arXiv:1607.08769v1 [math.OA] 29 Jul 2016

A NO-GO THEOREM FOR THE CONTINUUM LIMIT OF A
PERIODIC QUANTUM SPIN CHAIN.
VAUGHAN F. R. JONES

Abstract. We show that the Hilbert space formed from a block spin renormalization construction of a cyclic quantum spin chain (based on the Temperley-Lieb
algebra) does not support a chiral conformal field theory whose Hamiltonian generates translation on the circle as a continuous limit of the rotations on the lattice.

1. Introduction
This paper is part of an ongoing effort to construct a conformal field theory for
every finite index subfactor in such a way that the standard invariant of the subfactor,
or at least its quantum double, can be recovered from the CFT.
In [12] an infinite dimensional Hilbert space, envisioned as a limit of the Hilbert
spaces of finite quantum spin chains on the circle, was constructed using the following
data:
1) A (positive definite) “planar algebra” P ([8]) together with an affine unitary
representation of it ([11],[13]).
(An affine unitary representation is N-graded and the nth graded component is
thought of as the Hilbert space of a period quantum spin chain with n spins. For the
simplest planar algebra, the nth graded component is just ⊗n (C2 ) so it is literally
the Hilbert space of a quantum spin chain. In [9] it is argued that planar algebras
are indeed physically meaningful generalisations of ordinary spin chains.)
2) An element R of P4 with the normalization property

R
Figure 1.0.1.

=
R*

(See the appendix for an explanation of planar algebra. But one does not need to
know planar algebras to understand the constructions. Just interpret the R’s inside
V.J. is supported by the NSF under Grant No. DMS-0301173 and grant DP140100732, Symmetries of subfactors.
1

2

VAUGHAN F. R. JONES

the pictures as tensors with indices on the strings and the picture as giving a scheme
for contracting indices-[17]. This is already common usage in the physics literature.)
The element R ∈ P4 serves as a way of embedding the Hilbert space of a quantum
spin chain with n spins into the Hilbert space of a spin chain with 3n spins. As
a result of conversation with Tobias Osborne and Guifre Vidal we shall call these
limit Hilbert spaces "semicontinuous limits" of Hilbert spaces for the quantum spin
chains.
We will begin in the next section by giving a simplified and more general version
of the construction of the semicontinuous limit of [12]. For the circular version
this will give us unitary representations of Thompson’s group T which acts by local
scale transformations. This representation was hoped to tend to a representation
of Dif f + (S 1 ) by taking limits of elements of T on the semicontinuous limit. In
particular the rotation group Rot(S 1 ) was hoped to arise as the closure of the dyadic
rotations is T .
This approach is somewhat naive and very open to criticism on physical grounds,
and in this paper we show that this possibility fails as dramatically as possible, at
least for one example of a semicontinuous limit H. We show in fact that in this case
for any two vectors ξ, η ∈ H,
lim hρ

n→∞

1
2n

ξ, ηi = 0

where ρx is unitary on H representing rotation of the circle R/Z by a dyadic rational
x. Thus even in the weak topology the rotations by dyadic rationals are discontnuous
(though we do not show that limr→0 hρr ξ, ηi = 0).
Faced with this failure there are two possibilities. The first is to abandon the
semicontinuous limit and look for other ways to obtain the Hilbert space of the
conformal field theory. One idea which is relatively close to our approach is to
replace our embeddings of quantum spin chains one in another by Evenbly and
Vidal’s MERA (see [6]) which introduces more local interactions between the spins.
Vidal’s numerical evidence could be interpreted as saying that the Hilbert space
obtained by the MERA embeddings should naturally support a CFT. We have not
made any progress along these lines. See also [3].
Another possibility is to redefine the goal. After all, the direct limit approach
does produce states of a quantum spin chain that transform according to local scale
transformations of the lattice. Perhaps this semicontinuous limit is of value in the
analysis of critical behaviour of lattice quantum spin chains. The mathematics is
completely different from that of CFT but the structure of the nogo theorem certainly
yields numerical data that could be relevant, e.g. the rate at which hρ 1n ξ, ηi tends to
2
zero. And the appearance of the transfer matrix in the proof is oddly dual to the role
of the transfer matrix in models which, if [16] is to be believed, should have CFT as a
scaling limit. In these solvable models the Hamiltonian-the infinitesimal generator of
time evolution-is obtained as the logarithmic derivative of the transfer matrix with
respect to the spectral parameter. In our case the infinitesimal behaviour of time
(=space) evolution is governed by the transfer matrix.

A NO-GO THEOREM FOR THE CONTINUUM LIMIT OF A PERIODIC QUANTUM SPIN CHAIN.
3

In a future paper we will investigate scale invariant Hamiltonians and transfer
matrices on the semicontinuous limit.
In this paper all planar algebras will be unshaded and all representations will have a
positive definite invariant inner product unless otherwise specified. (See the appendix
for the meaning of this terminology.)
2. A categorical construction of the Thompson groups.
2.1. A group of fractions for certain categories. The following construction of
groups is well known and goes back at least as far as a 1931 result on semigroups
of Ore. (See also the work [4] in the category context.) The use of direct limits
and functors to construct representations of groups of fractions is probably also well
known, but less so as the corresponding representations of Thompson’s groups seem
to have appeared first in [12]. For this reason we give a self-contained exposition of
the whole business. The extension from group of fractions to groupoid of fractions
is clear.
Let K be a small category with the following 3 properties.
(i) (Unit) There is an element 1 ∈ Ob(K) with M orK (1, a) 6= ∅ for all a ∈ Ob(K).
(ii) (Stabilisation) Let D =
∪ M orK (1, a). Then for each f, g ∈ D there are
a∈Ob(K)

morphisms p and q with pf = qg.
(iii) (Cancellation) If pf = qf for f ∈ D then p = q.
Proposition 2.1.1. If we define  on D by f  g iff g = pf for some morphism p
then D becomes a directed set. Moreover given a functor F from K to some category
C then the sets Af , for f ∈ D,
Af = M orC (Φ(1), Φ(target(f )))
together with the maps

ιgf

: Af → Ag when f  g and g = pf given by
ιgf (v) = Φ(p) ◦ v

form a direct system denoted A(Φ).
Proof. The proof is just verification of the axioms of directed set and direct system
from the properties of K. (Note that  is not necessarily a partial order, just a
preorder.) For instance the directed set property follows from stabilisation.

We will explore the direct limit limA(Φ)f . Recall that the direct limit limAi of
→

→

a direct system is by definition the disjoint union of the Ai (which we will call P)
modulo the equivalence relation ∼
= defined by x ∈ Ai ∼
= y ∈ Aj ⇐⇒ ∃k with
k
k
i  k, j  k and ιi (x) = ιj (y) . If the ι’s are injections then each Φ(S) is naturally
identified with a subset of limΦ(S).
→
First we take the functor Φ to be the identity functor I from K to itself. By
definition then the direct limit limA(I)f is the quotient of the set P of all ordered
→

4

VAUGHAN F. R. JONES

pairs (f, g) with f, g ∈ D by the equivalence relation (f1 , g1 ) ∼
= (f2 , g2 ) ⇐⇒ ∃p, q ∈
K such that (pf1 , pg1 ) = (qf2 , qg2 ):
limA(I)f = P/ ∼
=
→

Now given two elements (f1 , g1 ) and (f2 , g2 ) in P we can choose by stabilisation
morphisms p, q ∈ K with pg1 = qf2 . Then define
(f1 , g1 )(p,q) (f2 , g2 ) = (pf1 , qg2 ).
Proposition 2.1.2. The map from P × P → limA(I)f taking ((f1 , g1 ), (f2 , g2 ))
→

to [(f1 , g1 )(p,q) (f2 , g2 )] depends neither on the choice of (p, q) nor on the choices of
(f1 , g1 ) and (f2 , g2 ) in their ∼
= equivalence classes. The resulting operation makes
limA(I)f into a group.
→

Proof. The proof follows in a relatively routine manner from stabilization and cancellation. The identity element is [(1, 1)] and the inverse of [(f, g)] is [(g, f )]. We
will have to do all the details of well-definedness again to prove the next result so we
leave the rest of the proof to be checked then.

Definition 2.1.1. The group defined by the previous proposition will be called the
group of fractions GK of K.
If Φ is not the identity functor we obtain an action of GK on limA(Φ)f .
→

The direct limit limA(Φ)f is the quotient of the set Q of all ordered pairs (f, g)
→
with f ∈ D and g ∈ M orC (Φ(1), target(Φ(f ))) by the equivalence relation (f1 , g1 ) ∼
=
(f2 , g2 ) ⇐⇒ ∃p, q ∈ K such that (pf1 , Φ(p) ◦ g1 ) = (qf2 , Φ(q) ◦ g2 ):
limA(Φ)f = Q/ ∼
=
→

Now given an element (f1 , g1 ) ∈ P (as in proposition 2.1) and (f2 , g2 ) in Q we can
choose by stabilisation morphisms p, q ∈ K with pg1 = qf2 . Then define
(f1 , g1 )(p,q) (f2 , g2 ) = (pf1 , Φ(q) ◦ g2 ).
Proposition 2.1.3. The map from P × Q → limA(Φ)f taking ((f1 , g1 ), (f2 , g2 ))
→

to [(f1 , g1 )(p,q) (f2 , g2 )] depends neither on the choice of (p, q) nor on the choices of
(f1 , g1 ) and (f2 , g2 ) in their ∼
= equivalence classes. The resulting operation defines
an action of GK on limA(Φ)f .
→

(f1 , g1 )((f2 , g2 )) = (pf1 , Φ(q) ◦ g2 ).
If the category C is linear, the action of GK is linear and if moreover the Hom spaces
of C are Hilbert spaces and the Φ(f ) are isometries then limA(Φ)f is a pre-Hilbert
→

space and the action of GK is unitary. Each individual Hilbert space (f, Φ(target(f )))
is a Hilbert subspace of limA(Φ)f and hence its Hilbert space completion.
→

A NO-GO THEOREM FOR THE CONTINUUM LIMIT OF A PERIODIC QUANTUM SPIN CHAIN.
5

Proof. First suppose p and q are changed to p0 and q 0 . Then by stabilisation there
are r and s such that sp0 g1 = rpg1 . So by cancellation
sp0 = rp.
Moreover rpg1 = rqf2 and sp0 g1 = sq 0 f2 hence rqf2 = sq 0 f2 and by cancellatioin
rq = sq 0
Thus (pf1 , Φ(q)g2 ) ∼
= (rpf1 , Φ(rq)g2 ) = (sp0 f1 , Φ(sq 0 )g2 ) ∼
= (p0 f1 , Φ(q 0 )g2 ). To see
the action property (or associativity of the group operation), let (f1 , g1 ), (f2 , g2 ) ∈ P
and (f3 , g3 ) ∈ Q be given. Choose r, s ∈ K with rg2 = sf3 and p, q such that pg1 =
qrf2 . Then to calculate [(f1 , g1 )]([(f2 , g2 )]([(f3 , g3 )])) and ([(f1 , g1 )][(f2 , g2 )])([(f3 , g3 )])
we can, by well-definedness, use (pf1 , pg1 ), (qrf2 , qrg2 ) and (qsf3 , Φ(qs)g3 ) instead.
Then both expressions yield [(pf1 , Φ(qs)g3 )]. The assertions about linearity and
unitarity are trivial.

Examples of groups and representations constructed in this way are more or less
interesting depending on how “small” the category is compared to the group it produces. We list a few examples below where our point of view brings nothing new.
The first example shows that the construction is universal in some sense but of no
interest at all in this case.
(i) (All groups) If G is a group, consider it as a small category G with one element. It trivially satisfies the conditions of 2.1 and of course GG = G. The
representations obtained are just the usual group actions.
(ii) (Fundamental group) If X is a path-connected space and G its homotopy
groupoid then if we choose 1 to be any point of X the properties of 2.1 are
trivially satisfied and one obtains π1 (X) from the construction. If the target
category C for Φ is Vect and we are given a flat connection on X then Φ can be
constructed by parallel transport and one obtains the holonomy representation
of π1 (X).
(iii) (Integers and rationals) If we take N ∪ {0} with addition we obtain Z. No
new representations will be obtained in this way. A functor Φ to sets is given
by the image of 1 which is simply a transformation T of the set (image under
Φ of the object of N). If T is invertible then the map (n, x) 7→ T −n (x) defines
a Z-equivariant bijection from limΦ to X. If T is not invertible things are
→

more complicated. (For instance for the identity functor.) We leave it to the
reader to work out the answer in general but we observe that if T is a linear
transformation of a finite dimensional vector space V then limΦ is
→

n

W = ∩ T V
n∈N

on which T acts surjectively hence invertibly by what we call T∞ . The isomor−n v provided n is sufficiently large that
phism takes a pair (p, v) in limΦ to T∞
→
T nv ∈ W .

6

VAUGHAN F. R. JONES

(iv) (Braids) See also [4]. If we take the category Bn consisting of positive braids
on n strings, with one object, then Garside theory shows that any braid a is
of the form ∆k b for some positive braid b and k ≤ 0 where ∆ is the positive
half twist braid. So if p, q ∈ Bn then q = qp−1 p. Writing qp−1 as ∆k b we see
bp = ∆−k q. This shows that stabilisation holds in Bn . Cancellation is obvious
and it is clear we get GBn = Bn . If Bn is represented by invertible matrices they
define a functor to Vect and we get a representation of Bn . We have not fully
analyzed the situation when the matrices representing Bn are not all invertible.
We now turn to examples of categories F which we will use to obtain genuinely
interesting representations of GF .
2.2. The category of planar forests and Thompson’s group F . By "forest"
we will mean a planar binary forest whose roots lie on a horizontal line and whose
leaves lie on another horizontal line above the roots. Two such forests will be considered the same if they can be isotoped one to another in the obvious way. Here is
an example of a forest:

Forests form a category F whose objects are N and whose morphisms from m to n
are the forests with m roots and n leaves. Obviously M orF (m, n) is only non-empty
if m ≤ n. Composition of morphisms is just the obvious stacking of planar forests.
Clearly M orF (1, n) is the set of all planar binary rooted trees with n leaves. So
∪n M orF (1, n) is the directed set T of all such trees. It is obvious that, for T , S ∈ T
there is at most one morphism F ∈ F with T ◦ F = S. Moreover any binary planar
tree can be completed to a full binary tree with 2m leaves for some large m. Thus
the category F satisfies the conditions of 2.1 and we may form the group GF .
Proposition 2.2.1. The group GF is isomorphic to Thompson’s group F of piecewise
linear homeomorphisms of [0, 1].
Proof. See [2] for an explanation of how elements of F can be represented by pairs
of binary trees, up to a certain equivalence relation. Check that this is the same as
our definition of GF .

The construction generalizes immediately to the categories Fm of planar rooted
forests all of whose vertices are n + 1-valent. The groups GFm are the Thompson
groups Fn (not free groups!) where 2 is replaced by n in the definitions.

A NO-GO THEOREM FOR THE CONTINUUM LIMIT OF A PERIODIC QUANTUM SPIN CHAIN.
7

2.3. The category of annular forests and Thompson’s group T . Any elegance
this treatment has derives from the paper [7] of Graham and Lehrer.
Definition 2.3.1. We define a rooted, affine binary forest Fm,n to be a planar binary
forest which can be drawn in the strip R × [0, 1] ⊂ R2 as a diagram with m roots
in the open interval (0, 1) and which is invariant under horizontal translation by Z.
The subforest connected to the roots in (0, 1) is to have its n leaves on R × {1} we
may suppose none of the leaves has an integral x-coordinate.
Here is a picture of an element F3,7 :

......

......

0

1

2

Where the diagram is continued to the left and right by periodicity.
The forest below in M orAF(n,n) will be called ρn (illustrated with n = 4):

......

......

0

1

2

And we will set τn = ρnn .
By planarity and peridocity the leaves of the subforest connected to the roots in
(0, 1) lie in an interval of length 1. There are exactly m roots in any interval of length
1 on the x-axis and exactly n leaves in any interval of length 1 on the line R × {1}.
Rooted affine binary forests may be stacked by lining up the leaf of the bottom
forest with smallest positive x coordinate with the root on the top forest with smallest
positive x coordinate. Planarity dictates how all the other roots match up with leaves.
(Alternatively one could insist that all the roots and leaves lie on specific points so
they will line up automatically.) Thus the set AF of all rooted affine binary forests
forms a category. Note that M orAF (m, m) is a group isomorphic to Z generated by
ρn and every Fm,n can be composed with an element of this group so that it becomes
a forest inside [0, 1] × [0, 1] extended to the whole strip by periodicity. With this
observation it is clear that AF satisfies the conditions of 2.1 with the number 1 as
the object 1. We see moreover that the data of an element Fm,n ∈ AF is the same
as a planar forest F as in 2.2 and a unique integer k so that ρkn ◦ F = Fm,n . (In the

8

VAUGHAN F. R. JONES

example of a forest we have given above, k = 3 but nothing is to stop it being bigger
than n.)
The group GAF is a natural central extension T̃ of Thompson’s group F which
may be defined as piecewise linear periodic foliations of the strip which are smooth
except at dyadic rationals and whose lines in the smooth parts have slope a power
of 2.
To obtain Thompson’s group T on the nose from a category construction we take
quotient of AF by the action of Z which acts on M orAF (m, n) by composing with
powers of τn . That this action is compatible with composition follows from the simple
relation
−1
τn ◦ Fm,n = Fm,n ◦ τm
So one obtains a category T with the same objects as AF and finitely many morphisms
for each n, one for each pair (an element of F with n leaves,an element of Z/nZ).
(such a pair obviously represents an orbit under the action of ρn ). Thus an element
of GT is an equivalence class of pairs of rooted binary trees with the same number n
of leaves, one of them marked for each tree. Using a power of ρn , one of the marks
can be taken to be the leftmost leaf. Comparing with [2] we see we have obtained
Thompson’s group T .
As for F , one can replace 2 by any larger integer to get affine categories whose
groups of fractions are the Thompson groups Tn .
2.4. Thompson’s group V and the braided Thompson groups. Thompson’s
group V is a larger group than F which allows discontinuous piecewise linear maps
of the circle that swap the intervals on which an element is linear. Thus any element
is given by a pair of binary planar rooted trees together with a permutation of the
leaves of one of them which determines how the intervals are to be identified. We
can capture this group with our category method by letting V be the category whose
objects are N and whose morphisms are pairs consisting (F, π) where F ∈ F and π is
a permutation of the leaves of F. The permutations themselves are morphisms in V
and the key observation is that for each π ∈ M orV (m, m) and each F ∈ M orF (m, m),
there is a σ ∈ M orV (n, n) with
σ ◦ F = F ◦ π.
We leave it to the reader to make sense of this and how it yields a well defined
category structure on V whose group of fractions is V .
For the braided Thompson BF group the situation is very similar, the category
BF consists of pairs (F, α) where α is an n − string braid where n is the number of
leaves of F. See [5] for the definitions of braided Thompson groups.
3. Review and development of the action of the Thompson groups on
the semicontinuous limit.
3.1. How to obtain representations, unitary and otherwise. The previous
section would be no more than a curiosity were it not for the fact that we can

A NO-GO THEOREM FOR THE CONTINUUM LIMIT OF A PERIODIC QUANTUM SPIN CHAIN.
9

now mechanically and uniformly construct actions of all the Thompson groups using
functors.
We will use the language of planar algebras (see the appendix) but we would like
to make it clear once again that all the essential ideas and many interesting examples
are exhibited in the tensor planar algebra so one needs to understand no more about
planar algebras than how diagrams specify ways to contract tensors.
The common ingredient is a *-planar algebra P = (Pn ) and an element R of Pn+1
where we are dealing with Thompson groups relevant to rationals of the form nak
with a and k integers. The element R must satisfy the “unitarity” condition:

R*
....... .......

=

R
Where there are n strings joining the discs containing R and R∗ . Such an R will
give rise to representations of the various forest categories of section 2.1. We fix P
and R and treat each case individually as there are some caveats.
(i) Thompson’s group F . Here R is in P3 . Let V = (Vn ) be a representation
of the rectangular category R of P (In the case of tensors, the objects are
just the tensor powers of a fixed vector space , with morphisms being tensors
mapping between the different tensor powers). A morphism in M orR (m, n) is
just a rectangle with m marked points on the bottom and n on the top, filled
with elements of P in discs connected by strings among themselves and to the
marked points on the boundary.
Definition 3.1.1. Let F be a rooted planar forest in M orF (m, n). Define
ΦR (F) to be the element of M orR (m, n) obtained by replacing every vertex in
F by a disc containing a copy of R as follows:

R

F=

R

R

Φ(F) =
R

R

10

VAUGHAN F. R. JONES

Proposition 3.1.1. The map ΦR defines a functor from F to the category V ect
of vector spaces and linear maps.
Proof. This is trivial, ΦR takes the object n ∈ F to Vn and the functor property
follows from stacking of diagrams in planar algebras.

(If one prefers, one could take an appropriate tensor category C with a fixed
object V , let Vn = ⊗n V and choose an element R ∈ Hom(V, V ⊗V ). The previous proposition is then just the well-known pictorial composition of morphisms
in a tensor category.)
We now come to the main object of interest in this paper.
Definition 3.1.2. Let P, V and R ∈ P3 as above be given and form the functor
ΦR . By section 2 we then have a direct system f 7→ A(ΦR )f of vector spaces
on the directed set T of binary planar rooted trees. The vector space
VR = limA(ΦR )f
→

will be called the semicontinous limit vector space for R. V contains all of the
spaces Vn (of V) embedded one in the other by the maps Φ(F) defined above.
If the planar algebra has positivity, e.g. a subfactor planar algebra, and R
satisfies unitarity ,the inclusion maps in the direct limit are isometries so the
semicontinuous limit V has a preHilbert space structure . The Hilbert space
completion of TR will be denoted HR and called the semicontinous limit Hilbert
space.
Note that the pre-Hilbert space structure on VR is preserved by the (linear)
action of F . Thus this action extends to a unitary representation πR on HR .
As an exercise, let us calculate a coefficient of πR . Suppose Vn = Pn and that
dimP1 = 1. Choose a unit vector Ω ∈ P0 (the “vacuum”). Let g ∈ F be given
by the pair of trees (T1 , T2 ). We want to calculate hπR (g)Ω, Ωi. Let ι be the
tree with one vertex and no edges. By definition πR (g)Ω is (T1 , T2 )((ι, Ω)). See
proposition 2.1.3 from which we see that this can also be written (T1 , Φ(T2 )(Ω)).
But also Ω = (T1 , Φ(T1 )(Ω). We see that
hπR (g)Ω, Ωi = hΦ(T2 )(Ω), Φ(T1 )(Ω)i,
the inner product being taken in the planar algebra. For instance if

T1 =

and T2 =

then

A NO-GO THEOREM FOR THE CONTINUUM LIMIT OF A PERIODIC QUANTUM SPIN CHAIN.
11
R*
R*
R*

= hπR (g)Ω, Ωi
R
R
R

so that if δ is the loop parameter of the planar algebra then

R*
*

R

R*

1
hπR (g)Ω, Ωi =
δ

R
R
R

There are many interesting choices of R. For instance if the planar algebra
is the tensor planar algebra on a vector space of dimension 3 with orthogonal
basis {1,(
2, 3} then we may define R to be the 3-tensor
0 if i = j or j = k or i = k
Ri,j,k =
Then hπR (g)Ω, Ωi is equal to the num1 otherwise .
ber of ways of 3-colouring the edges of the three valent graph underlying the
diagram for this inner product in such a way that the 3 colours at any vertex are distinct. The positivity of these coefficients for all g ∈ F is known to
be equivalent to the 4-colour theorem! We are grateful to Roland Bacher for
pointing this out-see [18].
Or, if the planar algebra is the version of the tensor planar algebra in which
the n indices sit in the regions and

i
k

R

j

(
0 if i = j or j = k or i = k
=
1 otherwise .

then nhπR (g)Ω, Ωi is the number of ways of n-colouring the map defined by the

12

VAUGHAN F. R. JONES

diagram for this inner product. If n = 3 the map can be coloured in 6 ways or
not at all so we find that the set of all g for which hπR (g)Ω, Ωi = 2 is a subgroup
of F . Yunxiang Ren has shown that it is isomorphic to the Thompson group
F4 .
(ii) Thompson’s group T. Here things work almost exactly as they do for F . One
takes the same kind of R as before and an affine representation of the planar
algebra. Replacing the vertices of morphisms in AF by discs containing R gives
a functor from AF to Vect, taking n to the n vector space of the affine representation. We thus get a representation of T̃ . If the representation is irreducible
and the rotation acts as a scalar then one obtains a projective representation
of T . The unitary affine representations of the Temperley-Lieb algebra are well
understood for all values of the loop parameter - see [7],[11] and [13]. The same
examples of R as for F yield similar interpretations of coefficients.
Definition 3.1.3. The semicontinuous limit vector space and Hilbert space VR
and HR are defined in exactly the same way in this annular context they were
in 3.1.2 for rectangular representations of the planar algebra.
Note that T̃ acts unitarily on HR if the planar algebra has positivity and R
satisfies unitarity.
It is clear that the projective representation of T will be an ordinary representation if the affine representation is in fact annular (see B.0.7).
(iii) Thompson’s group V. The representations are easiest to describe if we use
the tensor planar algebra based on an underlying vector space V . We can
choose any tensor R with three indices satisfying the unitarity condition. A
permutation π in Sn defines a linear map ⊗n π on ⊗n V by permuting coordinates
so for (F, π) ∈ M orV (m, n) we may define Φ((F, π)) by filling in F’s vertices
with discs containing R as before then composing the corresponding linear map
from ⊗m V to ⊗n V with ⊗n π. It is easy to check that this Φ is a functor and
hence defines a unitary representation of V .
Note that there is a purely diagrammatic way to represent the category V by
drawing permutations as strings connecting permuted points. So if one could
find a planar algebra (Pn ) with an element of P4 satisfying the obvious relations
of a transposition:

such that

=

and

=

then one will get a representation of V provide the R ∈ P3 and the crossing in
P4 satisfy:

A NO-GO THEOREM FOR THE CONTINUUM LIMIT OF A PERIODIC QUANTUM SPIN CHAIN.
13

=

R

R

This condition is automatic if the crossing is the transposition acting on
V ⊗V.
(iv) Braided Thompson group. This works just like for V . There is a purely diagrammatic representation of morphisms in BF which is just like the the one for
V except that the transposition is allowed to be a crossing:

satisfying the braid group relations and the following two relations with the
vertices of the trees:

=

and

=

.

Representations of BF are easy to come by in planar algebras/tensor categories. Coeffiecients of the form hgΩ, Ωi are just the partition functions in the
corresponding planar algebra.
Let us make one curious remark. We saw that the braid group can be obtained as the group of fractions of the semigroup of positive braids. So it is
with BF which we can make smaller by requiring that all the crossings be positive. Then to obtain a representation of BF we only need the first of the two
relations above between the crossing and the trivalent vertex. We have not
investigated this.
3.2. The relation between these constructions and those of [12]. The representations of F obtained in [12] may be obtained by the construction of this paper
by first embedding F = F2 in F3 by taking a pair of trees (T1 , T2 ) ∈ F2 and adding
strings to turn all the trivalent vertices into quadrivalent ones, obtaining the pair
(T̂1 , T̂2 ) as illustrated below:


(T1 , T2 ) =

,



→ (T̂1 , T̂2 ) =

,

Thus it was possible to use elements R ∈ P4 rather than R ∈ P3 to obtain
representations of F2 . Otherwise the construction of representations of F [12] was
just a more clumsy version of what we have done in this paper in much greater
generality.

14

VAUGHAN F. R. JONES

4. The NoGo theorem.
The Thompson group T contains the subgroup Rot of rotations of the circle by
dyadic rationals. We will prove that the representation of Rot on the semicontinuous
limit Hilbert space (from an affine representation of a positive definite planar algebra)
is highly dicontinuous if we topologise Rot as a subgroup of R/Z. This is not at all
surprising. The geometric structure underlying the semicontinuous limit is the full
binary tree whose branches are dangling and do not feel the topology of the circle.
The discontinuity result is true in great generality but we will only prove it for a single
family of planar algebras (with positive definite inner product). We have chosen this
family because there is, up to an irrelevant scalar, only one choice of R.
To be precise, let Q = (Qn ) be the planar algebra obtained from the TL planar
algebra with loop parameter δ = 2 cos π/n for n = 6, 7, 8, 9, · · · by cabling 2 strings
and cutting down by the JW idempotent (this is also quantum SO(3) at a root of
unity). See [15]. We can represent the JW idempotent in T L4 with 4 boundary
, entirely defined by the relations

points as a box

=

,

*=

and

= 0 . One checks that

= δ 2 − 1. In Q it is well known that Q3 is spanned by the single element
r
R=

δ2

δ
−2

,

the normalisation guaranteeing unitarity. Q is obtained by combining the cabled
strings to a single string. Thus R is an element of Q3 and in Q the loop parameter
is d = δ 2 − 1.
Note that R is rotationally invariant so we will suppress it in all pictures, i.e.
from now on

will mean

R

.

Now let H be the semicontinuous limit Hilbert space constructed in 3.1.2 and 3.1.3
from the planar algebra Q and an annular representation V = (Vn ) of it, using the
element R defined above to construct the functor Φ. By section 3.1 we know that
Thompson’s group T acts unitarily on H. In particular for every dyadic rational
r = 2an ∈ [0, 1) we have a unitary ρr on H representing the rotation by a in T .
We have proved the following for d = 4 cos2 π/n + 1 for n ∈ N, 7 ≤ n ≤ 20 and
d = 3. It is false for n = 5 and n = 6 and surely true for all n ≥ 7.
Theorem 4.0.1. For any vectors ξ, η ∈ H,

lim hρ

n→∞

1
2n

ξ, ηi = 0.

A NO-GO THEOREM FOR THE CONTINUUM LIMIT OF A PERIODIC QUANTUM SPIN CHAIN.
15

Proof. Note that since the representation is unitary we may suppose that ξ and η
are actually in some space (T, V2k ) where T is the annular tree

(shown for n = 4). The following diagram is hρ

1
2k+n+1

ξ, ηi which

we illustrate here for k = 1 and n = 3. Note that we are applying periodic boundary
conditions.
η

ξ

Now all the regions in the blue dotted circles can be isotoped to look like
so if we call x this element of Q4 the picture becomes:

16

VAUGHAN F. R. JONES

η

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

ξ

(The positions of the $ signs in the picture are obvious, so suppressed.)
We recognise the transfer matrix (see appendix B) T2n+k (x) !

Definition 4.0.1. We define the bilinear map B : Q4 × Q4 → Q4 by

B(x, y) =

x

y

and the renormalisa-

tion map R(x) = B(x, x)

Observe that B makes Q4 into a commutative non-associative algebra for which
R is the squaring operation.
We see the inner product formula becomes (if y = R(x)):

A NO-GO THEOREM FOR THE CONTINUUM LIMIT OF A PERIODIC QUANTUM SPIN CHAIN.
17

η

y

y

y

y

y

y

y

y

ξ

Continuing in this way we see that
hρ

1
2k+n+1

ξ, ηi = hT2k (R n (x))ξ, ηi

We thus have to understand the iterates of the renormalisation transformation
R : Q4 → Q4 . We begin by calculating R explicitly. For this we use the basis
{
,
,
} of Q4 and write an arbitrary element of Q4 as
a=p

+q

+r

.

Since B is bilinear it is easy to expand and compute R(a) using the skein relations
in Q. A sufficient set of relations is the following (see [15]):
= 0,

=

d−2
d−1 (

) , and of course unitarity,

.

(A quick way to deduce the second picture-both sides are eigenvalues for the
rotation of π/2 with eigenvalue −1. But, modulo the TL subspace, the rotation has
eigenvalue +1 by looking at a spanning set of TL diagrams reduced by the JW. Thus
the two sides of the equation are proportional and the constant can be obtained by
capping and using unitarity.)
With these relations it is not hard to show that:
d2 − 5d + 7 2
d−2
R(a) = {
pr + q 2 + r2 }
p + 2pq + 2
2
(d − 1)
d−1
1
1
−{
p2 +
(2pq + q 2 )}
(d − 1)3
d−1
d2 − 3d + 3 2
1
+{
p +
(2pq + q 2 )}
.
3
(d − 1)
d−1

18

VAUGHAN F. R. JONES

Completing some squares we get
d − 2 2 (d + 1)(d − 2) 2
R(a) = {(p + q)2 + (r +
p) −
p }
d−1
(d − 1)2
1
d(d − 2) 2
−{
p }
(p + q)2 −
(d − 1)
(d − 1)2
d − 2 2 (d + 1)(d − 2) 2
+{(p + q)2 + (r +
p) −
p }
d−1
(d − 1)2
Now define the norm || − ||1 on Q4 by ||p
+q
+r
. Then the above shows that
||R(a)||1 ≤

.
||1 = |p| + |q| + |r|

d+1
d − 2 2 d(d + 1)(d − 2) 2
(p + q)2 + (r +
p) +
p
d−1
d−1
(d − 1)3

By convexity the maximum of the right hand side on the || − ||1 unit ball is
M=

d+1
d − 2 2 d(d + 1)(d − 2)
+(
) +
.
d−1
d−1
(d − 1)3

Hence
||R(a)||1 ≤ M ||a||21
and if there is an n for which ||R n (
)||1 < K for some K > 0 with M K < 1
n+1
n
then ||R
(
)||1 < KM ||R (
)||1 and limn→∞ R n (
) = 0.
Computer calculations show that such an n exists (indeed is rather small) for all
the values of d mentioned before the statement of the theorem.
Now consider the following element Y ∈ Hom(V2k +2 , V2k +2 ), with y = R n (
)
(illustrated for n = 3):
y
y
y
y

Y =

,

y
y
y
y

and the following elements ξ˜ and η̃ of V2k +2 :

ξ˜ =

η̃ =

ξ

η

(Remember that we have imposed periodic horizontal boundary conditions.)
˜ η̃i = hT k (R n (x))ξ, ηi
Then a picture shows that hY ξ,
2
But we can now easily estimate ||Y || for it is a composition y1 y2 · · · yn where yi
is the element of Hom(V2k +2 , V2k +2 ) with a copy of y between the (i + 1)th. and

A NO-GO THEOREM FOR THE CONTINUUM LIMIT OF A PERIODIC QUANTUM SPIN CHAIN.
19

(i + 2)th. boundary points as illustrated below:

yi =

....

y
i+1

....
i+2

But the norms of the yi are all equal to the norm of y as an element of the C∗ algebra Q4 . And, all norms being equivalent, we have shown that ||Y || → 0 as
n → ∞. This proves the theorem.

Appendix A. Some notions of planar algebra.
In this paper a planar algebra P will be a graded vector space Pn , graded by N∪{0}
and admitting multilinear operations indexed by planar tangles T which are subsets
of the plane consisting of a large (output) circle containing smaller (input circles).
There are also non-intersecting smooth curves called strings whose end points, if
they have any, lie on the circles where they are called marked points. Elements of P
are “inserted” into the input circles with an element of Pn going into a disc with n
marked points, and the result of the operation specified by the tangle is in Pk where
there are k marked points on the output circle. In order to resolve cyclic ambiguities,
each of the circles of T comes with a privileged interval between marked points which
we will denote in pictures by putting a $ sign near that interval. The $ signs are used
to define an obvious notion of gluing of one tangle inside an internal disc of another.
Here is an example of a planar tangle:
Strings

$
$

Marked points

Output circle
$

$

Input circles

The result of the operation indexed by T on elements v1 , v2 , · · · , vn of P is denoted
ZT (v1 , v2 , · · · , vn ) where there are n input discs. See [8] for details. The operation
ZT depends only on T up to smooth planar isotopy so one has a lot of freedom
drawing the tangles, in particular the circles may be replaced by rectangles when it
is convenient. The operations ZT are compatible with the gluing of tangles. Tangles
may also be “labelled” by actually writing appropriately graded elements of P inside
some of the internal circles.

20

VAUGHAN F. R. JONES

It is a very useful convention to shrink the input discs in a planar tangle to points
so that the boundary intervals of the circle become the regions adjacent to the points.
And for labelled tangles one places the label in the region corresponding to the $ sign.
Thus
$

$

$

P

P
Q
$

Q

is represented by the picture
R

R
$

We will also often omit the output disc and/or dollar signs provided they are
obvious in context.
Definition A.0.2. Given a planar tangle T all of whose internal circles are labelled
by v1 , v2 , · · · , vn we call ZT (v1 , v2 , · · · , vn ) the element of Pk which it defines. If
k = 0 and the dimension of P0 is one, this may be identified with a scalar using the
rule that Z(emptytangle) = 1.
Planar tangles can be glued in an obvious way along input circles and the operations ZT are by definition compatible with the gluing.
For connections with physics and von Neumann algebras, planar algebras will
have more structure, namely an antilinear involution ∗ on each Pn compatible with
orientation reversing diffeomorphisms acting on tangles. If, moreover, dimP0 = 0 we
*

*
*

get a sesquilinear inner product hS, Ri on each Pn given by

R

S

.

A planar algebra will be called positive definite if this inner product is.
Our planar algebras will all have a parameter δ which is the value of a closed
string which may be removed from any tangle with multiplication by the scalar δ.
Two examples of planar algebras should be mentioned. The first is the TemperleyLieb algebra T L (which has its origins in [19] though its appearance here should
properly be attributed to [14], via [1]-see also [10]). A basis of T Ln consists of all
isotopy classes of systems of non-crossing strings joining 2n points inside the disc.
In particular T Ln is zero if n is odd. The planar algebra operations are the obvious
gluing ones with the rule that any closed strings that may be formed in the gluing
process are discarded but each one counts for a multiplicative factor of δ, called
the “loop parameter". The * structure is given by complex conjugation on basis
diagrams, extended by conjugate linearity. This planar algebra is positive definite iff
δ ≥ 2. If δ = 2cosπ/n for n = 3, 4, 5, · · · T L admits a quotient planar algebra which
is positive definite.
The second examples of planar algebras which we will use are the tensor planar
algebras. For fixed integer k ≥ 2 one considers A Hilbert space V of dimension k with
a basis so that elements of the tensor power ⊗n V may be represented as tensors with
n indices, each index running from 1 to n. The planar algebra P ⊗ is then defined

A NO-GO THEOREM FOR THE CONTINUUM LIMIT OF A PERIODIC QUANTUM SPIN CHAIN.
21

by P0⊗ = C, and for n ≥ 1, Pn⊗ = ⊗n V . The action of planar tangles on tensors is
nothing but contraction of tensors along the indices connected by the the strings of
the tangle, together with the rule that indices have to be constant along the strings.
The tensor planar algebras P ⊗ are positive definite when given the *-structure
Ri∗1 ,i2 ,··· ,in = R̄in ,in−1 ,··· ,i1 .
Appendix B. The affine category of a planar algebra.
Definition B.0.3. The affine category Af f (P) is the (linear) category whose objects
are sets m̄ of m points on the unit circle in C ,and whose vector space of morphisms
from m̄ to n̄ is the set of linear combinations of labelled tangles (with marked boundary
points m̄∪ n̄) between the unit circle and a circle of larger radius modulo any relations
in P which occur within contractible discs between the unit circle and the larger circle.
Composition of morphisms comes from rescaling and gluing the larger circle of the
first morphism to the smaller circle of the second.
If P is positive definite the morphism spaces of Af f (P) admit an adjoint x 7→ x∗
obtained by reflecting a labelled annular tangle about a circle between the inner and
outer circles of the tangle and taking the ∗’s of the labels.
Use of m̄ adds to clutter so we will abuse notation by using just m for an object
of Af f (P) with m points. We could also just suppose that the boundary points are
always just the roots of unity.
One needs to be careful with this definition (see [11],[7]). In a representation of
Af f (P), morphisms may be changed by planar isotopies without affecting the action,
but the isotopies are required to be the identity on the inner and outer circles. Thus
the tangle of rotation by 360 degrees does not necessarily act by the identity in a
representation of Af f (P).
The representations we will consider of Af f (P) are called lowest weight modules
and may be defined as in [11] by taking a representation W of the algebra M or(n, n)
for some n (the “lowest weight”) and inducing it in the obvious way. This may cause
problems with positive definiteness but it is known that subfactor planar algebras
possess a host of such representations. The vector spaces Vk of such a lowest weight
representation are zero if k ≤ n and spanned by diagrams consisting of a vector
w ∈ W inside a disc with n marked points, surrounded by a labelled planar tangle
of P with k marked points on the output circle.
Here is a vector w in a V6 created by the action of an affine morphism on v in the
lowest weight space V2 : and the action of a morphism in Af f (P) on it:
S
w=

v
R

22

VAUGHAN F. R. JONES

and here is a diagram illustrating the result of acting on the above vector w with
a morphism in M or(6, 4):

R

R
S
v
R
R
R

The planar algebra itself defines an affine representation simply by applying annular labelled tangles to elements of P. This representation is irreducible and plays
the role of the trivial representation.
In the TL case which is what we will mostly consider, irreducible lowest weight
representations are parametrized by their lowest weight (the smallest n for which Vn
is non-zero), and a complex number of absolute value one which is the eigenvalue
for the rotation tangle. The case n = 0 is exceptional and the rotation is replaced
by the tangle which surrounds an element v of V0 by a circular string. If v is an
eigenvector for this tangle and there are some restrictions on the eigenvalue µ-see
[11],[13]. The case where µ = δ is precisely the trivial representation. In this case
the vector v ∈ V0 is the empty diagram so it never features in pictures.
Definition B.0.4. An affine representation V = Vk of a positive definite planar
algebra will be called a Hilbert representation if each Vk is equipped with a Hilbert
space inner product which is invariant in the sense that haξ, ηi = hξ, a∗ ηi where
a ∈ M or(m, n), ξ ∈ Vn , η ∈ Vm and ∗ is the structure we defined earlier on the affine
category.
There are two particularly important affine tangles which play a big role in our
main theorem.
Definition B.0.5. If S ∈ P4 we define the “transfer matrix” Tn (S) to be the element
of M or(n, n) defined by the following annular tangle:
S
S
S

S
S
S

which it will be more convenient to draw horizontally with implcit periodic boundary conditions thus:

A NO-GO THEOREM FOR THE CONTINUUM LIMIT OF A PERIODIC QUANTUM SPIN CHAIN.
23

.....

S

S

S

S

S

S

.....

(Here we have illustrated with n = 6.) The second important tangle is the rotation
Definition B.0.6. The rotation ρn ∈ M or(n, n) is given by:

(illustrated for n = 8).
Definition B.0.7. An affine representation V = Vk of a planar algebra will be called
an annular representation if the rotation by 2π (= ρnn ) acts by the identity.
ρn generates a copy of Z inside M or(n, n).
References
[1] Baxter, R. J. (1982). Exactly solved models in statistical mechanics. Academic Press, New York.
[2] Cannon, J.W., Floyd,W.J. and Parry, W.R.(1996) Introductory notes on Richard Thompson’s
groups. L’Enseignement Mathématique 42 215–256
[3] Cirac, J. I. and Verstraete, F. (2009) Renormalization and tensor product states in spin chains
and lattices. JOURNAL OF PHYSICS A-MATHEMATICAL AND THEORETICAL 42 (50)
[4] P. Dehornoy, F. Digne, E. Godelle, D. Krammer, J. Michel, Foundations of Garside Theory.
arXiv:1309.0796
[5] P.Dehornoy (2006), The group of parenthesized braids, Advances in Mathematics 205 (2006)
354 Ð 409
[6] G. Evenbly, G. Vidal, Tensor Network Renormalization, arXiv:1412.0732
[7] J. J. Graham and G.I. Lehrer, The representation theory of affine Temperley Lieb algebras,
L’Enseignement Mathématique 44 (1998), 1–44.
[8] V.F.R. Jones, Planar Algebras I, preprint. math/9909027
[9] Jones, V. F. R. In and around the origin of quantum groups. Prospects in mathematical physics.
Contemp. Math., 437 Amer. Math. Soc. (2007) 101–126. math.OA/0309199.
[10] Jones, V. F. R. (1989). On knot invariants related to some statistical mechanical models. Pacific
Journal of Mathematics, 137, 311–334.
[11] V.F.R. Jones, The annular structure of subfactors, in “Essays on geometry and related topics”,
Monogr. Enseign. Math. 38 (2001), 401–463.
[12] V.F.R. Jones (2014) Some unitary representations of Thompson’s groups F and T,
arXiv:1412.7740
[13] Jones, V. and Reznikoff, S. (2006) Hilbert Space representations of the annular Temperley-Lieb
algebra. Pacific Math Journal, 228, 219–250
[14] Kauffman, L. (1987). State models and the Jones polynomial. Topology, 26, 395–407.
[15] S. Morrison, E.Peters, N. Snyder, (2015) Categories generated by a trivalent vertex.
arXiv:1501.06869

24

VAUGHAN F. R. JONES

[16] V Pasquier, H Saleur, Common structures between finite systems and conformal field theories
through quantum groups Nuclear Physics B 330 (2), 523-556
[17] Penrose, R. (1971). Applications of negative dimensional tensors. Applications of Combinatorial
Mathematics, Academic Press, 221–244
[18] R.Thomas , (1998) An Update on the Four-Color Theorem, Notices of the AMS (45) 848-859
[19] Temperley, H. N. V. and Lieb. E. H. (1971). Relations between the “percolation” and “colouring”
problem and other graph-theoretical problems associated with regular planar lattices: some
exact results for the “percolation” problem. Proceedings of the Royal Society A, 322, 251–280.

