text:
# Spin zero particle propagator from a random walk in 3-D space

## 1 Introduction

Stochastic problems in physics were extensively studied and this approach has shown its great efficiency since a long time (see, for instance, ). The attempts to understand, from stochastical point of view, the quantum behaviour, have a long history (see, e.g., ).

The derivation of the electron propagator in a 1-D space from a random walk assumption was carried out in the paper , where the motivation of this derivation is explained in detail. It was supposed that electron moves with the speed of light and randomly changes its direction of motion. The average distance between the changes of direction was shown to be exactly equal to the electron Compton length. In a different but, to some extent, analogous approach, the electron propagator was derived in .

In the present work we carry out the same calculations in a 3-D space to see what assumptions have to be made to get the correct propagator of a massive zero spin particle.

## 2 The propagator derivation

Like in the previous paper , we suppose that the particle always moves in straight line at the speed of light. From time to time it encounters on its way something in the space and isotropically scatters with the amplitude $`f`$. The process goes on until, at the time $`t`$, the particle arrives in the space point $`\stackrel{}{r}`$. Integrating over $`n`$ scattering points and taking the sum over $`n`$, we reproduce the spin zero particle propagator.

We use the term ”scattering” for convenience. Indeed, we do not localize the particle between the different scatterings. Therefore one could equally give another interpretation, like in the paper , assuming the re-creation of the particle at the random time moments $`t_i`$, in the points separated from each other by the distances $`r_i=ct_i`$. Scatterings on some quantum vacuum fluctuations like in  could also be invoked. These issues are beyond the scope of the present paper.

At present, we take our assumptions as postulates. It is instructive to see, how the scattering amplitude looks in order to reproduce the propagator. Namely, we suppose that after $`i`$-th scattering the wave function has the form:

$$\psi (r_i)=\frac{f}{4\pi \mathrm{}_0^2r_i},$$
(1)
where $`r_i`$ is the distance from the $`i`$-th scattering center and $`\mathrm{}_0=\mathrm{}/mc`$ is the Compton length which will be our unit of length throughout.

The factor $`1/(4\pi r_i)`$ in (1) gives the dependence on the distance from the scattering center. It corresponds to standard decreasing of a spherical wave. The factor $`1/\mathrm{}_0^2`$ is introduced to make the amplitude $`f`$ dimensionless. After each scattering the amplitude is multiplied by $`\psi (r_i)`$ and integrated over $`d^3r_i`$, so with the factor $`1/\mathrm{}_0^2`$ in (1) the product $`\psi (r_i)d^3r_i`$ is dimensionless too.

We suppose also that $`f=1`$, i.e. that our scattering process mimics the resonance S-wave scattering with $`\delta =\pi /2`$.

Let us calculate the amplitude $`I_n`$ over all the possible paths consisting of straight intervals with $`n1`$ changes of direction. We denote by $`\stackrel{}{r}`$ the distance between the extremal points in the propagator and $`t`$ is the necessary time to the particle to pass along that distance.

As mentioned, with our assumptions we have $`r_i=ct_i`$, the path covered between two changes of direction, $`t_i`$ the corresponding time interval. We will take $`c=1`$ all along and so the Compton length will be $`\mathrm{}_0=\mathrm{}/m`$ in this system of units.

The amplitude with $`n1`$ changes of direction is represented in the form:

$`I_n`$ $`=`$ $`(1)^{n1}{\displaystyle \delta ^3\left(\stackrel{}{r}_1+\stackrel{}{r}_2+\mathrm{}+\stackrel{}{r}_n\stackrel{}{r}\right)}`$ (2)
$`\times \delta (r_1+r_2+\mathrm{}+r_nt){\displaystyle \frac{1}{4\pi r_1}}d^3r_1\psi (r_2)d^3r_2\psi (r_3)\mathrm{}\psi (r_n)d^3r_n`$
The function $`\delta (r_1+r_2+\mathrm{}+r_nt)`$ takes into account the condition that the sum of times $`t_i=r_i/c`$ gives the total time $`t`$. It results from the function $`\delta (t_1+t_2+\mathrm{}+t_nt)`$ where, for $`c=1`$, we can change $`t_i`$ into $`r_i`$.

The first scattering occurs in the point $`\stackrel{}{r}_1`$. The particle arrives in this point without any scattering. It is reflected by the factor $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4\pi r_1}}`$ which does not contain the scattering amplitude $`f`$. After the first scattering the particle is described by the wave function $`\psi (r_2)`$, etc.

The integration in the equation (2) is carried out over the points $`\stackrel{}{r}_1,\stackrel{}{r}_2,\mathrm{}`$ and we can say nothing about the particle on the path between these points.

It turns out that we only have to calculate $`I_2`$, the amplitude with one change of direction, afterwards all the other amplitudes will be deduced by iteration. We give the details below. First we start with:

$$I_2=(1)\delta ^3\left(\stackrel{}{r}_1+\stackrel{}{r}_2\stackrel{}{r}\right)\delta (r_1+r_2t)\frac{d^3r_1}{4\pi r_1}\frac{d^3r_2}{4\pi r_2\mathrm{}_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}$$
(3)
After integration over $`d^3r_1`$, we get:

$$I_2=\frac{1}{(4\pi \mathrm{}_0)^2}\delta \left(r_1+r_2t\right)\frac{d^3r_2}{r_1r_2}$$

with $`r_1=\left|\stackrel{}{r}\stackrel{}{r}_2\right|=\left(r^2+r_2^22rr_2\mathrm{cos}\theta _2\right)^{1/2}`$.

This integral is rewritten as:

$$I_2=\frac{1}{8\pi \mathrm{}_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}\delta \left(r_1+r_2t\right)\frac{r_2dr_2dz_2}{r_1}=\frac{1}{8\pi \mathrm{}_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}_0^{\mathrm{}}r_2𝑑r_2_1^1\delta \left(f(z_2)\right)\frac{dz_2}{r_1}$$

where we put $`z_2=\mathrm{cos}\theta _2`$ and $`f(z_2)=r_2t+r_1`$; consequently

$$\frac{df(z_2)}{dz_2}=\frac{rr_2}{r_1}.$$

The value $`z_0`$ for which $`f(z_0)=0`$ reads:

$$z_0=\frac{r^2+2tr_2t^2}{2rr_2},$$

that gives $`r_1=tr_2`$. The condition $`1z_01`$ restricts the domain of $`r_2`$: $`tr<r_2<t+r`$. Integrating over $`dz_2`$, we get:

$$I_2=\frac{1}{8\pi \mathrm{}_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}\frac{1}{r}_{tr}^{t+r}𝑑r_2.$$

In this way we obtain the following result:

$$I_2=\frac{1}{8\pi \mathrm{}_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}$$
(4)
We can now look at the $`I_3`$ integral. It is given by :

$$I_3=(1)^2\delta ^3\left(\stackrel{}{r}_1+\stackrel{}{r}_2(\stackrel{}{r}\stackrel{}{r}_3)\right)\delta (r_1+r_2(tr_3))\frac{d^3r_1}{4\pi r_1}\frac{d^3r_2}{4\pi r_2\mathrm{}_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}\frac{d^3r_3}{4\pi r_3\mathrm{}_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}$$

So we can write this integral in a simpler form by using the former $`I_2`$ result,

$$I_3=I_2\frac{d^3r_3}{4\pi r_3\mathrm{}_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}=I_2\frac{1}{2\mathrm{}_0^2}r_3𝑑r_3𝑑z_3$$

with $`z_3=\mathrm{cos}\theta _3={\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{r}\stackrel{}{r}_3}{rr_3}}`$. We introduce the variable:

$$(\tau ^{})^2=(tr_3)^2(\stackrel{}{r}\stackrel{}{r}_3)^2=\tau ^22r_3(trz_3)$$

with $`\tau ^2=t^2r^2`$. Then we can replace the variable $`r_3`$ by $`\tau _{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}`$ using the formula: $`r_3={\displaystyle \frac{(\tau ^2\tau _{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2})}{2(trz_3)}}`$ which gives $`dr_3={\displaystyle \frac{d\tau _{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}{2(trz_3)}}`$. The integral $`I_3`$ is reduced to:

$$I_3=I_2\frac{1}{2\mathrm{}_0^2}_0^{\tau ^2}\text{d}\tau _{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}_1^{+1}𝑑z_3\frac{(\tau ^2\tau _{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2})}{4(trz_3)^2}$$

Taking into account that:

$$_1^{+1}\frac{\text{d}z}{(trz)^2}=\frac{2}{\tau ^2}$$

we represent the $`I_3`$ integral in the form:

$$I_3(\tau )=I_2\frac{1}{\mathrm{}_0^2}_0^{\tau ^2}\frac{(\tau ^2\tau _{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2})}{4\tau ^2}\text{d}\tau _{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}$$

Where $`I_2`$ has the constant value given in the equation (4), whereas $`I_3`$ depends on $`\tau `$.

The method can be similarly generalized to the integral of order $`n`$ and gives:

$$I_n(\tau )=\frac{1}{\mathrm{}_0^2}_0^\tau I_{n1}\left(\tau ^{}\right)\frac{(\tau ^2\tau _{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2})}{2\tau ^2}\tau ^{}\text{d}\tau ^{}$$
(5)
with as usual $`\tau ^2=t^2r^2`$ and $`\tau _{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}=(tr_n)^2(\stackrel{}{r}\stackrel{}{r_n})^2`$, without forgetting the first integral:

$$I_1=\delta ^3\left(\stackrel{}{r}_1\stackrel{}{r}\right)\delta \left(r_1t\right)\frac{d^3r_1}{4\pi r_1}=\frac{1}{4\pi r}\delta \left(rt\right)=\frac{1}{2\pi }\delta \left(\tau ^2\right)$$
(6)
This integral also contains the factor $`1/(4\pi r_1)`$ responsible for a decrease of the outgoing wave. But since the first scattering contributes into $`I_2`$, the integral $`I_1`$ does not contain the scattering amplitude $`f`$.

The propagator of the particle will be obtained in summing all the amplitudes corresponding to all the possible numbers of changes of direction, i.e.

$$K(\stackrel{}{r},t)=I_1+I_2+I_3+\mathrm{}+I_n+\mathrm{}$$

It is possible to do exactly this summation, the result being:

$$K(\stackrel{}{r},t)=\frac{1}{2\pi }\delta \left(\tau ^2\right)\frac{1}{8\pi \mathrm{}_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}\underset{n=0}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{(1)^n\left(\tau ^2/\mathrm{}_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}\right)^n}{(2^n)^2(n+1)(n!)^2}$$

Finally we obtain the propagator in a compact form using $`J_1`$ the Bessel function of first kind:

$$K(\stackrel{}{r},t)=\frac{1}{2\pi }\delta \left(\tau ^2\right)\frac{1}{4\pi \mathrm{}_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}\frac{\mathrm{}_0}{\tau }J_1\left(\frac{\tau }{\mathrm{}_0}\right)$$
(7)
It coincides with the well-known spin zero particle propagator .

One can also obtain this result without explicit calculation of integrals for $`I_n`$, but solving the integral equation. Indeed, if we define:

$$S(\tau )=I_2+I_3(\tau )+I_4(\tau )+\mathrm{},$$

then using the formula (5), we get:

$$S(\tau )=I_2\frac{1}{\mathrm{}_0^2}_0^\tau \left[I_2+I_3(\tau ^{})+\mathrm{}\right]\frac{(\tau ^2\tau _{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2})}{2\tau ^2}\tau ^{}\text{d}\tau ^{},$$

that is:

$$S(\tau )=\frac{1}{8\pi \mathrm{}_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}\frac{1}{\mathrm{}_0^2}_0^\tau S(\tau ^{})\frac{(\tau ^2\tau _{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2})}{2\tau ^2}\tau ^{}\text{d}\tau ^{}.$$
(8)
The solution of this equation (which can be transformed into a differential equation) is:

$$S(\tau )=\frac{1}{4\pi \mathrm{}_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}\frac{\mathrm{}_0}{\tau }J_1\left(\frac{\tau }{\mathrm{}_0}\right)$$

which is the same result as in the propagator (7).

## 3 Mean distance between scatterings

Let us find now the average distance covered by the particle between two scatterings. We repeat for the three dimensions case the same calculation done in  for the one-dimensional case. Namely, we will calculate the number of paths $`n_k(t)`$ with $`k`$ events during the time $`t`$. The total number of paths is:

$$n(t)=\underset{k}{}n_k(t).$$

Then we find the propability to have $`k`$ events for the time $`t`$:

$$w_k(t)=\frac{n_k(t)}{n(t)}.$$

The average number of events for the time $`t`$ is

$$\overline{k}(t)=\underset{k}{}kw_k(t).$$
(9)
The time $`t`$ divided by the number of events for the time $`t`$, that is, the ratio $`\overline{t}=t/\overline{k}(t)`$ for $`t\mathrm{}`$ gives the average time between two events. Since the speed between scatterings is always $`c`$, in this way we will find the average path between events $`\overline{r}=c\overline{t}`$.

At first we find the number of paths $`n_k(t)`$ with $`k`$ events for the time $`t`$:

$$n_k(t)=\delta (t_1+t_2+\mathrm{}+t_k+t_{k+1}t)\frac{d^3r_1}{\mathrm{}_0^3}\mathrm{}\frac{d^3r_k}{\mathrm{}_0^3}\frac{d^3r_{k+1}}{\mathrm{}_0^3}$$
(10)
where $`t_i=r_i/c`$. There are $`k+1`$ intervals and $`k`$ scatterings in the points where the intervals are linked with each other. Therefore $`n_k`$ is determined by $`k+1`$ integrations. The dimensionless integration measure is $`\frac{d^3r_i}{\mathrm{}_0^3}`$. Below we put $`\mathrm{}_0=1`$ and restore it in the final formulas.

For $`k=0`$:

$$n_0(t)=\delta (r_1t)d^3r_1=4\pi _0^{\mathrm{}}\delta (r_1t)r_1^2𝑑r_1=4\pi t^2$$
(11)
For $`k=1`$:

$`n_1(t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \delta (r_1+r_2t)d^3r_1d^3r_2}=(4\pi )^2{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}\delta (r_1+r_2t)r_1^2r_2^2𝑑r_1𝑑r_2`$ (12)
$`=`$ $`(4\pi )^2{\displaystyle _0^t}r_1^2(tr_1)^2𝑑r_1=(4\pi )^2{\displaystyle \frac{t^5}{30}}`$
Note that the function $`\delta (r_1+r_2t)`$ does not depend on angles, therefore the angle integrations give simply $`(4\pi )^2`$.

One can easily find the following recurrence formula:

$$n_k(t)=4\pi _0^tn_{k1}(tr_k)r_k^2𝑑r_k$$

which is represented in the form:

$$n_k(t)=4\pi _0^tn_{k1}(t^{})(tt^{})^2𝑑t^{}$$
(13)
From the above equations we can see that $`n_k(t)`$ has the form:

$$n_k(t)=c_kt^{2+3k}$$
(14)
From the recurrence relation (13) one can derive the integral equation for the sum $`n(t)`$ it gives:

$`n(t)`$ $`=`$ $`n_0(t)+n_1(t)+n_2(t)+\mathrm{}`$
$`=`$ $`n_0(t)+4\pi {\displaystyle _0^t}n_0(t^{})(tt^{})^2𝑑t^{}+4\pi {\displaystyle _0^t}n_1(t^{})(tt^{})^2𝑑t^{}+\mathrm{}`$
$`=`$ $`n_0(t)+4\pi {\displaystyle _0^t}[n_0(t^{})+n_1(t^{})+n_2(t^{})+\mathrm{}](tt^{})^2𝑑t^{}`$
Or:

$$n(t)=4\pi t^2+4\pi _0^tn(t^{})(tt^{})^2𝑑t^{}$$
(15)
Calculating the third derivative over $`t`$ of $`n(t)`$ defined by eq. (15), we get the equivalent differential equation:

$$n^{\prime \prime \prime }(t)=8\pi n(t)$$
(16)
with the initial conditions:

$$n(0)=0,n^{}(0)=0,n^{\prime \prime }(0)=8\pi .$$
(17)
The solution of eq. (16) satisfying the initial conditions (17) has the form:

$$n(t)=\frac{2\pi ^{1/3}}{3}\mathrm{exp}(2\pi ^{1/3}t)\frac{2\pi ^{1/3}}{3}\mathrm{exp}(\pi ^{1/3}t)\left[\mathrm{cos}(\sqrt{3}\pi ^{1/3}t)+\sqrt{3}\mathrm{sin}(\sqrt{3}\pi ^{1/3}t)\right],$$
(18)
that can be checked by the direct substitution.

The decomposition of (18) in the Taylor series reads:

$$n(t)=4\pi t^2+(4\pi )^2\frac{t^5}{30}+(4\pi )^3\frac{t^8}{5040}+\mathrm{}$$

that indeed coincides with the sum $`n(t)=n_0(t)+n_1(t)+n_2(t)+\mathrm{}`$.

Now we calculate $`k(t)=_kkn_k(t)`$. Namely, according to eq. (14), $`n(t)`$ is given by the sum:

$$n(t)=\underset{k=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}c_kt^{2+3k}$$

and similarly for $`k(t)`$:

$$k(t)=\underset{k=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}kn_k(t)=\underset{k=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}kc_kt^{2+3k}.$$

Calculating the first derivative of $`n(t)`$ over $`t`$, we get:

$$n^{}(t)=\underset{k=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}(2+3k)c_kt^{2+3k1}=\frac{2}{t}\underset{k=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}c_kt^{2+3k}+\frac{3}{t}\underset{k=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}kc_kt^{2+3k}=\frac{2}{t}n(t)+\frac{3}{t}k(t).$$

That is:

$$k(t)=\frac{1}{3}\left[tn^{}(t)2n(t)\right]$$
(19)
From (9) and (19) we find $`\overline{k}(t)`$:

$$\overline{k}(t)=\underset{k}{}kw_k(t)=\frac{_kkn_k(t)}{n(t)}=\frac{k(t)}{n(t)}=\frac{1}{3}\left[\frac{tn^{}(t)}{n(t)}2\right].$$
(20)
Substituting here, for $`t\mathrm{}`$, the leading term of the expression (18) for $`n(t)`$:

$$n(t)|_t\mathrm{}\frac{2\pi ^{1/3}}{3}\mathrm{exp}(2\pi ^{1/3}t)$$

we get:

$$\overline{k}(t)|_t\mathrm{}=\frac{2\pi ^{1/3}}{3}t.$$

For large $`t`$, the average number of events linearly increases with $`t`$, like for the Poisson distribution.

The average time between events is

$$\overline{t}=\frac{t}{\overline{k}(t)}=\frac{3}{2\pi ^{1/3}}.$$

From here we obtain the average distance between two events $`\overline{r}=c\overline{t}`$:

$$\overline{r}=\frac{3}{2\pi ^{1/3}}\mathrm{}_0.$$
(21)
Numerically it gives:

$$\overline{r}=1.02418\mathrm{}_0,$$

a value close to the Compton length.

## 4 Conclusions

In conclusion, the following remarks seem relevant.

It turned out that we had to suppose that the scattering wave v.s. the distance $`r`$ from the scattering center be decreased as $`1/r`$, eq. (1). It looks like the diffusion of a spherical wave which seems natural, but, at first glance, it has no any hint to relativity. However, if, instead of $`1/r`$, we would take another function of $`r`$, we would not reproduce the propagator, but also would loose the relativistic invariance. In this case we would obtain an expression depending on $`t`$ and $`r`$ taken separately, not in the invariant combination $`\tau ^2=t^2r^2`$. This “no choice” seems unexpected and intriguing.

On the other hand, in the stochastic motion of our particle, at each change of its direction, we supposed that its scattering mimics resonance S-wave scattering with an amplitude $`f=1`$ and a $`\pi /2`$ phase shift. One can say that the ”scatterings” which result in the propagator take place at very small distances, so that higher partial waves are suppressed.

Moreover it is interesting to compare the 1-D case with the 3-D one. In the 1-D case the average path between events was found to be exactly the Compton length $`\mathrm{}_0`$, whereas in this 3-D study it gets $`{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2\pi ^{1/3}}}\mathrm{}_01.02418\mathrm{}_0`$. This gives an example, how a fundamental characteristic of elementary particle can be calculated and expressed through simple numbers, like $`2,3,\pi ,\mathrm{}`$. Other examples can be found in .

We have clearly shown that the model is very constrained by our assumptions. We think that obtaining the same propagator for the particle as in standard quantum fields theory is not a pure accident. For sure, one should try to find out physical reasons resulting in the scatterings of the propagating particle on its path. As already said, some hypothesis have been advanced in many papers but it was, at present, beyond the scope of this work. It would be also interesting to see how to introduce the spin property in our 3-D model .

Acknowledgments. One of the authors (V.A.K.) is sincerely grateful for warm hospitality of the Laboratoire de Physique Corpusculaire, Université Blaise Pascal, Clermont-Ferrand, France, where this work was performed. This work is partially supported by the French-Russian PICS and RFBR grants Nos. 1172 and 01-02-22002 as well as by the RFBR grant 02-02-16809.


format: text

text:
# Scalar-field cosmologies with an arbitrary potential

## 1 Introduction

Scalar fields currently play a prominent role in the construction of cosmological scenarios aiming to describe the structure and evolution of the early universe. The standard inflationary idea requires that there be a period of slow-roll evolution of a scalar field (the inflaton) during which its potential energy drives the universe in a quasi-exponential expansion . Scalar fields also arise naturally in alternative theories of gravity which aim to extend general relativity, e.g., higher order gravity theories, scalar-tensor and string theories. In higher derivative gravity, due to its conformal relation with general relativity , scalar fields appear in the Einstein frame with a self-interaction, nonlinear potential term which mimics the higher order curvature properties of the original (Jordan) frame. Generalizations of the original Brans-Dicke theory lead to scalar-tensor theories with scalar field self-interactions and dynamical couplings to matter. Further generalizations can be achieved by considering multiple scalar fields . Similar results can be proved for simple bosonic string theories .

Most of the studies of scalar-field cosmologies with the dynamical systems methods are restricted to Friedmann-Robertson-Walker (FRW) models (see for example  and references therein). On the other hand, there are also important investigations in spatially homogeneous Bianchi cosmologies with an exponential potential , as well as in models containing both a perfect fluid of ordinary matter and a scalar field with an exponential potential, the so-called “scaling” cosmologies .

It is important to investigate the general properties shared by all FRW models with a scalar field irrespectively of the particular choice of the potential. In this paper we study the time evolution of flat and negatively curved FRW models with a perfect fluid and a scalar field with an arbitrary non-negative potential function $`V\left(\varphi \right)`$ and prove some general results for a large class of such functions. More precisely, we first show that $`\varphi `$ almost always diverges in the past. Furthermore, for potentials having a local zero minimum, flat and negatively curved FRW models are ever expanding and the energy density asymptotically approaches zero. If in addition the potential has a unique global zero minimum, the scalar field almost always asymptotically approaches zero. Similarly for exponential potentials it is shown that in an expanding universe the energy density $`\rho `$ of ordinary matter and the Hubble function $`H`$ asymptotically approach zero, while the scalar field $`\varphi `$ diverges to $`+\mathrm{}.`$

The plan of the paper is as follows. In the next Section we write down the field equations assuming an arbitrary non-negative potential, as a constrained four-dimensional dynamical system. In Section 3 and prove the above mentioned four propositions under mild conditions on the potential. In Section 4 we discuss the closed universe recollapse conjecture for a $`k=1`$ FRW universe, containing a perfect fluid and a scalar field with a non-negative potential.

## 2 Scalar-field cosmologies

In General Relativity the evolution of FRW models with a scalar field (ordinary matter is described by a perfect fluid with energy density $`\rho `$ and pressure $`p`$) are governed by the Friedmann equation,111We adopt the metric and curvature conventions of . Here, $`a\left(t\right)`$ is the scale factor, an overdot denotes differentiation with respect to time $`t,`$ and units have been chosen so that $`c=1=8\pi G.`$

$$\left(\frac{\dot{a}}{a}\right)^2+\frac{k}{a^2}=\frac{1}{3}\left(\rho +\frac{1}{2}\dot{\varphi }^2+V\left(\varphi \right)\right),$$
(1)
the Raychaudhuri equation,

$$\frac{\ddot{a}}{a}=\frac{1}{6}\left(\rho +3p+2\dot{\varphi }^22V\right),$$
(2)
the equation of motion of the scalar field,

$$\ddot{\varphi }+3\frac{\dot{a}}{a}\dot{\varphi }+V^{}\left(\varphi \right)=0,$$
(3)
and the conservation equation,

$$\dot{\rho }+3\left(\rho +p\right)\frac{\dot{a}}{a}=0.$$
(4)
Here $`V\left(\varphi \right)`$ is the potential energy of the scalar field and $`V^{}=dV/d\varphi .`$ We assume an equation of state of the form $`p=(\gamma 1)\rho ,`$ with $`0\gamma 2.`$

Formally the FRW model with a scalar field is obtained if we add to the matter content of the classical Friedmann universe a perfect fluid with energy density $`\epsilon :=\frac{1}{2}\dot{\varphi }^2+V`$ and pressure $`q:=\frac{1}{2}\dot{\varphi }^2V`$. However, this fluid violates the strong energy condition, i.e., $`\epsilon +3q=2\dot{\varphi }^22V`$ may be negative. It is precisely this violation that leads to inflation in the very early universe .

From Eqs. (1)-(4) we see that the state $`(a,\dot{a},\rho ,\varphi ,\dot{\varphi })^5`$ of the system lies on the hypersurface defined by the constraint (1) and the remaining evolution equations can be written as a five-dimensional dynamical system. In the case of a flat, $`k=0`$ model, the dimension of the dynamical system reduces to four.

In the remaining of the paper we assume that the potential of the scalar field is an arbitrary non-negative (at least $`C^2`$) function. Gradually we introduce further conditions on the potential that allow us to analyze the general properties of the resulted dynamical system. Setting $`\dot{\varphi }=y,\dot{a}/a=H`$ the evolution equations (2)-(4) for the flat model become

$`\dot{\varphi }`$ $`=y,`$
$`\dot{y}`$ $`=3HyV^{}\left(\varphi \right),`$
$`\dot{\rho }`$ $`=3\gamma \rho H,`$
$`\dot{H}`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}y^2{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma }{2}}\rho ,`$ (5)
subject to the constraint

$$3H^2=\rho +\frac{1}{2}y^2+V\left(\varphi \right).$$
(6)
Therefore, the phase space of the dynamical system (5) is the set

$$\mathrm{\Sigma }:=\{(\varphi ,y,\rho ,H)^4:3H^2=\rho +\frac{1}{2}y^2+V\left(\varphi \right)\}.$$

## 3 Flat and negatively curved FRW with an arbitrary non-negative potential

A theorem due to Foster  states that for expanding flat FRW models in vacuum with a scalar field having a non-negative potential, $`\varphi `$ almost always diverges in the past. The following Proposition is a generalization of this result in the case we include a barotropic fluid.

###### Proposition 1

Let $`𝐱\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ and let $`O^{}\left(𝐱\right)`$ be the past orbit of $`𝐱`$ under (5). Then $`\varphi `$ is almost always unbounded on $`O^{}\left(𝐱\right).`$

Proof. Let $`𝐱\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ be such that $`\varphi `$ is bounded on $`O^{}\left(𝐱\right).`$ Using the same type of argument as in Theorem 1 of , one can show that the $`\alpha `$limit set of $`𝐱`$ lies on the plane $`\rho =0,`$ $`y=0.`$ From (5) we see that the only invariant sets lying on the plane $`\rho =0,`$ $`y=0,`$ are equilibrium points of the form $`(\varphi ,y,\rho ,H):`$ $`\rho =0,y=0`$ and $`\varphi _1:V^{}\left(\varphi _1\right)=0.`$ Taking into account the constraint (6), we see that the past limit set $`\alpha \left(𝐱\right)`$ consists of equilibrium points of the form $`(\varphi _1,0,0,H_1),`$ where $`H_1^2=V\left(\varphi _1\right)/3.`$

We will show that no such equilibrium is past asymptote to an open neighborhood of $`𝐱`$. To reduce the dimension of the dynamical system (5) we use the constraint (6) to eliminate $`\rho .`$ The evolution equations become

$`\dot{\varphi }`$ $`=y,`$
$`\dot{y}`$ $`=3HyV^{}\left(\varphi \right),`$
$`\dot{H}`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{3\gamma }{2}}H^2{\displaystyle \frac{2\gamma }{4}}y^2+{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma }{2}}V\left(\varphi \right).`$ (7)
For an expanding universe, any equilibrium point of (7) can be written as $`𝐪=(\varphi _1,0,\sqrt{V_0/3}),`$ where $`\varphi _1:V^{}\left(\varphi _1\right)=0`$ and $`V_0:=V\left(\varphi _1\right)>0.`$ It is straightforward to see that the eigenvalues of the Jacobian matrix of (7) at $`𝐪`$ are

$$\gamma \sqrt{3V_0},\frac{1}{2}\left(\sqrt{3V_0}\pm \sqrt{\left(3V_04V^{\prime \prime }\left(\varphi _1\right)\right)}\right).$$
(8)
At least two of them have negative real parts and, therefore the center manifold theorem implies that there exists a 2 or 3-dimensional stable manifold through $`𝐪`$ (see for example ). That means that all trajectories asymptotically approaching $`𝐪`$ as $`t\mathrm{},`$ lie on a 2 or 3-dimensional invariant manifold. We conclude that all solution curves asymptotically approaching $`𝐪`$ as $`t\mathrm{},`$ lie on a 0 or 1-dimensional invariant manifold.

If all of the eigenvalues have negative real parts the assertion follows immediately from the linearization theorem. In particular, if $`V^{\prime \prime }\left(\varphi _1\right)>0,`$ i.e., $`\varphi _1`$ is a local minimum of the potential, then the equilibrium point $`(\varphi _1,0,\sqrt{V_0/3})`$ is future asymptotically stable. This equilibrium solution corresponds to a vacuum de Sitter space with a cosmological constant equal to $`\sqrt{V_0}.`$

Unfortunately the above Proposition cannot be applied to potentials having a zero local minimum $`V\left(\varphi _1\right)`$, because for $`V_0=0,`$ the eigenvalues (8) have zero real parts. However, a large class of potentials used in scalar-field cosmological models have a zero local minimum. Examples of potentials belonging to this class are polynomial potentials of the form $`V\left(\varphi \right)=\lambda \varphi ^{2n},`$ generalized and logarithmic potentials studied by Barrow and Parsons , or potentials in conformally related theories of gravity, for example

$$V\left(\varphi \right)=V_{\mathrm{}}\left(1e^{\sqrt{2/3}\varphi }\right)^2$$
(9)
which arises in the conformal frame of the $`R+\alpha R^2`$ theory . To study the late time evolution of these models, we adopt a different approach.

In the following discussion we assume that the potential function of the scalar field is non-negative with a local minimum $`V\left(0\right)=0`$, but otherwise arbitrary. For simplicity, we present only the flat case, $`k=0`$, but the results can be extended to the case of negatively curved FRW models (cf. Remark after Proposition 3).

The equilibrium points of (5) are $`(\varphi ,y,\rho ,H):`$ $`\rho =0,y=0`$ and $`\varphi :V^{}\left(\varphi \right)=0.`$ Using the constraint (6) and the assumed $`V_{min}=0`$ we see that an equilibrium point is the $`(0,0,0,0).`$ Physically, the equilibrium point $`(0,0,0,0)`$, corresponds to an empty universe. Linearization of (5) near the equilibrium point $`(0,0,0,0)`$ shows that the eigenvalues of the Jacobian matrix at that point have zero real parts (the assumptions on the potential imply that $`V^{}\left(\varphi \right)=0`$ at $`\varphi =0`$ and also that $`V^{^{\prime \prime }}\left(0\right)0`$), consequently the Hartman-Grobman Theorem does not apply . Therefore, we cannot conclude about the stability of the equilibrium. However, looking at the system (5), one arrives at the conclusion that for an ever-expanding universe, $`H\left(t\right)`$ and $`\rho \left(t\right)`$ are decreasing functions and $`\varphi \left(t\right)`$ oscillates around the minimum of the potential with a decreasing amplitude due to the damping factor $`3H\dot{\varphi }.`$ These intuitive arguments are made more precise in Propositions 2 and 3 below.

We first show that an initially expanding flat universe remains ever-expanding. In fact, the set $`\{(\varphi ,y,\rho ,H)^4:H=0\}`$ is invariant under the flow of (5) with the constraint (6). Therefore, the sign of $`H`$ is invariant. (If the sign of $`H`$ could change, a solution curve starting with say, a positive $`H`$, would pass through the point $`(0,0,0,0)`$ which is an equilibrium solution of (5), thus violating the fundamental existence and uniqueness theorem of differential equations). We conclude that if $`H\left(t_0\right)>0,`$ then $`H\left(t\right)>0`$ for all $`t>t_0.`$

In the following Proposition the potential function has a local minimum, $`V\left(0\right)=0`$, but we do not exclude the existence of other local minima with a higher value of $`V`$.

###### Proposition 2

Suppose that $`V0`$ and $`V\left(\varphi \right)=0\varphi =0`$. Suppose also that if $`A`$ is such that $`V`$ is bounded on $`A`$, then $`V^{}`$ is bounded on $`A`$. Then $`lim_{t+\mathrm{}}\rho =0=lim_{t+\mathrm{}}y`$.

Proof. Consider the trajectory passing through an arbitrary point $`𝐱_0=(\varphi ,y,\rho ,H)\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ with $`H>0`$ at $`t=t_0.`$ Since $`H\left(t\right)`$ is decreasing and positive, it follows that $`lim_t\mathrm{}H\left(t\right)`$ exists and is a non-negative number $`\eta `$; also,$`H\left(t\right)H\left(t_0\right)`$, for all $`tt_0`$. We then deduce from (6) that each of the terms $`\rho ,\frac{1}{2}y^2`$ and $`V`$ is bounded by $`3H\left(t_0\right)^2`$. Let $`A=\{\varphi :V\left(\varphi \right)3H\left(t_0\right)^2\}`$. Then the trajectory is such that $`\varphi `$ stays inside $`A`$.

From (5) we get

$$_{t_0}^t\left(\frac{1}{2}y^2+\frac{\gamma }{2}\rho \right)𝑑t=H\left(t\right)H\left(t_0\right),$$

and taking the limit as $`t\mathrm{},`$ we obtain

$$\frac{1}{2}_{t_0}^+\mathrm{}\left(y^2+\gamma \rho \right)𝑑t=H\left(t_0\right)\eta .$$

Therefore,

$$_{t_0}^{\mathrm{}}\left(y^2\left(t\right)+\gamma \rho \left(t\right)\right)𝑑t<\mathrm{}.$$
(10)
In general, if $`f`$ is a non-negative function, the convergence of $`_{t_0}^{\mathrm{}}f\left(t\right)𝑑t`$ does not imply that $`lim_t\mathrm{}f\left(t\right)=0,`$ unless the derivative of $`f`$ is bounded. It can be shown that $`lim_t\mathrm{}f\left(t\right)=0,`$ provided that $`f^{}`$ is bounded from above.222If $`f>0`$, $`\dot{f}<k,`$ where $`k`$ is a positive constant and $`_{t_0}^+\mathrm{}f𝑑t<+\mathrm{}`$ then, $`lim_{t+\mathrm{}}f\left(t\right)=0`$. Here is the proof: Suppose to the contrary that there exists $`\epsilon >0`$ such that one can find arbitrarily large $`t`$ such that $`f\left(t\right)>\epsilon `$. Choose such a $`t`$ and then define $`s_0<t`$ so that $`ts_0=\frac{\epsilon }{k}`$. One has    $`s`$ $`<t,{\displaystyle _s^t}\dot{f}\left(s\right)𝑑s<\left(ts\right)kf\left(s\right)>f\left(t\right)\left(ts\right)k`$    $`{\displaystyle _{s_0}^t}f\left(s\right)𝑑s`$ $`>\left(ts_0\right)f\left(t\right){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}k\left(ts_0\right)^2>{\displaystyle \frac{\epsilon ^2}{2k}}.`$   The assumption $`_{t_0}^+\mathrm{}f𝑑t<+\mathrm{}`$ implies that $`lim_{s+\mathrm{}}_s^+\mathrm{}f𝑑s=0`$. This contradicts the fact that one can find inside any interval $`(s,+\mathrm{})`$ a subinterval $`(s_0,t)`$ such that $`_{s_0}^tf\left(s\right)𝑑s>\frac{\epsilon ^2}{2k}`$. In our case,

$$\frac{d}{dt}\left(y^2+\gamma \rho \right)=2y\dot{y}+\gamma \dot{\rho }=6Hy^22yV^{}\left(\varphi \right)3\gamma ^2\rho H2yV^{}\left(\varphi \right).$$

As we already remarked, $`y`$ is bounded; also, by our assumption on $`V`$, $`V^{}\left(\varphi \right)`$ is bounded. We conclude that the derivative of the function $`y^2+\gamma \rho `$ is bounded from above and therefore, (10) implies that $`lim_t\mathrm{}y^2\left(t\right)=0`$and$`lim_t\mathrm{}\rho \left(t\right)=0.`$

The conditions in Proposition 2 are satisfied by a large class of potential functions, for example by the generalized and logarithmic potentials studied in . In particular, this class includes potentials which do not approach zero as $`\varphi \mathrm{}`$ (cf. equation (9)).

Remark. It is easy to conclude that $`lim_{t+\mathrm{}}\rho =0,`$ without any assumption of boundedness of $`V^{}`$. We only have to consider the case $`\eta >0`$ because if $`\eta =0`$ then (6) entails that $`lim_t\mathrm{}\rho =0`$. By (5b), $`\rho `$ is decreasing, thus $`lim_{t+\mathrm{}}\rho :=\rho _0`$. We shall show that $`\rho _0=0.`$ Suppose that $`\rho _0>0`$. Then from (5b) again we get $`\dot{\rho }3\eta \rho _0\gamma .`$ Thus

$$\rho \left(t\right)\rho \left(t_0\right)=_{t_0}^t\dot{\rho }\left(s\right)𝑑s<3\eta \rho _0\gamma \left(tt_0\right),$$

which implies that $`\rho `$ becomes negative for large $`t`$, a contradiction.

If we assume in addition that $`V^{}\left(\varphi \right)>0`$ for $`\varphi >0`$ and $`V^{}\left(\varphi \right)<0`$ for $`\varphi <0`$ (thus, $`0`$ is the only local minimum of $`V`$), then we can conclude that, if the initial value of $`H`$ is less than$`\sqrt{V\left(\mathrm{}\right)/3}`$, then $`lim_{t+\mathrm{}}\varphi `$ is equal to $`0`$. More precisely, we have the following result.

###### Proposition 3

Suppose that $`V^{}\left(\varphi \right)>0`$ for $`\varphi >0`$ and $`V^{}\left(\varphi \right)<0`$ for $`\varphi <0`$. Then, under the assumptions of Proposition (2), $`lim_{t+\mathrm{}}\varphi `$ exists and is equal to $`+\mathrm{},`$ or $`\mathrm{}`$ or $`0`$.

Proof. We know that $`lim_t\mathrm{}H\left(t\right)=\eta `$. If $`\eta =0`$, then from (6) we obtain $`lim_t\mathrm{}V\left(\varphi \right)=0`$. The assumption on the potential implies that $`lim_t\mathrm{}\varphi =0`$. So suppose that $`\eta >0`$. From (6) we get $`lim_{t+\mathrm{}}V\left(\varphi \left(t\right)\right)=3\eta ^2`$. Thus there exists $`t^{}`$ such that $`V\left(\varphi \right)>3\eta ^2/2`$ for all $`t>t^{}`$. It follows that $`\varphi `$ cannot become zero for some $`t>t^{}`$ because $`V\left(0\right)=0`$. Thus, $`\varphi `$ has a constant sign for all $`t>t^{}`$.

Suppose that $`\varphi >0`$ for all $`t>t^{}`$. Since $`V`$ is increasing as a function of $`\varphi `$ on $`(0,+\mathrm{})`$, we have $`lim_{t+\mathrm{}}V\left(\varphi \left(t\right)\right)=3\eta ^2lim_{\varphi +\mathrm{}}V\left(\varphi \right)`$. We consider two cases:

(i) If $`lim_{t+\mathrm{}}V\left(\varphi \left(t\right)\right)=lim_{\varphi +\mathrm{}}V\left(\varphi \right)`$ then obviously $`lim_{t+\mathrm{}}\varphi =+\mathrm{}`$.

(ii) If $`lim_{t+\mathrm{}}V\left(\varphi \left(t\right)\right)<lim_{\varphi +\mathrm{}}V\left(\varphi \right)`$ then there exists $`\overline{\varphi }0`$ such that $`lim_{t+\mathrm{}}V\left(\varphi \left(t\right)\right)=V\left(\overline{\varphi }\right)`$. Since $`V`$ is continuous and strictly increasing, it follows that $`lim_{t+\mathrm{}}\varphi =\overline{\varphi }`$. From (5b), taking into account that $`lim_{t+\mathrm{}}y=0`$ and $`H`$ is bounded, we deduce that, $`lim_{t+\mathrm{}}\dot{y}=V^{}\left(\overline{\varphi }\right)<0.`$ Hence, there exists $`t^{\prime \prime }>t^{}`$ such that for all $`t>t^{\prime \prime }`$, $`\dot{y}<V^{}\left(\overline{\varphi }\right)/2`$. But this entails immediately that

$$y\left(t\right)y\left(t^{\prime \prime }\right)=_{t^{\prime \prime }}^t\dot{y}𝑑t<\frac{V^{}\left(\overline{\varphi }\right)}{2}\left(tt^{\prime \prime }\right),$$

i.e., $`y\left(t\right)`$ takes arbitrarily large negative values as $`t`$ increases, which is not possible because $`lim_{t+\mathrm{}}y=0`$.

Thus, if $`\varphi >0`$ for all $`t>t^{}`$ then $`lim_{t+\mathrm{}}\varphi =+\mathrm{}`$. Similarly, the case $`\varphi <0`$ for all $`t>t^{}`$ leads to $`lim_{t+\mathrm{}}\varphi =\mathrm{}`$.

It follows that if initially, $`3H^2\left(t_0\right)<\mathrm{min}\{lim_{\varphi +\mathrm{}}V\left(\varphi \right),lim_\varphi \mathrm{}V\left(\varphi \right)\}`$, then $`lim_{t+\mathrm{}}H\left(t\right)=0`$. Indeed, we know that $`lim_{t+\mathrm{}}\varphi `$ is equal to $`0`$ or $`+\mathrm{}`$ or $`\mathrm{}`$. If, say, $`lim_{t+\mathrm{}}\varphi =+\mathrm{}`$, then by (6), $`3\eta ^2=lim_{t+\mathrm{}}V\left(\varphi \left(t\right)\right)=lim_{\varphi +\mathrm{}}V\left(\varphi \right)>3H^2\left(t_0\right)`$. This is impossible, since $`H\left(t\right)`$ is decreasing and thus $`H\left(t_0\right)\eta `$. Likewise, $`lim_{t+\mathrm{}}\varphi =\mathrm{}`$ leads to a contradiction. Hence, $`lim_{t+\mathrm{}}\varphi =0`$ and this implies that $`lim_{t+\mathrm{}}V\left(\varphi \left(t\right)\right)=0`$ and, again by (6), $`lim_{t+\mathrm{}}H\left(t\right)=0`$.

We use as an example the potential (9) to visualize the above result. This potential has a long and flat plateau. For large values of $`\varphi ,`$ the potential $`V`$ is almost constant, $`V_{\mathrm{}}=lim_{\varphi +\mathrm{}}V\left(\varphi \right),`$ thus $`V`$ has the general properties for inflation to commence. According to Proposition 3, if the initial value of $`H`$ is less than $`V_{\mathrm{}},`$ then $`\varphi ,H0`$ as $`t\mathrm{}.`$ For initial values of $`H`$ greater than $`V_{\mathrm{}},`$ $`\varphi `$ may diverge to $`+\mathrm{},`$ i.e., the scalar field may reach the flat plateau of the potential.

Remark. The above results can be extended to the case of negatively curved FRW models, $`k=1.`$ Setting $`x=1/a`$ the evolution equations (2)-(4) become

$`\dot{x}`$ $`=Hx`$
$`\dot{\varphi }`$ $`=y,`$
$`\dot{y}`$ $`=3HyV^{}\left(\varphi \right),`$
$`\dot{\rho }`$ $`=3\gamma \rho H,`$
$`\dot{H}`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}y^2{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma }{2}}\rho +kx^2,`$ (11)
subject to the constraint

$$3H^2+3kx^2=\rho +\frac{1}{2}y^2+V\left(\varphi \right).$$
(12)
With slight modifications we can repeat the same type of arguments to show that Propositions 2 and 3 still hold and, in addition, $`lim_{t+\mathrm{}}x=0.`$

Up to now, we have assumed that the potential is non-negative and has a minimum. Therefore, the above three Propositions do not apply directly to the important case of an exponential potential, vis. $`V\left(\varphi \right)=V_0e^{\lambda \varphi },`$ with $`V_0`$ and $`\lambda `$ positive constants. It is already known that the state corresponding to $`\rho =0,`$ $`y=0`$ and $`\varphi \mathrm{}`$ is an equilibrium of the projection of the system (5) on the $`\varphi y`$ plane. This result has been established using phase plane analysis (cf. ) on the reduced two-dimensional dynamical system. Using similar arguments as in Propositions 2 and 3, we complete our analysis by showing the global result that, for expanding flat models with an exponential potential, $`\varphi \mathrm{}`$ as $`t\mathrm{}.`$ More precisely, we have the following result.

###### Proposition 4

Let $`V`$ be a potential function with the following properties:333Note that $`V\left(\varphi \right)=V_0e^{\lambda \varphi }`$ has all these properties. We do not exclude potential functions with $`lim_{\varphi +\mathrm{}}V\left(\varphi \right)>0`$.

1. $`V`$ is non-negative and $`lim_\varphi \mathrm{}V\left(\varphi \right)=+\mathrm{}`$.

2. $`V^{}`$ is continuous and $`V^{}\left(\varphi \right)<0`$.

3. If $`A`$ is such that $`V`$ is bounded on $`A`$, then $`V^{}`$ is bounded on $`A`$.

Then $`lim_{t+\mathrm{}}y=0=lim_{t+\mathrm{}}\rho ,`$ and $`lim_{t+\mathrm{}}\varphi =+\mathrm{}`$.

Proof. It is easy to see that the set $`\rho >0`$ is invariant under the flow of (5), therefore $`\rho `$ is nonzero if initially $`\rho \left(t_0\right)`$ is nonzero. Now from (4) it follows that $`H`$ is never zero, thus it cannot change sign. Hence, $`H`$ is always non-negative if $`H\left(t_0\right)>0`$. Further, $`H`$ is decreasing in view of (5d), thus $`lim_{t+\mathrm{}}H=\eta 0`$.

We know from (5d) that

$$\frac{1}{2}_{t_0}^+\mathrm{}\left(y^2+\gamma \rho \right)𝑑t=H\left(t_0\right)\eta <+\mathrm{}.$$
(13)
As in Proposition 2, $`\frac{d}{dt}\left(y^2+\gamma \rho \right)2yV^{}\left(\varphi \right)`$. From this and (13) we deduce that $`lim_{t+\mathrm{}}y=lim_{t+\mathrm{}}\rho =0`$, as in Proposition 2.

We now show that $`lim_{t+\mathrm{}}\varphi =+\mathrm{}`$ as in Proposition 3. It follows from (6) that $`lim_{t+\mathrm{}}V\left(\varphi \right)=3\eta ^2`$. Since $`V`$ is strictly decreasing as a function of $`\varphi `$, we have $`V\left(\varphi \right)>lim_{\varphi +\mathrm{}}V\left(\varphi \right)`$ for all $`\varphi `$, thus $`lim_{t+\mathrm{}}V\left(\varphi \left(t\right)\right)lim_{\varphi +\mathrm{}}V\left(\varphi \right)`$. We consider two cases:

(i) If $`lim_{t+\mathrm{}}V\left(\varphi \left(t\right)\right)=lim_{\varphi +\mathrm{}}V\left(\varphi \right)`$ then obviously $`lim_{t+\mathrm{}}\varphi =+\mathrm{}`$.

(ii) If $`lim_{t+\mathrm{}}V\left(\varphi \left(t\right)\right)>lim_{\varphi +\mathrm{}}V\left(\varphi \right)`$, then there exists a unique $`\overline{\varphi }`$ such that $`lim_{t+\mathrm{}}V\left(\varphi \left(t\right)\right)=V\left(\overline{\varphi }\right)`$. It then follows that $`lim_{t+\mathrm{}}\varphi \left(t\right)=\overline{\varphi }`$. From (5b) we deduce that $`lim_{t+\mathrm{}}\dot{y}=V^{}\left(\overline{\varphi }\right)>0`$; thus, there exists $`t^{}`$ such that $`\dot{y}V^{}\left(\overline{\varphi }\right)/2`$ for all $`t>t^{}`$. From this we get that $`y\left(t\right)y\left(t^{}\right)>V^{}\left(\overline{\varphi }\right)\left(tt^{}\right)/2`$, which is not possible because $`lim_{t+\mathrm{}}y=0`$. We conclude that $`lim_{t+\mathrm{}}\varphi =+\mathrm{}`$.

If in addition the potential is such that $`lim_{\varphi +\mathrm{}}V\left(\varphi \right)=0,`$ then we conclude that $`H0`$ as $`t\mathrm{}.`$ This is obviously true for an exponential potential.

## 4 Discussion and the $`k=+1`$ FRW model

In this paper we have investigated the qualitative properties of flat and negatively curved FRW models containing a barotropic fluid and a scalar field with an arbitrary non-negative potential. For potentials having a unique minimum $`V\left(0\right)=0,`$ we have shown that in an expanding universe, the energy density $`\rho `$ of ordinary matter, the Hubble function $`H`$ and the scalar field $`\varphi `$ asymptotically approach zero. This result was rigorously proved without referring to the exact details of the potential.

However, the situation is more delicate for positively curved FRW models with a scalar field. In the present state of the universe the scalar field oscillates around the minimum of the potential and it is unobservable, in the sense that the energy density $`\rho `$ of ordinary matter dominates over the energy density $`\epsilon `$ of the scalar field, hence we expect an almost classical Friedmannian evolution. Using (3) it is easy to see that the energy density of the field satisfies

$$\dot{\epsilon }=3H\dot{\varphi }^2$$

i.e., in an expanding universe $`\epsilon `$ is a decreasing function of time. Since the energy density of ordinary matter also decreases, it may happen that in a future time, $`\epsilon `$ be comparable to $`\rho .`$ In particular, for closed ($`k=1`$) models, once the scale factor reaches its maximum value and recollapse commences i.e., $`H<0,`$ the term $`3H\dot{\varphi }`$ in (3) is no longer a damping factor, but acts as a driving force which forces the field $`\varphi `$ to oscillate with larger and larger amplitude. If this be the case, the repulsive effect of the cosmological term may drastically change the evolution of a classical FRW model.

These intuitive ideas show that it is of interest to study the late time evolution of the dynamical system (11) with $`k=+1`$. The main problem we are faced with is the following: Can a closed universe filled with ordinary matter and a scalar field avoid recollapse? In the following we give a partial answer to this question for an arbitrary non-negative potential having a unique minimum $`V\left(0\right)=0`$.

A closed Friedmann universe is considered almost synonymous to a recollapsing universe. This is mainly due to our experience with the dust and radiation filled Friedmann models usually treated in textbooks. That this picture is misleading follows clearly from an example found by Barrow *et al*  according to which an expanding Friedmann model with spatial topology $`S^3`$ satisfying the weak, the strong, the dominant energy conditions and the generic condition may not recollapse. Thus the problem of recollapse of a closed universe to a second singularity is not trivial already in the Friedmann case.

Among the known global results concerning the closed universe recollapse conjecture, let us recall that a closed universe recollapses provided that the strong energy condition (SEC) is satisfied and there exists a maximal spacelike hypersurface $`\mathrm{\Sigma },`$ i.e., the expansion is zero on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ (cf. ). Therefore, in FRW models it suffices to check if the scale factor has a maximum.

In the following we assume an equation of state of the form $`p=(\gamma 1)\rho ,`$ $`\gamma (\frac{2}{3},2).`$444The range of $`\gamma `$ is chosen in accordance to the conditions for recollapse of Barrow *et al* . Equation (4) can be integrated to give

$$\rho =\mathrm{const}\times a^{3\gamma }.$$
(14)
Assume that at time $`t_0`$ (now) the values of $`\varphi `$ and $`\dot{\varphi }`$ are very small in the sense that

$$\epsilon _0:=\frac{1}{2}\dot{\varphi }_0^2+V_0\rho _0\text{ and }2\dot{\varphi }_0^22V_0\rho _0+3p_0$$
(15)
so that the total stress-energy tensor satisfies the SEC. This is a plausible assumption since the scalar field is unobservable in the present universe. We write (3) (in first-order approximation) as

$$\ddot{\varphi }+3H\dot{\varphi }+m^2\varphi =0$$
(16)
where $`m^2:=V^{\prime \prime }\left(0\right).`$ This is the equation of motion of an harmonic oscillator with a variable damping factor $`3H.`$ For a slowly varying function $`H`$ this equation can be solved using the Kryloff-Bogoliuboff  approximation. We find that the amplitude of the scalar field varies as $`a^{3/2}.`$ Since the amplitude of $`\dot{\varphi }`$ has the same time dependence and in our approximation $`\epsilon =\frac{1}{2}\dot{\varphi }^2+\frac{1}{2}m^2\varphi ^2`$, it follows that

$$\epsilon a^3.$$
(17)
Comparing this with the time dependence of the density $`\rho a^{3\gamma }`$ we arrive at the following picture for the evolution of these universes. If $`\gamma 1`$ the initial conditions (15) imply that

$$\epsilon =\frac{1}{2}\dot{\varphi }^2+V\rho \text{ and }2\dot{\varphi }^22V\rho +3p,$$

for all $`tt_0,`$ that is, the SEC on the total stress-energy tensor is satisfied for all $`tt_0.`$ Hence the universe follows the classical Friedmannian evolution and has a time of maximum expansion. Therefore, with initial conditions (15) the approximation (16) suggests that if $`\gamma 1,`$ the universe recollapses. The case $`\gamma =1`$ is particularly interesting since it corresponds to a dust-filled universe which perfectly approximates our Universe. For $`\gamma >1`$, since $`\rho `$ decreases faster than the energy density $`\epsilon `$ of the scalar field, $`\epsilon `$ eventually dominates over $`\rho .`$ Hence this model may, or may not have a time of maximum expansion.

The above analysis may serve as an indication of the richness of possible scenarios for expanding closed FRW models with a scalar field. However, spurious conclusions may be drawn from an approximate analysis, especially if it is referred to the asymptotic behavior of the solutions. Similarly, the determination of the stability of equilibrium solutions does not reveal the complete global behavior of a dynamical system of dimension greater than two. A rigorous proof of the closed universe recollapse conjecture may come from the investigation of the global structure of the solutions of (11) with $`k=+1`$.

Acknowledgments I thank N. Hadjisavvas and S. Cotsakis for fruitful discussions during the preparation of this work.


text:
# HETE-2 Localization and Observation of the Bright, X-Ray-Rich Gamma-Ray Burst GRB 021211

## 1 Introduction

The bane of the gamma-ray burst (GRB) field are the so-called “optically dark” bursts: those frustrating events for which, despite the best efforts of the satellite observers to provide an accurate and rapid location for the burst, and the diligence of the followup community in searching for a corresponding transient event, in the end, only upper limits on any optical afterglow can be established. In this paper we report on an event that provides a partial answer to the puzzle of such “optically dark” GRBs.

On Dec 11 2002, at 11:18:34.03 UT (40714.03 SOD), the High Energy Transient Explorer 2 Satellite (HETE-2; Ricker et al. 2003) detected a GRB (Crew et al., 2002), with the French Gamma Telescope (FREGATE) (Atteia et al., 2003). GRB 021211 lasted only a few seconds, but it was bright enough and soft enough to allow the Wide-field X-ray Monitor (WXM) (Kawai et al., 2003) to unambiguously locate its position. The Soft X-ray Camera (SXC) (Villasenor et al., 2003a) also easily detected the burst. The WXM flight location was relayed to the ground via the burst alert network (Crew et al. 2003; Villasenor et al. 2003.; Vanderspek et al. 2003) 22 s after the start of the burst. HETE-2 was at this moment emerging from a no-contact zone over the Pacific Ocean—the burst message was caught on the horizon by the HETE-2 secondary ground station in the Galapagos Islands.

Three robotic telescopes, RAPTOR (RAPid Telescopes for Optical Response), KAIT (Katzman Automatic Imaging Telescope), and Super-LOTIS (Livermore Optical Transient Imaging System), caught the optical transient during the second minute of the event (Wozniak et al., 2002; Li et al., 2002; Park et al., 2002) and a fourth provided the identification of the optical afterglow only 54 minutes after the start of the burst (Fox & Price, 2002). However, the afterglow had already faded to R $``$ 19 at the time of this fourth observation, and subsequent observations showed that it had faded to $`>`$ 23rd magnitude within 24 hours of the burst (Klose et al., 2002; Lamb et al., 2002b; McLeod et al., 2002; Fox et al., 2003b; Pandey, et al., 2003). The host galaxy of the burst was identified in HST images taken on 18 December (Fruchter et al., 2002); soon thereafter, the redshift of the host galaxy was determined to be $`z=1.006`$ (Vreeswijk et al., 2002).

The optical afterglow of GRB 021211 is only the third to be caught in near-real time, the other two being GRB 990123 (Briggs et al., 1999; Akerlof et al., 1999) and GRB 021004 (Shirasaki et al., 2002; Doty et al., 2002; Lamb et al., 2002a; Fox et al., 2003a). The afterglow of GRB 021211 was more than three magnitudes fainter than was the afterglow of GRB 990123 at the same epochs, and about 70% of the searches conducted to date would have failed to detect it at one day after the burst (see Berger et al., Figure 4; Lazzati, Covino & Ghisellini 2002, Figure 1; Fox et al. 2003b, Figure 2).

We turn now to a discussion of the properties of the prompt X-ray and $`\gamma `$-ray emission from GRB 021211, which will allow a comparison of this event with GRB 990123 (and other bursts with bright optical afterglows), in the hope that such a comparison may shed some light on the nature of “optically dark” bursts. We show that GRB 021211, while having a duration that is shorter than that of most long-duration bursts and lying near the boundary in duration between long and short GRBs (Hurley 1992; Lamb, Graziani, and Smith 1993; Kouveliotou et al. 1993) is definitely a long burst, by virtue of its spectral properties. Indeed, the burst is “X-ray-rich,” with a spectrum that peaks at $`E_{\mathrm{peak}}^{\mathrm{obs}}47`$ keV. The duration of the burst decreases with increasing energy and exhibits strong spectral evolution from hard to soft, which are also properties that are typical of long GRBs.

## 2 Observations

### 2.1 Localization

At the time of the burst, the HETE-2 spacecraft was pointed $``$ 30° away from its nominal anti-solar pointing direction, in order to make calibration observations of the Crab. The burst triggered the FREGATE instrument on the 0.160 s trigger timescale in the FREGATE 85–400 keV energy band. The WXM flight software determined an initial position using the first 3 s of data from the burst; this was relayed to the ground in the Alert message. Several seconds later it found a better Update position using the first 4.8 s of data after the trigger: R.A. = 08h 08m 54.7s, Dec = 06° 44′ 05″. Both positions were assigned a 14′ error radius based on the strength of the image signal to noise ratios ($`S/N=29.2`$ and 33.5 in the X- and Y-detectors, respectively). The WXM localization was also relayed to the flight SXC software, which correctly localized the burst. However, the SXC flight localization was not sent out to the astronomical community because the calibration of SXC flight localizations had not yet been completed.

Owing to preventive maintenance of the Cayenne Primary Ground Station, burst buffer data were not relayed to the ground until an hour after the burst. The WXM and SXC data were then analyzed (Graziani et al., 2003; Shirasaki et al., 2003; Monnelly et al., 2003), and produced refined localizations that are in good agreement with the WXM flight localization (see Figure 1). Using a 4–5 s foreground region (similar to the choice made by the flight software), the radius of the 90% confidence region for the burst location is $``$ 3′ from statistical error alone; including systematic errors, it is conservatively 5′. The SXC analysis was also straightforward. The 2′ radius of the final SXC localization, centered at R.A. = 08h 09m 00.0s, Dec = 06° 44′ 20″, is dominated by systematic errors. The localization history is summarized in Table 1.

GRB 021211 was observed by other spacecraft in the Interplanetary Network, and the resulting IPN localization (Hurley, 2002) is fully consistent with the WXM and SXC localizations. All of these localizations are consistent with the location of the optical transient (Fox & Price, 2002), as shown in Table 1 and Fig. 1.

### 2.2 Temporal Properties

The burst time history is FRED-like (fast-rise, exponential decay) and relatively featureless in all energy bands of all instruments. The burst lasts $``$10 s in the SXC (2–10 keV) as shown in Fig. 2a. The SXC data have been binned in 250 ms bins in order to resolve the fast rise of the burst. The duration of the burst in the WXM decreases from $`20`$ s in the 2–5 keV energy band to $`4`$ s in the 10–25 keV energy band, as shown in Fig. 2b–d; the data are binned in 100 ms bins. Fig. 2e–h shows the time history of the burst in various FREGATE energy bands, again binned in 100 ms bins. The duration of the burst decreases to $`2.3`$ s in the highest FREGATE energy band (85–400 keV).

Table 2 gives the $`t_{50}`$ and $`t_{90}`$ durations for various SXC, WXM and FREGATE energy bands. Figure 3 shows that both duration measures decrease with increasing energy: $`t_{50}`$ = $`4.2E^{0.34}`$ (s/keV) and $`t_{90}`$ = $`13E^{0.40}`$ (s/keV). This behavior is typical of long-duration GRBs (Fenimore et al., 1995). The SXC and WXM data both suggest a departure from this relation at the lowest energies ($`<`$ 5 keV), and there is indeed some evidence in the WXM 2–5 keV time history for a weak, soft tail (see Figures 2b and 3).

### 2.3 Spectrum

We investigated the average spectral properties of the burst, using an interval of 8.0 s, which corresponds to the $`t_{90}`$ of the burst in the WXM 2–25 keV energy band (see Table 2). To examine the spectral evolution of the burst, we also analyzed the spectra for two subintervals: t = 0–2.3 s, in which the high energy photons are clearly seen in the FREGATE 85–400 keV band in Fig. 2h; and t = 2.3–8.0 s, in which they are absent.

Table 3 presents the results of our time-resolved and time-integrated spectral analysis of the burst. In this analysis, we consider two models: (1) power law times exponential (PLE) \[the COMP model in Preece et al. (2000)\], and (2) Band function (Band et al., 1993). Both the PLE and the Band function models provide satisfactory descriptions of the data: for the PLE model, $`\chi _\nu ^2=0.78`$ (111 DOF), while for the Band function, $`\chi _\nu ^2=0.68`$ (110 DOF). However, the difference between $`\chi _{\mathrm{min}}^2`$ for the PLE and Band function models is $`\mathrm{\Delta }\chi ^2=11.57`$ for one additional parameter. Thus the Band function is preferred at the $`6.7\times 10^4`$ confidence level.

Figure 4 shows the fit of the Band function to the WXM and FREGATE spectral data. The energy $`E_{\mathrm{peak}}^{\mathrm{obs}}=(2\alpha )E_0`$ of the peak of the $`\nu F_\nu `$spectrum is $`46.8_{5.1}^{+5.8}`$ keV, for the burst-average spectrum, which is at the low end of the range of $`E_{\mathrm{peak}}^{\mathrm{obs}}`$ values observed by BATSE (Preece et al., 2000) and BeppoSAX (Amati et al., 2002). Comparing the values obtained when the full interval is split into two sub-intervals, we find that the spectral index steepens from the first to the second. Likewise, the $`E_{\mathrm{peak}}^{\mathrm{obs}}`$ value decreases dramatically from $`51.6_{5.5}^{+6.2}`$ keV to $`20.6_{2.7}^{+2.7}`$ keV.

The overall emission characteristics of the burst are estimated from the best-fit Band function, and summarized in Table 4. In particular, the peak photon number and photon energy fluxes in 1 s are $`(34.0\pm 1.8)`$ ph cm-2 s-1 and $`(1.68\pm 0.11)\times 10^6`$ erg cm-2 s-1 in the 2–400 keV energy band. 111We compute the peak photon number flux using the ratio 2.672 of the flux of photons found in the 1 s time interval containing the largest number of photons and the average flux of photons in the 5 s time interval containing the largest number of photons and that brackets the 1 s time interval. We compute the peak photon energy flux in exactly the same way, except that we use the ratio 2.782 of the total photon energy flux (found by weighting each photon with its energy and summing the energies) found in the 1 s time interval containing the largest total photon energy and the average photon energy flux in the 5 s time interval containing the largest total photon energy and that brackets the 1 s time interval. The energy fluence over the first 8.0 s of the burst was $`S_X=1.36\pm 0.05\times 10^6`$ erg cm-2 in the 2–30 keV band and $`S_\gamma =2.17\pm 0.15\times 10^6`$ erg cm-2 in the 30-400 keV energy band. This gives a hardness ratio $`S_X/S_\gamma `$ of 0.63, which is softer than many of the bursts seen by HETE-2 to date (Barraud et al., 2003) and makes this an “X-ray-rich” GRB. 222Throughout this paper, we define “X-ray-rich” GRBs and XRFs as those events for which $`\mathrm{log}[S_X(230\mathrm{keV})/S_\gamma (30400\mathrm{keV})]>0.5`$ and 0.0, respectively.

## 3 Discussion

### 3.1 Burst Properties

GRB 021211 was bright, and its duration was relatively short ($`t_{50}=0.86\pm 0.07`$ s and $`t_{90}=2.30\pm 0.52`$ s in the FREGATE 85–400 keV energy band; see Table 2) for a long-duration GRB (Hurley, 1992; Lamb et al., 1993; Kouveliotou et al., 1993). The duration of the burst decreases with increasing energy and the spectrum of the burst evolves from hard to soft; both properties are typical of long-duration GRBs. The burst is “X-ray-rich,” with a soft spectrum having a peak energy of only $`E_{\mathrm{peak}}45`$ keV, and exhibits a soft tail, which may indicate that the X-ray afterglow of the burst had already begun at this time.

### 3.2 Optical Follow-Up Observations

Previous to GRB 021211, only two GRB optical afterglows had been caught in near-real time: the optical afterglow of GRB 990123, which was caught by a single robotic telescope (Akerlof et al., 1999); and the optical afterglow of GRB 021004 (another HETE-2 burst), which was caught by two automated telescopes and a robotic telescope (Fox et al., 2003a).

The real-time localization of GRB 021211 by the WXM flight software, which was rapidly followed by a refined WXM location and an SXC location, both based on ground analysis, led to identification of the optical afterglow in automated, filterless observations, using the 48-inch Schmidt telescope at Mt. Palomar, taken 20 minutes after the start of the burst, and reported 53 minutes later (Fox & Price, 2002).

The prompt reporting of the location of GRB 021211 by the HETE-2 flight software made possible an unprecedented number of successful near-real time observations of the optical afterglow by three robotic telescopes: RAPTOR (Wozniak et al., 2002), KAIT (Li et al., 2002), and Super-LOTIS (Park et al., 2002). The observations began 65 s, 108 s, and 143 s, respectively, after the start of the burst, and revealed a light curve for the optical afterglow that decreased rapidly during the first 12 minutes ($`t^{1.82\pm 0.02}`$), followed by a slower decline ($`t^{0.82\pm 0.11}`$) (Li et al., 2003). The latter decay rate is not atypical of the early-time behavior of GRB afterglows (see Figure 2 of Fox et al. 2003b).

The host galaxy of the burst was identified in HST images taken using the ACS on 18 December UT (six days after the burst) and using the NICMOS on 24 and 25 December UT (twelve and thirteen days after the burst) (Fruchter et al., 2002). Soon thereafter, observations at the European Southern Observatory using the Very Large Telescope showed that the redshift of the host galaxy is $`z=1.006`$ (Vreeswijk et al., 2002).

### 3.3 Implications for the Nature of GRB Jets

GRB 021211 is the second burst for which an exceptionally bright, rapidly decaying component of the optical afterglow has been seen, the other being the famous event GRB 990123 (Briggs et al., 1999; Akerlof et al., 1999). The rapidly decaying component in GRB 990123 has been interpreted as due to emission from the reverse shock resulting from the the GRB jet striking circumburst material (Sari & Piran, 1999a, b). The behavior of the bright, rapidly decaying component of the optical afterglow of GRB 021211 also appears to be consistent with this interpretation (Fox et al., 2003b).

Zhang, Kobayashi & Mészáros (2003) and Kumar & Panaitescu (2003) have shown that knowledge of both the early-time behavior of the optical afterglow (which is thought to be due to the reverse shock component), and the late-time behavior (which is thought to be due to the forward shock component) provides a diagnostic of whether or not the GRB jet is magnetic energy dominated. A detailed analysis by Kumar & Panaitescu (2003) shows that the early- and late-time behavior of the optical afterglow of GRB 021211 requires that the magnetic energy density in the jet exceed the kinetic energy in the ejecta by a factor $`1000`$. Zhang, Kobayashi & Mészáros (2003) reach a similar conclusion for GRB 990123 (Briggs et al., 1999), the only other GRB which is known to have had an optical afterglow that was very bright at early times (Akerlof et al., 1999).

### 3.4 Implications for the Nature of “Optically Dark” GRBs

Two explanations of why some GRBs are not detected optically, despite early and deep follow-up observations, have been widely discussed: (1) the optical afterglow is extinguished by dust in the host galaxy of the burst (see, e.g., Reichart & Price 2002) or (2) the GRB lies at very high redshifts ($`z>5`$), and the optical afterglow is absorbed by neutral hydrogen in the host galaxy and in the intergalactic medium along the line of sight from the burst to us (see, e.g., Lamb & Reichart 2000). A third explanation has also been mentioned: some GRBs have optical afterglows that are very faint (Fynbo et al., 2001; Berger et al., 2002; Lazzati, Covino, & Ghisellini, 2002).

The optical follow-up observations of GRB 021211 made possible by HETE-2 show that the optical afterglow of this burst was intrinsically much fainter at late times than most afterglows observed previously. In particular, the optical afterglow of GRB 021211 faded from $`14`$ mag to $`>19`$ mag within $``$ 20 minutes (Fox & Price, 2002), and was fainter than 23rd magnitude within one day (Klose et al., 2002; Lamb et al., 2002b; McLeod et al., 2002; Fox et al., 2003b; Pandey, et al., 2003). The afterglow of GRB 021211 was therefore more than three magnitudes fainter than the afterglow of GRB 990123 at similar epochs (Akerlof et al., 1999). It was $``$ 2 magnitudes fainter than the faint optical afterglow of GRB 020124 (Berger et al., 2002) at 100 minutes after the burst, and remained fainter at all subsequent epochs. It was also fainter at one day than the faint optical afterglows of GRB 980613 (Hjorth et al., 2002) and GRB 000630 (Fynbo et al., 2001).

Indeed, about 70% of the searches conducted to date would have failed to detect GRB 021211 at one day after the burst (see Berger et al., Figure 4; Lazzati, Covino & Ghisellini 2002, Figure 1; Fox et al. 2003b, Figure 2). In addition, according to the statistics compiled by Reichart and Yost (2003, Figure 1), 65% (15/23) of GRBs for which optical observations had been made with limiting magnitudes 20 $`<`$ R $`<`$ 23.5 at 18 hours after the burst were classified as “optically dark.” It is therefore quite likely that the optical afterglow of GRB 021211 would not have been detected, were it not for the real-time localization of the burst by the HETE-2 WXM, and the refined WXM and SXC ground localizations that were rapidly disseminated, and would therefore have been classified as an “optically dark” GRB.

Thus GRB 021211 shows that some fraction of burst afterglows are “optically dark” because their optical afterglows at times $`>`$ 1 hour after the burst are very faint, and previously have often escaped detection. These bursts are “optically dim” rather than truly “optically dark.” Their existence and properties may lead to an improved understanding of GRBs themselves, as well as burst afterglows. Their existence (as demonstrated by GRB 021211) also suggests that the current sample of burst optical afterglows is not a “fair sample,” but is skewed toward bright afterglows.

It is interesting to compare the optical afterglow of GRB 021211 and the optical afterglows of GRB 990123 (Briggs et al., 1999) and GRB 021004 (Shirasaki et al., 2002), the only other bursts for which successful real time or near-real time optical afterglow observations have been made (Akerlof et al., 1999; Fox et al., 2003a). The afterglows of both GRB 021211 and GRB 990123 show a rapid decline during the first 20 minutes after the burst, followed by a slower decline, approximately as $`t^1`$; the latter is similar to the behavior of the afterglows of many GRBs at early times. Indeed, the temporal behaviors of the two afterglows are almost carbon copies of each other, with the exception that the optical afterglow of GRB 021211 is more than 3 magnitudes fainter than that of GRB990123 at the same epoch (Akerlof et al., 1999; Fox et al., 2003b). In contrast, the optical afterglow of GRB 021004, another burst that was localized in near-real time by HETE-2 (Shirasaki et al., 2002) and the only other burst for which near-real time optical afterglow observations have been made (Fox et al., 2003a), exhibited a very different behavior at early times: the afterglow faded only gradually in the first $``$ 2.5 hours after the burst. These results show that the optical afterglows of GRBs exhibit a variety of behaviors at early times, and illustrate the fact that HETE-2 is making it possible to explore the previously unknown behavior of GRB afterglows in the “gap” in time from the end of the burst to 3–20 hours later that existed during the BeppoSAX era.

### 3.5 Implications for Using GRBs as a Probe of Cosmology

Confirmation that some GRBs have very bright optical afterglows at early times, even if the afterglows are “optically dim” at late times, has significant implications for using GRB afterglows as a probe of cosmology and the early universe. In particular, the bright early phase of the optical afterglows of GRB 021211 (which lasted $``$ 20 minutes) and GRB 990123 (which lasted $``$ 30 minutes), would have lasted $``$ 1, 2, and 3.5 hours had these burst occurred at redshifts $`z`$ = 5, 10, and 20, rather than at $`z=1.06`$ and $`z=1.6`$, respectively. This means that the spectral intensity of the afterglows of GRBs at very high redshifts ($`z>5`$) available at a fixed time after the burst for NIR and infrared observations could be much greater within the first few hours than has previously been assumed (Lamb & Reichart, 2000; Ciardi & Loeb, 2000).

## 4 Conclusions

GRB 021211 demonstrates that real-time localization of GRBs is critical to acquiring observations which can help us understand both the transition between the burst itself and its X-ray, optical, and radio afterglows, and the distinct, early behavior of the burst afterglow, including the interpretation that the bright, rapidly fading component is due to emission from a reverse shock.

GRB 021211 also demonstrates that “optically dark” GRBs are due not only to extinction of the optical afterglow by dust in the host galaxy, and to absorption of the optical afterglow by neutral hydrogen in the host galaxy and the IGM, if there are bursts at very high redshifts, but also because the optical afterglows of some GRBs are much fainter than those observed to date and are therefore not detected. The optical afterglows of these bursts should properly be called “optically dim,” rather than “optically dark.” However, GRB 021211 shows that even such “optically dim” bursts can have very bright optical afterglows at times $`<`$ 20 minutes after the burst. This suggests that the UVOT onboard Swift may be able to detect and localize a number of “optically dark” GRBs. The confirmation that some GRBs have very bright optical afterglows at early times, and that even GRBs whose afterglows are “optically dim” at late times can have bright afterglows at early times, also has significant implications for using GRBs and their afterglows as a probe of cosmology and the early universe. It means that the spectral intensity of the afterglows of GRBs at very high redshifts ($`z>5`$) at a fixed time after the burst could be much greater within the first few hours than has previously been assumed.

## Acknowledgments

We would like to thank the anonymous referee for comments and suggestions that materially improved the paper. We would also like to thank Scott Barthelmy for sine qua non GCN support. The HETE-2 mission is supported in the US by NASA contract NASW-4690; in Japan, in part by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology Grant-in-Aid 13440063; and in France, by CNES contract 793-01-8479. KH is grateful for HETE-2 support under Contract MIT-SC-R-293291, for Ulysses support under JPL Contract 958056, and for IPN support under NASA grant FDNAG5-11451. G. Pizzichini acknowledges support by the Italian Space Agency.