format: text

text:
# Bianchi II Brane-world Cosmologies (𝒰≥0)

## I Introduction

It is theorized that Einstein’s General Relativity breaks down at sufficiently high energies. Therefore, General Relativity may not be the most appropriate choice for a gravitational theory in the very early universe. Developments in string theory suggest that gravity may truly be a higher dimensional theory, becoming an effective 4-dimensional theory at lower energies. Some researchers have suggested an alternative scenario in which the matter fields are restricted to a $`3`$-dimensional brane-world embedded in $`1+3+d`$ dimensions (the bulk), while the gravitational field is free to propagate in the $`d`$ extra dimensions Rubakov83 ; Antoniadis98 ; Binetruy00a . This new scenario for the gravitational field will have significant implications for cosmology.

The dynamical equations on the 4-dimensional brane-world differ from the field equations of General Relativity, since there exist additional terms that carry non-local gravitational effects from the bulk onto the brane. These additional terms are quadratic in nature and reduce to the regular Einstein Field equations of General Relativity for late times. However, for early times, these quadratic terms will play a very critical role in the evolutionary dynamics of these brane-world models.

A lot of effort has been directed at the so-called perfect fluid Friedmann Brane-world models Binetruy00a ; Kaloper99 ; Mukohyama00 ; Binetruy00b ; Campos01a ; Campos01b . More recently, people have begun to investigate anisotropic brane-world models Campos01a ; Campos01b ; Maartens01 ; Toporensky01 ; Coley02 ; Russians , trying to determine the effects of the bulk gravitational field. People have also begun to look at the effect of scalar fields in the Friedmann brane-world Goheer02 . It is known in General Relativity that only sets of measure zero in the set of all spatially homogeneous models (satisfying a set of reasonable energy conditions) will isotropize CollinsHawking73 . It is not yet clear whether this result holds for spatially homogeneous brane-world models as well.

General relativistic cosmological models containing both a perfect fluid and a scalar field having an exponential potential have been previously studied Billyard99 ; vandenHoogen99 ; Billyard98 . One of the exact solutions found in these models is a spatially flat isotropic model with the property that the energy density of the scalar field is proportional to the energy density of the perfect fluid, and consequently are labeled scaling cosmologies (See Wands97 ; Copeland98  and references therein). It was found in Billyard99 ; vandenHoogen99 ; Billyard98  that these cosmological scaling solutions are in general not stable, and hence do not represent typical late-time behaviour. However, during the evolution of one of these cosmological models containing both a perfect fluid and a scalar field having an exponential potential, these scaling solutions may play an important role in the intermediate or transient behaviour of these cosmologies, since the scalar field and the perfect fluid are non-negligible in a neighborhood of the scaling solution. In particular, in these models a significant portion of the current energy density of the Universe could be contained in the scalar field whose dynamical effects mimic those of cold dark matter.

In general relativistic cosmological models, the Bianchi II model plays an important role in the past asymptotic behaviour of the Bianchi IX models. Recently, Coley Coley02  has argued that the Bianchi type IX model has an isotropic singularity in the brane-world scenario. This indicates that the Bianchi II model in the brane-world scenario may also have a behaviour that is different than in the general relativistic case. In this paper, we shall assume that the brane-world is a spatially homogeneous Bianchi type II model containing both a scalar field and a perfect fluid. Consequently, due to the additional terms that carry non-local gravitational effects from the bulk onto the brane, new evolutionary behaviours in the cosmologies are expected. In particular, with a combination of a perfect fluid and a scalar field, due to the quadratic nature of the non-local gravitational effects, a wide variety of new and exotic asymptotic and transient behaviours are possible.

Maartens Maartens00  and Shiromizo et al. Shiromizu00 ; Sasaki00  have developed an elegant covariant approach to the bulk effects on the brane. The equations derived by Maartens are an extension of earlier work by Ellis and MacCallum EllisMacCallum69  that has been subsequently developed more recently in the book by Wainwright and Ellis EllisWainwright97 . Using the formalism developed by Maartens and Wainwright and Ellis, we propose to investigate the dynamical behavior in a wider class of anisotropic models than what has been previously analyzed.

The resulting field equations will yield a system of ordinary differential equations, suitable for a geometric analysis using dynamical systems techniques. This analysis will determine whether the dynamics of the brane-world scenario mimics the dynamics of a General Relativistic cosmology or at the very least, is asymptotic to a general relativistic cosmology. One would be interested in both the early (nature of the initial singularity) and late time behavior (i.e., whether these models approach the General Relativistic regime and isotropize).

With regards to notation, quantities having a tilde are objects found in the five dimensional bulk while non-tilde quantities are objects restricted to the four dimensional brane-world. The upper case latin subscipts $`(A,B,C,\mathrm{})`$ range from $`\mathrm{0..4}`$, the lower case latin subscripts $`a,b,c,\mathrm{})`$ range from $`\mathrm{0..3}`$ and the greek subscripts $`(\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma ,\mathrm{})`$ range from $`\mathrm{1..3}`$.

## II Governing Equations

The popular brane-world scenario assumes the existence of a domain wall, $`M`$, (a 3-brane) with induced metric $`g_{AB}=\stackrel{~}{g}_{AB}\stackrel{~}{n}_A\stackrel{~}{n}_B`$ in a five dimensional spacetime $`\stackrel{~}{M}`$ with metric $`\stackrel{~}{g}_{AB}`$ where $`\stackrel{~}{n}^A`$ is the spacelike unit vector normal to $`M`$. In a neighborhood of the brane, one can choose coordinates $`x^A=(x^a,\chi )`$ such that $`\stackrel{~}{n}_A=\chi _{,A}`$ where $`\chi =0`$ coincides with the brane. The $`x^a`$ are the spacetime coordinates on the brane $`M`$. The five dimensional field equations are Einstein’s equations with a bulk cosmological constant $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$, and a brane energy-momentum source $`T_{AB}`$,

$$\stackrel{~}{G}_{AB}=\stackrel{~}{\kappa }^2[\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}g_{AB}+\delta (\chi )\{\lambda g_{AB}+T_{AB}\}]$$

where $`\stackrel{~}{\kappa }^2=8\pi /\stackrel{~}{M}_\mathrm{p}^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3}}`$, with $`\stackrel{~}{M}_\mathrm{p}`$ being the five-dimensional Plank mass and $`\lambda `$ is the brane tension.

The field equations induced on the brane have been derived using a geometric approach by Shiromizu et al. Shiromizu00 ; Sasaki00 ; Maartens00 , using the Gauss-Codazzi equations, Israel’s junction condition and imposing a $`Z_2`$ symmetry with the brane as a fixed point. The result is a modification of the standard Einstein equations with new terms ($`S_{ab}`$ and $`_{ab}`$ which are defined later) carrying bulk effects onto the brane:

$$G_{ab}=\mathrm{\Lambda }g_{ab}+\kappa ^2T_{ab}+\stackrel{~}{\kappa }^4S_{ab}_{ab}$$
(1)
where

$$\kappa ^2=\frac{8\pi }{M_\mathrm{p}^2}\lambda =6\frac{\kappa ^2}{\stackrel{~}{\kappa }^4}\mathrm{\Lambda }=\frac{4\pi }{\stackrel{~}{M}_\mathrm{p}^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3}}}\left[\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}+\left(\frac{4\pi }{3\stackrel{~}{M}_\mathrm{p}^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3}}}\right)\lambda ^2\right]$$
(2)
with $`M_\mathrm{p}`$ being the four-dimensional Plank mass, and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is the effective four-dimensional cosmological constant on the Brane. It is common to assume that the effective cosmological constant, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, on the brane is zero through fine tuning of the brane tension $`\lambda `$. However, we shall assume for the moment that it is non-zero.

We will assume that the source term, $`T_{ab}`$ (restricted to the Brane) is a non-interacting mixture of ordinary matter having energy density $`\rho `$, and a minimally coupled scalar field, $`\varphi `$, that is

$$T_{ab}=T_{ab}^{perfectfluid}+T_{ab}^{scalarfield}.$$
(3)
We will assume that the matter component is equivalent to a co-moving perfect fluid with 4-velocity $`u^a`$ and a linear barotropic equation of state $`p=(\gamma 1)\rho `$. Energy conditions impose the restriction $`\rho 0`$ and causality requires that $`\gamma [0,2]`$. We will assume that the potential for the scalar field has an exponential form, that is, $`V(\varphi )=V_0e^{k\kappa \varphi }=V_0e^{\frac{\sqrt{8\pi }}{M_p}k\varphi }`$. The energy-momentum tensors restricted to the brane for a perfect fluid and a minimally-coupled scalar field are

$`T_{ab}^{perfectfluid}`$ $`=`$ $`\rho u_au_b+ph_{ab},`$ (4)
$`T_{ab}^{scalarfield}`$ $`=`$ $`\varphi _{;a}\varphi _{;b}g_{ab}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\varphi _{;c}\varphi ^{;c}+V(\varphi )\right),`$ (5)
where the projection tensor $`h_{ab}g_{ab}+u_au_b`$ projects orthogonal to $`u^a`$. We note that if $`\varphi ^{;a}`$ is timelike, then a scalar field with potential $`V(\varphi )`$ is equivalent to a perfect fluid having an energy density and isotropic pressure

$`\rho ^{scalarfield}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\varphi _{;c}\varphi ^{;c}+V(\varphi ),`$ (6)
$`p^{scalarfield}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\varphi _{;c}\varphi ^{;c}V(\varphi ).`$ (7)
The bulk corrections to the Einstein equations on the brane are of two forms: firstly, the matter fields contribute local quadratic energy-momentum corrections via the tensor $`S_{ab}`$, and secondly, there are nonlocal effects from the free gravitational field in the bulk. The local matter corrections are given by

$$S_{ab}=\frac{1}{12}T_c{}_{}{}^{c}T_{ab}^{}\frac{1}{4}T_{ac}T^c{}_{b}{}^{}+\frac{1}{24}g_{ab}[3T_{cd}T^{cd}(T_c{}_{}{}^{c})^2].$$
(8)
Since the $`S_{ab}`$ is essentially quadratic in the energy momentum tensor, we should expect cross terms between the scalar field and the perfect fluid. In this paper we shall assume that the gradient of the scalar field $`\varphi ^{;a}`$, is aligned with the fluid 4-velocity, $`u^a`$, that is $`\varphi ^{;a}/\sqrt{\varphi _{;b}\varphi ^{;b}}=u^a`$. In general $`\varphi ^{;a}`$ need not be aligned with $`u^a`$ thereby creating a rich variety of cross terms. The local brane effects due to a combination of a perfect fluid and a scalar field are

$`S_{ab}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{12}}\left(\rho {\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\varphi _{;c}\varphi ^{;c}+V(\varphi )\right)^2u_au_b`$ (9)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{12}}\left(\rho {\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\varphi _{;c}\varphi ^{;c}+V\right)\left(\rho +2p{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}\varphi _{;c}\varphi ^{;c}V(\varphi )\right)h_{ab}`$
The non-local effects from the free gravitational field in the bulk are characterized by the projection of the bulk Weyl tensor onto the brane. Given a timelike congruence on the brane, the bulk correction, $`_{ab}`$ can be decomposed Maartens00  via

$$_{ab}=\left(\frac{\stackrel{~}{\kappa }}{\kappa }\right)^4\left[𝒰(u_au_b+\frac{1}{3}h_{ab})+𝒫_{ab}+2𝒬_{(a}u_{b)}\right]$$
(10)
(See Maartens00  for further details.) In general, the conservation equations (the contracted Bianchi identities on the brane) do not determine all of the independent components of $`_{ab}`$. In particular, there is no equation to determine $`𝒫_{ab}`$ and hence, in general, the projection of the 5-dimensional field equations onto the brane do not lead to a closed system of equations. In the cosmological context, in which the background metric is spatially homogeneous and isotropic, we have that

$$\mathrm{D}_a𝒰=𝒬_a=𝒫_{ab}=0$$
(11)
where $`\mathrm{D}_a`$ is the totally projected part of the brane covariant derivative. Since $`𝒫_{ab}=0`$, in this case the evolution of $`_{ab}`$ is fully determined RandallSundrum99 ; Arkani-Hamed00 ; ChamblinGibbons00 .

All of the brane source terms and bulk corrections mentioned above may be consolidated into an effective total energy density, pressure, energy flux, and anisotropic pressure as follows. The modified Einstein equations take the standard Einstein form with a redefined energy-momentum tensor:

$$G_{ab}=\kappa ^2T_{ab}^{\mathrm{total}}$$
(12)
where

$$T_{ab}^{\mathrm{total}}\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{\kappa ^2}g_{ab}+T_{ab}+\frac{\stackrel{~}{\kappa }^4}{\kappa ^2}S_{ab}\frac{1}{\kappa ^2}_{ab}.$$
(13)
The total equivalent energy density, pressure, energy flux, and anisotropic pressure due to a perfect fluid, scalar field, and both local and non-local brane effects are

$`\rho ^{\mathrm{total}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{\kappa ^2}}+\rho +\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\varphi _{;a}\varphi ^{;a}+V(\varphi )\right)`$ (14)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{\kappa }^4}{\kappa ^6}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa ^4}{12}}\left(\rho {\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\varphi _{;a}\varphi ^{;a}+V(\varphi )\right)^2+𝒰\right]`$
$`p^{\mathrm{total}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{\kappa ^2}}+p+\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\varphi _{;a}\varphi ^{;a}V(\varphi )\right)`$ (15)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{\kappa }^4}{\kappa ^6}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa ^4}{12}}\left(\rho {\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\varphi _{;a}\varphi ^{;a}+V(\varphi )\right)\left(\rho +2p{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}\varphi _{;a}\varphi ^{;a}V(\varphi )\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}𝒰\right]`$
$`q_a^{\mathrm{total}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{\kappa }^4}{\kappa ^6}}𝒬_a`$ (16)
$`\pi _{ab}^{\mathrm{total}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{\kappa }^4}{\kappa ^6}}𝒫_{ab}`$ (17)
As a consequence of the form of the bulk energy-momentum tensor and the $`Z_2`$ symmetry, it follows Shiromizu00 ; Sasaki00  that the brane energy-momentum tensor separately satisfies the conservation equations, (where we have tacitly assumed that the scalar field and the matter are non-interacting) that is,

$`T_{b;a}^{aperfectfluid}`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$ (18)
$`T_{b;a}^{ascalarfield}`$ $`=`$ $`0.`$ (19)
Given that $`T_{b;a}^a=0`$, the contracted Bianchi identities on the brane imply that the projected Weyl tensor obeys the constraint

$$_{b;a}^a=\stackrel{~}{\kappa }^4S_{b;a}^a.$$
(20)
## III Evolution and Constraint Equations for the Bianchi II Brane-world

### III.1 Orthonormal Frame Formalism

We shall adopt the orthonormal frame formalism as developed by Ellis and MacCallum EllisMacCallum69  and further developed in EllisWainwright97 . We shall assume that there is a $`G_3`$ group of motions acting simply transitively on three dimensional spacelike hypersurfaces. We will choose an orthonormal frame of vector fields $`\{𝐞_a\}`$ and align $`𝐞_0`$ to the fluid 4-velocity $`𝐮`$, i.e., $`𝐞_0=𝐮`$. Essentially we are assuming that the velocity field of the matter source is non-tilted with respect to the normal vector field of the hypersurfaces generated by the $`G_3`$ group of motions. Therefore, the triad of spacelike vectors $`\{𝐞_\alpha \}`$ at each point spans the tangent space of the group orbits and hence coordinates can be chosen such that the commutation functions are functions of $`t`$ only.

The commutation relation between $`𝐞_0`$ and $`𝐞_\alpha `$ yields the kinematic quantities associated with the vector field $`𝐮`$. That is

$$[𝐞_0,𝐞_\alpha ]=\gamma _{0\alpha }^b𝐞_b$$

where

$$\gamma _{0\alpha }^0=\dot{u}_\alpha ,\mathrm{and}\gamma _{0\alpha }^\beta =\sigma _\alpha ^\beta H\delta _\alpha ^\beta ϵ_{\alpha \delta }^\beta (\omega ^\delta +\mathrm{\Omega }^\delta ).$$

Where $`H`$ can be interpreted as the expansion of the fluid, $`\sigma _{\alpha \beta }`$ can be interpreted as the rate of shear tensor of the fluid, $`\dot{u}_\alpha `$ can be interpreted as the acceleration of the fluid, and $`\omega _\alpha `$ is a measure of the vorticity of the fluid. The quantity $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\alpha `$ can be interpreted as the angular velocity of the spatial tetrad $`\{𝐞_\alpha \}`$ with respect to a Fermi-propagated spatial frame. However, with the assumptions made thus far both $`\dot{u}_\alpha =0`$ and $`\omega _\alpha =0`$.

The vector fields $`𝐞_\alpha `$ generate a Lie Algebra with commutation functions $`\gamma _{\alpha \beta }^\delta `$ that can be decomposed in the following way

$`[𝐞_\alpha ,𝐞_\beta ]`$ $`=`$ $`\gamma _{\alpha \beta }^\delta 𝐞_\delta `$ (21)
$`=`$ $`(ϵ_{\alpha \beta \gamma }n^{\delta \gamma }+a_\alpha \delta ^\delta _\beta a_\beta \delta ^\delta _\alpha )𝐞_\delta `$ (22)
where $`n_{\alpha \beta }`$ and $`a_\alpha `$ are functions of time $`t`$ only. One can use a time dependent spatial rotation to diagonalize $`n_{\alpha \beta }=\mathrm{diag}(n_1,n_2,n_3)`$ EllisMacCallum69 ; EllisWainwright97 . The Jacobi identity $`[𝐞_1,[𝐞_2,𝐞_3]]=0`$ (and permutations) imply that $`n_{\alpha \beta }a^\beta =0`$, motivating the classification of a $`G_3`$ group of motions into two classes, Class A where $`a^\alpha =0`$, and Class B where $`a^\alpha 0`$. These two classes be be further sub-classified to yield the nine Bianchi types.

In this paper we are interested in a set of Class A models and in particular the Bianchi type II models. For the Bianchi type II models only one of the $`n_{\alpha \beta }`$ is different from zero. Here we assume that $`n_1=n`$, and $`n_2=n_3=0`$. In addition, we shall assume that the spatial triad $`\{𝐞_\alpha \}`$ is Fermi-propagated which implies that $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\alpha =0`$. In choosing a Fermi-propagated triad, we have effectively determined the effective energy flux, that is, $`q_\alpha ^{\mathrm{total}}=0`$. This then imposes the condition that $`𝒬_\alpha =0`$. In addition, in choosing a Fermi-propogated frame, one now has the freedom to rotate the spatial frame so that $`\sigma _{\alpha \beta }=\mathrm{diag}(\sigma _{11},\sigma _{22},\sigma _{33})`$ EllisMacCallum69 . Since there is no way to determine $`𝒫_{ab}`$ from observations on the brane, we impose the condition that our brane world model should be consistent with a Friedmann-LeMaitre cosmological brane model by assuming that $`𝒫_{\alpha \beta }=0`$. The equations describing the evolution of this class of models can be found in equations 1.90–1.100 of EllisWainwright97 . The Einstein Field equations and Jacobi identities yield

$`\dot{H}`$ $`=`$ $`H^2{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}\sigma ^2{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa ^2}{6}}(\rho ^{\mathrm{total}}+3p^{\mathrm{total}})`$ (23)
$`\dot{\sigma }_{11}`$ $`=`$ $`3H\sigma _{11}{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}n^2`$ (24)
$`\dot{\sigma }_{22}`$ $`=`$ $`3H\sigma _{22}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}n^2`$ (25)
$`\dot{\sigma }_{33}`$ $`=`$ $`3H\sigma _{33}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}n^2`$ (26)
$`\dot{n}`$ $`=`$ $`(H+2\sigma _{11})n`$ (27)
$`\kappa ^2\rho ^{\mathrm{total}}`$ $`=`$ $`3H^2\sigma ^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}n^2`$ (28)
where $`\rho ^{\mathrm{total}}`$, and $`p^{\mathrm{total}}`$ are defined in equations 1415 and we have introduced the constant $`\kappa ^2`$. Note, not all of the above equations are independent in particular $`\sigma _{11}+\sigma _{22}+\sigma _{33}=0`$.

From the conservation equations on the brane, (see equations 18 and 19) we obtain

$`\dot{\rho }`$ $`=`$ $`3\gamma H\rho `$ (29)
$`\ddot{\varphi }`$ $`=`$ $`3H\dot{\varphi }k\kappa V(\varphi )`$ (30)
Furthermore from the Bianchi identities on the brane (see equations 20 and 11) we obtain (see Maartens00 ),

$$\dot{𝒰}=4H𝒰.$$
(31)
### III.2 Dimensionless Formalism

To facilitate the analysis of these models and to compare with previous work we now choose new variables of the form

| $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_+={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\sigma _{22}+\sigma _{33}}{H}}`$, | $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\sqrt{3}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\sigma _{22}\sigma _{33}}{H}}`$, | $`N={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\sqrt{3}}}{\displaystyle \frac{n}{H}}`$, |
| --- | --- | --- |
| $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{pf}={\displaystyle \frac{\kappa ^2\rho }{3H^2}}`$, | $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{3H^2}}`$, | $`\mathrm{\Omega }_𝒰={\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{\kappa }^4}{\kappa ^4}}{\displaystyle \frac{𝒰}{3H^2}}`$, |
| $`\mathrm{\Phi }={\displaystyle \frac{\kappa ^2V}{3H^2}}`$, | $`\mathrm{\Psi }=\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa \dot{\varphi }}{3H}}`$, |  |
| $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda ={\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{\kappa }^4}{36H^2}}\left(\rho +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\dot{\varphi }^2+V\right)^2={\displaystyle \frac{\kappa ^2}{6\lambda H^2}}\left(\rho +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\dot{\varphi }^2+V\right)^2={\displaystyle \frac{3H^2}{2\kappa ^2\lambda }}\left(\mathrm{\Omega }_{pf}+\mathrm{\Psi }^2+\mathrm{\Phi }\right)^2`$ | | |

(32)
and a new time variable

$$\frac{dt}{d\tau }=\frac{1}{H}.$$

The system of equations (2331) becomes (where prime denotes differentiation with respect to $`\tau `$).

$`\mathrm{\Sigma }_+^{}`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_+(q2)+4N^2`$ (33)
$`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{}^{}`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{}(q2)`$ (34)
$`N^{}`$ $`=`$ $`N(q4\mathrm{\Sigma }_+)`$ (35)
$`\mathrm{\Omega }_{pf}^{}`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{pf}\left(2q(3\gamma 2)\right)`$ (36)
$`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }^{}`$ $`=`$ $`2\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }(q+1)`$ (37)
$`\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda ^{}`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda \left(2q(3\gamma _\lambda 2)\right)`$ (38)
$`\mathrm{\Omega }_𝒰^{}`$ $`=`$ $`2\mathrm{\Omega }_𝒰(q1)`$ (39)
$`\mathrm{\Psi }^{}`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Psi }(q2){\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{6}}{2}}k\mathrm{\Phi }`$ (40)
$`\mathrm{\Phi }^{}`$ $`=`$ $`2\mathrm{\Phi }(q+1+{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{6}}{2}}k\mathrm{\Psi })`$ (41)
where

$`q`$ $``$ $`2\mathrm{\Sigma }_+^2+2\mathrm{\Sigma }_{}^2+{\displaystyle \frac{3\gamma 2}{2}}\mathrm{\Omega }_{pf}\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }+{\displaystyle \frac{3\gamma _\lambda 2}{2}}\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda +\mathrm{\Omega }_𝒰+2\mathrm{\Psi }^2\mathrm{\Phi },`$
$`\gamma _\lambda `$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2\gamma \mathrm{\Omega }_{pf}+4\mathrm{\Psi }^2}{\mathrm{\Omega }_{pf}+\mathrm{\Psi }^2+\mathrm{\Phi }}},`$ (42)
where the generalized Friedmann equation becomes

$$\mathrm{\Omega }^{\mathrm{total}}\mathrm{\Omega }_{pf}+\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }+\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda +\mathrm{\Omega }_𝒰+\mathrm{\Psi }^2+\mathrm{\Phi }=1\mathrm{\Sigma }_+^2\mathrm{\Sigma }_{}^2N^2.$$
(43)
In addition, the equation for $`H`$ decouples and becomes

$$H^{}=(1+q)H$$
(44)
We have now determined the equations describing the evolution of the Bianchi II brane-world model. The resulting equations are suitable for a qualitative analysis using techniques from dynamical systems theory. In general, if we let $`𝐗=[\mathrm{\Sigma }_+,\mathrm{\Sigma }_{},N,\mathrm{\Omega }_{pf},\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda },\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda ,\mathrm{\Omega }_𝒰,\mathrm{\Psi },\mathrm{\Phi }]`$, then the system of equations (33), can be interpreted as $`𝐗^{}=𝐅(𝐗)`$ where $`𝐅:𝐗^9^9`$. Please see review of dynamical systems theory in EllisWainwright97  and other texts such as Perko91 ; Wiggins90  for a more complete description of dynamical systems techniques applied to systems of ordinary differential equations.

## IV  Qualitative Analysis of the Bianchi II Brane World Models

### IV.1 Invariant Sets

We note that equation (43) is a constraint or conservation equation that we rewrite as

$$G(𝐗)1\mathrm{\Sigma }_+^2\mathrm{\Sigma }_{}^2N^2\mathrm{\Omega }_{pf}\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Omega }_𝒰\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda \mathrm{\Phi }\mathrm{\Psi }^2=0.$$
(45)
Hence the phase space of the dynamical system $`𝒮`$ is an eight dimensional subset of $`^9`$, where

$$𝒮=\{𝐗^9|G(𝐗)=0\}.$$

Here, one is able to use (45) to eliminate the variable $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ globally from the dynamical system (33), which results in a system of eight differential equations.

The dynamical system (33) is invariant under the transformation $`NN`$, therefore without loss of generality we restrict the analysis to the set $`N0`$. The set $`N^+=\{𝐗𝒮|N>0\}`$ represents Bianchi II models, where as, the set $`N^0=\{𝐗𝒮|N=0\}`$ represents the Bianchi I models (if $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_+^2+\mathrm{\Sigma }_{}^20`$) or the zero curvature Friedman-Lemaitre models (if $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_+^2+\mathrm{\Sigma }_{}^2=0`$).

The dynamical system (33) is also invariant under the transformation $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{}\mathrm{\Sigma }_{}`$, therefore without loss of generality we restrict the analysis to the set $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{}0`$.

The evolution equation for $`\mathrm{\Omega }_𝒰`$ implies that the surface $`\mathrm{\Omega }_𝒰=0`$ divides the phase space into three distinct regions, $`𝒰^+=\{𝐗𝒮|\mathrm{\Omega }_𝒰>0\}`$, $`𝒰^0=\{𝐗𝒮|\mathrm{\Omega }_𝒰=0\}`$ and $`𝒰^{}=\{𝐗𝒮|\mathrm{\Omega }_𝒰<0\}`$.

With the assumption of the weak energy condition (i.e., $`\rho _{pf}+\frac{1}{2}\dot{\varphi }^2+V0`$), it can be shown that in the invariant sets $`𝒰^+`$ and $`𝒰^0`$ that

$$0\mathrm{\Sigma }_+^2,\mathrm{\Sigma }_{},N,\mathrm{\Omega }_{pf},\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda },\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda ,\mathrm{\Omega }_𝒰,\mathrm{\Psi }^2,\mathrm{\Phi },1,$$

that is, $`𝒰^+`$ and $`𝒰^0`$ are compact subsets of $`𝒮`$. Unfortunately, the invariant set $`𝒰^{}`$ is not compact in the variables we have chosen. One can however choose different dimensionless variables (32) to remedy this problem (see van den Hoogen and Abolghasem vandenHoogen02b ).

There are various invariant sets associated with the matter content. We define six sets

$`{}_{}{}^{0}\mathrm{\Omega }_{}^{0,0}`$ $`=`$ $`\{𝐗𝒮|\mathrm{\Omega }_{pf}=0,\mathrm{\Phi }=0,\mathrm{\Psi }=0\},`$
$`{}_{}{}^{0}\mathrm{\Omega }_{}^{0,\pm }`$ $`=`$ $`\{𝐗𝒮|\mathrm{\Omega }_{pf}=0,\mathrm{\Phi }=0,\mathrm{\Psi }0\},`$
$`{}_{}{}^{0}\mathrm{\Omega }_{}^{+,\pm }`$ $`=`$ $`\{𝐗𝒮|\mathrm{\Omega }_{pf}=0,\mathrm{\Phi }0,\mathrm{\Psi }0\},`$
$`{}_{}{}^{+}\mathrm{\Omega }_{}^{0,0}`$ $`=`$ $`\{𝐗𝒮|\mathrm{\Omega }_{pf}0,\mathrm{\Phi }=0,\mathrm{\Psi }=0\},`$
$`{}_{}{}^{+}\mathrm{\Omega }_{}^{0,\pm }`$ $`=`$ $`\{𝐗𝒮|\mathrm{\Omega }_{pf}0,\mathrm{\Phi }=0,\mathrm{\Psi }0\},`$
$`{}_{}{}^{+}\mathrm{\Omega }_{}^{+,\pm }`$ $`=`$ $`\{𝐗𝒮|\mathrm{\Omega }_{pf}0,\mathrm{\Phi }0,\mathrm{\Psi }0\},`$
where the notation is interpreted as

$${}_{}{}^{(\mathrm{value}\mathrm{of}\mathrm{\Omega }_{pf})}\mathrm{\Omega }_{}^{(\mathrm{value}\mathrm{of}\mathrm{\Phi },\mathrm{value}\mathrm{of}\mathrm{\Psi })}$$

One additional invariant set of interest is the invariant set $`𝒢=\{𝐗𝒮|\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda =0,\mathrm{\Omega }_𝒰=0\}`$. One is interested in whether this set is the future attractor of all brane-world cosmologies.

### IV.2 Monotonic Functions

In the set $`𝒰^+`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }>0`$, it can be shown that $`q>1`$. Therefore we easily see that $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ monotonically increases from its lower limit $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$ to its upper limit $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=1`$. Furthermore, with the existence of this monotonic function, we can rule out the existence of any closed or periodic orbits in the full eight-dimensional phase space, $`𝒮`$. That is, any closed or periodic orbits (if they exist) must lie on the lower-dimensional boundaries of $`𝒮`$.

The seven-dimensional set $`𝒰^0`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }>0`$ lies on the boundary of $`𝒮`$. If $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{}0`$ (or $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{pf}0`$) it can be shown that $`q>1`$ and again $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ monotonically increases. Again the existence of this monotonic function implies that there do not exist any closed or periodic orbits in this set. Note the only invariant subset of $`𝒰^0`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }>0`$ in which $`q=1`$ (i.e, the only invariant subset of $`𝒰^0`$ in which $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }^{}=0`$) is $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_+=\mathrm{\Sigma }_{}=N=\mathrm{\Omega }_{pf}=\mathrm{\Psi }=\mathrm{\Phi }=0`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }+\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda =1`$.

With the arguments made in the previous two paragraphs, the only sets in which a periodic and/or closed orbit might exist is the seven-dimensional set $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$ and the five-dimensional set $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{pf}=\mathrm{\Omega }_𝒰=\mathrm{\Sigma }_{}=0,\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }>0`$. In all other cases we observe that the future asymptotic behaviour characterized by $`lim_\tau \mathrm{}\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=1`$ (this also implies through the constraint equation (43) that $`lim_\tau \mathrm{}𝐗=[0,0,0,0,1,0,0,0,0]`$), the DeSitter Model (see local analysis in next section), while the past asymptotic behaviour is characterized by $`lim_\tau \mathrm{}\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$, cosmological models with a four dimensional cosmological constant that is equivalently equal to zero.

### IV.3 Equilibrium Points and Local Behaviour

The equilibrium points can be classified in to one of the six invariant sets $`{}_{}{}^{()}\mathrm{\Omega }_{}^{(,)}`$, depending on the matter content. The order of the coordinates is $`[\mathrm{\Sigma }_+,\mathrm{\Sigma }_{},N,\mathrm{\Omega }_{pf},\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda },\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda ,\mathrm{\Omega }_𝒰,\mathrm{\Psi },\mathrm{\Phi }])`$. In what follows, for those points located in the $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$ invariant set, the eigenvalue found in brackets $`\{\}`$ is the eigenvalue associated with $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ direction.

#### IV.3.1 Vacuum, $`{}_{}{}^{0}\mathrm{\Omega }_{}^{0,0}`$

Unfortunately the dynamical system (33) is not differentiable everywhere, and in particular, it is not differentiable in a neighborhood of this invariant set. However, since the system is continuous, we are able to find the equilibrium points of the dynamical system. To determine the stability of each equilibrium point in this set, we change the variables $`(\mathrm{\Omega }_{pf},\mathrm{\Psi },\mathrm{\Phi })`$ to spherical coordinates $`(\stackrel{~}{\rho },\stackrel{~}{\theta },\stackrel{~}{\varphi })`$ and analyze the resulting system. This is done in Appendix Appendix: Equilibrium Points in the Vacuum Invariant Set.

$`DS`$; De-Sitter $`[0,0,0,0,1,0,0,0,0]`$.

$`m`$; Isotropic Braneworld Solution $`[0,0,0,0,0,1,0,0,0]`$.

$`R^0`$; Robertson Walker Dark Radiation Solution $`[0,0,0,0,0,0,1,0,0]`$.

$`R^{II}`$; Bianchi II Dark Radiation Solution $`[\frac{1}{4},0,\frac{1}{4},0,0,0,\frac{7}{8},0,0]`$.

$`K`$; Kasner (Vacuum) Solution $`[\mathrm{cos}(\theta ),\mathrm{sin}(\theta ),0,0,0,0,0,0,0]`$ where $`\pi <\theta \pi `$. This point is part of the Kasner surface discussed below.

#### IV.3.2 Massless Scalar Field, $`{}_{}{}^{0}\mathrm{\Omega }_{}^{0,\pm }`$

$`𝒦`$; Kasner (Massless Scalar Field) Solution $`[\mathrm{sin}(\phi )\mathrm{cos}(\theta ),\mathrm{sin}(\phi )\mathrm{sin}(\theta ),0,0,0,0,0,\mathrm{cos}(\phi ),0]`$ where $`\pi <\theta \pi `$ and $`\frac{\pi }{2}\phi \frac{\pi }{2}`$. Or $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_+^2+\mathrm{\Sigma }_{}^2+\mathrm{\Psi }^2=1`$. At this equilibrium point the deceleration parameter $`q=2`$. The eigenvalues of the linearization restricted to the surface $`G(𝐗)=0`$ are ($`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ eliminated)

$$6,0,0,2,24\mathrm{\Sigma }_+,63\gamma ,6+\sqrt{6}k\mathrm{\Psi },\{6\}$$

The zero eigenvalues correspond to the fact that this is a two-dimensional set of equilibria. We note that this equilibrium set has at least one negative and one positive eigenvalue, and hence this point is always a saddle, even in the $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$ invariant set. However, in the invariant set $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda =0`$, a portion of this set becomes a local source.

#### IV.3.3 Massive Scalar Field, $`{}_{}{}^{0}\mathrm{\Omega }_{}^{+,\pm }`$

$`SF^0`$; Robertson-Walker Scalar Field Solution (Power Law Inflationary Solution) $`[0,0,0,0,0,0,0,\frac{k\sqrt{6}}{6},1\frac{k^2}{6}]`$ At this equilibrium point the deceleration parameter $`q=\frac{k^2}{2}1`$. The eigenvalues of the linearization restricted to the surface $`G(𝐗)=0`$ are ($`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ eliminated)

$$k^2,k^24,k^23\gamma ,\frac{1}{2}(k^26),\frac{1}{2}(k^26),\frac{1}{2}(k^26),\frac{1}{2}(k^22),\{k^2\}$$

We observe that this point has both negative and positive eigenvalues and that the point is not in the physical phase space for $`k^2>6`$. In the $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$ invariant set,

* if $`k^2<2`$ and $`1\gamma 2`$ then this point is stable.
* if $`2<k^2<3\gamma `$ and $`1\gamma <4/3`$ then this point has a 1 dimensional unstable manifold.
* if $`3\gamma <k^2<4`$ and $`1\gamma <4/3`$ then this point has a 2 dimensional unstable manifold.
* if $`4<k^2<6`$ and $`1\gamma <4/3`$ then this point has a 3 dimensional unstable manifold.
* if $`2<k^2<4`$ and $`4/3\gamma 2`$ then this point has a 1 dimensional unstable manifold.
* if $`4<k^2<3\gamma `$ and $`4/3\gamma 2`$ then this point has a 2 dimensional unstable manifold.
* if $`3\gamma <k^2<6`$ and $`4/3\gamma 2`$ then this point has a 3 dimensional unstable manifold.

We therefore conclude that for $`k^2<2`$, the power law inflationary solution is an attractor in the $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$ invariant set.

$`SF^{II}`$; Bianchi II Scalar Field Solution $`[2\frac{(k^22)}{k^2+16},0,\sqrt{\frac{3(2k^2)(k^28)}{(k^2+16)^2}},0,0,0,0\frac{3\sqrt{6}k}{k^2+16},36\frac{8k^2}{(k^2+16)^2}]`$. At this equilibrium point the deceleration parameter $`q=8\frac{k^22}{k^2+16}`$. This point only exists for parameter values in the range of $`2k^28`$. The eigenvalues of the linearization restricted to the surface $`G(𝐗)=0`$ are ($`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ eliminated)

$`18{\displaystyle \frac{k^2}{k^2+16}},6{\displaystyle \frac{k^28}{k^2+16}},6{\displaystyle \frac{k^28}{k^2+16}},2{\displaystyle \frac{7k^232}{k^2+16}},`$
$`3{\displaystyle \frac{6k^216\gamma \gamma k^2}{k^2+16}},{\displaystyle \frac{3}{k^2+16}}\left[(k^28)\pm \sqrt{(k^28)^2+12(k^28)(k^22)}\right],\{18{\displaystyle \frac{k^2}{k^2+16}}\}`$
We observe that this point has both negative and positive eigenvalues and therefore this point will always be a saddlepoint. In the $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$ invariant set

* if $`1\gamma <4/3`$ and $`2<k^2<16\gamma /(6\gamma )`$ then this point is stable.
* if $`1\gamma <4/3`$ and $`16\gamma /(6\gamma )<k^2<32/7`$ then this point has a one dimensional unstable manifold.
* if $`1\gamma <4/3`$ and $`32/7<k^2`$ then this point has a two dimensional unstable manifold.
* if $`4/3<\gamma <2`$ and $`2<k^2<32/7`$ then this point is stable.
* if $`4/3<\gamma <2`$ and $`32/7<k^2<16\gamma /(6\gamma )`$ then this point has a one dimensional unstable manifold.
* if $`4/3<\gamma <2`$ and $`16\gamma /(6\gamma )<k^2`$ then this point has a two dimensional unstable manifold.

$`RSF^0`$; Robertson Walker Radiation-Scalar Field Scaling Solution $`[0,0,0,0,0,0,\frac{k^24}{k^2},\frac{2\sqrt{6}}{3k},\frac{4}{3k^2}]`$. At this equilibrium point the deceleration parameter $`q=1`$. The eigenvalues of the linearization restricted to the surface $`G(𝐗)=0`$ are ($`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ eliminated)

$$4,1,1,43\gamma ,1,\frac{1}{2k}(k\pm \sqrt{k^2+16(4k^2)}),\{4\}$$

This point exists in the set $`U^+U^0`$ only if $`k^24`$. We observe that this point has both negative and positive eigenvalues and therefore this point will always be a saddlepoint. In the $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$ invariant set

* if $`1\gamma <4/3`$ then this point has a 2 dimensional unstable manifold.
* if $`4/3<\gamma 2`$ then this point has a 1 dimensional unstable manifold.

$`RSF^{II}`$; Bianchi II Radiation-Scalar Field Scaling Solution $`[\frac{1}{4},0,\frac{1}{4},0,0,0,\frac{7k^232}{8k^2},\frac{2\sqrt{6}}{3k},\frac{4}{3k^2}]`$ At this equilibrium point the deceleration parameter $`q=1`$. The eigenvalues of the linearization restricted to the surface $`G(𝐗)=0`$ are ($`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ eliminated)

$`4,1,43\gamma ,\{4\}`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4k^2}}\left((2k^2)\pm \sqrt{(2k^2)^2(2k^2)\left[(23k^264)\pm \sqrt{(23k^264)^264k^2(7k^232)}\right]}\right)`$
This point exists in the set $`U^+U^0`$ only if $`k^232/7`$. This point is a saddle in the full phase space. However, in the invariant set $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$,

* if $`1\gamma <4/3`$ then this point has a one dimensional unstable manifold.
* if $`4/3<\gamma <2`$ then this point is stable.

#### IV.3.4 Perfect Fluid Models, $`{}_{}{}^{+}\mathrm{\Omega }_{}^{0,0}`$

$`F^0`$; Robertson Walker Perfect Fluid Solution $`[0,0,0,1,0,0,0,0,0]`$ At this equilibrium point the deceleration parameter $`q=\frac{1}{2}(3\gamma 2)`$. The eigenvalues of the linearization restricted to the surface $`G(𝐗)=0`$ are ($`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ eliminated)

$$3\gamma ,\frac{3}{2}(\gamma 2),\frac{3}{2}(\gamma 2),\frac{3}{2}(\gamma 2),3\gamma 4,\frac{1}{2}(3\gamma 2),3\gamma ,\{3\gamma \}$$

We observe that this point has both negative and positive eigenvalues and therefore, this point will always be a saddlepoint. However, in the invariant set $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$,

* if $`1\gamma <4/3`$ then this point has a 2 dimensional unstable manifold.
* if $`4/3<\gamma <2`$ then this point has a 3 dimensional unstable manifold.

$`F^{II}`$; Bianchi II Perfect Fluid Solution $`[\frac{1}{8}(3\gamma 2),0,\frac{1}{8}\sqrt{3(3\gamma 2)(2\gamma )},\frac{3}{16}(6\gamma ),0,0,0,0,0]`$ At this equilibrium point the deceleration parameter $`q=\frac{1}{2}(3\gamma 2)`$. The eigenvalues of the linearization restricted to the surface $`G(𝐗)=0`$ are ($`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ eliminated)

$`3\gamma ,3\gamma 4,{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}(\gamma 2),{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}(\gamma 2),3\gamma ,\{3\gamma \},`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{3}{8}}\left(2(2\gamma )\pm \sqrt{[2(2\gamma )]^2+2(2\gamma )(\gamma 6)(3\gamma 2)}\right)`$
We observe that this point has both negative and positive eigenvalues and therefore, this point will always be a saddlepoint. However, in the invariant set $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$,

* if $`1\gamma <4/3`$ then this point has a 1 dimensional unstable manifold.
* if $`4/3<\gamma <2`$ then this point has a 2 dimensional unstable manifold.

#### IV.3.5 Perfect Fluid with a Massless Scalar Field, $`{}_{}{}^{+}\mathrm{\Omega }_{}^{0,\pm }`$

There are no equilibrium points in the interior of this invariant set.

#### IV.3.6 Perfect Fluid with a Massive Scalar Field, $`{}_{}{}^{+}\mathrm{\Omega }_{}^{+,\pm }`$

$`MSF^0`$; Robertson Walker Matter-Scalar Field Scaling Solution $`[0,0,0,1\frac{3\gamma }{k^2},0,0,0,\frac{\sqrt{6}\gamma }{2k},\frac{3\gamma (2\gamma )}{2k^2}]`$ At this equilibrium point the deceleration parameter $`q=\frac{1}{2}(3\gamma 2)`$. The eigenvalues of the linearization restricted to the surface $`G(𝐗)=0`$ are ($`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ eliminated)

$`3\gamma ,{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}(\gamma 2),{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}(\gamma 2),{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(3\gamma 2),3\gamma 4,\{3\gamma \},`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{3}{4}}\left((\gamma 2)\pm \sqrt{(\gamma 2)^2+8\gamma (\gamma 2)(1{\displaystyle \frac{3\gamma }{k^2}})}\right)`$
This point only exists in the physical phase space when $`k^23\gamma `$. We observe that this point has both negative and positive eigenvalues and therefore, this point will always be a saddlepoint. However, in the invariant set $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$,

* if $`1\gamma <4/3`$ then this point has a 1 dimensional unstable manifold.
* if $`4/3<\gamma <2`$ then this point has a 2 dimensional unstable manifold.

$`MSF^{II}`$; Bianchi II Matter-Scalar Field Scaling Solution $`[\frac{1}{8}(3\gamma 2),0,\frac{1}{8}\sqrt{3(3\gamma 2)(2\gamma )},1\frac{3\gamma }{k^2}+\frac{1}{16}(23\gamma ),0,0,0,\frac{\sqrt{6}\gamma }{2k},\frac{3\gamma (2\gamma )}{2k^2}]`$ At this equilibrium point the deceleration parameter $`q=\frac{1}{2}(3\gamma 2)`$. The eigenvalues of the linearization restricted to the surface $`G(𝐗)=0`$ are ($`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ eliminated)

$`3\gamma ,{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}(\gamma 2),3\gamma 4,\{3\gamma \},{\displaystyle \frac{3}{8}}\left(A\pm \sqrt{A^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}A(B\pm \sqrt{B^2+C})}\right)`$
$`\mathrm{where}`$
$`A=2(2\gamma )`$
$`B=24\gamma ({\displaystyle \frac{2\gamma }{k^2}}1)+3(2\gamma )^2`$
$`C=64\gamma (3\gamma 2)({\displaystyle \frac{16\gamma }{k^2}}+\gamma 6)`$
This point only exists in the physical phase space when $`1\frac{3\gamma }{k^2}+\frac{1}{16}(23\gamma )>0`$. We observe that this point has both negative and positive eigenvalues and therefore, this point will always be a saddlepoint. However, in the invariant set $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$,

* if $`1\gamma <4/3`$ then this point is stable.
* if $`4/3<\gamma <2`$ then this point has a 1 dimensional unstable manifold.

## V Observations

The early time behaviour of the brane-world cosmologies under consideration is no longer characterized by a Kasner type singularity. It is found that the initial singularity is represented by the isotropic brane-world solution. It is also observed that this initial singularity is very much dominated by the kinetic energy of the scalar field. It is worthy to note that the Kasner solutions are not stable to the past in the brane-world scenario, however, they continue to have an unstable manifold having a large dimension, and are indeed stable to the past for General Relativistic cosmologies.

It is no surprise that the De Sitter solution represents the late time behaviour of any cosmology with a positive four dimensional cosmological constant $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. The early time behaviour of any cosmology with a positive four dimensional cosmological constant is asymptotic to a regime with an equivalent four dimensional cosmological constant equal to zero. That is, the early time behaviour of cosmologies having a positive four-dimensional cosmological constant $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }>0`$, can be determined by investigating the behaviour of the governing dynamical system restricted to the $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$ invariant set.

We observe that the late time behaviour in the $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$ invariant set is dependent upon the curvature of the models under consideration. For example, the late time behaviour of the Bianchi II cosmological models is one of four possible behaviours/solutions. If $`k^2<2`$ then the isotropic power-law inflationary solution is the stable attractor. If $`k^2>2`$ then the late time behaviour is one in which the models fail to isotropize, and have either a scalar field source, a combination of a scalar field and an ordinary matter source, or a combination of a scalar field and a dark radiation source depending upon the values of $`k`$ and $`\gamma `$. (See table 1). On the other hand, the late time behaviour of the Bianchi I cosmological models is also one of four possible solutions. If $`k^2<2`$ then the isotropic power-law inflationary solution is the stable attractor. If $`k^2>2`$ then the late time behaviour is one in which the models continue to isotropize, and have either a scalar field source, a combination of a scalar-field and ordinary matter source, or a combination of a scalar field and a dark radiation source depending upon the values of $`k`$ and $`\gamma `$. (See table 1 for summary details).

For the most part, it becomes very obvious that the existence of the scalar field in these brane-world cosmologies affects the initial dynamics when compared to the perfect fluid models studied in Campos01a ; Campos01b . The scalar field also plays an important role in the future dynamics of those models with a zero cosmological constant, that is, the scalar field is a dominant feature in the future dynamics of both the Bianchi type II models and the Bianchi type I models. Two solutions of particular interest, the radiation-scalar field scaling solutions ($`RSF^{II},RSF^0`$) are shown to be stable for particular values of $`\gamma `$ and $`k`$. Since neither of these solutions exist in general relativistic cosmologies, and since both of these cosmologies are due to bulk effects acting on the brane, we have the conclusion, that in general (contrary to popular belief), these brane-world scenario’s are not necessarily asymptotic to general relativistic cosmologies to the future.

The qualitative analysis for the bifurcation values $`\gamma =1`$ and $`\gamma =4/3`$, and for the various values of $`k`$ has not been completed. However, this analysis is not expected to yield any new observations. Additional numerical calculations do not reveal anything unexpected. See figures 26 for phase portraits. Note, the analysis presented here also does not address the case in which the local energy density due to non-local effects from the free gravitational field is negative, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_𝒰<0`$. If $`\mathrm{\Omega }_𝒰<0`$, then these traditionally ever-expanding models could potentially recollapse due to the negativity of this dark radiation. This analysis is presently under consideration in vandenHoogen02b .

###### Acknowledgements.

RJvdH is supported by research grants through Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada and the University Council on Research at St. Francis Xavier University. The work has been supported by the CICYT(Spain) grant BFM 2000-0018. RJvdH wishes to thank the Departamento de Física Teórica of the Universidad del País Vasco in Bilbao for their generous support and warm hospitality.

References

## Appendix: Equilibrium Points in the Vacuum Invariant Set

We define spherical coordinates as follows,

$`\stackrel{~}{\rho }^2`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{pf}+\mathrm{\Psi }^2+\mathrm{\Phi }`$
$`\mathrm{tan}^2\stackrel{~}{\theta }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Phi }}{\mathrm{\Psi }^2}}`$ (46)
$`\mathrm{cos}^2\stackrel{~}{\varphi }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_{pf}}{\mathrm{\Omega }_{pf}+\mathrm{\Psi }^2+\mathrm{\Phi }}}`$
The evolution equations for $`(\stackrel{~}{\rho },\stackrel{~}{\theta },\stackrel{~}{\varphi })`$ are

$`\stackrel{~}{\rho }^{}`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }\left(q+1{\displaystyle \frac{3\gamma }{2}}\mathrm{cos}^2\stackrel{~}{\varphi }3\mathrm{sin}^2\stackrel{~}{\varphi }\mathrm{cos}^2\stackrel{~}{\theta }\right),`$ (47)
$`\stackrel{~}{\theta }^{}`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{sin}\stackrel{~}{\theta }\left(3\mathrm{cos}\stackrel{~}{\theta }+{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{6}}{2}}k\stackrel{~}{\rho }\mathrm{sin}\stackrel{~}{\varphi }\right),`$ (48)
$`\stackrel{~}{\varphi }^{}`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{sin}\stackrel{~}{\varphi }\mathrm{cos}\stackrel{~}{\varphi }\left({\displaystyle \frac{3\gamma }{2}}3\mathrm{cos}^2\stackrel{~}{\theta }\right)`$ (49)
where

$$q=2\mathrm{\Sigma }_+^2+2\mathrm{\Sigma }_{}^2+\frac{3\gamma 2}{2}\stackrel{~}{\rho }^2\mathrm{cos}^2\stackrel{~}{\varphi }\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }+\mathrm{\Omega }_𝒰+\rho ^2\mathrm{sin}^2\stackrel{~}{\varphi }(2\mathrm{cos}^2\stackrel{~}{\theta }\mathrm{sin}^2\stackrel{~}{\theta })+\frac{3\gamma _\lambda 2}{2}\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda $$

and

$$\gamma _\lambda =2\gamma \mathrm{cos}^2\stackrel{~}{\varphi }^2+4\mathrm{sin}^2\stackrel{~}{\varphi }\mathrm{cos}^2\stackrel{~}{\theta }.$$

The constraint equation (45) becomes

$$\stackrel{~}{\rho }^2+\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }+\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda +\mathrm{\Omega }_𝒰+\mathrm{\Sigma }_+^2+\mathrm{\Sigma }_{}^2+N^21=0$$
(50)
and we have $`0\stackrel{~}{\theta }\pi `$ and $`0\stackrel{~}{\varphi }\pi /2`$ since both $`\mathrm{\Phi }0`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{pf}0`$.

If we define $`𝐘=(\stackrel{~}{\rho },\stackrel{~}{\theta },\stackrel{~}{\varphi },\mathrm{\Sigma }_+,\mathrm{\Sigma }_{},N,\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda ,\mathrm{\Omega }_𝒰)`$ then we obtain a new dynamical system $`𝐘^{}=\stackrel{~}{𝐅}(𝐘)`$. Where the dynamical equations for $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_+,\mathrm{\Sigma }_{},N,\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda ,\mathrm{\Omega }_𝒰`$ are the same as those in equation (33) with the change of variables (46), and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is given by solving equation (50) for $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. Note, we indicate the eigenvalue corresponding to the $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ direction with brackets $`\{\}`$.

The geometrical interpretation of the analysis of this new system requires some care, as each equilibrium point will have a number of different coordinatizations in this new coordinate system. The dynamics in the rectangular coordinate system $`(\mathrm{\Omega }_{pf},\mathrm{\Psi },\mathrm{\Phi })`$ can be obtained by determining the dynamics along invariant rays or directions (the intersections of invariant planes $`(\stackrel{~}{\theta }^{}=0)`$ with invariant cones $`(\stackrel{~}{\varphi }^{}=0)`$) in the spherical coordinate system. We quickly observe here that $`\stackrel{~}{\theta }=\pi /2`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\varphi }=\pi /2`$ does not correspond to an invariant direction of the dynamical system $`𝐘^{}=\stackrel{~}{𝐅}(𝐘)`$.

$`DS`$; De-Sitter The equilibrium point corresponding to the De Sitter solution in the original variables is represented by six different equilibrium points in the spherical coordinates defined above: $`DS=[0,\stackrel{~}{\theta },\stackrel{~}{\varphi },0,0,0,0,0]`$ where $`\stackrel{~}{\theta }=0,\pi /2,\pi `$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\varphi }=0,\pi /2`$. The eigenvalues $`3,3,1,4,`$ have an eigenspace spanned by $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_+,\mathrm{\Sigma }_{},N,\mathrm{\Omega }_𝒰`$. The eigenvalues associated with the matter are $`\lambda _{\stackrel{~}{\rho }}=3\gamma /2`$, $`\lambda _{\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda }=6\gamma `$ when $`\stackrel{~}{\varphi }=0`$ and $`\lambda _{\stackrel{~}{\rho }}=3`$, $`\lambda _{\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda }=12`$ when $`\stackrel{~}{\varphi }=\pi /2`$ except at the point $`(\stackrel{~}{\theta }=\pi /2,\stackrel{~}{\varphi }=\pi /2)`$ where the eigenvalues are $`\lambda _{\stackrel{~}{\rho }}=0`$, $`\lambda _{\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda }=0`$. The eigenvalues associated with the two angular coordinates are: $`\lambda _{\stackrel{~}{\theta }}=3`$ when $`(\stackrel{~}{\theta }=0,\pi ,\stackrel{~}{\varphi }=0,\pi /2)`$ and $`\lambda _{\stackrel{~}{\varphi }}=3(2\gamma )/2`$ when $`(\stackrel{~}{\theta }=0,\pi ,\stackrel{~}{\varphi }=0)`$, and $`\lambda _{\stackrel{~}{\varphi }}=3(2\gamma )/2`$ when $`(\stackrel{~}{\theta }=0,\pi ,\stackrel{~}{\varphi }=\pi /2)`$; $`\lambda _{\stackrel{~}{\theta }}=3`$ when $`(\stackrel{~}{\theta }=\pi /2,\stackrel{~}{\varphi }=0,\pi /2)`$ and $`\lambda _{\stackrel{~}{\varphi }}=3\gamma /2`$ when $`(\stackrel{~}{\theta }=\pi /2,\stackrel{~}{\varphi }=0)`$, and $`\lambda _{\stackrel{~}{\varphi }}=3\gamma /2`$ when $`(\stackrel{~}{\theta }=\pi /2,\stackrel{~}{\varphi }=\pi /2)`$. The behaviour of the angular coordinates $`\stackrel{~}{\varphi },\stackrel{~}{\theta }`$ is illustrated in Figure 1. We observe that all the eigenvalues not associated with the angular coordinates are negative, therefore, this point is a local attractor. The dynamics in the $`\stackrel{~}{\varphi }\stackrel{~}{\theta }`$ plane indicate that $`\stackrel{~}{\varphi }\pi /2`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\theta }\pi /2`$ as $`\tau \mathrm{}`$. This implies that this equilibrium point is strongly attracting along this direction, that is, this equilibrium point strongly attracts along the $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{pf}=\mathrm{\Psi }=0`$ direction in the original variables. This local analysis, together with the global analysis in section IV.2, implies that the De Sitter solution is a global attractor for a wide class of Bianchi II, Bianchi I, and zero curvature Robertson Walker cosmological models with a cosmological constant.

$`m`$; Isotropic Braneworld Solution The equilibrium point $`m`$ in the original variables is represented by six different equilibrium points in the new variables, $`m=[0,\stackrel{~}{\theta },\stackrel{~}{\varphi },0,0,0,1,0]`$ where $`\stackrel{~}{\theta }=0,\pi /2,\pi `$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\varphi }=0,\pi /2`$. For $`\stackrel{~}{\theta }=0,\pi /2,\pi `$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\varphi }=0`$ the eigenvalues associated with the non-angular coordinates are $`\{6\gamma \},3\gamma /2,3(\gamma 1),3(\gamma 1),3\gamma 1,2(3\gamma 2)`$. For $`\stackrel{~}{\theta }=0,\pi `$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\varphi }=\pi /2`$ the eigenvalues associated with the non-angular coordinates are $`\{12\},3,3,3,5,8`$. For $`\stackrel{~}{\theta }=\pi /2`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\varphi }=\pi /2`$ the eigenvalues associated with the non-angular coordinates are $`3,3,1,0,\{0\},4`$. The eigenvalues of the angular coordinates are the same as in De-Sitter case above (see Figure 1). We observe that this point is always a source for $`\gamma >1`$ and strongly repel away from the $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{pf}=\mathrm{\Phi }=0`$ direction. As models evolve backwards in time, it is the kinetic energy of the scalar field that is the dominant component of the total energy density. For $`\gamma =1`$, numerical analysis reveals that this point remains a source (see Figure 2).

$`R^0`$; Robertson Walker Dark Radiation Solution The equilibrium point $`R^0`$ in the original variables is represented by six different equilibrium points in the new variables, $`R^0=[0,\stackrel{~}{\theta },\stackrel{~}{\varphi },0,0,0,0,1]`$ where $`\stackrel{~}{\theta }=0,\pi /2,\pi `$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\varphi }=0,\pi /2`$. The eigenvalues $`1,1,1,\{4\}`$ have an eigenspace spanned by $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_+,\mathrm{\Sigma }_{},N,\mathrm{\Omega }_𝒰`$. The eigenvalues associated with the matter are $`\lambda _{\stackrel{~}{\rho }}=(43\gamma )/2`$, $`\lambda _{\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda }=46\gamma `$ when $`\stackrel{~}{\varphi }=0`$ and $`\lambda _{\stackrel{~}{\rho }}=1`$, $`\lambda _{\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda }=8`$ when $`\stackrel{~}{\varphi }=\pi /2`$ except at the point $`(\stackrel{~}{\theta }=\pi /2,\stackrel{~}{\varphi }=\pi /2)`$ where the eigenvalues are $`\lambda _{\stackrel{~}{\rho }}=2`$, $`\lambda _{\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda }=4`$. The eigenvalues of the angular coordinates are the same as in De-Sitter case above. We observe that the eigenvalues not associated with the angular coordinates are both positive and negative, therefore, this point is a saddle point. If $`\gamma <4/3`$ then the point has a 3 dimensional unstable manifold in the rectangular coordinate system. (Note: If $`\gamma <4/3`$, then $`\lambda _{\stackrel{~}{\rho }}=(43\gamma )/2>0`$ along the invariant direction $`\stackrel{~}{\varphi }=0`$ but $`\lambda _{\stackrel{~}{\rho }}=1<0`$ along the invariant directions $`\stackrel{~}{\theta }=0,\stackrel{~}{\varphi }=\pi /2`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\theta }=0,\stackrel{~}{\varphi }=\pi /2`$.) If $`\gamma >4/3`$, then the point has a 2 dimensional unstable manifold.

$`R^{II}`$; Bianchi II Dark Radiation Solution The equilibrium point $`R^{II}`$ in the original variables is represented by six different equilibrium points in the new variables, $`R^{II}=[0,\stackrel{~}{\theta },\stackrel{~}{\varphi },\frac{1}{4},0,\frac{1}{4},0,\frac{7}{8}]`$. The eigenvalues $`1,1/2(1\pm \sqrt{6}i),\{4\}`$ have an eigenspace spanned by $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_+,\mathrm{\Sigma }_{},N,\mathrm{\Omega }_𝒰`$. The eigenvalues associated with the matter are $`\lambda _{\stackrel{~}{\rho }}=(43\gamma )/2`$, $`\lambda _{\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda }=46\gamma `$ when $`\stackrel{~}{\varphi }=0`$ and $`\lambda _{\stackrel{~}{\rho }}=1`$, $`\lambda _{\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda }=8`$ when $`\stackrel{~}{\varphi }=\pi /2`$ except at the point $`(\stackrel{~}{\theta }=\pi /2,\stackrel{~}{\varphi }=\pi /2)`$ where the eigenvalues are $`\lambda _{\stackrel{~}{\rho }}=2`$, $`\lambda _{\mathrm{\Omega }_\lambda }=4`$. The eigenvalues of the angular coordinates are the same as in De-Sitter case above. If $`\gamma <4/3`$ then the equilibrium point has a 2 dimensional unstable manifold in the rectangular coordinate system. If $`\gamma >4/3`$, then the equilibrium point has a one dimensional unstable manifold. We also observe that if $`\gamma >4/3`$ then this point is a stable attractor in the $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$ invariant set.


text:
# Universal scaling behavior of pseudogap with doping in high 𝑇_𝑐 cuprates; temperature and doping dependence of spectral intensity

## Abstract

Based on our improved SU(2) slave-boson approach (Phys. Rev. B 64, 052501(2001)) to the t-J Hamiltonian, we report a scaling behavior of pseudogap with doping and the temperature and doping dependence of spectral functions. In addition we discuss the cause of hump and quasi-particle peak in the observed spectral functions of high $`T_c`$ cuprates. It is demonstrated that the sharpening of the observed quasi-particle peak below $`T_c`$ is attributed to the bose condensation of holon pair. From the computed ratios of pseudogap $`\mathrm{\Delta }_0`$ to both the superconducting temperature $`T_c`$ and the pseudogap temperature $`T^{}`$ as a function of hole doping concentration $`x`$, we find that there exists a universal scaling of these ratios with doping, that is, the hyperbolic scaling behavior of the former, $`\frac{2\mathrm{\Delta }_0}{k_BT_c}x^\alpha `$ with $`\alpha 2`$ and near doping independence of the latter, $`\frac{2\mathrm{\Delta }_0}{k_BT^{}}46`$ are found. PACS numbers : 74.25.Jb, 79.60.-i, 74.20.Mn

Angle resolved photoemission spectroscopy(ARPES) measurements of high $`T_c`$ cuprates revealed both the temperature and doping dependence of both spectral peak intensity and pseudogap at varying pseudogap temperature $`T^{}`$ and superconducting temperature $`T_c`$. These measurements have shown a continuously increasing trend of pseudogap (leading edge gap) with decreasing temperature even below $`T_c`$ and appearance of sharp peaks below $`T_c`$. Earlier, Wen and Lee reported the momentum dependence of the spectral function based on their SU(2) slave boson theory involving single-holon bose condensation. Chubukov et al. obtained the peak-dip-hump feature of the spectral function by using their spin fermion model. Most recently, Muthukumar et al. studied the momentum dependence of the spectral function in the resonating-valence-bond state. However there exists lack of comprehensive investigations on the temperature and doping dependence of spectral functions. Lately, based on our newly improved SU(2) slave-boson approach of introducing holon-pair channels over a previous one we were able to successfully obtain the arch-shaped superconducting temperature line in the phase diagram of high $`T_c`$ cuprates. Further application of this theory resulted in the peak-dip-hump structure of optical conductivity in good agreement with observations. In the present study using this theory we report temperature and doping dependence of spectral functions for both the normal and superconducting states and discuss the origin of the hump and the quasiparticle peak observed in ARPES. Finally we report our theoretical finding of the scaling behavior of the spin gap vs the superconducting and pseudogap temperatures with respect to the hole doping concentration.

In the slave-boson representation, the electron operator of spin $`\sigma `$, $`c_\sigma `$ can be written as a composite of spinon and holon operators; $`c_\sigma =b^{}f_\sigma `$ in the U(1) representation and $`c_\alpha =\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}h^{}\psi _\alpha `$ in the SU(2) theory with $`\alpha =1,2`$, where $`f_\sigma `$($`b`$) is the spinon(holon) annihilation operator in the U(1) theory, and $`\psi _1=\left(\begin{array}{c}f_1\\ f_2^{}\end{array}\right)`$ $`\left(\psi _2=\left(\begin{array}{c}f_2\\ f_1^{}\end{array}\right)\right)`$ and $`h=\left(\begin{array}{c}b_1\\ b_2\end{array}\right)`$ are the doublets of spinon and holon annihilation operators respectively in the SU(2) theory. Judging from the presence of the intersite charge-charge coupling ($`n_in_j`$) in addition to the spin-spin coupling ($`𝐒_i𝐒_j`$) in Heisenberg term of the t-J Hamiltonian and the consideration of on-site charge fluctuations, it is obvious that the charge degree of freedom has to appear in the slave-boson representation of the Heisenberg term. The Heisenberg term in the t-J Hamiltonian is, then, derived to be $`P(𝐒_i𝐒_j\frac{1}{4}n_in_j)P=\frac{1}{2}b_ib_jb_j^{}b_i^{}(f_i^{}f_j^{}f_i^{}f_j^{})(f_jf_if_jf_i)`$ in the U(1) theory, and $`\frac{1}{2}(1h_i^{}h_i)(1h_j^{}h_j)(f_{2i}^{}f_{1j}^{}f_{1i}^{}f_{2j}^{})(f_{1j}f_{2i}f_{2j}f_{1i})`$ in the SU(2) theory . Here $`P`$ represents the projection onto the singly occupied site or empty site. The four holon (boson) operator in the above expression represents the charge degree of freedom and the four fermion operator, the spin degree of freedom. In the present SU(2) study the phase fluctuation effects of the spinon pairing order parameter are taken into account.

Introducing Hubbard Stratonovich transformations for direct, exchange and pairing channels and a subsequent saddle point approximation, the t-J Hamiltonian is decomposed into the spinon sector, $`H^f`$ and the holon sector, $`H^b`$,

$`H^f`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{J(1x)^2}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{<i,j>}{}}[\mathrm{\Delta }_{ij}^f(f_{1j}f_{2i}f_{2j}f_{1i})+c.c.]`$ (2)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{J(1x)^2}{4}}{\displaystyle \underset{<i,j>,\sigma }{}}[\chi _{ij}(f_{\sigma i}^{}f_{\sigma j})+c.c.],`$
$`H^b`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{t}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{<i,j>}{}}[\chi _{ij}(b_{1i}^{}b_{1j}b_{2j}^{}b_{2i})`$ (5)
$`\mathrm{\Delta }_{ij}^f(b_{1j}^{}b_{2i}+b_{1i}^{}b_{2j})]c.c.{\displaystyle }_{i,\alpha }\mu _ib_{\alpha i}^{}b_{\alpha i}`$
$`{\displaystyle \underset{<i,j>,\alpha ,\beta }{}}{\displaystyle \frac{J}{2}}|\mathrm{\Delta }_{ij}^f|^2[\mathrm{\Delta }_{ij;\alpha \beta }^b(b_{\alpha i}b_{\beta j})+c.c.],`$
where $`\chi _{ij}=<f_{\sigma j}^{}f_{\sigma i}+\frac{2t}{J(1x)^2}(b_{1j}^{}b_{1i}b_{2i}^{}b_{2j})>`$ is the hopping order parameter, $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{ij}^f=<f_{1j}f_{2i}f_{2j}f_{1i}>`$, the spinon pairing order parameter, $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{ij;\alpha \beta }^b=<b_{i\alpha }b_{\beta j}>`$, the holon pairing order parameter, $`\mu _i`$, the effective chemical potential, and $`x`$, the hole doping concentration. With the uniform hopping order parameter, $`\chi _{ij}=\chi `$, the d-wave spinon pairing order parameter, $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{ij}^f=\pm \mathrm{\Delta }_f`$ with the sign $`+()`$ for the nearest neighbor link parallel to $`\widehat{x}`$ ($`\widehat{y}`$) and the s-wave holon pairing order parameter, $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{ij;\alpha \beta }^b=\mathrm{\Delta }_b(\delta _{\alpha ,1}\delta _{\beta ,1}\delta _{\alpha ,2}\delta _{\beta ,2})`$, the quasiparticle energy for spinon is given by

$`E_k^f`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{(ϵ_k^f)^2+(\mathrm{\Delta }_f^{^{}})^2},`$ (6)
where the spinon single particle energy is given by,

$`ϵ_k^f`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{J(1x)^2}{2}}\chi (\mathrm{cos}k_x+\mathrm{cos}k_y),`$ (7)
and the spinon pairing gap or simply the spin gap,

$`\mathrm{\Delta }_f^{^{}}`$ $`=`$ $`J(1x)^2\mathrm{\Delta }_f(\mathrm{cos}k_x\mathrm{cos}k_y).`$ (8)
The single particle(electron) propagator of interest is given by a convolution integral of spinon and holon propagators in the momentum space,

$`G_{\alpha \beta }(𝐤,\omega )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}{\displaystyle }{\displaystyle \frac{d𝐤^{^{}}d\omega ^{^{}}}{(2\pi )^3}}[{\displaystyle \underset{l,m}{}}G_{\alpha \beta lm}^f(𝐤+𝐤^{^{}},\omega +\omega ^{^{}})\times `$ (10)
$`G_{ml}^b(𝐤^{^{}},\omega ^{^{}})].`$
The mean field Green’s functions are $`G_{\alpha \beta lm}^f(𝐤,\omega )=i𝑑t_xe^{i\omega ti𝐤𝐱}<T[\psi _{\alpha l}(𝐱,t)\psi _{\beta m}^{}(0,0)]>`$ and $`G_{lm}^b(𝐤,\omega )=i𝑑t_xe^{i\omega ti𝐤𝐱}<T[b_l(𝐱,t)b_m^{}(0,0)]>`$ respectively. The symbol $`<`$ $`>`$ refers to the finite temperature ensemble average of an observable quantity $`O`$, $`<O>\frac{1}{Z}\mathrm{tr}(e^{\beta H}O)`$.

The one electron removal spectral function, $`I(𝐤,\omega )`$ is obtained from ,

$`I(𝐤,\omega )={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\pi }}\mathrm{ImG}(𝐤,\omega +i0^+)f(\omega ),`$ (11)
where $`f(\omega )`$ is the Fermi distribution function. The Heisenberg coupling constant of $`J=0.2`$ $`t`$ and the hopping strength of $`t=0.44`$ $`eV`$ are chosen in the present calculations. Using the SU(2) theory, the predicted values of optimal hole doping $`x_o`$, pseudogap temperature $`T^{}`$ and bose condensation temperature $`T_c`$ are $`x_o=0.13`$, $`T^{}=0.029t`$($`148K`$) and $`T_c=0.021t`$ ($`107.2K`$) respectively. The spectral function is obtained from the convolution integral of the holon and spinon Green’s functions $`G(𝐤,\omega )`$. For the evaluation of the spectral functions $`I(𝐤,\omega )`$, the line width of the Lorentzian function is set to be $`ϵ=0.01t(4.4meV)`$ with the choice of $`t=0.44eV`$.

It is known from the ARPES measurements of LSCO and BSCCO that a good Fermi nesting appears in a region near the $`M`$ point ($`𝐤=(\pi ,0)`$) at which maximal antiferromagnetic correlations between electrons are realized. The predicted binding energy monotonically decreases with the increase of momentum $`𝐤`$ along $`\mathrm{\Gamma }M`$, in agreement with the ARPES. In Fig.1, predicted spectral functions at $`𝐤=(\pi /2,\pi /2)`$ below and above $`T_c`$ are displayed. The peak did not disappear even at a temperature above $`T_c`$ (e.g., $`T=0.022t`$($`112.3K`$) with a choice of $`t=0.44eV`$) and showed a decreasing trend of peak intensity with increasing temperature, in agreement with the ARPES measurement of Shen et al. At all temperatures below $`T^{}`$ the zero gap is predicted.

In Fig.2 we display the computed spectral functions $`I(𝐤,\omega )`$ at $`𝐤=(\pi ,0)`$ both below and above $`T_c`$. The computed gap size at $`𝐤=(\pi ,0)`$ is predicted to coincide with the spin gap size $`\mathrm{\Delta }_f^{^{}}`$ in Eq.(8). The peak position occurs at smaller binding energies at temperatures ($`0.022t`$($`112.3K`$)) above $`T_c`$. Although not shown here, a gap begins to open at higher critical temperature $`T^{}=0.029t`$($`147.9K`$). This is now taken to be the spin gap temperature. The predicted peak position shift, that is, the variation of leading edge gap is much slower below $`T_c`$ and reaches a finite value at $`T=0`$, in complete agreement with observations.

In order to see only the role of the antiferromagnetic fluctuations of the shortest possible correlation length, namely the spin singlet pair excitations in the evaluation of the convolution integral, we deliberately removed the contribution of the holon-pair channels which comes from momenta $`𝐤^{^{}}=(0,0)`$ and $`𝐤^{^{}}=(\pi ,\pi )`$. The sharp peak is now seen to disappear and only the hump structure persists while the pseudogap remains unchanged, indicating that the pseudogap is caused by the formation of spin singlet pairs as is shown in the inset of Fig.2. This indicates that the presence of holon-pair bosons is essential for yielding the observed sharp quasiparticle peaks at the $`M`$ point below $`T_c`$. That is, the quasiparticle peak is caused by bose condensation below $`T_c`$. The appearance of the hump in the absence of bose condensation is seen to be caused by the antiferromagnetic spin fluctuations of the shortest possible correlation length, that is, the spin singlet pair excitations. In Fig. 3 the doping dependence of spectral functions is displayed for underdoped, optimally doped and overdoped cases at a low temperature below $`T_c`$, $`T=0.004t`$ ($`T=20.4K`$), near the $`M`$ point ($`𝐤=(0.8\pi ,0)`$) for comparison with observation. In agreement with the ARPES the predicted spectral weight of the sharp quasiparticle peaks is seen to increase as the hole concentration increases upto a tested value in the overdoped region. The leading edge gap is shown to decrease with doping in agreement with observations. At all doping rates both the peak and hump structures are revealed with the absence of dip. It is observed to be caused by electron-phonon coupling, which is not considered in our present treatment of the t-J Hamiltonian. Figs.4 displays as a function of doping rate the ratios of the pseudogap $`2\mathrm{\Delta }_0(k=(\pi ,0))`$ at a temperature close to $`0K`$ to the superconducting temperature $`T_c`$ and the spin gap temperature $`T^{}`$, that is, $`2\mathrm{\Delta }_0`$ vs $`T_c`$ and $`2\mathrm{\Delta }_0`$ vs $`T^{}`$. It is possible that each high $`T_c`$ cuprate(e.g., LSCO, YBCO and BSCCO) may have an effectively different $`J`$ value causing variation in $`T_c`$. It is quite encouraging to find that in agreement with observations, $`\frac{2\mathrm{\Delta }_0(k=(\pi ,0))}{k_BT_c}`$ decreases rapidly, showing a hyperbolic behavior with doping concentration while $`\frac{2\mathrm{\Delta }_0(k=(\pi ,0))}{k_BT^{}}`$ shows a nearly doping independence of ranging between $`4`$ and $`6`$, as shown in Fig. 4. It is found that these ratios do not appreciably change with the variation of Heisenberg coupling $`J`$. This is due to the nature that $`\mathrm{\Delta }_0`$, $`T^{}`$ and $`T_c`$ are found to be proportional to $`J`$, keeping these ratios unchanged. Thus we found that independent of Heisenberg exchange coupling there exists a universal scaling behavior of the pseudogap with doping for the ratios of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_0`$ to $`T_c`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }_0`$ to $`T^{}`$.

Both the SU(2) and U(1) slave-boson theories predicts sharp quasiparticle peaks at $`𝐤=(\pi ,0)`$ and $`𝐤=(\pi /2,\pi /2)`$ particularly below $`T_c`$. Although not shown here, the predicted leading edge gap at $`𝐤=(\pi ,0)`$ showed a continuous increase as temperature drops down from a pseudogap temperature $`T^{}`$ to temperatures below the superconducting temperature $`T_c`$. This indicates that the origin of the observed leading edge gap in the superconducting state is the same as the ones in the pseudogap phase. That is, the pseudogap is caused by the formation of spin singlet pairs(spinon pairs). The presence of the singlet pairs, namely the antiferromagnetic fluctuations of a shortest possible range is shown to persist even in the superconducting state. We infer from our computed results that the appearance of the distinctively sharp quasiparticle peaks below $`T_c`$ is attributed to the enhanced probability of spin singlet pair excitations as a result of coupling to holon-pair bosons in the superconducting state. It is of note that such coupling between the two degrees of freedom is well manifested in the last term of Eq.(5).

In summary the present study revealed numerous salient features. They are; 1. regarding the hole doping dependence of spectral functions near $`𝐤=(\pi ,0)`$, the spectral intensity of quasiparticle peak shows an increasing trend with hole concentrations in the underdoped region, 2. regarding the temperature dependence of pseudogap(spin gap) at $`𝐤=(\pi ,0)`$, the gap size continuously increases as temperature decreases from the pseudogap temperature $`T^{}`$ to temperatures even below the superconducting temperature $`T_c`$, 3. regarding the temperature dependence of peak intensity, a decreasing trend of spectral peak intensity is observed as temperature increases, 4. the zero leading edge gap at $`𝐤=(\pi /2,\pi /2)`$ is unchanged both below and above $`T_c`$, 5. regarding the momentum dependence of binding energy, it decreases with increasing momentum $`𝐤`$ along the $`\mathrm{\Gamma }M`$ direction, 6. the sharp quasiparticle peak below $`T_c`$ is attributed to the bose condensation of holon pairs, and the hump is caused by the antiferromagnetic spin fluctuations of the shortest possible correlation length, 7. the coexistence of the spin singlet pair excitations and superconductivity below $`T_c`$ is predicted, and finally, 8. in complete agreement with observations, independent of the Heisenberg exchange coupling there exists a universal scaling behavior of the pseudogap with doping, namely the hyperbolic scaling behavior in $`\frac{2\mathrm{\Delta }_0}{k_BT_c}`$ and near doping independence in $`\frac{2\mathrm{\Delta }_0}{k_BT^{}}`$.

One(SHSS) of us acknowledges the generous supports of Korea Ministry of Education(HakJin Program 2001-2002) and the Institute of Basic Science Research (2002) at Pohang University of Science and Technology. He is also grateful to Chang Ryong Kim for helpful discussions.


text:
# Constraints on the Decomposition of the Rotation Curves of Spiral Galaxies

## 1 Introduction

The rotation curves of spiral galaxies provide the most direct evidence for the presence of dark matter in galaxies. However, taken alone they do not discriminate luminous from dark matter because their decomposition into the contributions from the various constituents of the galaxies is highly ambiguous. Thus further constraints are needed. Considerations of the dynamical state of the resulting disk models can provide such constraints (Bosma 1999, Fuchs 1999). Of particular interest is the question if the much discussed ‘maximum–disk’ models, i.e. disks with their masses chosen at the maximum allowed by the data, are dynamical viable disk models. The degeneracy of the decomposition problem is illustrated in Fig. 1 for the example of NGC 3198. The rotation curve is modelled as

$$v_\mathrm{c}^2(R)=v_{\mathrm{c},\mathrm{disk}}^2(R)+v_{\mathrm{c},\mathrm{halo}}^2(R)+v_{\mathrm{c},\mathrm{is}\mathrm{gas}}^2(R),$$
(1)
where $`v_{\mathrm{c},\mathrm{disk}}`$, $`v_{\mathrm{c},\mathrm{halo}}`$, and $`v_{\mathrm{c},\mathrm{is}\mathrm{gas}}`$ denote the contributions due to the stellar disk, the dark halo, and the interstellar gas, respectively. The disk is modelled as an exponential disk and the dark halo is described by a quasi–isothermal sphere. In the left panel of Fig. 1 the maximum–disk model of Broeils (1992) is reproduced, while the right panel shows a submaximal disk model. The halo model parameters have been changed so that both fits to the observed rotation curve are of the same quality.

Figure 1. Maximum and submaximal disk models of the rotation curve of NGC 3198.

## 2 Dynamical Constraints on the Decomposition of Rotation Curves

The diagnostic tools I use to analyze the dynamical state of the disk models are the Toomre stability parameter of the disks and, following Athanassoula et al. (1987), the predicted multiplicity of the spiral structures. The Toomre stability parameter is given by

$$Q=\frac{\kappa \sigma _\mathrm{U}}{3.36G\mathrm{\Sigma }_\mathrm{d}},$$
(2)
where $`\kappa `$ denotes the epicyclic frequency, $`\kappa =\sqrt{2}\frac{v_\mathrm{c}}{R}\sqrt{1+\frac{R}{v_\mathrm{c}}\frac{dv_\mathrm{c}}{dR}}`$. $`\sigma _\mathrm{U}`$ is the radial velocity dispersion of the stars, $`G`$ the constant of gravitation, and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_\mathrm{d}`$ the surface density of the disk. The stability parameter must lie in the range 1 $`<Q<`$ 2, in order to prevent Jeans instability of the disk, on one hand, and to allow the disks to develop spiral structures, on the other hand. If $`Q`$ were less than 1, the disks would develop fierce dynamical instabilities and heat up dynamically on very short time scales as demonstrated, for example, by Fuchs & von Linden (1998). Thus such disk models would be not equilibrium models.

The dynamics of galactic spiral structure is theoretically well understood in the framework of the density wave theory of spiral arms. Density wave theory makes, in particular, a specific prediction for the number of spiral arms. Spiral density waves develop in galactic disks preferentially with a circumferential wavelength of about (Toomre 1981, Fuchs 2001, 2003c)

$$\lambda X(\frac{A}{\mathrm{\Omega }_0})\lambda _{\mathrm{crit}},$$
(3)
where $`\lambda _{\mathrm{crit}}`$ denotes the critical wavelength

$$\lambda _{\mathrm{crit}}=\frac{4\pi ^2G\mathrm{\Sigma }_\mathrm{d}}{\kappa ^2}.$$
(4)
The coefficient $`X(\frac{A}{\mathrm{\Omega }_0})`$ depends on the slope of the rotation curve measured by Oort’s constant $`A`$, $`\frac{A}{\mathrm{\Omega }_0}=\frac{1}{2}\left(1\frac{R}{v_\mathrm{c}}\frac{dv_\mathrm{c}}{dR}\right)`$, and has been determined explicitely for various cases by Toomre (1981), Athanassoula (1984), or Fuchs (2001, 2003c). For a flat rotation curve the value is $`X(0.5)=2`$. The number of spiral arms is obviously determined by how often the wavelength $`\lambda `$ fits onto the annulus,

$$m\frac{2\pi R}{X\lambda _{\mathrm{crit}}}.$$
(5)
The predicted number of spiral arms (5) is based on the local model of a shearing sheet which describes the dynamics of a patch of a galactic disk (Goldreich & Lynden–Bell 1965, Julian &Toomre 1966, Fuchs 2001). Equation (5) can be applied globally to an entire disk strictly only in the case of a Mestel disk, which has an exactly flat rotation curve and a surface density distribution falling radially off as $`1/R`$. In the exponential disk models used here $`m`$ varies formally with galactocentric distance. However, the maximum growth factor of the amplitudes of the density waves is not sharply peaked at the circumferential wavelength (3) (Toomre 1981, Fuchs 2001, 2003c) so that density waves with smaller or greater wavelengths can develop as well. Allowing for these side fringes of wavelengths and the corresponding variations of the coefficient $`X`$ in equation (5) one can derive for the distance range in the galactic disks spanned by the spiral arms a uniform value of $`m`$.

## 3 Examples: NGC 3198 and NGC 2985

I demonstrate the implications of the dynamical constraints on the decomposition of the rotation curves with the examples NGC 3198 and NGC 2985. Both galaxies show clear spiral structure and the velocity dispersions of the stars have been measured in both galaxies (Bottema 1988, Gerssen 2000). The expected multiplicity of spiral arms and the $`Q`$ parameter are shown in Fig. 3 for the maximum disk and the submaximal disk models of NGC 3198, respectively. The maximum disk model predicts a two–armed spiral just as can be seen in the NIR image of the galaxy in Fig. 2. The $`Q`$ parameter is about 1 in this model. This avoids the the onset of fierce dynamical instabilities, but would imply that the spiral structure grows very rapidly which would lead to a considerable dynamical disk heating. However, the velocity dispersions have been measured by Bottema (1988) in the B band and might be dominated by bright young stars with velocity dispersions lower than that of the mass carrying stellar populations (Fuchs 1999). Thus the $`Q`$ parameter is probably underestimated. The submaximal disk model predicts a three–armed spiral and the $`Q`$ parameter is around 1.5 which is probably underestimated again and thus seems to be too high.

Figure 2. Images of NGC 3198 (left) and NGC 2985 (right) retrieved from the Digitized Sky Survey (ESO). The image sizes are 5’$`\times `$5’.

Figure 3. Expected number of spiral arms and $`Q`$ parameter according to the maximum disk and submaximal disk models of NGC 3198 shown again in the upper panels. The radial scale is also indicated in arcmin.

I conclude from this that the maximum disk model is the more realistic disk model. In a previous paper (Fuchs 1999) I have argued to the contrary. However, that was judging from an optical image with many filaments which does not reveal the major spiral arms as the NIR image and I revise my opinion here.

Fig. 4 shows the rotation curve of NGC 2985 (Gerssen 2000) and the corresponding maximum disk and submaximal disk models, respectively, which in both cases include a bulge contribution in the inner parts. The velocity dispersions have been measured by Gerssen (2000) in the I band and should allow a more reliable estimate of the $`Q`$ parameter than in the previous case. As can be seen from Fig. 4 both the expected multiplicity of spiral arms and the $`Q`$ parameter indicate even clearer than in the case of NGC 3198 that the maximum disk model is the more realistic disk model.

Figure 4. Expected number of spiral arms and $`Q`$ parameter according to the maximum disk and submaximal disk models of NGC 2985 shown in the upper panels. The radial scale is also indicated in arcmin.

## 4 Discussion

Arguments for and against maximum disks have been discussed at length in the literature and are reviewed in detail, for instance, by Bosma (1999) or Sellwood (1999). One of the major consequences of maximum disks are the implied large core radii of the dark halos. These challenge the contemporary theory of the formation of galaxies according to CDM cosmology.

Obviously the dynamical constraints on the decomposition of rotation curves must be tried out on a much larger data set than here in order to test the maximum disk hypothesis. This can be easily done with the density wave theory criterion by inspecting images of galaxies for which rotation curves are available. I have, for instance, analyzed a set of low surface brightness galaxies and found again indications for maximum disks (Fuchs 2003a, b). However, velocity dispersions have been measured in very few galaxies. Thus the $`Q`$ stability parameter criterion, which is an independent consistency check on the density wave theory criterion, can be applied only in deplorably few cases.

## Acknowledgments

The modelling of the rotation curve of NGC 2985 was done in collaboration with I. Arifyanto.