format: text

text:
# Some Recent Transcendental Techniques in Algebraic and Complex GeometryResearch partially supported by a grant from the National Science Foundation.

## 1. Introduction

Since the use of function theory in the study of algebraic curves as Riemann surfaces about two hundred years ago, transcendental methods such as harmonic forms in Hodge theory and curvature in the theory of Chern-Weil have been very important tools in complex algebraic geometry. Since the nineteen sixties very powerful techniques in the estimates of $`\overline{}`$, especially $`L^2`$ estimates and regularity techniques, have been extensively developed by C. B. Morrey, J. J. Kohn, L. Hörmander, et al. (To avoid too lengthy a bibliography here, we refer to ,,,,,, for references not listed here.) During the last two decades these new transcendental techniques have been increasingly used in complex algebraic geometry. The most noteworthy among them is J. J. Kohn’s method of multiplier ideals for $`\overline{}`$ estimates  which holds the promise of applicability to general partial differential equations and global geometry. Nadel  introduced multiplier ideal sheaves dual to Kohn’s. A number of longstanding problems in algebraic and complex geometry hitherto beyond the reach of known methods have been solved by the new techniques of $`\overline{}`$ estimates. On the other hand, demands of geometric applications motivate new approaches to $`\overline{}`$ estimates. We will discuss here some recent results in the following three topics in algebraic and complex geometry obtained by the new transcendental methods. (1) Invariance of plurigenera. (2) Nonexistence of smooth Levi-flat hypersurface in $`𝐏_2`$. (3) Hyperbolicity of generic hypersurface of high degree in $`𝐏_n`$. Though topic (3) is only peripherally linked to $`\overline{}`$ estimates, a long outstanding problem there is solved by some recent transcendental techniques.

## 2. Invariance of plurigenera

Let $`\mathrm{\Delta }_r=\{t𝐂||t|<r\}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }=\mathrm{\Delta }_1`$. Denote by $`K_Y`$ the canonical line bundle of a complex manifold $`Y`$. The $`m`$-genus of a compact complex manifold $`X`$ is the complex dimension of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(X,mK_X)`$. By Hodge theory the $`1`$-genus of a compact Kähler manifold is a topological invariant and therefore is invariant under holomorphic deformation. For the general $`m`$-genus there is the following conjecture on its invariance under holomorphic deformation for a compact Kähler manifold.

Conjecture 2.1 (on Deformational Invariance of Plurigenera for Kähler Manifolds). Let $`\pi :X\mathrm{\Delta }`$ be a holomorphic family of compact Kähler manifolds with fiber $`X_t`$. Then for any positive integer $`m`$ the complex dimension of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(X_t,mK_{X_t})`$ is independent of $`t`$ for $`t\mathrm{\Delta }`$.

Conjecture (2.1) has been verified in  when $`X`$ is a family of compact projective algebraic manifolds.

Theorem 2.2 . Let $`\pi :X\mathrm{\Delta }`$ be a holomorphic family of compact complex projective algebraic manifolds. Then for any integer $`m1`$ the complex dimension of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(X_t,mK_{X_t})`$ is independent of $`t`$ for $`t\mathrm{\Delta }`$.

The main techniques to solve the problem were first introduced in  where for technical reasons the assumption of each fiber being of general type is added. Because of the upper semicontinuity of $`dim_𝐂\mathrm{\Gamma }(X_t,mK_{X_t})`$, the conjecture is equivalent to extending every element of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(X_t,mK_{X_t})`$ to $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(X,mK_X)`$. We can assume $`t=0`$. The idea of the main techniques stemmed from the following naive motivation. If one could write an element $`s^{(m)}`$ of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(X_0,mK_{X_0})`$ as a sum of terms, each of which is the product of an element $`s^{(1)}`$ of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(X_0,K_{X_0})`$ and an element $`s^{(m1)}`$ of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(X_0,\left(m1\right)K_{X_0})`$, then one can extend $`s^{(m)}`$ to an element of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(X,mK_X)`$ by induction on $`m`$. Of course, in general it is clearly impossible to so express $`s^{(m)}`$ as a sum of such products. However, one could successfully implement a modified form of this naive motivation, in which $`s^{(1)}`$ is only a local holomorphic section and $`s^{(m1)}`$ is an element of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(X_0,\left(m1\right)K_{X_0}+E)`$ instead of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(X_0,\left(m1\right)K_{X_0})`$, where $`E`$ is a sufficiently ample line bundle on $`X`$ independent of $`m`$. The implementation of the modified form depends on the following two ingredients.

Proposition 2.3 (Global Generation of Multiplier Ideal Sheaves). Let $`L`$ be a holomorphic line bundle over an $`n`$-dimensional compact complex manifold $`Y`$ with a Hermitian metric which is locally of the form $`e^\xi `$ with $`\xi `$ plurisubharmonic. Let $`_\xi `$ be the multiplier ideal sheaf of the Hermitian metric $`e^\xi `$ (i.e., the sheaf consisting of all holomorphic function germs $`f`$ with $`\left|f\right|^2e^\xi `$ locally integrable). Let $`E`$ be an ample holomorphic line bundle over $`Y`$ such that for every point $`P`$ of $`Y`$ there are a finite number of elements of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(Y,E)`$ which all vanish to order at least $`n+1`$ at $`P`$ and which do not simultaneously vanish outside $`P`$. Then $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(Y,_\xi (L+E+K_Y))`$ generates $`_\xi (L+E+K_Y)`$ at every point of $`Y`$.

Proposition 2.4 (Extension Theorem of Ohsawa-Takegoshi Type). Let $`\gamma :Y\mathrm{\Delta }`$ be a projective algebraic family of compact complex manifolds. Let $`Y_0=\gamma ^1(0)`$ and let $`n`$ be the complex dimension of $`Y_0`$. Let $`L`$ be a holomorphic line bundle with a Hermitian metric $`e^\chi `$ with $`\chi `$ plurisubharmonic. Then for $`0<r<1`$ there exists a positive constant $`A_r`$ with the following property. For any holomorphic $`L`$-valued $`n`$-form $`f`$ on $`Y_0`$ with $`_{Y_0}|f|^2e^\chi <\mathrm{}`$, there exists a holomorphic $`L`$-valued $`(n+1)`$-form $`\stackrel{~}{f}`$ on $`\gamma ^1(\mathrm{\Delta }_r)`$ such that $`\stackrel{~}{f}|_{Y_0}=f\gamma ^{}(dt)`$ at points of $`Y_0`$ and $`_Y|\stackrel{~}{f}|^2e^\chi A_r_{Y_0}|f|^2e^\chi `$.

Locally expressing an element $`s^{(m)}`$ of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(X_0,mK_{X_0})`$ as a sum of terms, each of which is the product of a local holomorphic function $`s^{(1)}`$ and an element $`s^{(m1)}`$ of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(X_0,\left(m1\right)K_{X_0}+E)`$ is precisely Proposition 2.3, necessitating the use of $`E`$.

One constructs a metric of $`(m1)K_X+E`$ by using the sum of absolute-value squares of elements of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(X,\left(m1\right)K_X+E)`$ whose restrictions to $`X_0`$ form a basis of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(X_0,\left(m1\right)K_{X_0}+E)`$. Proposition 2.4 is now applicable to show the surjectivity of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(X,\left(m1\right)K_X+E)\mathrm{\Gamma }(X_0,\left(m1\right)K_{X_0}+E)`$ by induction on $`m`$. To get rid of $`E`$, for a sufficiently large $`\mathrm{}`$ one takes the $`\mathrm{}`$-th power of an element of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(X_0,mK_{X_0})`$ and multiplies it by an element of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(X,E)`$ and then takes the $`\mathrm{}`$-th root of the absolute value after its extension. This process, together with Hölder’s inequality, is used to produce a metric of $`(m1)K_X`$ which we can use in the application of Proposition 2.4 to get the surjectivity of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(X,mK_X)\mathrm{\Gamma }(X_0,mK_{X_0})`$. The assumption of general type facilitates the last technical step of getting rid of $`E`$ by writing $`aK_X=E+D`$ for some sufficiently large integer $`a`$ and an effective divisor $`D`$.

Kawamata  translated the argument of  to a purely algebraic geometric setting and Nakayama  explored generalizations including results concerning $`lim_m\mathrm{}\frac{1}{m}\mathrm{log}dim_𝐂\mathrm{\Gamma }(X_t,mK_{X_t}+E)`$ as a function of $`t`$. The case of non general type necessitates letting $`\mathrm{}`$, which is used in taking the power and the root, go to infinity. One has to control the estimates in the limiting process.

Tsuji put on the web a preprint on the deformational invariance of the plurigenera for manifolds not necessarily of general type , in which, besides the techniques of , he uses his theory of analytic Zariski decomposition and generalized Bergman kernels. Tsuji’s approach of generalized Bergman kernels naturally and elegantly reduces the problem of the deformational invariance of the plurigenera to a growth estimate on the generalized Bergman kernels. Unfortunately this crucial estimate is lacking and seems unlikely to be establishable, as explained in .

In  a metric as singular as possible is introduced for the limiting process, which, together with an estimation technique using the concavity of the logarithmic function, successfully removes the technical assumption of general type in .

The deformational invariance of the plurigenera for Kähler manifolds is still open. Only known results on the Kähler case are due to Levine’s  with the assumption of some pluricanonical section with nonsingular divisor (or only mild singularities). To generalize the methods of  and  to the Kähler case, one possibility is to use the “absolute value” of a holomorphic line bundle constructed from the Kähler metric, because in the key argument only the absolute value of the constructed holomorphic section is used and not the section itself. There is still no method of implementing this possibility.

## 3. Nonexistence of smooth Levi-Flat hypersurface in $`𝐏_\mathrm{𝟐}`$

The problem of the nonexistence of smooth Levi-flat hypersurface in $`𝐏_2`$ has its origin in dynamical systems in $`𝐏_2`$ (see ). In terms of $`\overline{}`$ estimates, its significance is that it gives a natural geometric setting for the understanding of $`\overline{}`$ regularity for domains with Levi-flat boundary. The $`\overline{}`$ regularity problem for a relatively compact domain $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ with smooth boundary $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ in a complex manifold is to find a solution $`u`$ on $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$, smooth up to $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$, to the equation $`\overline{}u=g`$ with a given $`\overline{}`$-closed $`(0,1)`$-form $`g`$ on $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$, smooth up to of $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$. Global regularity is said to hold for $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ if regularity holds for the particular solution $`u`$, known as the Kohn solution, which is orthogonal to all the $`L^2`$ holomorphic functions on $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$. The problem of global regularity has been very extensively studied in the past couple of decades (see bibliographies in ,). Global regularity holds for strictly pseudoconvex domains and, more generally, for weakly pseudoconvex domains whose boundary points are all of finite type. Finite type means that local complex-analytic curves touch the boundary only to bounded finite (normalized) order. Global regularity holds also for weakly pseudoconvex domains defined by global smooth weakly plurisubharmonic functions. On the other hand, worm domains are counter-examples for global regularity for general weakly pseudoconvex domains . Though the nonexistence of smooth Levi-flat hypersurface in $`𝐏_2`$ is connected with the regularity of any one solution of the $`\overline{}`$-equation rather than the particular Kohn solution, its proof ushers in a new approach of using vector fields to obtain $`\overline{}`$ regularity for domains with Levi-flat boundary. The following solution of the Levi-flat hypersurface problem was given in .

Theorem 3.1 . Let $`q8`$. Then there exists no $`C^q`$ Levi-flat real hypersurface $`M`$ in $`𝐏_2`$.

The nonexistence of real-analytic Levi-flat hypersurface in $`𝐏_3`$ was proved by Lins-Neto . Ohsawa  treated the nonexistence of real-analytic Levi-flat hypersurface in $`𝐏_2`$ (some points in the argument there not yet complete). The nonexistence of smooth Levi-flat hypersurface in $`𝐏_3`$ was proved in . The real-analytic case is completely different in nature from the smooth case, because the structure is automatically extendible to a neighborhood for the real-analytic case. Nonexistence in $`𝐏_2`$ implies nonexistence in $`𝐏_n`$ ($`n2`$) by slicing with a generic linear $`𝐏_2`$.

The following argument reduces the problem to a $`\overline{}`$ regularity question. Suppose $`M`$ exists. We seek a contradiction from the positivity of the $`(1,0)`$-normal bundle $`N_{M,𝐏_2}^{(1,0)}`$ of the Levi-flat hypersurface $`M`$. The curvature $`\theta `$ of $`N_{M,𝐏_2}^{(1,0)}`$ with the metric induced from the Fubini-Study metric is positive, because a quotient bundle cannot be less positive. On the other hand, $`M`$ is the zero-set of a smooth $`𝐑`$-valued function $`f_M`$ on $`𝐏_2`$ with $`df_M`$ nowhere zero on $`M`$. Evaluation by $`f_M`$ shows that $`N_{M,𝐏_2}^{(1,0)}`$ is smoothly trivial and $`\theta `$ must be $`d`$-exact on $`M`$, which means that $`\theta =d\alpha `$ for some smooth real $`1`$-form $`\alpha `$ on $`M`$. Decompose $`\alpha =\alpha ^{(1,0)}+\alpha ^{(0,1)}`$ into its $`(1,0)`$ and $`(0,1)`$ components. If $`\alpha ^{(0,1)}=\overline{}_b\psi `$ for some smooth function $`\psi `$ on $`M`$, then $`\theta =\sqrt{1}_b\overline{}_b\left(2\text{Im }\psi \right)`$. At a point of $`M`$ where $`\text{Im }\psi `$ assumes its maximum, the positivity of $`\theta `$ along the holomorphic foliation is contradicted. The problem is thus reduced to solving the $`\overline{}_b`$ equation on $`M`$ with regularity. By applying the Mayer-Vietoris sequence to $`𝐏_2M=U_1U_2`$ and using the vanishing of $`H^2(𝐏_2,𝒪_{𝐏_2})`$, the problem is reduced to whether, for any $`\overline{}`$-closed $`(0,1)`$-form $`g`$ on $`U_j`$ smooth up to $`U_j`$, the equation $`\overline{}u=g`$ can be solved on $`U_j`$ with $`u`$ smooth up to $`U_j`$.

The usual approach to $`\overline{}`$ regularity is to use the Bochner-Kodaira formula with boundary $`\overline{}g_\mathrm{\Omega }^2+\overline{}^{}g_\mathrm{\Omega }^2=_\mathrm{\Omega },\overline{g}g+\overline{}g_\mathrm{\Omega }^2+(\mathrm{\Theta }_E,\overline{g}g)_\mathrm{\Omega }`$ (with $`g`$ being a smooth $`E`$-valued $`(n,1)`$-form in the domain of $`\overline{}^{}`$), to solve the equation with $`L^2`$ estimates and then apply differential operators, integration by parts, and commutation relations to prove regularity. Here $`n=dim_𝐂\mathrm{\Omega }`$, $`_\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is the $`L^2`$ norm over $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$, $`\overline{}^{}`$ is the adjoint of $`\overline{}`$, $`\overline{}`$ means covariant differentiation in the $`(0,1)`$-direction, $``$ is the Levi form of $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$, and $`\mathrm{\Theta }_E`$ is the curvature form of the Hermitian holomorphic line bundle $`E`$ (which is usually chosen to be trivial).

In our new approach to get $`\overline{}`$ regularity for the Levi-flat domain $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ in $`𝐏_2`$ the use of holomorphic vector fields compensates for the complete lack of strict positivity for the Levi form of the boundary. We use a new norm to derive the Bochner-Kodaira formula with boundary. We choose a vector field $`\xi `$ on $`𝐏_2`$ which generates biholomorphisms preserving the Fubini-Study metric. The new norm is the $`L^2`$ norm $`L_m^2(\mathrm{\Omega },\xi )`$ for Lie derivatives $`\left(ie_\xi \right)^jg`$ along $`\xi `$ for order $`jm`$ on $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ for $`(0,1)`$-form $`g`$. Since $`\xi `$ generates metric-preserving biholomorphisms, the formal adjoint of $`\overline{}`$ with respect to $`L_m^2(\mathrm{\Omega },\xi )`$ agrees with the one with respect to usual $`L^2`$. One usual difficulty with regularity is the error terms from the commutation of differential operators with $`\overline{}`$ and $`\overline{}^{}`$. One advantage of using $`ie_\xi `$ is that there are no error terms from its commutation with $`\overline{}`$ and $`\overline{}^{}`$.

There are two technical problems. One is how to establish, for such a norm, the Bochner-Kodaira formula with boundary. The other is that appropriate regularity for a solution of the $`\overline{}`$ equation with finite $`L_m^2(\mathrm{\Omega },\xi )`$ norm can be obtained only at points where the real and imaginary parts of $`\xi `$ are not both tangential to $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$. We handle the first problem as follows. We prove that, if $`g`$ belongs to the domain of the adjoint of $`\overline{}`$ with respect to $`L_m^2(\mathrm{\Omega },\xi )`$, then $`\left(ie_\xi \right)^jg`$ belongs to the domain of the adjoint of $`\overline{}`$ with respect to the usual $`L^2`$ norm on $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ for $`jm`$. The formula for the new norm is simply the sum, over $`0jm`$, of such a formula for the usual $`L^2`$ norm on $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ for $`\left(ie_\xi \right)^jg`$. The proof for $`\left(ie_\xi \right)^jg`$ to belong to the domain of the adjoint of $`\overline{}`$ with respect to the usual $`L^2`$ norm on $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ consists of two steps. One shows that this is locally true at points where $`\xi `$ is not tangential to $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$. Then one uses a removable singularity argument to handle the other points when $`\xi `$ has been chosen generic enough. For the second problem, to handle the other points for a generic $`\xi `$, we use the foliation of $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ by local complex-analytic curves and the generalized Cauchy integral formula along the local complex-analytic curves.

## 4. Hyperbolicity of generic hypersurface of high degree in $`𝐏_𝒏`$

A complex manifold $`X`$ is hyperbolic if there exists no nonconstant holomorphic map $`𝐂X`$. For the last few decades the study of hyperbolicity has been focussed on hypersurfaces and their complements in two important settings: (1) inside an abelian variety and (2) inside $`𝐏_n`$. In the general setting hyperbolicity is conjectured to be linked to the positivity of canonical line bundle in the following formulation.

Conjecture 4.1(Conjecture of Green-Griffiths). In a compact algebraic manifold $`X`$ of general type (or with positive canonical line bundle) there exists a proper subvariety $`Y`$ containing the images of all nonconstant holomorphic maps $`𝐂X`$.

The theory for the setting inside an abelian variety is very well developed (see , for references). The Zariski closure of any holomorphic map from $`𝐂`$ to an abelian variety $`A`$ is the translate of an abelian subvariety of $`A`$. In particular, a subvariety of an abelian variety $`A`$ which does not contain any translate of an abelian subvariety of $`A`$ is hyperbolic. The defect of an ample divisor in an abelian variety is zero. In particular, the complement of an ample divisor in an abelian variety is hyperbolic.

Except those motivated by methods of number theory due to McQuillan, practically all the major techniques for problems related to hyperbolicity in the setting of abelian varieties are due to Bloch  who introduced the use of holomorphic jet differentials and differential equations in conjunction with the jet differentials. Investigations on problems related to hyperbolicity in the setting of abelian varieties have essentially been completed. Only technical details such as getting an optimal lower bound for $`k_n`$ in Theorem 4.2 below remain open. Theorem 4.2 (proved in Addendum of ) was added to  in response to a difficulty in the proof of Lemma 2 of the original paper  pointed out in . The difficulty resulted from an attempt to use semi-continuity of cohomology groups in deformations to avoid employing Bloch’s technique from  which involves the uniqueness part of the fundamental theorem of ordinary differential equations. Putting back Bloch’s technique removes the difficulty and at the same time improves the zero defect statement in  to Theorem 4.2 on the second main theorem with truncated multiplicity.

Theorem 4.2 (Addendum, ). Let $`D`$ be an ample divisor of an abelian variety $`A`$ of complex dimension $`n`$ and let $`k_0=0`$, $`k_1=1`$, and $`k_{\mathrm{}+1}=k_{\mathrm{}}+3^{n\mathrm{}1}\left(4(k+1)\right)^{\mathrm{}}D^n`$ ( $`1\mathrm{}<n`$). Then for any holomorphic map $`f:𝐂A`$ whose image is not contained in any translate of $`D`$, the following second main theorem with truncated multiplicity holds: $`m(r,f,D)+\left(N(r,f,D)N_{k_n}(r,f,D)\right)=O(\mathrm{log}T(r,f,D)+\mathrm{log}r)`$ for $`r`$ outside some set whose measure with respect to $`\frac{dr}{r}`$ is finite. Here $`T(r,f,D)`$, $`m(r,f,D)`$, $`N(r,f,D)`$, $`N_{k_n}(r,f,D)`$ are respectively the characteristic, proximity, counting functions, and truncated counting functions.

For the setting inside $`𝐏_n`$ there is the following outstanding conjecture.

Conjecture 4.3 (Kobayashi’s Conjecture). (a) The complement in $`𝐏_n`$ of a generic hypersurface of degree at least $`2n+1`$ is hyperbolic. (b) A generic hypersurface of degree at least $`2n1`$ in $`𝐏_n`$ is hyperbolic for $`n3`$.

For Conjecture 4.3(a) the complement in $`𝐏_2`$ of a generic curve of sufficiently high degree is known to be hyperbolic . For Conjecture 4.3(b) a generic surface of degree $`36`$ in $`𝐏_3`$ is known to be hyperbolic . The degree bound is lowered to $`21`$ in . There are some constructions of examples of smooth hyperbolic hypersurfaces in $`𝐏_n`$ (see ). The hyperbolicity result we want to discuss here is the following.

Theorem 4.4 . There exists a positive integer $`\delta _n`$ such that a generic hypersurface in $`𝐏_n`$ of degree $`\delta _n`$ is hyperbolic.

We sketch its proof here. A central role will be played by jet differentials which we now define. A $`k`$-jet differential on a complex manifold $`X`$ with local coordinates $`x_1,\mathrm{},x_n`$ is locally a polynomial in $`d^{\mathrm{}}x_j(1\mathrm{}k,1jn)`$.

Lemma 4.5 (Lemma of Jet Differentials). If a holomorphic jet differential $`\omega `$ on a compact complex manifold $`X`$ vanishes on an ample divisor of $`X`$ and $`\phi :𝐂X`$ is a holomorphic map, then $`\phi ^{}\omega `$ is identically zero on $`𝐂`$.

The intuitive reason for Lemma 4.5 is that $`𝐂`$ does not admit a metric (or not even a $`k`$-jet metric) with curvature bounded above by negative number. While a usual metric assigns a value to a tangent vector (which is a $`1`$-jet), a $`k`$-jet metric assigns a value to a $`k`$-jet. A non identically zero $`\phi ^{}\omega `$ defines a $`k`$-jet metric $`\left|\phi ^{}\omega \right|^2`$ on $`𝐂`$ which, even with some degeneracy, still gives a contradiction by its negative curvature. A rigorous proof of Lemma 4.5 depends on the logarithmic derivative lemma of Nevanlinna theory. A consequence of Lemma 4.5 is that the image of the $`k`$-jet $`d^k\phi `$ of any holomorphic map $`\phi :𝐂X`$ satisfies the differential equation $`\omega =0`$ on $`X`$. If there exist enough independent such $`\omega `$ on $`X`$, then the system of all equations $`\omega =0`$ does not admit any local solution curve and $`X`$ is hyperbolic.

In the setting of abelian varieties Bloch constructed jet differentials by comparing meromorphic functions on the image and the target of a map with finite fibers. For a holomorphic map $`\phi `$ from $`𝐂`$ to an abelian variety $`A`$, let $`X`$ be the Zariski closure of the image of $`\phi `$ in $`A`$ and $`𝒳`$ be the Zariski closure of $`(d^k\phi )(𝐂)`$ in $`J_k(A)=A\times 𝐂^{nk}`$. Here $`J_k()`$ means the space of $`k`$-jets. Let $`\sigma _k:𝒳𝐂^{nk}`$ be induced by the natural projection $`J_k(A)=A\times 𝐂^{nk}𝐂^{nk}`$ which forgets the position and keeps the differentials. Let $`\tau :J_k(X)X`$ be the natural projection. Let $`F`$ be a meromorphic function on $`X`$ whose pole-set is some ample divisor $`D`$. Suppose $`\sigma _k:𝒳𝐂^{nk}`$ is generically finite. Let $`x_1,\mathrm{},x_n`$ be the coordinates of $`𝐂^n`$. Then $`F\tau `$ belongs to a finite extension of the rational function field of $`𝐂^{nk}`$ and there exist polynomials $`P_j`$ ($`0jp`$) with constant coefficients in the variables $`d^{\mathrm{}}x_\nu `$ ($`1\mathrm{}k,1\nu n`$) such that $`_{j=0}^p(\sigma _k^{}P_j)(\tau ^{}F)^j=0`$ on $`𝒳`$ and $`\sigma _k^{}P_p`$ is not identically zero on $`𝒳`$. The equation forces the holomorphic jet differential $`P_p`$ on $`𝒳`$ to vanish on the ample divisor $`\tau ^1(D)`$. The assumption of generical finiteness of $`\sigma _k`$ is tied to the translational invariance of $`X`$.

The idea of our method of construction of holomorphic jet differentials on a generic hypersurface $`X`$ in $`𝐏_n`$ defined of by a polynomial $`f`$ of degree $`\delta `$ is to use the theorem of Riemann-Roch and the lower bound of negativity of jet differential bundles of $`X`$. The theorem of Riemann-Roch was first used by Green-Griffiths to obtain holomorphic jet differentials and is applicable only for surfaces where the higher cohomology groups could be easily handled. We can handle the higher cohomology groups in our higher dimensional case because of the lower bound of negativity of jet differential bundles of $`X`$. Since the twisted cohomology groups of $`𝐏_n`$ comes from counting the number of monomials, in the actual proof direct counting of monomials is used. Let $`x_1,\mathrm{},x_n`$ (respectively $`z_0,\mathrm{},z_n`$) be the inhomogeneous (respectively homogeneous) coordinates of $`𝐏_n`$. Let $`Q`$ be a non identically zero polynomial of degree $`m_0`$ in $`x_1,\mathrm{},x_n`$ and of homogeneous weight $`m`$ in $`d^jx_{\mathrm{}}`$ ($`1jn1,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}\mathrm{}n`$) with the weight of $`d^jx_{\mathrm{}}`$ equal to $`j`$. If $`m_0+2m<\delta `$, then $`Q`$ is not identically zero on $`J_{n1}(X)`$. By counting the number of coefficients of $`Q`$ and the number of equations needed for the jet differential on $`X`$ defined by $`Q`$ to vanish on an ample divisor in $`X`$ of high degree defined by a polynomial $`g=0`$ in $`𝐏_n`$ and using $`f=df=\mathrm{}=d^{n1}f=0`$ to eliminate one coordinate and its differentials, we obtain a jet differential $`\frac{Q}{g}`$ on $`X`$ which is holomorphic and vanishes on an ample divisor of high degree.

Proposition 4.6 (Existence of Holomorphic Jet Differentials). If $`0<\theta _0,\theta ,\theta ^{}<1ϵ`$ with $`n\theta _0+\theta n+ϵ`$, then there exists an explicit $`A=A(n,ϵ)>0`$ such that for $`\delta A`$ there exists a non identically zero $`𝒪_{𝐏_n}(q)`$-valued holomorphic $`(n1)`$-jet differential $`\omega `$ on $`X`$ of total weight $`m`$ with $`q\delta ^\theta ^{}`$ and $`m\delta ^\theta `$.

To construct enough independent jet differentials, we use meromorphic vector fields of low pole order on the total space $`𝒳`$ of all hypersurfaces in $`𝐏_n`$ of degree $`\delta `$. The total space $`𝒳`$ is defined by $`f=_{\nu 𝐍^{n+1},|\nu |=\delta }\alpha _\nu z^\nu `$ of bidegree $`(\delta ,1)`$ in $`𝐏_n\times 𝐏_N`$, where $`N=\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\delta +n}{n}\right)1`$, $`z^\nu =z_0^{\nu _0}\mathrm{}z_n^{\nu _n}`$, $`|\nu |=\nu _0+\mathrm{}+\nu _n`$, and $`𝐍`$ is the set of all nonnegative integers. Let $`e_{\mathrm{}}=(0,\mathrm{},0,1,\mathrm{},0)𝐍^{n+1}`$ with $`1`$ in the $`\mathrm{}`$-th place. The $`(1,0)`$-twisted tangent bundle of $`𝒳`$ is globally generated by holomorphic sections of the forms $`L\left(z_q\left(\frac{}{\alpha _{\lambda +e_p}}\right)z_p\left(\frac{}{\alpha _{\lambda +e_q}}\right)\right)`$ and $`_jB_j\frac{}{z_j}+_\mu L_\mu \frac{}{\alpha _\mu }`$, where $`\lambda 𝐍^{n+1}`$ with $`|\lambda |=\delta 1`$ and $`L,L_\mu `$ (respectively $`B_j`$) are homogeneous linear functions of $`\{\alpha _\nu \}`$ (respectively $`z_0,\mathrm{},z_n`$) with $`L_\mu `$ and $`B_j`$ suitably chosen.

We introduce the space $`J_{n1}^{\mathrm{vert}}\left(𝒳\right)`$ of vertical $`(n1)`$-jets of $`𝒳`$ which is defined by $`f=df=\mathrm{}=d^{n1}f=0`$ in $`\left(J_{n1}\left(𝐏_n\right)\right)\times 𝐏_N`$ with the coefficients $`\alpha _\nu `$ of $`f`$ regarded as constants when forming $`d^jf`$. By generalizing the above construction of vector fields on $`𝒳`$ to vector fields on $`J_{n1}^{\mathrm{vert}}\left(𝒳\right)`$, one obtains the following.

Proposition 4.7 (Existence of Low Pole-Order Vector Fields). There exist $`c_n,c_n^{}𝐍`$ such that the $`(c_n,c_n^{})`$-twisted tangent bundle of the projectivization of $`J_{n1}^{\mathrm{vert}}\left(𝒳\right)`$ is globally generated. (To avoid considering the singularities of weighted projective spaces, one can interpret the statement by using functions which are polynomials of homogeneous weight along the fibers of $`J_{n1}^{\mathrm{vert}}\left(𝒳\right)`$.)

For a generic fiber $`X`$ of $`𝒳`$ the constructed holomorphic $`(n1)`$-jet differential $`\omega `$ on $`X`$ with vanishing order at least $`q`$ on the infinity divisor can be extended holomorphically to $`\stackrel{~}{\omega }`$ on all neighboring fibers with vanishing order at least $`q`$ on the infinity divisor. We use vector fields $`v_1,\mathrm{},v_p`$ on $`J_{n1}^{\mathrm{vert}}\left(𝒳\right)`$ with fiber pole order low relative to $`q`$ and take successive Lie derivatives $`ie_{v_1}\mathrm{}ie_{v_p}\stackrel{~}{\omega }`$ whose restrictions to $`X`$ give holomorphic jet differentials on $`X`$ vanishing on an ample divisor of $`X`$. Because of the bound on the weight $`m`$ in the construction of $`\omega `$, for $`\delta `$ sufficiently large the jet differentials from the Lie derivatives are independent enough to eliminate the derivatives from the differential equations they define. As a result, one concludes that for some proper subvariety $`Y`$ in $`X`$ the image of any nonconstant holomorphic map from $`𝐂`$ to $`X`$ is contained in $`Y`$.

To get the full conclusion of hyperbolicity, for the constructed $`\omega `$ one has to control the vanishing order of the coefficients of the monomials of the differentials. For a generic $`X`$ the construction process enables one to bound the vanishing order by $`\delta ^{2\eta }`$ for some $`\eta >0`$. For hyperbolicity one needs the better bound of $`\delta ^{1\eta }`$ for some $`\eta >0`$. To achieve it, one uses an appropriate embedding $`\mathrm{\Phi }:𝐏_n𝐏_{\widehat{n}}`$ of degree $`\delta _1`$ so that a generic hypersurface $`X`$ of degree $`\delta :=\delta _1\delta _2`$ in $`𝐏_n`$ can be extended to a hypersurface $`\widehat{X}`$ of degree $`\delta _2`$ in $`𝐏_{\widehat{n}}`$. For this step the method of multiplier ideal sheaves from $`\overline{}`$ estimates is used. We deform $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ slightly and pull back the jet differential $`\widehat{\omega }`$ constructed on $`\widehat{X}`$ to get a differential $`\omega `$ on a slight deformation of $`X`$. When the image of the deformed $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ has appropriate transversality to the zero set of the coefficients of $`\widehat{\omega }`$, an appropriate choice of $`\delta _1`$ and $`\delta _2`$ gives the required bound on the vanishing order of the coefficients of $`\omega `$. This is at the expense of increasing the order of the jet differential from $`n1`$ to $`\widehat{n}1`$, which does not affect the argument. For this additional step in the argument the degree $`\delta `$ must be a product. To remove this condition, one uses an embedding $`𝐏_n𝐏_{\widehat{n}_1}\times 𝐏_{\widehat{n}_2}`$ instead of $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$.

The use and the construction of meromorphic vector fields on $`J_{n1}^{\mathrm{vert}}\left(𝒳\right)`$ of low pole order along the fibers are motivated by Clemens’s work  (with later generalizations and improvements by Ein  and Voisin ) on the nonexistence of regular rational and elliptic curves on generic hypersufaces of sufficiently high degree.

There is no way yet to handle Conjecture 4.1. Additional assumptions such as $`K_XmL>0`$ or $`\left(K_XmL\right)L^{n1}>0`$ for some large $`m`$ and $`L`$ ample or very ample could facilitate the construction of holomorphic jet differentials vanishing on an ample divisor. One possibility to handle the question of enough independent jet differentials is to deform $`d^k\phi `$ of $`\phi `$ for each $`k1`$ separately and use techniques analogous to the twisted difference maps in the Vojta-Faltings proof of the Mordell conjecture and to McQuillan’s separate rescaling of an entire holomorphic curve in each factor of a product of several copies of an abelian variety (see pp.504-505,).


text:
# Probing the Friedmann equation during recombination with future CMB experiments

## I Introduction

The parameters of our cosmological model will be determined with great accuracy by upcoming data from Cosmic Microwave Background experiments, galaxy surveys, weak lensing surveys, Lyman alpha forest studies, and other observations. With the new data it will be possible to perform a number of consistency checks that will strengthen our confidence in the underlying model. Some of these consistency checks have already been performed with existing data. Recent analysis of the CMB data have resulted in constraints on the baryon density $`\mathrm{\Omega }_bh^2`$ that are in excellent agreement with its determination based on the study of the primordial abundances of light elements (e.g. Wang ; Efsthathiou ). The combination of CMB data with local measures of the Hubble constant keyproject  and measures of the local strength of galaxy clustering result in a determination of the cosmological constant that is in good agreement with results from the study of the luminosity of distant supernovae (e.g. Riess ; revpar ). Recently also joint BBN and CMB constraints on different dark energy models have been discussed in Kneller:2002zh .

One of the assumptions of the cosmological model that has been hard to test is the explicit validity of the Friedmann equation – the relation between the expansion rate of the universe and its matter content. The difficulty lies in finding an epoch in the evolution of the universe during which both the energy density and the expansion rate can be determined independently. The two obvious candidates are the present time and Big Bang Nucleosynthesis (BBN).

Precise measures of both the expansion rate and the matter density in the local universe are difficult to accomplish and suffer from various systematic problems. At present the expansion rate has been measured with errors on the order of $`10\%`$ keyproject . Direct determinations of the matter density however are more uncertain. It is fair to say that the general conclusion from these studies is that the Friedmann equation only holds true if either a cosmological constant or a curvature term is added. This is because direct determinations of the present matter density almost always point to $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m<1`$ (e.g. see revpar ). Neither the cosmological constant nor the curvature scale can be constrained independently, that is without going through the Friedmann equation, so at best we can say that the Friedmann equation has not been tested accurately at the present epoch. A more radical interpretation would be that the Friedmann equation has been tested but that the test has failed. Although we do not support this interpretation, at present some infrared modification of gravity cannot be ruled out observationally. Such modifications are being explored for example as ways to solve the cosmological constant problem (see for example Arkani-Hamed ) or to explain the accelerated expansion inferred from the luminosity distance to high redshift supernovae without resorting in a cosmological constant or a quintessence field (e.g. see Deffayet:2001pu ; Deffayet2 ).

During the epoch of Big Bang Nucleosynthesis (BBN) the situation is more fortunate. The energy density is dominated by radiation which we think we can estimate accurately. On the other hand the expansion rate affects the freeze-out abundances of light elements, so that a precision test of the Friedmann equation can be performed. The standard procedure is to constrain the number of relativistic degrees of freedom, $`g_{}`$, which can be translated into a limit on the number of neutrino species. A lot of progress has been made in determining the primordial abundances. Recently the deuterium abundance in hydrogen clouds at high redshift was accurately determined O'Meara:2000dh ; Burles:1997ez ; Burles:1997fa . Building on a prior of $`N_\nu 3`$ these data have been exploited to enforce an upper limit of 3.2 at $`2\sigma `$ for the number of neutrino species, based purely on BBN considerations Burles:1999zt .

Progress has also been made in appreciating the systematical uncertainties that impair the determination of primordial $`{}_{}{}^{4}He`$ (see e.g. Olive:2000qm ; Peimbert:2002ks ). Built on the safely established abundance ranges for Deuterium, Helium and Lithium, it can be shown that the uncertainty in the number of relativistic degrees of freedom during BBN is around 9 % (68% C.L.)Olive:1998vj . This constraint can equally well be phrased as a constraint on the validity of the Friedmann equation: during Nucleosynthesis the ratio of the squared expansion rate to the energy density can depart by only $`9\%`$ from what is predicted by the Friedmann equation. Constraints on the expansion history during BBN have also been established in Carroll:2001bv .

In this paper we propose using the anisotropies in the CMB to perform a test similar to the one that has been done using BBN. We will show that such a test can ultimately constrain the validity of the Friedmann equation during recombination more accurately than what has so far been reached within Nucleosynthesis, albeit in a more model dependent way.

During recombination, the energy density is dominated by the density of non-relativistic matter which we cannot estimate directly. However the dark matter energy density enters in two different ways and one can exploit this to simultaneously determine the dark matter density and the expansion rate during recombination.

The ratio of matter to radiation energy density sets the redshift of matter radiation equality. At that time the expansion rate changes from a scaling as $`t^{1/2}`$ to $`t^{2/3}`$. Perturbation modes of the photon-baryon fluid that entered the horizon during the radiation dominated era behave differently than those that entered during the matter dominated era. Modes that entered during radiation domination provided the dominant contribution to the total density perturbation that generated the gravitational potential. On the contrary modes that entered the horizon during matter domination, were sub-dominant in their contribution to the total density perturbation which was dominated by the dark matter fluctuations. The gravitational potential acts as a source for perturbations in the photon baryon fluid. As a result, small scale modes that entered the horizon in the radiation era go through a sort of feedback loop that increases their amplitude as they cross the horizon (for a review of CMB physics see for example DodlesonHu ). The anisotropy power spectrum is very sensitive to the redshift of matter radiation equality and thus the CMB should very accurately determine the ratio of dark matter to radiation energy density, i.e. the parameter $`\mathrm{\Omega }_mh^2`$.

The dark matter density dominates over other energy components in the Friedmann equation during recombination. In the standard scenario, it sets both the redshift at which matter and radiation become equal and the rate of expansion during recombination through the Friedmann equation. In this paper we break the link between energy density and expansion rate by introducing a free parameter to modify the Friedmann equation. We investigate how well such a parameter can be constrained.

From a pragmatic perspective our study can be regarded as the investigation of a particular departure from standard recombination. Different variations have been studied in the literature. For instance the possibility that energetic sources of Ly-$`\alpha `$-photons could be present during recombination to delay it was considered in Peebles:200l . Also, the possiblility of a time variation of the fine structure constant was investigated Kaplinghat:1998ry ; Landau:2000dd ; Hannestad:2000ys . In Uzan:2002vq  the effects of a time dependence of the gravitational constant have been outlined. The conclusion of these investigations and ours is that with future CMB data departures from standard recombination will be severely constrained and perhaps modifications that point to interesting new physics could be discovered.

In section II, we will introduce our model and in section III we will investigate the constraints that can be set with currently available data and forecast what future CMB experiments might be able to achieve. We will conclude in section IV with discussion.

## II The Model: Variation of the gravitational constant

In this section we introduce the model we will use to investigate how well one can test the Friedmann equation using the CMB. The problem is somewhat more subtle than in the case of BBN because we are dealing with the dynamics of perturbations that could be affected by the “new physics” in ways other than through a change in the expansion rate. Thus we need to find a self-consistent way of modifying both the dynamics of the universe and that of the perturbations.

One possibility is to add another component that contributes to the energy density during recombination, increasing the rate of expansion at that time. The additional component could be a quintessence field with a potential and initial conditions tuned so that it has some effect during recombination and is unimportant or only marginally important at other times (except perhaps today when it could start to dominate). This approach has the virtue of only modifying the expansion rate but it introduces too much freedom because results depend on when exactly this extra component is important. In such a model we also expect the ratio of the sound horizon at recombination to the angular diameter distance to the last scattering surface to change and thus that the acoustic peaks be slightly shifted. At late times the evolution of the gravitational potentials will also induce an integrated Sachs-Wolfe (ISW) effect. As a result, constraints on any specific model of this kind will come from these three effects UzanRiaz .

In our study we want to isolate the information encoded in the change of the expansion rate at recombination so we will use a simpler prescription and assume that the gravitational constant $`G`$ is somewhat different from its locally measured value. We introduce a single parameter $`\lambda `$ such that,

$$G\lambda ^2G.$$
(1)
The expansion rate is proportional to $`\lambda `$. With this prescription not only the Friedmann equation gets modified but also the dynamics of the perturbations changes because it depends on the strength of gravity. We will show in the following that our prescription has the nice feature that it only changes the CMB power spectrum through the change in recombination, allowing us to isolate the observable effects of this change. The basic reason is that gravity does not have a preferred scale and that we only measure angles when studying the CMB. If $`G`$ were slightly different all that would happen is that the universe would be expanding a bit faster or slower by a factor $`\lambda `$ so that the “expansion clock” would be running at a different rate. Such a change cancels in the ratios of distances that we measure with the CMB. The only way we can find out that such an alteration had occurred is by having an independent clock that measures the expansion rate. In our case this independent clock will be the physics of hydrogen recombination. In this sense our simple test is very similar to what has been done in the context of BBN.

### II.1 Effect of $`\lambda `$ on the CMB anisotropies

The dependence of the Hubble parameter and the dynamics of perturbations on the gravitational constant will lead to modifications of the CMB anisotropies as we vary the parameter $`\lambda `$. We will discuss the physics in this section.

We start by considering the modification to the Friedmann equation,

$$H^2=\left(\frac{\dot{a}}{a}\right)^2=\frac{8\pi }{3}G\rho \frac{8\pi }{3}\lambda ^2G\rho $$
(2)
where $`\rho `$ is the total energy density. As a function of the expansion factor $`a`$ and $`\lambda `$, the expansion rate $`H`$ satisfies:

$$H(a,\lambda )=\lambda f(a),$$
(3)
where the function $`f(a)`$ is independent of $`\lambda `$. Thus with this simple prescription, the shape of the function $`H`$ of $`a`$ is not changed by $`\lambda `$, only the amplitude changes. For example the redshift at which matter and radiation contribute equally to the energy density does not change. The change introduced is a simple rescaling of the “expansion rate clock”.

In order to understand how the anisotropies get modified, we start by writing down the integral solution for the temperature anisotropies produced by a mode of wavevector $`𝐤`$ observed towards direction $`\widehat{𝐧}`$ Seljak:1996is . The temperature can be written as an integral along the line of sight over sources,

$$\mathrm{\Delta }T(\widehat{𝐧},𝐤)=_0^{\tau _0}𝑑\tau S(k,\tau )e^{i𝐤\widehat{𝐧}D(\tau )}g(\tau )$$
(4)
In this equation $`S(k,\tau )`$ is the source term, $`g(\tau )`$ is the visibility function, and $`D(\tau )`$ is the distance from the observer to a point along the line of sight corresponding to the conformal time $`\tau `$ ($`ad\tau =dt`$). Dots indicate differentiation with respect to $`\tau `$.

The visibility function $`g(\tau )`$ can be written in terms of the opacity for Thomson scattering $`\kappa `$ as

$$g(\tau )=\dot{\kappa }\mathrm{exp}(\kappa )=d/d\tau \mathrm{exp}(\kappa )$$
(5)
with

$$\kappa =\sigma _T_\tau ^{\tau _0}an_e(\tau )𝑑\tau ,$$
(6)
where $`\sigma _T`$ is the Thomson scattering cross section and $`n_e(\tau )`$ is the number density of free electrons. We have also defined $`\dot{\kappa }=\sigma _Tan_e`$. Finally, the source term in the integral equation is given by

$$S=\varphi +\frac{\delta _\gamma }{4}+\widehat{n}𝐯_b$$
(7)
where $`\varphi `$ is the gravitational potential, $`\delta _\gamma `$ is the fractional perturbation in the photon energy density and $`𝐯_b`$ is the baryon velocity.

The acoustic oscillations in the photon-baryon plasma satisfy (see e.g. Hu:1994jd )

$`\ddot{\delta }_\gamma `$ $`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\dot{R}}{(1+R)}}\dot{\delta }_\gamma +k^2c_S^2\delta _\gamma =`$ (8)
$`=`$ $`4\left[\ddot{\varphi }+{\displaystyle \frac{\dot{R}}{1+R}}\dot{\varphi }{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}k^2\varphi \right]`$
with the sound speed $`c_S^2=1/3(1+R)`$, and the baryon-photon momentum density ratio $`R=(p_b+\rho _b)/(p_\gamma +\rho _\gamma )3\rho _b/4\rho _\gamma `$. The velocity satisfies,

$$\dot{\delta }_\gamma +kv_\gamma +\dot{\varphi }=0$$
(9)
Finally the gravitational potential satisfies the Poisson equation

$$k^2\varphi =4\pi \lambda ^2G\rho \delta ^{total},$$
(10)
where $`\rho \delta ^{total}`$ gives the combined perturbation due to all the fluids.

We are now ready to study the dependence of $`\mathrm{\Delta }T`$ on $`\lambda `$. For this purpose it is best to consider the expansion factor as a time variable rather than $`\tau `$. We note that,

$$\frac{d}{d\tau }=\frac{da}{d\tau }\frac{d}{da}=a^2H\frac{d}{da}=\lambda f(a)a^2\frac{d}{da}.$$
(11)
As a result, when we change time variables, every time derivative introduces a factor of $`\lambda `$. By inspection of equations (8) and (10) it is clear that the dynamics of a mode with wavenumber $`k`$ in a universe with $`\lambda 1`$ is equivalent to the dynamics of a mode with $`k^{}=k/\lambda `$ in a universe with $`\lambda =1`$. That is,

$$S(k,a,\lambda )=S(k/\lambda ,a,\lambda =1).$$
(12)
We have explicitly included the $`\lambda `$ dependence of the source to make our argument clearer.

To obtain the CMB power spectrum, we first need to expand equation (4) in Legendre polynomials. The amplitude of the $`l`$ expansion coefficient is

$$\mathrm{\Delta }T_l(k,\lambda )=_0^1𝑑a\stackrel{~}{S}(k,a,\lambda )j_l(kD(a,\lambda ))\stackrel{~}{g}(a,\lambda ).$$
(13)
We have introduced $`\stackrel{~}{g}(a,\lambda )=d/da\mathrm{exp}(\kappa )`$. The conformal distance $`D`$ is given by

$$D(a,\lambda )=_a^1\frac{da}{H(a)a^2}=\lambda ^1D(a,\lambda =1).$$
(14)
Thus if the visibility function where to be independent of $`\lambda `$ we would have,

$$\mathrm{\Delta }T_l(k,\lambda )=\mathrm{\Delta }T_l(k/\lambda ,\lambda =1).$$
(15)
The power spectrum is calculated from $`\mathrm{\Delta }T_l(k,\lambda )`$ using,

$`C_l(\lambda )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{dk}{k}P(k)|\mathrm{\Delta }_{Tl}(k,\lambda )|^2}`$ (16)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{dk^{}}{k^{}}P(k^{}\lambda )|\mathrm{\Delta }_{Tl}(k^{},\lambda =1)|^2},`$
where $`P(k)`$ is the power spectrum of primordial fluctuations which is usually taken to be a power law $`P(k)k^{n1}`$. Thus we see that provided we adjust the amplitude of the primordial power spectrum appropriately $`C_l(\lambda )=C_l(\lambda =1)`$.

Our result is qualitatively very easy to understand: gravity introduces no preferred scale, so the dynamics of the perturbations remains the same when scales are measured in units of the expansion time. As a result, the angular power spectrum does not change as we change $`\lambda `$.

Of course this conclusion only holds true if the visibility function is not affected by $`\lambda `$. However the physics of recombination does introduce a preferred timescale, so the power spectra of the anisotropies will actually change. In other words, in our simple minded prescription the only source of change is the difference in the way recombination proceeds as we change the expansion rate of the universe at recombination. This is the sense in which our model resembles the studies done in the context of Big Bang Nucleosynthesis.

Let us now turn to study how the visibility function changes with $`\lambda `$. It depends on the ionization fraction $`x_e=n_e/n_H`$, where $`n_e`$ again is the free electron density and $`n_H`$ is the number density of hydrogen atoms. The evolution of the ionization fraction is modified when $`G`$ is changed. It evolves according to (e.g. Ma:1994ub ):

$$\frac{dx_e}{d\tau }=aC_r\left[\beta (T_b)(1x_e)n_H\alpha ^{(2)}(T_b)x_e^2\right]$$
(17)
where $`a(t)`$ is just the scale factor, $`\beta (T_b)`$ is the collisional ionization rate from the ground state and $`\alpha ^{(2)}(T_b)`$ is the recombination rate to excited states. The baryon temperature is $`T_b`$ and the Peebles correction coefficient (which also depends on the expansion rate) is denoted $`C_r`$ Peebles:1968 . The transformation from $`\tau `$ to $`a(\tau )`$ as a time variable using equation (11), makes clear, that contrary to what happens to the perturbation equations, $`x_e(a)`$ depends on $`\lambda `$. We plotted $`x_e`$ for different values of $`\lambda `$ in Figure 1. The behavior is easy to understand; the faster the universe is expanding at a given redshift (i.e. the larger the $`\lambda `$), the more difficult it is for hydrogen to recombine and hence the larger is $`x_e`$.

The change in $`x_e`$ leads to a change in the visibility function which we show in Figure 2. As $`\lambda `$ is increased, the visibility function becomes broader. This broadening leads to a larger damping of the anisotropies on small (angular) scales, as shown in Figure 3. We note however that even for a factor of four change in $`\lambda `$ the changes in the visibility function are rather small. What happens is that if we increase $`\lambda `$, $`x_e`$ at a given redshift after the start of recombination increases. However, when calculating optical depths this change almost exactly cancels with the decrease in the time intervals between different redshifts due to the increased expansion rate. As a result changes in both the location and shape of the visibility function are small even for large changes in $`\lambda `$.

Figure 3 shows that the effect of $`\lambda `$ is to change the relative amplitudes of the acoustic peaks on different scales. This effect can be compensated by changing the relative amplitude of modes of different scales in the primordial power spectrum.

We are now going to study what happens to CMB polarization and to show that it can lift the degeneracy between $`\lambda `$ and the shape of the primordial power spectrum. To understand the effect of $`\lambda `$ on the polarization we will employ the simple analytic expression for the amplitude of the $`Q`$ Stokes parameter produced by a single Fourier mode $`k`$ Zaldarriaga:1995gi :

$$Qc_sk\delta \tau _D\mathrm{sin}(kc_S\tau _D)e^{k^2/k_D^2}$$
(18)
where $`\tau _D`$ is the conformal time corresponding to the peak of the visibility function, $`\delta \tau _D`$ is its width and $`k_D`$ describes the damping of the small scale modes. As we discussed above, the damping increases with the width of the visibility function, so the exponential factor will lead to the same effect we described for the temperature. The difference in the case of the polarization is the extra $`\delta \tau _D`$ in the amplitude of the polarization. This extra factor comes from the fact that if the visibility function is wider the photons will travel on average longer between their last two scatterings which will enhance the quadrupole anisotropy and will thus lead to a higher level of polarization Zaldarriaga:1995gi . For that reason, there exists a characteristic wavemode value $`k^{}`$, for scales larger than which the polarization power spectrum will increase with $`\lambda `$, while it will decrease for scales smaller than $`k^{}`$.

The polarization power spectrum is plotted in Figure 4. We see that for $`l`$s larger than around $`800`$, the polarization behaves just as the temperature does, decreasing for increasing $`\lambda `$. On larger scales the effect is opposite, the amplitude of polarization relative to temperature roughly increases by 10% when $`\lambda `$ increases by 20%. This response of the anisotropies on $`\lambda `$ is what will help to break the degeneracy between $`\lambda `$ and the primordial power spectrum when information from polarization is included.

For completeness we show the temperature polarization cross correlation power spectrum in Figure 5. The cross correlation will be easier to detect in experiments such as the MAP satellite where the accuracy of the polarization measurement is limited by detector noise. The cross correlation power spectrum behaves similarly to the polarization power spectrum; when $`\lambda `$ is increased the power on small scales is suppressed while on large scales it is amplified.

## III Constraints on $`\lambda `$

In our likelihood analysis of currently available and simulated future data we let vary $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, $`\omega _{\text{dark matter}}=\mathrm{\Omega }_{\text{dark matter}}h^2`$, $`\omega _{\text{baryon}}=\mathrm{\Omega }_{\text{baryon}}h^2`$, the optical depth due to reionization $`\tau _{ri}`$, $`\lambda `$ and the amplitude and shape of the primordial power spectrum. We explicitly assume that the universe is flat.

As we mention above, we expect there to be a degeneracy between the shape of the primordial power spectrum and the parameter $`\lambda `$. To study this effect in the case of future satellite missions which will measure polarization and could break this degeneracy, we introduce additional freedom in the shape of the spectrum. Rather than just assuming that $`P(k)`$ is of power law form

$$P(k)=k^{n1}\frac{\mathrm{ln}P(k)}{\mathrm{ln}(k)}=n1,$$
(19)
we also allowed spectra with curvature by adding another term in the expansion of $`\mathrm{ln}P`$ as a function of $`\mathrm{ln}k`$.

$$\mathrm{ln}P(k)/P(k_0)=(n1)\mathrm{ln}(k/k_0)+\alpha [\mathrm{ln}(k/k_0)]^2+\mathrm{}$$
(20)
where $`k_0`$ is the pivot point. With this prescription the effective slope of the power spectrum changes slightly with scale,

$$\frac{\mathrm{ln}P(k)}{\mathrm{ln}k}=n1+\alpha \mathrm{ln}(k/k_0).$$
(21)
We employed two kinds of likelihood analysis. For an evaluation of what currently available data can tell us about $`\lambda `$ we used an importance sampling Markov-chain method to generate a large number of cosmological models distributed according to the likelihood distribution $`(\text{model}|\text{data})`$. This is more efficient than an exploration of the entire parameter space, because the sampling is weighted and statistics can be established over the target distribution itself. Moreover the algorithm is very easy to implement. The weighted sampling is achieved through the Metropolis-Hastings algorithm. The application of the Markov method to the extraction of cosmological parameters from CMB information has been suggested in Christensen:2001gj .

To speed up the power spectrum computations for the Markov chain we made use of the k-splitting technique discussed in Tegmark:2000qy . For each model we marginalized analytically over the amplitude of the scalar fluctuations. In the end we constructed histograms and computed expectation values and variances for each parameter directly from the Markov chain.

In order to estimate what the satellite missions MAP and Planck will be able to tell us about the relation between the energy density and the expansion rate of the universe during recombination, we investigated the shape of the likelihood function $`(C_l|\theta _i)`$ (for a power spectrum $`C_l`$ given a model consisting of the cosmological parameters $`\theta _i`$) in the vicinity of its maximum directly by a Fisher matrix evaluation. This method has been widely used to make predictions for the errors that are to be expected in the extraction of cosmological parameters from planned CMB-experiments. The Fisher matrix is given by the expectation value of the second derivative of the logarithm of the likelihood function $`(C_l|\theta _i)`$. Assuming Gaussianity of the likelihood it is of the form

$$F_{ij}=\underset{l}{}\underset{A,B}{}\frac{C_{Al}}{\theta _i}^1(\widehat{C}_{Al},\widehat{C}_{Bl})\frac{C_{Bl}}{\theta _j},$$
(22)
where $`A`$ and $`B`$ run over the three observables: temperature, E-type polarization, T-E cross correlation and $`i,j`$ run over the cosmological parameters. The covariance matrix between parameters is given by the inverse of the Fisher matrix. Overall we verified a good agreement between Fisher matrix and Markov chain results which confirms that the likelihood function $`(C_l|\theta _i)`$ resembles relatively well a Gaussian in the vicinity of its maximum value.

### III.1 Constraints from currently available temperature data

In order to find the constraints which can be imposed on the parameter $`\lambda `$ using available temperature data, we employed a compilation of 30 experiments which functions as a complete account of pre-MAP CMB temperature anisotropy information <sup>3</sup><sup>3</sup>3The results of the Archeops Benoit:2002mk  and ACBAR experiments Kuo:2002ua  as well as the new Boomerang data Ruhl:2002cz  were added to the compilation described in Tegmark:2002cy .. The data, which have been compressed to 29 bins, are plotted in Figure 6. In this context, we actually assumed a simple power law behaviour of the primordial scalar perturbations.

The results we obtained from the Markov-chain analysis are shown in Table 1 and Figure 7. As expected from the rather weak dependence of the anisotropies on $`\lambda `$ we find that current data cannot put severe constraints on the expansion rate during recombination even though other cosmological parameters are well determined.

Having emphasized the importance of measuring the linearly polarized component of the CMB, we should also note that its recent first detection by DASI Kovac:2002fg , unfortunately has too large errorbars to deliver much information about $`\lambda `$. Adding the DASI data in fact only changes the standard error in the determination of $`\lambda `$ by 3%.

### III.2 Future satellite missions and the relevance of measuring polarization

An up to date estimate of the expected angular resolutions and sensitivities of the MAP and Planck satellites has been obtained from the experimental groups websites. For both satellites we combined the three frequency channels with the highest angular resolution and took into account the number of polarized instruments. In the case of MAP the sensitivity estimate has been provided for 2 years of observation and the angular resolutions $`\theta _{\text{fwhm}}`$ are 13.2, 21.0 and 31.8 arcminutes for the three channels observing at 90, 60 and 40 $`GHz`$. This leads to a raw sensitivity of

$`w_T^1`$ $`=`$ $`(0.081\mu K)^2`$
$`w_P^1`$ $`=`$ $`(0.114\mu K)^2`$
If MAP observes for four years the raw sensitivities ($`w^1`$) will be halved. For the Planck satellite mission (here the sensitivity estimates are given for a one year observation period), the three channels (217, 143 and 100 GHz) at $`\theta _{\text{fwhm}}=`$ 5.0,7.1 and 9.2 arcminutes give together

$`w_T^1`$ $`=`$ $`(0.0084\mu K)^2`$
$`w_P^1`$ $`=`$ $`(0.0200\mu K)^2.`$
Again the raw sensitivities for a two year observation will be half of these values. For both satellites, a sky coverage of $`f_{Sky}=0.8`$ was assumed.

From these experimental characterisics the full estimator covariance matrices for each multipole $`l`$ can be constructed (e.g. Zaldarriaga:1997ch ). The diagonal terms of the covariance matrices for temperature, polarization and cross correlation are

$`\mathrm{Cov}\left(\widehat{C}_{Tl}^2\right)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\left(2l+1\right)f_{Sky}}}\left(C_{Tl}+w_T^1B_l^2\right)^2`$ (23)
$`\mathrm{Cov}\left(\widehat{C}_{El}^2\right)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\left(2l+1\right)f_{Sky}}}\left(C_{El}+w_E^1B_l^2\right)^2`$ (24)
$`\mathrm{Cov}\left(\widehat{C}_{Cl}^2\right)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\left(2l+1\right)f_{Sky}}}[C_{Cl}^2+(C_{Tl}+w_T^1B_l^2)`$ (25)
$`\times `$ $`(C_{El}+w_P^1B_l^2)]`$ (26)
where the beam window function $`_l`$ is to be constructed from the relevant frequency channels with their individual sensitivities $`w_c`$ as

$`_l^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{c}{}}B_{l,c}^2{\displaystyle \frac{w_c}{w}}`$ (27)
$`B_{l,c}^2`$ $`=`$ $`e^{l(l+1)\theta _b^2,c}`$ (28)
Here, the standard width of the beam $`\theta _b`$ is obtained from the full width half maximum resolution by

$$\theta _b,c=\frac{\theta _{\text{fwhm,c}}}{\sqrt{8\mathrm{ln}2}}$$
(29)
As a fiducial model we have adopted the parameter values

$$\begin{array}{cccccccc}& & & & & & & \\ \tau & \mathrm{\Omega }_K& \mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }& \omega _{\text{dm}}& \omega _{\text{ba}}& n_S& \lambda & \\ & & & & & & & \\ 0.05& 0& 0.7& 0.14& 0.02& 1& 1& \end{array}$$
(30)
They imply a hubble constant of $`h=0.73`$.

#### III.2.1 Expected constraints from MAP

The analysis of expected constraints from the *MAP* satellite mission shows the constraints it can put on $`\lambda `$ are rather weak. Better sensitivity is needed to accurately determine the polarization and higher angular resolution to map the damping tail. On the other hand our results illustrate how the inclusion of a curvature term for the primordial spectrum significantly weakens the constraints that one obtains from the temperature data.

A precision test of the Friedmann equation will have to wait until both polarization and the damping tail are measured accurately. In the near future experiments such as Boomerang, BICEP, Polatron and others are expected to significantly improve polarization measurements while CBI, ACBAR and others will map the damping tail. In a few more years, the Planck satellite will measure both temperature and polarization accurately enough to severely constrain any change in $`\lambda `$. We will present an analysis of Planck’s sensitivity in the next section.

In Section II we discussed the different response to a change of $`\lambda `$ of the temperature and the polarization anisotropy. We found that on large angular scales polarization power is increased if we increase the expansion rate during recombination, while the temperature anisotropy is almost not affected on these scales. When only temperature is being measured, changes in the expansion rate of the universe during recombination are strongly degenerate with the slope of the spectrum of the initial scalar perturbations, which can be clearly seen in Figures 8 and 9. Because polarization responds differently on different scales to a change of $`\lambda `$, it breaks this degeneracy. We show this in Figure 9. The result of the likelihood analysis which includes polarization information is included in Table 2.

We noticed that a major part of the information on $`\lambda `$ from MAP’s polarization measurements will come from the cross correlation between temperature and polarization. When adding just the cross correlation information we found that we gain almost 90 % of the information that is gained in the case in which all three estimators are included.

#### III.2.2 Expected constraints from Planck

The Planck satellite explores the very small structures in the primeaval plasma in a multipole range up to nearly $`l=3000`$. Even if only Planck’s temperature data are used, the standard error in $`\lambda `$ will after a one year observation be as small as $`3.2\%`$, even if one marginalizes over the parameters that describe the shape of the primordial power spectrum (Table 3). This corresponds to a constraint on the gravitational constant of $`\frac{\delta G}{G}=0.064`$. Finally, the improvement gained from Planck’s polarization data ($`\frac{\delta \lambda }{\lambda }0.017\frac{\delta G}{G}0.034`$) is shown on the right hand side of that same Table. If one assumes that there is no curvature in the primordial power spectrum the constraint on G would be as small as $`\frac{\delta G}{G}=1.8\%`$ after an observation of two years. Figure 10 and 11 show again, analogously to the case of MAP, how polarization helps break the degeneracy between $`\lambda `$ and the parameters that describe the shape of primodial perturbations.

We have extended our investigation beyond Planck to the case of an experiment which has essentially no noise and where the errors in the CMB power spectra are on all scales dominated by the cosmic variance term. For example experiments currently being considered for measuring the B-modes of CMB polarization would be cosmic variance limited for E polarization over a wide range of $`ls`$ (e.g. bmodes ). Such an optimal experiment, exploring structures into a multipole range of $`l=4000`$, represents the limit of how much information on $`\lambda `$ one could extract from the CMB in principle. We found an expected error for $`\lambda `$ of order $`0.3\%`$ which translates into a constraint of the value of the gravitational constant during recombination of $`\frac{\delta G}{G}0.6\%`$.

## IV Discussion

We have made the expansion rate of the universe a free parameter in a likelihood analysis within an eight-dimensional cosmological parameter space. For simplicity we assumed that the gravitational constant is changed by a factor $`\lambda `$. We showed that an increase of $`\lambda `$ leads to a wider visibility function which in turn increases the damping of anisotropies on small scales and increases the level of large scale polarization.

We calculated the constraints that current CMB data can impose on the expansion rate. The constraints that can be imposed on the parameter $`\lambda `$ using the information from the damping tail are severely weakened by our lack of knowledge about the shape of the primordial power spectrum. We showed that measuring polarization helps to break this degeneracy. Current data can only constrain $`\lambda `$ to about 47% at 1 $`\sigma `$. We showed that MAP could obtain 9% error bars for $`\lambda `$ while for Planck errorbars go down to 0.9%. We also explored the ultimate limit that could be achieved by a cosmic variance limited experiment measuring anisotropies up to $`l=4000`$ and found errors of under a percent in that case. Thus next generation experiments should be able to deliver very accurate constraints on the expansion rate of the universe during recombination.

We acknowledge that if the variation of the gravitational constant during recombination is taken seriously a model needs to be built where $`G`$ changes after recombination and converges towards the stable value observed in laboratory experiments today and where its current rate of change is less than the experimental bound $`\frac{\dot{G}}{G}10^{12}\text{yr}^1`$Uzan:2002vq ; Guenther:1998 . If we introduce a scalar field to control the value of $`G`$ we would also have to require that this field does not lead to an unacceptably large fifth force and does not violate solar system constraints such as shifting the orbit of the moon through the Nordvedt effect Will ; Nordtvedt .

The shift of $`G`$ after recombination will induce a change in the angular diameter distance to recombination, shifting the CMB power spectrum in $`l`$. We have shown that future experiments will be able to constrain the change of $`G`$ to a few percent due to its effect at recombination. As a result the induced shift in the peak positions would be small and could be interpreted as slightly different values of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m`$ and/or $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, the two parameters that control the distance to the last scattering surface in conventional models. In the same way, any induced integrated Sachs-Wolfe (ISW) effect would be difficult to observe because of the cosmic variance limitation. If observed with a high enough accuracy it should not be identical with what is predicted by a simple cosmological constant model.

In this paper we have shown that future measurements of the CMB anisotropy will be able to extract information about the relation between the expansion rate and the energy density of the universe during recombination, because of its effect on the recombination history of hydrogen.

## V Acknowledgements

OZ thanks Christian Armendariz-Picon, Hans-Joachim Drescher and Emiliano Sefusatti for useful discussion. OZ is supported by the Deutscher Akademischer Austauschdienst. MZ and OZ are supported by NSF grants AST 0098606 and PHY 0116590 and by the David and Lucille Packard Foundation Fellowship for Science and Engineering.


text:
# Neutrinos and Energetics of the Earth

## I Introduction

Earth emits a tiny heat flux with an average value $`\mathrm{\Phi }_H=80mW/m^2`$, definitely smaller than the radiation coming from the Sun, $`K_{}=1.4kW/m^2`$, larger however than the energy deposited by cosmic rays, $`\mathrm{\Phi }_c10^8W/m^2`$. When integrated over the Earth surface, the tiny flux translates into a huge heat flow, $`H_{}40TW`$, the equivalent of ten thousand nuclear power plants .

We would like to recall to the particle physics community that the sources of Earth energy flow are not understood quantitatively and that measurements of (anti)neutrinos from the Earth in the next few years should be capable of determining the radiogenic contribution.

A comparison between the Sun and Earth energy inventories may be useful for illustrating the differences in the two cases. Clearly, a heat flow $`H`$ can be sustained for a time $`t`$ provided that an energy source of at least $`U=Ht`$ is available.

For the Sun, $`U=H_{}t_{}510^{43}J`$ and clearly neither gravitation ($`U_GGM_{}^2/R_{}=410^{41}J`$ ) nor chemical reactions ($`U_{ch}0.1eVN_{}=210^{37}J`$, where $`N_{}`$ is the number of nucleons) are enough, and only nuclear energy ($`U_{nuc}1MeVN_{}=210^{44}J`$) can sustain the solar luminosity over the solar age, as beautifully demonstrated Gallium experiments in the last decade . On the other hand for the Earth one has $`U_G410^{32}J`$, $`U_{ch}610^{31}J`$ and $`U_{nuc}610^{30}J`$ (assuming some that some $`10^8`$ of Earth mass consists of radioactive nuclei), so that each of the previous mechanisms in principle can account for $`U_{}=510^{30}J`$. In order to understand the energetics of the Earth one has to clarify the roles of the different energy sources, their locations and when they have been at work. At the end of a review on the Earth energy sources J. Verhoogen  summarized the situation with the following words: “What emerges from this morass of fragmentary and uncertain data is that radioactivity by itself could plausibly account for at least 60 percent, if not 100 percent, of the earth’s heat output. If one adds the greater rate of radiogenic heat production in the past, … possible release of gravitational energy (original heat, separation of core, separation of inner core, tidal friction,… meteoritic impact …), the total supply of energy may seem embarrassingly large. … Most, if not all of the figures mentioned above are uncertain by a factor of at least 2, so that disentangling contributions from the several sources is not an easy problem.”.

In this respect a determination of the radiogenic contribution is most important. Radiogenic heat arises mainly***For simplicity we neglect $`{}_{}{}^{235}U`$ and $`{}_{}{}^{87}Rb`$ which provide smaller contributions. from the decay (chains) of $`{}_{}{}^{238}U`$, $`{}_{}{}^{232}Th`$ and $`{}_{}{}^{40}K`$. All these elements produce heat together with antineutrinos, with well fixed ratios heat/neutrinos. A measurement of the antineutrino flux, and possibly of the spectrum, would provide a direct information on the amount and composition of radioactive material inside Earth and thus would determine the radiogenic contribution to the heat flow.

On the other hand, until recently the neutrino fate could not be predicted reliably, as testified by the thirty years old solar neutrino puzzle . The disagreement between theory and observation by factors of order two suggested that (anti)neutrino survival probabilities were essentially known within factors of two. Thus observation of terrestrial (anti)neutrinos could not be useful for improving our knowledge of Earth radioactivity. The situation has dramatically changed since the SNO results , which clearly prove that a fraction of electron neutrinos change their flavor during the trip form Sun to Earth. When combined with the results of other solar and terrestrial neutrino experiments, the picture is converging towards the so called large mixing angle (LMA) oscillation solution. In other words, now we can predict reliably the fate of terrestrial neutrinos and antineutrinos, in their trip from production site to detectors.

Last but not least, the experimental techniques for detection of MeV antineutrinos have enormously improved in the last few years. As testified by the development of Kamland  and Borexino , it is now possible to build kiloton size detectors, with extremely low background.

The argument of geo-neutrinos was introduced by Eder  in the sixties, it was reviewed extensively by Krauss, Glashow and Schramm  in the eighties and it has been considered more recently in . Now it is the right time for neutrino physics to contribute in reconstructing the thermal history of the Earth.

## II Energy sources and neutrino luminosities

The heat production rates per unit mass of natural U, Th and K are given byThe marked difference of $`ϵ(K)`$ corresponds to the fact that the natural abundance of $`{}_{}{}^{40}K`$ is $`1.210^4`$, i.e. $`ϵ(^{40}K)=0.310^4W/kg`$.:

$`ϵ(U)`$ $`=`$ $`0.9510^4\mathrm{W}/\mathrm{k}\mathrm{g}`$ (1)
$`ϵ(Th)`$ $`=`$ $`0.2710^4\mathrm{W}/\mathrm{k}\mathrm{g}`$ (2)
$`ϵ(K)`$ $`=`$ $`0.3610^8\mathrm{W}/\mathrm{k}\mathrm{g}`$ (3)
This is sufficient to determine the Earth radiogenic heat production rate $`H`$ in terms of the mass of each element. When heat production is expressed in TW and masses in units of $`10^{17}kg`$ one has:

$$H=9.5M(U)+2.7M(Th)+3.610^4M(K)$$
(5)
It is convenient to write this equation in terms of the uranium mass $`M(U)`$ and of the mass ratios of the other elements to $`U`$, as these latter quantities are more regularly distributed in terrestrial and meteoritic samples:

$$H=9.5M(U)[1+0.28Th/U+3.810^5K/U]$$
(6)
The specific neutrino production rate (neutrinos per unit mass and time) of each element $`ϵ_\nu `$, is immediately derived from the isotopic abundance, decay time and the number of neutrinos emitted in each decay, see Table I. (Anti)Neutrinos luminosities are immediately derived in terms of the mass of each element and the appropriate $`ϵ_{\overline{\nu }/\nu }`$. Measuring $`L_{\overline{\nu }/\nu }`$ in units of $`10^{24}`$ particles per second and masses in units of $`10^{17}kg`$ one has:

$`L_{\overline{\nu }}`$ $`=`$ $`7.4M(U)+1.6M(Th)+2.710^3M(K)`$ (7)
$`L_\nu `$ $`=`$ $`3.310^4M(K)`$ (8)
We have thus the basic equations for determining radiogenic heat production and neutrino flows from models of the Earth composition.

### A A naive chondritic earth

The simplest model assumes that the global composition of the Earth is similar to that of the oldest meteorites, the carbonaceous chondrites (CI).

The typical values of CI  are $`Th/U=3.8`$ , $`K/U=710^4`$ and $`U/Si=7.310^8`$ . Silicon represents about 15% of the Earth mass, $`M_{}=5.9710^{24}kg`$. If these elements have not been lost in the Earth formation process, one obtains $`M(U)=0.65310^{17}kg`$, $`M(Th)=2.4810^{17}kg`$ and $`M(K)=4.5710^{21}kg`$.

The contribution to heat flows and neutrino luminosities are reported in the first column of Table II. Radiogenic production in the chondritic model easily accounts for 75% of the observed heat flow, and it could easily saturate it when uncertainties are included. Uranium and thorium provide comparable contributions, each a factor of two below that of potassium. Concerning antineutrinos, potassium dominates by an order of magnitude at least, as a consequence of the more favourable neutrino/energy ratio.

### B  The Bulk Silicate Earth model

Uranium, thorium and potassium are lithophile elements, so they should accumulate in the Earth crust. Actually, upon averaging data over the huge differences between continental and oceanic components, it is found that Earth crust contains some $`3/4`$ of the uranium predicted for the whole Earth by the chondritic model . Within large variations, $`Th/U`$ is consistent with the chondritic prediction. On the other hand, the crust looks depleted in potassium, the typical ratio being $`K/U=10,000`$, a factor 7 below that of CI.

Observational data on the mantle, which are anyhow limited to the upper part, suggest that uranium and potassium are globally more abundant than the CI prediction, $`Th/U`$ is consistent with the chondritic value and the potassium depletion is confirmed. No observational data are available on the core, which should consist of siderophile elements without significant amount of $`U,Th`$ or $`K`$.

Actually, when deriving Earth composition from meteoritic data, one has to take into account the volatilization of a significant fraction (some 17%)  of the total $`SiO_2`$, so that a larger amount of metoritic material is needed for Earth formation.

The origin of potassium depletion, also observed in the Moon, Venus and Martian meteorites, is somehow uncertain. Elements of the atomic weight of potassium cannot be lost from the terrestrial planets, even at elevated temperatures, once these bodies have reached their present size . The most reasonable explanations seems that this element was depleted in the precursor planetesimals from which the inner planets accumulated It has been suggested that potassium behaves as a metal at high pressure, and thus it can be buried in the planetary cores. This hypothesis could work for Earth, and it provides a suitably placed energy source for sustaining the terrestrial magnetic field, see . However it does not explain potassium depletion in Mars, where the central pressure, only 400 kbars, is insufficient for potassium to enter a Martian core..

All this brings us to the Bulk Silicate Earth (BSE) model, which provides a description of geological evidence coherent with geochemical information. It describes the primordial mantle, prior to crust separation. The estimated uranium mass is:

$$M(U)=0.810^{17}kg,$$
(10)
within some 20% , the ratio $`Th/U`$ is close to the chondritic value and $`K/U=10,000`$. The present crust and mantle should contain respectively about one half of each element.

In this BSE model the (present) radiogenic production, mainly from uranium and thorium, accounts for about one half of the total heat flow. The antineutrino luminosities from uranium and thorium are rescaled by a factor 1.3 whereas potassium, although reduced by a factor of 5, is still the principal antineutrino source.

### C  A fully radiogenic model

At the other extreme, one can conceive a model where heat production is fully radiogenic, with $`K/U`$ fixed at the terrestrial value and $`Th/U`$ at the chondritic value, which seems consistent with terrestrial observations. All the abundances are rescaled so as to provide the full $`40TW`$ heat flow (last column of table II). All particle production rates are correspondingly re-scaled by a factor of two with respect to the predictions of the BSE model.

In summary, the discussion of these somehow extreme models shows that particle luminosities are uncertain by a factor of order two, the relative contributions to heat production are strongly model dependent whereas potassium is anyhow the principal neutrino and anti-neutrino source.

## III From luminosity to flux and signal

An (anti)neutrino detector near the Earth surface ($`R=R_{}`$) is sensitive to the flux impinging onto it from any direction:

$$\mathrm{\Phi }=\frac{1}{4\pi }d^3r\frac{A(\stackrel{}{r})}{|\stackrel{}{R}\stackrel{}{r}|^2},$$
(11)
where the integral is taken over the Earth volume and $`A`$ is the number of particles produced per unit volume and time§§§ This is different from the flux normal to the Earth surface, which in the case of spherical symmetry is given by $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{}=\frac{1}{4\pi R_{}^2}d^3rA(r)`$.. The flux depends on the geometrical distribution of the sources, and we we can write:

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_{\overline{\nu }/\nu }=\frac{GL_{\overline{\nu }/\nu }}{4\pi R_{}^2}$$
(12)
where $`G`$ is a geometrical factor of order unity. One has: $`\mathrm{\Phi }/(10^6cm^1s^1)=0.2GL/(10^{24}s^1)`$.

In order to estimate fluxes, one needs to know the distribution of radioactive elements in the Earth interior, and not only their total abundances. Concerning the crust, these elements are mainly concentrated in the continental part. Recent estimates of the uranium average mass abundance in the continental crust $`(CC)`$ are near $`a_{CC}(U)=1.7ppm`$ . The abundance in the oceanic crust $`(OC)`$ is an order of magnitude smaller, $`a_{OC}0.1ppm`$. If one also considers that $`OC`$ is much thinner than $`CC`$ ($`M_{CC}=2.310^{22}kg`$ and $`M_{OC}=0.610^{22}kg`$) one concludes that the contribution of the oceanic crust to neutrino production is definitely smaller. In this way we estimate the total uranium mass in the crust:

$$M_c(U)=0.410^{17}kg.$$
(13)
For the sake of a first estimate, we shall assume that $`M_c(U)`$ is uniformly distributed over the Earth surface within a layer of thickness $`\overline{h}=30km`$. We associate to the mantle an uranium mass $`M_m(U)=M(U)M_c(U)`$, where $`M(U)`$ was estimated in the previous section for each model and $`M_c(U)`$ is given from eq.(13). Furthermore, we shall assume uniform distribution within the mantle. We also assume a uniform distribution of $`Th/U`$ and $`K/U`$. Within these approximations the geometrical factors $`G`$ are easily calculated.

For a spherical shell with radii $`r_1=x_1R_{}`$ and $`r_2=x_2R_{}`$ and uniform distribution one has:

$$G=\frac{3}{2(x_2^3x_1^3)}\left\{\frac{1}{2}(1x_1^2)\mathrm{ln}\frac{1+x_1}{1x_1}x_1\frac{1}{2}(1x_2^2)\mathrm{ln}\frac{1+x_2}{1x_2}+x_2\right\}$$
(14)
For the crust ($`r_2=R_{}`$ and $`r_2r_1=\overline{h}30km`$) and for the mantle ($`r_2R_{}`$ and $`r_1R_{}/2`$) one has:

$$G_c\frac{1}{2}[1+ln(2R_{}/\overline{h})]=3.5;G_m=1.6$$
(15)
This allows the calculation of the fluxes for each Earth model reported in Table III.

One remarks that fluxes are of the order of magnitude of the solar Boron neutrino flux. potassium (anti)neutrinos are the dominant component in any model. The various models yield significantly different predictions. Contributions from crust and mantle look comparable.

Indeed in order to reach these results we used several approximations, which is worth discussing, also in view of obtaining more precise estimates.

i)Global effects.
There are significant uncertainties on the value of $`a_{cc}(U)`$. For the lowest value found in the literature, $`a_{CC}(U)=0.91ppm`$ , the uranium mass in the crust is halved with respect to the reference value in eq.(13). In addition, there are indications that the upper part of the mantle is impoverished in the content of radioactive elements. The effect of these uncertainties are shown in Table IV, where $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{\overline{\nu }}(U)`$ is calculated for a fixed (BSE) value of the crust+mantle uranium mass. A change of the $`U`$-abundance in the crust by a factor of two corresponds to a 15% change in the flux. If uranium is completely removed from the upper mantle the flux is reduced by 3%. All these effects are thus smaller with respect to the uncertainty on the total uranium mass, which is reflected in changes of fluxes by factor two when going through the extreme chondritic and fully radiogenic models. Similar considerations hold for thorium and potassium

ii)Regional effects.
The fluxes reported in Table III are averaged values and one has to remind that Earth crust is significantly variable in thickness and composition. Thus one has to expect significant variations of the actual fluxes, depending on the detector location.

As a few significant examples, the Gran Sasso laboratory sits on a thick continental crust, whereas Kamioka is on an island arc in between the Eurasian plate and the Pacific plate. Following the approach of ref.  we have estimated $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{\overline{\nu }/\nu }`$ at the two sites, in a model which distinguishes between $`CC`$ and $`OC`$ and includes a variable crust thickness. The model is based over a global crustal map at $`5^o\times 5^o`$, and assumes uniform distribution within the mantle. Uranium mass in the crust and in total Earth are kept fixed at the values of eqs. (10) and (13). Table V shows that fluxes at specific sites can differ significantly from the average value and thus a crust map is really needed for a precise flux estimate at the detector size. On the other hand, the difference between Gran Sasso and Kamioka is at the level of 15%.

iii)Local effects.
The flux from the crust within a distance $`d`$ from the detector is easily estimated using planar geometry $`(d<<R_{})`$:

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(<d)=\frac{A}{2}[d\mathrm{arctan}(h/d)+(h/2)ln(1+d^2/h^2)]$$
(16)
where $`h`$ is the local crust thickness and $`A`$ is the local activity. This has to be compared with the total flux from the crust:

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_c=G_c\overline{A}\overline{h}.$$
(17)
where $`\overline{A}`$ and $`\overline{h}`$ are the mean crustal activity and thickness.

A significant quantity is the relative contribution $`R=\mathrm{\Phi }(<d)/\mathrm{\Phi }_c`$ . By suitable expansions of eq. (16) one immediately derives the contribution of the nearby rocks (say $`d=h/3`$) and of the local area, i.e. up to a distance $`d<<R_{}`$:

$`R_{nea}`$ $`=`$ $`0.07Ah/(\overline{A}\overline{h})`$ (18)
$`R_{loc}`$ $`=`$ $`(1/7)[1+\mathrm{ln}(d/h)]Ah/(\overline{A}\overline{h}).`$ (19)
If $`A=\overline{A}`$ and $`h=\overline{h}=30`$ km one finds that the rocks within 10 $`km`$ contribute 7% with respect to the total from the crust. Within 100 $`km`$ one has about 30% of the crust contribution and about 15% of the total flow, from crust and below. A more detailed geochemical information of this area is thus needed if one aims at a few percent accuracy

In summary, detection of terrestrial (anti)neutrinos is particularly important for determining the amount of radioactive material inside the mantle, where information on the chemical composition is most uncertain, the lower part being completely unaccessible to observation. A suitable approach would thus consist of i) measuring the (anti)neutrino flux; ii) subtracting the component originated in the crust, which has been mapped with geological methods, so as to determine the corresponding abundances in the mantle. The previous calculations show that crust and mantle provide comparable fluxes, so that the subtraction procedure is possible. The crust description however has to be more detailed in the proximity of the detector.

A detailed discussion of the (anti)neutrino signal is beyond the aim of this letter and we would like to remark just a few relevant points.

i)Due to the different antineutrino energy end-points  ($`E_{max}`$= 3.26, 2.25 and 1.31 MeV for $`U`$, $`Th`$ and $`{}_{}{}^{40}K`$ respectively) it is possible at least in principle to separate the contributions to Earth radioactivity.

ii)Antineutrinos from $`U`$ and $`Th`$ can be detected and separated by means of

$$\overline{\nu }+pe^++n1.804MeV,$$
(21)
whereas different detection schemes are necessary for $`K`$ antineutrinos, which are below the energy threshold for (21). The monochromatic ($`E=1.513MeV`$ ) neutrinos from $`{}_{}{}^{40}K`$ are essentially obscured by the dominant solar flux ($`\mathrm{\Phi }(pep)=1.410^8cm^2s^1`$ at $`E=1.44MeV`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }(CNO)10^9cm^2s^1MeV^1)`$ .

iii)So far we did not consider the effect of neutrino oscillations. If LMA is the correct solution, with $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^25.510^5eV^2`$ and $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta 0.83`$ , the oscillation length $`L=4\pi E/\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$ of 1 MeV antineutrino is around 45 km and the (distance averaged) survival probability of electron antineutrinos $`P_{ee}=11/2\mathrm{sin}^22\theta 0.58`$ The present uncertainty on $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta `$ (about 20%) translates into a 15% uncertainty on the fluxes.

iv) Events from $`U`$ and $`Th`$ antineutrinos in a organic scintillator detector have been estimated in the range (20-100)/kton-year , so that a flux measurement with a 10% accuracy should be feasible in a few years. The main background source  is antineutrinos from nuclear power plants (see last row of Table III), which depends on the detector location.

## IV Concluding remarks

We have estimated terrestrial antineutrino and neutrino fluxes according to different models of Earth composition. We find large variations, corresponding to uncertainties on the estimated $`U`$, $`Th`$ and $`K`$ abundances in the mantle. Information on the mantle composition can thus be derived from (anti)neutrino flux measurements after subtracting the crust contribution. This requires a good description of the crust composition in the region of the detector site and in return it will provide direct insight on the main sources of Earth’s heat flow.

Just a few years after the celebrated slow neutron studies of the Rome group, Bruno Pontecorvo developed the neutron well log , an instrument which is still used in geology for the search and analysis of hydrogen containing substances (water and hydrocarbons). Possibly it is now the time for applying to different disciplines what we have learnt so far on neutrinos. In fact, there are several attempts in this direction, see e.g.  and references therein. The determination of the radiogenic component of the terrestrial heat is an important and so far unanswered question. It looks to us as the first fruit which we can get from neutrinos, and Kamland will catch the firstlings very soon.

Aknowledgment It is a pleasure to acknowledge several interesting discussions with with L. Beccaluva, G. Bellini, E. Bellotti, C. Bonadiman, C. Broggini, L. Carmignani, M. Lissia, G. Ottonello, S. Schoenert, C. Vaccaro and F.L. Villante.

Addendum
After this paper was submitted, the first results of KamLAND have become available . From an exposure of $`1.3910^{31}`$ protons$``$year, 9 geo-neutrino events are reported. For the best fit survival probability $`P(\overline{\nu }_e\overline{\nu }_e)=0.55`$ , from the average fluxes calculated in Table III one predicts 2.6, 3.1 and 5.1 events respectively for the chondritic, BSE and fully-radiogenic models. Predictions from fluxes calculated specifically for the Kamioka site are 3.5, 4.0 and 6.0 events respectively. They are all consistent with the experimental value, within its statistical fluctuation of $`\pm 5.7`$ events .