1: \documentclass[12pt]{article}
2: %\usepackage[dvips]{color}
3: %\usepackage{epsfig}
4: %\usepackage{showkeys}
5: %\color{blue}
6: %\twocolumn
7: \usepackage{amsmath,amssymb,latexsym}
8: \usepackage[dvips]{graphicx}
9: \setlength{\textwidth}{16.5cm}
10: \setlength{\textheight}{22.5cm}
11: \addtolength{\oddsidemargin}{-12mm}
12: \addtolength{\topmargin}{-20mm}
13: \setlength{\arraycolsep}{2pt}
14:
15: \providecommand{\beqa}{\begin{eqnarray}}
16: \providecommand{\tbf}{\textbf}
17: \providecommand{\mbf}{\mathbf}
18: \providecommand{\tit}{\textit}
19: \providecommand{\mrm}{\mathrm}
20: \providecommand{\eeqa}{\end{eqnarray}}
21: \providecommand{\ti}{{\mathrm{t}}}
22: \providecommand{\lb}{{\bar{\lambda}_0}}
23: \providecommand{\la}{{\lambda}}
24: \def\Orb{{\mathbf{S}^1/\mathbf{Z}_2}}
25: \def\Z2{{\mathbf{Z}_2}}
26: \def\mX{{\mathbf{X}}}
27:
28:
29: \begin{document}
30:
31: \thispagestyle{empty}
32: %\rightline{HUTP-06/A0025}
33:
34:
35: \addtolength{\baselineskip}{1.5mm}
36:
37: \thispagestyle{empty}
38:
39: \vspace{28pt}
40:
41: \begin{center}
42: {\Large\textbf{Energy Transfer in Multi Field Inflation and\\ \vskip2mm Cosmological Perturbations}}\\
43:
44: \vspace{28pt}
45:
46: Amjad Ashoorioon$^\blacklozenge$\footnote{amjad@umich.edu}, Axel
47: Krause$^\clubsuit$\footnote{axel.krause@physik.uni-muenchen.de} and
48: Krzysztof
49: Turzynski$^{\blacklozenge\spadesuit}$\footnote{turzyn@fuw.edu.pl}
50:
51: \vspace{24pt}
52:
53: %\footnotesize{
54: ${}^\blacklozenge$\textit{Michigan Center for Theoretical Physics\\
55: University of Michigan, Ann Arbor\\
56: Michigan 48109-1040, USA}\\ \vskip2mm
57:
58: ${}^\clubsuit$\textit{Arnold Sommerfeld Center for Theoretical
59: Physics\\
60: Department f\"{u}r Physik, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universit\"{a}t M\"{u}nchen,\\
61: Theresienstr.~37, 80333 Munich, Germany}\\ \vskip2mm
62:
63: ${}^\spadesuit$\textit{Institute of Theoretical Physics\\
64: University of Warsaw,\\
65: ul.~Ho\. za 69, 00-681 Warsaw, Poland}\\
66: %}
67:
68: \end{center}
69:
70: \vspace{18pt}
71:
72: \begin{abstract}
73:
74: \addtolength{\baselineskip}{1.2mm}
75:
76: In cascade inflation and some other string inflation models,
77: collisions of mobile branes with other branes or orbifold planes
78: occur and lead to interesting cosmological signatures. The
79: fundamental M/string-theory description of these collisions is still
80: lacking but it is clear that the inflaton looses part of its energy
81: to some form of brane matter, e.g.~a component of tensionless
82: strings. In the absence of a fundamental description, we assume a
83: general barotropic fluid on the brane, which absorbs part of the
84: inflaton's energy. The fluid is modeled by a scalar with a suitable
85: exponential potential to arrive at a full-fledged field theory
86: model. We study numerically the impact of the energy transfer from the
87: inflaton to the scalar on curvature and isocurvature
88: perturbations and demonstrate explicitly that the curvature power
89: spectrum gets modulated by oscillations which damp away toward
90: smaller scales. Even though, the contribution of isocurvature
91: perturbations decays toward the end of inflation, they induce
92: curvature perturbations on scales that exit the horizon before the
93: collision. We consider cases where the scalar behaves like
94: radiation, matter or a web of cosmic strings and discuss the
95: differences in the resulting power spectra.
96:
97: \end{abstract}
98:
99: \setcounter{footnote}{0}
100:
101: \newpage
102:
103:
104:
105: \section{Introduction}
106:
107: There has been a lot of activity over the past few years to derive
108: inflation from string theory. Most prominent among the many
109: approaches has been brane inflation, in which the coordinates of
110: some mobile branes on the internal compactification manifold provide
111: the inflatons in the effective four-dimensional low energy theory
112: \cite{Dvali:1998pa}. While initial efforts focussed, for simplicity,
113: on compactifications with a single mobile brane (for recent updates
114: on single brane inflations, see
115: e.g.~\cite{Kachru:2003sx}-\cite{Hoi:2008gc}) general
116: compactifications with fluxes naturally possess several, often many,
117: mobile branes to satisfy tadpole cancellation equations
118: \cite{Becker:2005sg}-\cite{Ward:2007gs}. Multi brane inflation
119: models lead to multi field inflation cosmologies in the low energy
120: theory, which as a result have been actively researched recently
121: (see e.g.~\cite{Dimopoulos:2005ac}-\cite{Cai:2008if}). The multitude
122: of inflaton fields can be actually seen as a physical blessing
123: rather than a technical curse.
124:
125: The multi brane inflation models split into two classes: those with
126: brane-brane interactions which steer the multi brane system towards
127: a stable dynamical attractor and those with brane-brane interactions
128: for which no such attractor exists. The first class allows to
129: replace the multi field cosmologies by cosmologies involving fewer
130: fields, in the extreme case just a single inflaton field, once the
131: system evolves along the attractor. An example for the first class
132: is a multi brane system with exponential interactions among the
133: branes, caused by non-perturbative interactions between classically
134: non-interacting branes \cite{Becker:2005sg}. As a result of the
135: stable attractor evolution this class more readily allows for an
136: analytical treatment and moreover offers a parametric way to achieve
137: inflation. Namely by choosing the number of participating branes
138: large enough, one achieves a parametric suppression of the slow-roll
139: parameters -- a phenomenon which is known as assisted inflation
140: \cite{Liddle:1998jc}.
141:
142: The second class, on the other hand, requires an enormous
143: fine-tuning for the position of each mobile brane in order to yield
144: an ordered, e.g.~equidistant, brane configuration, which admits an
145: analytical treatment. An example of this class would be a system
146: consisting of many brane-antibrane pairs with mutual Coulomb
147: interactions. Full-fledged numerical studies for the cosmic
148: evolution of this second class still need to be performed.
149: Nevertheless, one might expect that this second class won't lead to
150: inflation. The reason is that even if one starts with a multi brane
151: configuration suitable for inflation (which, as said, requires a
152: tremendous fine-tuning for all brane positions as the system lacks
153: an attractor), small perturbations won't die away. They will lead
154: the system to a complicated multi brane dynamics which moves the
155: branes around on the internal space in an unconcerted way,
156: precluding the realization of assisted inflation. The upshot might
157: be that among the many possible multi brane models, the models of
158: the first class are the ones capable of generating inflation,
159: whereas the models of the second class have to be dismissed.
160:
161: In this paper we focus on a new phenomenon which arises in multi
162: brane inflation models: the possibility of cascade inflation phases
163: \cite{Ashoorioon:2006wc}. These arise when some of the mobile branes
164: collide successively with fixed branes or orbifold fixed planes and
165: thus no longer participate in the inflation process. The parameters
166: of the effective four-dimensional inflationary potential vary in
167: these collisions and as a result the inflationary potential acquires
168: features. A characteristic consequence of such features is a damped
169: oscillatory behavior of the power spectrum of density perturbations.
170: This could lead to important observational clues about the
171: underlying time variation of the inflationary potential.
172:
173: To date, we have no complete fundamental M/string-theory description
174: of such collisions. Therefore, we have to model the collision in
175: field theory as an energy transfer (ET) from the inflaton to the
176: brane. For instance, the brane could be modeled by a perfect fluid
177: with a coupling to the inflaton which allows to transfer the
178: inflaton's energy in discrete steps. More adapt to a field theory
179: description based on a Lagrangean, and the route we follow here, is
180: to model the perfect fluid by a scalar field with appropriate
181: potential. Our goal in this paper is to study the potentially
182: observable imprints of this ET on the resulting curvature and
183: isocurvature perturbation spectrum. Chapter \ref{chapter-cascade}
184: describes the M-theory motivation and background for our analysis,
185: reviewing cascade inflation. Chapter \ref{chapter-Model} introduces
186: our two scalar field theory, which models the ET in brane collisions
187: such as arising in cascade inflation. Chapter \ref{chapter-Spectra}
188: presents the curvature and isocurvature perturbations for this
189: model. We find that the contribution of isocurvature perturbations
190: decays toward the end of inflation. Nonetheless, they induce
191: curvature perturbations on scales that exit the horizon before the
192: collision. The curvature power spectrum gets modulated by
193: oscillations which damp away toward smaller scales. Finally,
194: technical details on how to calculate the perturbations in our
195: two-field model are presented in the Appendix.
196:
197:
198:
199: \section{Cascade Inflation}\label{chapter-cascade}
200:
201: The goal of this paper is to study perturbations generated in a two
202: scalar field inflation model with exponential potentials. Such
203: potentials arise in fundamental physics from M-theory multi brane
204: inflation \cite{Becker:2005sg} and cascade inflation
205: \cite{Ashoorioon:2006wc} through non-perturbative instanton
206: interactions. Since the two scalar field inflation model might also
207: be used to provide some first insight into the cosmological impact
208: of the ET arising when a bulk M5-brane collides with the boundary in
209: cascade inflation, we will now briefly recall cascade inflation as
210: one of the motivations for our study.
211:
212: Cascade inflation arises from heterotic M-theory
213: \cite{Horava:1995qa}, \cite{Horava:1996ma} compactified on
214: $\mX\times\Orb$, where $\mX$ is a Calabi-Yau threefold. Tadpole
215: cancellation requires generically the presences of $N$ M5-branes in
216: the background. These fill the four-dimensional spacetime and wrap a
217: holomorphic two-cycle on $\mX$ of genus zero. As BPS objects, the
218: M5-branes interact only non-perturbatively via open M2-instantons
219: which stretch along $\Orb$ and wrap the same two-cycle\footnote{For
220: simplicity we are assuming a Calabi-Yau threefold with Hodge number
221: $h^{(1,1)}(\mX) = 1$.}. The effective four-dimensional ${\cal N}=1$
222: supergravity resulting from this compactification contains as scalar
223: components of complex chiral superfields the M5-brane position
224: moduli $Y_i, \; i=1,\hdots,N$, the Calabi-Yau $\mX$ volume modulus
225: $S$ and the $\Orb$ orbifold-size modulus $T$. Twice their real parts
226: are denoted by $y_i$, $s$ and $t$. Moreover, it's convenient to
227: define $y = (\sum_{i=1}^N y_i^2)^{1/2}$. One can show that the
228: M-theory dynamics leads to an equidistant distribution of the
229: M5-branes along $\Orb$ \cite{Becker:2005sg}. For such a distribution
230: \beqa \text{Re}(Y_{i+1}-Y_i) \equiv \bigg(\frac{t}{2L}\bigg) \Delta
231: x \eeqa is independent of the M5-brane counting label $i$.
232: Consequently, the $N-1$ inflatons $\text{Re}(Y_{i+1}-Y_i)$ can be
233: identified. The multi inflaton system reduces effectively to one
234: with a single inflaton $\Delta x$. The $\Orb$ interval size is
235: denoted by $L$.
236:
237: In the large volume limit, specified by the inequality $st \gg y^2$,
238: where supergravity provides a reliable description of the dynamics
239: \cite{Becker:2005sg}, the potential for the canonically normalized
240: inflaton $\varphi \sim N^{3/2} \Delta x$ becomes
241: \beqa
242: V_N(\varphi)
243: = V_N e^{-\sqrt{\frac{2}{p_N}}\frac{\varphi}{M_{\rm P}}} \; ,
244: \label{Potential}
245: \eeqa
246: where
247: \beqa V_N = (N-1)^2
248: \bigg(\frac{6M_{\rm P}^4}{st^3 d}\bigg) \; , \qquad p_N =
249: \frac{4N(N^2-1)}{3st}
250: \eeqa
251: and $d$ is the Calabi-Yau intersection
252: number. For the detailed derivation from M-theory we refer the
253: reader to \cite{Becker:2005sg,Ashoorioon:2006wc}. The cosmological
254: FRW evolution in this background is given by power law inflation
255: \cite{Lucchin:1984yf} with FRW scale factor \beqa a(\ti) = a_0
256: \ti^{p_N} \; . \eeqa Inflation sets in when $p_N > 1$, which can
257: always be achieved when sufficiently many M5-branes are present
258: since $p_N \sim N^3$. Besides this bound on $N$ from below, there is
259: also a bound on $N$ from above which follows from the requirement to
260: work in the large volume regime where $st\gg y^2$ holds and the fact
261: that $y$ grows with $N$. For typical parameter values one thus finds
262: $20 \le N \le 200$ as a constraint on the number of M5-branes
263: \cite{Becker:2005sg}. Such numbers can easily be accounted for in
264: heterotic M-theory flux compactifications
265: \cite{Witten:1996mz,Curio:2000dw,Curio:2003ur} where tadpole
266: cancellation equations balance the amount of M5-branes with
267: quantized flux numbers.
268:
269: The repulsive M2-instanton interactions between the M5-branes cause
270: them to spread over the $\Orb$ interval until the two outermost
271: M5-branes hit the boundaries and dissolve into them via small
272: instanton transitions \cite{Witten:1995gx}, \cite{Ovrut:2000qi}, \cite{Buchbinder:2002ji}. This process changes the
273: topological data on the boundaries while the number of M5-branes
274: participating in the inflationary bulk dynamics drops from $N$ to
275: $N-2$. The remaining $N-2$ bulk M5-branes will continue to spread
276: until again the most outermost M5-branes hit the boundaries in a
277: second small instanton transition and so on. This evolution, in
278: which the number of M5-branes drops successively in discrete steps,
279: defines \emph{cascade inflation} \cite{Ashoorioon:2006wc}. In
280: \cite{Ashoorioon:2006wc}, the analysis neglected the energy
281: transferred to the boundaries by the instanton transitions and
282: therefore worked, after each instanton transition, with a suitably
283: modified power-law evolution
284: \begin{equation}\label{scl-fac}
285: a_{m}(\mathrm{t}) = a_{m}\mathrm{t}^{p_{N_m}}\; , \qquad
286: {\mathrm{t}}_{m-1}\leq \mathrm{t}\leq \mathrm{t}_m \; ,
287: \end{equation}
288: having different $N$ dependent parameters $p_N$ and $V_N$ for each
289: interval. The cascade inflation process terminates when the number
290: of M5-branes in the $m$th phase, $N_m = N-2m$, drops below a
291: critical value $N_K$ in the final $K$th phase. This critical value
292: $N_K$ is determined by the exit condition $p_{N_K} = 1$, at which
293: inflation stops and which is dynamically reached from larger powers
294: $p_{N_m} \ge p_{N_K}$, $m \le K$. Thus we have a finite number
295: $m=1,\hdots, K$ of cascade inflation bouts.
296:
297: Throughout the whole cascade inflation process the inflaton, $\Delta
298: x$, representing the distance between neighboring bulk M5-branes,
299: grows continuously. Matching the scale factors at the transition
300: times, $\mathrm{t}_m$, determines the prefactors \beqa a_{m}= a_1
301: \mathrm{t}_1^{p_{N_1}-p_{N_2}} \mathrm{t}_2^{p_{N_2}-p_{N_3}} \ldots
302: \mathrm{t}_{m-1}^{p_{N_{m-1}}-p_{N_m}} \; , \eeqa where
303: $\mathrm{t}_{ij}=\mathrm{t}_i/\mathrm{t}_j$. The scale factor, but
304: not the Hubble parameter, is continuous at the transition times
305: $\ti_m$, when the ET to the boundaries is neglected. The onset time
306: of inflation, $\mathrm{t}_0$, is determined by inverting the
307: power-law inflation solution for $\varphi(\ti)$ in the initial phase
308: and noting that $\Delta x(\mathrm{t}_0)/L\ll 1$. The result is
309: \begin{equation}\label{t0}
310: \mathrm{t}_{0} \simeq \frac{2 N^2}{3M_{\rm P}} \sqrt{\frac{2td}{s}} \; .
311: \end{equation}
312: Inverting the solution for $\varphi(\ti)$ gives the transition times
313: \beqa\label{tr-time}
314: (\mathrm{t}_m - \mathrm{t}_0) M_{\rm P} = \bigg(
315: \frac{p_{N_1}(3p_{N_1}-1)}{N_1-1} e^{\frac{t}{N_1}}
316: + \sum_{k=2}^m
317: \frac{p_{N_k}(3p_{N_k}-1)}{N_k-1}
318: e^{\frac{t}{N_k-1}-\frac{t}{N_{k-1}-1}} \bigg)
319: \sqrt{\frac{st^3 d}{6}} \; ,
320: \eeqa
321: from which the number of e-foldings, generated during cascade
322: inflation, derives
323: \begin{equation}\label{Ne}
324: N_e = \ln\left(\frac{a(\mathrm{t}_f)}{a(\mathrm{t}_0)}\right) =
325: \sum_{m=1}^{K} p_{N_m}\ln (\mathrm{t}_{m,m-1}) \; .
326: \end{equation}
327:
328: The analysis of \cite{Ashoorioon:2006wc} neglected the backreaction
329: of the energy, which gets lost to the boundaries. The reason for
330: this was the still open question how the small instanton transitions
331: should be described dynamically at a fundamental level plus the
332: naive expectation that, as long, as the number of M5-branes, having
333: been absorbed by the boundaries, stays small compared to those
334: remaining in the bulk and driving inflation, this might be a useful
335: approximation. For the type I string, possessing an $SO(32)$ gauge
336: group, the small $SO(32)$ instanton is nothing but a D5-brane in ten
337: dimensions \cite{Seiberg:1996vs}. When compactified on a K3 manifold
338: from ten to six dimensions, a six-dimensional instanton arises from
339: the D5-brane wrapping the K3 which describes an effective string in
340: six dimensions (as the string theory situation is best understood in
341: six dimensions, we stick to this case for this brief discussion). At
342: a certain point in moduli space the tension of this string vanishes
343: and a singularity occurs. At this point the string's sigma model
344: coupling is of order one, hence the sigma model is strongly coupled,
345: whereas the string coupling constant could be arbitrarily small
346: \cite{Seiberg:1996vs}. The type I - heterotic duality relates this
347: type I phenomena to a singularity involving the fundamental $SO(32)$
348: heterotic string in six dimensions. Furthermore, invoking T-duality,
349: one can relate the phenomenon further to the $E_8\times E_8$
350: heterotic string in six dimensions \cite{Ganor:1996mu}, for which at
351: the singularity one of the two $E_8$ gauge couplings diverges and
352: the string associated with the small instanton in that gauge group
353: becomes tensionless, while the other $E_8$ gauge coupling remains
354: finite.
355:
356: In heterotic M-theory, compactified on K3$\times\Orb$ from eleven
357: down to six dimensions, the two $E_8$ gauge groups are geometrically
358: separated and localized on the ends of the $\Orb$ interval. For
359: these we can first of all have the same instanton in either $E_8$
360: gauge theory as for the weakly coupled $E_8\times E_8$ heterotic
361: string with the associated tensionless string when the $E_8$
362: instanton shrinks and produces a singularity. However, a novel
363: situation arises from the presence of M5-branes, which are
364: generically needed to cancel anomalies. In six dimensions, these
365: M5-branes are located as points on the compactification manifold
366: K3$\times\Orb$. An M2-brane stretches along $\Orb$ from the M5-brane
367: to each boundary. Such an M2-brane produces a string in the
368: non-compact six dimensions, and generates a tensionless string once
369: the M5-brane hits a boundary \cite{Ganor:1996mu},
370: \cite{Seiberg:1996vs}. In heterotic M-theory compactifications on
371: $\mX\times\Orb$ down to four dimensions, the small instantons are
372: described by a torsion free sheaf, a singular bundle. The singular
373: torsion free sheaf can then be smoothed out to a non-singular
374: holomorphic vector bundle by moving in moduli space
375: \cite{Ovrut:2000qi}.
376:
377: To date, unfortunately, no clear fundamental M-theory description of
378: these small instanton transitions is available, which would fully
379: describe its dynamics, including the produced tensionless strings.
380: In what follows, switching back to a four dimensional analysis of
381: the ensuing cosmology, we will therefore adopt a quantum field
382: theory description which models such a transition by coupling the
383: inflaton $\varphi$ to another field $\chi$ (which in heterotic
384: M-theory would come from the boundary). To allow for an energy
385: transfer from the inflaton $\varphi$ to the boundary field $\chi$,
386: we will introduce a suitable coupling between the two fields.
387:
388:
389:
390: \section{The Two Field Model}\label{chapter-Model}
391:
392: \subsection{The Potential}
393:
394: As mentioned above, repulsive M2-instanton interactions cause the
395: M5-branes to spread over the $\Orb$ interval until the two outermost
396: M5-branes hit the interval's boundaries. The ensuing
397: non-perturbative small instanton transition transforms the outermost
398: M5-branes into small instantons on the boundaries
399: \cite{Witten:1995gx}. This process changes the topological data on
400: the boundaries while the number $N$ of M5-branes, participating in
401: the inflationary bulk dynamics, drops to $N-2$ at each such
402: transition. The resulting features in the inflaton's potential lead
403: to interesting new observational phenomena. These have been derived
404: in \cite{Ashoorioon:2006wc} under neglect of the full backreaction
405: of the energy which gets transferred to the boundaries. To get a
406: first clue how this backreaction alters the observational signatures of \cite{Ashoorioon:2006wc}, we will now introduce a simple two field model which allows us to study the backreaction effects numerically. In our subsequent analysis we will restrict ourselves to a single collision, i.e.~a single step in the inflaton potential. Furthermore, to obtain a numerically treatable model in which we can study the cosmological implications of the ET, our model will be based on just two degrees of freedom, the inflaton $\varphi$ and a scalar field $\chi$, representing the energy absorbing boundary.
407:
408: The field $\chi$ is used to model in field theory a variety of
409: boundary barotropic fluids by endowing $\chi$ with a suitable
410: exponential potential, as we now explain. Since we do not know the
411: equation of state of the interacting tensionless strings which are
412: being produced in the small instanton transitions and into which the
413: energy of the inflaton is fed, one would like to adopt a general
414: barotropic perfect fluid with equation of state \beqa P=w \rho \; ,
415: \eeqa which will absorb part of the inflaton's energy. The influence
416: of the ET on the cosmological perturbations can then be studied for
417: various values of the parameter $w$. This way one could e.g.~model
418: radiation, matter or cosmic strings as possible effective components
419: being generated on the brane in the collision. Now in a field theory
420: framework one should rather describe the perfect fluid by a suitable
421: field. In fact, it had been shown in \cite{Lucchin:1984yf} that a
422: scalar field $\chi$ with an exponential potential \beqa
423: \label{chi-potential-1} V(\chi) \sim
424: e^{-\sqrt{\frac{2}{q}}\frac{\chi}{M_{\rm P}}} \eeqa leads to a
425: power-law evolution of the scale-factor, $a(t)\sim t^q$, even when
426: $\frac{1}{3}\leq q \leq 1$. This type of evolution would also result
427: from a perfect fluid with equation of state parameter \beqa
428: w=\frac{2}{3q}-1 \; . \eeqa Hence we will model the perfect fluid in
429: a field theory description by the scalar $\chi$ together with the
430: above exponential potential. The reader should bear in mind that the
431: energy content of the fluids are subdominant with respect to the
432: inflaton's energy and thus the transferred energy does not dominate
433: the evolution of the background. Our work thus differs from others,
434: such as \cite{Burgess:2005sb}, in that respect.
435:
436: Our potential for the two scalar field model
437: \beqa
438: V(\varphi,\chi) =
439: V(\varphi) + W(\chi,\varphi)
440: \eeqa
441: consists therefore of two
442: different components. First, there is the inflaton potential \beqa
443: V(\varphi)&=&v(\varphi) \exp\left(-\sqrt{\frac{2}{p(\varphi)}}
444: \frac{(\varphi-\varphi_s)}{M_{\rm P}}\right) \; ,
445: \eeqa
446: with $\varphi_s$ being the value of the inflaton at the step (brane
447: collision). This type of potential results from an M5-brane
448: collision in cascade inflation, see eq.~\eqref{Potential}. The
449: amplitude $V_N$ and parameter $p_N$ vary with $N$ in a collision. We
450: model this step-like variation using an inflaton dependent amplitude
451: and parameter (the index $i$ refers to the initial state before
452: hitting the step, whereas the index $f$ refers to the final state
453: after hitting the step)
454: \begin{eqnarray}\label{vwpq}
455: v(\varphi)&=&\frac{U_f+U_i}{2}+\frac{U_f-U_i}{2}\tanh\left(\frac{\varphi-\varphi_s}{\Delta \varphi}\right)
456: \\
457: p(\varphi)&=&\frac{p_f+p_i}{2}+\frac{p_f-p_i}{2}\tanh\left(\frac{\varphi-\varphi_s}{\Delta \varphi}\right)
458: \end{eqnarray}
459: with a tanh dependence, which interpolates between $-1$ and $1$ and smoothes the step, while the parameter $\Delta \varphi$ governs the smoothed step's width. As said earlier, we will, for simplicity, focus our attention on a single step (single brane collision) in the inflaton's potential.
460:
461: Second, there is the scalar $\chi$ which has to absorb a certain amount of energy in the course of the collision, as can be seen as follows. Before the collision, there exists only the inflaton, $\varphi$, with an exponential potential with
462: parameter $p_i$ and amplitude $U_i$. During inflation the inflaton's value increases until it approaches the step at a
463: value $\varphi_s$. Here the exponent drops to $p_f$ and the potential's amplitude to $U_f$. The difference between initial and final inflaton potential energy has to be absorbed by the boundary fluid, i.e.~is transferred to the field, $\chi$. The potential for $\chi$ should be of the form given in eq.~\eqref{chi-potential-1} for the reasons explained above. However, since energy is transferred to $\chi$, the amplitude of its potential will change in time and thus depend on $\varphi$. Similarly, we can expect the nature of the fluid to change during the collision as e.g.~a tensionless string component is created which hadn't been there before the collision. Therefore, we model the potential for $\chi$ by
464: \begin{eqnarray}\label{W}
465: W(\chi,\varphi)&=&w(\varphi) \exp\left(-\sqrt{\frac{2}{r(\varphi)}}
466: \frac{\chi}{M_{\rm P}}\right),
467: \end{eqnarray}
468:
469: with inflaton dependent amplitude $w(\varphi)$ and parameter $r(\varphi)$. These are again expressed in terms of tanh functions
470: \begin{eqnarray}\label{wr}
471: w(\varphi)&=&\frac{U_i-U_f}{2}\left(1+\tanh\left(\frac{\varphi-\varphi_s}{\Delta \varphi}\right)\right)\\
472: r(\varphi)&=&\frac{q+p_i}{2}+\frac{q-p_i}{2}\tanh\left(\frac{\varphi-\varphi_s}{\Delta
473: \varphi}\right)
474: \end{eqnarray}
475: to describe a smoothed out step. In this way we arrive at a coupling between $\varphi$ and $\chi$.
476:
477: Before encountering the step, the scalar $\chi$ describes a fluid with equation of state parameter $w_i = \frac{2}{3p_i} - 1$. The potential of $\chi$ is almost zero because its amplitude is almost vanishing. This changes quickly during the collision, at which the amplitude raises to $U_i-U_f$ (the ET coming from the inflaton) and the equation of state parameter soon adjusts itself at $w = \frac{2}{3q} - 1$. In what follows, we will mostly focus on the case where the inflaton's energy is transferred to an effective
478: radiation component ($q=1/2$) but will also consider matter ($q=2/3$) or a network of cosmic strings component ($q=1$). We concentrate on the radiation case first and choose for definiteness the following parameter values
479: \begin{equation}\label{par1}
480: p_i=40.138\; , \qquad p_f=36.598\; , \qquad \frac{(U_i-U_f)}{U_i}=0.068 \; ,
481: \end{equation}
482: \begin{equation}\label{par2}
483: \varphi_s=1.477 M_{\rm P}\; , \qquad \Delta \varphi=10^{-3} M_{\rm P} \; .
484: \end{equation}
485: \begin{figure}[t]
486: \includegraphics[angle=0, width=80mm, height=70mm]{p=0.5-Hubble-parameter-DeltaU=0.932.eps}
487: \includegraphics[angle=0,width=80mm, height=70mm]{p=0.5-epsilon.eps}
488: \caption{The graphs show the evolution of the Hubble parameter and
489: the first slow-roll parameter as a function of the number of
490: e-foldings. Around $N_e\simeq 10$ the inflaton's potential energy
491: $(U_i-U_f)$ is transferred to the $\chi$
492: field.}\label{Hubble-epsilon}
493: \end{figure}
494: \begin{figure}[t]
495: \includegraphics[angle=0, scale=.72]{field-evolution.eps}
496: \includegraphics[angle=0, width=75mm, height=70mm]{p=.5-d-theta-by-dN.eps}
497: \caption{The left graph shows the evolution of the fields $\varphi$
498: and $\chi$. They move upwards from left to right along the black trajectory, whose very first part coincides with the $\varphi$ axis. The right graph displays $d\theta/dN_e$ as a function of the number of e-foldings $N_e$. A sharp turn in field space at the collision is clearly visible.}\label{field-evol-dtheta-dN}
499: \end{figure}
500: The initial value of $\chi$ is chosen to be zero, $\chi_{i}=0$, such
501: that the inflaton's potential energy $U_i-U_f$ is transferred to the
502: $\chi$ field.
503:
504:
505: \subsection{Cosmological Evolution}
506:
507: Fig.~\ref{Hubble-epsilon} shows the evolution of the Hubble
508: parameter and the first slow-roll parameter of the model as a
509: function of the number of e-foldings. Around $N_e\simeq 10$ the step
510: is encountered (brane collision takes place) and the fraction
511: $(U_i-U_f)/U_i$ of the inflaton's potential energy is transferred to
512: the $\chi$ field. Since the $\chi$ direction in the total potential
513: $V(\varphi,\chi)$ is much steeper than the inflaton direction, its
514: energy content redshifts within a few e-foldings and the background
515: evolves solely under the influence of the final inflaton potential
516: \beqa V(\varphi) \rightarrow U_f
517: \exp\left(-\sqrt{\frac{2}{p_f}}\frac{(\varphi-\varphi_s)}{M_{\rm
518: P}}\right) \eeqa after that. As the slope of the potential increases
519: after the energy of $\chi$ redshifts, the slow-roll parameter,
520: $\epsilon$, settles to a slightly larger value, see the right graph
521: in fig.~\ref{Hubble-epsilon}.
522:
523: The trajectory of $\varphi$ and $\chi$ in field space and the
524: evolution of their combination $\theta$, which had been defined in
525: eq.~\eqref{theta}, is graphed in fig.~\ref{field-evol-dtheta-dN}.
526: There is a sharp turn in the classical trajectory of the fields,
527: when the inflaton, $\varphi$, transfers part of its energy to
528: $\chi$. As we will see, with this bent in the trajectory, the
529: curvature perturbations are strongly fed by entropy perturbations.
530: \begin{figure}[t]
531: \includegraphics[angle=0, width=80mm, height=70mm]{k=7.5.eps}
532: \includegraphics[angle=0, width=80mm, height=70mm]{k=10.5.eps}
533: \caption{The left and right graphs show the evolution of
534: $|Q_{\sigma}^{\rm prim}|$, $|Q_{\sigma}^{\rm ind}|$ and $|\delta
535: s^{\rm prim}|$} as functions of $N_e$ for two comoving wave-numbers that exit the
536: horizon before respectively after the ET. \label{single-mode}
537: \end{figure}
538: We will now calculate the curvature and isocurvature spectra for our
539: energy exchanging two field model.
540:
541: \begin{figure}[t]
542: \includegraphics[angle=0, width=80mm, height=70mm]{Psigma-p=0.5-V2overV1=0.932-deltaphi=10to-3.eps}
543: \includegraphics[angle=0, width=80mm, height=70mm]{Psigma-single-field-V2overV1=0.932.eps}
544: \caption{The left graph shows the adiabatic spectrum vs.
545: $\log(k/a_0H_0)$ for the modes that exit the horizon around the
546: decay time. It is assumed that the energy of the decay products
547: redshifts as radiation, $U_f/U_i=0.932$ and $\Delta \phi=10^{-3}
548: M_{\rm P}$. The right graph shows the adiabatic power spectrum for
549: the single field case with an inflaton potential having a step of
550: equal height. The oscillations in the single field case last much
551: longer than in the two field case with
552: ET.}\label{adiabatic-spectrum-p=0.5-singlefield}
553: \end{figure}
554:
555: \section{Adiabatic and Isocurvature Perturbations} \label{chapter-Spectra}
556:
557: For the two-field model described above, we integrate the equations
558: of motion for the curvature and the isocurvature perturbations ,
559: eqs. (\ref{perturbations}) and (\ref{perturbationsDelSig}), whose
560: derivation is outlined in Appendix.
561:
562: \subsection{Evolution of Curvature and Entropy Perturbations.}
563:
564: Fig.~\ref{single-mode} shows the result for the evolution of
565: curvature and entropy fluctuations for two modes: one that exits the
566: horizon before the ET at $\log(k/a_0H_0)=7.5$, and a second mode
567: which exits it after the ET at $\log(k/a_0H_0)=10.5$. The subscript
568: $0$ denotes the values of the scale factor and Hubble parameter at
569: the beginning of inflation. Since we have to deal with two
570: independent physical degrees of freedom, we perform the integration
571: twice to account for the two independent quantum fluctuations. In
572: the first run, we assume that $Q_\sigma$ is initially in the
573: Bunch-Davies vacuum and that $\delta s$ initially vanishes. In this
574: manner, we obtain the primordial curvature perturbations
575: $Q_\sigma^\mathrm{prim}$ and the induced isocurvature perturbations
576: $\delta s^\mathrm{ind}$. In the second run we interchange the
577: initial conditions for $Q_\sigma$ and $\delta s$ to obtain
578: $Q_\sigma^\mathrm{ind}$ and $\delta s^\mathrm{prim}$. The total
579: amplitude of the curvature perturbations is given by:
580: \begin{equation}\label{Qtot}
581: {|Q_{\sigma}^{\rm tot}|}^2={|Q_{\sigma}^{\rm
582: ind}|}^2+{|Q_{\sigma}^{\rm prim}|}^2
583: \end{equation}
584: and the amplitude of the total isocurvature perturbations is given
585: by an analogical expression. In the single-field case, we perform
586: just one integration.
587:
588: Deep inside the Hubble radius, the two perturbations evolve
589: independently in the same way, up to a slow overall rotation which
590: practically does not change the amplitudes or the correlations.
591: After the Hubble radius crossing $|Q_{\sigma}^{\rm prim}|$
592: approaches the value it would have obtained in absence of any
593: isocurvature perturbations. The induced perturbations,
594: $Q_{\sigma}^{\rm ind}$ and $\delta s^{\rm ind}$ are practically
595: negligible inside the Hubble radius. The former can be generated on
596: the super-Hubble scales, where its EOM in the slow-roll
597: approximation reads \cite{Starobinsky:1994mh,Gordon:2000hv}:
598: \begin{equation}
599: \frac{1}{H} \dot{\mathcal{R}} = \frac{k^2}{\dot{H}a^2} \Phi
600: -\frac{2}{H}\dot{\theta}\mathcal{S} \, ,
601: \end{equation}
602: given that the background trajectory in the field space is
603: sufficiently curved. Also $|Q_{\sigma}^{\rm ind}|$ for such modes is
604: much smaller than $Q_{\sigma}^{\rm prim}$ and consequently we do not
605: see considerable enhancement at such scales.
606:
607: The behavior of the field valued function $d\theta/dN$ is displayed in the right graph of
608: fig.~\ref{field-evol-dtheta-dN}. Before the ET, this function is
609: zero and thus no induced curvature perturbations, $|Q_{\sigma}^{\rm
610: ind}|$, are generated. As the ET from $\varphi$ to $\chi$ happens,
611: the sharp turn in the classical trajectory creates a spike in
612: $d\theta/dN$. This will lead to a considerable increment in the
613: curvature perturbations on super-Hubble scales, due to interaction
614: with isocurvature perturbations. As the energy of the $\chi$-field
615: redshifts, $d\theta/dN$ becomes zero again and the amplitude
616: $|Q_{\sigma}^{\rm ind}|$ becomes frozen. This results in an overall
617: enhancement of the amplitude of the curvature modes that exit the
618: horizon before the ET. For modes that exit the horizon after the ET,
619: the function $|Q_{\sigma}^{\rm ind}|$ undergoes some modulated
620: oscillations before becoming constant at super-horizon scales. As we
621: will see, these oscillations will imprint themselves as modulated
622: oscillations on the curvature spectrum.
623:
624: \subsection{Curvature and Entropy Spectra}
625:
626: The left plot of fig.~\ref{adiabatic-spectrum-p=0.5-singlefield}
627: demonstrates the dependence of the adiabatic spectrum on $\log(k/a_0
628: H_0)$. For comparison, we have also shown the power spectrum for a
629: single inflaton model with exponential potential possessing a step
630: of same height. This model is obtained by setting the potential for
631: the $\chi$ field, $W(\chi,\varphi)$, and therefore also the coupling
632: to $\varphi$, to zero. The height of the potential step in the
633: single field case is entirely transferred into kinetic energy of the
634: inflaton \cite{Adams:2001vc}. One point that easily gets noticed by
635: comparing these two graphs is that the modulated oscillations in the
636: power spectrum for the two field case decay much faster than in the
637: single field case. For $U_f/U_i=0.932$, the modulated oscillations
638: last for four decades in $k$ for the two field case, whereas in the
639: single field case they continue for more than eight decades. Also
640: the amplitude of those modes that exit the horizon before the decay
641: is increased by $41\%$. As mentioned above, this is due to the
642: strong interaction of the adiabatic and isocurvature perturbations,
643: when part of the inflaton's energy is transferred to $\chi$.
644: \begin{figure}[t]
645: \includegraphics[angle=0, width=80mm, height=70mm]{Psigma-p=0.5-V2overV1=0.970-V2overV1=0.932.eps}
646: \includegraphics[angle=0, width=80mm, height=70mm]{Psigma-deltaphi-compared.eps}
647: \caption{The left graph shows the curvature spectra vs.
648: $\log(k/a_0H_0)$ for $\Delta U/U_i=0.068$ and $\Delta U/U_i=0.03$.
649: The right graph shows the adiabatic power spectra vs.
650: $\log(k/a_0H_0)$ for $\Delta\varphi=10^{-2} M_{\rm P}$ (black solid
651: line) and $\Delta\varphi=10^{-3} M_{\rm P}$ (dashed grey line)
652: }\label{DeltaU-Deltaphi}
653: \end{figure}
654:
655: \begin{figure}[t]
656: \includegraphics[angle=0, width=80mm, height=70mm]{Pdeltas-p=0.5-V2overV1=0.932-deltaphi=10to-3.eps}
657: \includegraphics[angle=0, width=80mm, height=70mm]{Psigma-q-compared.eps}
658: \caption{The left graph shows the entropy spectrum vs.
659: $\log(k/a_0H_0)$ for $\Delta U/U_i=0.932$ and $\Delta
660: \varphi=10^{-3}M_{\rm P}$. The right graph shows the dependence of
661: the adiabatic spectrum on $q$.} \label{entropy-spectrum-q-compared}
662: \end{figure}
663:
664: In the slow roll approximation, the EOM of the isocurvature
665: perturbations on the super-Hubble scales can be approximated by:
666: \begin{equation}\label{solution-entropy}
667: \frac{\mathrm{d} \delta s}{\mathrm{d}N_e}\simeq -\eta_{ss} \delta
668: s\, .
669: \end{equation}
670: Since the potential is typically much more curved in the direction
671: orthogonal to the trajectory in the field space than in the
672: direction along the trajectory. Hence, the isocurvature
673: perturbations decay exponentially from their corresponding value at
674: the horizon crossing. The shape of the isocurvature spectrum is
675: given in fig.~\ref{entropy-spectrum-q-compared}. Their corresponding
676: value is sub-dominant with respect to the curvature perturbations by
677: a factor which varies between $10^{-3}$ to $10^{-4}$ at different
678: scales. One can see a slight amplification followed by modulated
679: oscillation at the scales that leave the horizon around the ET.
680:
681: We now consider the effect of changing \beqa \Delta U/U \equiv
682: (U_i-U_f)/U_i \; , \eeqa keeping all other parameters constant. The
683: left graph of fig.~\ref{DeltaU-Deltaphi} shows the adiabatic spectra
684: for $\Delta U/U=0.068$ and $\Delta U/U=0.03$. Reducing the energy
685: which gets transferred to the $\chi$ field by a factor of $\sim
686: 2.25$, decreases the amount of increment in the adiabatic
687: perturbations at wave numbers smaller than $k_{{\rm ET}}\equiv
688: aH|_{\rm ET}$ by a factor of $\sim 4.2$. The amplitude of the
689: modulated fluctuations at $k>k_{{\rm ET}}$ decreases too, even
690: though the frequency of the oscillations remains more or less the
691: same.
692:
693: We also considered the effect of changing the parameter $\Delta
694: \varphi$ which physically corresponds to the decay width of the
695: inflaton. The result is displayed in the right graph of
696: fig.~\ref{DeltaU-Deltaphi}. The smaller this parameter is, the
697: faster the energy from inflaton, $\varphi$, transfers to $\chi$. By
698: decreasing this parameter, the adiabatic power spectrum is shifted
699: slightly toward larger scales. This is intuitively understandable,
700: as in this case the inflaton energy, $\Delta U$, is exchanged faster
701: and thus the resulting oscillations start at larger scales.
702:
703: So far we have assumed that the decay product $\chi$ has a potential
704: which makes it redshift like radiation, $q=1/2$. We now relax this
705: constraint and consider how the perturbations will evolve if we
706: choose $q$ appropriate for matter, $q=2/3$, or a web of cosmic
707: strings, $q=1$. Fig.(\ref{entropy-spectrum-q-compared}) shows how
708: the curvature spectrum changes once $\chi$ decays like radiation.
709: For a fixed amount of energy transferred to $\chi$ field, increasing
710: $q$, reduces the amount of amplification of curvature spectrum at
711: wave-numbers $k<k_{\rm ET}$. Thus the least amount of amplification
712: at such scales occurs for $q=1$. The amplitude and frequency of the
713: oscillations are more or less independent from parameter $q$.
714: \begin{figure}[t]
715: \includegraphics[angle=0, width=85mm, height=70mm]{P-T-compared.eps}
716: \includegraphics[angle=0, width=70mm, height=70mm]{epsilon-compared.eps}
717: \caption{The left graph shows the tensor spectra vs. $\log(k/a_0H_0)$
718: for $\Delta U/U_i=0.932$. Solid and dashed lines respectively
719: represent the single field and two field cases. The right plot shows the
720: dependence of the slow-roll parameter $\epsilon$ on $N_e$.} \label{tensor-spectra}
721: \end{figure}
722:
723:
724: \subsection{Tensor Spectrum}
725:
726: Finally, we are investigating the tensor spectra of the energy exchanging two field inflation model. The left plot of fig.~\ref{tensor-spectra} shows the profile of gravity
727: waves for the modes that exit the horizon during the ET. For
728: comparison we have also plotted the tensor spectrum for the single field case, in which the energy of the step in the $\varphi$ potential is snatched by the kinetic energy of $\varphi$ itself. In the single field case the spectrum displays some oscillations for the modes
729: that exit the horizon around the ET. This could be understood by
730: comparing the variations of $\epsilon$ for the two cases. Tensor
731: perturbations satisfy the following equation \cite{Lidsey:1995np}
732: \begin{equation}\label{tensor-perturbations}
733: p''_{k}+\left(k^2-\frac{a''}{a}\right)p_k=0.
734: \end{equation}
735: The quotient $a''/a$ can be written in terms of the slow-roll parameter $\epsilon$ as
736: \begin{equation}\label{apprima}
737: \frac{a''}{a}=2a^2 H^2(2-\epsilon) \; .
738: \end{equation}
739: To understand its implication for the tensor spectrum, we exhibit in the right plot of fig.~\ref{tensor-spectra} the evolution of $\epsilon$ with $N_e$ for the two field
740: and single field cases. In both cases, during the non-slow-roll
741: phases, there are sharp spikes in $\epsilon$. However, for the
742: single field case, the spike in $\epsilon$ is much greater than in the
743: two field case. This large variation in $\epsilon$ in the
744: single field case leads to modulated wiggles on the amplitude of
745: its tensor spectrum and explains the difference between the single and two field cases seen in the left part of fig.~\ref{tensor-spectra}.
746:
747: This result for the single field case should be
748: contrasted with the results of \cite{Adams:2001vc}, where no observable signature in the tensor power spectrum had been observed. However, one should note
749: that the energy difference in the step was chosen much smaller in
750: \cite{Adams:2001vc} and thus $\epsilon$ would not exhibit such a
751: sharp spike.
752:
753: Furthermore, it can be seen from the left plot in
754: fig.~\ref{tensor-spectra} that the amplitude of the tensor spectrum
755: decays much faster in the single field than in the two field case.
756: This is because the liberated energy from the potential's step
757: transforms in the single field case to the kinetic energy of the
758: inflaton $\varphi$, which redshifts like $a^{-6}$. On the contrary,
759: in the two field case the released energy is absorbed by the $\chi$
760: field which redshifts much slower. This will cause the the Hubble
761: parameter in the single field case to diminish much faster. As the
762: amplitude of the tensor perturbation is roughly given by $H/2\pi$,
763: this explains the smallness of the tensor spectra in the single
764: field case compared to the larger tensor spectra of the two field
765: case which we see in the left plot of fig.~\ref{tensor-spectra}.
766:
767:
768:
769: \section*{Acknowledgments}
770:
771: A.A.~is partially supported by the Natural Sciences and Engineering
772: Research Council of Canada. A.K.~is supported by the German Research
773: Foundation (DFG) and the Transregional Collaborative Research Centre
774: TR33 ``The Dark Universe''. K.T. is partially supported by the grant
775: MNiSW N202 176 31/3844 and by TOK Project MTKD-CT-2005-029466. K.T.
776: also acknowledges support from the Foundation for Polish Science
777: through its programme HOMING.
778:
779: \appendix
780:
781: \section*{Appendix: Curvature and Isocurvature Perturbations in Two-field
782: Inflation}
783:
784:
785: The calculation of cosmological perturbations in the multi-field
786: inflation is an extensively studied topic. Nonetheless, we would
787: like to review the basic notation, results and, in particular, the
788: equations of motion for the perturbations that we solve numerically.
789: In this section, we shall follow closely the presentation of
790: \cite{Lalak:2007vi}.
791:
792: A two-scalar-field system coupled to gravity is described by an
793: action of the form
794: \begin{equation}\label{action}
795: S=\int \mathrm{d}^4 x \sqrt{-g}\left(\frac{M_{\rm
796: P}^2}{2}R-\frac{1}{2}\partial_{\mu}\varphi\partial^{\mu}
797: \varphi-\frac{1}{2}\partial_{\mu}\chi\partial^{\mu}
798: \chi-V(\varphi,\chi)\right) \; ,
799: \end{equation}
800: where $M_{\rm P}$ is the reduced Planck mass, $M_{\rm P}\equiv (8\pi
801: G)^{-1/2}$.
802: %We will first discuss linear perturbations in this
803: %theory, following the notation of
804: %\cite{Lalak:2007vi,DiMarco:2002eb}.
805: The homogeneous and isotropic FRW background with metric
806: \begin{equation}\label{metric}
807: ds^2=-dt^2+a(\mathrm{t})^2 d{\mathbf{x}}^2,
808: \end{equation}
809: is governed by the equations of motion (EOM) for the two scalar
810: fields:
811: \begin{eqnarray}\label{eom-phi}
812: \ddot{\varphi}+3H\dot{\varphi}+V_{,\varphi}&=&0\\
813: \label{eom-chi} \ddot{\chi}+3H\dot{\chi}+V_{,\chi}&=&0 \; .
814: \end{eqnarray}
815: Subscripts $\varphi$ and $\chi$ denote partial derivatives with
816: respect to the corresponding field and a dot denotes a derivative
817: with respect to the cosmic time, $t$. The gravitational background
818: evolves according to Friedmann-Lem\^aitre equations:
819: \begin{eqnarray}
820: H^2 &=&\frac{1}{3M_{\rm P}^2}\left(\frac{1}{2}\dot{\varphi}^2+\frac{1}{2}\dot{\chi}^2+V(\varphi,\chi)\right) \\
821: \dot{H} &=& -\frac{1}{2M_{\rm P}}\left(\dot{\varphi}^2+\dot{\chi}^2\right) \; ,
822: \end{eqnarray}
823: where $H$ is the Hubble parameter, defined as $H \equiv
824: \frac{\dot{a}}{a}$.
825:
826: To study the linear perturbations for this theory, we start with the
827: longitudinal gauge for the metric \cite{Mukhanov:1990me}. In the
828: absence of any anisotropic stress-energy tensor the scalar
829: perturbation of the gravitational background reads:
830: \begin{equation}\label{metric-long}
831: ds^2=-\big(1+2\Phi(\mathrm{t},\mathbf{x})\big)d\mathrm{t}^2 +
832: a(\mathrm{t})^2 \big(1-2\Phi(\mathrm{t},\mathbf{x})\big)
833: d\mathbf{x}^2.
834: \end{equation}
835: The scalar fields are also perturbed around their homogeneous
836: parts,
837: \begin{equation}\label{fields-perturb}
838: \varphi(\mathrm{t},\mathbf{x})=\varphi(\mathrm{t})+\delta
839: \varphi(\mathrm{t},\mathbf{x})~~~~~{\rm
840: and}~~~~~\chi(\mathrm{t},\mathbf{x})=\chi(\mathrm{t})+\delta
841: \chi(\mathrm{t},\mathbf{x}),
842: \end{equation}
843: These perturbations introduce an $\mathbf{x}$ dependence which was
844: not present in the homogeneous and isotropic gravitational and
845: scalar field backgrounds. To determine the perturbations, one
846: therefore has to insert the perturbed metric and scalar fields into
847: the full Einstein field equations and/or Bianchi identities, and the
848: full scalar field EOMs.
849:
850: Since the perturbations of the metric and the scalar fields are not
851: independent, it is useful to introduce gauge-invariant
852: Mukhanov-Sasaki variables
853: \begin{equation}\label{Qphi-Qchi}
854: Q_{\varphi}\equiv \delta\varphi+\frac{\dot{\varphi}}{H}\Phi~~~~~{\rm
855: and}~~~~~Q_{\chi}\equiv \delta\chi+\frac{\dot{\chi}}{H}\Phi \; .
856: \end{equation}
857: They represent the scalar field fluctuations in the flat gauge. It
858: follows from the EOMs that their Fourier-components obey the coupled
859: differential equations\footnote{Even though, we will work with
860: Fourier components hereafter, we will not show explicitly the
861: subscript $\mathbf{k}$ which would denote the fluctuation with
862: comoving wave-number $\mathbf{k}$.}
863: \begin{eqnarray}\label{eqs}
864: \ddot{Q}_{\varphi}+3H\dot{Q}_{\varphi}+\left(\frac{k^2}{a^2}+C_{\varphi\varphi}\right)Q_{\varphi}+C_{\varphi\chi}Q_{\chi}&=&0\\
865: \ddot{Q}_{\chi}+3H\dot{Q}_{\chi}+\left(\frac{k^2}{a^2}+C_{\chi\chi}\right)Q_{\chi}+C_{\chi\varphi}Q_{\varphi}&=&0
866: \; ,
867: \end{eqnarray}
868: with the following background-dependent coefficients
869: \begin{eqnarray}
870: % \nonumber to remove numbering (before each equation)
871: C_{\varphi\varphi} &=& \frac{3{\dot{\varphi}}^2}{M_{\rm P}}-\frac{{\dot{\varphi}}^2 {\dot{\chi}}^2}{2{M_{\rm P}}^4 H^2}-
872: \frac{{\dot{\varphi}}^4}{2{M_{\rm P}}^4 H^2}+\frac{2\dot{\varphi} V_{\varphi}}{{M_{\rm P}}^2 H} \\
873: C_{\varphi\chi}&=&\frac{3\dot{\varphi}\dot{\chi}}{M_{\rm P}^2}-
874: \frac{\dot{\varphi}\dot{\chi}^3}{2M_{\rm P}^4 H^2}-\frac{\dot{\varphi}^3\dot{\chi}}{2M_{\rm P}^4 H^2}+
875: \frac{\dot{\varphi}V_{\chi}}{M_{\rm P}^2 H}+\frac{\dot{\chi}V_{\varphi}}{M_{\rm P}^2 H}+V_{\varphi\chi} \\
876: C_{\chi\chi}&=&\frac{3\dot{\chi}^2}{M_{\rm P}^2}-\frac{\dot{\chi}^4}{2M_{\rm P}^4H^2}-\frac{\dot{\varphi}^2\dot{\chi}^2}{2M_{\rm P}^4 H^2}+
877: \frac{\dot{\chi}V_{\chi}}{M_{\rm P}^2 H}+V_{\chi\chi} \\
878: C_{\chi\varphi}&=&\frac{3\dot{\varphi}\dot{\chi}}{M_{\rm P}^2}-\frac{\dot{\varphi}\dot{\chi}^3}{2M_{\rm P}^4
879: H^2}-\frac{\dot{\varphi}^3\dot{\chi}}{2M_{\rm P}^4 H^2}+\frac{\dot{\varphi}V_{\chi}}{M_{\rm P}^2
880: H}+\frac{\dot{\chi}V_{\varphi}}{M_{\rm P}^2 H}+V_{\varphi\chi}
881: \; .
882: \end{eqnarray}
883: Following \cite{Gordon:2000hv}, we decompose the perturbations along
884: and perpendicular to the trajectory in the (homogeneous) field
885: space. The projection parallel to the trajectory is called the
886: instantaneous curvature, or adiabatic, perturbation whereas the one
887: orthogonal to the trajectory is termed the instantaneous
888: isocurvature, or entropy, perturbation. The velocity in the field
889: space is $\dot{\sigma} \equiv \sqrt{\dot{\varphi}^2+\dot{\chi}^2}$
890: and we can define the polar angle in the field space as
891: \begin{equation}\label{theta}
892: \cos\theta\equiv\dot{\varphi}/\dot{\sigma}
893: \end{equation}
894: It is now useful to define the following Mukhanov-Sasaki variable:
895: \begin{equation}\label{Qsigma}
896: Q_{\sigma}=\cos\theta \, Q_{\varphi}+\sin \theta \, Q_{\chi} \; .
897: \end{equation}
898: In the flat gauge, $Q_{\sigma}$ represent the field perturbations
899: along the velocity in the field space. $Q_{\sigma}$ is also related
900: to the commonly used curvature perturbation, $\mathcal{R}$, of the
901: comoving hypersurface via
902: \begin{equation}\label{R}
903: {\mathcal R}=\frac{H}{\dot{\sigma}}Q_{\sigma} \; .
904: \end{equation}
905: Similarly the isocurvature perturbation is:
906: \begin{equation}\label{s-Q}
907: \delta s= -\sin \theta \, Q_{\varphi}+\cos\theta \, Q_{\chi} \; .
908: \end{equation}
909: It describes field perturbation perpendicular to the field velocity
910: in the field space and, by analogy with $\mathcal{R}$, we can define
911: a rescaled entropy perturbation, $\mathcal{S}$, through
912: \begin{equation}\label{S}
913: \mathcal{S} = \frac{H}{\dot{\sigma}}\delta s \; .
914: \end{equation}
915: The transformations described above basically amount to introducing
916: a new orthonormal basis in the field space, defined by vectors
917: \begin{eqnarray}\label{vectors}
918: E_{\sigma}&=& (E_{\sigma}^\varphi,E_{\sigma}^\chi) = (\cos\theta,\sin \theta) \; ,\\
919: E_s&=& (E_s^\varphi,E_s^\chi) = (-\sin\theta, \cos\theta) \; ,
920: \end{eqnarray}
921: which turn out to be useful to express various derivatives of the
922: potential with respect to the curvature and isocurvature
923: perturbations. Employing an implicit summation over the indices $I,J
924: \in \{\varphi,\chi\}$, one thus finds
925: \begin{equation}\label{VI}
926: V_{\sigma}=E^I_\sigma V_{I} \; , \qquad V_{s}=E_s^I V_I \; ,
927: \end{equation}
928: and
929: \begin{eqnarray}\label{VII}
930: V_{\sigma\sigma}=E^I_{\sigma}E^J_{\sigma}V_{IJ}\; , \qquad V_{\sigma
931: s}=E^I_{\sigma}E^J_{s}V_{IJ}\; , \qquad V_{ss}=E^I_{s}E^J_{s}V_{IJ}
932: \; .
933: \end{eqnarray}
934: for the first and second derivatives.
935:
936: By combining the Klein-Gordon equations for the background scalar
937: fields, eqs.~\eqref{eom-phi} and \eqref{eom-chi}, one obtains the
938: background EOMs along the curvature and isocurvature directions
939: \begin{eqnarray}\label{BG-curv-iso}
940: \frac{\mathrm{d}\dot{\sigma}}{\mathrm{d}t}+3H\dot{\sigma}+V_{\sigma}=0,\\
941: \dot{\theta}=-\frac{V_s}{\dot{\sigma}}.
942: \end{eqnarray}
943: With help of these one can show that the EOMs for curvature and
944: isocurvature perturbations become
945: \begin{equation}\label{perturbations}
946: \ddot{Q}_{\sigma}+3H\dot{Q}_{\sigma}+\left(\frac{k^2}{a^2}+C_{\sigma\sigma}\right)Q_{\sigma}+
947: \frac{2V_s}{\dot{\sigma}}\dot{\delta s}+ C_{\sigma s}\delta s =0,
948: \end{equation}
949: \begin{equation} \label{perturbationsDelSig}
950: \ddot{\delta s}+3H\dot{\delta
951: s}+\left(\frac{k^2}{a^2}+C_{ss}\right)\delta
952: s-\frac{2V_s}{\dot{\sigma}}\dot{Q}_{\sigma}+C_{s\sigma}Q_{\sigma} =
953: 0,
954: \end{equation}
955: with coefficients given by
956: \begin{eqnarray}
957: % \nonumber to remove numbering (before each equation)
958: C_{\sigma\sigma} &=& V_{\sigma\sigma}-{\left(\frac{V_s}{\dot{\sigma}}\right)}^2
959: +\frac{2\dot{\sigma}V_{\sigma}}{M_{\rm P}^2 H}
960: +\frac{3{\dot{\sigma}}^2}{M_{\rm P}^2}-\frac{{\dot{\sigma}}^4}{M_{\rm P}^4 H^2}\\
961: C_{\sigma s} &=& 6 H \frac{V_s}{\dot{\sigma}}+\frac{2V_{\sigma} V_s}{{\dot{\sigma}}^2}+2V_{\sigma s}+
962: \frac{\dot{\sigma} V_s}{M_{\rm P}^2 H} \\
963: C_{ss} &=& V_{ss}- {\left(\frac{V_s}{\dot{\sigma}}\right)}^2\\
964: C_{s\sigma} &=&-6H\frac{V_s}{\dot{\sigma}}-\frac{2
965: V_{\sigma}V_s}{{\dot{\sigma}}^2}+\frac{\dot{\sigma} V_s}{M_{\rm P}^2 H} \; .
966: \end{eqnarray}
967: A solution to these two coupled differential equations determines
968: the metric perturbation $\Phi$, which, in longitudinal gauge, is
969: related to the comoving energy density
970: \begin{equation}\label{epsilonm}
971: \epsilon_m=\dot{\sigma}\dot{Q}_{\sigma}+\left(3H+\frac{\dot{H}}{H}\right)\dot{\sigma}
972: Q_{\sigma}+V_{\sigma}Q_{\sigma}+2V_s \delta s
973: \end{equation}
974: via the Poisson-like relation
975: \begin{equation}\label{phi-epsilon}
976: \frac{k^2}{a^2}\Phi=-\frac{1}{2M_{\rm P}}\epsilon_m \; .
977: \end{equation}
978:
979: The power spectra of curvature (adiabatic) and isocurvature
980: (entropy) perturbations are defined, respectively, as
981: \begin{equation}\label{power-spectra}
982: \mathcal{P}_{\sigma}(k)=\frac{k^3}{2\pi^2}\left\langle Q_{\sigma
983: \mathbf{k}}^{\star} Q_{\sigma \mathbf{k}'}\right\rangle
984: \delta^3(\mathbf{k}-\mathbf{k}') \; , \qquad \mathcal{P}_{\delta
985: s}(k)=\frac{k^3}{2\pi^2}\left\langle \delta s_{\mathbf{k}}^{\star}
986: \delta s_{\mathbf{k}'}\right\rangle \delta^3(\mathbf{k}-\mathbf{k}')
987: \; .
988: \end{equation}
989: The curvature and isocurvature perturbations are then evolved by
990: assuming initially, at conformal time $\tau_i$, a Bunch-Davies
991: vacuum. Therefore, when the wavelength of the two types of
992: perturbations is initially much smaller than the Hubble radius,
993: $k\gg aH$, we impose the initial conditions
994: \begin{equation}\label{initial conditions}
995: Q_{\sigma}(\tau_i)=\frac{e^{-ik\tau_i}}{a(\tau_i)\sqrt{2k}} \; ,
996: \qquad {\rm and} \qquad \delta
997: s(\tau_i)=\frac{e^{-ik\tau_i}}{a(\tau_i)\sqrt{2k}} \; .
998: \end{equation}
999: Inside the horizon these two modes are independent, because their
1000: corresponding EOMs, eqs.~\eqref{perturbations} and
1001: \eqref{perturbationsDelSig}, are independent in the limit $k \gg
1002: aH$. However, as we will see in detail later, this does not hold
1003: when the modes leave the horizon
1004: \cite{Tsujikawa:2002qx,Byrnes:2006fr}.
1005:
1006: Finally, let us introduce the two field slow-roll parameters
1007: \begin{equation}\label{slow-roll-par}
1008: \epsilon_{\varphi\varphi}=\frac{{\dot{\phi}}^2}{2M_{\rm P}H^2} \; ,
1009: \qquad \epsilon_{\varphi\chi}=\frac{\dot{\phi}\dot{\chi}}{2M_{\rm
1010: P}H^2} \; , \qquad \epsilon_{\chi\chi}=\frac{{\dot{\chi}}^2}{2M_{\rm
1011: P}H^2}
1012: \end{equation}
1013: \begin{equation}\label{eta}
1014: \eta_{IJ}=\frac{V_{IJ}}{3H^2}
1015: \end{equation}
1016: and
1017: \begin{equation}\label{epsil}
1018: \epsilon=\epsilon_{\varphi\varphi}+\epsilon_{\chi\chi}=-\frac{\dot{H}}{H^2}
1019: \; .
1020: \end{equation}
1021:
1022: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
1023:
1024: %\cite{Dvali:1998pa}
1025: \bibitem{Dvali:1998pa}
1026: G.~R.~Dvali and S.~H.~H.~Tye,
1027: %``Brane inflation,''
1028: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 450}, 72 (1999)
1029: [arXiv:hep-ph/9812483].
1030: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B450,72;%%
1031:
1032: %\cite{Kachru:2003sx}
1033: \bibitem{Kachru:2003sx}
1034: S.~Kachru, R.~Kallosh, A.~Linde, J.~M.~Maldacena, L.~P.~McAllister and S.~P.~Trivedi,
1035: %``Towards inflation in string theory,''
1036: JCAP {\bf 0310}, 013 (2003)
1037: [arXiv:hep-th/0308055].
1038: %%CITATION = JCAPA,0310,013;%%
1039:
1040: %\cite{Burgess:2006cb}
1041: \bibitem{Burgess:2006cb}
1042: C.~P.~Burgess, J.~M.~Cline, K.~Dasgupta and H.~Firouzjahi,
1043: %``Uplifting and inflation with D3 branes,''
1044: JHEP {\bf 0703}, 027 (2007)
1045: [arXiv:hep-th/0610320].
1046: %%CITATION = JHEPA,0703,027;%%
1047:
1048: %\cite{Krause:2007jk}
1049: \bibitem{Krause:2007jk}
1050: A.~Krause and E.~Pajer,
1051: %``Chasing Brane Inflation in String-Theory,''
1052: JCAP {\bf 0807}, 023 (2008)
1053: [arXiv:0705.4682 [hep-th]].
1054: %%CITATION = JCAPA,0807,023;%%
1055:
1056: %\cite{Baumann:2007ah}
1057: \bibitem{Baumann:2007ah}
1058: D.~Baumann, A.~Dymarsky, I.~R.~Klebanov and L.~McAllister,
1059: %``Towards an Explicit Model of D-brane Inflation,''
1060: JCAP {\bf 0801}, 024 (2008)
1061: [arXiv:0706.0360 [hep-th]].
1062: %%CITATION = JCAPA,0801,024;%%
1063:
1064: %\cite{Haack:2008yb}
1065: \bibitem{Haack:2008yb}
1066: M.~Haack, R.~Kallosh, A.~Krause, A.~Linde, D.~Lust and M.~Zagermann,
1067: %``Update of D3/D7-Brane Inflation on K3 x T^2/Z_2,''
1068: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 806}, 103 (2008)
1069: [arXiv:0804.3961 [hep-th]].
1070: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B806,103;%%
1071:
1072: %\cite{Chen:2008jj}
1073: \bibitem{Chen:2008jj}
1074: H.~Y.~Chen, P.~Ouyang and G.~Shiu,
1075: %``On Supersymmetric D7-branes in the Warped Deformed Conifold,''
1076: arXiv:0807.2428 [hep-th].
1077: %%CITATION = ARXIV:0807.2428;%%
1078:
1079: %\cite{Easson:2007dh}
1080: \bibitem{Easson:2007dh}
1081: D.~A.~Easson, R.~Gregory, D.~F.~Mota, G.~Tasinato and I.~Zavala,
1082: %``Spinflation,''
1083: JCAP {\bf 0802}, 010 (2008)
1084: [arXiv:0709.2666 [hep-th]].
1085: %%CITATION = JCAPA,0802,010;%%
1086:
1087: %\cite{Misra:2007yu}
1088: \bibitem{Misra:2007yu}
1089: A.~Misra and P.~Shukla,
1090: %``Area Codes, Large Volume (Non-)Perturbative alpha'- and Instanton -
1091: %Corrected Non-supersymmetric (A)dS minimum, the Inverse Problem and Fake
1092: %Superpotentials for Multiple-Singular-Loci-Two-Parameter Calabi-Yau's,''
1093: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 799}, 165 (2008)
1094: [arXiv:0707.0105 [hep-th]].
1095: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B799,165;%%
1096:
1097: %\cite{Hoi:2008gc}
1098: \bibitem{Hoi:2008gc}
1099: L.~Hoi and J.~M.~Cline,
1100: %``How Delicate is Brane-Antibrane Inflation?,''
1101: arXiv:0810.1303 [hep-th].
1102: %%CITATION = ARXIV:0810.1303;%%
1103:
1104:
1105:
1106:
1107:
1108:
1109: %\cite{Becker:2005sg}
1110: \bibitem{Becker:2005sg}
1111: K.~Becker, M.~Becker and A.~Krause,
1112: %``M-theory inflation from multi M5-brane dynamics,''
1113: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 715}, 349 (2005)
1114: [arXiv:hep-th/0501130].
1115: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B715,349;%%
1116:
1117: %\cite{Cline:2005ty}
1118: \bibitem{Cline:2005ty}
1119: J.~M.~Cline and H.~Stoica,
1120: %``Multibrane inflation and dynamical flattening of the inflaton potential,''
1121: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 72}, 126004 (2005)
1122: [arXiv:hep-th/0508029].
1123: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D72,126004;%%
1124:
1125: %\cite{Ashoorioon:2006wc}
1126: \bibitem{Ashoorioon:2006wc}
1127: A.~Ashoorioon and A.~Krause,
1128: %``Power spectrum and signatures for cascade inflation,''
1129: arXiv:hep-th/0607001.
1130: %%CITATION = HEP-TH/0607001;%%
1131:
1132: %\cite{Thomas:2007sj}
1133: \bibitem{Thomas:2007sj}
1134: S.~Thomas and J.~Ward,
1135: %``IR Inflation from Multiple Branes,''
1136: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 76}, 023509 (2007)
1137: [arXiv:hep-th/0702229].
1138: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D76,023509;%%
1139:
1140: %\cite{Krause:2007jr}
1141: \bibitem{Krause:2007jr}
1142: A.~Krause,
1143: %``Large Gravitational Waves and Lyth Bound in Multi Brane Inflation,''
1144: JCAP {\bf 0807}, 001 (2008)
1145: [arXiv:0708.4414 [hep-th]].
1146: %%CITATION = JCAPA,0807,001;%%
1147:
1148: %\cite{Ward:2007gs}
1149: \bibitem{Ward:2007gs}
1150: J.~Ward,
1151: %``DBI N-flation,''
1152: JHEP {\bf 0712}, 045 (2007)
1153: [arXiv:0711.0760 [hep-th]].
1154: %%CITATION = JHEPA,0712,045;%%
1155:
1156: %\cite{Dimopoulos:2005ac}
1157: \bibitem{Dimopoulos:2005ac}
1158: S.~Dimopoulos, S.~Kachru, J.~McGreevy and J.~G.~Wacker,
1159: %``N-flation,''
1160: JCAP {\bf 0808}, 003 (2008)
1161: [arXiv:hep-th/0507205].
1162: %%CITATION = JCAPA,0808,003;%%
1163:
1164: %\cite{Easther:2005zr}
1165: \bibitem{Easther:2005zr}
1166: R.~Easther and L.~McAllister,
1167: %``Random matrices and the spectrum of N-flation,''
1168: JCAP {\bf 0605}, 018 (2006)
1169: [arXiv:hep-th/0512102].
1170: %%CITATION = JCAPA,0605,018;%%
1171:
1172: %\cite{Kim:2006ys}
1173: \bibitem{Kim:2006ys}
1174: S.~A.~Kim and A.~R.~Liddle,
1175: %``Nflation: Multi-field inflationary dynamics and perturbations,''
1176: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 74}, 023513 (2006)
1177: [arXiv:astro-ph/0605604].
1178: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D74,023513;%%
1179:
1180: %\cite{Piao:2006nm}
1181: \bibitem{Piao:2006nm}
1182: Y.~S.~Piao,
1183: %``On perturbation spectra of N-flation,''
1184: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 74}, 047302 (2006)
1185: [arXiv:gr-qc/0606034].
1186: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D74,047302;%%
1187:
1188: %\cite{Singh:2006yy}
1189: \bibitem{Singh:2006yy}
1190: H.~Singh,
1191: %``The N-tachyon assisted inflation,''
1192: Mod.\ Phys.\ Lett.\ A {\bf 22}, 2737 (2007)
1193: [arXiv:hep-th/0608032].
1194: %%CITATION = MPLAE,A22,2737;%%
1195:
1196: %\cite{Kim:2006te}
1197: \bibitem{Kim:2006te}
1198: S.~A.~Kim and A.~R.~Liddle,
1199: %``Nflation: Non-gaussianity in the horizon-crossing approximation,''
1200: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 74}, 063522 (2006)
1201: [arXiv:astro-ph/0608186].
1202: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D74,063522;%%
1203:
1204: %\cite{Battefeld:2006sz}
1205: \bibitem{Battefeld:2006sz}
1206: T.~Battefeld and R.~Easther,
1207: %``Non-gaussianities in multi-field inflation,''
1208: JCAP {\bf 0703}, 020 (2007)
1209: [arXiv:astro-ph/0610296].
1210: %%CITATION = JCAPA,0703,020;%%
1211:
1212: %\cite{Gong:2006zp}
1213: \bibitem{Gong:2006zp}
1214: J.~O.~Gong,
1215: %``End of multi-field inflation and the perturbation spectrum,''
1216: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 75}, 043502 (2007)
1217: [arXiv:hep-th/0611293].
1218: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D75,043502;%%
1219:
1220: %\cite{Olsson:2007he}
1221: \bibitem{Olsson:2007he}
1222: M.~E.~Olsson,
1223: %``Inflation Assisted by Heterotic Axions,''
1224: JCAP {\bf 0704}, 019 (2007)
1225: [arXiv:hep-th/0702109].
1226: %%CITATION = JCAPA,0704,019;%%
1227:
1228:
1229:
1230:
1231: %\cite{Battefeld:2007en}
1232: \bibitem{Battefeld:2007en}
1233: D.~Battefeld and T.~Battefeld,
1234: %``Non-Gaussianities in N-flation,''
1235: JCAP {\bf 0705}, 012 (2007)
1236: [arXiv:hep-th/0703012].
1237: %%CITATION = JCAPA,0705,012;%%
1238:
1239: %\cite{Kim:2007bc}
1240: \bibitem{Kim:2007bc}
1241: S.~A.~Kim and A.~R.~Liddle,
1242: %``Nflation: observable predictions from the random matrix mass spectrum,''
1243: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 76}, 063515 (2007)
1244: [arXiv:0707.1982 [astro-ph]].
1245: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D76,063515;%%
1246:
1247: %\cite{Kallosh:2007cc}
1248: \bibitem{Kallosh:2007cc}
1249: R.~Kallosh, N.~Sivanandam and M.~Soroush,
1250: %``Axion Inflation and Gravity Waves in String Theory,''
1251: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 77}, 043501 (2008)
1252: [arXiv:0710.3429 [hep-th]].
1253: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D77,043501;%%
1254:
1255: %\cite{Calcagni:2007sb}
1256: \bibitem{Calcagni:2007sb}
1257: G.~Calcagni and A.~R.~Liddle,
1258: %``Stability of multi-field cosmological solutions,''
1259: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 77}, 023522 (2008)
1260: [arXiv:0711.3360 [astro-ph]].
1261: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D77,023522;%%
1262:
1263: %\cite{Langlois:2008mn}
1264: \bibitem{Langlois:2008mn}
1265: D.~Langlois and S.~Renaux-Petel,
1266: %``Perturbations in generalized multi-field inflation,''
1267: JCAP {\bf 0804}, 017 (2008)
1268: [arXiv:0801.1085 [hep-th]].
1269: %%CITATION = JCAPA,0804,017;%%
1270:
1271: %\cite{Ahmad:2008rr}
1272: \bibitem{Ahmad:2008rr}
1273: I.~Ahmad, Y.~S.~Piao and C.~F.~Qiao,
1274: %``Spectrum of Curvature Perturbation of Multi-field Inflation with
1275: %Small-Field Potential,''
1276: JCAP {\bf 0802}, 002 (2008)
1277: [arXiv:0801.3129 [astro-ph]].
1278: %%CITATION = JCAPA,0802,002;%%
1279:
1280: %\cite{Battefeld:2008bu}
1281: \bibitem{Battefeld:2008bu}
1282: D.~Battefeld and S.~Kawai,
1283: %``Preheating after N-flation,''
1284: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 77}, 123507 (2008)
1285: [arXiv:0803.0321 [astro-ph]].
1286: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D77,123507;%%
1287:
1288: %\cite{Langlois:2008qf}
1289: \bibitem{Langlois:2008qf}
1290: D.~Langlois, S.~Renaux-Petel, D.~A.~Steer and T.~Tanaka,
1291: %``Primordial perturbations and non-Gaussianities in DBI and general
1292: %multi-field inflation,''
1293: arXiv:0806.0336 [hep-th].
1294: %%CITATION = ARXIV:0806.0336;%%
1295:
1296: %\cite{Watson:2006px}
1297: \bibitem{Watson:2006px}
1298: S.~Watson, M.~J.~Perry, G.~L.~Kane and F.~C.~Adams,
1299: %``Inflation without inflaton(s),''
1300: JCAP {\bf 0711}, 017 (2007)
1301: [arXiv:hep-th/0610054].
1302: %%CITATION = JCAPA,0711,017;%%
1303:
1304:
1305: %\cite{Battefeld:2008py}
1306: \bibitem{Battefeld:2008py}
1307: D.~Battefeld, T.~Battefeld and A.~C.~Davis,
1308: %``Staggered Multi-Field Inflation,''
1309: arXiv:0806.1953 [hep-th].
1310: %%CITATION = ARXIV:0806.1953;%%
1311:
1312: %\cite{Chen:2008ada}
1313: \bibitem{Chen:2008ada}
1314: H.~Y.~Chen, J.~O.~Gong and G.~Shiu,
1315: %``Systematics of multi-field effects at the end of warped brane inflation,''
1316: JHEP {\bf 0809}, 011 (2008)
1317: [arXiv:0807.1927 [hep-th]].
1318: %%CITATION = JHEPA,0809,011;%%
1319:
1320: %\cite{Langlois:2008sg}
1321: \bibitem{Langlois:2008sg}
1322: D.~Langlois,
1323: %``Cosmological perturbations from multi-field inflation,''
1324: arXiv:0809.2540 [astro-ph].
1325: %%CITATION = ARXIV:0809.2540;%%
1326:
1327: %\cite{Ahmad:2008vy}
1328: \bibitem{Ahmad:2008vy}
1329: I.~Ahmad, Y.~S.~Piao and C.~F.~Qiao,
1330: %``Phase Diagram for Nflation,''
1331: arXiv:0809.3333 [hep-th].
1332: %%CITATION = ARXIV:0809.3333;%%
1333:
1334: %\cite{Cai:2008if}
1335: \bibitem{Cai:2008if}
1336: Y.~F.~Cai and W.~Xue,
1337: %``N-flation from multiple DBI type actions,''
1338: arXiv:0809.4134 [hep-th].
1339: %%CITATION = ARXIV:0809.4134;%%
1340:
1341: %\cite{Liddle:1998jc}
1342: \bibitem{Liddle:1998jc}
1343: A.~R.~Liddle, A.~Mazumdar and F.~E.~Schunck,
1344: %``Assisted inflation,''
1345: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 58}, 061301 (1998)
1346: [arXiv:astro-ph/9804177].
1347: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D58,061301;%%
1348:
1349: %\cite{Lalak:2007vi}
1350: \bibitem{Lalak:2007vi}
1351: Z.~Lalak, D.~Langlois, S.~Pokorski and K.~Turzynski,
1352: %``Curvature and isocurvature perturbations in two-field inflation,''
1353: JCAP {\bf 0707}, 014 (2007)
1354: [arXiv:0704.0212 [hep-th]].
1355: %%CITATION = JCAPA,0707,014;%%
1356:
1357: %\cite{DiMarco:2002eb}
1358: \bibitem{DiMarco:2002eb}
1359: F.~Di Marco, F.~Finelli and R.~Brandenberger,
1360: %``Adiabatic and Isocurvature Perturbations for Multifield Generalized
1361: %Einstein Models,''
1362: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 67}, 063512 (2003)
1363: [arXiv:astro-ph/0211276].
1364: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D67,063512;%%
1365:
1366: %\cite{Mukhanov:1990me}
1367: \bibitem{Mukhanov:1990me}
1368: V.~F.~Mukhanov, H.~A.~Feldman and R.~H.~Brandenberger,
1369: %``Theory of cosmological perturbations. Part 1. Classical perturbations. Part
1370: %2. Quantum theory of perturbations. Part 3. Extensions,''
1371: Phys.\ Rept.\ {\bf 215}, 203 (1992).
1372: %%CITATION = PRPLC,215,203;%%
1373:
1374: %\cite{Gordon:2000hv}
1375: \bibitem{Gordon:2000hv}
1376: C.~Gordon, D.~Wands, B.~A.~Bassett and R.~Maartens,
1377: %``Adiabatic and entropy perturbations from inflation,''
1378: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 63}, 023506 (2001)
1379: [arXiv:astro-ph/0009131].
1380: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D63,023506;%%
1381:
1382: %\cite{Tsujikawa:2002qx}
1383: \bibitem{Tsujikawa:2002qx}
1384: S.~Tsujikawa, D.~Parkinson and B.~A.~Bassett,
1385: %``Correlation-consistency cartography of the double inflation landscape,''
1386: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 67}, 083516 (2003)
1387: [arXiv:astro-ph/0210322].
1388: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D67,083516;%%
1389:
1390: %\cite{Byrnes:2006fr}
1391: \bibitem{Byrnes:2006fr}
1392: C.~T.~Byrnes and D.~Wands,
1393: %``Curvature and isocurvature perturbations from two-field inflation in a
1394: %slow-roll expansion,''
1395: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 74}, 043529 (2006)
1396: [arXiv:astro-ph/0605679].
1397: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D74,043529;%%
1398:
1399: %\cite{Horava:1995qa}
1400: \bibitem{Horava:1995qa}
1401: P.~Horava and E.~Witten,
1402: %``Heterotic and type I string dynamics from eleven dimensions,''
1403: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 460}, 506 (1996)
1404: [arXiv:hep-th/9510209].
1405: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B460,506;%%
1406:
1407: %\cite{Horava:1996ma}
1408: \bibitem{Horava:1996ma}
1409: P.~Horava and E.~Witten,
1410: %``Eleven-Dimensional Supergravity on a Manifold with Boundary,''
1411: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 475}, 94 (1996)
1412: [arXiv:hep-th/9603142].
1413: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B475,94;%%
1414:
1415: %\cite{Lucchin:1984yf}
1416: \bibitem{Lucchin:1984yf}
1417: F.~Lucchin and S.~Matarrese,
1418: %``Power Law Inflation,''
1419: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 32}, 1316 (1985).
1420: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D32,1316;%%
1421:
1422: %\cite{Witten:1996mz}
1423: \bibitem{Witten:1996mz}
1424: E.~Witten,
1425: %``Strong Coupling Expansion Of Calabi-Yau Compactification,''
1426: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 471}, 135 (1996)
1427: [arXiv:hep-th/9602070].
1428: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B471,135;%%
1429:
1430: %\cite{Curio:2000dw}
1431: \bibitem{Curio:2000dw}
1432: G.~Curio and A.~Krause,
1433: %``Four-flux and warped heterotic M-theory compactifications,''
1434: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 602}, 172 (2001)
1435: [arXiv:hep-th/0012152].
1436: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B602,172;%%
1437:
1438: %\cite{Curio:2003ur}
1439: \bibitem{Curio:2003ur}
1440: G.~Curio and A.~Krause,
1441: %``Enlarging the parameter space of heterotic M-theory flux compactifications
1442: %to phenomenological viability,''
1443: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 693}, 195 (2004)
1444: [arXiv:hep-th/0308202].
1445: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B693,195;%%
1446:
1447: %\cite{Witten:1995gx}
1448: \bibitem{Witten:1995gx}
1449: E.~Witten,
1450: %``Small Instantons in String Theory,''
1451: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 460}, 541 (1996)
1452: [arXiv:hep-th/9511030].
1453: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 9511030;%%
1454:
1455: %\cite{Ovrut:2000qi}
1456: \bibitem{Ovrut:2000qi}
1457: B.~A.~Ovrut, T.~Pantev and J.~Park,
1458: %``Small instanton transitions in heterotic M-theory,''
1459: JHEP {\bf 0005}, 045 (2000)
1460: [arXiv:hep-th/0001133].
1461: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 0001133;%%
1462:
1463: %\cite{Buchbinder:2002ji}
1464: \bibitem{Buchbinder:2002ji}
1465: E.~Buchbinder, R.~Donagi and B.~A.~Ovrut,
1466: %``Vector bundle moduli and small instanton transitions,''
1467: JHEP {\bf 0206}, 054 (2002)
1468: [arXiv:hep-th/0202084].
1469: %%CITATION = JHEPA,0206,054;%%
1470:
1471: %\cite{Ganor:1996mu}
1472: \bibitem{Ganor:1996mu}
1473: O.~J.~Ganor and A.~Hanany,
1474: %``Small $E_8$ Instantons and Tensionless Non-critical Strings,''
1475: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 474}, 122 (1996)
1476: [arXiv:hep-th/9602120].
1477: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 9602120;%%
1478:
1479: %\cite{Seiberg:1996vs}
1480: \bibitem{Seiberg:1996vs}
1481: N.~Seiberg and E.~Witten,
1482: %``Comments on String Dynamics in Six Dimensions,''
1483: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 471}, 121 (1996)
1484: [arXiv:hep-th/9603003].
1485: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 9603003;%%
1486:
1487:
1488: %\cite{Copeland:1997et}
1489: \bibitem{Copeland:1997et}
1490: E.~J.~Copeland, A.~R.~Liddle and D.~Wands,
1491: %``Exponential potentials and cosmological scaling solutions,''
1492: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 57}, 4686 (1998)
1493: [arXiv:gr-qc/9711068].
1494: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D57,4686;%%
1495:
1496: %\cite{Burgess:2005sb}
1497: \bibitem{Burgess:2005sb}
1498: C.~P.~Burgess, R.~Easther, A.~Mazumdar, D.~F.~Mota and T.~Multamaki,
1499: %``Multiple inflation, cosmic string networks and the string landscape,''
1500: JHEP {\bf 0505}, 067 (2005)
1501: [arXiv:hep-th/0501125].
1502: %%CITATION = JHEPA,0505,067;%%
1503:
1504: %\cite{Adams:2001vc}
1505: \bibitem{Adams:2001vc}
1506: J.~A.~Adams, B.~Cresswell and R.~Easther,
1507: %``Inflationary perturbations from a potential with a step,''
1508: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 64}, 123514 (2001)
1509: [arXiv:astro-ph/0102236].
1510: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D64,123514;%%
1511:
1512: %\cite{Starobinsky:1994mh}
1513: \bibitem{Starobinsky:1994mh}
1514: A.~A.~Starobinsky and J.~Yokoyama,
1515: %``Density fluctuations in Brans-Dicke inflation,''
1516: arXiv:gr-qc/9502002.
1517: %%CITATION = GR-QC/9502002;%%
1518:
1519:
1520: %\cite{Lidsey:1995np}
1521: \bibitem{Lidsey:1995np}
1522: J.~E.~Lidsey, A.~R.~Liddle, E.~W.~Kolb, E.~J.~Copeland, T.~Barreiro and M.~Abney,
1523: %``Reconstructing the inflaton potential: An overview,''
1524: Rev.\ Mod.\ Phys.\ {\bf 69}, 373 (1997)
1525: [arXiv:astro-ph/9508078].
1526: %%CITATION = RMPHA,69,373;%%
1527:
1528:
1529:
1530:
1531: \end{thebibliography}
1532: \end{document}
1533: