Improved WKB analysis of Slow-Roll Inflation Roberto Casadio, 1, Fabio Finelli,, Mattia Luzzi, 1, and Giovanni Venturi 1, 1 Dipartimento di Fisica, Università di Bologna and I.N.F.N., Sezione di Bologna, via Irnerio 46, 4016 Bologna, Italy. ISF/INF, Istituto di strofisica Spaziale e Fisica Cosmica, Sezione di Bologna, Istituto Nazionale di strofisica, via Gobetti 101, 4019 Bologna, Italy. arxiv:gr-qc/0510103v 1 Nov 005 We extend the WKB method for the computation of cosmological perturbations during inflation beyond leading order and provide the power spectra of scalar and tensor perturbations to second order in the slow-roll parameters. Our method does not require that the slow-roll parameters be constant. lthough leading and next-to-leading results in the slow-roll parameters depend on the approximation technique used in the computation, we find that the inflationary theoretical predictions obtained may reach the accuracy required by planned observations. In two technical appendices, we compare our techniques and results with previous findings. PCS numbers: 98.80.Cq, 98.80.- I. INTRODUCTION One of the main topics in theoretical cosmology is the computation of the spectra of perturbations during inflation for an introduction and review see, e.g. Refs. 1, which are then to be compared with the data for the Cosmic Microwave Bacground Radiation CMBR obtained in present and future experiments, 3. It is in general impossible to obtain such spectra analytically, and therefore approximate methods have been proposed, amongst which stands out the slow-roll approximation of Ref. 4. This amounted to introducing a suitable hierarchy of parameters, whose time-dependence was frozen to first order, and corresponding spectra and spectral indices were then determined uniquely. The tas of extending standard slow-roll results beyond first order is however highly non-trivial. s was noted in Ref. 5, one expects that the time-dependence of the parameters that describe the inflationary Universe could then appear in the order of the Bessel functions which describe the perturbations. Since this is, in general, inconsistent, other ways have been devised in order to by-pass this issue, such as the Green s function method of Refs. 6, 7, and the uniform approximation developed in Refs. 8, 9, 10. Our approach to this problem is to mae use of an improvement of the WKB approximation first applied to cosmological perturbations in Ref. 11 introduced in Ref. 1. We followed the method of Ref. 13 in order to illustrate an improved uniform leading order approximation and then introduced two expansions: the adiabatic expansion of Ref. 13 and a perturbative Green s function expansion. In the present paper, we shall use our methods in particular the adiabatic expansion of Electronic address: Roberto.Casadio@bo.infn.it Electronic address: finelli@bo.iasf.cnr.it Electronic address: Mattia.Luzzi@bo.infn.it Electronic address: armitage@bo.infn.it Ref. 1 in conjunction with the slow-roll approximation 4, 14 in order to obtain higher order terms in the slow-roll parameters. Our method will not require that the slow-roll parameters be constant and extends the results illustrated in Ref. 15. Let us emphasize here the distinction between the slow-roll and WKB formalisms. The latter also referred to as semiclassical or adiabatic expansion is used to obtain approximate solutions to the general cosmological perturbation equations, whereas the former corresponds to an approximate solution for the homogeneous mode in which the inflaton inetic term is neglected and one has a hierarchy of horizon flow functions see Section II. Thus, they correspond to diverse, and independent, approximation schemes, even if, as is obvious, the validity or not of the slow-roll approximation will influence the form of the approximate WKB solution. In Section II, we briefly recall the main definitions and standard slow-roll results. Our results to leading WKB and second slow-roll order, and next-to-leading WKB and first slow-roll order from Ref. 15 are respectively reviewed in detail in Sections III and IV. New results for the next-to-leading WKB and second slow-roll order are given in Section V. We finally comment on our wor in Section VI and compare with other results in the literature in ppendices and B. II. BSICS Let us begin by recalling the Robertson-Waler metric in conformal time η, ds = a η dη d x d x, 1 where a is the scale factor of the Universe. Scalar density and tensor gravitational wave fluctuations are given on this bacground, respectively by µ = µ S a Q Q is the Muhanov variable 16 and µ = µ T a h h is the amplitude of the two polarizations of gravitational waves 17, 18, where the functions µ must satisfy the
one-dimensional Schrödinger-lie equation d dη Ω, η µ = 0, together with the initial condition lim µ, η e i η. 3 a H In the above is the wave-number, H a /a is the Hubble parameter, and Ω, η z z, 4 where z = z S a φ /H for scalar and z = z T a for tensor perturbations φ is the homogenous inflaton and primes denote derivatives with respect to η. The dimensionless power spectra PS henceforth of scalar and tensor fluctuations are then given by P ζ 3 π µ S z S, P h 4 3 π and the spectral indices and runnings n S 1 d P ζ d, n T d P h d µ T z T 5a 5b α S d P ζ d, α T d P h d. 5c We also define the tensor-to-scalar ratio where N is the number of e-folds, N a/a i where a i = aη i after the arbitrary initial time η i. The hierarchy of horizon flow functions HFF henceforth is then defined according to ǫ i1 d ǫ i dn, i 0 7 and inflation taes place for ǫ 1 < 1 see ppendix for a comparison with different conventions. We finally recall that the frequencies Ω can now be expressed in terms of ǫ 1, ǫ, and ǫ 3 only, as Ω T a H = ǫ 1 8 Ω S a H = ǫ 1 3 ǫ 1 ǫ 1 ǫ 1 4 ǫ 1 ǫ ǫ 3. In general, Ω, η vanishes for a certain time η = η 0 the classical turning point.. WKB Formalism Let us briefly summarize the essential formulae from our Ref. 1. First of all, we apply the Langer transformation x H a, χ 1 ǫ 1 1/ e x/ µ 9 R P h P ζ. 5d so that Eq. becomes The evolution of the Universe is usually described by means of a set of flow equations 11, 19. The zero horizon flow function is defined by ǫ 0 HN i HN, 6 d dx ω x χx = 0, 10 where for scalar and tensor perturbations one now has ω Sx = e x 1 ǫ 1 1 4 3 ǫ1 1 ǫ 1 3 ǫ 1ǫ 1 ǫ 1 1 ǫ 1ǫ ǫ 3 1 ǫ 1 3 1 4 ǫ 1ǫ 4 1 ǫ 1 4 11 ω Tx = e x 1 ǫ 1 1 4 3 ǫ1 1 ǫ 1 ǫ 1 ǫ 1 ǫ 1 ǫ 1 ǫ ǫ 3 1 ǫ 1 3 ǫ 1ǫ 1 ǫ 4 1 ǫ 1 4, and the corresponding turning points are mapped into x = x 0 η 0,. We then denote quantities evaluated in the region to the right left of the turning point x 0 with
3 the subscript I II. For example, and ξ I x = ω I x = ω x, ω II x = ω x 1 x x 0 ω I ydy, ξ II x = x0 x ω II ydy. 13 The next-to-leading WKB solutions of Eq. 10, in the adiabatic expansion and for one linear turning point, is then given by a combination of Bessel functions and their derivatives as 1, 13 U ± I x = 1 φ I1 x u ± I x γ I1 xu ± I x 14 U ± II x = 1 φ II1 x u ± II x γ II1 xu ± II x, where u ± I x = u ± II x = ξ I x ω I x J ± 1 3 ξ Ix ξ II x ω II x I ± 1 3 ξ IIx. 15 The above expressions 15 satisfy an equation of motion d dx ω x σx χx = 0, 16 where the residual term is defined by σx 3 4 ω ω ω ω 5 ω 36 ξ. 17 s we showed in Ref. 1, such a quantity is expected to be small for the cases of interest, that is, in the subhorizon limit in the super-horizon limit a H = ex, 18 a H = ex 0, 19 and also at the turning points zeros x = x 0 of the frequencies. In Eq. 17, we omitted the subscripts I and II for brevity and primes hereafter will denote derivatives with respect to x. The next-to-leading WKB PS in the adiabatic expansion are given by H P ζ = π ǫ 1 m Pl P h = 16 H π m Pl 3 e 1 ξii,s g1s D a H 1 ǫ 1 ω II,S 0a 3 e 1 ξii,t g1t D. a H 1 ǫ 1 ω II,T The spectral indices are also given by and their runnings by n S 1 = 3 d ξ II,S d d gd 1S d n T = 3 d ξ II,T d d gd 1T d, 0b α S = d ξ II,S d d g1s D d 0c α T = d ξ II,T d d g1t D d. Finally, the tensor-to-scalar ratio taes the form e ξ II,T 1 g1t D ω II,S R = 16 ǫ 1, e 1 ξii,s g1s D ω II,T 0d where all quantities are evaluated in the super-horizon limit x x 0 and we used the results g1s,t {φ D x = II1 x γ II1 x ω II x ω II x ω II x 1 } γ I1x i φ I1 x i 1a φ 1 x = 1 γ 1 x = 1 ωx S,T x γ 1 y σyγ 1y dy x σy ωy dy, 1b where it is understood that the integration must be performed from x 0 to x in region I and from x to x 0 in region II, and the indices S and T refer to the use of the corresponding frequencies. Let us note that if we tae the x 0, we obtain the leading WKB results given in Ref. 11 for the PS, spectral indices and α-runnings. above formulae with g D 1S,T B. Slow-Roll Results Let us briefly recall the nown results obtained from the slow-roll approximation 4, 11, 14. To first order in the slow-roll parameters 7, we have the PS
4 H P ζ = π ǫ 1 m Pl P h = 16 H π m Pl 1 C 1ǫ 1 C ǫ ǫ 1 ǫ 1 C 1ǫ 1 ǫ 1, a where C γ E 0.796, γ E being the Euler- Mascheroni constant, and all quantities are evaluated at the Hubble crossing η, that is the moment of time when = a HN a H. The number is usually called pivot scale. From Eqs. a, we can also obtain the spectral indices and α-runnings, n S 1 = ǫ 1 ǫ, n T = ǫ 1 b leading WKB approximation. We first set g1 D x 0 in Eqs. 0a, 0b, 0c and 0d. We then find it convenient to re-express all relevant quantities in terms of the conformal time η. For this purpose, we employ the relation α S = α T = 0, c on using respectively Eqs. 5b and 5c. From Eq. 5d, the tensor-to-scalar ratio becomes R = 16 ǫ 1 1 C ǫ ǫ. d η = = 1 ǫ1 ǫ O ǫ 3 i 3a a H 1 ǫ 1 e x 1 ǫ1 ǫ O ǫ 3 i. 3b 1 ǫ 1 III. LEDING WKB ND SECOND SLOW-ROLL ORDER We now consider the possibility of obtaining consistent second order results in the parameters ǫ i s from the We can now expand the frequencies to second order in the HFF, and the PS become P ζ = 9 ωsη = η 1 ǫ 1 ǫ 4 3 ǫ 1 4 ǫ 1 3 ǫ ǫ 1 ǫ 1 4 ǫ 1 ǫ ǫ 3 9 ωt η = η 1 ǫ 1 ǫ 4 3 ǫ 1 4 ǫ 1 1 ǫ 1 ǫ H f π ǫ 1,f m Pl P h = 16 H f π m Pl η f 3 1 8 3 3 ǫ 1,f 1 3 ǫ,f 19 9 ǫ 1,f 19 9 ǫ 1,f ǫ,f 1 9 ǫ,f 1 9 ǫ,f ǫ 3,f e ξii,s η f 3 1 8 3 3 ǫ 1,f 19 9 ǫ 1,f 6 9 ǫ 1,f ǫ,f e ξii,t., 4 5 From now on, the subscript f will denote that the given quantity is evaluated in the super-horizon limit. We must now compute the arguments of the exponentials in the above expressions, which are in general of the form ξ II η 0, η f ; = η0 η f η η d η η, 6
5 where the function η contains the HFF, but does not depend on, and we have used d x = d η η 1 ǫ1 ηǫ η Oǫ 3 i. 7 Let us also note that, at the turning point η = η 0, one has η 0 = η 0. 8 It is now clear that, in order to obtain consistent results to second order in the slow-roll parameters, we must consider the time-dependence of the ǫ i s, and the function η may not be approximated by a constant. This does not allow us to perform the integral unless the scale factor a = aη is given explicitly or, as we shall see, some further approximation is employed. In Ref. 15, we proposed a procedure which will now be described in detail. Let us start with the general exact relation η η η d η η = η η η η η η η η η η η η η η η η η η η 4 η d η,9 which holds for every function η. We can derive this relation by initially considering the integral in Eq. 6 with constant i.e. independent of η, which is just power-law inflation. In this case, the integration can be performed and yields the first and second term in the r.h.s. of Eq. 9 with the function independent of η, whereas the third term vanishes identically. If we then reinstate the η-dependence of in the two non-vanishing terms and differentiate them with respect to η, we obtain the original integrand in Eq. 6 plus another term, originating from η. We then obtain the result 9 by formally integrating the latter term and subtracting it from the previous two. One can also repeat the above procedure for the new integral in the r.h.s. of Eq. 9. To do this, we define η 1 Bη, 30 η and, after several simplifications, we can write the general relation as η η η η η η η η 4 η d η = Y η Bη η η B η 8 η Y η 16 η 3 η B η 8 η η η η η η η η with dη B η 8 η 3 dη, 31 η η η Y η η η η η η η η Li η η η η Li η η, 3 η and Li z is the dilogarithm function see, e.g. Ref. 0, Li z =1 z z = 0 1 z z dz. 33 On putting together all the pieces, we finally obtain η η η d η η = η η η Y η Bη η Y η η B η 16 η 3 η B η 8 η η η η η η η η 8 η η η η η η η η dη B η 8 η 3 dη. 34 η η For the cases of interest to us i.e. for the frequencies 4, the functions for scalar and tensor perturbations to second order in the HFF are given by S = 9 4 3 ǫ 1 3 ǫ 4 ǫ 1 13 ǫ 1 ǫ 1 4 ǫ 1 ǫ ǫ 3 35a T = 9 4 3 ǫ 1 4 ǫ 1 4 ǫ 1 ǫ,
so that B S = 3 ǫ 1 ǫ 3 ǫ ǫ 3, B T = 3 ǫ 1 ǫ. 35b For the results to second order in the HFF, we can neglect the last two integrals in Eq. 34, since B η = O ǫ 3 i and B η = O ǫi 4. Thus our approximation consists in neglecting such terms and not in assuming the HFF be constant or any specific functional form for them. We can finally write ξ II,S η 0, η f ; and ξ II,T η 0, η f ; as 6 ξ II,S 3 3 3 3 ǫ 1,f 3 ǫ,f 3 1 3 11 3 3 π 6 4 1 3 ǫ 1,f ǫ,f 3 6 3 4 3 ǫ 1,f 1 ǫ,f ǫ 1,f 3 11 ǫ 1,f ǫ,f 6 1 ǫ 1,f ǫ,f 1 ǫ,f ǫ 3,f η f ǫ 1,f 1 1 ǫ,f ǫ,f ǫ 3,f 48 ǫ,f ǫ 3,f η f π 3 1 6 36a ξ II,T 3 3 3 3 ǫ 1,f 3 ǫ 1,f ǫ 1,f 3 1 4 3 ǫ 1,f 3 3 π ǫ 1,f ǫ,f 3 4 ǫ 1,f ǫ,f η f 1 ǫ 1,f ǫ,f η f, 3 4 3 36b where the arguments in ξ II have been omitted. On inserting the above quantities in Eqs. 5, we can calculate the PS. In order to compare the PS from Eqs. 5, 36a and 36b, with the slow-roll expressions in Eqs. a, we need a relation between HN f and HN, ǫ 1 N f and ǫ 1 N, and so on, to second order in the HFF hereafter, quantities without a subscript will be evaluated at the Hubble crossing η corresponding to the pivot scale. We expand the parameters ǫ i,f to first order in N N f N in the numerators and to second order in the denominator of the scalar spectrum, ǫ i N f 1 ǫ i1 N 1 ǫ ǫ i i1 ǫ i1 ǫ i N,37 and, analogously, we find H N f H 1 ǫ 1 N ǫ 1 ǫ ǫ 1 N. 38 We can eliminate η f in the logarithms by expressing it in terms of 1/a H f, 1 ǫ1,f ǫ,f η f a H f 1 ǫ 1,f a H a H N ǫ 1,f N ǫ 1,f N ǫ 1 N ǫ 1, 39 where in the first equality we used Eq. 3a, in the second one the definition of the pivot scale, and, in the last relation, Eq. 37. If we now use the above expressions we obtain the following PS, where the superscript stands for second slow-roll order and the subscript WKB for leading adiabatic order,
7 P ζ,wkb = H π ǫ 1 m Pl WKB {1 D WKB 1 ǫ 1 D WKB ǫ D D WKB WKB 1 ǫ 1 9 D WKB D WKB π 1 0 1 ǫ 1 ǫ 9 D ǫ WKB 9 1 D π WKB 4 1 ǫ ǫ 3 18 ǫ 1 ǫ D WKB 1 ǫ 1 D WKB 1 ǫ 1 ǫ D WKB ǫ D WKB ǫ ǫ 3 1 } 4 ǫ 1 ǫ 1 ǫ ǫ ǫ ǫ 3 40a P 16 H = h,wkb π m WKB {1 D WKB 1 ǫ 1 D D WKB WKB 1 ǫ 1 Pl 9 D WKB D WKB π 1 19 ǫ 1 ǫ ǫ 1 D WKB 1 ǫ 1 9 D WKB 1ǫ 1 ǫ 1 } 4 ǫ 1 ǫ 1 ǫ. In the above, we have defined D WKB 1 3 3 0.7653, which approximates the coefficient C in Eqs. a with an error of about 5%, and the factor WKB 18/e 3 0.896 which gives an error of about 10% on the amplitudes. One of the main results of this paper, already reported in Ref. 15, is that the PS to second order in the slow-roll parameters do not depend on N, once the laborious dependence on the Hubble crossing has been wored out: this fact is in complete agreement with the constancy of the growing modes of ζ and h on large scales. The spectral indices, from Eqs. 0b, and their runnings, from Eqs. 0c, are analogously given by n 1 = ǫ S,WKB 1 ǫ ǫ 1 D WKB 3 ǫ 1 ǫ D WKB ǫ ǫ 3 ǫ 1 ǫ ǫ ǫ 3 n = ǫ T,WKB 1 ǫ 1 D WKB 1 ǫ 1 ǫ ǫ 1 ǫ 40b α S,WKB = ǫ 1 ǫ ǫ ǫ 3, α T,WKB = ǫ 1 ǫ. 40c From Eq. 0d the tensor-to-scalar ratio becomes R WKB = 16 ǫ 1 1 D WKB ǫ D WKB 1 1 ǫ 1 ǫ 9 ǫ ǫ 1 ǫ D WKB ǫ D WKB ǫ ǫ 3 1 D WKB 1 ǫ 9 D WKB π 4 1 ǫ ǫ 3 18 ǫ ǫ ǫ 3. 40d We note that Eqs. 40a, 40b and 40c agree with Ref. 11, to first order in the HFF. We can also compare the above results with others as we show in ppendix B. For example, one could approximate the HFF by their Taylor expansions around η 0 as in Ref. 8, 9, 10, and give the results in terms of the ǫ i s calculated at that point see Table III for results only on spectral indices.
8 IV. NEXT-TO-LEDING WKB ND FIRST SLOW-ROLL ORDER η 0 =, 4b To first order in the HFF, the function can be taen as constant. In this case, let us then introduce the more convenient notation ξ ± x 0, x; = ± ± x0 x η0 η ω ydy where we have used d x = dτ/τ, and τ d τ τ = ± atan ± Θ ± Θ ±, 41 with ǫ 1 and ǫ constant as well. It is also useful to define Θ ± ± 1 η η0 atan x arctanhx atan x arctanx, 43a 43b Sǫ i = 9 4 3ǫ 1 3 ǫ Tǫ i = 9 4 3ǫ 1 4a where the plus minus sign corresponds to region II I. With this notation, the expressions for γ 1 η and φ 1 η in Eqs. 1b can be explicitly written as γ ±1 η = 1 { 5 3 } Θ ± 5 4 Θ 4 ± ± 7 Θ ± atan ± Θ ± Θ ± { φ ±1 η = 1 3 3150 ± 505 654 Θ ± 153 Θ 4 ± 115 Θ 6 5 10 90 Θ ± atan± Θ ± } 10 157 Θ± Θ± ± 10368 Θ 3 ± atan ± Θ ± Θ ±. 44 The limits of interest are then given by where we have used lim γ 1η = 0 η lim φ 1η = η 45a 3 3150 45b lim γ 1 η = 1 η 0 1 45c lim η 0 φ 1η = lim Θ η = η 181 16800, 45d 45e We can now use the values in Eqs. 4a to calculate the correction g1 D in the super-horizon limit η 0 for scalar and tensor perturbations, obtaining g1s D = 37 34 19 ǫ 1 1 43 ǫ g D 1T = 37 34 19 43 ǫ 1. 46 and lim η 0 Θ η = 1, 45f lim ω II ω II =. 45g η 0 ω II Finally, from Eqs. 0a and 46, we can write the expressions for the scalar and tensor PS, with the superscript 1 for first slow-roll order and the subscript WKB for next-to-leading adiabatic order, as
9 P 1 ζ,wkb = H π ǫ 1 m Pl WKB 1 D WKB 1 ǫ 1 D WKB ǫ ǫ 1 ǫ P 1 16 H = h,wkb π m WKB 1 D WKB 1 ǫ 1 ǫ 1 Pl, 47a where D WKB 7 19 3 0.730, which approximates the coefficient C in Eqs. a with an error of about 0.08%, and the factor WKB 361/18 e 3 0.999 which gives an error of about 0.1% on the amplitudes. We also obtain the standard slow-roll spectral indices and α-runnings, n 1 S,WKB 1 = ǫ 1 ǫ, n 1 T,WKB = ǫ 1 α 1 S,WKB = α1 T,WKB = 0, 47b 47c on respectively using Eqs. 0b and 0c. From Eq. 0d the tensor-to-scalar ratio becomes R 1 WKB = 16 ǫ 1 1 D WKB ǫ ǫ. 47d V. NEXT-TO-LEDING WKB ND SECOND SLOW-ROLL ORDER In order to give the results to next-to-leading WKB order and second slow-roll order, we should evaluate the corrections g1 D for scalar and tensor perturbations to second order in the ǫ i s. This, in turn, would require the computation of the functions φ ±1 and γ ±1, in Eqs. 1b, whose analytical calculation is extremely difficult. We shall therefore try to give the expressions for the corrections by following a heuristic and faster method. Let us start from the first order slow-roll expressions given in Eqs. 46 and add all possible second order terms in the HFF. Some of such terms can then be partially fixed by maing reasonable requirements, which will be explained below, so that the corrections to the PS read 1 g1s D = 361 { 34 ǫ 1,f 1 ǫ,f 1 4 57 57 d S D WKB 171 8 4 361 ǫ 1,f 57 b S D WKB 6 ǫ 1,f ǫ,f 13 349 4 ǫ,f ǫ 3,f 57 ǫ 1,f ǫ,f } 57 ǫ,f ǫ 3,f η f 1083 ǫ,f 1 g1t D = 361 { 1 4 34 57 ǫ 1,f 8 4 361 ǫ 1,f 57 b T D WKB 16 ǫ 1,f ǫ,f 4 } 171 57 ǫ 1,f ǫ,f η f. 48 First of all, we have factorized the number 361/34 so as to recover the standard slow-roll amplitudes a with a very good accuracy. s already mentioned, the first order terms are the same as those in the results 46 of Section IV, evaluated however in the super-horizon limit. The form of the coefficients multiplying the second order monomials in the HFF have been partially determined by using the expressions given in Section IV Eq. 45a- 45g with Eqs. 35a replacing Eqs. 4a. By this procedure, one expects to obtain results correct up to derivatives of, which can just contain mixed terms to second order. The numerical coefficients in front of ǫ 1,f and ǫ,f are thus uniquely determined, whereas the coefficients multiplying the mixed terms ǫ 1,f ǫ,f and ǫ,f ǫ 3,f remain partially ambiguous. The last number in each square bracet arises directly from this procedure, whereas the other terms are chosen so as to match the standard dependence on D WKB in the PS, with b S,T and d S left undetermined. Finally, we have also required that the PS do not depend on N, consistently with the constancy in time of the growing modes for h and ζ. This requirement fixes the coefficients in front of the logarithms in Eqs. 48 uniquely 3, and leads to spectral indices which do not depend on b S,T and d S. Proceeding then as in Section III, from the above corrections we obtain the expressions for the scalar and tensor PS,
10 P ζ,wkb = H WKB {1 D WKB 1 ǫ 1 D WKB ǫ D D WKB WKB 71 1083 π ǫ 1 m Pl D WKB D WKB π 1 b 4 S 57 384 1 ǫ 1 ǫ 1083 D 53 ǫ WKB 1083 1 π DWKB 4 d S 57 49 ǫ ǫ 3 7 ǫ 1 ǫ D WKB 1 ǫ 1 D WKB 1 ǫ 1 ǫ D WKB ǫ D WKB ǫ ǫ 3 1 P 16 H = h,wkb π m Pl } 4 ǫ 1 ǫ 1 ǫ ǫ ǫ ǫ 3 WKB {1 D WKB 1 ǫ 1 D D WKB WKB 71 1083 D WKB D WKB π 1 b T 4 57 771 ǫ 1 ǫ 361 ǫ 1 D WKB 1 ǫ 1 D WKB 1ǫ 1 ǫ 1 ǫ 1 ǫ 1 } 4 ǫ 1 ǫ 1 ǫ. 49a We also obtain the spectral indices 0b and their runnings 0c, n 1 = ǫ S,WKB 1 ǫ ǫ 1 D WKB 3 ǫ 1 ǫ D WKB ǫ ǫ 3 ǫ 1 ǫ n = ǫ T,WKB 1 ǫ 1 D WKB 1 ǫ 1 ǫ ǫ 1 ǫ ǫ ǫ 3 49b α S,WKB = ǫ 1 ǫ ǫ ǫ 3, α T,WKB = ǫ 1 ǫ, 49c and the tensor-to-scalar ratio becomes R WKB = 16 ǫ 1 {1 D WKB ǫ 1 D WKB 53 1083 D WKB b T b S 4 57 71 1083 1 ǫ D WKB π 4 d S ǫ ǫ 1 ǫ D WKB ǫ D WKB ǫ ǫ 3 1 ǫ 1 ǫ ǫ ǫ 3 7 ǫ ǫ ǫ 3 57 49 }. 49d Let us end this Section with a few remars. The undetermined coefficients b S,T and d S still appear in the PS and their ratio R, but not in the spectral indices and runnings, which are therefore uniquely specified by our heuristic procedure. In general, one may expect that the complete adiabatic corrections to second order contain HFF calculated both in the super-horizon limit and at the turning points zeros of the frequencies. However, this is not relevant in the present context, since the possible numerical coefficients that would multiply such terms can be eventually re-absorbed in the definitions of b S,T and d S. This could only be an issue in particular for the spectral indices if we considered third order terms since it would then become important where the second order terms are evaluated. VI. CONCLUSIONS We have shown that the improved WKB treatment of cosmological perturbations agrees with the standard slow-roll approximation 4 to within 0.1 %, finally resolving the issue of a 10 % error in the prediction of the amplitudes to lowest order which was raised in Ref. 11.
11 The next issues are the inflationary predictions to second order in the slow-roll parameters. fter the results on the running of the power spectra 1, second order results have been obtained using the Green s function method with the massless solution in a de Sitter spacetime 6, 7. In a previous manuscript 15, and in full detail here, we have employed the leading WKB approximation to obtain the scalar and tensor power spectra to second order in the slow-roll parameters. The ey technical point is to use Eq. 34, which allows one to express the power spectra on large scales as a function of the Hubble crossing quantities, but with no explicit dependence on N. s one of our main results, we find that the polynomial structure of the power spectra in the ǫ i s obtained from the WKB method agrees with the one arising from the Green s function approach of Refs. 6, 7. In Section V, as a further development of Ref. 15, we employ the next-to-leading WKB approximation to second order in the ǫ i s and, by requiring that the power spectra do not explicitly depend on N a property which instead was derived both in Sections III and IV, and using the expressions found in Section IV, we obtain unique expressions for the spectral indices and runnings. Our findings show that different ways of approximating cosmological perturbations show up at the leading order in the amplitude, but in the next-to-leading order in the derivatives of the power-spectra with respect to wave number. The accuracy in the theoretical predictions on spectral indices to second order in the slow-roll parameters, evaluated at =, is now striing: the Green s function method coefficient C 0.796 is replaced by D WKB 0.730 in the WKB method, leading to a precision of 1 part on 1000 in the predictions of the coefficients of Oǫ i terms in the spectral indexes. PPENDIX : SLOW-ROLL VS HORIZON FLOW In this ppendix, we compare the HFF we used in the text with some other equivalent hierarchies. In Table I, we give the relations between the slow-roll parameters defined by some other authors and the HFF defined in Eq. 7. TBLE I: Relation between some slow-roll parameters and the HFF used here and in Ref. 11. J. Martin et al. 14 a E.D. Stewart et al. 4, 6 b S. Habib et al. 8 S. Habib et al. 9, 10 ǫ = ǫ 1 ǫ = ǫ 1 δ = ǫ 1 1 ǫ δ1 = 1 ǫ ǫ1 ξ = 1 ǫ ǫ3 δ = 5 ǫ1 ǫ ǫ 1 1 4 ǫ 1 ǫ ǫ3 a In... Ref. 14 ξ is used instead of ξ. b In Ref. 4 ǫ 1, δ, and φ δ/h φ are used instead of ǫ, δ 1 and δ respectively. We also compare the Hubble-slow-roll HSR and the potential-slow-roll PSR parameters see Ref. with the HFF. We recall that some authors redefine ξ V and ξ H as ξv and ξ H and write only ǫ, η and ξ, which can be confusing. The relations between the ǫ i s and HSR parameters are ǫ H = ǫ 1, η H = ǫ 1 1 ǫ ξ H = ǫ 1 3 ǫ 1 ǫ 1 ǫ ǫ 3, and for the PSR parameters we have 1 ǫ ǫ V = ǫ 1 1 ǫ 1, η V = 6 ǫ 1 3 ǫ ǫ 1 5 ǫ 1 ǫ 1 4 ǫ 1 ǫ ǫ 3 ǫ 1 1 3 ǫ 1 3 ǫ 1 ǫ ξv = ǫ 1 6 ǫ 8 ǫ 3 1 6 ǫ 1 4 3 ǫ ǫ 1 ǫ 18 6 ǫ 7 ǫ 3 ǫ ǫ 3 3 ǫ ǫ 3 ǫ 4 4 ǫ 1 3 ǫ 1 ǫ 1 ǫ ǫ 3, 4 3 ǫ 1 where we have shown both the exact formulas and approximate relations to the order of interest. We complete this review with the first three exact connection formulae between the PSR and HSR parameters ǫ V = 3 η H ǫ H 3 ǫ H, η V = 3 ǫ H η H ηh ξ H 3 ǫ H 3 and so on with σ H the next HSR parameter. ξv = 9 3ǫ H η H ξh ǫ HηH 3 4ηH ξh η H ξ H σ3 H ηh σh 3 3 ǫ H, PPENDIX B: OTHER RESULTS IN THE LITERTURE We use Table I and Eqs. 1, to compare the results for spectral indices - and for PS and runnings when available - in terms of the HFF in Tables II and III.
1 TBLE II: Results obtained with the Green s function method 7 suggested in Ref. 6; C γ E 0.796 with γ E the Euler-Mascheroni constant. We display the original results for spectral indices, α-runnings and tensor-to-scalar ratio evaluated at the pivot scale. P ζ = P h = H π ǫ 1 m Pl E.D. Stewart et al. 4, E.D. Stewart et al. 6, S.M. Leach et al. 7,.R. Liddle et al.. { 1 C 1 ǫ 1 C ǫ C C π 5 ǫ 1 C C 7 π 7 ǫ 1 1 ǫ 1 C π 1 ǫ 8 1 C π 4 ǫ 1 ǫ C 1 ǫ 1 C 1 ǫ 1 ǫ C ǫ C ǫ ǫ 3 16 H π m Pl ǫ ǫ 3 1 { 1 C 1 ǫ 1 C C π 5 ǫ 1 C C π ǫ 1 1 ǫ ǫ 1 C 1 ǫ 1 C 1 ǫ 1 ǫ 1 4 ǫ 1 ǫ 1 ǫ 4 ǫ 1 ǫ 1 ǫ ǫ ǫ ǫ 3 } } n S 1 = ǫ 1 ǫ ǫ 1 C 3 ǫ 1 ǫ C ǫ ǫ 3, n T = ǫ 1 ǫ 1 C 1 ǫ 1 ǫ α S = ǫ 1 ǫ ǫ ǫ 3, α T = ǫ 1 ǫ R = 16 ǫ 1 1 C ǫ C π 5 ǫ 1 ǫ 1 C π 8 1 ǫ 1 C π ǫ 4 ǫ 3 In Table II we summarize the results for scalar and tensor perturbations given in Ref. 7, as calculated with the method proposed in Ref. 6. We also refer to some other papers which give the same results, although expressed in different hierarchies. Let us then compare with the results obtained by the uniform approximation 8, 9, 10. The integrand in Eq. 9 of Ref. 8 can be obtained from our Eq. by the change of variables x = η, u = e x/ µ, which of course differs from our Eq. 9. Therefore, the integrands in our Eq. 13 and Eq. 9 of Ref. 8 differ by Oǫ 4 i terms, once both are expressed in conformal time. We also note that in Refs. 8, 9, 10, the authors just give expressions for the spectral indices which depend on i.e. without referring to a pivot scale =. Further, it is not easy to see that they obtain the correct scaling in /, which yields the α-runnings, and the ǫ i s are evaluated at the classical turning points for the frequencies. TBLE III: Results obtained with the uniform approximation. S. Habib et al. 10 n S 1 = ǫ 1 ǫ ǫ 1 0 3 π ǫ 1 ǫ 11 6 π ǫ ǫ 3 n T = ǫ 1 ǫ 1 14 3 3 π ǫ 1 ǫ In Tables III, we display the results for scalar and tensor perturbations given in Ref. 10. s it was properly stated in Ref. 10, the results for scalar and tensor spectral indices given in Ref. 8, 9 were not fully expanded to second order in the slow-roll parameters. 1.D. Linde, Particle physics and inflationary cosmology Harwood, Chur, Switzerland, 1990..R. Liddle and D.H. Lyth, Cosmological inflation and large-scale structure Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 000. http://wmap.gsfc.nasa.gov 3 http://www.rssd.esa.int/index.php?project=planc 4 E.D. Stewart and D.H. Lyth, Phys. Lett. B 30, 171 1993. 5 L. Wang, V.F. Muhanov and P.J. Steinhardt, Phys. Lett. B 414, 18 1997. 6 E.D. Stewart and J.O. Gong, Phys. Lett. B 510, 1 001. 7 S.M. Leach,.R. Liddle, J. Martin and D.J. Schwarz, Phys. Rev. D 66, 03515 00. 8 S. Habib, K. Heitmann, G. Jungman and C. Molina- París, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 81301 00. 9 S. Habib,. Heinen, K. Heitmann, G. Jungman and C. Molina-París, Phys. Rev. D 70, 083507 004. 10 S. Habib,. Heinen, K. Heitmann and G. Jungman Phys. Rev. D 71, 043518 005.
13 11 J. Martin and D.J. Schwarz, Phys. Rev. D 67, 08351 003. 1 R. Casadio, F. Finelli, M. Luzzi and G. Venturi, Phys. Rev. D 71, 043517 005. 13 R.E. Langer, Phys. Rev. 51, 669 1937. 14 J. Martin and D.J. Schwarz, Phys. Rev. D 6, 10350 000. 15 R. Casadio, F. Finelli, M. Luzzi and G. Venturi, Phys. Lett. B 65, 1 005. 16 V.F. Muhanov, Sov. Phys. JETP Lett. 41, 493 1985; Sov. Phys. JETP Lett. 67, 197 1988. 17 L.P. Grishchu, Sov. Phys. JETP Lett. 40, 409 1974. 18.. Starobinsy, JETP Lett. 30, 68 1979. 19 D.J. Schwarz, C.. Terrero-Escalante and.. Garcìa, Phys. Lett. B 517, 43 001. 0 L. Lewin, Dilogarithms and associated functions Macdonald, 1958. 1. Kosowsy and M.S. Turner, Phys. Rev. D 5, 1739 1995..R. Liddle, P. Parsons and J.D. Barrow, Phys. Rev. D 50, 7 1994; see also J.E. Lidsey,.R. Liddle, E.W. Kolb, E.J. Copeland, T. Barreiro, and M. bney, Rev. Mod. Phys. 69, 373 1997. 3 For the same reason i.e. to avoid the appearance of N, we cannot consider terms such as O ǫ i η f in Eqs. 48.