One spectrum to rule them all? Alexander Gallego Cadavid 2,3, Antonio Enea Romano 1,2,3 1 Theoretical Physics Department, CERN, CH-1211 Geneva 23, Switzerland 2 ICRANet, Piazza della Repubblica 1, I 65122 Pescara, Italy 3 Instituto de Física, Universidad de Antioquia, A.A.1226, Medellín, Colombia arxiv:1712.89v1 [astro-ph.co] 3 Nov 217 We show that there is an infinite family of slow-roll parameters histories which can produce the same spectrum of comoving curvature perturbations. After expressing the slow-roll parameters in terms of the scale factor this degeneracy can be shown to be related to the freedom in the choice of the initial conditions for the second order differential equation relating the coefficients of the curvature perturbation equations to the scale factor. This freedom implies that in general there is no one-to-one correspondence between the spectrum and higher order correlation functions, unless some special conditions are satisfied by the slow-roll parameters. We give some numerical example of expansion histories with the same spectrum but different bispectra. We also compute what kind of perturbations of the de-sitter scale factor can produce the same spectrum but different slow-roll parameters and higher correlation functions. Introduction Cosmic microwave background CMB) observations are compatible with an approximately scale invariant primordial curvature perturbations power spectrum [1 8]. Higher order correlation functions can be important to distinguish between inflationary models producing the same spectrum, as it was shown in some specific case in [9]. This can be particularly relevant for models with features [1 36]. Features of the inflaton potential can affect the evolution of primordial curvature perturbations and consequently generate a variation in the amplitude of the spectrum and bispectrum [1 35]. This can provide a better fit to the observational data at the scales where the spectrum shows some deviations from power law [13, 15, 19, 21, 37 41]. For single field inflationary models some consistency relations between the spectrum and bispectrum of primordial curvature perturbations [17, 26, 42, 43] have been derived, but our results show that they can be easily violated. In general there is in fact an infinite class of models having the same spectrum but different bispectra. We give some examples of models with the same spectrum and different bispectra, showing how they can be obtained by changing the initial conditions for the expansion history of the Universe during inflation. Inflation The results we will derive do not depend on the choice of any specific type of inflation model, since they are based only on the freedom in the evolution of the scale factor. Nevertheless to give some concrete example we will consider a single scalar field φ, minimally coupled to gravity with a standard kinetic term according to the action S = d 4 x [ 1 g 2 M P 2 lr 1 ] 2 gµν µ φ ν φ V φ), 1) where g µν is the Friedmann-Lemaitre-Robertson-Walker FLRW) metric in a flat Universe, M P l = 8πG) 1/2 is the reduced Planck mass, R is the Ricci scalar, and V is the potential energy of the inflaton φ. The variation of the action with respect to the metric and the scalar field gives the Friedmann equation and the inflaton equation of motion ȧ ) 2 H 2 = 1 ) 1 a 2 φ 2 + V φ), 2) 3M 2 P l φ + 3H φ + φ V =, 3) where H is the Hubble parameter, a is the scale factor, and we denote respectively the derivatives with respect to time and to scalar field with dots and φ. From now on we adopt a system of units in which M P l = 1. For the slow-roll parameters we use the following definitions ɛ Ḣ H 2 and η ɛ ɛh. 4) Primordial spectrum of curvature perturbations The study of primordial scalar perturbations is attained by expanding perturbatively the action with respect to the background FLRW solution [44]. In the comoving gauge the second order action for scalar perturbations is S 2 = [ dtd 3 x a 3 ɛr 2 c aɛ R c ) 2], 5) where R c is the curvature perturbation on comoving slices. The Euler-Lagrange equations for this action give a 3 ɛ R ) c aɛδ ij 2 R c t t x i =. 6) xj
2 1 1 9 a 1 12 a' 5 1 8 1 11 1 1 8 1 1 5 1 7 1 9 1 1 7 1 8 5 1 6 1 7 a a'.2.5.1.2.5 1. 2. 1 1. 5..1 1. 5..1 1..5.1 FIG. 1: The numerically computed scale factor a obtained from Eq. 15) dashed red) is compared with the reference a ref blue). In this plot we use δ = 1.5. In the bottom we plot the numerical percentage difference defined as a) 1 a ref a)/a ref. FIG. 2: The numerically computed scale factor a obtained from Eq. 15) dashed red) is compared with the reference a ref blue). In this plot we use δ = 1.5. In the bottom we plot the numerical percentage difference defined as a ) 1 a ref a )/a ref. Taking the Fourier transform of the previous equation we obtain the equation of motion for the primordial curvature perturbation R c k) + 2 z z R ck) + k 2 R c k) =, 7) where z a 2ɛ, k is the comoving wave number, and primes denote derivatives with respect to conformal time dτ dt/a. As initial conditions for Eq. 7) it is common to take R c τ i, k) = v ik) 8) R cτ i, k) = v i k) v ik) z i, 9) where from now on we denote quantities evaluated at initial time τ i by the subscript i and vk) = e ikτ 1 i ), 1) 2k kτ is the Bunch-Davies vacuum [45]. How many expansion histories can give the same spectrum? As can be seen from Eq. 7) the evolution of the primordial curvature perturbation R c is entirely determined by the background quantity z /z and the initial conditions in Eqs. 8) and 9), which are in terms of and z i. For a given spectrum how much freedom is left in specifying the slow roll parameters history or equivalently the expansion history? Mathematically this question corresponds to ask under what conditions we can obtain the same solution for the curvature perturbation equation, and the answer is that this is possible as long as the coefficient z /z of the equation and initial conditions are the same. After choosing a reference function z ref we can find the family of expansion histories such that the corresponding equation of curvature perturbation has the same coefficient, i.e. A general solution for s z z = z ref z ref. 11) zτ) = Cz ref, 12)
3 a'' Ε 1. 1 6 1 14 9. 1 7 8. 1 7 1 12 7. 1 7 1 1 6. 1 7 1 8 5. 1 7 a''.2.5.1.2.5 1. 2. 1. Η 1.5.2 1.1 1.5 FIG. 3: The numerically computed scale factor a obtained from Eq. 15) dashed red) is compared with the reference a ref blue). In this plot we use δ = 1.5. In the bottom we plot the numerical percentage difference defined as a ) 1 a ref a )/a ref. 1 1 6 z 5 1 5 1 1 5 5 1 4 1 1 4 5 FIG. 4: The numerically computed z corresponding to the scale factor a obtained from Eq. 15) for δ = 1.5 dashed red) is compared with z ref blue). where C is an arbitrary integration constant. In order for the spectrum to be the same also the initial conditions have to be the same, which implies that zτ) = z ref τ). 13) This means that different models could have the same spectrum of primordial curvature perturbations as long as s the same at all times. FIG. 5: The numerically computed slow-roll parameters corresponding to the scale factor a obtained from Eq. 15) for δ = 1.5 dashed red) is compared with the ones corresponding to a ref blue). The interesting fact is that models with the same z can have different slow-roll parameters, or equivalently expansion, histories. This can be seen from the relation between z and the scale factor z = a 2ɛ = 2 2a 2 a3 a a 2 ). 14) For a given z ref the scale factor evolution is not uniquely determined. From the above relation we get in fact a second order differential equation for the scale factor Expressing the initial conditions as 2a 2 a3 a a 2 = 1 2 z2 ref. 15) a i = a ref,i and a i = δa ref,i, 16) we can see that the freedom in fixing them corresponds to different slow-roll parameters histories producing exactly the same spectrum. While the initial value of the scale factor is arbitrary and does not really have any observable implication, the freedom in the choice of a i gives an infinite family of different expansion histories producing the same exact spectrum. In order to give some concrete example here we consider a single field inflationary model and calculate the
4 P 2.1 1 9 2. 1 9 1.9 1 9 1.8 1 9 F NL 1 1 2 1.7 1 9 3 1.6 1 9.1 1 1 1 F 2.5 1. 1.5 2. 2.5 3. FIG. 6: The numerically computed spectrum of primordial curvature perturbations P Rc corresponding to the scale factor a obtained form Eq. 15) for δ = 1.5 dashed red) is compared with the one corresponding to a ref blue). background evolution solving Eqs. 2) and 3). In particular we study a featured potential [9, 32] but the results obtained in this paper are independent of the chosen potential, and are valid for an arbitrary expansion history. We choose a potential of the type [ V φ) = V + 1 2 m2 φ 2 + λ φ 2 φn φ n φ ) ] ) 1 + tanh, σ 17) where V is the vacuum energy, m is the inflaton mass, λ is a parameter that controls the magnitude of the potential. We first integrate the background equations to obtain z ref, and then solve the differential equation 15) to obtain different expansion histories giving the same z ref, corresponding to different a i. Once the function a is known we compute the slow-roll parameters, solve the equation for curvature perturbations, and compute the spectrum and bispectrum. As expected the spectrum is exactly the same but the bispectrum is different, since the slow-roll parameters history is also different. In Figs. 1-7 we show the numerical results for different expansion histories producing the same spectrum. Degeneracy in the spectrum and bispectrum The two-point correlation function of primordial curvature perturbations is given by [7, 8] ˆRc k 1, τ e ) ˆR c k 2, τ e ) 2π) 3 2π2 k 3 P R c k)δ 3) k 1 + k 2 ), 18) where τ e is the exit horizon time and the power spectrum of primordial curvature perturbations is defined as P Rc k) 2k3 2π) 2 R ck) 2. 19) Similarly, the three-point correlation function is given 1 1 2 3 4 3 2 1 1 2 3 FIG. 7: The numerically computed F NL functions in the squeezed top panel) and equilateral bottom panel) limit corresponding to the scale factor a obtained from Eq. 15) for δ = 1.5 dashed red) are compared with the ones corresponding to a ref blue). by [44, 46] ˆRc τ e, k 1 ) ˆR c τ e, k 2 ) ˆR c τ e, k 3 ) 2π) 3 B Rc k 1, k 2, k 3 )δ 3) k 1 + k 2 + k 3 ), 2) where [ B Rc k 1, k 2, k 3 ) = 2I R c τ e, k 1 )R c τ e, k 2 )R c τ e, k 3 ) τe dτητ)ɛτ)a 2 τ) 2R cτ, k 1 )R c τ, k 2 )R c τ, k 3 ) ) k1r 2 cτ, k 1 )R cτ, k 2 )R cτ, k 3 ) ] + two permutations of k 1, k 2, and k 3, 21) is the bispectrum. In this work we will study the degeneracy in the bispectrum using the quantity [9, 22 24, 32] F NL k 1, k 2, k 3 ; k ) 1 k 1 k 2 k 3 ) 3 B ζ k 1, k 2, k 3 ) 32π) 4 k1 3 + k3 2 + k3 3 Pζ 2k, ) 22) where k is a pivot scale at which the power spectrum is evaluated and corresponds approximately to the scale of normalization of the spectrum [7, 8]. Our definition of
5.6.5.4.3.2.1.1.5 1. 1.5 FIG. 8: The numerically computed δ H using Eq. 24) blue) and the approximation given in Eq. 25) red) are plotted as a function of conformal time. As can be seen the approximation is not accurate. F NL reduces to the usual f NL [47] in the equilateral limit if the spectrum is approximately scale invariant, but in general f NL and F NL are different, and for example in the squeezed limit they are not the same [9, 22 24, 32]. In Fig. 6 we plot the numerically computed spectrum P Rc obtained from a given by Eq. 15) and compare it to the one for a ref. It can be seen that even though the spectrum is the same the degeneracy can be broken at the bispectrum level. This implies that in general spectrum and bispectrum do not satisfy the consistency relation derived in [26]. Violation of consistency conditions Some relations between the spectrum and the bispectrum have been derived [17, 26, 42, 43] under some simplifying assumptions about dependence of z on slow-roll parameters. In general this exact relation is valid at any order in slow-roll parameters where z z = a 2 H 2 2 ɛ + η ) 1 + η ) + ah 2 2 2 η 23) 2a 2 H 2 1 + 1 ) 2 δ H, δ H = ɛ 1 2 ɛη + 3 2 η + 1 4 η2 + 1 2aH η. 24) In [26] it was argued that for sudden variations of the background it can be further simplified to this form δ H 1 2 τη. 25) In Fig. 8 we plot the numerically computed result of δ H, showing that the above equation is not always a good approximation. In Ref. [26] this approximation is used to reconstruct the time evolution of the slow-roll parameter η from the spectrum. The η parameter is then used to compute the relation between the spectrum and bispectrum. If these relations were always valid models with the same spectrum should also have the same bispectrum, but as shown in Fig. 7, this is not always true. In general there is an infinite family of of slow-roll parameter histories which do not satisfy the approximation in Eq.25) and consequently violate the consistency relations which are derived assuming its validity. Perturbations of de-sitter giving the same spectrum In order to give an example which can be studied analytically let us consider a generic expansion history a τ) and consider small perturbations δaτ) such that zτ), and consequently the spectrum, is unchanged. Perturbing to first order aτ) and zτ) we get aτ) = a τ) + δaτ) ; zτ) = z τ) + δzτ), 2a t) 3 a δzτ) = t)δa t) a a t) 3 δa t) t)3 a + t)2 ) 3a t) 2 δat)a t) a + 4a t)δat). 26) t)2 The condition for having the same spectrum is zτ) = z τ), or equivalently δzτ) =. If we consider a de- Sitter background, i.e. we assume a τ) = 1 Hτ, the differential equation δzτ) = has the solution δaτ) = C 1 τ + C 2 τ 2. 27) The above is an example of a perturbative change of the de-sitter scale factor evolution which does not induce first order changes in the power spectrum. As long as the perturbative regime is valid, i.e. δa a, higher order changes in z should also be negligible and the spectrum should be approximately the same. Nevertheless the slow-roll parameters histories will be different already at first order in δa, and consequently also higher correlation functions will differ. Conclusions We have shown that there is an infinite family of slow-roll parameters histories which can produce the same spectrum of comoving curvature perturbations. This degeneracy is related to the freedom in the choice of the initial conditions for the second order differential equation relating the coefficients of the curvature perturbation equations to the scale factor. This freedom implies that in general there is no one-to-one correspondence between the spectrum and higher order correlation functions, unless some special conditions are satisfied by the slow-roll parameters. We have given some examples of models with the same spectrum but different bispectra, showing how they can be obtained by changing the initial conditions for the expansion history of the Universe during inflation. We have also studied analytically perturbations of the de-sitter background which produce the same spectrum but have different slow-roll parameters histories.
6 In general there is an infinite class of models having the same spectrum but different bispectra. This implies that the consistency relations between the spectrum and bispectrum of primordial curvature perturbations which have been derived assuming that the spectrum completely determines the full slow-roll parameters history are easily violated. [1] WMAP, G. Hinshaw et al., Astrophys.J.Suppl. 28, 19 213), arxiv:1212.5226. [2] WMAP, C. Bennett et al., Astrophys.J.Suppl. 28, 2 213), arxiv:1212.5225. [3] Planck, P. A. R. Ade et al., Astron. Astrophys. 571, A1 214), arxiv:133.562. [4] Planck, R. Adam et al., 215), arxiv:152.1582. [5] Planck, P. A. R. Ade et al., Astron. Astrophys. 571, A16 214), arxiv:133.576. [6] Planck, P. A. R. Ade et al., Astron. Astrophys. 594, A13 216), arxiv:152.1589. [7] Planck Collaboration, P. Ade et al., 213), arxiv:133.582. [8] Planck, P. A. R. Ade et al., Astron. Astrophys. 594, A2 216), arxiv:152.2114. [9] A. Gallego Cadavid, A. Enea Romano, and M. Sasaki, ArXiv e-prints 217), arxiv:173.4621. [1] S. M. Leach, M. Sasaki, D. Wands, and A. R. Liddle, Phys. Rev. D64, 23512 21), arxiv:astro-ph/1146. [11] A. A. Starobinsky, JETP Lett. 55, 489 1992). [12] J. A. Adams, G. G. Ross, and S. Sarkar, Nucl.Phys. B53, 45 1997), arxiv:hep-ph/974286. [13] J. A. Adams, B. Cresswell, and R. Easther, Phys. Rev. D64, 123514 21), arxiv:astro-ph/12236. [14] J. Chluba, J. Hamann, and S. P. Patil, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D24, 15323 215), arxiv:155.1834. [15] S. Gariazzo, C. Giunti, and M. Laveder, JCAP 154, 23 215), arxiv:1412.745. [16] S. Gariazzo, L. Lopez-Honorez, and O. Mena, Phys. Rev. D92, 6351 215), arxiv:156.5251. [17] S. Mooij, G. A. Palma, G. Panotopoulos, and A. Soto, JCAP 151, 62 215), arxiv:157.8481, [Erratum: JCAP162,no.2,E1216)]. [18] A. Ashoorioon and A. Krause, 26), arxiv:hepth/671. [19] D. K. Hazra, A. Shafieloo, and T. Souradeep, JCAP 1411, 11 214), arxiv:146.4827. [2] X. Chen, P. D. Meerburg, and M. Mnchmeyer, JCAP 169, 23 216), arxiv:165.9364. [21] D. K. Hazra, A. Shafieloo, G. F. Smoot, and A. A. Starobinsky, JCAP 169, 9 216), arxiv:165.216. [22] A. G. Cadavid, A. E. Romano, and S. Gariazzo, Eur. Phys. J. C76, 385 216), arxiv:158.5687. [23] A. Gallego Cadavid, A. E. Romano, and S. Gariazzo, Eur. Phys. J. C77, 242 217), arxiv:1612.349. [24] A. Gallego Cadavid and A. E. Romano, Nucl. Part. Phys. Proc. 267-269, 254 215). [25] A. Gallego Cadavid, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 831, 123 217), arxiv:173.4375. [26] G. A. Palma, JCAP 154, 35 215), arxiv:1412.5615. [27] A. E. Romano and M. Sasaki, Phys.Rev. D78, 13522 28), arxiv:89.5142. [28] F. Arroja, A. E. Romano, and M. Sasaki, Phys.Rev. D84, 12353 211), arxiv:116.5384. [29] X. Chen, JCAP 121, 38 212), arxiv:114.1323. [3] D. K. Hazra, A. Shafieloo, G. F. Smoot, and A. A. Starobinsky, JCAP 148, 48 214), arxiv:145.212. [31] J. Martin, L. Sriramkumar, and D. K. Hazra, JCAP 149, 39 214), arxiv:144.693. [32] A. G. Cadavid and A. E. Romano, Eur. Phys. J. C75, 589 215), arxiv:144.2985. [33] Y.-F. Cai, E. G. M. Ferreira, B. Hu, and J. Quintin, Phys. Rev. D92, 12133 215), arxiv:157.5619. [34] A. A. Starobinsky, Grav.Cosmol. 4, 88 1998), arxiv:astro-ph/981136. [35] C. P. Novaes, M. Benetti, and A. Bernui, 215), arxiv:157.1657. [36] G. A. Palma, D. Sapone, and S. Sypsas, 217), arxiv:171.257. [37] J. Hamann, L. Covi, A. Melchiorri, and A. Slosar, Phys.Rev. D76, 2353 27), arxiv:astro-ph/7138. [38] D. K. Hazra, M. Aich, R. K. Jain, L. Sriramkumar, and T. Souradeep, JCAP 11, 8 21), arxiv:15.2175. [39] P. Hunt and S. Sarkar, JCAP 141, 25 214), arxiv:138.2317. [4] M. Joy, V. Sahni, and A. A. Starobinsky, Phys.Rev. D77, 23514 28), arxiv:711.1585. [41] M. Joy, A. Shafieloo, V. Sahni, and A. A. Starobinsky, JCAP 96, 28 29), arxiv:87.3334. [42] A. E. Romano, S. Mooij, and M. Sasaki, Phys. Lett. B761, 119 216), arxiv:166.496. [43] D. J. Chung and A. Enea Romano, Phys.Rev. D73, 1351 26), arxiv:astro-ph/58411. [44] J. M. Maldacena, JHEP 35, 13 23), arxiv:astroph/2163. [45] T. Bunch and P. Davies, Proc.Roy.Soc.Lond. A36, 117 1978). [46] X. Chen, Adv.Astron. 21, 638979 21), arxiv:12.1416. [47] S. Hannestad, T. Haugbolle, P. R. Jarnhus, and M. S. Sloth, JCAP 16, 1 21), arxiv:912.3527.