Review of Literature and Research Proposal

Semiclassical Approximations in Quantum

Mechanics

Report

Course code PAS 9106

Submitted to the Central University of Himachal Pradesh

for the Partial Fulfilment of the Degree of

Master of Science (Physics)

In the School of Physical and Material Sciences
In the Department of Physics and Astronomical Science

Antariksha Basu
(REG. NO. CUHP23PGPAS07)
 Supervisor, Dr. Ayan Chatterjee

December, 2024
CENTRAL UNIVERSITY OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

2
 CERTIFICATE

It is certified that the project work entitled Exploring Sterile neutrino

framework and Non-Standard interactions for Gallium Neutrino
Experiments is submitted under the supervision of Prof. B.C. Chauhan, as a
project work towards the partial fulfilment of [Link]. degree in the academic year
2023-2025 by Keshav Ranga bearing Roll No.CUHP23PGPAS16, of the
Department of Physics and Astronomical Science, The School of Physical and
Material Science, Central University of Himachal Pradesh.

Prof. B.C. Chauhan

Department of Physics and Astronomical Science
Central University of Himachal Pradesh

Antariksha Basu

1
 Certificate
This is to certify that the report entitled “Review of Literature and Research
Proposal”, submitted to the Department of Physics and Astronomical Science,
Central University of Himachal Pradesh, in the partial fulfillment for the award of
the degree of [Link]. in Physics, is a record of review work done by Antariksha
Basu, Roll No. CUHP23PGPAS07, under my supervision.

Date

Dr. Ayan Chatterjee

2
 Acknowledgements
I wish to express my gratitude to my supervisor Dr. Ayan Chatterjee for
providing me the opportunity to join him for this course entitled “Review of
Literature and Research Proposal”. Being under his guidance has provided me
with interesting insights on theoretical physics. My progress would have been
much slower without his fruitful inputs.

Antariksha Basu

3
Contents

1 Symmetry through classical mechanics 6

1.1 The Euler Lagrange equations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

2 The covariant Wald formalism 8

2.1 The general formulation of the theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

2.2 The Noether current 3-form and the Noether charge 2-form . . . . . 11

2.3 The symplectic current 3-form . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

2.4 The perturbative identity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

3 Conclusion 17

References 17

4
 Abstract

Black holes and their statistical mechanics have been a topic investing the
greatest minds of the generation into formulating a grand unified theory that
reconciles the the topology of space time with the Lorentzian manifold of the
quantum theory. Nevertheless, a problem has also emerged in understanding the
thermodynamical nature of the the heart of General relativity, the black holes. We,
hereby attempt to generalize the notions of the thermodynamical variables, we in
fact would follow the theoretical methods of covariant phase space formalism and
deconstruct the diffeomorphism covariant theories in the Wald saga([1][2][3][4]).The
first chapter introduces a brief notion of the symplectic form in the setting of
classical mechanics and we would slowly process its generalization to a language of
field theory and Noether’s theorem and obtain the thermodynamical variables in
terms of conserved quantities and obtain the most general expression for laws of
blackhole thermodynamics.

5
1 Symmetry through classical mechanics

1.1 The Euler Lagrange equations

In this section we ought to understand the emergence of the symplectic structure,

so let’s consider a point particle with coordinate q(t) and Lagrangian L(q, q̇) and
take its variation.

∂L ∂L
δL = δq + δ q̇
∂q ∂ q̇
   
∂L d ∂L d ∂L
= − δq + δq (1)
∂q dt ∂ q̇ dt ∂ q̇

The total derivative defines the symplectic potential current:

∂L
θ(δ) ≡ δq (2)
∂ q̇

This is similar to what we had realised in the first section. Now, given two
variations δ1 and δ2 , define the symplectic current:

ω(δ1 , δ2 ) ≡ δ1 θ(δ2 ) − δ2 θ(δ1 ) = δ1 p.δ2 q − δ1 q.δ2 p (3)

The structure of Eq.[3] can be realised in terms of differential 2-form in the

variation space
δω ≡ δq ∧ δp (4)

Or for many degrees of freedom,

X X
δΩ = δω = δq i ∧ δpi (5)
i i

Then we can define something called a Hamiltonian charge H

iXH ω ≡ δt H (6)

6
 ∂ ∂
where XH is a phase flow vector defined as XH ≡ (q̇ ∂q , ṗ ∂p ). Using the identity
Eq.[6] , we get

∂H ∂H
ω(XH , δt ) = ṗδt q − q̇δt p, δt H = δt q + δt p (7)
∂q ∂p

Matching the terms we get back the Hamilton’s equation of motion,

∂H ∂H
q̇ = , ṗ = − (8)
∂p ∂q

This is a generic way of defining a Hamiltonian charge for a given symmetry.

Classical particle mechanics if we recall, has a Hamiltonian charge under time
translation symmetry (δt, Energy) and hence the Hamilton’s equation of motion
is satisfied.

7
2 The covariant Wald formalism

2.1 The general formulation of the theory

In this section we shall focus on the bread and butter of a relativistic field
theorist. We shall follow the pathway to re-deriving the results of blackhole
thermodynamics summarized by Bardeen-Carter-Hawking, through and
alterternate formalism devised in the covariant phase space by R.M. Wald and
[Link].
A series of paper have emerged in the recent years([1][2][3][4]). The Wald-Iyer
saga provides all the tools in differential manifold of phase space. We thereby
begin with the most general and poetic lagrangian in all of classical field theory.

L = L ϕα , ∇e1 ϕα , ∇(e1 ...∇em ) ϕα , . . .

(9)

where we can generalise the fields ϕα as of any mathematical structure such as

general tensor and vector fields like the metric, the curvature tensor or in fact
fields such as Maxwell field strength tensor. Where as L is the Lagrangian 4-form
in a 4 dimensional manifold M and its action in written as,
Z
S[ϕ] = L (10)
M

The lagrangian is also a functional of symmetrized covariant derivatives ∇ defined

as,
1 X
∇(µ1 · · · ∇µn ) Tα1 ···αk = ∇µπ(1) · · · ∇µπ(n) Tα1 ···αk (11)
n!
π∈Sn

Moreover the Lagrangian form L can be explicitly written as

L = L (ϕα , ∇e1 ϕα , ∇(e1 ...∇em ) )ϵ where ϵ is the n-volume form.
Further we can take the variation of the Lagrangian which yields

8
 δL = E α δϕα + ∇µ θµ (12)

where
N  
X ∂L
Eα = (−1)k ∇a1 · · · ∇ak (13)
∂(∇a1 · · · ∇ak ϕα )
k=0

and
N −1 X
k  
X ∂L
θa = (−1)i ∇a1 · · · ∇ai α


δ ∇ a · · · ∇a ϕ (14)
∂(∇a ∇a1 · · · ∇ak ϕα ) i+1 k
k=0 i=0

by the structure of ∇µ θµ , it is obvious that the term represents an on-shell

conservation law describing internal symmetry. Now, we can use the hodge
duality operator to write our boundary term expression as an exact form which
further can be expressed symbolically as

√
δL = δ(L g)dx1 ∧ ... ∧ dxn
√
= δL ϵ + L δ gdx1 ∧ ... ∧ dxn
1
= (δL + L g µν δgµν )ϵ
2
= (E α δϕα + ∇µ θµ )ϵ (15)

This can in fact written compactly as

δL = Eδϕ + dθ(ϕ, δϕ) (16)

In this expression we have re-symbolised our forms to,

√
θ → d[∗( gθµ dxµ )] (17)

The evident 3-current form θ is described as the symplectic 3-form potential.

This tells us that on-shell, our equation of motion E = 0, we use the

9
minimization principle δS = 0 with a vanishing boundary term that generates an
equation of continuity.
Here, d is known as the exterior derivative operator acting on forms, and
generally induces a k-form to (k+1) form with an useful property, d2 = 0
We now introduce ambiguities

L → L + dµ (18)

and
θ → θ + δµ + dY (ϕ, δϕ) (19)

These addition of ambiguities in Eq.[18] and Eq.[19] keeps the equation of motion
invariant.
These can be thought as degrees of freedom as on could appeal to the likeness of
the gauge parameters in gauge theories. And these can be used further in our
theory as gauge fixing parameter in the similar way one realises the Higgs
mechanism after the spontaneous symmetry breaking in SU (2)L × U (1)Y gauge
theory which will not be a feature in the following literature.
Concluding the subsection, we do some further simplifications and indentifications
considering the lagrangian with a matter field ψ and the a gravity field gab and
Rabcd .


L = L gab , Rabcd , ψ, ∇e1 (Rabcd , ψ), ∇(e1 ... ∇em ) (Rabcd , ψ) (20)

Here, (R, g) denotes the the metric tensor and and curvature tensor respectively.
We can now take the variation of the lagrangian and write it in form of eq().Some
further simplification would lead to

1
δL = Eg ∗ab δgab + dθg + E m δψ + dθm + T ab δgab
2
= Eg ab δgab + E m δψ + dθ (21)

10
where

1
Eg ab = Eg ∗ab + T ab (22)
2
θ = θg + θm (23)

2.2 The Noether current 3-form and the Noether charge

2-form

In the last section, we have translated our theory into a differential form
structure, now we ought to investigate other symmetries and their corresponding
conserved charges. We define a quantity,

J [ξ] = θ(ϕ, Lξ ϕ) − iξ L (24)

Now, as intimidating the symbols are, the iξ operator reduces a k-form to (k-1)
form by the contraction of the indices of the smooth spacetime vector field ξ α . It
is in a way related to the exterior derivative according to,

Lξ λ = iξ dλ + d(iξ λ) (25)

For our purpose we interpret the lie derivative Lξ as the variation along the flow
of ξ α , i.e
L ξ ϕ = δξ ϕ (26)

Applying the exterior derivative on J [ξ] and using Eq.[16] with Eq.[25] reads,

dJ[ξ] = d(θ − iξ L)
= δL − Eδϕ − d(iξ L)
= −ELξ ϕ (27)

11
We notice that Eq.[27] on-shell equals dJ[ξ] = 0 which means J [ξ] is a closed
form and denotes a conservation law and hence we get the definitive of
Noether’s theorem.

We can also define a charge 2-form Q[ξ],

J [ξ] = dQ[ξ] + ξ α Cα (28)

where Cα is a locally constructed covariant 3-form which vanishes on-shell. From

Eq.[19] , the ambiguities in the θ form implies ambiguities in the J [ξ] form,

J [ξ] → J [ξ] + dY (ϕ, Lξ ϕ) + d(iξ µ), (29)

and therefore the amiguities in Q[ξ]

Q[ξ] → Q[ξ] + Y (ϕ, Lξ ϕ) + iξ µ + dZ, (30)

where Z in an arbitrary covariant 1-form.

In Eq.[29] we have used Eq.[25] to obtain d(iξ µ). For a better analysis, one can
refer [Iyer˙1997] Now, we ought to figure out the charge form for the fields in
action. It is straight forward to see that the gravity and matter fields yield,

dJg [ξ] = −ELξ gαβ

= −ϵEgαβ [∇α ξβ + ∇β ξα ]
= −ϵEgαβ ∇α ξβ
= −2ϵ[∇α (Egαβ ξ β ) − ξβ ∇α Egαβ ] (31)
(32)

As we have seen previously that the divergergence of a vector can be written in

terms of hodge duality.
√ β β α
ϵ∇α (−2∇α (Egαβ ξ β )) = d[∗(−2 gEαg ξ dx )] (33)

12
The Noether’s second theorem suggests that due to diffeomorphism invariance ??,

∇α E αβ = 0 (34)

Hence,
√ β β α
d[∗(−2 gEαg ξ dx ) + J[ξ]] = 0 (35)
=⇒ dQ[ξ] = J[ξ] + 2ϵ.Eg .ξ (36)
(37)

In a similar sense one can use a generalised form of a field lie derivative contracted
to the equation of motion(one can check [4]) for a detailed understanding,
Now, as we have smpified all our stuffs, we can write the noether current form
seperately for the matter fields and gravity fields.

J g [ξ] = dθg [ξ] + 2ϵ.Eg∗ab .ξ (38)

J m [ξ] = dθm [ξ] − ϵ.Em .ψ.ξ − ϵ.T.ξ (39)

where ϵ is the volume form which contain the form basis in the manifold M and
conveniently E = ϵE. We also separate out the energy-momentum tensor into the
matter current.

We now define the symbols used in Eq.[39] and Eq.[38]

(ϵ.Eg .ξ)abc ≡ ϵdabc Egde ξe (40)

(ϵ.Em .ψ.ξ)abc ≡ ϵdabc Em ψξ d (41)

A more rigorous definitions and derivation are subjected to [Iyer˙1997]. Now, we

obtain on-shell results using Eq.[23]

dQ[ξ] = dQg [ξ] + dQm [ξ] (42)

→Q[ξ] = Qg [ξ] + Qg [ξ] + dH (43)

13
Here, again we used the ambiguity dH and H is another locally constructed
1-form

2.3 The symplectic current 3-form

The analog of the form described in Eq.[6] can be generalised in field theory
structure with the precise definition of a symplectic three current form as as
composition of variations of the symplectic 3-potential from the previous excerpt.
It is defined as
ω(ϕ, δ1 ϕ, δ2 ϕ) ≡ δ2 θ(ϕ, δ1 ϕ) + δ1 θ(ϕ, δ2 ϕ) (44)

and it is bilinear and antisymmetric 3-form. We can infact check that it is indeed
a 3-form in the co-ordinate form basis.
Now, we can apply our exterior derivative operator to ω

dω = δ2 (dθ) − δ1 (dθ)
= δ1 E.δ2 ϕ − δ2 E.δ1 ϕ (45)

where we have used Eq.[18] and[δ1 , δ2 ] = 0. Then Eq.[45] on-shell is a closed form
i.e dω = 0 and hence is similar to a conservation law as we saw in the previous
sections. Consider the symplectic current 3-form,

ω(ϕ, Lξ ϕ, δϕ) = δθ(ϕ, Lξ ϕ) + Lξ θ(ϕ, δϕ) (46)

Again, taking the variation of Eq.[24] and using Eq.[25]

δJ [ξ] = δθ(ϕ, Lξ ϕ) − iξ δL
= δθ(ϕ, Lξ ϕ) − Lξ θ(ϕ, δϕ) + d(iξ θ(ϕ, δϕ)) (47)

14
We have evaluated the variation on-shell fixing δξ a = 0. We recognise the first
two terms collectively as Eq.[46]

→ ω(ϕ, Lξ ϕ, δϕ) = δJ [ξ] + d(iξ θ(ϕ, δϕ))

= d(δQ[ξ] − iξ θ(ϕ, δϕ)) (48)

It is the most important structure of the theory and we’ll se how it connects to
the hamiltonian charge.

2.4 The perturbative identity

Now, we have established the mathematical structure of our theory which closely
resembles the symplectic structure of a manifold as we have seen while re-defining
classical mechanics, infact we have generalized those definitions as presented in
Eq[6].
Therefore, its reasonable now to embed the physics into our structure. So, we
present few consideration on how we mean to examine our spacetime:

• We assume yet another poetic structure of our manifold, a metric which

mimics being flat-ish at spatial infinity, or sometimes intellectual call it to
be ”asymptotically flat”, and ofcourse a stationary metric as a cherry on top
(Lξ ϕ = 0) with a stationary normalized killing vector field ξ a and an axial
normalized killing vector fieldΦa along with a closed orbit with length 2π.

• Our blackhole metric as it stands require a bit more structure, we assume a

bifurcation surface ∆ which is also our killing horizon. An asymptotic flat
horizon just gets our job done.

15
 • Last but not the least of our metric, it wont hurt to have a spacelike surface
Σ that bridges the gap of our killing horizon to the spatial infinity S∞ .

• Let ϕ a dynamical field satisfying the equations of motion, E = 0, and set

δϕ be an arbitrary perturbation of dynamical fields which satisfy the
linearized equations of motion, δE = 0 , in a neighborhood of infinity, but
not necessarily throughout the spacetime.

Now, we shall get into the business of evaluating all these restrictions. First, we
assume a killing field formed by the ξ and ζkilling fields. The construction is such
that the new killing field, say χ vanishes at the bifurcation surface ∆.

χa = ξ a + Ω ∆ ζ a (49)

Using Eq.[48] and the assumptions, one can expand,

ω(ϕ, Lξ ϕ, δϕ) = δθ(g, Lξ g) − Lξ θ(g, δg)

= δθ g (g, Lξ g) − Lξ θ g (g, δg) + δθ m (ϕ, Lξ ϕ) − Lξ θ m (ϕ, δϕ)
= δθ m (ϕ, Lξ ϕ) − Lξ θ m (ϕ, δϕ)

From our assumption, we assume two killing vectors for which the gravity part
vanishes in the above equation as verifiable from Eq[17]. The literature of can be
followed ahead to establish the relation

Z Z Z Z
1
δQg [ξ] − ξ.θg (g, δg) = ϵ.T αβ .ξδgαβ − δ(ϵ.T.ξ) + δQg [χ] − Ω∆ δQg [ζ]
S∞ Σ 2 ∆ ∆
(50)
We conclude this equation with the requirement of our pertubative identity.

16
3 Conclusion

Wald and Iyer’s paper on provides a niche transition from the differential
geometry mechanism to identifying fee hamiltonian charges framed up by our
killing vectors and indeed we se that we have a form of equation that corresponds
to what Hawing-Bekenstien had already formulated.
We make certain identifications as follows,
Z
J g∆ = − Q[ζ] (51)
∆Z
κ
δS∆ = δ Qg [χ] (52)
2π ∆

Further, the paper identifies left side of Eq.[50] as the ADM mass term, resulting
into an expression which gets as general and similar to that of the first law of
blackhole thermodynamics.

Z Z Z
1 κ
δMg = ϵ.T αβ .ξδgαβ −δ(ϵ.T.ξ)+ δQg [χ]−Ω∆ δ(ϵ.T.ξ)+ δS∆ +Ω∆ δJg∞
Σ 2 ∆ ∆ 2π
(53)
The terms look much similar to the first law of thermodynamics in the absence of
matter fields and further can be studied.

References

1. Lee, J. & Wald, R. M. Local symmetries and constraints. Journal of

Mathematical Physics 31, 725–743. issn: 0022-2488. eprint:
[Link]

17
 pdf/31/3/725/19103359/725\_1\_online.pdf.
[Link] (Mar. 1990).

2. Iyer, V. & Wald, R. M. Some properties of the Noether charge and a proposal
for dynamical black hole entropy. Physical Review D 50, 846–864. issn:
0556-2821. [Link] (July 1994).

3. Wald, R. M. Black hole entropy is the Noether charge. Phys. Rev. D 48,
R3427–R3431. [Link] (8
Oct. 1993).

4. Iyer, V. Lagrangian perfect fluids and black hole mechanics. Phys. Rev. D 55,
3411–3426. [Link] (6
Mar. 1997).

18