text:
# PECULIARITIES OF RAMAN SPECTRA SHAPE IN THE DISORDERED FERROELECTRICS

## 1 Introduction

Investigation of Raman spectra of the first order (FOR) in disordered ferroelectrics was shown to be sensitive method for studying of the critical slowing down of optic phonons nearby ferroelectric transition and dynamics of local fluctuation (see e.g.  and ref. therein). Several attempts were made to explain FOR spectral anomalies such as strong increase of peak intensity in the vicinity of $`T_c`$ and peculiar shape of the line  . However, up to now there is no general approach to the description of Raman spectra in the disordered ferroelectrics nearby $`T_c`$. These results are in the discrepancy in the values of the materials physical characteristics obtained from experimental data (see e.g.  -). The most promising way for development of general approach seems to be the model allowing for inhomogeneous broadening of FOR lines induced by static disorder and homogeneous broadening due to dynamic effects. The existence of both these contributions to Raman spectra was shown early in $`KTa_{1x}Nb_xO_3`$ ($`KTN`$) and $`K_{1x}Li_xTaO_3`$ ($`KLT`$) .

Theory of inhomogeneously broadened lines in radio-, optic- and other spectroscopy methods was developed in many details early for conventional dielectric and magnetic systems . In these materials inhomogeneous broadening used to be temperature independent, so that only homogeneous broadening may be the source of temperature dependence of the spectra line shape and width. In the disordered ferroelectrics due to nonlinear and spatial correlation effects which is known to be especially strong in the vicinity of $`T_c`$ inhomogeneous broadening was recently shown to be temperature dependent  .

In the present work a theory of FOR allowing for both linear and nonlinear contributions to inhomogeneous broadening as well as to homogeneous mechanisms of line broadening is developed. The theory explains the main peculiarities of observed FOR spectra in $`KTL`$ with 1% and 4% of $`Li`$  and in $`KTN`$ with 15.7% of $`Nb`$ ions  when the systems approach the phase transition from above. Since in vicinity of the phase transition the nonlinear effects are known to be large enough our theory is more general than that in  , where nonlinear and spatial correlation effects were not taken into account. The proposed theoretical approach allows to describe of the Raman spectra (in distingvish  ) without calculation of the correlation function of the quasi-static polarization fluctuations but only suggesting about its spectral density form. Because of generality of proposed theory it can be applied to many ferroelectrics in vicinity of transition temperature.

## 2 Theory of first order Raman spectra shape

2.1 Incipient ferroelectric $`KTaO_3`$ doped by $`Li`$ or $`Nb`$ ions can have ferroelectric phase transition, mixed ferroglass phase and dipole glass state in dependence on temperature and the impurities concentrations . These materials can be regarded as the model systems of the disordered ferroelectrics. Their peculiar properties are connected with off-center positions of $`Li`$ and $`Nb`$ ions substituted for $`K^+`$ and $`Ta^{5+}`$ ions respectively. Some anomalies of Raman spectra can be explained also by these ions off-centrality. In particular quasistatic polarization fluctuations induced by off-center ions can lead to the reduction of $`KTaO_3`$ cubic symmetry and to the appearance of first order Raman scattering (FOR) even above the transition temperature $`T_c`$ . The most detail description of the appeareance of the single phonon Raman lines above $`T_c`$ can be found in  where it was shown how the slow finite-range precursor order, dominant near the phase transition, is responsible for the persistence of quasi-first-order hard-mode features above $`T_c`$.

As known, Raman scattering in perovskite ferroelectrics is caused by the changes in the oxygen electrtonic polarizability $`\delta \alpha (r,t)`$ induced by optic vibration modes of the lattice. This changes can be written in the form

$$\delta \alpha (r,t)=𝐏(𝐫,t)\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}𝐏(𝐫,t)$$
(1)
where $`P(r,t)`$ represents the space- and time-dependent polarization fluctuation and $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$ is a fourth-rank tensor. Equation (1) usually describes second-order Raman scattering. However, if we write the fluctuation polarization as a sum over the components due to the polar hard modes $`P^h`$ and slow relaxing component $`P^\mu `$ we can explain the appearance of single-phonon Raman scattering above $`T_c`$ considering the cross terms $`P^\mu P^h`$ in the Eq.(1) The scattering intensity is given by the spatial and temperature Fourier components of the polarizability correlation function

$`I(\omega )`$ $``$ $`<\delta \alpha (r,t)\delta \alpha (0,0)>_{q=0,\omega }`$ (2)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{q^{}}{}}{\displaystyle 𝑑\omega ^{}<P^\mu (r,t)P^\mu (0,0)>_{q^{},\omega ^{}}<P^h(r,t)P^h(0,0)>_{q^{},\omega \omega ^{}}},`$
Because the first correlation function has a sharp maximum near $`\omega ^{}=0`$ and second one near $`\mathrm{\Omega }_q`$, $`I(\omega )`$ is sharply peaked at $`\omega =\mathrm{\Omega }_q`$, i.e., near the hard single-phonon frequency.

It is seen that (2) can be represented as the convolution of the functions represented inhomogeneous and homogeneous mechanisms of broadening connected respectively with the first and the second correlators and so it can be written in the form

$$I(\omega )=I_0_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}J(\omega ,\omega ^{})f(\omega ^{})𝑑\omega ^{}.$$
(3)
The detailed form of homogeneuos $`J(\omega ,\omega ^{})`$ and inhomogeneous contribution $`f(\omega ^{})`$ can be obtained by the following way. Thermal lattice vibrations usually lead to homogeneous broadening with simple Lorentzian shape, i.e.

$$<P^h(r,t)P^h(0,0)>_{q^{},\omega \omega ^{}}\frac{1}{\mathrm{\Omega }_q^{}}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }}{\mathrm{\Gamma }^2+\left(\omega \omega ^{}\mathrm{\Omega }_q^{}\right)^2},$$
(4)
which should be valid for the difference of frequencies $`(\omega \omega ^{})`$ close to hard phonon frequency $`\mathrm{\Omega }_q^{}`$. On the other hand the correlation function of quasistatic polarization reads

$$<P^\mu (r,t)P^\mu (0,0)>_{q^{},\omega ^{}}=<P^\mu (r)P^\mu (0)>_q^{}\pi \delta (\omega ^{}).$$
(5)
Substituting (long-wave approximation) $`_q^{}\frac{V}{(2\pi )^3}d^3q^{}`$ and performing some transformation one obtaine that

$$f(\omega ^{})=𝑑q^{}q^2<P^\mu (r)P^\mu (0)>_q^{}\delta (\omega ^{}\mathrm{\Omega }_q^{})\frac{1}{\mathrm{\Omega }_q^{}},$$
(6)
$$J(\omega ,\omega ^{})=\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }}{\mathrm{\Gamma }^2+(\omega \omega ^2)},I_0=\frac{V}{2\pi }.$$
(7)
Equations (6) and (7) determine respectively the contribution of inhomogeneous and homogeneous broadening into Raman line shape (see Eq. (3)). However it is seen from Eq. (6), that for $`f(\omega )`$ calculation one has to calculate firstly the correlation function of polarization. Its calculation utilized some special models and supposition  . To our mind more general approach for $`f(\omega )`$ calculation can be statistical theory of specrtal line shape . This theory was sucsessfully applied for description of optic, radiospectrroscopy, $`\gamma `$-resonance etc. line shapes .

2.2 The shape of $`f(\omega )`$ was calculated in the statistical theory framework for the cases when the frequency shift of spectral line is linear  and nonlinear  function of random fields. The latter case seems to be especially important for disordered ferroelectrics at $`T=T_c\pm \mathrm{\Delta }T`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }T(10÷20)K`$, where nonlinear and correlation effects is known to be large enough. As a matter of fact the distribution function allowing for these effects can be expressed via linear one in the framework of the general theory of probability which makes it possible to write down the distribution of one random quantity via that of another if the relation between these quantities is known . For example in the simplest case when the random quantity $`x`$ is a single-valued monotonous function of another random quantity $`h`$ then the relation between their distribution functions $`g(h)`$ and $`f(x)`$ can be written as

$$g(h)=f(x(h))\left|\frac{dx(h)}{dh}\right|.$$
(8)
In general case when several different $`x`$ values correspond to the same $`h(x)`$ value the space of $`x`$ should be devided into the regions where the function $`h(x)`$ is monotonous. For the entire $`x`$-domain distribution function $`g(h)`$ can be represented as a sum of terms like Eq.(8) . Since the distribution function in the case of linear contribution of the random field $`f_1(\omega )`$ can be analytically calculated in statistical theory approach  we have to express via it the distribution function allowing for nonlinear random field contribution. Let us suppose that the shift $`\mathrm{\Delta }\omega =\omega \omega _0\omega `$ of the spectral line maximum position $`\omega 0`$ due to random field contribution can be written as a power law (up to some $`m^{th}`$ power) of the random field $`\omega ^{}`$

$$\omega =\omega ^{}\alpha _2\omega ^2\mathrm{}\alpha _m\omega ^m.$$
(9)
Equation (9) makes it possible to express the distribution function of $`\omega `$ via that of $`\omega ^{}`$ in the form

$$f_m(\omega )=\underset{k=1}{\overset{m}{}}f_1\left(\omega ^{}=\omega _k\right)\left|\frac{d\varphi (\omega ,\omega ^{})}{d\omega ^{}}\right|_{\omega ^{}=\omega _k},$$
(10)
$$\varphi (\omega ,\omega ^{})=\omega \omega ^{}\alpha _2\omega _{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}\mathrm{}\alpha _m\omega _{}^{}{}_{}{}^{m}.$$
(11)
where $`\omega _k`$ are the real roots of the algebraic equation

$$\varphi (\omega ,\omega _k)=0.$$
(12)
It is seen, that $`m^{th}`$ order distribution function $`f_m(\omega )`$ is expressed via that calculated in linear approximation when all nonlinear coefficients equal zero, i.e. $`\alpha _2=\alpha _3=\mathrm{}=\alpha _m=0`$. Shape of $`f_1(\omega )`$ calculated in the statistical theory approach was shown to be Gaussian, Lorentzian or Holtzmarkian in dependence on types of random field sources with parameters determined by the sources concentrations and characteristics .

In the simplest case, when the main contribution is connected with the first nonlinear term in Eqs. (9), (11) ($`\alpha _20,\alpha _3=\mathrm{}=\alpha _m=0`$) Eqs.(10), (11) and (12) lead to the following form of the normalized second order distribution function

$$f_2(\omega )=\frac{\mathrm{\Theta }\left(\omega +\frac{1}{4\alpha _2}\right)}{\sqrt{1+4\alpha _2\omega }}\left[f_1\left(\frac{\sqrt{1+4\alpha _2\omega }1}{2\alpha _2}\right)+f_1\left(\frac{\sqrt{1+4\alpha _2\omega }+1}{2\alpha _2}\right)\right],$$
(13)
where $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ is the teta-function, so that $`f_20`$ only in region $`\omega _c\omega \mathrm{}`$ ($`\alpha _2>0`$) or $`\mathrm{}\omega \omega _c`$ ($`\alpha _2<0`$),

$$\omega _c=(1/4\alpha _2)$$
(14)
is a critical frequency at which a divergency of $`f_2(\omega )`$ appears. Therefore $`f_2(\omega )`$ is strongly asymmetrical, and its form at $`\omega \omega _c`$ (the wing of $`f_2(\omega )`$) is the following

$$f_2(\omega )1/\sqrt{1+4\alpha _2\omega }.$$
(15)
Let us consider the homogeneous contribution in the Lorentzian form (see Eq.(7)). In this case the integration in Eq.(3) is equivalent to substitution $`\omega \pm \frac{i}{\tau }`$ for $`\omega `$ in the Eq.(13) ($`1/\tau \mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is half width on the half height). If there are several mechanisms of homogeneous broadening with Lorentzian forms $`1/\tau =_i1/\tau _i`$, where $`i`$ numerates the mechanisms.

The aforementioned procedure (or integration in Eq.(3 )) with respect to Eq.(13) in supposition that $`f_1(\omega )`$ has Gaussian form, i.e.

$$f_1(\omega )=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi }}e^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{\omega ^2}{2\mathrm{\Delta }^2}}},$$
(16)
leads to the following shape of spectral line in the considered case

$`I_2(\omega )={\displaystyle \frac{\frac{1}{2}+\frac{1}{\pi }\mathrm{arctan}\tau (\omega \omega _c)}{\mathrm{\Delta }\sqrt{2\pi \phi (\omega )}}}\{\mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{S_1(\omega )2(1+2\alpha _2\omega )}{8\alpha _2^2\mathrm{\Delta }^2}}\right]\mathrm{cos}{\displaystyle \frac{4\alpha _2/\tau S_2(\omega )}{8\alpha _2^2\mathrm{\Delta }^2}}`$
$`+\mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{S_1(\omega )2(1+2\alpha _2\omega )}{8\alpha _2^2\mathrm{\Delta }^2}}\right]\mathrm{cos}{\displaystyle \frac{4\alpha _2/\tau +S_2(\omega )}{8\alpha _2^2\mathrm{\Delta }^2}}\},`$ (17)
where

$`\phi (\omega )=\sqrt{(1+4\alpha _2\omega )^2+(4\alpha _2/\tau )^2},`$
$`S_{1,2}(\omega )=\sqrt{2}\sqrt{\phi (\omega )\pm (1+4\alpha _2\omega )}.`$
The results of numerical calculations for several values of dimensionless parameters $`\alpha _2\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and $`1/(\tau \mathrm{\Delta })`$ are depicted in figs. 1,2. It is seen that homogeneous contribution transforms $`f_2(\omega )`$ divergence at $`\omega =\omega _c`$ into sharp maximum, so that the spectral line has two maxima (see fig. 1) instead of one in the linear case origin of high frequency one being connected with Gaussian form. The distance between two maxima approximately equals $`\omega _c`$ (see fig. 1). At large enough nonlinear contribution only sharp maximum at $`\omega =\omega _c`$ conserves, its width increases with $`1/\tau `$ increasing (see fig. 2). The left hand side half-width of low-frequency peak completely defined by homogeneous broadening mechanisms, meanwhile right hand side part of the line at $`\omega >\omega _c`$ defines mainly by inhomogeneous mechanism contribution.

## 3 Raman spectra in KTL and KTN

3.1 The developed theory was applied to recently observed $`TO_2`$ FOR in $`KTL`$ with 1% and 4% of $`Li`$ and in $`KTN`$ with 15.7% of $`Nb`$ .

Let us begin with the consideration of Raman spectra in $`KTL`$. Measurements were carried out at $`T=10`$ K ($`x_{Li}=0.01`$) and $`T=55`$ K ($`x_{Li}=0.04`$) . In both samples the observed line was strongly asymmetric with maximum at $`\omega 198\mathrm{cm}^1`$. These lines were fitted good enough by Eqs. (12) - (14) with the following dimensionless parameters $`\alpha _2\mathrm{\Delta }=0.38`$, $`(\tau \mathrm{\Delta })^1=0.06`$ (fig. 3) and $`\alpha _2\mathrm{\Delta }=0.55`$, $`(\tau \mathrm{\Delta })^1=0.15`$ (fig. 4) for the considered $`Li`$ concentrations respectively.

The position of the lines maxima $`\omega _m\omega _0=\omega _c`$ is defined by the parameter of nonlinearity in accordance with Eq. (14). We obtained $`\alpha _20.1`$ cm by the fitting of the high frequency line tails with the Eq.(15). This value gives $`\omega _m=\omega _c+\omega _0197.6\mathrm{cm}^1`$ with the reference point $`\omega _0=199\mathrm{cm}^1`$. Note that Eq.(15) describes also observed frequency dependence of the lines tails for the same $`\alpha _2`$ value. This made it possible to obtaine yhe magnitude of the Gaussian width $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ with the help of aforemationed $`\alpha _2\mathrm{\Delta }`$ values: $`\mathrm{\Delta }=3.8\mathrm{cm}^1`$ ($`x_{Li}=0.01`$) and $`\mathrm{\Delta }=5.5\mathrm{cm}^1`$ ($`x_{Li}=0.04)`$.

In accordance with our theory the line form at $`\omega <\omega _c`$ defines completely by homogeneous mechanism contribution represented by Eq.(4). It is seen that low-frequency half-width $`1/\tau `$ is connected with hard phonon life time $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^1`$. Keeping in mind the obtained values of $`(\tau \mathrm{\Delta })^1\mathrm{\Gamma }/\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ one find $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ ($`T=10`$ K) $`0.25\mathrm{cm}^1`$, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ ($`T=55`$ K) $`0.8\mathrm{cm}^1`$. These date are in resonable agreement with ordinary values of hard phonon life times and with observed low-frequency half-width (see figs 3, 4 ).

3.2 Now let us proceed to consideration of Raman spectra in $`KTN`$ with 15.7% $`Nb`$ which has the transition from cubic to tetragonal phase at $`T_c=138.6`$ K. The measurements were carried out at several temperatures in vicinity of $`T_c`$: $`T=160`$, 150, 146 and 142 K . At all the temperatures the lines with two maxima were observed, the first being nearby $`\omega _1200\mathrm{cm}^1`$ and the second at $`\omega _2220\mathrm{cm}^1`$. The intensity of low frequency maximum essentially increased with $`T`$ lowering, meanwhile the intensity of high frequency one became very small at $`T=142`$ K. Since nonlinear parameter $`\alpha _2`$ increases with temperature approaching to $`T_c`$ , nonlinear effects has to be the largest at $`T=142`$ K. Qualitatively transformation of spectra from two-peak line to one-sharp peak line at nonlinear parameter increasing is in agreement with theoretical overcasting (see figs.1, 2) It is seen also that increasing of low frequency maximum intensity with $`T`$ lowering can be the result of $`1/\tau `$ decreasing.

To be sure that nonlinear effects are really responsible for observed Raman spectra transformation we checked if the Eqs.(13-15) fitted experimental spectra. It was shown that Eq.(15) fitted the wing ($`\omega 230\mathrm{cm}^1`$) of Raman line at $`T=142`$ K for $`\alpha _20.015\mathrm{cm}`$, which lead to $`\omega _c20\mathrm{cm}^1`$ (see Eq. (14)). This value fits pretty good the distance between two peaks of observed Raman spectra (see fig. 5), which speaks in favour of nonlinear effects contribution. In fig. 5a we depicted line shape calculated with the help of Eq. (17) for $`\alpha _2=0.012\mathrm{cm}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }17\mathrm{cm}^1`$. The later quantity was taken from measured high frequency maximum width. Note, that obtained $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ value made it possible to fit dimensionless $`\omega /\mathrm{\Delta }`$ scale with $`\omega `$ scale in fig. 5 and later in fig. 6.

The values of homogeneous broadening parameter $`1/\tau `$ at different T were calculated in supposition that it defines mainly by reorientational frequency of elastic dipole connected with $`Nb`$. This frequency temperature dependence was measured early  and it was described by Arrenius law

$$\frac{1}{\tau }=\frac{1}{\tau _0}\mathrm{exp}(U/T)$$
(18)
with U=200 K and $`1/\tau _0=7\times 10^9`$ Hz. At $`T=150`$ K Eq.(13) leads to the value $`(\tau \mathrm{\Delta })^10.004`$, which was used in calculation of the line, depicted in fig. 5a. It is seen from fig. 5 that the calculation and observed spectra look like one another.More detailed comparison of the theory and experiment was carried out for Raman line observed at $`T=142`$ K (see fig. 6). Theoretical curve was drawn for aforementioned parameter $`\alpha _2=0.015`$ cm, obtained from line wing behaviour and $`1/\tau `$ was calculated with the help of Eq.(18). It is seen that theory fits pretty good observed Raman spectra. This gave evidence that measured Raman line asymmetry and rapid change in line shape when approaching the transition from above is really connected with nonlinear effects in $`KTN`$ with 15.7% $`Nb`$. Theory overcasts strong increasing of low frequency peak at the region $`142\mathrm{K}>T>T_c`$ because of $`\alpha _2`$ increasing and $`1/\tau `$ decreasing in supposition that there is no another even small temperature independent contribution to $`1/\tau `$.

Comparing the obtained data for $`KTL`$ and $`KTN`$ one can see that because the reorientation rate of $`Nb`$ dipoles is much larger than that of $`Li`$, the homogeneous broadening of Raman line in $`KTL`$ is defined by hard phonon dynamic whereas in $`KTN`$ \- by $`Nb`$ elastic moment reorintation. Note that in  the reorientation of $`Nb`$ electric dipole moment were supposed to be the origin of the homogeneous broadening. However the parameters of the electric dipoles orientations obtained from fitting of the theory with the experiment were strongly different from those obtained early in independent measurements .

## 4 Discussion

The proposed theoretical description of Raman spectra shapes was perfomed without calculation of correlation function of quasy-static fluctuation of polarization. The comparison with the caculations of Raman spectra based on calculation of this correlation function shows that the parameter $`\alpha _2\mathrm{\Delta }`$ corresponds to $`v_h^2/\omega _0^2r_c^2`$ where $`v_h`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0`$ and $`r_c`$ are, respectively, a sound velosity, hard mode frequency at $`q=0`$ and the correlation length of the polarisation in the pure lattice. These physical quantities define temperature and concentrational dependence of obtained values of $`\alpha _2\mathrm{\Delta }`$. The value of parameter $`R_c/r_c`$ ($`R_c`$ is correlation radius of the lattice with impurities) defines the ratio of inhomogeneous and homogeneous contributions and at $`TT_c`$ ($`R_c\mathrm{}`$ ) the line becomes completely inhomogeneous  . In our approach the parameter of nonlinearity strongly increases with $`TT_c`$ and becomes much greater than homogeneous contribution which tends to decrease the magnitude of line maximum. Therefore qualititavely our results are in agreement with those obtained in  .

However comparing the frequency dependence of $`J(\omega )`$ at large $`\omega `$ one can see that it was described as $`(\omega \mathrm{\Omega }_0)^{3/2}`$  whereas in our theory as $`(1+4\alpha _2\omega )^{1/2}`$. More accurate measurements of line intensity decay could be desirable for both theory comparison. Moreover, our theory gives the line shape with two maxima for intermidiate values of $`\alpha _2\mathrm{\Delta }`$, which looks like that observed in $`KTN`$ (see fig. 5). Thus the observed line shape with two maxima naturally appeares in our theory whereas the second maximum was not obtained in the previous theoretical description . Its origin was supposed to be some forbidden transition related to the mixture of acoustic and optic modes.

Therefore peculiarities of Raman spectra shape were explained by proposed theory. In particular it was shown that nonlinear effects leads to strong assymetry of the lines and to appearing of the low frequency sharp maximum, its left hand side is defined by dynamic properties of the system. The division between dynamic and static characteristics contribution into Raman spectra shape makes possible to investigate separately the both aforementioned characteristics by Raman spectroscopy method.

## Figure captions

Figure 1. Line shape calculated on the base of Eq.(9) for $`\alpha _2\mathrm{\Delta }`$ =0.22 and $`(\tau \mathrm{\Delta })^1`$= 0.3 (curve 1), 0.01 (curve 2); doted line is Gaussian form.

Figure 2. Line shape calculated on the base of Eq.(9) for $`\alpha _2\mathrm{\Delta }`$ =0.4 and $`(\tau \mathrm{\Delta })^1`$ = 0.1 (curve 1), 0.05 (curve 2), 0.01 (curve 3); doted line is Gaussian form.

Figure 3. FOR scattering line shape, solid line - theory at $`\alpha _2\mathrm{\Delta }`$ =0.38 and $`(\tau \mathrm{\Delta })^1`$= 0.06, crosses - experimental data for KLT with 1% of Li at $`T=10`$ K . Intensity is represented in arbitrary units.

Figure 4. FOR scattering line shape, solid line - theory at $`\alpha _2\mathrm{\Delta }`$ =0.55 and $`(\tau \mathrm{\Delta })^1`$= 0.15, crosses - experimental data for KLT with 4% of Li at $`T=55`$ K . Intensity is represented in arbitrary units.

Figure 5. FOR scattering line shape of KTN with 15.7% of Nb at $`T=150`$ K  (b); calculated line shape for $`\alpha _2\mathrm{\Delta }`$ =0.21, $`(\tau \mathrm{\Delta })^1`$= 0.004 (a).

Figure 6. FOR scattering line shape, solid line - theory at $`\alpha _2\mathrm{\Delta }`$ =0.25 and $`(\tau \mathrm{\Delta })^1`$= 0.0036, doted line - for KTN with 15.7% of Nb at $`T=142`$ K .


format: text

text:
# Massive Scalar Particles in a Modified Schwarzschild Geometry

Massive, spinless bosons have vanishing probability of reaching the sphere $`r=2M`$ from the region $`r>2M`$ when the original Schwarzschild metric is modified by maximal acceleration corrections.

PACS: 04.70.-s, 04.70.Bw
Keywords: Quantum Geometry, Schwarzschild metric

It is commonly believed that the construction of a geometrical theory of quantum mechanics would lend perspective to a variety of problems, from the unification of general relativity and quantum mechanics to the regularization of field equations. In response to this need Caianiello and collaborators ,  developed a model in which quantization is interpreted as curvature of the eight-dimensional space-time tangent bundle TM. The model incorporates the Born reciprocity principle and the notion that the proper acceleration of massive particles has an upper limit $`𝒜_m`$.

Classical and quantum arguments supporting the existence of a maximal acceleration (MA) have long been adduced . MA also appears in the context of Weyl space  and of a geometrical analogue of Vigier’s stochastic theory .

Some authors regard $`𝒜_m`$ as a universal constant fixed by Planck’s mass ,, but a direct application of Heisenberg’s uncertainty relations , as well as the geometrical interpretation of the quantum commutation relations given by Caianiello, suggest that $`𝒜_m`$ be fixed by the rest mass of the particle itself according to $`𝒜_m=2mc^3/\mathrm{}`$.

MA touches upon a number of issues. The existence of a MA would rid black hole entropy of ultraviolet divergencies ,, and circumvent inconsistencies associated with the application of the point-like concept to relativistic quantum particles .

It is significant that a limit on the acceleration also occurs in string theory. Here the upper limit manifests itself through Jeans-like instabilities  which occur when the acceleration induced by the background gravitational field is larger than a critical value $`a_c=(m\alpha )^1`$for which the string extremities become causally disconnected . $`m`$ is the string mass and $`\alpha `$ is the string tension.

Frolov and Sanchez  have then found that a universal critical acceleration $`a_c=(m\alpha )^1`$ must be a general property of strings.

While in all these instances the critical acceleration is the result of the interplay of the Rindler horizon with the finite extension of the particle ,, in the Caianiello model MA is a basic physical property of all massive particles which appears automatically in the physical laws. At the same time the model introduces an invariant interval in TM that leads to a regularization of the field equations that does not require a fundamental length as in  and does therefore preserve the continuum structure of space-time.

Applications of the Caianiello model range from cosmology to the calculation of corrections to the Lamb shift of hydrogenic atoms. A sample of pertinent references can be found in  . In all these works space-time is endowed with a causal structure in which the proper accelerations of massive particles are limited. This is achieved by means of an embedding procedure pioneered in  and discussed at length in , . The procedure stipulates that the line element experienced by an accelerating particle is represented by

$$d\tau ^2=\left[1+\frac{\ddot{x}_\mu \ddot{x}^\mu }{𝒜_m^2}\right]\eta _{\mu \nu }dx^\mu dx^\nu ,$$
(1)
and is therefore observer-dependent as conjectured by Gibbons and Hawking . As a consequence, the effective space-time geometry experienced by accelerated particles exhibits mass-dependent corrections, which in general induce curvature, and give rise to a mass-dependent violation of the equivalence principle. The classical limit $`\left(𝒜_m\right)^1=\frac{\mathrm{}}{2mc^3}0`$ returns space-time to its ordinary geometry.

In the presence of gravity, we replace $`\eta _{\mu \nu }`$ with the corresponding metric tensor $`g_{\mu \nu }`$, a choice that preserves the full structure introduced in the case of flat space. We obtain

$$d\tau ^2=\left(1+\frac{g_{\mu \nu }\ddot{x}^\mu \ddot{x}^\nu }{𝒜_m^2}\right)g_{\alpha \beta }dx^\alpha dx^\beta \sigma ^2(x)g_{\alpha \beta }dx^\alpha dx^\beta ,$$
(2)
where $`\ddot{x}^\mu =d^2x^\mu /ds^2`$ is the, in general, non–covariant acceleration of a particle along its worldline.

We have recently studied the modifications produced by MA in the motion of a test particle in a Schwarzschild field . We have found that these account for the presence of a spherical shell, external to the Schwarzschild sphere, that is forbidden to any classical particle and hampers the formation of a black hole. Our aim here is to study the behaviour of a quantum, scalar particle in this modified Schwarzschild geometry. The calculations involve both classical and quantum behaviours of the particle together in a single framework. The first one determines, through the expectation value of the acceleration, the effective gravitational field which in turn defines the latter by altering the make-up of the Klein-Gordon equation.

Before embarking on this problem, some cautionary remarks are in order .

The effective theory presented is intrinsically non-covariant. Non-covariant is the quadri-acceleration that appears in $`\sigma ^2(x)`$ and non-covariant is $`\sigma ^2(x)`$ itself which is not, therefore, a true scalar. In addition $`\sigma ^2(x)`$ could be eliminated from (2) by means of a coordinate transformation if one insisted on applying the principles of general relativity to this effective theory. On the contrary, the embedding procedure requires that $`\sigma ^2(x)`$ be present in (2) and that it be calculated in the same coordinates of the unperturbed gravitational background. It is therefore desirable to check the results of a particular calculation in more than a single coordinate system. Nonetheless the choice of $`\ddot{x}^\mu `$ is supported by the derivation of $`𝒜_m`$ from quantum mechanics, by special relativity and by the weak field approximation to general relativity. A fully covariant presentation of the ideas expounded is still lacking. The model is not intended, therefore, to supersede general relativity, but rather to provide a way to calculate the effect of MA on the quantum particle.

For convenience, the natural units $`\mathrm{}=c=G=1`$ are used below. The conformal factor can be easily calculated as in  starting from (2), with $`\theta =\pi /2`$, and from the well known expressions for $`\ddot{t},\ddot{r}`$ and $`\ddot{\varphi }`$ in Schwarzschild coordinates . One obtains

$$\sigma ^2(r)=1+\frac{1}{𝒜_m^2}\{\frac{1}{12M/r}(\frac{3M\stackrel{~}{L}^2}{r^4}+\frac{\stackrel{~}{L}^2}{r^3}\frac{M}{r^2})^2+$$

$$+(\frac{4\stackrel{~}{L}^2}{r^4}+\frac{4\stackrel{~}{E}^2M^2}{r^4(12M/r)^3})[\stackrel{~}{E}^2(1\frac{2M}{r})(1+\frac{\stackrel{~}{L}^2}{r^2})]\},$$
(3)
where $`M`$ is the mass of the source, $`\stackrel{~}{E}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{L}`$ are the total energy and angular momentum per unit of test particle rest mass $`m`$.

As discussed in , the modifications introduced by Eq. (3) include the presence of a spherical shell, external to the Schwarzschild sphere, that is forbidden to classical particles. The radius of the shell is $`2M<r<(2+\eta )M`$, where $`\eta `$ is much less than one and increases with the total energy per unit of test particle mass $`\stackrel{~}{E}`$. The question now arises whether quantum particles can penetrate the shell. This problem is tackled in the present work where the massive, quantum particle satisfies the Klein–Gordon equation.

In the effective curved space–time of metric (2), the wave equation for a scalar particle of rest mass $`m`$ is

$$(_\mu ^\mu +m^2)\psi (x)=0,$$
(4)
where $`_\mu ^\mu =(1/\sqrt{\stackrel{~}{g}})_\mu (\sqrt{\stackrel{~}{g}}\stackrel{~}{g}^{\mu \nu }_\nu )`$, $`\stackrel{~}{g}_{\mu \nu }=\sigma ^2(r)g_{\mu \nu }`$, and $`_\mu `$ is the covariant derivative.

Written explicitly, Eq. (4) takes the form

$$\{\frac{^2}{t^2}\frac{e^\lambda }{\sigma ^2r^2}\frac{}{r}\left(\sigma ^2r^2e^\lambda \frac{}{r}\right)$$

$$\frac{e^\lambda }{r^2}[\frac{1}{\mathrm{sin}\theta }\frac{}{\theta }\left(\mathrm{sin}\theta \frac{}{\theta }\right)+\frac{1}{\mathrm{sin}^2\theta }\frac{^2}{\varphi ^2}]+m^2\sigma ^2e^\lambda \}\psi (t,r,\theta ,\varphi )=0.$$
(5)
By separating variables, the wave function can be written as

$$\psi (t,r,\theta ,\varphi )=T(t)R(r)\mathrm{\Theta }(\theta ,\varphi )$$
(6)
and Eq. (5) can be split into the following three equations

$$\frac{^2T}{t^2}+\omega ^2T=0,$$
(7)
$$\frac{1}{\mathrm{\Theta }}\left[\frac{1}{\mathrm{sin}\theta }\frac{}{\theta }\left(\mathrm{sin}\theta \frac{}{\theta }\right)+\frac{1}{\mathrm{sin}^2\theta }\frac{^2}{\varphi ^2}\right]\mathrm{\Theta }=l(l+1),$$
(8)
$$e^{2\lambda }R^{^{\prime \prime }}+\left(2\frac{\sigma ^{}}{\sigma }+\frac{2}{r}+\lambda ^{}\right)e^{2\lambda }R^{^{}}+\left[\omega ^2e^\lambda \left(\frac{l(l+1)}{r^2}+m^2\sigma ^2\right)\right]R=0,$$
(9)
where $`\omega ^2`$ is a separation constant corresponding to the frequency of the wave, $`l`$ is the orbital angular momentum quantum number of the scalar particle and a prime indicates differentiation with respect to $`r`$.

The solution of Eq. (8) is

$$\mathrm{\Theta }_{lp}(\theta ,\varphi )=Y_l^p(\mathrm{cos}\theta )e^{ip\varphi }$$
(10)
where $`Y_l^p(\mathrm{cos}\theta )`$ are the usual spherical harmonics, and $`p`$, with $`pl`$, is the magnetic quantum number. The general solution of eq. (7) is

$$T(t)=C_1e^{i\omega t}+C_2e^{i\omega t},$$
(11)
where $`C_1`$ and $`C_2`$ are arbitrary constants. It follows, from Eqs. (6), (10) and (11) that the eigenfunctions of the scalar wave equation (5) can be cast in the form

$$\psi (t,r,\theta ,\varphi )=NR(r)Y_l^p(\mathrm{cos}\theta )e^{i(p\varphi \pm \omega t)},$$
(12)
where $`N`$ is a normalization constant and $`R(r)`$ is the solution of the radial wave equation (9).

In order to derive from (9) the effective quantum potential in which the boson field propagates, one usually introduces the variable $`r^{}=r^{}(r)`$ such that

$$e^{2\lambda }\left(\frac{dr^{}}{dr}\right)^2=1.$$
(13)
Eq. (13) implies that $`r^{}(r)=r+2M\mathrm{ln}(r2M)`$, which is defined for $`r2M`$. After substituting $`R(r^{})=\alpha (r^{})\beta (r^{})`$ into (9), one requires that the coefficient of $`d\alpha /dr^{}`$ vanishes , i.e.

$$\frac{d\beta }{dr^{}}G(r)\beta =0,$$
(14)
where

$$G(r)\left(\frac{\sigma ^{}}{\sigma }+\frac{1}{r}\right)e^\lambda .$$
(15)
In the region $`r2M`$, the equation linking $`r`$ to $`r^{}`$ may be used to integrate Eq. (14). The result is $`\beta (r)=\beta _0(r\sigma (r))^1`$ where $`\beta _0`$ is an integration constant. $`\beta `$ vanishes for $`r2M`$. The equation for $`\alpha (r)`$ reduces to the Schroedinger–like equation

$$\frac{d^2\alpha }{dr^2}+V_{eff}(r)\alpha =\omega ^2\alpha ,$$
(16)
where the effective potential $`V_{eff}(r)`$ is given by

$$V_{eff}(r)=G^2(r)+e^\lambda G^{}(r)+e^\lambda \left(\frac{l(l+1)}{r^2}+m^2\sigma ^2\right).$$
(17)
As in , it is convenient to introduce the adimensional quantities $`\lambda =\stackrel{~}{L}/M=l/(mM)`$, $`ϵ=(M𝒜_m)^1=(2mM)^1`$ and $`\rho =r/M`$. The behaviour of $`\stackrel{~}{V}_{eff}(\rho )=V_{eff}(\rho )/m^2`$ is shown in Fig. 1. The largest contribution comes from the $`e^\lambda m^2\sigma ^2`$ term in (16). For $`\rho 2`$ one finds $`\stackrel{~}{V}_{eff}(\rho )\frac{\stackrel{~}{E}^4ϵ^2}{(\rho 2)^2}`$, which, unlike $`\stackrel{~}{V}_{eff}(\rho )`$ of Ref. , definitely diverges on the Schwarzschild sphere. This suggests that $`|\alpha |^20`$ as $`r2M`$.

In order to get a clear indication of the behaviour of $`|R(r)|^2`$, we calculate the asymptotic solution of the radial wave equation near the Schwarzschild horizon by writing

$$\rho =2+x,$$
(18)
where $`x<<1`$, and by expanding the coefficients of the radial wave equation in a power series. To leading order, one obtains $`\sigma \sqrt{8/ϵ^2x^3}`$ and $`\sigma ^{}/\sigma 3/(2Mx)`$. The radial wave equation (9) then reduces to the Bessel equation

$$x^2\frac{d^2R}{dx^2}2x\frac{dR}{dx}\frac{4}{x^2}R=0$$
(19)
and its solution is

$$R(x)=x^{3/2}e^{\pm i(3/2)\pi }Z_{\pm 3/2}\left(\frac{2}{x}\right),$$
(20)
where $`Z_\nu (z)`$ is the Bessel function with half integer index. In the limit $`x0`$, Eq. (20) reads

$$R(x)\sqrt{\frac{1}{\pi }}x^2e^{i(1/x+\gamma )},$$
(21)
where $`\gamma `$ is a constant phase factor. The radial probability density $`P(x)`$ in proximity of the event horizon is then

$$P(x)=R(x)^2x^4,$$
(22)
which vanishes as $`x0`$. It must be emphasized that our result differs from that derived by Kofinti . In fact, the corresponding probability density for propagation of a quantum particle in an unmodified Schwarzschild geometry does not vanish at $`\rho =2`$ .

Let us now ascertain that the results obtained persist in isotropic coordinates. These are related to $`r`$ by the non-linear transformation $`r=(1+a/4u)^2u`$ and yield the metric tensor

$$g_{\mu \nu }=\text{diag}(e^\lambda ,e^\mu ,e^\mu u^2,e^\mu u^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta ),$$
(23)
where now

$$e^\lambda =\frac{(1a/4u)^2}{(1+a/4u)^2},e^\mu =\left(1+\frac{a}{4u}\right)^4,a=2GM/c^2.$$

In these coordinates, therefore, the weak field limits of (23) and of the Schwarzschild metric coincide. The isotropic coordinates also leave the element of spatial distance in conformal form.

We start again from the expressions for the components of the four-velocity

$`\dot{t}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{E}(1+a/4u)^2}{(1a/4u)^2}},`$ (24)
$`\dot{u}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(1+a/4u)^2}}\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{E}^2(1+a/4u)^2}{(1a/4u)^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{L}^2}{u^2(1+a/4u)^4}}1\right\}^{1/2},`$ (25)
$`\dot{\phi }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{L}}{u^2(1+a/4u)^4}}.`$ (26)
and that of the conformal factor

$$\sigma ^2(r)=1+\frac{1}{𝒜_m^2}\left[\frac{(1a/4u)^2}{(1+a/4u)^2}\ddot{t}^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}\left(1+\frac{a}{4u}\right)^4\ddot{u}^2u^2\left(1+\frac{a}{4u}\right)^4\ddot{\varphi }^2\right].$$
(27)
The classical, repulsive shell still exists in proximity of the horizon $`u=a/4`$ as indicated by Fig. 2 (compare with Fig. 1 of Ref. ). Its existence confirms the result of . The analogous occurrence of a classically impenetrable shell was also derived by Gasperini  as a consequence of the breaking of the $`SO(3,1)`$ symmetry.

Repeating the same calculations as in the Schwarzschild case, we find that the radial wave function $`R(u)`$ satisfies the equation

$$e^{\lambda \mu }R^{^{\prime \prime }}+e^{\lambda \mu }\left(2\frac{\sigma ^{}}{\sigma }+\frac{2}{u}+\frac{\lambda ^{}}{2}+\frac{\mu ^{}}{2}\right)R^{^{}}+$$
(28)
$$+\left[\omega ^2e^\lambda \left(e^\mu \frac{l(l+1)}{u^2}+m^2\sigma ^2\right)\right]R=0.$$

The functions $`\mathrm{\Theta }(\theta ,\phi ),T(t)`$ and the constants are as defined in (10) and (7).

In order to derive the effective potential from (28), we now introduce the variable $`u^{}=u^{}(u)`$ such that

$$e^{\lambda \mu }\left(\frac{du^{}}{du}\right)^2=1.$$
(29)
Eq. (29) implies that

$$u^{}(u)=\frac{a^2}{16}+ua\mathrm{ln}u+2a\mathrm{ln}(4ua),$$
(30)
which is defined for $`4ua`$. We again substitute $`R(u^{})=\alpha (u^{})\beta (u^{})`$ into (28) and require that the coefficient of $`d\alpha /du^{}`$ vanishes, i.e.

$$\frac{d\beta }{du^{}}+G(u)\beta =0,$$
(31)
where

$$G(r)\frac{e^{\lambda /2\mu /2}}{2}\left(2\frac{\sigma ^{}}{\sigma }+\frac{2}{u}+\mu ^{}\right).$$
(32)
The integration of (31) yields the result

$$\beta (u^{})=\frac{\beta _1e^{\mu /2}}{\sigma u},$$
(33)
where $`\beta _1`$ is an integration constant. The equation for $`\alpha (u^{})`$ reduces to the Schroedinger–like equation, where now the effective potential $`V_{eff}(u)`$ is given by

$$V_{eff}(u)=G^2(u)+e^{\lambda /2\mu /2}\frac{dG(u)}{du}+e^\lambda \left(e^\mu \frac{l(l+1)}{r^2}+m^2\sigma ^2\right).$$
(34)
It is a simple task to calculate the behaviour of the potential (34) in proximity of the singularity point $`4u=a`$. In fact, setting $`4u=a+x`$, with $`x0`$, one gets

$$V_{eff}(u)m^2/x^6\mathrm{}\text{as}x0,$$
(35)
where the dominant contribution is represented, once again, by $`e^\lambda m^2\sigma ^2`$. In analogy to the foregoing, we can therefore conclude that the probability to find the quantum particle near the horizon vanishes as $`ua/4`$. In fact, in the limit $`x0`$, Eq. (28) reduces to the form ($`Ry`$)

$$x^2y^{\prime \prime }9xy^{}\frac{4\stackrel{~}{E}^2m^2}{4a^2𝒜^2x^6}y=0,$$
(36)
whose solution is a Bessel function. In the limit $`x0`$, we get

$$yx^4\mathrm{cos}\left(\frac{\stackrel{~}{E}m}{2a𝒜x^3}\right).$$
(37)
Then the probability vanishes as $`x0`$, as expected. The choice of isotropic coordinates does not alter the fact that massive scalar particles cannot cross the horizon when propagating in a space-time modified by MA corrections.

In conclusion, we have determined the behaviour of a spinless boson in the neighborhood of the Schwarzschild sphere $`\rho =2`$ when the Schwarzschild metric is modified by maximal acceleration corrections according to the model of Refs. , , . Though the effective potentials experienced by classical and quantum particles are different, their effects are similar. Classical particles can not penetrate the shell of radius $`2<\rho <2+\eta `$ where their kinetic energy becomes negative. Similarly, the probability density to find massive spinless bosons in the region $`\rho =2+x`$ with $`x<<1`$, vanishes with $`x`$ at $`\rho =2`$ where $`\sigma ^2(x)`$ and the quantum potential diverge. In both instances, maximal acceleration corrections strongly suppress the absorption of particles in proximity of the horizon. Quantum tunneling of scalar particles through the shell is not therefore a viable process for black hole formation in the model, unless matter is transmuted first into massless particles, as discussed in . These would then have to be absorbed by the interior of the star at a rate higher than the corresponding re–emission rate.

Acknowledgments

Research supported by NATO Collaborative Research Grant No. 970150, by Ministero dell’Università e della Ricerca Scientifica of Italy MURST fund 40% and 60% art.65 D.P.R. 382/80 and by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada. GL acknowledges the financial support of UE (P.O.M. 1994/1999).


text:
# Field Redefinition Invariance in Quantum Field Theory

## Abstract

The issue of field redefinition invariance of path integrals in quantum field theory is reexamined. A “paradox” is presented involving the reduction to an effective quantum-mechanical theory of a $`(d+1)`$-dimensional free scalar field in a Minkowskian spacetime with compactified spatial coordinates. The implementation of field redefinitions both before and after the reduction suggests that operator-ordering issues in quantum field theory should not be ignored.

Field redefinition invariance is a basic property expected of all physically meaningful quantities, such as the poles of renormalized propagators. By contrast, there exist quantities related to the specific choice of field variables, such as wave function renormalization factors, whose values depend on the particular parametrization.

The question then arises as to the transformation properties of functional integrals under nonlinear point canonical transformations. For the quantum-mechanical counterpart of this problem, additional terms $`O(\mathrm{}^2)`$ appear in the path integral . This phenomenon—which can be viewed as a manifestation of the stochastic nature of the Lagrangian formulation of the path integral—is usually studied by introducing a discretization of the time variable . The ensuing “extra” terms are an inevitable consequence of the quantization of the theory, which promotes the classical coordinates to quantum operators; in effect, for every operator ordering of the associated Hamiltonian,***In this Letter we adopt Weyl ordering, which corresponds to the midpoint prescription. there exists a particular prescription for handling the lattice definition of the path integral .

The standard lore in quantum field theory dictates, in contradistinction to the quantum-mechanical procedure, that no additional terms are needed. More precisely, the action is assumed to change by direct substitution of the field transformation, together with the inclusion of a term arising from the Jacobian determinant associated with the change of field variables . Moreover, for a $`D`$-dimensional quantum field theory, the Jacobian becomes superfluous within the dimensional-regularization scheme—upon exponentiation, the formally infinite $`D`$-dimensional spacetime delta function $`\delta ^{(D)}(0)`$ generated by the trace is set equal to zero . A similar line of reasoning is employed to argue away any possible contribution by “extra” terms generated in the path integral; these terms—being a manifestation of operator ordering—would vanish by dimensional regularization, because they would involve delta functions at zero spatial argument, as follows from $`[\mathrm{\Phi }(x),\mathrm{\Pi }(x)]=i\mathrm{}\delta ^{(D1)}(0)`$. More precisely, the standard justification for this procedure is based on the assumed existence and necessity of local counterterms in the action, so that Jacobians and any other additional terms resulting from operator ordering (all of which are local quantities in the action), have the only effect of changing the coefficients of these local counterterms.

However, upon closer examination, one realizes that a solid justification for setting infinite quantities equal to zero is still lacking. Even if the validity of dimensional regularization is not questioned, one could analyze the problem from the lattice point of view,The spacetime delta function at zero argument is related to the inverse lattice spacing $`a`$, in the form $`\delta ^{(D)}(0)a^D`$. in which the Jacobian as well as the “extra” terms, do not vanish. In fact, the relevance of a term proportional to $`\delta ^{(D)}(0)`$, which may be interpreted as a limitation of dimensional regularization, was discovered in the early literature of the massive vector boson theory  and of the renormalization of the nonlinear sigma model , where it was used for the explicit cancellation of divergent terms .

The purpose of this Letter is to investigate these questions in a field theory toy model, in which we have full control of regularization issues and can test the relevance of non-linear field redefinitions. Further technical details will appear elsewhere. Our model is a free scalar quantum field theory in $`D=d+1`$ dimensions, in a flat spacetime with Minkowskian metric $`\eta ^{\mu \nu }=\mathrm{diag}(+1,1,\mathrm{},1)`$, characterized by the action

$`S[\mathrm{\Phi }]`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}^1\times T^d}}d^Dx\left(\eta ^{\mu \nu }_\mu \mathrm{\Phi }_\nu \mathrm{\Phi }m^2\mathrm{\Phi }^2\right)`$ (1)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle _\mathrm{}^1}𝑑t{\displaystyle _{T^d}}d^d𝐱\left\{\left[\dot{\mathrm{\Phi }}(t,𝐱)\right]^2\left[\mathbf{}\mathrm{\Phi }(t,𝐱)\right]^2m^2\left[\mathrm{\Phi }(t,𝐱)\right]^2\right\}.`$ (2)
In Eq. (2), each spatial coordinate (corresponding to $`\mu =1,\mathrm{},d`$) is assumed to be curled up into a circle $`S^1`$ of radius $`R`$, so that the whole space is compactified into a $`d`$-dimensional torus $`T^d=S^1\times \mathrm{}\times S^1`$; this amounts to the periodicity conditions $`x^\mu x^\mu +L`$ (for $`\mu =1,\mathrm{},d`$), with $`L=2\pi R`$, which permit a simplification in our analysis of field redefinitions.Our selection of the compact space $`T^d`$ is guided by the convenience of choosing a flat spacetime. Our analysis suggests that the “extra terms” will arise independently from the details of this compactification procedure. Our approach is based on making a nonlinear but local field redefinition

$$\mathrm{\Phi }=F[\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}],$$
(3)
using two different methods and comparing the corresponding results. In Method 1, the compactified spatial coordinates are integrated out to yield an effective quantum-mechanical problem, which is then subject to the quantum-mechanical counterpart of the transformation (3), for which the existence of an “extra” term is a well-established result . In Method 2, the standard quantum-field theoretical lore is applied directly to the field redefinition (3) of the $`D`$-dimensional field theory, followed by a reduction to a quantum-mechanical action by integrating out the spatial coordinates. The required identity of the results of the two methods leads to a remarkable “paradox”: no new terms are developed in the field-theory case (Method 2), despite the appearance of “extra” terms for the quantum-mechanical case (Method 1). Reconciling these two methods calls for either a detailed explanation or a revision of the standard lore.

A digression is in order for subsequent notational and computational purposes. In our Letter we will exploit the local nature of the field redefinition (3), which guarantees the ultralocal property of the spacetime metric, i.e.,

$$𝒢[\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}](t,𝐱;t^{},𝐱^{})=\delta (tt^{})\delta ^{(d)}(𝐱𝐱^{})\left(F^{}[\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}(t,𝐱)]\right)^2=\delta (tt^{})g[\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}](𝐱,𝐱^{};t),$$
(4)
where the reduced metric $`g[\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}]`$ will be useful for the calculations of Method 1. When implementing the nonlinear field redefinition (3), the transformed action $`S[\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}]`$ has two (Method 2) or three (Method 1) pieces: (i) the part obtained by direct substitution into the original free action (2), $`S_0[\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}]=S\left[F[\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}]\right]`$ ; (ii) the effective action arising from the Jacobian,

$$S_{\mathrm{Jacobian}}[\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}]=\frac{i\mathrm{}}{2}\mathrm{Tr}\mathrm{ln}𝒢[\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}],$$
(5)
where $`\mathrm{Tr}`$ stands for the spacetime trace; and (iii) the “extra” term $`S_{\mathrm{extra}}[\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}]`$ of $`O(\mathrm{}^2)`$ arising from its quantum-mechanical Weyl-ordered counterpart  (for Method 1).

Method 1.

Introducing the formal inner product

$$\mathrm{\Phi },\mathrm{\Psi }(t)=_{T^d}d^d𝐱\mathrm{\Phi }(t,𝐱)\mathrm{\Psi }(t,𝐱),$$
(6)
the action (2) becomes

$$S[\mathrm{\Phi }]=\frac{1}{2}_\mathrm{}^1𝑑t\left[\dot{\mathrm{\Phi }},\dot{\mathrm{\Phi }}(t)\mathbf{}\mathrm{\Phi },\mathbf{}\mathrm{\Phi }(t)m^2\mathrm{\Phi },\mathrm{\Phi }(t)\right],$$
(7)
which may be converted into an effective quantum-mechanical problem by expanding the scalar field in periodic eigenfunctions

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(t,𝐱)=\underset{𝐧Z^d}{}\varphi ^𝐧(t)b_𝐧(𝐱)$$
(8)
(Kaluza-Klein-like decomposition) and integrating out the $`𝐱`$ dependence. In Eq. (8), $`\left\{b_𝐧(𝐱)\right\}_{𝐧Z^d}`$ is a basis for the space $`\mathrm{}^{T^d}`$ of real functions on the $`d`$-torus ($`𝐱T^d`$). For the sake of simplicity and without loss of generality, we will take the spatial coordinates as defined in $`[L/2,L/2]^d`$, with periodic boundary conditions; even though it is customary to use the Fourier basis $`b_𝐧(𝐱)=e^{2\pi i𝐧𝐱/L}`$, our analysis will be carried out for an arbitrary $`\left\{b_𝐧(𝐱)\right\}`$.

In order to avoid the appearance of awkward divergences, we will work with the discrete version of the theory, as defined in a Minkowskian spacetime lattice with compactified spatial coordinates $`(t_\alpha ,𝐱_𝐣)`$. Specifically, the introduction of the large integers $`M`$ and $`N`$, as well as of a finite time interval $`T`$, defines the lattice spacings $`\delta =T/M`$ and $`ϵ=L/N`$, in terms of which $`t_\alpha =\alpha \delta `$ and $`𝐱_𝐣=𝐣ϵ`$, with $`\alpha `$ and $`𝐣`$ selected from the integers modulo $`M`$ and $`N`$ respectively, i.e., $`\alpha Z_M`$ and $`𝐣=(j_1,\mathrm{},j_d)(Z_N)^d`$. In what follows, it will prove useful to introduce the notation $`\phi ^𝐣(t)=\mathrm{\Phi }(t,𝐱_𝐣)`$, with which the lattice action becomes

$$S[\phi ]=\frac{1}{2}\delta ϵ^d\underset{\alpha Z_M}{}\underset{𝐣(Z_N)^d}{}\left\{\left[\frac{\phi ^𝐣(t_{\alpha +1})\phi ^𝐣(t_\alpha )}{\delta }\right]^2\underset{\mu =1}{\overset{d}{}}\left[\frac{\phi ^{𝐣+𝐞_\mu }(t_\alpha )\phi ^𝐣(t_\alpha )}{ϵ}\right]^2m^2\left[\phi ^𝐣(t_\alpha )\right]^2\right\},$$
(9)
where $`𝐞_\mu `$ is the unit vector in the $`\mu `$ direction. In this Letter, we will focus on the discretization of the spatial variable, as a way of introducing a quantum-mechanical system with a finite number of degrees of freedom. Instead, the time variable will be kept continuous in most equations, with the understanding that discretization of the time—independently from $`𝐱`$—can be implemented whenever this proves convenient.§§§In Ref. , it was shown that the use of a lattice for the variable $`t`$ (with an independent lattice constant $`\delta `$ arising from an even number $`M`$ of points) permits the correct quantum-mechanical treatment of “extra” terms $`O(\mathrm{}^2)`$ in the limit $`M\mathrm{}`$, under a nonlinear change of variables.

The main advantage of introducing a lattice for our problem lies in that it eliminates ultraviolet divergences, by reducing the space of functions defined on $`T^d`$ to a finite-dimensional space $`\mathrm{}^{(Z_N)^d}𝒱_{N^d}`$, of dimension $`N^d`$. In $`𝒱_{N^d}`$, an arbitrary basis can be chosen by selecting $`N^d`$ linearly independent vectors $`\mathbf{\{}\text{ }\mathbf{(}\text{ }b_𝐧(𝐱_𝐣)\mathbf{)}_{𝐣(Z_N)^d}\mathbf{\}}_{𝐧(Z_N)^d}`$. Then, for any field variable,

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(t,𝐱)=\underset{𝐧(Z_N)^d}{}\varphi ^𝐧(t)b_𝐧(𝐱),$$
(10)
which reproduces the Kaluza-Klein decomposition (8) in the continuum limit, while

$$\phi ^𝐣(t)=\underset{𝐧(Z_N)^d}{}\varphi ^𝐧(t)\mathrm{\Lambda }_𝐧^𝐣,$$
(11)
with $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_𝐧^𝐣=b_𝐧(𝐱_𝐣)`$ defining an invertible $`N^d\times N^d`$ matrix. A particular convenient choice, in addition to the Fourier basis, is provided by the “canonical” basis $`c_𝐣(𝐱)`$, which is defined by $`c_𝐣(𝐱_𝐤)=\delta _𝐣^𝐤`$ and amounts to a real-space lattice representation of the field $`\mathrm{\Phi }(t,𝐱)`$, with components $`\phi ^𝐣(t)`$. The discrete version of the inner product (6),

$$\mathrm{\Phi },\mathrm{\Psi }(t)=\left(\frac{L}{N}\right)^d\underset{𝐣(Z_N)^d}{}\phi ^𝐣(t)\psi ^𝐣(t)=\underset{𝐧,𝐦(Z_N)^d}{}\gamma _{\mathrm{𝐧𝐦}}\varphi ^𝐧(t)\psi ^𝐦(t)$$
(12)
defines the linear-space symmetric metric $`\gamma _{\mathrm{𝐧𝐦}}=b_𝐧,b_𝐦`$, in terms of which the resulting action is

$$S[\varphi ]=𝑑t\underset{𝐧,𝐦(Z_N)^d}{}\left[\frac{1}{2}g_{\mathrm{𝐧𝐦}}[\varphi ]\dot{\varphi }^𝐧\dot{\varphi }^𝐦\frac{1}{2}h_{\mathrm{𝐧𝐦}}\varphi ^𝐧\varphi ^𝐦\frac{m^2}{2}\gamma _{\mathrm{𝐧𝐦}}\varphi ^𝐧\varphi ^𝐦\right]$$
(13)
\[cf. Eq. (7)\], where the matrix elements $`g_{\mathrm{𝐧𝐦}}[\varphi ]`$ (metric) and $`h_{\mathrm{𝐧𝐦}}`$, and $`\gamma _{\mathrm{𝐧𝐦}}`$ admit the expressions

$$g[\varphi ]\frac{\phi }{\varphi ^𝐧},\frac{\phi }{\varphi ^𝐦}=b_𝐧,b_𝐦\gamma ;h=\underset{\mu =1}{\overset{d}{}}\left(_\mu \right)^T\gamma _\mu .$$
(14)
In Eq. (14) the elements of the matrix $`_\mu `$ are defined in terms of the lattice counterparts of the spatial derivatives $`_\mu b_𝐧(𝐱)`$, i.e.,

$$b_𝐧(𝐱_{𝐣+𝐞_\mu })b_𝐧(𝐱_𝐣)=ϵ\underset{𝐥(Z_N)^d}{}(_\mu )_𝐧^𝐥b_𝐥(𝐱_𝐣).$$
(15)
With this definition, the matrix $`_\mu `$ is explicitly dependent on $`ϵ`$ or $`1/N`$, i.e., $`_\mu =_\mu (1/N)`$; however, it admits the asymptotic expansion $`_\mu (1/N)=_\mu (0)+O(1/N)`$, so that a definite finite value $`_\mu ^{(0)}=_\mu (0)`$ exists in the continuum limit ($`N\mathrm{}`$). This limit will be eventually assumed in Eq. (13) and similar expressions, in which case the substitution $`(Z_N)^dZ^d`$ should be performed.Parenthetically, Eq. (13) describes a system of $`N`$ coupled quantum-mechanical oscillators $`\varphi ^𝐧(t)`$; for example, when the Fourier basis $`b_𝐧(𝐱)=e^{2\pi i𝐧𝐱/L}`$ is chosen, then $`\gamma _{\mathrm{𝐧𝐦}}=L^d\delta _{𝐧,𝐦}`$ and $`\mathbf{}_𝐦^𝐧=2\pi i𝐧\delta _𝐦^𝐧/L+O(1/N)`$, whence Eq. (13) provides the frequencies $`\omega _𝐧=\sqrt{(2\pi |𝐧|/L)^2+m^2}`$, as $`N\mathrm{}`$.

Let us now consider the field redefinition (3) and expand the new field $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}(t,𝐱)`$ in modes,

$$\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}(t,𝐱)=\underset{𝐧(Z_N)^d}{}\stackrel{~}{\varphi }^𝐧(t)b_𝐧(𝐱),$$
(16)
with the implicit transformation

$$\varphi ^𝐧f^𝐧[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }].$$
(17)
Then, the reduced metric $`g[\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}]`$ (with respect to the new coordinates), as defined in Eq. (4) from the ultralocal full-fledged metric $`𝒢[\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}](t,𝐱;t^{},𝐱^{})`$, is diagonal; in fact, the lattice version of Eq. (4) implies that the reduced lattice metric coefficients $`g_{\mathrm{𝐣𝐤}}[\stackrel{~}{\phi }]`$ are given from

$$g[\stackrel{~}{\phi }]=\left(\frac{L}{N}\right)^d\mathrm{diag}\left\{\left(F^{}[\stackrel{~}{\phi }]\right)^2\right\}.$$
(18)
On the other hand, with respect to any other basis,

$$g[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }]=\mathrm{\Lambda }^Tg[\stackrel{~}{\phi }]\mathrm{\Lambda },$$
(19)
where $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_𝐧^𝐣=\stackrel{~}{\phi }^𝐣/\stackrel{~}{\varphi }^𝐧=b_𝐧(𝐱_𝐣)`$.

The change of variables (17) in the quantum-mechanical path integral should be implemented by including the “extra” term, i.e., the transformed action $`S[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }]`$ becomes

$$S[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }]=S_0[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }]+S_{\mathrm{Jacobian}}[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }]+S_{\mathrm{extra}}[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }].$$
(20)
The first term in Eq. (20) can be computed by direct substitution in Eq. (13),

$$S_0[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }]=S\left[f[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }]\right]=𝑑t\underset{𝐧,𝐦(Z_N)^d}{}\left[\frac{1}{2}g_{\mathrm{𝐧𝐦}}[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }]\dot{\stackrel{~}{\varphi ^𝐧}}\dot{\stackrel{~}{\varphi ^𝐦}}\frac{1}{2}\left(h_{\mathrm{𝐧𝐦}}+m^2\gamma _{\mathrm{𝐧𝐦}}\right)f^𝐧[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }]f^𝐦[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }]\right].$$
(21)
As for the second term, the Jacobian determinant $`{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha Z_M}{}}\left\{\left(det\stackrel{ˇ}{g}[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }](t_\alpha )\right)^{1/2}\right\}`$—with $`\stackrel{ˇ}{g}[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }]=g[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }]\delta `$ \[from Eq. (4)\]—leads to the standard contribution to the action,

$$S_{\mathrm{Jacobian}}[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }]=\frac{i\mathrm{}}{2}\underset{\alpha Z_M}{}\mathrm{tr}\mathrm{ln}\left\{\stackrel{ˇ}{g}[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }](t_\alpha )\right\}=\frac{i\mathrm{}}{2}\mathrm{Tr}\mathrm{ln}\left\{g[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }]\delta (tt^{})\right\}$$
(22)
\[cf. Eq. (5)\], where $`\mathrm{tr}`$ stands for the reduced spatial trace (with respect to spatial indices alone), as opposed to the spacetime trace $`\mathrm{Tr}`$. Finally, the “extra” term arising from the stochastic nature of the path integral isThe Einstein summation convention for repeated indices is adopted from Eq. (23) on.

$$S_{\mathrm{extra}}[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }]=\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{8}𝑑tg^{\mathrm{𝐧𝐦}}[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }]\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{𝐥𝐧}}^𝐬[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }]\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{𝐬𝐦}}^𝐥[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }]=\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{8}𝑑t\mathrm{tr}\left(g^1[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }]\mathrm{\Xi }[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }]\right),$$
(23)
where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{𝐥𝐧}}^𝐬[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }]`$ are the connection coefficients associated with the metric $`g_{\mathrm{𝐧𝐦}}[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }]`$ and $`\mathrm{\Xi }_{\mathrm{𝐧𝐦}}=\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{𝐥𝐧}}^𝐬\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{𝐬𝐦}}^𝐥`$. Equation (23) requires the evaluation of $`\mathrm{tr}\left(g^1[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }]\mathrm{\Xi }[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }]\right)`$, which can be performed in an arbitrary basis $`\left\{b_𝐧\right\}`$, due to the tensor nature of the expressions involved in the lattice version of the theory. However, this is most easily done in real space, where the metric is diagonal\**\**\**Obviously, when the metric is nondiagonal, the computations are quite a bit lengthier. For example, for the Fourier basis of exponentials and $`\mathrm{\Phi }=\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}+\lambda \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}^\nu `$, the same results follow straightforwardly from $`g[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }]=(L/N)^d[1+\lambda \nu (\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }})^{\nu 1}]^2`$, with the matrix $`(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }})_𝐦^𝐧=\stackrel{~}{\varphi }^{𝐧𝐦}`$. \[Eq. (18)\], so that the inverse metric is $`g^1[\stackrel{~}{\phi }]=(L/N)^d\mathrm{diag}\left\{\left(F^{}[\stackrel{~}{\phi }]\right)^2\right\}`$ and the connection coefficients are $`\mathrm{\Gamma }[\stackrel{~}{\phi }]=\mathrm{diag}^{(3)}\left\{F^{\prime \prime }[\stackrel{~}{\phi }]/F^{}[\stackrel{~}{\phi }]\right\}`$ (diagonal with respect to the three indices in real space). Then,

$$\mathrm{tr}\left(g^1[\stackrel{~}{\phi }]\mathrm{\Xi }[\stackrel{~}{\phi }]\right)=\left(\frac{L}{N}\right)^d\underset{𝐣(Z_N)^d}{}\left[\frac{\left(F^{\prime \prime }[\stackrel{~}{\phi }]\right)^2}{\left(F^{}[\stackrel{~}{\phi }]\right)^4}\right]_𝐣.$$
(24)
For later comparison with Method 2, it is useful to rewrite Eqs. (23) and (24) explicitly in terms of the field $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}`$; then,

$$S_{\mathrm{extra}}[\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}]=\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{8}\left(\frac{L}{N}\right)^{2d}d^{d+1}x\frac{\left(F^{\prime \prime }[\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}]\right)^2}{\left(F^{}[\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}]\right)^4}.$$
(25)
Method 2.

In this method, the field redefinition (3) is applied first, while the expansion in Kaluza-Klein modes is later performed in the transformed field theory. The terms in the action obtained from Method 2 will be written with hats to distinguish them from those of Method 1. By direct substitution of the field redefinition (3) in the action (2), the piece

$$\widehat{S}_0[\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}]=S\left[F[\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}]\right]=\frac{1}{2}d^{d+1}x\left[\eta ^{\mu \nu }\left(F^{}[\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}]\right)^2_\mu \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}_\nu \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}m^2\left(F[\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}]\right)^2\right]$$
(26)
develops derivative interaction terms, while the Jacobian, from Eqs. (4) and (5), yields

$$\widehat{S}_{\mathrm{Jacobian}}[\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}]=i\mathrm{}\delta ^{(d+1)}(0)d^{d+1}x\mathrm{ln}F^{}[\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}].$$
(27)
The conventional arguments within the standard lore would imply that the total action is given by only these two contributions, $`\widehat{S}[\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}]=\widehat{S}_0[\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}]+\widehat{S}_{\mathrm{Jacobian}}[\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}].`$

Finally, the action $`\widehat{S}[\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}]`$ can be converted into an effective quantum-mechanical one, $`\widehat{S}[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }]=\widehat{S}_0[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }]+\widehat{S}_{\mathrm{Jacobian}}[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }]`$, by using Eq. (8) (for $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}`$) and integrating out the spatial coordinates, with the results

$$\widehat{S}_0[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }]=𝑑t\underset{𝐧,𝐦Z}{}\left[\frac{1}{2}\widehat{g}_{\mathrm{𝐧𝐦}}[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }]\dot{\stackrel{~}{\varphi ^𝐧}}\dot{\stackrel{~}{\varphi ^𝐦}}\frac{1}{2}\left(\widehat{h}_{\mathrm{𝐧𝐦}}+m^2\widehat{\gamma }_{\mathrm{𝐧𝐦}}\right)f^𝐧[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }]f^𝐦[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }]\right]$$
(28)
and \[from Eqs. (4) and (5)\]

$$\widehat{S}_{\mathrm{Jacobian}}[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }]=\frac{i\mathrm{}}{2}\mathrm{Tr}\mathrm{ln}\left\{\widehat{g}[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }]\delta (tt^{})\right\}.$$
(29)
In Eqs. (28) and (29),

$$\widehat{g}_{\mathrm{𝐧𝐦}}[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }]d^d𝐱b_𝐧(𝐱)b_𝐦(𝐱)\left(F^{}[\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}(t,𝐱)]\right)^2=g_{\mathrm{𝐧𝐦}}[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }],$$
(30)
as follows from the limit $`N\mathrm{}`$ of Eqs. (18) and (19); likewise $`\widehat{h}_{\mathrm{𝐧𝐦}}=h_{\mathrm{𝐧𝐦}}`$ \[from Eqs. (14) and (15)\] and $`\widehat{\gamma }_{\mathrm{𝐧𝐦}}=\gamma _{\mathrm{𝐧𝐦}}`$, so that $`\widehat{g}_{\mathrm{𝐧𝐦}}[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }]`$, $`\widehat{h}_{\mathrm{𝐧𝐦}}`$, and $`\widehat{\gamma }_{\mathrm{𝐧𝐦}}`$ coincide with the corresponding matrix elements appearing in the continuum limit of the quantum-mechanical version of this calculation.

Comparison of Methods.

The transformations involved in Methods 1 and 2 are represented in the diagram

$$\begin{array}{ccc}S[\mathrm{\Phi }]& \stackrel{\mathrm{\Phi }=F[\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}]\text{ }}{}& \widehat{S}[\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}]\\ & & \\ \begin{array}{c}S[\varphi ]\end{array}& \stackrel{\varphi =f[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }]\text{ }}{}& S[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }]\stackrel{\mathrm{?}}{=}\widehat{S}[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }]\end{array},$$
(31)
where $``$ stands for reduction to a quantum-mechanical problem (by integrating out the spatial coordinates). The identity of the results of the two methods amounts to the equality of the two actions for the effective quantum-mechanical theory; in other words, it is equivalent to the statement that diagram (31) be commutative. However, if the standard lore holds true, the action $`\widehat{S}[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }]`$ lacks the “extra” term, so that

$$S_0[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }]+S_{\mathrm{Jacobian}}[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }]+S_{\mathrm{extra}}[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }]=\widehat{S}_0[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }]+\widehat{S}_{\mathrm{Jacobian}}[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }].$$
(32)
Let us now analyze the feasibility of Eq. (32). Firstly, the equality $`S_0[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }]=\widehat{S}_0[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }]`$ follows from Eqs. (21) and (28). Secondly, the equality of the Jacobian factors, $`S_{\mathrm{Jacobian}}[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }]=\widehat{S}_{\mathrm{Jacobian}}[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }]`$ is seen from Eqs. (22) and (29). Finally, due to the identity of the first two terms, it is clear that Eq. (32) is incompatible with the existence of a nonzero term $`S_{\mathrm{extra}}[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }]`$. In other words, we are now confronted with the central issue of this Letter: in Method 1, $`S_{\mathrm{extra}}[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }]0`$, while in Method 2, the standard rules for nonlinear field redefinitions failed to generate such a term. The inescapable conclusion, if $`S_{\mathrm{extra}}[\stackrel{~}{\varphi }]`$ cannot be rationalized to vanish, is that this term should have emerged at the level of quantum field theory from the nonlinear field redefinition. Therefore, from Eq. (25) and the identification

$$\left(\frac{L}{N}\right)^d=\delta ^{(d)}(𝐱=0)$$
(33)
(in the limit $`N\mathrm{}`$)—which is recognized to be the standard condition for the transition from the lattice version of the theory to its continuous counterpart—it follows that the final expression for the “extra” quantum-field theoretical term is

$$S_{\mathrm{extra}}[\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}]=\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{8}\left[\delta ^{(d)}(𝐱=0)\right]^2d^{d+1}x\frac{\left(F^{\prime \prime }[\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}]\right)^2}{\left(F^{}[\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}]\right)^4}.$$
(34)
This divergent term is proportional to the square of the $`d`$-dimensional spatial delta function rather than the $`(d+1)`$-dimensional delta function at zero argument. An analogue of this result was found in the early literature on four-dimensional chiral dynamics .

A final remark is in order. An alternative to the approach of Method 2 is afforded by the addition, after field redefinition, of an infinite series of counterterms,

$`S[\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}]={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle }d^{d+1}x[`$ $`\eta ^{\mu \nu }`$ $`\left(F^{}[\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}]\right)^2_\mu \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}_\nu \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}m^2\left(F[\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}]\right)^2]`$ (35)
$``$ $`i\mathrm{}\delta ^{(d+1)}(0){\displaystyle d^{d+1}x\mathrm{ln}F^{}[\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}]}+{\displaystyle d^{d+1}x\underset{\mathrm{}=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}c_{\mathrm{}}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}^{\mathrm{}}},`$ (36)
where the unknown coefficients $`c_{\mathrm{}}`$ can be evaluated by computing physically significant quantities and matching with the original free theory. The advantage of our approach lies in that we have been able to directly derive the simple expression in Eq. (34), which would otherwise be obtained by laboriously computing Feynman diagrams and summing the series in Eq. (36).

In conclusion, we have shown evidence for a single “extra” term being generated upon making nonlinear field redefinitions for the (d+1)-dimensional quantum field theory in a Minkowskian spacetime with compactified spatial coordinates. An extension of the work in quantum mechanics , as well as a perturbative calculation based upon these results, gives additional confirmation of the existence of “extra” terms in quantum field theory, at least for the case of flat Euclidean $`D`$-dimensional spacetime. Finally, this work also reveals the need for a more careful use of dimensional regularization in higher-order calculations, as will be discussed elsewhere.

Acknowledgements.

C.R.O.’s work was supported in part by an Advanced Research Grant from the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board. H.E.C. acknowledges financial support by the University of San Francisco Faculty Development Fund, as well as the hospitality of the University of Houston.