Construction of Kink Sectors for Two-Dimensional Quantum Field Theory Models. An Algebraic Approach
Extracted source text ยท arXiv math-ph/9902028
\documentclass[12pt,twoside]{article}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%disseng2.tex%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\usepackage{amsmath,amssymb}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\def\1#1{{\bf #1}}
\def\2#1{{\cal #1}}\def\9#1{{\sl #1}}\def\4#1{{\tt #1}}\def\5#1{{\sf #1}}
\def\6#1{{\mathfrak #1}}\def\7#1{{\mathbb #1}}\def\8#1{{\rm #1}}
\def\9#1{{\mit #1}}
\def\set#1{{\{#1\}}}
\def\ord#1{{\underline #1}}
\def\hom{{\rm Hom}}
\def\aut{{\rm Aut}}
\def\3{{\ss}}
\def\mor{{\rm Mor}}
\def\ol{\overline}
\def\ska{\vskip 0.2cm}
\def\skb{\vskip 0.5cm}
\def\skc{\vskip 1.0cm}
\def\skd{\vskip 2.0cm}
\def\beq{\begin{eqnarray}}
\def\eeq{\end{eqnarray}}
\def\vs{\vspace{0.2cm} \\}
\def\hs{\hspace{0.5cm}}
\def\con{{\rm const.}}
\newtheorem{The}{Theorem}[section]
\newtheorem{Def}[The]{Definiton}
\newtheorem{Lem}[The]{Lemma}
\newtheorem{Pro}[The]{Proposition}
\newtheorem{Cor}[The]{Corollary}
\def\bdef{\begin{Def}\1: \em}
\def\eef{\end{Def}}
\def\bnoa{\paragraph*{\it Notation:}}
\def\enoa{\skb}
\def\blem{\begin{Lem}\1: }
\def\elem{\end{Lem}}
\def\bthe{\begin{The}\1: }
\def\ethe{\end{The}}
\def\bpro{\begin{Pro}\1: }
\def\epro{\end{Pro}}
\def\bcor{\begin{Cor}\1: }
\def\ecor{\end{Cor}}
\def\bobs{\paragraph*{\it Observation:}}
\def\eobs{\skb}
\def\brem{\paragraph*{\it Remark:}}
\def\erem{\skb}
\def\supp{{\rm supp}}
\def\sp{{\rm sp}}
\def\ps{{\rm ps}}
\def\st{{\rm st}}
\def\sen{{\rm sen}}
\def\re{{\rm re}}
\def\id{{\rm id}}
\def\sub{{\rm sub}}
\def\tr{{\rm tr}}\def\Tr{{\rm Tr}}
\def\al{\alpha}
\def\be{\beta}
\def\gam{\gamma}\def\Gam{\Gamma}
\def\lam{\lambda}\def\Lam{\Lambda}
\def\eps{\epsilon}
\def\te{\theta}\def\Te{\Theta}
\def\ta{\vartheta}
\def\sgm{\sigma}\def\Sgm{\Sigma}
\def\om{\omega}\def\Om{\Omega}
\def\lra{\Leftrightarrow}
\def\ra{\Rightarrow}
\def\la{\Leftarrow}
\def\bpr{\paragraph*{\it Proof.}}
\def\qed{\ska \ghost \skb}
\def\epr{$\square$\skb}
\def\dia{\diamond}
\def\mod{{\rm mod}}
\def\dg{\dagger}
\def\tl{\tilde}
\def\pa{\partial}
\def\<{\langle}
\def\>{\rangle}
\def\Ad{{\rm Ad}}
\def\ad{{\rm ad}}
\def\dyn{{\rm dyn}}
\def\span{{\rm span}}
\def\N{{\hspace{0.1cm} {\boldmath :}\hspace{0.1cm}}}
\def\bl{\biggl}
\def\br{\biggr}
\def\bm{\biggm}
\def\bs{\backslash}
\def\kh{kink-homomorphism}
%\newcommand\un[2]{\2U(#1,#2)}
%\newcommand\bo[2]{\2B(#1,#2)}
%\newcommand\kink[2]{\6S(\om_{#1},\om_{#2})}
%\newcommand\kise[2]{\sec(#1,#2)}
%\newcommand\itw[4]{{\rm I}(\pi_#1,\pi_#2;D(#3,#4))}
%\newcommand\uni[4]{{\rm U}(\pi_#1,\pi_#2;D(#3,#4))}
%\newcommand\dlt[4]{\psi_{#1#2}(#3,#4)}
%\newcommand\dmt[2]{\psi_{#1#2}}
%\newcommand\tld[4]{\psi^*_{#1#2}(#3,#4)}
%\newcommand\mwr[2]{\6M_{#1}(W_++#2)}
%\newcommand\mwl[2]{\6M_{#1}(W_-+#2)}
%\newcommand\mwb[2]{\6M_{#1}(W_\pm+#2)}
%\newcommand\mwd[3]{\6M_{#1}(D(#2,#3))}
%\newcommand\mr[2]{\6M^+_{#1}}
%\newcommand\ml[2]{\6M^-_{#1}}
%\newcommand\mb[2]{\6M^\pm_{#1}}
%\newcommand\cmr[1]{C^*(\6M^+_{#1})}
%\newcommand\cml[1]{C^*(\6M^-_{#1})}
%\newcommand\cmb[1]{C^*(\6M^\pm_{#1})}
%\newcommand\nwr[2]{\6A_{#1}(W_++#2)}
%\newcommand\nwl[2]{\6A_{#1}(W_-+#2)}
%\newcommand\nwb[2]{\6A_{#1}(W_\pm+#2)}
%\newcommand\nwq[3]{\6A_{#1}(W_{#3}+#2)}
%\newcommand\nwd[3]{\6A_{#1}(D(#2,#3))}
%\newcommand\nr[1]{\6A^+_{#1}}
%\newcommand\nl[1]{\6A^-_{#1}}
%\newcommand\nb[1]{\6A^\pm_{#1}}
\newcommand\cnr[1]{C^*(\6A^+_{#1})}
\newcommand\cnl[1]{C^*(\6A^-_{#1})}
\newcommand\cnb[1]{C^*(\6A^\pm_{#1})}
%\newcommand\cnq[2]{C^*(\6A^{#2}_{#1})}
%\newcommand\awr[1]{C^*(\6A,W_++#1)}
%\newcommand\awl[1]{C^*(\6A,W_-+#1)}
%\newcommand\awb[1]{C^*(\6A,W_\pm+#1)}
%\newcommand\awd[2]{\6A(#1,#2)}
%\newcommand\form[4]{{#1#2}(#3,#4)}
%\newcommand\ka[5]{#1^{(#3)}_{(#2|#4,#5)}}
%\newcommand\kb[4]{#1_{(#2|#3,#4)}}
%\newcommand\sR[3]{#1_{({#2},{#3})}}
%\newcommand\sL[3]{#1^{({#2},{#3})}}
%\newcommand\rr[2]{\rho_{({#1},{#2})}}
%\newcommand\rl[2]{\rho^{({#1},{#2})}}
\def\bdes{\begin{enumerate}}
\def\edes{\end{enumerate}}
\newcommand\itno[1]{\item[{\it ({#1})}]}
\newcommand\itbul[1]{\item[$#1$]}
\def\bmat{\left( \begin{array}{ccc} }
\def\emat{\end{array} \right)}
\def\ima{{\rmf Im}}
\def\ker{{\rm ker}}
\def\dimker{{\rm dim \ ker}}
\def\dimcoker{{\rm dim \ coker}}
\def\ind{{\rm ind}}
\def\beqa{\begin{eqnarray*}}
\def\eeqa{\end{eqnarray*}}
\def\bdia{\begin{diagram}}
\def\edia{\end{diagram}}
\def\shom{{\rm \Delta}}
\def\ul{\underline}
\def\sym{{\rm Sym}}
\def\ir{{\rm supp_I}}
\def\card{{\rm card }}
\def\olt{\ \overline{\otimes}\ }
\def\source{{\rm source}}
\def\range{{\rm range}}
\def\dim{{\rm dim}}
\def\kpp{\kappa}
\def\cp{{^\#}}
\def\deg{{\rm deg}}
\newcommand\tens[2]{
\biggl(\ \bigotimes_{j\in \ul n}{#1} \ \biggr)\otimes
\biggl( \ \bigotimes_{i\in \ul m}{#2} \ \biggr)}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\title{\bf
Construction of Kink Sectors for Two-Dimensional
Quantum Field Theory Models \\ (An Algebraic Approach)}
\author{{\it Dirk Schlingemann} \\
II. Institut f\"ur Theoretische Physik \\
Universit\"at Hamburg \\ and \\
Erwin Schr\"odinger International Institute \\
for Mathematical Physics (ESI)\\
Vienna}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\begin{document}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\maketitle
\abstract{
Several two-dimensional quantum field theory models
have more than one vacuum state. Familiar examples are
the Sine-Gordon and the $\phi^4_2$-model. It is known
that in these models there are also states,
called kink states, which interpolate different vacua.
A general construction scheme for
kink states in the framework of algebraic quantum field theory is
developed in a previous paper.
However, for the application of this method, the crucial condition is the
split property for wedge algebras
in the vacuum representations of the considered models.
It is believed that the vacuum representations of
$P(\phi)_2$-models fulfill this condition, but a
rigorous proof is only known for the massive free scalar field.
Therefore, we investigate in a
construction of kink states which can directly be
applied to a large class of quantum field theory models, by making use of
the properties of the dynamics of a $P(\phi)_2$ and Yukawa$_2$ models.}
\thispagestyle{empty}
\newpage
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%\tableofcontents
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\section{Introduction}
\label{s1}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Studying $1+1$-dimensional quantum field theories from an
axiomatic point of view shows that kink sectors naturally appear in the
theory of superselection sectors \cite{Fre1,Fre2,Schl2}.
This paper is concerned with the
construction of kink sectors for concrete quantum field theory models, like
$P(\phi)_2$ and Yukawa$_2$ models.\footnote{Parts are extracted from
the PhD thesis \cite{Schl6}.}
Our subsequent analysis is placed into the framework of
algebraic quantum field theory which has
turned out to be a successful
formalism to describe physical concepts like observables, states ,
superselection sectors (charges) and statistics.
These notions can appropriately be described by mathematical concepts
like C*-algebras, positive linear functionals and equivalence classes
of representations. For the convenience of the reader,
we shall state the relevant
definitions and assumptions here.
Let $\2O\subset \7R^{1,s}$ be a region in space-time. We denote by
$\6A(\2O)$ the algebra generated by all observables which can be measured
within $\2O$. For technical reasons we always suppose that
$\6A(\2O)$ is a C*-algebra and $\2O$ is a double cone,
i.e. a bounded and causally complete region.
Motivated by physical principles, we make the following assumptions:
\bdes
\itno 1
The assignment
\beqa
\6A:\2O\mapsto\6A(\2O)
\eeqa
is an isotonous net of C*-algebras, i.e.
if $\2O_1$ is contained in $\2O_2$, then $\6A(\2O_1)$ is a C*-sub-algebra
of $\6A(\2O_2)$. The isotony encodes the fact that
each observable which can be measured within $\2O$
can also be measured in every larger region.
Furthermore, the C*-inductive limit
\beqa
C^*(\6A)
\eeqa
of the net $\6A$
can be constructed since the set of double cones is directed.
We refer to \cite{Sak} for this notion.
\itno 2
Two local operations which take place
in space-like separated regions should not influence each other.
The {\em principle of locality} is formulated as follows:
If the regions $\2O_1$ and $\2O_2$ are space-like separated,
then the elements of $\6A(\2O_1)$ commute with those of $\6A(\2O_2)$.
\itno 3
Each operator $a$ which is localized in a region $\2O$ should have an
equivalent counterpart which is localized in the translated region
$\2O+x$. The {\em principle of translation symmetry} is encoded by
the existence of an automorphism group $\{\al_x;x\in\7R^{1,s}\}$ which
acts on the C*-algebra $C^*(\6A)$ such that
$\al_x$ maps $\6A(\2O)$ onto $\6A(\2O+x)$.
\edes
A net of C*-algebras which fulfills the conditions
{\it (1)} to {\it (3)} is called a
{\em translationally covariant Haag-Kastler net}.
In order to discuss particle-like concepts, we
select an appropriate class $\6S$ of normalized
positive linear functionals, called states, of $C^*(\6A)$.
We require that the states $\om\in\6S$ fulfill the conditions:
\bdes
\itno 1
There exists a strongly continuous unitary representation
of the translation group $U:x\mapsto U(x)$ on the GNS\footnote{
Given a state $\om\in\6S$, we obtain
via GNS-construction a Hilbert space $\2H$,
a *-representation $\pi$ of $C^*(\6A)$
on $\2H$ and a vector $\Om\in\2H$ such that
$\<\Om,\pi(a)\Om\>=\om(a)$ for each $a\in C^*(\6A)$.
The triple $(\2H,\pi,\Om)$ is called the GNS-triple of $\om$.}-Hilbert
space $\2H$
which implements the translations in the GNS-representation $\pi$, i.e.
\beqa
\pi(\al_xa)=U(x)\pi(a)U(-x)
\eeqa
for each $a\in C^*(\6A)$.
\itno 2
The stability of a physical system is encoded in the
spectrum condition (positivity of the energy), i.e.
the spectrum (of the generator) of $U(x)$ is contained
in the closed forward light cone.
\edes
These conditions are also known as the {\em Borchers criterion}.
States which satisfy the Borchers criterion
and which are, in addition, translationally invariant are
called {\em vacuum states}.
Kinks already appear in classical
field theories and the typical systems in which they occur are
1+1-dimensional. Familiar examples are
the Sine-Gordon and the $\phi^4_2$-model.
We briefly describe the latter:
The Lagrangian density of the model is given by
\beqa
\6L(\phi,x)={1\over 2} \ \pa_\mu\phi(x)\pa^\mu\phi(x)-U(\phi(x))
\eeqa
where the potential $U$ is given by
\beqa
U(z):=\lam/2 \ (z^2-a)^2 \ \ .
\eeqa
The energy of a classical field configuration $\phi$ is
\beqa
E(\phi)=\int \8d\1x \ \biggl ( {1\over 2} (\pa_0\phi(0,\1x))^2
+ {1\over 2} (\pa_1\phi(0,\1x))^2
+ U(\phi(0,\1x)) \biggr )\ \ .
\eeqa
With the choice of $U$, given above, the absolute minimum value of $U$ is
zero and thus the energy functional $E:\phi\mapsto E(\phi)$ is positive.
There are two configurations $\phi_\pm$ with
zero energy $E(\phi_\pm)=0$:
\beqa
\phi_\pm:(t,\1x)\mapsto \pm \ a \ \ .
\eeqa
These configurations are invariant under space-time translations and
represent the vacua of the classical system.
There are two further configurations $\phi_s,\phi_{\bar s}$ which
are stationary points of the energy functional $E$.
They are given by
\beqa
\phi_s:(t,\1x)\mapsto a \ \tanh(\ \sqrt{\lam} a \1x \ )
\ \ \mbox{ and } \ \
\phi_{\bar s}:(t,\1x)\mapsto -a \ \tanh(\ \sqrt{\lam} a \1x \ ) \ \ .
\eeqa
These configurations represent the kinks of the classical system which
{\em interpolate}
the vacua $\phi_\pm$. Indeed, we have for the kink $\phi_s$
\beq\label{classinterpol}
\lim_{\1x\to\pm\infty}\phi_s(t,\1x)=\phi_\pm(t,\1x)=\pm a \ \ .
\eeq
The configuration $\phi_{\bar s}$,
which interpolates the vacua $\phi_\pm$ in the opposite direction,
represents the anti-kink of $\phi_s$.
Both of them have the same energy, namely
\beqa
E(\phi_s)=E(\phi_{\bar s})={4\over 3} \sqrt{\lam} a^3 \ \ .
\eeqa
From the classical example above, we see that
the crucial properties of a kink are to interpolate vacuum configurations
as well as to be a configuration of finite energy.
Motivated by these properties, in quantum field theory
a {\em kink state} $\om$ is defined as
follows:
\paragraph*{\it The interpolation property:}
For each observable $a$, the limits
\beq\label{qminterpol}
\lim_{\1x\to\pm\infty}\om(\al_{(t,\1x)}(a))=\om_\pm(a)
\eeq
exist and $\om_\pm$ are vacuum states. Note that equation (\ref{qminterpol})
is the quantum version of the
interpolation property (\ref{classinterpol}).
\paragraph*{\it Positivity of the energy:}
$\om$ fulfills the Borchers criterion.
\skb
In the literature the concept of {\em kink} as
described above is often called {\em soliton} (see \cite{Froh1,Froh3})
or more seldom {\em lump} (see \cite{Col}).
In the following, we shall use the word kink.
In \cite{Schl4},
a construction scheme for kink states has been developed which is based on
general principles. In order to make the comprehension of the subsequent
sections easier we shall state the main ideas here.
The construction of an interpolating kink state is based on a
simple physical idea:
Let $\6A$ be a Haag-Kastler net of W*-algebras in $1+1$-dimensions.
Each double cone $\2O$ splits our system into two infinitely
extended laboratories, namely the laboratory which belongs to the left
space-like complement $\2O_{LL}$, and the laboratory
$\2O_{RR}$ which belongs the right space-like complement $\2O_{RR}$.
In order to prepare an interpolating kink state, we wish to
prepare one vacuum state $\om_1$ in the left laboratory
$\2O_{LL}$, and another vacuum state $\om_2$ in the
right laboratory $\2O_{RR}$.
This can only be done if the
preparation of $\om_1$ does not disturb the preparation procedure
of $\om_2$. In other words,
the physical operations which take place in
the laboratory on the left side $\2O_{LL}$ should be statistically
independent of those which take place in $\2O_{RR}$.
Therefore, we require that there exists a
vacuum representation $\pi_0$ such that the W*-tensor product
\beqa
\6A_{\pi_0}(\2O_{LL})\olt\6A_{\pi_0}(\2O_{RR})
\eeqa
is unitarily isomorphic to the von Neumann algebra
\beqa
\6A_{\pi_0}(\2O_{LL})\vee\6A_{\pi_0}(\2O_{RR})
\eeqa
where $\6A_{\pi_0}$ is the net in the vacuum representation $\pi_0$.
\footnote{
for an unbounded region $\2U$, $\6A_{\pi_0}(\2U)$ denotes the
von Neumann algebra which is generated by all local algebras
$\6A_{\pi_0}(\2O)$ with $\2O\subset\2U$.}
This condition is equivalent to the existence of a type I factor $\2N$ which
sits between $\6A_{\pi_0}(\2O_{RR})$ and $\6A_{\pi_0}(\2O_R)$:
\beqa
\6A_{\pi_0}(\2O_{RR})\subset\2N\subset\6A_{\pi_0}(\2O_R) \ \ .
\eeqa
Here $\2O_R$ is the space-like complement of $\2O_{LL}$.
In other words, the inclusion
\beq\label{split1}
\6A_{\pi_0}(\2O_{RR})\subset\6A_{\pi_0}(\2O_R)
\eeq
is {\em split}.
A detailed investigation of standard split inclusions of W*-algebras
has been carried out by S. Doplicher and R. Longo \cite{DLo}.
We also refer to the results of D. Buchholz \cite{Bu1},
C. D'Antoni and R. Longo \cite{AntLo} and
C. D'Antoni and K. Fredenhagen \cite{AntFre}.
Let $\om_1$ and $\om_2$ be two
inequivalent vacuum states whose restrictions
to each local algebra $\6A(\2O)$ are normal.
Using the isomorphy
\beqa
\6A_{\pi_0}(\2O_{LL})\olt\6A_{\pi_0}(\2O_{RR})
\cong
\6A_{\pi_0}(\2O_{LL})\vee\6A_{\pi_0}(\2O_{RR})
\eeqa
we conclude that the map
\beqa
ab\mapsto \om_1(a)\om_2(b) \ \ \mbox{, $a$ is localized in $\2O_{LL}$
and $b$ is localized in $\2O_{RR}$,}
\eeqa
defines a state of the algebra $C^*(\6A,\2O_{LL}\cup\2O_{RR})$ which,
by the Hahn-Banach theorem, can be extended to a state $\om$ of the C*-algebra
of all observables.
The state $\om$ interpolates the vacua
$\om_1$ and $\om_2$ correctly, but
for an explicit construction
of an interpolating state which satisfies the {\em Borchers criterion},
some technical difficulties have to be overcome.
The condition that the inclusion (\ref{split1}) is split is
sufficient to develop a general construction scheme for
interpolating kink states.
We shall give a brief description of it here.
\paragraph*{\it Step 1:}
We consider the W*-tensor product of the net $\6A$ with itself:
\beqa
\6A\olt\6A:\2O\mapsto\6A(\2O)\olt\6A(\2O)
\eeqa
The map $\al_F$ which is given by interchanging the
tensor factors,
\beqa
\al_F:a_1\otimes a_2\mapsto a_2\otimes a_1
\eeqa
is called the {\em flip automorphism}.
Since the inclusion (\ref{split1}) is split, the flip automorphism
is unitarily implemented on $\6A_{\pi_0}\olt\6A_{\pi_0}(\2O_{RR})$
by a unitary operator $\te$
which is contained in $\6A_{\pi_0}\olt\6A_{\pi_0}(\2O_R)$ \cite{AntLo}.
The adjoint action of $\te$ induces an automorphism
\beqa
\be:=(\pi_0\otimes\pi_0)^{-1}\circ\Ad(\te)\circ\pi_0\otimes\pi_0
\eeqa
which maps local algebras into local algebras.
Here we have assumed that the representation $\pi_0$ is faithful in order
to build the inverse $\pi_0^{-1}$. For each
observable $a$ which is localized in the left space-like complement of
$\2O$ we have $\be(a)=a$, and for each
observable $b$ which is localized in the right space-like complement of
$\2O$ we have $\be(b)=\al_F(b)$.
Note that $\be$ may depend on the choice of the
vacuum representation $\pi_0$.
\paragraph*{\it Step 2:}
It is obvious that the state
\beqa
\om:=\om_1\otimes\om_2\circ\be|_{C^*(\6A)\otimes\11}
\eeqa
interpolates $\om_1$ and $\om_2$.
Let $\pi_1$ and $\pi_2$ be the GNS-representations of $\om_1$ and $\om_2$
respectively. Then the GNS-representation
\beqa
\pi=\pi_1\otimes\pi_2\circ\be|_{C^*(\6A\otimes\11)}
\eeqa
of $\om$ is translationally covariant because the automorphism
\beqa
\al_x\circ\be\circ\al_{-x}\circ\be
\eeqa
is implemented by a cocycle $\gam(x)$ of {\em local} operators in
$C^*(\6A)$. The positivity of the energy can be proven by showing the
additivity of the energy-momentum spectrum for automorphisms like $\be$.
This together implies that $\om$ is an interpolating kink state.
\skb
In comparison to the work of J. Fr\"ohlich in which
the existence of kink states for the $\phi^4_2$ and the
Sine-Gordon model is proven \cite{Froh1,Froh3}, our
construction scheme has the following advantages:
\bdes
\item[$\oplus$]
It is independent of specific details of the considered model because
the split property (\ref{split1}), which is the crucial condition
for applying the construction scheme, can be motivated by general principles.
\item[$\oplus$]
It can be applied to pairs of vacuum sectors which are not
related by a symmetry transformation, whereas the techniques of J. Fr\"ohlich
rely on the existence of a symmetry transformation connecting different vacua.
Indeed, according to J. Z. Imbrie
\cite{Imb81}, there are examples for $P(\phi)_2$ models possessing
more than one vacuum state, but where the different vacua are
{\em not} related by a symmetry. We also mention here
the papers of K. Gawedzki \cite{Gaw78} and S.J. Summers \cite{Sum2}.
\edes
Unfortunately, there is one disadvantage which is the price
we have to pay for using a model independent analysis.
\bdes
\item[$\ominus$]
The split property for wedge algebras (\ref{split1}) has to be proven
for the vacuum states of the model
under consideration if we want to apply our construction scheme to it.
It is believed that the
vacuum states of the $P(\phi)_2$- and $\mbox{Yukawa}_2$ models
fulfill this condition, but a
rigorous proof is only known for the massive free Bose and Fermi field
\cite{AntFre,Bu1,Sum1}.
\edes
In the present paper, we investigate
an alternative construction of kink states which can
directly be applied to models.
It is convenient to formulate our setup in
the time slice formulation of a quantum field theory.
The time slice-formulation has two main aspects.
First, the {\em Cauchy data} with respect to a given space-like plane
$\Sgm$ which describes the
boundary conditions at time $t=0$. Second, the {\em dynamics} which
describes the time evolution of the quantum fields.
The {\em Cauchy data} of a quantum field theory are given by a
net of v.Neumann-algebras
$$
\6M:=\{\6M(\2I)\subset\6B(\2H_0);
\mbox{ $\2I$ is open and bounded interval in $\Sgm$} \}
$$
represented on a Hilbert-space $\2H_0$. This net has to
satisfy the following conditions:
\bdes
\itno 1
The net is isotonous, i.e. if
$\2I_1\subset\2I_2$, then $\6M(\2I_1)\subset\6M(\2I_2)$.
\itno 2
The net is local, i.e. if
$\2I_1\cap\2I_2=\emptyset$, then $\6M(\2I_1)\subset\6M(\2I_2)'$.
\itno 3
There exists a unitary and strongly continuous representation
$$
U:\1x\in \7R \mapsto U(\1x)\in\2U(\2H_0)
$$
of the
spatial translations in $\Sgm\cong\7R$, such that
$\al_{\1x}:=\Ad(U(\1x))$ maps $\6M(\2I)$ onto $\6M(\2I+\1x)$.
\edes
A one-parameter group of automorphisms
$\al=\{\al_t\in\aut(\6M);t\in\7R\}$ ($\aut(\6M)$ denotes the automorphisms
of $C^*(\6M)$) is called a {\em dynamics} of the net $\6M$ if the following
conditions are fulfilled:
\bdes
\itno a
The automorphism group $\al$ has {propagation speed} $\ps(\al)\leq 1$, where
$\ps(\al)$ is defined by:
\beqa
\ps(\al):=
\inf\{\beta'|\al_t\6M(\2I)\subset \6M(\2I_{\beta'|t|});
\forall t,\2I\} \ \ .
\eeqa
Here $\2I_s:=\2I+(-s,s)$ denotes the interval, enlarged by $s>0$.
\itno b
The automorphisms $\{\al_t\in\aut(\6M);t\in\7R\}$
commute with the automorphism group
of spatial translations $\{\al_\1x\in\aut(\6M);\1x\in\7R\}$, i.e.:
\beqa
\al_t\circ\al_\1x=\al_\1x\circ\al_t \ \ \ ; \ \ \ \forall \1x,t \ \ .
\eeqa
\edes
The set of all dynamics of $\6M$ is denoted by $\dyn(\6M)$.
For our purposes it is crucial to distinguish carefully the
C*-inductive limit $C^*(\6M)$ of the net $\6M$ and
the corresponding C*- and W*-algebras, which belong to an
unbounded region $\2J\subset\Sgm$. They are denoted by
$$
C^*(\6M,\2J):=\ol{\bigcup_{\2I\subset\2J}\6M(\2I)}^{||\cdot||}
\ \ \mbox{ and } \ \
\6M(\2J):=\bigvee_{\2I\subset\2J}\6M(\2I) \ \ \ \mbox{ respectively.}
$$
The Cauchy data of the $P(\phi)_2$- and the $\mbox{Yukawa}_2$
model are given by the nets of the corresponding free fields
at time $t=0$. For these Cauchy data it can be proven that
the inclusion
\beqa
\6M(\2I_{RR})\subset \6M(\2I_R)
\eeqa
is split \cite{Bu1,Sum1,Schl4}.
Let us briefly explain how kink states can be constructed if
the following conditions are assumed:
\bdes
\itno i
The dynamics of the model satisfies an appropriate
{\em extendibility condition}
which we shall explain later.
\itno {ii}
The vacuum states are local Fock states which is
automatically satisfied for $P(\phi)_2$ and $\mbox{Yukawa}_2$ models
\cite{GlJa1,Schra1}.
\edes
\paragraph*{\it Step 1':}
We consider the two-fold net
\beqa
\6M\olt\6M:\2I\mapsto \6M(\2I)\olt\6M(\2I) \ \ .
\eeqa
Like in {\it Step 1}
of our previous construction scheme, the split property
implies that on $\6M(\2I_{RR})\olt\6M(\2I_{RR})$, the flip automorphism
is implemented by a unitary operator $\te_{\2I}$
\cite{AntLo}. The adjoint action of $\te_{\2I}$
is an automorphism $\beta^{\2I}$
which has the following properties:
\bdes
\itno i
The automorphism $\beta^{\2I}$ acts trivially on observables which are
localized in the left complement of $\2I$ and it acts like the
flip on observables which are localized in the right complement of $\2I$.
\itno {ii}
The automorphism $\beta^{\2I}$ maps local algebras into local algebras.
\edes
Note that the automorphism $\be^\2I$ does not depend on the dynamics $\al$.
\paragraph*{\it Step 2':}
Let $\om_1$, $\om_2$ be two vacuum states with respect
to a given dynamics $\al$.
The state
\beqa
\om:=\om_1\otimes\om_2\circ\beta^\2I|_{C^*(\6M)\otimes\7C\11}
\eeqa
interpolates the vacua $\om_1$ and $\om_2$. Moreover, it is
covariant under spatial translations since for each $\1x$ the operator
\beqa
\gam(0,\1x)=(\al_\1x\otimes\al_\1x)(\te_\2I)\te_\2I
\eeqa
is localized in a sufficiently large bounded interval. Indeed,
the unitary operators
\beqa
U(0,\1x):=(U_1(0,\1x)\otimes U_2(0,\1x)) \ (\pi_1\otimes\pi_2)(\gam(0,-\1x))
\eeqa
implement the spatial translations in the GNS-representation
of $\om$ where $U_1$ and $U_2$ implement the translations in the
GNS-representations $\pi_1,\pi_2$ of $\om_1$ and $\om_2$ respectively.
\paragraph*{\it Step 3':}
It remains to be proven that $\om$ is translationally
covariant with respect to the dynamics $\al$.
For this purpose, we wish to construct a cocycle
$\gam(0,t)$ such that the operators
\beqa
U(t,0):=(U_1(t,0)\otimes U_2(t,0)) \ (\pi_1\otimes\pi_2)(\gam(-t,0))
\eeqa
implement the dynamics $\al$ in the GNS-representation
of $\om$. The operator
\beqa
\gam(t,0):=(\al_t\otimes\al_t)(\te_\2I)\te_\2I
\eeqa
is a formal solution. Unfortunately, the flip implementer
$\te_\2I$ is {\em not} contained in
any local algebra and the term
$(\al_t\otimes\al_t)(\te_\2I)$ has no mathematical meaning
unless $\al$ is the free dynamics. However, it can be given a meaning
in some cases. We shall see that for an interacting dynamics
there exists a suitable
cocycle of the operators $\gam(t,0)$ such that $\gam(t,0)$
is localized in a bounded interval whose size depends
linearly on $|t|$.
In order to formulate a sufficient condition for the existence
of $\gam(t,0)$, we construct an extension of the net
$\6M\olt\6M$.
We define $\hat\6M(\2I)$ to be the von Neumann algebra which is generated by
$\6M(\2I)\olt\6M(\2I)$ and the operator $\te_\2I$.
The net
\beqa
\hat\6M:\2I\mapsto\hat\6M(\2I)
\eeqa
is an extension of $\6M\olt\6M$ which does not fulfill locality. This is
due to the non-trivial implementation properties of $\te_\2I$.
We shall call a dynamics $\al$ {\em extendible} if there exists a dynamics
$\hat\al$ of $\hat\6M$ which is an extension of $\al\otimes\al$. Indeed,
\beqa
t\mapsto \gam(t,0):=\hat\al_t(\te_\2I)\te_\2I
\eeqa
is a cocycle which has the desired properties.
Finally, we conclude like in {Step 3} of our previous construction scheme
that the state
\beqa
\om:=\om_1\otimes\om_2\circ\beta^\2I|_{C^*(\6M)\otimes\7C\11}
\eeqa
is a kink state where $\om_1,\om_2$ are vacuum states
with respect to the dynamics $\al$.
Since the extendibility condition is rather technical one might worry
that it is only fulfilled for few exceptional cases.
Fortunately, this is not true.
There is a large class of quantum field theory models
whose dynamics are extendible.
We shall prove that the extendibility holds for the following models:
\bdes
\itno i
$P(\phi)_2$-models.
\itno {ii}
$\mbox{Yukawa}_2$ models.
\itno {iii}
Special types of Wess-Zumino models.
\edes
Note that a Dirac spinor field
contributes to the field content of
the $\mbox{Yukawa}_2$ and Wess-Zumino models, and the
nets of Cauchy data fulfill {\em twisted duality}
instead of Haag duality \cite{Sum1}. According to recent results which
have been established by M. M\"uger \cite{Mue1}, our results remain true
for these cases also.
Wess-Zumino models have been studied in several
papers. We refer to the work of
A. Jaffe, A. Lesniewski, J. Weitsman and S. Janowsky
\cite{JanWeit0,JaLesWeit1,JaLesWeit2,JanWeit1,JaLes}.
It has been proven in \cite{JanWeit1} that some
Wess-Zumino models possess more than one vacuum sector.
An application of our construction scheme proves
the existence of kink states for these models.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\section{Preliminaries}
\label{s3}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
In the first part (Section \ref{s3a}) of this preliminary section,
we briefly describe how to construct a Haag-Kastler net from a
given net of Cauchy data and a given dynamics.
Examples for physical states with respect to an
interacting dynamics are given in the second part (Section \ref{s4}).
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\subsection{From Cauchy Data to Haag-Kastler Nets}\label{s3a}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
We denote by $U(\6M)$ the group of unitary operators in $C^*(\6M)$.
Let $\6G(\7R,\6M)$ be the group which is generated by
the set
$$
\{ (t,u)|\mbox{ $t\in\7R$ and $u\in U(\6M)$ } \}
$$
modulo the following relations:
\bdes
\itno 1
For each $u_1,u_2\in U(\6M)$ and for each $t_1,t_2,t\in\7R$, we require:
$$
(t,u_1)(t,u_2)=(t,u_1u_2) \mbox{ and } (t,\11)=\11
$$
\itno 2
For $u_1\in\6M(\2I_1)$ and $u_2\in\6M(\2I_2)$ with
$\2I_1\subset(\2I_2+[-|t|,|t|])^c$ we require for each $t_1\in\7R$:
$$
(t_1+t,u_1)(t_1,u_2)=(t_1,u_2)(t_1+t,u_1)
$$
\edes
We conclude from relation {\it (1)} that $(t,u)$ is the inverse
of $(t,u^*)$. Furthermore, a localization
region in $\7R\times\Sgm$ can be assigned
to each element in $\6G(\7R,\6M)$.
A generator $(t,u)$, $u\in\6M(\2I)$
is localized in $\2O\subset\7R\times\Sgm$ if $\{t\}\times\2I\subset\2O$.
The subgroup of $\6G(\7R,\6M)$ which is generated by elements which are
localized in the double cone $\2O$, is denoted by $\6G(\2O)$.
We easily observe that relation {\it (2)} implies that group elements commute
if they are localized in space-like separated regions.
The translation group in $\7R^2$ is naturally represented by
group-automorphisms of $\6G(\7R,\6M)$. They are defined
by the prescription
$$
\beta_{(t,\8x)}(t_1,u):=(t+t_1,\al_\8xu) \ \ \ .
$$
Thus the subgroup $\6G(\2O)$ is mapped onto $\6G(\2O+(t,\8x))$
by $\beta_{(t,\8x)}$.
To construct the universal Haag-Kastler net, we build the group C*-algebra
$\6B(\2O)$ with respect to $\6G(\2O)$. For convenience, we shall
describe the construction of $\6B(\2O)$ briefly.
In the first step we build the *-algebra $\6B_0(\2O)$ which is generated
by all complex valued functions $a$ on $\6G(\2O)$, such that
\beqa
a(u)=0 \ \ \mbox{ for almost each $u\in\6G(\2O)$ .}
\eeqa
We write such a function symbolically as a formal sum, i.e.
\beqa
a=\sum_u a(u)\ u
\eeqa
The product and the *-relation is given as follows:
\beqa
ab= \sum_u a(u) \ u \cdot \sum_{u'} b(u') \ u' =
\sum_{u'}\bl(\sum_u a(u)b(u^{-1}u')\br) u'
\vs\vs
a^*=\sum_u \bar a(u^{-1}) \ u
\eeqa
It is well known, that the algebra $\6B_0(\2O)$ has a
C*-norm which is given by
\beqa
||a||:=\sup_\pi||\pi(a)||_\pi
\eeqa
where the supremum is taken over each Hilbert space representation $\pi$
of $\6B_0(\2O)$. Finally, we define $\6B(\2O)$ as the closure of
$\6B_0(\2O)$ with respect to the norm above.
The C*-algebra which is generated by all local algebras $\6B(\2O)$
is denoted by $C^*(\6B)$.
By construction, the group isomorphisms $\beta_{(t,\8x)}$
induce a representation of the translation group by automorphisms
of $C^*(\6B)$.
\paragraph*{\it Observation:}
The net of C*-algebras
$$
\6B:=\{\6B(\2O)|\2O \ \mbox{ is a bounded double cone in $\7R^2$ }\}
$$
is a translationally covariant Haag-Kastler net.
\skb
We have to mention that the universal
net $\6B$ is not Lorentz covariant. The universal properties of the net $\6B$
are stated in the following Proposition:
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\bpro\label{pro0}
Each dynamics $\al\in\dyn(\6M)$ induces a C*-homomorphism
$$
\iota_\al:C^*(\6B)\to C^*(\6M)
$$
such that
$$
\iota_\al\circ\beta_{(t,\8x)}=\al_{(t,\8x)}\circ\iota_\al \ \ \mbox{ ,}
$$
for each $(t,\8x)\in\7R^2$.
In particular,
$$
\6A_\al:\2O\mapsto\6A_\al(\2O):=\iota_\al(\6B(\2O))''
$$
is a translationally covariant Haag-Kastler net.
\epro
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\bpr
Given a dynamics $\al$ of $\6M$.
We conclude from $\ps(\al)\leq 1$ that the prescription
$$
(t,u)\mapsto \al_tu
$$
defines a C*-homomorphism
$$
\iota_\al:C^*(\6B)\to C^*(\6M)\ \ .
$$
In particular, $\iota_\al$ is a representation of $C^*(\6B)$
on the Hilbert space $\2H_0$.
This statement can be obtained by using the relations, listed below.
\bdes
\itno a
$$
\iota_\al((t,u_1)(t,u_2))=\al_tu_1\al_tu_2=\al_t(u_1u_2)=
\iota_\al(t,u_1u_2)
$$
\itno b
If $(t_1,u_1)$ and $(t_1+t,u_2)$ are localized in space-like separated
regions, then we obtain from $\ps(\al)\leq 1$:
$$
[\iota_\al(t_1,u_1),\iota_\al(t_1+t,u_2)]=
\al_{t_1}[u_1,\al_tu_2]=0
$$
\itno c
$$
\iota_\al(\beta_{(t,\8x)}(t_1,u))=\iota_\al(t+t_1,\al_{\8x}u)=
\al_{(t,\8x)}\al_{t_1}u
$$
\edes
\epr
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
In general we expect that for a given dynamics $\al$ the representation
$\iota_\al$ is not faithful. Hence each dynamics defines a two-sided
ideal
$$
J(\al):=\iota_\al^{-1}(0)\in C^*(\6B)
$$
in $C^*(\6B)$ which we call the {\em dynamical ideal}
with respect to $\al$ and the quotient C*-algebras
\beqa
\6B(\2O)/J(\al)\cong\6A_\al(\2O)
\eeqa
may depend on the dynamics $\al$. Indeed, if $\2O$ is a double cone
whose base is {\em not contained} in $\Sgm$, then
for different dynamics $\al_1,\al_2$ the algebras $\6A_{\al_1}(\2O)$ and
$\6A_{\al_2}(\2O)$ are different. On the other hand, if the base
of $\2O$ is contained in $\Sgm$, then we conclude from
the fact that the dynamics $\al$ has finite propagation speed and
from Proposition \ref{pro0}:
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\bcor
If $\2I\subset\Sgm$ is the base of the double cone $\2O$, then the algebra
$\6A_\al(\2O)$ is independent of $\al$.
In particular, the C*-algebra
$$
C^*(\6M)
=\ol{\bigcup_\2I \6M(\2I)}^{||\cdot||}
=\ol{\bigcup_\2O \6A_\al(\2O)}^{||\cdot||}
$$
is the C*-inductive limit of the net $\6A_\al$.
\ecor
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
From the discussion above, we see that two dynamics with the same dynamical
ideal induces the same quantum field theory.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\subsection{Examples for Physical States}
\label{s4}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Let us consider the set $\6S$ of all {\em locally normal states}
on $C^*(\6M)$, i.e. for each state $\om\in\6S$ and for each bounded interval
$\2I$, the restriction
$$
\om|_{\6M(\2I)}
$$
is a normal state on $\6M(\2I)$.
As mentioned in the introduction, we are interested in
states with vacuum and particle-like properties, i.e.
states satisfying the {\em Borchers criterion}
(See the Introduction for this notion).
\paragraph*{\it Notation:}
Given a dynamics $\al\in\dyn(\6M)$. We denote the corresponding
set of all locally normal
states which satisfies the Borchers criterion
by $\6S(\al)$ and analogously the set of all vacuum states by $\6S_0(\al)$.
Moreover, we write for the set
of vacuum sectors
\beq
\sec_0(\al):=\{[\om]|\om\in\6S_0(\al) \}
\eeq
where $[\om]$ denotes the unitary equivalence class of the
the GNS-representation of $\om$.
\paragraph*{}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\paragraph{Examples:}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Examples for vacuum states are the vacua of
the $P(\phi)_2$-models \cite{GlJa1,GlJa2}.
The interacting part of the cutoff Hamiltonian is
given by a Wick polynomial of the time zero field $\phi_0$, i.e.
$$
H_1(\2I)=H_1(\chi_\2I)=:P(\phi_0):(\chi_\2I)
$$
where $\chi_\2I$ is a test function with $\chi_\2I(\1x)=1$ for
$\1x\in\2I$ and $\chi_\2I(\1y)=0$
on the complement of a slightly lager region $\hat\2I\supset\2I$.
It is well known that $H_1(\2I)$ is a self-adjoint operator, which
has a joint core with the free Hamiltonian $h_0$, and is affiliated with
$\6M(\hat\2I)$.
The operator $h_1(\2I)$ induces a automorphism group
$\al_\2I$ which is given by
$$
\al_{\2I,t}(a):=e^{iH_1(\2I)t}ae^{-iH_1(\2I)t} \ \ \ .
$$
Consider the inclusion of intervals $\2I_0\subset\2I_1\subset\2I_2$.
Then we have for each $a\in\6M(\2I_0)$:
$$
\al_{\2I_1,t}(a)=\al_{\2I_2,t}(a)
$$
Hence, there exists a one-parameter automorphism group \newline
$\{\al_{1,t}\in\aut(\6M);t\in\7R\}$ such that
$\al_{1,t}$ acts on $a\in\6M(\2I)$ as follows:
$$
\al_{1,t}(a)=\al_{\2I,t}(a) \ \ \ ; \ \ \ \forall t\in\7R
$$
The automorphism group $\{\al_{1,t}\in\aut(\6M);t\in\7R\}$ is a
dynamics of $\6M$ with zero propagation speed, i.e. $\ps(\al_1)=0$.
Since $H_1(\2I)$ has a joint core with the free Hamiltonian $H_0$,
we are able to define the Trotter product of the automorphism groups
$\al_0$ and $\al_1$ which is given
for each local operator $a\in\6M(\2I)$ by
\beqa
\al_t(a):=(\al_0\times\al_1)_t(a)=
s-\lim_{n\to\infty}(\al_{0,t/n}\circ\al_{1,t/n})^n(a) \ \ \ .
\eeqa
The limit is taken in the strong operator topology.
Furthermore,the propagation speed is sub-additive with respect to the
Trotter product \cite{GlJa1}, i.e.
$$
\ps(\al_0\times\al_1)\leq\ps(\al_0)+\ps(\al_1)
$$
and we conclude that
$\al\in\dyn(\6M)$ is a dynamics of $\6M$. We call the dynamics $\al$
{\em interacting}.
It is shown by Glimm and Jaffe \cite{GlJa1}
that there exist vacuum states
$\om$ with respect to the interacting dynamics $\al$.
We have to mention, that there is {\em no} vector $\psi$ in
Fock space $\2H_0$, such that the state
\beqa
a\mapsto\<\psi,a\psi\>
\eeqa
is a vacuum state with respect to an interacting dynamics $\al$, but there
is a sequence of vectors $(\Om_n)$ in $\2H_0$ such that the
weak* limit
\beqa
\om=w^*-\lim_n \<\Om_n,\cdot\Om_n\>
\eeqa
is a vacuum state with respect to the dynamics $\al$.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\section{On the Existence of Kink States}
\label{s6}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
The main theorem (Theorem \ref{the1})
of this paper is formulated in the first part
(Section \ref{s6a}) of the present section.
In order to prepare the proof of Theorem \ref{the1}, we
need some technical preliminaries which are given in
Section \ref{s6b}. In the last part (Section \ref{s6c}),
we prove a criterion for the existence of kink states
(the extendibility of the dynamics) which turns out
to be satisfied by the $P(\phi)_2$ and Yukawa$_2$ models.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\subsection{The Main Result}
\label{s6a}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
We now reformulate the definition (see Introduction)
of a kink state within the time-slice formulation.
\bdef\label{def4}
Let $\al\in\dyn(\6M)$ be a dynamics of $\6M$.
A state $\om$ of $\6M$ is called a {\em kink state},
interpolating vacuum states
$\om_1,\om_2\in\6S_0(\al)$ if
\begin{description}
\item[{\it (a)}]
$\om$ satisfies the Borchers criterion
\item[{\it (b)}]
and there exists a bounded interval $\2I$, such that $\om$
fulfills the relations:
$$
\pi|_{C^*(\6M,\2I_{LL})}\cong\pi_1|_{C^*(\6M,\2I_{LL})} \ \ \mbox{ and } \ \
\pi|_{C^*(\6M,\2I_{RR})}\cong\pi_2|_{C^*(\6M,\2I_{RR})}
$$
where the symbol $\cong$ means unitarily equivalent
and $(\2H,\pi,\Om),(\2H_j,\pi_j,\Om_j)$ are the GNS-triples of
the states $\om\in\6S(\al)$ and $\om_j\in\6S_0(\al);j=1,2$ respectively.
\end{description}
The set of all kink states which interpolate $\om_1$ and $\om_2$ is denoted by
\newline
$\6S(\al|\om_1,\om_2)$.
\eef
As already mentioned in the Introduction, a criterion
for the existence of an interpolating kink state,
can be obtained by looking at the construction method of \cite{Schl4}.
In our context, we have to select a class of dynamics which are
equipped with {\em good properties}. Such a selection criterion is
developed in section \ref{s6}.
We shall show that each
dynamics of a $P(\phi)_2$-model satisfies this criterion which leads
to the following result:
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\bthe\label{the1}
If $\al\in\dyn(\6M)$ is a dynamics of a model with
$P(\phi)_2$ plus Yukawa$_2$ interaction, then for each
pair of vacuum states $\om_1,\om_2\in\6S_0(\al)$ there exists an
interpolating kink state $\om\in\6S(\al|\om_1,\om_2)$.
\ethe
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
We shall prepare the proof of Theorem \ref{the1} during the subsequent
sections.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\subsection{Technical Preliminaries}\label{s6b}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\bdef
Let $\6M$ be a net of Cauchy data.
We denote by $G(\6M)$ the group of unitary operators $u\in\6B(\2H_0)$
whose adjoint actions $\chi_u:=\Ad(u)$ commute with
the spatial translations, i.e.:
\beqa
\chi_u\circ\al_\1x=\al_\1x\circ\chi_u \ \ .
\eeqa
Let $\al\in\dyn(\6M)$ be a dynamics of the net $\6M$. Then we define
the following sub-group of $G(\6M)$:
\beqa
G(\al,\6M):=\{u\in G(\6M)|\chi_u\circ\al_t=\al_t\circ\chi_u \
\mbox{ for each $t\in\7R$.}\}
\eeqa
\eef
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\brem
Each operator $u\in G(\al,\6M)$ induces a
symmetry of the Haag-Kastler net $\6A_\al$.
\erem
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
We make the following assumptions for the
net of Cauchy data $\6M$:
\paragraph*{\it Assumption:}
\bdes
\itno a
The net $\6M$ fulfills duality, i.e.
\beq
\6M(\2I)'=\6M(\2I_{LL})\vee\6M(\2I_{RR})
\eeq
\itno b
There exists a dynamics $\al_0$ and a normalized vector $\Om_0$ in $\2H_0$,
such that
\beqa
\om_0=\<\Om_0,(\cdot)\Om_0\>
\eeqa
is a vacuum state with
respect to the dynamics $\al_0$.
\itno c
For each bounded interval $\2I$, the inclusion
\beqa
(\6M(\2I_{RR}),\6M(\2I_R))
\eeqa
is split.
\itno d
The net fulfills weak additivity.
\edes
\skb
According to our assumption, we conclude from
the Theorem of Reeh and Schlieder that
$\Om_0$ is a standard vector for the inclusion
$(\6M(\2I_{RR}),\6M(\2I_R))$ which implies that
\beq\label{splitincl}
\Lam(\2I):=(\6M(\2I_{RR}),\6M(\2I_R),\Om_0)
\eeq
is a standard split inclusion for each interval $\2I$.
and hence (see \cite{DLo})
there exists a unitary operator
$$
w_{\2I}:\2H_0\otimes \2H_0\to \2H_0
$$
such that for $a\in \6M(\2I_{LL})$ and $b\in\6M(\2I_{RR})$ we have:
$$
w_{\2I}(a\otimes b)w_{\2I}^*=ab
$$
Thus there is an interpolating type I factor $\2N\cong\6B(\2H_0)$, i.e.
$$
\6M(\2I_{RR})\subset\2N\subset \6M(\2I_R)
$$
which is given by
$$
\2N:=w_{\2I}(\11\otimes \6B(\2H_0))w_{\2I}^* \ \ \ .
$$
Hence we obtain an embedding of $\6B(\2H_0)$ into the algebra
$\6M(\2I_R)$:
$$
\Psi_\2I:F\in\6B(\2H_0)\mapsto
w_{\2I}(\11\otimes F)w_{\2I}^*\in\6M(\1x,\infty)
$$
This embedding is called the {\em universal localizing map}.
\brem
We shall make a few remarks on the assumptions given above.
\bdes
\itno {i}
The results, which we shall establish in the following, remain
correct if the
net of Cauchy data fulfills
{\em twisted duality} instead of duality \cite{Mue1,Sum1}.
\itno {ii}
For the application of our analysis to quantum field theory models,
like $P(\phi)_2$- or $\mbox{Yukawa}_2$ models,
we can choose as Cauchy data tensor products of the time-zero algebras of the
massive free Bose or Fermi field.
The time-zero algebras of the massive free Bose field
fulfill the assumptions {\it (a)} and {\it (b)}
and it has been shown \cite[Appendix]{Schl5} (compare also \cite{Bu1}) that
{\it (c)} is also fulfilled.
Replacing duality by twisted duality,
the assumptions {\it (a)} to {\it (c)} hold for the
massive free Fermi field, too \cite{Sum1}.
In addition to that, we claim that the weak additivity {\it (d)}
is also fulfilled in these cases.
\itno {iii}
The state $\om_0$ plays the role of a free massive vacuum state,
called the bare vacuum.
\edes
\erem
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\bpro\label{pro51}
Let $u\in G(\6M)$ be an operator and let $\2I$ be a bounded interval.
Then there exists a canonical automorphism $\chi_u^\2I$ with the properties:
\bdes
\itno 1
The relations
\beq\label{inpl2}
\chi_u^\2I|_{C^*(\6M,\2I_{LL})}=\id_{C^*(\6M,\2I_{LL})} \ \ \mbox{ and} \ \
\chi_u^\2I|_{C^*(\6M,\2I_{RR})}=\chi_u|_{C^*(\6M,\2I_{RR})}
\eeq
hold.
\itno 2
There exists a strongly continuous map
$\gam^1_{(u,\2I)}:\Sgm\to C^*(\6M)$ such that:
\bdes
\itno i
\beqa
\Ad(\gam^1_{(u,\2I)}(\1x))=
\al_\1x\circ\chi_u^\2I\circ\al_{-\1x}\circ(\chi_u^\2I)^{-1} \ \ .
\eeqa
\itno {ii}
The cocycle condition is fulfilled:
\beqa
\gam^1_{(u,\2I)}(\1x+\1y)=\al_\1x(\gam^1_{(u,\2I)}(\1y))
\gam^1_{(u,\2I)}(\1x) \ \ .
\eeqa
\edes
\edes
\epro
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\bpr\bdes
\itno 1
In the same manner as in \cite{Schl4}, we show that
\beqa
\Ad(\Psi_\2I(\11\otimes u))(\6M(\hat\2I))\subset\6M(\hat\2I)
\eeqa
if the interval $\hat\2I$ contains $\2I$.
This implies that
\beqa
\chi_u^\2I:=\Ad(\Psi_\2I(\11\otimes u))
\eeqa
is a well defined automorphism of $C^*(\6M)$.
By using the properties of the universal localizing map $\Psi_\2I$,
we conclude that $\chi_u^\2I$ fulfills equation (\ref{inpl2}).
\itno 2
By a straight forward generalization of
the proof of \cite[Proposition 4.2]{Schl4},
we conclude that the statement {\it (2)} holds where
$\gam^1_{(u,\2I)}(\1x)$ is given by:
\beqa
\gam^1_{(u,\2I)}(\1x)=\Psi_{\2I+\1x}(\11\otimes u)\Psi_\2I(\11\otimes u^*)\ \ .
\eeqa
\edes
\epr
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Let $\om$ be a vacuum state with respect to the dynamics $\al$ and let
$u\in G(\al,\6M)$, then
the state
\beqa
\om_u^\2I:=\om\circ\chi_u^\2I
\eeqa
seem to be a good candidate for an interpolating kink state.
Indeed, it follows from the construction of $\chi_u^\2I$ that
\beqa
\om_u^\2I|_{C^*(\6M,\2I_{RR})}&=&\om\circ\chi_u|_{C^*(\6M,\2I_{RR})}
\vs\vs
\om_u^\2I|_{C^*(\6M,\2I_{LL})}&=&\om|_{C^*(\6M,\2I_{LL})} \ \ .
\eeqa
Hence $\om_u^\2I$ interpolates $\om$ and $\om\circ \chi_u$.
To decide whether
$\om_u^\2I$ is a positive energy state, we
investigate in the subsequent section,
how $\chi_u^\2I$ is transformed under the action of a dynamics $\al$.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\subsection{When Does a Theory Possess Kink States?}
\label{s6c}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Let $\al$ be a dynamics and
$G\subset G(\al,\6M)$ be a {\em finite} subgroup.
By using the universal localizing map $\Psi_\2I$,
we obtain for each bounded interval $\2I$ a unitary representation
of $G$
\beqa
U_\2I:G\ni g \mapsto U_\2I(g):=\Psi_\2I(\11\otimes g)\in \6M(\2I_R) \ \ .
\eeqa
In the previous section it has been shown that
$U_\2I(g)$ implements an automorphism $\chi^\2I_g$ which is
covariant under spatial translations (Proposition \ref{pro51}).
For a dynamics $\al\in\dyn(\6M)$, we wish to construct a cocycle
$\gam_{(g,\2I)}$ in order to
show that $\chi^\2I_g$ is an interpolating automorphism.
The {\em formal} operator
\beqa
\gam_{(g,\2I)}(t,\1x):=\al_{(t,\1x)}(U_\2I(g))U_\2I(g)^*
\eeqa
seems to be a useful Ansatz since it formally implements the automorphism
\beqa
\al_{(t,\1x)}\circ\chi^\2I_g\circ\al_{(-t,-\1x)}\circ (\chi^\2I_g)^{-1} \ \ .
\eeqa
Unfortunately, the operators $U_\2I(g)$ are {\em not} contained in $C^*(\6M)$
and the term \newline $\al_{(t,\1x)}(U_\2I(g))$
has no well defined mathematical meaning.
To get a well defined solution for $\gam_{(g,\2I)}$,
we construct an extension of the net
$\6M$ which contains the operators $U_\2I(g)$ (compare also \cite{Mue1}).
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\bdef\label{exten}
Let $G\subset G(\6M)$ be a compact sub-group. The net
$\6M\rtimes G$ is defined by the assignment
\beqa
\6M\rtimes G:\2I\mapsto (\6M\rtimes G)(\2I):=\6M(\2I)\vee U_{\2I}(G)'' \ \ .
\eeqa
\eef
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\bpro\label{pro52}
Let $\2I$ be a bounded interval, then the map
\beqa
\pi^\2I:\6M(\2I)\rtimes G\ni a \cdot g \mapsto
a \ U_{\2I}(g)\in\6M(\2I)\vee U_{\2I}(G)''
\eeqa
is a faithful representation of the crossed product $\6M(\2I)\rtimes G$.
\epro
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\bpr
First, we easily observe that $\pi^\2I$ is a well defined representation
of \newline $\6M(\2I)\rtimes G$. According to
\cite[Theorem 2.2, Corollary 2.3]{Hag}, we conclude that the
crossed product $\6M(\2I)\rtimes G$ is isomorphic
to the von Neumann algebra $\6M(\2I)\vee U_{\2I}(G)''$ and
$\pi^\2I$ is a W*-isomorphism.
\epr
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\bdef
A one parameter
automorphism group $\al$, which satisfies the conditions, listed below,
is called a $G$-dynamics of the extended net $\6M\rtimes G$.
\bdes
\itno a
$\al$ is a dynamics of the net $\6M\rtimes G$ (See Introduction).
\itno b
The automorphisms $\al_t$ commute with the automorphisms $\chi_g$, i.e.
\beqa
\al_t\circ\chi_g=\chi_g\circ\al_t \ \ ; \mbox{ for each $t\in\7R$ and
for each $g\in G$.}
\eeqa
\edes
The set of all
$G$-dynamics of $\6M\rtimes G$ is denoted by $\dyn_G(\6M\rtimes G)$.
\eef
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\bpro\label{pro521}
Let $\al\in\dyn_G(\6M\rtimes G)$ be a $G$-dynamics and
$\2I$ be a bounded interval.
Then the operator
\beqa
\gam^0_{(g,\2I)}(t):=\al_t(U_\2I(g))U_\2I(g)^*
\eeqa
is contained in $\6M(\2I_{|t|})$ where $\2I_{|t|}$ denotes the
enlarged interval $\2I+(-|t|,|t|)$ and the operator
\beqa
\gam_{(g,\2I)}(t,\1x):=\al_{(t,\1x)}(U_\2I(g))U_\2I(g)^*
\eeqa
fulfills the cocycle condition:
\beqa
\gam_{(g,\2I)}(t+t',\1x+\1x')=
\al_{(t,\1x)}(\gam_{(g,\2I)}(t',\1x'))\gam_{(g,\2I)}(t,\1x) \ \ .
\eeqa
\epro
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\bpr
For $a\in C^*(\6M,\2I_{|t|,RR})$, the operator
$\al_{-t}(a)$ is contained in $C^*(\6M,\2I_{RR})$ which implies
\beqa
a \ \al_t(U_\2I(g))U_\2I(g)^* &=& \al_t(\al_{-t}(a)U_\2I(g))U_\2I(g)^*
\vs\vs
&=& \al_t(U_\2I(g)\chi_g\al_{-t}(a))U_\2I(g)^*
\vs\vs
&=& \al_t(U_\2I(g)\al_{-t}\chi_g(a))U_\2I(g)^*
\vs\vs
&=& \al_t(U_\2I(g))\chi_g(a)U_\2I(g)^*
\vs\vs
&=& \al_t(U_\2I(g))U_\2I(g)^* \ a
\eeqa
and we conclude:
\beqa
\al_t(U_\2I(g))U_\2I(g)^*\in C^*(\6M,\2I_{|t|,RR})'=\6M(\2I_{|t|,L})
\eeqa
By a similar argument, $\al_t(U_\2I(g))U_\2I(g)^*$ is contained
in $\6M(\2I_{|t|,R})$ and we conclude from duality that
it is contained in $\6M(\2I_{|t|})$.
The cocycle condition for $\gam_{(g,\2I)}$ is obviously fulfilled
and the proposition follows.
\epr
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\bdef
Let $\al\in\dyn(\6M)$ be a dynamics and $G\subset G(\6M)$ be
a compact subgroup.
We shall call $\al$ {\em $G$-extendible}
if there exists a $G$-dynamics $\hat\al$ of the extended net
$\6M\rtimes G$, such that
\beqa
\hat\al_t|_{C^*(\6M)}=\al_t
\eeqa
for each $t\in\7R$.
\eef
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
We are now prepared to prove one of our key results:
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\bthe\label{the51}
Let $\al\in\dyn(\6M)$ be a $G$-extendible dynamics and let $\chi^\2I_g$ be
the automorphism which can be constructed by
Proposition \ref{pro51}. Then for each vacuum state
$\om$ with respect to $\al$ the state
\beqa
\om_g^\2I:=\om\circ\chi_g^\2I
\eeqa
is a kink state which interpolates $\om$ and $\om\circ\chi_g$.
\ethe
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\bpr
As postulated, there exists an extension
$\hat\al\in\dyn_G(\6M\rtimes G)$ of $\al$.
We show that for each $g\in G$ the operator
\beqa
\gam^0_{(g,\2I)}(t):=\hat\al_t(U_\2I(g))U_\2I(g)^*
\eeqa
implements the automorphism
\beqa
\al_t\circ\chi^\2I_g\circ\al_{-t}\circ (\chi^\2I_g)^{-1}
\eeqa
on $C^*(\6M)$. Indeed, we have for each $a\in C^*(\6M)$:
\beqa
\Ad(\gam^0_{(g,\2I)}(t))a &=& \hat\al_t(U_\2I(g))U_\2I(g)^* \ a \
U_\2I(g)\hat\al_t(U_\2I(g))^*
\vs\vs
&=&
\hat\al_t(U_\2I(g)) \ (\chi^\2I_g)^{-1}(a) \ \hat\al_t(U_\2I(g))^*
\vs\vs
&=&
\hat\al_t\biggr ( U_\2I(g)\al_{-t}
\biggr ( (\chi^\2I_g)^{-1}(a) \biggl )U_\2I(g)^*\biggl )
\vs\vs
&=&
\al_t\biggr ( U_\2I(g)\al_{-t}
\biggr ( (\chi^\2I_g)^{-1}(a) \biggl )U_\2I(g)^*\biggl )
\vs\vs
&=&
\al_t\circ\chi^\2I_g\circ\al_{-t}\circ(\chi^\2I_g)^{-1}(a)
\eeqa
Finally we conclude from Proposition \ref{pro521} that
\beqa
\gam_{(g,\2I)}(t,\1x):=\al_{(t,\1x)}(U_\2I(g))U_\2I(g)^*
\eeqa
is a cocycle where $\gam_{(g,\2I)}(t,\1x)$ is localized in a
sufficiently large bounded interval.
By a straight forward generalization of the proof
of \cite[Proposition 5.5]{Schl4} we conclude that
$\om_u^\2I$ is a positive energy state which implies the result.
\epr
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
The dynamics $\al$ of $P(\phi)_2$- and $\mbox{Yukawa}_2$ models are locally
implementable by unitary operators. More precisely,
for each bounded interval $\2I$ and for each positive
number $\tau>0$, there exists a unitary
operator $u(\2I,\tau|t)$ with the properties:
\bdes
\itno 1
If $|t_1|,|t_2|,|t_1+t_2|<\tau$, then we have
\beqa
u(\2I,\tau|t_1+t_2)=u(\2I,\tau|t_1)u(\2I,\tau|t_2) \ \ .
\eeqa
\itno 2
For $|t|<\tau$, the operator
$u(\2I,\tau|t)$ implements $\al_t$ on $\6M(\2I)$, i.e.:
\beq\label{locimpl}
\al_t(a)=u(\2I,\tau|t) \ a \ u(\2I,\tau|t)^* \ \ ; \
\mbox{ for each $a\in\6M(\2I)$.}
\eeq
\edes
Let $G\subset G(\al,\6M)$ be a compact sub-group. In order to show
that $\al$ is $G$-extendible, it is sufficient to prove
that the operators
\beqa
u(\2I_1,\tau|t)U_\2I(g)u(\2I_1,\tau|t)^* \ \ ,
\eeqa
which are the obvious candidates
for $\hat\al(U_I(g))$,
are independent of $\2I_1$ for $\2I_1\supset\2I$ and $|t|\leq\tau$.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\blem\label{lem522}
If for each $\2I\subset\2I_1$, for each $\tau<\tau_1$ and for each $g\in G$
the equation
\beq\label{extendyn}
u(\2I,\tau|t)U_\2I(g)u(\2I,\tau|t)^*
=u(\2I_1,\tau_1|t)U_\2I(g)u(\2I_1,\tau_1|t)^*
\eeq
holds, then the dynamics $\al$ is $G$-extendible.
Here $u(\2I,\tau|t)$ are unitary operators which
fulfill equation (\ref{locimpl}).
\elem
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\bpr
Let $(\2I_n,\tau_n)_{n\in\7N}$ be a sequence, such that
$\lim_n\2I_n=\7R$ and $\lim_n\tau_n=\infty$.
We conclude from our assumption (equation (\ref{extendyn}))
that the uniform limit
\beqa
\hat\al_t(a):=\lim_{n\to\infty}\Ad(u(\2I_n,\tau_n|t))(a)
\eeqa
exists. Thus $\hat\al:t\mapsto\hat\al_t$ is a
well defined one-parameter automorphism group, extending the dynamics $\al$.
It remains to be proven that $\hat\al$ has propagation speed
$\ps(\hat\al)\leq 1$. Since $\hat\al$ is an extension
of $\al$ and $\ps(\al)\leq 1$, we conclude for each
$a\in C^*(\6M,\2I_{|t|,RR})$ and for each $b\in C^*(\6M,\2I_{|t|,LL})$:
\beqa
ab \ \hat\al_t(U_\2I(g))
&=&\hat\al_t(\al_{-t}(a)\al_{-t}(b)U_\2I(g))
\vs\vs
&=&\hat\al_t(U_\2I(g)\al_{-t}\chi_g(a)\al_{-t}(b))
\vs\vs
&=&\hat\al_t(U_\2I(g)) \ \chi_g(a)b
\eeqa
Thus the operator $\hat\al_t(U_\2I(g))$
is contained in $\6M(\2I_{|t|,R})$
and implements $\chi_g$ on \newline $\6M(\2I_{|t|,RR})$.
This finally implies:
\beqa
\hat\al_t(U_\2I(g))U_{\2I_{|t|}}(g)^*\in\6M(\2I_{|t|})
\eeqa
and the lemma follows.
\epr
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Let us consider the two-fold W*-tensor product of the net
of Cauchy data, i.e.:
\beqa
\6M\olt\6M:\2I\mapsto\6M(\2I)\olt\6M(\2I)
\eeqa
\bobs
\bdes
\itno {i}
If the net $\6M$ fulfills the conditions
{\it (a)} to {\it (c)} of the previous section, then the
net $\6M\olt\6M$ fulfills them, too.
\itno {ii}
Let $\al\in\dyn(\6M)$ be a dynamics of $\6M$, then $\al^{\otimes 2}$
is a dynamics of $\6M\olt\6M$. Note that the flip operator
$u_F$, which is given by
\beqa
u_F:\2H_0\otimes\2H_0\to\2H_0\otimes\2H_0 \ \ ; \ \
\psi_1\otimes\psi_2\mapsto \psi_2\otimes\psi_1
\eeqa
is contained in $G(\al^{\otimes 2},\6M\olt\6M)$. Hence $u_F$
induces an embedding of $\7Z_2$ into $G(\al^{\otimes 2},\6M\olt\6M)$.
\itno {iii}
According to Definition \ref{exten}, we can construct
a non-local extension
\beqa
\hat\6M:=(\6M\olt\6M)\rtimes\7Z_2
\eeqa
of the two-fold net $\6M\olt\6M$. Let $\Psi_\2I$ be the
universal localizing map of the
standard split inclusion
\beqa
\Lam(\2I)\otimes\Lam(\2I)=
(\6M(\2I_{RR})^{\olt 2},\6M(\2I_R)^{\olt 2},\Om_0\otimes\Om_0)
\eeqa
and define $\te_\2I:=\Psi_\2I(\11\otimes u_F)$.
Then the algebra $\hat\6M(\2I)$ is simply given by
\beqa
\hat\6M(\2I)=((\6M\olt\6M)\rtimes\7Z_2)(\2I)
=(\6M(\2I)\olt\6M(\2I))\vee \{\te_\2I\}'' \ \ \ .
\eeqa
\itno {iv}
By Proposition \ref{pro51}, there exists a canonical automorphism
\beq\label{intauto}
\be^\2I:=\Ad(\te_\2I) \ \ ,
\eeq
associated with the pair $(u_F,\2I)$.
\edes
\eobs
\bnoa
Let $\al$ be a dynamics of $\6M$. In the sequel, we shall call $\al$
{\em extendible} if $\al^{\otimes 2}$ is $\7Z_2$-extendible.
\enoa
We conclude this section by
the following corollary which can be derived by a direct application
of Theorem \ref{the51}:
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\bcor\label{cor52}
Let $\al\in\dyn(\6M)$ be an extendible dynamics, then
for each pair of vacuum states $\om_1,\om_2\in\6S_0(\6A_\al)$,
the state
\beqa
\om=\mu_{\be^\2I}(\om_1\otimes\om_2)
\eeqa
is a kink state.
\ecor
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\section{Application to Quantum Field Theory Models}
\label{s52}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
We show that a sufficient condition for the existence of interpolating
automorphisms, i.e. the extendibility of the dynamics, is
satisfied for the $P(\phi)_2$, the $\mbox{Yukawa}_2$ and special types
of Wess-Zumino models.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\subsection{Kink States in $P(\phi)_2$-Models}
\label{s521}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
We shall show that the dynamics of $P(\phi)_2$-models are extendible.
As described in Section \ref{s4} the dynamics of a $P(\phi)_2$-model
consists of two parts.
\begin{description}
\item[{\it (1)}]
The first part is given by the free dynamics $\al_0$, with
propagation speed \newline $\ps(\al_0)=1$,
$$
\al_{0,t}(a)=e^{iH_0t}ae^{-iH_0t}
$$
where $(H_0,D(H_0))$ is the free Hamiltonian
which is a self-adjoint operator
on the domain $D(H_0)\subset \2H_0$.
\item[{\it (2)}]
The second part is a dynamics $\al_1$ with propagation speed $\ps(\al_1)=0$,
i.e. $\al_{1,t}$ maps each local algebra $\6M(\2I)$ onto itself.
The interaction part of the full Hamiltonian is given by
a Wick polynomial of the time-zero field $\phi$:
$$
H_1(\2I)=H_1(\chi_\2I)=\int\8d\1x \ :P(\phi(\1x)): \ \chi_\2I(\1x)
$$
where $\chi_\2I$ is a smooth test function which is one on
$\2I$ and zero on the complement of a
slightly lager region $\hat\2I\supset\2I$.
The unitary operator $\exp(itH_1(\2I))$ implements the dynamics
$\al_1$ locally, i.e. for each $a\in\6M(\2I)$ we have:
$$
\al_{1,t}(a):=e^{iH_1(\2I)t}ae^{-iH_1(\2I)t} \ \ .
$$
\end{description}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\bdef
An operator valued distribution $v:S(\7R)\to L(\2H_0)$ is called
an {\em ultra local interaction}, if the following conditions are fulfilled:
\bdes
\itno 1
For each real valued test function $f\in S(\7R)$,
$v(f)$ is self-adjoint and has a common core with $H_0$.
%$C^\infty(H_0)=\cap_{n\in\7N}D(H_0^n)$
%is a core for $v(f)$.
\itno 2
Let $f\in S(\7R)$ be a real valued test function with support in a
bounded interval $\2I$, then the spectral projections of $v(f)$
are contained in $\6M(\2I)$.
\itno 3
For each pair of test functions $f_1,f_2\in S(\7R)$, the
spectral projections of $v(f_1)$ commute with the spectral
projections of $v(f_2)$.
\edes
\eef
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\brem
It has been proven in \cite{GlJa1}, that the Wick polynomials
of the time zero fields are ultra local interactions.
Furthermore, each ultra local
interaction $v$ induces a dynamics $\al^v\in\dyn(\6M)$
with propagation speed $\ps(\al^v)=0$. Let $\2I$ be a bounded
interval and let $\chi_\2I\in S(\7R)$ be a positive test function with
$\chi_\2I(\1x)=1$ for each $\1x\in\2I$. Indeed,
by an application of J. Glimm's and A. Jaffe's analysis \cite{GlJa1},
we conclude that the automorphisms
\beqa
\al^v_t:\6M(\2I)\to\6M(\2I) \ \
; \ \ a\mapsto \Ad(\ \exp(itv(\chi_\2I)) \ ) a
\eeqa
define a dynamics with zero propagation speed.
In the sequel,
we shall call a dynamics $\al^v$ {\em ultra local} if it is induced
by an ultra local interaction $v$.
\erem
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
In order to prove that a dynamics $\al$, which is given by
the Trotter product
\beqa
\al=\al_0\times\al^v
\eeqa
of a free and an ultra local dynamics, is extendible, we show
that each part of the dynamics can be extended separately.
Since the free part of the dynamics can be extended to the algebra $\6B(\2H_0)$
of all bounded operators on the Fock space $\2H_0$, it is obvious
that $\al_0$ is extendible. Thus it remains to be proven the following:
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\blem\label{lem53}
Each ultra local dynamics $\al^v\in\dyn(\6M)$ is extendible.
\elem
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\bpr
Let us consider any ultra local interaction $v$.
For each test function \newline $f\in S(\7R)$,
we introduce the unitary operator
\beqa
u(f|t):= e^{itv(f)}\otimes e^{itv(f)} \ \ \ .
\eeqa
Let $\2I$ be a bounded interval and denote by $\2I_\eps$, $\eps>0$, the
enlarged interval \newline $\2I+(-\eps,\eps)$.
We choose test functions $\chi^{(\2I,\eps)}\in S(\7R)$ such that
\beqa
\chi^{(\2I,\eps)}(\1x)=\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
1 & \1x\in \2I \\
0 & \1x\in \2I_\eps^c=\2I_\eps\bs\7R
\end{array} \right. \ \ .
\eeqa
For an interval $\hat\2I\supset\2I_\eps$, the region
$\hat\2I_\eps\bs\2I_\eps$ consists of two
connected components $(\hat\2I_\eps\bs\2I_\eps)_\pm$ and there exist
test functions $\chi^\pm\in S(\7R)$ with
\beqa
\begin{array}{l}
\supp(\chi^-)\subset (\hat\2I_\eps\bs\2I_\eps)_-\subset\2I_{LL}
\vs
\supp(\chi^+)\subset (\hat\2I_\eps\bs\2I_\eps)_+\subset\2I_{RR}
\vs
\chi^{(\hat\2I,\eps)}-\chi^{(\2I,\eps)}=\chi^++\chi^- \ \ .
\end{array}
\eeqa
Let us write
\beqa
\mbox{$u(\2I,\eps|t):=u(\chi^{(\2I,\eps)}|t)$
\ and \ $u_\pm(t):=u(\chi^\pm|t)$.}
\eeqa
Since we have $[u(f_1|t),u(f_2|t)]=0$ for any pair of test functions
$f_1,f_2\in S(\7R)$, we obtain for each $\eps>0$ and for
$\2I_\eps\subset\hat\2I$:
\beq
u(\hat\2I,\eps|t)= u(\2I,\eps|t)u_-(t)u_+(t)
\eeq
If we make use of the fact that $u_+(t)$ is
$\al_F$-invariant and localized in $\2I_{RR}$, we conclude that
$\te_\2I$ and $u_\pm(t)$ commute. Thus we
obtain
\beq
\Ad(u(\hat\2I,\eps|t))\te_\2I= \Ad(u(\2I,\eps|t))\te_\2I
\eeq
which depends only of the localization interval $\2I$ since
$\eps>0$ can be chosen arbitrarily small.
According to Lemma \ref{lem522}, the automorphisms
\beqa
\hat\al_t^v:\hat\6M(\2I)\ni a\mapsto \Ad(u(\2I,\eps|t))a\in\hat\6M(\2I)
\eeqa
define a dynamics of $\hat\6M$ whose restriction to
$\6M\olt\6M$ is $\al^v\otimes\al^v$. Thus $\al^v$ is extendible.
\epr
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
If $\hat\al_0$ denotes the natural extension of the free dynamics
$\al_0^{\otimes 2}$ to
$\hat\6M$ and let $\hat \al^v$ be the extension of the
ultra local dynamics $\al^v\otimes\al^v$ then,
by using the Trotter product, we conclude that the dynamics
\beqa
\hat\al:=\hat \al_0\times \hat \al^v
\eeqa
is an extension of the dynamics $(\al_0\times \al^v)^{\otimes 2}$ to
$\hat\6M$. This leads to the following result:
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\bpro\label{pro53}
Each dynamics of a $P(\phi)_2$-model is extendible.
\epro
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\bpr
The statement follows from Lemma \ref{lem53}
and from the fact that each dynamics
of a $P(\phi)_2$-model is a Trotter product of the free dynamics $\al_0$
and an ultra local dynamics $\al_1$.
\epr
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
The existence of interpolating kink states
in $P(\phi)_2$-models is an immediate consequence of Proposition \ref{pro53}.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\bcor
Let $\al\in\dyn(\6M)$ be a dynamics of a $P(\phi)_2$-model. Then
for each pair of vacuum states $\om_1,\om_2\in\6S_0(\al,\6M)$ there
exists an interpolating kink state $\om\in\6S(\om_1,\om_2)$.
\ecor
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\bpr
By Proposition \ref{pro53}
each dynamics of a $P(\phi)_2$-model is extendible and we can apply
Corollary \ref{cor52} which implies the result.
\epr
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\subsection{The Dynamics of the $\mbox{Yukawa}_2$ Model}
\label{s522a}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Since the dynamics of a $\mbox{Yukawa}_2$-like model
can not be written as a Trotter product which consists of
a free and an ultra local dynamics, it is a bit more
complicated to show that these dynamics are extendible.
We briefly summarize here the construction of the $\mbox{Yukawa}_2$ dynamics
which has been carried out by J. Glimm and A. Jaffe \cite{GlJa1}.
We also refer to the work of R. Schrader \cite{Schra0,Schra1}.
Let $\6M_s$ and $\6M_a$ be the
nets of Cauchy data for the free Bose and Fermi field, represented
on the Fock spaces $\2H_s$ and $\2H_a$ respectively. The Cauchy data
of the $\mbox{Yukawa}_2$ model are given by the
W*-tensor product $\6M:=\6M_s\olt\6M_a$ of the nets $\6M_s$ and $\6M_a$.
Moreover, we set $\2H_0:=\2H_s\otimes\2H_a$.
\paragraph*{\it Step 1:}
In the first step, a Hamiltonian, which
is regularized by an UV-cutoff $c_0>0$ and an IR-cutoff $c_1>1$, $c_0<< c_1$,
is constructed.
For this purpose, one chooses test functions
$\delta_{c_0},\chi_{c_1}\in S(\7R)$ with the properties:
\bdes
\itno a
\beqa
\supp(\delta_{c_0})\subset (-c_0,c_0) \ \ \mbox{ and } \ \
\int \8d\1x \ \delta_{c_0}(\1x)=1
\eeqa
\itno b
\beqa
\supp(\chi_{c_1})\subset (-c_1-1,c_1+1) \ \ \mbox{ and } \ \
\chi_{c_1}(\1x)=1
\\
\mbox{ for each $\1x\in (-c_1,c_1)$.}
\eeqa
\edes
The UV-regularized fields are given by
\beq\label{uvreg1}
\phi(c_0,\1x):=(\phi * \delta_{c_0})(\1x)
\ \ \mbox{ and } \ \
\psi(c_0,\1x):=(\psi * \delta_{c_0})(\1x)
\eeq
where $\phi$ is a massive free Bose field and
$\psi$ a free Dirac spinor field at $t=0$. The fields, defined by
equation (\ref{uvreg1}), act on $\2H_0$ via the operators
\beqa
\Phi(c_0,\1x):=\phi(c_0,\1x)\otimes\11_{\2H_a}
\ \ \mbox{ and } \ \
\Psi(c_0,\1x):=\11_{\2H_s}\otimes\psi(c_0,\1x) \ \ .
\eeqa
The regularized Hamiltonian $H(c_0,c_1)$
can be written as a sum of three parts:
\bdes
\itno 1
The free Hamiltonian $H_0$ which is given by
\beqa
H_0=H_{0,s}\otimes\11_{\2H_a}+\11_{\2H_s}\otimes H_{0,a}
\eeqa
where $H_{0,s}$ and $H_{0,a}$ are the free Hamilton operators
of the Bose and the Fermi field respectively.
\itno 2
The regularized Yukawa interaction term:
\beqa
H_Y(c_0,c_1)=\int \8d\1x \ \chi_{c_1}(\1x) \ \Phi(c_0,\1x)\
:\bar\Psi(c_0,\1x)\Psi(c_0,\1x):
\eeqa
\itno 3
The counterterms:
\beqa
H_C(c_0,c_1)=
\sum_{n=0}^N \ z_n(c_0) \ \int \8d\1x \ \chi_{c_1}(\1x)
\ :\Phi(\1x)^n:
\eeqa
where $z_n(c_0)$ are suitable renormalization constants.
\edes
The following statement has been established by J.Glimm and A.Jaffe
\cite{GlJa1,GlJa3}:
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\bthe
The counterterms $H_C(c_0,c_1)$ can be chosen in such a way that
\bdes
\itno 1
the cutoff Hamiltonian $H(c_0,c_1)=(H_0+H_Y(c_0,c_1)+H_C(c_0,c_1))^{**}$
is a positive and self adjoint operator with domain $D(H_0)$.
\itno 2
The uniform limit
\beqa
R(c_1,\zeta)=\lim_{c_0\to 0} (H(c_0,c_1)-\zeta)^{-1}
\eeqa
is the resolvent of a self adjoint operator $H(c_1)$.
\itno 3
$H(c_1)$ is the limit of $H(c_0,c_1)$ in the strong graph topology.
\edes
\ethe
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\bnoa
In the sequel, we shall use the following notation:
\beqa
u(c_0,c_1,t):=\exp(itH(c_0,c_1)) \ \ \mbox{ and } \ \
u(c_1,t):=\exp(itH(c_1)) \ \mbox{.}
\eeqa
\enoa
\brem
The aim is to show that $H(c_1)$ induces a dynamics of $\6M$, given locally
by the equation
\beqa
\al_t|_{\6M(\2I)}=\Ad( \ u(c_1,t) \ ) \ \ \
\mbox{ for $\2I_{|t|}:=\2I+(-|t|,|t|)\subset (-c_1,c_1)$.}
\eeqa
However, in comparison to the $P(\phi)_2$-models,
there are some more technical difficulties which have to be overcome.
\bdes
\itno {i}
The Hamiltonian $H(c_1)$ is only defined as a limit of the
Hamiltonians $H(c_0,c_1)$ and it has no mathematical meaning when
written as a sum
\beqa
H_0+H_Y(c_1)+H_C(c_1) \ \ \ .
\eeqa
Thus the construction scheme for a dynamics,
as it has been used for $P(\phi)_2$-models,
does not apply.
\itno {ii}
On the other hand, one might try to apply $P(\phi)_2$-like methods to the
Hamiltonian $H(c_0,c_1)$, for which the UV-cutoff is not removed.
For this purpose, one wishes to write $H(c_0,c_1)$ as a sum \newline
$H(c_0,c_1)=H_1(c_0,c_1)+H_2(c_0,c_1)$ where
$H_1(c_0,c_1)$ induces a dynamics
$\al_1$ with propagation speed $\ps(\al_1)\leq 1$ and
$H_2(c_0,c_1)$ induces a dynamics $\al_2$ with propagation
speed $\ps(\al_2)=0$.
The difficulty with writing such a decomposition for $H(c_0,c_1)$ arises
from the fact that the Yukawa interaction term $H_Y(c_0,c_1)$ induces
an automorphism group with infinite propagation speed.
\edes
\erem
\paragraph*{\it Step 2:}
In the next step, one introduces test functions
$\chi_{(\2I,s,c_0)}$,
depending on a bounded interval $\2I$, a real number $s>0$
and the UV-cutoff $c_0$, fulfilling the conditions
\beq\label{cutoffreg}
\begin{array}{l}
\supp(\chi_{(\2I,s,c_0)})\subset \2I_{2c_0+|s|+\epsilon}\bs\2I_{|s|-\epsilon}
\ \ \mbox{ and }
\vs\vs \ \
\chi_{(\2I,s,c_0)}(\1x)=1 \ \
\mbox{ if $\1x\in\2I_{2c_0+|s|}\bs\2I_{|s|}$.}
\end{array}
\eeq
Here $\epsilon<< c_0$ is any sufficiently small positive number.
The Hamiltonian $H(c_0,c_1)$ is replaced by the operator
\beq
H(\2I,s,c_0,c_1):=H_0+H_C(c_0,c_1)+H_Y(\2I,s,c_0,c_1)
\eeq
depending additionally on
$\2I$ and $s$, where $H_Y(\2I,s,c_0,c_1)$ is given by
\beqa
H_Y(\2I,s,c_0,c_1):=\int \8d\1x \
\Phi(c_0,\1x)\ :\bar\Psi(c_0,\1x)\Psi(c_0,\1x): \
( \ \chi_{c_1}(\1x)-\chi_{(\2I,s,c_0)}(\1x) \ ) \ \ \ .
\eeqa
In order to
construct from these data a $c_1$-independent approximation of
the dynamics which maps
$\6M(\2I)$ onto $\6M(\2I_{|t|})$, one defines the unitary operators
\beqa
w(\2I,c_0,c_1,t):=\prod_{j=1}^n
\exp\biggl ( i{t\over n} H( \ \2I,(n-j)n^{-1}t,c_0,c_1 \ ) \biggr )
\eeqa
where $n$ is equal to the integral part of $|c_0^{-1}t|$. The
lemma, given below, has been established in \cite{GlJa1}.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\blem\label{lem59}
{\em\cite[Lemma 9.1.2]{GlJa1}}
The adjoint action of $w(\2I,c_0,c_1,t)$ induces an automorphism
\beqa
\al_t^{(\2I,c_0)}:=\Ad(w(\2I,c_0,c_1,t)):\6M(\2I)\to\6M(\2I_{|t|})
\eeqa
which is independent of $c_1$.
\elem
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\paragraph*{\it Step 3:}
For technical reasons, to control convergence as
$c_0$ tends to zero, the length of time propagation is scaled, and one defines
for $\lam\in [0,1]$ the $c_1$-independent automorphism
\beqa
\al^{(\2I,c_0,\lam)}_t:=\Ad(w(\2I,c_0,c_1,\lam,t)):\6M(\2I)\to\6M(\2I_{|t|})
\eeqa
where $w(\2I,c_0,c_1,\lam,t)$ is given by
\beqa
w(\2I,c_0,c_1,\lam,t):=\prod_{j=1}^n
\exp\biggl ( i{\lam\cdot t\over n} H(\2I,(n-j)n^{-1}t,c_0,c_1) \biggr ) \ \ .
\eeqa
The final approximation is given by averaging over $\lam$:
\beqa
\al^{(\2I,c_0,\ell)}_t(a):=\int \8d\lam \ f_{\ell}(\lam) \
\al^{(\2I,c_0,\lam)}_t(a)
\eeqa
where $f_\ell$ is a positive continuous function such that
\beqa
\int \8d\lam \ f_\ell(\lam) =1 \ \
\mbox{ and $\supp(f_\ell)\subset [1-\ell,1]$, $\ell\leq 1$.}
\eeqa
Finally, J. Glimm and A. Jaffe have established the result:
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\bthe\label{theGlJa913}{\em \cite[Theorem 9.1.3]{GlJa1}}
There exists a function $c:\ell\mapsto c_\ell $ with
$\lim_{\ell\to 0}c_\ell =0$ such that
\beq
\al^Y_t(a):=w-\lim_{\ell\to 0}\al^{(\2I,c_\ell ,\ell)}_t(a)
=u(c_1,t) \ a \ u(c_1,t)^*
\eeq
for each $a\in\6M(\2I)$ and for each sufficiently large $c_1$.
\ethe
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\subsection{Kink States in Models with $\mbox{Yukawa}_2$ Interaction}
\label{s522}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
We shall use an analogous strategy as above (step 1- step 3) in order to show
that the dynamics $\al^Y$, which is given due to
Theorem \ref{theGlJa913} is extendible.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\bthe\label{the55}
The dynamics $\al^Y$ of the $\mbox{Yukawa}_2$ model is
extendible.
\ethe
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Let us prepare the proof. First, we give a few comments on
the notation to be used.
\bnoa
\bdes
\itno {a}
In the sequel, we write $\hat w(\cdots)=w(\cdots)^{\otimes 2}$
and $\hat u(\cdots)=u(\cdots)^{\otimes 2}$ for the corresponding quantities
of the two-fold theory.
As in step 3 above, we also define the automorphism
\beqa
\hat\al^{(\2I,c_0,\lam)}_t:=\Ad(\hat w(\2I,c_0,c_1,\lam,t))
\eeqa
and the average
\beqa
\hat\al^{(\2I,c_0,\ell)}_t(a)=\int \8d\lam \ f_\ell(\lam) \
\hat\al^{(\2I,c_0,\lam)}_t(a) \ \ \ .
\eeqa
\itno {b}
Let $\om_0$ be the vacuum state with respect to the free dynamics which is
induced by $H_0$. We denote by
$\Psi_\2I$ the universal localizing map
of the standard split inclusion $\Lam(\2I)\otimes\Lam(\2I)$
and we define $\te_\2I:=\Psi_\2I(\11\otimes u_F)$.
\edes
\enoa
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\blem\label{lem510}
The adjoint action of
$\hat w(\2I,c_0,c_1,t)$ induces an automorphism
\beqa
\hat\al_t^{(\2I,c_0)}:
\hat\6M(\2I)\to \hat\6M(\2I_{|t|})
\eeqa
which is independent of $c_1$.
\elem
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\bpr
By Lemma \ref{lem59}, it is sufficient to prove that
\beqa
\Ad(\hat w(\2I,c_0,c_1,t))\te_\2I
\eeqa
is $c_1$-independent.
Indeed, following the arguments in the proof of
Proposition \ref{pro53}, we conclude that
\beqa
\te'_\2I:=\exp(i\tau H(\2I,s,c_0,c_1))^{\otimes 2} \ \te_\2I \
\exp(-i\tau H(\2I,s,c_0,c_1))^{\otimes 2}
\eeqa
is $c_1$-independent for $|\tau|\leq c_0$ and that $\te'_\2I$ is contained in
$\hat\6M(\2I_{|s|+|\tau|})$.
Composing $n$ such maps, we obtain the lemma.
\epr
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
In complete analogy to Theorem \ref{theGlJa913} we have:
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\blem\label{lem511}
\beqa
\hat\al^Y(a):= w-\lim_{\ell\to 0}\hat\al^{(\2I,c_\ell ,\ell)}_t(a)=
\hat u(c_1,t) \ a \ \hat u(c_1,t)^*
\eeqa
For each $a\in \hat\6M(\2I)$ and for each
sufficiently large $c_1$.
\elem
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\bpr
By Theorem \ref{theGlJa913}, we conclude that the lemma holds for each
$a\in\6M(\2I)\olt\6M(\2I)$. Hence it remains to be proven that
\beqa
w-\lim_{\ell\to 0}\hat\al^{(\2I,c_\ell ,\ell)}_t(\te_\2I)=
\hat u(c_1,t) \ \te_\2I \ \hat u(c_1,t)^* \ \mbox{ .}
\eeqa
The Corollary 9.1.9 of \cite{GlJa1} states:
\beqa
w-\lim_{\ell\to 0} \int \8d\lam \
( \ \hat w(\2I,c_\ell ,c_1,\lam,t) \ - \ \hat u(c_\ell ,c_1,\lam t) \ )
f_\ell(\lam)=0 \ \ .
\eeqa
We define
\beqa
\te_\2I(\ell,t):=\hat\al^{(\2I,c_\ell ,\ell)}_t(\te_\2I)
\ \ \mbox{ and } \ \
\bar\te_\2I(\ell,t):=\int \8d\lam \ f_\ell(\lam) \
\Ad( \ \hat u(c_\ell ,c_1,\lam t) \ )\te_\2I \ \ \ .
\eeqa
The Schwarz's inequality implies for each $\psi\in\2H_0\otimes\2H_0$:
\beqa\begin{array}{l}
|\<\psi,\te_\2I(\ell,t)-\bar\te_\2I(\ell,t)\psi\>|
\vs
\leq
2||\psi||\cdot\biggl (\int \8d\lam \ f_\ell(\lam) \
||( \ \hat w(\2I,c_\ell ,c_1,\lam,t) \
- \ \hat u(c_\ell ,c_1,\lam t) \ )\psi||^2\biggr )^{1/2}
\end{array}\eeqa
Since $||(v-u)\psi||^2=2\cdot \8{Re}(\<(v-u)\psi,u\psi\>)$, we obtain:
\beqa
|\<\psi,\te_\2I(\ell,t)-\bar\te_\2I(\ell,t)\psi\>| \ \ \leq
\ \ 4||\psi||\cdot\biggl (\int \8d\lam \ f_\ell(\lam) \
\vs\vs
\8{Re}\biggl\<\ (\hat w(\2I,c_\ell ,c_1,\lam,t) \
- \ \hat u(c_\ell ,c_1,\lam t) \ )\psi ,
\hat u(c_\ell ,c_1,\lam t)\psi \biggr\> \biggr )^{1/2}
\eeqa
which proves the lemma.
\epr
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\paragraph*{\it Proof of Theorem \ref{the55}:}
We conclude from Lemma \ref{lem511} and Lemma \ref{lem522}
that the automorphism group $\hat\al^Y$ is a dynamics of the extended
net $\hat\6M$ whose restriction to
$\6M\olt\6M$ is $\al^Y\otimes\al^Y$. Thus $\al^Y$ is extendible.
\epr
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\brem
According to \cite{Schra1}, each dynamics $\al^{Y+P}$
of a quantum field theory model with
$\mbox{Yukawa}_2$ plus $P(\phi)_2$ boson self-interaction is extendible.
\erem
Finally, we conclude from Theorem \ref{the55}:
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\bcor\label{corll55}
Let $\al^{Y+P}$ be a dynamics of a quantum field theory model with
$\mbox{Yukawa}_2$ plus $P(\phi)_2$ boson self-interaction.
For each pair $\om_1,\om_2$ of vacuum states with respect to $\al^{Y+P}$,
there exists a kink state $\om$ in $\6S(\al^{Y+P}|\om_1,\om_2)$.
\ecor
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\subsection{Wess-Zumino Models}
\label{s523a}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
One interesting class of quantum field theory models which possess
more than one vacuum sector are the $N=2$ Wess-Zumino models in
two-dimensional space-time.
Their properties have been studied
in several papers \cite{JanWeit0,JaLesWeit1,JaLesWeit2,JanWeit1,JaLes}
and we summarize the main results which are
established there in order to setup our subsequent analysis.
The field content of these models with a finite volume cutoff $c>0$
consists of one {\em complex}
Bose field $\phi_c$ and one Dirac spinor field $\psi_c$, acting
as operator valued distributions on the Fock spaces
\beqa
\2H_a(c) &:=& \bigoplus_{n=0}^\infty \ L_2(T_c,\7C^2)^{\otimes_a}
\vs\vs
\2H_s(c) &:=& \bigoplus_{n=0}^\infty \ L_2(T_c,\7C)^{\otimes_s}
\eeqa
where $a,s$ stands for
symmetrization or anti-symmetrization of the tensor product and
$L_2(T_c,\7C^k)$ ($k=1,2$) denotes the Hilbert space of $\7C^k$-valued and
square integrable functions, living on the
circle $T_c$ of length $c$. The net of Cauchy data for the finite
volume theory is given by
\beqa
\6M_c:(-c,c)\supset\2I \mapsto \6M_c(\2I)=\6M_{c,s}(\2I)\olt\6M_{c,a}(\2I)
\eeqa
where the nets $\6M_{c,s}$ and $\6M_{c,a}$ are defined by the assignments:
\beqa
\6M_{c,s}:(-c,c)\supset\2I\mapsto \6M_{c,s}(\2I):=
\biggl\{ e^{i(\phi_c(f_1)+\pi_c(f_2))}\biggm | \supp (f_j)\subset \2I\biggr\}''
\eeqa
\beqa
\6M_{c,a}:(-c,c)\supset\2I\mapsto \6M_{c,a}(\2I):=
\biggl\{ \psi_c(f_1),\bar\psi_c(f_2)
\biggm | \supp (f_j)\subset \2I\biggr\}''
\eeqa
where $\pi_c$ is the canonically conjugate of $\phi_c$.
Let $\6M:=\6M_{c=\infty}$ be the net of Cauchy data in the infinite
volume limit, then the map
\beqa
\iota_c:\bmat\phi(f_{11}) & \pi(f_{12}) \\
\psi(f_{21}) & \bar\psi(f_{22}) \\ \emat \mapsto
\bmat\phi_c(f_{11}) & \pi_c(f_{12}) \\
\psi_c(f_{21}) & \bar\psi_c(f_{22}) \\ \emat
\ \ ; \ \ \supp(f_{ij})\subset (-c,c)
\eeqa
is a W*-isomorphism
which identifies the nets $\6M$ and $\6M_c$ for those regions $\2I$ which are
contained in $(-c,c)$.
The interaction part of the {\em formal} Hamiltonian consists
of two parts.
\bdes
\itno a
A $P(\phi)_2$-like part:
\beqa
H_P(v,c)=\int_{T_c} \8d \1x \ :|v'(\Phi_c)|^2: \ - \ :|\Phi_c|^2:
\eeqa
\itno b
A $\mbox{Yukawa}_2$-like part:
\beqa
H_Y(v,c):=\int_{T_c} \8d \1x \ : \bar\Psi_c
\bmat
v''(\Phi_c)-1 & 0 \\
0 & v''(\Phi_c)^*-1 \\
\emat
\Psi_c :
\eeqa
\edes
where $v$ is a polynomial of degree $\deg(v)=n$,
called {\em superpotential}, and
the fields $\Phi_c$ and $\Psi_c$ are given by
\beqa
\Phi_c:=\phi_c\otimes\11_{\2H_a(c)} \ \ \mbox{ and } \ \
\Psi_c:=\11_{\2H_s(c)}\otimes\psi_c \ \ .
\eeqa
According to the results of \cite{JanWeit0,JaLes,JaLesWeit1,JaLesWeit2},
it has been shown that,
there is a self-adjoint Fredholm operator $Q(v,c)$, called
{\em supersymmetry generator}, on \newline
$\2H_0(c):=\2H_s(c)\otimes\2H_a(c)$.
The {\em Fredholm index} of $Q(v,c)$
\beqa
\ind(Q(v,c))=\dimker(Q(v,c))-\dimcoker(Q(v,c))
\eeqa
has been computed in \cite{JaLesWeit1}. The result is
\beqa
|\ind(Q(v,c))|=\deg(v)-1 \ \ \ .
\eeqa
The space $\2H_0(c)$ may be decomposed $\2H_0(c)=\2H_+(c)\oplus\2H_-(c)$ into
the eigenspaces of the fermion parity operator $\Gam:=(-1)^{N_a}$, where
$N_a$ is the fermion number operator.
With respect to this decomposition, the operator $Q(v,c)$ has the form
\beqa
Q(v,c)=\bmat 0 & Q_+(v,c) \\ Q_-(v,c) & 0 \\ \emat \ \ .
\eeqa
The full Hamiltonian of the finite volume model is given by
\beqa
H(v,c)=Q(v,c)^2
\eeqa
which implies:
\beqa
\dimker(H(v,c))=|\dimker(Q_+(v,c))-\dimker(Q_-(v,c))|=\deg(v)-1
\eeqa
The Hamiltonian $H(v,c)$ induces a dynamics $\al^{(v,c)}$ of the finite
volume model and we conclude from the results of \cite{JanWeit0}:
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\bthe\label{theJanWeit0}{\em\cite[Theorem 1]{JanWeit0}}
There exists at least $\deg(v)-1$ vacuum sectors with respect to the dynamics
$\al^v:=\al^{(v,c=\infty)}$ of the model in the infinite volume limit.
\ethe
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\subsection{Kink States in Wess-Zumino Models}
\label{s523}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
In order to prove the existence of kink sectors, we now apply
the results which have been established in Section \ref{s521} and
Section \ref{s522} to $N=2$ Wess-Zumino Models.
\paragraph*{\it The case $\deg(v)=3$:}
Let us have a closer look at the simplest non-trivial case $\deg(v)=3$.
We let
\beqa
v'(z)=\lam_2 z^2+\lam_1z+\lam_0 \ \ \ .
\eeqa
As in the previous sections (equation (\ref{uvreg1})), we introduce the
UV-regularized fields:
\beqa
\Phi(c_0,\1x):=(\Phi * \delta_{c_0})(\1x)
\ \ \mbox{ and } \ \
\Psi(c_0,\1x):=(\Psi * \delta_{c_0})(\1x)
\eeqa
where $\delta_{c_0}$ is a smooth test function with support in $(-c_0,c_0)$.
We obtain for the $P(\phi)_2$-like part of the
regularized interaction Hamiltonian
\beqa
\begin{array}{l}
H_P(v;c_0,c_1)=\int \8d \1x \chi_{c_1}(\1x) \biggl [
\vs\vs
:|\lam_2\Phi(c_0,\1x)^2+\lam_1\Phi(c_0,\1x)+\lam_0|^2:-:|\Phi(c_0,\1x)|^2:
\biggr]
\end{array}
\eeqa
and for the $\mbox{Yukawa}_2$-like part:
\beqa
\begin{array}{l}
H_Y(v;c_0,c_1)=\int \8d \1x \chi_{c_1}(\1x) \biggl [
\vs\vs
:\bar\Psi(c_0,\1x) \bmat 2\lam_2\Phi(c_0,\1x)+\lam_1-1 & 0 \\
0 & 2\bar\lam_2\Phi(c_0,\1x)^*+\bar\lam_1-1 \\
\emat \Psi(c_0,\1x): \biggr ]
\end{array}
\eeqa
Using the same techniques as in Section \ref{s521} and
Section \ref{s522}, we obtain the corollary
(see also Corollary \ref{corll55}):
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\bcor
Let $v$ be a superpotential of degree $\deg(v)=3$. Then the following
statements are true:
\bdes
\itno 1
The dynamics $\al^v\in\dyn(\6M)$
of the model in the infinite volume limit
is extendible.
\itno 2
There exists two different vacuum sectors
$e_1,e_2\in\sec_0(\al^v,\6M)$ and two different
kink sectors $\te\in\sec(e_1,e_2)$, $\bar\te\in\sec(e_2,e_1)$.
\edes
\ecor
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\paragraph*{\it The case $\deg(v)>3$:}
We close this section by discussing the remaining case.
In order to show the extendibility of $\al^v\in\dyn(\6M)$,
we can try to proceed in the same manner as for the case $\deg(v)=3$.
According to Section \ref{s522} ({\it Step 2} and {\it Step 3}),
we construct an approximation
\beqa
\6M(\2I)\olt\6M(\2I)\ni a\mapsto\hat\al^{(v;\2I,c_0,\ell)}_t(a)
:=\int \8d\lam \ f_{\ell}(\lam) \ \hat\al^{(v;\2I,c_0,\lam)}_t(a)
\eeqa
of the dynamics $\al^v\otimes\al^v$ of the two-fold theory.
Provided that the corresponding result of Lemma \ref{lem510} is true
for the case $\deg(v)>3$ also, the linear maps
$\hat\al^{(v;\2I,c_0,\ell)}_t$ can be extended to the algebra
$\hat\6M(\2I)$.
For the generalization of
Theorem \ref{the55},
it seems that the most difficult part is to show that there exists a function
$c:\ell\mapsto c_\ell $ with $\lim_{\ell\to 0}c_\ell =0$ such that
\beq\label{dynapp}
\al^v_t(a):=w-\lim_{\ell\to 0}\al^{(v;\2I,c_\ell ,\ell)}_t(a) \ \ .
\eeq
The regularized Yukawa-like part of the Hamilton density
contains terms of the form
\beqa
&&:\Psi^{(i)}(c_0,\1x)\Psi^{(j)}(c_0,\1x): \ \ :\Phi(c_0,\1x)^k:
\vs\vs
&&\mbox{ $i,j\in\{0,1\}$, $i\not=j$ and $k\leq \deg(v)-2$, }
\eeqa
where $\Psi^{(j)}$ denotes the $j$-component of the Dirac spinor
field $\Psi$. Since there are contributions with $k>1$,
the proof of Theorem \ref{theGlJa913} does not directly apply.
Provided that for each superpotential $v$ the dynamics $\al^v$ is
extendible, we conclude that
for each pair of vacuum sectors $e_1,e_2\in \sec_0(\al^v,\6M)$ there exists
a kink state $\om\in\6S(e_1,e_2)$. Then the model
possesses at least $\deg(v)(\deg(v)-1)$ different non-trivial
kink sectors.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\section{Conclusion and Outlook}
\label{s8}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
In the present paper, a construction scheme for
kink sectors has been developed which can be applied to a large
class of quantum field theory models.
Most of the techniques which are used, except those in the proof of the
extendibility of the dynamics, concern operator algebraic methods.
They are model independent in the sense that they can be derived
from first principles.
There are still some interesting open problems and
we shall make a few remarks on them here.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\paragraph{Some further remarks on kink states:}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Let us consider a quantum field theory model ($P(\phi)_2$, $Y_2$),
possessing vacua $\om_1,\om_2$ which are related by a symmetry $\chi$.
According to Theorem \ref{the51}, there exists an
automorphism $\chi^\2I$ which induces a kink state
$\om=\om_1\circ\chi^\2I$. Note that $\om$ is a pure state
in this case.
Alternatively, we obtain a kink state $\hat\om$ by passing to the
two-fold tensor product of the theory with itself first and then
by restricting the $\al_F$-interpolating
automorphism $\be^\2I$, whose existence follows also from Theorem \ref{the51},
to the first tensor factor, i.e.:
\beqa
\hat\om=\om_1\otimes\om_2\circ\be_{C^*(\6A)\otimes\11} \ \ .
\eeqa
Provided the split property for wedge algebras holds for
the interacting vacua \cite{Schl4}, then, by applying a recent result
of M. M\"uger \cite{Mue2}, we conclude that $[\hat\om]$ is
nothing else but the infinite multiple of $[\om]$.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\paragraph{The problem of reducibility:}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
The problem of reducibility arises if the
vacua under consideration are not related by a symmetry since then
our construction scheme leads to kink representations of the form
\beqa
\pi=\pi_1\otimes\pi_2\circ\be|_{C^*(\6A)\otimes\11}
\eeqa
where $\be$ is an automorphism and $\pi_1,\pi_2$ are vacuum representations.
The representation $\pi$ is not irreducible and whether $\pi$ can be
decomposed into irreducible sub-representations is still an open
problem. Some of our results \cite[Theorem 4.4.3]{Schl5} suggest
that $\pi$ is, in non exceptional cases, an infinite multiple of one
irreducible component.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\paragraph{Kink sectors in $d>1+1$ dimensions:}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
It would be desirable to apply our program
to quantum field theories in higher dimensions.
Let us suppose a theory, given by a net of W*-algebras $\6A$,
possesses two locally normal vacuum states $\om_1,\om_2$.
As a sensible generalization of a kink states
to $d>1+1$, we propose to consider
locally normal states $\om$ which fulfill the
interpolation condition:
\beq\label{intergen}
\om|_{C^*(\6A,S_1)}=\om_1|_{C^*(\6A,S_1)} \ \ \mbox{ and } \ \
\om|_{C^*(\6A,S_2')}=\om_2|_{C^*(\6A,S_2')}
\eeq
where $S_1,S_2$, $S_1\subset S_2$, are space-like cones.
The state $\om$ describes the coexistence of two phases
which are separated by the {\em phase boundary}
$\pa S:=S_1'\cap S_2$.
Let us assume duality for space-like cones in the vacuum representations
under consideration. Furthermore, we presume that the inclusion
\beqa
\Lam=(\6A_{\pi_1}(S_1),\6A_{\pi_1}(S_2),\Om_1)
\eeqa
is standard split. Here $(\2H_1,\pi_1,\Om_1)$ is a
GNS-triple with respect to $\om_1$.
Unfortunately, for $d>1+1$ the phase boundary $\pa S$ is not compact
and therefore our construction scheme can not directly
be generalized to higher dimensions.
In order to overcome this difficulties, we consider a sequence of
standard split inclusions
\beqa
\Lam_n:=(\6A_{\pi_1}(\2O_{1n}),\6A_{\pi_1}(\2O_{2n}),\Om_1)
\eeqa
where $\2O_{1n}\subset\subset \2O_{2n}$ are bounded double cones
such that $\2O_{jn}$ tends to $S_j$ for $n\to\infty$.
As in the $1+1$-dimensional case we pass now to the two-fold
tensor product of the theory with itself. Denote by
$\Psi_{\Lam_n\otimes\Lam_n}$ the universal localizing map
with respect to the inclusion $\Lam_n\otimes\Lam_n$.
Since the operators
\beqa
\te_n:=\Psi_{\Lam_n\otimes\Lam_n}(\11\otimes u_F)
\eeqa
are localized in a bounded region, we may define the following
automorphisms of $C^*(\6A)$:
\beqa
\be_n:=(\pi_1\otimes\pi_1)^{-1}\circ\be_n\circ(\pi_1\otimes\pi_1) \ \ .
\eeqa
We obtain a sequence of states $\{\om_n,n\in\7N\}$ where $\om_n$
is given by:
\beqa
\om_n:=\om_1\otimes\om_2\circ\be_n|_{C^*(\6A)\otimes\11} \ \ .
\eeqa
For large $n$ the states $\om_n$ have {\em almost} the correct interpolation
property, namely for each pair of local
observables $a,b$ where $a$ is localized $S_2'$ and $b$ is localized in $S_1$,
there exists a sufficiently large $N$ such that
\beqa
\om_n(a)=\om_1(a) \ \ \mbox{ and } \ \ \om_n(b)=\om_2(b)
\eeqa
for each $n>N$.
Note that each state $\om_n$ fulfills the
Borchers criterion since $\om_n$ belongs to the vacuum sector $[\om_1]$.
In order to obtain generalized kink states, we propose to investigate
weak*-limit points of the sequence $\{\om_n,n\in\7N\}$.
Note that each weak*-limit $\om_\iota$ point
of the sequence $\{\om_n,n\in\7N\}$ fulfills the interpolation
condition (\ref{intergen}).
It remains to be proven that the weak*-limit points are locally normal.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\subsubsection*{{\it Acknowledgment:}}
I am grateful to Prof. K. Fredenhagen for
supporting this investigation with many ideas.
I am also grateful to Dr. K.H. Rehren for many hints and discussion.
This investigation is financially supported by the Deutsche
Forschungsgemeinschaft who is also gratefully acknowledged.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\begin{thebibliography}{References}
\bibitem{Ark2} Araki, H.:\\
Soliton Sectors of the XY-Model.
\\
Preprint from
Research Institute for Mathematical Sciences, Kyoto University, Japan 1995.
\bibitem{ArkHa} Araki, H. and Haag, R.:
Collision Cross Sections in Terms of
Local Observables. \\
Commun. Math. Phys. {\bf 4}, 77-91, (1967)
\bibitem{Bor0} Borchers, H.-J.:
Energy and Momentum as Observables in
Quantum Filed Theory. \\
Commun. Math. Phys. {\bf 2}, 49, (1966)
\bibitem{Bor1} Borchers, H.-J.:
{CPT-Theorem in the Theory of Local Observables.} \\
Commun. Math. Phys. {\bf 143}, 315-332, (1992)
\bibitem{Bor2} Borchers, H.-J.: {On the Converse of the
Reeh-Schlieder Theorem.} \\
Commun. Math. Phys. {\bf 10}, 269-273, (1968)
\bibitem{Bor3} Borchers, H.-J.: Commun. Math. Phys. {\bf 4}, 315-323, (1967)
\bibitem{BrRob1} Bratteli, O. and Robinson, D.:
{Operator Algebras and Quantum Statistical Mechanics I.} \\
Berlin, Heidelberg, New York: Springer 1979
\bibitem{Bu1} Buchholz, D.:
{Product States for Local Algebras.} \\
Commun. Math. Phys. {\bf 36}, 287-304, (1974)
\bibitem{BuDLo}
Buchholz, D., Doplicher, S. and Longo, R.:
On Noether's Theorem in Quantum Field Theory. \\
Ann. Phys. {\bf 170:1}, (1986)
\bibitem{BuFre}
Buchholz, D. and Fredenhagen K.:
Locality and the Structure of Particle States. \\
Commun. Math. Phys. {\bf 84}, 1-54, (1982)
\bibitem{Col}
Coleman, S.:
Aspects of Symmetry. \\ Cambridge University Press 1985
\bibitem{AntFre} D'Antoni, C. and Fredenhagen, K.:
Charges in Spacelike Cones. \\
Commun. Math. Phys. {\bf 94}, 537-544 (1984)
\bibitem{AntLo} D'Antoni, C. and Longo, R.: Interpolation by Type I Factors
and the Flip Automorphism, Jour. Func. Anal. {\bf 51}, 361-371 (1983)
\bibitem{DHRI}
Doplicher, S., Haag, R. and Roberts, J.E.:
Fields, Observables and Gauge Transformations I. \\
Commun. Math. Phys. {\bf 13}, 1-23, (1969)
\bibitem{DHRII}
Doplicher, S., Haag, R. and Roberts, J.E.:
Fields, Observables and Gauge Transformations II. \\
Commun. Math. Phys. {\bf 15}, 173-200, (1969)
\bibitem{DHRIII}
Doplicher, S., Haag, R. and Roberts, J.E.: {Local Observables and
Particle Statistics I.}\\
Commun. Math. Phys. {\bf 23}, 199-230, (1971)
\bibitem{DHRIIII}
Doplicher, S., Haag, R. and Roberts, J.E.: {Local Observables and
Particle Statistics II.}\\
Commun. Math. Phys. {\bf 35}, 49-58, (1971)
\bibitem{DLo}
Doplicher, S. and Longo R.:
Standard Split Inclusions of von Neumann Algebras. \\
Invent. math. {\bf 75}, 493-536, (1984)
\bibitem{Drie}
Driessler, W.:
On The Type of Local Algebras in Quantum Field Theory. \\
Commun.Math.Phys. {\bf 53}, 295, (1977)
\bibitem{Fre1}
Fredenhagen, K.:
Generalization of the Theory of Superselection Sectors. \\
Published in Kastler, D.: \\
The Algebraic Theory of Superselection Sectors ...
World Scientific 1989
\bibitem{Fre2}
Fredenhagen, K.: {Superselection Sectors in Low Dimensional
Quantum Field Theory.}\\
J. Geom. Phys. {\bf 11} (1993) 337-348
\bibitem{Fre3}
Fredenhagen, K.: {On the Existence of Antiparticles.}\\
Commun. Math. Phys. {\bf 79}, 141-151, (1981)
\bibitem{Fre4}
Fredenhagen, K.: {A Remark on the Cluster Theorem.} \\
Commun. Math. Phys. {\bf 97}, 461, (1985)
\bibitem{FreReSchr1}
Fredenhagen, K., Rehren, K.H. and Schroer, B.:
{Superselection Sectors with Braid Group Statistics and
Exchange Algebras I.} \\
Commun. Math. Phys. {\bf 125}, 201, (1989)
\bibitem{FreReSchr2}
Fredenhagen, K., Rehren, K.H. and Schroer, B.:
{Superselection Sectors with Braid Group Statistics and
Exchange Algebras II.}\\
Rev. Math. Phys. Special Issue, 111-154, (1992)
\bibitem{Froh1}
Fr\"ohlich, J.: {New Superselection Sectors (Soliton States)
in Two Dimensional Bose Quantum Field Models.}\\
Commun. Math. Phys. {\bf 47}, 269-310, (1976)
\bibitem{Froh3}
Fr\"ohlich, J.: Quantum Theory of Nonlinear Invariant Wave (Field) Equations.
\\
Erice, Sicily, Summer 1977
\bibitem{FrohMar1}
Fr\"ohlich, J. and Marchetti, P.A.:
Soliton Quantization in Lattice Field Theories.\\
Commun. Math. Phys. {\bf 112}, 343-383, (1987)
\bibitem{FrohMar2}
Fr\"ohlich, J. and Marchetti, P.A.:
Superselection Sectors in Quantum Field Theory Models:
Kinks in $\phi^4_2$ and Charged States in Lattice QED. \\
Published in Kastler, D.: \\
{The Algebraic Theory of Superselection Sectors ...}
World Scientific 1989
\bibitem{FrohSei}
Fr\"ohlich, J. and Seiler, E.: The Massive Thirring-Schwinger Model as the
Massive Sine-Gordon Equation. \\
Helv. Phys. Acta {\bf 49}, 889, (1976)
\bibitem{Gaw78}
Gawedzki, K.: Existence of Three Phases for a $P(\phi)_2$ Model of
Quantum Fields. \\
Commun. Math. Phys. {\bf 59}, 117-142, (1978)
\bibitem{GlJa1}
Glimm, J. and Jaffe, A.:
Collected Papers. Vol. 1 and Vol.2: \\
Quantum Field Therory and Statistical Mechanics.
Expositions. \\
Boston, USA: Birkh\"auser (1985)
\bibitem{GlJa2}
Glimm, J. and Jaffe, A.:
A $\lam\phi^4$ Quantum Field Theory without Cutoffs I. \\
Phys. Rev. {\bf 176}, 1945-1951, (1968)
Glimm, J. and Jaffe, A.:
A $\lam\phi^4$ Quantum Field Theory without Cutoffs II. \\
Ann. of Math. {\bf 91}, 362-401, (1970)
Glimm, J. and Jaffe, A.:
A $\lam\phi^4$ Quantum Field Theory without Cutoffs III. \\
Acta Math. {\bf 125}, 204-267, (1970)
Glimm, J. and Jaffe, A.:
A $\lam\phi^4$ Quantum Field Theory without Cutoffs IV. \\
J. Math. Phys. {\bf 13}, 1568-1584, (1972)
\bibitem{GlJa3}
Glimm, J. and Jaffe, A.:
The Yukawa-2 Quantum Field Theory without Cutoffs. \\
J. Funct. Anal. {\bf 7}, 323-357, (1971)
\bibitem{GlJa4}
Glimm, J. and Jaffe, A.: Quantum Physics, a Functional
Integral Point of View. \\
Springer, New York, Berlin, Heidelberg (1987)
\bibitem{GlJaSp1}
Glimm, J., Jaffe, A. and Spencer T.:
Phase Transitions for $\phi^4_2$ Quantum Fields. \\
Commun. Math. Phys. {\bf 45}, 203-216, (1975)
\bibitem{GlJaSp2}
Glimm, J., Jaffe, A. and Spencer T.:
The Wightman Axioms and Particle Structure in the
$P(\phi)_2$ Quantum Field Model. \\
Ann. of Math. {\bf 100}, 585-632, (1974)
\bibitem{Ha}
Haag, R.: {Local Quantum Physics.} \\
Berlin, Heidelberg, New York: Springer 1992
\bibitem{Hag}
Haga, Y.: {Crossed Products of Von Neumann Algebras by Compact Groups.} \\
T\^ohoku Math. Journ. {\bf 28}, 511-522, (1976)
\bibitem{Imb81}
Imbrie, J.Z.: Phase Diagrams and Cluster Expansions for Low Temperature
$P(\phi)_2$ Models, I and II. \\
Commun. Math. Phys. {\bf 59}, 261-304 and 305-343, (1981)
\bibitem{JanWeit0}
Janowsky, S.A. and Weitsman, J.:
The Phase Structure of the Two-Dimensional $N=2$
Wess-Zumino Model. \\
Commun. Math. Phys. {\bf 142}, 25-66, (1991)
\bibitem{JanWeit1}
Janowsky, S.A. and Weitsman, J.:
A Vanishing Theorem for Supersymmetric Quantum Field Theory
and Finite Size Effects in Multiphase Cluster Expansions. \\
Commun. Math. Phys. {\bf 143}, 85-97, (1991)
\bibitem{JaLes}
Jaffe, A. and Lesniewski, A.:
A Priori Estimates for $N=2$ Wess-Zumino Models
on a Cylinder. \\
Commun. Math. Phys. {\bf 114}, 553-575, (1988)
\bibitem{JaLesWeit1}
Jaffe, A., Lesniewski, A. and Weitzman, J.:
Index of Families of Dirac Operators on Loop Space. \\
Commun. Math. Phys. {\bf 112}, 75-88, (1987)
\bibitem{JaLesWeit2}
Jaffe, A., Lesniewski, A. and Weitzman, J.:
The Two-Dimensional $N=2$ Wess-Zumino Model on a Cylinder. \\
Commun. Math. Phys. {\bf 114}, 147-165, (1988)
\bibitem{Kun}
Kunhardt, W.:
On the Universal Algebra of Local Translation Operators in
Algebraic Quantum Field Theory. (in German).\\
Preprint - Kunhardt, W. (1994)
\bibitem{Mar1}
Marchetti, P.A.:
Particle Structure Analysis of Soliton Sectors in Massive
Lattice Field Theories. \\
Commun. Math. Phys. {\bf 117}, 501-528, (1988)
\bibitem{Mue1}
M\"uger, M.: Quantum Double Actions on Operator Algebras and
Orbifold Quantum Field Theories.\\
DESY-96-117, June 1996. To appear in Commun. Math. Phys.
\bibitem{Mue2}
M\"uger, M.: Superselection Structure of Massive Quantum Field Theories
in $1+1$ Dimensions.
To be published.
\bibitem{Roo}
Roos, H.: Independence of Local Algebras in Quantum Field Theory.\\
Commun. Math. Phys. {\bf 16}, 238-246, (1970)
\bibitem{Sak}
Sakai, S.: {$C^*$- Algebras and $W^*$- Algebras.}\\
Berlin, Heidelberg, New York: Springer 1971
\bibitem{Schl2}
Schlingemann, D.: On the Algebraic Theory of Soliton and Anti-Soliton
Sectors.\\
Rev. Math. Phys. {\bf 8}, No 2, 301-326, (1996)
\bibitem{Schl4}
Schlingemann, D.:
On the Existence of Kink (Soliton) States.\\
Rev. Math. Phys. {\bf 8}, No 8, 1187-1203, (1996)
\bibitem{Schl5}
Schlingemann, D.: Kink States in $P(\phi)_2$-Models.\\
DESY 96-051, Apr. 1996. 37pp.
\bibitem{Schl6}
Schlingemann, D.: On the Algebraic Theory of Kink Sectors:
Application to Quantum Field Theory Models and
Collision Theory.\\
PhD thesis,DESY 96-228, Oct. 1996. 163pp.
\bibitem{Schra0}
Schrader, R.: A Remark on Yukawa Plus Boson Self-Interaction in Two Space-Time
Dimensions. \\
Commun. Math. Phys. {\bf 21}, 164-170, (1971)
\bibitem{Schra1}
Schrader, R.: A Yukawa Quantum Field Theory in Two Space-Time Dimensions
without Cutoffs.\\
Ann. Phys. {\bf 70}, 412-457, (1972)
\bibitem{Sum1}
Summers, S.J.:
Normal Product States for Fermions and Twisted Duality
for CCR and CAR Type Algebras with
Application to Yukawa-2 Quantum Field Model. \\
Commun. Math. Phys. {\bf 86}, 111-141, (1982)
\bibitem{Sum2}
Summers, S.J.: On the Phase Diagram of a $P(\phi)_2$ Quantum Field Model.\\
Ann. Inst. Henri Poincar\'e {\bf 34}, 173-229 (1981).
\end{thebibliography}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\end{document}