text:
# Evidence for a Mid-Atomic-Number Atmosphere in the Neutron Star 1E1207.4-5209

## 1 Introduction

A major goal of neutron star (NS) research has remained unrealized despite 30 years of effort - to determine the fundamental properties of the superdense matter in a NS interior, in particular its equation of state (EOS) and composition. There are many approaches which can be employed in this effort (van Kerkwijk (2001) and references therein), but one of the most intensively studied is to exploit the thermal radiation from isolated NS. This radiation can be used to deduce information about the EOS from neutron star cooling theory (Tsuruta et al., 2002; Yakovlev et al., 1999). Extracting information about the NS interior is not straightforward, however, since the observed spectrum does not represent the NS surface emission, but is modified by radiative transfer effects in the NS atmosphere. The problem of unfolding the observed spectrum and understanding NS interiors thus depends on deducing the composition of the atmosphere.

NS atmospheres are interesting in their own right. We know little about their nature, other than that some NS probably have Hydrogen atmospheres (Pavlov et al., 2002a), since they fit well to the sophisticated H-atmosphere models that have been developed (Pavlov et al., 1995; Zavlin & Pavlov, 2002). The observations have been silent on the question of whether non-Hydrogen atmospheres exist.

The NS 1E1207.4-5209 was discovered by Helfand & Becker (1984) with the Einstein Observatory and is associated with the SNR PKS 1209-51. Subsequent observations established it as a prototypical radio silent NS associated with a SNR (Bignami et al., 1992; Caraveo et al., 1996). ROSAT and ASCA observations were fit with a black-body spectrum (Mereghetti et al., 1996; Vasisht et al., 1997) and a Hydrogen atmosphere model (Zavlin et al., 1998). No X-ray pulsations were detected. Chandra detected X-ray pulsations with $`P=0.424`$ s (Zavlin et al., 2000). While this is perhaps not surprising in light of previous work, the small period derivative estimated (Pavlov et al., 2002b) certainly was unexpected. The inferred surface B-field is $`(24)\times 10^{12}`$ G.

Even more remarkable, Sanwal et al. (2002) (hereafter SZPT) have discovered features at $`0.7`$ keV and $`1.4`$ keV are required to obtain acceptable fits to the spectrum (which was fit with a $`2.6\times 10^6`$ K underlying black-body continuum). A feature of marginal significance and unclear origin was also noted at $`2`$ keV. A subsequent observation by XMM-Newton (Mereghetti et al., 2002) has provided some hint of substructure in the features, and has marginally detected the $`2`$ keV feature seen by Chandra.

Three different phenomenological fits indicative of either absorption lines or edges were used by SZPT to fit the two strong features. Of enormous significance, the spectrum was shown to be inconsistent with Hydrogen atmosphere models. The intense effort which has gone into the Hydrogen atmosphere models and their success in explaining other NS observations (Pavlov et al., 2002a) lends credence to the inevitable conclusion that the atmosphere of 1E1207.4-5209 is something other than Hydrogen. Unfortunately, as pointed out elsewhere (Zavlin & Pavlov, 2002), work on non-Hydrogen atmospheres at high B-fields is much less developed. SZPT argued on various grounds that the features could not arise via cyclotron lines. Instead they tentatively suggested emission from a once ionized-Helium atmosphere with a B-field of $`1.5\times 10^{14}`$ G. This B-field is inconsistent with that derived from the spin parameters, but SZPT argue this could be due to an off-centered B-field or glitches affecting the $`\dot{P}`$ measurement. Others have argued for a cyclotron line solution at lower B-field (Xu et al., 2002). Mereghetti et al. (2002) claimed an atmosphere of Iron or other high-Z elements at a B-field of $`10^{12}`$ G, although they did not actually fit their XMM-Newton data to a model.

In this paper we offer alternate interpretations of these spectral features. All our interpretations involve atomic transitions, mainly in He-like ions of mid-Z elements at $`B10^{12}`$ G, consistent with the B-field derived from the NS spin properties. The most likely of these interpretations is that the NS atmosphere contains Oxygen or Neon; most noteworthy is that all our models, whether considering just the two strong features or including the third weak feature, demand mid-Z elements for an acceptable solution. Our model, combined with the XMM-Newton and Chandra data, easily rule out the Iron and high-Z solutions of Mereghetti et al. (2002).

Some comments are in order on our approach. The atomic spectroscopy data used in this analysis is based on a novel approach for obtaining fast and accurate solutions to the Schrödinger equation for B-fields in the Landau regime (appropriate for all cases considered here). This approach, multiconfigurational, perturbative, hybrid, Hartree, Hartree-Fock theory, allows rapid computation of transition energies and oscillator strengths for arbitrary atom, ion, excitation state and B-field (Mori & Hailey (2002a), hereafter MH02a). This permits a complete search of all possible spectroscopic transitions consistent with the given line or edge energies.

While it may appear that this approach produces an uninterestingly large number of potential solutions, we demonstrate in a companion paper (Mori & Hailey (2002b), hereafter MH02b) that this is not the case. We show that the presence of two or more line or edge features provides a remarkable robustness to a host of poorly-understood atomic physics effects and unambiguously restricts the atmosphere composition to mid-Z elements.

## 2 Chandra data reduction

We only briefly mention our data reduction here, as our approach closely follows that of SZPT. Indeed, we emphasize that none of our conclusions here would be modified if we simply used the spectral line parameters derived by SZPT. Our analysis is described in more detail in MH02b. The results presented here are for phase-integrated spectra only. Subsequent work will consider phase-resolved data, which can provide more information on the system geometry. We fit the spectrum with two models: a blackbody with two absorption edges (edge model) and a blackbody with two absorption lines (line model). As noted by SZPT, these spectral features are required to get acceptable fits. The fit parameters for our models are given in Table 1. We show the raw Chandra spectrum in figure 1 overlaid with a blackbody to clearly indicate the presence of the absorption features. Figures 2 show the results of our best fit line and edge models.

## 3 General Spectroscopic Considerations

We briefly review the quantum numbers of bound electrons in B-fields in the Landau regime. States are labeled by $`(m,\nu )`$ where $`m`$ is the magnetic quantum number and $`\nu `$ is the longitudinal quantum number. The $`\nu =0`$ states have larger binding energy than the $`\nu >0`$ states. Consistent with the terminology of MH02a, we call the former tightly-bound states and the latter loosely-bound states. Generally the ground state of an ion is a tightly-bound state. In the X-ray band transitions are mostly likely to be either photo-absorption (tightly-bound state to continuum) or absorption lines from tightly-bound to loosely-bound state (tight-loose transition). Tight-tight transitions appear in the optical band. Details of the transition selection rules are discussed elsewhere (MH02a,MH02b).

## 4 Specific Atmosphere Solutions (Two Spectral Features)

We first considered the two strongest features at $`0.7`$ keV and $`1.4`$ keV and assume both features are due to atomic transitions in a single element and ionization state (Case A). This effectively defines a solution for the dominant absorbing element in terms of He-like ions. Li-like ions and those in lower ionization states are not dominant absorbers under the expected atmospheric conditions (MH02b). H-like ions cannot be the dominant absorbers because this is grossly incommensurate with the features’ relative widths and strengths even under conditions far removed from local thermodynamic equilibrium (MH02b). H-like ions can, however, be present since the relevant spectral features will be blended with the He-like features. In the He-like ions, the electrons are making tight-loose transitions out of the $`(0,0)(1,0)`$ ground state to the $`(0,1)(1,1)`$ excited states respectively, or to the continuum. Neither tightly-bound states at higher magnetic quantum number nor non-adjacent tightly-bound states are acceptable. In the former case the feature energy ratios cannot be produced and in the latter case unobserved features in the Chandra band would be produced.

We searched for any combination of element, redshift and B-field which could give the observed positions of the spectral features. Our B-field range was $`10^{11}`$ G to $`2\times 10^{14}`$ G. In the case of edge solutions we also permitted (small) pressure shifts (details in MH02b). Line solutions are insensitive to pressure shifts. The properties of the solutions including derived values of the B-field and redshift are shown in table 2. The first two solutions involve atomic line transitions in He-like Oxygen and Neon and the third solution He-like Neon absorption edges. A similar Oxygen solution was rejected because its redshift was too low, violating causality and stability conditions for the NS interior (Lindblom, 1984; Haensel et al., 1999). For the Neon edge solution there is an electron cyclotron line in the Chandra/XMM-Newton energy band but it was made to overlap the higher energy spectral feature by introducing a small pressure shift ($`5090`$ eV). Such pressure shifts slightly affect the energy ratio of the two edge features and serve to further constrain other elements and conditions of the atmosphere (MH02b). The line and edge widths are all consistent with expectations for Stark broadening and non-constant B-field broadening respectively (MH02b).

Our case B assumes that one spectral feature is an atomic transition and the second is a cyclotron line. A 1.4 keV or 0.7 keV electron cyclotron line defines a B-field of $`1.2\times 10^{11}(1+z)`$ G or $`0.6\times 10^{11}(1+z)`$ G respectively. In the former case solutions can only be found for H-like ions transitioning out of the $`(0,0)`$ ground state to the $`(0,1)`$ excited state or the continuum. These are all mid-Z solutions albeit with lower B-field than those considered above. In the case of a 0.7 keV electron cyclotron line, the B-field is low enough that our perturbation method breaks down for higher Landau levels and is therefore less accurate; we estimate that putative solutions would involve the elements Beryllium or Boron and are therefore implausible. If one of the features is a nuclear cyclotron line then the other feature must be a transition from the ground state of either Helium or Hydrogen. However there is no combination of $`B`$ and $`z`$ that can reproduce the line positions. Thus nuclear cyclotron lines are ruled out.

Although Case B is formally allowed we consider it highly unlikely. There are difficulties in attempting to reconcile the depth and width of the spectral features (MH02b). Nevertheless it is interesting that even this scenario including cyclotron lines only admits solutions involving mid-Z elements.

## 5 Specific Atmosphere Models (Three Spectral Features)

Table 2 also shows proposed solutions if the feature at $`2`$ keV is confirmed (Case C solutions). Again it is of importance to note that only mid-Z solutions are acceptable. We had to relax one of our previous assumptions by assuming additional significant absorption from H-like ions. An admixture of H-like ions in a given atmosphere is quite plausible for reasonable conditions of temperature and density (MH02b).

The first case considered is identical to the He-like Oxygen/Neon case presented above but with the addition of a H-like Oxygen/Neon absorption edge due to the $`(0,0)`$ ground state to continuum transition. In this model the other H-like lines overlap the He-like lines so no additional features are produced.

The second solution invokes photoabsorption edges in He-like Neon for the two lower energy features and the higher energy feature is due to an electron cyclotron line.

## 6 Discussion

Our most important conclusion is that all viable solutions for B-fields comparable to that inferred from the NS spin parameters require mid-Z atmospheres in both the two and three spectral feature case. Our solutions which most closely correspond to the inferred B-field demand He-like Oxygen and Neon.

In contrast to this paper, SZPT proposed ultrahigh B-field solutions. Their Helium atmosphere appears problematic, however. In order to get the right feature positions SZPT’s H-like Helium features must of necessity arise in transitions from electrons in the $`(0,0)`$ or $`(1,0)`$ quantum states to $`(0,1)`$ and $`(1,1)`$ states. The $`(0,1)`$ state is heavily depopulated at the types of ion densities one expects and the $`(1,1)`$ state is actually autoionized due to the large nuclear cyclotron energy. In fact the motional Stark shift and pressure effects in Helium will likely destroy all the loosely-bound states. Consequently one is forced to assume the features are absorption edges, and this leads to severe difficulty explaining the relative edge strengths (MH02b).

Mereghetti et al. (2002) did not fit their XMM-Newton data, but proposed nevertheless that the spectral features could be attributed to Iron or some other high-Z element at a field $`10^{12}`$ G. Our current work rules out their proposal. There is no combination of B-field, redshift, element or ionization states, even with unphysical, arbitrary pressure shifts, that is consistent with the XMM-Newton and Chandra data.

The interpretation we present here makes an important prediction: the observed features may show substantial substructure when observed with higher spectral resolution. Transition energies from the tightly bound ground state to loosely bound final excited states differing in longitudinal quantum number are rather close to each other, and may be blended. Details of predicted energies and transition assignments are presented in MH02b. Whether detailed atmospheric models would lead to a washing out of this substructure through broadening is not clear, but its detection would certainly confirm that the features are atomic transitions since we would not expect similar substructure in cyclotron lines. In fact, Mereghetti et al. (2002) claim a marginal detection of such substructure.

Concerning the B-field derived from the free parameter fits to the data, we note that our Neon and Oxygen line solutions are all within a factor of two or three of the B-field derived from spin parameters. The discrepancy may lie in the NS B-field geometry or line blending. Line blending will affect our B-field (and redshift) estimate, but will not affect our element identifications.

The analysis here, along with that of SZPT, begs the question of why there is anything in the atmosphere other than Hydrogen. Oxygen or Neon are expected constituents near the NS mass cut in many models of supernova explosions (Arnett, 1996). Indeed due to turbulent mixing in such explosions Oxygen can be found throughout the core (Herant & Woosley, 1994). But given that a very thin layer of Hydrogen accreted from the interstellar medium is enough to produce an optically thick Hydrogen atmosphere, we are left to ponder mechanisms by which such accretion can be inhibited, or at least permit simultaneous emission from a mid-Z element. One possibility is that the timescale for an optically thick layer to accrete onto the surface is shorter than that for gravitational stratification in the atmosphere (van Kerkwijk, 2001). In that case, even trace amounts of mid-Z elements could lead to strong emission (Pavlov et al., 2002a). Optical observations of the associated SNR indicate the presence of Oxygen and it has been argued that the unusually high Galactic latitude of this NS implies the Oxygen originated in the progenitor star (Ruiz, 1983). Thus a rich source of Oxygen is available. Alternately the mid-Z atmosphere may be associated with the NS mass cut, and a propeller effect may be severely inhibiting accretion of Hydrogen. We note that several of our proposed solutions allow a Hydrogen-rich environment (MH02b).

For more progress to be made on 1E1207.4-5209 it will be necessary to develop complete models of NS atmosphere for mid-Z elements incorporating the more sophisticated atomic data bases we have utilized here. This source has much to tell us in the years to come, especially when higher resolution spectroscopic observations become available.

The authors thank David Helfand for helpful discussions and a careful reading of the manuscript.


format: text

text:
# Quintessence and the Relic Density of Neutralinos

## I Introduction.

The recent WMAP observations of the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) anisotropies , combined either with the determination of the relation between the distance of luminosity and the redshift of supernovae SNeIa , or with the large scale structure (LSS) information from galaxy and cluster surveys , give independent evidence for a cosmological average  matter density of $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{m}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{=}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{0.27}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\pm }\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{0.04}`$ . This value may be compared to a baryon density of  $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{b}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{=}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{0.044}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\pm }\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{0.004}`$ as indicated by nucleosynthesis  and the relative heights of the first acoustic peaks in the CMB data. A significant fraction of the matter in the universe is dark and non–baryonic. The cosmological observations also point towards a flat universe with $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{tot}}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{=}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{1.02}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\pm }\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{0.02}`$ and strongly favour the existence of a cosmological constant which contributes a fraction $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{=}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{0.73}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\pm }\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{0.04}`$ to the closure density. The pressure–to–density ratio $`w`$ of that fluid is negative with a value of $`w=1`$ in the case of an exact cosmological constant. That $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ component is called dark energy as opposed to the $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{m}`$ dark matter contribution.

The nature of the astronomical dark matter is still unresolved insofar. The favorite candidate for the non–baryonic component is a weakly–interacting massive particle (WIMP). The so–called neutralino naturally arises in the framework of supersymmetric theories. Large efforts have been devoted in the past decade to pin down these evading species. New experimental techniques have been devised to look for the direct and indirect astrophysical signatures of the presence of neutralinos in our Milky–Way  as well as in extra–galactic systems . The uncertainty on the theoretical estimates of the various signals has been considerably reduced. As an illustration, the energy spectrum of secondary spallation antiprotons – the natural background to a putative neutralino–induced antiproton extra radiation – is now well under control . Another example of the level of sophistication which the theoretical investigations have reached is provided by the calculations of the neutralino relic abundance $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\chi `$. The observation that this relic density – depending on the numerous parameters of the model – falls in the ballpark of the measured value for $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{m}`$ has been a crucial argument in favor of supersymmetric particles as a viable option to non–baryonic dark matter. A large number of processes – typically $``$ 2000 – are now taken into account and the corresponding diagrams are automatically generated and calculated with the help of numerical codes such as micrOMEGAs . Co–annihilations are taken into account and the thermal averaging $`\sigma v`$ of the product of the velocity by the cross section is performed.

Surprisingly enough, calculations of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\chi `$ are based on the assumption that the universe is dominated by radiation when neutralinos decouple from the primordial plasma and reach their relic density. This hypothesis is presumably correct as soon as primordial nucleosynthesis (BBN) sets in at a time of $``$ 1 second. We have however little information on the earlier pre–BBN period, a crucial stage during which neutralinos freeze out. If the expansion of the universe is modified with respect to a pure radiation–dominated behaviour, the quenching of these species could be drastically modified. An increase in the expansion rate $`H`$ accelerates the decoupling of neutralinos and translates into larger values for the relic density $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\chi `$.

Exploring the effects of a modified expansion history of the universe onto the relic abundance of neutralinos is no longer a mere academic exercise. Such an analysis has become mandatory inasmuch as a new and unexpected component – the dark energy $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ – has been discovered. The potential interplay between that component and its matter counterpart $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{m}`$ is worth being explored and may have unexpected consequences. The archetypal model for the cosmological dark energy is the so–called quintessence  and relies on the existence of a neutral scalar field $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ with Lagrangian density

$$=\frac{1}{2}g^{\mu \nu }_\mu \mathrm{\Phi }_\nu \mathrm{\Phi }V\left(\mathrm{\Phi }\right).$$
(1)
Should the field $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ be homogeneous and the metric be flat, the energy density may be expressed as

$$\rho _\mathrm{\Phi }T_{\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}0}}^0=\frac{\dot{\mathrm{\Phi }}^2}{2}+V\left(\mathrm{\Phi }\right),$$
(2)
whereas the pressure obtains from $`T_{ij}g_{ij}P`$ so that

$$P_\mathrm{\Phi }=\frac{\dot{\mathrm{\Phi }}^2}{2}V\left(\mathrm{\Phi }\right).$$
(3)
If the kinetic term $`\dot{\mathrm{\Phi }}^2/2`$ is negligible with respect to the contribution of the potential $`V\left(\mathrm{\Phi }\right)`$, a pure cosmological constant with $`w_\mathrm{\Phi }=P_\mathrm{\Phi }/\rho _\mathrm{\Phi }=1`$ is recovered since $`\rho _\mathrm{\Phi }=P_\mathrm{\Phi }=V\left(\mathrm{\Phi }\right)`$. As indicated by cosmological observations, this is the case today.  But the field $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}`$ has been continuously rolling down. Should the kinetic term $`\dot{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}}^\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{2}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{/}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{2}`$ have dominated over the potential $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{V}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\left(}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\right)}`$ in the early universe, a period of kination – i.e., domination by the kinetic energy of the field $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}`$ – would have ensued with drastic effects on the expansion rate of the universe .

In section II, we briefly recall why a pure cosmological constant should be disregarded and replaced by a dynamical dark energy component in the form of a scalar field, the so–called quintessence whose salient features are presented. The existence of tracking solutions provides a natural solution to the problem of initial conditions. We also pay some attention to the difficulty of generating a kination–dominated expansion in the early universe together with a cosmological constant today . We show that this difficulty may be circumvented depending on the potential $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{V}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\left(}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\right)}`$ that drives the evolution of the scalar field and we propose examples where quintessence boosts the expansion rate in the past while it still accounts for $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$ today. Following a suggestion by , we investigate in section III the effects of kination on the thermal decoupling of neutralinos and derive an approximate relation between their relic abundance $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\chi `$ and their annihilation cross section in the presence of kination. Section IV is devoted to a discussion of the consequences of this scenario on the astrophysical signatures of neutralino dark matter.

## II Kination and the expansion rate of the universe.

Two difficulties arise with a pure cosmological constant. The coincidence or fine–tuning problem lies in the fact that the vacuum energy $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\rho }_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}^\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{0}`$ comes into play only today and is therefore of order the closure density $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\rho }_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{C}^{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}}}`$, an exceedingly small value with respect to the typical Planck energy scale $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{M}_{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{Planck}}}^\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{4}`$ set by particle physics

$$\frac{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\rho }_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}^\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{0}}{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{M}_{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{Planck}}}^\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{4}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\frac{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{4}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{keV}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{cm}}^\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{3}}{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\left\{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{1.22}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\times }\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{10}^{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{19}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{GeV}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\right\}}^\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{4}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{10}^{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{123}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{.}$$
(4)
The other issue is related to the initial conditions in which a pure cosmological constant has to be prepared. At the Planck time, the corresponding vacuum energy density $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\rho }_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}^\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{i}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{=}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\rho }_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}^\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{0}`$ needs to be exceedingly fine–tuned with respect to the radiation density

$$\frac{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\rho }_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}^\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{i}}{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\rho }_{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{rad}}}^\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{i}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\frac{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\rho }_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}^\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{0}}{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\rho }_{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{rad}}}^\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{0}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\left\{}\frac{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{T}_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{0}}{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{M}_{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{Planck}}}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\right\}}^\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{4}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{10}^{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{125}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{.}$$
(5)
Because a pure cosmological constant does not vary in time, similar values are obtained in the previous relations. This has led to some confusion between the fine–tuning and the initial condition problems. Quintessence actually solves only the latter difficulty while the fine–tuning of $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\rho }_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}^\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{0}`$ with respect to $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{M}_{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{Planck}}}^\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{4}`$ is forced by direct observation.

The idea of quintessence is based on the existence of a scalar field $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}`$ that rolls down its potential $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{V}`$ according to the homogeneous Klein–Gordon equation

$$\ddot{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{+}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{H}\dot{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{+}\frac{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{V}}{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{=}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}0}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{.}$$
(6)
Should $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}`$ satisfy to that relation, its energy–momentum tensor would be immediately conserved as may be inferred from the identity

$$\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{D}_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mu }\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{T}^{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mu }\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\alpha }}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{=}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\left(}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}^\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\alpha }\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\phi }\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\right)}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\left\{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{D}_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mu }\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\left(}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}^\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mu }\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\phi }\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\right)}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{+}\frac{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{d}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{V}}{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{d}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\phi }}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\right\}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{.}$$
(7)
That energy–momentum tensor obtains from the Lagrangian density (1) and may be written as

$$\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{T}_{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mu }\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\nu }}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{=}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mu }\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\phi }\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\nu }\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\phi }\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{g}_{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mu }\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\nu }}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{.}$$
(8)
Its conservation translates into the adiabatic expansion of quintessence as

$$\frac{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{d}}{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{d}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{t}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\left(}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\rho }_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{a}^\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{3}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\right)}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{=}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{P}_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}\frac{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{d}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{a}^\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{3}}{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{d}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{t}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{,}$$
(9)
where the dark energy density $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\rho }_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}`$ and pressure $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{P}_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}`$ have been defined in relations (2) and (3). The expansion rate $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{H}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{=}\dot{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{a}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{/}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{a}`$ is increased by the presence of quintessence

$$\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{H}^\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{2}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{=}\frac{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{8}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\pi }\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{G}}{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{3}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\left\{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\rho }_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{B}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{+}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\rho }_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\right\}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{,}$$
(10)
where the energy density of the background $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\rho }_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{B}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{=}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\rho }_{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{rad}}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{+}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\rho }_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{m}}`$ is dominated by radiation in the past and by matter since equality. Notice that at fixed equation–of–state $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{w}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{=}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{P}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{/}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\rho }`$, the energy density scales as

$$\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\rho }\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{a}^{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\left(}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{1}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{+}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{w}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\right)}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{.}$$
(11)
As discussed in , we are looking for tracking solutions of (6) for which $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{w}_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{B}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{w}_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{constant}}`$. This allows a natural and smooth decrease of the quintessence energy density $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\rho }_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}`$ that remains subdominant until recently when it takes over from the background $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\rho }_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{B}}`$. This scenario is realized only if $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\left|}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{V}^{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{/}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{V}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\right|}`$ decreases with $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{V}`$ as time goes on. This translates into the condition

$$\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{=}\frac{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{V}^{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\prime \prime }}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{V}}{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{V}^{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{>}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{1}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{,}$$
(12)
where the prime denotes the derivative with respect to the field $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}`$. As long as the background dominates – for $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{=}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\rho }_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{/}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{(}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\rho }_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{+}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\rho }_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{B}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{)}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{1}`$ – the parameter $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}`$ is related to the equation–of–state $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{w}_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}`$ of the tracking solution through

$$\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{w}_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{=}\frac{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{w}_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{B}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\left(}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{1}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\right)}}{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{1}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{+}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\left(}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{1}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\right)}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{.}$$
(13)
Inverse power law potentials $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{V}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}^\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\alpha }`$ with $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\alpha }\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{>}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{0}`$ naturally drive quintessence since $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{1}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{=}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{1}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{/}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\alpha }\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{>}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{0}`$. On the contrary, exponential potentials $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{V}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{exp}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\left(}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{/}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{M}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\right)}`$ for which $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{=}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{1}`$ and $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{w}_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{=}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{w}_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{B}}`$ should be disregarded.

As shown in , the tracking solutions are attractors towards which the field $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}`$ relaxes for a large range of values of the initial energy density $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\rho }_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}^\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{i}}`$. Quintessence solves therefore the initial condition problem to a large extent – actually to the extent that $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\rho }_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}^\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{i}}`$ is comprised between $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\rho }_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}^\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{0}`$ and $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\rho }_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{B}}^\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{i}}`$. The Klein–Gordon equation (6) may be written as

$$\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\left|}\frac{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{V}^{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}}}{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{V}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\right|}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{=}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}3}}\sqrt{\frac{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\kappa }}{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}}}\sqrt{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{1}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{+}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{w}_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\left\{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{1}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{+}\frac{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{1}}{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{6}}\frac{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{d}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{ln}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{x}}{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{d}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{ln}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{a}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\right\}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{,}$$
(14)
where $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\kappa }\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{=}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{8}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\pi }\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{G}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{/}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3}}`$ and

$$\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{x}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{=}\frac{\dot{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}}^\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{2}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{/}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{2}}{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{V}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{=}\frac{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{1}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{+}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{w}_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}}{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{1}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{w}_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{.}$$
(15)
Along the tracking solution, $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{w}_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}`$ and $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{x}`$ are constant. When quintessence pops above the background – when $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\rho }_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\rho }_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{B}}`$ – relation (14) translates into

$$\frac{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}}{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{M}_{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{Planck}}}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\frac{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\alpha }}{\sqrt{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{24}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\pi }}}\sqrt{\frac{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}}{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{1}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{+}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{w}_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{𝒪}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{(}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{1}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{)}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{,}$$
(16)
in the case of an inverse power law potential. The field $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}`$ is naturally of order the Planck mass $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{M}_{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{Planck}}}`$ when quintessence takes over from the background. The actual coincidence – forced by direct observation – lies in the fact that quintessence becomes dominant today. As its energy density – and therefore the potential $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{V}`$ – are of order the closure density $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\rho }_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{C}^{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}}}`$, this implies a significant amount of fine–tuning as

$$\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{V}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\left(}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{0}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\right)}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{=}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mu }^\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{4}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\left\{}\frac{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{M}_{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{Planck}}}}{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{0}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\right\}}^\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\alpha }\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mu }^\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{4}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\rho }_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{C}^{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{10}^{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{47}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{GeV}}^\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{4}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{,}$$
(17)
where $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{0}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{M}_{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{Planck}}}`$ is the present value of the scalar field. We conclude at this stage that quintessence does not solve the coincidence or fine–tuning problem . This point cannot be too strongly emphasized.

As also sketched in , the entire scenario of quintessence would be in jeopardy should the initial energy density $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\rho }_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}^\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{i}}`$ exceed $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\rho }_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{B}}^\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{i}}`$. If so, the initial position from which the scalar field starts to roll lies too high on the potential. The field $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}`$ falls precipitously. As its kinetic energy becomes dominant, a kination stage ensues during which the potential $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{V}`$ plays no role. The Hubble friction – see the Klein–Gordon equation (6) – slows down the fall and the field gets frozen at the value $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{F}}`$ such that

$$\frac{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{F}}}{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{M}_{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{Planck}}}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\sqrt{\frac{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{3}}{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{4}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\pi }}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\left\{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{1}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{+}\frac{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{1}}{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{2}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{ln}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{i}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\right\}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{,}$$
(18)
where $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{i}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{=}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\rho }_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}^\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{i}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{/}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\rho }_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{B}}^\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{i}}`$. If, in the early universe, quintessence drives a period of kination with $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{i}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{1}`$, the field gets frozen at $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{F}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{10}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{100}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{M}_{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{Planck}}}`$, a value that exceeds by far what is required by the conventional quintessence scheme where $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{0}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{M}_{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{Planck}}}`$. The field has overshot the tracking solution and its energy density has become so small – the potential $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{V}`$ decreases with increasing $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}`$ – that it cannot account for $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\rho }_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}^\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{0}`$. A period of early kination seems therefore incompatible with a near constant dark energy density that becomes dominant today.

The problem raised by overshooting lies in the incompatibility between the conditions $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{F}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{M}_{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{Planck}}}`$ and $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{0}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{M}_{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{Planck}}}`$. However the latter has been derived in the framework of inverse power law potentials. We anticipate that the overshooting difficulty could be circumvented with other potentials. As an illustration, we consider the toy–model where

$$\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{V}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\left(}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\right)}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{=}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mu }^\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{4}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{exp}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\left\{}\frac{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{M}}{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\right\}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{,}$$
(19)
with $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{M}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{𝒪}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\left(}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{M}_{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{Planck}}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\right)}`$. In order for dark energy to overcome the background only today, we still need – as before – a considerable amount of fine–tuning as $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mu }^\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{4}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\rho }_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{C}^{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{10}^{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{47}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{GeV}}^\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{4}`$. That potential has nevertheless the correct behaviour with $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{=}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{V}^{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\prime \prime }}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{V}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{/}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{V}^{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{=}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{1}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{+}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{/}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{M}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{>}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{1}`$ and an associated equation–of–state

$$\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{w}_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{=}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\left\{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{1}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{+}\frac{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{M}}{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{4}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\right\}}^\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{1}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{,}$$
(20)
on the tracking solution. The initial condition problem is solved to the extent that $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\rho }_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}^\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{i}}`$ is now larger than $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\rho }_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{B}}^\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{i}}`$ and consequently drives a period of kination. In that case, the field rapidly freezes at $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{F}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{M}_{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{Planck}}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{M}`$ – irrespective of its precise initial value – and the potential reaches an asymptotic value of

$$\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{V}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\left(}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{F}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{M}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\right)}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mu }^\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{4}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{=}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\rho }_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}^\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{0}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{.}$$
(21)
This example is remarkable as early kination is now mandatory in order to get today a cosmological constant with $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{w}_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}}`$.

In our counter–example to the overshooting no go theorem, the potential (19) has a sharp decrease for small values of the field and then varies smoothly for $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{M}_{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{Planck}}}`$. A dynamical realization of that idea – proposed in  – is based on

$$\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{V}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{1}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{,}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{2}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{=}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{M}^{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\alpha }\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{+}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{4}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\left\{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{1}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{2}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\right\}}^{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\alpha }\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{/}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{2}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{,}$$
(22)
where two scalar fields come into play. If one of the fields starts not too far from the tracking solution whereas the other one is dropped from an elevated position on the potential, we still get kination in the past whereas a cosmological constant is recovered today. This behaviour occurs for a wide range of initial conditions on $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{1}`$ and $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{2}`$. Other examples are presented in  with the same trend and we conclude at this stage that a period of early dominant kination could perfectly occur at the time of neutralino decoupling without precluding a significant contribution today from a near constant dark energy density.

In the standard big bang model, the early universe is only filled with a gas of ultra–relativistic particles that behaves like a radiation of photons. If the kinetic energy $`\dot{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}}^\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{2}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{/}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{2}`$ of some additional scalar field component dominates both the potential $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{V}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\left(}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\right)}`$ and the radiation energy density $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\rho }_{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{rad}}}`$, a period of kination sets in. The overall energy density decreases consequently like

$$\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\rho }_{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{tot}}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\rho }_\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\frac{\dot{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}}^\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{2}}{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{2}}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{a}^\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{6}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{,}$$
(23)
with respect to the scale factor $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{a}`$. This amounts to say that the derivative $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{V}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{/}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}`$ is negligible with respect to the damping term $`\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{3}\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{H}\dot{\textcolor[rgb]{0,0,0}{\mathrm{\Phi }}}`$ in the Klein–Gordon equation (6) as the field tumbles down the potential. The energy density of radiation is related to the temperature $`T`$ of the primordial plasma through

$$\rho _{\mathrm{rad}}=g_{\mathrm{eff}}(T)\frac{\pi ^2}{15}T^4.$$
(24)
The effective number $`g_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ of degrees of freedom allows to express $`\rho _{\mathrm{rad}}`$ in units of the corresponding photon density $`\rho _\gamma `$. The evolution of the scale factor $`a`$ with respect to the temperature $`T`$ follows from the requirement that the entropy of the radiation is conserved so that

$$S_\gamma \frac{4\pi ^2}{45}h_{\mathrm{eff}}(T)T^3a^3$$
(25)
remains constant as $`T`$ drops. The effective number $`h_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ of entropic degrees of freedom is very close to $`g_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ since

$$h_{\mathrm{eff}}g_{\mathrm{eff}}\underset{\mathrm{B}}{}\frac{g_\mathrm{B}}{2}+\underset{\mathrm{F}}{}\frac{7g_\mathrm{F}}{16}.$$
(26)
The sum is carried over the bosonic $`g_\mathrm{B}`$ and fermionic $`g_\mathrm{F}`$ spin states that correspond to those species that are massless at temperature $`T`$. We infer that at any given time, the scale factor $`a`$ and the temperature $`T`$ are related through

$$\frac{a}{a_0}=\left\{\frac{h_{\mathrm{eff}}(T_0)}{h_{\mathrm{eff}}(T)}\right\}^{1/3}\frac{T_0}{T},$$
(27)
where $`a_0`$ is the scale factor at some temperature of reference $`T_0`$. During the decoupling of neutralinos, $`g_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ and $`h_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ do not change drastically so that $`a`$ varies approximately like $`T^1`$ at that time. This will prove to be helpful when we derive an approximate formula for the relic density $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\chi `$ in the next section. Numerical results are nevertheless based on equation (27).

We parametrize the contribution of quintessence to the overall energy density through

$$\eta _\mathrm{\Phi }=\frac{\rho _\mathrm{\Phi }^0}{\rho _\gamma ^0}.$$
(28)
The ratio $`\eta _\mathrm{\Phi }`$ of the quintessence–to–photon energy densities is defined at temperature $`T_0`$. The latter has been set equal to 1 MeV. Because quintessence should not upset the conventional BBN scenario, we expect in principle $`\eta _\mathrm{\Phi }1`$. Note however that a non–vanishing value for $`\eta _\mathrm{\Phi }`$ may still alter the pre–BBN era because quintessence may be the dominant form of energy at that time if kination holds. Its energy density varies actually like

$$\frac{\rho _\mathrm{\Phi }}{\rho _\gamma ^0}=\eta _\mathrm{\Phi }\left\{\frac{h_{\mathrm{eff}}(T)}{h_{\mathrm{eff}}(T_0)}\right\}^2\left(\frac{T}{T_0}\right)^6,$$
(29)
whereas for radiation, the temperature dependence is smoother with

$$\frac{\rho _{\mathrm{rad}}}{\rho _\gamma ^0}=g_{\mathrm{eff}}(T)\left(\frac{T}{T_0}\right)^4.$$
(30)
Going back in time, $`\rho _\mathrm{\Phi }`$ rises more steeply than $`\rho _{\mathrm{rad}}`$. Even for small values of $`\eta _\mathrm{\Phi }`$, quintessence dominates over the radiation at early times. Up to a numerical constant, we conclude that the expansion rate $`H`$ is increased by a factor of $`\sqrt{\eta _\mathrm{\Phi }}\left(T/T_0\right)`$ with respect to the conventional radiation dominated cosmology. The next section is devoted to the consequences of such a change in $`H`$ on the decoupling of neutralinos.

## III The freeze–out of neutralinos.

At early times – as long as the temperature $`T`$ exceeds their mass $`m_\chi `$ – neutralinos are in chemical equilibrium. They steadily annihilate into lighter species while the reverse process is concomitantly active. The annihilation–production reaction

$$\chi +\overline{\chi }f\overline{f},W^+W^{},Z^0Z^0,HH\mathrm{}$$
(31)
reaches its thermodynamical equilibrium. This implies a neutralino density

$$n_\chi ^0=g_\chi T^3e^y\left(\frac{y}{2\pi }\right)^{3/2},$$
(32)
that only depends on the mass–to–temperature ratio $`y=m_\chi /T`$ as well as on the number $`g_\chi `$ of spin states. As soon as $`T`$ drops below $`m_\chi `$ as the result of the overall adiabatic expansion, the neutralino population becomes non–relativistic and the annihilations take over the thermal productions. Neutralinos are severely depleted until their density $`n_\chi ^0`$ is so low that they fail to annihilate with each other. Reaction (31) stops to be in equilibrium. The resulting freeze–out occurs typically for values of the mass–to–temperature of $`y_F20`$. Because the probability for a neutralino to encounter a partner has become less than unity per typical expansion time $`H^1`$, the density $`n_\chi `$ remains subsequently constant per covolume – per volume that expands with the expanding universe. The relic abundance $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\chi `$ readily obtains from the value of $`n_\chi ^0`$ at freeze–out.

Assuming that there are as many species $`\chi `$ than antiparticles $`\overline{\chi }`$ – which is an obvious statement if neutralinos are Majorana fermions as is the case for instance in the supersymmetric extensions of the standard model – the density $`n_\chi `$ evolves according to the basic equation

$$\frac{dn_\chi }{dt}=3Hn_\chi <\sigma _{\mathrm{an}}v>n_\chi ^2+<\sigma _{\mathrm{an}}v>n_{\chi }^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}}{}_{}{}^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}.$$
(33)
The first expression in the right–hand side refers to the dilution resulting from the expansion of the universe. The second term accounts for the neutralino annihilations. The last expression – for which detailed balance has been assumed – describes the back–creations of $`\chi \overline{\chi }`$ pairs from lighter species. The neutralino density is given by $`n_\chi ^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}}`$ as long as a thermodynamical equilibrium is reached for reaction (31). In the non–relativistic regime at stake here, it is given by relation (32). In terms of the codensity $`f_\chi =n_\chi /T^3`$, the evolution equation simplifies into

$$\frac{df_\chi }{dt}+\left\{<\sigma _{\mathrm{an}}v>n_\chi \right\}f_\chi =<\sigma _{\mathrm{an}}v>T^3f_{\chi }^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}}{}_{}{}^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}.$$
(34)
As discussed in the previous section, the temperature $`T`$ varies roughly as the inverse of the scale factor $`a`$. The codensity $`f_\chi `$ corresponds therefore to the number of particles inside a typical volume $`a^3`$ that follows the expansion of the universe. In order to solve equation (34), two typical time scales may be defined. To commence, as long as reaction (31) has reached its equilibrium, the time derivative $`df_\chi /dt`$ may be neglected and we recover $`f_\chi =f_\chi ^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}}`$ as we should. The characteristic time scale with which the neutralino codensity $`f_\chi `$ relaxes towards its kinetic – and thermodynamical – equilibrium value $`f_\chi ^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}}`$ is set by the annihilation rate

$$\tau _{rel}^1=<\sigma _{\mathrm{an}}v>n_\chi .$$
(35)
Then, the time scale of the variations of the equilibrium $`f_\chi ^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}}`$ itself may be expressed as

$$\tau _{eq}^1=\frac{d}{dt}\mathrm{Log}\left\{f_{\chi }^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}}{}_{}{}^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}T^3\right\}\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}2}H\left\{\frac{m_\chi }{T}\right\},$$
(36)
in the non–relativistic regime. As is clear in Fig. 1, the neutralino freeze–out proceeds in two stages.

(i) At high temperature, as long as $`\tau _{rel}\tau _{eq}`$, $`f_\chi `$ has plenty of time to relax towards the equilibrium value $`f_\chi ^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}}`$ that evolves at a much slower pace during this stage. As a consequence, the annihilation reaction (31) reaches thermodynamical equilibrium. A very good approximation for the neutralino density is provided by $`f_\chi ^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}}`$ as featured in Fig. 1 where the various neutralino density curves all merge for $`y<10`$ whatever the value of the kination parameter $`\eta _\mathrm{\Phi }`$. As illustrated by Fig. 2 and 3, relaxation becomes progressively less efficient as long as the temperature decreases. The freeze–out takes place at the very moment when $`\tau _{rel}`$ crosses $`\tau _{eq}`$.

(ii) From that moment on – below the freeze–out temperature $`T_F`$ – the relaxation time $`\tau _{rel}`$ well exceeds $`\tau _{eq}`$. Whilst $`f_\chi ^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}}`$ drops down and vanishes, $`f_\chi `$ still decreases a little bit and reaches an asymptotic value of $`f_\chi ^{\mathrm{asy}}`$ that leads directly to the relic abundance $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\chi h^2`$.

To illustrate our discussion, we have considered a generic bino–like species with mass $`m_\chi =250`$ GeV and $`\mathrm{tan}\beta =50`$. The thermally averaged annihilation cross section has been approximated by

$$<\sigma _{\mathrm{an}}v>\stackrel{~}{a}+\stackrel{~}{b}x,$$
(37)
where the parameter $`x`$ stands for the temperature–to–mass ratio $`T/m_\chi `$. We have chosen the values $`\stackrel{~}{a}=0.1`$ pb and $`\stackrel{~}{b}=21`$ pb for the annihilation cross section. Before freeze–out, the neutralino density $`n_\chi `$ is set equal to $`n_\chi ^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}}`$. As soon as decoupling has taken place, we integrate the Boltzmann equation (33) in terms of the codensity $`F_\chi =f_\chi /\kappa `$ where the coefficient $`\kappa (T)=h_{\mathrm{eff}}(T)/h_{\mathrm{eff}}(T_0)`$ accounts for the reheating of the radiation as its massive species annihilate and are converted into lighter populations. As is clear from equation (27), the codensity $`F_\chi `$ evolves exactly as $`a^3`$. For convenience, we have plotted $`f_\chi `$ instead of $`F_\chi `$ as a function of the $`m_\chi /T`$ ratio in Fig. 1 for three different values of $`\eta _\mathrm{\Phi }`$. In Figs. 2 and 3, the age of the universe $`t_U`$ as well as the typical time scales $`\tau _{rel}`$ and $`\tau _{eq}`$ are also featured as a function of the mass–to–temperature ratio $`m_\chi /T`$. The kination parameter $`\eta _\mathrm{\Phi }`$ has been respectively set equal to $`0`$ and $`1`$. When the scalar field dominates over the radiation – see Fig. 3 – the expansion of the universe is accelerated with much smaller values for $`t_U`$. The evolution of $`\tau _{rel}`$ with $`y`$ is not affected by kination. On the contrary, $`\tau _{eq}`$ is much smaller than in the conventional radiation dominated cosmology. Freeze–out is therefore reached at a higher temperature with $`y_F=13.5`$ for $`\eta _\mathrm{\Phi }=1`$ instead of $`y_F=22.7`$ when $`\eta _\mathrm{\Phi }=0`$. The decoupling temperature increases by a factor of $`2`$. This mild variation nevertheless implies a strong rise in the neutralino relic density as a result of the strong dependence of $`n_\chi ^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}}`$ on $`y`$ – see relation (32). Fig. 1 features a growth of the asymptotic codensity $`f_\chi ^{\mathrm{asy}}`$ by a factor of $``$ 350 when $`\eta _\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is varied from 0 to 0.01. When $`\eta _\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is set equal to 1, that increase reaches a factor of $``$ 2900.

The previous example illustrates the large increase of the neutralino relic abundance when kination takes over radiation in the pre–BBN period. The effect of $`\eta _\mathrm{\Phi }`$ on $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\chi h^2`$ may also be understood in the framework of the simple approximation which we derive now. Integrating the cross section $`\sigma _{\mathrm{an}}V`$ over the thermal distribution of neutralinos is beyond the scope of this work. We will simply assume here that relation (37) applies. This is certainly correct as long as the annihilation does not proceed through a s–channel resonance for which the presence of a pole implies an unusual behaviour of the cross section and we will postpone this problem to a later analysis. The freeze–out occurs at temperature $`T_F`$ when $`\tau _{rel}=\tau _{eq}`$. This condition translates into

$$\left\{\stackrel{~}{a}+\stackrel{~}{b}x_F\right\}T_F^3f_F=\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}2}y_FH\left(T_F\right).$$
(38)
At temperature $`T`$, the expansion rate $`H`$ is increased with respect to the conventional situation by a factor of $`\sqrt{1+\alpha x^2}`$ where $`x=T/m_\chi `$. The parameter $`\alpha `$ describes the relative contribution of quintessence to the overall energy density as compared to the radiation

$$\alpha =\frac{\eta _\mathrm{\Phi }}{g_{\mathrm{eff}}(T)}\left\{\frac{m_\chi }{T_0}\right\}^2\kappa ^2.$$
(39)
The evolution of $`f_\chi `$ after decoupling is followed by integrating relation (34) from $`x=x_F`$ down to $`x=0`$ while neglecting the right–hand side term. This leads to a decrease of the codensity $`f_\chi `$ just after freeze–out from $`f_F`$ down to its asymptotic value $`f_\chi ^{\mathrm{asy}}`$ with

$$f_\chi ^{\mathrm{asy}}=\frac{f_F}{\mu }.$$
(40)
The decrease factor $`\mu `$ depends on $`x_F`$ and on the parameter $`\alpha `$ which we evaluate at the decoupling temperature $`T_F`$. This assumption is reasonable because most of the evolution of $`f_\chi `$ takes place immediatly after freeze–out as featured in Fig. 1. We readily obtain

$$\mu (x_F,\alpha )\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}=\frac{2}{x_F}\sqrt{1+\alpha x_{F}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}\left\{\frac{\stackrel{~}{a}A+\stackrel{~}{b}x_FB}{\stackrel{~}{a}+\stackrel{~}{b}x_F}\right\},$$
(41)
where the factors $`A`$ and $`B`$ depend on the combination $`u=\sqrt{\alpha }x_F`$ through the relations

$$A(u)=\frac{\mathrm{ln}\left\{u+\sqrt{1+u^2}\right\}}{u}$$
(42)
and

$$B(u)=\frac{\sqrt{1+u^2}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}}{u^2}.$$
(43)
In the conventional scenario for which $`\alpha =0`$, the previous expressions simplify into $`A(0)=1`$ and $`B(0)=1/2`$. The freeze–out codensity may be derived from the condition (38)

$$f_F=\sqrt{\frac{32\pi ^3}{45}}\left\{g_{\mathrm{eff}}(T_F)\right\}^{1/2}\frac{\sqrt{1+\alpha x_{F}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}}{x_{F}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}\left\{m_\chi M_\mathrm{P}\left(\stackrel{~}{a}+\stackrel{~}{b}x_F\right)\right\}^1,$$
(44)
where $`M_\mathrm{P}`$ denotes the Planck mass. The asymptotic codensity $`f_\chi ^{\mathrm{asy}}`$ is defined by relation (40) and we infer for the present epoch a neutralino relic density of

$$\rho _\chi =\frac{4}{11}\frac{1}{\kappa (T_F)}T_\gamma ^3f_\chi ^{\mathrm{asy}}m_\chi .$$
(45)
The factor $`(4/11)(1/\kappa )`$ accounts for the reheating of the photon background that occurs in the period extending from the neutralino freeze–out until now. Most of the relevant dark matter candidates have a mass $`m_\chi `$ in the range between 100 GeV and 10 TeV. Notice also that the freeze–out temperature–to–mass ratio $`x_F0.10.2`$ is not very sensitive to the quintessence parameter $`\eta _\mathrm{\Phi }`$. We can safely take $`g_{\mathrm{eff}}(T_F)h_{\mathrm{eff}}(T_F)45`$ for a numerical estimate of the previous expression in order to get

$$\rho _\chi \mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}0.69}\mathrm{keV}\mathrm{cm}^3\frac{\sqrt{1+\alpha x_{F}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}}{\mu x_{F}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}\left\{\frac{3\times 10^{27}\mathrm{cm}^3\mathrm{s}^1}{<\sigma _{\mathrm{an}}v>}\right\}.$$
(46)
That result is to be compared to the closure density

$$\rho _C^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}}=\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}1.879}\times 10^{29}\mathrm{g}\mathrm{cm}^3h^2\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}10.6}\mathrm{keV}\mathrm{cm}^3h^2,$$
(47)
hence a neutralino relic abundance that may be expressed as

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_\chi h^2\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}6.6}\times 10^2\frac{\sqrt{1+\alpha x_{F}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}}{\mu x_{F}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}\left\{\frac{3\times 10^{27}\mathrm{cm}^3\mathrm{s}^1}{<\sigma _{\mathrm{an}}v>}\right\},$$
(48)
where the annihilation cross section is taken at decoupling and may differ from its present value if $`\stackrel{~}{b}`$ well exceeds $`\stackrel{~}{a}`$. The approximation (48) tends to overestimate the relic abundance but is still acceptable. In our generic example illustrated in the previous figures, we have numerically derived a value of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\chi h^2=0.145`$ for $`\eta _\mathrm{\Phi }=0`$ and of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\chi h^2=440`$ for $`\eta _\mathrm{\Phi }=1`$ whereas expression (48) respectively gives $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\chi h^2=0.16`$ and 465.

## IV Discussion and prospects.

We have shown that the neutralino relic abundance increases if a period of kination takes place during the freeze–out of the species. We derive now an estimate of the corresponding boost factor as a function of $`\eta _\mathrm{\Phi }`$ and $`m_\chi `$. If $`\stackrel{~}{a}`$ dominates over $`\stackrel{~}{b}x_F`$ in the expression of the annihilation cross section, we may even simplify further relation (48) in order to get

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_\chi h^2\left\{\frac{2\times 10^{27}\mathrm{cm}^3\mathrm{s}^1}{\stackrel{~}{a}}\right\}$$
(49)
in the conventional radiation dominated cosmology. We have taken a value of $`y_F20`$ for the mass–to–decoupling temperature ratio in that case. On the contrary, if quintessence is the dominant form of energy with a large value for $`\eta _\mathrm{\Phi }`$, the neutralino fossile abundance becomes

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_\chi h^2\frac{\sqrt{\eta _\mathrm{\Phi }}m_{100}}{\mathrm{ln}\left(2u\right)}\left\{\frac{1.3\times 10^{23}\mathrm{cm}^3\mathrm{s}^1}{\stackrel{~}{a}}\right\},$$
(50)
where $`u=\sqrt{\alpha }x_F`$ has already been defined. With a value of $`y_F10`$ – see the previous section – this implies

$$u\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}1.5}\times 10^4\sqrt{\eta _\mathrm{\Phi }}m_{100},$$
(51)
so that the logarithm yields a contribution $``$ 10. The parameter $`m_{100}`$ denotes the neutralino mass in units of 100 GeV. A crude estimate of the relic abundance in this regime ensues

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_\chi h^2\sqrt{\eta _\mathrm{\Phi }}m_{100}\left\{\frac{12\times 10^{24}\mathrm{cm}^3\mathrm{s}^1}{\stackrel{~}{a}}\right\}.$$
(52)
We derive a boost factor of $`10^3\sqrt{\eta _\mathrm{\Phi }}m_{100}`$ with respect to the conventional cosmology. If now $`\stackrel{~}{b}x_F`$ is the leading term as regards the annihilation cross section, we find that the relic abundance which is normally given by

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_\chi h^2\left\{\frac{10^{25}\mathrm{cm}^3\mathrm{s}^1}{\stackrel{~}{b}}\right\},$$
(53)
is increased to

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_\chi h^2\sqrt{\eta _\mathrm{\Phi }}m_{100}\left\{\frac{1.2\times 10^{22}\mathrm{cm}^3\mathrm{s}^1}{\stackrel{~}{b}}\right\}.$$
(54)
in the presence of quintessence. The boost factor is still of the order of $`10^3\sqrt{\eta _\mathrm{\Phi }}m_{100}`$. In our fiducial illustration, we actually obtained an increase of the neutralino relic abundance by a factor of $`3,000`$ with $`m_{100}=2.5`$ and $`\eta _\mathrm{\Phi }=1`$ in good agreement with the bench mark value which has been derived here.

The increase of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\chi h^2`$ with $`\eta _\mathrm{\Phi }`$ has interesting consequences and brings up new perspectives as regards neutralino dark matter. To commence, the various avatars of the minimal or non–minimal supersymmetric extensions of the standard model start to be constrained – should R parity be conserved – by the accelerator data on the one hand side and by the requirement that the neutralino relic abundance should not overclose the universe or even exceed the observed value of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{m}h^2=0.135\pm 0.009`$ . If a period of kination takes place in the pre–BBN period, the various SUSY configurations in the $`(\mathrm{\Omega }_\chi h^2,m_\chi )`$ plane that are so far allowed are shifted upwards with the consequence of becoming forbidden. Exploring in greater detail this question is a worthwhile project.

We already anticipate that configurations with a very small relic density – for instance those for which poles dominate in the annihilation mechanism – would become cosmologically attractive if $`\eta _\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is large enough. The difference with the conventional cosmology lies in the significant enhancement of the annihilation cross section of neutralino dark matter candidates. At fixed $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\chi h^2`$, notice that $`\sigma _{\mathrm{an}}v`$ increases precisely by the same factor of $`10^3\sqrt{\eta _\mathrm{\Phi }}m_{100}`$ which we have derived above. This means a general enhancement of the various indirect signatures for supersymmetric dark matter. If neutralinos dominate the mass budget of the Milky Way halo, they should still annihilate today and produce gamma–rays, antiprotons and positrons which may be detected through the corresponding distortions in the various energy spectra. As a matter of fact, the recent HEAT experiment has confirmed  an excess around 8 GeV in the positron spectrum of cosmic rays. A large boost factor of $`10^3`$$`10^4`$ in most of the supersymmetric parameter space is needed to explain that excess in terms of a homogeneous distribution of annihilating galactic neutralinos. A certain degree of clumpiness is actually expected in most of the numerical simulations but even in the extreme case of , it does not exceed a few hundreds. A period of kination in the early universe could provide an alternate explanation for that boost factor.

Another potential consequence of quintessence is the rehabilitation of a fourth generation heavy neutrino in the realm of the dark matter candidates. In the conventional cosmology, a 100 GeV stable neutrino provides today a contribution of $`10^4`$ to the closure density. Once again, kination at the time of decoupling would enhance that relic density and make that species cosmologically relevant.

Notice finally that scenarios with extra–dimensions have the same effect as kination. The expansion rate is also increased and may even evolve as $`T^4`$ – to be compared to a $`T^3`$ behaviour in our case and to a $`T^2`$ dependence in the conventional radiation dominated universe. Implications of such scenarios on neutralino dark matter should be investigated. In the case of a low reheating temperature at the end of inflation, neutralinos are not thermally produced. Depending on the details of the scenario – decay of an inflaton field  or on the contrary decay of moduli fields  – the relic abundance is decreased or increased.

A key ingredient of our study is the contribution $`\eta _\mathrm{\Phi }`$ of the quintessential scalar field to the overall energy density at the onset of BBN. A detailed analysis of the light element yields in the presence of kination  is mandatory at that stage in order to explore a promising scenario or to derive constraints on $`\eta _\mathrm{\Phi }`$. The existence of dark energy opens up an exciting line of research and the study of its implications on the astronomical dark matter problem will certainly bring surprising results.

## Acknowledgements

I would like to thank M. Joyce for having pointed out to me this problem in suggesting that a period of kination could potentially affect the freeze–out of neutralinos and modify their relic density.