prev

next

out of 4

Published on

20-Feb-2017View

214Download

0

Transcript

VOLUME 65, NUMBER 26 PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS 24 DECEMBER 1990

Natural Inflation with Pseudo Nambu-Goldstone Bosons

Katherine FreesePhysics Department, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02I39

Joshua A. Frieman and Angela V. OlintoNASA/Fermilab Astrophysics Center, Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, Batavia, Illinois 605I0

(Received 4 September I 990)

We show that a pseudo Nambu-Goldstone boson, with a potential of the form V(P) =A [1cos(p/f)l, can naturally give rise to an epoch of inflation in the early Universe. Successful inflation

can be achieved if f-mp~ and A-moUT. Such mass scales arise in particle-physics models with a gaugegroup that becomes strongly interacting at a scale -A, e.g. , as can happen in superstring theories. Thedensity fluctuation spectrum is non-scale-invariant, with extra power on large length scales.

PACS numbers: 98.80.Cq

The inflationary-universe model was proposed ' tosolve several cosmological puzzles, notably the horizon,flatness, and monopole problems. During the inflation-ary epoch, the energy density of the Universe is dominat-ed by vacuum energy, p=p,.andthe scale factor of theUniverse expands exponentially: R(t) tx:e ', where theHubble parameter H =R/R = (8nGp,J3) '/' duringinflation. If the interval of exponential expansionsatisfies At +60H ', a small causally connected regionof the Universe grows sufficiently to explain the observedhomogeneity and isotropy of the Universe, to dilute anyoverdensity of magnetic monopoles, and to flatten thespatial hypersurfaces, 0 =8trGp/3H l.

To satisfy a combination of constraints on inflationarymodels, in particular, sufficient inflation and micro-wave-background anisotropy limits on density fluctua-tions, the potential of the field responsible for inflation(the inflaton) must be very flat. For a general class ofinflation models involving a single slowly rolling field (in-cluding new, chaotic, and double-field inflation ), theratio of the height to the (width) of the potential mustsatisfy

where AV is the change in the potential V(P) and Atli isthe change in the field p during the slowly rolling portionof the inflationary epoch. [For extended inflation, g& 10 ' (Ref. 8).] Thus, the inflaton must be extremelyweakly self-coupled, with eff'ective quartic self-couplingconstant A,~(6(g) (Ref. 7) (in realistic models,( 10 12)

While a number of workable inflation models [satisfy-ing Eq. (1)] have been proposed, none of them is com-pelling from a particle-physics standpoint. In somecases, the tiny coupling X~ is simply postulated ad hoc attree level, and then must be fine tuned to remain small inthe presence of radiative corrections. But this merely re-places a cosmological naturalness problem with unnatur-al particle physics. The situation is improved in modelswhere the smallness of k~ is protected by a symmetry,

V(y) =A'[1+ cos(/Vy/f)] . (2)

We will take the positive sign in Eq. (2) (this choice hasno eff'ect on our results) and, unless otherwise noted, as-sume N=1, so the potential, of height 2A, has a uniqueminimum at p =nf (we assume the periodicity of P is2trf). We show below that, for appropriately chosenvalues of the mass scales, namely, f-mp~ and A-mGUT10' GeV, the PNGB field p can drive inflation. [This

e.g. , supersymmetry. In these cases, ' k, may arise froma small ratio of mass scales; however, the required masshierarchy, while stable, is itself unexplained. It would bepreferable if such a hierarchy, and thus inflation itself,arose dynamically in particle-physics models.

Nambu-Goldstone bosons are ubiquitous in particle-physics models: They arise whenever a global symmetryis spontaneously broken. If there is additional explicitsymmetry breaking, these particles become pseudoNambu-Goldstone bosons (PNGBs). In models with alarge global-symmetry-breaking scale f, PNGBs are veryweakly interacting, since their couplings are suppressedby inverse powers of f. For example, in "invisible" axionmodels'" with Peccei-Quinn scale fpQ-10' GeV, theaxion self-coupling is k, (AQcD/fpQ) 10 . [Thissimply reflects the hierarchy between the QCD andgrand-unified-theory (GUT) scales, which arises fromthe slow logarithmic running of aQCD. ] Because of thenonlinearly realized global symmetry, the potential forPNGBs is exactly flat at tree level. The symmetry maybe explicitly broken by loop corrections, as in schizon'and axion" models. In the case of axions, for example,the PNGB mass arises from nonperturbative gauge-fieldconfigurations (instantons) through the chiral anomaly.When the associated gauge group becomes strong at amass scale A, instanton efl'ects give rise to a periodic po-tential of height -A for the PNGB field. ' Since thenonlinearly realized symmetry is restored as A 0, theflatness of the PNGB potential is natural in the sense of't Hooft. '

The resulting PNGB potential is generally of the form

1990 The American Physical Society 3233

VOLUME 65, NUMBER 26 PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS 24 DECEMBER 1990

is consistent with Eq. (1), since g-(A/f) 10These mass scales can arise naturally in particle-physicsmodels. For example, in the hidden sector of superstringtheories, if a non-Abelian group remains unbroken, therunning gauge coupling can become strong at the GUTscale;' then the role of the PNGB inflaton might beplayed, e.g. , by the model-independent axion. '

For temperatures T &f, the global symmetry is spon-taneously broken, and the field p describes the phase de-gree of freedom around the bottom of a "Mexican hat. "Since p thermally decouples at a temperature T-f imp~-f, we assume it is initially laid down at random be-tween 0 and 2nf in difTerent causally connected regions.Within each Hubble volume, the evolution of the field isdescribed by

j+3Hj+rj+ V'(y) =0,where I is the decay width of the inflaton. In the tem-perature range A (T (f, the potential V(p) is dynami-cally irrelevant, because the forcing term V'(p) is negli-gible compared to the Hubble damping term. (In addi-tion, for axion models, A 0 as T/A ~ due to thehigh-temperature suppression of instantons. ' ) Thus, inthis temperature range, aside from the smoothing of spa-tial gradients in p, the field does not evolve. Finally, atT A, in regions of the Universe with p initially near thetop of the potential, the field starts to roll slowly downthe hill toward the minimum. In those regions, the ener-

gy density of the Universe is quickly dominated by thevacuum contribution [V(p) =2A & pd-T], and theUniverse expands exponentially. Since the initial condi-tions for p are random, our model is closest in spirit tochaotic inflation. Note that PNGBs may also provide aflat potential for double-field inflation.

To successfully solve the cosmological puzzles of thestandard cosmology, an inflationary model must satisfy avariety of constraints.

(I) Slow rolling regi-me The field i.ssaid to be slow-ly rolling (SR) when its motion is overdamped, i.e.,p 3H& (N.B., I H), and two conditions are met:

i/2

IV I (9H2 2lcos(e/f)I ( ~48nf1+cos(p/f ) m p~ (4)and

V (4)mpl ( . si (pn/f ) & J48nf48n, i.e. ,V(p)

' ' ' I+cos(glf) mpi (5)From Eqs. (4) and (5) the existence of a broad SR re-gime requires f~ mp~/J48n (required below for otherreasons). The SR regime ends when p reaches a valueP2, at which one of the inequalities (4) or (5) is violated.For example, for f=m p~, p2/f =2.98 (near the minimumof the potential), while for f=m p~/424n, P2/f =1.9.Clearly, as f grows, p2/f approaches n. (Here andbelow, we assume inflation begins at a field value 0 & p~/

16nf ' sin(ifi2/2f ) (6)

Using Eqs. (4) and (5) to determine pp as a function off, the constraint (6) determines the maximum value(pP"") of p~ consistent with sufficient inflation. Thefraction of the Universe with p~ C [0,&~ "i will inflatesufficiently. If we assume that p~ is randomly distributedbetween 0 and nf from one horizon volume to another,the probability of being in such a region is pt '"/nf. Forexample, for f 3mp~, mp~, mp]/2, and mp~/J24n, theprobability is 0.7, 0.2, 3x10, and 3x10 '. The frac-tion of the Universe that inflates sufficiently drops pre-cipitously with decreasing f, but is large for f near mp~.

(3) Density fluctuations. Inflationary models gen-erate density fluctuations' with amplitude at horizoncrossing b'p/p=0. 1H /p, where the right-hand side isevaluated when the fluctuation crossed outside the hor-izon during inflation. Fluctuations on observable scalesare produced 60-50 e-foldings before the end ofinflation. The largest-amplitude perturbations are pro-duced 60 e-foldings before the end of inflation,

ap 0 3A'f 8n [I+cos(eP"/f)i"'p mp') 3 sin(yP'"/f)

Constraints on the anisotropy of the microwave back-ground require 8p/p ~ 5X10, i.e. ,

2X10' GeV for f=mp~,is3 x 10 GeV for f=m p~/2.

(8a)(8b)

Thus, to generate the fluctuations responsible for large-scale structure, A should be comparable to the GUTscale, and the inflaton mass m~=A /f-10"-(2X10' )GeV.

In this model, the fluctuations deviate from a scale-invariant spectrum. For f& 3mp~/4, the amplitude

m 2/48~f 2grows with mass scale M as Bp/p-M " . Thus,the primordial power spectrum (at fixed time) is a powerlaw, ISiI k", with spectral index n= 1 mp~/8nf .The extra power on large scales (compared to the scale-invariant n =1 spectrum) may have important implica-tions for large-scale structure. '

In new inflation models, the density perturbation con-straint usually requires a very large number of e-foldings

f & n", since the potential is symmetric about itsminimum, we can just as easily consider the casen & p ~/f & 2n. )

(2) Sufhcient inflation .We demand that the scalefactor of the Universe inflates by at least 60 e-foldingsduring the SR regime,

(yl $2,f) ln(+2!+ I )8n "2 V(y) d

3234

VOLUME 65, NUMBER 26 PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS 24 DECEMBER 1990

of the scale factor. Here, many regions of the Universewill inflate less than 60 e-foldings and generate accept-able density fluctuations. Thus, this model might beeasily embedded in double-inflation scenarios that alsoseek to produce extra power on large scales.

(4) Quantum fiuctuations T.he semiclassical treat-ment of the scalar field requires the initial value of p toexceed its quantum fluctuations, i.e., pi) A&=H/2tt.For example, this requires that pi/f ) 10 for f=mph.Since pP'"H/2n over the parameter range of interest,this constraint does not place significant restrictions onthe model.

(5) Reheating At.the end of the SR regime, thefield p oscillates about the minimum of the potential, andgives rise to particle and entropy production. The decayof p into fermions and gauge bosons reheats the Universeto a temperature

TRH45

4z gg

' 1/4

min[[H($2)mpl], (I mph) ], (9)

where g~ is the number of relativistic degrees of free-dom. On dimensional grounds, the decay rate isI =g m~/f =g2A6/f, where g is an eff'ective couplingconstant. [For example, in the original axion model, 'z

ga:aEM for two-photon decay, and g ec(m~/m, ) fordecays to light ferrnions y.] For f=mph and g+ =10,we find TaH = min [6x 10' GeV, 10 g GeV]. Since wegenerally expect g(1, the reheat temperature will beTaH(10 GeV, too low for conventional GUT baryo-genesis, but high enough if baryogenesis takes place atthe electroweak scale. Alternatively, the baryon asyrn-metry can be produced directly during reheating throughbaryon-violating decays of p or its decay products. Theresulting baryon-to-entropy ratio is ntt/s =eTaH/m~-egA/f-10 eg, where e is the CP-violating parame-ter; provided t.'g) 10, the observed asymmetry can begenerated.

(6) Spatial gradients and topological defectsAbove, we assume that the Universe is vacuum dom-inated [p= V(p)] when p begins to roll down the hill.Otherwise, the onset of inflation could be delayed or evenprevented altogether. Several sources of energy densitycould be problematic: spatial p gradients, global cosmicstrings, and domain walls. For a spatial fluctuation withamplitude bp and wavelength L, the gradient energydensity is (Vp) =(bp/L) . Requiring this to be lessthan the potential V(p) at the onset of inflation leads tothe constraint LH) 3(8&/f)f/mph, i.e., large-amplitudegradients (8p-f ) must have wavelengths longer thanthe Hubble length, L~0 ', at T-A. ' Gradients onsubhorizon scales (L (H ') are expected to besmoothed out by the beginning of inflation: Since thepotential is inoperative for T A, these gradients aredamped (redshifted away) by the Hubble expansion.Thus, the gradient energy density at TA is at mostcomparable to the potential and quickly becomes sub-

dominant; the net effect is to delay only slightly theonset of inflation. This conclusion follows as long asthere also exists a long-wavelength mode (LH ')with amplitude 6p-'f; in this case, there will be regionswith pi (pl '" which inflate. Since p is initially Pois-son distributed, we expect roughly equal power on allscales at T-f, i.e., Bpt -f independent of L (at leastfor L )mph '); consequently, gradients should be innocu-ous, and the probability for inflation will be given by theestimates in Sec. (2) above.

To be conservative, however, we can assume that wemust be in a region of the Universe that is homogeneousover at least 1 horizon volume at the onset of inflation.We model the Universe as a tetrahedral lattice with ver-tices separated by a Hubble length and assume the fieldis uncorrelated from one vertex point to another. Re-quiring each point of a tetrahedron to have 0(pi( pl '" (or the equivalent at other maxima of the poten-tial), we find that the fraction of the Universe that ishomogeneous and inflates is P =2N(&P'"/2nfN), whereN is the number of distinct minima of the potential. Forf=mpl, pP'"/f =0.6 and P=2x10 N; for f =mph/2, Pl '"=10 and P=10 ''N . From this argu-ment, the scale f must be very near mph to avoid fine tun-ing the initial conditions. On the other hand, if the pre-vious paragraph is correct, the constraints from gradientsare not so severe; ultimately, the issue should be settledby numerical simulations.

Initial gradients in p may also lead to global cosmicstrings, which form in the symmetry breaking at T-f,and to domain ~alls, which may form at T-A. Theenergy density in strings, which correspond to con-figurations in which p/f winds around 2tr and have di-mensionless mass per unit length Gp (f/mph) 1, iscomparable to the gradient density estimated above, as-suming of order one string per horizon. The initial ener-gy density in domain walls, pnw=aH, where cr=fA' isthe wall surface energy per unit area, will also be of thesame order of magnitude. Since their energy densitiesredshift away, topological defects do not prevent theUniverse from inflating, but, like gradients, delay brieflythe onset of inflation. Once inflation takes place, our ob-servable Universe lies deep inside a single domain withp=nf, so both strings and domain walls are inflatedaway.

In conclusion, a pseudo Nambu-Goldstone boson, witha potential [Eq. (2)] that arises naturally from particle-physics models, can lead to successful inflation if the glo-bal symmetry-breaking scale f=mpl and A=mo&T.

We thank F. Adams, A. Albrecht, R. Brandenberger,E. Copeland, R. Davis, D. Goldwirth, C. Hill, T. Piran,P. Tinyakov, M. Turner, and B. Zwiebach for helpfuldiscussions, and the Aspen Center for Physics for its hos-pitality. K.F. acknowledges support from NSF, theSloan Foundation (Grants No. 26722 and No. 26623),and NASA (Grant No. NAGW-1320). J.F. and A.O.

3235

VOLUME 65, NUMBER 26 PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS 24 DECEMBER 1990

acknowledge support from DOE and NASA (Grant No.NAGW-1340) at Fermilab, and A.O. from NSF (GrantNo. AST-22595) at The University of Chicago.

'A. H. Guth, Phys. Rev. D 23, 347 (1981).P. J. Steinhardt and M. S. Turner, Phys. Rev. D 29, 2162

(1984).Recent measurements include P. Meinhold and P. Lubin

(unpublished); A. C. S. Readhead er aj. , Astrophys. J. 346,566 (1989); J. M. Uson and D. T. Wilkinson, Nature (Lon-don) 312, 427 (1985). For discussion of Sp/p, see D. S. Salo-pek, J. R. Bond, and J. M. Bardeen, Phys. Rev. D 40, 1753(1989); S. Matarrese, A. Ortolan, and F. Lucchin, ibid 40, .290 (1989).

4A. D. Linde, Phys. Lett. 108B, 389 (1982); A. Albrecht andP. J. Steinhardt, Phys. Rev. Lett. 48, 1220 (1982).

sA. D. Linde, Phys. Lett. 129B, 177 (1983).6F. C. Adams and K. Freese, Phys. Rev. D (to be published).7F. C. Adams, K. Freese, and A. H. Guth, Phys. Rev. D (to

be published).sD. La and P. J. Steinhardt, Phys. Rev. Lett. 62, 376 (1989);

Phys. Lett. B 220, 375 (1989).For a review, see E. W. Kolb and M. S. Turner, The Early

Universe (Addison-Wesley, New York, 1990).'~See, e.g. , R. Holman, P. Ramond, and G. G. Ross, Phys.

Lett. B 137, 343 (1984).''H. Quinn and R. Peccei, Phys. Rev. Lett. 38, 1440 (1977);

S. Weinberg, ibid 40, 223 . (1978); F. Wilczek, ibid 40, 279.(1978); J. E. Kim, ibid 43, 103 (. 1979); M. Wise, H. Georgi,and S. L. Glashow, ibid 47, 402 (.1981); M. Dine, W. Fischler,and M. Srednicki, Phys. Lett. 104B, 199 (1981). For discus-

sion of axion cosmology, see J. Preskill, M. %'ise, and F.Wilczek, Phys. Lett. 120B, 127 (1983); L. Abbott and P.Sikivie, ibid 12.0B, 133 (1983); M. Dine and W. Fischler, ibid120B, 137 (1983).

'~See, e.g. , J. E. Kim, Phys. Rep. 150, I (1987).'3C. T. Hill and G. G. Ross, Phys. Lett. B 203, 125 (1988);

Nucl. Phys. B311,253 (1988).' See, e.g. , D. J. Gross, R. D. Pisarski, and L. G. Yaffe, Rev.

Mod. Phys. 53, 43 (1981).' G. 't Hooft, in Recent Developments in Gauge Theories,

edited by G. 't Hooft et al (Pl.enum, New York, 1979), p.135~

' J. P. Derendinger, L. E. Ibanez, and H. P. Nilles, Phys.Lett. 155B, 65 (1985); M. Dine, R. Rohm, N. Seiberg, and E.Witten, ibid 156.B, 55 (1985).

'7E. Witten, Phys. Lett. 149B, 351 (1984); K. Choi and J. E.Kim, ibid 154B, 39.3 (1985).

'sA. H. Guth and S.-Y. Pi, Phys. Rev. Lett. 49, 1110 (1982);S. W. Hawking, Phys. Lett. 115B, 295 (1982); A. A. Starobin-skii, ibid 117B., 175 (1982); J. Bardeen, P. Steinhardt, and M.S. Turner, Phys. Rev. D 28, 679 (1983).

'9N. Vittorio, S, Mattarese, and F. Lucchin, Astrophys. J.328, 69 (1988).

~oJ. Silk and M. S. Turner, Phys. Rev. D 35, 419 (1987); L.A. Kofman, A. D. Linde, and J. Einasto, Nature (London)326, 48 (1987).

'D. S. Goldwirth and T. Piran, Phys. Rev. Lett. 64, 2852(1990).

~~A. Albrecht, R. H. Brandenberger, and R. A. Matzner,Phys. Rev. D 32, 1280 (1985); 35, 429 (198/).

z3J. Kung and R. Brandenberger (to be published).~4T. W. B. Kibble, J. Phys. A 9, 1387 (1976); for a review,

see A. Vilenkin, Phys. Rep. 121, 263 (1985).

3236