1: \global\def\draftcontrol{0}
2:
3: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
4: \def\versionno{ cw sppression -- draft }
5: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
6:
7: \catcode`\@=11
8:
9: %%%
10: %%%%%% draftcontrol
11: %%%%%%%%%
12: \expandafter\ifx\csname draftcontrol\endcsname\relax\global\def\draftcontrol{0}
13: \fi
14:
15: %%%
16: %%%%%% draftdate
17: %%%%%%%%%
18: {\count255=\time\divide\count255 by 60
19: \xdef\hourmin{\number\count255}
20: \multiply\count255 by-60\advance\count255 by\time
21: \xdef\hourmin{\hourmin:\ifnum\count255<10 0\fi\the\count255}}
22: \def\draftdate{\number\month/\number\day/\number\year\ \ \ \hourmin }
23:
24: %%%
25: %%%%%% titlepage (adapted from article.cls)
26: %%%%%%%%%
27: \newcommand\makepapertitle{\par
28: \begingroup
29: \renewcommand\thefootnote{\@fnsymbol\c@footnote}%
30: \def\@makefnmark{\rlap{\@textsuperscript{\normalfont\@thefnmark}}}%
31: \long\def\@makefntext##1{\parindent 1em\noindent
32: \hb@xt@1.8em{%
33: \hss\@textsuperscript{\normalfont\@thefnmark}}##1}%
34: \newpage
35: \global\@topnum\z@ % Prevents figures from going at top of page.
36: \@makepapertitle
37: \thispagestyle{empty}\@thanks
38: \endgroup
39: \setcounter{footnote}{0}%
40: \global\let\thanks\relax
41: \global\let\makepapertitle\relax
42: \global\let\@makepapertitle\relax
43: \global\let\@thanks\@empty
44: \global\let\@author\@empty
45: \global\let\@date\@empty
46: \global\let\@title\@empty
47: \global\let\title\relax
48: \global\let\author\relax
49: \global\let\date\relax
50: \global\let\and\relax
51: \def\version{\let\version\@version\@gobble}
52: }
53: \def\@makepapertitle{%
54: \newpage
55: \ifnum\draftcontrol=1 {}
56: \version\versionno
57: \vskip 3em%
58: \else
59: \hfill\hbox to 3cm {\parbox{4cm}{\@pubnum}\hss}%
60: \vskip 3em%
61: \fi
62: \begin{center}%
63: \let \footnote \thanks
64: {\LARGE {\@title}}%
65: \vskip 1.5em%
66: {\normalsize%\large
67: \lineskip .5em%
68: \begin{tabular}[t]{c}%
69: \@author
70: \end{tabular}\par}%
71: \vskip 1.5em%
72: {\@bstract}%
73: \end{center}%
74: \vskip 1.5em
75: \@date%
76: \par
77: }
78:
79: \gdef\@pubnum{}
80: %\@latex@error{No \noexpand \pubnum given}\@ehc}
81: \def\pubnum#1{%
82: \gdef\@pubnum{#1}}
83:
84: \gdef\@bstract{}
85: \def\Abstract#1{%
86: \gdef\@bstract{%
87: \parbox{\textwidth-0pc}{%
88: \centerline{\bf Abstract}\penalty1000%
89: \kern.2cm%
90: \noindent%\abstractfont \baselineskip=12pt
91: \renewcommand\baselinestretch{1.0}%
92: {#1}}}
93: }
94:
95:
96: %%%
97: %%%%%% pagestyle
98: %%%%%%%%% for body of text
99: %%%%%%%%%%%%
100: \def\ps@paper{\let\@mkboth\@gobbletwo%
101: \ifnum\draftcontrol=1
102: \def\@oddfoot{\hbox to \textwidth{\tiny \versionno \hfil\tiny\draftdate}%
103: \hskip -\textwidth \hbox to \textwidth{\hfil\rm\thepage\hfil}}%
104: \else\def\@oddfoot{\hbox to \textwidth{\hfil\rm\thepage\hfil}}
105: \fi
106: \let\@evenfoot\@oddfoot
107: }
108: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
109:
110: %%%
111: %%%%%% front vs body vs coda
112: %%%%%%%%%
113: \def\body{\clearpage
114: % \pagenumbering{arabic}
115: \pagestyle{paper}
116: }
117: \newenvironment{acknowledgments}{%
118: \vskip 3.25ex
119: %\@startsection {section}{1}{\z@}%
120: % {-3.25ex \@plus -1ex \@minus -.2ex}%
121: % {1.5ex \@plus.2ex}%
122: % {\normalfont\normalsize\bfseries}
123: \noindent {\bf Acknowledgments}
124: %\vskip 0in
125: %\noindent
126: }
127:
128: %%%%%%%%%%%%
129:
130: %%%
131: %%%%%% definitions for draftmode
132: %%%%%%%%%
133: %%%%%%%%%%%% versioncontrol
134: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
135: \def\@version#1{\ifnum\draftcontrol=1
136: \typeout{}\typeout{#1}\typeout{}
137: \vskip3mm\centerline{\hbox{\fbox{\normalsize{\tt DRAFT -- #1 -- }
138: {\draftdate}}}}\vskip3mm
139: \fi}
140: \let\version\@version
141: %%%%%%%%%%%% labels in math mode
142: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
143: \long\def\eqlabel#1{\ifnum\draftcontrol=1
144: \tag@false % there are some problems with multline without this
145: \tag*{(\theequation) \hbox to -0.2cm{\hspace{0cm}\small{#1}\hss}}
146: \refstepcounter{equation}
147: \edef\@currentlabel{\theequation}
148: \ltx@label{#1} % use old LaTeX \label instead of new definition
149: % of \label in AMSLaTeX.
150: \else
151: \label{#1}
152: \fi
153: }
154: %%%%%%%%%%%% citations keys in bibliography (very short version of showkeys.sty)
155: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
156: \let\st@bibitem\@bibitem
157: \let\st@lbibitem\@lbibitem
158: \ifnum\draftcontrol=1
159: \def\@bibitem#1{%
160: \st@bibitem{#1}\a@@label{#1}\ignorespaces}
161: \def\@lbibitem[#1]#2{%
162: \st@lbibitem[#1]{#2}\a@@label{#2}\ignorespaces}
163: \def\a@@label#1{%
164: \gdef\a@lab{\smash{\normalfont\small#1}}
165: \ifvmode
166: \if@inlabel
167: \global\setbox\@labels\hbox{%
168: \llap{\a@lab\let\a@lab\relax
169: \kern\@totalleftmargin\kern\marginparsep}%
170: \box\@labels}%
171: \fi
172: \fi}
173: \fi
174: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
175:
176:
177: %%%
178: %%%%%% start
179: %%%%%%%%%
180: \documentclass[12pt,letterpaper]{article}
181: %%%%%%%%%%%%
182:
183: %%%
184: %%%%%% load packages
185: %%%%%%%%%
186: \usepackage{amsmath,amssymb,array,calc,rotating,epsfig,psfrag}
187: \usepackage[nosort]{cite}
188: %%%%%%%%%%%%
189:
190: %%%
191: %%%%%% relax
192: %%%%%%%%%
193: \ifnum\draftcontrol=1
194: \tolerance=1000
195: \fi
196: %%%%%%%%%%%%
197:
198: %%%
199: %%%%%% layout
200: %%%%%%%%%
201: \renewcommand\baselinestretch{1.25}
202: \setlength{\paperheight}{11in}
203: \setlength{\paperwidth}{8.5in}
204: \setlength{\textwidth}{\paperwidth-2.4in} \hoffset= -.3in % +1in from printer
205: \setlength{\textheight}{\paperheight-2.4in} \topmargin= -.6in % +1in from printer
206:
207: %%%%%%%%% section titles
208: \renewcommand\section{\@startsection {section}{1}{\z@}%
209: {-3.5ex \@plus -1ex \@minus -.2ex}%
210: {2.3ex \@plus.2ex}%
211: {\normalfont\large\bfseries}}
212: \renewcommand\subsection{\@startsection{subsection}{2}{\z@}%
213: {-3.25ex\@plus -1ex \@minus -.2ex}%
214: {1.5ex \@plus .2ex}%
215: {\normalfont\normalsize\bfseries}}
216: \renewcommand\subsubsection{\@startsection{subsubsection}{3}{\z@}%
217: {-3.25ex\@plus -1ex \@minus -.2ex}%
218: {1.5ex \@plus .2ex}%
219: {\normalfont\normalsize\it}}
220: \renewcommand\paragraph{\@startsection{paragraph}{4}{\z@}%
221: {-3.25ex\@plus -1ex \@minus -.2ex}%
222: {1.5ex \@plus .2ex}%
223: {\normalfont\normalsize\bf}}
224:
225: %%%
226: %%%%%% number equations within sections
227: %%%%%%%%%
228: \numberwithin{equation}{section}
229:
230: %%%
231: %%%%%% macros
232: %%%%%%%%%
233:
234: %%%%%%%%% standard
235: %%%%%%%%%%%%
236:
237: \def\ie{{\it i.e.}}
238: \def\eg{{\it e.g.}}
239:
240: \def\revise#1 {\raisebox{-0em}{\rule{3pt}{1em}}%
241: \marginpar{\raisebox{.5em}{\vrule width3pt\
242: \vrule width0pt height 0pt depth0.5em
243: \hbox to 0cm{\hspace{0cm}{%
244: \parbox[t]{4em}{\raggedright\footnotesize{#1}}}\hss}}}}
245:
246: \newcommand\fnxt[1] {\raisebox{.12em}{\rule{.35em}{.35em}}\mbox{\hspace{0.6em}}#1}
247: \newcommand\nxt[1] {\\\fnxt#1}
248:
249: \def\cala {{\cal A}}
250: \def\calA {{\mathfrak A}}
251: \def\calAbar {{\underline \calA}}
252: \def\calb {{\cal B}}
253: \def\calc {{\cal C}}
254: \def\cald {{\cal D}}
255: \def\cale {{\cal E}}
256: \def\calf {{\cal F}}
257: \def\calg {{\cal G}}
258: \def\calG {{\mathfrak G}}
259: \def\calh {{\cal H}}
260: \def\cali {{\cal I}}
261: \def\calj {{\cal J}}
262: \def\calk {{\cal K}}
263: \def\call {{\cal L}}
264: \def\calm {{\cal M}}
265: \def\caln {{\cal N}}
266: \def\calo {{\cal O}}
267: \def\calp {{\cal P}}
268: \def\calq {{\cal Q}}
269: \def\calr {{\cal R}}
270: \def\cals {{\cal S}}
271: \def\calt {{\cal T}}
272: \def\calu {{\cal U}}
273: \def\calv {{\cal V}}
274: \def\calw {{\cal W}}
275:
276: \def\complex {{\mathbb C}}
277: \def\naturals {{\mathbb N}}
278: \def\projective {{\mathbb P}}
279: \def\rationals {{\mathbb Q}}
280: \def\reals {{\mathbb R}}
281: \def\zet {{\mathbb Z}}
282:
283: \def\del {\partial}
284: \def\delbar {\bar\partial}
285: \def\ee {{\rm e}}
286: \def\ii {{\rm i}}
287: \def\chain {{\circ}}
288: \def\tr {\mathop{\rm Tr}}
289: \def\Re {{\rm Re\hskip0.1em}}
290: \def\Im {{\rm Im\hskip0.1em}}
291: \def\id {{\it id}}
292:
293: \def\de#1#2{{\rm d}^{#1}\!#2\,}
294: \def\De#1{{\cald}#1\,}
295:
296: \def\half{{\frac12}}
297: \newcommand\topa[2]{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{2}{\scriptstyle #1}{\scriptstyle #2}}
298: \def\undertilde#1{{\vphantom#1\smash{\underset{\widetilde{\hphantom{\displaystyle#1}}}{#1}}}}
299: \def\prodprime{\mathop{{\prod}'}}
300: \def\gsq#1#2{%
301: {\scriptstyle #1}\square\limits_{\scriptstyle #2}{\,}} % Ginsparg square
302: \def\sqr#1#2{{\vcenter{\vbox{\hrule height.#2pt
303: \hbox{\vrule width.#2pt height#1pt \kern#1pt
304: \vrule width.#2pt}\hrule height.#2pt}}}}
305: \def\square{%
306: \mathop{\mathchoice{\sqr{12}{15}}{\sqr{9}{12}}{\sqr{6.3}{9}}{\sqr{4.5}{9}}}}
307:
308: %%%%%%%%% jtl macros
309: %%%%%%%%%%%%
310: \newcommand{\fft}[2]{{\frac{#1}{#2}}}
311: \newcommand{\ft}[2]{{\textstyle{\frac{#1}{#2}}}}
312: \def\jsquare{\mathop{\mathchoice{\sqr{8}{32}}{\sqr{8}{32}}
313: {\sqr{6.3}{9}}{\sqr{4.5}{9}}}}
314:
315:
316: \newcommand{\wn}{\mathfrak{w}}
317:
318:
319: %%%%%%%%% paper specific macros
320: %%%%%%%%%%%%
321:
322:
323: \def\bx{\bar{x}}
324: \def\by{\bar{y}}
325: \def\bz{\bar{z}}
326: \def\bp{\bar{\phi}}
327: \def\SU{{\rm SU}}
328: \def\U{{\rm U}}
329: \def\dd{\delta}
330: \def\r{\rho}
331: %%%%%%%%%%%%
332:
333: \catcode`\@=12
334:
335: \begin{document}
336:
337: %%%
338: %%%%%% text starts here
339: %%%%%%%%%
340:
341:
342: \title{Radiative Corrections to the Inflaton Potential as an
343: Explanation of Suppressed Large Scale Power in Density Perturbations
344: and the Cosmic Microwave Background}
345:
346:
347: \pubnum{%
348: MCTP-04-57\\
349: hep-ph/0410117}
350: \date{October 2004}
351:
352: \author{
353: A.~Buchel$^{(1,2)}$, F.~A.~Chishtie$^{(2)}$, V.~Elias$^{(2)}$, Katherine Freese$^{(3)}$, R.~B.~Mann$^{(1,4)}$,\\
354: D.~G.~C.~McKeon$^{(2)}$, and T.~G.~Steele$^{(5)}$\\[0.4cm]
355: \it $^1$Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics\\
356: \it Waterloo, Ontario N2J 2W9, Canada\\[0.2cm]
357: \it $^2$Department of Applied Mathematics\\
358: \it University of Western Ontario\\
359: \it London, Ontario N6A 5B7, Canada\\
360: \it $^3$Michigan Center for Theoretical Physics\\
361: \it University of Michigan\\
362: \it Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA\\
363: \it $^4$Department of Physics\\
364: \it University of Waterloo\\
365: \it Waterloo, Ontario N2L 3G1, Canada\\
366: \it $^5$Department of Physics $\&$ Engineering Physics\\
367: \it University of Saskatchewan\\
368: \it Saskatoon, Saskatchewan S7N 5E2, Canada }
369:
370: \Abstract{
371: The Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe microwave background data
372: suggest that the primordial spectrum of scalar curvature fluctuations
373: is suppressed at small wavenumbers. We propose a UV/IR mixing effect
374: in small-field inflationary models that can explain the observable
375: deviation in WMAP data from the concordance model. Specifically, in
376: inflationary models where the inflaton couples to an asymptotically
377: free gauge theory, the radiative corrections to the effective inflaton
378: potential can be anomalously large. This occurs for small values of
379: the inflaton field which are of the order of the gauge theory strong
380: coupling scale. Radiative corrections cause the inflaton potential to
381: blow up at small values of the inflaton field. As a result, these
382: corrections can violate the slow-roll condition at the initial stage
383: of the inflation and suppress the production of scalar density
384: perturbations.
385: }
386:
387:
388:
389:
390:
391: %\enlargethispage{1.5cm}
392:
393: \makepapertitle
394:
395: \body
396:
397: \version\versionno
398:
399: \section{Introduction}
400: High precision observational cosmology places tight constraints on the
401: cosmological parameters of our universe. The Wilkinson Microwave
402: Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) results measuring anisotropies in the Cosmic
403: Background Radiation (CBR) \cite{cmb1,cmb2}, when combined with data
404: on high redshift supernovae and large scale structure, strongly
405: support the ``concordance model'' for our universe\footnote{The
406: concordance model is a spatially flat Universe with an adiabatic,
407: nearly scale invariant spectrum of initial fluctuations. In what
408: follows we assume a $\Lambda$CDM model as a realization of the
409: concordance model.}. One of the intriguing observations of the CBR
410: anisotropy spectrum is the suppression of its low-$\ell$ multipoles
411: compared to the predictions of $\Lambda$CDM model. The low-$\ell$
412: multipoles of the temperature-temperature (TT) angular power spectrum
413: correspond to large angular scales --- they encode the information
414: about the small wavenumbers in the spectrum of primordial density
415: perturbations. Consequently they provide a window on the detailed
416: features of the inflaton potential during the part of inflation
417: \cite{guth} that gives rise to observables in structure formation and
418: the microwave background, produced roughly 60-50 e-foldings before the
419: end of inflation.
420: %first few e-foldings of inflation.
421: Unfortunately, it is not possible to disentangle the suppression of
422: low-$\ell$ modes from cosmic variance limitations. In this paper we
423: assume the suppression is a physical effect.
424:
425: Not surprisingly, this suppression of low-$l$ multipoles
426: (along with the possibility of a
427: running spectral index) was the focus of much recent
428: discussion\cite{e1,e2,e3,e4,e5,e6,e7,e8,e9,k,e10,e11,e12,e13,e14,e15,e16}.
429: Most previous work
430: attempted to identify a new ultraviolet (UV) physics responsible for
431: the suppression of the primordial power spectrum at small wavenumbers.
432: In this paper we point out a simple low-energy (albeit strongly
433: coupled) field-theoretic phenomenon that produces a 'feature' in the
434: inflaton potential that serves to explain the suppression
435: of low-$\ell$ CBR anisotropies\footnote{Effects of strongly coupled gauge
436: theory dynamics on inflation were also studied in \cite{w}.}.
437: The observed effect is specific to
438: small-field inflationary models \cite{r0,r}. Here, small-field models
439: are defined to be those models of inflation in which the initial value
440: of the scalar field is small (e.g. near zero) as it starts rolling
441: down the potential.
442:
443:
444: We find a phenomenon that modifies the usual
445: power spectrum of density fluctuations from inflation,
446: \begin{equation}
447: \left(\delta^{(0)}_H\right)^2\propto \left(\frac{k}{k_s}\right)^{n_s-1}\,,
448: \end{equation}
449: to
450: \begin{equation}
451: \delta_H^2=\left(\delta_H^{(0)}\right)^2\ f\left(\frac{k}{k_s}\right)\,,
452: \end{equation}
453: where the superscript $0$ refers to the unmodified spectrum,
454: and the form-factor $f(\phi)$ has the following behavior:
455: \begin{equation}
456: f(k) \rightarrow 0 \,\,\,\, {\rm (small} \,\, k)
457: \end{equation}
458: \begin{equation}
459: f(k) \rightarrow 1 \,\,\,\, {\rm (large} \,\, k) .
460: \end{equation}
461: Here $k_s$ corresponds to the scale of perturbations that are produced
462: $60$ e-foldings before the end of inflation, which corresponds to the
463: present horizon size, $k_s\sim (4000 Mpc)^{-1}$.
464:
465: The suppression of large-scale power arises because the potential
466: blows up (becomes infinite) at small values of the field, so that the
467: field is not slowly rolling at all and production of density
468: fluctuations is suppressed; see Fig. (1). This blow-up of the
469: potential is sharply localized at 60 e-foldings before the end of
470: inflation, so that ordinary density fluctuations and structure
471: formation ensue just afterwards (at 60-50 e-foldings before the end).
472: While the sharpness of the feature is generic to our mechanism, its
473: location at exactly 60 e-folds before the end requires fine tuning\footnote{
474: The same fine-tuning problem is acknowledged in all previous work on the small-$\ell$ suppression of CBR
475: power spectrum we are aware of \cite{e1,e2,e3,e4,e5,e6,e7,e8,e9,k,e10,e11,e12,e13,e14,e15,e16}.
476: Unfortunately, neither
477: of the proposed models provided the solution to it.
478: It would be very interesting
479: to identify physical phenomena that alleviates the latter fine tuning problem.}. The
480: origin of the blow-up of the potential is due to the radiative
481: corrections for an inflaton coupled to an asymptotically free gauge
482: theory (analogous to QCD).
483:
484:
485:
486: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
487: \begin{figure}[ht]
488: \begin{center}
489: \epsfig{file=figure0.eps,width=0.9\textwidth}
490: \caption{
491: Effective inflaton potential (solid line) in small-field
492: inflationary models with inflaton coupled to asymptotically free
493: gauge theory. The slow-roll tree-level potential (dashed line)
494: receives large radiative corrections whenever the inflaton
495: expectation value is close to the gauge theory strong coupling scale
496: $\phi\sim \Lambda\ll v$. In the sharply localized regime
497: $|\phi-\Lambda|\ll v$ the field is not slowly rolling, and
498: production of density fluctuations is strongly suppressed. }
499: \label{cases0}
500: \end{center}
501: \end{figure}
502: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
503:
504:
505: Thirty years ago Coleman and Weinberg computed the one-loop effective potential for
506: (classically) conformally invariant
507: $\SU(2) \times \U(1)$ gauge theory with no quadratic mass term. However,
508: due to the massive top quark, the contributions due to the $t$-quark's
509: Yukawa coupling constant have subsequently been found to dominate over
510: those of the $\SU(2)\times \U(1)$ gauge coupling constants. Moreover,
511: when there is a large Yukawa coupling, subsequent leading logarithm
512: terms to the one-loop effective potential are too large to neglect. In the
513: next section we review a technique developed in Ref. \cite{a42,a4}
514: for all-order summation of leading logarithm terms for the effective
515: potential, including coupling to asymptotically free theory (QCD).
516: Radiative symmetry breaking as an explanation for the Higgs mass is
517: revived in this context, since a prediction for the Higgs mass above
518: 200 GeV can now be accommodated \cite{a42}.
519:
520: The physics characterizing this model extends to more
521: general scalar potentials, including that of any
522: inflaton coupled
523: to an asymptotically free gauge theory.
524: We explicitly compute the leading contribution to the effective
525: inflaton (Higgs) potential and show that radiative corrections become
526: anomalously large for small vacuum expectation values of the inflaton.
527: This is a reflection of a new UV/IR mixing effect in the model: even
528: though the inflationary potential has a typical GUT scale height, the
529: effective QCD coupling in radiative corrections to the inflaton
530: potential is evaluated at the field value of the inflaton.
531: The effect is thus most profound if the inflaton value at
532: the beginning of inflation is close to the gauge theory's strong
533: coupling scale. Thus, for a sufficiently small initial inflaton
534: value, the QCD coupling develops a perturbative Landau pole that
535: strongly enhances radiative corrections.
536:
537: In section 3 we model these radiative corrections in small-field
538: inflationary scenarios and demonstrate that they suppress the
539: primordial power spectrum of scalar density fluctuations for small
540: wavenumbers. We use the CMBEASY package \cite{cmbeasy} to relate the
541: latter suppression to the small multipole suppression in the CBR
542: spectrum of anisotropies as observed by WMAP. We summarize our results
543: in section 4.
544:
545:
546: \section{QCD contributions to radiative Higgs potential}
547:
548:
549: A technique for all-order summation of leading logarithm terms for the
550: effective potential in radiative electroweak symmetry breaking,
551: including coupling to asymptotically free theory (QCD), has been
552: developed in Ref.~\cite{a42,a4}. In this section we review this
553: analysis.
554:
555: Though our discussion is in the context of radiative symmetry breaking
556: of the Higgs potential in the Standard Model, the physics of the
557: ultraviolet-infrared mixing characterizing this model extends to more
558: general scalar (inflaton) potentials: all that is required is the
559: coupling of the inflaton to an asymptotically free gauge theory. We
560: emphasize the latter genericity, as from the inflationary perspective
561: the radiative symmetry breaking potential discussed in this section is
562: not suitable for inflation: it predicts unacceptably large amplitude
563: of density fluctuations. In the case of the effective radiative
564: symmetry breaking Higgs potential in the Standard Model the dominant
565: QCD contribution is given by \eqref{potsin}, which is the main result
566: of the section. We expect perturbatively divergent contributions of
567: precisely this kind to be present in all small-field inflationary
568: models with inflaton coupling to a QCD-like gauge theory. Hence, in the
569: next section we consider an exponential potential for inflation
570: (different from what is considered in this section), but with the same
571: physical behavior due to coupling to an asymptotically free theory.
572:
573:
574:
575: In the absence of an explicit scalar-mass term, the one-loop effective
576: potential for $\SU(2)\times \U(1)$ gauge theory was computed in 1973
577: in the seminal paper by Coleman and Weinberg \cite{cw}
578: \begin{equation}
579: V_{eff}^{1-loop}=\frac{\lambda\phi^4}{4}+\phi^4\left[\frac{3\lambda^2}{16\pi^2}+\frac{3(3g_2^4+2g_2^2g'^2+g'^4)}
580: {1024\pi^2}\right]\left(\log\frac{\phi^2}{\mu^2}-\frac{25}{6}\right)
581: \eqlabel{cw}
582: \end{equation}
583: where the $-25/6$ constant is chosen to ensure that
584: \begin{equation}
585: \frac{d^4V_{1-loop}}{d\phi^4}=\frac{d^4V_{tree}}{d\phi^4}=6\lambda
586: \end{equation}
587: and $\{g_2,g'\}$ are the $\SU(2)$ and $\U(1)$ coupling constants
588: respectively.
589:
590: The above one-loop computation neglects quark Yukawa couplings.
591: As there is a heavy $t$-quark, this is no longer
592: justifiable\footnote{When there is a large Yukawa coupling, it is also
593: inconsistent to neglect higher-loop contributions to the effective
594: potential.}. In fact \cite{a4}, the Yukawa
595: coupling of the $t$-quark makes contributions to the scalar effective potential
596: $V_{eff}$ which {\it dominate} over those of the $\SU(2)\times \U(1)$ gauge
597: coupling constants. As in \cite{a4}, we neglect the $\SU(2)\times
598: \U(1)$ gauge couplings, and all quark Yukawa couplings except for that of
599: the $t$-quark. Thus, the effective potential takes the form
600: \begin{equation}
601: V_{eff}=V_{eff}\left(\lambda(\mu),g_t(\mu),g_3(\mu),\phi^2(\mu),\mu\right)\,,
602: \eqlabel{veff}
603: \end{equation}
604: where $\lambda$ is the quartic scalar-field self-interaction coupling
605: constant appearing in the tree-level scalar potential
606: \begin{equation}
607: V_{tree}=\frac {\lambda}{4}\phi^4+{\rm const}\equiv \frac {\lambda}{4}\phi^4+V^{(0)}\,,
608: \eqlabel{tree}
609: \end{equation}
610: $g_t$ is the Yukawa coupling of the $t$-quark, $g_3$ is the QCD
611: coupling, and $\mu$ is the renormalization mass scale. The requirement
612: that $V_{eff}$ is independent of the renormalization scale $\mu$ gives
613: rise to the familiar renormalization group equation for the effective
614: potential
615: \begin{equation}
616: \begin{split}
617: 0=&\mu \frac{d}{d\mu} V[\lambda(\mu),g_t(\mu),g_3(\mu),\phi^2(\mu),\mu]\\
618: =&\left(\mu\frac{\del}{\del\mu}+\beta_\lambda\frac{\del}{\del\lambda}+\beta_t\frac{\del}{\del g_t}+\beta_3\frac{\del}
619: {\del g_3}-2\gamma\phi^2\frac{\del}{\del\phi^2}\right) V\left(\lambda,g_t,g_3,\phi^2,\mu\right)\,,
620: \end{split}
621: \eqlabel{pot}
622: \end{equation}
623: where to one loop order in $\lambda$, $g_t$ and $g_3$
624: \begin{equation}
625: \begin{split}
626: &\beta_{\lambda}\equiv \mu\frac{d\lambda}{d\mu}=\frac{48\lambda g_t^2}{64\pi^2}+\frac{12\lambda^2}{8\pi^2}
627: -\frac{3g_t^4}{8\pi^2}+\calo\left(\lambda^kg_{3,t}^{6-2k}\right)\,,\\
628: &\beta_t\equiv \mu \frac{dg_t}{d\mu}=\frac{\ft 92g_t^3-8g_tg_3^2}{16\pi^2}+\calo\left(\lambda^kg_{3,t}^{5-2k}\right)\,,\\
629: &\beta_3\equiv \mu \frac{dg_3}{d\mu}=-\frac{7g_3^3}{16\pi^2}+\calo\left(g_{3,t}^{5}\right)\,,\\
630: &\gamma\equiv -\frac{\mu}{\phi}\frac{d\phi}{d\mu}=\frac{3g_t^2}{16\pi^2}+\calo\left(\lambda^kg_{3,t}^{4-2k}\right)\,.
631: \end{split}
632: \eqlabel{1loop}
633: \end{equation}
634: For small coupling constants $\{x,y,z\}$ defined at a scale
635: $\mu=2^{-1/4}G_F^{-1/2}\equiv v$
636: \begin{equation}
637: \begin{split}
638: &x\equiv g_t^2(v)/4\pi^2\,,\\
639: &y\equiv \lambda/4\pi^2\,,\\
640: &z\equiv g_3^2(v)/4\pi^2\,,
641: \end{split}
642: \eqlabel{defxyz}
643: \end{equation}
644: the summation-of-leading-logarithms effective Higgs potential can be
645: written as \cite{a4}
646: \begin{equation}
647: V_{eff}^{LL}\equiv \pi^2\phi^2S_{LL}=\pi^2\phi^4\left\{\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}x^n\sum_{k=0}^{\infty}y^k
648: z^l C_{n,k,l}L^{n+k+l-1}\right\}\,,\ (C_{0,0,0}=0)\,,
649: \eqlabel{lldef}
650: \end{equation}
651: where the series $S_{LL}$ is the sum of all contributions involving a
652: power of the logarithm
653: \begin{equation}
654: L\equiv\ln(\phi^2/\mu^2)
655: \end{equation}
656: that is only one
657: degree lower than the aggregate power of the couplings $\{x,y,z\}$. In
658: this approximation the RGE \eqref{pot} takes the following form
659: \begin{equation}
660: \left[-2\frac{\del}{\del L}+\left(\frac 94x^2-4 x z \right)\frac{\del}{\del x}+\left(6y^2+3yx-\frac 32 x^2\right)
661: \frac {\del}{\del y}-\frac{7}{2}z^2\frac{\del}{\del z}-3x
662: \right]S_{LL}(x,y,z,L)=0\,.
663: \eqlabel{slle}
664: \end{equation}
665: Remarkably a closed-form solution to \eqref{slle} can be written down \cite{a4}
666: \begin{equation}
667: V_{eff}^{LL}=\pi^2\by(L/2)\bar{\phi}^4(L/2)=\pi^2\by(L/2)\phi^4\exp\left[-3 \int_0^{L/2}\bx(t)dt\right]\,,
668: \eqlabel{cf}
669: \end{equation}
670: where $\{\bx(t),\by(t),\bz(t)\}$ are characteristic functions defined by the differential equations and
671: initial conditions
672: \begin{equation}
673: \frac{d\bz}{dt}=-\frac 72 \bz^2\,,\qquad \bz(0)=z\,,
674: \eqlabel{eq1}
675: \end{equation}
676: \begin{equation}
677: \frac{d\bx}{dt}=\frac 94 \bx^2-4\bx\bz\,,\qquad \bx(0)=x\,,
678: \eqlabel{eq2}
679: \end{equation}
680: \begin{equation}
681: \frac{d\by}{dt}=6\by^2+3\bx\by-\frac 32 \bx^2\,,\qquad \by(0)=y\,,
682: \eqlabel{eq3}
683: \end{equation}
684: \begin{equation}
685: \frac{d\bar{\phi}}{dt}=-\frac 34 \bx\bar{\phi}\,,\qquad \bar{\phi}(0)=\phi\,,
686: \eqlabel{eq4}
687: \end{equation}
688: Eq.\eqref{eq1} describes the running of the QCD coupling
689: \begin{equation}
690: \bz(t)=\frac{2z}{2+7z\ t}\,.
691: \eqlabel{zrun}
692: \end{equation}
693: For
694: \begin{equation}
695: t\equiv t_s=-\frac {2}{7z}\,,
696: \eqlabel{ts}
697: \end{equation}
698: the QCD coupling blows-up --- this is the standard IR Landau pole of
699: the asymptotically free gauge theories. It is straightforward to
700: evaluate $V_{eff}^{LL}$ in the vicinity of the pole, \ie,
701: $|L/2-t_s|\to 0$. Given that
702: \begin{equation}
703: \begin{split}
704: &\bx(t)=\frac{4z}{9(2+7z t)}\left[1+\cdots\right]\,,\\
705: &\by(t)=\frac{\xi z}{2+7z t}\left[1+\cdots\right]\,,\qquad \xi\equiv\frac{\sqrt{689}-25}{36}\,,
706: \end{split}
707: \eqlabel{psol}
708: \end{equation}
709: where $\cdots$ indicates terms vanishing in the limit $(t-t_s)\to 0$, we find
710: \begin{equation}
711: V_{eff}^{LL}= \frac{\mu^4\pi^2\xi z}{2}\ e^{-\ft {8}{7z}}\ \left(\frac{9x}{2z}\right)^{4/3}\
712: \left(1+\frac 74z\ L\right)^{-25/21}\left[1+ \calo\left(1+\frac 74 z L\right)\right]
713: \eqlabel{potsin}
714: \end{equation}
715: as $(L/2-t_s)\to 0$, i.e., in the vicinity of the pole.
716: Notice that the dominant contribution near the perturbative QCD pole
717: in \eqref{psol} is insensitive to the small UV values
718: of the top quark Yukawa coupling ($x$) and Higgs self-coupling ($y$),
719: \eqref{eq1}-\eqref{eq3}. On the other hand, the residue of the branch-cut
720: in the effective potential \eqref{potsin} does depend on the UV top quark Yukawa
721: coupling\footnote{Such dependence arises from the subdominant terms in $\bx$, \eqref{psol}.} as this
722: singularity arises {\it only} when this coupling is non-vanishing.
723: Leading singular behavior of \eqref{psol}, \eqref{potsin} reflects the fact that an exact
724: solution of \eqref{eq1}-\eqref{eq3}
725: \begin{equation}
726: \begin{split}
727: \bz(t)=&\frac{2z}{2+7z\ t}\,,\\
728: \bx(t)=&\frac{4z}{9(2+7z t)}\,,\\
729: \by(t)=&\frac{\xi z}{2+7z t}\,,
730: \end{split}
731: \eqlabel{att}
732: \end{equation}
733: with initial conditions
734: \begin{equation}
735: \begin{split}
736: \bz(0)=z,\qquad \bx(0)=\frac{2z}{9}\,,\qquad \by(0)=\frac{\xi z}{2}\,,
737: \end{split}
738: \eqlabel{initatt}
739: \end{equation}
740: is an attractor of the physical\footnote{Subject to the constraints
741: $\{\bx(t),\by(t),\bz(t)\}>0$.} renormalization group flow. Finally,
742: the radiative contribution dominance over the tree level Higgs
743: potential in the full effective potential \eqref{potsin} is sharply
744: localized near the QCD strong coupling scale.
745:
746: The {\it existence} of this perturbative singularity is generic for
747: all asymptotically free gauge theories coupled to an inflaton (Higgs)
748: field (n.b. the order of the branch-cut and its residue in the
749: leading-logarithms effective potential \eqref{potsin} is specific to
750: the Standard Model matter content). The point is simply that radiative
751: corrections to the tree-level classical inflaton potential become
752: anomalously large when evaluated for small values of the inflaton
753: field, a consequence of the perturbative IR pole of the asymptotically
754: free gauge theory. In the framework of the effective quantum field
755: theory, the above conclusion is independent of the scale of the tree-level
756: inflaton potential, the constant term in \eqref{tree}. In fact, both
757: $V^{(0)}$ and $v$ (see \eqref{defxyz}) can be of order the GUT scale,
758: and $V_{eff}$ would still have a perturbative singularity for
759: sufficiently small $\phi$. Hence in the next section we will turn
760: to inflation.
761:
762:
763:
764: \section{UV/IR mixing in small-field inflationary models}
765:
766: In the previous section we argued that radiative corrections to the
767: tree-level effective inflaton potential are important, provided the
768: value of the inflaton is of the same order as the strong coupling scale
769: of the asymptotically free gauge theory to which it couples. In what
770: follows we study a simple model of small-field inflation that
771: illustrates observed effects on the spectrum of CBR anisotropies.
772: Here, small-field models are defined to be those models of inflation
773: in which the initial value of the scalar field is small (e.g. near
774: zero) as it starts rolling down the potential. Examples of
775: small-field models include models based on spontaneous symmetry
776: breaking phase transitions where the field rolls away from an unstable
777: equilibrium such as natural inflation \cite{ffo}. In this paper, as a
778: simple example, we will consider an exponential potential.
779:
780: We work with the tree level inflaton potential
781: \cite{i1,i2,i3}
782: \begin{equation}
783: V_{tree}=V_0 e^{-\lambda \phi}\,,
784: \eqlabel{ipot}
785: \end{equation}
786: where $\phi\equiv \Phi/m_{pl}$ is the inflaton field in Planck units.
787: We assume that the inflaton couples to some asymptotically free gauge
788: GUT. As a result, the tree-level inflaton potential will receive
789: radiative corrections. We model radiative corrections to \eqref{ipot}
790: as
791: \begin{equation}
792: V_{eff}=V_{tree}+V_{radiative}\equiv V_0 e^{-\lambda \phi}+\alpha\ \frac{V_0}{\ln \frac{\phi}{\Lambda}}\,,
793: \eqlabel{vefff}
794: \end{equation}
795: where $\alpha$ is proportional to the coupling constant of the GUT
796: asymptotically free gauge theory at the GUT scale, thus $0<\alpha\ll
797: 1$. The quantity $\Lambda$ is the strong coupling scale of the gauge
798: theory in Planck units, $\Lambda\ll 1$.
799: The form of the potential is similar to that of Fig. (1);
800: the potential becomes infinite at $\phi \rightarrow \Lambda$.
801: The starting point for inflation then clearly has to
802: be at $\phi=\phi_i>\Lambda$.
803:
804: The effective potential $V_{eff}$ has the required features to explain
805: the suppression of the observed CBR anisotropy spectrum at small $l$.
806: Indeed, if the beginning of inflation\footnote{By the 'beginning' we
807: mean the very outset of the $\sim 60$ e-foldings characterizing inflation.} $\phi_i$ is close to $\Lambda$, \ie,
808: $(\phi_i-\Lambda)\ll \Lambda$, the radiative contribution in
809: \eqref{vefff} is dominant. The inflaton then rolls too fast to
810: effectively generate primordial density perturbations at small
811: wavenumbers. This will further translate into the suppression of the
812: CBR anisotropy spectrum at large angles (or small $l$). This
813: suppression is rather sharply localized: for $\phi \sim 2 \Lambda$ or
814: larger, the radiative contribution does not exceed $V_{tree}$:
815: \begin{equation}
816: V_{radiative}\propto \alpha\ V_0\ll V_0\approx V_{tree}\,.
817: \eqlabel{vrad}
818: \end{equation}
819:
820: We now turn to the quantitative analysis of inflation with \eqref{vefff}. First, to determine the scales and parameters
821: we set $\alpha=0$, thus $V_{eff}=V_{tree}$. The standard slow roll parameters are\footnote{Prime denotes
822: derivative with respect to $\Phi$.}
823: \begin{equation}
824: \begin{split}
825: &\epsilon=\frac{m_{pl}^2}{2} \left(\frac{V_{eff}'}{V_{eff}}\right)^2=\frac 12 \lambda^2\,,\\
826: &\eta=m_{pl}^2\left(\frac{V_{eff}''}{V_{eff}}\right)=\lambda^2\,,
827: \end{split}
828: \eqlabel{sr}
829: \end{equation}
830: producing scalar density fluctuations with power spectrum
831: \begin{equation}
832: \delta_H^2\bigg|_{\alpha=0}\equiv \left(\delta^{(0)}_H\right)^2\propto \left(\frac{k}{k_s}\right)^{n_s-1}\,,
833: \eqlabel{ps}
834: \end{equation}
835: with spectral index
836: \begin{equation}
837: n_s-1=-6\epsilon+2\eta=-\lambda^2\,.
838: \eqlabel{nsdef}
839: \end{equation}
840: In \eqref{ps} $k_s$ corresponds to the scale of perturbations that
841: are produced $60$ e-foldings before the end of inflation, which
842: corresponds to the present horizon size, $k_s\sim (4000 Mpc)^{-1}$.
843: Within the slow-roll approximation, adiabatic density perturbations
844: are given by
845: \begin{equation}
846: \delta_H^{(0)}\sim \frac{1}{\sqrt{75}\pi m_{pl}^3}
847: \frac{V_{eff}^{3/2}}{V_{eff}'}=\frac{V_0^{1/2}}
848: {\sqrt{75}\pi m_{pl}^2\lambda}\ e^{-\lambda\phi/2}\,.
849: \eqlabel{dpert}
850: \end{equation}
851: This quantity should equal $1.91\cdot 10^{-5}$ at about $N_e\sim 60$ e-foldings before the end of inflation.
852: Assuming $\lambda\phi_i\ll 1$ and $m_{pl}=2.4\cdot 10^{18}$ GeV,
853: for $\lambda\sim 0.1$ we find that $V_0^{1/4}\sim 10^{16}$ GeV from \eqref{dpert}. If inflation ends at $\phi=\phi_f$, the number of e-foldings $N_e$ is
854: \begin{equation}
855: N_e=-\frac{1}{m_{pl}^2}\int_i^f\ \frac{V_{eff}}{V_{eff}'}\ d\Phi=\frac 1\lambda\int_i^f d\phi=\frac{\triangle\phi}{\lambda}\,.
856: \eqlabel{ndef}
857: \end{equation}
858: Thus to get sufficient inflation, $\triangle \phi\sim 10$. Since
859: derivatives with respect to $\phi$ can be expressed with respect to
860: wavenumber $k$ as
861: \begin{equation}
862: \frac{m_{pl}}{2}\sqrt{\epsilon}\frac{d}{d\Phi}=(1-\epsilon) \frac{d}{d\ln k}\,,
863: \eqlabel{derex}
864: \end{equation}
865: or
866: \begin{equation}
867: \frac{\lambda}{2^{3/2}} \frac{d}{d\phi}\approx \frac{d}{d\ln k}\,,
868: \eqlabel{derex1}
869: \end{equation}
870: we can relate the expectation value of the inflaton and the scale of
871: perturbations $k$ leaving the horizon at the corresponding instant
872: during inflation
873: \begin{equation}
874: \phi(k)\approx\phi_i+\frac{\lambda}{2^{3/2}} \ln \frac{k}{k_s}\,.
875: \eqlabel{derex2}
876: \end{equation}
877:
878: Upon inclusion of the radiative correction to the tree-level potential
879: \eqref{ipot}, the primordial spectrum of density perturbations
880: \eqref{ps} will be modified according to
881: \begin{equation}
882: \delta_H^2=\left(\delta_H^{(0)}\right)^2\ f\left(\frac{k}{k_s}\right)\,,
883: \eqlabel{sm}
884: \end{equation}
885: where
886: \begin{equation}
887: \left(\delta_H^{(0)}\right)^2\sim \frac{1}{\sqrt{75}\pi m_{pl}^3}
888: \frac{V_{tree}^{3}}{V_{tree}'^2}
889: \eqlabel{old}
890: \end{equation}
891: and the form-factor $f(\phi)$ can be estimated using the slow-roll
892: approximation in Eq.(\ref{dpert}) and Eq.(\ref{vefff}),
893: \begin{equation}
894: f\approx \frac{\left(1+\frac{V_{radiative}}{V_{tree}}\right)^3}{\left(1+\frac{V_{radiative}'}{V_{tree} '}\right)^2}
895: =\frac{\left(1+\frac{1}{\ln\frac{\phi}{\Lambda}}\ {\alpha e^{\lambda\phi}}\right)^3}{
896: \left(1+\frac{1}{\frac{\phi}{\Lambda}\ln^2\frac{\phi}{\Lambda}}\ \frac{\alpha e^{\lambda\phi}}{\lambda\Lambda}
897: \right)^2
898: }\,.
899: \eqlabel{slow}
900: \end{equation}
901: For inflaton expectation values $\phi$ close to the gauge theory
902: strong coupling scale $\Lambda$ (where $V_{radiative} >> V_{tree}$), we find that
903: \begin{equation}
904: f(\phi)\sim \alpha\lambda^2\Lambda^2\ \ln \frac{\phi}{\Lambda}\,,\qquad (\phi-\Lambda)\ll \Lambda\,.
905: \eqlabel{small}
906: \end{equation}
907: As $\phi/\Lambda\sim \calo(1)$, $f(\phi)$ rapidly approaches zero. More
908: precisely, assuming $\frac{\alpha}{\lambda\Lambda}>1$, the transition
909: between the small $\phi$-regime \eqref{small} and $f(\phi)=1+\calo(1)$
910: occurs within
911: \begin{equation}
912: \triangle\left(\frac{\phi}{\Lambda}\right)\sim \frac{\alpha}
913: {\lambda\Lambda}\equiv \zeta\,
914: \eqlabel{tranlength}
915: \end{equation}
916: or, equivalently, using \eqref{derex2},
917: \begin{equation}
918: \triangle\left(\frac{k}{k_s}\right) \sim
919: \delta\equiv \exp\left(\frac{2^{3/2}\zeta\Lambda}{\lambda}\right)
920: =\exp\left(\frac{2^{3/2}\alpha}{\lambda^2}\right).
921: \end{equation}
922: With $\phi_i\sim \Lambda$, and using \eqref{derex2}, we can approximate
923: \begin{equation}
924: \begin{split}
925: &f\left(\frac{k}{k_s}\right)=0,\qquad \frac{k}{k_s}<1\,,\\
926: &f\left(\frac{k}{k_s}\right)=\frac{\ln\frac{k}{k_s}}{\ln\delta},\qquad 1\le \frac{k}{k_s}\le \delta\,,\\
927: &f\left(\frac{k}{k_s}\right)=1,\qquad \frac{k}{k_s}>\delta\,,
928: \end{split}
929: \eqlabel{apf}
930: \end{equation}
931: Equivalently, using
932: Eq.(\ref{derex2}), the form-factor in the nontrivial region of
933: \eqref{apf} can be approximated as having a linear dependence on
934: $\phi$,
935: \begin{equation}
936: f(\phi)= \frac{\phi-\Lambda}{\Lambda\zeta},\qquad 0\le(\phi-\Lambda)\le \Lambda\zeta\,.
937: \end{equation}
938: Given the modified primordial power spectrum \eqref{sm} (with \eqref{ps},\eqref{nsdef} and the form-factor
939: \eqref{apf}), the present day power spectrum $P(k)$ is obtained as
940: \begin{equation}
941: \frac{k^3}{2\pi} P(k)=\left(\frac{k}{a H_0}\right)^4\ T^2(k)\ \delta^2_H(k)\,,
942: \eqlabel{present}
943: \end{equation}
944: where $T(k)$ is a transfer function as in \cite{i1}, and $H_0$ is the
945: present Hubble value.
946:
947: In Fig.~(2) we show the result generated with
948: the CMBEASY program \cite{cmbeasy}, which provides the power spectra
949: conversion \eqref{present}. In the latter analysis we take
950: $\lambda=.2$ and adjust cosmological parameters as given by the best
951: fit model of the WMAP collaboration. The two solid lines correspond to
952: a choice of $\delta=\{2,4\}$ in \eqref{apf}. The dashed line
953: corresponds to turning off the radiative correction, \ie, setting
954: $\alpha=0$. For $\delta=4$ we find from \eqref{apf} $\alpha\approx
955: 0.02$. Thus consistency of above approximations, \ie, $\xi>> 1$
956: requires $\Lambda\ll 10^{-1}$. The latter is consistent with the
957: assumption that the strong coupling scale of the GUT gauge theory is
958: below the Planck scale.
959:
960: We comment here on the validity of our approximation.
961: Small-$k$ suppression form-factor \eqref{apf} has been obtained in the slow-roll approximation,
962: which strictly speaking, is violated at the initial stages of inflation. Alternatively, one
963: can argue that the initial stage of inflation can be described by ``kinetic regime''\footnote{This is inflationary
964: stage where the dominant contribution to the inflaton energy comes from its kinetic energy.},
965: where the suppression form-factor was found (numerically) to be
966: \begin{equation}
967: f\left(\frac{k}{k_s}\right)\propto \left(\frac{k}{k_s}\right)^a
968: \eqlabel{sli}
969: \end{equation}
970: where $a\approx 3.35$ \cite{e6}. Though result \eqref{sli} was obtained in the context of chaotic (large-field) inflation,
971: it is straightforward to see that it is universal as long as inflaton energy is predominantly kinetic.
972: Indeed, the primordial power spectrum is
973: \begin{equation}
974: \dd_H\simeq \left(\frac{\dd\rho}{\r+p}\right)_{k=a H}
975: \eqlabel{rev1}
976: \end{equation}
977: where in the kinetic regime (assuming $\dd\dot\phi=\ft{d}{dt}\dd\phi$)
978: \begin{equation}
979: \dd\r \simeq \dot\phi\ \dd\dot\phi\simeq \dot\phi\ \frac{\dot H}{2\pi}
980: \eqlabel{rev2}
981: \end{equation}
982: Using $\r+p=-\dot H m_{pl}^2/(4\pi) $, we find
983: \begin{equation}
984: \dd_H\propto -\frac{\dot\phi}{m_{pl}^2}\bigg|_{k=a H}
985: \eqlabel{rev3}
986: \end{equation}
987: where the cosmic time dependence in $\dot\phi =\frac{d}{dt}\phi(t)$ is assumed to be eliminated through the horizon crossing
988: condition for the comoving momentum $k$ as $k=a(t) H$. In the kinetic regime $\dot\phi^2\gg V(\phi)$, thus
989: expansion of the Universe is well approximated by a fluid with equation of state $p=\rho$. For such an expansion we have
990: $\r\simeq \frac 12 \dot\phi^2 \propto a^{-6}$ and $a\propto t^{1/3}$, which in turn implies
991: that $\dot \phi\propto -t^{-1}$. From the Friedmann equation we conclude that $H\propto \rho^{1/2}\propto t^{-1}$, and thus the comoving scale
992: $k$ crossing the horizon at cosmic time $t$ is $k=a(t) H\propto t^{-2/3}$. Comparing the latter scale with the $\dot\phi$
993: time evolution we conclude
994: \begin{equation}
995: \dot\phi\propto - k^{3/2}
996: \eqlabel{rev4}
997: \end{equation}
998: leading to
999: \begin{equation}
1000: \dd_H^2\propto \left(\frac{k}{k_s}\right)^3
1001: \eqlabel{rev5}
1002: \end{equation}
1003: which approximately reproduces numerical analysis of \cite{e6}. Even though the suppression form-factor in the primordial power
1004: spectrum \eqref{rev5} has power-law rather than logarithmic behavior (as in \eqref{apf}), we find that the corresponding CBR spectrum of anisotropies
1005: is very similar to the one presented in Fig.2 (also compare with \cite{k}).
1006:
1007:
1008:
1009:
1010: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1011: \begin{figure}[ht]
1012: \begin{center}
1013: \epsfig{file=figure1.ps,width=1.3\textwidth}
1014: \caption{
1015: CBR spectrum of anisotropies with the primordial spectrum of scalar
1016: density fluctuations for the effective inflaton potential
1017: \eqref{veff}. We set $\lambda=0.2$, $k_s=0.00025\ Mpc^{-1}$. The
1018: scale of the tree level potential is $V_0^{1/4}\sim 10^{16}$ GeV.
1019: Two solid lines correspond to $\delta=\{2,4\}$ in the form-factor
1020: \eqref{apf}, with larger $\delta$ corresponding to stronger
1021: suppression at small $\ell$. The dashed line corresponds to the
1022: anisotropy spectrum from a tree-level approximation in the effective
1023: potential \eqref{veff}, \ie, setting $\alpha=0$. Cosmological
1024: parameters are as given by the best fit of the WMAP collaboration. }
1025: \label{cases}
1026: \end{center}
1027: \end{figure}
1028: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1029:
1030:
1031:
1032: \section{Summary}
1033: WMAP data indicates the suppression of small-$\ell$ multipoles in the
1034: anisotropy power spectrum of the CBR. It is difficult to isolate this
1035: suppression from the cosmic variance limitations. However, when taken
1036: seriously, such suppression can be due to a suppression of
1037: power in the spectrum of primordial scalar density fluctuations during
1038: inflation. As the generation of quantum fluctuations during inflation
1039: is most efficient in the slow-roll regime, the CBR anisotropy
1040: measurements provide a signature for the breakdown of the slow-roll
1041: conditions during the first few e-foldings of the single field
1042: inflationary models. In this paper we have identified a low-energy
1043: field-theoretic phenomenon that arises generically in small-field
1044: inflationary models in which the inflaton is coupled to an
1045: asymptotically free GUT-like gauge theory. Here, the small vacuum
1046: expectation values of the inflaton field probe the strongly coupled
1047: dynamics of this gauge theory. This produces large radiative
1048: corrections to the tree-level inflaton potential which break its
1049: slow-roll conditions. The effect is most profound if the inflaton
1050: scale at the beginning of inflation is close to the gauge theory's
1051: strong coupling scale.
1052:
1053: In this paper we have used summation of leading logarithms in the
1054: perturbation theory as a model of a strongly coupled dynamics of an
1055: inflaton and asymptotically free gauge theory. It would be very
1056: interesting to explore nonperturbative effects of the quantum field
1057: theory in this setting, particularly space-time curvature corrections.
1058:
1059:
1060:
1061: \section*{Acknowledgments}
1062: We would like to thank R.~Brandenberger, R.~Dick, E.~Gorbar, V.~A.~Miransky for
1063: helpful conversations. We are grateful to C.~M.~Mueller for help with
1064: CMBEASY, and W.~H.~Kinney for comments on a manuscript.
1065: Research at Perimeter Institute is supported in part by
1066: funds from NSERC of Canada. AB, FAC, VE, RBM, DGCM, and TGS acknowledge support by an NSERC
1067: Discovery grant. KF thanks the Michigan Center for Theoretical Physics
1068: and the DOE via the University of Michigan for support.
1069: AB and KF would like to thank Aspen Center for Physics for
1070: hospitality where part of this work was done.
1071:
1072:
1073:
1074: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
1075:
1076: \bibitem{cmb1}
1077: C.~L.~Bennett {\it et al.},
1078: ``First Year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Observations:
1079: Preliminary Maps and Basic Results,''
1080: Astrophys.\ J.\ Suppl.\ {\bf 148}, 1 (2003)
1081: [arXiv:astro-ph/0302207].
1082:
1083: \bibitem{cmb2}
1084: H.~V.~Peiris {\it et al.},
1085: ``First year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) observations:
1086: Implications for inflation,''
1087: Astrophys.\ J.\ Suppl.\ {\bf 148}, 213 (2003)
1088: [arXiv:astro-ph/0302225].
1089:
1090: \bibitem{guth}
1091: A. H. Guth, ``Inflationary Universe: A Possible solution to the
1092: Horizon and Flatness Problems,''
1093: Phys. \ Rev. \ D \ {\bf 23}, 347 (1981)
1094:
1095: \bibitem{e1}
1096: A.~Berera, L.~Z.~Fang and G.~Hinshaw,
1097: ``An attempt to determine the largest scale of primordial density
1098: perturbations in the universe,''
1099: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 57}, 2207 (1998)
1100: [arXiv:astro-ph/9703020]. A.~Berera and A.~F.~Heavens,
1101: ``Detection Limits for Super-Hubble Suppression of Causal Fluctuations,''
1102: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 62}, 123513 (2000)
1103: [arXiv:astro-ph/0010366].
1104:
1105:
1106: \bibitem{e2}
1107: M.~Tegmark, A.~de Oliveira-Costa and A.~Hamilton,
1108: ``A high resolution foreground cleaned CMB map from WMAP,''
1109: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 68}, 123523 (2003)
1110: [arXiv:astro-ph/0302496]. J.~P.~Uzan, A.~Riazuelo, R.~Lehoucq and J.~Weeks,
1111: ``Cosmic microwave background constraints on multi-connected spherical
1112: spaces,'' arXiv:astro-ph/0303580.
1113:
1114:
1115:
1116: \bibitem{e3} G.~Efstathiou,
1117: ``Is the low CMB quadrupole a signature of spatial curvature?,''
1118: Mon.\ Not.\ Roy.\ Astron.\ Soc.\ {\bf 343}, L95 (2003)
1119: [arXiv:astro-ph/0303127]. S.~L.~Bridle, A.~M.~Lewis, J.~Weller and G.~Efstathiou,
1120: ``Reconstructing the primordial power spectrum,''
1121: Mon.\ Not.\ Roy.\ Astron.\ Soc.\ {\bf 342}, L72 (2003)
1122: [arXiv:astro-ph/0302306].
1123:
1124:
1125: \bibitem{e4} J.~P.~Uzan, U.~Kirchner and G.~F.~R.~Ellis,
1126: ``WMAP data and the curvature of space,''
1127: Mon.\ Not.\ Roy.\ Astron.\ Soc.\ {\bf 344}, L65 (2003)
1128: [arXiv:astro-ph/0302597].
1129:
1130: \bibitem{e5} A.~Linde,
1131: ``Can we have inflation with Omega $>$ 1?,''
1132: JCAP {\bf 0305}, 002 (2003)
1133: [arXiv:astro-ph/0303245].
1134:
1135: \bibitem{e6}
1136: C.~R.~Contaldi, M.~Peloso, L.~Kofman and A.~Linde,
1137: ``Suppressing the lower Multipoles in the CMB Anisotropies,''
1138: JCAP {\bf 0307}, 002 (2003)
1139: [arXiv:astro-ph/0303636].
1140:
1141: \bibitem{e7}
1142: L.~Kofman,
1143: ``Probing string theory with modulated cosmological fluctuations,''
1144: arXiv:astro-ph/0303614.
1145:
1146: \bibitem{e8} J.~M.~Cline, P.~Crotty and J.~Lesgourgues,
1147: ``Does the small CMB quadrupole moment suggest new physics?,''
1148: JCAP {\bf 0309}, 010 (2003)
1149: [arXiv:astro-ph/0304558].
1150:
1151: \bibitem{e9}
1152: D.~J.~H.~Chung, G.~Shiu and M.~Trodden,
1153: ``Running of the scalar spectral index from inflationary models,''
1154: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 68}, 063501 (2003)
1155: [arXiv:astro-ph/0305193].
1156:
1157:
1158: \bibitem{k}
1159: M.~Bastero-Gil, K.~Freese and L.~Mersini-Houghton,
1160: ``What can WMAP tell us about the very early universe? New physics as an
1161: explanation of suppressed large scale power and running spectral index,''
1162: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 68}, 123514 (2003)
1163: [arXiv:hep-ph/0306289].
1164:
1165:
1166:
1167:
1168:
1169: \bibitem{e10}
1170: S.~Hannestad and L.~Mersini-Houghton,
1171: ``A first glimpse of string theory in the sky?,''
1172: arXiv:hep-ph/0405218.
1173:
1174: \bibitem{e11}
1175: M.~Kawasaki and F.~Takahashi,
1176: ``Inflation model with lower multipoles of the CMB suppressed,''
1177: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 570}, 151 (2003)
1178: [arXiv:hep-ph/0305319].
1179: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0305319;%%
1180:
1181: \bibitem{e12}
1182: M.~Kawasaki, F.~Takahashi and T.~Takahashi,
1183: ``Making waves on CMB power spectrum and inflaton dynamics,''
1184: arXiv:astro-ph/0407631.
1185: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 0407631;%%
1186:
1187: \bibitem{e13}
1188: B.~Feng, M.~z.~Li, R.~J.~Zhang and X.~m.~Zhang,
1189: ``An inflation model with large variations in spectral index,''
1190: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 68}, 103511 (2003)
1191: [arXiv:astro-ph/0302479].
1192: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 0302479;%%
1193:
1194: \bibitem{e14}
1195: B.~Feng and X.~Zhang,
1196: ``Double inflation and the low CMB quadrupole,''
1197: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 570}, 145 (2003)
1198: [arXiv:astro-ph/0305020].
1199:
1200: \bibitem{e15}
1201: M.~Liguori, S.~Matarrese, M.~Musso and A.~Riotto,
1202: ``Stochastic Inflation and the Lower Multipoles in the CMB Anisotropies,''
1203: JCAP {\bf 0408}, 011 (2004)
1204: [arXiv:astro-ph/0405544].
1205: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 0405544;%%
1206:
1207: \bibitem{e16}
1208: A.~Melchiorri and L.~Mersini-Houghton,
1209: ``Does the low CMB quadrupole provide a new cosmic coincidence problem?,''
1210: arXiv:hep-ph/0403222.
1211: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0403222;%%
1212:
1213: \bibitem{w}
1214: W.~H.~Kinney and A.~Riotto,
1215: ``Dynamical supersymmetric inflation,''
1216: Astropart.\ Phys.\ {\bf 10}, 387 (1999)
1217: [arXiv:hep-ph/9704388].
1218: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9704388;%%
1219:
1220:
1221: \bibitem{r0}
1222: S.~Dodelson, W.~H.~Kinney and E.~W.~Kolb,
1223: ``Cosmic microwave background measurements can discriminate among inflation
1224: models,''
1225: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 56}, 3207 (1997)
1226: [arXiv:astro-ph/9702166].
1227: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 9702166;%%
1228:
1229:
1230:
1231: \bibitem{r} A.~R.~Liddle and D.~H.~Lyth,
1232: ``Cosmological inflation and large-scale structure,''
1233: Cambridge, UK: Univ. Pr. (2000) 400 p.
1234:
1235: \bibitem{ffo} K. Freese, J. Frieman, and A. Olinto,
1236: ``Natural Inflation,''
1237: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett {\bf 65}, 3233 (1990);
1238: F. Adams, J. R. Bond, K. Freese, J. A. Frieman, and A. Olinto,
1239: ``Natural Inflation: Particle Physics Models, Power-Law Spectra
1240: for Large-Scale Structure, and Constraints from the Cosmic Background
1241: Explorer,'' Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 47}, 426 (1993)
1242: [arXiv:hep-ph/9207245].
1243:
1244: \bibitem{a42}
1245: V.~Elias, R.~B.~Mann, D.~G.~C.~McKeon and T.~G.~Steele,
1246: ``Radiative electroweak symmetry-breaking revisited,''
1247: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 91}, 251601 (2003)
1248: [arXiv:hep-ph/0304153].
1249: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0304153;%%
1250:
1251:
1252: \bibitem{a4}
1253: V.~Elias, R.~B.~Mann, D.~G.~C.~McKeon and T.~G.~Steele,
1254: ``Optimal renormalization group improvement of two radiatively broken gauge
1255: theories,''
1256: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 678}, 147 (2004)
1257: [arXiv:hep-ph/0308301].
1258:
1259:
1260:
1261: \bibitem{cmbeasy} M.~Doran,
1262: ``CMBEASY:: an Object Oriented Code for the Cosmic Microwave Background,''
1263: arXiv:astro-ph/0302138, www.cmbeasy.org
1264:
1265: \bibitem{cw} S. Coleman and E. Weinberg,
1266: ``Radiative Corrections As The Origin Of Spontaneous Symmetry Breaking,''
1267: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 7}, 1888 (1973).
1268:
1269: \bibitem{i1} J~Yokoyama and K.~I.~Maeda,
1270: ``On The Dynamics Of The Power Law Inflation Due To An Exponential Potential,''
1271: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 207}, 31 (1988).
1272: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B207,31;%%
1273:
1274: \bibitem{i2} E.~D.~Stewart,
1275: ``The spectrum of density perturbations produced during inflation to leading
1276: order in a general slow-roll approximation,''
1277: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 65}, 103508 (2002)
1278: [arXiv:astro-ph/0110322].
1279:
1280: \bibitem{i3} S.~Dodelson and E.~Stewart,
1281: ``Scale dependent spectral index in slow roll inflation,''
1282: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 65}, 101301 (2002)
1283: [arXiv:astro-ph/0109354].
1284:
1285: \end{thebibliography}
1286:
1287:
1288: \end{document}
1289:
1290: