1: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2: %% Revtex document %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
3: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
4:
5: \documentstyle[aps,prl,epsf,floats,amsmath]{revtex}
6: \bibliographystyle{srt}
7: %\documentstyle[prl,aps,preprint,epsf]{revtex}
8: % \hoffset=-0.35cm
9: % \voffset=0.3cm
10:
11: \flushbottom
12: \renewcommand{\textfraction}{0}
13: \renewcommand{\topfraction}{1}
14: \renewcommand{\bottomfraction}{1}
15:
16: \newcommand{\pd}{\partial}
17: \newcommand{\dd}{{\rm d}}
18: \newcommand{\e}{{\rm e}}
19: %\newcommand{\beq}{\begin{equation}}
20: %\newcommand{\eeq}{\end{equation}}
21: \newcommand{\bea}{\begin{eqnarray}}
22: \newcommand{\eea}{\end{eqnarray}}
23: \newcommand{\half}{\frac{1}{2}}
24: %\renewcommand{\lesssim}{\stackrel{<}{_{\scriptstyle \sim}}}
25: %\renewcommand{\gtrsim}{\stackrel{>}{_{\scriptstyle \sim}}}
26:
27: \draft
28:
29: \begin{document}
30: \twocolumn[\hsize\textwidth\columnwidth\hsize\csname
31: @twocolumnfalse\endcsname
32:
33:
34: %\begin{flushright}
35: %UCLA/99/TEP/*
36: %\end{flushright}
37:
38:
39:
40: \title{Solitosynthesis of $Q$-balls}
41:
42: \author{Marieke Postma}
43: \address{Department of Physics and Astronomy, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA
44: 90095-1547}
45: %\date{October 2001}
46:
47: \maketitle
48:
49: \begin{abstract}
50: We study the formation of $Q$-balls in the early universe,
51: concentrating on potentials with a cubic or quartic attractive
52: interaction. Large $Q$-balls can form via solitosynthesis, a process
53: of gradual charge accretion, provided some primordial charge assymetry
54: and initial ``seed'' $Q$-balls exist. We find that such seeds are
55: possible in theories in which the attractive interaction is of the
56: form $A H \psi^* \psi$, with a light ``Higgs'' mass. Condensate
57: formation and fragmentation is only possible for masses $m_\psi$ in
58: the sub-eV range; these $Q$-balls may survive untill present.
59: \end{abstract}
60:
61: \pacs{PACS numbers: 98.80.-k, 11.27.+d \hspace{1.0cm}
62: UCLA/01/TEP/31}
63:
64: \vskip2.0pc]
65:
66:
67: \renewcommand{\thefootnote}{\fnsymbol{footnote}}
68:
69: \setcounter{footnote}{0}
70:
71:
72:
73:
74:
75:
76: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
77: %% Section I %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
78: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
79:
80:
81: \section{Introduction}
82:
83: $Q$-balls are lumps of coherent scalar field that can be described
84: semi-classically as non-topological solitons. They can arise in
85: scalar field theories with a conserved global $U(1)$ charge and some
86: kind of attractive interaction \cite{coleman}. In a sector of fixed
87: charge, the $Q$-ball is the ground state of the theory. $Q$-balls
88: generically occur in supersymmetric extensions of the standard model
89: \cite{mssm}. In these theories, baryon and lepton number play the role
90: of conserved charge.
91:
92: $Q$-balls come in two types. Type II $Q$-balls are associated with
93: the flat directions of the potential, which are a generic feature of
94: supersymmetric theories. The VEV inside the $Q$-ball depends upon its
95: charge. Formation of this type of $Q$-balls through fragmentation of
96: an Affleck-Dine (AD)-like condensate has been studied extensively in
97: the literature \cite{frag,em,ad}. Type I $Q$-balls on the other hand
98: are characterized by a potential that is minimized at a finite VEV,
99: independent of the charge of the $Q$-ball. We have analyzed under
100: which conditions this type of $Q$-ball can be formed in the early
101: universe. In this paper we present the results.
102:
103: Large $Q$-balls can form via solitosynthesis, a process of gradual
104: charge accretion similar to nucleosynthesis, provided some primordial
105: charge assymetry exists~\cite{frieman,griest}. The bottleneck for
106: this process to occur then is the presence of initial ``seed''
107: $Q$-balls. Most potentials do not allow for small $Q$-balls which
108: makes solitosynthesis improbable. The exceptions are theories in
109: which the attractive interaction is provided by a cubic term in the
110: Lagrangian of the form $ A H \psi^* \psi$, with a light ``Higgs''
111: mass. Condensate formation does occur for light fields, for masses in
112: the range $m_\psi \lesssim {\rm eV}$. If this leads to fragmentation,
113: the thus formed $Q$-balls can survive evaporation if their binding
114: energies are large. $Q$-balls formed during a phase transition do not
115: survive evaporation, unless the phase transition takes place at
116: extremely low temperatures $T \lesssim 10^{-6} m_\psi$.
117:
118:
119: If $Q$-balls survive untill present they can be part of the dark
120: matter of the universe. Recently it was proposed that the dark matter
121: could be self-interacting; this would overcome various discrepancies
122: between observations and predictions based on collisionless dark
123: matter, such as WIMPs and axions~\cite{i_dm}. Due to their extended
124: nature $Q$-balls have relatively large cross sections, and therefore
125: can naturally satisfy the required self-interactions~\cite{q_dm}.
126:
127: Another cosmologically interesting feature of $Q$-balls is that
128: solitosynthesis in the false vacuum can result in a phase
129: transition~\cite{PT}. Accretion of charge proceeds until a critical
130: charge is reached, at which point it becomes energetically favorable
131: for the $Q$-ball to expand, filling space with the true vacuum phase.
132:
133:
134:
135:
136:
137:
138: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
139: %% Section II %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
140: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
141:
142:
143:
144: \section{$Q$-balls}
145:
146:
147: Consider a theory of an interacting scalar field $\phi$ that carries
148: unit charge under some conserved $U(1)$ charge. The potential has a
149: global minimum $U(0)=0$ at $\phi = 0$. We also require that the
150: potential admits $Q$-ball solutions, {\it i.e.},
151: %
152: \begin{equation}
153: \mu_0 = \sqrt{ \frac{2U(\phi)}{\phi^2}} = {\rm min},
154: \qquad {\rm for} \ \phi = \phi_0 \neq 0.
155: \label{mu_0}
156: \end{equation}
157: %
158: The $Q$-balls solutions are of the form $\phi(\vec{x},t)={\rm
159: e}^{i\omega t}\bar{\phi}(\vec{x})$. The charge and energy of such a
160: configuration is
161: %
162: \begin{equation}
163: Q = \omega \int {\rm d}^3 x \ \bar{\phi}^2,
164: \label{Q}
165: \end{equation}
166: and
167: \begin{equation}
168: E = \int {\rm d}^3 x \ \left[ \half |\nabla \bar{\phi}|^2
169: + U_\omega( \bar{\phi}) \right] + \omega Q,
170: \end{equation}
171: with
172: \begin{equation}
173: U_\omega({\phi}) = U(\phi) - \half \omega^2 \phi^2.
174: \end{equation}
175: %
176: Minimizing the energy for a fixed $\omega$ is equivalent to finding a
177: 3-dimensional bounce for tunneling in the potential $U_\omega$. The
178: bounce solution exists for $\mu_0 < \omega < \sqrt{U''(0)}$ by virtue
179: of eq.~(\ref{mu_0}), and is spherically symmetric~\cite{coleman}. The
180: equations of motion are:
181: %
182: \begin{equation}
183: \frac{ \dd^2 \bar{\phi} }{ \dd r^2 } + \frac{2}{r}
184: \frac{ \dd \bar{\phi} } { \dd r }
185: - \frac{ \pd U_\omega( \bar{\phi}) }{ \pd \bar{\phi} } = 0,
186: \label{bounce}
187: \end{equation}
188: %
189: with boundary conditions $\phi'(0)=0$ and $\phi(\infty)=0$.
190:
191: We will consider scalar potentials of the form
192: %
193: %\begin{subequations}
194: \begin{eqnarray}
195: U_1(\phi) &&= \frac{1}{2} m_\phi^2 \phi^2 - A \phi^3 + \lambda
196: \phi^4,
197: \label{U1} \\
198: U_2(\phi) &&= \frac{1}{2} m_\phi^2 \phi^2 - A \phi^4 + \lambda
199: \phi^6;
200: \label{U2}
201: \end{eqnarray}
202: %\end{subequations}
203: %
204: both have $\phi_0 = A / 2 \lambda$ and $\mu_0^2 = m_\phi^2 - A^2 / 2
205: \lambda$. $U_2$ is a typical potential that arises in effective field
206: theories. $U_1$ is a non-polynomial potential, as the cube term is of
207: the form $(\phi^* \phi)^{3/2}$. It is a typical potential in finite
208: temperature theories; this is however not interesting in the current
209: context since at high temperatures $Q$-balls evaporate quickly. But
210: it can also arise as an effective field theory. Consider for example
211: the potential
212: %
213: \bea
214: \label{U_1'}
215: U'_1(\psi) =&& m_\psi^2 \psi^* \psi + m_H^2 H^* H -A' H \psi^*
216: \psi + {\rm h.c.} \nonumber \\
217: && +\frac{\lambda_1}{4} \psi^* \psi\, H^*\! H +
218: \hfill \frac{\lambda_2}{4} (\psi^* \psi)^2
219: + \frac{\lambda_3}{4} (H^* H)^2,
220: \eea
221: %
222: where the ``Higgs'' field $H$ is uncharged under $U(1)$, whereas $\psi$
223: carries unit charge. Further, we take $A'$ real. Now make the field
224: redefinitions
225: %
226: \begin{equation}
227: {\rm Re} H = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \varphi \sin \theta, \qquad
228: \psi = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \varphi \e^{i \Omega} \cos \theta,
229: \end{equation}
230: %
231: then $U_1'$ becomes of the $U_1$ form, with $\phi$ some particular
232: direction in $(H,\psi)$-space. We can also calculate $\mu_0^2 = 2
233: U_1'/(\varphi^2 \cos^2 \theta) $ in terms of the $U_1'$
234: parameters. Taking $m_H =0$ and all quartic couplings equal $\lambda_1
235: = \lambda_2 = \lambda_3 = \lambda'$ to simplify the algebra, this
236: yields
237: %
238: \begin{equation}
239: \mu_0^2 = m_\psi^2 - \frac{ {A'}^2}{3 \lambda'}
240: \label{mu}
241: \end{equation}
242: %
243: at $\theta_0 = \pi/4$ and $\varphi_0 = 4 A'/ 3 \sqrt{2} \lambda'$.
244:
245: Potentials of the form $U'_1$ are present in the scalar sector of the
246: MSSM, where the Higgs field couples to sparticle fields through a
247: cubic interaction \cite{mssm}. The sparticles carry a conserved
248: $U(1)$ charge in the form of baryon or lepton number. However, the
249: sparticles and also possibly formed $Q$-balls are unstable, as they
250: can decay into light fermions \cite{evap_ferm}. Stable $Q$-balls can
251: be obtained in a model where the standard model (SM) Higgs field is
252: coupled to a charged SM singlet~\cite{demir}. The SM singlet $\psi$
253: is charged under a hidden sector $U(1)_\psi$ global symmetry, under
254: which none of the SM particles are charged. The $Q$-balls in this
255: model interact with the SM particles only weakly, through the Higgs
256: boson. Another possibility is that both the $H$ and $\psi$ field are
257: hidden sector fields, interacting only gravitationally or through some
258: other surpressed interaction with the visible sector. Hidden sectors
259: appear in a variety of models, such as technicolor, mirror symmetry,
260: hidden sector SUSY breaking, and brane world models. They also arise
261: naturally from string theory; in heterotic $E_8 \times E_8$ string
262: theory compactified on a Calabi-Yau manifold, one of the $E_8$'s
263: contains the SM whereas the other is some hidden sector.
264:
265: We will assume an initial charge asymmetry, {\it i.e.}, an excess of
266: particles over anti-particles. This asymmetry may be created through
267: a mechanism similar to those invoked to explain the baryon asymmetry
268: in the universe, such as the Affleck-Dine mechanism~\cite{affleck}.
269:
270:
271: %%%%%%%%%%%%%% subsection %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
272:
273:
274: \subsection{Large $Q$-balls --- thin wall approximation}
275:
276: For large $Q$ the $Q$-ball solution can be analyzed using a thin wall
277: approximation, which consists of neglecting the effect of the surface
278: compared to the bulk. The $Q$-ball may be approximated by a sphere of
279: radius $R_Q$ with $\phi = \phi_0$ inside and zero field value outside.
280: The mass and radius of the solition are
281: %
282: \begin{equation}
283: M_Q = \mu Q,
284: \end{equation}
285: %
286: and
287: \begin{equation}
288: R_Q = \frac{\beta_Q}{m_\phi} Q^{1/3},
289: \qquad \beta_Q = \left( \frac{3 m_\phi^3}
290: {4 \pi \omega \phi_0^2} \right)^{1/3},
291: \label{R_large}
292: \end{equation}
293: with $\mu,\omega \to \mu_0$ for $Q \to \infty$. The soliton is large
294: and its cross section is given by the geometrical area
295: %
296: \begin{equation}
297: \sigma_Q = \pi R_Q^2.
298: \end{equation}
299:
300:
301:
302: %%%%%%%%%%%%%% subsection %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
303:
304:
305: \subsection{Small $Q$-balls}
306: \label{sec_small}
307:
308:
309: The limit of small charge corresponds to $\omega \to m_\phi$. In this
310: limit the solution of the bounce equation (\ref{bounce}) is of the
311: form \cite{fin}
312: %
313: \begin{equation}
314: \bar{\phi} \sim (m_\phi^2-\omega^2)^{2-a} \,
315: \e^{-\sqrt{m_\phi^2-\omega^2} r},
316: \end{equation}
317: %
318: with $a$ the power of the attractive term in the potential. This
319: solution has the right behavior for $r \to \infty$ where $\phi \to 0$
320: and the quadratic term in the effective potential dominates, and for
321: $\omega \to m_\phi$ where the zero of $U_\omega$ is near the origin.
322: Using the solution to compute the conserved charge (\ref{Q}), and
323: taking the limit $\omega \to m_\phi$, one finds a finite, non-zero
324: value only for $4 + 2D - aD > 0$, with $D$ the number of spatial
325: dimensions. In $D=3$ dimensions, $U_1$ admits small $Q$-balls but
326: $U_2$ does not. Therefore, we will only consider $U_1$ in the
327: remaining of this section.
328:
329: In the limit of large $\omega$, or equivalently very non-degenerate
330: minima, one can neglect the quartic terms in $U_\omega(\phi)$. This
331: is the thick wall approximation \cite{thick}. The approximation is
332: valid for $Q$-balls with charge $Q$ that satisfies, for potential
333: $U_1$:
334: %
335: \begin{equation}
336: \left \{
337: \begin{array}{ll}
338: &Q \ll 14.6 m_\phi / \sqrt{\lambda} A, \\
339: &Q < 7.3 m_\phi^2 / A^2.
340: \end{array}
341: \right.
342: \label{cond_thick}
343: \end{equation}
344: %
345: If above conditions are met one can define an expansion parameter
346: %
347: \begin{equation}
348: \epsilon \equiv Q \frac{A^2}{3 S_\psi m_\phi^2} < \frac{1}{2},
349: \label{epsilon}
350: \end{equation}
351: with $S_\psi \approx 4.85$. The mass of the soliton is
352: \begin{equation}
353: M_Q = Q m_\phi \left[ 1 - \frac{1}{6} \epsilon^2 + {\cal O}
354: (\epsilon^4) \right].
355: \label{mass_small}
356: \end{equation}
357: The radius of the $Q$-ball can be parameterized
358: \begin{equation}
359: R_Q = \frac{\beta_Q}{m_\phi} Q^{1/3},
360: \label{R_small}
361: \end{equation}
362: with $\beta_Q \sim {\mathcal O}(1)$.
363:
364:
365: The $Q$-balls described above are classically stable for arbitrary
366: small charge $Q$. However, one expects quantum fluctuations to become
367: important in this regime. Indeed, numerical calculations indicate that
368: this is the case, and only configurations with $Q \gtrsim 7$ are
369: quantum mechanically stable \cite{graham}. All these calculations are
370: based on the potential $U_1$. This potential is an effective
371: potential which is well suited for a semi-classical description of
372: large $Q$-balls. But for small $Q$-balls the degrees of freedom of
373: the underlying potential $U_1'$ should be taken into account. In this
374: regime a treatment in terms of quantum bound states is more
375: appropiate. Solving the bound state problem in full generality is not
376: an easy task. However in the limit that all quartic interactions can
377: be neglected, the theory becomes identical to the Wick-Cutkosky
378: model. This model can be solved analytically for the case of a
379: massless exchange particle, {\it i.e.}, $m_H=0$. The various
380: approaches used in the literature, {\it e.g.} ladder approximation,
381: Feshback-Villars formulation, variational-perturbative calculations
382: \cite{wc,ladder,crit}, all lead to the same result that the bound
383: state spectrum is discrete with the $n^{\rm th}$ state having an
384: energy (to lowest order in $\alpha$):
385: %
386: \begin{equation}
387: E_n = 2 m_\psi (1 - \frac{\alpha^2}{8n^2}),
388: \qquad \alpha = \frac{1}{16\pi} \frac{{A'}^2}{m_\psi^2}.
389: \label{alpha}
390: \end{equation}
391: %
392:
393: The above result for the binding energy is derived in the limit of a
394: massless boson exchange. No analytic results are known for massive
395: scalar exchange. However, numerical studies show that bound states
396: still form, provided that $\alpha$ is larger than some critical value.
397: We estimate, based on the results in~\cite{crit}, that bound states
398: exist for
399: %
400: \begin{equation}
401: \alpha > \alpha_{\rm min} \approx 2 \frac{m_H}{m_\psi} +
402: {\mathcal O} \left( \frac{m_H}{m_\psi} \right)^2.
403: \end{equation}
404: %
405: That is, the Higgs mass needs to be sufficiently small $m_H \lesssim
406: 10^{-2} (A'/m_\psi)^2 m_\psi$. The energy of the bound state is of the
407: same parametric form as for the massless case.
408:
409: The other assumption that went into the derivation of eq.
410: (\ref{alpha}) is the absence of quartic couplings. We expect this to
411: be a good approximation in the regime where quartic interactions are
412: negligible small. The cross section for $\psi \psi$-scattering is
413: $\sigma_{\psi \psi \to \psi \psi} = {S |{\mathcal M}|^2}/ {16 \pi
414: E_{\rm cm}^2}$. For scattering through Higgs exchange, governed by
415: the cubic interaction, this gives at tree level
416: %
417: \begin{equation}
418: \sigma^{\rm cubic} \approx \frac{1}{128 \pi
419: m_\psi^2} \frac{{A'}^4}{E^4} \; \stackrel{T \lesssim
420: A'} {\longrightarrow} \; \sim \pi R_\psi^2.
421: \label{sigma_psi}
422: \end{equation}
423: %
424: Here $E = {\rm max}\{T, m_H\}$. At low temperatures $T \lesssim A'$,
425: which are the temperatures of interest, the cross section quickly
426: approaches the unitarity bound and higher order diagrams cannot be
427: neglected. In this regime we will approximate the cross section by
428: $\sigma \sim \pi R_\psi^2$ with $R_\psi = 2 \pi/m_\psi$ the Compton
429: wavelength. Scattering through the quartic point interaction has an
430: amplitude $|{\mathcal M}| = \lambda'$. And thus the requirement that
431: the repulsive quartic interactions are negligible small $\sigma^{\rm
432: quartic} \ll \sigma^{\rm cubic}$, are fullfilled for all quartic
433: couplings ${\lambda'} \lesssim 1$. It may be that also for
434: non-perturbative values of the quartic couplings bound states persist;
435: but this certainly cannot be \nobreak{analysed} perturbatively. As it
436: seems unnatural to have quartic couplings larger than one, we will
437: ignore this possibility.
438:
439: On the other hand, the quartic couplings cannot be arbitrary small or
440: else no $Q$-ball solution exists: for the case of zero Higgs mass and
441: all quartic couplings equal, $\mu_0^2 > 0$ translates into $\lambda' >
442: {A'}^2/ 3 m_\psi^2$, as follows from
443: eq. (\ref{mu}).~\footnote[2]{Condition $\mu_0^2 > 0$ corresponds to the
444: requirement that $\phi=0$ is the global minimum of the potential.
445: $Q$-ball solutions do exist for $\phi=0$ a local minimum. In the
446: potentials $U_1$ and $U_2$ this possibility is not realized, since at
447: low temperatures the field will end up in the true vacuum. ($U_1$: at
448: the temperature $T$ that the minimum at $\phi \neq 0$ becomes global
449: the energy barrier is $\sim 10^{-2} \lambda T^4$. $\; U_2$: at high
450: temperature $m^2(T) < 0$.)} Non-zero, but small Higgs mass $m_H <
451: 10^{-2} m_\psi$ does not alter this result noticeably. The quartic
452: couplings do not have to be all equal, but at least one of them has to
453: be ${\mathcal O}({A'}/ m_\psi)^2$. For \nobreak{$A' = m_\psi$},
454: $Q$-ball solutions exist for example for
455: $(\lambda_1,\lambda_2,\lambda_3) = (0.4, \,0.4, \,0.4), \; (1, \,0.01,
456: \,0.01)$ and $(0.05, \,0.8, \,0.3)$.
457:
458:
459: Both the quantum bound states discussed above and $Q$-balls describe
460: the same objects --- stable bound states with a fixed global charge
461: --- but in a different language. In both descriptions the existence
462: and stability of the bound state relies on the trilinear coupling and
463: the conserved global charge (that is, conserved particle number). For
464: large bound states quantum fluctuations can be neglected, and a
465: semi-classical description as a $Q$-ball becomes a good approximation.
466: The trilinear coupling makes it possible for the energy of a bound
467: state with a fixed charge to be less than a collection of free
468: particles with the same charge. In the limit of small particle number
469: (global charge), it becomes necessary to treat the full quantum
470: problem because the semiclassical approximation breaks down. The
471: trilinear term can be viewed as an attractive interaction between the
472: $\phi$-particles, which makes it possible for bound states to form.
473: The lowest level bound state is the stable ground state, as charge
474: conservation forbids it to lower its energy through annihilation of
475: $\phi$ particles.
476:
477: It is tempting to compare the ground state result ($n = 1$) of
478: eq.~(\ref{alpha}) with the $q = 2$ result obtained in the thick wall
479: approximation (\ref{mass_small}): both mass formulas give the same
480: parametric dependence. However, in the overlapping regime both
481: approximations are taken beyond their domain of validity: for equal
482: masses $m_H = m_\psi$ bound states can only form for large $\alpha$,
483: and for $q=2$ a semi-classical treatment breaks down. Of course both
484: approximations are similar in that they neglect the quartic
485: interactions.
486:
487: In conclusion, the potential $U_1'$ admits stable, two-particle bound
488: states at low temperatures (below the binding energy), provided the
489: Higgs mass is sufficiently light, and the quartic repulsive
490: interactions small. We repeat that our assumption here is that
491: non-zero quartic couplings do not destabilize the bound state provided
492: $\sigma^{\rm quartic}_{(\phi \phi \to \phi \phi)} \ll \sigma^{\rm
493: cubic}_{(\phi \phi \to \phi \phi)}$; this should be checked by an
494: explicit calculation. For the potential to have a global minimum at
495: $\phi =0$, or equivalently for $Q$-ball solutions to exist into which
496: the bound states can grow, the couplings cannot be too small.
497: %
498: \begin{eqnarray}
499: \left\{
500: \begin{array}{lll}
501: & {\lambda'} \lesssim 1
502: & \quad {\rm repulsive} \: {\rm forces}
503: \: {\rm small} \\
504: & {m_H} \lesssim 10^{-2} \left(
505: \frac{{A'}^2}{m_\psi^2} \right) {m_\psi}
506: & \quad {\rm small} \: {\rm Higgs} \: {\rm mass}\\
507: & \lambda' > \frac{{A'}^2} {3 m_\psi^2}
508: & \quad Q{\rm -balls} \: {\rm exist}
509: \end{array}
510: \right.
511: \end{eqnarray}
512: %
513: A possible set of parameters is $\lambda' \sim 0.5$, $A' \sim m_\psi$
514: and $m_H \lesssim 10^{-2} m_\psi$. The binding energy for the bound
515: state is then $B_2 = \alpha^2/8 \sim 5 \times 10^{-5} m_\psi$, and
516: $\mu_0 \sim 0.6 m_\psi$.
517:
518:
519: We will further assume that similary bound states of more than two
520: particles can exist, and that they have energies
521: %
522: \begin{equation}
523: M_Q = Q m_\psi (1 - f_{_Q}\frac{\alpha^2}{8}),
524: \qquad \alpha = \frac{1}{16\pi} \frac{{A'}^2}{m_\psi^2}.
525: \label{M_bnd}
526: \end{equation}
527: %
528: with $f_{_Q}$ some unknown factor depending on the charge $Q$, the
529: mass of the exchange particle and the strength of the quartic
530: interactions.
531:
532: The binding energy of a $Q$-ball is $B_Q = Q m_\psi -
533: M_Q$. Two-particle bound states are only stable at temperatures below
534: the binding energy $T < B_2 \sim \alpha^2/8$. From then on they can
535: grow by capturing charged particles. A non-relativistic particle with
536: kinetic energy $E_k \sim T$ has energy $T + B_Q$ inside the
537: $Q$-ball/bound state. For it to be captured it has to lose an amount
538: larger than $T$ in the collision. Assuming isotropy, on average a
539: particle will lose half of its energy. Therefore, for temperatures $T
540: < B_Q$ a considerable amount of the particles scattering with the
541: $Q$-ball will be captured. We approximate the absorption cross section
542: $\sigma_{\rm abs}(Q)$ for a $Q$-ball with charge $Q$ by the scattering
543: cross section: $\sigma_{\rm abs}(Q) \sim \pi R_Q^{2}$.
544:
545:
546:
547: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
548: %% Section III %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
549: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
550:
551:
552:
553: \section{Solitosynthesis}
554:
555: In thermal equilibrium, the production of large $Q$-balls through
556: gradual charge acretion is very efficient. This process is dubbed
557: solitosynthesis for its similarity with nucleosynthesis. It requires
558: an initial charge asymmetry not unlike the baryon asymmetry of the
559: universe. Freeze out of any of the reactions involved will put a halt
560: to solitosynthesis.
561:
562: In this section we will describe the thermodynamics of $Q$-balls in
563: terms of a gas of non-relativistic $\psi$ particles in thermal
564: equilibrium. The $\psi$ particles can bind together through the
565: exchange of a light scalar particle, as given by the cubic interaction
566: in $U'_1$. For large $Q$-balls a semi-classical description in terms
567: of $U_1$ suffices, and $\psi$ can be replaced by $\phi$ in all the
568: formulas.
569:
570:
571:
572: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% subsection %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
573:
574: \subsection{$Q$-balls in thermal equilibrium}
575:
576: At non-relativistic temperatures $T < m_\psi$, the number densities of
577: a distribution of $Q$-balls and free $\psi$ particles in thermal
578: equilibrium are governed by the Boltzmann distribution:
579: %
580: \begin{equation}
581: n_Q(T) = g_Q \left( \frac{M_Q T}{2 \pi} \right)^{3/2}
582: \e^{ {(\mu_Q - M_Q)}/{T} },
583: \end{equation}
584: and
585: \begin{equation}
586: n_\psi(T) = g_\psi \left( \frac{m_\psi T}{2 \pi} \right)^{3/2}
587: \e^{(\mu_\psi - m_\psi)/{T}}.
588: \label{n_phi}
589: \end{equation}
590: %
591: Here $g_Q$ is the internal partition function of the $Q$-ball, and
592: $g_\psi = 2$, the number of degrees of freedom of a complex field.
593: Solitosynthesis is only possible if capture rates are large compared
594: to the expansion rate of the universe, otherwise the densities are
595: frozen. If so, the gas of $\psi$ particles and $Q$-balls is in
596: chemical equilibrium, and the accretion and absorption reactions
597: %
598: \begin{equation}
599: (Q) + \psi \longleftrightarrow (Q+1)
600: \label{reaction}
601: \end{equation}
602: %
603: enforce a relation between the various chemical potentials: $ \mu_Q =
604: Q \mu_\psi$. This allows one to express the $Q$-ball number density
605: in terms of the $\psi$-number density
606: %
607: \begin{equation}
608: n_Q(T) = \frac{g_Q}{g_\psi^Q} n_\psi^Q
609: \left( \frac{M_Q}{m_\psi} \right)^{3/2}
610: \left( \frac{2 \pi}{m_\psi T} \right)^{3(Q-1)/2}
611: \e^{{B_Q}/{T} },
612: \label{nq}
613: \end{equation}
614: %
615: with $B_Q = Q m_\psi - M_Q > 0$ the binding energy of a $Q$-ball.
616: Similar equations can be written down for the number densities of
617: anti-$\psi$'s and anti-$Q$-balls.
618:
619: We will assume a primordial asymmetry of $\psi$'s over $\psi^*$'s,
620: $\eta \equiv (n_\psi - n_{\psi^*}) / n_\gamma$, where $n_\gamma = 2.4
621: T_\gamma^3 / \pi^2$ is the photon number density. Initially one has
622: both $\psi$ and $\psi^*$ particles. For large asymmetry the
623: anti-particle density can be neglected. Also, if the Higgs mass is
624: light then pair annihilation occurs, and at non-relativistic
625: temperature anti-particles deplete rapidly. The annihilation reaction
626: enforces $\mu_\psi = -\mu_{\psi^\ast}$, which in the non-relativistic
627: limit leads to
628: %
629: \begin{equation}
630: n_{\psi^\ast} = n_\psi \e^{-2\mu_\psi/T}.
631: \end{equation}
632: %
633: For temperature $T \lesssim m_\psi$ the chemical potential $\mu \sim
634: m_\psi$; otherwise the Boltzmann suppression $\exp[(\mu - m) / T]$ is
635: tremendous and the charge conservation equation
636: %
637: \begin{equation}
638: \eta n_\gamma = n_\psi - n_{\psi^\ast} + \Sigma Q n_Q +
639: \Sigma Q^\ast n_{Q^\ast}.
640: \label{charge}
641: \end{equation}
642: %
643: can never be satisfied. Annihilation is efficient untill the density
644: of anti-particles is negligible small. The number density of stable
645: $\psi$-particles is then
646: %
647: \begin{equation}
648: n_\psi \approx \eta n_\gamma,
649: \quad \eta = 2.5 \times 10^{-8} \Omega_\psi h^2
650: \frac{{\rm GeV}}{m_\psi}.
651: \label{eta}
652: \end{equation}
653: %
654: The local density can be higher if clustering occurs. This is not to
655: be expected until the matter dominated era, $T < T_{\rm eq} \approx
656: 5.5 (\Omega_0 h^2)^{-1} \zeta^{-1} {\rm eV}$.
657:
658: The photon temperature may in general be different from the
659: temperature of the $Q$-ball system. Particle species that decouple
660: from the heat bath when they are highly relativistic maintain an
661: equilibrium distribution with temperature $T \propto R^{-1}$. The
662: photon temperature red shifts as $T_\gamma \propto g_{* s}^{-1/3}
663: R^{-1}$, and thus the difference in temperatures is given by a factor
664: $\zeta \equiv (g_{* s}(T_D) - g_{* s}(T))^{1/3}$, with $T_D$ the
665: temperature at which the $Q$-ball system decouples. When the
666: $\psi$-particles only interact gravitationally $\zeta \sim 10$,
667: whereas it can be much lower for more general interactions $\psi
668: \psi^\ast \longleftrightarrow X$, where $X$ are light particles that
669: do not carry the same $U_Q(1)$ charge as the $\psi$-particles. We
670: parameterize $T_\gamma = \zeta T$, with $\zeta \sim 1 - 10$.
671:
672:
673: \begin{figure}[t]
674: \centering
675: \hspace*{-5.5mm}
676: \leavevmode\epsfysize=6cm \epsfbox{T.eps}\\[3mm]
677: \caption[fig.2] {Accretion time $T_g$ plotted as a function of
678: $c\zeta^3 \eta$ for various values of $I_Q/m_\psi$. For large values of
679: $c\zeta^3 \eta$ --- to the left of where the lines stop --- accretion
680: dominates over evaporation at all (non-relativistic) temperatures}
681: \end{figure}
682: %
683:
684: The $Q$-ball densities can start growing when the exponent in
685: equation~(\ref{nq}) dominates over the potentially small factor in
686: front. Since $B_Q$ grows with $Q$, formation of large $Q$-balls is
687: favored. The evolution of a single $Q$-ball is given by the absorption
688: and evaporation rates of $\psi$ particles by a $Q$-ball of charge $Q$
689: \cite{frieman}. These can be found using detailed balance
690: arguments. In chemical equilibrium we have for the process in
691: eq.~(\ref{reaction})
692: %
693: \begin{equation}
694: n_\psi \, v_\psi \, \sigma_{\rm abs} (Q)
695: = n_{Q+1} \, r_{\rm evap}(Q+1),
696: \label{balance}
697: \end{equation}
698: and
699: \begin{eqnarray}
700: \frac{{\rm d} Q}{{\rm d} t}
701: &=& r_{\rm abs}(Q) - r_{\rm evap}(Q) \nonumber \\
702: &=& n_\psi v_\psi [ \sigma_{\rm abs}(Q)
703: - \frac{n_{Q-1}}{n_Q} \sigma_{\rm abs}(Q-1)].
704: \end{eqnarray}
705: %
706: The $Q$-ball starts growing when $r_{\rm abs}(Q) > r_{\rm evap}(Q)$.
707: This happens for $T \lesssim T_g$ with
708: %
709: \begin{equation}
710: \frac{T_g}{m_\psi} = \frac{I_Q / m_\psi}
711: {- \frac{3}{2} \ln \left( \frac{T_g}{m} \right)
712: - \ln \left (c \zeta^3 \eta
713: \right)},
714: \label{T_g}
715: \end{equation}
716: and
717: \begin{equation}
718: I_Q = m_\psi + M_{Q-1} - M_{Q}.
719: \end{equation}
720: %
721: Here $c= (Q/Q-1)^{(13/6)} g_Q/g_{Q-1}$, which goes to one for large
722: $Q$, and $c \sim 10$ in the limit $Q\to 2$. $I_Q$ is the binding
723: energy with which a single $\psi$-particle is bound to the
724: $Q$-ball. For very small $Q$-balls $I_Q / m_\psi = f_{_Q} \alpha^2/8$.
725: Accretion of the smallest $(Q_{\rm min})$-ball starts when $T \sim
726: I_{Q_{\rm min}} < 10^{-6} m_\psi$ for $A' \lesssim 1$. For large
727: $Q$-balls $I_Q = m_\psi - \mu_0$. Figure~1 shows $T_g$ as a function
728: of $c \zeta^3 \eta$ for various values of $I_Q$. For large $c \zeta^3
729: \eta$ equation ({\ref{T_g}) has no solution; here absorbtion dominates
730: at non-relativistic temperatures.
731:
732: For large $H$ mass and early freeze out the charge asymmetry may be
733: small, as then both $\psi$ and $\psi^\ast$-densities are large at
734: freeze out while annihilation is negligible. Both particle and
735: anti-particle number are conserved, and one can in principal have
736: growing $Q$- and anti-$Q$-balls at the same time. In this case
737: however, the formation of small seed $Q$-balls, which are necessary to
738: start the fusion process, appears to be a major obstacle.
739:
740:
741:
742: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% subsection %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
743:
744: \subsection{Freeze out}
745:
746: For solitosynthesis to work $T_g$ must be higher than $T_{\rm FO}$,
747: the temperature at which the absorption reactions eq.~(\ref{reaction})
748: freeze out. This occurs when the reaction rate for accretion becomes
749: smaller than the expansion rate of the universe:
750: %
751: \begin{equation}
752: \Gamma[(Q) + \psi \to (Q+1)] \lesssim H.
753: \label{freeze}
754: \end{equation}
755: %
756: The Hubble constant during the radiation dominated era is $H = 1.7
757: g_{* s}^{1/2} T_\gamma^2 / M_{\rm pl}$; it is $H = 1.7
758: g_{* s}^{1/2} T_\gamma^{3/2} T_{\rm eq}^{1/2} / M_{\rm pl}$ in
759: the matter dominated era. The effective degrees of freedom are $g_{*
760: s} \lesssim 10$ for $T_\gamma \lesssim 10 {\rm MeV}$ and $g_{* s} \sim
761: 100$ for $0.1 {\rm GeV} \lesssim T_\gamma \lesssim 10^3 {\rm GeV}$.
762: The accretion rate is $\Gamma = n_\psi v_\psi \sigma_{\rm abs}(Q)$.
763: Neglecting the charge density subsiding in $Q$-balls, then for stable
764: $\psi$ particles $n_\psi$ is given by eq. (\ref{eta}). At
765: non-relativistic temperatures $v_\psi =(T/2\pi m_\psi)^{1/2}$.
766:
767: We are interested in temperatures $T<T_g$; then the cross section is
768: $\sigma_{\rm abs} \sim \pi R_Q^2$ and freeze out occurs for
769: temperatures, for $T_{\rm FO} > T_{\rm eq} \approx 5.5 (\Omega_0
770: h^2)^{-1} \zeta^{-1} {\rm eV}$:
771: %
772: \begin{equation}
773: \frac{T_{\rm FO}}{m_\psi} \lesssim
774: \left[ \frac{10^{-9}}{ \zeta \beta_Q Q^{2/3}}
775: \left(\frac{m_\psi}{{\rm GeV}}\right)^2
776: \left(\frac{0.3}{\Omega_\psi h^2}\right)
777: \left(\frac{g_*^{1/2}}{10}\right)
778: \right ]^{2 / 3}.
779: \end{equation}
780: And for $T_{\rm FO} < T_{\rm eq}$:
781: \begin{equation}
782: \frac{T_{\rm FO}}{m_\psi} \lesssim
783: \left[ \frac{10^{-13}}{ \zeta \beta_Q Q^{2 / 3}}
784: \left(\frac{m_\psi}{{\rm GeV}}\right)^{3/ 2}
785: \left(\frac{0.3}{\Omega_\psi h^2}\right)^{1 / 2}
786: \left(\frac{g_*^{1/2}}{10}\right)
787: \right ]^{1 / 2}.
788: \end{equation}
789: %
790: For $A' \sim m_\psi$, $\zeta \sim 10$ and $m_\psi \lesssim {\rm GeV}$
791: freeze out of the accretion reactions for the smallest $Q$-balls ($Q
792: =2$) occurs after the accretion phase, $T_{\rm FO} \lesssim T_g$. In
793: this case solitosynthes can start at photon temperature $T_\gamma =
794: \zeta T_g \sim 10^{-5} m_\psi \lesssim 10^4 {\rm eV}$. Note that $I_Q
795: \propto (A'/m_\psi)^4$ decreases rapidly for smaller cubic couplings
796: and $T_{\rm FO} < T_g$ can only be satisfied for increasingly low
797: $\psi$-mass. In the matter dominated era the reaction rate, and thus
798: the freeze out temperature, can be increased through clustering. For
799: an overdensity of $\sim 10^5$ in galaxies, we find that for $A' \sim
800: 0.1 m_\psi$ solitosynthesis occurs for $m_\psi \lesssim {\rm GeV}$,
801: starting at temperatures $T_\gamma \lesssim {\rm eV}$. For smaller
802: values $A' \lesssim 0.1$ or $m_\psi \lesssim {\rm MeV}$,
803: solitosynthesis occurs in the future, at temperatures smaller thant
804: the present day temperature $T_\gamma < T_0 = 2.35 \times 10^{-4} \,
805: {\rm eV}$.
806:
807: With the accumulation of charge in $Q$-balls the number density of
808: $\psi$ particle decreases and the system freezes out. Since the
809: accretion is such an explosive process, this will generelly not happen
810: until almost all charge resides in $Q$-balls. More quantitatively,
811: when the $\psi$-density decreases to 10\% of its original value,
812: $T_{\rm FO}$ decreases only by a factor $10^{-2/3}$. The back
813: reaction is only important when $T_g \approx T_{\rm FO}$, and it shuts
814: off the growth of $Q$-balls immediately; in all other cases most
815: charge will end up in $Q$-balls.
816:
817: The accretion rate of a {\rm single} $Q$-ball is limited by the
818: diffusion rate. However, diffusion of charge is only important when
819: $l \lesssim R_Q$, with $l \sim \Gamma_{\psi \psi}^{-1}$ the mean free
820: path. The radius $R_Q$ of a $Q$-ball becomes equal to the mean free
821: path for a large charge:
822: %
823: \begin{equation}
824: Q_{\rm diff}(T) \sim 10^{87}
825: \left[ \left( \frac{m_\psi/T}{10^7} \right)^{7/2}
826: \left( \frac{10}{\zeta} \right)^3 \frac{1}{\beta}
827: \frac{0.3}{\Omega h^2} \frac{m_\psi}{{\rm GeV}} \right]^3
828: \end{equation}
829: %
830: For $Q> Q_{\rm diff}$ diffusion is important. The total amount of
831: charge inside a Hubble volume is $Q_{\rm total} = n_\psi H^{-3}$
832: %
833: \begin{equation}
834: Q_{\rm total} (T)
835: \sim 10^{63} \left(\frac{m_\psi/T}{10^7}\frac{10^2}{\zeta g_*^{1/2}} \right)^3
836: \left( \frac{{\rm GeV}}{m_\psi}\right)^4
837: \left( \frac{\Omega_\psi h^2}{0.3} \right)
838: \label{Q_total}
839: \end{equation}
840: For small masses
841: $Q_{\rm diff}$ may be lower than the total charge inside a Hubble
842: volume; in this case $Q_{\rm diff}$ will be an upper limit on the
843: charge of the $Q$-balls formed during solitosynthesis.
844:
845:
846:
847: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
848: %% Section IV %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
849: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
850:
851: \section{Seeds}
852:
853:
854: Solythosynthesis is a very effecient way to form large $Q$-balls,
855: provided there are some initial seed $Q$-balls at temperatures above
856: freeze out. These seeds may be remnants of an earlier epoch, formed
857: during a phase transition or via the decay of a Bose-Einstein
858: condensate. Another option is that small stable $Q$-balls can form in
859: the gas of $\phi$-particles.
860:
861: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% subsection %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
862:
863: \subsection{Formation of small $Q$-balls}
864:
865:
866: As discussed in section \ref{sec_small}, small $Q$-ball solutions are
867: only stable for potentials with a cubic interaction. Two-particle
868: bound states can form through scalar exchange, provided the mass of
869: the exchange boson is sufficiently small and the quartic interactions
870: can be neglected. In this case seed $Q$-balls can be formed copiously
871: and solitosyntesis can start. If the mass of the scalar mass is of
872: the same order as the mass of the charged particles two-particle bound
873: states do not form, but it may still be that small $Q$-balls with
874: charge $Q_{\rm min} > 2$ are stable. Numerical calculations indicate
875: that in the thick wall approximation (which has $m_H =m_\psi$)
876: $Q$-balls are quantum mechanically stable for $Q_{\rm min} \gtrsim 7$
877: \cite{graham}.
878:
879: For $Q > 2$, $Q$-ball formation is surpressed compared to the
880: two-particle bound state, by the requirement that $Q$ charges should
881: be similtaneously in a volume of radius $\sim R_q$. Define $P(q)$ to
882: be the probability to find a charge $Q$ in the volume of a $Q$-ball,
883: $V_q \approx R_q^3$. The mean charge in $V_q$ is $\bar{q} = n_\psi
884: V_q$, whereas the variance is $\sigma^2 = \langle (\Delta q)^2 \rangle
885: = T ( \partial \bar{q} / \partial \mu)_{T,V} = \bar{q}$. Since
886: %
887: \begin{equation}
888: \bar{q} \approx 1.0 \, \zeta^3 \eta q
889: \left( \frac{T}{m_\psi} \right) \ll 1
890: \end{equation}
891: %
892: a discrete distribution is needed, the Poisson distribution:
893: %
894: \begin{equation}
895: P(q) = \frac{{\rm e}^{-\bar{q}} \bar{q}^{q}}{q!}
896: \approx \frac{(n_\psi V_q)^{q}}{q!}.
897: \end{equation}
898: %
899: The density of lumps with charge $Q$ in a volume $V_q$ is $n_{q} =
900: P(q) / V_q$. The reaction rate for the bound state is $\Gamma^{\rm
901: bnd}_q \sim \sigma^{\rm bnd}_q n_{q}$ so that the chance that in a
902: Hubble time a ``$Q$-lump'' forms a bound state is $\sim n_{q}
903: \sigma^{\rm bnd}_q H^{-1}$. Multiplying this with the total number of
904: $Q$-lumps in a Hubble volume gives the number of $Q$-ball seeds $N_q
905: \sim n_{q}^2 \sigma^{\rm bnd}_q H^{-4}$. Taking $R_Q \sim 1/m_\psi$
906: this yields
907: %
908: \begin{equation}
909: N_q \sim \eta^q (\sigma_{\rm bnd} m_\psi^2)
910: \left(\frac{T}{m_\psi}\right)^{6Q-8}
911: \left( \frac{M_{\rm pl}}{m_\psi} \right)^4.
912: \end{equation}
913: %
914: Assuming $\sigma^{\rm bnd}_q \lesssim \sigma_{\psi \psi}$ this gives an
915: upper bound on $N_q$. Only for small $q=2,3,4$ or so $N_q$ is larger
916: than unity, and there is seed forming.
917:
918:
919:
920: \subsection{Primordial seeds}
921:
922: The seed $Q$-balls may also be $Q$-balls formed at an earlier
923: epoch. For this to be possible the initial $Q$-balls should be large
924: enough to survive the period of evaporation. The evaporation rate is
925: given by the detailed balance equation (\ref{balance}). Ignoring
926: absorbtion, which is subdominant for $T < T_g$ (note that the
927: evaporation rate decreases exponentially with temperature), one gets
928: that the smallest $Q$-ball to survive has charge \cite{frieman}
929: %
930: \begin{equation}
931: Q_s \sim 10^{57} \frac{\beta^6}{ g_*^{3/2}}
932: \left( \frac{{\rm GeV}}{m_\psi}
933: \right)^{3} \left(
934: \int^{T_i}_{T_g} \dd T\, \frac{{\rm e}^{-I_Q/T}} {I_Q/T}
935: \right)^3,
936: \end{equation}
937: %
938: with $T_i$ the temperature at formation. For $T_{\rm FO}, T_g < T_i$,
939: the integral can be approximated by $\sim \exp (-I_Q/T_i)/ (1
940: +I_Q/T_i)$. Only for masses $m_\psi \lesssim {\rm eV}$ is $Q_s$
941: smaller than the total number of particles available in a Hubble
942: volume at $T_i \sim m_\psi$, eq. (\ref{Q_total}), and is there a
943: change for very large primordial $Q$-balls to survive the period of
944: thermal evaporation.
945:
946: Another possibility is that formation happens at the onset or during
947: the acretion phase: $T_i \lesssim T_g$. For large binding energy $I_Q
948: \to m_\psi$ (which is possible for large $Q$-balls) and large $\eta'$,
949: accretion dominates over evaporation at non-relativistic temperatures,
950: see figure~1,
951:
952: Primordial $Q$-balls may also form during a first order phase
953: transition~\cite{fggk} from the false ``$Q$-ball vacuum'' to the true
954: vacuum. At the Ginzburg temperature thermal transitions between
955: regions of false and true vacuum freeze out; any region of false
956: vacuum with a charge larger than the minimum charge of a stable
957: $Q$-ball surviving below this temperature will become a $Q$-ball. The
958: potentials under considerations do not exhibit the required first
959: order phase transition (see footnote 1). One could add additional
960: terms to the potential to get a phase transition. However, the
961: survival of regions of false vacuum is exponentially surpressed with
962: size, and correspondingly $Q$-ball formation is exponentially
963: surpressed with charge. If formed, the $Q$-balls are expected to be
964: small $Q \sim Q_{\rm min}$. Unless there is a mechanism to delay the
965: phase transition to very low temperatures $T \lesssim 10^{-6} m_\psi$,
966: these $Q$-balls quickly evaporate and are cosmologically unimportant.
967:
968: Formation of primordial $Q$-balls through fragmentation of a
969: condensate~\cite{frag} is studied in the next section.
970:
971:
972: \section{Bose-Einstein condensation}
973:
974: We will now study whether there will be condensation. A condensate
975: that is unstable under fluctuation can fragment into possibly large
976: $Q$-balls. We will consider the effective potentials $U_1$ and
977: $U_2$. In this section $m_\phi=1$, {\it i.e.}, all quantities are
978: expressed in units of mass.
979:
980: We will assume that the number density of anti-particles can be
981: neglected and $\rho \approx n_\phi$. The state of the system is given
982: by the minimum of the effective potential for a fixed charge Q:
983: %
984: \begin{equation}
985: V(q, \phi) = V(\mu, \phi) + \mu \rho,
986: \label{Vq}
987: \end{equation}
988: %
989: with $ V(\mu, \phi)$ the effective potential for a fixed chemical
990: potential. In this section $\phi$ denotes the classical background
991: field, and $\phi_0$ its value at the minimum of $V(q, \phi)$. A
992: non-zero value of $\phi_0$ signals the existence of a condensate. At
993: finite temperature the freqency $\omega$ of the $Q$-ball can be
994: identified with the chemical potential $\mu$~\cite{laine}. The charge
995: density can be solved from
996: %
997: \begin{equation}
998: \frac{ {\rm d} V(q, \phi)} {{\rm d} \mu} = 0 \quad
999: \Rightarrow \quad \rho = \rho(\mu).
1000: \label{rho_mu}
1001: \end{equation}
1002: Eliminating $\mu$ in eq. (\ref{Vq}) then gives the effective potential
1003: in a fixed charge section. A stable configuration lies at the minimum
1004: of $V(q, \phi)$.
1005:
1006: To analyze the stability of the condensate one can consider
1007: fluctuations in the homegeneous background. From the dispersion
1008: relation it follows that fluctuations are amplified for wavelengths
1009: smaller than $k_{\rm max}$~\cite{frag,lee}:
1010: %
1011: \begin{equation}
1012: k_{\rm max}^2 = \frac{\rho^2} {\phi_0^4} - U''(\phi_0).
1013: \label{unstable}
1014: \end{equation}
1015: %
1016: For $\rho^2 - \phi_0^4 U''(\phi_0) < 0$ the above equation does not
1017: have a physical solution and the condensate is stable.
1018:
1019:
1020: We parametrize the charge density is $\rho = \eta n_\gamma$
1021: %
1022: \begin{equation}
1023: \rho \approx 3 \times 10^{-9}\zeta^3 \left( \frac{\Omega_\phi
1024: h^2}{0.3} \right) \left( \frac{{\rm GeV}}{m_\phi} \right) T^3
1025: \equiv \eta' T^3.
1026: \label{eta_rho}
1027: \end{equation}
1028:
1029:
1030: \subsection{Non-Relativistic Limit}
1031:
1032: At zero temperature the charge density $\rho \propto T^3$ is zero, and
1033: there is no condensate. At non-zero temperature condensate formation
1034: will occur if the charge is larger than the number of excited states.
1035:
1036: In the non-relativistic limit the finite-temperature corrections to
1037: the potential are small, and as a first approximation we can use the
1038: zero temperature result $V(\mu,\phi)=U(\phi)-1/2 \mu^2\phi^2$ with
1039: $U(\phi)$ the classical potential, eq. (\ref{U1}, \ref{U2}). Equation
1040: (\ref{rho_mu}) gives $\rho = \mu \phi^2$. The minimum of $V(q,\phi)$
1041: is at
1042: %
1043: \begin{eqnarray}
1044: \rho_1^2 =& \phi_0^4 - 3 A \phi_0^5 + 4 \lambda \phi_0^6,
1045: &\quad {\rm for} \; U_1
1046: \nonumber \\
1047: \rho_2^2 =& \phi_0^4 - 4 A \phi_0^6 + 6 \lambda \phi_0^8,\
1048: &\quad {\rm for} \; U_2.
1049: \label{rho}
1050: \end{eqnarray}
1051: %
1052: At low temperatures $\mu \to 1$ and $\rho \approx \phi_0^2 \ll 1$. In
1053: this limit a possible condensate is unstable against decay for values
1054: $\phi_0 < \frac{3A}{8\lambda}$ for $U_1$ and $\phi_0 <
1055: \frac{A}{3\lambda}$ for $U_2$, as follows from eq. (\ref{unstable}).
1056:
1057: To see whether a condensate actually forms one has to compute the
1058: density of thermal states. At low temperatures the cubic and quartic
1059: terms in the potential become negligible small, and the theory
1060: approaches the free theory. In this limit the number of thermal
1061: states is
1062: %
1063: \begin{equation}
1064: n_\beta^{\rm NR} = \frac{\zeta(3/2)}
1065: {(2\pi)^{3/2}} T^{3/2}.
1066: \end{equation}
1067: %
1068: Since $\rho \propto T^3$, at low temperature all charge will be in the
1069: excited states and the condensate is empty. The only chance to have a
1070: filled condensate is for $T \to 1$ and $\eta'$ large, so that $\rho >
1071: n_\beta$ or $\eta' T^{3/2} >\zeta(3/2)/(2\pi)^{3/2} \approx
1072: 0.17$. Note however that in the limit $T \to 1$ the non-relativistic
1073: approximation breaks down, whereas in the limit $\eta' T^3 \to 1$ the
1074: free field approximation breaks down.
1075:
1076:
1077: \subsection{Relativistic limit}
1078:
1079: We will first consider the potential $U_1$. The effective potential
1080: for fixed chemical potential to highest order in $T$ is
1081: %
1082: \begin{eqnarray}
1083: V(\mu,\phi) = && 1/2 (1 + \lambda T^2 /3 -\mu^2) \phi^2
1084: - A \phi^3 + \lambda \phi^4 \nonumber \\ && - \mu^2
1085: \frac{T^2}{6} + c(T) + {\mathcal O}(T),
1086: \end{eqnarray}
1087: with $c(T)$ some temperature dependent constant which we will
1088: drop. From this it follows that
1089: \begin{equation}
1090: \rho = \mu \phi^2 + \mu T^2.
1091: \end{equation}
1092: The first term in the above equation is the charge in the condensate,
1093: the second term represents the charge in excited states. The charge
1094: fraction in the condensate is $\phi_0^2/(\phi_0^2 + T^2)$, which is
1095: small for $\phi_0 \ll T$. The effective potential for fixed charge
1096: density in the relativistic limit becomes
1097: %
1098: \begin{equation}
1099: V(q,\phi) = \frac{1}{2} (1 + \frac{\lambda}{3} T^2) \phi^2
1100: - A \phi^3 + \lambda \phi^4
1101: + \frac{3 \rho^2}{2(3 \phi^2 + T^2)}.
1102: \end{equation}
1103: %
1104: Consider the case $\phi_0 \ll T$; then the potential is minimized at
1105: $\phi_0 = 0$ (and thus the approximation is consistent), provided
1106: %
1107: \begin{equation}
1108: {\eta'}^2 < \frac{\lambda}{27} + \frac{1}{9 T^2}.
1109: \label{small_eta}
1110: \end{equation}
1111: %
1112: This can also be seen from the second derivative $V''(q,0) = 1 +
1113: \lambda/3 T^2 - 9 {\eta'}^2 T^2$, which becomes negative for large
1114: $\eta'$. Thus if condition (\ref{small_eta}) is obeyed there is no
1115: condensate. For finetuned values of $A^2 / \lambda$ a second minimum
1116: of the potential may develop, but since in the limit of large
1117: temperature the only minimum is at $\phi_0 = 0$ the field will not end
1118: up there.
1119:
1120:
1121: Consider then the potentially more interesting case that $\eta'$ is
1122: large, and condition (\ref{small_eta}) is not satisfied. Then $V''(0)
1123: <0$ and the potential is minimized at non-zero field value.
1124: Minimization in the limit $T \gg \phi_0$ as well as in the limit $T
1125: \ll \phi_0$ does not yield a consistent solution. It follows that the
1126: minimum is at $\phi_0 \sim T$. This is confirmed by numerical
1127: calculations. The charge density in the condensate is comparable to
1128: that in excited states. The condensate is unstable for $k_{\rm max}^2
1129: > 0$, eq. (\ref{unstable}), with
1130: %
1131: \begin{equation}
1132: k_{\rm max}^2 = \frac{{\eta'}^2 T^6}{\phi_0^4}
1133: - \frac{1}{3}\lambda(T^2+36 \phi_0^2)
1134: + 6 A \phi_0 -1.
1135: \end{equation}
1136: %
1137: At large temperatures $\phi_0 \propto \lambda^{-1}$ and the second
1138: term in the above equation dominates, as can be verified
1139: numerically. The condensate is stable for large $T$. The condensate
1140: becomes unstable in the limit $T \to 1$. As this is also the limit in
1141: which the high temperature expansion breaks down, it is unclear
1142: whether the condensate really fragments.
1143:
1144:
1145: The analysis for potential $U_2$ is similar. At high temperature the
1146: effective potential becomes
1147: %
1148: \begin{eqnarray}
1149: V(\mu,\phi) = && \frac{1}{2} (1 - \frac{3}{4} A T^2 - \mu^2)
1150: \phi^2 + (\frac{3}{2} \lambda T^2 - A )\phi^4 \nonumber \\ &&+
1151: \lambda \phi^6 - \mu^2 \frac{T^2}{6} + c(T) + {\mathcal O}(T).
1152: \end{eqnarray}
1153: %
1154: For this case, the equivalent of eq. (\ref{small_eta}) is
1155: %
1156: \begin{equation}
1157: {\eta'}^2 + \frac{A}{12} < \frac{1}{9T^2}.
1158: \end{equation}
1159: %
1160: At large temperature a stable condensate will form with $\phi_0 \sim
1161: \sqrt{A/2+6\eta^2}/2\sqrt{\lambda}$ for small asymmetry or $\phi_0
1162: \sim T$ for large asymmetry $\eta' \gtrsim 1/9$. The condensate only
1163: survives in the limit $T \to 1$ for large $\eta'$. The condensate may
1164: be unstable in this limit.
1165:
1166:
1167: To conclude this section, at non-relativistic temperatures there is no
1168: condensate and all charge resides in excited states. At temperatures
1169: $T \gtrsim m_\phi$ consensation occurs for large assymetries $\eta'
1170: \gtrsim 1/9$, corresponding to masses $m_\psi \lesssim {\rm eV}$. The
1171: condensate becomes unstable in the limit $T \to m_\phi$ and fragments
1172: into $Q$-balls. Caution should be taken, as he high temperature
1173: expansion breaks down in this limit. If the binding energy of the
1174: $Q$-balls is sufficiently large $A^2/2\lambda \gtrsim 10^{-2}$ the
1175: period of evaporation is absent, see figure~1, and these $Q$-balls
1176: survive.
1177:
1178: \section{Conclusions}
1179:
1180: To summarize, solitosynthesis is a very effecient way to form large
1181: $Q$-balls provided some primordial charge asymmetry and initial seed
1182: $Q$-balls exist. Most theories do not allow small stable $Q$-ball or
1183: bound state solutions, and solitosynthesis does not start. The
1184: exception are theories in which the attractive interaction is provided
1185: by a cubic term of the form $A H \psi^* \psi$. Bound states can form
1186: if the Higgs mass is light ($m_H/m_\psi \lesssim 10^{-3}
1187: {A}^2/m_\psi^2$). No bound state calculations have been done in the
1188: presence of quartic coupling. We assume that for quartic interactions
1189: that are small compared to interactions governed by the cubic term
1190: bound states persist ($\lambda \lesssim 1$). We note that if this
1191: assumption turns out to be too optimistic, and stable bound states
1192: require smaller quartic coulings, then small bound states and large
1193: $Q$-balls become mutually exclusive. This is because for the
1194: potential to admit $Q$-ball solutions the quartic coupling cannot be
1195: too small ($\lambda \gtrsim A^2/m_H^2$). Succesfull solitosynthesis
1196: will occur if the accretion phase happens before the system falls out
1197: of equilibrium. All these conditions together limit the paramater
1198: space severely.
1199:
1200: For solitosynthesis to have happened in the early universe one needs
1201: $A = 0.1 -1 m_\psi$, at least one of the quartic couplings $\lambda
1202: \sim 1$, $m_H \lesssim 10^{-2} m_\psi$, and ${\rm MeV} \lesssim m_\psi
1203: \lesssim {\rm GeV}$. This rules out models in which the $H$ field is
1204: the standard model Higgs field, such as the MSSM and the model studied
1205: in \cite{demir}. The temperature at which $Q$-balls start growing
1206: decreases very rapidly with $A$: $T_g/m_\psi \propto (A/m_\psi)^4$.
1207: For smaller values of the masses or of the cubic coupling than given
1208: above, solitosynthesis may still happen in the future.
1209:
1210: $Q$-balls that survive untill present can be part of the the dark
1211: matter in the Universe. For them to play a role during structure
1212: formation they must have been formed before the universe became matter
1213: dominated, that is at temperatures $T_\gamma \gtrsim T_{\rm eq} = 5.5
1214: (\Omega_0 h^2)^{-1} {\rm eV}$. This is only possible for $A'\sim 1$
1215: and $m_\psi \sim {\rm GeV}$. Whether the $Q$-balls can fullfill the
1216: required cross section to mass ratio to overcome the problems with
1217: cold dark matter as proposed in~\cite{q_dm} remains another question.
1218: More (numerical) studies are needed to determine if solitosynthesis
1219: results in a few $Q$-balls with a very large charge, or in a large
1220: number of $Q$-balls with lesser charge.
1221:
1222: Condensate formation is only possible for large asymmetries, or
1223: equivalently $m_\psi \lesssim {\rm eV}$. Symmetries of the order one
1224: can be generated through the Affleck-Dine
1225: Mechanism~\cite{affleck}. Early decoupling increases the number of
1226: charged particles by a factor $\zeta^3$ with $\zeta = (g_{* s}(T_D) -
1227: g_{* s}(T))^{1/3}$, which favors condensation. The condensate becomes
1228: unstable against fluctuations in the limit $T \to m_\psi$, {\it i.e.},
1229: the limit in which all the used approximations break down. Evidently,
1230: better approximations are needed to settle the matter. $Q$-balls
1231: formed through a possible fragmentation of the condensate survive
1232: untill present if accretion dominates over evaporation at
1233: non-relativistic temperatures. This is possible for $Q$-balls with a
1234: large binding energy, $I_Q = m_\psi - (m_\psi^2 - A^2 / 2 \lambda)^{1/2}
1235: \gtrsim 10^{-2} m_\psi$.
1236:
1237: The potentials studied do not allow for a first order phase transition
1238: from the false ``$Q$-ball vacuum'' to the true vacuum. One could try
1239: and add terms to the potential so that such a phase transition occurs.
1240: However, the $Q$-balls that may form during the phase transition are
1241: small and will evaporate quickly.
1242:
1243: Solitosynthesis can lead to a phase transition from the false to true
1244: vacuum. This will not happen for the potentials studied in this
1245: paper, as for these the field will always end up in the true vacuum.
1246:
1247:
1248:
1249: The author thanks Alexander Kusenko for very helpful discussions.
1250: This work was supported in part by the US Department of Energy grant
1251: DE-FG03-91ER40662, Task C, as well as by a Faculty Grant from UCLA
1252: Council on Research.
1253:
1254:
1255:
1256: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1257: %% References %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1258: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1259:
1260: \begin{references}
1261:
1262:
1263: \bibitem{coleman}
1264: S.~Coleman,
1265: %''Q-balls,''
1266: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 262}, 263 (1985).
1267:
1268: \bibitem{mssm}
1269: A.~Kusenko,
1270: %''Solitons in the supersymmetric generalizations of the Standard Model'',
1271: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 405}, 108 (1997).
1272: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9704273;%%
1273:
1274: \bibitem{frag}
1275: A.~Kusenko and M.~Shaposhnikov,
1276: %''Supersymmetric Q balls as dark matter'',
1277: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 418}, 46 (1998)
1278:
1279:
1280: \bibitem{em} K.~Enqvist, J.~McDonald,
1281: %``Q-balls and baryogenesis in the MSSM,''
1282: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 425}, 309 (1998);
1283: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9711514;%%
1284: %``B-ball baryogenesis and the baryon to dark matter ratio,''
1285: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 538}, 321 (1999);
1286: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9803380;%%
1287: %``D-term inflation and B-ball baryogenesis,''
1288: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 81}, 3071 (1998);
1289: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9806213;%%
1290: %``MSSM dark matter constraints and decaying B-balls,''
1291: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 440}, 59 (1998);
1292: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9807269;%%
1293: %K.~Enqvist and J.~McDonald,
1294: %``Observable isocurvature fluctuations from the Affleck-Dine condensate,''
1295: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 83}, 2510 (1999)
1296: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9811412;%%
1297: %``The dynamics of Affleck-Dine condensate collapse,''
1298: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9908316;%%
1299: %K.~Enqvist, A.~Jokinen and J.~McDonald,
1300: %``Flat direction condensate instabilities in the MSSM,''
1301: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 483}, 191 (2000).
1302: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0004050;%%
1303:
1304: \bibitem{ad}
1305: S.~Kasuya, M.~Kawasaki,
1306: %``Q-ball formation through Affleck-Dine mechanism,''
1307: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 61}, 041301 (2000);
1308: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9909509;%%
1309: S.~Kasuya and M.~Kawasaki,
1310: %``Q-ball formation in the gravity-mediated SUSY breaking scenario,''
1311: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 62}, 023512 (2000).
1312: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0002285;%%
1313: K.~Enqvist, A.~Jokinen, T.~Multamaki and I.~Vilja,
1314: %``Numerical simulations of fragmentation of the Affleck-Dine condensate,''
1315: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 63}, 083501 (2001)
1316: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0011134;%%
1317:
1318:
1319: \bibitem{frieman} J.~A.~Frieman, A.~V.~Olinto, M.~Gleiser and
1320: C.~Alcock,
1321: %``Cosmic evolution of nontoplogical solitons'',
1322: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 40}, 3241 (1989).
1323:
1324: \bibitem{griest}
1325: K.~Griest and E.~Kolb,
1326: %''Solitosythesis: Cosmological evolution of nontoplogical solitons'',
1327: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 40}, 3231 (1989).
1328:
1329:
1330: \bibitem{i_dm}
1331: D.~N.~Spergel and P.~J.~Steinhardt,
1332: ``Observational evidence for selfinteracting cold dark matter'',
1333: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 84}, 3760 (2000).
1334:
1335: \bibitem{q_dm}
1336: A.~Kusenko and P.~J.~Steinhardt,
1337: %''$Q$-ball candidates for self-interacting dark matter'',
1338: astro-ph/0106008
1339:
1340: \bibitem{PT}
1341: A.~Kusenko,
1342: %''Phase transitions precipitated by solitiosynthesis'',
1343: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 406}, 26 (1997)
1344:
1345:
1346:
1347: \bibitem{evap_ferm}
1348: A.~G.~Cohen, S.~R.~Coleman, H.~Georgi and A.~Manohar,
1349: %``The Evaporation Of Q Balls,''
1350: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 272}, 301 (1986).
1351: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B272,301;%%
1352:
1353: \bibitem{demir}
1354: D.~A.~Demir,
1355: %``Weak-scale hidden sector and electroweak Q-balls,''
1356: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 450}, 215 (1999)
1357: %[arXiv:hep-ph/9810453].
1358: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9810453;%%
1359:
1360: \bibitem{affleck}
1361: I.~Affleck and M.~Dine,
1362: %``A New Mechanism For Baryogenesis,''
1363: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 249}, 361 (1985).
1364: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B249,361;%%
1365:
1366:
1367: \bibitem{fin}
1368: T.~Multam\"{a}ki and I.~Vilja, 12
1369: %''Analytical and numverical properties of $Q$-balls'',
1370: Nucl.\ Phys.\ {\bf 574}, 130 (2000)
1371:
1372: \bibitem{thick}
1373: A.~Kusenko,
1374: %''Small Q balls'',
1375: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 404}, 285 (1997)
1376:
1377: \bibitem{graham}
1378: N.~Graham,
1379: %``Quantum corrections to q balls'',
1380: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 513}, 112 (2001).
1381:
1382: \bibitem{wc}
1383: G.~C.~Wick,
1384: Phys.\ Rev.\ {\bf 96}, 1124 (1954);
1385: R.~E.~Cutkosky,
1386: Phys.\ Rev.\ {\bf 96}, 1135 (1954);
1387:
1388: \bibitem{ladder}
1389: G.~Feldman, T.~Fulton and J.~Townsend,
1390: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 7}, 1814 (1973);
1391: C.~R.~Ji and J.~Funstahl,
1392: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 176}, 11 (1986).
1393: J.~W.~Darewych,
1394: %''Some exact solutions of reduced scalar Yukawa theory,''
1395: Can.\ J.\ Phys.\ {\bf 76}, 523 (1998);
1396: T.~Nieuwenhuis and J.~A.~Tjon,
1397: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 77}, 814 (1996).
1398:
1399: \bibitem{crit}
1400: L.~Di~Leo and J.~W.~Darewych,
1401: Can.\ J.\ Phys. {\bf 70}, 412 (1992);
1402:
1403: \bibitem{fggk}
1404: A.~Frieman, G.~B.~Gelmini, M.~Gleiser and E.~W.~Kolb,
1405: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 60}, 2101, (1988)
1406:
1407: \bibitem{laine}
1408: M.~Laine and M.~Shaposhnikov,
1409: %''Thermodynamics of nontopological solitons'',
1410: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 532}, 376 (1998).
1411:
1412: \bibitem{lee}
1413: K.~Lee,
1414: %``Quantum tunneling with global charge'',
1415: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 50}, 5333 (1994).
1416:
1417:
1418:
1419:
1420: \end{references}
1421:
1422: \end{document}
1423:
1424: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1425: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1426: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1427:
1428: