text:
# The traces of quantum powers commute

## Abstract

The traces of the quantum powers of a generic quantum matrix pairwise commute. This was conjectured by Kaoru Ikeda, in connection with certain Hamiltonian systems. The proof involves Newton’s formulae for quantum matrices, relating traces of quantum powers with sums of principal minors.

2000 Mathematics Subject Classification. 81R50, 16W35, 20G42, 70H06

Keywords: quantum matrices, trace, principal minor, Newton’s formulae, Cayley-Hamilton theorem, Hamiltonian systems

The quasi-classical limit of the quantum group $`GL_q(n)`$ is the $`n^2`$-variable commutative polynomial algebra generated by $`y_{ij}`$, $`1i,jn`$, together with the Poisson bracket given by

$$\{y_{ij},y_{kl}\}=(\theta (i,k)+\theta (j,l))y_{il}y_{kj},$$

where $`\theta (i,j)=1`$, if $`i<j`$; $`0`$, if $`i=j`$; $`1`$, if $`i>j`$; see . This Poisson bracket was used in  to construct a Hamiltonian system, which can be reduced to the classical Toda lattice. The approach of  is based on the fact that

$$\{\mathrm{Tr}(Y^k),\mathrm{Tr}(Y^m)\}=0\text{ for }k,m=1,2,\mathrm{},$$
(1)
where $`Y`$ is the $`n\times n`$ matrix with $`y_{ij}`$ as the $`(i,j)`$ entry; thus $`\mathrm{Tr}(Y^k)`$, $`k=1,2,\mathrm{}`$ can be considered as an involutive set of integrals. It is therefore natural to look for a quantum analogue of (1). This problem is addressed in , , . Recall that the coordinate ring $`𝒪(M_q)`$ of $`n\times n`$ quantum matrices is the $``$-algebra generated by $`x_{ij}`$, $`1i,jn`$, subject to the relations $`x_{ij}x_{kl}x_{kl}x_{ij}=(q^{\theta (j,l)}q^{\theta (i,k)})x_{il}x_{kj}`$, $`1i,j,k,ln`$, where $`q`$ is a fixed non-zero element of $``$ (in some papers $`q=e^{h/2}`$ is considered to be an element of the ring of formal power series $`[[h]]`$, and $`𝒪(M_q)`$ is the $`[[h]]`$-algebra generated by the $`x_{ij}`$; this convention has to be used in the definition of the ‘quasi-classical limit’). The so-called $`q`$-multiplication of matrices was introduced in . If $`A=(a_{ij})`$, $`B=(b_{ij})`$ are $`n\times n`$ matrices with entries from $`𝒪(M_q)`$, then let $`AB`$ be the matrix whose $`(i,j)`$-entry is

$$(AB)_{ij}=\underset{k=1}{\overset{n}{}}q^{\theta (j,k)}a_{ik}b_{kj}.$$

Note that $``$ is not an associative multiplication. Write $`X`$ for the $`n\times n`$ matrix with $`x_{ij}`$ as the $`(i,j)`$ entry. Define $`{}_{q}{}^{}X_{}^{k}`$ for $`k=0,1,2,\mathrm{}`$ as follows. Set $`{}_{q}{}^{}X_{}^{0}=I`$, the identity matrix, $`{}_{q}{}^{}X_{}^{1}=X`$, $`{}_{q}{}^{}X_{}^{2}=XX`$, $`{}_{q}{}^{}X_{}^{3}=X(XX)`$, and recursively, $`{}_{q}{}^{}X_{}^{k}=X({}_{q}{}^{}X_{}^{k1})`$. Denote by $`\mathrm{Tr}({}_{q}{}^{}X_{}^{k})`$ the usual trace (the sum of the diagonal entries) of $`{}_{q}{}^{}X_{}^{k}`$. When $`q`$ is specialized to $`1`$, the element $`\mathrm{Tr}({}_{q}{}^{}X_{}^{k})`$ goes to $`\mathrm{Tr}(Y^k)`$ from (1). Ikeda  has conjectured that the following quantum analogue of (1) holds:

$$[\mathrm{Tr}({}_{q}{}^{}X_{}^{k}),\mathrm{Tr}({}_{q}{}^{}X_{}^{m})]=0\text{ for }k,m=1,2,\mathrm{},$$
(2)
where $`[a,b]=abba`$. The special cases of (2) when $`k=1`$, $`m=2`$, and later, when $`k=1`$, $`m`$ arbitrary were verified in , . In the present paper we prove (2) in general. Note that this explains the reason behind (1).

We need to recall a related set of elements in $`𝒪(M_q)`$. The quantum determinant is

$$\sigma _n:=\underset{\pi S_n}{}(q)^{l(\pi )}x_{1,\pi (1)}\mathrm{}x_{n,\pi (n)},$$

where $`l(\pi )`$ denotes the number of pairs $`i<j`$ with $`\pi (i)>\pi (j)`$ for a permutation $`\pi `$. Take $`k`$-element subsets $`K,L`$ of $`\{1,\mathrm{},n\}`$. Then the $`x_{ij}`$ with $`iK`$, $`jL`$ generate a subalgebra of $`𝒪(M_q)`$, isomorphic to the coordinate ring of $`k\times k`$ quantum matrices. So we can form the quantum determinant of this subalgebra. The resulting element is denoted by $`[K|L]`$, and is called a $`k\times k`$ quantum minor in $`𝒪(M_q)`$. The sum $`_K[K|K]`$ of principal $`k\times k`$ quantum minors is denoted by $`\sigma _k`$ for $`k=1,\mathrm{},n`$. In particular, $`\sigma _1=\mathrm{Tr}(X)`$. For the sake of notational convenience, we define $`\sigma _{n+1},\sigma _{n+2},\mathrm{}`$ to be zero.

The elements $`\sigma _1,\mathrm{},\sigma _n`$ pairwise commute by . Denote by $`R`$ the subalgebra of $`𝒪(M_q)`$ generated by $`\sigma _1,\mathrm{},\sigma _n`$. So $`R`$ is an $`n`$-variable commutative polynomial algebra. The commutativity of $`R`$ was obtained in  as a by-product of its Hopf algebraic interpretation: the $`\sigma _k`$ are the basic coinvariants for a coaction (a $`q`$-analogue of the adjoint action) of $`GL_q(n)`$ on $`𝒪(M_q)`$; in an alternative formulation, $`R`$ is the subset of cocommutative elements in the coalgebra $`𝒪(M_q)`$.

To simplify notation, write $`t_k=\mathrm{Tr}({}_{q}{}^{}X_{}^{k})`$, $`k=1,2,\mathrm{}`$. We shall show that the $`t_k`$ pairwise commute by proving that they are all contained in $`R`$. (Actually, $`t_1,\mathrm{},t_n`$ turns out to be another generating set of the algebra $`R`$.) More precisely, we shall show that the sequences $`\sigma _1,\sigma _2,\mathrm{}`$ and $`t_1,t_2,\mathrm{}`$ are related by the same Newton’s formulae as in the classical case $`q=1`$, see Lemma 3. This will be derived from the proof of a Cayley-Hamilton theorem due to Zhang . We present this proof in detail, because (P 1.2) on page 103 of  is wrong, consequently, the formulae we need are not contained in .

###### Definition 1

We define $`Z_k`$, for $`k=0,1,2,`$, recursively, via

$`Z_0`$ $`:=I`$
$`Z_k`$ $`:=XZ_{k1}+(1)^kI\sigma _k,\text{ for }k1.`$
In order to prove the next lemma, we need to use a quantum Laplace expansion in the following form for a quantum minor $`[K|L]`$ with $`i,rK`$. This relation can be easily obtained from Proposition 8 in 9.2.2 of . Set $`\delta _{i,r}=1`$ if $`i=r`$, and $`0`$, otherwise.

$$\delta _{i,r}[K|L]=\underset{sL}{}(q)^{l(s,L)l(r,K)}x_{is}[K\backslash r|L\backslash s],$$
(3)
where $`l(u,J)`$ stands for the number of elements $`jJ`$ with $`u>j`$, for an element $`u`$ and a subset $`J`$ of $`\{1,\mathrm{},n\}`$, and $`K\backslash r`$ is the difference of the sets $`K`$ and $`\{r\}`$. Later we shall abbreviate $`l(u,\{j\})`$ as $`l(u,j)`$, so $`l(u,j)`$ is $`1`$, if $`u>j`$, and $`0`$, otherwise.

###### Lemma 2

The $`(i,j)`$ entry of $`Z_k`$ is

$$(1)^k\underset{\begin{array}{c}|J|=k+1\\ i,jJ\end{array}}{}q^{\theta (i,j)}(q)^{l(i,J)l(j,J)}[J\backslash j|J\backslash i]$$

for $`k=0,1,\mathrm{},n1`$, and $`Z_n=Z_{n+1}=Z_{n+2}=`$ is the zero matrix.

* Proof. The proof is by induction on $`k`$, the starting case where $`k=0`$ is easily checked. Take $`0kn2`$ and assume that the formula holds for $`k`$. First, we compute the $`(i,j)`$ entry of $`XZ_k`$:

$`(XZ_k)_{i,j}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{s=1}{\overset{n}{}}}x_{is}q^{\theta (j,s)}(Z_k)_{s,j}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{s=1}{\overset{n}{}}}x_{is}q^{\theta (j,s)}(1)^k\left\{{\displaystyle \underset{\begin{array}{c}|J|=k+1\\ s,jJ\end{array}}{}}q^{\theta (s,j)}(q)^{l(s,J)l(j,J)}[J\backslash j|J\backslash s]\right\}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\begin{array}{c}|J|=k+1\\ jJ\end{array}}{}}(1)^k\left\{{\displaystyle \underset{sJ}{}}(q)^{l(s,J)l(j,J)}x_{is}[J\backslash j|J\backslash s]\right\}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\begin{array}{c}|J|=k+1\\ jJ\end{array}}{}}(1)^kf(i,j,J)`$
where we have set

$$f(i,j,J)=\underset{sJ}{}(q)^{l(s,J)l(j,J)}x_{is}[J\backslash j|J\backslash s].$$

If $`iJ`$, then $`f(i,j,J)=\delta _{i,j}[J|J]`$ by (3); and so,

$`(XZ_k)_{i,j}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\begin{array}{c}|J|=k+1\\ i,jJ\end{array}}{}}(1)^k\delta _{i,j}[J|J]+{\displaystyle \underset{\begin{array}{c}|J|=k+1\\ jJ,iJ\end{array}}{}}(1)^kf(i,j,J).`$
Hence,

$`(Z_{k+1})_{j,j}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\begin{array}{c}|J|=k+1\\ jJ\end{array}}{}}(1)^k[J|J]+(1)^{k+1}{\displaystyle \underset{|J|=k+1}{}}[J|J]`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\begin{array}{c}|J|=k+1\\ jJ\end{array}}{}}(1)^{k+1}[J|J]`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\begin{array}{c}|J|=k+2\\ jJ\end{array}}{}}(1)^{k+1}[J\backslash j|J\backslash j]`$
which agrees with the formula in the statement of the lemma.

If $`ij`$, then

$`(Z_{k+1})_{i,j}`$ $`=`$ $`(XZ_k)_{i,j}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\begin{array}{c}|J|=k+1\\ jJ,iJ\end{array}}{}}(1)^kf(i,j,J)`$
For $`|J|=k+1`$ with $`jJ`$ and $`iJ`$, set $`K:=Ji`$, the disjoint union of $`J`$ and $`\{i\}`$. By (3),

$`[K\backslash j|K\backslash i]`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{sK\backslash i}{}}(q)^{l(s,K\backslash i)l(i,K\backslash j)}x_{is}[K\backslash \{i,j\}|K\backslash \{i,s\}]`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{sJ}{}}(q)^{l(s,J)l(i,Ji\backslash j)}x_{is}[J\backslash j|J\backslash s]`$
$`=`$ $`(q)^{l(j,J)l(i,Ji\backslash j)}f(i,j,J).`$
Hence,

$$f(i,j,J)=(q)^{l(i,Ji\backslash j)l(j,J)}[K\backslash j|[K\backslash i],$$

where $`K=Ji`$ when $`jJ`$ and $`iJ`$. Thus, for $`ij`$, we see that

$`(Z_{k+1})_{i,j}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\begin{array}{c}|K|=k+2\\ i,jK\end{array}}{}}(1)^k(q)^{l(i,K\backslash j)l(j,K\backslash i)}[K\backslash j|K\backslash i]`$
$`=`$ $`(q)^{l(j,i)l(i,j)}\left\{{\displaystyle \underset{\begin{array}{c}|J|=k+2\\ i,jJ\end{array}}{}}(1)^k(q)^{l(i,J)l(j,J)}[J\backslash j|J\backslash i]\right\},`$
which is the formula in the lemma for $`Z_{k+1}`$, since $`(q)^{l(j,i)l(i,j)}=q^{\theta (i,j)}`$, provided that $`ij`$. So we have proved the lemma for $`k=0,1,\mathrm{},n1`$. Applying the case $`k=n1`$ and (3) once more, we obtain that $`XZ_{n1}=(1)^{n1}I\sigma _n`$; and so $`Z_n=0`$. Consequently, we have $`0=Z_n=Z_{n+1}=Z_{n+2}=\mathrm{}`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

From the definition of $`Z_k`$, it follows that

$$Z_k={}_{q}{}^{}X_{}^{k}{}_{q}{}^{}X_{}^{k1}\sigma _1+{}_{q}{}^{}X_{}^{k2}\sigma _2+\mathrm{}+(1)^kI\sigma _k,$$
(4)
where $`{}_{q}{}^{}X_{}^{kj}\sigma _j`$ is the matrix obtained after multiplying each entry of $`{}_{q}{}^{}X_{}^{kj}`$ by $`\sigma _j`$ from the right. Thus the assertion $`Z_n=0`$ in Lemma 2 is the (second) Cayley-Hamilton theorem in .

By taking the trace of the equality (4) we obtain

$$\mathrm{Tr}(Z_k)=t_kt_{k1}\sigma _1+t_{k2}\sigma _2+\mathrm{}+(1)^{k1}t_1\sigma _{k1}+(1)^kn\sigma _k.$$

Now, for $`k=0,1,\mathrm{},n1`$ we have by Lemma 2 that

$`(Z_k)_{i,i}`$ $`=`$ $`(1)^k{\displaystyle \underset{\begin{array}{c}|K|=k\\ iK\end{array}}{}}[K|K]`$
and so $`\mathrm{Tr}(Z_k)=(1)^k(nk)\sigma _k`$. For $`kn`$ we have $`\mathrm{Tr}(Z_k)=\mathrm{Tr}(0)=0`$. Comparing the two expressions for $`\mathrm{Tr}(Z_k)`$ we see that Newton’s formulae hold:

###### Lemma 3

For $`k=1,2,`$ we have

$$t_kt_{k1}\sigma _1+t_{k2}\sigma _2+\mathrm{}+(1)^{k1}t_1\sigma _{k1}+(1)^kk\sigma _k=0.$$

(Recall that $`0=\sigma _{n+1}=\sigma _{n+2}=`$.)

A result of  together with Lemma 3 imply the following:

###### Theorem 4

We have $`[t_k,t_m]=0`$ for $`k,m=1,2,`$. The elements $`t_{n+1},t_{n+2},`$ can be expressed as polynomials of $`t_1,\mathrm{},t_n`$.

* Proof. It follows from Lemma 3 by induction on $`k`$ that $`t_k`$ is contained in $`R=[\sigma _1,\mathrm{},\sigma _n]`$ for all $`k`$. Since $`R`$ is commutative by , the $`t_k`$ pairwise commute. Moreover, $`R=[t_1,\mathrm{},t_n]`$, since $`\sigma _1,\mathrm{},\sigma _n`$ can be expressed as a polynomial of $`t_1,\mathrm{},t_n`$. This implies the second statement. (The fact that $`t_{n+1},t_{n+2},\mathrm{}`$ are polynomials of $`t_1,\mathrm{},t_{n1},\sigma _n`$ was shown in  by an elaborate argument.) $`\mathrm{}`$


format: text

text:
# The accelerated expansion of the Universe as a quantum cosmological effect

## I Introduction

Recent measurements of high redshift supernovae SN1 SN  indicate that the Universe is presently in accelerated expansion and not in a decelerated one, as was firmly believed by cosmologists since Hubble’s observation and its interpretation in the framework of General Relativity (GR). This was a spectacular break through in our understanding (or misunderstanding) of the Universe, and it became a major task to Cosmology and Astrophysics to explain this unexpected fact. Staying in the domain of classical GR and, consequently, considering the Friedmann’s equations as valid, the only way to explain such present acceleration of the Universe is by considering the existence of some negative pressure dark energy SN1 triangle garnavich wang .This cosmic dark energy opposes the self-atraction of matter and is causing the expansion of the universe to be positively acceleratedtriangle . The most obvious candidate to be such dark energy is the cosmological constant and/or the vacuum quantum fluctuations of fields, which do have negative pressure. However, theorists estimates that the zero point energies of the quantum fields must be at least 55 orders of magnitude larger than the critical density value. Hence, there must exist some yet unknown profound theoretical reason for the many contributions to the effective value of the cosmological constant be cancelled out to yield a number 55 orders of magnitude less then expected, or even zero. This is known as the cosmological constant problem. Some theorists believe that some profound symmetry requirements can be found to explain an exact cancellation, but not a partial one with an extreme fine tuning. In the case where the effective cosmological constant is indeed exactly zero, there were proposed some candidates in order to explain the present accelerated expansion of the Universe as, for example, a very light, evolving scalar field called quintescence quint jer .

Another way to tackle this problem is by considering that presently, at cosmological scales, classical GR is not valid. In other words, instead of changing the right-hand-side (RHS) of Einstein’s equations by introducing some new negative pressure fluid, one could try to find physical reasons which justify the modification of its left-hand-side (LHS) accordingly. How this can be done?

In early works fab2 fab , a quantum minisuperspace model containing a free massless scalar field minimally coupled to gravity in a FLRW geometry was studied. These models were interpreted in the framework of the ontological Bohm-de Broglie (BdB) interpretation of quantum mechanics, bohm1 bohm2 hol , in order to extract predictions from the wave function of the Universe. This interpretation avoids many conceptual difficulties inherent to the application of the Copenhagen interpretation to the quantization of the whole Universe, where no place for a classical domain exists. The BdB interpretation does not need a classical domain outside the quantized system to generate the physical facts out of potentialities (the facts are there ab initio), and hence it can be applied to the Universe as a whole 111Other alternative interpretations can be used in quantum cosmology, as the many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics eve . The solutions of the Wheeler-DeWitt equation for such scalar tensor model contain positive and negative frequency modes, the first leading to an expanding universe, and the second to a contracting one. There were constructed some particular superpositions mixing negative and positive frequency modes. In Ref. fab2 , gaussian superpositions were studied and, for the case of flat spatial section, the Bohm guidance equations were reduced to a dynamical system. In this way the quantum trajectories were studied, emerging the following three kind of scenarios: periodic solutions, representing oscilating universes, bouncing universes, and models with a big bang followed by a big crunch. The bouncing universes contract classicaly from infinity until a minimum size, where quantum effects become important acting as a repulsive force avoiding the singularity, expanding afterwards to an infinite size, approaching the classical expansion as long as the scale factor increases. For the periodic solutions, the quantum effects are always important, and they do not grow enough to yield a large Universe as ours. The models with a big bang followed by a big crunch behave as the classical solutions for small values of the scale factor, but display quantum behaviour for large scale factor. These quantum effects are responsible for the turning over of these solutions from decelerated expansion to contraction. Near the big crunch, the quantum effects are again negligible. Bohmian trajectories which behave classically for small scale factors but quantically for large scale factors where already found in Ref. fab . This is not surprising as it is well known hartle  that a large universe behaves classically or quantically depending on its initial quantum state. After these remarks, the natural question one can ask is if it is possible that quantum cosmological effects at large scales can mimic a negative pressure fluid and yield a positive acceleration for the whole Universe. The aim of this paper is to show with a simple model that it is indeed possible for some suitable initial quantum states of the universe. We take the flat model considered in Ref. fab2 , and we consider another gaussian superposition of negative and positive modes solutions of the Wheeler-DeWitt equation. We write the Bohm guidance equations, which are reduced to a dynamical system, and we analyze the bohmian trajectories in configuration space. We find the two following scenarios, depending on the initial conditions: oscillating universes without singularities and with relative small amplitudes of oscillation, and universes which arise classically from a singularity, experience quantum effects in the middle of its expansion, and recover its classical behaviour for large values of the scale factor. We concentrate our attention on these solutions and we study the epoch where the quantum effects are important. We calculate its acceleration and explore its behaviour as a function of the scalar field $`\varphi `$ and of the logarithm of the scale factor, $`\alpha \mathrm{ln}(a)`$. We find that a positive acceleration of the universe can be obtained in such models, whose value can be adjusted by the choice of the free parameters of the model. This positive acceleration is a quantum effect. The mechanism is driven by the quantum potential, which appears in the modified quantum Einstein-Hamilton-Jacobi equation and modifies the usual classical trajectories. In this model, the acceleration is not forever: in the future, the universe recovers its classical deccelerated expansion. In this way, we present a possible alternative explanation for the accelerated expansion of the Universe today. Note that this explanation is based on quantum effects not only present in the scalar field, as described within a different approach in Ref.parker , but also in the geometry itself.

The article is organized as follows. In Sec. II, we describe the classical model and we quantize it. In Sec. III, we introduce the Bohm-de Broglie interpretation of the quantized minisuperspace model presented in Sec. II. We study gaussian superpositions of the quantum solutions previously found, and we obtain the corresponding quantum bohmian trajectories. In Sec. IV we analyze the beahviour of the acceleration of the scale factor in the quantum bohmian trajectories, first qualitatively, by showing some period in the history of the model where the acceleration of its expansion is positive, then quantitatively, by comparing the curve relating the luminosity distance with redshift in the quantum model with the corresponding curve coming from the classical model suplemented by a cosmological constant. Sec. IV is for discussions and conclusions.

## II Classical and quantum minisuperspace models

In this section we make an overview of the models studied in Ref. fab2

### II.1 Classical Model.

We start from the Lagrangian

$$L=\sqrt{g}[R\frac{1}{2}\varphi _{;\rho }\varphi ^{;\rho }],$$
(1)
We consider the FLRW metric given (in isotropical coordinates) by

$$ds^2=N^2dt^2+\frac{a(t)^2}{(1+\frac{ϵ}{4}r^2)^2}[dr^2+r^2(d\theta ^2+\mathrm{sin}^2\theta d\varphi ^2)],$$
(2)
the quantity $`ϵ`$ being the spatial curvature with values $`0,1,1`$ for flat, spherical and hyperbolic spatial sections, respectively. This line element will give, after inserting it in the Lagrangian (1), the following action:

$$S=\frac{3V}{4\pi l_P^2}\frac{Na^3}{2}(\frac{\dot{a}^2}{N^2a^2}+\frac{1}{2}\frac{\dot{\varphi }^2}{6N^2}+\frac{ϵ}{a^2})dt,$$
(3)
where we have set $`\mathrm{}=c=1`$ and $`\dot{}\frac{d}{dt}`$. The quantity $`V`$ is the volume divided by $`a^3`$ of the spacelike hypersurfaces, which are supposed to be closed, and $`l_P`$ is the Planck length. The total volume $`V`$ depends on the value of $`ϵ`$ and on the topology of the hypersurfaces. For $`ϵ=0`$, $`V`$ can have any value because the fundamental polyhedra of closed $`ϵ=0`$ hypersurfaces can have arbitrary size dl . For the case $`ϵ=1`$ and topology $`S^3`$ we have $`V=2\pi ^2`$. Defining $`\beta ^2=\frac{4\pi l_P^2}{3V}`$, $`\overline{\varphi }\sqrt{\varphi /12}`$, and omiting the bars, we obtain for the Hamiltonian:

$$H=N(\beta ^2\frac{p_a^2}{2a}+\beta ^2\frac{p_\varphi ^2}{2a^3}ϵ\frac{a}{2\beta ^2})$$
(4)
where $`p_a`$ and $`p_\varphi `$ are the moments canonically conjugate to $`a`$ and $`\varphi `$ respectivelly, given by:

$$p_a=\frac{a\dot{a}}{\beta ^2N}$$
(5)
$$p_\varphi =\frac{a^3\dot{\varphi }}{\beta ^2N}$$
(6)
A dimensionless scale factor is defined by $`\stackrel{~}{a}\frac{a}{\beta }`$ and the Hamiltonian becomes, omitting the tilde,

$$H=\frac{N}{2\beta }(\frac{p_a^2}{a}+\frac{p_\varphi ^2}{a^3}ϵa)$$
(7)
As $`\beta `$ is a multiplicative constant in the hamiltonian, we can set $`\beta =1`$ without any loss of generality, keeping in mind that the scale factor which appears in the metric is $`a_{\mathrm{phys}}\beta a`$, not $`a`$. Defining now $`\alpha \mathrm{ln}(a)`$, we simplify the Hamiltonian obtaining:

$$H=\frac{N}{2e^{3\alpha }}[p^2_\alpha +p^2_\varphi ϵe^{4\alpha }],$$
(8)
where

$$p_\alpha =\frac{e^{3\alpha }\dot{\alpha }}{N},$$
(9)
$$p_\varphi =\frac{e^{3\alpha }\dot{\varphi }}{N},$$
(10)
This Hamiltonian does not depend explicitly on $`\varphi `$. Hence, $`p_\varphi `$ is a constant of motion, which we will call $`\overline{k}`$. The classical solutions in the gauge $`N=1`$ can now be listed:

#### II.1.1 Flat model, $`ϵ=0`$.

In configuration space, the classical solutions are:

$$\varphi =\pm \alpha +c_1,$$
(11)
where $`c_1`$ is an integration constant. In terms of cosmic time $`t`$ they read:

$$a=e^\alpha =(3\overline{k}t)^{\frac{1}{3}},$$
(12)
$$\varphi =\frac{\mathrm{ln}(t)}{3}+c_2.$$
(13)
These are solutions forever contracting or expanding from a singularity, depending on the signal of $`\overline{k}`$, without any inflationary epoch.

#### II.1.2 Spherical model, $`ϵ=1`$.

In this case we have,

$$a=e^\alpha =\frac{\overline{k}}{\mathrm{cosh}(2\varphi c_1)},$$
(14)
where $`c_1`$ is an integration constant. Conservation of $`p_\varphi `$ implies that

$$\overline{k}=e^{3\alpha }\dot{\varphi }.$$
(15)
These solutions describe universes expanding from a singularity till a maximum size and contracting again to a big crunch. Near the singularity, these solutions behave as in the flat case. There is no inflation.

#### II.1.3 Hyperbolic model, $`ϵ=1`$.

The classical solutions in configuration space are:

$$a=e^\alpha =\frac{\overline{k}}{|\mathrm{sinh}(2\varphi c_1)|},$$
(16)
where $`c_1`$ is an integration constant. Again, from the conservation of $`p_\varphi `$ we get

$$\overline{k}=e^{3\alpha }\dot{\varphi }.$$
(17)
These solutions describe universes contracting forever to, or expanding forever from, a singularity. Near the singularity, these solutions behave as in the flat case. There is no inflation phase. The cosmic time dependence is complicated in the cases 2 and 3 and we will not write it here.

### II.2 Quantization.

Let us quantize the model following the Dirac procedure dirac . The constraints become conditions imposed on the possible states of the quantum system. The operator version of the Hamiltonian (8), obtained by setting $`\widehat{\alpha }ı\frac{}{\alpha }`$ and $`\widehat{\varphi }ı\frac{}{\varphi }`$, must annihilate the wave function $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$. Choosing a factor ordering which make it covariant through field redefinitions, the quantum constraint, i.e. the Wheeler-DeWitt equation, reads

$$\frac{^2\mathrm{\Psi }}{\alpha ^2}+\frac{^2\mathrm{\Psi }}{\varphi ^2}+ϵe^{4\alpha }\mathrm{\Psi }=0,$$
(18)
whose general solution can be written as

$$\mathrm{\Psi }(\alpha ,\varphi )=_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}F(k)A_k(\alpha )B_k(\varphi )𝑑k,$$
(19)
where $`k`$ is a separation constant which in the classical limit corresponds to $`\overline{k}`$, $`F(k)`$ is an arbitrary function of $`k`$, the function $`B_k(\varphi )`$ reads

$$B_k(\varphi )=b_1e^{ik\varphi }+b_2e^{ik\varphi },$$
(20)
and, for $`ϵ=0`$, the function $`A_k(\alpha )`$ is given by

$$A_k(\alpha )=a_1e^{ik\alpha }+a_2e^{ik\alpha },$$
(21)
while for $`ϵ=1`$ it is

$$A_k(\alpha )=a_1I_{ik/2}\frac{e^{2\alpha }}{2}+a_2K_{ik/2}\frac{e^{2\alpha }}{2},$$
(22)
and for $`ϵ=1`$ it reads

$$A_k(\alpha )=a_1J_{ik/2}\frac{e^{2\alpha }}{2}+a_2N_{ik/2}\frac{e^{2\alpha }}{2}.$$
(23)
The functions $`J,N,I,K`$ are Bessel and modified Bessel functions of first and second kind.

## III The Bohm-de Broglie interpretation of the quantum model

The Bohm-de Broglie (BdB) interpretation of homogeneous minisuperspace models can be summarized as followsbola : the Wheeler-DeWitt equation is

$$[\widehat{p}^\alpha (t),\widehat{q}_\alpha (t)]\mathrm{\Psi }(q)=0.$$
(24)
Substituting the wave function in polar form, $`\mathrm{\Psi }=Ae^{iS}`$, we have a complex equation and its real part produce, after dividing it by $`A`$:

$$\frac{1}{2}f_{\alpha \beta }(q_\mu )\frac{S}{q_\alpha }\frac{S}{q_\beta }+U(q_\mu )+Q(q_\mu )=0,$$
(25)
where $`Q(q_\mu )`$ is the quantum potential, given by

$$Q(q_\mu )=\frac{1}{2A}f_{\alpha \beta }\frac{^2A}{q_\alpha q_\beta }.$$
(26)
In the BdB approach, the trajectories $`q_\alpha (t)`$ are supposed to be real, independent of any observations. Equation (25) is the Hamilton-Jacobi equation for them, but with an extra term given by the quantum potential (26). Then we define

$$p^\alpha =\frac{S}{q_\alpha },$$
(27)
where the momenta are related to the velocities in the usual way:

$$p^\alpha =f^{\alpha \beta }\frac{1}{N}\frac{q_\beta }{t}.$$
(28)
In order to obtain the quantum trajectories we have to solve the Bohm guidance relations, $`p=\frac{S}{q}`$, which are, in this case, given by:

$$\frac{S(q_\alpha )}{q_\alpha }=f^{\alpha \beta }\frac{1}{N}\frac{q_\beta }{t}.$$
(29)
Equations (29) are invariant under time reparametrization. Hence, even at the quantum level, different choices of $`N(t)`$ yield the same spacetime geometry for a given nonclassical solution $`q_\alpha (t)`$. There is no problem of time in BdB interpretation of minisuperspace quantum cosmology222 This is not true for the full superspace, see must , although the theory remain consistent, see cons , tese ..

In the case of hamiltonian (8), we obtain for the guidance relations (29)

$$\frac{S}{\alpha }=\frac{e^{3\alpha }\dot{\alpha }}{N},$$
(30)
$$\frac{S}{\varphi }=\frac{e^{3\alpha }\dot{\varphi }}{N}.$$
(31)
The modified Hamilton-Jacobi equation (25) reduces to

$$\frac{1}{2}\left[\right(\frac{S}{\varphi })^2(\frac{S}{\alpha })^2]\frac{ϵ}{2}e^{4\alpha }\frac{1}{2A}(\frac{^2A}{\varphi ^2}\frac{^2A}{\alpha ^2})=0,$$
(32)
where the last term in the LHS represents the quantum potential (26):

$$Q(\alpha ,\varphi )\frac{1}{2A}[\frac{^2A}{\alpha ^2}\frac{^2A}{\varphi ^2}].$$
(33)
We will now apply the BdB interpretation to our minisuperspace model. We will restrict ourselves to the case of flat spatial sections, hypersurfaces with $`ϵ=0`$. In Ref. fab2 , the following Gaussian superpositions of the solutions (19) were studied:

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_1(\alpha ,\varphi )=F(k)B_k(\varphi )[A_k(\alpha )+A_k(\alpha )]𝑑k,$$
(34)
and

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_2(\alpha ,\varphi )=F(k)A_k(\alpha )[B_k(\varphi )+B_k(\varphi )]𝑑k,$$
(35)
both with $`a_2=b_2=0`$ in Eqs (20,21), and where the arbitrary function $`F(k)`$ is the Gaussian

$$F(k)=\mathrm{exp}[\frac{(kd)^2}{\sigma ^2}].$$
(36)
While in paper fab2  the solution $`\mathrm{\Psi }_1`$ was studied in detail, here we will concentrate our analysis on the solution $`\mathrm{\Psi }_2`$. Integrating (36) in $`k`$ we obtain, for $`\mathrm{\Psi }_2`$,

$`\mathrm{\Psi }_2=a_1b_1\sigma \sqrt{\pi }\{\mathrm{exp}[{\displaystyle \frac{(\alpha +\varphi )^2\sigma ^2}{4}}]`$ $`\mathrm{exp}(id(\alpha +\varphi ))`$ (37)
$`+\mathrm{exp}[{\displaystyle \frac{(\alpha \varphi )^2\sigma ^2}{4}}]\mathrm{exp}(id(\alpha \varphi ))\}`$
To obtain the quantum trajectories, we have to calculate the phase $`S`$ of the above wave function and substitute it into the guidance equations (30) and (31). We will work in the gauge $`N=1`$. Computing the phase of $`\mathrm{\Psi }_2`$, we obtain $`S=d\alpha +\mathrm{arctan}(\frac{\sigma ^2\varphi \alpha }{2})\mathrm{tan}(d\varphi )`$ which, after substitution in Eqs (30,31), yields a planar system given by:

$$\dot{\alpha }=\frac{\varphi \sigma ^2\mathrm{sin}(2d\varphi )2d\mathrm{cos}(2d\varphi )2d\mathrm{cosh}(\sigma ^2\alpha \varphi )}{e^{3\alpha }2[\mathrm{cos}(2d\varphi )+\mathrm{cosh}(\sigma ^2\alpha \varphi )]}$$
(38)
$$\dot{\varphi }=\frac{\alpha \sigma ^2\mathrm{sin}(2d\varphi )+2d\mathrm{sinh}(\sigma ^2\alpha \varphi )}{e^{3\alpha }2[\mathrm{cos}(2d\varphi )+\mathrm{cosh}(\sigma ^2\alpha \varphi )]}$$
(39)
Equations (38,39) give the direction of the geometrical tangents to the trajectories which solves this planar system. By plotting the tangent direction field, it is possible to obtain the trajectories. The vertical line $`\varphi =0`$ divides the configuration space in two symmetric regions. The line $`\alpha =0`$ contains all singular points of this system, which are nodes and centers. The nodes appear when the denominator of the above equations, which is proportional to the norm of the wave equation, is zero. No trajectory can pass through these points. They happen when $`\alpha =0`$ and $`\varphi =(2n+1)\frac{\pi }{2d}`$, $`n`$ an integer, with periodicity $`\pi /|d|`$. The center points appear when the numerators are zero. They are given by $`\alpha =0`$ and $`\varphi =\frac{2d}{\sigma ^2}\mathrm{cot}(d\varphi )`$. As $`|\varphi |\mathrm{}`$ these points tend to $`n\pi /d`$ (zeros of $`\mathrm{tan}(d\varphi )`$). As one can see from the above system, the classical solutions $`(a(t)t^{1/3})`$ are recovered when $`|\varphi |\mathrm{}`$ or $`|\alpha |\mathrm{}`$, the other being different from zero.

We present a field plot of this planar system in Fig. 1, for the case $`d=1`$, $`\sigma =1`$. Depending on the initial conditions, we can see two different possibilities. Near the center points there are oscillating universes without singularities and with amplitudes of oscillation of order 1. The other possibility is given by non-oscillating universes. A non oscillating universe arises classically from a singularity, experiences quantum effects in the middle of its expansion, and recover its classical behaviour for large values of $`\alpha `$.

## IV The accelerated expansion.

### IV.1 Qualitative approach

In this subsection we show how our approach for the explanation of the accelerated expansion works in a qualitative manner, i.e., with the parameters of the wave packet ($`d`$ and $`\sigma `$) adapted for readable numerical treatment, without any fitting with usual cosmological orders of magnitude. The aim is just to show that in some period in the history of such quantum models where the expansion is positively accelerated. We take here $`d=1`$, $`\sigma =1`$ for the numerical computations. The quantum effects appearing in the middle of the non periodic bohmian trajectories described above can deviate them from their classical decelerated expansion to an accelerated one. We will show that this is indeed the case of this model. From $`\alpha =\mathrm{ln}a(t)`$ we have

$$\frac{\ddot{a}}{a}=\ddot{\alpha }+(\dot{\alpha })^2.$$
(40)
From Eq. (38), $`\dot{\alpha }`$ can be viewed as a function of the canonical variables $`\dot{\alpha }=f(\alpha ,\varphi )`$. Then we have

$$\ddot{\alpha }=\frac{f}{\alpha }\dot{\alpha }+\frac{f}{\varphi }\dot{\varphi }$$
(41)
Computing the derivatives with respect to $`\alpha `$ and $`\varphi `$, and substituting $`\dot{\alpha }`$ and $`\dot{\varphi }`$ from equations (38) and (39), respectively, we obtain

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\ddot{a}}{a}}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\left[\right(2\varphi ^2\sigma ^4+\alpha \sigma ^4\left)\right(\left(\mathrm{sin}(2d\varphi )\right)^2\mathrm{cos}(2d\varphi )+\left(\mathrm{sin}(2d\varphi )\right)^2\mathrm{cosh}(\sigma ^2\alpha \varphi ))+`$
$`\left(2\sigma ^2d2\sigma ^4d\varphi ^2\right)\left(\mathrm{sin}(2d\varphi )\mathrm{cos}(2d\varphi )\mathrm{sinh}(\sigma ^2\alpha \varphi )+\mathrm{sin}(2d\varphi )\mathrm{sinh}(\sigma ^2\alpha \varphi )\mathrm{cosh}(\sigma ^2\alpha \varphi )\right)+`$
$`\left(\sigma ^6\varphi ^3+4\sigma ^2d^2\varphi \sigma ^6\varphi \alpha ^2\right)\left(\mathrm{sin}(2d\varphi )\right)^2\mathrm{sinh}(\sigma ^2\alpha \varphi )+\left(2\sigma ^4d\varphi \alpha 8\sigma ^2d\varphi \right)\mathrm{sin}(2d\varphi )\left(\mathrm{cos}(2d\varphi )\right)^2+`$
$`\left(2\sigma ^4d\varphi \alpha 16\sigma ^2d\varphi \right)\mathrm{sin}(2d\varphi )\mathrm{cos}(2d\varphi )\mathrm{cosh}(\sigma ^2\alpha \varphi )+24d^2\left(\mathrm{cos}(2d\varphi )\right)^2\mathrm{cosh}(\sigma ^2\alpha \varphi )+`$
$`24d^2\mathrm{cos}(2d\varphi )\left(\mathrm{cosh}(\sigma ^2\alpha \varphi )\right)^28\varphi d\sigma ^2\mathrm{sin}(2d\varphi )\left(\mathrm{cosh}(\sigma ^2\alpha \varphi )\right)^2+4\sigma ^2\varphi d^2\left(\mathrm{cos}(2d\varphi )\right)^2\mathrm{sinh}(\sigma ^2\alpha \varphi )+`$
$`4\sigma ^2\varphi d^2\mathrm{cos}(2d\varphi )\mathrm{cosh}(\sigma ^2\alpha \varphi )\mathrm{sinh}(\sigma ^2\alpha \varphi )+2\sigma ^4\varphi \left(\mathrm{sin}(2d\varphi )\right)^3d\alpha 2\sigma ^4\varphi \mathrm{sin}(2d\varphi )\left(\mathrm{sinh}(\sigma ^2\alpha \varphi )\right)^2\alpha d+`$
$`8d^2\left(\mathrm{cos}(2d\varphi )\right)^3+8d^2\left(\mathrm{cosh}(\sigma ^2\alpha \varphi )\right)^3\left]\right[\left(e^{3\alpha }\right)^2(\mathrm{cos}(2d\varphi )+\mathrm{cosh}(\sigma ^2\alpha \varphi ))^3]^1.`$ (42)
The equation above gives the acceleration $`\frac{\ddot{a}}{a}`$ as a function of $`\alpha `$ and $`\varphi `$. If one integrates the system (38,39) to obtain $`\varphi =\varphi (a)`$, the quantum version of the classical equation (i.e. Raychaudhuri equation for the Friedmann model)

$$\frac{\ddot{a}}{a}=\frac{4\pi G}{3}(\rho +3p)(\dot{\varphi })^2\frac{1}{a^6}$$
(43)
can be obtained. Taking the limit where the absolute value of $`\alpha `$ is very large in Eq. (IV.1), one recovers the classical behaviour given in Eq. (43), $`\frac{\ddot{a}}{a}1/a^6`$. Note that the quantum analog of the Friedmann’s equation can also be easily obtained from Eqs.(30,31,32), yielding (recovering the unities) $`H^2=\dot{\varphi }^2+\beta ^4c^2Q(a,\varphi )/a_{\mathrm{phys}}^6`$.

We can represent $`\frac{\ddot{a}}{a}`$ in a tridimensional plot as a function of $`\alpha `$ and $`\varphi `$. In this plot we can see the regions on the plane $`\alpha \varphi `$ in which the acceleration is possitive, negative or zero. We show this plot, for the parameters $`d=1`$ and $`\sigma =1`$, in Fig. 2. One can see the classical behaviour $`\ddot{a}/a1/a^6`$ for $`a0`$ ($`\alpha \mathrm{}`$) and $`a\mathrm{}`$ ($`\alpha \mathrm{}`$), but near the region $`a=1`$ ($`\alpha =0`$), a clear departure from classical behaviour is observed, and positive values of $`\ddot{a}/a`$ are obtained. Fig. 3 shows the acceleration $`\ddot{a}/a`$ as a function of $`\alpha `$ for $`\varphi =1.66`$.

As we pointed above, the quantum potential is the cause of this positive acceleration. Fig. 4 shows the quantum potential in the $`\alpha \varphi `$ plane where we can see that it is different from zero in the regions of positive acceleration. A trajectory passing through this region on the plane $`\alpha \varphi `$ will correspond to a universe experiencing an accelerated expansion. Fig. 5 shows the quantum potential as a function of $`\alpha `$ for $`\varphi =1.66`$. Note also the increasing in the acceleration and in the quantum potential as we approach the node point $`\alpha =0`$, $`\varphi =\pi /2`$.

### IV.2 Comparison between the quantum acceleration of the Universe’s expansion and the presence of a cosmological constant

We will now compare quantitatively the accelerated expansion of the Universe caused by such a quantum cosmological effect with the one generated by the presence of a cosmological constant in the classical model . First of all, we must recover the units in Eqs.(38,39). This is done by multiplying the RHS of these equations by $`c/\beta `$, where $`\beta =\sqrt{\frac{4\pi }{3V}}l_P`$ and $`V=V_{\mathrm{phys}}(t)/a_{\mathrm{phys}}^3(t)`$, where $`a_{\mathrm{phys}}=a\beta `$ is the physical scale factor and $`V_{\mathrm{phys}}`$ is the physical volume of the spacelike section. Then we obtain

$$H=\dot{\alpha }=f(\alpha ,\varphi )\frac{V_P}{V_{\mathrm{phys}}(t)t_P},$$
(44)
$$\dot{\varphi }=g(\alpha ,\varphi )\frac{V_P}{V_{\mathrm{phys}}(t)t_P},$$
(45)
where

$$f(\alpha ,\varphi )=\frac{\varphi \sigma ^2\mathrm{sin}(2d\varphi )}{2[\mathrm{cos}(2d\varphi )+\mathrm{cosh}(\sigma ^2\alpha \varphi )]}d,$$
(46)
$$g(\alpha ,\varphi )=\frac{\alpha \sigma ^2\mathrm{sin}(2d\varphi )+2d\mathrm{sinh}(\sigma ^2\alpha \varphi )}{2[\mathrm{cos}(2d\varphi )+\mathrm{cosh}(\sigma ^2\alpha \varphi )]},$$
(47)
$`V_P\frac{4\pi }{3}l_P^3`$ is the Planck volume, and $`t_P`$ is the Planck time. We will compare this quantum cosmological model with the original classical free scalar field model, classically equivalent to stiff matter, with flat spatial section, suplemented with a cosmological constant as an alternative source for accelerated expansion. This classical model satisfies the Friedmann s equation

$$H^2=\frac{8\pi G}{3}\frac{c_\varphi }{a^6}+\mathrm{\Lambda }=H_0^2[(1\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda })(1+z)^6+\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }],$$
(48)
where $`c_\varphi `$ is a constant such that the energy density of the field is $`\rho _\varphi =c_\varphi /a^6`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=\mathrm{\Lambda }/(8\pi G\rho _{\mathrm{crit}})`$, $`\rho _{\mathrm{crit}}`$ is the critical density, and $`H_0`$ is the Hubble’s paremeter today. The deceleration parameter today, $`q_0=\ddot{a}/(aH_0^2)`$, is given by

$$q_0=23\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }.$$
(49)
To obtain the luminosity distance as a function of $`z`$ one can calculate numerically the integral

$$d_L=(1+z)_0^z\frac{\mathrm{d}y}{H(y)}=\frac{(1+z)}{H_0}_0^z\frac{\mathrm{d}y}{\sqrt{(1\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda })(1+y)^6+\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }}}.$$
(50)
As a power series, it can be written as

$$H_0d_L=z+z^2\left(\frac{1}{2}+\frac{3}{2}\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }\right)+z^3(1\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda })\left(\frac{1}{2}\frac{9}{2}\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }\right)+\mathrm{},$$
(51)
In the quantum cosmological problem, we have to deal with Eqs. (44,45). There are four arbitrary parameters: $`\sigma ,d`$ and two coordinates in the $`(\alpha ,\varphi )`$ plane, $`\varphi _0`$ designating the particular trajectory in Fig.(1) which represent our Universe, and $`\alpha _0`$ designating the present moment in a particular trajectory. The present value of the Hubble’s paremeter in a particular trajectory coming from Eq.(44) is given by

$$H_0=f(\alpha _0,\varphi _0)\frac{V_P}{V_{\mathrm{phys}}^0t_P}$$
(52)
where

$$f(\alpha _0,\varphi _0)\frac{\varphi _0\sigma ^2\mathrm{sin}(2d\varphi _0)}{2[\mathrm{cos}(2d\varphi _0)+\mathrm{cosh}(\sigma ^2\alpha _0\varphi _0)]}d$$
(53)
In order to obtain a model similar to our present Universe whith $`H_010^{18}\mathrm{s}^1`$ and $`V_{\mathrm{phys}}^010^{82}\mathrm{cm}^3`$, one must have

$$f(\alpha _0,\varphi _0)\frac{\varphi _0\sigma ^2\mathrm{sin}(2d\varphi _0)}{2(\mathrm{cos}(2d\varphi _0)+\mathrm{cosh}(\sigma ^2\alpha _0\varphi _0))}d10^{120}$$
(54)
This huge number can be obtained by choosing a very large value for $`\sigma ^2`$ (the gaussian in the wave function would be almost flat indicating no preference in the choice of $`k`$, or physically, no prefered choice in the strength of the initial explosion), a very large value for $`|d|`$ (a gaussian centered in a very negative value of $`k`$, or a choice for a very strong initial explosion), or trajectories passing very close to the node point, where the denominator of the above expression approaches zero.

In the case of a large value of $`\sigma ^2`$, choosing $`\alpha _01/\sigma ^40`$, one can check from Eq.(IV.1) that

$$q_0=\frac{\ddot{a}}{a}|_0\frac{1}{H_0^2}\frac{2\mathrm{cos}(2d\varphi _0)+1}{\mathrm{cos}(2d\varphi _0)+1}$$
(55)
. For $`2d\varphi _0=2n\pi +x`$ with $`x(2.145,2.15)`$ one has $`0.21<q_0<0.17`$. Note that, for the classical model with $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=0.73`$ new , $`q_0=0.19`$ (see Eq. (49)).

The supernovae measurements relate the luminosity distance $`d_L`$ with $`z`$. Hence, it would be instructive to compare the quantum cosmological luminosity distance $`d_L^q(z)`$

$$d_L^q=(1+z)_0^z\frac{\mathrm{d}ye^{3\alpha (y)}}{f(\alpha (y),\varphi (y))}\frac{\beta }{c},$$
(56)
with the one given in Eqs.(50,51). We will expande $`G(y)e^{3\alpha (y)}/f(\alpha (y),\varphi (y))`$ in powers of $`y`$ around $`y=0`$ (today)

$$G(y)=G(0)+y\frac{\mathrm{d}G}{\mathrm{d}y}|_{y=0}+\frac{y^2}{2!}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2G}{\mathrm{d}y^2}|_{y=0}+\frac{y^3}{3!}\frac{\mathrm{d}^3G}{\mathrm{d}y^3}|_{y=0}+\mathrm{}$$
(57)
up to third order. The operator $`\mathrm{d}/\mathrm{d}y`$ can be written as

$$\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}y}=\frac{1}{(1+y)}\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}\alpha }=\frac{1}{(1+y)}\left(\frac{}{\alpha }+\frac{\mathrm{d}\varphi }{\mathrm{d}\alpha }\frac{}{\varphi }\right),$$
(58)
where $`\mathrm{d}\varphi /\mathrm{d}\alpha `$ can be easily obtained from Eqs.(38,39) and $`\alpha =\mathrm{ln}(a)=\mathrm{ln}(1+y)+\mathrm{const}.`$. Recalling that

$$\frac{H_0\beta a_0^3}{c}=\frac{H_0a_{\mathrm{phys}}^3}{c\beta ^2}=\frac{H_0a_{\mathrm{phys}}^3l_P3V}{4\pi }=\frac{H_0t_PV_{\mathrm{phys}}}{V_P}10^{120},$$
(59)
we obtain

$`H_0d_L^q`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{10^{120}}{f_0}}[z+z^2(1+{\displaystyle \frac{f_0}{2a_0^3}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}G}{\mathrm{d}z}}|_0)+z^3({\displaystyle \frac{f_0}{2a_0^3}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}G}{\mathrm{d}z}}|_0+{\displaystyle \frac{f_0}{6a_0^3}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}^2G}{\mathrm{d}z^2}}|_0)+`$ (60)
$`+z^4({\displaystyle \frac{f_0}{6a_0^3}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}^2G}{\mathrm{d}z^2}}|_0+{\displaystyle \frac{f_0}{24a_0^3}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}^3G}{\mathrm{d}z^3}}|_0)+\mathrm{}].`$
Comparing Eq.(60) with Eq.(51), one can see that $`f_0`$ must be of order $`10^{120}`$, as we have already concluded in Eq. (53). Here we will choose $`|d|`$ as the big number to make $`f_010^{120}`$, and $`|\alpha _0|=\gamma /|d|`$, $`\gamma `$ being an arbitrary number of order $`1`$. This is to assure that $`\frac{\mathrm{d}^nG}{\mathrm{d}z^n}|_0`$ is of order $`1`$ or less for any $`n1`$, which is not the case if we choose $`\sigma 1`$333In this case, the series expansion of Eq.(56) is not meaningful at lower orders, and the integral must be performed by other methods.. Using Eq.(58), we can calculate the coefficients in Eq.(60), obtaining

$`H_0d_L^q`$ $``$ $`z{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}z^2+z^3\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\varphi _0^2\sigma ^4}{6[1+\mathrm{cos}(2d\varphi _0)]^2}}\right\}+`$ (61)
$`+z^4\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\varphi _0^2\sigma ^4}{3[1+\mathrm{cos}(2d\varphi _0)]^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\varphi _0^3\sigma ^6\gamma \mathrm{sin}(2d\varphi _0)}{2[1+\mathrm{cos}(2d\varphi _0)]^4}}\right\}+\mathrm{}`$
In order to obtain Eq.(61), we have used that $`|d|>>1`$ and $`|\alpha _0|=\gamma /|d|`$ is very small444Note that the first correction to the classical model without cosmological constant (see Eq.(51) with $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$) come in the cubic term. The correction to the deceleration parameter at this particular moment is negligible with this choice of parameters. However, the corrections in the cubic and forth terms can be adjusted in order to make the curve obtained from Eq.(61) close to the corresponding curve obtained from Eq.(50), as we will see..

There are many values of $`\varphi _0,\sigma _0`$ and $`\gamma `$ which makes the graphic of $`H_0d_L^q`$ similar to the one obtained from Eq. (50) for $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=0.73`$. For instance, for $`\gamma =1`$ we set $`2d\varphi =0.64\pm 2n\pi `$ and the coefficients of $`z^3`$ and $`z^4`$ become, respectively, $`2.6`$ and $`2.25`$.

In Fig.6, we show a plot of $`H_0d_L(z)`$ given by Eq.(50), $`H_0d_L(z)`$ given by Eq.(50) with $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{Lambda}=0`$, and $`H_0d_L^q(z)`$ given by Eq.(61) with the coefficients of $`z^3`$ and $`z^4`$ being equal to $`2.6`$ and $`2.25`$, respectively. Note that for small values of $`z`$ they are close but, for intermediary values of $`z`$, the quantum $`d_L^q(z)`$ remain close to the cosmological constant $`d_L(z)`$ while both separates of the pure stiff matter $`d_L(z)`$. Of course, for bigger values of $`z`$, the quantum $`d_L^q(z)`$ may separate strongly from the cosmological constant $`d_L(z)`$. Hence, quantum comological effects may mimic a cosmological constant in some region but not everywhere. The two models are distinguishable.

## V Conclusion

We have studied gaussian superpositions of positive and negative frequency mode solutions of the Wheeler-DeWitt equation corresponding to a scalar-tensor model in minisuperspace in the case of flat spatial section. According to the Bohm-de Broglie approach to quantum cosmology, the quantum trajectories representing dynamical universes evolving in time were studied. We have shown that it is possible to have universes which arise classically from a singularity, undergo a positive acceleration in the middle of its expansion, and recover its classical behaviour for large values of the scale factor. We have shown that this positive acceleration, which can be made compatible with observations for many choices of initial conditions, is due to a quantum cosmological effect driven by the quantum potential, according to the BdB interpretation of quantum cosmology. In this way, it may be possible to explain the positive acceleration suggested by the recent measurements of high redshift supernovae without postulating a new contribution to the energy density of the Universe as the dark energy. Note that this acceleration is caused by quantum effects not only present in the scalar field, as described in Ref.parker , but also in the geometry itself. We consider the Universe as a quantum system no matter its size. It is possible to have small classical universes and large quantum ones: it depends on the state functional and on initial conditions fab ; hartle .

The quantum cosmological explanation for the acceleration of the Universe presented in this paper needs to be studied further, not only because it would be an alternative explanation for a misterious behaviour of the present Universe without appealing to any new form of energy, but also because it is a possibility of an observable physical effect of quantum cosmology. Furthermore, quantum cosmological explanations may be suported by symmetry principles which are absent in the classical domain. As an example, we have seen that the huge cosmological numbers may be explained by some ”democracy” principle stating that any value of the velocity of expansion (the constant $`k`$) is equally good ($`\sigma `$ is very big, the gaussian is almost flat). Of course, more elaborated models taking into account relevant matter sources like dust and radiation must be studied. This will be the subject of our future investigations.

## ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We would like to thank Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq) of Brazil for financial support. ESS was succesively supported by a postdoctoral FACITEC (Fundo de Apoio á Ciência e Tecnologia do Município de Vitória – ES) fellowship, a visiting CBPF fellowship, and a posdoctoral CLAF-CNPq fellowship. We want to thank Sonia Ferreira and Zelia Quadros from Lafex-CBPF for technical support. We would also like to thank ‘Pequeno Seminario’ of CBPF’s cosmology group for useful discussions.


text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Nonlinear sigma models (NL$`\sigma `$Ms) in two dimensions are interesting for several reasons. They help us to understand various non-perturbative phenomena in four dimensional gauge theories such as confinement or dynamical mass generation . They also provide the description of superstrings propagating in the curved space-time. In the latter case, the consistency of strings requires the $`𝒩=2`$ superconformal symmetry of the NL$`\sigma `$Ms. Since $`𝒩=2`$ supersymmetry and the scale invariance imply $`𝒩=2`$ superconformal symmetry, these NL$`\sigma `$Ms have to be scale invariant. In quantum field theories, the scale invariance, suffering from anomaly due to the divergent renormalization effects, is realized only at the fixed-points of the renormalization group equation. Since field theories at the fixed-point also describes the phase transition, it is important to study these fixed-point theories of $`𝒩=2`$ supersymmetric NL$`\sigma `$Ms.

In $`𝒩=2`$ supersymmetric NL$`\sigma `$Ms, the field variables take values on the complex curved spaces called Kähler manifolds, whose metrics are specified completely by the Kähler potentials. These Kähler potentials, arbitrary functions of the chiral superfields, have infinite numbers of coupling constants since any NL$`\sigma `$M is renormalizable in perturbation theories in two dimensions. It is convenient to use the Wilsonian renormalization group (WRG) equation for the nonperturbative study of field theories with infinite numbers of coupling constants. In a previous paper, we derived the $`\beta `$ function for $`2`$-dimensional $`𝒩=2`$ supersymmetric NL$`\sigma `$M using the WRG equation:

$`\beta (g_{i\overline{j}})={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}R_{i\overline{j}}+\gamma \left[\phi ^kg_{i\overline{j},k}+\phi ^{\overline{k}}g_{i\overline{j},\overline{k}}+2g_{i\overline{j}}\right].`$ (1.1)
The WRG equation shows the variation of Wilsonian effective action when the cutoff scale is changed . The first term, proportional to the Ricci tensor of the target space, comes from the one-loop diagrams, whereas the second term, proportional to the anomalous dimension $`\gamma `$ of fields, comes from the rescaling of fields to normalize the kinetic term properly. The presence of the anomalous dimension reflects the nontrivial continuum limit of the fields.

When the anomalous dimension of the field vanishes, the scale invariance is realized for NL$`\sigma `$Ms on the Ricci-flat Kähler (Calabi-Yau) manifolds . Calabi-Yau metrics for some noncompact manifolds have been explicitly constructed , when the number of isometries is sufficient to reduce the Einstein equation to an ordinary differential equation.

On the other hand, when the anomalous dimension of fields does not vanish, the condition of the scale invariance is quite different. In this article, we study the novel conformal field theories with anomalous dimension by solving the condition of the fixed-point: $`\beta =0`$. We will assume $`𝐔(N)`$ symmetry to reduce a set of the partial differential equations to an ordinary differential equation. The conformal theories obtained have one free parameter corresponding to the anomalous dimension of the scalar fields. The geometry of the target manifolds crucially depends on the sign of the anomalous dimensions.

This paper is organized as follow: In §2, we review briefly the WRG equation for $`2`$ dimensional $`𝒩=2`$ supersymmetric nonlinear sigma model. In §3, we derive the condition of scale invariance assuming the $`𝐔(N)`$ symmetry. In §4, we study the geometry of target spaces of conformal field theories. In §5, the properties of the new conformal field theories are discussed.

## 2 Wilsonian Renormalization Group equation

In this section, let us recapitulate the Wilsonian renormalization group equation for the $`𝒩=2`$ supersymmetric NL$`\sigma `$M. The Wilsonian renormalization group equation describes the variation of effective action when the cutoff energy scale $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is changed to $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(\delta t)=\mathrm{\Lambda }e^{\delta t}`$ in $`D`$ dimensional field theory :

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dt}}S[\mathrm{\Omega };t]`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\delta t}}{\displaystyle _p^{}}tr\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\delta ^2S}{\delta \mathrm{\Omega }^i\delta \mathrm{\Omega }^j}}\right)`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\delta t}}{\displaystyle _p^{}}{\displaystyle _q^{}}{\displaystyle \frac{\delta S}{\delta \mathrm{\Omega }^i(p^{})}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\delta ^2S}{\delta \mathrm{\Omega }^i(p^{})\delta \mathrm{\Omega }^j(q^{})}}\right)^1{\displaystyle \frac{\delta S}{\delta \mathrm{\Omega }^j(q^{})}}`$
$`+\left[D{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{\Omega }_i}{}}{\displaystyle _p}\widehat{\mathrm{\Omega }}_i(p)\left(d_{\mathrm{\Omega }_i}+\gamma _{\mathrm{\Omega }_i}+\widehat{p}^\mu {\displaystyle \frac{}{\widehat{p}^\mu }}\right){\displaystyle \frac{\delta }{\delta \widehat{\mathrm{\Omega }}_i(p)}}\right]\widehat{S},`$
where $`d_\mathrm{\Omega }`$ and $`\gamma _\mathrm{\Omega }`$ denote the canonical and anomalous dimensions of the field $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$. The caret indicates dimensionless quantities. The first and second terms in eq.(LABEL:WRG-1) correspond to the one-loop and tree diagrams where internal lines are eliminated fields with high momentum $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(\delta t)<p<\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. The remaining terms come from the rescaling of fields to normalize the coefficient of the kinetic term to unity.

This WRG equation is an infinite set of differential equations for various coupling constants in the most general action $`S`$. In practice, we usually expand the action in power of derivatives and retain the first few terms. We often introduce symmetry to further reduce the number of independent coupling constants.

We impose $`𝒩=2`$ supersymmetry on the action and consider only Kähler potential term to define the $`𝒩=2`$ supersymmetric nonlinear sigma model in two dimensions

$`S`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle d^2\theta d^2\overline{\theta }d^2xK[\mathrm{\Phi },\mathrm{\Phi }^{}]}`$ (2.2)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle }d^2x[g_{n\overline{m}}(^\mu \phi ^n_\mu \phi ^{\overline{m}}+{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}\overline{\psi }^{\overline{m}}\sigma ^\mu (D_\mu \psi )^n+{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}\psi ^n\overline{\sigma }^\mu (D_\mu \overline{\psi })^{\overline{m}}+\overline{F}^{\overline{m}}F^n)`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}K_{,nm\overline{l}}\overline{F}^{\overline{l}}\psi ^n\psi ^m{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}K_{,n\overline{m}\overline{l}}F^n\overline{\psi }^{\overline{m}}\overline{\psi }^{\overline{l}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}K_{,nm\overline{k}\overline{l}}(\overline{\psi }^{\overline{k}}\overline{\psi }^{\overline{l}})(\psi ^n\psi ^m)],`$
where $`\mathrm{\Phi }^n`$ denote chiral superfields, whose components fields are complex scalars $`\phi ^n(x)`$, Dirac fermions $`\psi ^n(x)`$ and complex auxiliary fields $`F^n(x)`$. The Kähler metric of the target space $`g_{i\overline{j}}`$ is given by the Kähler potential

$`g_{i\overline{j}}(\phi ,\phi ^{})={\displaystyle \frac{^2K(\phi ,\phi ^{})}{\phi ^i\phi ^{\overline{j}}}}.`$ (2.3)
Higher derivative terms are not included in this paper to avoid the introduction of negative metric states.

For this nonlinear sigma model, the WRG eq.(LABEL:WRG-1) has been derived in Ref.. The scalar part of the WRG equations takes a simple form

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dt}}{\displaystyle d^2xg_{i\overline{j}}(_\mu \phi )^i(^\mu \phi ^{})^{\overline{j}}}`$
$`={\displaystyle d^2x\left[\frac{1}{2\pi }R_{i\overline{j}}\gamma \left(\phi ^kg_{i\overline{j},k}+\phi ^{\overline{k}}g_{i\overline{j},\overline{k}}+2g_{i\overline{j}}\right)\right](_\mu \phi )^i(^\mu \phi ^{})^{\overline{j}}}.`$
The field variables $`\phi ^n(x)`$ are assumed $`t`$ independent by a suitable rescaling of fields, which introduces the anomalous dimension $`\gamma `$ in return. What depends on $`t`$ is the infinite number of coupling constants included in the Kähler metric. From this WRG equation, the $`\beta `$ function for the Kähler metric is given by

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dt}}g_{i\overline{j}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}R_{i\overline{j}}\gamma \left[\phi ^kg_{i\overline{j},k}+\phi ^{\overline{k}}g_{i\overline{j},\overline{k}}+2g_{i\overline{j}}\right]`$ (2.5)
$``$ $`\beta (g_{i\overline{j}}).`$
Note that our $`\beta `$ function reduces to the Ricci tensor when the anomalous dimension of the fields vanishes. The second term which is proportional to the anomalous dimension $`\gamma `$ is not reparametrization invariant because of the renormalization condition of the fields breaks reparametrization invariance. The fermion part also gives the same WRG equation because of the supersymmetry. Since the Kähler metric contain the infinite number of coupling constants, the above WRG equation is an infinite set of differential equations for these coupling constants. In the next section, we investigate the conformal theories defined as the fixed-points of this renormalization group equation.

## 3 Fixed-point of SU(N) symmetric WRG equation

In this section, let us derive the action of the conformal field theory corresponding to the fixed-point of the $`\beta `$ function

$`\beta (g_{i\overline{j}})={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}R_{i\overline{j}}+\gamma \left[\phi ^kg_{i\overline{j},k}+\phi ^{\overline{k}}g_{i\overline{j},\overline{k}}+2g_{i\overline{j}}\right]=0.`$ (3.1)
Since Ricci curvature $`R_{i\overline{j}}`$ is a second derivative of the metric $`g_{i\overline{j}}`$, the equation is a set of coupled partial differential equations, and is very difficult to solve in general. So we simplify the problem by assuming symmetry $`𝐔(N)`$ for the Kähler potential.

$`K[\phi ,\phi ^{}]`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}g_nx^nf(x)`$ (3.2)
where $`x`$ is the $`𝐔(N)`$ invariant combination

$`x\stackrel{}{\phi }\stackrel{}{\phi }^{}`$ (3.3)
of the $`N`$ components scalar fields $`\stackrel{}{\phi }=(\phi ^1,\phi ^2,\mathrm{},\phi ^N)`$. The coefficients $`g_n`$ play the role of an infinite number of coupling constants which depend on the cutoff scale $`t`$. The Kähler potential gives the Kähler metric and Ricci tensor as follows333We use the convention: $`\phi _i^{}=\delta _{i\overline{j}}\phi ^{\overline{j}}`$ and $`\phi _{\overline{j}}=\delta _{i\overline{j}}\phi ^i`$.:

$`g_{i\overline{j}}`$ $``$ $`_i_{\overline{j}}K[\phi ,\phi ^{}]=f^{}\delta _{i\overline{j}}+f^{\prime \prime }\phi _i^{}\phi _{\overline{j}},`$ (3.4)
$`R_{i\overline{j}}`$ $``$ $`_i_{\overline{j}}tr\mathrm{ln}g_{i\overline{j}}`$
$`=`$ $`\left[(N1){\displaystyle \frac{f^{\prime \prime }}{f^{}}}+{\displaystyle \frac{2f^{\prime \prime }+f^{\prime \prime \prime }x}{f^{}+f^{\prime \prime }x}}\right]\delta _{i\overline{j}}`$
$`\left[(N1)\left({\displaystyle \frac{f^{(3)}}{f^{\prime \prime }}}{\displaystyle \frac{(f^{\prime \prime })^2}{(f^{})^2}}\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{3f^{(3)}+f^{(4)}x}{f^{}+f^{\prime \prime }x}}{\displaystyle \frac{(2f^{\prime \prime }+f^{\prime \prime \prime }x)^2}{(f^{}+f^{\prime \prime }x)^2}}\right]\phi _i^{}\phi _{\overline{j}},`$
where

$`f^{}={\displaystyle \frac{df}{dx}}.`$ (3.6)
We substitute these metric and Ricci tensor for the $`\beta `$ function (2.5) and compare the coefficients of $`\delta _{i\overline{j}}`$ and $`\phi ^i\phi ^{\overline{j}}`$ to find

$`{\displaystyle \frac{}{t}}f^{}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}\left[(N1){\displaystyle \frac{f^{\prime \prime }}{f^{}}}+{\displaystyle \frac{2f^{\prime \prime }+f^{\prime \prime \prime }x}{f^{}+f^{\prime \prime }x}}\right]2\gamma (f^{}+f^{\prime \prime }x),`$ (3.7)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{}{t}}f^{\prime \prime }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}\left[(N1)\left({\displaystyle \frac{f^{(3)}}{f^{\prime \prime }}}{\displaystyle \frac{(f^{\prime \prime })^2}{(f^{})^2}}\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{3f^{(3)}+f^{(4)}x}{f^{}+f^{\prime \prime }x}}{\displaystyle \frac{(2f^{\prime \prime }+f^{\prime \prime \prime }x)^2}{(f^{}+f^{\prime \prime }x)^2}}\right]`$ (3.8)
$`2\gamma (2f^{\prime \prime }+f^{\prime \prime \prime }x).`$
Since the second equation (3.8) follows from the first equation by differentiation with respect to $`x`$, we discuss only the first equation.

Our differential equation (3.7) describes the renormalization group flow in the theory space specified by the infinite number of coupling constant in the Kähler potential. In fact, we can derive an infinite number of coupled differential equations among the coupling constants $`g_n`$ by inserting (3.2) in eq.(3.7). We are specially interested in the fixed-point of eq.(3.7), which is supposed to give a scale invariant theory. The fixed-point theory is defined by the Kähler metric which satisfies the following differential equation

$`{\displaystyle \frac{}{t}}f^{}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}\left[(N1){\displaystyle \frac{f^{\prime \prime }}{f^{}}}+{\displaystyle \frac{2f^{\prime \prime }+f^{\prime \prime \prime }x}{f^{}+f^{\prime \prime }x}}\right]2\gamma (f^{}+f^{\prime \prime }x)`$ (3.9)
$`=`$ $`0.`$
To obtain the Lagrangian of the scale invariant field theory, we have to solve this differential equation.

By noting that this equation can be rewritten as

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dx}}\left[\mathrm{ln}(f^{})^{N1}(f^{}+f^{\prime \prime }x)\right]=4\pi \gamma {\displaystyle \frac{d}{dx}}(f^{}x),`$ (3.10)
we can integrate it easily to obtain

$`(f^{})^{N1}F^{}=C_1\mathrm{exp}[4\pi \gamma F],`$ (3.11)
where

$`Ff^{}x,`$ (3.12)
and $`C_1`$ is an integration constant. The normalization condition of the kinetic term,

$`g_{i\overline{j}}|_{x=0}=\delta _{i\overline{j}},`$
gives an initial condition

$`f^{}(0)=1,\text{namely}F^{}(0)=1`$ (3.13)
which fixes $`C_1=1`$.

Integrating eq.(3.11), we see that the solution of the differential equation satisfy the following algebraic equation:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{e^{aF}}{a}}{\displaystyle \underset{r=0}{\overset{N1}{}}}(1)^r{\displaystyle \frac{(N1)!F^{(N1)r}}{(N1r)!a^r}}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}x^N+C_2.`$ (3.14)
where we have introduced a constant $`a4\pi \gamma `$, namely, we write the anomalous dimension of the scalar field using a free parameter $`a`$ as follows:

$`\gamma ={\displaystyle \frac{a}{4\pi }}.`$ (3.15)
In NL$`\sigma `$M, the anomalous dimension of the scalar field can take either positive or negative value, so the parameter $`a`$ can also take either sign . Setting $`x=0`$ in eq.(3.14) and using the boundary condition (3.13), we obtain

$`C_2=(1)^{N1}{\displaystyle \frac{(N1)!}{a^N}}.`$ (3.16)
From this condition (3.14), we can obtain the function $`f^{}=F/x`$. Since the metric (3.4) is determined by $`f^{}`$ and $`f^{\prime \prime }`$, our Lagrangian is completely fixed by eq.(3.14). Thus we found that the Lagrangian of the scale invariant theory has a free parameter $`a`$ corresponding to the anomalous dimension of the field.

## 4 Geometry of the target space of the scale invariant theory

In this section, we study the geometry of target space when the theory is scale invariant.

### 4.1 One-dimensional target space

This equation (3.14) is very simple when the target manifold is of complex one-dimension. When $`N=1`$, this equation reads

$`{\displaystyle \frac{e^{aF}}{a}}`$ $`=`$ $`x+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{a}}`$ (4.1)
which gives

$`f^{}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{ax}}\mathrm{ln}(1+ax).`$ (4.2)
Using this $`f^{}`$ in eq.(3.4) gives the metric of the target space

$`g_{i\overline{j}}=f^{}+f^{\prime \prime }x={\displaystyle \frac{1}{1+ax}}.`$ (4.3)
Note that the metric has only one component, and the indices $`i`$ and $`\overline{j}`$ is $`1`$. The scalar curvature is given

$`R={\displaystyle \frac{a}{1+ax}}.`$ (4.4)
The property of this target manifold crucially depends on the sign of the parameter $`a`$.

Now, we investigate the property of the target manifold for each sign of $`a`$.

1. When $`a>0`$, the anomalous dimension is negative.
Since the line element is given by 444We use $`z`$ for the coordinate of the manifold instead of $`\phi `$ throughout this section.

$`ds^2={\displaystyle \frac{|dz|^2}{1+a|z|^2}},`$ (4.5)
or in polar coordinate $`z=re^{i\varphi }`$

$`ds^2={\displaystyle \frac{1}{1+ar^2}}\left((dr)^2+r^2(d\varphi )^2\right),`$ (4.6)
the volume and the distance from the origin ($`r=0`$) to infinity ($`r=\mathrm{}`$) is divergent, while the length of the circumference at the infinity is finite. Therefore, the shape of the target manifold is a semi-infinite cigar. The volume integral of the scalar curvature is also finite, giving the Euler number:

$`\chi ={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle 𝑑z𝑑\overline{z}(detg_{i\overline{j}})R}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle 𝑑z𝑑\overline{z}\frac{1}{(1+a|z|^2)^2}}=1,`$ (4.7)
which is equal to that of a disc.

Let us embed the manifold in $`3`$ dimensional Euclidean spaces. When the hyperplane has the rotational symmetry, the line element can be written using the cylindrical coordinates

$`ds^2=(dh)^2+(d\rho )^2+\rho ^2(d\varphi )^2.`$ (4.8)
Where the height is a function of the radius $`\rho `$,

$`h=g(\rho ).`$ (4.9)
From eq.(4.9), the line element can be rewritten

$`ds^2=(1+(g^{}(\rho ))^2)(d\rho )^2+\rho ^2(d\varphi )^2,`$ (4.10)
where $`g^{}`$ is the derivative of the function $`g(\rho )`$ in term of $`\rho `$. Now we transform the line element for the target metric (4.3) to the form of eq.(4.10) by a change of variable

$`\rho ={\displaystyle \frac{r}{\sqrt{1+ar^2}}},`$ (4.11)
which is a one-to-one mapping from the entire plane $`0r<\mathrm{}`$ to a disc $`0\rho <\frac{1}{\sqrt{a}}`$. Then eq.(4.6) can be rewritten

$`ds^2={\displaystyle \frac{1}{(1a\rho ^2)^2}}(d\rho )^2+\rho ^2(d\varphi )^2.`$ (4.12)
Comparing eq.(4.10) with eq.(4.12), we obtain the height function $`h=g(\rho )`$ as follow:

$`h`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _0^\rho }𝑑\rho g^{}(\rho )={\displaystyle _0^\rho }𝑑\rho \sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(1a\rho ^2)^2}}1}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\sqrt{a}}}\left(\mathrm{ln}|{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{2a\rho ^2}1}{\sqrt{2a\rho ^2}+1}}|+2\sqrt{2a\rho ^2}\mathrm{ln}|{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{2}1}{\sqrt{2}+1}}|2\sqrt{2}\right)`$
. (4.13)
Figure 1 shows the manifold embedded in $`3`$-dimensional flat Euclidean spaces. The distance between any two points is measured along the shortest path on the surface in the Euclidean spaces.
2. When $`a<0`$, the anomalous dimension is positive.
In this case, the metric and scalar curvature read

$`g_{i\overline{j}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1|a|x}}`$ (4.14)
$`R`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{|a|}{1|a|x}}.`$ (4.15)
This metric is ill-defined at the boundary $`|z|\frac{1}{\sqrt{a}}`$. It is not merely the coordinates singularity because the scalar curvature is divergent at the boundary. Although the volume integral is divergent, the distance to the boundary is finite. Now, let us embed this manifold in flat space. Note the eq.(4.13) is imaginary if $`a<0`$. Thus the manifold is embedded as a space-like surface in the flat Minkowski space. Figure 2 shows the manifold embedded in the $`3`$-dimensional flat Minkowski space.

### 4.2 Higher dimensional target spaces

Consider the conformal field theories whose target space have more than two dimensions, and investigate the property of the target manifolds. For $`N2`$, we have to solve the algebraic equation (3.14) which reads for $`N=2`$, for example,

$`e^{aF}(aF1)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(ax)^21.`$ (4.16)
Figure 3 displays $`aF`$ as a function of $`ax`$ for $`N=2`$ and $`|a|=1`$.

Kähler potential in the neighborhood of the origin is easily obtained by solving the equation (3.14)

$`f(x)=x{\displaystyle \frac{a}{2(N+1)}}x^2+\mathrm{}.`$ (4.17)
The asymptotic behaviors crucially depend on the sign of the parameter $`a`$, so that we will discuss them separately.

1. $`a>0`$ case
Figure 3 show the function $`f^{}`$, which is the diagonal component of the target metric, goes to infinity as $`x\mathrm{}`$. When $`aF`$ goes to infinity, the $`r=0`$ term of eq.(3.14) gives the dominant contribution in the left-hand side. To find the asymptotic behavior in this region, we retain only the dominant terms and solve

$`e^{aF}(aF)^{N1}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}(ax)^N.`$ (4.18)
by the iteration method

$`aF`$ $``$ $`\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{(ax)^N}{N}}\right)(N1)\mathrm{ln}(aF)`$
$`=`$ $`\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{(ax)^N}{N}}\right)(N1)\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{(ax)^N}{N}}\right)+\mathrm{}.`$
where we dropped other terms that vanish as $`ax\mathrm{}`$. Then we obtain the functions $`f^{}`$

$`f^{}`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{ax}}\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{(ax)^N}{N}}{\displaystyle \frac{N1}{ax}}\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{(ax)^N}{N}}+\mathrm{}.`$ (4.19)
The distance along the straight line in the radial direction is written

$`g_{i\overline{j}}dz^idz^{\overline{j}}`$ $`=`$ $`(f^{}\delta _{i\overline{j}}+f^{\prime \prime }z_{\overline{j}}z_i^{})dz^idz^{\overline{j}}`$ (4.20)
$``$ $`(f^{}+|r|^2f^{\prime \prime })|dr|^2={\displaystyle \frac{N}{a|r|^2}}|dr|^2`$
Here we have defined the complex radial coordinate $`r`$ and the angle variables by

$`z^1=u^1r,\mathrm{},z^{N1}=u^{N1}r,z^N=r.`$ (4.21)
The asymptotic behavior (4.20) for any $`N`$ is similar to $`N=1`$ case, in which the metric in the asymptotic region is given by

$`g_{1\overline{1}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{ax}}.`$ (4.22)
The asymptotic behavior of the Kähler potential (3.2) can be found by integrating eq.(4.19)

$`K(zz^{})`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{N}{2a}}(\mathrm{log}(azz^{}))^2+\mathrm{}`$ (4.23)
$`=`$ $`\chi \chi ^{}+2\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{N}{a}}}e\chi \mathrm{log}\left(1+|u^1|^2+\mathrm{}+|u^{N1}|^2\right)+\mathrm{}`$
where we have dropped holomorphic and anti-holomorphic terms by a Kähler transformation and defined $`\chi `$ by

$`\chi =\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{N}{a}}}\mathrm{log}\sqrt{a}r.`$ (4.24)
For fixed values of the radius $`r`$, (4.23) is the Kähler potential for the Fubini-Study metric of the complex projective space $`CP^{N1}`$, whose size is fixed by $`e\chi `$. Therefore, our target space is the direct product of the complex line represented by $`\chi `$ and the $`CP^{N1}`$ represented by $`(u^1,\mathrm{},u^{N1})`$ in the asymptotic region.
2. $`a<0`$ case
Figure 3 shows that the allowed region $`ax0`$ is limited inside of a ball $`|\stackrel{}{z}|<(\frac{\sqrt{2}}{|a|})^{\frac{1}{2}}`$ for $`N=2`$ as in the case of $`N=1`$. By assuming $`ax\sqrt{2}+ϵ`$ near the boundary, we can reduce eq.(4.18) to

$`e^{aF}aF\sqrt{2}ϵ`$
which can be solved by the iteration method

$`aF`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}ϵ}}+\mathrm{ln}(aF)`$
$`=`$ $`\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}ϵ}}+\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{ln}({\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}ϵ}})+\mathrm{}.`$
Because of $`ϵ<<1`$, the behavior of the function $`f^{}=\frac{F}{ax}`$ near the boundary is given

$`f^{}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{ax}}\mathrm{ln}(1+{\displaystyle \frac{ax}{\sqrt{2}}}),`$ (4.25)
which leads to the curvature singularity at the boundary.

Similarly, the allowed region in $`z`$-plane for general $`N`$ is

$`|\stackrel{}{z}|<(N!)^{\frac{1}{2N}}|a|^{\frac{1}{2}}.`$ (4.26)
The asymptotic behavior of the function $`f^{}`$ near the boundary

$$f^{}(x)\frac{1}{ax}\mathrm{ln}(1+\frac{ax}{(N!)^{1/N}})$$

leads to the curvature singularity at the boundary.

To summarize, we found that the target spaces of the scale invariant theory with nontrivial anomalous dimension are noncompact and well-behaved at the infinity for $`a0`$, while they have formidable curvature singularity at the boundary for $`a<0`$.

## 5 Property of the field theory at the fixed-point

In this section, let us discuss the property of the scale invariant field theories for $`a0`$. From (4.17), the Kähler potential is given as a power series of $`\phi \phi ^{}`$

$`K(\stackrel{}{\phi }\stackrel{}{\phi }^{})=\stackrel{}{\phi }\stackrel{}{\phi }^{}{\displaystyle \frac{a}{2(N+1)}}(\stackrel{}{\phi }\stackrel{}{\phi }^{})^2+\mathrm{}.`$ (5.1)
All coefficients in this series are expressed by a single parameter $`a`$. When $`a=0`$ this Lagrangian reduces to a free field theory

$$=|_\mu \stackrel{}{\phi }|^2+\frac{i}{2}\overline{\stackrel{}{\psi }}\sigma ^\mu _\mu \stackrel{}{\psi }+\frac{i}{2}\stackrel{}{\psi }\overline{\sigma }^\mu _\mu \overline{\stackrel{}{\psi }}.$$

with the two-point function

$`\phi ^m(x)\phi ^{\overline{n}}(y)=\delta ^{m\overline{n}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}\mathrm{log}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{|xy|}},`$ (5.2)
which corresponds to a vanishing anomalous dimension $`\gamma =0`$. Higher order terms of $`a`$ in (5.1) introduce the interaction, which gives the nontrivial anomalous dimension given by (3.15) while $`\beta `$ function remains zero by the contributions of further higher order terms in (5.1). Although the Lagrangian (5.1) gives a good description for small values of the fields $`\phi (x)`$, we have to use another Lagrangian derived from the Kähler potential (4.23) to describe the phenomena for large values of the fields. Equations (4.23) and (4.24) indicate that $`m\chi `$ is a periodic variable with a period $`2\pi \sqrt{\frac{N}{a}}`$. The Kähler potential for the Fubini-Study metric (4.23) implies that the squared radius of the $`CP^{N1}`$ is proportional to $`2\sqrt{\frac{N}{a}}e\chi `$.

In the presence of the nontrivial anomalous dimension $`\gamma `$, the two-point function has to behave

$`\phi ^m(x)\phi ^{\overline{n}}(y)\delta ^{m\overline{n}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{|xy|^{2\gamma }}}`$ (5.3)
because of the scale invariance. Although it is difficult to solve field theory with interaction, we can obtain this kind of behavior in the strong coupling limit $`a\mathrm{}`$ of $`N=1`$ model defined by the metric (4.3). Since the target space approaches to a cylinder at the infinity as is shown in the figure 1, it also approaches to another free field theory when $`a`$ goes to infinity. In fact, the bosonic part of the Lagrangian for $`N=1`$ model

$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{1+a|\phi |^2}}|_\mu \phi |^2`$ (5.4)
reduces to that of a free field theory when $`a\mathrm{}`$

$$=|_\mu \chi |^2,$$

where

$`\chi ={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{a}}}\mathrm{log}(\sqrt{a}\phi ).`$ (5.5)
Using this relation (5.5), we can evaluate the two-point function of $`\phi `$ by using the free propagator (5.2) for $`\chi `$

$`\phi (x)\phi ^{}(y)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{a}}e^{\sqrt{a}\chi (x)}e^{\sqrt{a}\chi ^{}(y)}`$ (5.6)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{a}}\mathrm{exp}(a\chi (x)\chi ^{}(y)){\displaystyle \frac{1}{|xy|^{\frac{a}{2\pi }}}}.`$
Thus, we find the anomalous dimension of opposite sign in the strong coupling regime. This seems to be an indication that the anomalous dimension aquires higher order corrections in the strong coupling regime. Study of the strong coupling expansion to reconcile this discrepancy is left for future works.

Although the real dimension of the target manifold is two in $`N=1`$ model, it looks like a cylinder with radius $`\sqrt{\frac{1}{a}}`$ when viewed from far away places.

## 6 Conclusion

In order to find non-trivial conformal field theories with anomalous dimension, we used the WRG equation. In solving the WRG equation, we have assumed $`𝐔(N)`$ symmetry to reduce the coupled partial differential equation to an ordinary differential equation. The new class of conformal field theories have one parameter $`a`$, corresponding to the anomalous dimension of the scalar field. The novel conformal field theories are well behaved for positive $`a`$, while they have curvature singularities at the boundary for $`a<0`$. We obtained the Lagrangian explicitly for $`N=1`$, which allows both the strong and weak coupling expansion. The target space in this case looks like a semi-infinite cigar with one-dimension compactified to a circle. It is interesting to examine the conformal symmetry of our new models both in the weak and in the strong coupling expansion.

After the completion of this work we came to know that our metric was also discussed in other context. The $`N=1`$ model was proposed by Witten as a model of the two dimensional black hole , which was subsequently generalized by Kiritsis, Kounnas and Lust as consistent backgrounds of the superstrings in the presence of the dilaton . Hori and Kapustin proposed to quantize these models by means of linear sigma models with massive gauge field in the Stueckelberg formalism .

## 7 Acknowledgements

This work was supported in part by the Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (#13640283 and #13135215). We would like to thank Toshio Nakatsu and Anton Kapustin for pointing out references .