arxiv: v1 [hep-th] 15 Sep 2015

Transcription

1 New self-dual k-generalized Abelian-Higgs models R. Casana, E. da Hora,2 and A. C. Santos. Departamento de Física, Universidade Federal do Maranhão, , São Luís, Maranhão, Brazil. 2 Coordenadoria Interdisciplinar de Ciência e Tecnologia, Universidade Federal do Maranhão, , São Luís, Maranhão, Brazil. arxiv: v [hep-th] 5 Sep 205 We have shown the existence of self-dual solutions in new Maxwell-Higgs scenarios whose gauge field possess k-generalized dynamics, i.e., the kinetic part of the gauge action being highly nonlinear. We have implemented the BPS formalism providing highly nonlinear generalized self-dual equations whose solutions possess a total energy proportional to the magnetic flux. However, there is a key condition which allows to express the self-dual equations in a form mathematically similar those arising in the Maxwell-Higgs model. Under such a key condition, we have analyzed the general properties of the self-dual axially symmetric vortices. We have observed the generalization modifies the vortex core, the magnetic field amplitude and the bosonic masses but the total energy remains proportional to the quantized magnetic flux. Finally, we have established a prescription which allows to obtain different k-generalized Abelian Higgs models providing self-dual configurations. PACS numbers:.0.kk,.0.lm,.27.+d I. INTRODUCTION Configurations exhibiting nontrivial topology usually emerge as static solutions of classical fields models presenting highly nonlinear interactions. In general, this nonlinearity is introduced by means of a potential describing the scalar-matter self-interaction []. Moreover, the potential must allow the mechanism of the spontaneous symmetry breaking happen, because it is known that the topological structures are formed during symmetry-breaking phase transitions. It is the reason why these solutions receive so much attention within the cosmological context or condensed matter physics. In some special cases, the topological configurations are described by a set of first-order differential equations named self-dual or BPS equations) which also solve the second-order Euler-Lagrange equations. The BPS equations are obtained via a minimization of the energy [2] or by studying the conservation of the energy-momentum tensor [3] of the corresponding model. In both cases, by using the appropriated Ansatz and boundary conditions it is possible to obtain regular or well-behaved solutions possessing finite energy. On the other hand, during the last years the topological objects arising within the context of noncanonical field models also have received a special attention because such models are stemming in some results coming from string theories. In general, these new models called k-generalized models) possess nonstandard kinetic terms playing the role of a symmetry breaking potential [4, 5]. The new solitonic solutions, depending on the k-generalization, present the same general behavior as their standard counterparts, for example, monotonic Electronic address: rodolfo.casana@gmail.com; Electronic address: edahora.ufma@gmail.com; Electronic address: andre cavs@hotmail.com profiles and localized energy. The exotic dynamics can alsoproduce variationson the core size and on the amplitudes of the new solutions [6]. Such a versatility has motivated many authors to use nonstandard kinetic terms in an attempt to explain the accelerated inflationary phase of the universe [7], strong gravitational waves [8], dark matter [9], and others [0]. The aim of the present manuscript is go further in the study of self-dual vortices in noncanonical models by considering a Maxwell-Higgs MH) scenario where the k-generalization is introduced in the gauge field kinetic term. In order to present our results the paper is organized as follows: In Sec. II, we show some frameworks where some generalized versions of the Maxwell-Higgs model arise naturally in the current literature. Based in such scenarios, we introduce our extended version containing the k-generalization of the gauge field dynamics. In Sec. III, we establish the general model in which our investigation is developed. By following the BPS formalism, we obtained the corresponding self-dual equations and the explicit form of the self-dual potential. At this point, we propose an important condition which simplifies enormously the self-dual equations. Under such a condition we study the general properties of the axially symmetric vortex solution generated by an arbitrary k- generalized Abelian-Higgs model. In such a way, we implement a general prescription to obtain new self-dual Maxwell-Higgs models whose gauge field possess a k- generalized or highly nonlinear dynamics. It is easily verified that our approach recovers the standard results. In Sec. IV, we illustrate the way our prescription works by studying explicitly two possible cases. The respective self-dual equations are solved numerically and the new solutions are compared with the standard one. Finally, in Sec. V, we present our ending comments and perspectives.

2 2 II. SOME SCENARIOS PRODUCING GENERALIZED MAXWELL-HIGGS-LIKE MODELS We consider here two different scenarios motivating the study of the generalized Maxwell-Higgs models: The first one is related to the problem of the localization of gravity and/or particle/field in a 6-D braneworld [2] and, a second scenario we present the Born-Infeld-Higgs model [3, 4]. In a 6-D braneworld context, the general action [2] describing the localization of gravity and/or particle/field is S = d 4 xd 2 y G [ R2κ ] Λ+L loc +L defect, ) where x µ with µ = 0,,2,3) are the usual spacetime coordinates,whilst y a with a = 4,5) stand for two extra spatial dimensions. We also have G = detg MN, where G MN with M,N = 0,,...,5) is the metric tensor, R stands for the Ricci scalar, and Λ is the cosmological constant. The Lagrangian density L loc describes a set of particles/fields to be localized in the defect. For our purposes, we consider the defect described by a Maxwell- Higgs theory in a curved spacetime, i.e. L defect = 4 GAC G BE F AB F CE +G AB D A φ) D B φ) U φ ), 2) Here, F BC = B A C C A B is the electromagnetic field strength tensor, B stands for the Riemannian covariant derivative, A B being the gauge field. The complex scalar field φ represents the Higgs boson, its covariant derivative reading D C φ = C φ iea C φ, the scalar-matter selfinteraction potential is given by U φ ). However, we consider here that the fields describing the defect depend only of the coordinates x 0,y 4 and y 5. Thus, from Eq. 2), the equation of motion of the gauge field is given by g EB E F BC = ej C, 3) where J C = iφ C φ φ C φ) 2eA C φ 2. The corresponding equation for the Higgs field reads g BC D B D C φ+ U = 0. 4) φ In order to describe the particle/field localization in the vortexlike defect, we consider the following metric: ds 2 = H 2 ρ)dx µ dx µ P 2 ρ)dρ 2 L 2 ρ)dθ 2, 5) where y 4 = ρ and y 5 = θ, the functions H, P and L depending on ρ only. Specifically, we are interested in the structure of the Euler-Lagrange equations for the fields describing a vortexlike. With this purpose, we consider the stationary regimen of the fields describing the vortex: φ = φρ, θ), the nonvanishing components of the gauge field being A 0 = A 0 ρ) and A θ = A θ ρ). Consequently, the Gauss law reads ρ ρ A 0 + ρ L L ρh H ) ρp ρ A 0 = 2e 2 P 2 A 0 φ 2, P 6) and once that, A 0 = 0 satisfies it identically, the resulting structures are electrically neutral. In addition, the stationary Ampère law is ρ F ρθ + ρ H H ρp P ) ρl F ρθ = ep 2 J θ. 7) L Below we will show explicitly that the gauge field equations 6) and 7) related to the model 2) are similar to the ones, in the Minkowski spacetime, coming from the generalized Maxwell-Higgs model [5] defined by L = 4 h φ )F µνf µν +w φ ) D µ φ 2 V φ ). 8) In this case, the electromagnetic field strength tensor is F µν = µ A ν µ A ν, with A µ being the gauge field. Here, the complex scalar field φ stands for the Higgs one, its covariant derivative reading as D µ φ = µ φ iea µ φ. The potential V φ ) describes the scalar-matter selfinteraction and the functions h φ ) and w φ ) generalize the model. Consequently, the Euler-Lagrange equation for the gauge sector is α hf αµ ) = ewj µ, 9) with J µ = iφ µ φ φ µ φ) 2eA µ φ 2. The stationary Gauss law reads ρ h ρ ρ A 0 + h + ) ρ A 0 = 2e 2w ρ h A 0 φ 2, 0) and the stationary Ampère law is ρ h ρ F ρθ + h ) F ρθ = e w ρ h J θ, ) with ρ and θ being the polar coordinates. Again, the resultinggausslaw0)issatisfiedbya 0 = 0identically, so that the corresponding solutions no possess electric charge. At this point, we note that the Gauss and Ampère s laws 0) and ) resemble their respective counterparts 6) and 7) arising from a Maxwell-Higgs model considered in a curved spacetime. Thus, this scenario enable us to study generalized Maxwell-Higgs models in Minkowski spacetime. A second scenario to be discussed is the Born-Infeld- Higgs BIH) model [3] whose Lagrangian density is L = β 2 + F µνf µν 2β 2 ) + D µ φ 2 V φ ), 2)

3 3 where β is the Born-Infeld parameter. In the present case, the highly nonlinear kinetic term controlling the dynamics of the gauge field can be thought as a k- generalized one. Also, such as it happens for the Maxwell-Higgs model, an extension or generalization of the BIH model can also arise naturally by coupling it with the gravitation. One possible generalization of the BIH model was introduced in Ref. [4], L = β 2 ) + h φ ) 2β 2 F µνf µν +w φ ) D µ φ 2 U φ ), where U φ ) is a convenient potential. III. THE k-generalized ABELIAN HIGGS MODEL 3) Based in the scenarios mentioned above, we propose an extended version of the k-generalization idea applied only to the dynamics of the gauge field in a model described by the Lagrangian density, L = h φ )KY)+w φ ) D µ φ 2 V φ ), 4) where KY) standing for an arbitrary function with Y F µνf µν 4U φ ). 5) The functions h φ ), U φ ) and w φ ) generalize the model, whilst V φ ) represents some convenient potential. It is easy to verify that the Born-Infeld-Higgs model 2)isrecoveredfrom4) ifwe dothefollowingselection KY) = β 2 2Y β 2 ), 6) h φ ) = w φ ) = U φ ) =. 7) In order to strictly to analyze the existence of selfdual configurations in absence of a spontaneous symmetry breaking potential we do the following choice in the more general Lagrangian 4), h φ ) = U φ ), w φ ) =, V φ ) = 0, 8) defining a k-generalized Abelian Higgs model with noncanonical Lagrange density: L = U φ )KY)+ D µ φ 2, 9) where D µ φ stands for the minimal covariant derivative, whilst U φ ) makes the role of an appropriated potential providing self-dual configurations to the particular model defined by KY) see Eq. 5)). The configurations arising from 9) can be thought as natural extensions of the nonstandard solutions studied in []. In that work, the authors have investigated the + )-dimensional model L = U φ)w X), 20) with W X) being an arbitrary function of X µφ µ φ U φ), 2) and φx) describing a real scalar field. The Euler-Lagrange equation for the gauge sector coming from 9) reads K Y dk/dy) µ K Y F µα ) = ej α, 22) where J µ = iφ µ φ φ µ φ) 2eA µ φ 2. For static solutions, the Gauss law is given by i K Y i A 0 ) = 2e 2 φ 2 A 0. 23) One more time, A 0 = 0 satisfies it identically, from which one concludes that the configurations do not possess electric field. In this case, the Ampère law reads ǫ kj j K Y B) = ej k. 24) Furthermore, the equation of motion of the Higgs field becomes D µ D µ φ K YK Y ) U = 0. 25) φ A. The BPS formalism The energy-momentum tensor related to model 9) is given by T µν = K Y F µβ F ν β +D µ φ) D ν φ 26) +D ν φ) D µ φ η µν L. The energy of the self-dual configurations is given by the integration of the T 00 component which, at stationary regimen and the gauge condition A 0 = 0, reads T 00 = L = UK + D k φ 2. 27) It is important to note that the energy density and potential U φ ) must be nonnegative definite, so that KY) must be negative. By using the identity D k φ 2 = D ± φ 2 ±eb φ 2 ± 2 ǫ ik i J k, 28) we implement the BPS formalism which allows to write the total energy of the self-dual configurations as [ E = d 2 x K Y B W) 2 + D ± φ 2 2K Y ±B W +e φ 2) ± 2 ǫ ik i J k 29) 2 K YB 2 ] W 2 UK,

4 4 where we have introduced the function W φ ) which will be determined later in order to obtain solutions with well defined energy. In this sense, we must to impose that the expression in the third row to be null, namely 2 K YB 2 + W 2 +UK = 0, 30) establishing a functional relation between the functions W, K, B andu. Undersuchacondition, thetotalenergy reads E = [ d 2 x K Y B W) 2 + D ± φ 2 3) W +e φ 2) ± ] 2 ǫ ik i J k. ±B At this point, in order to the obtain self-dual configurations we choose the form of the function W φ ) to be W = e v 2 φ 2). 32) Thus, the total energy can be written as { E = d 2 x ±ev 2 B ± 2 ǫ ik i J k 33) + D ± φ 2 + [ K Y B e v 2 φ 2)] } 2, and the condition 30) becomes 2 K YB 2 + e 2 v 2 φ 2) 2 +UK = 0. 34) The integration of the first term in Eq. 33) provides the total magnetic flux, d 2 xb = Φ, 35) and, under appropriated boundary conditions, the integration of the total derivative in Eq. 33) gives null contribution to the energy. This way, we can see that total energy has a lower bound E ±ev 2 Φ, 36) which is attained by field configurations satisfying the BPS or self-dual equations, D ± φ = 0, 37) K Y B = ±e v 2 φ 2). 38) Besides, the condition 34) determines explicitly the selfdual potential to be U sd = 2 KK Y U s, 39) where U s is the usual Maxwell-Higgs self-dual potential U s = e2 v 2 φ 2) 2. 40) 2 It is shown that the BPS equations37)-38) also solves the Euler-Lagrange equations given in Eqs. 24)-25). B. Simplest k-generalized models: A key condition In the BPS limit, the relation 34) can be written as K Y B 2 +KU sd = 0, or B 2 = K, 4) it induces us to perceive that the condition B 2 = = cte, 42) fixes Y = and, consequently, both K ) < 0 and K Y ) > 0 become well-defined constants. Such a situation enormously simplifies the BPS equations 37)-38) which now mathematically look very similar to the ones of the Maxwell-Higgs model. It can be verified explicitly these BPS equations, under condition 42), also solve the static Euler-Lagrange equations 24) and 25). Below we study some general properties of the selfdual axially symmetrical vortex solutions obtained via the condition 42). C. The axially symmetrical vortex solutions In this section, we seek axially symmetric solutions according to the usual vortex ansatz [5] φr,θ) = vgr)e inθ, A θ r,θ) = ar) n, er 43) with n = ±,±2,±3... standing for the vorticity of the resulting solutions. The functions gr) and ar) are regular functions obeying the boundary conditions g0) = 0, a0) = n, 44) g ) =, a ) = 0, 45) describing solutions possessing finite energy. Moreover, the magnetic field is written as Br) = da er dr, 46) and the BPS or self-dual equations 37)-38) read dg dr = ±ag r, 47) B = ± ev2 g 2 ). 48) K Y ) where we have used the condition 42). It is interesting to note that the generalization does not change the first self-dual equation 47), which remains the very same one obtained within the canonical context.

5 5 The behavior of gr) and ar) near the boundaries can be easily determined by the linearizing the self-dual equations 47) and 48) around the values 44) and 45). This way, one gets that, near the origin, the profile functions behave as gr) G ) n r n +..., 49) ar) n e2 v 2 ) r ) On the other hand, in the limit r, gr) and ar) obey G ) gr) e mr, 5) r ar) mg ) re mr. 52) The constants G ) n > 0 and G ) can be determined only numerically, m = m ) being the mass of the bosonic fields, i.e. m ) = m MH KY ), 53) with m MH = 2ev standing for the mass of the usual self-dual Maxwell-Higgs bosons. In addition, the self-dual energy density is given by ε sd = B 2 K Y )+2v 2 ag r ) 2, 54) reinforcing the positiveness of the self-dual energy density whenever K Y ) > 0 is fulfilled). The total energy of the self-dual solutions is given by the lower bound 36), E sd = ±ev 2 Φ B = ±2πv 2 n, 55) so far 47) and 48) are fulfilled. The total energy becomes proportional to the quantized magnetic flux, Φ B = 2πn/e, as expected. Moreover, the values of the magnetic field and the energy density near the origin can be calculated explicitly: ε sd 0) = B0) = ± ev2 K Y ), 56) e 2 v 4 ) 2 K Y ) +2v2 G ), n = e 2 v 4 K Y ), n > 57) The overallconclusion one gets from the Eqs. 48) and 53) is that the k-generalization introduced in 9) modifies both the amplitude of the magnetic field and the masses of the respective bosons. In this sense, depending on the particular form we choose for KY), such quantities can increase or decrease in comparison with the usual MH model. In the Sec. IV, we study some particular models for which this behavior can be verified explicitly.. The Maxwell-Higgs model Now, before going further, it is instructive to clarify the way the equations we have written so far lead us back to the standard self-dual Maxwell-Higgs scenario. The MH model is recovered by setting KY) = Y, 58) according to 9) and 5). In this case, 42) reads and we get B 2 = =, 59) Y =, K ) = 2, K Y ) =. 60) This way, Eq. 48) reduces to da r dr = ± 2 m2 MH g 2 ). 6) and the self-dual potential U sd g) = U s g). The equations 47) and 6) are the well-known selfdual ones coming from the simplest Maxwell-Higgs model in the presence of the usual fourth-order potential 40), the corresponding self-dual solutions possessing a total energy given by 55). In the next Section, we generalize the construction reviewed above in order to define new self-dual k- generalized Maxwell-Higgs models. We also depict the new solutions we have found and comment about their main features. IV. SOME NEW k-self-dual MODELS Wenowreachthemaingoalofourworkbygeneralizing the construction leading us back to the standard results; see the previous Section. In principle, the interesting reader can follow the prescription we introduce below in order to define different Maxwell-Higgs models, getting their self-dual structures automatically. It is also important to point out that the boundary conditions to be satisfied by the profile functions gr) and ar) are supposed to be the very same as before; see 44) and 45). We will use them to solve the new first-order equations numerically. In order to depict the numerical results, we choose the upper signs and e = v = n =, for simplicity. 2. The first model We generalize 58) by proposing N = leads us back to the usual case) KY) = Y) N, 62)

6 6 with KY) being negative, as required by 27). Now, given 62), the equation 48) provides B 2 = = Y, 63) 2N from which one gets that the resulting model is welldefined for N > /2 only. In this case, we obtain ) N 2N KY) =, 2N K Y Y) = N ) N 2N. 2N 64) In the sequel, according to our prescription, the self-dual equation 48) becomes da r dr = ± 2 m2 N g 2 ), 65) where m N, i.e. the mass of the generalized bosons, is given by 2N ) N m N = 2 N N N m. 66) MH A brief analysis elucidates that, within the range /2 < N <, the masses increase for N /2, whilst reaching m N m MH for N. On the other hand, for N >, m N decreasesm N N /2 m MH ) whenever N increases N ). In the sequel, by using 64) in 39), one gets the selfdual potential related to 62), i.e. FIG. : Numerical solutions to gr) top) and ar) bottom) coming from the model 62), for N = usual case, m.442, solid black line), N = 3 m , long-dashed blue line), and N = 5 m , dashed red line). The solutions spread over larger distances. U sd g) = Λ 2 N U sg), 67) where U s stands for the fourth-order potential 40) and we have defined the parameter Λ N as Λ N = 2 2N )N 2 N N N. 68) Furthermore, combining 62), 67) and 9), we can write down the corresponding nonstandard Lagrange density explicitly, L = Λ 2 NU s + F µνf µν ) N 4Λ 2 N U + D µ φ 2, 69) s whose self-dual equations are 47) and 65). The numerical solutions are plotted in the Figs. and 2. We depict the resulting profiles for the Higgs and gauge fields, magnetic field and the self-dual energy density for n = and some values of N. The Fig. shows the profiles of the Higgs and gauge fields. Notwithstanding the unusual form of 69), the numerical) solutions obtained from 47) and 65) are similar to their canonical counterparts solid black lines). The new profiles spread over larger distances due to the FIG. 2: Numerical solutions to Br) top) and ε bps bottom) coming from the model 62). Conventions as in Fig.. The values of B0) and ε bps 0) decrease when N increases.

7 7 generalization introduced via 62) in the mass 66) of bosonic fields: whenever N increases, the respective mass decreases monotonically reaching m N 0 for N ). Thus, for large values of N, the bosons mediate largerrange interactions. The results for the magnetic field and the energy density are plotted in the Fig. 2. These profiles also are spread over large distances and their amplitudes in r = 0 diminish when N increases unlimitedly. Explicitly, their values at origin are B0) = ± 2e m2 N, 70) ) 2, ε sd 0) = v2 2 m2 N +2v2 G N) 7) so that they go to zero, because both the bosonic mass and G N) do, when N The second model The second model we introduce is defined by KY) = Y Y) M, 72) with M = 0 leading us back to the canonical scenario. Now, the equation 48) provides B 2 = 2M ) M = Y, 73) which is real for M < /2. In the following, we obtain KY) = 2 M) K Y Y) = M 2M. 2M ) M M, Then, the second self-dual equation becomes 74) da r dr = ± 2 m2 M g 2 ), 75) where the mass of the bosons now stands for 2M) m M M m MH. 76) In this case, within the range 0 < M < /2, the masses decrease when M /2 while m M m MH when M 0. On the other hand, for M < 0, the masses increase continuously, attaining the maximum value m M = 2m MH in the limit M. We point out that, by using 74) in 39), one gets that the new self-dual potential is mathematically similar to 67), i.e. U g) = 2 M U sg), where M = 2M) 2M 2 M) M. 77) FIG. 3: Numerical solutions to gr) top) and ar) bottom) coming from the model 72), for M = 0 usual case, m 0.442, solid black line), M = 2 m , longdashed blue line), and M = 4 m , dashed red line). The solutions spread over smaller distances. By last, by summarizing our results, the Lagrangian density generated by 72) is L = 4 F µνf µν 2 Fµν F µν ) M MU s 4 2 M U + D µ φ 2, 78) s whose self-dual equations 47) and 75) still read similar to those that the MH model gives rise. The numerical solutions of the self-dual equations 47) and 75) are shown in Figs. 3 and 4 for n = and some values of M 0. The Fig. 3 shows the profiles for the Higgs and gauge fields. The solutions coming from 47) and 75) are similar but narrower than the canonical ones again, the solid black lines). Again, this effect is due to the k- generalization introduced via 72) in the mass 76) of bosonic fields: whenever M decreases, this mass increases monotonically reaching m M 2m MH for M ). Then, we conclude that the k-generalization in our second model acts in an inverse way in comparison to the previous one, i.e. by increasing the bosonic mass, in this sense, the respective bosons now mediate smaller-range interactions when M decreases. The Fig. 4 exhibits the profiles for the magnetic field and the energy density: these get more and more localized whenever M decreases in the same way it happens with profiles of the Higgs and gauge fields. Also, the generalization we have introduced increases continuously

8 8 FIG. 4: Numerical solutions to Br) top) and ε bps bottom) coming from the model 72). Conventions as in Fig. 3. The values of B0) and ε bps 0) increase. their amplitudes at origin when M, saturating the bounds: ev 2 B0) < 2ev 2, 79) e 2 v 4 +2v 2 G 0) ) 2 ε sd 0) < 2e 2 v 4 +2v 2 G ) ) 2. 80) The values G 0) and G ) for M = 0 and M =, respectively)computednumericallysatisfyg 0) < G ). In the case, when e = v =, the corresponding values are G 0) 0.85 and G ).20. V. ENDING COMMENTS In this manuscript, we have shown the existence of selfdual vortex solutions in Abelian-Higgs models in which the dynamics of the gauge field is driven a k-generalized action. By considering a general model4), we have analyzed a class of new models generically described by 9). We have computed the corresponding self-dual equations and the general expression for the self-dual potential. After that, we propose a general condition that turns the self-dual equations to be mathematically similar to the ones the simplest Maxwell-Higgs electrodynamics gives rise. Such a condition allows to establish a general prescription to obtain new self-dual Maxwell-Higgs models whose gauge field possess a k-generalized highly nonlinear dynamics. It is possible to establish general properties of the topological vortices by analyzing the equations 48), 39) and 53). In equations 48) and 53), the k-generalization introduced in 9) modifies both the amplitude of the magnetic field and the mass of the self-dual bosons. In the same way, in equation 39), the self-dual potential appears modified by K ) and K Y ). All these changes can be explained whether one considers that the k-generalized gauge field dynamics can be introduced via a redefinition of both the electric charge and the vacuum expectation value of the Higgs field, i.e. e e K ) K Y ) 2 and v v K ). 8) Thus, depending on the particular form we choose for KY), such properties can be amplified or diminished in comparison with the usual MH model. Despite the Abelian gauge field possessing a k- generalized dynamics, the total energy of the new selfdual configurations is the very same the standard solutions present, being proportional to the quantized magnetic flux. The interested reader can use this prescription to define different self-dual scenarios. Moreover, extensions of the present idea including the Chern-Simons term seem to be very promising. Also, we are trying to establish the gauged version of 20). These last two proposals are now under development, and we hope relevant results in a future contribution. Acknowledgments We thank CAPES, CNPq and FAPEMA Brazilian agencies) for partial financial support. [] N. Manton and P. Sutcliffe, Topological Solitons Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 2004). [2] E. Bogomol nyi, Sov. J. Nucl. Phys ) 449. [3] H. J. de Vega and F. A. Schaposnik, Phys. Rev. D 4 976) 00. [4] D. Bazeia, E. da Hora, C. dos Santos and R. Menezes, Phys. Rev. D 8 200) D. Bazeia, E. da Hora, R. Menezes, H. P. de Oliveira and C. dos Santos, Phys. Rev. D 8 200) C. dos Santos and E. da Hora, Eur. Phys.J. C70200) 45; Eur.Phys.J.C720) 59. C. dos Santos, Phys. Rev. D ) D. Bazeia, E. da Hora and D. Rubiera-Garcia, Phys. Rev. D 84 20) C. dos Santos and D. Rubiera-Garcia, J. Phys. A 44 20) D. Bazeia, R. Casana, E. da

9 9 Horaand R. Menezes, Phys. Rev. D ) R. Casana, M. M. Ferreira Jr. and E. da Hora, Phys. Rev. D ) R. Casana, M. M. Ferreira, E. da Hora and C. dos Santos, Phys. Lett. B ) 93. D. Bazeia, R. Casana, M. M. Ferreira Jr., E. da Hora and L. Losano, Phys. Lett. B ) 548. C. Adam, L. A. Ferreira, E. da Hora, A. Wereszczynski and W. J. Zakrzewski, J. High Energy Phys ) 062. R. Casana, M. M. Ferreira Jr., E. da Hora and C. dos Santos, Adv. in High Energy Phys ) [5] D. Bazeia, E. da Hora, C. dos Santos and R. Menezes, Eur. Phys. J. C 7 20) 833 [6] E. Babichev, Phys. Rev. D ) ; Phys. Rev. D ) C. Adam, N. Grandi, J. Sanchez-Guillen and A. Wereszczynski, J. Phys. A ) C. Adam, J. Sanchez-Guillen and A. Wereszczynski, J. Phys. A ) 3625; Phys. Rev. D ) C. Adam, N. Grandi, P. Klimas, J. Sanchez-Guillen and A. Wereszczynski, J. Phys. A ) C. Adam, P. Klimas, J. Sanchez- Guillen and A. Wereszczynski, J. Phys. A ) M. Andrews, M. Lewandowski, M. Trodden and D. Wesley, Phys. Rev. D ) C. Adam, J. M. Queiruga, J. Sanchez-Guillen and A. Wereszczynski, Phys. Rev. D 84 20) ; Phys. Rev. D 84 20) P. P. Avelino, D. Bazeia and R. Menezes, Eur. Phys. J. C 7 20) 683. D. Bazeia, J. D. Dantas, A. R. Gomes, L. Losano and R. Menezes, Phys. Rev. D 84 20) D. Bazeia and R. Menezes, Phys. Rev. D 84 20) C. Adam and J. M. Queiruga, Phys. Rev. D 84 20) 05028; Phys. Rev. D ) C. Adam, C. Naya, J. Sanchez-Guillen and A. Wereszczynski, Phys. Rev. D ) 08500; Phys. Rev. D ) D. Bazeia, E. da Hora and R. Menezes, Phys. Rev. D ) D. Bazeia, A. S. Lobão Jr. and R. Menezes, Phys. Rev. D ) [7] C. Armendariz-Picon, T. Damour and V. Mukhanov, Phys. Lett. B ) 209. [8] V. Mukhanov and A. Vikman, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys ) 004. [9] C. Armendariz-Picon and E. A. Lim, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys ) 007. [0] J. Garriga and V. Mukhanov, Phys. Lett. B ) 29. R. J. Scherrer, Phys. Rev. Lett ) 030. [] D. Bazeia and R. Menezes, Phys. Rev. D 84 20) [2] M. Giovannini, Phys. Rev. D ) [3] K. Shiraishi, S. Hirenzaki, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 6 99) [4] R. Casana, E. da Hora, D. Rubiera-Garcia, C. dos Santos, Eur. Phys. J. C ) 380. [5] H. B. Nielsen and P. Olesen, Nucl. Phys. B 6 973) 45.