the space - time geometry that is commonly used today arose from classical physics .
an interesting question is what geometry is appropriate for quantum physics .
it was suggested that the universal symmetry group elements which act on all hilbert spaces may be appropriate for constructing a physical geometry for quantum theory @xcite .
i also proposed the systematic study of all the fundamental interactions _ operationally _ from their effects on quantum interference @xcite .
the purpose of this paper is to attempt to bring together these two approaches .
the modular variables introduced by aharonov , pendleton and petersen @xcite will play a useful role in this .    in section 2
, i shall review noether s theorem and its converse in a generalized form in which the conserved quantities are elements of a group and not the generators of this group as usually stated .
this will suggest a quantum geometry by relations defined by the universal group elements , which constitute the symmetry group of physics , that act on all hilbert spaces , as discussed in section 3 .
the classical limit of this geometry will be obtained in section 4 as the usual space - time geometry from the quantum state metric in hilbert spaces and the universality of the action of the translational group in every hilbert space . in section 5 , the non locality of fundamental interactions in quantum physics implied by this approach , as shown physically by the aharonov - bohm effect @xcite and its generalizations @xcite , will be studied .
the study of the gravitational aharonov - bohm effect around a cosmic string in particular suggests that the use of universal group elements as quantum distances may be appropriate .
the usual statement of noether s theorem is that for every continuous symmetry of the equations of motion ( determined by the lagrangian or hamiltonian ) there exists a conserved quantity . although this is easy to prove , the meaning of this theorem is more readily evident in the hamiltonian than in the lagrangian formulation .
a symmetry of the equations of motion or time evolution is a transformation @xmath0 such that in any experiment if @xmath0 is applied to the initial state of the physical objects ( fields , particles , etc . )
participating in the experiment then the final state of the transformed experiment must be the same as @xmath0 applied to the final state of the original experiment .
for example , spatial translational symmetry implies that if the apparatus is translated to a new spatial location then the same experiment should give the same result .
suppose @xmath1 is the time - evolution operator , and @xmath2 , @xmath3 are the initial and final states , i.e. @xmath4 . then the above definition of @xmath0 being a symmetry of the time evolution is @xmath5 for every initial state @xmath2 .
this is equivalent to the commutator @xmath6=0 .
\label{symmetry}\ ] ] but ( [ symmetry ] ) states also that @xmath0 is conserved during the time - evolution .
therefore , the statements that @xmath0 is a symmetry and that @xmath0 is conserved are the _ same _ statement ( [ symmetry ] ) , and there is nothing to prove !    now suppose that there is a continuous symmetry generated by @xmath7 .
then ( [ symmetry ] ) is satisfied with @xmath8 for all @xmath9 , and therefore @xmath10=0 .
\label{commutator}\ ] ] hence , @xmath7 is conserved , which is noether s theorem .
furthermore , if the hamiltonian @xmath11 is independent of time @xmath12 , as it is for an isolated system , then @xmath13 .
if ( [ commutator ] ) is valid for all @xmath12 , then @xmath14=0 . \label{hcommutator}\ ] ] the above results may be extended to classical physics by turning the above commutators into poisson brackets in classical phase space .
these classical results may be regarded as the classical limit of the quantum results by recognizing that the symplectic structure that gives the poisson brackets are the classical limit @xcite of a symplectic structure in quantum theory @xcite that gives the commutators .
but the conservation of @xmath0 that follows from ( [ symmetry ] ) is more general than the usual form of noether s theorem .
there are at least two situations in which ( [ symmetry ] ) is valid but there are no corresponding ( [ commutator ] ) or ( [ hcommutator ] ) .
first , as is well known , in both classical and quantum physics , @xmath0 may be a discrete symmetry instead of a continuous symmetry .
for example , @xmath0 may be parity , which is a symmetry and therefore conserved for all interactions except the weak interaction , as far as we know .
another example is that ( [ symmetry ] ) is satisfied for @xmath15 for a discrete set of values @xmath16 only .
second , in quantum physics the mean value of @xmath8 has more information than the mean value of all the moments of @xmath7 , namely @xmath17 where @xmath18 is any positive integer @xcite .
this is unlike in classical physics where the mean value of a transformation generated by @xmath7 may be obtained using the mean values of all the @xmath17 .
both these situations will be considered in section 5 .    since in ( [ symmetry ] )
@xmath1 and @xmath0 occur symmetrically , it follows that the converse of the generalized noether s theorem is also true : _ a transformation @xmath0 that is conserved must be a symmetry of the equations of motion . _
the usual view is that @xmath1 is more fundamental than @xmath0 because @xmath1 is determined by the dynamical laws which are regarded as primary , whereas the symmetries such as @xmath0 are obtained secondarily as the symmetries of these laws .
but the concise form ( [ symmetry ] ) of the connection between the dynamical laws and symmetries , in which @xmath1 and @xmath0 are on an equivalent footing , suggest that we may equally turn the usual view around and regard the transformations @xmath19 as primary and @xmath1 as derived from them to satisfy ( [ symmetry ] ) so that @xmath19 are the symmetries @xcite .
the possibility of regarding symmetries as fundamental relations between quantum states by associating them with a quantum geometry will be explored in the next section .
the concept of space originates from our common experience of translating objects and from the possible states they can occupy .
if we translate a cup , for example , in various possible ways , classically we may say that the different configurations or states of the cup are `` immersed '' in `` space '' .
this space is _ universal _ in the sense that it is regarded as independent of the objects which are `` contained '' in it .
but quantum mechanically it is not clear what is meant by the cup being `` immersed '' in space .
the cup consists of electrons , protons and neutrons ( or the quarks and gluons which make up the protons and neutrons ) , and the states of these particles belong to the corresponding hilbert spaces which are different from the physical space or the phase space of classical physics .
the translation of a cup therefore needs to be represented by the corresponding translation operators that act on these hilbert spaces .
the fact that all the particles constituting the cup move together in some approximate sense suggests the introduction of universal translation group elements that are represented by operators that act on each hilbert space .
it is this _
universality _ of the translation group that gives us the concept of `` space '' that is independent of the particular system that partakes in it .
also , it is well known that we can not operationally determine the metric in space- time , or even the points of space - time , using quantum probes @xcite because of the uncertainty principle .
if one tries to obtain the space - time geometry using a clock and radar light signals , which is possible in classical physics @xcite , the uncertainty in the measurement of time in quantum physics is @xmath20 , where @xmath21 is the uncertainty in the energy of the clock .
if we try to decrease this uncertainty by increasing @xmath22 , then @xmath22 causes a corresponding uncertainty in the geometry of space- time .
the total uncertainty in the measurement of space - time distances is then @xmath23 .
the minimum value of this uncertainty as @xmath21 is varied is @xmath24 planck - length @xmath25 .
hence , space- time geometry is only approximately valid in quantum theory , with an uncertainty of the order of planck length .
however , a geometry for quantum theory may be defined by relations determined by a universal group @xmath26 , which generalizes the above translation group .
this is universal in the sense that the same @xmath26 has a representation in each hilbert space . but @xmath26 may have subgroups which may have trivial representations in some hilbert spaces and not in others .
an object may be displaced by any @xmath27 , which means that @xmath0 acts on each of the hilbert spaces of the particles or fields constituting that object through the corresponding representation of @xmath26 .
each @xmath28 in each of these hilbert spaces is mapped to a corresponding @xmath29 by this action of @xmath0 , and the group element @xmath0 that determines the _ relation _ between @xmath28 and @xmath29 is independent of the hilbert space and is therefore universal . in the example of a cup considered above ,
@xmath0 is an element of the translation group , @xmath28 and @xmath29 are the states of each particle constituting the cup before and after the translation , and the relation between each such pair is universal in the sense that the entire cup has undergone this translation , or any other object that could take the place of the cup
. this quantum geometry can not be subject to the above criticisms of the space - time geometry because the action of @xmath26 on each hilbert space is not subject to any uncertainty .
it is reasonable to require that this geometry is preserved in time in the absence of interactions .
then each @xmath27 is conserved and the converse of noether s theorem stated in the last paragraph of the previous section implies that @xmath0 is also a symmetry of the time evolution . since the evolution equations are now determined by the standard model , @xmath26 may be the symmetry group of the present day standard model , namely @xmath30 , where @xmath31 is the poincare group .
but if the standard model is superseded by new physics that has a different symmetry group then @xmath26 should be this new group and the above statements would all be unaffected .    as an illustration of the geometrical relations proposed here ,
consider the experimentally known quantization of electric charge : all known charges are integral multiple of the fundamental charge @xmath32 .
an aspect of this is that the magnitudes of the charges of the electron and the proton are experimentally known to be equal to an amazing precision . to obtain charge quantization ,
take @xmath0 above to be an arbitrary element of the electromagnetic @xmath33 group , which is a subgroup of @xmath26 .
this universal @xmath33 group is a circle parametrized by @xmath34 , say , that varies from @xmath35 to @xmath36 so that @xmath35 and @xmath36 represent the same point on this group , chosen to be the identity .
since @xmath33 is abelian , it has only one - dimensional representations .
hence the action of @xmath37 on an arbitrary state gives @xmath38 where @xmath7 corresponds to the particular representation of @xmath33 in the hilbert space in which @xmath28 belongs to .
but since @xmath39 , which is due to the compactness of the @xmath33 group , @xmath40 for all representations @xcite . hence , @xmath41 or @xmath42 where @xmath18 is an integer .    to interpret @xmath7 ,
consider the physical implementation of the transformation @xmath0 .
this may be done by sending each of the particles through the same electromagnetic field with 4-vector potential @xmath43 in a particular gauge so that the effect of the electromagnetic field alone on the particle is given by @xmath44 which is a @xmath33 transformation .
indeed , the statement that the electromagnetic field is a @xmath33 gauge field may be taken to mean that it is physically possible to implement a @xmath33 gauge transformation using the electromagnetic field in this way .
then @xmath9 has the interpretation of the electric charge . comparing ( [ em ] ) with ( [ u1 ] ) , we may take @xmath34 to be @xmath45 in which case @xmath46 . hence , from ( [ quantization ] ) , @xmath47 where @xmath48 is a universal constant that is determined experimentally to be @xmath49 , where @xmath50 is the charge of the electron .
the exact equality of the magnitudes of the charges of the electron and the proton may now be understood as due to them belonging to representations corresponding to @xmath51 and @xmath52 , respectively .
the above argument also provides a reason for the introduction of planck s constant which is purely geometrical .
the exponent in ( [ em ] ) must be dimensionless because the expansion of the exponential has all powers of the exponent .
now , @xmath53 is meaningful in classical physics . but to turn it into a dimensionless quantity , it is necessary to introduce a new scale , which is provided by @xmath54 . from the present point of view
, this is needed in order to physically implement the @xmath33 group elements that define relations between states which are part of the quantum geometry .
also , from ( [ quant ] ) , @xmath9 is proportional to @xmath50 , and @xmath43 is also proportional to @xmath50 because the charges that generate @xmath43 via maxwell s equations are proportional to @xmath50 .
hence , the exponent in ( [ em ] ) is proportional to the fine - structure constant @xmath55 .
this argument may be extended to gauge fields in general , and dimensionless coupling constants are obtained for all of them . from now
onwards , units in which @xmath56 will be used , and the metric convention is @xmath57 .    the relation defined by ( [ em ] ) is not gauge invariant .
hence , it can not be used to define an invariant geometrical ` distance ' .
consider again the translation of a cup which may be performed by acting on all the quantum states of the particles constituting the cup by a universal group element @xmath58 , where @xmath59 is a generator of translation .
the action of this group element on a wave function is also not gauge invariant .
but we may combine the two transformations to define the gauge - covariant transformation @xmath60 , where @xmath61 stands for @xmath62 or equivalently @xmath63 , and @xcite @xmath64 where at present the integral is taken along the straight line joining @xmath65 and @xmath66 for simplicity .
then , clearly , @xmath67 it is easy to show , using ( [ p ] ) and ( [ reversed ] ) , that the set of operators @xmath68 is a group under multiplication .    from ( [ p ] ) , under a gauge transformation , @xmath69 , where @xmath70 , and @xmath71 , @xmath72 transforms to @xmath73 on using @xmath74 it follows that @xmath75 hence , @xmath76 acts gauge covariantly on the hilbert space .
@xmath76 may also shown to be gauge covariant from the fact that @xmath77 is gauge invariant because the integrand is gauge invariant @xcite .
it also follows from ( [ < f > ] ) that the operator ( [ p ] ) is observable .
for example , in the josephson effect , where the current depends on the gauge invariant phase difference across the junction , if @xmath78 is chosen to be the vector across the junction then @xmath72 is observable from the current @xcite .
a gauge may be chosen , even if the field strength is non vanishing , so that the component of @xmath79 in the direction of @xmath78 is zero . then in this gauge @xmath80 , which is conserved for an isolated system .
since @xmath72 is gauge covariant , it follows that ( [ p ] ) is conserved for an isolated system in every gauge .
@xmath72 is a gauge covariant generalization of the modular momentum @xcite , and may be called the modular kinetic momentum .
when two systems interact , there would be an exchange of modular kinetic momentum . indeed ,
this may be regarded as the definition of two systems interacting @xcite . as will be seen in section [ interactions ] , this exchange may happen even when there are no forces between the two systems , which makes the latter interaction more general than the usual interaction via forces . if @xmath81 is the momentum space wave function of @xmath28 , then clearly @xmath82 hence , the change in @xmath83 results in a change in the distribution of the probability density @xmath84 of momentum @xmath85 @xcite . since in the above gauge
the gauge invariant @xmath86 is the same as ( [ ft ] ) , it follows that , in an arbitrary gauge , an interaction results in a change in the distribution of the gauge invariant kinetic momentum @xmath87 .
similarly , the modular energy @xcite may be generalized gauge - covariantly as follows .
define the transformation on the hilbert space @xmath88 by @xmath89 , where @xmath90 and @xmath91 denotes time - ordering . to prove that @xmath88 is gauge - covariant under the above gauge transformation , note first that for a solution @xmath92 of schrdinger s equation , @xmath93 therefore , under the gauge transformation @xmath94 @xmath95 using ( [ se ] ) .
hence , @xmath96 where @xmath97 is the gauge transformed hamiltonian .
the last equation is equivalent to @xmath98 under this gauge transformation , @xmath99 transforms to @xmath100 on using ( [ h ] ) .
hence , @xmath88 acts gauge - covariantly on the hilbert space .
more generally , for an arbitrary gauge field the above arguments hold with @xmath101 replaced by @xmath102 where @xmath103 generate the gauge group , and @xmath104 is the corresponding local gauge transformation .
the gauge field exponential ( parallel transport ) operator will be generalized to be along an arbitrary piece - wise differentiable curve @xmath105 in @xmath106 .
path ordering is necessary because @xmath107 do not commute in general .
the energy - momentum operator @xmath108 is defined by @xmath109 .
now define the transformation @xmath110 on the hilbert space by @xmath111 , where @xmath112 with p denoting path ordering , and @xmath113 is a curve in space - time that is congruent to @xmath105 while @xmath114 is the curve @xmath113 traversed in the reverse order . in ( [ g ] )
, @xmath113 begins at @xmath61 and ends at @xmath115 , where @xmath116 is a fixed vector ( independent of @xmath62 ) , and @xmath114 therefore begins at @xmath115 and ends in @xmath61 .
then @xmath117    under a local gauge transformation , ( [ g ] ) transforms to @xmath118 where @xmath119 .
now write @xmath120 as a product of infinitesimal exponentials of the form @xmath121 , and use ( [ p ] ) and ( [ h ] ) in their infinitesimal forms
. then ( [ g ] ) implies @xmath122 hence , the operator @xmath110 acts gauge covariantly on the hilbert space .
it follows from this proof that @xmath110 would be gauge - covariant also when @xmath114 in ( [ g ] ) is replaced by any piece - wise differentiable curve that would connect @xmath115 to @xmath61 .    also , on using ( [ conjugate ] ) , @xmath123 where @xmath124 .
the expectation value ( [ expectation ] ) is gauge invariant because the integrand is gauge invariant .
it may be observable , in principle , by the josephson effect for a non abelian gauge theory proposed in @xcite .
more experimental consequences of @xmath110 will be discussed in section v.    the energy - momentum operator @xmath108 may be generalized to relativistic quantum field theory by defining its components as the conserved quantities obtained via noether s theorem from the invariance of the lagrangian under space - time translations : @xmath125 where @xmath126 is the conserved , normal - ordered energy - momentum tensor . then the canonical commutation relations imply that @xmath108 generates space - time translations .
it therefore follows from arguments analogous to the above that @xmath110 , given by ( [ g ] ) with the quantum field theoretic @xmath108 , is gauge covariant .
since @xmath108 transforms as a covariant vector under lorentz transformations , it also follows that @xmath110 is lorentz invariant .
moreover , @xmath110 may be generalized to curves @xmath113 in @xmath127
( @xmath18 is any positive integer ) , which would correspond to an @xmath128dimensional space - time .    it may be reasonable to take @xmath110 as a quantum distance that replaces the classical space - time distance along the curve @xmath113 .
but to do so it would be necessary to obtain the classical distance in an appropriate limit from @xmath110 , which will be studied in the next section .
to take the classical limit of this geometry , note that classical space - time is constructed with measuring instruments consisting of particles that have approximate position and momentum .
it is therefore reasonable to represent them by gaussian wave packets which have minimum uncertainty . for a particle with mean position at the origin and mean momentum zero , the normalized wave function of such a state up to an arbitrary phase factor is @xmath129 where @xmath130 is the uncertainty in position .
this may be a state of a molecule in the cup , mentioned in section 3 , in a harmonic oscillator potential in which case it would not spread .
as the cup is displaced , the above wave function becomes @xmath131 up to a phase factor .    in ( [ p ] ) the second factor
may be made the identity by choosing a gauge in which @xmath132 .
therefore , @xmath133 may be regarded as a special case of ( [ p ] ) or ( [ g ] ) , and hence as defining a quantum distance between the states @xmath134 and @xmath135 .
we may therefore expect a metric to be defined on the translation group to which this operator belongs to and use that to define a metric in space .
but this group , being abelian , has no natural metric on it .
there are two ways , however , that a metric may be defined on it .
one is to use the casimir operator of the poincare group , @xmath136 , to define a metric on it , which locally may be associated with the space - time metric @xcite .
the other method , which will be used here , is to utilize the overlap of the two wave functions to obtain a measure of the displacement between them , which would then give an equivalent metric in the translation group .
this is possible if the space of wavefunctions on which this group acts has an inner product , which would give a measure of the overlap and therefore how far a state has been translated .
such a measure is given by the fubini - study metric in the quantum state space , or the set of rays , of every hilbert space .
this is the unique metric , up to multiplication by an overall constant , that is invariant under unitary ( and anti - unitary ) transformations .
this may therefore be written in the form @xcite @xmath137 where @xmath138 is the infinitesimal distance between two neighboring states ( rays ) represented by normalized state vectors @xmath28 and @xmath139 .
clearly , @xmath138 is zero when the states are the same , and it increases when the overlap between the states decreases .
it is also invariant under unitary transformations , and must therefore be the fubini- study metric .
the factor @xmath140 in ( [ fs ] ) is just a convention which ensures that this metric in the state space of the hilbert space spanned by @xmath28 and @xmath139 is the metric on a sphere of unit radius .
now substitute @xmath141 and @xmath142 as @xmath28 and @xmath139 in ( [ fs ] ) .
then , @xmath143 neglecting higher order terms in @xmath144 because it is infinitesimal . hence @xmath145 , which is the same for all hilbert spaces , may be used as a metric on the @xmath146 dimensional translational group that is parametrized by the components of the vector @xmath147 .
locally , this metric may be regarded as a metric in the physical space of classical physics .
this result may be generalized to an arbitrary state @xmath28 as follows .
require that @xmath148 to be close to the identity , where @xmath149 therefore expand @xmath150 where @xmath151 is the momentum component in the direction of @xmath152 .
substituting this in ( [ fs ] ) , @xmath153 where @xmath154 is the uncertainty in @xmath155 : @xmath156 .
for the gaussian wave packet , @xmath157 and therefore ( [ metric2 ] ) gives ( [ metric ] ) in this case .
time is measured by a clock .
since the clock must have moving parts , the uncertainty @xmath21 of its hamiltonian @xmath158 must be non zero . neglecting any external interaction of the clock
, @xmath158 is a constant
. the infinitesimal time evolution of the the clock is given by @xmath159 the fubini - study distance @xmath138 along the evolution curve in the quantum state space corresponding to @xmath160 is obtained analogous to the derivation of ( [ metric2 ] ) to be @xcite @xmath161 a quantum clock directly measures the fubini - study distance @xmath26 and the time @xmath12 is then inferred from @xmath26 using ( [ clock ] ) .
the appearance of the same @xmath12 in ( [ clock ] ) in all hilbert spaces is due to the universality of the action of the time translation @xmath162 in every hilbert space .
this is analogous to the universality of the spatial displacements which was used earlier to obtain the spatial metric .
the spatial translation ( [ spatial ] ) and the active time translation corresponding to ( [ evolution ] ) may be written covariantly as @xmath163 where @xmath164 .
this transformation is the infinitesimal version of ( [ g ] ) in a special gauge that makes the second factor in ( [ g ] ) the identity @xcite . in an arbitrary gauge , the same space and time metrics
are obtained by replacing the operator in ( [ covariant ] ) with the infinitesimal version of ( [ g ] ) in the above treatment . in relativistic quantum theory ,
owing to the transformation property of @xmath165 mentioned at the end of section iii , these metrics give a space - time metric that is invariant under lorentz transformations . in the presence of gravity , this lorentzian metric
may be obtained locally by doing the above space- time translations in a freely falling einstein elevator , which then globally gives a curved pseudo - riemannian metric .
if the quantum geometry is determined by relations between states that are group elements , and if these group elements , which are our observables , are made dynamical the way einstein made space - time distances dynamical in order to obtain gravity , then this would give both gravity and gauge fields @xcite .
also , quantum mechanics has an inherent non locality , which may also be understood as due to these group elements being the basic observables .
the combination of these two statements imply that gauge fields and gravity should affect quantum states in a non local manner as in the aharonov - bohm effect @xcite , as will be discussed later .
first consider the non locality of quantum theory , which may be illustrated by the following example : electrons with initial momentum in the @xmath166 direction go through an infinite diffraction grating in the @xmath167plane of a cartesian coordinate system , with the length of the slits along the @xmath168-direction .
then the grating destroys continuous translational symmetry for the electrons in the @xmath169 direction .
however , if the distance between successive slits in the @xmath170 direction is @xmath171 then @xmath172 satisfies ( [ symmetry ] ) , where @xmath155 is the momentum operator for electrons in the @xmath169direction which generates translations in the @xmath169direction .
( for simplicity , here and henceforth , the @xmath173 over operators is omitted . )
hence , it follows from the generalized noether s theorem in section 2 that @xmath174 is conserved although @xmath155 is _ not _ conserved .
indeed , it is well known that the interference fringes on a screen that is parallel to and far away from the @xmath175- plane is given by @xmath176 , where @xmath177 is the wave length and @xmath18 is an integer .
therefore , the possible values of the momentum for an electron in the @xmath169 direction after the interaction are @xmath178 , i.e. @xmath179 .
hence , @xmath180 is conserved during the passage of electrons through the grating .
the above operator @xmath0 is equivalent to the modular momentum @xmath181 introduced by aharonov et al on the basis of the above example @xcite .
but here i shall treat @xmath0 as an element of a universal group that is used to define a quantum geometry as in section 3 .
@xmath0 may be obtained from experiments by measuring the hermitian observables @xmath182 , s_i \equiv { 1\over 2i}[\exp(-i { p \ell\over \hbar})- \exp(i { p   \ell\over \hbar})].\ ] ] therefore , the unitary operator @xmath0 may also be regarded as an observable .
it is important to note that this is a _ non - local _ observable , unlike @xmath155 .
this non locality in quantum mechanics may be illustrated also in the simple interference experiment of two coherent wave packets .
suppose that the two wave packets are moving in the @xmath166direction and have no overlap at time @xmath12 . for simplicity
, assume that they are the same except that their centers are separated by a displacement @xmath171 in the @xmath169direction .
let @xmath183 be the phase difference between the wave packets .
the wave is then a superposition of these two wave packets : @xmath184 now no local experiments performed on the two wave packets at the two slits could determine the phase factor @xmath185 .
for example , the expectation values of the local variables @xmath186 , where @xmath18 is any positive integer , give no information about @xmath187 @xcite .
this is easily verified by writing @xmath188 in the coordinate representation . but
@xmath189 this means that the momentum distribution at time @xmath12 does depend on the phase factor @xmath190 , i.e. if @xmath155 is measured then the probability distribution for obtaining the individual eigenvalues of @xmath155 is changed by this phase factor ( but the average @xmath191 is unchanged ) . and this may be experimentally verified by letting the wave packets interfere and observing the shift in interference fringes .
hence , @xmath192 contains more information than the expectation values @xmath193 of any of the moments of momentum @xmath186 .
this is basically due to the linear structure of the hilbert space , which physically corresponds to the principle of superposition , and the fact that @xmath28 is not an analytic function .
this fundamental non locality of quantum mechanics translates into a non locality of the effect of all the fundamental interactions on the wave function .
this has been shown for the aharonov - bohm effect due to a magnetic field by aharonov et al @xcite .
it may be illustrated in the above described interference of two wave packets as follows .
suppose the above two wave packets @xmath194 and @xmath195 are those of an electron and they pass on the two sides of a solenoid containing a magnetic flux @xmath196 .
the gauge may be chosen so that the vector potential is non zero only along a thin strip bounded by two planes indicated by the dotted lines in figure 1 .
then when the line @xmath197 passes the solenoid , the wave packet @xmath194 acquires a phase difference @xmath198 with respect to the wave packet @xmath195 .
therefore , the expectation value of the modular momentum @xmath0 , given by ( [ alpha ] ) , which was @xmath199 before the line @xmath197 passed the solenoid is now @xmath200 .
it was pointed out by aharonov @xcite that in the last statement @xmath0 may be replaced by the gauge invariant modular kinetic momentum @xmath72 given by ( [ p ] ) .
this is because before and after the wave packets pass the solenoid the vector potential @xmath79 is zero along the line @xmath197 and therefore @xmath72 is the same as @xmath0 . since @xmath201 is gauge covariant , @xmath202 is gauge invariant .
hence , the above mentioned change in @xmath202 by the factor @xmath203 , as the line @xmath197 crosses the solenoid , is the same in every gauge .
vector aharonov - bohm effect in which a wave packet of an electron is split coherently into two wave packets at the beam splitter @xmath204 which are then made to interfere at @xmath205 . when the imaginary line joining the centers of the wave packets @xmath194 and @xmath195 sweeps across the magnetic flux in the solenoid ( shaded region ) the modular momentum or the modular kinetic momentum associated with this line changes , as pointed out by aharonov @xcite
.    however , we may replace @xmath76 in the above arguments by the more general gauge covariant operator @xmath110 given by ( [ g ] ) with @xmath113 here being an arbitrary ( piece - wise differentiable ) space - like curve that joins @xmath194 and @xmath195 .
then @xmath206 where the integral is from @xmath207 to @xmath208 along @xmath113 .
hence , @xmath209 which is gauge invariant .
then @xmath210 changes by the factor @xmath211 as a portion of @xmath113 crosses the solenoid .
it follows that there is nothing special about the straight line @xmath197 crossing the solenoid in the experiment described in figure 1 .
the arbitrariness of the choice of @xmath113 joining @xmath194 and @xmath195 in the above argument reflects the topological nature of the aharonov - bohm effect .
what is ultimately observed in this effect is the phase factor @xmath212 where the integral is around the solenoid or more generally around the region in which the field strength is non vanishing .
since this is an integral of the @xmath213form @xmath43 along a curve , it contains no information about the metric of space - time@xcite . to determine the straight line , or a geodesic in general ,
the metric is needed , and the above phase factor therefore can not show any preference to a geodesic such as the line @xmath197 .
the integrand of ( [ gamma ] ) ( with @xmath50 replaced by 2@xmath50 ) was previously used in ref .
@xcite to study the josephson effect due to the enclosed magnetic flux in a superconducting ring that has a josephson junction , which is also an aharonov - bohm effect .
consider now the scalar aharonov - bohm effect .
a wave packet traveling in the @xmath166 direction is partially transmitted and reflected by a beam splitter @xmath204 ( figure 2a ) . the resulting two wave packets which travel in opposite directions
are reflected by two mirrors @xmath214 and @xmath215 situated along the @xmath166axis and they interfere subsequently . meanwhile a pair of oppositely charged capacitor plates @xmath216 is separated and closed so that there is a non zero electric field in the region enclosed by the world- lines of the centers of the wave packets in the @xmath217plane .
the same experiment is viewed in the rest frame of the reflected wave packet in figure 2b .
figure 2 . a scalar aharonov - bohm effect shown schematically in the @xmath218plane .
( a ) the modular energy and modular kinetic energy associated with the imaginary lines @xmath219 and @xmath220 are different , partly because of the scalar @xmath197 phase shift due to the region of non zero electric field in the capacitor that is open and shut ( shaded region ) .
( b ) the same experiment viewed in the rest frame of the wave packet that is reflected at the beam splitter @xmath204 .
when the imaginary line @xmath197 joining the wave packets sweeps across the region of non zero electric field in the capacitor the modular energy and modular kinetic energy associated with this line changes due to the ab phase shift .
we may choose a gauge in which the vector potential is non zero only along a strip between the dotted lines parallel to the time - axis in figure 2a or 2b .
then the wave packet @xmath194 at time @xmath221 develops a phase shift @xmath222 with respect to @xmath195 at time
@xmath12 as the imaginary line @xmath197 crosses the space - time region containing the electric field , where @xmath223 and @xmath216 is the region in which the electric field @xmath224 is non zero .
this is a non local effect which may be understood using @xmath225 , where @xmath91 denotes time ordering and @xmath226 is the time interval between the events @xmath227 and@xmath228 .
we shall assume that the time dependence of @xmath11 comes only from the vector potential contained in @xmath11 .
suppose the wave function of the electron is @xmath229 where @xmath230 and @xmath231 are the wave functions of the above two localized wave packets .
then @xmath232 changes by the factor @xmath233 due to the electric field @xmath234 in the region @xmath216 as the imaginary line @xmath197 sweeps across the small region @xmath216 where @xmath234 is non zero ( fig .
2b ) .    in the last statement and in ( [ scab ] ) we may replace @xmath1 by the gauge covariant modular kinetic energy operator @xmath88 given by ( [ h ] ) , with @xmath50 replacing @xmath9 .
this is because @xmath235 is zero along @xmath236 and @xmath237 , which are outside the strip that contains the non zero @xmath43 .
however , is gauge invariant and therefore its change mentioned above may be obtained in any gauge .
but since there are no forces acting on the electron , there is no change of its kinetic energy @xmath238 or any of its moments .
hence , @xmath239 contains non local aspects which can not be obtained by measurements of the kinetic energy operator or any of its moments .
thus the scalar aharonov - bohm effect may be viewed as a quantum effect which is _ non local in time_.    the above results are easily generalized to the aharonov - bohm effects due to non abelian gauge fields@xcite by replacing the electromagnetic fluxes by fluxes of yang - mills field strength , and using the expectation values ( [ expectation ] ) of the gauge covariant operator @xmath110 given by ( [ g ] ) . in all cases , the gauge invariant @xmath240 changes as @xmath113 passes a cross - section of the gauge field flux .
if the gauge field flux has a singular cross - section , then @xmath113 passes the flux at an event , which of course is independent of the inertial frame in which the effect is being described . when this happens , in this idealized case , @xmath240 changes to @xmath241 , where @xmath216 is a closed curve going around the yang - mills flux .
the group element ( [ g ] ) belongs to the group @xmath242 , where for a closed system @xmath243 is the translation group and @xmath244 is the gauge group .
but it has an asymmetry in that the part of ( [ g ] ) that belongs to @xmath244 is dynamical , whereas the part that belongs to @xmath243 is fixed .
since i proposed that the fundamental interactions should correspond to the universal group element ( [ g ] ) being dynamical , consistency requires that the part of ( [ g ] ) that belongs to @xmath243 should be dynamical as well , i.e. @xmath116 should be made dynamical .
but the classical space - time geometry was constructed in section 4 using the latter group elements .
it follows therefore that making @xmath116 dynamical would make the space - time metric dynamical and not fixed as it is in minkowski space - time .
therefore , the interaction that corresponds to making the @xmath243 group elements dynamical gives , in the classical limit , the well known geometrical description of gravity in classical general relativity . a generalization of it is obtained by replacing @xmath243 with @xmath245 , where @xmath18 is any positive integer .
thus the present approach requires the existence of gravity .
i now give a simple illustration of the above unified way of treating gravity and gauge fields by considering the gravitational analog of the above vector aharonov - bohm effect .
the geometry surrounding a cosmic string in the two dimensional section normal to the axis of the string at a given time is that of a cone whose center is at the axis , which is seen by solving the classical gravitational field equations @xcite .
the space - time geometry of a non- rotating cosmic string is obtained by simply adding to this plane the extra dimension in the direction of the axis and the time dimension ; then the curvature outside the string is zero everywhere ( figure 3 ) .
it is known that this geometry is similar to the electromagnetic field around a solenoid because the curvature is zero outside the string and yet there is a non trivial holonomy around it .
consider now two wave packets separated by a distance @xmath171 and whose centers move along initially parallel lines such that the geodesic line @xmath197 joining their centers meets the conical singularity @xmath26 at its midpoint .
but there is another geodesic that connects the same pair of points @xmath194 and @xmath195 of length @xmath246 , shown by the line @xmath247 in figure 3 , where @xmath248 is identified with @xmath194 .
( actually , there are two geodesics connecting @xmath194 and @xmath195 when the angle @xmath249 on the left side exceeds @xmath250 but is less than @xmath251 .
the corresponding angles @xmath249 on the right side are @xmath251 and @xmath250 , respectively . the    figure 3 .
a gravitational analog of the experiment in fig .
the conical geometry around a cosmic string that is normal to the plane through @xmath26 is represented by cutting off the wedge @xmath252 from flat space and identifying the planes along which it is cut .
the wave packets moving at @xmath194 ( same as @xmath248 ) and @xmath195 are focused by this geometry to interfere at @xmath205 . just before @xmath197 crosses @xmath26 , there are two geodesics connecting @xmath194 and @xmath195 of lengths @xmath171 and @xmath253 in the curvature free region .
but just after the crossing there is a unique geodesic @xmath247 of length @xmath253 joining @xmath194 and @xmath195 .
singularity may be replaced by a small smooth cap that merges with the rest of the cone smoothly .
then there would be a third geodesic joining @xmath194 and @xmath195 though this cap . ) just after @xmath197 crosses the conical singularity , there is only one geodesic joining @xmath194 and @xmath195 , whose length is @xmath253 .
this is somewhat analogous to the change in modular kinetic momentum when @xmath197 crosses the solenoid in fig . 1 ,
because @xmath254 now translates locally along parallel geodesic line segments of length @xmath171 , and this length has gotten shorter after the crossing .    in figure 4 , this result is generalized to the case of @xmath26 not being the midpoint of the geodesic @xmath255 , and it is also seen to be ` gauge ' independent in the sense of being invariant under the rotation of the ` wedge ' mentioned above .
there is then a phase shift @xmath256 due to the difference in path lengths traveled by the wave packets given by @xmath257 for small @xmath258 , where and @xmath259 and @xmath260 are the path lengths @xmath261 and @xmath262 , @xmath263 is the mass per unit length of the cosmic string , and @xmath264 is the initial momentum of the particle . if the particle carries spin , then there is also a phase shift due to the coupling of spin to the curvature .
a generalization of the gedanken experiment shown schematically in fig . 3 to unequal lengths @xmath265 and @xmath266 .
the wedge @xmath267 has an arbitrary orientation .
but since @xmath268 and @xmath269 are identified , and @xmath270 in order for @xmath271 to be a geodesic , the distances along the geodesics @xmath255 and @xmath271 are respectively @xmath272 and @xmath273 , as shown in fig .
( b ) , independently of the orientation of the wedge .
this and other phase shifts for interference of two wave packets around a cosmic string are studied elsewhere and are understood as being due to the poincare holonomy around the string @xcite . in the present approach , these phase shifts may be understood by associating with each curve an element of the poincare group element @xcite whose expectation value changes as the curve crosses the cosmic string .
the change in geodesic distances between the wave packets due to the cosmic string , in section 5 , is not surprising because gravity changes distances , according to general relativity , and the cosmic string is a purely general relativistic object without a newtonian analog .
what may be more interesting is the similar change of the ` quantum distances ' due to the electromagnetic field in the usual aharonov - bohm effect and its generalization to non abelian gauge fields .
both these effects may be treated in a somewhat analogous manner if the modular kinetic energy - momentum ( [ g ] ) , regarded here as universal group elements , may be interpreted as ` distances ' in a quantum geometry as proposed earlier .
the fact that space - time distances may be obtained from them approximately , as shown in section 4 , reinforces this view .
the treatment of ( [ g ] ) as an observable , which implies the above mentioned non local effects in quantum theory , perhaps removes the mystery of why although the interactions are local as they occur in the hamiltonian or lagrangian , nevertheless there are non- local effects such as the aharonov - bohm and its generalizations to non abelian gauge fields and gravitation @xcite .    a criticism that may be made against regarding the universal group elements ( [ g ] ) as quantum distances is that their action on wave functions seems to require that @xmath105 be interpreted as a set of space - time curves , whereas it was argued in section 3 that space - time geometry is not appropriate for quantum theory . however , as discussed in that section , this limitation becomes critical only at the planck scales .
but at the planck scale these group elements need not be associated with curves in space - time .
they may be defined simply as operators acting on quantum states defining the quantum geometry and representing the fundamental interactions .
thus it is possible to have a quantum geometry even at scales in which the space - time geometry breaks down and this would also give a quantum description of all the interactions .
the action of @xmath274 on an analytic wave function @xmath28 may be understood as the usual taylor expansion of @xmath28 .
if @xmath28 is not analytic , then @xmath275 acts on the momentum space wave function @xmath81 according to @xmath276 in either case , we obtain @xmath277 .
this explains why in the non relativistic limit for the charged particle , the aharonov - bohm phase shift that it experiences due to the phase factor @xmath212 remains the same .
this is because the latter phase factor is unaffected by the change in the space - time metric that takes place in the non relativistic limit .
this reconciles the views of y. aharonov and c. n. yang , who regarded the aharonov - bohm effect as being non local and local , respectively , in proceedings of the international symposium on the foundations of quantum mechanics , tokyo , august 1983 , edited by s. kamefuchi et al .
( physical society of japan , tokyo , 1984 ) 65 - 73 .