text:
# Localization-induced Griffiths phase of disordered Anderson lattices

\[

## Abstract

We demonstrate that local density of states fluctuations in disordered Anderson lattice models universally lead to the emergence of non-Fermi liquid (NFL) behavior. The NFL regime appears at moderate disorder ($`W=W_c`$) and is characterized by power-law anomalies, e. g. $`C/T1/T^{(1\alpha )}`$, where the exponent $`\alpha `$ varies continuously with disorder, as in other Griffiths phases. This Griffiths phase is not associated with the proximity to any magnetic ordering, but reflects the approach to a disorder-driven metal-insulator transition (MIT). Remarkably, the MIT takes place only at much larger disorder $`W_{MIT}12W_c`$, resulting in an extraordinarily robust NFL metallic phase.

\]

The nature of the non-Fermi liquid (NFL) behavior observed in several heavy fermion compounds remains largely unresolved. In the cleaner systems, the proximity to a quantum critical point seems to be at the origin of many of the observed properties . Exotic impurity models cannot be discarded, though their behavior in concentrated systems remains ill understood.

In other compounds, non-stoichiometry has prompted the investigation of disorder-based mechanisms. A phenomenological “Kondo disorder” model (KDM), describing a broad distribution of Kondo temperatures $`T_K`$, has been successfully applied to several of these systems. Alternatively, the formation of large clusters of magnetically ordered material within the disordered phase has also been proposed. Both scenarios lead to a wide distribution of energy scales, giving rise to similar thermodynamic anomalies and NMR response. In addition, the predictions of the KDM prove to be consistent with a number of other experiments, including optical conductivity, magnetoresistance and dynamic neutron scattering  measurements.

Despite these successes, a number of basic questions remain unresolved, including: (1) What is the microscopic origin of the ubiquitous power law (or logarithmic) anomalies? (2) Can a model calculation be done, which can produce these power laws in a universal fashion? (3) Are these properties tied to the proximity to a quantum phase transition, and if so, which one? (4) How robust is the anomalous behavior with respect to the variation of materials parameters?

Within our model, all these questions find clear-cut and physically transparent answers: (i) The anomalies can be ascribed to a power law distribution of $`T_K`$’s, whose exponent varies continuously with disorder strength. The resulting NFL behavior, e. g. $`\gamma =C/T1/T^{(1\alpha )}`$, $`\alpha <1`$ sets in for relatively weak randomness, irrespective of the detailed model for disorder. This should be contrasted with the KDM , where the occurence of NFL behavior requires fine-tuning. (ii) We find universal behavior reflecting the nonlocal, many-body processes associated with Anderson localization effects in the presence of strong electron correlations. (iii) for stronger disorder, the NFL metallic behavior persists over a surprisingly large interval before a disorder-driven MIT is reached. This novel Griffiths phase is a manifestation of quantum critical behavior associated with the approach to a disorder-driven metal-insulator transition and does not require the proximity of any magnetically ordered phase.

We consider a disordered infinite-U Anderson lattice Hamiltonian

$`H`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{ij\sigma }{}}\left(t_{ij}+\epsilon _i\delta _{ij}\right)c_{i\sigma }^{}c_{j\sigma }^{}+{\displaystyle \underset{j\sigma }{}}E_{fj}f_{j\sigma }^{}f_{j\sigma }^{}`$ (1)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{j\sigma }{}}V_j(c_{j\sigma }^{}f_{j\sigma }^{}+\mathrm{H}.\mathrm{c}.),`$ (2)
in usual notation. The infinite-U constraint at each f-orbital is assumed ($`n_j^f=_\sigma f_{j\sigma }^{}f_{j\sigma }^{}1`$). We have studied different types of disorder, including randomness in the conduction electron site energies $`\epsilon _i`$, the f-electron energies $`E_{fj}`$, as well as the hybridization $`V_j`$. Within our approach, we find that most of our conclusions remain valid for any specific form of disorder, indicating robust and universal behavior.

We treat the above Hamiltonian within the recently proposed statistical dynamical mean field theory. This approach reduces to the usual dynamical mean field theory in the limit $`z\mathrm{}`$ (with $`t_{jk}t/\sqrt{z}`$), but unlike the latter, it incorporates Anderson localization effects. As a result, the spectral function of the local bath “seen” by each impurity has strong spatial fluctuations and contains information coming from sites which are many lattice parameters away. Physically, the fluctuations of the conduction electron wave-functions lead to the distribution of Kondo temperatures, which in turn creates a renormalized effective disorder seen by the conduction electrons. This nonlocal feedback mechanism results in the universal form of all the relevant distribution functions that we find.

The simplest model for incorporating localization effects is obtained by focusing on a Bethe lattice of coordination $`z`$ (with nearest neighbor hopping $`t`$, used as unit of energy). The resulting set of self-consistent stochastic equations is governed by the local actions

$`S_{\mathrm{eff}}^{(j)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _0^\beta }𝑑\tau {\displaystyle \underset{\sigma }{}}f_{j,\sigma }^{}(\tau )\left(_\tau +E_{fj}\right)f_{j,\sigma }(\tau )+`$ (5)
$`{\displaystyle _0^\beta }𝑑\tau {\displaystyle _0^\beta }𝑑\tau ^{}{\displaystyle \underset{\sigma }{}}f_{j,\sigma }^{}(\tau )\mathrm{\Delta }_j(\tau \tau ^{})f_{j,\sigma }(\tau ^{});`$
$`\mathrm{\Delta }_j(\omega )={\displaystyle \frac{V_j^2}{\omega \epsilon _j_{k=1}^{z1}t_{jk}^2G_{ck}^{(j)}(\omega )}}.`$
Here, $`G_{ck}^{(j)}(\omega )`$ is the local c-electron Green’s function on site $`k`$ with the nearest neighbor site $`j`$ removed. It is determined recursively from

$`G_{cj}^{(i)(1)}(\omega )`$ $`=`$ $`\omega \epsilon _j{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{z1}{}}}t_{jk}^2G_{ck}^{(j)}(\omega )\mathrm{\Phi }_j(\omega ),`$ (6)
$`\mathrm{\Phi }_j(\omega )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{V_j^2}{\omega E_{fj}\mathrm{\Sigma }_{fj}(\omega )}}.`$ (7)
The local self-energy $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{fj}(\omega )`$ is obtained from the solution of the effective action (5). In order to solve the impurity problems, we have used the large-N mean-field theory at $`T=0`$. We have solved Eqs. (5-7) numerically by sampling. In implementing this procedure, we have carried out large-scale simulations for $`z=3`$, with ensembles containing up to $`N_s=200`$ sites, and frequency meshes containing up to $`N_{omega}=8,000`$ frequencies. The numerical integrations needed to solve the impurity problems have been done by a combination of spline interpolations and adaptive quadrature routines. These careful numerics have made it possible to obtain Kondo temperatures spanning fifteen orders of magnitude, which was crucial in order to examine the long tails of the relevant distribution functions.

One of the greatest advantages of our approach is its ability to focus on full distribution functions, which is essential for characterizing any Griffiths phase. Some typical results are presented in Fig. 1, where we show the evolution of the distribution of local Kondo temperatures as a function of disorder, from which one computes the overall response of the lattice system (See the discussion in the first ref. of ). We find that (Fig. 1(a)) the distribution has a universal log-normal form for weak disorder. We have verified that such a log-normal behavior is obtained irrespective of the type and shape of the bare disorder distribution, as long as it is not too large.

As the disorder is increased, the distribution $`P(T_K)`$ no longer retains its log-normal form. Instead, a long tail emerges on the low-$`T_K`$ side, with a power law asymptotic form (Fig. 1(b))

$$P(T_K)T_K^{(\alpha 1)}.$$
(8)
The exponent $`\alpha `$ varies continuously with disorder, as seen on a plot of $`\mathrm{log}(P(\mathrm{log}(T_K)))`$ in Fig. 2.

Note that the value $`\alpha =1`$, (Figs. 1(b) and 2) with $`P(T_K)\mathrm{const}.`$, corresponds to the condition for Marginal Fermi Liquid behavior observed in some Kondo alloys, with logarithmically divergent magnetic susceptibility $`\chi (T)`$ and specific heat coefficient $`\gamma `$. This divergent behavior becomes more singular as the disorder is increased past this marginal case. For example, if we use the simple Wilson interpolation formula for $`\chi (T)`$

$$\chi (T)_0^\mathrm{\Lambda }\frac{T_K^{(\alpha 1)}}{T+aT_K}𝑑T_K\frac{1}{T^{(1\alpha )}}.$$
(9)
We thus have power law divergences with exponents which vary continuously with the disorder strength. If we take $`t10^4K`$, this should be observed below a few tens of Kelvin. Such generic behavior has been fitted to some NFL compounds. Besides, $`\chi (0)`$ will diverge at a critical disorder strength ($`W_c1`$ in Fig. 2)

$`\chi (0)`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{P(T_K)}{T_K}𝑑T_K}{\displaystyle _0^\mathrm{\Lambda }}T_K^{(\alpha 2)}𝑑T_K`$ (10)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\alpha 1}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{W_cW}},`$ (11)
with a similar result for $`\gamma `$. Note, however, that other higher order correlation functions, such as the non-linear susceptibility $`\chi _3(0)`$, which probes higher negative moments of the distribution ($`\chi _3(0)1/T_K^3`$), will begin to diverge at different critical values of disorder,

$$\chi _3(0)\frac{1}{\alpha 3}\frac{1}{W_{c3}W},$$
(12)
where $`W_{c3}0.66`$ for the parameters of Fig. 2.

This general behavior is characteristic of Griffiths phases and should not be confused with a true phase transition. The system should be viewed as a disordered metal with embedded clusters of Anderson insulators. It is precisely these poor conducting regions, with depleted densities of states, which give rise to imperfectly quenched spins and the corresponding singular thermodynamic properties.

We should also stress that the main mechanism that dominates the Griffiths phase is qualitatively different from the one in the KDM. There, $`T_K`$ fluctuations were simply caused by the distribution of local parameters ($`V_j`$, $`E_{fj}`$) and the conduction electron DOS does not fluctuate. By contrast, in the present treatment, fluctuations in the latter are dominant. To illustrate this, all the results we present are obtained for a model with conduction band disorder only, although similar results follow for any form of disorder. We stress that, in a KDM treatment of this case, $`T_K`$ fluctuations are severely limited. Here, however, $`T_K`$ fluctuations are enhanced by the fluctuations in the local conduction DOS, reflecting the localization effects and the approach to a disorder-driven MIT.

To confirm this picture, we examine the localization properties of the conduction electrons. We focus on the typical DOS $`\rho _{typ}=\mathrm{exp}\{<\mathrm{ln}\rho _j>\}`$; $`\rho _j=(1/\pi )ImG_{cj}(\omega =0)`$, as shown in Fig. 3. This quantity vanishes at any disorder-driven MIT, and thus can serve as an order parameter for localization. Remarkably, we find a strong decrease of this quantity upon entering the Griffiths phase ($`W/t1`$), reflecting the strongly enhanced conduction electron scattering due to Kondo disorder. Yet, the actual localization transition, where the typical DOS vanishes, occurs only at much larger disorder ($`W/t12`$). This results in a very extended NFL metallic region, where the thermodynamics is singular, and the conduction electrons are almost, but not completely localized.

This dramatic effect has a simple physical origin. Consider the distribution of the effective scattering potentials of the conduction electrons $`\mathrm{\Phi }_j(\omega =0)`$ (see Eq. (5)) introduced by the f-sites. Note that  $`\mathrm{\Phi }_j(\omega =0)=Z_jV^2/\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }_{fj}`$, where $`Z_j`$ is the quasiparticle weight and $`\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }_{fj}`$ the (renormalized) energy of the Kondo resonance at site $`j`$. For sufficient disorder, the Kondo resonances are randomly shifted up or down in energy, giving rise to $`\mathrm{\Phi }_j`$’s that can be random in magnitude but also in sign. The resulting distribution for the inverse quantity $`\mathrm{\Phi }_j^1`$ is shown in Fig. 4 and is found to broaden with disorder. For $`W/t1.5`$, a finite density of $`\mathrm{\Phi }_j^1=0+`$ (i. e. $`\mathrm{\Phi }_j=+\mathrm{}`$) sites emerges. This is crucial, since the corresponding f-sites act as unitary scatterers (US’s), characterized by a maximally allowed scattering phase shift ($`\delta =\pi /2`$) for the conduction electrons. If all the f-sites were US’s, the system would be a Kondo insulator. The presence of a finite fraction of US’s should be viewed as the emergence of droplets of a Kondo insulator within the heavy metal. Interestingly, at stronger disorder ($`W/t>4`$) the distribution of $`\mathrm{\Phi }_j^1(0)`$ continues to broaden, leading to a decrease in the number of US’s. This is illustrated by plotting $`P(\mathrm{\Phi }_j^1=0)`$ in the inset of Fig 4. In this regime, while the bare disorder increases, the effective disorder produced by the f-sites is reduced, stabilizing the almost localized metallic phase. This mechanism may be at the origin of the puzzling behavior of materials such as $`\mathrm{SmB}_6`$, where the low temperature resistivity remains anomalously large yet finite over a broad range of parameters.

Finally, we note that a similar NFL phase was identified in a study of the Mott-Anderson transition in the disordered Hubbard model. We have re-examined this system, and concluded that the NFL behavior should be attributed to a related Griffiths phase rather than a separate thermodynamic phase of the system. Despite the similarities, several features prove dramatically different. For Hubbard models, the emergence of NFL behavior does not have a dramatic effect on the conduction electrons and no US’s emerge. This observation may explain the strong correlation between thermodynamic and transport anomalies in Kondo alloys, but not in doped semiconductors. In the latter materials, the thermodynamics is still singular close to the MIT, while transport remains more conventional.

It would be of particular interest if it could be tested experimentally whether these localization effects are responsible for the observed NFL behavior of disordered heavy fermion systems. A scanning tunneling microscopy study might be able to detect the predicted insulator droplets. In order to distinguish this from the magnetic Griffiths phase scenario, a systematic study of systems with comparable amounts of disorder but different magnetic character would be useful. Besides, since the present theory relies very little on intersite magnetic correlations, a determination of the typical size of the relevant magnetic clusters could also serve as a test.

In summary, we have investigated and solved a microscopic model for disordered Anderson lattices that displays an unprecedented sensitivity to disorder, leading to localization-induced non-Fermi liquid behavior. Our results demonstrate that a well defined Griffiths phase can exist, which is not restricted to the vicinity of any magnetic ordering and yet seems to be consistent with most puzzling features of disordered heavy fermion systems and Kondo alloys.

We acknowledge useful discussions with M. C. Aronson, D. L. Cox, G. Kotliar, D. E. MacLaughlin, A. J. Millis, and G. Zarand. This work was supported by FAPESP and CNPq (EM), NSF grant DMR-9974311 and the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation (VD).


format: text

text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

It is hard to imagine modern particles physics without such fundamental notions as, for instance, the phase transitions, topological defects, taken from statistical physics. This extremely fruitful connection among two branches of physics based on the euclidean postulate : the formulae of particle physics are coincide with corresponding formulae of statistical physics if the transformation $`tit`$ is applied. But this coincidence exist iff the media is equilibrium only, since the time order of physical process becomes lost after the transition to imaginary time $`it`$. So, the particles static properties only can be considered by euclidean field theories.

The euclidean postulate does not ‘work’ for arbitrary element of $`S`$-matrix and, by this reason, there is not, at first glance, general connection between particles and statistical physics. Our aim is demonstrate this connection considering the multiple production example, staying in the real-time theory frame.

The multiple production is a typical dissipative process of the incident kinetic energies transition into the energies (masses) of produced particles. This is the nonequilibrium process and the fluctuations, generally speaking, may be high in it. Experimental data confirms this general expectation at the mean multiplicities region, when $`n\overline{n}`$ .

Considering multiple production we would like to note firstly that the mean multiplicity $`\overline{n}`$ of hadrons for modern accelerator energies ($``$10 Tev) is large $`\overline{n}(s)`$100. So, it is practically impossible to describe the system with $`N=3\overline{n}10`$ 300 degrees of freedom using ordinary methods.

Secondly, it is natural to assume that the entropy $`𝒮`$ tends to maximum with rising multiplicity $`n`$ and reach the maximum at $`nn_{max}\sqrt{s}`$, since the dissipation take place in the vacuum (presumably with zero energy density)222This consideration lie in the basis of earliest Fermi-Landau ‘statistical’ model of hadrons multiple production.. But the experiment shows that at high energies $`n\overline{n}(s)\mathrm{ln}^2s<<n_{max}(s)`$ are essential. This means that there is not total dissipation of incident energy in considered thermalization process . Absence of thermalization may be a consequence of hidden conservation laws .

We would like to adopt following fundamental principle of nonequilibrium statistics introduced by N.N.Bogolyubov . It is natural to assume that the system evaluate to the equilibrium in such a way that the ‘nonequilibrium’ fluctuations in it should tend to zero. In the frame of Bogolyubov’s principle the quantitative measure of ‘nonequilibrium’ fluctuation is the mean value of correlation functions and, therefore, this quantities should tend to zero when the media tends to equilibrium.

In our interpretation the Bogolyubov’s correlations relaxation principle means following. So, for nonequilibrium state presence ‘nonequilibrium’ fluctuations in the form of the macroscopic flow of, for instance, energy $`\epsilon `$ is natural. Then the mean value of $`m`$-point correlation functions $`K_m`$ can not be small as the consequence of macroscopic flow. But in vicinity of equilibrium the macroscopic flows should relax and, accordingly, the $`mean`$ value of correlation functions should be small, $`K_m0`$. To characterize the equilibrium one may consider also the particles, charge, spin, etc. densities macroscopic flows and theirs relaxation.

We would like to show in result that the correlations relaxation principle leads to the quantitative connection with real time thermodynamics of Schwinger-Keldysh type333Last one includes the nonequilibrium thermodynamics also. . Just for this purpose the generating functionals (GF) method of Bogolyubov will be used since it allows to find the quantitative connections, where the euclidean postulate does not applicable.

We will use more natural for particles physics microcanonical formalism. In this formalism the thermodynamical ‘rough’ variables are introduced as the Lagrange multipliers of corresponding conservation laws. Theirs physical meaning are defined by corresponding equations of state. So, if the fluctuations in vicinity of solutions of corresponding equations are Gaussian then one can use this variables for description of the system. Corresponding condition is the Bogolyubov’s correlations relaxation condition.

Formally, the generating functions method presents the integral transformation to new variables. One can choose them as the ‘rough’ thermodynamical variables. To describe the far from equilibrium system we will introduce the ‘local equilibrium hypothesis’. In its frame the preequilibrium state consist from equilibrium domains. In this case new variables should depend on the coordinates of domain and, in result, we are forced to use the generating functionals (GF) formalism.

We will consider two example to illustrate effectiveness of the GF method. In Sec.2 we will consider the transformation (multiplicity $`n`$ activity $`z`$) to show the origin of the Koba-Nielsen-Olesen scaling (KNO-scaling)444In privet discussion with one of the authors (A.S.) at summer of 1973 Z.Koba noted that the main reason of investigation leading to the KNO-scaling was just the GF method of N.N.Bogolyubov..

In Sec.3 we will investigate a possibility of temperature description of the multiple production processes. We will consider for this purpose the transformation (particles energies $`\epsilon `$ temperature $`1/\beta `$) to find the $`S`$-matrix interpretation of thermodynamics. It will be shown that this interpretation would be rightful iff the correlations are relax.

In Sec.4 we will use this interpretation to formulate the perturbation theory in the case when $`\beta `$ and $`z`$ are local coordinates of temperature $`(x,t)`$ . One can use this closed form of perturbation theory for description of nonequilibrium media (in kinetic phase) and for description of the multiple production process as well.

## 2 KNO-scaling

We would like start from note that the generating functions method allows connect inclusive spectra $`f_k`$  and exclusive cross sections $`\sigma _n(s)`$. One can use for this purpose the normalization condition:

$$\overline{f}_k\sigma _{tot}𝑑\omega _k(q)f_k(q_1,q_2,\mathrm{},q_k)=\underset{n=k}{}\frac{n!}{(nk)!}\sigma _n,\overline{f}_k0\mathrm{}k>n_{max},$$
(2.1)
where, as usual,

$$d\omega _k(q)=\underset{i=1}{\overset{k}{}}d^3q_i/(2\pi )^32\epsilon (q_i),\epsilon (q)=\sqrt{q^2+m^2}$$

, is the Lorentz-covariant element of phase space.

Eq.(2.1) can be considered as the set of coupled equations for $`\sigma _n`$. One may multiply both sides of (2.1) on $`(z1)^k/k!`$ and sum over $`k`$ to solve them. We will see that this is equivalent of introduction of ‘big partition function’ $`\mathrm{\Xi }(z)`$, where $`z`$ is the ‘activity’: the chemical potential $`\mu \mathrm{ln}z`$.

We will find in result of summation over $`k`$ that

$$\mathrm{\Xi }(z)\underset{k}{}\frac{(z1)^k}{k!}\overline{f}_k=\underset{n}{}z^n\frac{\sigma _n}{\sigma _{tot}}.$$
(2.2)
Then, assuming that $`\mathrm{\Xi }(z)`$ is known,

$$\sigma _n=\sigma _{tot}\frac{1}{2\pi i}_C\frac{dz}{z^{n+1}}\mathrm{\Xi }(z),$$
(2.3)
where the closed contour $`C`$ includes point $`z=0`$. Here $`\mathrm{\Xi }(z)`$ is defined by left hand side of (2.2) and is the generating function of $`\sigma _n`$.

The coefficients $`C_m`$ in decomposition:

$$\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{\Xi }(z)=\underset{m}{}\frac{(z1)^m}{m!}C_m.$$
(2.4)
are the (binomial) correlators. Indeed,

$$C_1=\overline{f}_1=\overline{n},C_2=\overline{f}_2\left\{\overline{f}_1\right\}^2,C_3=\overline{f}_33\overline{f}_2\left\{\overline{f}_1\right\}^2+2\left\{\overline{f}_1\right\}^3$$
(2.5)
an so on. If $`C_m=0`$, $`m>1`$, then $`\sigma _n`$ is described by Poisson formulae:

$$\sigma _n=\sigma _{tot}e^{\overline{n}}\frac{(\overline{n})^n}{n!}.$$
(2.6)
It corresponds to the case of absence of correlations.

Let us consider more week assumption:

$$C_m(s)=\gamma _m\left(C_1(s)\right)^m,$$
(2.7)
where $`\gamma _m`$ is the energy independent constant. Then

$$\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{\Xi }(z,s)=\underset{m=1}{}\frac{\gamma _m}{m!}\{(z1)\overline{n}(s)\}^m.$$
(2.8)
To find consequences of this assumption let us find the mostly probable values of $`z`$. The equation:

$$n=z\frac{}{z}\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{\Xi }(z,s)$$
(2.9)
has increasing with $`n`$ solutions $`\overline{z}(n,s)`$ since $`\mathrm{\Xi }(z,s)`$ is the increasing function of $`z`$, iff $`\mathrm{\Xi }(z,s)`$ is the nonsingular at finite $`z`$ function. Last condition has deep physical meaning and practically assumes that absence of first order phase transition .

Let us introduce new variable:

$$\lambda =(z1)\overline{n}(s).$$
(2.10)
Corresponding eq.(2.9) looks as follows:

$$\frac{n}{\overline{n}(s)}=\left(1+\frac{\lambda }{\overline{n}(s)}\right)\frac{}{\lambda }\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{\Xi }(\lambda ).$$
(2.11)
So, with $`O(\lambda /\overline{n}(s))`$ accuracy, one can assume that

$$\lambda \lambda _c(n/\overline{n}(s)).$$
(2.12)
are essential. It follows from this estimation that such scaling dependence is rightful at least in the neighborhood of $`z=1`$, i.e. in vicinity of main contributions into $`\sigma _{tot}`$. This gives:

$$\overline{n}(s)\sigma _n(s)=\sigma _{tot}(s)\psi (n/\overline{n}(s)),$$
(2.13)
where

$$\psi (n/\overline{n}(s))\mathrm{\Xi }(\lambda _c(n/\overline{n}(s)))\mathrm{exp}\{n/\overline{n}(s)\lambda _c(n/\overline{n}(s))\}O(e^n)$$
(2.14)
is the unknown function. The asymptotic estimation follows from the fact that $`\lambda _c=\lambda _c(n/\overline{n}(s))`$ should be, as follows from nonsingularity of $`\mathrm{\Xi }(z)`$, nondecreasing function of $`n`$.

The estimation (2.12) is rightful at least at $`s\mathrm{}`$. The range validity of $`n`$, where solution of (2.12) is acceptable depends from exact form of $`\mathrm{\Xi }(z)`$. Indeed, if $`\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{\Xi }(z)\mathrm{exp}\{\gamma \lambda (z)\}`$, $`\gamma =const>0`$, then (2.12) is rightful at all values of $`n`$ and it is enough to have the condition $`s\mathrm{}`$. But if $`\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{\Xi }(z)(1+a\lambda (z))^\gamma `$, $`\gamma =const>0`$, then (2.12) is acceptable iff $`n<<\overline{n}^2(s)`$.

Representation (2.13) shows that just $`\overline{n}(s)`$ is the natural scale of multiplicity $`n`$ . This representation was offered firstly as a reaction on the so called Feynman scaling for inclusive cross section:

$$f_k(q_1,q_2,\mathrm{},q_k)\underset{i=1}{\overset{k}{}}\frac{1}{\epsilon (q_i)}.$$
(2.15)
As follows from estimation (2.14), the limiting KNO prediction assumes that $`\sigma _n=O(e^n)`$. In this regime $`\mathrm{\Xi }(z,s)`$ should be singular at $`z=z_c(s)>1`$. The normalization condition

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Xi }(z,s)}{z}|_{z=1}=\overline{n}(s)$$

gives: $`z_c(s)=1+\gamma /\overline{n}(s)`$, where $`\gamma >0`$ is the constant. Note, such behavior of big partition function $`\mathrm{\Xi }(z,s)`$ is natural for stationary Markovian processes described by logistic equations . In the field theory such equation describes the QCD jets .

It is known that at $`Tevatron`$ energies the mean hadrons multiplicity rise with transverse momentum. The associated mean multiplicity is

$$C_1(q_{tr})=\overline{n}(q_{tr})=\frac{_nnd\sigma _n/dq_{tr}}{_nd\sigma _n/dq_{tr}}.$$

So, if

$$C_m(q_{tr})=\gamma _m\left(C_1(q_{tr})\right)^m:f_k(q_1,q_2,\mathrm{},q_k)\underset{i=1}{\overset{k}{}}\frac{1}{\epsilon (q_i)}\mathrm{\Omega }(q_{tr}),$$

then:

$$\overline{n}(q_{tr})\frac{d\sigma _n/dq_{tr}}{_nd\sigma _n/dq_{tr}}=\mathrm{\Psi }(n/\overline{n}(q_{tr})).$$

This prediction is in good agreement with experiment .

## 3 Temperature description

By definition,

$$\sigma _n^{ab}(s)=𝑑\omega _n(q)\delta (q_a+q_b\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}q_i)|A_n^{ab}|^2,$$
(3.1)
where $`A_n^{ab}`$ is the amplitude of $`n`$ creation at interaction of particles $`a`$ and $`b`$.

Considering Fourier transform of energy-momentum conservation $`\delta `$-function one can introduce the generating function $`\rho _n`$ . We may find in result that $`\sigma _n`$ is defined by equality:

$$\sigma _n(s)=_i\mathrm{}^{+i\mathrm{}}\frac{d\beta }{2\pi }e^{\beta \sqrt{s}}\rho _n(\beta ),$$
(3.2)
where

$$\rho _n(\beta )=\left\{\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}\frac{d^3q_ie^{\beta \epsilon (q_i)}}{(2\pi )^32\epsilon (q_i)}\right\}|A_n^{ab}|^2.$$
(3.3)
The mostly probable value of $`\beta `$ in is defined by equation of state:

$$\sqrt{s}=\frac{}{\beta }\mathrm{ln}\rho _n(\beta ).$$
(3.4)
Let us consider the simplest example of noninteracting particles:

$$\rho _n(\beta )=\left\{2\pi mK_1(\beta m)/\beta \right\}^n,$$

where $`K_1`$ is the Bessel function. Inserting this expression into (3.4) we can find that in the nonrelativistic case ($`nn_{max}`$)

$$\beta _c=\frac{3}{2}\frac{(n1)}{(\sqrt{s}nm)}.$$

I.e., $`E_{kin}=\frac{3}{2}T`$, where $`E_{kin}=(\sqrt{s}nm)`$ is the kinetic energy.

It is important to note that the equation(3.4) have unique real rising with $`n`$ and decreasing with $`s`$ solution $`\beta _c(s,n)`$ .

The expansion of integral (3.2) near $`\beta _c(s,n)`$ unavoidably gives asymptotic series with zero convergence radii since $`\rho _n(\beta )`$ is the essentially nonlinear function of $`\beta `$. From physical point of view this means that, generally speaking, fluctuations in vicinity of $`\beta _c(s,n)`$ may be arbitrarily high and in this case $`\beta _c(s,n)`$ has not any physical sense. But if fluctuations are small (strictly speaking, they may be arbitrarily high, bu distribution in vicinity of $`\beta _c(s,n)`$ should be Gaussian), then $`\rho _n(\beta )`$ should coincide with partition function of $`n`$ particles and $`\beta _c(s,n)`$ may be interpreted as the inverse temperature.

Let us define the conditions when the fluctuations are small . Firstly, we should expand $`\mathrm{ln}\rho _n(\beta +\beta _c)`$ over $`\beta `$:

$$\mathrm{ln}\rho _n(\beta +\beta _c)=\mathrm{ln}\rho _n(\beta _c)\sqrt{s}\beta +\frac{1}{2!}\beta ^2\frac{^2}{\beta _c^2}\mathrm{ln}\rho _n(\beta _c)\frac{1}{3!}\beta ^3\frac{^3}{\beta _c^3}\mathrm{ln}\rho _n(\beta _c)+\mathrm{}$$
(3.5)
and, secondly, expend the exponent in the integral over, for instance, over $`^3\mathrm{ln}\rho _n(\beta _c)/\beta _c^3`$ neglecting higher decomposition terms in (3.5). In result, $`k`$-th term of the perturbation series

$$\rho _{n,k}\left\{\frac{^3\mathrm{ln}\rho _n(\beta _c)/\beta _c^3}{(^2\mathrm{ln}\rho _n(\beta _c)/\beta _c^2)^{3/2}}\right\}^k\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{3k+1}{2}\right).$$
(3.6)
Therefore, one should assume that

$$^3\mathrm{ln}\rho _n(\beta _c)/\beta _c^3<<(^2\mathrm{ln}\rho _n(\beta _c)/\beta _c^2)^{3/2}.$$
(3.7)
to neglect this term. One of possible solution of this condition is

$$^3\mathrm{ln}\rho _n(\beta _c)/\beta _c^30.$$
(3.8)
If this condition is hold, then the fluctuations are Gaussian, but arbitrary since theirs value is defined by $`\{^2\mathrm{ln}\rho _n(\beta _c)/\beta _c^2\}^{1/2}`$, see (3.5).

Let us consider now (3.8) carefully. We will find computing derivatives that this condition means following approximate equality:

$$\frac{\rho _n^{(3)}}{\rho _n}3\frac{\rho _n^{(2)}\rho _n^{(1)}}{\rho _n^2}+2\frac{(\rho _n^{(1)})^3}{\rho _n^3}0,$$
(3.9)
where $`\rho _n^{(k)}`$ means the $`k`$-th derivative. For identical particles (see definition (3.3)),

$`\rho _n^{(k)}(\beta _c)=n^k(1)^k{\displaystyle \left\{\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}\epsilon (q_i)\frac{d^3q_ie^{\beta \epsilon (q_i)}}{(2\pi )^32\epsilon (q_i)}\right\}|A_n^{ab}|^2}`$
$`=\sigma _{tot}n^k{\displaystyle \left\{\underset{i=1}{\overset{k}{}}\epsilon (q_i)\frac{d^3q_ie^{\beta \epsilon (q_i)}}{(2\pi )^32\epsilon (q_i)}\right\}\overline{f}_k(q_1,q_2,\mathrm{},q_k)},`$ (3.10)
where $`\overline{f}_k`$ is the $`(nk)0`$-point inclusive cross section. It coincide with $`k`$-particle distribution function in the $`n`$-particle system. Therefore, l.h.s. of(3.9) is the 3-point correlator $`K_3`$:

$$K_3𝑑\omega _3(q)\left(<\underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}\epsilon (q_i)>_{\beta _c}3<\underset{i=1}{\overset{2}{}}\epsilon (q_i)>_{\beta _c}<\epsilon (q_3)>_{\beta _c}+2\underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}<\epsilon (q_i)>_{\beta _c}\right),$$
(3.11)
where the index means averaging with the Boltzmann factor $`\mathrm{exp}\{\beta _c\epsilon (q)\}`$.

In result, to have all fluctuations in vicinity of $`\beta _c`$ Gaussian, we should have $`K_m0`$, $`m3`$. But, as follows from (3.7), the set of minimal conditions looks as follows:

$$K_m<<K_2,m3.$$
(3.12)
If experiment confirms this conditions then, independently from number of particles, the final state may be described by one parameter $`\beta _c`$ with high enough accuracy $`\beta _c`$.

Considering $`\beta _c`$ as physical (measurable) quantity, we are forced to assume that both the total energy of the system $`\sqrt{s}=E`$ and conjugate to it variable $`\beta _c`$ may be measured with high accuracy555Note, the uncertainty principle $`\mathrm{}`$ did not restrict $`\mathrm{\Delta }E`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }\beta `$..

## 4 Real-time finite temperature generating functionals

We would like to show now why and in a what conditions our $`S`$-matrix interpretation of statistics is rightful.

In modern formulations, see e.g. the textbook , the temperature is introduced by so called periodic Kubo-Martin-Schwinger (KMS) boundary condition . Namely, in the Feynman-Kac functional integral representation of the partition function

$$\mathrm{\Xi }(\beta )=D\phi e^{S_\beta (\phi )}.$$
(4.1)
the action $`S_\beta (\phi ;z)`$ is defined on the Matsubara imaginary time contour $`C_M`$: $`(t_i,t_ii\beta )`$, but fields should obey KMS boundary condition:

$$\phi (t_i)=\phi (t_ii\beta ).$$
(4.2)
This is natural consequence of definition: $`\mathrm{\Xi }(\beta )=\mathrm{Sp}e^{\beta 𝐇}`$.

It was offered to deform Matsubara contour in a following way:

$$C_MC_{SK}:(t_i,t_f)+(t_f,t_i+i\beta ),$$
(4.3)
where $`C_{SK}`$ is the Mills time contour  and $`t_f>t_i`$ belongs to real axis . Including the real-time parts we obtain a possibility to describe time evolution of the system

But this attempt was not successful. First of all, we have not an evident interpretation $`t_i`$ and $`t_f`$ . Secondly, in spite of real-time parts, this formulation unable to describe the time evolution .

### 4.1 Equilibrium media

It was shown above that if $`\sigma _n`$ is defined by (3.1) then one may introduce $`\rho _n`$ using definition (3.3). The Fourier transform (3.2) connects $`\sigma _n`$ $`\rho _n`$. On other hand, $`\rho _n`$ reminds the partition function.

To find complete analogy with statistical physics we should consider transition $`mn`$ particles with amplitude $`A_{nm}=<out;n|in;m>`$. Summation over $`n`$ and $`m`$ is assumed. The corresponding $`\delta `$-function of energy-momentum conservation law should be written in the form:

$$\delta (\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}q_i\underset{i=1}{\overset{m}{}}p_i)=d^4P\delta (P\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}q_i)\delta (P\underset{i=1}{\overset{m}{}}p_i),P=(E,\stackrel{}{P}).$$
(4.4)
This will lead to necessity introduce independently the temperature of initial ($`1/\beta _i`$) and final ($`1/\beta _f`$) states. In particle physics we can consider the final state temperature only.

In result we get to the Fourier-Mellin transform $`\rho (\beta ,z)=\rho (\beta _i,z_i;\beta _f,z_f)`$. Direct calculations give important factorized form:

$$\rho (\beta ,z)=e^{\widehat{N}(\beta ,z;\varphi )}\rho _0(\varphi ),$$

where the operator

$`\widehat{N}(\beta ,z;\varphi )={\displaystyle }dxdx^{}(\widehat{\varphi }_+(x)D_+(xx^{},\beta _f,z_f)\widehat{\varphi }_{}(x^{})`$
$`\widehat{\varphi }_{}(x)D_+(xx^{},\beta _i,z_i)\widehat{\varphi }_+(x^{})),\widehat{\varphi }={\displaystyle \frac{\delta }{\delta \varphi }},`$ (4.5)
acts on the functional:

$$\rho _0(\varphi _\pm )=D\mathrm{\Phi }_+D\mathrm{\Phi }_{}e^{iS(\mathrm{\Phi }_+)iS(\mathrm{\Phi }_{})iV(\mathrm{\Phi }_++\varphi _+)+iV(\mathrm{\Phi }_{}+\varphi _{})}.$$
(4.6)
At the very end of calculations one should take auxiliary variables $`\varphi _\pm `$ equal to zero.

Here $`D_+`$ $`D_+`$ are the frequency correlation functions:

$$D_\pm (xx^{},\beta )=i𝑑\omega (q)e^{\pm iq(xx^{}+i\beta )}z(q)$$

They obey the equations:

$$(^2+m^2)_xG_+=(^2+m^2)_xG_+=0.$$

So, all ‘thermodynamical’ information contained in the operator $`\widehat{N}(\beta ,z;\varphi )`$, but interactions are described by $`\rho _0(\varphi )`$. One can say that the operator $`\widehat{N}`$ (adiabatically) maps the interacting filed system on the observable states. This important property allows consider only ‘mechanical’ processes and exclude from consideration the ‘thermal’ ones.

Calculating $`\rho _0(\varphi )`$perturbatively one can find:

$$\rho (\beta ,z)=e^{iV(i\widehat{j}_+)+iV(i\widehat{j}_{})}e^{\frac{i}{2}{\scriptscriptstyle 𝑑x𝑑x^{}j_a(x)D_{ab}(xx^{},\beta ,z)j_b(x^{})}},$$
(4.7)
where $`D_{++}`$ is the Feynman (causal) Green function and

$$D_{}=(D_{++})^{}$$

is the anticausal one and, as usual, $`\widehat{j}=\delta /\delta j`$. At the very end one should take $`j=0`$.

Let us assume now that our system is a subsystem of bigger system. This would lead to transformation of Boltzmann factor $`\mathrm{exp}\{\beta \epsilon \}`$ on corresponding statistics occupation number $`\overline{N}(\beta \epsilon )`$. This means that our interacting fields system is surrounded by black body radiation. This is mechanical model of the thermostat (heat bath of thermodynamics).

In result the matrix $`D_{ab}`$ takes form (we put for simplicity $`z_i=z_f=1`$):

$`iG(q;\beta )=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\frac{i}{q^2m^2+iϵ}& 0\\ 0& \frac{i}{q^2m^2iϵ}\end{array}\right)+`$
$`+2\pi \delta (q^2m^2)\left(\begin{array}{cc}\stackrel{~}{n}(\frac{\beta _f+\beta _i}{2}|q_0|)& \stackrel{~}{n}(\beta _i|q_0|)a_+(\beta _i)\\ \stackrel{~}{n}(\beta _f|q_0|)a_{}(\beta _f)& \stackrel{~}{n}(\frac{\beta _f+\beta _i}{2}|q_0|)\end{array}\right)`$ (4.8)
where

$$a_\pm (\beta )=e^{\frac{\beta }{2}(|q_0|\pm q_0)}.$$

Following Green functions:

$$D_{ab}(xx^{},\beta )=\frac{d^4q}{(2\pi )^4}e^{iq(xx^{})}G_{ab}(q,\beta )$$

was introduced and the occupation number

$$n_{++}(q_0)=n_{}(q_0)=\left\{e^{|q_0|(\beta _f+\beta _i)/2}1\right\}^1\stackrel{~}{n}(|q_0|\frac{\beta _i+\beta _f}{2}).$$
(4.9)
and

$$n_+(q_0)==\mathrm{\Theta }(q_0)(1+\stackrel{~}{n}(q_0\beta _f))+\mathrm{\Theta }(q_0)\stackrel{~}{n}(q_0\beta _i),$$
(4.10)
$$n_+(q_0)=\mathrm{\Theta }(q_0)\stackrel{~}{n}(q_0\beta _i)+\mathrm{\Theta }(q_0)(1+\stackrel{~}{n}(q_0\beta _f)).$$
(4.11)
Assuming that $`\beta _i=\beta _f=\beta _c`$ it is easy to find:

$$G_+(tt^{})=G_+(tt^{}i\beta ),G_+(tt^{})=G_+(tt^{}+i\beta ),$$
(4.12)
i.e. our Green function obey KMS boundary condition.

So, representation (4.7) with Green functions (4.8) coincide identically with (4.1) calculated perturbatively, see also .

### 4.2 Nonequilibrium media

Our attempt introduce the temperature as the quantitative characteristic of $`whole`$ system based on assumption that mean value of correlators is small. We can ‘localize’ this condition assuming that this rough description may be extended only on subdomains of the system. For definiteness the subdomains may be marked by space-time coordinate $`r`$.

It should be underlined that we divide on the subdomains not the system under consideration but the device, where external particles are measured. Noting that external flow consist from noninteracting particles (including the flow of black body radiation) the division on subdomains can not influence on the fields interaction.

In result we introduce the ‘local’ temperature $`1/\beta (r)`$ for $`r`$-th group of interacting particles assuming that fluctuations in vicinity of $`\beta (r)`$ are Gaussian. This means that the mean value of correlation in the group is small, but the correlation between groups may be high. Nevertheless last one is not important since the external particles are on the mass shell. At the same time dimension of group may be arbitrary, but large then some $`r_0`$ to have possibility to introduce the temperature as the collective variable.

We can distinguish following scales. Let $`L_q`$ be the characteristic 4-scale of quantum fluctuations, $`L_s`$ be the scale thermodynamical fluctuations and $`L`$ be the scale of subdomain. It is natural to assume that $`L_s>>L>>L_q`$.

Corresponding generating $`functional`$ has the form:

$$\rho _{cp}(\alpha _1,\alpha _2)=e^{\widehat{N}(\varphi _a^{}\varphi _b)}\rho _0(\varphi _\pm ).$$

One may note that the ‘localization’ gives influence on the operator only:

$$\widehat{N}(\varphi _a^{}\varphi _b)=𝑑Y𝑑y\widehat{\varphi }_a(Y+y/2)\stackrel{~}{n}_{ab}(Y,y)\widehat{\varphi }_b(Yy/2),$$

The occupation numbers $`n_{ab}(Y,q)`$ have same form, $`\beta \beta (Y)`$ and

$$\stackrel{~}{n}_{ij}(Y,y)=𝑑\omega (q)e^{iqy}n_{ij}(Y,q)$$

We find calculating $`\rho _0`$ perturbatively that:

$`\rho _{cp}(\beta )=\mathrm{exp}\{iV(i\widehat{j}_+)+iV(i\widehat{j}_{})\}\times `$
$`\mathrm{exp}\{i{\displaystyle }dYdy[j_a(Y+y/2)G_{ab}(y,(\beta (Y))j_b(Yy/2)\}`$ (4.13)
where the matrix Green function $`G(q,(\beta (Y)))`$ was defined in (4.8).

## 5 Conclusion

One more detail. Our consideration has show the uniqueness of Bogolyubov’s solution of the nonequilibrium thermodynamics problem. Indeed, without vanishing of correlations perturbation series in the $`\beta _c`$ vicinity, being asymptotic, is divergent.

We would like to stress in conclusion that Bogolyubov’s creative works naturally unite particle and statistical physics. In result, using Bogolyubov’s mathematical basis, we have the united scientific space in which both branches of physics, thermodynamics and quantum field theory, supplement each other.

Acknowledgement
We would like to thank V.Kadyshevsky, V.A.Matveev, A.N.Tavkhelidze for interest to described approach and E.Kuraev for fruitful discussions.


text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

There is accumulating evidence that the expansion rate of the universe is greater now than in the past . The data, taken alone or in conjunction with constraints from large scale structure , are compatible (in a flat universe) with a contribution $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }0.7`$ from a cosmological constant $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ or its equivalent. Cluster abundance estimates for the matter fraction $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{matter}`$ of the critical density, combined with an analysis  of CMB observations in the Doppler peak region (which support the inflation prediction $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{tot}=1`$) are also compatible with such a contribution to the “dark energy”. The resulting energy density is given by

$$\rho _\mathrm{\Lambda }=(2.2\times 10^3\mathrm{eV})^4(\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }/0.7)(h/0.65)^2,$$
(1)
where $`h=`$ present Hubble constant $`H_0`$ in units of 100 km/sec/Mpc. The introduction of a non-zero value for $`\rho _\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ or its equivalent presents an important challenge to particle physicists and cosmologists. Even if one concedes ignorance and simply accepts as premise that the universe is relaxing to a state with $`\rho _\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$ , there still remains the perplexing question of the origin of a mass scale $`\rho _\mathrm{\Lambda }^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}1}/4}10^3`$ eV which makes $`\rho _\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ relevant in the present era. Discussion in recent years has centered on models in which $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ becomes time-dependent, originating in the energy density of a scalar field $`\varphi `$ evolving in a potential $`V(\varphi ).`$ One candidate for $`\varphi `$ is a pseudo-Nambu-Goldstone boson (axion) in a harmonic potential associated with the breaking of a $`U(1)`$ symmetry to $`Z_N`$ . The cosmological consequences of this scenario depend on both the normalization of the potential $`M^4`$ and the scale $`f`$ at which the $`U(1)`$ symmetry is realized in the Goldstone mode, and there have been studies  where the parameters make the model relevant to late-time cosmology, including recent applications to the SNeIa results . The required scale $`M10^3\text{eV}`$ can be associated with a neutrino mass  or with the confining scale of a hidden gauge theory , $`\varphi `$ being the axion. In quintessence models , $`\varphi `$ evolves so that the late-time behavior of the dark energy density $`\rho _\varphi `$ is largely independent of initial conditions. What remains to be tuned by hand is the parameter in the potential which allows for a positive acceleration of the scale parameter during the SNeIa era relevant to the observations of Ref. . The origin of the field $`\varphi ,`$ the form of its potential, and its relation to other physics remain to be explained .

In this paper, I would like to propose that the dark energy $`\rho _\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is not evolving, but is the false vacuum energy associated with an incomplete chiral phase transition in a hidden $`SU(2)^{}`$ gauge theory with strong scale $`\rho _\mathrm{\Lambda }^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}1}/4}.`$ It will be seen that in the context of modern D-brane physics, the scale $`\rho _\mathrm{\Lambda }^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}1}/4}`$ for the vacuum energy can be accommodated in a natural manner in a supersymmetric GUT theory. Instead, the central problem will be to explain how a low temperature $`T_{hidden}<T_{\mathrm{CMB}}\frac{1}{10}\rho _\mathrm{\Lambda }^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}1}/4}`$ can be sustained for the quark-gluon phase of the (supercooled) plasma of the hidden sector. Such a high degree of supercooling can potentially be tested in lattice simulations. In the present work, it will strongly constrain the effective field theory. The model is described in the next section, and some possible advantages as an alternative to the scalar field scenario are mentioned in the concluding section.

## 2 The Model

I will consider a hidden unbroken $`SU(2)^{}`$ Yang-Mills theory whose low energy matter content is $`N_f`$Dirac fermions (2$`N_f`$Weyl fermions) with vector-like coupling to the gauge field. (For now, hidden sector quantities will be denoted by a prime.) Except for gravitational interactions, this $`SU(2)^{}`$ is completely decoupled from all standard model fields. The choice of $`SU(2)^{}`$ is doubly motivated: (1) the running of the gauge coupling is slow, so that the scale $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{SU(2)^{}}`$ can be pushed to values approximating $`\rho _\mathrm{\Lambda }^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}1}/4}`$  (2) there will be fewer massless degrees of freedom to perturb the successful scenario of Big Bang Nucleosynthesis (BBN), a critical requirement of the model. The hidden nature of the $`SU(2)^{}`$ will be discussed when the coupling requirement at GUT energies is obtained.

Since the theory will be considered to have evolved from GUT energies, the supersymmetric version becomes relevant. The matter content then consists solely of 2$`N_f`$chiral $`SU(2)^{}`$ doublet superfields $`Q_i(i=1\mathrm{}2N_f).`$ In order to preserve the low energy chiral phase transition, $`SU(2)^{}`$ singlet, flavor antisymmetric mass terms $`Q_iQ_jQ_jQ_i`$ must be prohibited by a discrete symmetry $`(R`$-invariance or $`Z_N,N>2`$ symmetry). Next, the 1-loop RG equation relates the gauge coupling at GUT $`\alpha _{\mathrm{GUT}}^{}`$ and the strong coupling scale $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{SU(2)^{}}`$:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{2\pi }{\alpha _{\mathrm{GUT}}^{}}}`$ $`=`$ $`b_2^{\mathrm{SUSY}}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{M_{\mathrm{GUT}}}{1\mathrm{TeV}}}\right)+b_2^{\mathrm{non}\mathrm{SUSY}}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1\mathrm{TeV}}{\mathrm{\Lambda }_{SU(2)^{}}}}\right)`$
$`b_2^{\mathrm{SUSY}}`$ $`=`$ $`6N_f`$
$`b_2^{\mathrm{non}\mathrm{SUSY}}`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{22}{3}\frac{2}{3}N_f,`$ (2)
so that for $`M_{\mathrm{GUT}}=2\times 10^{16}\mathrm{GeV},`$ $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{SU(2)^{}}=\rho _\mathrm{\Lambda }^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}1}/4}=2.2\times 10^3\mathrm{eV}`$ one obtains

$$\alpha _{\mathrm{GUT}}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}=68.68.46N_f.$$
(3)
The major premise of the model is the existence of a false vacuum at present. A first order phase transition driven by fluctuations of chiral condensates is strongly indicated by theoretical arguments , most cleanly for $`N_f4.`$ From Eq. (3), it would seem that unification with standard model couplings ($`\alpha _{\mathrm{GUT}}\frac{1}{25}`$) can be achieved with a choice $`N_f=5;`$ however, this would elevate the number of Goldstone degrees of freedom below the critical temperature $`(=2N_f^2N_f1)`$  to a value larger than the effective number of quark-gluon degrees of freedom $`(=7N_f+6),`$ presumably vitiating the first order phase transition. Thus I choose $`N_f=4,`$ and Eq. (3) gives

$$\alpha _{\mathrm{GUT}}^{}\frac{1}{35}\alpha _{\mathrm{GUT}}.$$
(4)
Such a disparity in GUT-scale gauge couplings is not difficult to accommodate in current formulations of string theory, with gauge fields residing in open strings tied to D-branes. If, for example, the standard model gauge group lives on a 5-brane and the hidden $`SU(2)^{}`$ on another 5-brane (orthogonal with respect to the compactified 2-tori) , the ratio of the gauge couplings would be inversely proportional to the volumes of the 2-tori:

$$\frac{\alpha _{\mathrm{GUT}}^{}}{\alpha _{\mathrm{GUT}}}=\frac{v_2}{v_2^{}}.$$
(5)
Thus, a 20% difference in toroidal moduli could account for the disparity in the $`\alpha `$’s.

### Temperature Constraints

Having established a model, one can quickly ascertain the constraints which follow from BBN. The hidden sector energy density $`\rho ^{}`$ of the $`SU(2)^{}`$ gauge fields and 2$`N_f`$ Weyl doublets, relative to a single species of left-handed neutrino is given by

$$\frac{\rho ^{}}{\rho _{\nu _e}}|_{BBN}=\left(\frac{7N_f+6}{(7/4)}\right)\left(\frac{T^{}}{T}\right)^4|_{BBN}.$$
(6)
Requiring this ratio to be $`0.3`$  implies (for $`N_f=4)`$

$$\frac{T^{}}{T}|_{BBN}0.353.$$
(7)
Much of this can be accounted for through reheat processes in the visible sector. Assuming no reheat for the hidden sector for energies below the electroweak scale, one finds

$`{\displaystyle \frac{T^{}}{T}}|_{BBN}`$ $`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{g^{}(BBN)}{g^{}(>EW)}}\right)^{1/3}{\displaystyle \frac{T^{}}{T}}|_{>EW}`$ (8)
$`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{10.75}{106.75}}\right)^{1/3}{\displaystyle \frac{T^{}}{T}}|_{>EW}=0.465{\displaystyle \frac{T^{}}{T}}|_{>EW},`$ (9)
where $`>EW`$ denotes temperatures above the electroweak scale. In order to comply with the BBN requirement (Eq. 6) an additional suppression of $`T^{}/T`$ above the electroweak scale by a factor of 0.76 is required. Here one can invoke an asymmetric post-inflation reheat into visible and hidden sector quanta . In the slow reheat scenario , $`T_{reheat}`$ is proportional to the coupling of the inflaton to the quanta , so that a ratio of couplings of the same order as the ratio of the $`\alpha `$’s (4) could provide the desired additional suppression. This reheat asymmetry could have the same origin as the $`\alpha `$ asymmetry, if the inflaton originates in the modular sector. Asymmetric reheating also obtains in the case of parametric resonance  because of the asymmetric coupling .

Because of $`e^+e^{}`$ annihilation, the present $`T^{}`$ is further depressed relative to the present CMB temperature by the same $`(4/11)^{1/3}`$ factor as with neutrinos. Thus, together with (7), one obtains $`(T_{\mathrm{now}}^{}/T_{\mathrm{CMB}})0.251.`$ Since $`T_{\mathrm{CMB}}=2.35\times 10^4\mathrm{eV}=0.11\rho _\mathrm{\Lambda }^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}1}/4},`$ one finds

$$T_{\mathrm{now}}^{}/\rho _\mathrm{\Lambda }^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}1}/4}0.028.$$
(10)
This suggests a great deal of supercooling, which needs to be accommodated. The calculations in this work will require the ratio $`T/T_c`$ ($`T_c`$ is the critical temperature111From here on, all temperatures will be understood to be hidden sector temperatures, and the primes will be omitted.) which in turn requires knowledge of the ratio $`\rho _\mathrm{\Lambda }^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}1}/4}/T_c.`$ This will be calculable in the effective field theory to be discussed.

### Supercooling

In the standard formulation of first order phase transitions via critical bubble formation  the condition for failure to complete a phase transition in the expanding universe at (hidden) temperature $`T`$ is

$$(T/H(T))^4e^{F_c/T}<1,$$
(11)
where $`F_c`$ is the free energy of a critical bubble, and $`H(T)`$ is the Hubble constant at temperature $`T.`$ With $`H_02.2\times 10^{33}h`$ eV, $`T=0.28T_{\mathrm{CMB}},`$ one obtains the condition for failure to nucleate

$$F_c/T>260.$$
(12)
In the thin wall approximation, the bubble has a well-defined surface tension $`\sigma ,`$ and the picture is consistent only for small supercooling below $`T_c.`$ The bubble action is given by

$$\frac{F_c}{T}=\frac{16\pi }{3}\frac{\sigma ^3}{L^2\eta ^2T_c},$$
(13)
where $`L`$ is the latent heat and $`\eta =(T_cT)/T_c.`$ Thus, a failure to nucleate via thin-walled bubbles requires a large surface tension, $`\sigma /T_c^3\stackrel{>}{}1.`$ In lattice studies of quenched QCD , the interface tension between confined and deconfined phases is small: $`\sigma /T_c^30.1.`$ However, a simple calculation  based on the MIT bag model  suggests that the picture can change drastically in the presence of chiral condensates: in that case,

$$\sigma =\frac{1}{4}\underset{i=1}{\overset{N_f}{}}\overline{q}_iq_i.$$
(14)
which for QCD $`(T_c150\text{MeV},\overline{q}_iq_i(240\text{MeV})^3`$ per flavor) would give a large surface tension, $`\sigma 4T_c^3,`$ possibly invalidating the thin-wall approximation.222This would give an average distance between nucleation sites of about 10 m , perhaps marginally affecting primordial light element abundances . A full analysis of the unquenched QCD situation is probably best carried in the framework of a mean field theory . I will proceed in the context of such a theory to see what constraints are imposed on the $`SU(2)^{}`$ model in order to attain the desired metastability (Eq. (12)) until the present era.

## 3 Linear Sigma Model for $`SU(2)^{}`$ with $`N_f`$Flavors.

The symmetry breaking pattern of color $`SU(2)^{}`$ with $`N_f`$flavors has long been known , and a linear sigma model for this case has recently been examined . Such a model will serve conveniently to study the chiral phase transition. The meson and diquark baryon fields are contained in the $`2N_f\times 2N_f`$ antisymmetric matrix $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{ij}=\mathrm{\Phi }_{ji},`$ with chiral symmetry breaking occurring in $`Sp(2N_f)`$ direction  compatible with the Vafa-Witten theorem

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_0=\frac{\varphi _0}{\sqrt{2(2N_f)}}\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\mathrm{𝟎}& \mathrm{𝟏}& \\ \mathrm{𝟏}& \mathrm{𝟎}& \end{array}\right)$$
(15)
where $`\mathrm{𝟎}`$ and $`\mathrm{𝟏}`$ are $`N_f\times N_f`$ matrices. The lagrangian is

$$=\text{Tr}^\mu \mathrm{\Phi }_\mu \mathrm{\Phi }m^2\text{Tr}\mathrm{\Phi }^{}\mathrm{\Phi }\lambda _1\left(\text{Tr}\mathrm{\Phi }^{}\mathrm{\Phi }\right)^2\lambda _2\text{Tr}\mathrm{\Phi }^{}\mathrm{\Phi }\mathrm{\Phi }^{}\mathrm{\Phi }.$$
(16)
I have omitted a term $`\text{Pf}(\mathrm{\Phi })+\text{Pf}(\mathrm{\Phi }^{})`$ arising from the axial anomaly. Since I will be working with $`N_f=4,`$ this additional operator quartic in the fields will not qualitatively change the discussion which follows. Stability in all field directions requires $`\lambda _20,\lambda _1+\lambda _2/2N_f0.`$

Specializing now to the field $`\varphi `$ in the direction of the vev, one obtains

$`_0`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{1}{2}(_\mu \varphi )^2V(\varphi ),`$
$`V(\varphi )`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{1}{2}m^2\varphi ^2+\frac{1}{4}\overline{\lambda }\varphi ^4,`$
$`\overline{\lambda }`$ $`=`$ $`\lambda _1+\overline{\lambda }_2,\overline{\lambda }_2=\lambda _2/2N_f.`$ (17)
With finite temperature corrections (restricted for simplicity to the $`m^2`$ term) and the introduction of a running quartic coupling, one obtains the effective potential

$$V(\varphi ,T)=\frac{1}{2}m^2(T)\varphi ^2+\frac{1}{4}\overline{\lambda }(t)\varphi ^4,$$
(18)
where $`t=\mathrm{ln}(\varphi /\varphi _0)`$, and $`m^2`$ has the standard $`T`$-corrected form

$$m^2(T)=A(T^2T_0^2).$$
(19)
In the model described, $`A`$ can be calculated, and I find at one loop

$$A=\frac{1}{12}\left[(2N_f(2N_f1)+2)\overline{\lambda }+(6N_f(2N_f1)2)\overline{\lambda }_2\right].$$
(20)
The $`ϵ`$ expansion analysis of the model described by (16) shows that it allows a first order phase transition through a Coleman-Weinberg mechanism at $`T=T_0,`$ when $`m^2(T)=0`$ . However, it will shortly be apparent that the large supercooling will require that $`T_0^2T_c^2.`$ This (approximate) conformal invariance at tree level in the chiral lagrangian (to be discussed below) in turn suggests that chiral symmetry breaking at zero temperature in this model also proceeds through radiative corrections (Coleman-Weinberg) . Thus, to lowest order (see Eq. (29) below)

$$\overline{\lambda }(t)=\lambda (14t),\lambda \overline{\lambda }(0).$$
(21)
where $`t=0`$ is defined by the minimum of the second term in (18).

The vacuum at $`\varphi =0`$ described by the potential (18) becomes metastable at a temperature $`T_c`$ determined by requiring simultaneously

$$V^{}(\varphi _+)=V(\varphi _+)=0,$$
(22)
at some field value $`\varphi _+.`$ A short algebraic exercise with Eqs. (18), (19), (21), and (22) determines $`T_c:`$

$$m(T_c)=\sqrt{A(T_c^2T_0^2)}=\sqrt{\lambda }\varphi _0e^{1/4}.$$
(23)
### Suppression of $`m^2`$.

For $`T_0<T<T_c`$ there is a barrier between the false and true vacua. But the extreme supercooling requirement indicated in Eq. (10) will be seen to impose a large hierarchy, $`T_0T_c`$ (it will turn out that $`T_00.124T_c.)`$ There is no obvious argument to justify this hierarchy — it is simply required in this model for compatibility with the supercooling requirement. Nevertheless, two comments may be made: (1) A quantitative comparison with the linear $`SU(3)\times SU(3)`$ sigma model (whose dynamics differs through the presence of the cubic term) is perhaps instructive. In that case, the coefficient $`A`$ is obtained as a sum over the massive mesons , $`A=\frac{1}{12}_iM_i^2/v^2,`$ where $`vf_\pi .`$ With $`M_i1`$ GeV, one estimates $`A83.`$ Since $`T_0=\sqrt{\mu ^2/A},`$ where $`\mu ^20.15\text{GeV}^2`$  is the temperature-independent (negative) mass parameter, we find $`T_043`$ MeV $`0.24T_c.`$ This may provide a normative expectation for $`T_0/T_c.`$ (2) In $`SU(N)`$ gauge theories with $`N_f`$ massless fermion flavors, a continuous transition to an approximately conformal phase (which would imply $`m^2=0)`$ is suggested at some value of $`N_f/N<11/2\text{[39]}.`$ Some analytic studies  indicate $`N_f/N4`$ as a critical value, while a QCD lattice study  show hints of a suppression of the chiral condensate (expected in the transition to the conformal phase ) for a smaller value, $`N_f/N=\frac{4}{3}`$ ($`SU(3)`$ with 4 flavors). Perhaps the ratio in the present case $`(N_f/N=2)`$ is sufficiently large to significantly suppress the zero temperature $`m^2`$ term in the effective lagrangian — a lattice study of chiral symmetry breaking in $`SU(2)`$ with $`N_f=4`$ could in principle shed light on this question. At any rate, at this juncture I accept the hierarchy $`T_0T_c,`$ and simplify matters even more by setting

$$T_0=0$$
(24)
in Eq. (19). In such a model, with two coupling constants, the chiral invariance is broken at $`T=0`$ in the Coleman-Weinberg manner . For $`T0,`$ the transition becomes first order, as described in the previous section.

### Critical Bubbles.

For $`T0`$ it will prove convenient to rescale $`\varphi =m(T)\varphi ^{}/2\sqrt{\lambda },`$ so that using Eqs. (18), (21) and (23) one may write

$`V`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{m^4(T)}{4\lambda }}\overline{V}`$
$`\overline{V}`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{1}{2}\varphi _{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+\frac{1}{4}\varphi _{}^{}{}_{}{}^{4}\left[\mathrm{ln}((m(T)/m(T_c))\varphi ^{})/2\frac{1}{2}\right]`$ (25)
$`=`$ $`\frac{1}{2}\varphi _{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+\frac{1}{4}\varphi _{}^{}{}_{}{}^{4}\left[\mathrm{ln}((T/T_c)\varphi ^{}/2)\frac{1}{2}\right]`$
for $`T_0=0.`$

The O(3) symmetric free energy for a critical bubble formed at temperature $`T`$ is given by

$`F_c`$ $`=`$ $`4\pi {\displaystyle \frac{m(T)}{4\lambda }}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑r^{}r_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}\left[\frac{1}{2}\left(d\varphi ^{}/dr^{}\right)^2+\overline{V}(\varphi ^{},T/T_c)\right]`$ (26)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{m(T)}{4\lambda }}f(T/T_c)`$
where $`r^{}=m(T)r.`$ The field $`\varphi ^{}`$ is the solution to

$$\frac{d^2\varphi ^{}}{dr_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}+\frac{2}{r^{}}\frac{d\varphi ^{}}{dr^{}}=\frac{\overline{V}}{\varphi ^{}}.$$
(27)
subject to $`d\varphi ^{}/dr^{}|_{r^{}=0}=0,\varphi ^{}(\mathrm{})=0.`$ With the help of Eqs. (19), (20) and (24) the bubble action can then be calculated more explicitly in terms of the the quantity $`f(T/T_c).`$ For $`N_f=4,`$ I obtain

$`F_c/T`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{A}/(4\lambda )f(T/T_c)`$ (28)
$`=`$ $`\sqrt{\frac{29}{6}\overline{\lambda }+\frac{83}{6}\overline{\lambda }_2}/(4\lambda )f(T/T_c).`$
At this point, I implement the condition of radiative symmetry breaking (at $`T=0`$) in the two-parameter $`(\overline{\lambda },\overline{\lambda }_2)`$ space. This imposes the condition

$$4\overline{\lambda }(0)=4\lambda =\beta _{\overline{\lambda }}(0).$$
(29)
From the one-loop RG equations , for $`\overline{\lambda }_2(0)\left|\overline{\lambda }(0)\right|,`$ but $`\overline{\lambda }_2(0)`$ still perturbative (this will be justified a posteriori), Eq. (29) gives

$$\overline{\lambda }_2(0)=\left(4\pi /\sqrt{4N_f^22N_f2}\right)\sqrt{\overline{\lambda }(0)}=(4\pi /\sqrt{54})\sqrt{\lambda },$$
(30)
and hence in the same approximation

$$A\frac{83}{6}\frac{4\pi }{\sqrt{54}}\sqrt{\lambda }.$$
(31)
Thus the bubble action can be written entirely in terms of the coupling constant $`\lambda =\overline{\lambda }(0):`$

$`F_c/T`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{\frac{4\pi }{\sqrt{54}}\frac{83}{6}\sqrt{\lambda }}/(4\lambda )f(T/T_c)`$ (32)
$``$ $`1.22f(T/T_c)\lambda ^{3/4}.`$
We now require the ratio $`T/T_c.`$ From Eq. (10), one needs to relate the vacuum energy $`\rho _\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ to $`T_c.`$ At $`T=0,m(T)=0,`$ Eqs. (18), (21), (23), (24) and (31) give

$`\rho _\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ $`=`$ $`V(0)V(\varphi _0)`$ (33)
$`=`$ $`\frac{1}{4}\lambda \varphi _0^4`$
$`=`$ $`\frac{1}{4}eA^2T_c^4/\lambda `$
$`=`$ $`(4.4T_c)^4.`$
Combining this with Eq. (10), we have the supercooling requirement

$$T/T_c0.124.$$
(34)
The bubble action may now be evaluated numerically, and I find $`f(0.124)=6.61.`$ Since $`f(T/T_c)`$ is a uniformly decreasing function of $`T/T_c,`$ I obtain (using (12)) the condition for no nucleation until the present era

$$260F_c/T(1.22)(6.61)\lambda ^{3/4},$$
(35)
giving a bound on $`\lambda ,`$

$$\lambda 0.010,\text{or}0.010\overline{\lambda }(0)0.$$
(36)
### Fine Tuning?

Does the bound (36) represent a substantial fine tuning? In an attempt to answer this question, I have presented in Figure 1 the renormalization group flow in the $`\overline{\lambda }\overline{\lambda }_2`$ plane over less than or equal to a decade $`\left[(t\mathrm{ln}(10))(t=0)\right]`$ for those trajectories which begin in the stability region and satisfy the requirement (36). It is seen that (1) a reasonable piece of the coupling constant phase space is available (2) the couplings are perturbative but not particularly small over much of the RG flow and (3) over some of the phase space $`\overline{\lambda }`$ reaches values of the order of the electroweak Higgs coupling. (In the same normalization, $`\lambda _H=0.08(m_H/100\text{GeV})^2.)`$

A summary of results and concluding remarks follows.

## 4 Discussion and Conclusions

$`(1)`$A model has been presented which can generate a cosmological constant of magnitude to account for $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }0.7`$ during the present era. The present quasi-deSitter phase is driven by the false vacuum energy associated with the supercooled phase of an incomplete chiral phase transition in a hidden gauge theory. The very small energy scale $`\rho _\mathrm{\Lambda }^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}1}/4}2\times 10^3`$ eV for the vacuum energy appears as the strong interaction scale for a hidden $`SU(2)^{}`$ whose coupling runs from GUT energies, with coupling at GUT not quite unifying with the standard model couplings. Having this $`SU(2)^{}`$ and the standard model fields reside on different branes presents a simple solution to this disparity.

$`(2)`$An unchanging vacuum energy has some advantages over evolving primordial scalar fields as an origin of the present near-deSitter phase: the problem of protecting the tiny curvature of the potential  is circumvented, as is the necessity (in quintessence models) to control the contribution of dark energy during nucleosynthesis .

$`(3)`$BBN considerations imply large supercooling in the metastable quark-gluon plasma of the present phase. Although present lattice simulations indicate only small supercooling in the quenched approximation of Yang-Mills theory, theoretical considerations indicate that large supercooling is possible in the presence of chiral condensates. A linear sigma model with two quartic couplings was analyzed in which all symmetry breaking takes place via dimensional transmutation. In this model the existence of substantial supercooling does not require fine tuning in the coupling constant space. The existence of a large interface energy in an $`SU(2)`$ theory with $`N_f=4`$ dynamical quarks would provide incisive support for this model.

$`(4)`$A pivotal requirement in this scenario is the near-scale invariance of the chiral lagrangian. This was briefly discussed in the text in terms of the ratio $`N_f/N(=2`$ in the present work). A hint of the continuous approach to a conformal phase may be suggested in the observed weakening of the chiral phase transition in a lattice study  of four flavor QCD with $`N_f/N`$ as small as 4/3.

$`(5)`$The bound $`\lambda 0.010`$ (Eq. (36)) does not change drastically with a tighter bound on the extra effective number of neutrinos. For example, with a requirement $`\mathrm{\Delta }N_{eff}0.1,`$ I find instead of (36) the bound $`\lambda 0.0086.`$ This would also involve a small amount of extra reheating in the visible sector between the GUT and electroweak scales.

$`(5)`$Although the phase transition discussed in this paper is long overdue, it may not be catastrophic when it occurs. The nucleation occurs via very thick-walled bubbles, so that the drastic shock-wave scenario depicted in the thin-walled case  is perhaps not inevitable.

### Acknowledgement

I would like to thank Gary Steigman for comments and for drawing attention to an arithmetic error in Eq. (9) in the original version of the manuscript. This research was supported in part by the National Science Foundation through Grant No. PHY-9722044.