macroscopic objects in contact with an ionized gas acquire a negative charge because the influx of electrons from the plasma outruns the influx of ions .
the collection of electrons at the wall ( boundary of the object ) gives rise to a repulsive coulomb potential which reduces the electron influx until the wall charge reaches a quasi - stationary value . as a consequence of the electron accumulation at the wall an electron depleted region , the plasma sheath ,
is formed adjacent to the wall .
most of the voltage driving the discharge drops across the sheath . wall charges may however not only affect the spatial structure of the plasma but also surface - supported elementary process such as electron - ion recombination and secondary electron emission , which are particularly important in dusty plasmas,@xcite dielectric barrier discharges,@xcite and solid - state based micro - discharges.@xcite a macroscopic description of the plasma - induced wall charge , sufficient for the modeling of the plasma sheath ,  @xcite is clearly insufficient for quantifying the effect wall charges might have on these processes .
a microscopic description of the plasma - induced wall charge and the potential across the plasma - wall interface it leads to is required .
traditionally , plasma walls are treated as perfect absorbers.@xcite irrespective of the microscopic interaction , all electrons and ions impinging on the wall are assumed to recombine instantly . from this model
only the wall potential just outside the wall can be obtained .
this is the potential that balances the electron and ion influx at the wall .
a first , qualitative step going beyond this model was taken by emeleus and coulter,@xcite who envisaged the wall charge as a two - dimensional surface plasma coupled to the bulk plasma via electron - ion wall recombination .
no attempt was however made to put this appealing idea onto a formal basis .
later the notion of a two - dimensional surface charge was developed further by behnke and coworkers@xcite utilizing phenomenological rate equations for the electron and ion surface densities . in these equations , the microphysics at the wall
is encapsulated in surface parameters , such as , electron and ion sticking coefficients , electron and ion desorption times , and an electron - ion wall recombination coefficient . in principle
these parameters can be calculated .
assuming , for instance , plasma electrons to ad- and desorb in the long - range image potential of the wall we calculated in our previous work electron sticking coefficients and electron desorption times for uncharged metallic  @xcite and dielectric surfaces .
@xcite we also made a first attempt to estimate these two quantities for charged dielectric plasma walls  @xcite and proposed a physisorption - inspired microscopic charging model for dust particles in a gas discharge .
@xcite    in this work , we shift gears and focus on the potential and charge distribution across the plasma - wall interface after the quasi - stationary wall charge ( electron adsorbate in the notation of our previous work  @xcite ) has been established . in other words , we extend the modeling of the plasma sheath  @xcite to the region inside the solid and calculate the plasma - induced modifications of the potential and charge distribution of the surface . although knowing the potential and charge distribution across the interface may not be of particular importance for present day technological plasmas , it is of fundamental interest from an interface physics point of view .
in addition , considering the plasma wall as an integral part of the plasma sheath may become critical when the miniaturization of solid - state based plasma devices  @xcite continues .    in the model outlined below we
specifically consider a dielectric wall and treat the plasma - induced quasi - stationary wall charge , that is , the surplus charge on top of the charge distribution of the bare , free - standing surface , as an electron surface layer of a certain extent , which is trapped by and in thermal equilibrium with the wall . in order to determine the chemical potential , width , and spatial position ( relative to the crystallographic interface ) of the electron surface layer , which depend on surface as well as plasma parameters , we employ a one - dimensional model for a graded interface between a collisionless plasma sheath and a dielectric surface which is assumed to be a perfect absorber , that is , the wall potential balances at a certain distance from the crystallographic interface the electron and the ion influx from the plasma .
the model of a graded interface encompasses two important ingredients : the surface dipole of the bare surface responsible for the offset of the conduction band minimum to the potential just outside the dielectric and the long - range image potential .
the former accounts for the charge re - distribution of the free - standing , uncharged surface arising from the truncation of the crystal and the latter supports polarization - induced external surface states ( image states ) , first predicted for liquid helium  @xcite and later studied for metallic and dielectric surface with negative electron affinity  @xcite , which may trap the electron surface layer in front of the crystallographic interface .
originally proposed by stern for the interface between two dielectrics,@xcite and later on used by others for semiconductor heterojunctions  @xcite and electron trapping in nanopores,@xcite the graded interface model also guarantees continuity of the electrostatic potential across the plasma - wall interface .
the model thus allows us to study the spatial distribution of the plasma - induced wall charge across the interface . to insert the surplus charge into the interface we follow tkharev and danilyuk  @xcite and minimize , in the spirit of density functional theory ,  @xcite the grand canonical potential of wall - thermalized excess electrons
we also investigate how the electron surface layer merges with the neutral bulk of the dielectric which we describe with the model of an intrinsic semiconductor .
various improvements of the model are conceivable but the increased mathematical complexity would mask the general ideas we would like to convey .
for instance , the model of a collisionless sheath could be replaced by more realistic models .
@xcite going beyond the perfect absorber model , on the other hand , is an unsolved problem .
it would require the inclusion of electron desorption , electron sticking , and electron - ion recombination , with the respective coefficients to be self - consistently calculated for the quasi - stationary electron adsorbate at the wall .
replacing the graded interface by an ab - initio theory for the surface , for instance , along the lines given in refs .
@xcite , possibly taking ad - layers of the host gas atoms or molecules as well as impurities and imperfections into account , is desirable but at the present stage of the investigation impractical .
it would require an expensive atomistic characterization of the plasma - wall interface , either experimentally via various surface diagnostics or theoretically via ab - initio simulations .
as long as the atomistic details affect however only the off - sets of the dielectric constant , the electron affinity , and the effective mass , the graded interface model already incorporates these details by a suitable parameterization .
what is not well described is the non - universal region a few atomic units below and above the crystallographic interface .
in particular , intrinsic surface states ( shockley and tamm states  @xcite ) and additional surface states which may arise from the short - range surface potential due to impurities , imperfections , and ad - layers are not included .
if unoccupied these states could trap the electron surface layer in the vicinity of the interface even for surfaces with positive electron affinity where image states are absent and can not trap the surplus charge in front of the surface .
the remaining paper is structured as follows . in sec .
[ electron surface layermain ] we first construct a crude model for the plasma - induced electron surface layer at the interface between a plasma and a dielectric wall .
it does not account for the merging of the electron surface layer with the bulk of the dielectric .
as long as the primary interest is in the region close to the crystallographic interface and the band gap of the dielectric is large enough , the crude model is sufficient .
section  [ negativescr ] describes a refinement of the model which enables one to also investigate the cross - over of the electron surface layer to the bulk of the dielectric .
this is particularly important for dielectrics with small energy gaps .
numerical results for the potential and the electron distribution are given in section [ results ] and a short summary is formulated in sec .
[ summary ] .
as depicted in fig .  [ figure1 ] , we consider an ideal , planar interface at @xmath2 with the dielectric occupying the half - space @xmath3 and the discharge occupying the half - space @xmath4 .
chemical contamination and structural damage due to the burning gas discharge are discarded . at the moment we focus on the physical principles controlling the electronic properties of the plasma - wall interface . in the model
we propose the plasma - induced wall charge to be treated as an electron surface layer ( esl ) which is an interface specific electron distribution on top of the charge re - distribution due to the truncation of the solid .
the esl is assumed to be thermalized with the solid and to stretch from the plasma sheath over the crystallographic interface to the bulk of the dielectric .
the boundary between the esl and the plasma sheath is located in front of the surface at @xmath5 .
it is the position where the attractive force due to the surface potential @xmath6 and the repulsive force due to the sheath potential @xmath7 balance each other .
thus , @xmath8 is given by @xmath9 it gives the position of an effective wall for plasma electrons and ions at which , for instance , the flux balance condition of the perfect absorber model , @xmath10 , with @xmath11 and @xmath12 , respectively , the electron and ion flux towards the dielectric surface , has to be fulfilled . for @xmath13 an electron
is attracted to the surface and thus contained in the esl while for @xmath14 it is repelled back into the plasma . on the solid side , for @xmath3 ,
the esl is bounded because of the shallow potential well formed by the restoring force from the positive charge in the plasma sheath .    in this section
we will outline the essential building blocks of the esl model .
putting together concepts from plasma as well as surface physics a detailed , self - contained account seems to be helpful .      in the traditional view , electrons missing in the positive space charge region in front of the plasma wall accumulate on the wall and give rise to a wall potential . for the construction of our one - dimensional interface model
we need the total number per unit area of missing sheath electrons ( that is , the total surface density of missing sheath electrons ) as a function of the wall potential because it is this number of electrons which can be distributed across the esl .
hence , we require a model for the plasma sheath .    for simplicity
, we use a collisionless sheath  @xcite , more realistic sheath models  @xcite make no difference in principle . in the collisionless
sheath electrons are thermalized , that is , the electron density @xmath15 , with @xmath16 the potential , @xmath17 the plasma density and @xmath18 the electron temperature .
the ions enter the sheath with a directed velocity @xmath19 and satisfy a source - free continuity equation , @xmath20 , implying @xmath21 , and an equation of motion @xmath22 , with @xmath23 the ion density , and @xmath24 the ion mass .
the potential @xmath16 satisfies poisson s equation @xmath25 .
thus , the governing equations for the collisionless plasma sheath are  @xcite @xmath26 \text { . }
\label{sheath2}\end{aligned}\ ] ] using dimensionless variables @xmath27 where @xmath28 equations ( [ sheath1 ] ) and ( [ sheath2 ] ) become @xmath29    in the esl model the plasma occupies not the whole half space @xmath4 but only the portion @xmath14 ( see fig.[figure1 ] ) .
the integration of the first equation gives , where @xmath30 is the reduced velocity of ions entering the sheath , so that the second equation becomes @xmath31 using the boundary condition that the potential and the field vanish far inside the plasma , that is , @xmath32 and @xmath33 for @xmath34 , eq . ( [ clsheatheq ] ) can be integrated once and we obtain @xmath35 for ions entering the sheath with the bohm velocity @xmath36 .
the field at the wall as a function of the wall potential @xmath37 is then given by @xmath38    the total surface density of electrons in the esl equals the total surface density of missing sheath electrons , in other words , the total surplus surface density of positive ions in the sheath @xmath39 which can be calculated from the electric field at the wall . integrating poisson s equation yields @xmath40 combing eqs .
( [ neq ] ) and ( [ etawprime ] ) gives the total surface density of electrons to be inserted into the esl as a function of the wall potential .
the wall potential itself is determined by the flux balance condition , @xmath10 , which , in the esl model , is assumed to be fulfilled at @xmath5 .
using the bohm flux for the ions and the thermal flux for the electrons , @xmath41 the wall potential is given by  @xcite @xmath42 that is , @xmath43 in the collisionless sheath model the wall potential depends only on the electron temperature and the ion to electron mass ratio .
we now turn to the interface region in which the missing sheath electrons will be inserted .
this region is absent in the traditional modeling of plasma walls . in our model
it is an extended region surrounding an ideal dielectric surface . in comparison to the electrons responsible for the chemical binding within the dielectric
the additional electrons coming from the plasma are only a few .
the electronic structure of the surface , in particular , the charge re - distribution due to truncation of the solid and the offset of the energy bands in the bulk with respect to the potential outside the dielectric will not be changed significantly by the presence of the surplus electrons comprising the wall charge .    in order to quantify the above statement
let us first consider the electrostatic potential and the electronic structure of a free - standing , uncharged dielectric surface . according to tung,@xcite it has to minimize the thermodynamical potential and satisfy poisson s equation implying that the potential is continuous across the surface .
strictly speaking , the continuity of the potential only applies to the microscopic crystal potential which has to merge continuously with the surface potential outside the crystal .
the averaged long - range potential , in contrast , can be discontinuous at the interface .
it is this offset which is encoded in the surface dipole .
the energy of an electronic state in the bulk of the dielectric can be referenced to the vacuum level @xmath44 , that is , the potential far outside the crystal , in the following way,@xcite @xmath45 where @xmath46 is the quantum - mechanical contribution to the energy , @xmath47 is the averaged potential of a cell due to the charge distribution within the same cell , and @xmath48 is the long range potential due to the surface dipole , space charges , and external fields . in the simple two - band model depicted in fig .
[ figure1 ] , @xmath49 .
@xmath50 contains the surface dipole arising from the truncation of the solid and responsible for the potential offset at the surface and a slowly varying component due to external fields and internal and plasma - induced space charges .
external fields and internal space charges will be neglected in the following and plasma - induced space charges will be accounted for by poisson s equation ( see below ) .    in order to judge
whether the surplus charge arising from the plasma affects the surface dipole it is useful to consider first the typical strength of the surface dipole of a free - standing , uncharged dielectric surface .
it results from a charge double - layer in immediate proximity to the surface . depending on the material it can have various origins . for an ionic crystal , for example
, it is the lattice relaxation at the surface which makes anions or cations to protrude and the other species to retract ( e.g. protruding oxygen and retracted cations for magnesium oxide@xcite ) , while for semiconductors it is the regrouping of covalent bonds which leads to charge re - distribution at the surface . even in the absence of these effects
the minimization of the thermodynamic potential of the surface s electrons leads already to an electron density leaking out into the vacuum .
this is particularly important for metals . as a result
a charge double - layer is formed over a length on the order of a lattice constant .
the dipole layer is usually characterized by a dipole strength @xmath51 where @xmath52 is the limit of the long range potential just inside the crystal at the surface position @xmath53 and @xmath54 is the limit of the potential at that position just outside the surface .
usually these two potentials , which characterize the discontinuity of the long - range potential at the surface , are termed the potential just inside and the potential just outside , respectively.@xcite here , just outside denotes a distance small compared to variations of the long - range potential due to external fields or space charges but large compared with the width of the charge double - layer .
note also that in the definition of the potential just outside the image potential is assumed to have already decreased to zero .
@xcite this point will be important later .
the strength of the dipole layer is a microscopic property of the surface which is relatively insensitive against the additional charges from the plasma .
the reason for this lies in the small number of additional electrons from the plasma compared to the number of displaced electrons involved in the formation of the dipole layer . to prove this statement we give a simple estimate .
typical surface dipoles @xmath55 are on the order of electron volts . for a double - layer of one @xmath56 to each side of the crystallographic interface a potential difference of one volt
requires a surface charge density of @xmath57 . the surface charge density at the wall of a helium discharge with plasma density @xmath58 and electron temperature @xmath59 amounts , however , only to @xmath60 .
for typical plasma densities , the number of additional electrons is thus far too small to lead to a change of the surface dipole . even for semiconductor - based microdischarges  @xcite , which can have much higher plasma densities
, we expect the surface dipole of the plasma wall not to be modified by the plasma .    in view of the just given estimate
, we have to revise an assumption in our previous work,@xcite where we assumed the surface charge accumulating on the wall would increase the dipole energy @xmath55 by @xmath61 , leading to the image states being pushed from the band gap into the energy region of the conduction band .
the numbers given in the previous paragraph indicate , however , that the band line - up of the conduction band and the potential just outside the solid , will not be affected much by the wall charge . hence ,
if a negative electron affinity supports image states in front of the uncharged surface , these states remain in the band gap for the charged surface .
electron trapping as investigated in refs .
@xcite is thus even possible for charged plasma walls .    instead of the dipole strength
@xmath55 which can not be measured directly , it is more convenient to characterize the dipole layer by the electron affinity @xmath62 which is a measurable quantity for a dielectric surface .
@xcite the electron affinity is the energy released when an electron is moved from just outside the surface to the bottom of the conduction band .
it accounts for charge re - distribution in the vicinity of the surface due to the truncation of the crystal . while many surfaces have positive electron affinity such as al@xmath0o@xmath1 or sio@xmath0 , there are also materials with negative electron affinity , for instance , diamond  @xcite , boron nitride@xcite , or the alkaline earth oxides .
@xcite the electron affinity depends also on ad - atoms . in some cases this
is even used to control the electron affinity of a surface .
terminating , for instance , a surface with weakly electronegative elements such as hydrogen induces a negative electron affinity ,  @xcite while termination with strongly electronegative elements can lead to a positive electron affinity .
@xcite    from eq .
( [ energyreference ] ) it is clear that @xmath62 equals @xmath55 plus a bulk contribution , @xmath63 where @xmath64 denotes the minimum of the conduction band .
we can thus use @xmath62 to characterize the potential offset at the surface .
there is however a caveat .
the long - range potential inside the solid is only specified up to a constant.@xcite typical choices are the cell - averaged potential or the inter - sphere potential of the muffin - tin approximation . for our purpose it will be however more convenient to take the conduction band minimum as the long - range potential inside the solid .
this choice is motivated as follows .
we are considering a dielectric with a large energy gap .
the valence band is thus fully occupied and the conduction band is essentially empty .
hence , only the conduction band can be populated by additional electrons coming from the plasma and referencing the electrostatic potential inside the solid to the conduction band minimum allows us to relate the total surplus electron density in the interface region to the potential in the interface region in analogy to what we have done for the plasma sheath in the previous subsection .    adopting the above discussion to the one - dimensional model shown in fig .
[ figure1 ] and assuming a quadratic dispersion for the conduction band , the energy of an electron in the conduction band is given by @xmath65 where @xmath66 is the total surface potential to be determined in the next subsection and the offset of the electrostatic potential at the surface , @xmath67 encompasses the surface dipole as well as the unspecified bulk contribution .      the surface potential of the bare , uncharged surface comprises at least the surface dipole and a long - range contribution , the image potential , resulting from the mismatch of the dielectric constants at the surface .
far away from the surface the image potential is given by@xcite @xmath68 but this expression can not be employed for our purpose because the singularity at @xmath2 prohibits a smooth electron distribution across the interface .
in reality the image potential has to continuously merge with the crystal potential .
equation  ( [ imageclassical ] ) is thus also unphysical .    to obtain a realistic image potential without performing an atomistically accurate calculation
we employ the model of a graded interface .
it also has the virtue to be parameterizable with experimentally measured values for the electron affinity , the dielectric mismatch , and the mismatch between effective electron masses .
the model incorporates therefore important properties of a surface , most importantly , it accounts for the charge re - distribution due to the truncation of the solid .
initially proposed by stern  @xcite to remove the unphysical singularity of the image potential at the interface of two dielectrics , the graded interface model assumes the dielectric constant @xmath69 to vary over a distance on the order of a lattice constant .
later the model was extended to variations of other physical quantities and applied to semiconductor heterostructures and nanopores .
@xcite clearly , because of the interpolation the model can not account for effects associated with intrinsic surface states ( shockley and tamm states  @xcite ) and additional surface states which may arise from the short - range surface potential .
nevertheless , the graded interface model is a reasonable description of a surface .    in the spirit of a graded interface , we assume the dielectric constant @xmath69 , the electron mass @xmath70 , and the potential offset at the surface to vary smoothly according to the grading function @xmath71 where @xmath72 is the half width of the graded interface and @xmath73 stands for the quantity that varies across the interface .
we use the value @xmath74 which is an estimate used in previous applications of the graded interface.@xcite while the grading parameter @xmath72 is not based on definite experimental or theoretical results it is motivated by the assumption that the bonding and the electron density at the surface change over one to two lattice constants implying a transition layer for the effective potential and the dielectric constant that is somewhat larger .
hence , across the interface the electron mass , the dielectric constant and the offset potential are given by @xmath75 and @xmath76 respectively , with @xmath77 the effective mass of the conduction band .
within the model of the graded interface , the image potential is the change in the selfenergy of an electron due to the proximity of the dielectric mismatch .
positioning the electron at @xmath78 it is given by  @xcite @xmath79~,\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath80 is the potential in the medium with dielectric mismatch arising from the electron at @xmath78 and @xmath81 is the same quantity in a homogeneous medium with dielectric constant @xmath82 .
hence , @xmath80 is the solution of @xmath83 while @xmath81 is the solution of @xmath84    to solve eqs .
( [ potmismatch ] ) and ( [ potnomismatch ] ) we follow stern@xcite and make the ansatz @xmath85 placing the electron on the @xmath86 axis , @xmath87 which implies @xmath88 and @xmath89 for @xmath90 . hence
, we need to keep only the @xmath91 term , so that @xmath92 where @xmath93 is given by @xmath94 and @xmath95 is the solution of @xmath96 which has to be obtained numerically .
the image potential is then given by @xmath97 in contrast to eq .
( [ imageclassical ] ) it is now smoothly varying across the interface with a deep well on the low-@xmath69 side and a small bump on the high-@xmath69 side .
the total surface potential comprises the graded offset potential ( [ gradedoffsetpotential ] ) and the graded image potential .
hence , @xmath98 it is continuous across the crystallographic interface at @xmath2 and enables us thereby to also calculate a smoothly varying electron distribution in the esl . the band structure and the total surface potential at the graded interface
are visualized in the lower panel of fig .
[ figure1 ] .    using eq .
( [ z0condition ] ) we can now determine the position @xmath8 of the effective wall , that is , the maximum extent of the esl on the plasma side .
the derivative of the bare surface potential is @xmath99 . due to the relatively weak field in the sheath
compared to the image force , the boundary @xmath8 will be so far away from the interface that @xmath100 vanishes and the image potential obeys  ( [ imageclassical ] ) .
thus , the boundary between the esl and the plasma sheath is given by @xmath101 with @xmath102 and @xmath103 given by  ( [ etawprime ] ) .
the plasma - induced wall charge is assumed to be in thermal equilibrium with the wall .
hence , the distribution of the excess electrons in the esl has to minimize the excess electron s grand canonical potential in the external potential due to the surface .
the coupling to the sheath is maintained by the constraint that only as many electrons can be filled into the esl as are missing in the sheath and the boundary conditions to the poisson equation which links the electron distribution in the esl to the ( internal ) electrostatic potential .    to minimize the grand canonical potential of the surplus electrons we follow tkharev and danilyuk  @xcite and apply density functional theory  @xcite to the graded interface .
while more refined schemes of density functional theory@xcite could , in principle , be employed , we will use for the purpose of this exploratory calculation density functional theory in the local approximation .
quite generally , the grand canonical potential of an electron system in an external potential @xmath104 is given in the local approximation by @xmath105- \mu \int n(\vec{r } ) \mathrm{d}\vec{r } \text { , } \end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath106 $ ] is the grand canonical potential of the homogeneous system with density @xmath107 and the coulomb potential is determined by @xmath108 the ground state electron density minimizes @xmath109 , that is , it satisfies @xmath110 where @xmath111/\delta n$ ] is the chemical potential for the homogeneous system .    specifically for the excess electrons in the one - dimensional graded interface eq .
( [ dft ] ) reduces to @xmath112 where @xmath113 and the electrostatic potential , @xmath114 consists of the potential of the bare surface given by eq .
( [ totalphi ] ) and the internal coulomb potential which satisfies poisson s equation , @xmath115 with the graded dielectric constant @xmath116 given by eq .
( [ graded1 ] ) and the boundary conditions @xmath117 and @xmath118 to guarantee continuity of the potential at @xmath8 and to include the restoring force from the positive charge in the sheath .
note that the coulomb potential derived from this equation includes the attraction of an electron to the image of the charge distribution .    for the functional relation @xmath113
we take the expression adequate for a homogeneous , non - interacting , non - degenerate electron gas , @xmath119 this is justified because the density of the excess electrons is rather low and the temperature of the surface is rather high , typically a few hundred kelvins .    in order to calculate the quasi - stationary distribution of the surplus electrons , eqs .
( [ vareq ] ) and ( [ poiseq ] ) have to be solved self - consistently with the additional constraint that the total electron surface density in the esl equals the total surface density of electrons missing in the sheath , that is , @xmath120 with @xmath39 given by eq . (
[ neq ] ) . in the above equation we introduced a cut - off @xmath121 at which the esl terminates inside the dielectric . as long as @xmath122 is chosen large enough it does not affect the numerical results close to the surface .
an improved treatment of the esl , avoiding the ad - hoc cut - off , is given in the next section .
within the crude esl model developed in this section the computation is performed iteratively in the interval @xmath123 according to the following scheme : ( i ) we start with the potential of the empty surface given by eq .
( [ potdft ] ) with @xmath124 obtained from eq .
( [ poiseq ] ) with @xmath125 but with the boundary conditions at @xmath8 as specified .
( ii ) we integrate both sides of eq .
( [ neq ] ) over @xmath86 with @xmath126 given by eq .
( [ vareq ] ) . enforcing
the constraint ( [ nconstraint ] ) determines @xmath127 .
( iii ) using @xmath127 we calculate from eq .
( [ vareq ] ) a new @xmath126 which gives with eq .
( [ neq ] ) a new electron density @xmath128 .
lastly , we determine from eq .
( [ poiseq ] ) the electrostatic potential associated with the up - dated @xmath128 . steps ( ii ) - ( iv )
are iterated until @xmath127 , which is far below the conduction band edge because of the non - degeneracy of the excess electrons , converges .
in the previous section we have taken into account only the electron concentration in the conduction band of the dielectric due to the electrons coming from the plasma . for wide band gap materials this is justified , especially near the surface , as their concentration is much larger than the intrinsic carrier concentration .
deep inside the dielectric , however , charge neutrality is not enabled by a vanishing electron density , but by the electron density decreasing to its intrinsic value , which is then balanced by the intrinsic hole concentration in the valence band .    to take this effect into account , which is particularly important
when the additional electrons accumulate deep inside the bulk of the dielectric , we divide the esl into two regions : a very narrow interface - specific region ( isr ) and a wide space charge region ( scr ) in the bulk of the dielectric .
the parameter @xmath129 denotes now no longer an ad - hoc cut - off but the boundary between the two regions .
it has to be chosen so that the isr includes the major effect of the image potential in the dielectric implying @xmath130 .
the electron distribution and the potential in the isr are calculated using the density functional approach outlined in the previous section . in the scr
we use for simplicity the model of an intrinsic semiconductor to describe electron and hole densities as well as the long - range potential . as the energy bands in the dielectric
follow the long - range potential the refined esl also captures the band bending which might be induced by the presence of the wall charge .
it is however only significant when most of the excess electrons are trapped in the scr and not in the isr .
figure  [ figure1a ] schematically shows the electron and hole densities for the refined esl model .
the boundary between the plasma sheath and the esl is still located at @xmath8 . as our model
does not encompass the electron and ion flux from the plasma for @xmath13 , the densities @xmath131 and @xmath23 are discontinuous at @xmath8 .
this is obvious for the ions which are not allowed to enter the solid .
the discontinuity of the electron density , in contrast , arises because we ensure only the total number of missing sheath electrons per unit area to be conserved .
this global constraint can not guarantee continuity of the electron density at @xmath8 . at the boundary between the isr ( @xmath123 ) and the scr ( @xmath132 ) the electron density and the potential are continuous . in principle ,
also the hole density @xmath133 should be continuous .
as @xmath134 for the materials we are considering , we can however neglect holes in the isr .    for the modeling of the scr it is convenient to use @xmath135 for the long range potential , which vanishes for charge neutrality in the bulk .
here , @xmath136 ( see below for an explicit relation for @xmath137 ) .
then , poisson s equation is given by , @xmath138 where the electron and hole densities for an intrinsic semiconductor with parabolic bands whose extremal points are , respectively , @xmath139 and @xmath140 are given by  @xcite @xmath141    from a comparison of the exponents in eq .
( [ compneq ] ) and eq .
( [ neq ] ) , where @xmath142 is given by eq .
( [ vareq ] ) we find @xmath143 far from the surface , @xmath144 and @xmath145 .
this gives the chemical potential @xmath146 and the bulk carrier concentration @xmath147 @xmath148 where @xmath149 .
hence , poisson s equation becomes @xmath150 and using dimensionless variables @xmath151 with @xmath152 we obtain @xmath153 this equation can be integrated once , which gives @xmath154 the boundary conditions in the bulk @xmath155 and @xmath156 for @xmath157 imply @xmath158 so that eq .
( [ first_integral ] ) becomes @xmath159 integration with the boundary condition at @xmath129 , that is , at @xmath160 , @xmath161 and requiring @xmath32 for @xmath162 gives @xmath163 \end{aligned}\ ] ] with @xmath164 \text { , }   \end{aligned}\ ] ] where the upper sign is for @xmath165 and the lower sign for @xmath166 .
in analogy to what we have done at the boundary of the esl with the plasma sheath at @xmath5 we relate the potential @xmath167 to the total electron surface density in the space charge region . from poisson
s equation we obtain for the total electron surface density in the scr @xmath168 where @xmath169 is given by eq .
( [ etaprime ] ) , so that @xmath170 or , @xmath171 for a negative space charge @xmath165 , so that the potential is given by @xmath172 and the electron and hole densities are given by @xmath173 and @xmath174 , respectively .
the relation between @xmath175 and @xmath16 is given by @xmath176 .
since @xmath177 we obtain @xmath178 .
now , quite generally , the excess electrons in the esl are distributed over the isr and scr according to @xmath179 where @xmath180 is the surface density of electrons in the isr , @xmath127 is the chemical potential in both regions , and @xmath39 is the total surface density of missing sheath electrons given by eq .
( [ neq ] ) .
the total surface density in the isr is given by @xmath181 , where @xmath128 is calculated with the density functional approach for the graded interface .
requiring continuity of the electron density at @xmath129 , @xmath182 gives @xmath167 as a function of @xmath127 .
from @xmath167 we finally obtain using eq .
( [ nsc ] ) @xmath183 .    for the calculation of the electron distribution and the potential in the refined esl we use the iteration cycle described in the last section with one modification . in step ( ii )
we solve eq .
( [ ndistrib ] ) instead of eq .
( [ nconstraint ] ) to fix @xmath127 . from @xmath127
we obtain using eq .
( [ ncontatzs ] ) @xmath167 which in turn determines the electron distribution and the potential in the scr .
this gives for each iteration step a continuous potential and electron distribution at @xmath129 .
as before , the steps ( ii ) -(iv ) are iterated until @xmath127 converges .    at the end of this section let us finally mention two simplifications of the refined esl model which could be used , respectively , for large band gap dielectrics irrespective of the electron affinity and dielectrics with small band gap and positive electron affinity . in the former case
the intrinsic carrier concentration @xmath147 is very low and the merger with the bulk occurs very deep in the dielectric .
almost all surplus electrons are however much closer to the surface where the holes can be neglected .
this can be seen from the differential equation for @xmath184 . for small @xmath147 eq .
( [ et0eq ] ) gives a large @xmath167 .
as @xmath184 satisfies a highly nonlinear differential equation ( [ diffeqetabb ] ) , a large @xmath167 implies a steeper gradient of @xmath184 near the surface so that almost all electrons are concentrated close to the surface where neglecting the holes has little effect .
hence , for large band gap dielectrics surplus electrons can be filled into a sufficiently large isr for which the crude esl model of the previous section will be sufficient provided the cut - off @xmath129 is large enough .
the merger with the bulk is of course not correctly captured by such an approach .    for dielectrics or semiconductors with small energy gaps and positive electron affinity , on the other hand
, almost all surplus electrons are deep inside the material .
it is thus a good approximation to neglect the isr and to fill all electrons in a scr . neglecting the surface potential has little effect in this case and using the scr already for @xmath185 gives a good description of the electron distribution inside the esl . the electron density and potential at the surface and in front of it can of course not be captured by such an approach . as before @xmath186 with @xmath187 where @xmath188 is now the limit of the long range potential just inside the dielectric given by @xmath189 .
.material parameters for the dielectrics considered in this work : dielectric constant @xmath190 , electron affinity @xmath62 , conduction band effective mass @xmath77 , valence band effective mass @xmath191 , band gap @xmath192 .
[ cols="<,<,<,<,<,<",options="header " , ]     [ kttable ]    let us now turn to the discussion of the influence of the electron temperature @xmath193 and the plasma density @xmath17 on the properties of the esl .
these two parameters enter through the total surface density of electrons @xmath39 depleting the sheath and accumulating in the esl .
how @xmath193 and @xmath17 affect the interface depends therefore on the sheath model and the model used for the interaction between plasma particles and the surface . for simplicity
we have used a collisionless sheath model and assumed the surface to be a perfect absorber for plasma electrons and ions .
the results for the properties of the esl as a function of the plasma parameters are thus to be taken only indicative .     at a sio@xmath0 surface in contact with a helium discharge as a function of the electron temperature ( upper panel , @xmath194 ) and the plasma density ( lower panel , @xmath59 ) for @xmath195 . the refined esl model without an isr
was employed to produce the data . ]
the effect of a variation of @xmath17 and @xmath196 is most significant for surfaces with positive electron affinity .
n0table ] shows the effect of the plasma density @xmath17 for a sio@xmath0 surface . if @xmath17 increases , the boundary @xmath8 between sheath and esl moves closer to the surface
this , however , does not affect the charge distribution much as most of the electrons occupy the scr inside the dielectric ( as shown in fig .
[ figure3 ] for al@xmath0o@xmath1 ) .
more important is that an increase in @xmath17 leads to an increase of the total surface electron density @xmath39 .
this entails a stronger restoring force from the plasma sheath so that the potential well confining the space charge inside the dielectric becomes steeper and the electrons in the scr of the esl are shifted towards the surface , in other words , the @xmath197 value increases with @xmath17 .
mathematically , the steeple - like shape of the electron distribution arises because a larger @xmath39 leads through eq .
( [ et0eq ] ) to a larger @xmath167 which makes the potential steeper at the surface so that the electron distribution is more peaked there .
this trend can be seen in the lower panel for fig .
[ figure4 ] .     and @xmath59 ) .
the data were obtained from the crude esl model . ]    a variation of the electron temperature @xmath193 has similar effects as the variation of the plasma density .
if @xmath196 increases , the total surface density of electrons increases also , as can be seen from table [ kttable ] . as shown in the upper panel of fig .
[ figure4 ] , this leads again to a steeple - like electron distribution which is the more concentrated at the surface the higher the electron temperature is .    for a surface with negative electron affinity ( mgo )
the surplus electrons are strongly bound in the image potential . while a variation of @xmath196 or @xmath17 changes the total number of surplus electrons per unit area in the same way as for a surface with positive electron affinity , the distribution of the surplus electrons within the esl
is not affected significantly because of the strong image interaction .
so far we have shown the potential and the electron distribution in the esl .
now , we will compare potential and charge distribution in the esl with the ones in the plasma sheath .
the electron distribution at the interface is the quasi - stationary electron gas on top of the charge re - distribution due to the truncation of the solid that guarantees flux equality at the sheath - esl boundary @xmath8 .
as already mentioned not included in this simple model is the flux of plasma electrons and ions in the esl before the electrons are trapped at the surface and the ions recombine with the negative wall charge .
the electron and ion densities in this model are thus discontinuous at @xmath8 .
the potential , however , which has been obtained from the integration of poisson s equation is continuous and differentiable everywhere . between the well of the image potential and
@xmath8 the electron and ion flux from the sheath would be important .
the neglect of the charge densities associated with these fluxes does however not affect the potential because they are too small to have a significant effect .
surface in contact with a helium discharge ( @xmath194 and @xmath59 ) . the refined esl model without an isr was employed to produce the data . ]
figure  [ figure6 ] shows the esl and the plasma sheath in front of a mgo surface . due to the negative electron affinity ,
the plasma - supplied surface electrons are bound by the image potential in front of the surface . in fig .
[ figure6 ] , we plot the electron and ion density ( upper panel ) , as well as the electric potential ( lower panel ) over the distance from the surface @xmath86 .
far from the surface , the potential approaches the bulk plasma value chosen to be zero . in the sheath
the potential develops a coulomb barrier and reaches the wall potential @xmath198 at @xmath8 , the distance where the sheath merges with the surface layer ( vertical dotted line ) .
the wall potential is the potential just outside to which the energies of the bulk states are referenced .
closer to the surface the potential follows the attractive image potential while at the surface the repulsive potential due to the negative electron affinity prevents the electron from entering the dielectric ( only scarcely seen on the scale of the figure ) .    in fig .
[ figure6a ] we finally plot the electron and ion densities ( upper panel ) as well as the electric potential ( lower panel ) for sio@xmath0 . note the linear z - axis in contrast to the logarithmic z - axis of fig .
[ figure6 ] . due to the positive electron affinity ,
the excess electrons constituting the wall charge penetrate deep into the dielectric and occupy therefore the scr of the esl .
compared to the variation of the electric potential in the sheath the band bending in the dielectric induced by the wall charge is rather small as indicated by the variation of @xmath16 inside the dielectric .
this is because @xmath69 is large and the width of the scr is narrow on the scale of the sheath . only on the scale of the isr ( a vertical line at @xmath2 ) the scr of the esl is wide .
we have studied the potential and the charge distribution across the interface of a plasma and a dielectric wall treating the plasma - induced wall charge as a quasi - stationary electron gas trapped by and in thermal equilibrium with the dielectric .
our approach is based on a model for a graded surface including the offset between the potential just outside the dielectric and the conduction band minimum arising from the re - distribution of charge due to the truncation of the solid as well as the image potential due to the dielectric mismatch at the boundary .
the missing electrons from the sheath populate the interface potential and thereby form an electron surface layer ( esl ) which minimizes the grand canonical potential of wall - thermalized excess electrons and satisfies poisson s equation .    within this model the boundary between the plasma sheath and the esl is given by the distance from the crystallographic interface where the potential for the excess electrons turns from the repulsive sheath potential into the attractive surface potential .
this distance is typically on the order of a micron .
it gives the position of an effective wall for plasma electrons and ions and thus the portion of the esl which lays in front of the surface .
most of the surplus electrons trapped in the esl , that is , the plasma - induced wall charge , will be , however , much closer to the surface or even inside the dielectric depending on the electron affinity .
we presented numerical results for the potential and the distribution of the plasma - supplied surplus electrons at the interface between a helium discharge and the surfaces of mgo , al@xmath0o@xmath1 , and sio@xmath0 , respectively .
the electron distribution within the esl strongly depends on the electron affinity . for negative electron affinity ,
the conduction band minimum is above the potential just outside the dielectric .
hence , it is energetically unfavorable for electrons to penetrate into the bulk and the surface electrons are bound in the image potential in front of the surface . in this case , their spatial profile changes little over a variation of the surface temperature or the plasma parameters . for positive electron affinity
the conduction band minimum is below the potential just outside the dielectric and the surface - bound electrons accumulate inside the wall .
the space charge in the bulk broadens if the surface temperature is increased and becomes more peaked if the total surface density of the electrons missing in the sheath is raised through either an increase in the plasma density or the electron temperature . separating the esl into an interface specific and a space charge region and modeling the bulk of the dielectric as an intrinsic semiconductor we also investigated how the esl merges with the bulk of the dielectric .
this is particularly important for dielectrics with small energy gaps and positive electron affinities where excess electrons coming from the sheath accumulate not in the image potential in front of the surface but deep inside the wall . in this case
the wall charge may also induce a significant band bending .    whereas the crude esl model we proposed neglects the space charge deep inside the bulk of the wall and is thus only applicable to large band gap dielectrics with negative electron affinity where basically the whole plasma - induced wall charge is trapped in the image potential in front of the surface , the refined esl model keeping the interface specific as well as the space charge region of the esl provides a quantitative description of the whole spatial structure of the extended charge double - layer which forms at a dielectric plasma wall as a result of the electrons in the esl and the positive space charge in the plasma sheath .
the esl can be regarded as that part of the plasma sheath which is inside the plasma wall .
it is thus the ultimate boundary of a bounded gas discharge and constitutes , depending on the electron affinity either a quasi two - dimensional electron plasma in front of the wall or an electron(-hole ) plasma inside the wall .


the quantization of polarized gravitational cylindrical waves has received a lot of attention in recent years @xcite .
this is partly due to the fact that this system provides a tractable , yet non - trivial , reduction of full general relativity and hence is an ideal framework to explore several issues involved in the quantization of gravity .
some intriguing phenomena , related to the existence of large quantum gravity effects , have been discussed by studying precisely this model @xcite .
it has also been argued that some manifestations of quantum gravity , such as the smearing of light cones are , indeed , present and can be understood in this simplified setting @xcite .
one of the interesting points behind the obtained results is the realization of the fact that the physical hamiltonian is a function of the free field hamiltonian for a 2 + 1 dimensional , axially symmetric , massless scalar field evolving in an auxiliary minkowski background @xcite .
as we show in the first section of the paper , this free hamiltonian naturally appears when one linearizes the system , thus suggesting that , in a precise sense , it can be considered as the free part of an interacting model .
however the full interacting hamiltonian is obtained by adding a very specific type of terms to the free part , namely , just functions of it . here
we plan to explore the consequences of this functional relation between the two physically relevant hamiltonians for the system and explore how this affects the causal structure of quantum spacetime . to this end we will pay attention to the smearing of the light cones due to quantum gravity effects within the framework of linearly polarized cylindrical waves . instead of considering the full information encoded in the metric tensor we will concentrate on the causal structure provided by light cones .
an interesting , albeit somewhat indirect way , to look at this structure is to study the commutators of field operators at different spacetime points .
these are the basic objects to discuss the commutativity of observables and the microcausality of the model ; conventionally , a physical model should be such that observables commute for space - like intervals .
this has been discussed in the standard perturbative quantum field theory framework for simple examples such as scalar or fermion fields ( see e.g. @xcite ) .
in fact , microcausality is one of the key conditions to prove such important results as the spin - statistics theorem @xcite
.    here we will use the commutator of the scalar field that describes linearly polarized cylindrical waves as a way to get information about the causal structure of quantum spacetime . as we show later
it is possible to give exact expressions for this commutator both for the evolution provided by the free and the full physical hamiltonians .
we will use these expressions to study in a quantitative way the smearing of the light cones as a function of the three - dimensional gravitational constant and explore some physical issues , in particular the appearance of singularities as a consequence of having a hamiltonian bounded from above @xcite .
the rest of the paper is structured as follows . in sec .
[ lingrav ] we discuss how the free hamiltonian is derived from the linearized cylindrical wave model .
[ evolutions ] deals with the classical and quantum dynamics of cylindrical gravitational waves under the evolution provided both by the free hamiltonian and the physical hamiltonian .
we will pause here to discuss and compare on a familiar example ( the harmonic oscillator ) the main features of the time evolution defined by functionally related hamiltonians , both from the classical and the quantum points of view .
this will provide valuable insights for the problem considered in this work .
[ microcausality ] is devoted to the study of microcausality .
we will look at the main features of the field commutators and study the smearing of the light cones due to quantum gravitational effects .
we end the paper with a discussion of the main results and perspectives for future work .
linearly polarized cylindrical waves in general relativity can be described by the spacetime metric @xcite : @xmath0 where @xmath1 is the coordinate of the symmetry axis and @xmath2 is the three - metric @xmath3 from this three - dimensional point of view , @xmath4 and @xmath5 correspond to polar coordinates , @xmath6 is the radial component of the shift vector and @xmath7 is the lapse function .
all metric functions ( @xmath8 , @xmath9 , @xmath7 , and @xmath6 ) depend only on the time and radial coordinates , @xmath10 and @xmath11 .
unless otherwise stated , we adopt a system of units such that @xmath12 , where @xmath13 is the speed of light , @xmath14 is planck constant , and @xmath15 is the effective newton constant per unit length in the direction of the symmetry axis @xcite . in these units ,
the gravitational action of the system has the form @xcite @xmath16,\ ] ] where the dot denotes the derivative with respect to @xmath10 , the @xmath17 s are the momenta canonically conjugate to the metric variables and @xmath18 is the total hamiltonian @xmath19.\end{aligned}\ ] ] the first term is a boundary contribution at infinity [ @xmath20 and the second term is a linear combination of the hamiltonian constraint @xmath21 and the ( radial ) diffeomorphisms constraint @xmath22 : @xmath23 , \nonumber\\ c^r&=&e^{-\gamma}\left(-2p^{\prime}_{\gamma}+ p_{\gamma}\gamma^{\prime}+p_rr^{\:\prime}+p_{\psi}\psi^{\prime } \right).\end{aligned}\ ] ] the prime denotes the derivative with respect to @xmath11 .
the gauge freedom associated with these constraints can be removed by imposing , respectively , the gauge fixing conditions @xcite @xmath24    on the other hand , the lagrangian form of the action can be obtained from the relations between momenta and time derivatives of the metric provided by the hamilton equations , @xmath25    from a three - dimensional perspective , the system describes an axially symmetric model consisting of a scalar field @xmath26 coupled to gravity @xcite , the line element being ( [ 3met ] ) .
a particular classical solution is a vanishing scalar field in three - dimensional minkowski spacetime or , equivalently , minkowski spacetime in four dimensions . in this solution ,
@xmath27 and @xmath28 , whereas the rest of metric fields and momenta vanish ( i.e. @xmath29 ) .    in this section
, we will consider this solution as a background and discuss first - order perturbations around it .
in other words , we will analyze the linearized theory of gravity around this minkowski spacetime , as it is usually done in the perturbative , quantum field theory approach to gravity . in order to expand the metric fields around the classical solution ,
let us call @xmath30 up to first - order terms in the fields , the expression of the three - metric becomes @xmath31 while the four - dimensional metric is given by @xmath32 here , it is understood that the product of @xmath26 with any other metric field vanishes in the perturbative order considered
. on the other hand , regularity on the axis of symmetry imposes the following conditions : @xmath33    in order to discuss the linearized gravitational system , we must keep up to quadratic terms in the fields in the action ( [ act ] ) .
a straightforward calculation leads to the result @xmath34,\nonumber\\ \bar{\cal h}&=&\int_0^\infty dr \left [ \frac{p_{\psi}^2}{2r}+\frac{r\,(\psi^{\prime})^2}{2}-p_{\gamma } p_{\bar{r}}+\bar{n}\bar{c}+n^r\bar{c}^r\right]\nonumber\\ & & + ( 2-\gamma_{\infty})\,\bar{r}^{\,\prime}(r\rightarrow\infty).\end{aligned}\ ] ] here , @xmath35 is the momentum canonically conjugate to @xmath36 , and the linearized constraints are : @xmath37    the diffeomorphisms gauge freedom can be fixed just like in the cylindrical reduction of general relativity , namely , by demanding that @xmath38 coincides with the radial coordinate @xcite .
we thus impose the gauge fixing condition @xmath39 .
it is easily checked that the poisson brackets @xmath40 of this condition with the linearized constraint do not vanish , so that the gauge fixing is admissible .
dynamical consistency of the gauge fixing procedure requires , in addition , @xmath41 hence , the shift must be chosen as @xmath42 .
finally , the momentum conjugate to @xmath36 is fixed by solving the diffeomorphisms constraint : @xmath43 . in this way
, the canonical pair @xmath44 is removed from the set of degrees of freedom .
the action of the resulting reduced model is @xmath45.\end{aligned}\ ] ] here , @xmath46 is the hamiltonian constraint of the reduced linearized system , and @xmath47.\ ] ]    remarkably , the condition employed to eliminate the hamiltonian gauge freedom in full cylindrical gravity @xcite can be used as well to fix the corresponding gauge in the linearized theory .
the gauge fixing @xmath48 is acceptable , because the poisson brackets of @xmath49 and @xmath50 differ from zero .
in addition , consistency of the chosen gauge demands the vanishing of @xmath51 therefore , @xmath52 has to be independent of the radial coordinate .
actually , we can set @xmath53 by demanding that the total lapse equals the unity at spatial infinity . on the other hand , taking into account the regularity condition ( [ reg ] ) , the solution to the hamiltonian constraint is simply @xmath54 .
this allows us to remove the canonical pair @xmath55 from the system and arrive at a constraint - free model in linearized gravity .
the degrees of freedom of this system are the field @xmath26 and its momentum .
the reduced action is @xmath56.\end{aligned}\ ] ] note that @xmath57 , given in eq .
( [ ham0 ] ) , is the hamiltonian of a massless scalar field with axial symmetry in three - dimensions .
furthermore , in the gauge that we have selected , the three - dimensional metric of the linearized gravitational theory is exactly that of minkowski spacetime and contains no physical degrees of freedom .
the scalar field @xmath26 determines the norm of the killing vector @xmath58 , and appears in the four - dimensional metric of the gauge - fixed , linearized model in the form ( [ metlin ] ) , but with @xmath59 substituted by the flat metric @xmath60 where we have renamed @xmath61 the time coordinate of the reduced system .
summarizing , the perturbative description provided in linearized gravity for cylindrical waves with linear polarization around four - dimensional minkowski spacetime is equivalent to a massless scalar field with axial symmetry in a three - dimensional flat background .
the dynamics of this field is dictated by the free hamiltonian @xmath57 , which generates the evolution in the minkowskian time @xmath61 .
it is worth noticing that the action and metric of the gauge - fixed model in linearized gravity reproduce in fact the results that one would obtain from the gauge - fixed model in full cylindrical gravity by working just in the first perturbative order , i.e. , by keeping in the action and metric , respectively , up to quadratic and linear terms in the field @xmath26 and its momentum . in this sense , the gauge fixing and linearization procedures commute .
one of the significant features of gravitational cylindrical waves is the existence of two distinct , physically relevant hamiltonians ( or equivalently two distinct time coordinates ) to define both the classical and quantum evolution .
one is the hamiltonian @xmath57 [ given in eq .
( [ ham0 ] ) ] that generates the dynamics in the linearized gravitational theory ; the other is the hamiltonian @xmath62 that provides the energy per unit length along the symmetry axis in general relativity @xcite . in fact , they are functionally dependent , since @xmath63 . in order to gain insight into the relation that can be established between the dynamics associated with these two different hamiltonians , we open this section by discussing a similar situation in a very simple example provided by the harmonic oscillator .
the usual description of the harmonic oscillator in a phase space coordinatized by @xmath64 comes from its standard hamiltonian @xmath65 .
the dynamics is given by the hamilton equations @xmath66 the general solution can be written as @xmath67 where @xmath68 and its complex conjugate @xmath69 are fixed by the initial conditions .    consider next a phase space @xmath70 with hamiltonian @xmath71 , i.e. a function of the standard hamiltonian for the harmonic oscillator .
for instance , the case @xmath72 arises in the context of quantum optics , in relation with the propagation of light in non - linear kerr media @xcite .
the equations of motion now read @xmath73 where @xmath74 denotes the derivative of @xmath75 with respect to its argument .
these new equations can be easily solved by means of a change of time .
specifically , making use of the time independence of the hamiltonian @xmath76 ( @xmath77 on solutions to the equations of motion ) , we can introduce the new time parameter @xmath78 .
then , the functions @xmath79 $ ] , @xmath80 $ ] and the new time @xmath61 serve us to transform the hamilton equations into the standard ones corresponding to the harmonic oscillator .
so , the classical solutions are @xmath81\!=\!\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\omega}}\!\left[ae^{\ !
-i\omega f'(\omega a^\dagger\!a)t}\!+\!a^\dagger e^{i\omega f'(\omega a^\dagger\!a)t}\right]\!,\\ p(t)\!=\!p_0[t(t)]\!=\!\frac{-i\omega}{\sqrt{2\omega}}\ !
\left[ae^{\!-i\omega f'(\omega a^\dagger\!a)t}\!-a^\dagger e^{i\omega f'(\omega a^\dagger\!a)t}\right]\!.\end{aligned}\ ] ] what we find is an energy dependent redefinition of time that induces a different time change for each solution to the equations of motion .
the situation in the quantum theory is quite different .
the reason lies on the fact than in quantum mechanics a physical state does not need to have a definite energy .
then , a `` change of time '' of the form @xmath82 has non - trivial consequences for the dynamics .
the usual quantum theory for the harmonic oscillator can be described by introducing a fock space with creation and annihilation operators @xmath69 , @xmath68 .
every initial state can be expressed as @xmath83 , where @xmath84 are fourier coefficients ( with the convenient normalization ) and @xmath85 are energy eigenvectors ( that is , @xmath86 ) . in the schrdinger picture ,
evolving with @xmath87 , we find @xmath88 however , if the same state @xmath89 evolves in time according to the evolution generated by @xmath90 , we get and @xmath90 act on the same hilbert space . moreover , if we demand the function @xmath75 to have a unique absolute minimum at @xmath91 , the two hamiltonians have also the same vacuum . ]
@xmath92 hence we do not recover an analogous situation to that found in the classical system by replacing ( formally ) the time @xmath61 in @xmath93 with @xmath82 , because @xmath94 except for linear homogeneous functions @xmath75 .
moreover , the properties of the states @xmath93 and @xmath95 are quite different . for example , if we consider the bounded hamiltonian @xmath96 it is obvious that the high energy contributions to @xmath95 are essentially frozen in time with respect to the evolution of the low energy ones , in the sense that the phase of the former type of contributions remains practically coherent in time .
let us turn now to the discussion of our gravitational system .
we will deal with the einstein - rosen family of linearly polarized gravitational waves @xcite .
these waves display the so - called whole cylindrical symmetry @xcite , namely , they correspond to topologically trivial spacetimes which possess two linearly independent , commuting , spacelike , and hypersurface orthogonal killing vector fields .
it is well known @xcite that these spacetimes admit coordinates @xmath97 such that the metric is given by @xmath98 where @xmath26 and @xmath8 are functions of only @xmath11 and @xmath61 .
when the einstein equations are imposed , @xmath26 encodes the physical degrees of freedom and satisfies the usual wave equation for an axially symmetric massless scalar field in three - dimensions : @xmath99 the metric function @xmath8 can be expressed in terms of this field on the classical solutions @xcite .
one gets @xmath100,\nonumber\\ \label{gaminf } \gamma_\infty&=&\frac{1}{2}\int^\infty_0 dr\ , r\ , \left [ ( \partial_t\psi)^2+(\partial_r\psi)^2\right].\end{aligned}\ ] ] note that @xmath101 and @xmath102 are the energy of the scalar field in a ball of radius @xmath11 and in the whole of the two - dimensional flat space , respectively .
furthermore , @xmath103 coincides with the hamiltonian @xmath57 given in eq .
( [ ham0 ] ) @xcite .    nevertheless , to reach a unit asymptotic timelike killing vector field in the actual four - dimensional spacetime , with respect
to which one can truly introduce a physical notion of energy ( per unit length ) @xcite , one must make use of a different system of coordinates , namely @xmath104 where @xmath105 . in these new coordinates the metric has the form @xmath106 assuming as a boundary condition that the metric function @xmath26 falls off sufficiently fast as @xmath107 , the above metric describes asymptotically flat spacetimes with a , generally non - zero , deficit angle . in this asymptotic region @xmath108
is a unit timelike vector .
the einstein field equations can be obtained from a hamiltonian action principle @xcite where the on - shell hamiltonian is given in terms of that for the free scalar field by @xmath109 owing to these reasons , in the following we will refer to @xmath10 as the physical time and to @xmath62 as the physical hamiltonian .
when we use the @xmath61-time and impose regularity at the origin @xmath110 @xcite , the classical solutions for the field @xmath26 can be expanded in the form @xmath111.\nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] @xmath112 and @xmath113 are fixed by the initial conditions and are complex conjugate to each other , because @xmath26 and @xmath114 ( the zeroth - order bessel function of the first kind ) are real . from eq .
( [ gaminf ] ) , we then obtain @xmath115 using this formula , we can express the field in the @xmath10-frame as @xmath116.\;\nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] notice that @xmath117 .    in principle
, the quantization of the field @xmath26 can be carried out in a standard way .
we can introduce a fock space in which @xmath118 , the quantum counterpart of @xmath119 , is an operator - valued distribution @xcite .
its action is determined by those of @xmath120 and @xmath121 , the usual annihilation and creation operators , whose only non - vanishing commutators are @xmath122=\delta(k_1,k_2).\ ] ] explicitly , @xmath123\!. \label{psi0}\ ] ] in the schrdinger picture , operators do not evolve , and the problem of the time evolution is transferred to the physical states .
we will return later to this issue . in the heisenberg picture , on the contrary ,
operators change in time and states remain fixed . in this case
, the value of the quantum field @xmath124 at any time can be obtained from its value at @xmath125 , evolving in one of the two times that we have at hand .
one is the physical time @xmath10 , with associated hamiltonian @xmath62 given in eq .
( [ newham ] ) .
the other is the time @xmath61 of the auxiliary three - dimensional minkowski spacetime , its hamiltonian being that of a massless scalar field , @xmath57 . from our discussion in sec .
ii , this time can be identified with the perturbative time ( denoted also by @xmath61 ) that arises in the study of the einstein - rosen waves in linearized gravity .    in the perturbative time @xmath61 ,
the evolution is provided by the unitary operator @xmath126 where @xmath127 is the quantum hamiltonian of an axially symmetric scalar field in three dimensions .
then @xmath128\!. \hspace*{.3cm}\end{aligned}\ ] ] the quantization procedure in this case is very simple : we have substituted the initial conditions @xmath112 and @xmath113 in the classical solution by the corresponding quantum operators .
the situation changes when we choose the physical time @xmath10 as the time parameter .
the quantum hamiltonian can be defined as @xmath129 .
we can then reach a unitary evolution by means of @xmath130 .
this leads to the following time evolved operators @xmath131\!\hat{a}(k),\nonumber\\ \label{crean } \hat{a}_e^\dagger(k , t)\!\!&=&\!\hat{a}^\dagger(k)\,\exp\!\left[ite(k ) e^{-\hat{h}_0/2}\right],\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath132 .
it is important to realize that the quantum evolution in the physical @xmath10-frame is not obtained by changing @xmath112 , @xmath113 , and @xmath103 by their direct quantum counterparts .
in fact , by restoring the value of the dimensionful constants @xmath14 and
@xmath15 , we can write @xmath133 with @xmath134 , so that @xmath135 and we can expand @xmath136 and @xmath137 in powers of @xmath14 , @xmath138 ( here , we have expressed @xmath139 with dimensions of an inverse length )    setting again @xmath140 , the expansion above clearly shows that the quantum evolution of the creation and annihilation variables in the physical time differs from the  classical evolution " in higher - order quantum corrections .
this unusual behavior can be partially corrected in the sense that one can actually find an operator for @xmath62 such that the quantum evolution in the @xmath10-time is similar to the classical one .
in fact , if one considers the normal ordered hamiltonian @xmath141 and its associated unitary evolution operator @xmath142 , it is easy to prove that @xmath143 therefore , the quantum evolution in @xmath10 given by @xmath144 parallels that encountered in the classical picture .
unfortunately , there is a severe problem with this quantum dynamics that renders it physically unacceptable : the hamiltonian @xmath144 is unbounded both from above and below @xcite .
obviously , the different possibilities for the unitary time evolution of the field @xmath124 considered here are closely related .
specifically , there exists a unitary mapping between both types of evolution .
this is a consequence of the fact that they are both unitary and coincide with the identity in the same hilbert space at @xmath125 .
so , if we denote the operators evolved from @xmath145 in the times @xmath61 and @xmath10 by @xmath146 and @xmath147 , respectively , we obtain @xmath148 then , we can go from one evolution to the other by means of the unitary operator @xmath149 .
let us close this section with a few comments about the fock space on which the field @xmath124 acts .
in the heisenberg picture the states do not depend on time .
they are constructed by successive actions of the time independent creation operators on the vacuum of the theory .
it is important to point out that both @xmath139 and @xmath150 act on the same hilbert space and have the same vacuum , that will be referred to as @xmath151 .
explicitly , given any square integrable complex function @xmath152 ( with the convenient normalization ) we can write a @xmath153-particle state in the form @xmath154 according to the usual interpretation of quantum mechanics , the measurable physical quantities correspond to expectation values of observables .
we can go over to the schrdinger picture by assigning the time evolution to the quantum states @xmath155 defining @xmath156 , @xmath157 , and noticing that the @xmath158-operators satisfy @xmath159 it is straightforward to see that the evolved states are solutions to the schrdinger equations @xmath160 as in the heisenberg picture , the unitary operator @xmath161 provides the bridge between the two kinds of quantum evolution , @xmath162 particularizing the above results to the case of @xmath153-particle states we readily get that , for the @xmath61-time , @xmath163 where @xmath164 . notice that @xmath165 is a superposition of eigenvectors of @xmath139 with eigenvalues equal to @xmath166 . on the other hand ,
if we evolve the states with @xmath167 , it is not difficult to check that @xmath168 in other words , @xmath169 is a superposition of eigenvectors of @xmath150 , each of them with energy @xmath170 .
finally , it is worth pointing out that the @xmath150-energy is not additive : @xmath171 this property is directly related to the existence of an upper bound for the physical hamiltonian .
microcausality plays a crucial role in perturbative quantum field theory ; in fact it is a crucial ingredient in such important issues as the spin - statistics theorem @xcite .
the point of view that we will develop in this section is the idea that field commutators of the scalar field that encodes the physical information in linearly polarized cylindrical waves can be used as an alternative to the metric operator to extract physical information about quantum spacetime
. some relevant information may be lost , but the availability of explicit exact expressions for commutators [ even under the evolution given by the hamiltonian ( [ newham ] ) ] opens up the possibility of getting precise information about the quantum causal structure of spacetime .
in particular we will see how the light cones get smeared by quantum corrections in a precise and quantitative way .
as is well known , the study of causality in perturbative quantum field theory requires the consideration of measurements of observables at different spacetime points and their mutual influence .
the key question is whether measurements taken at spatial separations commute or not .
the relevant commutators can be seen to be proportional to those of the quantum fields at two different spacetime points @xmath172 and @xmath173 . for a free massless scalar field described by the standard lagrangian ,
this commutator is a ( c - number ) function of @xmath172 and @xmath173 that is exactly zero when @xmath174 is space - like @xcite .
this means that observables at points separated by spatial intervals commute .
something similar happens for fermions described by the usual lagrangians if , instead of commutators , one takes anticommutators of the fields ( observables for fermion fields can be written as even powers of them and the relevant commutators can be written in terms of anticommutators of the basic fields ) @xcite .    in the case that we are considering in this work the only physical local degree of freedom
that we have is given by the scalar field @xmath26 .
what we will do in the following is discussing microcausality by considering the different time evolutions introduced in the first part of the paper .
we start by computing @xmath175 $ ] for the field operators ( [ hpsit ] ) obtained in the heisenberg picture by evolving the field at time @xmath176 with the hamiltonian @xmath139 given in eq .
( [ qham0 ] ) .
it is straightforward to get ( see @xcite for a somewhat related computation ) @xmath177=\hspace{4.cm}\nonumber\\ \label{s2 - 004 } i\int_0^\infty\!\!\!dk j_0(r_1k)j_0(r_2k ) \sin[(t_2-t_1 ) k ] .\hspace*{.3cm}\end{aligned}\ ] ] let us discuss the main features of this commutation function , that we will refer to in the following as the @xmath57-commutator . to begin with we can easily see that , as it happens for the familiar free field theories , the commutator ( [ s2 - 004 ] ) is a c - number , i.e. it is proportional to the identity in the fock space .
in addition , for @xmath178 fixed , let us call regions i , ii , and iii the regions of the @xmath179 plane defined , respectively , by @xmath180 , @xmath181 , and @xmath182 . then , it can be shown that the @xmath57-commutator vanishes in region i , whereas in region ii it can be written as @xcite @xmath177=\hspace*{4.4 cm } & & \nonumber \\
\label{propii } \frac{i}{\pi}\frac{1}{\sqrt { r_1 r_2}}\,k\left(\sqrt{\frac{(t_2\!-\!t_1)^2\!-\!(r_2\!-\!r_1)^2 } { 4r_1r_2}}\right).\hspace*{1.cm}&&\end{aligned}\ ] ] finally , its value in region iii is @xcite @xmath183}}&&\hspace*{-.4 cm } k\!\!\left(\!\!\sqrt{\!\frac{4r_1r_2}{(t_2\!-\!\!t_1)^2\!\!- \!(r_2\!-\!\!r_1)^2}}\right)\!.\nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] here , @xmath184 denotes the complete elliptic integral of the first kind , @xmath185 ( alternatively , the integral in eq .
( [ s2 - 004 ] ) can be written in terms of the associated legendre functions @xmath186 and @xmath187 @xcite ) .
plane for the @xmath57-commutator .
region i corresponds to @xmath188 , region ii to @xmath181 , and region iii to @xmath189 .
the singularity of the @xmath57-commutation function lies in the boundary between regions ii and iii , whereas the singularity for the @xmath190-commutator appears for @xmath191.,width=321 ]    several plots of the absolute value of this function ( in fact , of its imaginary part ) for fixed values of @xmath178 and @xmath192 are shown in fig .
[ fig : freeprop2 ] , and a three - dimensional plot for a fixed value of @xmath178 can be found in fig .
[ fig : freeprop ] .     of the commutator of the scalar field
@xmath175 $ ] for @xmath193 and several values of @xmath192 as a function of @xmath194.,width=321 ]     of the commutator of the scalar field @xmath175 $ ] for @xmath193 as a function of @xmath194 and @xmath192 .
the light cone structure and the singularity at @xmath195 can be readily seen .
the plot for negative values of @xmath194 is obtained by reflecting with respect to the @xmath192 axis.,width=321 ]    some interesting properties can be read off from the previous expressions .
first of all we see that the commutator is in fact identically zero in the region labeled i ; outside it differs from zero .
second we see that it is singular in the line @xmath195 .
it is easy to check that the singularity is logarithmic by using the explicit form of the propagator ( [ propii ] ) and expanding around @xmath195 .
this singularity can be understood as a consequence of the presence of the symmetry axis ; this is supported by the fact that the @xmath57-commutation function satisfies @xmath196=0\,,\nonumber\\ & & \left(\!\partial_t^2-\frac{1}{r}\partial_r(r\partial_r)\!\right)\!\cdot \theta(t - t_2)[\hat{\psi}(r , t),\hat{\psi}(r_2,t_2)]=\nonumber\\ & & \hspace{3.cm}\frac{i}{r_2}\delta^{(2)}\!(r - r_2,t - t_2)\,,\nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] which shows that the full commutator is an axially symmetric solution to the 2 + 1 dimensional wave equation and the future part of it ( obtained by multiplying by a step function ) is an axially symmetric green function for the same equation .
it is important to point out that even though there is a minkowskian background metric , the presence of a center of symmetry breaks lorentz invariance ; in fact , the only symmetries of the 2 + 1 axially symmetric wave equation @xmath197 that transform solutions @xmath198 into solutions are    \i ) translations @xmath199    \ii ) dilatations @xmath200    \iii ) inversions @xmath201 } { \sqrt{1\!-\!2t\epsilon\!+\!(t^2\!-\!r^2)\epsilon^2}}\!\quad(\epsilon\textrm { small enough})\end{aligned}\ ] ] with @xmath202 these can be obtained systematically by using the general theory of symmetry groups for partial differential equations ( see @xcite ) .
let us consider now the commutator of the field operators obtained in the heisenberg picture with the quantum hamiltonian @xmath203 . here
@xmath204 , and we have restored the values of the planck constant and the three - dimensional gravitational constant ( but kept @xmath205 ) to have the possibility of discussing the semiclassical limit . recall that the hamiltonian @xmath139 is given by eq .
( [ qham0 ] ) , where we choose the normalization of the creation and annihilation operators so that the commutation relation ( [ comma ] ) is satisfied ( with no @xmath14 in the r.h.s . ) .
notice that , with this convention , @xmath120 , @xmath139 , and @xmath150 have formally the same dimensions as @xmath206 ( or @xmath207 ) , @xmath208 , and @xmath209 ( or @xmath210 ) , respectively . to distinguish the field operators evolved with the new hamiltonian @xmath150 , we will denote them by @xmath211 . in order to compute the commutator @xmath212 $ ] , we make use of the expressions ( [ crean ] ) for the creation and annihilation operators evolved in @xmath10 , which can also be written as @xmath213 , \nonumber\\ \label{crean2 } \hat{a}^\dagger_e(k , t)\!&=&\!\hat{a}^\dagger(k)\exp\left[it \left(e(\hat{h}_0+k)-e(\hat{h}_0)\right)\right].\hspace*{.9cm}\end{aligned}\ ] ] substituting then the relation @xmath214,\end{aligned}\ ] ] we get the relevant field commutator @xmath215\!\!=\!\!\ ! \int_0^\infty\!\!\!\!\!\!\!dk_1\!\!\int_0^\infty\!\!\!\ ! \!\!\!dk_2j_0(r_1k_1)j_0(r_2k_2)\\ \times 4\bar{g } \bigg\{\!\big[\hat{a}_e(k_1,\!t_1),\hat{a}_e(k_2,\!t_2)\big]\!+\ ! \big[\hat{a}^\dagger_e(k_1,\!t_1),\hat{a}^\dagger_e(k_2,\!t_2)\big ]
\\ + \big[\hat{a}_e(k_1,\!t_1),\hat{a}^\dagger_e(k_2,\!t_2)\big]\!+\ !
\big[\hat{a}^\dagger_e(k_1,\!t_1),\hat{a}_e(k_2,\!t_2)\big ] \bigg\}.\end{aligned}\ ] ] the commutators involving @xmath136 and @xmath216 can be found in appendix [ a1 ] .
note that , in contrast with the evolution given by @xmath57 , for which the commutation function is a c - number , the situation now is more complicated because @xmath217 $ ] is an operator , as it happens in interacting theories .
we will analyze two types of matrix elements for it , namely , the expectation value on the vacuum and on one - particle states .
in addition , we will briefly comment on the expectation value on coherent states .
@xmath218 vacuum expectation value .
@xmath219\,|0\rangle=\hspace*{3.3 cm } & & \nonumber\\ i8\bar{g}\!\!\int_0^{\infty}\!\!\!\!\!\!dk\,j_0(r_1 k)j_0(r_2 k)\sin\left[\frac{t_2-t_1}{4\bar{g}}(1\!-\!e^{-4\bar{g}k})\right]\!. \hspace*{.4cm}&&\label{s2 - 005}\end{aligned}\ ] ]    in the following we will discuss the differences and similarities of this matrix element and the @xmath57-commutation function .    ) of the @xmath57-commutator and the vacuum expectation value of the @xmath190-commutator for two different values of @xmath220 , plotted for @xmath193.,width=321 ]
we point out that the factor @xmath221 $ ] that appears in the integrand of the @xmath57-commutator is substituted now by @xmath222 $ ] .
they coincide for @xmath223 , but the former of these functions oscillates for all values of @xmath208 whereas the latter approaches a constant value when @xmath224 .
this changes the convergence properties of the integral .
in particular it is straightforward to see that the integral ( [ s2 - 005 ] ) diverges whenever @xmath191 ( except if @xmath225=0 $ ] ) but converges otherwise .
therefore , the vacuum expectation value has a singularity structure that differs from the one given by eq .
( [ s2 - 004 ] ) .
this has some interesting physical consequences .
first we see that the singularity that originates in the axis in the @xmath57 case is not present when the evolution is dictated by @xmath190 ; this can be interpreted as a blurring of the axis due to quantum corrections .
second we see that a completely different kind of singularity pops up when the evolution is generated by @xmath190 . from a mathematical point of view its origin
is clearly related to the fact that the energy is bounded from above and , hence , for large values of @xmath208 the integrand is just a product of two @xmath114 bessel functions ( which give a divergent integral if their arguments coincide ) .
physically , the emergence of the singularity can be understood in an intuitive manner by writing a state as a superposition of vectors of the form @xmath226 , @xmath227 and projecting onto @xmath228 .
the @xmath229 factor ( for @xmath230 or 2 ) goes to a phase that depends only on @xmath231 as @xmath224 .
so , if @xmath191 , the coefficients of the linear superposition defining , respectively , @xmath232 and @xmath233 differ only by a constant phase for large values of @xmath208 .
this means that , in the sector of large @xmath208 , these two states have coherent phases and therefore a constructive interference .
since each of them has an infinite norm , their scalar product diverges .
a similar effect can be found in the quantum dynamics of a free particle with an energy given by a function @xmath234 with @xmath235 as @xmath224 .
if one builds a wave packet as @xmath236},\ ] ] with @xmath237 peaked around a large value of @xmath208 , @xmath238 , the group velocity becomes almost zero and @xmath239 stays essentially the same at every @xmath172 for long periods of time .
the integral in eq .
( [ s2 - 005 ] ) can be written explicitly as a convergent series ( when @xmath240 ) by expanding the sine function as a power series of @xmath241 and computing the resulting integrals involving two bessel functions and an exponential @xcite @xmath219\,|0\rangle= \hspace*{3.3cm}&&\nonumber   \label{s2 - 006}\\ \frac{i8\bar{g}}{\pi\sqrt{r_1r_2}}\left\{\!\sin(\delta t)\!\!\sum_{n=0}^{\infty } \!\frac{\!(-1)^n(\delta t)^{2n}\!\ ! } { ( 2n)!}q_{-1/2}\left[\sigma_{2n}(r_1,r_2)\right]\right .
& & \nonumber\\ -\left.\!\cos(\delta t)\!\sum_{n=0}^{\infty } \!\frac{\!(-1)^n(\delta t)^{2n+1}\!\!\ ! } { ( 2n+1)!}q_{-1/2}\!\left[\sigma_{2n+1}(r_1,r_2)\right]\!\right\}\!. \hspace*{.3cm}&&\end{aligned}\ ] ] here , we have introduced the notation @xmath242 besides , @xmath243 [ with @xmath244 is the associated legendre function of the second kind @xcite .
we recall that the function @xmath245 grows without bound as the argument approaches @xmath246 and falls off to zero as @xmath247 when @xmath248 . when @xmath191 the singularity in eq .
( [ s2 - 006 ] ) comes just from the @xmath249 term in the first series of the expansion , that is given by @xmath250 a series of plots of @xmath251 $ ] and @xmath252 \,|0\rangle$ ] ( both over @xmath253 ) is shown in fig .
[ fig4:compare ] for fixed values of @xmath178 and @xmath254 as a function of @xmath192 , with several choices for @xmath220 .
we choose @xmath254 small enough to guarantee the rapid convergence of the series in eq .
( [ s2 - 006 ] ) and leave a discussion of the behavior of the integral ( [ s2 - 005 ] ) when @xmath255 for future work . as we can see @xmath256\,|0\rangle$ ] seems to approach @xmath251 $ ] at least in a certain average sense when @xmath220 is sufficiently small ( though not vanishing ) .
it falls off to zero quite quickly outside the light cone defined by the free commutator and the auxiliary minkowski metric , and displays an oscillatory behavior within this light cone .
the characteristic length of this oscillation decreases with @xmath220 , as well as close to the @xmath191 singularity .
the approximation obtained by truncating the series expansion ( [ s2 - 006 ] ) , keeping a sufficiently large number of terms , compares well with the results of numerically computing expression ( [ s2 - 005 ] ) , at least for low enough values of @xmath254 .
@xmath218 expectation value on one - particle states .
we consider now states of the form @xmath257 where the function @xmath258 satisfies @xmath259 .
we then have @xmath260 } \cos{\left[\omega_f(k_1,k_2)\right ] } \nonumber\\ & & -j_0(r_2k_1)|f(k_2)|^2\sin{\left[(t_2-t_1)e(k_1 ) e^{-4\bar{g}k_2 } \right]}\bigg\},\hspace*{.9 cm } \label{s2 - 007}\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath261    a complete discussion of the meaning of the previous expression is beyond the scope of this paper .
nevertheless , some features already present in the vacuum expectation value are also present here ; in particular the @xmath191 singularity .
this can be seen by considering the last term in eq .
( [ s2 - 007 ] ) : the integral in @xmath262 is @xmath263},\ ] ] which takes in general a non - vanishing constant value ( depending on @xmath254 and @xmath220 ) as @xmath264 , thus rendering the remaining integral in @xmath265 divergent . as the first term in eq .
( [ s2 - 007 ] ) leads to a convergent integral , we conclude that the expectation value is singular when @xmath191 .
it is not difficult to obtain as well an explicit expression for the expectation value of the @xmath190-commutator on the coherent states of the field @xmath26 .
these diagonal matrix elements are calculated in appendix b. for our discussion in this work , let us only comment that the result is actually divergent when @xmath191 .
this supplies further support to the claim that the considered singularity is indeed a generic feature of the system .
linearly polarized cylindrical waves can be studied in great detail both from the classical and quantum points of view .
as we have seen , there are two relevant hamiltonians for the study of the system .
we have shown that the action and the metric of the gauge - fixed model in linearized gravity reproduce the results obtained by considering full cylindrical gravity and working to the first perturbative order .
we get in this way a free hamiltonian .
the hamiltonian governing the dynamics of the full system , on the other hand , is different from the free one , but turns out to be a function of it and presents certain features with deep physical consequences , like e.g. the existence of an upper bound .
we have studied the similarities and differences of these two admissible kinds of evolution ; in particular , we have discussed how the emergence of an upper bound for the energy affects the causal structure of the model and the spreading of the light cones .
the field commutator for the free hamiltonian is a c - number and shows the typical light cone structure found in standard perturbative quantum field theories .
the commutator for the physical hamiltonian , as it usually happens for interacting theories , is no longer a c - number , so one has to consider its matrix elements . by concentrating on the vacuum expectation value
we have been able to see several interesting phenomena : a spreading of the light cone as a function of the gravitational constant , the disappearance of the singularity present in the free case due to the smearing of the symmetry axis and the appearance of a new type of singularity associated with the fact that the energy is bounded from above .
this new singularity is also present in the other expectation values discussed in the paper , namely for one - particle states and coherent states , and appears to be a generic feature of the model .
there are several open questions that we plan to address in future work .
in particular , it would be desirable to reach a better understanding of the behavior of the field commutator in the limit in which the length scale provided by @xmath220 goes to zero .
the expectation values of the @xmath190-commutator discussed here resemble those derived from the free hamiltonian @xmath57 at least in a certain average sense .
however it is not obvious how precisely and up to what extent they actually relate to each other .
this is partly so because of the different singularity structure found in both cases .
further research on this subject will concentrate on the properties of the model in the semiclassical limit @xmath266 .
we will also pay detailed attention to matrix elements of the field commutator other than the vacuum expectation value , with the aim at discussing how the smearing of the light cones depends on the energy .
in this appendix , we compute the commutators of the creation and annihilation operators @xmath136 and @xmath216 , obtained from the corresponding operators @xmath120 and @xmath267 via the unitary evolution generated by @xmath268 , where @xmath269 . employing relations ( [ crean2 ] ) and the basic commutators ( [ comma ] ) ,
it is possible to show that    @xmath270&= & \hat{a}(k_1)\hat{a}(k_2 ) \exp\left[it_1e(\hat{h}_0-k_1-k_2)+i(t_2-t_1)e(\hat{h}_0-k_2 ) -it_2e(\hat{h}_0)\right ] \\&-&\hat{a}(k_1)\hat{a}(k_2)\exp\left[it_2e(\hat{h}_0-k_1-k_2 ) + i(t_1-t_2)e(\hat{h}_0-k_1)-it_1e(\hat{h}_0)\right]\ , , \\
\bullet \ , \big[\hat{a}^\dagger_e(k_1,t_1),\hat{a}^\dagger_e(k_2,t_2)\big]&= & \hat{a}^\dagger(k_1)\hat{a}^\dagger(k_2 ) \exp\left[it_1e(\hat{h}_0+k_1+k_2)+i(t_2-t_1)e(\hat{h}_0+k_2 ) -it_2e(\hat{h}_0)\right ] \\
& -&\hat{a}^\dagger(k_1)\hat{a}^\dagger(k_2 ) \exp\left[it_2e(\hat{h}_0+k_1+k_2)+i(t_1-t_2)e(\hat{h}_0+k_1 ) -it_1e(\hat{h}_0)\right]\ , , \\ \bullet \ , \big[\hat{a}_e(k_1,t_1),\hat{a}^\dagger_e(k_2,t_2)\big]&= & \hat{a}(k_1)\hat{a}^\dagger(k_2 ) \exp\left[it_1e(\hat{h}_0+k_2-k_1)+i(t_2-t_1)e(\hat{h}_0+k_2 ) -it_2e(\hat{h}_0)\right ] \\&-&\hat{a}^\dagger(k_2)\hat{a}(k_1)\exp\left[it_2 e(\hat{h}_0+k_2-k_1 ) + i(t_1-t_2)e(\hat{h}_0-k_1)-it_1e(\hat{h}_0)\right]\ , , \\
\bullet \ , \big[\hat{a}^\dagger_e(k_1,t_1),a_e(k_2,t_2)\big]&= & \hat{a}^\dagger(k_1)\hat{a}(k_2 )
\exp\left[it_1e(\hat{h}_0+k_1-k_2)+i(t_2-t_1)e(\hat{h}_0-k_2 ) -it_2e(\hat{h}_0)\right]\\&-&\hat{a}(k_2)\hat{a}^\dagger(k_1 ) \exp\left[it_2e(\hat{h}_0+k_1-k_2 ) + i(t_1-t_2)e(\hat{h}_0+k_1)-it_1e(\hat{h}_0)\right].\end{aligned}\ ] ]
we consider coherent states of the field @xmath26 , given by @xmath271 where @xmath237 is a square integrable function and @xmath272 is a normalization constant satisfying @xmath273 the expectation value of the @xmath190-commutator is @xmath274
\int_0^\infty\!\frac{dk_1}{2}\!\!\int_0^\infty \!\!\!\!\!\!dk_2 j_0(r_1k_1)j_0(r_2k_2)\sum_{s=0}^\infty\frac{i_s(c ) } { s!}g_s(k_1,k_2),\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath275^s \!\!-\![b(k_2,-k_1)]^s\!\bigg\}\\+ \overline{c}(k_2)c(k_1)\bigg\{[b(k_1,-k_2)]^s\!- \![b(-k_2,k_1)]^s\bigg\}e^{-4\bar{g}s k_1}\hspace*{.2cm}\\ + \overline{c}(k_1)c(k_2)\bigg\{[b(-k_1,k_2)]^s\ !
-\![b(k_2,-k_1)]^s\bigg\}e^{-4\bar{g}s k_2}\hspace*{.2 cm } \\ + c(k_1)c(k_2 ) \bigg\{[b(k_1,k_2)]^s\!-\![b(k_2,k_1)]^s\bigg\}e^{-4\bar{g}s ( k_1+k_2 ) } \\
+ \overline{c}(k_1)\overline{c}(k_2 ) \bigg\{[b(-k_1,-k_2)]^s\!-\![b(-k_2,-k_1)]^s\bigg\ } , \hspace*{.7cm}\end{aligned}\ ] ] and we have employed the notation @xmath276.\end{aligned}\ ] ] note that , when @xmath191 , the delta in the expression of @xmath277 leads to the divergent integral @xmath278^{\!2s+1}\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!.\end{aligned}\ ] ]    the authors wish to thank a. ashtekar , g. date , and l. garay for interesting discussions .
they are especially grateful to m. varadarajan for suggesting the subject and sharing enlightening conversations and insight .
is supported by a spanish ministry of education and culture fellowship co - financed by the european social fund .
this work was supported by the spanish mcyt under the research projects bfm2001 - 0213 and bfm2002 - 04031-c02 - 02 .