arxiv: v1 [gr-qc] 13 Nov 2018

Transcription

1 Scalaron tunneling the fate of antisymmetric tensor fields in FR) gravity Tanmoy Paul Soumitra SenGupta School of Physical Sciences, Indian Association for the Cultivation of Science, A & B Raja S.C. Mullick Road, Kolkata , India. Observable signatures of scalar, fermion, vector spin symmetric tensor field in the form of gravity) in our universe give rise to a natural question - why the universe is free from any perceptible signatures of massless antisymmetric tensor fields? This work proposes a natural explanation of this phenomena through higher curvature degrees of freedom in the gravity sector, which may originate from quantum corrections. In the backdrop of a FR) gravity model, we show that the scalar degree of freedom associated with higher curvature term may undergo a quantum tunneling which in turn generates a heavily suppressed coupling between any antisymmetric massless tensor modes various Stard Model fields. arxiv: v [gr-qc 3 Nov 08 I. INTRODUCTION A surprising feature of our present universe is that it carries observable footprints of scalar, fermion vector degrees of freedom along with spin massless graviton, while there is no noticeable observable effect of any massless antisymmetric tensor modes. Apart from being a massless representation of the underlying Lorentz group, such higher rank antisymmetric tensor fields also appear as massless closed string mode in a heterotic string model [. In this context, the second rank antisymmetric tensor field, known as Kalb-Ramond KR) field [ has been studied extensively in the context of cosmology particle phenomenology [3. Furthermore it has been shown that KR field B µν ) can also act as a possible source of spacetime torsion where the torsion is identifiedwith rank-3antisymmetricfieldstrengthtensorh µνρ having a relation with B µν as H µνρ = [µ B νρ [3. However from dimensional argument it may be observed that the coupling of KR field to matter should be / where isthefundamentalscaleofthegravity,namely the Planck scale) which is same as the coupling of gravity with matter. But there has been no experimental evidence that detects the footprint of the KR field in our present universe. All cosmological/astrophysical as well as particle phenomenological experiments so far have produced only negative results in terms of detecting any signatures of antisymmetric tensor fields. This implies that if such tensor fields exist, it must be heavily suppressed at the present energy scale of our universe. Thus the question that arises is: why are the effects of the Kalb- Ramond field or any higher rank antisymmetric tensor field less perceptible than the force of gravitation? Attempts have been made to explain this in the context of extra dimensional braneworld model in a warped background, where the effect of antisymmetric tensor fields are diluted on the visible brane through the exponential warping of the spacetime geometry [ 5. However, in the present work, we aim to show that without bringing in any extra dimension, such suppression of the KR as well as the other higher rank antisymmetric tensor fields can be explained in the light of higher curvature FR) theory in four spacetime dimension. It is well known that Einstein-Hilbert action can be generalized by adding higher order curvature terms which naturally arise from the underlying diffeomorphism invariance. Such terms also have their origin in String theory due to quantum corrections. FR) [6 6, Gauss- Bonnet GB) [7 9 or more generally Lanczos-Lovelock [30, 3 gravity are some of the cidates in higher curvature gravitational theory. In general inclusion of higher curvature terms in the action leads to the appearance of ghost from higher derivative terms resulting into Ostragradsky instability. The Gauss-Bonnet model a special case of Lanczos-Lovelock model ) is however free of this instability due to appropriate choice of various quadratic combinations of Riemann tensor, Ricci tensor curvature scalar. In contrast to GB model FR) gravity model however contains higher curvature terms consisting only of the scalar curvature R. Once again just as GBmodel, certainclassesoffr) gravitymodelsarefree from ghost-like instability See section II for a detailed discussion ). In general FR) action can be mapped into the action of a scalar-tensor theory by a conformal transformation of the metric [6 9, The issue of instability of the original FR) model is now reflected in the form of the kinetic potential terms of the scalar field in the dual scalar-tensor model, where the potential will have a stable minimum the kinetic term will have proper signature only if the original FR) model is free from ghosts. pul.tnmy9@gmail.com tpssg@iacs.res.in

2 II. THE MODEL The field strength tensor of any massless rank n antisymmetric tensor field X aa...a n can be expressed as, Y aa...a n+ = [an+ X aa...a n In four dimensional spacetime, the rank of antisymmetric tensor field can at most be 3, beyond which the corresponding field strength tensor will vanish identically. We begin our discussion with rank two antisymmetric Kalb-Ramond KR) field in the light of FR) gravity. The action of massless KR field together with spin fermion U) gauge field in the background of FR) gravity in four dimension is given by, S = d 4 x [ FR) g κ 4 H µνρh µνρ + Ψiγ µ µ Ψ 4 F µνf µν Ψγ µ σ νρ H µνρ Ψ A [µ F νρ H µνρ ) where H µνρ = [µ B νρ is the field strength tensor of the Kalb-Ramond field B νρ κ = M p. The third fourth terms of the action denote the kinetic Lagrangians of spin fermions Ψ U) gauge field A µ, while the last two terms represent the interactions of KR field with the fermion the gauge field respectively. These interaction terms play the key role to determine the observable signatures of the KR field in our universe. The interaction between KR U) electromagnetic field originates from Chern-Simons term which is incorporated to make the theory free from gauge anomaly. Introducing an auxiliary field Ax), the above action can be equivalently expressed as, S = d 4 x [ ) g κ F A)R A)+FA) 4 H µνρh µνρ + Ψiγ µ µ Ψ 4 F µνf µν Ψγ µ σ νρ H µνρ Ψ A [µ F νρ H µνρ ) Varying the auxiliary field Ax), one easily obtains A = R. Plugging back this solution A = R into action ), initial action ) can be reproduced, which confirms the equivalence between the two actions. At this stage, perform a conformal transformation of the metric as g µν x) g µν x) = e 3 κξx) g µν x) 3) µ,ν run form 0 to 3. ξx) is conformal factor is related to the auxiliary field as e 3 κξ = F A). The gamma matrices satisfy the algebra [γ µ,γ ν = g µν the conformal transformation of the metric transforms the gamma matrices γ µ the spin connection σ νρ as, γ µ γ µ = e 3 κξ γ µ σ νρ σ νρ = e 3 κξ σ νρ respectively. Moreover, if R R are the Ricci scalars corresponding to the metrics g µν g µν respectively, then these are related as, ) R = e 3 R κ g κξ 3 ) µν µ ξ ν ξ +κ ξ. where represents the d Alembertian operator in terms of the metric tensor g µν. Due to the above relation between R R, the action ) can be written as, S = d 4 x g [ κ e[ 3 κξ F A) R κ g ) 3 µν µ ξ ν ξ +κ ξ ) κ e[ 3 AF κξ A) FA) + e [ 3 κξ 4 H µνρh µνρ + Ψiγ µ µ Ψ 4 F µνf µν Ψγ µ σ νρ H µνρ Ψ A [µ F νρ H µνρ ) 4) Considering F A) > 0 using the relation between ξ F A), one obtains the following scalar-tensor action, S = d 4 x [ R g κ + gµν µ ξ ν ξ AF ) A) FA) κ F A) 4 e 3 κξ H µνρ H δ g µ g ν g ρδ 4 F ν µνf g µ g + e 3 κξ Ψ + γ 0 i γ µ µ Ψ Ψ + γ 0 γ µ σ νρ H µνρ Ψ e 3 κξ A [ F δ H µνρ g µ g ν g ρδ where R is the Ricci scalar formed by g µν. The field ξx) acts a scalar field endowed with a potential AF A) FA) κ F A) = VAξ)), say). Thereby it can be argued that the higher curvature degrees) of freedom manifests itself through a scalar field degree of freedom ξx) with a potential Vξ) which in turn depends on the form of FR). Further it is also important to note that for F R) < 0, the kinetic term of the scalar field ξ, as well as the Ricci scalarr in the aboveactioncome with wrongsign, which indicates the existence of a ghost field. To avoid this, the derivative of the functional form of FR) gravity, namely F R) must be chosen to be greater than zero. However it is evident that due to the appearance of the 5)

3 3 scalar field ξx) from higher curvature degree of freedom), the kinetic terms of the the fermion field the KR field become non-canonical while that for the electromagnetic field still canonical. In order to make such kinetic terms canonical, we redefine the fields as follows : FR) = R R +R 3 9) where are the model parameters with mass dimensions[- [-4 respectively. For this specific choice of FR), the potential Vξ) becomes, B µν B µν = e 3 κξ B µν Ψ Ψ = e 3 κξ Ψ Vξ) = 3 54κ e 3 [ κξ e 3 κξ [ e 3 κξ 0) A µ õ = A µ In terms of these redefined fields, the scalar-tensor action becomes canonical is given by, S = d 4 x [ R g κ + gµν µ ξ ν ξ Vξ) 4 H µνρ Hµνρ 4 F µν Fµν + Ψi γ µ µ Ψ e 3 κξ) Ψ γµ σ νρ Hµνρ Ψ e 3 κξ) à [ Fδ Hµνρ + terms proportional to µ ξ 6) It may be observed that the interaction terms between B µν Ψ, Aµ ) of the canonical scalar-tensoraction see eqn.6)) carriesan exponential factor e 3 κξ) overthe usual gravity-matter coupling /. Our main goal is to investigate whether such exponential factor in front of the interaction terms) suppresses the coupling strengths of KR field with various matter fields which in turn may explain the invisibility of the Kalb-Ramond field on our present universe. For this purpose, we need a certain form of the scalar field potential Vξ) recall, Vξ) in turn depends on the form of FR). However, the stability of Vξ) follows from the following two conditions on FR): [ FR) RF R) = 0 7) <R> [ F R) F R) R > 0 8) <R> In order to achieve an explicit expression of a stable scalar potential, we choose the form of FR) as a polynomial of Ricci scalar of order 3 as, This potential has two minimas at, < ξ > = < ξ > + = a maxima at [ 3 κ ln 4+/ [ 3 κ ln 4 / < 0 ) > 0 ) < ξ > max = 0 3) which can also be shown from the expression [FR) RF R) <R> = 0, see eqns.7), 8)), as long as the parameters satisfy the condition as < < 3, this indicates that are greater than zero. It may also be mentioned that this same condition on makes the potential Vξ) - a real valued function. Eqn.0) clearly indicates that asymptotically Vξ) tends to e 3 κξ 0 as ξ goes to diverges for ξ. Moreover Vξ) has two zeroes at ξ = 0 [ ξ = ξ is greater than < ξ > + 3 κ ln 4 as <, see above) respectively. With these informations, herewe presentaplot ofvξ) vs. ξ in Figure[. As mentioned earlier also evident from Figure[, Vξ) has two minimas at < ξ > at < ξ > +. Thereby from stability criteria if the scalar field ξ is at < ξ >, then it is in a local minimum in order to have a lower energy configuration, the scalar field may tunnel from ξ =< ξ > to ξ =< ξ > + which is a global minimum. Such tunneling may cause due to quantum fluctuation. Below, we discuss how this tunneling may lead to the invisibility of second rank antisymmetric Kalb-Ramond field in our present universe.

4 4 Keeping this in mind, here we take the plot of T vs. see Figure[). = 0.53 give FIG.. Vξ) vs ξ for = 0.53 III. SUPPRESSION OF ANTISYMMETRIC TENSOR FIELDS DUE TO TUNNELING In this case, as pointed out earlier, the scalar field tunnels from < ξ > to < ξ > + in order to attain a lower energy configuration. As we will see later that such tunneling effect is intimately connected to the explanation of why KR field has practically no observable signature on our universe. To calculate the tunneling probability from < ξ > to < ξ > +, the scalar potential is approximately taken as a rectangle barrier having width w) = κ [< ξ > + < ξ > height h) = V< ξ > + ) respectively. For such a potential barrier, the tunneling probability T) is given by, T = + V< ξ > +) m V sinh [w V M 3 4) where m = V < ξ > ) = 3 4+/ )6+/ ) the explicit expression of the width is given by, [ 3κ w = ln 4+/. Further V = V< ξ > max 4 / ) V< ξ > ), which can be easily calculated from the expression of the scalar potential. These expressions yield the explicit form of the tunneling probability as, T = + 4+/ 4 / )sinh [ 6ln 6M 3 3/4 4+/ ) 3/ 6+/ 4+/ 4 / ) / ) 5) Eqn.5) clearly indicates that T depends on /. Recall that the ratio is constrained by < < 6) 3 FIG.. T vs for = 0.53 Figure[ clearly depicts that the tunneling probability increases with the higher curvature parameter asymptotically reaches to unity at large. However this is expected, because with increasing value of, the height of the potential barrier ) decreases as a consequence, T increases. Moreover, T goes to zero as tends to zero, because for 0, the height of the potential barrier goes to infinite as a result, T = 0. However before the tunneling when the scalar field is frozen at its vev < ξ >, it becomes non-dynamical thus the action in eqn.6) turns out to be, S = d 4 x [ R g κ 4 H Hµνρ µνρ 4 F Fµν µν + Ψi γ µ µ Ψ e κ<ξ> ) Ψ γµ σ 3 νρ Hµνρ Ψ e 3 κ<ξ> ) Ã [µ M Fνρ Hµνρ 7) p The last two terms in the above expression of action give the coupling of KR field to fermion, U) gauge field before the tunneling are given by λ b) KR fer = e 3 κ<ξ> ) = 4+/ 8) λ b) KR U) = e 3 κ<ξ> ) = 4+/ 9)

5 respectively. Similarly after the tunneling when the scalar field acquires the vev < ξ > +, the couplings of KR field to fermion U) gauge field are given by λ a) KR fer = e 3 κ<ξ>+) X fer = 4 / X U) = [ 4 / 5 3) = 4 / 0) λ a) KR U) = e 3 κ<ξ>+) = 4 / ) where we use the explicit expression of < ξ > +. As the ratio is constrained to be less than see eqn.6)), there is no worry about the realness of λ a) s). However it may be observed that λ a) s) are smaller than λ b) s), which clearly argues that the couplings of KR field with matter fields) get reduced due to the tunneling of the scalar field. More explicitly, eqns.8) to ) demonstrate that before the tunneling, interactions of KR field with various matter fields are of same order as usual gravity-matter coupling strength /, while after the tunneling, the couplings of the KR field get suppressed by the factor 4 / the suppression increases as the ratio of / approaches more closer to the value. This indicates that the effect of KR field may be dominant in the early universe but as the universe evolves, the scalar field makes a tunneling from ξ =< ξ > to ξ =< ξ > + with a probability T, see eqn.5)) which induces a suppression on the interaction strengths of KR field. This fact is in agreement with [6 8 may explain the negligible footprint of Kalb-Ramond field on our present universe. Further the time scale for tunneling or equivalently the decaying time scale for KR field is related to the inverse of the tunneling probability T which decreases with the increasing value of the higher curvature parameter or see eqn.5) or Figure[). Let us now consider the rank 3 antisymmetric tensor field X ρ with the corresponding field strength tensor Y ρδ = [ X ρδ ). The action for such a field in four dimension is S[X = d 4 x gy ρδ Y ρδ Adopting the same procedure as for KR field, one ends up with the coupling of the field X to matter before after the tunneling) as, Ω b) X fer = 4+/ Ω b) X U) = [ 4+/ ) where Ω b) X fer Ωa) X fer denote the coupling between X fermion before after the tunneling of the scalaron respectively same type of symbols are used for X U) gauge field). Like the case of KR field, get suppressed in comparison to X fer Ωa) X U) thatbeforethetunneling. Howeverλ a) KR fer Ωa) X fer carry the same suppression factor while the comparison of λ a) KR U) Ωa) X U) makes it clear that the interaction with electromagnetic field become progressively smaller with the increasing rank of the tensor field. Therefore regarding the suppression of antisymmetric tensor fields, the effect of scalar field tunneling increases with the increasing rank of the tensor field. As a consequence, the suppression of an antisymmetric tensor field increases with the increasing rank. These are demonstrated in Table[. Coupling before tunneling λ a) KR fer λa) KR U) X fer X U) 0 / 0 / 0 / 0 / / 0 / 0 / 0 4 / 0 4 / 0 4 / 0 4 / 0 8 / TABLE I. Couplings of antisymmetric tensor fields for a wide range of /, before after the tunneling of the scalaron Before concluding, it may be mentioned that the Stard Model gauge couplings remain invariant under conformal transformation of the metric while the Yukawa coupling parameters can be suitably redefined. IV. CONCLUSION In conclusion, for every FR) gravity there exists an intrinsic scalar degree of freedom, besides the massless graviton in the dual scalar-tensor theory. Such scalar field appears with a potential which depends on the form of FR). Here, we consider the form of FR) as a cubic polynomial function of Ricci scalar for which the scalar potential Vξ)) acquires two minimas say at < ξ > < ξ > + ) with different energy configuration, in particular V< ξ > + ) < V< ξ > ). In such a scenario, we explore the possible effects of the scalaron on the coupling of antisymmetric tensor fields rank two or onwards) with various Stard Model fields. From stability criteria, if ξ is at < ξ >, then in order to have a lower energy configuration, the scalar field has a non-zero probability to tunnel from ξ =< ξ > to

6 6 ξ =< ξ > +, which occur due to quantum fluctuation. The tunneling probability is explicitly determined see eqn.5)) it is found to increase with the larger value of higher curvature parameter. However it turns out that before the tunneling of the scalar field, the interactions of all antisymmetric tensor fields with matter fields are same as usual gravity-matter coupling strength /, while after the tunneling, the couplings get severely suppressed over. Thereby one can argue that the effect of antisymmetric fields may be dominant in the early universe but as the universe evolves, the scalar field tunnels from ξ =< ξ > to ξ =< ξ > + which in turn induces a suppression on the interaction strengths of antisymmetric fields in comparison to /. Moreover it is also found that the suppression increases with the increasing rank of the tensor field. This may provide a natural explanation why the large scale behaviour of the present universe is free from any perceptible signatures of antisymmetric tensor fields solely governed by gravity. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS SSG acknowledges the financial support from SERB Research Project No. EMR/07/0037. TP acknowledges the hospitality by ICE-CSIC/IEEC Barcelona, Spain), where a part of this work was done during visit. [ M.J. Duff, J.T. Liu, Phys. Lett. B ). O. Lebedev, Phys. Rev. D ). [ M. Kalb, P. Ramond, Phys. Rev. D ). [3 P. Majumdar, S. SenGupta ; Class.Quant.Grav. 6 L89- L94 999). [4 S. Kar, P. Majumdar, S. SenGupta, A. Sinha ; Eur.Phys.J. C ). [5 S. Kar, P. Majumdar, S. SenGupta, S. Sur ; Class.Quant.Grav ). [6 A. Das, T. Paul, S. SenGupta ; Phys.Rev. D98 no.0, ). [7 E. Elizalde, S.D. Odintsov, T. Paul, D. Saez-Chilon Gomez ; arxiv:8.0960[gr-qc. [8 T. Paul, S. SenGupta ; arxiv: [gr-qc. [9 E. Elizalde, S.D. Odintsov, V.K. Oikonomou, T. Paul ; arxiv:80.077[gr-qc. [0 B. Mukhopadhyaya, S. Sen, S. Sen, S. SenGupta ; Phys. Rev. D 70, ). [ S. Chakraborty, S. SenGupta ; Annals of Physics 367, 58 06). [ B. Mukhopadhyaya, S. Sen, S. SenGupta ; Phys.Rev.Lett ). [3 B. Mukhopadhyaya, S. Sen, S. SenGupta ; Phys. Rev. D 76, 50R) 007). [4 A. Das, B. Mukhopadhyaya, S. SenGupta ; Phys. Rev. D 90, ). [5 A. Das, S. SenGupta ; Phys.Lett. B ). [6 S. Nojiri, S.D. Odintsov, Phys. Rept. 505, 59 0). [7 S. Nojiri, S. D. Odintsov V. K. Oikonomou, Phys. Rept ). [8 T. P. Sotiriou V. Faraoni, fr) Theories Of Gravity, Rev.Mod.Phys.8, ). [9 A.De Felice S. Tsujikawa, fr) theories, Living Rev.Rel. 3, 3 00). [0 A.Paliathanasis, fr)-gravity from Killing Tensors, Class. Quant. Grav.33no. 7, ). [ A. Das, H. Mukherjee, T. Paul, S. SenGupta ; Eur.Phys.J. C78 no., 08 08). [ N. Banerjee, T. Paul ; Eur.Phys.J. C77 no.0, 6707). [3 G. Cognola, E. Elizalde, S. Nojiri, S. D. Odintsov, L. Sebastiani, S. Zerbini ; Phys. Rev. D 77, ). [4 S.D. Odintsov, D. Saez-Chillon Gomez, G.S. Sharov; Eur.Phys.J. C77 no., 86 07). [5 E. V. Linder ; Phys. Rev. D 80, ). [6 K. Bamba, C. Q. Zeng, C. C. Lee, JCAP 008, 0 00). [7 S.Nojiri, S. D. Odintsov, Phys.Lett.B ). [8 S.Nojiri, S. D. Odintsov, O.G.Gorbunova, J.Phys.A39, ). [9 G.Cognola, E. Elizalde, S. Nojiri, S.D. Odintsov, S.Zerbini, Phys.Rev. D73, ). [30 C.Lanczos; Z. Phys ); C.Lanczos; Annals Math ). [3 D.Lovelock; J. Math. Phys ). [3 J. D. Barrow S. Cotsakis, Phys. Lett.B4, ). [33 S. Capozziello, R. de Ritis, A. A. Marino, Class. Quant. Grav.4, ). [34 S. Bahamonde, S. D. Odintsov, V. K. Oikonomou, M. Wright, arxiv: [gr-qc. [35 R. Catena, M. Pietroni, L. Scarabello, Phys. Rev.D76, ). [36 S. SenGupta, S. Chakraborty, Eur.Phys.J. C76, no.0, 55 06). [37 S. An, D. Choudhury, Anjan A. Sen, S. SenGupta, Phys.Rev. D9, no., ).