text:
# Nonlinear Jaynes-Cummings model of atom-field interaction

## 1 Introduction

Interaction of a single mode of electromagnetic field with a two-level atom is the simplest problem in matter-radiation coupling. A model for the interaction, introduced by Jaynes and Cummings , treats the atom as a dipole placed in an external field. The Jaynes-Cummings (JC) model has provided a lot of impetus for theoretical explorations and experimental verifications . The Hamiltonian for the model is

$$H_{JC}=H_0+g(\widehat{a}^{}\sigma _{}+\widehat{a}\sigma _+).$$
(1)
Here $`H_0`$, the Hamiltonian for the atom and field in the absence of interaction, is $`\omega \widehat{a}^{}\widehat{a}+\frac{1}{2}\nu \sigma _z`$. The atomic transition frequency is $`\nu `$, the field frequency is $`\omega `$ and $`g`$ is the coupling constant. We denote the creation operator by $`\widehat{a}^{}`$, annihilation operator by $`\widehat{a}`$, and their action on the basis states of the harmonic oscillator are

$`\widehat{a}|n`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{n}|n1,`$ (2)
$`\widehat{a}|0`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$ (3)
$`\widehat{a}^{}|n`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{n+1}|n+1.`$ (4)
The atom has two-levels, $`|g`$ and $`|e`$, the ground and excited states. The operators $`\sigma _z`$, $`\sigma _+`$ and $`\sigma _{}`$ act on the states as given below:

$`\sigma _z|g`$ $`=`$ $`|g`$ (5)
$`\sigma _z|e`$ $`=`$ $`|e`$ (6)
$`\sigma _\pm |g`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1\pm 1}{2}}|e`$ (7)
$`\sigma _\pm |e`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{11}{2}}|g`$ (8)
Atomic inversion, defined as the difference in probabilities for the atom to be in the excited and ground states, as predicted by JC model is a sum of quasiperiodic functions with incommensurate frequencies. The model predicts collapses, revivals and ringing revivals in the time-development of atomic inversion The revival phenomenon is entirely quantal, and hence the model is very important for testing predictions of quantum theory. The model has been generalized in very many ways. We list the respective Hamiltonian for some of the models:
1) Buck-Sukumar model

$$H_{IC}=H_0+g(\sqrt{\widehat{a}^{}\widehat{a}}\widehat{a}\sigma _++\widehat{a}^{}\sqrt{\widehat{a}^{}\widehat{a}}\sigma _{})$$
(10)
With this particular form of intensity-dependent coupling the atomic-inversion is a sum of periodic functions. This model is very interesting as it can be written as a combination of generators of SU(1,1) algebra. Generalization to two-photon case, where two-photons are absorbed or emitted in atom-field interactions, has been done. Once again the SU(1,1) algebraic structure in the model is used to solve the problem .
2) Kerr-nonlinearity

$$H_{Kerr}=H_{JC}+\chi \widehat{a}^2\widehat{a}^2$$
(11)
This is an effective Hamiltonian for a system in which the electromagnetic field mode is excited in a Kerr medium. The medium is modelled as an anharmonic oscillator.
3)Dicke-Tavis-Cummings model
In this model, the interaction between field and a group of two-level atoms is considered and the Hamiltonian is

$$H_{DTC}=\omega \widehat{a}^{}\widehat{a}+\frac{\nu }{2}\underset{i}{}\sigma _{i,z}+\text{Interaction part}$$
(12)
4) Nonlinear Jaynes-Cummings model
By including the motion of atom in the external field, the coupling is made position dependent. This offers enormous possibilities to tailor the form of atom-field interaction . The general form for the Hamiltonian is

$$H_{NL}=H_0+g(f(\widehat{a}^{}\widehat{a})\widehat{a}^m+\text{adjoint})$$
(13)
Here $`f(\widehat{a}^{}\widehat{a})`$ is an operator-valued function of the number operator $`\widehat{a}^{}\widehat{a}`$ and $`m`$ is an integer.

The objective of the present paper is to study the dynamics of a two-level atom interacting with a single mode of electromagnetic field. The interaction is governed by the Hamiltonian

$$H=\omega \left[\widehat{a}^{}\widehat{a}+\frac{r}{2}\sigma _z\right]+\chi \widehat{a}^2\widehat{a}^2+g\omega (\sqrt{1+k\widehat{a}^{}\widehat{a}}\widehat{a}\sigma _++\widehat{a}^{}\sqrt{1+k\widehat{a}^{}\widehat{a}}\sigma _{}).$$
(14)
This Hamiltonian is an example for nonlinear JC model including Kerr term. Note that we have scaled the coupling constant $`g`$ by $`\omega `$. The parameter $`r`$ is $`\frac{\nu }{\omega }`$ and the coupling constant for the Kerr term is $`\chi =k\omega `$. This will simplify the expressions we derive in sequel. In particular, we set $`\omega =1`$ which amounts to studying a new Hamiltonian $`\frac{H}{\omega }`$. The speciality of the Hamiltonian $`H`$ is that it becomes $`H_{JC}`$ when the parameter $`k`$ is set equal to zero. Further, the usual Holstein-Primikoff realization is obtained when $`k=1`$ so that the interaction is approximately given by $`g(\sqrt{\widehat{a}^{}\widehat{a}}\widehat{a}\sigma _++\text{adjoint})`$, which is same as the interaction studied in Ref.. Yet another form of interaction occurs when $`k1`$. If the photon number distribution is such that $`kn1`$ for all $`n`$ under the peak of the distribution, then Eq. 14 leads to

$$H\omega \left[\widehat{a}^{}\widehat{a}+k\widehat{a}^2\widehat{a}^2+g[(1+\widehat{a}^{}\widehat{a}/2)\widehat{a}\sigma _++\text{adjoint}]\right].$$
(15)
Further, when $`k1`$ so that we can neglect $`kn`$ in comparison to unity but retain $`kn^2`$, we arrive at $`H_{JC}`$ with an additional Kerr term. This system has been studied in Ref.. Many well studied systems are thus special cases of the Hamiltonian considered for discussion in the present paper. The organization of the paper is as follows. In section II we study the algebraic aspects of the Hamiltonian and construct the eigenvectors and eigenvalues. Section III is devoted to study the atomic inversion and approximate expressions are obtained for first collapse and revival periods when the field is in a coherent state. The time-development of field statistics is discussed in section IV and the results are summarized in Section V.

## 2 Model Hamiltonian and its properties

In this section we study the algebraic aspects of the generalized Hamiltonian given in Eq. (14). We introduce a set of operators which are closed under commutation. This algebraic structure is exploited to determine the time-evolution operator to evolve the initial state of the atom-field system. The eigenvalues and the corresponding eigenvectors are constructed.

### 2.1 Eigenvalues and eigenvectors

The Hamiltonian given in Eq.14 is written as

$$H=\omega K_+K_{}+\frac{\nu }{2}\sigma _z+g(K_+\sigma _{}+K_{}\sigma _+),$$
(16)
wherein we have set $`K_{}=\sqrt{1+k\widehat{a}^{}\widehat{a}}\widehat{a}`$ and $`K_+=\widehat{a}^{}\sqrt{1+k\widehat{a}^{}\widehat{a}}`$. Further, we assume that $`k`$ is nonnegative and restricted to take values less than or equal to unity. Formally, the Hamiltonian $`H`$ has the same structure as $`H_{JC}`$ with $`\widehat{a}`$ and $`\widehat{a}^{}`$ replaced by $`K_{}`$ and $`K_+`$. However, the former corresponds to Kerr-type medium with intensity-dependent coupling for atom-field interaction. The difference is very clear in the commutation relations among the operators. From the realisation of $`K_{}`$ and $`K_+`$ in terms of $`\widehat{a}^{}`$ and $`\widehat{a}`$, we arrive at

$`[K_{},K_+]`$ $`=`$ $`2K_0,`$ (17)
$`[K_0,K_\pm ]`$ $`=`$ $`\pm kK_\pm .`$ (18)
The operator $`K_0`$ is $`k\widehat{a}^{}\widehat{a}+\frac{1}{2}`$. Thus, the operators $`K_{},K_+`$ and $`K_0`$ form a closed algebra. It worth noting that the commutation relations define the SU(1,1) algebra when $`k=1`$. On the other hand, to get the well-known Heisenberg-Weyl algebra generated by $`\widehat{a}^{},\widehat{a}`$ and the identity $`I`$ we set $`k=0`$. Two different algebras are realized depending on the value of $`k`$ and hence the algebra of $`K_{},K_+`$ and $`K_0`$ is said to be an “interpolating algebra”. An invariant operator, which commutes with $`K_\pm `$ and $`K_0`$, for the algebra is given by $`K_0^2(k/2)(K_{}K_++K_+K_{})`$. The coherent states corresponding to this algebra and their Hilbert space properties are known .

The atom-field evolution is studied in the space of $`|e,n`$ and $`|g,n`$, where $`n=0,1,2,\mathrm{}`$. The state $`|e,n`$ means that the atom is in the excited state $`|e`$ and the field in the $`n^{\text{th}}`$ excited state $`|n`$. The states $`|e,n`$ and $`|g,n`$ are eigenstates of $`\omega K_+K_{}+\frac{\nu }{2}\sigma _z`$ and the respective eigenvalues are $`_{e,n}=(n+kn^2kn)\omega +\frac{\nu }{2}`$ and $`_{g,n}=(n+kn^2kn)\omega \frac{\nu }{2}`$. The Hamiltonian $`H`$ admits a constant of motion N such that the commutator $`[N,H]`$ vanishes. Explicitly, $`N=K_+K_{}+2K_0\sigma _+\sigma _{}`$. Note that when $`k=0`$, $`N`$ becomes $`\widehat{a}^{}\widehat{a}+\sigma _+\sigma _{}`$, the constant of motion for $`H_{JC}`$.

The interaction part of $`H`$ is such that the state $`|e,n`$ is taken to $`|g,n+1`$ and vice versa, during the evolution of the atom-field system. Thus, the entire Hilbert space is split into subspaces spanned by $`|e,n`$ and $`|g,n+1`$ and the dynamics confined to individual subspaces. In one such subspace, specified by the value of $`n`$, the Hamiltonian matrix is

$$H=\left(\begin{array}{cc}(n+\frac{1}{2}+kn^2kn)\omega +\mathrm{\Delta }/2& g\sqrt{(1+kn)(1+n)}\\ g\sqrt{(1+kn)(1+n)}& (n+\frac{1}{2}+kn^2+kn)\omega \mathrm{\Delta }/2\end{array}\right).$$
(19)
The detuning parameter $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is $`(r1)\omega `$. The eigenvalues of the Hamiltonian are

$$E_{\pm ,n}=(kn^2+n+\frac{1}{2})\omega \pm \frac{1}{2}\sqrt{(\mathrm{\Delta }2k\omega n)^2+4g^2\omega ^2(1+kn)(1+n)}.$$
(20)
and the corresponding eigenvectors are

$`|+,n=\mathrm{cos}\theta _n|e,n+\mathrm{sin}\theta _n|g,n+1,`$ (21)
$`|,n=\mathrm{sin}\theta _n|e,n\mathrm{cos}\theta _n|g,n+1.`$ (22)
The expansion coefficients are

$`\mathrm{cos}\theta _n={\displaystyle \frac{2g\omega \sqrt{(1+n)(1+kn)}}{\sqrt{(\mathrm{\Omega }_n\mathrm{\Delta }_n)^2+4g^2\omega ^2(1+n)(1+kn)}}}`$ (23)
$`\mathrm{sin}\theta _n={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_n\mathrm{\Delta }_n}{\sqrt{(\mathrm{\Omega }_n\mathrm{\Delta }_n)^2+4g^2\omega ^2(1+n)(1+kn)}}},`$ (24)
in which we have set $`\mathrm{\Delta }_n=\mathrm{\Delta }2kn\omega `$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_n=\sqrt{\mathrm{\Delta }_n^2+4g^2\omega ^2(1+n)(1+kn)}`$.

The energy difference between the levels $`E_{+,n}`$ and $`E_{,n}`$ is $`\sqrt{\mathrm{\Delta }_n+4g^2\omega ^2(1+kn)(1+n)}`$. The minimum of the separation occurs when $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ equals $`2kn\omega `$ and the corresponding difference is $`2g\omega \sqrt{(1+kn)(1+n)}`$. In Fig. 1 we have plotted the energy eigenvalues $`E_+`$ and $`E_{}`$ as a function of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$. The dashed lines represent the eigenvalues when $`g=0`$, i.e., $`_{e(g),n}`$. In this case the eigenvalues cross each other as $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ increases from negative to positive values. The continuous lines represent the energy eigenvalues for $`g=10^3`$. The diverging eigenvalue separation beyond the minimum separation indicates “level repulsion” in the eigenvalues of the dressed atom. The effect of nonzero $`k`$ is to shift the value of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ at which the minimum separation or the crossing occurs. If $`k=0`$, the minimum as well as the crossing occur at $`\mathrm{\Delta }=0`$.

### 2.2 Evolution of atom-field state

To understand the dynamics of the atom-field system, we solve for the state of the system in interaction picture, where the evolution equation is

$$i\frac{|\psi }{t}=\stackrel{~}{V}|\psi .$$
(25)
Here $`\stackrel{~}{V}`$ is the transformed interaction given by

$$\stackrel{~}{V}=g\mathrm{exp}[it(\omega K_+K_{}+\frac{\nu }{2}\sigma _z)](\sigma _{}K_++\sigma _+K_{})\mathrm{exp}[it(\omega K_+K_{}+\frac{\nu }{2}\sigma _z)].$$
(26)
The effect of the transformation on the interaction term is obtained from the following results:

$`\mathrm{exp}(it\omega K_+K_{})K_+\mathrm{exp}(it\omega K_+K_{})`$ $`=`$ $`K_+\mathrm{exp}(it\omega K_0),`$ (27)
$`\mathrm{exp}({\displaystyle \frac{it\nu }{2}}\sigma _z)\sigma _{}\mathrm{exp}({\displaystyle \frac{it\nu }{2}}\sigma _z)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{exp}(it\nu )\sigma _{},`$ (28)
and their adjoints. Note that the ordering of operators should be maintained in the rhs of the first of the results. Using these relations, the interaction picture Hamiltonian is written as

$$\stackrel{~}{V}=g(K_+\sigma _{}\mathrm{exp}[it(2\omega K_0\nu )]+\text{adjoint}.$$
(29)
At any time $`t`$, let the state of the atom-field system be represented as

$$|\psi (t)=\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}C_{e,n}(t)|e,n+C_{g,n}(t)|g,n.$$
(30)
The coefficients $`C_{e,n}(t)`$ and $`C_{g,n}(t)`$, determined in terms of their initial values by the evolution equation Eq.25, are

$`\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle \frac{i\mathrm{\Delta }_nt}{2}}\right)C_{e,n}(t)`$ $`=`$ $`\left[\mathrm{cos}({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_nt}{2}}){\displaystyle \frac{i\mathrm{\Delta }_n}{\mathrm{\Omega }_n}}\mathrm{sin}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_nt}{2}}\right)\right]C_{e,n}(0)`$ (31)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{2ig\sqrt{(n+1)(1+kn)}}{\mathrm{\Omega }_n}}\mathrm{sin}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_nt}{2}}\right)C_{g,n+1}(0),`$
$`\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle \frac{i\mathrm{\Delta }_nt}{2}}\right)C_{g,n+1}(t)`$ $`=`$ $`\left[\mathrm{cos}({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_nt}{2}})+{\displaystyle \frac{i\mathrm{\Delta }_n}{\mathrm{\Omega }_n}}\mathrm{sin}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_nt}{2}}\right)\right]C_{g,n+1}(0)`$ (32)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{2ig\sqrt{(n+1)(1+kn)}}{\mathrm{\Omega }_n}}\mathrm{sin}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_nt}{2}}\right)C_{e,n}(0).`$
The Rabi frequency $`\mathrm{\Omega }_n`$ is $`\sqrt{\mathrm{\Delta }_n^2+4g^2\omega ^2(1+kn)(1+n)}`$. The dependence of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_n`$ on $`n`$ such is that there is a minimum value for the Rabi frequency when $`n`$ satisfies $`\mathrm{\Delta }=2kn\omega +g^2\omega ^2(1+k+2kn)(k\omega )^1`$, provided $`k0`$. The variation of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_n`$ with respect to $`n`$ is shown in Fig. 2. In the case of $`H_{JC}`$, the Rabi frequency varies linearly with $`n`$ and hence there is no minimum. The existence of a minimum Rabi frequency has important consequences for the dynamics of atomic-inversion, squeezing, photon-statistics, etc. and they are discussed in the following sections.

Let the Rabi frequency attain its minimum for some specific value of $`n`$, denoted by $`\overline{n}`$. Therefore, we have

$$\mathrm{\Delta }=\mathrm{\Delta }_c=2k\omega \overline{n}+\frac{g^2(1+k+\overline{n})}{k\omega }.$$
(33)
The $`n`$ dependence of Rabi frequency, for values of $`n`$ close to $`\overline{n}`$, is obtained by Taylor expanding $`\mathrm{\Omega }_n`$ around $`\overline{n}`$, upto second order. The resultant expression is

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_n=\mathrm{\Omega }_{\overline{n}}+\frac{2(n\overline{n})^2(k^2\omega ^2+kg^2)}{\mathrm{\Omega }_{\overline{n}}}$$
(34)
In Fig. 2 the values predicted by the approximate expression for $`\mathrm{\Omega }_n`$ are compared with those of the exact expression. It is clear that for the chosen values of $`g`$, $`k`$ and $`\overline{n}`$, the values match very well for those values of $`n`$ under the peak of the photon number distribution. Quantitatively, the fractional difference is less than 3%.

## 3 Evolution of atomic inversion

In the previous section we constructed the complete state of the atom-field system in the dressed atom basis in interaction picture. The state $`|\varphi (t)`$ in the Schrödinger picture is easily obtained by premultiplying the interaction picture state function $`|\psi (t)`$ by $`\mathrm{exp}(i(K_{}K_++\nu /2)t)`$. In this section, we study the temporal evolution of atomic inversion.

The time-dependent state vector $`|\psi (t)`$ of the system is determined completely once the coefficients $`C_{e,n}(t)`$ and $`C_{g,n}(t)`$ are known, which, in turn, are specified by their initial values. For instance, if the atom is initially in the excited state, we have $`C_{g,n}(0)=0`$ and $`C_{e,n}(0)=n|\psi (0)`$. The probability that the atom is in the excited state, irrespective of the state of the field, is $`_{n=0}^{\mathrm{}}P_n|C_{e,n}(t)|^2`$ and to be in the ground state is $`_{n=0}^{\mathrm{}}P_n|C_{g,n}(t)|^2`$. The photon number distribution of the field is $`P_n`$. The difference of these two probabilities is atomic inversion. For the specified initial condition, namely, the atom is initially in the excited state, the atomic inversion $`W(t)`$ is

$$W(t)=1+\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}P_n\left[\frac{4g^2\omega ^2(1+n)(1+kn)}{\mathrm{\Omega }_n^2}(\mathrm{cos}(\mathrm{\Omega }_nt)1)\right],$$
(35)
and time-dependent part of $`W(t)`$ is

$$W_T(t)=4g^2\omega ^2\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}P_n\frac{(1+n)(1+kn)}{\mathrm{\Omega }_n^2}\mathrm{cos}(\mathrm{\Omega }_nt).$$
(36)
The quantity $`W_T`$ exhibits rich structure in its evolution. It exhibits collapse and revivals when the initial photon distribution is taken to be a Poissonian distribution of mean photon number $`\overline{n}`$, which corresponds to the field being in a coherent state $`|\sqrt{\overline{n}}`$. The photon number distribution for the state is $`P_n=\mathrm{exp}(\overline{n})\frac{\overline{n}^n}{n!}`$. This distribution has a single peak and the standard deviation is $`\overline{n}`$. Hence, the major contribution to the sum in Eq.36 comes from a few terms with $`n`$ around the peak. With this choice of $`P_n`$, we have plotted in Fig. 3a the evolution of $`W_T`$ as a function of time. The time required for the first collapse and the following revival, denoted by $`T_C`$ and $`T_R`$ respectively, can be estimated approximately. For the revival to occur, the terms corresponding to those $`n`$ around the peak, should be in phase. Thus, we require $`T_R(\mathrm{\Omega }_{\overline{n}+1}\mathrm{\Omega }_{\overline{n}})`$ be equal to $`2\pi `$. The difference of the nearest-neighbour Rabi frequencies is

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_{\overline{n}+1}\mathrm{\Omega }_{\overline{n}}=\frac{2A\overline{n}+A+B}{2\mathrm{\Omega }_{\overline{n}}}.$$
(37)
The constants $`A`$ and $`B`$ are $`4(k^2\omega ^2+kg^2)`$ and $`4(g^2+kg^2\mathrm{\Delta }k\omega )`$ respectively. The revival time $`T_R`$ is $`\frac{4\pi \mathrm{\Omega }_{\overline{n}}}{2A\overline{n}+A+B}`$.

For the inversion to collapse, the terms in the sum on the rhs of Eq.36 should be uncorrelated. Since the width of a Possionian distribution is where the probability $`P_n`$ is appreciable, the condition for collapse is written as $`T_C(\mathrm{\Omega }_{\overline{n}+\sqrt{\overline{n}}}\mathrm{\Omega }_{\overline{n}\sqrt{\overline{n}}})=1`$. If $`\overline{n}`$ is large, the expression for $`T_C`$ is $`\frac{T_R}{4\pi \sqrt{\overline{n}}}`$.

The function $`W_T`$ exhibits rich features when detuning is close to $`\mathrm{\Delta }_c`$. In Fig. 3. we have shown the behaviour of $`W_T`$ for three different values of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$. The values for the parameters are $`g=10^3`$, $`k=10^4`$, $`\omega =1`$, $`\overline{n}=30`$ and the corresponding $`\mathrm{\Delta }_c`$ is 0.01606. The values are so chosen that the Rabi frequency attains its minimum when $`n`$ is near $`\overline{n}`$, the average photon number. The evolution of $`W_T`$ with $`\mathrm{\Delta }=.01<\mathrm{\Delta }_c`$ is shown as the top most figure, marked $`(a)`$ in Fig. 3. The figure $`(b)`$ corresponds to $`\mathrm{\Delta }=\mathrm{\Delta }_c`$ and the one marked $`(c)`$ is for $`\mathrm{\Delta }=.22>\mathrm{\Delta }_c`$. The envelope of $`W_T`$ when detuning equals $`\mathrm{\Delta }_c`$, is distinct with structures repeating without much distortion. This should be compared with the top and bottom figures, which correspond to $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Delta }_c`$, which exhibit random oscillations and do not have neat envelope.

As noted in Section II, SU(1,1) algebra is realized in terms of $`K_\pm `$ and $`K_0`$ when $`k=1`$. If we consider resonant interaction $`(r=1)`$, then $`W_T`$ can be estimated approximately for the SU(1,1) case. The field is taken to be in a coherent state $`|\alpha `$ such that $`|\alpha |=\sqrt{\overline{n}}1`$. We use $`(1+n)(1+kn)n^2`$ and $`g^21`$ to arrive at $`\mathrm{\Omega }_n=2n\omega `$. With these approximations, we arrive at

$$W_T=g^2\mathrm{exp}(\overline{n}(\mathrm{cos}(\omega t)1))\mathrm{cos}(\overline{n}\mathrm{sin}(\omega t)),$$
(38)
in which we have used $`(1+n)(1+kn)\mathrm{\Omega }_{n}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}`$. The magnitude of $`W_T`$ is negligible in this case and so there is no perceptible collapse or revival. This is due to the presence of Kerr term and the fact that it dominates over $`\widehat{a}^{}\widehat{a}`$ in the Hamiltonian. However, we point out that collapses and revivals are present in $`W_T`$ if $`\chi \omega `$.

## 4 Dynamics of field properties

In the previous section, we studied the dynamics of the two-level atom, in particular, the atomic inversion. In the present section, we explore the temporal behaviour of field statistics and field amplitudes. As in the previous section, the field is initially in a coherent state of complex amplitude $`\alpha `$ and the atom is taken to be in its excited state. With these initial conditions, the probability distribution of photons at time $`t`$ is

$`P(n,t)`$ $`=`$ $`|C_{e,n}(t)|^2+|C_{g,n}(t)|^2`$ (39)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{P_n}{2}}\left[1+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }_n^2}{\mathrm{\Omega }_n^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{4g^2\omega ^2(1+n)(1+kn)}{\mathrm{\Omega }_n^2}}\mathrm{cos}(\mathrm{\Omega }_nt)\right]`$
Coherent states are the wavepackets whose behaviour is closest to that of a classical particle and hence are called classical states. Nevertheless, during their evolution in time the states may not be classical. The photon statistics of coherent states is Poissonian. Any deviation from this behaviour is characterized by Mandel’s Q parameter defined as $`\frac{\widehat{a}^{}\widehat{a}\widehat{a}^{}\widehat{a}\widehat{a}^{}\widehat{a}^2}{\widehat{a}^{}\widehat{a}}`$. Using the time-dependent probability distribution $`P(n,t)`$, the expectation values in the expression for Q parameter are

$$Q=\frac{\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}n^2P(n,t)[\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}P(n,t)n]^2}{_{n=0}^{\mathrm{}}P(n,t)n}$$
(40)
For coherent states, Q is unity. Any value of Q less than unity is nonclassical. In Fig. 4 the time evolution of Q parameter for an initially coherent state and $`\mathrm{\Delta }=0.01<\mathrm{\Delta }_c`$ is given. The emergence of nonclassical behaviour ($`Q<1`$) is seen. Though not shown in figure, we point out that for $`\mathrm{\Delta }=\mathrm{\Delta }_c=0.016061`$, the statistics does not become sub-Poissonian. When $`k=1`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }=0`$, the time-dependent part of $`P(n,t)`$ is of negligible magnitude and so $`Q`$ does not evolve in time.

### 4.1 Squeezing

We define the field amplitudes to be

$`X(t)={\displaystyle \frac{\widehat{a}^{}(t)+\widehat{a}(t)}{\sqrt{2}}},`$ (41)
$`Y(t)=i{\displaystyle \frac{\widehat{a}^{}(t)\widehat{a}(t)}{\sqrt{2}}}.`$ (42)
These amplitudes satisfy the commutation relation $`[X,Y]=i`$ and hence they satisfy $`(\delta X)(\delta Y)=1/2`$. The symbol $`(\delta X)`$ stands for the expression $`\sqrt{X^2X^2}`$, the variance in $`X`$ for a given field state. For coherent states of any amplitude $`\alpha `$, variances in $`X`$ and $`Y`$ are the same and equal to 1/2. A state is nonclassical if $`(\delta X)`$ is less than 1/2, the coherent state value. Using the time-dependent state function given in Eq. (31), the variances in the field amplitudes are given by

$$(\delta X)^2=\frac{1}{2}\left[1+2\widehat{a}^{}\widehat{a}+\widehat{a}^2+\widehat{a}^2\widehat{a}^2\widehat{a}^{}^22\widehat{a}^{}\widehat{a}\right],$$
(44)
and

$$(\delta Y)^2=\frac{1}{2}\left[1+2\widehat{a}^{}\widehat{a}\widehat{a}^2\widehat{a}^2+\widehat{a}^2+\widehat{a}^{}^22\widehat{a}^{}\widehat{a}\right].$$
(45)
The expectation values of various operators in these expressions are

$`\widehat{a}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}\sqrt{n+1}\left[C_{e,n}^{}C_{e,n+1}+C_{g,n}^{}C_{g,n+1}\right],`$ (46)
$`\widehat{a}^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}\sqrt{(n+1)(1+kn)}\left[C_{e,n}^{}C_{e,n+2}+C_{g,n}^{}C_{g,n+2}\right],`$ (47)
and
$`\widehat{a}^{}\widehat{a}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}n\left[C_{e,n}^{}C_{e,n}+C_{g,n}^{}C_{g,n}\right].`$ (48)
The expectation values $`\widehat{a}^{}`$ and $`\widehat{a}^2`$ are the complex conjugates of $`\widehat{a}`$ and $`\widehat{a}^2`$ respectively.

The evolution of $`\delta X`$ is shown in Fig. 5. As the field evolves in time, the variance in $`X`$ falls below 0.5 indicating that the quadrature exhibits squeezing. As a consequence of uncertainty relation, the $`Y`$ quadrature does not show squeezing. However, when we set $`\alpha =i\sqrt{3}0`$, the situation is reversed. In this case, squeezing is possible in $`Y`$ and not in $`X`$. An interesting feature is that the uncertainty in $`Y`$ with $`\alpha =i\sqrt{30}`$ is same as in $`X`$ when $`\alpha =\sqrt{30}`$. The reason for this is that the field states are of the form $`_{n=0}^{\mathrm{}}B_n\alpha ^n|n`$ wherein the coefficients $`B_n`$ are real for all $`n`$. For such superpositions, the uncertainty in $`X`$ for a given $`\alpha `$ is same as that in $`Y`$ with $`\alpha `$ replaced by $`i\alpha `$.

### 4.2 Overlap of initial and time-evolved states

A quantity of interest is the overlap of the state of the atom-field at time $`t`$ and that at $`t=0`$. With the same initial conditions for the atom-field state as in the previous section, the overlap is

$$|\psi (0)|\psi (t)|^2=\mathrm{exp}(|\alpha |^2)\left|\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{|\alpha |^{2n}}{n!}\left[\mathrm{cos}(\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_nt}{2})+i\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }_n}{\mathrm{\Omega }_n}\mathrm{sin}(\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_nt}{2})\right]\right|^2.$$
(49)
The numerical value of the overlap lies between zero and unity. It is seen from Fig. 6 that the overlap becomes zero at longer times. In other words, the time-evolved state is almost orthogonal to initial state. For short durations, an approximate expression for the decay of overlap is derived by replacing expression $`\mathrm{exp}(\overline{n})\frac{\overline{n}}{n!}`$ with the Gaussian distribution $`\mathrm{exp}(\frac{(n\overline{n})^2}{2\overline{n}})`$ and the sum over $`n`$ by integration. Further, we set $`\mathrm{\Omega }_n=\mathrm{\Omega }_N+(Nn)\mathrm{\Omega }_N^{}+\mathrm{\Omega }_N^{\prime \prime }(Nn)^2`$, with the assumption that $`N`$ is close to but not less than $`\overline{n}`$. Here, prime denotes taking derivative with respect to $`n`$ and the suffix represents the value of $`n`$ where the derivative is evaluated. With these approximations we get, after neglecting oscillatory terms,

$`{\displaystyle \underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}\mathrm{exp}({\displaystyle \frac{(n\overline{n})^2}{2\overline{n}}})\mathrm{cos}({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_nt}{2}})`$ $`=`$ $`\text{Re}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}\mathrm{exp}({\displaystyle \frac{(n\overline{n})^2}{2\overline{n}}}+i{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_nt}{2}})\text{d}n`$ (50)
$``$ $`\left[1+N^2{\displaystyle \frac{^2\mathrm{\Omega }_n}{^2n}}|_{n=N}{\displaystyle \frac{t^2}{4}}\right]^{\frac{1}{4}}`$
$`\times \mathrm{exp}\left[N^2{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_n}{n}}|_{n=N}{\displaystyle \frac{t^2}{4}}\right]`$
Similar expression can be derived for summation with $`\mathrm{sin}(\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_nt}{2})`$. The above expression indeed predicts that the overlap function decays with time. When $`N=\overline{n}`$, the first derivative of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_n`$ vanishes and the exponential term in the envelope is absent. Consequently the decay is slower. However, if the photon number distribution of the field is very broad, it is incorrect to truncate the Taylor series and the expression in Eq. (50) is invalid.

## 5 Summary

The Hamiltonian that contains the usual and intensity-dependent (including Kerr term) JC models as limiting cases has been constructed. The nondissipative dynamics dictated by the generalized Hamiltonian $`H`$ is completely solvable. The eigenvalues of the Hamiltonian, with Kerr term and intensity-dependent coupling, exhibits level-repulsion. In the case of nonvanishing Kerr term, the Rabi frequency, considered as a function of the photon number $`n`$, attains a minimum. The dynamical behaviour of atomic-inversion, when detuning is so chosen to have the minimum Rabi frequency, exhibits superstructures, which is absent in the usual JC model. The overlap of the initial coherent state and the time-evolved state decays with time. In the language of inner product, the initial coherent state is almost orthogonal to the time-evolved state. The results, except the occurrence of superstructures in atomic inversion, a consequence of nonvanishing Kerr term, go over to those of the JC model, in the limit of $`k0`$.

We note that the formal equivalence between $`H_{JC}`$ and $`H`$ is obtained by identifying $`K_+`$ with $`\widehat{a}^{}`$ and $`K_{}`$ with $`\widehat{a}`$. This, in conjunction with the fact both the sets of operators $`\{\widehat{a}^{},\widehat{a},I\}`$ and $`\{K_\pm ,K_0\}`$ are closed under commutation, implies that the expansion coefficients $`C_{e/g,n}(t)`$ for the evolution governed by $`H`$ are obtained from the corresponding expressions for the usual JC model by replacing $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ by $`\mathrm{\Delta }_n`$ and $`g`$ by $`g\sqrt{1+kn}`$. Hence, all those physical quantities, like the atomic inversion, quadrature fluctuations, etc., computed in terms of the expansion coefficients are derivable from those of the JC model.

List of Figures

Fig. 1 Dependence of eigenvalues $`E_+`$ and $`E_{}`$ on detuning $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$. The continuous curve corresponds to $`g=0.1`$ and the dashed curve corresponds to $`g=0`$. Here $`k=.1`$ and $`\overline{n}=30`$. The dashed curves with positive and negative slopes correspond respectively to $`_{e,n}`$ and $`_{g,n}`$. Lower part of the figure is for $`n=1`$ and upper part for $`n=2`$.
Fig. 2 Variation of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_n`$ with $`n`$. We have set $`g=10^3`$, $`k=10^4`$, $`\overline{n}=30`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }=0.016061`$. The approximate and actual Rabi frequencies are compared in the upper figure. Dotted line corresponds to the approximate expression in Eq.34 and continuous curve corresponds to exact expression. Values of $`k`$, $`g`$, $`\overline{n}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ are $`10^4`$, $`10^3`$, $`30`$ and $`0.016061`$ respectively. The bottom curve shows the photon number distribution for the coherent state $`|\alpha =\sqrt{3}0`$.
Fig. 3 Time-dependent part of atomic inversion. Case (a) corresponds to $`\mathrm{\Delta }=0.01<\mathrm{\Delta }_c`$. Case (b) is for $`\mathrm{\Delta }=\mathrm{\Delta }_c=0.016061`$ and Case (c) refers to $`\mathrm{\Delta }=0.022>\mathrm{\Delta }_c`$. Here Case (b) shows $`1+W_T`$ and Case (c) shows $`2+W_T`$.

Fig. 4 Time variation of $`(\delta X)^2`$, as the atom-field system evolves. The evolution is shown for three values of detuning, 0.01 (continuous), 0.016061 (dotted) and 0.02 (dashed). Instants of $`(\delta X)^2`$ less than 0.5 correspond to squeezing in $`X`$ quadrature.

Fig. 5 Mandel’s $`Q`$ parameter as a function of time. Instants of $`Q<1`$ correspond to sub-Poissonian statistics. Values of $`g`$, $`k`$ and $`\overline{n}`$ are same as in Fig. 2 and $`\mathrm{\Delta }=0.01`$.

Fig. 6 Overlap of initial and time-evolved field states. Y-axis corresponds to $`|\psi (0)|\psi (t)|^2`$. The envelope of the overlap function decays with time implying that the initial state is almost orthogonal to the evolved state. The values of the parameters are same as in Fig. 2 and the detuning $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is equal to $`0.016061`$.


format: text

text:
# 1 The low momentum interaction 𝑉_{"low"𝑘} derived from various realistic potentials. The lowest partial waves relevant to neutron matter are shown [].

## 1 Two-body low momentum interaction

As input to the many-body calculation we take the two-body low momentum potential $`V_{\text{low}k}`$ , which is derived from realistic nucleon-nucleon interaction models by integrating out the high momentum modes in the sense of the RG. Here, we briefly summarize the properties of $`V_{\text{low}k}`$ and refer to the original papers and Ref.  for details. The RG decimation to low momenta is constructed such that $`V_{\text{low}k}`$ is energy-independent and reproduces the half-on-shell $`T`$ matrix for momenta below a cutoff $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. For $`k^{},k<\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, we thus have

$$T(k^{},k;k^2)=V_{\text{low}k}(k^{},k)+\frac{2}{\pi }𝒫_0^\mathrm{\Lambda }\frac{V_{\text{low}k}(k^{},p)T(p,k;k^2)}{k^2p^2}p^2𝑑p.$$
(1)
Consequently, $`V_{\text{low}k}`$ is phase shift equivalent to the original nucleon-nucleon interaction. For values of the cutoff, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }2.1\text{fm}^1`$ (the scale up to which the potential models are fitted to empirical phase shifts), one finds the same low momentum potential for the various realistic nucleon-nucleon interactions, i.e., the resulting potential is model independent, as demonstrated in Fig. 1.

In $`V_{\text{low}k}`$, the model-dependent high momentum (short distance) modes have been integrated out. This procedure tames the strong short-range repulsion in the original interaction. Thus, the low momentum interaction $`V_{\text{low}k}`$ can, in contrast to the bare interaction, be used directly in many-body calculations. Furthermore, since the states above the cutoff $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ are included in $`V_{\text{low}k}`$ and those below are not, the cutoff acts much like the Pauli-blocking operator in the Brueckner $`G`$ matrix . By analyzing the angle-averaged Pauli blocking operator, one finds an effective cutoff slightly larger than the Fermi momentum. Here we employ a density-dependent cutoff for $`V_{\text{low}k}`$, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{V_{\text{low}k}}=\sqrt{2}k_\text{F}`$. Due to the separation of short distance and long distance scales, $`V_{\text{low}k}`$ is almost independent of the cutoff in the $`T=1`$ channel  for $`0.7`$ fm$`{}_{}{}^{1}\mathrm{\Lambda }2.1`$ fm-1. Thus, the exact value of the cutoff is not crucial for pure neutron matter.

## 2 Renormalization group approach to Fermi liquids

We now discuss the RG approach to the many-fermion problem. As originally proposed by Shankar , one separates the slow modes from the fast ones in a many-fermion system by introducing a momentum cutoff relative to the Fermi momentum. At zero temperature, the phase space for fast modes is then characterized by the occupation factors

$$n_𝐩(\mathrm{\Lambda })=\mathrm{\Theta }(k_\text{F}\mathrm{\Lambda }|𝐩|)\text{and}1n_𝐩(\mathrm{\Lambda })=\mathrm{\Theta }(|𝐩|(k_\text{F}+\mathrm{\Lambda })).$$
(2)
The slow modes that make up the model space are then located in the complementary shell of thickness $`2\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ around the Fermi surface. Starting at a large cutoff ($`\mathrm{\Lambda }=k_\text{F}`$), where the effective interaction in the model space is assumed to be given by the free-space low momentum interaction $`V_{\text{low}k}`$, it is successively renormalized by including the contributions of fast intermediate states lying in a thin shell between $`\mathrm{\Lambda }\delta \mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. For $`\delta \mathrm{\Lambda }0`$, one obtains a differential (RG) equation for the renormalization of the effective interaction as a function of the cutoff. As $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is decreased, more and more modes are shifted from the model space into the effective interaction, in such a way that the low energy scattering amplitude remains invariant. At the same time the single-particle degrees of freedom are gradually converted into quasiparticles. As $`\mathrm{\Lambda }0`$, the effective interaction equals the scattering amplitude for quasiparticles on the Fermi surface, since all modes have been integrated out. To one-loop order, the RG equation in the particle-hole channels, which play a special role in Fermi liquid theory, is at zero temperature given by

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{d\mathrm{\Lambda }}}a(𝐪,𝐪^{};\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ $`=z_{k_\text{F}}^2{\displaystyle \frac{d}{d\mathrm{\Lambda }}}\left\{g{\displaystyle \frac{d^3𝐩^{\prime \prime }}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{n_{𝐩^{\prime \prime }+𝐪/2}(\mathrm{\Lambda })n_{𝐩^{\prime \prime }𝐪/2}(\mathrm{\Lambda })}{\epsilon _{𝐩^{\prime \prime }+𝐪/2}\epsilon _{𝐩^{\prime \prime }𝐪/2}}}\right\}`$
$`\times a(𝐪,{\displaystyle \frac{𝐩+𝐩^{}}{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{𝐪^{}}{2}}𝐩^{\prime \prime };\mathrm{\Lambda })a(𝐪,𝐩^{\prime \prime }{\displaystyle \frac{𝐩+𝐩^{}}{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{𝐪^{}}{2}};\mathrm{\Lambda })`$
$`\text{exchange channel}\{𝐪𝐪^{}\}.`$ (3)
The contributions from the direct and the exchange channel are shown diagrammatically in Fig. 2. When only one channel is considered, the one-loop RG equation is exact in the sense that it is equivalent to the corresponding scattering equation. Within the RG method, the scattering amplitude remains antisymmetric at any-loop order when both particle-hole channels are included.

We choose a scattering geometry, where the external particles are restricted to the Fermi surface, $`|𝐩^{()}\pm 𝐪/2|=k_\text{F}`$. Then, the scattering amplitude depends only on two angles, or equivalently the magnitude of the two momenta $`|𝐪|`$ and $`|𝐪^{}|=|𝐩𝐩^{}|`$. The direct and exchange channels couple in the RG equation, Eq. (3). Microscopically the RG in the particle-hole channels includes particle-hole bubbles and ladders as well as vertex corrections. At this point we include only the high-momentum ladder diagrams summed in $`V_{\text{low}k}`$ in the particle-particle channel. Finally, the effective interaction of particles on the Fermi surface is obtained by setting $`|𝐪|=0`$ in Eq. (3. The resulting effective interaction includes the so-called induced interaction.

## 3 Neutron matter and S-wave pairing

We solve the RG equation, Eq. (3), for neutron matter (for details see Ref. ). The evolution of the effective mass as well as an approximate treatment of the renormalization of the quasiparticle strength is included in the flow. We note that the RG approach does not require a truncation in Landau $`l`$ of the Fermi liquid parameters. The resulting Landau parameters are given in Ref. .

While the Fermi liquid parameters are defined in the forward scattering limit, the RG procedure yields the quasiparticle scattering amplitude also for finite scattering angles. The latter can be used to compute the S-wave superfluid gap. In weak coupling BCS theory,

$$\mathrm{\Delta }=2\epsilon _\text{F}\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{1}{𝒜}\right),$$
(4)
where $`𝒜`$ denotes the angle averaged scattering amplitude on the Fermi surface, we find the pairing gap shown in Fig. 3. The S-wave gap is strongly suppressed, from $`3.3\text{MeV}`$ to $`0.8\text{MeV}`$ at maximum, due to particle-hole screening in the many-body medium. This agrees well with the results obtained in the polarization potential model by Wambach et al. .

At higher densities, neutrons form a P-wave (3P23F2) superfluid. For fermions interacting by means of a delta function force, the second order particle-hole contributions to the P-wave scattering amplitude are attractive for back-to-back configurations on the Fermi surface, and thus one expects the P-wave gap to increase. For a quantitative analysis of pairing in this channel, however, the effects of tensor and spin-orbit forces in the medium must be included.

## 4 Tensor and spin-orbit forces in the nuclear medium

Here we briefly discuss the noncentral parts of the effective two-nucleon interaction. In a nuclear medium, new spin-dependent interactions are induced by the presence of other particles nearby. The polarization of the Fermi sea leads to contributions, which depend on the two-body cm momentum $`𝐏`$ in the rest frame of the many-body system. In the long-wavelength Landau limit, two of these new operators survive, a modified spin-orbit term $`(𝝈_1\times 𝝈_2)(𝐪^{}\times 𝐏)`$, which does not conserve two-particle spin, and a tensor term $`S_{12}(𝐏)`$. Furthermore, relativistic corrections related to the transformation from the two-body cm frame to the rest frame of the many-body system also contribute to such nonstandard operators . Neither of these effects are included in conventional many-body calculations, where the two-body interaction is treated in the independent pair approximation. A calculation of the effective tensor and spin-orbit interactions in nuclear matter is in progress .

### Acknowledgements

We thank S. Bogner, H. Feldmeier, R. Furnstahl, T. Kuo and D.-O. Riska for stimulating discussions. AS is supported by the Ohio State University through a Postdoctoral Fellowship and the NSF under Grant No. PHY-0098645. The work of GEB is supported by the US DOE Grant No. DE-FG02-88ER40388.


text:
# Remark About dS/CFT Correspondence

## 1 Introduction

Remarkable series of recent observations suggest that we live in accelerating space-time . However understanding the quantum theory of gravity in de Sitter space remains one of the most important problems in theoretical physics. 222Very exciting and radical proposals considering string theory in de Sitter space can be found in . Alternative point of view on the quantum gravity in three dimensional de Sitter space can be found in . For recent discussion of some issues of quantum theory in de Sitter space, see . A correspondence relating de Sitter (dS) gravity to the conformal field theory (CFT) theory dual was presented in  and further studied in . For further details considering this proposal, see .

The dS/CFT correspondence is mainly modeled with analogy AdS/CFT correspondence : Like the AdS case, the symmetries of de Sitter space suggest that the dual theory is conformly invariant. Mainly, it was proposed the connection between gravity in de Sitter space and the correlation functions in the dual Euclidean CFT. It is also clear that the nature of de Sitter space is different from its AdS counterpart. For example, the conformal boundaries of dS are hyper-surfaces of Euclidean signature. Further, in de Sitter space, there are two such hyper-surfaces, the future boundary $`^+`$ and the past boundary $`^{}`$. There was great debate in the past few months if the proposed duality involves single CFT  living on either $`^+`$ or $`^{}`$, or if we should rather consider both of them as independent parts of one single theory and study nontrivial correlation between them, as was suggested in very interesting paper . This question was addressed in  where very impressive arguments were given that support the idea of single dual CFT. In this paper we will consider the CFT living on $`^{}`$ as the fundamental one, with agreement with . We will also sometimes consider operators in the second CFT living on $`^+`$ however as will be clear from the context the operators in CFT on $`^+`$ are determined by operators of CFT on $`^{}`$. On the other hand it is possible that the nontrivial relation between CFT living on $`^+,^{}`$ could capture dynamic of bulk quantum gravity.

However, the most striking difference from the AdS/CFT duality is the fact that we have no rigorous realization of the dS/CFT correspondence. In  dS/CFT duality was proposed on the direct analogy with AdS/CFT correspondence when the correlation functions in the dual CFT theory are determined through the bulk S-matrix elements of massive scalar field. However it is important to stress that there is no rigorous definition of such a duality as opposite with Ads/CFT correspondence.

In  different point of view on the problem of quantum gravity in dS space and its possible connection to the dual CFT was suggested. It was stressed by author that his approach seems to give increasingly less information as the cosmological constant is increased. More precisely, Witten argued that for negative cosmological constant the sort of reasoning, that he presented there, gives the boundary conformal field theory which, according to  might be regarded as supplying a dynamical principle. For zero cosmological constant we get S-matrix. For positive cosmological constant all what we get is definition of the Hilbert space $`_i`$ of initial states at $`^{}`$ or equivalently the Hilbert space $`_f`$ of final states at $`^+`$. In  also definition of the Hilbert spaces $`_{i,f}`$ and inner product was suggested. The modified inner product involves path integral evolution from $`^{}`$ to $`^+`$ together with $`𝒞𝒫𝒯`$ conjugation. The concrete realization of this proposal was given in  in the case of the free massive scalar field in $`dS_3`$. It was argued that the inner product for the bulk scalar field constructed along the lines given in  leads to the adjoint in the dual CFT that gives standard inner product of the boundary field theory.

In this paper we would like to apply these ideas and argue that from the proposed modified inner product and the relation between CFT living on $`^{}`$ and the bulk scalar field we can extract all correlation functions in the dual CFT without any explicit form of the conjectured dS/CFT duality. We begin with the review of the construction of the inner product in the space of initial states of the free massive field in $`dS_3`$ as was given in  that leads to the definition of the Hilbert space $`_i`$ of the initial states of the scalar field on $`^{}`$. According to the dS/CFT duality states in $`_i`$ should correspond to the states of Euclidean CFT living on $`_{}`$. Since the construction of the inner product presented in  is given in terms of $`|in`$ vacua with the natural particle interpretation, it is reasonable to presume an existence of dual CFT operator $`𝒪_+^{in}`$ that creates these quanta from the vacuum state $`|in`$. From the same reason we can deduce an existence of lowering operator $`𝒪_{}^{in}`$ and also that these operators must obey canonical commutation relations. From these commutation relations and definition of the inner product we will able to reproduce all two point functions in $`|in`$ vacuum state as were given in  as well as the correlation functions for operators defined on $`^+`$ and $`^{}`$, even it is clear that in case of the free massive scalar field in the bulk the CFT operators on $`^+`$ are uniquely functions of the CFT operators on $`^{}`$. It is also well known that there is one parameter family of vacuum states 333The quantum field theory of massive scalar field in de Sitter space time was extensively studied in the past, see for example . For general introduction to the quantum field theory in curved space time, see . There was great discussion about consistency of general vacuum states $`|\gamma `$ and their possible meaning in cosmology, see for example . for free massive scalar field in dS. It is then natural to presume that these vacuum states should have their description in CFT as well. In fact, CFT correlators in general vacuum states $`|\gamma `$ were previously calculated in . We extend our analysis to general vacuum states as well and we will show that we are able to reproduce results given in .

We hope that our calculation could be helpful for better understanding of the proposed dS/CFT correspondence. The main point of our calculations is the conjecture that the dual CFT gives an exact description of the Hilbert space on $`^{}`$. This approach is mainly motivated by Witten’s arguments that dual CFT theory can only give an information about the structure of the Hilbert space of quantum gravity of initial states on $`^{}`$ rather to supplies for dynamical principle as in the case of AdS/CFT correspondence. It is possible that this dynamical principle is somewhat hidden in the relation between CFT operators on $`^{}`$ and the operators living on $`^+`$ and that this relation could support the dynamical evolution of the bulk quantum gravity.

It seems to us that the possibility to extract CFT correlation functions directly from the definition of the inner product without any explicit realization of the dS/CFT correspondence could be helpful for further study of the bulk quantum theory. For example, there is Schrödinger picture description of the quantum field in dS space (See, for example  and reference there.) and at present it is not complete clear to us how this description could have its holographic description in dual CFT. We hope that our approach could be useful for addressing this issue.

The organization of this paper is follows. In section 2 we review the quantisation of the massive scalar field in dS space. In section 3 we review the construction of the inner product for the bulk scalar field as was given in  and we obtain all two point functions in the dual CFT in $`|in`$ vacuum state. In section 4 we will discuss these correlators in general vacuum states $`|\gamma `$. In conclusion 5 we summarize our results and suggest further direction of research.

## 2 Massive scalar field in de Sitter space

In this section we review the quantisation of the massive scalar field in de Sitter space following mainly very nice analysis given in .

d-dimensional de Sitter space ($`dS_d`$) is described by hyperboloid in $`d+1`$ dimensional Minkowski space 444With the metric $`\eta _{ab}=\mathrm{diag}(1,1,\mathrm{},1)`$.

$$P(X,X)=1,P(X,Y)=\eta _{ab}X^aX^b,a,b=0,\mathrm{},d.$$
(1)
In convention  lower case $`x`$ denote $`d`$-dimensional coordinate on $`dS_d`$ and upper case $`X`$ to denote the corresponding d+1 dimensional coordinate in the embedding space.

There are many coordinate systems that are useful for description of $`dS_d`$, for recent review, see . In this paper we will work in the global coordinates $`(\tau ,\mathrm{\Omega })`$ in which de Sitter metric is

$$ds^2=d\tau ^2+\mathrm{cosh}^2\tau d\mathrm{\Omega }_{d1}^2,$$
(2)
where $`d\mathrm{\Omega }_{d1}^2`$ is the standard round metric on $`S^{d1}`$ . The equation of motion of the scalar field is

$$(^2m^2)\varphi =0,^2\varphi =\frac{1}{\sqrt{g}}_\mu (\sqrt{g}g^{\mu \nu }_\nu \varphi )$$
(3)
that in the metric (2) has the form

$$\frac{1}{\mathrm{cosh}^{d1}\tau }_\tau (\mathrm{cosh}^{d1}\tau _\tau \varphi )+\frac{1}{\mathrm{cosh}^d\tau }_{S^{d1}}^2\varphi m^2\varphi =0.$$
(4)
This equation is separable with the solution

$$\varphi =y_L(\tau )Y_{Lj}(\mathrm{\Omega }),$$
(5)
where $`Y_{Lj}`$ are spherical harmonic on $`S^{d1}`$ obeying

$$_{S^{d1}}^2Y_{Lj}=L(L+d2)Y_{Lj},$$
(6)
where $`L`$ is non-negative integer and $`j`$ is a collective index $`(j_1,\mathrm{},j_{d2})`$. Following  we choose such $`Y_{Lj}`$’s that obey

$$Y_{Lj}(\mathrm{\Omega }_A)=Y_{Lj}^{}(\mathrm{\Omega })=(1)^LY_{Lj}(\mathrm{\Omega }),$$
(7)
where $`\mathrm{\Omega }_A`$ denotes the point on $`S^{d1}`$ antipodal to $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$. The functions $`Y_{Lj}`$ are orthonormal

$$𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }Y_{Lj}(\mathrm{\Omega })Y_{L^{}j^{}}^{}(\mathrm{\Omega })=\delta _{LL^{}}\delta _{jj^{}},$$
(8)
and complete

$$\underset{Lj}{}Y_{Lj}(\mathrm{\Omega })Y_{Lj}^{}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{})=\delta ^{d1}(\mathrm{\Omega },\mathrm{\Omega }^{}).$$
(9)
For real positive $`\mu ,2m>(d1)`$ we find 555$`\mu =\sqrt{m^2\frac{(d1)^2}{4}}`$. In this paper we will consider $`\mu `$ real positive only. For aspect of the quantisation of the scalar fields with other values of $`\mu `$, see recent papers  and reference therein.

$$y_L^{in}=\frac{2^{L+d/21}}{\sqrt{\mu }}\mathrm{cosh}^L\tau e^{(L+\frac{d1}{2}i\mu )\tau }F(L+\frac{d1}{2},L+\frac{d1}{2}i\mu ,1i\mu ,e^{2\tau })$$
(10)
which together with its complex conjugate are two independent solutions. The normalization is fixed that these modes are orthonormal with respect to the standard inner product

$$(\varphi _{Lj},\varphi _{L^{}j^{}})=i𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{cosh}^{d1}\tau \left(_\tau \varphi _{Lj}^{}\varphi _{L^{}j^{}}\varphi _{Lj}^{}_\tau \varphi _{L^{}j^{}}\right)=\delta _{LL^{}}\delta _{jj^{}},$$
(11)
where the integral is performed over $`S^{d1}`$ at fixed $`\tau `$. As is well known (See, for example .) this inner product is independent on time slicing for modes obeying (3) so that we can evaluate it in the limit $`\tau \mathrm{}`$ when $`F1,\mathrm{cosh}\tau \frac{1}{2}e^\tau `$ and consequently

$$\underset{\tau \mathrm{}}{lim}\varphi _{Lj}^{in}(x)=\frac{2^{d/21}}{\sqrt{\mu }}e^{(\frac{d1}{2}i\mu )\tau }Y_{Lj}(\mathrm{\Omega }).$$
(12)
Then it is simple task to show validity (11).

From (12) it is clear that $`\varphi ^{in}`$ modes correspond to the positive frequency modes with respect to the global time $`\tau `$ near the asymptotic past and hence they represent incoming particle states. Then we define $`|in`$ vacuum as a state which is annihilated by the lowering operator associated to $`\varphi ^{in}`$. Physically, $`|in`$ is the state with no incoming particles on $`^{}`$.

We also see that (4) is invariant under time reversal $`\tau \tau `$. Hence we can obtain another pair of linearly independent solutions by defining

$$y_L^{out}(\tau )=y_L^{in}(\tau )$$
(13)
with the asymptotic behavior

$$\underset{\tau \mathrm{}}{lim}y^{out}\frac{2^{d/21}}{\sqrt{\mu }}e^{(\frac{d1}{2}+i\mu )\tau }$$
(14)
which implies that modes

$$\varphi _{Lj}^{out}(x)=y_L^{out}(\tau )Y_{Lj}(\mathrm{\Omega })$$
(15)
are positive frequency modes with respect to the global time $`\tau `$ near the asymptotic future and represent outgoing particle states. As in the case of $`\varphi _{Lj}^{in}`$ we can define vacuum state $`|out`$ which is the state annihilated by the lowering operators associated to $`\varphi ^{out}`$. Generally $`|in`$ state is not the same as $`|out`$ state however as was recently reviewed in , for odd dimensional de Sitter space we can identify them

$$|in=|out\mathrm{in}\mathrm{odd}\mathrm{dimensions}.$$
(16)
It follows that there is no particle production in the sense that if no particles are coming in from $`^{}`$ no particles will go out on $`^+`$. This is in contrast to the even-dimensional case for which there is always some particle production.

Note that (12) implies asymptotic behavior of $`\varphi ^{in}`$ near $`^{}`$

$$\varphi _\pm ^{in}e^{h_\pm \tau },h_\pm =\frac{d1}{2}\pm i\mu ,\mathrm{for}\tau \mathrm{}.$$
(17)
As was conjectured in  $`\varphi _{}^{in}`$ is dual to the operators of weight $`h^+`$ in the CFT living on $`^{}`$. In the same way $`\varphi _+^{in}`$ is dual to operator of conformal weight $`h_{}`$.

As was shown in  it is useful for the definition of general vacuum states $`|\gamma `$ to introduce rescaled global modes

$`\stackrel{~}{\varphi }_{Lj}^{in}(x)=e^{i\theta _L}y_L^{in}(\tau )Y_{Lj}(\mathrm{\Omega }),`$
$`\stackrel{~}{\varphi }_{Lj}^{out}(x)=e^{i\theta _L}y_L^{out}(\tau )Y_{Lj}(\mathrm{\Omega }),`$
where the phase $`e^{i\theta _L}`$ is defined

$$e^{2i\theta _L}=(1)^{L\frac{d1}{2}}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(i\mu )\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(L+\frac{d1}{2}+i\mu \right)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(i\mu )\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(L+\frac{d1}{2}i\mu \right)}.$$
(19)
These rescaled modes will be used in the discussion of the general vacuum state in section 4.

In the following we will also need to know how at the general point in the bulk the field is determined from its value on $`^{}`$. It can be shown that these fields are related through

$`\varphi (x)=i{\displaystyle _{_{}}}𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }^{}\sqrt{g(\tau ^{})}\left(_\tau ^{}G_C(x,x^{})\varphi (x^{})G_C(x,x^{})_\tau ^{}\varphi (x^{})\right),`$
$`G_C(x,x^{})=G_E(x,x^{})G_E(x^{},x),G_E(x,x^{})=E\left|\varphi (x)\varphi (x^{})\right|E,`$
where $`|E`$ is Euclidean vacuum and $`G_E(x,x^{})`$ is Wightman function characterized given vacuum state, for more details and very nice discussion, see again . It is important to stress that $`G_c`$ does not depend on vacuum state that defines Wightmann function. For our purposes it is important to find limiting value of $`G_C(x,x^{})`$ for $`\tau \mathrm{}`$. It can be shown that

$`\underset{\tau ^{}\mathrm{},\tau \mathrm{}}{lim}G_E(x,x^{})=e^{h_+(\tau ^{}\tau )}e^{\pi \mu }\mathrm{}_+(\mathrm{\Omega }^{},\mathrm{\Omega }_A)e^{h_{}(\tau ^{}\tau )}e^{\pi \mu }\mathrm{}_{}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{},\mathrm{\Omega }_A),`$
$`\underset{\tau ^{}\mathrm{},\tau \mathrm{}}{lim}G_E(x^{},x)=e^{h_+(\tau ^{}\tau )}e^{\pi \mu }\mathrm{}_+(\mathrm{\Omega }^{},\mathrm{\Omega }_A)e^{h_{}(\tau ^{}\tau )}e^{\pi \mu }\mathrm{}_{}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{},\mathrm{\Omega }_A),`$
where

$$\mathrm{}_\pm (\mathrm{\Omega },\mathrm{\Omega }^{})=\frac{1}{\mu \mathrm{sinh}\pi \mu }\underset{Lj}{}e^{2i\theta _L}Y_{Lj}(\mathrm{\Omega })Y_{Lj}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{})$$
(22)
are two point functions for a conformal field of dimension $`h_\pm `$ on the sphere. Then we get

$$\underset{\tau ^{}\mathrm{},\tau \mathrm{}}{lim}G_C(x,x^{})=2e^{h_+(\tau ^{}\tau )}\mathrm{sinh}\pi \mu \mathrm{}_+(\mathrm{\Omega }^{},\mathrm{\Omega }_A)2\mathrm{sinh}\pi \mu e^{h_{}(\tau ^{}\tau )}\mathrm{}_{}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{},\mathrm{\Omega }_A).$$
(23)
Let us introduce $`\varphi _\pm ^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }),\varphi _\pm ^{out}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$ fields on $`^{},^+`$ by

$`\underset{\tau \mathrm{}}{lim}\varphi (\tau ,\mathrm{\Omega })=\varphi _+^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })e^{h_+\tau }+\varphi _{}^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })\varphi ^{h_{}\tau },`$
$`\underset{\tau \mathrm{}}{lim}\varphi (\tau ,\mathrm{\Omega }_A)=\varphi _+^{out}(\mathrm{\Omega })e^{h_+\tau }+\varphi _{}^{out}(\mathrm{\Omega })\varphi ^{h_{}\tau },`$
where, according to  $`\varphi _\pm ^{out}`$ have been defined with an antipodal inversion relative to $`\varphi _\pm ^{in}`$. Asymptotic form (12) for $`d=3`$ implies

$`\varphi _+^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })=\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\mu }}}{\displaystyle \underset{Lj}{}}b_{Lj}^{in}Y_{Lj}^{}(\mathrm{\Omega }),\varphi _{}^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })=\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\mu }}}{\displaystyle \underset{Lj}{}}a_{Lj}^{in}Y_{Lj}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$
$`\varphi _+^{out}(\mathrm{\Omega })=\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\mu }}}{\displaystyle \underset{Lj}{}}a_{Lj}^{out}Y_{Lj}(\mathrm{\Omega }_A),\varphi _{}^{out}(\mathrm{\Omega })=\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\mu }}}{\displaystyle \underset{Lj}{}}b_{Lj}^{out}Y_{Lj}^{}(\mathrm{\Omega }_A).`$
Then (2) gives

$$\varphi _\pm ^{out}(\mathrm{\Omega })=\mu \mathrm{sinh}\pi \mu 𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{}_\pm (\mathrm{\Omega },\mathrm{\Omega }^{})\varphi _{}^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{}).$$
(26)
In the next section we use many of the facts reviewed above for the construction of the non-standard inner product  and its realization in the case of free massive scalar field in .

## 3 CFT correlators from inner product

In  Witten suggested how to construct Hilbert spaces of initial and final states of quantum gravity in de Sitter space, together with the definition of inner product. This definition is based on the path integral evolution from $`^{}`$ to $`^+`$ together with $`𝒞𝒫𝒯`$ conjugation. Since we believe that there is an exact description of the quantum gravity and quantum field theory in de Sitter space in terms of dual CFT living on $`^{}`$ we expect that the Hilbert space of the initial states of scalar field in the bulk is described using CFT operators acting on some vacuum state. We will show that from the definition of the inner product according to Witten and its very nice analysis in  we can obtain all correlation functions in the dual CFT.

To begin with, we briefly review discrete symmetries $`𝒞,𝒫`$ and $`𝒯`$ in de Sitter space, following . As in this paper we restrict ourselves to the three dimensional de Sitter space.

Let us consider the real scalar field so that the operation of charge conjugation $`𝒞`$ is trivial. We define action of the following discrete symmetry operations on this field

$$𝒫\varphi (x)𝒫=\varphi (Px),𝒯\varphi (x)𝒯=\varphi (Tx),$$
(27)
where we have two discrete symmetries of de Sitter space $`P`$ and $`T`$ that are defined as

$`PX^0=X^0,PX^1=X^1,PX^2=X^2,PX^3=X^3,`$
$`TX^0=X^0,TX^1=X^1,TX^2=X^2,TX^3=X^3`$
that clearly leave (1) invariant. Bulk scalar field $`\varphi `$ can be written as

$`\varphi (\tau ,\mathrm{\Omega })={\displaystyle \underset{L,j}{}}\left(a_{Lj}^{in}y_L^{in}(\tau )Y_{Lj}(\mathrm{\Omega })+b_{Lj}^{in}y_L^{in}(\tau )Y_{Lj}^{}(\mathrm{\Omega })\right),`$
$`\varphi (\tau ,\mathrm{\Omega })={\displaystyle \underset{L,j}{}}\left(a_{Lj}^{out}y_L^{out}(\tau )Y_{Lj}(\mathrm{\Omega })+b_{Lj}^{out}y_L^{out}(\tau )Y_{Lj}^{}(\mathrm{\Omega })\right).`$
As in  we have introduced lowering and raising operators $`a_{Lj},b_{Lj}`$ respectively and are not assuming that $`a_{Lj}^{}=b_{Lj}`$. Then the action of the discrete symmetries $`𝒫,𝒯`$ was defined in such a way that their definition reproduces (27). More precisely we have

$$𝒫a_{Lj}^{in}𝒫=(1)^ja_{Lj}^{in},𝒫b_{Lj}^{in}𝒫=(1)^jb_{Lj}^{in}.$$
(30)
Since $`Y_{Lj}(P\mathrm{\Omega })=(1)^jY_{Lj}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$ we immediately see that this definition reproduces the first line in (27). In the same way

$$𝒯a_{Lj}^{in}𝒯=(1)^La_{Lj}^{in},𝒯b_{Lj}^{in}𝒯=(1)^Lb_{Lj}^{in}.$$
(31)
We note that time reversal transformation $`𝒯`$ is anti linear operator which combines unitary operator $`U`$ with complex conjugation $`K`$ of the functions. Then it can be shown

$`𝒫𝒯\varphi _+^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })𝒫𝒯=\varphi _{}^{out}(P\mathrm{\Omega }_A),`$
$`𝒫𝒯\varphi _+^{out}(\mathrm{\Omega })𝒫𝒯=\varphi _{}^{in}(P\mathrm{\Omega }_A).`$
Now we will review the construction of the Witten’s inner product  given in . Let us consider one particle states on $`^\pm `$

$`|\mathrm{\Psi }^{in}={\displaystyle 𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{\Psi }^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })\varphi _+^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })|in},`$
$`|\mathrm{\Psi }^{out}={\displaystyle 𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{\Psi }^{out}(\mathrm{\Omega })\varphi _{}^{out}(\mathrm{\Omega })|out}.`$
Using (26) we can express $`|\mathrm{\Psi }^{out}`$ as

$$|\mathrm{\Psi }^{out}=\mu \mathrm{sinh}\pi \mu 𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }^{}\mathrm{\Psi }^{out}(\mathrm{\Omega })\mathrm{}_{}(\mathrm{\Omega },\mathrm{\Omega }^{})\varphi _+^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{})|in.$$
(34)
This defines the bilinear pairing

$$\left(\mathrm{\Psi }^{out}|\mathrm{\Psi }^{in}\right)=\mu \mathrm{sinh}\pi \mu 𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }^{}\mathrm{\Psi }^{out}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{})\mathrm{}_{}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{},\mathrm{\Omega })\mathrm{\Psi }^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }).$$
(35)
Now we apply the $`𝒞𝒫𝒯`$ conjugation to any state on $`^{}`$ to give a state on $`^+`$

$$𝒞𝒫𝒯|\mathrm{\Psi }^{in}=𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{\Psi }^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })\varphi _{}^{out}(P\mathrm{\Omega }_A)|in=𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{\Psi }^{in}(P\mathrm{\Omega }_A)\varphi _{}^{out}(\mathrm{\Omega })|in.$$
(36)
Then we can use the previous pairing to define the inner product on $`^{}`$

$$\mathrm{\Psi }^{in}|\mathrm{\Gamma }^{out}=\mu \mathrm{sinh}\pi \mu 𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }^{}\mathrm{\Psi }^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })\mathrm{}_{}(P\mathrm{\Omega }_A,\mathrm{\Omega }^{})\mathrm{\Gamma }^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{}).$$
(37)
According to dS/CFT conjecture any state in the Hilbert space $`_i`$ should have description in the dual CFT. Using well known CFT state-operator correspondence we expect that this state is given by action of some operator $`𝒪_+^{in}`$ on the vacuum state $`|in`$. Let us denote the complete set of these operators as $`𝒪_{+Lj}^{in}`$ where the quantum numbers $`L,j`$ have the same meaning as in section 2. Then any state in the Hilbert space $`_i`$ can be written as

$$|\mathrm{\Gamma }=\underset{L,j}{}f_{Lj}𝒪_{+Lj}^{in}|in=\sqrt{\frac{2}{\mu }}𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{\Psi }^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })𝒪_+^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })|in$$
(38)
using

$$𝒪_+^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })=\sqrt{\frac{\mu }{2}}\underset{Lj}{}Y_{Lj}^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })𝒪_{+Lj}^{in},\mathrm{\Psi }^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })=\underset{Lj}{}f_{Lj}Y_{Lj}^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }).$$
(39)
We define $`𝒪_{+Lj}^{in}`$ as creation operator in CFT Hilbert space $`_i`$. It is then natural to postulate an existence of the annihilation operator $`𝒪_{Lj}^{in}`$ with the canonical commutation relation

$$[𝒪_{Lj}^{in},𝒪_{+L^{}j^{}}^{in}]=\delta _{LL^{}}\delta _{jj^{}}$$
(40)
which implies

$`[𝒪_{}^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }),𝒪_+^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{})]=[\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{\mu }{2}}}{\displaystyle \underset{Lj}{}}Y_{Lj}^{}(\mathrm{\Omega })𝒪_{Lj}^{in},\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{\mu }{2}}}Y_{L^{}j^{}}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{})𝒪_{+L^{}j^{}}^{in}]=`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{\mu }{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{Lj,L^{}j^{}}{}}Y_{Lj}^{}(\mathrm{\Omega })Y_{L^{}j^{}}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{})\delta _{LL^{}}\delta _{jj^{}}={\displaystyle \frac{\mu }{2}}\delta (\mathrm{\Omega },\mathrm{\Omega }^{}).`$
From the upper expression we immediately get two point function (Note that the commutator is pure number and hence its vacuum expectation value is the same for all vacuum sates.)

$`in\left|[𝒪_{}^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }),𝒪_+^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{})]\right|in={\displaystyle \frac{\mu }{2}}\delta (\mathrm{\Omega },\mathrm{\Omega }^{})in\left|𝒪_{}^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })𝒪_+^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{})\right|in={\displaystyle \frac{\mu }{2}}\delta (\mathrm{\Omega },\mathrm{\Omega }^{})`$
using

$$𝒪_{}^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })|in=0.$$
(43)
In order to determine other two point functions we use the definition of the inner product given above. This is the main point of our analysis that should deserve deeper explanation. In the usual dS/CFT correspondence the CFT correlators are determined from the possible equivalence of CFT partition function and S-matrix in the bulk, which is the proposal given in . The motivation for this proposal comes from the AdS/CFT correspondence. However when we adopt Witten’s arguments  considering the dependence of the holographic description of the quantum gravity on cosmological constant and his conclusion that CFT could give information about Hilbert space of initial states $`_i`$ it seems to us very natural to search for dS/CFT correspondence in the structure of this Hilbert space and in particular in the definition of the inner product in $`_i`$. We will see that this analysis really allows us to get desired two point functions. In the CFT the inner product is defined as

$$\mathrm{\Psi }^{in}|\mathrm{\Gamma }^{out}=\frac{2}{\mu }𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }^{}\mathrm{\Psi }^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })(O_+^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }))^{}𝒪_+^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{})\mathrm{\Gamma }^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{})$$
(44)
so that comparing this expression with (37) gives

$$\frac{2}{\mu }(O_+^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }))^{}𝒪_+^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{})=\mu \mathrm{sinh}\pi \mu \mathrm{}_{}(P\mathrm{\Omega }_A,\mathrm{\Omega }^{}).$$
(45)
Even if we do not know the precise form of the dS/CFT correspondence we can at least try to suggest the interaction between CFT operators and the bulk field. We expect that the interaction between bulk fields and boundary CFT operators has following local form

$`{\displaystyle 𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }\left(𝒪_+^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })\varphi _+^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })+𝒪_{}^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })\varphi _{}^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })\right)},`$
$`{\displaystyle 𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }\left(𝒪_+^{out}(\mathrm{\Omega })\varphi _+^{out}(\mathrm{\Omega })+𝒪_{}^{out}(\mathrm{\Omega })\varphi _{}^{out}(\mathrm{\Omega })\right)}`$
where we now consider the second CFT living on $`^+`$ even if it will be clear in the moment that there is unique relation between CFT operators $`𝒪^{in},𝒪^{out}`$ at least in the case of the free massive field in the bulk. Now when we apply (26) in (3) we obtain

$`{\displaystyle 𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }\left(𝒪_+^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })\varphi _+^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })+𝒪_{}^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })\varphi _{}^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })\right)}=`$
$`=\mu \mathrm{sinh}\pi \mu {\displaystyle }d\mathrm{\Omega }d\mathrm{\Omega }^{}(𝒪_+^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })\mathrm{}_+(\mathrm{\Omega },\mathrm{\Omega }^{})\varphi _{}^{out}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{})+`$
$`+𝒪_{}^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })\mathrm{}_{}(\mathrm{\Omega },\mathrm{\Omega }^{})\varphi _+^{out}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{}))`$
so that when we compare this expression with the second line in (3) we obtain the relation between $`in`$ and $`out`$ CFT operators

$$𝒪_{}^{out}=\mu \mathrm{sinh}\pi \mu 𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }^{}\mathrm{}_\pm (\mathrm{\Omega },\mathrm{\Omega }^{})𝒪_\pm ^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{})$$
(48)
with agreement with . We see that it is natural to define the adjoint operation in the CFT as

$$(𝒪_\pm ^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }))^{}=𝒪_\pm ^{out}(P\mathrm{\Omega }_A),(𝒪_\pm ^{out}(\mathrm{\Omega }))^{}=𝒪_\pm ^{in}(P\mathrm{\Omega }_A)$$
(49)
since now (45) is equal to

$`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\mu }}(𝒪_+^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }))^{}𝒪_+^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{})={\displaystyle \frac{2}{\mu }}𝒪_+^{out}(P\mathrm{\Omega }_A)𝒪_+^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{})=`$
$`=2\mathrm{sinh}\pi \mu {\displaystyle 𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime }\mathrm{}_{}(P\mathrm{\Omega }_A,\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime })𝒪_{}^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime })𝒪_+^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{})}=`$
$`=2\mathrm{sinh}\pi \mu {\displaystyle 𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime }\mathrm{}_{}(P\mathrm{\Omega }_A,\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime })\frac{\mu }{2}\delta (\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime },\mathrm{\Omega }^{})}=\mu \mathrm{sinh}\pi \mu \mathrm{}_{}(P\mathrm{\Omega }_A,\mathrm{\Omega }^{})`$
using (48). From the definition of adjoint and the inner product we can get all correlation functions in CFT. First of all, since $`𝒪_{}^{in}`$ annihilates vacuum state we immediately obtain following correlators

$$𝒪_{}^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })𝒪_{}^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{})=0,𝒪_+^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })𝒪_{}^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{})=0$$
(51)
with agreement with . We also have

$`𝒪_+^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })𝒪_+^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{}){\displaystyle 𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime }\mathrm{}_{}(\mathrm{\Omega },\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime })𝒪_{}^{out}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime })𝒪_+^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{})}`$
$`(𝒪_{}(P\mathrm{\Omega }_A^{\prime \prime }))^{}𝒪^+(\mathrm{\Omega }^{})=0,`$
where we used the definition of adjoint given above and the fact that if $`𝒪_{}^{in}`$ annihilates ket $`|in`$ then its adjoint annihilates bra $`in|`$.

In this section we calculated the two point functions in the CFT defined on $`^{}`$. This calculation was based on the analysis of the modified inner product . Since we began from the vacuum state $`|in`$ with its natural particle interpretation we could introduce creation and annihilation operators in CFT that create or annihilate given quanta. Since it is well known that there is one parameter family of different vacuum states of the bulk massive field in dS we would like to see how CFT operators $`𝒪_+^{in},𝒪_{}^{in}`$ act on general vacuum state $`|\gamma `$. This analysis will be done in the next section.

## 4 Correlation functions in $`\gamma `$ vacua

In this section we will calculate CFT correlators in other vacuum states $`|\gamma `$. Firstly we review the basic facts about different vacuum states of the scalar field in de Sitter space, following mainly . Let us consider the free massive field in de Sitter space with the mode expansion

$$\varphi (x)=\underset{n}{}\left[a_n\varphi _n(x)+b_n\varphi _n^{}(x)\right],$$
(53)
where subscript $`n`$ labels states of given mode $`\varphi _n`$ that obeys (3). In global coordinates, for example, $`n`$ means $`L,j`$ given in the previous section. We have also denoted, following  lowering and raising operators as $`a_n`$ and $`b_n`$ with commutation relation $`[a_n,b_m]=\delta _{nm}`$. The Wightman function is defined as

$$G_\gamma (x,x^{})=\gamma \left|\varphi (x)\varphi (x^{})\right|\gamma =\underset{n}{}\varphi _n(x)\varphi _n^{}(x^{})$$
(54)
characterized vacuum state $`|\gamma `$ that is defined to be the state annihilated by operators associated to positive modes $`\varphi _n`$

$$a_n|\gamma =0.$$
(55)
Since modes $`\varphi _n`$ satisfy the de Sitter space wave function (3), it is easy to see that Wightman function obeys

$$(^2m^2)G_\gamma (x,x^{})=0.$$
(56)
Let $`\stackrel{~}{\varphi }_n^{in}(x)`$ denote the positive frequency modes (2) associated to $`|in`$ vacuum. Let us consider a new set of modes related by the MA (Mottola-Allen) transform

$`\widehat{\varphi }_n=N_\gamma (\stackrel{~}{\varphi }_n^{in}e^\gamma \stackrel{~}{\varphi }_n^{in}),N_\gamma {\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{1e^{\gamma +\gamma ^{}}}}},`$
$`\stackrel{~}{\varphi }_n=N_\gamma (\widehat{\varphi }_n+e^\gamma \widehat{\varphi }_n^{}),`$
where $`\gamma `$ can be any complex number with $`\mathrm{Re}\gamma <0`$. These modes can be used to define new operators $`\widehat{a}_n,\widehat{b}_n`$ and hence the vacuum state $`|\gamma `$ that is annihilated by operators $`\widehat{a}_n`$ that multiply the positive frequency solutions $`\widehat{\varphi }_n`$ in the expansion of the scalar field field as

$`\varphi (x)={\displaystyle \underset{n}{}}\left[\widehat{a}_n\widehat{\varphi }_n(x)+\widehat{b}_n\widehat{\varphi }_n^{}(x)\right]=`$
$`={\displaystyle \underset{n}{}}\left[\stackrel{~}{a}_n^{in}\stackrel{~}{\varphi }_n^{in}+\stackrel{~}{b_n}^{in}\stackrel{~}{\varphi }_n^{in}\right]`$
$`\widehat{a}_n=N_\gamma (\stackrel{~}{a}_n^{in}+e^\gamma ^{}\stackrel{~}{b}_n^{in}),\widehat{b}_n=N_\gamma (\stackrel{~}{b}_n^{in}+e^\gamma \stackrel{~}{a}_n^{in}).`$
This relation can be written as

$$\widehat{a}_n=𝒰\stackrel{~}{a}_n^{in}𝒰^1,𝒰=e^K,K=\underset{n}{}(c(\stackrel{~}{b}_n^{in})^2\overline{c}(\stackrel{~}{a}_n^{in})^2)$$
(59)
with

$$c=\frac{1}{4}\left(\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{tanh}(\frac{Re\gamma }{2})\right)e^{iIm\gamma }Ae^{iIm\gamma }.$$
(60)
To prove that $`\widehat{a}`$ can be written as in (59) we use following commutation relations

$$[K,\stackrel{~}{a}_n^{in}]=\underset{m}{}c[(\stackrel{~}{b}_m^{in})^2,\stackrel{~}{a}_n^{in}]=2c\stackrel{~}{b}_m^{in},[K,[K,\stackrel{~}{a}^{in}]]=4c\overline{c}\stackrel{~}{a}_n^{in}$$
(61)
so that

$`𝒰\stackrel{~}{a}_n^{in}𝒰^1=\stackrel{~}{a}_n^{in}+{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{k!}}\stackrel{k}{\stackrel{}{[[K,\stackrel{~}{a}_n^{in}],\mathrm{}]}}=(2c+{\displaystyle \frac{8c^2\overline{c}}{6}}+\mathrm{})\stackrel{~}{b}_n^{in}+`$
$`+(1{\displaystyle \frac{4c\overline{c}}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{16(c\overline{c})^2}{24}}+\mathrm{})\stackrel{~}{a}_n^{in}=\mathrm{sinh}(2A)e^{Im\gamma }\stackrel{~}{b}_n^{in}+\mathrm{cosh}(2A)\stackrel{~}{a}_n^{in}.`$
Consequently the vacuum state $`|\gamma `$ can be written as

$$|\gamma =𝒰|in.$$
(63)
We can also express $`𝒰`$ using in and out fields as

$$𝒰=\mathrm{exp}\left(c(\gamma )\frac{\mu }{2}d^2\mathrm{\Omega }\varphi _+^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })\varphi _{}^{out}(\mathrm{\Omega })+c(\overline{\gamma })\frac{\mu }{2}𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }\varphi _{}^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })\varphi _+^{out}(\mathrm{\Omega })\right).$$
(64)
To see this note that in the definition of the MA transformation we used rescaled fields

$$\stackrel{~}{\varphi }_{Lj}^{in}(x)=e^{i\theta _L}y_L^{in}(\tau )Y_{Lj}(\mathrm{\Omega }).$$
(65)
This implies that the lowering and raising operators given in the MA transformation formula are related to the operators defined using $`\varphi _+^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }),\varphi _{}^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$ as $`\stackrel{~}{b}_n^{in}=e^{i\theta _L}b_n^{in},\stackrel{~}{a}_n^{in}=e^{i\theta _L}b_n^{in}`$. Then in the variables corresponding to $`\varphi _\pm ^{in,out}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$ modes we can express operator $`K`$ as

$`K={\displaystyle \underset{n}{}}(ce^{2i\theta _L}(b_n^{in})^2\overline{c}e^{2i\theta _L}(a_n^{in})^2)=`$
$`=c{\displaystyle \frac{\mu }{2}}{\displaystyle 𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }\varphi _+^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })\varphi _{}^{out}(\mathrm{\Omega })}\overline{c}{\displaystyle \frac{\mu }{2}}{\displaystyle 𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }\varphi _{}^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })\varphi _+^{out}(\mathrm{\Omega })}.`$
According to dS/CFT correspondence we can presume an existence of one parameter family of vacuum states $`|\gamma `$ in CFT as well and that these states are given as

$$|\gamma =𝒰|in,𝒰=e^K,K=c(\gamma )\frac{2}{\mu }𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }𝒪_+^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })𝒪_{}^{out}(\mathrm{\Omega })\overline{c}(\gamma )\frac{2}{\mu }𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }𝒪_{}^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })𝒪_+^{out}(\mathrm{\Omega }).$$
(67)
Using (49)we can easily show that

$$K^{}=K$$
(68)
with respect to the adjoint given in the previous section. Then two point functions of CFT operators in general vacuum state $`|\gamma `$ are

$`\gamma \left|𝒪_\pm ^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })𝒪_\pm ^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{})\right|\gamma =e^K𝒪_\pm (\mathrm{\Omega })e^Ke^K𝒪_\pm ^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{})e^K,`$
$`\gamma \left|𝒪_\pm ^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })𝒪_{}^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{})\right|\gamma =e^K𝒪_\pm ^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })e^Ke^K𝒪_{}^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{})e^K.`$
In order to obtain these two point functions we should calculate following expression

$$e^K𝒪_\pm ^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })e^K=𝒪_\pm ^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })+\underset{N=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{(1)^N}{N!}\stackrel{N}{\stackrel{}{[K,[K,𝒪_\pm ^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })],\mathrm{},]]}}.$$
(70)
For this calculation we will need following commutators

$$[𝒪_\pm ^{out}(\mathrm{\Omega }),𝒪_{}^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{})]=\mu \mathrm{sinh}\pi \mu 𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime }\mathrm{}_{}(\mathrm{\Omega },\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime })[𝒪_{}^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime }),𝒪_{}^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{})]=0$$
(71)
and

$`[𝒪_+^{out}(\mathrm{\Omega }),𝒪_+^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{})]=\mu \mathrm{sinh}\pi \mu {\displaystyle 𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime }\mathrm{}_{}(\mathrm{\Omega },\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime })[𝒪_{}^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime }),𝒪_+^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{})]}=`$
$`=\mu \mathrm{sinh}\pi \mu {\displaystyle 𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime }\mathrm{}_{}(\mathrm{\Omega },\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime })\frac{\mu }{2}\delta (\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime },\mathrm{\Omega })}={\displaystyle \frac{\mu ^2}{2}}\mathrm{sinh}\pi \mu \mathrm{}_{}(\mathrm{\Omega },\mathrm{\Omega }^{}),`$
$`[𝒪_{}^{out}(\mathrm{\Omega }),𝒪_{}^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{})]=\mu \mathrm{sinh}\pi \mu {\displaystyle 𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime }\mathrm{}_+(\mathrm{\Omega },\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime })[𝒪_+^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime }),𝒪_{}^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{})]}=`$
$`=\mu \mathrm{sinh}\pi \mu {\displaystyle 𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime }\mathrm{}_+(\mathrm{\Omega },\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime })\frac{\mu }{2}\delta (\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime },\mathrm{\Omega }^{})}={\displaystyle \frac{\mu ^2}{2}}\mathrm{sinh}\pi \mu \mathrm{}_+(\mathrm{\Omega },\mathrm{\Omega }^{})`$
so we easily get

$$[K,𝒪_+^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })]=2\overline{c}𝒪_+^{out}(\mathrm{\Omega }),[K,[K,𝒪_+^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })]]=4c\overline{c}𝒪_+^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }).$$
(73)
Then it is easy to see that

$$e^K𝒪_+^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })e^K=N_\gamma (𝒪_+^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })e^\gamma ^{}𝒪_+^{out}(\mathrm{\Omega }))$$
(74)
and consequently

$`\gamma \left|𝒪_+^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })𝒪_+^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{})\right|\gamma =e^K𝒪_+^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })e^Ke^K𝒪_+^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{}))e^K=`$
$`=N_\gamma ^2(𝒪_+^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })e^\gamma ^{}𝒪_+^{out}(\mathrm{\Omega }))(𝒪_+^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{})e^\gamma ^{}𝒪_+^{out}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{})=`$
$`=N_\gamma ^2e^\gamma ^{}𝒪_+^{out}(\mathrm{\Omega })𝒪_+^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{})=N_\gamma ^2e^\gamma ^{}\mu \mathrm{sinh}\pi \mu {\displaystyle 𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime }\mathrm{}_{}(\mathrm{\Omega },\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime })𝒪_{}^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime })𝒪_+^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{})}=`$
$`=N_\gamma ^2e^\gamma ^{}\mu \mathrm{sinh}\pi \mu {\displaystyle 𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime }\mathrm{}_{}(\mathrm{\Omega },\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime })\frac{\mu ^2}{2}\delta (\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime },\mathrm{\Omega })}={\displaystyle \frac{\mu ^2}{2}}N_\gamma ^2e^\gamma ^{}\mathrm{sinh}\pi \mu \mathrm{}_{}(\mathrm{\Omega },\mathrm{\Omega }^{}).`$
Performing the same analysis for $`𝒪_{}^{in}`$ leads to

$$e^K𝒪_{}^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })e^K=N_\gamma (𝒪_{}^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })e^\gamma 𝒪_{}^{out}(\mathrm{\Omega }))$$
(76)
and hence

$`\gamma \left|𝒪_{}^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })𝒪_{}^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{})\right|\gamma =e^K𝒪_{}^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })e^Ke^K𝒪_{}^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{})e^K=`$
$`=N_\gamma ^2(𝒪_{}^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })e^\gamma 𝒪_{}^{out}(\mathrm{\Omega }))(𝒪_{}^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{})e^\gamma 𝒪_{}^{out}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{}))=`$
$`=N_\gamma ^2e^\gamma 𝒪_{}^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })𝒪_{}^{out}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{})=N_\gamma ^2e^\gamma \mu \mathrm{sinh}\pi \mu {\displaystyle 𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime }\mathrm{}_+(\mathrm{\Omega },\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime })𝒪_{}^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime })𝒪_+^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime })}=`$
$`=N_\gamma ^2e^\gamma \mu \mathrm{sinh}\pi \mu {\displaystyle 𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime }\mathrm{}_+(\mathrm{\Omega },\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime })\frac{\mu }{2}\delta (\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime },\mathrm{\Omega })}=N_\gamma ^2e^\gamma {\displaystyle \frac{\mu ^2}{2}}\mathrm{sinh}\pi \mu \mathrm{}_+(\mathrm{\Omega },\mathrm{\Omega }^{}).`$
Finally we will calculate the mixed correlators

$$\gamma \left|𝒪_{}^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })𝒪_+^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{})\right|\gamma =N_\gamma ^2𝒪_{}^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })𝒪_+^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{})=N_\gamma ^2\frac{\mu }{2}\delta (\mathrm{\Omega },\mathrm{\Omega }^{})$$
(78)
and

$`\gamma \left|𝒪_+^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega })𝒪_{}^{in}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{})\right|\gamma =N_\gamma ^2e^{\gamma +\gamma ^{}}𝒪_+^{out}(\mathrm{\Omega })𝒪_{}^{out}(\mathrm{\Omega }^{})=`$
$`=N_\gamma ^2e^{\gamma +\gamma ^{}}\mu ^2\mathrm{sinh}^2\pi \mu {\displaystyle 𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime }𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime \prime }\mathrm{}_{}(\mathrm{\Omega },\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime })\frac{\mu }{2}\delta (\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime },\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime \prime })\mathrm{}_+(\mathrm{\Omega },\mathrm{\Omega }^{\prime \prime \prime })}={\displaystyle \frac{\mu }{2}}N_\gamma ^2e^{\gamma +\gamma ^{}}\delta (\mathrm{\Omega },\mathrm{\Omega }^{}).`$
These two point functions agree with the correlators that were calculated in  from slightly different approach. We have seen that these correlators can be easily calculated using the conjecture that the states in the dual CFT correspond to the states of massive scalar field in de Sitter space at $`^{}`$.

## 5 Conclusion

In this paper we tried to present our point of view on the nature of dS/CFT correspondence. We studied the relation between free massive scalar field in the bulk of de Sitter space and the dual Euclidean CFT living in the past infinity $`^{}`$. Using the definition of the inner product in the Hilbert space $`_i`$ of initial states of massive scalar field in de Sitter space we were able to reconstruct all two point functions of dual CFT operators in arbitrary vacuum state. Let us express once again the main idea of our approach. Following arguments given in  we consider operators in dual CFT living on $`^{}`$ that define states in the Hilbert space $`_i`$ of initial states of quantum gravity in de Sitter space. Using this conjecture we can from the known inner product and the structure of the Hilbert space of initial states on $`^{}`$ obtain all correlators in the dual CFT and define adjoint operation. We have seen that application of this idea gives correlators in the dual CFT that have the same form as the two point functions that were calculated in  from the equivalence of partition function of CFT on $`^{}`$ and S-matrix elements in the bulk.

It is clear that the same analysis, as was presented in previous sections, could be performed for CFT defined on $`^+`$ in the sense that this theory gives an exact description of the Hilbert space $`H_f`$ of the final states of massive scalar field at past infinity. Of course in the case of the example studied in this paper these two Hilbert spaces are identical and hence corresponding CFT are the same. For that reason we considered the CFT defined on $`^{}`$ as the fundamental one. However it is clear that one single CFT cannot contain information about dynamical evolution of the bulk quantum gravity which, in our personal point of view, should have its CFT description in terms of renormalization group flow  that maps CFT operators on $`^+`$ corresponding to UV limit of the theory to the CFT operators on $`^{}`$ corresponding to IR limit.

The extension of this approach is natural. The first possibility is to apply this analysis to the case of arbitrary $`\mu `$ as in . It would be also nice to analyse massless bulk scalar field with its potential application to the cosmology . Very interesting analysis of this problem from the point of view of dS/CFT was given recently in . We would like also study the relation between CFT and quantum field theory in Elliptic de Sitter space  and the relation between CFT and quantum field theory in the space-times that approach their de Sitter phase in the asymptotic past or future only.

Even if we know that this paper gives only modest contribution to the question of the quantum gravity in de Sitter space and its relation to the string theory we believe that this small contribution could be helpful for further study of dS/CFT correspondence.
Acknowledgment We have benefitted greatly from discussions with Ulf Danielsson. This work is partly supported by EU contract HPRN-CT-2000-00122.


text:
# Two representations of the fundamental group and invariants of lens spaces

## 1. Introduction

Let us shortly remind the main constructions of works .

Let there be given the universal covering of an oriented three-dimensional manifold, considered as a simplicial complex, in which every simplex is mapped into the three-dimensional Euclidean space (so that the intersections of their images in $`^3`$ are possible). To each edge is assigned thus a Euclidean length, and each tetrahedron has a sign “plus” or “minus” depending on orientation of its image in $`^3`$; the defect angle (minus algebraic sum of dihedral angles) at each edge is equal to zero modulo $`2\pi `$. Then we consider infinitesimal translations of vertices of the complex which lead to infinitesimal changes of edge lengths, while these latter lead, in their turn, to the infinitesimal changes of defect angles. Thus, the following sequence of vector spaces arises:

$$0\stackrel{}{}𝔢_3\stackrel{𝐶}{}(dx)\stackrel{𝐵}{}(dl)\stackrel{𝐴}{}(d\omega )\stackrel{B^T}{}(\mathrm{})\stackrel{C^T}{}(\mathrm{})\stackrel{}{}0.$$
(1)
Here $`𝔢_3`$ is the Lie algebra of motions of three-dimensional Euclidean space; $`(dx)`$ is the space of column vectors of vertex coordinates differentials; $`(dl)`$ is the space of column vectors of edge length differentials; $`(d\omega )`$ is the space of column vectors of differentials of defect angles. The superscript $`T`$ means matrix transposition. Matrices $`A`$, $`B`$ and $`C`$ consist of partial derivatives. One can see  that the sequence (1) is an algebraic complex (superposition of two next matrices is equal to zero). Besides, it is possible to show  that for manifolds with finite fundamental group this complex is acyclic.

For lens spaces we consider two sets of representations of fundamental group (recall that $`\pi _1(L(p,q))=_p`$):

$`f_k:_p`$ $`\{\text{group of motions of 3-dimensional Euclidean space}\},`$ (2a)
$`g_j:_p`$ $`\{\text{group of automorphisms of vector spaces entering in (}\text{1}\text{)}\},`$ (2b)
$`j,k=0,\mathrm{},p1.`$
The realization of representations $`f_k`$ was described in detail in  (there they were denoted $`\phi _k`$). As to representations $`g_j`$, we will describe them below when we consider the structure of spaces entering in complex (1).

## 2. Calculation of invariants for $`L(p,q)`$

In figure 1 we show the simplicial complex (bipyramid) corresponding to the lens space $`L(p,q)`$. Let index $`m`$ (in figure) vary from $`0`$ to $`p1`$. Then gluing together $`p`$ bipyramids numbered by $`m`$ by identical vertices, edges and $`2`$-simplices we obtain an image of simplicial complex for $`\stackrel{~}{L(p,q)}=S^3`$ in $`^3`$.

Every element of group $`_p`$ can be represented in the group of motions of three-dimensional Euclidean space as a rotation through angle $`2\pi k/p`$ around some axis which we denote $`x_0`$. The integer parameter $`k`$ numbers the characters of these representations. Thus, in the right Cartesian coordinate system $`Ox_1x_{p1}x_0`$ the coordinates of vertices of simplicial complex look like (cf. ):

$`B_m`$ $`(\rho \mathrm{cos}{\displaystyle \frac{2\pi mk}{p}},\rho \mathrm{sin}{\displaystyle \frac{2\pi mk}{p}},0),`$ (3)
$`C_m`$ $`(\sigma \mathrm{cos}\left(\alpha +{\displaystyle \frac{2\pi qmk}{p}}\right),\sigma \mathrm{sin}\left(\alpha +{\displaystyle \frac{2\pi qmk}{p}}\right),s),`$ (4)
where $`\alpha `$, $`\rho `$, $`\sigma `$, $`s`$ are some parameters that fix, to within the motions of $`^3`$, the location of vertices and hence all geometrical values of the complex such as edge lengths, volumes of tetrahedra, dihedral angles, etc. For instance, a simple calculation shows that the oriented volumes of tetrahedra are determined in this case by the formula:

$$V_{C_0C_1B_{m+1}B_m}=\frac{4}{6}\rho \sigma s\mathrm{sin}\frac{\pi k}{p}\mathrm{sin}\frac{\pi qk}{p}\mathrm{sin}\left(\alpha +\frac{\pi (q12m)k}{p}\right).$$
(5)
Let us write out now more explicitly some of vector spaces entering in (1) (due to the symmetry of the complex, it is enough for us to deal only with the first three of them):

$$𝔢_3=\left(\begin{array}{c}d\phi _1\\ d\phi _{p1}\\ d\phi _0\\ dx_1\\ dx_{p1}\\ dx_0\end{array}\right),(dx)=\left(\begin{array}{c}(dx)_0\\ (dx)_1\\ \mathrm{}\\ (dx)_{p1}\end{array}\right),(dl)=\left(\begin{array}{c}(dl)_0\\ (dl)_1\\ \mathrm{}\\ (dl)_{p1}\end{array}\right),$$
(6)
where $`dx_{\mathrm{}}`$ and $`d\phi _{\mathrm{}}`$ are infinitesimal translations and rotations in the described above coordinate system $`Ox_1x_{p1}x_0`$.

Every element of group $`_p`$ acts on spaces $`(dx)`$ and $`(dl)`$ by cyclic shifts as follows: it sends subspaces $`(dx)_m`$ and $`(dl)_m`$ to $`(dx)_{jm}`$ and $`(dl)_{jm}`$ respectively. Index $`j`$ changes from $`0`$ to $`p1`$. So, these actions completely determine representations $`g_j`$.

Subspaces $`(dx)_m`$ and $`(dl)_m`$ look like (all indexes are taken modulo $`p`$):

$$(dx)_m=\left(\begin{array}{c}dx_{B_m}\\ dy_{B_m}\\ dz_{B_m}\\ dx_{C_{m/q}}\\ dy_{C_{m/q}}\\ dz_{C_{m/q}}\end{array}\right),(dl)_m=\left(\begin{array}{c}dl_{B_mB_{m+1}}\\ dl_{B_mC_{m/q}}\\ dl_{B_{m+1}C_{m/q}}\\ \mathrm{}\\ dl_{B_{m1}C_{m/q}}\\ dl_{C_{m/q}C_{m/q+1}}\end{array}\right).$$
(7)
In general, matrices $`A`$, $`B`$ and $`C`$ specifying the mappings of vector spaces in complex (1) are not block-diagonal. In order to make them such we perform unitary change-of-basis transformations in all spaces entering in the complex. Our goal is to split (1) into the direct sum of subcomplexes each of which would correspond to the character of some representation $`g_j`$ (see (2b)). The unitarity of transformations is necessary to preserve the symmetric form (1) of the complex. Let $`\epsilon `$ denote the primitive root of unity of degree $`p`$. Then

* the change-of-basis matrix in space $`𝔢_3`$ is

$$U_1=\left(\begin{array}{cccccc}\frac{\sqrt{2}}{2}& \frac{\sqrt{2}}{2}i& 0& & & \\ \frac{\sqrt{2}}{2}i& \frac{\sqrt{2}}{2}& 0& & & \\ 0& 0& 1& & & \\ & & & \frac{\sqrt{2}}{2}& \frac{\sqrt{2}}{2}i& 0\\ & & & \frac{\sqrt{2}}{2}i& \frac{\sqrt{2}}{2}& 0\\ & & & 0& 0& 1\end{array}\right);$$
(8)
* the change-of-basis matrix in space $`(dx)`$ is

$$U_2=\frac{1}{\sqrt{p}}\left(\begin{array}{cccc}1H_0& 1H_0& \mathrm{}& 1H_0\\ 1H_1& \epsilon ^kH_1& \mathrm{}& \epsilon ^{(p1)k}H_1\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& & \mathrm{}\\ 1H_{p1}& \epsilon ^{(p1)k}H_{p1}& \mathrm{}& \epsilon ^{(p1)^2k}H_{p1}\end{array}\right),$$
(9)
where

$$H_m=U_1\left(\begin{array}{cccccc}\epsilon ^{mk}& 0& 0& & & \\ 0& \epsilon ^{mk}& 0& & & \\ 0& 0& 1& & & \\ & & & \epsilon ^{mk}& 0& 0\\ & & & 0& \epsilon ^{mk}& 0\\ & & & 0& 0& 1\end{array}\right);$$
(10)
* the change-of-basis matrix in space $`(dl)`$ is

$$U_3=\frac{1}{\sqrt{p}}\left(\begin{array}{cccc}1I& 1I& \mathrm{}& 1I\\ 1I& \epsilon ^kI& \mathrm{}& \epsilon ^{(p1)k}I\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& & \mathrm{}\\ 1I& \epsilon ^{(p1)k}I& \mathrm{}& \epsilon ^{(p1)^2k}I\end{array}\right),$$
(11)
where $`I`$ is the identical matrix of size $`(p+2)\times (p+2)`$.

Now, in an obvious way,

$`CU_2^{}CU_1,`$
$`BU_3^{}BU_2,`$
$`AU_3^{}AU_3,`$
and each of matrices $`A`$, $`B`$ and $`C`$ becomes block-diagonal (the rearrangement of rows or/and columns can be required). Thus, the acyclic complex (1) splits into the following direct sum of $`p`$ acyclic subcomplexes:

$`0\stackrel{}{}\left(\begin{array}{c}d\phi _j\\ dx_j\end{array}\right)\stackrel{\sqrt{p}C_j}{}(dx)_j\stackrel{B_j}{}`$ $`(dl)_j\stackrel{A_j}{}(d\omega )_j\stackrel{B_j^{}}{}(\mathrm{})_j\stackrel{\sqrt{p}C_j^{}}{}(\mathrm{})_j\stackrel{}{}0,`$ (12a)
$`j=0,\pm 1modp,`$
$`0\stackrel{}{}(dx)_j\stackrel{B_j}{}`$ $`(dl)_j\stackrel{A_j}{}(d\omega )_j\stackrel{B_j^{}}{}(\mathrm{})_j\stackrel{}{}0,`$ (12b)
$`j=2,\mathrm{},p2.`$
The superscript $``$ means operation of Hermitian conjugation.

We define the torsions of complexes (12) by formulas:

$$𝒯_j=\{\begin{array}{cc}p^2\left|(detC_j|_{\overline{𝒟}_j})\right|^2\left|(det{}_{𝒟_j}{}^{}|B_j|_{\overline{𝒞}_j})\right|^2(det{}_{𝒞_j}{}^{}|A_j)^1,\hfill & j=0,\pm 1modp,\hfill \\ \left|(det{}_{𝒟_j}{}^{}|B_j|_{\overline{𝒞}_j})\right|^2(det{}_{𝒞_j}{}^{}|A_j)^1,\hfill & j=2,\mathrm{},p2.\hfill \end{array}$$
(13)
Here $`𝒞_j`$ is a maximal subset of edges such that the restriction of matrix $`A_j`$ onto its corresponding subspace of $`(dl)`$ (we denote it as $`{}_{𝒞_j}{}^{}|A_j`$) is nondegenerate. $`\overline{𝒞}_j`$ is the complement of $`𝒞_j`$. Sets $`𝒟_j`$ and $`\overline{𝒟}_j`$ consist of vertices and are defined similarly.

On the base of torsions (13), one can construct  invariant values not changing under the Pachner moves $`23`$ and $`14`$. In our case, these invariants take the form:

$$I_{j,1}(L(p,q))=\{𝒯_j\frac{l_{B_0B_1}^2l_{C_0C_1}^2\underset{m=0}{\overset{p1}{}}l_{B_mC_0}^2}{\underset{m=0}{\overset{p1}{}}6V_{C_0C_1B_{m+1}B_m}}:k=1,\mathrm{},\frac{p}{2}\},j=0,\mathrm{},p1.$$
(14)
Here $`l_{\mathrm{}}`$ are usual Euclidean edge lengths, $`V_{\mathrm{}}`$ are volumes of tetrahedra given by (5). We use definition $`I_{j,1}`$ to emphasize that, in contrast with work , here we deal with nontrivial representations $`f_k`$. The calculations implied by formula (14) are as follows. Using acyclicity of complexes, we choose subsets $`𝒞_j`$ and $`𝒟_j`$. Then we calculate the corresponding minors of matrices $`A_j`$, $`B_j`$ and $`C_j`$. In particular, we use the known expressions for partial derivatives $`{\displaystyle \frac{\omega }{l}}`$ (see  for details). After this, we find the torsions according to (13) and substitute them into (14).

The computer calculations which have been carried out for first several $`p`$’s allow us to suppose that the general formula for invariants of lens spaces (14) looks as follows:

$`I_{0,1}(L(p,q))`$ $`=\{{\displaystyle \frac{(1)^{p1}}{p^4}}\mathrm{\Delta }_k^4:k=1,\mathrm{},{\displaystyle \frac{p}{2}}\},`$ (15a)
$`I_{\pm 1,1}(L(p,q))`$ $`=\{{\displaystyle \frac{(1)^{p1}}{p^4}}\mathrm{\Delta }_k^2\mathrm{\Delta }_{2k}^2:k=1,\mathrm{},{\displaystyle \frac{p}{2}}\},`$ (15b)
$`I_{j,1}(L(p,q))`$ $`=\{(1)^p\mathrm{\Delta }_{(j1)k}^2\mathrm{\Delta }_{jk}^2\mathrm{\Delta }_{(j+1)k}^2:k=1,\mathrm{},{\displaystyle \frac{p}{2}}\},`$ (15c)
where we have denoted

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_m=4\mathrm{sin}\frac{\pi m}{p}\mathrm{sin}\frac{\pi qm}{p}.$$
(16)
## 3. Discussion

Let us note once again that the value $`\mathrm{\Delta }_m`$ determined in (16) is nothing but the module of $`m`$th component of the Reidemeister torsion of $`L(p,q)`$. It is of course very intriguing to calculate invariants of such kind for other 3- and 4-manifolds.

In the future we plan to investigate similar invariants based on $`SL(2)`$-solution of the pentagon equation . After that, we plan to move on from lens spaces to manifolds with noncommutative or/and infinite fundamental group.

### Acknowledgements

I am grateful to I. G. Korepanov for proposing me this problem and improvements in the initial text of this Letter.