--- abstract: | We show that ${\operatorname{Sine}_{\beta}}$, the bulk limit of the Gaussian $\beta$-ensembles is the spectrum of a self-adjoint random differential operator $$f\;\;\mapsto\;\; 2 {R_t^{-1}}{\left( \begin{array}{cc} 0 & -\tfrac{d}{dt} \\ \tfrac{d}{dt} & 0 \\ \end{array} \right)} f, \qquad f:[0,1)\to \mathbb R^2,$$ where $R_t$ is the positive definite matrix representation of hyperbolic Brownian motion with variance $4/\beta$ in logarithmic time. The result connects the Montgomery-Dyson conjecture about the ${\operatorname{Sine}}_2$ process and the non-trivial zeros of the Riemann zeta function, the Hilbert-Pólya conjecture and de Brange's attempt to prove the Riemann hypothesis. We identify the Brownian carousel as the Sturm-Liouville phase function of this operator. We provide similar operator representations for several other finite dimensional random ensembles and their limits: finite unitary or orthogonal ensembles, Hua-Pickrell ensembles and their limits, hard-edge $\beta$-ensembles, as well as the Schrödinger point process. In this more general setting, hyperbolic Brownian motion is replaced by a random walk or Brownian motion on the affine group. Our approach provides a unified framework to study $\beta$-ensembles that has so far been missing in the literature. In particular, we connect Itô's classification of affine Brownian motions with the classification of limits of random matrix ensembles. author: - Benedek Valkó and Bálint Virág bibliography: - 'szeta.bib' title: 'The Sine$_\beta$ operator' --- Introduction ============ ### Operator for the ${\operatorname{Sine}}_2$ process {#operator-for-the-operatornamesine_2-process .unnumbered} A central theme in random matrix theory is the study of point process limits of random matrix spectra. Classical models have point process limits that can be characterized by their joint intensity functions. Most famous is the bulk limit of the Gaussian unitary ensemble (GUE), the ${\operatorname{Sine}}_2$ process. This point process has remarkable connections to the critical zeros of the Riemann zeta-function. According to the Montgomery-Dyson conjecture the set $\mathcal{Z}=\{y\in {{\mathbb R}}: \zeta(1/2+i y)=0\}$ looks like the ${\operatorname{Sine}}_2$ process. The conjecture states that $$(\mathcal{Z}-U t)\log t\Rightarrow {\operatorname{Sine}}_2$$ in law as $t\to \infty$ and $U$ is a uniform random variable on $[0,1]$. @Montgomery as well as @RS have breakthrough results in this direction. The Hilbert-Pólya approach to possibly prove the Riemann hypothesis is built on the conjecture that the set $\mathcal{Z}$ can be realized as the spectrum of a self-adjoint operator (see @Montgomery). One of the most famous attempts to carry out a proof is due to de @deBranges. It is based on the theory of Hilbert spaces of entire functions he developed previously (see also @Lagarias). This approach would produce a self-adjoint differential operator of the form $$\begin{aligned} \label{123} \tau f(t)=R(t)^{-1} {\left( \begin{array}{cc} 0 & -\tfrac{d}{dt} \\ \tfrac{d}{dt} & 0 \\ \end{array} \right)} f(t)\end{aligned}$$ acting on functions $f$ mapping an interval to ${{\mathbb R}}^2$ with a spectrum given by $\mathcal{Z}$. Here $R(t)$ is a positive definite matrix valued function. In view of the Montgomery-Dyson conjecture it is natural to ask the following question. $$\text{\it Is there a random self-adjoint operator of the form (\ref{123}) whose spectrum is ${\operatorname{Sine}}_2$ process?}$$ In this paper we construct such a random operator. The question whether there is a natural self-adjoint operator where the spectrum has the same distribution as the ${\operatorname{Sine}}_2$ process has been raised by various authors. See e.g. @KatzSarnak_book and @KatzSarnak_AMS. @BO01 and @MNN generalize the notion of eigenvalue to construct a random operator-like object that has generalized eigenvalues given by the ${\operatorname{Sine}}_2$ process. Our approach is the first to produce an honest-to-goodness natural self-adjoint operator. ### Operators for $\beta$-ensembles {#operators-for-beta-ensembles .unnumbered} The derivation of the bulk limit of GUE relies on the fact that the joint eigenvalue distribution of the finite ensemble can be computed explicitly. The joint density is proportional to the squared Vandermonde determinant $\prod_{i<j} |\lambda_i-\lambda_j|^2$ with respect to an i.i.d. Gaussian reference measure. Other solvable classical Gaussian models (GOE, GSE) have similar joint eigenvalue densities involving the first and fourth power of the Vandermonde. By allowing the exponent of that term to be any $\beta>0$, @Dyson62_1 introduced a one-parameter extension of the eigenvalue distributions, called the Gaussian $\beta$-ensemble. Beta versions of other ensembles are obtained similarly. The joint density can be identified with the Boltzmann factor of a one-dimensional log-gas, with $\beta$ playing the role of the inverse temperature (see the monograph @ForBook for an extensive treatment). The point process limits of the most important $\beta$-ensembles have been identified in recent years. In @RRV the soft edge scaling limit of the Gaussian and Laguerre $\beta$-ensembles (the ${\operatorname{Airy}_{\beta}}$ process) and in @RR the hard edge scaling limit of the Laguerre ensemble (the ${\operatorname{Bessel}}_{\beta,a}$ process) have been derived. The bulk limit of the Gaussian $\beta$-ensemble (the ${\operatorname{Sine}_{\beta}}$ process) and the circular $\beta$-ensemble (the $C\beta E$ process) have been derived in @BVBV and @KS, respectively. Many of these limits have been shown to be universal, see @BEY, @BEYedge, and @KRV. The soft and hard edge limit point processes are realized as the spectrum of second order self-adjoint random differential operators, but similar characterization has been missing in the bulk case. We will provide such a characterization using random differential operators of the form (\[123\]). ### Operators and carousels {#operators-and-carousels .unnumbered} We construct a self-adjoint random differential operator of the form (\[123\]) which has an a.s. pure point spectrum distributed as the bulk limit process ${\operatorname{Sine}_{\beta}}$. The proof relies on the Brownian carousel, a geometric construction of the ${\operatorname{Sine}_{\beta}}$ process given in @BVBV. The hyperbolic carousel, introduced in @BVBV, is a geometric functional which maps a real sequence $\{\lambda_k: k\in {{\mathbb Z}}\}$ to the objects $(\gamma,\eta_0, \eta_1,f)$ where $\eta_0, \eta_1$ are boundary points of the hyperbolic plane ${{\mathbb H} }$, $\gamma(t)\in {{\mathbb H} }, t\in[0,T)$ is a path and $f:[0,T)\to (0,\infty)$. See Section \[s:carousel\], Definition \[def:hypc\]. In Proposition \[prop:car\_dir\] of Section \[s:carousel\] we show that the hyperbolic carousel $(\gamma,\eta_0, \eta_1,f)$ can be identified with a self-adjoint differential operator using the classical Sturm-Liouville oscillation theory. More precisely, under some mild conditions on the path $\gamma$, we construct a differential operator of the form (\[123\]) with a pure point spectrum that is the same as the sequence produced by the carousel. The operator is given as (\[123\]) with $$\begin{aligned} \label{gendirac} R=\frac1{2y} X^t X, \qquad X={\left( \begin{array}{cc} 1 & -x \\ 0 & y \\ \end{array} \right)},\end{aligned}$$ on an appropriately defined domain with boundary conditions. Here $x(t)+i y(t), t\in [0,T)$ is the path $\gamma(t)$ in the upper half plane representation of the hyperbolic plane. The boundary points $\eta_0$ and $\eta_1$ show up in the definition of the domain as boundary conditions. The inverse operator $\tau^{-1}$ is a Hilbert-Schmidt integral operator with a finite $L^2$ norm on the appropriate space, with an integral kernel that is explicitly given in terms of $ \gamma, \eta_0$ and $\eta_1$. In @BVBV it was proved that if $\gamma(t)$ is hyperbolic Brownian motion in logarithmic time, $\eta_0$ is a fixed boundary point of ${{\mathbb H} }$, and $\eta_1$ as the limit point $\gamma$, then the carousel produces the ${\operatorname{Sine}_{\beta}}$ process. See Theorem \[thm:bcar\] below for the precise statement. The connection between hyperbolic carousels and differential operators provides the appropriate random differential operator for the ${\operatorname{Sine}_{\beta}}$ process. \[thm:intro1\] Let $x(t)+i y(t), t\in [0,1)$ be hyperbolic Brownian motion with variance $\frac{4}{\beta}$, run in logarithmic time $-\log(1-t)$. Let ${\mathtt{Sine}_{\beta}}$ be the differential operator of the form (\[123\]) with $R$ given by (\[gendirac\]). Then the operator ${\mathtt{Sine}_{\beta}}$ is self-adjoint on an appropriately defined domain, and its spectrum is given by the ${\operatorname{Sine}_{\beta}}$ process. The explicit form of the operator is given in Theorem \[thm:SSO\] of Section \[s:bcar\]. In Section \[s:KS\] we use the connection between hyperbolic carousels and differential operators to show that the point process scaling limit of the circular $\beta$-ensembles (the $C\beta E$ process) is the same as the ${\operatorname{Sine}_{\beta}}$ process. @Nakano has recently proved this equivalence by deriving both processes as the limit of the same sequence of models. ### Unitary matrices and Dirac operators {#unitary-matrices-and-dirac-operators .unnumbered} We prove that Dirac operators of the form can be associated to finite unitary matrices in a natural way. In Section \[s:unitary\] we show the following theorem. \[thm:intro2\] Suppose that $V$ is an $n\times n$ unitary matrix with distinct eigenvalues $e^{i \lambda_k}, 1\le k\le n$. Then there is a self-adjoint differential operator of the form (\[123\]) with spectrum that is equal to the set $\Lambda=\{n \lambda_k+2\pi n j: 1\le k\le n, j\in {{\mathbb Z}}\}$. Moreover, there is a hyperbolic carousel driven by a piecewise constant path that produces the same point sequence $\Lambda$. See Propositions \[prop:unitary\_car\], \[prop:unitary\_car2\], and \[prop:unitary\_car2b\] in Section \[s:unitary\] for the exact statements. Our approach builds on the Szego recursion of the orthogonal polynomials on the unit circle. The path of the constructed is built from the Verblunsky coefficients, the main ingredients of the Szego recursion. @KillipNenciu constructed random unitary matrices with a spectrum that is distributed as the circular $\beta$-ensemble, the $\beta$-generalization of random unitary matrices. Using their results and Theorem \[thm:intro2\] we construct random differential operators of the form (\[123\]) with spectrum distributed as the circular $\beta$-ensemble. Formal rescaling of these differential operators yield the ${\mathtt{Sine}_{\beta}}$ operator of Theorem \[thm:intro1\]. The rigorous derivation of this operator level convergence is carried out in the forthcoming paper @BVBV_future. We also consider a generalization of the circular $\beta$-ensemble called the Hua-Pickrell ensemble (or circular Jacobi $\beta$-ensemble). Using results of @BNR2009 we construct the corresponding random differential operator. These results are stated in Propositions \[prop:circ\_car\] and \[prop:Hua\] in Section \[s:circ\]. ### Classification of operator limits of random matrices {#classification-of-operator-limits-of-random-matrices .unnumbered} The hyperbolic plane ${{\mathbb H} }$ can be identified with the affine group of matrices of the form $$X={\left( \begin{array}{cc} 1 & -x \\ 0 & y \\ \end{array} \right)},$$ which in turn can be identified with the $2\times 2$ positive definite matrices of determinant $1$ via the correspondence $X\mapsto R=\frac{X^t X}{2\det X}$. This transforms a path $x+i y$ in the upper half plane to a path on the affine group of matrices and to a positive definite $2\times 2$ matrix valued function $2R_t$ with $R_t$ given in (\[gendirac\]). The random differential operator for the ${\operatorname{Sine}_{\beta}}$ process is built from hyperbolic Brownian motion, while the operators corresponding to the finite circular ensembles are built from random walks on the hyperbolic plane. In several examples we represent point process limits of classical random matrix models (and their $\beta$ generalizations) as the spectrum of similar random differential operators. These operators are built from diffusions on the hyperbolic plane which in turn correspond to right Brownian motions on the affine group of $2\times 2$ matrices. In particular, we show that the hard edge limit operator constructed in @RR is equivalent to a differential operator of the form (\[123\]), and the corresponding hyperbolic carousel is driven by a real Brownian motion with drift embedded in the hyperbolic plane. Finally, we obtain the ${\operatorname{Airy}_{\beta}}$ process constructed in @RRV from a $2\times 2$ canonical system, a generalization of operators of the form (\[123\]). Quick review of hyperbolic geometry {#s:hyp} =================================== We give an of the hyperbolic plane and the hyperbolic Brownian motion. For a more detailed discussion see e.g. @hypgeo and @hypBM. The hyperbolic plane -------------------- We will focus on two models of the two dimensional hyperbolic geometry. The first is the upper half plane $\{z\in {{\mathbb C}}: \Im z>0\}$, for which (with a slight abuse of notation) we will also use the notation ${{\mathbb H} }$. The second is the the Poincaré disk model ${{\mathbb U}}=\{|z|<1, z\in {{\mathbb C}}\}$. The boundary points of the hyperbolic plane are represented by ${{\mathbb R}}\cup \{\infty\}$ for ${{\mathbb H} }$ and $\{|z|=1\}$ for ${{\mathbb U}}$. The lines in both models are circular arcs or Euclidean lines that are perpendicular to the boundary. Angles are measured the same way as Euclidean angles. Distance along a line is measured by integrating $(\Im z)^{-1}$ or $\frac{2}{1-|z|^2}$, respectively. For the half plane model the distance between two points $x_1+i y_1$ and $x_2+i y_2$ can be expressed explicitly as $$d_{{\mathbb H} }(x_1+i y_1, x_2+i y_2)=\operatorname{arccosh}\left( 1+\frac{(x_1-x_2)^2+(y_1-y_2)^2}{2 y_1 y_2}\right).$$ The two models can be mapped into each other using the Cayley transform or its inverse. The version we use will map $i\mapsto 0$ and $\infty\mapsto 1$ (some authors use the version $\infty \to -1$). The transform is given by the linear fractional transformation $$\begin{aligned} \label{Cayley} U: {{\mathbb H} }\to {{\mathbb U}}, \qquad U(z)=\frac{z-i}{z+i}, \qquad U^{-1}(w)=i\frac{w+1}{-w+1}.\end{aligned}$$ Note that the map extends to the boundaries as $r\to e^{i 2 \rm{arccot}(r)}$ and $e^{i \theta}\to -\cot(\tfrac{\theta}{2})$. In particular, for the hyperbolic angle in $\mathbb H$ with $r\in \partial \mathbb H= \mathbb R\cup{\infty}$ we have $$\label{eq:hangle} \theta=\mbox{angle}(\infty,i,r) = -2\rm{arccot}(r)$$ often, we write $r=a/b$, then $\theta$ is $-2$ times the usual Euclidean angle of the vector $(a,b)$. For a boundary point $\xi$ and two points $a, b$ in the hyperbolic plane we define the *horocyclic distance* as $$\begin{aligned} \label{def:horo} d_\xi(a, b)=\lim_{z\to \xi} \left| d(a, z)-d(b,z)\right|.\end{aligned}$$ This is well-defined, and there are explicit formulas in both models. We record the half-plane formulas with $\xi=q\in {{\mathbb R}}$ and $\xi=\infty$: $$\begin{aligned} \label{horo_H} d_q(x+i y, i)=\log\left(\tfrac{(x-q)^2+y^2}{(1+q^2) y}\right), \qquad d_\infty(x+i y, i)=\log\left(\tfrac{1}{y}\right).\end{aligned}$$ The orientation preserving isometries of both models can be described by Möbius transformations $z\to \frac{az+b}{cz+d}$ with $a,b,c,d\in {{\mathbb C}}, ad-bc=1$. In the half plane model we have $a,b,c,d\in {{\mathbb R}}$ while in the unit disk model we have $c=\bar b$, $d=\bar a$. Let $ \mathcal P {\left ( \begin{array} {c} r_1 \\ r_2 \end{array} \right )}=\frac{r_1}{r_2}$ be the projection operator $\mathcal P: {{\mathbb C}}^2\to {{\mathbb C}}$. If $M={\left( \begin{array}{cc} a & b \\ c & d \\ \end{array} \right)}$ with $\det M\neq 0$ and $\mathcal P {\left ( \begin{array} {c} r_1 \\ r_2 \end{array} \right )}=z$ then $ \mathcal P M {\left ( \begin{array} {c} r_1 \\ r_2 \end{array} \right )}=\frac{az+b}{cz+d}$. This way the isometries of the half plane and disk models correspond to elements of SL$(2,{{\mathbb R}})$ and SU$(1,1)$ respectively. The matrix $$\tilde U=\frac1{\sqrt{2}} {\left( \begin{array}{cc} -1 & i \\ 1 & i \\ \end{array} \right)}$$ corresponds to the Cayley transform $U(z)$ given in (\[Cayley\]) and can be used to transform elements of $\rm{SU}(1,1)$ to elements of $\rm{SL}(2, {{\mathbb R}})$ (and vice versa). Let $B^A=A^{-1}BA$ for the conjugation of matrices. Then for $M\in\rm{SU}(1,1)$ we have $M^{\tilde U}\in \rm{SL}(2,{{\mathbb R}})$. The non-trivial orientation preserving isometries of ${{\mathbb H} }$ are classified according to how many fixed points they have. An isometry can have a single fixed point inside the plane, a single fixed point on the boundary or two fixed points on the boundary. The case with a single fixed point inside the hyperbolic plane is called a hyperbolic rotation. If the fixed point is 0 in the Poincaré disk representation then the hyperbolic rotation this is the same as Euclidean rotation: $z\to e^{i\theta} z$. The general hyperbolic rotation can be obtained by conjugating this 'classical' rotation with a Möbius transformation of ${{\mathbb U}}$. The hyperbolic rotations in the half plane model are obtained after by conjugation with the inverse of the Cayley transform. The evolution of a boundary point under a rate $\lambda$ rotation is as follows. In the disk model when the center of rotation is zero the evolution is described by the ODE $z'(t)=i \lambda z(t)$. In the half plane model and the center of rotation is $x+i y$ the appropriate conjugation can be applied to show that the evolution is given by $$\begin{aligned} r'(t)=\lambda \frac{y^2+(r(t)-x)^2}{2y}. \label{hyprot}\end{aligned}$$ For $\lambda>0$ the function $r(t)$ restarts at $-\infty$ whenever it hits $\infty$, for $\lambda<0$ it restarts at $\infty$ whenever it hits $-\infty$. The hyperbolic plane, the affine group, and positive definite matrices {#subs:hypmat} ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The group SL$(2,\mathbb R)$ acts on the upper half plane $\mathbb H$ by Möbius transformations. This is also true for the group of all $2\times 2$ matrices with positive determinant. An important subgroup of these matrices are the ones where the corresponding Möbius transformation fixes the point $\infty$. This group is the product of the group of constant matrices $cI,\ c>0$ (all of which act trivially on $\mathbb H$), and the affine group of matrices of the form $$\label{affine1} X={\left( \begin{array}{cc} 1 & -x \\ 0 & y \\ \end{array} \right)}, \qquad y>0, x\in \mathbb R.$$ The minus sign in $-x$ is unimportant but will be convenient later. In the half-plane action the matrix $X$ takes the point $x+iy$ to $i$. Formula gives a correspondence between points $x+iy$ in the upper half plane (or equivalently, the hyperbolic plane) and the affine group. The matrix $$R=\frac{X^tX}{\det X}$$ is a positive definite matrix of determinant one; the map $X\mapsto R$ is a bijection between the affine group and all positive definite $2\times 2$ matrices of determinant one. We call $R$ the <span>**positive definite representation**</span> of the point $x+iy$ in (the Poincaré half–plane model of) the hyperbolic plane $\mathbb H$. Hyperbolic Brownian motion {#subs:hypB} -------------------------- In this section we review some basic properties of Brownian motion on the hyperbolic plane, a conformally invariant diffusion process. See @hypBM for proofs and additional details. In the half-plane model standard hyperbolic Brownian motion is the solution of the SDE $$\begin{aligned} d\mathcal B = \Im \mathcal B\, dZ \label{hypBM01}\end{aligned}$$ where $Z$ is standard complex Brownian motion, i.e. $\Im Z$, $\Re Z$ are independent standard real Brownian motions. If we replace $dZ$ by $\sigma dZ$ we get hyperbolic Brownian motion with variance $\sigma^2$. We note that an equivalent SDE in the Poincaré disk model is $ d\tilde {{\mathcal B}}=\tfrac{1}2 (1-|\tilde {{\mathcal B}}|^2)\,dZ. $ With $\mathcal B(0)=i$ the solution of the SDE is $$\begin{aligned} \label{explicit} \Im {{\mathcal B}}(t)= e^{\Im Z(t)-t/2}, \qquad \Re {{\mathcal B}}(t)= \int_0^t e^{\Im Z (s)- s/2} d\Re Z(s).\end{aligned}$$ In the affine representation this reads $$dX={\left( \begin{array}{cc} 0 & d\Re Z \\ 0 & d\Im Z \\ \end{array} \right)} X, \qquad X={\left( \begin{array}{cc} 1 & -\Re {{\mathcal B}}\\ 0 & \Im {{\mathcal B}}\\ \end{array} \right)}$$ which is simply a right Brownian motion on the affine group . The minus sign ensures that corresponding fractional linear transformation takes ${{\mathcal B}}\in \mathbb H $ to $i\in \mathbb H$. Hyperbolic Brownian motion converges to a boundary point ${{\mathcal B}}(\infty)$ as $t\to \infty$. With ${{\mathcal B}}(0)=i$ we have $${{\mathcal B}}(\infty) = \int_0^\infty e^{ \Im Z(s)-s/2} \,d\Re Z(s).$$ The process ${{\mathcal B}}$ is invariant under hyperbolic rotations fixing ${{\mathcal B}}(0)$, and so $\mathcal B(\infty)$ has a rotationally invariant distribution. We say that $\mathcal B(\infty)$ is is <span>**uniformly distributed as seen from $\mathcal B(0)$**</span>. By the Markov property the following also holds. For any fixed $T$ the random variable ${{\mathcal B}}(\infty)$ conditionally on ${{\mathcal B}}(t), t\in [0,T]$ is uniformly distributed as seen from ${{\mathcal B}}(T)$. Hyperbolic Brownian motion conditioned to converge to a given boundary point is also a diffusion, as can be seen from a standard application of Doob's $h$-transform. In the half-plane model the process conditioned to converge to $\infty$ satisfies the SDE $$d{{\mathcal B}}=\Im {{\mathcal B}}(dZ+i dt).$$ Finally, we describe reversed hyperbolic Brownian motion on a finite time interval, as viewed from the endpoint. Let ${{\mathcal B}}(t), t\in[0,s]$ be hyperbolic Brownian motion in the half-plane model then the process $$\label{eq:bhat}\hat {{\mathcal B}}(t)=\frac{{{\mathcal B}}(s-t)-\Re {{\mathcal B}}(s)}{\Im {{\mathcal B}}(s)}, \qquad t\in[0,s]$$ is a time reversal, translated to start at $i$ by the hyperbolic isometry fixing the boundary point $\infty$. Using the explicit solution we see that $\tilde B$ has the same distribution as hyperbolic Brownian motion started from $i$, conditioned to hit $\infty$. \[Time-reversal symmetry of hyperbolic Brownian motion\]\[prop:reverse\] Fix a time $s$, and given ${{\mathcal B}}(t),t\in[0,s]$, let $X$ be a uniform random point on $\partial \mathbb H=\mathbb R\cup\{\infty\}$ as seen from ${{\mathcal B}}_s$. Let ${\mathrm{T}}$ be the Möbius transformation taking ${{\mathcal B}}(s)$ to $i$ and $X$ to $\infty$. Let $\tilde {{\mathcal B}}(t)={\mathrm{T}}{{\mathcal B}}(s-t)$. Then $$\label{eq:timereversal} ((\tilde {{\mathcal B}}(t)\in[0,s]),{\mathrm{T}}\infty){\stackrel{d}{=}}(({{\mathcal B}}(t),t\in[0,s]),X).$$ Consider the process $\hat {{\mathcal B}}$ in . It is a time-reversal of ${{\mathcal B}}$ mapped by the Möbius transformation $S$ that fixes $\infty$ and moves ${{\mathcal B}}(s)$ to $i$. The law of $\hat {{\mathcal B}}$ is Brownian motion conditioned to converge to $\infty$. We extend $\hat {{\mathcal B}}$ from $[0,s]$ to $[0,\infty)$ to get a hyperbolic Brownian motion conditioned to converge to $\infty$. We can write ${\mathrm{T}}={\mathrm{R}}{\mathrm{S}}$ where ${\mathrm{R}}$ is a uniform random rotation about $i$ independent of $\hat {{\mathcal B}}(t), t\in [0,s]$ by the angle $(X,{{\mathcal B}}(s), \infty)$. Then $\tilde B={\mathrm{R}}\hat B$ is distributed as hyperbolic Brownian motion. In particular the point ${\mathrm{T}}\infty={\mathrm{R}}\hat {{\mathcal B}}(\infty)$ given $\tilde {{\mathcal B}}(t), t\in[0,s]$ is uniform as seen from $\tilde {{\mathcal B}}(s)$. This proves . Note the following heuristic computation. By It\^ o's formula applied to $\tilde {{\mathcal B}}={\mathrm{R}}\hat {{\mathcal B}}$ where ${\mathrm{R}}z=(az-1)/(z+a)$ with $a={\mathrm{T}}\infty$ we get an equation for $\tilde {{\mathcal B}}$ as $d\tilde {{\mathcal B}}=\Im \tilde {{\mathcal B}}d\tilde Z$, where $$\label{eq:driftterm} d\tilde Z(s-t) = -\frac{ \tilde {{\mathcal B}}(s-t)-{\mathrm{T}}\infty}{\overline {\tilde {{\mathcal B}}(s-t)}-{\mathrm{T}}\infty}(dZ(t) + idt)= -\frac{\overline{ {{\mathcal B}}(t)}-X}{ {{{\mathcal B}}(t)}-X}(dZ(t)+idt).$$ This SDE looks into the future so it is not defined within the Itô theory. The rotation factor depends on $Z$ so there is no contradiction in the appearance of a drift term on the right. Using enlargement of filtration or rough path theory this computation can be made rigorous. Dirac operators and canonical systems {#s:Dirac} ===================================== A canonical system is a differential equation of the form $$\begin{aligned} \label{canonical} J v'(t)=\lambda R(t) v(t), \qquad J={\left( \begin{array}{cc} 0 & -1 \\ 1 & 0 \\ \end{array} \right)}.\end{aligned}$$ Here $R(t)$ is an integrable positive semidefinite real $2\times 2$ matrix valued function and the $\mathbb R^2$-valued function $v(t)$ also depends on $\lambda$. If $R(t)$ is strictly positive definite then $v(t)$ solves the eigenvalue equation of the differential operator $\tau$ defined as $$\begin{aligned} \label{Diracop} \tau v(t)=R^{-1}(t) J v'(t). $$ Differential operators of this form are called Dirac operators. The goal of this section is to review some of the well-known properties of such Dirac operators, our main source is @Weidmann. We consider the operator on the interval $[0,T)$ with a fixed $T>0$, where $T$ can be $\infty$. We will assume that the function $R:[0,T)\to {{\mathbb R}}^{2\times 2}$ satisfies the following conditions: (A) \[cond1\] $R(t)$ is positive definite for all $t\in [0,T)$. (B) \[cond2\] $R(t)$ is measurable and $\|R\|, \|R^{-1}\|$ are locally bounded on $[0,T)$. (C) \[cond3\] There exists a nonzero vector $u_*\in \mathbb R^2$ for which $\int_0^T u_*^t R(s) u_* ds<\infty$. In our applications we will mostly consider the following two examples: $R(t)$ is continuous or piecewise constant on $[0,T)$. Let ${{\text{\sc ac}}}={{\text{\sc ac}}}_{[0,T)}$ denote the space of absolutely continuous functions on $[0,T)$, i.e. $f\in{{\text{\sc ac}}}$ if for some function $g$ we have $f(t)=f(0)+\int_0^t g(s)\,ds$ and $\int_0^t |g(s)|\,ds<\infty$ for all $t\in[0,T)$. For any $f\in {{\text{\sc ac}}}$ the value of $\tau f$ is defined almost everywhere on $[0,T)$. Standard theory of differential equations gives the following proposition. \[see Theorem 2.1 in @Weidmann\]\[prop:ODE\] For any $a\in {{\mathbb C}}^2$, $t_0\in [0,T)$ and $\lambda \in {{\mathbb C}}$ there is a unique continuous solution of $\tau v=\lambda v$ with $v(t_0)=a$. Moreover, the solution $v(t,\lambda)$ is analytic in $\lambda$ for any fixed $t\in [0,T)$. Self-adjoint extensions ----------------------- We consider the Hilbert space $L^2_R=L^2_ R[0,T)$ with the inner product $$\begin{aligned} \label{L2R} {\langle}v, w{\rangle}_R=\int_0^T v(t)^t R(t) w(t) \,dt.\end{aligned}$$ By assumption (\[cond3\]), the constant function $f(t)=u_*$ is in $L^2_R$. Assuming that $v$ and $w$ are differentiable and have compact support in $(0,T)$, partial integration yields ${\langle}v, \tau w{\rangle}_R={\langle}\tau v, w{\rangle}_R$. We will now define a domain on which $\tau$ is self-adjoint with respect to the inner product . Recall that a linear operator $A$ with domain ${\operatorname{dom}}A\subset L^2$ is <span>**self-adjoint**</span> with respect to the inner product of $L^2$ if the following hold: - for all $v,w\in {\operatorname{dom}}A$ we have ${\langle}v,Aw{\rangle}= {\langle}Av,w {\rangle}$, and - if $v\in L^2$ satisfies that $w\mapsto {\langle}v,Aw{\rangle}$ is continuous on ${\operatorname{dom}}A$, then $v\in {\operatorname{dom}}A$. To define the domain, we will need to specify boundary conditions. We distinguish two cases: 1. There is a vector $\tilde u$ not parallel to $u_*$ so that the constant function $\tilde u$ is in $L^2_R$. Then all constant vectors are in $L^2_R$ and $\|R\|$ is integrable on $[0,T)$. In this case we say that the operator $\tau$ is <span>**limit circle**</span> at the right boundary $T$. 2. $\|R\|$ is not integrable on $[0,T)$. Then $\tau$ is called <span>**limit point**</span> at the right boundary $T$. Note that from our assumption (\[cond2\]) it follows that $\|R\|$ is integrable near 0, thus $\tau$ will always be limit circle at the left boundary $0$. To motivate the choice of the domain, we recall the following theorem: \[Weyl's alternative, Theorem 5.6 in @Weidmann\] \[thm:Weyl\] In the limit circle case, for every $\lambda\in {{\mathbb C}}$ all solutions of $(\tau- \lambda)v=0$ are $L^2_R$ near the right boundary $T$. In the limit point case, for every $\lambda\in {{\mathbb C}}$ there exists at most one (up to constant factor) $L^2_R$ solution of $(\tau- \lambda)v=0$. In the limit point case, the $L^2$ condition on a function forces it to have the same behavior near $T$ as the constant $u_*$. Hence we only need to specify the boundary condition on the left. We define, for some nonzero vector $u_0\in \mathbb R^2$: $$\begin{aligned} \label{domLP} \textup{dom}_{LP}(\tau)=\{v\in L^2_R\,:\, v\in {{\text{\sc ac}}}, \, \tau v\in L^2_R,\,v(0)^t\,J\,u_0=0\}.\end{aligned}$$ For the limit circle case we need boundary conditions at both endpoints. For nonzero vectors $u_0, u_1\in \mathbb R^2$, we set $$\begin{aligned} \label{domLC} \textup{dom}_{LC}(\tau)=\{v\in L^2_R\,:\, v\in {{\text{\sc ac}}}, \, \tau v\in L^2_R,\,v(0)^t\,J\,u_0=0, \,\lim_{s\to T} v(s)^t\,J\,u_1 = 0\}.\end{aligned}$$ The expression $a^tJ b=a_2 b_1-a_1 b_2$ is the Wronskian of the constant functions $a$ and $b$, and it vanishes exactly when the vectors $a$ and $b$ are parallel. By the standard theory we have: \[see Theorem 5.8 in @Weidmann\] The operator $\tau$ with the above domain is self-adjoint with respect to $L^2_R$. From this point we fix the domain of the operator $\tau$, this means fixing the boundary condition $u_0$ and $u_1$ in the limit circle case, and $u_0$ in the limit point case. In the limit point case we will use the notation $u_1$ for the vector $u_*$ from condition (\[cond3\]). This way the constant function $u_1$ is always the unique (up to a constant factor) solution of $\tau u=0$ in the domain of $\tau$. We will say that $u_0$ and $u_1$ are the boundary conditions for the operator $\tau$. The inverse operator -------------------- In this section we describe the inverse operator $\tau^{-1}$. Assume that the boundary conditions $u_0$ and $u_1$ are not parallel. This implies that $0$ is not an eigenvalue of $\tau$, otherwise the constant function $u_0$ would be an eigenfunction and in particular it would be in the domain of $\tau$. If $u_0, u_1$ are not parallel then $u_0^t J u_1\neq 0$, and because only the 1-dimensional subspaces spanned by $u_0, u_1$ are important in the definitions of the domain, we can assume $u_0^t J u_1=1$. As the following theorem shows, one can find a simple representation for $\tau^{-1}$. \[see Theorem 7.8 in @Weidmann\] Suppose that $\tau$ is a Dirac operator of the form (\[Diracop\]) satisfying (\[cond1\]-\[cond3\]) and $u_0^t J u_1=1$. For any $v\in L^2_R$ the integral $$g(x)=\int_0^T \mathcal K(x,y)R(y) v(y) \,dy,\qquad \mathcal K(x,y)=u_0 u_1^t {\mathbf 1}(x<y)+u_1 u_0^t {\mathbf 1}(x\ge y)$$ is finite for $x\in [0,T)$, and the function $g$ satisfies $\tau g = v$. If $g$ is in $L^2_R$ then $g\in {\operatorname{dom}}(\tau)$. Thus if $\tau^{-1}$ is a bounded operator (i.e. if 0 is in the resolvent set of $\tau$) then it is the integral operator with kernel $$\begin{aligned} \label{HSkernel} \mathcal{K}(x,y)R(y)=\left(u_0 u_1^t {\mathbf 1}(x<y)+u_1 u_0^t {\mathbf 1}(x\ge y) \right) R(y).\end{aligned}$$ Note that $R(x) (\mathcal K(x,y)R(y))= (\mathcal K(y,x)R(x))^t R(y)$, hence $\tau^{-1}$ is symmetric in $L^2_R$ as expected. The Hilbert-Schmidt norm of $\tau^{-1}$ is given by $$\|\tau^{-1}\|_2^2=\sum_k \|\tau^{-1} \varphi_k\|_R^2$$ where $\varphi_k$ is an orthonormal basis in $L^2_R$. A straightforward computation gives the result $$\begin{aligned} \label{HSnorm0} \|\tau^{-1}\|_2^2=\int_0^T\int_0^T {\operatorname{tr}}(\mathcal K(x,y)R(y)\mathcal K(x,y)^tR(x))\,dy\,dx.\end{aligned}$$ One way to see this is by conjugating the integral operator $\tau^{-1}$ with a positive definite square root of $R(x)$ to get the integral operator $A=R(x)^{1/2}\mathcal K(x,y)R(y)^{1/2}$ which is now symmetric with respect to the Lebesgue measure. The Hilbert-Schmidt norm of $A$ is given by the usual formula $\int_0^T\int_0^T {\operatorname{tr}}(A(x,y)A(x,y)^t)\,dx\,dy$ which simplifies to (\[HSnorm0\]). If this norm is finite, we call the operator $A$ Hilbert-Schmidt. By symmetry we can write $$\begin{aligned} \label{eq:HSnorm} \|\tau^{-1}\|_2^2=2 \int_0^T \int_0^x u_0^t R(y) u_0 \, u_1^tR(x) u_1 \,dy\,dx.\end{aligned}$$ This leads to the following theorem. \[see Theorem 7.11 in @Weidmann\] Assume that the integral in (\[eq:HSnorm\]) is finite. Then $\tau^{-1}$ is Hilbert-Schmidt, $\tau$ has a discrete spectrum and the eigenvalues satisfy $\sum_i \lambda_i^{-2}<\infty$. By taking the second integral in (\[eq:HSnorm\]) up to $T$ we get the upper bound $$\|\tau^{-1}\|_2^2\le 2 \int_0^T u_0^t R(y) u_0 dy \, \int_0^T u_1^t R(x) u_1 dx.$$ In the limit circle case this is always finite and thus the previous theorem always applies. We can use the inverse operator to approximate $\tau$ with limit circle type operators. Let $0<T_n\uparrow T$ be a positive increasing sequence approximating $T$. For each $n$ we denote by $\tau_n$ the restriction of the differential operator $\tau$ to the interval $[0,T_n)$. On $[0,T_n)$ the function $\|R\|$ is bounded, thus $\tau_n$ is limit circle at the right endpoint $T_n$. Then $\tau_n$ is self-adjoint if we set its domain as $$\begin{aligned} \textup{dom}(\tau_n)=\{v\in L^2_R\,:\, v\in {{\text{\sc ac}}}, \, \tau v\in L^2_R,\,v(0)^t\,J\,u_0=0, \,v(T_n)^t\,J\,u_1=0\}.\end{aligned}$$ Note that we used the same boundary conditions as for $\tau$. The inverse operator $\tau_n^{-1}$ is the integral operator defined in (\[HSkernel\]), but restricted to $[0,T_n)$. We can view this as an integral operator on $[0,T)$ by setting the kernel equal to zero outside of $[0,T_n)^2$, and the sequence of these integral operators converge to $\tau^{-1}$ in the Hilbert-Schmidt sense. This gives the following result. \[Theorem 1 in @StolzWeidmann93\]\[thm:appr\] Suppose that $\tau^{-1}$ is Hilbert-Schmidt, and consider an approximating sequence $T_n\uparrow T$ with corresponding operators $\tau_n$. Then the eigenvalues of $\tau$ are exactly the limits of the eigenvalues of $\tau_n$ as $n\to \infty$, moreover the corresponding eigenprojections converge in norm. In particular, if $a<b$ are not eigenvalues of $\tau$ then the number of eigenvalues in $[a,b]$ for $\tau_n$ converges to the number of eigenvalues of $\tau$ in $[a,b]$ as $n\to \infty$. A parametrization of $\tau$ --------------------------- Consider the operator $\tau$ from (\[Diracop\]). Since $R(t)$ is positive definite it has a unique representation in the form of $$\begin{aligned} \label{Rrep} R=\frac{f}{y} {\left( \begin{array}{cc} 1 & -x \\ -x & x^2+y^2 \\ \end{array} \right)}\end{aligned}$$ where $f>0$, $y>0$ and $x\in {{\mathbb R}}$. Specifically, $f=\sqrt{\det R}$, $y=\frac{f}{R_{1,1}}$ and $x=- \frac{R_{1,2}}{R_{1,1}}$. As a consequence, we get another useful formula $$\begin{aligned} \label{RXX} R=\frac{f}{\det{X}}X^tX, \qquad X={\left( \begin{array}{cc} 1 & -x \\ 0 & y \\ \end{array} \right)}.\end{aligned}$$ If $\det R=1$ then $R$ is exactly the positive definite representation of $x+i y$ introduced in Subsection \[subs:hypmat\]. We can use the representation (\[Rrep\]) to parametrize the operator $\tau$. We introduce the notation ${\mathtt{Dir}}(x+i y, u_0, u_1,f)$ to denote the Dirac operator $\tau$ with $R$ given in (\[Rrep\]) with boundary conditions $u_0, u_1$. Note that $x+i y:[0,T)\to {{\mathbb H} }$ is a function in the Poincaré upper half plane, $f:[0,T)\to (0,\infty)$ is a positive function and $u_0, u_1$ are non-zero real vectors. Since only the directions of $u_0, u_1$ matter for the definition of $\tau$, we will use $u_i$ and $\mathcal P u_i \in \partial {{\mathbb H} }$ interchangeably. If $f$ is the constant function $\tfrac12$ then we drop it from the notation, i.e. ${\mathtt{Dir}}(x+i y, u_0, u_1)={\mathtt{Dir}}(x+i y, u_0, u_1,\tfrac12)$. The following lemma summarizes some properties of ${\mathtt{Dir}}(x+i y, u_0, u_1,f)$ in terms of the ingredients $x+i y, u_0, u_1,f$. Recall from (\[def:horo\]) the definition of the horocyclic distance of two points in the hyperbolic plane corresponding to a boundary point. Suppose that the function $x+i y:[0,T)\to {{\mathbb H} }$ is measurable and locally bounded, and let $f:[0,T)\to (0,\infty)$ be measurable with $f, f^{-1}$ locally bounded. Let $u_0\neq u_1$ be boundary points of ${{\mathbb H} }$ and let $r_0$ be a point in ${{\mathbb H} }$. Then the $R(t)$ function of the operator ${\mathtt{Dir}}(x+i y, u_0, u_1,f)$ (defined via (\[Rrep\])) satisfies the conditions (\[cond1\])-(\[cond3\]) if $$\begin{aligned} \label{horo_int1} \int_0^T f(t) e^{d_{u_1}(r_0, x(t)+i y(t))}dt<\infty.\end{aligned}$$ The inverse operator ${\mathtt{Dir}}(x+i y, u_0, u_1,f)^{-1}$ is Hilbert-Schmidt if $$\begin{aligned} \label{horo_int2} \int_0^T \int_0^t f(s) f(t) e^{d_{u_0}(r_0, x(s)+i y(s))+d_{u_1}(r_0, x(t)+I y(t))} ds dt<\infty.\end{aligned}$$ By our assumptions on $x+i y$ and $f$ the conditions (\[cond1\]) and (\[cond2\]) are immediately satisfied. Recall the representation (\[horo\_H\]) of the horocyclic distance in the half-plane model. A simple computation shows that for any nonzero $v\in {{\mathbb R}}^2$ we have $$e^{d_{\mathcal P v}(x(t)+i y(t), i)}=\frac{1}{f(t) |v|^2} v^t R(t) v,$$ with $R$ given in (\[Rrep\]). Thus if (\[horo\_int1\]) holds with $r_0=i$ then the function $R$ satisfies condition (\[cond3\]) with $u_*=u_1$. We also have $|d_\xi(r_0, b)-d_\xi(r_1, b)|\le d(r_0, r_1)$, thus if condition (\[horo\_int1\]) holds for some $r_0\in {{\mathbb H} }$, then it holds for any $r_0\in {{\mathbb H} }$. The same argument shows that (\[horo\_int2\]) implies $$\int_0^T \int_0^t u_0^t R(s) u_0 \, u_1^t R(t) u_1 ds \, dt<\infty,$$ which is equivalent to ${\mathtt{Dir}}(x+i y, u_0, u_1,f)^{-1}$ being Hilbert-Schmidt. We finish this section by recording a simple change of variables transforming the Dirac operator $\tau$ into a self-adjoint operator on $L^2$, using the representation (\[RXX\]). A function $u$ is in $L^2_R[0,T]$ (see ) if and only if $ \tilde X u\in L^2[0,T]$ where $\tilde X=\left(\frac{f}{\det X}\right)^{1/2} X$. The conjugated operator $$\begin{aligned} \label{tildetau} \tilde \tau u =\tilde X \tau( \tilde X^{-1} u)=(\tilde X^t)^{-1} J (\tilde X^{-1} u)'\end{aligned}$$ is self-adjoint on the domain $\{u: \tilde X^{-1} u\in \textup{dom}_\tau\}\subset L^2[0,T]$ and has the same spectrum as $\tau$. The inverse $\tilde \tau^{-1}$ is an integral operator on $L^2[0,T]$ with kernel $$\begin{aligned} \tilde X(x) \mathcal K(x,y) \tilde X(y)^t=\tilde X(x) \left(u_0 u_1^t {\mathbf 1}(x<y)+u_1 u_0^t {\mathbf 1}(x\ge y) \right) \tilde X(y)^t,\end{aligned}$$ and its Hilbert-Schmidt norm is the same as that of $\tau^{-1}$. Oscillation theory and the hyperbolic carousel {#s:carousel} ============================================== The phase function {#subs:phase} ------------------ For $\lambda\in {{\mathbb R}}$ let $v(t,\lambda), t\in[0,T)$ be the solution of $$\begin{aligned} \label{osc} \tau v=\lambda v \qquad \textup{ with } \quad v(0,\lambda)=u_0.\end{aligned}$$ Then $v\in\mathbb R^2$ is continuous on $[0,T)\times {{\mathbb R}}$ and by Proposition \[prop:ODE\] it is never equal to $(0,0)^t$. Since only the 1-dimensional subspaces spanned by the vectors $u_0$ and $u_1$ are relevant for the definition of the operator, we may assume that $u_i=(\cos(\varphi_i/2), -\sin (\varphi_i/2))^t$ with $\varphi_i\in [0,2\pi)$ for $i=0,1$. Let $\phi_\lambda(t)$ be twice the angle of $(1,-i)\cdot v(t,\lambda)$, that is the unique real-valued continuous function so that with $r(t,\lambda)>0$ we have $$\begin{aligned} \label{car_angle} (1,-i)\cdot v(t,\lambda)=r(t,\lambda) e^{i \phi_\lambda(t)/2}, \qquad \mbox{ with }\phi_\lambda(0)=\varphi_0.\end{aligned}$$ More precisely, $t\mapsto i\varphi_\lambda(t)/2+\log r(t,\lambda)$ is the unique lifting of the 2-dimensional curve $(1,-i)\cdot v$ under the covering given by the exponential function from ${{\mathbb C}}$ to ${{\mathbb C}}\setminus\{0\}$, with initial condition $i \varphi_0/2$. We will call $\phi_\lambda(t)$ the *phase function* of $\tau$. Some authors define the phase function as $2 \phi_\lambda$. With our definition the phase angle has period $2\pi$ which is more convenient for us. In particular, $v(t,\lambda)\parallel u_1$ if and only if $\phi_\lambda(t)=\varphi_1$ mod $2\pi$. If $v=(v_1,v_2)^t$ solves the ODE (\[car\_angle\]) then $r_\lambda(t)=\frac{v_1(t,\lambda)}{v_2(t,\lambda)}=-\cot(\phi_\lambda(t)/2)$ satisfies $$\begin{aligned} r_\lambda'&=\frac{v_1' v_2-v_2' v_1}{v_2^2}=\frac{v^t J v'}{v_2^2}=\lambda \frac{v^t R v}{v_2^2}=\lambda (z,1) R {\left ( \begin{array} {c} z \\ 1 \end{array} \right )}. $$ If we now assume that $R$ is of the form (\[Rrep\]) then we can further simplify this as $$\begin{aligned} \label{carouselODE} r_\lambda'=\lambda f \frac{y^2+(x-r_\lambda)^2}{y}, \qquad r_\lambda(0)=-\cot(\varphi_0/2).\end{aligned}$$ For $\lambda>0$ the function $r_\lambda(t)$ is strictly increasing in $t$ and it restarts at $-\infty$ whenever it blows up to $\infty$. For $\lambda<0$ the function $r_\lambda(t)$ is strictly decreasing and restarts at $\infty$ after exploding to $-\infty$. The ODE (\[carouselODE\]) has a nice geometric representation. By (\[hyprot\]) it describes the evolution of a boundary point $r_\lambda(t)\in \partial {{\mathbb H} }$ which is continuously rotated with rate $2\lambda f(t)$ about the moving center of rotation $x(t)+i y(t)\in {{\mathbb H} }$. The evolution of the angle $\phi_\lambda$ can be expressed using (\[carouselODE\]) and $r_\lambda=-\cot(\phi_\lambda/2)$. One gets $$\begin{aligned} \label{car_disk} \phi_\lambda'=2f \lambda \frac{\left|e^{i \phi_\lambda}- \gamma\right|^2}{1-| \gamma|^2}, \qquad \phi_\lambda(0)=\varphi_0.\end{aligned}$$ Here $ \gamma=U(x+i y)\in {{\mathbb U}}$ is the representation of the path $x+i y$ in the Poincaré disk model (see (\[Cayley\])). One advantage of this representation is that the solution has no blow-ups. The geometric picture is the same as before, but now in the Poincaré disk: the boundary point $e^{i \phi_\lambda(t)}\in \partial {{\mathbb U}}$ is continuously rotated with rate $2\lambda f(t)$ about the moving center of rotation $\gamma(t) \in {{\mathbb U}}$. Note that Proposition \[prop:ODE\] implies that $\phi_\lambda(t)$ is analytic in $\lambda$ for any fixed $t\in [0,T)$. End behavior of the phase function ---------------------------------- The following theorem fully describes the behavior of the phase function as $t\to T$ and shows how it can be used to describe the eigenvalues in the limit circle case. \[thm:osc\] Consider a Dirac operator $\tau={\mathtt{Dir}}(x+i y, u_0,u_1, f)$ satisfying the conditions (\[cond1\])-(\[cond3\]), with non-parallel boundary conditions $u_i\parallel (\cos(\varphi_i/2), -\sin (\varphi_i/2))^t$, and a Hilbert-Schmidt inverse. Let $\phi_\lambda(t)$ be the phase function introduced in (\[car\_angle\]). Then for every $\lambda$, $$\phi_\lambda(T)=\lim_{t\uparrow T} \phi_\lambda(t)$$ exists and the limit is finite. In the limit circle case the function $\lambda\to \phi_\lambda(T)$ is continuous and strictly increasing, and $$\begin{aligned} \{\textup{eigenvalues of } \tau\}=\{\lambda: \phi_\lambda(T)\in \varphi_1+2\pi \mathbb Z\}.\end{aligned}$$ In the limit point case we have $\phi_\lambda(T)\in \varphi_1+2\pi {{\mathbb Z}}$ for all nonzero $\lambda\in{{\mathbb R}}$. The theorem shows that in the limit circle case the endpoint of the carousel is a continuous, strictly increasing function of $\lambda$, while in the limit point case the endpoint (as a point on the unit circle) is always $e^{i \varphi_1}$ for all $\lambda\not=0$. \[Proof of Theorem \[thm:osc\]\] The phase angle $\phi_\lambda(t)$ satisfies the ODE (\[car\_disk\]) where $\gamma$ is the image of the path $x+i y$ under the transformation $U(z)=\frac{z-i}{i+z}$. Note that we have $$\begin{aligned} \label{XXXb} |\gamma|< 1, \qquad \frac{1}{1-|\gamma|^2}=\frac{x^2+(y+1)^2}{4 y}.\end{aligned}$$ This implies $$\begin{aligned} \label{XXXc} c_0 \|R\|\le \frac{f}{1-|\gamma|^2}\le c_1 \|R\|,\end{aligned}$$ i.e. the function $ \frac{f}{1-|\gamma|^2}$ is integrable on $[0,T)$ if and only if $\|R\|$ is integrable there. Note that for $\lambda=0$ we have $\phi_0(t)=\varphi_0$ for all $t$. We will now assume that $\lambda>0$, the $\lambda<0$ case can be treated similarly. For $\lambda>0$ the function $\phi_\lambda(t)$ is increasing in $t$, which shows that the limit $\lim_{t\uparrow T}\phi_\lambda(t) $ exists. To show that the limit is finite we need to prove that $\phi_\lambda(t)$ is bounded on $[0,T)$ for each $\lambda$. We first consider the limit circle case. As $\left|e^{i \phi_\lambda}- \gamma\right|\le 2$, we have $$\begin{aligned} \phi_\lambda(T)-\phi_\lambda(t) \le 8\lambda \int_t^T \frac{f}{1-|\gamma|^2}ds.\end{aligned}$$ Since $\|R\|$ is integrable on $[0,T)$ this means that $\frac{f}{1-|\gamma|^2}$ is also integrable. This shows that the limit is finite, the convergence is uniform on compact sets of $\lambda$, and hence the limit $\lambda\to \phi_\lambda(T)$ is continuous. The geometric picture behind ODE (\[car\_disk\]) shows that $\phi_\lambda(t)$ is strictly increasing as a function of $\lambda$ for any $t>0$. This also implies that $\phi_\lambda(T)$ is non-decreasing in $\lambda$. The fact that it is strictly increasing follows from the fact that if $\phi_{\lambda_1}(T)=\phi_{\lambda_2}(T)$ for some $\lambda_1<\lambda_2$ then the ODE (\[car\_disk\]) would imply that $\phi_{\lambda_1}(t)>\phi_{\lambda_2}(t)$ for a $t$ close to $T$ which contradicts the fact that $\lambda\to \phi_\lambda(t)$ is strictly increasing. The integrability of $\|R\|$ also implies that the solution of (\[osc\]) can be extended to $[0,T]$ in a continuous way, and it is in $L^2_R$. The eigenvalues of $\tau$ are exactly the $\lambda\in {{\mathbb R}}$ values for which the shooting problem $\tau v=\lambda v$, $v(0)=u_0$, $v(T)\parallel u_1$ can be solved. But this is equivalent to $ \phi_\lambda(T)\in \varphi_1+2\pi \mathbb Z$. Getting back to the limit point case, let us consider an approximating sequence $T_n\uparrow T$ with the corresponding operators $\tau_n$. Then the eigenvalues of $\tau_n$ converge to those of $\tau$ as $n\to \infty$. Since $\tau_n$ is limit circle, the number of eigenvalues of $\tau_n$ in $[0,\lambda]$ is given by $\left|\{\lambda: \phi_\lambda(T_n)\in \varphi_1+2\pi \mathbb Z\}\right|$. This gives an upper bound on $\limsup_{n\to \infty} \phi_\lambda(T_n)$ in terms of the number of eigenvalues of $\tau$ in $[0,\lambda]$, which shows that $\lim_{t\uparrow T}\phi_\lambda(t) $ is finite. In the limit point case we have $\int_0^T \|R\| dt=\infty$. By we have $\int_0^T \frac{f}{1-|\gamma|^2} dt=\infty$. Using equation (\[car\_disk\]) and the finiteness of $\phi_\lambda(T)$ we see that $ f \frac{\left|e^{i \phi_\lambda}-\gamma\right|^2}{1-|\gamma|^2} $ is integrable on $[0,T)$. Note, that for the vector $a=(e^{i\alpha/2},e^{-i\alpha/2})^t$, and $\tilde U=\tfrac{1}{\sqrt{2}} {\left( \begin{array}{cc} 1 & -i \\ 1 & i \\ \end{array} \right)}$ we have $$(\tilde U^*a)^*R\tilde U^*a=\frac{ f |e^{i\alpha}-\gamma|^2}{1-|\gamma|^2}.$$ By definition of the limit point case this is integrable if and only if $\tilde U^*a$ is parallel to $u_1$, which is equivalent to $\alpha\in \varphi_1+2\pi {{\mathbb Z}}$. Let $\alpha$ be such an angle, and let $d=|e^{i\alpha}-e^{i\phi_\lambda(T)}|/2$. By the triangle inequality $$|e^{i\alpha}-\gamma(t)|+|\gamma(t)-e^{i\phi_\lambda(t)}|+|e^{i\phi_\lambda(t)}-e^{i\phi_\lambda(T)}|\ge 2d.$$ The inequality $(x+y+z)^2\le 3(x^2+y^2+z^2)$ gives $$|e^{i\alpha}-\gamma(t)|^2+|\gamma(t)-e^{i\phi_\lambda(t)}|^2+|e^{i\phi_\lambda(t)}-e^{i\phi_\lambda(T)}|^2\ge \frac{4}{3}d^2.$$ We consider two cases depending on whether the last term is at most $d^2$ or more. If it is more, 4 is still an upper bound. This gives $$\begin{aligned} \label{xyzd} |e^{i\alpha}-\gamma|^2+|\gamma-e^{i\phi_\lambda(t)}|^2+4\cdot \mathbf{1}(|e^{i\phi_\lambda(t)}-e^{i\phi_\lambda(T)}|>d)\ge \tfrac{d^2}{3}.\end{aligned}$$ Multiplying inequality (\[xyzd\]) with $\frac{f}{1-|\gamma|^2}$ and integrating on $[0,T)$, we see that all three integrals on the left hand side are finite. But the right side can only be finite if $d=0$, showing that $\phi_\lambda(T)\in \varphi_1+2\pi {{\mathbb Z}}$. The hyperbolic carousel ----------------------- The evolution (\[car\_disk\]) has already appeared in @BVBV where it was used to define the hyperbolic carousel. This is a geometric functional producing a discrete set of points from a hyperbolic path and two boundary points. \[Hyperbolic carousel\]\[def:hypc\] Suppose that $\gamma(t), t\in [0,T)$ is a measurable, locally bounded path in the hyperbolic plane ${{\mathbb H} }$, $\eta_0, \eta_1\in \partial {{\mathbb H} }$ are two distinct boundary points and $f$ is a positive, locally integrable function on $[0,T)$. The hyperbolic carousel associated to $(\gamma, \eta_0, \eta_1, f)$ produces a discrete set of points on ${{\mathbb R}}$, denoted by $\mathcal{HC}(\gamma, \eta_0, \eta_1, f)$, defined as follows. For any fixed $\lambda\in {{\mathbb R}}$ we consider a moving boundary point $r_\lambda(t)$ with $r_\lambda(0)=\eta_0$, which is rotated about $\gamma(t)$ continuously with rate $2 \lambda f(t)$ for $t\in [0,T)$. For each $\lambda$ we count how many times the moving point passes $\eta_1$ (counting it with a negative sign if $\lambda<0$) and we denote this number by $N(\lambda)$. More precisely, $N(\cdot)$ is the right-continuous version of the function $$\lambda \mapsto\operatorname{sgn}(\lambda) \cdot \left|\left\{t\in[0,T): r_\lambda(t)=\eta_1\right\}\right|.$$ If $N(\cdot)$ is a finite function then $\mathcal{HC}(\gamma, \eta_0, \eta_1, f)$ is the set of points whose counting function is $N$. If $N(\cdot)$ is not finite then $\mathcal{HC}(\gamma, \eta_0, \eta_1, f)$ is undefined. If $f$ is the constant function $\tfrac12$ then we drop it from the notation, i.e. $\mathcal{HC}(\gamma, \eta_0, \eta_1)=\mathcal{HC}(\gamma, \eta_0, \eta_1, \tfrac12)$. This corresponds to the carousel where the boundary point $r_\lambda$ is rotated with constant speed $\lambda$. Note that the definition does not rely on any particular representation of the hyperbolic plane. If we consider the Poincaré disk representation of ${{\mathbb H} }$ then we can describe the moving boundary points of the carousel as $r_\lambda(t)=e^{i \phi_\lambda(t)}$ with a continuous $ \phi_\lambda(t)$ satisfying $\phi_\lambda(0)=\arg \eta_0$. By the discussion around (\[car\_disk\]) we see that the function $ \phi_\lambda(t)$ satisfies the ODE (\[car\_disk\]) with initial condition $\varphi_0=\arg \eta_0$. Thus the ODE describing the moving boundary points of the carousel is exactly the same as the ODE for the phase angle of a Dirac operator. The next proposition shows that under some mild conditions the set of points produced by the carousel is exactly the same as the spectrum of the Dirac operator built from the same ingredients. \[prop:car\_dir\] Assume that $u_0, u_1$ are nonzero vectors that are not parallel, the operator ${\mathtt{Dir}}(x+i y, f, u_0, u_1)$ defined on $[0,T)$ satisfies conditions (\[cond1\])-(\[cond3\]) and this operator has a Hilbert-Schmidt inverse. Then $\mathcal{HC}(x+i y, u_0, u_1, f)$ is well defined and it is equal to the spectrum of ${\mathtt{Dir}}(x+i y, u_0, u_1,f)$. Let $\varphi_0, \varphi_1\in [0,2\pi)$ so that $u_i \parallel (\cos(\varphi_i/2), -\sin(\varphi_i/2))^t$. We have seen that the phase angle of $\tau={\mathtt{Dir}}(x+i y, u_0, u_1,f)$ satisfies the ODE (\[car\_disk\]). This phase angle also encodes the moving boundary points of the carousel with the parameters $(x+iy, u_0, u_1, f)$. This means that the counting function of $\mathcal{HC}(x+i y, u_0, u_1, f)$ is given by the right-continuous version of the function $$\begin{aligned} \tilde N(\Lambda) &=\operatorname{sign}(\Lambda) \cdot \left| \{t\in [0,T): \phi_\Lambda(t)\in \varphi_1+2\pi{{\mathbb Z}}\} \right|.\end{aligned}$$ In order to prove the proposition we need to show that this is finite for all $\Lambda$ and that the right-continuous version of $\tilde N(\cdot)$ is exactly the counting function of the spectrum of $\tau$. For simplicity, we will only deal with the $\Lambda>0$ case (the other case can be handled the same way). Consider an approximating sequence $T_n\uparrow T$ with the corresponding operators $\tau_n$, as in Theorem \[thm:appr\]. Denote the counting function of the spectrum of $\tau$ and $\tau_n$ by $F$ and $F_n$, respectively. Fix $n$. By Theorem \[thm:osc\] we have $$\begin{aligned} F_n(\Lambda)&= \left|\{\lambda\in [0,\Lambda]: \phi_\lambda(T_n)\in \varphi_1 +2\pi{{\mathbb Z}}\}\right|.\end{aligned}$$ From the geometric definition (or the ODE (\[car\_disk\])) it follows that for a fixed $\lambda>0$ the function $t\to \phi_\lambda(t)$ is strictly increasing, and for any fixed $0<t<T$ the function $\lambda\to \phi_\lambda(t)$ is also strictly increasing. Note that $\phi_\lambda(t)$ is continuous for $(\lambda,t)\in [0,\Lambda]\times[0,T)$, and we have $$\phi_\lambda(0)=\phi_0(t)=\varphi_0, \qquad \textup{and} \qquad \varphi_0 \not\equiv \varphi_1 \mod 2\pi.$$ For any $0<T_n<T$ the functions $\lambda\to \phi_\lambda(T_n), \lambda\in [0,\Lambda]$ and $t\to \phi_\Lambda(t), t\in [0,T_n]$ are both continuous, strictly increasing and have the same starting and end points which yields $$\begin{aligned} \label{car_123} \left|\{\lambda\in [0,\Lambda]: \phi_\lambda(T_n)\in \varphi_1 + 2\pi{{\mathbb Z}}\}\right|=\left| \{t\in [0,T_n): \phi_\Lambda(t)\in \varphi_1 + 2\pi{{\mathbb Z}}\}\right|.\end{aligned}$$ For any fixed $\Lambda$ the right side of (\[car\_123\]) converges to $\tilde N(\Lambda)$ as $n\to \infty$. The left side of (\[car\_123\]) is $F_n(\Lambda)$ and by Theorem \[thm:appr\] this will converge to $F(\Lambda)$ as $n\to \infty$ for every $\Lambda$ which is not an eigenvalue of $\tau$. From this it follows that $\tilde N(\cdot)$ is a finite function and that its right-continuous version is exactly $F(\cdot)$, the counting function of the spectrum of $\tau$. We have seen the carousel ODE in both the half-plane (\[carouselODE\]) and the unit disk (\[car\_disk\]) coordinates. We have also seen that the driving path in the half-plane representation can be used to express the parameters of the corresponding Dirac operator. With a simple linear transformation of the operator we can also recover the driving path in the unit disk coordinates. Suppose that $\tau=R(t) J \partial_t$ where $R(t)$ is given as in (\[Rrep\]). Now consider the operator $$\begin{aligned} \label{HtoU} \tilde \tau u(t)=\tilde U \tau(\tilde U^{-1} u)=\tilde U R^{-1}(t) J \tilde U^{-1} u'(t)\end{aligned}$$ defined on functions $u:[0,1]\to {{\mathbb C}}^2$ where $\tilde U=\tfrac{1}{\sqrt{2}} {\left( \begin{array}{cc} 1 & -i \\ 1 & i \\ \end{array} \right)}$. (This is just the linear transformation corresponding to the Cayley map $U(z)$.) A simple computation shows that $$\begin{aligned} \label{Dirac_disk} \tilde \tau u=\frac{1}{f(t)(1-|\gamma(t)|^2)} {\left( \begin{array}{cc} 1+|\gamma(t)|^2 & 2 \gamma(t) \\ 2 \bar \gamma(t) & 1+|\gamma(t)|^2 \\ \end{array} \right)} {\left( \begin{array}{cc} -i & 0 \\ 0 & i \\ \end{array} \right)} u'\end{aligned}$$ where $\gamma(t)=U(x(t)+i y(t))$ is exactly the image of the driving path in the unit disk representation. The reverse phase function -------------------------- The phase function can be started at the right end point $T$, even when the operator is limit point there. Consider a Dirac operator $\tau={\mathtt{Dir}}(x+iy, u_0, u_1, f)$ on $[0,T)$ satisfying conditions (\[cond1\])-(\[cond3\]) with non-parallel boundary conditions and with a Hilbert-Schmidt inverse. Let $\varphi_i\in [0,2\pi)$ be the angles with $u_i \parallel (\cos(\varphi_i/2), -\sin (\varphi_i/2))^t$ and let $\gamma=U(x+i y)$ be the representation of the path $x+i y$ in the Poincaré disk, as in (\[car\_disk\]). Then there is a unique solution of the following ODE system $$\begin{aligned} \label{phase_reversed} \rho_\lambda'=2f \lambda \frac{\left|e^{i \rho_\lambda}- \gamma\right|^2}{1-| \gamma|^2}, \qquad \lim_{t\uparrow T}\rho_\lambda(t)=\varphi_1\end{aligned}$$ with the following condition: for $\lambda>0$ if the function $\tilde \rho_\lambda$ also solves (\[phase\_reversed\]) then $\rho_\lambda(t)\ge \tilde \rho_\lambda(t)$ for $t\in [0,T)$. Similarly: if $\lambda<0$ then $\rho_\lambda(t)\le \tilde \rho_\lambda(t)$ for $t\in [0,T)$. Moreover, $\lambda\to \rho_\lambda(t)$ is continuous and strictly decreasing for any $t\in [0,T)$, and $$\begin{aligned} \label{rev_spec} \{\textup{eigenvalues of } \tau\}=\{\lambda: \rho_\lambda(0)\in \varphi_0+2\pi \mathbb Z\}.\end{aligned}$$ We call the function $\rho_\lambda$ the *reverse phase function* of ${\mathtt{Dir}}(x+iy, u_0, u_1, f)$. If the function $\|R\|$ is bounded on $[0,T)$ then the lemma follows from the time reversal $t\to T-t$ and Theorem \[thm:osc\]. Set $0<\tilde T<T$. Since $\|R\|$ is bounded on $[0,\tilde T]$, the reverse phase function $ \rho_{\lambda, \tilde T}$ for the restriction of $\tau$ to $[0,\tilde T)$ exists, and satisfies the ODE $$\begin{aligned} \rho_{\lambda, \tilde T}'=2f \lambda \frac{\left|e^{i \rho_{\lambda, \tilde T}}- \gamma\right|^2}{1-| \gamma|^2}, \qquad \rho_{\lambda, \tilde T}(\tilde T)=\varphi_1.\end{aligned}$$ The function $\lambda\to \rho_{\lambda,\tilde T}(t)$ is continuous and strictly increasing for any $t\in [0,\tilde T)$, and the spectrum of $\tau$ restricted to $[0,\tilde T)$ is equal to the set $\{\lambda: \rho_{\lambda, \tilde T}(0)\in \varphi_0+2\pi \mathbb Z\}$. We will show that the limit $\lim_{\tilde T\uparrow T} \rho_{\lambda,\tilde T}$ satisfies the ODE (\[phase\_reversed\]) and the listed conditions. Without loss of generality we assume $\lambda>0$. The ODE (\[phase\_reversed\]) describes the evolution of $e^{i \rho_{\lambda,\tilde T}}$ as a boundary point of $\partial {{\mathbb U}}$ being continuously rotated about $\gamma$ with rate $2f\lambda$. This implies the following coupling result: if $0<T_1<T_2<T$ then $\rho_{\lambda, T_2}(t)< \rho_{\lambda, T_1}(t)$ for $t\in [0,T_1]$. We also have $\rho_{0,T_1}(t)=\rho_{0,T_2}(t)=\varphi_1$. Borrowing the arguments of the proof of Theorem \[thm:osc\] we see that the limit $$\begin{aligned} \label{rho} \rho_\lambda(t):= \lim_{\tilde T\uparrow T} \rho_{\lambda,\tilde T}(t)\end{aligned}$$ exists for each $t\in [0,T)$ because of monotonicity, and $\rho_\lambda(t)$ will be non-decreasing in $t$. For a fixed $\Lambda>0$ the limit $|\rho_{\lambda}(0)|$ can be bounded uniformly on $[0,\Lambda]$ in terms of the number of eigenvalues of $\tau$ in $[0,\Lambda]$. This shows that the limit $\rho_\lambda(0)$ is finite, which in turn shows that $\rho_\lambda(t)$ is finite for any $t\in [0,T)$. Note that since $\lambda\to \rho_{\lambda,\tilde T}(t)$ is decreasing, the function $\lambda\to \rho_{\lambda}(t)$ is non-increasing. For any $0\le t_0<t_1\le \tilde T$ we have $$\rho_{\lambda,\tilde T}(t_1)- \rho_{\lambda,\tilde T}(t_0)=\int_{t_0}^{t_1} 2f \lambda \frac{\left|e^{i \rho_{\lambda, \tilde T}(u)}- \gamma(u)\right|^2}{1-| \gamma(u)|^2}du.$$ Since $\gamma$ is locally bounded in ${{\mathbb U}}$ on $[0,T)$ and $f$ is locally bounded on $[0,T)$ the integral on the right converges to $\int_{t_0}^{t_1} 2f \lambda \frac{\left|e^{i \rho_{\lambda}(u)}- \gamma(u)\right|^2}{1-| \gamma(u)|^2}du$, which shows that the limit $ \rho_{\lambda}$ satisfies the ODE (\[phase\_reversed\]) on $[0,T)$. We will now prove the continuity of the function $\lambda\to \rho_\lambda(0)$. Once we have that, the continuity of $\lambda\to \rho_\lambda(t)$ for $t\in (0,T)$ follows
{'source': 'arXiv_out/1604'}