3
$\begingroup$

Let $\{ S_n \}_{n=0}^\infty$ be a collection of tempered distributions where $S_0:=1$ and $S_n$ is a tempered distribution on $\mathbb{R}^n$.

Just below formula [5] in p.122 of the Fröhlich paper, factorial growth bounds and Nelson-Symanzik positivity imply existence of a probability measure $d\mu$ on $\mathcal{S}'(\mathbb{R})$ having $\{S_n\}$ as moments: \begin{equation} S_n(\otimes_{i=1}^n f_i)=\int_{\mathcal{S}'} \prod_{i=1}^n \omega(f_i) d\mu(\omega) \end{equation}

A similar (or more general) result is presented in p.207-208 Theorem 3.7 of the Borchers-Yngvason paper.

Now in p.199 of the same paper, you can find the following sentence in the paragraph just above 2.1 Definition:

Moreover, a measure will not be uniquely determined by the functional it defines on $S(\mathscr{S})$.

Here, a functional on $S(\mathscr{S})$ corresponds to a collection of (Bosonic) Schwingers $\{S_n \}_{n=0}^\infty$ as mentioned above.

Therefore, my understanding is that uniqueness of the moment problem is generally NOT guaranteed.

In fact, 2.1 Definition in p.199 of the Borchers-Yngvason paper introduces a larger space $\mathscr{F}$ than $S(\mathscr{S})$. With a linear functional on $\mathscr{F}$, uniqueness of a measure is guaranteed as shown in p.200 Theorem 2.3 or p.201 Theorem 2.7.

In p.159 of Fröhlich paper, he somehow mentions both uniqueness and ergodicity, but I admit that I can't fully understand what he actually says there.

Meanwhile, I believe that relation between ergodicity and spectral gap is a well-understood topic, as presented in this MO post.

Therefore, I am led into these very rough and tentative questions:

Does ergodicity somehow ensures uniqueness of $\mu$ on $\mathcal{S}'$ as a solution of the moment problem for a give collection $\{ S_n \}_{n=0}^\infty$?

In this case, how does ergodicity relate to the notion of spectral gap?

Several ideas are mixed up here, and I admit that they are by no means organized...I deeply appreciate any insight.

$\endgroup$
4
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Ergodicity and mass gap i.e. mixing has nothing to do with the Hamburger moment problem being determinate i.e. the uniqueness of $\mu$. The growth condition $|S_n(f_1\otimes\cdots\otimes f_n)|\le n! \ \|f_1\|\cdots \|f_n\|$ for some continuous seminorm $\|\cdot\|$ is already enough for uniqueness. $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 10 at 20:56
  • $\begingroup$ @AbdelmalekAbdesselam Your statement seems to be in direct contrast with the two papers cited in my post. Could you explain a bit more? $\endgroup$
    – Isaac
    Commented Sep 10 at 21:12
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ It's hard to answer when one does not know what to answer. It would help to quote in full, the the body of the question, the passages from the papers by Froehlich and by Borchers and Yngvason you are referring to. $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 12 at 13:38
  • $\begingroup$ @AbdelmalekAbdesselam I have just revised my question to present the relevant theorems and statements. Hope it suffices. $\endgroup$
    – Isaac
    Commented Sep 12 at 18:32

1 Answer 1

1
$\begingroup$

Let $\mathscr{S}=\mathscr{S}(\mathbb{R}^d)$ be the space of real-valued Schwartz functions with its usual Frechet topology, and let $\mathscr{S}'=\mathscr{S}'(\mathbb{R}^d)$ be the space of real-valued temperate distributions equipped with the strong topology. For a Borel probability measure $\mu$ on $\mathscr{S}'$, we will say that it has finite moments of all orders iff for all $f\in\mathscr{S}$, and all $p\in[1,\infty)$, the map $\phi\mapsto \phi(f)$ is in $L^p(\mathscr{S}',\mu)$. By the multilinear Hölder inequality, this implies the map $\mathscr{S}'\rightarrow\mathbb{R}$, $$ \phi\longmapsto \phi(f_1)\cdots\phi(f_n) $$ is integrable with respect to $\mu$, for any $n$ and any choice of test functions $f_1,\ldots,f_n$ in $\mathscr{S}$. By a result of Fernique (based on the closed graph theorem and the continuity of the tensor product of distributions for the strong topology), the multilinear map $$ (f_1,\ldots,f_n)\longmapsto \int_{\mathscr{S}'}\phi(f_1)\cdots\phi(f_n)\ d\mu(\phi) $$ is automatically continuous. By the nuclear theorem, it is therefore given by $$ (f_1,\ldots,f_n)\longmapsto S_n(f_1\otimes\cdots\otimes f_n) $$ for a unique temperate distribution $S_n$ in $\mathscr{S}'(\mathbb{R}^{nd})$, which we will call the $n$-th moment of $\mu$. We will say that $\mu$ has the $n!$-growth property iff there exists a continuous seminorm $\|\cdot\|$ on $\mathscr{S}$, such that for all $n$, and all $f_1,\ldots,f_n$ in $\mathscr{S}$, $$ |S_n(f_1\otimes\cdots\otimes f_n)|\le n!\times \|f_1\|\cdots\|f_n\|\ . $$ An immediate consequence is that for any $n$ and test function $f$, $$ \int_{\mathscr{S}'} |\phi(f)|^n\ d\mu(\phi)\le 2^n n!\ \|f\|^n\ . $$ This follows from the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality, the growth condition and the elementary bound $$ (2n)!=\binom{2n}{n}\ n!^2\le 2^{2n}n!^2\ . $$

Theorem: Let $\mu$, $\nu$ be two such measures with the $n!$-growth property, and suppose they have the same moments $S_n$, then $\mu=\nu$.

Proof:

Fix a test function $f$, and consider the characteristic function $\Phi(z)=E(e^{izX})$ of the real-valued random variable $X=\phi(f)$ on $\Omega=\mathscr{S}'$ with the measure $\mu$. We will show it is analytic in the strip $|{\rm Im}\ z|<\frac{1}{2\|f\|}$. Note that for $z$ in this strip $e^{izX}$ is integrable since $$ E(|e^{izX}|)=E(e^{-({\rm Im}\ z)X})\le E(e^{|{\rm Im}\ z||X|}) $$ $$ =\sum_{n=0}^{\infty} \frac{|{\rm Im}\ z|^n}{n!}E(|X|^n) \le \sum_{n=0}^{\infty}\frac{|{\rm Im}\ z|^n}{n!} 2^n n! \|f\|^n<\infty\ . $$ Moreover, for $t$ real and $z$ complex such that $|z|<\frac{1}{2\|f\|}$, we have $$ \Phi(t+z)=E\left(e^{itX}\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}\frac{(iz)^n}{n!}X^n\right) $$ $$ =\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}\frac{(iz)^n}{n!}E(e^{itX}X^n) $$ and the exchange of series and integral is legitimate because $$ \sum_{n=0}^{\infty}\left|\frac{(iz)^n}{n!}\right|E(|e^{itX}X^n|) =\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}\frac{|z|^n}{n!}E(|X|^n) $$ $$ \le \sum_{n=0}^{\infty}\frac{|z|^n}{n!} 2^n n! \|f\|^n<\infty\ . $$ Moreover, at $t=0$ we have $$ \Phi(z)=\sum_{n=0}^{\infty} a_n z^n $$ with $$ a_n=\frac{i^n}{n!} S_n(f^{\otimes n})\ . $$ We then do the same for the random variable $Y=\phi(f)$ on $\Omega=\mathscr{S}'$ with the measure $\nu$.

We thus have two random variables whose characteristic functions are analytic on the intersection of the two strips, and have the same Taylor series at the origin. By the uniqueness of analytic continuation, they must coincide on this intersection and in particular on the entire real line, and thus at $z=1$. Hence, $$ \int_{\mathscr{S}'} e^{i\phi(f)}\ d\mu(\phi)=\int_{\mathscr{S}'} e^{i\phi(f)}\ d\nu(\phi)\ . $$ Since $f$ is arbitrary, the two measures have the same characteristic function, and by the Bochner-Minlos Theorem, we must have $\mu=\nu$.

$\endgroup$
12
  • $\begingroup$ It is quite surprising that your (relatively simpler) proof refutes the Borchers-Yngvason paper directly....I should be careful about not criticizing somebody else's work, but I found several parts of the paper quite awkward and not understandable... $\endgroup$
    – Isaac
    Commented Sep 13 at 7:52
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I don't know if I refuted BY. My guess is not, but I would need to read the paper carefully to be able to say. Unfortunately, I don't have time to do that anytime soon. For the new question: it does not make sense to me. My answer only involved basic measure theory, i.e., integrals of real or complex valued functions. Bochner or Pettis integrals are meant for integrals of functions valued in say a Banach space. I don't see their relevance here at all. $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 13 at 14:03
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Why on earth do you want to study the unsmeared version? The latter is the distribution $S_n$ but the way to get it is via the preliminary explanations I gave at the beginning of my answer, not by some Bochner/Dunford/Pettis integral. $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 13 at 18:24
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ In everything I said, the measures are probability measures. I recommend staying away from complex measures if interested in QFT. $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 29 at 18:16
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ It's bad to say "Nelson-Symanzik positivity is not compatible with reflection positivity" because there is no incompatibility. There are examples which satisfy OS but not NS positivity. There are examples which satisfy NS but not OS positivity, etc. all four possibilities can occur. Most bosonic models of interest satisfy both. $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 1 at 17:54

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .