Abstract
In this paper, we show the limiting absorption principle for the wave operator on asymptotically Minkowski spacetimes. This problem was previously considered by Vasy (J Spectr Theory 10:439–461, 2020). Here, we employ Mourre theory which seems a more transparent tool. Moreover, we also prove that the anti-Feynman propagator defined by Gérard and Wrochna coincides with the outgoing resolvent.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Chihara, H.: Smoothing effects of dispersive pseudodifferential equations. Commun. Partial Differ. Equ. 27, 1953–2005 (2002)
Dang, N.V., Wrochna, M.: Complex powers of the wave operator and the spectral action on Lorentzian scattering spaces. Preprint (2020). arXiv:2012.00712
Dereziński, J., Siemssen, D.: Feynman propagators on static spacetimes. Rev. Math. Phys. 30, 1850006 (2018)
Dereziński, J., Siemssen, D.: An evolution equation approach to the Klein–Gordon operator on curved spacetime. Pure Appl. Anal. 1, 215–261 (2019)
Duistermaat, J., Hörmander, L.: Fourier integral operators. II. Acta Math. 128, 183–269 (1972)
Dyatlov, S., Zworski, M.: Mathematical Theory of Scattering Resonances. Graduate Studies in Mathematics, vol. 200. AMS, Providence (2019)
Gell-Redman, J., Haber, N., Vasy, A.: The Feynman propagator on perturbations of Minkowski space. Commun. Math. Phys. 342, 333–384 (2016)
Gérard, C.: A proof of the abstract limiting absorption principle by energy estimates. J. Funct. Anal. 254, 2707–2724 (2008)
Gérard, C., Wrochna, M.: Hadamard property of the in and out states for Klein-Gordon fields on asymptotically static spacetimes. Ann. Henri Poincaré 18, 2715–2756 (2017)
Gérard, C., Wrochna, M.: The massive Feynman propagator on asymptotically Minkowski spacetimes. Am. J. Math. 141, 1501–1546 (2019)
Gérard, C., Wrochna, M.: The massive Feynman propagator on asymptotically Minkowski spacetimes II. Int. Math. Res. Not. 2020, 6856–6870 (2020)
Hörmander, L.: Analysis of Linear Partial Differential Operators, vol. I–IV. Springer (1983–1985)
Nakamura, S., Taira, K.: Essential self-adjointness of real principal type operators. Ann. Henri Lebesgue arXiv:1912.05711(to appear)
Melrose, R.: Spectral and scattering theory for the Laplacian on asymptotically Euclidian spaces. Marcel Dekker 161, 85–130 (1994)
Mourre, E.: Absence of singular continuous spectrum for certain selfadjoint operators. Commun. Math. Phys. 78, 391–408 (1980/1981)
Reed, M., Simon, B.: The Methods of Modern Mathematical Physics, vol. I–IV. Academic Press (1972–1980)
Tadano, Y., Taira, K.: Uniform bounds of discrete Birman-Schwinger operators. Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 372, 5243–5262 (2019)
Vasy, A.: Essential self-adjointness of the wave operator and the limiting absorption principle on Lorentzian scattering spaces. J. Spectr. Theory 10, 439–461 (2020)
Zworski, M.: Semiclassical Analysis. Graduate Studies in Mathematics, vol. 138. American Mathematical Society, Providence (2012)
Acknowledgements
This work is supported by JSPS Research Fellowship for Young Scientists, KAKENHI Grant Number 20J00221. The author would like to thank Christian Gérard for suggesting the problem on the equivalence of the Feynman propagator and to Shu Nakamura for valuable discussions. Michal Wrochna explained the convention of the Feynman propagator in [10, 11], and in physics. The author is also very grateful to anonymous referees for numerous comments which are very helpful to improve the manuscript.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Communicated by S. Dyatlov.
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendix A: Propagation Estimates
Appendix A: Propagation Estimates
In this appendix, we give a proof for some propagation estimates, that is, the propagation of singularities and the radial estimates although these proofs may be well-known for specialists in geometric scattering theory (see [6, Appendix E.4]). The radial estimates can be regarded as a microlocal alternative of the Mourre theory. However, its proof does not require technical assumptions such as the self-adjointness of the operator and the radial estimates often give an additional information such as regularity of the function. We also mention that the abstract limiting absorption principle is proved by a similar method in [8].
First, we shall explain key dynamical properties of \(H_p\) for the propagation estimates. We set
A key property of the observable \(\beta _0\) is the following: Setting \(\beta _{\pm }=1\pm \beta _0\), we have
Then it turns out that the sets \(L_{{\mp }}=\{\beta _{\pm }=0\}\cap \{|x|=\infty , \xi \ne 0\}\) are attracting/repelling sets along the rescaled Hamiltonian \(|x|H_{p_0}\). The sets \(L_{{\mp }}\cap \{|x|=\infty ,\xi \ne 0\}\) are called the radial source/sink in [6, DEFINITION E.50] (see also [2, Definition 2.3]), which are also called the incoming/outgoing regions in scattering theory.
Similarly to Sect. 3, in this “Appendix”, let P be a self-adjoint operator on the standard \(L^2\)-space \(L^2({\mathbb {R}}^{n+1})\) satisfying
Since the multiplication operator \(|g|^{\frac{1}{4}}\) preserves all spaces \(H^{k,l}({\mathbb {R}}^{n+1})\) with \(k,l\in {\mathbb {R}}\), all the results hold for P which is defined in (1.1).
1.1 A.1. Preliminary
Now we fix some notation. For symbols a, b, we denote \(a\Subset b\) if we have
and we denote \(\mathrm {Op}(a)=:A\Subset B:=\mathrm {Op}(b)\) if \(a\Subset b\).
Definition 2
Let \(k,l\in {\mathbb {R}}\).
(i) We call \(a\in S^{k,l}\) (or its quantization \(\mathrm {Op}(a)\)) elliptic in a subset \(\Omega \subset {\mathbb {R}}^{2n+2}\) if there exists \(r\in S^{-\infty ,-\infty }\) such that
(ii) We call \(a\in S^{k,l}\) (or its quantization \(\mathrm {Op}(a)\)) microlocally negligible outside a subset \(\Omega \subset {\mathbb {R}}^{2n+2}\) if there exists \(r\in S^{-\infty ,-\infty }\) such that
(iii) We call \(a\in S^{k,l}\) (or its quantization \(\mathrm {Op}(a)\)) microlocally contained in a pair \((\Omega _1,\Omega _2)\) if a is elliptic in \(\Omega _1\) and is microlocally negligible outside \(\Omega _2\).
(iv) Let \(X\subset {\mathcal {S}}'({\mathbb {R}}^{n+1})\) be a function space. For \(u\in {\mathcal {S}}'({\mathbb {R}}^{n+1})\), we say that \(u\in X\) microlocally in a subset \(\Omega \subset {\mathbb {R}}^{2n+2}\) if there exists \(A=\mathrm {Op}(a)\in \mathrm {Op}S^{0,0}\) which is elliptic on \(\Omega \) such that \(Au\in X\).
We set
1.2 Estimates for weight functions
For \(k,l\in {\mathbb {R}}\), \(N,\kappa >0\) and \(0\le \delta \le 1\), we set
Lemma A.1
(i) For \(r>0\), there exists \(C_1>0\) independent of \(0\le \delta \le 1\) such that
(ii) Suppose \(l>-\frac{1}{2}\) and \(2l+1-2\kappa >0\). For \(r>0\), \(\varepsilon \in (0,1)\) and \(R\ge 1\) large enough, there exists \(C_2>0\) independent of \(0\le \delta \le 1\) such that
(iii) Suppose \(l<-\frac{1}{2}\). For \(r>0\), \(\varepsilon \in (0,1)\) and \(R\ge 1\) large enough, there exists \(C_3>0\) independent of \(0\le \delta \le 1\) such that
Proof
First, we note \(\partial _{x}p\in S^{2,-1-\mu }\) and \(\partial _{\xi }p\in S^{1,0}\). (i) follows from a simple calculation. A simple calculation gives \(H_p|\xi |^2=O(|x|^{-1-\mu }|\xi |^3)\) and
Moreover,
where \(c_1,c_2>0\) are independent of \(0<\delta \le 1\) and \(x\in {\mathbb {R}}^n\). Thus, for \(R>0\) large enough, we have
if \(l>-\frac{1}{2}\), \(2l+1-2\kappa >0\) and \((x,\xi )\in \Omega _{\varepsilon ,r,R,in}\) or if \(l<-\frac{1}{2}\) and \((x,\xi )\in \Omega _{\varepsilon ,r,R,out}\). This proves (ii) and (iii). \(\square \)
1.3 Estimates for cut-off functions
First, we note that for \(0<\varepsilon _0<1\) and \(R\ge 1\) large enough, there exists \(C_4>0\) such that
since \(H_p\beta =|x|^{-1}|\partial _{\xi }p(x,\xi )|(1-\beta ^2)+O(\langle x \rangle ^{-1-\mu }|\xi |)\).
Lemma A.2
(i) Let \(-1<\beta _1<\beta _2<1\). For each \(L>0\), \(\varepsilon >0\) small enough, \(R\ge 1\) large enough, there exist \(a,b_1,b_2\in S^{0,0}\), \(e\in S^{-\infty ,-1/2}\) supported in \(\{r/2\le |\xi |\le \frac{5r}{2}\}\) satisfying the following properties: The symbol a is microlocally contained in \((\Omega _{\beta _1-\varepsilon ,\beta _2+\varepsilon ,2r,2R,mid},\Omega _{\beta _1-2\varepsilon ,\beta _2+2\varepsilon ,r,R,mid})\), the symbols \(b_1,b_2\) are microlocally negligible outside \(\Omega _{\beta _1-2\varepsilon ,\beta _1-\varepsilon ,r,R,mid}\) and \(\Omega _{r,R}\) respectively. Moreover, we have
In addition, if \(\beta _2<0\), we can take \(b_2=0\).
(ii) For \(0<\varepsilon <\frac{1}{2}\), \(r\ge 1\) and \(R\ge 1\) large enough, there exist \(a\in S^{0,0}\) which is microlocally contained in \((\Omega _{\varepsilon ,2r,2R,in},\Omega _{2\varepsilon ,r,R,in})\) and \(e\in S^{-\infty ,-1/2}\) supported in \(\{r/2\le |\xi |\le \frac{5r}{2}\}\) such that
(iii) For \(0<\varepsilon <\frac{1}{4}\), \(r\ge 1\) and \(R\ge 1\), there exist \(a,b_1,b_2\in S^{0,0}\) and \(e\in S^{-\infty ,-1/2}\) supported in \(\{r/2\le |\xi |\le \frac{5r}{2}\}\) such that the following properties hold: The symbol a is microlocally contained in \((\Omega _{\varepsilon ,2r,2R,out},\Omega _{2\varepsilon ,r,R,out})\), \(b_1\) and \(b_2\) are microlocally negligible outside \(\Omega _{1-2\varepsilon ,1-\varepsilon ,r,R,mid}\) and \(\Omega _{r,R}\) respectively. Moreover, we have
Proof
Take \(\chi \in C^{\infty }({\mathbb {R}}; [0,1])\) such that
Moreover, we set \({\bar{\chi }}_R(x)=1-\chi (|x|/R)\) for \(R>0\).
(i) Take \(\varepsilon >0\) small enough and \(\rho _{mid}\in C^{\infty }({\mathbb {R}};[0,1])\) such that
Moreover, take \(R\ge 1\) large enough such that \(H_p\beta \ge C_0|\xi |\langle x \rangle ^{-1}\) for \((x,\xi )\in {\mathrm{supp}\;}\rho _{mid}(\beta )\) with \(|x|\ge R\) and take \(M>0\) such that
Now we set
Then we have \({\mathrm{supp}\;}a\subset \Omega _{\beta _1-2\varepsilon ,\beta _2+2\varepsilon ,r,R,mid}\) and
Since \(H_p\beta (x,\xi )\ge 0\) on \(\Omega _{\beta _1-2\varepsilon ,\beta _2+2\varepsilon ,r,R,mid}\) and \(\rho _{mid}'(t)\le 0\) for \(\beta _2+\varepsilon \le t\le \beta _2+2\varepsilon \), there exists \(\rho _1\in C^{\infty }({\mathbb {R}};{\mathbb {R}})\) supported in \([\beta _1-3\varepsilon ,\beta _1-\varepsilon /2]\) such that
Now we construct \(b_1=e^{-M\beta }\rho _1(\beta ){\overline{\chi }}_R{\overline{\chi }}_r\). The symbols \(b_2\) and e are similarly constructed, where we note that \(b_2\) and e come from the term \(H_p({\overline{\chi }}_R)\) and \(H_p({\overline{\chi }}_r)\) respectively. If \(\beta _2<0\) and \(\varepsilon >0\) small enough, then \(H_p({\overline{\chi }}_R)\le 0\) and hence we can take \(b_2=0\).
(ii) Take \(\rho _{in}\in C^{\infty }({\mathbb {R}};[0,1])\) such that \(\rho _{in}(t)=1\) on \(t\le -1+\varepsilon \), \(\rho _{in}(t)=0\) for \(t\ge -1+2\varepsilon \) and \(\rho _{in}'(t)\le 0\). We set
By virtue of (A.1), we can take \(R\ge 1\) large enough such that \(H_p\beta \ge 0\) if \(-1+\varepsilon \le \beta (x,\xi )\le -1+2\varepsilon \) and \(|x|\ge R\). Then we have
for \(|x|\ge R\) and \((x,\xi )\in {\mathrm{supp}\;}\rho _{in}(\beta )\). Then the symbol e can be constructed associated with the term \(a\rho _{in}{\overline{\chi }}_RH_p{\overline{\chi }}_r\) as in (i).
(iii) Take \(\rho _{out}\in C^{\infty }({\mathbb {R}};[0,1])\) such that \(\rho _{out}(t)=1\) on \(t\ge 1-\varepsilon \) and \(\rho _{out}(t)=0\) for \(t\le 1-2\varepsilon \). We set
Then our claim follows as in (i) and (ii), where we note that the term \(b_1\) comes from \(H_p(\rho _{in}(\beta ))\) and the term \(b_2\) comes from the term \(H_p({\overline{\chi }}_R)\) as in (i). \(\square \)
1.4 A.2. Radial estimates
In this subsection, we do not assume the null non-trapping condition (Assumption A). In the other parts of this “Appendix”, we shall impose Assumption A.
Let \(a,b_1,b_2,e\in S^{0,0}\) be as in Lemma A.2 (i), (ii) and (iii) respectively, where we take \(b_1=b_2=0\) in the case (ii). Set \(A=\mathrm {Op}(a)\), \(B_j=\mathrm {Op}(b_j)\) and \(E=\mathrm {Op}(e)\) and take \(A\in \mathrm {Op}S^{0,0}\) such that
Correspondingly, we have the following theorem.
Theorem A.3
Let
We consider the estimate
We have the following statements.
\((i)\) \((\)Propagation of singularity) Let \(k,l\in {\mathbb {R}}\), \(N>0\) and \(-1<\beta _1<\beta _2<1\). Suppose that \(u\in H^{-N,-N}\cap H^k_{loc}\) satisfies \(u\in H^{k,l}\) microlocally on \(\{|\xi |\le 3r\}\) and
for \(r>0\), \(\varepsilon >0\) small enough and \(R\ge 1\) large enough. Then we have \(u\in H^{k,l}\) microlocally on \(\Omega _{r',R'}(\beta _1)\) for some \(r',R'>0\).
More precisely, the following statement holds: Then, for \(u\in {\mathcal {S}}'({\mathbb {R}}^{n+1})\) such that the right hand side of (A.3) is bounded, the estimate (A.3) hold with a constant \(C>0\) independent of \(z\in {\mathbb {C}}_+\).
\((ii)\) \((\)Radial source estimate) Let \(l>-1/2\), \(N>0\) and \(k\in {\mathbb {R}}\). Suppose that \(u\in {\mathcal {S}}'({\mathbb {R}}^{n+1})\) satisfies \(u\in H^{k,l}\) microlocally on \(\{|\xi |\le 3r\}\) and
for some \(l_0>-1/2\), \(r>0\) and \(R\ge 1\) large enough. Then we have \(u\in H^{k,l}\) microlocally on \(\Omega _{r',R'}(-1)\) for some \(r',R'>0\).
More precisely, the following statement holds: Set \(B_1=B_2=0\). Consider \(u\in {\mathcal {S}}'({\mathbb {R}}^{n+1})\) such that the right hand side of (A.3) is bounded and \(A'u\in H^{-N,l_0}\). Then the estimate (A.3) holds for such u with a constant \(C>0\) independent of \(z\in {\mathbb {C}}_+\).
\((iii)\) \((\)Radial sink estimate) Let \(l<-\frac{1}{2}\), \(N>0\) and \(k\in {\mathbb {R}}\). Suppose that \(u\in H^{-N,-N}\cap H^k_{loc}\) satisfies \(u\in H^{k,l}\) microlocally on \(\{|\xi |\le 3r\}\) and
for \(r>0\), \(0<\varepsilon <1/2\) and \(R\ge 1\) large enough. Then we have \(u\in H^{k,l}\) microlocally on \(\Omega _{r',R'}(1)\) for some \(r',R'>0\).
More precisely, the following statement holds: Then, for \(u\in {\mathcal {S}}'({\mathbb {R}}^{n+1})\) such that the right hand side of (A.3) is bounded, the estimate (A.3) holds for such u with a constant \(C>0\) independent of \(z\in {\mathbb {C}}_+\).
Remark A.4
For the radial source estimate (ii), we do not need the regularity assumption \(u\in H^k_{loc}\), which is different from the propagation of singularity (i) and the radial sink estimate (iii).
Remark A.5
If \(z\ne 0\) and if we take \(r>0\) sufficiently small, then we have \(|p(x,\xi )-z|\ge C>0\) on \(\{|\xi |\le 3r\}\). This implies that under \(z\ne 0\), the assumption \(u\in H^{k,l}\) microlocally on \(\{|\xi |\le 3r\}\) can be removed if we also assume \(A'\) is elliptic on \(\{|\xi |\le 3r\}\).
Remark A.6
For \(z\in {\mathbb {C}}_-=\{w\in {\mathbb {C}}\mid {\mathrm{Im}\;}w\le 0\}\), similar results hold although the direction of the propagation should be reversed.
1.5 Commutator estimates
For the proof of Theorem A.3, the following commutator calculus has an important role: For pseudodifferential operators \(A, \Lambda \), where A is formally self-adjoint and \({\mathrm{Im}\;}z\ge 0\), we have
for \(u\in {\mathcal {S}}({\mathbb {R}}^{n+1})\). Moreover, the equation (A.4) with the Cauchy-Schwartz inequality implies that for any small \(\varepsilon _1>0\), there exists \(C>0\) such that
We set
Proof of Theorem A.3
We may assume \(N>0\) is sufficiently large. If we take \(R\ge 1\) large enough and \(\varepsilon >0\) small enough, Lemma A.1 and Lemma A.2 yield
with a constant \(C_4>0\), where we take \(L=-2C_0\) in the case (i). The sharp Gårding inequality (Lemma 2.1 (iii)) gives
up to the term \(\mathrm {Op}S^{-\infty ,-\infty }\) uniformly bounded in \(0\le \delta \le 1\). Here, the last term comes from a remainder term of the sharp Gårding inequality and from \([P-\mathrm {Op}(p),iA\Lambda _{\delta }\Lambda ^2\Lambda _{\delta }A]\). Moreover, \(A_1\in \mathrm {Op}S^{0,0}\) is elliptic in
Now (A.4) and (A.5) imply that for \(u\in {\mathcal {S}}({\mathbb {R}}^{n+1})\),
with a constant \(C>0\) independent of \(0\le \delta \le 1\). Now it suffices to prove the lower order term \(\Vert \Lambda _{\delta }A_1u\Vert _{H^{k-\frac{1}{2},l-\frac{1}{2}}}\) and relax the a priori regularity assumption of u.
By a standard bootstrap argument, the term \(\Vert \Lambda _{\delta }A_1u\Vert _{H^{k-\frac{1}{2},l-\frac{1}{2}}}^2\) can be absorbed into the term \(\Vert u\Vert _{H^{-N,-N}}^2\) for the cases (i) and (iii). For the case (ii), using the bootstrap argument, an interpolation argument, and the part (i), the term \(\Vert \Lambda _{\delta }A_1u\Vert _{H^{k-\frac{1}{2},l-\frac{1}{2}}}^2\) can be absorbed into the left hand side and the term \(\Vert u\Vert _{H^{-N,-N}}^2\). For a detail, see [6, Part 2 of proof for Theorem E.52]. Thus, for \(u\in {\mathcal {S}}({\mathbb {R}}^{n+1})\), we have
Taking \(\delta =0\) and using a standard approximation argument with Lemma 2.2, we have (A.6) for \(u\in {\mathcal {S}}'({\mathbb {R}}^{n+1})\) satisfying \(A'u\in H^{k,l}\) and \(A'(P-z)u\in H^{k-1,l+1}\). In fact, take \(a\in C_c^{\infty }({\mathbb {R}}^{2n+2})\) with \(a(x,\xi )=1\) for \(|(x,\xi )|\le 1\) and set \(a_R(x,\xi )=a(x/R,\xi /R)\). Substituting \(\mathrm {Op}(a_R)u\) into (A.6) with \(\delta =0\) and taking \(R\rightarrow \infty \), we obtain (A.6) for such u by Lemma 2.2.
Finally, we consider \(u\in {\mathcal {S}}'({\mathbb {R}}^{n+1})\) such that the right hand side of (A.3) is bounded. For the case (ii), we also assume \(A'u\in H^{-N,l_0}\). We recall the notation
First, we consider the cases (i) and (iii). Take \(\kappa \) and N large enough. Substituting \(\mathrm {Op}(a_R)u\) into (A.6) with \(0<\delta \le 1\), where \(a_R\) is as above, and taking \(R\rightarrow \infty \), we obtain (A.6), which implies (A.3) for such u by taking \(\delta \rightarrow 0\). For the case (ii), we can use this procedure for arbitrary \(N>0\) and for \(\kappa >-l-\frac{1}{2}\) due to Lemma A.1. Thus we need the additional assumption \(A'u\in H^{-N,l_0}\). We omit the detail. For a similar argument, see [6, Exercises E.31, E.35, E.36]. \(\square \)
1.6 A.3. Propagation to the radial source in the past infinity
In order to control the regularity for a bounded region of the x-space, we use the standard propagation of singularity theorem and the null non-trapping condition. To apply it, we need the following dynamical result.
Lemma A.7
Let \((x_0,\xi _0)\in T^*{\mathbb {R}}^{n+1}\) with \(\xi _0\ne 0\) and \(p(x_0,\xi _0)=0\). We denote \(z(t)=z(t,x_0,\xi _0)\), \(\zeta (t)=\zeta (t,x_0,\xi _0)\) and \(\beta (t)=\beta _0(z(t),\zeta (t))\). Then for any \(0<\varepsilon <1\) and \(R\ge 1\), there exists \(T>0\) such that \(|z(-T)|>R\) and
Remark A.8
The argument below is standard. However, for its justification, we need some estimates for the classical trajectories which are proved in [13, Appendix A].
Proof
Let \(0<\varepsilon <1\) and \(R\ge 1\). Take \(R_0\ge R\) such that
By Assumption A, we can choose \(T_0>0\) such that
This inequality and (A.8) imply that \(|z(-t)|\ge R_0\) for \(t\ge T_0\). By the proof of [13, Lemma A.2] and [13, Corollary A.4], we have
for all \(t\in {\mathbb {R}}\) with a constant \(C_1,C_2>0\). Now suppose that (A.7) fails. By the inequality (A.8), we obtain
which is a contradiction. \(\square \)
Combining the radial source estimate with the standard propagation of singularities, we have the following corollary which is a generalization of [13, Proposition 3.2].
Corollary A.9
Let \(k\in {\mathbb {R}}\), \(\delta >0\) and \(z\in {\mathbb {C}}_{+}{\setminus } \{0\}\). Suppose that
with \(R\ge 1\) large enough and \(r>0\) small enough. Then we have \(u\in C^{\infty }({\mathbb {R}}^{n+1})\).
Proof
We shall prove \(u\in C^{\infty }({\mathbb {R}}^{n+1})\) microlocally near \((x_0,\xi _0)\in {\mathbb {R}}^{n+1}{\setminus } \{\xi =0\}\). The last lemma implies that for \(R\ge 1\) large enough, and \(0<\varepsilon <1\), there exists \((x_1,\xi _1)\in T^*{\mathbb {R}}^{n+1}{\setminus } 0\) such that \((x_1,\xi _1)\) lies in the same integral curve of \(H_p\) and
Then it suffices to prove \(u\in C^{\infty }({\mathbb {R}}^{n+1})\) microlocally near \((x_1,\xi _1)\in {\mathbb {R}}^{n+1}{\setminus } \{\xi =0\}\) by the standard propagation of singularities theorem. Moreover, since \(\xi _0\ne 0\) and since p is homogeneous of degree 2, we have \(\xi _1\ne 0\). Moreover, we may assume \(|\xi _1|\) is large enough since the wave front set is invariant under scaling with respect to the \(\xi \)-variable. To use Theorem A.3 (ii), we shall check \(u\in {\mathcal {S}}({\mathbb {R}}^{n+1})\) microlocally in \(\{|\xi |\le 3r\}\). We note that if \(z\ne 0\), then \(P-z\) is elliptic on \(\{|\xi |\le 4r\}\) with some \(r>0\). Then the standard elliptic parametrix construction yields \(u\in {\mathcal {S}}({\mathbb {R}}^{n+1})\) microlocally in \(\{|\xi |\le 3r\}\). Now Theorem A.3 (ii) implies that for \(R>>1\) large enough and \(0<\varepsilon <1\), we have \(u\in C^{\infty }({\mathbb {R}}^{n+1})\) microlocally on the incoming region \(\Omega _{\varepsilon ,r,R,in}\). This completes the proof since \((x_1,\xi _1)\in \Omega _{\varepsilon ,r,R,in}\). \(\square \)
Summarizing the above results, we obtain the following corollary.
Corollary A.10
Let \(z\in {\mathbb {C}}_{+}{\setminus } \{0\}\), \(k\in {\mathbb {R}}\) and \(\delta >0\). Suppose \(u\in {\mathcal {S}}'({\mathbb {R}}^{n+1})\) satisfies \((P-z)u\in {\mathcal {S}}({\mathbb {R}}^{n+1})\) and \(u\in H^{k,-\frac{1}{2}+\delta }({\mathbb {R}}^{n+1})\) microlocally in the incoming region \(\Omega _{r,R}(-1)\) with \(R\ge 1\) large enough and \(r>0\) small enough. Then we have \(u\in \cap _{k\in {\mathbb {R}}, \delta >0}H^{k,-\frac{1}{2}-\delta }\). Moreover, we have \(u\in {\mathcal {S}}({\mathbb {R}}^{n+1})\) microlocally away from the outgoing region \(\Omega _{r,R}(1)\) for \(R\ge 1\) large enough and \(r>0\) small enough..
1.7 A.4. Elliptic estimate
The following lemma is proved by a standard parametrix construction.
Lemma A.11
Let \(m_0>0\). If \(u\in {\mathcal {S}}'({\mathbb {R}}^{n+1})\) satisfies \((P+m_0^2)u\in H^{k,l}\) with \(k,l\in {\mathbb {R}}\), then we have \(u\in H^{k+2,l}\) microlocally in \(\{(x,\xi )\in {\mathbb {R}}^{2n+2}\mid |x|\ge R,\,\, |p_0(\xi )+m_0^2|\ge \varepsilon |\xi |^2\}\) for \(R\ge 1\) large enough and \(\varepsilon >0\).
1.8 A.5. Absence of resonances
By the proof of [18, Proposition 7], we have the following proposition.
Proposition A.12
Let \(z\in {\mathbb {C}}_{+}{\setminus } \{0\}\). Suppose that a distribution \(u\in {\mathcal {S}}'({\mathbb {R}}^{n+1})\) satisfies \((P-z)u=0\) and \(u\in {\mathcal {S}}({\mathbb {R}}^{n+1})\) microlocally away from the outgoing region \(\Omega _{r,R}(1)\) for some \(R\ge 1\) large enough and \(r>0\) small enough. Then we have \(u\in {\mathcal {S}}({\mathbb {R}}^{n+1})\).
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Taira, K. Limiting Absorption Principle and Equivalence of Feynman Propagators on Asymptotically Minkowski Spacetimes. Commun. Math. Phys. 388, 625–655 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00220-021-04196-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00220-021-04196-7