1: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2: % Massive fermion production in nonsingular superstring
3: % cosmology
4: %
5: % %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
6:
7: %\documentstyle[preprint,eqsecnum,aps]{revtex}
8: \documentstyle[aps,prd,eqsecnum,twocolumn,epsf]{revtex}
9: %\documentstyle[prd,twocolumn,eqsecnum,aps]{revtex}
10:
11: %------------------------------
12: \newcommand{\beq}{\begin{equation}}
13: \newcommand{\beqn}{\begin{eqnarray}}
14: \newcommand{\eeq}{\end{equation}}
15: \newcommand{\eeqn}{\end{eqnarray}}
16: \newcommand{\beqa}{\begin{eqnarray}}
17: \newcommand{\eeqa}{\end{eqnarray}}
18: \newcommand{\mpl}{m_{pl}}
19: \newcommand{\k}{{\kappa}}
20: \newcommand{\lmk}{\left(}
21: \newcommand{\rmk}{\right)}
22: \newcommand{\lkk}{\left[}
23: \newcommand{\rkk}{\right]}
24: \newcommand{\lnk}{\left\{}
25: \newcommand{\rnk}{\right\}}
26: \newcommand{\zk}{z_k}
27: \newcommand{\call}{{\cal L}}
28: \newcommand{\calr}{{\cal R}}
29: \newcommand{\half}{\frac{1}{2}}
30: \newcommand{\kc}{\kappa\chi}
31: \newcommand{\bkc}{\beta\kappa\chi}
32: \newcommand{\gkc}{\gamma\kappa\chi}
33: \newcommand{\gbkc}{(\gamma-\beta)\kappa\chi}
34: \newcommand{\dchi}{\delta\chi}
35: \newcommand{\dsigma}{\delta\sigma}
36: \newcommand{\dOmega}{\delta\Omega}
37: \newcommand{\Phibd}{\Phi_{\rm BD}}
38: \newcommand{\echi}{\epsilon_\chi}
39: \newcommand{\esigma}{\epsilon_\sigma}
40: \newcommand{\Phihat}{\hat{\Phi}}
41: \newcommand{\Psihat}{\hat{\Psi}}
42: \newcommand{\ahat}{\hat{a}}
43: \newcommand{\that}{\hat{t}}
44: \newcommand{\Hhat}{\hat{H}}
45: \newcommand{\gsim}{\mbox{\raisebox{-1.ex}{$\stackrel
46: {\textstyle>}{\textstyle\sim}$}}}
47: \newcommand{\lsim}{\mbox{\raisebox{-1.ex}{$\stackrel
48: {\textstyle<}{\textstyle \sim}$}}}
49: \newcommand{\square}{\kern1pt\vbox{\hrule height
50: 1.2pt\hbox{\vrule width 1.2pt\hskip 3pt
51: \vbox{\vskip 6pt}\hskip 3pt\vrule width 0.6pt}\hrule
52: height 0.6pt}\kern1pt}
53:
54: %%%%% singlefig %%%%%
55: \newcommand{\singlefig}[2]{
56: \begin{center}
57: \begin{minipage}{#1}
58: \epsfxsize=#1
59: \epsffile{#2}
60: \end{minipage}
61: \end{center}}
62: %
63: %%%%% figcaption %%%%%
64: \newenvironment{figcaption}[2]{
65: \vspace{0.3cm}
66: \refstepcounter{figure}
67: \label{#1}
68: \begin{center}
69: \begin{minipage}{#2}
70: \begingroup \small FIG. \thefigure: }{
71: \endgroup
72: \end{minipage}
73: \end{center}}
74: %
75:
76:
77: \def\beq{\begin{equation}}
78: \def\l{\label}
79: \def\eeq{\end{equation}}
80:
81: %------------------------------
82:
83: \begin{document}
84:
85: \draft
86: \twocolumn[\hsize\textwidth\columnwidth\hsize\csname
87: @twocolumnfalse\endcsname
88:
89: \title{{\bf Massive fermion production in nonsingular superstring
90: cosmology\\}}
91: \author{Shinji Tsujikawa and Hiroki Yajima}
92: \address{Department of Physics,
93: Waseda University, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo 169-8555, Japan\\[.3em]
94: e-mail:~shinji@gravity.phys.waseda.ac.jp, yajima@gravity.phys.waseda.ac.jp}
95: \date{\today}
96: \maketitle
97: \begin{abstract}
98: We study massive spin-1/2 fermion production in nonsingular superstring
99: cosmology, taking into account one-loop quantum corrections to
100: a superstring effective action with dilaton and modulus fields.
101: While no creation occurs in the massless limit, massive fermions can be
102: produced by the existence of a time-dependent frequency. Due to the
103: increase of the Hubble expansion rate during the modulus-driven phase, the
104: occupation of number of fermions continues to grow until the point of the
105: graceful exit, after which fermion creation ceases with the decrease of the
106: Hubble rate.
107: \end{abstract}
108: %\pacs{PACS 98.80.Cq}
109: \vskip 2pc
110: ]
111:
112: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
113: % %
114: \section{Introduction} %
115: % %
116: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
117:
118: With the development of superstring theory, string-inspired
119: cosmological models \cite{review} have received much attention
120: to describe the evolution of the very early stage of the Universe.
121: Most of such scenarios are based on the low-energy effective
122: field theory, which is expected to be valid at the Planck scale.
123: While a full theory is not yet established, it is important to
124: test the viability of string theories by extracting various
125: cosmological implications from them.
126:
127: Among string-motivated cosmological models proposed so far,
128: the {\it pre-big-bang} (PBB) scenario \cite{PBB} has been
129: most widely studied.
130: If one assumes that the Universe has a $T$-duality, there
131: exist two disconnected branches. One of which ($t<0$) corresponds to the
132: stage of superinflation driven by the kinetic term of the dilaton field,
133: and another ($t>0$) is the Friedmann branch where the Universe exhibits
134: standard decelerating expansion. The PBB scenario basically requires the
135: existence of nonsingular solutions which interpolates between two
136: disconnected branches \cite{GV1}. In the tree-level superstring action,
137: however, one has no-go results that singularity can not be
138: avoided \cite{tree,Kaloper}.
139:
140: In order to overcome such singularity problems,
141: Antoniadis, Rizos, and Tamvakis \cite{oneloop} involved one-loop quantum
142: corrections to the string effective action with dilaton and modulus fields,
143: and found some nonsingular solutions.
144: Since the success of singularity avoidance is mainly determined by the
145: motion of the modulus field, the allowed ranges of
146: parameters have been analyzed in the absence of the dilaton field in the flat
147: Friedmann-Robertson-Walker (FRW) background \cite{RT}
148: and the anisotropic Bianchi type-I metric \cite{KSS}.
149: In the full dilaton-modulus system,
150: several authors studied generality of singularity avoidance in the closed
151: FRW \cite{closed} and Bianchi type-I and -IX \cite{yaji} spacetimes.
152: It was found that nonsingular solutions generically exist
153: except for the Bianchi-IX case.
154:
155: From observational point of view, analysis of the perturbations predicted in
156: the PBB model is an important issue in order to test realistic string theories.
157: In this respect, many authors investigated quantum creation of scalar
158: particles such as dilaton and
159: axions \cite{GVdilaton,CEW,BH2,DGSV,VMD,DKS},
160: and production of gravitational waves \cite{BGGV,BMU,CCG}, most of which
161: exhibit different spectra compared to the standard cosmology. Another
162: interesting prediction in the PBB scenario is the generation of primordial
163: magnetic fields due to the break of the conformal invariance
164: \cite{gasperini,lemoine}.
165:
166: Recently, Brustein and Hadad \cite{fermion} studied fermion production
167: in superstring cosmology in the presence of the dilaton coupling only. It
168: was found that massless fermions are not created, since the equation of
169: fermions reduces to that in the Minkowski spacetime in the massless limit.
170: In this {\it Letter}, we investigate {\it massive} fermion production in
171: more general dilaton-modulus system whereby singularity can be avoided.
172: In fact we will show that massive fermions are nonadiabatically
173: created due to the existence of a time-dependent mass term.
174:
175:
176: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
177: \section{Nonsingular solutions}
178: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
179: Consider the following one-loop effective action of the heterotic superstring
180: theory \cite{oneloop,closed,yaji},
181: %
182: \begin{eqnarray}
183: S &=& \int d^4 x \sqrt{-g} \Biggl[ \frac12 R -\frac14(\nabla
184: \phi)^2-\frac34(\nabla \sigma)^2 \nonumber \\
185: &-& \frac16
186: H_{\mu\nu\lambda}H^{\mu\nu\lambda}+\frac{1}{16} \left\{ \lambda
187: e^{\phi}-\delta \xi (\sigma) \right\} R_{\rm GB}^2 \Biggr],
188: \label{lag}
189: \end{eqnarray}
190: %
191: written in the Einstein frame. Here $R$, $\phi$, $\sigma$, and
192: $H_{\mu\nu\lambda}$ are the scalar curvature,
193: the dilaton, the modulus, and the antisymmetric
194: tensor field, respectively. In this work we set
195: $H_{\mu\nu\lambda}=0$ and neglect the
196: curvature terms higher than the second order. The Gauss-Bonnet term,
197: $R_{\rm GB}$, is defined as
198: %
199: \begin{eqnarray}
200: R_{\rm GB}^2 =R^2-4R^{\mu\nu}R_{\mu\nu}+
201: R^{\mu\nu\alpha\beta}R_{\mu\nu\alpha\beta}.
202: \label{gauss}
203: \end{eqnarray}
204: %
205: In the presence of the last term in the action (\ref{lag}) (i.e, one-loop
206: quantum corrections), singularity problems in the tree-level action can be
207: avoided \cite{oneloop}. The coefficients, $\lambda$ and $\delta$, are
208: determined by the inverse string tension $\alpha'$ and the four-dimensional
209: trace anomaly of the $N=2$ sector, respectively. While $\lambda$ is
210: positive definite, $\delta$ can be either positive or negative.
211:
212: The function, $\xi(\sigma)$, is expressed as
213: %
214: \begin{eqnarray}
215: \xi(\sigma)={\rm ln} \left[2e^{\sigma-\pi e^{\sigma}/3}
216: \left\{ \prod_{n=1}^{\infty} \left( 1-e^{-2n\pi e^{\sigma}}
217: \right) \right\}^4 \right].
218: \label{xi}
219: \end{eqnarray}
220: %
221: Then the first derivative of $\xi(\sigma)$ in terms of $\sigma$
222: is well approximated as $\xi'(\sigma) =-(2\pi/3) \sin {\rm h\sigma}$,
223: which we use in our numerical analysis.
224:
225: It is also convenient to introduce a dimensionless function, $f(\phi,\sigma)
226: \equiv [e^{\phi}-\bar{\delta} \xi(\sigma)]/16$ with
227: $\bar{\delta}\equiv\delta/\lambda$. We normalize time and spatial
228: coordinates by the string length scale $\sqrt{\lambda}$ as
229: $\bar{x^{\mu}}=x^{\mu}/\sqrt{\lambda}$, and scalar fields as
230: $\bar{\phi}=\phi \sqrt{\lambda}$, $\bar{\sigma}=\sigma \sqrt{\lambda}$.
231: Hereafter we drop bars for simplicity.
232:
233: Adopting the flat FRW metric as the background spacetime, with $a \equiv
234: e^p$ being the scale factor, the dynamical equations for the metric and
235: scalar fields yield
236: %
237: \beqa
238: & & 8(1+8\dot{p}\dot{f})(\ddot{p}+\dot{p}^{2})
239: +4(1+8\ddot{f})\dot{p}^2+\dot{\phi}^{2}
240: +3\dot{\sigma}^{2}=0,
241: \label{eq_p}\\
242: & & \ddot{\phi}+3\dot{p}\dot{\phi}
243: -2f_{,\phi} R^{2}_{\rm GB}=0,
244: \label{eq_phi} \\
245: & & \ddot{\sigma}+3\dot{p}\dot{\sigma}
246: -\frac{2}{3}f_{,\sigma} R^{2}_{\rm GB}=0,
247: \label{eq_sigma}
248: \eeqa
249: %
250: together with the constraint equation,
251: \beqa
252: 12\dot{p}^2+96\dot{p}^{3}\dot{f}
253: -\dot{\phi}^{2} -3\dot{\sigma}^{2}=0.
254: \label{constraint}
255: \eeqa
256: %
257: Here an overdot denotes a derivative with respect to cosmic time, $t$,
258: and the Gauss-Bonnet term is given as $R^{2}_{\rm
259: GB}=24\dot{p}^2(\ddot{p}+\dot{p}^{2})$. Nonsingular cosmological
260: solutions have been found for negative values of
261: $\delta$ \cite{oneloop,closed}.
262:
263: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
264: \begin{figure}
265: \epsfxsize = 3.5in
266: \epsffile{Fig1.eps}
267: \caption{The evolution of the Hubble rate is plotted
268: when the singularity is avoided.
269: We choose $\delta=-48/\pi$, and set $\phi=\dot{\phi}=0$,
270: $\sigma=0$, $p=0$ at $t=0$. $\dot{\sigma}$
271: is determined by the constraint equation (\ref{constraint})
272: as $\dot{\sigma}=0.2$.
273: {\bf Inset:} $\phi$ and $\sigma$ vs $t$.
274: The evolution of the system is dominated by the $\sigma$
275: field around the graceful exit.
276: }
277: \label{Fig1}
278: \end{figure}
279: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
280:
281:
282: In the absence of the modulus field, the scale factor in the Einstein
283: frame evolves as $a \propto |t|^{1/3}$ during the dilaton-driven phase.
284: For negative $t$, this corresponds to the accelerated contraction,
285: $\dot{a}<0$ and $\ddot{a}<0$.
286: In the tree-level action, one needs to assume
287: that the epoch of the accelerated evolution comes to an end at some time in
288: order to make a smooth transition to another branch ($t>0$). In the
289: present scenario, however, taking into account one-loop corrections opens
290: up the possibility of the graceful exit driven by the kinetic energy of the
291: modulus field.
292:
293: We show one nonsingular solution in Fig.~1.
294: Generally the Hubble rate, $H \equiv \dot{p}$, grows as
295: $H \propto (-t)^{-2}$ during the modulus-driven phase. In order to avoid
296: singularity at $t=0$, the velocity of $\phi$ is required to be much smaller
297: than $\sigma$ during the graceful exit. If $|\dot{\phi}|$ is sufficiently
298: small around $t=0$, there always exist nonsingular solutions for $\phi<0$.
299: This is because $e^\phi \approx 0$ for negative large values of $\phi$,
300: which indicates that the singularity avoidance is practically independent
301: of $\phi$. The allowed parameter regions with respect to $\phi$
302: were precisely analyzed in Ref.~\cite{yaji}, which we do not
303: repeat it here.
304:
305: The sign of $\dot{\sigma}$ does not change during the whole evolution.
306: For $\dot{\sigma}>0$ which corresponds to the case of Fig.~1, $\sigma$
307: rapidly moves relative to $\phi$ around the graceful exit.
308: After a smooth transition at $t=0$, the dilaton freezes with $\phi \sim 0$ and
309: the modulus evolves as $\sigma \propto {\rm ln}~t$ as $t \to \infty$. The
310: Hubble rate begins to decrease for $t>0$, which asymptotically approaches
311: the Friedmann-like Universe, $a \propto t^{1/3}$ and $H \sim 1/(3t)$.
312:
313:
314:
315: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
316: \section{Massive fermion production}
317: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
318:
319: Let us consider the following action for the fermion field $\psi$
320: with bare mass $m$:
321: %
322: \begin{eqnarray}
323: S_{\rm fermion} = \int d^4 x \sqrt{-g}~
324: f \left( i\bar{\psi}\bar{\gamma}^\mu \overrightarrow{D}_{\mu} \psi
325: -m\bar{\psi} \psi \right),
326: \label{lagfermion}
327: \end{eqnarray}
328: %
329: where $\bar{\gamma}^\mu$ is the curved-space Dirac matrices, and
330: $D_{\mu} \equiv \partial_{\mu}+(1/4)
331: \gamma_{\alpha \beta} \omega_{\mu}^{\alpha
332: \beta}$ is the spin-1/2 covariant derivative, where
333: $\omega_{\mu}^{\alpha \beta}$ is the spin connection.
334: $\gamma_{\alpha}$
335: denotes the Dirac matrices in Minkowski spacetime with
336: $\gamma_{\alpha \beta} \equiv
337: \gamma_{[\alpha}\gamma_{\beta]}$.
338:
339: {}From the action (\ref{lagfermion}) we obtain the Dirac equation,
340: %
341: \begin{eqnarray}
342: \left( i \bar{\gamma}^\mu D_{\mu}-m+\frac{i}{2}
343: \frac{\partial_{\mu}f}{f} \bar{\gamma}^\mu
344: \right)\psi=0.
345: \label{dirac}
346: \end{eqnarray}
347: %
348: Since $\bar{\gamma}^0=\gamma^0$,
349: $\bar{\gamma}^i=\gamma^i/a$, and $\bar{\gamma}^\mu D_{\mu}
350: =\bar{\gamma}^\mu \partial_{\mu} +(3/2)H\gamma^0$
351: in the flat FRW background, Eq.~(\ref{dirac}) is simplified by
352: introducing a new field, $\chi \equiv a^{3/2}f^{1/2}\psi$, as
353: %
354: \begin{eqnarray}
355: \left( i \gamma^{\mu} \partial_{\mu}-ma \right)\chi=0,
356: \label{dirac2}
357: \end{eqnarray}
358: %
359: where $\partial_0$ denotes the derivative with respect to conformal
360: time, $\eta \equiv \int a^{-1} dt$.
361: We decompose the $\chi$ field into Fourier modes as
362: %
363: \begin{eqnarray}
364: \chi \left( x \right) &=& \int \frac{d^3k}{(2\pi )^{3/2}} e^{-i\vec{k}\cdot
365: \vec{x}} \nonumber \\
366: &\times& \sum_{s=\pm 1} \left[ u_s(k,\eta)a_s(k) +
367: v_s(k,\eta)b_s^\dagger (-k)\right],
368: \label{decom}
369: \end{eqnarray}
370: %
371: where $v_s(k)=C{\bar u}^T_s (-k)$ with $C$ being a constant.
372:
373: Defining
374: $u_s=\left[u_+(\eta)\varphi_s(k), s u_-(\eta)\varphi_s(k) \right]^T$ and
375: $v_s=\left[s v_+(\eta)\varphi_s(k), v_-(\eta)\varphi_s(k) \right]^T$ with
376: $\varphi_s(k)$ being eigenvectors of helicity operators, the Dirac
377: equation (\ref{dirac2}) reads \cite{GPRT,CKRT}
378: %
379: \begin{eqnarray}
380: u'_{\pm}(\eta)=iku_{\mp}(\eta) \mp ima u_{\pm}(\eta),
381: \label{u_pm}
382: \end{eqnarray}
383: %
384: which reduces to the decoupled form:
385: %
386: \begin{eqnarray}
387: u''_\pm+ \left[\omega_k^2 \pm i(ma)'\right]
388: u_\pm=0,
389: \label{decoupled}
390: \end{eqnarray}
391: %
392: where $\omega_k^2 \equiv k^2+(ma)^2$. Note that we imposed the normalization
393: conditions, $u_r^\dagger (k,\eta) v_s (k,\eta) =0$, $u_r^\dagger (k,\eta)
394: u_s (k,\eta) = v_r^\dagger (k,\eta) v_s (k,\eta) =\delta_{rs}$,
395: $|u_+|^2+|u_-|^2=2$.
396:
397: In order to diagonalize the Hamiltonian, we introduce new operators,
398: ${\hat a}(k,\eta)=\alpha_k(\eta)a(k)+\beta_k(\eta) b^\dagger (-k)$
399: and ${\hat b}^\dagger (k,\eta)= -\beta^*_k(\eta)a(k)+ \alpha^*_k(\eta)
400: b^\dagger (-k)$, where the Bogolyubov coefficients satisfy
401: %
402: \begin{eqnarray}
403: \alpha_k=\frac{E_k+\omega_k}{F^*_k}\beta_k,~~|\beta_k|^2=
404: \frac{|F_k|^2}{2\omega_k (\omega_k +E_k)},
405: \label{Bogolyubov}
406: \end{eqnarray}
407: %
408: with
409: %
410: \begin{eqnarray}
411: &&E_k =k {\rm Re} (u_+^*u_-) +ma
412: \left( 1-|u_+|^2 \right) , \\
413: &&F_k = (k/2) \left(u_+^2 -u_-^2\right) + ma
414: u_+u_- .
415: \label{EKFK}
416: \end{eqnarray}
417: %
418: Note that the canonical commutation relation leads to
419: $|\alpha_k|^2+|\beta_k|^2=1$, which restricts the occupation
420: numbers of fermions as $n_k \equiv |\beta_k|^2 \le 1$.
421: The initial conditions are chosen as $u_{\pm}(\eta_0)=
422: \sqrt{(\omega_k \mp ma)/\omega_k}$,
423: corresponding to $E_k(\eta_0)=\omega_k$, $F_k(\eta_0)=0$,
424: and $n_k(\eta_0)=0$.
425:
426: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
427: \begin{figure}
428: \epsfxsize = 3.5in
429: \epsffile{Fig2.eps}
430: \caption{The evolution of the occupation number of
431: fermions for three cases:
432: $k=10^{-2}, m=10^{-2}$; $k=10^{-1}, m=1$; and
433: $k=1, m=10^{-6}$,
434: where $k$ and $m$ are normalized by the string length scale,
435: $\sqrt{\lambda}$.
436: The $\delta$ and initial values of background quantities
437: are the same as in Fig.~1. The enhancement of fermions
438: strongly depends on the relation of two parameters,
439: $k$ and $m$.}
440: \label{Fig2}
441: \end{figure}
442: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
443:
444: In the limit of $m \to 0$, Eq.~(\ref{decoupled}) reduces to that in Minkowski
445: spacetime,
446: %
447: \begin{eqnarray}
448: u''_\pm+ k^2u_\pm=0.
449: \label{Minkowski}
450: \end{eqnarray}
451: %
452: The solution for this equation is expressed as
453: $u_{\pm}(\eta)=e^{ik(\eta-\eta_0)}$, where we used the initial conditions,
454: $u_{\pm}(\eta_0)=1$. Then we have $n_k=0$ by
455: Eqs.~(\ref{Bogolyubov})-(\ref{EKFK}), which indicates that no creation
456: occurs in the massless limit \cite{fermion}.
457:
458: When the mass of fermion is sufficiently small relative to the
459: physical wave number ($m \ll k/a$), the situation is similar to
460: the massless case. In Fig.~2 we find that fermions are hardly excited for
461: $k=1$ and $m=10^{-6}$, where $k$ and $m$ are normalized by
462: the string length scale, $\sqrt{\lambda}$.
463: Note that the acquired number of e-foldings during
464: the modulus-driven phase is not large compared to the standard inflationary
465: scenarios, e.g., if we normalize the scale factor as $a=1$ for $t=0$, $a
466: \approx 0.345$ for $t=-500$ at which the contribution of modulus begins
467: to be important relative to dilaton. This indicates that when
468: the condition, $m \ll k/a$, holds in the initial stage of the
469: modulus-driven phase, it is typically valid even around the graceful exit.
470:
471: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
472: \begin{figure}
473: \epsfxsize = 3.5in
474: \epsffile{Fig3.eps}
475: \caption{The occupation number of fermions
476: at the end of the modulus-driven phase
477: as a function of the fermion mass, $m$, for three different
478: comoving momenta, $k=10^{-4}$, $k=10^{-2}$, and $k=1$.
479: The $\delta$ and initial values of background quantities
480: are the same as in Fig.~1.
481: }
482: \label{Fig3}
483: \end{figure}
484: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
485:
486: When $m$ and $k/a$ are comparable during the modulus-driven phase,
487: massive fermions are created due to the existence
488: of the time-dependent mass term in Eq.~(\ref{decoupled}).
489: In Fig.~2 the number density of fermions continues to grow until the point of
490: the graceful exit for the cases of $k=10^{-2}, m=10^{-2}$; and $k=10^{-1},
491: m=1$. The nonadiabatic condition where particles are sufficiently excited
492: can be written as $|\dot{\omega}_k|~\gsim~\omega_k^2$, which yields
493: %
494: \begin{eqnarray}
495: H~\gsim~\frac{\left[k^2+(ma)^2\right]^{3/2}}{(ma)^2}.
496: \label{nonadiabatic}
497: \end{eqnarray}
498: %
499: In a dust or radiation dominated Universe, the Hubble rate decreases as
500: $H \propto 1/t$, which works to violate the nonadiabatic condition,
501: (\ref{nonadiabatic}). In fact, in preheating after inflation, unless an
502: inflaton decay to fermions is not taken into account,
503: the mass term $(ma)^2$ does not lead to sufficient fermion production
504: \cite{GPRT,BHP,GK,shinji}.
505: However, in the present model, the growth of the Hubble rate during the
506: modulus-driven phase assists the nonadiabatic condition to hold, which
507: results in nonperturbative particle creation solely by the time-dependent mass
508: term. The growth of the occupation number ends after the smooth transition
509: to the Friedmann-like Universe, since the Hubble rate begins to decrease
510: (see Fig.~1).
511:
512: When $m$ is much larger than $k/a$, fermion production is generally
513: suppressed. Especially for $m \gg H$ where the nonadiabatic condition
514: (\ref{nonadiabatic}) is not satisfied, Eq.~(\ref{decoupled}) is approximately
515: written as $\ddot{X}_{\pm}+m^2 X_{\pm} \simeq 0$
516: with $X_{\pm} \equiv a^{1/2}u_{\pm}$.
517: This indicates that fermions are
518: hardly created in the supermassive limit, $m \to \infty$.
519:
520: In Fig.~3 we plot the occupation number of
521: fermions at $t=0$ as a function of mass for three different momenta.
522: For each momentum, there exists a maximum $n_k$
523: for some value of $m$ ($=m_*$).
524: Since $m_*$ is typically of the same order as the each corresponding
525: momentum, the curves shift from left to right with increasing $k$.
526: If the $1/\sqrt{\lambda}$ is around the Planck scale, our results suggest that
527: massive fermions heavier than the GUT scale can be copiously produced,
528: which may play important roles
529: for the leptogenesis scenarios \cite{GPRT}.
530:
531:
532: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
533: \section{Conclusions and discussions}
534: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
535:
536: We have investigated the production of massive spin-1/2 fermions
537: in nonsingular
538: superstring cosmology with dilaton and modulus fields. The existence of
539: the modulus coupled to the Gauss-Bonnet curvature invariant leads to a smooth
540: transition from the modulus-driven accelerated expansion phase toward the
541: Friedmann-like Universe. Since the Hubble rate increases before the
542: graceful exit, this makes it possible to produce massive fermions in terms of
543: nonadiabatic change of their frequencies. In particular, fermions are most
544: efficiently excited when the bare mass $m$ is comparable to the physical
545: momentum, $k/a$. In both massless and supermassive limits,
546: fermion creation is strongly suppressed.
547:
548: The occupation number of fermions achieved
549: by the time-dependent mass term $(ma)^2$ is typically smaller
550: than the Pauli bound, $n_k=1$, even at the end of
551: the modulus-driven phase. If one introduces the Yukawa couplings
552: between two scalar fields $\phi, \sigma$ and the fermion $\psi$
553: such as $h_1\phi \bar{\psi}\psi$ and $h_2\sigma \bar{\psi}\psi$,
554: the effective mass of fermions is expressed as \cite{shinji}
555: %
556: \begin{eqnarray}
557: m_{\rm eff}=m+h_1\phi+h_2\sigma.
558: \label{effmass}
559: \end{eqnarray}
560: %
561: In this case it is known that particle creation is most efficient when
562: $m_{\rm eff}$ vanishes, leading to $n_k \sim 1$
563: both in the context of inflation
564: \cite{CKRT} and preheating \cite{GPRT,BHP,GK,shinji}. In the present
565: scenario, since $m_{\rm eff}$ vanishes or becomes close to zero depending
566: on two coupling constants, $h_1$ and $h_2$, this may further strengthen
567: nonadiabatic amplification of fermions. We leave to future work about the
568: precise investigation of this issue.
569:
570: Although we have restricted ourselves in spin-1/2 fermions satisfying the
571: Dirac equation, nonthermal production of gravitinos (spin-3/2 fermions) has
572: recently become an issue of great importance \cite{gravitinos}. Gravitinos
573: have both helicity-3/2 and -1/2 states. While the helicity-3/2 mode
574: reduces to the form of the Dirac equation, the helicity-1/2 mode behaves
575: like the goldstino in global supersymmetric limit. It was shown in
576: Ref.~\cite{fermion} that the latter mode also reduces to the same form as
577: the former mode in the massless limit by assuming the power-law evolution
578: of the scale factor in the standard PBB scenario, which means that creation
579: of massless gravitinos is highly suppressed. However, the situation will
580: change for {\it massive} gravitinos, in which case the existence of
581: time-dependent mass terms may lead to the amplification of gravitinos
582: during the modulus-driven phase. It is certainly of interest to study
583: gravitino production in realistic nonsingular cosmology, since this
584: provides a powerful mechanism to distinguish between different models of
585: string theories and regions of the parameter space, together with the CMB
586: constraint by scalar and tensor metric perturbations produced during the
587: graceful exit \cite{KS2}.
588:
589:
590:
591: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
592: \section*{ACKOWLEDGMENTS}
593: We thank Bruce A. Bassett and Kei-ichi Maeda for useful discussions. This
594: work was supported by the Waseda University Grant for Special Research
595: Projects.
596: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
597:
598: % references
599:
600: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
601:
602:
603: %superstring cosmology
604: \bibitem{review}
605: J. E. Lidsey, D. Wands and E. J. Copeland,
606: %Superstring cosmology
607: Phys. Rep. {\bf 337}, 343 (2000).
608:
609: \bibitem{PBB}
610: G. Veneziano,
611: %Scale factor duality for classical and quantum strings
612: Phys. Lett. B {\bf 265}, 287 (1991);
613: M. Gasperini and G. Veneziano,
614: %Pre big bang in string cosmology,
615: Astropart. Phys. {\bf 1}, 317 (1993); Mod.
616: Phys. Lett. {\bf A 8}, 3701 (1993).
617:
618: \bibitem{GV1}
619: M. Gasperini and G. Veneziano,
620: Phys. Lett. B {\bf 329}, 429 (1994).
621:
622: \bibitem{tree}
623: R. Easther, K. Maeda, and D. Wands,
624: %Tree-level String Cosmology
625: Phys. Rev. D {\bf 53}, 4247 (1996);.
626:
627: \bibitem{Kaloper}
628: N. Kaloper, R. Madden, and K. A. Olive,
629: %Axions and the Graceful Exit Problem in String Cosmology
630: Nucl. Phys. {\bf B452}, 677 (1995);
631: Phys. Lett. B {\bf 371}, 34 (1996).
632:
633: \bibitem{oneloop}
634: I. Antoniadis, J. Rizos, and K. Tamvakis,
635: %Singularity-free cosmological solutions of the superstring effective action
636: Nucl. Phys. {\bf B415}, 497 (1994).
637:
638: \bibitem{RT}
639: Rizos and Tamvakis,
640: Phys. Lett. B {\bf 326}, 57 (1994).
641:
642: \bibitem{KSS}
643: S. Kawai, M. Sakagami, and J. Soda,
644: %Instability of 1-loop superstring cosmology
645: Phys. Lett. B {\bf 437}, 284 (1998);
646: S. Kawai and J. Soda,
647: %Nonsingular Bianchi type I cosmological solutions
648: %from 1-loop superstring effective action
649: Phys. Rev. D {\bf 59}, 063506 (1999).
650:
651: \bibitem{closed}
652: R. Easther and K. Maeda,
653: %One-Loop Superstring Cosmology and the Non-Singular Universe
654: Phys. Rev. D {\bf 54}, 7252 (1996).
655:
656: \bibitem{yaji}
657: H. Yajima, K. Maeda, and H. Ohkubo,
658: %Generality of Singularity Avoidance in Superstring Theory:
659: %Anisotropic Case
660: Phys. Rev. D {\bf 62}, 024020 (2000).
661:
662: %particle creation in superstring theory
663: \bibitem{GVdilaton}
664: M. Gasperini and G. Veneziano,
665: %Dilaton Production in String Cosmology
666: Phys. Rev. D {\bf 50}, 2519 (1994).
667:
668: \bibitem{CEW}
669: E. J. Copeland, R. Easther, and D. Wands,
670: % Vacuum fluctuations in axion-dilaton cosmologies
671: Phys. Rev. D {\bf 56}, 874 (1997).
672:
673: \bibitem{BH2}
674: R. Brustein and M. Hadad,
675: % Particle production in string cosmology models.
676: Phys. Rev. D {\bf 57}, 725 (1998).
677:
678:
679: \bibitem{DGSV}
680: R. Durrer, M. Gasperini, M. Sakellariadou, and G. Veneziano,
681: % Seeds of large-scale anisotropy in string cosmology
682: Phys. Rev. D {\bf 59}, 043511 (1999).
683:
684: \bibitem{VMD}
685: F. Vernizzi, A. Melchiorri, and R. Durrer,
686: %CMB anisotropies from pre-big bang cosmology
687: Phys. Rev. D {\bf 63}, 063501 (2001).
688:
689: \bibitem{DKS}
690: R. Durrer, K. E. Kunze, and M. Sakellariadou,
691: % Particle Creation in Pre-Big-Bang Cosmology:
692: %theory and observational consequences
693: astro-ph/0010408 (2000).
694:
695: % gravitational waves
696: \bibitem{BGGV}
697: R. Brustein, M. Gasperini, M. Giovannini and G. Veneziano,
698: %Relic gravitational waves from string cosmology
699: Phys. Lett. B {\bf 361}, 45 (1995).
700:
701: \bibitem{BMU}
702: A. Buonanno, M. Maggiore, and C. Ungarelli,
703: %Spectrum of relic gravitational waves in string cosmology
704: Phys. Rev. D {\bf 55}, 3330 (1997).
705:
706: \bibitem{CCG}
707: C. Cartier, E. J. Copeland, and M. Gasperini,
708: %Gravitational waves in non-singular string cosmologies
709: gr-qc/0101019 (2001).
710:
711: %magnetic field in superstring theory
712: \bibitem{gasperini}
713: M. Gasperini, M. Giovannini, and G. Veneziano,
714: %Primordial magnetic fields from string cosmology
715: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 75}, 3796 (1995).
716:
717: \bibitem{lemoine}
718: D. Lemoine and M. Lemoine,
719: %Primordial magnetic fields in string cosmology
720: Phys. Rev. D {\bf 52}, 1955 (1995).
721:
722: % fermion_string cosmology
723: \bibitem{fermion}
724: R. Brustein and M. Hadad,
725: %Production of fermions in models of string cosmology
726: Phys. Lett. B {\bf 477}, 263 (2000).
727:
728: % fermion_general
729: \bibitem{GPRT}
730: G. F. Giudice, M. Peloso, A. Riotto, and I. I. Tkachev,
731: %Production of Massive Fermions at Preheating and Leptogenesis
732: JHEP {\bf 9908}, 014 (1999);
733: M. Peloso and L. Sorbo, JHEP {\bf 0005}, 016 (2000).
734:
735: \bibitem{CKRT}
736: D. Chung, E. Kolb, A. Riotto, and I. I. Tkachev,
737: %Probing Planckian physics: resonant production of particles
738: %during inflation and features in the primordial power spectrum
739: Phys. Rev. D {\bf 62}, 043508 (2000).
740:
741: \bibitem{BHP}
742: J. Baacke, K. Heitman, and C. Patzold,
743: %Nonequilibrium dynamics of fermions in a spatially
744: %homogeneous scalar background field
745: Phys. Rev. D {\bf 58}, 125013 (1998).
746:
747: \bibitem{GK}
748: P. B. Greene and L. Kofman,
749: %Preheating of Fermions
750: Phys. Lett. B {\bf 448}, 6 (1999);
751: %Theory of fermionic preheating
752: Phys. Rev. D {\bf 62}, 123516 (2000).
753:
754: \bibitem{shinji}
755: S. Tsujikawa, B. A. Bassett, and F. Viniegra,
756: %Multi-field fermionic preheating
757: JHEP {\bf 0008}, 019 (2000).
758:
759: % gravitinos_general
760: \bibitem{gravitinos}
761: A. L. Maroto and A. Mazumdar,
762: %Production of spin 3/2 particles from vacuum fluctuations
763: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 84}, 1655 (2000);
764: R. Kallosh, L. Kofman, A. Linde, and A. Van Proeyen,
765: %Gravitino Production After Inflation
766: Phys. Rev. D {\bf 61}, 103503 (2000);
767: %Superconformal Symmetry, Supergravity and Cosmology
768: Class. Quant. Grav. {\bf 17}, 4269 (2000);
769: G. F. Giudice, I. I. Tkachev, and A. Riotto,
770: %Non-Thermal Production of Dangerous Relics in the
771: %Early Universe
772: JHEP {\bf 9908}, 009 (1999);
773: G. F. Giudice, A. Riotto, and I. I. Tkachev,
774: %Thermal and Non-Thermal Production of Gravitinos
775: %in the Early Universe
776: JHEP {\bf 9911}, 036 (1999);
777: D. H. Lyth and H. B. Kim,
778: %Gravitino creation by an oscillating scalar field
779: hep-ph/0011262 (2000).
780:
781: \bibitem{KS2}
782: S. Kawai and J. Soda,
783: %Evolution of Fluctuations during Graceful Exit in String Cosmology
784: Phys. Lett. B {\bf 460}, 41 (1999).
785:
786: \end{thebibliography}
787:
788: \end{document}
789:
790: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
791: %%% uu-files (figures) %%%%
792: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
793:
794: