1: \documentclass[12pt]{article}
2: \pagestyle{plain}
3: \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{0cm}
4: \setlength{\evensidemargin}{0cm}
5: \setlength{\textwidth}{15cm}
6: \setlength{\topmargin}{-10mm}
7: \setlength{\textheight}{22cm}
8: %%
9: \usepackage{epsf}
10: %%
11: \newcommand{\gtrsim}{ \mathop{}_{\textstyle \sim}^{\textstyle >} }
12: \newcommand{\lesssim}{ \mathop{}_{\textstyle \sim}^{\textstyle <} }
13: %%
14:
15: \title{\begin{flushright}
16: \small{RESCEU-5/01} \\
17: \small{hep-ph/0105134}
18: \end{flushright}
19: \vspace{2cm}
20: \Large
21: \bf Adiabatic and isocurvature fluctuations of Affleck-Dine field in
22: D-term inflation model}
23:
24: \author{Masahiro Kawasaki and Fuminobu Takahashi \\
25: \it{Research Center for the Early Universe (RESCEU),}\\
26: \it{School of Science,
27: University of Tokyo} }
28:
29: \def\ds{\displaystyle}
30:
31:
32:
33: \begin{document}
34:
35: \maketitle
36: \vspace{3cm}
37: \begin{abstract}
38: %%
39: We reconsider fluctuations of Affleck-Dine (AD) field in a D-term
40: inflation model. Contrary to the previous analysis,
41: we find that the spectrum of the adiabatic fluctuations is almost
42: scale invariant even if the AD field has a large initial value.
43: Furthermore, we study the isocurvature fluctuations of the AD field
44: and estimate the ratio of the isocurvature to adiabatic power
45: spectrum. The dynamics of the inflaton and AD fields sets the
46: upper bound for the value of the AD field, leading to a lower limit
47: for isocurvature perturbation. It is shown that the recent Cosmic
48: Microwave Background data give a constraint on the D-term inflation
49: and the AD field.
50: %%
51: \end{abstract}
52: \clearpage
53: \section{Introduction}
54:
55: Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model (MSSM) have many flat
56: directions, along which there are no classical potentials.
57: The flat directions are only
58: lifted by soft SUSY breaking mass terms and non-renormalizable
59: terms. Such flat directions have several interesting consequences in
60: cosmology such as baryogenesis and Q-ball formation. In Affleck-Dine
61: mechanism for baryogenesis, a complex field along a flat direction (AD
62: field) has a large field value during inflation. After inflation the AD
63: field starts to oscillate when its mass becomes larger than the Hubble
64: parameter $H$. At that time the AD field obtains velocity in the phase
65: direction because of the baryon number violating operator,
66: and the baryon number is generated very efficiently.
67:
68: For inflation models in which the accelerated cosmic expansion is caused
69: by a F-term potential, the AD field generally obtains an effective mass of
70: the order of $H$ through supergravity effects during inflation. In this
71: case, the expectation value of the AD field $\Phi$ is determined by the
72: balance between mass term $c H^2 |\Phi|^2$ and the non-renormalizable
73: term where $c$ is order one constant. If the mass
74: term is positive ($c > 0$) as expected from minimal supergravity,
75: the potential takes minimum at $\Phi = 0$ and the AD mechanism does not
76: work. Thus the supergravity effects must lead to negative mass term (i.
77: e. $c < 0$) for baryogenesis in F-term inflation models.
78:
79: Supersymmetric inflation models are also constructed with use of D-term
80: potential. In the D-term inflation models supergravity effects do not
81: induce $O(H^2)$ mass terms and the AD field has only soft SUSY breaking
82: mass term of the order of weak scale. Thus, the AD field can have a
83: large expectation
84: value during inflation, which makes the AD baryogenesis work.
85:
86: Since the effective masses of the AD field in D-term inflation models are
87: much smaller than the Hubble parameter during inflation, the AD field
88: has large fluctuations which may give some contribution to the density
89: fluctuations of the universe. In the previous work~\cite{McE,McE2}, the
90: fluctuations of AD field was considered and it was pointed out that the
91: the fluctuations of the AD field change the spectral index of the
92: adiabatic fluctuations produced in the D-term inflation, from which the
93: expectation value of the AD field is constrained.
94: The authors in Refs.~\cite{
95: McE,McE2} also pointed out that the small expectation value of the AD
96: field during inflation leads to lager isocurvature (baryon)
97: perturbations which are induced by the fluctuations in the phase
98: direction of the AD field. However, their estimation of the adiabatic
99: fluctuations was too naive, and one needs careful treatment for the
100: multi-field dynamics.
101:
102: In this paper, we reconsider the AD field fluctuations in the D-term
103: inflation model. We find that the spectrum of the adiabatic fluctuations
104: is almost scale invariant even if the AD field has a large initial
105: value. Furthermore, we study the isocurvature fluctuations of the AD
106: field and estimate the ratio of the isocurvature to adiabatic power
107: spectrum. It is shown that the recent Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB)
108: data give a constraint on the model parameters of D-term inflation and
109: the AD field.
110:
111:
112: \section{Dynamics of AD and inflaton fields}
113:
114: Let us discuss the dynamics of the AD and inflaton fields in the D-term
115: inflation model. The flat direction corresponding to the AD field can
116: be lifted by soft SUSY breaking mass term and the non-renormalizable
117: term coming from the superpotential given by
118: %%
119: \begin{equation}
120: W(\Phi) = \frac{\lambda \Phi^d}{d M^{d-3}},
121: \end{equation}
122: %%
123: where $M \equiv \frac{1}{\sqrt{8 \pi G}}$ is the reduced Planck mass,
124: $\lambda$ is an $O(1)$ coupling constant, and $\Phi \equiv \frac{\phi \,e^{
125: i \theta}}{\sqrt{2}}$ is the AD field.
126: Then, the potential is written as ~\cite{Dine}
127: %%
128: \begin{equation}
129: \label{eq:adp}
130: V(\phi) = m^2 |\Phi|^2 + \left(\frac{a m_{3/2} \Phi^{d}}{d M^{d-3}}+
131: h.c. \right)+
132: \frac{\lambda^{2} \left| \Phi \right|^{2(d-1)}}{M^{2(d-3)}},
133: \end{equation}
134: %%
135: where $m$ is the soft mass, $m_{3/2}$ is the mass of gravitino, and
136: $a$ is an $O(1)$ complex constant.
137: The dimension $d$ is an even
138: number, and the cases of $d=4, 6 $ are considered in this paper. Note
139: that the AD scalar $\phi$ should be less than $O(M)$, otherwise the
140: potential cannot be described as Eq. (\ref{eq:adp})
141:
142: The tree-level scalar potential for D-term inflation is given by \cite{
143: Dterm}
144: %%
145: \begin{equation}
146: V = \left | \kappa \right | ^{2}
147: \left ( \left | \psi_{+} \psi_{-} \right |^{2}+
148: \left | S\psi_{+} \right | ^{2}+\left | S\psi_{-} \right | ^{2}
149: \right) +
150: \frac{g^{2}}{2} \left (\left | \psi_{+} \right |^{2}
151: -\left | \psi_{-} \right |^{2} + \xi^{2} \right)^{2},
152: \end{equation}
153: %%
154: where $\kappa$ is the coupling constant of the interaction between
155: $S$ and $\psi_{\pm}$, $\xi^{2}$ is the Fayet-Illiopoulos term, and
156: $g$ is the $U(1)_{FI}$ gauge coupling. Though the global minimum
157: of this potential is at $S=\psi_{+}=0$, $|\psi_{-}|=\xi$, the local
158: minimum is at $\psi_{+}=\psi_{-}=0$ for $|S |> S_{c} \equiv
159: g \xi/\kappa$. We can take $S$ real using the $U(1)_{FI}$ phase
160: rotation. With use of $\sigma \equiv \sqrt{2}S$, for $\sigma >
161: \sigma_{c} = \sqrt{2} g \xi/\kappa$, the potential of $\sigma$ up
162: to a 1-loop correction is given by~\cite{Dterm}
163: %%
164: \begin{equation}
165: V(\sigma)=V_{0}+\frac{g^{4} \xi^{4}}{16 \pi^{2}}
166: \ln{\left(\frac{\sigma}{Q} \right)},
167: \end{equation}
168: %%
169: where $V_{0}=\frac{g^{2} \xi^{4}}{2}$, and $Q = \sigma_{c}$ is a
170: renormalization point. If the potential is dominated by
171: $V(\sigma)$, $\sigma$ is related to the number of e-folds (
172: of inflation) $N$,
173: %%
174: \begin{equation}
175: \label{eq:efolding}
176: \sigma \simeq \frac{g M}{2 \pi} \sqrt{N}.
177: \end{equation}
178: %%
179: Assuming that the present scale crosses the Hubble radius at $N=50$
180: during inflation, the COBE normalization ($V^{\frac{3}{2}}/V'=5.3
181: \times
182: 10^{-4}$) fixes
183: %%
184: \begin{equation}
185: \xi = 7.05\times 10^{15}~{\rm GeV}.
186: \end{equation}
187: %%
188: %With the gently-sloping potential, $\sigma$ always slowly rolls until
189: %$\sigma$ reaches $\sigma_{c}$, even when $V(\phi)$ is dominant
190: % (see below).
191:
192: If $\phi$ starts with $\phi_{i} \sim O(M)$, the potential is dominated
193: by the F-term of the AD field. Then there arises $O(H^2)$ mass term for
194: the inflaton due to supergravity effects, and it rapidly rolls down to its true minimum.
195: Therefore inflation does not occur at all in this case.
196: In order to have a successful inflationary model, $\phi_{i}$ must be less
197: than $\phi_{c}$, which is given by
198: \begin{equation}
199: \phi_{c} = \sqrt{2} \left(\frac{g}{\sqrt{2} \lambda}
200: \xi^{2} M^{d-3} \right)^{\frac{1}{d-1}}.
201: \end{equation}
202: For $\phi_{i} \leq \phi_{c}$, the universe is dominated by the D-term of the
203: inflaton field.\footnote{
204: Precisely speaking, the inflation can occur even if $\phi_{i} \gtrsim
205: \phi_{c}$ (say, $\phi_{i}=1.5 \phi_{c}$, $\sigma_{i}=M$).
206: In any case, the AD field value is set below $\phi_{sr}$ along
207: the same argument, once the D-term driving inflation begins.
208: }
209: Thus the D-term driving inflation accounts for
210: the necessary $O(50)$ e-folds. This gives $\sigma_{i} =O(g M)$.
211: Then it is easy to show that the slow roll condition for $\sigma$ is satisfied,
212: %%
213: \begin{equation}
214: \epsilon_{\sigma} \ll |\eta_{\sigma}| \simeq M^{2}
215: \frac{V(\sigma)''}{V(\sigma)}
216: \simeq \frac{1}{2N} \ll 1,
217: \end{equation}
218: %%
219: where $\epsilon_{\sigma}$ and $\eta_{\sigma}$ are slow roll
220: parameters~\cite{Lyth}. Once the inflation begins, the AD field
221: rapidly oscillates with a decreasing amplitude.
222: When the amplitude of the oscillation
223: becomes small enough ($\phi \lesssim \phi_{sr}$), $\phi$ begins to
224: slow-roll. $\phi_{sr}$ is obtained by solving $\eta_{\phi}(\phi_{sr})
225: = M^2\frac{V(\phi)''}{V(\sigma)}
226: \simeq 1$:
227: %%
228: \begin{eqnarray}
229: \phi_{sr} &=& \left(
230: \frac{2^{d-1}M^{2d-8}V_{0} }{(2d-2)(2d-3) \lambda^{2}}
231: \right)^{\frac{1}{2d-4}} , \\
232: &=&\left\{
233: \begin{array}{ll}
234: \ds{ \left(\frac{2}{15} \right)^{\frac{1}{4}}
235: \sqrt{\frac{g}{\lambda}} \xi} & \ds{d=4} \\
236: \ds{\left(\frac{8}{45} \right)^{\frac{1}{8}}
237: \left(\frac{g}{\lambda} \right) ^{\frac{1}{4}}
238: \sqrt{\xi M}} & \ds{d=6}
239: \end{array}
240: \right..
241: \end{eqnarray}
242: %%
243: Therefore, the expectation value of the AD field $\phi$ at the horizon exit
244: of the present scale is generally less than $O(\phi_{sr})$. Thus, we have
245: an upper limit to $\phi$,
246: %%
247: \begin{equation}
248: \label{eq:upper}
249: \phi \lesssim \phi_{sr}.
250: \end{equation}
251: %%
252: Note that this upper limit to the AD field value is totally due to its
253: dynamical property and the requirement that an inflation should occur,
254: not any observational constraint.
255:
256:
257: \section{Adiabatic Fluctuations}
258:
259: Next, we calculate the fluctuations of the AD field $\phi$ and
260: inflaton $\sigma$. According to Ref.~\cite{Sta}, the gauge-invariant
261: curvature perturbation $\Phi_{H}$
262: is given by
263: %%
264: \begin{equation}
265: \label{eq:BPH}
266: \Phi_{H} = -C_{1} \frac{\dot{H}}{H} + \frac{C_{3}}{3 V_{total}^{2}}
267: \left( V'(\sigma)^{2} V(\phi)-V(\sigma) V'(\phi)^{2} \right),
268: \end{equation}
269: %%
270: where\footnote{%%
271: %%
272: As mentioned in \cite{doubleD},
273: it is not so obvious how to distribute the constant $V_{0}$
274: into $V(\sigma)$ and $V(\phi)$ in Eq. (\ref{eq:const}). We have
275: checked Eq. (\ref{eq:const}) by numerical calculation as shown
276: in Fig.\ref{fig:spectrum}.
277: }
278: %%
279: \begin{equation}
280: \label{eq:const}
281: C_{1}=\frac{H}{V_{total}}
282: \left( V(\sigma) \frac{\delta \sigma}{\dot{\sigma}}
283: +V(\phi) \frac{\delta \phi}{\dot{\phi}} \right),
284: \end{equation}
285: %%
286: is the growing adiabatic mode, and
287: %%
288: \begin{equation}
289: C_{3} = \frac{1}{2 H} \left(\frac{\delta \sigma}{\dot{\sigma}}
290: -\frac{\delta \phi}{\dot{\phi}} \right),
291: \end{equation}
292: %%
293: is the isocurvature mode. For $\phi < \phi_{sr}$, $V_{total}$ is
294: dominated by $V_{0}$, and $\dot{\sigma} \leq \dot{\phi}$.
295: Hence $C_{1} \simeq H\frac{\delta \sigma}
296: {\dot{\sigma}}$. In other words, the main contribution to the
297: adiabatic fluctuation comes from the inflaton. Therefore the primordial
298: spectrum is almost scale-invariant as usual. With this approximation,
299: the primordial spectrum is given by
300: %%
301: \begin{equation}
302: \label{eq:analytic}
303: k^{\frac{3}{2}} \Phi_{H} (k) \simeq \frac{\sqrt{12}\pi}{5}
304: \left(\frac{\xi}{M} \right)^{2}
305: \sqrt{50-\ln{\frac{k}{k_{0}}}} ,
306: \end{equation}
307: %%
308: where $k_{0} ^{-1} \equiv 3000 h^{-1}$Mpc.
309:
310: In order to check the above estimate,
311: we also solve the evolution of zero modes and
312: fluctuations of the AD and inflaton fields and the gauge-invariant
313: curvature perturbation $\Phi_H$
314: by numerical calculation, following Ref.\cite{BB}.
315: We present the evolution equations in
316: synchronous gauge as \cite{BB}
317: \begin{eqnarray}
318: \kappa & \equiv & \left(\frac{k^{2}}{a^{2}}\mathcal{R}-4 \pi G \delta \rho
319: \right) /H, \\
320: \delta \rho_{com}&\equiv& \delta \rho-3H \Psi,
321: \end{eqnarray}
322: \begin{eqnarray}
323: \dot{\mathcal{R}} &=& 4 \pi G \Psi, \\
324: \delta \dot{\rho}_{com} &=& -3 H\left(1+\frac{1}{2} (1+\omega) \right)
325: \delta \rho_{com}+\frac{k^{2}}{a^{2}} \left(\frac{(\rho+p)\mathcal{R}}{H}+
326: \Psi \right), \\
327: \dot{\Psi}&=&-3H \Psi-\delta p, \\
328: \delta\dot{p} &=& \frac{1}{3} \delta \rho_{com}+H \Psi +\frac{2}{3}
329: \sum_{j} \left(\dot{\phi_{j}} \delta \dot{\phi_{j}}-
330: 2\frac{\partial V_{total}}{\partial \phi_{j}} \delta \phi_{j}\right),\\
331: \delta \ddot{\phi_{j}}&+&3H \delta \dot{\phi_{j}}+\frac{k^{2}}{a^{2}}
332: \delta \phi_{j}+ \sum_{i} \frac{\partial^{2}V_{total}}{\partial \phi_{j}
333: \partial \phi_{i}} \delta \phi_{i}-\kappa \dot{\phi_{j}}=0,
334: \end{eqnarray}
335: where $a$ is the scale factor,
336: $\phi_{1(2)}=\sigma \,(\phi)$, $\mathcal{R}$ is the curvature
337: perturbation, $\Psi \equiv
338: -\Sigma_{j}\dot{\phi_{j}} \delta \phi_{j}$ is the total momentum
339: current potential, $p$ and $\rho$ are the total pressure and energy
340: density, and $\omega \equiv \frac{p}{\rho}$.
341: The gauge-invariant
342: curvature perturbation $\Phi_{H}$ is given by
343: \begin{equation}
344: \Phi_{H} = 4 \pi G \frac{a^{2}}{k^{2}} \delta \rho_{com}.
345: \end{equation}
346: We have found that the above analytic
347: solution Eq.(\ref{eq:analytic}) agrees well with the numerical results.
348: These two primordial
349: spectra are plotted in Fig.\ref{fig:spectrum}.
350: From Fig.\ref{fig:spectrum}, one can see that the analytic solution (the
351: solid line) agrees with the numerical results very well, which support
352: the validity of the approximation used above.
353:
354: \begin{figure}[htbp]
355: \centering
356: \hspace*{-7mm}
357: \leavevmode\epsfysize=14cm \epsfbox{spe.ps}\\[2mm]
358: %\begin{center}
359: %\leavevmode\psfig{figure=spectrum.ps,width=16cm}
360: %\end{center}
361: \vspace{-1mm}
362: \caption[fig-ho]{\label{fig:spectrum}The analytic and numerical
363: results for the primordial spectra. We have taken $d=6$,
364: $g=\lambda=\kappa=0.1$,
365: $\sigma_{i}=0.114M$, $\phi_{i}=0.0278M$ in numerical calculation.}
366: \end{figure}
367:
368:
369: The spectral index is given by
370: %%
371: \begin{equation}
372: \label{eq:index}
373: n=1+2\frac{d \ln{k^{\frac{3}{2}} \Phi_{H}(k)}}{d\ln{k}}.
374: % \frac{d\ln {T(k)}}{d \ln {k}},
375: \end{equation}
376: %%
377: Substituting Eq.(\ref{eq:BPH}) ( or Eq.(\ref{eq:analytic})) into Eq.
378: (\ref{eq:index}), the spectral index $n_{\rm COBE}$ on COBE scales
379: %%
380: \begin{eqnarray}
381: n_{\rm COBE} &\simeq &1-3M^{2}
382: \frac{V'(\sigma)^{2}}{V_{0}^{2}}
383: +2M^{2}\frac{V''(\sigma)}{V_{0}}-M^{2}
384: \frac{V'(\phi)^{2}}{V_{0}^{2}}, \\
385: &\simeq & 1+2M^{2}\frac{V''(\sigma)}{V_{0}}, \\
386: & =& 1-\frac{1}{N_{COBE}} \simeq 0.98.
387: \end{eqnarray}
388: %%
389: We have also obtained $n_{\rm COBE} = 0.98$ from our numerical
390: calculation. Note that $n_{\rm COBE}=1.2 \pm 0.3$ is implied by
391: present CMB observations and hence the CMB observation does not
392: restrict any parameters in this model as opposed to the result
393: in Ref.~\cite{McE2}. This discrepancy is due to the incorrect estimation
394: of the gauge invariant $\zeta$ in Ref.~\cite{McE2} where $\zeta$ is
395: given by
396: %%
397: \begin{equation}
398: \label{eq:wrong}
399: \zeta = \frac{\delta \rho}{\rho+p} \propto
400: \frac{V'(\phi)+V'(\sigma)}{V'(\phi)^{2}+V'(\sigma)^{2}}
401: \delta \phi.
402: \end{equation}
403: %%
404: On the other hand, the accurate form of $\zeta$ is given by
405: %%
406: \begin{equation}
407: \zeta=\frac{\Delta_{g}}{1+ \omega}
408: -\frac{16 \pi G a^{2} p}{(1+\omega)k^{2}} \Pi,
409: \end{equation}
410: %%
411: where $\Delta_{g}\equiv \delta+3(1+\omega) \mathcal{R}$, $\delta \equiv
412: \delta \rho/\rho$, and $\Pi$ is an anisotropic stress
413: perturbation. Hence only if we take the flat slicing and an anisotropic
414: stress perturbation can be neglected, then the first equality in
415: Eq.~(\ref{eq:wrong}) is satisfied. It is also worth noting that the
416: dynamics of the perturbed system cannot be described by one
417: equation for $\zeta$ when more than one scalar field are
418: involved~\cite{pps,nakano}. In addition, the expression (\ref {eq:wrong}) is
419: based on $\delta \sigma= \delta \phi$. However, $\delta \sigma$ and
420: $\delta \phi$ are classical random quantities,
421: and the correct expression is $ \langle(\delta \sigma)^2\rangle =
422: \langle (\delta \phi)^2\rangle$, where $\langle\cdots\rangle$ means
423: ensemble average. The results of numerical calculation
424: for the time evolutions of $\zeta$ and
425: $\frac{V'(\phi)+V'(\sigma)}{V'(\phi)^{2}+V'(\sigma)^{2}} \delta \phi$
426: during inflation are plotted in Fig.\ref{fig:zeta}. As seen in
427: Fig.\ref{fig:zeta}, the two quantities are not proportional to each
428: other.
429:
430: \begin{figure}[htbp]
431: \centering
432: \hspace*{-7mm}
433: \leavevmode\epsfysize=14cm \epsfbox{zeta.ps}\\[2mm]
434: \vspace{-1mm}
435: \caption[fig-ho]{\label{fig:zeta}
436: The time evolutions of the gauge invariant $\zeta$ and
437: $\frac{V'(\phi)+V'(\sigma)}{V'(\phi)^{2}+V'(\sigma)^{2}} \delta \phi$
438: during inflation.}
439: \end{figure}
440:
441:
442: \section{Isocurvature Fluctuations}
443:
444: During inflation, the fluctuation of the phase $\theta$ of the AD field is
445: given by
446: %%
447: \begin{equation}
448: \delta \theta =\frac{H}{\sqrt{2 k^{3}} \phi}.
449: \end{equation}
450: %%
451: After baryogenesis by the AD mechanism, the fluctuation of $\theta$
452: becomes baryonic isocurvature perturbation~\cite{astro}. According to
453: Ref.~\cite{McE2}, the baryon number density $n_{B}$ is proportional
454: to $\sin {2\theta}$. Thus the isocurvature fluctuation with comoving
455: wavenumber $k$ is given by
456: %%
457: \begin{eqnarray}
458: \delta_{iso}(k) &=&\frac{\delta n_{B}^{iso}}{n_{B}}
459: \frac{\Omega_{B}}{\Omega_{t}}, \\
460: &=&2 \cot 2\theta_{k}
461: \frac{H(t_{k})}{\sqrt{2 k^{3}} \phi(t_{k})}
462: \frac{\Omega_{B}}{\Omega_{t}},
463: \end{eqnarray}
464: %%
465: where $\Omega_{B(t)}$ is the density parameter of baryons (total matter),
466: $t_{k}$ is the time when the given mode crosses the Hubble radius during
467: inflation. On the other hand, both the AD field and the inflaton generate
468: the adiabatic fluctuation given by
469: %%
470: \begin{eqnarray}
471: \delta_{ad}(k) &=& \frac{2}{3}
472: \left(\frac{k}{a(t)H(t)}\right)^{2}
473: \Phi_{H} \\
474: &=& \frac{2}{3}
475: \left(\frac{k}{a(t)H(t)}\right)^{2}\times
476: \frac{2}{3}\frac{1}{M^{2}}\left(\frac{V(\sigma)}{V'(\sigma)}
477: \delta \sigma+\frac{V(\phi)}{V'(\phi)}
478: \delta \phi \right)\\
479: &=& \frac{2\sqrt{2}}{9}
480: \frac{\sqrt{k}H(t_{k})}{a(t)^{2} H(t)^{2}M^{2}}
481: \left(\frac{8 \pi^{2}}{g^{2}} \sigma(t_{k})
482: +\frac{\phi(t_{k})}{2d-2} \right),
483: \end{eqnarray}
484: %%
485: where $t$ is an arbitrary time. To compare these two types of fluctuations,
486: it may be natural to consider the ratio of the power spectra at horizon
487: crossing, i.e., $k^{-1} a(t) =H(t)^{-1}$, which is
488: written as~\cite{ksy}
489: %%
490: \begin{equation}
491: \label{eq:ratio}
492: \alpha_{KSY} = \left. \frac{P_{iso}}{P_{ad}} \right|_{k=a(t)H(t)} =
493: \frac{81 g^{4}M^{4}}{256 \pi^{4} \phi(t_{k})^{2} \sigma(t_{k})^{2}}
494: \left(\frac{\Omega_{B}}{\Omega_{t}}\right)^{2}
495: \cot^{2} 2\theta_{k}.
496: \end{equation}
497: %%
498: It is also useful to consider the ratio $\alpha$ of the present power
499: spectra~\cite{kanazawa}. The present power spectrum can be described as
500: %%
501: \begin{equation}
502: P (k)=P_{ad}+P_{iso}=
503: A_{ad} k T_{ad}^{2}(k)+A_{iso} k T_{iso}^{2}(k),
504: \end{equation}
505: %%
506: where the transfer functions ($T_{ad,\, iso}$) are normalized
507: as $T(k \rightarrow 0)=1$.
508: The ratio $\alpha$ is defined as
509: %%
510: \begin{equation}
511: \alpha \equiv \frac{A_{iso}}{A_{ad}}.
512: \end{equation}
513: %%
514: Actually, $\alpha$ is related to $\alpha_{KSY}$~\cite{kanazawa} by
515: $\alpha =\left( \frac{4}{27} \right)^{2} \alpha_{KSY}$. From
516: Eqs.~(\ref{eq:efolding}), (\ref{eq:upper}), and (\ref{eq:ratio}), we
517: obtain a lower limit for $\alpha$ as
518: %%
519: \begin{eqnarray}
520: \alpha &=&
521: \frac{g^{4}M^{4}}{144 \pi^{4} \phi(t_{k})^{2} \sigma(t_{k})^{2}}
522: \cot ^{2} 2 \theta_{k}
523: \left(\frac{\Omega_{B}}{\Omega_{t}} \right)^{2}, \\
524: &>& \alpha_{c},
525: \end{eqnarray}
526: %%
527: where $\alpha_{c}$ is given by
528: %%
529: \begin{eqnarray}
530: \alpha_{c} &=& \left\{
531: \begin{array}{ll}
532: \ds{ \frac{\sqrt{30}}{72\pi^{2}}g \lambda \cot^{2}2\theta_{k}
533: \left(\frac{\xi}{M} \right)^{-2}N_{k}^{-1}
534: \left(\frac{\Omega_{B}}{\Omega_{t}} \right)^{2}} & \ds{d=4}\\
535: \ds{ \left(\frac{5}{72} \right)^{\frac{1}{4}}
536: \frac{g^{\frac{3}{2}}
537: \lambda ^{\frac{1}{2}}}{12 \pi^{2}}\cot^{2}2\theta_{k}
538: \left(\frac{\xi}{M} \right)^{-1}N_{k}^{-1}
539: \left(\frac{\Omega_{B}}{\Omega_{t}} \right)^{2}} & \ds{d=6}
540: \end{array}
541: \right..
542: \end{eqnarray}
543: %%
544: If we take $N=50, \, \Omega_{B} =0.03h^{-2}, \, \Omega_{t}=0.28,$
545: and $ h=0.8$,\footnote{%%
546: %%
547: These are best-fit values of model(10) in~\cite{ekv}.
548: The fit was done for the data from Boomerang and MAXIMA-1.}
549: %%
550: this lower limit is approximately given by
551: %%
552: \begin{eqnarray}
553: \label{eq:lower}
554: \alpha_{c} &\simeq &\left\{
555: \begin{array}{ll}
556: \ds{0.52g\lambda\cot^{2}2\theta_{k}}
557: & \ds{d=4} \\
558: \ds{8.4\times 10^{-4} g^{\frac{3}{2}} \lambda
559: ^{\frac{1}{2}}\cot^{2}2\theta_{k}} & \ds{d=6}
560: \end{array}
561: \right..
562: \end{eqnarray}
563: %%
564: If $g\simeq \lambda \simeq $0.1 and $\theta \sim O(1)$,
565: then $\alpha_{c}\sim 1.1 \times 10^{-3}$ for the $d=4$ case.
566: According to \cite{ekv}, the best-fit value\footnote{%%
567: %%
568: $\alpha_{EKV}$ defined as Eq.(6) in~\cite{ekv} is related to our
569: definition of $\alpha$ as follows.
570: $$ \alpha = \frac{\alpha_{EKV}}{36(1-\alpha_{EKV})}.$$
571: We adopt the model (10) in \cite{ekv}, because
572: both adiabatic and isocurvature perturbations are
573: almost scale-invariant in our model.}
574: %%
575: of $\alpha$ is $\alpha_{best-fit} = 2.4 \times 10^{-3}$.
576: Finally, we have constraints on $g$, $\lambda$, and $\theta$:
577: %%
578: \begin{eqnarray}
579: \label{eq:d4}
580: g \lambda \cot ^{2} 2 \theta_{k} &<&
581: 4.7 \times 10^{-3} , \,\, d=4, \\
582: \label{eq:d6}
583: g^{\frac{3}{2}} \lambda ^{\frac{1}{2}}\cot^{2}2\theta_{k}&<&
584: 2.9,\,\, ~~~~~~d=6 .
585: \end{eqnarray}
586: %%
587: Thus, the large coupling constants can be excluded for $d=4$. On the
588: other hand, the constraint for $d=6$ ( and $d\ge 8$) is not severe at
589: all. It is noticed that the value of the AD field during inflation
590: can be smaller than that used here for some initial conditions because
591: the AD field may oscillate before inflation. For this case, the
592: constraint becomes more stringent.
593:
594: \section{Conclusion}
595:
596: In this paper we have considered the adiabatic and isocurvature
597: fluctuations of the AD field in the D-term inflation model, and
598: have found that there exists an upper limit for AD field due
599: to its dynamical property and the requirement that an inflation
600: should occur. The primordial spectrum has been
601: calculated analytically and numerically, and has been found to be
602: of the familiar Harrison-Zeldovich type. While the adiabatic
603: fluctuations of the AD field do not make any significant contribution,
604: the isocurvature fluctuations of the AD field can generate baryonic
605: isocurvature perturbations. The upper bound for the AD field in
606: turn leads to the lower limit for isocurvature fluctuation as
607: Eq.(\ref{eq:lower}). Taking account of the observational constraints
608: on isocurvature perturbations from Boomerang and MAXIMA-1,
609: we had interesting constraints on some combinations of $g$,
610: $\lambda$, and $\theta$, especially in the case of $d=4$.
611:
612:
613: \vspace*{0.5cm}
614: {\sl Acknowledgment:} We thank Masahide Yamaguchi and Tsutomu Yanagida
615: for useful discussion. This work is supported by the Grant-in-Aid
616: for Scientific Research from the Ministry of Education, Science,
617: Sports, and Culture of Japan, Priority Area
618: ``Supersymmetry and Unified Theory of
619: Elementary Particles'' (No.\ 707).
620:
621:
622: \begin{thebibliography}{9}
623: %%
624: \bibitem{McE}
625: K. Enqvist and J. Mcdonald,
626: Phys. Rev. Lett. \textbf{83}, 2510 (1999) .
627: %%
628: \bibitem{McE2}
629: K. Enqvist and J. Mcdonald,
630: Phys. Rev. D \textbf{62}, 043502 (2000).
631: %%
632: \bibitem{Dine}
633: M. Dine, L. Randall, and S. Thomas,
634: Nuc. Phys. B \textbf{458}, 291 (1996).
635: %%
636: \bibitem{Dterm}
637: E. Haylo,
638: Phys. Lett. B \textbf{387}, 43 (1996); \\
639: P. Binetruy and G. Dvali, \textit{ibid}.\ \textbf{388}, 241 (1996).
640: %%
641: \bibitem{Lyth}
642: A.R. Liddle and D.H. Lyth,
643: {\sl Cosmological Inflation and Large-Scale Structure},
644: (Cambridge, 2000)
645: %%
646: \bibitem{Sta}
647: D.Polarski, and A.A.Starobinsky,
648: Nuc. Phys. B \textbf{385}, 623 (1992).
649: %%
650: \bibitem{BB}
651: D.S. Salopek, J.R. Bond, and J.M. Bardeen,
652: Phys. Rev. D \textbf{40}, 1753 (1989)
653: %%
654: \bibitem{doubleD}
655: J. Lesgourgues,
656: Nuc. Phys. B \textbf{582}, 593, (2000)
657: %%
658: \bibitem{pps}
659: P.Peter, D. Polarsky, A. A. Starobinsky,
660: Phys. Rev. D \textbf{50}, 4827, (1994).
661: %%
662: \bibitem{nakano}
663: A. A. Starobinsky and Jun'ichi Yokoyama,
664: Proc.\ 4th Workshop on General Relativiey and
665: Gravitation. eds.\ K.\ Nakao {\it et al} (Kyoto University, 1995) 381--390.
666: %%
667: \bibitem{astro}
668: Jun'ichi Yokoyama,
669: Astroparticle Physics \textbf{2}, 291, (1994)
670: %%
671: \bibitem{ksy}
672: M. Kawasaki, N. Sugiyama and T. Yanagita,
673: Phys. Rev. D \textbf{54}, 2442 (1996).
674: %%
675: \bibitem{kanazawa}
676: T. Kanazawa, M. Kawasaki, N. Sugiyama, and T. Yanagita,
677: Prog. Theor. Phys. \textbf{102}, 71, (1999)
678: %%
679: \bibitem{ekv}
680: K. Enqvist, H. Kurki-Suonio, J. Valiviita,
681: Phys. Rev. D \textbf{62}, 103003 (2000).
682: %%
683: \end{thebibliography}
684:
685:
686:
687:
688:
689: \end{document}
690:
691:
692: