MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Let $(X,\omega)$ be a symplectic manifolds.

For $f∈C^∞(M,ℂ)$ a function on phase space, the corresponding quantum operator(prequantized observable function) is the linear map $$\mathcal{O}_f:Γ_X(L)→Γ_X(L)$$ given by $$ψ↦−i\hbar∇ _{X_f}ψ+f⋅ψ$$ Where

  1. $X_f$ is the Hamiltonian vector field corresponding to $f$;

2.$∇_{X_f}:Γ_X(L)→Γ_X(L)$ is the covariant derivative of sections along $X_f$ for the given choice of pre-quantum connection;

3.$f⋅(−):Γ_X(L)→Γ_X(L)$ is the operation of degreewise multiplication pf sections.

Recall that a global flow is one whose flow domain is all of $\mathbf{R} \times M$ and a vector field is complete if it generates a global flow.

Then I can not see why when the Hamiltonian vector field $X_f$ is complete the pre-quantized observable functions can be written as $$\mathcal{O}_fs=-\frac{i\hbar}{2\pi}\frac{d}{dt}(\exp(tX_f)s)\vert_{t=0}$$.

which $s$ is a section of Line bundle $L$ and $exp$ means "exponential" . Is there any referrence . What about when Hamiltonian vector field is not complete. Can we write the quantum operators as flow? seehere for more details

share|cite|improve this question
Could you please edit the question to explain the set-up and notation? Is $\omega$ the curvature of a given connection in a hermitian line bundle $L\to X$? If so, what exactly does $exp(tX_f)s$ mean when $s$ is a section of $L$? Also, please include a reference for this formula. – Tim Perutz Dec 28 '13 at 14:42
(I know that a reference is what you are asking for, but presumably the formula came from somewhere.) – Tim Perutz Dec 28 '13 at 15:04
yes, all of your notations are correct. But the main part is the second part which Hamiltonian vector field is not complete? – Hassan Jolany Dec 28 '13 at 15:07
Is $\exp(tX_f)$ the flow of $X_f$ through some point? Also, as @TimPerutz asked, could you explain what is meant by $\exp(tX_f)s$? – Peter Crooks Dec 28 '13 at 18:30
It has been edited now – Hassan Jolany Dec 28 '13 at 18:59
up vote 3 down vote accepted

Conceptually, it's much easier to see what is going on if you focus not on the line bundle $L$, but on the principal $\mathrm{U}(1)$-bundle $\pi:P\rightarrow M$ to which it is associated (so that $L=P\times_{\mathrm{U}(1)}\mathbb{C}$; $P$ can be thought of as the subset $L$ of unit norm with respect to the Hermitian form). In his 1970 lectures, Kostant showed how to lift the Hamiltonian vector fields $X_f$ on $M$ to $U(1)$-invariant vectors fields $A_f$ on $P$ while preserving the commutation relations (so $[A_f,A_g] = -A_{\lbrace f,g\rbrace}$ on $P$ covers $[X_f,X_g] = -X_{\lbrace f,g\rbrace}$ on $M$). Explicitly, $$ A_f = X_f^\mathrm{h} - \frac{i}{\hbar}(f\circ\pi) $$ where the first term is the horizontal lift of $X_f$ (with respect to a connection $\alpha$ on $P$ of curvature $\frac{i}{\hbar}\omega$), while the second term is a vector lying along the $\mathrm{U}(1)$-direction in $P$. BTW, the classical observables $f, g$ should be real-valued, not complex-valued as you wrote. It is not too difficult to see that $A_f$ is complete iff $X_f$ is complete, and by construction the flow $\phi_t^{A_f}:P\rightarrow P$ covers $\phi_t^{X_f}:M\rightarrow M$.

Now, a section $s\in\Gamma(L)$ can be thought of as a $\mathrm{U}(1)$-equivariant function $\tilde{s}:P\rightarrow \mathbb{C}$. The flow $\phi_t^{A_f}$ induces a flow on this space of sections, given by $$ \tilde{s}\mapsto \tilde{s}\circ\phi_{-t}^{A_f}. $$ Differentiating this expression wrt $t$ (and multiplying by $i\hbar$ to produce a Hermitian operator) yields the corresponding quantum observable $\mathcal{O}_f$ $$ \mathcal{O}_f\tilde{s} = i\hbar\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}t}\Bigg\vert_{t=0}\left(\tilde{s}\circ\phi_{-t}^{A_f}\right) = -i\hbar\, A_f\tilde{s} = \left(-i\hbar\, X_f^\mathrm{h} + f\circ\pi\right)\widetilde{s}. $$ Thinking of sections $s\in\Gamma(L)$ instead of $\mathrm{U}(1)$-equivariant functions $\tilde{s}$, this says that $$ \mathcal{O}_f s = (-i\hbar \nabla_{X_f} + f)s. $$

I believe this also answers your other question - the Reeb vector field in this case is the vector field along the $\mathrm{U}(1)$ direction of $P$ (the contact form is the connection form $\alpha$).

Kostant's lecture notes are still the best place to learn all this, IMO.

Edit: of course, the whole point of requiring $[A_f,A_g] = A_{-\lbrace f,g\rbrace}$ is so that $$ [\mathcal{O}_f,\mathcal{O}_g] = [-i\hbar\,A_f, -i\hbar\,A_g] = (i\hbar)^2 A_{-\lbrace f,g\rbrace} = i\hbar\,\mathcal{O}_{\lbrace f,g\rbrace}, $$ the usual Heisenberg ``Poisson brackets go to commutators'' relationship.

share|cite|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.