text:
# Cosmological Time in (2+1)-Gravity

## 1 Introduction.

We shall be mainly concerned with maximal globally hyperbolic, matter-free spacetimes $`M`$ of topological type $`S\times `$, where $`S`$ is a compact closed oriented surface of genus $`g>1`$. The (2+1)-dimensional Einstein equation with vanishing cosmological constant actually implies that $`M`$ is (Riemann) flat.

After \[D-J-’t H\] and \[W\], a large amount of literature has grown up about this $`(2+1)`$-gravity topic, regarded as a useful toy-model for the higher dimensional case. Two main kinds of description have been experimented. A “cosmological” approach points to characterize the spacetimes in terms of some distinguished global time; for instance the constant mean curvature CMC time has been widely studied \[A-M-T\], \[Mo\]. A “geometric” time-free approach eventually identifies each flat spacetime by means of its $`ISO(2,1)`$-valued holonomy \[W\], \[Me\]. With the exception of the case with toric space ($`g=1`$), there is not a clear correspondence between the results obtained in these two approaches.

The aim of this paper is to show that this gap can be filled by using the canonical Cosmological Time CT, that is “the length of time that the events of $`M`$ have been in existence” (see \[A-G-H\]). It turns out that this is a global time which reveals the fundamental properties of spacetime. It is canonically defined by means of the very basic spacetime’s structures: its casual structure and the Lorentz distance. The cosmological time $`\tau `$ is invariant under diffeomorphisms, therefore the $`\tau =a`$ level surfaces $`S_a`$ provide a gauge-invariant description of space evolution in $`M`$. Both the intrinsic and extrinsic geometry of the surfaces $`S_a`$, as well as their past/future asymptotic states, are intrinsic features of spacetime. The asymptotic states are defined by the evolution of the observables associated to the length of closed geodesic curves on the surfaces $`S_a`$. Remarkably, they recover and decouple the linear and the translational parts of the holonomy. The study of the asymptotic states also leads to understand the initial singularity (we will always assume that the space is future expanding) and the way how the classical geometry degenerates, but does not completely disappear. The initial singularity can be interpreted as the isometric action of the fundamental group of $`S`$ on a suitable “real tree”. Differently to the case of the CMC time (for instance), the level surfaces $`S_a`$ of the CT are in general only $`C^1`$-embedded into the spacetime $`M`$. This lack of smoothness takes place on a “geodesic lamination” on $`S_a`$ and is a observable large scale manifestation of the intrinsic geometry of the initial singularity. Thus the initial singularity admits two complementary descriptions: one, in terms of real trees and, the second, in terms of geodesic laminations. The existence of a duality relation between real trees and laminations was already known in the context of Thurston theory of the boundary of the Teichmüller space. It is remarkable that Einstein theory of (2+1)-gravity sheds new light on this subject and puts duality in concrete form.

In \[B-G2\] we have also used the cosmological time in order to study certain interesting families of $`(2+1)`$-spacetimes coupled to particles.

Our main purpose consists of elucidating the central role of the cosmological time and its asymptotic states in the description of spacetimes. The cosmological time perspective provides a new interpretation of several facts spread in the literature which are related to Thurston work. More precisely, the present article is based on, and could be considered a complement of, Mess’s fundamental paper \[Me\].

## 2 The Cosmological Time Function.

For the basic notions of Lorentzian geometry and causality we refer for instance to \[B-E\], \[H-E\]. Let $`N`$ be any time oriented Lorentzian manifold of dimension $`n+1`$. The cosmological time function, $`\tau :N(0,\mathrm{}]`$, is defined as follows. Let $`C^{}(q)`$ be the set of past-directed causal curves in $`N`$ that start at $`qN`$, then

$$\tau (q)=\mathrm{sup}\{L(c):cC^{}(q)\}$$

where $`L(c)`$ denotes the Lorentzian length of the curve $`c`$:

$$L(c)=_c(\mathrm{proper}\mathrm{time}).$$

$`\tau (q)`$ can be interpreted as the length of time the event $`q`$ has been in existence in $`N`$. For example, if $`N`$ is the standard flat Minkowski space $`𝕄^{n+1}`$, $`\tau `$ is the constant $`\mathrm{}`$-valued function, so in this case it is not very interesting. In \[A-G-H\] (see also \[W-Y\]) one studies the properties of a manifold $`N`$ with regular cosmological time function. Recall that $`\tau `$ is regular if:

1) $`\tau (q)`$ is finite valued for every $`qN`$;

2) $`\tau 0`$ along every past directed inextensible causal curve.

The existence of a regular cosmological time function has strong consequences on the structure of $`N`$ and of the constant-$`\tau `$ surfaces \[A-G-H\]. In particular when $`\tau `$ is regular, $`\tau :N(0,\mathrm{}[`$ is a continuous function, which is twice differentiable almost everywhere, giving a global time on $`N`$ denoted by CT. Each $`\tau `$ level surface is a future Cauchy surface, so that $`N`$ is globally hyperbolic. For each $`qN`$ there exists a future-directed time-like unit speed geodesic ray $`\gamma _q:(0,\tau (q)]N`$ such that:

$$\gamma _q(\tau (q))=q,\tau (\gamma _q(t))=t.$$

The union of the past asymptotic end-points of these rays can be regarded as the initial singularity of $`N`$.

The cosmological time function is not related to any specific choice of coordinates in $`N`$; it is “gauge-invariant” and so it represents an intrinsic feature of spacetime. Thus, when the cosmological time is regular, the $`\tau `$-constant level surfaces and their properties have a direct physical meaning as they are observables.

We present now two basic examples of spacetime with regular cosmological time, which shall be important throughout all the paper. To fix the notations, the standard Minkowski space $`𝕄^{2+1}`$ is endowed with coordinates $`x=(x^1,x^2,x^3)`$, so that the metric is given by $`ds^2=(dx^1)^2+(dx^2)^2(dx^3)^2`$. $`𝕄^{2+1}`$ is oriented and time-oriented in the usual way.

Example 1. Consider the chronological future of the origin $`0𝕄^{2+1}`$

$$I^+(0)=\{x𝕄^{2+1}:(x^1)^2+(x^2)^2(x^3)^2<0,x^3>0\}.$$

Its cosmological time, $`\tau :I^+(0)(0,\mathrm{})`$, is a smooth submersion; the constant-time $`\{\tau =a\}`$ surfaces are the (upper) hyperboloids

$$𝕀(a)=\{x𝕄^{2+1}:(x^1)^2+(x^2)^2(x^3)^2=a^2,x^3>0\}.$$

Hence $`𝕀(a)`$ is a complete space of constant Gaussian curvature equal to $`1/a^2`$, and of constant extrinsic mean curvature $`1/a`$. The Lorentzian length of the time-like geodesic arc connecting any $`pI^+(0)`$ with $`0`$ equals $`\tau (p)`$; $`0`$ is the initial singularity. Note that $`𝕀(a)`$ can be obtained from $`𝕀(1)`$ by means of a dilatation in $`𝕄^{2+1}`$ with constant factor $`a`$; shortly we write $`𝕀(a)=a𝕀(1)`$. We shall denote by $`SO(2,1)`$ the group of oriented Lorentz transformations acting on $`𝕄^{2+1}`$ and by $`ISO(2,1)`$ the Poincaré group. $`SO^+(2,1)`$ denotes the subgroup of $`SO(2,1)`$ transformations which keep $`I^+(0)`$ and each $`𝕀(a)`$ invariant. $`ISO^+(2,1)`$ is the corresponding subgroup of $`ISO(2,1)`$.

Example 2. Let us denote by $`I^+(1,3)`$ the chronological future in $`𝕄^{2+1}`$ of the line $`\{x^1=x^3=0\}`$

$$I^+(1,3)=\{x𝕄^{2+1}:(x^1)^2(x^3)^2<0,x^3>0\}.$$

The Lorentzian length of the time-like geodesic arc connecting any $`p=(x^1,x^2,x^3)I^+(1,3)`$ with $`q=(0,x^2,0)`$ equals the cosmological time $`\tau (p)`$. The level surfaces are

$$𝕀(1,3,a)=\{x𝕄^{2+1}:(x^1)^2(x^3)^2=a^2,x^3>0\}$$

and have constant extrinsic mean curvature equal to $`(1/2a)`$. Each surface $`𝕀(1,3,a)`$ is isometric to the flat plane $`^2`$. To make this manifest, it is useful to consider the following change of coordinates. Let $`\mathrm{\Pi }^{2+1}=\{(u,y,\tau )^{2+1}:\tau >0\}`$ be endowed with the metric $`ds^2=\tau ^2du^2+dy^2d\tau ^2`$. Then, $`x^1=\tau sh(u),x^2=y,x^3=\tau ch(u)`$, is an isometry between $`\mathrm{\Pi }^{2+1}`$ and $`I^+(1,3)`$. The level set $`\{\tau =a\}`$ of $`\mathrm{\Pi }^{2+1}`$ goes isometrically onto $`𝕀(1,3,a)`$, so this is intrinsically flat. Note that the group of oriented isometries of $`\mathrm{\Pi }^{2+1}`$ is generated by the translations parallel to the planes $`\{\tau =a\}`$, and the rotation of angle $`\pi `$ of the $`(u,y)`$ coordinates.

We are going to show that any maximal globally hyperbolic, matter-free $`(2+1)`$-spacetime $`M`$, with compact space $`S`$, actually has regular cosmological time, and its initial singularity can be accurately described.

## 3 Flat (2+1)-spacetimes

A flat spacetime is, by definition, locally isometric to the Minkowski space $`𝕄^{2+1}`$. We assume that our maximal hyperbolic flat spacetimes are time-oriented and future expanding, and that these orientations locally agree with the usual ones on $`𝕄^{2+1}`$. The spacetime structures on $`S\times `$ are regarded up to oriented isometry homotopic to the identity.

### 3.1 Minkowskian suspensions

We introduce here the simplest $`(2+1)`$ spacetimes with compact space $`S`$ of genus $`g>1`$.

Recall that the upper hyperboloid $`𝕀(1)𝕄^{2+1}`$, mentioned in the previous section, is a classical model for the hyperbolic plane $`^2`$ (see \[B-P\] for this and other models); the Poincaré disk is another model which can be obtained from $`𝕀(1)`$ by means of the stereographic projection shown in figure 1. We shall use the Poincaré model in section 4.

Take any hyperbolic surface $`F=^2/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ homeomorphic to $`S`$. $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is a subgroup of $`SO^+(2,1)`$ which acts freely and properly discontinuously on $`^2𝕀(1)`$. $`𝕀(1)`$ can be identified with the universal covering of $`S`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ with the fundamental group $`\pi _1(S)`$. $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ can be thought also as a group of isometries of the spacetime $`I^+(0)`$ and $`M(F)=I^+(0)/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is the required spacetime with compact space homeomorphic to $`S`$. We call it the Minkowskian suspension of $`F`$. This construction is well-known; sometimes $`M(F)`$ is also called the Lorentzian cone over $`F`$ or the Löbell spacetime based on $`F`$. $`I^+(0)`$ can be regarded as the universal covering of $`M(F)`$. Let us now consider the cosmological time of $`M(F)`$. The CT of $`I^+(0)`$ naturally induces the CT of $`M(F)`$. Indeed, each level surface $`S_a`$ of $`M(F)`$ has $`𝕀(a)`$ as universal covering; moreover, $`S_1=F`$ and $`S_a=aF`$. In this case, the CT coincides with the CMC time and each level surface $`S_a`$ smoothly embeds into $`M(F)`$. The initial singularity “trivially” consists of one point.

Notation. Let $`Y`$ be any subset of $`𝕀(1)`$, we shall denote by $`\widehat{Y}`$ its “suspension” in $`I^+(0)`$ which is defined by $`\widehat{Y}=_{a(0,\mathrm{}[}aY`$.

### 3.2  (2+1) spacetimes as deformed Minkowskian suspensions

It has been shown in \[Me\] that any maximal globally hyperbolic, future expanding flat spacetime $`M`$ with compact space homeomorphic to $`S`$, as above, can be regarded as a “deformation” of some Minkowskian suspension (see also \[W\]). In fact $`M`$ is of the form $`M=U(M)/\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$, where:

1) The domain $`U(M)`$ of $`𝕄^{2+1}`$ is a convex set

$$U(M)=\{x𝕄^{2+1};x^3>f(x)\}$$

where $`f:\{x^3=0\}[0,\mathrm{}[`$ is a convex function.

2) $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$ is a subgroup of $`ISO^+(2,1)`$ (also called the holonomy group of $`M`$) acting freely and properly discontinuously on $`U(M)`$. Hence $`U(M)`$ is the universal covering of $`M`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$ is isomorphic to $`\pi _1(M)\pi _1(S)`$.

3) The “linear part” $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$ is a subgroup of $`SO^+(2,1)`$ which is isomorphic to $`\pi _1(S)`$ and acts freely and properly discontinuously on $`𝕀(1)^2`$. This is a non trivial fact which follows from a result of Goldman \[Go\]. Each element $`\gamma ^{}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$ is of the form $`\gamma ^{}=\gamma +t(\gamma )`$, where $`\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and $`t(\gamma )^3`$ is a translation. $`t:\mathrm{\Gamma }^3`$ is a cocycle representing an element of $`H^1(\mathrm{\Gamma },^3)`$. If $`t^{}=\lambda t`$, $`\lambda ^{}`$, then $`U(M^{})`$ differs from $`U(M)`$ by : $`U(M)=\lambda ^1U(M^{})`$. When $`\lambda `$ is “small”, $`U(M^{})`$ is “close” to $`I^+(0)`$ ($`M^{}`$ is “close” to $`M(F)`$, $`F=^2/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$).

Note that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$, whence $`U(M)`$ and $`t`$, are defined up to inner automorphism of $`ISO^+(2,1)`$.

### 3.3 Spacetimes of simplicial type

In this section, we shall consider the flat spacetimes that can be obtained from Minkowskian suspensions by means of particular deformations. These spacetimes will be called of simplicial type, the origin of this name is related to the material presented in section 4. Spacetimes of simplicial type are important because they are “dense” in the set of all spacetimes; the shape of any spacetime and of its CT can be arbitrarily well approximated by some spacetime of simplicial type (see proposition 4.23). So, it is enough to understand these examples in order to have a rather complete qualitative picture of our general presentation. Moreover, all the statements of this paper can easily be checked in a spacetime of simplicial type.

Start with a Minkowskian suspension $`M(F)`$. Assume that a weighted multi-curve $``$ on $`F`$ is given. $``$ is the union of a finite number of disjoint simple closed geodesics on $`F`$, each one endowed with a strictly positive real weight. $``$ governs a specific deformation of $`M(F)`$ producing a required flat spacetime denoted by $`M(F,)`$. A particular spacetime deformation is associated to each component of $``$ and can be obtained by means of an appropriate surgery operation in Minkowski space. As the deformations associated to the components of $``$ act locally and independently from each other, we may assume for simplicity that $``$ just consists of one component $`c`$, with weight $`r`$ and length $`s`$.

Elementary deformation. In order to illustrate the deformation associated with one geodesic $`c`$ with weight $`r`$, we shall now introduce a simple hyperbolic surface $`F_0`$ which can be understood as a local model for the general surface $`S`$. Let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_0`$ be an infinite cyclic subgroup of $`SO^+(2,1)`$ generated by an element $`g_0`$ acting on $`𝕀(1)`$ as an isometry of hyperbolic type (see for instance \[B-P\] for the classification of the isometries of $`^2`$). We can assume that $`g_0`$ is a Lorentz transformation corresponding to a boost along the $`x^1`$-direction, so that the $`g_0`$-invariant geodesic line on $`𝕀(1)`$ is the line $`\sigma _0=𝕀(1)\{x^2=0\}`$. The hyperbolic surface $`F_0=𝕀(1)/\mathrm{\Gamma }_0`$ is homeomorphic to the non-compact annulus $`S^1\times `$ and its area is not finite. The image in $`F_0`$ of the axis of $`g_0`$ is a simple closed geodesic $`c`$ of a certain length $`s`$; give it the positive weight $`r`$. So we dispose of a one-component weighted multi-curve $`_0`$ on $`F_0`$, as illustrated in figure 2.

The suspension $`M(F_0)=I^+(0)/\mathrm{\Gamma }_0`$ is a flat spacetime. Let us now construct $`M_0=M(F_0,_0)`$ which represents the deformation of $`M(F_0)`$ associated to the weighted multi-curve $`_0`$. We shall use the spacetimes $`I^+(0)`$, $`I^+(1,3)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Pi }^{2+1}`$ that we have introduced in section 2. The universal covering $`U(M_0)`$ of $`M_0`$ will be the union of three domains of $`𝕄^{2+1}`$: $`U(M_0)=ABC`$, where $`A=I^+(0)\{x^20\}`$, $`B=I^+(1,3)\{0x^2r\}`$, $`C=C^{}+r(0,1,0)`$ and $`C^{}=I^+(0)\{x^20\}`$. In our notations, $`C^{}+r(0,1,0)`$ denotes the set of points in $`𝕄^{2+1}`$ which can be obtained from $`C^{}`$ by means of a translation of length $`r`$ along the unit vector $`(0,1,0)`$. It is important to note that the cosmological times of the different pieces $`A`$, $`B`$ and $`C`$ fit well together; in fact, the CT level surfaces $`\stackrel{~}{S}_a`$ of $`U(M_0)`$ are

$$\stackrel{~}{S}_a=(a𝕀(1)\{x^2<0\})(𝕀(1,3,a)\{0x^2r\})(a𝕀(1)\{x^2>0\}+r(0,1,0)).$$

As shown in figure 3, each surface $`\stackrel{~}{S}_a𝕄^{2+1}`$ can be obtained by cutting the hyperboloid $`𝕀(a)`$ along $`a\sigma _0`$ (which is the intersection of $`𝕀(a)`$ with the $`\{x^2=0\}`$-plane) and then by inserting a band of $`𝕀(1,3,a)`$ of depth $`r`$.

The surfaces $`\stackrel{~}{S}_a`$ are only $`C^1`$-embedded into $`U(M_0)`$. The initial singularity of $`U(M_0)`$ is the segment $`J_0=\{x^1=x^3=\mathrm{0\hspace{0.17em}\; 0}x^2r\}`$.

###### Remark 3.1

We have the following characterization of $`J_0`$. The interior points of this segment make the subset of $`U(M_0)`$ (boundary of the convex set $`U(M_0)`$) of the points with exactly two null supporting planes; the end-points make the subset of $`U(M)`$ with more than two null supporting planes. Recall that a supporting plane at $`xU(M_0)`$ is a plane $`P`$ such that $`xP`$ and $`U(M_0)P=\mathrm{}`$. $`P`$ is null if it contains some null-lines.

The covering $`U(M_0)𝕄^{2+1}`$ is flat. To get $`M_0`$, we only need to specify the action of $`\pi _1=\pi _1(F_0)`$ on $`U(M_0)`$.

Action of the fundamental group. $`\pi _1`$ acts on $`A`$ by the restriction of the action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_0`$ on $`𝕀(1)`$. The domain $`B`$ corresponds (via the isometry established in section 2) to $`B^{}=\{(u,y,\tau )\mathrm{\Pi }^{2+1};0yr\}`$, so that the action of $`\pi _1`$ on $`B`$ transported on $`B^{}`$ is just given by the translation $`(u,y,\tau )(u+s,y,\tau )`$. Finally, if $`\alpha `$ is the translation $`(x^1,x^2,x^3)(x^1,x^2+r,x^3)`$ on $`𝕄^{2+1}`$, then the action of $`\pi _1`$ on $`C`$ is just the conjugation of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_0`$ by $`\alpha `$.

The CT of the covering $`U(M_0)`$ passes to the quotient $`M_0=U(M_0)/\pi _1`$; each level surface $`S_a`$ is only $`C^1`$-embedded into $`M_0`$, so that it is endowed with an induced $`C^1`$-Riemannian metric. This allows anyway to define the length of curves traced on the surface $`S_a`$ and the derived length-space distance. Let $`𝒜=A/\pi _1`$, $`=B/\pi _1`$ and $`𝒞=C/\pi _1`$. Then, $`S_a`$ is a flat annulus of depth $`r`$ and parallel geodesic boundary components of length $`as`$; $`S_a(𝒜𝒞)`$ can be isometrically embedded into $`aF_0`$, and has geodesic boundary curves of length $`as`$. As shown in figure 4, $`S_a`$ can be obtained by cutting $`F_0`$ along $`c`$ and by inserting a annulus of depth $`r`$.

###### Remark 3.2

If $`g`$ is an element of $`ISO^+(2,1)`$ acting on $`X𝕄^{2+1}`$ as $`g(X)=QX+w`$, the transformed domain $`g(U(M_0))=Q(ABC)+w`$ is, of course, an isometric copy of the universal covering in $`𝕄^{2+1}`$. The curve $`\sigma =Q(\sigma _0)`$ is a geodesic line of $`𝕀(1)`$; $`\sigma `$ is the intersection of $`𝕀(1)`$ with a suitable hyperplane passing at the origin of $`𝕄^{2+1}`$. Let us denote by $`\widehat{\sigma }`$ the suspension of $`\sigma `$; then

$$Q(B)=_{\lambda [0,r]}\{\widehat{\sigma }+\lambda v\}$$

where $`v`$ is the unitary (in the Minkowski norm) vector tangent to $`𝕀(1)`$, normal to $`\sigma `$, and pointing towards $`Q(C^{})`$. We also denote $`Q(B)=B(\sigma ,v,r)`$. The shape of the CT level surfaces in $`g(U(M_0))`$ is shown in figure 5. The initial singularity of $`g(U(M_0))`$ is given by the space-like segment $`J=Q(J_0)+w`$.

Simplicial type deformation. $`M_0`$ represents a local model of the deformation $`M=M(F,)`$ we are interested in. In fact, there exists a neighborhood $`𝒲`$ of $``$ in $`M_0`$ which embeds isometrically into $`M`$, respecting the cosmological time. Let us denote by $`𝒲^{}`$ the image of $`𝒲`$ in $`M`$. Then $`M𝒲^{}`$ embeds isometrically into the Minkowskian suspension $`M(F)`$, respecting again the cosmological time.

We describe now the universal covering $`U(M)𝕄^{2+1}`$ and a cocycle $`t:\mathrm{\Gamma }^3`$ which leads to $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}ISO^+(2,1)`$ such that $`M=U(M)/\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$. The inverse image of $`cF=𝕀(1)/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ into the covering $`𝕀(1)`$ is an infinite and locally finite set $`\stackrel{~}{}`$ of disjoint complete geodesic lines. Given any geodesic $`\sigma _0\stackrel{~}{}`$, then $`\stackrel{~}{}=\{\sigma =\gamma (\sigma _0);\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }\}`$. Let $`\widehat{}I^+(0)`$ be the suspension of the geodesic lines of $`\stackrel{~}{}`$. The set $`𝕀(1)\stackrel{~}{}`$ is the union of an infinite number of connected components. Denote by $`R`$ any such a component, and by $`\widehat{R}`$ its suspension, which is a component of $`I^+(0)\widehat{}`$. Every $`R`$ covers a component $`F_R`$ of $`F`$; more precisely, if $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_R`$ is the subgroup of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ which keeps $`R`$ invariant, then $`F_R=R/\mathrm{\Gamma }_R`$.

Now, fix one base component $`R_0`$ and take in it one base point $`x_0`$. For each $`\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }`$, let $`\gamma (x_0)`$ be the point in $`𝕀(1)`$ which is defined by the action of $`\gamma `$ on $`x_0`$. The geodesic arc in $`𝕀(1)`$ connecting $`x_0`$ with $`\gamma (x_0)`$ crosses a finite number of lines $`\{\sigma _i\}`$ belonging to $`\stackrel{~}{}`$. At each crossing consider the unitary (in the norm of $`𝕄^{2+1}`$) vector $`v_i`$ tangent to $`𝕀(1)`$ and normal to $`\sigma _i`$, pointing far from $`x_0`$. Then, the required cocycle $`t(\gamma )^3`$ is given by

$$t(\gamma )=\underset{i}{}rv_i.$$

Note that if $`\gamma _1(x_0)`$ and $`\gamma _2(x_0)`$ belong to the same component $`R`$, then $`t(\gamma _1)=t(\gamma _2)`$, whence also $`t(R)=t(\gamma )`$ for any $`\gamma `$ such that $`\gamma (x_0)R`$, is well defined. $`U(M)`$ is tiled by tiles of two types: (i) “$`\widehat{R}+w`$”, (ii) “$`B(\sigma ,v,r)+w`$”, for some translation vector $`w^3`$. More precisely, the tiles of the first type make the open subset of $`U(M)`$

$$=_R\{\widehat{R}+t(R)\}.$$

Each line $`\sigma \stackrel{~}{}`$ is in the boundary of two regions $`R_\sigma `$, $`R_\sigma ^{}`$ and we assume that $`R_\sigma `$ is closer to $`x_0`$ than $`R_\sigma ^{}`$. Set $`v_\sigma `$ the unitary (in the norm of $`𝕄^{2+1}`$) vector tangent to $`𝕀(1)`$ and normal to $`\sigma `$, pointing towards $`R_\sigma ^{}`$. The two regions $`\widehat{R}_\sigma +t(R_\sigma )`$ and $`\widehat{R}_\sigma ^{}+t(R_\sigma ^{})`$ are connected by the tile of the second type $`B(\sigma ,v_\sigma ,r)+t(R_\sigma )`$, so that

$$U(M)=_{\sigma \stackrel{~}{}}(B(\sigma ,v_\sigma ,r)+t(R_\sigma )).$$

Note that each tile has its own CT; all the cosmological times fit well together and define the CT of $`U(M)`$ which passes to the quotient $`M`$.

###### Remark 3.3

The construction of $`M(F)`$ and of $`M(F,)`$ can be performed for any hyperbolic surface $`F`$, not necessarily compact nor of finite area. Similarly, by starting from any locally finite family of weighted geodesic lines in $`𝕀(1)`$, the simplicial deformation that we have just described produces a globally hyperbolic spacetime structure on $`^2\times `$ with a regular cosmological time.

###### Remark 3.4

When $`F`$ is compact, every region $`R`$ (defined above) is bounded by infinitely many lines of $`\stackrel{~}{}`$. In fact, as $`F`$ is compact, every $`\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }`$ with $`\gamma 1`$ is of hyperbolic type \[B-P\]. Consequently, for any $`\sigma \stackrel{~}{}`$ and for every $`\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }`$ with $`\gamma (\sigma )\sigma `$, $`\sigma `$ and $`\gamma (\sigma )`$ are “ultra-parallel”. This means that the hyperbolic distance satisfies $`d(\sigma ,\gamma (\sigma ))>0`$; moreover, $`\sigma `$ and $`\gamma (\sigma )`$ have a common orthogonal geodesic line. Suppose now that a region $`R`$ is bounded by finitely many lines in $`\stackrel{~}{}`$. In this case, $`R`$ contains a band $`E`$ of infinite diameter, bounded by two half-lines contained in $`\stackrel{~}{}`$. As $`F`$ is compact, $`^2`$ is tiled by tiles of the form $`\gamma (𝒟)`$, where $`𝒟`$ is a fundamental domain for $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ of finite diameter. So, one (at least) tile $`\gamma (𝒟)`$ must be contained in $`E`$. But clearly $`\gamma (𝒟)\stackrel{~}{}\mathrm{}`$ and this contradicts the fact that $`R`$ is a region of $`^2\stackrel{~}{}`$.

The same conclusion holds if $`F`$ is of finite area. If $`F`$ is of infinite area, we can eventually have different behaviours. For instance, in the example $`F_0`$ above, $`\stackrel{~}{}_0`$ just consists of one component which divides $`^2`$ into two regions. Other examples will be presented in subsection 4.1.

## 4 The cosmological time of (2+1)-spacetimes

In this section we describe the main properties of the CT for an arbitrary spacetime $`M`$. We adopt the notations of the previous sections; in particular, $`M`$ is assumed to be an expanding matter-free spacetime of topological type $`S\times `$ with compact surface $`S`$ of genus $`g>1`$. The validity of the following statements can be quite easily checked for spacetimes of simplicial type. We shall try to point out the main ideas; we postpone a commentary on the proofs, with references to the existing literature.

###### Proposition 4.1

The cosmological time function, $`\tau :M(0,\mathrm{}[`$, is surjective and regular, so that it defines a global time on $`M`$. It lifts to a regular cosmological time on the covering, $`\stackrel{~}{\tau }:U(M)(0,\mathrm{}[`$. Each level surface $`\stackrel{~}{S}_a`$ of $`U(M)`$ maps onto $`S_a`$ of $`M`$ and is its universal covering. In other words, the action of $`\pi _1(S)`$ on $`U(M)`$ restricts to a free, properly discontinuous isometric action on $`\stackrel{~}{S}_a`$ such that $`S_a=\stackrel{~}{S}_a/\pi _1(S)`$. Each $`\stackrel{~}{S}_a`$ ($`S_a`$) is a future Cauchy surface.

### 4.1 Initial singularity - external view

Let us give a description of the initial singularity of $`M`$ as it appears “from the exterior” point of view, that is, from the Minkowski space in which the universal covering $`U(M)`$ is placed. In subsection 4.5 we shall show how the initial singularity can also be characterized in terms of the observables associated with the CT asymptotic states.

Let us first give a definition.

###### Definition 4.2

An $``$-tree (also called a real tree) is a metric space $`(𝒯,d)`$ such that for each couple of points $`pq𝒯`$ there exists a unique arc in $`𝒯`$ with $`p`$ and $`q`$ as end-points and this arc is isometric to the interval $`[0,d(p,q)]`$. This arc is called a segment of $`𝒯`$ and is denoted $`[p,q]`$.

###### Remark 4.3

The so-called simplicial trees are the simplest examples of real trees. A simplicial tree is a real tree covered by a countable family of elementary segments, called the “edges” of the tree, in such a way that: a) whenever two edges intersect, then they just have one common endpoint; b) the edge-lengths take values in a finite set of strictly positive numbers. Any endpoint of any edge is called a “vertex” of the tree. The distance is the natural length-space distance. Note that a simplicial tree is not necessarily locally finite; in other words, vertices of infinite “valence” may occur. In general, a real tree is more complicated than a simplicial tree because one might find, for instance, a segment containing a Cantor set made by the endpoints of other segments.

###### Proposition 4.4

For any $`pU(M)𝕄^{2+1}`$ there is a unique time-like geodesic arc $`a(p)`$ contained in $`U(M)`$, which starts at $`p`$ and is directed in the past of $`p`$, such that the Lorentzian length of $`a(p)`$ equals $`\stackrel{~}{\tau }(p)`$. The other end-point of $`a(p)`$, denoted by $`i(p)`$, belongs to the boundary $`U(M)`$ of $`U(M)`$ in $`𝕄^{2+1}`$. If $`p`$ and $`q`$ are identified in $`M`$ by the action of $`\pi _1(S)`$, so are $`a(p)`$ and $`a(q)`$. The union of the initial points $`𝒯=\{i(p);pU(M)\}`$ is an $``$-tree. More precisely, each segment of $`𝒯`$ is a rectifiable space-like curve in $`U(M)`$ with its own length. There is a natural isometric action of the fundamental group $`\pi _1(S)`$ on $`𝒯`$. The quotient space $`i(M)=𝒯/\pi _1(S)`$ can be thought as the initial singularity of $`M`$.

###### Remark 4.5

We have already encountered several examples of spaces of the form $`X=\stackrel{~}{X}/\pi _1(S)`$ for some action of $`\pi _1`$ on $`\stackrel{~}{X}`$: for instance, $`F=^2/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, $`M=U(M)/\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$, $`S_a=\stackrel{~}{S}_a/\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$. Now, the initial singularity of spacetime also is a quotient $`i(M)=𝒯/\pi _1(S)`$. Instead of the bare topological quotient space, it is more interesting to consider $`\stackrel{~}{X}`$ endowed with the action of $`\pi _1`$.

###### Remark 4.6

When $`M`$ is of simplicial type, the corresponding real tree $`𝒯`$ is actually a simplicial real tree. This justifies the name we have given to these special spacetimes. In this case, the set of edges of $`𝒯`$ consists of the union of the space-like segments which form the initial singularity of the different tiles of the form $`B(\sigma ,v_\sigma ,r)+t(R_\sigma )`$ (see section 3). The points of $`𝒯`$ can also be characterized by the properties discussed in remark 3.1. A homeomorphic (not isometric) copy of $`𝒯`$ can easily be embedded into $`𝕀(1)`$. Select one point in each region of $`𝕀(1)\stackrel{~}{}`$ and consider the set made by the union of all these points. Connect two points of this set by a geodesic segment of $`𝕀(1)`$ if and only if they belong to adjacent regions. In this way we get the required tree. This tree is manifestly “dual” of $`\stackrel{~}{}`$; in fact, the regions of $`𝕀(1)\stackrel{~}{}`$ correspond to the vertices of $`𝒯`$ and the lines of $`\stackrel{~}{}`$ correspond to the edges of $`𝒯`$. We shall return on this duality in section 4.3. Note that, as demonstrated in remark 3.4, all the vertices of $`𝒯`$ are of infinite valence.

Examples of real trees. A hyperbolic surface $`F=^2/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is represented in figure 6. $`F`$ is of infinite area and is homeomorphic to a torus with one puncture; two simple closed geodesics $`c`$ and $`a`$ on $`F`$ are depicted. The geodesic $`c`$ cuts open $`F`$ into a compact surface and an infinite area annulus. By using the Poincaré disk model, a fundamental domain of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ in $`^2`$ is also shown in figure 6. This domain is delimited by four pair-wise ultra-parallel geodesic lines. The inverse images of $`c`$ and $`a`$ are represented on this domain. The first two terms of a sequence of partial tilings of $`^2`$, made by a finite number of copies of the fundamental domain, are shown in figure 7. The first partial tiling just contains one fundamental domain. The second is made by the union of $`1+4=5`$ copies of the fundamental domain. The next partial tiling of this sequence, which is not shown in the figure, contains $`1+4+12=17`$ tiles, and so on. For each partial tiling of $`^2`$ one can determine a corresponding partial lifting of the curves $`c`$ and $`a`$. Figure 8 shows the first two partial liftings $`\stackrel{~}{c}`$ of $`c`$ and the structure of the associated partial dual trees. In the limit of the complete infinite tiling of $`^2`$, the complete lifting of $`c`$ contains an infinite number of geodesics and the associated real tree is infinite. In this case, $`^2\stackrel{~}{c}`$ has exactly one component with infinitely many boundary lines (the associated vertex of the dual tree has infinite valence), whereas all the remaining components have one boundary line. The first three partial liftings $`\stackrel{~}{a}`$ of $`a`$ are shown in figure 9; the corresponding partial dual trees are also represented. Note that these figures are just evocative, as they are not geometrically exact.

###### Remark 4.7

The $``$-trees and the associated $`\pi _1(S)`$-actions which occur in proposition 4.4 are not arbitrary (see \[O\] pag. 32). In fact, one can prove that the $`\pi _1(S)`$-action is minimal with small edge-stabilizers. This means that there is no non-empty strictly sub-tree which is invariant for this action, and that, for each segment in the tree, the subgroup of $`\pi _1(S)`$ which keeps the segment invariant is virtually Abelian. We shortly say that a real tree which admits such a kind of $`\pi _1(S)`$-action, is geometric.

### 4.2 Intrinsic and extrinsic geometry of the constant CT surfaces

In order to describe the geometric properties of the surfaces of constant cosmological time, it is natural to introduce the notion of geodesic lamination.

###### Definition 4.8

Let $`G`$ be a surface endowed with a $`C^1`$-Riemannian metric. As usual, this induces a length-space distance on $`G`$ and the notion of geodesic arc (line) makes sense. A geodesic lamination of $`G`$ is a closed subset $`K`$ of $`G`$, also called the support of the lamination, which is the disjoint union of complete and simple geodesics, also called the leaves of the lamination. “Complete” means that we dispose of arc-length parametrization defined on the whole real line $``$; “simple” means that the geodesic has no self-normal crossing in $`G`$. In other words, each leaf is either a simple closed geodesic or a simple geodesic which is an isometric copy of $``$ embedded in $`G`$. When $`G`$ is compact, such a non compact leaf is not a closed subset of $`G`$.

###### Remark 4.9

A finite union of disjoint simple closed geodesics is called a multi-curve and is the simplest example of geodesic lamination. We have already introduced multi-curves in section 3.3. A generic geodesic lamination $`K`$ can be more complicated than a multi-curve; in fact, if $`\alpha `$ is an arc embedded in $`G`$ which is transverse to the leaves of $`K`$, typically $`\alpha K`$ is a Cantor set.

###### Proposition 4.10

For every $`a(0,\mathrm{}[`$:

1) $`\stackrel{~}{S}_a`$ is the graph of a positive convex function defined on the plane $`\{x^3=0\}`$ in $`𝕄^{2+1}`$.

2) $`\stackrel{~}{S}_a`$ is only $`C^1`$-embedded into $`U(M)`$, so that it carries an induced $`C^1`$-Riemannian metric. $`\stackrel{~}{S}_a`$ is geodesically complete and for each $`pq\stackrel{~}{S}_a`$, there is a unique geodesic arc connecting $`p`$ and $`q`$.

3) The locus $`\stackrel{~}{L}_a`$ at which the embedding of $`\stackrel{~}{S}_a`$ into $`U(M)`$ is no longer $`C^2`$ is a geodesic lamination of $`\stackrel{~}{S}_a`$. $`\stackrel{~}{L}_a`$ is in fact the pull-back of a geodesic lamination $`L_a`$ of $`S_a`$.

###### Remark 4.11

If $`M`$ is the spacetime of simplicial type which corresponds to the weighted multi-curve $``$ on the surface $`F`$, then $`L_a`$ is just made by the boundary components of the flat annular components embedded into $`S_a`$, which are associated to the components of $``$.

The content of the last remark generalizes as follows. Recall that $`\pi _1(S)`$ acts as $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on each $`𝕀(a)`$. For every $`a(0,\mathrm{}[`$, let us consider the map

$$p_a:\stackrel{~}{S}_a𝕀(a)$$

defined as follows: $`p_a(x)`$ is the unique point of $`𝕀(a)`$ such that the tangent plane to $`\stackrel{~}{S}_a`$ at $`x`$ is parallel to the tangent plane to $`𝕀(a)`$ at $`p_a(x)`$. This map is well-defined, surjective and $`\pi _1(S)`$-equivariant. By taking the union of the $`p_a`$’s we get a $`\pi _1(S)`$-equivariant map $`p:U(M)I^+(0)`$, respecting the CT. This induces a map $`p^{}:MM(F)`$ respecting the CT.

###### Proposition 4.12

1) There exists a geodesic lamination $``$ on $`F=𝕀(1)/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, which lifts to a geodesic lamination $`\stackrel{~}{}`$ on $`𝕀(1)`$, such that, for every $`a`$, one has $`p_a(\stackrel{~}{L}_a)=a\stackrel{~}{}`$ and any leaf of $`\stackrel{~}{L}_a`$ is isometrically mapped onto a leaf of $`a\stackrel{~}{}`$. That is, the union of $`p_a(\stackrel{~}{L}_a)`$’s covers the suspension $`\widehat{}`$ of $`\stackrel{~}{}`$.

2) $``$ is the disjoint union of two sublaminations

$$=^{}$$

where $``$ is the maximal multi-curve sublamination of $``$. Note that either $``$ or $`^{}`$ may be empty. Then

a) $`p`$ embeds $`U(M)p^1(\widehat{})`$ isometrically into $`I^+(0)`$ respecting the CT;

b) $`p`$ embeds $`U(M)p^1(\widehat{})`$ continuously into $`I^+(0)`$ respecting the CT.

3) The set $`p^1(\widehat{})`$ is the union of components of the type $`B(\sigma ,v_\sigma ,r)+w`$, so that $`(p^{})^1()S_a`$ is the disjoint union of flat annular components of $`S_a`$, like in the case of a spacetime of simplicial type.

We have an immediate corollary concerning the intrinsic and extrinsic geometry of the constant CT surfaces.

###### Corollary 4.13

$`\stackrel{~}{W}_a=\stackrel{~}{S}_a\stackrel{~}{L}_a`$ is an open dense set of $`\stackrel{~}{S}_a`$. Each component of $`\stackrel{~}{W}_a`$ is either isometric to an open set of $`𝕀(a)`$ or is a flat band which embeds into $`𝕀(1,3,a)`$, and projects onto an annulus of $`S_a`$. Flat annuli do occur only if $``$ is non empty.

### 4.3  CT duality

To sum up, two geometric structures are naturally associated to the spacetime $`M`$: the real tree $`𝒯`$ (the initial singularity) and the geodesic lamination $``$ on $`F=𝕀(1)/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ which reflects the lack of smoothness of the embedding of $`S_a`$ into $`M`$. We have already noted that for a spacetime of simplicial type these two objects are “dual” to each other. Here we want to strengthen and generalize this point.

If $``$ is non empty, we extend the lamination $`L_a`$ on $`S_a`$ to a lamination $`L_a^{}`$, by foliating the flat annular regions of $`S_a`$ by closed geodesics parallel to the boundary components. As usually $`\stackrel{~}{L}_a^{}`$ denotes the lifted lamination to $`\stackrel{~}{S}_a`$. The above map $`p_a`$ sends $`\stackrel{~}{L}_a^{}`$ onto $`a\stackrel{~}{}`$.

We have a natural continuous surjective map $`i_a:\stackrel{~}{S}_a𝒯`$ which associates to $`x`$ the initial point on the arc $`a(x)`$. So $`𝒯^{}=\{i_a^1(x)\}_{x𝒯}`$ is a partition of $`\stackrel{~}{S}_a`$ by closed subsets. $`\pi _1(S)`$ acts also on $`𝒯^{}`$ and, clearly, $`i_a`$ induces an $`\pi _1`$-equivariant identification between $`𝒯^{}`$ and $`𝒯`$.

###### Proposition 4.14

For every $`a`$, each closed set $`E`$ of the partition $`𝒯^{}`$ of $`\stackrel{~}{S}_a`$ is:

1) either the closure of a component of $`\stackrel{~}{S}_a\stackrel{~}{L}_a^{}`$;

2) or a leaf of the foliation of some band component of $`\stackrel{~}{L}_a^{}`$ which projects onto a flat annular region of $`S_a`$ .

We describe how the distance $`d`$ on the real tree $`𝒯`$ can be encoded, in dual terms, by equipping the geodesic laminations $`\stackrel{~}{}`$, $``$, with suitable transverse invariant measures.

###### Definition 4.15

A measured geodesic lamination on $`F`$ is a couple $`(,\mu )`$, where $``$ is a geodesic lamination and $`\mu `$ is a transverse invariant measure which consists of a Borel measure $`\mu _J`$ on each embedded interval $`J[0,1]`$ in $`F`$, transverse to the leaves of $``$ such that

(1) the support of $`\mu _J`$ coincides with $`J`$;

(2) if $`J,J^{}`$ are arcs, homotopic through arcs which are transverse to the leaves of $``$, keeping the endpoints either on the same leaf or in the same connected components of $`F`$, then $`\mu _J(J)=\mu _J^{}(J^{})`$ . $`(,\mu )`$ lifts to $`(\stackrel{~}{},\stackrel{~}{\mu })`$ which is $`\pi _1`$-equivariant.

###### Remark 4.16

The simplest measured geodesic laminations of $`F`$ are the weighted multi-curves.

Let $`J`$ be an arc in $`𝕀(1)`$ transverse to the leaves of $`\stackrel{~}{}`$. The map $`p_a`$ lifts $`J`$ to an arc $`J^{}`$ in $`\stackrel{~}{S}_a`$ transverse to the leaves of $`\stackrel{~}{L}_a^{}`$. On the other hand, by means of the map $`i_a`$, the distance $`d`$ on $`𝒯`$ lifts to a measure $`\stackrel{~}{\mu }_J^{}`$ on $`J^{}`$ which finally gives us the required ($`\pi _1`$-equivariant) transverse measure on $`\stackrel{~}{}`$.

One can invert the above construction and associate to each measured geodesic lamination $`(,\mu )`$ of the hyperbolic surface $`F`$ a suitable geometric $``$-tree.

From geodesic laminations to real trees. Take the measured lamination $`(,\mu )`$ of the surface $`F`$. $``$ is in general the disjoint union of two sublaminations

$$=^{\prime \prime }$$

where $``$ is the maximal weighted multi-curve sublamination of $``$. Note that either $``$ or $`^{\prime \prime }`$ may be empty. $`F`$ consists of a finite number of connected components, the metric completion of any such a component is isometric to a compact hyperbolic surface with geodesic polygonal boundary. If $``$ is non-empty, let us consider the spacetime of simplicial type associated to $``$, and let $`F^{}`$ be the $`\tau =1`$ level surface of this spacetime. Let us denote by $`^{}`$ the lamination on $`F^{}`$ which coincides with $``$ outside the flat annuli of $`F^{}`$ and is defined as $`L_1^{}`$ above on these annuli. If $``$ is empty, set $`F^{}=F`$. The measured lamination $`(,\mu )`$ “extends” to a measured lamination $`(^{},\mu ^{})`$ on $`F^{}`$. The flat annular components are foliated by closed geodesics parallel to the boundary components. These annuli are endowed with a plain transverse measure of total mass equal to the corresponding annulus depth. Take the universal covering $`\stackrel{~}{F}^{}`$ of $`F^{}`$ with the lifted ($`\pi _1`$-equivariant) measured geodesic lamination $`(\stackrel{~}{^{}},\stackrel{~}{\mu }^{})`$. Now define a partition of $`\stackrel{~}{F}^{}`$ by closed subsets in the very same way we have defined above the the partition $`𝒯^{}`$ of $`\stackrel{~}{S}_1`$, with respect to the lamination $`\stackrel{~}{L}_1^{}`$. Call again this partition $`𝒯^{}`$. We can give it a distance $`d`$ which makes it an $``$-tree. If $`E`$ and $`E^{}`$ are the closure of two components of the complement of the lamination, take two points $`x`$ and $`x^{}`$ in these closed sets such that the geodesic segment $`[x,x^{}]`$ of $`\stackrel{~}{F}^{}`$ is transverse to the leaves of the lamination. By integration, the transverse measure induces a distance on the subset of $`𝒯^{}`$ made by the closed sets intersecting $`[x,x^{}]`$. In fact, by the “invariance” of the measure, this distance doesn’t depend on the segment $`[x,x^{}]`$. Finally one verifies that in this way one can actually define a distance between any two points of $`𝒯^{}`$ and that the resulting $`(𝒯^{},d)`$ is a geometric real tree.

###### Remark 4.17

Clearly, weighted multi-curves on the surface $`F`$ dually correspond to geometric simplicial real trees; the spacetimes of simplicial type do materialize this duality.

### 4.4 Reconstruction of $`M=U(M)/\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$

Starting from $`(F=𝕀(1)/\mathrm{\Gamma },𝒯)`$ or, equivalently, from $`(F=𝕀(1)/\mathrm{\Gamma },(,\mu ))`$, one can reconstruct a cocycle $`t`$, whence $`M=U(M)/\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$. This generalizes what we have done for a spacetime of simplicial type in subsection 3.3.

With the notations introduced at the end of the previous subsection, consider $`(\stackrel{~}{}^{},\stackrel{~}{\mu }^{})`$ on $`\stackrel{~}{F}^{}`$. To recover a cocycle $`t`$ do as follows: fix one base point $`p_0^{}`$ on $`\stackrel{~}{F}^{}`$ out from the support of the lamination. Let $`p_0`$ be its image on $`F^{}`$. If $`\sigma `$ is a loop in $`F^{}`$ based on $`p_0`$, which represents an element $`[\sigma ]`$ of $`\pi (F^{},p_0)`$, lift it to the oriented arc $`\sigma ^{}`$ in $`\stackrel{~}{F}^{}`$ which starts at $`p_0^{}`$; up to homotopy we can assume that $`\sigma ^{}`$ is transverse to the leaves of the lamination. Let $`f`$ be any continuous $`^3`$-valued function on $`\sigma ^{}`$ which coincides with the unit normal to the leaves of the lamination, tangent to $`\stackrel{~}{F}^{}`$, and oriented in agreement with $`\sigma ^{}`$. Now we can integrate $`f`$ along $`\sigma ^{}`$ by using the transverse measure getting a vector $`t([\sigma ])`$. By varying $`[\sigma ]`$, one gets such a cocycle $`t`$.

### 4.5 CT asymptotic states

The above discussion tells us that any spacetime $`M=U(M)/\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$ is completely determined by the linear part $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ of its holonomy $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$ (or equivalently by the surface $`F=𝕀(1)/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$) and by its initial singularity $`i(M)=𝒯/\pi _1(S)`$. The aim of this subsection is to recover these geometric objects from the “internal point of view” by “working inside the spacetime”. More precisely, we would like to show that $`F`$ and $`𝒯`$ can be interpreted as the future and past asymptotic states for the geometry of the CT level surfaces. To this aim we shall consider the observables defined by the lengths of the curves on the CT level surfaces. It is convenient to introduce the concept of Marked Spectrum associated with a metric space $`(\stackrel{~}{X},d)`$ which is endowed with an action $`\alpha `$ of the surface’s fundamental group $`\pi _1(S)`$, so that $`X=\stackrel{~}{X}/\pi _1(S)`$. Whenever we shall refer to $`X`$, we shall actually refer to the triple $`(\stackrel{~}{X},d,\alpha )`$ (see remark 4.5).

Let us denote by $`𝒞`$ the set of conjugation classes of $`\pi _1(S)\{1\}`$ which coincide with the homotopy classes of non-contractible continuous maps $`f:S^1S`$. Each marked spectrum is a point of the functional space $`(_0)^𝒞`$, endowed with the natural product topology. The Marked Spectrum $`s_X`$ of $`X`$ (denoted also by $`s_{\stackrel{~}{X}}`$), is defined as follows: for any $`c=[\gamma ]𝒞`$, $`\gamma \pi _1(S)`$, $`\gamma 1`$,

$$s_X(c)=\underset{p\stackrel{~}{X}}{inf}d(p,\alpha _\gamma (p)).$$

The spectrum is “marked” because one takes track of the map in addition to its image.

When $`X=F`$ or $`S_a`$, $`s_X(c)`$ is just the length of a closed geodesic curve (not necessarily simple; that is, self-crossings could possibly occur in $`c`$) which minimizes the length among the curves in that homotopy class. For this reason, in such a case, $`s_X`$ is called the Marked Length Spectrum and is denoted by $`l_X`$. When $`\stackrel{~}{X}=𝒯`$, $`s_𝒯`$ can be expressed, in dual terms, as the Marked Measure Spectrum of the corresponding measured geodesic lamination $``$ on $`F`$; usually this is denoted $`I_{}`$. $`I_{}(c)`$ is just the minimal transverse measure realized by the curves in that homotopy class. When $`𝒯`$ is simplicial, that is when $``$ is a weighted multi-curve $``$ of $`F`$, $`I_{}(c)`$ is easily expressed in terms of the geometric intersection number (this also justifies the notation): assume that all the weights are equal to $`1`$ (that is the length of all edges of $`𝒯`$ is equal to $`1`$); then it is easy to see that $`I_{}(c)`$ is just the minimum number of intersection points between $``$ and any curve belonging to $`c`$ and transverse to the components of the lamination. For arbitrary weights one just takes multiples of the contribution of each component of $``$.

###### Remark 4.18

Instead of the whole $`𝒞`$, one could prefer to use the subset $`𝒮𝒞`$ of isotopy classes of simple closed curve in $`S`$, and take the corresponding (restricted) marked spectra. The discussion should proceed without any substantial modification.

On the boundary of the Teichmüller space. It is convenient, at this stage, to recall the fundamental facts about the role that the marked spectra play in the study of the Teichmüller space and in Thurston’s theory of its natural boundary. Let us denote by $`T_g`$ the Teichmüller space of the hyperbolic structures on $`S`$ up to isometry isotopic to the identity. It is well-known (see \[T3\], \[B-P\], \[F-L-P\]) that the map

$$l:T_g(_0)^𝒞$$

defined by $`l(F=^2/\mathrm{\Gamma })=l_F`$, realizes a meaningful embedding of $`T_g`$ onto a subset of $`(_0)^𝒞`$ homeomorphic to the finite dimensional open ball $`B^{6g6}`$. We shall identify $`T_g`$ with $`l(T_g)`$. In fact $`T_g`$ is in a natural way a real analytic submanifold of $`(_0)^𝒞`$.

Fix any such a hyperbolic structure $`FT_g`$ on $`S`$. Let us denote by $`𝒢(F)`$ the set of measured geodesic laminations on $`F`$. Let us denote by $`𝒢𝒯(S)`$ the set of all $`\pi _1(S)`$-geometric $``$-trees (remark 4.7). At the end of subsection 4.3, we have outlined a construction which associates to each $`𝒢(F)`$ a dual $``$-tree say $`\mathrm{\Delta }()𝒢𝒯(S)`$. Note that this construction did not use the fact that $`F`$ was associated to a spacetime $`M`$.

###### Proposition 4.19

$`\mathrm{\Delta }:𝒢(F)𝒢𝒯(S)`$ is a bijection, that is it can be naturally inverted. For each $`r>0`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }(r)=r\mathrm{\Delta }(`$; here we take either the $`r`$-multiple of the measure or the $`r`$-multiple of the distance. We can shortly say that “$`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ respects the positive rays”.

###### Proposition 4.20

Consider the maps, $`I:𝒢(F)(_0)^𝒞`$ and $`s:𝒢𝒯(S)(_0)^𝒞`$, obtained by taking the corresponding marked spectra. Then $`I=s\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and is injective. The image in $`(_0)^𝒞`$ is a positive cone based on the origin and positive rays go onto positive rays, in a obvious sense. Moreover $`T_g`$ and the image Im(I) are disjoint subsets of $`(_0)^𝒞`$

###### Remark 4.21

These spectra represent the actual “physical” observables in our discussion. The last two propositions specify the meaning of the duality between laminations and real trees. As the spectra coincide, they reveal the same physical content.

Similarly to $`T_g`$, we identify $`𝒢(F)`$ and $`𝒢𝒯(S)`$ with the image $`Im(I)(_0)^𝒞`$, endowed with the subspace topology.

Set $`𝒫^+(𝒢(F))=𝒫^+(𝒢𝒯(S))=𝒫^+(Im(I))`$ the projective quotient space, obtained by identifying to one point each positive ray in $`Im(I)\{0\}`$. Similarly $`T_g𝒫^+(Im(I))`$ has a natural quotient topology.

###### Proposition 4.22

The pair $`(\overline{T}_g,\overline{T}_g)=(T_g𝒫^+(Im(I)),𝒫^+(Im(I)))`$ is homeomorphic to the pair $`(\overline{B}^{6g6},S^{6g7})`$, where $`\overline{B}^{6g6}`$ is the closed ball and $`S^{6g7}`$ is its boundary sphere. The natural action on $`T_g`$ of the mapping class group $`Mod_g`$ of $`S`$ extends to an action on the compactification $`\overline{T}_g`$. This is called the Thurston’s natural compactification and $`\overline{T}_g`$ is the natural boundary of the Teichmüller space.

We can state precisely how the simplicial trees are dense, as we claimed in section 3. Let us denote $`𝒮𝒯(S)`$ the subset of $`𝒢𝒯(S)`$ made by the simplicial real trees.

###### Proposition 4.23

$`𝒮𝒯(S)`$ is dense in $`𝒢𝒯(S)`$ in the induced topology by $`(_0)^𝒞`$.

###### Remark 4.24

In this remark we collect a few technical complements concerning the marked spectra and the geometric meaning of spectra convergence.

1) The natural compactification of $`T_g`$ is formally similar to the the natural compactification of $`^2`$ in the hyperboloid model $`𝕀(1)`$ where $`S_{\mathrm{}}^1`$ is obtained by adding to $`𝕀(1)`$ the endpoints of the rays of the future light cone.

2) Let $`F_n`$ be a sequence in $`T_g`$ considered as a sequence of actions of $`\pi _1(S)`$ on $`^2`$. The meaning of the compactification is the following; up to passing to a subsequence (still denoted by $`F_n`$), one of the following situations occur: for every $`c𝒞`$,

(a) $`l_{F_n}(c)l_{F_0}(c)`$, for some $`F_0T_g`$.

(b) There exist a geometric real tree $`𝒯𝒢𝒯(S)`$ and a positive sequence $`ϵ_n0`$, such that $`ϵ_nl_{F_n}(c)s_𝒯(c)`$. This is also called the Morgan-Shalen convergence of the sequence of actions. This can be reformulated in a similar, equivalent, dual way as the convergence (up to positive multiples) of a sequence of marked length spectra of hyperbolic structures on $`S`$ to the marked measure spectrum of a measured geodesic lamination on a fixed base $`F_0`$.

3) The convergence of marked spectra has a deep geometric content. This can be expressed in terms of the Gromov convergence. Given two metric spaces $`(Y,d)`$ and $`(Y^{},d^{})`$ and $`ϵ>0`$, an $`ϵ`$-relation is a set $`RY\times Y^{}`$ (i.e. a relation between the two spaces) such that:

(i) the two projections of $`R`$ to $`Y`$ and $`Y^{}`$ are both surjective;

(ii) if $`(y,y^{}),(z,z^{})R`$ then $`|d(y,z)d(y^{},z^{})|<ϵ`$.

Let $`G`$ be a group, and $`\{G\times Y_nY_n\}_{n1}`$ be a sequence of isometric actions of $`G`$ on the metric spaces $`Y_n`$. We say that $`(G\times Y_nY_n)(G\times Y_0Y_0)`$ in the sense of Gromov, if for every compact subset $`K_0Y_0`$, for every $`ϵ>0`$ and for every finite subset $`P`$ of $`G`$, if $`n`$ is big enough, there are compact subsets $`K_nY_n`$ and $`ϵ`$-relations $`R_n`$ between $`K_n`$ and $`K_0`$ which are $`P`$-equivariant; this means that: if $`xK_0`$, $`gP`$, $`g(x)K_0`$, $`x_n,y_nK_n`$ and $`(x,x_n),(g(x),y_n)R_n`$, then $`d_n(g(x_n),y_n)ϵ`$.

It turns out that in case $`(a)`$ above we actually have the convergence in the Gromov sense of the sequence of actions on $`^2`$ to an interior point of $`T_g`$. In case $`(b)`$, the Morgan-Shalen convergence is equivalent to the Gromov convergence for the sequence of actions on $`ϵ_n^2`$.

4) Note that $`𝒢𝒯(S)`$ is defined by using only the topology of $`S`$ (its fundamental group indeed) while in order to adopt the dual view point we have to fix (in an arbitrary way) a base hyperbolic surface $`F_0T_g`$. In fact, the dual view point can be developed by using the marked measure spectra of the measured (singular) foliations on $`S`$ (instead of the measured geodesic laminations on $`F_0`$), which only depend on the differential structure of $`S`$ (see \[F-L-P\]). On the other hand, let us consider $`T_g`$ as a space of complex holomorphic structures on $`S`$ (thanks to the classical Uniformization Theorem). By fixing any such structure $`F_0`$, one can realize such a spectrum as the measure spectrum of the horizontal measured foliation of a unique quadratic differential $`\omega `$ on $`F_0`$. These “rigidifications” (via geodesic laminations or quadratic differentials) of softer objects (the measured foliations) is reminiscent of the role of Hodge theory with respect to De Rham Cohomology.

CT asymptotic states as limit spectra. After this somewhat long but necessary digression, let us come back to the CT asymptotic states.

###### Proposition 4.25

(a) $`\underset{a0}{lim}l_{S_a}=s_𝒯`$; (b) $`\underset{a\mathrm{}}{lim}l_{S_a}/a=l_F`$.

###### Remark 4.26

This means, in particular, that, in a far CT future the spacetime looks like the Minkowskian suspension $`M(F)`$. In order to detect the dual effect of the initial singularity on the embedding of $`S_a`$ into $`M`$, for large value of the cosmological time one needs to increase the accuracy in the measurement of geometric quantities. Nevertheless this effect is, in principle, observable for any finite value $`a`$ of the CT.

###### Proposition 4.27

For every $`a(0,\mathrm{}[`$, $`l_{S_a}/a`$ belongs to $`T_g(_0)^𝒞`$. Hence, the cosmological time determines a curve $`\gamma _M:(0,\mathrm{}[T_g`$. This is a real analytic curve which connects $`FT_g`$ with the point on the natural boundary $`[𝒯]T_g`$ (here $`[.]`$ denotes the projective class).

###### Remark 4.28

Consider a spacetime of simplicial type. To prove proposition 4.25 in this case, one has to note that the depth of the annular regions is constant on each $`S_a`$. When $`a0`$, the contribution (to the length of any curve on $`S_a`$) of the part contained in the non-annular components becomes negligible, the length of the annuli boundaries goes linearly to zero, so that only the transverse crossing of the annuli becomes dominant. When $`a\mathrm{}`$, the annuli depth goes to zero because of the rescaling by $`1/a`$, and the length spectrum converge to the spectrum of $`F`$. The general case follows by using the density stated in proposition 4.23. Concerning proposition 4.27, in the special case of a spacetime of simplicial type, the curve in $`T_g`$ is just given by the Fenchel-Nielsen flow obtained by “twisting” the hyperbolic surface $`F`$ along the closed geodesic of the multi-curve (see \[T3\] and also \[B-P\]).

### 4.6  A commentary on the proofs

The identification between cocycles of a spacetime $`M`$ with measured geodesic laminations on $`F=𝕀(1)/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is due to Mess \[Me\]. In fact one can find other examples of such a construction of “cocycles” from measured laminations in the contest of Thurston’s theory of “bending” or “earthquakes” (see for instance \[E-M\]).

Measured geodesic laminations emerged in the original Thurston’s approach to the natural compactification of $`T_g`$ \[T\] \[T2\] \[T3\]. See also \[F-L-P\] for the alternative approach by using the measured foliations (see remark 4.24 4). For the claim about the quadratic differentials in remark 4.24 4) see \[Ke\]. The dual approach via real trees is due to Morgan-Shalen \[M-S\] \[M-S2\]. This approach does apply to more general, higher dimensional situations. The monography \[O\] contains a rather exhaustive introduction to this matter and we mostly refer to it (and to its bibliography) for all the details. In particular one can find in \[O\] a complete proof of the duality (see proposition 4.19 and proposition 4.20). The delicate point is just the inversion of the map $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ we have described above. The geometric interpretation of the Morgan-Shalen convergence (see remark 4.24 3) is due to Paulin and Bestvina (c.f. the bibliography of \[O\]).

It is an amazing fact that the spacetimes “materialize” this subtle duality in the way we have seen. Note also that, in the spacetime setting, the choice of the base hyperbolic surface $`F`$ (see remark 4.24 4) is fixed by the linear part of the holonomy of $`M`$, that is by its future asymptotic state.

Concerning proposition 4.27, the Fenchel-Nielsen flow generalizes to the earthquake flow (one uses again the density 4.23) with initial data $`(F,)`$ which has real analytic orbits \[Ke2\].

## 5 Complements

In this section we add a few comments about the flat spacetimes with compact space of genus $`g=1`$, and about the spacetimes with negative cosmological constant. Finally we discuss a conjecture relating the CT and the CMC time.

### 5.1 Toric space ($`g=1`$)

The case in which the surface $`S`$ is a torus is a particular example of the so called Teichmüller spacetimes which we have analysed in \[B-G\]. So we simply remind the main points. Each non static spacetime determines a curve $`\gamma :(0,\mathrm{}[T_1^{}`$, $`\gamma (a)=(w(a),\omega (a))`$, where $`T_1^{}`$ is the cotangent bundle of the Teichmüller space $`T_1`$ of conformal structures on the torus up to isomorphism isotopic to the identity. Let us recall that $`T_1`$ is isometric with the Poincaré disk. The cotangent vectors $`\omega (a)`$ at the point $`w(a)T_1`$ is a quadratic differential on a Riemann surface representing $`w(a)`$. It is not hard to verify that $`\gamma `$ is just the complete orbit of the Teichmüller flow with initial data $`(w(1),\omega (1))`$ (see \[Ab\],\[B-G\]). In particular the projection of $`\gamma `$ onto $`T_1`$ is a complete geodesic connecting two boundary points. These points can also be interpreted in terms of marked spectra. Let us denote by $``$ and by $`𝒱`$ the horizontal and vertical measured foliations of $`w(1)`$. Then: $`\underset{a\mathrm{}}{lim}l_{S_a}/a=I_{}`$ and $`\underset{a0}{lim}l_{S_a}=I_𝒱`$.

### 5.2 Spacetime with negative cosmological constant

The above discussion on CT for flat spacetimes (i.e. with cosmological constant $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$) can be adapted to the case of negative $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ which we normalize to be $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=1`$. We denote by $`𝕏^{2+1}`$ the Universal anti de Sitter Spacetime of dimension $`2+1`$. Each spacetime is now locally isometric to $`𝕏^{2+1}`$. The role played by $`I^+(0)`$ in the flat case, is played now by the diamond-shaped domain $`D(2)`$ (see \[H-E\] pag. 132) isometric to $`B^2\times (\pi /2,\pi /2)`$ with metric, in coordinates $`(y^1,y^2,t)`$, $`ds^2=(\mathrm{cos}^2t)h_2dt^2`$, where $`h_2`$ is the usual Poincaré hyperbolic metric on the open disk $`B^2`$.

Anti-de Sitter Suspensions. If $`F=^2/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is a hyperbolic surface of genus $`g>1`$, then $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ isometrically acts also on $`D(2)`$ and $`D(F)=D(2)/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is the anti-de Sitter suspension of $`F`$. Up to a translation, the function $`t`$ gives the CT and it has many qualitative properties similar to the CT of the Minkowskian suspensions, but we have now both an initial and a final singularity, both reduced to one point. In a sense, $`D(F)`$ can be obtained by the Minkowskian suspension $`M(F)`$ by a procedure of warping and doubling; $`D(F)`$ and $`M(F)`$ have the same initial singularity; the future asymptotic state of $`M(F)`$ “becomes” the level surface of the CT on $`D(F)`$ where the expansion ends and the collapsing begins. Also the anti-de Sitter analogous of $`I^+(1,3)`$ is easy to figure out.

Deforming anti-de Sitter suspensions. We want to generalize the above “warping and doubling” construction. Let $`M=U(M)/\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$ as in the former flat-spacetime discussion, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}=\mathrm{\Gamma }+t(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$. $`F=𝕀(1)/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ as usually. For $`t(\pi /2,0)`$, $`\tau (0,\mathrm{})`$, set $`t=(\pi /2)e^\tau `$. Denote $`h(a)`$ the spatial metric on $`S_a`$. On the manifold $`F\times (\pi /2,0)`$ consider the metric $`ds^2=\mathrm{cos}^2(t)h(\tau )/\tau ^2dt^2`$, getting a spacetime $`𝒟^{}(M)`$. Similarly, take $`M^{}`$ and $`𝒟^{}(M^{})`$, where $`M^{}=U(M^{})/\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}=\mathrm{\Gamma }t(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$, $`𝒟^{}(M^{})`$ is obtained from $`𝒟^{}(M^{})`$ by reversing the time and the orientation. Finally set $`𝒟(M)=𝒟^{}(M)𝒟^{}(M^{})`$, by gluing the two pieces at $`t=0`$. $`𝒟(M)`$ is locally anti de Sitter; up to a translation, $`t`$ gives the CT. The asymptotic state for $`t\pi /2`$ (i.e. the initial singularity) is equal to the initial singularity of $`M`$. The final singularity ($`t\pi /2`$) coincides with the initial singularity of $`M^{}`$. The future asymptotic states of $`M`$ and $`M^{}`$ “glue” at the level surface $`\{t=0\}`$ of the CT where the expansion ends and the collapse begins. The orbit of $`𝒟(M)`$ in $`T_g`$ is given by the union of two earthquake rays associated to $`M`$ (pointing to the future) and to $`M^{}`$ (towards the past); note that the qualitative behaviour is similar to what we have remarked for $`g=1`$. $`𝒟(M)`$ is the quotient of a domain $`D(2)_M𝕏^{2+1}`$, which is a “deformation” of the diamond-shaped domain $`D(2)`$. Also in this case the spacetimes with simplicial asymptotic singularities are significant and particularly simple to be understood.

### 5.3  CT versus CMC

Assume again that the space $`S`$ is of genus $`g>1`$, and that the spacetimes are flat. Given any global time on a spacetime $`M=U(M)/\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$, the asymptotic behaviour of the geometry of the corresponding level surfaces reflects in general a property of the specific time and not of the spacetime. On the other hand, we have seen that the asymptotic states of the cosmological time are intrinsic features of the spacetime. In this sense, we can say that a global time is “good” when it has the same asymptotic states of the CT. The CMC time, $`\rho `$ say, is a widely studied global time. A natural question is whether $`\rho `$ is a good global time. We conjecture that this is the case. Let us denote by $`W_a`$ the $`\{\rho =a\}`$ level surfaces of the CMC time.

###### Conjecture 5.1

(a) $`\underset{a\mathrm{}}{lim}l_{W_a}=s_𝒯`$; (b) $`\underset{a0}{lim}l_{W_a}/a=l_F`$.

There are some strong evidences supporting the conjecture; in particular by \[A-M-T\] we know that:

(1) $`\rho `$ is a global time function with image the interval $`(0,+\mathrm{})`$.

(2) If $`\gamma :(0,\mathrm{})T_g`$ is any $`\rho `$-orbit in $`T_g`$ (here $`T_g`$ is intended as a space of conformal structures) then:

(i) The $`\underset{\rho 0}{lim}\gamma `$ exists in $`T_g`$.

(ii) $`\gamma `$ is proper, that is it goes out from any compact set of $`T_g`$, roughly it “goes to $`\mathrm{}`$”.

An idea to prove the conjecture, should be to confine each $`W_a`$ between two barriers made by CT-level surfaces $`S_a^{}`$, $`S_{a^{\prime \prime }}`$, in such a way that $`a^{}`$ and $`a^{\prime \prime }`$ depend nicely on $`a`$ and, when $`a\mathrm{}`$ or $`a0`$, $`S_a^{}`$ and $`S_{a^{\prime \prime }}`$ become more and more “geometrically” close to each other. In a recent conversation, L. Andersson confirmed that this should actually work at least for a spacetime with simplicial initial singularity. A similar conjecture can be formulated in the anti-de Sitter context.


format: text

text:
# The recent star formation history of the Hipparcos solar neighbourhood

## 1 Introduction

The problem of deducing the star formation rate history, $`SFR(t)`$, of the Milky Way has been generally attempted in terms of indirect inferences mostly through chemical evolution models. The validity of these methods relies on the soundness of the assignation of a “chemical age” to each of the studied stars. Generally a metallicity indicator is chosen, and used to measure the metal content of a number of stars which are then binned into age groups through the use of an age-metallicity relation derived from a chemical evolution model. For example, Rocha-Pinto & Maciel (1997) take a variety of age-metallicity relations (AMRs) from the literature and use a closed box chemical evolution model to translate AMRs into $`SFR(t)s`$, allowing for an intrinsic Gaussian spread in the AMR assumed to be constant in time.

The advantages of these methods are that large samples of stars both in the solar neighbourhood and further away within the disk of the galaxy can be studied. An inferred $`SFR(t)`$ can be constructed over an ample time range and spatial extent within the Galaxy which is consistent with the metallicities of the sample studied, and the chemical evolution model proposed. However, the validity of the AMR assumption can not be checked independently of the proposed chemical evolution model, and is necessarily dependent on what is chosen for the mixing physics of the ISM, the possible infall of primordial non enriched gas, and the still largely unknown galactic formation scenario in general. This last problem also affects attempts at inferring the $`SFR(t)`$ from stellar kinematics (e.g. Gomez et al. 1990, Marsakov et al., 1990).

With the recent availability of the Hipparcos satellite catalogue (ESA 1997) we are now in a position to attempt recovery of the local $`SFR(t)`$ directly, without the need of any model dependent assumptions. Previous direct approaches have been undertaken through the binning of observed stars into age groups according to the degree of chromospheric activity as measured through selected emission line features, with conflicting results depending on the assumed age-activity relation (e.g. Barry, 1988, and Soderblom et al., 1991). Using this technique, Rocha-Pinto et al. (1999) have derived a star formation history from the chromospheric activity-age distribution of a larger sample comprising 552 stars, founding evidence for intermittency in the $`SFR(t)`$ over 14 Gyr. The Hipparcos catalogue offers high quality photometric data for a large number of stars in the solar neighbourhood, which can be used to construct a colour-magnitude diagram (CMD) for this region. Once a CMD is available, it is in principle possible to recover the $`SFR(t)`$ which gave rise to the observed distribution of stars, assuming only a stellar evolutionary model in terms of a set of stellar tracks. In practice the most common approach to inverting CMDs has been to propose a certain parameterization for the $`SFR(t)`$, which is used to construct synthetic CMDs, which are statistically compared to the observed ones to select the values of the parameters which result in a best match CMD. Examples of the above are Chiosi et al. (1989), Aparicio et al. (1990) and Mould et al. (1997) using Magellanic and local star clusters, and Mighell & Butcher (1992), Smecker-Hane et al. (1994), Tolstoy & Saha (1996), Aparicio & Gallart (1995) and Mighell (1997) using local dSph’s.

We have extended these methods in Hernandez et. al. (1999) (henceforth paper I) by combining a rigorous maximum likelihood statistical approach, analogous to what was introduced by Tolstoy & Saha (1996), with a variational calculus treatment. This allows a totally non-parametric solution of the problem, where no a priori assumptions are introduced. This method was applied by Hernandez et al. (2000) (paper II) to a set of HST CMDs of local dSph galaxies to infer the $`SFR(t)`$ of these interesting systems. The result differs from what can be obtained from a chemical evolution model in that a direct answer is available, with a time resolution which depends only on the accuracy of the observations.

Limitations on the applicability of our method to the Hipparcos data appear in connection to the selection function of the catalogue. The need to work only with complete volume-limited samples limits the age range over which we can recover the $`SFR(t)`$ to 0–3 Gyr, with a resolution of $`0.05`$ Gyr. This makes it impossible to compare our results with those of chemical evolution models which typically sample ages of 0–14 Gyr, with resolutions of 0.5–1.5 Gyr.

In Section 2 we give a summarized review of the method introduced in paper I, the sample selection and results are discussed in section 3. Section 4 presents a careful statistical testing of our results, and Section 5 our conclusions.

## 2 The method

In this section we give a summary description of our HR diagram inversion method, which was described extensively in our paper I. In contrast with other statistical methods, we do not need to construct synthetic colour magnitude diagrams for each of the possible star formation histories being considered. Rather we use a direct approach which solves for the best $`SFR(t)`$ compatible with the stellar evolutionary models assumed and the observations used.

The evolutionary model consists of an isochrone library, and an IMF. Our results are largely insensitive to the details of the latter, for which we use:

$$\rho (m)\{\begin{array}{cc}\hfill m^{1.3}& 0.08M_{}<m0.5M_{}\hfill \\ \hfill m^{2.2}& 0.5M_{}<m1.0M_{}\hfill \\ \hfill m^{2.7}& 1.0M_{}<m\hfill \end{array}$$
(1)
The above fit was derived by Kroupa et al. (1993) for a large sample towards both galactic poles and all the solar neighbourhood, and therefore applies to the Hipparcos data.

As we shall be treating here only data from the solar neighbourhood derived by the Hipparcos satellite, we shall assume for the observed stars a fixed metallicity of $`[Fe/H]=0`$. This assumption is valid as we will only be treating stars within a short distance from the Sun, having a small spread in ages. Once the metallicity is fixed we use the latest Padova isochrones (Fagotto et al., 1994, Girardi et al., 1996) together with a detailed constant phase interpolation scheme using only stars at constant evolutionary phase, to construct an isochrone library having a chosen temporal resolution.

To transform the isochrones from the theoretical HR diagram to the observed colour-magnitude diagrams, we used the transformations provided by the calibrations of Lejeune et al. (1997) which are appropriate for the solar metallicities considered here. Using the updated calibrations given by Bessell et al. (1998) does not change the transformations significantly in the regime used here, unlike the case for giant and AGB stars (see Weiss & Salaris, 1999).

In this case we implement the method with a formal resolution of 15 Myr, compatible with the high resolution of the Hipparcos observations. It is one of the advantages of the method that this resolution can be increased arbitrarily (up to the stellar model resolution) with computation times scaling only linearly with it.

Our only other inputs are the positions of, say, $`n`$ observed stars in the HR diagram, each having a colour and luminosity, $`c_i`$ and $`l_i`$. Starting from a full likelihood model, we first construct the probability that the $`n`$ observed stars resulted from a certain $`SFR(t)`$. This will be given by:

$$=\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}\left(_{t_0}^{t_1}SFR(t)G_i(t)𝑑t\right),$$
(2)
where

$`G_i(t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _{m_0}^{m_1}}{\displaystyle \frac{\rho (m;t)}{2\pi \sigma (l_i)\sigma (c_i)}}\times `$
$`\times \mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle \frac{D(l_i;t,m)^2}{2\sigma ^2(l_i)}}\right)\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle \frac{D(c_i;t,m)^2}{2\sigma ^2(c_i)}}\right)dm`$
In the above expression $`\rho (m;t)`$ is the density of points along the isochrone of age $`t`$, around the star of mass $`m`$, and is determined by the assumed IMF together with the duration of the differential phase around the star of mass $`m`$. The ages $`t_0`$ and $`t_1`$ are a minimum and a maximum age needed to be considered, as $`m_0`$ and $`m_1`$ are a minimum and a maximum mass considered along each isochrone, e.g. 0.6 and 20 $`M_{}`$. $`\sigma (l_i)`$ and $`\sigma (c_i)`$ are the amplitudes of the observational errors in the luminosity and colour of the $`i`$th star. These values are supplied by the particular observational sample one is analysing. Note that for the sample we have selected (Section 3), there is no correlation between these errors. Finally, $`D(l_i;t,m)`$ and $`D(c_i;t,m)`$ are the differences in luminosity and colour, respectively, between the $`i`$th observed star and a general star of age and mass $`(m,t)`$. We shall refer to $`G_i(t)`$ as the likelihood matrix, since each element represents the probability that a given star, $`i`$, was actually formed at time $`t`$ with any mass.

A similar version was introduced in paper I, but restricted to the case of observational errors only in one variable, which was adequate to the problem of studying the $`SFR(t)`$ of local dSph galaxies treated in paper II. Equation (2) is essentially the extension from the case of a discretised $`SFR(t)`$ used by Tolstoy & Saha (1996), to the case of a continuous function in the construction of the likelihood. The challenge now is to find the optimum $`SFR(t)`$ without evaluating equation (2) i.e. without introducing a fixed set of test $`SFR(t)`$ cases from which one is selected.

The condition that $`(SFR)`$ has an extremal can be written as

$$\delta (SFR)=0,$$

and a variational calculus treatment of the problem applied. Firstly, we develop the product over $`i`$ using the chain rule for the variational derivative, and divide the resulting sum by $``$ to obtain:

$$\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}\left(\frac{\delta _{t_0}^{t_1}SFR(t)G_i(t)𝑑t}{_{t_0}^{t_1}SFR(t)G_i(t)𝑑t}\right)=0$$
(3)
Introducing the new variable $`Y(t)`$ defined as:

$$Y(t)=\sqrt{SFR(t)}𝑑tSFR(t)=\left(\frac{dY(t)}{dt}\right)^2$$

and introducing the above expression into equation (3) we can develop the Euler equation to yield

$$\frac{d^2Y(t)}{dt^2}\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}\left(\frac{G_i(t)}{I(i)}\right)=\frac{dY(t)}{dt}\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}\left(\frac{dG_i/dt}{I(i)}\right)$$
(4)
where

$$I(i)=_{t_0}^{t_1}SFR(t)G_i(t)𝑑t$$

This in effect has transformed the problem from one of searching for a function which maximizes a product of integrals (equation 2) to one of solving an integro-differential equation (equation 4). We solve this equation iteratively, with the boundary condition $`SFR(t_1)=0`$.

Details of the numerical procedure required to ensure convergence to the maximum likelihood $`SFR(t)`$ can be found in our paper I, where a more complete development of the method is also found. In paper I the method was tested extensively using synthetic HR diagrams, obtaining very satisfactory results. Equation (4) will be satisfied by any stationary point in the likelihood, not just the global maximum, it is therefore important to check that the numerical algorithm implemented converges to the true $`SFR(t)`$. This was shown in our paper I, using synthetic HR diagrams extensively, and testing the robustness of the method to changes in the initialization condition of the algorithm. An independent test of the validity of the results was also implemented, and is described in section 4.

The main advantages of our method over other maximum likelihood schemes are (1) the totally non parametric approach the variational calculus treatment allows, and (2) the efficient computational procedure, where no time consuming repeated comparisons between synthetic and observational CMD are necessary, as the optimal $`SFR(t)`$ is solved for directly.

### 2.1 Two tests

We now present two examples of the method’s performance, in cases similar to the Hipparcos samples CMDs. The left panel of Figure (1) shows a synthetic CMD produced from the first input $`SFR(t)`$, resulting in a number of stars similar to what the Hipparcos samples yield for small errors in $`VI`$ ($`<0.12`$ mag) and $`M_V`$ $`(<0.02`$ mag). The positions of the simulated stars are then used to construct the likelihood matrix,which is used to recover the inferred $`SFR(t)`$, through an iterative numerical procedure (see paper I). The right panel of Figure (1) shows the last 3 iterations of the method (solid curves) and the input $`SFR(t)`$, a three burst $`SFR(t)`$ (dotted curve). It can be seen that the main features of the input $`SFR(t)`$ are accurately recovered. The age, duration and shape of the input $`SFR(t)`$ are clearly well represented by the final inferred $`SFR(t)`$. As the difference between successive isochrones diminishes with age, since the errors remain constant, the accuracy of the recovery procedure diminishes with the age of the stellar populations being treated. This is seen in that the first burst is very accurately recovered, whilst the last one appears somewhat spread out.

The last example is shown in Figure (2), which is analogous to Figure (1). Here a $`SFR(t)`$ which is constant over a large period is treated. The HR diagram of this case appears by sight almost identical to that of the previous case, however, given the extremely small errors assumed (typical of the Hipparcos data) the method is capable of distinguish and accurately recover the input $`SFR(t)`$ of these two cases. The small number of stars $`(450)`$ result in a degree of shot noise, which has to be artificially suppressed using a smoothing procedure, the result of which is seen in the residual short period oscillations of the inferred $`SFR(t)`$. This smoothing procedure reduces the effective resolution of the method to $`50`$ Myr. Note that as in the previous example, the inversion method successfully recovers the main features of the input $`SFR(t)`$. In these two tests only stars bluewards of $`VI=0.7`$ where considered in the inversion procedure (see below).

## 3 Sample selection and results

In order to apply the method described in the preceding section to the Hipparcos data, we would like to construct a volume-limited sample, where no biases appear between stars of different ages. Further, such a sample should contain a sufficient number of stars coming from all age groups being considered i.e. it must go down in magnitude to the turnoff point corresponding to the oldest age being considered. Although the Hipparcos satellite produced a catalogue having very well understood errors and highly accurate magnitude and colour determinations for a large number of stars, the sample has to be reduced through several cuts before it complies with the restrictions required by our method.

The Hipparcos catalogue provides an almost complete sample of stars in the solar neighbourhood. The limiting magnitude depends both on spectral type and galactic latitude (ESA SP-1200, Volume 1, page 131). For the types earlier than G5 which we consider here, the limiting V magnitude is given by $`V_{\mathrm{lim}}=7.9+1.1\mathrm{sin}|b|`$. To avoid unnecessary complications, we consider cuts of the type $`V`$=const. at all latitudes with $`V<7.9`$

Figure (3) shows a graph of $`M_V`$ vs. distance for all stars in the Hipparcos catalogue having distance errors smaller than $`20\%`$, and an apparent magnitude $`m_V<7.9`$. The solid lines show the inclusion criteria for one possible volume limited sample, complete to $`M_V<3.15,m<7.25`$ . As it can be seen, the maximum age which can be considered will not be very large, as the number of stars in a volume-limited sample complete to absolute magnitudes greater than 4 rapidly dwindles. After experimenting with synthetic CMDs of known $`SFR(t)`$ produced using our isochrone grid and constructed to have the same numbers of stars as a function of lower magnitude limit as in Figure (3), and recovering the $`SFR(t)`$ using our method, we identified 3 Gyr as the maximum age we can accurately treat with the data at hand. This fixes $`t_0=0,t_1=3`$ Gyr as the temporal limits in equation (2), were the use of 200 isochrones establishes the formal resolution of the method to be $`15`$ Myr.

Although the absolute magnitude errors correlate tightly with the distance, the colour errors correlate more strongly with the apparent magnitude, and can actually represent the dominant error in inverting the CMDs. The solid curve shows the $`m_V<7.25`$ completion limit, which implies errors similar to those used in Figures (1) and (2). It will be with complete volume-limited samples having this apparent magnitude limit that we will be dealing.

As the limit in $`M_V`$ is moved to dimmer stars, the structure of the $`SFR(t)`$at older ages is better recovered by the inversion method, but the number of younger stars diminishes (see Figure 1) and the $`SFR(t)`$ of the younger period is under represented in the recovered $`SFR(t)`$. We constructed a variety of somewhat independent Hipparcos CMDs for different absolute magnitude limits in the range $`3.0<M_V<3.5`$, and obtained highly compatible answers.

Also, all our samples include a certain number of contaminating stars having ages greater than the 3 Gyr limit considered by the inversion method, mostly in the RGB region, as their turn off points appear at magnitudes dimmer than the minimum ones considered. To avoid these stars, the inversion method considers only stars bluewards of $`VI=0.7`$, as was done in the synthetic examples of Figures (1) and (2).

As the fraction of stars produced by the $`SFR(t)`$ which live into the observed CMD diminishes with age, in inverting a well populated CMD the older regions of the $`SFR(t)`$ are under estimated by the recovery method. This is compensated by a correction factor given by the assumed IMF, and the mass at the tip of the RGB as a function of time, as discussed in paper I.

Once the IMF, metallicity, positions of the observed stars in the CMD and observational errors in both coordinates (also supplied by the Hipparcos catalogue) are given, they are used to construct the likelihood matrix $`G_i(t)`$, which is the only input given to the inversion method. The small number of stars present in any volume-limited sample ($`450`$) leaves us insensitive to the existence of small features in the $`SFR(t)`$ producing only a few stars. The limited numbers of stars also reduces the resolution of the method, as a smoothing function has to be applied to suppress instabilities in solving the integro-differential equation of the problem. This final smoothing reduces the effective temporal resolution of the method to 50 Myr, still much higher than that of any indirect chemical evolution inference of $`SFR(t)`$.

### 3.1 Kinematic and geometric corrections

Once the apparent and absolute magnitudes of the sample have been chosen, the set of stars to be studied is fully specified. The positions of which in the CMD are compared to the assumed isochrones to construct the likelihood matrix, which is the only input required by the numerical implementation of the method, as described above. The resulting $`SFR(t)`$ will be representative of the stars which where used in the construction of the likelihood matrix.

To normalize the various inferred $`SFRs(t)`$ from samples having different $`M_V`$ limits, and hence complete out to different distances, we apply the following kinematic and geometric corrections.

Let $`F(v,h)`$ be the fraction of the time a star having vertical velocity at the disk plane $`v`$ spends between heights $`h`$ and $`+h`$. Then, for a cylindrical sample complete to height $`h`$ above and below the disk plane,

$$N(t)=\frac{N_o(t)}{\sqrt{2\pi }\sigma (t)}_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}\frac{e^{v^2/2\sigma (t)^2}}{F(v,h)}𝑑v$$
(5)
where $`N(t)`$ is the number of stars a stellar population of age $`t`$ contains, $`N_o(t)`$ the number of stars of age $`t`$ observed and $`\sigma (t)`$ the time dependent velocity dispersion of the several populations. As volume-limited samples are generally spherical around the Sun, a further geometric factor is required, giving:

$$N(t)=\frac{3N_o(t)}{2\sqrt{2\pi }\sigma (t)R^3}_0^Rrh_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}\frac{e^{v^2/2\sigma (t)^2}}{F(v,h)}𝑑v𝑑r$$
(6)
where $`R`$ is the radius of the observed spherical volume limited sample, $`r`$ is a radial coordinate and $`h^2=R^2r^2`$. To estimate $`F(v,h)`$ one requires the detailed vertical force law of the galactic disk at the solar neighbourhood. The best direct estimate of this function remains that of Kuijken and Gilmore (1989), who show this function to deviate from that of a harmonic potential to a large degree. This detailed force law we integrate numerically to obtain $`F(v,h)`$. We use $`\sigma (t)=\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}20}\mathrm{km}/\mathrm{s}`$ which is appropriate for the metallicity and age ranges we are studying (Edvardsson et al. 1993, Wyse & Gilmore 1995). Note also that the scatter in metallicity within 80 pc is rather small (Garnett and Kobulnicky, 1999) and will not change significantly our results.

In this way, assuming a Gaussian distribution for the vertical velocities of the stars, and a given $`\sigma (t)`$, an observed $`N_o(t)`$ can be transformed into a total $`N(t)`$, which is equal to the total projected disk quantity.

In our case the $`SFR(t)`$ given by the method takes the place of $`N_o(t)`$, and equation (6) is used to obtain a final star formation history, which accounts for the kinematic and geometric factors described. This function is then normalized through the total number of stars in the relevant sample, to give the deduced $`SFR(t)`$ in units of $`M_{}`$Myr<sup>-1</sup>kpc<sup>-2</sup>.

### 3.2 Results

Figure (4) shows the CMD corresponding to a volume-limited sample complete to $`M_V<3.15`$ for stars in the Hipparcos catalogue having errors in parallax of less than $`20\%`$ and $`m_V<7.25`$ (left panel). The right panel of this figure shows the result of applying our inversion method to this CMD, solid curve. The dotted envelope encloses several alternative reconstructions arising from different $`M_V`$ cuts, and gives an estimate of the errors likely to be present in our result, which can be seen to increase with time. The reconstruction based on the $`(M_V,BV)`$ diagram gives essentially the same results.

A certain level of constant star formation activity can be seen, superimposed onto a strong, quasi-periodic component having a period close to $`0.5`$ Gyr, as encoded in the positions of the observed stars in the CMD. The sharp feature seen towards $`t=3`$ Gyr could be the beginning of a fifth cycle, truncated by the boundary condition $`SFR(3)=0`$. We have performed tests with synthetic CMDs having the same numbers of stars and magnitude limits as in Figure (4), and having a variety of $`SFR(t)`$. The method efficiently discriminates between constant and periodic input $`SFR(t)`$, and correctly recovers features such as those found in the inferred $`SFR(t)`$ of Figure (4). We conclude that as far as the Padova isochrones at solar metallicity are representative of the observational properties of the stars in the CMDs, the $`SFR(t)`$ of the solar neighbourhood over the last 3 Gyr has been that shown in Figure (4). The unprecedented time resolution of our $`SFR`$ reconstruction makes it difficult to compare with the results derived from chromospheric activity studies (Rocha-Pinto et al. 1999), although qualitatively we do find the same activity at both 0.5 and above 2 Gyr, but not the decrease between 1 and 2 Gyr.

One possible interpretation of a cyclic component in the $`SFR(t)`$ of the solar neighbourhood can be found in the density wave hypothesis (Lin and Shu, 1964) for the presence of spiral arms in late type galaxies. As the pattern speed and the circular velocity are in general different, a given region of the disk (e.g. the solar neighbourhood), periodically crosses an arm region where the increased local gravitational potential might possibly trigger an episode of star formation. In the simplest version of this scenario, we can take the pattern angular frequency $`\mathrm{\Omega }_p`$ equal to twice the circular frequency $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ at the Sun’s position (Binney & Tremaine 1987), valid within a flat rotation curve region. The time interval $`\mathrm{\Delta }t`$ between encounters with an arm at the solar neighbourhood will be given in general by

$$\mathrm{\Delta }t=\frac{2\pi }{m|\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{\Omega }_p|}$$

that is,

$$\mathrm{\Delta }t=\frac{0.22\mathrm{Gyr}}{m}\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }}{29\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1\mathrm{kpc}^1}\right)^1\left|\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_p}{\mathrm{\Omega }}1\right|^1$$

where $`m`$ is the number of arms in the spiral pattern. The classical value of the pattern speed, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_p=0.5\mathrm{\Omega }14.5`$ km s<sup>-1</sup> kpc<sup>-1</sup> would imply that the interaction with a single arm ($`m=1`$) would be enough to account for the observed regularity in the recent SFR history. However, more recent determinations tend to point to much larger values (e.g. Mishkurov et al. 1979, Avedisova 1989, Amaral and Lépine 1997) close to $`\mathrm{\Omega }_p2324`$ km s<sup>-1</sup> kpc<sup>-1</sup>, which would then imply that the regularity present in the reconstructed $`SFR(t)`$ would be consistent with a scenario where the interaction of the solar neighbourhood with a two-armed spiral pattern would have induced the star formation episodes we detect. These arms are clearly detected in, for instance, the distribution of free electrons in the galactic plane (Taylor and Cordes 1993). This is reminiscent of the explanations put forward to account for the inhomogeneities observed in the velocity distribution function, where well-defined branches associated with moving groups of different ages (Chereul et al. 1999, Skuljan et al. 1999, Asiain et al. 1999) could perhaps be also associated with an interaction with spiral arm(s), although in this case the time scales are much smaller.

Alternatively, if the solar neighbourhood is closer to the corotation radius, the galactic bar could have triggered star formation in the solar neighbourhood with episodes separated by about 0.5 Gyr if the pattern speed of the bar is larger than about 40 km s<sup>-1</sup> kpc<sup>-1</sup> (Dehnen 1999).

Of course, other explanations are possible, for example the cloud formation, collision and stellar feedback models of Vazquez & Scalo (1989) predict a phase of oscillatory $`SFR(t)`$ behaviour as a result of a self-regulated star formation régime. Close encounters with the Magellanic Clouds have also been suggested to explain the intermittent nature of the SFR on longer time scales (Rocha-Pinto et al. 2000).

We have tested the ability of our method to accurately distinguish oscillatory components in the $`SFR(t)`$ with tests such as those shown in Figures (1) and (2). The oscillatory component in the case shown in Figure (1) is successfully recovered by the method. In the case shown in Figure(2) however, although the main features are also accurately recovered, a level of small amplitude fluctuations spuriously appears. This last feature is of such a small level, that if a CMD where produced from the method answer of Figure (1) having the same total number of stars, each small fluctuation would produce a number of stars of order 1.

Our answer shown in Figure (4) shows not only a large scale oscillatory component, but superimposed onto this, a certain level of small amplitude fluctuations. Given the total number of stars present in our sample, we can not rule out the possibility (quit possibly in fact the case) that these small fluctuations are numerical, as they are of amplitude similar to the ones discussed appearing in Figure(2), and are actually buried within the error envelope. The main oscillatory component having a period of 0.5 Gyr however, involves a sufficiently large number of stars to be objectively identified.

A larger and independent data set from which to derive $`SFR(t)`$ would be necessary in order to extend our results to a broader age range, and a more extensive region of the Galactic disk. Increasing the number of stars available for the HR inversion procedure would also allow to recover finer features, and reduce the small numerical fluctuations discussed above.

## 4 Testing the results

In our Paper I we tested this method using synthetic CMDs produced from known star formation histories, with which we could assess the accuracy of the result of the inversion procedure, as shown in Figures (1) and (2). In working with real data, we require the introduction of an independent method of comparing our final result to the starting CMD, in order to check that the answer our inversion procedure gives is a good answer. From our paper I we know that when the stars being used in the inversion procedure were indeed produced from the isochrones and metallicity used to construct the likelihood matrix, the inversion method gives accurate results. The introduction of an independent comparison between our answer and the data is hence a way of checking the accuracy of the input physics used in the inversion procedure, i.e. the IMF, metallicity and observational parameters.

The most common procedure of comparing a certain $`SFR(t)`$ with an observed CMD is to use the $`SFR(t)`$ to generate a synthetic CMD, and compare this to the observations using a statistical test to determine the degree of similarity between the two.

The disadvantage however is that one is not comparing the $`SFR(t)`$ with the data, but rather a particular realisation of the $`SFR(t)`$ with the data. The distinction becomes arbitrary when large numbers of stars are found in all regions of the CMD, which is generally not the case. Following a Bayesian approach, we prefer to adopt the $`W`$ statistic presented by Saha (1998), essentially

$$W=\underset{i=1}{\overset{B}{}}\frac{(m_i+s_i)!}{m_i!s_i!}$$

where B is the number of cells into which the CMD is split, and $`m_i`$ and $`s_i`$ are the numbers of points two distributions being compared have in each cell. This asks for the probability that two distinct data sets are random realisations of the same underling distribution. In implementing this test we first produce a large number (500) of random realisations of our inferred $`SFR(t)`$, and compute the $`W`$ statistic between pairs in this sample of CMD’s. This gives a distribution which is used to determine a range of values of $`W`$ which are expected to arise in random realisations of the $`SFR(t)`$ being tested. Next the $`W`$ statistic is computed between the observed data set, and a new large number of random realisations of $`SFR(t)`$ (also 500), this gives a new distribution of $`W`$ which can be objectively compared to the one arising from the model-model comparison to assess whether both data and modeled CMD’s are compatible with a unique underling distribution.

Figure (5) shows a synthetic CMD produced from our inferred $`SFR(t)`$ for the solar neighbourhood, down to $`M_V=3.15`$. This can be compared to the Hipparcos CMD complete to the same $`M_V`$ limit of Figure (4). A visual inspection reveals approximately equal numbers of stars in each of the distinct regions of the diagram, a more rigorous statistical comparison is also included. The right panel of Figure (5) shows a histogram of the values of the $`W`$ statistic for 500 random realisations of our inferred $`SFR(t)`$ in a model-model comparison. This gives the range of values of the $`W`$ statistic likely to appear in comparisons of two CMD diagrams arising from the same underlying $`SFR(t)`$, our inferred $`SFR(t)`$. The dashed histogram shows the results of 500 synthetic CMDs vs. the observed Hipparcos data set. The compatibility of both sets of $`W`$ values is clear. In this way the observed stars in the volume limited sample complete to $`M_V=3.15`$ and the isochrones, IMF and metallicity used in estimating the inferred $`SFR(t)`$ shown in Figure (4) are shown to be compatible with each other. Similar tests were also performed changing the limiting $`M_V`$ in the range $`3.03.5`$, and comparing against the corresponding Hipparcos sample. This produces alternative CMDs which contain different stars (see Figure 3), which were compared to synthetic CMDs coming always from the same central inferred $`SFR(t)`$. The results were always equal or better than what is shown in Figure 5, model-model and data-model distributions of $`W`$ having mean values well within $`1\sigma `$ of each other, where $`\sigma `$ refers to either the model-model or the data-model $`W`$ distributions.

## 5 Conclusion

We have applied the method developed in our paper I to the data of the Hipparcos catalogue. An objective answer for the $`SFR(t)`$ of the solar neighbourhood over the last 3 Gyr was found, which can be shown to be consistent with the complete volume-limited Hipparcos samples relevant to this age range. A structured $`SFR(t)`$ is obtained showing a cyclic pattern having a period of about 0.5 Gyr, superimposed on some degree of underlying star formation activity which increases slightly with age. No random bursting behaviour was found at the time resolution of 0.05 Gyr of our method. A first order density wave model for the repeated encounter of galactic arms could explain the observed regularity.