8.2. When may a -term be described by a minimally coupled scalar field?
Now let us consider the following important question: can a
-term
always be described by a minimally coupled scalar field, for any
observed behaviour of a(t) or H(a) ?
To answer this question let us first consider the equations of motion
describing a FRW universe with matter (dust)
m
and a scalar field
![]() | (96) (97) |
The clue to whether a
-term can be
successfully described by a minimally coupled field
is provided by the background equation for
which
we rewrite in the following form changing the independent variable from
t to a
(
= 0 is assumed):
![]() | (98) |
where a0 is the present value of the FRW scale factor
a(t) and
m
includes all dust-like matter at present (CDM, baryons,
sufficiently massive neutrinos, etc.). Since the left-hand side
of Eq. (98) is always non-negative therefore so is the right-hand
side. From this follows a fundamental restriction on the
expansion law for the Universe, which we write in terms of the following
inequality on the redshift dependence of the Hubble parameter
H(z), 1 + z
a0 /
a:
![]() | (99) |
Actually, Eq. (99) is nothing more than the weak energy
condition for a lambda-field:
+
p
0.
This inequality saturates in the case of a constant
-term (a
cosmological constant). Equation (99)
constitutes the necessary condition for
an arbitrary H(z) dependence to be physically described by
a minimally coupled
scalar field (in the absence of spatial curvature). It will be shown below
that Eq. (99) is also a sufficient condition, since a
knowledge of H(z) and
m permits
a unique reconstruction of the self-interaction potential
V(
) of this scalar
lambda-field
(see section 8.4). Taken
at z = 0, Eq. (99) reduces to the following relation between
the acceleration parameter q0 and
m:
![]() | (100) |
It should be emphasized that we have no idea at present whether or not
Eqs. (99, 100)
are fulfilled. Only future observations will tell us that.
Moreover, as was explained in previous sections, a constant
-term fits
existing data very well. Thus, we know already that the inequalities
(99, 100) are close to saturation. So, it will be not an easy
observational task. In this case, the presence of even a small spatial
curvature may dramatically change our conclusions.
In the case of non-zero spatial curvature
(
0),
Eq. (99) generalizes to:
![]() | (101) |
Therefore, if future data show that the inequality (99) is
not valid, one has either to invoke a positive spatial curvature
for the Universe ( = 1),
or else to discard this model entirely and to
consider a more complicated model of a
-term, modelled
by, say, a scalar-field
non-minimally coupled to gravity. It is easy to verify that in the case of
R
2 / 2
coupling, no necessary conditions such as (99) or
(101) appear. However, as was mentioned above, this type of coupling
is strongly restricted by observational data
[33].
An interesting example of dissipationless decay of a lambda-field is provided by Peebles and Ratra (1988) who consider a minimally coupled scalar field rolling down a potential
![]() |
subject to the equation of motion
![]() | (102) |
(k and are
constants, we set MP = 1 for simplicity).
Let us assume that the energy density of the scalar field
![]() | (103) |
is subdominant at early epochs (as demanded by CMB and nucleosynthesis
constraints) so that
<
B at
z >> 1, where
B is
the density of background matter driving the expansion
of the universe. Assuming a general expansion law for the universe
a(t)
tq the field equation
of motion (102) becomes
![]() | (104) |
which has the solution
![]() | (105) |
Substituting
in (103) we find
t2p -
2, as a result if p > 0 the scalar field density
decreases more slowly than
the background density of matter or radiation which decreases
as
B
t-2. Consequently we find
![]() | (106) |
i.e. for
> 0 the scalar field
density can dominate the
matter/radiation density at late times even if it was subdominant to
begin with
[163,
155].
(This attractive property of scalar fields
is occasionally referred to as `quintessence'.) The rate of growth of
/
m,r
can be modulated by
`tuning' the value of
.
Another way of arriving at this conclusion is to examine the equation of
state of the scalar field while the latter is subdominant, this turns
out to be
![]() | (107) |
where wB is the background equation of state.
From (107) we find
w <
wB i.e. the
equation of state of the scalar field is less stiff than that of matter
driving expansion. The conservation condition
,B
a-3[1 +
w(
, B)]
now guarantees that the scalar field
will come to dominate the expansion dynamics of the universe even if
it was initially subdominant.
As a result
can be significantly small during the radiation
dominated epoch to satisfy nucleosynthesis constraints yet be large
enough today to
give rise to an accelerating universe in agreement with recent supernovae
results.
(Once
begins to
dominate the energy density, the
universe enters into a period of accelerated expansion driven by
the scalar field energy density which begins to mimic an effective
-term.)
A different possibility arises if we consider a scalar field rolling down an exponential potential
![]() |
In the case of a flat universe, the scalar field density scales exactly like the background density of matter driving the expansion of the universe so that the ratio of the scalar field density to the total matter density rapidly approaches a constant value [163, 63, 64]
![]() | (108) |
(wB = 0, 1/3 respectively for dust, radiation).
This `tracker-like' quality whereby the scalar field
contributes the same fixed amount to the total matter density allows it
to play the role of a form of dark matter. However
strong constraints on this model come from
cosmological nucleosynthesis which suggests
/
B
0.2.
(14)
As a result the scalar field in these models is forever destined to
remain subdominant, it can neither dominate the matter density of
the universe nor give rise to its accelerated expansion rate.
A potential which interpolates between an exponential and a power law is
![]() | (109) |
Since V()
exp
,
for
>> 1,
we would expect this potential to reproduce
features of the exponential potential discussed earlier. As a result
/
B
constant and
w
wB,
if the scalar field commences rolling from a large initial value.
As the scalar field rolls down towards smaller values,
the potential begins to resemble the Inflationary `chaotic' form
V(
)
2
2, leading to
late-time Inflation during which
w
- 1. Finally
oscillations of the scalar field
give rise to a `dust-like' phase during which
w
0.
An unusual potential with interesting features was proposed in [215]
![]() | (110) |
However, the requirement that
<< 1 during
the matter dominated epoch, while
~ 1 nowadays, is fulfilled
for this potential only if the present value of
is significantly
larger than MPl. Thus, for practical applications in
the present
universe, this potential shows little difference from the inverse-power-law
potential V
-1.
A useful property of potentials (102),
(109) & (110) is that they significantly alleviate
the fine tuning problem associated with generating
a small cosmological term at precisely
the present epoch. As a result,
can come to
dominate the current cosmological density
from a fairly general class of initial conditions.
A phase space analysis of scalar field models was carried out in
[163,
63,
64,
125]
where it was shown that
both exponential and negative power-law potentials display appealing
attractor-like qualities.
However, despite the many attractive features of `quintessence' models
a degree of fine tuning does remain in fixing the parameters of
the potential and has been commented on in
[125,
118].
It is worth pointing out in this context that the energy density of relic
gravity waves created during Inflation
(g)
behaves like a tracker field since
g /
B
constant, if the
expansion factor grows exponentially during Inflation
[2]. For more realistic
situations in which the inflaton field rolls down its potential slowly
the ratio
g /
B
increases with time with the result that
the graviton energy density may become comparable to
B
at very late times provided Inflation commenced
at the Planck epoch
[168].
COBE measurements of the large angle anisotropy of
the cosmic microwave background (CMB) however
ensure that the gravity wave contribution
to the total matter density is negligibly small today:
g
10-12
[178]. However the
intriguing possibility that quanta of a different type
of fundamental field (the dilaton perhaps) may
come to dominate the energy density of the universe without necessarily
violating CMB bounds remains to be investigated.
Some cosmological consequences of scalar field models and models with a decaying cosmological term have been analyzed in [155, 75, 140, 177, 36, 69, 70, 23] [24, 202, 98, 34, 96, 77, 156, 201, 203]. Candidates for quintessence based on high energy physics and string theory are discussed in [35, 118] and non-minimal scalar field models are treated in [74, 33].
Phenomenological
models usually belong to the
general category of models in which matter
either violates or marginally satisfies the strong energy condition (SEC)
+ 3P
0. Scalar fields driving
inflation as well as the models
discussed earlier in this section furnish examples
of matter which can violate the SEC. Other
examples of such `strange' or `exotic' forms of
matter include cosmic strings and domain walls. The field configuration
within a string is in the false vacuum state leading to P =
-
along the string length. A network of random non-intercommuting
strings therefore possesses the average equation of state
P = -
/
3 which marginally satisfies the SEC
[197]. The
mean energy density of a string network dominated by straight strings
decays as
a-2
leading to the linear expansion law
a
t
[197,
79]. Similarly
P = -
is satisfied along any two orthogonal directions within a domain wall
leading to
P = - 2
/ 3 for a network of walls
[197,
180]
and resulting in `mild' Inflation
a-1,
a
t2. The presence of
tangled strings and/or domain walls can be tested by measurements
sensitive to the expansion dynamics of the universe. For instance recent
supernovae results strongly suggest
w
- 2/3
which severely constraints the string network for which
w
- 1/3. Thus it
appears that a tangled network of strings is ruled out by current
observations (see section 4.3).
Evolutionary relation for
![]() |
Reference | |
![]() ![]() |
[59, 25, 16, 15, 13, 133, 147] | |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
[14, 103, 104] | |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
[14, 181] | |
![]() ![]() |
[133, 148, 149, 1, 199, 32, 79, 116] | |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
[143, 151, 169, 135, 138, 176, 177] [93, 102, 147, 193, 23, 24, 202, 96, 77] | |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
[162] | |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
[25, 107] | |
![]() ![]() |
[127, 207, 208, 63, 42] | |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
[3, 28, 172, 200] | |
![]() ![]() |
[128, 129] | |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
[89, 164] | |
A brief summary of some models with a decaying cosmological term is given in Table 1 (adapted from [147]), we should stress that most of these models are phenomenological and are therefore not necessarily backed by strong physical arguments.
Finally one should mention another phenomenological
approach tied to the possibility of
a cosmological term decaying and transferring its energy
into articles and/or radiation
[148,
68].
Observationally such an approach can, in principle, be tested:
in the case of dissipative, baryon number conserving decay of a
-term
into baryons and antibaryons,
the subsequent annihilation of matter and antimatter would result in a
homogeneous gamma-ray
flux which could be constrained by observations of the
diffuse gamma-ray background in the Universe
[68,
138].
A decay of the cosmological term directly into radiation could be probed
by cosmic microwave background anisotropies,
cosmological nucleosynthesis etc.
[68,
174,
17,
146,
138,
151,
176,
177].