Localised eigenfunctions in Šeba billiards J.P. Keating J. Marklof B. Winn 2 School of Mathematics, University of Bristol, Bristol, BS8 TW, U.K. 2 School of Mathematics, Loughborough University, Loughborough, LE 3TU, U.K. 4 th September 2009 arxiv:0909.3797v [math-ph] 2 Sep 2009 Abstract We describe some new families of quasimodes for the Laplacian perturbed by the addition of a potential formally described by a Dirac delta function. As an application we find, under some additional hypotheses on the spectrum, subsequences of eigenfunctions of Šeba billiards that localise around a pair of unperturbed eigenfunctions. Introduction One of the unsolved questions in the analysis of quantum eigenfunctions concerns possible limiting distributions as the eigenvalue tends to infinity. For eigenfunctions of the Laplace operator on certain surfaces with arithmetical properties, it has been proved [, 2] that there is only one possible limit; all sequences of eigenfunctions become uniformly distributed. On the other hand, Hassell [3] has proved the existence of chaotic billiard domains in R 2 for which zero-density subsequences of eigenfunctions fail to equi-distribute in the limit. We consider the Laplace operator plus potential supported at a single point. Such a potential has been variously referred to as delta-interaction potential, Fermi pseudopotential or zero-range potential in different parts of the literature. Mathematically this operator can be constructed using the tools of self-adjoint extension theory. We will prove our results for the case where the underlying space is a compact 2- dimensional manifold, for which the Laplace operator has eigenfunctions and eigenvalues denoted by Φ j and E j respectively. We perturb this operator with a delta potential supported at the point p, which will remain fixed throughout, and suppressed from notations. This perturbation can be realised by a -parameter family of self-adjoint operators, H Θ, indexed by an angle Θ which controls the strength of the perturbation. We fix a finite interval I R containing at least one E j, and define, for notational convenience, ζ I s, λ := Φ j p 2 E j λ s. E j I
Let σ [0, ]. We define ψx := E j I Φ j p E j µ Φ jx + σ E j I E j sin Θ Φj p cos Θ + Ej 2 Φ j x, 2 for µ a solution to ζ I, µ = σ E j I E j sin Θ Φj p 2 cos Θ + Ej 2. 3 Our main results are as follows: Theorem.. The pair ψ, µ is a quasimode for H Θ with discrepancy d, where σ 2 ζ I 0, µ + σ 2 2 d 2 E j I + E j µ + sin Θ cos Θ E Φj p j µ 2 +Ej = 22 ζ I 2, µ + σ 2 E j I E j sin Θ cos Θ 2 φj p 2 +E 2 j 2 4 Furthermore, if ψ, ψ 2 are defined by 2 for µ µ 2, two solutions of 3 then ψ, ψ 2 = σ 2 E j sin Θ 2 Φ j p 2 cos Θ + E 2. 5 E j I j 2 The construction of families of quasimodes is a key step in Hassell s proof [3], as well as the proofs of many recent results on localisation of quantum eigenfunctions [4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9]. One reason for this is that quasimodes can often be used to approximate eigenfunctions. In general see the introduction to section 3 for precise statements the smaller the discrepancy, the closer quasimodes are to true eigenfunctions. For this reason it is important to know when the discrepancy can be made small. In this direction we have the following corollary to theorem.: Corollary.2. Let σ = and let I = [0, T ] where T > E. Then the discrepancy d of the quasimode ψ satisfies d µ. 6 T Let σ = 0 and I be any interval containing at least one E j. If µ I then the discrepancy d of ψ satisfies d li, where li is the length of I. In particular, the quasimodes with σ = can be made arbitrarily precise by choosing T as large as desired. We are interested in ascertaining when true eigenfunctions of H Θ have mass supported on our quasimodes. Without any assumptions on the spectrum of the Laplacian we can prove the following. Proposition.3. For any consecutive eigenvalues E a < E b < E c < E d from the sequence E j j=, let I = [E b, E c ] and take σ = 0. Choose µ so that µ I. Then there is an eigenfunction φ of H Θ with eigenvalue in the interval E a, E d such that φ, ψ ψ E c E b 2 /2 3 min{e d E c, E b E a } 2. 7 2
Proposition.3 is most interesting when the sequence of eigenfunctions Φ j fail to equidistribute. For example if they are solutions to a PDE which is subject to separation of variables; see below. Then, if one could establish an infinite subset of the spectrum {E j } along which the right-hand side of 7 is bounded away from 0, then proposition.3 would prove the existence of a sequence of eigenfunctions of H Θ which fail to equi-distribute. Clearly the best that proposition.3 can achieve is to prove that a sequence of quasimodes has an overlap of up to / 3 with a subsequence of true eigenfunctions. In order to prove that a sequence of quasimodes converges fully towards a sequence of eigenvalues of H Θ we need to make some assumptions on the spectrum of the Laplacian. Sufficient conditions for this and a precise statement of the result theorem 4.4 are given in section 4. The history of the study of the spectral properties of differential operators perturbed by the addition of a delta scatterer goes back at least to [0], in which a one-dimensional lattice of delta interactions was used to model an electron moving in a crystal lattice. A comprehensive historical review is given in the appendix to the book []. Part of our interest in the subject comes from the Šeba billiard which was introduced in [2]. In this work, a hard-walled rectangular billiard with a potential supported at a single point was considered. In terms of classical dynamics, the motion is integrable, since only a zero-measure set of trajectories meet the point at which the potential is supported. However, diffraction effects are introduced when one considers the quantum spectrum of the corresponding Schrödinger operator. Šeba billiards have become important since the observation [3, 4] that the quantum spectral statistics belong to a new universality class, different from the classes from random matrix theory conjecturally associated to chaotic dynamical systems [5, 6] or the statistics of a Poisson process conjecturally associated to fully-integrable dynamical systems [7]. It is now known that general integrable systems perturbed by the addition of such a localised scatterer also belong to the same universality class [8], as do quantum Neumann star graphs [9, 20]. Characteristic features of the spectral statistics of this universality class are an exponential decay of large level spacings, together with level repulsion. Several analytical studies of these spectral statistics have been made [8, 2, 22, 23, 24, 25]. Typically, a key feature of these arguments is the assumption of Poissonian behaviour for the eigenvalues of the billiard table without scatterer, a conjectured consequence of the integrable dynamics [7] the Berry-Tabor conjecture. In the final section of this article we apply theorem 4.4 to the original Šeba billiard. Our final result is a proof that there exists a subsequence of eigenfunctions of the Šeba billiard that become localised on a pair of consecutive eigenfunctions of the unperturbed billiard, if the spectrum of the unperturbed billiard satisfies an assumption which is consistent with the Berry-Tabor conjecture. This proves that there are subsequences of eigenfunctions that do not become equi-distributed in phase space in the classical limit. This result is a rigorous derivation of a formal argument first proposed in [26] and mirrors a related result proved for quantum star graphs [27]. 3
2 Realisation of the perturbed operator Let M be a compact 2-dimensional Riemannian manifold, possibly with piecewise-smooth boundary, and let be a self-adjoint Laplacian on M. The realisation of the operator formally defined by H = + cδx p, 8 where p M and δ is the Dirac delta function, using the theory of self-adjoint extensions is given in many places in the literature. We refer the reader to [28, 29] for the details. Here we recapitulate only that which is necessary to fix notations. We denote by and, the norm and inner product of L 2 M. Since M is compact, has a complete basis of eigenfunctions, Φ j, with corresponding eigenvalues E j which we write in non-decreasing order. We will remove from the list of eigenvalues any E j for which Φ j p = 0. Such eigenfunctions are not affected by a delta-scatterer at p, and so it is convenient to exclude them from the spectrum. This further allows us to assume that the spectrum {E j } is simple, without losing generality. To see this, consider an eigenspace of dimension r > spanned by the eigenfunctions { φ,... φ r }. Then the vectors φ p,..., φ r p T and R, 0,..., 0 T in C r, where R 2 = r φ i p 2, 9 i= have identical norm. This means that we can find a unitary r r matrix mapping the first vector to the second. Multiplying U by the vector of eigenfunctions φ,..., φ r T leads to a new basis for the eigenspace, in which all but the first eigenfunction vanishes at the point p, and the corresponding eigenvalue is counted with multiplicity one. The resulting spectrum is therefore ordered so that E < E 2 < E 3 0 We will frequently use Weyl s law with remainder estimate [30]: NE := E j E Φ j p 2 = E 4π + OE/2, where the implied constant may depend on the position of the point p M. Define g ±i x := j= Φ j xφ j p. 2 E j i Then g ±i L 2 M and in fact they are the Green functions for the resolvent of at the imaginary energies ±i, satisfying f, g ±i = ± i fp. 3 The notations f = Og and f g both mean that there exists a positive constant C the implied constant such that f Cg. 4
In particular, which will be useful to know later. Let Φ j, g ±i = ± i Φ j p and define the operator H 0 with domain D p by H 0 is a symmetric, but not self-adjoint operator. spanned by g ±i. = Φ jp E j ± i, 4 D p := {f Dom : f, δ p = 0}, 5 It follows from the von Neumann theory [3] that, H 0 : f f. 6 In fact its deficiency subspaces are DomH 0 = D p span{g i, g i }. 7 Since the deficiency indices are equal, H 0 possesses self-adjoint extensions, constructed as follows. First of all, note that we can write for ψ DomH 0, where ˆψ D p and a ± ψ C. In fact we have ψ = ˆψ + a + ψg i + a ψg i, 8 H 0 ψ = H 0 ˆψ + ia+ ψg i ia ψg i. 9 Since the deficiency indices of H 0 are both equal to, there is a -parameter family of self-adjoint extensions, H Θ, 0 < Θ 2π with DomH Θ = {ψ DomH 0 : a ψ = e iθ a + ψ}. 20 We take the self-adjoint operator H Θ to be the realisation of the formal operator 8. 3 Quasimodes 3. Definitions and basic properties Let H be a self-adjoint operator in a Hilbert space, without continuous spectrum. Definition 3.. A quasimode of H with discrepancy d is a pair ψ, µ DomH R such that H µψ d ψ. 2 5
We are interested in the situation when the quasi-eigenvalue µ and quasi-eigenfunction ψ approximate true eigenvalues λ j and eigenfunctions φ j of H. In this direction, the following classical results apply see, e.g. [32, 9] For a quasimode with discrepancy d, the interval [µ d, µ + d] contains at least one eigenvalue of H. If we consider instead, the interval [µ M, µ + M] where M > 0, then λ j [µ M,µ+M] ψ, φ j 2 d2 M 2 ψ 2. 22 In particular, if ψ is normalised, and the interval [µ M, µ + M] contains only a single eigenvalue with eigenfunction φ, then there is a phase χ [0, 2π such that φ e iχ ψ 2d M. 23 These results will be the main tools by which we relate the quasimodes constructed in the next subsection to the eigenfunctions and eigenvalues of H Θ. 3.2 Quasimodes of delta perturbations Let I R be a finite interval containing at least one point E j of the spectrum of. Let σ [0, ]. We will associate to the interval I a family of quasimodes parametrised by σ. We first define ψ σ,i,z := E j I where P S is the spectral projection operator onto the set S, Φ j p E j z Φ j + σ e iθ P I c gi e iθ g i, 24 P S f := E j S f, Φ j Φ j, 25 and I c is the complement to I. We have the following: Lemma 3.2. For z E j for any E j I, the function ψ σ,i,z satisfies ψ σ,i,z 2 = ζ I 2, z + σ 2 E j I E j sin Θ 2 Φ j p 2 cos Θ + Ej 2, 26 2 with the second term being bounded by a constant independent of I, z and σ [0, ]. Proof. We have ψ σ,i,z 2 = E j I Φ j p 2 E j z 2 + σ 2 e iθ 2 P I cg i e iθ g i 2. 27 6
By 4 we get using Φ j, g i e iθ g i = By Parseval s identity E j + i e iθ Φ j p E j i = E j e iθ i + e iθ + Ej 2 Φ j p = e iθ E j + Ej 2 sin Θ cos Θ + Ej 2 Φ j p, 28 e iθ 2 P I cg i e iθ g i 2 = E j I i + eiθ sin Θ = eiθ cos Θ. 29 = O, where Weyl s law was used to obtain the final estimate. Let µ = µσ, I be a solution to E j I Φ j p 2 E j µ = E j sin Θ 2 Φ j p 2 cos Θ + Ej 2 30 2 σ e iθ P I gi e iθ g i p. 3 Then the pair ψ σ,i, µ is a quasimode for H Θ, where ψ σ,i := ψ σ,i,µ. This follows from the following proposition: Proposition 3.3. The function ψ σ,i belongs to DomH Θ and satisfies H Θ µψ σ,i 2 = σ 2 ζ I 0, µ + σ 2 E j I Proof. First of all, let us prove that ψ σ,i DomH Θ. We can write ψ σ,i = E j I Using 28 we can express this as where + E j µ + sin Θ 2 cos Θ E Φ j p 2 j µ + Ej 2. 2 32 Φ j p E j µ Φ j σ e iθ P Ig i e iθ g i + σ e iθ g i e iθ g i. 33 ψ σ,i = ˆψ σ,i + ˆψ σ,i x := E j µ σe j + E 2 Ej I j σ e iθ gi e iθ g i, 34 + σ sin Θ cos Θ + E 2 j Φ j pφ j x. 35 7
Now observe that due to the definition 3 of µ, ˆψσ,I p = 0, so ˆψ σ,i D p. Thus 34 justifies the assertion ψ σ,i DomH Θ. Now, Since H 0 is an extension of H Θ, we have H Θ µψ σ,i = H 0 µ ˆψ σ,i + σ e iθ i µgi + e iθ i + µg i. 36 H 0 µ ˆψ σ,i = E j I = E j I σe je j µ + E 2 j + σ sin Θ cos Θ E j µ + Ej 2 Φ j pφ j + σej 2 + σe j µ + σ sin Θ cos Θ E Φj p j µ + Ej 2 Φ j. 37 Using 4 we find Φj, i µg i + e iθ i + µg i = i + µ E j + i Φ iθ i + µ jp + e E j i Φ jp 38 = e iθ + Ej 2 + E j µ sin Θ cos Θ E j µ Φ j p, again using 29. This leads to σ e iθ H Θ µg i e iθ g i = σ and combining this with 37, we get j= + E j µ + sin Θ cos Θ E Φj p j µ + Ej 2 Φ j, 39 H Θ µψ σ,i = σ E j I Φ j pφ j σ E j I + E j µ + sin Θ cos Θ E Φj p j µ + Ej 2 Φ j. 40 Since the summations in 40 are over disjoint sets it is easy to calculate the norm: H Θ µψ σ,i 2 = σ 2 E j I + σ 2 E j I Φ j p 2 + E j µ + sin Θ 2 cos Θ E Φ j p 2 j µ + Ej 2. 4 2 3.2. Proof of theorem. The first part of the theorem follows from lemma 3.2 and proposition 3.3 and the definition of a quasimode. 8
For the second part, let µ µ 2 be two solutions of 3. We have ψ σ,i,µ, ψ σ,i,µ2 = E j I Φ j p Φ j, E j µ E j I Φ j p Φ j + E j µ 2 = Φ j p 2 E j µ E j µ 2 + σ2 E j I E j I σ 2 e iθ 2 P I cg i e iθ g i 2 E j sin Θ 2 Φ j p 2 cos Θ + Ej 2, 2 42 using 30. By elementary algebra, E j µ E j µ 2 = µ µ 2 E j µ E j µ 2, 43 so, since by 3 we get E j I E j I Φ j p 2 = Φ j p 2, 44 E j µ E j µ 2 E j I Φ j p 2 = 0. 45 E j µ E j µ 2 3.2.2 Controlling the discrepancy of quasimodes By tuning the parameter σ, and choosing the interval I accordingly, we can find fix quasimodes with particular properties. In the previous section we have seen that sets of quasimodes with σ = 0 are orthogonal. We are particularly interested in when the discrepancy is small. In this subsubsection we prove corollary.2 that quasimodes with σ = can be made arbitrarily precise, and that quasimodes with σ = 0 also can have a simple bound for the discrepancy. Proof of corollary.2. Choosing I = [0, T ] for T > E with σ = gives, by theorem., that the discrepancy of ψ,i satisfies d 2 ψ,i 2 = E j T + E j µ + sin Θ 2 cos Θ E Φ j p 2 j µ + Ej 2. 46 2 By lemma 3.2 we see that the norm of ψ,i is bounded away from 0 by a constant, so that the asymptotics for d are given by the term on the right-hand side of 46. Using Weyl s law, we can estimate E j T + E j µ + sin Θ 2 cos Θ E Φ j p 2 µ2 j µ + Ej 2 2 T, 47 which can be made arbitrarily small by increasing T. 9
For the second part, with σ = 0, we have d 2 ψ 0,I 2 = E j I noting that E j µ li for µ I. Φ j p 2 li 2 E j I Φ j p 2 E j µ 2 = li2 ψ 0,I 2, 48 The existence of arbitrarily precise quasimodes can be used to give a new proof of the often-used representation for eigenvalues and eigenfunctions of rank-one perturbations see e.g. [8, 28, 24, 33] Theorem 3.4. The solutions λ to the equation E j λ E j + Ej 2 Φ j p 2 = sin Θ cos Θ j= are eigenvalues of H Θ with corresponding eigenfunctions given by φx = j= j= Φ j p 2 + Ej 2, 49 Φ j p E j λ Φ jx. 50 Note that the left-hand side of 49 converges pointwise, and 50 converges in L 2 Ω. By analysing the resolvent, it is possible to extend theorem 3.4 to get the following [28, Theoreme 2], Theorem 3.5. Apart from the solutions to 49, there are no other points of the spectrum of H Θ in any of the intervals E M, E M+. 4 Localisation results In this section we will consider the extent to which eigenfunctions of H Θ can be approximated by quasimodes. In particular we will focus on the quasimodes with σ = 0. First we shall prove proposition.3, which is straightforward. Then we shall show that strengthening the assumptions made on the spectrum of leads to a proof of full convergence. Proof of proposition.3. The length of the interval I is li = E c E b. Let M = min{e d µ, µ E a } min{e d E c, E b E a }. By applying 22 with this M we get, ψ 0,I, φ j 2 ψ 0,I 2 li 2 min{e d E c, E b E a } 2. 5 λ j [E a,e d ] From theorem 3.5 there are only three eigenvalues of H Θ in the interval [E a, E d ]. It therefore follows that for at least one of these three eigenfunctions its inner-product squared with ψ 0,I is at least 3 of the right-hand side of 5. We now consider how to improve proposition.3 at the expense of making further assumptions about the spectrum of. For simplicity we will focus henceforth on the choice of parameter Θ = π. 0
ε δ λ λ E a E b µ E c E d Figure : Part of the spectrum of and H π. Vertical bars denote eigenvalues of H π, and circles denote eigenvalues of. The triangle µ is a quasi-eigenvalue approximating λ. See main text for further explanation. In figure a cartoon of part of the spectrum of H π and is displayed. Highlighted are four consecutive eigenvalues of, labelled E a, E b, E c and E d, chosen so that E c E b ε. The positions of all points depend on ε. Between E b and E c is an eigenvalue, λ, of H π. We find a quasimode ψ 0,I associated to the interval I = [E b, E c ] with quasi-eigenvalue µ approximating λ. By corollary.2 the discrepancy of this quasimode is no greater than ε. Between E c and E d is another eigenvalue λ of H π. In order to be able to apply 23, we need to be sure that λ is not too close to E c. An argument to show that this is the case is given below. The eigenvalue between E a and E b can be handled with a similar method. We shall make the following assumption on the spectral sequence of : Assumption 4.. For some 0 < q < /2 and < ρ < 2 q, there exists a sequence ε n n=, ε n 0 such that for each n there are four consecutive eigenvalues, E a n < E b n < E c n < E d n ε ρ n, satisfying as n. E c E b ε n E d E c ε q n 52 E b E a ε q n. Assumption 4. asserts that the positions of eigenvalues of occur with the spacings as described above, and furthermore that this does not happen too high up in the spectrum. This upper bound is necessary as a consequence of the non-uniform convergence in λ of the series in 49. In appendix B we show that assumption 4. is satisfied almost surely if the sequence E j comes from a Poisson process. In this sense, assumption 4. is consistent with the Berry-Tabor conjecture, if is the Hamiltonian corresponding to an integrable dynamical system. We shall also assume a lower bound for the absolute values of the eigenfunctions Φ j at the point p.
Assumption 4.2. There exists a constant c 0 > 0 independent of j such that Φ j p c 0. 53 Remark 4.3. In fact we require only that assumption 4.2 holds for possibly a subsequence of the sequence of pairs Φ b p and Φ c p for eigenfunctions associated with the sequences of energy levels E b and E c defined in assumption 4.. We recall that the spectral sequence is defined in such a way that Φ j p 0 for all j. Thus assumption 4.2 disqualifies subsequences of eigenfunctions converging to 0 at the point p. This assumption reflects the fact that if Φ j p becomes small, two eigenvalues of H π will approach E j. Then we would only be able to prove that the quasi-eigenfunction approximates a certain linear combination of these eigenfunctions of, rather than an actual eigenfunction. Assumption 4.2 can be relaxed slightly see remark 4.5 below. Theorem 4.4. Assume that the spectrum of satisfies assumptions 4. and 4.2. Then the sequence of quasimodes ψ 0,I associated to the sequence of intervals I = [E b, E c ] and µ I, with E a,..., E d as described in assumption 4., after normalisation, converge in L 2 to a subsequence of true eigenfunctions of H π. Let us fix a point n of the sequence ε n with ε n = ε, and I fixed as described in the statement of theorem 4.4. Proof of theorem 4.4. In order to use 23 we will employ partial summation, to estimate the position of eigenvalues of H π. If g is a smooth function, then X E j Y Y ge j Φ j p 2 = gy NY gxnx g tnt dt, 54 X where Nt has been defined in. Equation 54 may be proved by Riemann-Stieltjes integration. Let λ be the solution of 49 lying between E c and E d. Let gt := t λ t + t 2 = + tλ t λ + t 2, 55 and observe that gt > 0 if t > λ and gt < 0 if t < λ. By 49 we have Now, by 54, using. 0 = ge j Φ j p 2 ge c Φ c p 2 + j= E j E d ge j Φ j p 2. 56 ge j Φ j p 2 = ge d NE d g tnt dt 57 E j E E d d = gt dt + O ge d E /2 4π d + g t t /2 dt, E d E d 2
Since we get g t = t λ 2 + t 2 + 2t2 + t 2 2, 58 E d We can also calculate g t t /2 dt t λ 2 dt /2 E d λ E d t λ /2 Ed E d λ E d λ /2 E d gt dt = t /2 E d Ed 3/2 dt = E/2 d E d λ. 59 E d t λ t dt = ln E d λ. 60 + t2 + Ed 2 So we have ge j Φ j p 2 = 4π ln E d λ /2 E d + O E j E d + Ed 2 E d λ, 6 in which the dominant term on the RHS is actually the error term. We have, from 56 implying the lower bound ge c Φ c p 2 E/2 d E d λ 62 Φ c p 2 E c λ ε ρ/2 E d E c λ E c ε ρ/2 ε q λ E c, 63 λ E c ε ρ/2+q. 64 To see this, observe that if λ = oε q+ρ/2 then we would have from 63 a contradiction. Φ c p 2 E c λ ε ρ/2 q, 65 By the same method, we can establish the same bound for the solution to 49 between E a and E b, and by theorem 3.5 we deduce that there is an interval of size M ε q+ρ/2 about µ such that [µ M, µ + M] contains only one eigenvalue of H π. Since q + ρ/2 <, and since the discrepancy of ψ 0,I is Oε, equation 23 allows us to conclude that the normalised quasimode differs from the true eigenfunction associated to µ by an amount which converges to 0 as ε 0. 3
Remark 4.5. From the proof of theorem 4.4 we see that we can relax assumption 4.2 to demanding only that Φ j p ε r/2 with 0 < r < q ρ/2. However, in a generic situation this is unlikely to be achieved. In appendix A we show that for a badly-approximable position of the point p in a rectangle, the best possible bound is which is not sufficiently slow. Φ j p E j, 66 5 Application to rectangular Šeba billiards In this section we will apply theorem 4.4 to the original Šeba billiard [2]. We consider a rectangular billiard Ω = 0, 2a 0, 2b R 2 and point p = a, b at the centre of the billiard. However, we remark that we could position p at any point with co-ordinates that are rational multiples of the side lengths without significant changes to the forthcoming analysis. by The eigenvalues of, the Laplacian with Dirichlet boundary conditions, are given E n,m = π2 4 n 2 a 2 + m2 b 2, 67 where n, m N, and the corresponding eigenfunctions are Φ n,m x, y = nπx mπy sin sin. 68 ab 2a 2b If either n or m are even, then the symmetry of the problem forces Φ n,m p = 0. So for these values of n and m, Φ n,m D p, and are automatically eigenfunctions of the extended operator H π. We exclude these eigenvalues from the spectrum, as discussed in section 2. Instead, we concentrate on the more interesting subsequence where n and m are both odd, e.g. n = 2s + and m = 2t + with s, t = 0,, 2,... Then we have Φ s,t p = ab s+t, 69 so that along this sequence assumption 4.2 is satisfied. The corresponding set of eigenvalues is given by s + E s,t = π 2 2 2 a 2 + t + 2 2 b 2, s, t = 0,, 2,... 70 For generic choices of a and b it is conjectured that the set of values given by 70 behave statistically like the event times of a Poisson process [7, 34, 35, 36]. Under assumption 4. for the set of values 70, theorem 4.4 asserts the existence of a subsequence j n N such that φ jn ψ n 0 as n, 7 where φ j are eigenfunctions of H π, and ψ n are of the form ψ n = Φ jn + βn Φ jn+, 72 2 4
where β n can be 0 or and depends on the relative signs of Φ jn p and Φ jn+p. So the subsequence φ jn converges to a superposition of two consecutive unperturbed eigenfunctions of. The consequences for this subsequence are most striking when one considers the momentum representation. This is is given by the Fourier transform; ˆφ j p x, p y = 2π e ixpx iypy φ j x, y dxdy. 73 For an ergodic system, the quantum ergodicity theorem of Šnirel man, Zelditch and Colin de Verdière [37, 38, 39] would imply that the momentum representation of almost all eigenfunctions equi-distributes around the circle of radius E j as j ; ˆφ j x 2 π δ x 2 E j as j, 74 where convergence in 74 is in the weak sense. Šeba billiards are not ergodic, but we see a very different behaviour to 74 for the subsequence φ jn. From Parseval s theorem, it follows that ˆφ jn ˆψ n 0 in L 2 norm. 75 The momentum representation of the unperturbed eigenfunctions Φ n,m is ˆΦ n,m p x, p y = Since we re-scale and write 2πnm ab n 4p 2 xa 2 n 2 π 2 4p 2 yb 2 m 2 π 2 e 2iapx m e 2ibpy. 76 nπ 4p 2 xa 2 n 2 π 2 = 2 2p x a nπ 2p x a + nπ, 77 ˆΦ n,m np x, mp y = π ab 2nm δ n2p x a + π δ n 2p x a π δ m 2p y b π δ m 2p y b + π, where δ n is the smoothed-delta function 78 δ n t := e int. 79 πit The function δ n t converges weakly to δt as n. Furthermore, it satisfies δ n t 2 2n π δt as n. 80 Hence nm ˆΦ n,m np x, mp y 2 ab δ2p x a π + δ2p x a + π δ2p y b π + δ2p y b + π 8 as n, m. The momentum eigenfunction localises around the 4 points p x, p y = ± nπ 2a, ±mπ, 82 2b 5
which satisfy p 2 x + p 2 y = E n,m. Since ψ n is a superposition of Φ jn and Φ jn+, the states in the subsequence ˆφ jn become localised around 8 points, which all lie on the circle with radius E j, very much in contrast to the expected equi-distribution 74 for ergodic systems. Numerical simulations illustrating this behaviour have been presented in [26]. This localisation is, in some sense, analogous to the scarring phenomenon which occurs in some chaotic systems. Since these states are not associated with an unstable periodic orbit, they do not fall into the very precise definition of a scar given in [40]. Rather they are localising around ghosts of departed tori of the unperturbed integrable system. Nevertheless they cannot be explained simply by using torus quantisation, and so they provide a further example of the already rich behaviours in systems with intermediate statistics. Acknowledgements We are grateful to Gregory Berkolaiko, Jens Bolte, Yves Colin de Verdière and Tom Spencer for interesting conversations about this work. This work has been supported by an EPSRC Senior Research Fellowship JPK, a Royal Society Wolfson Research Merit Award JM and the National Sciences Foundation under research grant DMS-0604859 BW. The writing-up of the manuscript was completed during a visit of two of the authors JM & BW to the Max-Planck-Institut für Mathematik, Bonn. A Non-constant unperturbed eigenfunctions at the position of the scatterer In order to consider what can happen when the value of the unperturbed eigenfunctions at the position of the scatterer can vary, let us consider the rectangular billiard Ω, with sides of length a and b, and Dirichlet boundary conditions. The energy levels are given by n E = E n,m = π 2 2 a 2 + m2 b 2, 83 for n, m integers. Lemma A.. Proof. We have 4π4 n 2 m2 a 2 b 2 E 2. 84 n 0 π 4 2 2 a 2 m2 b 2 = n4 π 4 a 4 2 n2 m 2 a 2 b 2 π4 + m4 π 4 b 4 and then re-arrange to get the required estimate. = E 2 4 n2 m 2 a 2 b 2 π4, 85 6
The eigenfunctions themselves are proportional to nπx mπy sin sin. 86 a b Let us choose the point p = x p, y p Ω so that x p /a and y p /b are badly-approximable, in the sense that n x p a r C n, r Z, 87 n this is the best we can hope to do if we want to bound the eigenfunctions away from 0. Then n x p = r + ϑn 88 a where ϑ can depend on x p and r and satisfies ϑn n 89 uniformly. Furthermore this bound is achieved if r/n is a continued fraction approximant to x p /a. We get sin 2 nπx p a n 2. 90 With a similar bound for the contribution of the y-coordinate, we find that the best bound we can obtain is Φ n,m p 2 n 2 m 2 E 2 9 and this bound is sharp. B Assumption 4. for the event times of a Poisson process The purpose of this appendix is to prove the following result. < ρ < 2 q be fixed throughout. Let 0 < q < /2 and Proposition B.. Let P = E j j= be the sequence of event times for a Poisson process with parameter. There is, almost surely, a sequence ε n n=, ε n 0 such that for each n there are four consecutive members of P, E a < E b < E c < E d < ε ρ n, satisfying E c E b < ε n E d E c > ε q n 92 E b E a > ε q n. Thus, assumption 4. is almost surely satisfied for a Poisson process. As a model for a Poisson process, we will let ξ, ξ 2,... be a sequence of independent exponentially distributed random variables with parameter. Then, defining E = ξ E 2 = ξ + ξ 2 93. The sequence P = E j j= so-formed is a Poisson process. 7
Proposition B.2. Let ε > 0. The probability that there are four consecutive members of P, E a < E b < E c < E d < ε ρ satisfying is Oε. E c E b < ε E d E c > ε q 94 E b E a > ε q, The notation Oε refers to a quantity which goes to zero faster than any power of ε. One can say that the event described in proposition B.2 occurs with overwhelming probability. Let us fix < ρ < ρ, and chose N = 3M ε ρ where M N. Let us define the events S j, j = 0,..., M, by S j = {ξ 3j+ > ε q, ξ 3j+2 < ε, ξ 3j+3 > ε q }. 95 Lemma B.3. The events S j, j = 0,..., M are independent, and the probability that at least one of them occurs is Oε. Proof. The independence of the events S j clearly follows because they are defined on independent random variables. We first calculate the probability of one of them. By independence of ξ, ξ 2, ξ 3, Then, by independence of the S j s, PS 0 = Pξ 2 < εpξ > ε q Pξ 3 > ε q ε 2 = e x dx e x dx 0 = e ε e εq 2 ε q = ε + Oε +q. 96 p := Pat least one S j occurs = PS 0 M = ε + Oε +q M. 97 So, we have log p = Mε + OMε +q 3 ε ρ. 98 For ε sufficiently small, this yields p exp 6 ε ρ = Oε. 99 The probability that the upper bound of ε ρ is met is given in the following lemma Lemma B.4. The probability that E N < ε ρ is Oε. 8
Proof. Let α > 0. The probability density for E N is Γ N x N e x. So p 2 := PE N < N +α = Γ N expanding the binomial. Using N j=0 = exp N +α Γ N N +α x N e x dx 0 x + N +α N e x dx N = exp N +α N +αn, 00 Γ N jn +αj Γ N j N j Γ N N Γ N jn +αj Γ N j=0 j=0 we can estimate where the implied constant could depend on α. This leads to p 2 exp N +α N +αn Γ N exp N +α + NN αn 2πN N αj Γ N, 0 N, 02 where Stirling s formula has been used. This last line is Oε since N ε ρ. Finally setting α = ρ ρ > 0 03 gives the required estimate. Proof of proposition B.2. We are interested in the events corresponding to lemmata B.3 and B.4 happening simultaneously. By the inclusion-exclusion principle, the probability that this happens is at least p + p 2 = Oε. Proof of proposition B.. Let E n, n N be the event that there are found four consecutive members of P, E a < E b < E c < E d < n ρ satisfying E c E b < n E d E c > n q 04 E b E a > n q. By proposition B.2, PE c n n 2. Hence, by the Borel-Cantelli lemma, the probability that infinitely many E c n occur is zero. Equivalently, only finitely many E c n occur, almost surely. So, almost surely, there is an infinite subsequence of n N such that E n occurs. 9
References [] E. Lindenstrauss 2006 Invariant measures and arithmetic quantum unique ergodicity, Ann. of Math. 2 63, pp. 65 29. [2] K. Soundararajan Quantum unique ergodicity for SL 2 Z\H. Preprint arxiv:090.4060. [3] A. Hassell Ergodic billiards that are not quantum unique ergodic. With an appendix by A. Hassell and L. Hillairet. Preprint arxiv:0807.0666. To appear in Ann. Math. [4] E. Bogomolny and C. Schmit 2004 Structure of wave functions of pseudointegrable billiards, Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, art. no. 24402. This article appears at ArXiv:nlin.CD/040207 with title Superscars. [5] N. Burq and M. Zworski 2005 Bouncing ball modes and quantum chaos, SIAM Review 47, pp. 43 49. [6] Y. Colin de Verdière Modes and quasi-modes on surfaces: variation on an idea of Andrew Hassell. Preprint arxiv:0902.2095. [7] H. Donnelly 2003 Quantum unique ergodicity, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 3, pp. 2945 295. [8] L. Hillairet 2006 Clustering of eigenvalues on translation surfaces, Ann. Henri Poincaré 7, pp. 689 70. [9] J. Marklof 2006 Quantum leaks, Commun. Math. Phys. 264, pp. 303 36. [0] R. d. L. Kronig and W. G. Penney 93 Quantum mechanics of electrons in crystal lattices, Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A 30, pp. 499 53. [] S. Albeverio and P. Kurasov Singular perturbations of differential operators, vol. 27 of London Mathematical Society Lecture Note Series. Cambridge University Press 2000. [2] P. Šeba 990 Wave chaos in singular quantum billiard, Phys. Rev. Lett. 64, pp. 855 858. [3] P. Šeba and K. Życzkowski 99 Wave chaos in quantized clasically nonchaotic systems, Phys. Rev. E 44, pp. 3457 3465. [4] T. Shigehara, N. Yoshinaga, T. Cheon, and T. Mizusaki 993 Level spacing distribution of a singular billiard, Phys. Rev. E 47, pp. R3822 R3825. [5] O. Bohigas, M.-J. Giannoni, and C. Schmit 984 Characterization of chaotic quantum spectra and universality of level fluctuation laws, Phys. Rev. Lett. 52, pp. 4. [6] G. Casati, F. Valz-Griz, and I. Guarneri 980 On the connection between the quantization of nonintegrable systems and statistical theory of spectra, Lett. Nuovo Cimento 28, pp. 279 282. [7] M. V. Berry and M. Tabor 977 Level clustering in the regular spectrum, Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A 356, pp. 375 394. 20
[8] S. Albeverio and P. Šeba 99 Wave chaos in quantum systems with point interaction, J. Stat. Phys. 64, pp. 369 383. [9] G. Berkolaiko and J. P. Keating 999 Two-point spectral correlations for star graphs, J. Phys. A 32, pp. 7827 784. [20] G. Berkolaiko, E. B. Bogomolny, and J. P. Keating 200 Star graphs and Šeba billiards, J. Phys. A 34, pp. 335 350. [2] E. Bogomolny and O. Giraud 2002 Semiclassical calculations of the two-point correlation form factor for diffractive systems, Nonlinearity 5, pp. 993 08. [22] E. Bogomolny, U. Gerland, and C. Schmit 200 Singular statistics, Phys. Rev. E 63, art. no. 036206. [23] E. Bogomolny, O. Giraud, and C. Schmit 2002 Nearest-neighbor distribution for singular billiards, Phys. Rev. E 65, art. no. 05624. [24] S. Rahav and S. Fishman 2002 Spectral statistics of rectangular billiards with localized perturbations, Nonlinearity 5, pp. 54 594. [25] S. Rahav, O. Richman, and S. Fishman 2003 Point perturbations of circle billiards, J. Phys. A 36, pp. L529 L536. [26] G. Berkolaiko, J. P. Keating, and B. Winn 2003 Intermediate wavefunction statistics, Phys. Rev. Lett 9, art. no. 3403. [27] G. Berkolaiko, J. P. Keating, and B. Winn 2004 No quantum ergodicity for star graphs, Commun. Math. Phys. 250, pp. 259 285. [28] Y. Colin de Verdière 982 Pseudo-laplaciens. I, Ann. Inst. Fourier Grenoble 32, pp. xiii, 275 286. [29] J. Zorbas 980 Perturbation of self-adjoint operators by Dirac distributions, J. Math. Phys. 2, pp. 840 847. [30] V. J. Ivriĭ 980 The second term of the spectral asymptotics for a Laplace-Beltrami operator on manifolds with boundary, Funktsional. Anal. i Prilozhen. 4, pp. 25 34. [3] J. von Neumann 930 Allgemeine Eigenwerttheorie Hermitescher Funktionaloperatoren, Math. Ann. 02, pp. 49 3. [32] V. F. Lazutkin KAM theory and semiclassical approximations to eigenfunctions vol. 24 of Ergebnisse der Mathematik und ihrer Grenzgebiete 3 [Results in Mathematics and Related Areas 3]. Berlin: Springer-Verlag 993. With an addendum by A. I. Šnirel man. [33] T. Shigehara and T. Cheon 996 Wave chaos in quantum billiards with small but finite-size scatterer, J. Phys. E 54, pp. 32 33. [34] P. Sarnak Values at integers of binary quadratic forms, in Harmonic analysis and number theory Montreal, PQ, 996 vol. 2 of CMS Conf. Proc. pp. 8 203 Providence, RI: Amer. Math. Soc. 997. 2
[35] A. Eskin, G. Margulis, and S. Mozes 2005 Quadratic forms of signature 2, 2 and eigenvalue spacings on rectangular 2-tori, Ann. of Math. 2 6, pp. 679 725. [36] J. Marklof 998 Spectral form factors of rectangle billiards, Commun. Math. Phys. 99, pp. 69 202. [37] A. I. Šnirel man 974 Ergodic properties of eigenfunctions, Usp. Math. Nauk. 29, pp. 8 82. [38] S. Zelditch 987 Uniform distribution of the eigenfunctions on compact hyperbolic surfaces, Duke Math. J. 55, pp. 99 94. [39] Y. Colin de Verdière 985 Ergodicité et fonctions propres du Laplacien, Commun. Math. Phys. 02, pp. 497 502. [40] L. Kaplan 999 Scars in quantum chaotic wavefunctions, Nonlinearity 2, pp. R R40. 22