text:
# Braneworld Dynamics of Inflationary Cosmologies with Exponential Potentials

## I Introduction

String and membrane theories are considered to be promising candidates for a unified theory of all forces and particles in Nature. Since a consistent construction of a quantum string theory is only possible in more than four spacetime dimensions we are compelled to compactify any extra spatial dimensions to a finite size or, alternatively, find a mechanism to localize matter fields and gravity in a lower dimensional submanifold.

Motivated by orbifold compactification of higher dimensional string theories in particular the dimensional reduction of eleven - dimensional supergravity introduced by Ho$`\stackrel{ˇ}{\text{r}}`$ava and Witten Horava1 ; Horava2 , Randall and Sundrum showed that for non - factorisable geometries in five dimensions there exists a single massless bound state confined in a domain wall or three - brane Randall . This bound state is the zero mode of the Kaluza - Klein dimensional reduction and corresponds to the four - dimensional graviton. This scenario may be described by a model consisting of a five - dimensional Anti - de Sitter space (known as the bulk) with an embedded three - brane on which matter fields are confined and Newtonian gravity is effectively reproduced on large - scales. A discussion of earlier work on Kaluza - Klein dimensional reduction and matter localization in a four - dimensional manifold of a higher - dimensional non - compact spacetime can be found in List1 .

Gravity on the brane can be described by the standard Einstein equations modified by two additional terms, one quadratic in the energy - momentum tensor and the other representing the electric part of the five - dimensional Weyl tensor.

Following an approach to the study of homogeneous cosmological models with a cosmological constant first introduced by by Goliath and Ellis Goliath  (see also Dynamics  for a detailed discussion of the dynamical systems approach to cosmology), Campus and Sopuerta have recently studied the complete dynamics of Friedmann - Lemaître - Robertson - Walker (FLRW) and the Bianchi type I and V cosmological models with a barotropic equation of state, taking into account effects produced by the corrections to the Einstein Field Equations Campos .

Their analysis led to the discovery of new critical points corresponding to the Bin$`\stackrel{´}{\text{e}}`$truy - Deffayet - Langlois (BDL) models Binetruy , representing the dynamics at very high energies, where effects due to the extra dimension become dominant. These solutions appear to be a generic feature of the state space of more general cosmological models. They also showed that the state space contains new bifurcations, demonstrating how the dynamical character of some of the critical points changes relative to the general - relativistic case. Finally, they showed that for models satisfying all the ordinary energy conditions and causality requirements the anisotropy is negligible near the initial singularity, a result first demonstrated by Maartens et. al. Maartens-Sahni .

In this paper we extend their work to the case where the matter is described by a dynamical scalar field $`\varphi `$ with an exponential potential $`V(\varphi )=\mathrm{exp}(b\varphi )`$. This work builds on earlier results obtained by Burd and Barrow Burd  and Haliwell Halliwell  who considered the dynamics of these models in standard general relativity (GR). Van den Hoogen et. al. and Copeland et. al. have also considered the GR dynamics of exponential potentials in the context of Scaling Solutions in FLRW spacetimes containing an additional barotropic perfect fluid Hoogen ; Copeland .

It is worth mentioning that Exponential potentials are somewhat more interesting in the brane - world scenario, since the high - energy corrections to the Friedmann equation allow for inflation to take place with potentials ordinarily too steep to sustain inflation Copeland2 .

## II Preliminaries

In what follows we summarise the geometric framework used analyse the brane - world scenario in the cosmological context.

### II.1 Basic equations of the brane - world

In Randall - Sundrum brane - world type scenarios matter fields are confined in a three - brane embedded in a five - dimensional spacetime (bulk). It is assumed that the metric of this spacetime, $`g_{AB}^{(5)}`$, obeys the Einstein equations with a negative cosmological constant $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{(5)}`$ Shiromizu ; Sasaki ; Maartens )

$$G_{AB}^{(5)}=\mathrm{\Lambda }_{(5)}g_{AB}^{(5)}+\kappa _{(5)}^2\delta (\chi )\left[\lambda g_{AB}+T_{AB}\right],$$
(1)
where $`G_{AB}^{(5)}`$ is the Einstein tensor, $`\kappa _{(5)}`$ denotes the five - dimensional gravitational coupling constant and $`T_{AB}`$ represents the energy - momentum tensor of the matter with the Dirac delta function reflecting the fact that matter is confined to the spacelike hypersurface $`x^4\chi =0`$ (the brane) with induced metric $`g_{AB}`$ and tension $`\lambda `$.

Using the Gauss - Codacci equations, the Israel junction conditions and the $`Z_2`$ symmetry with respect to the brane the effective Einstein equations on the brane are

$$G_{ab}=\mathrm{\Lambda }g_{ab}+\kappa ^2T_{ab}+\kappa _{(5)}^4S_{ab}_{ab},$$
(2)
where $`G_{ab}`$ is the Einstein tensor of the induced metric $`g_{ab}`$. The four - dimensional gravitational constant $`\kappa `$ and the cosmological constant $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ can be expressed in terms of the fundamental constants in the bulk $`(\kappa _{(5)},\mathrm{\Lambda }_{(5)})`$ and the brane tension $`\lambda `$ 111In order to recover conventional gravity on the brane $`\lambda `$ must be assumed to be positive..

As mentioned in the introduction, there are two corrections to the general - relativistic equations. Firstly $`S_{ab}`$ represent corrections quadratic in the matter variables due to the form of the Gauss - Codacci equations:

$$S_{ab}=\frac{1}{12}TT_{ab}\frac{1}{4}T_a{}_{}{}^{c}T_{bc}^{}+\frac{1}{24}g_{ab}\left[3T^{cd}T_{cd}T^2\right].$$
(3)
Secondly $`_{ab}`$, corresponds to the “electric” part of the five - dimensional Weyl tensor $`C_{ABCD}^{(5)}`$ with respect to the normals, $`n_A`$ ($`n^An_A=1`$), to the hypersurface $`\chi =0`$, that is

$$_{AB}=C_{ACBD}^{(5)}n^Cn^D,$$
(4)
representing the non - local effects from the free gravitational field in the bulk. The modified Einstein equations (2) together with the conservation of energy - momentum equations $`^aT_{ab}=0`$ lead to a constraint on $`S_{ab}`$ and $`_{ab}`$:

$$^a(_{ab}\kappa _{(5)}^4S_{ab})=0.$$
(5)
We can decompose $`_{ab}`$ into its ineducable parts relative to any timelike observers with 4 - velocity $`u^a`$ ($`u^au_a=1`$):

$$_{ab}=\left(\frac{\kappa _{(5)}}{\kappa }\right)^4\left[(u_au_b+\frac{1}{3}h_{ab})𝒰+2u_{(a}𝒬_{b)}+𝒫_{ab}\right],$$
(6)
where

$$𝒬_au^a=0,𝒫_{(ab)}=𝒫_{ab},𝒫^a{}_{a}{}^{}=0,𝒫_{ab}u^b=0.$$
(7)
Here $`𝒰`$ has the same form as the energy - momentum tensor of a radiation perfect fluid and for this reason is referred to as the “dark” energy density of the Weyl fluid. $`𝒬_a`$ is a spatial and $`𝒫_{ab}`$ is a spatial, symmetric and trace - free tensor. $`𝒬_a`$ and $`𝒫_{ab}`$ are analogous to the usual energy flux vector $`q^a`$ and anisotropic stress tensor $`\pi _{ab}`$ in General Relativity. The constraint equation (5) leads to evolution equations for $`𝒰`$ and $`𝒬_a`$, but not for $`𝒫_{ab}`$ (see Maartens ).

The above equations correspond to the general situation. In what follows we restrict our analysis to the case where $`_{ab}=0`$ so the brane is conformally flat. Such bulk spacetimes admit FLRW brane - world models with vanishing non - local energy density ($`𝒰=0`$).

### II.2 Scalar field dynamics on the brane

Relative to a normal congruence of curves with tangent vector

$$u^a=\frac{_a\varphi }{\dot{\varphi }},u^au_a=1,$$
(8)
the energy - momentum tensor $`T_{\mu \nu }`$ for a scalar field takes the form of a perfect fluid (See page 17 in BED  for details):

$$T_{\mu \nu }=\rho u_\mu u_\nu +ph_{\mu \nu },$$
(9)
with

$$\rho =\frac{1}{2}\dot{\varphi }^2+V(\varphi )$$
(10)
and

$$p=\frac{1}{2}\dot{\varphi }^2V(\varphi ).$$
(11)
where $`\dot{\varphi }`$ is the momentum density of the scalar field and $`V(\varphi )`$ is its potential energy. If the scalar field is not minimally coupled this simple representation is no longer valid, but it is still possible to have an imperfect fluid form for the energy - momentum tensor Madsen .

Substituting for $`\rho `$ and $`p`$ from (10) and (11) into the energy conservation equation

$$\dot{\rho }+\mathrm{\Theta }(\rho +p)=0,$$
(12)
leads to the 1+3 form of the Klein - Gordon equation

$$\ddot{\varphi }+\mathrm{\Theta }\dot{\varphi }+V^{}(\varphi )=0,$$
(13)
an exact ordinary differential equation for $`\varphi `$ once the potential has been specified. It is convenient to relate $`p`$ and $`\rho `$ by the index $`\gamma `$ defined by

$$p=(\gamma 1)\rho \gamma =\frac{p+\rho }{\rho }=\frac{\dot{\varphi }^2}{\rho }.$$
(14)
This index would be constant in the case of a simple one - component fluid, but in general will vary with time in the case of a scalar field:

$$\dot{\gamma }=\mathrm{\Theta }\gamma (\gamma 2)2\gamma \frac{V^{}}{\dot{\varphi }}.$$
(15)
Notice that this equation is well-defined even for $`\dot{\varphi }0`$, since $`\frac{\gamma }{\dot{\varphi }}=\frac{\dot{\varphi }}{\rho }`$.

The dynamics of FLRW models imposed by the modified Einstein equations are governed by the Raychaudhuri and Friedmann equations

$`\dot{H}`$ $`=`$ $`H^2{\displaystyle \frac{3\gamma 2}{6}}\kappa ^2\rho \left[1+{\displaystyle \frac{3\gamma 1}{3\gamma 2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\rho }{\lambda }}\right],`$ (16)
$`H^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}\kappa ^2\rho \left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{\rho }{2\lambda }}\right){\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}{}_{}{}^{3}R,`$ (17)
together with the Klein Gordon equation (13) above. $`{}_{}{}^{3}R`$ denotes the scalar curvature of the hypersurfaces orthogonal to the the fluid 4 - velocity (8) and can be expressed in terms of the scale factor via $`{}_{}{}^{3}R=\frac{6k}{a^2}`$ where as usual $`k=0,\pm 1`$ determines whether the model is flat, open or closed.

## III Dynamical systems analysis for exponential potentials

In the following analysis we extend recent work presented by Campus and Sopuerta Campos  to the case where the matter is described by a dynamical scalar field $`\varphi `$ with a self - interacting potential $`V(\varphi )=\mathrm{exp}(b\varphi )`$, where $`b0`$ and consider only models which have negligible non - local energy density $`𝒰`$ and cosmological constant $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. Although the full dynamics are described by the equations presented in the previous section, it is useful to re - write these equations in terms of a set of dimensionless expansion normalized variables. In order to get compact state spaces it is convenient to consider two different cases (i) $`{}_{}{}^{3}R0`$ ($`k=0`$ or $`k=1`$) and (ii) $`{}_{}{}^{3}R0`$ ($`k=0`$ or $`k=1`$). In case (i) the appropriate variables are

$`\mathrm{\Omega }_\rho {\displaystyle \frac{\kappa ^2\rho }{3H^2}},\mathrm{\Omega }_k{\displaystyle \frac{{}_{}{}^{3}R}{6H^2}}={\displaystyle \frac{k}{\dot{a}^2}},\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda {\displaystyle \frac{\kappa ^2\rho ^2}{6\lambda H^2}},`$ (18)
leading via equation (17) to very simple expression of the Friedmann constraint:

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_\rho +\mathrm{\Omega }_k+\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda =1.$$
(19)
We introduce a dimensionless time variable by

$${}_{}{}^{}\frac{1}{|H|}\frac{d}{dt},$$

where $`|H|`$ is the absolute value of $`H`$. It follows that

$$H^{}=ϵ(1+q)H,$$
(20)
where $`ϵ`$ is the sign of $`H`$ and $`q`$ is the usual deceleration parameter defined by

$$q=\frac{1}{H^2}\frac{\ddot{a}}{a}.$$
(21)
It is clear that $`ϵ=1`$ corresponds to models which are expanding while $`ϵ=1`$ correspond to models which are contracting.

Using the above definitions, the dynamics for open and flat models are described by the following system of equations

$`\mathrm{\Omega }_k^{}=ϵ[(3\gamma 2)(1\mathrm{\Omega }_k)+3\gamma \mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda ]\mathrm{\Omega }_k,`$ (22)
$`\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda ^{}=ϵ[3\gamma (\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda \mathrm{\Omega }_k1)+2\mathrm{\Omega }_k]\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda .`$
In case (ii) it is necessary to normalise using

$$D\sqrt{H^2+\frac{1}{6}{}_{}{}^{3}R}$$
(23)
instead of the Hubble function $`H`$, so the dimensionless variables for this case are given by

$`Q{\displaystyle \frac{H}{D}},\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\rho {\displaystyle \frac{\kappa ^2\rho }{3D^2}}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\lambda {\displaystyle \frac{\kappa ^2\rho ^2}{6\lambda D^2}}`$ (24)
and the Friedmann constraint is

$$\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\rho +\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\lambda =1.$$
(25)
The appropriate dimensionless time derivative is defined via

$${}_{}{}^{}\frac{1}{D}\frac{d}{dt}$$

so the dynamical equations for closed models become

$`Q^{}=[1{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}\gamma (1+\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\lambda )](1Q^2),`$ (26)
$`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\lambda ^{}=3\gamma Q(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\lambda 1)\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\lambda .`$
Notice that in (22), (26) we have already included the constraint (19), (25) in order to keep the dimensionality of the state space as low as possible. The evolution of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\rho `$, $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\rho `$ can easily be recovered from the Friedmann equation.

We have to add a third equation to (22), (26) respectively in order to describe the dynamics of the scalar field $`\varphi `$. It turns out, that the equation of state parameter $`\gamma `$ instead of $`\dot{\varphi }`$, is a the preferred coordinate, since it is both bounded by causality requirements ($`0\gamma 2`$) and is dimensionless.

For open models (case (i)), we find using (15) that the evolution of $`\gamma `$ is determined by

$$\gamma ^{}=ϵ\sqrt{3\gamma }(\gamma 2)[\sqrt{3\gamma }+ϵsgn(\dot{\varphi })b\sqrt{1\mathrm{\Omega }_k\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda }]$$
(27)
where $`sgn(\dot{\varphi })`$ is the sign of $`\dot{\varphi }`$. We can see from (27) that we only need to consider the case $`\dot{\varphi }0`$, since the case $`\dot{\varphi }0`$ can be recovered from the former by time reversal; simultaneously changing the sign of $`\dot{\varphi }`$ and $`H`$ results in an overall change of sign of $`\gamma ^{}`$. From (22), we see that this transformation also changes the sign of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_k^{}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda ^{}`$, which means that $`\dot{\varphi }\dot{\varphi }`$ corresponds to time reversal $`\tau \tau `$.

In the closed case, we find that

$$\gamma ^{}=\sqrt{3\gamma }(\gamma 2)[\sqrt{3\gamma }Q+sgn(\dot{\varphi })b\sqrt{1\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\lambda }]$$
(28)
and again we can easily see from (28) and (26) that $`\dot{\varphi }\dot{\varphi }`$ corresponds to time reversal $`\tau \tau `$. Therefore in the following analysis we restrict ourselves to the case $`\dot{\varphi }0`$.

So in summary, the resulting dynamical equations we have to analyse are

$`\gamma ^{}=ϵ\sqrt{3\gamma }(\gamma 2)[\sqrt{3\gamma }+ϵb\sqrt{1\mathrm{\Omega }_k\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda }],`$ (29)
$`\mathrm{\Omega }_k^{}=ϵ[(3\gamma 2)(1\mathrm{\Omega }_k)+3\gamma \mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda ]\mathrm{\Omega }_k,`$
$`\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda ^{}=ϵ[3\gamma (\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda \mathrm{\Omega }_k1)+2\mathrm{\Omega }_k]\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda `$
for the open case and

$`\gamma ^{}=\sqrt{3\gamma }(\gamma 2)[\sqrt{3\gamma }Q+b\sqrt{1\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\lambda }],`$ (30)
$`Q^{}=[1{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}\gamma (1+\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\lambda )](1Q^2),`$
$`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\lambda ^{}=3\gamma Q(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\lambda 1)\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\lambda `$
for the closed case.

Notice that in the open sector, the cosmological constant - like subset $`\gamma =0`$, the stiff - matter - subset $`\gamma =2`$, the flat subset $`\mathrm{\Omega }_k=0`$, the GR subset $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda =0`$ and the vacuum subset $`\mathrm{\Omega }_k+\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda =1`$ are invariant sets. Analogously, the closed sector has the invariant sets $`\gamma =0,2`$, the flat subset $`Q=\pm 1`$, the GR subset $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\lambda =0`$ and the vacuum subset $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\lambda =1`$.

## IV Analysis of the Dynamical System

In order to analyse the dynamical systems (29) and (30), we will use for the most part the standard method of linearising the dynamical equations around any equilibrium points. One can easily see that because of the $`\gamma ^{}`$ \- equation, the linearisation matrix (the Jacobian), is not well - defined for certain values of $`(\gamma ,\mathrm{\Omega }_k,\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda )`$ if $`b0`$. Indeed, if $`b0`$ and $`\gamma =0`$ or $`b0`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_k+\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda =1`$ ($`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\lambda =1`$), the Jacobian diverges. This means that we cannot linearise the dynamical equations in the neighbourhood of these points. Instead, we will have to consider the full non - linear equations and study the behaviour of small perturbations away from these problematic equilibrium points.

Furthermore the fact that we are dealing with a non - linear system is also important in cases, where the dynamical equations can be linearised. Whenever the linear terms are not dominant, the peculiar behaviour of non - linear systems becomes visible. We then have to analyse the dynamical equations with additional caution. If for example an eigenvalue of the linearised system vanishes at an equilibrium point, which means that the first order terms of the dynamical equation vanishes, we have to study the higher order terms in a perturbative analysis around that point.

Notice that the dynamical systems (29) and (30) match at the $`k=0`$ plane (the flat subspace). If we analyse critical points that lie in the flat subspace by studying small perturbations out of that surface, i.e. where (29) differs from (30), it is necessary to do the analysis in both coordinate systems and check, whether the results agree. If they don’t, this means that small perturbations around the critical point will evolve differently, depending on whether they enter the closed or the open sector. In our analysis we have checked this carefully. In only one case ($`F_+^{2/3}`$) the higher order terms were dominant and of different sign, depending on which sector was entered. This will be commented on below. In all the other cases, the behaviour of the perturbations did not depend on the sector they entered 222Note however that even if the eigenvalues are the same in the closed and open sectors, the eigenvectors pointing out of the $`\mathrm{\Omega }_k=0`$ plane into these two different sectors are not necessarily parallel..

### IV.1 Models with Non - positive Spatial Curvature

The dynamical system (29) has 5 hyperbolic critical points corresponding to the flat FLRW universe $`F_+^{b^2/3}`$ with $`\gamma =\frac{b^2}{3}`$ and $`a(t)=t^{2/b^2}`$ 333If $`b^2=6,ϵ=1`$, this point is actually non - hyperbolic. That case will be discussed in detail below.; the flat FLRW universe $`F_ϵ^2`$ with stiff matter and $`a(t)=t^{1/3}`$; the Milne universe $`M_ϵ^2`$ with stiff matter and $`a(t)=t`$; a flat non - general - relativistic model $`m_ϵ^2`$ with $`\gamma =2`$, which has been discussed in Campos ; and a set of universe models $`X_+^{2/3}(b)`$ with $`\gamma =2/3`$ and curvature $`\mathrm{\Omega }_k=12/b^2`$ depending on the value of b. The critical points, their coordinates in state space and their eigenvalues is given in Table I below. In Table II we give the corresponding eigenvectors. Notice that $`F_+^{b^2/3}`$ only occurs for $`0b^26`$, and $`X_+^{2/3}(b)`$ for $`b^22`$ only. Both only occur in the expanding sector $`ϵ=1`$.

We further find the non - hyperbolic critical points $`M_ϵ^0`$ and $`m_ϵ^0(\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda )`$, where the former describes the Milne universe with $`\gamma =0`$ and the latter is a line of non - general - relativistic critical points with $`\gamma =0`$ including the flat FLRW model with constant energy density. The Jacobian of the dynamical system (29) at both $`M_ϵ^0`$ and $`m_ϵ^0(\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda )`$ diverges for $`b0`$, which means that the dynamical system cannot be linearised around these points for arbitrary positive values of $`b^2`$.

For $`b=0`$, the Jacobian is well - defined for both $`M_ϵ^0`$ and $`m_ϵ^0(\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda )`$, and the eigenvalues and corresponding eigenvectors are given in Tables I, II. For $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda 1`$, the Jacobian around $`m_ϵ^0(\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda )`$ can still be evaluated even for $`b0`$. The results from taking the limits $`\gamma ,\mathrm{\Omega }_k0`$ are included in Table I.

If $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda =1`$ and $`b^2>0`$, we have to look at the non - linear system (29) and study small perturbations $`x(\tau ),y(\tau ),z(\tau )`$ about the equilibrium point $`m_ϵ^0(\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda =1)`$. That means we evaluate (29) at $`(\gamma ,\mathrm{\Omega }_k,\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda )=(x,y,1z)`$, where $`0<x(\tau ),y(\tau ),z(\tau )1`$.

Up to first order, (29) becomes

$`x^{}=6ϵx2\sqrt{3}b\sqrt{x}\sqrt{zy)},`$
$`y^{}=2ϵy,`$
$`z^{}=2ϵy.`$
For $`y=z`$ or $`b=0`$, this can be solved to give

$`x=x_0e^{6ϵ\tau },`$
$`y=y_0e^{2ϵ\tau },`$
$`z=z_0+y_0e^{2ϵ\tau }.`$
For $`yz`$ and $`b0`$, we find

$`x=3b^2z_0(\tau \tau _0)^2,`$
$`y=y_0e^{2ϵ\tau },`$
$`z=z_0+y_0e^{2ϵ\tau },`$
where $`x_0`$, $`y_0`$ and $`z_0`$ are positive constants of integration (initial values).

This demonstrates, that for $`b0`$, $`m_+^0(\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda =1)`$ is an unstable saddle point (to be precise, it is a line of saddles, since $`z`$ is stationary), whereas the contracting model $`m_{}^0(\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda =1)`$ remains a source (actually a line of sources) for all b.

In the same way, we analyse the nature of the point $`M_ϵ^0`$. Here, we find that the perturbed system $`(\gamma ,\mathrm{\Omega }_k,\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda )=(x,1y,z)`$ becomes up to first order

$`x^{}=6ϵx2\sqrt{3}b\sqrt{x}\sqrt{yz},`$
$`y^{}=2ϵy,`$
$`z^{}=2ϵz.`$
If $`z=y`$ or $`b=0`$, this can be solved to give

$`x=x_0e^{6ϵ\tau },`$
$`y=y_0e^{2ϵ\tau },`$
$`z=z_0e^{2ϵ\tau },`$
where of course $`y_0=z_0`$ in the case $`y=z`$.

For $`zy`$ and $`b0`$, the perturbations behave like

$`x=3b^2(y_0z_0)(ϵe^{ϵ\tau }+const)^2,`$
$`y=y_0e^{2ϵ\tau },`$
$`z=z_0e^{2ϵ\tau }.`$
Notice that the Friedmann constraint (19) translates into $`0yz1`$, therefore in particular $`y_0z_00`$.

Since we are looking at small perturbations $`0<x(\tau )1`$, we conclude that the constant of integration is positive for $`ϵ=1`$, whereas $`const<0`$ for $`ϵ=1`$. This shows, that $`M_ϵ^0`$ is a saddle for all values of $`b`$. It should be realised that for $`b0`$, the dynamics around the expanding model $`M_+^0`$ are reflecting the non - linearity of the system: $`x`$ is decreasing until $`e^\tau =const`$, but then the system is repelled since $`x`$ increases for $`const<e^\tau <\mathrm{}`$.

Table III below summarizes the dynamical character of the critical points with non - positive spatial curvature.

Note that if one of the eigenvalues in Table I vanishes, this just means that the lowest order terms vanish. This is very different to what happens in the case of systems of linear differential equations, where vanishing eigenvalues indicate lines of critical points. For a non - linear system to contain a line of critical points, we need small perturbations away from the critical point to be stationary in one direction. We found an example of that case in the analysis of $`m_ϵ^0(\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda )`$ above. Since we are dealing with a non - linear system here, vanishing eigenvalues only indicate that it is not sufficient to look at the linearised equations, i.e. to study the eigenvalues and eigenvectors of the Jacobian. Instead, we carried out a perturbative analysis of the kind that we have presented above when analyzing $`M_ϵ^0`$ and $`m_ϵ^0(\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda )`$. Including the higher order contributions, we obtained the results presented in Tables III and VI.

### IV.2 Models with Positive Spatial Curvature

We now analyse the dynamical system (30), which describes flat or closed models. In addition to the critical points corresponding to the flat models $`F_+^{b^2/3}`$, $`F_ϵ^2`$, $`m_ϵ^0(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\lambda )`$ and $`m_ϵ^2`$, we find a maximally non - general - relativistic Einstein universe - like model $`E^{1/3}`$ with $`\gamma =1/3,k=1`$ and $`H=0`$, which for $`b=0`$ degenerates into a line (hyperbola) of critical points $`E(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\lambda )`$ with $`\gamma [\frac{1}{3},\frac{2}{3}]`$. For $`0b^22`$, we also find the model $`X_+^{2/3}(b)`$, which has $`\gamma =2/3`$ and $`Q=b/\sqrt{2}`$. A summary of all these critical points, their coordinates in state space and their eigenvalues can be found in Table IV below. The corresponding eigenvectors are given in Table V.

In order to analyse the nature of $`m_ϵ^0(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\lambda )`$, we have to study the first order perturbations around the point, as shown in detail in the previous section. We find here, that the behaviour of the perturbed system agrees to leading order with the results obtained in section IV.1.

Notice that the Jacobian of the dynamical system around the equilibrium point corresponding to the static model $`E^{1/3}`$ is not well - defined for $`b0`$ however we can extract the eigenvalues using a limiting procedure. The results are given in Table IV. Since the third eigenvalue vanishes, it is not sufficient to analyse the linearised equations at that point, unless we remain in the invariant subset $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\lambda =1`$, in which $`E^{1/3}`$ appears as a saddle with the two eigenvectors given in Table V. A study of the full perturbed equations around $`E^{1/3}`$ confirms, that this point is a saddle however it has a more complicated behaviour out of the $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\lambda `$ \- plane; to second order, the system will be repelled in the $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\lambda `$ \- direction in the expanding sector ($`Q0`$) , while in the collapsing sector ($`Q0`$), it is attracted in that direction.

The dynamical character of all the critical points with non - negative spatial curvature is summarized in Table VI.

## V The structure of the state space

With the information we have obtained in the last section about the equilibrium points of the dynamical system, we can now analyse the structure of the state space. The whole state space is obtained by matching the dynamical systems (29) and (30). It consists of three pieces corresponding to the collapsing open models, the closed models and the expanding open models, matched together at the corresponding flat boundaries.

As mentioned above, the state space has the invariant subsets $`\gamma =0,2`$$`\mathrm{\Omega }_k=0Q=\pm 1`$$`\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda ,\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\lambda =0`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_k+\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda ,\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\lambda =1`$.

The bottom planes in Figures 1 - 9 correspond to GR, while top planes represent the vacuum boundaries.

Since the eigenvalues of the equilibrium points in general depend on the parameter $`b`$, the nature of these critical points varies with $`b`$. Furthermore, some of the critical points ($`F_+^{b^2/3},X_+^{2/3}`$) will also move in state space as $`b^2`$ increases, since their coordinates are also functions of $`b`$. We also find critical points, which only appear for $`b=0`$ and then disappear, as we increase $`b^2`$.

For certain values of $`b`$, some of the eigenvalues pass through zero. At these values of $`b`$, the state space is “torn” in that it undergoes topological changes. In contrast to the model that Campos  analysed, the appearance of such bifurcations in our model does not coincide with the appearance of lines of critical points. This a consequence of the fact, that in our inflationary model, the critical points are moving in state space. Bifurcations appear, when two of the equilibrium points merge, which occurs at $`b^2=0,2,6`$. These are the same parameter values as in GR Burd ; Halliwell . This was to be expected, since the only points moving in state space and causing these bifurcations, are the ones corresponding to the general relativistic models $`F_+^{b^2/3},X_+^{2/3}`$. For this reason the occurrence of bifurcations is restricted to the GR - subspace. Therefore the dynamics of these bifurcations will only be discussed in section V.1.

Since the collapsing open sector remains unchanged with varying parameter value $`b`$, we do not include that sector in the different portraits of state space. The whole state space can be obtained by matching Fig. 1 to Fig. 2 - Fig. 9.

### V.1 The GR - subspace

As discussed above, the subset $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda ,\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\lambda =0`$ is the invariant submanifold of the full state space corresponding to GR. In this section, we will discuss the stability of the general relativistic equilibrium points within the GR - subspace. In the next section, we will discuss the brane - world - modifications of these general relativistic results due to the additional degrees of freedom $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda ,\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\lambda `$, and also the additional non - general relativistic equilibrium points.

It is worth mentioning that although the GR - submanifold has been discussed in detail by Burd and Barrow Burd  and Halliwell Halliwell , their analysis is somewhat incomplete, since the state space they considered was non - compact. The variables they chose to describe the inflationary dynamics of homogeneous isotropic models were $`\varphi ^{},\alpha ^{}`$. Here $`\alpha `$ relates to the scale factor $`a(\tau )`$ by $`a(\tau )=e^{\alpha (\tau )}`$, and the potential has been absorbed into the time derivative by rescaling the time variable $`t\tau `$ by $`\frac{d}{d\tau }={}_{}{}^{}=V^{1/2}\frac{d}{dt}`$. We find that these coordinates relate to our expansion normalized variables via the following transformations:

$`(\alpha ^{})^2={\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(2\gamma )(1\mathrm{\Omega }_k)}},`$
$`(\varphi ^{})^2={\displaystyle \frac{2\gamma }{2\gamma }},`$
for $`\gamma 2,\mathrm{\Omega }_k1`$. We can see that

$$\alpha ^{}\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Omega }_k1\mathrm{\Omega }_\rho 0$$

and

$$\varphi ^{}\mathrm{}\gamma 2.$$

This means, that we have compactified the state space by mapping $`\varphi ^{}[0,\mathrm{}]\gamma [0,2]`$ and $`\alpha ^{}[0,\mathrm{}]\mathrm{\Omega }_k[0,1]`$. In this way we have extended the work that has been done on inflationary models with exponential potentials in the general relativistic context. We find that $`X_+^{2/3},F_+^{b^2/3}`$ correspond to the critical points I, II in Burd . In addition, we obtain the new critical points $`F_ϵ^2`$, $`M_ϵ^0`$ and $`M_ϵ^2`$ corresponding to a FLRW universe with stiff matter and a Milne universe with $`\gamma =0`$ or stiff matter $`\gamma =2`$ respectively.

Notice that we also find the new equilibrium point $`F_ϵ^0`$. The reason is that we are using $`\gamma `$ to describe the dynamics of the scalar field $`\varphi `$, which essentially is a function of $`\dot{\varphi }^2`$ instead of $`\dot{\varphi }`$. Therefore our $`\dot{\gamma }`$ \- equation is homogeneous in $`\dot{\varphi }`$, whereas the dynamical equation for $`\dot{\varphi }`$ is inhomogeneous in $`\dot{\varphi }`$.

It might seem surprising, that we find a critical point at $`\dot{\varphi }=0`$, whereas there is no equilibrium point at $`\dot{\varphi }=0`$ in Burd . The reason for this is, that we are describing different physical quantities; although the equation of state does not change as $`\dot{\varphi }0(\dot{\gamma }=0)`$, $`\dot{\varphi }`$ does change as $`\dot{\varphi }0,(\ddot{\varphi },\varphi ^{\prime \prime }0)`$.

The collapsing FLRW model with stiff matter found in this analysis is of particular interest, since for all values of $`b`$, $`F_{}^2`$ is the future attractor for all collapsing open and some of the closed models within the GR - subspace. $`F_{}^0`$ is the past attractor for the whole collapsing open and parts of the closed sector for all $`b`$.

Notice that the dynamics of the collapsing open sector does not depend on the parameter value $`b`$. The dynamics of this sector is constrained by the fact, that for all models in this sector, the flat FLRW model with constant energy density is the past attractor, and the flat FLRW model with stiff matter is the future attractor (see FIG 1).

Having said that, we will now discuss the more complicated dynamics of the closed and the expanding open models for the different ranges of the parameter value $`b`$.

At $`b=0`$, we find a bifurcation of the state space, since for this value of $`b`$, the equilibrium points $`E^{1/3}`$ and $`X_+^{2/3}(b)`$, as well as $`F_+^0`$ and $`F_+^{b^2/3}`$ coincide. All expanding open models are attracted to $`F_+^0`$. All closed models will evolve into either $`F_{}^2`$ or $`F_+^0`$, depending on the initial conditions. At $`\gamma =2/3`$, the Einstein universe appears as an unstable saddle point (see FIG 2).

As $`b^2`$ increases, the Einstein universe disappears. Instead, we find the saddle point $`X_+^{2/3}(b)`$, which moves in $`Q`$ \- direction as $`b^2`$ is increases, remaining a saddle until it reaches the flat sector $`Q=1`$ at $`b^2=2`$. There it merges with expanding FLRW model $`F_+^{b^2/3}`$. For $`0<b^2<2`$, $`F_+^{b^2/3}`$ is a sink moving along the $`\gamma `$ \- axis. All open and some of the closed models are attracted to this solution (see FIG 3).

At $`b^2=2`$, the models $`X_+^{2/3}(b)`$ and $`F_+^{b^2/3}`$ merge, which causes a bifurcation of the state space. The nature of the two merging critical points is significantly changed at this value of $`b`$. The flat solution $`X_+^{2/3}(b=\sqrt{2})=F_+^{2/3}`$ is an attractor for all open or flat models, but a repeller for all closed models (see FIG 4). This behaviour has been observed by Burd . At this value of $`b^2`$, the two merging critical points swap their nature: for all $`b^22`$, $`X_+^{2/3}(b)`$ will be a sink, while $`F_+^{b^2/3}`$ will be a saddle (see FIGS 5 - 9).

As $`b`$ is further increased ($`2<b^2<6`$), $`F_+^{b^2/3}`$ moves further along the $`\gamma `$ \- axis. It is now a saddle for all models. All flat models are attracted, whereas all open or closed models are repelled. $`X_+^{2/3}(b)`$ has now entered the open sector and moves further to the $`\mathrm{\Omega }_k=1`$ boundary. $`X_+^{2/3}(b)`$ is a node sink for all $`2<b^2<8/3`$ and a spiral sink for $`8/3<b^2<\mathrm{}`$. For all $`b^22,F_{}^2`$ is the future attractor for all closed models and $`X_+^{2/3}(b)`$ the future attractor for all expanding open models (see FIGS 5 - 7).

At $`b^2=6`$, we find another bifurcation of the state space. The two points $`F_+^{b^2/3}`$ and $`F_+^2`$ merge. This turns $`F_+^2`$ from a source into a saddle (see FIG. 8). For $`b^26`$, all open or closed models are still repelled from $`F_+^2`$, but all flat models are now attracted. In the limit $`b^2\mathrm{}`$, the future attractor for the open sector, $`X_+^{2/3}(b)`$ approaches the vacuum solution $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\rho 0`$ with $`\gamma =2/3`$ (see FIG 9).

### V.2 Higher dimensional effects

The question we will now discuss is how the behaviour of the dynamical system describing GR is changed within the brane - world context. In particular, do the additional degree of freedom $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda ,\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\lambda `$ change the stability of the general relativistic models, and are there new non - general relativistic stable equilibrium points?

We will first answer the second question. In addition to the general relativistic points, we have found the non - general - relativistic equilibrium points $`m_ϵ^2`$ and the lines $`m_ϵ^0(\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda )`$. We can solve the Friedmann equation at these points to determine their behaviour in detail. At $`m_ϵ^0`$, the energy density is constant $`\rho (t)=\rho _0`$, and we can easily integrate the Friedmann equation to find

$$a(t)e^{ϵ\sqrt{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}/3}t},$$
(31)
where $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}=\kappa ^2\rho _0(1+\frac{\rho _0}{2\lambda })`$ behaves like a modified cosmological constant.

For $`m_+^2`$, the scale factor is given by

$$a(t)=(tt_{BB})^{1/6}(t+t_{BB})^{1/6}.$$
(32)
where $`t_{BB}=1/\sqrt{6\kappa ^2\lambda }`$ is the Big Bang time. As explained in detail in Campos , this model corresponds to the Binétruy - Deffayet - Langlois (BDL) solution Binetruy  with scale factor $`a(t)=(tt_{BB})^{1/6}`$. The solution for $`m_{}^2`$ is given by time reversal and $`t_{BB}`$ should now be identified as the Big Crunch time.

At $`b=0`$, we also observe, that the general - relativistic Einstein universe has non - general - relativistic analogues. We find a whole line of Einstein universe - like static equilibrium points $`E(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\lambda )`$ extending in the $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\lambda `$ direction. For $`b^2>0`$, the line collapses to the non - general - relativistic Einstein saddle $`E^{1/3}`$ in the $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\lambda =1`$ subset, and the general relativistic model $`X_+^{2/3}(b)`$.

We now study the dynamical character of these non - general - relativistic equilibrium points. We find that in the full state space, $`m_{}^2`$ instead of $`F_{}^2`$ is the future attractor for all collapsing open models and some of the closed models. This means, that within the brane - world context, FLRW with stiff matter changes from a stable solution into a unstable saddle. $`F_{}^0`$ remains a past attractor for the collapsing open and parts of the closed sector, but now there is a whole line $`m_{}^0(\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda )`$ of sources extending in $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Omega }}_\lambda `$ direction. The same applies to the corresponding expanding models: the sink/saddle $`F_+^0`$ is a one - element subset of the line of sinks/saddles $`m_+^0(\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda )`$. This means, that for $`b=0`$, the future attractor of the expanding open and some of the closed models is not necessarily $`F_+^0`$, but instead any of the points $`m_+^0(\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda )`$ depending on the initial conditions. For $`b^2>0`$, $`m_+^0(\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda )`$ including $`F_+^0`$ turns into a line of saddles.

For $`b>0`$ the models $`m_+^0(\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda )`$ represent high energy inflationary models with exponential potentials (which are too steep to inflate in GR) Copeland . The fact that they are all unstable (saddle points) reflects the fact that steep inflation ends naturally, since as the energy drops below the brane tension the condition for inflation no longer holds.

Finally let us consider whether the stability of the most interesting equilibrium points $`F_+^{b^2/3}`$ and $`X_+^{2/3}`$ is changed by the higher - dimensional degrees of freedom. From Tables V, VI, we can see that the third eigenvalues (corresponding to eigenvectors pointing out of the GR - plane) are negative for all $`b0`$. That means, if $`F_+^{b^2/3}`$, $`X_+^{2/3}`$ was a sink in GR, it will remain a sink in the brane - world scenario.

## VI Discussion and Conclusion

In this paper we extend recent work by Campos and Sopuerta Campos  to the case where the matter is described by a dynamical scalar field $`\varphi `$ with an exponential potential. By using expansion normalised variables which compactifies the state space we built on earlier results due to Burd and Barrow Burd  and Halliwell Halliwell  for the case of GR and explored the effects induced by higher dimensions in the brane - world scenario.

As in Campos  we obtain the equilibrium point corresponding to the BDL model ($`\text{m}_\pm `$) Binetruy  which dominates the dynamics at high energies (near the Big Bang and Big Crunch), where the extra - dimension effects become dominant supporting the claim that this solution is a generic feature of the state space of more general cosmological models in the brane - world scenario.

We emphasise again that here, unlike in the analysis by Campos and Sopuerta Campos , $`\gamma `$ is a dynamical variable. Fixing $`\gamma `$ to be a constant corresponds to looking at the $`\gamma =const.`$ slices of the full state space. This obviously only makes sense for the invariant sets $`\gamma =0`$ and $`\gamma =2`$. The important point is, that even if we want to analyse the dynamical character of the de Sitter and Milne models in the $`\gamma =0`$ \- plane, we have to bear in mind the dynamical character of $`\gamma `$. Unlike in Campos , we have to study perturbations away from the plane. This makes these models much more interesting in the presence of an exponential potential, since the dynamics are not reduced to the plane $`\gamma =0`$. In fact, unless $`b=0`$, we find that the plane $`\gamma =0`$ is unstable. Small perturbations out of that plane will in general be enhanced, i.e. even for initial conditions with negligible $`\gamma `$, the system will in general evolve towards $`\gamma =2/3`$ or $`\gamma =2`$. Notice that orbits confined to the $`\gamma =0`$ plane evolve towards the expanding de Sitter models $`m_+^0(\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda )`$ or the contracting Milne universe $`M_{}^0`$ for all values of $`b`$.

Finally we note that we did not find any new bifurcations in this simple brane - world scenario because we consider only the case $`𝒰=0`$. In the next paper in this series paper2  we will analyse both the effects of the non - local energy density $`𝒰`$ on the FLRW brane - world dynamics and look at homogeneous and anisotropic models with an exponential potential.

Acknowledgments: We would like to thank Roy Maartens and Varun Sahni for very useful discussions during the Cape Town Cosmology Meeting in July 2001. We also thank Toni Campos and Carlos Souperta for comments and suggestions for future work. This work has been funded by the National Research Foundation (SA) and a UCT international postgraduate scholarship.


format: text

text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1  Introduction

The central problem in modern cosmology is the formation of large scale structures in the universe. In the standard picture of hierarchical structure formation, dark matter dominates the universe, and a wide variety of observed structures, such as galaxies, groups and clusters of galaxies, have formed by the gravitational growth of Gaussian primordial density fluctuations. Due to self-gravitational instability, the fluctuations of dark matter have collapsed and virialized into objects which are so-called ’dark matter halos’ or ’dark halos’. The larger halos are generally considered to have formed via the merger of smaller ones collapsed first. The distribution of mass in the gravitationally collapsed structures, such as galaxies and groups (or clusters) of galaxies, which is usually called the mass or multiplicity function, has been determined by observation .1,2,3,4 The best approximate description for cosmological mass function was proposed by Press and Schechter5. The PS theory did not draw much attention until 1988, when the first relative large N-Body simulation6,7 revealed a good agreement with it. The mystery of the ’fudge factor’ of 2 in PS theory was solved by Peacock & Heavens8 and Bond et al9 approaching the ’cloud-in-cloud’ problem by a rigorous way. The reliability of the PS formula has been tested using N-Body simulation by several authors, which turns out the PS formula indeed provides an overall satisfactory description of mass function for virialized objects. Among the virialized structures, galaxy clusters are extremely useful to cosmology because they may be in detail studied as individual objects, and especially are the largest virialized structure in the universe at present. The mass of a typical rich clusters is approximately $`10^{15}h^1M_{}`$, which is quite similar to the average mass within a sphere of $`8h^1`$Mpc radius in the unperturbed universe. However, the theoretical estimate of the mass of the largest collapsed object in the cosmological framework has still not been presented. In this paper, we will calculate the mass function of collapsed objects by PS formula although it has already been carried out by many authors. Different from the previous works, we will further focus on the derivation of the mass of the largest virialized object by a volume integration over the whole Universe. In addition, the virial temperature and radius of the largest structure are also derived.

## 2  The Mass distribution of Virialized Objects

It is now believed that the comoving number density of massive halos per unit mass at a given redshift $`z`$ and mass $`M`$ follows the PS formula

$$\frac{dn}{dM}=\sqrt{\frac{2}{\pi }}\frac{\rho _m}{M}\frac{d\mathrm{ln}\sigma (M)}{dM}\nu _c\mathrm{e}^{\frac{\nu _{c}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}{2}}.$$
(1)
where $`\rho _m=\mathrm{\Omega }_m\rho _{crit,0}`$, is the present average comoving matter density of the universe , the critical density at the present $`\rho _{crit,0}=3H_0^2/8\pi G=2.7755\times 10^{11}h^2M_{}`$Mpc-3 where the Hubble constant $`H_0=100h`$km s-1Mpc-1 and the threshold function for collapse $`\nu _c=\delta _{crit}(z)/\sigma (M)`$. In addition, we introduce the cosmological density parameters

$`\mathrm{\Omega }_m=\rho _m/\rho _{crit,0};\mathrm{\Omega }_k=k/(H_0R_0)^2;\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=\mathrm{\Lambda }/(3H_0^2)`$

which satisfies $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m+\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Omega }_k=1`$ and where $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is the cosmological constant, $`R_0`$ is today’s scale factor of the universe and $`k=0,\pm 1`$ is the spatial curvature of the universe. The present mass variance for the fluctuation spectrum fitted on mass $`M`$ takes the form

$$\sigma ^2(M)=\frac{1}{2\pi ^2}_0^{\mathrm{}}k^2p(k)W^2(Rk)dk$$
(2)
in which $`W(x)=3(sinxxcosx)/x^3`$ works as the Fourier-Space representation of a spherical top-hat window function and $`M=4\pi R^3\rho _m/3`$. We parameterize the power spectrum of initial fluctuation by

$$p(k)=Ak^nT^2(k)$$
(3)
The normalization of the power spectrum is realized by $`\sigma _8`$, the rms mass fluctuation on a scale of $`8h^1`$Mpc, and the Harrison-Zeldovich case of the primordial power spectrum, i.e., n=1, is adopted. The transfer function of an adiabatic CDM model is given by Bardeen et al.10

$$T(q)=\frac{\mathrm{ln}(1+2.34q)}{2.34q}[1+3.89q+(16.1q)^2+(5.46q)^3+(6.71q)^4]^{\frac{1}{4}}$$
(4)
where $`q=(k/h`$Mpc$`{}_{}{}^{1})/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=\mathrm{\Omega }_mhexp[\mathrm{\Omega }_b(1+\sqrt{2h}/\mathrm{\Omega }_m)]`$ is the shape parameter with the baryon density $`\mathrm{\Omega }_b`$, the mean density of baryons in the universe with respect to the critical density at the present.

The overdensity linearly extrapolated to the present epoch is characterized by the normalized linear growth factor $`D(z):\delta _{crit}(z)=\delta _{crit}(0)/D(z)`$, where $`\delta _{crit}(0)`$ has a week dependence on $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m`$ and can be approximated by

$`\delta _{crit}(0)=\{\begin{array}{cc}0.15(12\pi )^{2/3}\hfill & \mathrm{\Omega }_k=0and\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=0\hfill \\ 0.15(12\pi )^{2/3}\mathrm{\Omega }_{m}^{}{}_{}{}^{0.0185}\hfill & \mathrm{\Omega }_m<1and\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=0\hfill \\ 0.15(12\pi )^{2/3}\mathrm{\Omega }_{m}^{}{}_{}{}^{0.0055}\hfill & \mathrm{\Omega }_k=0\hfill \end{array}`$ (8)
where we have not taken into account the dependence of the $`\delta _{crit}(0)`$ on redshift $`z`$, which Lokas and Hoffman even consider11. It is convenient to express the growth factor as $`D(z)=[g(z)/g(0)]/(1+z)`$, where the best-fit of $`g(z)`$ reads12

$$g(z)=\frac{(5/2)\mathrm{\Omega }_m(z)}{\mathrm{\Omega }_m(z)^{4/7}\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }(z)+(1+\mathrm{\Omega }_m(z)/2)(1+\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }(z)/70)}$$
(9)
where

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_m(z)=\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_m(1+z)^3}{E^2(z)},\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }(z)=\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }}{E^2(z)}$$
(10)
where $`E^2(z)=\mathrm{\Omega }_m(1+z)^3+\mathrm{\Omega }_k(1+z)^2+\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$.

Based on the theoretical expression above, we can easily get the total number $`N`$ of the virialized objects with the mass larger than $`M_0`$

$$N=_0^{\mathrm{}}[_{M_0}^{\mathrm{}}\frac{dn}{dM}dM]\frac{dV}{dz}dz$$
(11)
where $`dV`$ is the comoving volume element for the Friedmann-Robertson-Walker metric and $`\frac{dV}{dz}`$ takes the form

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dV}{dz}}=\{\begin{array}{cc}4\pi \frac{c^3}{H_0^3}\frac{D_a^2(1+z)^2\mathrm{cos}[\sqrt{\mathrm{\Omega }_k}f]}{\sqrt{1+\mathrm{\Omega }_kD_a^2(1+z)^2}E(z)}\hfill & for\mathrm{\Omega }_k<0\hfill \\ 4\pi \frac{c^3}{H_0^3}\frac{D_a^2(1+z)^2}{E(z)}\hfill & for\mathrm{\Omega }_k=0\hfill \\ 4\pi \frac{c^3}{H_0^3}\frac{D_a^2(1+z)^2\mathrm{cosh}[\sqrt{\mathrm{\Omega }_k}f]}{\sqrt{1+\mathrm{\Omega }_kD_a^2(1+z)^2}E(z)}\hfill & for\mathrm{\Omega }_k>0\hfill \end{array}`$ (15)
where $`D_a=d_AH_0/c`$, $`d_A`$ is the angular diameter distance and $`f=_0^zdz/E(z)`$.

## 3  Results

In this paper, we exploit the three representative cosmological models: Model 1, standard CDM (SCDM) model, a flat model with $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m=1`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$; Model 2, flat Lambda CDM ($`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM) model, a low density flat model with $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m=0.3`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=0.7`$; Model 3, open CDM (OCDM) model , a low density open model with $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m=0.3`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$, which are all in detail listed in Table 1. Throughout this paper, we take $`H_0=100h`$kms-1Mpc-1.

It is obvious from the Eq.(11) that the total number $`N`$ decrease with the increase of the mass $`M_0`$. Setting $`N=1`$, we can finally obtain the largest virial mass $`M_0`$ (or $`M_{vir}`$) for virialized object, which is connected to the virial radius and virial temperature respectively13

$$M_{vir}=4\pi r_{vir}^3\rho _{crit}\mathrm{\Delta }_c/3,$$
(16)
$$kT=1.39f_T(\frac{M}{10^{15}M_{}})^{2/3}(h^2\mathrm{\Delta }_cE^2)^{1/3}keV,$$
(17)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }_c`$ represents the overdensity of dark matter with respect to the critical density $`\rho _{crit}(z)`$ and can be approximated by14

$`\mathrm{\Delta }_c=18\pi ^2+82x39x^2`$ for $`\mathrm{\Omega }_k=0`$; $`\mathrm{\Delta }_c=18\pi ^2+60x32x^2`$ for $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$,

where $`x=\mathrm{\Omega }_m(1+z)^3/E^2(z)1`$. The critical density of the universe at a given redshift $`z`$ is related to the present critical average mass density by

$$\rho _{crit}(z)=\rho _{crit,0}E(z)^{1/2}.$$
(18)
In this paper the normalization factor $`f_T`$ in Eq.(17) is taken to be 1.1. The virial temperature and radius corresponding to the largest mass of the virialized halos for the cosmological models are also demonstrated in Table 1.

## 4  Conclusion and Discussion

From Table 1 we can see that the different cosmological models may yield the different result about virial mass, temperature and radius for the largest virialized halos. As expected, the result from the flat $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM model with the largest virialized cluster mass of about $`9.01\times 10^{15}h^1M_{}`$ is in good agreement with the mass of $`10^{15}h^1M_{}`$ for a typical rich cluster, while that for OCDM model with the mass $`1.62\times 10^{15}h^1M_{}`$ is roughly consistent with the mass for the typical rich clusters. In addition, the SCDM model clearly gives a result in conflict with the other cosmological models and results observed. Due to the accumulative effect of the integration for volume(or redshift) over the whole space in the universe, the prediction for virial mass is slightly greater than the observed one. Therefore both SCDM model and OCDM model can be ruled out. On the other hand, the measurement of luminosity-redshift relation for SN Ia suggests that the expansion of the universe is accelerating, which indicates the existence of a cosmological constant or dark energy possessing negative pressure $`p`$ and equation of state $`\omega =p/\rho `$15,16. And the observation of curvature of the universe from the highest redshift cosmological test-CMB, also reveals that the universe is flat, which is consistent with the standard inflationary prediction. As a result, the precise measurements of accelerating expansion of the universe from SN Ia and the spatial curvature from the CMB may combine to suggest a flat $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM model with approximately $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m=1/3`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=2/3`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_k=0`$17,18. In a sense, the obtained largest virialized object , which is referred to as the complement to the observations of the CMB, SN Ia and the large scale structure of the universe, may provide a strong support to the present popular $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM model.

Acknowledgments:
We are grateful for the hospitality of Prof. Xiang-Ping Wu’s Cosmology group of the National Astronomical Observatory and Prof. Wu’s many useful suggestions. We thank the anonymous referee for helpful comments.

References
1. J.P.Henry and K.A.Arnaud, ApJ. 372,410 (1991).
2. V.R.Eke, J.F.Navarro and C.S.Frenk, ApJ. 503,569 (1998).
3. M.Markevitch, W.R. Forman, C.L.Sarazin and A.Vikhlinin,ApJ. 540,27 (1998).
4. K.M.Ashman, P.Salucci and M.Persic, MNRAS. 260,610 (1993).
5. W.H.Press, and P.Schechter, Astrophys. J. 187, 425 (1974).
6. G.Efstathiou et al, MNRAS.235,715 (1988).
7. R.G.Carlbeng et al, Astrophys. J. 340,47 (1989).
8. J.A.Peacock et al, MNRAS. 243,133 (1990).
9. J.R.Bond et al, Astrophys. J. 379,440 (1991).
10. J.M.Bardeen et al, Astrophys. J. 304,15 (1986).
11. E.L.Lokas, Y.Hoffman, astroph/0011295.
12. S.M.Carroll, W.H.Press and E.L.Turner,ARA and A. 30,499 (1992).
13. G.L.Bryan and M.L.Norman, Astrophys. J. 495,80-99 (1998).
14. Peebles and P.J.E ,The large-scale structure of the Universe (Princeton, NJ: Princeton Universe Press) (1980).
15. A.G.Riess et al, Astrophys. J. 116,1009 (1998).
16. S.Perlmutter et al, Astrophys. J. 517,565 (1999).
17. L.Wang et al astro-ph/9901388 (1999).
18. S.Perlmutter et al, astro-ph/9901052 (1999).


text:
# Energy and Efficiency of Adiabatic Quantum Search Algorithms

## I Introduction

The subject of quantum computation and quantum information theory has attracted a great deal of attention in the recent past (for reviews, see review1 ; review0 ; review ). This is mainly due to the existence of many algorithms showing that the principles of quantum mechanics can be used to greatly enhance the efficiency of solving specific computational problems. Notable among them are the factorization algorithm due to Shor shor , the algorithms of Deutsch and Jozsa deutsch ; dj  and the data search algorithm due to Grover grover , which is the subject of the present paper.

Assume that there are a total of $`N`$ items in a completely unstructured database, out of which exactly one is marked (item $`m`$ say). The task is to find that marked element in as few steps as possible. Classically, on average $`N/2`$ steps are required, but Grover was able to devise a quantum search algorithm which finds the marked element in $`𝒪(\sqrt{N})`$ steps grover . Moreover, this is the best that one can do since Grover’s algorithm saturates the lower bound found by Bennett et al BBBV  (henceforth referred to as the BBBV bound. See also fg ; gg ; zalka ). Recently it was suggested adia1 ; fg  that such gates can be replaced entirely by a continuously time varying Hamiltonian which evolves a chosen initial quantum mechanical state directly to the required marked item/state in an efficient way. The details of this “adiabatic” approach are as follows: consider $`N2^n`$ items in the database, each associated with one vector in the complete orthonormal vector set $`\{|i,i=0,\mathrm{},N1\}`$ in the Hilbert space of $`n`$ spin-$`1/2`$ objects. Assume that the initial state of the quantum computer is the symmetric (normalized) state:

$$|\psi _0=\frac{1}{\sqrt{N}}\underset{i=0}{\overset{N1}{}}|i.$$
(1)
Let $`|m`$ denote the eigenstate associated with the marked item. Now define the two Hermitian operators

$`H_0`$ $`=`$ $`I|\psi _0\psi _0|`$ (2)
$`H_1`$ $`=`$ $`I|mm|`$ (3)
whose ground states are $`|\psi _0`$ and $`|m`$, respectively, and the time dependent Hamiltonian

$$H(t)=(1s(t))H_0+s(t)H_1.$$
(4)
In the above, $`s(t)`$ is some monotonically increasing function of time $`t`$, subject to the conditions

$$s(0)=0,s(T)=1.$$
(5)
where $`T`$ is the total computation time. Note that $`H_1`$, which projects out the marked state, plays the role of the “oracle” of the Grover algorithm.

As long as the time evolution is slow enough, the adiabatic theorem guarantees that the state $`|\psi _0`$ will evolve into the desired state $`|m`$ in time $`T`$. In Ref.rc  it was shown that the optimal running time for such an adiabatic quantum search goes as $`𝒪(\sqrt{N})`$, consistent with the BBBV bound.

The purpose of this letter is to present the results of a detailed and rigorous analysis of the general form of this search algorithm. The corresponding equations reduce exactly to a two-dimensional system which can easily be solved numerically for arbitrary $`N`$ without making any approximations. In principle, the generalized algorithm can be used to speed-up the search, but, as one might expect this comes at a cost: it is necessary to inject a large amount of energy, albeit temporarily into the system. We illustrate this mechanism with a specific example, and then derive the adiabatic analogue of the BBBV bound and comment on its implications.

## II A General Class of Models

We begin by considering a time dependent Hamiltonian of the following general form:

$$H(t)=f(t)H_0+g(t)H_1,$$
(6)
where $`H_0`$ and $`H_1`$ are given by (2) and (3). $`f(t)`$ and $`g(t)`$ are arbitrary functions of time, subject to the boundary conditions:

$`f(0)=1`$ , $`g(0)=0`$ (7)
$`\text{and}f(T)=0`$ , $`g(T)=1.`$ (8)
Once again, the system evolves from the initial state $`|\psi _0`$ to the marked state $`|m`$ in time $`T`$. Note, however, that unlike the usual algorithm, $`f`$ and $`g`$ are not necessarily monotonic (and hence bounded above by one), nor do they not obey the constraint $`f+g=1`$. This will play an important role later on.

It is a straightforward exercise to find all $`N`$ eigenvalues $`\{E_j(t)\}`$ of the Hamiltonian $`H(t)`$ and their corresponding eigenvectors $`|E_j,t`$. The two lowest eigenvalues are

$$E_\pm (t)=\frac{1}{2}\left[(f+g)\pm \sqrt{(fg)^2+\frac{4}{N}fg}\right].$$
(9)
The higher energy eigenvalue is $`(N2)`$ fold degenerate:

$$E_i(t)=f+g,i\pm .$$
(10)
From the expression (9) it follows that the eigenvalues $`E_\pm `$ are non-degenerate as long as $`f`$ and $`g`$ are non-negative and do not vanish simultaneously.

Without loss of generality we now write the solutions $`|\psi (t)`$ to the time dependent Schrödinger equation in terms of the complete basis of energy eigenstates:

$$|\psi (t)=\underset{j=\pm ,i}{}a_j(t)e^{\frac{i}{\mathrm{}}_0^tE_j(t^{})𝑑t^{}}|E_j,t.$$
(11)
The probability amplitudes $`a_\pm (t)`$ for the two lowest energy eigenstates decouple from those of the higher excitations. They obey the simple equations:

$$\dot{a}_\pm =F_\pm a_{}.$$
(12)
In the above $`\dot{}d/dt`$ and

$$F_+=F_{}^{}=\frac{\sqrt{N1}}{N}\frac{\dot{g}fg\dot{f}}{\omega ^2}\mathrm{exp}\left(i_0^t\omega 𝑑t^{}\right),$$
(13)
and we have defined:

$$\omega (t):=E_+(t)E_{}(t)=\sqrt{(fg)^2+\frac{4}{N}fg}.$$
(14)
We have also used the following matrix elements:

$`E_+,t\left|{\displaystyle \frac{dH}{dt}}\right|E_{},t`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{N1}}{N}}{\displaystyle \frac{\dot{f}g\dot{g}f}{\omega }}`$ (15)
$`E_\pm ,t\left|{\displaystyle \frac{dH}{dt}}\right|E_i,t`$ $`=`$ $`0,i\pm .`$ (16)
According to the adiabatic theorem mess , as used in adia1 , if there is a small number $`ϵ<<1`$, such that for all $`t`$,

$$E_+,t\left|\frac{dH}{dt}\right|E_{},t\frac{1}{\omega ^2}ϵ$$
(17)
and if the system starts in the ground state $`|\psi _0`$ of $`H(t)`$ at $`t=0`$, then the probability of transition to the excited state, $`|a_+(t)|^2`$, will not exceed a number of order $`ϵ^2`$. Note that for the theorem to hold, the eigenvalues $`E_\pm (t)`$ must never cross. For a given desired computational accuracy $`ϵ`$, Eq.(17) limits the rate at which the Hamiltonian can evolve, and therefore puts a lower bound on the total running time $`T`$. In order to calculate the bound, one needs more information about the form of functions $`f(t)`$ and $`g(t)`$. For example, if $`f(t)=1s(t)`$ and $`g(t)=s(t)`$, as in Eq.(4), the total running time $`T`$ can be minimized by choosing $`ds/dt`$ to saturate the bound (17) at each instant in time. This results in a running time of order $`\sqrt{N}`$ rc , consistent with the BBBV bound BBBV .

## III A Specific Example

We now illustrate with a specific example that more general choices for the functions $`f(t)`$ and $`g(t)`$ allow the computation to be performed considerably more rapidly. Consider $`f(t)`$ and $`g(t)`$ to be quadratic functions of $`s(t)`$:

$$f(s)=1s+As(1s),g(s)=s+As(1s)(0s1),$$
(18)
where $`A`$ is a constant and $`s(t)`$ is again a function of time that varies monotonically between 0 and 1, so that the required boundary conditions (7-8) are satisfied. Note that $`f`$ and $`g`$ are not monotonic in this case. Their peak values are $`A/4+1/21/4A`$ respectively (occurring at $`s=1/2(11/A)`$ respectively). The “adiabaticity condition” (17) in this case becomes (we use $`d/dt=(ds/dt)d/ds`$)

$`{\displaystyle \frac{ds}{dt}}{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{N1}}{N}}{\displaystyle \frac{1+A(12s+2s^2)}{\left[(12s)+\frac{4}{N}s(1s)\left[1+As(1s)A^2\right]\right]^{3/2}}}ϵ.`$ (19)
For a system satisfying the constraint (19), the minimum computation time can again be found by adjusting $`s(t)`$ so that the inequality is saturated at all times. This yields a minimum running time of:

$$T_{min}=\frac{1}{ϵ}\frac{\sqrt{N1}}{N}_0^1𝑑s\frac{\left|1+A(12s+2s^2)\right|}{\left[(12s)+\frac{4}{N}s(1s)\left[1+As(1s)A^2\right]\right]^{3/2}}.$$
(20)
If $`A=0`$, the result of adia1  is reproduced. However, by choosing $`A`$ appropriately, considerably lower running times can be achieved. For example, if $`A=\sqrt{N}1`$ we get :

$`T_{min}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{ϵ}}\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2}}\right)+𝒪({\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{N}}}).`$ (21)
The limit (21) can be obtained by Taylor expanding the integrand in (20) about $`N=\mathrm{}`$. This is possible for the choice $`A=\sqrt{N}`$ because the denominator does not vanish anywhere when $`N=\mathrm{}`$. One has to be considerably more careful in deriving the limit for other values of $`A`$. We have also verified (21) numerically.

Thus we see that the data search can be completed in a constant time, independent of $`N`$. The cost of this improvement is that the energy of the system gets very large for a finite time before returning to zero at the end of the computation. In particular, for the choices of $`f`$ and $`g`$ in (18), $`E_{}(s)`$ reaches a maximum of $`(A+1)/4`$ (for $`N1`$) at $`s=1/2`$, so that if $`A=\sqrt{N}`$, the maximum energy grows with $`\sqrt{N}`$ as well.

By numerically solving (12), it can be confirmed that the quantum computer indeed remains in the ground state at all times. One can explicitly calculate the transition probability $`P_{}(t)=|a_{}(t)|^2`$ as a function of time (by the equations of motion (12), the corresponding $`P_+(t)=|a_+(t)|^2`$ is guaranteed to be $`1P_{}(t)`$). Figure 1 illustrates a sample solution with $`A=\sqrt{N}`$ and $`s(t)`$ chosen to saturate the inequality (19) at all times $`t`$. The transition probability $`|a_{}|^2`$ remains above $`(1ϵ^2)`$ and the graph is plotted till the end of running time $`ϵt=1+\pi /22.57`$.

We have explored numerically other choices of $`A`$. For $`AN^\alpha `$, where $`\alpha 0.5`$, the calculational running time approaches a constant for large $`N`$, with the constant of proportionality decreasing as $`\alpha `$ increases. A systematic analysis of this problem is in progress dkk3 , but in light of this and the discussion below, it is interesting to speculate what happens to the running time for a non-polynomial choice such as $`Ae^N`$.

## IV Adiabatic Version of the BBBV Bound

At this stage it is natural to ask what are the most general conditions that allow a speed-up of the search algorithm. This question is answered in the following theorem, which generalizes the results of BBBV ; fg ; gg ; zalka ; rc .

> THEOREM: Suppose there exists an unstructured adiabatic quantum search algorithm that can successfully evolve the initial state (1) to any one of a complete set of orthogonal states $`\{|m\}`$ via a Hamiltonian containing an oracle term of the form $`g(t)|m><m|`$. Then the time $`T`$ for the computation is bounded below by the relationship:
>
> $$\frac{1}{\mathrm{}}_0^Tg(t)𝑑t\frac{k\sqrt{N}}{4}$$
> (22)
> in the limit that $`N`$ is large ($`k`$ is a constant of order unity).

This inequality is virtually identical to the one obtained by rc . The one important difference is that we do not restrict $`g(t)`$ to be less than one, nor do we impose the constraint $`f(t)+g(t)=1`$. Details of the proof can be found in rc  so we will not repeat the details, merely outline the important ingredients. The key is to decompose the Hamiltonian into two parts:

$$H(t)=H_{2m}(t)+H_1(t),$$
(23)
where

$`H_{2m}(t)`$ $`=`$ $`g(t)|mm|.`$ (24)
contains all the dependence on the needle state $`|m`$ and $`H_1(t)`$ is an arbitrary term independent of the state $`|m`$ (in particular, for the Hamiltonian (6), $`H_1(t)=f(t)+g(t)f(t)|\psi _0\psi _0|`$). Note, however, that $`H_1(t)`$ is completely general, apart from the restriction that it not depend explicitly on the state $`|m`$.

Consider two computers at time $`t`$, evolving to states $`|m`$ and $`|m^{}`$ respectively, represented by the wavefunctions $`|\psi _m,t`$ and $`|\psi _m^{},t`$ respectively subject to the boundary conditions:

$`|\psi _m,0`$ $`=`$ $`|\psi _m^{},0=|\psi _0`$ (25)
$`|\psi _m,T`$ $`=`$ $`|m;|\psi _m^{},T=|m^{}.`$ (26)
In terms of the specific model we considered earlier, this requires $`f(T)=0`$ and $`g(T)=1`$. Following the steps in rc  it is straightforward to obtain the inequality:

$$\underset{m,m^{}}{}\left[1|\psi _m,T|\psi _m^{},T|^2\right]\frac{4N^{3/2}}{\mathrm{}}_0^Tg(t)𝑑t.$$
(27)
The assumed orthogonality of the final states at time $`T`$ implies that

$$1|\psi _m,T|\psi _m^{},T|^2k,mm^{}$$
(28)
where $`k`$ is a number of order 1. Summing over $`m`$ and $`m^{}`$ in Eq.(27) for $`N1`$ yields Eq.(22) as desired. Again we stress the Eq.(22) is virtually identical to the result obtained in rc . The key difference concerns our relaxed assumptions about the functions $`f`$ and $`g`$ in the Hamiltonian.

Eq.(22) shows that the BBBV bound can only be beaten if the mean value of $`g(t)`$ over the time $`T`$ grows as some power of $`N`$. If this power is $`1/2`$ then the above theorem states that the running time $`T`$ may be bounded by a constant independent of $`N`$, as in the example quoted in this paper. Note that this result is a generalization of a similar bound obtained in rc  for the special case given by (4), in which $`g(t)`$ never exceeds order unity. It also is a natural extension of the result presented by Farhi and Gutmann in fg  for constant $`g`$.

## V Conclusions

In summary, we have presented the results of an analysis of a generalized adiabatic quantum search algorithm. The corresponding Schrödinger equation was shown to reduce exactly to a two dimensional system for arbitrary $`N`$. We derived the adiabatic analogue of the BBBV bound. Our theorem shows that the optimal speed normally associated with Grover’s search algorithm can be improved in this framework by a suitable choice of the time-dependent Hamiltonian. As one might expect from dimensional grounds this speed-up requires an increase in energy, at least temporarily. However, it should be emphasized that it is not the total Hamiltonian that needs to be increased, only the coefficient in front of the oracle term. In principle this leaves open the possibility of speeding up the search while keeping the ground state energy of the system small. Another way to keep the ground state energy zero would be to use a new Hamiltonian obtained from (6) by subtracting the term $`E_{}(t)I`$ from the latter. Note that although the resultant Hamiltonian cannot be written in the form $`fH_0+gH_1`$, since $`E_{}(0)=0=E_{}(T)`$, it would still evolve the initial state to $`|m`$. Moreover, the ‘gap’ $`\omega (t)`$, as well as the matrix element (15) will remain intact, implying that the running time will still be a constant, given by (21). In any case, our analysis suggests that the physical quantity $`\frac{1}{\mathrm{}}_0^Tg(t)𝑑t`$ provides an adiabatic analogue of resources required for the unstructured search, just as the number of operations does for the conventional quantum search.

It must be emphasized that the system considered here is highly idealized. The Hamiltonian is non-local in the sense that $`H_0`$ and $`H_1`$ require all qubits to be coupled simultaneously. It is therefore not clear how to implement such a Hamiltonian in a realistic physical system. One should therefore investigate the circumstances under which one can find simpler, more local, Hamiltonians that have the same ground states and hence can be used as the basis of a realistic adiabatic quantum search algorithm. This issue will be the subject of a separate publicationadkkz2 .

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank D. Ahrensmeier, J. Currie, R. Laflamme, V. Linek and H. Zaraket for useful discussions and encouragement at various stages during this work. G.K. also thanks N. Cerf and J. Roland for helpful input. We are grateful to A. Childs, E. Farhi, S. Gutmann, H. Ollivier and D. Poulin for comments on an earlier version of this paper. This work was supported in part by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada.


text:
# A Cosmological Tale of Two Varying Constants

## I Introduction

There have been many studies of the cosmological consequences of allowing some of the traditional constants of Nature to change. These include evaluations of the effects of altering the observed value of a constant to another constant value and studies of the time-evolution of ’constants’ in generalisations of the general theory of relativity that allow them to become space-time variables. The most studied case is that of varying the Newtonian gravitation constant, $`G`$, through the Brans-Dicke (BD) scalar-tensor theory of gravity . Recently, following Bekenstein, , Sandvik, Barrow and Magueijo , have developed a theory (BSBM) which describes the space-time variation of the fine structure constant. In these, and other, studies of varying constants only a single constant is allowed to vary at one time. However, since we have no understanding of why the constants of Nature take the values that they do, whether they are logically independent, or even whether they all are truly constant, this restriction is somewhat artificial. Motivated by recent observational evidence for a time evolution of the fine structure ’constant’, $`\alpha ,`$ at redshifts $`z13.5`$, , , , we have unified the BD and BSBM theories to produce an exact theory which describes the simultaneous variation of $`\alpha `$ and $`G`$. This type of model also provides a framework within which to consider the consequences of changes in the scale of extra dimensions of space on apparent three-dimensional coupling constants.

In section 2 we set up the theory and evolution equations for Friedmann universes in a theory that generalises general relativity to include varying $`\alpha `$ and $`G.`$ In section 3 we show how to find the cosmological solutions during the dust-dominated eras. We find an exact solution where $`\alpha G`$ is constant during the dust era while $`\alpha `$ and $`G^1`$ both increase with time. We then determine analytically the coupled evolution of $`\alpha `$ and $`G`$ during the radiation, curvature, and vacuum-energy dominated eras of cosmological expansion. From here we go on to check the solutions numerically and we show how in Universes like our own, with actual initial values for $`\alpha `$ and $`G`$ the asymptotic behaviour is never reached. Instead we find constant $`\alpha `$ and $`G`$ in the radiation era, slow growth of $`\alpha `$ and slow decrease in $`G`$ in the dust epoch, constant values for both in curvature dominated universe, and constant $`\alpha `$ and decreasing $`G`$ in $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ dominated epoch. Generally we find that the overall evolution of the expansion scale factor of the universe is dictated by the $`G`$ variation and assumes the form found in the Brans-Dicke theory to a very good approximation irrespective of the $`\alpha `$ variation. The evolution of $`\alpha `$ is influenced by the $`G`$ variation but does not differ much from that found in the BSBM cosmologies where only $`\alpha `$ varies.

## II Field Equations

We introduce the structure of the BSBM theory for varying $`\alpha `$ as another matter field in Brans-Dicke theory. The resulting theories has two scalar fields: the BD field $`\varphi `$ propagating variations in $`G,`$ and the field $`\psi `$ propagating variations in $`\alpha `$. The action for this theory becomes

$$S=d^4x\sqrt{g}\left(R\varphi +\frac{16\pi }{c^4}\omega _{BD}\frac{\varphi _{,\mu }\varphi ^{,\mu }}{\varphi }\right)$$
(1)
where

$$=_m+_{em}\mathrm{exp}(2\psi )+_\psi ,$$
(2)
and

$`_\psi ={\displaystyle \frac{\omega }{2}}\psi _{,\mu }\psi ^{,\mu }.`$

The field equations for the theory, specialised to the case of a homogeneous and isotropic Friedmann space-time metric containing dust and radiation perfect fluids are:

$`3{\displaystyle \frac{\dot{a}^2}{a^2}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{8\pi }{\varphi }}\left(\rho _m(1+|\zeta |\mathrm{exp}(2\psi ))+\rho _r\mathrm{exp}(2\psi )+\rho _\psi \right)3{\displaystyle \frac{\dot{a}^{}\dot{\varphi }}{a\varphi }}+{\displaystyle \frac{\omega _{BD}}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\dot{\varphi }^2}{\varphi ^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{k}{a^2}}`$ (3)
$`\ddot{\varphi }+3{\displaystyle \frac{\dot{a}}{a}}\dot{\varphi }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{8\pi }{3+2\omega _{BD}}}(\rho _m2\rho _\psi )`$ (4)
$`\ddot{\psi }+3H\dot{\psi }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\omega }}\mathrm{exp}(2\psi )\zeta \rho _m`$ (5)
$`\dot{\rho _m}+3H\rho _m`$ $`=`$ $`0`$ (6)
$`\dot{\rho _r}+4H\rho _r`$ $`=`$ $`2\dot{\psi }\rho _r`$ (7)
where $`\rho _\psi =\frac{\omega }{2}\dot{\psi }^2`$ is the kinetic energy density for the $`\psi `$ fluid, with $`\omega `$ the coupling setting the relevant energy scale for the $`\psi `$-field. $`\zeta `$ is defined as the ratio $`_{em}/\rho _m`$ averaged over all types of matter in the universe. The fine structure ’constant’ is given by ($`\mathrm{}=c=1`$)

$$\alpha \alpha _0\mathrm{exp}(2\psi ),$$
(8)
where $`\alpha _0`$ is the present day value of the fine structure ’constant’. The present-day value of $`G`$ is set equal to unity.

We shall confine our attention to the case with $`\zeta <0`$ where the magnetic energy dominates the electric field energy of the matter coupling to electric charge in the universe. This places particular constraints upon the nature of the cold dark matter dominating the universe today. From our earlier studies, -, we know that this case provides a slow variation with $`\alpha `$ increasing logarithmically in time during the dust era but staying constant during any subsequent curvature or cosmological constant dominated era. Also, in a universe with a matter-radiation balance like our own, $`\alpha `$ remains constant during the radiation era except close to the initial singularity. Negative $`\zeta `$ models are well behaved and correspond to the dark matter in the universe being dominated by magnetic coupling, (for example superconducting cosmic strings contribute $`\zeta =1`$). The expansion scale factor evolution is not affected by variations in $`\alpha `$ to leading order. By contrast, the choice $`\zeta >0`$ creates major changes to cosmological evolution. It does not lead to slow increase of $`\alpha `$ with time during the dust era, as observations suggest, and the evolution of the expansion scale factor is affected to leading order (see for example refs. who discuss related theories for the variation of $`\alpha `$ with $`\zeta >0`$ and hence $`\dot{\alpha }<0`$ cosmological behaviour in the dust era in contrast to our discussions in - and below). In what follows we shall investigate how the $`\zeta <0`$ evolution of the fine structure constant couples to variation of $`G`$ in the Brans-Dicke theory.

The constant $`\omega _{BD}`$ is the Brans-Dicke parameter and $`\omega `$ is the analogous parameter for the coupling of the $`\psi `$ field driving variations in $`\alpha .`$ We have used the facts that dust is pressureless, $`p=\rho _r/3`$ for a sea of radiation and $`p=\rho _\psi `$ for a fluid with kinetic energy only. Equation (3) can be recast for numerical solutions

$$\frac{\dot{a}}{a}=\frac{1}{2}\frac{\dot{\varphi }}{\varphi }\pm \frac{1}{2}\sqrt{\left(\frac{\dot{\varphi }}{\varphi }\right)^2+\frac{4}{3}\left(\frac{8\pi \rho }{\varphi }+\frac{\omega _{BD}}{2}\left(\frac{\dot{\varphi }}{\varphi }\right)^2\right)4\frac{k}{a^2}}$$
(9)
and eqn. (7) integrates to give $`\rho _\gamma \mathrm{exp}(2\psi )a^4.`$ Note that this is the combination that appears in the generalised Friedmann equation, (3). In ref.  we showed how to deduce the solutions of these equations when $`G`$ is constant. Here, we will extend this analysis to the new situation where both $`\alpha `$ and $`G`$ vary in time.

## III Dust era evolution

From our study of the Friedmann models in BSBM theory we know that, to a very good approximation, the $`\alpha `$ variations do not significantly affect the evolution of the expansion scale factor $`a(t)`$. The effects of varying $`G`$ in Brans-Dicke theories is different. No matter how slow the variation in $`G`$, a correction will occurs to the power of the time-variation of the expansion scale factor. In the dust era we assume the asymptotic solution for the Brans-Dicke (BD) flat dust model holds to high accuracy. This is an exact solution of (3) for $`\zeta =k=\psi =\rho _\gamma =0`$ and is the late-time attractor of the general flat BD dust solution (see refs. , ) which differs only as $`t0`$, where the solution becomes dominated by the kinetic energy of the $`\varphi `$ field and approaches the BD vacuum solution. Thus, to leading order the expansion dynamics and $`\varphi `$ evolution are described at late times by the exact Brans-Dicke dust solution with $`k=0`$:

$`a(t)`$ $``$ $`t^{(2n)/3};\varphi =\varphi _0t^n`$ (10)
$`\rho `$ $`=`$ $`Ma^3\dot{M}0`$ (11)
$`\varphi _0`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{8\pi M}{n(3+2\omega _{BD})}}`$ (12)
where $`n`$ is related to the Brans-Dicke parameter by

$$n2/(4+3\omega _{BD}),$$
(13)
and $`M`$ is the present density of the universe in Planck units, $`M10^{123}`$.

What is the asymptotic solution for $`\alpha `$ during the dust era? The relevant equation is (5), which can now be rewritten as

$$\frac{d}{dt}(t^{2n}\dot{\psi })=N\mathrm{exp}(2\psi )$$
(14)
where

$`N{\displaystyle \frac{2\zeta }{\omega }}\rho _ma^3={\displaystyle \frac{2\zeta M}{\omega }}>0\dot{N}0,`$

and $`\zeta /\omega 10^4`$ is the best fit of this parameter ratio to the observations of Webb et. al. -***The value used for $`\zeta /\omega `$ is the value fitted for the BSBM theory with constant $`G`$. However, since $`n`$ is so close to zero it should not be significantly different numerically in the case with varying $`G`$ .

Unlike the case with constant $`G`$, there is an exact solution (for $`\omega _{BD}`$ positive and finite)

$$\psi (t)=\frac{n}{2}\mathrm{ln}(t)+\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{ln}N\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{ln}(\frac{n}{2}\frac{n^2}{2})$$
(15)
so we have, using this solution for $`\psi `$ to solve for $`\varphi `$ in (4):

$$\alpha (t)=\alpha _0\mathrm{exp}(2\psi )=\alpha _0\frac{2Nt^n}{n(1n)}$$
(16)
Hence, there is a simple relationship between $`\alpha (t)`$ and $`G(t)`$:

$$\varphi =G^1=\frac{2\pi \omega (1n)}{\zeta (3+2\omega _{BD})}\frac{\alpha }{\alpha _0}=\frac{2\pi \omega (2+3\omega _{BD})}{\zeta (3+2\omega _{BD})(4+3\omega _{BD})}\frac{\alpha }{\alpha _0}t^n,$$
(17)
so $`\alpha G`$ is always a constant. Note that for large values of $`\omega _{BD}`$ we have a simple relation between the values of $`G`$ and $`\alpha `$:

$$G\frac{\alpha }{\alpha _0}\frac{\zeta \omega _{BD}}{\pi \omega }>0$$
(18)
As expected, $`\alpha `$ increases whilst $`G`$ falls as $`t\mathrm{}`$ in a flat universe. It is interesting to note that the asymptotic value of $`G\alpha `$ is uniquely determined by the parameters in the model with no arbitrary constants.

Although the asymptotic behaviour is now determined, the question of whether this can be reached on a cosmological timescale depends strongly on the choice of initial conditions and needs to be investigated numerically. We can quickly conclude that the asymptotic regime is not reached in our universe. Presently we have $`\alpha 1/137`$, and in our units the numerical value of $`M`$ is extremely small, $`10^{123}`$. Obviously the actual value of $`\alpha `$ is then many orders of magnitude larger than given by the solution in eq.(15) and we are thus nowhere near the asymptotic regime. Consequently, in order to find the behaviour of $`\alpha `$ and $`G`$ we turn to numerical solutions of the equations. We evolve the Friedmann equations through time with initial conditions chosen so as to yield the present day values of $`G`$ and $`\alpha `$. For $`\alpha `$ we find a behaviour very similar to the BSBM theory, with a slow growth giving a relative change of the order $`10^4`$ throughout the dust epoch. $`G`$ goes through a decrease of order $`10^3`$ during the same period. The numerical results are shown in Figures 1 and 2.

## IV Radiation era evolution

The evolution in the radiation era is slightly more complicated because of the contribution of the $`\rho _\psi `$ term to the right-hand side of the $`\varphi `$ evolution equation. This means that we do not have the usual late-time asymptotic behaviour of constant $`\varphi `$ to accompany the $`a=t^{1/2}`$ scale factor as in BD radiation universes. If we assume

$`a=t^{1/2}`$

then we have

$$\frac{d}{dt}(\dot{\varphi }t^{3/2})=R\lambda t^{3/2}\dot{\psi }^2$$
(19)
where

$`\lambda `$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{8\pi \omega }{3+2\omega _{BD}}},`$ (20)
$`R`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{8\pi M}{3+2\omega _{BD}}}={\displaystyle \frac{4\pi \omega N}{\zeta (3+2\omega _{BD})}}`$ (21)
The $`R`$ term is negligible when the kinetic energy of the $`\psi `$ field dominates the matter density during the radiation era. Likewise, the $`\lambda `$ term can be neglected when the matter density dominates the $`\psi `$ kinetic energy. We also have

$$\frac{d}{dt}(\dot{\psi }t^{3/2})=N\mathrm{exp}[2\psi ]$$
(22)
as in the case with constant $`G.`$ This has the exact solution

$$\psi =\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{ln}(8N)+\frac{1}{4}\mathrm{ln}(t)$$
(23)
as before, so $`\dot{\psi }^2=(16t^2)^1`$. If we substitute this in (19)

$$\frac{d}{dt}(\dot{\varphi }t^{3/2})=R\frac{\lambda }{16}t^{1/2}$$
(24)
so

$$\varphi =\varphi _0+2Rt^{1/2}\frac{\lambda }{8}\mathrm{ln}(t)+Ct^{1/2}$$
(25)
where $`C`$ and $`\varphi _0`$ are constants. If the universe expands for long enough to reach the asymptotic regime then we have (as $`R>0)`$

$`\psi `$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\mathrm{ln}(t)`$ (26)
$`\varphi `$ $`=`$ $`G^1{\displaystyle \frac{8\pi \omega N}{\zeta (3+2\omega _{BD})}}t^{1/2}`$ (27)
so, from eqns. (18) and (8),

$$G\frac{\alpha }{\alpha _0}\frac{\zeta (3+2\omega _{BD})}{8\pi \omega N}\frac{\zeta \omega _{BD}}{4\pi \omega N}$$
(28)
for large $`\omega _{BD}`$. Thus we still have the nice asymptotic behaviour of $`\alpha G`$ in the radiation-dominated epoch. However, we again need to compare with numerical results to determine whether these asymptotic solutions can indeed be realised in the Universe. As in the case of dust, the same simple reality check can now be performed on the solution (23). As in the case of constant $`G`$ we are nowhere near this particular solution in our Universe. $`\alpha `$ would need to be several orders of magnitude smaller if it was to satisfy the solution, and as in the BSBM theory we expect instead a constant value of $`\alpha `$ in the rad epoch. This assumption is indeed confirmed by the numerical solutions shown in Figures (2) and (1).

Another possible problem for the analytic solutions above would arise if the kinetic energy of the $`\psi `$ field dominates the matter density during radiation domination. We regard this situation as unrealistic and it cannot be realised asymptotically.

## V Curvature era evolution

During a curvature-dominated phase of an open universe the expansion scale factor tends to that of the Milne vacuum universe, which is an exact solution of general relativity and of Brans-Dicke theory (with constant $`\varphi `$) with

$$a=t$$
(29)
Using this in the propagation equations for $`\varphi `$ and $`\psi ,`$we find that, as $`t\mathrm{}`$, so leading order

$`\psi `$ $`=`$ $`\psi _{}{\displaystyle \frac{N\mathrm{exp}[2\psi _0]}{t}}`$
$`\varphi `$ $`=`$ $`\varphi _{}+{\displaystyle \frac{4\pi \omega N}{\zeta (3+2\omega _{BD})t}}`$
with $`\psi _{}`$ and $`\varphi _{}`$ constants, so both $`\alpha `$ and $`G`$ tend to constant values as $`t\mathrm{}`$. In a universe that passes directly from dust domination to curvature domination these constant values will be very close to the asymptotic attractors for the dust era of evolution found above in eqn. (18) providing the dust epoch has lasted long enough for the attractor to be reached.

The behaviour of $`G,\alpha `$ and $`G\alpha `$ in a universe like our own but which eventually becomes dominated by negative curvature is shown in Figure (2).

## VI Cosmological ’constant’ era evolution

In flat Brans-Dicke cosmologies a solution of the Friedmann equation with cosmic vacuum energy ($`p_v=\rho _v)`$ is

$`a`$ $`=`$ $`t^{\omega _{BD}+\frac{1}{2}}`$ (30)
$`\varphi `$ $`=`$ $`\varphi _ot^2`$ (31)
$`\varphi _0`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{32\pi \rho _v}{(5+6\omega _{BD})(3+2\omega _{BD})}}`$ (32)
and $`\rho _v`$ is constant. This is not the general solution but it is the attractor for the general $`p_v=\rho _v`$ solution at late times . It is a power-law inflation model . Note that in Brans-Dicke theory, unlike in general relativity, a $`p_v=\rho _v`$ stress behaves differently in the Friedmann equation to an explicit constant $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ term. It is the former that describes the stress contributed by a stationary scalar field with a constant potential. Every term in the BD Friedmann equations falls as $`t^2`$ for this solution. It is unusual in that it appears to predict that if the universe has just begun accelerating (as observations imply, ) then $`G`$ should vary rapidly in the solar system. However, this argument assumes that the vacuum stress is dominant everywhere, right down to the solar system scale, which in reality it is not.

If we substitute this solution for $`a(t)`$ (but not $`\varphi `$) in the $`\psi `$ and $`\varphi `$ evolution equations, (4) and (5) then we get, since

$`p_v=\rho _v=const,`$

that

$`\ddot{\varphi }+{\displaystyle \frac{3(2\omega _{BD}+1)}{2t}}\dot{\varphi }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{8\pi }{3+2\omega _{BD}}}(4\rho _v2\rho _\psi ){\displaystyle \frac{8\pi }{3+2\omega _{BD}}}(4\rho _v\omega \dot{\psi }^2)`$
$`\ddot{\psi }+{\displaystyle \frac{3(2\omega _{BD}+1)}{2t}}\dot{\psi }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\omega }}e^{2\psi }\zeta \rho _m0`$
So, at late times

$`\dot{\psi }`$ $`=`$ $`Aa^3=Dt^{3(\omega _{BD}+\frac{1}{2})}`$
$`\psi `$ $`=`$ $`Et^{3\omega _{BD}\frac{1}{2}}+FF`$
$`\ddot{\varphi }+{\displaystyle \frac{3(2\omega _{BD}+1)}{2t}}\dot{\varphi }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{8\pi \omega }{3+2\omega _{BD}}}(4\rho _vQa^6){\displaystyle \frac{32\pi \omega \rho _v}{3+2\omega _{BD}}},`$
so

$$\varphi =A+Bt^2+Ct^{3\omega _{BD}\frac{1}{2}}\varphi _0t^2,$$
(33)
and, as expected, we get the same growing behaviour as in pure BD. When the universe becomes vacuum-energy dominated $`\alpha `$ tends to a constant value but $`\alpha GGt^2`$ continues to fall. This behaviour is confirmed by numerical solutions shown in Figure (1). Using eqn. (18), we see that if $`t_{v\text{ }}`$is the time when a vacuum-dominated era succeeds a sufficiently long dust-dominated era in a flat universe, then at $`tt_v`$ in the vacuum-dominated era we expect

$$\alpha (t)G(t)=\frac{\zeta \omega _{BD}}{\pi \omega }\left(\frac{t_v}{t}\right)^2.$$
(34)
Hence, today, we would have

$$\alpha (t_0)G(t_0)=\frac{\zeta \omega _{BD}}{\pi \omega (1+z_v)^{\frac{4}{1+2\omega _{BD}}}}.$$
(35)
We see that, as in the situation where $`G`$ is constant, the effect of a vacuum energy or quintessence field is to turn off variations in $`\alpha `$ when it takes over the expansion of the universe, .

## VII Discussion

We have formulated a simple gravity theory which extends general relativity, by the addition of two scalar fields, to include time variation of $`G`$ and $`\alpha `$. Previously, the study of the cosmological variation of physical ’constants’ has confined attention to varying one constant only or to discussing the effects of altering the values of physical constants without a self-consistent theory for their dynamical variation , . The structure of unified gauge theories and particle physics theories with extra dimensions has given some indication as to the self consistency conditions required if traditional constants are allowed to vary, .

We have found that the expansion of the universe is affected by varying $`G`$ to first order and the evolution of the expansion scale factor follows the behaviour found in Brans-Dicke cosmologies to leading order without being significantly affected by variations in $`\alpha `$. The variations in $`\alpha `$ are affected by the variations in $`G`$ through their influence on the expansion rate. This is significant in the dust-dominated era of cosmic expansion, which is known to exhibit a special mathematical behaviour in the absence of $`G`$ variation, . The effect of any $`G`$ time variation simplifies the $`\alpha `$ variation and allows an exact solution to be found with $`\alpha t^n,`$where $`n2/(4+3\omega _{BD})`$is determined by the Brans-Dicke parameter $`\omega _{BD}`$.

In both the radiation and dust dominated eras, there are asymptotic solutions in which the product $`G\alpha `$ remains constant and its value is determined uniquely by the coupling constants of the theory. However in universes like our own with the values of $`\alpha `$ and $`G`$ near present values these asymptotic regimes are not reached throughout the life of the universe. Typically our present values for $`\alpha `$ are much larger than the values required by the asymptotic solution.

In a curvature-dominated or quintessence-dominated era the variation in $`\alpha `$ ceases, just as in the situation with no $`G`$ variation . This is an important feature of all models with varying $`\alpha `$ in theories of the BSBM sort because it naturally reconciles evidence of variations in $`\alpha `$ at redshifts $`z13`$, with local ($`z=0.1)`$ constraints from the Oklo natural reactor if the universal expansion began to accelerate at $`z0.7,`$ as current observations imply.

Finally, we reiterate that the conclusions drawn above apply only to varying-$`\alpha `$ theories with negative $`\zeta `$. The exact solutions given in eqs. (15),(16),and (23) for the evolution of $`\alpha (t)`$ during the radiation and dust eras no longer exist when $`\zeta >0`$ and hence $`N<0.`$ During the curvature and cosmological constant-dominated eras the evolution of $`a(t)`$ is significantly changed by the variations of $`\psi `$ and the assumptions (29) and (30) for the scale factor evolution are no longer valid.

The study performed here provides a simple cosmological model in which the variation of two ’constants’ can be studied exactly. A number of extensions are possible. The variations of weak and strong couplings can be included and the constraints imposed by any scheme grand unification can be imposed .

Acknowledgements We thank Bernard Carr and David Mota for discussions. HBS acknowledges support from the Research Council of Norway. The numerical work shown herein was performed on COSMOS, the Origin 2000 supercomputer owned by the UK-CCC.