Advances in Mathematical Physics
VolumeΒ 2009Β (2009), Article IDΒ 978903, 52 pages
doi:10.1155/2009/978903
Research Article

Spectral Theory for a Mathematical Model of the Weak Interaction—Part I: The Decay of the Intermediate Vector Bosons π‘Š Β±

1Centre de Physique Théorique, Centre National de la Recherche Scientique (CNRS), Luminy Case 907, 13288 Marseille Cedex 9, France
2Département de Mathématiques, Université du Sud Toulon-Var, 83957 La Garde Cedex, France
3Centre de Mathématiques Appliquées, École Polytechnique, UMR-CNRS 7641, 91128 Palaiseau Cedex, France

Received 28 April 2009; Accepted 13 August 2009

Academic Editor: ValentinΒ Zagrebnov

Copyright Β© 2009 J.-M. Barbaroux and J.-C. Guillot. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

We consider a Hamiltonian with cutoffs describing the weak decay of spin 1 massive bosons into the full family of leptons. The Hamiltonian is a self-adjoint operator in an appropriate Fock space with a unique ground state. We prove a Mourre estimate and a limiting absorption principle above the ground state energy and below the first threshold for a sufficiently small coupling constant. As a corollary, we prove the absence of eigenvalues and absolute continuity of the energy spectrum in the same spectral interval.

1. Introduction

In this article, we consider a mathematical model of the weak interaction as patterned according to the Standard Model in Quantum Field Theory (see [1, 2]). We choose the example of the weak decay of the intermediate vector bosons π‘Š Β± into the full family of leptons.

The mathematical framework involves fermionic Fock spaces for the leptons and bosonic Fock spaces for the vector bosons. The interaction is described in terms of annihilation and creation operators together with kernels which are square integrable with respect to momenta. The total Hamiltonian, which is the sum of the free energy of the particles and antiparticles and of the interaction, is a self-adjoint operator in the Fock space for the leptons and the vector bosons and it has an unique ground state in the Fock space for a sufficiently small coupling constant.

The weak interaction is one of the four fundamental interactions known up to now. But the weak interaction is the only one which does not generate bound states. As it is well known, it is not the case for the strong, electromagnetic, and gravitational interactions. Thus we are expecting that the spectrum of the Hamiltonian associated with every model of weak decays is absolutely continuous above the energy of the ground state, and this article is a first step towards a proof of such a statement. Moreover a scattering theory has to be established for every such Hamiltonian.

In this paper we establish a Mourre estimate and a limiting absorption principle for any spectral interval above the energy of the ground state and below the mass of the electron for a small coupling constant.

Our study of the spectral analysis of the total Hamiltonian is based on the conjugate operator method with a self-adjoint conjugate operator. The methods used in this article are taken largely from [3, 4] and are based on [5, 6]. Some of the results of this article have been announced in [7].

For other applications of the conjugate operator method see [819].

For related results about models in Quantum Field Theory see [20, 21] in the case of the Quantum Electrodynamics and [22] in the case of the weak interaction.

The paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we give a precise definition of the model we consider. In Section 3, we state our main results and in the following sections, together with the appendix, detailed proofs of the results are given.

2. The Model

The weak decay of the intermediate bosons π‘Š + and π‘Š βˆ’ involves the full family of leptons together with the bosons themselves, according to the Standard Model (see [1, formula (4.139)] and [2]).

The full family of leptons involves the electron 𝑒 βˆ’ and the positron 𝑒 + , together with the associated neutrino 𝜈 𝑒 and antineutrino 𝜈 𝑒 , the muons πœ‡ βˆ’ and πœ‡ + together with the associated neutrino 𝜈 πœ‡ and antineutrino 𝜈 πœ‡ , and the tau leptons 𝜏 βˆ’ and 𝜏 + together with the associated neutrino 𝜈 𝜏 and antineutrino 𝜈 𝜏 .

It follows from the Standard Model that neutrinos and antineutrinos are massless particles. Neutrinos are left handed, that is, neutrinos have helicity βˆ’ 1 / 2 and antineutrinos are right handed, that is, antineutrinos have helicity + 1 / 2 .

In what follows, the mathematical model for the weak decay of the vector bosons π‘Š + and π‘Š βˆ’ that we propose is based on the Standard Model, but we adopt a slightly more general point of view because we suppose that neutrinos and antineutrinos are both massless particles with helicity Β± 1 / 2 . We recover the physical situation as a particular case. We could also consider a model with massive neutrinos and antineutrinos built upon the Standard Model with neutrino mixing [23].

Let us sketch how we define a mathematical model for the weak decay of the vector bosons π‘Š Β± into the full family of leptons.

The energy of the free leptons and bosons is a self-adjoint operator in the corresponding Fock space (see below), and the main problem is associated with the interaction between the bosons and the leptons. Let us consider only the interaction between the bosons and the electrons, the positrons, and the corresponding neutrinos and antineutrinos. Other cases are strictly similar. In the Schrödinger representation the interaction is given by (see [1, page 159, equation (4.139)] and [2, page 308, equation (21.3.20)]) ξ€œ 𝐼 = d 3 π‘₯ Ξ¨ 𝑒 ( π‘₯ ) 𝛾 𝛼 ξ€· 1 βˆ’ 𝛾 5 ξ€Έ Ξ¨ 𝜈 𝑒 ( π‘₯ ) π‘Š 𝛼 ( ξ€œ π‘₯ ) + d 3 π‘₯ Ξ¨ 𝜈 𝑒 ( π‘₯ ) 𝛾 𝛼 ξ€· 1 βˆ’ 𝛾 5 ξ€Έ Ξ¨ 𝑒 ( π‘₯ ) π‘Š 𝛼 ( π‘₯ ) βˆ— , ( 2 . 1 ) where 𝛾 𝛼 , 𝛼 = 0 , 1 , 2 , 3 and 𝛾 5 are the Dirac matrices and Ξ¨ β‹… ( π‘₯ ) and Ξ¨ β‹… ( π‘₯ ) are the Dirac fields for 𝑒 βˆ’ , 𝑒 + , 𝜈 𝑒 , and 𝜈 𝑒 .

We have Ξ¨ 𝑒 ξ‚€ 1 ( π‘₯ ) =  2 πœ‹ 3 / 2  𝑠 = Β± 1 / 2 ξ€œ d 3 𝑝  𝑏 𝑒 , + ( 𝑝 , 𝑠 ) 𝑒 ( 𝑝 , 𝑠 ) √ 𝑝 0 e 𝑖 𝑝 β‹… π‘₯ + 𝑏 βˆ— 𝑒 , βˆ’ ( 𝑝 , 𝑠 ) 𝑣 ( 𝑝 , 𝑠 ) √ 𝑝 0 e βˆ’ 𝑖 𝑝 β‹… π‘₯ ξƒͺ , Ξ¨ 𝑒 ( π‘₯ ) = Ξ¨ 𝑒 ( π‘₯ ) † 𝛾 0 . ( 2 . 2 ) Here 𝑝 0 = ( | 𝑝 | 2 + π‘š 2 𝑒 ) 1 / 2 where π‘š 𝑒 > 0 is the mass of the electron, and 𝑒 ( 𝑝 , 𝑠 ) and 𝑣 ( 𝑝 , 𝑠 ) are the normalized solutions to the Dirac equation (see [1, Appendix]).

The operators 𝑏 𝑒 , + ( 𝑝 , 𝑠 ) and 𝑏 βˆ— 𝑒 , + ( 𝑝 , 𝑠 ) (resp., 𝑏 𝑒 , βˆ’ ( 𝑝 , 𝑠 ) and 𝑏 βˆ— 𝑒 , βˆ’ ( 𝑝 , 𝑠 ) ) are the annihilation and creation operators for the electrons (resp., the positrons) satisfying the anticommutation relations (see below).

Similarly we define Ξ¨ 𝜈 𝑒 ( π‘₯ ) and Ξ¨ 𝜈 𝑒 ( π‘₯ ) by substituting the operators 𝑐 𝜈 𝑒 , Β± ( 𝑝 , 𝑠 ) and 𝑐 βˆ— 𝜈 𝑒 , Β± ( 𝑝 , 𝑠 ) for 𝑏 𝑒 , Β± ( 𝑝 , 𝑠 ) and 𝑏 βˆ— 𝑒 , Β± ( 𝑝 , 𝑠 ) with 𝑝 0 = | 𝑝 | . The operators 𝑐 𝜈 𝑒 , + ( 𝑝 , 𝑠 ) and 𝑐 βˆ— 𝜈 𝑒 , + ( 𝑝 , 𝑠 ) (resp., 𝑐 𝜈 𝑒 , βˆ’ ( 𝑝 , 𝑠 ) and 𝑐 βˆ— 𝜈 𝑒 , βˆ’ ( 𝑝 , 𝑠 ) ) are the annihilation and creation operators for the neutrinos associated with the electrons (resp., the antineutrinos).

For the π‘Š 𝛼 fields we have (see [24, Section  5.3]) π‘Š 𝛼 ξ‚€ 1 ( π‘₯ ) =  2 πœ‹ 3 / 2  πœ† = βˆ’ 1 , 0 , 1 ξ€œ d 3 π‘˜ √ 2 π‘˜ 0 ξ€· πœ– 𝛼 ( π‘˜ , πœ† ) π‘Ž + ( π‘˜ , πœ† ) e 𝑖 π‘˜ β‹… π‘₯ + πœ– βˆ— 𝛼 ( π‘˜ , πœ† ) π‘Ž βˆ— βˆ’ ( π‘˜ , πœ† ) e βˆ’ 𝑖 π‘˜ β‹… π‘₯ ξ€Έ . ( 2 . 3 ) Here π‘˜ 0 = ( | π‘˜ | 2 + π‘š 2 π‘Š ) 1 / 2 where π‘š π‘Š > 0 is the mass of the bosons π‘Š Β± . π‘Š + is the antiparticule of π‘Š βˆ’ . The operators π‘Ž + ( π‘˜ , πœ† ) and π‘Ž βˆ— + ( π‘˜ , πœ† ) (resp., π‘Ž βˆ’ ( π‘˜ , πœ† ) and π‘Ž βˆ— βˆ’ ( π‘˜ , πœ† ) ) are the annihilation and creation operators for the bosons π‘Š βˆ’ (resp., π‘Š + ) satisfying the canonical commutation relations. The vectors πœ– 𝛼 ( π‘˜ , πœ† ) are the polarizations of the massive spin 1 bosons π‘Š Β± (see [24, Section  5.2]).

The interaction (2.1) is a formal operator and, in order to get a well-defined operator in the Fock space, one way is to adapt what Glimm and Jaffe have done in the case of the Yukawa Hamiltonian (see [25]). For that sake, we have to introduce a spatial cutoff 𝑔 ( π‘₯ ) such that 𝑔 ∈ 𝐿 1 ( ℝ 3 ) , together with momentum cutoffs πœ’ ( 𝑝 ) and 𝜌 ( π‘˜ ) for the Dirac fields and the π‘Š πœ‡ fields, respectively.

Thus when one develops the interaction 𝐼 with respect to products of creation and annihilation operators, one gets a finite sum of terms associated with kernels of the form πœ’ ξ€· 𝑝 1 ξ€Έ πœ’ ξ€· 𝑝 2 ξ€Έ 𝜌 ξ€· 𝑝 ( π‘˜ ) Μ‚ 𝑔 1 + 𝑝 2 ξ€Έ , βˆ’ π‘˜ ( 2 . 4 ) where Μ‚ 𝑔 is the Fourier transform of 𝑔 . These kernels are square integrable.

In what follows, we consider a model involving terms of the above form but with more general square integrable kernels.

We follow the convention described in [24, Section  4.1] that we quote: “The state-vector will be taken to be symmetric under interchange of any bosons with each other, or any bosons with any fermions, and antisymmetric with respect to interchange of any two fermions with each other, in all cases, whether the particles are of the same species or not.’’ Thus, as it follows from [24, Section  4.2], fermionic creation and annihilation operators of different species of leptons will always anticommute.

Concerning our notations, from now on, β„“ ∈ { 1 , 2 , 3 } denotes each species of leptons. β„“ = 1 denotes the electron 𝑒 βˆ’ the positron 𝑒 + and the neutrinos 𝜈 𝑒 , 𝜈 𝑒 . β„“ = 2 denotes the muons πœ‡ βˆ’ , πœ‡ + and the neutrinos 𝜈 πœ‡ and 𝜈 πœ‡ , and β„“ = 3 denotes the tau-leptons and the neutrinos 𝜈 𝜏 and 𝜈 𝜏 .

Let πœ‰ 1 = ( 𝑝 1 , 𝑠 1 ) be the quantum variables of a massive lepton, where 𝑝 1 ∈ ℝ 3 and 𝑠 1 ∈ { βˆ’ 1 / 2 , 1 / 2 } is the spin polarization of particles and antiparticles. Let πœ‰ 2 = ( 𝑝 2 , 𝑠 2 ) be the quantum variables of a massless lepton where 𝑝 2 ∈ ℝ 3 and 𝑠 2 ∈ { βˆ’ 1 / 2 , 1 / 2 } is the helicity of particles and antiparticles, and, finally, let πœ‰ 3 = ( π‘˜ , πœ† ) be the quantum variables of the spin 1 bosons π‘Š + and π‘Š βˆ’ where π‘˜ ∈ ℝ 3 and πœ† ∈ { βˆ’ 1 , 0 , 1 } is the polarization of the vector bosons (see [24, Section  5]). We set Ξ£ 1 = ℝ 3 Γ— { βˆ’ 1 / 2 , 1 / 2 } for the leptons and Ξ£ 2 = ℝ 3 Γ— { βˆ’ 1 , 0 , 1 } for the bosons. Thus 𝐿 2 ( Ξ£ 1 ) is the Hilbert space of each lepton and 𝐿 2 ( Ξ£ 2 ) is the Hilbert space of each boson. The scalar product in 𝐿 2 ( Ξ£ 𝑗 ) , 𝑗 = 1 , 2 is defined by ( ξ€œ 𝑓 , 𝑔 ) = Ξ£ 𝑗 𝑓 ( πœ‰ ) 𝑔 ( πœ‰ ) d πœ‰ , 𝑗 = 1 , 2 . ( 2 . 5 ) Here ξ€œ Ξ£ 1 d  πœ‰ = 𝑠 = + 1 / 2 , βˆ’ 1 / 2 ξ€œ d ξ€œ 𝑝 , Ξ£ 2 d  πœ‰ = πœ† = 0 , 1 , βˆ’ 1 ξ€œ d ξ€· π‘˜ , 𝑝 , π‘˜ ∈ ℝ 3 ξ€Έ . ( 2 . 6 )

The Hilbert space for the weak decay of the vector bosons π‘Š + and π‘Š βˆ’ is the Fock space for leptons and bosons that we now describe.

Let 𝔖 be any separable Hilbert space. Let ⨂ 𝑛 π‘Ž 𝔖 (resp., ⨂ 𝑛 𝑠 𝔖 ) denote the antisymmetric (resp., symmetric) 𝑛 th tensor power of 𝔖 . The fermionic (resp., bosonic) Fock space over 𝔖 , denoted by 𝔉 π‘Ž ( 𝔖 ) (resp., 𝔉 𝑠 ( 𝔖 ) ) , is the direct sum 𝔉 π‘Ž ( 𝔖 ) = ∞  𝑛 𝑛 = 0  π‘Ž 𝔖  r e s p . , 𝔉 𝑠 ( 𝔖 ) = ∞  𝑛 𝑛 = 0  𝑠 𝔖 ξƒͺ , ( 2 . 7 ) where ⨂ 0 π‘Ž ⨂ 𝔖 = 0 𝑠 𝔖 ≑ β„‚ . The state Ξ© = ( 1 , 0 , 0 , … , 0 , … ) denotes the vacuum state in 𝔉 π‘Ž ( 𝔖 ) and in 𝔉 𝑠 ( 𝔖 ) .

For every β„“ , 𝔉 β„“ is the fermionic Fock space for the corresponding species of leptons including the massive particle and antiparticle together with the associated neutrino and antineutrino, that is, 𝔉 β„“ = 4  𝔉 π‘Ž ξ€· 𝐿 2 ξ€· Ξ£ 1 ξ€Έ ξ€Έ β„“ = 1 , 2 , 3 . ( 2 . 8 ) We have 𝔉 β„“ =  π‘ž β„“ β‰₯ 0 , π‘ž β„“ β‰₯ 0 , π‘Ÿ β„“ β‰₯ 0 , π‘Ÿ β„“ β‰₯ 0 𝔉 ( π‘ž β„“ , π‘ž β„“ , π‘Ÿ β„“ , π‘Ÿ β„“ ) β„“ ( 2 . 9 ) with 𝔉 ( π‘ž β„“ , π‘ž β„“ , π‘Ÿ β„“ , π‘Ÿ β„“ ) β„“ =  π‘ž β„“  π‘Ž 𝐿 2 ξ€· Ξ£ 1 ξ€Έ ξƒͺ βŠ— βŽ› ⎜ ⎜ ⎝ π‘ž β„“  π‘Ž 𝐿 2 ξ€· Ξ£ 1 ξ€Έ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ βŠ—  π‘Ÿ β„“  π‘Ž 𝐿 2 ξ€· Ξ£ 1 ξ€Έ ξƒͺ βŠ— βŽ› ⎜ ⎜ ⎝ π‘Ÿ β„“  π‘Ž 𝐿 2 ξ€· Ξ£ 1 ξ€Έ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ . ( 2 . 1 0 ) Here π‘ž β„“ (resp., π‘ž β„“ ) is the number of massive fermionic particle (resp., antiparticles) and π‘Ÿ β„“ (resp., π‘Ÿ β„“ ) is the number of neutrinos (resp., antineutrinos). The vector Ξ© β„“ is the associated vacuum state. The fermionic Fock space denoted by 𝔉 𝐿 for the leptons is then 𝔉 𝐿 = 3  β„“ = 1 𝔉 β„“ , ( 2 . 1 1 ) and Ξ© 𝐿 = ⨂ 3 β„“ = 1 Ξ© β„“ is the vacuum state.

The bosonic Fock space for the vector bosons π‘Š + and π‘Š βˆ’ , denoted by 𝔉 π‘Š , is then 𝔉 π‘Š = 𝔉 𝑠 ξ€· 𝐿 2 ξ€· Ξ£ 2 ξ€Έ ξ€Έ βŠ— 𝔉 𝑠 ξ€· 𝐿 2 ξ€· Ξ£ 2 ξ€Έ ξ€Έ ≃ 𝔉 𝑠 ξ€· 𝐿 2 ξ€· Ξ£ 2 ξ€Έ βŠ• 𝐿 2 ξ€· Ξ£ 2 . ξ€Έ ξ€Έ ( 2 . 1 2 ) We have 𝔉 π‘Š =  𝑑 β‰₯ 0 , 𝑑 β‰₯ 0 𝔉 ( 𝑑 , π‘Š 𝑑 ) , ( 2 . 1 3 ) where 𝔉 ( 𝑑 , π‘Š 𝑑 ) ⨂ = ( 𝑑 𝑠 𝐿 2 ( Ξ£ 2 ⨂ ) ) βŠ— ( 𝑑 𝑠 𝐿 2 ( Ξ£ 2 ) ) . Here 𝑑 (resp., 𝑑 ) is the number of bosons π‘Š βˆ’ (resp., π‘Š + ). The vector Ξ© π‘Š is the corresponding vacuum.

The Fock space for the weak decay of the vector bosons π‘Š + and π‘Š βˆ’ , denoted by 𝔉 , is thus 𝔉 = 𝔉 𝐿 βŠ— 𝔉 π‘Š , ( 2 . 1 4 ) and Ξ© = Ξ© 𝐿 βŠ— Ξ© π‘Š is the vacuum state.

For every β„“ ∈ { 1 , 2 , 3 } let 𝔇 β„“ denote the set of smooth vectors πœ“ β„“ ∈ 𝔉 β„“ for which πœ“ ( π‘ž β„“ , π‘ž β„“ , π‘Ÿ β„“ , π‘Ÿ β„“ ) β„“ has a compact support and πœ“ ( π‘ž β„“ , π‘ž β„“ , π‘Ÿ β„“ , π‘Ÿ β„“ ) β„“ = 0 for all but finitely many ( π‘ž β„“ , π‘ž β„“ , π‘Ÿ β„“ , π‘Ÿ β„“ ) . Let 𝔇 𝐿 = ξ‚Š ⨂ 3 β„“ = 1 𝔇 β„“ . ( 2 . 1 5 ) Here ξ‚Š ⨂ is the algebraic tensor product.

Let 𝔇 π‘Š denote the set of smooth vectors πœ™ ∈ 𝔉 π‘Š for which πœ™ ( 𝑑 , 𝑑 ) has a compact support and πœ™ ( 𝑑 , 𝑑 ) = 0 for all but finitely many ( 𝑑 , 𝑑 ) .

Let 𝔇 = 𝔇 𝐿  βŠ— 𝔇 π‘Š . ( 2 . 1 6 ) The set 𝔇 is dense in 𝔉 .

Let 𝐴 β„“ be a self-adjoint operator in 𝔉 β„“ such that 𝔇 β„“ is a core for 𝐴 β„“ . Its extension to 𝔉 𝐿 is, by definition, the closure in 𝔉 𝐿 of the operator 𝐴 1 βŠ— 1 2 βŠ— 1 3 with domain 𝔇 𝐿 when β„“ = 1 , of the operator 1 1 βŠ— 𝐴 2 βŠ— 1 3 with domain 𝔇 𝐿 when β„“ = 2 , and of the operator 1 1 βŠ— 1 2 βŠ— 𝐴 3 with domain 𝔇 𝐿 when β„“ = 3 . Here 1 β„“ is the operator identity on 𝔉 β„“ .

The extension of 𝐴 β„“ to 𝔉 𝐿 is a self-adjoint operator for which 𝔇 𝐿 is a core and it can be extended to 𝔉 . The extension of 𝐴 β„“ to 𝔉 is, by definition, the closure in 𝔉 of the operator  𝐴 β„“ βŠ— 1 π‘Š with domain 𝔇 , where  𝐴 β„“ is the extension of 𝐴 β„“ to 𝔉 𝐿 . The extension of 𝐴 β„“ to 𝔉 is a self-adjoint operator for which 𝔇 is a core.

Let 𝐡 be a self-adjoint operator in 𝔉 π‘Š for which 𝔇 π‘Š is a core. The extension of the self-adjoint operator 𝐴 β„“ βŠ— 𝐡 is, by definition, the closure in 𝔉 of the operator 𝐴 1 βŠ— 1 2 βŠ— 1 3 βŠ— 𝐡 with domain 𝔇 when β„“ = 1 , of the operator 1 1 βŠ— 𝐴 2 βŠ— 1 3 βŠ— 𝐡 with domain 𝔇 when β„“ = 2 , and of the operator 1 1 βŠ— 1 2 βŠ— 𝐴 3 βŠ— 𝐡 with domain 𝔇 when β„“ = 3 . The extension of 𝐴 β„“ βŠ— 𝐡 to 𝔉 is a self-adjoint operator for which 𝔇 is a core.

We now define the creation and annihilation operators.

For each β„“ = 1 , 2 , 3 , 𝑏 β„“ , πœ– ( πœ‰ 1 ) (resp., 𝑏 βˆ— β„“ , πœ– ( πœ‰ 1 ) ) is the fermionic annihilation (resp., fermionic creation) operator for the corresponding species of massive particle when πœ– = + and for the corresponding species of massive antiparticle when πœ– = βˆ’ . The operators 𝑏 β„“ , πœ– ( πœ‰ 1 ) and 𝑏 βˆ— β„“ , πœ– ( πœ‰ 1 ) are defined as usually (see, e.g., [20, 26]; see also the detailed definitions in [27]).

Similarly, for each β„“ = 1 , 2 , 3 , 𝑐 β„“ , πœ– ( πœ‰ 2 ) (resp., 𝑐 βˆ— β„“ , πœ– ( πœ‰ 2 ) ) is the fermionic annihilation (resp., fermionic creation) operator for the corresponding species of neutrino when πœ– = + and for the corresponding species of antineutrino when πœ– = βˆ’ . The operators 𝑐 β„“ , πœ– ( πœ‰ 2 ) and 𝑐 βˆ— β„“ , πœ– ( πœ‰ 2 ) are defined in a standard way, but with the additional requirements that for any β„“ , β„“ ξ…ž , πœ– and πœ– ξ…ž , the operators 𝑏 β™― β„“ , πœ– ( πœ‰ 1 ) and 𝑐 β™― β„“ β€² , πœ– β€² ( πœ‰ 2 ) anticommutes, where β™― stands either for a βˆ— or for no symbol (see the detailed definitions in [27]).

The operator π‘Ž πœ– ( πœ‰ 3 ) (resp., π‘Ž βˆ— πœ– ( πœ‰ 3 ) ) is the bosonic annihilation (resp., bosonic creation) operator for the boson π‘Š βˆ’ when πœ– = + and for the boson π‘Š + when πœ– = βˆ’ (see, e.g., [20, 26], or [27]). Note that π‘Ž β™― ( πœ‰ 3 ) commutes with 𝑏 β™― β„“ , πœ– ( πœ‰ 1 ) and 𝑐 β™― β„“ β€² , πœ– β€² ( πœ‰ 2 ) .

The following canonical anticommutation and commutation relations hold:  𝑏 β„“ , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 1 ξ€Έ , 𝑏 βˆ— β„“ β€² , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ ξ…ž 1 ξ€Έ  = 𝛿 β„“ β„“ β€² 𝛿 πœ– πœ– β€² 𝛿 ξ€· πœ‰ 1 βˆ’ πœ‰ ξ…ž 1 ξ€Έ ,  𝑐 β„“ , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ , 𝑐 βˆ— β„“ β€² , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ ξ…ž 2 ξ€Έ  = 𝛿 β„“ β„“ β€² 𝛿 πœ– πœ– β€² 𝛿 ξ€· πœ‰ 2 βˆ’ πœ‰ ξ…ž 2 ξ€Έ , ξ€Ί π‘Ž πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ , π‘Ž βˆ— πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ ξ…ž 3 ξ€Έ ξ€» = 𝛿 πœ– πœ– β€² 𝛿 ξ€· πœ‰ 3 βˆ’ πœ‰ ξ…ž 3 ξ€Έ , ξ€½ 𝑏 β„“ , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 1 ξ€Έ , 𝑏 β„“ β€² , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ ξ…ž 1 = ξ€½ 𝑐 ξ€Έ ξ€Ύ β„“ , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ , 𝑐 β„“ β€² , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ ξ…ž 2 ξ€Ί π‘Ž ξ€Έ ξ€Ύ = 0 , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ , π‘Ž πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ ξ…ž 3 ξ€½ 𝑏 ξ€Έ ξ€» = 0 , β„“ , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 1 ξ€Έ , 𝑐 β„“ β€² , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 2 =  𝑏 ξ€Έ ξ€Ύ β„“ , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 1 ξ€Έ , 𝑐 βˆ— β„“ β€² , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ  ξ€Ί 𝑏 = 0 , β„“ , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 1 ξ€Έ , π‘Ž πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 3 = ξ€Ί 𝑏 ξ€Έ ξ€» β„“ , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 1 ξ€Έ , π‘Ž βˆ— πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 3 = ξ€Ί 𝑐 ξ€Έ ξ€» β„“ , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ , π‘Ž πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 3 = ξ€Ί 𝑐 ξ€Έ ξ€» β„“ , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ , π‘Ž βˆ— πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ ξ€» = 0 , ( 2 . 1 7 ) where we used the notation 𝛿 ( πœ‰ 𝑗 βˆ’ πœ‰ ξ…ž 𝑗 ) = 𝛿 πœ† πœ† β€² 𝛿 ( π‘˜ βˆ’ π‘˜ ξ…ž ) .

We recall that the following operators, with πœ‘ ∈ 𝐿 2 ( Ξ£ 1 ) , 𝑏 β„“ , πœ– ( ξ€œ πœ‘ ) = Ξ£ 1 𝑏 β„“ , πœ– ( πœ‰ ) πœ‘ ( πœ‰ ) d πœ‰ , 𝑐 β„“ , πœ– ( ξ€œ πœ‘ ) = Ξ£ 1 𝑐 β„“ , πœ– ( πœ‰ ) πœ‘ ( πœ‰ ) d 𝑏 πœ‰ , βˆ— β„“ , πœ– ξ€œ ( πœ‘ ) = Ξ£ 1 𝑏 βˆ— β„“ , πœ– ( πœ‰ ) πœ‘ ( πœ‰ ) d πœ‰ , 𝑐 βˆ— β„“ , πœ– ξ€œ ( πœ‘ ) = Ξ£ 1 𝑐 βˆ— β„“ , πœ– ( πœ‰ ) πœ‘ ( πœ‰ ) d πœ‰ ( 2 . 1 8 ) are bounded operators in 𝔉 such that β€– β€– 𝑏 β™― β„“ , πœ– β€– β€– = β€– β€– 𝑐 ( πœ‘ ) β™― β„“ , πœ– β€– β€– ( πœ‘ ) = β€– πœ‘ β€– 𝐿 2 , ( 2 . 1 9 ) where 𝑏 β™― (resp., 𝑐 β™― ) is 𝑏 (resp., 𝑐 ) or 𝑏 βˆ— (resp., 𝑐 βˆ— ).

The operators 𝑏 β™― β„“ , πœ– ( πœ‘ ) and 𝑐 β™― β„“ , πœ– ( πœ‘ ) satisfy similar anticommutaion relations (see, e.g., [28]).

The free Hamiltonian 𝐻 0 is given by 𝐻 0 = 𝐻 0 ( 1 ) + 𝐻 0 ( 2 ) + 𝐻 0 ( 3 ) = 3  β„“ = 1  0 π‘₯ 0 2 0 0 𝑑 πœ– = Β± ξ€œ 𝑀 β„“ ( 1 ) ξ€· πœ‰ 1 ξ€Έ 𝑏 βˆ— β„“ , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 1 ξ€Έ 𝑏 β„“ , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 1 ξ€Έ d πœ‰ 1 + 3  β„“ = 1  0 π‘₯ 0 2 0 0 𝑑 πœ– = Β± ξ€œ 𝑀 β„“ ( 2 ) ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ 𝑐 βˆ— β„“ , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ 𝑐 β„“ , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ d πœ‰ 2 +  πœ– = Β± ξ€œ 𝑀 ( 3 ) ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ π‘Ž βˆ— πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ π‘Ž πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ d πœ‰ 3 , ( 2 . 2 0 ) where 𝑀 β„“ ( 1 ) ξ€· πœ‰ 1 ξ€Έ = ξ‚€ | | 𝑝 1 | | 2 + π‘š 2 β„“  1 / 2 , w i t h 0 < π‘š 1 < π‘š 2 < π‘š 3 , 𝑀 β„“ ( 2 ) ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ = | | 𝑝 2 | | , 𝑀 ( 3 ) ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ = ξ‚€ | | π‘˜ | | 2 + π‘š 2 π‘Š  1 / 2 , ( 2 . 2 1 ) where π‘š π‘Š is the mass of the bosons π‘Š + and π‘Š βˆ’ such that π‘š π‘Š > π‘š 3 .

The spectrum of 𝐻 0 is [ 0 , ∞ ) and 0 is a simple eigenvalue with Ξ© as eigenvector. The set of thresholds of 𝐻 0 , denoted by 𝑇 , is given by ξ€½ 𝑇 = 𝑝 π‘š 1 + π‘ž π‘š 2 + π‘Ÿ π‘š 3 + 𝑠 π‘š π‘Š ; ( 𝑝 , π‘ž , π‘Ÿ , 𝑠 ) ∈ β„• 4 ξ€Ύ , , 𝑝 + π‘ž + π‘Ÿ + 𝑠 β‰₯ 1 ( 2 . 2 2 ) and each set [ 𝑑 , ∞ ) , 𝑑 ∈ 𝑇 , is a branch of absolutely continuous spectrum for 𝐻 0 .

The interaction, denoted by 𝐻 𝐼 , is given by 𝐻 𝐼 = 2  𝛼 = 1 𝐻 𝐼 ( 𝛼 ) , ( 2 . 2 3 ) where 𝐻 𝐼 ( 1 ) = 3  β„“ = 1  0 π‘₯ 0 2 0 0 𝑑 πœ– β‰  πœ– β€² ξ€œ 𝐺 ( 1 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 1 , πœ‰ 2 , πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ 𝑏 βˆ— β„“ , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 1 ξ€Έ 𝑐 βˆ— β„“ , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ π‘Ž πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ d πœ‰ 1 d πœ‰ 2 d πœ‰ 3 + 3  β„“ = 1  0 π‘₯ 0 2 0 0 𝑑 πœ– β‰  πœ– β€² ξ€œ 𝐺 ( 1 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ( πœ‰ 1 , πœ‰ 2 , πœ‰ 3 ) π‘Ž βˆ— πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ 𝑐 β„“ , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ 𝑏 β„“ , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 1 ξ€Έ d πœ‰ 1 d πœ‰ 2 d πœ‰ 3 , 𝐻 𝐼 ( 2 ) = 3  β„“ = 1  πœ– β‰  πœ– β€² ξ€œ 𝐺 ( 2 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 1 , πœ‰ 2 , πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ 𝑏 βˆ— β„“ , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 1 ξ€Έ 𝑐 βˆ— β„“ , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ π‘Ž βˆ— πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ d πœ‰ 1 d πœ‰ 2 d πœ‰ 3 + 3  β„“ = 1  πœ– β‰  πœ– β€² ξ€œ 𝐺 ( 2 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 1 , πœ‰ 2 , πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ π‘Ž πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ 𝑐 β„“ , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ 𝑏 β„“ , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 1 ξ€Έ d πœ‰ 1 d πœ‰ 2 d πœ‰ 3 . ( 2 . 2 4 ) The kernels 𝐺 ( 2 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ( β‹… , β‹… , β‹… ) , 𝛼 = 1 , 2 , are supposed to be functions.

The total Hamiltonian is then 𝐻 = 𝐻 0 + 𝑔 𝐻 𝐼 , 𝑔 > 0 , ( 2 . 2 5 ) where 𝑔 is a coupling constant.

The operator 𝐻 𝐼 ( 1 ) describes the decay of the bosons π‘Š + and π‘Š βˆ’ into leptons. Because of 𝐻 𝐼 ( 2 ) the bare vacuum will not be an eigenvector of the total Hamiltonian for every 𝑔 > 0 as we expect from the physics.

Every kernel 𝐺 β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ( πœ‰ 1 , πœ‰ 2 , πœ‰ 3 ) , computed in theoretical physics, contains a 𝛿 -distribution because of the conservation of the momentum (see [1] and [24, Section  4.4]). In what follows, we approximate the singular kernels by square integrable functions.

Thus, from now on, the kernels 𝐺 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² are supposed to satisfy the following hypothesis.

Hypothesis 2.1. For 𝛼 = 1 , 2 , β„“ = 1 , 2 , 3 , πœ– , πœ– ξ…ž = Β± , we assume 𝐺 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 1 , πœ‰ 2 , πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ ∈ 𝐿 2 ξ€· Ξ£ 1 Γ— Ξ£ 1 Γ— Ξ£ 2 ξ€Έ . ( 2 . 2 6 )

Remark 2.2. A similar model can be written down for the weak decay of pions πœ‹ βˆ’ and πœ‹ + (see [1, Section  6.2]).

Remark 2.3. The total Hamiltonian is more general than the one involved in the theory of weak interactions because, in the Standard Model, neutrinos have helicity βˆ’ 1 / 2 and antineutrinos have helicity 1 / 2 .
In the physical case, the Fock space, denoted by 𝔉 ξ…ž , is isomorphic to 𝔉 ξ…ž 𝐿 βŠ— 𝔉 π‘Š , with 𝔉 ξ…ž 𝐿 = 3  β„“ = 1 𝔉 ξ…ž β„“ , 𝔉 ξ…ž β„“ =  2  π‘Ž 𝐿 2 ξ€· Ξ£ 1 ξ€Έ ξƒͺ βŠ—  2  π‘Ž 𝐿 2 ξ€· ℝ 3 ξ€Έ ξƒͺ . ( 2 . 2 7 ) The free Hamiltonian, now denoted by 𝐻 ξ…ž 0 , is then given by 𝐻 ξ…ž 0 = 3  β„“ = 1  πœ– = Β± ξ€œ 𝑀 β„“ ( 1 ) ξ€· πœ‰ 1 ξ€Έ 𝑏 βˆ— β„“ , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 1 ξ€Έ 𝑏 β„“ , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 1 ξ€Έ d πœ‰ 1 + 3  β„“ = 1  πœ– = Β± ξ€œ ℝ 3 | | 𝑝 2 | | 𝑐 βˆ— β„“ , πœ– ξ€· 𝑝 2 ξ€Έ 𝑐 β„“ , πœ– ξ€· 𝑝 2 ξ€Έ d 𝑝 2 +  πœ– = Β± ξ€œ 𝑀 ( 3 ) ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ π‘Ž βˆ— πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ π‘Ž πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ d πœ‰ 3 , ( 2 . 2 8 ) and the interaction, now denoted by 𝐻 ξ…ž 𝐼 , is the one obtained from 𝐻 𝐼 by supposing that 𝐺 ( 𝛼 ) ( πœ‰ 1 , ( 𝑝 2 , 𝑠 2 ) , πœ‰ 3 ) = 0 if 𝑠 2 = πœ– ( 1 / 2 ) . The total Hamiltonian, denoted by 𝐻 ξ…ž , is then given by 𝐻 ξ…ž = 𝐻 ξ…ž 0 + 𝑔 𝐻 ξ…ž 𝐼 . The results obtained in this paper for 𝐻 hold true for 𝐻 ξ…ž with obvious modifications.

Under Hypothesis 2.1 a well-defined operator on 𝔇 corresponds to the formal interaction 𝐻 𝐼 as it follows.

The formal operator ξ€œ 𝐺 ( 1 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 1 , πœ‰ 2 , πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ 𝑏 βˆ— β„“ , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 1 ξ€Έ 𝑐 βˆ— β„“ , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ π‘Ž πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ d πœ‰ 1 d πœ‰ 2 d πœ‰ 3 ( 2 . 2 9 ) is defined as a quadratic form on ( 𝔇 β„“ βŠ— 𝔇 π‘Š ) Γ— ( 𝔇 β„“ βŠ— 𝔇 π‘Š ) as ξ€œ ξ‚€ 𝑐 β„“ , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ 𝑏 β„“ , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 1 ξ€Έ πœ“ , 𝐺 ( 1 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² π‘Ž πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ πœ™  d πœ‰ 1 d πœ‰ 2 d πœ‰ 3 , ( 2 . 3 0 ) where πœ“ , πœ™ ∈ 𝔇 β„“ βŠ— 𝔇 π‘Š .

By mimicking the proof of [29, Theorem X.44], we get a closed operator, denoted by 𝐻 ( 1 ) 𝐼 , β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² , associated with the quadratic form such that it is the unique operator in 𝔉 β„“ βŠ— 𝔉 π‘Š such that 𝔇 β„“ βŠ— 𝔇 π‘Š βŠ‚ π’Ÿ ( 𝐻 ( 1 ) 𝐼 , β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ) is a core for 𝐻 ( 1 ) 𝐼 , β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² and 𝐻 ( 1 ) 𝐼 , β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² = ξ€œ 𝐺 ( 1 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 1 , πœ‰ 2 , πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ 𝑏 βˆ— β„“ , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 1 ξ€Έ 𝑐 βˆ— β„“ , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ π‘Ž πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ d πœ‰ 1 d πœ‰ 2 d πœ‰ 3 ( 2 . 3 1 ) as quadratic forms on ( 𝔇 β„“ βŠ— 𝔇 π‘Š ) Γ— ( 𝔇 β„“ βŠ— 𝔇 π‘Š ) .

Similarly for the operator ( 𝐻 ( 1 ) 𝐼 , β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ) βˆ— , we have the equality as quadratic forms ξ‚€ 𝐻 ( 1 ) 𝐼 , β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€²  βˆ— = ξ€œ 𝐺 ( 1 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ( πœ‰ 1 , πœ‰ 2 , πœ‰ 3 ) π‘Ž βˆ— πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ 𝑐 β„“ , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ 𝑏 β„“ , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 1 ξ€Έ d πœ‰ 1 d πœ‰ 2 d πœ‰ 3 . ( 2 . 3 2 )

Again, there exists two closed operators 𝐻 ( 2 ) 𝐼 , β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² and ( 𝐻 ( 2 ) 𝐼 , β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ) βˆ— such that 𝔇 β„“ βŠ— 𝔇 π‘Š βŠ‚ π’Ÿ ( 𝐻 ( 2 ) 𝐼 , β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ) , 𝔇 β„“ βŠ— 𝔇 π‘Š βŠ‚ π’Ÿ ( ( 𝐻 ( 2 ) 𝐼 , β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ) βˆ— ) , and 𝔇 β„“ βŠ— 𝔇 π‘Š is a core for 𝐻 ( 2 ) 𝐼 , β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² and ( 𝐻 ( 2 ) 𝐼 , β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ) βˆ— and such that 𝐻 ( 2 ) 𝐼 , β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² = ξ€œ 𝐺 ( 2 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 1 , πœ‰ 2 , πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ 𝑏 βˆ— β„“ , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 1 ξ€Έ 𝑐 βˆ— β„“ , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ π‘Ž βˆ— πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ d πœ‰ 1 d πœ‰ 2 d πœ‰ 3 , ξ‚€ 𝐻 ( 2 ) 𝐼 , β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€²  βˆ— = ξ€œ 𝐺 ( 2 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 1 , πœ‰ 2 , πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ π‘Ž πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ 𝑐 β„“ , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ 𝑏 β„“ , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 1 ξ€Έ d πœ‰ 1 d πœ‰ 2 d πœ‰ 3 ( 2 . 3 3 ) as quadratic forms on ( 𝔇 β„“ βŠ— 𝔇 π‘Š ) Γ— ( 𝔇 β„“ βŠ— 𝔇 π‘Š ) .

We will still denote by 𝐻 ( 𝛼 ) 𝐼 , β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² and ( 𝐻 ( 𝛼 ) 𝐼 , β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ) βˆ— ( 𝛼 = 1 , 2 ) their extensions to 𝔉 . The set 𝔇 is then a core for 𝐻 ( 𝛼 ) 𝐼 , β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² and ( 𝐻 ( 𝛼 ) 𝐼 , β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ) βˆ— .

Thus 𝐻 = 𝐻 0  + 𝑔 3 𝛼 = 1 , 2  β„“ = 1  πœ– β‰  πœ– β€² ξ‚€ 𝐻 ( 𝛼 ) 𝐼 , β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² + ξ‚€ 𝐻 ( 2 ) 𝐼 , β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€²  βˆ—  ( 2 . 3 4 ) is a symmetric operator defined on 𝔇 .

We now want to prove that 𝐻 is essentially self-adjoint on 𝔇 by showing that 𝐻 ( 𝛼 ) 𝐼 , β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² and ( 𝐻 ( 𝛼 ) 𝐼 , β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ) βˆ— are relatively 𝐻 0 -bounded.

Once again, as above, for almost every πœ‰ 3 ∈ Ξ£ 2 , there exists closed operators in 𝔉 𝐿 , denoted by 𝐡 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ( πœ‰ 3 ) and ( 𝐡 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ( πœ‰ 3 ) ) βˆ— such that 𝐡 ( 1 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ ξ€œ = βˆ’ 𝐺 ( 1 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ( πœ‰ 1 , πœ‰ 2 , πœ‰ 3 ) 𝑏 β„“ , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 1 ξ€Έ 𝑐 β„“ , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ d πœ‰ 1 d πœ‰ 2 , ξ‚€ 𝐡 ( 1 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ  βˆ— = ξ€œ 𝐺 ( 1 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 1 , πœ‰ 2 , πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ 𝑏 βˆ— β„“ , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 1 ξ€Έ 𝑐 βˆ— β„“ , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ d πœ‰ 1 d πœ‰ 2 , 𝐡 ( 2 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ = ξ€œ 𝐺 ( 2 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 1 , πœ‰ 2 , πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ 𝑏 βˆ— β„“ , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 1 ξ€Έ 𝑐 βˆ— β„“ , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ d πœ‰ 1 d πœ‰ 2 , ξ‚€ 𝐡 ( 2 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ  βˆ— ξ€œ = βˆ’ 𝐺 ( 2 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ( πœ‰ 1 , πœ‰ 2 , πœ‰ 3 ) 𝑏 β„“ , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 1 ξ€Έ 𝑐 β„“ , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ d πœ‰ 1 d πœ‰ 2 ( 2 . 3 5 ) as quadratic forms on 𝔇 β„“ Γ— 𝔇 β„“ .

We have that 𝔇 β„“ βŠ‚ π’Ÿ ( 𝐡 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ( πœ‰ 3 ) ) (resp., 𝔇 β„“ βŠ‚ π’Ÿ ( ( 𝐡 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ( πœ‰ 3 ) ) βˆ— ) is a core for 𝐡 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ( πœ‰ 3 ) (resp., for ( 𝐡 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ( πœ‰ 3 ) ) βˆ— ). We still denote by 𝐡 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ( πœ‰ 3 ) ) and ( 𝐡 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ( πœ‰ 3 ) ) βˆ— ) their extensions to 𝔉 𝐿 .

It then follows that the operator 𝐻 𝐼 with domain 𝔇 is symmetric and can be written in the following form: 𝐻 𝐼 =  3 𝛼 = 1 , 2  β„“ = 1  πœ– β‰  πœ– β€² ξ‚€ 𝐻 ( 𝛼 ) 𝐼 , β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² + ξ‚€ 𝐻 ( 𝛼 ) 𝐼 , β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€²  βˆ—  =  3 𝛼 = 1 , 2  β„“ = 1  πœ– β‰  πœ– β€² ξ€œ 𝐡 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ βŠ— π‘Ž βˆ— πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ d πœ‰ 3 +  3 𝛼 = 1 , 2  β„“ = 1  πœ– β‰  πœ– β€² ξ€œ ξ‚€ 𝐡 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ  βˆ— βŠ— π‘Ž πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ d πœ‰ 3 . ( 2 . 3 6 ) Let 𝑁 β„“ denote the operator number of massive leptons β„“ in 𝔉 β„“ , that is, 𝑁 β„“ =  πœ– ξ€œ 𝑏 βˆ— β„“ , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 1 ξ€Έ 𝑏 β„“ , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 1 ξ€Έ d πœ‰ 1 . ( 2 . 3 7 ) The operator 𝑁 β„“ is a positive self-adjoint operator in 𝔉 β„“ . We still denote by 𝑁 β„“ its extension to 𝔉 𝐿 . The set 𝔇 𝐿 is a core for 𝑁 β„“ .

We then have the following.

Proposition 2.4. For almost every πœ‰ 3 ∈ Ξ£ 2 , π’Ÿ ( 𝐡 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ( πœ‰ 3 ) ) , π’Ÿ ( ( 𝐡 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ( πœ‰ 3 ) ) βˆ— ) βŠƒ π’Ÿ ( 𝑁 β„“ 1 / 2 ) , and for Ξ¦ ∈ π’Ÿ ( 𝑁 β„“ 1 / 2 ) βŠ‚ 𝔉 𝐿 one has β€– β€– 𝐡 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ( πœ‰ 3 β€– β€– ) Ξ¦ 𝔉 𝐿 ≀ β€– β€– 𝐺 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ( β‹… , β‹… , πœ‰ 3 ) β€– β€– 𝐿 2 ( Ξ£ 1 Γ— Ξ£ 1 ) β€– β€– 𝑁 β„“ 1 / 2 Ξ¦ β€– β€– 𝔉 𝐿 , β€– β€– β€– ξ‚€ 𝐡 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ  βˆ— Ξ¦ β€– β€– β€– 𝔉 𝐿 ≀ β€– β€– 𝐺 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ( β‹… , β‹… , πœ‰ 3 ) β€– β€– 𝐿 2 ( Ξ£ 1 Γ— Ξ£ 1 ) β€– β€– 𝑁 β„“ 1 / 2 Ξ¦ β€– β€– 𝔉 𝐿 . ( 2 . 3 8 )

Proof. The estimates (2.38) are examples of 𝑁 𝜏 estimates (see [25]). The proof is quite similar to the proof of [20, Proposition  3.7]. Details can be found in [27] but are omitted here.

Let 𝐻 ( 3 ) 0 , πœ– = ξ€œ 𝑀 ( 3 ) ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ π‘Ž βˆ— πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ π‘Ž πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ d πœ‰ 3 . ( 2 . 3 9 ) Then 𝐻 ( 3 ) 0 , πœ– is a self-adjoint operator in 𝔉 π‘Š , and 𝔇 π‘Š is a core for 𝐻 ( 3 ) 0 , πœ– .

We get the following.

Proposition 2.5. One has β€– β€– β€– ξ€œ ξ‚€ 𝐡 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ  βˆ— βŠ— π‘Ž πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ d πœ‰ 3 Ξ¨ β€– β€– β€– 2 ≀ βŽ› ⎜ ⎜ ⎜ ⎝ ξ€œ Ξ£ 1 Γ— Ξ£ 1 Γ— Ξ£ 2 | | | 𝐺 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 1 , πœ‰ 2 , πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ | | | 2 𝑀 ( 3 ) ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ d πœ‰ 1 d πœ‰ 2 d πœ‰ 3 ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ β€– β€– β€– ξ€· 𝑁 β„“ ξ€Έ + 1 1 / 2 βŠ— ξ‚€ 𝐻 ( 3 ) 0 , πœ–  1 / 2 Ξ¨ β€– β€– β€– 2 , ( 2 . 4 0 ) β€– β€– β€– ξ€œ 𝐡 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ( πœ‰ 3 ) βŠ— π‘Ž βˆ— πœ– ( πœ‰ 3 ) d πœ‰ 3 Ξ¨ β€– β€– β€– 2 ≀ βŽ› ⎜ ⎜ ⎜ ⎝ ξ€œ Ξ£ 1 Γ— Ξ£ 1 Γ— Ξ£ 2 | | | 𝐺 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 1 , πœ‰ 2 , πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ | | | 2 𝑀 ( 3 ) ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ d πœ‰ 1 d πœ‰ 2 d πœ‰ 3 ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ β€– β€– β€– ξ€· 𝑁 β„“ ξ€Έ + 1 1 / 2 βŠ— ξ‚€ 𝐻 ( 3 ) 0 , πœ–  1 / 2 Ξ¨ β€– β€– β€– 2 + ξ‚΅ ξ€œ Ξ£ 1 Γ— Ξ£ 1 Γ— Ξ£ 2 | | | 𝐺 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 1 , πœ‰ 2 , πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ | | | 2 d πœ‰ 1 d πœ‰ 2 d πœ‰ 3 πœ‚ β€– β€– ξ€· 𝑁 ξ‚Ά ξ‚΅ β„“ ξ€Έ + 1 1 / 2 β€– β€– βŠ— 1 Ξ¨ 2 + 1 4 πœ‚ β€– Ξ¨ β€– 2 ξ‚Ά ( 2 . 4 1 ) for every Ξ¨ ∈ π’Ÿ ( 𝐻 0 ) and every πœ‚ > 0 .

Proof. Suppose that Ξ¨ ∈ π’Ÿ ( 𝑁 β„“ 1 / 2 )  βŠ— π’Ÿ ( ( 𝐻 ( 3 ) 0 , πœ– ) 1 / 2 ) . Let Ξ¨ πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ = 𝑀 ( 3 ) ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ 1 / 2 ξ‚€ ξ€· 𝑁 β„“ ξ€Έ + 1 1 / 2 βŠ— π‘Ž πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ  Ξ¦ . ( 2 . 4 2 ) We have ξ€œ ξ‚€ 𝐡 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ  βˆ— βŠ— π‘Ž πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ d πœ‰ 3 ξ€œ Ξ¨ = Ξ£ 2 1 ξ€· 𝑀 ( 3 ) ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ ξ€Έ 1 / 2 𝐡 ξ‚€ ξ‚€ ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ  βˆ— ξ€· 𝑁 β„“ ξ€Έ + 1 βˆ’ 1 / 2  Ξ¨ βŠ— 1 πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ d πœ‰ 3 . ( 2 . 4 3 ) Therefore, for Ξ¨ ∈ π’Ÿ ( 𝑁 β„“ 1 / 2 )  βŠ— π’Ÿ ( ( 𝐻 ( 3 ) 0 , πœ– ) 1 / 2 ) , (2.40) follows from Proposition 2.4.
We now have β€– β€– β€– ξ€œ 𝐡 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ( πœ‰ 3 ) βŠ— π‘Ž βˆ— πœ– ( πœ‰ 3 ) Ξ¨ d πœ‰ 3 β€– β€– β€– 2 𝔉 = ξ€œ ξ‚€ 𝐡 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ βŠ— π‘Ž πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ ξ…ž 3 ξ€Έ Ξ¨ , 𝐡 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ ξ…ž 3 ξ€Έ βŠ— π‘Ž πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ Ξ¨  d πœ‰ 3 d πœ‰ ξ…ž 3 + ξ€œ β€– β€– ξ‚€ 𝐡 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ( πœ‰ 3  Ξ¨ β€– β€– ) βŠ— 1 2 d πœ‰ 3 , ( 2 . 4 4 ) ξ€œ Ξ£ 2 Γ— Ξ£ 2 ξ‚€ 𝐡 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ βŠ— π‘Ž πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ ξ…ž 3 ξ€Έ Ξ¨ , 𝐡 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ ξ…ž 3 ξ€Έ βŠ— π‘Ž πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ Ξ¨  d πœ‰ 3 d πœ‰ ξ…ž 3 = ξ€œ Ξ£ 2 Γ— Ξ£ 2 1 𝑀 ( 3 ) ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ 1 / 2 𝑀 ( 3 ) ξ€· πœ‰ ξ…ž 3 ξ€Έ 1 / 2 Γ— 𝐡 ξ‚€ ξ‚€ ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 3 𝑁 ξ€Έ ξ€· β„“ ξ€Έ + 1 βˆ’ 1 / 2  Ξ¨ βŠ— 1 πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ ξ…ž 3 ξ€Έ , ξ‚€ 𝐡 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ ξ…ž 3 𝑁 ξ€Έ ξ€· β„“ ξ€Έ + 1 βˆ’ 1 / 2  Ξ¨ βŠ— 1 πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ  d πœ‰ 3 d πœ‰ ξ…ž 3 ≀  ξ€œ Ξ£ 2 1 𝑀 ( 3 ) ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ 1 / 2 β€– β€– 𝐡 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 3 𝑁 ξ€Έ ξ€· β„“ ξ€Έ + 1 βˆ’ 1 / 2 β€– β€– 𝔉 𝐿 β€– β€– Ξ¨ πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ β€– β€– d πœ‰ 3 ξƒͺ 2 ≀  ξ€œ Ξ£ 1 Γ— Ξ£ 1 Γ— Ξ£ 2 | | 𝐺 ( 𝛼 ) ξ€· πœ‰ 1 , πœ‰ 2 , πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ | | 2 𝑀 ( 3 ) ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ d πœ‰ 1 d πœ‰ 2 d πœ‰ 3 ξƒͺ β€– β€– β€– ξ€· 𝑁 β„“ ξ€Έ + 1 1 / 2 βŠ— ξ‚€ 𝐻 ( 3 ) 0 , πœ–  1 / 2 Ξ¨ β€– β€– β€– 2 . ( 2 . 4 5 ) Furthermore ξ€œ Ξ£ 2 β€– β€– ξ‚€ 𝐡 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ  Ξ¨ β€– β€– βŠ— 1 2 d πœ‰ 3 = ξ€œ Ξ£ 2 β€– β€– ξ‚€ 𝐡 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 3 𝑁 ξ€Έ ξ€· β„“ ξ€Έ + 1 βˆ’ 1 / 2 ξ€· 𝑁 βŠ— 1  ξ‚€ β„“ ξ€Έ + 1 1 / 2  Ξ¨ β€– β€– βŠ— 1 2 d πœ‰ 3 ≀ ξ‚΅ ξ€œ Ξ£ 1 Γ— Ξ£ 1 Γ— Ξ£ 2 | | | 𝐺 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 1 , πœ‰ 2 , πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ | | | 2 d πœ‰ 1 d πœ‰ 2 d πœ‰ 3 πœ‚ β€– β€– ξ€· 𝑁 ξ‚Ά ξ‚΅ β„“ ξ€Έ Ξ¨ β€– β€– + 1 2 + 1 4 πœ‚ β€– Ξ¨ β€– 2 ξ‚Ά ( 2 . 4 6 ) for every πœ‚ > 0 .
By (2.40), (2.45), and (2.46), we finally get (2.41) for every Ξ¨ ∈ π’Ÿ ( 𝑁 β„“ 1 / 2 )  βŠ— π’Ÿ ( 𝐻 ( 3 ) 0 , πœ– ) . It then follows that (2.40) and (2.41) are verified for every Ξ¨ ∈ π’Ÿ ( 𝐻 0 ) .

We now prove that 𝐻 is a self-adjoint operator in 𝔉 for 𝑔 sufficiently small.

Theorem 2.6. Let 𝑔 1 > 0 be such that 3 𝑔 2 1 π‘š π‘Š  1 π‘š 2 1 ξƒͺ  + 1 3 𝛼 = 1 , 2  β„“ = 1  πœ– β‰  πœ– β€² β€– β€– 𝐺 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² β€– β€– 2 𝐿 2 ( Ξ£ 1 Γ— Ξ£ 1 Γ— Ξ£ 2 ) < 1 . ( 2 . 4 7 ) Then for every 𝑔 satisfying 𝑔 ≀ 𝑔 1 , 𝐻 is a self-adjoint operator in 𝔉 with domain π’Ÿ ( 𝐻 ) = π’Ÿ ( 𝐻 0 ) , and 𝔇 is a core for 𝐻 .

Proof. Let Ξ¨ be in 𝔇 . We have β€– β€– 𝐻 𝐼 Ξ¨ β€– β€– 2 ≀ 1 2  3 𝛼 = 1 , 2  β„“ = 1  πœ– β‰  πœ– β€² ξ‚» β€– β€– β€– ξ€œ ξ‚€ 𝐡 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ  βˆ— βŠ— π‘Ž πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ Ξ¨ d πœ‰ 3 β€– β€– β€– 2 + β€– β€– β€– ξ€œ ξ‚€ 𝐡 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ  βŠ— π‘Ž βˆ— πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ Ξ¨ d πœ‰ 3 β€– β€– β€– 2 ξ‚Ό . ( 2 . 4 8 ) Note that β€– β€– 𝐻 ( 3 ) 0 , πœ– Ξ¨ β€– β€– ≀ β€– β€– 𝐻 0 ( 3 ) Ξ¨ β€– β€– ≀ β€– β€– 𝐻 0 Ξ¨ β€– β€– , β€– β€– 𝑁 β„“ Ξ¨ β€– β€– ≀ 1 π‘š β„“ β€– β€– 𝐻 0 , β„“ Ξ¨ β€– β€– ≀ 1 π‘š 1 β€– β€– 𝐻 0 , β„“ Ξ¨ β€– β€– ≀ 1 π‘š 1 β€– β€– 𝐻 0 Ξ¨ β€– β€– , ( 2 . 4 9 ) where 𝐻 0 , β„“ =  πœ– ξ€œ 𝑀 β„“ ( 1 ) ξ€· πœ‰ 1 ξ€Έ 𝑏 βˆ— β„“ , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 1 ξ€Έ 𝑏 β„“ , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 1 ξ€Έ d πœ‰ 1 +  πœ– ξ€œ 𝑀 β„“ ( 2 ) ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ 𝑐 βˆ— β„“ , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ 𝑐 β„“ , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ d πœ‰ 2 . ( 2 . 5 0 ) We further note that β€– β€– β€– ξ€· 𝑁 β„“ ξ€Έ + 1 1 / 2 βŠ— ξ‚€ 𝐻 ( 3 ) 0 , πœ–  1 / 2 Ξ¨ β€– β€– β€– 2 ≀ 1 2  1 π‘š 2 1 ξƒͺ β€– β€– 𝐻 + 1 0 Ξ¨ β€– β€– 2 + 𝛽 2 π‘š 2 1 β€– β€– 𝐻 0 Ξ¨ β€– β€– 2 + ξ‚΅ 1 2 + 1 ξ‚Ά β€– 8 𝛽 Ξ¨ β€– 2 ( 2 . 5 1 ) for 𝛽 > 0 , and πœ‚ β€– β€– 𝑁 ξ€· ξ€· β„“ ξ€Έ ξ€Έ Ξ¨ β€– β€– + 1 βŠ— 1 2 + 1 4 πœ‚ β€– Ξ¨ β€– 2 ≀ πœ‚ π‘š 2 1 β€– β€– 𝐻 0 Ξ¨ β€– β€– 2 + πœ‚ 𝛽 π‘š 2 1 β€– β€– 𝐻 0 Ξ¨ β€– β€– 2 ξ‚΅ 1 + πœ‚ 1 + ξ‚Ά 4 𝛽 β€– Ξ¨ β€– 2 + 1 4 πœ‚ β€– Ξ¨ β€– 2 . ( 2 . 5 2 ) Combining (2.48) with (2.40), (2.41), (2.51), and (2.52) we get for πœ‚ > 0 , 𝛽 > 0 β€– β€– 𝐻 𝐼 Ξ¨ β€– β€– 2 βŽ› ⎜ ⎜ ⎝  ≀ 6 3 𝛼 = 1 , 2  β„“ = 1  πœ– β‰  πœ– β€² β€– β€– 𝐺 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² β€– β€– 2 ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ Γ—  1 2 π‘š π‘Š  1 π‘š 2 1 ξƒͺ β€– β€– 𝐻 + 1 0 Ξ¨ β€– β€– 2 + 𝛽 2 π‘š π‘Š π‘š 2 1 β€– β€– 𝐻 0 Ξ¨ β€– β€– 2 + 1 2 π‘š π‘Š ξ‚΅ 1 1 + ξ‚Ά 4 𝛽 β€– Ξ¨ β€– 2 ξƒͺ βŽ› ⎜ ⎜ ⎝  + 1 2 3 𝛼 = 1 , 2  β„“ = 1  πœ– β‰  πœ– β€² β€– β€– 𝐺 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² β€– β€– 2 ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠  πœ‚ π‘š 2 1 β€– β€– 𝐻 ( 1 + 𝛽 ) 0 Ξ¨ β€– β€– 2 + ξ‚΅ πœ‚ ξ‚΅ 1 1 + ξ‚Ά + 1 4 𝛽 ξ‚Ά 4 πœ‚ β€– Ξ¨ β€– 2 ξƒͺ , ( 2 . 5 3 ) by noting ξ€œ Ξ£ 1 Γ— Ξ£ 1 Γ— Ξ£ 2 | | 𝐺 β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 1 , πœ‰ 2 , πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ | | 2 𝑀 ( 3 ) ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ d πœ‰ 1 d πœ‰ 2 d πœ‰ 3 ≀ 1 π‘š π‘Š β€– β€– 𝐺 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² β€– β€– 2 . ( 2 . 5 4 ) By (2.53) the theorem follows from the Kato-Rellich theorem.

3. Main Results

In the sequel, we will make the following additional assumptions on the kernels 𝐺 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² .

Hypothesis 3.1. (i) For 𝛼 = 1 , 2 , β„“ = 1 , 2 , 3 , πœ– , πœ– ξ…ž = Β± , ξ€œ Ξ£ 1 Γ— Ξ£ 1 Γ— Ξ£ 2 | | | 𝐺 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 1 , πœ‰ 2 , πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ | | | 2 | | 𝑝 2 | | 2 d πœ‰ 1 d πœ‰ 2 d πœ‰ 3 < ∞ . ( 3 . 1 )
(ii) There exists 𝐢 > 0 such that for 𝛼 = 1 , 2 , β„“ = 1 , 2 , 3 , πœ– , πœ– ξ…ž = Β± , ξ‚΅ ξ€œ Ξ£ 1 Γ— { | 𝑝 2 | ≀ 𝜎 } Γ— Ξ£ 2 | | | 𝐺 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 1 , πœ‰ 2 , πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ | | | 2 d πœ‰ 1 d πœ‰ 2 d πœ‰ 3 ξ‚Ά 1 / 2 ≀ 𝐢 𝜎 2 . ( 3 . 2 )
(iii) For 𝛼 = 1 , 2 , β„“ = 1 , 2 , 3 , πœ– , πœ– ξ…ž = Β± , and 𝑖 , 𝑗 = 1 , 2 , 3 ( i i i . a ) ξ€œ Ξ£ 1 Γ— Ξ£ 1 Γ— Ξ£ 2 | | |  ξ€· 𝑝 2 β‹… βˆ‡ 𝑝 2 ξ€Έ 𝐺 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ξ‚„ ( πœ‰ 1 , πœ‰ 2 , πœ‰ 3 ) | | | 2 d πœ‰ 1 d πœ‰ 2 d πœ‰ 3 ( < ∞ , i i i . b ) ξ€œ Ξ£ 1 Γ— Ξ£ 1 Γ— Ξ£ 2 𝑝 2 2 , 𝑖 𝑝 2 2 , 𝑗 | | | | | πœ• 2 𝐺 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² πœ• 𝑝 2 , 𝑖 πœ• 𝑝 2 , 𝑗 ( πœ‰ 1 , πœ‰ 2 , πœ‰ 3 ) | | | | | 2 d πœ‰ 1 d πœ‰ 2 d πœ‰ 3 < ∞ . ( 3 . 3 )
(iv) There exists Ξ› > π‘š 1 such that for 𝛼 = 1 , 2 , β„“ = 1 , 2 , 3 , πœ– , πœ– ξ…ž = Β± , 𝐺 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 1 , πœ‰ 2 , πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ = 0 i f | | 𝑝 2 | | β‰₯ Ξ› . ( 3 . 4 )

Remark 3.2. Hypothesis 3.1(ii) is nothing but an infrared regularization of the kernels 𝐺 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² . In order to satisfy this hypothesis it is, for example, sufficient to suppose that 𝐺 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 1 , πœ‰ 2 , πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ = | | 𝑝 2 | | 1 / 2  𝐺 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 1 , πœ‰ 2 , πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ , ( 3 . 5 ) where  𝐺 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² is a smooth function of ( 𝑝 1 , 𝑝 2 , 𝑝 3 ) in the Schwartz space.
Hypothesis 3.1(iv), which is a sharp ultraviolet cutoff, is actually not necessary, and can be removed at the expense of some additional technicalities. However, in order to simplify the proof of Proposition 3.5, we will leave it.

Our first result is devoted to the existence of a ground state for 𝐻 together with the location of the spectrum of 𝐻 and of its absolutely continuous spectrum when 𝑔 is sufficiently small.

Theorem 3.3. Suppose that the kernels 𝐺 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² satisfy Hypotheses 2.1 and 3.1(i). Then there exists 0 < 𝑔 2 ≀ 𝑔 1 such that 𝐻 has a unique ground state for 𝑔 ≀ 𝑔 2 . Moreover 𝜎 ( 𝐻 ) = 𝜎 a c [ ( 𝐻 ) = i n f 𝜎 ( 𝐻 ) , ∞ ) ( 3 . 6 ) with i n f 𝜎 ( 𝐻 ) ≀ 0 .

According to Theorem 3.3 the ground state energy 𝐸 = i n f 𝜎 ( 𝐻 ) is a simple eigenvalue of 𝐻 , and our main results are concerned with a careful study of the spectrum of 𝐻 above the ground state energy. The spectral theory developed in this work is based on the conjugated operator method as described in [5, 6, 30]. Our choice of the conjugate operator denoted by 𝐴 is the second quantized dilation generator for the neutrinos.

Let π‘Ž denote the following operator in 𝐿 2 ( Ξ£ 1 ) : 1 π‘Ž = 2 ξ€· 𝑝 2 β‹… 𝑖 βˆ‡ 𝑝 2 + 𝑖 βˆ‡ 𝑝 2 β‹… 𝑝 2 ξ€Έ . ( 3 . 7 ) The operator π‘Ž is essentially self-adjoint on 𝐢 ∞ 0 ( ℝ 3 , β„‚ 2 ) . Its second quantized version d Ξ“ ( π‘Ž ) is a self-adjoint operator in 𝔉 π‘Ž ( 𝐿 2 ( Ξ£ 1 ) ) . From the definition (2.8) of the space 𝔉 β„“ , the following operator in 𝔉 β„“ 𝐴 β„“ = 1 βŠ— 1 βŠ— d Ξ“ ( π‘Ž ) βŠ— 1 + 1 βŠ— 1 βŠ— 1 βŠ— d Ξ“ ( π‘Ž ) ( 3 . 8 ) is essentially self-adjoint on 𝔇 𝐿 .

Let now 𝐴 be the following operator in 𝔉 𝐿 : 𝐴 = 𝐴 1 βŠ— 1 2 βŠ— 1 3 + 1 1 βŠ— 𝐴 2 βŠ— 1 3 + 1 1 βŠ— 1 2 βŠ— 𝐴 3 . ( 3 . 9 ) Then 𝐴 is essentially self-adjoint on 𝔇 𝐿 .

We will denote again by 𝐴 its extension to 𝔉 . Thus 𝐴 is essentially self-adjoint on 𝔇 and we still denote by 𝐴 its closure.

We also set ξ€· ⟨ 𝐴 ⟩ = 1 + 𝐴 2 ξ€Έ 1 / 2 . ( 3 . 1 0 )

We then have the following.

Theorem 3.4. Suppose that the kernels 𝐺 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² satisfy Hypotheses 2.1 and 3.1. For any 𝛿 > 0 satisfying 0 < 𝛿 < π‘š 1 there exists 0 < 𝑔 𝛿 ≀ 𝑔 2 such that, for 0 < 𝑔 ≀ 𝑔 𝛿 , the following points are satisfied. (i)The spectrum of 𝐻 in ( i n f 𝜎 ( 𝐻 ) , π‘š 1 βˆ’ 𝛿 ] is purely absolutely continuous.(ii)Limiting absorption principle.
For every 𝑠 > 1 / 2 and πœ‘ , πœ“ in 𝔉 , the limits l i m πœ€ β†’ 0 ξ€· πœ‘ , ⟨ 𝐴 ⟩ βˆ’ 𝑠 ( 𝐻 βˆ’ πœ† Β± 𝑖 πœ€ ) ⟨ 𝐴 ⟩ βˆ’ 𝑠 πœ“ ξ€Έ ( 3 . 1 1 ) exist uniformly for πœ† in any compact subset of ( i n f 𝜎 ( 𝐻 ) , π‘š 1 βˆ’ 𝛿 ] . (iii) Pointwise decay in time.
Suppose 𝑠 ∈ ( 1 / 2 , 1 ) and 𝑓 ∈ 𝐢 ∞ 0 ( ℝ ) with s u p p 𝑓 βŠ‚ ( i n f 𝜎 ( 𝐻 ) , π‘š 1 βˆ’ 𝛿 ) . Then β€– β€– ⟨ 𝐴 ⟩ βˆ’ 𝑠 e βˆ’ 𝑖 𝑑 𝐻 𝑓 ( 𝐻 ) ⟨ 𝐴 ⟩ βˆ’ 𝑠 β€– β€– ξ€· 𝑑 = π’ͺ 1 / 2 βˆ’ 𝑠 ξ€Έ ( 3 . 1 2 ) as 𝑑 β†’ ∞ .

The proof of Theorem 3.4 is based on a positive commutator estimate, called the Mourre estimate, and on a regularity property of 𝐻 with respect to 𝐴 (see [5, 6, 30]). According to [4], the main ingredient of the proof is auxiliary operators associated with infrared cutoff Hamiltonians with respect to the momenta of the neutrinos that we now introduce.

Let πœ’ 0 ( β‹… ) , πœ’ ∞ ( β‹… ) ∈ 𝐢 ∞ ( ℝ , [ 0 , 1 ] ) with πœ’ 0 = 1 on ( βˆ’ ∞ , 1 ] , πœ’ ∞ = 1 on [ 2 , ∞ ) and πœ’ 0 2 + πœ’ ∞ 2 = 1 .

For 𝜎 > 0 we set πœ’ 𝜎 ( 𝑝 ) = πœ’ 0 ξ‚΅ | | 𝑝 | | 𝜎 ξ‚Ά , πœ’ 𝜎 ( 𝑝 ) = πœ’ ∞ ξ‚΅ | | 𝑝 | | 𝜎 ξ‚Ά ,  πœ’ 𝜎 ( 𝑝 ) = 1 βˆ’ πœ’ 𝜎 ( 𝑝 ) , ( 3 . 1 3 ) where 𝑝 ∈ ℝ 3 .

The operator 𝐻 𝐼 , 𝜎 is the interaction given by (2.23) and (2.24) and associated with the kernels  πœ’ 𝜎 ( 𝑝 2 ) 𝐺 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ( πœ‰ 1 , πœ‰ 2 , πœ‰ 3 ) . We then set 𝐻 𝜎 ∢ = 𝐻 0 + 𝑔 𝐻 𝐼 , 𝜎 . ( 3 . 1 4 )

Let Ξ£ 1 , 𝜎 = Ξ£ 1 ∩ 𝑝 ξ€½ ξ€· 2 , 𝑠 2 ξ€Έ ; | | 𝑝 2 | | ξ€Ύ , Ξ£ < 𝜎 𝜎 1 = Ξ£ 1 ∩ 𝑝 ξ€½ ξ€· 2 , 𝑠 2 ξ€Έ ; | | 𝑝 2 | | ξ€Ύ 𝔉 β‰₯ 𝜎 β„“ , 2 , 𝜎 = 𝔉 π‘Ž ξ€· 𝐿 2 ξ€· Ξ£ 1 , 𝜎 ξ€Έ ξ€Έ βŠ— 𝔉 π‘Ž ξ€· 𝐿 2 ξ€· Ξ£ 1 , 𝜎 , 𝔉 ξ€Έ ξ€Έ 𝜎 β„“ , 2 = 𝔉 π‘Ž ξ€· 𝐿 2 ξ€· Ξ£ 𝜎 1 ξ€Έ ξ€Έ βŠ— 𝔉 π‘Ž ξ€· 𝐿 2 ξ€· Ξ£ 𝜎 1 , 𝔉 ξ€Έ ξ€Έ β„“ , 2 = 𝔉 β„“ , 2 , 𝜎 βŠ— 𝔉 𝜎 β„“ , 2 , 𝔉 β„“ , 1 = 2  𝔉 π‘Ž ξ€· 𝐿 2 ξ€· Ξ£ 1 . ξ€Έ ξ€Έ ( 3 . 1 5 ) The space 𝔉 β„“ , 1 is the Fock space for the massive leptons β„“ , and 𝔉 β„“ , 2 is the Fock space for the neutrinos and antineutrinos β„“ .

Set 𝔉 𝜎 β„“ = 𝔉 β„“ , 1 βŠ— 𝔉 𝜎 β„“ , 2 𝔉 β„“ , 𝜎 = 𝔉 β„“ , 2 , 𝜎 . ( 3 . 1 6 ) We have 𝔉 β„“ ≃ 𝔉 𝜎 β„“ βŠ— 𝔉 β„“ , 𝜎 . ( 3 . 1 7 ) Set 𝔉 𝜎 𝐿 = 3  β„“ = 1 𝔉 𝜎 β„“ 𝔉 𝐿 , 𝜎 = 3  β„“ = 1 𝔉 β„“ , 𝜎 . ( 3 . 1 8 ) We have 𝔉 𝐿 ≃ 𝔉 𝜎 𝐿 βŠ— 𝔉 𝐿 , 𝜎 . ( 3 . 1 9 ) Set 𝔉 𝜎 = 𝔉 𝜎 𝐿 βŠ— 𝔉 π‘Š . ( 3 . 2 0 ) We have 𝔉 ≃ 𝔉 𝐿 , 𝜎 βŠ— 𝔉 𝜎 . ( 3 . 2 1 ) Set 𝐻 0 ( 1 ) = 3  β„“ = 1  πœ– = Β± ξ€œ 𝑀 β„“ ( 1 ) ξ€· πœ‰ 1 ξ€Έ 𝑏 βˆ— β„“ , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 1 ξ€Έ 𝑏 β„“ , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 1 ξ€Έ d πœ‰ 1 , 𝐻 0 ( 2 ) = 3  β„“ = 1  πœ– = Β± ξ€œ 𝑀 β„“ ( 2 ) ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ 𝑐 βˆ— β„“ , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ 𝑐 β„“ , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ d πœ‰ 2 , 𝐻 0 ( 3 ) =  πœ– = Β± ξ€œ 𝑀 ( 3 ) ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ π‘Ž βˆ— πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ π‘Ž πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ d πœ‰ 3 , 𝐻 0 ( 2 ) 𝜎 = 3  β„“ = 1  πœ– = Β± ξ€œ | 𝑝 2 | > 𝜎 𝑀 β„“ ( 2 ) ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ 𝑐 βˆ— β„“ , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ 𝑐 β„“ , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ d πœ‰ 2 , 𝐻 ( 2 ) 0 , 𝜎 = 3  β„“ = 1  πœ– = Β± ξ€œ | 𝑝 2 | ≀ 𝜎 𝑀 β„“ ( 2 ) ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ 𝑐 βˆ— β„“ , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ 𝑐 β„“ , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ d πœ‰ 2 . ( 3 . 2 2 ) We have on 𝔉 𝜎 βŠ— 𝔉 𝜎 𝐻 0 ( 2 ) = 𝐻 0 ( 2 ) 𝜎 βŠ— 1 𝜎 + 1 𝜎 βŠ— 𝐻 ( 2 ) 0 , 𝜎 . ( 3 . 2 3 ) Here, 1 𝜎 (resp., 1 𝜎 ) is the identity operator on 𝔉 𝜎 (resp., 𝔉 𝜎 ).

Define 𝐻 𝜎 = 𝐻 𝜎 | | 𝔉 𝜎 , 𝐻 𝜎 0 = 𝐻 0 | | 𝔉 𝜎 . ( 3 . 2 4 )

We get 𝐻 𝜎 = 𝐻 0 ( 1 ) + 𝐻 0 ( 2 ) 𝜎 + 𝐻 0 ( 3 ) + 𝑔 𝐻 𝐼 , 𝜎 o n 𝔉 𝜎 , 𝐻 𝜎 = 𝐻 𝜎 βŠ— 1 𝜎 + 1 𝜎 βŠ— 𝐻 ( 2 ) 0 , 𝜎 o n 𝔉 𝜎 βŠ— 𝔉 𝜎 . ( 3 . 2 5 ) In order to implement the conjugate operator theory, we have to show that 𝐻 𝜎 has a gap in its spectrum above its ground state.

We now set, for 𝛽 > 0 and πœ‚ > 0 , 𝐢 𝛽 πœ‚ = ξ‚΅ 3 π‘š π‘Š ξ‚΅ 1 1 + π‘š 1 2 ξ‚Ά + 3 𝛽 π‘š π‘Š π‘š 1 2 + 1 2 πœ‚ π‘š 1 2 ξ‚Ά ( 1 + 𝛽 ) 1 / 2 , 𝐡 𝛽 πœ‚ = ξ‚΅ 3 π‘š π‘Š ξ‚΅ 1 1 + ξ‚Ά ξ‚΅ πœ‚ ξ‚΅ 1 4 𝛽 + 1 2 1 + ξ‚Ά + 1 4 𝛽 4 πœ‚ ξ‚Ά ξ‚Ά 1 / 2 . ( 3 . 2 6 ) Let ξ‚€ 𝐺 𝐺 = ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€²  ( β‹… , β‹… , β‹… ) 𝛼 = 1 , 2 ; β„“ = 1 , 2 , 3 ; πœ– , πœ– β€² = Β± , πœ– β‰  πœ– β€² , ( 3 . 2 7 ) and set βŽ› ⎜ ⎜ ⎝  𝐾 ( 𝐺 ) = 3 𝛼 = 1 , 2  β„“ = 1  πœ– β‰  πœ– β€² β€– β€– 𝐺 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² β€– β€– 2 𝐿 2 ( Ξ£ 1 Γ— Ξ£ 1 Γ— Ξ£ 2 ) ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 1 / 2 . ( 3 . 2 8 ) Let  𝐢 𝛽 πœ‚ = 𝐢 𝛽 πœ‚ ξ‚΅ 𝑔 1 + 1 𝐾 ( 𝐺 ) 𝐢 𝛽 πœ‚ 1 βˆ’ 𝑔 1 𝐾 ( 𝐺 ) 𝐢 𝛽 πœ‚ ξ‚Ά ,  𝐡 𝛽 πœ‚ = ξ‚΅ 𝑔 1 + 1 𝐾 ( 𝐺 ) 𝐢 𝛽 πœ‚ 1 βˆ’ 𝑔 1 𝐾 ( 𝐺 ) 𝐢 𝛽 πœ‚ ξ‚΅ 𝑔 2 + 1 𝐾 ( 𝐺 ) 𝐡 𝛽 πœ‚ 𝐢 𝛽 πœ‚ 1 βˆ’ 𝑔 1 𝐾 ( 𝐺 ) 𝐢 𝛽 πœ‚ 𝐡 ξ‚Ά ξ‚Ά 𝛽 πœ‚ . ( 3 . 2 9 )

Let  𝐾 βŽ› ⎜ ⎜ ⎜ ⎝  ( 𝐺 ) = 3 𝛼 = 1 , 2  β„“ = 1  πœ– β‰  πœ– β€² ξ€œ Ξ£ 1 Γ— Ξ£ 1 Γ— Ξ£ 2 | | | 𝐺 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 1 , πœ‰ 2 , πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ | | | 2 | 𝑝 2 | 2 d πœ‰ 1 d πœ‰ 2 d πœ‰ 3 ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ 1 / 2 . ( 3 . 3 0 ) Let 𝛿 ∈ ℝ be such that 0 < 𝛿 < π‘š 1 . ( 3 . 3 1 )

We set  ξ‚΅ 𝐷 = s u p 4 Ξ› 𝛾 2 π‘š 1 ξ‚Ά  ξ‚€ βˆ’ 𝛿 , 1 𝐾 ( 𝐺 ) 2 π‘š 1  𝐢 𝛽 πœ‚ +  𝐡 𝛽 πœ‚  , ( 3 . 3 2 ) where Ξ› > π‘š 1 has been introduced in Hypothesis 3.1(iv).

Let us define the sequence ( 𝜎 𝑛 ) 𝑛 β‰₯ 0 by 𝜎 0 𝜎 = Ξ› , 1 = π‘š 1 βˆ’ 𝛿 2 , 𝜎 2 = π‘š 1 βˆ’ 𝛿 = 𝛾 𝜎 1 , 𝜎 𝑛 + 1 = 𝛾 𝜎 𝑛 , 𝑛 β‰₯ 1 , ( 3 . 3 3 ) where 𝛾 = 1 βˆ’ 𝛿 / ( 2 π‘š 1 βˆ’ 𝛿 ) .

Let 𝑔 𝛿 ( 1 ) be such that 0 < 𝑔 𝛿 ( 1 ) ξ‚΅ < i n f 1 , 𝑔 1 , 𝛾 βˆ’ 𝛾 2 3  𝐷 ξ‚Ά . ( 3 . 3 4 ) For 0 < 𝑔 ≀ 𝑔 𝛿 ( 1 ) we have   𝐷 0 < 𝛾 < 1 βˆ’ 3 𝑔 𝛾 ξƒͺ , ( 3 . 3 5 ) 0 < 𝜎 𝑛 + 1 <   𝐷 1 βˆ’ 3 𝑔 𝛾 ξƒͺ 𝜎 𝑛 , 𝑛 β‰₯ 1 . ( 3 . 3 6 ) Set 𝐻 𝑛 = 𝐻 𝜎 𝑛 ; 𝐻 𝑛 0 = 𝐻 𝜎 𝑛 0 𝐸 , 𝑛 β‰₯ 0 , 𝑛 = i n f 𝜎 ( 𝐻 𝑛 ) , 𝑛 β‰₯ 0 . ( 3 . 3 7 ) We then get the following.

Proposition 3.5. Suppose that the kernels 𝐺 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² satisfy Hypotheses 2.1, 3.1(i), and 3.1(iv). Then there exists 0 < Μƒ 𝑔 𝛿 ≀ 𝑔 𝛿 ( 1 ) such that, for 𝑔 ≀ Μƒ 𝑔 𝛿 and 𝑛 β‰₯ 1 , 𝐸 𝑛 is a simple eigenvalue of 𝐻 𝑛 and 𝐻 𝑛 does not have spectrum in ( 𝐸 𝑛 , 𝐸 𝑛  + ( 1 βˆ’ 3 𝑔 𝐷 / 𝛾 ) 𝜎 𝑛 ) .

The proof of Proposition 3.5 is given in the appendix.

We now introduce the positive commutator estimates and the regularity property of 𝐻 with respect to 𝐴 in order to prove Theorem 3.4.

The operator 𝐴 has to be split into two pieces depending on 𝜎 .

Let πœ‚ 𝜎 ξ€· 𝑝 2 ξ€Έ = πœ’ 2 𝜎 ξ€· 𝑝 2 ξ€Έ , πœ‚ 𝜎 ξ€· 𝑝 2 ξ€Έ = πœ’ 2 𝜎 ξ€· 𝑝 2 ξ€Έ , π‘Ž 𝜎 = πœ‚ 𝜎 ξ€· 𝑝 2 ξ€Έ π‘Ž πœ‚ 𝜎 ξ€· 𝑝 2 ξ€Έ , π‘Ž 𝜎 = πœ‚ 𝜎 ξ€· 𝑝 2 ξ€Έ π‘Ž πœ‚ 𝜎 ξ€· 𝑝 2 ξ€Έ . ( 3 . 3 8 ) Since πœ‚ 2 𝜎 + ( πœ‚ 𝜎 ) 2 = 1 , and [ πœ‚ 𝜎 , [ πœ‚ 𝜎 , π‘Ž ] ] = 0 = [ πœ‚ 𝜎 , [ πœ‚ 𝜎 , π‘Ž ] ] , we obtain (see [4]) π‘Ž = π‘Ž 𝜎 + π‘Ž 𝜎 . ( 3 . 3 9 )

Note that we also have π‘Ž 𝜎 = 1 2 ξ‚€ πœ‚ 𝜎 ξ€· 𝑝 2 ξ€Έ 2 𝑝 2 β‹… 𝑖 βˆ‡ 𝑝 2 + 𝑖 βˆ‡ 𝑝 2 β‹… πœ‚ 𝜎 ξ€· 𝑝 2 ξ€Έ 2 𝑝 2  , π‘Ž 𝜎 = 1 2 ξ‚€ πœ‚ 𝜎 ξ€· 𝑝 2 ξ€Έ 2 𝑝 2 β‹… 𝑖 βˆ‡ 𝑝 2 + 𝑖 βˆ‡ 𝑝 2 β‹… πœ‚ 𝜎 ξ€· 𝑝 2 ξ€Έ 2 𝑝 2  . ( 3 . 4 0 )

The operators π‘Ž , π‘Ž 𝜎 , and π‘Ž 𝜎 are essentially self-adjoint on 𝐢 ∞ 0 ( ℝ 3 , β„‚ 2 ) (see [5, Proposition  4.2.3]). We still denote by π‘Ž , π‘Ž 𝜎 , and π‘Ž 𝜎 their closures. If Μƒ π‘Ž denotes any of the operator π‘Ž , π‘Ž 𝜎 , and π‘Ž 𝜎 , we have ξ€½ π’Ÿ ( Μƒ π‘Ž ) = 𝑒 ∈ 𝐿 2 ξ€· Ξ£ 1 ξ€Έ ; Μƒ π‘Ž 𝑒 ∈ 𝐿 2 ξ€· Ξ£ 1 . ξ€Έ ξ€Ύ ( 3 . 4 1 )

The operators d Ξ“ ( π‘Ž ) , d Ξ“ ( π‘Ž 𝜎 ) , and d Ξ“ ( π‘Ž 𝜎 ) are self-adjoint operators in 𝔉 π‘Ž ( 𝐿 2 ( Ξ£ 1 ) ) , and we have d Ξ“ ( π‘Ž ) = d Ξ“ ( π‘Ž 𝜎 ) + d Ξ“ ξ€· π‘Ž 𝜎 ξ€Έ . ( 3 . 4 2 )

By (2.8), the following operators in 𝔉 β„“ , denoted by 𝐴 𝜎 β„“ and A 𝜎 β„“ , respectively, 𝐴 𝜎 β„“ = 1 βŠ— 1 βŠ— d Ξ“ ( π‘Ž 𝜎 ) βŠ— 1 + 1 βŠ— 1 βŠ— 1 βŠ— d Ξ“ ( π‘Ž 𝜎 𝐴 ) , 𝜎 β„“ = 1 βŠ— 1 βŠ— d Ξ“ ξ€· π‘Ž 𝜎 ξ€Έ βŠ— 1 + 1 βŠ— 1 βŠ— 1 βŠ— d Ξ“ ξ€· π‘Ž 𝜎 ξ€Έ ( 3 . 4 3 ) are essentially self-adjoint on 𝔇 β„“ .

Let 𝐴 𝜎 and 𝐴 𝜎 be the following two operators in 𝔉 𝐿 : 𝐴 𝜎 = 𝐴 𝜎 1 βŠ— 1 2 βŠ— 1 3 + 1 1 βŠ— 𝐴 𝜎 2 βŠ— 1 3 + 1 1 βŠ— 1 2 βŠ— 𝐴 𝜎 3 , 𝐴 𝜎 = 𝐴 𝜎 1 βŠ— 1 2 βŠ— 1 3 + 1 1 βŠ— 𝐴 𝜎 2 βŠ— 1 3 + 1 1 βŠ— 1 2 βŠ— 𝐴 𝜎 3 . ( 3 . 4 4 ) The operators 𝐴 𝜎 and 𝐴 𝜎 are essentially self-adjoint on 𝔇 𝐿 . Still denoting by 𝐴 𝜎 and 𝐴 𝜎 their extensions to 𝔉 , 𝐴 𝜎 and 𝐴 𝜎 are essentially self-adjoint on 𝔇 and we still denote by 𝐴 𝜎 and 𝐴 𝜎 their closures.

We have 𝐴 = 𝐴 𝜎 + 𝐴 𝜎 . ( 3 . 4 5 )

The operators π‘Ž , π‘Ž 𝜎 , and π‘Ž 𝜎 are associated to the following 𝐢 ∞ -vector fields in ℝ 3 , respectively: 𝑣 ξ€· 𝑝 2 ξ€Έ = 𝑝 2 , 𝑣 𝜎 ξ€· 𝑝 2 ξ€Έ = πœ‚ 𝜎 ξ€· 𝑝 2 ξ€Έ 2 𝑝 2 , 𝑣 𝜎 ξ€· 𝑝 2 ξ€Έ = πœ‚ 𝜎 ξ€· 𝑝 2 ξ€Έ 2 𝑝 2 . ( 3 . 4 6 ) Let 𝒱 ( 𝑝 ) be any of these vector fields. We have | | | | | | 𝑝 | | 𝒱 ( 𝑝 ) ≀ Ξ“ ( 3 . 4 7 ) for some Ξ“ > 0 , and we also have 𝒱 Μƒ 𝑣 ξ€· | | 𝑝 | | ξ€Έ ( 𝑝 ) = 𝑝 , ( 3 . 4 8 ) where the Μƒ 𝑣 's are defined by (3.46) and (3.48) and fulfil | 𝑝 | 𝛼 ( d 𝛼 / d | 𝑝 | 𝛼 ) Μƒ 𝑣 ( | 𝑝 | ) bounded for 𝛼 = 0 , 1 , 2 .

Let πœ“ 𝑑 ( β‹… ) ∢ ℝ 3 β†’ ℝ 3 be the corresponding flow generated by 𝒱 : d d 𝑑 πœ“ 𝑑 ξ€· πœ“ ( 𝑝 ) = 𝒱 𝑑 ξ€Έ , πœ“ ( 𝑝 ) 0 ( 𝑝 ) = 𝑝 . ( 3 . 4 9 ) πœ“ 𝑑 ( 𝑝 ) is a 𝐢 ∞ -flow and we have e βˆ’ Ξ“ | 𝑑 | | | 𝑝 | | ≀ | | πœ“ 𝑑 | | ≀ ( 𝑝 ) e Ξ“ | 𝑑 | | | 𝑝 | | . ( 3 . 5 0 ) πœ“ 𝑑 ( 𝑝 ) induces a one-parameter group of unitary operators π‘ˆ ( 𝑑 ) in 𝐿 2 ( Ξ£ 1 ) ≃ 𝐿 2 ( ℝ 3 , β„‚ 2 ) defined by ξ€· πœ“ ( π‘ˆ ( 𝑑 ) 𝑓 ) ( 𝑝 ) = 𝑓 𝑑 ( 𝑝 ) ξ€Έ ξ€· d e t βˆ‡ πœ“ 𝑑 ξ€Έ ( 𝑝 ) 1 / 2 . ( 3 . 5 1 ) Let πœ™ 𝑑 ( β‹… ) , πœ™ 𝜎 𝑑 ( β‹… ) , and πœ™ 𝜎 𝑑 ( β‹… ) be the flows associated with the vector fields 𝑣 ( β‹… ) , 𝑣 𝜎 ( β‹… ) , and 𝑣 𝜎 ( β‹… ) , respectively.

Let π‘ˆ ( 𝑑 ) , π‘ˆ 𝜎 ( 𝑑 ) , and π‘ˆ 𝜎 ( 𝑑 ) be the corresponding one-parameter groups of unitary operators in 𝐿 2 ( Ξ£ 1 ) . The operators π‘Ž , π‘Ž 𝜎 , and π‘Ž 𝜎 are the generators of π‘ˆ ( 𝑑 ) , π‘ˆ 𝜎 ( 𝑑 ) , and π‘ˆ 𝜎 ( 𝑑 ) , respectively, that is, π‘ˆ ( 𝑑 ) = e βˆ’ 𝑖 π‘Ž 𝑑 , π‘ˆ 𝜎 ( 𝑑 ) = e βˆ’ 𝑖 π‘Ž 𝜎 𝑑 , π‘ˆ 𝜎 ( 𝑑 ) = e βˆ’ 𝑖 π‘Ž 𝜎 𝑑 . ( 3 . 5 2 )

Let 𝑀 ( 2 ) ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ = ξ‚€ 𝑀 β„“ ( 2 ) ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ  β„“ = 1 , 2 , 3 , d Ξ“ ξ€· 𝑀 ( 2 ) ξ€Έ = 3  β„“ = 1  πœ– ξ€œ 𝑀 β„“ ( 2 ) ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ 𝑐 βˆ— β„“ , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ 𝑐 β„“ πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ d πœ‰ 2 . ( 3 . 5 3 ) Let 𝑉 ( 𝑑 ) be any of the one-parameter groups π‘ˆ ( 𝑑 ) , π‘ˆ 𝜎 ( 𝑑 ) , and π‘ˆ 𝜎 ( 𝑑 ) . We set 𝑉 ( 𝑑 ) 𝑀 ( 2 ) 𝑉 ( 𝑑 ) βˆ— = ξ‚€ 𝑉 ( 𝑑 ) 𝑀 β„“ ( 2 ) 𝑉 ( 𝑑 ) βˆ—  β„“ = 1 , 2 , 3 , ( 3 . 5 4 ) and we have 𝑉 ( 𝑑 ) 𝑀 ( 2 ) 𝑉 ( 𝑑 ) βˆ— = 𝑀 ( 2 ) ξ€· πœ“ 𝑑 ξ€Έ . ( 3 . 5 5 ) Here πœ“ 𝑑 is the flow associated to 𝑉 ( 𝑑 ) .

This yields, for any πœ‘ ∈ 𝔇 , (see [11, Lemma  2.8]) e βˆ’ 𝑖 𝐴 𝑑 𝐻 0 e 𝑖 𝐴 𝑑 πœ‘ βˆ’ 𝐻 0 ξ€· πœ‘ = d Ξ“ ξ€· e βˆ’ 𝑖 π‘Ž 𝑑 𝑀 ( 2 ) e 𝑖 π‘Ž 𝑑 ξ€Έ βˆ’ d Ξ“ ξ€· 𝑀 ( 2 ) πœ‘ = ξ€· ξ€Έ ξ€Έ d Ξ“ ξ€· w ( 2 ) ∘ πœ™ 𝑑 βˆ’ 𝑀 ( 2 ) ξ€Έ ξ€Έ πœ‘ , e ( 3 . 5 6 ) βˆ’ 𝑖 𝐴 𝜎 𝑑 𝐻 0 e 𝑖 𝐴 𝜎 𝑑 πœ‘ βˆ’ 𝐻 0 ξ€· πœ‘ = d Ξ“ ξ€· e βˆ’ 𝑖 π‘Ž 𝜎 𝑑 𝑀 ( 2 ) e 𝑖 π‘Ž 𝜎 𝑑 ξ€Έ βˆ’ d Ξ“ ξ€· 𝑀 ( 2 ) πœ‘ = ξ€· ξ€Έ ξ€Έ d Ξ“ ξ€· 𝑀 ( 2 ) ∘ πœ™ 𝜎 𝑑 βˆ’ 𝑀 ( 2 ) ξ€Έ ξ€Έ πœ‘ , e ( 3 . 5 7 ) βˆ’ 𝑖 𝐴 𝜎 𝑑 𝐻 0 e 𝑖 𝐴 𝜎 𝑑 πœ‘ βˆ’ 𝐻 0 ξ€· πœ‘ = d Ξ“ ξ€· e βˆ’ 𝑖 π‘Ž 𝜎 𝑑 𝑀 ( 2 ) e 𝑖 π‘Ž 𝜎 𝑑 ξ€Έ βˆ’ d Ξ“ ξ€· 𝑀 ( 2 ) πœ‘ = ξ€· ξ€Έ ξ€Έ d Ξ“ ξ€· 𝑀 ( 2 ) ∘ πœ™ 𝜎 𝑑 βˆ’ 𝑀 ( 2 ) ξ€Έ ξ€Έ πœ‘ . ( 3 . 5 8 )

Proposition 3.6. Suppose that the kernels 𝐺 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² satisfy Hypothesis 2.1.
For every 𝑑 ∈ ℝ one has, for 𝑔 ≀ 𝑔 1 , ( i ) e 𝑖 𝑑 𝐴 π’Ÿ ξ€· 𝐻 0 ξ€Έ = e 𝑖 𝑑 𝐴 ξ€· 𝐻 π’Ÿ ( 𝐻 ) βŠ‚ π’Ÿ 0 ξ€Έ ( = π’Ÿ ( 𝐻 ) , i i ) e 𝑖 𝑑 𝐴 𝜎 π’Ÿ ξ€· 𝐻 0 ξ€Έ = e 𝑖 𝑑 𝐴 𝜎 ξ€· 𝐻 π’Ÿ ( 𝐻 ) βŠ‚ π’Ÿ 0 ξ€Έ ( = π’Ÿ ( 𝐻 ) , i i i ) e 𝑖 𝑑 𝐴 𝜎 π’Ÿ ξ€· 𝐻 0 ξ€Έ = e 𝑖 𝑑 𝐴 𝜎 ξ€· 𝐻 π’Ÿ ( 𝐻 ) βŠ‚ π’Ÿ 0 ξ€Έ = π’Ÿ ( 𝐻 ) . ( 3 . 5 9 )

Proof. We only prove (i), since (ii) and (iii) can be proved similarly. By (3.56) we have, for πœ‘ ∈ 𝔇 , e βˆ’ 𝑖 𝑑 𝐴 𝐻 0 e 𝑖 𝑑 𝐴 ξ‚€ 𝐻 πœ‘ = 0 ( 1 ) + 𝐻 0 ( 3 ) + d Ξ“ ξ€· 𝑀 ( 2 ) ∘ πœ™ 𝑑 ξ€Έ  πœ‘ . ( 3 . 6 0 ) It follows from (3.50) and (3.60) that β€– β€– 𝐻 0 e 𝑖 𝑑 𝐴 πœ‘ β€– β€– ≀ e Ξ“ | 𝑑 | β€– β€– 𝐻 0 πœ‘ β€– β€– . ( 3 . 6 1 ) This yields (i) because 𝔇 is a core for 𝐻 0 . Moreover we get β€– β€– 𝐻 0 e 𝑖 𝑑 𝐴 ξ€· 𝐻 0 ξ€Έ + 1 βˆ’ 1 β€– β€– ≀ e Ξ“ | 𝑑 | . ( 3 . 6 2 ) In view of 𝔇 ( 𝐻 0 ) = 𝔇 ( 𝐻 ) , the operators 𝐻 0 ( 𝐻 + 𝑖 ) βˆ’ 1 and 𝐻 ( 𝐻 0 + 𝑖 ) βˆ’ 1 are bounded, and there exists a constant 𝐢 > 0 such that β€– β€– 𝐻 e 𝑖 𝑑 𝐴 ( 𝐻 + 𝑖 ) βˆ’ 1 β€– β€– ≀ 𝐢 e Ξ“ | 𝑑 | . ( 3 . 6 3 ) Similarly, we also get β€– β€– 𝐻 0 e 𝑖 𝑑 𝐴 𝜎 ξ€· 𝐻 0 ξ€Έ + 1 βˆ’ 1 β€– β€– ≀ e Ξ“ | 𝑑 | , β€– β€– 𝐻 0 e 𝑖 𝑑 𝐴 𝜎 ξ€· 𝐻 0 ξ€Έ + 1 βˆ’ 1 β€– β€– ≀ e Ξ“ | 𝑑 | , β€– β€– 𝐻 e 𝑖 𝑑 𝐴 𝜎 ( 𝐻 + 𝑖 ) βˆ’ 1 β€– β€– ≀ 𝐢 e Ξ“ | 𝑑 | , β€– β€– 𝐻 e 𝑖 𝑑 𝐴 𝜎 ( 𝐻 + 𝑖 ) βˆ’ 1 β€– β€– ≀ 𝐢 e Ξ“ | 𝑑 | . ( 3 . 6 4 )

Let 𝐻 𝐼 ( 𝐺 ) be the interaction associated with the kernels 𝐺 = ( 𝐺 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ) 𝛼 = 1 , 2 ; β„“ = 1 , 2 , 3 ; πœ– β‰  πœ– β€² = Β± , where the kernels ( 𝐺 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ) satisfy Hypothesis 2.1.

We set ξ‚€ 𝑉 ( 𝑑 ) 𝐺 = 𝑉 ( 𝑑 ) 𝐺 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€²  𝛼 = 1 , 2 ; β„“ = 1 , 2 , 3 ; πœ– β‰  πœ– β€² = Β± . ( 3 . 6 5 ) We have for πœ‘ ∈ 𝔇 (see [11, Lemma  2.7]), e βˆ’ 𝑖 𝐴 𝑑 𝐻 𝐼 ( 𝐺 ) e 𝑖 𝐴 𝑑 πœ‘ = 𝐻 𝐼 ξ€· e βˆ’ 𝑖 π‘Ž 𝑑 𝐺 ξ€Έ πœ‘ , e βˆ’ 𝑖 𝐴 𝜎 𝑑 𝐻 𝐼 ( 𝐺 ) e 𝑖 𝐴 𝜎 𝑑 πœ‘ = 𝐻 𝐼 ξ€· e βˆ’ 𝑖 π‘Ž 𝜎 𝑑 𝐺 ξ€Έ πœ‘ , e βˆ’ 𝑖 𝐴 𝜎 𝑑 𝐻 𝐼 ( 𝐺 ) e 𝑖 𝐴 𝜎 𝑑 πœ‘ = 𝐻 𝐼 ξ€· e βˆ’ 𝑖 π‘Ž 𝜎 𝑑 𝐺 ξ€Έ πœ‘ . ( 3 . 6 6 )

According to [5, 6], in order to prove Theorem 3.4 we must prove that 𝐻 is locally of class 𝐢 2 ( 𝐴 𝜎 ) , 𝐢 2 ( 𝐴 𝜎 ) , and 𝐢 2 ( 𝐴 ) in ( βˆ’ ∞ , π‘š 1 βˆ’ 𝛿 / 2 ) and that 𝐴 and 𝐴 𝜎 are locally strictly conjugate to 𝐻 in ( 𝐸 , π‘š 1 βˆ’ 𝛿 / 2 ) .

Recall that 𝐻 is locally of class 𝐢 2 ( 𝐴 ) in ( βˆ’ ∞ , π‘š 1 βˆ’ 𝛿 / 2 ) if, for any πœ‘ ∈ 𝐢 ∞ 0 ( ( βˆ’ ∞ , π‘š 1 βˆ’ 𝛿 / 2 ) ) , πœ‘ ( 𝐻 ) is of class 𝐢 2 ( 𝐴 ) ; that is, 𝑑 β†’ e βˆ’ 𝑖 𝐴 𝑑 πœ‘ ( 𝐻 ) e 𝑖 𝑑 𝐴 πœ“ is twice continuously differentiable for all πœ‘ ∈ 𝐢 ∞ 0 ( ( βˆ’ ∞ , π‘š 1 βˆ’ 𝛿 / 2 ) ) and all πœ“ ∈ 𝔉 .

Thus, one of our main results is the following one.

Theorem 3.7. Suppose that the kernels 𝐺 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² satisfy Hypotheses 2.1, 3.1(i) and 3.1(iii). (a) 𝐻 is locally of class 𝐢 2 ( 𝐴 ) , 𝐢 2 ( 𝐴 𝜎 ) , and 𝐢 2 ( 𝐴 𝜎 ) in ( βˆ’ ∞ , π‘š 1 βˆ’ 𝛿 / 2 ) . (b) 𝐻 𝜎 is locally of class 𝐢 2 ( 𝐴 𝜎 ) in ( βˆ’ ∞ , π‘š 1 βˆ’ 𝛿 / 2 ) .

It follows from Theorem 3.7 that [ 𝐻 , 𝑖 𝐴 ] , [ 𝐻 , 𝑖 𝐴 𝜎 ] , [ 𝐻 , 𝑖 𝐴 𝜎 ] , and [ 𝐻 𝜎 , 𝑖 𝐴 𝜎 ] are defined as sesquilinear forms on ⋃ 𝐾 𝐸 𝐾 ( 𝐻 ) 𝔉 , where the union is taken over all the compact subsets 𝐾 of ( βˆ’ ∞ , π‘š 1 βˆ’ 𝛿 / 2 ) .

Furthermore, by Proposition 3.6, Theorem 3.7 and [4, Lemma  29], we get for all πœ‘ ∈ 𝐢 ∞ 0 ( ( 𝐸 , π‘š 1 βˆ’ 𝛿 / 2 ) ) and all πœ“ ∈ 𝔉 , [ ] πœ‘ ( 𝐻 ) 𝐻 , 𝑖 𝐴 πœ‘ ( 𝐻 ) πœ“ = l i m 𝑑 β†’ 0 ξ‚Έ πœ‘ ( 𝐻 ) 𝐻 , e 𝑖 𝑑 𝐴 βˆ’ 1 𝑑 ξ‚Ή ξ€Ί πœ‘ ( 𝐻 ) πœ“ , πœ‘ ( 𝐻 ) 𝐻 , 𝑖 𝐴 𝜎 ξ€» πœ‘ ( 𝐻 ) πœ“ = l i m 𝑑 β†’ 0 ξ‚Έ πœ‘ ( 𝐻 ) 𝐻 , e 𝑖 𝑑 𝐴 𝜎 βˆ’ 1 𝑑 ξ‚Ή [ πœ‘ ( 𝐻 ) πœ“ , πœ‘ ( 𝐻 ) 𝐻 , 𝑖 𝐴 𝜎 ] πœ‘ ( 𝐻 ) πœ“ = l i m 𝑑 β†’ 0 ξ‚Έ πœ‘ ( 𝐻 ) 𝐻 , e 𝑖 𝑑 𝐴 𝜎 βˆ’ 1 𝑑 ξ‚Ή πœ‘ ( 𝐻 ) πœ“ , πœ‘ ( 𝐻 𝜎 ) [ 𝐻 𝜎 , 𝑖 𝐴 𝜎 ] πœ‘ ( 𝐻 𝜎 ) πœ“ = l i m 𝑑 β†’ 0 πœ‘ ( 𝐻 𝜎 ) ξ‚Έ 𝐻 𝜎 , e 𝑖 𝑑 𝐴 𝜎 βˆ’ 1 𝑑 ξ‚Ή πœ‘ ( 𝐻 𝜎 ) πœ“ . ( 3 . 6 7 )

The following proposition allows us to compute [ 𝐻 , 𝑖 𝐴 ] , [ 𝐻 , 𝑖 𝐴 𝜎 ] , [ 𝐻 , 𝑖 𝐴 𝜎 ] , and [ 𝐻 𝜎 , 𝑖 𝐴 𝜎 ] as sesquilinear forms. By Hypotheses 2.1 and 3.1(iii.a), the kernels 𝐺 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ( πœ‰ 1 , β‹… , πœ‰ 3 ) belong to the domains of π‘Ž , π‘Ž 𝜎 , and π‘Ž 𝜎 .

Proposition 3.8. Suppose that the kernels 𝐺 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² satisfy Hypotheses 2.1 and 3.1(iii.a). Then (a)for all πœ“ ∈ π’Ÿ ( 𝐻 ) one has (i) l i m 𝑑 β†’ 0 [ 𝐻 , ( e 𝑖 𝑑 𝐴 βˆ’ 1 ) / 𝑑 ] πœ“ = ( d Ξ“ ( 𝑀 ( 2 ) ) + 𝑔 𝐻 𝐼 ( βˆ’ 𝑖 π‘Ž 𝐺 ) ) πœ“ , (ii) l i m 𝑑 β†’ 0 [ 𝐻 , ( e 𝑖 𝑑 𝐴 𝜎 βˆ’ 1 ) / 𝑑 ] πœ“ = ( d Ξ“ ( ( πœ‚ 𝜎 ) 2 𝑀 ( 2 ) ) + 𝑔 𝐻 𝐼 ( βˆ’ 𝑖 π‘Ž 𝜎 𝐺 ) ) πœ“ , (iii) l i m 𝑑 β†’ 0 [ 𝐻 , ( e 𝑖 𝑑 𝐴 𝜎 βˆ’ 1 ) / 𝑑 ] πœ“ = ( d Ξ“ ( ( πœ‚ 𝜎 ) 2 𝑀 ( 2 ) ) + 𝑔 𝐻 𝐼 ( βˆ’ 𝑖 π‘Ž 𝜎 𝐺 ) ) πœ“ , (iv) l i m 𝑑 β†’ 0 [ 𝐻 𝜎 , ( e 𝑖 𝑑 𝐴 𝜎 βˆ’ 1 ) / 𝑑 ] πœ“ = ( d Ξ“ ( ( πœ‚ 𝜎 ) 2 𝑀 ( 2 ) ) + 𝑔 𝐻 𝐼 ( βˆ’ 𝑖 π‘Ž 𝜎 (  πœ’ 𝜎 ( 𝑝 2 ) 𝐺 ) ) ) πœ“ ; (b)and(i) s u p 0 < | 𝑑 | ≀ 1 β€– [ 𝐻 , ( e 𝑖 𝑑 𝐴 βˆ’ 1 ) / 𝑑 ] ( 𝐻 + 𝑖 ) βˆ’ 1 β€– < ∞ , (ii) s u p 0 < | 𝑑 | ≀ 1 β€– [ 𝐻 , ( e 𝑖 𝑑 𝐴 𝜎 βˆ’ 1 ) / 𝑑 ] ( 𝐻 + 𝑖 ) βˆ’ 1 β€– < ∞ , (iii) s u p 0 < | 𝑑 | ≀ 1 β€– [ 𝐻 , ( e 𝑖 𝑑 𝐴 𝜎 βˆ’ 1 ) / 𝑑 ] ( 𝐻 + 𝑖 ) βˆ’ 1 β€– < ∞ , (iv) s u p 0 < | 𝑑 | ≀ 1 β€– [ 𝐻 𝜎 , ( e 𝑖 𝑑 𝐴 𝜎 βˆ’ 1 ) / 𝑑 ] ( 𝐻 + 𝑖 ) βˆ’ 1 β€– < ∞ .

Proof. Part ( b ) follows from part ( a ) by the uniform boundedness principle. For part ( a ) , we only prove ( a ) (i), since other statements can be proved similarly.
By (3.50), we obtain 1 | | 𝑀 | 𝑑 | β„“ ( 2 ) ξ€· πœ™ 𝑑 ξ€· 𝑝 2 ξ€Έ ξ€Έ βˆ’ 𝑀 β„“ ( 2 ) ξ€· 𝑝 2 ξ€Έ | | ≀ 1 ξ€· | 𝑑 | e Ξ“ | 𝑑 | ξ€Έ 𝑀 βˆ’ 1 β„“ ( 2 ) ξ€· 𝑝 2 ξ€Έ ( 3 . 6 8 ) for β„“ = 1 , 2 , 3 .
By (3.56)–(3.58) and Lebesgue's Theorem we then get for all πœ“ ∈ π’Ÿ ( 𝐻 0 ) l i m 𝑑 β†’ 0 ξ‚Έ 𝐻 0 , e 𝑖 𝑑 𝐴 βˆ’ 1 𝑑 ξ‚Ή πœ“ = l i m 𝑑 β†’ 0 1 𝑑 ξ€Ί e βˆ’ 𝑖 𝑑 𝐴 𝐻 0 e 𝑖 𝑑 𝐴 βˆ’ 𝐻 0 ξ€» πœ“ = d Ξ“ ξ€· 𝑀 ( 2 ) ξ€Έ πœ“ , l i m 𝑑 β†’ 0 ξ‚Έ 𝐻 0 , e 𝑖 𝑑 𝐴 𝜎 βˆ’ 1 𝑑 ξ‚Ή πœ“ = l i m 𝑑 β†’ 0 1 𝑑 ξ€Ί e βˆ’ 𝑖 𝑑 𝐴 𝜎 𝐻 0 e 𝑖 𝑑 𝐴 𝜎 βˆ’ 𝐻 0 ξ€» πœ“ = d Ξ“ ξ€· ( πœ‚ 𝜎 ) 2 𝑀 ( 2 ) ξ€Έ πœ“ , l i m 𝑑 β†’ 0 ξ‚Έ 𝐻 0 , e 𝑖 𝑑 𝐴 𝜎 βˆ’ 1 𝑑 ξ‚Ή πœ“ = l i m 𝑑 β†’ 0 1 𝑑 ξ€Ί e βˆ’ 𝑖 𝑑 𝐴 𝜎 𝐻 0 e 𝑖 𝑑 𝐴 𝜎 βˆ’ 𝐻 0 ξ€» πœ“ = d Ξ“ ξ‚€ ξ€· πœ‚ 𝜎 ξ€Έ 2 𝑀 ( 2 )  πœ“ . ( 3 . 6 9 ) By (3.66), we obtain, for all πœ“ ∈ π’Ÿ ( 𝐻 ) , l i m 𝑑 β†’ 0 ξ‚Έ 𝐻 𝐼 ( 𝐺 ) , e 𝑖 𝑑 𝐴 βˆ’ 1 𝑑 ξ‚Ή πœ“ = l i m 𝑑 β†’ 0 1 𝑑 ξ€Ί e βˆ’ 𝑖 𝑑 𝐴 𝐻 𝐼 ( 𝐺 ) e 𝑖 𝑑 𝐴 βˆ’ 𝐻 𝐼 ξ€» ( 𝐺 ) πœ“ = 𝐻 𝐼 ( βˆ’ 𝑖 ( π‘Ž 𝐺 ) ) πœ“ , l i m 𝑑 β†’ 0 ξ‚Έ 𝐻 𝐼 ( 𝐺 ) , e 𝑖 𝑑 𝐴 𝜎 βˆ’ 1 𝑑 ξ‚Ή πœ“ = l i m 𝑑 β†’ 0 1 𝑑 ξ€Ί e βˆ’ 𝑖 𝑑 𝐴 𝜎 𝐻 𝐼 ( 𝐺 ) e 𝑖 𝑑 𝐴 𝜎 βˆ’ 𝐻 𝐼 ξ€» ( 𝐺 ) πœ“ = 𝐻 𝐼 ( βˆ’ 𝑖 ( π‘Ž 𝜎 𝐺 ) ) πœ“ , l i m 𝑑 β†’ 0 ξ‚Έ 𝐻 𝐼 ( 𝐺 ) , e 𝑖 𝑑 𝐴 𝜎 βˆ’ 1 𝑑 ξ‚Ή πœ“ = l i m 𝑑 β†’ 0 1 𝑑 ξ€Ί e βˆ’ 𝑖 𝑑 𝐴 𝜎 𝐻 𝐼 ( 𝐺 ) e 𝑖 𝑑 𝐴 𝜎 βˆ’ 𝐻 𝐼 ξ€» ( 𝐺 ) πœ“ = 𝐻 𝐼 ξ€· ξ€· π‘Ž βˆ’ 𝑖 𝜎 𝐺 ξ€Έ ξ€Έ πœ“ , l i m 𝑑 β†’ 0 ξ‚Έ 𝐻 𝐼 ξ€·  πœ’ 𝜎 ξ€· 𝑝 2 ξ€Έ 𝐺 ξ€Έ , e 𝑖 𝑑 𝐴 𝜎 βˆ’ 1 𝑑 ξ‚Ή πœ“ = l i m 𝑑 β†’ 0 1 𝑑 ξ€Ί e βˆ’ 𝑖 𝑑 𝐴 𝜎 𝐻 𝐼 ξ€·  πœ’ 𝜎 ξ€· 𝑝 2 ξ€Έ 𝐺 ξ€Έ e 𝑖 𝑑 𝐴 𝜎 βˆ’ 𝐻 𝐼 ξ€·  πœ’ 𝜎 ξ€· 𝑝 2 ξ€Έ 𝐺 πœ“ ξ€Έ ξ€» = 𝐻 𝐼 ξ€· ξ€· π‘Ž βˆ’ 𝑖 𝜎 ξ€·  πœ’ 𝜎 ξ€· 𝑝 2 ξ€Έ 𝐺 ξ€Έ ξ€Έ ξ€Έ πœ“ . ( 3 . 7 0 ) This concludes the proof of Proposition 3.8.

Combining (3.67) with Proposition 3.8, we finally get for every πœ‘ ∈ 𝐢 ∞ 0 ( ( βˆ’ ∞ , π‘š 1 βˆ’ 𝛿 / 2 ) ) and every πœ“ ∈ 𝔉 [ ] ξ€Ί πœ‘ ( 𝐻 ) 𝐻 , 𝑖 𝐴 πœ‘ ( 𝐻 ) πœ“ = πœ‘ ( 𝐻 ) d Ξ“ ξ€· 𝑀 ( 2 ) ξ€Έ + 𝑔 𝐻 𝐼 ξ€» ( βˆ’ 𝑖 ( π‘Ž 𝐺 ) ) πœ‘ ( 𝐻 ) πœ“ , ( 3 . 7 1 ) [ πœ‘ ( 𝐻 ) 𝐻 , 𝑖 𝐴 𝜎 ] ξ€Ί πœ‘ ( 𝐻 ) πœ“ = πœ‘ ( 𝐻 ) d Ξ“ ξ€· ( πœ‚ 𝜎 ) 2 𝑀 ( 2 ) ξ€Έ + 𝑔 𝐻 𝐼 ( βˆ’ 𝑖 ( π‘Ž 𝜎 ξ€» 𝐺 ) ) πœ‘ ( 𝐻 ) πœ“ , ( 3 . 7 2 ) ξ€Ί πœ‘ ( 𝐻 ) 𝐻 , 𝑖 𝐴 𝜎 ξ€»  πœ‘ ( 𝐻 ) πœ“ = πœ‘ ( 𝐻 ) d Ξ“ ξ‚€ ξ€· πœ‚ 𝜎 ξ€Έ 2 𝑀 ( 2 )  + 𝑔 𝐻 𝐼 ξ€· ξ€· π‘Ž βˆ’ 𝑖 𝜎 𝐺 ξ‚„ ξ€Έ ξ€Έ πœ‘ ( 𝐻 ) πœ“ , ( 3 . 7 3 ) πœ‘ ( 𝐻 𝜎 ) [ 𝐻 𝜎 , 𝑖 𝐴 𝜎 ] πœ‘ ( 𝐻 𝜎 ) πœ“ = πœ‘ ( 𝐻 𝜎 ) ξ€Ί d Ξ“ ξ€· ( πœ‚ 𝜎 ) 2 𝑀 ( 2 ) ξ€Έ + 𝑔 𝐻 𝐼 ξ€· ξ€· π‘Ž βˆ’ 𝑖 𝜎 ξ€·  πœ’ 𝜎 𝐺 ξ€Έ ξ€Έ ξ€Έ ξ€» πœ‘ ( 𝐻 𝜎 ) πœ“ . ( 3 . 7 4 )

We now introduce the Mourre inequality.

Let 𝑁 be the smallest integer such that 𝑁 𝛾 β‰₯ 1 . ( 3 . 7 5 )

We have, for 𝑔 ≀ 𝑔 𝛿 ( 1 ) , 1 𝛾 < 𝛾 + 𝑁   𝐷 1 βˆ’ 3 𝑔 𝛾 ξƒͺ  𝐷 βˆ’ 𝛾 < 1 βˆ’ 3 𝑔 𝛾 , 𝛾 𝑁 1 ≀ 𝛾 βˆ’ 𝑁   𝐷 1 βˆ’ 3 𝑔 𝛾 ξƒͺ βˆ’ 𝛾 < 𝛾 . ( 3 . 7 6 ) Let πœ– 𝛾 = 1  2 𝑁 1 βˆ’ 3 𝑔 𝛿 ( 1 )  𝐷 𝛾 ξƒͺ . βˆ’ 𝛾 ( 3 . 7 7 ) We choose 𝑓 ∈ 𝐢 ∞ 0 ( ℝ ) such that 1 β‰₯ 𝑓 β‰₯ 0 and ⎧ βŽͺ βŽͺ βŽͺ ⎨ βŽͺ βŽͺ βŽͺ ⎩ 1 𝑓 ( πœ† ) = i f  ξ€· πœ† ∈ 𝛾 βˆ’ πœ– 𝛾 ξ€Έ 2 , 𝛾 + πœ– 𝛾 ξ‚„ , 0 i f 1 πœ† > 𝛾 + 𝑁  1 βˆ’ 3 𝑔 𝛿 ( 1 )  𝐷 𝛾 ξƒͺ βˆ’ 𝛾 = 𝛾 + 2 πœ– 𝛾 , 0 i f  1 πœ† < 𝛾 βˆ’ 𝑁  1 βˆ’ 3 𝑔 𝛿 ( 1 )  𝐷 𝛾 βˆ’ 𝛾 ξƒͺ ξƒͺ 2 = ξ€· 𝛾 βˆ’ 2 πœ– 𝛾 ξ€Έ 2 . ( 3 . 7 8 ) Note that 𝛾 + 2 πœ– 𝛾  < 1 βˆ’ 3 𝑔 𝐷 / 𝛾 for 𝑔 ≀ 𝑔 𝛿 ( 1 ) and 𝛾 βˆ’ πœ– 𝛾 > 𝛾 / 𝑁 .

We set, for 𝑛 β‰₯ 1 , f 𝑛 ξ‚΅ πœ† ( πœ† ) = 𝑓 𝜎 𝑛 ξ‚Ά . ( 3 . 7 9 )

Let 𝐻 𝑛 = 𝐻 𝜎 𝑛 , 𝐸 𝑛 ξ€· 𝐻 = i n f 𝜎 𝑛 ξ€Έ , 𝐻 ( 2 ) 0 𝑛 = 𝐻 ( 2 ) 0 𝜎 𝑛 . ( 3 . 8 0 ) Let 𝑃 𝑛 denote the ground state projection of 𝐻 𝑛 . It follows from Proposition 3.5 that, for 𝑛 β‰₯ 1 and 𝑔 ≀ Μƒ 𝑔 𝛿 ≀ 𝑔 𝛿 ( 1 ) , 𝑓 𝑛 ξ€· 𝐻 𝑛 βˆ’ 𝐸 𝑛 ξ€Έ = 𝑃 𝑛 βŠ— 𝑓 𝑛 ξ‚€ 𝐻 ( 2 ) 0 , 𝑛  . ( 3 . 8 1 ) Note that 𝐸 𝑛 = 𝐸 𝑛 = i n f 𝜎 ( 𝐻 𝑛 ) . ( 3 . 8 2 ) Set π‘Ž 𝑛 = π‘Ž 𝜎 𝑛 , π‘Ž 𝑛 = π‘Ž 𝜎 𝑛 , 𝐴 𝑛 = 𝐴 𝜎 𝑛 , 𝐴 𝑛 = 𝐴 𝜎 𝑛 , 𝔉 𝑛 = 𝔉 𝜎 𝑛 , 𝔉 𝑛 = 𝔉 𝜎 𝑛 . ( 3 . 8 3 ) We have 𝔉 ≃ 𝔉 𝑛 βŠ— 𝔉 𝑛 , 𝐴 = 𝐴 𝑛 + 𝐴 𝑛 . ( 3 . 8 4 ) We further note that π‘Ž 𝑛  πœ’ 𝜎 𝑛 ξ€· 𝑝 2 ξ€Έ = π‘Ž 𝑛 . ( 3 . 8 5 ) By (3.72), (3.74), and (3.85), we obtain ξ€Ί 𝐻 , 𝑖 𝐴 𝑛 ξ€» = ξ€Ί 𝐻 𝑛 , 𝑖 𝐴 𝑛 ξ€» βŠ— 1 ( 3 . 8 6 ) as sesquilinear forms with respect to 𝔉 = 𝔉 𝑛 βŠ— 𝔉 𝑛 .

Furthermore, it follows from the virial theorem (see [6, Proposition  3.2] and Proposition 6.1) that 𝑃 𝑛 ξ€Ί 𝐻 𝑛 , i 𝐴 𝑛 ξ€» 𝑃 𝑛 = 0 . ( 3 . 8 7 ) By (3.81) and (3.87) we then get, for 𝑔 ≀ Μƒ 𝑔 𝛿 ≀ 𝑔 𝛿 ( 1 ) , 𝑓 𝑛 ξ€· 𝐻 𝑛 βˆ’ 𝐸 𝑛 ξ€Έ ξ€Ί 𝐻 , 𝑖 𝐴 𝑛 ξ€» 𝑓 𝑛 ξ€· 𝐻 𝑛 βˆ’ 𝐸 𝑛 ξ€Έ = 0 . ( 3 . 8 8 )

We then have the following.

Proposition 3.9. Suppose that the kernels 𝐺 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² satisfy Hypotheses 2.1 and 3.1. Then there exists  𝐢 𝛿 > 0 and Μƒ 𝑔 𝛿 ( 1 ) > 0 such that Μƒ 𝑔 𝛿 ( 1 ) ≀ Μƒ 𝑔 𝛿 and 𝑓 𝑛 ξ€· 𝐻 𝑛 βˆ’ 𝐸 𝑛 ξ€Έ ξ€Ί 𝐻 , 𝑖 𝐴 𝑛 ξ€» 𝑓 𝑛 ξ€· 𝐻 𝑛 βˆ’ 𝐸 𝑛 ξ€Έ β‰₯  𝐢 𝛿 𝛾 2 𝑁 2 𝜎 𝑛 𝑓 𝑛 ξ€· 𝐻 𝑛 βˆ’ 𝐸 𝑛 ξ€Έ 2 ( 3 . 8 9 ) for 𝑛 β‰₯ 1 and 𝑔 ≀ Μƒ 𝑔 𝛿 ( 1 ) .

Let 𝐸 Ξ” ( 𝐻 βˆ’ 𝐸 ) be the spectral projection for the operator 𝐻 βˆ’ 𝐸 associated with the interval Ξ” , and let Ξ” 𝑛 =  ξ€· 𝛾 βˆ’ πœ– 𝛾 ξ€Έ 2 𝜎 𝑛 , ξ€· 𝛾 + πœ– 𝛾 ξ€Έ 𝜎 𝑛 ξ‚„ , 𝑛 β‰₯ 1 . ( 3 . 9 0 ) Note that ξ€Ί 𝜎 𝑛 + 2 , 𝜎 𝑛 + 1 ξ€» βŠ‚ ξ‚€ ξ€· 𝛾 βˆ’ πœ– 𝛾 ξ€Έ 2 𝜎 𝑛 , ξ€· 𝛾 + πœ– 𝛾 ξ€Έ 𝜎 𝑛  , 𝑛 β‰₯ 1 . ( 3 . 9 1 )

Theorem 3.10. Suppose that the kernels 𝐺 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² satisfy Hypotheses 2.1 and 3.1. Then there exists 𝐢 𝛿 > 0 and Μƒ 𝑔 𝛿 ( 2 ) > 0 such that Μƒ 𝑔 𝛿 ( 2 ) ≀ Μƒ 𝑔 𝛿 ( 1 ) and 𝐸 Ξ” 𝑛 [ ] 𝐸 ( 𝐻 βˆ’ 𝐸 ) 𝐻 , 𝑖 𝐴 Ξ” 𝑛 ( 𝐻 βˆ’ 𝐸 ) β‰₯ 𝐢 𝛿 𝛾 2 𝑁 2 𝜎 𝑛 𝐸 Ξ” 𝑛 ( 𝐻 βˆ’ 𝐸 ) ( 3 . 9 2 ) for 𝑛 β‰₯ 1 and 𝑔 ≀ Μƒ 𝑔 𝛿 ( 2 ) .

4. Existence of a Ground State and Location of the Absolutely Continuous Spectrum

We now prove Theorem 3.3. The scheme of the proof is quite well known (see [9, 31]). It follows from Proposition 3.5 that 𝐻 𝑛 has a unique ground state, denoted by πœ™ 𝑛 , in 𝔉 𝑛 : 𝐻 𝑛 πœ™ 𝑛 = 𝐸 𝑛 πœ™ 𝑛 , πœ™ 𝑛 ∈ π’Ÿ ( 𝐻 𝑛 β€– πœ™ ) , 𝑛 β€– = 1 , 𝑛 β‰₯ 1 . ( 4 . 1 ) Therefore 𝐻 𝑛 has an unique normalized ground state in 𝔉 , given by  πœ™ 𝑛 = πœ™ 𝑛 βŠ— Ξ© 𝑛 , where Ξ© 𝑛 is the vacuum state in 𝔉 𝑛 : 𝐻 𝑛  πœ™ 𝑛 = 𝐸 𝑛  πœ™ 𝑛 ,  πœ™ 𝑛 ξ€· 𝐻 ∈ π’Ÿ 𝑛 ξ€Έ , β€– β€–  πœ™ 𝑛 β€– β€– = 1 , 𝑛 β‰₯ 1 . ( 4 . 2 ) Since β€–  πœ™ 𝑛 β€– = 1 , there exists a subsequence ( 𝑛 π‘˜ ) π‘˜ β‰₯ 1 , converging to ∞ such that (  πœ™ 𝑛 π‘˜ ) π‘˜ β‰₯ 1 converges weakly to a state  πœ™ ∈ 𝔉 . We have to prove that  πœ™ β‰  0 . By adapting the proof of Theorem 4 . 1 in [22] (see also [20]), the key point is to estimate β€– 𝑐 β„“ , πœ– ( πœ‰ 2 )  Ξ¦ 𝑛 β€– 𝔉 in order to show that 3  β„“ = 1  πœ– ξ€œ β€– β€– 𝑐 β„“ , πœ– ( πœ‰ 2 )  πœ™ 𝑛 β€– β€– 2 d πœ‰ 2 ξ€· 𝑔 = π’ͺ 2 ξ€Έ , ( 4 . 3 ) uniformly with respect to 𝑛 .

The estimate (4.3) is a consequence of the so-called “pull-through’’ formula as it follows.

Let 𝐻 𝐼 , 𝑛 denote the interaction 𝐻 𝐼 associated with the kernels 1 { | 𝑝 2 | β‰₯ 𝜎 𝑛 } ( 𝑝 2 ) 𝐺 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² . We thus have 𝐻 0 𝑐 β„“ , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ  πœ™ 𝑛 = 𝑐 β„“ , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ 𝐻 0  πœ™ 𝑛 βˆ’ 𝑀 β„“ ( 2 ) ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ 𝑐 β„“ , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ  πœ™ 𝑛 , 𝑔 𝐻 𝐼 , 𝑛 𝑐 β„“ , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ  πœ™ 𝑛 = 𝑐 β„“ , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ 𝑔 𝐻 𝐼 , 𝑛  πœ™ 𝑛 + 𝑔 𝑉 β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ  πœ™ 𝑛 ( 4 . 4 ) with 𝑉 β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ ξ€œ 𝐺 = 𝑔 ( 1 ) β„“ , πœ– β€² πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 1 , πœ‰ 2 , πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ 𝑏 βˆ— β„“ , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 1 ξ€Έ π‘Ž πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ d πœ‰ 1 d πœ‰ 3 ξ€œ 𝐺 + 𝑔 ( 2 ) β„“ , πœ– β€² πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 1 , πœ‰ 2 , πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ 𝑏 βˆ— β„“ , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 1 ξ€Έ π‘Ž βˆ— πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ d πœ‰ 1 d πœ‰ 3 . ( 4 . 5 ) This yields ξ‚€ 𝐻 𝑛 βˆ’ 𝐸 𝑛 + 𝑀 β„“ ( 2 ) ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ  𝑐 β„“ , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ  πœ™ 𝑛 = 𝑉 β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ  πœ™ 𝑛 . ( 4 . 6 ) By adapting the proof of Propositions 2.4 and 2.5 we easily get β€– β€– 𝑉 β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² πœ“ β€– β€– 𝔉 ≀ 𝑔 π‘š π‘Š 1 / 2   𝛼 = 1 , 2 β€– β€– 𝐺 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ( β‹… , πœ‰ 2 β€– β€– , β‹… ) 𝐿 2 ( Ξ£ 1 Γ— Ξ£ 2 ) ξƒͺ β€– β€– 𝐻 0 1 / 2 πœ“ β€– β€– β€– β€– 𝐺 + 𝑔 ( 2 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ( β‹… , πœ‰ 2 β€– β€– , β‹… ) 𝐿 2 ( Ξ£ 1 Γ— Ξ£ 2 ) β€– πœ“ β€– , ( 4 . 7 ) where πœ“ ∈ π’Ÿ ( 𝐻 0 ) .

Let us estimate β€– 𝐻 0  πœ™ 𝑛 β€– . By (2.53), (2.54), (3.26), and (3.28) we have 𝑔 β€– β€– 𝐻 𝐼 , 𝑛  πœ™ 𝑛 β€– β€– ξ‚€ 𝐢 ≀ 𝑔 𝐾 ( 𝐺 ) 𝛽 πœ‚ β€– β€– 𝐻 0  πœ™ 𝑛 β€– β€– + 𝐡 𝛽 πœ‚  , β€– β€– 𝐻 0  πœ™ 𝑛 β€– β€– ≀ | | 𝐸 𝑛 | | β€– β€– 𝐻 + 𝑔 𝐼 , 𝑛  πœ™ 𝑛 β€– β€– . ( 4 . 8 ) Therefore β€– β€– 𝐻 0  πœ™ 𝑛 β€– β€– ≀ | | 𝐸 𝑛 | | 1 βˆ’ 𝑔 1 𝐾 ( 𝐺 ) 𝐢 𝛽 πœ‚ + 𝑔 𝐾 ( 𝐺 ) 𝐡 𝛽 πœ‚ 1 βˆ’ 𝑔 1 𝐾 ( 𝐺 ) 𝐢 𝛽 πœ‚ . ( 4 . 9 ) By (3.82), (A.11), and (4.9), there exists 𝐢 > 0 such that β€– β€– 𝐻 0  πœ™ 𝑛 β€– β€– ≀ 𝐢 , ( 4 . 1 0 ) uniformly in 𝑛 and 𝑔 ≀ 𝑔 1 .

By (4.6), (4.7), and (4.10) we get β€– β€– 𝑐 β„“ , πœ–  πœ™ 𝑛 β€– β€– ≀ 𝑔 | | 𝑝 2 | |  𝐢 1 / 2  2  𝛼 = 1 β€– β€– 𝐺 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ( β‹… , πœ‰ 2 β€– β€– , β‹… ) 𝐿 2 ( Ξ£ 1 Γ— Ξ£ 2 ) ξƒͺ + β€– β€– 𝐺 ( 2 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ( β‹… , πœ‰ 2 β€– β€– , β‹… ) 𝐿 2 ( Ξ£ 1 Γ— Ξ£ 2 ) ξƒͺ . ( 4 . 1 1 ) By Hypothesis 3.1(i), there exists a constant 𝐢 ( 𝐺 ) > 0 depending on the kernels 𝐺 = ( 𝐺 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ) β„“ = 1 , 2 , 3 ; 𝛼 = 1 , 2 ; πœ– β‰  πœ– β€² = Β± and such that 3  β„“ = 1  πœ– ξ€œ β€– β€– 𝑐 β„“ , πœ– ( πœ‰ 2 )  πœ™ 𝑛 β€– β€– 2 d πœ‰ 2 ≀ 𝐢 ( 𝐺 ) 2 𝑔 2 . ( 4 . 1 2 ) The existence of a ground state  πœ™ for 𝐻 follows by choosing 𝑔 sufficiently small, that is, 𝑔 ≀ 𝑔 2 , as in [20, 22]. By adapting the method developed in [32] (see [32, Corollary  3.4]), one proves that the ground state of 𝐻 is unique. We omit here the details.

Statements about 𝜎 ( 𝐻 ) are consequences of the existence of a ground state and follows from the existence of asymptotic Fock representations for the CAR associated with the 𝑐 β™― β„“ , πœ– ( πœ‰ 2 ) 's. For 𝑓 ∈ 𝐿 2 ( ℝ 3 , β„‚ 2 ) , we define on π’Ÿ ( 𝐻 0 ) the operators 𝑐 β™― 𝑑 β„“ , πœ– ( 𝑓 ) = e 𝑖 𝑑 𝐻 e βˆ’ 𝑖 𝑑 𝐻 0 𝑐 β™― β„“ , πœ– ( 𝑓 ) e i 𝑑 𝐻 0 e βˆ’ 𝑖 𝑑 𝐻 . ( 4 . 1 3 ) By mimicking the proof given in [21, 31] one proves, under the hypothesis of Theorem 3.3 and for 𝑓 ∈ 𝐢 ∞ 0 ( ℝ 3 , β„‚ 2 ) , that the strong limits of 𝑐 β™― 𝑑 β„“ , πœ– ( 𝑓 ) when 𝑑 β†’ Β± ∞ exist for πœ“ ∈ π’Ÿ ( 𝐻 0 ) : l i m 𝑑 β†’ Β± ∞ 𝑐 β™― 𝑑 β„“ , πœ– ( 𝑓 ) πœ“ ∢ = 𝑐 β™― Β± β„“ , πœ– ( 𝑓 ) πœ“ . ( 4 . 1 4 ) The operators 𝑐 β™― Β± β„“ , πœ– ( 𝑓 ) satisfy the CAR and we have 𝑐 Β± β„“ , πœ–  ( 𝑓 ) πœ™ = 0 , 𝑓 ∈ 𝐢 ∞ 0 ξ€· ℝ 3 , β„‚ 2 ξ€Έ , ( 4 . 1 5 ) where  πœ™ is the ground state of 𝐻 .

It then follows from (4.14) and (4.15) that the absolutely continuous spectrum of 𝐻 equals to [ i n f 𝜎 ( 𝐻 ) , ∞ ) . We omit the details (see [21, 31]).

5. Proof of the Mourre Inequality

We first prove Proposition 3.9. In view of Proposition 3.8(a)(iii) and (3.73), we have, as sesquilinear forms, ξ€Ί 𝐻 , 𝑖 𝐴 𝜎 ξ€» = ( 1 βˆ’ 𝑔 ) d Ξ“ ξ‚€ ξ€· πœ‚ 𝜎 ξ€Έ 2 𝑀 ( 2 )  ξ‚€ + 𝑔 d Ξ“ ξ‚€ ξ€· πœ‚ 𝜎 ξ€Έ 2 𝑀 ( 2 )   + 𝑔 𝐻 𝐼 ξ€· ξ€· π‘Ž βˆ’ 𝑖 𝜎 𝐺 . ξ€Έ ξ€Έ ( 5 . 1 ) Let 𝔉 β„“ ( 1 ) (resp., 𝔉 β„“ ( 2 ) ) be the Fock space for the massive leptons β„“ (resp., the neutrinos and antineutrinos β„“ ).

We have 𝔉 β„“ ≃ 𝔉 β„“ ( 1 ) βŠ— 𝔉 β„“ ( 2 ) . ( 5 . 2 )

Let 𝔉 ( 1 ) = 𝔉 π‘Š βŠ—  3  β„“ = 1 𝔉 β„“ ( 1 ) ξƒͺ , 𝔉 ( 2 ) = 3  β„“ = 1 𝔉 β„“ ( 2 ) . ( 5 . 3 )

We have 𝔉 ≃ 𝔉 ( 1 ) βŠ— 𝔉 ( 2 ) , ( 5 . 4 ) 𝔉 ( 1 ) is the Fock space for the massive leptons and the bosons π‘Š Β± , and 𝔉 ( 2 ) is the Fock space for the neutrinos and antineutrinos.

We have, as sesquilinear forms and with respect to (5.4), d Ξ“ ξ‚€ ξ€· πœ‚ 𝜎 ξ€Έ 2 𝑀 ( 2 )  + 𝐻 𝐼 ξ€· ξ€· π‘Ž βˆ’ 𝑖 𝜎 𝐺 = ξ€Έ ξ€Έ 3  β„“ = 1  πœ– ξ€œ πœ‚ 𝜎 ξ€· 𝑝 2 ξ€Έ 2 | | 𝑝 2 | | 𝑐 βˆ— β„“ , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ 𝑐 β„“ , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ d πœ‰ 2 + 3  β„“ = 1  πœ– β‰  πœ– β€² ξ€œ | | 𝑝 2 | | βŽ› ⎜ ⎜ ⎝ 1 1 βŠ— πœ‚ 𝜎 ξ€· 𝑝 2 ξ€Έ 𝑐 βˆ— β„“ , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ +  𝛼 = 1 , 2 β„³ ( 𝛼 ) βˆ— β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² , 𝜎 ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ | | 𝑝 2 | | βŠ— 1 2 ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ Γ— βŽ› ⎜ ⎜ ⎝ 1 1 βŠ— πœ‚ 𝜎 ξ€· 𝑝 2 ξ€Έ 𝑐 β„“ , πœ– ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ +  𝛼 = 1 , 2 β„³ ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² , 𝜎 ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ | | 𝑝 2 | | βŠ— 1 2 ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ d πœ‰ 2 βˆ’ 3  β„“ = 1  πœ– β‰  πœ– β€² ξ€œ βŽ› ⎜ ⎜ ⎝  𝛼 = 1 , 2 β„³ ( 𝛼 ) βˆ— β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² , 𝜎 ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ | | 𝑝 2 | | 1 / 2 βŠ— 1 2 ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ βŽ› ⎜ ⎜ ⎝  𝛼 = 1 , 2 β„³ ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² , 𝜎 ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ | | 𝑝 2 | | 1 / 2 βŠ— 1 2 ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ d πœ‰ 2 , ( 5 . 5 ) where β„³ ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² , 𝜎 ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ ξ€œ   = 𝑖 𝛼 = 1 , 2 ξ‚€ π‘Ž πœ‚ 𝜎 ξ€· 𝑝 2 ξ€Έ 𝐺 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 1 , πœ‰ 2 , πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ  ξƒͺ 𝑏 βˆ— β„“ , πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 1 ξ€Έ π‘Ž πœ– β€² ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ d πœ‰ 1 d πœ‰ 3 , ( 5 . 6 ) and where 1 𝑗 is the identity operator in 𝔉 ( 𝑗 ) .

By mimicking the proofs of Propositions 2.4 and 2.5, we get, for every πœ“ ∈ 𝔇 , 3  β„“ = 1  πœ– β‰  πœ– β€² βŽ› ⎜ ⎜ ⎝ ξ€œ βŽ› ⎜ ⎜ ⎝  πœ“ , 𝛼 = 1 , 2 β„³ ( 𝛼 ) βˆ— β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² , 𝜎 ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ | | 𝑝 2 | | 1 / 2 βŠ— 1 2 ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ βŽ› ⎜ ⎜ ⎝  𝛼 = 1 , 2 β„³ ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² , 𝜎 ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ | | 𝑝 2 | | 1 / 2 βŠ— 1 2 ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ πœ“ d πœ‰ 2 ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ = 3  β„“ = 1  πœ– β‰  πœ– β€² β€– β€– β€– β€– ξ€œ   𝛼 = 1 , 2 β„³ 𝛼 β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² , 𝜎 ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ | | 𝑝 2 | | 1 / 2 βŠ— 1 2 ξƒͺ πœ“ d πœ‰ 2 β€– β€– β€– β€– 2 ≀ βŽ› ⎜ ⎜ ⎜ ⎝ ξ€œ | | | βˆ‘ 𝛼 = 1 , 2 ξ‚€ π‘Ž πœ‚ 𝜎 ξ€· 𝑝 2 ξ€Έ 𝐺 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€²  ξ€· πœ‰ 1 , πœ‰ 2 , πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ | | | 2 𝑀 ( 3 ) ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ | | 𝑝 2 | | d πœ‰ 1 d πœ‰ 2 d πœ‰ 3 ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ β€– β€– β€– ξ‚€ 𝐻 0 ( 3 )  1 / 2 πœ“ β€– β€– β€– . ( 5 . 7 ) Noting that | ( π‘Ž πœ‚ 𝜎 ) ( 𝑝 2 ) | ≀ 𝐢 uniformly with respect to 𝜎 , it follows from Hypotheses 2.1 and 3.1 that there exists a constant 𝐢 ( 𝐺 ) > 0 such that ξ€œ | | | βˆ‘ 𝛼 = 1 , 2 ξ‚€ π‘Ž πœ‚ 𝜎 ξ€· 𝑝 2 ξ€Έ 𝐺 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€²  ξ€· πœ‰ 1 , πœ‰ 2 , πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ | | | 2 𝑀 ( 3 ) ξ€· πœ‰ 3 ξ€Έ | | 𝑝 2 | | d πœ‰ 1 d πœ‰ 2 d πœ‰ 3 ≀ 𝐢 ( 𝐺 ) 𝜎 . ( 5 . 8 ) This yields βˆ’ ξ€œ βŽ› ⎜ ⎜ ⎝  𝛼 = 1 , 2 β„³ ( 𝛼 ) βˆ— β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² , 𝜎 ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ | | 𝑝 2 | | 1 / 2 βŠ— 1 2 ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ βŽ› ⎜ ⎜ ⎝  𝛼 = 1 , 2 β„³ ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² , 𝜎 ξ€· πœ‰ 2 ξ€Έ | | 𝑝 2 | | 1 / 2 βŠ— 1 2 ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ d πœ‰ 2 β‰₯ βˆ’ 𝐢 ( 𝐺 ) 𝜎 . ( 5 . 9 )

Combining (5.1), (5.5) with (5.9), we obtain ξ€Ί 𝐻 , 𝑖 𝐴 𝑛 ξ€» β‰₯ ( 1 βˆ’ 𝑔 ) d Ξ“ ξ‚€ ξ€· πœ‚ 𝜎 𝑛 ξ€Έ 2 𝑀 ( 2 )  βˆ’ 𝑔 𝐢 ( 𝐺 ) 𝜎 𝑛 . ( 5 . 1 0 )

We have d Ξ“ ξ‚€ ξ€· πœ‚ 𝜎 𝑛 ξ€Έ 2 𝑀 ( 2 )  β‰₯ 𝐻 ( 2 ) 0 𝑛 . ( 5 . 1 1 )

By (3.76), (3.81), and (5.11) we get 𝑓 𝑛 ξ€· 𝐻 𝑛 βˆ’ 𝐸 𝑛 ξ€Έ d Ξ“ ξ€· πœ‚ 𝜎 𝑛 2 𝑀 ( 2 ) ξ€Έ 𝑓 𝑛 ξ€· 𝐻 𝑛 βˆ’ 𝐸 𝑛 ξ€Έ β‰₯ 𝑃 𝑛 βŠ— 𝑓 𝑛 ξ‚€ 𝐻 ( 2 ) 0 𝑛  𝐻 ( 2 ) 0 𝑛 𝑓 𝑛 ξ‚€ 𝐻 ( 2 ) 0 𝑛  β‰₯ 𝛾 2 𝑁 2 𝜎 𝑛 𝑓 𝑛 ξ€· 𝐻 𝑛 βˆ’ 𝐸 𝑛 ξ€Έ 2 ( 5 . 1 2 ) for 𝑔 ≀ 𝑔 𝛿 ( 1 ) .

This, together with (5.10), yields for 𝑔 ≀ 𝑔 𝛿 ( 1 ) 𝑓 𝑛 ξ€· 𝐻 𝑛 βˆ’ 𝐸 𝑛 ξ€Έ ξ€Ί 𝐻 , 𝑖 𝐴 𝑛 ξ€» 𝑓 𝑛 ξ€· 𝐻 𝑛 βˆ’ 𝐸 𝑛 ξ€Έ β‰₯ ξ‚€ 1 βˆ’ 𝑔 𝛿 ( 1 )  𝛾 2 𝑁 2 𝜎 𝑛 𝑓 𝑛 ξ€· 𝐻 𝑛 βˆ’ 𝐸 𝑛 ξ€Έ 2 βˆ’ 𝑔 𝐢 ( 𝐺 ) 𝜎 𝑛 𝑓 𝑛 ξ€· 𝐻 𝑛 βˆ’ 𝐸 𝑛 ξ€Έ 2 . ( 5 . 1 3 ) Setting 𝑔 𝛿 ( 2 )  𝑔 = i n f 𝛿 ( 1 ) , 1 βˆ’ 𝑔 𝛿 ( 1 ) 𝛾 2 𝐢 ( 𝐺 ) 2 𝑁 2 ξƒͺ , ( 5 . 1 4 ) we get 𝑓 𝑛 ξ€· 𝐻 𝑛 βˆ’ 𝐸 𝑛 ξ€Έ ξ€Ί H , 𝑖 𝐴 𝑛 ξ€» 𝑓 𝑛 ξ€· 𝐻 𝑛 βˆ’ 𝐸 𝑛 ξ€Έ β‰₯ 1 βˆ’ 𝑔 𝛿 ( 1 ) 2 𝛾 2 𝑁 2 𝜎 𝑛 𝑓 𝑛 ξ€· 𝐻 𝑛 βˆ’ 𝐸 𝑛 ξ€Έ 2 ( 5 . 1 5 ) for 𝑔 ≀ 𝑔 𝛿 ( 2 ) .

Proposition 3.9 is proved by setting Μƒ 𝑔 𝛿 ( 1 ) = 𝑔 𝛿 ( 2 ) and  𝐢 𝛿 = ( 1 βˆ’ 𝑔 𝛿 ( 1 ) ) / 2 .

The proof of Theorem 3.10 is the consequence of the following two lemmas.

Lemma 5.1. Assume that the kernels 𝐺 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² satisfy Hypotheses 2.1 and 3.1(ii). Then there exists a constant 𝐷 > 0 such that | | 𝐸 βˆ’ 𝐸 𝑛 | | ≀ 𝑔 𝐷 𝜎 𝑛 2 ( 5 . 1 6 ) for 𝑛 β‰₯ 1 and 𝑔 ≀ 𝑔 ( 2 ) .

Proof. Let πœ™ (resp.,  πœ™ 𝑛 ) be the unique normalized ground state of 𝐻 (resp., 𝐻 𝑛 ). We have 𝐸 βˆ’ 𝐸 𝑛 ≀ ξ‚€  πœ™ 𝑛 , ξ€· 𝐻 βˆ’ 𝐻 𝑛 ξ€Έ  πœ™ 𝑛  , 𝐸 𝑛 ξ€· ξ€· 𝐻 βˆ’ 𝐸 ≀ πœ™ , 𝑛 ξ€Έ πœ™ ξ€Έ βˆ’ 𝐻 ( 5 . 1 7 ) with 𝐻 βˆ’ 𝐻 𝑛 = 𝑔 𝐻 𝐼 ξ€· πœ’ 𝜎 𝑛 ξ€· 𝑝 2 ξ€Έ 𝐺 ξ€Έ . ( 5 . 1 8 ) Combining (2.53) and (2.54) with (3.26)–(3.28) and (5.18), we get β€– β€– ξ€· 𝐻 βˆ’ 𝐻 𝑛 ξ€Έ  πœ™ 𝑛 β€– β€– ξ€· πœ’ ≀ 𝑔 𝐾 𝜎 𝑛 ξ€· 𝑝 2 ξ€Έ 𝐺 ξ€Έ ξ‚€ 𝐢 𝛽 πœ‚ β€– β€– 𝐻 0  πœ™ 𝑛 β€– β€– + 𝐡 𝛽 πœ‚  , β€– β€– ξ€· 𝐻 βˆ’ 𝐻 𝑛 ξ€Έ πœ™ β€– β€– ξ€· πœ’ ≀ 𝑔 𝐾 𝜎 𝑛 ξ€· 𝑝 2 ξ€Έ 𝐺 𝐢 ξ€Έ ξ€· 𝛽 πœ‚ β€– β€– 𝐻 0 πœ™ β€– β€– + 𝐡 𝛽 πœ‚ ξ€Έ . ( 5 . 1 9 ) It follows from Hypothesis 3.1(ii), (4.10), and (5.19) that there exists a constant 𝐷 > 0 such that ξ‚€ β€– β€– ξ€· m a x 𝐻 βˆ’ 𝐻 𝑛 ξ€Έ  πœ™ 𝑛 β€– β€– , β€– β€– ξ€· 𝐻 βˆ’ 𝐻 𝑛 ξ€Έ πœ™ β€– β€–  ≀ 𝑔 𝐷 𝜎 𝑛 2 ( 5 . 2 0 ) for 𝑛 β‰₯ 1 and 𝑔 ≀ 𝑔 ( 2 ) .
By (5.17), this proves Lemma 5.1.

Lemma 5.2. Suppose that the kernels 𝐺 ( 𝛼 ) β„“ , πœ– , πœ– β€² satisfy Hypotheses 2.1 and 3.1(ii). Then there exists a constant 𝐢 > 0 such that β€– β€– 𝑓 𝑛 ( 𝐻 βˆ’ 𝐸 ) βˆ’ 𝑓 𝑛 ξ€· 𝐻 𝑛 βˆ’ 𝐸 𝑛 ξ€Έ β€– β€– ≀ 𝑔 𝐢 𝜎 𝑛 ( 5 . 2 1 ) for 𝑛 β‰₯ 1 and 𝑔 ≀ 𝑔 ( 2 ) .

Proof. Let  𝑓 ( β‹… ) be an almost analytic extension of 𝑓 ( β‹… ) given by (3.78) satisfying | | πœ• 𝑧  | | 𝑓 ( π‘₯ + 𝑖 𝑦 ) ≀ 𝐢 𝑦 2 . ( 5 . 2 2 ) Note that  𝑓 ( π‘₯ + 𝑖 𝑦 ) ∈ 𝐢 ∞ 0 ( ℝ 2 ) . We thus have ξ€œ 𝑓 ( 𝑠 ) = d  𝑓 ( 𝑧 ) , 𝑧 βˆ’ 𝑠 d  1 𝑓 ( 𝑧 ) = βˆ’ πœ‹ πœ•  𝑓 πœ• 𝑧 d π‘₯ d 𝑦 . ( 5 . 2 3 ) Using the functional calculus based on this representation of 𝑓 ( 𝑠 ) , we get 𝑓 𝑛 ( 𝐻 βˆ’ 𝐸 ) βˆ’ 𝑓 𝑛 ξ€· 𝐻 𝑛 βˆ’ 𝐸 𝑛 ξ€Έ = 𝜎 𝑛 ξ€œ 1 𝐻 βˆ’ 𝐸 βˆ’ 𝑧 𝜎 𝑛 ξ€· 𝐻 βˆ’ 𝐻 𝑛 + 𝐸 𝑛 ξ€Έ 1 βˆ’ 𝐸 𝐻 𝑛 βˆ’ 𝐸 𝑛 βˆ’ 𝑧 𝜎 𝑛 d  𝑓 ( 𝑧 ) . ( 5 . 2 4 ) Combining (2.53) and (2.54) with (3.26)–(3.28) and Hypothesis 3.1(ii), we get, for every πœ“ ∈ π’Ÿ ( 𝐻 0 ) and for 𝑔 ≀ 𝑔 ( 2 ) , 𝑔 β€– β€– 𝐻 𝐼 ξ€· πœ’ 𝜎 𝑛 𝐺 ξ€Έ πœ“ β€– β€– ≀ 2 𝑔 𝐢 𝜎 𝑛 2 ξ€· 𝐢 𝐾 ( 𝐺 ) 𝛽 πœ‚ β€– β€– ξ€· 𝐻 0 ξ€Έ πœ“ β€– β€– + ξ€· 𝐢 + 1 𝛽 πœ‚ + 𝐡 𝛽 πœ‚ ξ€Έ ξ€Έ . β€– πœ“ β€– ( 5 . 2 5 ) This yields 𝑔 β€– β€– 𝐻 𝐼 ξ€· πœ’ 𝜎 𝑛 ξ€· 𝑝 2 ξ€Έ 𝐺 𝐻 ξ€Έ ξ€· 0 ξ€Έ + 1 βˆ’ 1 β€– β€– ≀ 𝑔 𝐢 1 𝜎 𝑛 2 ( 5 . 2 6 ) for some constant 𝐢 1 > 0 and for 𝑔 ≀ 𝑔 ( 2 ) .
By mimicking the proof of (A.21) we show that there exists a constant 𝐢 2 > 0 such that β€– β€– ξ€· 𝐻 0 𝐻 + 1 ξ€Έ ξ€· 𝑛 βˆ’ 𝐸 𝑛 βˆ’ 𝑧 𝜎 𝑛 ξ€Έ βˆ’ 1 β€– β€– ≀ 𝐢 2 ξ‚΅ 1 1 + | | | | 𝜎 I m 𝑧 𝑛 ξ‚Ά ( 5 . 2 7 ) or 𝑔 ≀ 𝑔 ( 1 ) .
Combining Lemma 5.1 and (5.24) with (5.25)–(5.27) we obtain β€– β€– 𝑓 𝑛 ( 𝐻 βˆ’ 𝐸 ) βˆ’ 𝑓 𝑛 ξ€· 𝐻 𝑛 βˆ’ 𝐸 𝑛 ξ€Έ β€– β€– ≀ 𝑔 𝐢 𝜎 𝑛 ξ€œ | | | ξ‚€ πœ•  𝑓 / πœ• 𝑧  | | | ( π‘₯ + 𝑖 𝑦 ) 𝑦 2 d π‘₯ d 𝑦 ( 5 . 2 8 ) for some constant 𝐢 > 0 and for 𝑔 ≀ 𝑔 ( 2 ) .
Using (5.22) and  𝑓 ( π‘₯ + 𝑖 𝑦 ) ∈ 𝐢 ∞ 0 ( ℝ 2 ) one concludes the proof of Lemma 5.2.

We now prove Theorem 3.10.

Proof. It follows from Proposition 3.9 that 𝑓 𝑛 ξ€· 𝐻 𝑛 βˆ’ 𝐸 𝑛 ξ€Έ [ ] 𝑓 𝐻 , 𝑖 𝐴 𝑛 ξ€· 𝐻 𝑛 βˆ’ 𝐸 𝑛 ξ€Έ = 𝑓 𝑛 ξ€· 𝐻 𝑛 βˆ’ 𝐸 𝑛 ξ€Έ ξ€Ί 𝐻 , 𝑖 𝐴 𝑛 ξ€» 𝑓 𝑛 ξ€· 𝐻 𝑛 βˆ’ 𝐸 𝑛 ξ€Έ β‰₯  𝐢 𝛿 𝛾 2 𝑁 2 𝜎 𝑛 𝑓 𝑛 ξ€· 𝐻 𝑛 βˆ’ 𝐸 𝑛 ξ€Έ 2 ( 5 . 2 9 ) for 𝑛 β‰₯ 1 and 𝑔 ≀ Μƒ 𝑔 𝛿 ( 1 ) .
This yields 𝑓 𝑛 ξ€Ί ( 𝐻 βˆ’ 𝐸 ) 𝐻 , 𝑖 𝐴 𝑛 ξ€» 𝑓 𝑛 β‰₯  𝐢 ( 𝐻 βˆ’ 𝐸 ) 𝛿 𝛾 2 𝑁 2 𝜎 𝑛 𝑓 𝑛 ( 𝐻 βˆ’ 𝐸 ) 2 βˆ’ 𝑓 𝑛 [ ] ξ€· 𝑓 ( 𝐻 βˆ’ 𝐸 ) 𝐻 , 𝑖 𝐴 𝑛 ξ€· 𝐻 𝑛 βˆ’ 𝐸 𝑛 ξ€Έ βˆ’ 𝑓 𝑛 ξ€Έ βˆ’ ξ€· 𝑓 ( 𝐻 βˆ’ 𝐸 ) 𝑛 ξ€· 𝐻 𝑛 βˆ’ 𝐸 𝑛 ξ€Έ βˆ’ 𝑓 𝑛 ξ€Έ [ ] 𝑓 ( 𝐻 βˆ’ 𝐸 ) 𝐻 , 𝑖 𝐴 𝑛 ξ€· 𝐻