1: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2: % Induced Gravity Exchange
3: % - Kofinas, Panotopoulos, Tomaras
4: % VERSION 10/01/05
5: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
6: \documentclass[aps,twocolumn]{revtex4}
7: \usepackage{amsmath,amssymb}
8:
9: \usepackage{tabularx}
10:
11: \usepackage{epsfig}
12: \usepackage{graphicx}
13:
14:
15: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
16:
17: \newcommand{\be}{\begin{equation}}
18: \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}}
19: \newcommand{\bea}{\begin{eqnarray}}
20: \newcommand{\eea}{\end{eqnarray}}
21: \newcommand{\nn}{\nonumber}
22:
23: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
24: \begin{document}
25:
26: \title{Brane-bulk energy exchange : a model with the present universe as a global attractor}
27:
28: \author{Georgios Kofinas$^1$\footnote{kofinas@ffn.ub.es},
29: Grigorios Panotopoulos$^2$\footnote{panotop@physics.uoc.gr} and
30: Theodore N. Tomaras$^{2,3}$\footnote{tomaras@physics.uoc.gr}}
31:
32: \date{\today}
33:
34: \address{~}
35:
36: \address{$^{1}$Departament de F{\'\i}sica Fonamental,
37: Universitat de Barcelona, Diagonal 647, 08028 Barcelona, Spain}
38:
39: \address{$^{2}$Department of Physics and Institute of Plasma Physics, University of Crete, 71003 Heraklion, Greece}
40:
41: \address{$^{3}$Foundation of Research and Technology, Hellas, 71110 Heraklion, Greece}
42: %\address{~}
43:
44:
45:
46:
47:
48: \begin{abstract}
49:
50: The role of brane-bulk energy exchange and of an induced gravity term on a single braneworld of negative
51: tension and vanishing effective cosmological constant is studied.
52: It is shown that for the physically interesting cases of dust and radiation
53: a unique global attractor which can realize our present universe
54: (accelerating and $0\!<\!\Omega_{m0}\!<\!1$) exists for a wide range of the parameters of the model. For
55: $\Omega_{m0}\!=\!0.3$, independently of the other
56: parameters, the model predicts that the equation of state for the dark energy today is
57: $w_{DE,0}\!=\!-1.4$, while $\Omega_{m0}\!=\!0.03$ leads to
58: $w_{DE,0}\!=\!-1.03$. In addition, during its evolution, $w_{DE}$
59: crosses the $w_{DE}\!=\!-1$ line to smaller values.
60:
61:
62: \end{abstract}
63:
64: \maketitle
65:
66:
67: \section{Introduction}
68:
69: In cosmologies where the present universe is realized as a finite
70: point during the cosmic evolution, the answer to the coincidence
71: question ``why it is that today $\Omega_{m0}$ and $\Omega_{DE,0}$ are of the same order of magnitude'',
72: relies on appropriate choice of \textit{initial conditions}. By contrast, in a scenario in
73: which the present universe is in its asymptotic era (close to a
74: fixed point) the answer to the above question reduces to an appropriate
75: choice of the \textit{parameters} of the model. However, this latter situation is not easily realized
76: if today's universe is accelerating, because:
77: \par
78: If the energy density of a perfect fluid with equation of state
79: $w\!>\!-1/3$ of any cosmological system is conserved, all fixed
80: points of the system with $\Omega_{m}\!\neq\! 0$ are decelerating.
81: \par
82: Indeed, with $\rho$ the energy density of the perfect fluid with conservation equation
83: $\dot{\rho}+3(1+w)H\rho\!=\!0$, the Hubble equation of an arbitrary cosmology
84: can be written in the form \be
85: H^{2}=2\gamma(\rho\!+\!\rho_{DE}), \label{observ}\ee where
86: $\gamma\!=\!4\pi G_{N}/3$. Then, the
87: equation governing $\rho_{DE}$ can always be brought into the form
88: $\dot{\rho}_{DE}\!+\!3(1\!+\!w_{DE})H\rho_{DE}\!=\!0$, where
89: $w_{DE}$ is time-dependent and distiguishes one model from the other. It
90: can be easily seen that $d(\Omega_{m}/\Omega_{DE})/d\ln
91: a\!=\!3(\Omega_{m}/\Omega_{DE})(w_{DE}\!-\!w)$ and
92: $2q\!=\!1\!+\!3(w\Omega_{m}\!+\!w_{DE}\Omega_{DE})$, where
93: $\Omega_{m}\!=\!2\gamma \rho/H^{2}$, $\Omega_{DE}\!=\!2\gamma
94: \rho_{DE}/H^{2}$ and $q\!=\!-\ddot{a}/aH^{2}$. At the fixed point (denoted by $\ast$)
95: $d(\Omega_{m}/\Omega_{DE})/d\ln a\!=\!0$. For $\Omega_{m\ast}\!\neq\! 0$ one obtains
96: $w_{DE\ast}\!=\!w$, and $2q_{\ast}\!=\!1\!+\!3w\!>\!0$.
97: \par
98: Thus, independently of the cosmological model, the only way our accelerating universe with
99: $\Omega_{m\ast}\!\neq \!0$ can be close to a late time fixed point is by violating the
100: standard conservation equation of matter. In 4-dimensional theories, an accelerating late time
101: cosmological phase characterized by a frozen ratio of dark
102: matter/dark energy appears in coupled dark energy scenarios
103: \cite{amendola} as a result of the interaction of the dark
104: matter with other energy-momentum components, such as scalar fields. In
105: higher dimensional theories, where the universe is represented as a
106: 3-brane, this violation could be the result of energy exchange
107: between the brane and the bulk. In particular in five dimensions, a
108: universe with fixed points
109: characterized by $\Omega_{m\ast}\!\neq\! 0$, $q_{\ast}\!<\!0$ was realized in \cite{kkttz} in the context of the
110: Randall-Sundrum braneworld scenario with energy influx from the bulk. However, these fixed points cannot
111: represent the present universe, since they have $\Omega_{m\ast}\!>\!2$. In
112: this paper we present a brane-bulk energy exchange model
113: with induced gravity whose global attractor can
114: represent today's universe.
115: \par
116: Let us consider an arbitrary cosmology in the form (\ref{observ}).
117: Instances of such cosmologies arise in braneworld models or
118: in theories with modified 4-dimensional actions leading to $H^{2}\!=\!f(\rho)$, or
119: in cosmologies where $\rho_{DE}$ is due to additional fields.
120: Assuming that as a result of some interaction $\rho$ is not
121: conserved, it will satisfy an equation of the form \be
122: \dot{\rho}+3(1\!+\!w)H\rho=-T. \label{oval}\ee Then, the equation
123: governing $\rho_{DE}$ can always be brought into the form \be
124: \dot{\rho}_{DE}+3(1\!+\!w_{DE})H\rho_{DE}=T,\label{obelix}\ee where
125: $w_{DE}$ is time and model dependent.
126: Whenever a fixed point of the system satisfies \be
127: H_{\ast}T_{\ast}\!\neq\!
128: 0\,\,\,\,\,,\,\,\,\,\,\dot{\rho}=\dot{\rho}_{DE}=0,\label{fro}\ee
129: one obtains \be
130: w_{DE\ast}=-1-\frac{1+w}{\Omega_{m\ast}^{-1}-1}. \label{trikala}\ee
131: Equation (\ref{trikala}) is model-independent, in the sense that it does not
132: depend on the form of $T$ or the function $w_{DE}(t)$. For
133: $\Omega_{m\ast}\!<\!1$ equation (\ref{trikala}) gives
134: $w_{DE\ast}\!<\!-1$. Specifically, for $w\!=\!0$ and
135: $\Omega_{m\ast}\!=\!\Omega_{CDM}\!=\!0.3$ one obtains $w_{DE\ast}\!=\!-1.4$, while
136: for $\Omega_{m\ast}\!=\!\Omega_{bar}= 0.03$, $w_{DE\ast}\!=\!-1.03$.
137: \par
138: The cosmology discussed in the present paper has a global attractor of the form
139: (\ref{fro}), (\ref{trikala}) \cite{foot}. Moreover, the universe during its evolution crosses
140: the $w_{DE}\!=\!-1$ barrier from higher values. This behavior is favored by several recent model-independent
141: \cite{staro} as well as model-dependent \cite{laura,alam,leandros,phantom} analyses of the astronomical data.
142:
143:
144:
145: \section{The model}
146:
147: We consider the model described by the gravitational brane-bulk
148: action \cite{Dvali}
149: \begin{equation}
150: S=\int \!d^{5}x\sqrt{-g}\,(M^{3}R-\Lambda)\,+\int
151: \!d^{4}x\sqrt{-h}\,(m^{2}\hat{R}-V),
152: \end{equation}
153: where $R,\hat{R}$ are the Ricci scalars of the bulk metric $g_{AB}$
154: and the induced metric $h_{AB}\!=\!g_{AB}\!-\!n_{A}n_{B}$
155: respectively ($n^{A}$ is the unit vector normal to the brane and
156: $A,B\!=\!0,1,2,3,5$). The bulk cosmological constant is
157: $\Lambda/2M^{3}\!<\!0$, the brane tension is $V$, and the
158: induced-gravity crossover scale is $r_{c}\!=\!m^{2}/M^{3}$.
159: \par
160: We assume the cosmological bulk ansatz
161: \begin{equation}
162: ds^{2}=-n(t,y)^2dt^{2}+a(t,y)^{2}\gamma_{ij}dx^{i}dx^{j}+b(t,y)^{2}dy^{2},
163: \end{equation}
164: where $\gamma_{ij}$ is a maximally symmetric 3-dimensional metric,
165: parametrized by the spatial curvature $k\!=\!-1,0,1$. The non-zero
166: components of the five-dimensional Einstein tensor are
167: \begin{eqnarray}
168: &&\!\!\!\!\!\!G_{00}=3\Big\{\frac{\dot{a}}{a}\Big(\frac{\dot{a}}{a}\!+\!\frac{\dot{b}}{b}\Big)-
169: \frac{n^{2}}{b^{2}}\Big[\frac{a''}{a}\!+\!\frac{a'}{a}\Big(\frac{a'}{a}\!-\!\frac{b'}{b}\Big)\Big]+
170: \frac{kn^{2}}{a^{2}}\!\Big\} \!\label{eq:11}\\
171: &&\!\!\!\!\!\!G_{ij}\!=\!\frac{a^{2}}{b^{2}}\gamma_{ij}\Big\{\frac{a'}{a}\Big(\!\frac{a'}{a}\!
172: +\!\frac{2n'}{n}\!\Big)-\frac{b'}{b}\Big(\!\frac{n'}{n}\!+\!\frac{2a'}{a}\!\Big)+\frac{2a''}{a}\!+\!\frac{n''}{n}\Big\} \nn \\
173: &&+\frac{a^{2}}{n^{2}}\gamma_{ij}\Big\{\frac{\dot{a}}{a}\Big(\frac{2\dot{n}}{n}\!-\!
174: \frac{\dot{a}}{a}\Big)\!-\!\frac{2\ddot{a}}{a}\!+\!\frac{\dot{b}}{b}\Big(\frac{\dot{n}}{n}\!-\!
175: \frac{2\dot{a}}{a}\Big)\!-\!\frac{\ddot{b}}{b}\Big\}\!-\!k\gamma_{ij} \label{eq:12} \\
176: &&\!\!\!\!\!G_{05}\!=\!3\Big(\frac{n'}{n}\frac{\dot{a}}{a}+\frac{a'}{a}\frac{\dot{b}}{b}-\frac{\dot{a}'}{a}\Big)
177: \label{eq:13}\\
178: &&\!\!\!\!\!G_{55}\!=\!3\Big\{\frac{a'}{a}\Big(\!\frac{a'}{a}\!+\!\frac{n'}{n}\!\Big)-\frac{b^{2}}{n^{2}}
179: \Big[\frac{\ddot{a}}{a}+\frac{\dot{a}}{a}\Big(\!\frac{\dot{a}}{a}\!-\!\frac{\dot{n}}{n}\!\Big)\Big]-
180: \frac{kb^{2}}{a^{2}}\Big\},\! \label{eq:14}
181: \end{eqnarray}
182: where primes indicate derivatives with respect to $y$, while dots
183: derivatives with respect to $t$. The five-dimensional Einstein
184: equations take the usual form
185: \begin{equation}
186: G_{AC}=\frac{1}{2M^{3}}T_{AC}|_{tot},\label{Einstein}
187: \end{equation}
188: where \begin{eqnarray} T_{C}^{A}|_{tot}\!=
189: T_{C}^{A}\!|_{v,B}+T_{C}^{A}\!|_{m,B}+T_{C}^{A}\!|_{v,b}\!+T_{C}^{A}\!|_{m,b}\!+T_{C}^{A}\!|_{ind}
190: \end{eqnarray}
191: is the total energy-momentum tensor,
192: \begin{eqnarray}
193: &&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!T_{C}^{A}|_{v,B}=\textrm{diag}(-\Lambda,-\Lambda,-\Lambda,-\Lambda,-\Lambda)\\
194: &&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!T_{C}^{A}|_{v,b}=\textrm{diag}(-V,-V,-V,-V,0)\frac{\delta(y)}{b}\\
195: &&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!T_{C}^{A}|_{m,b}=\textrm{diag}(-\rho,p,p,p,0)\frac{\delta(y)}{b}.
196: \end{eqnarray}
197: $T_{C}^{A}|_{m,B}$ is any possible additional energy-momentum in the
198: bulk, the brane matter content $T_{C}^{A}|_{m,b}$ consists of a
199: perfect fluid with energy density $\rho$ and pressure $p$, while the
200: contributions arising from the scalar curvature of the brane are
201: given by
202: \begin{eqnarray}
203: &&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!T_{0}^{0}|_{ind}=\frac{6m^{2}}{n^{2}}\Big(\frac{\dot{a}^{2}}{a^{2}}+\frac{kn^{2}}{a^{2}}\Big)
204: \frac{\delta(y)}{b}\\
205: &&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!T_{j}^{i}|_{ind}=\frac{2m^{2}}{n^{2}}\Big(\frac{\dot{a}^{2}}{a^{2}}-\frac{2\dot{a}\dot{n}}{an}+
206: \frac{2\ddot{a}}{a}+\frac{kn^{2}}{a^{2}}\Big)\delta_{j}^{i}\frac{\delta(y)}{b}.
207: \end{eqnarray}
208: \par
209: Assuming a $\mathbb{Z}_{2}$ symmetry around the brane, the singular
210: part of equations (\ref{Einstein}) gives the matching conditions
211: \begin{equation}
212: \!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\frac{a_{o^{+}}'}{a_{o}b_{o}}=-\frac{\rho\!+\!V}{12M^{3}}+\frac{r_{c}}{2n_{o}^{2}}
213: \Big(\frac{{\dot{a}_{o}}^{2}}{a_{o}^{2}}\!+\!\frac{kn_{o}^{2}}{a_{o}^{2}}\Big)\label{eq:15}
214: \end{equation}
215: \begin{equation}
216: \frac{n_{o^{+}}'}{n_{o}b_{o}}\!=\!\frac{2\rho\!+\!3p\!-\!V}{12M^{3}}
217: +\frac{r_{c}}
218: {2n_{o}^{2}}\Big(\frac{2{\ddot{a}_{o}}}{a_{o}}-\frac{{\dot{a}_{o}}^{2}}{a_{o}^{2}}-
219: \frac{2{\dot{a}_{o}}{\dot{n}_{o}}}
220: {a_{o}n_{o}}-\frac{kn_{o}^{2}}{a_{o}^{2}}\Big)\label{eq:16}
221: \end{equation}
222: (the subscript o denotes the value on the brane), while from the 05,
223: 55 components of equations (\ref{Einstein}) we obtain
224: \begin{equation} \label{eq:17}
225: \frac{n'_{o}}{n_{o}}\frac{\dot{a}_{o}}{a_{o}}+\frac{a'_{o}}{a_{o}}\frac{\dot{b}_{o}}{b_{o}}-
226: \frac{\dot{a}'_{o}}{a_{o}}=\frac{T_{05}}{6M^{3}}
227: \end{equation}
228: \begin{equation} \label{eq:18}
229: \frac{a'_{o}}{a_{o}}\Big(\!\frac{a'_{o}}{a_{o}}+\frac{n'_{o}}{n_{o}}\!\Big)-\frac{b_{o}^{2}}{n_{o}^{2}}
230: \Big[\frac{\ddot{a}_{o}}{a_{o}}
231: +\frac{\dot{a}_{o}}{a_{o}}\Big(\!\frac{\dot{a}_{o}}{a_{o}}\!-\!\frac{\dot{n}_{o}}{n_{o}}\!\Big)
232: \Big]-\frac{kb_{o}^{2}}{a_{o}^{2}}\!=\!\frac{T_{55}\!-\!\Lambda
233: b_{o}^{2}}{6M^{3}}\!,
234: \end{equation}
235: where $T_{05},T_{55}$ are the $05$ and $55$ components of
236: $T_{AC}|_{m,B}$ evaluated on the brane. Substituting the expressions
237: (\ref{eq:15}), (\ref{eq:16}) in equations (\ref{eq:17}),
238: (\ref{eq:18}), we obtain the semi-conservation law and the
239: Raychaudhuri equation
240: \begin{equation}
241: \dot{\rho}+3\frac{\dot{a}_{o}}{a_{o}}(\rho+p)=-\frac{2n_{o}^{2}}{b_{o}}T_{5}^{0}
242: \label{eq:22}
243: \end{equation}
244: \begin{eqnarray}
245: &&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\Big(\!H_{o}^{2}\!+\!\frac{k}{a_{o}^{2}}\!\Big)
246: \Big[1\!-\!\frac{r_{c}^{2}(\rho\!+\!3p\!-\!2V)}{24m^{2}}\Big]
247: \!+\!\frac{r_{c}^{2}(\rho\!+\!3p\!-\!2V)(\rho\!+\!V)}{144m^{4}}\nn\\
248: &&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!+\Big(\!\frac{\dot{H}_{o}}{n_{o}}\!+\!H_{o}^{2}\!\Big)\Big[1\!-\!\frac{r_{c}^{2}}{2}
249: \Big(\!H_{o}^{2}\!+\!\frac{k}{a_{o}^{2}}\!\Big)\!+\!\frac{r_{c}^{2}(\rho\!+\!V)}{12m^{2}}\Big]
250: \!=\!\frac{\Lambda\!-\!T_{5}^{5}}{6M^{3}}, \label{eq:19}
251: \end{eqnarray}
252: where $H_{o}\!=\!\dot{a}_{o}/a_{o}n_{o}$ is the Hubble parameter of
253: the brane. One can easily check that in the limit $m\! \rightarrow\!
254: 0$, equation (\ref{eq:19}) reduces to the corresponding second order
255: equation of the model without $\hat{R}$ \cite{kkttz}. Energy exchange between the brane and the bulk has also
256: been investigated in \cite{hall, hebecker, tetra}.
257: \par
258: Since only the 55 component of $T_{AC}|_{m,B}$ enters equation
259: (\ref{eq:19}), one can derive a cosmological system that is largely
260: independent of the bulk dynamics, if at the position of the brane
261: the contribution of this component relative to the bulk vacuum
262: energy is much less important than the brane matter relative to the
263: brane vacuum energy, or schematically
264: \begin{equation}
265: \Big|\frac{T^{5}_{5}}{\Lambda}\Big| \ll \Big|\frac{\rho}{V}\Big|.
266: \label{relation}\end{equation} Then, for $|\Lambda|$ not much larger
267: than the Randall-Sundrum value $V^{2}/12M^{3}$, the term $T^{5}_{5}$
268: in equation (\ref{eq:19}) can be ignored. Alternatively, the term
269: $T^{5}_{5}$ can be ignored in equation (\ref{eq:19}) if simply
270: \begin{equation}
271: \Big|\frac{T^{5}_{5}}{\Lambda}\Big| \ll 1.
272: \label{relation1}\end{equation} Note that relations (\ref{relation})
273: and (\ref{relation1}) are only boundary conditions for $T_{5}^{5}$,
274: which in a realistic description in terms of bulk fields will be
275: translated into boundary conditions on these fields. In the special
276: case where (\ref{relation}), (\ref{relation1}) are valid throughout
277: the bulk, the latter remains unperturbed by the exchange of energy
278: with the brane.
279: \par
280: One can now check that a first integral of equation (\ref{eq:19}) is
281: \begin{eqnarray}
282: &&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
283: H_{o}^{4}-\frac{2H_{o}^{2}}{3}\Big(\frac{\rho\!+\!V}{2m^{2}}\!+\!\frac{6}{r_{c}^{2}}\!-\!\frac{3k}{a_{o}^{2}}\Big)
284: +\Big(\!\frac{\rho\!+\!V}{6m^{2}}\!-\!\frac{k}{a_{o}^{2}}\!\Big)^{2}\!+ \nn \\
285: &&\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,
286: +\frac{4}{r_{c}^{2}}\Big(\!\frac{\Lambda}{12M^{3}}\!-\!\frac{k}{a_{o}^{2}}\!\Big)-\frac{\chi}{3r_{c}^{2}}=0,
287: \label{eq:20}
288: \end{eqnarray}
289: with $\chi$ satisfying
290: \begin{equation}
291: \dot{\chi}+4n_{o}H_{o}\chi=\frac{r_{c}^{2}n_{o}^{2}\,T}{m^{2}b_{o}}\Big(\!H_{o}^{2}
292: \!-\!\frac{\rho\!+\!V}{6m^{2}}\!+\!\frac{k}{a_{o}^{2}}\!\Big),
293: \label{eq:21}\end{equation} and $T\!=\!2T_{5}^{0}$ is the
294: discontinuity across the brane of the 05 component of the bulk
295: energy-momentum tensor. The solution of (\ref{eq:20}) for $H_{o}$ is
296: \begin{equation} \label{eq:23}
297: H_{o}^{2}=\frac{\rho\!+\!V}{6m^{2}}\!+\!\frac{2}{r_{c}^{2}}\!-\!\frac{k}{a_{o}^{2}}\pm
298: \frac{1}{\sqrt{3}r_{c}}
299: \Big[\frac{2(\rho\!+\!V)}{m^{2}}\!+\!\frac{12}{r_{c}^{2}}\!-\!\frac{\Lambda}{M^{3}}\!+\!\chi\Big]^{\!\frac{1}{2}}\!,
300: \end{equation}
301: and equation (\ref{eq:21}) becomes
302: \begin{equation} \label{eq:24}
303: \dot{\chi}+4n_{o}H_{o}\chi\!=\!\frac{2n_{o}^{2}\,T}{m^{2}b_{o}}\!\Big\{\!1\pm
304: \frac{r_{c}}{2\sqrt{3}}
305: \Big[\frac{2(\rho\!+\!V)}{m^{2}}\!+\!\frac{12}{r_{c}^{2}}\!-\!\frac{\Lambda}{M^{3}}\!+\!\chi\Big]^{\!\frac{1}{2}}
306: \!\Big\}\!.
307: \end{equation}
308: \par
309: At this point we find it convenient to employ a coordinate frame in
310: which $b_{o}\!=\!n_{o}\!=\!1$ in the above equations. This can be
311: achieved by using Gauss normal coordinates with $b(t,z)\!=\!1$, and
312: by going to the temporal gauge on the brane with $n_{o}\!=\!1$. It
313: is also convenient to define the parameters
314: \begin{eqnarray}
315: \lambda & = & \frac{2V}{m^{2}}+\frac{12}{r_{c}^{2}}-\frac{\Lambda}{M^{3}} \\
316: \mu & = & \frac{V}{6m^{2}}+\frac{2}{r_{c}^{2}} \\
317: \gamma & = & \frac{1}{12m^{2}} \\
318: \beta & = & \frac{1}{\sqrt{3}r_{c}}.
319: \end{eqnarray}
320: For a perfect fluid on the brane with equation of state $p=w\rho$
321: our system is described by equations (\ref{eq:22}), (\ref{eq:23}),
322: (\ref{eq:24}), which simplify to (we omit the subscript o in the
323: following)
324: \begin{eqnarray}
325: &&\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\dot{\rho}+3(1+w)H\rho=-T \label{eq:27}\\
326: &&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!H^{2}=\mu+2\gamma \rho \pm
327: \beta\sqrt{\lambda\!+\!24\gamma
328: \rho\!+\!\chi}-\frac{k}{a^{2}}\label{eq:25}\\
329: &&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\dot{\chi}+4H\chi=24\gamma T\Big(1\pm
330: \frac{1}{6\beta}\sqrt{\lambda\!+\!24\gamma
331: \rho\!+\!\chi}\Big)\label{eq:28},
332: \end{eqnarray}
333: while the second order equation (\ref{eq:19}) for the scale factor becomes
334: \begin{equation}
335: \frac{\ddot{a}}{a}=\mu-(1\!+\!3w)\gamma \rho \pm
336: \beta\frac{\lambda+6(1\!-\!3w)\gamma \rho}{\sqrt{\lambda+24\gamma
337: \rho+\chi}}\label{eq:26}.
338: \end{equation}
339: Finally, setting $\psi \equiv \sqrt{\lambda+24\gamma \rho+\chi}$,
340: equations (\ref{eq:25}), (\ref{eq:28}), (\ref{eq:26}) take the form
341: \begin{eqnarray}
342: &&\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,H^{2}=\mu+2\gamma \rho \pm \beta
343: \psi-\frac{k}{a^{2}}
344: \label{eq:31}\\
345: &&\!\!\!\!\!\!
346: \dot{\psi}+2H\Big(\!\psi-\frac{\lambda+6(1\!-\!3w)\gamma
347: \rho}{\psi}\!\Big)=\pm \frac{2\gamma T}{\beta}
348: \label{eq:35}\\
349: &&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\frac{\ddot{a}}{a}=\mu-(1\!+\!3w)\gamma \rho \pm
350: \beta \frac{\lambda+6(1\!-\!3w)\gamma \rho}{\psi}. \label{eq:32}
351: \end{eqnarray}
352: Throughout, we will assume $T(\rho)\!=\!A\rho^{\nu}$, with
353: $\nu>0,\,A$ constant parameters \cite{kkttz, kiritsis}. Notice that
354: the system of equations (\ref{eq:27})-(\ref{eq:28}) has the
355: influx-outflow symmetry $T\rightarrow -T$, $H\rightarrow -H$,
356: $t\rightarrow -t$. For $T=0$ the system reduces to the cosmology studied in \cite{Deffayet}.
357: \par
358: We will be referring to the upper (lower) $\pm$ solution as Branch A
359: (Branch B). We shall be interested in a model that reduces to the
360: Randall-Sundrum vacuum in the absence of matter, i.e. it has
361: vanishing effective cosmological constant. This is achieved for
362: $\mu\!=\!\mp\beta\sqrt{\lambda}$, which, given that
363: $m^{2}V\!+\!12M^{6}$ is negative (positive) for branches A (B), is
364: equivalent to the fine-tuning $\Lambda\!=\!-V^{2}/12M^{3}$. Notice
365: that for Branch A, $V$ is necessarily negative. Cosmologies with negative brane tension in the induced
366: gravity scenario have also been discussed in \cite{yuri}.
367: \par
368: Consider the case $k=0$. The system possesses the obvious fixed
369: point ($\rho_{*}, H_{*}, \psi_{*})=(0, 0, \sqrt{\lambda})$. However,
370: for $sgn(H) T<0$ there are non-trivial
371: fixed points, which are found by setting $\dot{\rho}=\dot{\psi}=0$ in
372: equations (\ref{eq:27}), (\ref{eq:35}). For $w\leq 1/3$ these are:
373: \begin{eqnarray}
374: &&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\frac{2T(\rho_{*})^{2}}{9(1\!+\!w)^{2}\rho_{*}^{2}}=2\mu+(1\!-\!3w)\gamma\rho_{*}\nn\\
375: &&\,\,\,\,\,\pm
376: \sqrt{9(1\!+\!w)^{2}\gamma^{2}\rho_{*}^{2}+4\beta^{2}[\lambda+6(1\!-\!3w)\gamma\rho_{*}]}
377: \label{fp1}\\
378: &&\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,H_{*}=-\frac{T(\rho_{*})}{3(1\!+\!w)\rho_{*}}\label{fp2}\\
379: &&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\psi_{*}^{2}\pm
380: \frac{3(1\!+\!w)}{\beta}\gamma\rho_{*}\psi_{*}-[\lambda+6(1\!-\!3w)\gamma\rho_{*}]=0\label{fp3}.
381: \end{eqnarray}
382: Equation (\ref{eq:32}) gives
383: \begin{eqnarray}
384: &&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\Big(\frac{\ddot{a}}{a}\Big)_{*}\!\!=
385: \frac{T(\rho_{\ast})^{2}}{9(1\!+\!w)^{2}\rho_{\ast}^{2}}\,,
386: \label{accel}
387: \end{eqnarray}
388: which is positive, and also, it has the same form (as a function of
389: $\rho_{\ast}$) as in the absence of $\hat{R}$. The deceleration
390: parameter is found to have the value \bea q_{\ast}=-1,
391: \label{decel}\eea which means $\dot{H}_{\ast}\!=\!0$. Furthermore,
392: at this fixed point we find
393: \begin{eqnarray}
394: \Omega_{m*}\equiv\frac{2\gamma\rho_{\ast}}{H_{\ast}^{2}}=\frac{18(1\!+\!w)^{2}}{A^{2}}\gamma\rho_{\ast}^{3-2\nu}.
395: \label{flat1}
396: \end{eqnarray}
397: Equation (\ref{fp1}), when expressed in terms of $\Omega_{m\ast}$,
398: has only one root for each branch \bea
399: \rho_{\ast}=\frac{\beta}{2\gamma}\frac{6(1\!-\!3w)\beta\pm\sqrt{\lambda}(1\!-\!3w\!-\!4\Omega_{m\ast}^{-1})}
400: {(2\Omega_{m\ast}^{-1}\!+\!1\!+\!3w)(\Omega_{m\ast}^{-1}\!-\!1)}.
401: \label{star} \eea However, it can be seen from (\ref{star}) that for
402: $-1\leq w \leq 1/3$ and $\Omega_{m\ast}< 1$ the Branch B is
403: inconsistent with equation (\ref{fp1}). On the contrary, Branch A
404: with $-1\leq w \leq 1/3$ and $\Omega_{m\ast}< 1$ is consistent for
405: $0<6(1\!-\!3w\!)\beta\!+\!\sqrt{\lambda}(1\!-\!3w\!-\!4\Omega_{m\ast}^{-1})
406: <3\sqrt{4(1\!-\!3w\!)^{2}\beta^{2}\!-\!(1\!+\!w\!)^{2}\lambda}$.
407: Thus, since we are interested in realizing the present universe as a
408: fixed point, Branch B should be rejected, and from now on we will
409: only consider Branch A. So, we have seen until now that {\textit{for
410: negative brane tension, we can have a fixed point of our model with
411: acceleration and $0<\Omega_{m\ast}<1$}}. This behavior is
412: qualitatively different from the one obtained in the context of the
413: model presented in \cite{kkttz} (for $-1/3 \! \leq\!w\!\leq\!1/3$),
414: where for positive brane tension we have $\Omega_{m\ast}>2$, while
415: for negative brane tension the universe necessarily exhibited
416: deceleration; therefore, in that model the idea that the present
417: universe is close to a fixed point could not be realized.
418: \par
419: Concerning the negative brane tension the following remarks are in
420: order: (a) In the conventional, non-supersymmetric setting,
421: it is well known that a negative tension brane with or without
422: induced gravity is accompanied by tachyonic bulk gravitational modes
423: \cite{ratazi}; however, including the
424: Gauss-Bonnet corrections relevant at high-energies, the tachyonic
425: modes can be completely removed for a suitable range of the
426: parameters \cite{charmousis}. (b) As shown in \cite{stelle}, in
427: supersymmetric theories, spacetimes with two branes of opposite
428: tension are stable; in particular, there is no instability due to
429: expanding ``balooning'' modes on the negative brane. It is, however,
430: unclear what happens in models with supersymmetry unbroken in the
431: bulk but softly broken on the brane. (c) Finally, it has been shown \cite{smolyakov} that with appropriate
432: choice of boundary conditions, both at the linearized level as well as in the full theory,
433: the gravitational potential of a mass on a negative tension brane has the correct $1/r$ attractive behaviour.
434:
435: \section{Critical point analysis}
436:
437: We shall restrict ourselves to the flat case $k\!=\!0$. In order to study the dynamics of the system,
438: it is convenient to use (dimensionless) flatness parameters such that the state space is
439: compact \cite{goheer}. Defining
440: \be \omega_{m}\!=\!\frac{2\gamma\rho}{D^{2}}
441: \,\,\,\,\,,\,\,\,\,\,\omega_{\psi}=\frac{\beta\psi}{D^{2}}\,\,\,\,\,,\,\,\,\,\,
442: Z=\frac{H}{D}\,, \label{flat} \ee where
443: $D\!=\!\sqrt{H^{2}\!-\!\mu}$, we obtain the equations
444: \begin{eqnarray}
445: &&\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,
446: \omega_{m}+\omega_{\psi}=1
447: \label{friflat}\\
448: &&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\omega_{m}'\!=\!\omega_{\!m}\!\Big[\!(1\!+\!3w)(\omega_{\!m}\!\!-\!1\!)Z\!-\!\frac{
449: A}{\sqrt{|\mu|}}
450: \Big(\!\frac{|\mu|\omega_{\!m}}{2\gamma}\!\Big)^{\!\!\nu\!-\!1}\!(1\!-\!Z^{2})^{\frac{3}{2}-\nu}\nn\\
451: &&\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,
452: -2Z(1\!-\!Z^{2})\frac{1\!-\!Z^{2}\!-\!3(1\!-\!3w)\beta^{2}\mu^{-1}\omega_{m}}
453: {1\!-\!\omega_{m}}\!\Big] \label{gerold}\\
454: &&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!Z'\!=\!(1\!-\!Z^{2})\Big[(1\!-\!Z^{2})
455: \frac{1\!-\!Z^{2}\!-\!3(1\!-\!3w)\beta^{2}\mu^{-1}\omega_{m}}{1\!-\!\omega_{m}}-1\nn\\
456: && \,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,
457: \,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,
458: \,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,-\frac{1\!+\!3w}{2}\omega_{m}\Big],
459: \label{italy}
460: \end{eqnarray}
461: with $'\!=\!d/d\tau\!=\!D^{-1}d/dt$. Note that $-1\leq Z\leq 1$,
462: while both $\omega$'s satisfy $0\leq \omega\leq 1$. The
463: deceleration parameter is given by \be
464: q\!=\!\frac{1}{Z^{2}}\!\Big[\!\frac{1\!+\!3w}{2}\omega_{m}\!-\!(1\!-\!Z^{2})
465: \frac{\omega_{m}\!-\!\!Z^{2}\!-\!3(1\!-\!3w)\beta^{2}\mu^{-1}\omega_{m}}{1\!-\!
466: \omega_{m}}\!\Big]\label{greece} \ee and
467: $H'=-HZ(q+1)$. The system of equations
468: (\ref{gerold})-(\ref{italy}) inherits from equations
469: (\ref{eq:27})-(\ref{eq:28}) the symmetry $A\rightarrow -A$,
470: $Z\rightarrow -Z$, $\tau\rightarrow -\tau$. The system written in the new variables contains only three
471: parameters. However, going back to the physical quantities $H$, $\rho$ one will need specific values of
472: two more parameters.
473: \par
474: It is obvious that the points with $|Z|=1$ have $H=\infty$.
475: Therefore, from (\ref{eq:31}) it arises that the infinite
476: density $\rho\!=\!\infty$ big bang (big crunch)
477: singularity, when it appears, is represented by one of the points with
478: $Z\!=\!1$ ($Z\!=\!-1$). The points
479: with $\omega_{m}\!=\!1$, $|Z|\!\neq\! 1,0$ have $\omega_{m}'\!=\infty$,
480: $Z'\!=\infty$ and finite $\rho$, $H$; for
481: $w\!\leq \!1/3$, one has in addition $\ddot{a}/a\!=\!+\infty$, i.e.
482: divergent 4D curvature scalar on the brane.
483: \par
484: The system possesses, generically, the fixed point (a)
485: $(\omega_{m\ast},\omega_{\psi\ast},Z_{\ast})\!=\!(0,1,0)$, which
486: corresponds to the fixed point
487: $(\rho_{\ast},H_{\ast},\psi_{\ast})\!=\!(0,0,\sqrt{\lambda})$ discussed above. For $\nu\!\leq\! 3/2$
488: there are in addition the fixed points (b)
489: $(\omega_{m\ast},\omega_{\psi\ast},Z_{\ast})\!=\!(0,1,1)$ and (c)
490: $(\omega_{m\ast},\omega_{\psi\ast},Z_{\ast})\!=\!(0,1,-1)$. All these
491: critical points are either non-hyperbolic, or their characteristic
492: matrix is not defined at all; thus, their stability cannot be
493: studied by first order perturbation analysis. In cases like these, one can find non-conventional
494: behaviors (such as saddle-nodes and cusps \cite{perko}) of the flow-chart near the critical points.
495: There are two more candidate fixed points (d)
496: $(\omega_{m\ast},\omega_{\psi\ast},Z_{\ast})=(1,0,1)$ and (e)
497: $(\omega_{m\ast},\omega_{\psi\ast},Z_{\ast})=(1,0,-1)$, whose
498: existence cannot be confirmed directly from the dynamical system,
499: since they make equations (\ref{gerold}), (\ref{italy})
500: undetermined. Apart from the above, there are other critical points given by \bea
501: &&\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,
502: \frac{A}{\sqrt{|\mu|}}\Big(\!\frac{|\mu|\omega_{m\ast}}{2\gamma}\!\Big)^{\!\nu-1}\!=
503: -\frac{3(1\!+\!w)\,Z_{\ast}}{(1\!-\!Z_{\ast}^{2}) ^{\frac{3}{2}-\nu}}\label{jack}\\
504: &&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
505: (1\!+\!3w\!)\omega_{\!m\ast}^{2}\!\!+\!(1\!-\!3w\!)\Big[\!1\!-\!\frac{6\beta^2}{\mu}
506: \!(1\!-\!Z_{\ast}^{2})\!\Big]\omega_{\!m\ast}\!\!-\!2[1\!-\!(1\!-\!Z_{\ast}^{2})^{2}]\nn\\
507: &&\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,
508: \,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,
509: \,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,=\!0.\label{office} \eea They exist only for $A Z_{\ast}\!<\!0$ and
510: correspond to the ones given by equations
511: (\ref{fp1})-(\ref{fp3}). For the physically interesting case $w\!=\!0$ with influx we scanned the parameter
512: space and were convinced that for $\nu\!\neq\!3/2$ there is always only one fixed point; for $\nu\!<\!3/2$
513: this is an attractor ($\textsf{A}$), while for $\nu\!>\!3/2$ this is a saddle ($\textsf{S}$).
514: For $w\!=\!0$, $\nu\!=\!3/2$ there is either one fixed point (attractor) or no fixed points, depending on the
515: parameters. For the other characteristic value $w\!=\!1/3$, we concluded that for $\nu\!<\!3/2$ there is only one
516: fixed point (attractor), for $\nu\!>\!2$ there is only one fixed point (saddle), while for $3/2\!<\!\nu\!<\!2$
517: there are either two fixed points (one attractor and one saddle) or no fixed points at all, depending on the
518: parameters. For $w\!=\!1/3$, $\nu\!=\!3/2$ there is either one fixed point (attractor) or no fixed points.
519: Finally, for $w\!=\!1/3$, $\nu\!=\!2$ there is either one fixed point (saddle) or no fixed points. These results
520: were obtained numerically for a wide range of parameters and are summarized in Tables 1 and 2.
521: \vspace{0.3cm}
522: \begin{center}
523: \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}
524: %\multicolumn{4}{c}{w=0} \\
525: \hline
526: & $\nu<3/2$ & $\nu=3/2$ & $\nu>3/2$ \\ \hline
527: No. of F.P. & 1 & 0 or 1 & 1 \\ \hline
528: Nature & \textsf{A} & \,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\textsf{A} & \textsf{S} \\
529: \hline
530: \multicolumn{4}{l}{Table 1: The fixed points for w=0, influx}
531: \end{tabular}
532: \end{center}
533: \vspace{0.05cm}
534: \begin{center}
535: \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
536: %\multicolumn{6}{c}{w=1/3} \\
537: \hline
538: & $\nu\!<\!3/2$ & $\nu\!=\!3/2$ & $3/2\!<\!\nu\!<\!2$ & $\nu\!=\!2$ & $\nu\!>\!2$ \\ \hline
539: No. of F.P. & 1 & 0 or 1 & \!\!0 or 2 & 0 or 1 & 1\\ \hline
540: Nature & \textsf{A} & \,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\textsf{A} & \,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,
541: \textsf{A},\textsf{S} & \,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\textsf{S} & \textsf{S} \\
542: \hline
543: \multicolumn{6}{l}{\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\, Table 2: The fixed points for w=1/3, influx}
544: \end{tabular}
545: \end{center}
546: \vspace{0.15cm}
547: The approach to an attractor described by the linear approximation of (\ref{gerold})-(\ref{italy})
548: is exponential in $\tau$ and takes infinite time $\tau$ for the universe to reach it. Given that near
549: this fixed point the relation between the cosmic time $t$ and the
550: time $\tau$ is linear, we conclude that it also takes infinite
551: cosmic time to reach the attractor.
552: \par
553: Defining $\epsilon\!=\!sgn(H)$, we see from (\ref{gerold})-(\ref{italy}) that the lines $Z \!=\! \epsilon$ ($\nu\!\leq\! 3/2$),
554: $\omega_{m}\!=\! 0$ are orbits of the system. Furthermore, the
555: family of solutions with $Z\!\approx \!\epsilon$ and
556: $dZ/d\omega_{m}\!=\!Z'/\omega_{m}'\!\approx\! 0$ is approximately
557: described for $\nu\!<\!3/2$ by
558: $\omega_{m}'\!=\!\epsilon(1\!+\!3w)\omega_{m}(\omega_{m}\!-\!1)$, and thus, they move away from the point
559: $(\omega_{m\ast},Z_{\ast})\!=\!(1,1)$, while they approach the point
560: $(\omega_{m\ast},Z_{\ast})\!=\!(1,-1)$. In addition, the solution of this
561: equation is
562: $\omega_{m}\!=\![1\!+\!ce^{\epsilon(1\!+\!3w)\tau}]^{-1}$, with
563: $c\!>\!0$ an integration constant. Using this solution in
564: equation $H'/H\!=\!-Z (q\!+\!1)$ we find that for $w\!=\!1/3$,
565: $H/H_{o}\!=\!\sqrt{\omega_{m}}/(1\!-\!\omega_{m})$, where $H_{o}$
566: is another integration constant. Then, the equation for $\omega_{m}(t)$ becomes
567: $d\omega_{m}/dt\!=\!-2\epsilon\omega_{m}\sqrt{H_{o}^{2}\omega_{m}\!-\!\mu(1\!-\!\omega_{m})^{2}}$,
568: and can be integrated giving $t$ as a function of $\omega_{m}$ or
569: $H$. Therefore, in the region of the big bang/big crunch singularity
570: one obtains $a(t)\!\sim \!\sqrt{\epsilon t}$, $\rho(t)\!\sim\!t^{-2}$, as in the standard radiation
571: dominated big-bang scenario. This means that for $\nu\!<\!3/2$ the energy exchange has no observable effects
572: close to the big bang/big crunch singularity.
573: %
574: \begin{figure}[h!]
575: \centering
576: %\hspace{0.1cm}%
577: \begin{tabular}{cc}
578: \includegraphics*[width=240pt, height=180pt]{Dust.eps}&%
579: \end{tabular}
580: \caption{
581: Influx, $w\!=\!0$, $\nu\!<\!3/2$. The arrows show the
582: direction of increasing cosmic time. The dotted line
583: corresponds to $w_{DE}\!=\!-1$. The region inside (outside) the dashed line corresponds to acceleration
584: (deceleration). The region with $Z\!>\!0$ represents expansion, while
585: $Z\!<\!0$ represents collapse. The present universe is supposed to be close to the global attractor.}
586: \end{figure}
587: %
588: %
589: \begin{figure}[h!]
590: \centering
591: %\hspace{0.1cm}%
592: \begin{tabular}{cc}
593: \includegraphics*[width=240pt, height=180pt]{Radiation.eps}&%
594: \end{tabular}
595: \caption{
596: Outflow, $w\!=\!1/3$, $\nu\!<\!3/2$. The arrows show the
597: direction of increasing cosmic time. The region inside (outside) the dashed line corresponds to acceleration
598: (deceleration). The region with $Z\!>\!0$ represents expansion, while
599: $Z\!<\!0$ represents collapse.}
600: \end{figure}
601: %
602: \par
603: Since our proposal relies on the existence of an attractor, we shall restrict ourselves to the case
604: $\nu\!<\!3/2$. It is convenient to discuss the four possible cases separately:
605: \newline
606: (i) $w\!=\!0$ with influx. The generic behavior of the solutions of equations
607: (\ref{gerold})-(\ref{italy}) is shown in Figure 1. We see that all the expanding solutions approach the global attractor.
608: Furthermore, there is a class of collapsing solutions which bounce to expanding ones.
609: Finally, there are solutions which collapse all during their lifetime to a state with finite $\rho$ and $H$.
610: The physically interesting
611: solutions are those in the upper part of the diagram emanating from the big bang $(\omega,Z)\!\approx\!(1,1)$.
612: These solutions start with a period of deceleration. The subsequent evolution depends on the value of
613: $3\beta^{2}\!/|\mu|$, which determines the relative position of the dashed and dotted lines.
614: Specifically, for $3\beta^{2}\!/|\mu|\!>\!1$ (the case of Figure 1) one distinguishes two possible
615: classes of universe evolution. In the first, the universe crosses the dashed line entering the
616: acceleration era still with $w_{DE}\!>\!-1$, and finally it crosses the dotted line to $w_{DE}\!<\!-1$ approaching
617: the attractor. In the second, while in the deceleration era,
618: it first crosses the dotted line to $w_{DE}\!<\!-1$, and then the dashed line entering the
619: eternally accelerating era. For $3\beta^{2}\!/|\mu|\!\leq\!1$, the dotted line lies above the dashed line,
620: and, consequently, only the second class of trajectories exists. To connect with the discussion in the introduction, notice that the
621: Friedmann equation (\ref{eq:31}) can be written in the form
622: (\ref{observ}) with dark energy
623: $\rho_{DE}\!=\!(\beta\psi\!+\!\mu)/2\gamma$. Using (\ref{eq:35}), the equation for $\rho_{DE}$ takes the form
624: (\ref{obelix}) with \be
625: \!w_{DE}\!=\!\frac{-1}{3(1\!-\!\omega_{m})}\Big[\!2Z^{2}\!-\!\omega_{m}\!-\!1\!-\!6(1\!-\!3w)\frac{\beta^{2}}{\mu}
626: \frac{\omega_{m}(1\!-\!Z^{2})}{Z^{2}\!-\!\omega_{m}}\!\Big]\!.
627: \label{dark}\ee The global attractor (\ref{fp1})-(\ref{fp3})
628: satisfies relations (\ref{fro}) and consequently, $w_{DE}$ evolves to the value $w_{DE\ast}$ given
629: by (\ref{trikala}). As for the bouncing solutions, they approach the attractor
630: after they cross the line
631: $Z^{2}\!=\!\omega_{m}$, where $w_{DE}$ jumps from $+\infty$ to $-\infty$; however,
632: the evolution of the observable quantities is regular.
633: \newline
634: (ii) $w\!=\!0$ with outflow. The generic behavior in this case is obtained from Figure 1
635: by the substitution $Z\!\rightarrow\! -Z$ and $\tau\rightarrow -\tau$, which reflects the diagram
636: with respect to the $\omega_{m}$ axis and converts attractors to repelers.
637: \newline
638: (iii) $w\!=\!1/3$ with outflow. Figure 2 depicts the flow diagram of this case. Even though in the case of
639: radiation in general $w_{DE}\!>\!-1/3$ from equation (\ref{dark}), there are both acceleration and deceleration
640: regions. Furthermore, from equation (\ref{trikala}) it is
641: $\Omega_{m\ast}\!>\!1$.
642: \newline
643: (iv) $w\!=\!1/3$ with influx. This arises like in (ii) by reflection of Figure 2 and resembles Figure 1.
644:
645:
646:
647: \section{Conclusions}
648:
649: In this work, we studied the role of brane-bulk energy exchange on the cosmological evolution
650: of a brane with negative tension, zero effective cosmological constant, and in the presence of the
651: induced curvature scalar term in the action. Adopting the physically motivated $\rho^{\nu}$ power-law form
652: for the energy transfer and assuming a cosmological constant in the bulk, an autonomous system of equations
653: was isolated. In this scenario, the ``dark energy'' is a result of the geometry and the brane-bulk
654: energy exchange. The negative tension of the brane is necessary in order to
655: realize the present universe (accelerating with $0\!<\!\Omega_{m0}\!<\!1$) as being close to a future fixed point
656: of the evolution equations. We studied the possible cosmologies using bounded normalized variables and the
657: corresponding global phase portraits were obtained.
658: By studying the number and nature of the fixed points we demonstrated numericaly that our present universe
659: can be easily realized as a late-time fixed point of the evolution. This provides an alternative answer
660: to the coincidence problem in cosmology, which does not require specific fine-tuning of the
661: initial data. Furthermore, the equation of state for the dark energy at the attractor is uniquely
662: specified by the value $\Omega_{m0}$. Remarkably, for
663: $\Omega_{m0}\!=\!0.3$, one obtains $w_{DE,0}\!=\!-1.4$, independently of the other parameters, while for
664: the other suggestive value $\Omega_{m0}\!=\!0.03$, $w_{DE,0}\!=\!-1.03$.
665: In the past, the function $w_{DE}$ crosses the line $w_{DE}\!=\!-1$ to larger values.
666: \par
667: It would be interesting to investigate if the above
668: partial success of the present scenario persists after one tries to fit the supernova data
669: and the detailed CMB spectum \cite{miz}. Of course, the nature of the content of the bulk and
670: of the mechanism of energy exchange with the brane is another crucial open question, which we hope
671: to deal with in a future publication.
672:
673:
674:
675: \[ \]
676: {\bf Acknowlegements.} Supported in part by the EU grant
677: MRTN-CT-2004-512194. The work of G.K. is also supported by the
678: European Commission Marie-Curie Fellowship under contract
679: MEIF-CT-2004-501432. G.P. is also supported by the Greek Ministry of
680: Education research program ``Herakleitos''.
681:
682: \begin{references}
683:
684: \bibitem{amendola} J. Ellis, S. Kalara, K. Olive and C. Wetterich, Phys. Lett. {B228} (1989) 264;
685: C. Wetterich, Astron. Astrophys. {\bf 301} (1995) 321
686: [hep-th/9408025]; L. Amendola, Phys. Rev. {\bf D60} (1999) 043501
687: [astro-ph/9904120]; L. Amendola and D.
688: Tocchini-Valentini, Phys. Rev. {\bf D64} (2001) 043509
689: [astro-ph/0011243]; L. Chimento, A. Jakubi, D. Pavon and W. Zimdahl, Phys. Rev. {\bf D67} (2003) 083513
690: [astro-ph/0303145]; L. Amendola, M. Gasperini and F. Piazza, astro-ph/0407573.
691:
692: \bibitem{kkttz}
693: E. Kiritsis, G. Kofinas, N. Tetradis, T.N. Tomaras and V. Zarikas,
694: JHEP {\bf 0302} (2003) 035 [hep-th/0207060].
695:
696: \bibitem{foot} This is in contrast to the models discused in \cite{amendola}
697: in which equation (\ref{fro}) is not satisfied.
698:
699: \bibitem{staro} U. Alam, V. Sahni and A. Starobinsky, JCAP {\bf 0406} (2004) 008
700: [astro-ph/0403687]; Y. Gong, Class. Quant.
701: Grav. {\bf 22} (2005) 2121 [astro-ph/0405446]; Y. Wang and M. Tegmark, Phys.
702: Rev. {\bf D71} (2005) 103513 [astro-ph/0501351]; Y. Wang and P. Mukherjee, Astrophys. J. {\bf
703: 606} (2004) 654 [astro-ph/0312192]; R. Daly and S. Djorgovski,
704: Astrophys. J. {\bf 612} (2004) 652 [astro-ph/0403664]; U. Alam, V. Sahni, T. Saini and A. Starobinsky,
705: Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. {\bf 354} (2004) 275 [astro-ph/0311364]; T. Choudhury and T.
706: Padmanabhan, Astron. Astrophys. {\bf 429} (2005) 807 [astro-ph/0311622].
707:
708: \bibitem{laura} A. Riess et
709: all, Astrophys. J. {\bf 607} (2004) 665 [astro-ph/0402512]; S.
710: Allen, R. Schmidt, H. Ebeling, A. Fabian and L. van Speybroeck, Mon.
711: Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. {\bf 353} (2004) 457 [astro-ph/0405340]; A.
712: Melchiorri, L. Mersini, C. Odman and M. Trodden, Phys. Rev. {\bf
713: D68} (2003) 043509 [astro-ph/0211522]; P. Singh, M. Sami and N.
714: Dadhich, Phys. Rev. {\bf D68} (2003) 023522 [hep-th/0305110]; E.
715: Gunzig and A. Saa, Int. J. Mod. Phys. {\bf D13} (2004) 2255
716: [gr-qc/0406068]; F. Carvalho and A. Saa, Phys. Rev. {\bf D70} (2004)
717: 087302 [astro-ph/0408013].
718:
719: \bibitem{alam}
720: S. Carroll, M. Hoffman and M. Trodden, Phys.
721: Rev. {\bf D68} (2003) 023509 [astro-ph/0301273];
722: D. Huterer and A. Cooray, Phys. Rev. {\bf D71} (2005) 023506
723: [astro-ph/0404062]; H. Jassal, J. Bagla and T. Padmanabhan, Mon. Not.
724: Roy. Astron. Soc. {\bf 356} (2005) L11 [astro-ph/0404378]; Y. Gong,
725: Int. J. Mod. Phys. {\bf D14} (2005) 599; P. Corasaniti, M.
726: Kunz, D. Parkinson, E. Copeland and B. Bassett, Phys. Rev. {\bf D70}
727: (2004) 083006 [astro-ph/0406608]; S. Hannestad and E. Mortsell, JCAP
728: {\bf 0409} (2004) 001 [astro-ph/0407259]; Y. Gong and Y.
729: Zhang, astro-ph/0502262.
730:
731: \bibitem{leandros} R. Lazkoz, S. Nesseris and L. Perivolaropoulos,
732: astro-ph/0503230; L. Perivolaropoulos, astro-ph/0504582.
733:
734: \bibitem{phantom} C. Armendariz-Picon, T. Damour and V.
735: Mukhanov, Phys. Lett. {\bf B458} (1999) 209 [hep-th/9904075];
736: J. Garriga and V. Mukhanov, Phys. Lett. {\bf B458} (1999) 219 [hep-th/9904176];
737: L. Parker and A. Raval, Phys. Rev. {\bf D60} (1999) 063512
738: [Erratum-ibid. {\bf D67} (2003) 029901] [gr-qc/9905031]; R.
739: Caldwell, Phys. Lett. {\bf B545} (2000) 23 [astro-ph/9908168]; C.
740: Armendariz-Picon, V. Mukhanov and P. Steinhardt, Phys. Rev. Lett.
741: {\bf 85} (2000) 4438 [astro-ph/0004134]; A. Schulz, M. White, Phys. Rev. {\bf D64} (2001)
742: 043514 [astro-ph/0104112]; I. Maor, R. Brustein, J. McMahon and P.
743: Steinhardt, Phys. Rev. {\bf D65} (2002) 123003 [astro-ph/0112526];
744: V. Sahni and Y. Shtanov, JCAP {\bf 0311} (2003) 014
745: [astro-ph/0202346]; P. Frampton, Phys. Lett. {\bf B555} (2003) 139 [astro-ph/0209037];
746: M. Ahmed, S. Dodelson, P. Greene and R. Sorkin, Phys. Rev. {\bf D69}
747: (2004) 103523 [astro-ph/0209274]; B. Feng, X-L Wang and X-M Zhang, Phys. Lett. {\bf B607} (2005) 35
748: [astro-ph/0404224]; V. Onemli and R. Woodard, Phys. Rev. {\bf D70} (2004) 107301
749: [gr-qc/0406098]; A. Vikman, Phys. Rev. {\bf D71} (2005) 023515
750: [astro-ph/0407107]; S. Nojiri and S. Odintsov, Phys. Rev. {\bf D70}
751: (2004) 103522 [hep-th/0408170]; A. Lue and G. Starkman, Phys. Rev. {\bf D70} (2004) 101501 [astro-ph/0408246];
752: Z. Guo, Y. Piao, X. Zhang and Y. Zhang, Phys. Lett. {\bf B608} (2005) 177 [astro-ph/0410654]; W. Hu,
753: Phys. Rev. {\bf D71} (2005) 047301 [astro-ph/0410680]; S. Nojiri, S.
754: Odintsov and S. Tsujikawa, Phys. Rev. {\bf D71} (2005) 063004
755: [hep-th/0501025]; H. Wei, R-G Cai and D-F Zeng,
756: Class. Quant. Grav. {\bf 22} (2005) 3189 [hep-th/0501160];
757: X. Zhang, H. Li, Y. Piao and X. Zhang,
758: astro-ph/0501652; P. Singh, gr-qc/0502086; M. Li, B. Feng and X.
759: Zhang, hep-ph/0503268; I. Brevik and O. Gorbunova, gr-qc/0504001;
760: H. Stefancic, Phys. Rev. {\bf D71} (2005) 124036 [astro-ph/0504518];
761: A. Anisimov, E. Babichev and A. Vikman,
762: JCAP {\bf 0506} (2005) 006 [astro-ph/0504560]; R. Cai, H. Zhang and
763: A. Wang, hep-th/0505186; B. Wang, Y. Gong and E. Abdalla,
764: hep-th/0506069; M. Cataldo, N. Cruz and S. Lepe, Phys. Lett. {\bf B619} (2005) 5
765: [hep-th/0506153].
766:
767: \bibitem{Dvali} G. Dvali, G. Gabadadze and M. Porrati, Phys. Lett. {\bf B485}
768: (2000) 208 [hep-th/0005016]; G. Dvali and G. Gabadadze, Phys. Rev. {\bf D63} (2001) 065007
769: [hep-th/0008054].
770:
771: \bibitem{hall} L. Hall and D. Smith, Phys. Rev. {\bf D60} (1999) 085008
772: [hep-ph/9904267]; S. Hannestad, Phys. Rev. {\bf D64} (2001) 023515 [hep-ph/0102290].
773:
774: \bibitem{hebecker} U. Ellwanger, Eur. Phys. J. {\bf C25}
775: (2002) 157 [hep-th/0001126]; C. Barcelo and M. Visser, Phys. Rev. {\bf D63} (2001) 024004 [gr-qc/0008008];
776: K. Maeda and D. Wands, Phys. Rev. {\bf D62} (2000) 124009 [hep-th/0008188];
777: A. Mennin and R. Battye, Class. Quant. Grav. {\bf 18} (2001) 2171 [hep-th/0008192];
778: C. van de Bruck, M. Dorca, C. Martins and M. Parry, Phys. Lett. {\bf B495} (2000) 183 [hep-th/0009056];
779: A. Hebecker and J. March-Russel, Nucl. Phys. {\bf B608} (2001) 375 [hep-ph/0103214];
780: P. Brax, C. van de Bruck and A. C. Davis, JHEP {\bf 0110} (2001) 026 [hep-th/0108215];
781: D. Langlois, L. Sorbo and M. Rodriguez-Martinez, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 89} (2002) 171301 [hep-th/0206146];
782: E. Leeper, R. Maartens and C. Sopuerta, Class. Quant. Grav. {\bf 21} (2004) 1125 [gr-qc/0309080];
783: P. Binetruy, M. Bucher and C. Carvalho, Phys. Rev. {\bf D70} (2004) 043509 [hep-th/0403154];
784: M. Bouhmadi-Lopez and D. Wands, Phys. Rev. {\bf D71} (2005) 024010 [hep-th/0408061].
785:
786: \bibitem{tetra} P. Apostolopoulos and N. Tetradis, Class. Quant. Grav. {\bf 21} (2004) 4781 [hep-th/0404105];
787: F. Diakonos, E. Saridakis and N. Tetradis, Phys. Lett. {\bf B605} (2005) 1 [hep-th/0409025];
788: E. Kiritsis, hep-th/0504219.
789:
790: \bibitem{kiritsis} E. Kiritsis, N. Tetradis and T.N. Tomaras, JHEP {\bf 0203} (2002) 019 [hep-th/0202037].
791:
792: \bibitem{Deffayet} C. Deffayet, Phys. Lett. {\bf B502} (2001) 199 [hep-th/0010186];
793: C. Deffayet, G. Dvali and G. Gabadadze, Phys. Rev. {\bf D65} (2002) 044023 [astro-ph/0105068].
794:
795: \bibitem{yuri} V. Sahni and Y. Shtanov, Int. J. Mod. Phys. {\bf D11} (2000) 1515 [gr-qc/0205111].
796:
797: \bibitem{ratazi} L. Pilo, R. Rattazzi and A. Zaffaroni, JHEP {\bf 0007} (2000) 056 [hep-th/0004028];
798: Y. Shtanov and A. Viznyuk, Class. Quant. Grav. {\bf 22} (2005) 987 [hep-th/0312261];
799: A. Padilla, Class. Quant. Grav. {\bf 21} (2004) 2899 [hep-th/0402079].
800:
801: \bibitem{charmousis} C. Charmousis and J-F Dufaux, Phys. Rev. {\bf D70} (2004) 106002 [hep-th/0311267].
802:
803: \bibitem{stelle} J. Lehners, P. Smyth and K. Stelle, Class. Quant. Grav. {\bf 22} (2005) 2589 [hep-th/0501212].
804:
805: \bibitem{smolyakov} M. Smolyakov and I. Volobuev, hep-th/0208025;
806: E. Kiritsis, N. Tetradis and T.N. Tomaras, JHEP {\bf 0108} (2001) 012 [hep-th/0106050];
807: G. Kofinas, E. Papantonopoulos and I. Pappa, Phys. Rev. {\bf D66} (2002) 104014 [hep-th/0112019].
808:
809: \bibitem{goheer} M. Goliath and G.F.R. Ellis, Phys. Rev. {\bf D60} (1999) 023502 [gr-qc/9811068];
810: A. Campos and C. Sopuerta, Phys. Rev. {\bf D63} (2001) 104012 [hep-th/0101060];
811: N. Goheer and P. Dunsby, Phys. Rev. {\bf D66} (2002) 043527 [gr-qc/0204059].
812:
813: \bibitem{perko} L. Perko, ``Differential equations and dynamical systems'', Springer-Verlag, 1991.
814:
815: \bibitem{miz} K. Umezu, K. Ichiki, T. Kajino, G. Mathews, R. Nakamura and M. Yahiro, astro-ph/0507227.
816:
817: \end{references}
818:
819: \end{document}
820: