text:
# Nuclear matter EOS with a three-body force

## 1  Introduction

The theoretical prediction of the nuclear equation of state (EOS) is of great interest for understanding extreme states of matter as to density, temperature and isospin. In spite of the great deal of effort already done, yet this topic is largely controversial in many aspects, including the mechanism of nuclear saturation.

In non-relativistic approaches the model of nucleons interacting only via a two-body force fails to reproduce the empirical saturation observables. Thus phenomenological three-body forces (TBF), derived by the Urbana group, have been introduced with few adjustable parameters within both the variational method  and the Brueckner theory .

At the contrary, the success of Dirac-Brueckner calculations without TBF  seems to indicate that the mechanism of saturation is a purely relativistic effect. This effect can be traced to the virtual excitations of nucleon-antinucleon pairs and their contribution alone, estimated in Ref. , seems to be able to reproduce the correct saturation properties .

This raises the question of the role played by other important elementary processes such as the nucleonic excitations ($`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ or Roper resonance). This point was examined already a decade ago by Grange et al. , who proposed a microscopic TBF based on the meson-exchange model. In that paper they reported a decisive improvement of both the saturation energy and density with respect to the existing Brueckner-Hartree-Fock (BHF) predictions based on pure two-body interactions . Later more refined BHF calculations with two-body force gave results so sharply different  to call for a numerical re-examination of the BHF approach with the microscopic TBF.

In the present note this re-examination is made and new results for the EOS of nuclear matter are reported which benefit from a more sophisticated version of the two-body realistic interaction, i.e., the Argonne $`AV18`$ . The calculations are also extended to neutron matter with the purpose of extracting the symmetry energy which over the last years has been raising a strong interest for its remarkable astrophysical implications .

## 2 Effective three-body force

Our microscopic three-body force is deduced from the meson-exchange current approach. It contains the contribution due to the medium modification of the two-meson ($`\pi \pi ,\pi \rho ,\rho \rho `$) exchange part of the nucleon-nucleon ($`NN`$) interaction, the contribution associated to the $`\sigma `$ and $`\omega `$ meson exchange and, finally, the $`\rho \pi \gamma `$ diagram. Their bare mass and free coupling constant are assigned to all mesons except the $`\sigma `$ meson, for which a strong mass renormalization is expected as medium polarization effect. Moreover its value cannot be completely dissociated from the other parameters giving the two-body force due to the self-consistent nature of the present approach . The value of $`540`$MeV has been adopted with the Paris force , but it is also compatible with the $`AV18`$, which is used in the present calculations. For a more detailed description of the model and approximations we refer to Ref. .

The effect of the TBF has been included in the calculation along the same line as in , where it is conveniently reduced to an effective two-body interaction to avoid the difficulty of the full three-body problem. A detailed description and justification of the procedure is given in . Here we simply write down the equivalent two-body potential, which is given in $`r`$-space by

$`\stackrel{}{r}_1\stackrel{}{r}_2|V_3|\stackrel{}{r}_1^{}\stackrel{}{r}_2^{}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}Tr{\displaystyle \underset{n}{}}{\displaystyle }\mathrm{d}\stackrel{}{r}_3\mathrm{d}\stackrel{}{r}_3^{}\varphi _n^{}(\stackrel{}{r}_3)[1\eta (r_{13}^{})][1\eta (r_{23}^{})]`$
$`\times W_3(\stackrel{}{r}_1^{}\stackrel{}{r}_2^{}\stackrel{}{r}_3^{}|\stackrel{}{r}_1\stackrel{}{r}_2\stackrel{}{r}_3)\varphi _n(r_3)[1\eta (r_{13})][1\eta (r_{23})]`$ (1)
where the trace is taken with respect to the spin and isospin of the nucleon 3. The function $`\eta (r)`$ is the average over spin and momenta in the Fermi sea of the defect function, in which only the most important partial wave components have been included, i.e., the $`{}_{}{}^{1}S_{0}^{}`$ and $`{}_{}{}^{3}S_{1}^{}`$ partial waves. According to Eq. (1) the effective two-body interaction is obtained by averaging the three-body force over the wave function of the third particle taking into account the correlations between this particle and the two others.

As above mentioned the mass of $`\sigma `$ meson is taken as a free parameter in the present TBF. This is due to the lack of information on the medium polarization effect on the $`\sigma `$ meson propagator. The EOS could offer a chance of investigating this effect as far as the two-body force is also built on a meson-exchange model. For a numerical comparison with the results Ref. , we decided to adopt the same value of the $`\sigma `$-meson mass, i.e., $`m_\sigma =540MeV`$, which anyhow makes the saturating effect of the TBF to be the most efficient.

## 3  Numerical results

Due to its dependence on the defect function the effective two-body interaction, Eq. (1), is calculated selfconsistently at each step of the iterative BHF procedure. Otherwise the procedure is the same as in standard BHF approach. The $`G`$-matrix is calculated selfconsistently along with the auxiliary potential by solving the Bethe-Goldstone equation. The continuous choice is adopted for the auxiliary potential because it provides a convergence of the hole-line expansion much faster than the gap choice . The Argonne $`AV18`$ is used for the two body nuclear force as it gives an excellent fit to $`NN`$ scattering data as well as to the deuteron binding energy .

### 3.1 EOS in nuclear and neutron matter

In Fig. 1 the energy per nucleon is reported for both nuclear matter (lower curves) and neutron matter (upper curves). The effect of the three-body force can be assessed by the comparison between the BHF results with (solid curve) and without (short dashed curve) three-body force. The three-body force affects the EOS in such a way that in the low-density domain the energy per nucleon is practically unchanged, but in the high-density domain it rises up significantly. One main result for the EOS of symmetric nuclear matter is that the saturation density turns decisively improved towards the empirical value, from $`0.265fm^3`$ to $`0.19fm^3`$. At the same time there is no appreciable change in the saturation energy. This is a quite desirable feature of the three-body force, since the result for the saturation energy in our BHF calculation based on purely two-body interaction is already in good agreement with its empirical counterpart. All that makes us more confident with the general guess on the importance of the three-body force for the saturation problem of nuclear force. Compared to the old calculation with Paris force in Ref.  the new saturation density obtained in the present work is smaller and closer to the empirical value. This is not a surprise because in the calculation of Ref.  the saturation density predicted with only a two-body force was a bit larger than $`0.3fm^3`$.

In Fig. 1 is also plotted the EOS’s obtained from BHF calculations with two-body $`AV18`$ force and phenomenological Urbana TBF  (longdashes). Despite the two different TBF’s the two EOS’s do not significantly differ from each other both for nuclear matter and for neutron matter. The Urbana TBF has two free parameters which were adjusted  in order to reproduce the saturation point, as shown in the latter EOS.

In recent variational calculations, which adopt the $`AV18`$ combined with the recent Urbana $`IX`$ TBF , the two free parameters of the TBF are fixed to reproduce the binding energy of $`{}_{}{}^{3}H`$ and the saturation density of nuclear matter. But the resulting equilibrium energy of about $`12MeV`$ for symmetric nuclear matter disagrees with the empirical value and no significant improvement is achieved by including relativistic boost corrections . This discrepancy casts some doubt on constraining the TBF by means of the binding energy of light nuclei.

No less important is the effect on the stiffness of the EOS measured by the compressibility modulus

$`K=\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}\hspace{0.17em}9}\rho ^2{\displaystyle \frac{^2E_A}{\rho ^2}}`$ (2)
calculated at the saturation density. The effect of three-body force on the compressibility is to enhance its value from $`250`$MeV to $`265`$MeV. This small change is due to the fact that the more pronounced curvature of the saturation curve is balanced by the smaller value of the saturation density.

The neutron matter EOS combined with that of symmetric nuclear matter provides us information on the isospin effects , in particular on the symmetry energy. The symmetry energy is defined as

$`E_{sym}(\rho )={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{^2E_A(\rho ,\beta )}{\beta ^2}}\right]_{\beta =0}.`$ (3)
It is well established  that the binding energy per nucleon $`E_A`$ fulfills the simple $`\beta ^2`$-law not only for $`\beta 1`$ as assumed in the empirical nuclear mass formula , but also in the whole asymmetry range. This enables us to calculate the symmetry energy $`E_{sym}`$ in terms of the difference between the binding energy of pure neutron matter $`E_A(\rho ,1)`$ and that of symmetric nuclear matter $`E_A(\rho ,0)`$, i.e.,

$`E_{sym}(\rho )=E_A(\rho ,1)E_A(\rho ,0),`$ (4)
but one would refrain from applying it at very high density. The results of our calculation for the symmetry energy as a function of baryonic density are depicted in Fig. 2.

As expected from the strongly repulsive TBF component at high density, a considerable enhancement of $`E_{sym}`$ is found (compare the two solid lines). At the saturation point the enhancement is rather small, i.e., from 30.3 to 31.3MeV, which anyway is in agreement with the empirical value of $`30\pm 4`$MeV . Also reported are the symmetry energy obtained from the Urbana TBF  and the DBHF calculation . Apart from the density range above 0.4fm-3, all three curves exhibit an almost linear increase of $`E_{sym}`$($`\rho `$) as a function of $`\rho `$ and also a quantitative agreement with one another. A rather good agreement with the variational approach is also found extracting the symmetry energy from the EOS’s reported in Refs. . The difference, which for instance at $`\rho =0.4`$fm-3 is a bit less than $`15\%`$, would be attributed to the fact that the variational calculation underbinds symmetric nuclear matter.

The close similarity of our result with the DBHF prediction is quite astonishing if one considers the two different contexts, i.e. the relativistic DBHF without a TBF in Ref.  and the present non-relativistic BHF with TBF, in which they have been obtained. On the other hand, we already mentioned the equivalence between the medium effects on the Dirac spinor in the Dirac-Brueckner approach and the virtual excitation of $`N\overline{N}`$ pairs, which is an important component of the present TBF . In spite of the good agreement in $`E_{sym}`$, one expects significant differences for observables which are very sensitive to $`E_{sym}`$ such as the proton fraction $`Y=\frac{Z}{A}`$ in $`\beta `$-equilibrium nuclear matter, which approximately fulfills a power law , i.e., $`YE_{sym}^3`$ . Due to the important implications for the cooling mechanism in neutron stars , a comparison among the different predictions is worth to be done. The proton fraction is calculated from the equilibrium condition in nuclear matter formed by mixture of neutrons, protons, electrons and muons with respect to weak interaction. Assuming charge neutrality, one easily gets

$`3\pi ^2(\mathrm{}c)^3\rho Y=[4E_{sym}(12Y)]^3+`$
$`\{[4E_{sym}(12Y)]^2m_\mu c^2\}^{3/2}\theta (\mu _em_\mu c^2)`$ (5)
where the step function $`\theta (\mu _em_\mu c^2)`$ indicates that when the electron chemical potential exceeds the muon rest mass, the muon channel opens and muons participate to the chemical equilibrium. Within this context we calculated the proton fractions corresponding to the different $`E_{sym}`$ reported in Fig. 2. The values of $`Y(\rho )`$ are reported in Tab. I. It has been shown  that the direct URCA process can occur if the proton fraction exceeds certain threshold values of $`Y`$, which has been estimated of about 0.148 in the case of $`\mu _em_\mu c^2`$. This value serves as a good approximation for a simple estimate. For example, at the density $`\rho =0.45`$, the critical value of $`Y`$ is about 0.136 for electrons and about 0.161 for muons. It is seen that in the density domain here considered (up to 0.5fm-3) this value is not reached in the non-relativistic calculation based on purely two-body force, whereas it is reached in the range 0.4 – 0.5 fm-3 in the other cases. Comparing the data of last column with the data of Ref. , where the $`AV14`$ is used as two-body potential, we notice that the $`AV18`$ interaction has the effect of reducing the density threshold from 0.5fm-3 to a value between 0.4 and 0.5fm-3.

Tab. I Proton fractions vs density for $`\beta `$-equilibrium nuclear matter: our results from Argonne $`V18`$ without (second column) and with TBF (third column), Dirac-Brueckner calculations from Ref.  (forth column) and and BHF from $`AV18`$+Urbana from Ref.  (last column).    $`\rho `$ BHF BHF+TBF DBHF BHF+Urbana    0.04 0.0161 0.0138    0.06 0.0210 0.0181    0.085 0.0245 0.0229    0.10 0.0264 0.0264 0.0241 0.031  0.14 0.0328 0.0338    0.17 0.0378 0.0417 0.0403 0.050  0.20 0.0440 0.0508 0.0528 0.060  0.30 0.0659 0.0920 0.0993 0.096  0.40 0.0865 0.1365 0.1364 0.128  0.50 0.1069 0.1882 0.1616 0.155

Before we conclude, let us give a brief discussion about the single-particle ( s.p. ) potential. It is found that at low density ($`\rho \rho _0=0.17`$fm-3), the effect of the TBF on the s.p. potential is rather small. At the saturation density $`\rho _o=0.17`$fm-3, only a small increase about $`1.01.5`$MeV in symmetric nuclear matter is observed at the momentum around the Fermi momentum $`k_F`$, which amounts a reduction of the attractive mean field of less that $`2\%`$. This is consistent with the result for the binding energy $`E_A`$ as discussed before and suggests that it is still necessary, even after introducing the TBF, to include the ground state particle-hole exitations (the second-order $`M_2`$ contributions) in the mass operator in order to get a satisfactory agreement to the phenomenological optical potential . As the density increases, the repulsive contribution of the TBF to the s.p. potential becomes increasingly pronounced since the TBF plays its major role at high density. For example, at $`\rho =0.34`$fm-3 for symmetric nuclear matter, there is an enhancement over the whole momentum range (from $``$130.8 to $``$123.7MeV at $`k=0`$ and $``$94.4 to $``$80.3MeV at $`k_F`$). Again this is in agreement with the observation on the binding energy $`E_A`$.

## 4 Summary and conclusions

In summary, we have investigated the effect of a microscopic three-body force on the EOS of symmetric nuclear matter and pure neutron matter within the Brueckner approach. The introduction of a TBF turns out to be crucial for reproducing the empirical saturation point, confirming the previous investigations with phenomenological TBF. But the microscopic TBF has the advantage of tracing the properties of nuclear matter back to more fundamental degrees of freedom. In addition it is suitable for a closer contact with relativistic approaches.

In particular, the saturation density approaches closely the empirical value after including the TBF in the calculation. At the contrary the saturation energy turns out to be almost unaffected which is a desirable result since, in the present calculation, its value only with two-body force is already in good agreement with the empirical binding energy. Accordingly, the TBF modifies appreciably the mean field only above the saturation density, so confirming the limit of BHF approximation without ground state correlations in describing the phenomenological optical potential. From the calculation of the EOS for pure neutron matter we have extracted the symmetry energy, which turns in good agreement with the relativistic DBHF calculations and also with the BHF and variational calculations adopting phenomenological Urbana TBF.

The steep uprise of the energy symmetry with density could have deep influence on the properties of neutron stars and on the supernovae explosions. The proton fraction has been calculated under conditions of $`\beta `$-equilibrium. The threshold value necessary to switch on the direct URCA processes is reached below 0.5fm-3 when the three-body force is included. This result may have remarkable consequences for the neutron-star cooling mechanism.

Finally, we address the question whether or not the EOS of nuclear matter can probe the medium modifications of the $`NN`$ interaction. Our approach to the TBF looks suitable for such a purpose provided that the two-body interaction is also described in terms of a meson-exchange model.

## Acknowledgments

We wish to thank J.F. Mathiot for valuable discussions and G.F. Burgio for providing us the results with $`AV18`$ and Urbana TBF.


format: text

text:
# Universes inside a Λ black hole

\[

## Abstract

We address the question of universes inside a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ black hole which is described by a spherically symmetric globally regular solution to the Einstein equations with a variable cosmological term $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mu \nu }`$, asymptotically $`\mathrm{\Lambda }g_{\mu \nu }`$ as $`r0`$ with $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ of the scale of symmetry restoration. Global structure of spacetime contains an infinite sequence of black and white holes, vacuum regular cores and asymptotically flat universes. Regular core of a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ white hole models the initial stages of the Universe evolution. In this model it starts from a nonsingular nonsimultaneous big bang, which is followed by a Kasner-type anisotropic expansion. Creation of a mass occurs mostly at the anisotropic stage of quick decay of the initial vacuum energy. We estimate also the probability of quantum birth of baby universes inside a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ black hole due to quantum instability of the de Sitter vacuum.

\]

Introduction- The idea of a de Sitter core replacing a black hole singularity goes back to the 60-s papers by Sakharov who suggested $`p=\epsilon `$ as an equation of state at superhigh densities , and by Gliner who interpreted $`p=\epsilon `$ as a vacuum equation of state and suggested that it could be a final state in a gravitational collapse .

In the 80-s several solutions have been obtained by direct matching de Sitter metric inside to Schwarzschild metric outside of a spacelike junction surface $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_0`$ of the Planckian thickness $`\delta l_{Pl}10^{33}`$cm . Global structure of spacetime in this case is shown in Fig.1.

The idea of a baby Universe inside a black hole has been proposed by Farhi and Guth (FG) in 1987  as the idea of creation of a universe in the laboratory starting from a false vacuum bubble in the Minkowski space. FG studied an expanding spherical de Sitter bubble separated by a thin wall from the outside region of the Schwarzschild geometry. The global structure of spacetime in this case (Fig.1) implies that the expanding bubble must be associated with an initial spacelike singularity which clearly represents a singular initial value configuration. Therefore Farhi and Guth concluded that the initial singularity would be an unavoidable obstacle to creation of a universe in the laboratory .

In 1988 Poisson and Israel have analyzed de Sitter-Schwarzschild transition and found that the spacetime geometry can be self-regulatory and describable semiclassically down to a few Planckian radii by the Einstein equations with a source term representing vacuum polarization effects . They found also that the Cauchy horizon must exist in this geometry ($`H_C`$ at the Fig.1).

In 1989 arising a new universe inside a black hole has been considered by Frolov, Markov, and Mukhanov (FMM)  in the context of the hypothesis that the curvature is limited by the Planckian scale and at this scale the equation of state becomes $`p=\epsilon `$. The difference of FMM from FG approach is that FG assumption of existence of a global Cauchy surface may be violated, due to the existence of the Cauchy horizon , which implies the absence of a global Cauchy surface.

In 1990 Farhi, Guth and Guven studied the model in which the initial bubble is small enough to be produced without initial singularity . A small bubble classically could not become a universe - instead it would reach a maximum radius and then contract. FGG investigated the possibility that quantum effects allow the bubble to tunnel into the larger bubble of the same mass which for an external observer disappears beyond the black hole horizon, whereas on the inside the bubble would classically evolve to become a new universe .

Both FG and FMM models are based on matching the Schwarzschild and de Sitter metrics using thin shell approach which implies that the whole dynamical evolution from the equation of state $`\epsilon =p=0`$ to $`p=\epsilon _{Pl}`$ occurs within a junction layer of the Planckian thickness $`\delta l_{Pl}10^{33}`$cm. As a result the matched metrics typically have a jump at the junction surface.

The general case of a smooth de Sitter-Schwarzschild transition, i.e., of a distributed density profile, has been qualitatively addressed in the paper by Frolov, Markov, and Mukhanov in 1990 . They mentioned two possibilities: or arising a new macroscopic closed universe either creation of a white hole in a new asymptotically flat universe which lies in the absolute future with respect to the original asymptotically flat universe.

The exact analytic solution describing de Sitter-Schwarzschild transition in general case of a distributed density profile, has been found by one of us  in a simple semiclassical model for density profile due to vacuum polarization in a spherically symmetric gravitational field . This solution belongs to the class of solutions to the Einstein equations with the source term such that $`T_r^r=T_t^t;T_\theta ^\theta =T_\varphi ^\varphi `$. The stress-energy tensor with such an algebraic structure describes a spherically symmetric vacuum invariant under boosts in the radial direction  and represents the extension of the Einstein cosmological term $`\mathrm{\Lambda }g_{\mu \nu }`$ to the spherically symmetric $`r`$dependent cosmological tensor $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_\nu ^\mu `$ .

In the case of de Sitter-Schwarzschild transition it connects in a smooth way two vacuum states: de Sitter vacuum $`T_{\mu \nu }=(8\pi G)^1\mathrm{\Lambda }g_{\mu \nu }`$ replacing a singularity at the origin and Minkowski vacuum $`T_{\mu \nu }=0`$ at infinity. This corresponds to $`r`$dependent cosmological term evolving from $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mu \nu }=\mathrm{\Lambda }g_{\mu \nu }`$ as $`r0`$ (with $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ of the scale of symmetry restoration in the origin ) to $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mu \nu }=0`$ as $`r\mathrm{}`$.

In the Schwarzschild coordinates the metric is given by

$$ds^2=\left(1\frac{R_g(r)}{r}\right)dt^2\frac{dr^2}{1\frac{R_g(r)}{r}}r^2d\mathrm{\Omega }^2$$
(1)
where $`d\mathrm{\Omega }^2`$ is the line element on the unit two-sphere.
The function $`R_g(r)`$ represents an $`r`$dependent gravitational radius

$$R_g(r)=8\pi G\underset{0}{\overset{r}{}}\rho (x)x^2𝑑x=2G(r)$$
(2)
A density profile $`\rho (r)=(8\pi G)^1\mathrm{\Lambda }_t^t(r)`$ should be a smooth function providing the proper asymptotic behaviour of $`R_g(r)`$: quick vanishing as $`r\mathrm{}`$ to guarantee finiteness of a mass

$$M=4\pi \underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\rho (x)x^2𝑑x<\mathrm{};R_g(r\mathrm{})=r_g,$$
(3)
where $`r_g=2GM`$ and $`M`$ is the Schwarzschild mass, and proper asymptotics as $`r0`$

$$R_g(r0)=\frac{r^3}{r_0^2}$$
(4)
where $`r_0`$ is the de Sitter horizon defined by

$$r_0^2=\frac{3}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}=\frac{3c^2}{8\pi G\rho _0}$$
(5)
Here $`\rho _0`$ is the vacuum density and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=\mathrm{\Lambda }_t^t(0)`$ is the value of the cosmological constant at the origin.

For any density profile satisfying conditions (3)-(4), the metric (1) describes a globally regular de Sitter-Schwarzschild geometry, asymptotically Schwarzschild as $`r\mathrm{}`$, and asymptotically de Sitter as $`r0`$ . For cosmological term $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mu \nu }`$ with the algebraic structure $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_t^t=\mathrm{\Lambda }_r^r;\mathrm{\Lambda }_\theta ^\theta =\mathrm{\Lambda }_\varphi ^\varphi `$, responsible for this geometry, the inflationary equation of state is satisfied by the radial pressure $`p_r^\mathrm{\Lambda }=\mathrm{\Lambda }_r^r`$, while the tangential pressure $`p_{}^\mathrm{\Lambda }=\mathrm{\Lambda }_\theta ^\theta =\mathrm{\Lambda }_\varphi ^\varphi `$ is calculated from the conservation equation $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{;\nu }^{\mu \nu }=0`$, giving the equation of state for cosmological tensor $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_\mu ^\nu `$

$$p_r^\mathrm{\Lambda }=\rho ^\mathrm{\Lambda };p_{}^\mathrm{\Lambda }=p_r^\mathrm{\Lambda }+\frac{r}{2}\frac{dp_r^\mathrm{\Lambda }}{dr}$$
(6)
The cosmological term $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mu \nu }`$ corresponds to a spherically symmetric vacuum $`T_{\mu \nu }^\mathrm{\Lambda }(r)=(8\pi G)^1\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mu \nu }(r)`$ with the variable density and pressure. It belongs to the Type I in the classification by Hawking and Ellis . For any density profile decreasing monotonically ($`d\rho /dr0`$ everywhere) it satisfies the weak energy condition $`T_{\mu \nu }u^\mu u^\nu 0`$ for any timelike vector $`u^\nu `$, which holds if $`\rho 0,\rho +p_k0(k=1,2,3)`$ . With the above restriction on a density profile $`T_{\mu \nu }^\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ satisfies also the dominant energy condition $`T^{00}|T^{ab}|`$ for each $`a,b`$, which holds if $`\rho 0,\rho p_k\rho `$. These conditions imply that the local energy density is non-negative and each component of the pressure never exceeds the energy density. The strong energy condition $`(T_{\mu \nu }g_{\mu \nu }T/2)u^\mu u^\nu 0`$, which for Type I holds if $`\rho +p_k0,\rho +p_k0`$, is violated (i.e. a gravitational acceleration changes sign) at the surface of zero gravity defined by $`2\rho +rd\rho /dr=0`$.

In the range of masses $`MM_{crit}0.3M_{Pl}\sqrt{\mathrm{\Lambda }_{Pl}/\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$ the de Sitter-Schwarzschild spacetime has two horizons, an event horizon $`r=r_+`$ and an internal Cauchy horizon $`r=r_{}`$, and the metric (1) describes a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ black hole ($`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$BH) . Its global structure is presented in Fig.2. It contains an infinite sequence of black and white holes, whose singularities are replaced with future and past regular cores $`𝒞`$, and asymptotically flat universes $`𝒰`$. The Penrose-Carter diagram Fig.2 is plotted in coordinates related to the photon radial geodesics. The surfaces $`𝒥^{}`$ and $`𝒥^+`$ represent their past and future infinities. The event horizons $`r=r_+`$ and the Cauchy horizons $`r=r_{}`$ are formed by the outgoing and ingoing radial photon geodesics $`r_\pm `$=const.

It is evident from the Penrose-Carter diagram Fig.2 that inside a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$BH there exists an infinite number of vacuum-dominated asymptotically flat universes in the future of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ white holes. Geodesic structure of de Sitter-Schwarzschild space-time shows that the possibility of travelling into other universes through a black hole interior, discussed in the literature for the case of Reissner-Nordström and Kerr geometry ( and references therein), exists also in the case of a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$BH .

It is widely known that the interiors of white holes can be described locally as cosmological models (see, e.g., ). In the case of a Schwarzschild white hole it starts from the spacelike singularity $`r=0`$ (see Fig.3).

Replacing a Schwarzschild singularity with the regular core $`𝒞`$ transforms the spacelike singular surfaces $`r=0`$, both in the future of $``$ and in the past of $`𝒲`$, into the timelike regular surfaces $`r=0`$ (see Fig.2). In a sense, this rehabilitates a white hole, whose existence in a singular version has been forbidden by the cosmic censorship .

A cosmological model related to a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ white hole corresponds to an asymptotically flat vacuum-dominated cosmology with the de Sitter origin governed by the time-dependent cosmological term $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mu \nu }`$ (segment $`𝒞,𝒲,𝒰`$ in the Fig.2). The $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$WH (more precisely its $`𝒞`$ region) models thus the initial stages of a nonsingular cosmology with the inflationary origin.

In this paper we address two questions: First is the vacuum-dominated cosmological model with the variable cosmological term $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mu \nu }`$, related to $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$WH. Second is question of baby universes inside a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$BH. The case of direct de Sitter-Schwarzschild matching (Fig.1) clearly corresponds to arising of a closed or semiclosed world inside a black hole . We estimate the probability of this event in the case of global structure Fig.2 as a result of quantum instability of the de Sitter vacuum near the surface $`r=0`$. We consider also the case when some admixture of strings or quintessence is present in the initial fluctuation near $`r=0`$ in the vacuum-dominated system governed by $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mu \nu }`$. We show that in such a case a multiple quantum birth of open or flat baby universes is possible, which are causally disjoint from each other. $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$WH model for a nonsimultaneous big bang-

To investigate a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$WH together with its past regular core $`𝒞`$ and future asymptotically flat universe $`𝒰`$, we introduce the Finkelstein coordinates, related to radial geodesics of nonrelativistic test particles at rest at infinity. They are given by

$$c\tau =\pm ct\pm \sqrt{\frac{R_g(r)}{r}+f(R)}\frac{dr}{1\frac{R_g(r)}{r}}$$
(7)
$$R=ct+\sqrt{\frac{r}{R_g(r)}}\frac{\sqrt{1+f(R)}dr}{1\frac{R_g(r)}{r}}$$
(8)
Here $`f(R)`$ is an arbitrary function satisfying the condition $`1+f(R)>0`$. The lower sign in (7) is for outgoing geodesics corresponding to the case of an expansion.

The metric (1) transforms into the Lemaitre metric

$$ds^2=c^2d\tau ^2e^{\lambda (R,\tau )}dR^2r^2(R,\tau )d\mathrm{\Omega }^2$$
(9)
with

$$e^{\lambda (R,\tau )}=\frac{R_g(r(R,\tau ))}{r(R,\tau )}$$
(10)
Coordinates $`R,\tau `$ are the Lagrange (comoving) coordinates of a test particle, and $`r`$ is its Euler radial coordinate (luminosity distance). In the case of outgoing geodesics the $`(R,\tau )`$ coordinates with the lower sign in (7), map the segment $`𝒞,𝒲,𝒰`$, i.e. $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$WH with its regular core $`𝒞`$ and its external universe $`𝒰`$.

For the metric (9) the Einstein equations reduce to

$$8\pi Gp_r=\frac{1}{r^2}\left(e^\lambda r^22r\ddot{r}\dot{r}^21\right)$$
(11)
$$8\pi Gp_{}=\frac{e^\lambda }{r}\left(r^{\prime \prime }\frac{r^{}\lambda ^{}}{2}\right)\frac{\dot{r}\dot{\lambda }}{2r}\frac{\ddot{\lambda }}{2}\frac{\dot{\lambda }^2}{4}\frac{\ddot{r}}{r}$$
(12)
$$8\pi G\rho =\frac{e^\lambda }{r^2}\left(2rr^{\prime \prime }+r^2rr^{}\lambda ^{}\right)+\frac{1}{r^2}\left(r\dot{r}\dot{\lambda }+\dot{r}^2+1\right)$$
(13)
$$8\pi GT_t^r=\frac{e^\lambda }{r}\left(2\dot{r}^{}r^{}\dot{\lambda }\right)=0$$
(14)
Here the dot denotes differentiation with respect to $`\tau `$ and the prime with respect to $`R`$. The component $`T_t^r`$ of the stress-energy tensor vanishes in the comoving reference frame, and Eq.(14) is integrated giving

$$e^\lambda =\frac{r^2}{1+f(R)}$$
(15)
Putting (15) into into (11), we obtain the equation of motion in the form

$$\dot{r}^2+2r\ddot{r}+\kappa p_rr^2=f(R)$$
(16)
This cosmological model belongs to the Lemaitre class of spherically symmetric models with anisotropic fluid . The dynamics of our model is governed by cosmological tensor $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mu \nu }`$ which in this case is time-dependent.

Near the surface $`r=0`$ the metric (9) transforms into the FRW form for any $`f(R)`$. It reads

$$ds^2=c^2d\tau ^2a^2(\tau )(d\chi ^2+\mathrm{sin}^2\chi d\mathrm{\Omega }^2)$$
(17)
with the de Sitter scale factor $`a(\tau )\mathrm{cosh}(H_0\tau )`$ for $`f(R)<0`$, $`a(\tau )\mathrm{sinh}(H_0\tau )`$ for $`f(R)>0`$, $`a(\tau )\mathrm{exp}(H_0\tau )`$ for $`f(R)=0`$, where $`H_0`$ is the Hubble parameter corresponding to the initial value of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$.

In this paper we present numerical results for the case of $`f(R)=0`$ ($`\mathrm{\Omega }=1`$). For numerical integration of the equiation of motion we adopt the density profile in the form

$$\rho (r)=\rho _0exp\left(\frac{r^3}{r_0^2r_g}\right)$$
(18)
The characteristic scale of de Sitter-Schwarzschild space-time is $`r_{}=(r_0^2r_g)^{1/3}`$, and we normalize $`r`$ to this scale introducing the dimensionless variable $`\xi `$ by $`r=r_{}\xi `$. The behaviour of pressures in this case is shown in Fig.4.

The equation of motion (16) for $`f(R)=0`$ reduces to

$$\dot{\xi }^2+2\xi \ddot{\xi }3\xi ^2e^{\xi ^3}=0$$
(19)
It has the first integral

$$\dot{\xi }^2=\frac{Ae^{\xi ^3}}{\xi }$$
(20)
and the second integral

$$\tau \tau _0(R)=\underset{\xi _0}{\overset{\xi }{}}\sqrt{\frac{x}{Ae^{x^3}}}𝑑x$$
(21)
Here $`\tau _0(R)`$ is an arbitrary function (constant of integration parametrized by $`R`$) which is called the ”bang-time function” . For example, in the case of the Tolman-Bondi model for a dust, the evolution is described by $`r(R,\tau )=(9GM(R)/2)^{1/3}(\tau \tau _0(R))^{2/3}`$, where $`\tau _0(R)`$ is an arbitrary function of $`R`$ representing the big bang singularity surface for which $`r(R,\tau )=0`$ .

The big bang starts from $`\xi _0=0`$. In our case this is the timelike regular surface $`r=0`$ at the Fig.2. Choosing $`\xi _0=0`$ we fix the constant $`A=1`$ and $`\tau _0(R)=R`$. In coordinates $`(R,\tau )`$ the bang starts from the surface $`R+c\tau =\mathrm{}`$ (see Fig.5).

Different points of the bang surface $`\xi =0`$ start at different moments of synchronous time $`\tau `$. In the limit $`\xi 0`$ the law of the expansion is

$$\xi =e^{\tau \tau _0(R)}=\dot{\xi }$$
(22)
This gives

$$e^\lambda =\frac{r^2}{r_0^2}\left(\frac{d\tau _0(R)}{dR}\right)^2$$
(23)
and the metric takes the form

$$ds^2=c^2d\tau ^2r_0^2e^{\frac{2c\tau }{r_0}}\left(dq^2+q^2d\mathrm{\Omega }^2\right),$$
(24)
where the variable $`q=e^{\frac{R}{r_0}}`$ is introduced to transform the metric into the FRW form. It describes, with the initial conditions $`\xi _0(R+\tau \mathrm{})=0`$, $`\dot{\xi }_0(R+\tau \mathrm{})=0`$, the nonsingular nonsimultaneous de Sitter bang.

In the case of a Schwarzschild WH, a singularity is spacelike (see Fig.1,3), so there exists the reference frame in which it is simultaneous. In the case of a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ white hole, a regular surface $`r=0`$ is timelike, and there does not exist any reference frame in which two events occuring on $`r=0`$ would be simultaneous.

The first lesson of the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$WH model is that the nonsingular de Sitter big bang must be nonsimultaneous.

The further evolution of the function $`\xi `$, velocity $`\dot{\xi }`$ and acceleration $`\ddot{\xi }`$ is shown in Fig. 6-8, obtained by numerical integration of the equation of motion (19) with the initial conditions $`\xi _0=10^6`$, $`\dot{\xi }_0=10^6`$.

Numerical integration of the equation (19) shows an exponential growth of $`\xi (\tau \tau _0)`$ at the begining, when $`p_{}p_r\rho `$, followed by an anisotropic Kasner-type stage when the anisotropic pressure leads to an anisotropic expansion.

Qualitatively we can see this approximating the second integral (21) in the region $`1\xi (r_g/r_0)^{2/3}`$ (far beyond a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$WH horizon) by

$$\tau +R=\underset{0}{\overset{\xi _0(R)}{}}\sqrt{\frac{x}{1e^{x^3}}}𝑑x+\underset{\xi _0(R)}{\overset{\xi }{}}\sqrt{x}𝑑x$$

It gives

$$\xi =\left(\frac{9}{4}\right)^{\frac{1}{3}}\left(\tau +\stackrel{~}{\tau }_0(R)\right)^{\frac{2}{3}},$$
(25)
where $`\stackrel{~}{\tau }_0(R)=R+\left(\frac{2}{3}\xi _0^{\frac{2}{3}}(R)F(\xi _0(R))\right)`$ and $`F(\xi _0(R))=\underset{0}{\overset{\xi _0(R)}{}}\sqrt{\frac{x}{1e^{x^3}}}𝑑x`$

Then we get anisotropic Kasner-type metric

$$ds^2=c^2d\tau ^2\left(\frac{9r_g}{4}\right)^{\frac{2}{3}}\left(\tau +\stackrel{~}{\tau }_0(R)\right)^{\frac{2}{3}}\left(\frac{d\stackrel{~}{\tau }_0(R)}{dR}\right)^2dR^2$$

$$\left(\frac{9r_g}{4}\right)^{\frac{2}{3}}\left(\tau +\stackrel{~}{\tau }_0(R)\right)^{\frac{2}{3}}d\mathrm{\Omega }^2$$
(26)
with contraction in the radial direction and expansion in the tangential direction.

The second lesson of the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$WH model is the existence of the anisotropic Kasner-type stage after inflation.

In our case the Kasner-type stage follows the stage of the nonsingular nonsimultaneous big bang from the regular surface $`r=0`$. It looks that this kind of behaviour is generic for cosmological models near the origin  (for recent review see ). Our case differs from a singular case also in that the solution is not vacuum in the sense of zero source term in the Einstein equations, although it is vacuum in the sense that the variable cosmological term $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mu \nu }`$ corresponds to a spherically symmetric vacuum invariant under boosts in the radial direction .

Since the 3-curvature is zero for the case $`f(R)=0`$, the Schwarzschild (ADM) mass $`_{ADM}`$ coincides with the total proper (invariant) mass $`_{inv}`$ which is the sum of the invariant masses of all particles with radial coordinates less than $`R`$ given by

$$_{inv}(R)=\underset{0}{\overset{2\pi }{}}𝑑\phi \underset{0}{\overset{\pi }{}}𝑑\vartheta \underset{0}{\overset{R}{}}\rho \sqrt{g}𝑑R=4\pi \underset{0}{\overset{R}{}}e^{\frac{\lambda }{2}}r^2\rho 𝑑R$$

Indeed, for a fixed time section, $`r`$ may be regarded as the function of $`R`$ only . Then $`e^{\lambda /2}dR=dr`$ and

$$_{inv}=4\pi \underset{0}{\overset{r}{}}\rho x^2𝑑x=_{ADM}=(r)$$

At the beginning $`=0`$ and $`\dot{}=0`$, as it follows from the first integral (20) which gives

$$\dot{\xi }^2=\frac{(\xi )}{\xi }$$

The behavior of a mass normalized to the Schwarzschild mass $`M`$ is shown in the Fig.9.

During inflationary stage the mass increases as $`\xi ^3`$. At the next anisotropic stage the mass is growing abruptly towards the Schwarzschild mass $`M`$. Since the density is quickly falling at the same time starting from the initial value $`\rho _0=(8\pi G)^1\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, the growth in a mass is connected with the fall of $`\rho ^\mathrm{\Lambda }=(8\pi G)^1\mathrm{\Lambda }_t^t`$, i.e., with the decay of the initial vacuum energy (the growth of a universe mass by many orders of magnitude in the course of decay of the de Sitter vacuum was first noticed in the Ref ).

The third lesson of the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$WH model is the quick growth of the mass during the Kasner-type anisotropic stage. Baby universes inside a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$BH- In the case of direct de Sitter-Schwarzschild matching the global structure of spacetime (Fig.1) corresponds to arising of a closed or semiclosed world inside a BH . In general case of a distributed density profile (the global structure of space-time as shown in Fig.2) the physical situation near the timelike surface $`r=0`$ is similar to that considered by Farhi and Guth. This region, which is the part of the regular core $`𝒞`$, differs from that considered in Ref. by an $`r`$-dependent density profile. Our density profile (18) is almost constant near $`r0`$ and then quickly falls down to zero. In Fig.10 it is plotted for the case of a stellar mass black hole with $`M=3M_{}`$.

We may think of the region near $`r=0`$ as of a small false vacuum bubble which can be a seed for a quantum birth of a new universe in accordance with the main idea of papers . In this case the global structure of space-time is shown in Fig.11, which corresponds to arising of a closed or semiclosed world in one of the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$WH structures in the future of a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$BH in the original universe.

On the other hand, instability of a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ white hole leads to possibilities other than considered by Farhi and Guth. Instabilities of Schwarzschild white holes are related to physical processes (particle creation) near a singularity (see, e.g.,  and references therein). In the case of a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ white hole its quantum instability is related to instability of the de Sitter vacuum near the surface $`r=0`$. Instability of the de Sitter vacuum is well studied, both with respect to particle creation  and with respect to the quantum birth of a universe .

The possibility of a multiple birth of causally disconnected universes from the de Sitter background was noticed in 1975 in the Ref. . In 1982 such a possibility has been investigated by Gott III who considered creation of a universe as a quantum barrier penetration leading to an open FRW cosmology . The case of arising of open universes from de Sitter vacuum is illustrated by Fig.12 . The events $`E`$ and $`E^{}`$ are creation of causally disconnected universes. The curved lines are world lines of comoving observers. At the spacelike surface AB the phase transition occurs from the inflationary to the radiation dominated stage .

In the case of a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$BH the region ECB in Fig.12 corresponds to the region $`𝒞_1`$ in Fig.2, and the region BFD corresponds to a part of the region $`𝒞_2`$. The regions $`𝒞_1`$ and $`𝒞_2`$ in the de Sitter-Schwarzschild spacetime are entirely disjoint from each other for the same reason as the regions $`𝒰_1`$ and $`𝒰_2`$ (they can be connected by space-like curves only). Birth of open (or flat) baby universes inside a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$BH looks very similar to the picture shown in Fig.12. The essential difference is existence of an infinite number of the regions $`𝒞_1`$ and $`𝒞_2`$ inside a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$BH.

In any case a nucleating spherical bubble can be described by a minisuperspace model with a single degree of freedom, the bubble radius , in our case $`a=(r_0^2r_g)^{1/3}\xi `$.

The Friedmann equation in the conformal time ($`cdt=ad\eta `$) reads

$$\left(\frac{da}{d\eta }\right)^2=\frac{8\pi G\rho a^4}{3c^2}ka^2,$$
(27)
where $`k=0,\pm 1`$. The standard procedure of quantization  results in the Wheeler-DeWitt equation in the minisuperspace for the wave function of universe  which reduces to the Schrödinger equation

$$\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m_{Pl}}\frac{d^2\psi }{da^2}[U(a)E]\psi =0$$
(28)
with $`E=0`$ and the potential (for the case of $`k=1`$)

$$U(a)=\frac{m_{Pl}c^2}{2l_{Pl}^2}\left(a^2\frac{a^4}{r_0^2}\right)$$
(29)
With this equation we calculate the probability of a tunnelling which describes the quantum growth of an initial bubble on its way to the classically permitted region $`ar_0`$, which corresponds to the case of a closed universe inside a black hole as in FG and FMM models .

This potential is plotted in Fig.13. It has two zeros, at $`a=0`$ and $`a=r_0`$, and two extrema: the minimum at $`a=0`$ and the maximum at $`a=r_0\sqrt{2}`$.

The WKB coefficient for penetration through the potential barrier reads

$$D=\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{2}{\mathrm{}}|_{a_1}^{a_2}\sqrt{2m_{Pl}[EU(a)]}𝑑a|\right)$$
(30)
We get this probability in the frame of the Weeler-DeWitt equation, applying the general formula for the tunnel effect in quantum mechanics firstly calculated by Gamow . In the Euclidean approach  the same result for the tunnelling probability is obtained  from the WKB wave function with the Euclidean Action written in the imaginary time in the Euclidean domain (under a barrier where the kinetic energy term is negative). The sign in the exponent in Eq. (30) corresponds to the tunnelling wave function .

Calculating the integral in (30) we obtain

$$D=\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{2}{3}\left(\frac{r_0}{l_{Pl}}\right)^2\right]$$
(31)
For the GUT scale $`E_{GUT}10^{15}`$GeV the probability of quantum birth of a universe is $`D=\mathrm{exp}(\frac{2}{3}10^{16})`$. This value of the penetration factor is in agreement with that calculated in the Ref. .

To estimate the probability of a quantum birth of an open or flat universe, we consider the instability of a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$WH as evolved from a quantum fluctuation near $`r=0`$ which contains some admixture of strings or quintessence  with the equation of state $`p=\rho /3`$. In this case it is possible to find the nonzero probability of tunnelling for any value of $`k`$ .

In the equation (27) the density evolves with $`a`$ as

$$\rho =\rho _0\left(\frac{a}{r_0}\right)^{3(1+\alpha )},$$
(32)
where $`\alpha `$ is a factor in the equation of state $`p=\alpha \rho `$. For the de Sitter vacuum $`\alpha =1`$, and $`\alpha =1/3`$ for strings or quintessence with $`p=\rho /3`$. When both components are present in the initial fluctuation, the density can be written in the form

$$\rho =\rho _0\left(B_0+B_2\frac{r_0^2}{a^2}\right),$$
(33)
where $`B_0`$ and $`B_2`$ refers to the vacuum and strings (quintessence) contributions. The Friedmann equation (27) takes the form

$$\left(\frac{da}{d\eta }\right)^2=(B_2k)a^2+\frac{B_0a^4}{r_0^2}$$
(34)
and transforms to the Schrödinger equation (28) with the potential

$$U(a)=\frac{m_{pl}c^2}{2l_{pl}^2}\left[(kB_2)a^2\frac{B_0a^4}{r_0^2}\right]$$
(35)
This potential has two zeros at $`a_1=0`$ and $`a_2=\sqrt{(kB_2)/B_0}r_0`$ and two extrema: the minimum at $`a=0`$ and the maximum at $`a=r_0\sqrt{(kB_2)/2B_0}`$.

The WKB coefficient for penetration through the potential barrier (35) is given by

$$D=exp\left(\frac{2}{l_{Pl}}|\underset{a_1}{\overset{a_2}{}}\sqrt{(kB_2)a^2\frac{B_0a^4}{r_0^2}}𝑑a|\right)$$
(36)
We see that the presence of strings or a quintessence with the equation of state $`p=\rho /3`$ in the initial fluctuation provides a possibility of quantum creation of flat ($`k=0`$) and open ($`k=1`$) universe with the probability

$$D=\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{2}{3}\left(\frac{r_0}{l_{pl}}\right)^2\frac{\sqrt{(kB_2)^3}}{B_0}\right)$$
(37)
For $`r_010^{25}`$ cm, $`D=\mathrm{exp}(\frac{1}{3}10^{16})`$ for $`k=0`$, $`B_0=2`$, $`B_2=1`$ which is very close to the value calculated above for the case of $`k=1`$ and $`B_2=0`$, and to that obtained by Farhi, Guth and Guven .

The probability of a single tunnelling event is very small. However in the case of a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$BH the probability of arising of a baby universe in a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$BH is the probability of arising it in one of the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$WH structures inside a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$BH. Since there is an infinite number of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$WH in one particular $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$BH, this probability is much greater than that for a single tunnelling event. Conclusion - Let us emphasize that an obstacle related to the initial singularity does not arise in general case of a distributed profile, since both future and past singularities are replaced with the regular surfaces $`r=0`$.

The results presented above concerning baby universes inside a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ black hole are obtained for the case of an eternal black hole. In case a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$BH is formed in the course of a gravitational collapse, the global structure of the spacetime differs from that shown in Fig.2 by the presence of a matter. The analysis similar to that for the case of direct de Sitter-Schwarzschild matching , shows that estimates of probabilities of arising baby universes inside a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$BH do not change for the case when it arises in a gravitational collapse. The probability of a quantum birth of baby universes inside a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ black hole is not negligible due to existence of an infinite number of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$WH structures inside each particular $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ black hole.

On the other hand, in the context of creation of a universe in the laboratory, the possibility of influence on the created universe is restricted by the presence of the Cauchy horizon in the de Sitter-Schwarzschild geometry.

Acknowledgement

This work was supported by the Polish Committee for Scientific Research through the Grant 2.P03D.017.11.


text:
# Stochastic Gravitational Radiation from Phase Transitions

## Introduction

Scientific and design goals for gravitational radiation detectors have been driven primarily by point sources of radiation like binary compact objects. While the distribution and properties of such sources will undoubtedly be of cosmological interest, the most interesting gravitational wave signals for cosmology are likely to be stochastic backgrounds produced in the early Universe. Since the Universe is opaque to electromagnetic radiation at redshifts greater than $`z=1300`$ due to Thomson scattering off free electrons, gravitational radiation offers the only hope of “imaging” the earliest epochs of the Universe when it was dominated by high-energy fundamental physics processes.

Several possible stochastic sources have been considered. The best motivated are cosmic defects like strings or textures; quantum fluctuations in the fields driving inflation; and phase transitions. More speculative ideas include string-theory inspired scenarios for cosmic evolution at times prior to the apparent initial singularity (so-called “pre-big-bang” cosmology) or explosive preheating at the end of inflation. Here we review the stochastic background of gravitational radiation expected from first-order phase transitions. New results for gravitational radiation from turbulence, which could be produced in a first-order phase transition, are included. The final section considers the detectability of various stochastic sources, with an emphasis on the electroweak phase transition. A thorough review of stochastic gravitational radiation, with extensive material about detector phenomenology, overviews of a variety of sources, and a comprehensive bibliography, has recently appeared mag00 .

## General Considerations

The time evolution of cosmological gravitational radiation follows directly from the linearized Einstein equations,

$$\ddot{h}_{ij}(𝐤,\eta )+2\frac{\dot{a}}{a}\dot{h}_{ij}(𝐤,\eta )+k^2h_{ij}(𝐤,\eta )=8\pi Ga^2\mathrm{\Pi }_{ij}(𝐤,\eta ),$$
(1)
where $`𝐤`$ is a comoving wave vector, $`\eta `$ is conformal time, overdots are derivatives with respect to $`\eta `$, $`a`$ is the scale factor of the Universe, $`h_{ij}`$ is the tensor metric perturbation, and $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{ij}`$ is the tensor piece of the stress-energy tensor. We will also make use of the Hubble parameter, $`H=(1/a)da/dt`$ and its present value $`h_{100}`$ in units of 100 km/s/Mpc, and throughout we use natural units with $`\mathrm{}=c=k_B=1`$. The right side of Eq. (1) is the source term for generating gravitational radiation, while the left side describes the free propagation of the radiation, including damping due to the expansion of the Universe. Since each comoving $`𝐤`$-mode is independent, the physical wavelength of a given gravitational wave increases linearly with the scale factor $`a`$, just as with electromagnetic radiation.

Solutions to the homogeneous equation with $`\mathrm{\Pi }=0`$ are easily obtained. For a radiation-dominated universe, $`a\eta `$ and

$$h_{ij}j_0(k\eta ),y_0(k\eta )$$
(2a)
while for the matter-dominated era, $`a\eta ^2`$ and
$$h_{ij}\frac{j_1(k\eta )}{k\eta },\frac{y_1(k\eta )}{k\eta },$$
(2b)
where $`j_l`$ and $`y_l`$ are the usual spherical Bessel functions. It is straightforward to show that in both cases, the amplitude of the gravitional waves scales as $`a^1`$. This result also follows from the stress-energy tensor for gravitational radiation, whose energy density is given by mtw73

$$\rho _{GW}=\frac{1}{32\pi G}\frac{h_{ij}}{t}\frac{h^{ij}}{t}$$
(3)
where the average is over many wavelengths. So the energy density is proportional to $`h_c^2f^2`$, where $`h_c`$ is the characteristic amplitude of the metric perturbation $`h_{ij}`$ and $`f`$ is the (physical) frequency of the wave. The energy density scales like $`a^4`$ with the expansion of the Universe, while the frequency scales like $`a^1`$. It follows that $`h_ca^1`$ as derived above from the evolution equation. Note this is different from the amplitude scaling of the electric and magnetic fields in an electromagnetic wave, which drop off like $`a^2`$.

In practice, only very large stress-energy sources contribute significantly to the stochastic gravitational wave amplitude. If a particular source acts for a period of time shorter than the Hubble time $`H^1`$, then the expansion of the Universe can be neglected during the time the source is active and the resulting gravitational wave amplitude can be conveniently calculated in flat space. Then the entire subsequent evolution of the gravitational waves is simply a reduction of amplitude and frequency by the factor

$$\frac{a_{}}{a_0}=8.0\times 10^{14}\left(\frac{100}{g_{}}\right)^{1/3}\left(\frac{1\mathrm{GeV}}{T_{}}\right),$$
(4)
where $`a_{}`$ and $`T_{}`$ are the scale factor and temperature at the time the source is active, $`g_{}`$ is the total number of relativistic degrees of freedom at the time of the source, and $`a_0`$ is the scale factor today. This expression is valid as long as the evolution of the Universe since the source has been adiabatic. If a source exists for a time interval long compared to the Hubble time, then the expansion of the Universe may impact the source evolution and the full evolution equation, Eq. (1), must be used.

A stochastic background of gravitational waves can be characterized by $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{GW}}(f)`$, its energy density per frequency octave in units of the critical density $`\rho _c=3H^2/8\pi G`$. From this, we follow Thorne tho87  in defining a convenient characteristic amplitude at frequency $`f`$ as

$$h_c(f)1.3\times 10^{18}\left[\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{GW}}(f)h_{100}^2\right]^{1/2}\left(\frac{1\mathrm{Hz}}{f}\right).$$
(5)
We will calculate characteristic energy densities in gravitational wave backgrounds and convert to characteristic amplitudes with this relation.

## Model Phase Transitions

The most interesting potential source of a cosmological gravitational wave background is an early-Universe phase transition. Phase transitions very likely occurred in the early Universe. The standard model of particle physics provides two: the electroweak phase transition at $`T100`$ GeV, at which the electroweak symmetry was spontaneously broken, and the QCD phase transition at $`T150`$ MeV, at which chiral symmetry was broken. If the standard model is actually the result of the breaking of a larger gauge symmetry (i.e. a Grand Unified Theory), then a GUT phase transition at an energy scale of $`T10^{16}`$ GeV is also likely. Other more speculative phase transitions involving the breaking of hypothesized additional symmetries have also been discussed.

The details of a particular phase transition, in particular its order, latent heat, and dynamics, are determined by the effective potential driving the phase transition. In a given particle theory, calculation of an effective potential is in general a difficult, non-perturbative problem of finite-temperature field theory. For purposes of gravitational wave signals, we consider a generic, model first-order phase transition described by several physical parameters; a specific phase transition corresponds to some set of model parameters.

As the Universe cools due to its expansion, phase transitions can occur if a new state with lower energy density becomes physically possible. Assume this occurs at some characteristic temperature scale $`T_{}`$. The energy density difference between the two phases is roughly the vacuum energy density, $`\rho _{\mathrm{vac}}`$. If the two phases are separated by a significant potential energy barrier (greater than the characteristic thermal energy density at temperature $`T_{}`$), then the transition must proceed via the nucleation of new-phase bubbles via quantum or thermal processes. We define $`\alpha \rho _{\mathrm{vac}}/a_RT_{}^4`$, the ratio of vacuum energy density to thermal energy density ($`a_R`$ is the radiation constant). Once a bubble of new phase is nucleated, the potential energy difference between the two phases exerts an outward force on the walls of the bubble, causing it to expand. Hydrodynamic forces will tend to resist the bubble expansion, which will quickly attain some equilibrium velocity $`v`$. We neglect possible instabilities which might distort the bubble’s spherical shape and redistribute energy. As the bubbles expand, some fraction $`\kappa `$ of the available vacuum energy is converted to the kinetic energy of the expanding bubble walls, while the rest goes into heat.

Once multiple bubbles have been nucleated in some region of the Universe, they will expand until eventually their walls meet and they merge together, converting the entire region to the lower-energy phase. The energy stored up in the bubble walls is eventually dissipated into heat via hydrodynamical turbulence. If $`\alpha `$ is large enough, the kinetic energy of the bubble walls will represent a significant fraction of the entire energy density of the Universe, and will have $`v`$ a significant fraction of $`c`$. Note that for $`T_{}>10^5`$ K, the energy density of the Universe is dominated by radiation, so the sound speed will be $`c_s=c/\sqrt{3}`$, the relativistic limit. As soon as the spherical symmetry of an individual bubble is broken due to collisions with other bubbles, gravitational radiation will be produced; the high energy densities and velocities involved make bubble collisions a potentially potent source wit84 ; hog86 ; tw90 .

The characteristic frequency of the gravitational radiation is determined by the duration of the phase transition, corresponding to the percolation time of the biggest bubbles with the largest energies. A simple bubble nucleation model takes an exponential bubble nucleation rate per unit volume $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=\mathrm{\Gamma }_0\mathrm{exp}(\beta t)`$ tww92 . This form is motivated by the general observation that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ will typically be the exponential of some nucleation action, and the time dependence of the nucleation action can be approximated as linear at the time of the phase transition. For such a nucleation rate, the duration of the phase transition is roughly $`\tau \beta ^1`$. The characteristic length scale is just $`\beta ^1v`$, the size of the largest bubbles at the end of the phase transition. In general, $`\beta 4\mathrm{ln}(m_{\mathrm{Pl}}/T_{})H_{}100H_{}`$, where $`H_{}`$ is the Hubble parameter at the time of the phase transition tww92 . Thus the characteristic wavelength of gravitational radiation at the time of the phase transition is perhaps a percent of the Hubble radius at that time.

A simple model of a first-order phase transition is comprised of the quantities defined above: the characteristic time scale $`\beta ^1`$; the vacuum energy $`\rho _{\mathrm{vac}}`$; the bubble expansion velocity $`v`$; the temperature of the phase transition $`T_{}`$ or equivalently the ratio of vacuum energy to thermal energy $`\alpha `$; and the efficiency factor $`\kappa `$.

The gravitational radiation resulting from the violent collision of bubbles in a first-order phase transition has been calculated in detail ktw92 ; kt93 ; kkt94 . It was demonstrated that the radiation source is primarily the bubble walls, which for can be treated in the thin-wall approximation if the bubble walls propagate as detonation fronts. The traceless portion of the stress-energy tensor is nonzero only at the position of the spherically expanding bubble walls, and the amplitude of the stress-energy tensor follows simply from the amount of vacuum energy liberated by a particular bubble’s expansion. Then the radiation from many randomly nucleated bubbles in a sample volume can be computed numerically. The result is a stochastic background of radiation with energy density

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{GW}}(f)h^21.1\times 10^6\kappa ^2\left(\frac{H_{}}{\beta }\right)^2\left(\frac{\alpha }{1+\alpha }\right)^2\left(\frac{v^3}{0.24+v^3}\right)\left(\frac{100}{g_{}}\right)^{1/3},$$
(6)
peaking at a characteristic frequency

$$f_{\mathrm{max}}5.2\times 10^8\mathrm{Hz}\left(\frac{\beta }{H_{}}\right)\left(\frac{T_{}}{1\mathrm{GeV}}\right)\left(\frac{g_{}}{100}\right)^{1/6},$$
(7)
with characteristic amplitude

$$h_c(f_{\mathrm{max}})1.8\times 10^{14}\kappa \left(\frac{\alpha }{\alpha +1}\right)\left(\frac{H_{}}{\beta }\right)^2\left(\frac{1\mathrm{GeV}}{T_{}}\right)\left(\frac{v^3}{0.24+v^3}\right)^{1/2}\left(\frac{100}{g_{}}\right)^{1/3}.$$
(8)
At frequencies lower than the characteristic peak frequency, the energy density per frequency octave increases like $`f^{2.5}`$ while above this frequency it drops off more slowly kt93 . For very strong phase transitions, the energy spectrum of gravitational radiation has a long tail at high frequencies, due to the presence of numerous small bubbles with significant energy densities. These results hold for a strongly first-order phase transition where the bubbles expand supersonically as detonation fronts. For weaker transitions with deflagration (subsonic) bubble walls, the dynamics are more complex, but the resulting radiation is expected to be much smaller.

Note that the frequency range of the proposed LISA space-based interferometer, $`10^5`$ to $`10^1`$ Hz, is particularly well-suited to probing the electroweak phase transition at an energy scale of 100 GeV: $`\beta /H_{}`$ is generically around 100, putting the frequency for the peak of the gravity wave power spectrum somewhere between $`10^3`$ and $`10^4`$ Hz. The strength of the electroweak phase transition is an open question; this issue is discussed below in the concluding section.

## Model Turbulence

Substantial gravitational radiation can also be produced by a period of turbulence in the early Universe kkt94 . The following analysis mkk01  is completely general, without reference to a particular source of turbulence, although the most likely source is a first-order phase transition: once the bubbles of low-temperature phase begin to collide with each other, they stir up the primordial plasma on a characteristic length scale corresponding to the size of the largest bubbles in the transition. The gravitational radiation produced by the turbulence will be in addition to that from the bubbles given above.

We construct a simple model of isotropic cosmological turbulence as follows: at some particular temperature $`T_{}`$ and corresponding enthalpy $`w_{}=\rho _{}+P_{}`$ the turbulence commences, with energy input into the Universe on a largest length scale $`L_S`$. In general, the energy input will be a complicated process; we make the simple idealization that the turbulence will last for a time $`\tau `$ and that the turbulent energy will be distributed as a stationary Kolmogoroff spectrum with

$$E(k)\frac{1}{w}\frac{d\rho _{\mathrm{turb}}}{dk}\overline{\epsilon }^{2/3}k^{5/3},$$
(9)
where $`\overline{\epsilon }`$ is the energy density dissipation rate per unit enthalpy my75 . The turbulent energy injected at the scale $`L_S`$ will be written as $`ϵ\rho _{\mathrm{vac}}`$, with $`ϵ`$ an efficiency factor. This energy cascades to smaller scales until it is dissipated by viscous damping at a scale determined by the kinematic viscosity $`\nu `$ of the fluid. The damping scale $`L_D`$ can be obtained from the Reynolds number, which can be approximated as

$$\mathrm{Re}=\left(\frac{L_S}{L_D}\right)^{4/3}\frac{2}{3}\left(\frac{L_S}{2\pi }\right)^{4/3}\left(\frac{ϵ\rho _{\mathrm{vac}}}{\nu ^3\tau w}\right)^{1/3},$$
(10)
if the turbulent source lasts for a long time compared to the dynamical time scale of the turbulence on the scale $`L_S`$. The critical Reynolds number for the development of a Kolmogoroff spectrum of turbulence is around 2000; generally this number is easily exceeded for early-Universe phase transitions. If the source lasts for a time short compared to the dynamical time at the scale $`L_S`$ (as is likely with the electroweak phase transition kkt94 ), then fully developed turbulence never appears, but we argue on physical grounds that, as far as gravitational wave production is concerned, this case can be treated like fully-developed turbulence which lasts for one dynamical time on the scale $`L_S`$ mkk01 .

In analogy with the first-order phase transition calculation, the model turbulence is completely described by the physical quantities defined above: the characteristic time scale $`\tau `$, which we write as $`\beta H_{}^1`$; the energy density which goes into turbulent motions, $`ϵ\rho _{\mathrm{vac}}`$; the characteristic length scale $`L_S`$, which we write as $`\gamma H_{}^1`$; the temperature of the phase transition $`T_{}`$, which determines the enthalpy density $`w_{}`$; and the kinematic viscosity $`\nu `$, which fixes the scale $`L_D`$ at which the turbulence is dissipated into heat.

Given this model, the turbulent stress-energy tensor can be constructed. The starting point is the Fourier-space expression

$$T_{ij}(𝐤)=\frac{w}{(2\pi )^3}𝑑𝐪u_i(𝐪)u_j(𝐤𝐪)$$
(11)
where $`𝐮`$ is the relativistic velocity of the fluid at a given point and $`w`$ is the fluid enthalpy, assumed to be independent of position. The source for gravitational radiation can be obtained via a projection tensor dfk00 ,

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_{ij}(𝐤)=\left(P_{il}P_{jm}\frac{1}{2}P_{ij}P_{lm}\right)T_{lm}(𝐤)$$
(12)
where $`P_{ij}\delta _{ij}\widehat{𝐤}_i\widehat{𝐤}_j`$ is a projector onto the transverse plane. The connection to isotropic turbulence is obtained via the two-point correlation function

$$u_i(𝐤)u_j^{}(𝐤^{})=(2\pi )^3P_{ij}P(k)\delta (𝐤𝐤^{})$$
(13)
which holds for any statistically isotropic and homogeneous velocity field. For Kolmogoroff turbulence, the power spectrum is

$$P(k)\pi ^2\overline{\epsilon }^{2/3}k^{11/3}.$$
(14)
After a lengthy calculation which combines these pieces, the resulting gravitational radiation spectrum can be estimated as mkk01

$$h_c(f)7\times 10^{14}\gamma ^{5/3}\beta ^{1/3}\left(\frac{ϵ\rho _{\mathrm{vac}}}{w_{}}\right)^{2/3}\left(\frac{100}{g_{}}\right)^{1/3}\left(\frac{1\mathrm{GeV}}{T_{}}\right)\left(\frac{f_S}{f}\right)^{4/3},$$
(15)
with the lowest frequency $`f_S`$ corresponding to the comoving scale $`L_S`$,

$$f_S=1.6\times 10^7\mathrm{Hz}\gamma ^1\left(\frac{T_{}}{1\mathrm{GeV}}\right)\left(\frac{g_{}}{100}\right)^{1/6},$$
(16)
using Eq. (4). The spectrum of the gravitational radiation extends to the highest frequency corresponding to the dissipation length scale. This can be approximated, but it suffices to note that the Reynolds number is large in the early Universe, so the range of frequencies will span at least a factor of several hundred. Turbulence can be just as efficient at producing gravitational radiation as the first-order phase transition that spawned it. In cases where the phase transition is only weakly first-order, the turbulence may be the dominant source.

Turbulence has the possibility of producing gravitational radiation via another mechanism. If any small seed magnetic field is present at the onset of turbulence, a turbulent dynamo will amplify the field exponentially until it saturates at equipartition with the turbulent kinetic energy. In Kolmogoroff turbulence, the dynamical time on a given scale is shorter at smaller scales, so the diffusion scale magnetic fields will saturate first. Typically, the smallest scale dynamical time is at least 100 times shorter than the largest scale dynamical time, so the magnetic seed field on the smallest scales will be amplified by at least 100 e-foldings. We can crudely approximate the resulting magnetic field as isotropic with a power spectrum that has the Kolmogoroff form from the smallest scale up to some saturation scale, and then an exponential drop up to the largest scale.

The magnetic fields generated by turbulence are potentially interesting because they also generate gravitational radiation. Roughly, the equipartition magnetic fields are as efficient as the turbulence at making gravitational waves, with the crucial difference that the magnetic fields last much longer. The turbulence damps out on the turbulence time scale, while the magnetic fields remain until matter-radiation equality. The resulting gravitational radiation energy density can be approximated as that from the turbulence times an additional factor of $`\mathrm{ln}(z_{}/z_{\mathrm{eq}})`$, where $`z_{}`$ is the redshift of the turbulence and $`z_{\mathrm{eq}}`$ is the redshift of matter-radiation equality. For the electroweak phase transition, this factor is around 25, giving a large increase in the gravitational wave amplitude. This mechanism would yield a distinctive power spectrum of gravitational waves: it peaks at a frequency corresponding to the largest scale on which the dynamo saturates, drops off like a power law at smaller scales, and drops off exponentially at larger scales. The major question about this mechanism is whether an adequate seed field exists. The plasma in the very early Universe is strongly in the MHD regime (collision time short compared to dynamical time) and has a very high conductivity, making it difficult for any seed field generation mechanism to work. It has been suggested that the expanding bubbles in the electroweak phase transition will produce adequate seed fields soj97 , while thermal seed fields have also been advocated taj92 . We are currently investigating gravitational radiation from turbulent-dynamo magnetic fields in detail.

## Detectability of Stochastic Sources

Phase transitions are almost sure to have occurred in the early Universe; in particular, electroweak symmetry breaking at $`T100`$ GeV and the QCD phase transition at $`T1`$ GeV follow from our current understanding of the standard model of particle physics. However, only phase transitions which are first order are likely to have caused large enough stress-energy fluctuations to leave behind a significant gravitational wave background. In the standard model, both the electroweak and QCD phase transitions appear to be second-order. On the other hand, no high-energy theorist believes that the standard model is the final story. Once additional symmetries and fields are allowed, as with supersymmetry, the strength of the electroweak phase transition can be greatly enhanced. Belief in a strongly first-order electroweak phase transition is motivated by electroweak baryogenesis tro99 , which requires significant departure from thermodynamic equilibrium and thus a strongly first-order phase transition (but see tg99 ). Baryogenesis at the electroweak energy scale is a natural possibility, since at higher energies, sphaleron processes which violate baryon number occur rapidly enough to erase any net baryon number. The very existence of matter in the Universe may be connected to a detectable gravitational wave background; we are currently studying this issue.

Inflationary gravitational radiation may be detectable with LISA, although it is difficult to come up with sensible models which give signals much above the anticipated LISA sensitivity lid94 . The amplitude of the gravitational radiation at the present horizon scale is limited by the COBE measurement of large angular scale fluctuations in the microwave background temperature, and general considerations of slow-roll inflation argue that the power spectrum of gravitational radiation must drop as the scale decreases. Detection of such a background would be extremely important, because it would reflect the energy scale at which inflation occurred.

Cosmic defect sources, while well-motivated, offer less hopeful direct detection prospects. At this point, measurements of large-scale structure and the microwave background likely rule out any cosmic defects as the primary mechanism for structure formation in the Universe abr99 . On the other hand, defects are a generic product of symmetry breaking. The gauge group of the standard model of particle physics is SU(3)$`{}_{C}{}^{}\times `$SU(2)$`{}_{L}{}^{}\times `$U(1)<sub>Y</sub>, which has a U(1) subgroup. A topological theorem states that the breaking of any larger group to a subgroup containing a U(1) factor will result in one-dimensional defects, i.e. cosmic strings. Thus the production of cosmic strings is a generic feature of any cosmology incorporating breaking of a grand-unified (GUT) symmetry to the standard model. (although if the GUT transition is inflationary, the number density of cosmic strings will be exponentially suppressed, making them completely irrelevant). Even if strings or other defects do not drive structure formation, they could conceivably produce detectable amounts of stochastic gravitational radiation vv85 .

Other cosmological sources of gravitational radiation, such as an early string phase of cosmic evolution lwc00  or complex field dynamics during reheating after inflation preheat , offer detection possibilities, but these sources are based on more speculative underlying physics. Until further theoretical advances put them on more secure footing, they are perhaps best considered examples of the flavor of theories which might give an unanticipated signal.

In summary, potential cosmological sources of a stochastic background of gravitational radiation are more speculative than the compact binary point sources towards which LIGO is largely oriented. But several sources are well motivated, and the potential scientific payoff is spectacular. In particular, a direct probe of electroweak symmetry breaking with the LISA space-based interferometer is a distinct possibility, as is the direct detection of gravitational waves from inflation. All conjectured gravitational wave sources in the early Universe are intimately connected with fundamental physics at energy scales between 100 GeV and $`10^{16}`$ GeV. For all but the lowest portion of this range, gravitational radiation represents the only direct probe of physics available with currently envisioned technology. It also seems likely that stochastic backgrounds offer a greater chance at serendipidous discovery than point sources, since the evolution of the very early Universe is determined by physics which is partly unknown, while point sources are probably known astrophysical objects. We strongly encourage designers of gravitational radiation detectors to make stochastic background sensitivity a primary design consideration.

This work has been supported by NASA’s Astrophysics Theory Program. T.K. has been partially supported by the National Research Council’s COBASE program. A.K. is a Cotrell Scholar of the Research Corporation.