text:
# Symmetries leading to inflation

## I Introduction

Symmetries are the cornerstone of the development of modern physics and in particular of the description of the Universe at large scales. Even General Relativity, the framework used for that description, has its roots in symmetry requirements. Not long ago, a new proposal for exploiting the symmetries of the Einstein field equations was made si . In this framework two spacetimes are said to be equivalent if the corresponding set of equations is form invariant under the action of a given transformation. This unusual concept of equivalence has been successfully applied to the study of equivalences among different cosmological models, and in particular to those exhibiting inflation.

The equations that govern the evolution of spatially flat Friedmann–Robertson–Walker (FRW) cosmologies filled with a perfect fluid or massive scalar fields happen to admit a peculiar type of form invariance. It directly relates an increase in the energy density of the model with an increase in its expansion rate. This provides a mechanism for using non-accelerating FRW models as seeds for inflationary cosmologies.

Remarkably, this link between the energy density and the expansion rate is the key feature of the assisted inflation proposal. According to it, for some cosmological models, the occurrence of inflation is directly related to the number of scalar fields driving the expansion lms . This cooperative effect can be easily illustrated in terms of the form invariance we alluded to. In particular, for the expansion rate of a spatially flat FRW model to increase by a factor of $`n`$ it is only necessary that the energy density gets multiplied by $`n^2`$. In the language of scalar fields this just means that a universe containing a single selfinteracting field has transformed into one with $`n`$ fields interacting with themselves but not amongst them.

The natural question that comes to mind is whether this form invariance symmetry is just a very special feature of spatially flat FRW, rather than commonplace. We have addressed here this question, and our results show that form invariance transformations do exist for any FRW models and their simplest generalization, Bianchi V models.

In sections I and II we outline the details of the transformations of the metric functions, pressure and energy density of perfect fluid FRW and Bianchi V cosmologies leading to unchanged field equations. Then, we exploit the equivalence between that kind of matter content and a scalar field with a self-interaction potential to write equivalent transformation rules for them. The existence of this symmetry provides us with algorithms to generate new cosmological solutions from known ones. We are mainly concerned here by the possibility of generating inflationary solutions from others that do not show that behaviour.

A straightforward particularization of the transformation allows obtaining spacetimes with a Hubble factor that is a constant times the original one. As a consequence, the transformed deceleration factor becomes smaller than the original one, provided this constant is larger than unity. One key feature here is that this information on the spacetime expansion is obtained without knowing the metric functions explicitly.

This is, as we see, very similar to what happened in the assisted inflation scenario (we will dwell on the identification of the analogies in the sections below). Previous studies on this topic have focused on power-law solutions because they are late time attractors for the evolution of both FRW lms  and Bianchi I-VI$`_\text{0}`$ accz  models (see as well Gre  for a discussion regarding general geometries). We reach in Section III an analogous result in the Bianchi V case, and in particular, we will see that the expression of the potential in terms of the scale factor for the power-law solutions gives the clue to a method of obtaining new exact scalar field solutions up to quadratures.

The discussion fits into a method to obtain solutions that, as will be explained in Section IV, has turn out to be fruitful before. The scalar field potentials, or the equation of state in the case of perfect fluids, and the evolution of the scale factor are derived from the history of the potential. We use these solutions to present simple examples of the action of the transformation on models with well known potentials. Finally, we outline our future prospects and main conclusions in section V.

## II Form invariance symmetry in FRW spacetimes

Let us consider a FRW spacetime (isotropic and spatially homogeneous) with curvature $`k`$, which is described by the metric

$$ds^2=dt^2+a^2(t)\left[(1kr^2)^1dr^2+r^2\left(d\theta ^2+\mathrm{sin}^2\theta d\varphi ^2\right)\right].$$
(1)
If the source of the geometry is a perfect fluid with energy density $`\rho `$ and identical pressure $`p`$ along the three spatial directions (isotropic perfect fluid), then the model is governed by the Friedmann equation

$$3H^2+3\frac{k}{a^2}=\rho $$
(2)
and the energy conservation equation

$$\dot{\rho }+3H(\rho +p)=0,$$
(3)
where, $`H=\dot{a}/a`$ is the Hubble factor, as usual. Given a different perfect fluid with energy density $`\overline{\rho }`$ and pressure $`\overline{p}`$, the corresponding equations take the form

$$3\overline{H}^2+3\frac{k}{\overline{a}^2}=\overline{\rho },$$
(4)
$$\dot{\overline{\rho }}+3\overline{H}(\overline{\rho }+\overline{p})=0.$$
(5)
Our goal is to obtain a transformation that leaves the form of the system of equations (4)–(5) unchanged. In other words, we want to find the symmetry transformation that maps (4)–(5) into (2)–(3). Since we mean to obtain this transformation explicitly, we make the following ansatz:

$`\overline{a}`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{a}(a,H,\rho ,p),`$ (6)
$`\overline{H}`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{H}(a,H,\rho ,p),`$ (7)
$`\overline{\rho }`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{\rho }(a,H,\rho ,p),`$ (8)
$`\overline{p}`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{p}(a,H,\rho ,p).`$ (9)
From equations (2)–(3) and (4)–(5) we obtain the Raychaudhuri equation

$$\dot{H}=\frac{1}{2}(\rho +p)+\frac{k}{a^2}$$
(10)
and its transformed version

$$\dot{\overline{H}}=\frac{1}{2}(\overline{\rho }+\overline{p})+\frac{k}{\overline{a}^2}.$$
(11)
In what follows, we are going to use the fact that a transformation can be regarded as a symmetry transformation when it does not impose restrictions on the functions appearing in the equations, that is, when one always obtains identities for any function. If we differentiate Eq. (7) a term proportional to $`\dot{p}`$ arises, but if we insert the expression in the l.h.s. of Eq. (11), it can be noticed immediately that it must vanish identically for there are no terms proportional to $`\dot{p}`$ in the r.h.s. Then, the first conclusion we draw is that $`\overline{H}=\overline{H}(a,H,\rho )`$. If we replace now Eqs. (6) and (8) in Eqs. (4) and (5), and use the same argument we conclude that $`\overline{a}=\overline{a}(a,H,\rho )`$ and $`\overline{\rho }=\overline{\rho }(a,H,\rho )`$.

The next step is to calculate $`\overline{H}`$ from Eq. (6) using the definition $`\overline{H}=\dot{\overline{a}}/\overline{a}`$, so that

$$\overline{H}=\frac{a}{\overline{a}}\frac{\overline{a}}{a}H+\frac{1}{\overline{a}}\frac{\overline{a}}{H}\left[\frac{k}{a^2}\frac{1}{2}(\rho +p)\right]\frac{3H(\rho +p)}{\overline{a}}\frac{\overline{a}}{\rho },$$
(12)
where equations (3) and (10) have been used. Since $`\overline{H}`$ does not depend on $`p`$, the coefficient of $`p`$ in Eq. (12) must vanish as well. For that reason,

$$\frac{\overline{a}}{\left(3H^2\right)}+\frac{\overline{a}}{\rho }=0,$$
(13)
and the general solution to the latter is $`\overline{a}=\overline{a}(a,\rho 3H^2)=\overline{a}(a,3k/a^2)`$, that is, $`\overline{a}`$ depends on $`a`$ only.

Summarizing, the transformation turns out to be

$$\overline{a}=\overline{a}(a),$$
(14)
$$\overline{H}=\frac{\mathrm{ln}\overline{a}}{\mathrm{ln}a}H,$$
(15)
$$\overline{\rho }=3\left[\frac{\mathrm{ln}\overline{a}}{\mathrm{ln}a}\right]^2H^2+\frac{3k}{\overline{a}^2},$$
(16)
$$\overline{p}=\overline{\rho }2\dot{\overline{H}}+2\frac{k}{\overline{a}^2},$$
(17)
where $`\dot{\overline{H}}`$ has to be calculated using Eq. (15). Here, $`\overline{a}=\overline{a}(a)`$ is the only “parameter” of the symmetry transformation. Once more, we must emphasize the general character of the transformation as no assumption on the equation of state of the fluid had to be made.

Now, it is interesting to investigate the transformation properties of other physical parameters, so that one can deepen in the comparison between the features of the two models. For instance, the deceleration parameter

$$q(t)=\frac{\ddot{a}}{aH^2}$$
(18)
transforms as

$$\overline{q}+1=\left[\frac{\mathrm{ln}\overline{a}}{\mathrm{ln}a}\right]^1(q+1)+\frac{}{\mathrm{ln}a}\left[\frac{\mathrm{ln}\overline{a}}{\mathrm{ln}a}\right]^1$$
(19)
under the symmetry transformations (8)–(9).

As an example let us look at the power–law transformation $`\overline{a}=a^n`$. In this particular case, we obtain from Eqs. (15) (16) and (17) the transformation rules $`\overline{H}=nH`$,

$$\overline{\rho }=n^2\left[\rho 3\frac{k}{a^2}\right]+3\frac{k}{a^{2n}}$$
(20)
and

$$\overline{p}=3n^2H^22n\dot{H}\frac{k}{a^{2n}}.$$
(21)
The transformation rule for the deceleration parameter is

$$\overline{q}=1+\frac{q+1}{n}.$$
(22)
It becomes negative for $`n`$ high enough, showing in this case that the inflation is more likely. In other words, the strong energy condition (SEC) $`\overline{\rho }+3\overline{p}=6(n^2H^2+n\dot{H})>0`$ is violated for large $`n`$. So, we will be interested in the cases with $`n>1`$, where the transformed evolution will always be closer to de Sitter spacetime than the original one.

The fluid interpretation of the scalar field has proven very useful in the study of the inflationary and quintessence scenarios cjp . The energy-momentum tensor of the scalar field may be written in the perfect fluid form

$$T_{ik}=(p+\rho )u_iu_k+pg_{ik},$$
(23)
if one defines

$`\rho `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\dot{\varphi }^2+V(\varphi ),`$ (24)
$`p`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\dot{\varphi }^2V(\varphi ),`$ (25)
where we have taken into account that the scalar field $`\varphi `$ depends on $`t`$ only. Inserting Eqs. (24)–(25) in Eqs. (20)–(21) we find that

$$\dot{\overline{\varphi }}^2=n\dot{\varphi }^2+2k\left[\frac{1}{a^{2n}}\frac{n}{a^2}\right],$$
(26)
$$\overline{V}=nV+3n(n1)H^2+2k\left[\frac{1}{a^{2n}}\frac{n}{a^2}\right].$$
(27)
Asymptotically (i.e., when $`a\mathrm{}`$) and for large and positive $`n`$ the transformation (20) reduces to $`\overline{\rho }n^2\rho `$ and we recover in this limit the results found in si  for the particular case of flat FRW metrics. Under these specific conditions one can speak in terms of a single field model transforming into a multifield model in the fashion of assisted inflation.

## III Bianchi V models

We wish to investigate now the form invariance symmetry of the Einstein equations of an anisotropic universe described by the Bianchi V metric. These spacetimes are the simplest generalizations of FRW open universes and they possess a non-abelian group of three isometries. We write the line element as (cf. Jos )

$$ds^2=dt^2+e^{f(t)}dz^2+G(t)e^z\left(e^{h(t)}dx^2+e^{h(t)}dy^2\right),$$
(28)
with $`G(t)0`$. Considering once again a universe filled with an isotropic perfect fluid, the Einstein equations for (28) are

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\ddot{G}}{G}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\dot{G}}{2G}}\dot{f}+p\rho e^f=0,`$ (29)
$`\ddot{h}+\dot{h}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\dot{f}}{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\dot{G}}{G}}\right)=0,`$ (30)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\dot{G}}{G}}\dot{f}=0,`$ (31)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\ddot{G}}{G}}{\displaystyle \frac{\dot{G}\dot{f}}{2G}}{\displaystyle \frac{\dot{G}^2}{2G^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\dot{h}^2}{2}}+p+\rho +{\displaystyle \frac{e^f}{2}}=0,`$ (32)
$`\dot{\rho }+{\displaystyle \frac{3\dot{G}}{2G}}(\rho +p)=0.`$ (33)
From Eqs. (30) and (31) one readily gets

$`e^f=G,`$ (34)
$`\dot{h}={\displaystyle \frac{A}{G^{3/2}}},`$ (35)
with the integration constant $`A0`$. Combining the remaining Einstein equations in terms of the new variables

$$a=G^{1/2},H=\frac{\dot{a}}{a}=\frac{\dot{G}}{2G},$$
(36)
we get

$$3H^2=\rho +\frac{3}{4a^2}+\frac{A^2}{4a^6},$$
(37)
$$\dot{\rho }+3H(\rho +p)=0.$$
(38)
These equations are equivalent to those of negatively curved FRW models filled with a perfect fluid and stiff matter. The shear’s contribution to the expansion is precisely the last term in Eq. (37) and basically can be associated with a free scalar field. Equation (37) together with the conservation equation (38) forms the set of equations to be solved.

### III.1 Form invariance symmetry

Remarkably, the pair formed by equations (37) and (38) is form-invariant as well. This means that for a different fluid with density $`\overline{\rho }`$ and pressure $`\overline{p}`$ the equations

$`3\overline{H}^2=\overline{\rho }+{\displaystyle \frac{3}{4\overline{a}^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{A}^2}{4\overline{a}^6}},`$ (39)
$`\dot{\overline{\rho }}+3\overline{H}(\overline{\rho }+\overline{p})=0`$ (40)
become equations (37)–(38) under the symmetry transformation

$$\overline{a}=\overline{a}(a),$$
(41)
$$\overline{H}=\frac{\mathrm{ln}\overline{a}}{\mathrm{ln}a}H,$$
(42)
$$\overline{\rho }=3\left[\frac{\mathrm{ln}\overline{a}}{\mathrm{ln}a}\right]^2H^2\frac{3}{4\overline{a}^2}\frac{\overline{A}^2}{4\overline{a}^6},$$
(43)
$$\overline{p}=\overline{\rho }2\dot{\overline{H}}\frac{1}{2\overline{a}^2}\frac{\overline{A}^2}{2\overline{a}^6},$$
(44)
where $`\dot{\overline{H}}`$ has to be calculated using Eq. (42). Here, $`\overline{a}=\overline{a}(a)`$ is the “parameter” of the transformation.

Since our main objective is to use this symmetries in the context of inflation, it is of interest to exploit the customary equivalence between a perfect fluid and a self-interacting scalar field with potential $`V(\varphi )`$ when $`\overline{a}=a^n`$. In this case equations (37)–(38) become

$$3H^2=\frac{1}{2}\dot{\varphi }^2+V+\frac{3}{4a^2}+\frac{A^2}{4a^6},$$
(45)
$$\ddot{\varphi }+3H\dot{\varphi }+\frac{V}{\varphi }=0,$$
(46)
where the last one is the Klein-Gordon equation. Transforming Eqs. (24)–(25) according to Eqs. (43)–(44) we obtain the transformation properties of the scalar field and the corresponding potential

$`\dot{\overline{\varphi }}^2=n\dot{\varphi }^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{n}{a^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{a^{2n}}}\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{nA^2}{a^6}}{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{A}^2}{a^{6n}}}\right),`$ (47)
$`\overline{V}=nV+3n(n1)H^2+{\displaystyle \frac{n}{2a^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2a^{2n}}}.`$ (48)
It can be shown that the transformation rule for the deceleration factor under the transformation $`\overline{a}=a^n`$ is again Eq. (22).

### III.2 Asymptotic behaviour and power-law solutions

The combined measurements of the cosmic microwave background temperature fluctuations and the distribution of galaxies on large scales seem to imply that the Universe may be flat or nearly flat OS95 ; Bahcall99 ; Efst . The equivalence between the equations (37)–(38) for the Bianchi V model and those of open FRW, permits to introduce the cosmological density parameter $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$, defined as the ratio of the scalar field energy density $`\rho `$ to the asymptotic critical density $`\rho _c=3H^2`$. The asymptotic critical density corresponds to the asymptotic flat spacetime solution of equation (45). Thus, inserting $`\mathrm{\Omega }\rho /\rho _c=\rho /3H^2`$ in Eqs. (37)–(38), we find the dynamical equation for the cosmological density parameter:

$$\dot{\mathrm{\Omega }}=\left[6\frac{a^4+A^2}{3a^4+A^2}3\left(1+\frac{p}{\rho }\right)\right]\mathrm{\Omega }(1\mathrm{\Omega })H.$$
(49)
Stable constant solutions of this equation are relevant to understand the asymptotic behaviour of that spacetime, where Eq. (49) reduces to

$$\dot{\mathrm{\Omega }}=\left(1+3\frac{p}{\rho }\right)\mathrm{\Omega }(1\mathrm{\Omega })H+O\left(\frac{1}{a^4}\right).$$
(50)
The constant solution of Eqs. (49) and (50), compatible with observations at late times, is $`\mathrm{\Omega }=1`$. It is asymptotically stable for expanding universes ($`H>0`$) when the SEC is violated. Hence the model inflates, i.e., $`\ddot{a}/a=(\rho +3p)/6>0`$ and the expansion of the universe is driven by a gravitationally repulsive stress.

The general form of the perfect fluid Bianchi V solution, up to a quadrature, has been known Ellis  for long (see also (Heck , Ruban ,EllMac ). Here, however, we adopt a different perspective in what exact solutions are regarded. In order to investigate the existence of power-law solutions in the Bianchi V model with a self-interacting scalar field and their stability, we combine the scaling parameter $`\omega =2\dot{H}/3H^2`$ with equations (45) and (46), so that we get

$$\dot{\omega }=(\omega 2)\left[\frac{\dot{V}(H/a^2)}{V+(1/2a^2)}+3H\omega \right].$$
(51)
The fixed point solution of Eq. (51), $`\omega =\omega _0=\text{constant}`$, corresponds to

$`a`$ $`=`$ $`t^{2/3\omega _0},`$ (52)
$`V`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2\left(2\omega _0\right)}{3\omega _0^2a^{3\omega _0}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2a^2}},`$ (53)
where the scalar field can be calculated from Eq. (45):

$$\frac{1}{2}\dot{\varphi }^2=\frac{2}{3\omega _0t^2}\frac{1}{4t^{4/3\omega _0}}\frac{A^2}{4t^{4/\omega _0}}.$$
(54)
Furthermore, equation (51) becomes

$$\dot{\omega }=3(\omega 2)(\omega \omega _0)H.$$
(55)
Therefore, for the potential (53) the power-law solution is asymptotically stable whenever be $`\omega _0<2`$. When $`\omega _0<2/3`$ the SEC is violated and there is an accelerated scenario. If $`2/3<\omega _0<2`$ we can construct an inflationary model by substituting $`\omega _0/n`$ for $`\omega _0`$ and taking $`n`$ large enough, because

$$\overline{a}=t^{2n/3\omega _0}$$
(56)
is an asymptotically stable exact power-law solution of Eqs. (45)–(46) for the potential

$$\overline{V}=\left(2\frac{\omega _0}{n}\right)\frac{2n^2}{3\omega _0^2\overline{a}^{3\omega _0/n}}\frac{1}{2\overline{a}^2},$$
(57)
where the scalar field can be calculated from Eq. (45):

$$\frac{1}{2}\dot{\overline{\varphi }}^2=\frac{2n}{3\omega _0t^2}\frac{1}{4t^{4n/3\omega _0}}\frac{A^2}{4t^{4n/\omega _0}}.$$
(58)
Quantities $`(\dot{\varphi },V)`$ and $`(\dot{\overline{\varphi }},\overline{V})`$ are related by transformations (47)–(48). Also from Eqs. (41), (42) and (56), we obtain

$$\overline{a}=a^n,\overline{H}=nH.$$
(59)
For large $`n`$ the energy density of the scalar field transforms as $`\overline{\rho }n^2\rho `$ showing that the cumulative effects of adding energy density in the 00-component of the Einstein equations leads to an accelerated scenario. In this regime $`\overline{\varphi }2(n/3\omega _0)^{1/2}\mathrm{ln}t`$ and the potential is exponential

$$\overline{V}(\varphi )\frac{2n^2}{3\omega _0^2}\left(2\frac{\omega _0}{n}\right)\text{e}^{\sqrt{3\omega _0/n}\varphi }.$$
(60)
When $`n`$ is an integer it could represent the number of scalar fields contained in the Bianchi V universe. This particular multifield Bianchi V problem is equivalent to realize the usual assisted inflation in the FRW model with $`n`$ identical non interacting scalar fields, in a negatively curved space-time filled with an extra free scalar field. Hence we have extended the previous results obtained in si  for FRW to the Bianchi V type metrics. Again we have seen that form invariance of the Einstein equations leads to a simple generalization of the assisted inflation linking two different cosmological models, one of which, is accelerated.

## IV Transformation between closed form solutions

We seek now models for which the potential $`V(\varphi )`$ and the scale factor evolution $`a(t)`$ can be obtained in closed form and exhibit the action of the power–law transformation in simple terms. The expression (57) for the potential suggests to start looking for exact solutions where the scale factor is the independent variable. In Ref. scal  it was shown the reduction of the system (2)(3) to quadratures using as input the history of the potential. In this case Eq. (3) becomes (46), we write the potential as

$$V[\varphi (a)]=\frac{F(a)}{a^6}$$
(61)
and make the change of variables $`dt=a^3d\eta `$ in Eq. (46),

$$\frac{d^2\varphi }{d\eta ^2}+a^6\frac{dV}{d\varphi }=0,$$
(62)
so that we obtain the first integral

$$\frac{1}{2}\dot{\varphi }^2+V(\varphi )\frac{6}{a^6}𝑑a\frac{F}{a}=\frac{C}{a^6},$$
(63)
where $`C`$ is an arbitrary integration constant. Then, using equations (2) and (46) we obtain

$$\mathrm{\Delta }t=\sqrt{3}\frac{da}{a}\left[\frac{6}{a^6}𝑑a\frac{F}{a}+\frac{C}{a^6}3\frac{k}{a^2}\right]^{1/2},$$
(64)
$$\mathrm{\Delta }\varphi =\sqrt{6}\frac{da}{a}\left[\frac{F+6𝑑aF/a+C}{6𝑑aF/a+C3ka^4}\right]^{1/2},$$
(65)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }ttt_0`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }\varphi \varphi \varphi _0`$ and $`t_0`$, $`\varphi _0`$ are two other arbitrary integration constants.

This unconventional procedure of solving the field equations starting from the history of the potential was also used to obtain exact solutions in two and four dimensional spacetimes with a scalar field and a perfect fluid in Refs. scal ; Cos . An interesting simple class of models arise for potentials with power–law histories $`F=Ba^m`$ and $`C=0`$. In this case, $`\dot{\rho }_\varphi =3H\dot{\varphi }^2<0`$ implies $`m<6`$ for $`H>0`$, $`\dot{\varphi }^2>0`$ implies $`B/m>0`$. Then, for positive definite potentials, hence $`B>0`$, we have $`0<m<6`$. We find hyperbolic potentials for $`m4`$ and $`k=1`$

$$V(\varphi )=\left(\frac{m}{2}\right)^{\frac{6m}{4m}}B^{2/(m4)}\left\{\mathrm{cosh}^2\left[\frac{(4m)\mathrm{\Delta }\varphi }{2(6m)^{1/2}}\right]\right\}^{\frac{6m}{4m}},$$
(66)
or $`k=1`$

$$V(\varphi )=\left(\frac{m}{2}\right)^{\frac{6m}{4m}}B^{2/(m4)}\left\{\mathrm{sinh}^2\left[\frac{(4m)\mathrm{\Delta }\varphi }{2(6m)^{1/2}}\right]\right\}^{\frac{6m}{4m}},$$
(67)
while an exponential potential arise for $`m=4`$, $`k=1`$ or $`k=1`$ with $`B>2`$,

$$V(\varphi )=B\mathrm{exp}\left[\left(2\frac{B2k}{B}\right)^{1/2}\mathrm{\Delta }\varphi \right].$$
(68)
As we see, potentials of this class include hyperbolic potentials that are relevant to describe the scalar dark matter Matos:1999et ; Matos:2000ng ; Matos:2000ss ; and they also include the exponential potential, which is typically considered when modelling inflation, and is motivated by supergravity theories cop ; eas .

For these models, the scale factor can be obtained in closed, implicit form when $`m4`$ in terms of the hypergeometric function. For $`k=1`$ we obtain

$$\mathrm{\Delta }t=\left(\frac{2m}{B}\right)^{1/2}\frac{a^{3m/2}}{6m}{}_{2}{}^{}F_{1}^{}(\frac{1}{2},\frac{m6}{2(m4)},\frac{3m14}{2(m4)},\frac{ma^{4m}}{2B}),$$
(69)
while for $`k=1`$ we get

$$\mathrm{\Delta }t=a{}_{2}{}^{}F_{1}^{}(\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{m4},\frac{m3}{m4},\frac{2B}{m}a^{m4}).$$
(70)
We wish to see the action of the symmetry transformation on this class of models, linking non-accelerated expansions with accelerated ones. So we start looking at their late time behavior.

For $`k=1`$ and $`4<m<6`$, the scale factor has a bounce and its asymptotic behavior for large times is $`t^{2/(6m)}`$; while for $`0<m<4`$, the scale factor has an upper bound so that we will not consider this case any further. For $`k=1`$ and $`0<m<4`$ the scale factor evolves from a unaccelerated initial phase with $`a\mathrm{\Delta }t^{2/(6m)}`$ at small times to a linear expansion at late times; while for $`4<m<6`$ the scale factor evolves from a linear stage at small times to an accelerated stage $`at^{2/(6m)}`$ at late times. Finally, for $`k=\pm 1`$ and $`m=4`$, the expansion is linear.

Taking into account Eq. (63) we observe that the action of the symmetry transformation (14)–(17) becomes the map $`(F(a),C)(\overline{F}(\overline{a}),\overline{C})`$ where Eq. (64) remains invariant. That is, the set of the solutions that can be expressed in terms of quadratures transforms into itself. In the case of the power–law transformation (26)–(27) we get

$$\overline{F}=na^{6(n1)}\left[F+\left(n1\right)\left(6\frac{da}{a}F+C\right)\right]n\left(3n1\right)ka^{6n2}+2ka^{4n}.$$
(71)
For the models with power–law history of their potential the transformation becomes

$$\overline{F}=nB\left(1+6\frac{n1}{m}\right)a^{6(n1)+m}n(3n1)ka^{6n2}+2ka^{4n}.$$
(72)
So, the requirement that the transformed potential has a power–law history, i.e. $`\overline{F}=\overline{B}\overline{a}^{\overline{m}}`$ can be satisfied for $`k=1`$ with $`\overline{B}=n(3n1)`$ and $`\overline{m}=(326m)/(6m)=62/n`$. The requirements that $`m>0`$ and $`\overline{m}>0`$ constraint the transformation exponent to $`1/3<n<3`$ and the history exponents to the interval $`(0,16/3)`$. We observe that the transformation with $`n>1`$ maps unaccelerated models with $`m<4`$ into accelerated ones with $`\overline{m}>4`$, while the linearly expanding model with $`m=4`$ transforms into itself.

As a second example we consider transformations for $`k=\pm 1`$ that allow an arbitrary large exponent. In this case we will request that the transformed potential has power–law history only asymptotically for $`n1`$ and large scale factor. This case occurs for $`m=4`$ and we have

$$\overline{B}=n\left\{B\left[1+\frac{3}{2}(n1)\right](3n1)k\right\}$$
(73)
and again $`\overline{m}=62/n`$. This transformation maps the linearly expanding model with exponential potential into a model with deceleration parameter so close to $`1`$ as required while $`n`$ is made large enough. Equations (66) (67) show explicitly how the slope of the potential can be made arbitrary small in this limit.

Following similar steps we can integrate the system (45)–(46) by quadratures.

$$\mathrm{\Delta }t=\sqrt{3}\frac{da}{a}\left[\frac{6}{a^6}𝑑a\frac{F}{a}+\left(C+\frac{A^2}{4}\right)\frac{1}{a^6}+\frac{3}{4a^2}\right]^{1/2},$$
(74)
$$\mathrm{\Delta }\varphi =\sqrt{6}\frac{da}{a}\left[\frac{F+6𝑑aF/a+C}{6𝑑aF/a+C+A^2/4+3a^4/4}\right]^{1/2}.$$
(75)
In this case, the action of the symmetry transformation (41)–(44) becomes the map $`(F(a),C,A)(\overline{F}(\overline{a}),\overline{C},\overline{A})`$ where Eq. (74) remains invariant. In the case of the power–law transformation (47)–(48) we get

$$\overline{F}=na^{6(n1)}\left[F+\left(n1\right)\left(6\frac{da}{a}F+C+\frac{A^2}{4}\right)\right]+\frac{n\left(3n1\right)}{4}a^{6n2}\frac{a^{4n}}{2}$$
(76)
and for models with power–law history of their potential it becomes

$$\overline{F}=nB\left(1+6\frac{n1}{m}\right)a^{6(n1)+m}+\frac{n(3n1)}{4}a^{6n2}\frac{a^{4n}}{2}.$$
(77)
Comparing Eqs. (74) and (75) with Eqs. (64) (65) we see that the solutions of FRW for $`k=1`$ give the leading behavior of the solutions of Bianchi V spacetime. Hence, the simple action of the power law transformation in FRW still holds for Bianchi V in the asymptotic sense.

We recover the solution (52)–(54) inserting

$$F=\frac{2(2\omega _0)}{3\omega _0^2}a^{3(2\omega _0)}\frac{a^4}{2}$$
(78)
into Eqs. (61), (74) and (75), and similarly we recover the asymptotic behaviour (60) inserting into Eq. (75) the leading term of (78), transformed by (76), when $`\omega _0<2n/3`$ .

## V Conclusions

We have shown the symmetry transformation under which the Einstein equations in the general Friedmann–Robertson–Walker and Bianchi V cosmologies are form invariant. It relates geometrical quantities with the energy density and pressure of the perfect fluid. We have seen that the cooperative effect of adding energy density into the spacetime leads to inflation and gives a way to link a non-accelerated scenario with an inflationary scenario by means of a symmetry transformation.

As an example, we have investigated the connections between assisted inflation and this symmetry transformation. We have shown that assisted inflation can be generalized to any potential that increases the energy density of the scalar field configuration without specifying the number of fields.

The violation of the strong energy condition has been shown to be required for the asymptotic stability of power-law solutions in Bianchi V spacetime, and the potential leading to these solutions has been found.

We have also constructed the invariant set of perfect fluid Friedmann–Robertson–Walker and Bianchi V spacetimes that may be obtained by quadratures. These solutions are characterized by the history of the scalar field potential and their parametric expression is shown. We give the action of the symmetry transformation in this representation.

Finally, we conclude that it is very interesting to study this kind of symmetry transformations, which have received up to now little attention. We shall continue exploring this subject for other metrics in future papers.

###### Acknowledgements.

This work was supported by the University of Buenos Aires under Project X223, the Spanish Ministry of Science and Technology jointly with FEDER funds through research grant BFM2001-0988, and the University of the Basque Country through research grant UPV172.310G02/99. Ruth Lazkoz’s work is also supported by the Basque Government through fellowship BFI01.412.


format: text

text:
# References

Low-Mass Baryon-Antibaryon Enhancements

in $`B`$ Decays 111Enrico Fermi Institute preprint EFI 03-11, hep-ph/0303079. To be submitted to Phys. Rev. D.

Jonathan L. Rosner 222rosner@hep.uchicago.edu

Enrico Fermi Institute and Department of Physics

University of Chicago, 5640 S. Ellis Avenue, Chicago, IL 60637

> The nature of low-mass baryon-antibaryon enhancements seen in $`B`$ decays is explored. Three possibilities include (i) states near threshold as found in a model by Nambu and Jona-Lasinio, (ii) isoscalar states with $`J^{PC}=0^{\pm +}`$ coupled to a pair of gluons, and (iii) low-mass enhancements favored by the fragmentation process. Ways of distinguishing these mechanisms using angular distributions and flavor symmetry are proposed.

PACS Categories: 13.25.Hw, 14.40.Nd, 13.75.Cs, 14.40.Cs

I. INTRODUCTION

In many decays $`B\overline{D}^{()}N\overline{N}`$ , $`B^+K^+p\overline{p}`$ , and $`B^0\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}p\pi ^{}`$ , the baryon-antibaryon effective mass peaks at very low values. Even more pronounced peaking at low baryon-antibaryon effective mass has now been observed in the radiative decay $`J/\psi \gamma p\overline{p}`$ . The effective mass distribution in this last process is so sharply peaked near threshold that for an S-wave the data can been interpreted in terms of a $`p\overline{p}`$ bound state with $`M=1859_{1025}^{+3+5}`$ MeV/$`c^2`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }<30`$ MeV (90% c.l.). For a P-wave a fit  yields a state just at $`p\overline{p}`$ threshold: $`M=1876.4\pm 0.9`$ MeV/$`c^2`$, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=4.6\pm 1.8`$ MeV. There are numerous earlier claims for such states (see, e.g.,  and ), but not much unanimity on their properties. An enhancement near threshold is seen in $`p\overline{p}e^+e^{}`$ , while various multi-particle production processes such as $`e^+e^{}`$ hadrons , $`e^+e^{}6\pi `$ , and diffractive photoproduction of $`6\pi `$  show dips at $`p\overline{p}`$ threshold.

Theoretical investigations of baryon-antibaryon bound states date back to the proposal of Fermi and Yang  to make the pion out of a nucleon-antinucleon pair. The model of Nambu and Jona-Lasinio , which is constructed to give a nearly zero-mass pion as a fermion-antifermion bound state, also has a scalar resonance of twice the fermion mass. Enhancements in the baryon-antibaryon channel near threshold are expected on the basis of duality arguments  and by comparison with the systematics of resonance formation in meson-meson and meson-baryon channels . A historical survey of bound states or resonances coupled to the nucleon-antinucleon channel is given in Ref. . Gluonic states can couple to baryon-antibaryon channels of appropriate spin and parity. Recent discussions of $`B`$ decays involving baryon-antibaryon pairs include Refs. .

In the present note we suggest some tests that may be useful in sorting out the various interpretations of the observed effects near or below baryon-antibaryon thresold. Gluonic states with $`J^{PC}=0^+`$ can couple to isoscalar $`p\overline{p}`$ pairs in a $`{}_{}{}^{1}S_{0}^{}`$ state, while those with $`J^{PC}=0^{++}`$ can couple to such pairs in a $`{}_{}{}^{3}P_{0}^{}`$ state. The decays of both such states into $`p\overline{p}`$ are isostropic. Fragmentation-based effects need not (and, we shall argue, should not) lead to such isotropy. The decays of gluonic states should be flavor-symmetric, while fragmentation products need not be. The decay $`B^\pm p\overline{p}K^\pm `$ may occur through a similar mechanism which gives rise to $`B^\pm \eta ^{}K^\pm `$ and $`B^0\eta ^{}K^0`$, involving the emission of two gluons by a penguin diagram.

We discuss gluonic mechanisms in Section II and fragmentation mechanisms in Section III. Section IV contains some more general remarks about the possibility of observing baryon-antibaryon and other exotic resonances in $`B`$ decays, while Section V concludes.

II. GLUONIC MECHANISMS

Decays of the form $`BK+X`$ receive an important contribution from a “flavor-singlet penguin” amplitude. Here the fundamental subprocess is $`\overline{b}\overline{s}+g+g`$, where $`g+g`$ stands for a pair of gluons or a non-perturbative structure with vacuum quantum numbers. The need for this amplitude was anticipated  before it appeared experimentally in the decays $`B\eta ^{}K`$ . The $`\eta ^{}`$, being largely a flavor-singlet meson, couples strongly to a pair of gluons with $`J^{PC}=0^+`$. A flavor-singlet penguin contribution which boosts that of the ordinary penguin amplitude by as little as 50% suffices to explain the observed decay rate . Taking account of interference with the ordinary penguin amplitude (whose importance is considerable; see the arguments by Lipkin ), the branching ratio of $`B^+`$ to $`\eta ^{}K^+`$ due to the singlet penguin (sp) alone was estimated to be

$$(B^+\eta ^{}K^+)|_{\mathrm{sp}}1.1\times 10^5.$$
(1)
The inequality becomes an equality if the singlet and ordinary penguin interfere constructively. We shall use this result to estimate the value of $`(B^+p\overline{p}K^+)`$ due to a gluonic mechanism.

The decays $`B^+p\overline{p}K^+`$ and $`J/\psi \gamma p\overline{p}`$ both appear to be dominated by a $`p\overline{p}`$ bound state whose mass we shall take to be that for the $`0^+`$ (S-wave) fit presented in Ref. , or 1859 MeV/$`c^2`$. We shall denote this state by $`E`$. We assume

$$\frac{(B^+EK^+)|_{\mathrm{sp}}}{(B^+\eta ^{}K^+)|_{\mathrm{sp}}}=\frac{(J/\psi \gamma E)}{(J/\psi \gamma \eta ^{})}$$
(2)
modulo phase space corrections. Since $`E`$ is assumed to be spinless, the $`B^+EK^+`$ and $`B^+\eta ^{}K^+`$ decays are characterized by S-wave kinematic factors proportional to the first power of the center-of-mass (c.m.) momenta $`p^{}`$, with $`p_{B^+EK^+}^{}=2282`$ MeV/$`c`$ and $`p_{B^+\eta ^{}K^+}^{}=2528`$ MeV/$`c`$, respectively. The magnetic dipole (M1) $`J/\psi `$ decays contain kinematic factors proportional to $`p^3`$, with $`p_{J/\psi \gamma E}^{}=990`$ MeV/$`c`$ and $`p_{J/\psi \gamma \eta ^{}}^{}=1400`$ MeV/$`c`$. We use the branching ratios

$$(J/\psi \gamma p\overline{p})=(3.8\pm 1.0)\times 10^4,(J/\psi \gamma \eta ^{})=(4.31\pm 0.30)\times 10^3,$$
(3)
whose ratio is $`0.088\pm 0.024`$, to calculate

$$\frac{(B^+EK^+)|_{\mathrm{sp}}}{(B^+\eta ^{}K^+)|_{\mathrm{sp}}}=\frac{2282}{2528}\left(\frac{1400}{990}\right)^3(0.088\pm 0.024)=0.23\pm 0.06,$$
(4)
or, combining this result with Eq. (1),

$$(B^+EK^+)|_{\mathrm{sp}}(2.5\pm 0.7)\times 10^6.$$
(5)
This lower bound is to be compared with the observed branching ratio

$$(B^+p\overline{p}K^+)=(4.3_{0.9}^{+1.1}\pm 0.5)\times 10^6.$$
(6)
Thus, the singlet penguin amplitude is expected to provide a fair fraction of the observed final state. Reasons for a shortfall could be: (1) the singlet penguin amplitude is larger than its lower bound based on Eq. (1); (2) there could be some additional contribution from another $`p\overline{p}`$ partial wave, such as $`{}_{}{}^{3}P_{0}^{}`$ ($`J^{PC}=0^{++}`$); (3) there could be a contribution from the fragmentation mechanism to be discussed in the next Section.

The angular distribution of the photon in $`J/\psi p\overline{p}\gamma `$ is found to be compatible with the $`1+\mathrm{cos}^2\theta ^{}`$ for expected if the $`p\overline{p}`$ system is in a state with $`J^{PC}=0^+`$ . Here $`\theta ^{}`$ is measured with respect to the beam direction in the $`e^+e^{}`$ c.m. The same angular distribution is expected for a $`0^{++}`$ ($`{}_{}{}^{3}P_{0}^{}`$) $`p\overline{p}`$ state. The two possibilities could be distinguished from one another by measuring the photon polarization, e.g., in the Dalitz process $`J/\psi p\overline{p}e^+e^{}`$.

If the $`p\overline{p}`$ system is in a $`J=0`$ final state (whether $`0^+`$ or $`0^{++}`$), the band for the low-mass $`p\overline{p}`$ enhancement in the Dalitz plot for $`J/\psi p\overline{p}\gamma `$ should be uniformly populated. A similar remark holds for the $`p\overline{p}`$ system in $`B^+p\overline{p}K^+`$ if the singlet penguin mechanism is dominant. In such a case one expects the c.m. momentum distributions of $`p`$ and $`\overline{p}`$ to be identical. As we shall argue, this is not necessarily the case in a fragmentation picture.

When the $`p\overline{p}`$ system is produced through a pair of gluons (or any such flavorless state), one should expect isospin symmetry to give the same production rate for an $`n\overline{n}`$ system. This prediction is difficult to test. In the limit of flavor-SU(3) symmetry one would also expect the same rate for $`B_8\overline{B}_8`$, where $`B_8`$ is any member of the baryon octet, but SU(3)-breaking could alter this prediction considerably. For example, the proposed $`p\overline{p}`$ bound state at 1859 MeV is far below $`\mathrm{\Lambda }\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}`$, or $`\mathrm{\Xi }\overline{\mathrm{\Xi }}`$ threshold, reducing the likely branching ratios when $`p\overline{p}`$ is replaced by a hyperon-antihyperon pair. Some nucleon-antinucleon bound states proposed to exist near or below threshold have $`I=1`$ , and could not be identified with the gluonic effect we are proposing.

III. FRAGMENTATION MECHANISMS

The gluonic mechanism of the previous Section is unlikely for certain $`B`$ decays involving low-mass $`p\overline{p}`$ states. A singlet penguin mechanism cannot account for such decays as $`B^0\overline{D}^0p\overline{p}`$ and $`B^0\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}p\pi ^{}`$. Instead, a fragmentation picture is appealing; this may also play a role in $`B^+K^+p\overline{p}`$.

Let us consider the example of $`B^0\overline{D}^0p\overline{p}`$. Imagine that the quark subprocess is $`\overline{b}d(\overline{c}u)_{\overline{D}^0}\overline{d}d`$, with subsequent fragmentation of $`\overline{d}d`$ into $`\overline{p}p`$ through the creation of two additional $`u\overline{u}`$ pairs. The fragmentation rate for $`\overline{d}d`$ into $`\overline{p}p`$ may differ from that into $`\overline{n}n`$ and other $`B_8\overline{B}_8`$ pairs. Moreover, the fact that the $`d`$ is a spectator quark while $`\overline{d}`$ was produced in the weak decay can lead to kinematic asymmetries. The Dalitz plot need no longer be uniform along the low-mass $`p\overline{p}`$ band. Since both the $`\overline{D}^0`$ and $`\overline{d}`$ are produced in the weak decay, they are correlated, leading one to expect the inequality $`M(\overline{D}^0\overline{p})<M(\overline{D}^0p)`$ between the average effective masses of pairs, and $`p_p^{}<p_{\overline{p}}^{}`$ between average c.m. momenta.

As has been pointed out elsewhere (see in particular Fig. 2 of the last of Refs. ), there are other subprocesses contributing to $`B^0\overline{D}^0p\overline{p}`$. One involves the exchange process $`\overline{b}d\overline{c}u`$, followed by the fragmentation of $`\overline{c}u`$ to $`\overline{D}^0p\overline{p}`$. Such processes are expected to be suppressed in other $`B`$ decays (see, e.g., ) and there is no reason to expect them to play a major role here.

Another color-suppressed mechanism involves the quark subprocess $`\overline{b}\overline{c}u\overline{d}`$ in which the $`u`$ is incorporated into a baryon while the $`\overline{d}`$ is incorporated into an antibaryon. This process is not expected to lead to a low-mass baryon-antibaryon enhancement. Its relative importance is hard to estimate without a detailed flavor-symmetry analysis.

Similar arguments apply to the decay $`B^0\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}p\pi ^{}`$. Since strangeness-changing charmless $`B`$ decays appear to be dominated by the $`\overline{b}\overline{s}`$ penguin amplitude, we assume that to be the case here, so the expected quark subprocess is $`\overline{b}d\overline{s}d`$ followed by fragmentation of $`\overline{s}d`$ into $`\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}p\pi ^{}`$. A graph for this process, reading from top to bottom, involves the following subprocesses.

The $`\overline{s}`$ antiquark is “dressed” by a $`\overline{u}\overline{d}`$ anti-diquark to form a $`\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$. The anti-diquark is produced with a $`ud`$ diquark which is dressed by a $`u`$ quark to form a proton. The $`u`$ quark is produced with a $`\overline{u}`$ antiquark which forms a $`\pi ^{}`$ with the spectator $`d`$ quark.

In this process the $`\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$ and the proton are neighbors in the fragmentation chain. One thus expects their effective mass to be low, as is seen. Since the $`p`$ and $`\pi ^{}`$ are also neighbors, one expects their average effective mass $`M(p\pi ^{})`$ to be less than the average effective mass $`M(\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}\pi )`$.

The observed branching ratio

$$(B^0\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}p\pi ^{})=(3.97_{0.80}^{+1.00}\pm 0.56)\times 10^6$$
(7)
is quite similar to that for $`B^+K^+p\overline{p}`$ quoted in Eq. (6). Thus, one might expect at least some contribution to this last process from fragmentation. Here the quark subprocess is expected to be $`\overline{b}u\overline{s}u`$, followed by $`\overline{s}u`$ fragmentation into the final state. Reading again from top to bottom in the diagram, the $`\overline{s}`$ is dressed with a $`u`$ to form a $`K^+`$. The $`u`$ is produced in a pair with a $`\overline{u}`$. The $`\overline{u}`$ is dressed with $`\overline{u}\overline{d}`$ to form a $`\overline{p}`$. The $`\overline{u}\overline{d}`$ is produced with a $`ud`$, which combine with the spectator $`u`$ to form a proton.

In the fragmentation picture for $`B^+K^+p\overline{p}`$, the Dalitz plot need not be uniform along the low-$`p\overline{p}`$-mass band. One expects the fact that the $`K^+`$ and $`\overline{p}`$ are neighbors along the fragmentation chain to result in $`M(K^+\overline{p})<M(K^+p)`$ and $`p_p^{}<p_{\overline{p}}^{}`$. The $`\overline{p}p`$ system in this case has been formed by fragmentation of a $`\overline{u}u`$ pair, which is not a flavor singlet, so there are no simple relations for production of other baryon-antibaryon pairs.

A further example which may shed light on the fragmentation process is the decay $`B^+\pi ^+\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}_cp`$ . This process has a color-suppressed contribution which can be visualized as involving the intermediate state $`\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}_c\mathrm{\Delta }^{++}`$ (treated recently in ), but more importantly a color-favored contribution involving the subprocess $`\overline{b}\pi ^+\overline{c}`$. The $`\overline{c}`$ and the spectator $`u`$ quark then fragment into a $`\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}_cp`$ final state. Simple kinematic arguments then favor low $`M(\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}_cp)`$, as is apparently observed .

A similar discussion applies to the decay $`B^0\pi ^+\pi ^{}\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}_cp`$ . Here the $`\overline{c}`$ produced in the color-favored subprocess $`\overline{b}\pi ^+\overline{c}`$ combines with a spectator $`d`$ to produce $`\pi ^{}\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}_cp`$. This system should have a low effective mass, as should its $`\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_c^{}p`$ component. Another mechanism for the decay $`B^0\pi ^+\pi ^{}\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}_cp`$ is $`B^0\mathrm{\Sigma }_c^{}\mathrm{\Delta }^{++}`$, which proceeds only via $`W`$ exchange  and thus is expected to be highly suppressed.

Some baryon-production processes in $`B`$ decays, such as $`B^0D^{}p\overline{p}\pi ^{}`$ and $`B^0D^{}p\overline{n}`$ , occur with much larger branching ratios \[$`𝒪(10^3)`$\] than penguin-mediated processes such as (6) or (7). In these, it appears that the charged weak current is fragmenting into a nucleon-antinucleon system (plus possible additional pions) . Nucleon form factors then favor low effective masses for these subsystems.

If all of the above processes are shown to be compatible with a fragmentation process, what does one learn? First of all, one would then have established the phenomenological observation that fragmentation into baryon-antibaryon pairs leads to low effective masses for those pairs. This feature should be taken into account in any simulation which seeks to describe baryon production. Second, one would have established another feature of low-energy quantum chromodynamics for which any non-perturbative approach (such as lattice gauge theory) is obliged to provide an explanation.

IV. EXOTIC RESONANCES IN $`B`$ DECAYS

The fact that some $`B`$ decays lead to low-mass baryon-antibaryon enhancements encourages the re-opening of an old question which has never been satisfactorily addressed: If such enchancements do exist, are they limited to the ordinary quantum numbers of the $`q\overline{q}`$ system? Some arguments based on duality  or the systematics of resonance formation  suggest instead that baryon-antibaryon enhancements are possible in all systems with the quantum numbers of two quarks and two antiquarks. If such resonances exist, why aren’t they seen in ordinary meson-meson channels? A consistent set of selection rules was proposed  to forbid such mesonic couplings. $`B`$ decays offer a new opportunity to test such rules.

Let us consider the decay of a $`B^+`$ at the quark level: $`\overline{b}u\overline{c}u\overline{d}u`$. The final state is “exotic” in the sense that it does not share flavor quantum numbers with any quark-antiquark state. Now let the charmed antiquark $`\overline{c}`$ fragment into a $`D^{}`$ by dressing itself with a $`d`$ quark. This is produced in a pair with a $`\overline{d}`$, so that in addition to the $`D^{}`$ we have a meson with the quark content $`\overline{d}\overline{d}uu`$. This is an exotic meson.

We thus suggest that in the decay $`B^+D^{}X^{++}`$ the missing mass of $`X^{++}`$ be studied. If the selection rules of Ref.  are valid, any resonances in the $`X^{++}`$ channel should decay to baryon-antibaryon pairs. Such pairs might be $`p\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}^+`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{++}\overline{n}`$, or $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{++}\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }}^0`$. The last final state has the property that $`p\overline{p}\pi ^+\pi ^+`$ is one of its decay products; the others involve antineutrons and thus might be tricky to observe.

If the $`\overline{c}`$ quark instead fragments to a $`D_s^{}`$ by dressing itself with a $`s`$ quark, the remaining meson has the quark content $`\overline{s}\overline{d}uu`$. Thus in $`B^+D_s^{}X^{++}`$ if the missing-mass of $`X^{++}`$ displays peaks, one should see whether such resonances decay to baryon-antibaryon pairs such as $`\overline{\mathrm{\Lambda }}p\pi ^+`$.

The selection rules of Ref.  also imply that the $`\overline{c}\overline{d}uu`$ system produced by a $`B^+`$ decay can fragment into an exotic antibaryon (composed of four antiquarks and a quark) and a baryon. All one needs is the production of two extra pairs, $`\overline{q}_1\overline{q}_2q_1q_2`$, where neither $`q_1`$ nor $`q_2`$ is a $`u`$ quark. Then the exotic antibaryon is $`\overline{c}\overline{d}\overline{q}_1\overline{q}_2u`$, while the baryon is $`uq_1q_2`$. If $`q_1=q_2=d`$, the baryon is a neutron. The system $`X^+`$ in $`B^+X^+n`$ is exotic, but the neutron is difficult to detect. If $`q_1=d`$ and $`q_2=s`$, the baryon can be a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ (easier to see). The system $`X^+`$ in $`B^+X^+\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ again is exotic; a missing-mass plot would be interesting. Depending on the relative masses of exotic baryons and exotic mesons, such a state might be forced to decay via a violation of the selection rules of Ref. .

V. CONCLUSIONS

The observation of low-mass baryon-antibaryon enhancements in $`B`$ decays has opened a range of interesting possibilities. Some of these enhancements may be associated with coupling to flavorless states of two or more gluons, and may be related to the enhanced branching ratios for $`B\eta ^{}K`$ and $`B\eta ^{}X`$. If they are associated with spinless versions of such states, specific features of the Dalitz plots for three-body decays are expected. Other enhancements may be associated with details of the fragmentation picture, suggesting a short-range correlation between baryons and antibaryons in the fragmentation chain. The possibility that exotic mesons and baryons may be observable in the decays of charged $`B`$ mesons is a further outcome of the recent experimental observations.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I am grateful to Tom Browder, Steve Olsen, Sandip Pakvasa, Xerxes Tata, and San Fu Tuan for discussions, and to the Physics Department of the University of Hawaii for hospitality during part of this research. This work was supported in part by the United States Department of Energy through Grant No. DE FG02 90ER40560.


text:
# A Constraint on Electromagnetic Acceleration of Highest Energy Cosmic Rays

## I Introduction

The detection of ultra-high-energy cosmic rays (UHECRs) with energies above $`10^{20}`$ eV has posed a challenge to the understanding of their origin and nature. At present, 17 such events were reported by the AGASA group and 2 events were observed by HiRes an energy of the one of them is estimated to be $`3\times 10^{20}`$ eV, close to the energy of the largest ($`3.2\times 10^{20}`$ eV) event observed with the Fly’s Eye detector Nearly isotropic distribution on the sky and the absence of large-scale clustering suggests the cosmological origin of UHECRs. This is in apparent conflict with the observed energy spectrum which lacks the Greisen-Zatsepin-Kuzmin (GZK) cutoff at energy $`5\times 10^{19}`$ eV G66 ; ZK66  indicating that UHECRs have traveled the distance smaller than $`60`$ Mpc ($`20`$ Mpc for protons with $`E3\times 10^{20}`$ eV).

Cosmic rays are accelerated in astrophysical sources either by repeated scattering off macroscopic flows, such as shocks, winds and outflows, turbulent flows, or directly by an induced electric field around a magnetized rotating object. For the acceleration to operate, a particle must remain confined within the acceleration region: the gyro-radius of the particle should not exceed the size of the system, $`R`$. This sets the maximum energy of the accelerated particle,

$$E_{\mathrm{acc}}=ZeBR9.3\times 10^{23}ZBR_{\mathrm{kpc}}\text{eV},$$
(1)
where $`Ze`$ is the charge of a particle, $`B`$ is the characteristic magnetic field strength in the acceleration region (in gauss), and $`R_{\mathrm{kpc}}`$ is the size in kiloparsecs. If the whole medium is moving relativistically with the Lorentz factor $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ towards an observer, $`E_{\mathrm{acc}}`$ is boosted to $`\mathrm{\Gamma }E_{\mathrm{acc}}`$, with $`B`$ and $`R`$ being measured in the co-moving frame. Specifying the particle energy, say $`E_{\mathrm{acc}}=3\times 10^{20}`$ eV (the largest observed), and assuming $`Z1`$, one obtains the magnetic field–size relation SB50 ; Hillas84 , which is plotted in Figure 1 with the long-dashed line. Any astrophysical object to the right from this line can accelerate protons to energies $`3\times 10^{20}`$ eV.

Various energy losses, such as collisional and inverse Compton scattering in a radiation field, limit the UHECR energy. But even in the absence of any such processes, an energetic particle will still loose energy radiatively while moving through magnetic and electric fields which confine and accelerate this particle. The radiative (synchrotron) losses have been considered by various authors Hillas84 ; KE86 ; Aharonian+02 , who usually estimated the synchrotron cooling time, but didn’t take into account the finite size of the source self-consistently.111 The paper by Aharonian+02 , appeared when the present paper was in preparation, accounts for the finite source size but still not self-consistently.

In this paper we re-analyze the energetics of electromagnetic acceleration to elucidate its inherent and inevitable limitations. The Hillas criterion, equation (1), is shown to be often inaccurate and even misleading. We consider the most idealized models that carry only the most robust properties of cosmic accelerators, any details of the electromagnetic acceleration process are not important for us. Thanks to the simplicity of the models, analytical solutions for the particle energy, which account for a source size self-consistently, were obtained. These results represent the most relaxed (and, hence, unavoidable) constraints on the maximum energy of an electromagnetically accelerated particle. This implies that the most favorable sources of UHECRs, such as neutron stars (NSs), active galactic nuclei (AGNs) and gamma-ray bursts (GRBs), cannot accelerate protons to the energy $`3\times 10^{20}`$ eV and, hence, must be ruled out. However, our critetion does not apply to linear accelerators (e.g., axial jets) L76 . The Auger experiment may be capable of ruling out the remaining candidates, radio lobes of AGNs and galaxy clusters, and if it does, the whole conventional astrophysical picture of UHECRs as accelerated particles must be revisited.

## II Inefficient acceleration

Let us consider diffusive acceleration first. This type of acceleration operates in shocks of $`\gamma `$-ray bursters, galaxy clusters, jets from AGNs interacting with the intergalactic medium and producing radio lobes, and, perhaps, in AGN cores near the base of a jet. Let us consider a shock propagating through a magnetized medium (inter-cluster medium \[ICM\], for instance), as shown in Figure 2a. Magnetic field may be inhomogeneous on a scale $`R`$. An accelerated particle gains energy by repeated scattering off a shock or a flow. After every scattering, the particle travels a great distance along the Larmor orbit until it returns and gets another kick. As long as the particle moves freely in the magnetic field it radiates and slows down. We will see that the maximum terminal energy of a particle (i.e., when the particle escapes the system), $`E`$, is determined by these radiative losses, but is insensitive to how large the energy, $`E_0`$, of the particle at the shock front is. Therefore, we refer to this regime as “inefficient acceleration”.

Let us consider a particle with some initial energy $`E_0`$ propagating through a region of a size $`R`$ filled with a magnetic field $`B`$. The energy of the particle gradually decreases according to the equation (see Pomeranchuk40 ):

$$\frac{dE}{dx}=F_{\mathrm{Rad}}=\frac{2}{3}\left(\frac{Ze}{Am_pc^2}\right)^4B^2(x)E^2,$$
(2)
where $`x`$ is the distance along the particle trajectory, $`F_{\mathrm{Rad}}`$ denotes the radiation friction force, and $`Am_p`$ is the particle mass. In (2) only the transverse field component enters; we assimed that $`B_{}B`$. The solution of this equation is

$$E^1=E_0^1+E_{\mathrm{cr}}^1,$$
(3)
where $`E_0`$ is the initial energy of the particle and

$`E_{\mathrm{cr}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{Am_pc^2}{Ze}}\right)^4\left({\displaystyle _0^R}B^2(x)𝑑x\right)^1`$ (4)
$``$ $`2.9\times 10^{16}{\displaystyle \frac{(A/Z)^4}{B^2R_{\mathrm{kpc}}}}\text{eV}.`$
For simplicity, it is assumed here that $`B(x)constant`$ within the system. It must be clear now that no matter how energetic the particle is ($`E_0\mathrm{}`$), after traveling through a region with a magnetic field its energy will not exceed the critical energy $`E_{\mathrm{cr}}`$. Specifying the energy $`E_{\mathrm{cr}}=3\times 10^{20}`$ eV and assuming $`A1`$, one obtains another $`B`$ vs. $`R`$ constraint, shown in Figure 1 with the short-dashed line. All astrophysical sources located above this line have $`E_{\mathrm{cr}}3\times 10^{20}`$ eV and hence cannot accelerate UHECRs.

It should be mentioned that the classical expression (2) for the radiation friction force is valid if the wavelength of the emitted radiation is larger than the “classical radius” of a charge, $`c/\omega _B(Ze)^2/(Am_pc^2)`$ (where $`\omega _B=ZeB/Am_pc`$), that is for the field strengths not exceeding $`(Am_p)^2c^4/(Ze)^3`$ in the rest frame of a particle. This yields the condition for the particle energy

$$E\left(\frac{Am_pc^2}{Ze}\right)^3\frac{1}{B}1.9\times 10^{31}(A/Z)^3B^1\text{eV},$$
(5)
which is satisfied for $`E10^{21}`$ eV for practically all sources.

## III Efficient acceleration

Let us now consider “cosmic inductors” where particles are accelerated by electric fields induced by rapid rotation of a magnetized object. Acceleration of this type should occur in neutron star magnetospheres and around accreting supermassive black holes in the centers of AGNs. We naturally assume that the magnetic field has a dipolar (or a multipolar) structure, hence field lines are bent on a scale $`R`$, as shown in Figure 2b. Because of rapid rotation, there is an induced electric field $`E_{\mathrm{ind}}|𝐯\times 𝐁|/c`$ which accelerates a particle. The maximum value of $`E_{\mathrm{ind}}`$ is achieved near the light cylinder 222That is at a cylindrical radius $`R_{lc}`$ at which the linear velocity of magnetospheric field lines is close to the speed of light, $`\mathrm{\Omega }R_{lc}c`$, where $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is the angular velocity of a magnetized object, e.g., a pulsar. is close where it is equal to, at most, $`E_{\mathrm{ind}}B`$. The particle in such a system gains energy rapidly, within one passage through the system. Hence one must retain the electromagnetic accelerating force $`F_{\mathrm{EM}}=ZeE_{\mathrm{ind}}ZeB`$ in the energy equation (2). Then it reads

$$\frac{dE}{dx}ZeB\frac{2}{3}\left(\frac{Ze}{Am_pc^2}\right)^4B^2E^2.$$
(6)
For a small initial energy of an accelerated particle ($`E_0E_{\mathrm{acc}},E_{\mathrm{cr}}`$), the solution of this equation takes a simple and elegant form:

$$E=\sqrt{E_{\mathrm{acc}}E_{\mathrm{cr}}}\mathrm{tanh}\sqrt{E_{\mathrm{acc}}/E_{\mathrm{cr}}},$$
(7)
where $`E`$ is the terminal energy of the particle. The solution has two obvious asymptotics. If $`E_{\mathrm{acc}}E_{\mathrm{cr}}`$ one recovers the Hillas constrain Hillas84  $`EE_{\mathrm{acc}}`$ (equation ), whereas in the opposite limit one has

$`E_{\mathrm{max}}`$ $``$ $`\sqrt{E_{\mathrm{acc}}E_{\mathrm{cr}}}`$ (8)
$``$ $`1.3\times 10^{20}A^2Z^{3/2}B^{1/2}\text{eV}.`$
This equation, in fact, follows from the balance between the acceleration and radiative losses, $`F_{\mathrm{EM}}=F_{\mathrm{Rad}}`$, in equation (6). Hence, we refer to this regime as “efficient acceleration”. Acceleration above this energy is impossible because at larger energies radiative friction begins to dominate over electromagnetic acceleration. This constraint for $`E_{\mathrm{max}}=3\times 10^{20}`$ eV is plotted in Figure 1 with the dot-dashed line. No objects above this line can accelerate cosmic rays to this energy.

## IV Discussion

The conventional astronomical picture for the origin of these cosmic rays is the acceleration of charged particles, e.g., protons or heavier atomic nuclei, in extragalactic objects Hillas84 ; Hillas98 . There are only few types of such objects. The most favorable are: spinning neutron stars (NSs) and magnetars central regions of active galactic nuclei (AGNs) AGN radio lobes and $`\gamma `$-ray burst (GRB) shocks. It is unlikely that shocks in galaxy clusters are the UHECR sources because they are too far, beyond the GZK distance, and they are not able to accelerate protons to energies above few times $`10^{19}`$ eV KRJ96 .

In the previous sections we demonstrated that the energy of a particle confined by magnetic fields within an acceleration site is determined by its radiative losses. We now discuss the constraints on $`B`$ and $`R`$ given by equations (1), (4), and (8) and plotted in Figure 1.

First, the constraint (8) shown with the dot-dashed line is the most stringent. It tells that protons cannot be accelerated electromagnetically at the sources which lie above this line. Equation (8) also holds for heavier (e.g., iron) nuclei. Hence, compact stars, AGN cores, and GRB shocks (except during the late afterglow phase) are readily ruled out from the list of possible sources of ultra-high-energy protons and nuclei.

Second, the remaining candidates, i.e., the radio lobes and galaxy clusters, may accelerate particles only via the diffusive mechanism, hence equation (4) is appropriate. This equation together with (1) specifies the allowed $`B`$$`R`$ parameter region. In the figure the dotted line corresponds to iron nuclei with the energy $`3\times 10^{20}`$ eV and the solid lines correspond to protons with three energies: $`3\times 10^{20}`$, $`10^{22}`$, and $`3\times 10^{23}`$ eV. One can see that the AGN radio lobes are at most marginally consistent with being the sources of the highest energy cosmic rays. Moreover, only a handful of such sources are relatively nearby (e.g., M87, Cen A, NCG 315) but their angular distribution is completely uncorrelated with the nearly isotropic distribution arrival directions of UHECRs. Shocks in galaxy clusters can be such sources, according to Figure 1. It has been argued from a more detailed analysis of shock acceleration, however, that they are not able to accelerate protons above $`6\times 10^{19}`$ eV KRJ96 . Overall, large objects are more preferable candidates for the highest energy cosmic ray sources, both due to the larger terminal energy of an accelerated particle and the larger energy reservoir available, see Fig. 5 in the paper by Kronberg K02 .

Equation (1) together with (4) or (8) puts a lower bound 333The above criteria are applicable only to cosmic accelerators which involve acceleration on curved paths; no constraints on linear cosmic accelerators (if any) are placed. on the size of the accelerating source:

$$R6.0\times 10^5E_{20}^3Z^2A^4\text{ kpc},$$
(9)
where $`E_{20}=E/10^{20}`$ eV. This is a quite remarkable result since it sets the absolute limit on $`R`$, independent of the field strength. Now, two special cases follow. First, the size $`R`$ exceeds the GZK distance $`20`$ Mpc when the energy of the proton is larger than $`E_{\mathrm{GZK}}7\times 10^{22}`$ eV. That is, such an energetic proton will loose its energy through the interaction with the 2.7 K background radiation right at the acceleration site. Hence, it is unlikely that protons may be accelerated to the energies above $`E_{\mathrm{GZK}}`$. Second, above the energy $`E_{\mathrm{Hor}}4\times 10^{23}`$ eV, the size of the accelerator exceeds the size of the Universe. Thus, $`E_{\mathrm{Hor}}`$ is the ultimate upper bound on the energy of electromagnetically accelerated protons. Note that this energy limit is below the energy of primary protons ($`10^{24}`$ eV) in the most popular (among other models Sarkar02 ; Watson01 ) Z-burst model.

To conclude, we arrived at an interesting result. Practically all known astronomical sources are not able to produce cosmic rays with energies near few times $`10^{20}`$ eV. There is not too much room left for the conventional electromagnetic (in a broad sense) acceleration. Pushing observations up in energy by about an order of magnitude should clarify this situation. During ten years of operation of the Auger cosmic ray observatoryabout 300 events above $`10^{20}`$ eV are expected to be recorded. Extrapolating the present AGASA spectrum one can then expect a few events near or above $`10^{21}`$ eV to be recorded, which may be enough to exclude radio lobes from UHECR sources. Should this happen, a considerable revision of the current astrophysical picture will be inevitable.

## Acknowledgements

We thank Andrei Beloborodov for a discussion and an anonymous referee for very careful reading and many suggestions greatly improving the manuscript.


text:
# References

A comment on the paper ‘Coherence in Neutrino Oscillations’ by C.Giunti. Either lepton flavour eigenstates or neutrino oscillations do not exist

J.H.Field

Département de Physique Nucléaire et Corpusculaire, Université de Genève

24, quai Ernest-Ansermet CH-1211Genève 4.

E-mail: john.field@cern.ch

## Abstract

The definition of ‘lepton flavour eigenstates’ introduced in a recent paper hep-ph/0302045 is in disagreement with the Standard Model prediction for the structure of the leptonic charged current and implies the absence of neutrino oscillations following pion decay, in contradiction to experimental data

PACS 03.65.Bz, 14.60.Pq, 14.60.Lm, 13.20.Cz
Keywords ; Quantum Mechanics, Neutrino Oscillations.

In a recent short note , Giunti has claimed to refute the claim of Reference  that experimental measurements of the decay width ratio in pion decay:

$$R_{e/\mu }=\mathrm{\Gamma }(\pi ^{}e^{}\overline{\nu })/\mathrm{\Gamma }(\pi ^{}\mu ^{}\overline{\nu })$$

and of the elements of the MNS  lepton flavour/mass mixing matrix exclude the possiblity, for massive neutrinos, of the production of a coherent ‘lepton flavour eigenstates’ $`\overline{\nu }_e`$, $`\overline{\nu }_\mu `$ in pion decay. The discussion of Reference  is first briefly recalled, before considering Giunti’s counter argument.

In the Standard Electroweak Model the invariant amplitude for the pion decay process: $`\pi ^{}\mathrm{}^{}\overline{\nu }_i`$ where $`\mathrm{}=e,\mu `$ and $`\overline{\nu }_i`$ denotes a mass eigenstate, is:

$$_\mathrm{}i=\frac{G}{\sqrt{2}}f_\pi m_\pi V_{ud}\overline{\psi }_{\mathrm{}}(1\gamma _5)U_\mathrm{}i\psi _{\overline{\nu }_i}_\mathrm{}i^DU_\mathrm{}i$$
(1)
where $`G`$ is the Fermi constant, $`f_\pi `$ and $`m_\pi `$ are the pion decay constant and mass respectively, and $`V_{ud}`$, $`U_\mathrm{}i`$ are, respectively, elements of the CKM  quark flavour/mass mixing matrix and the MNS lepton flavour/mass mixing matrix. For simplicity, only two flavour mixing is considered so that $`i=1,2`$ and $`U_\mathrm{}i`$ can be taken to be real.

The standard discussion of neutrino oscillations following pion decay starts with the assumption that the state produced is the coherent superposition, $`\psi _{\overline{\nu }_{\mathrm{}}}`$, of mass eigenstates defined by:

$$\psi _{\overline{\nu }_{\mathrm{}}}U_\mathrm{}1\psi _{\overline{\nu }_1}+U_\mathrm{}2\psi _{\overline{\nu }_2}$$
(2)
Denoting the coherent state in Eqn(2) as $`\psi _{\overline{\nu }_{\mathrm{}}}(\tau =0)`$, where $`\tau `$ is the anti-neutrino proper time, the standard neutrino oscillation phase is derived by introducing time evolution of the mass eigenstates in Eqn(2), according to the Schrödinger equation in the anti-neutrino rest frames, as, for example, in Reference :

$$\psi _{\overline{\nu }_{\mathrm{}}}(\tau )=U_\mathrm{}1\psi _{\overline{\nu }_1}(0)e^{im_1\tau }+U_\mathrm{}2\psi _{\overline{\nu }_2}(0)e^{im_2\tau }$$
(3)
As is well known, the assumption that the anti-neutrinos have equal momentum, $`p`$, but different energies, and are ultra-rlativisitic, then leads to the standard result for the oscillation phase: $`\varphi =(m_1^2m_2^2)L/2p`$ where $`L`$ is the source-detector distance. It is clear, then, that the assumption that the coherent state $`\psi _{\overline{\nu }_{\mathrm{}}}`$ of Eqn(2) is produced in pion decay is crucial for the derivation of the standard neutrino oscillation phase. Combining now Eqns(1) and (2) allows the invariant amplitude $`_{\mathrm{}\mathrm{}}`$ for the production of the state $`\psi _{\overline{\nu }_{\mathrm{}}}`$ to be introduced:

$$_{\mathrm{}\mathrm{}}_\mathrm{}1+_\mathrm{}2=\frac{G}{\sqrt{2}}f_\pi m_\pi V_{ud}\overline{\psi }_{\mathrm{}}(1\gamma _5)\psi _{\overline{\nu }_{\mathrm{}}}$$
(4)
This amplitude does produce the state $`\psi _{\overline{\nu }_{\mathrm{}}}`$ in pion decay, and, as shown above, subsequent observation of the anti-neutrinos via charged current interactions will give rise to neutrino oscillations with the standard phase. Another immediate consequence of Eqn(4) is the prediction:

$$R_{e/\mu }\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\pi ^{}e^{}\overline{\nu }_e)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\pi ^{}\mu ^{}\overline{\nu }_\mu )}=\left(\frac{m_e}{m_\mu }\right)^2\left[\frac{m_\pi ^2m_e^2}{m_\pi ^2m_\mu ^2}\right]^2\left(\frac{U_{e1}+U_{e2}}{U_{\mu 1}+U_{\mu 2}}\right)^2$$
(5)
where it is assumed that purely kinematical effects of non-vanishing anti-neutrino masses may be neglected in both the invariant amplitudes and the phase space factors. As shown in Reference  the prediction, Eqn(5), is excluded with a huge statistical significance by the experimental measurements of $`R_{e/\mu }`$  and the MNS matrix elements . It must then be concluded that the initial hypothesis underlying Eqn(5), that the coherent state in Eqn(2) is produced in pion decay, is false.

In Reference  it is proposed to use, instead of Eqn(2), a different definition of the ‘lepton flavour eigenstate’, $`\psi _{\overline{\nu }_{\mathrm{}}}^G`$, according to the definitions:

$$_{\mathrm{}\mathrm{}}^G_\mathrm{}1U_1\mathrm{}+_\mathrm{}2U_2\mathrm{}=\frac{G}{\sqrt{2}}f_\pi m_\pi V_{ud}\overline{\psi }_{\mathrm{}}(1\gamma _5)\psi _{\overline{\nu }_{\mathrm{}}}^G$$
(6)
and

$`\psi _{\overline{\nu }_{\mathrm{}}}^G`$ $``$ $`U_\mathrm{}1U_1\mathrm{}\psi _{\overline{\nu }_1}+U_\mathrm{}2U_2\mathrm{}\psi _{\overline{\nu }_2}`$ (7)
$`=`$ $`|U_\mathrm{}1|^2\psi _{\overline{\nu }_1}+|U_\mathrm{}2|^2\psi _{\overline{\nu }_2}`$
$``$ $`(|U_\mathrm{}1|^2+|U_\mathrm{}2|^2)\psi _{\overline{\nu }_0}=\psi _{\overline{\nu }_0}`$
where $`\psi _{\overline{\nu }_0}`$ denotes the wavefunction of a massless anti-neutrino, the unitarity of the MNS matrix: $`|U_\mathrm{}1|^2+|U_\mathrm{}2|^2=1`$, has been used, and, as in Eqn(5), the purely kinematical effects of non-vanishing anti-neutrino masses are neglected. Since the MNS elements do not appear in Eqn(6), the prediction given by this equation for $`R_{e/\mu }`$ is the same as the text-book massless anti-neutrino result, which is in excellent agreement with experiment and provides no information on the values of the MNS elements. However, since the amplitude (6) evidently does not produce the coherent state $`\psi _{\overline{\nu }_{\mathrm{}}}`$ of Eqn(2), it predicts the absence of neutrino oscillations following pion decay. This seems now to be experimentally excluded by the observation of such oscillations in both atmospheric neutrinos  and the K2K  experiment.

To summarise: the analysis of Reference  shows that the production of ‘lepton flavour eigenstates’ as in Eqn(2) in the final state of pion decay is experimentally excluded, but that neutrino oscillations are possible, albeit with a phase that is often quite different from the standard one. The analysis of Reference  avoids the constraint of Eqn(5), but predicts the absence of of neutrino oscillations following pion decay, in contradiction to the results of both the Superkamiokande and K2K experiments.

Actually, the anstatz of Eqn(6), which appears to have been constructed precisely to avoid the constraint imposed by Eqn(5), is without any physical justification. As first pointed out by Shrock  and as recently recalled by Pallin and Snellman , the correct Standard Model structure of the leptonic charged current in pion decay is just that given by Eqns(1) and (2) above, not by Eqns(6) and (7). The ‘lepton flavour eigenstate’ of Eqn(2), though useful as a formal device to write the Lagrangian or Hamiltonian of the charged weak current in a compact form (as, for example, in Eqn(4) of Reference  or Eqn(2) of Reference ) does not occur in the amplitude of any physical process. The final and intial states in the amplitudes of all physical processes in the Standard Model are mass eigenstates. This is true of all fermions, whether quarks or leptons. A close analogy, in the quark sector, to pion decay is provided by the decay of W bosons into quarks :

$$\mathrm{W}^{}\overline{\mathrm{c}}\mathrm{d}\mathrm{W}^{}\overline{\mathrm{c}}\mathrm{s},\mathrm{W}^{}\overline{\mathrm{c}}\mathrm{b}$$
(8)
The analogue of the neutrino ‘lepton flavour eigenstate’ of Eqn(2) would be the ‘charm flavour eigenstate of d-type quarks’:

$$\psi _cV_{cd}\psi _d+V_{cs}\psi _s+V_{cb}\psi _b$$
(9)
Of course, such a ‘coherent’ state has no relevance to W decays. The decays into the different quark flavours shown above occur incoherently, that is in different physical processes. In the Standard Model the different neutrino flavours (mass eigenstates) are, just like the different quark flavours just discussed, also produced incoherently  in different physical processes. Because of this incoherent behaviour the ratio $`R_{e/\mu }`$ is indeed quite insensitive to the values of the MNS matrix elements. This is because:

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }(\pi ^+\mathrm{}^+\overline{\nu })`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(\pi ^+\mathrm{}^+\overline{\nu }_1)+\mathrm{\Gamma }(\pi ^+\mathrm{}^+\overline{\nu }_2)`$ (10)
$``$ $`|_\mathrm{}1^D|^2|U_\mathrm{}1|^2+|_\mathrm{}2^D|^2|U_\mathrm{}2|^2`$
$``$ $`|_\mathrm{}0^D|^2(|U_\mathrm{}1|^2+|U_\mathrm{}2|^2)=|_\mathrm{}0^D|^2`$
where, unlike in Eqn(7), the unitarity of the MNS matrix has been used in a physically correct manner. In fact, Eqn(10) leads to the same prediction for $`R_{e/\mu }`$ as Eqns(6) and (7): there is no sensitivity to the values of the MNS matrix elements. This is, however, a simple consequence of the incoherent nature of the production processes as exemplified in the first line of Eqn(8), not of the unphysical anstatz of Eqns(6) and (7).

Because the different neutrino mass eigenstates are produced incoherently, in different physical processes, they are not necessarily produced at the same time (as they must be if they are produced in the coherent state of Eqn(2)) so that the propagator of the source particle gives an important contribution to the oscillation phase, which is then found to be process dependent and, in many cases, markedly different from the standard one .


text:
# AFM local oxidation nanopatterning of a high mobility shallow 2D hole gas.

thanks: Present address: Department of Physics, Purdue University, W. Lafayette, IN 7907 USA

## Abstract

Recently developed AFM local anodic oxidation (LAO) technique offers a convenient way of patterning nanodevices, but imposes even more stringent requirements on the underlying quantum well structure. We developed a new very shallow quantum well design which allows the depth and density of the 2D gas to be independently controlled during the growth. A high mobility ($`0.5\times 10^6`$ cm2/Vs at 4.2 K) 2D hole gas just 350 Å below the surface is demonstrated. A quantum point contact, fabricated by AFM LAO nanopatterning from this wafer, shows 9 quantum steps at 50 mK.

Rapidly developing area of physics of nanodevices laid down new demands to heterostructure design, for example, shallow 2D gas is required in order to improve size control and enhance the confining potential. Even more stringent requirements are imposed by recently developed AFM local anodic oxidation nanolithography (LAO), which promise a low-energy high resolution alternative to the conventional e-beam lithographysc ; held97 ; bo02 . A key to the success of LAO is the properly designed heterostructure. The maximum depth of the LAO grown oxide is 100-150 Å, and shifting the surface by this amount should effectively deplete the underlying 2D gas. Experimentally it has been deduced that 2D gas should be $`<400`$ Å below the surfaceheld98 . In conventionally grown shallow modulation doped quantum wells (QWs) $`\delta `$-doping provides carriers to the 2D gas and compensates the surface potential of GaAs. There is a delicate balance between underdoping, when most of the carriers are trapped at the surface and no carriers left to form the 2D gas, and overdoping, when $`\delta `$-doping layer becomes conducting at low temperatures. An addition of another doping layer at the other side of the QW reduces the necessary amount of the dopants in the top layer, but precise control of the final density of the 2D gas is still difficult.

We developed a novel heterostructure design which does not suffer from either of the above mentioned drawbacks. The as-grown structure of a shallow p-type QW consists of a GaAs buffer grown on a \[$`\overline{3}`$11\] substrate, followed by 3000 Å AlGaAs (x=0.32), Si $`\delta `$-doping ($`6\times 10^{11}`$ cm-2), 500 Å AlGaAs setback, 150 Å GaAs QW, 100 Å AlGaAs barrier, 100 Å GaAs, Si $`\delta `$-doping ($`5\times 10^{12}`$ cm-2), and 150 Å GaAs cap layer. The calculated band diagram of this structure is plotted in Fig. 1 sim ; tan90 ; snider90 . The top $`\delta `$-doping resides in GaAs and serves the purpose of compensating the surface potential and pinning the valence band edge $`E_V`$ at the Fermi energy $`E_F`$. The doping should be low enough to avoid conduction through this layer at low temperatures. The design relaxes the criticality of the exact amount of doping because this doping layer does not provide carriers to the underlying 2D gas. The carriers are supplied by the bottom $`\delta `$-doping. Again, the design provides some window for the doping concentration because the density of the 2D gas is determined by the setback thickness. An excessive doping leads to the outdiffusion of dopants toward the QW and degradation of the mobilitypfeiffer91 . Indeed, we have grown two wafers with 3 times different concentration of the bottom doping; both QWs have hole concentrations different by $`<5`$%, but the wafer with lower doping has 8 time higher mobility.

The band diagram is very sensitive to the thickness of the GaAs cap layer $`t_c`$ and, thus, is ideal for the LAO nanolithography. In Fig. 1 we simulated the effect of the LAO by reducing the $`t_c`$ by the oxide thickness. The 2D hole gas is depleted when $`t_c110`$ Å, which corresponds to the oxide thickness of 60 Å. 100 Å of the oxide is estimated to lower the $`E_V`$ in the QW region by 200 meV below the $`E_F`$, creating the corresponding barrier for the adjacent 2D hole gas.

We have grown a wafer using the above parameters. The wafer has the hole density $`1.38\times 10^{11}`$ cm-2 and mobility $`0.48\times 10^6`$ cm-2/Vs at 0.3 K, the highest reported for so shallow (350 Å below the surface) a 2D hole gas. An AFM image of a quantum point contact, fabricated from this wafer using AFM LAO, is shown in the inset in Fig. 2. Profile of the oxide is plotted in the top inset. Position of the first energy level $`E_0`$ in the QW, relative to the level position far from the oxide line, is extracted from the band calculations and plotted with black dots. Due to non-monotonic dependence of the $`E_0`$ on the oxide thickness, width of the potential barrier is narrower by factor of 2 than the thickness of the oxide line and is $`440`$ Å at half height. The current–voltage (IV) characteristic across the oxide line, measured at 4.2 K, is shown in Fig. 2. Current is negligible at $`|V|<0.6`$ V and there is a sharp turn on of the current at $`0.6`$ V. We model the IV characteristic by calculating the tunneling probability through the barrier

$$U(x)=\frac{U_0}{\mathrm{cosh}^2(\alpha x)}+\frac{V/2}{\mathrm{tanh}(\alpha x)},$$

where $`U_0`$ is the height of the potential under the center of the oxide line, $`V`$ is the applied voltage, and $`\alpha ^1`$ is related to the width of the oxide line. This potentialllqm  provides a good approximation to the expected potential, see solid line in the inset in Fig. 2. The turn on voltage is not very sensitive to $`\alpha `$ at low temperatures for our barrier widths, as well as to the exact shape of the potential. The calculated current is plotted in Fig. 2 with the dashed line. The turn on voltage for $`U_0=200`$ meV is close to the experimentally measure one. This value of $`U_0`$ is consistent with the estimate of the tunneling barrier for 100 Å oxidation from band calculations. Experimentally, IV characteristic is linear for oxidations depth $`<60`$ Å, indicating that no tunneling barrier is formed, also consistent with the band calculations.

Finally, we present transport characteristics of the point contact. In Fig. 3 differential conductance $`G`$ is plotted as a function of the gate voltage $`V_g=V_{g1}=V_{g2}`$ at 50 mK. The $`G`$ is quantized in units of $`2e^2/h`$, and up to 9 plateaus can be clearly seen. Large number of steps indicate low disorder in the vicinity of the point contact. Thus, the designed heterostructure, in combination with LAO technique, provides an easy and reliable method of fabricating high quality nanostructures with sub-nanometer control over the size, shape and position.

Previously, it has been shown that the position of the change can be shifted by applying a voltage difference between the gatesheinzel00 . Moreover, the barrier width under the oxide and, correspondingly, the electrostatic coupling, can be also adjusted. The effect is the best demonstrated at elevated temperatures, when steps are smeared out and the $`dG/dV_g`$ slope reflects the electrostatic coupling between the gates and the 1D channel. In the inset in Fig. 3 $`G`$ is plotted as a function of $`V_{g1}=V_{g2}+\mathrm{\Delta }V_g`$ for different values of $`\mathrm{\Delta }V_g`$ at 4 K . The slope $`dG/dV_g`$ increases with the increase of $`|\mathrm{\Delta }V_g|`$, indicating large electrostatic coupling between one of the gates and the channel. This enhancement is due to non-liner dependence of both channel and barrier widths on the gate voltage for in-plane gateslarkin90 .

To summarize, we developed a novel heterostructure design for reliable and reproducible growth of high mobility shallow QWs. We demonstrate the design by fabricating a high quality quantum point contact from such a wafer using AFM local anodic oxidation technique. We show that amplitude of potential barriers, formed by local oxidation of the surface, can be reliably predicted using readily available numerical simulation tools.

We thank E.V. Tsiper for discussions. The work was supported by a DURINT grant through the ONR and MARCO Focused Research Center on Meterials, Structures, and Devices which is funded at the MIT, in part by MARCO under contract 2001-MT-887 and DARPA under grant MDA972-01-1-0035.