arXiv:1909.07661v2 [math-ph] 11 Jan 2021 broeaoshv h aefr oan u h intersecti the m is but massive operators domain, the form fiber same for the hold have operators also fiber that almo operators an fiber to renormalized us allows unnat remove it to Third, us hypotheses. allows to general it Second, very expected under in spin. be found with cannot models method which as the such models all, invariant of translation First avoi to of threefold: purpose is The ingredient momen a invariance. an p on rotation rely sta via the we derived Instead, ground in states [Miy18]). of used (see available non-degeneracy method be avoids o would The fiber crucially the but for model. states [Dam20], Nelson ground of massless absence prove renormalized we paper, this In Introduction 1 bec fGon ttsi h Renormalized the in States Ground of Absence asesTasainIvratNlo Model Nelson Translation-Invariant Massless ∗ ln h a,w bansvrlnwrslsaottedomain the about results new several obtain we way, the Along rsn ffiito:Dnk ak uefl nltc,QA La QRA, Analytics, Superfly Bank, Danske Affiliation: Present eomlzdHmlo prtreit nti ae Furthe It operators. case. fiber this model. into Nelson in decomposes the exists as operator to Hamilton referred renormalized widely non-relativist field, uncharged massive bosonic a less of model the consider We eae oes ao nacmn epoiei htteme the eigenspaces. that generalizatio state is new provide ground a we degenerate enhancement is with major states A ground models. of related absence constant the coupling for d non-zero operators any proof fiber for the hold that especially prove results and domains form and operator nti ae,w ra h eomlzdfie prtr.W g We operators. fiber renormalized the treat we paper, this In hmsNra Dam Norman Thomas ahsUniversitet Aarhus odeRngd 1 Ringgade Nordre { 0 00Aru C Aarhus 8000 } Denmark ncs fte3dmninlNlo model. Nelson 3-dimensional the of case in ∗ uy2,2021 28, July Abstract rerc cilrUiesttJena Universität Schiller Friedrich [email protected] ejmnHinrichs Benjamin rs-bePaz2 Ernst-Abbe-Platz sgd 1 03Cpnae ,Denmark K, Copenhagen 1063 11, ksegade ignndgnrc fgon ttsas states ground of non-degeneracy ding n rirr oa oetm Our momentum. total arbitrary and nbtentedmi ftodifferent two of domain the between on 74 Jena 07743 hspprcni rnil eapplied be principle in can paper this ,det rnlto-naine it translation-invariance, to due r, cpril neatn ihamass- a with interacting particle ic u siaefrhpteia ground hypothetical for estimate tum e sa nrdet vntog it though even ingredient, an as tes Germany dl npriua,w hwta all that show we particular, In odel. tsl-otie ro forclaim. our of proof self-contained st fmtosrcnl ple to applied recently methods of n rltcnclasmtosadwork and assumptions technical ural swl nw hta ultraviolet an that known well is eaosi h rnlto invariant translation the in perators aenndgnrt rudstates, ground non-degenerate have o aeagon tt.Our state. ground a have not o hdcnb ple omodels to applied be can thod offlosaogtelnsof lines the along follows roof n h omdmi fthe of domain form the and v ecito fthe of description a ive T.N. Dam, B. Hinrichs 2

To further introduce the results, we will use vague but standard definitions of the operators. For rigorous definitions we refer the reader to Section 2. The Nelson model was originally treated by Edward Nelson in his paper [Nel64]. He investigated a formal expression for a Hamiltonian describing the interaction of a chargeless particle with a scalar bosonic field. We here denote the dispersion relation of the bosonic field as ω : R3 R and the → interaction function between particle and field as v : R3 R. In the physical case, they are given as ω(k) = µ2 + k2 and v = gω−1/2 for some coupling→ constant g R 0 and the photon ∈ \{ } mass µ 0p. By removing the interaction between the particle and field modes with momentum ≥ larger than a parameter Λ (0, ), the so-called ultraviolet cutoff, Nelson was able to define the corresponding operator acting∈ on∞ψ L2(R3, ) as ∈ F

−ikx † HΛψ(x)= ∆xψ(x)+ dΓ(ω)ψ(x)+ e v(k)(a + ak)ψ(x)dk. − Z k |k|<Λ

2 3 2 3 Here, ∆x denotes the positive Laplacian on L (R ), denotes the bosonic Fock space on L (R ), − F † dΓ is the second-quantization of a multiplication operator, and ak, ak are the pointwise annihilation and creation operators. He then found a constant EΛ, sometimes referred to as the self-energy, such that H E converges to an operator H in the strong resolvent sense as Λ . H is Λ − Λ ∞ → ∞ ∞ the operator we refer to as the translation-invariant renormalized Nelson Hamiltonian. It was later proven in [Can71] that the convergence is actually in the norm resolvent sense. The operators HΛ and H∞ strongly commute with the total momentum

P = i + dΓ(m), where m : R3 R3, k k, − ∇ → 7→ which is the reason they are called translation-invariant. This implies that there is a unitary operator V (sometimes called the Lee-Low-Pines operator, see [LLP53]) such that the operator ∗ VHΛV decomposes into a direct integral

⊕ ∗ VHΛV = HΛ(ξ)dξ for all Λ (0, ], ZR3 ∈ ∞ where the so-called fiber operators H (ξ) act on . For Λ < they can explicitly be written as Λ F ∞

2 † HΛ(ξ)=(ξ dΓ(m)) + dΓ(ω)+ v(k)(a + ak)dk. − Z k |k|<Λ

In [Can71] it was also proven, that HΛ(ξ) EΛ converges to H∞(ξ) in the norm resolvent sense as Λ for all ξ R3. − →∞ ∈ The treatment of the renormalized operators H∞ and H∞(ξ) is considerably harder than ana- lyzing the operators with finite cutoff Λ < , starting with the identification of form and operator ∞ domains. Results on the full operator H∞ are hereby derived in [GW18], whereas we treat the renormalized fibers H∞(ξ) (cf. Theorem 2.6). Explicitly, we prove that the form domain of the renormalized fibers H∞(ξ) is independent of the total momentum ξ. We further derive a necessary and sufficient condition for the operator domain to also be independent of ξ. If this is not the case, we show that the domains of H∞(ξ1) and H∞(ξ2) only have the zero-vector in common if ξ1 = ξ2. This result especially holds for the physical case independent of coupling constant or photon mass.6 Theorem 3.8 in Section 3 also contains numerous interesting results about improved convergence of H (ξ) as Λ , which hold in very high generality. In a recent paper [LS19] an explicit expression Λ →∞ Absence of Ground States in the Renormalized Massless Translation-Invariant Nelson Model T.N. Dam, B. Hinrichs 3

for the renormalized operators has been derived using interior boundary conditions. However, the regularity assumptions therein are considerably stronger than the ones we use. We say the Nelson model is infrared divergent, if v/ω is not square-integrable in any ball centred at zero. In the physical example this is the case if we set the photon mass µ =0. In Theorem 2.7, we prove that in case of infrared divergence the renormalized operator H∞(ξ) does not have a 3 ground state for any ξ R , i.e., inf σ(H∞(ξ)) is not an eigenvalue. The proof is based on the techniques developed in∈ the papers [Dam20, HH08], but extends them to a more general setting. The method used in [HH08] needs the differentiability of the mass-shell ΣΛ(ξ) = inf(σ(HΛ(ξ))) with nonzero derivative, which is hard to prove by itself. In [Dam20] this condition is replaced by using the non-degeneracy of the eigenspace associated with ΣΛ(ξ), which yields the first non-perturbative proof along this line. Using new results from [Miy19, Miy18] the non-degeneracy of Σ∞(ξ) can be proven. This, in principal, would allow us to extend the method from [Dam20] to the renormalized case more directly. This, however, has two severe disadvantages. First, proving the non-degeneracy of the mass-shell requires the use of a technically different approach, based on the work of Perron, Frobenius and Faris. Second, it prevents the method from being applied to any model having a natural degeneracy of the mass-shell, such as models involving spins. Therefore, we derive a generalization of the method in [Dam20] which lets us drop the assumption of non-degeneracy and can therefore be applied to a broader class of models. Theorem 2.7 stands in a long line of results on ground state existence and absence for the Nelson model. For the full operator with cutoff HΛ existence in the infrared regular case, i.e., µ> 0 for the physical example, goes back to [G00],´ while non-existence in the infrared divergent case is proven in [DG04]. The equivalent results for the renormalized operator H∞ can be found in [GHL14] and [HM19]. The situation is similar for the fiber operators. The infrared regular case is treated in [Fro73, Fro74]. For the non-renormalized fiber operators HΛ(ξ) absence of ground states for all ξ R3 and Λ (0, ) in the infrared divergent case is proven in [Dam20]. Our result is therefore a somewhat∈ natural,∈ although∞ non-trivial, generalization of known results. In the context of scattering theory this result poses some challenges, as ground states near ξ = 0 are used to define scattering states, which is why results of this type are often referred to as the infrared catastrophe. One workaround is to construct ground states in a so called non-equivalent Fock representation, which is done in [BDP12, Piz03].

2 Notation, Model and Main Result

In this section we first introduce Fock space notation and operators in Section 2.1. Then, we define the Nelson model in Section 2.2 and state our main results Theorem 2.6 and Theorem 2.7. 2.1 Fock Space Operators

Throughout this paper we assume ν N and write = L2(Rν) for the state space of a single boson. Then, let be the bosonic Fock∈ space definedH by F ∞ = C (n) with (n) = L2 (Rnν), (2.1) F ⊕ F F sym Mn=1 where we symmetrize over the n Rν -variables in each component. We write an element ψ in ∈ F terms of its coordinates ψ =(ψ(n)) and define the vacuum Ω=(1, 0, 0,... ).

Absence of Ground States in the Renormalized Massless Translation-Invariant Nelson Model T.N. Dam, B. Hinrichs 4

For measurable functions ω : Rν R we define → ∞ n dΓ(ω)=0 ω(n) with ω(n)(k ,...,k )= ω(k ). (2.2) ⊕ 1 n i Mn=1 Xi=1 Further, for unitary operators U on we define H ∞ Γ(U)=1 U ⊗n (2.3) ⊕ Mn=1 as operators on . We will write Γ(n)(U) for the restriction to (n). F F For g we define a so-called coherent state ǫ(g) ( ) by ǫ(g)(0) =1 and ∈ H ∈F H 1 n ǫ(g)(n)(k ,...,k )= g(k ). (2.4) 1 n √ i n! Yi=1

Also for g we define the annihilation operator a(g) and creation operator a†(g) using a(g)Ω=0, a†(g)Ω = g∈and H for f (n) ∈F

a(g)f(k1,...,kn−1)= √n g(k)f(k,k1,...,kn−1)dk, (2.5) Z n+1 † 1 a (g)f(k1,...,kn,kn+1)= g(ki)f(k1,..., ki,...,kn+1), (2.6) √n +1 Xi=1 b where ki means that ki is omitted from the argument. One can show that these operators can be extended to closed operators on that satisfy (a(g))∗ = a†(g). From the creation and annihilation b operator, we define the symmetricF operator

ϕ(g)= a(g)+ a†(g). (2.7)

For h there exists a unique unitary map W (h), called Weyl operator, such that ∈ H − 1 khk2−hh,gi W (h)ǫ(g)= e 2 ǫ(h + g) for all g . (2.8) ∈ H Some well-known properties of the above operators are collected in the next lemma.

Lemma 2.1. Let ω : Rν R be a measurable function, U be an unitary operator on and f,g . Then → H ∈ H (1) dΓ(ω) is selfadjoint. If ω 0, then dΓ(ω) 0. ≥ ≥ (2) ϕ(g) is selfadjoint and eiϕ(g) = W ( ig). − (3) Γ(U) is unitary with Γ(U)∗ = Γ(U ∗) and

Γ(U)ϕ(g)Γ(U)∗ = ϕ(Ug), Γ(U)W (f)Γ(U)∗ = W (Uf), Γ(U)dΓ(ω)Γ(U)∗ = dΓ(UωU ∗).

Absence of Ground States in the Renormalized Massless Translation-Invariant Nelson Model T.N. Dam, B. Hinrichs 5

− 1 1/2 (4) Assume ω > 0 almost everywhere and g (ω 2 ). Then ϕ(g) and a(g) are dΓ(ω) -bounded and we have the bounds ∈D

− 1 1 a(g)ψ ω 2 g dΓ(ω) 2 ψ and k k≤k kk k − 1 1 ϕ(g)ψ 2 (ω 2 + 1)g (dΓ(ω)+1) 2 ψ , k k ≤ k kk k 1 which hold on (dΓ(ω) 2 ). Especially, ϕ(g) is infinitesimally dΓ(ω)-bounded. Furthermore, D − 1 2 dΓ(ω)+ ϕ(g) ω 2 g . ≥ −k k (5) f W (f) is strongly continuous and W (f)W (g)= e−i Im(hf,gi)W (f + g). 7→ Proof. These results can for example be found in [LHB11, Par92, Ara18].

ν p If we have a measurable function h : R R with coordinate functions h1, ..., hp, it follows that dΓ(h ) and dΓ(h ) have commuting unitary→ groups for any j = i. For a function f : Rp R we i j 6 → will then write ∞ f(dΓ(h)) := f(dΓ(h ), ..., dΓ(h ))=0 f(h(n)) (2.9) 1 p ⊕ Mn=1 (n) where h (k1, ..., kn)= h(k1)+ ... + h(kn). We will need the following lemma.

ν p p Lemma 2.2. Let h : R R be measurable with coordinate functions h1, ..., hp. For all ξ R → ν ∈ and s> 0 we have ( dΓ(h) ξ s)= ( dΓ(h ) s). Further, if ω : Rν R and h(k) ω(k) D | − | i=1 D | i | → | |≤ for all k Rν then for all s [0, 1] theT operator dΓ(h) s is dΓ(ω)-bounded. ∈ ∈ | | Proof. For all x, ξ ,ξ Rp we have the inequalities 1 2 ∈ p x ξ 2s 22s( x ξ 2s + ξ ξ 2s) and x 2s x 2s ν2s x 2s. | − 1| ≤ | − 2| | 2 − 1| | i| ≤| | ≤ | i| Xi=1 Together with the spectral theorem this shows ( dΓ(h) ξ s) is independent of ξ and ( dΓ(h) s)= ν ( dΓ(h ) s). Fix s [0, 1] and note thatD | − | D | | i=1 D | i | ∈ T h(n)(k , .., k ) s h(n)(k , .., k ) +1 ω(n)(k , .., k )+1. | 1 n | ≤| 1 n | ≤ 1 n This proves dΓ(h) s is dΓ(ω)-bounded. | | 2.2 The Translation Invariant Nelson Model

To define the Nelson model, we fix two measurable functions ω : Rν R and v : Rν R. For each Λ 0 we define v (k)=1 v(k). → → ≥ Λ {|k|≤Λ} Hypothesis 1. We say ω and v satisfy Hypothesis 1 if the following holds.

(1) ω > 0 λν-almost everywhere. (2) v (ω−1/2) for all Λ 0. Λ ∈D ≥

Absence of Ground States in the Renormalized Massless Translation-Invariant Nelson Model T.N. Dam, B. Hinrichs 6

2 ν ik·x Let Vx denote the unitary map on L (R ) defined as multiplication by k e . The Nelson model with ultraviolet cutoff Λ is defined as 7→

⊕ HΛ = ∆ 1+1 dΓ(ω)+ ϕ(V−xvΛ)dx (2.10) − ⊗ ⊗ ZRν on L2(Rν, ). For a detailed definition and properties of direct integrals, we refer the reader to AppendixF C. Note, that the dominated convergence theorem implies strong continuity of the map x V , so the direct integral makes sense by Lemma C.2. 7→ x Let m : Rν Rν, m(k) := k. Given ξ Rν we then define the fiber operators → ∈ H (ξ)= ξ dΓ(m) 2+dΓ(ω)+ ϕ(v ) (2.11) Λ | − | Λ on . We have F Proposition 2.3. Assume Hypothesis 1 holds. Then for all Λ 0 and ξ Rν ≥ ∈ (1) H is selfadjoint on (H ) and bounded below, Λ D 0 (2) H (ξ) is selfadjoint on (H (0)) = (dΓ(ω)) ( dΓ(m) 2) and bounded below. Λ D 0 D ∩D | |

Proof. The operators H0 and H0(0) are sums of selfadjoint nonnegative commuting operators and hence nonnegative and selfadjoint. By the Kato-Rellich theorem (cf. [RS75, Theorem X.12]) and Lemmas 2.1 and C.2 we find HΛ and HΛ(ξ) are selfadjoint on the domains (H0) and (H0(ξ)), respectively. That (H (ξ)) = (H (0)) follows from Lemma 2.2. D D D 0 D 0 The connection between the fiber operators and the full model is described in the following propo- sition, which goes back to [LLP53].

Proposition 2.4. Define the operator (also known as the Lee-Low-Pines operator)

⊕ ∗ V =(F 1) Γ(Vx)dx, (2.12) ⊗ ZRν where F denotes the Fourier transform on L2(Rν). If Hypothesis 1 holds and Λ [0, ), then ∈ ∞ ⊕ ∗ VHΛV = (HΛ(ξ))dξ. (2.13) ZRν We now want to renormalize the model, i.e., remove the ultraviolet cutoff Λ. To that end, we need the following assumptions.

Hypothesis 2. We say ω and v fulfill Hypothesis 2, if the following holds.

(1) There is σ > 0 such that mσ := inf|k|≥σ ω(k) > 0,

v(k) 2 v(k) 2ω(k) | | dk < and | | dk < . Z ω(k)1/2(1 + k 2) ∞ Z (1 + k 2)2 ∞ {|k|>σ} | | {|k|>σ} | | (2) v(k)= v( k) and ω(k)= ω( k) for all k Rν. − − ∈ (3) k ω(k)(1 + k 2)−1 is bounded. 7→ | | Absence of Ground States in the Renormalized Massless Translation-Invariant Nelson Model T.N. Dam, B. Hinrichs 7

Now define v(k) 2 EΛ = | | dk, (2.14) Z ω(k)+ k 2 |k|≤Λ | | which is finite by assumption Hypothesis 1 (2). The self-energy renormalization of the Nelson model goes back to [Nel64, Can71] and is stated in the following proposition.

Proposition 2.5. Assume Hypotheses 1 and 2 hold. Then

(1) There is a selfadjoint and lower-bounded operator H∞, such that HΛ + EΛ converges to H∞ in the norm resolvent sense as Λ . →∞ ν (2) For all ξ R there is a selfadjoint and lower-bounded operator H∞(ξ), such that HΛ(ξ)+ EΛ converges∈ to H (ξ) in the norm resolvent sense as Λ . ∞ →∞ Further, ξ inf σ(H (ξ)) is continuous and uniformly bounded below. 7→ ∞ (3) The map ξ H (ξ) is continuous in the norm resolvent sense and the decomposition (2.13) 7→ ∞ holds for Λ= . ∞

The domain of the full renormalized operator H∞ is thoroughly studied in [GW18]. We review their results in Section 3 and derive similar statements for the renormalized fiber operators H∞(ξ) in Theorem 3.8. For the case Λ < a straightforward calculation from the definition (2.11) leads to the transformation law ∞

H (ξ )= H (ξ ) 2dΓ((ξ ξ ) m)+2(ξ ξ ) ξ + ξ ξ 2 (2.15) Λ 2 Λ 1 − 2 − 1 · 2 − 1 · 1 | 2 − 1| for ξ ,ξ Rν. However, in the Λ= case, this statement heavily depends on the domains of the 1 2 ∈ ∞ involved operators. For a selfadjoint operator A we define the associated sesquilinear form as

q (ψ,φ)= A 1/2ψ, Sign(A) A 1/2φ for all ψ,φ (A)= ( A 1/2). (2.16) A h| | | | i ∈ Q D | | We prove the following result on the renormalized fiber operators.

Theorem 2.6. Assume Hypotheses 1 and 2 hold and let σ as in Hypothesis 2 (1). For K σ we ≥ define BK as ∈ H v(k) B (k)=1 (k) . K {K≤|k|} ω(k)+ k 2 | | The following domain and transformation statements hold:

(1) The form domain of H (ξ) is independent of ξ Rν. Explicitly, ∞ ∈ (H (ξ)) = W (B )∗ (H (0)1/2) for any K σ. Q ∞ K D 0 ≥ 1/2 2/3 Further, (H∞(ξ)) (dΓ(ω) ) ( dΓ(m) ) and the transformation rule (2.15) with Λ= holdsQ in the sense⊂ D of sesquilinear∩D forms| for| all ξ ,ξ Rν. ∞ 1 2 ∈ ν (2) For ξ1,ξ2 R the operator domains satisfy (H∞(ξ1)) = (H∞(ξ2)) if and only if k (ξ ξ ) kB∈ (k) is square-integrable. In this case,D the transformationD rule (2.15) with Λ= 7→ 2 − 1 · K ∞ holds. Otherwise, (H (ξ )) (H (ξ )) = 0 . D ∞ 1 ∩D ∞ 2 { } Absence of Ground States in the Renormalized Massless Translation-Invariant Nelson Model T.N. Dam, B. Hinrichs 8

For our main result we add a third hypothesis. Hypothesis 3. We say ω and v fulfill Hypothesis 3, if the following holds. (1) ω is continuous and k > k implies ω(k ) >ω(k ). | 1| | 2| 1 2 (2) ω and v are rotation invariant. (3) v / (ω−1) for one and hence all Λ > 0. Λ ∈D k (4) The limit Cω = lim | | (0, ) exists. k→0 ω(k) ∈ ∞ For Λ [0, ] let Σ (ξ) = inf(σ(H (ξ))). We obtain the following theorem. ∈ ∞ Λ Λ Theorem 2.7. Assume Hypotheses 1, 2 and 3 hold and ν 2. Then Σ∞(ξ) is not an eigenvalue of H (ξ) for any ξ Rν. ≥ ∞ ∈ Example 2.8. We refer to the physical case of a (possibly massive) uncharged non-relativistic particle interacting with a radiation field in ν = 3 dimensions. In this case ω(k) = µ2 + k2 and v = gω−1/2. We note that Hypotheses 1 and 2 are satisfied for any photon mass µ 0pand coupling constant g =0. One easily checks that (ξ ξ ) kB (k) is not square-integrable≥ for any choice of 6 2 − 1 · K ξ1 = ξ2 and K > 0. Hence, by Theorem 2.6, (H∞(ξ1)) (H∞(ξ2)) = 0 if ξ1 = ξ2. 6 The physical model is infrared divergentD in the massless∩D case µ = 0{, i.e.,} it then6 satisfies Hy- pothesis 3. By Theorem 2.7 there is no ground state in this case. Hence, a massive non-relativistic particle interacting with a quantized massless bosonic field does not exhibit a stable ground state, due to infrared divergence.

3 Fiber Renormalization

In this section we go into more details on the renormalization procedure for the fiber operators. The central result we obtain is Theorem 3.8, which gives a collection of regularity results on the renormalized fiber operators. We then use these to prove Theorem 2.6. We begin by recalling the renormalization procedure outlined in [GW18], as we will need some of their results in our proofs. Throughout this section, we assume that Hypotheses 1 and 2 hold and define σ as in Hypothesis 2 (1). For σ K < Λ we define the map ≤ ≤∞ v(k) B (k)=1 (k) . (3.1) K,Λ {K≤|k|≤Λ} ω(k)+ k 2 | | We collect some regularity properties of these functions for future reference. Lemma 3.1. Let σ K < Λ . Then the following holds: ≤ ≤∞ (1) B (ωa) ( m b) (ωa m b) for all a, b R K,Λ ∈D ∩D | | ∩D | | ∈ (2) B (ω1/2) (ω−1/2 m ) ( m s) for all s 2 K,∞ ∈D ∩D | | ∩D | | ≤ 3 ∞ Rν Proof. (1) holds, since BK,Λ is compactly supported and ω Lloc( ) by Hypothesis 2 (3). Now (2) follows due to the inequality ∈

2/3 1/2 −1/4 m(k) ω(k) 1 2/3 1/2 (k)+ m(k) ω(k) 1 2/3 1/2 (k), | | ≤ {|m| ≤ω } | | {|m| >ω } the integrability conditions in Hypothesis 2 (1) and Hypothesis 2 (3). Absence of Ground States in the Renormalized Massless Translation-Invariant Nelson Model T.N. Dam, B. Hinrichs 9

Since the Weyl representation is strongly continuous, the direct integral

⊕ UK,Λ := W (V−xBK,Λ)dx (3.2) ZRν exists. Using this, we define

∗ HK,Λ = UK,ΛHΛUK,Λ + EΛ. (3.3) Now, the following proposition is [GW18, Pages 5-8]. Proposition 3.2. For all σ K < Λ < we have ≤ ∞ (H )= U (H )= (H ). D K,Λ K,ΛD 0 D 0 Moreover, there is a symmetric sesquilinear form Q on (H ), such that K,Λ Q 0

qHK,Λ = qH0 + QK,Λ. (1) For any ε> 0 there are K,b > 0, such that

Q (ψ, ψ) εq (ψ, ψ)+ b ψ 2 for all Λ >K and ψ (H1/2). | K,Λ |≤ H0 k k ∈D 0 (2) For any K σ and ε> 0 there is Λ >K, such that ≥ 0 ′ 1/2 Q (ψ, ψ) Q ′ (ψ, ψ) εq (ψ, ψ) for Λ, Λ > Λ and ψ (H ). | K,Λ − K,Λ |≤ H0 0 ∈D 0 (3) There exists a sesquilinear form Q on (H1/2), such that K,∞ D 0 1/2 QK,∞(ψ,φ) = lim QK,Λ(ψ,φ) for φ, ψ (H0 ). Λ→∞ ∈D The bounds in (1) and (2) are also satisfied for Λ= . ∞ Griesemer and Wünsch use above proposition to deduce the existence of the norm-resolvent limit HK,∞ in [GW18, Theorem 3.3]. We add some further technical properties to their results in the next proposition. From now on, we will write the resolvents of H with K σ and Λ (K, ] K,Λ ≥ ∈ ∞ as R (z)=(H z)−1 for any z / σ(H ). (3.4) K,Λ K,Λ − ∈ K,Λ Proposition 3.3. Fix any K σ. ≥ (1) The operators HK,Λ are bounded below uniformly in Λ > K. As Λ they converge to a lower-bounded selfadjoint operator H in the norm resolvent sense.→ ∞ Further, (H ) = K,∞ Q K,∞ (H ) and q = q + Q . Q 0 HK,∞ H0 K,∞ (2) For λ< inf σ(H ) there is Λ >K, such that λ< inf σ(H ) for Λ Λ . K,∞ 0 K,Λ ≥ 0 Setting C (λ) := (H + 1)1/2R (λ)1/2 (L2(Rν, )) we have K,Λ 0 K,Λ ∈ B F ∗ ∗ lim CK,Λ(λ)CK,Λ(λ) = CK,∞(λ)CK,∞(λ) . Λ→∞

(3) The operators HΛ + EΛ are uniformly bounded below and converge to the operator H∞ = U H U ∗ in the norm resolvent sense as Λ . K,∞ K,∞ K,∞ →∞ Absence of Ground States in the Renormalized Massless Translation-Invariant Nelson Model T.N. Dam, B. Hinrichs 10

Proof. We first prove the uniform lower bounds in (1) and (3). Pick K′,b> 0 as in Proposition 3.2 (1) corresponding to ε =1/2. Then for Λ >K′ we have

q ′ = q + Q b HK ,Λ H0 K,Λ ≥ − showing HK′,Λ is uniformly bounded below by b. As inf σ(HK,Λ) = inf σ(HΛ)+ EΛ for all K < Λ, − ′ it remains only to prove HΛ is uniformly bounded below on [0,K ]. However, this directly follows from Lemma C.2. The convergence in (1) and (3) is covered in [GW18] for all K larger than some K′ > σ. Hence, we may assume they hold for K′ and only need to prove the statement for all K [σ, K′). Observe ∈ that for Λ [K′, ] we have U = U ′ U ′ = U ′ U ′ by Lemma 2.1, so ∈ ∞ K,Λ K,K K ,Λ K ,Λ K,K

′ ′ ∗ ∗ ′ ′ ∗ HK,Λ = UK,K UK ,Λ(HΛ + EΛ)UK′,ΛUK,K′ = UK,K HK ,ΛUK,K′ (3.5)

′ ′ ′ ∗ holds for all Λ [K , ). Hence HK,Λ converges to HK,∞ = UK,K HK ,∞UK,K′ in the norm resolvent sense. Using this∈ we also∞ obtain

∗ ′ ′ H∞ = UK′,∞HK ,∞UK ,∞

∗ ∗ ′ ′ ∗ ′ ′ = UK′,∞UK,K′ UK,K HK ,∞UK,K′ UK,K UK ,∞ ∗ = UK,∞HK,∞UK,∞.

As UK,K′ (H0) = (H0) by Proposition 3.2, we see from Lemma A.1 that UK,K′ (H0) = (H0). D D ′ Q Q Now, since (HK′,∞) = (H0) by assumption on K , we obtain (HK,∞) = UK,K′ (HK′,∞) = Q Q Q ∗ Q (H ). For φ, ψ (H ) we use (3.5) and the fact H = U ′ H ′ U ′ to obtain Q 0 ∈ Q K,∞ K,∞ K,K K ,∞ K,K ∗ ∗ ′ ′ ′ qHK,∞ (φ, ψ)= qHK ,∞ (UK,K φ, UK,K ψ) ∗ ∗ = lim qH ′ (UK,K′ φ, UK,K′ψ) Λ→∞ K ,Λ

= lim qH (φ, ψ) Λ→∞ K,Λ

= qH0 (φ, ψ)+ QK,∞(φ, ψ), which concludes the proofs of (1) and (3). It remains only to prove (2), so let λ < inf σ(HK,∞). By Lemma A.7 lim inf σ(HK,Λ) = Λ→∞ inf σ(H ), so there is Λ > K such that λ < inf σ(H ) for all Λ Λ . We set Z = K,∞ 0 K,Λ ≥ 0 H1/2R (λ)1/2 . For ε> 0 we choose δ , such that k 0 K,∞ k ε Z2δ Z2δ < 1 and C (λ) 2 ε < ε. ε k K,∞ k 1 Z2δ − ε By Proposition 3.2 (2) there is Λ , such that q := q q satisfies ε K,Λ HK,Λ − HK,∞ q (ψ, ψ) δ H1/2ψ 2 for all ψ (H1/2) and Λ Λ . | K,Λ | ≤ εk 0 k ∈D 0 ≥ ε Hence, by Lemma A.5, the sesquilinear form q (R (λ)1/2 , R (λ)1/2 ) is bounded by Z2δ , so K,Λ K,∞ · K,∞ · ε there is a corresponding operator D with D Z2δ < 1. Further, we have ε k εk≤ ε 1/2 −1 1/2 RK,Λ(λ)= RK,∞(λ) (1 + Dε) RK,∞(λ)

Absence of Ground States in the Renormalized Massless Translation-Invariant Nelson Model T.N. Dam, B. Hinrichs 11

and hence

C (λ)C (λ)∗ C (λ)C (λ)∗ = C (λ)((1 + D )−1 1)C (λ)∗ k K,Λ K,Λ − K,∞ K,∞ k k K,∞ ε − K,∞ k Z2δ C (λ) 2 ε < ε, ≤k K,∞ k 1 Z2δ − ε finishing the proof. We want to prove a similar theorem for the fiber operators. Therefore, let σ K < Λ < and ≤ ∞ define

∗ HK,Λ(ξ)= W (BK,Λ)HΛ(ξ)W (BK,Λ) + EΛ and (3.6)

ΣK,Λ(ξ) = inf σ(HK,Λ(ξ))=ΣΛ(ξ)+ EΛ. (3.7)

Let V be the unitary transformation from Proposition 2.4. Using Lemma 2.1 we have

⊕ ⊕ ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ V UK,ΛV =(F 1) Γ(Vx)W (Vx BK,Λ)Γ(Vx )dx(F 1) = W (BK,Λ)dx. ⊗ ZRν ⊗ ZRν Combined with Proposition 2.4 this implies

⊕ ∗ VHK,ΛV = (HK,Λ(ξ))dξ. ZRν Lemma 3.4. H (ξ) is selfadjoint on (H (0)) for all ξ Rν. K,Λ D 0 ∈

Proof. Since (HK,Λ(ξ)) = W (BK,Λ) (HΛ(ξ)) = W (BK,Λ) (HΛ(0)) for all ξ we see the domain does not dependD on ξ. As (H ) =D (H ), it followsD from Lemma C.5 that (H (ξ)) = D 0 D K,Λ D K,Λ (H (ξ)) = (H (0)) for almost all ξ, hence it holds for all ξ. D 0 D 0 Throughout this paper, we will need to treat differences of fiber operators appropriately. To this end, we define for k,ξ Rν the operator ∈ D (k) := 2k (ξ dΓ(m)) + k 2 = 2dΓ(k m)+2k ξ + k 2, (3.8) ξ · − | | − · · | | which by (2.15) satisfies

H (ξ + k)= H (ξ)+ D (k) for all Λ [0, ), ξ,k Rν. (3.9) Λ Λ ξ ∈ ∞ ∈

The next lemma collects some statements on the regularity of Dξ(k). Hereby and henceforth, we denote B =(H (ξ)+1)1/2 for ξ Rν. (3.10) ξ 0 ∈ Lemma 3.5. Let a 0 and c R. The operator D (k) c a is Ba-bounded for all ξ,k Rν. ≥ ∈ | ξ − | ξ ∈ Further, D (k)B−1 4 k holds for all k,ξ Rν with k 1 and k ξ ξ k ≤ | | ∈ | | ≤ B−a = B−a(1 + D (k)B−2)−a/2 for k < 1 (3.11) ξ+k ξ ξ ξ | | 4 −2 −a/2 lim(1 + Dξ(k)Bξ ) =1. (3.12) k→0

Absence of Ground States in the Renormalized Massless Translation-Invariant Nelson Model T.N. Dam, B. Hinrichs 12

Proof. We observe the operator D (k) c aB−a acts on (n) as multiplication by the function | ξ − | ξ F 2k (ξ k k )+ k 2 c a f (k ,...,k )= | · − 1 −···− n | | − | . n 1 n (1 + ω(n)(k ,...,k )+ ξ k k 2)a 1 n | − 1 −···− n| Since f 2a( k a + k 2 c a), the operator D (k) c aBa is bounded. Hence, D (k) a is Ba- | n| ≤ | | || | − | | ξ − | ξ | ξ | ξ bounded and the bound D (k)B−1 4 k holds for k < 1. For k < 1 we have D (k)B−2 < k ξ ξ k ≤ | | | | | | 4 k ξ ξ k 4 k < 1 as B 1 and hence 1+ D (k)B−2 is invertible. (3.11) follows using (3.9) and the fact | | k ξk ≤ ξ ξ that H0(ξ) and Dξ(k) commute. We now see

−1 −a/2 −a/2 k→0 (1 + Dξ(k)(H0(ξ)+1) ) 1 sup ((1+4x) 1) 0. k − k ≤ |x|≤|k| − −−→

Similar to (3.4) we define the fiber resolvents

R (z)=(H (ξ)+ E z)−1 and R (z)=(H (ξ) z)−1. (3.13) ξ,Λ Λ Λ − ξ,K,Λ K,Λ −

Note, that we set E∞ =0 in the Λ= case. To renormalize fiber operators we∞ will need a collection of continuity statements for resolvents of the fiber operators. They are collected in the next proposition. Proposition 3.6. Let k,ξ Rν. Then the following holds. ∈ (1) Fix Λ [0, ). Then H (ξ) is uniformly bounded below in ξ and for λ< inf Rν (Σ (ξ)+ E ) ∈ ∞ Λ ξ∈ Λ Λ the map ξ R (λ) is continuous. 7→ ξ,Λ (2) Fix σ K < Λ < . Then H (ξ) is uniformly bounded below in ξ and (B ) (H (ξ)). ≤ ∞ K,Λ D ξ ⊂ Q K,Λ If λ< inf Rν Σ (ξ) and a [0, 1] then the map ξ∈ K,Λ ∈ r : ξ BaR (λ)1/2(BaR (λ)1/2)∗ a,λ 7→ ξ ξ,K,Λ ξ ξ,K,Λ is continuous in norm. Proof. To prove (1), we first note the uniform lower bound follows directly from Lemma 2.1. Now fix Λ,λ as stated in (1) and ξ Rν. From Proposition 2.3 and Lemmas 3.5 and A.1 we know ∈ (H (ξ)) = (H (ξ)) = (B ) (D (k)) and Q Λ Q 0 D ξ ⊂D ξ D (k)R (λ)1/2 D (k)B B R (λ)1/2 k→0 0. k ξ ξ,Λ k≤k ξ ξkk ξ ξ,Λ k −−→ Recalling (3.9) and Lemma 3.5 we obtain

−1 Rξ+k,Λ(λ)= Rξ,Λ(λ)(1 + Dξ(k)Rξ,Λ(λ)) for k sufficiently small. Taking the limit k 0 proves the claim. | | → The uniform lower bound in (2) follows directly from (1) and (3.6), while (Bξ) (HK,Λ(ξ)) Dν ⊂ Q follows from Lemmas 3.4 and A.1. Fix K, Λ,λ as stated in (2) and ξ R . Define D˜ ξ(k) = ∗ ∈ W (BK,Λ)Dξ(k)W (BK,Λ) and note that

D˜(k)R (λ)1/2 = W (B )D (k)R (λ + E )1/2W (B )∗ k→0 0 ξ,K,Λ K,Λ ξ ξ,Λ Λ K,Λ −−→ in norm. In particular, 1/2 1/2 Z(k)= Rξ,K,Λ(λ) D˜(k)Rξ,K,Λ(λ) Absence of Ground States in the Renormalized Massless Translation-Invariant Nelson Model T.N. Dam, B. Hinrichs 13 is bounded and goes to 0 for k 0. We easily deduce HK,Λ(ξ + h) = HK,Λ(ξ)+ D(h) from (3.9) and therefore obtain → e 1/2 −1 1/2 Rξ+k,K,Λ(λ)= Rξ,K,Λ(λ) (1 + Z(k)) Rξ,K,Λ(λ)

a 1/2 for sufficiently small k. Setting C = Bξ Rξ,K,Λ(λ) this yields

−2 a/2 −1 ∗ −2 a/2 ra,λ(ξ + k)=(1+ Dξ(k)Bξ ) C(1 + Z(k)) C (1 + Dξ(k)Bξ ) , so r (ξ + k) converges to CC∗ = r (ξ) in norm as k 0 by Lemma 3.5. a,λ a → We can now renormalize the transformed fiber operators.

Theorem 3.7. Let K σ and V be the transformation from Proposition 2.4. Then the following holds:≥

(1) The operators HK,Λ(ξ) are bounded below uniformly in Λ and ξ. Further, HK,Λ(ξ) converges to ν an operator HK,∞(ξ) in the norm resolvent sense as Λ for all ξ R . Convergence is uniform in ξ, so the map ξ H (ξ) is continuous in→ the ∞ norm resolvent∈ sense and 7→ K,∞ ⊕ ∗ VHK,∞V = (HK,Λ(ξ))dξ. ZRν

(2) (H (ξ)) = (H (0)) for all ξ Rν and for all λ< Σ (ξ) we have Q K,∞ Q 0 ∈ K,∞ 1/2 1/2 s-lim BξRξ,K,Λ(λ) = BξRξ,K,∞(λ) =: hλ(ξ). Λ→∞ Further, the map ξ h (ξ)h (ξ)∗ is continuous. 7→ λ λ

Proof. We first prove (1). From Proposition 3.6 (2) with a = 0 we see HK,Λ(ξ) ξ∈Rν is uniformly lower bounded and continuous in the norm resolvent sense. Hence we{ can use} Lemma C.4 and Proposition 3.3 (1) to obtain the result. ν To prove (2) we pick λ < ΣK,Λ(ξ) for all Λ (K, ) and ξ R . For finite Λ > K we use ∈ 1/2 ∞ ∈ Lemmas C.2 and C.5 to obtain hΛ(ξ)= BξRξ,K,Λ(λ) is essentially bounded and

⊕ 1/2 1/2 1/2 1/2 ∗ ∗ ∗ V (H0 + 1) RK,Λ(λ) ((H0 + 1) RK,Λ(λ) ) V = hΛ(ξ)hΛ(ξ) dξ. ZRν The left hand side converges in norm as Λ by Proposition 3.3 (2). Hence, Lemma C.3 and → ∞∗ Proposition 3.6 (2) with a = 1 yield hΛ(ξ)hΛ(ξ) converges uniformly to a continuous function as Λ . The claim follows from Lemma A.8. →∞ Finally, we move back to the non-transformed fiber operators and finish the renormalization in the next theorem. Especially, we establish a connection between the regularity of the Gross transfor- mations (3.1) and the regularity of the domain of H∞(ξ). To that end we define the operators

A := 1 + dΓ(ω)1/2 + dΓ(m) s for s [0, 1]. (3.14) s | | ∈

As a sum of commuting, non negative and selfadjoint operators, they are selfadjoint on (As) = s 1/2 D ( dΓ(m) ) (dΓ(ω) ). Also note, that we already investigated the regularity of BK,∞ using HypothesisD | | 2∩D in Lemma 3.1. Absence of Ground States in the Renormalized Massless Translation-Invariant Nelson Model T.N. Dam, B. Hinrichs 14

Theorem 3.8. Let s [0, 1]. Then the following holds: ∈ (1) HΛ(ξ)+ EΛ is uniformly bounded below in ξ and Λ and converges to an operator H∞(ξ) in the norm resolvent sense as Λ . Further, ξ H (ξ) is resolvent continuous and →∞ 7→ ∞ ⊕ ∗ VH∞V = H∞(ξ)dξ. ZRν

∗ (2) For all K σ we have H∞(ξ) = W (BK,∞) HK,∞(ξ)W (BK,∞). Especially, (H∞(ξ)) = W (B )∗ ≥(H (0)) holds for all ξ Rν. Q K,∞ Q 0 ∈ (3) Fix K σ. If B ( m s), then (H (ξ)) (H (ξ)) (A ) and ≥ K,∞ ∈D | | D ∞ ⊂ Q ∞ ⊂D s 1/2 1/2 s-lim AsRξ,Λ(λ) = AsRξ,∞(λ) =: gλ(ξ) for any λ< Σ∞(ξ). Λ→∞ Further, for λ sufficiently small the maps ξ g (ξ)g (ξ)∗ and ξ g (ξ) are continuous. 7→ λ λ 7→ k λ k Proof. We first prove (1). From Proposition 3.6 (1) we see HΛ(ξ) Rν is uniformly lower bounded and continuous in the norm resolvent sense. Hence, we can use{ Lemma} C.4 and Proposition 3.3 (1) to obtain the result. (2) follows from Theorem 3.7 (2) and −1 ∗ −1 (H∞ + i) = s-lim W (BK,Λ) (HK,Λ + i) W (BK,Λ) Λ→∞ ∗ −1 =(W (BK,∞) HK,∞W (BK,∞)+ i) . We now prove (3). The domain statement follows directly from (2), Lemma 3.1 and Theorem B.1 (4). For Λ large enough that λ< ΣΛ(ξ)+ EΛ (cf. Lemma A.7), the definition (3.6) yields 1/2 ∗ −1 1/2 AsRξ,Λ(λ) = AsW (BK,Λ) Bξ BξRξ,K,Λ(λ) W (BK,Λ), for any K σ. Convergence now follows from Theorem B.1 and Theorem 3.7 (2). To prove ≥ ∗ 2 the continuity statements we first observe gλ(ξ)gλ(ξ) = gλ(ξ) so it is enough to see that ξ g (ξ)g (ξ)∗ is continuous in norm. Writingk h as ink Theoremk 3.7k (2) we have 7→ λ λ λ g (ξ)g (ξ)∗ = A W (B )∗B−1h (ξ)h (ξ)∗B−1W (B )A for any K σ. λ λ s K,∞ ξ λ λ ξ K,∞ s ≥ ∗ −1 By Lemma 3.5 the map ξ AsW (BK,∞) Bξ is continuous, so the statement follows from Theo- rem 3.7 (2). 7→

1/2 The next lemma shows we can replace A 2 by B in above convergence statements. It especially 3 ξ provides a key ingredient in the proof of Theorem 2.6. Rν 1/2 Lemma 3.9. Let ξ . Then Bξ is infinitesimally A 2 bounded. ∈ 3 Proof. Let ε> 0. Pick C such that 1 1 x1/4 εx1/2 + C and x1/2 εx2/3 + C for all x 0. ≤ 2 ≤ 25/4 ≥ Then the sub-additivity of x x1/4 and ξ k ... k 2 2 ξ 2+2 k + ... + k 2 lead to 7→ | − 1 − − n| ≤ | | | 1 n| (1 + ω(n)(k , .., k )+ ξ k ... k 2)1/4 1 n | − 1 − − n| 1+ ω(n)(k , .., k )1/2 + ξ k ... k 2/3 1 n | − 1 − − n| ε +(1+21/4 ξ 1/2+3C)(1 + ω(n)(k , .., k )1/2 + k + ... + k 2/3)−1. ≤ | | 1 n | 1 n| As this holds uniformly for all n N, we obtain (A 2 ) (Bξ). To finish the proof we observe ∈ D 3 ⊂D 1/4 1/2 Bξψ ε A 2 ψ +(1+2 ξ +3C) ψ for all ψ (A 2 ). k k≤ k 3 k | | k k ∈D 3 Absence of Ground States in the Renormalized Massless Translation-Invariant Nelson Model T.N. Dam, B. Hinrichs 15

We are now ready to prove Theorem 2.6. Proof of Theorem 2.6 (1). Fix ξ,k Rν. Note that by Theorem 3.8 (2) and Lemmas 3.5 and 3.9 ∈ we already know qDξ(k) is infinitesimally qH∞(ξ) bounded. Hence, let Hk denote the selfadjoint operator corresponding to qH∞(ξ) + qDξ(k) by the KLMN Theorem. It remains only to prove that Hk = H∞(ξ + k). To do this it suffices to prove

(H λ)−1 = R (λ) k − ξ+k,∞ for some (and hence all) λ σ(H (ξ + k))c. ∈ ∞ Therefore, we pick λ0 and Λ0 such that λ0 < min inf σ(Hk), ΣΛ(ξ)+ EΛ for Λ > Λ0. By the uniform boundedness principle, Theorem 3.8 (3) and Lemma{ 3.1, we can set }

1/2 a := sup A 2 Rξ,Λ(λ0) . 3 Λ∈[Λ0,∞]k k

Since R (λ )−1/2R (λ)1/2 < 1 by the spectral theorem, this yields k ξ,Λ 0 ξ,Λ k 1/2 A 2 Rξ,Λ(λ) a for all λ<λ0, Λ > Λ0. k 3 k≤ By Lemmas 3.5 and 3.9, we can choose C > 0 such that

1/2 1 1 Bξ ψ A 2 ψ +C ψ for all ψ (A 2 ). k k≤ D (k) 1/2B−1/2 4ak 3 k k k ∈D 3 | ξ | ξ

We now fix λ<λ so small that C R (λ)1/2 1 . For ψ this leads to 0 k ξ,Λ k≤ 4 ∈F D (k) 1/2R (λ)1/2ψ D (k) 1/2B−1/2 B1/2R (λ)1/2 k| ξ | ξ,Λ k ≤ | ξ | ξ k ξ ξ,Λ k 1 1/2 1 1 A 2 Rξ,Λ(λ) ψ + ψ ψ . ≤ 4ak 3 k 4k k≤ 2k k The operator corresponding to the form q (R1/2 , R1/2 ) is Dξ(k) ξ,Λ· ξ,Λ· (k)=( D (k) 1/2R (λ)1/2)∗ Sign(D (k)) D (k) 1/2R (λ)1/2, ZΛ,λ | ξ | ξ,Λ ξ | ξ | ξ,Λ which satisfies (k) < 1 for all Λ Λ by above considerations. kZΛ,λ k 4 ≥ 0 Using (3.9) we now have

∞ R (λ)= R (λ)1/2 (k)nR (λ)1/2 for Λ [Λ , ], ξ+k,Λ ξ,Λ ZΛ,λ ξ,Λ ∈ 0 ∞ Xn=0 while by Lemma A.5

∞ (H λ)−1 = R (λ)1/2 (k)nR (λ)1/2. k − ξ,∞ Z∞,λ ξ,∞ Xn=0 As R (λ) converges strongly to R (λ) and (k) < 1 uniformly in Λ, it only remains to ξ+k,Λ ξ+k,∞ kZΛ,λ k 4 prove s-lim Λ,λ(k)= ∞,λ(k) Λ→∞ Z Z This however directly follows from Theorem 3.8 (2) and Lemma 3.9. Absence of Ground States in the Renormalized Massless Translation-Invariant Nelson Model T.N. Dam, B. Hinrichs 16

Proof of Theorem 2.6(2). Set = (A )= (dΓ(ω)1/2) ( dΓ(m) s) and note we have Ds D s D ∩D | | (H (ξ )) = (H (ξ )) = W (B )∗ , Q ∞ 1 Q ∞ 2 K,∞ D1 by Theorem 3.8. Furthermore, (3.8) and Lemmas 2.2 and 3.5 imply

= (B )= (B ) (D (ξ ξ )) = (dΓ(2(ξ ξ ) m). D1 D 0 D ξ ⊂D ξ1 2 − 1 D 2 − 1 · ∗ Now assume (ξ2 ξ1) mBK,∞ . Then W (BK,∞) 1 (Dξ1 (ξ2 ξ1)) by Theorem B.1. Hence, Theorem 2.6 (1)− yields· ∈ H D ⊂D −

∗ q ∞ (ψ,φ)= q ∞ (ψ,φ)+ D (ξ ξ )ψ,φ for all ψ,φ W (B ) . H (ξ2) H (ξ1) h ξ1 2 − 1 i ∈ K,∞ D1 ∗ If we fix ψ W (B ) , the map φ q ∞ (ψ,φ) is continuous if and only if the map ∈ K,∞ D1 7→ H (ξ1) φ q ∞ (ψ,φ) is continuous. Hence, Lemma A.4 yields (H (ξ )) = (H (ξ )) and H (ξ )= 7→ H (ξ2) D ∞ 1 D ∞ 2 ∞ 2 H∞(ξ1)+ Dξ1 (ξ2 ξ1). We move to the− case (ξ ξ ) mB / and let ψ (H (ξ )) (H (ξ )). Then it follows 2 − 1 · K,∞ ∈ H ∈D ∞ 1 ∩D ∞ 2 from Lemma A.4 and Theorem 2.6 (1) that

∗ W (BK,∞) 1 φ qD (ξ −ξ )(ψ,φ) D ∋ 7→ ξ1 2 1 ∗ is continuous. If we can prove W (BK,∞) 1 is a form core for dΓ((ξ2 ξ1)m) we can deduce ψ (D (ξ ξ ) by Lemma A.4. From TheoremD B.1 we then find − ∈D ξ1 2 − 1 ψ (dΓ((ξ ξ )m)) W (B )∗ = 0 , ∈D 2 − 1 ∩ K,∞ D1 { } which proves the statement. 1/2 1/2 2 2 As A dominates Dξ1 (ξ2 ξ1) by Lemma 3.9 and A commutes with Dξ1 (ξ2 ξ1) we 3 3 | − | 1/2 | − | 2 2 see that any core for A is a core for Dξ1 (ξ2 ξ1) by Lemma A.2. Now we note A commutes 3 | − | 3 with A1 and is A1-bounded, since 1 2 , so 1 is a core for A 2 by Lemma A.2. Further, by 3 3 D ⊂ D ∗D ∗ Theorem B.1 and Lemma 3.1 we know W (BK,∞) maps 2 continuously onto 2 , so W (B ) 1 3 3 K,∞ 1/2 D D D 2 is a core for A and hence for Dξ1 (ξ2 ξ1) . This finishes the proof. 3 | − | 4 Proof of Ground State Absence

In this section we prove Theorem 2.7. We will work under Hypotheses 1, 2 and 3 in this section and fix ν 2. We will also use some notation from the previous section. Specifically, for ξ,k Rν ≥ ∈ we define the operators Bξ and Dξ(k) as in (3.8) and (3.10), respectively. Then from Theorem 2.6 (1) and Lemmas 3.5 and 3.9 we know

1/2 ν (H∞(ξ1)) (H∞(ξ1)) (B ) (dΓ(ξ3 m)) for ξ1,ξ2,ξ3 R . (4.1) D ⊂ Q ⊂D ξ2 ⊂ Q · ∈ We will work with the vector valued form

qdΓ(m)(φ, ψ)=(qdΓ(m1)(φ, ψ), ..., qdΓ(mn)(φ, ψ)) (4.2) defined for φ, ψ (q ) = ( dΓ(m) 1/2) = ν ( dΓ(m ) 1/2) by Lemma 2.2. The following ∈ D dΓ(m) D | | i=1 D | i | holds T

Absence of Ground States in the Renormalized Massless Translation-Invariant Nelson Model T.N. Dam, B. Hinrichs 17

Lemma 4.1. Let k Rν and ψ,φ (B1/2) (dΓ(k m)). Then we have k q (φ, ψ) = ∈ ∈ D 0 ⊂ Q · · dΓ(m) qdΓ(k·m)(φ, ψ). Proof. This follows directly from

∞ (n) (n) qdΓ(m)(φ, ψ)= (k1 + ... + kn)φ (k1, ..., kn)ψ (k1, ..., kn)dk1...dkn. ZRnν Xn=1 We now observe some direct consequences of the rotation invariance in Hypothesis 3. The following lemma is well-known, but is so essential to our method that we provide a short proof. Lemma 4.2. Let O Rν×ν be orthogonal and U be the associated rotation operator acting on ∈ O f as U f(k)= f(Ok). Then we have: ∈ H O (1) Γ(U ) (B1/2)= (B1/2) and O D 0 D 0 ξ q (Γ(U )ψ, Γ(U )φ)= Oξ q (ψ,φ) for φ, ψ (B1/2), ξ Rν . · dΓ(m) O O · dΓ(m) ∈D 0 ∈

∗ ν (2) Γ(UO) HΛ(ξ)Γ(UO)= HΛ(Oξ) holds for all Λ [0, ] and ξ R . Further, Γ(U ) (H (ξ)) = (H (ξ)). ∈ ∞ ∈ O Q Λ Q Λ Proof. Let Λ < . By Lemma 2.1 and rotation invariance of v and ω we find ∞ ∗ ∗ Γ(UO) dΓ(ω)Γ(UO)= dΓ(UOωUO)= dΓ(ω), ∗ ∗ Γ(UO) dΓ(ξ m)Γ(UO)= dΓ(UO(ξ m)UO)= dΓ(Oξ m), ∗ · ∗ · · Γ(UO) ϕ(vΛ)Γ(UO)= ϕ(UOvΛ)= ϕ(vΛ).

Furthermore, we see

(U ⊗n)∗ k + ... + k 2U ⊗n = Ok + ... + Ok 2= k + ... + k 2 for n N, O | 1 n| O | 1 n| | 1 n| ∈ ∗ 2 2 which proves Γ(UO) dΓ(ω) Γ(UO) = dΓ(ω) . Hence, by the definition (2.11), for all finite Λ we have Γ(U )∗H |(ξ)Γ(U| ) = H (Oξ| ). Taking| limits yields the case Λ = . This now O Λ O Λ ∞ implies Γ(UO) (HΛ(ξ)) = (HΛ(Oξ)) = (HΛ(ξ)) by Theorem 2.6 (1). Further, note that 1/2 Q Q Q 1/2 1/2 B0 = f(H0(0)) for a real function f (cf. (3.10)), so in particular Γ(UO) (B0 ) = (B0 ). Using Lemma 4.1, we finally have D D

ξ q (Γ(U )ψ, Γ(U )φ)= q (Γ(U )ψ, Γ(U )φ)= Oξ q (ψ,φ). · dΓ(m) O O dΓ(ξ·m) O O · dΓ(m) Let ε (0, 1) and define ∈ S (ξ)= k Rν 0 :2 k ξ < (1 ε) k ξ . (4.3) ε { ∈ \{ } | · | − | || |} We now collect some results from [Dam20]. A separate proof would be a lengthy repetition of that paper. Hence, we only briefly explain how to extend the results in [Dam20].

Lemma 4.3. Let Λ (0, ] and ξ Rν. Then we have: ∈ ∞ ∈ (1) Σ (ξ) Σ (0). Λ ≥ Λ (2) Σ (ξ k)+ ω(k) Σ (ξ) for k Rν. Λ − ≥ Λ ∈ Absence of Ground States in the Renormalized Massless Translation-Invariant Nelson Model T.N. Dam, B. Hinrichs 18

(3) Σ (ξ k)+ ω(k) > Σ (ξ) for k / Rξ. Λ − Λ ∈

(4) For ε (0, 1) there exist D< 1 and r> 0 independent of Λ, such that for all k Br(0) Sε(ξ) we have∈ ∈ ∩ Σ (ξ k) Σ (ξ) Dω(k). Λ − − Λ ≥ −

Proof. All statements are proved for finite Λ in [Dam20]. Using that ΣΛ(ξ)+EΛ converges to Σ∞(ξ) for all ξ Rν by Theorem 3.8 and Lemma A.7 the statements (1) and (2) follow immediately. The proof of∈ (3) and (4) is word by word the same as that of [Dam20, Lemma 4.4]. This proof only relies on (1) and (2), Hypothesis 3 (1) and the rotation invariance of ω and ΣΛ, where the latter follows from Lemma 4.2. For ξ Rν and k Rν 0 we define ∈ ∈ \{ }

P0(ξ)=1{Σ∞(ξ)}(H∞(ξ)), V (ξ)=2C (B1/2P (ξ))∗(ξ dΓ(m ))B−1(B1/2P (ξ)) for i =1, . . . , ν, (4.4) i ω ξ 0 i − i ξ ξ 0 k V (ξ)= k V + ... + k V , · 1 1 ν ν |k| 1/2 where Cω = lim as in Hypothesis 3. Note, Bξ P0(ξ) is bounded by Theorem 3.8 and Lemmas 3.1 k→0 ω(k) and 3.9. Furthermore, the operator (ξ dΓ(m ))B−1 is bounded by Lemma 3.5 and selfadjoint i − i ξ (acts as a real multiplication operator in each (n)), so V (ξ) is bounded and selfadjoint. F i Lemma 4.4. Let ξ Rν, ε (0, 1), k S (ξ) and kˆ = k/ k . Then we have kˆ V (ξ) 1 (1 ε) ∈ ∈ ∈ ε | | k · k≤ 2 − and hence, the operator 1 kˆ V (ξ) is invertible. − · Proof. For ψ P (ξ) define v (ξ)=2(ξ q (ψ, ψ)). As kˆ V (ξ) is selfadjoint, we have ∈ 0 F ψ − dΓ(m) · kˆ V (ξ) = sup ψ, kˆ V (ξ)ψ . k · k ψ∈F |h · i| kψk=1

Let ψ and assume ψ =1. Note that ∈F k k ψ, kˆ V (ξ)ψ = P (ξ)ψ, kˆ V (ξ)P (ξ)ψ , h · i h 0 · 0 i so we may assume P (ξ)ψ = ψ. Now setting v (ξ)=2(ξ q (ψ, ψ)) we have 0 ψ − dΓ(m) ψ, kˆ V (ξ)ψ =2C kˆ ( ψ 2ξ q (ψ, ψ)) = C kˆ v (ξ). h · i ω · k k − dΓ(m) ω · ψ Hence, it suffices to prove ˆ 1 ε k vψ(ξ) − . (4.5) | · | ≤ 2Cω By Theorem 2.6 (1) and Lemma 4.1 we have

2 2 q ∞ (ψ, ψ)= q ∞ (ψ, ψ)+ h v (ξ)+ h = Σ (ξ)+ h v (ξ)+ h H (ξ+h) H (ξ) · ψ | | ∞ · ψ | | ν for all h R . Since q ∞ (ψ) Σ (ξ + h) this yields ∈ H (ξ+h) ≥ ∞ Σ (ξ + h) Σ (ξ) h v (ξ)+ h 2 for all h Rν. (4.6) ∞ − ∞ ≤ · ψ | | ∈

Absence of Ground States in the Renormalized Massless Translation-Invariant Nelson Model T.N. Dam, B. Hinrichs 19

If ξ =0, the left hand side is non-negative by Lemma 4.3 (1), so taking the limit h 0 we obtain ν | |→ hˆ vψ(0) 0 for all h R . This directly implies vψ(0) = 0 and hence (4.5). · From≥ now we can∈ assume ξ = 0. By Hypothesis 2 and Lemma 4.3 (2) we know Σ (ξ + h) 6 ∞ − Σ (ξ) ω(h). Inserted in (4.6) this leads to ∞ ≥ − h v (ξ) ω(h) h 2 for all h Rν. · ψ ≥ − −| | ∈ Rν ˆ −1 For h 0 we divide by h and take h 0 to obtain h vψ(ξ) Cω and hence v (ξ) ∈ C−\1. { For} φ (H (ξ))| | (H (ξ))| |with → φ = 1, Theorem· 2.6≥ (1) − and Lemma 4.1 | ψ | ≤ ω ∈ D ∞ ⊂ Q ∞ k k yield 2 Σ (ξ) q ∞ (φ,φ)= q ∞ (φ,φ) 2ξ q (φ,φ)+ ξ . ∞ ≤ H (ξ) H (0) − · dΓ(m) | | By Lemma 4.2 we can choose φ = Γ(UO)ψ, which leads to

2 Σ (ξ) q ∞ (ψ, ψ) 2Oξ q (ψ, ψ)+ ξ . ∞ ≤ H (0) − · dΓ(m) | |

Inserting this in (4.6) with h = ξ and using q ∞ (ψ, ψ) Σ (0), we obtain − H (0) ≥ ∞ ξ q (ψ) Oξ q (ψ, ψ) for all orthogonal O Rν×ν. · dΓ(m) ≥ · dΓ(m) ∈ Hence, there is a constant R R, such that q (ψ)= R ξ. For all k S (ξ) this means ψ ∈ dΓ(m) ψ ∈ ε ˆ ˆ 1 ε ˆ 1 ε 1 ε k vψ(ξ) = (1 Rψ)k ξ − k (1 Rψ)ξ = − vψ(ξ) − . | · | | − · | ≤ 2 | || − | 2 | | ≤ 2Cω

We will also need, that (1 kˆ V (ξ))−1 conserves weak convergence to 0. − · Rν Lemma 4.5. Let ξ , R> 0 and ε (0, 1). Further, let o(k) k∈BR(0)∩Sε(ξ) be a bounded family of operators satisfying∈ w-lim o(k)=0. Then∈ { } k→0

w-lim(1 kˆ V (ξ))−1o(k)=0. k→0 − ·

Proof. Let φ, ψ . By Lemma 4.4, we know kˆ V (ξ) < 1 (1 ε) so ∈F k · k 2 − ∞ ψ, (1 kˆ V (ξ))−1o(k)φ = (kˆ V (ξ))nψ,o(k)φ h − · i h · i Xn=0 By dominated convergence, it is enough to see each term in the sum converges to 0 as k 0. This follows from kˆ =1 and → | | ν ν (kˆ V (ξ))nψ,o(k)φ = ... kˆ ...kˆ V (ξ)...V (ξ)ψ,o(k)φ . h · i i1 in h i1 in i iX1=1 iXn=1 For ξ Rν and Λ [0, ] we introduce the operators ∈ ∈ ∞ Q (k,ξ)= ω(k)(H (ξ) Σ (ξ)+ ω(k))−1 for k Rν 0 , 0,Λ Λ − Λ ∈ \{ } (4.7) Q (k,ξ)= ω(k)(H (ξ + k) Σ (ξ)+ ω(k))−1 for k Rν Rξ, Λ Λ − Λ ∈ \ which are well defined and bounded by Lemma 4.3 (3). We will write Q0 and Q instead of Q0,∞ and Q∞, respectively. The next lemmas collect some simple statements about these operators. Absence of Ground States in the Renormalized Massless Translation-Invariant Nelson Model T.N. Dam, B. Hinrichs 20

Lemma 4.6. Let ξ Rν and R > 0. Then the operator B1/2Q (k,ξ) is bounded uniformly in ∈ ξ 0 k BR(0) 0 and ∈ \{ } 1/2 s-lim Bξ Q0(k,ξ)(1 P0(ξ))=0. k→0 − Proof. This follows from the domain inclusion (4.1) and Lemma A.3.

Lemma 4.7. Let ε (0, 1) and r > 0 as in Lemma 4.3 (4). Then the operators Q(k,ξ) and ∈ B1/2Q(k,ξ) are bounded uniformly for all k B (0) S (ξ). ξ ∈ r ∩ ε Proof. For all k B (0) S (ξ) Lemma 4.3 (4) yields Q(k,ξ) (1 D)−1 for some D (0, 1), ∈ r ∩ ε k k≤ − ∈ which proves the first uniform upper bound. 1/2 Now note Bξ Q(k,ξ) is bounded by (4.1). By Theorem 3.8 and Lemma 3.9, we can pick λ small enough such that k B (H (ξ + k) λ)−1 is continuous and hence uniformly bounded by some 7→ k ξ ∞ − k constant C on Br(0). This leads to

B1/2Q(k,ξ) C (H (ξ k) λ)Q(k,ξ) . k ξ k ≤ k ∞ − − k 1/2 The uniform bound on Bξ Q(k,ξ) now follows from the one on Q(k,ξ) by (H (ξ k) λ)Q(k,ξ)= ω(k)+(λ + Σ (ξ) ω(k))Q(k,ξ). ∞ − − ∞ − Lemma 4.8. For ξ Rν, k Rν Rξ and Λ (0, ] we have ∈ ∈ \ ∈ ∞ 1 Q (k,ξ)= Q (k,ξ)+ (B1/2Q (k,ξ))∗D (k)B−1(B1/2Q (k,ξ)). Λ 0,Λ ω(k) ξ 0,Λ ξ ξ ξ Λ

Proof. The statement for Λ < follows from the resolvent identity, (3.9) and the fact that B and ∞ ξ Dξ(k) commute strongly. It remains to show we can take strong limits on both sides. To that end, it suffices to prove

a/2 a/2 a/2 a/2 s-lim Bξ Q0,Λ(k,ξ)= Bξ Q0(k,ξ) and s-lim Bξ QΛ(k,ξ)= Bξ Q(k,ξ) (4.8) Λ→∞ Λ→∞

for a 0, 1 . By Lemma A.7 and Theorem 3.8, we have lim ΣΛ(ξ)+ EΛ = Σ∞(ξ), so using ∈{ } Λ→∞ exp( t(H (ξ + h) Σ (ξ))) = exp( t(Σ (ξ)+ E )) exp( t(H (ξ + h)+ E )) − Λ − Λ − Λ Λ − Λ Λ Λ→∞ exp( t(H (ξ + h) Σ (ξ))) −−−→ − ∞ − ∞ so the case a =0 in (4.8) follows due to Lemma A.7. Further, for (ZΛ, h) (Q0,Λ(k,ξ),ξ), (QΛ(k,ξ),ξ + k) and λ < ΣΛ(ξ) + EΛ the resolvent identity yields ∈ { }

1 B1/2Z = B1/2(H (h)+ E λ)−1 1 (Σ (ξ)+ E λ) Z . ξ Λ ξ Λ Λ −  − ω(k) Λ Λ −  Λ

Hence, (4.8) follows for the case a =1 by Theorem 3.8 and Lemma 3.9.

Lemma 4.9. Let ξ Rν and ε (0, 1). Then ∈ ∈

w-lim Q(k,ξ)(1 P0(ξ)) = w-lim(1 P0(ξ))Q(k,ξ)=0. k→0 − k→0 − k∈Sε(ξ) k∈Sε(ξ) Absence of Ground States in the Renormalized Massless Translation-Invariant Nelson Model T.N. Dam, B. Hinrichs 21

Proof. By taking adjoints it suffices to prove one of the statements. By taking the adjoint in Lemma 4.8, we notice

∗ Q(k,ξ)(1 P0(ξ))=(Q(k,ξ)) (1 P0(ξ)) − − −1 k Dξ(k)B = Q (k,ξ)(1 P (ξ)) + | | (B1/2Q(k,ξ))∗ ξ B1/2Q (k,ξ)(1 P (ξ)). 0 − 0 ω(k) ξ k ξ 0 − 0 | | This goes to 0 strongly as k 0 by Lemmas 3.5, 4.6 and 4.7 and Hypothesis 3 → We now prove the main ingredient of our proof, explicitly, that (1 kˆ V (ξ))−1P (ξ) describes the − · 0 behaviour of Q(k,ξ) for small k in the weak sense.

Lemma 4.10. Let ξ Rν and ε (0, 1). Then ∈ ∈ −1 w-lim (Q(k,ξ) (1 kˆ V (ξ)) P0(ξ))=0. k→0 − − · k∈Sε(ξ)∩Sε(−ξ)

Proof. Throughout this proof we assume k S (ξ) S ( ξ). First, note ∈ ε ∩ ε −

w-lim(Q(k,ξ) P0(ξ)Q(k,ξ)P0(ξ))=0, k→0 −

1/2 ∗ 1/2 ∗ by Lemma 4.9. Using Q0(k,ξ)P0(ξ)= P0(ξ), P0(ξ)(Bξ Q0(k,ξ)) =(Bξ P0(ξ)) and Lemma 4.8, we get

1 1 − 1 P (ξ)Q(k,ξ)P (ξ)= P (ξ)+ (B 2 P (ξ))∗D (k)B 2 Q(k,ξ)P (ξ) 0 0 0 ω(k) ξ 0 ξ ξ 0 1 1 − 1 = P (ξ)+ (B 2 P (ξ))∗D (k)B 2 P (ξ)Q(k,ξ)P (ξ)+ o (k), 0 ω(k) ξ 0 ξ ξ 0 0 1 = P (ξ)+ kˆ V (ξ)P (ξ)Q(k,ξ)P (ξ)+ o (k)+ o (k), where 0 · 0 0 1 2 1 1 − 1 o (k) := (B 2 P (ξ))∗D (k)B 2 (1 P (ξ))Q(k,ξ)P (ξ) and 1 ω(k) ξ 0 ξ ξ − 0 0 1 1 − 1 o (k) := (B 2 P (ξ))∗D (k)B 2 P (ξ) kˆ V (ξ) P (ξ)Q(k,ξ)P (ξ). 2 ω(k) ξ 0 ξ ξ 0 − ·  0 0

This leads to

P (ξ)Q(k,ξ)P (ξ) (1 kˆ V (ξ))−1P (ξ)=(1 kˆ V (ξ))−1(o (k)+ o (k)). 0 0 − − · 0 − · 1 2

By Lemma 4.5, it suffices to prove w-lim o1(k) = w-lim o2(k)=0. Let φ, ψ . By the definition k→0 k→0 ∈F (3.8), we have

ν 1 − 1 1 − 1 (B 2 P (ξ))∗D (k)B 2 (1 P (ξ))ψ = k (B 2 P (ξ))∗dΓ(m )B 2 (1 P (ξ))ψ ξ 0 ξ ξ − 0 i ξ 0 i ξ − 0 Xi=1 and hence

ν k 1 1 φ,o (k)ψ = | | kˆ B 2 P φ,dΓ(m )B−1B 2 (1 P (ξ))Q(k,ξ)P (ξ)ψ . h 1 i ω(k) ih ξ 0 i ξ ξ − 0 0 i Xi=1 Absence of Ground States in the Renormalized Massless Translation-Invariant Nelson Model T.N. Dam, B. Hinrichs 22

k→0 Using Lemmas 4.7, 4.9 and A.6 (1), we see φ,o1(k)ψ 0. Further, definition (4.4) yields h i −−→

1 − 1 kˆ V (ξ)= C k −1(B 2 P (ξ))∗D (k)B 2 P (ξ) k P (ξ), · ω| | ξ 0 ξ ξ 0 −| | 0 so we have

−1 2 k 1 Dξ(k)B 1 k o (k)= | | C (B 2 P (ξ))∗ ξ B 2 P (ξ)Q(k,ξ)P (ξ) | | P (ξ). 2 ω(k) − ω ξ 0 k ξ 0 0 − ω(k) 0 | | This converges to 0 in norm, due to Lemma 4.7 and Hypothesis 3. The rest of the proof is an adaption of the proof in [Dam20]. Proof of Theorem 2.7. The proof goes by contradiction. We fix ξ Rν and assume there exists a ψ , such that ∈ gs ∈ F ψgs =1 and H∞(ξ)ψgs = Σ∞(ξ)ψgs. k Fork k Rν we define the pointwise annihilation operator a which acts on ψ(n) (n) by ∈ k ∈F a ψ(n) = √nψ(n)(k, ) (n−1). k ··· ∈F (n+1) ∞ ν In Theorem D.3 we prove a ψ =(a ψgs ) for almost all k R and k gs k n=0 ∈F ∈ v(k) a ψ = Q(k,ξ)ψ for almost all k Rν. k gs −ω(k) gs ∈

Pick ε = 1 and let k S (ξ). Then kˆ V (ξ) 1 by Lemma 4.4, so a power expansion shows 2 ∈ ε k · k≤ 4 kˆ V (ξ) 1 1 (1 kˆ V (ξ))−1 k · k (4.9) k − − · k≤ 1 kˆ V (ξ) ≤ 3 −k · k We denote the number operator N = dΓ(1) and choose a normalized element η (N 1/2), such ∈ D that η, ψ > 1 . Then, the pull-through formula shows |h i| 2 v(k) η, a ψ = η, Q(k,ξ)ψ for almost every k Rν . h k gsi −ω(k) h gsi ∈ Further, for k S (ξ) S ( ξ) Lemma 4.10 yields ∈ ε ∩ ε − η, Q(k,ξ)ψ η, (1 kˆ V (ξ))−1ψ k→0 0. h gsi−h − · gsi −−→ By (4.9) we now see η, (1 kˆ V (ξ))−1ψ > 1 1 = 1 . Hence, there is R> 0 such that |h − · gsi| 2 − 3 6 v(k) η, a ψ | | for all k S (ξ) S ( ξ) B (0) =: B˜ (ξ). |h k gsi | ≥ 6ω(k) ∈ ε ∩ ε − ∩ R ε,R

Further, since Sε(ξ) Sε( ξ) is open, non-empty (due to ν 2) and invariant under positive scalings, we obtain by∩ rotation− invariance of v and ω that ≥

2 2 v(k) vol(B˜ε,1(ξ)) v(k) | |2 dk = ν | |2 dk = . ZB˜ε,R(ξ) ω(k) vol(B1(0)) ZBR(0) ω(k) ∞ Absence of Ground States in the Renormalized Massless Translation-Invariant Nelson Model T.N. Dam, B. Hinrichs 23

This proves that η, akψgs is not square-integrable. On the other handh usingi Lemma 2.1 and Cauchy-Schwarz we find

2 1/2 2 −1/2 2 η, akψgs (N + 1) η (N + 1) akψgs |h i| ≤k k k∞ k 1/2 2 (n) 2 = (N + 1) η ψgs (k,k1,...,kn−1) dk1 dkn, k k ZR(n−1)ν | | ··· Xn=1 which is integrable by definition of the Fock space norm. Hence, we have arrived at a contradiction and the state ψgs cannot exist.

A Some Lemmas from General Operator Theory

In this appendix we state well-known or easy to prove properties of selfadjoint operators. Without further mentioning, we assume is a separable Hilbert space. H Lemma A.1. Let A, B be selfadjoint operators in and U be unitary. If U (A) (B) then U (A) (B). H D ⊂ D Q ⊂ Q Proof. Note (U A U ∗)= (UAU ∗)= U (A) (B)= ( B ), which by [Wei80, Theorem 9.4] implies (U DA 1/2|U|∗) (DB 1/2)= (B)D. As ⊂D(U A 1/2UD∗)=| |U (A) the claim follows D | | ⊂D | | Q D | | Q Lemma A.2. Let A and B be strongly commuting and selfadjoint operators. If A is B-bounded and is a core for B then is a core for A. D D Proof. Clearly any element in (B) can be approximated in A-norm by elements in , so it is D D enough to see (B) is a core for A. However, for any ψ (A) we can choose the approximating D ∈D sequence 1{|B|≤n}ψ, which converges in A-norm since A1{|B|≤n}ψ =1{|B|≤n}Aψ. Lemma A.3. Let A, B be selfadjoint operators on and ω : Rν R. Assume A is bounded below, H → B is A-bounded, ω is continuous, ω(0) = 0 and ω(k) > 0 for k = 0. Define λ = inf(σ(A)) and f(k) = ω(k)B(A λ + ω(k))−1 for k = 0. Then k f(k) is locally6 bounded and s-lim f(k) = − 6 7→ k→0 BP ( λ ), where P denotes the projection valued measure associated to A. A { } A Proof. By the assumptions C = B(A λ + 1)−1 is bounded. The conclusion now follows from the − spectral theorem and the identity

f(k)= ω(k)C + Cω(k)(A λ + ω(k))−1 ω(k)Cω(k)(A λ + ω(k))−1. − − − Lemma A.4 ([Wei80, Theorem 5.37]). Let A be a selfadjoint operator on and ψ (A). Then the following are equivalent: H ∈ Q

(1) ψ (A), ∈D (2) The map (A) φ q (ψ,φ) is continuous. Q ∋ 7→ A (3) There is a form core D of A, such that D φ q (ψ,φ) is continuous. ∋ 7→ A

Absence of Ground States in the Renormalized Massless Translation-Invariant Nelson Model T.N. Dam, B. Hinrichs 24

Lemma A.5 ([Tes14, Theorem 6.25]). Let A be a selfadjoint operator with A λ, q a symmetric sesquilinear form with (A) (q) and a, b R. The symmetric sesquilinear≥ form q((A z)−1/2φ, (A z)−1/2ψ) forQ φ, ψ⊂ Q corresponds∈ to a bounded operator C(z) with C(z) a for− − ∈ H k k ≤ z < ba−1 λ if and only of − − q(ψ, ψ) aq (ψ, ψ)+ b ψ 2 for all ψ (q). ≤ A k k ∈ Q Further, if a< 1, then

(B z)−1 =(A z)−1/2(1 + C(z))−1(A z)−1/2, − − −

where B denotes the selfadjoint and lower bounded operator corresponding to qA + q by the KLMN theorem.

Lemma A.6 (based on [Wei80, Section 4.5]). Let (Cn)n∈N ( ), C ( ) and A be a closed operator on such that (A) C for all n N and (AC⊂) BisH uniformly∈ B H bounded. Then: H D ⊃ nH ∈ n (1) If w-lim Cn = C, then C (A) and w-lim ACn = AC. n→∞ H⊂D n→∞ ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ (2) If s-lim Cn = C , then C (A) and s-lim(ACn) =(AC) . n→∞ H⊂D n→∞ Lemma A.7 ([RS72, Theorems VIII.20, VIII.23 and VIII.24] and [DM20a, Lemma 5.5]). Let (An)n∈N be selfadjoint operators and A a selfadjoint operator.

(1) Assume (An)n∈N converges to A in the norm resolvent sense. If λ / σ(A) then λ / σ(An) for n large enough and (A λ)−1 converges to (A λ)−1 in norm. ∈ ∈ n − −

(2) If (An)n∈N converges to A in the norm resolvent sense and f : R R is continuous and bounded then f(A ) converges strongly to f(A). If f is vanishing at →then convergence is in norm. n ±∞

(3) If (An)n∈N uniformly bounded below by λ R then (An)n∈N converges to A in the norm resolvent tAn tA ∈ sense if and only if e converges to e in norm. In this case, inf σ(An) converges to inf σ(A).

Lemma A.8. Let (A ) N be a family of selfadjoint operators on and assume there is λ R such n n∈ H ∈ that An λ for all n N. Let A and B be selfadjoint operators on and assume that (An) ≥ ∈ H 1/2 Q ⊂ (B) for all n N, that (An) converges to A in the norm resolvent sense and B has a bounded Q ∈ 1/2 | |−1/2 ∗ inverse. Define for z < inf σ(An) the bounded operator Cn,z = B (An z) . If Cn,zCn,z | | 1/−2 −1/2 converges strongly for some z<λ, then (A) (B) and s-lim Cn,z = B (A z) =: C∞,z Q ⊂ Q n→∞ | | − ∗ ∗ for all z < inf σ(A). Further, s-lim Cn,zCn,z = C∞,zC∞,z n→∞ Proof. Note A λ by Lemma A.7 (3). Pick z <λ such that C C∗ converges to a selfadjoint ≥ 0 n,z0 n,z0 operator C ( ) strongly. For φ (B) and ψ we see ∈ B H ∈ Q ∈ H 1/2 −1/2 ∗ 1/2 1/2 B φ, (A z0) ψ lim φ,Cn,z0 Cn,z φ ψ C ψ φ , h| | − i ≤ n→∞h 0 i k k≤ k k k kk k showing (A z )−1/2ψ (B) and hence (A) (B). − 0 ∈ Q Q ⊂ Q For φ, ψ (B) the norm resolvent convergence of (A ) also yields ∈ Q n ∗ −1/2 1/2 −1/2 1/2 φ,C∞,z0 C∞,z ψ = lim (An z0) B φ, (An z0) B ψ h 0 i n→∞h − | | − | | i ∗ = lim φ,Cn,z0 Cn,z ψ = φ,Cψ n→∞h 0 i h i Absence of Ground States in the Renormalized Massless Translation-Invariant Nelson Model T.N. Dam, B. Hinrichs 25

∗ so C∞,z0 C∞,z0 = C. Note C 2= C C∗ is bounded uniformly in n by the uniform boundedness principle. k n,z0 k k n,z0 n,z0 k Since (A) is dense, it is now enough to show lim Cn,z ψ = C∞,z ψ for all ψ (A) by [Wei80, Q n→∞ 0 0 ∈ Q Theorem 4.23]. Hence, using

C ψ =C C∗ B −1/2(A z )1/2ψ n,z0 n,z0 n,z0 | | − 0 + C ((A z )−1/2 (A z )−1/2)(A z )1/2ψ, n,z0 − 0 − n − 0 − 0 we see that C ψ converges to C B −1/2(A z )1/2ψ = C ψ for all ψ (A) by Lemma A.7 n,z0 | | − 0 ∞,z0 ∈ Q (2). For any other z < inf σ(A) we conclude that z < inf σ(An) for n large enough by Lemma A.7 (3). Then, by Lemma A.7 (2)

1/2 1/2 A z s A z C = C n − 0 C − 0 = C . n,z n,z0  A z  −→ ∞,z0  A z  ∞,z n − − For two selfadjoint operators A and B we define the sesquilinear form associated to their commutator as q (ψ,φ)= Aψ,Bφ Bψ,Aφ for ψ,φ (A) (B). (A.1) [A,B] h i−h i ∈D ∩D Lemma A.9. Let A and B be selfadjoint operators and assume there is a set D (B) such that ⊂D eitBD (A) for all t R and t AeitBψ is continuous for all ψ D. Then for all ψ,φ D the map ⊂D ∈ 7→ ∈ ∈ f(t)= ψ, e−itBAeitBφ h i is continuously differentiable with derivative

′ itB itB f (t)= iq[A,B](e ψ, e φ).

Proof. We easily calculate

f(t + h) f(t)= (eihB 1)eitBψ, Aei(t+h)Bφ + AeitBψ, (eihB 1)eitBφ . − h − i h − i The statement then directly follows using the continuity assumption.

B Transformation and Convergence Properties of Weyl Operators

In this appendix we prove transformation and convergence properties of Weyl operators defined in (2.8), which we need in the proof of Theorem 3.8. Throughout this appendix we assume ω : Rν R → is measurable and satisfies ω > 0 almost everywhere and h : Rν Rp is measurable. We define the selfadjoint operators →

B := (1 + dΓ(ω))1/2 and A := 1 + dΓ(ω)1/2 + dΓ(h) s for s [0, 1]. s | | ∈ Note that (A )= (B)1/2 ( dΓ(h) s) and (B)= (dΓ(ω)1/2). D s D ∩D | | D D Theorem B.1. Let f (ω1/2) and s [0, 1]. Then: ∈D ∈ (1) W (f) (B)= (B) and (dΓ(ω)+1)1/2W (f)(dΓ(ω)+1)−1/2 1+ ω1/2f . D D k k ≤ k k Absence of Ground States in the Renormalized Massless Translation-Invariant Nelson Model T.N. Dam, B. Hinrichs 26

(2) If f ( h ) (ω−1/2 h ), then W (f) (A )= (A ) and on (A ) we have ∈D | | ∩D | | D 1 D 1 D 1 W (f)dΓ(h )W (f)∗ = dΓ(h ) ϕ(h f)+ f, h f for i 1,...,p . (B.1) i i − i h i i ∈{ } (3) If f ( h 1/2) ( h ω−1/2) (h ), then (dΓ(h )) W (f)∗ (A )= 0 for all i 1,...,p ∈D | | ∩D | | \D i D i ∩ D 1 { } ∈{ } s −1/2 s s (4) If f ( h ) (ω h ), then W (f) (As) = (As). Furthermore, if (fn) ( h ) (ω−∈1/2 Dh|s)| converges∩D to|f| simultaneouslyD in ω1/2-,Dh s- and ω−1/2 h s-norm, then⊂ D | | ∩ D | | | | | | −1 −1 s-lim AsW (fn)As = AsW (fn)As . (B.2) n→∞

This theorem is an extension of [GW18, Lemma C.3, C.4 & Cor. C.5] and [HM19, Lemma A.4]. The proof is obtained in several lemmas. For ε> 0 and λ [0, ) we write ∈ ∞ 1/2 Bǫ(λ) := (ǫdΓ(ω)+1+ ǫλ) and Bε := Bε(0).

Further, if f satisfies W (f) (B) (B), then we define D ⊂D −1 Cf,ε = BεW (f)Bε and Cf := Cf,1.

Lemma B.2. The set := ǫ(g) g (ω + h ) spans a core for A . E { | ∈D | | } s Proof. Note that spans a dense set inside (dΓ(ω + h )) (cf. [Par92, Prop. 20.7]) and is left invariant by Γ(eit(Eω+|h|)) = eitdΓ(ω+|h|), so spansD a core| for| dΓ(ω + h ) ([RS72, Thm. VIII.11]). Now A commutes with dΓ(ω + h ) and isE dΓ(ω + h )-bounded by Lemma| | 2.2, so the conclusion s | | | | follows from Lemma A.2

Lemma B.3. If f (ω1/2) ( h ) (ω−1/2 h ), then W (f) (A ) (dΓ(h )) for all i ∈ D ∩D | | ∩D | | D 1 ⊂ D i ∈ 1,...,p and (B.1) holds on (A ). { } D 1

Proof. The left hand side of (B.1) is a closed operator and the right hand side is A1-bounded, so by Lemma B.2 it suffices to show (B.1) holds on . Let g (hi). Then using (2.2), (2.4) and (2.6) we † E ∈D † easily see ǫ(g) (dΓ(h)) (a (hg)) and dΓ(hi)ǫ(g)= a (hig)ǫ(g). Further, (2.4) and (2.5) yield a(f)ǫ(g) = f,g∈Dǫ(g) for all∩Df,g . Now let g ,g (ω + h ). Using (2.8), W (f)∗ = W ( f) h i ∈ H 1 2 ∈ D | | − and ǫ(g ), ǫ(g ) = ehg2,g1i we then have h 2 1 i 2 ǫ(g ), W (f)dΓ(h)W (f)∗ǫ(g ) = e−kfk +hf,g1i+hg2,fi ǫ(g f),dΓ(h)ǫ(g f) h 2 1 i h 2 − 1 − i = g f, h(g f) ehg2,g1i h 2 − 1 − i = ǫ(g ), (a(hf)+ f, hf )ǫ(g ) h 2 h i 1 i = ǫ(g ), (dΓ(h) ϕ(hf)+ f, hf )ǫ(g ) h 2 − h i 1 i As is total (as it spans a core), this proves (B.1) holds on . E E

2 ν Lemma B.4. Let ε> 0 and (fn)n∈N L (R ) and assume lim fn =: f. ⊂ n→∞ N ∗ ∗ If W (fn) (B) (B) for all n and both Cfn,εCfn,ε and C−fn,εC−fn,ε converge strongly, then D ⊂ D ∈ ∗ ∗ W (f) (B) (B) and s-lim Cfn,ε = Cf,ε, s-lim Cf ,ε = Cf,ε. D ⊂D n→∞ n→∞ n

Absence of Ground States in the Renormalized Massless Translation-Invariant Nelson Model T.N. Dam, B. Hinrichs 27

∗ ∗ 2 ∗ −1 Proof. Since C C±fn,ε = C , we see C is uniformly bounded. As s-lim Bε W (fn)= k ±fn,ε k k ±fn,εk ±fn,ε n→∞ −1 ∗ ∗ Bε W (f) by Lemma 2.1, Lemma A.6 (2) implies W (f) (B) (B) and s-lim C = C . D ⊂ D n→∞ ±fn,ε ±f,ε ∗ ∗ Taking adjoints, this yields w-lim Cfn,ε = Cf,ε. Now, the equality Cfn,ε = C−f ,ε(Cf ,εCfn,ε) shows n→∞ n n the convergence is actually strong.

Lemma B.5. Let f,g : Rν C satisfy ω−1/2f,ω−1/2g L2(Rν). Then for ε> 0 → ∈ −1/2 −1/2 −1/2 2 ν (1) There is (fn) (ω ), such that lim ω fn = ω f in L (R ). ⊂D n→∞

(2) If (fn) is a sequence as in (1), then there is a bounded operator ϕε(f) independent of the −1 −1 sequence, such that ϕε(f) = lim Bε ϕ(fn)Bε . n→∞ e (3) ϕ (f) 2ε−1/2 ω−e1/2f and ϕ (f) ϕ (g)= ϕ (f g). k ε k≤ k k ε − ε ε −

Proof.eA possible choice in (1) is fen(k) = fe(k)1{|f|

B−1ϕ(h )B−1 B−1ϕ(h )B−1 = B−1ϕ(h h )B−1 for h , h (ω−1/2) ε 1 ε − ε 2 ε ε 1 − 2 ε 1 2 ∈D then finish the proof.

1/2 1/2 Lemma B.6. Let ε > 0 and f (ω ). Then W (f) (B) (B). Further, if (fn) (ω ) 1/2 ∈ D D ∗ ⊂ D ∗ ⊂1/ D2 converges to f in ω -norm, then s-lim Cfn,ε = Cf,ε, s-lim Cf ,ε = Cf,ε and Cf 1+ ω f . n→∞ n→∞ n k k≤ k k

Proof. We set gn = f1{ω

Absence of Ground States in the Renormalized Massless Translation-Invariant Nelson Model T.N. Dam, B. Hinrichs 28

Proof. By Lemma B.3, we have

B−1W (f )dΓ(h )−1W (f )∗ψ = dΓ(h )B−1ψ ϕ(h f )B ψ + f , h f B−1ψ. (B.4) ε Λ i Λ i ε − i Λ ε h Λ i Λi ε 1/2 1/2 1/2 2 Setting C = dΓ(hi)ψ + hi ω f dΓ(ω) ψ + hie f ψ , Lemma 2.1 and (B.4) imply −1 † k −k1 k| | kk k k| | k k k Bε a (hifΛ)ψ Bε W (fΛ)dΓ(hi)W (fΛ)ψ + C. Note that Lemma B.5 implies the right hand sidek of (B.4) convergesk≤k as Λ . Hence, k →∞ −1 ∗ ∗ −1 −1 ∗ Bε dΓ(hi)W (fΛ) ψ = CfΛ,εBε W (fΛ)dΓ(hi) W (fΛ) ψ

−1 −1 ∗ must also converge by Lemma B.6. As Bε dΓ(hi) is closed, the limit must be Bε dΓ(hi)W (f) ψ. Hence, we obtain

−1 −1 ∗ ∗ −1 ∗ Bε W (fΛ)dΓ(hi) W (fΛ) ψ = C−fΛ,εBε dΓ(hi)W (fΛ) ψ converges to B−1W (f)dΓ(h )−1W (f)∗ψ as Λ . We obtain ε i →∞ −1 lim sup lim sup Bε W (fΛ)dΓ(hi)W (fΛ)ψ = dΓ(hi)W (fΛ)ψ < . ε→0 Λ→∞ k k k k ∞

−1/2 Lemma B.8. Let i 1, .., p and f (hiω ) (hi). Set fΛ = f1{|h|<Λ,ω<Λ}. If ψ (B) ∈− {1 † } ∈ D \D ∈ D and lim sup lim sup Bε a (hifΛ)ψ < , then ψ =0. ε→0 Λ→∞ k k ∞ Proof. We use the definitions (2.5) and (2.6) and obtain

2 −2 † (n) hi(k)fΛ(k) ψ(k1, ..., kn) (a(hifΛ)Bε a (hifΛ)ψ )(k1, ..., kn)= | | (n) dk Zk∈Rν 1+ εω(k)+ εω (k1, ..., kn) n (n) hi(k)f(k)ψ (k,k1, ..., kˆi, ..., kn) + hi(kj)f(kj) (n+1) dk. Z Rν 1+ εω (k,k , ..., k ) Xj=1 k∈ 1 n

The second term is bounded by a†( h f )a( h f ) ψ(n) (k ,...,k ), since ω 0. Hence, we obtain | i Λ| | i Λ| | | 1 n ≥

−1 † (n) 2 2 (n) 2 (n) 2 Bε a (hifΛ)ψ hi(k)fΛ(k) Bε(ω(k))ψ dk a( hifΛ ) ψ k k ≥ Zk| | k k −k | | | |k

(n) 2 −1/2 (n) By Lemma 2.1, a( hifΛ ) ψ hiω f Bψ , so summing over n and using monotone convergence in thek limits| |Λ| |k ≤and k ε wekk get k →∞ →∞

2 2 −1/2 2 2 > lim sup hi(k)fΛ(k) dk ψ hiω f Bψ . ∞ Λ→∞ Zk| | k k −k k k k Since h f is not square-integrable, this implies ψ =0. i k k Lemma B.9. Let s [0, 1] and f (ω1/2) ( h s) (ω−1/2 h s). ∈ ∈D ∩D | | ∩ | | Then, there is a unique bounded operator Df,s, such that (cf. (A.1))

−1 q s (ψ, B ψ)= ψ, D ψ for ψ (A ). [|dΓ(h)| ,ϕ(f)] h f,s i ∈D s −1/2 s Further, Df,s 2 (1 + ω ) h f . k k≤ k −1/2 |−1|/2 k s s If fn converges to f in ω ,ω h and h norm then lim Df ,s = Df,s. | | | | n→∞ n Absence of Ground States in the Renormalized Massless Translation-Invariant Nelson Model T.N. Dam, B. Hinrichs 29

Proof. Let g ( h(n) s) (cf. (2.9)). We use x + y s x s y s for all x, y Rν and the definition of the anihilation∈D | operator| (cf. (2.5)) and see|| the inequali| −| | |≤ty | | ∈

a(f) h(n) sg h(n−1) sa(f)g a( h s f ) g | | | −| | |≤ | | | | | | holds pointwise. Now let φ, ψ (A ) and define ψ = ψ(n) , φ = φ(n) (A ). We now ∈ D s | | {| |} | | {| |} ∈ D s write qf,s = q[|dΓ(h)|s,ϕ(f)] and use above inequality to obtain

q (ψ,φ) ψ , a( h s f ) φ + a( h s f ) ψ , φ = ψ ,ϕ( h s f ) φ . | f,s |≤ h| | | | | | | |i h | | | | | | | |i h| | | | | | | |i Since ω 0, we have B−1ψ = B−1 ψ . Inserting φ = B−1ψ together with Lemma 2.1 and the ≥ | | | | Cauchy-Schwarz inequality then yields

q (ψ, B−1ψ) 2 (1 + ω−1/2) h sf ψ 2. | f,s |≤ k | | kk k

This proves existence and upper bound of Df,s. We observe q q = q , which yields D D = D by the bound above. The f,s − fn,s f−fn,s f,s − fn,s f−fn,s convergence statement directly follows. Proof of Theorem B.1. Recalling W (f)∗ = W ( f) (1) and (2) follow from Lemmas B.3 and B.6. Further, Lemmas B.7 and B.8 yield (3). − Hence, it remains to prove (4). Therefore, let fΛ(k)=1{|k|≤Λ}f(k) and recall that by (2) W (tfΛ) maps (A ) on itself for all t R. Now assume ψ,φ (A ) and define D 1 ∈ ∈D 1 g (t)= W (tf )ψ, dΓ(h) sW (tf )φ for t R. (B.5) Λ,ψ,φ h Λ | | Λ i ∈ For all i 1,...,p the map ∈{ } t dΓ(h )W (tf )ψ = W (tf )(dΓ(h )ψ tϕ(f )ψ + t2 h f , f ψ) 7→ i Λ Λ i − Λ h i Λ Λi

is continuous by Lemma 2.1, so W (tfΛ)ψ is continuous in dΓ(hi)-norm. Since

n dΓ(h) sη η + dΓ(h )η for all η ( dΓ(h) ) k| | k≤ k k k i k ∈D | | Xi=1 by the spectral theorem, t dΓ(h) sW (tf )ψ is continuous, so we can apply Lemma A.9 to (B.5). 7→ | | Λ Hence, gΛ,ψ,φ is continuously differentiable with derivative

′ g (t)= iq (W (tf )ψ, W (tf )φ), where q = q s as in (A.1). Λ,ψ,φ − Λ Λ Λ Λ [|dΓ(h)| ,ϕ(fΛ)] By Lemma B.9, the form q (ψ, B−1ψ) corresponds to an operator D ( ) bounded uniformly Λ Λ ∈ B F in Λ and satisfying lim DΛ = D∞. We now therefore have Λ→∞

s ψ, dΓ(h) W (fΛ)φ = gΛ,W (−fΛ)ψ,φ(1) h | | i 1 ′ = gΛ,W (−fΛ)ψ,φ(0) + gΛ,W (−fΛ)ψ,φ(t)dt Z0 1 s = ψ, W (fΛ) dΓ(h) φ i ψ, W ((1 t)fΛ)DΛBW (tfΛ)φ dt. h | | i − Z0 h − i

Absence of Ground States in the Renormalized Massless Translation-Invariant Nelson Model T.N. Dam, B. Hinrichs 30

Since ψ (A ) was arbitrary and (A ) is dense, this yields ∈D 1 D 1 1 s s dΓ(h) W (fΛ)φ = W (fΛ) dΓ(h) φ i W ((1 t)fΛ)DΛBW (tfΛφ)dt, | | | | − Z0 − where we use the Bochner integral on the right hand side. By the dominated convergence theorem, Lemmas 2.1 and B.6 we can take the limit Λ and obtain W (f)φ ( dΓ(h) s) as well as →∞ ∈D | | 1 s s dΓ(h) W (f)φ = W (f) dΓ(h) φ i W ((1 t)f)D∞BW (tf)φdt. (B.6) | | | | − Z0 − Again W ( f)= W (f)∗ directly yields W (f) (A )= (A ). Finally, (B.2) follows by Lemma B.6 − D s D s and a dominated convergence type argument applied to (B.6) as we did above for finite Λ.

C Decomposable Hilbert Space Operators

In this appendix we introduce the notation of direct integrals. The definition and simple lemmas are necessary to define our model and for the fiber decomposition. Further, we prove some convergence statements, which are essential in the proof of Theorem 3.8. Assume H is a separable Hilbert space. Then L2(Rν) H is the vector valued L2-space L2(Rν, H) ⊗ with f ψ being the map x f(x)ψ. We call a map f : Rν (H) strongly measurable, if x f(⊗x)ψ is measurable for all7→ ψ H. Further, if x f(x) is→ essentially B bounded, we define 7→ ∈ 7→ k 2 k ν the direct integral I⊕,x(f(x)) to be the bounded operator on L (R , H) defined by

⊕ 2 ν I⊕,x(f(x))ψ := f(x)dxψ = x f(x)ψ(x) for ψ L (R , H). ZM 7→ ∈ One may prove that the norm is given by the essential supremum (see [RS78, Theorem XIII.83]), i.e.,

I⊕,x(f(x)) = ess sup f(x) . (C.1) k k x∈Rν k k

−1 We call a collection of selfadjoint operators Ax x∈Rν strong resolvent measurable if x (Ax + i) is strongly measurable. Then we define the{ direct} integral 7→

⊕ I⊕,x(Ax)ψ = Axdxψ = x Axψ(x) ZRν 7→ with domain (I (A )) = D ⊕,x x 2 ν 2 ψ L (R , H) ψ(x) (Ax) for almost all x and Axψ(x) dx < .  ∈ ∈D ZRν k k ∞

The following theorem sums up the results about direct integrals we shall need. Lemma C.1 (based on [RS78, Theorem XIII.85]). The following holds

(1) A collection of selfadjoint operators A Rν is strong resolvent measurable if and only if { x}x∈ x eitAx is weakly measurable. 7→ ν ν In this case, if ψ : R H is measurable and ψ(x) (Ax) for all x R , then x Axψ(x) is measurable. → ∈D ∈ 7→ Absence of Ground States in the Renormalized Massless Translation-Invariant Nelson Model T.N. Dam, B. Hinrichs 31

(2) Let Ax x∈Rν be a strong resolvent measurable collection of selfadjoint operators. Then I⊕,x(Ax) is selfadjoint.{ } Further, if f : R R is measurable, then f(A ) Rν is strong resolvent measurable and → { x }x∈ f(I (A )) = I (f(A )). If there is λ R such that A λ for all x Rν, then I (A ) λ. ⊕,x x ⊕,x x ∈ x ≥ ∈ ⊕,x x ≥ (3) If A is selfadjoint or bounded on H, we may identify 1 A = I (A). ⊗ ⊕,x The next lemma concerns direct integrals of Fock space operators, as introduced in Section 2.1, i.e., H = . F 2 ν Lemma C.2. Assume f L (R ) is measurable and let Ux x∈M be a strongly measurable family of unitary operators on L2∈(Rν ). Then { }

(1) ϕ(U f) Rν is strong resolvent measurable. { x }x∈ Further, x W (U f) and x Γ(U ) are strongly measurable. 7→ x 7→ x (2) Let ω : Rν R be a multiplication operator with ω > 0 almost everywhere. If f (ω−1/2) then → ∈D I (ϕ(U f)) is infinitesimally 1 dΓ(ω)-bounded and I (ϕ(U f))+1 dΓ(ω) ω−1/2f 2. ⊕,x x ⊗ ⊕,x x ⊗ ≥k k Proof. Combine Lemmas 2.1 and C.1. The next two statements connect norm convergence and norm resolvent convergence with the direct integral decomposition of bounded and selfadjoint operators, respectively. This is essential in the proof of Theorem 3.8.

ν Lemma C.3. Let (f ) N be a family of continuous and bounded function f : R (H) and set n n∈ n → B Bn = I⊕,x(fn(x)). Assume (Bn) converges to an operator B in norm. Then there is a continuous and bounded function f : Rν (H), such that (f ) uniformly converges to f and B = I f(x). → B n ⊕,x Proof. Let n, m N. Since f and f are continuous, (C.1) implies ∈ n m

Bn Bm = ess sup fn(x) fm(x) = sup fn(x) fm(x) . k − k x∈Rν k − k x∈Rν k − k

ν Hence, (fn) is a Cauchy sequence in the Banach space Cb(R , (H)) and there is a limit f C (Rν, (H)). Clearly, B = I (f (x)) converges to I (f(x)) whichB finishes the proof. ∈ b B n ⊕,x n ⊕,x A collection Ax x∈Rν of selfadjoint operators is called resolvent continuous, if it is uniformly { } −1 bounded below and for some z < inf Rν inf(σ(A)) the map x (A z) is continuous in x∈ 7→ x − norm. Note this implies x inf σ(A ) is continuous by Lemma A.7. 7→ x Lemma C.4. Let ( A Rν ) N be a sequence of resolvent continuous collections of selfadjoint { n,x}x∈ n∈ operators on H and define An = I⊕,x(An,x). If (An) is uniformly bounded below by λ and converges to an operator A in the norm resolvent sense, then inf σ(A ) λ for all (x, n) Rν N and n,x ≥ ∈ × (A ) converges to a selfadjoint operator A in the norm resolvent sense for all x Rν . Further, n,x n x ∈ the collection A Rν is resolvent continuous and uniformly bounded below by λ. { x}x∈ Proof. By the assumptions x inf(σ(A )) is continuous for each n N and hence 7→ n,x ∈ e−λ sup e−An = sup ess sup e−An,x = sup e− inf(σ(An,x)). ≥ n k k n x k k (n,x)

ν This proves inf(σ(An,x)) λ for all x R and n N. Let z <λ. Using Lemma A.7 x (A z)−1 is continuous≥ and therefore∈ using Lemma∈ C.3 there is a continuous map x B 7→to n,x − 7→ x Absence of Ground States in the Renormalized Massless Translation-Invariant Nelson Model T.N. Dam, B. Hinrichs 32

−1 which x (An,x z) converges uniformly. It follows Bx is selfadjoint and bounded, since it is 7→ − −1 a limit of selfadjoint and bounded operators. Furthermore, we have I⊕,x(Bx)=(A z) , so via Lemma C.1 we see − A = ((A z)−1)−1 + z = I (B−1 + z). − ⊕,x x −1 Define Ax = Bx + z. Then Ax is selfadjoint and clearly the norm resolvent limit of An,x, so ν by Lemma A.7 we see Ax λ for all x R . Furthermore, Ax x∈Rν is resolvent continuous as x B =(A z)−1 is continuous.≥ ∈ { } 7→ x x − We end this appendix with a lemma about the domains of direct integrals, which we use in the proof of theorem Theorem 3.8.

Lemma C.5. Let A Rν , B Rν be strong resolvent measurable families of selfajoint opera- { x}x∈ { x}x∈ tors, A = I (A ), B = I (B ) and assume A Rν is uniformly bounded below. Further, let ⊕,x x ⊕,x x { x}x∈ z < infRν inf(σ(Ax)). ν −1 If (A) (B), then (Ax) (Bx) for almost all x R and x Bx(Ax z) is essentially bounded.D ⊂D If further (AD ) ⊂D(B ) for all x, then x ∈B (A z)7→−1 is strongly− measurable and D x ⊂ D x 7→ x x − B(A z)−1 = I (B (A z)−1). − ⊕ x − Proof. Note z < inf σ(A) by Lemma C.1. Now let H be countable and dense and write C = B(A z)−1 . We want to prove there is D ⊂ −1 c k − k−1 a nullset F such that (Bx(Ax z) ) for x F and Bx(Ax z) ψ C ψ for all ψ . D⊂D − ∈ k − k≤ k k ∈D−1 As is countable, this amounts to proving that for any ψ we have ψ (Bx(Ax z) ) almostD everywhere and B (A z)−1ψ C ψ almost everywhere.∈ D To that∈ end, D we define− the k x x − k≤ k k heat kernel φ (x)=(4tπ)−ν/2 exp( x y /4t) for t> 0 and y Rν. t,y | − | ∈ Then we have (A + z)−1φ1/2φ1/2ψ (B), which implies t,y 1,0 ∈D φ (x)φ (x)(A z)−1ψ (B ) for almost all x Rν. t,y 1,0 x − ∈D x ∈ As φ φ > 0, we see ψ (B (A z)−1) almost everywhere. Further, we have t,y 1,0 ∈D x x − −1 1/2 1/2 2 φt,y(x)φ1,0(x) Bx(Ax z)ψ dx = B(A z) φt,y φ1,0 ψ ZRν k − k k − k

2 2 C φt,y(x)φ1,0(x)dx ψ . ≤ ZRν k k 1 ν Integrating a function g L (R ) against the heat kernel φt,y(x) gives a function in the y-variable 1∈ ν that converges to g in L (R ) as t 0 (see e.g. [Gri09, Theorem 7.19]). Hence by φ1,0 > 0, we see −1 → ν By(Ay z) ψ C ψ for almost every y R . k − k≤ k k ν∈ −1 Assume now (Ax) (Bx) for all x R . Note that for any ψ H we have x Bx(Ax z) ψ D ⊂D ∈ −1 ∈ 7→ − −1 is measurable by Lemma C.1 (1), so I⊕,x(Bx(Ax z) ) is well defined. That I⊕,x(Bx(Ax z) )= B(A z)−1 is obvious. − − − D Proof of Pull-Through Formula

This appendix is devoted to proving the pull through formula. The method is built on the results in [DM20b] and the reader should consult this paper for the proofs. We start by defining ∞ (n) + = F n=0 F Absence of Ground States in the Renormalized× Massless Translation-Invariant Nelson Model T.N. Dam, B. Hinrichs 33

with coordinate projections P . We equip with the σ-algebra induced by the projections. Define n F+ (Rν)= f : Rν n N : x P f(x) L2(Rν, (n)) / . C { →F|∀ ∈ 0 7→ n ∈ F } ∼ where f g if an only if f = g almost everywhere. We will now introduce the pointwise annihilation operator.∼ For ψ =(ψ(n)) we define Aψ (Rν) by ∈F+ ∈ C (n+1) Pn(Aψ)(k)= (n + 1)ψ (k, ,..., ), p · · which is easily seen to be well defined and take values in (n). The next statement can be found in [DM20b] F

Theorem D.1. Let B : Rν R be measurable with B 0. Then → ≥ 1 1 2 ν ψ (dΓ(B) 2 ) B 2 Aψ L (R , ) ∈D ⇐⇒ ∈ F 1 Furthermore, for φ, ψ (dΓ(B) 2 ) we have ∈D

1 1 dΓ(B) 2 φ,dΓ(B) 2 ψ = B(k) Aφ(k), Aψ(k) dµ(k), (D.1) h i ZM h i and Aψ(k) almost everywhere on k Rν : B(k) > 0 . ∈F { ∈ } A pull-through formula for the cutoff Hamiltonian is proven in [Dam20, Lemma B.12].

Theorem D.2. Let ω and v satisfy Hypotheses 1, 2 and 3. Further, let ξ Rν, ν 2 and ∈ ≥ Λ (0, ). Assume ψ (H (ξ)) with A(H (ξ) Σ (ξ))ψ is almost everywhere valued. Then ∈ ∞ ∈D Λ Λ − Λ F (Aψ)(k) =(H (ξ k) Σ (ξ)+ ω(k))−1(AH (ξ)ψ)(k) Λ − − Λ Λ v (k)(H (ξ k) Σ (ξ)+ ω(k))−1ψ − Λ Λ − − Λ almost everywhere.

We can now prove the pull-through formula for the renormalized case.

Theorem D.3. Let ω and v satisfy Hypotheses 1, 2 and 3. Further, let ξ Rν, ν 2. Assume ψ ∈ ≥ is a ground state for H∞(ξ). Then

(Aψ)(k)= v(k)(H (ξ k)+ ω(k) Σ (ξ))−1ψ − ∞ − − ∞ almost everywhere.

Proof. Define E =0 and define for Λ [0, ] the operator ∞ ∈ ∞ H′ (ξ,k)= H (ξ k) Σ (ξ)= H (ξ k)+ E (Σ (ξ)+ E ) Λ Λ − − Λ Λ − Λ − Λ Λ

Using Lemma A.7 and Theorem 3.8, we see ΣΛ(ξ)+ EΛ converges to Σ∞(ξ), so

′ ′ −tH (ξ,k) −t(H (ξ−k)+E ) t(Σ (ξ)+E ) −tH∞(ξ,k) lim e Λ = lim e Λ Λ e Λ Λ = e Λ→∞ Λ→∞

Absence of Ground States in the Renormalized Massless Translation-Invariant Nelson Model T.N. Dam, B. Hinrichs 34

′ ′ in norm for all t> 0 which implies HΛ(ξ,k) converges to H∞(ξ,k) in the norm resolvent convergence ∞ R (cf. Lemma A.7). Pick χ C0 ( ) such that χ(0) = 1 and pick Λ0 such that ΣΛ(ξ)+ EΛ Σ∞(ξ)+ 1 > 0 for all Λ > Λ . We∈ then define for a 0, 1 , Λ (Λ , ) − 0 ∈{ } ∈ 0 ∞ ′ ψΛ = χ(HΛ(ξ, 0))ψ, C = H′ (ξ, 0)a(H′ (ξ, 0)+ E + Σ (ξ) Σ (ξ)+1)χ(H′ (ξ, 0)), a,Λ Λ Λ Λ Λ − ∞ Λ B =(dΓ(ω)+1)1/2, D = B(H (ξ)+ E Σ (ξ)+1)−1. Λ Λ Λ − ∞ By the spectral theorem, Proposition 2.3 and Theorem 3.8, we see H′ (ξ, 0)aψ (H (ξ)) (B) Λ Λ ∈D Λ ⊂D and that

′ a B(HΛ(ξ, 0)) ψΛ = DΛCa,Λψ.

0 a We abuse notation by setting 0 = 1. By the spectral theorem we see Ca,Λψ converges to 0 ψ as a ′ a Λ , so using Theorem 3.8 we find DΛCa,Λψ converges to 0 ψ. Hence (HΛ(ξ, 0)) ψΛ converges to→∞0aψ in B-norm. ′ By Theorem D.1 we see that AHΛ(ξ, 0)ψΛ is Fock space valued, so we may apply Theorem D.2 and find

(Aψ )(k) =(H (ξ k) Σ (ξ)+ ω(k))−1(AH′ (ξ, 0)ψ )(k) Λ Λ − − Λ Λ Λ v (k)(H (ξ k) Σ (ξ)+ ω(k))−1ψ . − Λ Λ − − Λ Λ 1/2 2 Rν ′ By Theorem D.1 we see that ω AψΛ converges to Aψ in L ( , ( )). Additionally, AHΛ(ξ, 0)ψΛ 2 ν F H converges to 0 in L (R , ( )). As ω > 0 almost everywhere, we may pick elements Λ0 < Λ1 < Λ < such that F H 2 ···

lim (AψΛ )(k)=(Aψ)(k) n→∞ n ′ lim (AHΛ(ξ, 0)ψΛn )(k)=0 n→∞ for almost every k. Now

−1 −1 lim (HΛ(ξ k) ΣΛ(ξ)+ ω(k)) =(H∞(ξ k) Σ∞(ξ)+ ω(k)) Λ→∞ − − − − in norm except at k Rξ, which finishes the proof. ∈ References

[Ara18] A. Arai. Analysis on Fock Spaces and Mathematical Theory of Quantum Fields. World Scientific, New Jersey, 2018. [BDP12] S. Bachmann, D. A. Deckert, and A. Pizzo. The mass shell of the Nelson model without cut-offs. J. Funct. Anal., 263(5):1224–1282, 2012, arXiv:1104.3271. doi:10.1016/j.jfa.2012.04.021. [Can71] J. Cannon. Quantum field theoretic properties of a model of Nelson: Domain and eigenvector stability for perturbed linear operator. J. Funct. Anal., 8(1):101–152, 1971. doi:10.1016/0022-1236(71)90023-1. [Dam20] T. N. Dam. Absence of Ground States in the Translation Invariant Massless Nelson Model. Ann. Henri Poincaré, 21:2655–2679, 2020, arXiv:1808.00088. doi:10.1007/s00023-020-00928-y. [DG04] J. Dereziński and C. Gérard. Scattering theory of infrared divergent Pauli-Fierz Hamiltonians. Ann. Henri Poincaré, 5(3):523–577, 2004. doi:10.1007/s00023-004-0177-5. Absence of Ground States in the Renormalized Massless Translation-Invariant Nelson Model T.N. Dam, B. Hinrichs 35

[DM20a] T. N. Dam and J. S. Møller. Asymptotics in Spin-Boson type models. Commun. Math. Phys., 374(3):1389– 1415, 2020, arXiv:1808.00085. doi:10.1007/s00220-020-03685-5. [DM20b] T. N. Dam and J. S. Møller. Spin-Boson type models analysed using symmetries. Kyoto J. Math., 60(4):1261–1332, 2020, arXiv:1803.05812. doi:10.1215/21562261-2019-0062. [Fro73] J. Fröhlich. On the infrared problem in a model of scalar electrons and massless scalar bosons. Ann. Henri Poincaré, 19(1):1–103, 1973. [Fro74] J. Fröhlich. Existence of dressed one-electron states in a class of persistent models. Fortschr. Phys., 22(3):159–198, 1974. doi:10.1002/prop.19740220304. [G00]´ C. Gérard. On the Existence of Ground States for Massless Pauli-Fierz Hamiltonians. Ann. Henri Poincaré, 1(3):443–459, 2000. doi:10.1007/s000230050002. [GHL14] M. Gubinelli, F. Hiroshima, and J. Lőrinczi. Ultraviolet renormalization of the Nelson Hamil- tonian through functional integration. J. Funct. Anal., 267(9):3125–3153, 2014, arXiv:1304.6662. doi:10.1016/j.jfa.2014.08.002. [Gri09] A. Grigor’yan. Heat Kernel and Analysis on Manifolds, volume 47 of AMS/IP Studies in Advanced Mathematics. AMS, Providence, 2009. [GW18] M. Griesemer and A. Wünsch. On the domain of the Nelson Hamiltonian. J. Math. Phys., 59(4):042111, 2018, arXiv:1711.10916. doi:10.1063/1.5018579. [HH08] D. Hasler and I. Herbst. Absence of Ground States for a Class of Translation Invariant Mod- els of Non-relativistic QED. Commun. Math. Phys., 279(3):769–787, 2008, arXiv:math-ph/0702096. doi:10.1007/s00220-008-0444-2. [HM19] F. Hiroshima and O. Matte. Ground states and their associated Gibbs measures in the renormalized Nelson model. Eprint, 2019, arXiv:1903.12024. [LHB11] J. Lőrinczi, F. Hiroshima, and V. Betz. Feynman-Kac-Type Theorems and Gibbs Measures on Path Space, volume 34 of De Gruyter Studies in Mathematics. De Gruyter, Berlin, 2011. [LLP53] T.-D. Lee, F. E. Low, and D. Pines. The motion of slow electrons in a polar crystal. Phys. Rev., 90:297–302, 1953. doi:10.1103/PhysRev.90.297. [LS19] J. Lampart and J. Schmidt. On Nelson-Type Hamiltonians and Abstract Boundary Conditions. Commun. Math. Phys., 367(2):629–663, 2019, arXiv:1803.00872. doi:10.1007/s00220-019-03294-x. [Miy18] T. Miyao. On renormalized Hamiltonian nets. Preprint, 2018, arXiv:1810.12716. [Miy19] T. Miyao. On the semigroup generated by the renormalized Nelson Hamiltonian. J. Funct. Anal., 276(6), 2019, arXiv:1803.08659. doi:10.1016/j.jfa.2018.11.001. [Nel64] E. Nelson. Interaction of Nonrelativistic Particles with a Quantized Scalar Field. J. Math. Phys., 5(9):1190–1197, 1964. doi:10.1063/1.1704225. [Par92] K. R. Parthasarathy. An Introduction to Quantum Stochastic Calculus, volume 85 of Monographs in Mathematics. Birkhäuser, Basel, 1992. doi:10.1007/978-3-0348-0566-7. [Piz03] A. Pizzo. One-particle (improper) States in Nelson’s Massless Model. Ann. Henri Poincaré, 4(3):439–486, 2003, arXiv:math-ph/0010043. doi:10.1007/s00023-003-0136-6. [RS72] M. Reed and B. Simon. Functional Analysis, volume 1 of Methods of Modern Mathematical Physics. Academic Press, San Diego, 1972. [RS75] M. Reed and B. Simon. Fourier Analysis, Self-Adjointness, volume 2 of Methods of Modern Mathematical Physics. Academic Press, San Diego, 1975. [RS78] M. Reed and B. Simon. Analysis of Operators, volume 4 of Methods of Modern Mathematical Physics. Academic Press, San Diego, 1978. [Tes14] G. Teschl. Mathematical Methods in Quantum Mechanics, volume 157 of Graduate Studies in Mathemat- ics. AMS, Providence, 2014. [Wei80] J. Weidmann. Linear Operators in Hilbert Spaces, volume 68 of Graduate Texts in Mathematics. Springer, New York, 1980. doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-6027-1.

Absence of Ground States in the Renormalized Massless Translation-Invariant Nelson Model