On the Imaginary Part of the Effective Action in de Sitter Spacetime with Different Regularization Schemes

Basic Information

• Paper ID: 2510.13712
• Title: On the Imaginary Part of the Effective Action in de Sitter Spacetime with Different Regularization Schemes
• Authors: Yu Zhou, Hai-Qing Zhang (Beihang University)
• Categories: hep-th (High Energy Physics - Theory), gr-qc (General Relativity and Quantum Cosmology)
• Publication Date: October 16, 2025 (arXiv v2)
• Paper Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.13712v2

Abstract

The imaginary part of the effective action encodes vacuum instability and particle creation in background fields. Two standard methods are typically employed to derive it: the Bogoliubov method and the Green function method, which are generally expected to yield consistent results. However, in de Sitter spacetime, they produce different results. This paper revisits this issue by introducing explicit time and momentum cutoffs in the Green function representation of the effective action. The apparent discrepancies are found to arise from different limiting procedures in regularization, respectively reproducing the Bogoliubov and Green function results. Consequently, the two methods are understood as different regularization limits of the same expression, clarifying the origin of their divergence.

Research Background and Motivation

Core Problems

1. Fundamental Physical Issue: In de Sitter spacetime, two standard methods for calculating the imaginary part of the effective action—the Bogoliubov method and the Green function method—yield different results, a long-standing source of confusion in theoretical physics.
2. Significance:
   • The imaginary part of the effective action directly quantifies vacuum instability and particle creation probability
   • Important applications in cosmology and strong-field quantum electrodynamics
   • Relates to fundamental understanding of vacuum structure in de Sitter spacetime
3. Limitations of Existing Methods:
   • Bogoliubov Method: Based on canonical quantization, predicts a non-zero and positive imaginary part corresponding to thermal particle creation
   • Green Function Method: Based on path integrals, yields zero results in odd spacetime dimensions and alternating sign results in even dimensions
   • While the two methods typically agree in flat spacetime or finite-duration external fields, they produce fundamental disagreement in de Sitter spacetime
4. Research Motivation: Clarify the physical origin of this discrepancy and unify the theoretical framework of both methods

Core Contributions

1. Unified Framework: Establishes a unified integral representation with explicit time and momentum cutoffs, incorporating both methods into a single theoretical framework
2. Key Parameter Identification: Introduces a "balance parameter" λ = -τΛ, where τ is the time cutoff and Λ is the momentum cutoff
3. Clarification of Divergence Origin: Demonstrates that the difference between the two methods stems from different regularization limiting procedures:
   • λ → 0⁺: reproduces the Bogoliubov result
   • λ → +∞: reproduces the Green function result
4. Physical Interpretation: Provides deep understanding of the physical meaning of regularization procedures, explaining why different computational orders lead to different results

Detailed Methodology

Problem Definition

Calculate the imaginary part of the effective action for a free scalar field of mass m in (d+1)-dimensional de Sitter spacetime, unifying the results of the Bogoliubov and Green function methods.

Theoretical Framework

1. Bogoliubov Method

Based on canonical quantization of mode functions:

ImW_B = (1/4)∫d^d x∫(d^d k/(2π)^d) log|α_k|

where α_k is the Bogoliubov coefficient satisfying |α_k|² = 1/(1-e^(-2πν)), with ν = √(m²-d²/4).

2. Green Function Method

Based on the coincidence limit of the Feynman propagator:

ImW_G = -(1/2)∫d^(d+1)x√|g|∫_{m²}^{+∞} dm̄² ImG_F(x,x;m̄²)

3. Unified Representation

The unified integral with explicit cutoffs:

W = -(1/2)∫d^d x∫_{-∞}^τ dη√|g(η)|∫_{m²}^{+∞} dm̄²∫_{-∞}^{+∞} (d^d k/(2π)^d) G_k(η,η)

Technical Innovations

Balance Parameter λ

Define λ = -τΛ as the key parameter connecting the time cutoff τ → 0⁻ and momentum cutoff Λ → +∞. Different limiting values of this parameter correspond to different regularization schemes.

Hypergeometric Function Expansion

Express the integral result in terms of generalized hypergeometric function ²F₃:

ImW = (V_d/4)(2π^(d/2))/((2π)^d Γ(d/2)) (Λ^d/d)∫_ν^{+∞} dμ πμ(coth(πμ)-1)[1/μ + F(μ,d,λ) + F̃(μ,d,λ)]

Asymptotic Behavior Analysis

• λ → 0⁺ limit: Using the Riemann-Lebesgue lemma, oscillatory terms vanish, yielding the Bogoliubov result
• λ → +∞ limit: Large parameter expansion of hypergeometric functions, retaining non-oscillatory terms, yielding the Green function result

Experimental Setup

Theoretical Verification

This paper primarily conducts theoretical analysis and mathematical derivation verification without numerical experiments. Verification methods include:

1. Analytical Computation: Rigorous mathematical derivations verifying the correctness of both limits
2. Function Expansion: Application of asymptotic expansion theory for hypergeometric functions
3. Integration Techniques: Application of complex analysis and special function theory

Consistency Checks

• Verification of Bogoliubov coefficient normalization: |α_k|² - |β_k|² = 1
• Examination of Green function behavior in different dimensions
• Confirmation of mathematical self-consistency of the balance parameter

Experimental Results

Main Results

1. Bogoliubov Limit (λ → 0⁺)

ImW(λ → 0⁺) = -(V_d/4)(2π^(d/2))/((2π)^d Γ(d/2)) (Λ^d/d) log(1-e^(-2πν)) = ImW_B

Completely reproduces the Bogoliubov method result.

2. Green Function Limit (λ → +∞)

ImW(λ → +∞) = ((-1)^((d+1)/2))/((4π)^((d+1)/2) Γ((d+1)/2)) ∫d^(d+1)x√|g|∫_ν^{+∞} dμ μe^(-πμ)|Γ(d/2 + iμ)|²

Precisely reproduces the Green function method result, including its dimension dependence.

3. Unified Dimension Dependence

• Odd Spacetime Dimensions: The Green function method yields zero results because 1/Γ(-d/2) = 0
• Even Spacetime Dimensions: Alternating sign changes with coefficient ((-1)^((d+1)/2))/((4π)^((d+1)/2) Γ((d+1)/2))

Physical Interpretation

Impact of Computational Order

• Bogoliubov Method: Implicitly performs time integration first, smoothing temporal evolution
• Green Function Method: Performs momentum integration first, directly using the coincidence limit of the propagator

Physical Meaning of Regularization Schemes

Different values of λ correspond to different physical settings and regularization treatments, explaining why the two methods produce different results in de Sitter spacetime.

Related Work

Historical Development

1. Classical Works: Hawking particle creation, Schwinger effect, etc., laying the foundation for vacuum instability research
2. de Sitter Spacetime Research: Pioneering work by Gibbons-Hawking, Mottola, and others
3. Methodological Development: Development of Bogoliubov transformation theory and Green function techniques

Recent Related Research

1. Work by Akhmedov et al.: Attributed the discrepancy to the existence of vacuum wave functions in functional integrals
2. Research by Anderson and Mottola: Handled divergent integrals through scaling relations
3. Distinction from Previous Work: Provides an exact unified framework rather than approximate treatments

Conclusions and Discussion

Main Conclusions

1. Unification: The two seemingly contradictory methods are actually different regularization limits of the same expression
2. Origin of Discrepancy: The difference stems from different computational procedures and regularization treatments
3. Physical Advantage: The Bogoliubov method yields physically more reasonable positive-definite probabilities

Limitations

1. Scope of Applicability: Analysis is limited to de Sitter spacetime in Poincaré coordinates
2. Mass Condition: Requires m > d/2 to ensure ν is real
3. Theoretical Framework: Does not explicitly include the vacuum wave function contribution proposed by Akhmedov et al.

Future Directions

1. Keldysh-Schwinger Formalism: Employ more appropriate theoretical frameworks for dynamical backgrounds
2. Vacuum Wave Function: Investigate whether including the vacuum wave function yields a unique result
3. Other Spacetimes: Extend the analysis to other curved spacetimes

In-Depth Evaluation

Strengths

1. Theoretical Innovation:
   • First to provide a complete unified theoretical framework for both methods
   • Introduction of the balance parameter λ carries profound physical and mathematical significance
   • Mathematical derivations are rigorous, employing advanced special function theory
2. Physical Insights:
   • Clarifies long-standing theoretical confusion
   • Provides deep understanding of the physical meaning of regularization procedures
   • Explains the impact of computational order on results
3. Methodological Contributions:
   • Demonstrates how to unify different methods by introducing appropriate cutoff parameters
   • Provides a paradigm for addressing similar regularization problems

Weaknesses

1. Applicability Restrictions:
   • Only considers Poincaré coordinates, not covering global de Sitter spacetime
   • Mass condition restrictions may exclude some physically relevant cases
2. Practical Applications:
   • Lacks numerical verification or concrete physical applications
   • Does not discuss how to select appropriate λ values in practice
3. Completeness:
   • Does not fully resolve the vacuum wave function issue raised by Akhmedov et al.
   • The question of which method is more "correct" requires further investigation

Impact

1. Theoretical Physics: Provides important tools for quantum field theory research in de Sitter spacetime
2. Cosmology: Important for understanding particle creation mechanisms in the early universe
3. Mathematical Physics: Demonstrates the crucial role of regularization theory in solving physical problems

Applicable Scenarios

1. Theoretical Research: Applicable to studying quantum effects in curved spacetime
2. Cosmological Models: Can be applied to particle creation calculations in inflationary cosmology
3. Methodology: Provides insights for addressing regularization discrepancies in other physical problems

References

The paper cites important literature in the field, including:

• Classical works by Hawking, Schwinger, and others
• Textbooks by Birrell & Davies, Parker & Toms, and others
• Recent research by Akhmedov, Anderson, Mottola, and others
• Standard references on special functions and hypergeometric functions in mathematical physics

Overall Assessment: This is a paper of significant importance in theoretical physics that resolves a long-standing confusion in quantum field theory in de Sitter spacetime through rigorous mathematical analysis. The unified framework and the concept of the balance parameter are innovative, providing valuable tools and insights for research in related fields.