta =\omega \omega ^{}\}`$. La construction 3.6 donne lieu au foncteur $`𝒢_p\mathrm{\Gamma }(X,𝔄𝔩𝔤_X)`$ qui est une équivalence des catégories. Il en résulte que $`\pi _0\mathrm{\Gamma }(X,𝔄𝔩𝔤_X)`$ est un torseur sous $`H^1(X,\mathrm{\Omega }_X^{[2,3})`$, non-vide si et seulement si $`p(𝒯_X)=0`$, et pour $`𝒜\mathrm{\Gamma }(X,𝔄𝔩𝔤_X)`$ le groupe $`Aut(𝒜)`$ est isomorphe à $`H^0(X,\mathrm{\Omega }_X^{[2,3})`$.

## 4. Exemple

Soit $`X`$ une courbe lisse sur $`k`$. Dans ce cas $`\mathrm{\Omega }_X^{[2,3}=0`$, donc sur $`X`$ il existe l’unique, à isomorphisme unique près, $`𝒪_X`$-algébroïde vertex $`𝒜_X`$. On propose ici une construction directe de $`𝒜_X`$. Pour $`j`$ on a défini dans \[BS\] le faisceau d’algèbres de Lie différentielles graduées $`𝒜_j^{}`$ ($`j`$-ième Virasoro) sur $`X`$ (cf. \[BS\] 3.1). On a $`𝒜_j^i=0`$ pour $`i2,1,0`$; $`𝒜_j^2=𝒪_X,𝒜_j^0=𝒯_X`$. On a la suite exacte canonique des $`k`$-vectoriels (des $`𝒪_X`$-modules si $`j=0`$) $`0\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1𝒜_j^1\stackrel{\pi }{}𝒯_X0`$; Par définition, la différentielle $`d:𝒜_j^1𝒜_j^0`$ est égale à $`\pi `$ et $`d:𝒜_j^2𝒜_j^1`$ est égale à la composée de la différentielle de de Rham avec l’inclusion $`\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1𝒜_j^1`$. Comme il est expliqué dans op. cit., la catégorie des algèbres de Lie dg comme ci-dessus est un $`k`$-espace vectoriel en catégories; en particulier, on peut les multiplier par un scalaire. On a l’isomorphisme canonique $`𝒜_j^{}\stackrel{}{}(6j^26j+1)𝒜_0^{}`$. Pour chaque $`\lambda k`$ on a l’isomorphisme des $`k`$-modules $`\lambda 𝒜_0^1\stackrel{}{}𝒜_0^1`$, donc la structure canonique d’un $`𝒪_X`$-module sur $`𝒜_0^1`$ induit une structure de $`𝒪_X`$-module sur $`\lambda 𝒜_0^1`$.

Considérons l’algèbre de Lie dg $`6𝒜_0`$. On pose $`𝒜_X=6𝒜_0^1`$. On définit les opérations par $`a_{(1)}x=ax2\pi (x)(a);x_{(0)}y=[\pi (x),y],x_{(1)}y=[x,y](a𝒪_X,x,y𝒜_X)`$. Alors les axiomes (Alg1)–(Alg3) sont vérifiés, et l’on obtient une algébroïde vertex sur $`X`$.

## Bibliographie


text:
# Strings and the Stable Cohomology of Mapping Class Groups

## 1. Introduction

Twenty years ago, Mumford initiated the systematic study of the cohomology ring of moduli spaces of Riemann surfaces. Around the same time, Harer proved that the homology of the mapping class groups of oriented surfaces is independent of the genus in low degrees, increasing with the genus. The (co)homology of mapping class groups thus stabelizes. At least rationally, the mapping class groups have the same (co)homology as the corresponding moduli spaces. This prompted Mumford to conjecture that the stable rational cohomology of moduli spaces is generated by certain tautological classes that he defines. Much of the recent interest in this subject is motivated by mathematical physics and, in particular, by string theory. The study of the category of strings led to the discovery of an infinite loop space, the cohomology of which is the stable cohomology of the mapping class groups. We explain here a homotopy theoretic approach to Mumford’s conjecture based on this fact. As byproducts infinite families of torsion classes in the stable cohomology are detected, and the divisibility of the tautological classes is determined. An analysis of the category of strings in a background space leads to the formulization of a parametrized version of Mumford’s conjecture.

The paper is chiefly a summary of the author’s work and her collaboration with Ib Madsen. Earlier this year Madsen and Weiss announced a solution of Mumford’s conjecture. We touch on some of the consequences and the ideas behind this most exciting new developement.

## 2. Mumford’s conjecture

Let $`F_{g,n}^s`$ be an oriented, connected surface of genus $`g`$ with $`s`$ marked points and $`n`$ boundary components. Let $`\text{ Diff}(F_{g,n}^s)`$ be its group of orientaton preserving diffeomorphisms that fix the $`n`$ boundary components pointwise and permute the $`s`$ marked points. By , for genus at least 2, $`\text{ Diff}(F_{g,n}^s)`$ is homotopic to its group of components, the mapping class group $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{g,n}^s`$. Furthermore, if the surface has boundary, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{g,n}^s`$ acts freely on Teichmüller space. Hence,

$$B\text{ Diff}(F_{g,n}^s)B\mathrm{\Gamma }_{g,n}^s_{g,n}^s\text{ for }n1,g2,$$

where $`_{g,n}^s`$ denotes the moduli space of Riemann surfaces appropriately marked. When $`n=0`$, the action of the mapping class group on Teichmüller space has finite stabilizer groups and the latter is only a rational equivalence.

We recall Harer’s homology stability theorem  which plays an important role through out the paper.

###### Harer Stability Theorem 2.1

$`H_{}B\mathrm{\Gamma }_{g,n}^s`$ is independent of $`g`$ and $`n`$ in degrees $`3<g1`$.

Ivanov ,  improved the stability range to $`2<g1`$ and proved a version with twisted coefficients. Glueing a torus with two boundary components to a surface $`F_{g,1}`$ induces a homomorphism $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{g,1}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{g+1,1}`$. Let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{}}:=lim_g\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{g,1}`$ be the stable mapping class group.

Mumford  introduced certain tautological classes in the cohomology of the moduli spaces $`_g`$. Topological analogues were studied by Miller  and Morita : Let $`E`$ be the universal $`F`$-bundle over $`B\text{ Diff}(F)`$, and let $`T^vE`$ be its vertical tangent bundle with Euler class $`eH^2E`$. Define

$$\kappa _i:=_Fe^{i+1}H^{2i}B\text{ Diff}(F).$$

Here $`_F`$ denotes “integration over the fiber” - the Gysin map. Miller and Morita showed independently that the rational cohomology of the stable mapping class group contains the polynomial ring on the $`\kappa _i`$.

###### Mumford Conjecture 2.2

$`H^{}(B\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{}};)[\kappa _1,\kappa _2,\mathrm{}].`$

### 2.1. Remark

The stable cohomology of the decorated mapping class groups is known modulo $`H^{}B\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{}}`$ because of decoupling . For example, let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{}}^s:=lim\mathrm{\Gamma }_{g,1}^s`$. The following is a consequence of Theorem 2.1.

###### Proposition 2.3

$`(B\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{}}^s)^+B\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{}}^+\times B(\mathrm{\Sigma }_sS^1)^+.`$

Here $`Y^+`$ denotes Quillen’s plus-construction on $`Y`$ with respect to the maximal perfect subgroup of the fundamental group. It is important to note that the plus construction does not change the (co)homology. In particular,

$$H^{}B\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{}}=H^{}B\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{}}^+.$$

## 3. String category

The category underlying the quantum mechanics of a state space $`X`$ is the path category $`𝒫X`$. Its objects are particles represented by points in $`X`$. As time evolves a particle sweeps out a path. Thus a morphism between particles $`a`$ and $`b`$ is a continuous path in $`X`$ starting at $`a`$ and ending at $`b`$. Concatenation of paths defines the composition in the category.

$$𝒫X=\{\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \text{objects }:& a,b,\mathrm{}X,\hfill \\ \hfill \text{morphisms }:& \underset{t>0}{}\text{ map}([0,t],X).\hfill \end{array}$$

In string theory, the point objects are replaced by closed loops in $`X`$. As time evolves these strings sweep out a surface. Thus the space of morphisms from one string to another is now described by a continuous map from an oriented surface $`F`$ to $`X`$. The parametrization of the path should be immaterial. To reflect this, take homotopy orbits under the action of $`\text{ Diff}(F)`$. 111 Strings should also be independent of the parametrization. One should therefore take homotopy orbit spaces of the objects under the $`S^1`$ action. In that case the diffeomorphisms of the surfaces need not be the identity on the boundary. The resulting category has the same homotopy type as $`𝒮X`$ in the sense that its classifying space is homotopic to that of $`𝒮X`$. Composition is given by concatenation of paths, i.e. by glueing of surfaces along outgoing and incoming boundary components.

To be more precise, let $`LX=\text{ map}(S^1,X)`$ denote the free loop space on $`X`$. A cobordism $`F`$ is a finite union

$$F_{g_1,n_1+m_1}\mathrm{}F_{g_k,n_k+m_k}$$

where $`n=\mathrm{\Sigma }_in_i`$ boundary components are considered incoming and $`m=\mathrm{\Sigma }_im_i`$ outgoing. For technical reasons we will assume $`m_i>0`$. The category of strings in $`X`$ is then

$$𝒮X=\{\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \text{objects }:& \alpha ,\beta ,\mathrm{}\underset{n0}{}(LX)^n,\hfill \\ \hfill \text{morphisms }:& \underset{F}{}E\text{ Diff}(F)\times _{\text{ Diff}(F)}\text{ map}(F,X).\hfill \end{array}$$

The disjoint union is taken over all cobordisms $`F`$, one for each topological type.

### 3.1. Elliptic elements

The category $`𝒮X`$ was first introduced by Segal . A functor from the path category $`𝒫X`$ to the category of $`n`$-dimensional vector spaces and their isomorphisms defines a vector bundle on $`X`$ with connection. In particular, it defines an element in the $`K`$-theory of $`X`$. A functor from $`𝒮X`$ to an appropriate (infinite dimensional) vector space category is also referred to as a gerbe (or $`B`$-field) with connection. In , Segal proposes this as the underlying geometric object of elliptic cohomology. More recently, this notion has been refined by Teichner and Stolz.

### 3.2. Conformal field theory

The category $`𝒮:=𝒮()`$ is studied in conformal field theory . Its objects are the natural numbers and its morphims are Riemann surfaces. A conformal field theory (CFT) is a linear space $``$ which is an algebra over $`𝒮`$. Thus each element in $`_{g,n+m}`$ defines a linear map from $`^n`$ to $`^m`$. The physical states of a topological conformal field theory (TCFT) form a graded vector space $`A_{}`$. Each element of the homology $`H_{}_{g,n+m}`$ defines a linear map from $`A_{}^n`$ to $`A_{}^m`$.

### 3.3. Gromov-Witten theory

Let $`X`$ be a symplectic manifold. A model for the homotopy orbit spaces in the definition of $`𝒮X`$ is the fiber bundle $`\text{ map}(F_{g,n},X)_{g,n}(X)_{g,n}`$ over the Riemann moduli space. In each fiber, $`F`$ comes equipped with a complex structure and we may replace the continuous maps by the space of pseudo-holomorphic maps $`\text{ hol}(F_g^n,X)`$ yielding a category $`𝒮^{\text{ hol}}X`$. This is the category relevant to Gromov-Witten theory. Note, for $`X`$ a complex Grassmannian, a generalized flag manifold, or a loop group, the degree $`d`$-component of $`\text{ hol}(F_g,X)`$ approximates the components of $`\text{ map}(F_g,X)`$ in homology. The categories $`𝒮X`$ and $`𝒮^{\text{ hol}}X`$ are therefore closely related.

## 4. From categories to infinite loop spaces

There is a functorial way to associate to a category $`𝒞`$ a topological space $`|𝒞|`$, the realization of its nerve. It takes equivalences of categories to homotopy equivalences. It is a generalization of the classifying space construction of a group: $`|G|=BG`$ where $`G`$ is identified with the category of a single object and endomorphism set $`G`$. The path-category $`𝒫X`$ of a connected space $`X`$ is a many object group up to homotopy. The underlying “group” is the space $`\mathrm{\Omega }X=\text{ map}_{}(S^1,X)`$ of based loops in $`X`$. Again one has $`|𝒫X|B(\mathrm{\Omega }X)X.`$ A functor from $`𝒫X`$ to $`n`$-dimensional vector spaces and their isomorphisms thus defines a map

$$XBGL_n,$$

and hence an element in the $`K`$-theory of $`X`$. Motivated by this, we would like to understand the classifying space of the string category $`𝒮X`$ and its relation to elliptic cohomology.

###### Definition 4.1

$`\text{St}(X):=\mathrm{\Omega }|𝒮X|.`$

###### Theorem 4.2

St is a homotopy functor from the category of topological spaces to the category of infinite loop spaces.

We recall that $`Z`$ is an infinite loop space if it is homotopic to some $`Z_0`$ such that successive based spaces $`Z_i`$ can be found with homeomorphisms $`\gamma _i:Z_i\mathrm{\Omega }Z_{i+1}`$. Any infinite loop space $`Z`$ gives rise to a generalized homology theory $`h_{}`$ which evaluated on a space $`Y`$ is

$$h_{}Y:=\pi _{}\underset{i\mathrm{}}{lim}\mathrm{\Omega }^i(Z_iY).$$

Infinite loop spaces are abelian groups up to homotopy in the strongest sense.

The proof of Theorem 4.2 can be sketched as follows, compare . $`𝒮X`$ is a symmetric monoidal category under disjoint union. Infinite loop space machinery (see for example ) implies that its classifying space $`|𝒮X|`$ is a homotopy abelian monoid in the strongest sense. But $`\pi _0|𝒮X|=H_1X`$ is a group. Hence homotopy inverses exist and $`|𝒮X|`$ is an infinite loop space.

Using another piece of infinite loop space machinery (a generalization of the group completion theorem) and Harer Stability Theorem 2.1, one can identify the string theory of a point as $`\times B\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{}}^+`$. As an immediate consequence we have

###### Corollary 4.3

() $`\text{ St}()\times B\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{}}^+`$ is an infinite loop space.

## 5. CFT-operad

We offer now a different perspective on Theorem 4.1 and Corollary 4.3. Let $`=\{_n\}_{n0}`$ with $`(n)=_{g0}B\mathrm{\Gamma }_{g,n+1}`$ be the operad contained in the CFT category $`𝒮`$. A space $`X`$ is an algebra over $``$ if there are compatible maps $`(n)\times X^nX`$. In particular $`X`$ has a monoid structure. Let $`𝒢X`$ be its group completion. $`𝒢X`$ is homotopic to $`X`$ if and only if $`\pi _0X`$ is a group.

###### Theorem 5.1

() If $`X`$ is an algebra over $``$ then its group completion $`𝒢X`$ is an infinite loop space.

CFT is therefore closely linked to the theory of infinite loop spaces. The crucial point of the proof is a decoupling result similar to Proposition 2.3. The corresponding statement for TCFT’s implies that Getzler’s Batalin-Vilkovisky algebra structure on the physical states $`A_{}`$ is stably trivial, see . The following examples illustrate the strength of Theorem 5.1.

### Example 5.1

Let $`X_1`$ be the disjoint union $`_{g0}B\mathrm{\Gamma }_{g,1}`$. It has a product induced by glueing $`F_{g,1}`$ and $`F_{h,1}`$ to the “legs” of a pairs of pants surface $`F_{0,3}`$. Miller observes in  that this induces a double loop space structure on the group completion $`𝒢X_1\times B\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{}}^+`$. This product extends to an $``$-algebra structure. Hence Miller’s double loop space structure extends to an infinite loop space structure. Wahl  proved that it is equivalent to the infinite loop spaces structure implied by Corollary 4.3.

### Example 5.2

Let $`X_2`$ be the disjoint union of the Borel constructions

$$E_g:=E\text{ Diff}(F_{g,1})\times _{\text{ Diff}(F_{g,1})}\text{ map}(F_{g,1},;X,).$$

As the functions to $`X`$ map the boundary to a point, they can be extended from $`F_{g,1}`$ to $`F_{g+1,1}`$ via the constant map. $`X_2`$ thus becomes an $``$-algebra and $`𝒢X_2=\times (lim_g\mathrm{}E_g)^+`$ is an infinite loop space. $`𝒢X_2`$ is homotopic to $`\text{ St}(X)`$ when $`X`$ is simply connected.

### Example 5.3

Let $`C(F_{g,1};X)`$ denote the space of unordered configurations in the interior of $`F_{g,1}`$ with labels in a connected space $`X`$. Let $`C_g`$ be its Borel construction. Their disjoint union defines an $``$-algebra $`X_3`$. The following decoupling result determines its group completion.

###### Proposition 5.2

$`𝒢X_3\times (lim_g\mathrm{}C_g)^+\times B\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{}}^+\times Q(BS^1X_+).`$

$`Q=lim\mathrm{\Omega }^{\mathrm{}}S^{\mathrm{}}`$ is the free infinite loop space functor and $`X_+`$ denotes $`X`$ with a disjoint basepoint. Note the close relation with the above example. By work of McDuff and Bödigheimer, there is a homotopy equivalence

$$C(F_{g,1};X)\text{ map}(F_{g,1},;S^2X).$$

Note though that the induced $`\text{ Diff}(F_{g,1})`$-action from the left on the right is non-trivial on the sphere in the target space.

## 6. Refinement of Mumford’s conjecture

Infinite loop spaces are relatively rare and the question arises whether $`\times B\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{}}^+`$ can be understood in terms of well-known infinite loop spaces. This question was addressed in joint work with Madsen.

Let $`^l`$ be the Grassmannian of oriented 2-planes in $`^{l+2}`$ and let $`L_l`$ be the complement of the canonical 2-plane bundle $`L`$ over $`^l`$. The one-point compactification, the Thom space $`\text{Th}(L_l)`$, restricts on the subspace $`^{l1}`$ to the suspension of $`\text{Th}(L_{l1})`$. Taking adjoints yields maps $`\text{Th}(L_{l1})\mathrm{\Omega }\text{Th}(L_l)`$, and we may define

$$\mathrm{\Omega }^{\mathrm{}}\text{Th}(L):=\underset{l\mathrm{}}{lim}\mathrm{\Omega }^l\text{Th}(L_l).$$

More generally, for any space $`X`$, define

$$\mathrm{\Omega }^{\mathrm{}}(\text{Th}(L)X_+):=\underset{l\mathrm{}}{lim}\mathrm{\Omega }^l(\text{Th}(L_l)X_+).$$

###### Conjecture 6.1

There is a homotopy equivalence of infinite loop space

$$\alpha :\text{ St}(X)\stackrel{}{}\mathrm{\Omega }^{\mathrm{}}(\text{Th}(L)X_+).$$

### Remarks 6.2

For $`X=`$, Conjecture 6.1 postulates a homotopy equivalence $`\alpha :\times B\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{\Omega }^{\mathrm{}}\text{Th}(L).`$ A proof of this has been announced by Madsen and Weiss, see Section 8. The Mumford conjecture follows from this as we will explain presently. Conjecture 6.1 claims in addition that $`\text{ St}(\mathrm{\_})`$ is a homology functor, i.e. $`\pi _{}\text{ St}(\mathrm{\_})`$ is the homology theory associated to the infinite loop space $`\mathrm{\Omega }^{\mathrm{}}\text{Th}(L)`$.

The infinite loop space $`\mathrm{\Omega }^{\mathrm{}}\text{Th}(L)`$ is well-studied, more recently because of its relation to Waldhausen $`K`$-theory. The inclusion of $`L_l`$ into the trivial bundle $`L(L_l)^l\times ^{l+2}`$ induces a map

$$\omega :\mathrm{\Omega }^{\mathrm{}}\text{Th}(L)Q(_+^{\mathrm{}}).$$

$`\omega `$ has homotopy fibre $`\mathrm{\Omega }^2Q(S^0)`$. As the stable homotopy groups of the sphere are torsion in positive dimensions, $`\omega `$ is a rational equivalence. Let $`^{\mathrm{}}BU`$ be the map that classifies $`L`$. By Bott periodicity, the map can be extended to the free infinite loop space $`L:Q_0(^{\mathrm{}})BU`$. The subscript here indicates the 0-component. $`L`$ has a splitting and is well known to be a rational equivalence:

$$H^{}(\mathrm{\Omega }_0^{\mathrm{}}\text{Th}(L);)\stackrel{\omega ^{}L^{}}{}[c_1,c_2,\mathrm{}].$$

The $`/p`$-homology of $`\mathrm{\Omega }^{\mathrm{}}\text{Th}(L)`$ has recently been determined by Galatius .

Figure 1: Surface $`h(F)^{l+2}`$ with tubular neighborhood $`U`$.

To define a map $`\alpha `$ comes down to defining maps from the morphism spaces of $`𝒮X`$. (See also Example 5.2.) $`\alpha `$ is the homotopy theoretic interpretation of the formula defining $`\kappa _i`$ where the wrong way map $`_F`$ is replaced by the (pre)transfer map of Becker and Gottlieb. We give now an explicid description of this map.

For simplicity, let $`F`$ be a closed surface. Consider the space of smooth embeddings $`\text{ Emb}(F,^{l+2})`$. By Whitney’s embedding theorem, as $`l\mathrm{}`$, it may serve as a model for $`E\text{ Diff}(F)`$. Let

$$(h,f)\text{ Emb}(F,^{l+2})\times _{\text{ Diff}(F)}\text{ map}(F,X).$$

Choose a tubular neighborhood $`U`$ of $`h(F)`$ such that every $`tU`$ can uniquely be written as $`x+v`$ with $`xh(F)`$ and $`v`$ normal to the tangent plane $`T_xh(F)`$. $`\alpha `$ sends $`(h,f)`$ to the continuous function $`\alpha (h,f):S^{l+2}\text{Th}(L_l)X_+`$ defined by

$$t\{\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \mathrm{}& \text{ if }tU,\hfill \\ \hfill ((T_xh(F),v),f(h^1(x))& \text{ if }t=x+vU.\hfill \end{array}$$

In , $`\alpha `$ is shown to be a 3-connected map of infinite loop spaces and the tautological classes are identified. Let $`i!(ch_i)H^{2i}BU`$ denote the $`i`$-th integral Chern character class. Then

$$\kappa _i=\alpha ^{}\omega ^{}L^{}(i!ch_i).$$

## 7. Splittings and (co)homological results

The main result of  is a partial splitting of the composition

$$\omega \alpha :\times B\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{}}^+Q(_+^{\mathrm{}})Q(S^0)\times Q(^{\mathrm{}}).$$

This is achieved by constructing a map $`\mu `$ from $`_+`$ to $`\times B\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{}}^+`$ and then extending it to the free infinite loop space $`Q(_+^{\mathrm{}})`$ utilizing the infinite loop space structure on $`\times B\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{}}^+`$. In order to construct $`\mu `$, approximate $`^{\mathrm{}}BS^1`$ by the classifying spaces of cyclic groups $`C_{p^n}`$ for $`n\mathrm{}`$, one prime $`p`$ at a time, as the cyclic groups can be mapped into suitable mapping class groups. However, this means that we have to work with $`p`$-completions.

Let $`Y_p^{}`$ denote the $`p`$-completion of $`Y`$ and $`g_p^\times `$ be a topological generator of the $`p`$-adic units ($`g=3`$ if $`p=2`$). Denote by $`\psi ^k:^{\mathrm{}}(^{\mathrm{}})_p^{}`$ the map that represents $`k`$ times the first Chern class in $`H^2(^{\mathrm{}},_p)`$.

###### Theorem 7.1.

There exists a map $`\mu :(Q(S^0)\times Q(^{\mathrm{}}))_p^{}(\times B\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{}}^+)_p^{}`$ such that

$$\omega \alpha \mu \left(\begin{array}{cc}2& \\ 0& 1g\psi ^g\end{array}\right).$$

The map $`1g\psi ^g`$ induces multiplication by $`1g^{n+1}`$ on $`H_{2n}(^{\mathrm{}};_p)`$ which is a $`p`$-adic unit precisely if $`n1(modp1)`$. The following applications of Theorem 7.1 are also found in . There is a splitting $`Q(_+^{\mathrm{}})_p^{}E_0\times \mathrm{}\times E_{p2}`$ corresponding to the idempotent decomposition of $`[/p^\times ]_p[_p^\times ]`$.

###### Corollary 7.2

For some $`W_p`$, there is a splitting of infinite loop spaces

$$(\times B\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{}}^+)_p^{}E_0\times \mathrm{}\times E_{p3}\times W_p.$$

The $`/p`$-homology of $`Q(_+^{\mathrm{}})`$ is well-understood in terms of Dyer-Lashof operation. These are homology operations for infinite loop spaces that are formally similar to the Steenrod operations. For each generator $`a_iH_{2i}^{\mathrm{}}=`$ there is an infinite family of $`/p`$-homology classes freely generated by the Dyer-Lashof operations. The product $`E_0\times \mathrm{}\times E_{p3}`$ contains precisely those families for which $`i1(\text{mod }p1)`$, giving a huge collection of new $`p`$-torsion in $`H_{}B\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{}}`$.

For odd primes $`p`$, Madsen and Schlichtkrull \[MS\] found split surjective maps $`l_0`$ and $`l_1`$ of infinite loop spaces such that the following diagram is commutative

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\mathrm{\Omega }^{\mathrm{}}\text{Th}(L)_p^{}& \stackrel{\omega }{}& Q(_+^{\mathrm{}})_p^{}\\ l_1& & l_0& & \\ (\times BU)_p^{}& \stackrel{1g\psi ^g}{}& (\times BU)_p^{}.\end{array}$$

###### Corollary 7.3

For odd primes $`p`$ and some space $`V_p`$, there is a splitting of spaces

$$(B\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{}}^+)_p^{}BU_p^{}\times V_p.$$

This gives a $`_p`$-integral version of Miller and Morita’s theorem: the polynomial algebra $`_p[c_1,c_2,\mathrm{}]`$ is a split summand of $`H^{}(B\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{}};_p)`$. The divisibility of the tautological classes $`\kappa _i`$ at odd primes $`p`$ can also be deduced from the above diagram.

###### Corollary 7.4

If $`i=1(\text{mod }p1)`$, then $`\kappa _i`$ is divisible by $`p^{1+\nu _p(i+1)}`$ where $`\nu _p`$ is the $`p`$-adic valuation. Otherwise, $`p`$ does not divide $`\kappa _i`$.

In the light of  this result is sharp.

## 8. Geometric interpretation

$`\alpha :B\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{\Omega }_0^{\mathrm{}}\text{Th}(L)`$ is a homotopy equivalence if and only if it induces an isomorphism in oriented cobordism theory $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{}^{\text{SO}}`$. An element in $`\mathrm{\Omega }_n^{\text{SO}}(B\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{}}^+)=\mathrm{\Omega }_n^{\text{SO}}(B\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{}})`$ is a cobordism class of oriented surface bundles $`FE^{n+2}\stackrel{𝜋}{}M^n`$. An element in $`\mathrm{\Omega }_n^{\text{SO}}(\mathrm{\Omega }_0^{\mathrm{}}\text{Th}(L))`$ is a cobordism class of pairs $`[\pi :E^{n+2}M^n,\widehat{\pi }]`$ of smooth maps $`\pi `$ and stable bundle surjections from $`TE`$ to $`\pi ^{}TM`$. (Upto cobordism one can assume that $`\widehat{\pi }`$ is a vector bundle surjection.) $`\alpha `$ maps a bundle $`[FE\stackrel{𝜋}{}M]`$ to the pair $`[\pi :EM,D\pi ]`$ where $`D\pi `$ denotes the differential of $`\pi `$. Hence, $`\alpha `$ is a homotopy equivalence if and only if each cobordism class of pairs $`[\pi :E^{n+2}M^n,\widehat{\pi }]`$ contains a “unique” representative with $`\pi `$ a submersion.

It is this geometric formulation that underpins the solution to the Mumford conjecture by Madsen and Weiss. A key ingredient of the proof is the Phillips-Gromov $`h`$-principle of submersion theory: A pair $`(g:XM,\widehat{g}:TXg^{}TM)`$ can be deformed to a submersion – provided $`X`$ is open. $`E`$ above, however, is closed. The approach taken in  is to replace $`\pi :EM`$ by $`g=\pi pr_1:X=E\times M`$. Now the submersion $`h`$-principle applies and $`g`$ can be replaced by a submersion $`f`$. The proof then consists of a careful analysis of the singularities of the projection $`pr_1:X`$ on the fibers of $`f`$. At a critical point it uses Harer’s Stability Theorem 2.1.

###### Madsen-Weiss Theorem 8.1

The map $`\alpha :\times B\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{\Omega }^{\mathrm{}}\text{Th}(L)`$ is a homotopy equivalence.

## References


text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Scattering and pair production by an external field can be treated ether by Feynman propagator method \[1-2\] or in the framework of $`S`$ matrix formalism \[3-5\]. In the latter method the Bogoliubov coefficients, relating the in- and out-states, determine the probabilities of all processes in an external field. So, at first we have to determine the in- and out- states. Surprisingly enough there is a controversy on how to choose these states among the stationary solutions of a wave equation with one-dimensional static potential $`A_\mu (x_3)`$. The choice made in  and accepted in \[7-8\] disagrees with that one made in \[4, 9-11\]. For detailed justification of our choice see \[9-11\].

In this paper we give the in- and out-sets of solutions of the Dirac equation with barrier potential and the Bogoliubov transformations. We express the normalization of a stationary one-dimensional solution via the largest amplitude of its asymptotic form when $`x_3\pm \mathrm{}`$. For Sauter type potential and step potential we give the explicit solutions of the Dirac equation and also Bogoliubov coefficients. In contrast to \[6-7\] we do not assume that the transverse (to the field) momentum of electron is zero. The treatment of spinor case in this paper is similar to that of scalar case in .

## 2 The choice of in- and out-states

We consider the one-dimensional potential $`A^0(x_3)=aF(kx_3)`$ and assume that the corresponding electrical field $`E_3=\frac{A^0}{x_3}=akF^{}(kx_3)`$ disappears when $`x_3\pm \mathrm{}`$. We use the metric $`\eta _{\mu \nu }=\mathrm{diag}(1,1,1,1)`$ and introduce the kinetic energy $`\pi ^0(x_3)`$ and kinetic momentum $`\pi _3(x_3)`$ of a classical particle defined by the expressions

$$\pi ^0(x_3)=p^0eA^0(x_3),\pi _3(x_3)=\sqrt{\pi _0^2(x_3)m_{}^2},m_{}^2=m^2+p_1^2+p_2^2.$$
$`(1)`$
We also use the notation

$$\pi ^0(x_3)|_{x_3\pm \mathrm{}}=\pi ^0(\pm ),\pi _3(x_3)|_{x_3\pm \mathrm{}}=\pi _3(\pm )=\sqrt{\pi _0^2(\pm )m_{}^2},\pi ^\pm (x_3)=\pi ^0(x_3)\pm \pi _3(x_3).$$
$`(2)`$
The electron charge is denoted as $`e=|e|`$. We assume for definiteness that $`E_3>0`$ and consider two regions: electron scattering ($`\pi ^0(\pm )>m_{}`$) and Klein region

$$\pi ^0()>m_{},\pi ^0(+)<m_{},$$
$`(3)`$
In the Klein region the large positive $`x_3`$ are accessible only to positrons.

For brevity reasons we often write only the wave function factor depending on $`x_3`$ (i.e. we drop the factor $`\mathrm{exp}\{i[p_1x_1+p_2x_2p^0t]\}`$). We denote solutions of the Dirac equation as $`f_n(x_3)`$, where $`(n=p,r)`$ and $`p=(p^0,p_1,p_2,0)`$ are the eigenvalues of operators $`i_0,i_1,i_2`$ ; $`r=1,2`$ indicate spin state. $`f_n`$ can be expressed via solutions $`Q_p(x_3,\pm \lambda )`$ of the squared Dirac equation

$$[\mathrm{\Pi }^2+m^2\pm ieE_3(x_3)]Q_p(x_3,\pm \lambda )e^{ipx}=0.$$
$`(4)`$
Here

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_\mu =i_\mu eA_\mu ,\stackrel{}{A}=0,\lambda =\frac{ea}{k}$$

and $`\pm 1`$ are the eigenvalues of $`\sigma _3`$. It follows from (4) that ($`\phi =kx_3`$)

$$[\frac{d^2}{d\phi ^2}+\frac{2eap^0}{k^2}F(\phi )+\lambda ^2F^2(\phi )+\frac{p_0^2m_{}^2}{k^2}i\lambda F^{}(\phi )]Q_p(x_3,\lambda )=0.$$
$`(5)`$
We consider solutions with the following boundary conditions

$${}_{\pm }{}^{}Q_{p}^{}|_{x_3\mathrm{}}=\mathrm{exp}[\pm i\pi _3()x_3],$$

$${}_{}{}^{\pm }Q_{p}^{}|_{x_3\mathrm{}}=\mathrm{exp}[\pm i\pi _3(+)x_3]$$
$`(6)`$
independently of the sign in front of $`\lambda `$. The corresponding $`f_n`$ solutions are

$${}_{\pm }{}^{}f_{n}^{}=[4|\pi _3()\pi ^{}()|]^{\frac{1}{2}}[u_r{}_{\pm }{}^{}Q_{p}^{}(x_3,\lambda )+\pi ^{}()u_r^{}{}_{\pm }{}^{}Q_{p}^{}(x_3,\lambda )],$$

$${}_{}{}^{\pm }f_{n}^{}=[4|\pi _3(+)\pi ^{}(+)|]^{\frac{1}{2}}[u_r{}_{}{}^{\pm }Q_{p}^{}(x_3,\lambda )+\pi ^{}(+)u_r^{}{}_{}{}^{\pm }Q_{p}^{}(x_3,\lambda )].$$
$`(7)`$
In the standard representation of $`\gamma `$-matrixes we have

$$u_1=\left[\begin{array}{c}p_1ip_2\\ m\\ p_1ip_2\\ m\end{array}\right],u_2=\left[\begin{array}{c}m\\ p_1ip_2\\ m\\ p_1+ip_2\end{array}\right],$$

$$u_1^{}=\left[\begin{array}{c}0\\ 1\\ 0\\ 1\end{array}\right],u_2^{}=\left[\begin{array}{c}1\\ 0\\ 1\\ 0\end{array}\right].$$
$`(8)`$
All these spinors are orthogonal:

$$u_1^{}u_2=u_1^{}u_2^{}=u_1^{}u_1^{}=\mathrm{}=0,$$

so that $`f_{rp}^{}f_{r^{}p}\delta _{r^{}r}`$. This means that states with $`rr^{}`$ are orthogonal. The normalization factors in (7) are chosen in such a way that the current density along the third axis is equal to unity up to a sign. The 4-vector transition current is conserved. For $`p^0=p^{}^0`$ this means that 3-current is independent of $`x_3`$ and can be evaluated using the asymptotic forms of $`f_n`$. It is easy to find that

$$j_3(f_n^{},f_n)=f_n^{}^{}\alpha _3f_n,j_3({}_{}{}^{\epsilon }f_{r,p}^{},{}_{}{}^{\epsilon ^{}}f_{r^{},p}^{})=\delta _{\epsilon \epsilon ^{}}\delta _{rr^{}}\{\begin{array}{cc}\epsilon 1,\pi ^0(+)>m_{},& \\ \epsilon 1,\pi ^0(+)<m_{},& \end{array}\epsilon ,\epsilon ^{}=\pm ;$$
$`(9)`$
$$j_3({}_{\epsilon }{}^{}f_{r,p}^{},{}_{\epsilon ^{}}{}^{}f_{r^{},p}^{})=\delta _{\epsilon \epsilon ^{}}\delta _{rr^{}}\{\begin{array}{cc}\epsilon 1,\pi ^0()>m_{},& \\ \epsilon 1,\pi ^0()<m_{},& \end{array}.$$
$`(10)`$
To obtain the relation between $`{}_{\pm }{}^{}f_{n}^{}`$ and $`{}_{}{}^{\pm }f_{n}^{}`$, we first write

$${}_{+}{}^{}Q_{p}^{}(x_3,\lambda )=a(\lambda ){}_{}{}^{+}Q_{p}^{}(x_3,\lambda )+b(\lambda ){}_{}{}^{}Q_{p}^{}(x_3,\lambda ).$$
$`(11)`$
$`a(\lambda )`$ and $`b(\lambda )`$ are defined by this equation. From here by complex conjugation and substitutions $`pp`$, $`ee`$, we get

$${}_{}{}^{}Q_{p}^{}(x_3,\lambda )=a^{}(\lambda ){}_{}{}^{}Q_{p}^{}(x_3,\lambda )+b^{}(\lambda ){}_{}{}^{+}Q_{p}^{}(x_3,\lambda ).$$
$`(12)`$
Now it can be shown  that

$${}_{+}{}^{}f_{n}^{}=c_{1n}^{}{}_{}{}^{+}f_{n}^{}+c_{2n}^{}{}_{}{}^{}f_{n}^{},$$

$${}_{}{}^{}f_{n}^{}=\pm c^{}{}_{2n}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{+}f_{n}^{}\pm c^{}{}_{1n}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{}f_{n}^{},\pm |c_{1n}^{}|^2|c_{2n}^{}|^2=1,$$
$`(13)`$
or equivalently

$${}_{}{}^{+}f_{n}^{}=\pm c^{}{}_{1n}{}^{}{}_{+}{}^{}f_{n}^{}c_{2n}^{}{}_{}{}^{}f_{n}^{},$$

$${}_{}{}^{}f_{n}^{}=c^{}{}_{2n}{}^{}{}_{+}{}^{}f_{n}^{}+c^{}{}_{1n}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{}f_{n}^{}.$$
$`(14)`$
Here

$$c_{1n}^{}=\left(\frac{\pi _3(+)|\pi ^{}(+)|}{\pi _3()|\pi ^{}()|}\right)^{1/2}a(\lambda ),c_{2n}^{}=\left(\frac{\pi _3(+)|\pi ^+(+)|}{\pi _3()|\pi ^{}()|}\right)^{1/2}b(\lambda )$$
$`(15)`$
are independent of spin states $`r=1,2`$. The upper sign in front of $`c_{1n}^{},c_{2n}^{}`$ (and their complex conjugates) corresponds to scattering region ($`\pi ^0(\pm )>m_{}`$ or $`\pi ^0(\pm )<m_{}`$), while the lower sign corresponds to the Klein region ($`\pi ^0()>m_{},\pi ^0(+)<m_{})`$.

The consistency of equations (13-14) can be checked by calculating $`j_3({}_{+}{}^{}f_{n}^{},{}_{}{}^{+}f_{n}^{})`$ in two different ways:

$$j_3({}_{+}{}^{}f_{n}^{},{}_{}{}^{+}f_{n}^{})=\pm c^{}{}_{1n}{}^{}j_{3}^{}({}_{+}{}^{}f_{n}^{},{}_{+}{}^{}f_{n}^{})=c^{}{}_{1n}{}^{}j_{3}^{}({}_{}{}^{+}f_{n}^{},{}_{}{}^{+}f_{n}^{}).$$
$`(16)`$
In the first equation here the use has been made of the first equation in (14) and equation (10). The last term in (16) was obtained similarly. The last equality in (16) is consistent (valid) due to (9).

Now we have to classify the solutions as in- and out-states. For the Klein region we have ,

$${}_{}{}^{}\psi _{n}^{}{}_{}{}^{}\psi _{nout}^{}=𝒩_n{}_{+}{}^{}f_{n}^{},{}_{}{}^{+}\psi _{n}^{}{}_{}{}^{+}\psi _{nout}^{}=𝒩_n\frac{c_{2n}^{}^{}}{c_{2n}^{}}{}_{}{}^{+}f_{n}^{},$$

$${}_{}{}^{}\psi _{n}^{}{}_{}{}^{}\psi _{nin}^{}=𝒩_n{}_{}{}^{}f_{n}^{},{}_{+}{}^{}\psi _{n}^{}{}_{+}{}^{}\psi _{nin}^{}=𝒩_n{}_{}{}^{}f_{n}^{}.$$
$`(17)`$
Here the subscripts and superscripts $`\pm `$ in front of $`\psi `$-functions indicate the sign of frequencies i.e. the sign of $`\pi ^0`$ of the largest wave. $`{}_{}{}^{}\psi _{n}^{}`$ is the out-wave because in this state only one current goes out of the barrier (two other currents go to the barrier). Similar arguments hold for other states. The normalization factor $`𝒩_n`$ will be determined later, see eq. (40) and text below it. In terms of these $`\psi `$functions in (17) the relations (13) and (14) take on the form required for the application in the $`S`$matrix theory, see \[3-4\],

$${}_{+}{}^{}\psi _{n}^{}=c_{1n}{}_{}{}^{+}\psi _{n}^{}+c_{2n}{}_{}{}^{}\psi _{n}^{},$$

$${}_{}{}^{}\psi _{n}^{}=c_{2n}^{}{}_{}{}^{+}\psi _{n}^{}+c_{1n}^{}{}_{}{}^{}\psi _{n}^{};$$

$${}_{}{}^{+}\psi _{n}^{}=c_{1n}^{}{}_{+}{}^{}\psi _{n}^{}c_{2n}{}_{}{}^{}\psi _{n}^{},$$

$${}_{}{}^{}\psi _{n}^{}=c_{2n}^{}{}_{+}{}^{}\psi _{n}^{}+c_{1n}{}_{}{}^{}\psi _{n}^{};$$
$`(18)`$
$$|c_{1n}|^2+|c_{2n}|^2=1,c_{1n}=\frac{c_{1n}^{}}{c^{}_{2n}^{}},c_{2n}=\frac{1}{c_{2n}^{}}.$$
$`(19)`$
The sign of frequency is not conserved in the Klein region. We note also that the first eq. in (19) follows from the last eq. in (13) with the lower signs.

The corresponding Bogoliubov transformation for the creation operators $`a_n^{}`$ ($`b_n^{}`$) and distraction operators $`a_n`$ ($`b_n`$) for particle (antiparticle) are obtainable from the definition of the field operator

$$\mathrm{\Psi }=\underset{n}{}(a_{nin}{}_{+}{}^{}\psi _{n}^{}+b_{nin}^{}{}_{}{}^{}\psi _{n}^{})=\underset{n}{}(a_{nout}{}_{}{}^{+}\psi _{n}^{}+b_{nout}^{}{}_{}{}^{}\psi _{n}^{}).$$
$`(20)`$
It follows from here and (18-19) that

$$a_{nout}=c_{1n}a_{nin}c_{2n}^{}b_{nin}^{},$$

$$b_{nout}^{}=c_{2n}a_{nin}+c_{1n}^{}b_{nin}^{},$$
$`(21)`$
or

$$a_{nin}=c_{1n}^{}a_{nout}+c_{2n}^{}b_{nout}^{},$$

$$b_{nin}^{}=c_{2n}a_{nout}+c_{1n}b_{nout}^{}.$$
$`(22)`$
In the scattering region $`\pi ^0(\pm )>m_{}`$ the sign of frequency is conserved, but the sign of kinetic momentum is not. We define

$${}_{}{}^{+}\psi _{n}^{}(x_3|+)=\frac{c^{}_{1n}^{}}{c_{1n}^{}}N_n{}_{+}{}^{}f_{n}^{},{}_{}{}^{+}\psi _{n}^{}(x_3|)=N_n{}_{}{}^{}f_{n}^{},$$

$${}_{+}{}^{}\psi _{n}^{}(x_3|+)=N_n{}_{}{}^{+}f_{n}^{},{}_{+}{}^{}\psi _{n}^{}(x_3|)=N_n{}_{}{}^{}f_{n}^{}.$$
$`(23)`$
(The sign in parentheses coincides with the subscript or superscript of the corresponding $`f`$-function.) $`{}_{}{}^{+}\psi _{n}^{}(x_3|\pm )`$ are functions with two ingoing waves in the past and one outgoing wave in the future. Similarly, $`{}_{+}{}^{}\psi _{n}^{}(x_3|\pm )`$ are functions with one ingoing wave in the past and two outgoing waves in the future. In terms of these $`\psi `$function the relations (13-14) become

$${}_{+}{}^{}\psi _{n}^{}(x_3|+)=e_{1n}{}_{}{}^{+}\psi _{n}^{}(x_3|+)+e_{2n}{}_{}{}^{+}\psi _{n}^{}(x_3|),$$

$${}_{+}{}^{}\psi _{n}^{}(x_3|)=e_{2n}^{}{}_{}{}^{+}\psi _{n}^{}(x_3|+)+e_{1n}^{}{}_{}{}^{+}\psi _{n}^{}(x_3|),$$

$${}_{}{}^{+}\psi _{n}^{}(x_3|+)=e_{1n}^{}{}_{+}{}^{}\psi _{n}^{}(x_3|+)e_{2n}{}_{+}{}^{}\psi _{n}^{}(x_3|),$$

$${}_{}{}^{+}\psi _{n}^{}(x_3|)=e_{2n}^{}{}_{+}{}^{}\psi _{n}^{}(x_3|+)+e_{1n}{}_{+}{}^{}\psi _{n}^{}(x_3|);$$
$`(24)`$
$$e_{1n}=\frac{1}{c^{}_{1n}^{}},e_{2n}=\frac{c_{2n}^{}}{c_{1n,}^{}},|e_{1n}|^2+|e_{2n}|^2=1.$$
$`(25)`$
The last eq. in (25) is equivalent to the last eq. in (13) with upper signs. Proceeding as usual, from these relations and definition (see eq.(20))

$$a_{nin}(+){}_{+}{}^{}\psi _{n}^{}(x_3|+)+a_{nin}(){}_{+}{}^{}\psi _{n}^{}(x_3|)=a_{nout}(+){}_{}{}^{+}\psi _{n}^{}(x_3|+)+a_{nout}(){}_{}{}^{+}\psi _{n}^{}(x_3|),$$
$`(26)`$
we get

$$a_{nout}(+)=e_{1n}a_{nin}(+)e_{2n}^{}a_{nin}(),$$

$$a_{nout}()=e_{2n}a_{nin}(+)+e_{1n}^{}a_{nin}(),$$
$`(27)`$
and from here

$$a_{nout}^{}(+)=e_{1n}^{}a_{nin}^{}(+)e_{2n}a_{nin}^{}(),$$

$$a_{nout}^{}()=e_{2n}^{}a_{nin}^{}(+)+e_{1n}a_{nin}^{}().$$
$`(28)`$
Solving (27) for $`a_{nin}(\pm )`$, we obtain

$$a_{nin}(+)=e_{1n}^{}a_{nout}(+)+e_{2n}^{}a_{nout}(),$$

$$a_{nin}()=e_{2n}a_{nout}(+)+e_{1n}a_{nout}(),$$
$`(29)`$
and for the creation operators

$$a_{nin}^{}(+)=e_{1n}a_{nout}^{}(+)+e_{2n}a_{nout}^{}(),$$

$$a_{nin}^{}()=e_{2n}^{}a_{nout}^{}(+)+e_{1n}^{}a_{nout}^{}().$$
$`(30)`$
## 3 Matrix elements and probabilities

We denote $`|0_{nin}>`$ the in-vacuum state in the cell with quantum numbers $`n`$ and similarly for the out-vacuum. To find $`<0_{nout}|0_{nin}>`$, we rewrite Bogoliubov transformations (21) in the form

$$a_{nout}=B_n^1a_{nin}B_n,b_{nout}^{}=B_n^1b_{nin}^{}B_n,$$
$`(31)`$
where

$$B_n=c_{1n}^{}+(1c_{1n}^{})[a_{nin}^{}a_{nin}+b_{nin}^{}b_{nin}]c_{2n}^{}a_{nin}^{}b_{nin}^{}$$

$$c_{2n}a_{nin}b_{nin}+(c_{1n}+c_{1n}^{}2)a_{nin}^{}a_{nin}b_{nin}^{}b_{nin}.$$
$`(32)`$
Eq.(31) imply $`<0_{nout}|=<0_{nin}|B_n`$ and hence

$$<0_{nout}|0_{nin}>=c_{1n}^{}.$$
$`(33)`$
We note now that the unitary operator $`B`$ is defined by (31) and (21) only up to a phase factor and we put it equal to unity. It is a natural choice. It leads to (33) from which the correct vacuum-vacuum amplitude for a constant electromagnetic field can be obtained .

Now we can write down matrix elements. We start with the Klein region. From second eq. (22) we have

$$b_{nin}=c_{2n}^{}a_{nout}^{}+c_{1n}^{}b_{nout}.$$
$`(34)`$
Using this relation, we find

$$b_{nout}|0_{nin}>=c_{2n}^{}c_{1n}^1a_{nout}^{}|0_{nin}>.$$
$`(35)`$
From here for the pair creation amplitude we find

$$<0_{nout}|a_{nout}b_{nout}|0_{nin}>=c_{2n}^{}c_{1n}^1<0_{nout}|0_{nin}>=c_{2n}^{}.$$
$`(36)`$
The sum of all probabilities in the cell $`n`$ initially in the vacuum state is

$$|<0_{nout}|0_{nin}>|^2+|<0_{nout}|a_{nout}b_{nout}|0_{nin}>|^2=1,$$
$`(37)`$
see (33), (36) and the first eq. in (19). Similarly, when the initial state with quantum numbers $`n`$ is occupied, we get for the scattering amplitude

$$<0_{nout}|a_{nout}a_{nin}^{}|0_{nin}>=c_{1n}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}<0_{nout}|0_{nin}>=1.$$
$`(38)`$
We see that the information on processes in an external field is contained in the solutions of wave equation, but it has to be decoded. In particular, if the initial state with quantum numbers $`n`$ is occupied, we know that the electron cannot penetrate deep into the barrier. It is suggested in \[14-15\] that the accessible region is defined by the condition $`\pi ^0(x_3)>0`$.

Now we go to the scattering region, extending its definition to all energies outside the Klein region. In this case $`c_{2n}=0`$, $`c_{1n}c_{1n}^{}=1`$ in (18), (19) and (21). Hence

$${}_{}{}^{+}\psi _{n}^{}=c_{1n}^{}{}_{+}{}^{}\psi _{n}^{},a_{nout}=a_{nin}c_{1n}$$
$`(39)`$
and similarly for the other quantities. We first consider the scattering region, where the reflection is complete. Then $`\pi _3(+)`$ is imaginary and $`|c_{1n}^{}|=|c_{2n}^{}|`$ due to current conservation. The solutions $`{}_{\pm }{}^{}f_{n}^{}`$ in (13) must be discarded as containing exponentially growing terms when $`x_3\mathrm{}`$. Instead of two solutions $`{}_{}{}^{\pm }f_{n}^{}`$ we are left with only one as there is only one boundary condition when $`x_3\mathrm{}`$, see eq. (6). The reflection amplitude is

$$<0_{nout}|a_{nout}()a_{nin}^{}(+)|0_{nin}>=c_{1n}<0_{nout}|0_{nin}>=1,$$
$`(40)`$
see the second eq. in (39), eq. (33) and the condition $`c_{1n}c_{1n}^{}=1`$.

The final state $`{}_{}{}^{+}\psi _{n}^{}`$ in (39) differs from the initial state $`{}_{+}{}^{}\psi _{n}^{}`$ only by the phase factor given by the (renormalized) value of $`<0_{nout}|0_{nin}>`$, see (33), i.e. by $`<0_{nout}|0_{nin}>^{ren}e^{i\varphi _n}`$. In principle this factor can be observed in the interference pattern of the incident and reflected waves. Then it will be a way to find $`\varphi _n`$ experimentally.

We note here that the considered region of complete reflection can be reached from the Klein region by raising the value of $`p^0`$. At the top of the Klein region $`c_{2n}`$ is very small and the reflected wave resembles the one at the bottom of complete reflection region; the corresponding $`c_{1n}`$ just above and below the boundary between two regions must be almost equal.

By raising $`p^0`$ still further, we enter into the scattering region where $`\pi ^0(\pm )>m_{}`$. For the initial state $`{}_{+}{}^{}\psi _{n}^{}(x_3|+)`$, using (27), we find for the reflection and transmission amplitudes

$$<0_{nout}|a_{nout}()a_{nin}^{}(+)|0_{nin}>=e_{2n}<0_{nout}|0_{nin}>,$$
$`(41)`$
$$<0_{nout}|a_{nout}(+)a_{nin}^{}(+)|0_{nin}>=e_{1n}<0_{nout}|0_{nin}>.$$
$`(42)`$
Alternatively we may say that our solutions $`{}_{}{}^{+}\psi _{n}^{}(x_3|\pm )`$ are relative ones and the absolute solutions are obtained from them by multiplying by $`e^{i\varphi _n}`$. Then the factor $`<0_{nout}|0_{nin}>`$ in the r.h. sides of (41) and (42) disappears.

The propagator method gives the same results. In the Klein region we start from $`{}_{+}{}^{}\psi _{n}^{}`$. The Feynman propagator evolves this state to the relative function $`c_{1n}^1{}_{}{}^{+}\psi _{n}^{}`$ . So the absolute final function is $`{}_{}{}^{+}\psi _{n}^{}`$. In scattering region the relative final wave function is the same as the initial one and the absolute final function is $`e^{i\varphi _n}{}_{+}{}^{}\psi _{n}^{}`$. It is a happy occasion when $`c_{1n}^{ren}`$ gives $`e^{i\varphi _n}<0_{nout}|0_{nin}>^{ren}`$. In general $`e^{i\varphi _n}`$ have to be found by other means, see . In quantum mechanics for the state $`{}_{+}{}^{}\psi _{n}^{}(x_3|+)`$ the amplitudes of reflection and transmission are obtained directly from the first equation in (24), which says: the reflection (transmission) amplitude is $`e_{2n}`$ ($`e_{1n}`$). In the considered scattering region $`e^{i\varphi _n}`$ is a phase factor. We see that vacuum virtual processes lead to the appearance of an additional phase shift in the reflected and transmitted waves.

In conclusion of this section, we note that in the scattering region instead of (32) and (31) we have (again with natural choice of phase factor)

$$A_n=1+(e_{1n}1)a_{nin}^{}(+)a_{nin}(+)+(e_{1n}^{}1)a_{nin}^{}()a_{nin}()+e_{2n}a_{nin}^{}()a_{nin}(+)$$

$$e_{2n}^{}a_{nin}^{}(+)a_{nin}()+[2(e_{1n}+e_{1n}^{})]a_{nin}^{}(+)a_{nin}(+)a_{nin}^{}()a_{nin}(),$$
$`(43)`$
$$A_n^1a_{nin}(\pm )A_n=a_{nout}(\pm ),<0_{nin}|=<0_{nin}|A_n,$$
$`(44)`$
see Appendix 5 in .

## 4 Normalization of wave functions

For our stationary states the (transition) current conservation gives

$$i(p^{}{}_{}{}^{0}p^0)j^0(f_n^{},f_n)=\frac{}{x_3}j_3(f_n^{},f_n).$$
$`(45)`$
So

$$_{L_d}^{L_u}𝑑x_3j^0(f_n^{},f_n)=\frac{i}{p^{}{}_{}{}^{0}p^0}[j_3(f_n^{},f_n|L_u)j_3(f_n^{},f_n|L_d)].$$
$`(46)`$
First we consider $`f_n^{}={}_{+}{}^{}f_{n^{}}^{}`$, $`f_n={}_{+}{}^{}f_{n}^{}`$ where $`n^{}=(p^0,p_1,p_2,r)`$, $`n=(p^0,p_1,p_2,r)`$, $`r=1,2`$. For $`x_3\mathrm{}`$ we can easily calculate $`j_3({}_{+}{}^{}f_{n^{}}^{},{}_{+}{}^{}f_{n}^{}|L_d)`$ because $`{}_{+}{}^{}f_{n^{}}^{}`$, $`{}_{+}{}^{}f_{n}^{}`$ are known in this limit, see eq (6) and (7). The result is:

$$j_3({}_{+}{}^{}f_{n^{}}^{},{}_{+}{}^{}f_{n}^{}|L_d)e^{i[\pi _3()\pi _3^{}()]L_d}=e^{iA_d(p^0p^0)},A_d=\frac{\pi ^0()+\pi ^0()}{\pi _3()+\pi _3^{}()}L_d.$$
$`(47)`$
The arrow means that we put $`\pi _3^{}()=\pi _3()`$, $`\pi ^{}()=\pi ^{}()`$ everywhere except in the exponent. This is permissible because when $`L_d\mathrm{}`$, the effectively nonzero result will be achieved only when $`\pi ^{}`$ will be close to $`\pi `$. In the last equation in (47) we have used the relation

$$\pi _3^2\pi ^{}{}_{3}{}^{2}=(\pi ^0)^2(\pi ^{}{}_{}{}^{0})^2=(\pi ^0+\pi ^{}{}_{}{}^{0})(p^0p^{}{}_{}{}^{0}),$$
$`(48)`$
see eqs. (1) and (2).

The contribution from $`j_3({}_{+}{}^{}f_{n^{}}^{},{}_{+}{}^{}f_{n}^{}|L_u)`$ is treated in the same manner. Using the first equation in (13), we have

$$j_3({}_{+}{}^{}f_{n^{}}^{},{}_{+}{}^{}f_{n}^{})=c_{1n^{}}^{}c_{1n}^{}j_3({}_{}{}^{+}f_{n^{}}^{},{}_{}{}^{+}f_{n}^{})+c_{2n^{}}^{}c_{2n}^{}j_3({}_{}{}^{}f_{n^{}}^{},{}_{}{}^{}f_{n}^{})+c_{1n^{}}^{}c_{2n}^{}j_3({}_{}{}^{+}f_{n^{}}^{},{}_{}{}^{}f_{n}^{})+$$

$$c_{2n^{}}^{}c_{1n}^{}j_3({}_{}{}^{}f_{n^{}}^{},{}_{}{}^{+}f_{n}^{})|c_{1n}^{}|^2j_3({}_{}{}^{+}f_{n^{}}^{},{}_{}{}^{+}f_{n}^{})+|c_{2n}^{}|^2j_3({}_{}{}^{}f_{n^{}}^{},{}_{}{}^{}f_{n}^{}).$$
$`(49)`$
In the Klein region this can be written as follows

$$j_3({}_{+}{}^{}f_{n^{}}^{},{}_{+}{}^{}f_{n}^{}|L_u)|c_{1n}^{}|^2e^{i[\pi _3(+)\pi _3^{}(+)]L_u}+|c_{2n}^{}|^2e^{i[\pi _3(+)\pi _3^{}(+)]L_u}=$$

$$|c_{1n}^{}|^2e^{iA_u(p^0p^{}{}_{}{}^{0})}+|c_{2n}^{}|^2e^{iA_u(p^0p^{}{}_{}{}^{0})},A_u=\frac{\pi ^0(+)\pi ^0(+)}{\pi _3(+)+\pi _3^{}(+)}L_u.$$
$`(50)`$
Noting that $`A_d`$ and $`A_u`$ are of the same sign, we fix the relation between them: $`A_d=A_u`$. Using also $`|c_{2n}^{}|^2=|c_{2n}^{}|^2+1`$, we finally obtain from (46)

$$_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}dx_3j^0({}_{+}{}^{}f_{n^{}}^{},{}_{+}{}^{}f_{n^{}}^{})=2\pi |c_{2n}^{}|^2\delta (p^0p^{}{}_{}{}^{0})$$
$`(51)`$
in the Klein region where $`c_{2n}^{}`$ is the amplitude of the largest wave. Thus, choosing $`𝒩_n=|c_{2n}^{}|^1`$, we normalize $`\psi `$functions in (17) on $`2\pi \delta (p^0p^{}{}_{}{}^{0})`$.

In the scattering region the amplitude of the largest wave is $`c_{1n}^{}`$ and we must substitute $`c_{2n}^{}c_{1n}^{}`$ in the r.h.s. of (51). This can be seen as follows. The relation (47) remains unchanged. Instead of (50) we have

$$j_3({}_{+}{}^{}f_{n^{}}^{},{}_{+}{}^{}f_{n}^{}|L_u)|c_{1n}^{}|^2e^{iA_u(p^0p^{}{}_{}{}^{0})}|c_{2n}^{}|^2e^{iA_u(p^0p^{}{}_{}{}^{0})}.$$
$`(52)`$
Besides, now $`A_u=|A_u|`$ and $`|c_{1n}^{}|^2=|c_{2n}^{}|^2+1`$. So the condition $`A_d=|A_u|`$ leads to the stated result. We note here that the condition

$$\frac{\pi ^0()+\pi ^0()}{\pi _3()+\pi _3^{}()}L_d=\frac{\pi ^0(+)+\pi ^0(+)}{\pi _3(+)+\pi _3^{}(+)}L_u$$
$`(53)`$
is a generalization to the scattering region of the free field condition $`L_d=L_u`$. In the case of a complete reflection $`|c_{1n}^{}|=|c_{2n}^{}|`$ and (51) remains valid.

Going back to the Klein region we can show that $`{}_{}{}^{+}\psi _{n^{}}^{}`$ and $`{}_{}{}^{}\psi _{n}^{}`$, see (17), are orthogonal. As $`{}_{}{}^{+}\psi _{n}^{}{}_{}{}^{+}f_{n}^{}`$ and $`{}_{}{}^{}\psi _{n}^{}{}_{+}{}^{}f_{n}^{}`$ , we write

$$j_3({}_{}{}^{+}f_{n^{}}^{},{}_{+}{}^{}f_{n}^{})=c_{1n^{}}^{}j_3({}_{+}{}^{}f_{n^{}}^{},{}_{+}{}^{}f_{n}^{})c_{2n^{}}^{}j_3({}_{}{}^{}f_{n^{}}^{},{}_{+}{}^{}f_{n}^{}),$$
$`(54)`$
where use has been made of the first equation in (14) with lower sign. Arguing as above, we have

$$j_3({}_{}{}^{+}f_{n^{}}^{},{}_{+}{}^{}f_{n}^{}|L_d)c_{1n}^{}e^{i[\pi _3()\pi _3^{}()](L_d)}=c_{1n}^{}e^{iA_d(p^0p^{}{}_{}{}^{0})}.$$
$`(55)`$
Similarly

$$j_3({}_{}{}^{+}f_{n^{}}^{},{}_{+}{}^{}f_{n}^{}|L_u)c_{1n}^{}e^{iA_u(p^0p^{}{}_{}{}^{0})}.$$
$`(56)`$
For $`A_d=A_u`$ the difference of the last two expressions is zero. So $`{}_{}{}^{+}\psi _{n^{}}^{}`$ and $`{}_{}{}^{}\psi _{n}^{}`$ are orthogonal. The same is true for $`{}_{+}{}^{}\psi _{n^{}}^{}`$ and $`{}_{}{}^{}\psi _{n}^{}`$.

In the same manner it easy to show that in the scattering region $`{}_{}{}^{+}\psi _{n^{}}^{}(x_3|+)`$ and $`{}_{}{}^{+}\psi _{n}^{}(x_3|)`$ are orthogonal; the same is true for $`{}_{+}{}^{}\psi _{n^{}}^{}(x_3|+)`$ and $`{}_{+}{}^{}\psi _{n}^{}(x_3|)`$.

Thus, the orthogonal pairs of functions in the Klein region are ($`{}_{+}{}^{}f_{n^{}}^{},{}_{}{}^{+}f_{n}^{}`$) and ($`{}_{}{}^{}f_{n^{}}^{},{}_{}{}^{}f_{n}^{}`$), and in the scattering region ($`{}_{+}{}^{}f_{n^{}}^{},{}_{}{}^{}f_{n}^{}`$) and ($`{}_{}{}^{}f_{n^{}}^{},{}_{}{}^{+}f_{n}^{}`$). This assertion must be true for particles of any spin.

For the step potential, considered in Sec.6, the results of this Sec. were checked by a straightforward calculation of the l.h.s. of (46) with $`j^0(f_n^{},f_n)=f_n^{}^{}f_n`$ and $`L_d,L_u`$ equal to infinity.

## 5 Solvable potential

For the potential

$$A^0(x_3)=a\mathrm{tanh}(kx_3)$$
$`(57)`$
the solution $`{}_{+}{}^{}Q_{p}^{}(x_3,\lambda )`$ of the squared Dirac equation has the form

$${}_{+}{}^{}Q_{p}^{}(x_3,\lambda )=(z)^{i\mu }(1z)^{i\lambda }F(\alpha ,\beta ;\gamma ;z),$$
$`(58)`$
where

$$z=e^{2kx_3},\lambda =\frac{ea}{k},\pi ^0(\pm )=p^0\pm ea,2k\nu =\pi _3(+),2k\mu =\pi _3(),$$

$$\alpha =i\mu +i\nu +i\lambda ,\beta =i\mu i\nu +i\lambda ,\gamma =1+2i\mu .$$
$`(59)`$
We assume at first that $`\pi _3(\pm )`$ are real. The solution $`{}_{}{}^{}Q_{p}^{}(x_3,\lambda )`$ can be obtained from (58) either by substitution $`\mu \mu `$ or by complex conjugation and substitutions $`ee`$, $`p^0p^0`$.

The solution $`{}_{}{}^{+}Q_{p}^{}(x_3,\lambda )`$ is obtainable from $`{}_{+}{}^{}Q_{p}^{}(x_3,\lambda )`$ by complex conjugation and substitutions $`ee`$, $`x_3x_3`$ (these operations do not change eq. (5) with $`F(\phi )=F(\phi )`$):

$${}_{}{}^{+}Q_{p}^{}(x_3,\lambda )=(z^1)^{i\nu }(1z^1)^{i\lambda }F(i\mu i\nu +i\lambda ,i\mu i\nu +i\lambda ;12i\nu ;z^1).$$
$`(60)`$
$`{}_{}{}^{}Q_{p}^{}(x_3,\lambda )`$ is obtainable from (60) by substitution $`\nu \nu `$. Now, eq. (11) takes the form

$${}_{+}{}^{}Q_{p}^{}(x_3,\lambda )=\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+2i\mu )\mathrm{\Gamma }(2i\nu )}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(i\mu +i\nu +i\lambda )\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+i\mu +i\nu i\lambda )}{}_{}{}^{+}Q_{p}^{}(x_3,\lambda )$$

$$+\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+2i\mu )\mathrm{\Gamma }(2i\nu )}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(i\mu i\nu +i\lambda )\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+i\mu i\nu i\lambda )}{}_{}{}^{}Q_{p}^{}(x_2,\lambda ).$$
$`(61)`$
From here by complex conjugation and substitutions $`ee,`$ and $`x_3x_3`$ we find

$${}_{}{}^{+}Q_{p}^{}(x_3,\lambda )=\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(2i\mu )\mathrm{\Gamma }(12i\nu )}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(i\mu i\nu +i\lambda )\mathrm{\Gamma }(1i\mu i\nu i\lambda )}{}_{+}{}^{}Q_{p}^{}(x_2,\lambda )$$

$$+\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(12i\nu )\mathrm{\Gamma }(2i\mu )}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(i\mu i\nu +i\lambda )\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+i\mu i\nu i\lambda )}{}_{}{}^{}Q_{p}^{}(x_2,\lambda ).$$
$`(61^{})`$
Neglecting $`\lambda =\frac{ea}{kc\mathrm{}}`$ we get the nonrelativistic limit, see Problem 3 in §25 in  where the potential $`U`$ differs from our $`eA^0`$ only by an additive constant.

Now we can rewrite eq. (15) in the form

$$c_{1n}^{}=\left(\frac{\pm \pi ^{}(+)}{\pi ^{}()}\frac{\pi _3(+)}{\pi _3()}\right)^{1/2}a(\lambda ),c_{2n}^{}=\left(\frac{\pm \pi ^+(+)}{\pi ^{}()}\frac{\pi _3(+)}{\pi _3()}\right)^{1/2}b(\lambda ).$$
$`(62)`$
The sign + ($``$) in front of $`\pi ^{}(+)`$ and $`\pi ^+(+)`$ refers to the scattering (Klein) region.

We note now that in the Klein region

$$\pi ^0()\pi ^0(+)=2ea=2|ea|$$
$`(63)`$
is the total energy of the $`e^+e^{}`$ pair. Hence $`2|ea|>\pi _3()+\pi _3(+)`$, i.e. $`\lambda \mu \nu >0`$ and all the more so $`\lambda \pm \mu \nu >0`$.

In the scattering region $`\pi ^+(+)/\pi ^{}()>0`$ and from here we shell obtain

$$\mu \nu +\lambda >0.$$
$`(64)`$
To this end we use the relation

$$\frac{\pi ^+(+)}{\pi ^{}()}=\frac{\pi ^+()}{\pi ^{}(+)}=\frac{\mu \nu \lambda }{\mu \nu +\lambda }=\frac{\pi _3()\pi _3(+)2ea}{\pi _3()\pi _3(+)+2ea}.$$
$`(65)`$
In the scattering region $`\pi ^0()=\pi ^0(+)+2|ea|`$, see (63), i.e. $`\pi ^0()>\pi ^0(+)`$. Hence, $`\pi _3()>\pi _3(+)`$ and all the more so $`\pi _3()\pi _3(+)+2|ea|>0`$. The numerator in the r,h.s. of (65) is positive, so must be the denominator because the l.h.s. of the expression is positive.

We note also another useful relation, obtainable from (65) by substitution $`\pi _3(+)\pi _3(+)`$

$$\frac{\pi ^{}(+)}{\pi ^{}()}=\frac{\pi ^+()}{\pi ^+(+)}=\frac{\mu +\nu \lambda }{\mu +\nu +\lambda }.$$
$`(66)`$
With the help of these relations we find more symmetric expressions for $`c_{1n}^{}`$, $`c_{2n}^{}`$

$$c_{1n}^{}=2\sqrt{\frac{\mu \nu }{\pm (\mu +\nu +\lambda )(\mu +\nu \lambda )}}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(2i\mu )\mathrm{\Gamma }(2i\nu )}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(i\mu +i\nu +i\lambda )\mathrm{\Gamma }(i\mu +i\nu i\lambda )},$$

$$c_{2n}^{}=2\sqrt{\frac{\mu \nu }{\pm (\mu \nu +\lambda )(\mu \nu \lambda )}}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(2i\mu )\mathrm{\Gamma }(2i\nu )}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(i\mu i\nu +i\lambda )\mathrm{\Gamma }(i\mu i\nu i\lambda )}.$$
$`(67)`$
Here and below the upper sign refers to the scattering region, the lower one to the Klein region. We see that

$$c_{1n}^{}(\mu ,\nu ,\lambda )=c_{1n}^{}(\nu ,\mu ,\lambda ),c^{}{}_{2n}{}^{}(\mu ,\nu ,\lambda )=c^{}{}_{2n}{}^{}(\nu ,\mu ,\lambda ).$$
$`(68)`$
It is still assumed that $`\mu ,\nu `$ and $`\lambda `$ are real.

When we approach the complete scattering region from the Klein region, $`\pi _3(+)0`$, and $`c_{1n}^{}`$, $`c_{2n}^{}`$ become unlimited. Then $`c_{2n}0`$ and $`c_{1n}`$ becomes a phase factor, see eq.(19).

When $`k0`$, $`a\mathrm{}`$, $`ak=E`$ in eq. (57), we get the potential of a constant electric field. This case was studied earlier, see , , . When $`k\mathrm{}`$, we have a step potential. This case is instructive because of its simplicity. In particular, we can verify the orthogonality and normalization in the set of solutions by a straightforward calculations.

## 6 Step potential

From (62), (61) and (59) we find when $`k\mathrm{}`$

$$c_{1n}^{}=\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{\pm \pi ^{}(+)}{\pi ^{}()}\frac{\pi _3(+)}{\pi _3()}\right)^{1/2}\left(1+\frac{\pi _3()+2ea}{\pi _3(+)}\right),$$

$$c_{2n}^{}=\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{\pm \pi ^+(+)}{\pi ^{}()}\frac{\pi _3(+)}{\pi _3()}\right)^{1/2}\left(1\frac{\pi _3()+2ea}{\pi _3(+)}\right).$$
$`(69)`$
Due to relations (65) and (66) there are several other useful forms for $`c_{1n}^{}`$ and $`c_{2n}^{}`$. We note these

$$c_{1n}^{}=\pm \frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{\pm \{[\pi _3()+\pi _3(+)]^2(2ea)^2\}}{\pi _3()\pi _3(+)}\right)^{1/2},$$

$$c_{2n}^{}=\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{\pm \{[\pi _3()\pi _3(+)]^2(2ea)^2\}}{\pi _3()\pi _3(+)}\right)^{1/2},$$
$`(70)`$
and these

$$c_{1n}^{}=\pm \frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{\pi ^{}()}{\pm \pi ^{}(+)}\frac{\pi _3()}{\pi _3(+)}\right)^{1/2}\left(1+\frac{\pi _3(+)2ea}{\pi _3()}\right),$$

$$c_{2n}^{}=\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{\pi ^+()}{\pm \pi ^{}(+)}\frac{\pi _3()}{\pi _3(+)}\right)^{1/2}\left(1\frac{\pi _3(+)2ea}{\pi _3()}\right).$$
$`(71)`$
From (70) and (19) we find (in both regions)

$$c_{1n}=\frac{c_{1n}^{}}{c^{}_{2n}^{}}=\left(\frac{(2ea)^2[\pi _3()+\pi _3(+)]^2}{(2ea)^2[\pi _3()\pi _3(+)]^2}\right)^{1/2}.$$
$`(72)`$
We see that $`c_{1n}1`$ when $`\pi _3(+)0`$ and probably in this limit $`e^{i\varphi _n}=1`$.

As mentioned at the end of Sec. 3 the results of that section were verified, using step potential. The expressions (69) and (71) turns out to be most handy, cf. examples of much less cumbersome calculations for a scalar particle in the first reference in .

## 7 Conclusion

In general the $`S`$matrix approach gives the same results as the propagator method. Yet, the former approach gives naturally the expression for $`<0_{nout}|0_{nin}>`$. Its renormalized value provides the factor distinguishing absolute and relative wave functions. The contribution from (virtual) pair production to any given final wave function must be observable in principle. If the theory is correct, it suggests that particle clock ticking depends upon the field.

## Acknowledgments

I am grateful to V.I.Ritus for encouraging discussions and useful suggestions. This work was supported in part by the Russian Foundation for Basic Research (projects no. 00-15-96566 and 02-02-16944)

## References

1. N.B.Narozhny and A.I.Nikishov, Yad. Fiz. 11, 1072 (1970).
2. A.I.Nikishov, Nucl. Phys. B 21, 346 (1970).
3. A.I.Nikishov, Tr. Fiz. Inst. Akad. Nauk SSSR 168, 157 (1985);
in Issues in Intensive-Field Quantum Electrodynamics, Ed. by V.L.Ginzburg (Nova Science, Commack, 1987).
4. A.I.Nikishov, Tr. Fiz. Inst. Akad. Nauk SSSR 111, 152 (1979); J. Sov. Laser Res. 6,
619 (1985).
5. A.A.Grib, S.G.Mamaev, and V.M.Mostepanenco,Vacuum Quantum Effects in Strong Fields (Energoatomizdat, Moscow, 1988).
6. A.Hansen, F.Ravndal, Physica Scripta, 23, 1036 (1981).
7. W.Greiner, B.Müller, J.Rafelski, Quantum Electrodynamics of Strong Field, Springer-Verlag (1985).
8. A.Calogeracos, N.Dombey, Contemp. Phys. 40, 313 (1999).
9. A.I.Nikishov, hep-th/0111137; A.I.Nikishov, Problems of atomic science and technology, Special issue dedicated to the 90-birthday anniversary of A.I.Akhieser, Kharkov, Ukraine, p.103 (2001).
10. A.I.Nikishov, hep-th/0202024.
11. A.I.Nikishov, hep-th/0211088.
12. A.I.Nikishov, Teor. Mat. Fiz. 98, 60 (1994).
13. A.I.Nikishov, hep-th/0207085.
14. A.I.Nikishov, Zh.Éxsp. Teor. Fiz. 91, 1565 (1986) \[Sov. Phys. JETP 64, 922 (1986)\].
15. A.I.Nikishov, Yad. Fiz. 46, 163 (1987) \[Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 46, 101 (1987)\].
16. F.A.Kaempfer, Concepts in quantum mechanics, Academic press, New York (1965).
17. L.D.Landau, E.M.Lifshits, Quantum mechanics, Pergamon Press, 1977.