format: text

text:
# Effective equations in quantum cosmology

## 1. Introduction

This paper is a sequel to the previous work  on quantum dynamics of the early Universe starting from initial conditions inspired by quantum cosmology. These initial conditions, encoded in the no-boundary  and tunneling  quantum states, can be a source of the inflationary scenario at the low (typically GUT) energy scale , compatible with the observational status of inflation theory. In  the initial conditions were found as a sharp peak in the probability distribution of the quantum scalar field whose expectation value simulates the effective Hubble constant and drives inflation. The parameters of this peak – its location and quantum width – are suppressed relative to the Planckian values by a small factor coinciding with the magnitude of the CMBR anisotropy, $`\mathrm{\Delta }T/T10^5`$, according to normalization on COBE . In  these results were extended to the open model based on the Hawking-Turok instanton .

Although, apriori these features make this model attractive, serious objections usually arise regarding the present day status of initial conditions in cosmology. Their issue in inflation theory is a subject of strong debate in current literature  and numerous meetings on structure formation of the Universe. The possibility of quantum cosmological imprint on the observational data was called in question either from the viewpoint of the self-reproducing inflation scenario  or from the viewpoints of the eternal inflation  and anthropic principle . However, these objections become legitimate only when the conditions of self-reproduction and eternal inflation or the dominance of anthropic probabilities are guaranteed. In their turn, the realization of these conditions depends on cosmological state. Typically, they require the initial Planckian energy scale, a very long duration of the inflationary epoch, etc., and as a rule go beyond the scope of reliable perturbative methods. The model of  avoids all these aspects, because it represents maybe the first example of the low-energy phenomenon of the quantum birth of the Universe. Thus, it is likely to be a reasonable candidate for the cosmological quantum state deserving further studies.

The dynamical consequences of the probability peak in the distribution of the inflaton were first studied at the level of classical equations . Then they were reexamined at the level of effective equations for quantum expectation values of fields . However, the analyses of  was not complete – the quantum contribution to effective equations included all the modes except the main spatially homogeneous mode related to quantum fluctuations of the inflaton field itself. This is the main spatially global degree of freedom in cosmology. It is responsible for the quantum fluctuations of the homogeneous (minisuperspace) background on top of which all the other inhomogeneous modes dynamically evolve.

As was understood in , the contribution of this mode requires the calculational technique different from the technique for inhomogeneous modes. The latter is strongly facilitated by the method of Euclidean effective action which is based on specific properties of their quantum state on the quasi-DeSitter background – Euclidean DeSitter invariant vacuum . On the contrary, the quantum state of the inflaton is irrelevant to this vacuum and its contribution cannot be obtained by the analytic continuation from the Euclidean effective action. Rather, this state is determined by the peak of the inflaton probability distribution and can be approximated by the gaussian packet. Direct quantum averaging with respect to this packet is required for obtaining the contribution of the inflaton mode to effective equations. This step, however, should be preceded by several other calculational steps involving the Hamiltonian reduction to the physical sector, setting the quantum Cauchy problem in the minisuperspace sector of the system, etc. Thus, the goal of the present paper is to pose the quantum Cauchy problem in cosmology for the no-boundary and tunneling quantum states, derive the one-loop contribution of the homogeneous mode to effective equations and analyze its influence on the inflationary dynamics.

One of particular questions, to be clarified in this work, is to what an extent this contribution can change the conclusions of our previous papers . In the spatially closed model with the no-boundary and tunneling cosmological states these conclusions were pretty stringent. The no-boundary quantum state can give rise only to the eternally long inflation, while the finite inflation stage with the conventional exit to the matter-dominated Universe exists only for the tunneling state111In open cosmology based on the Hawking-Turok instanton  the initial conditions for finite inflation stage can be realized for the no-boundary state , but the models of  with all their merits and disadvantages go beyond the scope of this paper.. These conclusions give an undoubtful preference to the tunneling state from the viewpoint of the observational cosmology, but, at the fundamental level, the tunneling state has an intrinsic problem if one goes beyond the tree-level approximation222Point is that the classical Euclidean action enters the exponential of the tunneling wavefunction with the “wrong” sign – opposite to that of the loop corrections . This mismatch invalidates the conventional renormalization procedure of absorbing the ultraviolet divergences into the redefinition of classical coupling constants . This inconsistency does not break the results of  (heavily relying on loop effects) for accidental reasons – renormalization ambiguous part of the distribution function in the slow roll approximation factors out as an inert overall normalization. However, it shows up beyond this approximation and, thus, persists at the fundamental level.. So, there is a hope that the inclusion of quantum fluctuations in the minisuperspace sector can render the no-boundary state viable from the viewpoint of the inflationary cosmology. Unfortunately, as we shall see, this hope does not realize – the effect of this mode turns out to be too small. This result, however, is model dependent, and the application of the general framework of this paper might lead to other conclusions in alternative models with well-defined quantum states of the inflaton.

It should be emphasized, that despite intensive studies on the inflationary dynamics, the quantum nature of the homogeneous inflaton mode has not yet been completely understood. This mode is peculiar because of its ghost nature – its kinetic term enters the action with the wrong sign. This fact was emphasized in , but its cosmological consequences have not yet properly been examined. There is a viewpoint that this mode should at all be excluded from the quantum perturbations spectrum on the physical grounds that it is always beyond the horizon and not directly observable . This approach can hardly be justified, because this mode is in some sense the most fundamental one, for it determines the homogeneous background on top of which all observable perturbations are unraveling. The energy of this quantum mechanical mode in view of its ghost nature is not positive definite, and it leads to peculiar back reaction phenomena which we are going to discuss here. Despite their actual small magnitude in our model, in other cases they might essentially contribute to the cosmological evolution. As we shall see, quantum fluctuations of the homogeneous inflaton have the equation of state $`p+\epsilon =0`$ and, thus, it can even be a candidate for the present day cosmological constant, instead of quintessence. This is one more motivation for our studies.

The organization of the paper is as follows. In Sect. 2 we briefly recapitulate the results of  for the model with a big negative non-minimal coupling of the inflaton, $`\xi R\phi ^2/2`$, $`\xi =|\xi |1`$, having a quasi-quartic potential $`V(\phi )=\lambda \phi ^4/4+\mathrm{}`$. We formulate the mechanism of one-loop radiative corrections due to which the inflaton distribution acquires a sharp peak. This peak gives rise to initial conditions for inflation and quantum fluctuations contributing to the radiation currents – quantum terms in the effective equations. In Sect. 3 we reveal the general structure of these currents and their gauge invariance properties. In particular, their decomposition into the contributions of two sectors is presented: the quantum mechanical sector of the homogeneous inflaton and the field-theoretical sector of inhomogeneous modes. The Euclidean effective action method is formulated for

the calculation of the latter, while the former is supposed to be obtained by direct quantum averaging with respect to the peak-like wavefunction of the inflaton. In Sect. 4 we go over to the generic model with minimally coupled inflaton. For this model we pose the Cauchy problem for the classical solution – the tree-level approximation for expectation values. We perform quantum reduction of the wavefunction from minisuperspace (of the scale factor and inflaton) to the physical subspace, the latter playing the role of the Cauchy surface in minisuperspace at which quantum initial conditions are posed. For the no-boundary and tunneling wavefunctions this subspace is chosen as a domain corresponding to the nucleation of the Lorentzian quasi-DeSitter spacetime from the Euclidean one. In Sect. 5 a similar quantum Cauchy problem is posed for cosmological perturbations. Their physical reduction is briefly presented along the lines of . Perturbations of minisuperspace variables – scale factor, lapse and inflaton – are expressed in the Newton gauge in terms of the invariant physical variables of . The latter, in their turn, are found as operators in the representation of the physical wavefunction on the Cauchy surface of the above type. In Sect. 6 we get back to the non-minimal model of Sect. 2 and discuss its reparametrization to the Einstein frame which allows one to transform its quantum Cauchy problem to that of the minimal model of Sects. 4 - 5. We also describe here the calculation of radiation currents and derive the expression for the rolling force in the effective inflaton equation. Sects. 7 and 8 present the resulting effects respectively at the beginning of inflation and at late steady inflationary stage. Concluding section contains a brief summary of results and prospective implications of its technique.

## 2. Quantum origin of the Universe as a low-energy phenomenon

The starting point of our considerations is the assumption that quantum cosmology can give initial conditions for inflation, which in their turn determine main cosmological parameters of the observable Universe, including the density parameter $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$. The requirement of $`\mathrm{\Omega }>1`$ in closed cosmology gives the bound on the e-folding number $`N`$ – the logarithmic expansion coefficient for the scale factor $`a`$ during the inflation stage with a Hubble constant $`H=\dot{a}/a`$,

$`N={\displaystyle _0^{t_F}}𝑑tH`$ (2.1)
(with $`t=0`$ and $`t_F`$ denoting the beginning and the end of inflation epoch). This bound reads $`N60`$ . On the other hand, the value of $`N`$ is directly related to the initial conditions for inflation – initial value of the inflaton, $`\phi _I`$,

$`N{\displaystyle _0^{\phi _I}}𝑑\phi {\displaystyle \frac{H(\phi )}{\dot{\phi }}}.`$ (2.2)
In the chaotic inflation model the effective Hubble constant $`H=H(\phi )`$ is generated by the inflaton and, therefore, all the parameters of the inflationary epoch can be found as functions of $`\phi _I`$. This initial condition belongs to the quantum domain, i.e. it is subject to the quantum distribution following from the cosmological wavefunction. If this distribution has a sharp probability peak at certain $`\phi =\phi _I`$, then this value serves as the initial condition for inflation.

There are two known quantum states that lead in the semiclassical regime to the closed inflationary Universe – the no-boundary  and tunneling  wavefunctions. They both describe quantum nucleation of the Lorentzian quasi-DeSitter spacetime from the Euclidean (positive signature) hemisphere – the gravitational instanton responsible for the classically forbidden state of the gravitational field. In the tree-level approximation they generate the distribution functions

$`\rho _{NB,T}^{\mathrm{tree}}(\phi )\mathrm{exp}\left[I(\phi )\right],`$ (2.3)
where $`I(\phi )`$ is the Euclidean action of this instanton with the inflaton $`\phi `$. These functions are unnormalizable in the high-energy domain $`\phi \mathrm{}`$ and generally devoid of the observationally justified probability peaks. However, by including quantum loop effects and applying the theory to a particular model with strong non-minimal curvature coupling of the inflaton one can qualitatively change the situation – generate a sharp probability peak at GUT energy scale satisfying the above bound on $`N`$ . The basic formalism underlying this result is as follows.

Beyond the tree level the distribution $`\rho _{NB,T}(\phi )`$ is not just the square of the cosmological wavefunction (2.3). It becomes the diagonal element of the reduced density matrix obtained by tracing out all degrees of freedom but $`\phi `$. As shown in  in the one-loop approximation it reads

$`\rho _{\mathrm{NB},\mathrm{T}}(\phi )\mathrm{exp}[I(\phi )𝚪_{1\mathrm{loop}}(\phi )],`$ (2.4)
where the classical action is amended by the Euclidean effective action $`𝚪_{1\mathrm{loop}}(\phi )`$ of all quantum fields that are integrated out. This action is calculated on the same instanton, and its contribution can qualitatively change predictions of the tree-level theory due to the logarithmic scaling behavior of $`𝚪(\phi )`$. On the instanton of the size $`1/H(\phi )`$ it looks like $`𝚪(\phi )Z\mathrm{ln}H(\phi )`$, where $`Z`$ is the total anomalous scaling of all quantum fields in the model.

The model of  has the graviton-inflaton sector with a big negative constant $`\xi =|\xi |1`$ of nonminimal curvature coupling,

$$S[g_{\mu \nu },\phi ]=d^4xg^{1/2}\left(\frac{m_P^2}{16\pi }R(g_{\mu \nu })\frac{1}{2}\xi \phi ^2R(g_{\mu \nu })\frac{1}{2}(\phi )^2\frac{1}{2}m^2\phi ^2\frac{\lambda }{4}\phi ^4\right),$$
(2.5)
and generic GUT sector of Higgs $`\chi `$, vector gauge $`A_\mu `$ and spinor fields $`\psi `$ coupled to the inflaton via the interaction term

$`S_{\mathrm{int}}={\displaystyle d^4xg^{1/2}\left(\underset{\chi }{}\frac{\lambda _\chi }{4}\chi ^2\phi ^2+\underset{A}{}\frac{1}{2}g_A^2A_\mu ^2\phi ^2+\underset{\psi }{}f_\psi \phi \overline{\psi }\psi +\mathrm{derivative}\mathrm{coupling}\right)}.`$ (2.6)
This model is of a particular interest for a number of reasons. Firstly, from the phenomenological viewpoint a strong nonminimal coupling allows one to solve the problem of exceedingly small $`\lambda `$ (because here the observable magnitude of CMBR anisotropy $`\mathrm{\Delta }T/T10^5`$ is proportional to the ratio $`\sqrt{\lambda }/|\xi |`$ ). Secondly, this coupling is inevitable from the viewpoint of renormalization theory. Also, among recent implications, it might be important in the theory of an accelerating Universe . Finally, for a wide class of GUT-type particle physics sectors this model generates a sharp probability peak in $`\rho _{\mathrm{NB},\mathrm{T}}(\phi )`$ at some $`\phi =\phi _I`$. This peak belongs to the GUT energy scale – the corresponding effective Hubble constant, $`H(\phi _I)=\sqrt{\lambda /12|\xi |}\phi _I`$, is proportional to $`m_P\sqrt{\lambda }/|\xi |10^5m_P`$. This, in its turn, justifies the use of GUT for matter part of the model, because this scale is much below the supersymmetry and string theory scales.

The mechanism of this peak is based on a large value of $`|\xi |`$ and the interaction (2.6) which induces via the Higgs effect large masses of all the particles directly coupled the inflaton. Due to this effect the parameter $`Z`$ (dominated by terms quartic in particle masses) is quadratic in $`|\xi |`$, $`Z=6|\xi |^2𝑨/\lambda `$, with a universal combination of the coupling constants from (2.6)

$`𝑨={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\lambda }}\left({\displaystyle \underset{\chi }{}}\lambda _\chi ^2+16{\displaystyle \underset{A}{}}g_A^416{\displaystyle \underset{\psi }{}}f_\psi ^4\right).`$ (2.7)
Therefore, the probability peak in this model reduces to the extremum of the function

$`\mathrm{ln}\rho _{NB,T}(\phi )\mathrm{const}\pm {\displaystyle \frac{24\pi (1+\delta )|\xi |}{\lambda }}{\displaystyle \frac{m_P^2}{\phi ^2}}3{\displaystyle \frac{|\xi |^2}{\lambda }}𝑨\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{\phi ^2}{\mu ^2}}+O\left({\displaystyle \frac{m_P^4}{\phi ^4}}\right).`$ (2.8)
Here the $`\phi `$-dependent part of the classical instanton action is taken in the lowest order of the slow roll smallness parameter, $`m_P^2/|\xi |\phi ^21`$, renormalization ambiguous parameter $`\mu `$ enters only the overall normalization of $`\rho _{\mathrm{NB},\mathrm{T}}(\phi )`$ and

$`\delta {\displaystyle \frac{8\pi |\xi |m^2}{\lambda m_P^2}}.`$ (2.9)
For the no-boundary and tunneling states the peak exists for positive $`𝑨`$ and respectively negative and positive values of $`1+\delta `$, $`\pm (1+\delta )<0`$. The parameters of this peak – mean values of the inflaton and Hubble constants and the quantum width $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$,

$`\phi _I=m_P\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{8\pi |1+\delta |}{|\xi |𝑨}}},H(\phi _I)=m_P{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{\lambda }}{|\xi |}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{2\pi |1+\delta |}{3𝑨}}},`$ (2.10)
$`\mathrm{\Delta }={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{12𝑨}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{\lambda }}{|\xi |}}\phi _I,`$ (2.11)
are strongly suppresed by a small ratio $`\sqrt{\lambda }/|\xi |`$ known from the COBE normalization for $`\mathrm{\Delta }T/T10^5`$ . Because of small width the distribution function can be approximated by the gaussian packet

$`\rho _{NB,T}(\phi ){\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{\Delta }\sqrt{2\pi }}}\mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{(\phi \phi _I)^2}{2\mathrm{\Delta }^2}}\right].`$ (2.12)
The value of the parameter (2.9) is crucial for the inflationary evolution from this gaussian peak. The classical equations of motion in the slow roll approximation,

$`\ddot{\phi }+3H\dot{\phi }F(\phi )=0,`$ (2.13)
$`H(\phi )\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda }{12|\xi |}}}\phi ,F(\phi ){\displaystyle \frac{\lambda m_P^2(1+\delta )}{48\pi \xi ^2}}\phi ,`$ (2.14)
show that the inflaton decreases from its initial value, $`\dot{\phi }F/H<0`$, only for $`1+\delta >0`$, that is only for the tunneling state (minus sign in (2.8)). Only in this case the duration of the inflationary epoch is finite with the e-folding number (2.2)

$`N{\displaystyle \frac{6\pi |\xi |\phi _I^2}{m_P^2(1+\delta )}}={\displaystyle \frac{48\pi ^2}{𝑨}}.`$ (2.15)
Comparison with $`N60`$ immediately yields the bound $`𝑨5.5`$ which can be regarded as a selection criterion for particle physics models . This conclusion remains qualitatively true when taking into account the contribution of the inhomogeneous quantum modes to the radiation current of the effective equations . This contribution and its dynamical effect were obtained in  by the method of the Euclidean effective action, however, the quantum fluctuations of the inflaton field itself have not been taken into account.

For the proponents of the no-boundary quantum states in a long debate on the wavefunction discord  this situation might seem unacceptable. According to this result the no-boundary proposal does not generate realistic inflationary scenario, while the tunneling state does not satisfy important aesthetic criterion – the universal formulation of the initial conditions and dynamical aspects in one concept – spacetime covariant path integral over geometries333The Lorentzian path integral for the tunneling state of  also requires, in this respect, extension beyond minisuperspace level, development of the semiclassical expansion technique, etc., not to say about intrinsic inconsistency mentioned in Introduction. Thus, one of the motivations of considering the quantum mechanical sector of the inflaton mode is the hope that it can handle this difficulty. In view of the smallness of the quantum width (2.11) the quantum fluctuations $`\mathrm{\Delta }\phi \mathrm{\Delta }`$ are expected to be negligible, but those of their quantum momenta $`\mathrm{\Delta }p_\phi 1/\mathrm{\Delta }`$ blow up for small $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$. Therefore, apriori, it is hard to predict the overall magnitude of the quantum rolling force and its sign due to $`\mathrm{\Delta }\phi (t)`$. In what follows we carefully consider this problem.

## 3. Effective equations: setting the problem

Effective equations for expectation values of operators in the quantum state $`|𝚿>`$,

$`g(x)=<𝚿|\widehat{g}(x)|𝚿>,`$ (3.1)
$`\widehat{g}(x)=\widehat{\phi }(x),\widehat{\chi }(x),\widehat{\psi }(x),\widehat{A}_\mu (x),\widehat{g}_{\mu \nu }(x),\mathrm{},`$ (3.2)
can be obtained by expanding the Heisenberg equations of motion, $`\delta S[\widehat{g}]/\delta \widehat{g}(x)=0`$, for the full quantum field $`\widehat{g}(x)=g(x)+\mathrm{\Delta }\widehat{g}(x)`$ in powers of quantum disturbances $`\mathrm{\Delta }\widehat{g}(x)`$

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\delta S[g]}{\delta g(x)}}+{\displaystyle 𝑑y\frac{\delta ^2S[g]}{\delta g(x)\delta g(y)}\mathrm{\Delta }\widehat{g}(y)}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle 𝑑y𝑑z\frac{\delta ^3S[g]}{\delta g(x)\delta g(y)\delta g(z)}\mathrm{\Delta }\widehat{g}(y)\mathrm{\Delta }\widehat{g}(z)}+\mathrm{}=0,`$ (3.3)
and averaging them with respect to $`|𝚿>`$. The linear in $`\mathrm{\Delta }\widehat{g}(x)`$ term identically drops out of this expansion, because $`<\mathrm{\Delta }\widehat{g}(x)>0`$, and the effective equations acquire a generic form

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\delta S[g]}{\delta g(x)}}+J(x)=0.`$ (3.4)
Here $`S[g]`$ is the classical action of the system, and the radiation current $`J(x)`$ accumulates all quantum corrections which begin with the one-loop contribution

$`J(x)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle 𝑑y𝑑z\frac{\delta ^3S[g]}{\delta g(x)\delta g(y)\delta g(z)}G(z,y)}+\mathrm{}.`$ (3.5)
The Wightman function of quantum disturbances $`G(z,y)`$ in a given quantum state $`|𝚿>`$

$`G(z,y)=<𝚿|\mathrm{\Delta }\widehat{g}(z)\mathrm{\Delta }\widehat{g}(y)|𝚿>,`$ (3.6)
$`\mathrm{\Delta }\widehat{g}(y)\widehat{g}(y)g(y),`$ (3.7)
can be found by iterations as a loop expansion in powers of $`\mathrm{}`$. Because semiclassically $`\mathrm{\Delta }\widehat{g}=O(\mathrm{}^{1/2})`$ and $`J(x)=O(\mathrm{})`$, it follows from the equations (3.3) and (3.4) that the linear in $`\mathrm{\Delta }\widehat{g}`$ term of (3.3) is at least linear in $`\mathrm{}`$. Therefore, in the one-loop approximation the quantum perturbation $`\mathrm{\Delta }\widehat{g}(y)`$ can be identified with the solution of the linearized classical equation on the mean-field background

$`{\displaystyle 𝑑y\frac{\delta ^2S[g]}{\delta g(x)\delta g(y)}\mathrm{\Delta }\widehat{g}(y)}=0.`$ (3.8)
Its solution can be parametrized by the operator-valued initial conditions. Depending on the representation of the initial state $`|𝚿>`$, they can be either the creation-annihilation operators, or operators of initial fields and their conjugated momenta, so that quantum averaging in (3.6) becomes straightforward. Continuing this procedure by iterations one can obtain the radiation current in any loop order as a complicated but, in principle, calculable functional of the mean field.

Alternatively to (3.5)-(3.6), the one-loop radiation current can be written as

$`J^{1\mathrm{loop}}(x)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\delta S[\widehat{g}]}{\delta \widehat{g}(x)}}\right]_2,`$ (3.9)
where $`\left[\mathrm{}\right]_2`$ denotes the quadratic part of the quantity expanded in powers of disturbances $`\mathrm{\Delta }\widehat{g}`$ that solve linearized classical equations, and $`<\mathrm{}>`$ implies the quantum averaging with respect to $`|𝚿>`$.

For the cosmological system this simple perturbative scheme should, however, be amended by two important aspects. One of them reflects the local gauge (general coordinate) invariance of the problem and the other deals with disentangling the collective variables. The latter describes the most important (minisuperspace) cosmological degrees of freedom having non-trivial expectation values. In the next two sections we consider these two aspects of the problem.

### 3.1. Gauge properties of the radiation current

In view of local general coordinate and other gauge invariances, fields and their perturbations contain purely gauge variables that should be gauged away. Thus, the physical sector should be disentangled from the full configuration space of the system and the physical state should be prescribed on this physical sector. This is the general scheme of the reduced phase space quantization . For describing this scheme in application to perturbative radiation currents we simplify the formalism by using condensed notations for the full set of fields (3.1), $`g^a=g(x)`$, in which the condensed index $`a`$ includes both discrete spin labels and spacetime coordinates $`x`$. Contraction of these indices implies also the spacetime integration. In these notations, the invariance of the action $`S[g]`$ under local gauge transformations, $`g^ag^a+R_\mu ^af^\mu `$, with infinitesimal gauge parameters $`f^\mu `$ (the condensed index $`\mu `$ bearing together with discrete tensor labels spacetime arguments of the local function $`f^\mu =f(x)`$) reads

$`R_\mu ^a{\displaystyle \frac{\delta S}{\delta g^a}}=0.`$ (3.10)
Here, $`R_\mu ^a`$ is a generator of the gauge transformation – the quasilocal two-point kernel with respect to spacetime coordinates associated with condensed labels $`a`$ and $`\mu `$.

A gauge breaking procedure – a part of the physical reduction – can be enforced by adding to the classical action the gauge-breaking term and, in the quantum domain – for Heisenberg equations – by including the action of Faddeev-Popov ghosts. Then the derivation of effective equations repeats the perturbative scheme of the above type with gauge-breaking and ghost terms included into the full action. However, for the purpose of physical reduction gauge conditions should be unitary, that is transforming under gauge transformations locally in time (not involving time derivatives of the gauge parameters $`f^\mu `$). In such a gauge the ghosts are not propagating, and the ghost action can be omitted from the total quantum system. As a result, the one-loop effective equations again take the form (3.4) with the same radiation current

$`J_a^{1\mathrm{loop}}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\delta ^3S}{\delta g^a\delta g^b\delta g^c}}<\mathrm{\Delta }\widehat{g}^b\mathrm{\Delta }\widehat{g}^c>.`$ (3.11)
The only modification due to local invariance is that the linearized equations of motion (3.8) for quantum perturbations $`\mathrm{\Delta }\widehat{g}^a`$ are supplied with the linear gauge conditions

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\delta ^2S}{\delta g^a\delta g^b}}\mathrm{\Delta }\widehat{g}^b=0,`$ (3.12)
$`\chi _a^\mu \mathrm{\Delta }\widehat{g}^a=0.`$ (3.13)
The functional matrix (two-point kernel) of the linear gauge condition $`\chi _a^\mu `$ is assumed to form the Faddeev-Popov operator

$`Q_\nu ^\mu \chi _a^\mu R_\nu ^a,`$ (3.14)
which is ultralocal in time, $`Q_\nu ^\mu \delta (t_\mu t_\nu )`$ (the property of the unitary gauge), and invertible. In view of this ultralocality the inverse of $`Q_\nu ^\mu `$, $`Q_\mu ^{1\nu }`$, does not require imposing any boundary conditions in the past or future of the time variable.

The system of equations (3.12)-(3.13) for quantum perturbations $`\mathrm{\Delta }\widehat{g}^b`$ has a number of peculiarities. First, the linearized gauge condition (3.13) guarantees that the gauge-breaking term (usually quadratic in gauge conditions) does not contribute to the radiation current (3.11). Second, it fixes uniquely the solution for $`\mathrm{\Delta }\widehat{g}^a`$ under given initial conditions. In the absence of gauge conditions, eq. (3.12) would have the ambiguity in the solution, $`\mathrm{\Delta }\widehat{g}^a\mathrm{\Delta }\widehat{g}^a+R_\mu ^a\widehat{f}^\mu `$, with arbitrary $`\widehat{f}^\mu `$ because of a simple corollary of (3.10)

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\delta ^2S}{\delta g^a\delta g^b}}R_\mu ^a={\displaystyle \frac{\delta S}{\delta g^a}}{\displaystyle \frac{\delta R_\mu ^a}{\delta g^b}}.`$ (3.15)
Here the right hand side vanishes on the classical solution, $`\delta S/\delta g^a=0`$. So, the gauge generators $`R_\mu ^a`$ are zero vectors of the Hessian of the action on this background, which implies the gauge invariance of the linearized solution of the above type. However, the auxiliary condition (3.13) gauges this invariance away and guarantees the uniqueness of the solution for $`\mathrm{\Delta }\widehat{g}^a`$.

The parametrization of the general solution of eqs. (3.12)-(3.13) in terms of the symplectic (phase space) initial conditions is equivalent to the Hamiltonian reduction of this linearized system to the physical sector. This reduction should be done in the canonical formalism. The unitarity of gauge conditions (3.13) guarantees that they can be rewritten in terms of the phase space variables – configuration coordinates and conjugated momenta – contained in the set of $`\mathrm{\Delta }\widehat{g}^a`$ and $`d\mathrm{\Delta }\widehat{g}^a/dt`$ (the rest of the variables in $`\mathrm{\Delta }\widehat{g}^a`$ are the Lagrange multipliers). Solving these canonical gauge conditions together with the first class constraints – the nondynamical subset of eq.(3.12) – one finds all the perturbations $`\mathrm{\Delta }\widehat{g}^a`$ as functions of the physical variables $`\mathrm{\Delta }\widehat{g}_{\mathrm{phys}}`$ which in their turn become functions of initial physical coordinates and momenta $`(𝒒_0,𝒑_0)`$

$`\mathrm{\Delta }\widehat{g}^a=\mathrm{\Delta }\widehat{g}^a(\mathrm{\Delta }\widehat{g}_{\mathrm{phys}}),`$ (3.16)
$`\mathrm{\Delta }\widehat{g}_{\mathrm{phys}}=\mathrm{\Delta }\widehat{g}_{\mathrm{phys}}(𝒒_0,𝒑_0).`$ (3.17)
If the initial quantum state is known on the physical sector in the representation of these quantum variables, $`|𝚿>=𝚿(𝒒_0)`$, $`\widehat{𝒑}_0=/i𝒒_0`$, then the calculation of averages in (3.11) becomes straightforward.

In what follows we use this calculational strategy. The no-boundary and tunneling wavefunctions as solutions of the Wheeler-DeWitt equations on superspace will, first, be reduced to the physical sector. This quantum reduction in the one-loop approximation will be performed by the technique of 444The fact that the cosmological states are known as solutions of quantum Dirac constraints on superspace, and the fact that their quantum reduction to the physical sector is readily available from , explains why we work within unitary gauge fixing procedure. Relativistic gauges with propagating Faddeev-Popov ghosts would require a quantum state on extended Hilbert space with indefinite metric, satisfying the zero BRST-charge equation (see review of this problem in ). Lifting the Dirac wavefunctions of the no-boundary and tunneling states to this space, to the best of our knowledge, has not been done and goes beyond the scope of this paper.. Simultaneously, the physical reduction will be performed for the cosmological background and its perturbations, the both being parametrized in terms of initial data encoded in the (reduced) physical wavefunction. This makes further calculation of radiation currents straightforward.

We finish this section with gauge invariance of the radiation current – the corollary of the Noether identity for the classical action (3.10). The latter, after two consequitive functional differentiations, yields another identity

$`R_\mu ^a{\displaystyle \frac{\delta ^3S}{\delta g^a\delta g^b\delta g^c}}={\displaystyle \frac{\delta R_\mu ^a}{\delta g^b}}{\displaystyle \frac{\delta ^2S}{\delta g^a\delta g^c}}{\displaystyle \frac{\delta R_\mu ^a}{\delta g^c}}{\displaystyle \frac{\delta ^2S}{\delta g^a\delta g^b}}{\displaystyle \frac{\delta ^2R_\mu ^a}{\delta g^b\delta g^c}}{\displaystyle \frac{\delta S}{\delta g^a}}.`$ (3.18)
Using it, one shows on account of the linearized equations (3.12) that the radiation current satisfies the relation

$`R_\mu ^aJ_a^{1\mathrm{loop}}={\displaystyle \frac{\delta ^2R_\mu ^a}{\delta g^b\delta g^c}}{\displaystyle \frac{\delta S}{\delta g^a}}<\mathrm{\Delta }\widehat{g}^b\mathrm{\Delta }\widehat{g}^c>.`$ (3.19)
Here the right hand side vanishes on the classical background, $`\delta S/\delta g^a=0`$, and, moreover, on an arbitrary mean field background when the generator is linear in the field, $`\delta ^2R_\mu ^a/\delta g^b\delta g^c=0`$. But this is a well known property of the generators of general coordinate transformations that form the closed algebra of spacetime diffeomorphisms. Thus, the one-loop radiation currents also satisfy the Noether identity

$`R_\mu ^aJ_a^{1\mathrm{loop}}=0.`$ (3.20)
This property will be very important in what follows. It implies that the radiation currents are linearly dependent, which reduces the number of effective equations to be solved in cosmological applications. Moreover, this identity reflects the gauge invariance of effective equations themselves. In particular, for purely gravitational system with $`g^a(x)=g_{\mu \nu }(x)`$, when the radiation current coincides with the expectation value of the stress tensor $`J^{\mu \nu \mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}\mathrm{loop}}(x)=<\widehat{T}^{\mu \nu }(x)>`$, this property signifies the covariant conservation law, $`_\mu <\widehat{T}^{\mu \nu }(x)>=0`$.

### 3.2. Two configuration space sectors of the model

In closed cosmological model, the total metric and inflaton scalar field are usually decomposed into the spatially homogeneous background and inhomogeneous perturbations

$`ds^2=N^2(t)dt^2+a^2(t)\gamma _{ij}dx^idx^j+h_{\mu \nu }(x)dx^\mu dx^\nu ,`$ (3.21)
$`\phi (x)=\phi (t)+\delta \phi (x),x=(t,\text{x}),`$ (3.22)
where $`a(t)`$ is the scale factor, $`N(t)`$ is the lapse function and $`\gamma _{ij}`$ is the spatial metric of the 3-sphere of unit radius. Therefore, the full set of fields consists of the minisuperspace sector of spatially homogeneous variables $`Q(t)`$ and inhomogeneous fields $`f(x)`$ essentially depending on spatial coordinates $`x^i`$=x

$`g(x)=Q(t),f(t,\text{x}),`$ (3.23)
$`Q(t)=a(t),\phi (t),N(t),`$ (3.24)
$`f(x)=\delta \phi (t,\text{x}),h_{\mu \nu }(t,\text{x}),\chi (t,\text{x}),\psi (t,\text{x}),A_\mu (t,\text{x}),\mathrm{}`$ (3.25)
From the structure of the initial quantum state, that will be discussed later, it follows that only minisuperspace variables have nonvanishing expectation values

$`<\widehat{Q}(t)>0,<\widehat{f}(x)>=0.`$ (3.26)
Therefore, the full set of effective equations reduces to the following three equations in the minisuperspace sector

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\delta S[Q]}{\delta Q(t)}}+J_Q(t)=0,`$
$`J_Q=J_N,J_a,J_\phi ,`$ (3.27)
their quantum radiation currents $`J_Q(t)`$ containing the contribution of quantum fluctuations of minisuperspace modes themselves and those of spatially inhomogeneous fields.

The set of these equations is, however, redundant in view of the Noether identities for both classical (3.10) and quantum (3.20) parts. In the minisuperspace sector the general coordinate transformations reduce to reparametrizations of time. Infinitesimal transformations of minisuperspace variables $`Q(t)=(N(t),a(t),\phi (t))`$, in the notations of Sect. 3.1, read as: $`f^\mu f(t),_\mu ^af^\mu ^Qf=(d(Nf)/dt,\dot{a}f,\dot{\phi }f)`$, and the identity (3.20) takes the form

$`\dot{\phi }J_\phi +\dot{a}J_aN\dot{J}_N=0.`$ (3.28)
The currents $`J_N`$ and $`J_\phi `$ have direct physical interpretation in terms of the quantum energy density $`\epsilon `$ and pressure $`p`$

$`J_N=a^3\sqrt{\gamma }\epsilon ,J_a=3a^2\sqrt{\gamma }p,`$ (3.29)
so that eq.(3.28) in the cosmic time, $`N=1`$, takes the form

$`\dot{\epsilon }+3{\displaystyle \frac{\dot{a}}{a}}(\epsilon +p)+{\displaystyle \frac{J_\phi }{\sqrt{\gamma }a^3}}\dot{\phi }=0.`$ (3.30)
As we shall see later, the third current $`J_\phi `$ can be interpreted in terms of the quantum rolling force driving the evolution of the inflaton field. Therefore, this equation measures the balance of the conservation for the quantum stress tensor vs the work of this force. In the slow roll regime, $`\dot{\phi }0`$, it reduces to the conventional covariant conservation law on the Robertson-Walker background.

The Hamiltonian reduction to the physical sector, discussed above,

$`\mathrm{\Delta }g(x)=(\mathrm{\Delta }Q(t),f(x))\mathrm{\Delta }g_{\mathrm{phys}}(x)=(\mathrm{\Delta }Q_{\mathrm{phys}}(t),f_{\mathrm{phys}}(x)),`$ (3.31)
$`f_{\mathrm{phys}}(x)=(h^{\mathrm{TT}}(x),\mathrm{matter}\mathrm{fields}),`$ (3.32)
leaves us with the set of physical variables $`\mathrm{\Delta }g_{\mathrm{phys}}(x)`$ which also splits into minisuperspace and field-theoretical subsets. Here $`\mathrm{\Delta }Q_{\mathrm{phys}}(t)`$ is a single field variable that originates from the minisuperspace sector of metric and inflaton perturbations555Counting the number of physical degrees of freedom is usual: in 3-dimensional configuration space of $`(N,a,\phi )`$ subject to one first class constraint the number of physical degrees of freedom equals $`32\times 1=1`$.. The rest, $`f_{\mathrm{phys}}(x)`$, represent the transverse traceless modes of the gravitational wave $`h^{\mathrm{TT}}(x)`$ and other physical nongravitational degrees of freedom. The nature of $`\mathrm{\Delta }Q_{\mathrm{phys}}(t)`$ depends on the gauge used for disentangling the physical sector. A particular gauge fixing procedure widely used in the theory of cosmological perturbations  picks up a special gauge invariant variable $`\mathrm{\Delta }Q_{\mathrm{phys}}(t)=𝒒(t)`$ that will be discussed in much detail in Sect.5. At the nonlinear level (beyond perturbation theory on a classical background) another choice of $`Q_{\mathrm{phys}}(t)`$ is possible by simply identifying it with the spatially homogeneous inflaton field $`\phi (t)`$, $`Q_{\mathrm{phys}}(t)=\phi (t)`$. In both cases, particular expressions for the original minisuperspace variables $`Q(t)`$ and their perturbations $`\mathrm{\Delta }Q(t)`$ in terms of $`Q_{\mathrm{phys}}(t)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }Q_{\mathrm{phys}}(t)`$ depend on the choice of gauge conditions. Two types of these gauge conditions will be considered in Sects. 4 and 5.

Splitting the whole configuration space into minisuperspace and inhomogeneous sectors (3.23) reflects the choice of the collective variables. Moreover, it reflects distinctly different nature of quantum states for the modes belonging to these two sectors. This results in different calculational strategies for the corresponding quantum averages. To see it, note that on the space of physical variables $`(\phi ,f_{\mathrm{phys}}(\text{x}))`$, with $`f_{\mathrm{phys}}(\text{x})`$ treated perturbatively, the initial no-boundary and tunneling wavefunctions read (see Sect. 4)

$`𝚿^{1\mathrm{loop}}(\phi ,f_{\mathrm{phys}})=P(\phi )\mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}I(\phi ){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{\Omega }(\phi )f_{\mathrm{phys}}^2+O(f_{\mathrm{phys}}^3)\right].`$ (3.33)
Here $`P(\phi )`$ is the loop prefactor and the tree-level exponential contains the Euclidean action expanded up to a quadratic term in inhomogeneous modes, $`\mathrm{\Omega }(\phi )f_{\mathrm{phys}}^2`$.

From (3.33) it follows that the one-loop quantum correlators between the minisuperspace modes and inhomogeneous fields vanish666Note that due to the gaussian nature of the state $`f\mathrm{}^{1/2}`$, so that the terms contributing to $`<f\mathrm{\Delta }\phi >`$-correlators, $`O(f^3)\mathrm{}^{3/2}`$, go beyond the one-loop approximation., therefore they contribute additively to the total one-loop radiation current

$`J=J^q+J^f,`$ (3.34)
$`J^q(t)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle 𝑑t^{}𝑑t^{\prime \prime }\frac{\delta ^3S[Q]}{\delta Q(t)\delta Q(t^{})\delta Q(t^{\prime \prime })}<\mathrm{\Delta }\widehat{Q}(t^{})\mathrm{\Delta }\widehat{Q}(t^{\prime \prime })>},`$ (3.35)
$`J^f(t)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle 𝑑x𝑑y\frac{\delta ^3S[Q+f]}{\delta Q(t)\delta f(x)\delta f(y)}}|_{f=0}<\widehat{f}(x)\widehat{f}(y)>.`$ (3.36)
Similarly to (3.9) these contributions represent the quantum averages of the quadratic terms of the expansion of $`\delta S/\delta Q`$ correspondingly in $`\mathrm{\Delta }\widehat{Q}(t)`$ and $`\widehat{f}(x)`$. However, the calculation methods for $`J^q`$ and $`J^f`$ are very different, and the difference can be attributed to qualitatively different quantum states of the modes $`\phi `$ and $`f_{\mathrm{phys}}`$. Let us begin with the radiation current $`J^f`$ which can be obtained by the effective action method .

The matrix of quantum dispersions $`\mathrm{\Omega }(\phi )`$ in the gaussian state of inhomogeneous modes is such that this state turns out to be the Euclidean quasi-DeSitter invariant vacuum

$`|\mathrm{vac}>_{DS}=C(\phi )\mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{\Omega }(\phi )f_{\mathrm{phys}}^2\right].`$ (3.37)
The corresponding quantum averages

$`{}_{DS}{}^{}<\mathrm{vac}|f_{\mathrm{phys}}(x)f_{\mathrm{phys}}(y)|\mathrm{vac}>_{DS}=G_{DS}(x,y)`$ (3.38)
are given by DeSitter invariant Green’s functions which can be obtained by analytic continuation from the unique Green’s function on the Euclidean section of the DeSitter spacetime – the inverse of the Hessian of the Euclidean action

$`G_{DS}(x,y)=G_E(x_E,y_E)|_{+++++++},`$ (3.39)
$`{\displaystyle 𝑑y_E\frac{\delta ^2𝑰[Q+f]}{\delta f(x_E)\delta f(y_E)}}|_{f=0}G_E(y_E,z_E)=\delta (x_E,z_E),`$ (3.40)
$`𝑰[Q+f]=iS[Q+f]|_{+++++++}.`$ (3.41)
Here $`x_E`$ denotes the coordinates on the Euclidean DeSitter manifold related by the analytic continuation to the Lorentzian spacetime coordinates, $`x_E^4=\pi /2H+ix^0,\text{x}_E=\text{x}`$, with $`H`$ – the Hubble constant or the inverse radius of the Euclidean 4-sphere777The Lorentzian Green’s function $`G_{DS}(x,y)=iG_{DS}^{(+)}(x,y)`$ is the positive frequency Wightman function – the solution of the homogeneous linearized equation of motion. On the contrary, $`G_E(x_E,y_E)`$, as an inverse of the Hessian, solves the inhomogeneous equation. However, the Wightman function can be obtained from $`G_E(x_E,y_E)`$ by taking the boundary value of its analytic continuation on a proper shore of the cut in the complex plane of $`[\sigma (x,y)]^{1/2}`$ – the geodetic distance between the points $`x`$ and $`y`$ . and $`x^0=t`$ – the cosmic time in the unperturbed DeSitter metric (3.21) corresponding to $`N=1`$, $`a(t)=\mathrm{cosh}(Ht)/H`$.

In view of this relation and in view of a similar analytic continuation rule between the Lorentzian, $`\delta ^3S/\delta Q\delta f^2`$, and Euclidean, $`\delta ^3𝑰/\delta Q\delta f^2`$, 3-vertices, one finds the Euclidean effective action algorithm for the radiation current of inhomogeneous quantum modes

$`J^f(x^0)={\displaystyle \frac{\delta 𝚪_{1\mathrm{loop}}[Q]}{\delta Q(x^4)}}|_{+++++++},`$ (3.42)
$`𝚪_{1\mathrm{loop}}[Q]={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{Tr}\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{\delta ^2𝑰[Q+f]}{\delta f(x_E)\delta f(y_E)}}|_{f=0}.`$ (3.43)
Note that this is exactly the functional that yields the one-loop contribution to the distribution function (2.4), when evaluated at the classical solution for the minisuperspace background $`Q(x^4)=Q(x^4,\phi )`$ parametrically depending on $`\phi `$,

$`𝚪_{1\mathrm{loop}}(\phi )=𝚪_{1\mathrm{loop}}[Q(x^4,\phi )].`$ (3.44)
This algorithm was used in the previous paper  for the calculation one-loop radiation currents of $`f`$-modes. In  $`𝚪_{1\mathrm{loop}}[Q]`$ was obtained by the local Schwinger-DeWitt expansion – the expansion in spacetime derivatives of the background fields, which in the cosmological context corresponds to the slow-roll expansion888The algorithm (3.42)-(3.43) looks as a generalization of the analytic continuation method for the effective equations in asymptotically flat spacetime . Strictly speaking, this algorithm as derived above holds only for exact DeSitter background, while the method of  was proven for arbitrary asymptotically flat backgrounds that are perturbatively related to flat spacetime. For the deviations from the DeSitter geometry (measured by the magnitude of the slow-roll smallness parameter) the relations (3.42)-(3.43) hold for local terms of the effective action, and might not be true for an essentially nonlocal part that cannot be expanded in powers of derivatives. But for the slow-roll inflation regime, which we use throughout the paper, such an expansion – the local Schwinger-DeWitt series – is definitely applicable, which justifies the effective action method.. Within this expansion the one-loop action is represented as a spacetime integral of the effective Lagrangian expanded in powers of curvatures, matter field strengths and their covariant derivatives. Therefore, the analytic continuation rule (3.42) is trivial – the current $`J^f(x^0)`$ can be given by the functional variation of the local Lorentzian one-loop action

$`J^f(x^0)={\displaystyle \frac{\delta S_{1\mathrm{loop}}[Q]}{\delta Q(x^0)}},`$ (3.45)
$`S_{1\mathrm{loop}}[Q(x^0)]=i𝚪_{1\mathrm{loop}}[Q(x^4)]|_{+++++++}.`$ (3.46)
Therefore, within the local expansion the $`J^f`$ part of the radiation current can be absorbed in the functional variation of the total Lorentzian effective action $`S_{\mathrm{eff}}[Q]`$, and the effective equations acquire the final form

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\delta S_{\mathrm{eff}}[Q]}{\delta Q(x^0)}}+J^q(x^0)=0,`$ (3.47)
$`S_{\mathrm{eff}}[Q]=S[Q]+S_{1\mathrm{loop}}[Q].`$ (3.48)
Here $`S_{\mathrm{eff}}[Q]`$ can be obtained from the classical action $`S[Q]`$ by adding loop corrections to the classical coefficient functions in the curvature and gradient expansion of the Lagrangian 999Note that the notion of $`S_{\mathrm{eff}}[Q]`$, as a generator of equations for expectation values, is legitimate only within the local derivative expansion. For nonlocal contributions this action does not exist at all – there is no mean field functional that could yield by the variational procedure effective equations for expectation values . The reason of this is that for nonlocalities the analytic continuation from the Euclidean to Lorentzian spacetime is not unique – in addition, it requires setting the retardation boundary conditions for nonlocal form factors (see  and cf. the previous footnote). These boundary conditions prohibit the existence of the effective action for expectation values.. These corrections, in their turn, can be calculated in the Euclidean spacetime by the local Schwinger-DeWitt technique . For our model these corrections has been obtained in . Thus, this essential simplification in treating the $`J^f`$-part of the radiation current exists due to the two important aspects of the problem – DeSitter-invariant vacuum of $`f`$-modes and the slow roll approximation. In contrast to this, to the best of our knowledge, no simplification is available in the calculation of the quantum mechanical part of the current $`J^q`$.

To begin with, the wavefunction of the quantum mechanical minisuperspace mode $`\phi `$ is not gaussian. Moreover, in the tree-level approximation the graph of the probability distribution (2.3) is very flat. It does not have good probability peaks and is even unnormalizable. This means that the tree-level quantum averages $`<\mathrm{\Delta }Q\mathrm{\Delta }Q>^{\mathrm{tree}}`$ are badly defined. Beyond the tree-level approximation the situation can be improved, because they should now be defined with the aid of the reduced density matrix

$`<\mathrm{\Delta }Q(t)\mathrm{\Delta }Q(t^{})>=\mathrm{tr}\left[\mathrm{\Delta }\widehat{Q}(t)\mathrm{\Delta }\widehat{Q}(t^{})\widehat{\rho }\right],`$ (3.49)
$`\widehat{\rho }\rho (\phi ,\phi ^{})={\displaystyle 𝑑f𝚿(\phi ,f)𝚿^{}(\phi ^{},f)},`$ (3.50)
which originates from tracing the $`f`$-variables out and includes loop corrections. As shown in , the diagonal element of this density matrix – the distribution function of $`\phi `$,

$`\rho (\phi )=\rho (\phi ,\phi ),`$ (3.51)
is given in the approximation of a gaussian integral by the effective action algorithm (2.4). Effective action contributes the factor that can generate a sharp probability peak (2.12) with the dispersion $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ defined by (2.11). With this modification the quantum correlators become well defined, being expressed in terms of $`<\mathrm{\Delta }\phi \mathrm{\Delta }\phi >\mathrm{\Delta }^2<\mathrm{}`$. Certainly, this improvement is achieved by exceeding the precision of the one-loop approximation – badly defined tree-level quantum correlators become finite due to one-loop contribution (therefore, in their turn they effectively contribute to the radiation currents two-loop quantities). But overstepping the conventional rules of the loop expansion is justified here because it reflects the underlying physics of the slow roll dynamics.

Point is that the inflaton field in models satisfying the slow-roll conditions effectively represents the massless scalar field – its mass is roughly proportional to the slow-roll smallness parameter . But massless scalar fields do not have a well defined DeSitter invariant vacuum . This fact, in particular, manifests itself in the unnormalizability of the tree-level wavefunction $`\mathrm{exp}[I(\phi )/2]`$, absence of its local maxima, etc. As we see, loop effects render this state a quasi-gaussian nature (2.12) and thus justify the improved semiclassical expansion. A major part of the paper in what follows deals with the direct calculation of the quantum mechanical radiation current $`J^q`$ and its physical implications.

## 4. Quantum Cauchy problem: tree level approximation

Loop expansion for effective equations is essentially perturbative. Therefore, we solve them by iterations starting with the classical solution. Then, in the one-loop approximation the radiation current can be calculated on the classical background – the lowest order approximation for the mean field. Here we pose the initial conditions for this solution that follow from the no-boundary and tunneling cosmological wavefunctions.

In this and the next section we work with the model of minimally coupled inflaton field $`\varphi `$ having a generic potential $`V(\varphi )`$ (we reserve the notation $`\varphi `$ as opposed to the notation $`\phi `$ for the non-minimal inflaton). This general framework of the Cauchy problem for the cosmological background and perturbations can be easily extended to include the non-minimal model by reparametrizing the latter to the Einstein frame , and this will be done in Sect. 6. Thus, we begin with the action

$$S[g_{\mu \nu },\varphi ]=d^4xg^{1/2}\left(\frac{m_P^2}{16\pi }R(g_{\mu \nu })\frac{1}{2}(\varphi )^2V(\varphi )\right).$$
(4.1)
Under the (unperturbed) ansatz for spatially homogeneous metric (3.22), it takes the minisuperspace form

$`S[a,\varphi ,N]={\displaystyle 𝑑tNa^3\sqrt{\gamma }\left[\frac{3}{\kappa }\left(\frac{1}{a^2}\frac{\dot{a}^2}{N^2a^2}\right)+\frac{1}{2}\frac{\dot{\varphi }^2}{N^2}V(\varphi )\right]},`$ (4.2)
$`\sqrt{\gamma }2\pi ^2,\kappa ={\displaystyle \frac{8\pi }{m_P^2}}.`$ (4.3)
Classical equations for this action in the cosmic time gauge, $`N=1`$, read

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{a^3\sqrt{\gamma }}}{\displaystyle \frac{\delta S}{\delta N}}{\displaystyle \frac{3}{\kappa }}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{a^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\dot{a}^2}{a^2}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{\dot{\varphi }^2}{2}}V(\varphi )=0,`$ (4.4)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{Na^3\sqrt{\gamma }}}{\displaystyle \frac{\delta S}{\delta \varphi }}\ddot{\varphi }3{\displaystyle \frac{\dot{a}}{a}}\dot{\varphi }V_\varphi (\varphi )=0,`$ (4.5)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3Na^2\sqrt{\gamma }}}{\displaystyle \frac{\delta S}{\delta a}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\kappa }}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{a^2}}+2{\displaystyle \frac{\ddot{a}}{a}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\dot{a}^2}{a^2}}\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{\dot{\varphi }^2}{2}}V(\varphi )=0,`$ (4.6)
The first of the eqs.(5.1) represents the nondynamical Hamiltonian constraint. In terms of the momenta conjugated to $`a`$ and $`\varphi `$, $`\mathrm{\Pi }_\varphi =\sqrt{\gamma }a^3\dot{\varphi }/N`$, $`\mathrm{\Pi }_a=6\sqrt{\gamma }a\dot{a}/\kappa N`$, this constraint has the following form

$`𝑯(a,\varphi ,\mathrm{\Pi }_a,\mathrm{\Pi }_\varphi )={\displaystyle \frac{\kappa }{12a\sqrt{\gamma }}}\mathrm{\Pi }_a^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2a^3\sqrt{\gamma }}}\mathrm{\Pi }_\varphi ^2+a^3\sqrt{\gamma }\left[V(\varphi ){\displaystyle \frac{3}{\kappa a^2}}\right]=0,`$ (4.7)
which at the quantum level in the coordinate representation of the quantum minisuperspace, $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Pi }}_a=/ia,\widehat{\mathrm{\Pi }}_\varphi =/i\varphi `$, gives rise to the minisuperspace Wheeler-DeWitt equation on $`𝚿(\varphi ,a)`$

$`𝑯(a,\varphi ,/ia,/i\varphi )𝚿(\varphi ,a)=0.`$ (4.8)
There are two well known semiclassical solutions of this equation – the so-called no-boundary and tunneling wavefunctions. In the approximation of the inflationary slow roll (when the derivatives with respect to $`\varphi `$ are much smaller than the derivatives with respect to $`a`$) these two solutions read

$`𝚿_{NB}(\varphi ,a)=C_{NB}(a^2H^2(\varphi )1)^{1/4}\mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}I(\varphi )\right]\mathrm{cos}\left[S(a,\varphi )+{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{4}}\right],`$ (4.9)
$`𝚿_T(\varphi ,a)=C_T(a^2H^2(\varphi )1)^{1/4}\mathrm{exp}\left[+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}I(\varphi )+iS(a,\varphi )+{\displaystyle \frac{i\pi }{4}}\right]`$ (4.10)
They describe two types of the nucleation of the Lorentzian quasi-DeSitter spacetime (described by the Hamilton-Jacobi function $`S(\varphi ,a)`$) from the gravitational semi-instanton – the Euclidean signature hemisphere bearing the Euclidean gravitational action $`I(\varphi )/2`$

$`I(\varphi )={\displaystyle \frac{\pi m_P^2}{H^2(\varphi )}},`$
$`S(\varphi ,a)={\displaystyle \frac{\pi m_P^2}{2H^2(\varphi )}}(a^2H^2(\varphi )1)^{3/2}.`$ (4.11)
The size of this hemisphere – its inverse radius – as well as the curvature of the quasi-DeSitter spacetime are determined by the effective Hubble constant, $`\dot{a}/aH(\varphi )`$, driving the inflationary dynamics of the model

$`H^2(\varphi )={\displaystyle \frac{8\pi V(\varphi )}{3m_P^2}}={\displaystyle \frac{\kappa V(\varphi )}{3}}.`$ (4.12)
The nucleation of the Lorentzian spacetime from the Euclidean hemisphere takes place at $`a=1/H(\varphi )`$. This domain forms the one-dimensional curve in the two-dimensional superspace. Its embedding equation can be written in the form

$`\chi (\varphi ,a)=a\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{3}{\kappa V(\varphi )}}}=0.`$ (4.13)
The dimensionality of this subspace coincides with the number of physical degrees of freedom in the minisuperspace sector of the model. The intrinsic coordinate on this subspace becomes the physical coordinate and the restriction of the Dirac wavefunction $`𝚿(\varphi ,a)`$ to this subspace becomes the physical wavefunction, provided one takes care of a proper relation between the quantum measures on the original superspace and the physical subspace. For a generic constrained system, the details of such a quantum reduction can be found in  . Here we just briefly repeat it for our model.

Let us identify $`\chi (\varphi ,a)`$ in (4.13) with the gauge condition fixing the time reparametrization invariance in the theory (4.2) and choose $`\varphi `$ as the physical coordinate. Then, according to the formalism of , the physical wavefunction $`𝚿(\varphi )`$ in the one-loop (linear in $`\mathrm{}`$ approximation) can be obtained from the semiclassical Dirac wavefunction $`𝚿(\varphi ,a)`$ by the transformation

$`𝚿(\varphi )=|\{\chi ,𝑯\}|^{1/2}𝚿(\varphi ,a)|_{\chi (\varphi ,a)=0}.`$ (4.14)
Here we distinguish the original Dirac wavefunction in 2-dimensional minisuperspace from the physical wavefunction by the number of their arguments. The factor $`|\{\chi ,𝑯\}|`$ – the Poisson bracket of the gauge condition with the first class Hamiltonian constraint – is the Faddeev-Popov determinant which should be calculated at the semiclassical values of momenta, $`\mathrm{\Pi }_a=_aS(\varphi ,a),\mathrm{\Pi }_\varphi =_\varphi S(\varphi ,a)`$. In the slow roll approximation, when the $`\mathrm{\Pi }_\varphi `$-momentum is negligible, this factor equals $`|\{\chi ,𝑯\}|^{1/2}(H^2a^21)^{1/4}`$ and, thus, cancels the preexponential factors in eqs.(4.9)-(4.10) divergent at the nucleation surface (4.13).

Thus, the physical wavefunction on the nucleation surface (4.13) which should be regarded as the Cauchy surface in minisuperspace reads as

$`𝚿_{NB,T}(\varphi )=C_{NB,T}\mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}I(\varphi )\right],`$ (4.15)
minus and plus signs related respectively to the no-boundary and tunneling states. It is well known that the graphs of these wavefunctions are very flat for the situations when the slow roll approximation holds (equivalent to small $`\varphi `$-derivatives). Therefore, they are generally not normalizable and do not have good probability peaks that could be interpreted as a source of initial conditions for inflation. The inclusion of loop terms via eq.(2.4) might lead to the normalizability of the wavefunction and, for the model of the nonminimally coupled inflaton, even yield a sharp probability peak of the above type. Then, the expectation value of the inflaton $`\varphi =<\widehat{\varphi }>`$ becomes finite. It is determined by the location of this peak and serves as the initial condition for the classical extremal that will be used as the background for the calculation of the one-loop radiation currents.

The second initial condition for this classical extremal – the time derivative of the inflaton – arises from the expectation value of the physical momentum conjugated to $`\varphi `$, $`p_\varphi =<\widehat{p}_\varphi >`$. In view of reality of the initial density matrix (3.50) this expectation value is vanishing

$`<\widehat{p}_\varphi >={\displaystyle 𝑑\varphi \frac{1}{i}\frac{}{\varphi }\rho (\varphi ,\varphi ^{})}|_{\varphi ^{}=\varphi }=0.`$ (4.16)
From the Hamiltonian reduction of the symplectic form in the gauge $`\chi (\varphi ,a)=0`$ it follows that the physical momentum expresses in terms of the original momenta

$`\mathrm{\Pi }_ada+\mathrm{\Pi }_\varphi d\varphi =p_\varphi d\varphi ,`$
$`p_\varphi =\mathrm{\Pi }_\varphi \mathrm{\Pi }_a\chi _\varphi /\chi _a,\chi _\varphi _\varphi \chi ,\chi _a_a\chi .`$ (4.17)
Therefore, for $`p_\varphi =0`$, $`\mathrm{\Pi }_\varphi `$ homogeneously expresses in terms of $`\mathrm{\Pi }_a`$ and, after plugging this relation into the Hamiltonian constraint (4.7), it implies that at the initial Cauchy surface $`\mathrm{\Pi }_\varphi =0`$ and $`\mathrm{\Pi }_a=0`$. Thus, the full set of initial conditions for the classical background reads

$`\varphi =<\widehat{\varphi }>,a={\displaystyle \frac{1}{H(\varphi )}},\dot{\varphi }=\dot{a}=0.`$ (4.18)
## 5. Cauchy problem for cosmological perturbations

In this section we pose the Cauchy problem for quantum cosmological perturbations propagating on the classical background of the previous section. First, the set of perturbations is reduced by the technique of  to the set of linearized invariants of spacetime diffeomorphisms, and their quadratic action is constructed. The ghost nature of their minisuperspace sector is revealed and the original perturbations are built in terms of invariants in the Newton gauge. Then, quantum initial conditions for perturbations are obtained with the aid of the linearized version of the minisuperspace gauge introduced above. Again, we consider the minimal model which will be later, in Sect. 6, reparametrized to the non-minimal curvature coupling.

### 5.1. Hamiltonian reduction to the physical sector

Here we start with the physical reduction for cosmological perturbations on the classical background of Sect. 4. In the main, we follow the notations of  where this reduction was presented in much detail. In particular, we use the conformal time denoted by $`\eta `$ corresponding to $`N=a(\eta )`$. In this gauge the classical equations of motion (4.4)-(4.6) have the form

$`{\displaystyle \frac{3}{\kappa }}^2{\displaystyle \frac{\varphi ^2}{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{3}{\kappa }}a^2V=0,`$
$`^2+1^{}={\displaystyle \frac{\kappa }{2}}\varphi ^2,`$
$`\varphi ^{\prime \prime }+2\varphi ^{}+a^2V_\varphi =0,`$ (5.1)
where primes denote the derivatives with respect to the conformal time, subscript $`\varphi `$ implies the partial derivative with respect to the inflaton, $`V_\varphi _\varphi V(\varphi )`$, and $``$ is the “conformal” Hubble constant

$`{\displaystyle \frac{a^{}}{a}},a^{}{\displaystyle \frac{da}{d\eta }},`$ (5.2)
related to the Hubble constant in cosmic time $`H`$ by the equation $`=aH`$.

The cosmological perturbations $`(h_{ij},A,S_i,\delta \varphi )`$ of metric and inflaton field are introduced according to the ansatz

$`ds_{\mathrm{total}}^2=a^2(\eta )\left[(1+2A)d\eta ^2+2S_idx^id\eta +(\gamma _{ij}+h_{ij})dx^idx^j\right],`$ (5.3)
$`\varphi _{\mathrm{total}}=\varphi +\delta \varphi ,`$ (5.4)
$`h_{ij}=2\psi \gamma _{ij}+2E_{|ij}+2F_{(i|j)}+t_{ij},`$ (5.5)
$`S_i=_iB+V_i,_iF^i=_iV^i=t_i^i=^it_{ij}=0.`$
They consist of the scalar perturbations $`(\psi ,\delta \varphi ,E,A,B)`$, transverse vector perturbations $`(F_i,V_i)`$ and transverse-traceless tensor ones $`t_{ij}`$. Here $`_i`$ denotes the spatial covariant derivative.

Spatially homogeneous modes from the minisuperspace sector, upon which we focuse in this paper, belong to scalar perturbations. As discussed above, the inhomogeneous modes which contribute to the $`J^f`$ radiation current can be treated by the effective action method and do not require a manifest physical reduction. Thus we consider only the scalar sector. After constructing the quadratic part of the action in terms of scalar perturbations one introduces the momenta conjugated to $`(\psi ,\delta \varphi ,E)`$

$`\mathrm{\Pi }_\psi ={\displaystyle \frac{2a^2\sqrt{\gamma }}{\kappa }}\left[3\left(\psi ^{}{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa }{2}}\varphi ^{}\delta \varphi +A\right)\mathrm{\Delta }(BE^{})\right],`$
$`\mathrm{\Pi }_{\delta \varphi }=a^2\sqrt{\gamma }(\delta \varphi ^{}\varphi ^{}A),`$
$`\mathrm{\Pi }_E={\displaystyle \frac{2a\sqrt{\gamma }}{\kappa }}\mathrm{\Delta }\left[\psi ^{}{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa }{2}}\varphi ^{}\delta \varphi +A(BE^{})\right],`$ (5.6)
and finds out that $`(A,B)`$ play the role of Lagrange multipliers to the linearized Hamiltonian and momentum constraints

$`C_A=\mathrm{\Pi }_\psi +\varphi ^{}\mathrm{\Pi }_{\delta \varphi }+a^2\sqrt{\gamma }\left[{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\kappa }}D\psi +(\varphi ^{}\varphi ^{\prime \prime })\delta \varphi \right],`$ (5.7)
$`C_B=\mathrm{\Pi }_E,`$ (5.8)
where $`D`$ is the following modified covariant Laplacian acting on a closed 3-sphere with the metric $`\gamma _{ij}`$

$`D=\mathrm{\Delta }+3,\mathrm{\Delta }=\gamma ^{ij}_i_j.`$ (5.9)
The constraints (5.7) generate the diffeomorphisms in the scalar perturbation sector with respect to the vector-field parameter $`\lambda ^\mu =(\lambda ^0,^i\lambda )`$

$`\delta _\lambda \psi =\lambda ^0,\delta _\lambda (\delta \varphi )=\varphi ^{}\lambda ^0,\delta _\lambda E=\lambda ,`$ (5.10)
$`\delta _\lambda \mathrm{\Pi }_\psi ={\displaystyle \frac{2a^2\sqrt{\gamma }}{\kappa }}D\lambda ^0,\delta _\lambda \mathrm{\Pi }_{\delta \varphi }=a^2\sqrt{\gamma }(\varphi ^{\prime \prime }\varphi ^{})\lambda ^0,\delta _\lambda \mathrm{\Pi }_E=0,`$ (5.11)
accompanied by the transformations of the Lagrange multipliers $`\delta _\lambda A=(\lambda ^0)^{}+\lambda ^0`$, $`\delta _\lambda B=\lambda ^{}\lambda ^0`$. There are two obvious invariants of the gauge canonical transformations (5.10)-(5.11)

$`𝚿=\psi +{\displaystyle \frac{}{\varphi ^{}}}\delta \varphi ,`$ (5.12)
$`𝚷_\psi =\mathrm{\Pi }_\psi {\displaystyle \frac{2a^2\sqrt{\gamma }}{\kappa \varphi ^{}}}D\delta \varphi .`$ (5.13)
It turns out that after solving the constraints, $`C_A=C_B=0`$, (5.7)-(5.8), with respect to $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{\delta \varphi }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Pi }_E`$ and feeding the result into the canonical action the latter entirely expresses in terms of these two invariants. Moreover, they play the role of a single pair of canonically conjugated variables in the physical sector : on the constraint surface in phase space the original symplectic form goes over into the physical one, $`\mathrm{\Pi }_\psi \psi ^{}+\mathrm{\Pi }_{\delta \varphi }\delta \varphi ^{}+\mathrm{\Pi }_EE^{}=𝚷_\psi 𝚿^{}+(\mathrm{})^{}`$. The corresponding canonical action quadratic in $`(𝚿,𝚷_\psi )`$ reads

$`S[𝚿,𝚷_\psi ]|_2={\displaystyle }d\eta [𝚷_\psi 𝚿^{}{\displaystyle \frac{2a^2\sqrt{\gamma }}{\kappa ^2\varphi ^2}}(D𝚿+{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa }{2a^2\sqrt{\gamma }}}𝚷_\psi )^2`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{a^2\sqrt{\gamma }}{\kappa }}𝚿D𝚿+{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa }{4a^2\sqrt{\gamma }}}𝚷_\psi {\displaystyle \frac{1}{D}}𝚷_\psi ]`$ (5.14)
Somewhat simpler form this action acquires in terms of the new variables $`(𝒒,𝒑)`$ related to (5.12)-(5.13) by the canonical transformation

$`𝒒={\displaystyle \frac{2a}{\kappa \varphi ^{}}}𝚿+{\displaystyle \frac{}{\varphi ^{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{a\sqrt{\gamma }D}}𝚷_\psi ,`$
$`𝒑={\displaystyle \frac{\varphi ^{}a}{2}}\sqrt{\gamma }D𝚿+{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa \varphi ^{}}{4a}}𝚷_\psi .`$ (5.15)
In terms of them the quadratic action in the physical sector of scalar perturbations looks as

$`S[𝒒,𝒑]|_2={\displaystyle }d\eta [𝒑𝒒^{}+𝒑𝒒({\displaystyle \frac{\varphi ^{\prime \prime }}{\varphi ^{}}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa \varphi ^2}{4}})+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\sqrt{\gamma }}}𝒑{\displaystyle \frac{1}{D}}𝒑`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa \varphi ^2}{8^2}}(^2+1{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa \varphi ^2}{4}})\sqrt{\gamma }𝒒D𝒒{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\sqrt{\gamma }(D𝒒)^2].`$ (5.16)
With the extremal expression for the momentum

$`𝒑=\sqrt{\gamma }D\left[𝒒^{}+(\varphi ^{\prime \prime }/\varphi ^{}+\kappa \varphi ^2/4)𝒒\right]`$ (5.17)
the Lagrangian form of this action is even shorter

$`S[𝒒]|_2={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle 𝑑\eta \sqrt{\gamma }(D𝒒)\left[\frac{d^2}{d\eta ^2}+\varphi ^{}\left(\frac{1}{\varphi ^{}}\right)^{\prime \prime }+\frac{\kappa \varphi ^2}{2}+D\right]𝒒}.`$ (5.18)
The invariant field $`𝒒`$ here is well known from the theory of cosmological perturbations . It is actually given by the so called Bardeen variable , $`𝚽_𝑯=(BE^{})\psi ,𝒒=2a𝚽_𝑯/\kappa \varphi ^{}`$.

Note that the operator $`D`$ given by (5.9) is negative definite except for two modes: the zero mode corresponding to the Laplacian eigenvalue $`\mathrm{\Delta }=3`$ and the spatially homogeneous mode for $`\mathrm{\Delta }=0`$, $`D=+3`$. In view of the overall factor $`D`$ the zero mode does not enter the action at all, while the homogeneous mode enters (5.18) with a wrong sign – its kinetic term is negative. Thus, this is a ghost variable signifying the classical instability of the model. This instability at the linearized level is nothing but the manifestation of the inflation which is a huge instability phenomenon incorporating the runaway modes. In contrast with a conventional wisdom of the S-matrix theory, this instability should not be regarded as an irrecoverable flaw of the theory, because we know a nonlinear damping mechanism that provides an exit from the inflation stage in case of the inflaton field rolling down to smaller values of the potential. In particular, no special measures like introducing the indefinite metric should be undertaken to eradicate this phenomenon. Homogeneous fluctuations of the inflaton field do not have a particle nature and one should not take care of guaranteeing the energy positivity of their excitations. Therefore, this mode can and should be quantized in the coordinate representation with positive metric in the Hilbert space.

A single spatially homogeneous mode $`𝒒(\eta )`$ contained in the full set of

$`𝒒(x)=(𝒒(\eta ),𝒒(\eta ,\text{x}))`$ (5.19)
corresponds to the $`D=+3`$ eigenvalue of the operator (5.9) in the action (5.18). It also satisfies all the above relations with a simple ultralocal substitution $`D=+3`$ and is actually responsible for the perturbations in the minisuperspace sector of the cosmological model. Indeed, from the metric ansatz (5.3), (5.5) it follows that spatially homogeneous variables $`\psi (\eta )`$, $`\delta \varphi (\eta )`$ and $`A(\eta )`$ induced by $`𝒒(\eta )`$ generate the variations of the scale factor, inflaton field and lapse function

$`\delta a=a\psi +O(\psi ^2),\delta \varphi ,\delta N=aA+O(A^2).`$ (5.20)
Actual expression for $`\psi (\eta )`$, $`\delta \varphi (\eta )`$ and $`A(\eta )`$ in terms of $`(𝒒(\eta ),𝒑(\eta ))`$ depend on the particular gauge chosen for minisuperspace variables. In what follows we will need two types of such gauges. One will be used for gauge fixing the dynamical evolution of perturbations as a function of dynamically evolving invariant variable $`𝒒(\eta )`$. Another gauge serves as a part of the quantum Cauchy problem – as shown in the previous section, it facilitates the quantum reduction to the physical sector and relates the wavefunction to the initial conditions for both the classical background and the homogeneous perturbation variable $`𝒒(\eta )`$. The first gauge may coincide with the second one. However, its use is strongly biased by practical necessities of the theory of cosmological perturbations  and, therefore, is usually chosen to be the Newton gauge which is essentially different from the minisuperspace gauge of Sect. 3. Thus we consider these two gauges separately.

### 5.2. Newton gauge

Newton gauge is widely used in the theory of cosmological perturbations  to express them in terms of the Bardeen invariant $`𝒒`$. The Newton gauge for spatially inhomogeneous modes reads

$`B=0,E=0.`$ (5.21)
From the equations for momenta (5.6) and the momentum constraint $`C_B=0`$ this implies that

$`\mathrm{\Pi }_\psi ={\displaystyle \frac{6a^2\sqrt{\gamma }}{\kappa }}\left(\psi ^{}{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa }{2}}\varphi ^{}\delta \varphi +A\right)=0.`$ (5.22)
In the spatially homogeneous sector of the theory, where the contribution of $`B`$ and $`E`$ is missing (they enter only differentiated with respect to spatial coordinates) the latter equation should be regarded as the definition of the Newton gauge. This gauge involves only the phase space coordinate – the momentum $`\mathrm{\Pi }_\psi `$ – and, therefore, it is unitary and can be identified with the gauge (3.13).

Canonical equations of motion for $`(𝚿,𝚷_\psi )`$, which follow from the action (5.14), in this gauge have a simple corollary $`(a\psi )^{}/a\kappa \varphi ^{}\delta \varphi /2=0`$. When compared with (5.6), $`\mathrm{\Pi }_\psi =0`$, this corollary yields the main relation in the Newton gauge

$`A=\psi .`$ (5.23)
Then one easily expresses all the perturbations in terms of the physical phase space variables $`(𝒒,𝒑)`$. On substituting the Lagrangian value of the momentum (5.17) these expressions finally simplify to

$`\psi ={\displaystyle \frac{\kappa \varphi ^{}}{2a}}𝒒,`$ (5.24)
$`\delta \varphi ={\displaystyle \frac{(\varphi ^{}𝒒)^{}}{a\varphi ^{}}}.`$ (5.25)
Eqs. (5.23)-(5.25) form the needed set of relations (3.16) of the physical reduction for minisuperspace perturbations.

### 5.3. Minisuperspace gauge

The minisuperspace gauge $`\chi (a,\varphi )=0`$ of Sect. 3 was used for the physical reduction of the minisuperspace wavefunction and for establishing the tree-level initial conditions – for the classical background. Let us now use it in order to find the initial conditions for $`(𝒒,𝒑)`$. The linearized minisuperspace gauge condition (the gauge (3.13) in condensed notations of Sect. 3.1) gives the perturbation of $`a`$ in terms of $`\delta \varphi `$. Taking into account the relations (5.20), expressing $`\delta a`$ in terms of the perturbation $`\psi `$, we get

$`\psi ={\displaystyle \frac{\chi _\varphi }{a\chi _a}}\delta \varphi .`$ (5.26)
The corresponding reduction of the symplectic form gives the expression for the physical momentum $`p_{\delta \varphi }`$ conjugated to $`\delta \varphi `$

$`\mathrm{\Pi }_\psi \psi ^{}+\mathrm{\Pi }_{\delta \varphi }\delta \varphi ^{}=p_{\delta \varphi }\delta \varphi ^{}+\mathrm{},p_{\delta \varphi }=\mathrm{\Pi }_{\delta \varphi }+\mathrm{\Pi }_\psi {\displaystyle \frac{\chi _\varphi }{a\chi _a}}.`$ (5.27)
Then, by solving the linearized constraint $`C_A=0`$ one easily finds $`\mathrm{\Pi }_\psi `$ and $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{\delta \varphi }`$ as functions of $`(\delta \varphi ,p_{\delta \varphi })`$ and, via the formalism above, proceeds to the final transformation relating $`(𝒒,𝒑)`$ to $`(\delta \varphi ,p_{\delta \varphi })`$

$`𝒒(\eta )={\displaystyle \frac{1}{M}}\left[\left({\displaystyle \frac{\varphi ^{\prime \prime }}{\varphi ^{}}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{a^2\chi _a}{3}}+{\displaystyle \frac{2\chi _\varphi ^2}{\kappa \chi _a}}\right]\delta \varphi (\eta )+{\displaystyle \frac{\chi _a}{3M\sqrt{\gamma }}}p_{\delta \varphi }(\eta ),`$ (5.28)
$`𝒑(\eta )=\sqrt{\gamma }\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa \varphi ^2}{4M}}\left[\left({\displaystyle \frac{\varphi ^{\prime \prime }}{\varphi ^{}}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{a^2\chi _a}{3}}+{\displaystyle \frac{2\chi _\varphi ^2}{\kappa \chi _a}}\right]{\displaystyle \frac{M}{\chi _a}}\right\}{\displaystyle \frac{3}{}}\delta \varphi (\eta )+{\displaystyle \frac{\chi _a}{M}}{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa \varphi ^2}{4}}p_{\delta \varphi }(\eta ),`$ (5.29)
$`M\varphi ^{}\chi _\varphi +a\chi _a.`$ (5.30)
Note that this relation is written down in the homogeneous sector which is emphasized by the time arguments of the phase space variables. In the right hand side of these equations the spatial homogeneity manifests itself in the particular value of the operator $`D`$, $`D=3`$. One can easily check that this transformation is canonical, $`\{𝒒,𝒑\}=\{\delta \varphi ,p_{\delta \varphi }\}=1`$, and invertible. Inverting it, one can find all the minisuperspace perturbations as functions of $`𝒒`$ and $`𝒒^{}`$, similarly to the relations (5.23)-(5.25) in the Newton gauge. However, the goal of working in the gauge (4.13) is somewhat different. We shall need the relations (5.28)-(5.30) in order to express initial conditions for $`(𝒒(\eta ),𝒑(\eta ))`$ in terms of initial conditions for $`(\delta \varphi ,p_{\delta \varphi })`$. The latter in their turn follow from the cosmological wavefunction in the physical sector.

We begin by noting that at the initial moment of time the following relations hold

$`=\eta +O(\eta ^2),\varphi ^{}={\displaystyle \frac{3V_\varphi }{\kappa V}}\eta +O(\eta ^2),{\displaystyle \frac{}{\varphi ^{}}}|_0={\displaystyle \frac{^{}}{\varphi ^{\prime \prime }}}|_0={\displaystyle \frac{\kappa V}{3V_\varphi }},`$
$`M=\eta \left({\displaystyle \frac{3}{\kappa V}}\right)^{1/2}\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{V_\varphi ^2}{\kappa V^2}}\right)+O(\eta ^2),\eta 0.`$
Using these relations in eqs(5.28)-(5.29) we obtain the asymptotic behavior of the invariant variables $`(𝒒,𝒑)`$ for $`\eta 0`$ in terms of the physical variables of the minisuperspace gauge fixing $`(\delta \varphi (\eta ),p_{\delta \varphi }(\eta ))`$

$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{\kappa V}{3}}\right)^{1/2}𝒒{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3\eta }}\delta \varphi +{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa V}{9}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{19ϵ^2/16}}{\displaystyle \frac{p_{\delta \varphi }}{\sqrt{\gamma }}},`$ (5.31)
$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{3}{\kappa V}}\right)^{1/2}𝒑{\displaystyle \frac{9}{\kappa V}}(19ϵ^2/32)\sqrt{\gamma }\delta \varphi ,\eta 0.`$ (5.32)
Just to emphasize the role of the slow roll expansion we retained here the corrections proportional to the smallness parameter

$`ϵ^2{\displaystyle \frac{8}{3}}{\displaystyle \frac{V_\varphi ^2}{\kappa V^2}}1.`$ (5.33)
In what follows we shall systematically discard such corrections retaining only the leading order of the slow roll expansion.

Important peculiarity of the behavior (5.31)-(5.32) is its singularity at $`\eta 0`$. This singularity is, however, an artifact of the definition of the invariant variables (5.15) nonanalytic at $`\varphi ^{}0`$, rather than the manifestation of some physical inconsistencies. To see it, one can decompose the general classical solution for $`𝒒(\eta )`$ in the sum of two linearly independent solutions of the equation of motion for the action (5.18)

$`𝒒(\eta )=c_+𝒒_+(\eta )+c_{}𝒒_{}(\eta ),`$ (5.34)
$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{d^2}{d\eta ^2}}+\varphi ^{}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{\varphi ^{}}}\right)^{\prime \prime }+{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa \varphi ^2}{2}}+3\right)𝒒_\pm (\eta )=0.`$ (5.35)
Because of $`\varphi ^{}(1/\varphi ^{})^{\prime \prime }2/\eta ^2,\eta 0`$, the initial moment $`\eta =0`$ is a singular point of this differential equation, at which one of the two solutions, $`𝒒_{}(\eta )`$, diverges as $`1/\varphi ^{}`$. One can make a singular rescaling,

$`𝒒{\displaystyle \frac{𝑸}{\varphi ^{}}},`$ (5.36)
to a new variable $`𝑸(\eta )`$ which is finite at this point. It satisfies the equation

$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{d^2}{d\eta ^2}}+2{\displaystyle \frac{\varphi ^{\prime \prime }}{\varphi ^{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{d}{d\eta }}+{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa \varphi ^2}{2}}+3\right)𝑸(\eta )=0,`$ (5.37)
and has as two solutions the following regular functions

$`𝑸_+(\eta )=\eta ^3\left(1+O(\eta ^2)\right),`$ (5.38)
$`𝑸_{}(\eta )=13\eta ^2/2+O(\eta ^3).`$ (5.39)
Substituting the decomposition (5.34), with $`𝒒_\pm `$ related to $`𝑸_\pm `$ by (5.36), to the left hand sides of (5.31)-(5.32) one obtains the system of equations for $`c_\pm `$ with singular coefficients. This system, however, has a regular solution in terms of the initial conditions for physical variables $`(\delta \varphi (0),p_{\delta \varphi }(0))`$

$`c_+={\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\kappa V}{3}}\right)^{1/2}{\displaystyle \frac{V_\varphi }{\kappa V}}{\displaystyle \frac{p_{\delta \varphi }(0)}{\sqrt{\gamma }}},`$ (5.40)
$`c_{}=\left({\displaystyle \frac{3}{\kappa V}}\right)^{1/2}{\displaystyle \frac{V_\varphi }{\kappa V}}\delta \varphi (0).`$ (5.41)
This basic relation will be used throughout the rest of the paper to express the Heisenberg operators of quantum perturbations $`\mathrm{\Delta }\widehat{Q}_{\mathrm{phys}}(\eta )`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }\widehat{Q}(\eta )`$ in terms of the Schrodinger operators, $`\delta \widehat{\varphi }(0)=\delta \varphi ,\widehat{p}_{\delta \varphi }(0)=/i(\delta \varphi )`$, and then find the quantum averages of their bilinear combinations in the inflaton representation of the initial density matrix (3.50).

## 6. Non-minimal model

In what follows we go over to the model (2.5) that has a good peak-like behavior of the initial distribution function of the inflaton . The inflaton-graviton sector of the action in this model can be rewritten in the form

$`S[g_{\mu \nu },\phi ]={\displaystyle d^4xg^{1/2}\left\{V(\phi )+U(\phi )R\frac{1}{2}G(\phi )(\phi )^2\right\}}.`$ (6.1)
In fact, the curvature (and derivative) expansion of any low-energy effective graviton-scalar action can be truncated to this form with some coefficient functions of the zeroth and first order in the curvature – the scalar field potential $`V(\phi )`$, the effective $`\phi `$-dependent Planck “mass” $`16\pi U(\phi )`$ and the coefficient of the inflaton kinetic term $`G(\phi )`$. In the classical model (2.5) these functions have a particular form

$`U(\phi )={\displaystyle \frac{m_P^2}{16\pi }}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}|\xi |\phi ^2,`$ (6.2)
$`V(\phi )={\displaystyle \frac{m^2\phi ^2}{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda \phi ^4}{4}},`$ (6.3)
$`G(\phi )=1.`$ (6.4)
It is well known that the action (6.1) can be transformed to the Einstein frame by a special conformal transformation and reparametrization of the inflaton field $`(g_{\mu \nu },\phi )(\overline{g}_{\mu \nu },\overline{\phi })`$,

$`S[g_{\mu \nu },\phi ]=\overline{S}[\overline{g}_{\mu \nu },\overline{\phi }],`$
$`\overline{S}[\overline{g}_{\mu \nu },\overline{\phi }]={\displaystyle d^4x\overline{g}^{1/2}\left\{\overline{V}(\overline{\phi })+\frac{m_P^2}{16\pi }R(\overline{g}_{\mu \nu })\frac{1}{2}(\overline{}\overline{\phi })^2\right\}}.`$ (6.5)
In what follows, we shall denote the fields and other objects in the Einstein frame of the non-minimal model by bars and identify them with those of the minimal model considered in Sects. 3 - 5. In this way we reduce all the calculations, Cauchy data setting, gauge fixing, reduction to the physical sector, etc. to the algorithms derived above for the case of the minimal model.

### 6.1. Reparametrization to the minimal frame

The transformations relating the actions $`S[g_{\mu \nu },\phi ]`$ and $`\overline{S}[\overline{g}_{\mu \nu },\overline{\phi }]`$ are implicitly given by equations

$`\overline{g}_{\mu \nu }={\displaystyle \frac{16\pi U(\phi )}{m_P^2}}g_{\mu \nu },`$ (6.6)
$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{d\overline{\phi }}{d\phi }}\right)^2={\displaystyle \frac{m_P^2}{16\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{GU+3U_\phi ^2}{U^2}},`$ (6.7)
where, similarly to previous sections, $`\phi `$-subscripts denote the derivatives of the coefficient functions with respect to the inflaton, $`V_\phi dV/d\phi ,V_{\phi \phi }d^2V/d\phi ^2`$, etc. The action in terms of new fields (6.5) has a minimal coupling and the new inflaton potential

$`\overline{V}(\overline{\phi })=\left({\displaystyle \frac{m_P^2}{16\pi }}\right)^2{\displaystyle \frac{V(\phi )}{U^2(\phi )}}|_{\phi =\phi (\overline{\phi })}.`$ (6.8)
For the coefficient functions (6.2)-(6.3) the explicit reparametrization between the frames can be found for large value of the nonminimal coupling constant $`|\xi |1`$ and small value of the parameter $`m_P^2/|\xi |\phi ^21`$

$`\phi (\overline{\phi }){\displaystyle \frac{m_P}{|\xi |^{1/2}}}\mathrm{exp}\left[\sqrt{4\pi /3}\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{6|\xi |}}\right)^{1/2}{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{\phi }}{m_P}}\right],`$ (6.9)
$`\overline{V}(\overline{\phi })={\displaystyle \frac{\lambda m_P^4}{256\pi ^2|\xi |^2}}\left[\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}{\displaystyle \frac{1+\delta }{4\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{m_P^2}{|\xi |\phi ^2}}+\mathrm{}\right]_{\phi =\phi (\overline{\phi })},`$ (6.10)
where we have retained only the first order term in $`m_P^2/|\xi |\phi ^2`$. In view of (6.9), for large $`\overline{\phi }`$ this potential exponentially approaches a constant and satisfies the slow roll approximation with the expansion parameter

$`ϵ={\displaystyle \frac{m_P}{\sqrt{3\pi }}}{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{V}_{\overline{\phi }}(\overline{\phi })}{\overline{V}(\overline{\phi })}}{\displaystyle \frac{1+\delta }{3\pi }}\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{6|\xi |}}\right)^{1/2}{\displaystyle \frac{m_P^2}{|\xi |\phi ^2}}1,`$ (6.11)
which justifies the smallness of the parameter $`m_P^2/|\xi |\phi ^2`$ chosen above.

Let us now consider the minimal model of Sects. 3 - 5 as an Einstein frame of the non-minimal model and label all the objects of the minimal model – the metric, inflaton field, scale factor, conformal time, cosmological perturbations and the minisuperspace gauge fixing conditions – by bars

$`\overline{g}_{\mu \nu },\varphi =\overline{\phi },\overline{a},\overline{\eta },`$
$`\overline{\psi },\delta \varphi =\delta \overline{\phi },\overline{A},\overline{\mathrm{\Pi }}_\psi ,\overline{\mathrm{\Pi }}_{\delta \varphi },\overline{\chi }(\overline{a},\overline{\phi }),`$ (6.12)
as opposed to the objects in the original – non-minimal – frame: $`g_{\mu \nu },\phi ,a,\eta ,\psi ,\delta \phi ,A,\chi (a,\phi )`$. Comparing the metrics in these frames, perturbed by the cosmological disturbances from the scalar sector,

$`ds^2=a^2\left[(1+2A)d\eta ^2+(12\psi )\gamma _{ij}dx^idx^j\right],`$
$`d\overline{s}^2=\overline{a}^2\left[(1+2\overline{A})d\overline{\eta }^2+(12\overline{\psi })\gamma _{ij}dx^idx^j\right],`$ (6.13)
$`d\overline{s}^2={\displaystyle \frac{16\pi U}{m_P^2}}ds^2,`$ (6.14)
one finds the relations between these two sets of variables

$`\overline{a}=\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{16\pi U(\phi )}{m_P^2}}}a\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{8\pi |\xi |\phi ^2}{m_P^2}}}a,\overline{\eta }=\eta ,`$ (6.15)
$`\delta \varphi \delta \overline{\phi }=\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{m_P^2}{16\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{U+3U^2}{U^2}}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{3}{4\pi }}}{\displaystyle \frac{m_P}{\phi }}\delta \phi ,`$ (6.16)
$`\overline{\psi }=\psi {\displaystyle \frac{U_\phi }{2U}}\delta \phi \psi {\displaystyle \frac{\delta \phi }{\phi }},`$ (6.17)
$`\overline{A}=A+{\displaystyle \frac{U_\phi }{2U}}\delta \phi A+{\displaystyle \frac{\delta \phi }{\phi }},`$ (6.18)
where the last three relations hold in the linear order of perturbation theory in cosmological disturbances. The canonical momenta $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{\delta \phi }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Pi }_\psi `$ obviously transform by the rule contragradient to (6.16) and (6.17).

We also need the frame transformation between the physical sectors defined in the minisuperspace gauge of Sect. 5.3. The gauge condition itself transforms as a scalar – only in this case it represents one and the same Cauchy surface, written in two different coordinate systems on minisuperspace

$`\overline{\chi }(\overline{a},\overline{\phi })=\chi (a,\phi ).`$ (6.19)
As regards the reparametrization beteween these coordinate systems, (6.9) and (6.15), it has a general form

$`\overline{\phi }=\overline{\phi }(\phi ),\overline{a}=\overline{a}(\phi ,a),`$ (6.20)
mixing the inflaton and the scale factor only in the transformation of $`a`$. Therefore, the linearized perturbations of $`a`$ and $`\phi `$ and their momenta in both frames are related by a triangular transformation

$`\delta \overline{\phi }={\displaystyle \frac{\overline{\phi }}{\phi }}\delta \phi ,\overline{\psi }={\displaystyle \frac{1}{a}}{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{a}}{\phi }}\delta \phi +{\displaystyle \frac{a}{\overline{a}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{a}}{a}}\psi ,`$ (6.21)
$`\overline{\mathrm{\Pi }}_{\delta \phi }={\displaystyle \frac{\phi }{\overline{\phi }}}\mathrm{\Pi }_{\delta \phi }{\displaystyle \frac{1}{a}}{\displaystyle \frac{a}{\overline{\phi }}}\mathrm{\Pi }_\psi ,\overline{\mathrm{\Pi }}_\psi ={\displaystyle \frac{\overline{a}}{a}}{\displaystyle \frac{a}{\overline{a}}}\mathrm{\Pi }_\psi .`$ (6.22)
The physical momentum $`\overline{p}_{\delta \phi }`$ expresses in terms of phase space momenta by the barred version of eq. (5.27). Then, in view of the above relations, one easily finds

$`\overline{p}_{\delta \phi }={\displaystyle \frac{\phi }{\overline{\phi }}}p_{\delta \phi }.`$ (6.23)
This equation holds exactly for an arbitrary choice of the gauge condition function $`\chi (a,\phi )`$, and this is a corollary of the triangular form of the transformation (6.20). In our nonminimal model with $`|\xi |1`$ this implies the following simple relation between the physical sectors in two frames

$`\delta \overline{\phi }\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{3}{4\pi }}}m_P{\displaystyle \frac{\delta \phi }{\phi }},\overline{p}_{\delta \phi }\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{4\pi }{3}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\phi }{m_P}}p_{\delta \phi }.`$ (6.24)
### 6.2. Quadratic order currents

In the minisuperspace sector of the non-minimal model $`Q=(N(t),a(t),\phi (t))`$ the functional derivatives of the classical action read

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{a^3\sqrt{\gamma }}}{\displaystyle \frac{\delta S}{\delta N}}=6U(\phi )\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{a^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\dot{a}^2}{a^2}}\right)+6U_\phi (\phi )\dot{\phi }{\displaystyle \frac{\dot{a}}{a}}{\displaystyle \frac{\dot{\phi }^2}{2}}V(\phi ),`$ (6.25)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{Na^3\sqrt{\gamma }}}{\displaystyle \frac{\delta S}{\delta \phi }}=\ddot{\phi }3{\displaystyle \frac{\dot{a}}{a}}\dot{\phi }+6U_\phi (\phi )\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{a^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\ddot{a}}{a}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\dot{a}^2}{a^2}}\right)V_\phi (\phi ),`$ (6.26)
where dots are used to denote the parametrization invariant derivative $`\dot{a}da/Ndt,\dot{\phi }d\phi /Ndt`$. Now we use the perturbed ansatz (6.13) for total minisuperspace variables in these equations, $`N^2N_{\mathrm{tot}}^2=a^2(1+2A)`$, $`a^2a_{\mathrm{tot}}^2=a^2(12\psi )`$, $`\phi \phi _{\mathrm{tot}}=\phi +\delta \phi `$, and carefully expand the first order variations of the classical action up to the second order in perturbations $`(A,\psi ,\delta \phi )`$ on the classical background. The result reads as follows

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{a\sqrt{\gamma }}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\delta S}{\delta N}}\right]_2=A^2\left(24U^2+24U_\phi \phi ^{}2\phi ^2\right)`$
$`+A\psi \left(36U^2+36U_\phi \phi ^{}3\phi ^2\right)+A\psi ^{}\left(24U+12U_\phi \phi ^{}\right)`$
$`+A\delta \phi \left(12U_\phi ^212U_{\phi \phi }\phi ^{}\right)+A\delta \phi ^{}\left(12U_\phi +2\phi ^{}\right)`$
$`12U\psi ^2+\psi \psi ^{}\left(12U+6U_\phi \phi ^{}\right)+6U\psi ^2`$
$`+\psi \delta \phi \left[6U_\phi (1+3^2)18U_{\phi \phi }\phi ^{}+3a^2V_\phi \right]`$
$`+\psi ^{}\delta \phi \left(12U_\phi 6U_{\phi \phi }\phi ^{}\right)+\psi \delta \phi ^{}\left(18U_\phi +3\phi ^{}\right)6U_\phi \psi ^{}\delta \phi ^{}`$
$`+\delta \phi ^2\left[3U_{\phi \phi }\left(1+^2\right){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}a^2V_{\phi \phi }+3U_{\phi \phi \phi }\phi ^{}\right]`$
$`+6U_{\phi \phi }\delta \phi \delta \phi ^{}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\delta \phi ^2,`$ (6.27)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{a^2\sqrt{\gamma }}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\delta S}{\delta \phi }}\right]_2=A^2\left(2a^2V_\phi 12U_\phi \right)+AA^{}\left(18U_\phi 3\phi ^{}\right)`$
$`+A\psi \left(6a^2V_\phi 24U_\phi \right)+(A\psi )^{}\left(18U_\phi 3\phi ^{}\right)+6U_\phi (A\psi ^{})^{}`$
$`+A\delta \phi \left[6U_{\phi \phi }(1^2^{})a^2V_{\phi \phi }\right]+2A\delta \phi ^{}`$
$`6U_{\phi \phi }A^{}\delta \phi +(A\delta \phi ^{})^{}`$
$`12U_\phi \psi ^2+\psi \psi ^{}\left(18U_\phi 3\phi ^{}\right)+6U_\phi \psi \psi ^{\prime \prime }`$
$`+\psi \delta \phi \left[6U_{\phi \phi }(1+3^2+3^{})+3a^2V_{\phi \phi }\right]18U_{\phi \phi }\psi ^{}\delta \phi `$
$`+6\psi \delta \phi ^{}+3(\psi \delta \phi ^{})^{}6U_{\phi \phi }\psi ^{\prime \prime }\delta \phi `$
$`+\delta \phi ^2\left[3U_{\phi \phi \phi }\left(1+^2+^{}\right){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}a^2V_{\phi \phi \phi }\right].`$ (6.28)
Here the unlabelled variables correspond to the minisuperspace background in the conformal time gauge, $`N=a,t=\eta `$, primes denote derivatives with respect to $`\eta `$ and $`=a^{}/a`$ denotes the conformal time background Hubble constant. The background satisfies classical equations of motion which were used to simplify the coefficients of the above quadratic forms in $`\mathrm{\Delta }Q=(A,\psi ,\delta \phi )`$.

### 6.3. Quantum rolling force: effective action and minisuperspace contributions

In the presence of the spatial densities of one-loop radiation currents

$`j_N{\displaystyle \frac{1}{a^3\sqrt{\gamma }}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\delta S}{\delta N}}\right]_2,`$ (6.29)
$`j_\phi {\displaystyle \frac{1}{Na^3\sqrt{\gamma }}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\delta S}{\delta \phi }}\right]_2,`$ (6.30)
$`N`$ and $`\phi `$ components of the effective equations of motion in the non-minimal model read

$`6U\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{a^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\dot{a}^2}{a^2}}\right)+6U_\phi \dot{\phi }{\displaystyle \frac{\dot{a}}{a}}{\displaystyle \frac{\dot{\phi }^2}{2}}V+j_N=0,`$ (6.31)
$`\ddot{\phi }3{\displaystyle \frac{\dot{a}}{a}}\dot{\phi }+6U_\phi \left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{a^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\ddot{a}}{a}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\dot{a}^2}{a^2}}\right)V_\phi +j_\phi =0.`$ (6.32)
In view of eqs.(3.10) and (3.20) their $`a`$-component expresses in terms of the above two ones, so that eqs.(6.31)-(6.32) in a consistent manner exhaust the quantum dynamics of the mean fields. Differentiating the first of them with respect to time one obtains the system of two equations for $`\ddot{a}`$ and $`\ddot{\phi }`$. Substituting the solution of this system for $`\ddot{a}`$ into the second equation one finally has the equation for the mean inflaton field with quantum contributions to the friction term and the rolling force

$`\ddot{\phi }+\left(3{\displaystyle \frac{\dot{a}}{a}}{\displaystyle \frac{a}{2\dot{a}}}U_\phi j_\phi \right)\dot{\phi }F(\phi ,a,\dot{\phi })=0,`$ (6.33)
$`F(\phi ,a,\dot{\phi })={\displaystyle \frac{2VU_\phi UV_\phi }{U+3U_\phi ^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\dot{\phi }^2{\displaystyle \frac{d}{d\phi }}\mathrm{ln}(U+3U_\phi ^2)+F_{\mathrm{loop}}(\phi ,a,\dot{\phi },\dot{a}),`$ (6.34)
$`F_{\mathrm{loop}}(\phi ,a,\dot{\phi },\dot{a})={\displaystyle \frac{1}{U+3U_\phi ^2}}\left(Uj_\phi 2U_\phi j_N{\displaystyle \frac{a}{2\dot{a}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dj_N}{dt}}\right).`$ (6.35)
The first two terms in eq.(6.34) represent the classical rolling force, the $`\dot{\phi }^2`$ contribution belonging to the subleading order of the slow roll expansion. As regards the quantum part, its radiation currents in the one-loop approximation split into the contributions of the quantum mechanical sector and the field sector of spatially inhomogeneous modes, $`j_{1\mathrm{loop}}=j^q+j^f`$ (cf. eq.(3.34)). According to the discussion of Sect. 3.1, see eqs.(3.45)-(3.48), the $`f`$-part of the current can be absorbed by the replacement of the original classical action with the effective one (3.48). This implies the replacement of the classical coefficient functions $`V(\phi ),U(\phi ),G(\phi )`$, (6.2)-(6.4), by their effective counterparts

$`S_{\mathrm{eff}}[g_{\mu \nu },\phi ]={\displaystyle d^4xg^{1/2}\left\{V^{\mathrm{eff}}(\phi )+U^{\mathrm{eff}}(\phi )R\frac{1}{2}G^{\mathrm{eff}}(\phi )(\phi )^2+\mathrm{}\right\}},`$ (6.36)
and truncation of the (generally infinite) series to the first three terms. This truncation is based on two assumptions – the smallness of inflaton derivatives due to the slow roll regime and smallness of $`R/m_{\mathrm{part}}^2`$ – the curvature to particle mass squared ratio101010The Schwinger-DeWitt expansion involves the inverse powers of masses of particles of constituent quantum fields. The latter acquire their masses via the Higgs effect due to the interaction with the inflaton, so that this ratio becomes order of magnitude $`\lambda /|\xi |1`$ .. Thus, with this approximation, the effective equations of motion in our non-minimal model take the form of (6.31) and (6.33) with $`V_{\mathrm{eff}}(\phi ),U_{\mathrm{eff}}(\phi ),G_{\mathrm{eff}}(\phi )`$ replacing $`V(\phi ),U(\phi ),G(\phi )`$ and the radiation currents $`j_N,j_\phi `$ saturated by the contribution of the quantum mechanical mode, $`j_N^q,j_\phi ^q`$. The resulting rolling force in the leading order of the slow roll expansion becomes the sum of the force induced by the effective action, $`F^{\mathrm{eff}}`$, and the quantum mechanical force, $`F^q`$,

$`F=F^{\mathrm{eff}}+F^q,`$ (6.37)
$`F^{\mathrm{eff}}={\displaystyle \frac{2V^{\mathrm{eff}}U_\phi ^{\mathrm{eff}}U^{\mathrm{eff}}V_\phi ^{\mathrm{eff}}}{G^{\mathrm{eff}}U^{\mathrm{eff}}+3(U_\phi ^{\mathrm{eff}})^2}},`$ (6.38)
$`F^q={\displaystyle \frac{1}{U+3U_\phi ^2}}\left(Uj_\phi ^q2U_\phi j_N^q{\displaystyle \frac{a}{2\dot{a}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dj_N^q}{dt}}\right).`$ (6.39)
The one-loop calculation of $`V_{\mathrm{eff}}(\phi ),U_{\mathrm{eff}}(\phi )`$ and $`G^{\mathrm{eff}}(\phi )`$ and the effect of $`F^{\mathrm{eff}}`$ on the inflationary dynamics have been studied in . This effect is qualitatively different for the no-boundary and tunneling cases and briefly looks as follows. For the no-boundary state the one-loop corrections in the distribution function add up to form the full Euclidean effective action

$`\rho _{NB}(\phi )=\mathrm{const}\mathrm{exp}[𝚪(\phi )],`$ (6.40)
$`𝚪(\phi )=𝑰(\phi )+𝚪^{1\mathrm{loop}}(\phi )={\displaystyle \frac{96\pi ^2[U_{\mathrm{eff}}(\phi )]^2}{V_{\mathrm{eff}}(\phi )}}+O(\mathrm{}^2).`$ (6.41)
Its value on the DeSitter instanton follows from that of the classical Euclidean action, $`𝑰(\phi )=96\pi ^2U^2/V`$, by replacing the classical coefficient functions $`V(\phi ),U(\phi )`$ and $`G(\phi )`$ by the effective ones, coinciding with those of the Lorentzian effective action (6.36). Therefore, by the direct inspection of (6.38) one observes that the effective rolling force in the no-boundary case is proportional to the derivative of the distribution function111111The explanation of this observation is simple. In the minimal frame the rolling force is given by the gradient of the potential, while the logarithm of the distribution function is inverse proportional to it, the combination $`V^{\mathrm{eff}}(\phi )/[U^{\mathrm{eff}}(\phi )]^2`$ representing the minimal frame potential in terms of the non-minimal objects (6.8).

$`F_{NB}^{\mathrm{eff}}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{96\pi ^2U^{\mathrm{eff}}}}{\displaystyle \frac{(V^{\mathrm{eff}})^2}{G^{\mathrm{eff}}U^{\mathrm{eff}}+3(U_\phi ^{\mathrm{eff}})^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{d}{d\phi }}\mathrm{ln}\rho _{NB}(\phi )`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{\lambda m_P^2(1+\delta )}{48\pi \xi ^2}}\phi \left(1{\displaystyle \frac{\phi ^2}{\phi _I^2}}\right)+O(1/|\xi |^3),`$ (6.42)
and, thus, vanishes at the probability peak $`\phi _I`$. The no-boundary peak is realized for $`1+\delta <0`$, therefore the point $`\phi _I`$ turns out to be an attractor – quantum terms in effective rolling force lock the inflaton at its constant initial value and give rise to infinitely long inflationary scenario with exactly DeSitter spacetime.

In the tunneling case, the distribution function is not related to the overall effective action, because its tree-level part has a wrong sign. The probability peak exists in the opposite range of the parameter (2.9), $`\delta >1`$, and the rolling force

$`F_T^{\mathrm{eff}}={\displaystyle \frac{\lambda m_P^2(1+\delta )}{48\pi \xi ^2}}\phi \left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{\phi ^2}{\phi _I^2}}\right)+O(1/|\xi |^3)`$ (6.43)
has the quantum term which initially doubles the negative classical part. Therefore, the inflaton starts slowly decreasing under the influence of this force, and the tunneling state generates a finite inflation stage with the estimated e-folding number (2.15). These conclusions disregard the contribution of the quantum mechanical radiation currents, and we proceed to their calculation.

### 6.4. Quantum state of the minisuperspace perturbations and their correlators

The calculation of quantum averages in the quadratic currents (6.27) and (6.28) requires the set of quantum correlators (3.49) of bilinear combinations of minisuperspace disturbances $`\mathrm{\Delta }\widehat{Q}=(A,\psi ,\delta \phi )`$ and their derivatives. For this purpose we, first, need the reduced density matrix of the inflaton field $`\rho (\phi ,\phi ^{})`$ in the non-minimal model and, second, the expressions for the Heisenberg operators $`\mathrm{\Delta }\widehat{Q}(\eta )`$ in terms of the Schrodinger operators of initial perturbations and their momenta, $`\delta \widehat{\phi }=\delta \phi `$, $`\widehat{p}_{\delta \phi }=/i(\delta \phi )`$.

As we know, the diagonal element of the density matrix has a quasi-gaussian behavior (2.12), which is, however, insufficient for averaging the operators involving momenta. The necessary off-diagonal elements with one-loop contributions of various massive and massless fields have been calculated in . It was shown that in the model with a big $`|\xi |`$ the initial density matrix describes practically pure quantum state and expresses in terms of the distribution function

$`\rho (\phi ,\phi ^{})|_{t=0}\sqrt{\rho (\phi )}\sqrt{\rho (\phi ^{})},|\xi |1.`$ (6.44)
The explanation of this property  is based on the fact that the decoherence factor $`D(\phi ,\phi ^{})`$ by which the initial density matrix differs from (6.44) is a function of the arguments $`m/H(\phi )`$ and $`m/H(\phi ^{})`$ for a quantum field of a mass $`m`$. For large $`|\xi |`$ the masses of particles generated by the Higgs effect give rise to big and predominantly $`\phi `$-independent ratio $`m/H(\phi )\sqrt{|\xi |}`$, so that $`D(\phi ,\phi ^{})1`$. For massless fields a similar conclusion can be drawn because for them the role of mass is played by the Hubble constant $`H(\phi )`$ of the quasi-DeSitter background.

In view of (2.12), the effectively pure quantum state,

$`𝚿_{NB,T}(\phi )\sqrt{\rho _{NB,T}(\phi )},`$ (6.45)
in the vicinity of the probability maximum, which is located at $`\phi _I`$, can, thus, be approximated by the gaussian packet of small quantum width $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$

$`𝚿_{NB,T}(\delta \phi )𝚿_{NB,T}(\phi _I+\delta \phi )={\displaystyle \frac{1}{(2\pi )^{1/4}\sqrt{\mathrm{\Delta }}}}\mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\delta \phi ^2}{4\mathrm{\Delta }^2}}\right].`$ (6.46)
The operators of quantum disturbances in the $`\delta \phi `$-representation, acting on the wavefunction of the above type can be found by collecting together several sets of equations derived above. First, we use the equations (6.16)-(6.18), relating $`\mathrm{\Delta }Q`$ to the Einstein frame perturbations $`\mathrm{\Delta }\overline{Q}`$. Then, we apply the barred version of equations (5.23)-(5.25) to express the minisuperspace perturbations $`\mathrm{\Delta }\overline{Q}`$ in the Newton gauge as functions of the invariants $`𝒒`$ and $`𝒒^{}`$ in the minimal frame. Finally, we use the set of equations (5.34), (5.36) and (5.40)-(5.41) with barred (minimal frame) potential and physical variables to express these invariants in terms of $`\delta \overline{\phi }`$ and $`\overline{p}_{\delta \phi }`$. The final result looks as follows

$`A={\displaystyle \frac{1}{3a\phi ^{}}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa }{|\xi |}}}\left[\left(𝑸_+^{}{\displaystyle \frac{3\phi ^{}}{\phi }}𝑸_+\right)\widehat{c}_++\left(𝑸_{}^{}{\displaystyle \frac{3\phi ^{}}{\phi }}𝑸_{}\right)\widehat{c}_{}\right],`$ (6.47)
$`\psi ={\displaystyle \frac{1}{3a\phi ^{}}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa }{|\xi |}}}\left[\left(𝑸_+^{}+{\displaystyle \frac{3\phi ^{}}{\phi }}𝑸_+\right)\widehat{c}_++\left(𝑸_{}^{}+{\displaystyle \frac{3\phi ^{}}{\phi }}𝑸_{}\right)\widehat{c}_{}\right],`$ (6.48)
$`\delta \phi ={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{6|\xi |}a\phi ^{}}}\left(𝑸_+^{}\widehat{c}_++𝑸_{}^{}\widehat{c}_{}\right),`$ (6.49)
where the operators $`\widehat{c}_\pm `$ with the aid of (6.24) read as

$`\widehat{c}_+={\displaystyle \frac{1+\delta }{576\pi ^3}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{2\pi }{3}}}{\displaystyle \frac{m_P^3}{|\xi |^2\phi _I}}{\displaystyle \frac{}{i(\delta \phi )}},`$ (6.50)
$`\widehat{c}_{}={\displaystyle \frac{1+\delta }{2\lambda \pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{m_P^3}{\phi _I^3}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2\pi }}}\delta \phi .`$ (6.51)
Now we are ready to find the quantum correlators necessary for the radiation currents. We choose a symmetrized combination of disturbances and their conformal time derivatives, $`\mathrm{\Delta }Q_{1,2}=(\mathrm{\Delta }\widehat{Q},\mathrm{\Delta }\widehat{Q}^{},\mathrm{\Delta }\widehat{Q}^{\prime \prime })`$, in the definition of the correlator

$`<\mathrm{\Delta }Q_1\mathrm{\Delta }Q_2>{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle d(\delta \phi )𝚿^{}(\delta \phi )(\mathrm{\Delta }\widehat{Q}_1\mathrm{\Delta }\widehat{Q}_2+\mathrm{\Delta }\widehat{Q}_2\mathrm{\Delta }\widehat{Q}_1)𝚿(\delta \phi )},`$ (6.52)
because in the Hermitian operators of quadratic currents (3.9) the products of operator valued disturbances automatically enter in symmetrized form (in view of the symmetry of the 3-vertex function). The further calculation of the correlators and radiation currents is straightforward. However, the general answer that involves the basis functions $`𝑸_\pm (\eta )`$ for arbitrary $`\eta `$ is still very complicated. Therefore, we separately consider the beginning of the inflation epoch, $`\eta =0`$, and the late stationary stage of inflation.

## 7. The onset of inflation

At the onset of inflation the basis functions $`𝑸_\pm (\eta )`$ have a behaviour (5.38)-(5.39). Using it in eqs.(6.47)-(6.49) with the operators $`\widehat{c}_\pm `$ defined by (6.50)-(6.51) one easily obtains the initial equal-time correlators with respect to the gaussian state (6.46).

In the leading order of the slow roll expansion those correlators that do not involve derivatives (potential type correlators) read

$`<A^2>_0=<A\psi >_0=<\psi ^2>_0={\displaystyle \frac{\lambda }{288\pi ^2|\xi |^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{f}},`$
$`<\psi \delta \phi >_0=<A\delta \phi >_0={\displaystyle \frac{\lambda \phi _I}{288\pi ^2|\xi |^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{f}},`$
$`<\delta \phi ^2>_0={\displaystyle \frac{\lambda \phi _I^2}{288\pi ^2|\xi |^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{f}},`$ (7.1)
while the correlators of conformal time “velocities” (the kinetic type correlators) equal

$`<A^2>_0=<A^{}\psi ^{}>_0=<\psi ^2>_0={\displaystyle \frac{\lambda }{288\pi ^2|\xi |^2}}f,`$
$`<\psi ^{}\delta \phi ^{}>_0=<A^{}\delta \phi ^{}>_0={\displaystyle \frac{\lambda \phi _I}{288\pi ^2|\xi |^2}}f,`$
$`<\delta \phi ^2>_0={\displaystyle \frac{\lambda \phi _I^2}{288\pi ^2|\xi |^2}}f.`$ (7.2)
As we see, these two groups of correlators differ by the power of a special parameter $`f`$ which is inverse proportional to the square of quantum dispersion of the inflaton field

$`f{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda }{48\pi ^2|\xi |^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\kappa \mathrm{\Delta }^2}}=\left({\displaystyle \frac{𝑨}{16\pi ^2}}\right)^2{\displaystyle \frac{|\xi |}{|1+\delta |}}.`$ (7.3)
Such a dependence on $`f`$ reflects an obvious fact that the kinetic type correlators (or correlators of momenta) in the gaussian state of the form (6.46) are inverse proportional to $`\mathrm{\Delta }^2`$, and thus grow with $`\mathrm{\Delta }0`$, while the potential type correlators (correlators of coordinates) are proportional to $`\mathrm{\Delta }^2`$, and thus decrease with the narrowing of the gaussian peak.

The calculation of mixed correlators with one or two derivatives of the form

$`<\mathrm{\Delta }Q\mathrm{\Delta }Q^{}>_0=<\mathrm{\Delta }Q\mathrm{\Delta }Q>_0O(ϵ^2),<\mathrm{\Delta }Q\mathrm{\Delta }Q^{\prime \prime }>_0=<\mathrm{\Delta }Q\mathrm{\Delta }Q>_0O(ϵ)`$ (7.4)
shows that they belong to the subleading order in the slow roll parameter (6.11). Finally, the additional correlators with three derivatives, which arise in the calculation of $`dj_N^q/dt`$ in the quantum rolling force (6.39), express as

$`<\psi ^{\prime \prime }\delta \phi ^{}>_0=<\psi ^{}\delta \phi ^{\prime \prime }>_0=2<\psi ^{}\delta \phi ^{}>_0,`$
$`<\delta \phi ^{}\delta \phi ^{\prime \prime }>_0=2<\delta \phi ^2>_0,`$
$`<\psi ^{}\psi ^{\prime \prime }>_0=2<\psi ^2>_0,\eta 0.`$ (7.5)
Although they tend to zero in view of $`(\eta )0`$ at $`\eta 0`$, their contribution to the quantum rolling force is nontrivial because in (6.35) they are devided by $`\dot{a}/a=/a`$.

Let us now go over to the calculation of radiation currents at $`\eta =0`$. Within the slow roll approximation, $`m_P^2/|\xi |\phi ^21`$, $`|\xi |1`$, and in view of a particular form of classical coefficient functions $`V(\phi ),U(\phi )`$, the quadratic currents (6.27)-(6.28) are dominated by the following expressions involving both the potential and kinetic terms

$`j_N^q(0)={\displaystyle \frac{\lambda \phi ^4}{4}}\left[2<\psi ^2>+{\displaystyle \frac{10}{\phi }}<\psi \delta \phi >{\displaystyle \frac{15}{\phi ^2}}<\delta \phi ^2>+<\psi ^2>{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\phi }}<\psi ^{}\delta \phi ^{}>\right],`$ (7.6)
$`j_\phi ^q(0)=\lambda \phi ^3\left[4<A\psi >+{\displaystyle \frac{7}{\phi }}<\psi \delta \phi >+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}<A^{}\psi ^{}>\right].`$ (7.7)
On using the tables of correlators above, the radiation currents, contributing to the quantum rolling force, take the following final form

$`j_N(0)={\displaystyle \frac{\lambda \phi _I^4}{4}}{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda }{96\pi ^2|\xi |^2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{f}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}f\right),`$ (7.8)
$`j_\phi (0)=\lambda \phi _I^3{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda }{96\pi ^2|\xi |^2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{f}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}f\right),`$ (7.9)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{a}{2\dot{a}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dj_N}{dt}}(0)=0.`$ (7.10)
These quantities are strongly suppressed as compared to their classical values, $`j_N=V(\phi _I)\lambda \phi _I^4/4`$, $`j_\phi =V_\phi (\phi _I)\lambda \phi _I^3`$ by a very small

factor $`\lambda /|\xi |^2\mathrm{\Delta }T^2/T^210^{10}`$ related to the CMBR anisotropy. Their sign crucially depends on the magnitude of the parameter $`f`$, (7.3), which in our model is likely to be very big, $`f1`$. This follows from the estimate $`N60`$ on the e-folding number (2.15) and the value of $`|\xi |10^4`$ . In this case, the terms proportional to $`f1/\mathrm{\Delta }^2`$, generated by the kinetic terms of the radiation currents, $`<\mathrm{\Delta }Q^{}\mathrm{\Delta }Q^{}>`$, dominate and, in particular, result in

$`\epsilon ^q(0)=j_N(0){\displaystyle \frac{\lambda ^2|1+\delta |}{18|\xi |^3}}{\displaystyle \frac{m_P^4}{(16\pi ^2)^2}}m_P^4.`$ (7.11)
Interestingly, the sign of the quantum rolling force due to the homogeneous mode is independent of the magnitude of $`f`$, because in the leading order of the slow-roll expansion the contributions of potential terms, $`<\mathrm{\Delta }Q\mathrm{\Delta }Q>1/f`$, completely cancel out

$`F^q(0)={\displaystyle \frac{Uj_\phi ^q(0)2U_\phi j_N^q(0)}{U+3U_\phi ^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda \phi _I^3}{36}}{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda }{96\pi ^2|\xi |^3}}f>0.`$ (7.12)
In view of the expressions for $`f`$ and $`\phi _I`$, (2.10), the magnitude of this force is again much smaller than its classical counterpart

$`F^q(0)={\displaystyle \frac{\lambda m_P^2}{48\pi |\xi |^3}}\phi _I{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda }{144\pi ^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{𝑨}{16\pi ^2}}|F^{\mathrm{class}}(0)|{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda }{144\pi ^2|\xi |}}{\displaystyle \frac{𝑨}{16\pi ^2|1+\delta |}}|F^{\mathrm{class}}(0)|.`$ (7.13)
Therefore, for the tunneling state it gives a negligible contribution to the effective force (6.43). For the no-boundary state, the initial effective force (6.42) vanishes, but the only effect that the positive $`F^q(0)`$ can produce in this case is that it shifts the equilibrium point from $`\phi _I`$ to slightly higher value of the inflaton $`\phi _{}`$, $`F^q(0)+F_{NB}^{\mathrm{eff}}(\phi _{})=0`$, at which again the system will undergo endless inflation.

## 8. Late stage of inflation

At late stationary stage of inflation the dynamics of the classical background can be approximated by the ansatz

$`a={\displaystyle \frac{1}{H(\phi )}}\mathrm{cosh}[H(\phi )t],\phi \phi _I,`$ (8.1)
$`H^2(\phi )={\displaystyle \frac{V(\phi )}{6U(\phi )}}{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda \phi ^2}{12|\xi |}}`$ (8.2)
with the Hubble constant $`H(\phi )`$ approximately linear in $`\phi `$. In the Einstein frame, it looks similar with the Hubble constant which is practically independent of the inflaton $`\overline{H}^2(\overline{\phi })=8\pi \overline{V}(\overline{\phi })/3m_P^2\lambda m_P^2/96\pi |\xi |^2`$, the cosmic time parameters being related in both frames by $`\overline{t}t\sqrt{8\pi |\xi |}\phi /m_P`$.

The transition period between the onset of inflation and its steady stage can be described by solving the inflaton equation with the approximately constant rolling force $`F`$ and the friction term based on the ansatz (8.1) for $`\dot{a}/a`$

$`\ddot{\phi }+3H\mathrm{tanh}(Ht)\dot{\phi }F=0,`$
$`\phi (0)=\phi _I,\dot{\phi }(0)=0.`$ (8.3)
For late times, $`Ht1`$ (but not so late that the inflaton field evolves too far from its initial value), the exact solution to this equation

$`\phi (t)=\phi _I+{\displaystyle \frac{F}{3H^2}}\mathrm{ln}(\mathrm{cosh}Ht)+{\displaystyle \frac{F}{3H^2}}\mathrm{tanh}^2(Ht)`$ (8.4)
reads as an almost linear function of $`t`$

$`\phi (t)=\phi _I+{\displaystyle \frac{F}{3H}}t+{\displaystyle \frac{F}{3H^2}}(1\mathrm{ln}2)+O\left(e^{2Ht}\right).`$ (8.5)
This behaviour corresponds to neglecting the $`\ddot{\phi }`$ term in the inflaton equation of motion and solving it for $`\dot{\phi }`$, $`\dot{\phi }F/3H`$. In our model with the classical rolling force (2.14), $`\dot{\phi }4\phi Hϵ/3H\phi `$ with $`ϵm_P^2/|\xi |\phi ^2`$ – the slow roll smallness parameter (6.11). Thus, in the lowest order of the slow roll approximation the inflaton field remains constant.

Let us study the behaviour of the basis functions $`𝑸_\pm (\eta )`$ for $`Ht1`$. To begin with, note that for late times corresponding to exponentially large scale factor the potential terms in the wave equation for $`𝑸_\pm (\eta )`$, (5.37), can be discarded. The first one, $`\kappa \overline{\phi }^2/2=O(ϵ^2)`$, is small in view of the slow roll regime and the second one, the spatial curvature term $`3`$, is small compared to the kinetic terms growing with $`a`$, $`d^2/d\eta ^2a^2d^2/dt^2`$. Therefore, at late times this equation simplifies to

$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{d^2}{d\eta ^2}}+2{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{\phi }^{\prime \prime }}{\overline{\phi }^{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{d}{d\eta }}\right)𝑸_\pm (\eta )=0,`$ (8.6)
and has two explicit solutions $`𝑸_\pm `$

$`𝑸_{}(\eta )=1,`$ (8.7)
$`𝑸_+(\eta )=N_+{\displaystyle _0^\eta }𝑑\stackrel{~}{\eta }\overline{\phi }^2(\stackrel{~}{\eta }),N_+\left({\displaystyle \frac{8\pi |\xi |\phi _I^2}{m_P^2}}\right)^2{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{m_P^2(1+\delta )^2}},`$ (8.8)
compatible with the expansions (5.38)-(5.39) at early times $`\eta 0`$. (The mismatch between the constant function (8.7) and eq.(5.39) has a simple explanation: the term $`3\eta ^2/2`$ in $`𝑸_{}`$ of eq.(5.39) is induced by the curvature term which we discard at late times, while the $`O(\eta ^3)`$ corrections are due to the perturbation $`\kappa \overline{\phi }^2/2`$.) In terms of the cosmic time in the original frame, $`𝑸_+`$ represents a well known growing mode  which for late times in the slow roll approximation reads as

$`𝑸_+={\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}\mathrm{sinh}Ht.`$ (8.9)
Thus at late times the operator of the invariant cosmological perturbation is dominated by the growing mode

$`\widehat{𝑸}(t)=\widehat{c}_+𝑸_+(t)+\widehat{c}_{}𝑸_{}(t)\widehat{c}_+𝑸_+(t),Ht1,`$ (8.10)
and in the Newton gauge all the minisuperspace perturbations express in terms of one operator $`\widehat{c}_+`$ defined by the momentum $`\widehat{p}_{\delta \phi }`$, (6.50),

$`\overline{A}=\overline{\psi }={\displaystyle \frac{\kappa 𝑸}{2\overline{a}(t)}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{\pi \lambda }{54}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\widehat{c}_+}{m_P|\xi |}},`$
$`\delta \overline{\phi }={\displaystyle \frac{\dot{𝑸}}{\overline{a}(t)\dot{\overline{\phi }}(t)}}{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{2\lambda }}{3}}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi \phi ^2}{m_P^2(1+\delta )}}\widehat{c}_+.`$ (8.11)
Since $`\delta \overline{\phi }`$ contains $`\dot{\overline{\phi }}`$ in the denominator, all the other perturbations in the minimal frame are much smaller in magnitude, $`(\overline{A},\overline{\psi })O(ϵ)\delta \overline{\phi }/m_P\delta \overline{\phi }/m_P`$. Therefore, in view of eqs.(6.16)-(6.18) the perturbations in the non-minimal frame read

$`A\psi =\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{4\pi }{3}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\delta \overline{\phi }}{m_P}},\delta \phi \sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{4\pi }{3}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\phi }{m_P}}\delta \overline{\phi },Ht1.`$ (8.12)
Another important property of the perturbations in both frames is that to the leading order in slow roll they are constant in time for $`Ht1`$. This follows from eqs.(8.11) containing the exponentially growing functions of time in both of its numerator and denominator (respectively $`𝑸`$ and $`\overline{a}`$). As a result, the time derivatives of perturbations belong to the subleading order of the slow roll expansion, $`\mathrm{\Delta }\dot{Q}(\dot{A},\dot{\psi },\delta \dot{\phi })=O(ϵ)\mathrm{\Delta }Q`$.

Thus, we arrive at the following list of correlators at late times. The potential type correlators read

$`<A^2>=<\psi ^2>=<A\psi >={\displaystyle \frac{\lambda }{2592\pi ^2|\xi |^2}}f,`$
$`<\psi \delta \phi >=<A\delta \phi >={\displaystyle \frac{\lambda \phi }{2592\pi ^2|\xi |^2}}f,`$
$`<\delta \phi ^2>={\displaystyle \frac{\lambda \phi ^2}{2592\pi ^2|\xi |^2}}f,`$ (8.13)
where the parameter $`f`$ is given by eq.(7.3), while the kinetic type correlators are negligibly small

$`<\mathrm{\Delta }Q\mathrm{\Delta }Q^{}>=O(ϵ)aH<\mathrm{\Delta }Q\mathrm{\Delta }Q>,`$
$`<\mathrm{\Delta }Q^{}\mathrm{\Delta }Q^{}>=O(ϵ^2)(aH)^2<\mathrm{\Delta }Q\mathrm{\Delta }Q>,`$
$`<\mathrm{\Delta }Q\mathrm{\Delta }Q^{\prime \prime }>=O(ϵ)(aH)^2<\mathrm{\Delta }Q\mathrm{\Delta }Q>,`$
$`<\mathrm{\Delta }Q^{}\mathrm{\Delta }Q^{\prime \prime }>=O(ϵ^2)(aH)^3<\mathrm{\Delta }Q\mathrm{\Delta }Q>`$ (8.14)
In view of these relations, the terms that give the leading contribution to radiation currents are exhausted by a small fraction of terms in the equations (6.27)-(6.28). They include only the potential type correlators and read

$`j_N^q={\displaystyle \frac{\lambda \phi ^4}{4}}\left[4+6{\displaystyle \frac{4}{\phi }}+{\displaystyle \frac{6}{\phi }}<\psi \delta \phi >{\displaystyle \frac{5}{\phi ^2}}<\delta \phi ^2>\right],`$ (8.15)
$`j_\phi ^q=\lambda \phi ^3\left[2+6{\displaystyle \frac{8}{\phi }}+{\displaystyle \frac{6}{\phi }}<\psi \delta \phi >{\displaystyle \frac{3}{\phi ^2}}<\delta \phi ^2>\right].`$ (8.16)
The resulting radiation currents, thus, equal

$`j_N^q={\displaystyle \frac{\lambda \phi ^4}{4}}{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda }{864\pi ^2|\xi |^2}}f,`$ (8.17)
$`j_\phi ^q={\displaystyle \frac{\lambda \phi ^3}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda }{864\pi ^2|\xi |^2}}f,Ht1`$ (8.18)
Similarly to the onset of inflation, eqs.(7.8)-(7.9), they are strongly suppressed relative to the classical values, $`V(\phi )\lambda \phi ^4/4`$ and $`V_\phi (\phi )\lambda \phi ^3`$ by the factor $`\lambda /|\xi |^210^{10}`$. In absolute units, the energy density of the quantum mechanical mode is given by

$`\epsilon ^q=j_N^q{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda ^2|1+\delta |}{54|\xi |^3}}{\displaystyle \frac{m_P^4}{(16\pi ^2)^2}},|\epsilon ^q|m_P^4.`$ (8.19)
Note that, in contrast to the onset of inflation, this energy is negative. Apparently, this is a manifestation of the ghost nature of the invariant physical mode $`𝒒`$, whose kinetic term enters the action (5.18) with the wrong sign. In the slow roll approximation with negligible $`\dot{\phi }`$ a constant energy density (8.19) in view of eq.(3.30) – the conservation law for radiation current – generates the effective equation of state of the inflaton excitation mode

$`\epsilon ^q+p^q=0,\epsilon ^q<0,Ht1,`$ (8.20)
which in the absence of other sources would maintain the Anti-DeSitter spacetime. Similar equation of state at the onset of inflation corresponds to the DeSitter case, so that the inflaton quantum excitation undergoes a sort of phase transition reversing the sign of its energy density.

In view of the relation between the radiation currents, $`j_N^q=\phi j_\phi /4+O(ϵ)`$, and approximately constant value of $`j_N^q`$, $`dj_N^q/dt=O(ϵ)`$, the quantum rolling force in eq.(6.35),

$`F^q{\displaystyle \frac{1}{6|\xi |\phi }}\left(\phi j_\phi ^q4j_N^q{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2H}}{\displaystyle \frac{dj_N^q}{dt}}\right)=O(ϵ),`$ (8.21)
vanishes in the leading order of the slow roll expansion. Thus, similarly to the onset of inflation, at late times of inflation epoch $`F^q`$ does not qualitatively change the cosmological evolution.

## 9. Conclusions

We have developed a general framework for effective equations of inflationary dynamics in quantum cosmology and for their quantum Cauchy problem with no-boundary and tunneling quantum states. This framework combines the Euclidean effective action method and the method of direct quantum averaging for calculations of two distinctly different parts of radiation currents – contributions of the field theoretical and quantum mechanical (minisuperspace) sectors of the system. We focus on the latter and show that its calculation is based on explicit physical reduction for the spatially homogeneous cosmological perturbation. Because of the ghost nature of this perturbation, its effect is not related to the conventional analytic continuation from the Euclidean spacetime. Rather, in the model of strongly coupled non-minimal inflaton it originates from the quasi-gaussian state which incorporates the tree-level and one-loop effects on the DeSitter instanton. It is, thus, irrelevant to the DeSitter invariant Euclidean vacuum and cannot be obtained by analytic continuation from the Euclidean section of spacetime. This means that the universality of analytic continuation methods of  should not be overestimated – they apply to spatially inhomogeneous, particle like excitation but may fail for minisuperspace cosmological modes.

Unfortunately, the dynamical contribution of the quantum mechanical mode to effective equations turned out to be disappointingly small – it is strongly dominated by the effective rolling force (contributed on equal footing by the classical term and the one-loop term due to the inhomogeneous modes). The property of its strong suppression by powers of $`1/|\xi |1`$ was actually conjectured in , and now it is quantitatively confirmed. Thus, the inflaton mode cannot change the dynamical predictions in spatially closed model with strong non-minimal coupling. As a model of the low-energy quantum origin of the Universe only the tunneling state remains observationally justified, because the no-boundary wavefunction generates infinitely long inflationary stage. The role of this mode should not, however, be underestimated, because its effect is model dependent, and might be important in other models generating initial conditions for inflation . Moreover, the quantum inflaton mode simulates the DeSitter and Anti-DeSitter effective equations of state, $`\epsilon +p=0`$, respectively at the onset of inflation and at late times. The sign of its energy density contribution can change depending on the balance of the potential and kinetic terms of this ghost mode. Therefore, it is not quite clear at the moment, what can the role of this mode be at post inflationary epoch. A natural question arises if this mode can be responsible for the present day observable acceleration of the Universe  as an alternative to quintessence  or be capable of inducing DeSitter-anti-DeSitter phase transitions in cosmology? This question is subject to further studies .

## Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Russian Foundation for Basic Research under the grant No 99-02-16122. The work of A.O.B. was also supported by the grant of support of leading scientific schools No 00-15-96699. The work of D.V.N. was supported by the grant of support of leading scientific schools No 00-15-96566. This work has also been supported in part by the Russian Research program “Cosmomicrophysics”.