1: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2: %% On 11 Nov 2005 at JMI %%
3: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
4: \documentclass[prd,twocolumn,showpacs,nofootinbib,preprintnumbers]{revtex4}
5: \usepackage{amsmath}
6: \usepackage{amsfonts}
7: \usepackage{graphicx}
8: \usepackage{hyperref}
9: \usepackage{mathbbol}
10: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
11: \begin{document}
12: \preprint{QMUL-PH-06-03}
13: \title{A Quintessentially Geometric Model}
14: \date{\today}
15:
16: \vspace{2cm}
17:
18: \author{Burin Gumjudpai}
19: \email{buring@nu.ac.th} \affiliation{Fundamental Physics \&
20: Cosmology Research Unit, The Tah Poe Academia Institute (TPTP),
21: Department of Physics, Naresuan University, Phitsanulok 65000,
22: Thailand}
23:
24: \author{Tapan Naskar}
25: \email{tapan@iucaa.ernet.in} \affiliation{IUCAA, Post bag 4,
26: Ganeshkhind, Pune 411007, India}
27:
28: \author{John Ward}
29: \email{j.ward@qmul.ac.uk} \affiliation{Department of Physics,
30: Queen Mary, University of London, Mile End Road, London, E1 4NS
31: U.K.}
32:
33: \begin{abstract}
34: We consider string inspired cosmology on a solitary $D3$ brane moving in the background of a ring of branes located on a circle of radius $R$.
35: The motion of the $D3$ brane transverse to the plane of the ring
36: gives rise to a radion field which can be mapped to a massive non-BPS Born-Infeld type field with a $\cosh$ potential.
37: For certain bounds of the brane tension we find an inflationary phase is possible, with the string scale relatively
38: close to the Planck scale. The relevant perturbations and spectral indices are all well within the expected
39: observational bounds.
40: The evolution of the universe eventually comes to be dominated by dark energy, which we show is a late
41: time attractor of the model. However we also find that the equation of state is time dependent, and will
42: lead to late time Quintessence.
43: \end{abstract}
44:
45: \pacs{98.80.Cq}
46:
47: \maketitle
48: \section{Introduction}
49: It was recently suggested that the rolling open string tachyon, inspired by a class of string theories, can
50: have important cosmological implications. The decay of a non-BPS $D3$-brane filling four dimensional
51: space time leads to a pressureless dust phase which we identify with the closed string vacuum.
52: The rolling tachyon has an interesting equation of
53: state whose parameter ranges from $0$ to $-1$. It was therefore thought to be a candidate of inflation
54: and dark matter, or a model of transient dark energy~\cite{senrev}. However if we rigorously stick to string
55: theory, the effective tachyon potential contains no free parameter. A viable inflationary scenario
56: should lead to enough number of $e-$folding, and the correct level of density perturbations. The latter
57: requires a free parameter in the effective potential which could be tuned to give rise to an
58: adequate amount of primordial
59: density perturbations. One also requires an adjustable free parameter in
60: the effective potential to account for the late time acceleration.
61:
62: Recently a time dependent configuration in a string theory was investigated and was shown
63: to have interesting cosmological application \cite{kutasov}. In this scenario a BPS $D3$-brane is placed in the
64: background of several coincident, static $NS5$-branes which are extremely heavy compared to the $D3$-brane and form
65: an infinite throat in the space time. This system is inherently non-supersymmetric because the two different kinds of
66: branes preserve different halves of the bulk supersymmetries.
67: As a result the $D3$ brane can be regarded as a probe of the warped background and
68: is gravitationally attracted toward the $NS5$-branes. Furthermore there exists an exact conformal field theory
69: description of this background where the number of five-branes determines the level of the WZW current algebra
70: \cite{saha}, which allows for exact string based calculations.
71: Despite the fact that the string coupling diverges as we approach the fivebranes, it was shown that we
72: can trust our effective Dirac-Born-Infeld (DBI) action to late times in the evolution provided that the energy
73: of the probe brane is sufficiently high. In any event, as the probe $D3$-brane approaches the background branes
74: the spatial components of the energy-momentum tensor tend to zero in exactly the same way as in
75: the effective action description of the open string tachyon. Thus it was anticipated that the dynamics of branes
76: in these backgrounds had remarkably similar properties to rolling tachyon solutions.
77: This relationship was further developed by Kutasov who showed that it was possible to mimic the open string
78: tachyon potential by considering brane motion in a specific kind of 10D geometry. In order to do this one
79: must take the action of the BPS probe brane in the gravitational background and map it to a non-trivial scalar
80: field solution described by the non-BPS action \cite{DBI}. The new field is essentially a holographic field
81: living on the world-volume of the brane, but encodes all the physics of the bulk background.
82: This is known as the geometrical tachyon construction.
83: Another particularly interesting solution considered the background branes distributed around a ring of radius $R$,
84: which was analysed in ref \cite{TW1, TW2}, and whose geometry is described by a coset model \cite{israel},
85: again potentially opening the way for an exact string calculation.
86:
87: It seems natural to enquire as to whether these geometrical tachyon solutions have any relevance for cosmology,
88: since they neatly avoid the problems associated with open string tachyon inflation \cite{KL} by having
89: a significantly different mass scale. This change in scale is due to the motion of the probe brane in a gravitationally
90: warped background, provided by the branes in the bulk geometry. In essence, this is an alternative formulation of the
91: simple Randall-Sundrum model \cite{randall}. More recently, flux compactification has opened up the possibility of realising these models
92: in a purely four-dimensional string theory context \cite{warpcosm}. The fluxes form a throat which is glued onto a compact manifold
93: in the UV end of the geometry. The warp factor in the metric has explicit dependence on the fluxes, and so provides
94: us with a varying energy scale. The recent approaches to brane cosmology \cite{BA} are based on the motion of $D3$-branes in
95: these compactifications. Typically we find $\bar{D}3$-branes located at some point in the IR end of the throat, which
96: provide a potential for a solitary probe brane, with the inflaton being the inter-brane distance. In this context
97: we can obtain slow roll inflation, and also the so-called DBI inflation \cite{dbiinflation}, which relies heavily on the red-shifting of
98: energy scales. However flux compactification models have an unacceptably large number of vacua, characterised by the
99: string landscape. They are also low energy models, where the string scale is significantly lower than the Planck scale and
100: so there is no attempt to deal with the initial singularity. In addition, we require multiple throats attached to the
101: compact manifold where the standard model is supposed to live, however there is no explanation for the
102: decoupling of the inflaton sector. These problems need to be addressed if we are to
103: fully understand early universe cosmology in a string theory context.
104: The alternative approach is to consider cosmology in the full ten dimensional string theory. Although these models
105: are plagued by their own problems there is a definite sense of where the standard model is assumed to live, and a natural realisation
106: of inflation. Furthermore we can invoke a Brandenberger-Vafa type mechanism to explain the origin of our $D3$-brane,
107: arising from the mutual cascade annihilation of a gas of $D9$-$\bar{D}9$-branes \cite{BVmechanism}.
108:
109: An alternative approach is compactify our theory on a compact manifold, where some mechanism is employed to
110: stabilise the various moduli fields. This will naturally induce an Einstein-Hilbert term into the four dimensional action
111: \cite{verlinde}. However this is a highly non-trivial problem whose precise details remain unknown. Despite being unable
112: to embed this into String Theory, we can still learn a great deal about the physics of the model - as emphasised by recent works \cite{NS5cos}.
113:
114: A specific case of interest has been to study inflation in the ring solution ref \cite{TWinf}. Due to the unusual nature
115: of the harmonic function we find decoupled scalar modes, one transverse to the ring plane and the other
116: inside the ring. The cosmology of modes inside the ring have been studied in ref \cite{ringinf}.
117: In this note we will consider the situation in which the $D3$-brane moves in the transverse direction to the ring.
118: Performing the tachyon map in this instance yields a $\cosh$ type potential implying that the resulting scalar
119: field in the dual picture is massive.
120: It is interesting that in this setting we do not have to worry about
121: the continuity condition around the ring. And unlike the longitudinal motion, we have an
122: analytic expression for the effective potential every where in the transverse directions.
123: We study the cosmological application of the resulting scenario and show that the model leads
124: to an ever accelerating universe. We study the autonomous form of field evolution equation in the
125: presence of matter and radiation and show that the de-Sitter solution is a late time attractor of the
126: model. We also demonstrate the viability of the geometrical tachyon for dark energy in the setting under consideration,
127: arising in a natural way due to the non-linearity of the DBI action.
128: In the next section we will introduce the string theory inspired model, and discuss how we an relate it to
129: four dimensional cosmology. In section III we will consider the more phenomenological aspects of our model by comparing
130: our results with experimental observation. Section IV shows how we have a natural realisation of reheating in our model,
131: whilst section V discusses the final stage of dark energy domination. Our model predicts that the equation of state parameter will
132: tend to $\omega \sim -1$, but on even larger timescales we expect it to increase toward zero as in models of quintessence \cite{quintessence}.
133: We will conclude with some remarks and a discussion of possible future directions.
134: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
135:
136: \section{Geometrical Scalar Field and Coupling to Gravity.}
137: We begin with the string frame CHS solution for $k$ parallel, static $NS5$ branes in type IIB String Theory \cite{Callan, sfet}.
138: The metric is given by:
139: \begin{eqnarray}
140: ds^2 &=& \eta_{\mu \nu}dx^{\mu}dx^{\nu}+F(x^n)dx^mdx^m,
141: \end{eqnarray}
142: where $\chi$ is the dilaton field define as $e^{2(\chi-\chi_0)} = F(x^n)$, and there exists the three
143: form field strength of the NS B-field $H_{mnp}=-\varepsilon^q_{mnp}\partial_q \phi $. Here $F(x^n)$ is the
144: harmonic function describing the position of branes. For a large
145: number of branes we can consider the throat approximation, which amounts to dropping the factor
146: of unity in the function. Inherently we are decoupling Minkowski space time from the theory, and therefore
147: only interested in the region around the $NS5$-branes. The harmonic function is given by:
148: \begin{eqnarray}
149: F &=& 1+\frac{kl_s^2~\sinh(ky)}{2R\rho ~ \sinh(ky)~(\cosh(ky)-\cos(k\theta))} \nonumber \\
150: &\approx &\frac{kl_s^2~\sinh(ky)}{2R\rho ~ \sinh(ky)~(\cosh(ky)-\cos(k\theta))},
151: \end{eqnarray}
152: where $\rho$, $\theta$ parameterise polar coordinates in the ring plane, and the factor $y$ is given by:
153: \begin{eqnarray}
154: {\rm cosh}(y) &=& \frac{R^2+\rho^2}{2 R \rho}.
155: \end{eqnarray}
156: We put a probe $D3$ brane at the centre of $NS5$ branes, as mention in the introduction this brane will
157: move toward the circumference due to gravitational interaction if it shifted a little
158: from the centre keeping the brane in the plane of the ring; the cosmology in this case
159: is described elsewhere. We consider the case where the probe brane lies in the centre
160: of the ring but shifted a little from the plane. In this case the probe brane shows
161: transverse motion. Note that because of the form of the DBI action, the configuration here is actually $S$-dual
162: to the $D5$-brane ring solution. The only difference is the shift of $k \to 2g_sk$ in the harmonic function.
163: The physics however are very different as we know that $F$-strings cannot end on the $NS5$-branes, but can
164: end on the $D5$-branes. This implies that in the case of the $D5$-brane ring we can have additional open
165: string tachyonic modes once the probe brane starts to resolve distances of order of the string scale.
166: The cosmological implications for this extra field were discussed in \cite{NS5cos}.
167:
168: For the brane at the center ($\rho=0$) moving transverse to the ring ($\dot{\rho}=0$), the harmonic
169: function is given by:
170: \begin{eqnarray}
171: F(\sigma) &=& \frac{kl_s^2}{R^2+\sigma^2},
172: \end{eqnarray}
173: and the DBI action for the probe brane can be written in the following form, in static gauge
174: \begin{equation}
175: S = -\tau_3 \int d^4 \xi \sqrt{F^{-1}-\dot{\sigma}^2}.
176: \end{equation}
177: The tachyon map in this instance arises via field redefinition. We define the following
178: scalar field, which has dimensions of length
179: \begin{equation}
180: \phi(\sigma) = \int \sqrt{F}d\sigma,
181: \end{equation}
182: which maps the BPS action to a form commonly used in the non-BPS case \cite{DBI}
183: \begin{equation}
184: S = -\int d^4 \xi V(\phi) \sqrt{1-\dot{\phi}^2},
185: \end{equation}
186: where $V(\phi)$ is the potential for the scalar field which describes the changing tension of the
187: $D$-brane.
188:
189: From the above mapping we get the solution of field as:
190: \begin{eqnarray}
191: \phi(\sigma) &=& \int^{\sigma}_{0}\sqrt{F(\sigma')}d\sigma'\nonumber \\
192: &=& \sqrt{kl_s^2}\ln\left(\frac{\sigma}{R}+\sqrt{1+\frac{\sigma^2}{R^2}}\right) \nonumber \\
193: &=& \sqrt{kl_s^2} {\rm arcsinh} \left(\frac{\sigma}{R}\right) \\
194: V(\phi) &=& \frac{\tau_3}{\sqrt{F}} \nonumber \\
195: &=& \frac{\tau_3 R}{\sqrt{kl_s^2}}\cosh\left(\frac{\phi}{\sqrt{kl_s^2}}\right) \label{poten}.
196: \end{eqnarray}
197: Clearly we see that $\phi \to \pm \infty$ as $\sigma \to \pm \infty$, and that at the minimum of the potential
198: we have $\phi=0$ \footnote{We must bear in mind that our approximation of the harmonic function prevents us from
199: taking the $\sigma \to \infty$ limit.}.
200: The potential of the field suggests that the mass is given by $1/kl_s^2$, corresponding to a massive scalar
201: fluctuation.
202: One may ask if there is a known string mode exhibiting this profile. In fact the fluctuations of a massive scalar
203: were computed in \cite{garousi} using a similar approach to the construction of the open string tachyon mode
204: in boundary conformal field theory \cite{senrev}.
205: This field was then used in ref. \cite{GST, scalarfield} as a candidate for the inflaton living on a $\bar{D}3$-brane
206: in the KKLT scenario ref. \cite{KKLT}. The potential for the scalar is
207: known to fourth order and was been assumed to be exponential in profile, although globally it may be hyperbolic.
208:
209: In order to discuss the cosmological evolution of our scalar field
210: we need to couple our effective action to four dimensional
211: Einstein gravity. There are several ways we can accomplish this.
212: Firstly we can consider the Mirage Cosmology scenario
213: \cite{mirage}. This requires us to re-write the induced metric on
214: the $D3$-brane world-volume in a Friedmann-Robertson-Walker (FRW)
215: form. The universe will automatically be flat, or closed if we
216: imagine the $D$-brane to be spherical. The problem here is that
217: there is no natural way to couple gravity to the brane action and
218: therefore we must insert it by hand, however the cosmological
219: dynamics are expected to be reliable virtually all the way to the
220: string scale. The second option is a slight modification of the
221: first. We imagine that the bulk is infinite in extent, and that
222: the $D3$-brane is again coupled to gravity through some unknown
223: mechanism. However rather than writing the induced metric in FRW
224: form, we switch to the holographic theory. Now, the tachyon
225: mapping in this case is only concerned with time-dependent
226: quantities, and in particular only with the temporal component of
227: the Minkowski metric. Therefore we choose to include a scale
228: factor component in the spatial directions. This means that we
229: have a cosmological coupling for the holographic scalar field, and
230: the universe lives on the $D3$-brane world-volume. The final
231: approach would be to compactify the theory down to four
232: dimensions. In order to do this we need to truncate the background
233: to ensure the space is compact \cite{warpcosm}. In our case the
234: ring can naturally impose a cut-off in the planar direction,
235: however we must still impose some constraint in the transverse
236: direction to the ring plane. Our solution simplifies somewhat if
237: we can consider the $R \to 0$ limit, or equivalently the $\sigma
238: \gg 1$ limit, as the background will appear point like. Smoothly
239: gluing the truncated space to a proper compact manifold will now
240: automatically include an Einstein-Hilbert term in the effective
241: action \cite{verlinde}. However, although we now have a natural
242: coupling to gravity, the compactification itself is far from
243: trivial as we also need to wrap two of the world-volume directions
244: of the $NS$5-branes on a compact cycle. In order to proceed we
245: must first uplift the full solution to M-theory \footnote{This was
246: discussed by Ghodsi et al in \cite{NS5cos}. We refer the
247: interested reader there for more details.}, where we now have a
248: ring of $M5$-branes magnetically charged under the three-form
249: $C_{(3)}$. Compactification demands that the magnetic directions
250: of the three-form are wrapped on toroidal cycles, which is further
251: complicated by the ring geometry and will generally result in
252: large corrections to the potential once reduced down to
253: four-dimensions. So, although we have a natural gravitational
254: coupling we may have large corrections to the theory. The complete
255: description of this compactification is interesting, but well
256: beyond the scope of this note and should be tackled as a future
257: problem. However we could also assume a large volume toroidal
258: compactification, where again all the relevant moduli have been
259: stabilised. Provided we introduce some 'sink' for the five-brane
260: charge, located at the some distant point in the compact space,
261: and also only concentrate on the region close to the branes so
262: that the harmonic function remains valid and we will have an induced
263: gravitational coupling in the low energy theory. The corrections
264: to the scalar potential in this region of moduli space may well be
265: sub-leading with respect to the scalar field dynamics and thus we
266: can treat our model as the leading order behaviour.
267: \\
268: Recent work in this direction has been concerned with the compactification approach \cite{NS5cos, TWinf}, where it was assumed
269: all the relevant moduli are fixed along the lines of the KKLT model \cite{KKLT} and that all corrections to the
270: potential are sub dominant. We will tentatively assume that this will also hold in our toy model.
271: \\
272: We can now analyse our four dimensional minimally coupled action, where we find the following solutions to the
273: Einstein equations
274: \begin{eqnarray}
275: H^2 &=& \frac{V(\phi)}{3M_p^2\sqrt{1-\dot{\phi}^2}} \\
276: \frac{\ddot{a}}{a}&=&\frac{V(\phi)}{3M_p^2\sqrt{1-\dot{\phi}^2}}\left(1-\frac{3\dot{\phi}^2}{2} \right).
277: \end{eqnarray}
278: These expressions are different to those associated with a traditional canonical scalar field. In particular we see that
279: inflation will automatically end once $\dot{\phi}^2 \sim 2/3$ as in the tachyon cosmology models \cite{tachinfl, tachyonpapers, sen}.
280: For completeness we write the
281: equation of motion for the inflaton derived from the non-BPS action as follows
282: \begin{equation}\label{eq:eom}
283: \frac{V(\phi) \ddot{\phi}}{1-\dot{\phi}^2} + 3HV(\phi)\dot\phi + V'(\phi)=0,
284: \end{equation}
285: where dots are derivatives with respect to time and primes are derivatives with respect to the field. Note that we are
286: suppressing all delta functions in the expressions.
287: We can now proceed with the analysis of our theory in the usual manner. It must be noted that this
288: model corresponds to large field inflation, where the initial value of the scalar field must satisfy
289: the following condition
290: \begin{equation}
291: \phi_0 \ll \sqrt{kl_s^2} {\rm arccosh}
292: \left(\frac{\sqrt{kl_s^2}}{R} \right),
293: \end{equation}
294: according to our truncation of the harmonic function.
295:
296: Note that in what follows we will frequently switch between the field theory and the bulk geometry.
297: The latter is more geometrical and so provides us with extra intuition about the physics of the solution, however both are
298: equivalent - at least in this simplified model.
299:
300: Using the slow-roll approximation, $H^2 \simeq V(\phi)/3M_p^2$ and $3H \dot{\phi} \simeq -V_{\phi}/V$,
301: the e-folding %N=\ln a$ is:
302: \begin{eqnarray}
303: N &=&\int _t ^{t_f} H dt \nonumber \\
304: &=& \frac{\tau_3R\sqrt{kl_s^2}}{M_p^2}\int_{x(\phi_f)}^{x(\phi)}\frac{\cosh^2x}{{\rm sinh}\, x}dx \nonumber \\
305: &=& s\left[-\cosh(x_f)+\cosh(x)-\ln\left(\frac{{\tanh(x_f/2)}}{{\tanh(x/2)}}\right)\right]. \nonumber \\
306: \end{eqnarray}
307: Where we have introduced the dimensionless quantities $x = \phi/{\sqrt{kl_s^2}}$ and $s = {\tau_3R\sqrt{kl_s^2}}/{M_p^2}$.\\
308: Further defining the new quantity: $ y \equiv \cosh x $ we can write the number of e-folds as follows:
309: \begin{eqnarray}
310: N &=& s\left[-y_f+y-\frac{1}{2}\ln\left(\frac{(y_f-1)(y+1)}{(y_f+1)(y-1)}\right)\right]
311: \label{N}
312: \end{eqnarray}
313: Now, the relevant slow-roll parameter is defined as $\epsilon \equiv -\dot{H}/H $
314: which in our solution reduces to
315: \begin{eqnarray}
316: \epsilon &=& \frac{y^2-1}{2sy^3}.
317: \end{eqnarray}
318: Note that our model is explicitly non-supersymmetric, and therefore we don't need to calculate the second slow roll parameter $\eta$ since we anticipate that this will be trivially satisfied if $\epsilon$ is.
319: At the end of inflation $\epsilon =1$, then $y_f \equiv f(s) $ is given by the root of above
320: equation, setting $\epsilon=1$
321: \begin{eqnarray}
322: f(s) &=& \frac{1}{6s}\left[g(s)+\frac{1}{g(s)}+1\right]
323: \end{eqnarray}
324: where $g(s) = \left(-54s^2+1+6s\sqrt{3(27s^2-1)}\right)^{1/3}$
325: From eqn(\ref{N}) the equation for $y$ is:
326: \begin{eqnarray}
327: \ln\left(\frac{y+1}{y-1}\right)-2y &=& -\frac{2N}{s}-2f(s)-\ln\left(\frac{f(s)-1}{f(s)+1}\right)\nonumber \\
328: \label{transc}
329: \end{eqnarray}
330: For $s>1$ and as $y_{\rm min}=1$, $\epsilon$ always remains less
331: than one leading to an ever accelerating universe. Thus, in this
332: case the geometrical scalar field in the present setting is not
333: suitable to describe inflation but can become a possible candidate
334: of dark energy. However if $\tau_3$ is small enough so that $s<1$,
335: then we will find that inflation is possible as the slow roll
336: parameter will naturally tend toward unity.
337: There is a critical bound $s \leq 1/(3\sqrt{3})$, which must be satisfied if we are to consider inflation in this context.\\
338:
339: %%%%%%%%
340: \section{Inflationary Constraints.}
341: To know the observational constraint on $s$ we have to calculate the density perturbations. In the slow-roll
342: approximation, the power spectrum of curvature perturbation is given by \cite{MFB, HN, SV}:
343: \begin{eqnarray}
344: P_S &=& \frac{1}{12 \pi^2 M_p^6}\left(\frac{V^2}{V_{\phi}}\right)^2 \nonumber \\
345: &=& \frac{\tau_3^2 R^2}{12 \pi^2 M_p^6}\left(\frac{\cosh^2(\phi/\sqrt{kl_s^2})}{\sinh(\phi/\sqrt{kl_s^2})}\right)^2
346: \label{pert}
347: \end{eqnarray}
348: The COBE normalisation corresponds to $P_S \simeq 2 \times 10^{-9}$ for modes which crossed $N=60$ before
349: the end of inflation \cite{constraints} which gives the following constraint:
350: \begin{eqnarray}
351: k(l_sM_p)^2 &\simeq & \frac{10^9}{12\pi^2}\frac{s^2\cosh^4(\phi/\sqrt{kl_s^2})}{\cosh^2(\phi/\sqrt{kl_s^2})-1}
352: \label{cons}
353: \end{eqnarray}
354: From the numerics using eqn(\ref{transc}) and eqn(\ref{pert}), we find that
355: \begin{eqnarray}
356: k(l_sM_p)^2 \geq 3 \times 10^{10}
357: \end{eqnarray}
358: which corresponds to $s \sim 10^{-3}$ when we impose the constraints $\tau_3 = 10^{-10}M_p^4$ and $R=10^2/M_p$ which
359: we regard as being typical values. The constraint on the tension in fact implies the following relationship
360: \begin{equation}
361: \frac{M_p}{M_s} \sim \frac{10^2}{g_s^{1/4}},
362: \end{equation}
363: which we need to be consistently satisfied.
364: However, note that because of our basic assumptions about the theory we will generally obtain the bound
365: \begin{equation}
366: \frac{\tau_3 R}{M_p^3} \le \frac{1}{9 \times 10^5}.
367: \end{equation}
368: If we write the tension of the brane in terms of fundamental parameters we can estimate the relationship between the
369: String and Planck scales using the fact that we require $R > M_s^{-1}$ for the action to be valid
370: \begin{equation}
371: \frac{M_p}{M_s} \ge \frac{15}{g_s^{1/3}},
372: \end{equation}
373: where $g_s$ is the string coupling constant. Note that this potentially constrains the String scale to be close to the
374: Planck scale, as even if we demand weak coupling with $g_s = 0.001$ this gives us $M_p \ge 10^2 M_s$. Of course this
375: is only a bound, and in our model we are treating this as a free parameter. In any event our typical values
376: are consistent and thus we feel free to proceed. We should note that from a string theoretic point of view we should not take $s$ as being a variable
377: in this model. However our earlier analysis has shown that if we wish to consider non-eternal inflation, there exists a maximum bound on this parameter
378: which is quite small. Thus we can make the assumption that $s$ will always be small, with appropriate tuning of the ratio of the string and Planck scales..
379: In the following analysis we will always be assuming that this is satisfied so as to avoid en eternal inflation scenario. Of course, in the string theory picture
380: we have a probe brane moving in a non-trivial background geometry, and we would expect that the $RR$ charge on the brane will be radiated away in the form of
381: closed string modes. This effectively means that there is an additional decay constant in the definition of the field $\phi$, which we have neglected in this note. Thus
382: what we have here is a first-order approximation to the behaviour of the solution. It remains an open question as to whether we can define a tachyon map in this
383: instance - and how this changes the inflationary scenario described here.
384:
385: At leading order in our solutions, where $s$ is assumed to be small and making sure our effective action remains valid, we obtain
386: \begin{eqnarray}
387: k(l_sM_p^2)^2 &\simeq& \frac{10^9}{48\pi^2}\left(2N+1\right)^2
388: \label{l_bound_kl}
389: \end{eqnarray}
390: which corresponds to $s \sim 10^{-5}(2N+1)$ and $y\sim \frac{(2N+1)}{2s}$,
391: when $\tau_3 = 10^{-10}M_p^4$ and $R=10^2/M_p$.
392: Again, more generally we would find the following upper limit on the solution
393: \begin{equation}
394: s \le 10^{-3} (2N+1),
395: \end{equation}
396: which is easily satisfied by our typical values. In fact our results remain robust when compared to the WMAPII and SDSS results combined \cite{wmap2}.
397: The new data constrains $n_s = 0.98 \pm 0.02$ at the $68$ confidence level, and $r < 0.24$ at the $95$ confidence level.
398:
399: The spectral index of scalar perturbations is defined as \cite{MFB, HN, SV}:
400: \begin{eqnarray}
401: n_S-1 &\equiv& -4\frac{M_p^2V^2_{\phi}}{V^3}+2\frac{M_p^2V_{\phi \phi}}{V^2} \nonumber\\
402: &=&\frac{2}{s}\left(\frac{2-y^2}{y^3}\right)
403: \label{n_s}
404: \end{eqnarray}
405: The spectral index of tensor perturbations is defined as:
406: \begin{eqnarray}
407: n_T &=& -\frac{M_p^2V_{\phi}}{V^3} \nonumber \\
408: &=& -\frac{1}{s}\left(\frac{y^2-1}{y^3}\right)
409: \label{n_T}
410: \end{eqnarray}
411: The tensor-to-scalar ratio is:
412: \begin{eqnarray}
413: r &\equiv& 8\frac{M_p^2V^2_{\phi}}{V^3} \nonumber \\
414: &=&\frac{8}{s}\left(\frac{y^2-1}{y^3}\right)
415: \label{r}
416: \end{eqnarray}
417: With the limit $s\to 0$ we get
418: \begin{equation}
419: \begin{array}{lll}
420: n_S = 1-\frac{4}{(2N+1)}, & n_T = -\frac{2}{(2N+1)}, & r=\frac{16}{(2N+1)}
421: \end{array}
422: \end{equation}
423: For $N=60$, we get $n_S=0.96694$ and $r= 0.13223$; for $N=50$, we get $n_S=0.96040$ and
424: $r=0.15842$. We know from observations that the constraint on the tensor-to-scalar
425: ratio is $r<0.36$ \cite{obcon, obcon2}, and so our model appears to be well within this bound.
426: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
427: \section{Reheating}
428: We see that the potential is a symmetric potential with a
429: minima. In terms of the bulk field $\sigma$ it can be written as:
430: \begin{eqnarray}
431: V(\sigma) &=&\frac{\tau _3 R}{2\sqrt{kl_s^2}}\left[\left(\frac{\sigma}{R}+\sqrt{1+\frac{\sigma ^2}{R^2}}\right)\right.\nonumber \\
432: && \left.+\left(\frac{\sigma}{R}+\sqrt{1+\frac{\sigma ^2}{R^2}}\right)^{-1}\right]
433: \end{eqnarray}
434: Now the question is would the brane oscillate back and forth through the ring, and if so what are the necessary
435: conditions for oscillation? In the bulk picture we would naturally anticipate oscillation with a decaying amplitude
436: due to $RR$-emission. Moreover the minimum of the potential in this case is actually metastable.
437: However this has not been verified as we need to calculate the energy emission in the coset model
438: description \cite{israel}, which we leave as future work. This will alter the dynamics of the inflaton field as discussed in the previous section.
439: \\
440: In any event we may also expect similar behaviour once our field
441: is coupled to gravity, with the damping being provided by the
442: Hubble term. This is particularly important because we may find
443: inflation occurring in the phase space region beyond $s \ge s_{\rm
444: crit}$, once enough damping has occurred. The relevant dynamical
445: equations are the inflaton field equation (\ref{eq:eom}) and the
446: Friedmann equation. We repeat them below for convenience.
447: \begin{eqnarray}
448: \ddot{\phi}+3H\dot{\phi}(1-\dot{\phi}^2) +
449: \frac{V_{\phi}}{V}(1-\dot{\phi}^2) &=&0 \label{dyn_eqn}
450: \end{eqnarray}
451: \begin{eqnarray}
452: H^2 &=& \frac{1}{3M_p^2}\left(\frac{V}{\sqrt{1-\dot{\phi}^2}}+\rho _B\right)
453: \end{eqnarray}
454: where the terms inside the curly brackets cause damping. For an
455: easy treatment let us first consider the slow-roll approximation,
456: then in the damping equation only the $\dot{\phi}$ term remains
457: and all other powers of $\dot{\phi}$ can be ignored. That is to
458: say we are considering the case near the stable point. Then $H^2
459: \sim \frac{\tau _3R}{3M_p^2\sqrt{kl_s^2}}+\frac{\rho_B}{3M_p^3}$
460: is constant and $\frac{V_{\phi}}{V} \sim \frac{2}{kl_s^2}\phi$.
461: The equation of motion is then:
462: \begin{eqnarray}
463: \ddot{\phi} + 3\dot{\phi}
464: \sqrt{\left(\frac{\tau_3R}{3M_p^2\sqrt{kl_s^2}}+\frac{\rho_B}{3M_p^2}
465: \right)} + \frac{2}{kl_s^2} \phi &=& 0 \label{phi_ddot}
466: \end{eqnarray}
467: for critically damped motion we need:
468: \begin{eqnarray}
469: \left(\frac{\tau_3
470: R}{3M_p^2\sqrt{kl_s^2}}+\frac{\rho_B}{3M_p^2}\right) &=&
471: \frac{8}{9kl_s^2} \label{damping_condition}
472: \end{eqnarray}
473: If the RHS of (\ref{damping_condition}) is greater than the LHS we will find oscillations but it is reduced by damping which depends on the size of the damping factor ($=\frac32\sqrt{\left(\frac{\tau _3R}{3M_p^2\sqrt{kl_s^2}}+\frac{\rho_B}{3M_p^2}\right)}$), compared to the
474: oscillation frequency ($=\sqrt{\frac{8}{kl_s^2}-9\left(\frac{\tau _3R}{3M_p^2\sqrt{kl_s^2}}+\frac{\rho_B}{3M_p^2}\right) }$).\\
475: From the definition of $\Omega_B$ setting it to $0.3$, we get $\rho _B = \frac{3\tau _3 R}{7\sqrt{kl_s^2}}$, then from
476: eqn(\ref{damping_condition}) we obtain
477: \begin{eqnarray}
478: %\frac{10\tau _3R}{21M_p^2}\sqrt{kl_s^2} &>& \frac89 ~~\textrm{Over damp} \nonumber \\
479: % &=& \frac89 ~~\textrm{Critically damp} \nonumber \\
480: % &<& \frac89 ~~\textrm{Oscillatory with decaying amplitude.} \nonumber \\
481: s &>& \frac{168}{90} ~~\textrm{Over damped} \nonumber \\
482: &=& \frac{168}{90} ~~\textrm{Critically damped} \nonumber \\
483: &<& \frac{168}{90} ~~\textrm{Oscillatory with a decaying amplitude.} \nonumber \\
484: \end{eqnarray}
485: Recall from the previous section that for us to have non-eternal inflation there is a maximal bound for $s$, and so only the
486: last solution can be considered physical.
487: From the constraint we get $\sqrt{kl_s^2} \sim 10^5M_p^{-1}$,
488: $\tau _3 \sim 10^{-10}M_p^4$ and $R \sim 10^2M_p^{-1}$. Hence it
489: is oscillatory near the critical point. The energy of the decaying
490: scalar field is used in expansion and particle production. If the
491: rate of expansion of universe is much less than the decaying rate
492: of the amplitude of the field then most of the energy released by
493: the scalar field goes to reheating. The explicit solution of eqn
494: (\ref{phi_ddot}) is:
495: \begin{eqnarray}
496: \phi(t) & &
497: =\phi_0e^{\left[-\frac32t\sqrt{\frac{10\tau_3R}{21M_p^2\sqrt{kl_s^2}}}\right]}
498: e^{\left[\pm \mathbb{i}
499: t\sqrt{\frac{2}{kl_s^2}-\frac{15\tau_3R}{14M_p^2\sqrt{kl_s^2}}}\right]}
500: \end{eqnarray}
501: The ratio of rate of field decay to the rate of expansion of universe is is defined to be:
502: \begin{eqnarray}
503: \Theta &\equiv |\frac{\dot{\phi}}{H\phi}|
504: \end{eqnarray}
505: For this case we find:
506: \begin{eqnarray}
507: \Theta &=& \sqrt{\frac{21M_p^2}{5\tau _3 R\sqrt{kl_s^2}}}
508: \end{eqnarray}
509: The above quantity can be made to be less than one by adjusting the various parameters.\\
510: Using eqn(\ref{l_bound_kl}) we obtain:
511: \begin{eqnarray}
512: %\Theta &=& \frac{537.66}{\sqrt{2N+1}}
513: \Theta &\sim& \sqrt{\frac{21 \times 10^5}{5(2N+1)}}
514: \end{eqnarray}
515: which allows us to write the parameter as a function of the number of e-foldings, provided we can trust our small $s$ expansion.
516: We know that reheating ends when $\Theta =1$, thus the minimal number of e-foldings we require for this to be satisfied is
517: \begin{eqnarray}
518: N_{\rm end} &\sim& 10^{5}.
519: \end{eqnarray}
520: Clearly this is a large number of e-foldings, and this should motivate us to do a more thorough analysis. For now it would
521: appear that unless there is a large amount of fine tuning, reheating would not end in this scenario.
522: The difficulty is that we cannot use the WKB approximation in this case due to rapid fluctuations
523: in the variation of the potential. Moreover, the analysis will be incomplete without specifying
524: the exact form the gravitational coupling - as there will be corrections to the effective action
525: arising from any compactification. For these reasons we will postpone the analysis and return
526: to it in a later publication.
527:
528: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
529: \section{Dark energy}
530: What are the implications of our model for dark energy\footnote{See \cite{darkrev} for an excellent review.}? It is well known that the non-linear form of the DBI action
531: admits an unusual equation of state, which is of the form
532: \begin{eqnarray}
533: \omega &=& \frac{P}{\rho} \\
534: &=& \dot{\phi}^2-1 \nonumber
535: \end{eqnarray}
536: where $P$ and $\rho$ are the pressure and energy densities respectively.
537: In tachyon models the field is moving relativistically near the vacuum and the equation of state will
538: tend to $\omega \sim 0$, which is problematic for reheating.
539: However our model
540: has significantly different late time behaviour because our scalar field will oscillate about the minimum of its
541: potential, eventually coming to a halt at the minimum.
542: Therefore we expect the equation of state to become $\omega \sim -1$, corresponding to the vacuum energy of the universe.
543: This motivates us to analyse our system as a potential candidate for dark matter.
544: One problem, however, is that the reheating phase doesn't seem to have a natural termination point. Rather, reheating of the universe
545: continues whilst the brane oscillates around the minimum of the potential, and then terminates in what appears to be a dark energy dominated phase.
546: From the perspective of model building this is obviously a difficult problem. For now let us assume that there is some ad hoc mechanism which
547: ends inflation, and look at the evolution of the system in this dark matter dominated phase.
548: The corresponding evolution equations of interest are:
549: \begin{eqnarray}
550: \frac{\ddot{\phi}}{1-\dot{\phi^2}}+3H\dot{\phi} + \frac{V_{\phi}}{V} &=& 0 \label{phidot}\\
551: \dot{H}+\frac{V(\phi)\dot{\phi^2}}{2M_p^2\sqrt{1-\dot{\phi^2}}}+\frac{\gamma \rho_B}{2M_p^2} &=& 0
552: \end{eqnarray}
553: where we have included contribution from a barotropic fluid in the second equation.
554: Defining the following dimensionless quantities:
555: \begin{eqnarray}
556: Y_1 &=& \frac{\phi}{\sqrt{kl_s^2}} \nonumber \\
557: Y_2 &=& \dot{\phi},
558: \label{dimless}
559: \end{eqnarray}
560: and using eqn(\ref{phidot}) and eqn(\ref{dimless}) we get the autonomous equations:
561: \begin{eqnarray}
562: Y'_1 &=& \frac{1}{\sqrt{kl_s^2}H}Y_2 \label{y1}\\
563: Y'_2 &=& -\left(1-Y_2^2\right)\left(3Y_2+\frac{1}{H}\frac{dY_3}{dY_1}\right) \label{y2}
564: \end{eqnarray}
565: Where we have switched to using the number of e-folds as the time parameter, and now primes denote derivatives with respect to $N$. The final expressions we require can be read off as
566: \begin{eqnarray}
567: Y_3 &=& \ln \left(\frac{V(\phi)}{3M_p^2}\right) \nonumber
568: \end{eqnarray}
569:
570: \vspace{0.1in}
571: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
572: %%% Phase Potrait %%
573: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
574: \begin {figure}[h]
575: \begin{center}
576: \includegraphics[width=2.5in, angle=-90]{phase.eps}
577: \end{center}
578: \caption{Plot of the phase space solution with a variety of initial conditions.
579: Here we see the presence of global attractor at $(\phi=0, \dot{\phi}=0)$}
580: \label{phase}
581: \end {figure}
582: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
583: \begin{eqnarray}
584: H^2 &=& \frac{e^{Y_3}}{\sqrt{1-Y_2^2}}+\frac{\rho_B}{3M_p^2}.
585: \end{eqnarray}
586: Simple analysis shows us that critical point is at $ Y_1 =0$ and $Y_2 = 0$ which is a global attractor.
587: This agrees with our physical intuition since it implies the probe brane will slow down, eventually coming to
588: rest at the origin of the transverse space. In terms of our critical ratios we find
589: \begin{eqnarray}
590: \Omega_{\phi} &=& \frac{e^{Y_3}}{e^{Y_3}+\frac{ \rho_B}{3M^2_p}\sqrt{1-Y^2_2}} \\
591: \Omega_B &=& \frac{\rho_B}{\frac{3M_p^2e^{Y_3}}{\sqrt{1-Y_2^2}}+ \rho_B}
592: %q &=& \frac{3}{2}\gamma -1 -\frac{3\left(\gamma-Y^2_2\right)e^{Y_3}}{2\left(e^{Y_3}
593: %+\frac{\rho_B}{3M^2_p}\sqrt{1-Y_2^2}\right)}\\
594: %\lambda &=& -\frac{M_pV_{\phi}}{V^{3/2}} \\
595: % &=& -\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}e^{-Y_3/2}\frac{dY_3}{dY_1}
596: \end{eqnarray}
597:
598: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
599: %%% Omega Vs N %%
600: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
601: \begin {figure}[h]
602: \begin{center}
603: \vspace{0.5in}
604: \includegraphics[width=2.0in,angle=-90]{Omega.eps}
605: \end{center}
606: \caption{Illustration of the various behaviour for $\Omega_i$. Here we have taken $\rho_m^0 = 4.58 \times10^6$, $\rho_R^0=10^{10}$ and $V_0=10^{-6}$.
607: The dark line is for $\Omega_R$, dotted line is for $\Omega_{\phi}$ and light line is for $\Omega_m$}
608: \label{omega}
609: \end {figure}
610: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
611:
612: \noindent
613: Note that they are constrained by $\Omega_{\phi}+\Omega_B = 1$. We also have $\Omega_B=\Omega_M+\Omega_R$,
614: where $M$ and $R$ denote matter and radiation respectively, whilst $\phi$ is associated with our scalar field.\\
615: From the plots fig(\ref{omega}) we see that the $\Omega_{\phi}$ goes to $0.7$ and $\Omega_M$
616: goes to $0.3$ and $\Omega_R$ goes to $0$ in the presence epoch.
617: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
618: %%% Equation of state %%
619: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
620: \begin{figure}[b]
621: \begin{center}
622: \includegraphics[width=2.0in,angle=-90]{eos.eps}
623: \end{center}
624: \caption{Evolution of the equation of state parameter with the number of e-folds. Note that $\omega$ rapidly
625: approaches -1 as expected.}
626: \label{eos}
627: \end{figure}
628: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
629: \noindent
630: We see that at late times, the field settles at the potential minimum leading to
631: de-Sitter solution with energy scale $V_0={\tau_3 R}/{\sqrt{kl_s^2}}$.
632: Using the numerical data from the preceding sections we can write this an upper bound on the energy density as follows
633: \begin{equation}
634: V_0 \le 10^{-12} M_p^4.
635: \end{equation}
636: Although this is several orders of magnitude higher than the observed value, we note that this value is
637: heavily dependent on the scales in the theory, and with appropriate tuning could be substantially smaller.
638: Since there exists no realistic scaling solution (which could
639: mimic matter/radiation), the model also requires the fine tuning of the initial value of the scalar field. The
640: field should remain sub dominant for most of the cosmic evolution and become comparable to the background at
641: late times. It would then evolve to dominate the background energy density ultimately settling down in the de-Sitter
642: phase.
643:
644: However, recall from the bulk picture that the point $\sigma=0, \rho=0$ will be gravitationally unstable and
645: the probe brane will eventually be attracted toward the ring. In terms of our cosmological theory we see that this
646: de-Sitter point will actually be only quasi-stable and that a tachyonic field will eventually condense forcing the
647: vacuum energy down toward zero. This suggests that the vacuum energy will not be constant, but will slowly varying.
648: Furthermore our equation of state should be modified to incorporate the dynamics of this additional field. It is
649: trivial to see that the inflationary phase will terminate and give way to a dark energy phase where $\omega \sim -1$.
650: Once the tachyon field starts to roll, $\omega$ will increase toward zero from below giving rise to a phase of quintessence \cite{quintessence}.
651: Eventually we will begin to probe the strong coupling regime and our effective action will break down.
652:
653: let us return to the bulk picture to understand this in more detail. We introduce a complex field $\xi = \rho + i\sigma$
654: which can actually be globally defined in the target space. The harmonic function factorises in this coordinate
655: system into holomorphic and anti-holomorphic parts $F(\xi, \bar{\xi}) = f(\xi)f(\bar{\xi})$. Thus the tachyon map will also split accordingly
656: \begin{equation}
657: \partial_t \phi = f(\xi) \partial_t \xi, \hspace{0.5cm} \partial_t \bar{\phi} = f(\bar{\xi}) \partial_t \bar{\xi}.
658: \end{equation}
659: These expressions are exactly solvable provided we continue them into the complex plane.
660: If we now re-construct the potential for these fields in terms of our holographic theory we obtain the general
661: solution
662: \begin{equation}\label{eq:generalpot}
663: V(\phi, \bar{\phi}) = \frac{R\tau_3}{\sqrt{kl_s^2}} \left\lbrack
664: \cos\left(\frac{\phi}{\sqrt{kl_s^2}}\right)
665: \cos\left(\frac{\bar{\phi}}{kl_s^2} \right) \right\rbrack^{1/2}.
666: \end{equation}
667: Clearly when $\phi$ is real we recover our $cosine$ potential, whilst if it is purely imaginary we recover the
668: $cosh$ solution. These correspond to motion inside the ring and motion transverse to the ring respectively.
669: The tachyonic instability forces the field from the false vacuum state toward the true ground state.
670: Therefore we expect the dark energy potential to be
671: \begin{equation}
672: V(\phi, \bar{\phi}) \sim \frac{R\tau_3}{\sqrt{kl_s^2}} \cos \left(\frac{\phi}{\sqrt{kl_s^2}} \right),
673: \end{equation}
674: and so the true minimum will occur when $V \sim 0$ at $\phi = \pm \pi \sqrt{kl_s^2}/2$ corresponding to the location
675: of the ring in the bulk picture. The cosmological dynamics in this particular phase are well described
676: by \cite{TWinf, ringinf}, where it was shown to be possible for the true vacuum to be non-zero,
677: provided the trajectory of the probe brane is sufficiently fine tuned.
678:
679: We finally comment on the instability for the field fluctuations
680: for potential with a minimum \cite{FKS}. In a flat FRW background each Fourier mode of $\phi$ satisfies the
681: following equation
682: \begin{eqnarray}
683: && \frac{\delta \ddot{\phi}_{\tilde{k}}}{1-\dot{\phi}^2}+
684: \left[3H + \frac{2\dot{\phi}\ddot{\phi}}{(1-\dot{\phi}^2)^2}\right]\delta\dot{\phi}_{\tilde{k}} \nonumber \\
685: &&+\Big[\frac{\tilde{k}^2}{a^2} +(\ln V)_{\phi,\phi}\Big] \delta \phi_{\tilde{k}}= 0
686: \end{eqnarray}
687: Where $\tilde{k}$ is the comoving wavenumber. We now compute the second derivatives of the potential and obtain
688: \begin{eqnarray}
689: \left(\ln V\right)_{\phi,\phi} &=&\frac{1}{kl_s^2}\left(1-\tanh\left\lbrack\frac{\phi}{\sqrt{kl_s^2}}\right\rbrack\right).
690: \end{eqnarray}
691: Here we see that $(\ln V)_{\phi,\phi}$ is never divergent
692: for any value of $\phi$, and is always non-negative i.e that $(\ln V)_{\phi,\phi} \in[0,1]$.
693: Thus we do not have any instability associated with the perturbation $\delta \phi _k$ with our potential (\ref{poten}).
694: This is to be contrasted with the result obtained for the open string tachyon. which has rapid fluctuations and
695: instabilities associated with its evolution.
696:
697: \section{Conclusion}
698: In this note we have examined the time dependant configuration of a single $D3$ brane in the background of $NS5$ branes
699: distributed on a ring of radius $R$, taking the near horizon approximation.
700: We then studied the cosmological implications of the effective potential
701: which arises due to the transverse motion of $D3$ with respect to the plane of the ring.
702: The model appears to describe an inflationary phase giving way to a natural reheating mechanism, and then a further
703: phase of dark energy driven expansion. Although we cannot accurately predict the scale of the energy density at this
704: point, we do obtain an upper bound. In this case the dark energy phase
705: is a late time attractor of our model, and we predict that the vacuum energy will eventually decay to zero - although on
706: extremely large time-scales \footnote{However we must be careful since the DBI action will not be valid once it coalesces with the $NS$5-branes
707: so we must assume that it passes between the branes. This requires fine tuning of the initial trajectory which
708: is not realistic. This problem may be resolved by switching to the description of the model in terms of
709: Little String Theory \cite{lst}.}.
710: In fact our results will be dramatically improved by keeping the full structure of the harmonic function, because
711: at large distances the potential is even flatter yielding even more e-foldings of inflation.
712: Due to the absence of scaling solutions in our field theory, we need
713: to tune the initial value of the scalar field such that it can become relevant only at late times.
714: With these described fine tunings, the geometrical field is
715: a potential candidate for dark energy.
716: The model is free from tachyon instabilities, and the field perturbations behave in a similar manner to those of
717: the canonical scalar field.
718:
719: Of the model we have several potential problems. Firstly our assumption about the coupling of the DBI to four-dimensional
720: gravity, although as we have pointed out this can be resolved by a full string theory compactification. However
721: there will generally be large corrections, potentially destroying the simplicity of the solution.
722: Secondly the trajectory of the brane in the bulk space is particularly special. In the most generic case we would anticipate
723: a general spiralling trajectory toward the ring. In this case there would be no simple decoupling of the modes and
724: we would need to consider the full form of the potential. This amounts to a certain amount of fine tuning of the
725: initial conditions. Another problem is that we have not turned on any standard model fields which would be expected
726: to couple to the inflaton on the world-volume. However the inclusion of U(1) gauge fields on the brane will act to
727: reduce the velocity of the field by a factor of $\sqrt{1-E^2}$, where $E$ is our dimensionless electric field.
728: More importantly however is that we have neglected the induced two-form field strength, which can have important
729: applications in cosmology as seen in the recent paper \cite{bfield}.
730: Despite these problems, we know there is a coset model describing the background which opens the way for exact
731: string theory calculations. Furthermore the relationship between the two energy scales in the theory means it is
732: possible to talk about long-standing problems such as the Transplanckian issue \cite{trans}.
733: One further problem is the termination of reheating in this model. We have emphasised that this is indeed difficult
734: to tackle in this model due to its analytic simplicity. One may hope that a careful analysis of the tachyon mapping
735: will lead to more realistic behaviour for the inflaton field, and thus a possible exit from reheating. In fact this may also be possible
736: by considering more general trajectories of the probe brane in the bulk picture. We hope to return to this issue in a future publication.
737:
738: One thing that emerges though is the relationship between a dark energy dominated phase and the 'fast rolling' DBI action \cite{dbiinflation}.
739: Although our proposal is far from rigorous, it does capture the majority of the same physics as in the
740: flux compactification scenario. We know that $D$-branes moving in non-trivial backgrounds have sub-luminal velocities
741: as measured by observers in the far UV of the geometry, due to the gravitational red-shifting. In fact the
742: branes are decelerating and for late times will have negligible velocities. This in turn implies that the
743: equation of state parameter will tend to $\omega \sim -1$ at late times. A concrete example where this could be examined
744: is in the case of the warped deformed conifold \cite{conifold}. The RR flux will wrap the $S^3$ in the IR end of the geometry, and we can
745: imagine a solitary $D3$-brane probing this part of the conifold after an inflationary phase. To an observer in
746: the compact space the brane will slow down as it reaches the origin of the $S^3$ yielding a dark matter dominated
747: phase \cite{darkenergy}.
748:
749: However our model opens up the possibility that non-trivial background configurations may have important
750: implications for brane cosmology, as we have seen how to combine inflation, reheating and dark energy in a single
751: model. Furthermore this is not subject to the same landscape problems as the flux compactification models, and
752: we can try and tackle higher energy issues in a clear formalism \cite{warpcosm}.
753: Although we acknowledge the simplicity of our solution we hope that this will encourage more research
754: in this direction.
755:
756:
757: \section{Acknowledgement}
758: We thank M. Sami, S. Tsujikawa, S. Thomas for discussion and
759: critical comments. BG thank D. Samart and S. Pantian for
760: re-checking numerical plots and calculation. BG is supported by
761: the Thailand Research Fund. Tapan Naskar thanks Jamia for
762: hospitality. JW is supported by a Queen Mary studentship.
763: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
764: \begin{thebibliography}{100}
765: \bibitem{senrev}
766: A.~Sen,
767: %``Tachyon dynamics in open string theory,''
768: arXiv:hep-th/0410103.
769: \bibitem{DBI}
770: A.~Sen, JHEP {\bf 9910}, 008 (1999);
771: M.~R.~Garousi, Nucl. Phys. B{\bf 584}, 284 (2000);
772: Nucl. Phys. B {\bf 647}, 117 (2002);
773: JHEP {\bf 0305}, 058 (2003);
774: E.~A.~Bergshoeff, M.~de Roo, T.~C. de Wit,
775: E.~Eyras, S.~Panda, JHEP {\bf 0005}, 009 (2000);
776: J.~Kluson, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 62}, 126003 (2000);
777: D.~Kutasov and V.~Niarchos, Nucl. Phys. B {\bf 666},
778: 56 (2003).
779:
780: \bibitem{tachinfl}
781: A.~Mazumdar, S.~Panda and A.~Perez-Lorenzana,
782: %``Assisted inflation via tachyon condensation,''
783: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 614}, 101 (2001); M.~Fairbairn and
784: M.~H.~G.~Tytgat,
785: %``Inflation from a tachyon fluid?,''
786: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 546}, 1 (2002); A.~Feinstein,
787: %``Power-law inflation from the rolling tachyon,''
788: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 66}, 063511 (2002); M.~Sami, P.~Chingangbam
789: and T.~Qureshi,
790: %``Aspects of tachyonic inflation
791: % with exponential potential,''
792: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 66}, 043530 (2002); M.~Sami,
793: %``Implementing power law inflation with
794: %rolling tachyon on the brane,''
795: Mod.\ Phys.\ Lett.\ A {\bf 18}, 691 (2003); Y.~S.~Piao,
796: R.~G.~Cai, X.~m.~Zhang and Y.~Z.~Zhang,
797: %``Assisted tachyonic inflation,''
798: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 66}, 121301 (2002).
799:
800: \bibitem{KL}
801: L.~Kofman and A.~Linde,
802: %``Problems with tachyon inflation,''
803: JHEP {\bf 0207}, 004 (2002).
804:
805: \bibitem{tachyonpapers}
806: G.~W.~Gibbons,
807: %``Cosmological evolution of the rolling tachyon,''
808: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 537}, 1 (2002);
809: S.~Mukohyama,
810: %``Brane cosmology driven by the rolling tachyon,''
811: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 66}, 024009 (2002);
812: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 66}, 123512 (2002); D.~Choudhury, D.~Ghoshal, D.~P.~Jatkar and S.~Panda, %``On the cosmological relevance of the tachyon,''
813: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 544}, 231 (2002);
814: G.~Shiu and I.~Wasserman,
815: %``Cosmological constraints on tachyon matter,''
816: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 541}, 6 (2002);
817: T.~Padmanabhan,
818: %``Accelerated expansion of the universe driven by
819: % tachyonic matter,''
820: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 66}, 021301 (2002);
821: J.~S.~Bagla, H.~K.~Jassal and T.~Padmanabhan,
822: %``Cosmology with tachyon field as dark energy,''
823: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 67}, 063504 (2003);
824: G.~N.~Felder, L.~Kofman and A.~Starobinsky,
825: %``Caustics in tachyon matter and
826: %other Born-Infeld scalars,''
827: JHEP {\bf 0209}, 026 (2002);
828: J.~M.~Cline, H.~Firouzjahi and P.~Martineau,
829: %``Reheating from tachyon condensation,''
830: JHEP {\bf 0211}, 041 (2002);
831: M.~C.~Bento, O.~Bertolami and A.~A.~Sen,
832: %``Tachyonic inflation in the braneworld scenario,''
833: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 67}, 063511 (2003);
834: J.~g.~Hao and X.~z.~Li,
835: %``Reconstructing the equation of state of tachyon,''
836: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 66}, 087301 (2002);
837: C.~j.~Kim, H.~B.~Kim and Y.~b.~Kim,
838: %``Rolling tachyons in string cosmology,''
839: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 552}, 111 (2003);
840: T.~Matsuda,
841: %``Non-tachyonic brane inflation,''
842: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 67}, 083519 (2003);
843: A.~Das and A.~DeBenedictis,
844: %``Inhomogeneous cosmologies with
845: %tachyonic dust as dark matter,''
846: arXiv:gr-qc/0304017;
847: Z.~K.~Guo, Y.~S.~Piao, R.~G.~Cai and Y.~Z.~Zhang,
848: %``Inflationary attractor from tachyonic matter,''
849: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 68}, 043508 (2003);
850: L.~R.~W.~Abramo and F.~Finelli,
851: %``Cosmological dynamics of the tachyon
852: % with an inverse power-law potential,''
853: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 575} (2003) 165;
854: G.~W.~Gibbons,
855: %``Thoughts on tachyon cosmology,''
856: Class.\ Quant.\ Grav.\ {\bf 20}, S321 (2003);
857: M.~Majumdar and A.~C.~Davis,
858: %``Inflation from tachyon condensation, large N effects,''
859: arXiv:hep-th/0304226;
860: S.~Nojiri and S.~D.~Odintsov,
861: %``Effective equation of state and energy conditions
862: %in phantom / tachyon inflationary cosmology
863: %perturbed by quantum effects,''
864: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 571}, 1 (2003);
865: E.~Elizalde, J.~E.~Lidsey, S.~Nojiri and S.~D.~Odintsov,
866: %``Born-Infeld quantum condensate
867: % as dark energy in the universe,''
868: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 574}, 1 (2003);
869: D.~A.~Steer and F.~Vernizzi,
870: %``Tachyon inflation: Tests and comparison with single
871: %scalar field inflation,''
872: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 70}, 043527 (2004);
873: V.~Gorini, A.~Y.~Kamenshchik, U.~Moschella and V.~Pasquier,
874: %``Tachyons, scalar fields and cosmology,''
875: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 69}, 123512 (2004);
876: L.~P.~Chimento,
877: %``Extended tachyon field, Chaplygin gas and
878: % solvable k-essence cosmologies,''
879: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 69}, 123517 (2004);
880: J.~M.~Aguirregabiria and R.~Lazkoz,
881: %``Tracking solutions in tachyon cosmology,''
882: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 69}, 123502 (2004); M.~B.~Causse,
883: %``A rolling tachyon field for both dark
884: % energy and dark halos of galaxies,''
885: arXiv:astro-ph/0312206;
886: B.~C.~Paul and M.~Sami,
887: %``A note on inflation with tachyon rolling
888: % on the Gauss-Bonnet brane,''
889: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 70}, 027301 (2004);
890: G.~N.~Felder and L.~Kofman,
891: %``Inhomogeneous fragmentation of the rolling tachyon,''
892: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 70}, 046004 (2004);
893: J.~M.~Aguirregabiria and R.~Lazkoz,
894: %``A note on the structural stability of tachyonic inflation,''
895: Mod.\ Phys.\ Lett.\ A {\bf 19}, 927 (2004);
896: L.~R.~Abramo, F.~Finelli and T.~S.~Pereira,
897: %``Constraining Born-Infeld models of
898: % dark energy with CMB anisotropies,''
899: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 70}, 063517 (2004);
900: G.~Calcagni,
901: %``Noncommutative models in patch cosmology,''
902: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 70}, 103525 (2004);
903: G.~Calcagni and S.~Tsujikawa,
904: %``Observational constraints on patch inflation
905: % in noncommutative spacetime,''
906: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 70}, 103514 (2004); P.~F.~Gonzalez-Diaz,
907: %``Dark energy and supermassive black holes,''
908: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 70}, 063530 (2004);
909: S.~K.~Srivastava,
910: %``Tachyon as a dark energy source,''
911: arXiv:gr-qc/0409074; gr-qc/0411088;
912: P.~Chingangbam and T.~Qureshi,
913: %``Dynamics of rolling massive scalar field cosmology,''
914: arXiv:hep-th/0409015;
915: S.~Tsujikawa and M.~Sami,
916: %``A unified approach to scaling solutions in a
917: %general cosmological background,''
918: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 603}, 113 (2004); M.~R.~Garousi, M.~Sami and
919: S.~Tsujikawa, Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 606}, 1 (2005); Phys.\ Rev.\ D
920: {\bf 71}, 083005 (2005); N.~Barnaby and J.~M.~Cline,
921: %``Tachyon defect formation and reheating in brane-antibrane inflation,''
922: Int.\ J.\ Mod.\ Phys.\ A {\bf 19}, 5455 (2004);
923: E.~J.~Copeland, M.~R.~Garousi, M.~Sami and S.~Tsujikawa,
924: %``What is needed of a tachyon if it is to be the dark energy?,''
925: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 71}, 043003 (2005);
926: B.~Gumjudpai, T.~Naskar, M.~Sami and S.~Tsujikawa,
927: %``Coupled dark energy: Towards a general
928: %description of the dynamics,''
929: JCAP {\bf 0506}, 007 (2005);
930: M.~Novello, M.~Makler, L.~S.~Werneck and C.~A.~Romero,
931: %``Extended Born-Infeld dynamics and cosmology,''
932: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 71}, 043515 (2005);
933: A.~Das, S.~Gupta, T.~D.~Saini and S.~Kar,
934: %``Cosmology with decaying tachyon matter,''
935: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 72}, 043528 (2005);
936: H.~Singh,
937: %``More on tachyon cosmology
938: % in de Sitter gravity,''
939: arXiv:hep-th/0505012;
940: S.~Tsujikawa,
941: %``Reconstruction of general scalar-field
942: %dark energy models,''
943: arXiv:astro-ph/0508542;
944: G. Calcagni, arXiv:hep-th/0512259;
945: G. L. Alberghi and A. Tronconi, arXiv:hep-ph/0509044;
946: G. L. Alberghi, R. Casadio and A. Tronconi, JHEP {\bf 0406}, 040 (2004);
947: I. Ya. Aref'eva, A. S. Koshelev and S. Yu. Vernov, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 72}, 0604017 (2005);
948: I. Ya. Aref'eva, arXiv:astro-ph/0410443;
949: I. Ya. Aref'eva and L. V. Joukovskaya, JHEP {\bf 0510}, 087 (2005).
950:
951: \bibitem{constraints}
952: A. Linde, \emph{Particle Physics and Inflationary Cosmology}, Harwood, Chur (1990), arXiv:hep-th/0503203;
953: D. H. Lyth and A. Riotto, Phys. Rept {\bf 314}, 1 (1999);
954: A. R. Liddle and D. H. Lyth, \emph{Cosmological inflation and large-scale structure}, Cambridge University Press (2000).
955:
956: \bibitem{BA}
957: C. P. Burgess, M. Majumdar, D. Nolte, F. Quevedo, G. Rajesh and
958: R. J. Zhang, JHEP {\bf 0107} (2001) 047; C. P. Burgess, P.
959: Martineau, F. Quevedo, G. Rajesh and R. J. Zhang, JHEP {\bf 0203}
960: (2002) 052; D. Choudhury, D. Ghoshal, D. P. Jatkar and S. Panda,
961: JCAP {\bf 0307} (2003) 009;
962: G. R. Dvali and S. H. H. Tye, Phys. Lett B{\bf 450}, 72 (1999);
963: G. R. Dvali, Q. Shafi and S. Solganik, arXiv:hep-th/0105203;
964: J. Garcia-Bellido, R. Rabadan and F. Zamora, JHEP {\bf 0201}, 036 (2002);
965: N. Jones, H. Stoica and S. H. H. Tye, JHEP {\bf 0207}, 051 (2002);
966: M. Gomez-Reino and I. Zavala, JHEP {\bf 0209}, 020 (2002);
967: C. Herdeiro, S. Hirano and R. Kallosh, JHEP {\bf 0112}, 027 (2001).
968:
969: \bibitem{GST}
970: M.~R.~Garousi, M.~Sami and S.~Tsujikawa,
971: %``Inflation and dark energy arising from rolling massive
972: %scalar field on the D-brane,''
973: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 70}, 043536 (2004).
974:
975: \bibitem{warpcosm}
976: J. Raemaekers, JHEP {\bf 0410}, 057 (2004); P. Chingangbam, A.
977: Deshamukhya and S. Panda, JHEP {\bf 0502}, 052 (2005); D.
978: Cremades, F. Quevedo and A. Sinha, arXiv:hep-th/0505252;
979: D.~Cremades, arXiv:hep-th/0512294;
980: S. E. Shandera and S. H. Henry Tye, arXiv: hep-th/0601099;
981: X. Chen, JHEP {\bf 0508}, 045 (2005);
982: A. Buchel, arXiv:hep-th/0601013;
983: N. Barnaby, C. P. Burgess and J. M. Cline, JCAP {\bf 0504}, 007 (2005);
984: A. Buchel and R. Roiban, Phys. Lett B{\bf 590}, 284-294 (2004);
985: N. Iizuka and S. P. Trivedi, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 70}, 043519 (2004).
986:
987: \bibitem{dbiinflation}
988: E. Silverstein and D. Tong, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 70}, 103505 (2004);
989: M. Alishahiha, E. Silverstein and D. Tong, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 70},
990: 123505 (2004);
991: M. A. Ganjali, JHEP {\bf 0509}, 004 (2005).
992:
993: \bibitem{sen}
994: A.~Sen, JHEP {\bf 0204}, 048 (2002); JHEP
995: {\bf 0207}, 065 (2002);
996: Mod. Phys. Lett. A {\bf 17}, 1797 (2002);
997: arXiv: hep-th/0312153.
998:
999: \bibitem{kutasov}
1000: D. Kutasov, arXiv:hep-th/0405058, arXiv:hep-th/0408073.
1001:
1002: \bibitem{saha}
1003: D.~Sahakyan,
1004: JHEP {\bf 0410}, 008 (2004).
1005:
1006: \bibitem{israel}
1007: D.~Israel, A.~Pakman and J.~Troost,
1008: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 722}, 3-64 (2005).
1009:
1010: \bibitem{TW1}
1011: S.~Thomas and J.~Ward,
1012: %``D-brane dynamics and NS5 rings,''
1013: JHEP {\bf 0502}, 015 (2005).
1014:
1015: \bibitem{TW2}
1016: S.~Thomas and J.~Ward,
1017: %``Geometrical tachyon kinks and NS5 branes,''
1018: JHEP {\bf 0510}, 098 (2005).
1019:
1020: \bibitem{ringinf}
1021: S.~Panda, M.~Sami and S.~Tsujikawa,
1022: arXiv:hep-th/0510112.
1023:
1024: \bibitem{NS5cos}
1025: H. Yavartanoo, arXiv:hep-th/0407079; A. Ghodsi and A. E. Mosaffa,
1026: Nucl. Phys. B {\bf 714} (2005) 30; S.~Panda, M.~Sami,
1027: S.~Tsujikawa and J.~Ward, arXiv:hep-th/0601037.
1028:
1029: \bibitem{TWinf}
1030: S.~Thomas and J.~Ward,
1031: %``Inflation from geometrical tachyons,''
1032: Phys. Rev. D {\bf 72}, 083519 (2005).
1033:
1034: \bibitem{Callan}
1035: C.~G.~Callan, J.~A.~Harvey and A.~Strominger,
1036: %``Worldbrane actions for string solitons,''
1037: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 367}, 60 (1991);
1038: hep-th/9112030.
1039:
1040: \bibitem{sfet}
1041: K. Sfetsos, arXiv:hep-th/9903201.
1042:
1043: \bibitem{MFB}
1044: V.~F.~Mukhanov, H.~A.~Feldman and R.~H.~Brandenberger,
1045: %``Theory Of Cosmological Perturbations. Part 1.
1046: %Classical Perturbations. Part
1047: %2. Quantum Theory Of Perturbations.
1048: %Part 3. Extensions,''
1049: Phys.\ Rept.\ {\bf 215}, 203 (1992);
1050: H.~Kodama and M.~Sasaki,
1051: %``Cosmological Perturbation Theory,''
1052: Prog.\ Theor.\ Phys.\ Suppl.\ {\bf 78}, 1 (1984);
1053: B.~A.~Bassett, S.~Tsujikawa and D.~Wands,
1054: %``Inflation dynamics and reheating,''
1055: arXiv:astro-ph/0507632.
1056:
1057: \bibitem{HN}
1058: J.~c.~Hwang and H.~Noh,
1059: %``Cosmological perturbations in a generalized gravity
1060: %including tachyonic condensation,''
1061: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 66}, 084009 (2002).
1062:
1063: \bibitem{SV}
1064: D.~A.~Steer and F.~Vernizzi,
1065: %``Tachyon inflation: Tests and comparison
1066: %with single scalar fieldinflation,''
1067: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 70}, 043527 (2004).
1068:
1069: \bibitem{obcon}
1070: H.~V.~Peiris \textit{et al.}, Astrophys. J. Suppl.
1071: \textbf{148}, 213 (2003);
1072: V.~Barger, H.~S.~Lee, and D.~Marfatia,
1073: Phys.\ Lett. \ B \textbf{565}, 33 (2003);
1074: W.~H.~Kinney, E.~W.~Kolb, A.~Melchiorri and A.~Riotto,
1075: Phys.\ Rev.\ D \textbf{69}, 103516 (2004);
1076: S.~M.~Leach and A.~R.~Liddle, Phys. Rev. D
1077: \textbf{68}, 123508 (2003);
1078: M. Tegmark {\em et al.},
1079: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 69}, 103501 (2004);
1080: S.~Tsujikawa and A.~R.~Liddle,
1081: JCAP {\bf 0403}, 001 (2004);
1082: S.~Tsujikawa and B.~Gumjudpai,
1083: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 69}, 123523 (2004);
1084: D. N. Spergel {\em et al}, arXiv:astro-ph/0603449.
1085:
1086: \bibitem{obcon2}
1087: U.~Seljak {\it et al.},
1088: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 71}, 103515 (2005).
1089:
1090: \bibitem{wmap2}
1091: G. Hinshaw et al, astro-ph/0603451;
1092: L. Page et al, astro-ph/0603450;
1093: D. N. Spergel et al, astro-ph/0603449;
1094: H. V. Peiris and R. Easther, astro-ph/0609003.
1095:
1096: \bibitem{FKS}
1097: A.~V.~Frolov, L.~Kofman and A.~A.~Starobinsky,
1098: %``Prospects and problems of tachyon matter cosmology,''
1099: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 545}, 8 (2002).
1100:
1101: \bibitem{garousi}
1102: M.~R.~Garousi,
1103: JHEP {\bf 0304}, 027 (2003).
1104:
1105: \bibitem{verlinde}
1106: H.~Verlinde,
1107: Nucl.~Phys.~ B \textbf{580}, 264 (2000).
1108:
1109: \bibitem{scalarfield}
1110: M.~R.~Garousi, M.~Sami and S.~Tsujikawa,
1111: Phys. Lett. B {\bf 606}, 1 (2005);
1112: P.~Chingangbam and T.~Qureshi,
1113: Int. J. Mod. Phys A{\bf 20}, 6083 (2005).
1114:
1115: \bibitem{randall}
1116: L. Randall and R. Sundrum,
1117: Phys. Rev. Lett. \textbf{83}, 3370 (1999);
1118: L. Randall and R. Sundrum,
1119: Phys. Rev. Lett. \textbf{83}, 4690 (1999).
1120:
1121: \bibitem{mirage}
1122: A.~Kehagias and E.~Kiritsis,
1123: JHEP {\bf 9911}, 022 (1999);
1124: E.~Papantonopoulos, I.~Pappa and V.~Zamarias,
1125: arXiv:hep-th/0601152.
1126:
1127: \bibitem{KKLT}
1128: S.~Kachru, R.~Kallosh, A.~Lindei and S.~P.~Trivedi,
1129: Phys. Rev. D {\bf 68}, 046005 (2003);
1130: S.~Kachru, R.~Kallosh, A.~Linde, J.~Maldacena, L.~McAllister and S.~P.~Trivedi,
1131: JCAP {\bf 0310}, 013 (2003).
1132:
1133: \bibitem{lst}
1134: D.~Kutasov,
1135: Trieste 2001, Superstrings and Related matters, 165-209.
1136:
1137: \bibitem{darkenergy}
1138: Y-S. Piao. Phys. Rev. D {\bf 71}, 107301 (2005);
1139: S. Mukohyama, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 72}, 061901 (2005);
1140:
1141: \bibitem{BVmechanism}
1142: R. Brandenberger and C. Vafa, Nucl. Phys. B {\bf 316}, 391 (1989);
1143: T. Boehm and R. Brandenberger, arXiv:hep-th/0208188;
1144: F. Quevedo, Class. Quant. grav {\bf 19}, 5721-5779 (2002).
1145:
1146: \bibitem{trans}
1147: U. H. Danielsson, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 66}, 023511 (2002).
1148:
1149: \bibitem{conifold}
1150: I. R. Klebanov and M. J. Strassler, JHEP {\bf 0008}, 052 (2000).
1151:
1152: \bibitem{bfield}
1153: I. Cho, E. J. Chun, H. B. Kim and Y. Kim, arXiv:hep-th/0601147.
1154:
1155: \bibitem{quintessence}
1156: P. J. E. Peebles and A. Vilenkin, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 59}, 063505 (1999);
1157: M. Peloso and F. Rosati, JHEP {\bf 9912}, 026 (1999);
1158: K. Dimopoulos, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 68}, 123506 (2003);
1159: R. Rosenfeld and J. A. Frieman, JCAP {\bf 0509}, 003 (2005).
1160:
1161: \bibitem{darkrev}
1162: E. J. Copeland, M. Sami and S. Tsujikawa, arXiv:hep-th/0603057.
1163:
1164: \end{thebibliography}
1165: \end{document}
1166: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1167: