text:
# Inflationary magnetogenesis from dynamical gauge couplings

## I Introduction

The gauge coupling has to be (almost) constant by the time when the Universe is approximately old of one second, namely by the time of big-bang nucleosynthesis (BBN). The abundances of light elements are very sensitive to any departure from the standard cosmological model. Hence, fluctuations in the baryon to photon ratio , matter–antimatter domains , anisotropies in the expansion of the four space-time dimensions , can all be successfully constrained by demanding that the abundances of the light elements are correctly reproduced. Following the same logic the variation in the gauge couplings can also be constrained from BBN .

The variation of the gauge coupling may also produce effects upon the epoch at which the baryon asymmetry was formed  namely the epoch of the electroweak phase transition (EWPT)  occurring when the Universe was approximately $`10^{11}`$ sec old. The influence of the variation of the gauge couplings on the generation of the baryon asymmetry of the Universe (BAU) is not direct but it can occur in a specific model. Suppose, for instance, that the gauge coupling evolution is modelled using a scalar field. If the field decays prior to the EWPT the BAU generated after the EWPT will be preserved. However, if the field decays between the EWPT and BBN the generated entropy associated with the decay of the field will have to be constrained. Too much entropy could dilute the BAU and, therefore, a constraint on the produced entropy will translate into a constraint on the scalar mass.

In  it was argued that the evolution of the gauge couplings may have interesting effects associated with the generation of magnetic fields. In the present investigation the compatibility of the evolution of the gauge coupling with an ordinary (i.e de Sitter or quasi-de Sitter) stage of inflation will be analyzed. In this sense the present discussion is an extension and a completion of the results reported in  where the compatibility of the evolution of the gauge coupling with a de Sitter stage of inflation has not been addressed.

The evolution of the Abelian coupling will be mainly investigated. The non-Abelian couplings will be fixed. This choice is motivated by the remark that the effects associated with large scale gauge fluctuations are related more with the magnetic component of Abelian fields . Furthermore, the necessity of not erasing the produced BAU (by excessive entropy production) leads to exclude a variability of the gauge coupling during the EWPT taking place (roughly) at $`100`$ GeV . To relax these to assumptions is possible but it is beyond the aim of the present discussion.

Suppose that during a de Sitter stage of expansion the coupling constant of an Abelian gauge field evolves in time. Thus the kinetic term of the gauge field can be written (in four space-time dimensions) as

$$S_{\mathrm{em}}=\frac{1}{4}d^4x\sqrt{G}f(\varphi )F_{\alpha \beta }F^{\alpha \beta },$$
(1.1)
where $`G`$ is the determinant of the space-time metric, $`\varphi `$ is a scalar field (which can depend upon space and time) and $`g(\varphi )=f(\varphi )^{1/2}`$ is the coupling The Heaviside electromagnetic system of units will be used throughout the investigation. The effective “electron” charge will then be given, in the present context, by $`e(\varphi )=e_1f(\varphi )^{1/2}`$.. This type of vertex is typical of scalar-tensor theories of gravity  and of the low energy string effective action . Early suggestions that the Abelian gauge coupling may change over cosmological times were originally made by Dirac  (and subsequently discussed in  and in ) mainly in the framework of ordinary electromagnetism.

The dynamics of the field $`\varphi `$ will be described by the action of a minimally coupled (massive) scalar. If the field is displaced from the minimum of its potential during inflation, there will be a phase where the field relaxes. Provided the scalar mass is much smaller than the curvature scale during inflation such a phase could be rather long. During the de Sitter stage, the specific form of the expanding background will dictate, through the equations of motion, the rate of suppression of the amplitude of $`\varphi `$.

While the field relaxes towards the minimum of its potential, energy is pumped from the homogeneous mode of $`\varphi `$ to the gauge field fluctuations. The function $`f(\varphi )`$ can be either an increasing function of $`\varphi `$ (leading to a decreasing coupling) or a decreasing function of $`\varphi `$ (leading to an increasing coupling). In both cases, depending upon the parameters of the model, the two-point correlation function of magnetic inhomogeneities increases during the inflationary stage. This implies that large scale magnetic fields can be potentially generated.

Since the pioneering work of Fermi  large-scale magnetic fields are a crucial component of the interstellar and perhaps intergalactic medium . Faraday rotation measurements, Zeeman splitting estimates (when available) and synchrotron emission patterns conspire towards the conclusion that distant galaxies are endowed with a magnetic field of roughly the same strength of the one of the Milky Way .

Observations of magnetic fields at even larger scales (i.e cluster, inter-cluster) are only at the beginning but, recently, promising measurements have been reported. Abell clusters with strong x-ray emission were studied using a twofold technique . From the ROSAT The ROetgen SATellite was flying from June 1991 to February 1999. ROSAT provided a map of the x-ray sky in the range $`0.1`$$`2.5`$ keV. full sky survey the electron density along the line of sight has been determined. Faraday rotation (for the same set of 16 Abell clusters) has been determined through observations at the VLA §§§The Very Large Array telescope is a radio-astronomical facility consisting of 27 parabolic antennas spread around 20 km in the New Mexico desert.. The amusing result (confirming previous claims based only on one cluster ) is that x-ray bright Abell clusters possess a magnetic field of $`\mu `$ Gauss strength. The existence of strong magnetic fields with coherence scale larger than the galactic one can be of crucial importance for the propagation of high-energy cosmic rays.

The large scale galactic magnetic fields are assumed to be the result of the exponential amplification (due to galactic rotation) of some primeval seed fields . It was Harrison  who suggested that these seeds might have something to do with cosmology in the same way as he suggested that the primordial spectrum of gravitational potential fluctuations (i.e. the Harrison-Zeldovich spectrum) might be produced in some primordial phase of the evolution of the Universe. Since then, several mechanisms have been invoked in order to explain the origin of these seeds  and few of them are compatible with inflationary evolution.

The plan of the present paper is then the following. In Section II the basic ideas concerning the model of evolution of the gauge coupling will be introduced. In Section III bounds coming both from the homogeneous and from the inhomogeneous evolution of $`\varphi `$ will be described. In Section IV the evolution of the magnetic inhomogeneities will be addressed along the various stages of the model with particular attention to the role of the two-point function. The magnetohydrodynamical (MHD) approach will be generalized. In Section V the large scale magnetic fields produced in the scenario will be estimated. Section VI contains some concluding remarks.

## II Basic Equations

### A Preliminaries

Thanks to the high degree of isotropy and homogeneity of the observed Universe, the background geometry can be described using a (conformally flat) Friedmann-Robertson-Walker (FRW) line element

$$ds^2=G_{\mu \nu }dx^\mu dx^\nu =a^2(\eta )[d\eta ^2d\stackrel{}{x}^2],$$
(2.1)
where $`\eta `$ is the conformal time coordinate and $`G_{\mu \nu }`$ is the four-dimensional space-time metric. The cosmic time coordinate (often employed in this investigation) is related to $`\eta `$ as $`a(\eta )d\eta =dt`$.

From the anisotropies of the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) it is consistent to assume that the Universe underwent a period of inflationary expansion of de Sitter or quasi-de Sitter type. Therefore $`a(\eta )\eta _1/\eta `$ during a phase stopping, approximately, when the curvature scale was $`H_110^6M_\mathrm{P}`$. For $`\eta >\eta _1`$ (possibly after a transient period) the Universe gets dominated by radiation \[i.e. $`a(\eta )\eta `$\] and then, after decoupling, by dust matter \[i.e. $`a(\eta )\eta ^2`$\].

The action describing the dynamics of the (Abelian) gauge coupling in a given background geometry can be parametrised as

$$S=d^4x\sqrt{G}\left[\frac{1}{2}G^{\mu \nu }_\mu \varphi _\nu \varphi V(\varphi )\frac{1}{4g^2(\varphi )}F_{\mu \nu }F^{\mu \nu }+J_\alpha A^\alpha \right].$$
(2.2)
In Eq. (2.2) the contribution of a classical (Ohmic) current has been included because of the relevance, for the problem at hand, of dissipative effects associated with the finite value of the conductivity, as it will be discussed in Section IV.

From Eq. (2.2) the equations of motion can be derived

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{G}}}_\mu \left[\sqrt{G}G^{\mu \nu }_\nu \varphi \right]+{\displaystyle \frac{V}{\varphi }}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2g^3(\varphi )}}{\displaystyle \frac{g}{\varphi }}F_{\alpha \beta }F^{\alpha \beta }+{\displaystyle \frac{J_\alpha }{\varphi }}A^\alpha ,`$ (2.3)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{G}}}_\alpha \left[{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{G}}{g^2(\varphi )}}F^{\alpha \beta }\right]=J^\beta .`$ (2.4)
Since the gauge coupling appears in the Ohmic current, the term $`_\varphi J_\alpha 0`$. Inserting Eq. (2.4) into Eq. (2.3) the explicit dependence upon the Ohmic current can be expressed, in terms of the gauge fields, as suggested in . Namely, using Eq. (2.4) we can write that

$$\sqrt{G}\frac{J^\alpha }{\varphi }2_\mu \left[\frac{\sqrt{G}}{g^3}\frac{g}{\varphi }F^{\mu \alpha }A_\alpha \right]\frac{\sqrt{G}}{g^3}\frac{g}{\varphi }F_{\alpha \beta }F^{\alpha \beta }.$$
(2.5)
An alternative form of Eq. (2.4) becomes then

$$\frac{1}{\sqrt{G}}_\mu \left[\sqrt{G}G^{\mu \nu }_\nu \varphi \right]+\frac{V}{\varphi }=\frac{1}{2g^3(\varphi )}\frac{g(\varphi )}{\varphi }F_{\alpha \beta }F^{\alpha \beta }.$$
(2.6)
If the gauge coupling does not change, the evolution of Abelian gauge fields is conformally invariant. Hence, using the the conformal time coordinate, the appropriately rescaled gauge field amplitudes obey a set of equations which is exactly the one they would obey Minkowski space. In order to simplify the explicit form of the equations of motion the electric and magnetic fields will be rescaled in such a way that the obtained system of equations will reproduce the usual (conformally invariant) system in the limit $`g`$ constant. The rescalings in the fields are

$`\stackrel{}{B}=a^2\stackrel{}{},\stackrel{}{E}=a^2\stackrel{}{},`$ (2.7)
$`\stackrel{}{A}=a\stackrel{}{𝒜}\stackrel{}{J}=a^3\stackrel{}{j},\sigma =\sigma _ca,`$ (2.8)
where $`\stackrel{}{}`$, $`\stackrel{}{}`$, $`\stackrel{}{𝒜}`$, $`\stackrel{}{j}`$, $`\sigma _c`$ are the flat-space quantities whereas $`\stackrel{}{B}`$, $`\stackrel{}{E}`$, $`\stackrel{}{A}`$, $`\stackrel{}{J}`$, $`\sigma `$ are the curved-space ones.

Bearing in mind Eq. (2.8), the explicit form of Eqs. (3.10)–(2.6) becomes:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{^2\varphi }{\eta ^2}}+2{\displaystyle \frac{\varphi }{\eta }}+{\displaystyle \frac{V}{\varphi }}a^2^2\varphi ={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2g^3a^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{g}{\varphi }}\left[\stackrel{}{E}^2\stackrel{}{B}^2\right],`$ (2.9)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{B}}{\eta }}=\stackrel{}{}\times \stackrel{}{E},`$ (2.10)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{}{\eta }}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{g^2(\varphi )}}\stackrel{}{E}\right]+\stackrel{}{J}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{g^2(\varphi )}}\left[\stackrel{}{}\times \stackrel{}{B}{\displaystyle \frac{2}{g}}{\displaystyle \frac{g}{\varphi }}\stackrel{}{}\varphi \times \stackrel{}{B}\right],`$ (2.11)
$`\stackrel{}{}\stackrel{}{B}=0,`$ (2.12)
$`\stackrel{}{}\stackrel{}{E}={\displaystyle \frac{2}{g}}{\displaystyle \frac{g}{\varphi }}\stackrel{}{E}\stackrel{}{}\varphi ,`$ (2.13)
$`\stackrel{}{}\stackrel{}{J}=0,\stackrel{}{J}=\sigma (\stackrel{}{E}+\stackrel{}{v}\times \stackrel{}{B}).`$ (2.14)
where $`\stackrel{}{v}`$ is the bulk velocity of the plasma. The spatial gradients used in Eqs. (2.9)–(2.14) are defined according to the metric (2.1). In Eq. (2.15) the quantity $`=\mathrm{ln}a/\eta `$ has also been introduced. $``$ is the Hubble factor in conformal time which is related to the Hubble factor in cosmic time as $`=aH`$ where $`H=\mathrm{ln}a/t`$.

Once the background geometry is specified we are interested in the situation when the gauge field background is vanishing and the only fluctuations are the ones associate with the vacuum state of the Abelian gauge fields. Hence, Eqs. (2.9)–(2.14) allow to compute the evolution of $`\varphi `$ and the associated evolution of the two-point function of the gauge field fluctuations.

Suppose that $`\varphi `$ is originally displaced from the minimum of its potential. As far as the zero mode of $`\varphi `$ is concerned the system of equations can be further simplified:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{^2\varphi }{\eta ^2}}+2{\displaystyle \frac{\varphi }{\eta }}+{\displaystyle \frac{V}{\varphi }}a^2={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2g^3a^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{g}{\varphi }}\left[\stackrel{}{E}^2\stackrel{}{B}^2\right],`$ (2.15)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{B}}{\eta }}=\stackrel{}{}\times \stackrel{}{E},`$ (2.16)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{}{\eta }}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{g^2(\varphi )}}\stackrel{}{E}\right]+\stackrel{}{J}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{g^2(\varphi )}}\stackrel{}{}\times \stackrel{}{B},`$ (2.17)
$`\stackrel{}{}\stackrel{}{B}=0,\stackrel{}{}\stackrel{}{E}=0,`$ (2.18)
$`\stackrel{}{}\stackrel{}{J}=0,\stackrel{}{J}=\sigma (\stackrel{}{E}+\stackrel{}{v}\times \stackrel{}{B}).`$ (2.19)
By now combining together the modified Maxwell’s equations we obtain the evolution of the magnetic fields

$$\stackrel{}{B}^{\prime \prime }2\frac{g^{}}{g}\stackrel{}{B}^{}^2\stackrel{}{B}=g^2\stackrel{}{}\times \stackrel{}{J},$$
(2.20)
where the prime denoted derivation with respect to the conformal time coordinate (the over-dot will denote, instead, derivation with respect to cosmic time).

Once the evolution of the metric is specified, Eq. (2.15) dictates a specific evolution for $`\varphi `$ and the evolution of $`\varphi `$ will determine, in its turn, the evolution of the gauge fields. The interesting initial conditions for the system are the ones where the classical gauge field background vanishes. Thus, when the homogeneous component of $`\varphi `$ starts its evolution during the de Sitter phase, quantum mechanical fluctuations will be postulated as initial conditions of gauge inhomogeneities.

When the background geometry evolves from the de Sitter phase to the subsequent epoch, massive quanta of $`\varphi `$ are produced. The amount of the produced inhomogeneous modes of $`\varphi `$ can be computed and it will be shown that the associated energy density will always be smaller than the one of the homogeneous mode. This analysis will be one of the subjects discussed in Section III.

## III Constraints on the evolution of the gauge coupling

Sub-millimiter tests of the Newton’s law show that no deviations are observed down to distances as small as $`0.1`$ mm . Therefore, $`\varphi `$ should be massive. Of course the potential of $`\varphi `$ may be much more complicated than the one provided by a simple mass term. However, for sake of simplicity, a massive scalar will be analyzed since, already in this case, interesting effects can be analyzed. In spite of the fact that this choice is apparently simple, various constraints on the scalar mass appear.

### A Evolution of the homogeneous mode

Suppose that the potential term driving the evolution of the gauge coupling is simply

$$V(\varphi )\frac{m^2}{2}\varphi ^2.$$
(3.1)
During the inflationary stage of expansion the scale factor evolves as $`a(\eta )=(\eta _1/\eta )`$ for $`\eta <\eta _1`$. The evolution of $`\varphi `$ is obtained by solving

$$\varphi ^{\prime \prime }+\frac{2}{\eta }\varphi ^{}+\frac{\mu ^2}{\eta ^2}\varphi =0,$$
(3.2)
where $`\mu =m/H_1`$ and where the relation $`\eta ^1aH`$ has been used. If $`\mu 1`$, for $`\eta <\eta _1`$ the solution of Eq. (3.2) can be written as

$$\varphi _\mathrm{i}(\eta )=\varphi _1\varphi _2\left(\frac{\eta }{\eta _1}\right)^3.$$
(3.3)
The end of the inflationary stage of expansion may not be directly followed by the radiation dominated phase. In the intermediate phase the scalar mass is still small than the curvature scale but the curvature decreases, in general, faster than during the inflationary phase since the background is neither of de Sitter nor of quasi-de Sitter type. The evolution of the scale factor can be parametrised as $`a(\eta )\eta ^\alpha `$ where, in order to fix the ideas, $`\alpha 2`$ could be assumed The case $`\alpha =2`$ corresponds to a matter-dominated intermediate stage.. The evolution of $`\varphi `$ will simply be

$$\varphi _{\mathrm{rh}}(\eta )=\varphi _1+\varphi _2\left[\frac{2\alpha 4}{2\alpha 1}+\frac{3}{2\alpha 1}\left(\frac{\eta }{\eta _1}\right)^{2\alpha 1}\right],\eta _1<\eta <\eta _\mathrm{r},$$
(3.4)
where the continuity between Eq. (3.3) and Eq. (3.4) has been required, so that $`\varphi _\mathrm{i}(\eta _1)=\varphi _{\mathrm{rh}}(\eta _1)`$ and $`\varphi _\mathrm{i}^{}(\eta _1)=\varphi _{\mathrm{rh}}^{}(\eta _1)`$.

After $`\eta _\mathrm{r}`$ the background enters a radiation dominated phase and the evolution of $`\varphi `$ can be explicitly solved in cosmic time. The equation for $`\varphi `$ , in this phase, is given by

$$\ddot{\varphi }+3H\dot{\varphi }+m^2\varphi =0,H=\frac{\dot{a}}{a},$$
(3.5)
which in terms $`\mathrm{\Phi }=a^{\frac{3}{2}}\varphi `$, becomes

$$\ddot{\mathrm{\Phi }}+\left[m^2\frac{3}{2}\dot{H}\frac{9}{4}H^2\right]\mathrm{\Phi }=0.$$
(3.6)
In the radiation-dominated stage of expansion Eq. (3.6) becomes

$$\ddot{\mathrm{\Phi }}+\left[m^2+\frac{3}{16t^2}\right]\mathrm{\Phi }=0,$$
(3.7)
whose solution can be written in terms of Bessel functions

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(mt)=\sqrt{mt}\left[AY_{\frac{1}{4}}(mt)+BJ_{\frac{1}{4}}(mt)\right].$$
(3.8)
For $`mt1`$, $`\varphi `$ has a constant mode and a solution as $`t^{1/2}`$. Recalling the relation between cosmic and conformal time and imposing the continuity of $`\varphi `$ and $`\varphi ^{}`$ (in $`\eta _r`$) with the solution of Eq. (3.4) the following form can be obtained:

$$\varphi _\mathrm{r}(\eta )=\varphi _1+\varphi _2\left[\left(\frac{2\alpha 4}{2\alpha 1}+\frac{6(1\alpha )}{2\alpha 1}\left(\frac{\eta _1}{\eta _\mathrm{r}}\right)^{2\alpha 1}\right)+3\left(\frac{\eta _1}{\eta _\mathrm{r}}\right)^{2\alpha 1}\frac{\eta _\mathrm{r}}{\eta }\right],$$
(3.9)
which is valid for $`\eta _r<\eta <\eta _\mathrm{m}`$. The time $`\eta _\mathrm{m}`$ marks the moment where $`Hm`$. When $`mt>1`$, the regime of coherent oscillations takes over and the solution (3.8) implies that the energy density stored in $`\varphi `$ decreases as $`a^3`$, meaning that $`\varphi _\mathrm{c}(\eta )\eta ^{3/2}`$. Since the coherent oscillations decrease as $`a^3`$ there will be a typical curvature scale $`H_\mathrm{c}`$ and a typical time $`\eta _\mathrm{c}`$ at which the coherent oscillations become dominant with respect to the radiation background. This moment is determined by demanding that

$$H_\mathrm{r}^2M_\mathrm{P}^2\left(\frac{a_\mathrm{r}}{a_\mathrm{c}}\right)^4m^2\varphi _1^2\left(\frac{a_\mathrm{m}}{a_\mathrm{c}}\right)^3,$$
(3.10)
which also implies that

$$H_\mathrm{c}m\phi ^4,$$
(3.11)
where $`\phi =\varphi _1/M_\mathrm{P}`$. Eq. (3.11) has been obtained without tuning the asymptotic value of $`\varphi `$ to the minimum of its potential. If such a tuning is made, the amplitude of oscillations at $`\eta _\mathrm{m}`$ will be smaller than $`\varphi _1`$ and it will be given, according to Eq. (3.9), by $`\varphi _2(\eta _1/\eta _\mathrm{r})^{2\alpha 1}`$. Thus, the scale $`H_c`$ will be defined by a different relation namely:

$$m^2\varphi _2^2\left(\frac{H_\mathrm{r}}{H_1}\right)^{\frac{2(2\alpha 1)}{\alpha +1}}\left(\frac{m}{H_\mathrm{r}}\right)\left(\frac{a_\mathrm{m}}{a_\mathrm{c}}\right)^3H_\mathrm{r}^2M_\mathrm{P}^2\left(\frac{a_\mathrm{r}}{a_\mathrm{c}}\right)^4,$$
(3.12)
leading, ultimately, to

$$H_\mathrm{c}=m\left(\frac{\varphi _2}{M_\mathrm{P}}\right)^4\left(\frac{H_\mathrm{r}}{H_1}\right)^{\frac{4(2\alpha 1)}{\alpha +1}}\left(\frac{m}{H_\mathrm{r}}\right)^2.$$
(3.13)
In the approximation of instantaneous reheating \[i.e. $`\eta _\mathrm{r}\eta _1`$\], $`H_\mathrm{r}H_1`$. Therefore, from Eq. (3.13) $`H_\mathrm{c}`$ is smaller than the value determined in Eq. (3.11) by a factor $`(m/H_1)^2`$. In the approximation of matter-dominated reheating (i.e. $`\alpha 2`$), the result of instantaneous reheating is further suppressed by a factor $`(H_\mathrm{r}/H_1)^4`$ as one can easily argue from Eq. (3.13). From Eqs. (3.5)–(3.6), the evolution of $`\varphi `$ will go as $`\eta ^3`$ when coherent oscillations start dominating.

In spite of the possible tunings made in the asymptotic values of $`\varphi `$, after $`\eta _\mathrm{c}`$ there will be a typical time at which the field $`\varphi `$ will decay. In order not to spoil the light elements produced at the epoch of BBN $`\varphi `$ has to decay at a scale larger than $`H_{\mathrm{ns}}T_{\mathrm{ns}}^2/M_\mathrm{P}`$ (where $`T_{\mathrm{ns}}\mathrm{MeV}`$. Since $`\varphi `$ is only coupled gravitationally the typical decay scale will be given by comparing the rate with the curvature scale giving that

$$H_\varphi \mathrm{\Gamma }\frac{m^3}{M_\mathrm{P}^2}>H_{\mathrm{ns}},$$
(3.14)
implying that $`m>10^4`$ GeV. This requirement also demands that the reheating temperature associated with the decay of $`\varphi `$ will be larger than the BBN temperature.

In order to illustrate some concrete examples of the various possibilities implied by our considerations, suppose that $`m10^3`$ TeV and suppose that the asymptotic value of $`\varphi `$ is fine-tuned to its minimum. Furthermore, suppose that the reheating is instantaneous. Then, according to the picture which has been presented, inflation stops at a scale $`H_110^{13}`$ GeV and $`\varphi `$ starts oscillating at a curvature scale $`H_\mathrm{m}10^3`$ TeV. The coherent oscillations will then become dominant at a curvature scale $`H_\mathrm{c}10^8`$ GeV (having assumed $`\varphi _2M_\mathrm{P}`$). The coherent oscillations of $`\varphi `$ will last down to $`H_\varphi 10^{20}`$ GeV. After this moment the Universe will be dominated by the radiation produced in the decay of $`\varphi `$. Notice, for comparison, that the BBN curvature scale is $`H_{\mathrm{ns}}10^{25}`$ GeV so that the decay occurs well before BBN (five orders of magnitude in curvature scale).

Another illustrative example is the one where $`m10^6`$ TeV. In this case the decay of $`\varphi `$ occurs prior to the EWPT epoch, namely

$$H_\varphi >H_{\mathrm{ew}}.$$
(3.15)
In fact $`H_{\mathrm{ew}}=\sqrt{N_{\mathrm{eff}}}T_{\mathrm{ew}}^2/M_\mathrm{P}10^{17}`$ GeV (with $`N_{\mathrm{eff}}=106.75`$ and $`T_{\mathrm{ew}}100`$ GeV) whereas, from Eq. (3.14), $`H_\varphi 10^9`$ GeV. In more general terms we can say that in order to have the $`\varphi `$ decay occurring prior to the EWPT epoch we have to demand that $`H_\varphi >H_{\mathrm{ew}}`$ which means that $`m>10^5`$ TeV.

In closing this section two general comments are in order. If no fine-tuning is made in the asymptotic amplitude of $`\varphi `$, the typical scale of the coherent oscillations will almost coincide with $`m`$. However, the possibility $`\phi 1`$ is still left if, for some reason, we want $`H_\mathrm{c}m`$.

The decay of $`\varphi `$ and the consequent freezing of the gauge coupling should occur prior to the EWPT epoch and the baryon number should be generated, in the present context, at the electroweak time . Suppose, for example, that this is not the case and that the BAU has been created prior to the electroweak scale. Suppose, moreover, that the decay of $`\varphi `$ occurs after baryogenesis. Then the temperature of the radiation gas before the decay of $`\varphi `$ will be $`T_\varphi T_\mathrm{m}(a_\mathrm{m}/a_\varphi )m(m/M_\mathrm{P})^5`$. Thus, the entropy increase due to the decay of $`\varphi `$ will be $`\mathrm{\Delta }S(T_{\mathrm{decay}}/T_\varphi )^3`$ where $`T_{\mathrm{decay}}\sqrt{H_\varphi M_\mathrm{P}}`$. This implies that $`\mathrm{\Delta }Sm/M_\mathrm{P}`$. It has been observed in different contexts that in order to preserve a pre-existing BAU one should have $`\mathrm{\Delta }S<10^5`$ . Thus, this bound would imply $`m>10^{14}`$ GeV. This is the reason why the present analysis will assume that the decay of $`\varphi `$ occurs prior to the electroweak time and that the BAU is generated at the EWPT or shortly after.

### B Evolution of the inhomogeneous modes

When the Universe passes from the inflationary stage to the subsequent radiation dominated expansion, inhomogeneities of the field $`\varphi `$ are generated. This may invalidate the original assumptions and introduce further complications by adding qualitatively new constraints on the scenario.

It is useful to recall that the inhomogeneities of $`\varphi `$ can be interpreted, in the framework of second quantization, as quanta of the field $`\varphi `$. Hence, the inhomogeneities produced because of the sudden change of the geometry from the de Sitter epoch to the radiation dominated epoch can be counted by estimating the number of quanta produced by the sudden change of the geometry according to the well known techniques of curved space-times .

Consider the first order fluctuations of the field $`\varphi `$

$$\varphi (\stackrel{}{x},\eta )=\varphi (\eta )+\delta \varphi (\stackrel{}{x},\eta ),$$
(3.16)
whose evolution equation is, in Fourier space,

$$\psi ^{\prime \prime }+2\psi ^{}+[k^2+m^2a^2]\psi =0,$$
(3.17)
where $`\psi (k,\eta )`$ is the Fourier component of $`\delta \varphi (\stackrel{}{x},\eta )`$. In order to count the number of quanta produced during the transition of the geometry from the inflationary to the radiation dominated stage of expansion the (canonically normalized) amplitude of fluctuations $`\mathrm{\Psi }=\psi a`$ should be defined so that Eq. (3.17) becomes:

$$\mathrm{\Psi }^{\prime \prime }+\left[k^2+m^2a^2\frac{a^{\prime \prime }}{a}\right]\mathrm{\Psi }=0.$$
(3.18)
In the de Sitter stage of expansion Eq. (3.18) reduces to

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_\mathrm{i}^{\prime \prime }+\left[k^2+\frac{\mu ^22}{\eta ^2}\right]\mathrm{\Psi }_\mathrm{i}=0,$$
(3.19)
whereas during the radiation dominated stage of expansion Eq. (3.19) takes the form

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_\mathrm{r}^{\prime \prime }+\left[k^2+\frac{\mu ^2(\eta +2\eta _1)^2}{\eta _1^4}\right]\mathrm{\Psi }_\mathrm{r}=0.$$
(3.20)
The solution of Eq. (3.19) (with the correct quantum-mechanical normalization for $`\eta \mathrm{}`$) can be written as

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_\mathrm{i}(\eta )=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2k}}p\sqrt{x}H_\rho ^{(1)}(x),$$
(3.21)
where $`x=k\eta `$ and $`H_\nu ^{(1)}`$ is the first order Hankel function . In the pure de Sitter case, $`\rho =3/2\sqrt{1(4/9)\mu ^2}`$ and since $`\mu 1`$, $`\rho 3/2`$; $`p`$ is a phase factor which has been chosen in such a way that

$$p=\sqrt{\frac{\pi }{2}}e^{i\frac{\pi }{4}(1+2\rho )}.$$
(3.22)
With this choice of $`p`$ we have that $`\mathrm{\Psi }_\mathrm{i}(\eta )e^{ik\eta }/\sqrt{2k}`$ for $`\eta \mathrm{}`$.

During the radiation dominated stage of expansion Eq. (3.20) is the equation of parabolic cylinder functions . The solutions turning into positive and negative frequencies for $`\eta +\mathrm{}`$ are then

$`f_\mathrm{r}(\eta )={\displaystyle \frac{1}{(2\gamma )^{1/4}}}e^{i\frac{\pi }{8}}D_{iq\frac{1}{2}}(ie^{i\frac{\pi }{4}}z),`$ (3.23)
$`f_\mathrm{r}^{}(\eta )={\displaystyle \frac{1}{(2\gamma )^{1/4}}}e^{i\frac{\pi }{8}}D_{iq\frac{1}{2}}(e^{i\frac{\pi }{4}}z),`$ (3.24)
where

$$z=\sqrt{2\gamma }(\eta +2\eta _1),q=\frac{k^2}{2\gamma },$$
(3.25)
and where $`D_\sigma `$ are the parabolic cylinder functions in the Whittaker’s notation. The solution of Eq. (3.20)

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_\mathrm{r}(\eta )=c_+(k)g_\mathrm{r}(\eta )+c_{}(k)g_\mathrm{r}^{}(\eta ),$$
(3.26)
is given in terms of $`c_+(k)`$ and $`c_{}(k)`$ which are the two (complex) Bogoliubov coefficients satisfying $`|c_+(k)|^2|c_{}|^2=1`$. In a second quantized approach $`|c_{}(k)|^2`$ is the mean number of created quanta, whereas in a semi-classical approach $`c_{}(k)`$ can be viewed as the coefficient parametrising the mixing between positive and negative frequency modes. In the case $`c_{}(k)0`$ no mixing takes place and no amplification is produced. In order to determine $`c_\pm (k)`$, $`\mathrm{\Psi }_\mathrm{i}(\eta )`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }_\mathrm{r}(\eta )`$ should be continuously matched in $`\eta =\eta _1`$, namely

$`\mathrm{\Psi }_\mathrm{i}(\eta _1)=\mathrm{\Psi }_\mathrm{r}(\eta _1),`$ (3.27)
$`\mathrm{\Psi }_\mathrm{i}^{}(\eta _1)=\mathrm{\Psi }_\mathrm{r}^{}(\eta _1),`$ (3.28)
By solving this system, an exact expression for the Bogoliubov coefficients is obtained which is, in general a function of two variables : $`\mu =m\eta _1`$ and $`x_1=k\eta _1`$. Since $`\mu 1`$ the exact result can be expanded, in this limit,

$`c_+(k)=\pi e^{i\frac{\pi }{8}}\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{i}{\sqrt{2}\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{3}{4})}}S_2(x_1,\rho )\mu ^{\frac{1}{4}}+{\displaystyle \frac{(1+i)}{2\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{1}{4})}}[S_1(x_1,\rho )+S_2(x_1,\rho )]\mu ^{\frac{1}{4}}\right\}+𝒪(\mu ^{\frac{5}{4}}),`$ (3.29)
$`c_{}(k)=\pi e^{i\frac{\pi }{8}}\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{i}{\sqrt{2}\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{3}{4})}}S_2(x_1,\rho )\mu ^{\frac{1}{4}}+{\displaystyle \frac{(i1)}{2\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{1}{4})}}[S_1(x_1,\rho )+S_2(x_1,\rho )]\mu ^{\frac{1}{4}}\right\}+𝒪(\mu ^{\frac{5}{4}}),`$ (3.30)
where $`S_1(x_1,\rho )`$ and $`S_2(x_1,\rho )`$ contain the explicit dependence upon the Hankel’s functions:

$`S_1(x_1,\rho )=e^{i\frac{\pi }{4}(1+2\rho )}H_\rho ^{(1)}(x_1),`$ (3.31)
$`S_2(x_1,\rho )=\sqrt{x_1}e^{i\frac{\pi }{4}(1+2\rho )}\left[\left(\rho +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{H_\rho ^{(1)}(x_1)}{\sqrt{x_1}}}\sqrt{x_1}H_{\rho +1}^{(1)}(x_1)\right].`$ (3.32)
If $`\rho 3/2`$ Eq. (3.32) gives

$`c_+(k)=e^{i\frac{\pi }{8}}\sqrt{\pi }\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{x_1^{\frac{3}{2}}}{2\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{3}{4})\mu ^{\frac{1}{4}}}}+{\displaystyle \frac{ix_1^{\frac{1}{2}}}{2\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{3}{4})\mu ^{\frac{1}{4}}}}+\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{3}{4})\mu ^{\frac{1}{4}}}}+{\displaystyle \frac{(i1)\mu ^{1/4}}{\sqrt{2}\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{1}{4})}}\right]\sqrt{x_1}\right\}+𝒪(\mu ^{\frac{5}{4}}),`$ (3.33)
$`c_{}(k)=e^{i\frac{\pi }{8}}\sqrt{\pi }\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{x_1^{\frac{3}{2}}}{2\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{3}{4})\mu ^{\frac{1}{4}}}}{\displaystyle \frac{ix_1^{\frac{1}{2}}}{2\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{3}{4})\mu ^{\frac{1}{4}}}}+\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{3}{4})\mu ^{\frac{1}{4}}}}+{\displaystyle \frac{(i+1)\mu ^{1/4}}{\sqrt{2}\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{1}{4})}}\right]\sqrt{x_1}\right\}+𝒪(\mu ^{\frac{5}{4}}).`$ (3.34)
In the limit $`x_1=k\eta _11`$ the mean number of created quanta can be finally approximated as

$$\overline{n}(k)|c_{}(k)|^2=q|k\eta _1|^{2\rho }\mu ^{1/2}$$
(3.35)
where $`q`$ is a numerical coefficient of the order of $`10^2`$. The energy density of the created (massive) quanta can be estimated from

$$d\rho _\psi =\frac{d^3\omega }{(2\pi )^3}m\overline{n}(k)$$
(3.36)
where $`\omega =k/a`$ is the physical momentum. In the case of a de Sitter phase ($`\rho =3/2`$) the typical energy density of the produced fluctuations is

$$\rho _\psi (\eta )qmH_1^3\left(\frac{m}{H_1}\right)^{1/2}\left(\frac{a_1}{a}\right)^3$$
(3.37)
The produced massive quanta may become dominant. If they become dominant after $`\varphi `$ already decayed they will not lead to further constraints on the scenario. If they become dominant prior to the decay of $`\varphi `$ further constraints may be envisaged. The scale at which the massive fluctuations become dominant with respect to the radiation background can be determined by requiring that $`\rho _\psi (\eta _{})\rho _\gamma (\eta _{})`$ implying that

$$qmH_1^3\left(\frac{m}{H_1}\right)^{1/2}\left(\frac{a_1}{a_{}}\right)^3H_1^2M_\mathrm{P}^2\left(\frac{a_1}{a_{}}\right)^4,$$
(3.38)
which translates into

$$H_{}q^2mϵ^4,$$
(3.39)
where $`ϵ=H_1/M_\mathrm{P}`$. In order to make sure that the non-relativistic modes will become dominant after $`\varphi `$ already decayed $`H_{}<H_\varphi `$ should be imposed, that is to say $`m>10^2`$ TeV for $`ϵ10^6`$.

The maximum tolerable amount of entropy, in order not to wash-out any preexisting BAU is model-dependent but, in general, $`\mathrm{\Delta }S<10^5`$ seems to be acceptable . Defining $`T_\varphi `$ as the radiation gas already present at the scale $`H_\varphi `$, the entropy increase from $`T_\varphi `$ to $`T_{\mathrm{decay}}\sqrt{H_\varphi M_\mathrm{P}}`$ is of the order of

$$\mathrm{\Delta }S=\left(\frac{T_{\mathrm{decay}}}{T_\varphi }\right)^3,$$
(3.40)
where

$$T_\varphi =T_{}\left(\frac{a_{}}{a_\varphi }\right)m\xi ^{1/6}ϵ^{1/2},$$
(3.41)
where $`\xi =m/M_\mathrm{P}`$. Demanding that $`\mathrm{\Delta }S<10^5`$ implies that

$$\xi >10^{10}ϵ^3.$$
(3.42)
Taking, as usual, $`ϵ10^6`$, $`m>10`$ GeV.

Hence, if the constraints pertaining to the homogeneous mode are enforced, the bounds coming from the inhomogeneous modes do not invalidate the conclusions of the analysis. According to the logic expressed in Eq. (3.15), an illustrative example is the case where $`m>10^5`$ TeV and the BAU is generated after EWPT. In this case the bounds obtained in the present section are satisfied and the analysis of the evolution of the inhomogeneous modes shows that the qualitatively new bounds introduced in the picture are less constraining than the ones obtained in the analysis of the dynamics of the homogeneous mode.

## IV Evolution of the gauge field fluctuations

The evolution of the field $`\varphi `$ during and after the de Sitter stage implies, according to Eqs. (3.3)–(3.9), that the two-point function of the gauge field fluctuations may very well grow.

For $`\eta <\eta _1`$, a rough approximation suggests that the effect of the ohmic current is not present and the gauge field is in the vacuum state with $`k/2`$ energy in each of its modes. By promoting the classical fields to quantum mechanical operators we have that the physical polarizations of the magnetic field can be written as

$$\widehat{b}_i(\stackrel{}{x},\eta )=\frac{d^3k}{(2\pi )^{3/2}}\underset{\alpha }{}e_i^\alpha \left[\widehat{a}_{k,\alpha }b(k\eta )e^{i\stackrel{}{k}\stackrel{}{x}}+\widehat{a}_{k,\alpha }^{}b^{}(k\eta )e^{i\stackrel{}{k}\stackrel{}{x}}\right],$$
(4.1)
where $`b(k\eta )=B(k\eta )/g(\eta )`$ obey the equation

$$b^{\prime \prime }+\left[k^22\left(\frac{g^{}}{g}\right)^2+\frac{g^{\prime \prime }}{g}\right]b=0.$$
(4.2)
Notice that $`b(k\eta )`$ are the correct normal modes whose limit (for $`\eta \mathrm{}`$) should be normalized to $`\sqrt{k/2}e^{ik\eta }`$. The two-point correlation function of the magnetic fluctuations can then be expressed as

$$𝒢_{ij}(\stackrel{}{r},\eta )\widehat{b}_i(\stackrel{}{x},\eta )\widehat{b}_j(\stackrel{}{x}+\stackrel{}{r},\eta )=\frac{d^3k}{(2\pi )^3}P_{ij}(k)b(k,\eta )b^{}(k,\eta )e^{i\stackrel{}{k}\stackrel{}{r}},$$
(4.3)
where

$$P_{ij}(k)=\left(\delta _{ij}\frac{k_ik_j}{k^2}\right).$$
(4.4)
The magnetic energy density, derived from the energy-momentum tensor corresponding to the action of Eq. (2.2), is related to the trace of the correlation function reported in Eq. (4.1) over the physical polarizations:

$$\rho _B(r,\eta )=\rho _B(k,\eta )\frac{\mathrm{sin}kr}{kr}\frac{dk}{k}$$
(4.5)
where

$$\rho _B(k,\eta )=\frac{1}{\pi ^2}k^3|b(k,\eta )|^2.$$
(4.6)
A necessary condition in order to assess that gauge field fluctuations grow during the de Sitter phase is that the two-point function increases in the limit $`\eta \eta _1`$ .

Suppose that the gauge coupling decreases with monotonic dependence upon the field $`\varphi `$, namely

$$g(\eta )=\left(\frac{\varphi \varphi _1}{M_\mathrm{P}}\right)^{\frac{\lambda }{2}},\lambda >0.$$
(4.7)
This parametrisation is purely phenomenological, however, it allows to take into account, at once, some physically interesting cases like the one suggested by the low-energy string effective action where, in the limit of $`\varphi /M_\mathrm{P}<1`$, $`g^2(\varphi )\varphi `$.

Using Eq. (3.3) and Eq. (4.7) into Eq. (4.2) the time evolution of the normal modes of the magnetic field can be found analytically since the specific form of Eq. (4.2) falls in the same category of Eq. (3.19). Hence,

$$b(k,\eta )=N\sqrt{k\eta }H_\nu ^{(2)}(k\eta ),N=\frac{\sqrt{k\pi }}{2}e^{i\frac{\pi }{4}(1+2\nu )},$$
(4.8)
with $`\nu =(3\lambda +1)/2`$ and where $`H_\nu ^{(2)}(k\eta )`$ the Hankel function of second kind . Notice that the normalization $`N`$ has been chosen in such a way that for $`\eta \mathrm{}`$ the correct quantum mechanical normalization is reproduced. Consequently, following Eq. (4.3), the two-point function evolves as

$$\underset{\eta \eta _1}{lim}𝒢_{ij}(r,\eta )\left|\frac{\eta }{\eta _1}\right|^{3\lambda }.$$
(4.9)
Since the two-point function increases magnetic fluctuations are generated.

For sake of completeness the case of increasing gauge coupling will now be examined using the following phenomenological parameterisation

$$g(\eta )=\left(\frac{\varphi \varphi _1}{M_\mathrm{P}}\right)^{\frac{\delta }{2}},\delta >0.$$
(4.10)
Again different scenarios can be imagined. For instance, one coould argue in favour of scenarios where the gauge coupling depends upon $`\varphi `$ (or upon $`\eta `$) in a highly non-monotonic way. For the illustrative purposes of the present investigation it is however sufficient to focus the attention on the case of monotonic dependence.

Following now the same steps outlined in the case of decreasing gauge coupling the evolution of the two-point function can be obtained

$$\underset{\eta \eta _1}{lim}𝒢_{ij}(r,\eta )\left|\frac{\eta }{\eta _1}\right|^{23\delta }.$$
(4.11)
for $`\delta >1/3`$ and

$$\underset{\eta \eta _1}{lim}𝒢_{ij}(r,\eta )\left|\frac{\eta }{\eta _1}\right|^{3\delta }.$$
(4.12)
for $`\delta <1/3`$. If $`\delta <1/3`$ the correlation function decreases and this signals that large scale magnetic fields are not produced.

The back-reaction of the produced fluctuations can be safely neglected in de Sitter space. Looking at Eqs. (2.3) and (2.15) it can happen that if the magnetic fluctuations grow too much the term at the right hand side will become of the same order of the others. This is not the case. Using the conventions of this Section together with the explicit form of the scale factor in the de Sitter phase it can be shown that

$$\frac{1}{g^3a^2}\frac{g}{\varphi }\stackrel{}{B}^2\left|\frac{\eta }{\eta _1}\right|^{2\nu }|k\eta _1|^{52\nu }$$
(4.13)
where $`\nu `$ is determined from the specific power dependence of the coupling as a function of $`\varphi `$. Since we are interested in large scale modes we have $`k\eta _11`$. Therefore the back reaction effects are relevant towards the end of the de Sitter phase (i.e. $`\eta \eta _1`$ ) and for $`k\eta _1^1`$, namely exactly for the modes not relevant for the present investigation.

After the end of inflation the onset of the conductivity dominated regime may not be instantaneous. In this case after $`\eta _1`$ the presence of a reheating phase should be taken into account. Suppose, for instance, that $`g(\eta )`$ decreases according to Eq. (4.7). Suppose, moreover, that during reheating the background is dominated by the coherent oscillations of the inflaton. In this case the effective evolution of the geometry will be dominated by matter with $`a(\eta )\eta ^2`$. According to Eq. (3.4) (with $`\alpha 2`$), $`\varphi \eta ^3`$. The value of the magnetic inhomogeneities at $`\eta _\mathrm{r}`$ will be given by solving Eq. (4.2)

$$b(k,\eta _\mathrm{r})A_1\left(\frac{\eta _\mathrm{r}}{\eta _1}\right)^{\frac{3}{2}\lambda }+A_2\left(\frac{\eta _\mathrm{r}}{\eta _1}\right)^{1\frac{3}{2}\lambda },$$
(4.14)
where $`A_1`$ and $`A_2`$ are two arbitrary constants. Depending upon the value of $`\lambda `$ the fastest growing solution is selected in Eq. (4.14). This phase may induce further amplification on the two-point function since its main effect is to delay the conductivity-dominated regime.

### A Generalized MHD equations

For $`\eta >\eta _r`$ the role of the Ohmic diffusion becomes important and the evolution of the magnetic inhomogeneities will be described by the MHD equations generalized to the case of time varying gauge coupling.

The ordinary (i.e. fixed coupling) MHD treatment is an effective description valid for length scales larger than the Debye radius and for frequencies smaller than the iono-acoustic frequency. This means that MHD is accurate in reproducing the spectrum of plasma excitations obtained from the full kinetic (Vlasov-Landau) approach but only for sufficiently low frequencies and for sufficiently large scales.

Implicit in the ordinary MHD analysis is the assumption that the plasma has to be electrically neutral ($`\stackrel{}{}\stackrel{}{E}=0`$) over length scales larger than the Debye radius. Thus, this system of equations cannot be applied for distances shorter than the Debye radius and for frequencies larger than the plasma frequency  where a kinetic description should be employed.

MHD equations can be derived from a microscopic (kinetic) approach and also from a macroscopic approach where the displacement current is neglected . If the displacement current is neglected the electric field can be expressed using the Ohm law and the magnetic diffusivity equation can be derived

$$\frac{\stackrel{}{B}}{\eta }=\stackrel{}{}\times (\stackrel{}{v}\times \stackrel{}{B})+\frac{1}{\sigma }^2\stackrel{}{B}.$$
(4.15)
The term containing the bulk velocity field is called dynamo term and it receives contribution provided parity is globally broken over the physical size of the plasma. In Eq. (4.15) the contribution containing the conductivity is usually called magnetic diffusivity term.

In the superconducting (or ideal) approximation the resistivity of the plasma goes to zero and the induced (Ohmic) electric field is orthogonal both to the bulk velocity of the plasma and to the magnetic field \[i. e. $`\stackrel{}{E}\stackrel{}{v}\times \stackrel{}{B}`$\]. In the real (or resistive) approximation the resistivity may be very small but it is always finite and the Ohmic field can be expressed as

$$\stackrel{}{E}\frac{\stackrel{}{}\times \stackrel{}{B}}{\sigma }\stackrel{}{v}\times \stackrel{}{B}.$$
(4.16)
If the gauge coupling changes with time the system of equations obtained by neglecting the displacement current receives new contributions and the relevant equations can be obtained, in the resistive approximation, from Eqs. (2.15)–(2.19):

$`\stackrel{}{}\times \stackrel{}{E}={\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{B}}{\eta }},`$ (4.17)
$`\stackrel{}{E}={\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{J}}{\sigma }}\stackrel{}{v}\times \stackrel{}{B},`$ (4.18)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{g^2}}\stackrel{}{}\times \stackrel{}{B}=\stackrel{}{J}2{\displaystyle \frac{g^{}}{2g^3}}\stackrel{}{E},`$ (4.19)
Using Eqs. (4.17)–(4.19) the generalized magnetic diffusivity equation can be obtained:

$$\left(1\frac{2}{\sigma g^2}\frac{g^{}}{g}\right)\frac{\stackrel{}{B}}{\eta }=\stackrel{}{}\times (\stackrel{}{v}\times \stackrel{}{B})+\frac{1}{\sigma g^2}^2\stackrel{}{B}.$$
(4.20)
Notice that Eq. (4.20) reproduces Eq. (4.15) if $`g^{}0`$.

Suppose now that the plasma, whose effective Ohmic description has been presented, is relativistic. In the case when the coupling is constant $`\sigma `$ is constant and it is given by

$$\sigma \sigma _c(\eta )a(\eta ),$$
(4.21)
where $`\sigma _cT/g^2`$ scales as the inverse of $`a(\eta )`$ if the evolution of the Universe is, to a good approximation, adiabatic.

If $`g`$ is not constant, $`\sigma `$ is not constant anymore but it decreases if the gauge coupling increases and, vice versa, it increases if the gauge coupling decreases. In spite of this, in the generalized MHD equations, the combination which appears is always $`\sigma g^2`$ which is roughly constant for an adiabatically expanding Universe.

In the approximation of instantaneous reheating, the solution of Eq. (4.20) is given by

$$B(k,\eta )=B(k,\eta _1)e^{{\scriptscriptstyle {\scriptscriptstyle \frac{k^2}{\sigma g^22\frac{g^{}}{g}}}𝑑\eta }}.$$
(4.22)
According to Eqs. (3.13)–(3.14), in order to get the coupling frozen prior to $`H_{\mathrm{ew}}10^{17}`$ GeV, $`m>10^5`$ TeV shall be required. If the gauge coupling is always decreasing as a function of $`\eta `$, it can be parametrized by Eq. (4.7). Hence Eq. (4.22) can be evaluated by using the explicit evolution of $`\varphi `$ as obtained from Eqs. (3.8)–(3.9) implying that $`\varphi _\mathrm{r}\eta ^1`$, $`\varphi _\mathrm{m}\eta ^{3/2}`$ and $`\varphi _\mathrm{c}\eta ^3`$. The result is

$$B(k,\eta _0)=(\eta _1,\eta _\mathrm{m},\eta _\varphi ,\eta _\mathrm{c})e^{\frac{k^2}{\sigma g^2}(\eta _1+\eta _0)}$$
(4.23)
where $`\eta _0`$ is the present time and

$$(\eta _1,\eta _\mathrm{m},\eta _\varphi ,\eta _\mathrm{c})=\left[\left(\frac{\lambda +\sigma g^2\eta _1}{\lambda +\sigma g^2\eta _\mathrm{m}}\right)\left(\frac{3\lambda +2\sigma g^2\eta _\mathrm{m}}{3\lambda +2\sigma g^2\eta _\mathrm{c}}\right)^{\frac{3}{2}}\left(\frac{3\lambda +\sigma g^2\eta _\mathrm{c}}{3\lambda +\sigma g^2\eta _\varphi }\right)^3\right]^{\lambda \left[\frac{k}{\sigma g^2}\right]^2}.$$
(4.24)
Concerning Eqs. (4.23)–(4.24) few comments are in order. From Eq. (4.23) all the modes

$$k^2>k_\sigma ^2\frac{\sigma g^2}{\eta _0}$$
(4.25)
are suppressed by the effect of the conductivity. The present value of $`\omega _\sigma (\eta _0)`$  With $`\omega (\eta )k/a(\eta )`$ the physical momentum will be denoted. can be estimated by recalling that $`1/\eta _0H_0a_0`$ where $`H_010^{61}M_\mathrm{P}`$. Thus $`\omega _\sigma 10^3`$ Hz. Present modes of the magnetic fields are dissipated if $`\omega >\omega _\sigma `$.

As far as the problem of galactic magnetic fields is concerned, the relevant set of scales range around the Mpc corresponding to present modes of the magnetic field $`\omega _\mathrm{G}10^{14}`$ Hz, i.e. $`\omega _\mathrm{G}\omega _\sigma `$.

## V Magnetic field generation

Large scale magnetic fields have been postulated over fifty years ago in the context of cosmic rays. Prior to the development of magnetohydrodynamics there was the common belief that cosmic rays are in equilibrium with the stars (like the sun) . Fermi was probably the first one to realize that if our galaxy has a magnetic field, then cosmic rays could be in equilibrium with the large scale magnetic field of the galaxy. Implicit in the Fermi argument there was also the idea that large scale magnetic fields could also be present in other galaxies and, indeed, Fermi and Chandrasekar  tried to develop the first theory of gravitational instability in the presence of large scale magnetic fileds. Today large scale magnetic fields are measured with a number of different techniques. Among them Faraday rotation is certainly the most robust.

### A Generalities

When polarized radiation passes through a cold plasma containing a magnetic field the polarization plane of the incoming radiation gets rotated by an amount which is directly proportional to the Larmor frequency (and then to the magnetic field), to the square of the plasma frequency (and then to the electron density). The quantity which is experimentally measured is the shift in the polarization plane per quadratic interval of wave-length, namely:

$$\mathrm{RM}=\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }\chi }{\mathrm{\Delta }\lambda ^2}=811.9\left(\frac{n_\mathrm{e}}{\mathrm{cm}^3}\right)\left(\frac{B}{\mu \mathrm{Gauss}}\right)𝑑,\frac{\mathrm{rad}}{m^2}$$
(5.1)
where $`=l/\mathrm{kpc}`$ and $`l`$ is the integration variable running over the line of sight. It is clear from the expression of Eq. (5.1) that an independent estimate of the electron density is needed in order to asses the precise value of the magnetic fields we ought to measure. In the interstellar medium an estimate of the electron density along the line of sight is provided by the so called dispersion measurements . Pulsars emit regular pulses of electromagnetic radiation with periods ranging from few seconds to few milliseconds. By comparing the arrival times of different radio-signals at different radio-wavelengths, it is found that they are slightly delayed as they pass through the interstellar medium exactly because electromagnetic waves travel faster in the vacuum than in an ionized medium. From the amount of the delay one can infer the dispersion measurement , namely, $`n_\mathrm{e}𝑑l`$ . Dividing the rotation measurement by the dispersion measurement the mean magnetic field along the line of sight can be estimated.

Recently magnetic fields have been measured in the intra-cluster medium . ROSAT satellite identified a number of x-rays bright Abell clusters (XRBAC). From the surface brightness of the cluster the thermal electron density can be obtained. Various XRBAC (sixteen) have been monitored also with VLA observations. The clusters have been selected in order to show similar morphological features. From VLA observations the RM has been obtained, and from ROSAT the electron density has been obtained. The results show the presence of large scale magnetic fields ( of $`\mu `$Gauss strength) in the intra-cluster medium. The possible existence of large scale magnetic fields beyond the galaxy is also rather crucial for the deflection of high energy cosmic rays .

### B Origin of large-scale magnetic fields

The discovery of large scale magnetic fields in the intra-cluster medium implies some interesting problems for the mechanisms of generation of large scale magnetic fields. Let us consider, first of all, magnetic fields in galaxies. Usually the picture for the formation of galactic magnetic fields is related to the possibility of implementing the dynamo mechanism. The galaxy rotates with a typical period of $`10^8`$ yrs . By comparing the rotation period with the age of the galaxy (for a Universe with $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }0.7`$, $`h0.65`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{m}0.3`$) the number of rotations performed by the galaxy since its origin is approximately $`30`$. During these $`30`$ rotations the dynamo term of Eq. (4.15) dominates against the magnetic diffusivity term since parity is globally broken over the physical size of the galaxy. As a consequence an instability develops. This instability can be used in order to drive the magnetic field from some small initial condition up to its observed value. Most of the work in the context of the dynamo theory focuses on reproducing the correct features of the magnetic field of our galaxy . For instance one could ask the dynamo codes to reproduce the specific ratio between the poloidal and toroidal amplitudes of the magnetic field of the Milky Way.

In spite of these aspects, if the number of rotations of the galaxy is approximately $`30`$, the achievable amplification produced by the dynamo instability can be at most of $`10^{13}`$, i.e. $`e^{30}`$. Thus, if the present value of the galactic magnetic field is $`10^6`$ Gauss, its value right after the gravitational collapse of the protogalaxy might have been as small as $`10^{19}`$ Gauss over a typical scale of $`30`$$`100`$ kpc.

There is a simple way to relate the value of the magnetic fields right after gravitational collapse to the value of the magnetic field right before gravitational collapse. Since the gravitational collapse occurs at high conductivity the magnetic flux and the magnetic helicity are both conserved. Right before the formation of the galaxy a patch of matter of roughly $`1`$ Mpc collapses by gravitational instability. Right before the collapse the mean energy density of the patch, stored in matter, is of the order of the critical density of the Universe. Right after collapse the mean matter density of the protogalaxy is, approximately, six orders of magnitude larger than the critical density.

Since the physical size of the patch decreases from $`1`$ Mpc to $`30`$ kpc the magnetic field increases, because of flux conservation, of a factor $`(\rho _\mathrm{a}/\rho _\mathrm{b})^{2/3}10^4`$ where $`\rho _\mathrm{a}`$ and $`\rho _\mathrm{b}`$ are, respectively the energy densities right after and right before gravitational collapse. Henceforth, the correct initial condition in order to turn on the dynamo instability is $`B10^{23}`$ Gauss over a scale of $`1`$ Mpc, right before gravitational collapse.

Since the flux is conserved the ratio between the physical magnetic energy density and the energy density sitting in radiation is almost constant and therefore, in terms of this quantity (which is only scale dependent but not time dependent), the dynamo requirement can be rephrased as

$$r_\mathrm{B}(L)=\frac{\rho _\mathrm{B}(L,\eta )}{\rho _\gamma (\eta )}10^{34},L1\mathrm{Mpc}.$$
(5.2)
If the dynamo is not invoked but the galactic magnetic field directly generated through some mechanism the correct value to impose at the onset of gravitational collapse is

$$r_\mathrm{B}(L)10^8,L1\mathrm{Mpc}.$$
(5.3)
Clearly even the number given in Eq. (5.2) is, physically, not so small. The magnetic energy density stored in a quantum mechanical fluctuations of $`1`$ Mpc is, in terms of $`r_\mathrm{B}`$, $`10^{95}`$.

The possible applications of dynamo mechanism to clusters is still under debate and it seems more problematic . The typical scale of the gravitational collapse of a cluster is larger (roughly by one order of magnitude) than the scale of gravitational collapse of the protogalaxy. Furthermore, the mean mass density within the Abell radius ( $`1.5h^1`$ Mpc) is roughly $`10^3`$ larger than the critical density . Consequently, clusters rotate less than galaxies since their origin and the value of $`r_\mathrm{B}(L)`$ has to be larger than in the case of galaxies. Since the details of the dynamo mechanism applied to clusters are not clear, at present, it will be required that $`r_\mathrm{B}(L)10^{34}`$ (for instance $`r_\mathrm{B}(L)10^{20}`$), in order to see if in the parameter space of the present model magnetic fields larger than the (galactic) dynamo requirement.

### C Estimates of large scale magnetic fields

In the approximation of instantaneous reheating the typical (present) frequency corresponding to the end of inflation can be computed and it turns out to be

$$\omega _1(\eta _0)z_{\mathrm{dec}}^1T_{\mathrm{dec}}ϵ^{1/2}\xi ^{1/3}\phi ^{\frac{2}{3}}.$$
(5.4)
Since $`T_{\mathrm{dec}}0.26`$ eV , $`z_{\mathrm{dec}}^1T_{\mathrm{dec}}100\mathrm{GHz}`$. Eq. (5.4) can be obtained by red-shifting the highest mode, i.e. $`\omega _1(\eta _1)H_1`$ through the different stages of the evolution of the model, namely, according to Eqs. (3.11) and (3.14), from $`\eta _1`$ down to $`\eta _\mathrm{m}`$ and from $`\eta _\mathrm{m}`$ down to $`\eta _{rmc}`$. Recall that from $`\eta _\mathrm{c}`$ to $`\eta _\varphi `$ the Universe is, effectively, matter dominated. The other typical frequencies appearing in the time evolution of the gauge coupling can be written, in units of $`\omega _1(\eta _0)`$, as

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\omega _\mathrm{m}(\eta _0)}{\omega _1(\eta _0)}}=ϵ^{1/2}\xi ^{1/2},`$ (5.5)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\omega _\mathrm{c}(\eta _0)}{\omega _1(\eta _0)}}=\xi ^{1/2}ϵ^{1/2}\phi ,`$ (5.6)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\omega _\varphi (\eta _0)}{\omega _1(\eta _0)}}=ϵ^{1/2}\xi ^{7/6}\phi ^{2/3},`$ (5.7)
where, as in the case of Eq. (5.4) all the frequencies are evaluated at the present time.

In the case of decreasing gauge coupling \[described by Eq. (4.7)\] the amount of generated large scale magnetic field can be estimated from Eqs. (4.2)–(4.8) together with Eqs. (4.20)–(4.23). Bearing in mind that the typical frequency scale corresponding to $`1`$ Mpc is $`10^{14}`$ Hz we have, following the notations of Eq. (5.2)

$$r_B(\omega _\mathrm{G})=f(\lambda )ϵ^{\frac{3}{2}\lambda }\xi ^{\lambda \frac{4}{3}}\phi ^{2\lambda \frac{8}{3}}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}\hspace{0.17em}10}^{25(43\lambda )}𝒯(\omega _\mathrm{G}),$$
(5.8)
where

$$f(\lambda )=\frac{2^{3\lambda 1}}{\pi ^3}\mathrm{\Gamma }^2\left(\frac{3}{2}\lambda +\frac{1}{2}\right),$$
(5.9)
and

$$𝒯(\omega _\mathrm{G})e^{\frac{\omega _\mathrm{G}^2}{\omega _\sigma ^2}}\left[\left(\frac{\omega _\varphi }{\omega _1}\right)\left(\frac{\omega _\varphi }{\omega _\mathrm{m}}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}\left(\frac{\omega _\varphi }{\omega _\mathrm{c}}\right)^{\frac{3}{2}}\right]^{\lambda \frac{\omega _\mathrm{G}^2}{T_0^2}},$$
(5.10)
which means, using Eqs. (5.4)–(5.7),

$$𝒯(\omega _\mathrm{G})=e^{\frac{\omega _\mathrm{G}^2}{\omega _\sigma ^2}}\left[ϵ^{1/2}\phi ^1\xi ^{5/2}\right]^{\lambda \frac{\omega _\mathrm{G}^2}{T_0^2}}.$$
(5.11)
Notice that in Eq. (5.10) is the present CMB temperature.

In order to illustrate the regions of the parameter space where magnetogenesis is possible $`\phi 1`$ will be assumed. In Fig. 1 and Fig. 2 the case of decreasing gauge coupling is discussed. In Fig. 1, $`\lambda `$ is fixed and the exclusion plot is given in terms of $`ϵ`$ and $`\xi `$. In particular, for illustration, $`\lambda =1`$ has been chosen. The choice of $`\lambda 1`$ implies that $`g^2(\varphi )\varphi `$. Such a case is favoured from the tree-level string effective action where the effective coupling can be approximated as $`g^2(\varphi )\varphi /M_\mathrm{P}`$ for $`\varphi <M_\mathrm{P}`$.

The two vertical lines lines mark, respectively, the bounds coming from BBN \[i.e. $`\xi >10^{15}`$, from Eq. (3.14)\] and from the electroweak epoch \[i.e. $`\xi >10^{11}`$, from Eq. (3.15)\]. For consistency with the assumptions of Eqs. (3.2)–(3.3) $`m/H_11`$, implying $`ϵ\xi `$. With the lower dashed line the bound $`ϵ>\xi `$ is reported. Notice that the requirement of Eq. (3.42) is not numerically relevant. The upper dashed line is obtained by requiring, according to Eq. (3.39), that $`H_\varphi >H_{}`$. Finally, the full (diagonal) line is derived by imposing on Eqs. (5.8)–(5.11) the dynamo requirement of Eq. (5.2).

In Fig. 2 the value of $`\xi `$ has been fixed to $`10^{11}`$, as required by the considerations related to the electroweak epoch and the magnetogenesis region is described in terms of $`ϵ`$ and $`\lambda `$, both varying over their physical range. The two horizontal lines fix the bounds coming from $`ϵ10^6`$ and from $`ϵ>\xi `$. With the dashed line the curve $`r_B(\omega _\mathrm{G})10^{20}`$ is denoted. Hence, values larger than the dynamo requirement are allowed. This observation may be relevant in the context of magnetic fields associated with clusters.

In Fig. 2, $`\lambda `$ lies in the range $`0<\lambda <4/3`$. This choice guarantees the growth of the correlation function of the magnetic inhomogeneities during the de Sitter stage.

In order not to conflict with large scale bounds coming from the isotropy of the CMB the energy spectra of the produced gauge field fluctuations have to decay at large distance scales, implying that $`0<\lambda 4/3`$. To be compatible with CMB anisotropies $`r_\mathrm{B}(\omega _{\mathrm{dec}})10^{10}`$ should be imposed (where $`\omega _{\mathrm{dec}}10^{16}`$ Hz). If the condition $`0<\lambda <4/3`$ is enforced, the spectra increase with frequency and the possible bounds coming from the anisotropy of the CMB are satisfied.

An analogous estimate can be obtained in the case of increasing gauge coupling discussed in Eq. (4.10). In this case

$$r_\mathrm{B}(\omega _\mathrm{G})f(\delta )ϵ^{\frac{3}{2}\delta 1}\xi ^{\delta 2}\phi ^{42\delta }\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}\hspace{0.17em}10}^{25(63\delta )}𝒯(\omega _\mathrm{G}),$$
(5.12)
where

$$f(\delta )=\frac{2^{3\delta 3}}{\pi ^3}\mathrm{\Gamma }^2\left(\frac{3}{2}\delta \frac{1}{2}\right),$$
(5.13)
and

$$𝒯(\omega _\mathrm{G})=e^{\frac{\omega _\mathrm{G}^2}{\omega _\sigma ^2}}\left[ϵ^{1/2}\phi ^1\xi ^{5/2}\right]^{\delta \frac{\omega _\mathrm{G}^2}{T_0^2}}.$$
(5.14)
In Fig. 3 and Fig. 4 the requirements coming from the dynamo mechanism as well as the other theoretical constraints are illustrated. For both plots $`ϵ<10^6`$ and $`\phi 1`$. In Fig. 3 the case $`\delta =2`$ is illustrated. The shaded area selects the region of the parameter space where the dynamo requirement of Eq. (5.2) is imposed on Eq. (5.12). The two vertical lines illustrate the conditions of Eqs. (3.14)–(3.15). As in Fig. 2 the two dashed lines correspond to the constraints coming from the inhomogeneous modes and from the condition $`ϵ>\xi `$.

The requirement that the spectra decrease at large distance scales implies, in this case that $`\delta 2`$. The condition on the growth of the correlation function obtained in Eqs. (4.11)–(4.12) imply $`\delta >1/3`$. Thus the interesting physical range of Eq. (4.10) and (5.12) will be $`1/3<\delta 2`$.

In Fig. 4 the parameter space is illustrated for fixed values of $`\xi `$, i.e. $`\xi 10^{11}`$. As in Fig. 3 the full and dashed curves correspond to the dynamo requirements imposed on Eq. (5.12). The shaded area selects the allowed region in the space of the parameters where magnetogenesis is possible for $`10^{11}<ϵ<10^6`$. As in the case of Fig. 2 there are regions in the shaded area where values much larger than the magnetogenesis requirement are possible (see the dashed line in Fig. 4).

As it has been pointed out in deriving the theoretical bounds on the scenario the requirement $`\xi 10^{11}`$ may be too restrictive since it excludes the variation of the gauge coupling at the electroweak time. To relax this assumption is possible and it would require a precise analysis of the dynamics of the EWPT in the presence of time varying gauge coupling. At the moment this kind of analysis is not available.

Summarizing this illustrative discussion, there are regions in the parameter space of the models wher all the theoretical constraints are satisfied and where magnetogenesis is possible. In particular, it is possible that the gauge coupling freezes prior to the electroweak epoch, leading still to magnetogenesis.

## VI Concluding remarks

There are no reasons why the gauge couplings should be constant throughout all the history of the Universe. If they are allowed to change prior to the formation of the light elements they can lead to computable differences in the cosmological evolution.

In the present paper the interplay between inflationary magnetogenesis and the evolution of the Abelian gauge coupling has been addressed. In a phenomenologically reasonable model of inflationary and post-inflationary evolution the relaxation of the gauge coupling leads to a growth in the correlation function of magnetic inhomogeneities. Large scale magnetic fields are then generated. The evolution of the gauge coupling is driven, in the present context, by a massive scalar.

Since the gauge coupling evolves significant changes in the evolution of the plasma can be envisaged. In the present investigation the ordinary MHD equations have been generalized to the case of time evolving gauge coupling but other effects could be envisaged. In particular, the generlization of the full kinetic approach to the case of time evolving “electron” charge would be of related interest.

The value of large scale magnetic fields produced with this mechanism has been estimated. For a broad range of parameters the obtained values of the magnetic fields are much larger than the dynamo requirements.

In the present investigation the main assumption has been that the only gauge coupling free to evolve is the Abelian one. Furthermore, the parameters of the model have been chosen in such a way that the gauge coupling is not dynamical by the onset of the electroweak phase transition. It would be interesting to relax both assumptions since they may lead to potential differences with the standard scenarios.

Therefore, in many respects, the present investigation is not conclusive. At the same time it shows that acceptable models for the evolution of the gauge couplings can be obtained in a standard cosmological framework.

## Acknowledgements

The author wishes to thank M. E. Shaposhnikov for important discussions.


format: text

text:
# Broad Band Equilibration of Strangeness

## 1 Introduction

As shown in some talks  of this conference, statistical descriptions work very successfully for multihadron final states in nucleon-nucleon, nucleon-nucleus, and nucleus-nucleus collisions. In this approach the chemical equilibrium particle ratios are functions of temperature $`T`$ and baryon chemical potential $`\mu _B`$ only***In the canonical description for heavy ion collision we need a system size parameter but the parameters are related to the number of participants. For example, $`V1.9\pi A_p`$ . And in the grand canonical description we need the chemical potentials of conserved charges..

Recently GSI measured Au-Au and Ni-Ni collisions at 0.8 $``$ 2.0 GeV. Some measured particle multiplicity ratios are in Table 1 below.

Cleymans, Oeschler and Redlich  fit them well by a common chemical freezeout at $`T=70`$ MeV and $`\mu _B=750`$ MeV in terms of a canonical thermal model. This is another success of statistical description. However, it is hard to understand that the chemical freezeout density from these values of $`T`$ and $`\mu _B`$ is just $`\rho _0/4`$ where the $`K^{}`$mean free path is $``$ 6 fm. Bratkovskaya and Cassing’s transport calculations in Fig. 1 show that $`K^{}`$production comes from all densities.

We can understand simply why they are compelled to obtain such a low density. By strangeness conservation the number of $`K^+`$is the sum of the number of $`K^{}`$and that of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$Of course we need to include $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$ hyperon. Here they are neglected to simplify the discussion. We measured $`K^+`$/$`K^{}`$$``$ 32 in Table 1 so $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$/$`K^{}`$$``$ 31. Thus if we get the right $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$/$`K^{}`$ratio, $`K^+`$/$`K^{}`$follows. The ratio is

$`R={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{K^{}}}=\left({\displaystyle \frac{\overline{p}_\mathrm{\Lambda }}{\overline{p}_{\overline{K}}}}\right)^{\frac{3}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{e^{(E_\mathrm{\Lambda }\mu _B)/T}}{e^{E_{\overline{K}}/T}}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{M_\mathrm{\Lambda }}{M_{\overline{K}}}}\right)^{\frac{3}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{e^{(M_\mathrm{\Lambda }\mu _B)/T}}{e^{M_{\overline{K}}/T}}}.`$ (1)
If $`\mu _B=M_N`$, $`M_\mathrm{\Lambda }=M_N+175`$ MeV gives $`R`$ 280. It’s too large so they need $`\mu _B=750`$ MeV, 190 MeV lower than $`M_N`$, in order to get the right value of $`R`$. That’s why they obtained the low density for equilibration with free-space mass hadrons.

## 2 In-medium kaons

A simple way to introduce an in-medium $`K^{}`$mass is the V-spin formalism in . In the formalism we can obtain the kaon effective mass by considering the kaon fields as small fluctuations $`\theta `$ around the $`\sigma `$ axis as shown in Fig. 2.

The Hamiltonian for explicit chiral symmetry breaking is

$`H_{X\chi SB}=\mathrm{\Sigma }_{KN}<\overline{N}N>\mathrm{cos}\theta +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}m_K^2f^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta .`$ (2)
Then the effective mass of kaons (small fluctuation $`\theta `$) comes to drop from movement towards restoration of explicitly broken chiral symmetry;

$`{\displaystyle \frac{m_K^2}{m_K^2}}=1{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Sigma }_{KN}\rho }{f^2m_K^2}}`$ (3)
with an approximation $`<\overline{N}N>\rho `$. Taking $`m_s150`$ MeV, $`m_u=m_d=6`$ MeV, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{\pi N}=46`$ MeV and $`<N|\overline{s}s|N>\frac{1}{3}<N|\overline{d}d|N>`$ , we obtain

$`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{KN}={\displaystyle \frac{(m_u+m_s)<N|\overline{u}u+\overline{s}s|N>}{(m_u+m_d)<N|\overline{u}u+\overline{d}d|N>}}\mathrm{\Sigma }_{\pi N}400\text{MeV}.`$ (4)
The effective value of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{KN}`$ is somewhat smaller by range corrections ;

$`(\mathrm{\Sigma }_{KN})_{eff}=(10.37\omega _K^2/m_K^2)\mathrm{\Sigma }_{KN}`$ (5)
where $`\omega _K^{}^{}=m_K^{}\frac{\omega _K^{}^{}}{m_K}V_K`$ is the self-energy of the antikaon at rest with vector potential $`V_K`$.

## 3 Broad equilibration and kaon condensation

Considering kaon mass shift in medium, we can rewrite $`R`$ in Eq. (1) as

$`R=\left({\displaystyle \frac{M_\mathrm{\Lambda }}{m_K^{}^{}}}\right)^{3/2}e^{(\mu _B+\omega _K^{}^{})/T}e^{M_\mathrm{\Lambda }/T}.`$ (6)
We assume that kaon vector potential $`V_K`$ is proportional to the density below $`\rho _0`$ and constant above $`\rho _0`$, because the vector decoupling is expected at high density . As $`\mu _B`$ goes from 860 MeV to 905 MeV, $`\rho `$ goes from 1.2$`\rho _0`$ to 2.1$`\rho _0`$ and $`\mu _B+\omega _K^{}^{}`$ goes from 1230 to 1227 MeV with fixed $`T=`$ 70 MeV. Even at $`\rho _0/4`$ $`\mu _B+\omega _K^{}^{}`$ is 1245 MeV. Disregarding the dependence on $`m_K^{}^{}`$ in the denominator and on TThe increase of $`R`$ by $`m_K^{}^{}`$ in the denominator can be compensated for by increasing $`T`$. for simplicity, we found the ratio $`R`$ is independent of density. This results can be checked by the recent experimental results. The ratio $`K^+`$/$`K^{}`$,which is directly related to $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$/$`K^{}`$, is almost independent of centrality in GSI  and AGS  experiments. In other words, the ratio of hyperon to $`K^{}`$is roughly the same at all densities. We call it “broad-band equilibration”.

So the negatively charged strangeness sector looks well and truly equilibrated within itself. Positively charged strangeness hardly changes as the system expands below 2$`\rho _0`$ . Since the number of positively charged strangeness is the same as that of the negatively charged strangensess, most of the negatively charged strangeness particles will be produced early.

The strong attraction that the $`K^{}`$experiences in dense matter can make the kaon energy come down to the electron chemical potential and kaons be able to replace electrons. If the vector decouples in the changeover from nucleons to constituent quarks as variables as we expect, the kaon will condensate before chiral restoration. The kaon condensation sets the maximum neutron star mass 1.5 $`M_{}`$ . This is consistent with the observation that all the neutron star masses are below 1.5 $`M_{}`$, in systems with degenerate companions, where the companion structure should not influence the measurement.


text:
# FOSSIL RADIO PLASMA IN CLUSTER MERGER SHOCK WAVES

## 1 Introduction

In the current picture of hierarchical structure formation clusters of galaxies grow mainly by the merging of smaller and moderately sized sub-clusters. During such merger events a significant fraction of the kinetic energy of the intergalactic medium (IGM) is dissipated in Mpc-sized shock waves. The shock waves are responsible for heating the IGM to temperatures of several keV. Moreover, they are likely to inject and accelerate relativistic particle populations on cluster scales.

Cluster-wide relativistic electron populations are indeed observed in several merging or post-merging clusters. The so-called cluster radio relics are are believed to be directly related to cluster mergers (Enßlin et al. 1998, Roettiger et al. 1999, Venturi et al. 1999, Enßlin & Gopal-Krishna 2001). Like the radio halos they are extended radio sources with a steep spectrum. In the literature radio relics are often confused with radio halos even though several distinctive properties exist. Cluster radio relics are typically located near the periphery of the cluster; they often exhibit sharp emission edges and many of them show strong radio polarisation.

In several cases it could be shown that shock waves are present at the locations of the relics. Moreover, the cluster radio relic 1253+275 in the Coma cluster shows a morphological connection to the nearby radio galaxy NGC 4789 (Giovannini, Feretti & Stanghellini 1991). This suggests that radio relics may be fossil radio plasma that has been revived by a shock. Fossil radio plasma is the former outflow of a radio galaxy in which the high-energy radio emitting electrons have lost their energy. Due to their invisibility in the radio these cocoons are also called radio ghosts (Enßlin 1999).

The first relic formation models considered diffusive shock acceleration (Fermi I) as the process producing the radio emitting electrons (Enßlin et al. 1998, Roettiger et al. 1999, Venturi et al. 1999). However, when a fossil radio cocoon is passed by a cluster merger shock wave, with a typical velocity of a few 1000 km/s, the cocoon is compressed adiabatically and not shocked, owing to the much higher sound speed within it. Therefore, shock acceleration cannot be the mechanism that re-energises the relativistic electron population in the cocoon. But the energy gained during the adiabatic compression combined with the increase in the magnetic fields strength can make a fossil radio cocoon emit radio waves again. One prerequisite for this is that the electron population is not older than 0.2 - 2 Gyr (Enßlin & Gopal-Krishna 2001).

Enßlin & Gopal-Krishna (2001) showed that the spectral properties of cluster radio relics are well reproduced by this scenario. Here and in Enßlin & Brüggen (2001), we demonstrate that the observed morphologies and polarisation patterns are reproduced by this model as well. This is done with the help of the first 3-dimensional magneto-hydrodynamical (MHD) simulations of a fossil radio cocoon that is passed by a shock wave. We produce artifical radio maps that can be compared directly to new high-resolution radio maps of cluster radio relics.

## 2 Method

### 2.1 3D MHD Simulation

The magneto-hydrodynamical simulations were obtained using the ZEUS-3D code which was developed especially for problems in astrophysical hydrodynamics (Stone & Norman 1992a, b).

The simulations were computed on a Cartesian grid with 1003 and 2003 equally spaced zones. In the units of the simulation the computational domain ranged form 0 to 10 in each coordinate. The simulation was set up such that a stationary shock formed at $`x=5`$ that is perpendicular to the direction of the flow.

In the pre-shock region a spherical bubble was set up, in which the density was lowered by a factor of 10 with respect to the environment. In turn, the temperature in the bubble was raised such that the bubble remained in pressure equilibrium with its surroundings. Inside the bubble a magnetic field was set up which was computed from a random field that consisted of several hundred Fourier modes. Finally, the bubble was filled with around $`10^4`$ uniformly distributed tracer particles that are advected with the flow.

### 2.2 Radio Maps

The radio maps are constructed using the tracer particles. Initially, each tracer particle is located inside the radio plasma cocoon and is associated with the same initial relativistic electron population. Then the electron spectrum for each tracer particle is evolved in time taking into account synchrotron, inverse Compton, and adiabatic energy losses and gains (see Enßlin & Gopal-Krishna 2001).

The pre-shock external gas density is set to about $`510^4\mathrm{electrons}/\mathrm{cm}^3`$ and the temperature to 1-2 keV. The simulation box is assumed to have a size of 1 Mpc3 and to be located at a distance of 100 Mpc from the observer.

An increase in the radio luminosity during the compression can be seen in the simulation. However, the strong increase expected from the analytical model of Enßlin & Gopal-Krishna (2001) could not be reproduced here. This is a result of the decaying magnetic fields due to numerical resistivity, and not a failure of the model. In order not to be too much affected by the rapidly evolving spectral cutoff we restrict our analysis in the following to a low radio frequency, namely 100 MHz.

### 2.3 Radio Morphology

As the shock wave passes the initially spherical radio cocoon (Fig. 2), the cocoon is torn into a filamentary structure (Fig. 3). In the simulations with weak magnetic fields the final morphology is toroidal for a strong shock, Fig. 4, and shows two tori in the case of a weak shock wave, Fig. 3). Such a double torus seems to be observed in the relic in Abell 85 (Slee et al. 2001). The degree of polarisation is relatively high everywhere. The electric polarisation vectors tend to be perpendicular to the radio filaments indicating aligned magnetic field structures within them. At some few spots the polarisation E-vectors are aligned with the radio filaments (see Fig. 4).

### 2.4 Radio Polarisation

The total integrated polarisation flux of a radio relic observed face-on can be expected to be small. In the case of a toroidal relic all polarisation orientations are roughly equally present and therefore cancel each other out in the surface integration. But even in a more complex relic the polarisation cancels out in the face-on view.

In the edge-on view this is different. Now a preferential direction exists: E-vectors tend to be aligned with the projected shock normal. Whenever the imprinted polarisation dominates over the initial intrinsic one, the direction of the E-vector can be used relatively reliably to infer the shock normal projected onto the plane of the sky. The angle with respect to this plane can be estimated roughly from the total polarisation.

Thus, in principle, the 3-dimensional orientation (modulo a mirror ambiguity) can be derived from the polarisation data only. However, these points will need additional investigations before it is applicable to real data.

### 2.5 Shock Properties

The observed dimensions of a cluster radio relic with a toroidal shape can be used to get a rough estimate of the shock strength. This is based on the observation that in the numerical simulations the diameter $`D`$ of the spherical cocoon and the major radius of the torus after the passage of the shock are approximately equal. Since the major and minor radii of the torus can be read off approximately from a sensitive high-resolution radio map, the compression of the radio plasma by the shock can be estimated. In the idealised case of an initially spherical and finally toroidal radio cocoon, the compression factor is given by

$$C=\frac{V_{\mathrm{sphere}}}{V_{\mathrm{torus}}}=\frac{2D^2}{3\pi d^2}.$$
(1)
Using Eq. (12), the shock strength can be estimated. Assuming the radio cocoon to be in pressure equilibrium with its environment before and after the shock passage, the pressure jump in the shock is given by $`P_2/P_1=C^{\gamma _{\mathrm{rp}}}`$. If the adiabatic index of the radio plasma $`\gamma _{\mathrm{rp}}`$ is assumed to be known, e.g $`\gamma _{\mathrm{rp}}=4/3`$ for an ultra-relativistic equation of state, the shock strength can be estimated. But even if this assumption is not justified and the geometry deviates from the idealised geometries assumed here, the strength of the shock wave should be correlated to the ratio of the global diameter of a toroidal relic and the thickness of its filaments. Unfortunately, the quality of the best current radio maps of relics do not yet allow a qualitative comparison of the shock strength by comparing the $`D/d`$ ratios of toroidal relics. But these maps demonstrate that the necessary sensitivity and resolution might be reached soon.

If, furthermore, the strength of the shock wave of well resolved cluster radio relics can be estimated independently from X-ray maps of the IGM, it would be possible to directly measure the adiabatic index of radio plasma. Even though the present radio and X-ray data do not have the required accuracy yet, this method will enable us to measure the unknown equation of state of radio plasma in the future.

In our simulations the adiabatic index of the radio plasma ($`\gamma _{\mathrm{rp}}=\gamma _{\mathrm{gas}}=5/3`$) and the shock strength are known ($`P_2/P_1=3.5`$ and $`P_2/P_1=17.4`$ for the shock compression factor $`C_{\mathrm{shock}}=2`$ and $`C_{\mathrm{shock}}=3.3`$ respectively). Thus we find that the ratio of the length scales $`D/d3`$ for $`C_{\mathrm{shock}}=2`$ and $`D/d5`$ for $`C_{\mathrm{shock}}=3.3`$. This is roughly consistent with our synthetic radio maps. At least the qualitative correlation of shock strength and diameter ratio is clearly observed, as can be seen in Figs. 3 and 4.

## 3 Conclusion

We have presented 3-D MHD simulations of a hot, magnetised bubble that traverses a shock wave in a much colder and denser environment. This is assumed to be a fair model for a blob of radio plasma in the IGM which is passed by a cluster merger shock wave. We have calculated radio polarisation maps for the relativistic electron population and computed the spectrum subject to synchrotron-, inverse Compton- and adiabatic energy losses and gains. These maps show that the shock wave produces filamentary radio emitting structures and, in many cases, toroidal structures. Such filaments and tori are indeed observed by very recent high-resolution radio maps of cluster radio relics (Slee et al. 2001). Our simulations find polarisation patterns which indicate that the magnetic fields are mostly aligned with the direction of the filaments. This also seems to be the case for the observed cluster radio relics.

Therefore, we conclude that we have found strong evidence that cluster radio relics indeed consist of fossil radio plasma that has been compressed adiabatically by a shock wave, as proposed by Enßlin & Gopal-Krishna (2001).

The formation of the tori and filaments is not instantaneous. First, the simulations show a phase in which the radio plasma is strongly compressed into a flat shape. During this phase a sheet-like radio relic with a flat spectrum would be observed. Later, the radio plasma moves towards the edges of this sheet and finally becomes a torus (or a more complicated, filamentary structure). Since spectral ageing is likely to have affected these later stages, we expect that on average the filamentary relics have a steeper, more bent radio spectrum than the sheet-like ones.

Our simulations indicate that the diameter $`D`$ of the bubble of radio plasma remains approximately constant during the passage of the shock. It was also found that the final structure consists of radio filaments of small diameter $`d`$ that are distributed (often in form of a torus) in a region of size $`D`$. The compression factor of the radio plasma is proportional to $`(D/d)^2`$, and this ratio is a measure of the shock strength. Thus, the approximate compression factor of the radio plasma can be read off the radio map. The local radio polarisation strongly reflects the complicated magnetic field structures while the total integrated polarisation of a relic reveals the 3-dimensional orientation of the shock wave. Since the compression aligns the fields with the shock plane, the sky-projected field distribution is aligned with the intersection of the shock plane and the sky plane. Thus, the direction of the total E-polarisation vector yields the sky-projected normal of the shock wave. The angle between the normal of the shock and the plane of the sky can in principle be estimated from the fractional polarisation of the integrated flux. We conclude that this work provides strong evidence that cluster radio relics are revived bubbles of fossil radio plasma, the so-called radio ghosts. Spectral aging arguments (Enßlin & Gopal-Krishna 2001) predict the existence of a sizable population of yet undetected cluster radio relics which are only observable with sensitive low frequency radio telescopes. More details of the simulations can be found in Enßlin & Brüggen (2001).

## Acknowledgments

We thank O.B. Slee, A.L. Roy, M. Murgia, H. Andernach, M. Ehle for providing us with their observational data prior to publication, and allowing us to display their 1.4 GHz map of the relic in Abell 85. We also thank G. Giovannini and L. Feretti for access to their 330 MHz data of the same relic. We acknowledge A. Kercek’s contributions to a very early stage of this simulation project. Some of the computations reported here were performed using the UK Astrophysical Fluids Facility (UKAFF). This work was supported by the European Community Research and Training Network ‘The Physics of the Intergalactic Medium’. TAE and MB acknowledge the award of a European grant to attend this excellent conference.

## References