Structural Aspects of Loop Quantum Gravity and Loop Quantum Cosmology From An Algebraic Perspective

a
r
X
i
v
:
1
3
1
2
.
3
6
5
7
v
1

[
g
r
-
q
c
]

1
2

D
e
c

2
0
1
3
Structural aspects of loop quantum gravity and loop quantum
cosmology from an algebraic perspective
Alexander Stottmeister
and Thomas Thiemann
Lehrstuhl f ur Theoretische Physik III, FAU Erlangen-N urnberg,

Staudtstrae 7/B2, D-91058 Erlangen
December 16, 2013
Abstract
We comment on structural properties of the algebras A
LQG/LQC
underlying loop quantum gravity and loop
quantum cosmology, especially the representation theory, relating the appearance of the (dynamically induced)
superselection structure (-sectors) in loop quantum cosmology to recently proposed representations with non-
degenerate background geometries in loop quantum gravity with Abelian structure group. To this end, we
review and employ the concept of extending a given (observable) algebra with possibly non-trivial centre to
a (charged) eld algebra with (global) gauge group.We also interpret the results in terms of the geometry of
the structure group G. Furthermore, we analyze the Koslowski-Sahlmann representations with non-degenerate
background in the case of a non-Abelian structure group. We nd that these representations can be interpreted
from two dierent, though related, points view: Either, the standard algebras of loop quantum gravity need to
be extended by a (possibly) central term, or the elementary ux vector elds need to acquire a shift related to
the (classical) background to make these representations well-dened. Both perspectives are linked by the fact
that the background shift is not an automorphism of the algebras, but rather an ane transformation. Finally,
we show how similar algebraic mechanisms, which are used to explain the breaking of chiral symmetry and the
occurrence of -vacua in quantum eld theory, extend to loop quantum gravity. Thus, opening a path for the
discussion of these questions in loop quantum gravity.
Contents
1 Introduction 2
2 Preliminaries 4
2.1 Some bre bundle theoretic digressions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.1.1 Gauge transformations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.2 The algebras of loop quantum gravity P
LQG
, A
LQG
& the AIL representation . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.3 The algebra of loop quantum cosmology A
LQC
& the Bohr representation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
2.3.1 Dynamically induced superselection sectors in LQC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
3 Central operators and the structure group 21
3.1 Central operators in A
0
LQC
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
LQG
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
3.2.1 G

= U(1)
n
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
3.2.2 G

= K is compact, connected, simply connected and simple . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
4 The Koslowski-Sahlmann representations 32
4.1 Central extensions of holonomy-ux algebras and non-degenerate backgrounds . . . . . . . . . . . 33
4.2 Weyl form of the holonomy-ux algebras and non-degenerate backgrounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
alexander.stottmeister@gravity.fau.de
thomas.thiemann@gravity.fau.de
1
5 Chiral symmetry breaking and -vacua in loop quantum gravity 36
5.1 An extension of the algebra A
LQG
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
5.2 Chiral symmetry breaking and -vacua for = R
3
& P = R
3
G . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
6 Conclusions & perspectives 41
7 Acknowledgements 42
8 References 42
1 Introduction
Loop quantum gravity is based on a Hamiltonian formulation of general relativity in terms of a constrained Yang-
Mills-type theory, i.e. in a eld theoretic description the phase space of the classical theory is given by the (densi-
tiezed) cotangent bundle [[
1
T
A
P
to the space of connections on a given (right) principal G-bundle P

, where
is the spatial manifold in a 3+1-splitting of a (globally hyperbolic) spacetime M

= R. In general relativity,
we have G = SU(2), Spin
4
, or central quotients of these groups.
The basic variables, the theory is phrased in, are the Ashtekar-Barbero connection A = A
P
and its conjugate
momentum E
_
TAd
(P) [[
1
()
_
. Strictly speaking, we further require E to be non-degenerate as a
(densitiezed) section of the bundle of linear operators L(Ad(P), T). In general relativity, the existence of E is
ensured by the triviality of the orthogonal frame bundle P
SO
(). This mathematical setup also appears to be valid
in the context of the new variables proposed in [1, 2]. Here, Ad
(P) := P
Ad
g
and [[
1
() denotes the bundle of
1-densities on . Since A
P
is an ane space modeled on
1
(Ad(P)) := (T
Ad(P)), Ad(P) := P
Ad
g , the
following Poisson structure
E
a
i
(x), A
j
b
(y) =
a
b
j
i
(x, y) (1.1)
is meaningful in local coordinates : U V R
3
subordinate to a local trivialization : P
]U
U G, i.e.
(( )
1
)
A
]P
|U
= A
j
b
dx
b
j
, ( )
E
]P
|U
= E
a
i
x
a

i
. (1.2)
Here,
j
j
is a basis of g and
i
i
its dual in g
.
The variables (A, E) are directly related to the Arnowitt-Deser-Misner variables (q, P). Namely, E
a
i
is a densitiezed
dreibein for the spatial metric q
ab
E
a
i
E
b
j
= det(q)
ij
, and A
i
a
=
i
a
+K
i
a
is built out of the Levi-Civita connection
of the spatial metric q and the extrinsic curvature K determined by the momentum P.
What makes the variables (A, E) special, is that they allow to carry out a canonical quantization of general relativity,
i.e. loop quantum gravity (cf. [3, 4] for general accounts on the topic). Especially, it is possible to construct
mathematically well-dened operators for all constraints acting in a suitable Hilbert space within this approach,
most prominently the Wheeler-DeWitt constraint (cf. [511]).
The process of canonical quantization of constrained system in the sense of Dirac can roughly be divided into four
steps: First, a point-separating Poisson algebra of function(al)s on the classical phase space is identied. Second,
an abstract quantum *-algebra based on the Poisson algebra is dened. Third, a representation of the quantum
*-algebra is chosen. Fourth, operators corresponding to the constraint are constructed in the chosen representation,
and invariant (sub)spaces w.r.t. to these are selected as physical Hilbert spaces.
In this article, we focus on the third step of this program. That is, we will analyze structures of loop quantum gravity
related to the representation theory of a choice of quantum *-algebra. We will mainly work in the setting of the
F/LOST theorem [12, 13], which is an analog of the von Neumann uniqueness theorem for dieomorphism invariant
theories. Therefore, the classical Poisson algebra will be given by the Ashtekar-Corichi-Zapata algebra [1416], which
is based on the Ashtekar-Isham conguration space [17] of generalized connections and its associated dierential
calculus [18] (see also [19]). As quantum *-algebra, we will use the holonomy-ux algebra in the semi-analytic
category, which was dened in [12], or a certain Weyl form of this algebra [20]. Although, the F/LOST theorem
states the uniqueness of a dieomorphism invariant, pure state on the holonomy-ux algebra or a (concrete) Weyl
form of it, which leads to a unitary implementation of the dieomorphisms in the associated GNS representation,
the Ashtekar-Isham-Lewandowski representation, it was pointed out by several authors [2124] that some of the
underlying assumptions of the theorem have a rather technical avor and could be weakened from a physical
3
perspective while others are not strictly necessary to from a mathematical point of view to achieve a unitary
implementation of the dieomorphisms. Another issue, which was raised in [25] and followed upon in [23, 24], is the
peculiar nature of the GNS vacuum of the Ashtekar-Isham-Lewandowski representation describing the extremely
degenerate situation of an empty geometry. While this appears to be a valid ground state for the deep quantum
regime of a quantum theory of gravity, where geometry is built from excitations of the gravitational eld, such a state
is not well suited for semi-classical considerations, where a classical background geometry needs to be approximated.
Therefore, candidates for representations with ground states capturing information on a xed background geometry
were proposed: The Koslowski-Sahlmann representations. Quite recently [2629], these candidates were analyzed
with a focus on their applicability to asymptotically at boundary conditions for the gravitational eld, which
require a non-degenerate geometry at spatial innity.
Although, we will discuss certain aspects of the Koslowski-Sahlmann representations, and point out the need to
extend the standard holonomy-ux algebra to make these representations well-dened, e.g. by admitting additional
central terms in the commutation relations of the uxes, the main focus of the article lies on structural aspects of
the quantum *-algebras, which are related to non-trivial geometrical and topological features of the structure group
of the underlying Yang-Mills-type theory. More precisely, we observe that the use of a compact structure group G
leads to a non-trivial center in the Weyl form of the holonomy-ux algebra, which clearly aects the representation
theory, because central elements need to be given by multiples of the identity in irreducible representations. Similar
features are known in quantum mechanical models [3033]. Moreover, we point out distinctive features between
the cases where G is Abelian or non-Abelian, and nd that the representation theory is severely more constrained
in the latter case. The Koslowski-Sahlmann representation can be interpreted in this setting, as well. We also
identify a purely topological feature, which leaves its imprint in the representation theory. Namely, the existence
of a sequence of coverings
G ... G ...

G/Z(
G), (1.3)
where

G is the simply connected cover of G and Z(
G) its center, accompanied by a sequence of non-trivial bundle

coverings
P
G
... P ... P
G/Z(
G)
(1.4)
allows for the construction of a sequence of extensions of *-algebras
A
G
... A ... A
G/Z(
G)
. (1.5)
Such a sequence of extensions gives rise to another type of candidates for new representations of the quantum
*-algebra, which are in some sense complementary to the Koslowski-Sahlmann representations.
These structures resemble many aspects of a rigorous, fully quantum theoretical discussion of chiral symmetry
breaking and the related -vacua in quantum eld theory [34, 35]. That is, the existence of large gauge transfor-
mations,
3
(G) ,= 1, is reected in a non-trivial center of the (observable) algebra, and the anomalous chiral
symmetry does not leave the center point-wise invariant, thus leading to a spontaneous breakdown of the chiral
symmetry and the appearance of the -sectors. Interestingly, the main arguments of [35] can be transferred to the
framework of loop quantum gravity, if the existence of an anomalous chiral symmetry is assumed. This provides
a rst step towards a discussion of anomalies in loop quantum gravity, which is a important issue in the analysis
of the semi-classical limit of the theory, especially in the presence of additional matter degrees of freedom. More
precisely, since anomalies lead to non-trivial prediction concerning the matter content of quantum eld theory, it is
necessary to establish a relation to such results in this limit. Thus, our observation will allow to draw conclusions
in loop quantum gravity similar those of quantum eld theory, if the presence of a chiral anomaly is achieved, either
in full quantum theory or the semi-classical limit only. An arena for detailed investigations of these issue could be
given by the so-called deparametrized models (see [36] for an overview).
The article is organized as follows:
In section 2, we provide a review of the mathematical background required to give precise denitions of the algebraic
structures employed in loop quantum gravity. Specically, we use subsection 2.1 to recall some facts from the theory
of (principal) bre bundles, which are the basis for the (classical) phase space formulation of loop quantum gravity.
In subsection 2.2 and 2.3, we introduce the (quantum) algebras and states, which form the standard setting of loop
quantum gravity. Readers, which are familiar with these topics and/or are mainly interested in the results, skip
this section and use it as a reference.
4
In section 3, we show that those algebras possess non-trivial centers, which are closely related to geometric and
topological properties of the structure group, and aect their representation theory, e.g. by the appearance of the
Koslowski-Sahlmann representations. Moreover, if the structure group is not simply connected,
1
(G) ,= 1, we
provide a mechanism to construct extended (eld) algebras, which admit automorphic actions by the centers, and
contain the original algebras in their x-point algebras w.r.t. these actions (cp. [30, 33]). This, in turn, allows us to
understand parts of the representation theory from a constructive point of view.
In section 4, we analyze the Koslowski-Sahlmann representations in more detail, and point out the necessity to
extend the algebras if G is non-Abelian, e.g. by admitting central terms in the basic commutation relations. The
case, when G is Abelian, can be understood in terms of the results of section 3.
In section 5, we explain, how the algebraic explanation of chiral symmetry breaking and the occurrence of the -
vacua in quantum eld theory (cf. [34, 35]) can be imported into the framework of loop quantum gravity. Again, the
non-trivial structure in the representation theory, i.e. the -sectors, manifests itself as a consequence of a non-trivial
center of the (quantum) algebra, which is closely related to topological properties of the structure group.
Throughout the whole article, we choose units such that G = = c = 1. Furthermore, we x the Barbero-Immirzi
parameter = 1, although everything applies to the case R
,=0
, as well.
2 Preliminaries
In this section, we review the denition of the (quantum) algebras P
LQG
and A
LQG/LQC
(cf. [4, 13, 37]) based on
the (classical) variables (A, E), and provide the necessary formalism for the analysis of the following sections.
2.1 Some bre bundle theoretic digressions
Before we explain the construction of the algebras P
LQG
& A
LQG/LQC
, we need some formalism from the theory
of principal bre bundles.
As above, let P

be a principal G-bundle. Since A A
P
, it denes a parallel transport (or holonomy)
h
A
e
: P
]e(0)
=
1
(e(0)) P
]e(1)
=
1
(e(1)) (2.1)
for every (broken, C
) path e : [0, 1] .
Denition 2.1 (cf. [38, 39]):
Given a path e : [0, 1] , for every p P
e(0)
we consider the unique, horizontal (w.r.t. A) lift e : [0, 1] P
dened by
1. t [0, 1] : A
] e(t)
( e
(t)) = 0 (2.2)
2. e = e (2.3)
3. e(0) = p. (2.4)
The parallel transport (or holonomy) of A along e is the map
h
A
e
: P
]e(0)
/
P
]e(1)
p

/
h
A
e
(p) := e(1).
(2.5)
Clearly, the parallel transport is right equivariant, because the connection A is Ad-equivariant, i.e.
g G : h
A
e
R
g
= R
g
h
A
e
, (2.6)
and satises
h
A
e2e1
= h
A
e2
h
A
e1
, h
A
e
1 = (h
A
e
)
1
, (2.7)
where e
2
e
1
is the composition of the paths e
1
, e
2
(e
1
(1) = e
2
(0)), and e
1
is the reversion of the path e.
To set up a correspondence between parallel transports, h
A
e
: P
]e(0)
P
]e(1)
, and elements g G, we x a set of
2.1 Some bre bundle theoretic digressions 5
reference points p
x
P
]x
, x , and use the relation
h
A
e
(p
e(0)
) = R
g(e,A,px]x)
(p
e(1)
) (2.8)
to dene the element g(e, A, p
x
x
) G, which is well-dened by the free and bre transitive action of G on P
(cf. [12, 13]).
Denition 2.2:
Given a path e : [0, 1] and set of reference points p
x
x
P (2.8) denes the map
g(e, . , p
x
x
) : A
P
/
G
A

/
g(e, A, p
x
x
).
(2.9)
This map inherits the properties (2.7) in the following sense:
g(e
2
e
1
, A, p
x
x
) = g(e
2
, A, p
x
x
)g(e
1
, A, p
x
x
), (2.10)
g(e
1
, A, p
x
x
) = g(e, A, p
x
x
)
1
.
Due to the equivariance of the parallel transport, a change of reference points p
x
x
p
x
= p
x
g
x
x
, where
the set g
x
x
G is, again, well-dened by the free and bre transitive action of G on P, eects the map (2.9)
in a equivariant way:
g(e, A, p
x
) = g
1
e(1)
g(e, A, p
x
x
)g
e(0)
. (2.11)
For the purposes of loop quantum gravity, it is important that the map (2.9) separates points in A
P
, if we allow
the path e : [0, 1] to vary among a suitable class of paths P
(cf. [40]). Furthermore, (2.9) allows to identify

the space of generalized connections A with the groupoid homomorphisms Hom(P
, G),
A

= Hom(P
, G) (2.12)
where G is considered as the action groupoid over a single object .
Recall, that elements of A are dened as sets of parallel transports w.r.t. the class of paths P
.
Denition 2.3:
A generalized connection A A is given by maps
h
A
e
: P
]e(0)
P
]e(1)
(2.13)
for every e P
with the properties

h
A
e2e1
= h
A
e2
h
A
e1
, h
A
e
1 = (h
A
e
)
1
. (2.14)
The space of connections A
P
is naturally identied with a subset of A via the holonomies.
Next, let us consider the conjugate momentum E
_
TAd
(P) [[
1
()
_
, which similar to a connection
A A
P
that is given as an Ad-equivariant 1-form on P with values in g, i.e. an element of
1
(P, g)
Ad
, has
an interpretation as a geometric entity on P rather than on . To this end, we need the following proposition
(cf. [38, 41]).
Proposition 2.4:
A section (
k
(P
V )) =:
k
(P
V ), where P
V is the bundle associated with P via a (linear)

representation : G Aut(V ), corresponds in a one-to-one fashion to an element
k
(P, V )
, the horizontal,
-equivariant k-forms on P with values in V , or shortly -tensorial k-forms on P.
Proof:
Given an element (
k
(P
V )), we dene in the following way:

]p
(

X
1
, ...,

X
k
) := p
1
(p)
(d
]p
(

X
1
), ..., d
]p
(

X
k
)), p P,

X
1
, ...,

X
k
T
p
P, (2.15)
where p
1
is the inverse of p : V (P
V )
](p)
, p(v) := [(p, v)]
. Clearly, is well-dened and horizontal, as

d
]p
: T
p
P T
(p)
vanishes on vertical vectors, i.e. elements of T
p
(P)
](p)
. Furthermore, it is -equivariant:
((R
g
)
)
]p
(

X
1
, ...,

X
k
) =
]pg
(dR
g]p
(

X
1
), ..., dR
g]p
(

X
k
)) (2.16)
= (pg)
1
(pg)
(d
]pg
(dR
g]p
(

X
1
)), ..., d
]pg
(dR
g]p
(

X
k
)))
= (g
1
) p
1
(p)
(d
]p
(

X
1
), ..., d
]p
(

X
k
))
= (g
1
)
]p
(

X
1
, ...,

X
k
),
since d
]pg
dR
g]p
= d
]p
and (pg)(v) = p((g)v).
Conversely, if
k
(P, V )
we construct by:
]x
(X
1
, ..., X
k
) := p
]p
(

X
1
, ...,

X
k
), (2.17)
for any p P
]x
and any

X
1
, ...,

X
k
T
p
P, s.t. d
]p
(

X
i
) = X
i
, i = 1, ..., k, which is well-dened, because is
horizontal and -equivariant.
Similarly, we may set up a correspondence between sections X (T (P
V )) and horizontal, -equivariant

vector elds on P with values in V ,

X X(P, V )
, or -tensorial vector elds on P for short. In contrast to

k
(P, V )
,
X(P, V )
requires a connection A A
P
to be dened, as only horizontal k-forms and vertical vector elds on P are
dened naturally. On the other hand, we expect this to be the case, as we expect the Ashtekar-Barbero connection
A and its conjugate momentum E to provide coordinates for T
A
P
, and we have
T
A
A
P
=
1
(P, g)
Ad
= (X(P, g
)
Ad
)
. (2.18)
Proposition 2.5:
If we x a connection A A
P
, there is a one-to-one correspondence between sections X (T (P
V )) and
elements

X of X(P, V )
.
Proof:
Given X (T (P
V )), let X (T P(P
V )) be its unique horizontal lift w.r.t. to A (cf. [38]), which is

right invariant,
((R
g
)
X)
]p
= X
]p
, p P, g G, (2.19)
by the Ad-equivariance of A. We dene
X
]p
:= p
1
X
]p
, p P. (2.20)
We only have to check -equivariance.
((R
g
)

X)
]p
= dR
g]pg
1 (

X
]pg
1 ) (2.21)
= dR
g]pg
1 ((pg
1
)X
]pg
1 )
= (g) p
1
X
]p
= (g)

X
]p
.
Conversely, let

X X(P, V )
, and set
X
]x
= d
]p
(p

X
]p
) (2.22)
for an arbitrary p P
]x
. This is well-dened, because
d
]p
(p

X
]p
) = d
]pg
((pg
)

X
]pg
) (2.23)
= (d
]pg
dR
g
]p
)(p((g
) (g
1
)

X
]p
))
= d
]p
(p

X
]p
),
for any pair p, p
P
]x
.
Clearly, (2.22) does not depend on the choice of connection A, which will be important in the follow-up.
In analogy with the pairing between connections A A
P
and paths e : [0, 1] yielding group elements
g(e, A, p
x
x
) G,
A
P
P
/
G
(A, e)

/
g(e, A, p
x
x
),
(2.24)
there is a pairing
(TAd
(P) [[
1
()) (Ad(P)) S
/
C
(E, n, S)

/
_
S
(E(n)),
(2.25)
where S
is a suitable class of hypersurfaces in , E(n) (T [[

1
()) denotes the brewise pairing between
E and n, and (E(n)) is the pseudo-2-form associated with E(n):
(E(n)) =
abc
E(n)
a
dx
b
dx
c
(2.26)
in local coordinates : U V R
3
. Here,
abc
:=
1
[a
2
b
3
c]
denotes the invariant pseudo tensor density of
weight 1. Noteworthy, the duality
(T Ad
(P) [[
1
()) (Ad(P))
/
(T[[
1
())
(E, n)

/
E(n),
(2.27)
is compatible with the corresponding pairing
(T P[[
1
(P), V )
Ad

0
(P, g)
Ad
/
(T P[[
1
(P))
G
(

E, n)

/
E( n),
(2.28)
in the sense, that
d
]p
(

E( n)
]p
) = E(n)
](p)
, p P
]x
. (2.29)
2.1.1 Gauge transformations
In this subsection, we will analyze the behaviour of the variables (A,

E) [[
1
T
A
P
:=
AAP
(T P[[
1
(P), g
)
Ad
under the action of the gauge transformations G

P
of P
1
, i.e. right equivariant dieomorphisms of P,
P
/
Rg
P
Rg
P

/
P
(2.30)
that reduce to the identity = on . First, let us derive some properties of gauge transformations.
1
It is possible to consider the action of general bundle automorphism Aut(P) on ||
1
T
A
P
(see e.g. [12, 42]). Furthermore, in local
trivialization : P
|U
U G of P we have Aut(P
|U
)

= Di(U) G
P
|U
(cf. [4]).
Lemma 2.6 (cf. [41]):
There is an isomorphism between the group of gauge transformations G
P
and the group of -equivariant maps from
G to P, C(P, G)
, where
g
: G
/
G
g

/

g
(g
) := gg
g
1
.
(2.31)
In analogy with proposition 2.4, we also have the isomorphism C(P, G)

= (P
G).
Proof:
Let G
P
and dene f
C(P, G)
by
(p) = pf
(p), p P. (2.32)
f
is well-dened by right equivariance of and the free and bre transitive action of G on P.
Conversely, for f C(P, G)
we obtain
f
G
P
by
f
(p) := pf(p), p P. (2.33)
Similarly, we get s
f
(P
G) for the second isomorphism,

s
f
(x) := pf(p) (2.34)
for any p P
]x
. Here p : G P
G is the map we get from the associated bundle construction. (2.34) is

independent of the choice of p by -equivariance,
p
f(p
) = (pg
)f(pg
) (2.35)
= p
g

g
1 f(p)
= pf(p)
for any pair p, p
P
]x
. The inverse of the second isomorphism is
f
s
(p) := p
1
s((p)), p P (2.36)
for s (P
G).
Remark 2.7:
In general, the right action R
g
: P P is not a gauge transformation, as this would require
R
g
R
g
= R
g
g
= R
g
R
g
, g, g
G, (2.37)
which holds if and only if G is Abelian.
The Ad-tensorial 0-forms on P,
0
(P, g)
Ad
, can be regarded as the Lie algebra of G
P
.
Theorem 2.8 (cf. [41]):
0
(P, g)
Ad
has a natural Lie algebra structure inherited from g,
[ n, n
]
]p
:= [ n
]p
, n
]p
], n, n

0
(P, g)
Ad
, p P. (2.38)
Proof:
Given n, n

0
(P, g)
Ad
, we need to verify that [ n, n
]
0
(P, g)
Ad
.
(R
g
)
[ n, n
]
]p
= [ n, n
]
]pg
(2.39)
= [ n
pg
, n
]pg
]
= [Ad
g
1 n
]p
, Ad
g
1 n
]p
]
= Ad
g
1 [ n, n
]
]p
, p P.
Denition 2.9 (cf. [41]):
The gauge algebra G
P
of P is the space
0
(P, g)
Ad
of Ad-tensorial 0-forms on P with the Lie algebra structure given
in theorem 2.8.
Furthermore, there is an exponential map
exp
GP
: G
P
G
P
. (2.40)
Theorem 2.10 (cf. [41]):
There is a map exp :
0
(P, g)
Ad
C(P, G)
dened by exp( n)(p) = exp

G
( n
]p
), n
0
(P, g)
Ad
, p P with the
properties
1.
d
dt ]t=0
exp(t n) = n (2.41)
2.
d
2
dtds]t,s=0
exp(t n)
(exp(s n
)) = [ n, n
]. (2.42)
exp :
0
(P, g)
Ad
C(P, G)
induces exp
G
P
: G
P
G
P
by
exp
GP
( n)(p) = p exp( n)(p). (2.43)
Proof:
Clearly, -equivariance of exp( n) follows from the properties of exp
G
: g G.
(R
g
)
exp( n)(p) = exp( n)(pg) (2.44)

= exp
G
( n
]pg
)
= exp
G
(Ad
g
1 n
]p
)
=
g
1 (exp
G
( n
]p
))
=
g
1 exp( n)(p).
The properties 1. & 2. are proved along the same lines, and are omitted at this point. exp
GP
: G
P
G
P
is
well-dened by appealing to the isomorphism of lemma 2.6.
Remark 2.11:
The notation n
0
(P, g)
Ad
is intentional, when compared with (2.27) & (2.28), as it will be important to consider
n as generator of a gauge transformation in the regularization of the Poisson structure (1.1).
Next, we dene the (left) action of G
P
on [[
1
T
A
P
.
Denition 2.12:
The gauge transformations G
P
act on [[
1
T
A
P
to the left by pullback and pushforward, i.e.
L
: [[
1
T
A
P
/
[[
1
T
A
P
(A,

E)

/
L
(A,

E) := ((
1
)
A,

E).
(2.45)
This action is well-dened by the duality between pullback and pushforward
((
1
)
A)(

E) = A(
1

E)) = A(

E) = 0, (A,

E) [[
1
T
A
P
. (2.46)
By the denition 2.12, we only need the dierential d : T P T P to obtain an explicit expression for ((
1
)
A,

E).
Lemma 2.13 (cf. [41]):
The dierential d : T P T P of G
P
is given by
d
]p
(

X
]p
) = dR
f
(p)]p
(

X
]p
) + (dL
f
(p)
1
]f
(p)
df
]p
(

X
]p
))
(p)
, p P,

X
]p
T
p
P, (2.47)
where

: g X(P) gives the fundamental vector elds:
T
]p
:=
d
dt ]t=0
p exp
G
(tT), p P, T g, (2.48)
which have the properties
1. (R
g
)
]p
= (Ad
g
1 T)
]p
(2.49)
2.
]p
= T
]p
. (2.50)
Proof:
Let G
P
and : [0, 1] P, (0) = p,
(0) =

X
]p
, then
d
]p
(

X
]p
) =
d
dt ]t=0
((t)) (2.51)
=
d
dt ]t=0
(t)f
((t))
= dR
f
(p)]p
(

X
]p
) +
d
dt ]t=0
pf
((t))
= dR
f
(p)]p
(

X
]p
) +
d
dt ]t=0
(p)L
f
(p)
1(f
((t)))
= dR
f
(p)]p
(

X
]p
) +d(p)
]e
dL
f
(p)
1
]f
(p)
df
]p
(

X
]p
)
= dR
f
(p)]p
(

X
]p
) + (dL
f
(p)
1
]f
(p)
df
]p
(

X
]p
))
](p)
.
The properties of the fundamental vector elds are evident from their denition.
Corollary 2.14:
The action of the gauge transformations G
P
on [[
1
T
A
P
is explicitly given as
(
1
)
A
]p
= A
]
1
(p)
d
1
]p
(2.52)
= Ad
f
(p)
A
]p
+dL
f
(p)]f
(p)
1 df
]p

E
]p
= d
]
1
(p)
(

E
1
(p)
) (2.53)
= Ad
(p)
(

E
]p
+ (dR
f
(p)
1
]f
(p)
df
]p
(

E
]p
))
]p
).
Proof:
Recall that A(T
) = T, T g for A A
P
.
The map exp
GP
: G
P
G
P
allows us to derive the (innitesimal) action of G
P
on [[
1
T
A
P
.
Lemma 2.15:
The explicit form of the action of G
P
on [[
1
T
A
P
is
d
dt ]t=0
((
t n
)
1
)
A = (d n + [A, n]) = d
A
n (2.54)
d
dt ]t=0
(
t n
)

E = (d n(

E))
+ ad
n

E,
where
t n
= exp
G
P
(t n) G
P
, n G
P
, and ad
: g g
is the co-adjoint representation of g.

Proof:
Note that for : [0, 1] P, (0) = p,
(0) =

X
]p
we have
d
dt ]t=0
dR
exp
G
(t n
|p
)] exp
G
(t n
|p
)
d exp
G
(t n
]( . )
)
]p
(

X
]p
) =
d
2
dtds]t,s=0
R
exp
G
(t n
|p
)
(exp
G
(t n
](s)
)) (2.55)
=
d
2
dsdt ]t,s=0
R
exp
G
(t n
|p
)
(exp
G
(t n
](s)
))
= d n
]p
(

X
]p
).
Then apply corollary 2.14.
For completeness, we also state the transformation behavior of -tensorial k-forms on P, since T
A
A
P

=
1
(P, g)
Ad
.
Lemma 2.16 (cf. [41]):
The gauge transformations G
P
and the gauge algebra G
P
act on
k
(P, V )
(to the left) in the following way:

(
1
)
= (f
) (2.56)
d
dt ]t=0
((
t n
)
1
)
= d( n) . (2.57)
Here
k
(P, V )
, G
P
, n G
P
,
t n
= exp
G
(t n), and d : g End(V ) is the dierential of : G Aut(V ).
Proof:
Use lemma 2.13 and -equivariance of .
Now, that we understand how the gauge transformations G
P
act on pairs (A,

E) [[
1
T
A
P
, we are able to derive
their action on parallel transports h
A
e
, e P
, and projected, 1-density, vector elds E (TAd
(P)[[
1
()).
Proposition 2.17 (cf. [12]):
A Gauge transformation G
P
aects the parallel transports h
A
e
, e P
, of a connection A A
P
via conjugation,
i.e.
h
(
1
)
A
e
= h
A
e

1
. (2.58)
The associated group elements g(e, A, p
x
x
) G (see denition 2.2) behave in an equivariant way, as well:
g(e, (
1
)
A, p
x
x
) = f
(p
e(1)
)g(e, A, p
x
x
)f
(p
e(0)
)
1
, (2.59)
which is compatible with changes of reference points p
x
x
p
x
. The corresponding innitesimal actions
of n G
P
are:
d
dt ]t=0
h
((t n)
1
)
A
e
(p) = ( n
]h
A
e
(p)
)
]h
A
e
(p)
( n
]p
)
]h
A
e
(p)
(2.60)
d
dt ]t=0
g(e, ((
t n
)
1
)
A, p
x
x
) = n
i
]p
e(1)
R
i]g(e,A,px]x)
n
j
]p
e(0)
L
j]g(e,A,px]x)
, (2.61)
where R
i
, L
j
X(G) are the right and left invariant vector elds on G associated with the generators
i
.
Proof:
First, observe that G
P
acts on horizontal lifts in the appropriate way, i.e. if e : [0, 1] P is a horizontal lift of
e : [0, 1] P w.r.t A, then e : [0, 1] P is a horizontal lift w.r.t (
1
)
A by (2.47). Second, we have:

h
A
e
( e(0)) = e(1) (2.62)
=
1
(( e(1)))
=
1
(h
(
1
)
A
e
(( e(0)))).
(2.59) and compatibility follow from the right equivariance of G
P
resp. -euqivariance of f
C(P, G)
. To
prove (2.60) & (2.61) we merely stick to the denition of fundamental, left invariant and right invariant vector
elds.
Remark 2.18:
The action (2.59) is opposite to the one employed in parts of the literature (cf. [4, 13]), where instead we nd
g(e, (
1
)
A, p
x
x
) = f
(p
e(0)
)g(e, A, p
x
x
)f
(p
e(1)
)
1
. (2.63)
This could be achieved if we worked with left principal bundles, or if we changed the dening identity (2.8) to
h
A
e
(p
e(0)
) = R
g(e,A,px]x)
1(p
e(1)
). (2.64)
The former would, in the case of trivial bundles, P

= G, lead to a right action of the gauge transformations
G
P

= C(, G), which is not the typical choice in the majority of the literature. On the other hand, the latter would
make the homomorphism (2.9) an anti-homomorphism, i.e. reverse the order in the rst line of (2.10).
It remains to discuss how the gauge transformations G
P
and the gauge algebra G
P
act on (TAd
(P)[[
1
()).
Proposition 2.19:
The compatible actions of G
P
and G
P
on (TAd
(P) [[
1
()) are
E
]x
:= p Ad
(p)
p
1
E
]x
(2.65)
n E
]x
:= p ad
n
|p
p
1
E
]x
.
Here x , p P
]x
and G
P
, n G
P
. As before, we regard p : G Ad
(P) as a map.
Proof:
The actions are well-dened, i.e. independent of the choice of p P
]x
, because of -equivariance of f
resp. Ad-
equivariance of n. To prove compatibility, we only need to combine proposition 2.5, corollary 2.14, lemma 2.15 and
the fact that d : T P T P vanishes on vertical vectors.
d
]p
(p(

E)
]p
) = d
]p
(p Ad
(p)
p
1
E
]p
) (2.66)
= p Ad
(p)
p
1
d
]p
(E
]p
)
= p Ad
(p)
p
1
E
]x
,
d
dt ]t=0
d
]p
(p((
t n
)

E)
]p
) = d
]p
(p ad
n
|p
p
1
E
]p
) (2.67)
= p ad
n
|p
p
1
d
]p
(E
]p
)
= p ad
n
|p
p
1
E
]x
,
where

E (T P[[
1
(P), g
)
Ad
corresponds to E via proposition 2.5.
In view of lemma 2.16, identical formulas hold for k-forms in associated bundles.
LQG
, A
LQG
& the AIL representation 13
Proposition 2.20:
There are compatible actions of G
P
and G
P
on
k
(P
V ):
1

]x
:= p (f
(p)) p
1
]x
(2.68)
n
]x
:= p d( n) p
1
]x
,
where x , p P
]x
and G
P
, n G
P
. As before, we regard p : V P
V as a map.
Proof:
Just apply lemma 2.16 and proposition 2.4.
These induced actions on spaces of section in associated bundles have propertie that is essential in the following
subsection 2.2.
Corollary 2.21:
The actions given in propositions 2.19 & 2.20 are transpose w.r.t. to the duality pairing (2.28), i.e.
( E)(n) = E( n) (2.69)
( n
E)(n) = E( n
n). (2.70)
Let us make a closing remark for this subsection regarding the formalism in trivial bundles P

= G.
Remark 2.22:
If the bundle P is isomorphic to the trivial bundle G, the gauge transformations G
P
are isomorphic to the
G-valued functions on , C(, G). The isomorphism is dened by the relation:
f
(x, g) =
g
1 (g
(x)), (x, g) G. (2.71)

LQG
, A
LQG
& the AIL representation
In this subsection, we will stick to the semi-analytic category (cf. [12, 13] for the original utilization in the context
of loop quantum gravity).
Given a (right, semi-analytic) principal G-bundle P

(G compact Lie group), as before, we consider the groupoid
of (semi-analytic) paths P
in . Fixing a system of reference points p

x
x
, we have the isomorphism
A

= Hom(P
, G) (2.72)
by denition 2.2.
The construction of P
LQG
and A
LQG
is guided by the observation that A may be endowed with a compact,
Hausdor topology, which makes it accessible to measure theoretic consideration (cf. [17, 18, 4346] for the original
literature). This topology is induced by giving an isomorphism
Hom(P
, G)

= lim
lL
Hom(l, G)
lL
Hom(l, G), (2.73)
where the projective limit is taken over subgroupoids L of P
generated by embedded, semi-analytic, compactly

supported graphs
sa
0
in . The projection p
l
: Hom(P
, G) Hom(l, G), l L, are simply the restrictions

of the homomorphisms. It follows that the projective limit is a closed subset of the product space
lL
Hom(l, G),
where the latter carries the Tikhonov topology. The spaces p
l
(A) =: A
]l

= Hom(l, G) acquire their compact
topology by the map (2.9)
Hom(l, G)

= G
]E(
l
)]
, (2.74)
which makes
lL
Hom(l, G) compact. Here, [E(
l
)[ denotes the number of edges in
l
. Furthermore, this allows
for the denition of a smooth and an analytic structure on A, since these structures are left and right invariant,
and thus are invariant under a change of reference points p
x
x
[18, 19].
Following this, let us introduce the basic building blocks of the algebra P
LQG
, which is constructed form certain
(point-separating) functionals on [[
1
T
A
P
. We loosely follow the notation of [4].
LQG
, A
LQG
Denition 2.23 (Cylindrical functions):
The C
-algebra Cyl is the closure of the cylindrical functions Cyl :=
lL
C(A
l
)/ in the sup-norm | . |
. The
equivalence is dened to be
f
l
f
l
: l
l, l
: p
l
f
l
= p
l
f
l
, (2.75)
where p
l
l
: A
l
A
l
, l, l
L, is the restriction map. Every f Cyl is given as a projective family of functions

f
l
lL
. Explicitly, we have
f(

A) = p
l
f
l
(

A) (2.76)
= f
l
(p
l
(

A))
= f
l
(h
A
e

eE(
l
)
)
= F
l
(g(e,

A, p
x
x
)
eE(
l
)
).
Here F
l
C(G
]E(
l
)]
) is the function corresponding to f
l
C(A
l
) via (2.74).
It is well known that the spectrum of Cyl can be identied with the space of generalized connections A, thus leading
to the isomorphism
Cyl

= C(A ). (2.77)
Denition 2.24 (Flux vector elds, cf. [12]):
The ux vector elds X
Flux
on A considered as derivations on Cyl
1
are the (regularized
2
) Hamiltonian vector elds
of the functions
E
n
(S) :=
_
S
(E(n)) (2.78)
on T
A dened by the pairing (2.25), where S is a face, i.e. an embedded, semi-analytic, connected hypersurface
(without boundary) with oriented normal bundle NS, and n
sa
0
(Ad(P
]S
)), a compactly supported, semi-analytic
section of adjoint pullback bundle P
]S
:=
S
P. The action of the ux vector elds on f Cyl
1
is obtained as follows:
By proposition 2.4, we nd a unique n
0
(P
]S
, g)
Ad
, which gives rise to a 1-parameter group of gauge transfor-
mation
t n
G
P
|S
by theorem 2.10. These gauge transformations dene generalized gauge transformations on A
in the following way:
h
1
2
t n
A
e
:= h
A
e
(1
2
t n
)
(e,S)
(2.79)
where
(e, S) :=
_
_
_
+1 e S = e(0) e is positively outgoing from S
1 e S = e(0) e is negatively outgoing from S
0 e S = e

S = e
(2.80)
is the indicator function of S w.r.t. to adapted edges
3
. It is at this point, where semi-analyticity is crucial to ensure
that an arbitrary edge e
decomposes into a nite number of adapted edges e, which is necessary to get a well-dened
action on Cyl. On the group elements g(e,

A, p
x
x
) G this leads to
g(e,
1
2
t n
A, p
x
x
) = g(e,

A, p
x
x
) exp
G
(
1
2
t(e, S) n
]p
e(0)
) (2.81)
2
See [4] for a detailed account of the regularization of (1.1).
3
The factor
1
2
in (2.79) is a remnant of the regularization procedure for the Hamiltonian vector eld of En(S) (see [4] for further
explanations).
LQG
, A
LQG
A ux vector eld E
n
(S) is the generator of a generalized gauge transformation on Cyl
1
.
(E
n
(S) F
S
l
)(g(e,

A, p
x
x
)
eE(
l
)
) :=
d
dt ]t=0
F
S
l
(g(e,
1
2
t n
A, p
x
x
)
eE(
l
)
) (2.82)
=
1
2
eE(
S
l
)
(e, S) n
i
]p
e(0)
(L
e
i
F
S
l
)(g(e,

A, p
x
x
)
eE(
S
l
)
).
F
S
l
denotes the representative of f Cyl
1
w.r.t. an adapted decomposition
S
l
of an underlying graph
l

sa
0
and
its associated groupoid l L. In the following, we will always assume to work with an adapted decomposition of a
graph, when we consider the action of a ux vector eld.
Remark 2.25:
Note that we stick to the realization of the ux vector elds by left invariant vector elds on the structure group G.
This is, again, due to the use of right principal bundles, and the requirement of an isomorphism A

= Hom(P
, G)
rather than an anti-isomorphism (cp. remark 2.18). Contrary, we could change the denition of adapted edges in
such a way that the non-vanishing contributions would be due to edges ending at a face, i.e. e S = e(1), if we
wanted to arrive at a formulation in terms of right invariant vector elds on G.
Our denition of the ux vector eld appears to dier slightly from those existing in the literature (cf. especially [12]),
but is nevertheless equivalent by the following lemma.
Lemma 2.26:
Instead of dening the ux vector eld in terms of S and n
sa
0
(Ad(P
]S
)), we may equivalently dene them
by S and

X X
sa
0
(P
]S
)
G
vert
, a semi-analytic, compactly supported, right invariant, vertical vector eld on P
]S
(cf. [12]).
More precisely, we consider the ow
X
t
: P
]S
P
]S
, t R (2.83)
generated by

X, which is a gauge transformation of P
]S
by the right invariance of

X. Then, we may replace
1
2
t n
in (2.79) by
1
2
t
and dene ux vector elds E
X
(S) according to this relation.
Proof:
Note that for n
0
(P
]S
, g)
Ad
we have by theorem 2.10:
d
dt ]t=0
exp
G
P
|S
(t n)(p) =
d
dt ]t=0
p exp
G
(t n
]p
) (2.84)
= ( n
]p
)
]p
, p P
]S
.
Clearly, ( n)
X(P
]S
) is semi-analytic and compactly supported if and only if n is. Moreover, due to the denition
of

: g X(P
]S
)
G
and the Ad-equivariance of n, ( n)
is right invariant and vertical.

Conversely, since
X
t
, t R, is a 1-parameter group (connected to the identity,
X
t=0
= id
P
|S
), we nd a cor-
responding 1-parameter group f
X,t
C(P
]S
, G)
, t R, by lemma 2.6. Then, by theorem 2.10, we nd n
X
,
s.t.
X
t
= exp
GP
(t n
X
), t R. (2.85)
In view of the calculations which will be performed in the following section of the article, we state a useful result
about the ux vector elds.
Lemma 2.27 (cf. [20]):
The action of the ux vector elds on Cyl
1
can be computed as follows:
E
n
(S) f =
[e]xK
([e]
x
, S)n
i
]px
L
[e]x
i]x
f, (2.86)
LQG
, A
LQG
where denotes the indicator functions of S w.r.t. the edge germs [e]
x
, x . The set of edge germs K
x
does not
depend on x in this setting. The action of the elementary vector elds L
i
x,[e]x
is dened to be:
L
[e]x
i]x
p
l
f
l
:= p
l
_
_
1
2
eE(
l
)
x, e(0)
[e]x,[ e]
e(0)
L
e
i
f
l
_
_
, (2.87)
where an adapted representative f
l
of f was chosen. The commutation relations between these vector elds are
_
L
[e]x
i]x
, L
[e
]
x
j]x
_
=
1
2
f
ij
k
x,x

[e]x,[e
]x
L
k
x,[e]x
, (2.88)
where [
i
,
j
] = f
ij
k
k
denes the structure constants of g.
From the cylindrical functions Cyl and the ux vector elds (short: uxes) we construct the *-algebra P
LQG
and
a certain Weyl form A
LQG
of it. We denote by X
Flux
the Lie algebra span of X
Flux
.
Denition 2.28 (The holonomy-ux algebra, cf. [12]):
The *-algebra P
LQG
is the *-algebra given by the quotient F/I of the tensor algebra F generated by Cyl
and
X
Flux
X(A) by the two-sided -*-ideal I dened by the elements:
V f fV V f (2.89)
V V
V [V, V
]
X(A)
ff
f = 0, f, f
Cyl
, V, V
X
Flux
.
The tensor product is taken relative to the algebra structure of Cyl resp. Cyl
to make F a Cyl
-module. The
involution is dened by complex conjugation on Cyl
, by V f = V f on X
Flux
, and extends to an anti-
automorphism of F. Note that the ux vector elds satisfy the reality condition E
n
(S) = E
n
(S)
, E
n
(S) X
Flux
.
At this point, it is important to note, that there is a natural action by semi-analytic gauge transformations G
sa
P
and, more generally, semi-analytic automorphisms Aut
sa
(P) on the algebra P
LQG
. In general, the latter cover
dieomorphisms, Di
sa
(), dierent from the identity:
P

/
/

(2.90)
with Aut
sa
(P),
Di
sa
(). For general bundles, it is not necessary the case that every dieomorphism
Di
sa
() is covered by an automorphism
Aut
sa
(P), as this amounts to a non-trivial lifting problem
(cf. [47]).
P
/

(2.91)
In the smooth category, one nds a short exact sequence of NLF-manifolds [47]
1
/
G
P
/
Aut
(P)
/
Di
()
/
1 (2.92)
with an open subgroup Di
() of Di
() containing the connected component of the identity. This issue does

not arise for the Ashtekar-Barbero variables, since then the bundle P comes from the natural bundle P
SO
() [48].
The actions of both groups of transformations on the basic elements, i.e. the cylindrical functions and the uxes,
look as follows:
Denition 2.29:
The transformations G
sa
P
and automorphisms Aut
sa
(P) have natural (right) actions on Cyl and X
Flux
induced by
LQG
, A
LQG
those of corollary 2.14 and lemma 2.16.
(f)(

A) := p
l
f
l
((
1
)

A) = F
l
(f
(p
e(1)
)g(e,

A, p
x
x
)(f
(p
e(0)
))
1
eE((l))
) (2.93)
(E
n
(S)) := ( E)
n
(S) = E
n
(S)
(f)(

A) := p
l
f
l
((
1
)

A) = f
l
( h
A
(e)

1
eE(
l
)
) (2.94)
= F
l
(g(e, (
1
)
A, p
x
x
)
eE(
l
)
) = F
(
l
)
(g
( e(1))g( e, A, p
x
x
)g
( e(0))
1
eE(
1
(
l
))
),
(E
n
(S)) := (
E)
n
(S) = E
n
(
1
(S)), f Cyl, E
n
(S) X
Flux
, G
sa
P
, Aut
sa
(P),
where g
: G, s.t. (p
x
) = R
g(x)
(p
(x)
)
4
, and
n :=
1
n
. These actions extend to *-automorphic

actions on P
LQG
.
Since the algebra P
LQG
is supposed to be generated by the cylindrical functions and the uxes, it is necessary to
allow only semi-analytic gauge transformations or automorphisms, as otherwise the action of the transformations
groups would not preserve the elementary operators of the algebra. Nevertheless, (distributional) extensions of these
transformations groups have been discussed in the literature [42, 49], and can be shown to have a well-dened action
on Cyl
, but which do not preserve X

Flux
. As an example, we show that, in case of a trivial bundle P

= G,
the extension of G
sa
P
= C
sa
(, G) to G
= g : G leads to elements that are not generated from nite linear

combinations of uxes (unless Ad : G Aut(g) is trivial):
Let us consider a ux E
n
(S) and w.l.g. a generalized gauge transformation g
x
xS
, s.t. Ad
g
1 (n)(x) = m(x) n(x)
and y ,= x : Ad
g
1 (n)(y) = n(y). Then the element
g
(E
n
(S)) = E
Ad
g
1 (n)
(S) (2.95)
is not of the form required of a ux. Furthermore, this leads to
[E
n
(S),
g
(E
n
(S))] = E
[n,Ad
g
1 (n)]
([S[) =
1
2
[e]xK
([e]
x
, S)
2
[n, m]
j
(x) L
[e]x
j]x
, (2.96)
which is a point-localized vector eld on Cyl
. Although it is not a point-localized ux, as it contains the squared

type indicator function of S. Clearly, such a point-localized object cannot be obtained from nite linear combinations
of uxes, as these are dened w.r.t. to open, semi-anlaytic surfaces S and compactly supported, semi-analytic
functions n C
sa
0
(S, g) thereon.
Interestingly, this subtlety indicates, that the available proof of the uniqueness of the Ashtekar-Isham-Lewandowski
representation [12], which requires the algebra P
LQG
to be generated by nite linear combinations of products of
the cylindrical functions and the uxes, strictly speaking only holds without considering the action of G
. On the
other hand, this subtlety poses no problem for the uniqueness proof given in [13] involving a generalized Weyl form
of P
LQG
.
From a practical point of view the extension of G
sa
P
to G
appears to be unnecessary, because the action of the semi-

analytic gauge transformations is suciently localizable due to the existence of semi-analytic partitions of unity
(cf. [12] and references therein). Additionally, the use of G
sa
P
entails the occurrence of large gauge transformation,
i.e. gauge transformation not homotopic to the identity, which might be useful in the discussion of chiral symmetry
breaking in loop quantum gravity (see below).
The algebra A
LQG
is obtained by partially extending and exponentiating the generators of P
LQG
, and providing it
with the formal commutation relations induced by the Lie bracket on X(A). The reason for not exponentiating the
cylindrical functions is due to the fact, that they are essentially continuous functions of holonomies, the latter being
already a sort of exponential of the connection 1-form A. In contrast, the ux vector elds are not exponentiated
up to this point, being essentially Hamiltonian vector elds of the (smeared) vector densities E.
Denition 2.30 (The *-algebra in Weyl form, cf. [20]):
The *-algebra A
LQG
is generated by the elements of Cyl and the Weyl elements W
S
(tn) := e
tEn(S)
=
1
2
t n
subject
4
This implies: g
1 = g
1
. Furthermore, this denition has the necessary equivariance properties w.r.t. a change of reference
system {px}
x
{p
x
}
x
.
LQG
, A
LQG
to the following relations (cp. (2.79) & (2.93)):
f
:= f, W
S
(0) := 1, W
S
(tn)
:= W
S
(tn)
1
= W
S
(tn), (2.97)
ff
:= f
Cyl
f
, W
S
(tn)fW
S
(tn)
1
:= W
S
(tn) f =
1
2
t n
(f)
W
S
(tn)W
S
(t
n) := W
S
((t +t
)n), W
S
(tn)W
S
(t
)W
S
(tn)
1
W
S
(t
)
1
:=
1
2
t n

1
2
t
1
2
t n

1
1
2
t
,
where f, f
Cyl and
1
2
t n
,
1
2
t
are as in denition 2.24. The action of the Weyl elements on Cyl implements
the formal identity W
S
(tn) f =
k=0
t
k
k!
E
n
(S)
k
f on Cyl
. The set of Weyl elements will be denoted by W , and

the group generated by this set by W .
Remark 2.31:
This denition of the algebra A
LQG
is not equivalent to the denition in [13], because we do not regard A
LQG
as a (closed) subalgebra of B(L
2
(A, d
0
)) (see below, (2.100)), and thus do not require all relations among the
generating elements that would follow from such a denition. We will further explain the consequences of this
dierence in the next section.
Additionally, we consider the extended algebra A
ext
LQG
of A
LQG
generated by elementary, point-localised uxes (2.87)
and the cylindrical functions. The extended algebra allows us to obtain an explicit expression for the commutator
between the uxes
[E
n
(S), E
n
(S
)] =
1
2
xSS
[e]xK
([e]
x
, S)([e]
x
, S
)[n, n
]
k
(x) L
[e]x
k]x
, (2.98)
which will be important in the following sections. It is interesting to note that the commutator does not close among
the uxes in the non-Abelian case
5
precisely because of the indicator function , i.e. the product ([e]
x
, S)([e]
x
, S
)
is in general not of the form ([e]
x
, S
) for a suitable surface S
. Although, there are certain special cases where

iterated commutators lead to uxes again, e.g.
[E
n
(S), [E
n
(S), E
n
(S)]] =
1
4
xSS
[e]xK
([e]
x
, S)[n, [n
, n
]
k
(x) L
[e]x
k]x
=
1
4
E
[n,[n
,n
]]
(S), (2.99)
since ([e]
x
, S)
3
= ([e]
x
, S). This is a feature that is missed by a restriction to Abelian groups G, e.g. G =
U(1)
3
(Abelian artifact, cf. [50]).
As a Hilbert space representation of P
LQG
resp. A
LQG
, one typically invokes the Ashtekar-Isham-Lewandowski
representation dened by the irregular (algebraic) state
0
(fE
n1
(S
1
)...E
nj
(S
j
)) =
_
0
(f) if 1, .., j =
0 else
, f Cyl
, E
n1
(S
1
)...E
nj
(S
j
) X
Flux
, (2.100)
0
(fW
S1
(n
1
)...W
Sj
(n
j
)) =
0
(f), f Cyl, W
S1
(n
1
)...W
Sj
(n
j
) A
LQG
,
where
0
denotes the Ashtekar-Isham-Lewandowski measure induced by the Haar measure on G. In terms of
(gauge-variant) spin network functions T
s
, s S, which form a special orthonormal basis in H
0
= L
2
(A, d
0
),
(2.100) reads
0
(T
s
E
n1
(S
1
)...E
nj
(S
j
)) =
_
s,0
if 1, .., j =
0 else
, f Cyl, E
n1
(S
1
)...E
nj
(S
j
) X
Flux
, (2.101)
0
(T
s
W
S1
(n
1
)...W
Sj
(n
j
)) =
s,0
, s S, W
S1
(n
1
)...W
Sj
(n
j
) A
LQG
,
where s = 0 denotes the spin network label corresponding to the empty graph = . This representation enjoys a
uniqueness property under certain natural assumptions [12].
At this point, we want to state a short lemma regarding the regularity and gauge invariance of states on P
LQG
and
5
In the Abelian case the relation (2.98) is trivially closed, i.e. [En(S), E
n
(S
)] = 0.
LQC
& the Bohr representation 19
A
LQG
for compact, connected G.
Lemma 2.32:
Let be a gauge invariant state, i.e.
= , G
sa
P
, on P
LQG
or A
LQG
. Then, is irregular w.r.t. the
gauge variant spin network functions (cf. [4]),
T
,, m,n
(

A) :=
eE()
_
dim(
e
)
e
(g(e,

A, p
x
x
))
me,ne
, (2.102)
with
sa
0
, [
e
]
eE()
(

G [
triv
])
]E()]
, m
e
, n
e
= 1, ..., dim(
e
). Here, irregularity is understood in the
sense that for any
e
,=
triv
there exist m
e
, n
e
= 1, ..., dim(
e
), s.t.
[0, 1] s (T
es,e,me,ne
), e P
, e
s
(t) := e(st), t [0, 1] (2.103)
is not continuous from the right in [0, 1] at s = 0.
Proof:
The action of the gauge transformations G
sa
P
on the gauge variant spin network functions looks as follows:
(T
,, m,n
)(

A) =
eE()
_
dim(
e
)
e
(f
(p
e(1)
)g(e,

A, p
x
x
)f
(p
e(0)
)
1
)
me,ne
(2.104)
=
eE()
_
dim(
e
)
dim(e)
ke,le=1
e
(f
(p
e(1)
))
me,ke
e
(g(e,

A, p
x
x
))
ke,le
e
(f
(p
e(0)
)
1
)
le,ne
.
Now, let us choose maximal torus T G and consider spin network functions T
es,e,me,ne
dened on single edges
e
s
s[0,1]
P
, and gauge transformations

es(1)
localized at the vertex e
s
(1) of e
s
, s.t. 1 s > 0: f
(p
es(1)
) =
t ,= 1
G
T G and f
(p
es(0)
) = 1
G
. Such gauge transformations exist because of the existence of semi-analytic
partitions of unity [12, 13]. Next, we notice that [
e
] ,= [
triv
] implies the non-triviality of
e]T
: T Aut(V
e
), t T :
e]T
(t) ,= 1
Ve
, (2.105)
since every g G is conjugate to some t
g
T [51]. Thus, we obtain, by diagonalizing the representation of T, a
non-trivial decomposition
V
e
e
V
e
,
e]T

=
e
, (2.106)
where
e
: T T, dim(V
e
) = 1, are irreducible representations of T, i.e. characters of the maximal torus,
e

T.
From (2.104), (2.105) and (2.106), we conclude that we nd an element t T, s.t.
(T
es,e,me,ne
) = (
s
(T
es,e,me,ne
)) (2.107)
=
e
(t)
. .
,=1
(T
es,e,me,ne
), s [0, 1],
for some m
e
, n
e
, and we have 1 s > 0 : (T
es,e,me,ne
) = 0. We may even choose m
e
= n
e
. But, (T
e0,e,me,ne
) =
_
dim(
e
)
me,ne
, because g(e
0
, A, p
x
x
) = 1. Thus, discontinuity follows for diagonal expectation value functions
[0, 1] s (T
es,e,me,me
), m
e
= 1, ..., dim(
e
).
This result is inspired by a similar statement in the algebraic formulation of quantum gauge eld theories [31].
Interestingly, in quantum eld theory the only way to avoid irregular representations of the gauge eld variable
A A
P
, seems to be the use of indenite inner product (Krein) spaces (cf. [31, 32]).
LQC
& the Bohr representation
The algebra A
LQC
of (homogeneous, isotropic) loop quantum cosmology is given by the Weyl algebra associated
with the space R
2
= (, ) [ , R with the (canonical) symplectic structure ((
1
,
1
), (
2
,
2
)) =
1
1
(cf. [30]).
LQC
& the Bohr representation 20
Denition 2.33:
The algebra A
LQC
is the *-algebra generated by the elements U() = e
ib
, R, and V () = e
i
, R, subject
to the relations
U()
= U() = U()
1
, U(0) = 1 V ()
= V () = V ()
1
, V (0) = 1 (2.108)
U(
1
)U(
2
) = U(
1
+
2
), V (
1
)V (
2
) = V (
1
+
2
), U()V () = e
i
V ()U().
A
LQC
can be made a C
-algebra by completing it w.r.t. the maximal C
-norm (cf. [52])

[[W[[
max
:= sup[[W[[ [ [[ . [[ is a C
norm on A
LQC
, W A
LQC
. (2.109)
The generators b, dened w.r.t. a regular representations are related to the Hubble parameter and the oriented
volume respectively. These elementary variables are related to those in standard treatments of LQC, where b, v =
2, by rescaling the volume =
1
2
v. Alternatively, this algebra is written in terms of the combined operators
W(, ) = e
i(b+)
= e
i
2
U()V (), (, ) R
2
.
W(, )
= W(, ) = W(, )
1
, W(0, 0) = 1 (2.110)
W(
1
,
1
)W(
2
,
2
) = e
i
2
((1,1),(2,2))
W(
1
+
2
,
1
+
2
) = e
i((1,1),(2,2))
W(
2
,
2
)W(
1
,
1
).
This algebra is obtained by restricting the holonomies to a cubic graph and the uxes to surfaces dual to this graph,
and exploiting isotropy to reduce from SU(2) to U(1), followed by a decompactication to R
Bohr
(cf. [37, 50]).
In analogy with the Hilbert space representation typically chosen for A
LQG
, one selects a preferred (irregular)
representation induced by the (algebraic) state
0
(W(, )) =
,0
, , R. (2.111)
The representation of this state can be understood in terms of almost-periodic functions, i.e. H
0
= L
2
(R
Bohr
, d
Bohr
)
(cf. [30, 53]). The uniqueness of this state was recently justied [54] along the same lines as the uniqueness of the
Ashtekar-Isham-Lewandowski representation for A
LQG
[12]. In contrast, the usual Fock or Schrodinger representa-
tion is obtained from the (regular) state
F
(W(, )) = e
2
+
2
4
, , R. (2.112)
2.3.1 Dynamically induced superselection sectors in LQC
The quantization of the (gravitational) Hamiltonian constraint H in the spatially at case (k = 0) that is derived
w.r.t. the GNS representation (H
0
,
0
,
0
) of the state (2.111) takes the form (up to numerical constants) [37]:
H
sin(
0
b)
sin(
0
b)
0
(U(
0
))(U(
0
)),
0
R, (2.113)
where (U(
0
)) denotes the imaginary part,
0
is a minimal length scale connected to the (kinematical) minimal
area eigenvalue of loop quantum gravity
6
, and is the (densely dened) generator of the 1-parameter group
0
(V ())
R
, which exists by the continuity of the state w.r.t. (cf. [55] for details regarding the domain
D(H )). It is easy to see that H commutes with
0
(V ( =

0
)), and the representation admits a direct sum
decomposition w.r.t. the spectrum of the latter ((
0
(V ( =

0
))) = S
1
= e
i
[ [0, 2)):
H
0
[0,2)
H
,
0
[0,2)
, (2.114)
where the summands (H
), [0, 2), are preserved by the subalgebra A

U(1)
LQC
A
LQC
A
0
LQC
:= W(2
0
n, ) [ (n, ) Z R R
2
, (2.115)
6
The presence of the minimal length scale
0
serves as an argument for the use of the irregular representation, as the limit
0
0 is
supposed to be forbidden in the quantum theory.
21
i.e. the Weyl algebra associated with the cotangent bundle T
U(1)

= S
1
R. Thus, the parameter
0
is one half
of the inverse radius of the S
1
-factor, and plays the role of a compactication scale. In the literature, it is argued
that this gives rise to a superselection structure induced by H , and Dirac observables are computed w.r.t. one
of the -sectors (cf. [37, 56]).
In the following sections we will explain further similarities between this structure in loop quantum cosmology and
the Koslowki-Sahlmann representations [24].
3 Central operators and the structure group
The algebras A
LQG
and A
0
LQC
have a common feature that will be in focus of this section. Namely, both algebras,
as dened in 2.33 and 2.30, have non-trivial centers, which implies that they have no irreducible, faithful represen-
tations. Furthermore, there is a common cause for the appearance of non-trivial central elements in these algebras,
as both can be related to quantizations of the cotangent bundle of a compact group, i.e. the structure group G
and the dual U(1) of the invariance group Z of H respectively. This feature aects the representations theory of
both algebras, since irreducible representation require that elements of the center are represented by multiples of
the identity (superselection structure). In the subsequent discussion of these aspects, we will repeatedly encounter
a unifying algebraic structure consisting of the following data (cf. [30]):
1. An algebra A of observables with a non-trivial center Z.
2. An extended algebra F A, which is called the eld algebra.
3. A group of automorphisms G representing the adjoint action of Z on F, s.t. A F
G
is contained in the
x-point algebra of F w.r.t. this action. G is called global gauge group.
4. A group of automorphisms of A, which does not leave the center Z pointwise invariant, i.e. (Z) ,= Z for
C, Z Z. Elements of C are called charge automorphisms.
Let us briey explain the nomenclature (see also remark 3.6 below): The algebra A is the algebra, of which we
intend to understand the representation theory. In many cases this will be the algebra of observables of a given
quantum system. The center Z of A reects the superselection structure of the quantum system. Moreover, if we
are dealing with a gauge theory, we will have to deal with the question of gauge invariance, and the issue of charged
elds (charged with respect to the global gauge group G) from which construct observables. As the observables
should be invariant under global gauge group G, and the charged elds cannot be part of A, but should belong
to an (extended) eld algebra F, we need to require A F
G
. On the other hand, the center Z embeds into the
gauge group G via the adjoint action, and is therefore part of the global gauge group, while the adjoint action of
a (unitary) charged eld can lead to an automorphism of A (charge and conjugate charge combine to zero charge)
that moves the elements of center among each other, which amounts to a shift the superselection structure.
Thus, we see that the construction of a eld algebra F from a given algebra A with center Z provides candidates of
charge automorphisms, C, which can be combined with known representations of A to give new, inequivalent
representations .
Furthermore, the inequivalence of the representations and can be understood as an instance of spontaneous
symmetry breaking (in the algebraic sense, cf. [57]). Namely, in spite of the fact that is an automorphisms (a
symmetry) of A, a pure (or primary), algebraic state on A cannot be invariant w.r.t. , i.e. ,= . To see
this, we recall that a state is pure (or primary) if and only if the associated GNS representation (
, H
)
has a 1-dimensional commutant
(A)
= C1
H
(or center Z
(A)
(A)
= C1
H
). But, this implies

non-invariance of , because
(Z)
(A)
= C1
H
, and acts non-trivially on Z, which are incompatible

requirements.
If we intended to consider an invariant state on A, we will have an extremal (or central) decomposition into pure
(or primary) states
x
, x X,:
=
_
X
x
d(x). (3.1)
The central decomposition of is related to the central decomposition of the von Neumann algebra
(A)
with
respect to its center Z
(A)
(A)
, which is especially important in physics, because elements of the center

describe invariants of the quantum system, which assume specic values in the states
x
, x X [57]. This point
of view will be important in the discussion of chiral symmetry breaking in section 5.
0
LQC
22
The algebraic formulation of spontaneous symmetry breaking connects with the standard formulation, that a sym-
metry of the Hamiltonian of a quantum system does not entail a symmetric (ground) state of the latter, in the
following way: Symmetries of the algebra A of observables, to which the Hamiltonian is aliated, are not neces-
sarily symmetries of a state on A.
0
LQC
Our analysis of the algebra A
0
LQC
, and how the structure of its center Z
0
LQC
reects the decomposition (2.114),
follows closely the analysis of the Weyl algebra for a quantum particle on a circle as given in [30].
The center Z
0
LQC
is generated by the element W(0,

0
), and we may regard the algebra A
0
LQC
as the x-point algebra
A
Z
LQC
w.r.t the Z-action
m
(W(, )) := e
i

0
m
W(, ), m Z. (3.2)
In this setting, Z is called the global gauge group, and A
LQC
the eld algebra. The extension of A
0
LQC
to A
LQC
is
minimal in a precise sense (cf. [58]). Clearly, the action of the global gauge group is implemented by the adjoint
action generator W(0,

0
) of the center Z
0
LQC
on A
LQC
:
m
(W(, )) = W(0,

0
)
m
W(, )W(0,

0
)
m
. (3.3)
We observe that the irregular state
0
(2.111) is gauge invariant, in contrast to the regular Fock state
F
(2.112).
On the other hand, requiring a gauge invariant state
m
= immediately leads to (W(, )) = 0 if / 2
0
Z.
Additionally, we have the so-called charged automorphisms of A
0
LQC
:
(W(2
0
n, )) := e
i

W(2
0
n, ), [0, 2), (3.4)
which are necessarily outer automorphisms, as they do not the leave the center Z
0
LQC
pointwise invariant. These
automorphisms are inner in the larger algebra A
LQC
(W(2
0
n, )) = W(
, 0)W(2
0
n, )W(
, 0), (3.5)
and they intertwine inequivalent irreducible representations of A
0
LQC
. The latter follows, because every irreducible
representation requires that we have for the generator of the center (W(0,

0
)) = e
i
, [0, 2). Thus, an
irreducible representation
is labeled by an angle [0, 2), and we nd that
0
:=
(3.6)
is a representation satisfying
0
(W(0,

0
)) = 1. (3.7)
One can show that any two irreducible representations of A
0
LQC
supplemented by (3.7), which are regular w.r.t.
the 1-parameter group W(0, )
R
, are unitarily equivalent. The representations
can be realized by the GNS

representation of the state
(W(2
0
n, )) = e
i
n,0
, n Z, R. (3.8)
The dierence between the representations with distinct values of are also seen on the level of the generator
of
(V ())
R
, i.e. we have H

= L
2
([0,

0
), db) and
is the self-adjoint extension of i

b
subject to the
boundary condition (

0
) = e
i
(0).
The occurrence of these structures can be related to the topology of group U(1), which is the dual of the invariance
group Z acting according to (3.2) (cf. [33]). The Z-action corresponds geometrically to translations of the variable
b, i.e. b b +

0
m, m Z. In the restricted setting of the algebra A
0
LQC
, it can be interpreted as the action of
the large gauge transformations with winding number m, which are the rotations by 2m of the underlying circle
LQG
23
group U(1) T
U(1). As argued in [31, 32, 59], there is a strong analogy between these algebraic structures and
those present in the context of chiral symmetry breaking and the vacuum structure of QCD (see section 5). To this
end the following remark is in order:
Although the charge automorphisms
, which play the role of the chiral automorphisms of QCD, and gauge
automorphisms
m
commute, i.e.

m
=
m

, [0, 2), m Z, (3.9)

the implementers of the gauge transformations W(0, m

0
) Z
0
LQC
are not invariant under the charge automorphisms
by (3.4). Thus, the charge symmetry is necessarily spontaneously broken in any irreducible representation
of
A
0
LQC
.
Interestingly, there is also way to relate the -sectors to a purely imaginary topological term contributing to the
action of a free particle on the circle via the functional integral point of view (cf. [30]):
S =
m
2
_
x()
2
d +i
_
x()d. (3.10)
We conclude this subsection by pointing out how the appearance of these structures diers in the GNS representation
of the Fock state (2.112) from that in the Bohr state (2.111). The Fock state leads to a representation (H
F
,
F
,
F
)
of A
LQC
that is unitarily equivalent to the Schrodinger representation by von Neumanns uniqueness theorem, but
this representation is reducible for A
0
LQC
. In fact, we have a central decomposition of the representation over the
spectrum of W(0,

0
):
H
F

=
_
[0,2)
H
d,
F

=
_
[0,2)
d. (3.11)
In comparison with (2.114), which reects that
0
(W(0,

0
)) has only pure point spectrum, the spectrum of
F
(W(0,

0
)) is purely absolutely continuous, and the GNS vectors
are its improper eigenvectors.

LQG
In the construction of A
LQG
, it is assumed that the structure group of the principal bundle P is a compact Lie
group G. By compactness, G is the nite extension of its (connected) identity component G
0
by G/ G
0

=
0
(G).
On the other hand, it is well-known [51] that G
0
is isomorphic to the quotient of the product of a n-torus U(1)
n
and a compact, connected, simply connected Lie group K by a central, nite, Abelian subgroup A. Furthermore,
K is isomorphic to a nite product of compact, connected, simply connected, simple Lie groups.
G
0

= (KU(1)
n
)/ A (3.12)
Therefore, we will give separate discussions of the structure of A
LQG
in the two cases:
1. G

= U(1)
n
for some n N.
2. G

= K is compact, connected, simply connected and simple.
In the second case, we will also comment on the case G

= K/ A, A Z(K) & nite, i.e.
1
(G) ,= 1.
3.2.1 G

= U(1)
n
If G

= U(1)
n
, we notice that the only non-trivial relation among the generators of A
LQG
is (cp. (2.97))
W
S
(tn)f =
1
2
t n
(f)W
S
(tn). (3.13)
Furthermore, the generators
i
i=1,...,n
u(1)
n
(u(1) := Lie(U(1)) = i R) can be treated independently, because
U(1)
n
is Abelian. Thus, it is sucient to discuss the relation (3.13) for n = 1.
Since the C
-algebra C(U(1)) is generated by the characters ( . )

n
: U(1) C, g g
n
, let us consider (3.13) for
LQG
24
the spin (or charge) network functions
T
, m
(

A) :=
eE()
g(e,

A, p
x
x
)
me
,
sa
0
,

A A, (3.14)
where m = (m
e
)
eE()
Z
]E()]
,=0
:
W
S
(tn)T
, m
=
_
_
eE(
S
)
e
m
S
e
1
2
t(e,S) n
|p
e(0)
_
_
T
, m
W
S
(tn). (3.15)
The labels m
S
e
eE(
S
)
are those dened by T
, m
for the adapted graph
S
. This relation basically resembles the
commutation relations of A
0
LQC
(cp. (2.108)), apart from the complication due to the intersection properties of
and S. Therefore, the center Z
LQG
of A
LQG
is generated by elements W
S
(tn) with t n
]px
= 4i x S. But by
denition 2.24, this is only possible if S is closed and compact, as otherwise n (Ad(P)) is not allowed to be
constant on S. Examples of such closed and compact S are given by embedded compact Riemann surfaces, e.g.
S = S
2
or T
2
. Thus, we have:
Z
LQG
= W
S
(4i), S closed and compact. (3.16)
As in the previous subsection, we conclude that in any irreducible representation of A
LQG
the generators of Z
LQG
are represented by multiples of the identity, i.e.
(W
S
(4i)) = e
iS
,
S
[0, 2) S closed and compact, (3.17)
which implies that any irreducible representation =
is labeled by family of angles :=

S
S
, where we set
S
= 0 if S is not closed and compact.
If we dene a type of (charged) automorphisms
,E
(0) :=
S,E
S
by
S,E
(0) (W
S
(tn)) :=
_
e
i

S
4 vol
E
(0)
(i)
(S)
t
S
E
(0)
(n)
W
S
(tn) S closed and compact
W
S
(tn) otherwise
, (3.18)
for some E
(0)
(T Ad
(P) [[
1
())
7
, we nd a relation analogous to (3.6):
0
=

,E
(0) . (3.19)
Clearly, the Ashtekar-Isham-Lewandowski representation (2.100) is a representation with = 0
S
, and is singled
out by automorphism invariance or dieomorphism and gauge invariance (cf. [12, 13]). The question, if this is the
only representation with = 0
S
, is more subtle, and will be discussed elsewhere. Inspecting (3.18) more closely,
we may even choose
S
,= 0 for arbitrary faces S, and set
S
=
0
S
0,E
(0) (W
S
(tn)) := e
i

0
4 vol
E
(0)
(i)
(S)
t
S
E
(0)
(n)
W
S
(tn) S, (3.20)
which would lead us to the Koslowksi-Sahlmann representations
0,E
(0) =
0

1
0,E
(0)
[24] (see below).
Following the discussion of the previous subsection, we can also ask, whether we can regard A
LQG
as the x-point
algebra of a larger eld algebra F
LQG
under the adjoint action of the generators of the center Z
LQG
. To this end,
we exploit the similarity of (3.15) and (2.108):
First, we use the covering homomorphism
0
: R U(1), e
i
, which coincides with the exponential map
exp : u(1) U(1), to lift the functions F
l
on U(1)
]E(
l
)]
= Hom(l, U(1)) to functions

F
l
:= F
l

]E(
l
)]
0
to R
]E()]
= Hom(l, R). Clearly, the lifting is isometric w.r.t the sup-norm and compatible with the projective
structure of Hom(P
, R). Thus, we are allowed to consider

F
l
as dening a cylindrical function on the latter via
p
l
: Hom(P
, R) Hom(l, R). This is possible, because the construction of A does not require the compactness
of G. Only the construction of the Ashtekar-Isham-Lewandowski measure requires a compact structure group.
7
vol
E
(0)
(i)
(S) :=
S
E
(0)
(i) is the volume of S relative to the pairing of E
(0)
and the generator i of u(1), and serves as a normalization
factor.
LQG
25
Especially, we may lift the spin network functions

T
, m
, which form a subset of the Fourier network functions on
Hom(P
, R):
T
,
(
e
eE()
) :=
eE()
e
iee
,
sa
0
,

= (
e
)
eE()
R
]E()]
,=0
. (3.21)
Second, we note that the action of the Weyl elements W
S
(tn) on the cylindrical functions, which denes the
commutation relation (3.13), is compatible with lift through
0
: R U(1), as well.
(W
S
(tn)

F
S
l
)(
e
eE(
S
l
)
) =

F
S
l
(
e
i
1
2
t(e, S) n
]p
e(0)
eE(
S
l
)
) = F
S
l
(e
ie
e
1
2
t(e,S) n
|p
e(0)
eE(
S
l
)
). (3.22)
Third, we dene the eld algebra F
LQG
to be generated by the Fourier network functions

T
,
and the Weyl elements

W
S
(tn) subject to the equivalent set of relations as in (2.97), but involving the lifted action (3.22).
Remark 3.1:
The lifting of the structure group U(1) to R by the covering homomorphism , requires on the classical level, i.e.
for the construction to be related to structures in principal G-bundles, the existence of a non-trivial covering of the
principal U(1)-bundle P by a principal R-bundle P
R
P
R
id
/

P
R
/
R
P
R
0
()
P
R
/
P
(3.23)
with a diagram of brations:
R
0
/
U(1)
Z
8
'
P
R
R '
(3.24)
By construction, the adjoint action of the generators of Z
LQG
on F
LQG
xes the algebra A
LQG
8
, which we infer
from:
S
m
(T
,
) := W
S
(4i)
m

T
,
W
S
(4i)
m
=
_
_
eE(
S
)
e
2i
S
e
(e,S)m
_
_
T
,
, (3.25)
S
m
(W
S
(tn)) := W
S
(4i)
m
W
S
(tn)W
S
(4i)
m
= W
S
(tn),
where we dened Z-actions
S
: Z Aut(F
LQG
) (the global gauge group) for every closed, compact face
S. On the other hand, we get (charged) automorphisms by the adjoint action of the Fourier network functions
T
,
,

= (
e
2
)
eE()
[0, 1]
]E()]
on A
LQG
:
(T
, m
) :=

T
,
, m

T
,
= T
, m
, (3.26)
(W
S
(tn)) :=

T
,
W
S
(tn)
T
,
=
_
_
eE(
S
)
e
S
e
1
2
t(e,S) n
|p
e(0)
_
_
W
S
(tn).
On the generators of the center Z
LQG
these automorphisms lead to
(W
S
(4i)) := e
i
eE(
S
)
(e,S)
S
e
W
S
(4i) = e
iS
W
S
(4i), (3.27)
8
Strictly speaking, it xes an algebra containing the lift of A
LQG
in F
LQG
.
LQG
26
where we dened
S
:=
eE()
(e, S)
S
e
. Thus, we arrive at a second type of (charged) automorphisms (cp.
(3.18) & (3.20)) labeled by a graph
sa
0
and an associated set of angles
e
eE()
. As in the previous section,
we have (cp. (3.9))
S,E
(0)
S
m
=
S
m

S,E
(0) , (3.28)

S
m
=
S
m

.
Similar to the discussion of -representations of A
0
LQC
, the dierence between representations of A
LQG
with distinct
labels
S
S
, which are regular w.r.t. the Weyl elements W
S
(tn), can be seen on the level of the uxes, e.g. in the
GNS representation of
0
(2.100):
E
,E
(0)
S
(n) = E
S
(n) +i

0
4 vol
E
(0)
(i)
(S)
_
S
E
(0)
(n) (3.29)
E
,
S
(n) = E
S
(n) +
1
4
eE(
S
)
(e, S)
S
e
n
]p
e(0)
.
Actually, this is the starting point for the construction of Koslowski-Sahlmann representations (see below).
3.2.2 G

= K is compact, connected, simply connected and simple
In this subsection, we assume that G

= K is a compact, connected, simply connected and simple Lie group, which
is the most important case for loop quantum gravity, because in a version of the theory in the Ashtekar-Barbero
variables K = SU(2). A variant of loop quantum gravity w.r.t. the new variables has G = Spin
4
[1], which is
compact, connected, simply connected and semi-simple, because Spin
4
= SU(2) SU(2) [60], and thus can be

reduced to the simple case.
In view of the previous subsection, we have additional non-trivial relations among the generators of A
LQG
(cp.
(2.97)):
W
S
(tn)fW
S
(tn)
1
= W
S
(tn) f =
1
2
t n
(f) (3.30)
W
S
(tn)W
S
(t
)W
S
(tn)
1
W
S
(t
)
1
=
1
2
t n

1
2
t
1
2
t n

1
1
2
t
.
As in the case of the Weyl algebra associated with a linear symplectic space (cp. (2.110)), the second relation sets
up a strong relation between the product of Weyl elements W
S
(tn) and the composition of the maps
1
2
t n
, and
thus the group product of K. But, the relation leaves room for the existence of non-trivial central elements.
To be more precise, the existence of the central elements is due to the relations (3.30) and the fact that for a
compact Lie group we can nd 0 ,= X k s.t. exp
K
(X) = 1
K
, because there exist maximal tori in K. Moreover,
since we assume K to be simple, it has a non-degenerate, negative denite (by compactness) Killing form (X, Y )
k
:=
tr
gl(k)
(ad
X
ad
Y
), which is Ad-invariant, i.e. Ad
K
SO(k). This implies, that all elements in the adjoint orbit of
X k, s.t. exp
K
= 1
K
, are mapped to 1
K
:
exp
K
(Ad
g
(X)) =
g
(exp
K
(X)) =
g
(1
K
) = 1
K
, g K. (3.31)
In general, a similar observation can be made for all elements g Z(K), since then Stab(g) = K. But by the rst
line of (3.30), only the cut locus exp
1
K
(1
K
) of 1
K
in k will dene central elements of A
LQG
:
Z
LQG
= W
S
(tn),
1
2
t n
]px
= X exp
1
K
(1
K
) for all reference points p
x
, S closed and compact. (3.32)
The restriction to closed and compact faces S is again necessary, because of the support properties of n. By (3.31),
the Ad-equivariance of n implies that
1
2
t n
]p
exp
1
K
(1
K
) p P. In the case K = SU(2), we have:
exp
1
K
(1
K
) =
_
4(e ) [ e S
2
R
3
,
i
=
i
2
i
_
, (3.33)
LQG
27
where
i
i=1,2,3
are the Pauli matrices. As above, we conclude that Z
LQG
is non-trivial, and that in any irreducible
representation the identities
(W
S
(2X)) = e
iS(2X)
,
S
(2X) [0, 2) X exp
1
K
(1
K
), S closed and compact, (3.34)
hold, with
S
(2X + 2X
) =
S
(2X) +
S
(2X
) mod 2 if X = X
for some R. Unfortunately, we cannot

dene (charged) isomorphisms by the analog of (3.18), because we have non-trivial relations among Weyl elements.
For example, since we have that K is simply connected, we know that Ad(P) is spin [60]. Therefore, we nd that
Ad(P
]S
)

= S k [60], which gives the identication
sa
0
(Ad(P
]S
))

= C
sa
0
(S, k). Now, we specialized to K = SU(2)
choose two constant, ortho-normalized functions f
i
n
C
sa
0
(S, k), i = 1, 2, i.e. (f
i
n
, f
j
n
)
k
=
ij
and f
i
n
(x) = X
i

k x S, and consider the associated Weyl element W
S
(n
i
), i = 1, 2. By the second line of (3.30) and the
Ad-equivariance of n
i
, i = 1, 2, we obtain
W
S
(4n
1
)W
S
(n
2
)W
S
(4n
1
)
1
W
S
(n
2
)
1
= W
S
(2n
2
). (3.35)
On the level of the holonomy-ux algebra, the presence of non-trivial relations is exemplied by (2.99). Clearly, an
analogue of this construction works for G = Spin
4
by the isomorphism Spin
4
= SU(2) SU(2). We summarize this
observation in the following proposition.
Proposition 3.2:
For G compact, connected and simply connected, assume that X g g
X
: Ad
gX
(X) = X. Then, the subgroup
W
0
W , generated by the Weyl elements
W
S
(tn), S closed and compact, n
sa
0
(Ad(P
]S
)) constant w.r.t. some triv. of Ad(P
]S
), (3.36)
is perfect, i.e. [W
0
, W
0
] = W
0
.
Proof:
From the simply connectedness of G, we deduce the triviality of Ad(P
]S
)

= S g, as above. Thus, W
S
(tn) W
0
is determined by a constant function f

n
: S g. By assumption, we are allowed to choose an element g
n
G, s.t.
Ad
gn
(f
n
) = f
n
, and by compactness and connectedness of G, we nd 0 ,= X
n
g, s.t. exp
G
(X
n
) = g
n
. If we
dene a constant section s
n

sa
0
(Ad(P
]S
)) by S x X
n
g, we have
W
S
(s
n
)W
S
(
1
2
tn)W
S
(s
n
)
1
W
S
(
1
2
tn)
1
= W
S
(tn). (3.37)
This implies the proposition.
Corollary 3.3:
By proposition 3.2, representations of A
LQG
with
S
,= 0, for some closed and compact S, cannot be induced by
character automorphisms
(W
S
(tn)) := (W
S
(tn))W
S
(tn) (3.38)
of the Weyl group W , where : W U(1) is a character.
Proof:
The generators of the center Z
LQG
are contained in the subgroup W
0
, which is perfect. Therefore, the restriction
]W0)
is trivial.
Remark 3.4:
The proof of the proposition 3.2 clearly fails in this form for G = SU(2), if we remove the condition that n is
constant. To see this, choose S

= S
2
subordinate to a coordinate chart of , and dene n : S
2
g
= R
3
to be the
(outward) unit normal vector eld on S
2
. This implies that n
]x
= T
x
S
2
. But, TS
2
admits no nowhere vanishing,
continuous section m : S
2
TS
2
, since the Euler characteristic is positive, (S
2
) = 2 [61].
A similar result can formulated for the algebra of ux vector elds X
Flux
(cp. (2.99)).
LQG
28
Proposition 3.5:
Assume that g is perfect, which will be the case, if g is simple or semi-simple, i.e. [g, g] = g. Then, the subalgebra
X
Flux,0
X
Flux
generated by the elements
E
n
(S), S closed and compact, n
sa
0
(Ad(P
]S
]S
), (3.39)
is perfect, i.e. [X
Flux,0
, X
Flux,0
] = X
Flux,0
.
Proof:
This follows immediately from equation (2.99) and the perfectness of g.
Remark 3.6:
The subalgebra X
Flux,0
and subgroup W
0
also exist in the Abelian case, where they admit a natural, heuristic
interpretation in terms of Gau law. Formally, we have W
S
(tn) = e
tEn(S)
, and for S closed and compact, n
sa
0
(Ad(P
]S
)) constant, we nd from the (classical) formula (2.78) and the Gau theorem:
_
V
(div
T
(E))(n) =
_
S
E(n), V = S, (3.40)
where n is extended constantly to the region V bounded by S, and the adjoint bundle is assumed to trivialize over
V , i.e. Ad(P
]V
)

= V g. Thus, X
Flux,0
and subgroup W
0
are quantizations of the smeared Gau constraints
(div
T
(E))
n
(V ) :=
_
V
(div
T
(E))(n), and can serve as implementers of the gauge transformations generated by
n (Ad(P
]V
)), n = constant. This justies the terminology global gauge group for the Z-automorphisms
S
dened by the adjoint action of the center Z
LQG
on the eld algebra F
LQG
:
Z
LQG
G
LQG
= W
0
=
G
sa,0
P
. (3.41)
The relations (3.28) generalize accordingly
S,E
(0)
WS(n)
=
WS(n)

S,E
(0) , (3.42)

WS(n)
=
WS(n)

,
and we conclude that the charge automorphisms are spontaneously broken w.r.t. gauge invariant, pure states .
An interpretation along these lines is not available in the non-Abelian setting, because the Gau law is given by
the vanishing of the smeared horizontal (or covariant) divergences:
_
V
(div
A
T
(E))(n) =
_
V
E(d
A
n) = 0, (A,

E) [[
1
T
A
P
, (3.43)
which spoils the applicability of the Gau theorem. Here,

E(d
A
n) denotes the projection of the right invariant
density

E(d
A
n) on P to (cp. (2.29)).
Corollary 3.7:
There are no representations of P
LQG
satisfying
(E
n
(S)) =
0
(E
n
(S)) +c
n
(S) 1
H
0
, c
n
(S) C, (3.44)
with c
n
(S) ,= 0 for closed and compact S, n
sa
0
(Ad(P
]S
]S
).
0
is the
Ashtekar-Isham-Lewandowski state (2.100)
LQG
29
Proof:
Let E
n
(S) X
Flux,0
. Then, we have by proposition 3.5 and (??):
(E
n
(S)) = ([E
n
, [E
n
(S), E
n
(S)]]) (3.45)
= [(E
n
(S)), [(E
n
(S)), (E
n
(S))]]
= [
0
(E
n
(S)), [
0
(E
n
(S)),
0
(E
n
(S))]]
=
0
([E
n
(S), [E
n
(S), E
n
(S)]])
=
0
(E
n
(S)),
where we chose n
, n
, n
, s.t. [n
, [n
, n
]] = n by the perfectness of g. Thus, c

n
(S) = 0.
Applying the same reasoning to general E
n
(S) X, we conclude, that for arbitrary faces S, we are forced to
set c
n
(S) = 0 n
sa
0
(Ad(P
]S
)), s.t. n [G
sa,0
P
|S
, [G
sa,0
P
|S
, G
sa,0
P
|S
]], where G
sa,0
P
|S
denotes the semi-analytic, compactly
supported gauge algebra of P
]S
(see denition 2.9).
Finally, we want to consider the case G

= K/ A, for some Abelian, nite group A Z(K). With minor modications,
similar results holds for semi-simple K, e.g. Spin
4
. In the same way, as in the discussion of G = U(1), we use the
covering homomorphism
A
: K G to construct a lift of the algebra A
LQG
to an extended algebra F
LQG
. Because
G is compact, the spin network functions of G,
T
,, m,n
(

A) :=
eE()
_
dim(
e
)
e
(g(e,

A, p
x
x
))
me,ne
, (3.46)
generate the algebra Cyl
G
by the Peter-Weyl theorem, where we introduced the notation Cyl
G
to indicate the
Lie group the cylindrical functions are based on. Here, we denote by
e
( . )
me,ne
, e E(), a matrix entry of a
non-trivial, unitary, irreducible representation of G. Therefore, we only need to dene the lifts of these functions
and the Weyl elements. The lift of a spin network function is dened via pullback:
T
,, m,n
(g
e
eE()
) :=
eE()
_
dim(
e
)
e
(
A
(k
e
))
me,ne
, k
e
eE()
K
]E()]
, (3.47)
which embeds these function, isometrically w.r.t. sup-norm, into the spin network functions of K, and is compatible
with the projective structure of Hom(P
, K):
T
, ,
i,
j
(k
e
eE()
) :=
eE()
_
dim(
e
)
e
(k
e
)
ie,je
, [
e
]
eE()
(
K [
triv
])
]E()]
, k
e
eE()
K
]E()]
.
(3.48)
The naturalness of the exponential maps, exp
G
d
A]1K
=
A
exp
K
, and the fact that d
A]1K
: k g is an
isomorphism, gives rise to a compatible action of the Weyl elements:
(W
S
(tn)

T
S
,, m,n
)(k
e
eE(
S
)
) =

T
S
,, m,n
(k
e
exp
K
(
1
2
t(e, S)(d
A]1K
)
1
( n
]p
e(0)
))
eE(
S
)
) (3.49)
= T
S
,, m,n
(
A
(k
e
) exp
G
(
1
2
t(e, S) n
]p
e(0)
)
eE(
S
)
).
This action respects the Ad-equivariance of n, because Ad
k
= (d
A]1K
)
1
Ad
A(g)
d
A]1K
, k K. The eld
algebra F
LQG
is dened as the algebra generated by the cylindrical functions on Hom(P
, K) and the Weyl elements

of A
LQG
subject to the relations (2.97) and the compatible action (3.49).
In view of remark 3.1, the construction requires on the level of the principal G-bundle P the existence of a non-trivial
covering
P
K
/
K
id
/

P
K
/
R
k
P
R
A
(k)
P
K
/
P
(3.50)
LQG
30
with a diagram of brations:
K
A
/
G
A
7
'
P
K
/
K '
P
_xq
q
q
q
q
q
(3.51)
The fact that Ad : K Aut(K) descends to the central quotient G

= K/ A, since ker(Ad) = Z(K), implies the
equivalence of the adjoint bundles of P and P
K
:
Ad(P)

= Ad(P
K
). (3.52)
Thus, we can regard the eld algebra F
LQG
as the a Weyl algebra of P
K
. The algebra A
LQG
embeds into F
LQG
via
the lifting procedure, and its image is contained in x-point algebra under the adjoint action of the generators of
Z
LQG
, i.e. W
S
(tn),
1
2
t n = X exp
1
G
(1
G
), S closed and compact:
S
m
(T
, ,
i,
j
) := W
S
(tn)
m

T
, ,
i,
j
W
S
(tn)
m
= W
S
(tn)
m

T
, ,
i,
j
, (3.53)
S
m
(W
S
(t
)) := W
S
(tn)
m
W
S
(t
)W
S
(tn)
m
= W
S
(t
), W
S
(tn) Z
LQG
, m Z.
In fact, the rst line of (3.53) is trivial for those irreducible representations
e
, e E(), of K that are trivial on
A, which are precisely the irreducible representation of G. Moreover, the algebra F
LQG
is not equal to the x-point
algebra, which can be seen by considering the action (3.53) on spin network functions

T
e,e,ie,je
dened on single
edges e P
. The actions of the gauge transformations G

sa
PK
and G
sa
P
are compatible with the covering, as we will
show next.
Lemma 3.8:
Given a bundle covering : P
K
P as in (3.50) & (3.51), every
K
G
sa
PK
induces a (
K
)
G
G
sa
P
by
(
K
)
G
(p) := (
K
(q)) (3.54)
for some q P
K
, s.t. (q) = p. The map ( . )
G
: G
sa
PK
G
sa
P
is a homomorphism.
Proof:
Clearly, (3.54) is well-dened: If q
P
K
is another element, s.t. (q
) = p, we know by (3.51) that q
= qa, a A.
This implies:
(
K
(q
)) = (
K
(qa)) (3.55)
= (
K
(q)a)
= (
K
(q))
A
(a)
= (
K
(q)).
Semi-analyticity follows from the semi-analyticity of the involved maps, and we have (
K
)
1
G
= (
1
K
)
G
, (
K
K
)
G
=
(
K
)
G
(
K
)
G
. Now, we only need to verify that (
K
)
G
is a right equivariant bundle map covering the identity.
((
K
)
G
(p)) = ((
K
(q))) (3.56)
=
K
(
K
(q))
=
K
(q)
= ((q))
= (p), q P
K
: (q) = p
(
K
)
G
(pg) = (
K
(qk)) (3.57)
= (
K
(q))
A
(k)
= (
K
)
G
(p)g, q P
K
: (q) = p, k K :
A
(k) = g.
LQG
31
The lemma tells us that the action of G
sa
PK
on A
LQG
F
LQG
descends to the action of induced gauge transformations
in G
sa
P
. If we assume that P
K
and P are path-connected, we may conclude that ( . )
G
: G
sa
PK
G
sa
P
is onto.
Proposition 3.9 (Lifting of gauge transformations):
Assume that P
K
and P are path-connected. Given
G
G
sa
P
and two points q, q
P
K
, s.t.
G
((q)) = (q
), there
exist a unique lift

G
G
sa
PK
, s.t.
G
=
G
and

G
(q) = q
. The diagram of pointed spaces is

(P
K
, q
(P
K
, q)
G
9
G
/
(P, p)
(3.58)
Proof:
Form the assumptions, we deduce the existence of a lift

G
Di
sa
((P
K
, q), (P
K
, q
)) by the lifting theorem for

covering spaces [62], which applies, because [
G
](
1
(P
K
, q)) = [](
1
(P
K
, q
)) since
G
is a dieomorphisms.
That

G
covers the identity, is evident from the denition of the lift:
G
=

G
(3.59)
=
G

=
=
K
.
Finally, we need to check that

G
is right equivariant. We know that k K : R
k

G
and

G
R
k
are lifts of
G
R
A(k)
by the equivariance of
G
. Furthermore, we nd R
k
(
G
(q)) = q
k and

G
(R
k
(q)) = q
ka(q) for some

continuous a : P
K
A. But, A is discrete by assumption, which implies q P
K
: a(q) = a
0
A. Thus, we have
k K :

G
R
k
= R
a0
R
k

G
, which leads to a
0
= 1
K
for k = 1
K
and the free action of K on P
K
.
A similar reasoning applies to the actions of the automorphisms Aut
sa
(P
K
) and Aut
sa
(P).
Candidates for (charged) automorphisms of A
LQG
can be dened by unitary cylindrical function f on Hom(P
, K)
that do not descend through A, i.e. f = p
l
f
l
Cyl
K
s.t. f
l

f
l
= 1 and f
l
does not dene a function on G
]E(
l
)]
:
f
(T
,, m,n
) := f T
,, m,n
f
= T
,, m,n
, (3.60)
f
(W
S
(tn)) := f W
S
(tn) f
= f(W
S
(tn) f
)W
S
(tn).
Two examples of such functions are:
f
, ,
i,
j
:= e
i(T
, ,
i,
j
)
, (3.61)
f
, ,
i,
j
:= e
i(T
, ,
i,
j
)
,
for irreducible representations
e
, e E(), of K that do not reduce to G. To arrive at a true automorphism of
A
LQG
, we need to ensure that W
S
(tn) : f(W
S
(tn) f
) gives a cylindrical function on Hom(P
, G). We call
functions f Cyl
K
satisfying these requirements (K, A)-admissible, and denote them by U(Cyl
K
)
A
. Examples
of (K, A)-admissible functions could be generated from 1-dimensional, unitary representations : K T, s.t.
] A
,= 1. But, unfortunately compact, connected, semi-simple Lie groups are (topologically) perfect, and thus do
not posses non-trivial 1-dimensional, unitary representations [63]. Therefore it seems possible that there are no
(K, A)-admissible functions, i.e. U(Cyl
K
)
A
= . Nevertheless, we observe that U(Cyl
K
)
A
is preserved by gauge
transformations and automorphisms (see lemma 3.8).
Thus, we conclude the section with the observation that for structure groups G admitting non-trivial coverings :
K G, together with a bundle covering (3.50) & (3.51), we can construct an embedding of algebras A
LQG
F
LQG
,
which allows to construct candidates for (charged) automorphisms
f
, f Cyl
K
as in (3.60). If we nd among the
latter a true automorphism of A
LQG
that acts non-trivially on the center Z
LQG
, we will obtain a new irreducible
32
representations of A
LQG
from the state (cp. (2.100)):
f
:=
0

f
. (3.62)
Let us also shortly comment on the issue of gauge and automorphism invariance of the state
f
. From the invariance
of
0
, we nd:
1 (f)
(3.63)
1 (f)
, G
sa
PK
, Di
sa
().
Thus, gauge invariance could be achieved by the additional requirement
(f) = f G
sa
PK
, although it is
not obvious that this condition can be satised non-trivially in combination with the additional constraints on
f. Requiring automorphism invariance poses a much more severe constraint, because the analogous requirement
(f) = f Aut
sa
(P) can probably not be satised non-trivially [64], i.e. it leads to f 1.
In general, we could follow the same strategy as in [24] to obtain a unitary implementation of the gauge transforma-
tions and automorphisms in a representation constructed from states of the form (3.62). That is, we make use of the
Ashtekar-Isham-Lewandowski representation (H
0
,
0
,
0
) of the eld algebra F
LQG
, w.r.t. which the (charged)
automorphisms
f
, f U(Cyl
K
)
A
, of A
LQG
are unitarily implemented, because they are inner automorphisms of
F
LQG
. Therefore, we nd A
LQG
-invariant subspaces
H
f
:=
0
(f
)(
0
(A
LQG
)
0
),
f
:=
0] H
f
. (3.64)
The implementers of the gauge transformations and automorphisms U(), G
sa
PK
, and U(), Aut
sa
(P
K
)
map these subspaces into each other according to (3.63):
U() H
f
= U()
0
(f
)(
0
(A
LQG
)
0
) (3.65)
=
0
(
(f
))(
0
(
(A
LQG
))
0
)
=
0
(
(f)
)(
0
(A
LQG
)
0
)
= H
(f)
U() H
f
= U()
0
(f
)(
0
(A
LQG
)
0
)
=
0
(
(f
))(
0
(
(A
LQG
))
0
)
=
0
(
(f)
)(
0
(A
LQG
)
0
)
= H
(f)
.
If we denote by [f] the equivalence class of f U(Cyl
K
)
A
under the actions of G
sa
PK
and Aut
sa
(P
K
), we can form
the direct sum
H
[f]
:=
[f]
H
f
,
[f]
:=
[f]
f
. (3.66)
This gives us a (reducible) representation of A
LQG
with a unitary implementation of G
sa
PK
and Aut
sa
(P
K
). On it,
we can apply the usual group averaging procedure to obtain gauge or automorphism invariant spaces (H
G
), (H)
Aut
(cf. [4, 14]).
4 The Koslowski-Sahlmann representations
Now, we turn to the discussion of the Koslowski-Sahlmann representations, mainly for non-Abelian structure group
G, [24] in view of the results of the previous section. The discussion will be split into two parts related to a similar
division in [24]:
1. Central extensions of holonomy-ux algebras an non-degenerate backgrounds,
2. Weyl forms of the holonomy-ux algebra and non-degenerate backgrounds.
4.1 Central extensions of holonomy-ux algebras and non-degenerate backgrounds 33
4.1 Central extensions of holonomy-ux algebras and non-degenerate backgrounds
The holonomy-ux algebras considered in [24] are essentially of the form, we dened in subsection 2.2 (see 2.28).
That is, the algebras are generated by elements f Cyl
, Y
n
(S), S a face, n
sa
0
(Ad(P
]S
)) together with the
commutation relation
[Y
n
(S), f] = E
n
(S) f, [f, f
] = 0 (4.1)
and the reality and linearity conditions
f
=

f, Y
n
(S)
= Y
n
(S), Y
n+n
(S) = Y
n
(S) +Y
n
(S). (4.2)
But, in contrast to denition 2.28, the higher commutation relations for the elements Y
n
(S) are not specied, but
only required to satisfy the Jacobi identity, i.e.
[[Y
n
(S), Y
n
(S
)], f] = [Y
n
(S), [Y
n
(S
), f]] [Y
n
(S
), [Y
n
(S), f]] (4.3)
= [E
n
(S), E
n
(S)]
X(A)
f,
and similar higher order relations. While, in the case of an Abelian structure group, e.g. G = U(1), this poses no
specic constraints
9
on the algebraic relations for the elements Y
n
(S) to make the Koslowski-Sahlmann represen-
tations well-dened, this is not the case for a non-Abelian structure group, e.g. G = SU(2). In the latter case, we
nd (cp. (2.99)):
[[Y
n
(S), [Y
n
(S), Y
n
(S)]], f] = [E
n
(S), [E
n
(S), E
n
(S)]
X(A)
]
X(A)
f (4.4)
=
1
4
E
[n,[n
,n
]]
(S) f
=
1
4
[Y
[n,[n
,n
]]
(S), f].
Thus, we are forced to require the additional relation
[Y
n
(S), [Y
n
(S), Y
n
(S)]] =
1
4
Y
[n,[n
,n
]]
(S) +c
[n,[n
,n
]]
(S), (4.5)
where c
[n,[n
,n
]]
(S) is an element of the algebra that commutes with the subalgebra Cyl
. If we additionally assume
that c
[n,[n
,n
]]
(S) commutes with the generators Y
m
(S), the Jacobi identity will give us a co-cycle condition:
c
[n,[n
,n
]]
(S) +c
[n
,[n
,n]]
(S) +c
[n
,[n,n
]]
(S) = 0. (4.6)
Clearly, c
[n,[n
,n
]]
(S) also needs to satisfy linearity conditions related to (4.2), as well. Having said this, we return to
the Koslowski-Sahlmann representations, which are proposed to be dened by an E
(0)
(TAd
(P) [[
1
()):
E
(0) (Y
n
(S)) :=
0
(E
n
(S)) +i
_
S
E
(0)
(n) 1
H
0
, (4.7)
E
(0) (f) :=
0
(f),
w.r.t. to the Ashtekar-Isham-Lewandowski representation (
0
, H
0
,
0
). A similar construction applies in the
temporal gauge to algebraic formulation of quantum electrodynamics [31]. The interpretation of these representation
is obtained from the consideration of the limit
lim
R
(
0

E
(0) )(W
SR
(n)) = e
i(n)
(4.8)
in the Abelian case (cp. (3.18)) for = R
3
, where we chose S
R
= S
2
R
, n = n(, ), ( n, n)
g
= 1, E
(0)
]S
2
(r, , )
(,)
r
2
. Thus, the choice of E
(0)
aects the asymptotic ux conguration (cp. [65]).
We will analyze the Koslowski-Sahlmann representations of the holonomy-ux algebras, in the above sense, from two
dierent, though related, points of view. First, we will argue that the Koslowski-Sahlmann representations require
9
Although, we are allowed to consider modications, e.g. a central extension [Yn(S), Y
n
(S
)] = c
[n,n
]
(S, S
).
a modication of the commutation relations by a non-trivial central term, if we want the Y
n
(S) to correspond to
the uxes E
n
(S). Second, we will show, that we can interpret the Y
n
(S) as shifted uxes E
n
(S) + i
_
S
E
(0)
(n),
which leads to the conclusion that the Koslowski-Sahlmann representations are the Ashtekar-Isham-Lewandowski
representations w.r.t. the shifted uxes. The two points are related by the observation that the shift transformation
E
(0) : E
n
(S) E
n
(S) +i
_
S
E
(0)
(n) (4.9)
is not a *-automorphism of P
LQG
but only an ane transformation. Thus, in contrast to section 3 the charge
transformations
E
(0) are already broken on the level of the algebra P
LQG
, and not on the level of a state or
representation.
As we discussed in subsection 3.2.1, the Koslowski-Sahlmann representations can be understood in terms of charged
automorphisms of the Weyl algebra A
LQG
(c 0) in the Abelian case (cp. (3.20) & (3.29)). In the non-Abelian
setting, the question, whether (4.7) denes representations of a holonomy-ux algebra is more subtle, because of
(4.5):
E
(0) ([Y
n
(S), [Y
n
(S), Y
n
(S)]]) = [
E
(0) (Y
n
(S), )[
E
(0) (Y
n
(S)),
E
(0) (Y
n
(S))]] (4.10)
=
0
([E
n
(S), [E
n
(S), E
n
(S)]
X(A)
]
X(A)
)
=
1
4
0
(E
[n,[n
,n
]]
(S)),
E
(0) ([Y
n
(S), [Y
n
(S), Y
n
(S)]]) =
E
(0) (Y
[n,[n
,n
]]
(S)) +
E
(0) (c
[n,[n
,n
]]
(S)) (4.11)
=
1
4
0
(E
[n,[n
,n
]]
(S)) +
i
4
_
S
E
(0)
([n, [n
, n
]]) 1
H
0
+
E
(0) (c
[n,[n
,n
]]
(S)).
Therefore, we nd, that the Koslowski-Sahlmann representations require the presence of a non-trivial central term
in the higher commutation relations (cp. corollary 3.7):
E
(0) (c
[n,[n
,n
]]
(S)) =
i
4
_
S
E
(0)
([n, [n
, n
]]) 1
H
0
. (4.12)
This relation could be easily satised by
c
E
(0)
[n,[n
,n
]]
(S) =
i
4
_
S
E
(0)
([n, [n
, n
]]) 1,
E
(0) (c
[n,[n
,n
]]
(S)) =
0
(c
E
(0)
[n,[n
,n
]]
(S)), (4.13)
which satises the co-cycle condition due to the linearity of the integral and the Jacobi identity of [ . , . ] : g g
g. But, we would still have to check that there is compatible denition for [Y
n
(S), Y
n
(S)], and that there are no
other higher order relations in conict with it. Moreover, we have to extend the actions of the gauge transformation
G
sa
P
and automorphisms Aut
sa
(P) to account for the central term.
(c
[n,[n
,n
]]
(S)) := c
[n,[n
,n
]]
(S) (4.14)
(c
[n,[n
,n
]]
(S)) := c
[n,[n
,n
]]
(
1
(S)), G
sa
P
, Aut
sa
(P),
where we assumed that the actions are natural w.r.t. to the generators Y
n
(S), i.e. identical to those on the ux vector
elds E
n
(S) (see denition 2.29). Unfortunately, this leads to the conclusion that (4.13) and (4.14) are incompatible,
i.e. the central term cannot be proportional to the unit element. Moreover, the unitary implementers of the gauge
transformations and automorphisms in the Ashtekar-Isham-Lewandowski representation are not compatible with
the choice (4.12), and an extension like (4.14) for generic E
(0)
:
E
(0) (
(c
[n,[n
,n
]]
(S))) =
i
4
_
S
E
(0)
( [n, [n
, n
]]) 1
H
0
(4.15)
=
i
4
_
S
( E
(0)
)([n, [n
, n
]]) 1
H
0
,= U
0
()
_
i
4
_
S
E
(0)
([n, [n
, n
]]) 1
H
0
_
U
0
()
= U
0
()
E
(0) (c
[n,[n
,n
]]
(S))U
0
()
E
(0) (
(c
[n,[n
,n
]]
(S))) =
i
4
_
(S)
E
(0)
(
[n, [n
, n
]]) 1
H
0
(4.16)
=
i
4
_
S
(
E
(0)
)([n, [n
, n
]]) 1
H
0
,= U
0
()
_
i
4
_
S
E
(0)
([n, [n
, n
]]) 1
H
0
_
U
0
()
= U
0
()
E
(0) (c
[n,[n
,n
]]
(S))U
0
()
.
The latter issue can be xed in the same way a proposed in [24], i.e. the unitary implementers intertwine between
representations with dierent background.
E
(0) (
(Y
n
(S))) = U
0
()
E
(0) (Y
n
(S))U
0
()
, (4.17)
E
(0) (
(c
[n,[n
,n
]]
(S))) = U
0
()
E
(0) (c
[n,[n
,n
]]
(S))U
0
()
E
(0) (
(Y
n
(S))) = U
0
()
E
(0) (Y
n
(S))U
0
()
, (4.18)
E
(0) (
(c
[n,[n
,n
]]
(S))) = U
0
()
E
(0) (c
[n,[n
,n
]]
(S))U
0
()
.
The second way of thinking about the Koslowski-Sahlmann representations, which is more along the lines of section
3, is oered by the following observation:
There is a shift transformation of the holonomy-ux algebra P
LQG
dened by:
E
(0) (E
n
(S)) := E
n
(S) + i
_
S
E
(0)
(n) 1, (4.19)
E
(0) (f) := f.
It resembles the (classical) moment map problem, i.e. the association of a phase space function with a Hamiltonian
vector eld is only unique up to constant terms. By the same argument as before, this transformation is not a
*-automorphism of the holonomy-ux algebra P
LQG
, but only an ane transformation:
E
(0) ([E
n
(S), [E
n
(S), E
n
(S)]]) ,= [
E
(0) (E
n
(S)), [
E
(0) (E
n
(S)),
E
(0) (E
n
(S))]], (4.20)
and we will be forced to introduce central elements as above, if we want it to be a *-isomorphism. Thus, the
shift transformations
E
(0) can be considered as charge transformations that are already broken on the level of the
algebra P
LQG
. The Koslowski-Sahlmann representations arise by the identication Y
n
(S) =
E
(0) (E
n
(S)) and the
use of the Ashtekar-Isham-Lewandowski representation (
0
, H
0
,
0
). In terms of an algebraic state , we have:
(fY
n1
(S
1
)...Y
nj
(S
j
)) =
_
0
(f)
_
i
_
S1
E
(0)
(n
1
)
_
...
_
i
_
Sj
E
(0)
(n
j
)
_
if 1, .., j =
0 else
, (4.21)
for every f Cyl
, Y
n1
(S
1
)...Y
nj
(S
j
) X
Flux
.
Let us summarize our ndings in this subsection:
1. The Koslowski-Sahlmann representations require, at least, the modication of the commutation relations of
the standard holonomy-ux algebra (see denition 2.28) by a central term (4.5) to be well-dened (cp.
4.2 Weyl form of the holonomy-ux algebras and non-degenerate backgrounds 36
corollary 3.7) w.r.t. the identication Y
n
(S) = E
n
(S). But, it is so far unclear, whether the addition of a
central term suces to satisfy all relation imposed by higher order commutators.
2. If the extension exists, and the central term commutes with the generators Y
n
(S), it has to satisfy the
co-cycle condition (4.6). The actions of the gauge transformations and automorphisms have to be modied
to account for the presence of the central term. If the gauge transformations and automorphisms are
supposed to act naturally on the generators Y
n
(S), i.e. the actions are identical to those on the ux vector
elds E
n
(S), the standard unitary implementers of both groups of transformations in the Koslowski-Sahlmann
representations do not implement the modied actions, but intertwine between dierent backgrounds.
3. The Koslowski-Sahlmann representations can be viewed as an instance of the Ashtekar-Isham-Lewandowski
representation after shifting the generators of P
LQG
by
E
(0) . But, the shift transformation is not a *-
automorphism, and thus broken on the level of the algebra.
4. An important dierence between the rst and the second point of view is the relation to gauge and au-
tomorphism invariance, because the second perspective does not allow to treat dierent choices of E
(0)
as
representations of the same generators, i.e.
E
(0) (E
n
(S)) ,=
E
(0) (E
n
(S)) for generic E
(0)
,= E
(0)
. Al-
though, the various generators are realized in the Ashtekar-Isham-Lewandowski representation, there is only
the standard vacuum
0
. Thus, a treatment along the lines of [24] requires the rst attitude towards the
Koslowski-Sahlmann representations.
4.2 Weyl form of the holonomy-ux algebras and non-degenerate backgrounds
Regarding the Weyl form of the holonomy-ux algebra in relation to non-degenerate backgrounds, we will only
comment on the version dened by Fleischhack in [13]. Koslowski and Sahlmann also consider a dierent version
generated by exponentials of area operators, which we will not discuss in this article (cf. [24]).
The C
-Weyl algebra dened by Fleischhack is similar to the concrete realization of the algebra A
LQG
for G = SU(2)
via the Ashtekar-Isham-Lewandowski representation, i.e.
0
(A
LQG
)
]] . ]]
B(H
0
)
B(H
0
). (4.22)
Especially, both algebras contain the perfect subgroup of Weyl elements
0
(W
0
) (see proposition 3.2). Thus, by
corollary 3.3, there is a severe constraint on the denition of new representations via character automorphisms (3.38)
as suggested in [24]. This observation is in accordance with the result of the previous subsection that the Koslowski-
Sahlmann representations for holonomy-ux algebras cannot be dened for the algebra P
LQG
. Therefore, it appears
to be necessary to look for Weyl forms of the (possibly) modied holonomy-ux algebras proposed above. On the
other hand, there is the second possibility, in analogy with the preceding discussion, to consider the representation
of Weyl form A
LQG
dened by the state
0
(fV
S1
(n
1
)...V
Sj
(n
j
)) =
0
(f) e
i
S
1
E
(0)
(n1)
... e
i
S
j
E
(0)
(nj)
, f Cyl, V
S1
(n
1
)...V
Sj
(n
j
) A
LQG
(4.23)
w.r.t. the shifted generators V
n
(S) := e
i
S
E
(0)
(n)
W
n
(S). The GNS representation realizes the Koslowski-Sahlmann
representation with E
(0)
for A
LQG
:
(V
n
(S)) = e
i
S
E
(0)
(n)
0
(W
n
(S)) (4.24)
(f) =
0
(f),
but again the shift transformation W
n
(S) V
n
(S) is not a *-automorphism of A
LQG
.
5 Chiral symmetry breaking and -vacua in loop quantum gravity
In the last section of this article, we would like to present another application of the relation between central
operators and representation theory (see section 3), and outline a setup for the discussion of chiral symmetry
breaking and occurrence of -vacua in the framework of loop quantum gravity. This setup is inspired by and
strongly resembles a discussion of these topics in the setting of algebraic quantum eld theory, which was given by
Morchio and Strocchi in [35] (see also [34] for the original account on the ideas involving the topology of the gauge
LQG
37
group without the use of semi-classical approximations).
Let us briey, recall the problem of chiral symmetry breaking and the -vacuum structure in quantum eld theory.
If we consider a eld theory on Minkowski space M in the temporal gauge given in terms of gauge eld variables
(A, E) chirally coupled to fermion eld variables (,

) (notably the standard model), we will have a chiral symmetry
associated with the transformation
() := e
5
,
(A) := A (5.1)
) :=

e
5
,
(E) := E,
where
5
=
5
. If this symmetry were preserved in the quantization of the eld theory, we would expect the
presence of associated parity doublets. In the case of the standard model, such parity doublets are missing, and
the chiral symmetry is said to be broken. Since the standard model is also missing Goldstone bosons related to
breaking of the chiral symmetry, we arrive at the so-called axial U(1)-problem [66], the solution of which is argued
to be the chiral anomaly and its relation to the large gauge transformations [34, 67] in standard treatments. The
arguments goes, loosely speaking, as follows [34]:
The regularized expression for the symmetry generating axial current j
5
= i
acquires the famous gauge

dependent axial anomaly, which is crucial for the theoretical explanation of the
0
decay:
j
5
= 2P = 2
, (5.2)
where P denotes the Pontryagin density, which equals the divergence of the Chern-Simons form
C
=
1
16
2
tr(F
A

2
3
A
) (5.3)
Thus, the conserved current J
5
:= j
5
+ 2C
gives rise to a gauge dependent symmetry generator

10
Q
5
=
_
J
5
0
d
3
x

J
5
0
+ 2n
[]
, G
0
(5.4)
and is therefore rejected. Here, n
[]
is the winding number of the extension of to the 1-point compactication
R
3
= R
3
= S
3
, i.e. : S
3
=

R
3
G, which is dened by () = 1
G
, since diers from 1
G
only on a
compact set.
On the other hand, it is argued in [35] that this line of thought is incomplete in view of the results of Bardeen [70],
who showed that J
5
gives rise to a well-dened symmetry on the observable algebra in perturbation theory in

local gauges. Furthermore, in [35] Morchio and Strocchi put forward a way to close this gap, which we will argue
could apply in the framework of loop quantum gravity, as well. This is of particular interest in the setting of
deparametrizing models, which provide an arena for the discussion of the standard model and related theories
in the context of loop quantum gravity (see [36] for a review), and for which the Ashtekar-Isham-Lewandowski
representation can provide the physical Hilbert space.
The main ingredients necessary for a discussion of chiral symmetry breaking along the lines of [35], are an algebra
of (localized) observables A, containing unitary elements U() implementing the (localized) gauge transformations
G
0
, and a 1-parameter group of chiral automorphisms
: A A, interacting non-trivially with elements associated

with large gauge transformation , 0 ,= []
3
(G)(

= Z in many relevant cases, e.g. SU(n), n 2):
(U()) = e
i2n
[]
U(). (5.5)
In the following, we will argue that, if we assume the existence of a 1-parameter group of automorphisms of the
form (5.5) for the algebra A
LQG
(or a slightly extended version of it), we will have all ingredients at our disposal.
A discussion of the possibility to obtain a chiral symmetry (5.5) in loop quantum gravity will be given elsewhere.
LQG
We start our discussion with the observation that the algebra A
LQG
admits an extension by operators U(),
G
sa,0
P
, representing the semi-analytic, compactly supported gauge transformations, in the following way:
10
The expression for Q
5
is heuristic, but there are known strategies to regularize such expressions [68, 69].
3
& P = R
3
G 38
Denition 5.1:
The extension G
sa,0
P
A
LQG
of A
LQG
is given along the lines of denition 2.30, but with the additional elements
U(), G
sa,0
P
and relations
U()
= U(
1
), U(
) = U(
)U(), (5.6)
U()f =
(f)U(), U()W
S
(tn) =
(W
S
(tn))U(),
for any f, W
S
(tn) A
LQG
. The action of the automorphims Aut
sa
(P) extends to this algebra by conjugation on the
gauge transformations G
sa,0
P
, i.e.
(U()) = U(
1
). (5.7)
Evidently, there is an analogous construction on the basis of the holonomy-ux algebra P
LQG
, and it is possible to
extend by the automorphisms Aut
sa
(P) in a similar way. As a simple corollary we have:
Corollary 5.2:
The Ashtekar-Isham-Lewandowski representation (
0
, H
0
,
0
) extends to a representation of G
sa,0
P
A
LQG
of
A
LQG
, which can be dened by the (algebraic) state:
ext
0
(fW
S
(n)...W
S
(n
)U()) =
0
(f), f Cyl, W
S
(n)...W
S
(n
), U() G
sa,0
P
A
LQG
. (5.8)
Proof:
This is immediate from the invariance properties of
0
.
Interestingly, if we extend the algebra A
LQG
only by the subgroup of gauge transformations close to the identity
Gauss
P
:= exp
GP
(G
P
), this will correspond to the inclusion of (smeared) generators of the gauge transformation
into P
LQG
, and ts with their separate quantization (cf. [4], cp. also (2.61)):
G
V
() :=
_
V
div
A
T
(E)(),
sa
0
(Ad(P
]V
)), V open and semi-analytic. (5.9)
Thus, the extension Gauss
P
A
LQG
appears to be natural from the point of view that the algebra A
LQG
contains
(smeared) functions of the (classical) variables (A,

E) [[
1
T
A
P
.
3
& P = R
3
G
For the discussion of chiral symmetry breaking in the context of loop quantum gravity it is important to note, that
the formalism, recalled here, is capable of treating gravitational and Yang-Mills degrees of freedom at the same
time. At the given structural level, this is reected in the choice of structure group G. Further dierences would
arise at the level of dynamics and the associated Hamiltonian constraints. In the following, we will not distinguish
between the dierent types of degrees of freedom, and therefore in principle allow for chiral symmetry breaking
w.r.t. the gravitational degrees of freedom. Furthermore, it is possible to include fermions into the treatment
(cf. [71]), which points out a potential direction to investigate the existence of a gauge dependent chiral symmetry
(5.5). Interestingly, the anomaly (5.2) can be generated by a gauge invariant regularization procedure by point-split
objects like
j
5
(e(1), e(0)) = i
(e(1))
5
hol
A
e
(e(0)), (5.10)
which have natural analogs in the loop quantum gravity framework (cf. [7274]). But, these objects behave com-
plicated w.r.t. general automorphisms Aut
sa
(P) [71], which might restrict their applicability to deparametrized
models.
Let us now turn to the mechanism for chiral symmetry breaking in the loop quantum gravity framework. To simplify
the discussion, we will restrict to a spatial manifold = R
3
and a trivial bundle P = R
3
G. The quantum eld
algebra will be Gauss
P
A
LQG
or G
sa,0
P
A
LQG
, and the existence of a chiral symmetry
R
with the property
(5.5) will be assumed in the latter case.
This has the important implication, that G
sa,0
P
= C
sa
0
(R
3
, G). Thus every G
sa,0
P
determines uniquely a map (see
3
& P = R
3
G 39
above)
g
:

R
3
= S
3
G, (5.11)
and a homotopy class [] := [g
]
3
(G). From this point on, let us assume that
3
(G)

= Z, which holds for
G = SU(n), n 2 or G = SO(n), n 3, n ,= 4
11
. Then, [] is uniquely determined by the winding number or
instanton number [75]
n
[]
:=
1
24
2
_
R
3
tr(g
1
dg
g
1
dg
g
1
dg
). (5.12)
Gauge transformations with n
[]
,= 0 are called large gauge transformations.
Next, we analyze the dierence between Gauss
P
-invariance and gauge invariance for Gauss
P
A
LQG
. Again, the
argument follows Morchio and Strocchi [35], who exploit the localization properties of operators in the quantum
algebra, which is also possible for the algebra Gauss
P
A
LQG
.
Lemma 5.3:
Any Gauss
P
-invariant state on Gauss
P
A
LQG
is also gauge invariant, and the large gauge transformations
are unitarily implemented in the GNS representation (
, H
). Furthermore, any Gauss

P
-invariant operator in
Gauss
P
A
LQG
is also gauge invariant.
Proof:
Let C
sa
0
(R
3
, G) be a large gauge transformation, and dene
a
(x) = (x a), x, a R
3
. Then,
1
a
and
1
a
are Gauss
P
transformations. This implies
(
)(f) = (
)(
1
a
f
(f)) (5.13)
= (
1
a
f
)(f)
= (f)
(
)(W
S
(tn)) = (
)(
1
a
S,n
(W
S
(tn))) (5.14)
= (
1
a
S,n
)(W
S
(tn))
= (W
S
(tn)).
(
)(U(
)) = (
)(
1
a
(U(
))) (5.15)
= (
1
a
)(U(
))
= (U(
)),
where f, W
S
(tn), U(
) are generators of Gauss

P
A
LQG
, and we chose a
f
, a
S,n
, a
R
3
in accordance with
the respective localization regions. The unitary implementability follows from a standard argument. The other
statement follows from the same argument.
The implementers of the (large) gauge transformations are unique up to phases in irreducible (or factorial) repre-
sentations, i.e. w.r.t. to pure (or primary), Gauss
P
-invariant states , of Gauss
P
A
LQG
.
In view of this result, and corollary 5.2, we will use the algebra G
sa,0
P
A
LQG
to discuss the spontaneous breakdown
of the chiral symmetry and its relation to the topology of G
sa,0
P
. To this end, we need a further result concerning
the implementers of the (large) gauge transformations.
Proposition 5.4 (cp. [35]):
In a GNS representation of a Gauss
P
-invariant state with Gauss
P
-invariant GNS-vacuum
(U())
, Gauss
P
, (5.16)
11
Note that this excludes the case G = Spin
4
,
3
(Spin
4
)

= Z Z, which is important in the treatment of the new variables [1].
3
& P = R
3
G 40
the implementers
(U()) of the gauge transformations G

sa,0
P
are of the form:
(U())
= C
n
[]
. (5.17)
The non-trivial elements C
n
[]
are central, and belong to the strong closure of
(G
sa,0
P
A
LQG
). Furthermore, we
have
C
n
[]
C
n
[
]
= C
n
[]
+n
[
]
. (5.18)
Proof:
For G
sa,0
P
, we (densely) dene
S
()
(O)
(O))
, O G
sa,0
P
A
LQG
. (5.19)
Clearly, S
() is isometric on dense subspace of H
, and extends to an unitary element of B(H
), which we denote
by S
(), as well. Then, by the same argument as in lemma 5.3, we have

S
() = s-lim
]a]
(U(
1
a
)). (5.20)
This operator has the properties
S
()
(O)S
()
(O)), O G
sa,0
P
A
LQG
, (5.21)
S
()
.
These allow us to dene C
n
[]
:=
(U())S
()
, which are central and belong to the strong closure of
(G
sa,0
P
A
LQG
). Clearly, the C
n
[]
s depend only on the topological quantities n
[]
and satisfy (5.18), since for
any ,
G
sa,0
P
with n
[]
= n
[
]
the operator
(U(
(U()) represents a Gauss

P
transformation, which
leaves
invariant. The (general) non-triviality of the elements C
n
[]
follow from (5.5).
The proposition implies that the central elements C
nZ
represent the quotient G
sa,0
P
/Gauss
P
. Similar to the
preceding sections, we nd non-trivial, central elements associated with the algebra G
sa,0
P
A
LQG
, reecting the
topology of the group of gauge transformations G
sa,0
P
. The property (5.5) of the chiral automorphisms leads to their
spontaneous breakdown w.r.t. pure (or primary), Gauss
P
-invariant states, and the appearance of the -sectors.
Corollary 5.5 (cp. [35]):
Given a pure (or primary), Gauss
P
-invariant state on G
sa,0
P
A
LQG
, the chiral automorphisms
R
are
necessarily spontaneouly broken. Moreover, every such state is labeled by an angle [0, ), C
n
= e
i2n
1
H
. The
GNS representation of a chirally invariant, Gauss
P
-invariant state
admits a central decomposition, w.r.t. C
1
H
=
_
[0,)
H
d(), C
n
H
= e
i2n
H
, (5.22)
with translation invariant measure .
Proof:
Assume that the chiral symmetry is unbroken. Then, we nd a 1-parameter group of unitaries U
5
()
R
that
implements the symmetry by conjugation
(O)) = U
5
()
(O)U
5
()
, O G
sa,0
P
A
LQG
, R. (5.23)
This leads to a unique extension of the
s to the strong closure of
(G
sa,0
P
A
LQG
), and we nd by (5.5) and
(5.20) (since n
[]
= n
[a]
):
(S
()) = S
(), R. (5.24)
41
This implies, again by (5.5) and the denition of C
n
:
(C
n
[]
) = e
i2n
[]
C
n
[]
, R, (5.25)
which is incompatible with the purity (or primarity) of , as this implies irreducibility (or factoriality) of (
, H
),
and thus C
n
[]
= e
i2n
[]
1
H
, [0, ).
The central decomposition (5.22) follows from the observation that (5.24) implies (C
1
) = e
i2
[ [0, ). The
unitaries U
5
() act as intertwiners between the -sectors:
U
5
() H
= H
mod
. (5.26)
6 Conclusions & perspectives
To conclude the article, we comment on our ndings in the various sections, and oer some future perspectives.
Section 2 mainly provided a review of the mathematical structures behind the (canonical) formulation of loop
quantum gravity with two exceptions: Equation (2.99), which states an algebraic relation among the ux vector
elds that aects the representation theory of the holonomy-ux algebra P
LQG
in a non-trivial way (see section
4), and lemma 2.32, which shows that Hilbert space representations of P
LQG
and its Weyl form A
LQG
induced
by gauge invariant states are necessarily discontinuous w.r.t. to the spin network functions, i.e. the two-point
function (A(x)A(y)) of the quantum connection A cannot exist in such representations. The latter result is
in accordance with results in of quantum eld theory in the temporal gauge [31], where the only alternative appears
to be the use of (non-positive) Krein space representations, e.g. the Feynman-Gupta-Bleuler quantization of QED.
Thus, it would be interesting, whether such an alternative is possible in loop quantum gravity, as well, and how it
connects to the standard approach.
In section 3, we focused on aspects of the representation theory of A
LQG
with an emphasis on the presence of
non-trivial central operators, and their relation to topological and geometrical structures of the structure group
G. We found, that a non-trivial rst homotopy group
1
(G), supplemented by an associated bundle covering,
can be related to the existence of a eld algebra extension F
LQG
, that can be used to generate new, inequivalent
representations from existing ones with the help of charge automorphisms dened by the adjoint action of unitary,
charged elds. While this construction works well for Abelian structure groups, where it oers a new perspective
on the Koslowski-Sahlmann representations and the -sectors of loop quantum cosmology, it is accompanied by
further diculties in the non-Abelian case, which are due to restrictive topological and geometrical properties of
G (see proposition 3.2 & 3.5). Especially, there might exist no suitable unitary, charged elds in the extension
F
LQG
to dene charge automorphisms. In the future, it could be gratifying to investigate the algebraic structure of
A
LQG
resp. P
LQG
on a deeper level, e.g. its structure of ideals, its universal enveloping von Neumann algebra etc.,
to improve control on the representation theory and the possible dynamics supported by the algebra. Especially,
in view of the deparametrizing models (see [36] for an overview), where A
LQG
and P
LQG
become algebras of
elementary observables, instead of purely kinematical objects, such an analysis will oer immediate insight into
physical questions.
We continued our analysis of the Koslowski-Sahlmann representations, started in section 3 for Abelian structure
groups, in section 4, where we concentrated on the non-Abelian case. We showed, that the general line of thought,
which places these representations into the framework of section 3, bifurcates for non-Abelian structure groups, and
one is left with two possible interpretations:
1. The Koslowski-Sahlmann representations are dened for an (centrally) extended algebra, and the elementary
operators Y
n
(S) are identied with the uxes E
n
(S).
2. The Koslowski-Sahlmann representations are dened for the holonomy-ux algebra, but the elementary op-
erators Y
n
(S) are identied with shifted uxes E
n
(S) +i
_
S
E
(0)
(n).
This bifurcation is explained by the fact that the shift transformation
E
(0) : E
n
(S) E
n
(S) +i
_
S
E
(0)
(n) is not
a *-automorphism of P
LQG
, but only an ane transformation, in the non-Abelian setting. Thus, the rst point
of view represents the idea to dene a modied holonomy-ux algebra P
E
(0)
LQG
, s.t.
E
(0) : P
E
(0)
LQG
P
LQG
becomes
a *-isomorphism, while the second point of view changes the interpretation of the elementary operators Y
n
(S) of
the Koslowski-Sahlmann framework. Clearly, the second option avoids the obstruction posed by corollary 3.7, and
42
shows that the Koslowski-Sahlmann representations reduce to the Ashtekar-Isham-Lewandowski representation for
the shifted uxes, but it forbids the treatment of gauge and automorphism invariance along the lines of [24], as well
(see the summary at the end of section 4). The rst option, which oers a richer mathematical structure, suers
from the fact that the central extension of the holonomy-ux algebra is only a necessary ingredient, but probably
not sucient due to further higher order commutation relations imposed by the basic commutation rule
[Y
n
(S), f] = E
n
(S) f. (6.1)
Thus, this approach is weakened, because control on all higher order relation appears to be out of reach at the present
stage. Nevertheless, it might be interesting to analyze the recent work on the Koslowski-Sahlmann representation,
which is focused on the implementation of dieomorphisms and possible applications to asymptotically at scenarios
[2629], in view of our ndings.
Finally, in section 5, we applied the general formalism of section 3 to adapt the discussion of chiral symmetry
breaking and -vacua by Morchio and Strocchi [35] to the framework of loop quantum gravity. We showed that
under the assumption of an anomalous, chiral symmetry (5.5) this adaption is possible, and has some of the expected
properties (a discussion of the Goldstone spectrum of the generator of the chiral symmetry is missing). Our analysis
is intended to stimulate the discussion of gauge anomalies in loop quantum gravity, especially in the matter sector,
because anomalies have important physical consequences for the matter content of the standard model. Thinking
of the semi-classical limit of loop quantum gravity, it is necessary to make contact with the predictions of quantum
eld theory, and to oer an explanation of the consequences of anomalies in the latter, e.g. the solution of the U(1)-
problem and the restriction of matter to so-called safe representations. Thus, in spite of the fact that an anomaly
like (5.5) appears to be a rather strong requirement, we would expect that a structure of this type arises in loop
quantum gravity, at least in a limiting sense connected to the aforesaid semi-classical limit. A natural starting point
for an investigation, of how anomalies could occur in loop quantum gravity, is suggested by symmetry generating
currents of the form (5.10), which, on the one hand, are natural objects in the framework of loop quantum gravity
and, on the other hand, are the central objects in the study of anomalies in quantum eld theory. More precisely,
an understanding of the coincidence limit of these point-split currents, possibly in combination with a semi-classical
limit, could oer rst insights. At a preliminary stage, it might be easiest to consider these objects in the context
of deparametrizing models (see [36] for an overview), which avoid complications due to the dieomorphism and
Hamiltonian constraints. A further simplication might be achieved, if the discussion is restricted to cosmological
or other symmetry reduced models.
7 Acknowledgements
We thank Norbert Bodendorfer, Detlev Buchholz and Hanno Sahlmann for helpful comments and suggestions.
Furthermore, we thank Stefan Hollands for pointing out the importance of anomalies in the relation to quantum
eld theory to one of us. AS gratefully acknowledges nancial support by the Ev. Studienwerk e.V..
8 References
[1] Norbert Bodendorfer, Thomas Thiemann, and Andreas Thurn. New variables for classical and quantum gravity
in all dimensions: I. hamiltonian analysis. Classical and Quantum Gravity, 30(4):045001, 2013.
[2] Norbert Bodendorfer, Thomas Thiemann, and Andreas Thurn. New variables for classical and quantum gravity
in all dimensions: Ii. lagrangian analysis. Classical and Quantum Gravity, 30(4):045002, 2013.
[3] Carlo Rovelli. Quantum Gravity. Cambridge University Press, 2004.
[4] Thomas Thiemann. Modern Canonical Quantum General Relativity. Cambridge University Press, 2007.
[5] Thomas Thiemann. Quantum spin dynamics (qsd). Classical and Quantum Gravity, 15(4):839, 1998.
[6] Thomas Thiemann. Quantum spin dynamics (qsd): Ii. the kernel of the wheeler-dewitt constraint operator.
Classical and Quantum Gravity, 15(4):875, 1998.
[7] Thomas Thiemann. Quantum spin dynamics (qsd): Iii. quantum constraint algebra and physical scalar product
in quantum general relativity. Classical and Quantum Gravity, 15(5):1207, 1998.
8 REFERENCES 43
[8] Thomas Thiemann. Quantum spin dynamics (qsd): Iv. euclidean quantum gravity as a model to test lorentzian
quantum gravity. Classical and Quantum Gravity, 15(5):1249, 1998.
[9] Thomas Thiemann. Quantum spin dynamics (qsd): V. quantum gravity as the natural regulator of the
hamiltonian constraint of matter quantum eld theories. Classical and Quantum Gravity, 15(5):1281, 1998.
[10] Thomas Thiemann. Quantum spin dynamics (qsd): Vi. quantum poincare algebra and a quantum positivity
of energy theorem for canonical quantum gravity. Classical and Quantum Gravity, 15(6):1463, 1998.
[11] Thomas Thiemann. Quantum spin dynamics (qsd): Vii. symplectic structures and continuum lattice formula-
tions of gauge eld theories. Classical and Quantum Gravity, 18(17):3293, 2001.
[12] J. Lewandowski, A. Oko low, H. Sahlmann, and T. Thiemann. Uniqueness of dieomorphism invariant states
on holonomy-ux algebras. Commun. Math. Phys., 267:703733, 2006.
[13] Christian Fleischhack. Representations of the weyl algebra in quantum geometry. Communications in Mathe-
matical Physics, 285(1):67140, 2009.
[14] Abhay Ashtekar and Jerzy Lewandowski. Quantum theory of geometry: I. area operators. Classical and
Quantum Gravity, 14(1A):A55, 1997.
[15] Abhay Ashtekar and Jerzy Lewandowski. Quantum theory of geometry ii: Volume operators. Arxiv preprint
gr-qc/9711031, 1997.
[16] Abhay Ashtekar, Alejandro Corichi, and Jose Antonio Zapata. Quantum theory of geometry: Iii. non-
commutativity of riemannian structures. Classical and Quantum Gravity, 15(10):2955, 1998.
[17] Abhay Ashtekar and Chris J. Isham. Representations of the holonomy algebras of gravity and nonabelian
gauge theories. Classical and Quantum Gravity, 9(6):1433, 1992.
[18] Abhay Ashtekar and Jerzy Lewandowski. Dierential geometry on the space of connections via graphs and
projective limits. Journal of Geometry and Physics, 17(3):191230, 1995.
[19] Maria Cristina Abbati and Alessandro Mani` a. On dierential structure for projective limits of manifolds.
Journal of Geometry and Physics, 29(1):3563, 1999.
[20] Hanno Sahlmann and Thomas Thiemann. On the superselection theory of the weyl algebra for dieomorphism
invariant quantum gauge theories. arXiv preprint gr-qc/0302090, 2003.
[21] Madhavan Varadarajan. Towards new background independent representations for loop quantum gravity.
[22] Micha l Dziendzikowski and Andrzej Oko low. New dieomorphism invariant states on a holonomy-ux algebra.
[23] Hanno Sahlmann. On loop quantum gravity kinematics with a non-degenerate spatial background. Classical
and Quantum Gravity, 27(22):225007, 2010.
[24] Tim A. Koslowski and Hanno Sahlmann. Loop quantum gravity vacuum with nondegenerate geometry. SIGMA,
8:,026,15pages, September 2011.
[25] Tim A. Koslowski. Dynamical quantum geometry (dqg programme). arXiv preprint arXiv:0709.3465, 2007.
[26] Madhavan Varadarajan. The generator of spatial dieomorphisms in the koslowskisahlmann representation.
[27] Miguel Campiglia and Madhavan Varadarajan. The koslowski-sahlmann representations: Gauge and dieo-
morphism invariance. arXiv preprint arXiv:1311.6117v1, 2013.
[28] Sandipan Sengupta. Quantum geometry with a nondegenerate vacuum: A toy model. Physical Review D,
88(6):064016, 2013.
[29] Sandipan Sengupta. Asymptotic atness and quantum geometry. arXiv preprint arXiv:1309.5266, 2013.
8 REFERENCES 44
[30] Franco Strocchi. An introduction to the mathematical structure of quantum mechanics: a short course for
mathematicians, volume 28. World Scientic, 2008.
[31] J. L oelholz, Giovanni Morchio, and Franco Strocchi. Mathematical structure of the temporal gauge. Lett.
Math. Phys., 44:50955107, 2003.
[32] Franco Strocchi. An Introduction to Non-perturbative Foundations of Quantum Field Theory, volume 158.
Oxford University Press, 2013.
[33] Giovanni Morchio and Franco Strocchi. Quantum mechanics on manifolds and topological eects. Letters in
Mathematical Physics, 82(2-3):219236, 2007.
[34] Roman Wladimir Jackiw. Topological investigations of quantized gauge theories. In Current Algebra and
Anomalies. World Scientic, 1985.
[35] Giovanni Morchio and Franco Strocchi. Chiral symmetry breaking and vacuum structure in qcd. Annals of
physics, 324(10):22362254, 2009.
[36] Kristina Giesel and Thomas Thiemann. Scalar material reference systems and loop quantum gravity. arXiv
preprint arXiv:1206.3807, 2012.
[37] Abhay Ashtekar and Parampreet Singh. Loop quantum cosmology: A status report. Class. Quant. Grav.,
28::213001,2011, August 2011.
[38] Shoshichi Kobayashi and Katsumi Nomizu. Foundations of Dierential Geometry Volume I. Wiley Classics
Library. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1963.
[39] Richard L. Bishop and Richard J. Crittenden. Geometry of manifolds, volume 15. Academic Press, 2011.
[40] R. Giles. Reconstruction of gauge potentials from wilson loops. Phys. Rev. D;(United States), 24(8), 1981.
[41] David Bleecker. Gauge theory and variational principles, volume 225. Addison-Wesley Reading, Massachusetts,
1981.
[42] Benjamin Bahr and Thomas Thiemann. Automorphisms in loop quantum gravity. Classical and Quantum
Gravity, 26(23):235022, 2009.
[43] Abhay Ashtekar and Jerzy Lewandowski. Representation theory of analytic holonomy c* algebras. In Knots
and Quantum Gravity. Oxford University Press, 1994.
[44] John Carlos Baez. Generalized measures in gauge theory. Letters in Mathematical Physics, 31(3):213223,
1994.
[45] Donald Marolf and Jose Manuel Cidade Mour ao. On the support of the ashtekar-lewandowski measure. Com-
munications in Mathematical Physics, 170(3):583605, 1995.
[46] Abhay Ashtekar and Jerzy Lewandowski. Projective techniques and functional integration. J. Math. Phys.,
36:21702191, 1995.
[47] Maria Christina Abbati, Renzo Cirelli, Alessandro Mania, and Peter Wolfram Michor. The lie group of
automorphisms of a principle bundle. Journal of Geometry and Physics, 6(2):215235, 1989.
[48] Ivan Kolar, Jan Slovak, and Peter Wolfram Michor. Natural operations in dierential geometry. Springer
Verlag, 1993.
[49] Jose Manuel Velhinho. Functorial aspects of the space of generalized connections. Modern Physics Letters A,
20(17n18):12991303, 2005.
[50] Martin Bojowald. Mathematical structure of loop quantum cosmology: Homogeneous models. June 2012.
[51] Theodor Br ocker and Tammo tom Dieck. Representations of compact Lie groups, volume 98. Springer, 1985.
[52] Christian Bar, Nicolas Ginoux, and Frank Pf ae. Wave Equations on Lorentzian Manifolds and Quantization.
ESI Lectures in Mathematics and Physics. European Mathematical Society, 2007.
8 REFERENCES 45
[53] J. L oelholz, Giovanni Morchio, and Franco Strocchi. Spectral stochastic processes arising in quantum me-
chanical models with a non-l 2 ground state. Letters in Mathematical Physics, 35(3):251262, 1995.
[54] Abhay Ashtekar and Miguel Campiglia. On the uniqueness of kinematics of loop quantum cosmology. Classical
and Quantum Gravity, 29(24):242001, 2012.
[55] Wojciech Kami nski and Jerzy Lewandowski. The at frw model in lqc: self-adjointness. Classical and Quantum
Gravity, 25(3):035001, 2008.
[56] Abhay Ashtekar, Tomasz Pawlowski, and Parampreet Singh. Quantum nature of the big bang. Physical review
letters, 96(14):141301, 2006.
[57] Ola Bratteli and Derek W. Robinson. Operator Algebras and Quantum Statistical Mechanics 1: C*-and W*-
Algebras, Symmetry Groups, Decomposition of States. Texts and Monographs in Physics. Springer Verlag, 2ed
edition, 1987.
[58] Fabio Acerbi, Giovanni Morchio, and Franco Strocchi. Infrared singular elds and nonregular representations
of canonical commutation relation algebras. Journal of Mathematical Physics, 34:899, 1993.
[59] Fabio Acerbi, Giovanni Morchio, and Franco Strocchi. Theta vacua, charge connement and charged sectors
from nonregular representations of ccr algebras. Letters in Mathematical Physics, 27(1):111, 1993.
[60] Marie-Louise Michelson and H. Blaine Lawson Jr. Spin geometry. Princeton University Press, 1989.
[61] Norman Earl Steenrod. The Topology of Fibre Bundles, volume 14. Princeton University Press, 1951.
[62] Glen E. Bredon. Topology and Geometry, volume 139 of Graduate Texts in Mathematics. Springer Verlag,
1993.
[63] Morikuni Goto. A theorem on compact semi-simple groups. Journal of the Mathematical Society of Japan,
1(3):270272, 1949.
[64] Jose Manuel Cidade Mour ao, Thomas Thiemann, and Jose Manuel Velhinho. Physical properties of quantum
eld theory measures. Journal of Mathematical Physics, 40:2337, 1999.
[65] Detlev Buchholz. The physical state space of quantum electrodynamics. Communications in Mathematical
Physics, 85(1):4971, 1982.
[66] Steven Weinberg. The u (1) problem. Physical Review D, 11(12):3583, 1975.
[67] Gerardus t Hooft. Symmetry breaking through bell-jackiw anomalies. Physical Review Letters, 37(1):811,
1976.
[68] Bert Schroer and Peter Stichel. Current commutation relations in the framework of general quantum eld
theory. Communications in Mathematical Physics, 3(4):258281, 1966.
[69] Giovanni Morchio and Franco Strocchi. Charge density and electric charge in quantum electrodynamics. Journal
of Mathematical Physics, 44:5569, 2003.
[70] William Allan Bardeen. Anomalous currents in gauge eld theories. Nuclear Physics B, 75(2):246258, 1974.
[71] Thomas Thiemann. Kinematical hilbert spaces for fermionic and higgs quantum eld theories. Classical and
Quantum Gravity, 15(6):1487, 1998.
[72] Hugo A. Morales-Tecotl and Carlo Rovelli. Loop space representation of quantum fermions and gravity. Nuclear
Physics B, 451(1):325361, 1995.
[73] Hugo A. Morales-Tecotl and Carlo Rovelli. Fermions in quantum gravity. Physical review letters, 72(23):3642,
1994.
[74] John Carlos Baez and Kirill Krasnov. Quantization of dieomorphism-invariant theories with fermions. Journal
of Mathematical Physics, 39(3):12511271, 1998.
[75] Dariusz Chrusci nski and Andrzej Jamio lkowski. Geometric phases in classical and quantum mechanics, vol-
ume 36. Birkhauser, 2004.

Structural Aspects of Loop Quantum Gravity and Loop Quantum Cosmology From An Algebraic Perspective

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Structural Aspects of Loop Quantum Gravity and Loop Quantum Cosmology From An Algebraic Perspective

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

a

and Thomas Thiemann

Lehrstuhl f ur Theoretische Physik III, FAU Erlangen-N urnberg,

G) its center, accompanied by a sequence of non-trivial bundle

(cf. [40]). Furthermore, (2.9) allows to identify

with the properties

V is the bundle associated with P via a (linear)

V )), we dene in the following way:

. Clearly, is well-dened and horizontal, as

V )) and horizontal, -equivariant

, or -tensorial vector elds on P for short. In contrast to

V )), let X (T P(P

V )) be its unique horizontal lift w.r.t. to A (cf. [38]), which is

is a suitable class of hypersurfaces in , E(n) (T [[

under the action of the gauge transformations G

G) for the second isomorphism,

G is the map we get from the associated bundle construction. (2.34) is

dened by exp( n)(p) = exp

exp( n)(p) = exp( n)(pg) (2.44)

is the co-adjoint representation of g.

(to the left) in the following way:

, and projected, 1-density, vector elds E (TAd

A by (2.47). Second, we have:

(x)), (x, g) G. (2.71)

in . Fixing a system of reference points p

generated by embedded, semi-analytic, compactly

, G) Hom(l, G), l L, are simply the restrictions

-algebra Cyl is the closure of the cylindrical functions Cyl :=

L, is the restriction map. Every f Cyl is given as a projective family of functions

is right invariant and vertical.

, t R, by lemma 2.6. Then, by theorem 2.10, we nd n

() containing the connected component of the identity. This issue does

. These actions extend to *-automorphic

, but which do not preserve X

= g : G leads to elements that are not generated from nite linear

. Although it is not a point-localized ux, as it contains the squared

appears to be unnecessary, because the action of the semi-

. The set of Weyl elements will be denoted by W , and

) for a suitable surface S

. Although, there are certain special cases where

, and gauge transformations

-algebra by completing it w.r.t. the maximal C

-norm (cf. [52])

), [0, 2), are preserved by the subalgebra A

). But, this implies

, and acts non-trivially on Z, which are incompatible

, which is especially important in physics, because elements of the center

is labeled by an angle [0, 2), and we nd that

can be realized by the GNS

is the self-adjoint extension of i

, [0, 2), m Z, (3.9)

are its improper eigenvectors.

-algebra C(U(1)) is generated by the characters ( . )

is labeled by family of angles :=

, R). Thus, we are allowed to consider

and the Weyl elements

= SU(2) SU(2) [60], and thus can be

for some R. Unfortunately, we cannot

is determined by a constant function f

]] = n by the perfectness of g. Thus, c

, K) and the Weyl elements

. The actions of the gauge transformations G

) = p, we know by (3.51) that q