1: \documentclass[12pt]{iopart}
2:
3: \usepackage{iopams}
4: \usepackage{multicol,mathrsfs,bm}
5: \usepackage{graphicx, graphics}
6: \usepackage{hyperref}
7: \usepackage{slashed}
8: \usepackage{fancyhdr}
9:
10: \textwidth=16cm
11: \textheight=21cm
12: \topmargin -1cm
13: \oddsidemargin -0.cm
14: \evensidemargin -0.cm
15: \hoffset -0 cm
16:
17: \def\baselinestretch{1.1}
18: \parskip .1cm
19:
20: \def\x{{\bf x}}
21: \def\p{{\bf p}}
22: \def\k{{\bf k}}
23: \def\z{{\bf z}}
24:
25: \renewcommand{\not}{\slashed}
26: \renewcommand{\overline}{\bar}
27: \renewcommand{\headrulewidth}{0pt}
28:
29: \newcommand{\gsim}{\geq}
30: %\newcommand{\lsim}{\lower.7ex\hbox{$\;\stackrel{\textstyle<}{\sim}\;$}}
31: %
32: \def\gappeq{\mathrel{\rlap {\raise.5ex\hbox{$>$}} {\lower.5ex\hbox{$\sim$}}}}
33: \def\lappeq{\mathrel{\rlap{\raise.5ex\hbox{$<$}} {\lower.5ex\hbox{$\sim$}}}}
34: \def\be{\begin{equation}} \def\ee{\end{equation}}
35: \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}} \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}}
36: \def\bq{\begin{quote}} \def\eq{\end{quote}}
37: \def\bc{\begin{center}} \def\ec{\end{center}}
38: \def\ov{\overline}
39: \def\nn{\nonumber}
40: \def\FC{{\rm FC}}
41: \def\FV{{\rm FV}}
42: \def\Pl{{\rm Pl}}
43: \def\dd{\displaystyle}
44: \def\wh{\widehat}
45: \def\ti{\tilde}
46: \def\latin#1{{\it #1}}
47: \def\cf{{cf.}} \def\ie{{i.e.}} \def\eg{{\it e.g.~}} \def\etc{{etc~\ldots}}
48: \def\adhoc{{ad hoc}} \def\defacto{{de facto}} \def\viceversa{{vice versa}}
49: \def\apriori{{a priori}} \def\Apriori{{A priori}} \def\grosso{{grosso modo}}
50: \def\aposteriori{{a posteriori}} \def\afortiori{{a fortiori}}
51: \def\ra {$\rightarrow$}
52: %
53: \newcommand{\nsect}{\setcounter{equation}{0}
54: \def\theequation{\thesection.\arabic{equation}}\section}
55: \newcommand{\nappend}{\setcounter{equation}{0}
56: \def\theequation{\rm{A}.\arabic{equation}}\section*}
57: \newcommand{\appendixA}{\setcounter{equation}{0}
58: \def\theequation{\rm{A}.\arabic{equation}}\section*}
59: \newcommand{\appendixB}{\setcounter{equation}{0}
60: \def\theequation{\rm{B}.\arabic{equation}}\section*}
61: %
62: %\draft
63: \def\meg{\mu \rightarrow e \gamma}\def\tmg{\tau \rightarrow \mu \gamma}
64: \def\teg{\tau \rightarrow e \gamma}
65:
66:
67: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
68:
69: \begin{document}
70:
71:
72: %\thispagestyle{empty}
73: %\def\footnote{\fnsymbol{footnote}}
74: \begin{flushright}
75: \textbf{JCAP} 08 (2007) 002\\
76: \small {DFPD-07/TH/04}\\
77: {\small MIT-CTP-3817}
78: \end{flushright}
79:
80: \title{ Quantum Boltzmann Equations and Leptogenesis}
81:
82: \author{Andrea De Simone $^1$ and Antonio Riotto $^{2, 3}$}
83:
84: \address{$^1$ Center for Theoretical Physics,\\
85: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA}
86:
87:
88: \address{$^2$ INFN, Sezione di Padova, Via Marzolo,
89: 8 - I-35131 Padua, Italy}
90:
91: \address{$^3$ D\'epartement de Physique Th\'eorique,\\ Universit\'e de
92: Gen\`eve, 24 Quai Ansermet, Gen\`eve, Switzerland}
93: \eads{\mailto{andreads@mit.edu} and \mailto{antonio.riotto@pd.infn.it}}
94:
95:
96: \begin{abstract}
97: The closed time-path formalism is a
98: powerful Green's function formulation to describe
99: non-equilibrium phenomena in field theory and
100: it leads to a complete non-equilibrium quantum
101: kinetic theory. We make use of this formalism to write down the
102: set of quantum Boltzmann equations relevant for leptogenesis.
103: They manifest memory effects and off-shell corrections. In particular,
104: memory effects lead to a time-dependent CP asymmetry whose
105: value at a given instant of time depends upon the
106: previous history of the system. This result is particularly
107: relevant when the asymmetry is generated by the decays of nearly
108: mass-degenerate heavy states, as in resonant or soft leptogenesis.
109: \end{abstract}
110:
111: \maketitle
112:
113:
114: %\newpage
115:
116: \pagestyle{fancy}
117: \def\thefootnote{\arabic{footnote}}
118: \setcounter{footnote}{0}
119: \setcounter{page}{1}
120:
121: \fancyhead{}
122: \fancyfoot[C]{\thepage}
123:
124:
125: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
126: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
127: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
128:
129: \section{Introduction}
130:
131: Thermal leptogenesis~\cite{fy,lept,ogen,work} is a well-motivated scenario
132: for the production of the baryon asymmetry in the early Universe.
133: It takes place through the
134: decay of heavy right-handed (RH) Majorana neutrinos.
135: The out-of-equilibrium decays occur violating
136: lepton number and CP, thus satisfying Sakharov's
137: conditions~\cite{sakharov}. In grand unified theories (GUT) the
138: masses of the heavy Majorana neutrinos masses are typically smaller
139: than the scale of unification of the electroweak and strong
140: interactions, $M_{\rm GUT} \sim 10^{16}$~GeV, by a few to
141: several orders of magnitude. This range coincides with the range of
142: values of the heavy Majorana neutrino masses required for a
143: successful thermal leptogenesis.
144: Being RH neutrinos a key ingredient in the formulation of
145: the well-known seesaw mechanism~\cite{seesaw},
146: which explains why neutrinos are
147: massive and mix among each other and why they turn out to be
148: much lighter than the other known fermions
149: of the Standard Model (SM), thermal leptogenesis has been the
150: subject of intense research activity in the last few years.
151: For instance, flavour effects
152: have been recently investigated in detail (and shown to be relevant)
153: \cite{Barbieri99,endoh,davidsonetal,nardietal,dibari,
154: davidsonetal2,antusch,silvia1,Branco:2006ce,aat,silvia2,adsar,vives,
155: Engelhard:2006yg}
156: including the quantum oscillations/correlations of the asymmetries
157: in lepton flavour space~\cite{davidsonetal,adsar}.
158: The interactions related to the charged Yukawa couplings enter in the
159: dynamics by inducing nonvanishing
160: quantum oscillations among the lepton asymmetries
161: in flavour space \cite{davidsonetal}.
162: Therefore the lepton asymmetries must be
163: represented as a matrix in flavour space,
164: the diagonal elements are the flavour asymmetries, and the off-diagonals
165: encode the quantum correlations. The off-diagonals
166: should decay away when the charged Yukawa couplings start
167: mediating very fast
168: processes. For instance, at temperatures $T\sim 10^{12}$ GeV, the interactions
169: mediated by the tau-Yukawa coupling enter in equilibrium and the
170: tau-flavour becomes distinguishable from the muon and the electron flavour.
171: A full treatment of this transition
172: based on the quantum, rather than classical,
173: Boltzmann equations is suitable to properly describe
174: all the physical effects.
175:
176: Mainly, but not only, motivated by the impact of flavour effects,
177: in this paper we set the stage for the study of the dynamics
178: of thermal leptogenesis by means of
179: quantum Boltzmann equations (for a previous study, see \cite{buchmuller}).
180: They are obtained
181: starting from the non-equilibrium quantum field theory based on the
182: Closed Time-Path (CTP) formulation. We will see that the resulting
183: kinetic equations describing the evolution of the
184: lepton asymmetry and the RH neutrinos are non-Markovian and
185: present memory effects. In other
186: words, differently from the classical approach where every scattering
187: in the plasma is independent from the previous one, the particle abundances
188: at a given time depend upon the history of the system. The more
189: familiar energy-conserving delta functions are replaced by retarded
190: time integrals of time-dependent kernels and
191: cosine functions whose arguments are the energy involved
192: in the various processes. Therefore, the non-Markovian kinetic equations
193: include the contribution of coherent processes throughout the history
194: of the kernels.
195:
196: We will see that
197: one immediate consequence of the CTP approach to thermal
198: leptogenesis is that the CP asymmetry is a function of time
199: and its value at a given
200: instant depends upon the previous history of the system.
201: Furthermore, in the quantum approach, the
202: relaxation times are expected to be typically
203: longer than the one dictated by the classical approach.
204: Particle number densities are replaced by
205: Green's functions which are subject both to exponential
206: decays and to an oscillatory behaviour. This restricts the range of time
207: integration for the scattering terms and leads to a decrease of the wash-out
208: rates. This is a well-established fact in nuclear collisions \cite{dan}.
209: If the time range of the kernels are shorter than the
210: relaxation time of the particles abundances, the solutions to the
211: quantum and the classical
212: Boltzmann equations differ only by terms of the order of the ratio
213: of the timescale of the kernel to the relaxation timescale of the
214: distribution. In thermal leptogenesis this is typically the case. However,
215: there are situations where this does not happen. For instance, in the
216: case of resonant leptogenesis and soft leptogenesis,
217: two RH (s)neutrinos $N_1$ and $N_2$
218: are almost degenerate
219: in mass and the CP asymmetry from the decay of the first RH $N_1$
220: is resonantly enhanced if the mass difference
221: $\Delta M=(M_2-M_1)$
222: is of the order of the decay rate of the second RH neutrino
223: $\Gamma_{N_2}$ . The typical timescale
224: to build up coherently the CP asymmetry is of the order of $1/\Delta M$, which
225: can be larger than the timescale $\sim 1/\Gamma_{N_1}$
226: for the change of the abundance of the
227: $N_1$'s. This tells us that the reduction of the quantum Boltzmann
228: equations to the classical ones should not be taken for granted.
229:
230: The paper is organized as follows. In Section \ref{ctpform} we provide the basics
231: of the CTP
232: formulation of non-equilibrium quantum field theory,
233: we set the notations and state the main results which will be used throughout the paper.
234: The quantum Boltzmann equation describing the time evolution of the lepton
235: number asymmetry is formally derived in Section \ref{qbegeneral}, in terms of propagators and
236: self-energies of the leptons. Sections \ref{qberhneutrino} and \ref{qbeleptonasym}
237: are devoted to write down more explicitly
238: the quantum Boltzmann equations for the abundance of right-handed neutrinos
239: and the lepton asymmetry, respectively. The familiar classical equations are then
240: easily recovered as a limit case. Section \ref{qbeleptonasym} also contains an analysis of the time-dependent CP asymmetry obtained in this more general setup. Concluding remarks are in Section \ref{concl}.
241:
242:
243:
244:
245:
246: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
247: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
248: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
249:
250: \section{The CTP formalism for non-e\-qui\-lib\-ri\-um quantum field theory}
251: \label{ctpform}
252:
253: We first briefly present some of the basic
254: features of the non-equilibrium quantum field theory based on the
255: CTP formalism, also known as Schwinger-Keldysh formalism \cite{sk}.
256: The interested reader is referred to the excellent review by Chou
257: {\it et al.} \cite{chou} for a more exhaustive discussion.
258: Since we
259: need the time evolution of the particle asymmetries with definite
260: initial conditions and not
261: simply the transition amplitude of particle reactions,
262: the ordinary equilibrium quantum field theory at finite temperature
263: is not the appropriate tool.
264: The most appropriate extension of the field theory
265: to deal with non-equilibrium phenomena amounts to generalizing
266: the time contour of
267: integration to a closed time-path. More precisely, the time integration
268: contour is deformed to run from $t_0$ to $+\infty$ and back to
269: $t_0$ (see Fig.~\ref{contour}).
270: The CTP formalism is a powerful
271: Green's function
272: formulation for describing non-equilibrium phenomena in field theory. It
273: allows to describe phase-transition phenomena and to obtain a
274: self-consistent set of quantum Boltzmann equations.
275: The formalism yields various quantum averages of
276: operators evaluated in the in-state without specifying the out-state.
277: On the contrary, the ordinary quantum field theory
278: yields quantum averages of the operators evaluated
279: with an in-state at one end and an out-state at the other.
280:
281: For example, because of the time-contour deformation, the partition function
282: in the in-in formalism for a complex scalar field is defined to be
283: \begin{eqnarray}
284: Z\left[ J, J^{\dagger}\right] &=& {\rm Tr}\:
285: \left[ \mathcal{T}\left( {\rm exp}\left[i\:\int_C\:\left(J(x)\phi(x)+
286: J^{\dagger}(x)\phi^{\dagger}(x) \right) d^4 x\right]\right)\rho\right]\nonumber\\
287: &=& {\rm Tr}\:\left[ \mathcal{T}_{+}\left( {\rm exp}\left[ i\:\int\:
288: \left(J_{+}(x)\phi_{+}(x)+J^{\dagger}_{+}(x)\phi^{\dagger}_{+}(x) \right) d^4 x\right]\right)
289: \right.
290: \nonumber\\
291: &\times&\left. \mathcal{T}_{-}\left( {\rm exp}\left[
292: -i\:\int\:\left(J_{-}(x)\phi_{-}(x)+J^{\dagger}_{-}(x)\phi^{\dagger}_{-}(x)
293: \right) d^4 x\right]\right) \rho\right],
294: \end{eqnarray}
295: where $C$ in the integral denotes that the time
296: integration contour runs from $t_0$ to plus infinity
297: and then back to $t_0$ again. The symbol $\rho$
298: represents the initial density matrix and the fields are in
299: the Heisenberg picture and defined on this closed time-contour (plus and minus subscripts refer to the positive and negative directional branches of the time path, respectively). The time-ordering operator along the path is the standard one ($\mathcal T_+$) on the positive branch, and the anti-time-ordering ($\mathcal T_-$) on the negative branch.
300: As with the Euclidean-time formulation, scalar (fermionic) fields $\phi$ are
301: still periodic (anti-periodic) in time, but with
302: $\phi(t,\vec{x})=\phi(t-i\beta,\vec{x})$, $\beta=1/T$.
303: The temperature $T$ appears due to boundary
304: condition, and time is now explicitly present in the integration
305: contour.
306: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
307: \begin{figure}[t]
308: \centering
309: \includegraphics{circ.eps}
310: \caption{The complex time contour for the CTP formalism.}
311: \label{contour}
312: \end{figure}
313: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
314:
315: We must now identify field
316: variables with arguments on the positive or negative directional
317: branches of the time path. This doubling of field variables leads to
318: six different real-time propagators on the contour \cite{chou}. These six
319: propagators are not independent, but using all of them simplifies the
320: notation.
321: For a generic charged scalar field $\phi$ they are defined as
322: \begin{eqnarray}
323: \label{def1}
324: G_{\phi}^{>}\left(x, y\right)&=&
325: -G_{\phi}^{-+}\left(x, y\right)=
326: -i\langle
327: \phi(x)\phi^\dagger (y)\rangle,\nonumber\\
328: G_{\phi}^{<}\left(x,y\right)&=&-G_{\phi}^{+-}\left(x, y\right)=-i\langle
329: \phi^\dagger (y)\phi(x)\rangle,\nonumber\\
330: G^t _{\phi}(x,y)&=& G_{\phi}^{++}\left(x, y\right)=
331: \theta(x,y) G_{\phi}^{>}(x,y)+\theta(y,x)
332: G_{\phi}^{<}(x,y),\nonumber\\
333: G^{\overline{t}}_{\phi} (x,y)&=& G_{\phi}^{--}\left(x, y\right)=
334: \theta(y,x) G_{\phi}^{>}(x,y)+
335: \theta(x,y) G_{\phi}^{<}(x,y), \nonumber\\
336: G_{\phi}^r(x,y)&=&G_{\phi}^t-G_{\phi}^{<}=G_{\phi}^{>}-
337: G^{\overline{t}}_{\phi},
338: \:\:\:\: G_{\phi}^a(x,y)=G^t_{\phi}-G^{>}_{\phi}=G_{\phi}^{<}-
339: G^{\overline{t}}_{\phi},
340: \end{eqnarray}
341: where the last two Green's functions are the retarded and advanced
342: Green's functions respectively and $\theta(x,y)\equiv\theta(t_x-t_y)$
343: is the step function.
344:
345: For a generic fermion field $\psi$ the six
346: different propagators are analogously defined as
347: \begin{eqnarray}
348: \label{def2}
349: G^{>}_{\psi}\left(x, y\right)&=&-G^{-+}_{\psi}\left(x, y\right)=-i\langle
350: \psi(x)\overline{\psi} (y)\rangle,\nonumber\\
351: G^{<}_{\psi}\left(x,y\right)&=&-G^{+-}_{\psi}\left(x, y\right)=+i\langle
352: \overline{\psi}(y)\psi(x)\rangle,\nonumber\\
353: G^{t}_{\psi} (x,y)&=& G^{++}_{\psi}\left(x, y\right)
354: =\theta(x,y) G^{>}_{\psi}(x,y)+
355: \theta(y,x) G^{<}_{\psi}(x,y),\nonumber\\
356: G^{\overline{t}}_{\psi} (x,y)&=& G^{--}_{\psi}\left(x, y\right)=
357: \theta(y,x) G^{>}_{\psi}(x,y)+
358: \theta(x,y) G^{<}_{\psi}(x,y),\nonumber\\
359: G^r_{\psi}(x,y)&=&G^{t}_{\psi}-G^{<}_{\psi}=G^{>}_{\psi}
360: -G^{\overline{t}}_{\psi}, \:\:\:\: G^a_{\psi}(x,y)=G^{t}_{\psi}-
361: G^{>}_{\psi}=G^{<}_{\psi}-G^{\overline{t}}_{\psi}.
362: \end{eqnarray}
363: From the definitions of the Green's functions, one can see
364: that the hermiticity properties
365:
366: \begin{equation}
367: \label{prop}
368: \left(i\gamma^0 G_\psi(x,y)\right)^\dagger=i\gamma^0 G_\psi(y,x), \,\,\,
369: \left(i G_\phi(x,y)\right)^\dagger=i G_\phi(y,x).
370: \end{equation}
371: are satisfied.
372: When computing a loop diagram, one has to assign to the interaction points
373: a plus or a minus sign in all possible manners and sum all the possible
374: diagrams, taking into account that, by definition, vertices with a minus sign
375: must be multiplied by $-1$.
376:
377: For equilibrium phenomena, the brackets $\langle \cdots\rangle$
378: imply a thermodynamic average over all the possible states
379: of the system. For homogeneous systems in equilibrium, the
380: Green's functions
381: depend only upon the difference of their arguments $(x,y)=(x-y)$
382: and there is no dependence upon $(x+y)$;
383: for systems out of equilibrium, the
384: definitions (\ref{def1}) and (\ref{def2})
385: have a different meaning. The concept of thermodynamic averaging
386: is now ill-defined. Instead, the brackets mean the need to
387: average over all the available states of the system for the non-equilibrium
388: distributions. Furthermore, the arguments of the Green's functions
389: $(x,y)$ are not usually given as the difference $(x-y)$.
390: For example, non-equilibrium could be caused
391: by transients which make the Green's functions
392: depend upon $(t_x,t_y)$ rather than $(t_x-t_y)$.
393:
394: For interacting systems,
395: whether in equilibrium or not, one must
396: define and calculate self-energy functions.
397: Again, there are six of them: $\Sigma^{t}$,
398: $\Sigma^{\overline{t}}$, $\Sigma^{<}$, $\Sigma^{>}$,
399: $\Sigma^r$ and $\Sigma^a$. The same
400: relationships exist among them as for the
401: Green's functions in (\ref{def1}) and (\ref{def2}), such as
402: \begin{equation}
403: \Sigma^r=\Sigma^{t}-\Sigma^{<}=\Sigma^{>}-\Sigma^{\overline{t}},
404: \:\:\:\:\Sigma^a=\Sigma^{t}-\Sigma^{>}=\Sigma^{<}-\Sigma^{\overline{t}}.
405: \end{equation}
406: The self-energies are incorporated into the Green's
407: functions through the use of Dyson's equations.
408: A useful notation may be introduced which expresses
409: four of the six Green's functions as the elements of
410: two-by-two matrices \cite{craig}
411:
412: \begin{equation}
413: \widetilde{G}=\left(
414: \begin{array}{cc}
415: G^{t} & \pm G^{<}\\
416: G^{>} & - G^{\overline{t}}
417: \end{array}\right), \:\:\:\:
418: \widetilde{\Sigma}=\left(
419: \begin{array}{cc}
420: \Sigma^{t} & \pm \Sigma^{<}\\
421: \Sigma^{>} & - \Sigma^{\overline{t}}
422: \end{array}\right),
423: \end{equation}
424: where the upper signs refer to the bosonic case and the lower signs
425: to the fermionic case. For systems either in equilibrium or in non-equilibrium,
426: Dyson's equation is most easily expressed by using the matrix notation
427: \begin{equation}
428: \label{d1}
429: \widetilde{G}(x,y)=\widetilde{G}^0(x,y)+\int d^4 z_1
430: \int d^4 z_2 \: \widetilde{G}^0(x,z_1)
431: \widetilde{\Sigma}(z_1,z_2)\widetilde{G}(z_2,y),
432: \end{equation}
433: where the superscript ``0'' on the Green's functions means
434: to use those for noninteracting system. It is useful
435: to notice that Dyson's equation can be written in an
436: alternative form, instead of (\ref{d1}), with $\widetilde{G}^0$
437: on the right in the interaction terms,
438: \begin{equation}
439: \label{d2}
440: \widetilde{G}(x,y)=\widetilde{G}^0(x,y)+\int\: d^4z_3\:\int d^4z_4\:
441: \widetilde{G}(x,z_3)
442: \widetilde{\Sigma}(z_3,z_4)\widetilde{G}^0(z_4,y).
443: \end{equation}
444: Eqs.~(\ref{d1}) and (\ref{d2}) are the
445: starting points to derive the quantum Boltzmann equations
446: describing the time evolution of the
447: CP-violating particle density asymmetries.
448:
449:
450: For a generic complex scalar field
451: we will adopt the real-time propagator in the form
452: $G^{t}_\phi(\k,t_x-t_y)$ in terms of the spectral
453: function $\rho_\phi(\k,k_0)$ \cite{buchmuller} (for the equilibrium analog, see \cite{ww})
454: \begin{eqnarray}
455: G^{t}_\phi(\k,t_x-t_y)&=&\int_{-\infty}^{+\infty}\:
456: \frac{d k^0}{2\pi}\:e^{-i k^0(t_x-t_y)}\:\rho_\phi(\k,k^0)\nonumber\\
457: &\times&\left\{
458: \left[1+f_\phi(k^0)\right]\theta(t_x-t_y)+f_\phi(k^0)\theta(t_y-t_x)\right\},
459: \label{rho}
460: \end{eqnarray}
461: where $f_\phi(k^0)$ represents the scalar distribution function.
462: Notice that the expression (\ref{rho}) is only strictly correct for free
463: Green's functions.
464: To account for
465: interactions with the surrounding particles of the thermal bath,
466: particles must be
467: substituted by quasiparticles, dressed propagators are to be adopted
468: and self-energy corrections to the propagator modify the dispersion
469: relations by introducing a finite width $\Gamma_\phi(k)$.
470: In the limit of small decay width, the spectral function is expressed by
471: \begin{equation}
472: \rho_\phi(\k,k^0)=i\:\left[\frac{1}{(k^0+i\epsilon+ i\Gamma_\phi)^2
473: -\omega_\phi^2(k)}-
474: \frac{1}{(k^0-i\epsilon-i\Gamma_\phi)^2-\omega_\phi^2(k)}\right],
475: \end{equation}
476: where $\omega_\phi^2(k)=\k^2 +M_\phi^2(T)$ and
477: $M_\phi(T)$ is the thermal mass.
478: Performing the integration over $k^0$ and picking up
479: the poles of the spectral function (which is valid for
480: quasi-particles in equilibrium or very close to equilibrium),
481: one gets
482: \bea
483: G_\phi^{>}(\k,t_x-t_y)&=&\frac{i}{2\omega_\phi}
484: \left\{
485: \left[1+f_\phi(\omega_\phi-i\Gamma_\phi)\right]\:
486: e^{-i(\omega_\phi-i\Gamma_\phi)(t_x-t_y)}\right.\nonumber\\
487: &+&\left.
488: \overline{f}_\phi(\omega_\phi+i\Gamma_\phi)\:
489: {\rm
490: e}^{i(\omega_\phi+i\Gamma_\phi)(t_x-t_y)}\right\},\nonumber\\
491: G_\phi^{<}(\k,t_y-t_x)&=&\frac{i}{2\omega_\phi}\left\{
492: f_\phi(\omega_\phi+i\Gamma_\phi)\:e^{-i(\omega_\phi-i\Gamma_\phi)(t_x-t_y)}
493: \right.\nonumber\\
494: &+&\left.\left[1+\overline{f}_\phi(\omega_\phi-i\Gamma_\phi)\right]\:
495: e^{i(\omega_\phi+i\Gamma_\phi)(t_x-t_y)}\right\},
496: \label{a}
497: \eea
498: where $f_\phi$ and $\overline{f}_\phi$ denote the distribution function of
499: the scalar particles and antiparticles, respectively. The expressions (\ref{a})
500: are valid for $t_x-t_y>0$.
501:
502: Similarly, for a generic fermion $\psi$,
503: we adopt the real-time propagator in the form
504: $G^{t}_\psi(\k,t_x-t_y)$ in terms of the spectral
505: function $\rho_\psi(\k,k_0)$ \cite{buchmuller} (for the equilibrium analog, see \cite{ww})
506: \bea
507: G^{t}_\psi(\k,t_x-t_y)&=&\int_{-\infty}^{+\infty}\:
508: \frac{d k^0}{2\pi}\:e^{-i k^0(t_x-t_y)}\:\rho_\psi(\k,k^0)\nonumber\\
509: &\times&\left\{
510: \left[1-f_\psi(k^0)\right]\theta(t_x-t_y)-f_\psi(k^0)\theta(t_y-t_x)\right\},
511: \label{rho1}
512: \eea
513: where $f_\psi(k^0)$ represents the fermion distribution function.
514: Again, particles must be
515: substituted by quasiparticles, dressed propagators are to be adopted
516: and
517: self-energy
518: corrections to
519: the propagator modify the dispersion relations by
520: introducing a finite width $\Gamma_\psi(k)$.
521: Equilibrium fermionic dispersion
522: relations
523: are highly nontrivial \cite{weldon} and here we will adopt
524: relatively simple expressions
525: for the fermionic spectral functions holding in the limit
526: in which the damping rate is smaller than the real part of the self-energy
527: of the fermionic excitation \cite{henning}. For a fermion with
528: chiral mass $m_\psi$, it reads
529: \begin{equation}\fl\qquad
530: \rho_\psi({\bf k},k^0) = i\left(\not k +m_\psi\right)
531: \left[\frac{1}{(k^0+i\epsilon+ i
532: \Gamma_{\psi})^2-\omega_{\psi}^2(k)}-
533: \frac{1}{(k^0-i\epsilon-i\Gamma_{\psi})^2
534: -\omega_{\psi}^2(k)}\right],
535: \label{rofermion}
536: \end{equation}
537: where $\omega_{\psi}^2(k)={\bf k}^2 +
538: M_{\psi}^2(T)$ and $M_{\psi}(T)$
539: is the effective thermal mass of the fermion in the plasma (not a
540: chiral mass).
541: We reiterate the fact that at finite temperature the dispersion relation is
542: in fact more complicated than (\ref{rofermion}). However, the latter
543: suffices for our goals.
544: Performing the integration over $k^0$ and picking up
545: the poles of the spectral function (which is valid for
546: quasi-particles in equilibrium or very close to equilibrium),
547: one gets
548: \begin{eqnarray}
549: G_\psi^{>}(\k,t_x-t_y)&=&-\frac{i}{2\omega_\psi}
550: \left\{
551: \left(\not k+ m_\psi\right)
552: \left[1-f_\psi(\omega_\psi-i\Gamma_\psi)\right]\:
553: e^{-i(\omega_\psi-i\Gamma_\psi)(t_x-t_y)}\right.\nonumber\\
554: &+&\left.\gamma^0\left(\not k-
555: m_\psi\right) \gamma^0
556: \overline{f}_\psi(\omega_\psi+i\Gamma_\psi)\:
557: e^{i(\omega_\psi+i\Gamma_\psi)(t_x-t_y)}\right\},\nonumber\\
558: G_\psi^{<}(\k,t_y-t_x)&=&\frac{i}{2\omega_\psi}\left\{
559: \left(\not k+ m_\psi\right)
560: f_\psi(\omega_\psi+i\Gamma_\psi)\:
561: e^{-i(\omega_\psi-i\Gamma_\psi)(t_x-t_y)}\right.\nonumber\\
562: &+&\left.\gamma^0\left(\not k- m_\psi\right)
563: \gamma^0
564: \left[1-\overline{f}_\psi(\omega_\psi-i\Gamma_\psi)\right]\:
565: e^{i(\omega_\psi+i\Gamma_\psi)(t_x-t_y)}\right\},
566: %\nonumber\\
567: %&&
568: \label{b}
569: \end{eqnarray}
570: where $k^0=\omega_\psi$ and
571: $f_\psi, \overline{f}_\psi$ denote the distribution function of
572: the fermion particles and antiparticles, respectively.
573: The expressions (\ref{b}) are valid for $t_x-t_y>0$.
574:
575: The above definitions
576: hold for the Higgs and lepton doublets (after inserting the
577: chiral left-handed projector $P_L$), as well as for the Majorana
578: RH neutrinos, for which one has to assume identical particle and antiparticle
579: distribution functions and insert the inverse of the charge conjugation matrix
580: $C$ in the dispersion relation.
581:
582:
583:
584:
585: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
586: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
587: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
588:
589: \section{The quantum Boltzmann equation for the lepton asymmetry: generalities}
590: \label{qbegeneral}
591:
592: Since we are interested in the lepton asymmetry,
593: we define the fermionic CP-violating current of the lepton doublet
594: $\ell_i$ as
595: \begin{equation}
596: \langle J_{\ell_i}^\mu(x) \rangle \equiv \langle
597: \bar{{\ell_i}}(x)\gamma^\mu {\ell_i}(x)
598: \rangle\equiv \left( n_{{\cal L}_i}(x),
599: \vec{J}_{{\cal L}_i}(x)\right).
600: \end{equation}
601: The zero-component of this current
602: $n_{{\cal L}_i}$ represents the number density of particles minus
603: the number density of antiparticles and is therefore the
604: relevant quantity for leptogenesis.
605:
606: We want to find a couple of equations of motion for
607: the interacting fermionic Green's function $\widetilde{G}_{\ell_i}(x,y)$
608: when the system is not in equilibrium. Such equations may be found
609: by applying the operators
610: $i\stackrel{\rightarrow}{\not \partial}_x$
611: and $i\stackrel{\leftarrow}{\not \partial}_y$
612: on both sides of Eqs. (\ref{d1}) and (\ref{d2}), respectively.
613: We find
614: \begin{eqnarray}
615: \label{c}
616: i\stackrel{\rightarrow}{\not\partial}_x\widetilde{G}_{\ell_i}(x,y)&=&
617: \delta^{(4)}(x,y)I+
618: \int\:d^4 z \widetilde{\Sigma}_{\ell_i}(x,z)\widetilde{G}_{\ell_i}(z,y),
619: \nonumber\\
620: \widetilde{G}_{\ell_i}(x,y)i\stackrel{\leftarrow}{\not \partial}_y&=&
621: -\delta^{(4)}(x,y) I
622: -\int\:d^4 z \widetilde{G}_{\ell_i}(x,z)\widetilde{\Sigma}_{\ell_i}(z,y),
623: \end{eqnarray}
624: where $I$ is the $4\times 4$ identity matrix.
625: We can now take the trace over the spinorial indices of both sides of
626: the equations, sum up the two equations above and
627: finally extract the equation
628: of motion for the Green's function $G^{>}_{{\ell_i}}$
629: \begin{eqnarray}
630: \fl\qquad
631: \label{v}
632: {\rm Tr} \left\{\left[i\stackrel{\rightarrow}{\not \partial}_x +
633: i\stackrel{\leftarrow}{\not \partial}_y\right]
634: G^{>}_{{\ell_i}}(x,y)\right\}&=&
635: \int\:d^4 z\:{\rm Tr}\left[\Sigma^{>}_{\ell_i}(x,z)
636: G^t_{\ell_i}(z,y)-\Sigma^{\overline{t}}_{\ell_i}(x,z)
637: G^{>}_{\ell_i}(z,y)\right.\nonumber\\
638: &-&
639: \left. G^{>}_{\ell_i}(x,z)\Sigma^t_{\ell_i}(z,y)+G^{\overline{t}}_{\ell_i}(x,z)
640: \Sigma^{>}_{\ell_i}(zy,y)\right].
641: \end{eqnarray}
642: Since we want to compute the average of observables at equal time,
643: we will identify the variables $x$ and $y$.
644: Therefore, it turns out useful to define a center-of-mass coordinate system
645: \begin{equation}
646: \label{dd}
647: X\equiv(t,\vec{X})\equiv\frac{1}{2}(x+y),\:\:\:\: (\tau,\vec{r})\equiv x-y.
648: \end{equation}
649: The notation of the Green's function is altered in these center-of-mass
650: coordinates
651: \begin{equation}
652: \fl\qquad
653: G^{>}_{{\ell_i}}(x,y)=G^{>}_{{\ell_i}}(\tau,\vec{r},t,\vec{X})=i\langle
654: {\ell_i}\left(t-\frac{1}{2}\tau, \vec{X}-\frac{1}{2}
655: \vec{r}\right)\overline{{\ell_i}}\left(t+\frac{1}{2}\tau, \vec{X}+\frac{1}{2}
656: \vec{r}\right)\rangle.
657: \end{equation}
658: Making use of the center-of-mass coordinate system,
659: we can work out the left-hand side of Eq.~(\ref{v})
660: \begin{eqnarray}
661: &&\left.{\rm Tr}\left[i\stackrel{\rightarrow}{\not \partial}_x
662: G^{>}_{\ell_i}(t,\vec{X},\tau,\vec{r})+
663: G^{>}_{\ell_i}(t,\vec{X},\tau,\vec{r})i
664: \stackrel{\leftarrow}{\not \partial}_y\right]
665: \right|_{\tau=\vec{r}=0}\nonumber\\
666: &=&\left.i\left( \partial^x_\mu + \partial^y_\mu\right) i \langle
667: \overline{{\ell_i}}\gamma^\mu {\ell_i}\rangle\right|_{\tau=\vec{r}=0}
668: -\frac{\partial}{\partial X^\mu} \langle
669: \overline{{\ell_i}}(X)\gamma^\mu
670: {\ell_i}(X)\rangle=-\frac{\partial}{\partial X^\mu} J^\mu_{\ell_i}.
671: \end{eqnarray}
672:
673: The next step is to employ the definitions in (\ref{def2}) to
674: express the time-ordered functions $G^{t}_{{\ell_i}}$,
675: $G^{\overline{t}}_{{\ell_i}}$,
676: $\Sigma ^t_{\ell_i}$, and
677: $\Sigma^{\overline{t}}_{{\ell_i}}$ in terms of $G^{<}_{{\ell_i}}$,
678: $G^{>}_{{\ell_i}}$,
679: $\Sigma^{<}_{{\ell_i}}$ and $G^{>}_{{\ell_i}}$.
680: The time integrals are separated into whether
681: $t_z>t$ or $t_z<t$ and the right-hand side of Eq. (\ref{v}) reads,
682: after setting $x=y$
683: \begin{eqnarray}
684: &&\int\: d^3 z\:\int_{0}^{t} dt_z \left[\theta(t-t_z)
685: \left(\Sigma^{>}_{\ell_i} G^{<}_{\ell_i}+G^{<}_{\ell_i}
686: \Sigma^{>}_{\ell_i}-
687: \Sigma^{<}_{\ell_i} G^{>}_{\ell_i}-G^{>}_{\ell_i}
688: \Sigma^{<}_{\ell_i}
689: \right)\right.\nonumber\\
690: &&+\left. \theta(t_z-t)
691: \left(\Sigma^{>}_{{\ell_i}} G^{>}_{{\ell_i}}+G^{>}_{{\ell_i}}
692: \Sigma^{>}_{{\ell_i}}-
693: \Sigma^{>}_{{\ell_i}} G^{>}_{{\ell_i}}-G^{>}_{{\ell_i}}
694: \Sigma^{>}_{{\ell_i}}\right)\right].
695: \end{eqnarray}
696: The terms with $t_z>t$ all cancel, leaving
697: \begin{eqnarray}
698: \label{aa}
699: \frac{\partial n_{{\cal L}_i}(X)}{\partial t}
700: &=&-\int\: d^3 z\:\int_{0}^{t} dt_z\:{\rm Tr}
701: \left[\Sigma^{>}_{{\ell_i}}(X,z) G^{<}_{{\ell_i}}(z,X)
702: - G^{>}_{{\ell_i}}(X,z) \Sigma^{<}_{{\ell_i}}(z,X) \right.\nonumber\\
703: &+&\left. G^{<}_{{\ell_i}}(X,z)\Sigma^{>}_{{\ell_i}}(z,X)-\Sigma^{<}_{{\ell_i}}(X,z)
704: G^{>}_{{\ell_i}}(z,X)\right].
705: \end{eqnarray}
706: This is the quantum Boltzmann equation describing the time
707: evolution of a lepton number asymmetry $n_{{\cal L}_i}$.
708: The initial conditions are set at $t=0$ when the lepton
709: asymmetries and the RH neutrino abundances are assumed to be vanishing.
710: All the information
711: regarding lepton number violating interactions
712: and CP-violating sources are stored in the self-energy $\Sigma_{\ell_i}$.
713: The kinetic Eq.~(\ref{aa}) has an obvious interpretation in terms of
714: gain and loss processes.
715: What is unusual, however, is the presence of the integral over
716: the time where the theta function ensures that
717: the dynamics is causal. The equation is manifestly non-Markovian. Only
718: the assumption that the relaxation timescale of the particle asymmetry
719: is much longer than the timescale of the non-local kernels leads to
720: a Markovian description. A further approximation, {\it i.e.} taking the
721: upper limit of the
722: time integral to $t\rightarrow \infty$, leads to the familiar Boltzmann
723: equation.
724: The physical interpretation of the integral over the past history of
725: the system is straightforward: it leads to the typical ``memory''
726: effects which are observed in quantum transport theory
727: \cite{dan, henning, boyanovsky}.
728: In the classical kinetic theory the ``scattering term''
729: does not include any integral over the past history of the
730: system which is equivalent to assume that any collision in the plasma
731: does not depend upon the previous ones. On the contrary,
732: quantum distributions possess strong memory effects and the thermalization
733: rate obtained from the quantum transport theory may be
734: substantially longer than the one obtained from
735: the classical kinetic theory. The very same effects
736: play a fundamental role in electroweak baryogenesis \cite{riobau}.
737:
738:
739:
740: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
741: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
742: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
743:
744: \section{The quantum Boltzmann equation for the right-handed neutrinos}
745: \label{qberhneutrino}
746:
747: To get familiar with the out-of-equilibrium technique, we
748: derive the quantum Boltzmann equation for the abundance of RH neutrinos.
749:
750: The Lagrangian we consider consists of the SM one plus
751: three RH neutrinos
752: $N_{\alpha}$ ($\alpha=1,2,3$), with Majorana masses $M_\alpha$.
753: The interactions among RH neutrinos, Higgs doublets $H$, lepton doublets
754: $\ell_i$ and singlets $e_i$ ($i=e,\mu,\tau$)
755: are described by the Lagrangian
756: \begin{equation}
757: {\mathscr L}_{\rm int}=\lambda_{\alpha i} N_\alpha
758: \ell_i H+h_{i}
759: \bar{e}_{i} \ell_i H^c +{1\over 2}M_\alpha N_\alpha N_\alpha + {\rm h.c.}\,,
760: \label{lagr_flav}
761: \end{equation}
762: with summation over repeated indeces.
763: The Lagrangian is written in the mass eigenstate basis of RH neutrinos and
764: charged leptons.
765:
766:
767:
768: We focus here on the dynamics of the lightest RH neutrino $N_1$.
769: To find its quantum Boltzmann
770: equation we start from Eq.~(\ref{d1}) for the Green's function $G^<_{N_1}$
771: of the RH neutrino
772: $N_1$
773:
774:
775: \begin{eqnarray}
776: \fl\qquad
777: \label{vv}
778: \left(i\stackrel{\rightarrow}{\not \partial}_x -M_1\right)
779: G^{<}_{N_1}(x,y)&=&-
780: \int d^4 z \,\left[-\Sigma^{t}_{N_1}(x,z)
781: G^<_{N_1}(z,y)+\Sigma^{<}_{N_1}(x,z)
782: G^{\overline{t}}_{N_1}(z,y)
783: \right]\nonumber\\
784: %&=&\int d^4 z\:\left[-\Sigma^{t}_{N_1}(x,z)
785: %G^<_{N_1}(z,y)+\Sigma^{<}_{N_1}(x,z)
786: %G^{\overline{t}}_{N_1}(z,y)
787: %\right]\nonumber\\
788: &=&\int\: d^3 z\:\int_{0}^{t}\: dt_z\:
789: \left[\Sigma^{>}_{N_1}(x,z)
790: G^<_{N_1}(z,y)-\Sigma^{<}_{N_1}(x,z)
791: G^{>}_{N_1}(z,y)
792: \right].\nonumber\\
793: &&
794: \end{eqnarray}
795: On the left-hand side of
796: this equation we perform a number of operation. We first go
797: to the center-of-mass coordinates and
798: perform a Fourier transform over the spatial internal coordinates
799: $\vec{r}$. We then insert the expression in Eq.~(\ref{b}) for the corresponding
800: RH neutrino Green's function. The real part of
801: the left-hand side of Eq. (\ref{vv})
802: gives, after setting $x=y$, projecting onto the positive frequencies
803: and taking the trace over the spinorial indeces
804:
805: \begin{equation}
806: {\rm Re}\left[{\rm Tr}
807: \left(\frac{i}{2}\stackrel{\rightarrow}{\not \partial}_X
808: \frac{i}{2\omega_{N_1}}\left(\not k+ M_1\right)f_{N_1}\right)\right]=-
809: \frac{\partial f_{N_1}({\bf k},t) }{\partial t},
810: \end{equation}
811:
812:
813: The self-energy of the RH neutrino is given diagrammatically in Fig.~\ref{RHself} (where
814: $\ell$ indicates the generic lepton doublet in the loop) and reads
815:
816: \begin{equation}
817: \Sigma^{>,<}_{N_1}(x,y)=i\,G^{>,<}_{H}(x,y)G^{>,<}_{{\ell}}(x,y).
818: \end{equation}
819: Inserting in the right-hand side of Eq.~(\ref{vv}) the expressions in Eqs.~(\ref{a})
820: and
821: (\ref{b}) for the Higgs and lepton doublet Green's functions and taking the
822: real part of it and the trace of the spinorial indices, we find
823:
824:
825:
826: \begin{eqnarray}
827: \fl\qquad
828: \frac{\partial f_{N_1}({\bf k},t) }{\partial t}&=&
829: -2
830: \int_{0}^{t} dt_z\, \int\frac{d^3{\bf p}}{(2\pi)^3}\,
831: \frac{1}{2\omega_{\ell}({\bf p})}\frac{1}{2\omega_H({\bf k}-{\bf p})}
832: \frac{1}{\omega_{N_1}({\bf k})}
833: \left|{\cal M}(N_1\rightarrow {\ell} H)\right|^2
834: \nonumber\\
835: && \times \left[
836: f_{N_1}({\bf k},t)(1-f_{{\ell}}({\bf p},t))(1+f_{H}({\bf k}-{\bf p},t))
837: \right.\nonumber\\
838: &&\left.
839: -f_{{\ell}}({\bf p},t)f_{H}({\bf k}-{\bf p},t)(1-f_{N_1}({\bf k},t))
840: \right]\nonumber\\
841: && \times \cos\left[\left(\omega_{N_1}({\bf k})-
842: \omega_{\ell}({\bf p})-
843: \omega_H({\bf k}-{\bf p})\right)(t-t_z)\right]\nonumber\\
844: &\simeq& -2
845: \int_{0}^{t} dt_z\, \int\frac{d^3{\bf p}}{(2\pi)^3}\,
846: \frac{1}{2\omega_{\ell}({\bf p})}\frac{1}{2\omega_H({\bf k}-{\bf p})}
847: \frac{1}{\omega_{N_1}({\bf k})}\left|{\cal M}(N_1\rightarrow {\ell} H)
848: \right|^2\nonumber\\
849: && \times\left(
850: f_{N_1}({\bf k},t)-f^{\rm eq}_{{\ell}}({\bf p})f^{\rm eq}_{H}({\bf k}-
851: {\bf p})
852: \right)\nonumber\\
853: && \times\cos\left[\left(\omega_{N_1}({\bf k})-
854: \omega_{\ell}({\bf p})-
855: \omega_H({\bf k}-{\bf p})\right)(t-t_z)\right].
856: \label{cy}
857: \end{eqnarray}
858:
859: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
860: \begin{figure}[t]
861: \centering
862: \includegraphics{RH1loop.eps}
863: \caption{One-loop self-energy of the lightest RH neutrino.}
864: \label{RHself}
865: \end{figure}
866: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
867:
868: We have made the assumption that the relaxation timescale for the
869: distribution functions are longer than the timescale
870: of the non-local kernels so that they can be extracted out of the
871: time integral. This allows to think the distributions
872: as functions of the center-of-mass time only.
873: We have set to zero
874: the damping rates of the particles in Eq.~(\ref{b}) and
875: retained only those cosines giving rise to
876: energy delta functions
877: that can be satisfied\footnote{For simplicity,
878: we neglect here the fact that thermal effects may
879: kinematically open new channels beyond those at zero temperature, see
880: \cite{lept}.}.
881: Under these assumptions, the distribution
882: function may be taken out of the time integral, leading -- at large times --
883: to the so-called
884: Markovian description. The kinetic equation (\ref{cy})
885: has an obvious interpretation in terms
886: of gain minus loss processes, but the retarded
887: time integral and the cosine function replace the familiar energy conserving
888: delta functions. In the second passage, we have also made the
889: usual assumption that
890: all distribution functions are smaller than unity
891: and that those of the Higgs and lepton doublets are in
892: equilibrium and much smaller than
893: unity, $f_{\ell} f_H\simeq f^{\rm eq}_{{\ell}}f^{\rm eq}_{H}$. Elastic
894: scatterings are typically fast enough to keep kinetic equilibrium.
895: For any distribution function we may write $f=(n/n^{\rm eq})f^{\rm eq}$,
896: where $n$ denotes the total number density.
897: Therefore, Eq.~(\ref{cy}) can be re-written as
898:
899: \begin{eqnarray}
900: \frac{\partial n_{N_1}}{\partial t}&=&
901: -\langle \Gamma_{N_1}(t)\rangle n_{N_1}+\langle
902: \widetilde{\Gamma}_{N_1}(t)\rangle n^{\rm eq}_{N_1},\nonumber\\
903: \langle\Gamma_{N_1}(t)\rangle&=&\int_{0}^{t} dt_z
904: \int\frac{d^3{\bf k}}{(2\pi)^3}
905: \frac{f^{\rm eq}_{N_1}}{n^{\rm eq}_{N_1}}
906: \,\Gamma_{N_1}(t),\nonumber\\
907: \Gamma_{N_1}(t)&=&
908: 2
909: \int\frac{d^3{\bf p}}{(2\pi)^3}\,
910: \frac{\left|{\cal M}(N_1\rightarrow {\ell}
911: H)\right|^2}{2\omega_{\ell} 2\omega_H\omega_{N_1}}
912: \cos\left[\left(\omega_{N_1}-
913: \omega_{\ell}-
914: \omega_H\right)(t-t_z)\right], \nonumber\\
915: \langle\widetilde{\Gamma}_{N_1}(t)\rangle&=&\int_{0}^{t} dt_z
916: \int\frac{d^3{\bf k}}{(2\pi)^3}
917: \frac{f^{\rm eq}_{N_1}}{n^{\rm eq}_{N_1}}
918: \,\widetilde{\Gamma}_{N_1}(t),\nonumber\\
919: \widetilde{\Gamma}_{N_1}(t)&=&
920: 2
921: \int\frac{d^3{\bf p}}{(2\pi)^3}\,
922: \frac{f^{\rm eq}_{\ell}f^{\rm eq}_H}{f^{\rm eq}_{N_1}}
923: \frac{\left|{\cal M}(N_1\rightarrow {\ell}
924: H)\right|^2}{2\omega_{\ell} 2\omega_H\omega_{N_1}}
925: \cos\left[\left(\omega_{N_1}-
926: \omega_{\ell}-
927: \omega_H\right)(t-t_z)\right], \nonumber\\
928: \label{ddd}
929: \end{eqnarray}
930: where $\langle \Gamma_{N_1}(t)\rangle$ is the time-dependent
931: thermal average of the
932: Lorentz-dilated decay width.
933: Integrating over
934: large times, $t\rightarrow \infty$, thereby replacing the
935: cosines by energy conserving delta functions \cite{boyanovsky},
936:
937:
938: \begin{equation}
939: \int_{0}^{\infty}dt_z\,\cos\left[\left(\omega_{N_1}-
940: \omega_{\ell}-
941: \omega_H\right)(t-t_z)\right]=\pi\delta\left(
942: \omega_{N_1}-
943: \omega_{\ell}-
944: \omega_H
945: \right),
946: \end{equation}
947: we find that the two averaged rates $\langle\Gamma_{N_1}\rangle$ and
948: $\langle\widetilde{\Gamma}_{N_1}\rangle$ coincide and we recover
949: the usual classical Boltzmann equation for the RH distribution
950: function
951:
952: \begin{eqnarray}
953: \frac{\partial n_{N_1}}{\partial t}&=&-\langle\Gamma_{N_1}\rangle\left(
954: n_{N_1}-n^{\rm eq}_{N_1}
955: \right),\nonumber\\
956: \langle\Gamma_{N_1}\rangle&=&
957: \int\frac{d^3{\bf k}}{(2\pi)^3}
958: \frac{f^{\rm eq}_{N_1}}{n^{\rm eq}_{N_1}}
959: \int\frac{d^3{\bf p}}{(2\pi)^3}\,
960: \frac{\left|{\cal M}(N_1\rightarrow {\ell} H)
961: \right|^2}{2\omega_{\ell}2\omega_H\omega_{N_1}}\,(2\pi)\delta\left(
962: \omega_{N_1}-
963: \omega_{\ell}-
964: \omega_H\right).\nonumber\\
965: &&
966: \end{eqnarray}
967: Taking the time interval to infinity, namely implementing Fermi's golden rule,
968: results in neglecting memory effects, which in turn results only
969: in on-shell processes contributing to the rate equation. The main difference
970: between the classical and the quantum Boltzmann equations can be traced to
971: memory effects and to the fact that the time evolution
972: of the distribution function is
973: non-Markovian. The memory of the past time evolution
974: translates into off-shell processes. It would be certainly interesting
975: to perform a numerical study to assess the impact of the memory effects
976: onto the final baryon asymmetry.
977:
978:
979:
980:
981: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
982: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
983: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
984:
985:
986: \section{The quantum Boltzmann equation for the lepton asymmetry and the
987: CP asymmetry}
988: \label{qbeleptonasym}
989:
990: Our goal is now to compute the right-hand side of the Eq.~(\ref{aa})
991: describing the evolution of the lepton asymmetry following the
992: CTP approach. We start with the CP
993: asymmetry source term.
994: We will see that the CP asymmetry manifests memory effects,
995: evolves in time and at large times may resemble
996: the usual CP asymmetry expression
997: existing in the literature only if certain conditions are satisfied.
998:
999:
1000: As we have
1001: already mentioned, Eq.~(\ref{aa}) contains the information about all possible
1002: interesting processes for leptogenesis, {\it e.g.} $\Delta L=1$
1003: inverse decays, $\Delta L=2$ scatterings and so on.
1004: To extract the CP asymmetry, we first consider the
1005: ``wave''-diagram contribution to
1006: the lepton doublet ${\ell}_i$ (see Fig.~\ref{wavediagram}).
1007: From the previous discussion, we know that this diagram is in fact a sum of
1008: diagrams obtained assigning to the interaction points
1009: a plus or a minus sign in all possible manners,
1010: taking into account that, by definition, vertices with a minus sign
1011: must be multiplied by $-1$. The sum of all diagrams
1012: has to give rise to theta functions which ensure that the dynamics is
1013: causal. Since baryogenesis is a process close to equilibrium and we know
1014: that a vanishing baryon asymmetry has to be recovered when the RH neutrinos
1015: are in equilibrium,
1016: we can expand
1017: at linear order the Green's functions of the RH neutrinos
1018: by expanding their distribution functions around equilibrium $\delta
1019: f_{N_1}=f_{N_1}-f^{\rm eq}_{N_1}$:
1020: \begin{eqnarray}
1021: \delta G^{>}_{N_1}({\bf k},t_x-t_y)&=&\delta G^{<}_{N_1}({\bf k},t_y-t_x)
1022: \nonumber\\
1023: &=&
1024: i\,\frac{e^{-\Gamma_{N_1}\left|t_x-t_y\right|}}{2\omega_{N_1}}
1025: \left\{
1026: \left(\not k+ M_1\right) \:{\rm
1027: e}^{-i\omega_{N_1}(t_x-t_y)}\right.\nonumber\\
1028: && \left.-\gamma^0\left(\not k-
1029: M_1\right) \gamma^0{\rm
1030: e}^{i\omega_{N_1}(t_x-t_y)}\right\}\times C^{-1}\,\delta f_{N_1}\,,
1031: \end{eqnarray}
1032: where we have neglected the dependence of the distribution function
1033: on the damping rate.
1034: Summing all possible diagrams
1035: contributing to the loop of Fig.~\ref{wavediagram}, after a
1036: long,
1037: but straightforward computation, we find,
1038: for instance,
1039: \bea
1040: &&i\left(\Sigma^{>}_{\ell_i}(X,z)G^{<}_{\ell_i}(z,X)
1041: \Sigma^{<}_{\ell_i}(X,z)G^{>}_{\ell_i}(z,X)\right)\nonumber\\
1042: &=&\sum_{j=1}^3
1043: \left(\lambda_{1i}
1044: \lambda_{1j}\lambda^\dagger_{j2}\lambda^\dagger_{i2}\right)
1045: \int d^4 x_1\int d^4 x_2\,\delta G^{>}_{N_1}(X,x_1)
1046: \nonumber\\
1047: &&\times
1048: \left[G^{<}_{\ell_j}(x_1,x_2)G^{<}_{H}(x_1,x_2)-
1049: G^{>}_{\ell_j}(x_1,x_2)G^{>}_{H}(x_1,x_2)
1050: \right]\nonumber\\
1051: &&\times \left[G^{<}_{N_2}(x_2,z)-
1052: G^{>}_{N_2}(x_2,z)\right]\nonumber\\
1053: &&\times\left[G^{<}_{\ell_i}(z,X)G^{<}_{H}(z,X)-
1054: G^{>}_{\ell_i}(z,X)G^{>}_{H}(z,X)
1055: \right]\nonumber\\
1056: &&\times\theta(z,x_2) \theta(x_2,x_1)\theta(X,z),
1057: \eea
1058: where we have only retained the contribution from the RH neutrino
1059: $N_2$, since we will focus on the resonance case
1060: in which $M_1$ and $M_2$ are nearly degenerate.
1061:
1062: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1063: \begin{figure}[t]
1064: \centering
1065: \includegraphics{wave.eps}
1066: \caption{The wave-diagram contributing to the two-loop self-energy of the
1067: lepton doublet.}
1068: \label{wavediagram}
1069: \end{figure}
1070: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1071:
1072: Making use of the hermiticity properties in Eq.~(\ref{prop}) and
1073: inserting the various propagators for the Higgs fields, the lepton doublets
1074: and the heavy Majorana neutrinos, we find that Eq.~(\ref{aa})
1075: for the lepton asymmetry - as far as the CP violating source
1076: is concerned - is given by
1077:
1078: \begin{eqnarray}
1079: \fl\quad
1080: \frac{\partial n_{{\cal L}_i}}{\partial t}
1081: &\fl\qquad\qquad=&\;
1082: \epsilon^{{\rm W}\,i}_{N_1}(t)
1083: \langle\Gamma_{N_1}\rangle\left(
1084: n_{N_1}-n^{\rm eq}_{N_1}
1085: \right),\nonumber\\
1086: \fl\quad
1087: \epsilon^{{\rm W}\,i}_{N_1}(t)
1088: &\fl\qquad\qquad=&
1089: -\frac{4}{\langle\Gamma_{N_1}\rangle}\sum_{j=1}^3{\rm Im}
1090: \left(\lambda_{1i}
1091: \lambda_{1j}\lambda^\dagger_{j2}
1092: \lambda^\dagger_{i2}\right)\nonumber\\
1093: &\fl\qquad\qquad\times&\int_0^t dt_z\int_0^{t_z} dt_2\int_0^{t_2} dt_1
1094: e^{-\Gamma_{N_2}(t_z-t_2)}
1095: e^{-\left(\Gamma_{\ell_j}+\Gamma_H\right)(t_2-t_1)}
1096: \int\frac{d^3{\bf k}}{(2\pi)^3}
1097: \frac{f^{\rm eq}_{N_1}}{n^{\rm eq}_{N_1}}\nonumber\\
1098: &\fl\qquad\qquad\times&
1099: \int\frac{d^3{\bf p}}{(2\pi)^3}
1100: \frac{1-f_{\ell_j}^{\rm eq}({\bf p})+f_{H}^{\rm eq}({\bf k}-{\bf p})
1101: }{2\omega_{\ell_j}({\bf p})2\omega_H({\bf k}-{\bf p})
1102: \omega_{N_1}({\bf k})}
1103: \int\frac{d^3{\bf q}}{(2\pi)^3}
1104: \frac{1-f_{\ell_i}^{\rm eq}({\bf q})+f_{H}^{\rm eq}({\bf k}-{\bf q})
1105: }{2\overline{\omega}_{\ell_i}({\bf q})2\overline{\omega}_H({\bf k}
1106: -{\bf q})
1107: \omega_{N_2}({\bf k})}\nonumber\\
1108: &\fl\qquad\qquad\times&
1109: {\rm sin}\left(\omega_{N_1}(t-t_1)+\left(
1110: \omega_{\ell_j}+\omega_H\right)(t_1-t_2)+\omega_{N_2}(t_2-t_z)
1111: +\left(
1112: \overline{\omega}_{\ell_i}+\overline{\omega}_H\right)(t_z-t)
1113: \right)\nonumber\\
1114: &\fl\qquad\qquad\times&
1115: {\rm Tr}\left(M_1 P_L \not p M_2 \not q\right),
1116: \end{eqnarray}
1117: where, to avoid double counting,
1118: we have not inserted the decay rates in the propagators of the initial
1119: and final states and,
1120: for simplicity, we have assumed that the damping rates of the
1121: lepton doublets and the Higgs field are constant in time. This should
1122: be a good approximation as the damping rate are to be computed
1123: for momenta of order of the mass of the RH neutrinos.
1124: As expected from first principles, we find that the
1125: CP asymmetry is a function of time and its value at a given
1126: instant depends upon the previous history of the system.
1127:
1128: Performing the time integrals and retaining only those pieces which
1129: eventually give rise to energy-conserving delta functions in the
1130: Markovian limit (as in the previous Section, we do not include here
1131: the new channels that thermal effects may eventually open), we obtain
1132: \begin{eqnarray}
1133: \label{eeee}
1134: \fl\qquad
1135: \epsilon^{{\rm W}\,i}_{N_1}(t)&=&
1136: -\frac{4}{\langle\Gamma_{N_1}\rangle}\sum_{j=1}^3{\rm Im}
1137: \left(\lambda_{1i}
1138: \lambda_{1j}\lambda^\dagger_{j2}
1139: \lambda^\dagger_{i2}\right)\nonumber\\
1140: &\times&
1141: \int_0^t dt_z
1142: \frac{\cos\left[\left(\omega_{N_1}-
1143: \overline{\omega}_{\ell_i}-
1144: \overline{\omega}_H\right)(t-t_z)\right]}{
1145: \left(\Gamma_{N_2}^2+(\omega_{N_2}-\omega_{N_1})^2\right)
1146: \left((\Gamma_{\ell_j}+\Gamma_{H})^2+(\omega_{N_1}-
1147: \omega_{\ell_j}-\omega_H
1148: )^2\right)}
1149: \nonumber\\
1150: &\times&
1151: \int\frac{d^3{\bf k}}{(2\pi)^3}
1152: \frac{f^{\rm eq}_{N_1}}{n^{\rm eq}_{N_1}}
1153: (\Gamma_{\ell_j}+\Gamma_{H})\Bigg(2\,(\omega_{N_2}-\omega_{N_1})
1154: \,{\rm sin}^2 \left[\frac{(\omega_{N_2}-\omega_{N_1})t_z}{2}\right]
1155: \nonumber\\
1156: &-&
1157: \Gamma_{N_2}\,{\rm sin} \left[(\omega_{N_2}-\omega_{N_1})t_z\right]
1158: \Bigg)
1159: \int\frac{d^3{\bf p}}{(2\pi)^3}
1160: \frac{1-f_{\ell_j}^{\rm eq}({\bf p})+f_{H}^{\rm eq}({\bf k}-{\bf p})
1161: }{2\omega_{\ell_j}({\bf p})2\omega_H({\bf k}-{\bf p})
1162: \omega_{N_1}({\bf k})}
1163: \nonumber\\
1164: &\times&
1165: \int\frac{d^3{\bf q}}{(2\pi)^3}
1166: \frac{1-f_{\ell_i}^{\rm eq}({\bf q})+f_{H}^{\rm eq}({\bf k}-{\bf q})
1167: }{2\overline{\omega}_{\ell_i}({\bf q})2\overline{\omega}_H({\bf k}
1168: -{\bf q})
1169: \omega_{N_2}({\bf k})}\;
1170: {\rm Tr}\left(M_1 P_L \not p M_2 \not q\right).
1171: \end{eqnarray}
1172: From this expression it is already
1173: manifest that the typical timescale for the
1174: building up of the coherent CP asymmetry depends crucially on
1175: the difference in energy of the two RH neutrinos.
1176:
1177: If we now let the upper limit of the time integral to take large values, we neglect
1178: the memory effects, the CP asymmetry picks contribution only
1179: from the
1180: on-shell processes. Taking the damping rates of the lepton doublets
1181: equal for all the flavours and the RH neutrinos nearly at rest
1182: with respect to the thermal bath, the CP asymmetry from the
1183: ``wave''-diagram
1184: reads (now summing over all flavour indices)
1185: \begin{eqnarray}
1186: \epsilon^{{\rm W}}_{N_1}(t)&\simeq &-\frac{{\rm Im}
1187: \left(\lambda\lambda^\dagger\right)^2_{12}}{\left(\lambda\lambda^\dagger
1188: \right)_{11}\left(\lambda\lambda^\dagger
1189: \right)_{22}}
1190: \frac{M_1}{M_2}\Gamma_{N_2}\frac{1}{(\Delta M)^2+
1191: \Gamma_{N_2}^2}\nonumber\\
1192: &\times& \left(2\,\Delta M \,{\rm sin}^2 \left[\frac{\Delta M t}{2}\right]
1193: -\Gamma_{N_2}\,{\rm sin} \left[\Delta M t\right]\right),
1194: \label{ll}
1195: \end{eqnarray}
1196: where $\Delta M= (M_2-M_1)$.
1197: The CP asymmetry (\ref{ll}) is resonantly
1198: enhanced when $\Delta M\simeq \Gamma_{N_2}$ and at the resonance
1199: point it is given by
1200:
1201: \begin{equation}
1202: \label{kkk}
1203: \epsilon^{{\rm W}}_{N_1}(t)\simeq -\frac{1}{2}\frac{{\rm Im}
1204: \left(\lambda\lambda^\dagger\right)^2 _{12}}{\left(\lambda\lambda^\dagger
1205: \right)_{11}\left(\lambda\lambda^\dagger
1206: \right)_{22}}
1207: \left(1-{\rm sin} \left[\Delta M t\right]-
1208: {\rm cos} \left[\Delta M t\right]\right),
1209: \end{equation}
1210: The timescale for the
1211: building up of the CP asymmetry is $\sim 1/\Delta M$.
1212: The CP asymmetry grows starting from a vanishing value and, for
1213: $t\gg (\Delta M)^{-1}$, it averages to the constant
1214: value quoted in the literature \cite{resonant}.
1215: This is true if the
1216: timescale for the other processes relevant
1217: for leptogenesis is larger than $\sim 1/\Delta M$.
1218: In other words, one may define an ``average'' CP asymmetry
1219:
1220: \begin{equation}
1221: \langle \epsilon^{{\rm W}}_{N_1}\rangle=\frac{1}{\tau_{\rm p}}
1222: \int_{t-\tau_{\rm p}}^{t}
1223: dt^\prime\, \epsilon^{{\rm W}}_{N_1}(t^\prime),
1224: \end{equation}
1225: where $\tau_{\rm p}$ represents the typical timescale
1226: of the other processes relevant for leptogenesis, {\it e.g.}
1227: the $\Delta L=1$ scatterings. If $\tau_{\rm p}\gg 1/\Delta M\sim
1228: \Gamma^{-1}_{N_2}$,
1229: the oscillating functions
1230: in (\ref{kkk}) are averaged to zero and the average CP asymmetry
1231: is given by the value used in the literature.
1232: However, the expression (\ref{ll}) should be
1233: used when $\tau_{\rm p}\lsim 1/\Delta M\sim \Gamma^{-1}_{N_2}$.
1234:
1235: The fact that the CP asymmetry is a function of time
1236: is particularly relevant in the case in which the
1237: asymmetry is generated by the decays of two heavy states which are
1238: nearly degenerate in mass and oscillate into one another with a
1239: timescale given by the inverse of the mass difference.
1240: This is the case of resonant leptogenesis \cite{resonant}
1241: and soft leptogenesis
1242: \cite{soft}.
1243: From Eq. (\ref{ll})
1244: it is manifest that the CP asymmetry itself oscillates with the very same
1245: timescale and such a dependence may or may not be
1246: neglected depending upon the rates of the other processes in the plasma.
1247: If $\Gamma_{N_1}\gsim \Gamma_{N_2}$, the time dependence of the CP asymmetry
1248: may not be neglected.
1249:
1250:
1251: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1252: \begin{figure}[t]
1253: \centering
1254: \includegraphics{vertex.eps}
1255: \caption{The vertex-diagram contributing to the two-loop self-energy of the
1256: lepton doublet.}
1257: \label{vertexdiagriam}
1258: \end{figure}
1259: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1260:
1261: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1262: \begin{figure}[t]
1263: \centering
1264: \includegraphics[width=.48\textwidth]{lep1loop.eps}
1265: \caption{One-loop diagram contributing to the self-energy of the
1266: lepton doublet.}
1267: \label{lep1loop}
1268: \end{figure}
1269: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1270:
1271: The expression (\ref{ll}) can also be used, once
1272: it is divided by a factor 2 (because in the wave diagram also the charged
1273: states of Higgs and lepton doublets may propagate) and the limit $M_2\gg M_1$
1274: is taken, for the CP asymmetry contribution from the vertex diagram (see
1275: Fig.~\ref{vertexdiagriam})
1276:
1277:
1278: \begin{equation}
1279: \epsilon^{{\rm V}}_{N_1}(t)\simeq -\frac{{\rm Im}
1280: \left(\lambda\lambda^\dagger\right)^2_{12}}{16 \pi\left(\lambda\lambda^\dagger
1281: \right)_{11}}
1282: \frac{M_1}{M_2}
1283: \left(2\, {\rm sin}^2 \left[\frac{M_2 t}{2}\right]
1284: -\frac{\Gamma_{N_2}}{M_2}\,{\rm sin} \left[M_2 t\right]\right),
1285: \label{lv}
1286: \end{equation}
1287: The timescale for this CP asymmetry is $\sim M_2$ and much larger
1288: than any other timescale in the dynamics. Therefore, one can safely average
1289: over many oscillations, getting the expression present in the
1290: literature
1291:
1292: \begin{equation}
1293: \langle\epsilon^{{\rm V}}_{N_1}\rangle \simeq -\frac{{\rm Im}
1294: \left(\lambda\lambda^\dagger\right)^2_{12}}{16 \pi\left(\lambda\lambda^\dagger
1295: \right)_{11}}
1296: \frac{M_1}{M_2}.
1297: \label{lvv}
1298: \end{equation}
1299:
1300: Finally,
1301: the $\Delta L=1$ inverse decays can be computed along the same lines described
1302: previously by considering the one-loop contribution to
1303: the lepton doublet self-energy $\Sigma_{\ell_i}$ (see Fig.~\ref{lep1loop}).
1304: The equation for the
1305: lepton asymmetry then becomes
1306:
1307: \begin{eqnarray}
1308: \frac{\partial n_{{\cal L}_i}}{\partial t}&=&\epsilon^{i}_{N_1}(t)
1309: \langle\Gamma_{N_1}\rangle\left(
1310: n_{N_1}-n^{\rm eq}_{N_1}
1311: \right)-\langle\Gamma^{\rm ID}_{N_1}(t)\rangle\,
1312: \frac{n^{\rm eq}_{N_1}}{2\,n^{\rm eq}_{\ell_i}}\, n_{{\cal L}_i}
1313: \label{dddd}
1314: \end{eqnarray}
1315: where $\epsilon^{i}_{N_1}(t)=\epsilon^{{\rm V}\,i}_{N_1}+\epsilon^{{\rm W}\,i}_{N_1}$
1316: is the total time-dependent CP asymmetry for the flavour $i$, and
1317: \begin{eqnarray}
1318: \langle\Gamma^{\rm ID}_{N_1}(t)\rangle &=&
1319: 2\int_0^t dt_z \int\frac{d^3{\bf k}}{(2\pi)^3}
1320: \frac{f^{\rm eq}_{\ell_i}f^{\rm eq}_{H}}{n^{\rm eq}_{N_1}}
1321: \int\frac{d^3{\bf p}}{(2\pi)^3}\,
1322: \frac{\left|{\cal M}({\ell_i}
1323: H\rightarrow N_1)\right|^2}{2\omega_{\ell_i} 2\omega_H \omega_{N_1}}\nonumber\\
1324: &\times&
1325: \cos\left[\left(\omega_{N_1}-
1326: \omega_{\ell_i}-
1327: \omega_H\right)(t-t_z)\right],
1328: \end{eqnarray}
1329: is the time-dependent thermal average of the inverse-decay interaction rate.
1330:
1331:
1332: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1333: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1334: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1335:
1336: \section{Conclusions}
1337: \label{concl}
1338:
1339: The quantum Boltzmann equations derived in this paper can be used to
1340: perform a thorough investigation of the impact of flavour effects
1341: onto leptogenesis and, on more general grounds, to provide a quantitative
1342: relation between the light neutrino properties and the final baryon asymmetry.
1343: It would be interesting to see how large are the corrections to the
1344: baryon asymmetry once the non-Markovian description is adopted, including
1345: memory effects and off-shell corrections. They may lead to
1346: the slowdown of the relaxation processes thus keeping
1347: the system out of equilibrium for longer times and therefore
1348: to an enhancement of the final baryon asymmetry. It would also be of interest
1349: to see the impact of our results on the transition between one
1350: flavour and two flavours
1351: as we discussed in the Introduction.
1352:
1353: One of the main results of our investigation is that the CP asymmetry
1354: turns out to be a function of time and its value at a given instant
1355: of time depends on the past history of the system, see
1356: for instance Eq.~(\ref{eeee}). This
1357: result is relevant when the timescale of the evolution of the CP asymmetry
1358: is larger than the timescale of the other processes. We have
1359: pointed out that this is relevant
1360: when the asymmetry is generated by the decays of two nearly mass-degenerate
1361: heavy states and the resonant effects are exploited.
1362:
1363:
1364:
1365:
1366:
1367:
1368:
1369:
1370:
1371:
1372:
1373:
1374:
1375:
1376:
1377:
1378: \ack
1379: We thank S. Davidson for useful discussions, comments and for carefully
1380: reading the manuscript.
1381: A.D.S. is supported in part by INFN
1382: `Bruno Rossi' Fellowship and in part by
1383: the U.S. Department of Energy (D.O.E.)
1384: under cooperative research agreement DE-FG02-05ER41360.
1385:
1386:
1387:
1388:
1389: %%%%%%%%%%%%%% Bibliography %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1390:
1391: \section*{References}
1392: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
1393: \bibitem{fy} M.~Fukugita and T.~Yanagida,
1394: %``Baryogenesis Without Grand Unification,''
1395: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 174}, 45 (1986).
1396:
1397: \bibitem{lept} G.~F.~Giudice, A.~Notari, M.~Raidal, A.~Riotto and A.~Strumia,
1398: %``Towards a complete theory of thermal leptogenesis in the SM and MSSM,''
1399: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 685}, 89 (2004) [arXiv:hep-ph/0310123].
1400: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0310123;%%
1401:
1402:
1403: \bibitem{ogen} W.~Buchmuller, P.~Di Bari and M.~Plumacher,
1404: %``Leptogenesis for pedestrians,''
1405: Annals Phys.\ {\bf 315} (2005) 305 [arXiv:hep-ph/0401240].
1406: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0401240;%%
1407:
1408: \bibitem{work} A partial list:~W.~Buchmuller, P.~Di Bari and M.~Plumacher,
1409: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 643} (2002) 367 [arXiv:hep-ph/0205349];
1410: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0205349;%%
1411: J.~R.~Ellis, M.~Raidal and T.~Yanagida,
1412: %``Observable consequences of partially degenerate leptogenesis,''
1413: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 546} (2002) 228 [arXiv:hep-ph/0206300];
1414: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0206300;%%
1415: G.~C.~Branco, R.~Gonzalez Felipe, F.~R.~Joaquim and M.~N.~Rebelo,
1416: %``Leptogenesis, CP violation and neutrino data: What can we learn?,''
1417: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 640} (2002) 202 [arXiv:hep-ph/0202030];
1418: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0202030;%%
1419: G.~C.~Branco, R.~Gonzalez Felipe, F.~R.~Joaquim, I.~Masina,
1420: M.~N.~Rebelo and C.~A.~Savoy,
1421: %``Minimal scenarios for leptogenesis and CP violation,''
1422: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 67}, 073025 (2003) [arXiv:hep-ph/0211001];
1423: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0211001;%%
1424: R.~N.~Mohapatra, S.~Nasri and H.~B.~Yu,
1425: %``Leptogenesis, mu - tau symmetry and theta(13),''
1426: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 615} (2005) 231 [arXiv:hep-ph/0502026];
1427: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0502026;%%
1428: A.~Broncano, M.~B.~Gavela and E.~Jenkins,
1429: %``Neutrino physics in the seesaw model,''
1430: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 672} (2003) 163 [arXiv:hep-ph/0307058];
1431: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0307058;%%
1432: A.~Pilaftsis,
1433: %``CP violation and baryogenesis due to heavy Majorana neutrinos,''
1434: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 56} (1997) 5431 [arXiv:hep-ph/9707235];
1435: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9707235;%%
1436: E.~Nezri and J.~Orloff,
1437: %``Neutrino oscillations vs. leptogenesis in S{\cal O}(10) models,''
1438: JHEP {\bf 0304} (2003) 020 [arXiv:hep-ph/0004227];
1439: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0004227;%%
1440: S.~Davidson and A.~Ibarra,
1441: %``Leptogenesis and low-energy phases,''
1442: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 648}, 345 (2003) [arXiv:hep-ph/0206304];
1443: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0206304;%%
1444: S.~Davidson,
1445: %``From weak-scale observables to leptogenesis,''
1446: JHEP {\bf 0303} (2003) 037 [arXiv:hep-ph/0302075];
1447: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0302075;%%
1448: S.~T.~Petcov, W.~Rodejohann, T.~Shindou and Y.~Takanishi,
1449: %``The see-saw mechanism, neutrino Yukawa couplings, LFV decays l(i) ...
1450: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 739} (2006) 208 [arXiv:hep-ph/0510404].
1451: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0510404;%%
1452:
1453:
1454:
1455: \bibitem{sakharov} A.D. Sakharov. \newblock JETP Lett. {\bf 5} (1967) 24.
1456: For a review, see A.~Riotto and M.~Trodden,
1457: %``Recent progress in baryogenesis,''
1458: Ann.\ Rev.\ Nucl.\ Part.\ Sci.\ {\bf 49}, 35 (1999)
1459: [arXiv:hep-ph/9901362].
1460: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9901362;%%
1461:
1462:
1463: \bibitem{seesaw}
1464: P.~Minkowski,
1465: %``Mu $\to$ E Gamma At A Rate Of One Out Of 1-Billion Muon Decays?,''
1466: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 67} 421 (1977); M.~Gell-Mann, P.~Ramond and R.~Slansky,
1467: in {\it Supergravity}, eds.\ P.~Van Nieuwenhuizen and D.~Freedman
1468: (North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1979), p.~315; T.~Yanagida, in
1469: {\it Proceedings of the Workshop on the Unified Theory and the
1470: Baryon Number in the Universe}, eds.\ O.~Sawada and A.~Sugamoto
1471: (KEK, Tsukuba, 1979), p.~95; S.L.~Glashow, in {\it Quarks and
1472: Leptons}, eds.\ M.~L\'evy et al., (Plenum, 1980, New-York), p. 707;
1473: R.N.~Mohapatra and G.~Senjanovi\'{c}, Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 44},
1474: 912 (1980).
1475:
1476:
1477: \bibitem{Barbieri99}
1478: R.~Barbieri, P.~Creminelli, A.~Strumia and N.~Tetradis,
1479: %``Baryogenesis through leptogenesis,''
1480: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 575} (2000) 61
1481: [arXiv:hep-ph/9911315].
1482: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B575,61;%%
1483:
1484: \bibitem{endoh}
1485: T.~Endoh, T.~Morozumi and Z.~h.~Xiong,
1486: %``Primordial lepton family asymmetries in seesaw model,''
1487: Prog.\ Theor.\ Phys.\ {\bf 111} (2004) 123
1488: [arXiv:hep-ph/0308276].
1489: %%CITATION = PTPKA,111,123;%%
1490:
1491: \bibitem{davidsonetal}
1492: A.~Abada, S.~Davidson, F.~X.~Josse-Michaux, M.~Losada and A.~Riotto,
1493: %``Flavour issues in leptogenesis,''
1494: JCAP {\bf 0604}, 004 (2006) [arXiv:hep-ph/0601083].
1495: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0601083;%%
1496:
1497: \bibitem{nardietal}
1498: E.~Nardi, Y.~Nir, E.~Roulet and J.~Racker,
1499: %``The importance of flavour in leptogenesis,''
1500: JHEP {\bf 0601}, 164 (2006) [arXiv:hep-ph/0601084].
1501: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0601084;%%
1502:
1503:
1504: \bibitem{dibari}
1505: S.~Blanchet and P.~Di Bari,
1506: %``Flavour effects on leptogenesis predictions,''
1507: arXiv:hep-ph/0607330.
1508: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0607330;%%
1509:
1510:
1511: \bibitem{davidsonetal2}
1512: A.~Abada, S.~Davidson, A.~Ibarra, F.~X.~Josse-Michaux, M.~Losada and
1513: A.~Riotto,
1514: %``Flavour matters in leptogenesis,''
1515: JHEP {\bf 0609}, 010 (2006) [arXiv:hep-ph/0605281].
1516: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0605281;%%
1517:
1518:
1519: \bibitem{antusch}
1520: S.~Antusch, S.~F.~King and A.~Riotto,
1521: %``Flavour-dependent leptogenesis with sequential dominance,''
1522: JCAP {\bf 0611}, 011 (2006) [arXiv:hep-ph/0609038].
1523: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0609038;%%
1524:
1525:
1526: \bibitem{silvia1} S.~Pascoli, S.~T.~Petcov and A.~Riotto,
1527: %``Connecting low energy leptonic CP-violation to leptogenesis,''
1528: arXiv:hep-ph/0609125.
1529: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0609125;%%
1530:
1531: \bibitem{Branco:2006ce}
1532: G.~C.~Branco, R.~Gonzalez Felipe and F.~R.~Joaquim,
1533: %``A new bridge between leptonic CP violation and leptogenesis,''
1534: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 645} (2007) 432
1535: [arXiv:hep-ph/0609297].
1536: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B645,432;%%
1537:
1538: \bibitem{aat} S.~Antusch and A.~M.~Teixeira,
1539: %``Towards constraints on the SUSY seesaw from flavour-dependent
1540: %leptogenesis,''
1541: arXiv:hep-ph/0611232.
1542: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0611232;%%
1543:
1544: \bibitem{silvia2} S.~Pascoli, S.~T.~Petcov and A.~Riotto,
1545: %``Leptogenesis and low energy CP violation in neutrino physics,''
1546: arXiv:hep-ph/0611338.
1547: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0611338;%%
1548:
1549: \bibitem{adsar}
1550: A.~De Simone and A.~Riotto,
1551: %``On the impact of flavour oscillations in leptogenesis,''
1552: JCAP {\bf 0702} (2007) 005
1553: [arXiv:hep-ph/0611357];
1554: %%CITATION = JCAPA,0702,005;%%
1555: S.~Blanchet, P.~Di Bari and G.~G.~Raffelt,
1556: %``Quantum Zeno effect and the impact of flavour in leptogenesis,''
1557: arXiv:hep-ph/0611337.
1558: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0611337;%%
1559:
1560:
1561:
1562: \bibitem{vives}
1563: O. Vives, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 73}, 073006 (2006)
1564: [arXiv:hep-ph/0512160].
1565: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0512160;%%
1566:
1567: %\cite{Engelhard:2006yg}
1568: \bibitem{Engelhard:2006yg}
1569: G.~Engelhard, Y.~Grossman, E.~Nardi and Y.~Nir,
1570: %``The importance of N2 leptogenesis,''
1571: arXiv:hep-ph/0612187.
1572: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0612187;%%
1573:
1574: \bibitem{buchmuller} W.~Buchmuller and S.~Fredenhagen,
1575: %``Quantum mechanics of baryogenesis,''
1576: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 483}, 217 (2000)
1577: [arXiv:hep-ph/0004145].
1578:
1579:
1580: \bibitem{dan} P.~Danielewicz,
1581: %``Quantum Theory Of Nonequilibrium Processes. I,''
1582: Annals Phys.\ {\bf 152}, 239 (1984);
1583: P.~Danielewicz,
1584: %``Quantum Theory Of Nonequilibrium Processes. Ii. Application To Nuclear
1585: %Collisions,''
1586: Annals Phys.\ {\bf 152}, 305 (1984).
1587:
1588: \bibitem{sk} J. Schwinger, J. Math. Phys. {\bf 2} 407, (1961);
1589: L.V. Keldysh, JETP {\bf 20} 1018, (1965); P.~M.~Bakshi and K.~T.~Mahanthappa,
1590: %``Expectation value formalism in quantum field theory. 1,''
1591: J.\ Math.\ Phys.\ {\bf 4}, 1 (1963); P.~M.~Bakshi and K.~T.~Mahanthappa,
1592: %``Expectation value formalism in quantum field theory. 2,''
1593: J.\ Math.\ Phys.\ {\bf 4}, 12 (1963);
1594: K.~T.~Mahanthappa,
1595: %``Multiple production of photons in quantum electrodynamics,''
1596: Phys.\ Rev.\ {\bf 126} (1962) 329.
1597:
1598: \bibitem{chou}
1599: K. Chou, Z. Su, B. Hao and L. Yu, Phys. Rep. {\bf 118}
1600: 1, (1985) and references therein.
1601:
1602: \bibitem{craig} R.A. Craig, J. Math. Phys. {\bf 9} 605, (1968).
1603:
1604: \bibitem{ww} N.P. Landsmann and Ch.G. van Weert, Phys. Rep. {\bf 145}
1605: 141, (1987).
1606:
1607: \bibitem{weldon} H.A. Weldon, Phys. Rev. {\bf D26} (1982),
1608: 1394; V.V. Klimov, Sov. Phys. JETP {\bf 55}, (1982) 199.
1609: %
1610: \bibitem{henning} P.A. Henning, Phys. Rep. {\bf 253}, 235 (1995);
1611:
1612: \bibitem{boyanovsky}
1613: D.~Boyanovsky, H.~J.~de Vega, R.~Holman, S.~Prem Kumar and R.~D.~Pisarski,
1614: %``Real-time relaxation of condensates and kinetics in hot scalar QED: Landau
1615: % damping,''
1616: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 58}, 125009 (1998)
1617: [arXiv:hep-ph/9802370]
1618:
1619:
1620:
1621: \bibitem{riobau}
1622: A.~Riotto,
1623: %``Towards a Nonequilibrium Quantum Field Theory Approach to Electroweak
1624: %Baryogenesis,''
1625: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 53}, 5834 (1996) [arXiv:hep-ph/9510271];
1626: A.~Riotto,
1627: %``Supersymmetric electroweak baryogenesis, nonequilibrium field theory and
1628: %quantum Boltzmann equations,''
1629: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 518}, 339 (1998) [arXiv:hep-ph/9712221];
1630: A.~Riotto,
1631: %``More about electroweak baryogenesis in the minimal supersymmetric standard
1632: %model,''
1633: Int.\ J.\ Mod.\ Phys.\ D {\bf 7}, 815 (1998)
1634: [arXiv:hep-ph/9709286];
1635: A.~Riotto,
1636: %``The more relaxed supersymmetric electroweak baryogenesis,''
1637: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 58}, 095009 (1998)
1638: [arXiv:hep-ph/9803357].
1639:
1640: \bibitem{resonant} %\cite{Flanz:1994yx}
1641: M.~Flanz, E.~A.~Paschos and U.~Sarkar,
1642: %``Baryogenesis from a lepton asymmetric universe,''
1643: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 345} (1995) 248 [Erratum-ibid.\ B {\bf 382}
1644: (1996) 447] [arXiv:hep-ph/9411366];
1645: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9411366;%%
1646: %\cite{Pilaftsis:1997jf}
1647: %\bibitem{Pilaftsis:1997jf}
1648: A.~Pilaftsis,
1649: %``CP violation and baryogenesis due to heavy Majorana neutrinos,''
1650: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 56} (1997) 5431 [arXiv:hep-ph/9707235].
1651: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9707235;%%
1652:
1653: \bibitem{soft} G.~D'Ambrosio, G.~F.~Giudice and M.~Raidal,
1654: %``Soft leptogenesis,''
1655: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 575}, 75 (2003)
1656: [arXiv:hep-ph/0308031];
1657: Y.~Grossman, T.~Kashti, Y.~Nir and E.~Roulet,
1658: %``Leptogenesis from supersymmetry breaking,''
1659: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 91} (2003) 251801
1660: [arXiv:hep-ph/0307081].
1661: %%CITATION = PRLTA,91,251801;%%
1662: \end{thebibliography}
1663:
1664: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1665: \end{document}
1666: