text:
# The Janus head of the HD 12661 planetary system

## 1 Introduction

The recently discovered planetary systems, HD 12661 and HD 38529 Fischer et al. (2003), are among about a dozen of multi-planetary systems. Their dynamics are the subject of extensive work carried out by many researchers. The knowledge of these systems changes rapidly, as more and more observational data are gathered. Remarkably, most of the new multi-planetary systems have a resonant nature. The mean motion resonances (MMR) and/or the secular apsidal resonances (SAR) are most likely present in $`\upsilon `$ Andr, HD 82943, Gliese 876, 47 UMa, 55 Cnc, and HD 12661 (Fischer et al., 2003, Table 8).

The orbital fit to the radial velocity (RV) observations of the HD 12661 system has been determined by Fischer et al. (2003). They discovered two giant planets, b and c, with masses $`m_\text{b}2.3\text{M}_\text{J}`$, and $`m_\text{c}1.57\text{M}_\text{J}`$, revolving around the parent star in elongated orbits, $`e_\text{b}0.35`$, $`e_\text{c}0.2`$ and semi-major axes $`a_\text{b}0.83`$ au and $`a_\text{c}2.56`$ au, respectively. These data permit to classify the HD 12661 system as a planetary hierarchical triple system. Recently, using the initial conditions provided by Fischer et al. (2003), Goździewski (2003) and Lee & Peale (2003), investigated the dynamics of the HD 12661 system. Lee & Peale (2003) studied coplanar dynamics in the framework of an analytical secular theory. The work of Goździewski (2003), mostly numerical, is devoted to the stability analysis of the system, in a wide neighborhood of the initial condition, also for non-coplanar systems. The results of these papers are in accord. They reveal that the HD 12661 system is close to the 11:2 MMR, accompanied by the SAR, with the critical angle $`\varpi _c\varpi _b`$ librating about $`180^{}`$. This type of SAR is the first such case found among the known planetary systems Lee & Peale (2003). The octupole-level secular theory of these authors explains that the planetary system is located in an extended resonance island in the phase space, and it helps to understand why the resonance persists in wide ranges of orbital parameters. This is also true for non-coplanar systems and wide ranges of planetary masses Goździewski (2003).

Our dynamical study of the HD 12661 system Goździewski (2003) have been based on the first 2-Keplerian fit published by the California and Carnegie Planet Search Team on their WEB site111http://exoplanets.org/. Recently, an updated fit to the RV data appeared (Fischer et al., 2003, Table 2). A preliminary dynamical analysis of this initial condition does not bring qualitative changes to the system dynamics. However, the results of remarkable papers by Laughlin & Chambers (2001) and Lee & Peale (2003) inspired us to analyze the RV data again, in the framework of the full, nonlinear $`N`$-body dynamics. Although the RV observations are most commonly modeled by additive Keplerian signals, the mutual interaction between giant planets can introduce substantial changes to such simple model. A further nuance flows from the fact that the 2-Keplerian fits are mostly interpreted as osculating, astrocentric elements. In fact, the fits should be interpreted as Keplerian elements related to the Jacobi coordinates Lee & Peale (2003). These refinements seem to change qualitatively the view of the dynamical state of the HD 12661 system, as it can be derived from the current RV data.

## 2 Orbital fits

We used the updated RV observations of the HD 12661 system (Fischer et al., 2003, Table 4), containing 86 data points, collected in Keck and Lick observatories. The reported uncertainties are $`3`$-$`6`$ ms-1 for the Keck data and $`7`$-$`17`$ ms-1 for the Lick observations.

In the first attempt to find the initial condition to the RV data we applied the genetic algorithm (GA). To the best of our knowledge, this method of minimization was used for analyzing the RV of $`\upsilon `$ Andr by Butler et al. (1999) and Stepinski et al. (2000), the Gliese 876 system by Laughlin & Chambers (2001), and 55 Cnc by Marcy et al. (2002). Basically, the genetic scheme makes it possible to find the global minimum of the $`\chi ^2`$ function. Our experiments confirm remarks of Stepinski et al. (2000) that the method is inefficient for finding very accurate best-fit solutions, but it provides good starting points to fast and precise gradient methods, like the Levenberg-Marquardt (LM) scheme Press et al. (1992). These two methods of minimization complement each other. We used publicly available code PIKAIA v. 1.2222http://www.hao.ucar.edu/public/research/si/pikaia/pikaia.html by Charbonneau (1995), a great advocate of the genetic algorithms.

In the simplest case, the minimized function is given by the following formula

$$\chi ^2=\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}\left[\frac{V_\text{k}(t_i,𝐩)+V_0V(t_i)}{\sigma (t_i)}\right]^2,$$

where $`N`$ is the number of observations of the radial velocity $`V(t_i)`$ at moments of time $`t_i`$, with uncertainties $`\sigma (t_i)`$, modeled by a sum of Keplerian signals $`V_\text{k}(t_i,𝐩)=V_\text{b}(t_i,𝐩_\text{b})+V_\text{c}(t_i,𝐩_\text{c})`$, and the velocity offset $`V_0`$. The fit parameters, $`𝐩=(𝐩_\text{b},𝐩_\text{c})`$, where $`𝐩_\text{p}=(K_\text{p},n_\text{p},e_\text{p},\omega _\text{p},T_\text{p})`$, for every planet $`\text{p}=\text{b},\text{c}`$, are: the amplitude $`K_\text{p}`$, the mean motion $`n_\text{p}`$, the eccentricity $`e_\text{p}`$, the argument of periastron $`\omega _\text{p}`$, and the time of periastron passage $`T_\text{p}`$. The orbital elements emerging from these parameters should be related to the Jacobi coordinates Lee & Peale (2003). Recently, we drew a similar conclusion independently Goździewski et al. (2003). In our fit model, the planetary system’s reference frame is chosen in such way that the $`z`$-axis is directed from the observer to the system’s barycenter and $`V(t)`$ is the $`z`$-coordinate of star velocity. The relation between $`K_\text{p}`$ and the mass of a planet $`m_\text{p}`$, the mass of the host star $`m_{}`$ and the geometric elements, related to the Jacobi coordinates, is given by $`K_\text{p}=\sigma _\text{p}a_\text{p}n_\text{p}\mathrm{sin}i`$, where, for the three-body system, $`\sigma _\text{b}=Gm_\text{b}/(m_{}+m_\text{b})`$ for the first planet, $`\sigma _\text{c}=Gm_\text{c}/(m_{}+m_\text{b}+m_\text{c})`$ for the second companion. For efficiency reasons, the code for the dynamical analysis, incorporating the MEGNO indicator, works internally in astrocentric coordinates, thus, when it is required, the Jacobi coordinates are transformed to these coordinates. In this sense, the astrocentric elements are considered only as a formal representation of the initial condition333Although it is quite obvious, we would like to remark that the results of the MEGNO tests are coordinate independent.. Together with $`\chi ^2`$, we use $`\sqrt{\chi _\nu ^2}=\sqrt{\chi ^2/\nu },`$ where $`\nu =NN_p1`$ is the number of degrees of freedom and $`N_p`$ is the total number of parameters.

The PIKAIA code is controlled by a set of 11 parameters. We set the most relevant as follows: the population number to 256, the number of generations to a rather high value 8000–12000, and the variable mutation rate in between 0.005 to 0.07 with crossover probability equal to 0.95. The PIKAIA runs, restarted many times, resulted in a number of qualitatively similar fits, with $`\sqrt{\chi _\nu ^2}1.44`$ and RMS $`8.2`$ ms-1. The RV data have been modeled by 2-Keplerian signal and one RV offset. We found that, surprisingly, all these solutions, not only have a slightly smaller $`\sqrt{\chi _\nu ^2}`$ and RMS than reported by Fischer et al. (2003) for the 2-Keplerian model ($`\sqrt{\chi _\nu ^2}1.46`$ and RMS $`8.8`$ ms-1), but also differ from the former fit substantially. The periods ratio is very close to 6:1, and not to 11:2! Also, the initial $`e_\text{c}0.1`$ is smaller than previous estimates.

Actually, because the Doppler measurements have been performed in two different observatories, we should account for two independent velocity offsets $`V_0`$ and $`V_1`$, different for the the Lick and Keck observations. Data that are inhomogeneous in this sense were analyzed by Stepinski et al. (2000) and Rivera & Lissauer (2001). Indeed, the GA incorporating the RV model with two velocity offsets, makes it possible to obtain a significantly better solution ($`\sqrt{\chi _\nu ^2}1.37`$ and RMS $`7.9`$ ms-1).

We verified this fit by determining the quasi-global minimum of $`\chi ^2`$ as a function of $`(P_\text{c},e_\text{c})`$. We searched for the best fit solutions with these two parameters fixed. Because $`P_\text{b}`$ is determined very well, its value, as well as $`e_\text{b}`$, approximated by the best GA solution for the 2-Keplerian model, was selected for the starting point in the LM method. Next, varying the initial phases (the arguments of periastron and the mean anomalies) of the two companions, with the step $`30^{}`$, we calculated the best fit solution with the LM algorithm. The results of this experiment are given in Fig. 1. This scan reveals that the best fit solution is localized in a flat minimum. Its parameters agree very well with the GA solution. This test confirmed that the GA fit is really global. Finally, we refined this fit by the LM algorithm, driven by the full model of the dynamics, incorporating the mutual gravitational interaction between the planets. The best GA fit was used as a starting point to the gradient search. The result is shown in Table 1, and named the LM1 fit. The synthetic RV curve is shown in Fig. 2.

To estimate the errors of this solution we used, at the first attempt, a method relying on a determination of the $`\chi ^2`$ confidence intervals Press et al. (1992). We were warned by the referees, that this method has drawbacks and the most relevant is that using it we do not account for the stellar “jitter”. Even for a chromospherically inactive HD 12661 star, the uncertainty, $`\sigma _{\text{jitter}}`$, contributed by the jitter to the RV measurements, can be relatively high. The referee, Gregory Laughlin, suggested to us using the estimate $`\sigma _{\text{jitter}}5`$ ms-1, based on the data by Saar et al. (1998). Actually, the observations have to be weighted by $`\sigma =\sqrt{\sigma _{\text{obs}}^2+\sigma _{\text{jitter}}^2}`$, where $`\sigma _{\text{obs}}`$ are “pure” instrumental errors. Such joint uncertainty, accounted for calculating $`\sqrt{\chi _\nu ^2}`$, leads to a value $`1`$, thus giving a statistical indication of an adequate model of the RV data. To estimate the parameters errors we synthesized about $`250`$ sets of “observations”. To every original RV measurement we added a Gaussian noise with the mean dispersion $`\sigma _\text{K}=3.4`$ ms-1, $`\sigma _\text{L}=7.6`$ ms-1 for observations gathered by Keck and Lick spectrometers, respectively, and the Gaussian noise of the stellar jitter, with the dispersion $`\sigma _{\text{jitter}}=5`$ ms-1. Next, the Newtonian model of dynamics was fitted to every such synthetic data set with the LM algorithm which started from the LM1 solution. The mean values of the fit parameters are given in Table 1, and called the LM2 fit. Finally, the dispersions of these orbital parameters are adopted as the mean uncertainties of both the LM1 and LM2 fits. In fact, both solutions are the same, with respect to the error bounds.

## 3 Stability analysis

To investigate the dynamical stability of the LM1 and LM2 fits we used the fast indicator called MEGNO. This technique was advocated by us in a series of recent papers, see, e.g, Goździewski et al. (2001); Goździewski (2003). The MEGNO indicator is closely related to the maximal Lyapunov exponent, but it permits to determine rapidly whether an initial condition leads to a regular, quasi-periodic or a chaotic, irregular solution. It is a very efficient tool that helps to detect orbital resonances, their structure, and unstable regions in the phase space. Looking at a neighborhood of the analyzed initial conditions is a profitable way of resolving the question whether the system dynamics are robust to the fit errors.

The MEGNO tests reveal that both the LM1 and LM2 fits are related to quasi-periodic motions of the HD12661 system. The MEGNO signature for the LM1 fit is shown in Fig. 4c and a perfect convergence of the temporal value of MEGNO to 2 indicates a quasi-periodic evolution of the planetary system. The MEGNO scan in the neighborhood of this fit, in the ($`a_\text{c},e_\text{c})`$-plane, is shown in the left panel of Fig. 3. Actually, both fits are located in a relatively extended stable zone, in a proximity of the the 6:1 MMR. The 6:1 MMR is separated about $`0.2`$ au from the 11:2 MMR, which has been considered, up to now, as the closest MMR neighboring the system in the phase space. The evolution of orbital elements in the LM1 fit is shown in Fig. 4a,b.

The stable zone of the 6:1 MMR is relatively very narrow in the range of small $`e_\text{c}`$. To illustrate its effect on the motion of the HD 12661 system we changed $`a_\text{c}`$ in the LM2 fit, from the nominal value $`2.78`$ au to $`2.745`$ au, still keeping it in the error bound. The MEGNO scan, in the ($`a_\text{c},e_\text{c})`$-plane, for such modified initial condition is shown in the right panel of Fig. 3, and the Jacobi elements are shown in Fig. 4d,e,f. Note that in both cases the SAR with the apsidal lines antialigned in the exact resonance is present, so the system still remains in the large libration island found by Lee & Peale (2003).

The scan in the $`(i,\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Omega })`$-plane, where $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Omega }=\mathrm{\Omega }_\text{c}\mathrm{\Omega }_\text{b}`$, is shown in Fig. 5, and it makes is possible to estimate the bounds on masses in the systems with the same $`i`$, in terms of regular and chaotic motions. For coplanar systems, the stable zone extends up to $`i25^{}`$, but also two islands about $`i10^{},18^{}`$ exist. Whether the system can survive during evolutionary time scales, in the chaotic regions, can be verified, in general, only by long-term integrations.

## Conclusions

The study of the RV observations of the HD 12661 star revealed fits which lead to significantly different dynamics when compared to the original solution published by Fischer et al. (2003). Combined genetic and gradient methods of optimization helped us to find a global minimum of $`\chi ^2`$ for the RV model that incorporates the mutual interactions between planets. A dynamical analysis shows that the new fits are related to a system close to the 6:1 MMR, and locked into a deep secular resonance with apsidal lines antialigned. The fits preclude the proximity of the 11:2 MMR, which has been suggested by the previously determined initial conditions. In the phase space, the system lies in a relatively extended zone of stable, quasi-periodic motions. The closeness of the HD 12661 system to the low-order 6:1 MMR adds a new inquiring case to the 3:1 MMR in the 55 Cnc system, the 7:3 MMR in the 47 UMa system, and the 5:2 MMR of Jupiter and Saturn. It is difficult to claim that the HD 12661 system is locked exactly in the 6:1 MMR, but our results suggest that very likely it is close to this resonance. Hopefully, the observational window of the HD 12661 will cover soon two orbital periods of the outer companion, and the updated set of measurements will help to refine the fits again.

The analysis of the RV data benefits from a global approach, similarly to the stability studies. For planetary systems with large, and not very distant planets, the effects of mutual interactions and a proper dynamical interpretation of the orbital fits are vital for understanding the dynamics and for resolving all the information hidden in the observations. Their analysis requires much care, because omitting even subtle factors can lead to quite a different interpretation of the same data set.

## Acknowledgments

We want to thank Dr. Gregory Laughlin and the anonymous Referee for invaluable remarks and comments that improved the manuscript. We are indebted to Zbroja for correcting the manuscript. Calculations in this paper were performed on the HYDRA computer-cluster, supported by the Polish Committee for Scientific Research, Grants No. 5P03D 006 20 and No. 2P03D 001 22. This work is supported by the Polish Committee for Scientific Research, Grant No. 2P03D 001 22.


format: text

text:
# Curvature force and dark energy

## 1 Introduction

An adequate description of the present Universe seems to require a cosmic substratum, which is characterized by a negative pressure . In particular observations of supernovae at high redshift strongly suggest that the Universe is accelerating its expansion . A possible explanation is the existence of a dominant component of dark energy, besides cold dark matter (pressureless). There exist a number of dark energy candidates, the best known being a cosmological constant and different quintessence scenarios (). Most of the latter rely on the dynamics of a minimally coupled scalar field. But also non-minimal “extended quintessence” models have been studied, which are characterized by an explicit coupling of the scalar field to the Ricci scalar . This additional coupling results in a richer dynamical structure of the theory, which has been used to search for scaling and tracker field solutions . A different type of non-minimal coupling is obtained from higher-order theories of gravity, which was shown to give rise to the concept of “curvature quintessence” . Geometric terms in fourth-order gravity are interpreted as effective quantities within general relativity such as “curvature pressure” and “curvature density”. Under certain conditions the curvature pressure may be sufficiently negative to generate a phase of accelerated expansion. This kind of modification of the gravitational action was previously used in connection with different problems, as for instance to avoid the initial singularity of homogeneous, isotropic universes .

A negative pressure may also be the consequence of self-interactions in gas models of the Universe . In particular, an “antifrictional” force, self-consistently exerted on the particles of the cosmic substratum, was shown to provide an alternative explanation for an accelerated expansion of the universe . This approach relies on the fact that the cosmological principle is compatible with the existence of a certain class of (hypothetical) microscopic one-particle forces, which manifest themselves as “source” terms in the macroscopic perfect-fluid balance equations. These sources can be mapped on an effective negative pressure of the cosmic medium. The energy-momentum tensor of the latter thus acquires an imperfect fluid structure. An advantage of this approach is the possibility to unify dark energy and dark matter, since just a single dark component has to be introduced to describe cosmological observations. However, a compelling microphysical explanation for antifrictional forces is still missing, as is the case for all other models.

The energy-momentum tensor of a non-minimally coupled scalar field has an imperfect fluid structure as well , which reduces to that of a perfect fluid in the limit of minimal coupling. This indicates that there might be a relation between imperfect fluid degrees of freedom and non-minimal coupling. Here we exploit the general idea of describing a non-minimal coupling within an imperfect fluid picture. We point out that effective antifrictional forces can be regarded as a specific non-minimal coupling of the cosmic gas to the Ricci scalar. Generally, a force that explicitly depends on curvature quantities describes a coupling of matter to the space-time curvature, which goes beyond Einstein’s theory. However, mapping the non-minimal interaction on an imperfect fluid degree of freedom admits a self-consistent treatment on the basis of general relativity. This may be seen as a gas dynamical counterpart to the non-minimal couplings of scalar fields or those of higher-order gravity theories. We emphasize that the present coupling represents a new type of curvature self-interaction of the cosmic medium, which cannot be reduced to just a mapping of the described scalar field approaches to a fluid description. The starting points are quite different. The non-minimal scalar field approaches start with a given interaction term and then look for suitable solutions for the cosmological dynamics. It is not clear from the outset which coupling could provide a “successful” solution.

Here, we use an inverse strategy. We design a (non-minimal) fluid interaction such that it results in the desired cosmic evolution. Designing the coupling to obtain a specific dynamics has already been used for interacting two-component models . We apply this idea to the case of a one-component fluid, which is self-consistently coupled to the Ricci scalar. As a characteristic feature of this approach, Hubble rate and deceleration parameter explicitly enter the microscopic dynamics, which gives rise to a self-consistent coupling of the latter to the gravitational field equations. We demonstrate this for a power-law behaviour of the scale factor, implying a specifically rolling tachyon field, for the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM model and for a (generalized) Chaplygin gas. All these cases may be understood as the result of specific curvature self-interactions in an otherwise pressureless gas.

A problem common to all unified models (dark energy and dark matter being the same component) is that a tiny, non-vanishing speed of sound can spoil the scenario by inducing acoustic oscillations of primordial, adiabatic fluctuations at late times . The fact that neither oscillations nor exponential instabilities are observed, at scales of galaxy clusters and below, puts severe constraints on the isentropic speed of sound in such models, i.e. $`c_\mathrm{s}^2<10^5`$ . In fact, this seems to exclude any perfect fluid model, which does not mimic a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM model. As a consequence, the Chaplygin gas, say, cannot be considered a realistic model of the cosmic substratum. One should be aware, however, that the mentioned limits are derived under the assumption of an equation of state $`P=P(\rho )`$, where $`P`$ is the total pressure and $`\rho `$ is the energy density. Since a general (dissipative) fluid has to be described by an equation of state of the type $`P=P(\rho ,s)`$, where $`s`$ is the (specific) entropy, it remains open whether or not these constraints apply in this more general case as well. The point is that dissipative processes in imperfect fluids give rise to entropy perturbations and we have $`c_\mathrm{s}^2\dot{P}/\dot{\rho }`$. This implies that a simple relation between the perturbations of pressure and energy density, which was used to obtain the constraints in , does not necessarily exist.

The paper is organized as follows. In section 2 we relate an effective, non-equilibrium type pressure to the Ricci scalar of a homogeneous and isotropic, spatially flat Universe. A gas dynamical motivation for this pressure as the result of a non-minimal curvature self-interaction is given in section 3. In section 4 the mentioned examples, a power-law behaviour, including a special case of a rolling tachyon, the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM model, and the Chaplygin gas are considered. A brief summary is given in section 5. Units are fixed by $`c=k_B=h=1`$.

## 2 Field equations and viscous pressure

The field equations for a homogeneous, isotropic, and spatially flat Universe filled by an imperfect fluid are

$$3H^2=8\pi G\rho ,\dot{H}=4\pi G\left(\rho +P\right),P=p+\mathrm{\Pi }.$$
(1)
Here, $`\rho `$ is the energy density seen by a comoving observer. The fluid four-velocity $`u^i`$ is normalized by $`u^iu_i=1`$. The Hubble rate is given by $`H=\dot{a}/a`$, where $`a`$ is the scale factor of the Robertson-Walker metric and a dot denotes a derivative with respect to cosmic time $`t`$. The pressure $`P`$ of the cosmic medium is assumed to be the sum of a kinetic part $`p>0`$ \[see Eq. (10) below\] and an additional contribution $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$. The derivation of the latter quantity from the type of self-interactions mentioned in the introduction is the main objective of the paper. We shall show that such a pressure appears as the result of an effective one-particle force $`F^i`$ of structure $`mF^i=B\left(Ep^i+m^2u^i\right)`$ \[see Eq. (13) below\], where $`m`$ is the mass of the gas particles, $`p^i`$ is their four momentum and $`Eu_ip^i`$ is the particle energy for a comoving (with the macroscopic four velocity) observer. The pressure $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ will directly be related to the force function $`B`$ \[see Eqs. (15) and (16) below\].

From the definition, $`q\ddot{a}/(aH^2)`$, of the deceleration parameter, one has

$$q=1\frac{\dot{H}}{H^2}.$$
(2)
For the special case of a constant $`q>1`$, we find

$$H=\frac{1}{\left(1+q\right)t},a(t)t^{\frac{1}{1+q}},$$
(3)
and

$$H=H_0,a(t)=a_0e^{H_0t},$$
(4)
for $`q=1`$. Often, an accelerated expansion of the Universe is traced back to a suitably designed scalar field potential. There exist other approaches, which imply a non-minimal coupling of a scalar field to the Ricci scalar .

Here, we obtain an accelerating expansion of the Universe within a fluid picture, due to a sufficiently large negative effective non-equilibrium pressure $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$. A conventional bulk viscous pressure of linear irreversible thermodynamics is inappropriate for this purpose, since it corresponds to a fluid configuration which is close to a fiducial equilibrium reference state such that the total pressure is positive. Non-standard self-interactions of the cosmic medium, however, have been considered as a potential mechanism to generate an accelerated expansion . In this paper we demonstrate how these interactions can be obtained as the result of a non-minimal coupling of the underlying gas dynamics to the space-time curvature. For this purpose it is convenient to solve Eqs. (1) with (2) for $`P/\rho `$, which yields

$$\frac{P}{\rho }=\frac{1}{3}\left(1+2q\right).$$
(5)
In general, $`q`$ is time-dependent. The ratio $`P/\rho `$ may be related to the Ricci scalar, which in a homogeneous, isotropic, and spatially flat Universe is given by

$$R=6\left(\frac{\ddot{a}}{a}+\frac{\dot{a}^2}{a^2}\right)=6\left(1q\right)H^2.$$
(6)
Therefore we may also write

$$\frac{P}{\rho }=\frac{1}{3}\left[\frac{R}{3H^2}1\right].$$
(7)
The simplest way of obtaining the latter relation is to combine the trace of Einstein’s equation, $`R=8\pi GT=8\pi G(\rho 3P)`$, with Friedmann’s equation, $`8\pi G\rho =3H^2`$. For the Einstein–de Sitter Universe one has $`at^{2/3}`$ and $`R=3H^2`$, equivalent to $`q=\frac{1}{2}`$, i.e. $`P=0`$. In the following we shall look for a mechanism that produces deviations from $`R=3H^2`$, leading to a negative pressure. From now on we focus on non-relativistic matter and set $`p=0`$, thus $`P=\mathrm{\Pi }`$. This is motivated by observations of the large scale structure, which suggest that a non-relativistic equation of state ($`p\rho `$) is required at the onset of structure formation and thereafter.

## 3 Kinetic theory and curvature self-interaction

Equation (7) shows that to have a non-vanishing dissipative pressure $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$, a departure from $`R=3H^2`$ is necessary. This comes about because $`R=3H^2`$ characterizes a perfect fluid Universe with the equation of state for dust. Before focusing on such departures, we recall that from a gas dynamical point of view a perfect fluid consists of particles with mass $`m`$, which move on geodesics according to

$$m\frac{\text{d}x^i}{\text{d}\tau }=p^i,\frac{\text{D}p^i}{\text{d}\tau }=0.$$
(8)
The parameter $`\tau `$ denotes the proper time. This corresponds to a Boltzmann equation for the one-particle distribution function $`f=f(x,p)`$ (see, e.g. ),

$$p^if,_i\mathrm{\Gamma }_{kl}^ip^kp^l\frac{f}{p^i}=C\left[f\right]\text{ , }$$
(9)
where $`C[f]`$ is Boltzmann’s collision integral. The latter describes elastic binary collisions between the particles. The second moment of the distribution function provides us with the energy-momentum tensor, which, in a spatially homogeneous and isotropic Universe, has necessarily a perfect fluid structure, i.e.

$$T^{ik}=\text{d}Pp^ip^kf(x,p)=\rho u^iu^k+ph^{ik},$$
(10)
where $`h^{ik}=g^{ik}+u^iu^k`$. The continuity equation $`\dot{\rho }+3H\left(\rho +p\right)=0`$ follows, with a pressure in the range $`0<p\rho /3`$. The special case of a dust universe is approached for $`p\rho `$, which is obtained for $`Tm`$, where $`T`$ is the fluid equilibrium temperature (). In particular, the kinetic pressure is always non-negative.

Our strategy now is the following. Under the assumption that a gaseous fluid description makes sense, we attribute the accelerated expansion of the Universe to the existence of a non-vanishing dynamical pressure $`P`$ in Eq. (7). We ask for a suitable modification of the above perfect fluid description, which might give rise to a negative pressure of a substantial amount. A natural option for such a modification consists of additional interparticle interactions, not taken into account by Boltzmann’s collision integral (e.g. inelastic interactions or many-particle effects). The currently unknown properties of dark energy (and dark matter as well) are then mapped onto non-standard interactions between the microscopic constituents of the fluid. That is, we shall look for those interactions that are able to reproduce the observed cosmological dynamics. This strategy resembles the more familiar scalar field approach according to which one tries to “explain” the dynamics of the Universe by designing a potential term in order to reproduce the given dynamics.

Following previous work , we introduce additional interactions, which cannot be reduced to elastic, binary collisions. There are specific interactions, which may be mapped onto a quantity $`F^i`$ such that the Boltzmann equation (9) is generalized to

$$p^if,_i\mathrm{\Gamma }_{kl}^ip^kp^l\frac{f}{p^i}+mF^i\frac{f}{p^i}=C\left[f\right].$$
(11)
The left-hand side of this equation can be regarded as

$$\frac{\text{d}f(x,p)}{\text{d}\tau }\frac{f}{x^i}\frac{\text{d}x^i}{\text{d}\tau }+\frac{f}{p^i}\frac{\text{d}p^i}{\text{d}\tau },$$

with

$$m\frac{\text{d}x^i}{\text{d}\tau }=p^i,\frac{\text{D}p^i}{\text{d}\tau }=F^i,$$
(12)
the equations of motion for gas particles moving under the influence of a force field $`F^i=F^i(x,p)`$. As a consequence, the particle motion is no longer geodesic. However, describing interactions in terms of a four-force raises the question of the extent to which such a procedure is consistent with the assumption of a spatially homogeneous and isotropic Universe.

To answer this question it is convenient to split the microscopic particle momentum according to $`p^i=Eu^i+\lambda e^i`$, where $`u^ie_i=0`$ and $`e^ie_i=1`$. Here, $`Ep^iu_i`$ is the particle energy as measured by an observer, comoving with the macroscopic four-velocity $`u^i`$. From $`p^ip_i=m^2`$ we have $`E^2=m^2+\lambda ^2`$. In general, the individual particles do not move with the mean velocity $`u^i`$. Apparently, homogeneous and isotropic models require a geodesic mean motion, but not necessarily a geodesic motion of the individual particles. To clarify the situation it is useful to introduce the particle velocity $`u_{\left(p\right)}^i`$, defined by $`p^imu_{(p)}^i`$, which is not necessarily geodesic, and to contrast it with the velocity $`u^i`$ of the geodesic mean motion. The particle velocity is also normalized by $`u_{\left(p\right)}^iu_{\left(p\right)i}=1`$.

In order to get an idea about the admissible forces, it seems suggestive to assume $`F^i`$ to be proportional to the difference $`u^iu_{\left(p\right)}^i`$, i.e. to start with an ansatz $`F^iu^iu_{\left(p\right)}^i`$. On the other hand, the relation $`F^ip_i=0`$ has to be satisfied. But the latter condition, together with the ansatz $`F^iu^iu_{\left(p\right)}^i`$, leads to $`E=m`$, the case that characterizes the mean motion with $`u_{\left(p\right)}^i=u^i`$, which is force-free. It follows that a non-vanishing force cannot simply be proportional to the difference between the macroscopic and the particle velocities. A more general ansatz is

$$\frac{F^i}{m}=Bu^iCu_{\left(p\right)}^i,$$

where the quantities $`B`$ and $`C`$ are not constants but should depend on the particle and fluid quantities in such a way that $`B=C`$ only for $`u_{\left(p\right)}^i=u^i`$ in order to guarantee that the mean motion remains force-free. With this ansatz we obtain

$$F^ip_i=0C=\frac{E}{m}B,$$

which indeed provides us with $`C=B`$ for $`E=m`$, equivalent to $`u_{\left(p\right)}^i=u^i`$. For the force we find under such conditions

$$mF^i=B\left(Ep^i+m^2u^i\right)=Bu^k\left(g_k^ip^mp_mp^ip_k\right).$$
(13)
The expression in the parenthesis on the right-hand side of the second equation coincides with the projector orthogonal to the particle momentum. In the special case $`p^i=mu^i`$, we have $`E=m`$ and the force consistently vanishes. A force of the type (13) makes the individual particles move on non-geodesic trajectories, while the macroscopic mean motion remains geodesic. This force, which was used in , is compatible with the cosmological principle. Now we have to investigate whether, and under which circumstances, a deviation from the geodesic motion of the microscopic constituents due to a force (13) may result in an effective negative pressure of the cosmic medium. In the following we shall restrict ourselves to the case where $`B`$ does not depend on $`E`$.

An interaction term in the Boltzmann equation gives rise to “source” terms in the balances of the moments. In particular, from the balance for the second moment of $`f`$ we obtain

$$\dot{\rho }+3H\left(\rho +p\right)=3B\left(\rho +p\right).$$
(14)
As before, $`\rho `$ and $`p`$ are defined by

$$\rho =u_iu_k\text{d}Pp^ip^kf(x,p)\mathrm{and}p=\frac{1}{3}h_{ik}\text{d}Pp^ip^kf(x,p),$$

respectively. With the definition

$$\mathrm{\Pi }HB\left(\rho +p\right),$$
(15)
the energy balance (14) becomes

$$\dot{\rho }+3H\left(\rho +p+\mathrm{\Pi }\right)=0.$$
(16)
This proves that, macroscopically, the action of the force manifests itself as a dissipative pressure. The reinterpretation of the right-hand side of Eq. (14) in terms of an effective pressure is crucial for our approach. It maps the source in the energy balance, which is a consequence of the additional interaction, onto an imperfect fluid degree of freedom of a conserved energy-momentum tensor $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}^{ik}=\rho u^iu^k+\left(p+\mathrm{\Pi }\right)h^{ik}`$. We emphasize that the quantity $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ does not coincide with the dissipative pressure of conventional, linear, irreversible fluid dynamics. The latter has its origin in Boltzmann’s collision integral and may provide only small corrections in $`p`$. Here, it is the force (13), which, via the identification (15), generates an effective pressure of an entirely different kind. There is no restriction of the type $`|\mathrm{\Pi }|<p`$, which is characteristic of conventional fluid dynamics.

In the following, we are interested in $`\mathrm{\Pi }0`$, equivalent to $`B0`$. We assume the cosmic substratum to be non-relativistic matter ($`p\rho `$). Then it follows from (15) that

$$\frac{P}{\rho }=\frac{B}{H}+𝒪\left(\frac{p}{\rho }\right).$$
(17)
This may be regarded as the effective equation of state of the cosmic medium. The quantity $`B`$, which determines the strength of the force, is directly related to the effective fluid pressure. This opens the possibility to establish an explicit relation between the force function $`B`$, which quantifies the microscopic interaction and the cosmological parameters. Namely, comparing the result (17) from kinetic theory for particles in a force field with Eq. (5) \[or (7)\], which is a consequence of the field equations (1), we may simply read off the fraction $`B/H`$ which is equivalent to a given value of the deceleration parameter, namely

$$\frac{B}{H}=\frac{1}{3}\left(12q\right)=\frac{1}{3}\left[\frac{R}{3H^2}1\right].$$
(18)
This relation is the key element of our approach. It relates the force function $`B`$ to the Hubble rate and to the deceleration parameter. Consequently, the effective one-particle force, which gives rise to a cosmological dynamics, characterized by a Hubble rate $`H`$ and a deceleration parameter $`q`$, is

$`mF^i`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{H}{3}}\left(12q\right)\left[Ep^i+m^2u^i\right]`$ (19)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{H}{3}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{R}{3H^2}}1\right]\left[Ep^i+m^2u^i\right].`$
This quantity depends on the microscopic particle momenta but also on the Hubble rate $`H`$ and the deceleration parameter $`q`$. Through the expression (19), the microscopic particle motion, governed by Eq. (12), is self-consistently coupled to the cosmological dynamics. The parameters $`H`$ and $`q`$ enter the microscopic dynamics and determine the effective fluid pressure $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$; in turn, via the field equations (1), $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ is coupled again to $`H`$ and $`q`$. According to Eqs. (5)–(7), the force is related to the Ricci scalar. It is proportional to the deviation from the flat dust Universe ($`R=3H^2`$). This force describes an interaction of the individual particle with a space-time curvature, which is determined by the ensemble of particles itself, i.e. it represents a curvature self-interaction. All the properties of a force of the type (13) remain valid in this case. In particular, this self-interaction is compatible with the cosmological principle. For any given $`H`$ and $`q`$ we may construct a force field that produces the desired dynamics. The described procedure, which relies on identifying the quantities (5) \[or (7)\] and (17), couples the gas dynamics self-consistently to the Ricci scalar, more precisely to the quantity $`R3H^2`$. In a sense, this may be regarded as a gas-dynamical counterpart to corresponding couplings of a scalar field to $`R`$.

Curvature forces are generally not admitted in Einstein’s theory since they represent a non-minimal coupling and violate the equivalence principle. Here, the mapping of the curvature interaction on an effective viscous pressure allows a treatment as an imperfect fluid within the framework of general relativity. We emphasize that our approach does not introduce new fundamental particles or fields and preserves Einstein gravity (the left-hand side of Einstein’s equations). It remains open, however, whether the force (19) represents a physical reality or just a phenomenological fit to some other underlying microphysics. One might also think of an interpretation according to which averaging the inhomogeneous matter configuration (see, e.g.,  for recent accounts) gives rise to a back-reaction on the homogeneous background dynamics, such that an epoch of accelerated expansion is induced by the process of structure formation . A force of this type, being the result of an averaging procedure on cosmological scales, would hardly be detectable in accelerator experiments.

The force (19) may be split into components parallel and perpendicular to the comoving velocity:

$$mu_iF^i=B(E^2m^2),me_iF^i=BE\sqrt{E^2m^2},$$
(20)
where

$$e^i\frac{1}{\sqrt{E^2m^2}}\left(p^iEu^i\right)$$
(21)
is the spatial direction of the particle momentum. In the non-relativistic limit, the spatial projection of the force becomes

$$e_iF^iBmv.$$
(22)
For $`q<1/2`$, the quantity $`B=\frac{1}{3}H(12q)`$ plays the role of a negative friction coefficient. This allows us to interpret the previously discussed cosmic antifriction  as the result of a non-minimal coupling of the gas dynamics to the Ricci scalar, equivalent to a specific curvature self-interaction of the cosmic medium.

## 4 Curvature force and accelerated expansion

So far, we have established a link between the dynamical pressure $`P\mathrm{\Pi }`$ and the coefficient of antifriction $`B`$, and we have shown that this antifriction can be interpreted as the result of a non-minimal coupling of matter to curvature. In order to study the dynamics for a model with given departure from the Einstein–de Sitter case, we have to integrate the equation

$$\frac{P}{\rho }=1\frac{2}{3}\frac{\dot{H}}{H^2}\frac{B}{H},$$
(23)
which follows from (5) and (17). To solve this equation, an assumption on $`B(H,\dot{H})`$ is necessary. Alternatively, one might start from an assumption on the deceleration parameter $`q`$ and $`B/H`$ from Eq. (18). It is convenient to express the Hubble rate as a function of redshift $`z=\left(a_0/a\right)1`$. With

$$\dot{H}=H^{}H(1+z),$$

where $`H^{}\text{d}H/\text{d}z`$, the resulting equation is

$$\frac{H^{}}{B+H}=\frac{3}{2(1+z)}.$$
(24)
### 4.1 Power-law expansion

The ansatz

$$B=\sigma \frac{\dot{H}}{H}\nu H$$

with constant, non-negative parameters $`\sigma `$ and $`\nu `$ leads to

$$H(z)=H_0(1+z)^{1+q},q=\frac{13(\sigma +\nu )}{2+3\sigma }.$$
(25)
This is nothing but a power-law expansion, $`at^n`$, with $`n=1/(1+q)`$. Since $`q`$ is the (constant) deceleration parameter, we consistently find that the exponent $`n`$ is larger than unity for any $`1<q<0`$, equivalent to the conditions $`3(\sigma +\nu )>1`$ and $`\nu <1`$. This is the simplest case of a self-consistent solution of the cosmological dynamics with curvature self-interaction. Any power $`1/(1+q)`$ corresponds to a specific force function $`B`$ \[cf. Eq. (18)\], with some degeneracy $`\sigma (\nu )`$ for a given $`q`$.

### 4.2 The rolling tachyon

String-theory-inspired tachyon matter was introduced by Sen , and its cosmological consequences as an alternative to a minimally coupled scalar field were explored in . A rolling tachyon field $`\phi `$ may lead to a power-law behaviour of the scale factor  similar to a scalar field with exponential potential . Tachyon matter, which is characterized by

$$\rho =\frac{V}{\sqrt{1\dot{\phi }^2}}\mathrm{and}P=V\sqrt{1\dot{\phi }^2},$$
(26)
has recently received some attention as a possible candidate for dark matter and/or dark energy. Here we demonstrate how the corresponding dynamics may be related to our present approach. Assuming $`\sigma =0`$, the relevant connection is established by

$$\nu =1\dot{\phi }^2.$$

Since $`\nu `$ is assumed to be constant, $`\dot{\phi }`$ has to be constant as well, which represents a special case of the tachyon dynamics, namely $`\ddot{\phi }=0`$ and $`3HV\dot{\phi }+\text{d}V/\text{d}\phi =0`$, the quantity $`V`$ being the tachyon potential. The corresponding Hubble rate is determined by

$$H^2=\frac{8\pi G}{3}\rho =H_0^2(1+z)^{3\dot{\phi }^2}.$$
(27)
It follows that

$$\dot{\rho }=3H\rho \dot{\phi }^2,$$
(28)
which implies

$$\frac{P}{\rho }=(1\dot{\phi }^2).$$
(29)
This is the general equation of state for tachyonic matter, here obtained for the special case $`\phi t`$ and $`V\phi ^2`$ , which, according to (22), corresponds to a force field with spatial projection

$$e_iF^i(1\dot{\phi }^2)Hmv.$$
(30)
As was pointed out in , the energy density $`\rho `$ and pressure $`P`$ of the tachyon field may be considered as the sum of two components according to

$$\rho =\rho _V+\rho _{\mathrm{DM}},P=p_V+p_{\mathrm{DM}},$$
(31)
where

$$\rho _{\mathrm{DM}}=\frac{V\dot{\phi }^2}{\sqrt{1\dot{\phi }^2}},p_{\mathrm{DM}}=0,$$
(32)
$$\rho _V=V\sqrt{1\dot{\phi }^2},p_V=\rho _V.$$
(33)
The first component behaves as a pressureless fluid, the second one has a negative pressure. The power $`n`$ (recall that $`at^n`$) is then related to the ratio $`\rho _V/\rho _{\mathrm{DM}}`$ by

$$n=\frac{1}{1+q}=\frac{2}{3}\frac{1}{1\nu }=\frac{2}{3}\left(1+\frac{\rho _V}{\rho _{\mathrm{DM}}}\right).$$
(34)
It follows that this dynamics is realized for a force with

$$B=\frac{\rho _V}{\rho }H.$$

### 4.3 The $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM model

A constant deceleration parameter $`q`$, equivalent to a constant ratio $`\mathrm{\Pi }/\rho `$, is not expected to provide a realistic description of the cosmological dynamics over a large range in redshift. Successful structure formation requires a period of decelerated, matter-dominated expansion of substantial length. Consistent with this requirement, the SNIa data suggest an onset of accelerated expansion at $`z1`$ . (Notice, however, that there are models that allow structure formation also during acceleration . In such a scenario the accelerated epoch could have started as early as $`z5`$ ). Therefore, a realistic model has to account for a transition from positive to negative values of the deceleration parameter. A simple choice which admits this kind of transition is $`|B|H^1`$, equivalent to the ansatz

$$\frac{B}{H}=\frac{1}{\mu +1}\frac{H_0^2}{H^2},$$
(35)
where $`\mu `$ is a constant. Integration of Eq. (24) with the ansatz (35) yields

$$H=H_0\left[\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{CDM}}(1+z)^3+\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }\right]^{1/2}$$
(36)
with $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{CDM}}=\mu /(\mu +1)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=1/(\mu +1)`$. For $`z1`$ we have $`H(1+z)^{3/2}`$, which is characteristic of a matter-dominated Universe. For the opposite case, $`z1`$, the Hubble rate approaches the constant value $`HH_0\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }^{1/2}`$. The Hubble rate (36) implies a transition from a matter-dominated Universe at $`z1`$ to a de Sitter universe as $`z1`$. It reproduces the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM model. The observationally favoured value is $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }0.7`$. One realizes by direct calculation that the Hubble rate (36) leads to

$$12q=3\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }}{\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{CDM}}\left(1+z\right)^3+\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }},$$
(37)
which is indeed consistent with the general relation (18). For large $`z`$, we have $`q1/2`$, while $`q1`$ for $`z1`$. Consequently, the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM model is equivalent to a non-relativistic gas in which a curvature force of the type (22) is self-consistently exerted on the individual particles. Any ratio $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }/\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{CDM}}`$ can be traced back to a specific curvature self-interaction of the medium. The explicit expression for the antifriction coefficient $`|B(z)|=(12q)H/3`$ in Eq. (22) is

$$|B(z)|=H_0\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }}{\left[\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{CDM}}\left(1+z\right)^3+\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }\right]^{1/2}}.$$
(38)
For $`z1`$ we have $`e_iF^i0`$, which corresponds to simple, non-interacting dust. For the opposite case $`z1`$ the force projection approaches $`e_iF^iH_0\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }^{1/2}mv`$, with the asymptotic Hubble rate \[cf. Eq. (36) for $`z1`$\] as curvature antifriction constant. In other words, the interaction is gradually switched on during the cosmic expansion.

In our approach, the ‘coincidence problem’, i.e. the question, why $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{CDM}}`$ happen to be of the same order today, is equivalent to the question: why is the cosmic force parameter $`|B(z)|`$ of the order of the Hubble rate just at the present epoch? There are tentative suggestions that the answer to this question might be related to the onset of the non-linear stage of the cosmic structure formation process .

### 4.4 The Chaplygin gas

A Chaplygin gas is defined by the equation of state (see  and references therein) $`P=A/\rho `$, where $`A`$ is a positive-definite constant. It can be generalized by putting an arbitrary power ($`\alpha >0`$)

$$P=\frac{A}{\rho ^\alpha }.$$
(39)
This equation has the appealing feature of providing a negative pressure and at the same time a speed of sound that remains real and positive. It is reminiscent of certain cases of string-driven inflation—see Eq. (2.7) of  with $`m<0`$. Support for this exotic fluid (with $`\alpha =1`$) can also be found in higher dimensional theories ; likewise Bento et al. showed that Eq. (39) can be derived from a Lagrangian of the Born–Infeld type . Integration of the continuity equation allows us to obtain the energy density

$$\rho =\left(A+\frac{D}{a^{3(1+\alpha )}}\right)^{1/(1+\alpha )},$$
(40)
where $`D`$ is a constant. For large values of $`a`$ the energy density becomes a cosmological constant. For small values of $`a`$ it behaves like matter. This property has recently made the Chaplygin gas an interesting candidate for a one-component model of the cosmic substratum . However, new observational constraints seem to restrict the parameter $`\alpha `$ to very small values () for which the Chaplygin gas becomes indistinguishable from the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM model.

Let us now show that in our curvature force approach the Chaplygin gas can be obtained with an ansatz $`B=\beta H^{2\alpha 1}`$, where $`\beta `$ is a non-negative constant. From Eq. (17) and the Friedmann equation, we may immediately read off that for a choice $`\beta =(8\pi G/3)^{(\alpha +1)}`$ we have

$$\frac{P}{\rho }\frac{B}{H}=\frac{A}{\rho ^{\alpha +1}}$$
(41)
and, consequently

$$B(z)=\left(\frac{8\pi G}{3}\right)^{\alpha +1}\frac{A}{H^{2\alpha +1}}.$$
(42)
Thus the generalized Chaplygin gas is equivalent to a force field with spatial projection (according to Eq. (22))

$$e_iF^i\left(\frac{8\pi G}{3}\right)^{\alpha +1}\frac{Amv}{H^{2\alpha +1}}.$$
(43)
We point out that the above relations for the Chaplygin gas (as well as those for the other examples given in this paper) rely on an assumption for the dependence $`B=B(H)`$ of the force function $`B`$ on the Hubble rate. Via Eq. (17) and the Friedmann equation, this is equivalent to an effective equation of state $`P=P(\rho )`$ (see the discussion in the introduction).

## 5 Conclusion

We have established a scheme that self-consistently relates the expansion behaviour of the Universe to curvature self-interactions in the cosmic gas. Assuming that a fluid picture is allowed for the description of the present Universe, we have constructed specific internal interactions, which may give rise to the observed cosmological evolution. The $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM model may be regarded as the consequence of a non-relativistic particle motion, which is non-minimally coupled to the Ricci scalar. This corresponds to a curvature force, equivalent to a negative friction, characterized by Eqs. (22) and (38). Alternative dark energy candidates such as a rolling tachyon (here with $`\varphi t`$ and $`V\varphi ^2`$) or a Chaplygin gas have been traced back to curvature interactions in a similar manner. The corresponding negative friction coefficients are given by Eqs. (30) and (43), respectively. We conclude that actually any cosmological model with given $`H(z)`$ and $`q(z)`$ may be interpreted on the basis of a gas model with a self-consistent coupling to the space-time curvature. The presented approach rather than introducing new particles or fields introduces a new effective coupling of gravity to matter. The required non-minimal interaction can be incorporated into general relativity. Whether the corresponding force is a physical reality or the consequence of a back-reaction due to an averaging procedure, or whether it just provides a phenomenological fit to some other underlying microphysics, remains open at this stage. However, contrasting the CMB anisotropies with a perturbation analysis to be performed elsewhere, is already likely to constrain the admissible interactions.
Acknowledgement
This study was supported by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, the Spanish Ministry of Science and Technology (Grant BFM 2000-0351-C03-01) and NATO grant PST. CLG.977973.


text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Dualities between gauge theories and string theories follow naturally from the discovery of branes. The Born Infeld action for the brane (like the Nambu-Goto string action) has a dual interpretation as either describing a brane embedded in a space-time or as a field theory living on the brane’s surface. The position of the brane in the bulk can equally be thought of as a scalar vacuum expectation value in the field theory. The first example of such a duality was the $`AdS`$/CFT Correspondence  which is a duality between the conformal $`N`$=4 super Yang Mills theory and IIB strings (supergravity) on five dimensional Anti-de-Sitter space cross a five sphere. The field theory’s global symmetries (an SO(2,4) superconformal symmetry and an SU(4)R symmetry) match to space-time symmetries of the $`AdS`$ space and the five sphere respectively. The supergravity fields enter the field theory in symmetry invariant ways and so appear as sources (eg masses) for field theory operators. The radial direction in $`AdS`$ has the conformal symmetry properties of an energy scale and has been interpreted as renormalization group scale. Thus the radial behaviour of the supergravity fields describes the RG flow of the field theory sources. Expectation values of operators in the field theory are obtained from derivatives with respect to these sources on the supergravity partition function. The need to take derivatives suggests the duality should hold in the presence of non-zero values for these sources. We should therefore be able to study all possible deformations of the $`N`$=4 super Yang Mills theory.

Techniques for introducing these deformations  and learning how to interpret them  have been developed over recent years. The cleanest example  involves the introduction of a vev for the six adjoint scalar fields ($`tr\varphi _i\varphi _j`$) by allowing a supergravity scalar field in the 20 representation of SU(4)R to be non-zero. Solutions of the five dimensional truncated supergravity theory can be found but to interpret these geometries they have been lifted to ten dimensions. In ten dimensions the solutions can, for example, be brane probed  and placed in appropriate coordinates where they become multi-centre D3 brane solutions. The original geometry was found from that around a stack of D3 branes whose surface theory is the $`N`$=4 gauge theory. Moving the branes apart, as in the multi-centre solutions, places the theory on its moduli space and provides a natural gravity dual in the presence of scalar vevs. The deformation program reproduced these geometries and therefore seems to work well!

Here we will describe an on going attempt  to describe a non-supersymmetric gauge theory using this technology. The four adjoint fermions of the supersymmetric theory will be made massive via a non-zero five dimensional supergravity field. The solution will be lifted to a complete ten dimensional solution. Brane probing then reveals the scalar potential and we will see that the fermion mass radiatively generates a bounded mass for the six scalar fields. The deep infra-red of this theory is therefore just a gauge field. The ultra-violet theory is still the strongly coupled and conformal $`N`$=4 theory. Since the UV is strongly coupled there will never be a complete decoupling of the massive matter fields from the dynamics. The goal is to find a theory with the generic properties of QCD and only time will tell how good it is as a numerical approximation. As a first step towards uncovering the physics encoded by the geometry we study the $`O^{++}`$ glueballs of the theory . The appropriate Schroedinger equation potential  is a bounded well (providing further evidence of the stability of the solution) and showing that there is both a mass gap and a discrete glueball spectrum. We determine the spectrum and compare to the results  from Witten’s thermal AdS-Schwarzchild geometry  and lattice simulations  of the non-supersymmetric spectrum. Remarkably the results agree at the 10$`\%`$ level suggesting this approach may become a useful tool in studying the non-supersymmetric theory.

## 2 The Deformation in Five Dimensions

We will introduce an equal mass for the four adjoint fermions of the $`N`$=4 theory via a five dimensional supergravity scalar in the 10 of SU(4)R. The appropriate scalar, $`\lambda `$, and its potential can be found in  ($`V=\frac{3}{2}\left[1+\mathrm{cosh}^2\lambda \right]`$) We look for solutions where $`\lambda `$ varies in the radial direction, $`r`$, of $`AdS`$ and the metric is described by

$$ds_{(1,4)}^2=e^{2A(r)}dx^\mu dx_\mu +dr^2$$
(1)
where $`\mu =\mathrm{0..3}`$.

The equation of motion for the scalar fields are

$$\lambda ^{^{\prime \prime }}+4A^{^{}}\lambda ^{^{}}=\frac{V}{\lambda },3A^{^{\prime \prime }}6A^{}_{}{}^{}2=\lambda ^{}_{}{}^{}2+2V$$
(2)
Asymptotically, where the geometry returns to $`AdS`$, the solutions are

$$\lambda =Me^r+Ke^{3r}$$
(3)
Corresponding to a mass and a vev for our fermionic operator.

Numerical solution of these equations are displayed in figure 1 for different asymptotic boundary conditions. The mass only flow is a unique flow - in the presence of any condensate the flows clearly diverge. Finding the final fate of the mass only flow numerically requires arbitrary fine tuning of the initial conditions. However, from figure 1 it seems likely the flow diverges in the very deep infra-red. The interpretation of such singularities remains open. For example the backgrounds describing $`N`$=4 SYM on moduli space are singular but those singularities are understood to correspond to the presence of D3 branes in the solution. In the $`N`$=2 theory  the singularities correspond to the divergence of the running gauge coupling. This latter case is the most likely explanation of the divergence here. We will see that a well defined glueball spectrum emerges from this geometry in spite of the divergence suggesting it is not a disaster!

Interpreting the five dimensional geometries has proven hard so we will move to the lift of the solution to ten dimensions.

## 3 The Ten Dimensional Lift

Lifting the five dimensional solutions to ten seems like a tough task but Pilch and Warner have made an ansatz  for the form of the metric and dilaton. The remaining ten dimensional forms can then be found from the equations of motion (after much work!). The lift is described in detail in  but here we will just present the results.

Asymptotically the scalar in the 10 lifts to a 3-form potential

$$A_{(2)}=2\lambda (i\mathrm{cos}^3\alpha \mathrm{cos}\theta _+d\theta _+d\varphi _+\mathrm{sin}^3\alpha \mathrm{cos}\theta _{}d\theta _{}d\varphi _{})$$
(4)
We have written the five-sphere as two 2-spheres ($`d\mathrm{\Omega }_\pm ^2=d\theta _\pm ^2+\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _\pm d\varphi _\pm ^2`$) and an angle $`\alpha `$ between them.

The full solution has all the ten dimensional fields switch on. The metric is given by

$$ds_{10}^2=(\xi _+\xi _{})^{\frac{1}{2}}ds_{1,4}^2+(\xi _+\xi _{})^{\frac{3}{2}}ds_5^2$$
(5)
$$ds_5^2=\xi _{}\mathrm{cos}^2\alpha d\mathrm{\Omega }_+^2+\xi _+\mathrm{sin}^2\alpha d\mathrm{\Omega }_{}^2+\xi _+\xi _{}d\alpha ^2$$
(6)
where the $`\xi _\pm `$ are given by

$$\xi _\pm =c^2\pm s^2\mathrm{cos}2\alpha ,c=\mathrm{cosh}\lambda ,s=\mathrm{sinh}\lambda $$
(7)
The dilaton is given, in unitary gauge, by the functions

$$f=\frac{1}{\xi ^{1/2}}\sqrt{\frac{\mathrm{cosh}^2\lambda +(\xi _+\xi _{})^{1/2}}{2}},B=\frac{\mathrm{sinh}^2\lambda \mathrm{cos}2\alpha }{\mathrm{cosh}^2\lambda +(\xi _+\xi _{})^{1/2}}$$
(8)
In the more usual language the axion-dilaton field is given by

$$C+ie^\mathrm{\Phi }=i\frac{(1B)}{(1+B)}$$
(9)
Thus for this solution the $`\theta `$ angle is switched off.

The two-form potential is given by

$$A_{(2)}=iA_+\mathrm{cos}^3\alpha \mathrm{cos}\theta _+d\theta _+d\varphi _+A_{}\mathrm{sin}^3\alpha \mathrm{cos}\theta _{}d\theta _{}d\varphi _{}$$
(10)
with

$$A_\pm =\mathrm{sinh}2\lambda /\xi _\pm $$
(11)
Finally the four-form potential lifts to

$$F_{(4)}=F+F,F=dx^0dx^1dx^2dx^3d\omega $$
(12)
where

$$\omega (r)=e^{4A(r)}A^{}(r)$$
(13)
## 4 Brane Probing

As a first exploration of this geometry we can place a probe D3 brane in the geometry. At leading order in $`1/N`$ we can neglect the back reaction of the probe on the geometry. Substituting the geometry into the Born Infeld action for the probe

$$S_{probe}=\tau _3__4d^4xdet[G_{ab}^{(E)}+2\pi \alpha ^{}e^{\mathrm{\Phi }/2}F_{ab}]^{1/2}+\mu _3__4C_4,$$
(14)
will reveal the field theory on the brane’s surface. We find a potential

$$V_{probe}=e^{4A}\left[\xi _+\xi _{}A^{^{}}\right]$$
(15)
It is illuminating to evaluate this potential at leading order in the ultra-violet with $`\lambda =Me^r`$, $`A=r`$, which gives

$$V=M^2e^{2r}+\mathrm{}$$
(16)
The field $`e^r`$ has conformal dimension 1 and should be identified with the scalar fields of the field theory. This term corresponds to an equal, bounded mass for the six scalars. This confirms field theory expectations that when supersymmetry is broken via the fermion mass the scalars will radiatively acquire a mass. It is also encouraging that the theory has a bounded potential.

## 5 The Glueball Spectrum

We can make an initial investigation of the infra-red properties of the gauge theory described by our geometry as follows. The $`O^{++}`$ glueballs of the theory have been identified  with excitations of the dilaton field of the form

$$\delta \mathrm{\Phi }=\psi (r)e^{ikx},k^2=M^2$$
(17)
This deformation must be a solution of the 5d dilaton field equation $`_\mu (\sqrt{g}g^{\mu \nu }_\nu )\delta \mathrm{\Phi }=0`$. If we make the change of coordinates  ($`rz`$) such that

$$\frac{dz}{dr}=e^{2A},\psi e^{3A/2}\psi $$
(18)
Then the dilaton field equation takes a Schroedinger form

$$(_z^2+V(z))\psi (z)=M^2\psi (z)$$
(19)
where

$$V=\frac{3}{2}A^{^{\prime \prime }}+\frac{9}{4}(A^{^{}})^2$$
(20)
Solving the equations of motion in these coordinates and tuning onto the mass only solution produces the well potential shown in figure 2 . Note that if any condensate is present the

well becomes unstable at large $`z`$. In the massive case the potential well shows us that there is a mass gap and a discrete glueball spectrum. The gauge theory dual is confining in the infra-red.

The glueball spectrum can be obtain using the numerical shooting technique and the three lowest energy solutions are shown in figure 2. We therefore have predictions for the lightest $`O^{++}`$ glueball states, shown in table 1. The lightest state’s mass is not a prediction but can be used to fix the value of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{QCD}`$ \- we normalize it to the lattice results discussed below. It is interesting to compare to other computations of these masses. Witten  found a high temperature deformation of the gravity dual of the field theory on the surface of an M5 brane which is expected at low energies to describe 4 dimensional non-supersymmetric Yang Mills theory (but in the UV has many extra adjoint matter fields and lives in 6 dimensions). Similar techniques were used to determine the predicted glueball masses  and are shown in Table 1. They match remarkably well with our results suggesting that the high energy completion of the theory is relatively unimportant. We also display the limited lattice results in non-supersymmetric Yang Mills in the table and again the agreement is at the 10$`\%`$ level although we only have the one excited state result for comparison.

|  | YM | AdS-Schwarz | Lattice |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| O++ | 1.6 (input) | 1.6 (input) | $`1.6\pm 0.15`$ |
| O++∗ | 2.4 | 2.6 | $`2.48\pm 0.23`$ |
| O++∗∗ | 3.1 | 3.5 | ? |

Table 1: Glueball mass predictions from the $`AdS`$/CFT Correspondence and lattice calculations.

Encouragingly the Yang Mills gravity dual appears to encode much of the physics we would expect of non-supersymmetric Yang Mills theory. The obvious next challenge is to include quark fields which we are currently working on.

## 6 Acknowledgements

DEC is grateful to PPARC for the support of a studentship. NE is grateful to PPARC for the support of an Advanced Fellowship.