1: \documentstyle[prd,aps,preprint,psfig]{revtex}
2:
3: %\topmargin -2.8cm
4:
5: %\documentstyle[prd,aps,twocolumn,psfig]{revtex}
6:
7: %%--------------------------
8: %% Command Abbreviations
9: %%--------------------------
10:
11: \newcommand{\CA}{{\cal A}}
12: \newcommand{\CB}{{\cal B}}
13: \newcommand{\CC}{{\cal C}}
14: \newcommand{\CD}{{\cal D}}
15: \newcommand{\CE}{{\cal E}}
16: \newcommand{\CF}{{\cal F}}
17: \newcommand{\CG}{{\cal G}}
18: \newcommand{\CH}{{\cal H}}
19: \newcommand{\CI}{{\cal I}}
20: \newcommand{\CJ}{{\cal J}}
21: \newcommand{\CK}{{\cal K}}
22: \newcommand{\CL}{{\cal L}}
23: \newcommand{\CM}{{\cal M}}
24: \newcommand{\CN}{{\cal N}}
25: \newcommand{\CO}{{\cal O}}
26: \newcommand{\CP}{{\cal P}}
27: \newcommand{\CQ}{{\cal Q}}
28: \newcommand{\CR}{{\cal R}}
29: \newcommand{\CS}{{\cal S}}
30: \newcommand{\CT}{{\cal T}}
31: \newcommand{\CU}{{\cal U}}
32: \newcommand{\CV}{{\cal V}}
33: \newcommand{\CW}{{\cal W}}
34: \newcommand{\CX}{{\cal X}}
35: \newcommand{\CY}{{\cal Y}}
36: \newcommand{\CZ}{{\cal Z}}
37:
38: \newcommand{\bear}{\begin{array}} \newcommand{\eear}{\end{array}}
39: \newcommand{\bea}{\begin{eqnarray}} \newcommand{\eea}{\end{eqnarray}}
40: \newcommand{\beq}{\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\eeq}{\end{equation}}
41: \newcommand{\bef}{\begin{figure}} \newcommand{\eef}{\end{figure}}
42: \newcommand{\bec}{\begin{center}} \newcommand{\eec}{\end{center}}
43: \newcommand{\non}{\nonumber} \newcommand{\eqn}[1]{\beq {#1}\eeq}
44: \newcommand{\lmk}{\left(} \newcommand{\rmk}{\right)}
45: \newcommand{\lkk}{\left[} \newcommand{\rkk}{\right]}
46: \newcommand{\lhk}{\left \{ } \newcommand{\rhk}{\right \} }
47: \newcommand{\lla}{\left \langle } \newcommand{\rra}{\right \rangle }
48: \newcommand{\del}{\partial} \newcommand{\abs}[1]{\vert{#1}\vert}
49: \newcommand{\vect}[1]{\mbox{\boldmath${#1}$}}
50: \newcommand{\bib}{\bibitem} \newcommand{\new}{\newblock}
51: \newcommand{\la}{\left\langle} \newcommand{\ra}{\right\rangle}
52: \newcommand{\bfx}{{\bf x}} \newcommand{\bfk}{{\bf k}}
53: \newcommand{\gtilde} {~ \raisebox{-1ex}{$\stackrel{\textstyle >}{\sim}$} ~}
54: \newcommand{\ltilde} {~ \raisebox{-1ex}{$\stackrel{\textstyle <}{\sim}$} ~}
55: \newcommand{\gr}{g_{\rm R}}
56: \newcommand{\gi}{g_{\rm I}}
57:
58: %%-------------------------
59: %% Journal
60: %%-------------------------
61:
62: \def\IB#1#2#3{{\bf #1}, #2 (19#3)}
63: \def\IBB#1#2#3{{\bf #1}, #2 (20#3)}
64: \def\IBID#1#2#3{{\it ibid}. {\bf #1}, #2 (19#3)}
65: \def\IBIDD#1#2#3{{\it ibid}. {\bf #1}, #2 (20#3)}
66: \def\AA#1#2#3{Astron. Astrophys. {\bf #1}, #2 (19#3)}
67: \def\AP#1#2#3{Ann. Phys. {\bf #1}, #2 (19#3)}
68: \def\APJ#1#2#3{Astrophys. J. {\bf #1}, #2 (19#3)}
69: \def\APJL#1#2#3{Astrophys. J. Lett. {\bf #1}, L#2 (19#3)}
70: \def\APJLL#1#2#3{Astrophys. J. Lett. {\bf #1}, L#2 (20#3)}
71: \def\ARAA#1#2#3{Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. {\bf#1}, #2 (19#3)}
72: \def\ARNP#1#2#3{Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. {\bf#1}, #2 (19#3)}
73: \def\CMP#1#2#3{Comm. Math. Phys. {\bf #1}, #2 (19#3)}
74: \def\CP#1#2#3{Computers in Physics {\bf #1}, #2 (19#3)}
75: \def\CQG#1#2#3{Class. Quantum Grav. {\bf #1}, #2 (19#3)}
76: \def\CQGG#1#2#3{Class. Quantum Grav. {\bf #1}, #2 (20#3)}
77: \def\IJMPA#1#2#3{Int. J. Mod. Phys. {\bf A#1}, #2 (19#3)}
78: \def\IJMPD#1#2#3{Int. J. Mod. Phys. {\bf D#1}, #2 (19#3)}
79: \def\IJTP#1#2#3{Int. J. Thor. Phys. {\bf #1}, #2 (19#3)}
80: \def\JCP#1#2#3{J. Chem. Phys. {\bf #1}, #2 (19#3)}
81: \def\JETP#1#2#3{JETP. {\bf #1}, #2 (19#3)}
82: \def\JHEP#1#2#3{J. High Energy Phys. {\bf #1}, #2 (19#3)}
83: \def\JL#1#2#3{JETP. Lett. {\bf #1}, #2 (19#3)}
84: \def\JMP#1#2#3{J. Math. Phys. {\bf #1}, #2 (19#3)}
85: \def\JP#1#2#3{J. Phys. A {\bf #1}, #2 (19#3)}
86: \def\MNRAS#1#2#3{Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. {\bf #1}, #2 (19#3)}
87: \def\MPLA#1#2#3{Mod. Phys. Lett. A {\bf #1}, #2 (19#3)}
88: \def\NAT#1#2#3{Nature (London) {\bf #1}, #2 (19#3)}
89: \def\NATT#1#2#3{Nature (London) {\bf #1}, #2 (20#3)}
90: \def\NPB#1#2#3{Nucl. Phys. {\bf B#1}, #2 (19#3)}
91: \def\NPBB#1#2#3{Nucl. Phys. {\bf B#1}, #2 (20#3)}
92: \def\NPPS#1#2#3{Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. {\bf #1}, #2 (19#3)}
93: \def\PLB#1#2#3{Phys. Lett. B {\bf #1}, #2 (19#3)}
94: \def\PLBB#1#2#3{Phys. Lett. B {\bf #1}, #2 (20#3)}
95: \def\PLBold#1#2#3{Phys. Lett. {\bf#1B}, #2 (19#3)}
96: \def\PR#1#2#3{Phys. Rev. {\bf #1}, #2 (19#3)}
97: \def\PRA#1#2#3{Phys. Rev. A {\bf #1}, #2 (19#3)}
98: \def\PRD#1#2#3{Phys. Rev. D {\bf #1}, #2 (19#3)}
99: \def\PRDD#1#2#3{Phys. Rev. D {\bf #1}, #2 (20#3)}
100: \def\PRE#1#2#3{Phys. Rev. E {\bf #1}, #2 (19#3)}
101: \def\PRL#1#2#3{Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf#1}, #2 (19#3)}
102: \def\PRLL#1#2#3{Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf#1}, #2 (20#3)}
103: \def\PRS#1#2#3{Proc. Roy. Soc. {\bf A#1}, #2 (19#3)}
104: \def\PRT#1#2#3{Phys. Rep. {\bf#1}, #2 (19#3)}
105: \def\PTP#1#2#3{Prog. Theor. Phys. {\bf #1}, #2 (19#3)}
106: \def\PZE#1#2#3{Pis'ma Zh. \'Eksp. Teor. Fiz. {\bf#1}, #2 (19#3)}
107: \def\RMP#1#2#3{Rev. Mod. Phys. {\bf #1}, #2 (19#3)}
108: \def\SJNP#1#2#3{Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. {\bf #1}, #2 (19#3)}
109: \def\SPS#1#2#3{Sov. Phys. Solid State {\bf #1}, #2 (19#3)}
110: \def\YF#1#2#3{Yad. Fiz. {\bf #1}, #2 (19#3)}
111: \def\ZKTF#1#2#3{Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. {\bf #1}, #2 (19#3)}
112: \def\ZP#1#2#3{Zeit. f\"ur Physik {\bf C#1}, #2 (19#3)}
113:
114: \begin{document}
115:
116: %\twocolumn[\hsize\textwidth\columnwidth\hsize\csname
117: %@twocolumnfalse\endcsname
118: %%
119: %%
120: \tighten
121: \draft
122: %%
123: \title{Density Fluctuations and Primordial Black Hole Formation
124: in Natural Double Inflation in Supergravity}
125: %%
126: %%
127: %%
128: %
129: \author{Masahide Yamaguchi}
130: \address{Research Center for the Early Universe, University of Tokyo,
131: Tokyo 113-0033, Japan}
132: %%%
133:
134: \date{\today}
135: %%
136:
137: \maketitle
138:
139: \begin{abstract}
140: We investigate the recently proposed natural double inflation
141: model in supergravity. Chaotic inflation first takes place by
142: virtue of the Nambu-Goldstone-like shift symmetry. During chaotic
143: inflation, an initial value of second inflation (new inflation) is
144: set, which is adequately far from the local maximum of the
145: potential due to the small linear term in the K\"ahler potential.
146: Then, primordial fluctuations within the present horizon scale may
147: be produced during both inflations. Primordial fluctuations
148: responsible for anisotropies of the cosmic microwave background
149: radiation and the large scale structure are produced during
150: chaotic inflation, while fluctuations on smaller scales are
151: produced during new inflation. Because of the peculiar nature of
152: new inflation, they can become as large as $10^{-1}$-$10^{-2}$,
153: which may lead to the formation of primordial black holes.
154: \end{abstract}
155:
156: \pacs{PACS number(s): 98.80.Cq,04.65.+e,12.60.Jv}
157:
158: %]
159:
160: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
161: \section{Introduction}
162: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
163:
164: \label{sec:int}
165:
166: Inflation is the most attractive mechanism to generate primordial
167: density fluctuations responsible for anisotropies of the cosmic
168: microwave background radiation (CMB) and the large scale structure, in
169: addition to solving the flatness and the horizon problem
170: \cite{inflation}. Realistic inflation models should be constructed in
171: the context of the supersymmetric theory, especially, its local
172: version, supergravity (SUGRA) \cite{LR} because supersymmetry (SUSY)
173: guarantees the flatness of the inflaton against radiative corrections
174: and gives a natural solution to the hierarchy problem between the
175: inflationary scale and the electroweak scale \cite{SUSY}.
176:
177: New inflation \cite{newinf} is very attractive in the context of SUGRA
178: because it takes place at a low energy scale and naturally leads to a
179: sufficiently low reheating temperature to avoid the overproduction of
180: gravitinos. However, roughly speaking, new inflation has two severe
181: problems \cite{inflation}. One is the initial value problem: that is,
182: the inflaton must be fine-tuned near the local maximum of the
183: potential for sufficient inflation. The other is the flatness
184: (longevity) problem: that is, why the universe lives so long beyond
185: the Planck time. Asaka, Kawasaki, and the present author \cite{AKY}
186: found that, due to gravitationally suppressed interactions with
187: particles in the thermal bath, the inflaton can dynamically go to the
188: local maximum of its potential. However, the other problem still
189: exists unless the universe is open at the beginning. Izawa, Kawasaki,
190: and Yanagida \cite{IKY} considered another type of inflation (called
191: preinflation) which takes place before new inflation and drives the
192: inflaton for new inflation dynamically toward the local maximum of its
193: potential. If preinflation is chaotic inflation \cite{chaoinf}, the
194: longevity problem is solved too.
195:
196: It, however, is believed to be difficult to realize chaotic inflation
197: in SUGRA. This is mainly because a scalar potential in minimal SUGRA
198: has an exponential factor with the form $\exp(|\phi|^2/M_G^2)$ so that
199: any scalar field $\phi$ cannot take a value much larger than the
200: reduced Planck scale $M_G\simeq 2.4\times 10^{18}$ GeV. Several
201: supergravity chaotic inflation models were proposed by use of
202: functional degrees of freedom of the K\"ahler potential in SUGRA
203: \cite{GL,MSY2}. But, there are no symmetry reasons to have such
204: proposed forms. Recently, Kawasaki, Yanagida, and the present author
205: \cite{KYY} proposed a natural model of chaotic inflation in SUGRA by
206: use of the Nambu-Goldstone-like shift symmetry. Motivated by this
207: model, Yokoyama and the present author \cite{YY} considered chaotic
208: inflation followed by new inflation, where chaotic inflation first
209: takes place around the Planck scale to solve the longevity problem and
210: gives an adequate initial condition for new inflation. Thus double
211: inflation has been proposed as a solution of initial condition
212: problems of some types of inflation \cite{IKY,doublehyb}. (See Refs.
213: \cite{inithyb,doublehyb} for the initial value problem and its
214: solution of hybrid inflation.)
215:
216: On the other hand, double inflation is also motivated by observational
217: results. One motivation is to reconcile predicted spectra with
218: observations of the large scale structure \cite{double}. It is known
219: that a standard cold dark matter (CDM) model in a flat universe with a
220: nearly scale-invariant spectrum cannot reproduce the observation of
221: the large scale structure. Furthermore, the recent observations of
222: anisotropies of the CMB by the BOOMERANG experiment \cite{BOOMERANG}
223: and MAXIMA experiment \cite{MAXIMA} found a relatively low second
224: acoustic peak. Another motivation is to produce primordial black holes
225: (PBHs) \cite{PBH,PBH2,PBH3}. Massive compact halo objects (MACHOs) are
226: observed through gravitational microlensing effects \cite{MACHO},
227: which are a possible candidate of dark matter. Furthermore, PBHs
228: evaporating now may be a source of antiproton flux observed by the
229: BESS experiment \cite{BESS} or responsible for short gamma ray bursts
230: (GRBs) \cite{gamma}. Though many double inflations have been
231: considered, they are often discussed in a simple toy model with two
232: massive scalar fields. However, a natural double inflation model in
233: SUGRA is recently proposed \cite{YAMA}, where there are no initial
234: condition problems and the model parameters are natural in the 't
235: Hooft sense \cite{tHooft}. In this model, chaotic inflation takes
236: place first of all, during which an initial value of new inflation is
237: dynamically set due to the supergravity effects. It can be adequately
238: far from the local maximum of the potential due to the small linear
239: term of the inflaton in the K\"ahler potential. Therefore primordial
240: density fluctuations responsible for the observable universe can be
241: attributed to both inflations, that is, chaotic inflation produces
242: primordial fluctuations on large cosmological scales and new inflation
243: on smaller scales.\footnote{In Ref. \cite{YY} the initial value of new
244: inflation is so close to the local maximum of the potential for new
245: inflation that the universe enters a self-regenerating stage
246: \cite{eternal,sr}. Therefore primordial fluctuations responsible for
247: the observable universe are produced only during new inflation.
248: Furthermore, even if chaotic inflation proposed in Ref. \cite{KYY} is
249: adopted as preinflation in Ref. \cite{IKY}, the same situation occurs,
250: that is, second inflation becomes eternal inflation because the
251: superpotential in Ref. \cite{KYY} vanishes during chaotic inflation.}
252: The energy scale of new inflation becomes of the same order as the
253: initial value of new inflation so that produced density fluctuations
254: may become as large as the order of unity due to the peculiar nature
255: of new inflation, which straightforwardly may lead to PBHs formation.
256:
257: In this paper we minutely investigate the recently proposed natural
258: double inflation model in supergravity, especially, primordial density
259: fluctuations produced during inflation. Then, the PBHs formation is
260: discussed.
261:
262:
263: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
264: \section{Model and dynamics}
265: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
266:
267: \subsection{Model}
268:
269: In this section we briefly review the double inflation model in
270: supergravity proposed recently \cite{YAMA}. We introduce an inflaton
271: chiral superfield $\Phi(x,\theta)$ and assume that the model,
272: especially, K\"ahler potential $K(\Phi,\Phi^{\ast},\dots)$ is a
273: function of $\Phi+\Phi^{\ast}$, which enables the imaginary part of
274: the scalar component of the superfield $\Phi$ to take a value larger
275: than the gravitational scale, and leads to chaotic inflation. Such a
276: functional dependence of $K$ can be attributed to the
277: Nambu-Goldstone-like symmetry introduced in Ref. \cite{KYY}. We also
278: introduce a spurion superfield $\Xi$ describing the breaking of the
279: shift symmetry and extend the shift symmetry as follows,
280: %
281: \bea
282: \Phi &\rightarrow& \Phi + i~C M_{G}, \non \\
283: \Xi &\rightarrow& \lmk\frac{\Phi}{\Phi + i~C M_{G}}\rmk^{2} \Xi,
284: \label{eq:shift}
285: \eea
286: %
287: where $C$ is a dimensionless real constant. Below, the reduced Planck
288: scale $M_{G}$ is set to be unity. Under this shift symmetry, the
289: combination $\Xi\Phi^{2}$ is invariant. Inserting the vacuum value
290: into the spurion field, $\la \Xi \ra = \lambda$, softly breaks the
291: above shift symmetry. Here, the parameter $\lambda$ is fixed with a
292: value much smaller than unity representing the magnitude of breaking
293: of the shift symmetry (\ref{eq:shift}).
294:
295: We further assume that in addition to the shift symmetry, the
296: superpotential is invariant under the U$(1)_{R}$ symmetry because it
297: prohibits a constant term in the superpotential. The above K\"ahler
298: potential is invariant only if the $R$-charge of $\Phi$ is zero. Then,
299: we are compelled to introduce another supermultiplet $X(x,\theta)$
300: with its $R$-charge equal to two, which allows the linear term $X$ in
301: the superpotential. As shown in Ref. \cite{YAMA}, for successful
302: inflation, the absolute magnitude of the coefficient of the linear
303: term $X$ must be at most of the order of $|\lambda|$, which is much
304: smaller than unity. Therefore in order to suppress the linear term of
305: $X$ in the superpotential, we introduce the $Z_{2}$ symmetry and a
306: spurion field $\Pi$ with odd charge under the $Z_{2}$ symmetry and
307: zero $R$-charge. The vacuum value $\la \Pi \ra = v$ softly breaks the
308: $Z_{2}$ symmetry and suppress the linear term of $X$. Then, the
309: general superpotential invariant under the shift, U$(1)_{R}$ and
310: $Z_{2}$ symmetries is given by
311: %
312: \bea
313: W = \alpha_{1} \Pi X \lhk 1 + \alpha_{2}(\Xi\Phi^{2})^{2}
314: + \cdots \rhk
315: - \alpha_{3} X \lhk \Xi\Phi^{2} + \alpha_{4}(\Xi\Phi^{2})^{3}
316: + \cdots
317: \rhk,
318: \label{eq:superpotential}
319: \eea
320: %
321: where we have assumed the $R$-charge of $\Xi$ vanish and $\Phi$, $X$,
322: and $\Xi$ fields are odd under the $Z_{2}$ symmetry.\footnote{The
323: oddness of the spurion field $\Xi$ under the $Z_{2}$ symmetry implies
324: that it breaks both the shift symmetry and the $Z_{2}$ symmetry at
325: once. So, we expect that the magnitudes of the breaking of both the
326: $Z_{2}$ and the shift symmetries are of the same order. We hope that
327: the yet unknown mechanism simultaneously gives the spurion field $\Xi$
328: and $\Pi$ the vacuum values and such a mechanism be realized, for
329: example, in the superstring theory.}(See table I in which charges for
330: superfields are shown.) Here, $\alpha_{i}$ are complex constants of
331: the order of unity.
332:
333: After inserting vacuum values of spurion fields $\Xi$ and $\Pi$, the
334: superpotential is given by
335: %
336: \bea
337: W = v X \lhk 1 + \alpha_{2}(\lambda \Phi^{2})^{2}
338: + \cdots \rhk
339: - X \lhk \lambda \Phi^{2} + \alpha_{4}(\lambda \Phi^{2})^{3}
340: + \cdots
341: \rhk.
342: \eea
343: %
344: Here, the complex constants $\alpha_{1}$ and $\alpha_{3}$ are
345: renormalized into $v$ and $\lambda$. Though the above superpotential
346: is not invariant under the shift and the $Z_{2}$ symmetries, the model
347: is completely natural in the 't Hooft's sense \cite{tHooft} because we
348: have enhanced symmetries in the limit $\lambda$ and $v \rightarrow 0$.
349: As long as $|\Phi| \ll |\lambda|^{-1/2}$, higher order terms with
350: $\alpha_{i}$ of the order of unity become irrelevant for the dynamics.
351: Therefore we can safely omit them in the following discussion. After
352: all, we use, in the following analysis, the superpotential,
353: %
354: \bea
355: W &\simeq& vX - \lambda X\Phi^{2} \\
356: &=& vX(1 - g\Phi^{2}),
357: \eea
358: %
359: with $g \equiv \lambda / v$. Though, generally speaking, only a
360: constant can become real by the use of the phase rotation of the $X$
361: field, below we set both constants $v$ and $\lambda$ ($g$) to be real
362: for simplicity.\footnote{The dynamics of the general case is discussed
363: in Ref. \cite{YAMA}.}
364:
365: The K\"ahler potential neglecting a constant term and higher order
366: terms is given by
367: %
368: \beq
369: K = v_{2}(\Phi + \Phi^{\ast})
370: + \frac12 (\Phi + \Phi^{\ast})^{2}
371: + XX^{\ast}.
372: \label{eq:kahler}
373: \eeq
374: %
375: Here $v_{2} \sim v$ is a real constant representing the breaking
376: effect of the $Z_{2}$ symmetry. Here and hereafter, we use the same
377: characters for scalar with those for corresponding supermultiplets.
378:
379: \subsection{Dynamics}
380:
381: Now that the K\"ahler potential and the superpotential are specified,
382: the Lagrangian density $L(\Phi,X)$ for the scalar fields $\Phi$ and
383: $X$ is given by
384: %
385: \beq
386: L(\Phi,X) = \partial_{\mu}\Phi\partial^{\mu}\Phi^{\ast}
387: + \partial_{\mu}X\partial^{\mu}X^{\ast}
388: -V(\Phi,X).
389: \eeq
390: %
391: The scalar potential $V$ of the chiral superfields $X(x,\theta)$ and
392: $\Phi(x,\theta)$ in supergravity is given by
393: %
394: \beq
395: V = v^{2} e^{K} \lkk
396: \left|1 - g\Phi^{2}\right|^{2}(1-|X|^{2}+|X|^{4})
397: + |X|^{2} \left
398: |-2g\Phi + (v_{2}+\Phi+\Phi^{\ast})(1-g\Phi^{2})
399: \right|^{2}
400: \rkk.
401: \eeq
402: %
403: Now, we decompose the scalar field $\Phi$ into real and imaginary
404: components,
405: %
406: \beq
407: \Phi = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} (\varphi + i \chi).
408: \eeq
409: %
410: Then, the Lagrangian density $L(\varphi,\chi,X)$ is given by
411: %
412: \beq
413: L(\varphi,\chi,X) =
414: \frac{1}{2}\partial_{\mu}\varphi\partial^{\mu}\varphi
415: + \frac{1}{2}\partial_{\mu}\chi\partial^{\mu}\chi
416: + \partial_{\mu}X\partial^{\mu}X^{*}
417: -V(\varphi,\chi,X),
418: \eeq
419: %
420: with the potential $V(\varphi,\chi,X)$ given by
421: %
422: \bea \hspace{-1.0cm}
423: V(\varphi,\chi,X)
424: &=& v^{2} e^{-\frac{v_{2}^{2}}{2}}
425: \exp \lhk \lmk \varphi + \frac{v_{2}}{\sqrt{2}} \rmk^{2}
426: + |X|^{2}
427: \rhk \non \\
428: && \hspace{0.0cm} \times
429: \lhk~\lkk
430: 1 - g (\varphi^{2} - \chi^{2})
431: + \frac14~g^{2} (\varphi^{2} + \chi^{2})^{2}
432: \rkk
433: (1-|X|^{2}+|X|^{4})
434: \right. \non \\
435: && \hspace{0.5cm}
436: +~|X|^{2}
437: \lkk~
438: 2g^{2}(\varphi^{2}+\chi^{2})
439: \right. \non \\
440: && \hspace{2.0cm}
441: - (v_{2}+\sqrt{2}\varphi) \lhk
442: \sqrt{2}~g\varphi
443: \lkk~2 - g (\varphi^{2} - \chi^{2})
444: ~\rkk - 2\sqrt{2}~g^{2}\varphi\chi^{2}
445: \rhk \non \\
446: && \hspace{2.0cm} \left. \left.
447: +(v_{2}+\sqrt{2}\varphi)^{2}
448: \lhk
449: 1 - g (\varphi^{2} - \chi^{2})
450: + \frac14~g^{2}
451: ~(\varphi^{2} + \chi^{2})^{2}
452: \rhk
453: ~\rkk
454: ~\rhk.
455: \eea
456: %
457:
458: Because of the exponential factor, $\varphi$ and $X$ rapidly goes down to
459: $\CO(1)$. On the other hand, $\chi$ can take a value much larger than
460: unity without costing exponentially large potential energy. Then the
461: scalar potential is approximated as
462: %
463: \beq
464: V \simeq \lambda^{2}
465: \lmk \frac{\chi^{4}}{4}
466: + 2 \chi^{2} |X|^{2}
467: \rmk,
468: \label{eq:twopot}
469: \eeq
470: %
471: with $\lambda = g v$. Thus the term proportional to $\chi^{4}$ becomes
472: dominant and chaotic inflation can take place. Then, using the
473: slow-roll approximation, the $e$-fold number $\widetilde{N}$ during
474: chaotic inflation is given by
475: %
476: \beq
477: \widetilde{N} \simeq \frac{\chi_{\widetilde{N}}^{2}}{8}.
478: \label{eq:chaoe}
479: \eeq
480: %
481: The effective mass squared of $\varphi$, $m_{\varphi}^{2}$, during
482: chaotic inflation becomes
483: %
484: \beq
485: m_{\varphi}^{2} \simeq \frac{\lambda^{2}}{2} \chi^{4}
486: \simeq 6H^{2} \gg \frac94 H^{2},
487: ~~~~~~H^{2} \simeq \frac{\lambda^{2}}{12}\chi^{4},
488: \eeq
489: %
490: where $H$ is the hubble parameter at that time. Therefore $\varphi$
491: oscillates rapidly around the minimum $\varphi_{min}$ so that its
492: amplitude damps in proportion to $a^{-3/2}$ with $a$ being the scale
493: factor. Here, the potential minimum for $\varphi$, $\varphi_{min}$,
494: during chaotic inflation is given by
495: %
496: \beq
497: \varphi_{min} \simeq - v_{2}/\sqrt{2}.
498: \eeq
499: %
500: Thus the initial value of the inflaton $\varphi$ of second inflation
501: (new inflation) is set dynamically during chaotic inflation.
502:
503: On the other hand, the mass squared of $X$, $m_{X}^{2}$, is dominated
504: by
505: %
506: \beq
507: m_{X}^{2} \simeq 2 \lambda^{2} \chi^{2} \simeq \frac{24}{\chi^2}H^2,
508: \label{mhratio}
509: \eeq
510: %
511: which is much smaller than the hubble parameter squared until
512: $\chi^{2} \sim 24$ so that $X$ also slow-rolls. In order to analyze
513: the dynamics of $X$, we set $X$ to be real and positive making use of
514: the freedom of the phase choice. In this regime classical equations of
515: motion for $X$ and $\chi$ are given by
516: %
517: \bea
518: 3H &\dot{X}& \simeq - m_{X}^{2} X, \label{Xeq} \\
519: 3H &\dot{\chi}& \simeq - \lambda^{2} \chi^{3}, \label{chieq}
520: \eea
521: %
522: which leads to
523: %
524: \beq
525: \lmk \frac{X}{X_{i}} \rmk \simeq
526: \lmk \frac{\chi}{\chi_{i}} \rmk^{2}, \label{propto}
527: \eeq
528: %
529: where $X_{i}$ and $\chi_{i}$ are the initial values of $X$ and $\chi$
530: fields. This relation holds actually if and only if quantum
531: fluctuations are unimportant for both $\chi$ and $X$. First of all,
532: for $\chi$, the comparison of the magnitude of quantum fluctuations
533: and that of the classical evolution during one hubble time shows that
534: quantum fluctuations become dominant if $\chi \gtrsim \lambda^{-1/6}$,
535: when the universe enters the self-reproduction stage of eternal
536: inflation \cite{eternal,sr}. So, we consider only the regime with
537: $\chi \ll \lambda^{-1/6}$, where the classical equation of motion Eq.
538: (\ref{chieq}) is valid. Next, we estimate the amplitude of quantum
539: fluctuations for $X$, Using the Fokker-Planck equation for the
540: statistical distribution function of $X$ based on the stochastic
541: inflation method of Starobinsky \cite{stochastic}, the
542: root-mean-square (rms) of quantum fluctuations for $X$, $\lla
543: \lmk\Delta X\rmk^2 \rra$, is given by \cite{YY}
544: %
545: \beq
546: \sqrt{\lla \lmk\Delta X\rmk^2 \rra} \simeq
547: \frac{\lambda^{1/3}}{8\pi\sqrt{6}}~\chi^2. \label{Xyuragi}
548: \eeq
549: %
550: On the other hand, using $X_{i} = \CO(1)$ and $\chi_{i} \sim
551: \lambda^{-1/6}$, the classical value of $X$ becomes $X \sim
552: \lambda^{1/3} \chi^{2}$. Thus, since $\lambda \ll 1$, the amplitude of
553: $X$ becomes much smaller than unity by the time $\chi \simeq
554: \sqrt{24}$, when the effective mass squared $m_{X}^{2}$ is comparable
555: with $H^{2}$. Thereafter, $X$ rapidly oscillates around the origin and
556: its amplitude damps in proportion to $a^{-3/2}$ even more. Thus our
557: approximation that both $\varphi$ and $X$ are much smaller than unity
558: is consistent throughout the chaotic inflation regime.
559:
560: As $\chi$ becomes of order of unity, either the constant term $v^{2}$
561: or the term with $v^{2} g \chi^{2}$ becomes dominant. In the former
562: case, small hybrid inflation takes place, which is followed by new
563: inflation. Hence there is no break between chaotic and new inflation.
564: On the other hand, in the latter case, $\chi$ rapidly oscillates
565: around the origin until new inflation starts so that there is a break
566: between them, though the scale factor grows twice at most. A little
567: numerical calculation shows that if $g \gtilde 1.1$, we have a break
568: between chaotic and new inflation.
569:
570: Next let us investigate when new inflation starts. The potential with
571: $X \simeq 0$ is approximated as
572: %
573: \bea
574: V(\varphi,\chi,X \simeq 0)
575: &\simeq& v^{2} e^{-\frac{v_{2}^{2}}{2}}
576: \exp \lmk \varphi + \frac{v_{2}}{\sqrt{2}}
577: \rmk^{2}
578: \non \\
579: && \hspace{-2.0cm} \times
580: \lkk
581: \lmk
582: 1 - \frac{g}{2} \varphi^{2}
583: \rmk^{2}
584: + \chi^{2}
585: \lmk
586: g + \frac{g^{2}}{2} \varphi^{2}
587: + \frac{g^{2}}{2} \chi^{2}
588: \rmk
589: \rkk.
590: \eea
591: %
592: The global minima are given by $\varphi^{2} = 2/g$ and $\chi = 0$. The
593: mass squared for $\varphi$, $m_{\varphi}^{2}$, reads
594: %
595: \beq
596: m_{\varphi}^{2}
597: \simeq - (g - 1) + (g + \frac12 g^{2}) \chi^{2}.
598: \eeq
599: %
600: Thus new inflation begins when $\chi \simeq \chi_{crit}$ given by
601: %
602: \beq
603: \chi_{crit} = \frac{2}{g}
604: \sqrt{\frac{g - 1}{g + 2}}.
605: \eeq
606:
607: Once new inflation begins, $\chi$ rapidly goes to zero because the
608: effective mass squared becomes $m_{\chi}^{2} \simeq 6 g H^{2} \ge 6
609: H^{2}$. Then, for $\chi \simeq 0$ and $X \ll 1$, the potential is
610: given by
611: %
612: \beq
613: V(\varphi,\chi \simeq 0,X \ll 1) \sim
614: v^{2} \lhk 1 - (g - 1) \widetilde\varphi^{2}
615: + 2 (g - 1)^{2} \widetilde\varphi^{2}|X|^{2}
616: + \cdots
617: \rhk,
618: \eeq
619: %
620: where $\widetilde\varphi = \varphi - \varphi_{max}$ and $\varphi_{max}
621: \equiv v_{2}/[\sqrt{2}(g-1)]$. Thus if $g \ge 1$ ($\lambda \ge v$),
622: new inflation takes place and $\varphi$ rolls down slowly toward the
623: vacuum expectation value $\eta = \sqrt{2/g}$.
624:
625: Before new inflation starts, $\varphi$ stays at $\varphi_{min}$, which
626: is different from $\varphi_{max}$. Then, the initial value of
627: $\widetilde\varphi$, $\widetilde\varphi_{i}$ for new inflation is given by
628: %
629: \beq
630: \widetilde\varphi_{i} = - \frac{v_{2}}{\sqrt{2}}
631: \frac{g}{g-1}.
632: \eeq
633: %
634: On the other hand, the amplitude of quantum fluctuations of $\varphi$
635: is estimated as $\delta\varphi_{q} \sim v / (2\pi\sqrt{3})$. Using the
636: fact that $g \ge 1$, we find that quantum fluctuations do not dominate
637: the dynamics unless $v_{2} \ll v$.
638:
639: The total $e$-folding number $N_{new}$ during new inflation is given
640: by
641: %
642: \beq
643: N_{new} \simeq \frac{1}{2(g-1)}
644: \ln \left| \frac{\sqrt{2}}{v_{2}}
645: \frac{g-1}{g} \right|.
646: \eeq
647: %
648: Then the total $e$-folding number $N$ is given by $N = \widetilde{N} +
649: N_{new}$. We set $N_{\rm COBE} = 60$ for simplicity, when the physical
650: wavenumber of the mode ($k_{\rm COBE}$) corresponding to the Cosmic
651: Background Explorer~(COBE) scale exits the horizon, that is, $k_{\rm
652: COBE}/(a_{(N=60)} H_{(N=60)}) = 1$.
653:
654: In case $N_{new} \gtrsim 60$, primordial density fluctuations
655: responsible for the observable universe are produced only during new
656: inflation. Otherwise, chaotic inflation produces primordial
657: fluctuations on large cosmological scales and new inflation on smaller
658: scales. In this paper we consider only the latter case.
659:
660: After new inflation, $\varphi$ oscillates around the global minimum
661: $\eta$ and the universe is dominated by a coherent scalar-field
662: oscillation of $\sigma \equiv \varphi -\eta$. Expanding the
663: exponential factor $e^{v_{2}\varphi + \varphi^2} $ in $e^K$,
664: %
665: \beq
666: e^{v_{2}\varphi + \varphi^2} = e^{\eta^2}(1+2\eta\sigma+\cdots ),
667: \eeq
668: %
669: we find that $\sigma$ has gravitationally suppressed linear
670: interactions with all scalar and spinor fields including minimal
671: supersymmetric standard model (MSSM) particles. For example, let us
672: consider the Yukawa superpotential $W = y_{i}D_{i}HS_{i}$ in MSSM,
673: where $D_{i}$ and $S_{i}$ are doublet (singlet) superfields, $H$ is a
674: Higgs superfield, and $y_{i}$ is a Yukawa coupling constant. Then the
675: interaction Lagrangian is given by
676: %
677: \beq
678: \CL_{\rm int} \sim
679: y_{i}^{2} \eta \sigma D_{i}^{2} S_{i}^{2} + \cdots,
680: \eeq
681: %
682: which leads to the decay width $\Gamma$ given by
683: %
684: \beq
685: \Gamma \sim \sum_{i} y_{i}^4 \eta^2 m_{\sigma}^3.
686: \label{eq:gamma}
687: \eeq
688: %
689: Here $m_{\sigma} \simeq 2\sqrt{g_{R}}e^{\sqrt{2/g_{R}}}v$ is the mass
690: of $\sigma$. Thus the reheating temperature $T_{R}$ is given by
691: %
692: \beq
693: T_{R} \sim 0.1 \bar{y} \eta m_{\varphi}^{3/2},
694: \eeq
695: %
696: where $\bar{y}=\sqrt{\sum_{i} y_{i}^4}$. Taking
697: $\bar{y} \sim 1$, the reheating temperature $T_{R}$ is given by
698: %
699: \beq
700: T_{R} \sim v^{3/2} \lesssim \lambda^{3/2}.
701: \eeq
702: %
703: As shown later, the upper bound of $\lambda$ is given by $\lambda <
704: 1.2 \times 10^{-6}$. Hence the reheating temperature $T_{R}$ is
705: constrained as
706: %
707: \beq
708: T_{R} \lesssim 10^{-9} \sim 10^{9}~{\rm GeV},
709: \eeq
710: %
711: which is low enough to avoid the overproduction of gravitinos in a
712: wide range of the gravitino mass \cite{Ellis}.
713:
714:
715: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
716: \section{Density fluctuations and PBHs formation}
717: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
718:
719: \subsection{Density fluctuations}
720:
721: In this section we investigate primordial density fluctuations
722: produced by this double inflation model. First of all we consider
723: density fluctuations produced during chaotic inflation. As shown in
724: the previous section, there are two effectively massless fields,
725: $\chi$ and $X$, during chaotic inflation. Using Eq. (\ref{eq:twopot})
726: and adequate approximations, the metric perturbation in the
727: longitudinal gauge $\Phi_{A}$ can be estimated as \cite{PS}
728: %
729: \bea
730: \Phi_{A} &=& - \frac{\dot{H}}{H^{2}} C_{1}
731: - 16 \frac{X^{2}}{\chi^{2}} C_{2}, \non \\
732: C_{1} &=& H \frac{\delta\chi}{\dot{\chi}}, \non \\
733: C_{2} &=& H \lmk \frac{\delta\chi}{\dot{\chi}}
734: - \frac{\delta X}{\dot{X}}
735: \rmk
736: \frac{2}{\chi^{2}},
737: \eea
738: %
739: where the dot represents time derivative, the term with $C_{1}$
740: corresponds to the growing adiabatic mode, and the term with $C_{2}$
741: the nondecaying isocurvature mode. You should notice that only $\chi$
742: contributes to growing adiabatic fluctuations. Then, with the fact
743: that $X \ll 1$, the amplitude of curvature perturbation $\Phi_{A}$ on
744: the comoving horizon scale at $\chi=\chi_{\widetilde{N}}$ is
745: given by the standard one-field formula and reads
746: %
747: \beq
748: \Phi_{A}(\widetilde{N})
749: \simeq \frac{f}{2\sqrt{3}\pi}
750: \frac{\lambda\chi_{\widetilde{N}}^{3}}{8},
751: \label{eq:gpotentialc}
752: \eeq
753: %
754: where $f=3/5~(2/3)$ in the matter (radiation) domination. If $N_{new}
755: \lesssim 60$, the comoving scale corresponding to the COBE scale exits
756: the horizon during chaotic inflation. Defining $\widetilde{N}_{\rm
757: COBE}$ as the $e$-folding number during chaotic inflation,
758: corresponding to the COBE scale, the COBE normalization requires
759: $\Phi_{A}(\widetilde{N}_{\rm COBE}) \simeq 3\times 10^{-5}$
760: \cite{COBE}. Then the scale $\lambda$ is given by
761: %
762: \beq
763: \lambda \simeq 4.2 \times 10^{-3}
764: \chi_{\widetilde{N}_{\rm COBE}}^{-3}.
765: \label{eq:COBEnor}
766: \eeq
767: %
768: The spectral index $n_{s}$ is given by
769: %
770: \beq
771: n_{s} \simeq 1 - \frac{3}{\widetilde{N}_{\rm COBE}}.
772: \eeq
773: %
774: Since the COBE data shows $n_s = 1.0 \pm 0.2$ \cite{COBE},
775: $\widetilde{N}_{\rm COBE} \ge 15$, which leads to $\lambda < 1.2
776: \times 10^{-6}$.
777:
778: Next let us discuss density fluctuations produced during new
779: inflation. In this case, both $\widetilde\varphi$ and $X$ are effectively
780: massless fields. As with the case of chaotic inflation, the metric
781: perturbation in the longitudinal gauge $\Phi_{A}$ can be estimated as
782: \cite{PS},
783: %
784: \bea
785: \Phi_{A} &=& - \frac{\dot{H}}{H^{2}} C_{1}
786: - 4 (g - 1)^{3} X^{2}\widetilde\varphi^{2} C_{2}, \non \\
787: C_{1} &=& H \frac{\delta\widetilde\varphi}{\dot{\widetilde\varphi}}, \non \\
788: C_{2} &=& H \lmk \frac{\delta\widetilde\varphi}{\dot{\widetilde\varphi}}
789: - \frac{\delta X}{\dot{X}}
790: \rmk
791: 2 (g - 1)\widetilde\varphi^{2}.
792: \eea
793: %
794: In this case, also, only $\widetilde\varphi$ contributes to growing
795: adiabatic fluctuations. Then, with the fact that $X \ll 1$, the
796: amplitude of curvature perturbation $\Phi_{A}$ on the comoving horizon
797: scale at $\widetilde\varphi=\widetilde\varphi_{N}$ is given by
798: %
799: \beq
800: \Phi_{A}(N) \simeq \frac{f}{2\sqrt{3}\pi}
801: \frac{v}{ 2 (g - 1) \widetilde\varphi_{N}}.
802: \label{eq:gpotentialn}
803: \eeq
804: %
805: The spectral index $n_s$ of the density fluctuations is given by
806: %
807: \beq
808: n_s \simeq 1 - 4 (g - 1).
809: \eeq
810: %
811:
812: Here we relate the $e$-folding number $N < N_{new}$ with the comoving
813: wave number $k$. Notice that the hubble parameter during new inflation
814: is much smaller than that during the early stage of chaotic inflation
815: [$\widetilde{N} = \CO(10)$]. Then, the $e$-folding number $N <
816: N_{new}$ when the comoving wave number $k = k_{\rm COBE}~e^{(60-N')}$
817: ($N_{\rm COBE}=60$) exits the horizon during new inflation is
818: determined by
819: %
820: \beq
821: \frac{k_{\rm COBE}~e^{(60-N')}}{a_{(N=60)}~e^{(60-N)}~H_{N}} = 1.
822: \eeq
823: %
824: Using $H_{N} \simeq v / \sqrt{3}$, $H_{(N=60)} \simeq \lambda
825: \chi_{\widetilde{N}_{\rm COBE}}^{2}/(2\sqrt{3})$, and Eq.
826: (\ref{eq:chaoe}), the correspondence is given by
827: %
828: \bea
829: N &=& N' + \ln \lmk \frac{2}{g \chi_{\widetilde{N}_{\rm COBE}}^{2}} \rmk,
830: \non \\
831: &=& N' - \ln 4 g \widetilde{N}_{\rm COBE}.
832: \eea
833: %
834: The deviation from the standard correspondence ($N = N'$) is not
835: negligible for $\widetilde{N}_{\rm COBE} = \CO(10)$.\footnote{The
836: hubble parameter during chaotic inflation changes significantly ($H
837: \propto \widetilde{N}$). Hence, the deviation from the standard
838: correspondence may be also significant during chaotic inflation. The
839: $e$-folding number $\widetilde{N} < \widetilde{N}_{\rm COBE}$ when the
840: comoving wave number $k = k_{\rm COBE} e^{(\widetilde{N}_{\rm
841: COBE}-N')}$ exits the horizon during chaotic inflation is given by $N'
842: = \widetilde{N} + \ln (\widetilde{N}_{\rm COBE}/\widetilde{N})$.}
843:
844: You should also notice that $\widetilde\varphi \sim v_{2}$ at the
845: beginning of new inflation. Then, since $v \sim v_{2}$, the amplitude
846: of curvature perturbation $\Phi_{A}$ can become as large as the order
847: unity, which may lead to PBHs formation.
848:
849: Before discussing PBHs formation, let us comment on the case with a
850: break between chaotic and new inflation. As shown before, we have such
851: a break if $g \gtrsim 1.1$. In this case some of the comoving wave
852: numbers which exit the horizon during chaotic inflation reenter the
853: horizon and again exit during new inflation. Therefore, for such
854: modes, we need to compare the amplitude of quantum fluctuations
855: induced during chaotic and new inflation. Following the procedure as
856: done in Ref. \cite{PBH3}, we can easily show that fluctuations induced
857: during chaotic inflation are a little less than newly induced
858: fluctuations during new inflation. Thus we conclude that the
859: fluctuations of $\varphi$ induced in chaotic inflation can be
860: neglected when we estimate density fluctuations produced during new
861: inflation.
862:
863:
864: \subsection{Primordial black holes formation}
865:
866: PBHs have been paid renewed attention to because they may explain the
867: existence of massive compact halo objects (MACHOs) \cite{MACHO} and
868: become a part of cold dark matter. Furthermore, PBHs are responsible
869: for antiproton fluxes observed by the BESS experiments \cite{BESS} or
870: short gamma ray bursts \cite{gamma}.
871:
872: Carr and Hawking first discussed PBHs formation and showed that in the
873: radiation dominated universe, a black hole is formed soon after the
874: perturbed region reenters the horizon if the amplitude of density
875: fluctuations $\delta$ lies in the range $1/3 \le \delta \le 1$
876: \cite{CH}. Then, the mass of produced PBHs $M_{BH}$ is roughly given
877: by the horizon mass,
878: %
879: \beq
880: M_{BH} \simeq \frac{4 \sqrt{3} \pi}{\sqrt{\rho}}
881: \simeq 0.066 M_{\odot} \lmk \frac{T}{\rm GeV} \rmk^{-2},
882: \label{eq:BHmass}
883: \eeq
884: %
885: where $\rho$ and $T$ are the total energy density and the temperature
886: of the universe at formation. The horizon scale at formation is
887: related to the present cosmological scale $L$ by
888: %
889: \bea
890: L &\simeq& \frac{a(T_{0})}{a(T)} H^{-1}(T), \non \\
891: &\simeq& 6.4 \times 10^{-8} {\rm Mpc}
892: \lmk \frac{T}{\rm GeV} \rmk^{-1},\
893: \label{eq:BHscale}
894: \eea
895: %
896: with $T_{0} \simeq 2.7 $ K the present temperature of the universe.
897: The corresponding comoving wave number $k = 2\pi / L$ is given by
898: %
899: \beq
900: k \simeq 1.0 \times 10^{8} {\rm ~Mpc}^{-1}
901: \lmk \frac{T}{\rm GeV} \rmk.\
902: \label{eq:BHwave}
903: \eeq
904:
905: Assuming Gaussian fluctuations, the mass fraction of produced PBHs
906: ($\beta \equiv \rho_{BH}/\rho$) is given by
907: %
908: \bea
909: \delta(M) &=& \int^{1}_{1/3} \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}\sigma(M)}
910: \exp \lmk - \frac{\delta^{2}}{2 \sigma^{2}(M)} \rmk
911: d\delta, \non \\
912: &\simeq& \sigma(M)
913: \exp \lmk - \frac{1}{18 \sigma^{2}(M)} \rmk,
914: \label{eq:BHfraction}
915: \eea
916: %
917: where $\sigma(M)$ is the root mean square of mass variance evaluated
918: at horizon crossing. Bullock and Primack \cite{BP} pointed out that
919: the standard Gaussian assumptions may be inadequate because PBHs are
920: formed at high density peaks so that the linear theory may be
921: invalidated and non-Gaussianity may affect the abundance of PBHs
922: significantly (see also \cite{Ivanov}). However, for example, in the
923: model adopted in \cite{Ivanov}, the root mean square of mass variance
924: calculated in the standard Gaussian theory differs at most by the
925: factor 1.5 from that calculated taking into account the non-Gaussian
926: effects. The aim in this paper is just to demonstrate that our double
927: inflation model straightforwardly leads to PBHs formation, and the
928: concrete values of the parameters should not be taken seriously.
929: Therefore, for our purpose, it is sufficient to assume that
930: fluctuations are Gaussian distributed. The analysis of non-Gaussianity
931: in a similar model as ours is done in Ref. \cite{PBH2}.
932:
933: Using the mass fraction $\beta$ at formation, the ratio of the present
934: energy density $\rho_{BH}(M)$ of PBHs with the mass $M$ and the
935: entropy density is given by
936: %
937: \beq
938: \frac{\rho_{BH}(M)}{s} \simeq \frac34 \beta(M) T,
939: \eeq
940: %
941: which yields the normalized energy density,
942: %
943: \bea
944: \Omega_{BH} h^{-2} &\simeq& 2.1 \times 10^{8} \beta
945: \lmk \frac{T}{\rm GeV} \rmk \non \\
946: &\simeq& 5.4 \times 10^{7} \beta
947: \lmk \frac{M}{M_{\odot}} \rmk^{-1/2} \non \\
948: &\simeq& 2.1 \beta
949: \lmk \frac{k}{\rm Mpc^{-1}} \rmk.
950: \eea
951:
952: Then, MACHO PBHs with mass $\sim 0.1M_{\odot}$ are produced at the
953: temperature given by
954: %
955: \beq
956: T \simeq 0.81 {\rm ~GeV},
957: \eeq
958: %
959: which corresponds to
960: %
961: \bea
962: L &\simeq& 7.9 \times 10^{-8} {\rm ~Mpc}, \non \\
963: k &\simeq& 8.1 \times 10^{7} {\rm ~Mpc^{-1}}.
964: \label{eq:MACHOscale}
965: \eea
966: %
967: As easily seen from Eq. (\ref{eq:gpotentialn}), the fluctuations with
968: the largest amplitude are produced at the onset of new inflation,
969: which we identify with the formation time of PBHs. As shown later, the
970: spectrum is so steep that the formation of the PBHs with smaller
971: masses is suppressed strongly. From Eq. (\ref{eq:MACHOscale}) we
972: obtain $N'_{new} \simeq 37$, which corresponds to
973: %
974: \beq
975: N_{new} \simeq 37 - \ln 92 g.
976: \label{eq:MACHON}
977: \eeq
978: %
979: On the other hand, the present energy density $\Omega_{BH} h^{-2} \sim
980: 0.25$ is explained if the mass fraction is given by
981: %
982: \beq
983: \beta \simeq 1.5 \times 10^{-9},
984: \eeq
985: %
986: which implies the mass variance $\sigma \simeq 0.056$ under the
987: Gaussian approximation, corresponding to
988: %
989: \beq
990: \Phi_{A} \sim 0.04.
991: \label{eq:MACHOP}
992: \eeq
993: %
994: Taking into account Eqs. (\ref{eq:MACHON}), (\ref{eq:MACHOP}), and the
995: COBE normalization (\ref{eq:COBEnor}), MACHO PBHs are produced in this
996: model if we take the parameters given by
997: %
998: \bea
999: \lambda &\sim& 1.3 \times 10^{-6}, \non \\
1000: v &\sim& 1.1 \times 10^{-6}, \non \\
1001: v_{2} &\sim& 0.93 \times 10^{-6},
1002: \eea
1003: %
1004: with $g = \lambda / v \simeq 1.2$.
1005:
1006: As another example, let us consider PBHs responsible for antiproton
1007: fluxes observed by the BESS experiments \cite{BESS} or short gamma ray
1008: bursts \cite{gamma}. Such PBHs are evaporating now, which leads to the
1009: initial mass $M \sim 3 \times 10^{-19} M_{\odot}$. Then, the
1010: temperature at formation is given by $T \simeq 4.7 \times 10^{8}$ GeV
1011: corresponding to $L \simeq 1.4 \times 10^{-16}$ Mpc and $k \simeq 4.7
1012: \times 10^{16}$ Mpc$^{-1}$. On the other hand, the abundance is given
1013: by $\Omega_{BH}h^{2} \simeq 2 \times 10^{-9}$, which implies $\beta
1014: \simeq 2.0 \times 10^{-26}$, $\sigma \simeq 0.032$, and $\Phi_{A}
1015: \simeq 0.002$. The PBHs satisfying the above conditions are produced
1016: if we take the parameters given by
1017: %
1018: \bea
1019: \lambda &\sim& 5.8 \times 10^{-7}, \non \\
1020: v &\sim& 3.9 \times 10^{-7}, \non \\
1021: v_{2} &\sim& 5.2 \times 10^{-6},
1022: \eea
1023: %
1024: with $g = \lambda / v \simeq 1.5$. Note that in both cases, all
1025: parameters are of the same order. Also, the temperatures at formation
1026: are lower than the reheating temperature so our assumption that PBHs
1027: are formed in the radiation dominated universe is justified.
1028:
1029:
1030: \subsection{Numerical calculations of density fluctuations}
1031:
1032: In this section we numerically calculate density fluctuations
1033: produced during double inflation in order to confirm the analytic
1034: results given above and show explicitly that density fluctuations
1035: which lead to PBHs are realized in our model. Our method of numerical
1036: calculations is based on Ref. \cite{num}.
1037:
1038: We decompose multiscalar fields $\phi_{i}(\vect{x},t)$ into the
1039: homogeneous mode $\overline{\phi_{i}}(t)$ and fluctuations
1040: $X_{i}(\vect{x},t)$,
1041: %
1042: \bea
1043: \phi_{i}(\vect{x},t) &=& \overline{\phi_{i}}(t) + X_{i}(\vect{x},t)
1044: \non \\
1045: &=& \overline{\phi_{i}}(t) +
1046: \int \frac{d^{3}\vect{k}}{(2\pi)^{3/2}}
1047: \lmk
1048: \widetilde{X}_{i}(\vect{k},t)
1049: e^{i\vect{k}\cdot\vect{x}} +
1050: \widetilde{X}^{\dagger}_{i}(\vect{k},t)
1051: e^{-i\vect{k}\cdot\vect{x}}
1052: \rmk.
1053: \eea
1054: %
1055: The metric is also expanded around the background metric,
1056: %
1057: \bea
1058: g_{\mu\nu}(\vect{x},t) &=& \overline{g}_{\mu\nu}(t)
1059: + y_{\mu\nu}(\vect{x},t) \non \\
1060: &=& \overline{g}_{\mu\nu}(t) +
1061: \int \frac{d^{3}\vect{k}}{(2\pi)^{3/2}}
1062: \lmk
1063: \widetilde{y}_{\mu\nu}(\vect{k},t)
1064: e^{i\vect{k}\cdot\vect{x}} +
1065: \widetilde{y}^{\dagger}_{\mu\nu}(\vect{k},t)
1066: e^{-i\vect{k}\cdot\vect{x}}
1067: \rmk.
1068: \eea
1069: %
1070: Since fluctuations are generated quantum mechanically, we need to
1071: treat them as quantum Heisenberg operators. Defining creation and
1072: annihilation operators satisfying the canonical commutation relations
1073: $ [\widehat{a}_{i}(\vect{k}),\widehat{a}^{\dagger}_{j}(\vect{k}')]
1074: =\delta_{ij}\delta(\vect{k}-\vect{k}')$, fluctuations are expanded
1075: over such operators:
1076: %
1077: \bea
1078: \widetilde{X}_{i}(\vect{k},t) &=&
1079: \sum_{j} \delta\varphi_{ij}(\vect{k},t)
1080: \widehat{a}_{j}(\vect{k}), \non \\
1081: \widetilde{y}_{\mu\nu}(\vect{k},t) &=& \sum_{i} h_{\mu\nu,i}(\vect{k},t)
1082: \widehat{a}_{i}(\vect{k}).
1083: \eea
1084: %
1085: In particular, the metric perturbation in the longitudinal gauge is
1086: expanded as
1087: %
1088: \bea
1089: \Phi_{A}(\vect{x},t) &=& \int \frac{d^{3}\vect{k}}{(2\pi)^{3/2}}
1090: \lmk
1091: \Phi(\vect{k},t)
1092: e^{i\vect{k}\cdot\vect{x}} +
1093: \Phi^{\dagger}(\vect{k},t)
1094: e^{-i\vect{k}\cdot\vect{x}}
1095: \rmk, \\
1096: \Phi(\vect{k},t) &=& \sum_{i} \Phi_{i}(\vect{k},t)
1097: \widehat{a}_{i}(\vect{k}).
1098: \eea
1099:
1100: The equations of motion for the homogeneous mode are given by
1101: %
1102: \beq
1103: \ddot{\overline{\phi}}_{i} + 3 H \dot{\overline{\phi}}_{i}
1104: + \frac{\del V}{\del {\overline{\phi_{i}}}} = 0,
1105: \eeq
1106: %
1107: with the hubble constant $H$ given by
1108: %
1109: \beq
1110: H^{2} = \frac{1}{3M_{G}^{2}}
1111: \lmk
1112: V + \frac12 \sum_{i} \dot{\overline{\phi}}^{2}_{i}
1113: \rmk.
1114: \eeq
1115: %
1116: Here and hereafter we recover the reduced Planck scale $M_{G}$. The
1117: perturbed equations of motion in the longitudinal gauge are given by
1118: %
1119: \bea
1120: \dot{\Phi_{i}} + H \Phi_{i} &=& \frac{1}{2M_{G}^{2}}
1121: \sum_{j}
1122: \dot{\overline{\phi}}_{i} \delta\varphi_{ij},
1123: \label{eq:dotphi} \\
1124: \ddot{\delta\varphi}_{ij} + 3 H \dot{\delta\varphi}_{ij}
1125: + \lmk \frac{k^{2}}{a^{2}} +
1126: \frac{\del^{2}V}{\del{\overline{\phi_{i}}}^{2}}
1127: \rmk
1128: \delta\varphi_{ij}
1129: &=&
1130: 4 \dot{\overline{\phi}}_{i} \dot\Phi_{j}
1131: - 2 \frac{\del V}{\del{\overline{\phi_{i}}}} \Phi_{j}
1132: + \sum_{l \ne i} \frac{\del^{2}V}
1133: {\del{\overline{\phi_{i}}} \del{\overline{\phi_{l}}}}
1134: \delta\varphi_{lj},
1135: \label{eq:ddotvar}
1136: \eea
1137: %
1138: for arbitrary $i,j$. There is another convenient equation given by
1139: %
1140: \beq
1141: \Phi_{i} = \sum_{j} \lkk \lmk
1142: - 3 H \dot{\overline{\phi}}_{j}
1143: - \frac{\del V}{\del {\overline{\phi_{j}}}}
1144: \rmk \delta\varphi_{ji}
1145: - \dot{\overline{\phi}}_{j} \delta\varphi_{ji}
1146: \rkk \biggl/
1147: \lmk 2 M_{G}^{2} \frac{k^{2}}{a^{2}}
1148: - \sum_{j} \dot{\overline{\phi}}^{2}_{j}
1149: \rmk.
1150: \label{eq:phi}
1151: \eeq
1152:
1153: Before giving the initial conditions for $\delta\varphi_{ij}$ and
1154: $\Phi_{i}$, we determine the normalization of $\delta\varphi_{ij}$.
1155: The conjugate momentum of $X_{i}$ is given by $a^{3}\dot{X}_{i}$,
1156: which leads to the equal-time commutation relation
1157: $[X_{i}(\vect{x},t),\dot{X}_{j}(\vect{x}',t)] = i a^{-3}(t)
1158: \delta_{ij} \delta(\vect{x}-\vect{x}')$. Thus the Wronskian
1159: normalization conditions for $\delta\varphi_{ij}$ are given by
1160: %
1161: \beq
1162: \sum_{j} ( \delta\varphi_{ij} \dot{\delta\varphi}_{jl}^{\ast}
1163: - \delta\varphi_{ij}^{\ast} \dot{\delta\varphi}_{jl} )
1164: = i a^{-3} \delta_{il}.
1165: \eeq
1166: %
1167: Then, we find the WKB solutions of Eq. (\ref{eq:ddotvar}) in the short
1168: wavelength approximation ($k/a \gg H$),
1169: %
1170: \beq
1171: \delta\varphi_{ij} = \delta_{ij} \frac{1}{\sqrt{2k} a}
1172: \exp \lmk -i k \int \frac{dt}{a} \rmk,
1173: \eeq
1174: %
1175: which give the initial conditions for $\delta\varphi_{ij}$.
1176: Differentiating these with respect to the cosmic time, we obtain the
1177: initial conditions for $\dot{\delta\varphi}_{ij}$,
1178: %
1179: \beq
1180: \dot{\delta\varphi}_{ij} = \delta_{ij}
1181: \lmk
1182: - i \sqrt{\frac{k}{2}} \frac{1}{a^{2}}
1183: - \frac{\dot{a}}{\sqrt{2k} a^{2}}
1184: \rmk
1185: \exp \lmk -i k \int \frac{dt}{a} \rmk.
1186: \eeq
1187: %
1188: Note that the exponent can be set to zero because the origin of the
1189: conformal time $\equiv \int dt/a$ is arbitrary. The initial conditions
1190: for $\Phi_{i}$ are derived from Eq. (\ref{eq:phi}) by the use of those
1191: of $\delta\varphi_{ij}$ and $\dot{\delta\varphi}_{ij}$.
1192:
1193: Since the vacuum expectation value of the squared of the operator
1194: $\Phi_{A}(\vect{x},t)$ is given by
1195: %
1196: \beq
1197: \la 0 | \Phi_{A}^{2}(\vect{x},t) | 0 \ra =
1198: \int \frac{d^{3}\vect{k}}{(2\pi)^{3/2}}
1199: \sum_{i} |\Phi_{i}(\vect{k},t)|^{2},
1200: \eeq
1201: %
1202: we define the primordial spectrum $k^{3/2} \Phi(\vect{k})$
1203: as\footnote{Note that the relation between $k^{3/2} \Phi(\vect{k})$
1204: and $\Phi_{A}(N)$ used in the previous sections is given by
1205: $k^{3/2} \Phi(\vect{k}) \simeq \pi\sqrt{2} \Phi_{A}(N)$.}
1206: %
1207: \beq
1208: k^{3/2} \sqrt{\la 0 | \Phi^{2}(\vect{k}) | 0 \ra / \delta(\vect{0})}
1209: = k^{3/2} \sqrt{\sum_{i} |\Phi_{i}(\vect{k})|^{2}}.
1210: \eeq
1211:
1212: All quantities are normalized by the combination of $M_{G}$ and $H_{0}
1213: \equiv v / \sqrt{3}$. Concretely, $\widetilde{\phi}_{i} =
1214: \overline{\phi}_{i} / M_{G}$, $\widetilde{V} = V /
1215: (M_{G}^{2}H_{0}^{2})$, $\widetilde{t} = t H_{0}$,
1216: $\widetilde{\delta\varphi}_{ij} = \delta\varphi_{ij} H_{0}^{1/2}$,
1217: $\widetilde{\Phi}_{i} = \Phi_{i} M_{G} H_{0}^{1/2}$, and
1218: $\widetilde{k} = k H_{0}^{-1}$. Thus all terms except $k^{2}/a^{2}$ in
1219: the equations of motion become of the order of unity, which is
1220: essentially important for numerical calculations, avoiding rounded
1221: errors. Also, in order to confirm the results of our numerical
1222: calculations we compare the spectrum derived from the evolution
1223: equation (\ref{eq:dotphi}) and that obtained from the constrained
1224: equation (\ref{eq:phi}). Both spectra coincide up to the order of
1225: $10^{-8}$.
1226:
1227: The spectra of primordial fluctuations for the cases of the MACHO PBHs
1228: and the BESS (GRBs) PBHs are depicted in Figs. \ref{fig:macho} and
1229: \ref{fig:bess}. As is easily seen, the numerical results reproduce
1230: excellently analytic estimates, which is confirmed to be correct.
1231:
1232:
1233: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1234: \section{Discussion and conclusions}
1235: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1236:
1237: \label{sec:con}
1238:
1239: In this paper we have minutely investigated a natural double
1240: inflation model in SUGRA. By virtue of the shift symmetry, chaotic
1241: inflation can take place, during which the initial value of new
1242: inflation is set. The initial value of new inflation is adequately far
1243: from the local maximum of the potential so that primordial
1244: fluctuations within the present horizon scale are attributed to both
1245: inflations. That is, fluctuations responsible for the anisotropy of
1246: the CMB and the large scale structure are produced during chaotic
1247: inflation, while fluctuations on smaller scale are produced during new
1248: inflation. Due to the peculiar nature of new inflation, fluctuations
1249: on smaller scale are as large as of the order of unity, which may lead
1250: to PBHs formation. As examples we consider PBHs responsible for
1251: MACHOs and antiproton flux observed by the BESS experiment or short
1252: gamma ray bursts. We find that if we take reasonable values of
1253: parameters, such PBHs are produced in our double inflation model. To
1254: make sure, we also perform numerical calculations and confirm analytic
1255: estimates definitely.
1256:
1257: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1258: \subsection*{Acknowledgments}
1259: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1260:
1261: M.Y. is grateful to T. Kanazawa, M. Kawasaki, F. Takahashi, and J.
1262: Yokoyama for discussions. M.Y. is partially supported by the Japanese
1263: Society for the Promotion of Science.
1264:
1265: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
1266:
1267: \bib{inflation}See, for example, {\it A. D. Linde, Particle Physics and
1268: Inflationary Cosmology} (Harwood, Chur, Switzerland, 1990).
1269:
1270: \bib{LR}See, for a review, D. H. Lyth and A. Riotto,
1271: \PRT{314}{1}{99}.
1272:
1273: \bib{SUSY}See, for example, H. P. Nilles,
1274: \PRT{110}{1}{84}.
1275:
1276: \bib{newinf} A. D. Linde,
1277: \PLBold{108}{389}{82}; \\
1278: A. Albrecht and P. J. Steinhardt,
1279: \PRL{48}{1220}{82}.
1280:
1281: \bib{AKY}T. Asaka, M. Kawasaki, and M. Yamaguchi,
1282: \PRDD{61}{027303}{00}.
1283:
1284: \bib{IKY}K. I. Izawa, M. Kawasaki, and T. Yanagida,
1285: \PLB{411}{249}{97}.
1286:
1287: \bib{chaoinf} A. D. Linde,
1288: \PLBold{129}{177}{83}.
1289:
1290: \bib{GL}A. S. Goncharov and A. D. Linde,
1291: \PLBold{139}{27}{84};
1292: \CQG{1}{L75}{84}.
1293:
1294: \bib{MSY2}H. Murayama, H, Suzuki, T. Yanagida, and J. Yokoyama,
1295: \PRD{50}{R2356}{94}.
1296:
1297: \bib{KYY}M. Kawasaki, M. Yamaguchi, and T. Yanagida,
1298: \PRLL{85}{3572}{00}; \PRDD{63}{103514}{01}.
1299:
1300: \bib{YY}M. Yamaguchi and J. Yokoyama,
1301: \PRDD{63}{043506}{01}.
1302:
1303: \bib{inithyb}G. Lazarides, C. Panagiotakopoulos, and N. D. Vlachos,
1304: \PRD{54}{1369}{96};
1305: G. Lazarides and N. D. Vlachos,
1306: \IBID{56}{4562}{97};
1307: N. Tetradis,
1308: \IBID{57}{5997}{98}.
1309:
1310: \bib{doublehyb}C. Panagiotakopoulos and N. Tetradis,
1311: \PRD{59}{083502}{99};
1312: G. Lazarides and N. Tetradis,
1313: \IBID{58}{123502}{98}.
1314:
1315: \bib{double}L. A. Kofman, A. D. Linde, and A. A. Starobinsky,
1316: \PLBold{157}{361}{85}; \\
1317: J. Silk and M. S. Turner,
1318: \PRD{35}{419}{87}; \\
1319: D. Polarski and A. A. Starobinsky,
1320: \NPB{385}{623}{92}; \\
1321: P. Peter, D. Polarski, and A. A. Starobinsky,
1322: \PRD{50}{4827}{94}; \\
1323: S. Gottl\"{o}ber, J. P. M\"{u}cket, and A. A. Starobinsky,
1324: \APJ{434}{417}{94}; \\
1325: R. Kates, V. M\"{u}ller, S. Gottl\"ober, J. P. M\"ucket, and J. Retzlaff,
1326: \MNRAS{277}{1254}{95}; \\
1327: D. Langlois,
1328: \PRD{54}{2447}{96}; \IB{59}{123512}{99}; \\
1329: J. A. Adams, G. G. Ross, and S. Sarkar,
1330: \NPB{503}{405}{97}; \\
1331: J. Lesgourgues and D. Polarski,
1332: \PRD{56}{6425}{97}; \\
1333: J. Lesgourgues, D. Polarski, and A. A. Starobinsky,
1334: \MNRAS{297}{769}{98};
1335: M. Sakellariadou and N. Tetradis,
1336: hep-ph/9806461; \\
1337: J. Lesgourgues,
1338: \PLB{452}{15}{99}; \NPBB{582}{593}{00}; \\
1339: T. Kanazawa, M. Kawasaki, N. Sugiyama, and T. Yanagida,
1340: \PRDD{61}{023517}{00}; astro-ph/0006445.
1341:
1342: \bib{BOOMERANG}P. de Bernardis {\it et al.},
1343: \NATT{404}{955}{00}; \\
1344: A. E. Lange {\it et al.},
1345: \PRDD{63}{042001}{01}.
1346:
1347: \bib{MAXIMA}S. Hanany {\it et al.},
1348: \APJLL{545}{5}{00}; \\
1349: A. Balbi {\it et al.},
1350: \IBIDD{545}{1}{00}.
1351:
1352: \bib{PBH}L. Randall, M. Soljaci\'c, and A. H. Guth,
1353: \NPB{472}{377}{96}; \\
1354: J. Garc\'ia-Bellido, A. D. Linde, and D. Wands,
1355: \PRD{54}{6040}{96}.
1356:
1357: \bib{PBH2}
1358: J. Yokoyama,
1359: \PRD{58}{083510}{98};
1360: \IB{59}{107303}{99}.
1361:
1362: \bib{PBH3}
1363: M. Kawasaki, N. Sugiyama, and T. Yanagida,
1364: \PRD{57}{6050}{98}; \\
1365: M. Kawasaki, and T. Yanagida,
1366: \IBID{59}{043512}{99}; \\
1367: T. Kanazawa, M. Kawasaki, and T. Yanagida,
1368: \PLBB{482}{174}{00}.
1369:
1370: \bib{MACHO}C. R. Alcock {\it et al.},
1371: \NAT{365}{621}{93};
1372: \PRL{74}{2867}{95};
1373: \APJ{486}{697}{97}; \\
1374: E. Aubourg {\it et al.},
1375: \NAT{365}{623}{93};
1376: \AA{301}{1}{95}.
1377:
1378: \bib{BESS}K. Yoshimura {\it et al.},
1379: \PRL{75}{3792}{95}.
1380:
1381: \bib{gamma}See, for example, D. B. Cline, C. Matthey, and S.
1382: Otwinowski, in {\it Proceedings of the 14th IAP Colloquium}
1383: (Frontieres, Paris, 1998), p. 374.
1384:
1385: \bib{YAMA}M. Yamaguchi,
1386: hep-ph/0103045.
1387:
1388: \bib{tHooft}G. 't Hooft, in {\it Recent Developments in Gauge
1389: Theories}, edited by G. 't Hooft {\it et al.} (Plenum, Carg\`ese,
1390: 1980).
1391:
1392: \bib{eternal} A. D. Linde,
1393: \PLB{175}{395}{86};
1394: \MPLA{1}{81}{86}.
1395:
1396: \bib{sr}A. Vilenkin,
1397: \PRD{27}{2848}{83}.
1398:
1399: \bib{stochastic}A. A. Starobinsky, in {\it Current Topics in Field
1400: Theory, Quantum Gravity, and Strings}, edited by H. J. de Vega and N.
1401: Sanchez, Lecture Notes in Physics Vol. 246 (Springer, Berlin, 1986),
1402: p. 107.
1403:
1404: \bib{Ellis}M. Yu. Khlopov and A. D. Linde,
1405: \PLBold{138}{265}{84}; \\
1406: J. Ellis, G. B. Gelmini, J. L. Lopez, D. V. Nanopoulos, and S. Sarker,
1407: \NPB{373}{92}{99}; \\
1408: M. Kawasaki and T. Moroi, \PTP{93}{879}{95}.
1409:
1410: \bib{PS}D. Polarski and A. A. Starobinsky,
1411: \NPB{385}{623}{92}; \PRD{50}{6123}{94};
1412: A. A. Starobinsky and J. Yokoyama, in {\it Proceedings of the
1413: Fourth Workshop on General Relativity and Gravitation}, edited by K.
1414: Nakao {\it et al.} (Kyoto University, Kyoto, 1994), p. 381.
1415:
1416: \bib{COBE}C. L. Bennett {\it et al.},
1417: \APJL{464}{1}{96}.
1418:
1419: \bib{CH}B. J. Carr and S. W. Hawking,
1420: \MNRAS{168}{399}{74};
1421: B. J. Carr,
1422: \APJ{201}{1}{75}.
1423:
1424: \bib{BP}J. S. Bullock and J. R. Primack,
1425: \PRD{55}{7423}{97}.
1426:
1427: \bib{Ivanov}P. Ivanov,
1428: \PRD{57}{7145}{98}.
1429:
1430: \bib{num}D. S. Salopek, J. R. Bond, and J. M. Bardeen,
1431: \PRD{40}{1753}{89};
1432: J. Lesgourgues,
1433: \NPBB{582}{593}{00};
1434: H. Suzuki,
1435: Master thesis, University of Tokyo, Japan, 1999.
1436:
1437:
1438: \end{thebibliography}
1439:
1440: \begin{table}[t]
1441: \begin{center}
1442: \begin{tabular}{| c | c | c | c | c |}
1443: & $\Phi$ & $X$ & $\Xi$ & $\Pi$ \\
1444: \hline
1445: $Q_R$ & 0 & 2 & 0 & 0 \\
1446: \hline
1447: $Z_{2}$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$
1448: \end{tabular}
1449: \caption{The charges of various supermultiplets of U$(1)_{R}
1450: \times Z_{2}$.}
1451: \label{tab:charges}
1452: \end{center}
1453: \end{table}
1454:
1455: \begin{figure}[htb]
1456: \begin{center}
1457: \leavevmode\psfig{figure=macho.ps,width=17cm}
1458: \end{center}
1459: \caption{The spectrum of primordial fluctuations which produces the
1460: MACHO PBHs is depicted.}
1461: \label{fig:macho}
1462: \end{figure}
1463:
1464: \begin{figure}[htb]
1465: \begin{center}
1466: \leavevmode\psfig{figure=bess.ps,width=17cm}
1467: \end{center}
1468: \caption{The spectrum of primordial fluctuations which produces the
1469: BESS (GRBs) PBHs is depicted.}
1470: \label{fig:bess}
1471: \end{figure}
1472:
1473:
1474:
1475: \end{document}
1476:
1477: