1: \documentclass[12pt]{article}
2: \usepackage{graphicx}
3: \usepackage{amsmath}
4: \usepackage{amssymb}
5: \topmargin=-.75cm
6: \oddsidemargin=0.25cm
7: \textheight=24cm
8: \textwidth=16.0cm
9: \newcommand{\be}{\begin{equation}}
10: \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}}
11: \newcommand{\bea}{\begin{eqnarray}}
12: \newcommand{\eea}{\end{eqnarray}}
13: \newcommand{\pr}{\partial}
14: \newcommand{\nno}{\nonumber}
15: \newcommand{\bse}{\begin{subequations}}
16: \newcommand{\ese}{\end{subequations}}
17: \newcommand{\cphi}{\phi_{cl}}
18:
19: \begin{document}
20: \title{Domain walls in Born-Infeld-dilaton background}
21: \author{Debaprasad Maity\footnote{E-mail: debu@imsc.res.in}\\
22: The Institute of Mathematical Sciences,\\
23: C.I.T. Campus, Taramani,\\
24: Chennai - 600 113, India}
25: \maketitle
26: \begin{abstract}
27: We study the dynamics of domain walls
28: in Einstein-Born-Infeld-dilaton theory. Dilaton is
29: non-trivially coupled with the Born-Infeld electromagnetic field.
30: We find three different types of solutions consistent with
31: the dynamic domain walls.
32: For every case, the solutions have singularity.
33: Further more, in these backgrounds, we study the
34: dynamics of domain walls. We qualitatively
35: plot various form of the bulk metrics
36: and the potential encountered by the domain walls.
37: In many cases, depending upon the value of the parameters,
38: the domain walls show bouncing universe and also undergo
39: inflationary phase followed by standard decelerated expansion.
40:
41: \bigskip
42: \noindent
43: PACS number: 04.50.-h, 04.60.Cf, 04.20.Jb
44: \end{abstract}
45: %\maketitle
46: \section{Introduction}\label{intro}
47: Our universe as a four dimensional domain wall [1-9]
48: in an extra dimensional spacetime is an interesting field to study
49: particularly in
50: the cosmological context. The domain wall
51: is allowed to move in an extra spacelike dimension. The inherent nexus
52: between this dynamics of the domain wall
53: and Hubble like expansion equation of its scale factor attracts
54: much attention to study
55: the cosmology in a new perspective. In this scenario,
56: all the standard model fields are assumed to
57: be either in the bulk but dynamically peaked at the position
58: of the wall \cite{rubakov,dvali} or \cite{polchinski} fully
59: localized on the domain wall depending upon what kind of
60: model we are going to construct.
61:
62: As we know for the past few years, domain wall are actively
63: considered to embed as a four dimensional Friedmann-Robertson-Walker
64: (FRW) universe in bulk spacetime with various possible matter
65: components\cite{kraus,csaki}.
66: Important aspect of this embedding, as just stated, is that
67: boundary condition so called Israel junction condition\cite{israel}
68: across the wall actually leads to Hubble expansion equation.
69: So, what it turns out that various parameters of the
70: bulk solutions effectively act as
71: (invisible) energy density with different equations of
72: states on the wall. So, by tuning these various bulk
73: parameters in a model under consideration, one can in principle construct
74: viable cosmology. In fact, on the domain wall there exits
75: bouncing cosmology. The important feature to mention in this kind of
76: cosmology is non-singular transition between a
77: contracting phase of the scale factor of the wall,
78: and a following expanding stage
79: \cite{sudipto,novello}.
80: In this report will not going to construct the cosmological model.
81: We will first try to find out the various possible background
82: configurations in a string inspired theoretical model
83: and then do a qualitative analysis on the dynamic domain walls in those
84: backgrounds.
85:
86: As is well known, Born-Infield type generalisation of
87: abelian and non-abelian gauge field theories have
88: long been the subject of interest in the context of
89: superstring theory. For the abelian case, it was first
90: argued in the reference \cite{teys} to be an open string effective action
91: taking into account all order loop corrections in $\alpha'$(string coupling).
92: On the other hand, it has also been noted that the D-branes \cite{leigh} and
93: some soliton solutions of supergravity, are governed by the
94: Born-Infeld action. For various reasons particularly in
95: the context of ADS/CFT correspondence, extending the gravitational
96: background by including Born-Infeld gauge field in addition to
97: Einstein-Hilbert term, has recently been
98: considered extensively in \cite{tdey,Born-infeld}.
99: In a slightly different direction, we will try to analyse
100: the dynamics of the domain wall in these background.
101:
102: So, as a follow up of \cite{debu}, here we will be
103: discussing on dynamic domain walls in the more general
104: Einstein-Born-Infield-dilaton \cite{dil}
105: background along the line of \cite{chamblin}.
106: String theories in their low-energy supergravity
107: limit gives rise to effective models of gravity in higher dimensions which
108: involve an infinite series of higher curvature terms in the gravity as
109: well as gauge sector.
110: For our purpose in this report, we will ignore
111: the higher spacetime curvature terms. Although including the same
112: is very much worth calculating. We leave this for future study
113: (recent attempt towards this direction \cite{0806.2481}).
114: Considering this born-Infield Lagrangian,
115: there has been considerable work on understanding the role
116: of these higher derivative gauge field
117: in various points of view, especially with
118: regard to black hole physics \cite{tdey,Born-infeld}.
119: In this report we will analyze various static black hole
120: as well as non-static spacetime solutions in consistent with
121: dynamic domain walls in the aforementioned string inspired model.
122: However, in addition to dilaton scalar field coupled with the
123: BI Lagrangian in our theory, we also assume the dilaton to
124: be coupled with domain
125: wall in an exponential way \cite{chamblin}.
126: We first analytically find
127: three different types of metric solutions under specific
128: relations among the various constant parameters in the theory.
129: We have taken into account full back-reaction of the
130: domain wall on background spacetime.
131: Subsequently we study the structure of the
132: solutions in details by plotting them in various
133: possible region of the parameter space.
134: In many cases, we find static black hole solution as well as
135: various non-static solutions depending upon the choice of
136: parameters.
137: Then, we study the dynamics of a domain wall in those
138: bulk backgrounds.
139: A topic of particular interest in these kind
140: of scenarios is how inflation occurs on the wall.
141: In this regard, we find, for a
142: wide range of parameter space of the model under
143: consideration, the domain wall indeed inflates either in the
144: early stage of the evolution followed by
145: standard decelerated expansion or in asymptotic limit of its scale factor.
146: Depending upon the choice of parameters,
147: the inflation is either exponential or power law type with respect to
148: the domain wall proper time.
149: One important feature in these kind of scenarios is natural
150: emergence of inflation as
151: well as decelerated expansion phase on the domain wall world volume.
152: Various energy densities which drive this dynamics
153: , strictly come from the bulk.
154:
155:
156: We structured this report as follows: In the section \ref{sec1}, we
157: start with an action corresponding to a domain wall
158: moving in Born-Infield-dilaton background. We explicitly
159: write down the equations of motion and corresponding boundary conditions
160: across the domain wall. In section \ref{sec2}, by taking static
161: metric ansatz, we analytically solve the Einstein equations.
162: We get three different types of solutions depending upon the
163: value of the parameters in our theory.
164: Due to complicated expressions, we study the structure of these solutions
165: by graphical representation in various limits of radial coordinate.
166: In section \ref{sec3}, again following the line of \cite{chamblin,debu},
167: we plot the various potentials encountered by the domain walls and
168: qualitatively study their dynamics.
169: There are several situations we find, for which domain
170: wall undergoes an inflationary phase as well as standard decelerated
171: expansion. We also get bounce for finite value of scale factor
172: as well as periodic universe on the domain wall world volume.
173: This might lead to a hope of constructing the cosmological
174: model in this theory also.
175: Finally, in the section \ref{con}, we do some concluding remarks and
176: describe some futures directions to work.
177:
178:
179: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
180: \section{Einstein equations and Boundary conditions} \label{sec1}
181: We start with an string inspired action of Einstein-Born-Infeld
182: system in an arbitrary spacetime dimension $n$.
183: Along with this there exists a bulk scalar field $\phi$
184: called dilaton. The dilaton is assumed to
185: have nontrivial coupling with the Born-Infeld field
186: $A_{B}$ and a co-dimension one domain wall.
187: The action takes the from
188: \begin{equation} \label{action}
189: S = \int d^n x\sqrt{-g}\left( \frac 1 2 R ~-~ \frac 1 2
190: \pr_{A} \phi \pr^{A} \phi ~-~ V(\phi) ~+~ {\cal L}(F,\phi)\right) ~+~ S_{DW},
191: \end{equation}
192: where action for the domain wall is
193: \begin{center}
194: $S_{DW} ~=~ ~-~ \int d^{n-1} x \sqrt{-h} \left(
195: \{K\} + \bar{V}(\phi) \right)$.
196: \end{center}
197: The expression for ${\cal L}(F,\phi)$ is
198: \begin{equation}
199: { L(F,\phi)} = {4{\lambda}^2 e^{2 \gamma \phi} \Big (1-\sqrt{1+\frac{e^{-4 \gamma \phi} F^{AB}
200: F_{AB}}{2{\lambda}^2}}\Big)}.
201: \label{}
202: \end{equation}
203: The constant $\lambda$ is the Born-Infeld parameter and has
204: the dimension of mass. In the limit $\lambda \rightarrow \infty $, $ L(F)$
205: reduces to the standard Maxwell form with a scalar field coupled exponentially like
206: \begin{equation}
207: { L(F)} = {- e^{-2 \gamma \phi} F^{AB} F_{AB}} +{\cal{O}}(F^4).
208: \label{}
209: \end{equation}
210: $h_{AB}$ is the induced metric on the domain wall. $K$ is the trace of the
211: extrinsic curvature of the domain wall.
212: For simplicity, in this paper, we will work with the convention
213: that $16 \pi G =1$, where $G$ is the Newton's
214: constant.
215:
216: By varying the action with respect to the gauge field $ A_B$, dilaton field
217: $\phi$ and the metric $ g_{AB} $, we get the equations
218: of motion as
219: \bea
220: &&R_{AB} = \pr_{A} \phi \pr^A \phi + \frac 2 {n -2} V(\phi) g_{AB}+ \frac {8 \lambda^2} {(n-2)}
221: e^{2 \gamma \phi}\left\{2 {\cal Y} \frac {\pr {\cal L}}{\pr {\cal Y}} - {\cal Y} \right\} g_{AB}
222: - 8 e^{- 2 \gamma \phi} \frac {\pr {\cal L}}{\pr {\cal Y}} F_{AC}F_B^C ~~~~\\
223: &&D_C \pr^C \phi - \frac {\pr (\phi)}{\pr \phi} + 8 \lambda^2 \gamma e^{2 \gamma \phi}\left\{2 {\cal Y} \frac {\pr {\cal L}}{\pr {\cal Y}} - {\cal Y} \right\} = 0 \\
224: && D_A\left( e^{- 2 \gamma \phi} \frac {\pr {\cal L}}{\pr {\cal Y}} F^{AB}\right) = 0
225: \eea
226: where, $D_A$ is co-variant derivative with respect to the bulk
227: metric and the new variable ${\cal Y} = \frac{e^{-4 \gamma \phi} F^{AB}
228: F_{AB}}{2{\lambda}^2}$. We also have the corresponding boundary
229: conditions as follows
230: \bea \label{bond}
231: &&\{K_{MN}\} = - \frac 1 {n -2} \bar V(\phi) h_{MN} \\
232: &&\{n^{M}\pr_{M} \phi\} = \frac {\pr \bar{V}(\phi)}{\pr \phi}
233: \eea
234: where, $n^M$ is the unit normal to the domain wall.
235: $R$ is the curvature scalar. The first boundary condition comes
236: from the Israel junction condition (for details \cite{chamblin})
237: across the wall.
238:
239: We will be considering the solution which has
240: reflection symmetry($Z_2$) across the domain wall.
241: So, from Eq.\ref{bond}, expression
242: for the extrinsic curvature turns out to be
243: \be
244: K_{MN} = - \frac 1 {2(n -2)} \bar V(\phi) h_{MN}
245: \ee
246: We consider the static spherically symmetric bulk metric ansatz as
247: \be \label{metric}
248: ds^2 = - N(r) dt^2 + \frac 1 {N(r)} dr^2 + R(r)^2 d\Omega_{\kappa}^2
249: \ee
250: where, we have taken $ d\Omega_{\kappa}^2$ as the line element
251: on a $(n -2)$ dimensional space of constant curvature with the metric
252: $\tilde {g}_{ij}$. The Ricci curvature of this sub-space is
253: $\tilde {R}_{ij} = k (n - 3) \tilde {g}_{ij}$ with $ k \in \{-1,0,1\}$
254:
255: We want to get the spherically symmetric solutions corresponding to a
256: homogeneous and isotropic induced metric on the domain wall like
257: \bea
258: ds_{wall}^2 = - d\tau^2 + R(\tau)^2 d\Omega_{\kappa}^2,
259: \eea
260: which is Robertson-Walker metric. $\tau$ is the
261: domain wall proper time.
262: The size of the $n$-dimensional domain wall universe is
263: determined by the radial distance,
264: $R$, which in turn determines the position of it in the bulk spacetime.
265:
266: However, by using the unit normal pointing into $r < r(t)$ and
267: the unit tangent to the moving wall
268: \bea
269: &&n_M = \frac {\sqrt{N}} {\sqrt{N^2 - \dot{r}^2}}(\dot{r}, -1, 0,\dots,0), \\
270: &&u^{M} = \frac {\sqrt{N}} {\sqrt{N^2 - \dot{r}^2}}(1, \dot{r}, 0,\dots,0),
271: \eea
272: respectively,
273: one can express the induced
274: metric on the domain wall and its extrinsic curvature as
275: \bea
276: &&h_{MN} = g_{MN} - n_{M} n_{N} \\
277: &&K_{MN} = h_M^P h_N^Q \nabla_P n_Q.
278: \eea
279: Where $\dot{r} = \frac {\pr r}{\pr t}$.
280:
281: So, the expressions for the components of the extrinsic curvature
282: come out to be
283: \begin{subequations} \label{excomp1}
284: \bea
285: &&K_{ij} = - \frac {R'}{R} \frac {N^{3/2}}{\sqrt{N^2 - \dot{r}^2}} h_{ij} \\
286: &&K_{00} = \frac 1 {\dot r} \frac d {dt}
287: \left( \frac {N^{3/2}}{\sqrt{N^2 - \dot{r}^2}}\right) .
288: \eea
289: \end{subequations}
290: 'Prime' is derivative with respect to bulk radial coordinate $r$.
291:
292: Using the equations for $K_{ij}$ into $K_{00}$, and then integrating
293: one gets
294: \bea \label{E1}
295: R' = C \bar{V}(\phi) .
296: \eea
297: Now, by using Eq.\ref{E1} in the
298: boundary condition for the scalar field one gets
299: \bea \label{E2}
300: \frac {\pr \phi}{\pr R} = - \frac {n -2} R \frac 1 {\bar V} \frac {\pr \bar V}
301: {\pr \phi}
302: \eea
303: This equation has to hold at every point in the bulk visited by the
304: domain wall. So, if the wall visits a range of R, then the above equation
305: can be solved to yield $\phi$ as a function of R without specifying
306: the bulk potential. This gives us a consistency condition for the
307: dynamic domain wall coupled with the bulk scalar to exists.
308: In what follows, we will use this condition to get final
309: solution for the scalar field and the metric.
310:
311:
312: \section{The solutions for bulk metric} \label{sec2}
313: In this section, we first solve the equation for Born-Infeld field.
314: Then using this solution to the remaining equations of
315: motion we will find out the solution for metric under
316: static bulk metric ansatz Eq.\ref{metric}.
317:
318: So, we note that a class of solutions for the equation of
319: Born-Infield electromagnetic field
320: can be written down with all the components of $F^{AB}$ being
321: zero except $F^{rt}$. The solution looks like
322: \bea \label{BIsol}
323: F^{rt} = \frac {2 Q \lambda e^{2 \gamma \phi}}{\sqrt{4 Q^2 + \lambda^2 R^{2 n -4}}}
324: \eea
325: where, $Q$ is the integration constant and
326: related to the electromagnetic charge. One can define
327: electromagnetic charge with respect to an asymptotic observer as
328: \bea
329: q = \frac 1 {4\pi} \int_{\Sigma_\infty} e^{- 2 \gamma \phi}~ {^*F} =
330: \frac {Q \omega_{n-1}}{4 \pi},
331: \eea
332: where, ${^*F}_{AB} = \frac 1 {2 \sqrt{-g}}
333: \varepsilon^{ABCD} F^{CD}$ and $\Sigma_{\infty}$ is a hyper-surface
334: at $R \rightarrow \infty$. $\omega_{n-1}$ is volume of unity $n$ sphere.
335: One can notice that the electric field is finite at $R = 0$.
336: This is expected in Born-Infeld theories.
337:
338: Now using Eq.\ref{BIsol} and the metric ansatz Eq.\ref{metric},
339: one can read out the remaining equations of motion as
340: \begin{subequations}
341: \bea
342: &&\frac {R''} {R} = - \frac 1 {n-2} \phi'^2\\
343: && \frac 1 {2 R^{n-2}} \left\{N \left( R^{n-2}\right)'\right\}' -
344: \frac {k(n-3)(n-2)} {2 R^2} = - V - {\cal T}_{22}(R,Q) \\
345: && \frac {n-2}{4 R^{n-2}} \left( N' R^{n-2}\right)' = - V - {\cal T}_{00}(R,Q) \\
346: &&\frac 1 {R^{n-2}}\left( \phi' N R^{n-2}\right)' =
347: \frac {\pr V(\phi)}{\pr \phi} + 8 \lambda^2 \gamma e^{2 \gamma \phi} {\cal F}(r,Q),
348: \eea\end{subequations}
349:
350: where, various new notations are given below,
351: \bea
352: {\cal T}_{22}(R,Q) = 4 \lambda^2 e^{2 \gamma \phi} {\cal F}(R,Q)~~;~~{\cal T}_{00}(R,Q) =
353: 4(n-2) \lambda^2 e^{2 \gamma \phi}\left[\frac {{\cal F}(R,Q)}{n-2} + \frac {{\cal G}(R,Q)}2 \right]
354: \eea
355: and
356: \bea
357: {\cal F}(R,Q) = \frac {\sqrt{4 Q^2 + \lambda^2 R^{2 n -4}}}{\lambda R^{n -2}} - 1~~~;~~~
358: {\cal G}(R,Q) = - \frac {4 Q^2}{\sqrt{4 Q^2 + \lambda^2 R^{2 n -4}}} \frac 1 {\lambda R^{n -2}}.
359: \eea
360:
361: ${\cal T}_{00}$ and ${\cal T}_{22}$ are proportional to the $tt$ and spatial
362: components of the energy-momentum tensor for the Born-Infield Lagrangian respectively.
363:
364:
365: Now, in order to find the solutions of Einstein equation, we will employ
366: the Eqs.(\ref{E1},\ref{E2}). So, taking the Liouville
367: type brane potential
368: \be
369: \bar V(\phi) = {\bar V}_0 e^{\alpha \phi},
370: \ee
371: one can easily get the solution for the scalar field
372: without specifying the bulk potential, as well as
373: for the radius $R(r)$ of the unit sphere $\Omega_k$ as
374: \begin{subequations} \label{sol}
375: \bea
376: &&\phi = \phi_0 - \frac {\alpha (n-2)}{\alpha^2(n-2) + 1} log (r)\\
377: &&R(r) = C {\bar V}_0 e^{\alpha \phi_0}
378: r^{\frac 1 {\alpha^2(n-2) + 1}},
379: \eea
380: \end{subequations}
381: where $\phi_0$ and $C$ are integration constants.
382: Furthermore, in order to have the solution for the bulk metric, we need to specify the
383: bulk potential. So, again we take the same Liouville type bulk potential,
384: \be
385: V(\phi) = V_0 e^{\beta \phi}
386: \ee
387: where, $V_0$ is constant.
388: Now, by considering above two expressions Eqs.(\ref{sol})
389: for $R$ and $\phi$ as solutions ansatz
390: and making use of the bulk potential for the scalar field, we find three
391: different types of solutions corresponding to the full Einstein
392: equations of motion.
393: In what follows, we discuss about
394: the nature of these various types of solutions and subsequently
395: the dynamics of the
396: domain walls in those bulk backgrounds.
397: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
398:
399: {\bf Type-I solution}: When, $\alpha = \beta = \gamma = 0$. We note that the
400: bulk and brane potential play the roll of cosmological constant
401: and brane tension respectively. So, effectively, the action is a
402: Einstein-Born-Infeld system with a bulk cosmological constant and domain
403: wall with fixed tension.
404:
405: By choosing these particular set of value of the parameters,
406: the solution turns out
407: to be
408: \bea
409: N(r) &=& k - 2 M r^{-(n-3)} - \left(\frac {2 V_0}{(n-2)(n-1)} - \frac {8 \lambda^2}{(n-2)(n-1)}\right)r^2 \\
410: &+& \frac {8 \lambda r^{-(n-4)}} {(n-1)(n-2)} \left( {- \sqrt{4 Q^2 + \lambda^2 r^{2n -4}}}
411: + \frac {4 (n-2) Q^2 r^{-(n-2)}}{\lambda (n-3)}~~ {\cal D}(r,Q) \right)\\
412: &&R(r) = r ~~~~;~~~ \phi = \phi_0 ,
413: \eea
414: Where $M$ and $\phi_0$ are integration constants and
415: \bea
416: {\cal D}(r,Q) = {_2}F_1\left[\frac {n-3} {2n -4}, \frac 1 2 , \frac {3n-7}{2n -4}, -\frac {4 Q^2 r^{-(2n -4)}}
417: {\lambda^2}\right].
418: \eea
419: Now, as a whole expression, the solution looks much difficult.
420: So, it is rather easer to see the metric in various limits of
421: the radial coordinate and study its behaviour.
422:
423: As we note, for large r the expression for the above solution looks like
424: \bea
425: {N(r)|_{r\rightarrow \infty}} = k - \frac {2 V_0}{(n-2)(n-1)} r^2 - 2 M r^{-(n - 3)} +
426: \frac {16 Q^2}{(n-3)(n-2)}r^{-(2n-6)} + {\cal O}(r^{\frac{10 -4n}{1+c^2}}),
427: \eea
428: and for small $r$ limit,
429: \bea
430: {N(r)|_{r\rightarrow 0}} = k - 2 {\cal M}_1 r^{-(n-3)}
431: &-& \frac {16 \lambda {\cal Q}_1} {(n-1)(n - 2)} r^{-(n-4)} -
432: \frac {2 {\cal V}_1 }{(n-1)(n-2)}
433: r^{2} \nonumber \\ &-& \frac {8 \lambda {\cal H}_1} {(n-1)(n - 2)}
434: r^n + {\cal O}(r^{{3n-4}}),
435: \eea
436: where
437: \bea
438: {\cal M}_1 & =& M - \frac {16 Q^2 \Gamma[\frac {3n-7}{2n -4}]\Gamma[\frac {1}{2n-4}]}{\sqrt{\pi}(n-1)(n-3)}
439: \left(\frac {4 Q^2}{\lambda^2} \right)^{-\frac {n-3}{2n -4}}\\
440: {\cal Q}_1 &=& Q - \frac {2 Q^2 (n-2) \Gamma[\frac {3n-7}{2n -4}]\Gamma[\frac {-1}{2n-4}]}{\lambda (n-3)
441: \Gamma[\frac {n-3}{2n -4}] \Gamma[\frac {2n -5}{2n -4}]} \left(\frac {4 Q^2}{\lambda^2}
442: \right)^{-\frac 1 2} \\
443: {\cal H}_1 &=& \frac {\lambda^2}{4 Q} + \frac {1}{(2n-3)}\left(\frac {4 Q^2}{\lambda^2}
444: \right)^{-1} (Q - {\cal Q}_1) \\
445: {\cal V}_1 &=& = V_0 - 4 \lambda^2 .
446: \eea
447:
448: The solution for the scalar field becomes constant \cite{tdey}.
449: In order to have better understanding of the metric,
450: we have plotted the metric in the Fig.1 for several possibilities of
451: parameter values. Now it is easy to read off the horizon structure
452: from the figure. As is seen from the figures that for every case,
453: there exists singularity at $r = 0$ which is either timelike or spacelike.
454:
455: We have four possibilities for different region of the parameter
456: space $(V_0 , M )$. When $V_0 > 0, M > 0$, for the first case the
457: metric would be either a Reisner-Nordstrom(RN)
458: black hole inside the cosmological horizon ($k = 1$) or
459: only de Sitter space ($k = 0,-1$).
460: For the other case, we have either Schwarzschild-de Sitter black hole
461: which has black hole ($k=1$) and cosmological horizon or non-static
462: spacetime ($k = 0,-1$) with a naked singularity. As is clear, for every case,
463: the behaviour of the metric near the singularity region $r\rightarrow 0$ is
464: governed by the sign of ${\cal M}_1$ . In all these cases asymptotically,
465: the metric becomes de-sitter space where, $V_0$ is playing the roll of
466: cosmological constant. Usually, the ADM \cite{abbot} mass of
467: the black hole is taken to be
468: \bea
469: m_{ADM} = \frac {2 n\omega_{n-1}} 2 M,
470: \eea
471: where, $\omega_{n-1}$ is the volume of the unit $n$-sphere.
472:
473: When $V_0 > 0, M < 0$, the singularity is either space-like or
474: time like defined by the sign of ${\cal M}_1$ , negative or
475: positive respectively. The interplay between the value of $ Q$ and
476: $M$ determines the singularity structure at $r = 0$.
477: Asymptotically the metric is Anti-de Sitter.
478: For one case we have Reisner-Nordstrom (RN) black hole or
479: there is a naked singularity at $r=0$. For the other case,
480: the spacetime is Schwarzschild-anti-de Sitter.
481:
482: If $V_0 < 0, M > 0$, for every case $k = 0,\pm 1$,
483: the metric has cosmological horizon with
484: asymptotically de Sitter space.
485:
486: When $V_0 < 0, M < 0$, for $k = 0,1$, the metric has a
487: time like naked singularity at $r = 0$ for any value of the
488: other parameters present. However, $k = 1$ leads to a possibility
489: of having a RN black hole in an asymptotically Anti-de Sitter
490: spacetime for certain range of parameter space $(V_0 , M)$ and $\lambda Q^2$.
491: \begin{figure}
492: \includegraphics[width=5.5in,height=1.5in]{BI-T1.eps}
493: \caption{N(r) for type-I solution.} \label{one}
494: \end{figure}
495:
496: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
497: \begin{figure}
498: \includegraphics[width=5.50in,height=3.2in]{BI-T2.eps}
499: \caption{N(r) for type-II solution.
500: } \label{two}
501: \end{figure}
502:
503: {\bf Type-II solution}: For $\alpha = \frac {\beta} 2 = \gamma ~;~
504: k = 0$, which means that metric with flat spatial section is the only
505: allowed configuration for this choice of parameters. The
506: solution comes out to be
507: \bea
508: N(r) &=& -(1 + c^2)^2 r^{\frac 2 {1 + c^2}} \left[\frac 1 {(n-1-c^2)} \left\{ {2 L_0} -
509: \frac {8 \lambda^2 \Omega}{(n-2)(1+c^2)^2}\right\} + 2 M r^{- \frac {n - 1 - c^2}{1 + c^2}} \right] \\
510: && + \frac {8 \lambda \Omega r^{-\frac {n-4}{1 + c^2}}}
511: {(n-2)(1 + c^2 -n)} \left(\sqrt{4 Q^2 + \lambda^2 r^{\frac {2n -4}{1 +c^2}}} -
512: \frac {4(n -2)Q^2 r^{-\frac {n-2}{1 + c^2}}}{\lambda (- 3 + c^2 +n)}~ {\cal P}(r,Q)\right)\\
513: &&R(r) = r^{\frac 1 {1 + c^2}} ~~~;~~~ \phi(r) = \sqrt{n-2}\left(
514: \phi^*_0 - \frac b {1 + c^2} log (r) \right),
515: \eea
516: where $\phi^*_0 = \phi_0/\sqrt{n-2}$, the integration constants.
517: Various other notations are given below,
518: \be
519: c = \frac 1 2 \beta \sqrt{n-2}~~~~;~~~~ L_0 = \frac
520: {V_0 e^{2 c \phi^*_0}} {n-2}~~~~;~~~~\Omega =
521: \frac {(1 + c^2)^2 e^{2 c \phi^*_0}}{n-2}
522: \ee
523: and
524: \bea
525: {\cal P}(r,Q) = {_2F_1}\left[\frac {c^2 + n -3}{2n-4},\frac 1 2,\frac{3n- 7 + c^2}{2n-4},-\frac{4 Q^2
526: r^{-\frac {2n-4}{1 + c^2}}} {\lambda^2} \right].
527: \eea
528:
529:
530: Again, taking the large $r$ limit, the above solution turns out to be
531: \bea
532: \frac {N(r)|_{r\rightarrow \infty}}{(1 + c^2)^2} = r^{\frac 2 {1 + c^2}} \left[\frac {2 L_0} {(1+c^2 -n)} - 2 M r^{- \frac {n - 1 - c^2}{1 + c^2}} \right] +
533: \frac {16 \Omega' Q^2}{(n-3+c^2)}r^{-\frac {2n-6}{1 +c^2}}+ {\cal O}(r^{\frac{10 -4n}{1+c^2}}),
534: \eea
535: and for small $r$ limit,
536: \bea
537: \frac {N(r)|_{r\rightarrow 0}}{(1+c^2)^2} = - 2 {\cal M}_2
538: r^{-\frac {n-3-c^2}{1 +c^2}}
539: &-& \frac {16 \lambda \Omega' {\cal Q}_2} {(n-1 - c^2 )}
540: r^{-\frac{n-4}{1 +c^2}} - \frac {2 {\cal V}_2}{n-1-c^2}
541: r^{\frac 2{1 +c^2}} \nonumber \\ &-& \frac {8 \lambda \Omega' {\cal H}_2}
542: {(n-1 - c^2 )}
543: r^{\frac n {1 +c^2}} + {\cal O}(r^{\frac{3n-4}{1+c^2}}),
544: \eea
545: where
546: \bea
547: {\cal M}_2 & =& M - \frac {16 Q^2 \Omega' (n-2)\Gamma[\frac {3n-7+c^2}{2n -4}]\Gamma[\frac {1-c^2}{2n-4}]}{\sqrt{\pi}(n-1-c^2)(n-3+c^2)} \left(\frac {4 Q^2}{\lambda^2} \right)^{-\frac {n-3+c^2}{2n -4}}\\
548: {\cal Q}_2 &=& Q - \frac { Q (n-2) \Gamma[\frac {3n-7+c^2}{2n -4}]\Gamma[\frac {c^2-1}{2n-4}]}{(n-3+c^2)
549: \Gamma[\frac {n-3+c^2}{2n -4}] \Gamma[\frac {2n -5 + c^2}{2n -4}]} \\
550: {\cal H}_2 &=& \frac {\lambda^2}{4 Q} + \frac {(1-c^2)}{(2n-3-c^2)}\left(\frac {4 Q^2}{\lambda^2}
551: \right)^{-1} (Q - {\cal Q}_2) \\
552: {\cal V}_2 &=& = L_0 - 4 \lambda^2 \Omega'\\
553: \Omega' &=& \frac {e^{2 c \phi^*_0}}{n-2}.
554: \eea
555:
556: For this case again, we have plotted
557: various possibilities for different values of the parameters present in the
558: expression for $N(r)$.
559: All the detailed structure can easily be
560: read off from the corresponding Fig.\ref{two}.
561:
562:
563: The structure of the space time is depending upon the value of $c$.
564: If $c^2 < 1$, the singularity behaviour is determined by the sign of
565: ${\cal M}_2$. As is seen from the expression of ${\cal M}_1$, for $M < 0$,
566: it is always negative which leads to timelike singularity at $r = 0$.
567: Whereas for $M >0$, the metric can have both types of singularities
568: depending upon the value of other parameters $Q$ and $\lambda$.
569: This leads us to a quite distinct singularity behaviour which is expected
570: in a Born-Infeld theory as opposed
571: to the standard RN black hole spacetime in Einstein-Maxwell theory.
572: In particular, the spacetime singularity comes from a mass dependent
573: term in the metric.
574:
575: On the other hand, for $c^2 > 1$, ${\cal Q}_2$ determines the singularity
576: behaviour. It is interesting to note that the expression for ${\cal Q}_2$
577: is such, the combined expression $\frac {{\cal Q}_2} {(n-1 - c^2 )}$
578: is always negative. This in turn leads to timelike
579: singularity for any value of $c^2 >1$ as is also clear from the
580: plots Fig.\ref{two}.
581:
582: However, for a wide range of parameter space, the metric has a
583: cosmological horizon. For $c^2 < 1$, and $1 < c^2 < n - 1$,
584: asymptotic structure of the spacetime is depending upon the value of
585: $L_0$ which is playing the roll of cosmological constant.
586: On the other hand for $c^2 > n - 1$, it is governed by the sign of
587: the parameter $M$ . As we note the asymptotic expression for the metric
588: to be
589: \bea \label{first}
590: ds^2 &=& r^{\frac 2 {1 +c^2}}\left( - L_0 dt^2 + d\Omega_k^2\right)
591: + \frac 1 {L_0 r^{\frac 2 {1 +c^2}}} dr^2 ~~~~~~~~ \hbox{for $c^2 < n-1$}\\
592: \label{second}
593: ds^2 &=& r^{\frac 2 {1 +c^2}}\left( - h(r) dt^2 + d\Omega_k^2\right)
594: + \frac 1 {h(r) r^{\frac 2 {1 +c^2}}} dr^2 ~~~~ \hbox{for $c^2 > n-1$},
595: \eea
596: where
597: \bea
598: h(r) = \left( \frac {2 L_0}{n-1-c^2} + 2 M r^{-\frac {n-1-c^2} {1 +c^2}}\right).
599: \eea
600: So, for the second case, we observe that the spacetime is
601: asymptotically ADS kind of Schwarzschild black hole for the
602: parameter $L_0 > 1, M < 0$ as also depicted in the plot.
603: Now, for both the parameters $M, L_0$ being negative, the
604: bulk metric would be globally non-static with a naked singularity.
605: On the other hand when $ L_0 <0, M> 0$, the
606: second metric Eq.\ref{second} has a cosmological horizon.
607:
608: Now, for $ c^2 < 1$ and $ L_0 <0, M> 0$, the metric
609: can have either a RN or Schwarzschild black hole
610: depending upon the value of ${\cal M}_2$. Whereas for $1 >c^2 > n-1$
611: we can have again a RN black hole in the bulk.
612: But for both the cases, the bulk metric can
613: have naked singularity depending upon the region
614: of the parameter space.
615:
616: \begin{figure}
617: \includegraphics[width=5.50in,height=2.2in]{BI-T3.eps}
618: \caption{N(r) for type-III solution
619: } \label{three}
620: \end{figure}
621:
622: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
623: {\bf Type-III solution}: For $\alpha = \frac 2 {\beta(n-2)} = \gamma ~;~ k \ne 0$, the
624: metric has no solution with flat spatial section. The solution looks like
625: \bea
626: N(r)&=& (1 + c^2)^2 r^{\frac 2 {1 + c^2}} \left[ \frac {-2 L_0}
627: {(n - 3)c^2 + 1}
628: - 2 M r^{- \frac {(n - 3) c^2 + 1}{1 + c^2}} \right] + \frac {8 \lambda^2 \Omega r^{\frac {2c^2}{1 + c^2}}}
629: {c^2 ((n-1)c^2 -1)} \\
630: &-& \frac {8 \lambda \Omega r^{-\frac {(n -4)c^2}{1 +c^2}}} {c^2 \xi^{n-2} ((n-1)c^2 -1)}
631: \left(\sqrt{4 Q^2 + \lambda^2 R^{2n -4} } -
632: \frac{4 (n -2) c^2 Q^2 r^{-\frac {(n-4)c^2}{1+c^2}} }
633: {\lambda \xi^{n-2}((n-3)c^2 +1)} \Delta(r,Q) \right) \nonumber \\
634: &&R(r) =\xi r^{\frac {c^2} {1 + c^2}} ~~~;~~~ \phi(r) = \sqrt{n-2}\left(
635: \phi^*_0 - \frac c {1 + c^2} log (r)\right),
636: \eea
637: where, we use the notation
638: \bea
639: \xi = \sqrt{\frac { k (n-3)}{2 L_0(1 - c^2)}}~~;~~
640: \Delta(r,Q) = {_2F_1}\left[\frac {(n-3)c^2 +1}{c^2(2n-4)},\frac 1 2,\frac{(3n-7)c^2 + 1}{(2n-4)c^2},
641: -\frac{4 Q^2 R^{(4-2n)}
642: }{\lambda^2} \right].
643: \eea
644:
645: For large $r$ limit, expression for the above solution terns out to be
646: \bea
647: \frac {N(r)|_{r\rightarrow \infty}}{(1 + c^2)^2} =\frac { -2 L_0 r^{\frac 2 {1 + c^2}}} {((n-3)c^2 +1)}
648: - 2 M r^{- \frac {((n - 3)c^2 -1)}{1 + c^2}} +
649: \frac {16 \Omega' Q^2 r^{-\frac {(2n-6)c^2}{1 +c^2}}}{c^2 \xi^{2n-4}((n-3)c^2+1)}+ {\cal O}(r^{\frac{(10 -4n)c^2}{1+c^2}}),
650: \eea
651: whereas in small $r$ limit, it will be
652: \bea
653: \frac {N(r)|_{r\rightarrow 0}}{(1+c^2)^2} = &-&2 {\cal M}_3
654: r^{-\frac {(n-3)c^2 -1}{1 +c^2}}
655: - \frac {16 \lambda \Omega' {\cal Q}_3} {c^2 \xi^{n-2}
656: ((n-1)c^2-1)} r^{-\frac{(n-4)c^2}{1 +c^2}} -
657: \frac {2 V}{(n-1)c^2 +1} r^{\frac 2{1 +c^2}} \nonumber \\
658: &+& \frac {8 \beta^2 \Omega' r^{\frac {2c^2}{1 +c^2}} }{c^2 ((n-1)c^2 -1)} -
659: \frac {8 \lambda \Omega' {\cal H}_3 r^{\frac {nc^2} {1 +c^2}}}
660: {c^2 ((n-1)c^2-1)} + {\cal O}(r^{\frac{(3n-4)c^2}{1+c^2}}).
661: \eea
662: Various notations are in order
663: \bea
664: {\cal M}_3 & =& M - \frac {16 Q^2 \Omega' (n-2)\Gamma[\frac {(3n-7)c^2 +1 }{(2n -4)c^2}]\Gamma[\frac {c^2-1}{(2n-4)c^2}]}{\sqrt{\pi} \xi^{2n -4}((n-1)c^2 -1)((n-3)c^2 +1)} \left(\frac {4 Q^2}{\lambda^2} \right)^{-\frac {((n-3)c^2 +1}{(2n -4)c^2}}\\
665: {\cal Q}_3 &=& Q - \frac {c^2 Q (n-2) \Gamma[\frac {(3n-7)c^2 +1} {(2n -4)c^2}]\Gamma[\frac {1-c^2}{(2n-4)c^2}]}
666: {((n-3)c^2 +1)
667: \Gamma[\frac {(n-3)c^2 +1}{(2n -4)c^2}] \Gamma[\frac {(2n -5)c^2 + 1}{(2n -4)c^2}]}
668: \\
669: {\cal H}_3 &=& \frac {\lambda^2}{4 Q c^2} + \frac {(c^2-1)}{((2n-3)c^2-1)}\left(\frac {4 Q^2}{\xi^{2n-4}\lambda^2}
670: \right)^{-1} (Q - {\cal Q}_3). \\
671: \eea
672:
673: Again all the solutions are singular at $r = 0$.
674: The Fig.\ref{three} says the detailed asymptotic
675: structure of the spacetime.
676: The general form of the asymptotic metric would be
677: \bea \label{third}
678: ds^2 = r^{\frac {2c^2} {1 +c^2}}\left( - L_0 r^{\frac {2-2 c^2}{1 +c^2}}
679: dt^2 + d\Omega_k^2\right) + \frac 1 {L_0 r^{\frac 2 {1 +c^2}}} dr^2 .
680: \eea
681: So, it is to be noted that $L_0$ characterise the nature
682: of asymptotic metric for full range of $c^2$.
683:
684: The structure of the metric near $r =0$ is determined by the value
685: of $c^2$. When $c^2 >1$ it is the parameter ${\cal M}_3$ which
686: plays the role. Where as if $c^2 < 1$ then singularity
687: structure is determined by ${\cal Q}_3$. In this case also,
688: the behaviour of ${\cal M}_3$ and ${\cal Q}_3$ is same
689: as that of Type-II solution.
690:
691: It is clear from the plots, when $L_0 <0, M>0$, we can have either
692: Schwarzschild or RN type black hole in bulk spacetime depending
693: upon the value of various parameters.
694: Otherwise, it has naked singularity.
695: \begin{figure}
696: \includegraphics[width=5.5in,height=1.5in]{BI-P1.eps}
697: \caption{F(R) for type-I solution.} \label{fourth}
698: \end{figure}
699:
700: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%55
701: \section{Domain wall dynamics} \label{sec3}
702: Dynamics of the domain wall is governed by the Hubble kind of expansion equation with
703: respect to the domain wall observe. So, in general the equation looks like
704: \bea
705: {\dot{R}}^2 + F(R) = 0
706: \eea
707: where, $'.'$ is derivative with respect to the domain wall proper time $\tau$.
708: The expression for $F(R)$ is
709: \bea \label{pot}
710: F(R) = N(R)R'^2 - \frac {{\bar V}_0^2}{4 (n-2)^2} R^2,
711: \eea
712: where "prime" is derivative with respect to r.
713: So, the equation is like a particle moving in potential $F(R)$. So, in what
714: follows we will be studying different types of potential encountered by the
715: domain wall during the course of its motion.
716:
717: {\bf Type-I potential}:
718: The expression for the potential is given below
719: \bea
720: F(R) = N(R) - \frac {{\bar V}_0^2}{4(n-2)^2} R^2.
721: \eea
722: The form of the potential as shown in Fig. 4 is like
723: metric function $N(R)$ with an asymptotic modification by the
724: domain wall tension.
725:
726: Now, we will try to analyze the motion of the domain wall in various limits
727: of the scale factor or distance of the wall along the bulk radial co-ordinate.
728: Rather than writing
729: down the exact expression for the potential, it is better
730: to see the limiting cases. So, in the large $R$ limit,
731: the equation of motion would be
732: \bea
733: H^2 = \frac {{\dot{R}}^2}{R^2} = - \frac k {R^2} + E_0 + 2 M R^{-(n - 1)} -
734: {\cal O} (R^{-(2n-4)}),
735: \eea
736: where
737: \bea
738: E_0 =\frac {2 L_0}{(n-1)(n-2)} + \frac {{\bar V}_0^2}{4(n-2)^2}.
739: \eea
740:
741: For small $R$ limit,
742: \bea
743: H^2 = - \frac k {R^2} + 2 {\cal M} R^{-(n-1)}
744: &+& \frac {16 \lambda {\cal Q}} {(n-1)(n - 2)} R^{-(n-2)}\nonumber \\
745: &+& \frac {2 {\cal V}}{(n-1)(n-2)} + \frac {{\bar V}_0^2}{4(n-2)^2}+
746: {\cal O}(R^{n-2}). \eea
747:
748: So, from the above equation it is clear that for flat spatial section
749: $k =0$, with $({\cal M}_1> 0)$, the domain wall is
750: radiation dominated in the early
751: epoch followed by the matter domination
752: and cosmological constant domination
753: respectively. Where as the bad feature is that during the course of its
754: motion, domain
755: wall hits the bulk singularity
756: at $R = 0$ for finite period of time. On the other hand,
757: with the parameters being
758: ${\cal M}_1 <0$ but $M >0$, the domain wall starts from a finite
759: value of the scale factor with matter energy domination followed
760: by late time cosmological constant domination for $E_0 > 0$.
761: Domain wall never reaches the bulk singularity in this case.
762: A kind of bouncing universe scenario appears
763: in th domain wall world volume (recent study \cite{supratik1}).
764: For the first case, the bulk space time may either be non-static
765: space time with naked singularity or a Schwarzschild black hole.
766: For the second case, the bulk can have a de-Sitter
767: horizon or it can be RN black hole depending upon the sign of
768: $V_0$.
769: Furthermore, a special range of value of parameters exist so that the
770: domain wall depicts a periodic universe between the
771: two horizons of the bulk black hole background. During this stage
772: of evaluation, the domain wall has a finite period of inflation
773: near the minimum of the potential followed by the standard deceleration.
774: This case happens for both the cases $M >0, E_0 >0$ and $M <0, E_0 <0$
775: as is seen from the plot as well.
776:
777: For every case, asymptotic dynamics of the domain wall
778: is fixed by the interplay between the bulk cosmological constant
779: and the brane tension. So, if $E_0 > 0$, then domain wall undergoes
780: exponential inflation
781: \bea
782: R(\tau) \propto e^{\sqrt{E_0} \tau}.
783: \eea
784:
785: Another interesting case is $M <0, E_0 >0$, which again leads to
786: bouncing cosmology. So, domain wall starts collapsing from infinity
787: to a finite value of $R = R_0$ say. At this value, domain wall
788: gets repelled back to infinity by the timelike singularity in the bulk.
789: The value of $R_0$ may be inside the de-Sitter horizon or
790: the inner horizon of a RN type black hole of the background spacetime.
791:
792: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%5
793: {\bf Type-II potential}: The domain wall strictly restricted to be of
794: spatially flat metric $(k = 0)$.
795: However, we note below the Hubble equation of the domain wall
796: for in large $R$ limit,
797: \bea
798: H^2 = P_0 R^{-2 c^2}+ {\cal O}(R^{-(n-1 +c^2)}),
799: \eea
800: where
801: \bea
802: P_0 = \left[ \frac {2 L_0}{n-1-c^2} + \frac {{\bar V}_0^2 \Omega'}
803: {4(n-2)}\right]
804: \eea
805: \begin{figure}
806: \includegraphics[width=5.50in,height=3.40in]{BI-P2.eps}
807: \caption{F(R) for type-II solution. For the range $ n-1 < c^2 < n-3$,
808: the qualitative form of the potential is same as for $ 1 < c^2 < n-3$}.
809: \label{fifth}
810: \end{figure}
811:
812: On the other hand for small $R$ limit, the expression for the above Hubble
813: like equation turns out to be
814: \bea
815: H^2 = 2 {\cal M}_2 R^{-(n-1 +c^2)} &+& \frac {16 \lambda \Omega' {\cal Q}_2}
816: {n-1-c^2} R^{-(n-2 + 2c^2)} + \left( \frac {2 {\cal V}}{n-1-c^2}
817: + \frac {{\bar V}_0^2 \Omega'} {4(n-2)}\right) R^{-2 c^2} \nonumber\\
818: &+& \frac {8 \lambda \Omega' {\cal H}_2} {n-1-c^2} R^{-(n-2 - 2c^2)}
819: + {\cal O}(R^{3n -6-2 c^2}).
820: \eea
821:
822: In this case, we have different possibilities for the form of the
823: potential function depending upon the value of the set of
824: parameters as is also seen from Fig. 5
825:
826: Case-i) F(R) is positive every where. So, in this
827: case there is no dynamics of the domain wall.
828:
829: Case-ii) F(R) is negative for finite rang of R. For $P_0 <0,M > 0$ with
830: $c^2 < n-1$ and $ P_0 >0, M> 0$ with $c^2 > n-1$ we have thi
831: this kind of behaviour. However, in this
832: case, the potential has minimum which corresponds to a short
833: period of inflation followed by the decelerated expansion.
834: The domain wall has a period oscillation between two
835: extreme value of the scale factor.
836:
837: Case-iii) F(R) is positive for small $R$ and then negative for large $R$.
838: Now depending upon the value of $c$, the asymptotic structure of the potential
839: again is of two different types. As we note asymptotically
840: $F(R) \sim -P_0 R^{2 -2 c^2}$. So, it is clear that for $P_0 > 0$,
841: when $c^2 > 1$, $F(R)$ grows negatively clear from the plot also.
842: For $c^2 < 0$, $F(R)$ tends to zero value from negative side.
843: So, generally, domain wall starts from infinity and
844: gets repelled by the time like singularity in the bulk
845: from a finite value of $R$. Asymptotically, the dynamics is
846: \bea
847: R(\tau) \propto \tau^{\frac 1 {c^2}}.
848: \eea
849: So, $c^2 <1$ gives a late time accelerated expansion of the domain wall.
850: For other case, expansion is decelerated. For all the cases we
851: get bouncing universe scenarios.
852:
853: Case-iv) $F(R)$ is negative every where. In this case, the
854: domain wall has big-bang singularity at $R =0$. For $P_0 >0,M >0$ and
855: $c^2 > 1$, we have this form of the potential. Domain wall
856: starts collapses from infinity all the way to bulk singularity.
857:
858: Case-v) $F(R)$ is negative for small value of $R$ but positive
859: for large value. This occurs only for $P_0 < 0,M >0$ irrespective
860: of the value of $c^2$. In this potential domain wall emerges from
861: a the white hole region of the bulk spacetime and gets halted at finite
862: value of its scale factor and re-collapses into the black hole.
863:
864: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%555
865: \begin{figure}
866: \includegraphics[width=5.50in,height=2.2in]{BI-P3.eps}
867: \caption{F(R) for type-III solution.} \label{sixth}
868: \end{figure}
869:
870: {\bf Type-III potential}: The domain wall in this
871: background strictly restricted to be of
872: spatially non-flat metric $(k\ne 0)$.
873: For large $R$ limit Hubble equation for the potential Eq.\ref{pot}
874: with this solution looks like
875: \bea
876: H^2 =\frac {\xi^2 c^4}{ R^2} \left[ \frac {2 L_0}{(n-3)c^2 +1} +
877: 2 M \left(\frac R {\xi}\right)^{-\frac {((n-3)c^2 +1)} {c^2}}
878: + \frac {{\bar V}_0^2 \Omega' \left(\frac R {\xi}\right)^{2 - \frac 2 {c^2}}}
879: {4(n-2)}\right] + {\cal O}(R^{-2n-6 }).
880: \eea
881: On the other hand for small $R$ limit, the expression for the above
882: Hubble like equation turns out to be
883: \bea
884: H^2 &=& \frac {\xi^2 c^4}{ R^2} \left[ 2 {\cal M}_3
885: \left(\frac R {\xi}\right)^{-\frac {(n-3)c^2 +1}
886: {c^2}} + \frac {16 \lambda \Omega' {\cal Q}_3} {c^2 \xi^{n-2}
887: ((n-1)c^2-1)} \left(\frac R {\xi}\right)^{-\frac{(n-4)c^2 +2}{c^2}} +
888: \frac {2 L_0}{(n-1)c^2 +1} \right. \nonumber \\
889: &+& \left. \frac {{\bar V}_0^2 \Omega'
890: \left(\frac R {\xi}\right)^{2 - \frac 2 {c^2}}}
891: {4(n-2) c^2}-\frac {8 \lambda^2 \Omega'
892: \left(\frac R {\xi}\right)^{2 -\frac 2{c^2}}}{c^2 ((n-1)c^2 -1)} -
893: \frac {8 \lambda \Omega' {\cal H}_3
894: \left(\frac R {\xi}\right)^{n-\frac 2 {c^2}}} {c^2 ((n-1)c^2-1)} \right] +
895: {\cal O}(R^{\frac{(3n-6)c^2-2}{c^2}}).
896: \eea
897:
898: As is seen from the plot Fig.\ref{sixth}, qualitatively the
899: form of potential can be categorized into two
900: sets corresponding to the value of $c^2$. In one $c^2 >1$,
901: the potential tends to asymptotic negative infinity. This
902: leads to asymptotically power law type inflation. In the
903: small $R$ limit, domain wall can have bounce due to the presence
904: of time like bulk singularity for full $(L_0,M)$ space
905: or it can go all the way to bulk attractive spacelike singularity.
906:
907: In the other one $c^2 <1$, the potential is asymptotically
908: goes to some constant value depending on the value of $L_0$.
909: The constant $L_0$ is shown in the plots by dot-dashed horizontal
910: lines. For this, we have three kind of potential structures.
911: In many respects, these are of the same form
912: compare to type-II potential. But main difference is the
913: value of the parameter $c^2$. It acts as a inverse of that
914: of type-II case.
915:
916: Asymptotically, the domain wall undergoes
917: \bea
918: R(\tau) &\propto & \tau~~~~ \hbox{for $c^2 < 1$ and $L_0 >0$}\\
919: R(\tau) &\propto &\tau^{c^2}~~~ \hbox{for $c^2 > 1$ }.
920: \eea
921: So, for the first case, it is linear expansion with spherical
922: spatial section. Where as for the second case, domain wall
923: has power law inflation. For almost every case, domain wall
924: has a bounce for a finite value of scale factor.
925:
926: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
927: \section{Conclusion}\label{con}
928: To summarize, in this report we have
929: tried to study the Einstein-Born-Infeld-dilaton theory
930: in presence of dynamic domain walls.
931: We have first tried to find out the possible background
932: solutions taking into account the domain wall back-reaction.
933: We have analytically found three different types of solutions.
934: The analytical study of these various metrics
935: is very difficult. So, we have adopted the same
936: line as in \cite{chamblin,debu} by plotting all the
937: metric functions and studied its structure in various
938: limits along the radial coordinate.
939:
940: As was mentioned earlier, BI electromagnetic field
941: has a critical value which is responsible for smoothing of
942: pointlike singularity of the vector field. So, it is expected
943: to have same kind of affects on the gravitational background
944: in connection with the singularity at the origin. We have seen
945: in our previous work \cite{debu} for Maxwell electromagnetic case which
946: is basically $\lambda \rightarrow \infty$ limit of the present
947: analysis that for the first three types of solutions the singularities
948: were governed by the electric charge Q
949: as expected. The singularities were in general timelike in those cases.
950: On the other hand the present analysis
951: shows that for finite value of $\lambda$, singularities are somewhat
952: smoothed. As one can see explicitly for the first three solutions being
953: one to one correspondence with $\lambda \rightarrow \infty$ case,
954: singularities at $r = 0$ are governed either by parameter ${\cal M}$ which
955: is related to mass parameter $M$ or charge Q. Importantly, depending
956: upon the various parameters, in these cases singularity can either be
957: timelike or spacelike as also clear from various plots.
958: However, in order to be more explicit,
959: we demonstrated in the Table I that the nature of singularities appear in the
960: different background metric solutions for different limits of $\lambda$.
961: \bea
962: \begin{array}{c}
963: \hbox{Table 1: {\bf Comparison of various singularities up to sign}} \\
964: \begin{array}{|c|c|c|}
965: \hline
966: \hbox{Type of Sol}^n & \begin{array}{c} \hbox{Maxwell EM field}
967: \\ \lambda \rightarrow \infty \end{array} & \begin{array}{c}
968: \hbox{BI EM field} \\ \lambda~~\hbox{is finite}\end{array} \\
969: \hline
970: \hbox{Type-I} & Q^2 r^{-(2n-6)} & {\cal M}_1 r^{-(n-3)} \\
971: \hline
972: \hbox{Type-II} & Q^2 r^{-\frac {2n-6}{1 +c^2}} & \begin{array}{cc}
973: {\cal M}_2 r^{-\frac {n-3-c^2} {1 + c^2}} & \hbox{for}~c^2 < 1\\
974: Q r^{-\frac {n-4}{1+c^2}} &\hbox{for}~c^2 >1 \end{array} \\
975: \hline
976: \hbox{Type-III} & Q^2 r^{- \frac {(2n -6)c^2}{1+c^2}} & \begin{array}{cc}
977: {\cal M}_3 r^{-\frac {(n-3)c^2-1} {1 + c^2}} & \hbox{for}~c^2 > 1\\
978: Q r^{-\frac {(n-4)c^2}{1+c^2}} &\hbox{for}~c^2 < 1 \end{array} \\
979: \hline
980: \end{array}
981: \end{array}
982: \eea
983:
984: It may also be noted that for any value of $\lambda$
985: the asymptotic structure i.e. in $r \rightarrow \infty$
986: limit, the background spacetime does not depend on it at all.
987:
988: Finally, after getting details of the background spacetime
989: we have tried to study the dynamics of the domain walls in
990: those bulk spacetime configurations.
991: In this case also, there exists specific relations
992: among the various coupling parameters so that one can have
993: static bulk spacetime background in consistent with
994: the dynamic domain wall.
995: As a direct consequence of drastic changes of the singularity
996: behaviour in our present analysis compared to $\lambda \rightarrow \infty$
997: case \cite{debu}, the dynamics of the domain wall near the singularity
998: has also modified significantly follows from various plots.
999:
1000: In many cases again, we also have found to exist
1001: inflation for finite period of proper time with
1002: respect to domain wall world volume followed by standard decelerated
1003: expansion phase. Another important feature is the presence
1004: of negative energy density in domain wall scenario.
1005: In fact, the very presence of this negative energy density, plays the role
1006: of bounce for the domain wall avoiding bulk singularity.
1007: This has recently been discussed \cite{supratik1}
1008: for the first solution. But we have several solutions with
1009: different asymptotic behaviour as well as near singularity structure
1010: for the same kind of background field configurations. So,
1011: in that respect it might be interesting to study this bounce in details for
1012: the other non-trivial background solutions.
1013:
1014: In the context of dark energy and dark matter in our universe,
1015: these various kind of induced unseen energy density
1016: on the wall may be interesting points to study. For
1017: example, this non-standard behavior
1018: may help us to construct dark matter
1019: and dark energy \cite{dark} model building \cite{supratik}
1020: in solving discrepancies with standard general relativity predictions
1021: for the galaxy rotation curves \cite{galaxy}, late time acceleration of the universe \cite{acce},
1022: gravitational lensing \cite{lensing}.
1023: As an another possible interesting extension of this work
1024: would be to analyze stability under
1025: perturbation in the domain wall world volume.
1026: An interesting point to
1027: analyze would be whether all these types of solutions are
1028: compatible in addition to external matter sources such as
1029: radiation and baryonic matter, restricted to the domain
1030: world volume.
1031:
1032: \vspace{.1cm}
1033: \noindent
1034: {\bf Acknowledgment}\\
1035: The referee's valuable comments and suggestions are
1036: gratefully acknowledged.
1037:
1038:
1039:
1040:
1041: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
1042: \markright{Bibliography}
1043: \bibitem{joseph} D. W. Joseph, Phys. Rev. {\bf 126}, 319 (1962).
1044:
1045: \bibitem{akama} K. Akama, Lect. Notes Phys.{\bf 176},
1046: 267 (1982)[hep-th/0001113]; K. Akama, Prog. Theor. Phys. {\bf 60}, 1900 (1978);
1047: K. Akama, Prog. Theor. Phys. {\bf 78}, 184 (1987); {\bf 79}, 1299
1048: (1988); {\bf 80}, 935 (1988); K. Akama and T. Hattori, Mod. Phys. Lett.
1049: {\bf A15}, 2017 (2000).
1050:
1051: \bibitem{rubakov} V.A. Rubakov and M.E. Shaposhnikov, Phys. Lett. {\bf B125}, 136 (1983);
1052: M. Visser, Phys. Lett. {\bf 159B}, 22 (1985).
1053:
1054:
1055: \bibitem{other} P. Laguna-Castillo and R. A. Matzner, Nucl. Phys. {\bf B282}, 542 (1987);
1056: E. J. Squires, Phys. Lett. {\bf B167}, 286 (1986);
1057: G. W. Gibbons and D. L. Wiltshire, Nucl. Phys. {\bf B287}, 717 (1987);
1058: J.M. Overduin and P.S. Wesson, Phys. Rept. {\bf 283}, 303 (1997).
1059:
1060: \bibitem{randall} L. Randall, R. Sundrum, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 83}, 3370 (1999)[hep-ph/9905221];
1061: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 83}, 4690 (1999)[hep-th/9906064].
1062:
1063:
1064: \bibitem{dvali} G. Dvali, M. Shifman, Phys. Lett. {\bf B396}, 64 (1997)[hep-th/9612128]; Nucl.
1065: Phys. {\bf B504}, 127 (1996)[hep-th/9611213].
1066: \bibitem{cvetic} M. Cvetic and H. H. Soleng, Phys. Rept. {\bf 282},
1067: 159 (1997) [hep-th/9604090].
1068: \bibitem{pol} J. Hughes, J. Liu and J. Polchinski,
1069: Phys. Lett. {\bf B180}, 370 (1986).
1070:
1071: \bibitem{lukus} A. Burt A. Ovrut and D. Waldram, Phys. Rev. {\bf D61}, 023506 (2000)[hep-th/9902071],
1072: {\it ibid} Phys. Rev. {\bf D60}, 086001 (1999)[hep-th/9806022].
1073:
1074:
1075:
1076: \bibitem{polchinski} J. Polchinski, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 75}, 4724 (1995)[hep-th/9510017].
1077:
1078:
1079: \bibitem{kraus} P. Kraus, JHEP {\bf 9912}, 011 (1999)[hep-th/9910149].
1080: \bibitem{csaki} T. Nihei, Phys. Lett. {\bf B465},81 (1999), [hep-ph/9905487];
1081: C. Csaki, M. Graesser, C. Kolda and J. Terning, Phys. Lett. {\bf B426},34 (1999), [hep-ph/9906513];
1082: P. Binetruy, C. Deffayet, U. Ellwanger and D. Langlois, Phys. Lett. {\bf B477},285 (2000),
1083: [hep-th/9910219];
1084: D. Ida, JHEP {\bf 0009},014 (2000), [gr-qc/9912002];
1085: C. Bercelo and M. Visser, Phys. Lett. {\bf B482},183 (2000), [hep-th/0004056];
1086: L. Anchordoqui, C. Nunez and K. Olsen, JHEP {\bf 0010},050 (2000), [hep-th/0007064];
1087: P. Bowcock, C. Charmousis and R. Gregory, Class. Quant. Grav. {\bf 17},4745 (2000), [hep-th/0007177];
1088: C. Csaki, J. Erlich and C. Grojean, Nucl. Phys. {\bf B604},312 (2001), [hep-th/0012143];
1089: Y. S. Myung, hep-th/0103241.
1090: D. H. Coule, Class. Quant. Grav. {\bf 1}8 (2001) 4265;
1091: J. P. Gregory and A. Padilla, Class. Quant. Grav. {\bf 19},4071 (2002), [hep-th/0204218].
1092: S. Nojiri, S. D. Odintsov and S. Ogushi, hep-th/0205187.
1093:
1094: \bibitem{israel} W. Israel, Nuovo Cimento, {\bf B44}, 1 (1966), Erratum: {\bf B48}, 463 (1967).
1095:
1096: \bibitem{sudipto} S. Mukherji and M. Peloso, Phys. Lett. {\bf B547}, 297 (2002)[hep-th/0205180]. A. Biswas,
1097: S. Mukherji and S. Sekhar Pal, Int. J. Mod. Phys. {\bf A19}, 557 (2004)[hep-th/0301144]; A. Biswas and S. Mukherji,
1098: JCAP {\bf 0602}, 002 (2006)[hep-th/0507270];S. Mukherji, S. Pal,
1099: arXiv:0806.2507 [gr-qc].
1100:
1101: \bibitem{novello} M. Novello and S.E.Perez Bergliaffa, arXiv:0802.1634 [astro-ph] and references there in; J. L. Hovdebo and R. C. Myers, JCAP {\bf 0311}, 012 (2003) [hep-th/0308088]. C.P. Burgess, F. Quevedo, R. Raba, G. Tasinato
1102: and I. Zavala, JCAP, {\bf 0402}, 008 (2004) [hep-th/0310122]; M. R. Setare, F. Darabi, Int. J. Mod. Phys. {\bf D16}, 1563 (2007) [hep-th/0605081].
1103: G. De. Risi, Phys. Rev. {\bf D7}, 044030 (2008).
1104: \bibitem{teys} E. S. Fradkin and A.A. Tseytlin,
1105: Phys. Lett. {\bf B160}, 69 (1985).
1106:
1107: \bibitem{leigh}R. G. Leigh, Mod. Phys. Lett. {\bf A4}, 2767 (1989).
1108: \bibitem{tdey} T. Kr. Dey, Phys. Lett. {\bf B595},
1109: 484 (2004)[hep-th/0406169]; R. Cai,
1110: D. Pang and A. Wang, Phys. Rev. {\bf D70}, 124034 (2004)[hep-th/0410158].
1111:
1112: \bibitem{Born-infeld} D. L. Wiltshire,
1113: Phys. Rev. {\bf D38}, 2445 (1988);
1114: D. A. Rasheed, arXiv:hep-th/9702087; M. Cataldo and A. Garcia,
1115: Phys. Lett. {\bf B456}, 28 (1999)[hep-th/9903257]; S. Fernando and
1116: D. Krug, Gen. Rel. Grav. {\bf 35}, 129 (2003)[hep-th/0306120];
1117: T. Tamaki, JCAP {\bf 0405}, 004 (2004)[gr-qc/0310099]; S. Fernando,
1118: Gen. Rel. Grav. {\bf 37}, 585 (2005)[hep-th/0407062];
1119: S. Fernando, C. Holbrook, Int. J. Theor. Phys. {\bf 45}, 1630 (2006)
1120: [hep-th/0501138]; E. F. Eiroa, Phys. Rev. {\bf D73} 043002 (2006)
1121: [gr-qc/0511065]; S. Fernando, Phys. Rev. {\bf D74}, 104032 (2006)
1122: [hep-th/0608040]; A. Sheykhi, N. Riazi, Phys. Rev. {\bf D75}, 024021 (2007)
1123: [hep-th/0610085]; M. H. Dehghani, S. H. Hendi, A. Sheykhi and
1124: H. R. Sedehi, JCAP {\bf 0702}, 020 (2007)[hep-th/0611288];
1125: X. Gao, JHEP {\bf 0711}, 006 (2007)[arXiv:0708.1226] [hep-th];
1126: S. Yun, arXiv:0706.2046 [hep-th]; B. Chandrasekhar, H. Yavartanoo and
1127: S. Yun, Phys. Lett. {\bf B660}, 392 (2008)[hep-th/0611240];
1128: A. Sheykhi, Phys. Lett. {\bf B662}, 7 (2008)[arXiv:0710.3827] [hep-th];
1129: A. Sheykhi, arXiv:0801.4112 [hep-th]; O. Miskovic and R. Olea
1130: arXiv:0802.2081 [hep-th]; Y. S. Myung, Y. Kim and Y. Park,
1131: arXiv:0804.0301 [gr-qc]; Y. S. Myung, Y. Kim and Y. Park,
1132: arXiv:0805.0187 [gr-qc]; S. S. Yazadjiev, Phys. Rev. {\bf D72}, 044006 (2005)
1133: [hep-th/0504152]; M.H. Dehghani, N. Bostani and S.H. Hendi,
1134: arXiv:0806.1429 [gr-qc].
1135:
1136:
1137: \bibitem{debu} D. Maity, arXiv:0806.2041[hep-th].
1138: \bibitem{dil} T. Tamaki and T. Torii, Phys. Rev. {\bf D62}, 061501 (2000)
1139: [gr-qc/0004071]; Clement and D. Galtsov, Phys. Rev. {\bf D62},
1140: 124013 (2000)[hep-th/0007228].
1141:
1142: \bibitem{chamblin} H.A. Chamblin and H.S. Reall,
1143: Nucl. Phys. B {\bf 562}, 133 (1999); A. Chamblin, M. J. Perry
1144: and H. S. Reall, JHEP {\bf 9909}, 014 (1999)[hep-th/9908047].
1145:
1146:
1147: \bibitem{0806.2481} M.H. Dehghani {\it et al} Phys. Rev.{\bf D77},
1148: 104025 (2008)[arXiv:0802.2637] [hep-th];
1149: Z. Guo, N. Ohtaa and T. Toriib, arXiv:0806.2481[gr-qc].
1150:
1151: \bibitem{abbot} L. F. Abbot and S. Deser, Nucl. Phys. {\bf B195}, 76 (1982);
1152: S. W. Hawking and G. T. Horowitz, Class. Quant. Grav. {\bf 13}, 1487 (1996).
1153:
1154: \bibitem{supratik1} S Mukherji and S. Pal, arXiv:0806.2507 [gr-qc].
1155:
1156:
1157: \bibitem{dark} L. Bergstrom, Rept. Prog. Phys. 63, 793 (2000); F. Combes, New Astron. Rev. {\bf 46}, 755 (2002).
1158:
1159: \bibitem{supratik} S. Pal, S. Bharadwaj and S. Kar, Phys. Lett. {\bf B609}, 194 (2005) [gr-qc/0409023];
1160: C. G. Boehmer and T. Harko, Class. Quant. Grav. {\bf 24}, 3191 (2007) [0705.2496 [gr-qc]].
1161: \bibitem{galaxy} J. J. Binney and S. Tremaine, Galactic Dynamics, Princeton University Press, Princeton
1162: (1987); M. Persic, P. Salucci and F. Stel, Mon. Not. Roy.
1163: Astron. Soc. {\bf 281}, 27 (1996);
1164: A. Berriello and P. Salucci, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. {\bf 323}, 285 (2001); Y. Safue and V. Rubin,
1165: Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. {\bf 39}, 137 (2001).
1166:
1167: \bibitem{acce} A. G. Riess et al., Astron. J. {\bf 116}, 1009 (1998);
1168: S. Perlmutter et al., Bull. Am. Astron. Soc. {\bf 29}, 1351 (1997);
1169: S. Perlmutter et al., Astrophys. J. {\bf 517}, 565 (1997);
1170: J. L. Tonry et al., Astrophys. J. {\bf 594}, 1 (2003);
1171: S. Bridle, O. Lahav, J. P. Ostriker and P. J. Steinhardt, Science, {\bf 299}, 1532 (2003);
1172: C. Bennet et al., Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser. {\bf 148}, 1 (2003) [astro-ph/0302207];
1173: G. Hinshaw et al., Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser. {\bf 148}, 135 (2003)[astro-ph/0302217;
1174: A. Kogut et al., Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser. {\bf 148}, 161 (2003)[astro-ph/0302213];
1175: D. N. Spergel et al., Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser. {\bf 148}, 175 (2003)[astro-ph/0302209].
1176:
1177: \bibitem{lensing} P. Schneider, J. Ehlers and E. Falco, Gravitational lenses , Springer Verlag, Berlin (1992)
1178:
1179:
1180: \end{thebibliography}
1181: \end{document}
1182:
1183:
1184:
1185:
1186:
1187:
1188: