format: text

text:
# New Cosmological Singularities in Braneworld Models

## Abstract

Higher-dimensional braneworld models which contain both bulk and brane curvature terms in the action admit cosmological singularities of rather unusual form and nature. These ‘quiescent’ singularities, which can occur both during the contracting as well as the expanding phase, are characterised by the fact that while the matter density and Hubble parameter remain finite, all higher derivatives of the scale factor ($`\stackrel{..}{a}`$, $`\stackrel{\mathrm{}}{a}`$ etc.) diverge as the cosmological singularity is approached. The singularities are the result of the embedding of the (3+1)-dimensional brane in the bulk and can exist even in an empty homogeneous and isotropic (FRW) universe. The possibility that the present universe may expand into a singular state is discussed.

In this letter, we would like to draw attention to the fact that braneworld theory admits cosmological singularities of very unusual form and nature. The theory we work with in this paper is described by the action

$$S=M^3\underset{i}{}\left[_{\mathrm{bulk}}\left(2\mathrm{\Lambda }_i\right)2_{\mathrm{brane}}K\right]+_{\mathrm{brane}}\left(m^2R2\sigma \right)+_{\mathrm{brane}}L(h_{\alpha \beta },\varphi ),$$
(1)
the notation of which is standard. We use the signature and sign conventions of . The sum in (1) is taken over the bulk components bounded by branes, and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_i`$ is the cosmological constant in the $`i`$th bulk component. Note that we have included the curvature term in the action for the brane with the coefficient $`m^2`$. Such a term generically arises when one considers quantum effects generated by matter fields residing on the brane , in the spirit of the idea of the induced effective action ; its inclusion in the action is therefore mandatory. The lagrangian $`L(h_{\alpha \beta },\varphi )`$ corresponds to the presence of matter fields $`\varphi `$ on the brane interacting with the induced metric $`h_{\alpha \beta }`$ and describes their dynamics. The extrinsic curvature $`K_{\alpha \beta }`$ on both sides of the brane is defined with respect to the inner normal $`n^a`$, as in .

Let us first consider the case with $`Z_2`$ symmetry of reflection, which requires equal cosmological constants on the two sides of the brane: $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_1=\mathrm{\Lambda }_2=\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. The corresponding cosmological equation of theory (1) was derived in  and has the form

$$H^2+\frac{\kappa }{a^2}=\frac{\rho +\sigma }{3m^2}+\frac{2}{\mathrm{}^2}\left[1\pm \sqrt{1+\mathrm{}^2\left(\frac{\rho +\sigma }{3m^2}\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{6}\frac{C}{a^4}\right)}\right],$$
(2)
where the integration constant $`C`$ corresponds to the presence of a black hole in the five-dimensional bulk solution, and the term $`C/a^4`$ (occasionally referred to as ‘dark radiation’) arises due to the projection of the bulk gravitational degrees of freedom onto the brane. The length scale $`\mathrm{}`$ is defined as

$$\mathrm{}=\frac{m^2}{M^3}.$$
(3)
The new singularities that we are going to discuss in this paper are connected with the fact that the expression under the square root of (2) turns to zero at some point during evolution, so that solutions of the cosmological equations cannot be continued beyond this point. There are essentially two types of ‘quiescent’ singularities displaying this behaviour:

A type 1 singularity (S1) is essentially induced by the presence of the ‘dark radiation’ term under the square root of (2) and arises in either of the following two cases:

* $`C>0`$ and the density of matter increases slower than $`a^4`$ as $`a0`$. Such singularities occur if the universe is filled with matter having equation of state $`P/\rho <1/3`$, an example is provided by pressureless matter (dust) for which $`\rho a^3`$. A special case is an empty universe ($`\rho =0`$).
* The energy density of the universe is radiation-dominated so that $`\rho =\rho _0/a^4`$ and $`C>\rho _0`$.

The singularities discussed above can take place either in the past of an expanding universe or in the future of a collapsing one.

A type 2 singularity (S2) arises if

$$\mathrm{}^2\left(\frac{\sigma }{3m^2}\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{6}\right)<1.$$
(4)
In this case, it is important to note that the combination $`\rho /3m^2C/a^4`$ decreases monotonically as the universe expands. The expression under the square root of (2) can therefore become zero at suitably late times, in which case the cosmological solution cannot be extended beyond this time. S2 is even more interesting than S1 since: (i) it can occur during the late time expansion of the universe; (ii) it can occur even if dark radiation is entirely absent ($`C=0`$).

For both S1 & S2, the scale factor $`a(t)`$ and its first time derivative remain finite, while all the higher time derivatives of $`a(t)`$ tend to infinity as the singularity is approached. As an example consider a type 2 singularity with $`C=0`$, for which

$$\frac{d^na}{dt^n}=𝒪\left(\left[\rho (t)\alpha \right]^{3/2n}\right),n2,$$
(5)
as $`\rho (t)\alpha =\mathrm{\Lambda }m^2/2\sigma 3m^2/\mathrm{}^2`$. We therefore find that the scalar curvature $`R\mathrm{}`$ near the singularity, while the energy density and pressure remain finite. Although this situation is quite unusual from the viewpoint of the intrinsic dynamics on the brane, it becomes comprehensible when one considers the embedding of the brane in the bulk. It is well known that the cosmological braneworld under consideration can be isometrically embedded in the five-dimensional solution of the vacuum Einstein equations described by the metric

$$ds^2=f_\kappa (r)dt^2+\frac{dr^2}{f_\kappa (r)}+r^2d\mathrm{\Omega }_\kappa ,$$
(6)
where

$$f_\kappa (r)=\kappa \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{6}r^2\frac{C}{r^2},$$
(7)
and $`d\mathrm{\Omega }_\kappa `$ is the metric of the three-dimensional Euclidean space, sphere or pseudosphere corresponding to the value of $`\kappa =0,\pm 1`$. The embedding of the brane is defined by the function $`r=a(t)`$, and one can then proceed to define evolution in terms of the proper cosmological time $`\tau `$ of the induced metric on the brane. The cosmological singularity under consideration is connected with the fact that the brane embedding is not extendable beyond some moment of time $`t`$ because the function $`a(t)`$ that defines the embedding cannot be smoothly continued beyond this point (see Fig. 1).

This specific feature of the brane embedding can be compared to the behaviour of the involute of a planar curve. The involute $``$ of a convex planar curve $`𝒞`$ is a line which intersects the tangent lines of $`𝒞`$ orthogonally . $``$ can be visualised as the trajectory described by the end of a strained thread winding up from $`𝒞`$ (see Fig. 2). The involute of a typical curve is sharp at the starting point $`Q`$ so that it is not smoothly extendable beyond the point $`Q`$.

This analogy can be traced further. Note that the evolution of the brane in theory (1) is described by the following well-known equation:

$$m^2G_{\alpha \beta }+\sigma h_{\alpha \beta }=T_{\alpha \beta }+M^3\left(K_{\alpha \beta }h_{\alpha \beta }K\right),$$
(8)
where the extrinsic curvature is summed over both sides of the brane. One can see that it is the influence of the sum of the extrinsic curvatures on the right-hand side that leads to the singularities under investigation so that the singularity of the Einstein tensor $`G_{\alpha \beta }`$ is accompanied by the singularity of the extrinsic curvature $`K_{\alpha \beta }`$, while the induced metric $`h_{\alpha \beta }`$ and the stress-energy tensor $`T_{\alpha \beta }`$ on the brane remain finite. Quite similarly, the involute of a curve is defined through the extrinsic curvature of its embedding in the plane, as is clear from Fig. 2, and its singularity at the point $`Q`$ is connected with the fact that the extrinsic curvature diverges at this point. Specifically, the parametric equation for the involute $`𝐱_{}(s)`$, $`s0`$, in Cartesian coordinates on the plane can be written as

$$𝐱_{}(s)=𝐱(qs)+s𝐱^{}(qs),$$
(9)
where $`𝐱(s)`$ is the curve $`𝒞`$ parametrized by the natural parameter $`s`$, and $`𝐱(q)=𝐱_{}(0)`$ is the coordinate of the starting point $`Q`$ of the involute. The extrinsic curvature of the involute is

$$k(s)=\frac{1}{s},$$
(10)
which diverges at the starting point $`Q`$ corresponding to $`s=0`$.

One should also highlight an important difference between the 1D and 4D embeddings: the involute being one-dimensional, a singularity in its extrinsic curvature does not lead to a singularity in its intrinsic geometry. As we have seen, this is not the case with the brane for which the extrinsic and intrinsic curvatures are related through (8), so that a singularity in $`K_{\alpha \beta }`$ is reflected in a singularity in $`G_{\alpha \beta }`$.

Interestingly, an S2 singularity can arise in the distant future of a universe resembling our own ! To illustrate this we rewrite Eq. (2) (with $`C=0`$) as

$$\frac{H^2(z)}{H_0^2}=\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{m}(1+z)^3+\mathrm{\Omega }_\kappa (1+z)^2+\mathrm{\Omega }_\sigma +\underset{¯}{2\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{}}\pm 2\sqrt{\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{}}}\sqrt{\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{m}(1+z)^3+\mathrm{\Omega }_\sigma +\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{}}+\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }}},$$
(11)
The underlining emphasises those terms which cause the braneworld to differ from its general-relativistic counterpart. For simplicity, we shall only discuss the solution corresponding to the ‘+’ sign in (11) (called BRANE2 in ). In this case, it can be shown that our model satisfies the constraint equation

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{m}+\mathrm{\Omega }_\kappa +\mathrm{\Omega }_\sigma +\underset{¯}{2\sqrt{\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{}}}\sqrt{1\mathrm{\Omega }_\kappa +\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }}}=1,$$
(12)
where

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{m}=\frac{\rho _0}{3m^2H_0^2},\mathrm{\Omega }_\kappa =\frac{\kappa }{a_0^2H_0^2},\mathrm{\Omega }_\sigma =\frac{\sigma }{3m^2H_0^2},\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{}}=\frac{1}{\mathrm{}^2H_0^2},\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{6H_0^2},$$
(13)
and the subscript ‘0’ refers to the present value of the various cosmological quantities.

Inequality (4) now becomes

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_\sigma +\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{}}+\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }<0,$$
(14)
and the limiting redshift, $`z_s=a_0/a(z_s)1`$, at which the braneworld becomes singular is given by

$$z_s=\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_\sigma +\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{}}+\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }}{\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{m}}\right)^{1/3}1.$$
(15)
The time of occurance of the singularity (measured from the present moment) can easily be determined from

$$T_s=t(z=z_s)t(z=0)=_{z_s}^0\frac{dz}{(1+z)H(z)},$$
(16)
where $`H(z)`$ is given by (11) (see also ). In Fig. 3 we show a specific braneworld model having $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{m}=0.2`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{}}=0.4`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=\mathrm{\Omega }_\kappa =0`$. In keeping with observations of high redshift supernovae our model universe is currently accelerating , but will become singular at $`z_s0.3a(z_s)1.4\times a_0`$, i.e. after $`T_s4.5h_{100}^1`$ Gyr ($`h_{100}=H_0/100`$ km/sec/Mpc). Figure 3 demonstrates that the deceleration parameter becomes singular as $`z_s`$ is approached:

$$q=\frac{\ddot{a}}{aH^2}\frac{H^{}}{H}(1+z)1;\underset{zz_s}{lim}q(z)\mathrm{},$$
(17)
while the Hubble parameter remains finite:

$$\frac{H^2(z_s)}{H_0^2}=\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }.$$
(18)
It should be noted that, for a subset of parameter values, inequality (14) can be satisfied simultaneously with $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }>\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{}}`$ . In these models, the universe will recollapse (under the influence of the negative brane tension) before the S2 singularity is reached. (The marginal case $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{}}`$ corresponds to the Hubble parameter vanishing at the singularity.)

Now let us briefly consider the general braneworld without $`Z_2`$ symmetry. In this case, theory (1) leads to the following general cosmological equation for the brane embedded into the five-dimensional bulk :

$$\begin{array}{ccc}m^4\left(H^2+\frac{\kappa }{a^2}\frac{\rho +\sigma }{3m^2}\right)^2\hfill & =& 4M^6\left(H^2+\frac{\kappa }{a^2}\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }_1+\mathrm{\Lambda }_2}{12}\frac{C}{a^4}\right)\hfill \\ & & \frac{M^{12}}{36m^4}\left[\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }_1\mathrm{\Lambda }_2+E/a^4}{H^2+\kappa /a^2(\rho +\sigma )/3m^2}\right]^2,\hfill \end{array}$$
(19)
where $`C`$ has the same meaning as in (2), $`E`$ is another arbitrary integration constant, and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_1`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_2`$ are the cosmological constants on the two sides of the brane. In this paper, we restrict ourselves to the situation where $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_1=\mathrm{\Lambda }_2=\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, but $`E0`$. One should note that (19) reduces to (2) if $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_1=\mathrm{\Lambda }_2=\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and $`E=0`$ .

It is easy to see that singularity S2 is always present in the past of the expanding brane. The reason for this rests in the negative character of the last term on the right-hand side of Eq. (19), which rapidly grows by absolute value as $`a0`$, while the left-hand side of this equation is constrained to remain positive. In the case of an expanding brane (assuming $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_1=\mathrm{\Lambda }_2=\mathrm{\Lambda }`$), the last term on the right-hand side of (19) rapidly decays and becomes unimportant. Therefore, provided (4) is satisfied, the expanding universe will encounter an S2 singularity in its future.

We note that all the singularities described above are absent in the limit $`m0`$ which is frequently discussed in the literature. Indeed, in this limit, Eq. (19) takes the form

$$H^2+\frac{\kappa }{a^2}=\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }_1+\mathrm{\Lambda }_2}{12}+\frac{C}{a^4}+\frac{(\rho +\sigma )^2}{36M^6}+\frac{M^6}{16}\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }_1\mathrm{\Lambda }_2+E/a^4}{\rho +\sigma }\right)^2,$$
(20)
which only admits cosmological singularities associated with an infinite density of matter and dark radiation ($`C/a^4`$). These singularities are reached as $`a0`$. (In general relativity, homogeneous and isotropic space-times generically admit only infinite-density singularities, whereas anisotropic space-times can be empty yet singular .)

Singularites of the kind discussed in this paper occur when the original equations of motion are non-linear with respect to the highest derivative. They have earlier been discussed in the context of Einstein gravity with the conformal anomaly . (This result is not surprising in view of the formal similarity between braneworld theory and GR-based models with the conformal anomaly, discussed in .) ‘Determinant singularities’ having a similar structure and properties are known to arise in the anisotropic Bianchi I model containing a dilaton coupled to a Gauss–Bonnet term in the action  (the general theory of such ‘determinant singularities’ is discussed in ). We should emphasise that both the past (S1) and future (S1, S2) singularities in the braneworld scenario occur for a wide range in parameter space and might provide an interesting alternative to the ‘big bang’/‘big crunch’ singularities of general relativity. In addition, the universe of Fig. 3 which terminates at the S2 singularity with $`\rho _m`$ constant as $`tt_s`$, provides an interesting contrast to the bleak finale presented by quintessence or cosmological-constant dominated models, in which $`\rho _m0`$ as $`t\mathrm{}`$.

Finally, we would like to draw the reader’s attention to issues which we feel require further investigation. First of all, the singularities discussed in this paper occur for the very special class of homogeneous and isotropic spaces. The singularities in this case are characterized by the property that the energy density remains bounded while the curvature blows up as one approaches the space-time singularity. It is open to question whether singularities of this kind will persist in space-times having less symmetry, including the more general anisotropic and inhomogeneous case. Secondly, as the singularity is approached and the scalar curvature of the induced metric on the brane diverges, higher-order derivative terms in the effective action for the brane become important. Taking these into account may qualitatively modify the behaviour of solutions as is the case in general relativity. Thirdly, back-reaction associated with quantum effects such as particle production and vacuum polarization may influence the behaviour of cosmological solutions in the vicinty of the singularity. We hope to return to these issues in our subsequent work.

Acknowledgments: The authors acknowledge useful discussions with Alexei Starobinsky and support from the Indo-Ukrainian program of cooperation in science and technology. The work of Yu. S. was also supported in part by the INTAS grant for project No. 2000-334.


text:
# KdV and Almost Conservation Laws

## 1. Introduction

This short survey paper is concerned with a new method to prove global well-posedness results for dispersive equations below energy spaces, namely $`H^1`$ for the Schrödinger equation and $`L^2`$ for the KdV equation.

Even though I am the single writer of this article, all the new statements that I will make below have been proved together with my collaborators J. Colliander, M. Keel, H. Takaoka and T. Tao. What started as a simple lunch at Stanford two years ago, evolved into a very fruitful collaboration in mathematics and a pleasant friendship. For whatever the reader appreciates in what follows, we all take the credit, for the mistakes, inaccuracies and the typos, I am the only one to blame!

Before starting with the story that I am set to tell, I should warn the reader that because this article is a written version of the talk that I gave at the conference on Harmonic Analysis in Mt. Holyoke College, I will not present the complete proofs of the statements, but rather the main ideas involved in them. The interested reader can check the references that I will list for a detailed proof of all the claims made. I also apologize in advance for not citing all the work that has been published in the context of well-posedness for dispersive equations. Here I will limit the bibliography to those publications that are in direct contact with the methods and the findings that I am about to describe.

We end this section with some notations. Throughout the paper we use $`C`$ to denote various constants. If $`C`$ depends on other quantities as well, this will be indicated by explicit subscripting, e.g. $`C_{u_0_2}`$ will depend on $`u_0_2`$. We use $`AB`$ to denote an estimate of the form $`ACB`$, where $`C`$ is an absolute constant. We use $`a+`$ and $`a`$ to denote expressions of the form $`a+\epsilon `$ and $`a\epsilon `$, for some $`0<\epsilon 1`$.

We use $`f_{L^p}`$ to denote the $`L^p()`$ norm. For a fixed interval of time $`[0,T]`$ and a Banach space of functions $`X`$, we denote with $`C([0,T],X)`$ the space of the continuous maps from $`[0,T]`$ to $`X`$.

We define the spatial Fourier transform of $`f(x)`$ by

$$(f)(\xi ):=\widehat{f}(\xi ):=_{}e^{ix\xi }f(x)𝑑x$$

and the spacetime Fourier transform of $`u(t,x)`$ by

$$(u)(\tau ,\xi ):=\widehat{u}(\tau ,\xi ):=_{}_{}e^{i(x\xi +t\tau )}u(t,x)𝑑t𝑑x.$$

Note that the derivative $`_x`$ is conjugated to multiplication by $`i\xi `$ by the Fourier transform. We shall also define $`D_x`$ to be the operator conjugate to multiplication by $`\xi :=1+|\xi |`$. We can then define the Sobolev norms $`H^s`$ by

$$f_{H^s}:=D_x^sf_2=\xi ^s\widehat{f}_{L_\xi ^2}.$$

## 2. Well-posedness and conservation laws

We consider the initial value problem (IVP) given by

(2.1)
$$\{\begin{array}{c}_tu+P(D)u+N(u)=0\hfill \\ u(x,0)=u_0(x),\hfill \end{array}$$

where $`t`$ and $`x^n`$ or $`𝕋^n`$, $`P(D)`$ is a differential operator with constant coefficients and $`N(u)`$ is the nonlinear part of the equation. For the moment we do not assume any special structure either for $`P(D)`$ or $`N(u)`$, we only assume that in terms of derivatives $`P(D)`$ is of at least one order higher than $`N(u)`$, in other wards we assume that the first equation in (2.1) is semilinear. The function $`u_0`$ is called the initial profile and in general we assume that $`u_0H^s`$.

We will use the following definition for well-posedness:

###### Definition 2.1.

The IVP (2.1) is locally well-posed (l.w.p.) in $`H^s`$ if for any $`u_0H^s`$ there exists $`T=T(u_0_{H^s})`$ and a unique solution $`uC([0,T],H^s)`$ for (2.1). Moreover the map that associates to each initial data its evolution is continuous.

We say that the IVP is globally well-posed  (g.w.p.) in $`H^s`$ if for any $`T>0`$ the definition above is satisfied.

The question of l.w.p is certainly the first one that one investigates. After a positive result, then one trys to extend the local result to a global one.

To convince the reader that proving well-posedness for a small interval of time is simpler than proving it for any fixed interval of large size, we briefly recall the contraction method. We first use the Duhamel principle to write (2.1) as the integral equation:

(2.2)
$$u(t,x)=W(t)u_0+_0^tW(tt^{})N(u(t^{}))𝑑t^{},$$

where $`W(t)u_0(x)`$ is the solution of the linear problem

(2.3)
$$\{\begin{array}{c}_tv+P(D)v=0\hfill \\ v(x,0)=u_0(x).\hfill \end{array}$$

If one is willing to reduce the size of the interval of existence of the solution then one can replace (2.2) with

(2.4)
$$u(t,x)=\psi (t/\delta )W(t)u_0+\psi (t/\delta )_0^tW(tt^{})N(u(t^{}))𝑑t^{},$$

where $`\psi (t)`$ is a smooth cut-off function for the interval $`[2,2]`$. We can still claim that $`u`$ solves (2.1) in $`[0,\delta ]`$ if and only if $`u`$ solves (2.4) in the same interval. Now, consider the operator

(2.5)
$$Lv(t,x)=\psi (t/\delta )W(t)u_0+\psi (t/\delta )_0^tW(tt^{})N(v(t^{}))𝑑t^{},$$

and assume that we are able to prove that there exists a Banach space $`X^s`$ and $`s_0,`$ such that for any $`ss_0`$ we have $`X^sC(,H^s)`$ and

(2.6) $`\psi (t/\delta )W(t)u_0_{X^s}C_0u_0_{H^s},`$
(2.7) $`\psi (t/\delta ){\displaystyle _0^t}W(tt^{})N(v(t^{}))𝑑t^{}_{X^s}C_1\delta ^\alpha u_{X^s}F(u_{X^{s_0}}),`$
(2.8) $`\psi (t/\delta ){\displaystyle _0^t}W(tt^{})[N(v_1(t^{}))N(v_2(t^{}))]𝑑t^{}_{X^s}`$
$`C_1\delta ^\alpha \mathrm{max}[\stackrel{~}{F}(v_1_{X^{s_0}}),\stackrel{~}{F}(v_2_{X^{s_0}})]v_1v_2_{X^s},`$
where $`\alpha >0`$, and $`F,\stackrel{~}{F}:^+`$ are functions bounded on bounded sets. If we set $`a=2C_0u_0_{H^{s_0}}`$ and we take $`\delta ^\alpha =1/4(C_1\mathrm{max}[F(a),\stackrel{~}{F}(a)])^1`$, then the operator $`L`$ defined in (2.5) maps the ball $`B_a`$ in $`X^s`$ centered at the origin and radius $`a`$ into itself and is a contraction. Hence a unique fixed point exists and this is the unique solution for (2.1). Using a combination of (2.6) and (2.8) one also obtains, for free, the continuity with respect to the initial data.

Arguably, this method has been used to prove the best results on local well-posedness for a variety of dispersive equations (see , , , , and , just to name a few).

We assume now for simplicity that $`N(u)`$, the nonlinear part of the equation, is polynomial and that again (2.6), (2.7) and (2.8) still hold. Then the method we just described gives well-posedness in $`H^s,ss_0`$ in an interval of time $`[0,T]`$ such that

(2.9)
$$T=Cu_0_{H^{s_0}}^\beta ,$$

for some $`\beta >0`$. We discuss now how to extend this short time result to a long time one.

Accordingly to (2.9), if we are willing to restrict our result to data small in $`H^s`$, then we can enlarge the time of existence. But this is not our goal here. We are looking in fact for a long time well-posedness for any initial data in $`H^s`$!.

The first attempt that one can try is to iterate the short time result. Again by looking at (2.9), it is clear that the obstacle in doing so will be the growth of $`H^{s_0}`$ norm of the solution $`u(t)`$ of (2.1). It is at this stage that uniform bounds for the Sobolev norms of the solution $`u`$ are needed and the conservation laws are the first source for such bounds.

The existence of useful conservation laws depends on the structure of the equation in (2.1). So to continue our general exposition in this first section we do not write explicitly any conservation laws involving the solution $`u`$, but instead we assume a consequence of them, whenever they are available, that is we assume that there exists $`s_{}`$ such that

(2.10)
$$u(t)_{H^s_{}}C^{},$$

where $`C^{}`$ does not depend on $`t`$. If now $`s_{}s_0`$, then by (2.9) and (2.10) we can take $`T^{}=C(C^{})^\beta `$ and iterate the local well-posedness result presented above. In the rest of the paper we will refer to this as the method of conservation laws.

We consider now two special examples of the IVP (2.1). We start with the cubic defocusing Schrödinger equation in $`^2`$:

(2.11)
$$\{\begin{array}{c}i_tu+\mathrm{\Delta }u|u|^2u=0,\hfill \\ u(x,0)=u_0(x).\hfill \end{array}$$

There are two conservation laws for this problem: the Hamiltonian

(2.12)
$$_^2\frac{1}{2}|u|^2(x,t)+\frac{1}{4}|u|^4(x,t)dx=C_1,$$

and the $`L^2`$ norm

(2.13)
$$_^2|u|^2(x,t)𝑑x=C_0.$$

Using the Gagliardo-Nirenberg inequality, (2.12) and (2.13), one obtains (2.10) for $`s_{}=1`$. On the other hand one can prove111and this is sharp! that if $`s>0`$ then the IVP (2.11) is well-posed in $`H^s`$ for an interval of time $`[0,T]`$, where $`Tu_0_{H^s}^\beta `$, for some $`\beta >0`$, (see  and ). Then by the method of conservation laws presented above one obtains global well-posedness for $`s1`$. So this method leaves the gap $`s(0,1)`$ open because the l.w.p., in the sense defined here, is barely missed at $`s=0`$, where the next conservation laws (2.13) could have been used!

Next we pass to the KdV initial value problem

(2.14)
$$\{\begin{array}{c}_tu+_xu+\frac{1}{2}_xu^2=0,\hfill \\ u(x,0)=u_0(x),\hfill \end{array}$$

where $`x`$ or $`𝕋`$. The KdV equation is special, in fact it enjoys infinitely many conserved integrals. Here we recall only the first four of them (notice that here $`u`$ is a real function!):

(2.15) $`{\displaystyle u(x,t)𝑑x}=C_0`$
(2.16) $`{\displaystyle u^2(x,t)𝑑x}=C_1`$
(2.17) $`{\displaystyle _xu^2}+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}u^3=C_2`$
(2.18) $`{\displaystyle (_x^2u)^2}{\displaystyle \frac{5}{3}}u(_xu)^2+{\displaystyle \frac{5}{9}}u^4=C_3.`$
Bourgain proved local well-posedness in $`L^2`$, hence by (2.16) and the method of conservation laws, global well-posedness in $`L^2`$ . Later Kenig, Ponce and Vega showed that the IVP (2.14) on the line is locally well-posed in $`H^s,s>3/4`$, leaving the gap $`s(3/4,0)`$ open for global well-posedness. Similarly they proved that KdV on the circle is locally well-posed in $`H^s,s1/2`$, leaving here the gap $`s[1/2,0)`$.

Similar results to the ones presented here for the IVP (2.11) and (2.14) are available, with the obvious changes, also for the modified KdV equations  , the 1D Schrödinger equation with derivative nonlinearity , the KP-II equation  and the Zakharov system .

###### Remark 2.2.

The method of conservation laws has two types of limitations. In general they only provide bounds for the $`H^1`$ norm (coming from the Hamiltonian), and the $`L^2`$ norm. Hence when good local results are available for rough data222 So far this has only been proved in low dimensions., these uniform bounds are not enough to cover all the possible indices $`s`$, and gaps are left as we showed above. The second limitation is that in higher dimensions well-posedness results are available only for relatively smooth data (in general in $`H^{s_n}`$, where $`n`$ is the dimension and $`s_n>n/2`$). Then again uniform bounds in $`H^1`$ and $`L^2`$ are not enough (at least not yet!) to control these higher Sobolev norms.

## 3. The method of Bourgain

The method that we are about to describe is used to prove global well-posedness for rough initial data in low dimensions. It partially solves the first limitation of the method of conservation laws discussed in Remark 2.2. This method was first introduced by Bourgain  who considered the cubic, defocusing NLS on $`^2`$, ( but soon the reader will appreciate its generality).
As recalled above, for this IVP, the method of conservation laws leaves the gap $`(0,1)`$ between l.w.p and g.w.p.. So assume that $`u_0H^s`$ and $`s<1`$. We split $`u_0=\varphi _0+\psi _0`$, such that

(3.1)
$$\widehat{\varphi _0}(\xi )=\chi _{\{|\xi |N\}}\widehat{u_0}(\xi )\widehat{\psi _0}(\xi )=\chi _{\{|\xi |>N\}}\widehat{u_0}(\xi ),$$

that is we decompose $`u_0`$ into low and high frequency parts. One can immediately observe that the low frequency part $`\varphi _0`$ is smoother, but has a large norm:

$$\varphi _0_{H^1}N,$$

while the high frequency part $`\psi _0`$ clearly does not improve its smoothness, but its lower order norms are small:

$$\psi _0_{H^\sigma }N^{\sigma s},\text{ for }\sigma s.$$

Then we evolve these two initial data. We call $`u^0`$ the evolution of the low frequency part $`\varphi _0`$ under the equation in (2.11). We call $`v^0`$ the evolution of the high frequency part $`\psi _0`$ under the difference equation

$$i_tv^0+\mathrm{\Delta }v^0=|v^0+u^0|^2(v^0+u^0)|u^0|^2u^0.$$

We can rewrite $`v^0(t,x)=S(t)\psi _0(x)+w^0(t,x)`$, where $`e^{it\mathrm{\Delta }}\psi _0(x)`$ is the solution of the associated linear problem

(3.2)
$$\{\begin{array}{c}i_tv+\mathrm{\Delta }v=0,\hfill \\ v(x,0)=\psi _0(x).\hfill \end{array}$$

and

$$w^0(t,x)=_0^tS(tt^{})(|v^0+u^0|^2(v^0+u^0)|u^0|^2u^0)𝑑t^{}$$

is the nonlinear part. Clearly $`u^0(t)+v^0(t)=u(t)`$, where $`u`$ is the solution of (2.11). There are two key parts in Bourgain’s argument. The first is that there exists $`\delta =\delta (\varphi _0_{H^1})>0`$ such that both $`u^0(t)`$ and $`v^0(t)`$ are defined for $`t[0,\delta ]`$. The second, more surprising333The reader should appreciate the remarkable fact that the nonlinear part of the evolution of the high frequency of the initial data is smoother than the data itself and small in the energy norm, hence it can be treated as an error!, is that

$$w^0_{H^1}\frac{1}{N^\alpha },\text{ for some }\alpha =\alpha (s)>0.$$

This is now the right set up for iteration. At this point we know that the unique solution $`u(x,t)=u^0(x,t)=v^0(x,t)`$ lives for all times in $`[0,\delta ]`$. To proceed from $`\delta `$ to $`2\delta `$ we start a new IVP at time $`\delta `$ by assigning the new initial data

$`\varphi _1`$ $`=`$ $`u^0(\delta )+w^0(\delta )`$
$`\psi _1`$ $`=`$ $`e^{i\delta \mathrm{\Delta }}\psi _0`$
and we repeat the argument above. An iteration like this would work on any finite interval $`[0,T]`$, as long as the total error is at most comparable with the size of $`\varphi _0_{H^1}`$, the quantity that defines $`\delta `$, that is

$$\underset{1}{\overset{M}{}}w^i_{H^1}\varphi _0_{H^1}N,$$

where $`M\delta ^1T`$. By simple calculations on the explicit formula for $`\delta `$ and $`\alpha (s)`$ that we do not report here, one obtains the following result

###### Theorem 3.1 (Bourgain).

The Shrödinger IVP (2.11) in $`^2`$ is globally well-posed in $`H^s`$ for $`s>3/5`$.

Using this method several authors extended global well-posedness results for variety of equations, see for example  for the KdV equation,  for the modified KdV,  for wave equations,  and  for the KP-II equation and  for the Schrödinger equations with derivative nonlinearity.

## 4. The almost conservation laws: a first attempt

We restrict the description of this method to the KdV initial value problem (2.14). We remark at the end on the applications to other equations.

To help the reader in understanding this method we decided to reproduce in a coherent way the evolution of thoughts that guided us to our recent findings. We start by proving the conservation of the $`L^2`$-norm for the solution $`u`$ of (2.14) by integration by parts. We refer to this proof as a proof in physical space in contrast with another one that we will give later and that will be performed in frequency space. If we multiply the equation in (2.14) by $`u`$ we obtain

$$\frac{1}{2}_tu^2=_x(u_x^2u)+_x\left(\frac{1}{2}[_xu]^2\right)\frac{1}{3}_xu^3$$

and integration over the line, or in the periodic case, over the circle, we obtain the desired identity

(4.1)
$$\frac{d}{dt}u_{L^2}^2=0.$$

This type of proof does not involve any analysis of the interaction of frequencies, which we believe is the key to understand the evolution not just of the of the $`L^2`$, but also of the $`H^s`$ norms, for any $`s`$.

We recall that in Section 2 we observed that the method of conservation laws cannot establish global results for (2.14) on the line, when the initial data $`u_0H^s`$ for $`s(3/4,0)`$. So we assume that $`s<0`$. There are no conservation laws, that we are aware of, for the $`H^s`$ norm, when $`s`$ is negative, hence some new idea has to be considered. We borrow from Bourgain  the splitting process into low and high frequency, but this time the splitting is done in a smooth way and on the solution $`u`$ itself, not the initial data. This argument has been successfully used by Keel and Tao for the 1D wave map problem . So we consider the multiplier

(4.2)
$$\widehat{Iu}(\xi )=m(\xi )\widehat{u}(\xi ),m(\xi )=\{\begin{array}{cc}1,& |\xi |<N,\\ N^s|\xi |^s,& |\xi |10N\end{array}$$

where $`m`$ is smooth and monotone and $`N`$ is a large number to be fixed later. The operator $`I`$ (barely) maps $`H^s()L^2()`$. Observe that on low frequencies $`\{\xi :|\xi |<N\},I`$ is the identity operator. Note also that $`I`$ commutes with differential operators. We now want to repeat the argument presented above to prove the conservation of the $`L^2`$ norm, but this time for $`Iu(t)_{L^2}`$. Using the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, the equation, and integration by parts, we have

$`Iu(t)_{L^2}^2`$ $`=`$ $`Iu(0)_{L^2}^2+{\displaystyle _0^t}{\displaystyle \frac{d}{d\tau }}(Iu(\tau ),Iu(\tau ))𝑑\tau ,`$
$`=`$ $`Iu(0)_{L^2}^2+2{\displaystyle _0^t}(I\dot{u}(\tau ),Iu(\tau ))𝑑\tau ,`$
$`=`$ $`Iu(0)_{L^2}^2+2{\displaystyle _0^t}(I(u_{xxx}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}_x[u^2])(\tau ),Iu(\tau ))𝑑\tau `$
$`=`$ $`Iu(0)_{L^2}^2+{\displaystyle _0^t}(I(_x[u^2]),Iu)𝑑\tau ,`$
where $`(,)`$ is the scalar product in $`L^2`$. The error that could make $`Iu(t)_{L^2}`$ too large in the future is

(4.4)
$$R(t)=_0^t(I(_x[u^2]),Iu)𝑑\tau .$$

The idea is to use local well-posedness estimates to show that locally in time $`R(t)`$ is small. To do so we first have to recall the precise local well-posedness result of Kenig, Ponce and Vega . We define the space $`X^{s,b},s,b`$ as the closure of the Schwartz’s functions with respect to the norm

$$f_{X^{s,b}}=\left(_^2|\widehat{f}|^2(\xi ,\tau )(1+|\xi |)^{2s}(1+|\tau \xi ^3|)^{2b}\right)^{1/2}.$$

Observe that for $`b>1/2`$, it follows that $`X^{s,b}C([0,T],H^s)`$. Kenig, Ponce and Vega proved the following bilinear estimate

###### Theorem 4.1 (Kenig-Ponce-Vega).

For $`s>3/4`$ and $`b>1/2`$, there exists $`b^{}<b`$ such that

(4.5)
$$_x(uv)_{X^{s,b^{}1}}u_{X^{s,b}}v_{X^{s,b}}.$$

Moreover if $`s<3/4`$, there is no $`b`$ and $`b^{}`$ such that (4.5) is true.

This bilinear estimate is essential to obtain an estimate like (2.7) and hence to use a fixed point theorem. The local well-posedness result can be summarized in the following theorem. Assume that $`\psi (t)`$ is a cut-off function relative to the interval $`[2,2]`$, .

###### Theorem 4.2 (Kenig-Ponce-Vega).

For any $`u_0H^s,s>3/4`$ there exist $`T=C(u_0_{H^s})^\alpha `$ and a unique solution $`u`$ for (2.14) such that $`u`$ exists for all $`t[T,T]`$ and in particular

$$\psi (/T)u_{X^{s,b}}Cu_0_{H^s}.$$

A modification of this theorem can be proved when we introduce the multiplier operator $`I`$. In fact we have

###### Theorem 4.3.

For any $`u_0H^s,s>3/2`$ there exist $`T=C(Iu_0_{L^2})^\alpha `$ and a unique solution $`u`$ for (2.14) such that $`u`$ exists for all $`t[T,T]`$ and in particular

(4.6)
$$\psi (/T)Iu_{X^{0,b}}CIu_0_{L^2}.$$

Now let’s go back to the estimate of the error $`R(t)`$. Using Plancherel

$`|R(t)|`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle _{}}{\displaystyle _{}}|\widehat{_xI(u^2)}|(\xi ,\tau )(1+|\xi |)^s(1+|\tau \xi ^3|)^{b^{}1}`$
$`\times `$ $`|\widehat{\chi _tIu}|(\xi ,\tau )(1+|\xi |)^s(1+|\tau \xi ^3|)^{b^{}+1}d\xi d\tau ,`$
where $`\chi _t`$ is the characteristic function of $`[0,t]`$. Then by the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality we have

(4.7)
$$|R(t)|_xI(u^2)_{X^{0,1b^{}}}Iu_{X^{0,1b^{}}}.$$

Hence if we could prove a bilinear inequality like

(4.8)
$$_xI(u^2)_{X^{0,1b^{}}}N^\beta Iu_{X^{0,b}}^2,$$

for some $`\beta >0`$, then we would be done because the factor $`N^\beta `$, would make the error small 444This will be explained in more details in Theorem 4.5.. But unfortunately, even though (4.8) looks a lot like (4.5), it is false 555This is not obvious at first sight, for more explanation one should consult . due to the interaction of very low frequencies ($`|\xi |<<N`$) with very large frequencies ($`|\xi |>>N`$). But not everything is lost, in fact we can introduce for free a suitable cancellation666This cancellation is recognaseble once one writes the expression in Fourier transform and uses the mean value theorem, see  for a precise calculation. by rewriting (4.4) as

(4.9)
$$R(t)=_0^t_x\left\{(I(u))^2I(u^2)\right\}Iudxd\tau ,$$

and we replace (4.7) with

(4.10)
$$|R(t)|_x\{(I(u))^2I(u^2)\}_{X^{0,1b^{}}}Iu_{X^{0,1b^{}}}.$$

Now the following desired proposition is true (see )

###### Proposition 4.4.

(Extra smoothing) The bilinear estimate

(4.11)
$$_x\{I(u)I(v)I(uv)_{X^{0,1/2}}CN^{\frac{3}{4}+}Iu_{X^{0,1/2+}}Iv_{X^{0,1/2+}}.$$

holds.

Combining (4) with (4.10) and (4.11), we obtain the almost conservation law777We refer to these types of estimate as almost conservation laws because of the presence of the decaying factor $`N^\beta `$.

(4.12)
$$Iu(t)_{L^2}^2Iu(0)_{L^2}^2+CN^{\frac{3}{4}+}Iu_{X^{0,1/2+}}^3.$$

In proving the following theorem we describe in detail how one obtains a global result by an iteration based on (4.12).

###### Theorem 4.5.

The initial value problem (2.14) is globally well posed in $`H^s`$ for all $`s`$ such that $`s>3/10`$.

###### Proof.

The proof is taken from . Global well-posedness of (2.14) will follow if we show well-posedness on $`[0,T]`$ for arbitrary $`T>0`$. We renormalize things a bit via scaling. If $`u`$ solves (2.14) then $`u_\lambda (x,t)=(\frac{1}{\lambda })^2u(\frac{x}{\lambda },\frac{t}{\lambda ^3})`$ solves (2.14) with initial data

(4.13)
$$u_{0,\lambda }(x,t)=\left(\frac{1}{\lambda }\right)^2u_0\left(\frac{x}{\lambda }\right).$$

Note that $`u`$ exists on $`[0,T]`$ if and only if $`u_\lambda `$ exists on $`[0,\lambda ^3T]`$. A calculation shows that

(4.14)
$$Iu_{0,\lambda }_{L^2}C\lambda ^{\frac{3}{2}s}N^su_0_{H^s}.$$

Here $`N=N(T)`$ will be selected later but we choose $`\lambda =\lambda (N)`$ right now by requiring

(4.15)
$$C\lambda ^{\frac{3}{2}s}N^su_0_{H^s}1\lambda N^{\frac{2s}{3+2s}}.$$

We now drop the $`\lambda `$ subscript on $`u_0`$ by assuming that

(4.16)
$$Iu_0_{L^2}=ϵ_01,$$

and our goal is to construct the solution of (2.14) on the time interval $`[0,\lambda ^3T]`$.

The local well-posedness result of Theorem 4.3 shows we can construct the solution for $`t[0,1]`$ if we choose $`ϵ_0`$ small enough. Using (4.6) and (4.16), the almost $`L^2`$ conservation property (4.12) we obtain

$$Iu(1)_2^2ϵ_0^2+N^{\frac{3}{4}+}.$$

We can iterate this process $`N^{\frac{3}{4}}`$ times before doubling $`Iu(t)_{L^2}`$. Therefore, we advance the solution by taking $`N^{\frac{3}{4}}`$ time steps of size $`O(1)`$. We now restrict $`s`$ by demanding that

(4.17)
$$N^{\frac{3}{4}}\lambda ^3T=N^{\frac{6s}{3+2s}}T$$

is ensured for large enough $`N`$, so $`s>\frac{3}{10}`$. ∎

## 5. The almost conservation laws: the final version

The cancellation that we introduced in (4.10), and that can be seen explicitly in frequency space by taking Fourier transforms, led us to try to understand more deeply the interaction of frequencies during the evolution of the solution $`u(x,t)`$ of (2.14). For this purpose we propose here a proof in frequency space of the $`L^2`$ conservation law for the solution of (2.14). By the Plancherel theorem we have

$`u(t)_{L^2}^2={\displaystyle \widehat{u}(\xi )\overline{\widehat{u}}(\xi )𝑑\xi }={\displaystyle \widehat{u}(\xi )\widehat{\overline{u}}(\xi )𝑑\xi }={\displaystyle _{\xi _1+\xi _2=0}}\widehat{u}(\xi _1)\widehat{u}(\xi _2)𝑑\xi _1𝑑\xi _2,`$
since $`u`$ is $``$-valued. Therefore, by substituting in the equation we obtain

$`_t{\displaystyle \widehat{u}(\xi )\overline{\widehat{u}}(\xi )𝑑\xi }`$ $`=`$ $`2{\displaystyle _{\xi _1+\xi _2=0}}\widehat{u_t}(\xi _1)\widehat{u}(\xi _2)𝑑\xi _1𝑑\xi _2`$
$`=`$ $`2{\displaystyle _{\xi _1+\xi _2=0}}\left[(i\xi _1)^3\widehat{u}(\xi _1){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(i\xi _1)\widehat{u^2}(\xi _1)\right]\widehat{u}(\xi _2)𝑑\xi _1𝑑\xi _2.`$
Now we symmetrize the first term and we expand the convolution to get

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dt}}{\displaystyle u^2(x)𝑑x}`$ $`=`$ $`_t{\displaystyle \widehat{u}(\xi )\overline{\widehat{u}}(\xi )𝑑\xi }={\displaystyle _{\xi _1+\xi _2=0}}i(\xi _1^3+\xi _2^3)\widehat{u}(\xi _1)\widehat{u}(\xi _2)𝑑\xi _1𝑑\xi _2`$
$`{\displaystyle _{\xi _1+\xi _2+\xi _3=0}}i(\xi _1+\xi _2)\widehat{u}(\xi _1)\widehat{u}(\xi _2)\widehat{u}(\xi _3)𝑑\xi _1𝑑\xi _2𝑑\xi _3.`$
The first term is clearly zero. Upon writing $`\xi _1+\xi _2=\xi _3`$ and symmetrizing, the second term vanishes too. This symmetrization/cancellation describes the non linear interaction of the frequencies of the solution $`u`$ for the KdV equation in (2.14). We stress here once more that we think this is an important mechanism to understand in order to keep track of the various pieces of $`\widehat{u}`$ once we perform a frequency localization like we did by introducing the multiplier operator $`I`$.

It is time now to introduce some notation that will make the rest of our presentation less cumbersome. We start with the following definitions:

###### Definition 5.1.

A $`k`$-multiplier $`m`$ is a function $`m:^k`$. A $`k`$-multiplier is symmetric if $`m(\xi )=m(\sigma (\xi ))`$ for all $`\sigma S_k`$. The symmetrization of a $`k`$-multiplier is

$$[m]_{sym}(\xi )=\frac{1}{n!}\underset{\sigma S_k}{}m(\sigma (\xi )).$$

A $`k`$-multiplier generates the $`k`$-linear functional via the integration

(5.1)
$$\mathrm{\Lambda }_k(m)=_{A_k}m(\xi _1,\mathrm{}\xi _k)\widehat{u}(\xi _1)\mathrm{}\widehat{u}(\xi _k),$$

where $`A_k=\{(\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _k)/\xi _1+\mathrm{}+\xi _k=0\}`$.

We immediately observe that we can rewrite $`Iu_{L^2}`$ using the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ notation above. In fact

$$Iu(t)_{L^2}^2=_{A_2}m(\xi _1m(\xi _2)\widehat{u}(\xi _1,t)\widehat{u}(\xi _2,t)=\mathrm{\Lambda }_2(m(\xi _1)m(\xi _2)).$$

It is then clear the purpose of next proposition:

###### Proposition 5.2.

Suppose $`u`$ satisfies the KdV equation, and $`m`$ is a symmetric $`k`$-multiplier and

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }_k(m)=_{A_k}m(\xi _1,\mathrm{}\xi _k)\widehat{u}(\xi _1)\mathrm{}\widehat{u}(\xi _k),$$

is the $`k`$-linear functional generated by $`m`$. Then

(5.2)
$$\frac{d}{dt}\mathrm{\Lambda }_k(m)=\mathrm{\Lambda }_k(m\alpha _k)i\frac{k}{2}\mathrm{\Lambda }_{k+1}\left(\stackrel{~}{m}(\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _{k+1})\right),$$

where

$$\alpha _k=i(\xi _1^3+\mathrm{}+\xi _k^3)$$

and

$$\stackrel{~}{m}(\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _{k+1})=m(\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _{k1},[\xi _k+\xi _{k+1}])(\xi _k+\xi _{k+1}).$$

We now describe the general principle behind the almost conservation laws.

Let $`m`$ be an $``$-valued even 1-multiplier. Define again the multiplier operator888This is the same operator introduced in Section 4 when we take $`m`$ as in (4.2). $`I`$ via

$$\widehat{If}(\xi )=m(\xi )\widehat{f}(\xi ).$$

For convenience of notation we rename $`E_I^1(t)=u(t)_{H^s}^2`$ and

$$E_I^2(t)=Iu(t)_{L^2}^2=\mathrm{\Lambda }_2(m(\xi _1)m(\xi _2)).$$

Our goal now is to define a hierarchy of modified energies $`E_I^i(t),i=2,3,\mathrm{}`$ for the solution of the IVP (2.14) such that, when $`m`$ is like in (4.2),

(5.3) $`u(t)_{H^s}E_I^i(t)E_I^{i+1}(t),`$
(5.4) $`(E_I^{i+1}(b)E_I^{i+1}(a))<<(E_I^i(b)E_I^i(a)),`$
for any fixed interval $`[a,b]`$. In other words we want to find better generations of energies that are comparable to the original norm $`u(t)_{H^s}`$, but which increments decrease as the generations evolve.

We now present an algorithm that formally999At this stage not all the mathematical quantities that we write are proven to make sense, we will worry about this later, for the moment we just want to give the original flow of ideas that brought us to rigorous and useful results! provides improved generations of energies. Using Proposition 5.2 we calculate

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dt}}E_I^2(t)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_2(m(\xi _1)m(\xi _2)\alpha _2)i\mathrm{\Lambda }_3(m(\xi _1)m(\xi _2+\xi _3)[\xi _2+\xi _3])`$
$`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_3(i[m(\xi _1)m(\xi _2+\xi _3)(\xi _2+\xi _3)]_{sym}).`$
We should point out that for $`m`$ as in (4.2)

$$R(t)=_0^t\mathrm{\Lambda }_3(i[m(\xi _1)m(\xi _2+\xi _3)(\xi _2+\xi _3)]_{sym})𝑑s$$

where $`R(t)`$ is the error defined in Section 4. We proved in Proposition 4.4 that even though $`R(t)`$ is a threelinear expression coming from a bilinear expression such as $`E_I^2`$, the symmetrization101010This is what we called then cancellation. allows us to obtain a decay in $`N`$ which is in fact what gives (5.4). So our goal is to push this idea further in the following way: we first denote

(5.5)
$$M_3(\xi _1,\xi _2,\xi _3)=i([m(\xi _1)m(\xi _2+\xi _3)(\xi _2+\xi _3)]_{sym}).$$

Then we define the third generation of modified energy as

$$E_I^3(t)=E_I^2(t)+\mathrm{\Lambda }_3(\sigma _3),$$

where $`\sigma _3`$ is a multiplier that will be chosen later. Now again by Proposition 5.2 we have

$$\frac{d}{dt}E_I^3(t)=\mathrm{\Lambda }_3(M_3)+\mathrm{\Lambda }_3(\sigma _3\alpha _3)+\mathrm{\Lambda }_4(M_4),$$

where

(5.6)
$$M_4(\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _4)=\sigma _3(\xi _3+\xi _4).$$

We choose $`\sigma _3`$ to cancel the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_3`$ terms, that is

$$\sigma _3=\frac{M_3}{\alpha _3}.$$

Because $`\alpha _3=_{i=1}^3\xi _i^3`$, we expect that

(5.7)
$$|M_4|=\left|M_3\frac{(\xi _3+\xi _4)}{\alpha _3}\right||M_3|,$$

and hence (5.4). Certainly at this point our expectation is a pure leap of faith because anybody could argue that when111111 The reader should observe that $`_{i=1}^3\xi _i^3=0`$ is the relationship that defines the resonance set of three wave interaction! $`_{i=1}^3\xi _i^3=0`$, the left hand side of the expression in (5.7) would become infinity unless a miraculous cancellation occurs in the numerator. What really amazed us was that indeed such a miracle happens! The “miracle” is a combination of the type of frequency cancellation that we observed in the proof of the $`L^2`$ conservation law via the frequency method, with several applications of the Mean Value Theorem that we can perform since we are assuming that the multiplier $`m`$ is smooth, see  for details.

The process we described above may be iterated to formally generate a sequence of modified energies $`\{E_I^j(t)\}_{j=2}^{\mathrm{}}`$, with the property that

$$\frac{d}{dt}E_I^j(t)=\mathrm{\Lambda }_{j+1}(M_{j+1}).$$

The hard part of the argument is to present a rigorous proof for the statement

(5.8)
$$|M_{j+1}|<<|M_j|$$

in an appropriate sense!

Before we proceed to a less formal, but more technical discussion on the algorithm above, we want to convince the reader that in principle our method could be used to recover all the conservation laws that the KdV equation enjoys. We didn’t set to the onerous task of checking this in detail, but we can show at least an example that is not trivial, see also , the paper where this computation first appeared.

We first specify the multiplier $`m`$ by setting $`m(\xi )=i\xi `$. Then

$$E^2(t)=_xu_{L^2}^2=\mathrm{\Lambda }_2((i\xi _1)(i\xi _2)).$$

Next we define $`E^3(t)=E^2(t)+\mathrm{\Lambda }_3(\sigma _3)`$, and we use Proposition 5.2 to see that

$$_tE^3(t)=\mathrm{\Lambda }_3([i(\xi _1+\xi _2)i\xi _3\{\xi _1+\xi _2\}]_{sym})+\mathrm{\Lambda }_3(\sigma _3\alpha _3)+\mathrm{\Lambda }_4(M_4),$$

where $`M_4`$ is explicitly obtained from $`\sigma _3`$. Noting that $`i(\xi _1+\xi _2)i\xi _3\{\xi _1+\xi _2\}=\xi _3^3`$ on the set $`\xi _1+\xi _2+\xi _3=0`$, we know that

$$_tE^3(t)=\mathrm{\Lambda }_3(\frac{1}{3}\alpha _3)+\mathrm{\Lambda }_3(\sigma _3\alpha _3)+\mathrm{\Lambda }_4(M_4).$$

The choice of $`\sigma _3=\frac{1}{3}`$ results in a cancellation of the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_3`$ terms and

$$M_4=[\{\xi _1+\xi _2\}]_{sym}=\xi _1+\xi _2+\xi _3+\xi _4,$$

so $`M_4=0`$. Therefore, $`E^3(t)=\mathrm{\Lambda }_2((i\xi _1)(i\xi _2))+\mathrm{\Lambda }_3(\frac{1}{3})`$ is an exactly conserved quantity. The modified energy construction applied to the Dirichlet energy $`_xu_{L^2}^2`$ led us to the Hamiltonian for KdV described in (2.17). Applying the construction to higher order derivatives in $`L^2`$ we expect that will similarly lead to the higher conservation laws of KdV.

Assume now that the initial data $`u_0`$ of our IVP is in $`H^s,s(3/4,0)`$. Let $`m`$ be the multiplier defined in (4.2).

Using multilinear type estimate one can show that

(5.9)
$$u(t)_{H^s}E_I^2(t)E_I^4(t).$$

But the hart of the matter is the following proposition

###### Proposition 5.3.

For fixed $`T>0`$

(5.10)
$$E_I^4(T)E_I^4(0)=_0^T\mathrm{\Lambda }_5(M_5)(\tau )𝑑\tau C_TN^{3+ϵ}Iu_{X^{0,1/2+}}^5.$$

For a complete proof see .

At this point probably the reader would like to ask the following question: Why did we stop at $`E_I^4`$? The obvious answer that we can give is that we stopped because the decay of the increment of this modified energy, given by (5.10), is enough to obtain the best possible result:

###### Theorem 5.4.

The IVP (2.14) is globally well-posed in $`H^s`$ for $`s>3/4`$.

But there is a much deeper reason why we didn’t pursue the estimates of the increment of the energies $`E_I^k`$, for $`k>4`$. The formal expression for the increment of these energies becomes more and more complex. Nice algebraic properties like (5.11) and (5.12) below are no longer available! Also it seems to us that the reason why we didn’t need to estimate the increment for all the modified energies is that $`3/4`$ is larger than the scaling index121212The scaling index is the the Sobolev index $`s_c`$ such that the rescaled initial data $`u_{0,\lambda }`$ defined in (4.13) has the property that $`u_{0,\lambda }_{\dot{H}^{s_c}}`$ is independent of $`\lambda `$., which, in this case, is $`3/2`$.

The proof of Theorem 5.4 is similar to the proof of Theorem 4.5 if one uses (5.9) and replaces (4.12) with (5.10), see  for details.

To give an idea of the type of miracle that makes (5.8) analytically correct we consider $`M_4`$, defined in (5.6). The complete estimate of $`M_4`$ is very involved, so we will restrict ourselves to some special cases. The computations that follow are directly taken from . We recall the following arithmetic facts that may be easily verified:

(5.11)
$$\xi _1+\xi _2+\xi _3=0\alpha _3=\xi _1^3+\xi _2^3+\xi _3^3=3\xi _1\xi _2\xi _3.$$

(5.12)
$$\xi _1+\xi _2+\xi _3+\xi _4=0\alpha _4=\xi _1^3+\xi _2^3+\xi _3^3+\xi _4^3=3(\xi _1+\xi _2)(\xi _1+\xi _3)(\xi _1+\xi _4).$$

Recall that,

(5.13)
$$M_4(\xi _1,\xi _2,\xi _3,\xi _4)=c[\sigma _3(\xi _1,\xi _2,\xi _3+\xi _4)(\xi _3+\xi _4)]_{sym},$$

where $`\sigma _3=\frac{M_3}{\alpha _3}`$ and

$`M_3(x_1,x_2,x_3)`$ $`=`$ $`i[m(x_1)m(x_2+x_3)(x_2+x_3)]_{sym}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{i}{3}}[m^2(x_1)x_1+m^2(x_2)x_2+m^2(x_3)x_3],`$
and by (5.11) $`\alpha _3(x_1,x_2,x_3)=x_1^3+x_2^3+x_3^3=3x_1x_2x_3`$. We shall ignore the irrelevant constant in (5.13). Therefore,

(5.15)
$$M_4(\xi _1,\xi _2,\xi _3,\xi _4)=\frac{1}{2}\left[\frac{m^2(\xi _1)\xi _1+m^2(\xi _2)\xi _2+m^2(\xi _3+\xi _4)(\xi _3+\xi _4)}{3\xi _1\xi _2}\right]_{sym}$$

$$=\frac{1}{2}\left[\frac{2m^2(\xi _1)\xi _1+m^2(\xi _3+\xi _4)(\xi _3+\xi _4)}{3\xi _1\xi _2}\right]_{sym}.$$

Using the identity (5.12) and lots of symmetrizations and clever tricks like in , one can reexpress $`M_4`$ as

(5.16)
$$M_4(\xi _1,\xi _2,\xi _3,\xi _4)=\frac{1}{36}\frac{1}{\xi _1\xi _2\xi _3\xi _4}\times $$

$`\{`$ $`\xi _1\xi _2\xi _3[m^2(\xi _1)+m^2(\xi _2)+m^2(\xi _3)m^2(\xi _1+\xi _2)m^2(\xi _1+\xi _3)m^2(\xi _1+\xi _4)]`$
$`+`$ $`\xi _1\xi _2\xi _4[m^2(\xi _1)+m^2(\xi _2)+m^2(\xi _4)m^2(\xi _1+\xi _2)m^2(\xi _1+\xi _3)m^2(\xi _1+\xi _4)]`$
$`+`$ $`\xi _1\xi _3\xi _4[m^2(\xi _1)+m^2(\xi _3)+m^2(\xi _4)m^2(\xi _1+\xi _2)m^2(\xi _1+\xi _3)m^2(\xi _1+\xi _4)]`$
$`+`$ $`\xi _2\xi _3\xi _4[m^2(\xi _2)+m^2(\xi _3)+m^2(\xi _4)m^2(\xi _1+\xi _2)m^2(\xi _1+\xi _3)m^2(\xi _1+\xi _4)]\}.`$
Assume now that $`m`$ is like in (4.2) and that $`\xi _i=0`$ for $`i=1,\mathrm{},4`$. Then obviously $`M_4=0`$. To make things more interesting let’s now assume that only $`\xi _1=0`$. Then the numerator of $`M_4`$ takes the form of

$$\xi _2\xi _3\xi _4[m^2(\xi _2)+m^2(\xi _3)+m^2(\xi _4)m^2(\xi _2)m^2(\xi _3)m^2(\xi _4)]\}$$

which is once again zero.

We end this section and the article with some general remarks. Using the arguments presented in this section we are able to completely fill the gap between local well-posedness and global well-posedness also for the periodic KdV and the continuous and periodic mKdV. The periodic KdV problem is more difficult because the scaling argument used in the proof of Theorem 5.4 changes the period of the rescaled solution, hence all the estimates have to be independent of the rescaling parameter $`\lambda `$ up to a factor $`\lambda ^{0+}`$. To approach the mKdV problem we use the Miura transformation that relates solutions of the KdV to solution of the mKdV equation in an explicit way. For details the reader should see .

The method of almost conservation laws that we presented here is very general. We used it to obtain similar sharp results for the 1D Schrödinger equation with derivative nonlinearity  , and to obtain partial results for the IVP (2.11) , that improve Bourgain’s results in .

We believe that given a dispersive equation, the method we developed gives an analytic tool to study the nonlinear interactions of parts of the solution of the equation carried by different frequencies. We are now entering the domain of the weak turbulence theory!


text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

It is quite expectable that four dimensional world is formed in the process of compactification from the ten-dimensional superstring theory. The D-brane approach is getting very useful for the study of such theory. In particular, there is some interest in the geometry obtained from the D3-brane of type IIB theory. Near the horizon of the stacked D3-branes, the configuration $`AdS_5\times S^5`$ is realized and the string theory on this background describes the four-dimensional SUSY Yang-Mills theory which lives on the corresponding boundary .

On the other hand, a thin three-brane (Randall-Sundrum brane) embedded in $`AdS_5`$ space has been proposed  as a model of our world. The position of the brane is possible at any value of the transverse coordinate, which is considered as the energy scale of the dual conformal field theory (CFT) living on the boundary. Another interesting point is that this idea gives an alternative to the standard Kaluza-Klein (KK) compactification via the localization of the zero mode of the graviton . Brane approach opened also a new way to the construction of the hierarchy between four-dimensional Planck mass and the electro-weak scale, and also for realization of the small observable cosmological constant with lesser fine-tuning .

The gravity theory under consideration is five-dimensional. However, its zero mode is trapped on the brane, and as a result the usual 4-dim Newton law is realized on the brane. Non-trapped, massive KK modes correspond to a correction to Newton’s law, and they are also understood from the idea of the AdS/CFT correspondence. Localization of the various fields, especially of gravity, is thus essential for the brane-world to be realistic. The study of localization, however, was limited to the case of $`AdS_5`$ bulk space and not made for $`dS_5`$ bulk space.

The purpose of this paper is to study the localization of the graviton on our brane when it is taken to be time dependent and embedded in $`AdS_5`$ or in $`dS_5`$. In Section 2, we give various brane solutions obtained on the basis of a simple ansatz imposed on the bulk metric. For these solutions, we make some brief comments from a cosmological viewpoint. In Section 3, the localization of the graviton on those brane solutions are examined, and a restriction for the parameters of the theory is given in order to realize the localization (cf. Eq. (61) below). In Section 4, the relation of our solutions to cosmology, especially to the recently observed mini-inflation, is discussed. Also, the sub-class of viscous cosmology is briefly dealt with. Concluding remarks are given in the final section.

## 2 Cosmological solutions of brane-universe

We start from the five-dimensional gravitational action. It is given in the Einstein frame as555 Here we take the following definition, $`R_{\nu \lambda \sigma }^\mu =_\lambda \mathrm{\Gamma }_{\nu \sigma }^\mu \mathrm{}`$, $`R_{\nu \sigma }=R_{\nu \mu \sigma }^\mu `$ and $`\eta _{AB}=`$diag$`(1,1,1,1,1)`$. Five dimensional suffices are denoted by capital Latin and the four dimensional one by the Greek ones.

$$S_5=\frac{1}{2\kappa ^2}\left\{d^5X\sqrt{G}(R2\mathrm{\Lambda }+\mathrm{})+2d^4x\sqrt{g}K\right\},$$
(1)
where the dots denote the contribution from matter, $`K`$ being the extrinsic curvature on the boundary. This term is formal here and it plays no role until one considers the AdS/CFT correspondence. The fields represented by the dots are not needed to construct the background of the brane. The other ingredient is the brane action,

$$S_\mathrm{b}=\tau d^4x\sqrt{g},$$
(2)
which is added to $`S_5`$, and the Einstein equation is written as

$$R_{MN}\frac{1}{2}g_{MN}R=\kappa ^2T_{MN}$$
(3)
where $`\kappa ^2T_{MN}=(\mathrm{\Lambda }+\frac{1}{b}\delta (y)\kappa ^2\tau \delta _\mu ^M\delta _\nu ^N)g_{MN}`$ and $`b=\sqrt{g}/\sqrt{G}`$. Here we solve the Einstein equation (3) with the following metric,

$$ds^2=n^2(t,y)dt^2+a^2(t,y)\gamma _{ij}(x^i)dx^idx^j+dy^2,$$
(4)
where the coordinates parallel to the brane are denoted by $`x^\mu =(t,x^i)`$, $`y`$ being the coordinate transverse to the brane. The position of the brane is taken at $`y=0`$.

Although the form (4) is simple, it could describe various geometries of both the bulk and the brane. The solutions are controlled by two parameters, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and $`\tau `$. The configuration of the bulk is determined by $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, i.e., anti-de Sitter (AdS) space for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }<0`$ and de Sitter (dS) space for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }>0`$. The geometry of the four-dimensional brane is controlled by the effective four-dimensional cosmological constant, $`\lambda `$, which follows from Eq. (15) below and is given explicitly by

$$\lambda =\kappa ^4\tau ^2/36+\mathrm{\Lambda }/6.$$
(5)
Thus $`\lambda `$ is determined by both $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and the intrinsic four-dimensional cosmological constant, $`\tau `$. Here we notice that there are two values of $`\tau =\pm |\tau |`$ for the same $`\lambda `$, but positive $`\tau `$ should be chosen for the localization of the gravity since one needs attractive $`\delta `$-function force (see Eqs. (43) and (57)). We restrict our interest here to the case of a Friedmann-Robertson-Walker type (FRW) universe. In this case, the three-dimensional metric $`\gamma _{ij}`$ is described in Cartesian coordinates as

$$\gamma _{ij}=(1+k\delta _{mn}x^mx^n/4)^2\delta _{ij},$$
(6)
where the parameter values $`k=0,1,1`$ correspond to a flat, closed, or open universe respectively.

We consider the solution of the Einstein equation (3) with the ansatz (4). This leads to the following equations:

$$3\{(\frac{\dot{a}}{a})^2n^2(\frac{a^{\prime \prime }}{a}+(\frac{a^{}}{a})^2)+k\frac{n^2}{a^2}\}=\kappa ^2T_{tt},$$
(7)
$$a^2\gamma _{ij}\{\frac{a^{}}{a}(\frac{a^{}}{a}+2\frac{n^{}}{n})+2\frac{a^{\prime \prime }}{a}+\frac{n^{\prime \prime }}{n}\}+\frac{a^2}{n^2}\gamma _{ij}\{\frac{\dot{a}}{a}(\frac{\dot{a}}{a}+2\frac{\dot{n}}{n})2\frac{\ddot{a}}{a}\}k\gamma _{ij}=\kappa ^2T_{ij},$$
(8)
$$3(\frac{n^{}}{n}\frac{\dot{a}}{a}\frac{\dot{a^{}}}{a})=\kappa ^2T_{ty},$$
(9)
$$3\{\frac{a^{}}{a}(\frac{a^{}}{a}+\frac{n^{}}{n})\frac{1}{n^2}(\frac{\dot{a}}{a}(\frac{\dot{a}}{a}\frac{\dot{n}}{n})+\frac{\ddot{a}}{a})\frac{k}{a^2}\}=\kappa ^2T_{yy}.$$
(10)
Integrating once the $`(t,t)`$ and $`(y,y)`$ components of the Einstein equation with respect to $`y`$ , one gets

$$(\frac{\dot{a}}{na})^2=\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{6}+(\frac{a^{}}{a})^2\frac{k}{a^2}+\frac{C}{a^4},$$
(11)
where $`C`$ is a constant of integration. Let us consider this constant more closely. The solution of Eq. (11) can be given as ,

$$a(t,y)=\{\frac{1}{2}(1+\frac{\kappa ^4\tau ^2}{6\mathrm{\Lambda }})a_0^2+\frac{3C}{\mathrm{\Lambda }a_0^2}+[\frac{1}{2}(1\frac{\kappa ^4\tau ^2}{6\mathrm{\Lambda }})a_0^2\frac{3C}{\mathrm{\Lambda }a_0^2}]\mathrm{cosh}(2\mu y)$$

$$\frac{\kappa ^2\tau }{\sqrt{6\mathrm{\Lambda }}}a_0^2\mathrm{sinh}(2\mu |y|)\}^{1/2},$$
(12)
for negative $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ where $`\mu =\sqrt{\mathrm{\Lambda }/6}`$. For positive $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, the solution is given as

$$a(t,y)=\{\frac{1}{2}(1+\frac{\kappa ^4\tau ^2}{6\mathrm{\Lambda }})a_0^2+\frac{3C}{\mathrm{\Lambda }a_0^2}+[\frac{1}{2}(1\frac{\kappa ^4\tau ^2}{6\mathrm{\Lambda }})a_0^2\frac{3C}{\mathrm{\Lambda }a_0^2}]\mathrm{cos}(2\mu _dy)$$

$$\frac{\kappa ^2\tau }{\sqrt{6\mathrm{\Lambda }}}a_0^2\mathrm{sin}(2\mu _d|y|)\}^{1/2},$$
(13)
where $`\mu _d=\sqrt{\mathrm{\Lambda }/6}`$. In both cases, $`a_0(t)=a(t,y=0)`$ and $`n(t,y)=\dot{a}(t,y)/\dot{a}_0(t)`$. As for $`a_0(t)`$, its governing equation can be obtained by considering Eq. (11) at $`y=0`$ with the boundary condition at $`y=0`$,

$$\frac{a^{}(t,0+)a^{}(t,0)}{a_0(t)}=\frac{\kappa ^2\tau }{3},$$
(14)
the latter following from integrating Eq. (7) across the surface $`y=0`$. We get

$$(\frac{\dot{a}_0}{a_0})^2=\lambda \frac{k}{a_0^2}+\frac{C}{a_0^4}.$$
(15)
(cf. Eq. (5)). The solution of this equation is obtained with a new constant of integration, $`c_0`$:

$$a_0(t)=\frac{\lambda ^{3/4}}{2f(t)}(\sqrt{\lambda }(f^4(t)4C)+2k\lambda ^{1/4}f^2(t)+k^2)^{1/2},$$
(16)
$$f(t)=e^{\sqrt{\lambda }(tc_0)}.$$
(17)
This solution shows inflationary behavior for positive $`\lambda `$. It then describes the inflation at the early universe and the mini-inflation at the present universe. Further remarks on this point are given in Section 4.

In terms of these general solutions, it is possible to discuss more closely the meaning of the parameter $`C`$. For example, $`C`$ can be related to the CFT radiation field energy in a cosmological context, from the viewpoint of the AdS/CFT correspondence . In this sense, the above solution with non-zero $`C`$ may be important to see the cosmological dS/CFT correspondence(for the introduction, see).

In this general case, it will however be difficult to proceed with the analysis of the localization problem of the graviton. We intend to discuss this general case elsewhere. Instead, we impose here the following ansatz on the metric (4):

$$a(t,y)=a_0(t)A(y),n(t,y)=A(y).$$
(18)
This turns out to be convenient for our purpose of examining the localization problem. This form is suitable to see the effects of the bulk geometry $`A(y)`$ on the cosmological evolution expressed by the scale factor $`a_0(t)`$. It is easy to see that the solution of this type can be obtained by taking $`C=0`$ in Eq. (13). Then the solutions obtained in the form of (18) are restricted to the one where the radiation energy content of CFT is neglected. We will see, in Section 4, that this simplification is justified in a realistic cosmological scenario. Hereafter, we discuss the solutions of the form (4) with the ansatz (18) for FRW brane-universes, with $`k=0,\pm 1`$.

When considering Eq. (18), we obtain from Eq. (11) the following equations when $`C=0`$:

$$(\frac{\dot{a_0}}{a_0})^2+\frac{k}{a_0^2}=A^2+\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{6}A^2=D,$$
(19)
where $`D`$ is a constant being independent of $`t`$ and $`y`$. In view of the boundary condition at the brane position,

$$A^{}(0+)A^{}(0)=\frac{\kappa ^2\tau }{3}A(0),$$
(20)
one gets

$$D=\lambda $$
(21)
if $`A(0)=1`$. The normalization condition $`A(0)=1`$ does not affect the generality of our discussion. In the following, we discuss solutions for the cases where $`\lambda `$ takes zero, positive, or negative values.

### 2.1 Solutions for $`\lambda =0`$

When $`\lambda =0`$, solutions are available only for $`k=0,1`$, because of Eq. (19). The solution for the flat three space ($`k=0`$) is known as the Randall-Sundrum (RS) brane , and is

$$ds^2=e^{2|y|/L}\eta _{\mu \nu }dx^\mu dx^\nu +dy^2$$
(22)
where $`\tau =6/(L\kappa ^2)`$, $`L=\sqrt{6/\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$ being the AdS radius. Here $`\lambda =0`$ is achieved by the fine-tuning of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and $`\tau `$ as given above. This is assured from Eq. (5). The solution (22) represents a static and flat brane situated at $`y=0`$, and the configuration is taken to be $`Z_2`$ symmetric for $`yy`$.

Another solution is obtained for $`k=1`$, open three space, as

$$ds^2=e^{2|y|/L}(dt^2+a_0^2(t)\gamma _{ij}dx^idx^j)+dy^2$$
(23)
where $`\gamma _{ij}`$ is taken from Eq. (6) with $`k=1`$ and $`a_0(t)=\pm t+c_0`$ with a constant $`c_0`$. This solution leads to the curvature dominated universe whose open three space size expands or shrinks linearly with time. But this universe would not correspond to our present universe, since recent analyses of the cosmic microwave background indicates that our universe is almost flat.

In the evolution of our universe, the cosmological constant $`\lambda `$ may be not zero but positive. It is considered to be large in the early inflation epoch and tiny in the present epoch. Recent observations of Type Ia supernovae and the cosmic microwave background indicate that our universe is dominated by a positive $`\lambda `$ . Next, we consider this case.

### 2.2 Solutions for $`\lambda >0`$

When $`\lambda >0`$, we obtain time-dependent solutions for each value of $`k=0,1,1`$. When $`k=0`$, the typical, inflationary brane is obtained, and it has the following form

$$a_0(t)=e^{H_0t},A(y)=\frac{\sqrt{\lambda }}{\mu }\mathrm{sinh}[\mu (y_H|y|)]$$
(24)
where $`\mu =\sqrt{\mathrm{\Lambda }/6}`$, and the Hubble constant is represented as $`H_0=\sqrt{\lambda }`$. This solution is obtained for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }<0`$, $`y_H`$ representing the position of the horizon, and the five dimensional space-time is expressed as

$$ds^2=A(y)^2(dt^2+e^{H_0t}\delta _{ij}dx^idx^j)+dy^2.$$
(25)
This solution represents a brane at $`y=0`$. The configuration is taken to be $`Z_2`$ symmetric as in Eq. (22). It should be noticed that the solution approaches the RS solution (22) in the limit $`H_00`$. In this sense, the solution can be understood as an extension of the RS brane to a time-dependent brane due to the non-zero $`\lambda `$, which in turn can be considered as a result of the failure of the fine-tuning to obtain zero $`\lambda `$.

For $`k=\pm 1`$, the solutions are given by the same $`A(y)`$ but with a different $`a_0(t)`$;

$$a_0(t)=\frac{1}{H_0}\mathrm{cosh}(H_0t+\alpha _1),$$
(26)
for $`k=1`$ and

$$a_0(t)=\frac{1}{H_0}\mathrm{sinh}(H_0t+\alpha _2),$$
(27)
for $`k=1`$, where $`\alpha _i`$ are constants. These solutions also represent inflation with curved three space. For any value of $`k=0,\pm 1`$, we obtain the same solution for $`A(y)`$ as given above. Thus $`a_0(t)`$ has nothing to do with the problem of localization since it depends only on the form of $`A(y)`$, as we will see below.

When $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is positive, the solution for $`a_0(t)`$ is the same as above, but $`A(y)`$ becomes different. One has

$$A(y)=\frac{\sqrt{\lambda }}{\mu _d}\mathrm{sin}[\mu _d(y_H|y|)],$$
(28)
$$\mu _d=\sqrt{\mathrm{\Lambda }/6},\mathrm{sin}(\mu _dy_H)=\mu _d/\sqrt{\lambda }.$$
(29)
Here $`y_H`$ represents the position of the horizon in the bulk $`dS_5`$, where there is no spatial boundary as in $`AdS_5`$. This configuration represents a brane with $`dS_4`$ embedded in the bulk $`dS_5`$ at $`y=0`$. The $`Z_2`$ symmetry is also imposed.

Related to this solution for positive $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, we comment on an another form of solution  which can be solved by the following ansatz,

$$ds^2=A^2(y)a_0^2(T)(dT^2+\gamma _{ij}dx^idx^j)+dy^2,$$
(30)
where we take as $`a(T,y)=n(T,y)=a_0(T)A(y)`$. In this case, the solution is obtained for $`k=1`$ as

$$a_0(T)=\frac{l}{\sqrt{\lambda }}\frac{1}{\mathrm{cos}(T)},A(y)=\frac{\sqrt{\lambda }}{\mu _d}\mathrm{sin}[\mu _d(y_H|y|)],$$
(31)
where $`A(y)`$ is the same as in Eq. (28) and $`a_0`$ has a different form. But we can see that this metric is transformed to (28) by a coordinate transformation from $`T`$ to $`t`$ by $`dT/dt=a_0(t)`$. So the properties of this metric will be the same as of the metric given above. Similar coordinate transformations for the other solutions given above would lead to different form of the solutions, but we will not discuss this further here.

### 2.3 Solutions for $`\lambda <0`$

Another type of time-dependent solution occurs for $`\lambda <0`$. In this case, we obtain the $`AdS_4`$ brane only with $`k=1`$ as seen from Eq.(19). The solution is obtained as

$$a_0(t)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda }}\mathrm{sin}(\sqrt{\lambda }t),A(y)=\frac{\sqrt{\lambda }}{\mu }\mathrm{cosh}(\mu [c|y|]),$$
(32)
where $`c`$ is a constant. (We cannot get this solution for positive $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ since $`\lambda `$ is then positive, as is seen from Eq. (5).) This solution, however, would not represent our universe since we cannot see the graviton as a massless field in this AdS brane world .

In any case, it would be important to observe the localization of various fields, especially the graviton, which is needed in the brane-world in order to get a realistic theory. In the next section, we discuss this problem.

## 3 Localization of gravity

The case of $`\lambda =0`$ is well known and studied widely, and it is known that there is no normalizable zero-mode for $`\lambda <0`$. So we discuss here the case of $`\lambda >0`$, where we can get solutions for both $`\mathrm{\Lambda }>0`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }<0`$. Consider the perturbed metric $`h_{ij}`$ in the form

$$ds^2=n^2(t,y)dt^2+a^2(t,y)[\gamma _{ij}(x^i)+h_{ij}(x^i)]dx^idx^j+dy^2.$$
(33)
We are interested in the localization of the traceless transverse component, which represents the graviton on the brane, of the perturbation. It is projected out by the conditions, $`h_i^i=0`$ and $`_ih^{ij}=0`$, where $`_i`$ denotes the covariant derivative with respect to the three-metric $`\gamma _{ij}`$ which is used to raise and lower the three-indices $`i,j`$. The transverse and traceless part is denoted by $`h`$ hereafter for simplicity.

We first consider the simple case where $`\mathrm{\Lambda }<0`$ and $`\gamma _{ij}(x^i)=\delta _{ij}`$ . Then the transverse and traceless part $`h`$ is projected out by $`_ih^{ij}=0`$ and $`h_i^i=0`$, where $`\delta _{ij}`$ is used to raise and lower the indices $`ij`$. One arrives at the following linearized equation of $`h`$ in terms of the five dimensional covariant derivative $`_5^2=_M^M`$:

$$_5^2h=0.$$
(34)
This is equivalent to the field equation of a five dimensional free scalar. The general form of this linearized equation for (33) is given in , so we abbreviate it here.

First, consider the case of (18), where the metric is written as

$$ds^2=A(y)^2(dt^2+a_0(t)^2\delta _{ij}dx^idx^j)+dy^2.$$
(35)
In this case, Eq. (34) is written by expanding $`h`$ in terms of the four-dimensional continuous mass eigenstates:

$$h=𝑑m\varphi _m(t,x^i)\mathrm{\Phi }(m,y),$$
(36)
where the mass $`m`$ is defined by

$$\ddot{\varphi }_m+3\frac{\dot{a_0}}{a_0}\dot{\varphi }_m+\frac{_i^2}{a_0^2}\varphi _m=m^2\varphi _m,$$
(37)
and $`\dot{}=d/dt`$. For $`a_0=1`$, we get the usual relation, $`k^2=\eta ^{\mu \nu }k_\mu k_\nu =m^2`$, where $`\varphi =e^{ik_\mu x^\mu }`$, $`m`$ representing the four-dimensional mass. So we can consider $`m`$ as the mass of the field on the brane. The explicit form of the solution of Eq. (37) is not shown here since it is not used hereafter. The equation for $`\mathrm{\Phi }(m,y)`$ is obtained as

$$\mathrm{\Phi }^{\prime \prime }+4\frac{A^{}}{A}\mathrm{\Phi }^{}+\frac{m^2}{A^2}\mathrm{\Phi }=0,$$
(38)
where $`{}_{}{}^{}=d/dy`$.

Before considering the solution of Eq. (38), we note that this equation can be written in a ”supersymmetric” form as

$$Q^{}Qu(z)=(_z\frac{3}{2A}\frac{A}{z})(_z\frac{3}{2A}\frac{A}{z})u(z)=m^2u(z),$$
(39)
where $`\mathrm{\Phi }=A^{3/2}u(z)`$ and $`z/y=\pm A^1`$. So the eigenvalue $`m^2`$ should be non-negative, i.e., no tachyon in four dimension. Then the zero mode $`m=0`$ is the lowest state which would be localized on the brane. The localization is seen by solving the one-dimensional Schrödinger-like equation in the $`y`$-direction with the eigenvalue $`m^2`$, in the form of Eq.(41). The potential $`V(z)`$ in Eq. (41) is determined by $`A(y)`$, and it should contain a $`\delta `$-function attractive force at the brane position to trap the zero-mode of the bulk graviton. Another condition for the localization is the existence of a normalizable state for the wave function of $`m=0`$ eigenvalue. For the solution (24) with $`\gamma _{ij}=\delta _{ij}`$, the discussions are also given in .

For the cases of $`k=\pm 1`$, some of the solutions given above are also considered in , especially for $`\lambda <0`$ and $`k=1`$ ($`AdS_4`$ brane). An interesting feature is that the graviton on the brane in this case might be massive . We will not discuss this point further here. The procedure to examine the localization for $`k=\pm 1`$ is parallel to the procedure for $`k=0`$. The metric perturbation taken as in Eq. (33) is projected out by the condition $`_ih^{ij}=0`$ applied to the transverse component, and its traceless part is denoted by $`h`$ as above. It satisfies Eq. (34). By expanding it as in Eq. (36), one obtains the equation for $`\varphi _m(t,x)`$:

$$\ddot{\varphi }_m+2\frac{\dot{a_0}}{a_0}\dot{\varphi }_m+\frac{_i^2+2k}{a_0^2}=m^2\varphi _m.$$
(40)
Similarly to the case of Eq. (37), it is easy to see that $`m`$ corresponds to the mass on the brane. And we obtain the same equation (38) as before, for $`\mathrm{\Phi }(m,y)`$. So in the solution of the above equation the mass has to obey the restriction $`m^20`$.

For any solution, Eq.(38) can be rewritten in terms of $`u(z)`$, which is defined by $`\mathrm{\Phi }=A^{3/2}u(z)`$ as given above, as follows:

$$[_z^2+V(z)]u(z)=m^2u(z),$$
(41)
where the potential $`V(z)`$ depends on $`A(y)`$ as

$$V(z)=\frac{9}{4}(A^{})^2+\frac{3}{2}AA^{\prime \prime }$$
(42)
Hereafter, we examine the spectrum of $`u(z)`$ for various solutions given above.

First, we discuss the solution (28) obtained for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }>0`$. In this case,

$$z=\mathrm{sgn}(\mathrm{y})(\lambda )^{1/2}\mathrm{ln}(\mathrm{cot}[\mu _\mathrm{d}(\mathrm{y}_\mathrm{H}|\mathrm{y}|)/2])$$

where $`V(z)`$ is expressed as

$$V(z)=\frac{15}{4}\lambda [\frac{1}{\mathrm{cosh}^2(\sqrt{\lambda }\mathrm{z})}+\frac{3}{5}]\frac{\kappa ^2\tau }{2}\delta (|z|z_0),$$
(43)
$$z_0=\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda }}\mathrm{arccosh}(\frac{\sqrt{\lambda }}{\mu _\mathrm{d}}).$$
(44)
Here $`z_0`$ corresponds to $`y=0`$, the position of the brane. (Note that $`\sqrt{\lambda }/\mu _d1`$, because of Eq. (5).) We notice several points with respect to this potential.

1. One sees the presence of an attractive $`\delta `$-function force at the brane for $`\tau >0`$. Then one would expect one bound state on the brane, and it should be the ground state, i.e., the zero-mode of $`m=0`$.
2. The potential monotonically increases with $`z`$ and approaches

$$V_{\mathrm{}}=\frac{9}{4}\lambda $$
(45)
at $`z=\mathrm{}`$ or at the horizon $`y=y_H`$. (See Fig.1.) Then one might suppose the existence of discrete Kaluza-Klein (KK) modes in the range $`0<m<V_{\mathrm{}}`$. However, as will be shown below, there is no such discrete mode except from the zero-mode, $`m=0`$.
3. For $`m>V_{\mathrm{}}`$, there appear the continuum KK modes. Due to this lower bound of the continuum spectrum of KK modes, the shift from the Newton law on the brane is qualitatively different from the case of the RS brane, where the continuum KK modes are observed with $`m>0`$.
4. The potential takes its minimum,

$$V(z_0)=\frac{5}{8}\lambda (\frac{18}{5}\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{\lambda }),$$
(46)
at $`z=z_0`$, which is the left-hand end point of curves $`A^{}`$ and $`B^{}`$ in Fig.1. The value of $`V(z_0)`$ should be non-negative to confine the zero mode on the brane. This requirement leads to the condition

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }(\frac{\kappa ^2\tau }{2})^2.$$
(47)
This constraint is necessary for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }>0`$ since $`V(z_0)`$ is always positive for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }<0`$, where volcano type potential is realized although the tail of the mountain does not approach zero but instead $`V_{\mathrm{}}=9\lambda /4`$ (see curves $`A`$ and $`B`$ in Fig.1).
5. When one considers the above constraints (47) and (29), the distance between the horizon and the brane is restricted to be

$$y_H\frac{1}{\mu _d}\mathrm{sin}^1(\sqrt{\frac{3}{5}}).$$
(48)
6. If $`\lambda `$ is large, implying that also $`\sqrt{\lambda }/\mu _d1`$, then the position coordinate of the brane approaches $`z_0=\lambda ^{1/2}\mathrm{ln}(2\sqrt{\lambda }/\mu _d)`$, which is a small quantity.

The first and second points above are explicitly examined through the solution of Eq. (41), which is given as

$$u(z)=c_1X^{id}{}_{2}{}^{}F_{1}^{}(a,b;c;X)+c_2X^{id}{}_{2}{}^{}F_{1}^{}(a^{},b^{};c^{};X),$$
(49)
where $`c_{1,2}`$ are constants of integration and

$$X=\frac{1}{\mathrm{cosh}^2(\sqrt{\lambda }\mathrm{z})},d=\frac{\sqrt{9+4m^2/\lambda }}{4},$$
(50)
$$a=\frac{3}{4}id,b=\frac{5}{4}id,c=12id,$$
(51)
$$a^{}=\frac{3}{4}+id,b^{}=\frac{5}{4}+id,c^{}=1+2id.$$
(52)
Here $`{}_{2}{}^{}F_{1}^{}(a,b;c;X)`$ denotes the Gauss’s hypergeometric function. It follows from this solution that $`u(z)`$ oscillates with $`z`$ when $`m>3\sqrt{\lambda }/2`$, where the continuum KK modes appear. While for $`m<3\sqrt{\lambda }/2`$, $`u(z)`$ should decrease rapidly for large $`z`$ since the mode in this region should be a bound state. Then one must take $`c_2=0`$, and this solution must satisfy the boundary condition at $`z=z_0`$,

$$u^{}(z_0)=\frac{\kappa ^2\tau }{4}u(z_0),$$
(53)
because of the $`\delta `$-function in the potential. However, we find such a state, which satisfies the above condition, only at $`m=0`$ as shown in Fig.2.

Then there is no other bound state than the zero-mode, which is confined on the brane, and the remaining mass eigen-modes, $`m>V_{\mathrm{}}`$, are the continuum KK modes with the lower mass-bound.

The next point to be shown for the localization is the normalizability of this zero-mode in the sense

$$_0^{y_0}𝑑yA^2(y)\mathrm{\Phi }^2(0,y)<\mathrm{},$$
(54)
for the zero-mode solution $`\mathrm{\Phi }(0,y)`$ which is obtained as

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(0,y)=\stackrel{~}{c}_1\frac{\mathrm{cos}(\mu _d[y_H|y|])}{3\mathrm{sin}^3(\mu _d[y_H|y|])}(2\mathrm{sin}^2(\mu _d[y_H|y|])+1)+\stackrel{~}{c}_2,$$
(55)
where $`\stackrel{~}{c}_1`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{c}_2`$ are integral constants. This solution must satisfy the boundary condition, $`\mathrm{\Phi }^{}(0,y=0)=0`$, so $`\stackrel{~}{c}_1=0`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }(0,y)=\stackrel{~}{c}_2`$. Then the condition (54) is satisfied. This problem can also be studied in terms of the propagators in the bulk space , but it is difficult to present such analysis here.

Next is the case of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }<0`$ and $`\lambda >0`$. In this case, $`A(y)`$ is given as follows,

$$A(z)=\frac{\sqrt{\lambda }}{\mu \mathrm{sinh}(\sqrt{\lambda }|\mathrm{z}|)},$$
(56)
where $`z=\mathrm{sgn}(\mathrm{y})(\lambda )^{1/2}\mathrm{ln}(\mathrm{coth}[\mu (\mathrm{y}_\mathrm{H}|\mathrm{y}|)/2])`$ and $`V(z)`$ is expressed as

$$V(z)=\frac{15}{4}\lambda [\frac{1}{\mathrm{sinh}^2(\sqrt{\lambda }\mathrm{z})}+\frac{3}{5}]\frac{\kappa ^2\tau }{2}\delta (|z|z_0).$$
(57)
The position of the brane $`z_0`$ ($`y=0`$) is given by

$$z_0=\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda }}\mathrm{arcsinh}(\frac{\sqrt{\lambda }}{\mu }).$$
(58)
In contrast to the case of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }>0`$, the potential (57) has a volcano form, although this mountain ends at $`z=\mathrm{}`$ with $`V_{\mathrm{}}`$ as mentioned above. (See Fig.1., curves $`A`$ and $`B`$.) However, the discussions are parallel and the conclusions for the localization are the same except for the constraint on $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. Namely, (i) Only the zero mode ($`m=0`$) is bounded and there is no other bound state in the expected region, $`0<m<3\sqrt{\lambda }/2`$. (ii) Only the continuum KK mode for $`m>3\sqrt{\lambda }/2`$ occurs. Also, it is to be noted from Eq. (58) that in the limiting case when $`\lambda 0`$, $`z_0`$ approaches $`z_0=1/\mu =\sqrt{6/\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$, which is independent of $`\tau `$.

As in the previous case, these results can be assured by the explicit solution for $`u(z)`$ with the above potential (57). It is obtained as

$$u(z)=\overline{c}_1Y^{id}{}_{2}{}^{}F_{1}^{}(a,b;c;Y)+\overline{c}_2Y^{id}{}_{2}{}^{}F_{1}^{}(a^{},b^{};c^{};Y),$$
(59)
where $`\overline{c}_{1,2}`$ are integration constants and

$$Y=\frac{1}{\mathrm{sinh}^2(\sqrt{\lambda }\mathrm{z})}.$$
(60)
Here $`(a,b,c),(a^{},b^{},c^{})`$ and $`d`$ are the same as those given in Eqs. (50) $``$ (52). The function $`u(z)`$ oscillates with $`z`$ for $`m>3\sqrt{\lambda }/2`$, where the continuum KK modes appear. For $`m<3\sqrt{\lambda }/2`$, $`u(z)`$ decreases rapidly for large $`z`$ as before. Then one must take $`\overline{c}_2=0`$, and this solution must satisfy the boundary condition (53) at $`z=z_0`$. Then we find the above condition only at $`m=0`$. This is shown in Fig.3.

As a result, the localization of zero-mode occurs both for positive and negative $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, but the value of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is restricted as

$$\frac{1}{6}\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{\kappa ^4\tau ^2}<0,$$
(61)
for $`AdS_5`$ bulk space, and

$$0<\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{\kappa ^4\tau ^2}\frac{1}{4},$$
(62)
for $`dS_5`$ bulk. The constraint (61) comes from the positivity of $`\lambda `$, and (62) represents Eq. (47), which is required in the case of positive $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. So we conclude that the brane with a tiny positive cosmological constant should be embedded in the 5d bulk space with $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ in the range given above in order to localize gravity.

## 4 Cosmological implications to the $`C/a^4`$ term

The product anzatz (18) is essential in our present analyses, and this anzatz is equivalent to setting as $`C=0`$ in the solutions (12) and (13). In this section, we show that this setting $`C=0`$ is reliable and applicable to the early inflationary epoch and the present mini-inflationary one. We also present some cosmological implications to the coefficient $`C`$. The term $`C/a_0^4`$ in Eq. (15) is called as the dark radiation. From the viewpoint of the AdS/CFT correspondence , the dark radiation can be regarded as CFT radiation. We then show the relation of $`C`$ to temperature of CFT radiation. Also, the sub-class of viscous cosmology is briefly dealt with. It is known from non-viscous theory that radiation is proportional to $`a^4`$. We point out how the presence of a bulk viscosity destroys the simple property.

### 4.1 Justification of $`C=0`$ and temperature of CFT

The evolution of our universe consists of four epochs; (1) the early inflationary epoch, (2) the radiation dominated epoch, (3) the matter dominated epoch and (4) the present mini-inflationary epoch. Epoch (4) is supported by recent observations of Type Ia supernovae and the cosmic microwave background , since they indicate that our universe is accelerating. The energy density of our universe is dominated by the effective cosmological constant in epochs (1) and (4). The present analyses are then applicable for these epochs, as long as the dark radiation $`C/a_0(t)^4`$ is negligible in the solutions (12) and (13). The energy density $`\rho _{DR}C/a_0(t)^4`$ of the dark radiation is constrained by Big-Bang Nucleosynthesis (BBN) . The result is $`\rho _{DR}/\rho _r\begin{array}{c}<\hfill \\ \hfill \end{array}0.05`$ at BBN epoch, where $`\rho _r`$ is the radiation energy density. The ratio is almost time indepentent, mentioned below. The ratio then persists in epochs (1) and (4) where even $`\rho _r`$ is negligible compared with $`\lambda `$. The dark radiation is thus negligible in epochs (1) and (4). The product ansatz (18) is then true there, since it can be obtained by taking $`C=0`$ in (12) and (13).

The dark radiation can be related to the CFT radiation from the viewpoint of the AdS/CFT correspondence . The radiation energy density at the BBN era is obtained as $`\rho _r=g(T_{BBN})T_{BBN}^4\pi ^2/30`$, where $`g(T_{BBN})`$ is the effective number of relativistic degrees of freedom at temperature $`T_{BBN}`$ in the BBN era. In the standard model, $`g(T_{BBN})=10.75`$. In the four-dimensional conformal symmetric Yang-Mills theory with $`𝒩=4`$, the corresponding effective number $`g_{CFT}`$ is $`15(N^21)3/4`$ for SU(N) gauge, where the factor $`3/4`$ is an effect of strong interactions . The CFT radiation (dark radiation) energy density is then $`\rho _{DR}=\rho _{CFT}=g_{CFT}T_{CFT}^4\pi ^2/30`$. The temperature $`T_{CFT}`$ of CFT differs from real temperature $`T`$, since CFT has no coupling with ordinary fields except graviton. Hence, we obtain

$$\delta \frac{g_{CFT}T_{CFT}^4}{g(T_{BBN})T_{BBN}^4}\begin{array}{c}<\hfill \\ \hfill \end{array}0.05,$$
(63)
and then

$$\frac{T_{CFT}}{T_{BBN}}\begin{array}{c}<\hfill \\ \hfill \end{array}\frac{1}{\sqrt{5N}}$$
(64)
for large $`N`$. This ratio is estimated in the BBN era, but it is almost time independent since real and CFT temperatures, $`T`$ and $`T_{CFT}`$, are almost proportional to $`1/a_0(t)`$. ¿From a theoretical point of view, $`N`$ should be large. For such large $`N`$, $`T_{CFT}`$ is proportional to $`1/\sqrt{N}`$ and then much smaller than $`T`$.

It is likely that both $`\rho _{CFT}`$ and $`\rho _r`$ are generated in the reheating era just after the early inflation. The constraint (63) for $`\delta `$ is somewhat modified in the era, since the effective number $`g(T_{})`$ at the era is $`106.75`$ in the standard model and different from $`g(T_{BBN})`$. A precise estimate is possible on the basis of entropy conservation, $`a_0(t_{BBN})^3g(T_{BBN})T_{BBN}^3=a_0(t_{})^3g(T_{})T_{}^3`$ and $`a_0(t_{BBN})^3g_{CFT}T_{CFT}^3=a_0(t_{})^3g_{CFT}T_{CFT}^3`$, where $``$ stands for the reheating era. For example, $`T_{CFT}`$ is the CFT temperature in the era. The ratio $`\delta (t_{})`$ at the reheating era is

$$\delta (t_{})\frac{g_{CFT}T_{CFT}^4}{g(T_{})T_{}^4}\begin{array}{c}<\hfill \\ \hfill \end{array}0.05(\frac{g(T_{})}{g(T_{BBN})})^{1/3}0.11.$$
(65)
This ratio can be regarded as a ratio of the coupling of inflaton with CFT fields to that with ordinary fields. The former coupling is thus at least an order of magnitude smaller than the latter.

### 4.2 On viscous cosmology

In cosmological theory, the cosmic fluid with four-velocity $`U^\mu `$ is most often taken to be ideal, i.e., to be nonviscous. From a hydrodynamical viewpoint this idealization is almost surprising, all the time that the viscosity property is so often found to be of great physical significance in ordinary hydrodynamics. As one might expect, the viscosity concept has gradually come into more use in cosmology in recent years, and it may seem to be pertinent to deal briefly with this topic here also, emphasizing in particular the close relationship between viscous theories and nonconformally invariant field theories.

Consider the fluid’s energy-momentum tensor (cf., for instance, Ref. ):

$$T_{\mu \nu }=\rho U_\mu U_\nu +(p\zeta \theta )h_{\mu \nu }2\eta \sigma _{\mu \nu },$$
(66)
where $`\zeta `$ is the bulk viscosity and $`\eta `$ the shear viscosity, $`h_{\mu \nu }=(g_{\mu \nu }+U_\mu U_\nu )`$ the projection tensor, $`\theta =U_{}^{\mu }{}_{;\mu }{}^{}`$ the scalar expansion, and $`\sigma _{\mu \nu }`$ the shear tensor. Here we ought to notice that under normal circumstances in the early universe the value of $`\eta `$ is enormously larger than the value of $`\zeta `$. As an example, if we consider the instant $`t=1000`$ s after Big Bang, meaning that the universe is in the plasma era and is characterized by ionized H and He in equilibrium with radiation, one can estimate on the basis of kinetic theory  that the value of $`\eta `$ is about $`2.8\times 10^{14}\mathrm{g}\mathrm{cm}^1\mathrm{s}^1`$, whereas the value of $`\zeta `$ is only about $`7.0\times 10^3\mathrm{g}\mathrm{cm}^1\mathrm{s}^1`$. Even a minute deviation from isotropy, such as we encounter in connection with a Kasner metric, for instance, would thus be sufficient to let the strong shear viscosity come into play. However, let us leave this point aside here, and follow common usage in taking the universe to be perfectly homogeneous and isotropic. Then, $`\eta `$ can be ignored and we obtain, for a radiation dominated universe with $`p=\rho /3`$ ,

$$\frac{d}{dt}(\rho _ra^4)=\zeta \theta ^2a^4,$$
(67)
where $`a`$ is the conventional scale factor. The important point in our context is the following: In the presence of viscosity the content $`\rho _r`$ of radiation energy is no longer proportional to $`a^4`$. We recall that energy density terms of the form $`C/a^4`$ were found above, both in the five-dimensional theory (Eq. (11)), and on the brane (Eq. (15)). Physically, the inclusion of even a simple bulk viscosity coefficient means a violation of conformal invariance (like mass terms).

## 5 Concluding remarks

We have examined the localization of gravity on various cosmological branes with a non-trivial curvature. The cosmological constant $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ in the bulk space is considered for both negative and positive values. The latter case ($`\mathrm{\Lambda }>0`$) has recently attracted interest in connection with the proposed dS/CFT correspondence. In both cases, we find a localized zero mode of the gravity fluctuation for a restricted region of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$.

For negative $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, the bulk is asymptotically $`AdS_5`$ and the solution known as RS brane with flat four-dimensional metric can be obtained by fine-tuning the parameters. On this brane, the localization of gravity has been demonstrated by number of previous works. Different choices for the parameters in our model can lead to positive as well as negative values for the four-dimensional cosmological constant ($`\lambda `$). In the case of negative $`\lambda `$, $`AdS_4`$ space is obtained as a solution for the brane-world with $`k=1`$, and we cannot obtain normalizable zero-mode of gravity fluctuations. This implies that we cannot observe the usual four-dimensional gravity on this brane. There is a normalizable zero-mode in the case of positive $`\lambda `$, and we find that this mode is confined on the brane. In contrast to the case of $`\lambda =0`$, the continuous mass of the KK modes has a lower bound which is proportional to $`\lambda `$. We also demonstrated that there is no bound-state on the brane below this lower bound other than the zero-mode, the four-dimensional graviton.

For positive $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, the bulk is asymptotically $`dS_5`$ and the brane is realized only for positive $`\lambda `$. Although the graviton could be localized on the brane, the situation in the bulk is different from the case of negative $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. In fact, we find a critical value of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, below which we can see the localized graviton, which could lead to the usual Newton law, on the brane. Above this critical value, the zero mode expands in the fifth dimension and one cannot see the four-dimensional graviton anymore on the brane. The KK mode has the same lower mass-bound as in the case of negative $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, but the wave function is different due to the part dependent on the fifth coordinate. So, the contribution to the shift from the Newton law will be discriminated from the case of negative $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$.

Also from the smallness of the presnt $`\lambda `$, the value of the positive $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ should be bounded, but we cannot reject the possibility of positive $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ in considering our brane-world. Our current conclusion is that the value of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ can be restricted to the region given in Eqs. (61) and (62). Detailed analysis is necessary in order to restrict the parameters region in a realistic brane-world. Moreover, such an analysis may indicate if the bulk space should be de Sitter or anti-de Sitter one.

All the analyses mentioned above are based on the assumption that the radiation part of CFT on the boundary is negligible. This assumption is reliable for the early inflationary epoch and the present mini-inflationary one. The smallness of the part indicates that so is the temperature of CFT. The possible applicability of our results to viscous cosmology is also given.


text:
# 1 The scalar one-loop contribution to the graviton propagator. 𝑞 is the 4-momentum of the graviton.

## Acknowledgements

We thank Profs. S. Bethke and L. Stodolsky for the support and kind hospitality of the MPI, Munich, while a part of this work was completed. We thank Prof. C. Prescott for the kind hospitality of SLAC Group A as well during the beginning stages of this work and we thank Prof. S. Jadach for useful discussions.

## Notes Added

1. The limit of quantum gravity studied here is that of the deep Euclidean regime, i.e., the short-distance limit of the theory. This should be contrasted with the long-distance limit studied by effective Lagrangian methods such as those used in Ref. .

2. That we get a cut-off at $`M_{Pl}`$ in our theory means that, if the improved propagators we find are introduced into the renormalizable SM Feynman rules, the net effect will be to cut-off the respective Feynman integrals at $`M_{Pl}`$ and ,hence, by the standard results of renormalizable quantum field theory, there will no effect on any of the phenomenological predictions of the SM at scales well below $`M_{Pl}`$.

3. For nonrenormalizable theories, our methods appear to offer a ‘new lease’ on life for many of them. We caution that, while our improved propagators render many of them finite, they may have other problems.