text:
# Quantum Noise and Fluctuations in Gravitation and Cosmology

## Prologue

(BLH) ”It is no secret that the message of this conference is ‘NOISE IS GOOD’. In this talk I want to show that not only is noise good, it is absolutely essential… ” . These words were not uttered in this conference, as it would have been acausal, but ten years ago, at a workshop devoted to the nascent yet fascinating subject of Fluctuations and Order . After a decade, the tenor and objectives of this statement are even closer to reality, as witnessed by the strong focus and great variety of this symposium.

I substantiated this claim then by an enumeration of the many processes in gravitation and cosmology where quantum noise and fluctuations play an active role:

1. Particle creation as parametric amplification of vacuum fluctuations
2. Thermal radiance from accelerated observers and black holes as fluctuation-dissipation phenomena
3. Entropy generation from quantum stochastic and kinetic processes
4. Phase transitions in the early universe as noise-induced processes
5. Galaxy formation from primordial quantum fluctuations
6. Anisotropy dissipation from particle creation as backreaction processes
7. Dissipation in quantum cosmology and the issue of the initial state
8. Decoherence, backreaction and the semiclassical limit of quantum gravity
9. Stochastic spacetime and continuum limit, gravity as an effective theory
10. Topology change in spacetime and loss of quantum coherence problems
11. Gravitational entropy, singularity and time asymmetry
12. ‘Birth’ of the universe as a spacetime fluctuation and tunneling phenomenon

The above list was prepared for cosmological issues. Further developments in the last ten years focusing on the effects of noise and fluctuations using the statistical field theory approach we have developed (for a review, see ) include, related to Topic 1 : Preheating in post-inflationary cosmology ; Topic 2: Thermal and near-thermal radiance in detectors, moving mirrors, black holes and cosmology ; Topic 3: Correlation entropy ; Topic 4: Defect formation , tunneling induced by quantum and thermal noise fluctuations . Topic 5 is presently under pursuit  and partially summarized in the last section of this paper. Topic 9 includes preliminary work on wave propagation in stochastic spacetimes  and mesoscopic fluctuations .

In black hole physics, focusing again on fluctuations, one can mention topics on black hole fluctuations and backreaction  (see references therein for other related work) and the energetics and dynamics of black hole phase transition . The wish list would include: applications of stochastic gravity to the statistical mechanical definition of entropy and statistical field theory of black hole nonequilibrium thermodynamics.

Using statistical quantum field theory , Topics 1, 2, 3, 6 are quite well understood, 7, 8 only partially, and Topics 4, 5, 9 are currently under pursuit. Certain concepts in Topics 10-12 may not even be well-defined (e.g., what does the ‘birth’ of the universe mean?), but the newly established theory of stochastic gravity (for a review, see , an ongoing development, see ) may offer alternative ways to address these issues, as well as provide an intermediary towards quantum gravity (our definition is different from the ordinary, see ).

In this talk I will focus on the theory of noise in quantum fields and how quantum fluctuations could have played an active and even decisive role in many fundamental processes in cosmology and gravitation, especially near the Planck time ($`10^{43}`$ sec from the Big Bang). I will describe how stochastic gravity theory can be understood easily from an open system conceptual framework, and give two examples of its applications: fluctuations and backreaction in black holes, and structure formation in the early universe.

The Planck time is the time when many familiar features of spacetime depicted by Einstein’s theory of general relativity give way to an as-yet-unknown quantum theory of gravity depicting the microstructure of spacetime. (Some theoreticians believe the superstring theory is the answer.) Just below the Planck energy we believe the universe can be adequately described by a semiclassical theory of gravity , where quantized matter fields coexist with a classical spacetime. Many qualitative changes are believed to have taken place at this energy scale, amongst them the formation of spacetime depictable as a manifold, the emergence of time, the creation of particle pairs from the vacuum, the growth of fluctuations as seeds for galaxies, and possible phase transitions and the ensuing entropy generation processes. It is also the cross-over point of quantum to classical and micro to macroscopic transitions.***It is for this reason that I think one can view general relativity as geometro-hydrodynamics , semiclassical gravity as a mesoscopic physics , and take a kinetic theory approach to quantum gravity. The only difference is that instead of dealing with the quantum to classical and micro- to macro- transition in the state of matter and fields we are dealing with the corresponding issues for spacetime and geometry.

In Section I, we first explain the origin and nature of noise in quantum systems interacting with an environment, using the influence functional method. (For non-Ohmic bath at low temperatures, colored noise and nonlocal dissipation would appear; and for nonlinear coupling multiplicative noise is generally expected. A generalized fluctuation-dissipation relation for these systems can be proven, and the stochastic (master, Langevin and Fokker-Planck) equations derived, depicting the dissipative dynamics of the open system under the influence of noise. We then discuss stochastic gravity theory in Sec. 2 and the two examples in Sections 3 and 4.

## I Quantum Fluctuations in Open Systems

We begin by describing how the concepts of quantum open systems can be of use in the treatment of statistical mechanical problems involving quantum fields. We start with two subsystems A and B. When the precise information of subsystem B is not required, but only its averaged effect on subsystem A is of interest, one can coarse-grain B and include its averaged effect on A, which involves finding the backreaction on A. In so doing A is rendered an open system, with B acting as its environment. For the analysis of open systems with backreaction from the environments the influence functional (IF) formalism of Feynman and Vernon  proves useful. Let us first use a simple example from quantum mechanics to illustrate the idea and the method. We then show how we can use this framework to address issues in gravitation and cosmology.

### A Stochastic Effective Action in Quantum Open Systems

We begin with a brief schematic summary of the IF formalism as applied to a simple system. Consider a system $`S`$, described by the degrees of freedom $`x`$, interacting with an environment $`E`$, described by the degrees of freedom $`q`$.We are labeling the degrees of freedom of the system and the environment by single letters $`x`$ and $`q`$ with the understanding that they can represent multiple or even infinite degrees of freedom, e.g. corresponding to a field . The full closed quantum system $`S+E`$ is described by a density matrix $`\rho (x,q;x^{},q^{},t)`$. If we are interested only in the state of the system as influenced by the overall effect, but not the precise state of the environment, i.e, the dynamics of the open system, then the reduced density matrix $`\rho _r(x,x^{},t)=𝑑q\rho (x,q;x^{},q,t)`$ would provide the relevant information. (The subscript $`r`$ stands for reduced.) Assuming that the action of the coupled system decomposes as $`S=S_s[x]+S_e[q]+S_{int}[x,q]`$, and that the initial density matrix factorizes (i.e., takes the tensor product form), $`\rho (x,q;x^{},q^{},t_i)=\rho _s(x,x^{},t_i)\rho _e(q,q^{},t_i)`$, the reduced density matrix is given by

$$\rho _r(x,x^{},t)=\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}𝑑x_i\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}𝑑x_i^{}_{x_i}^{x_f}Dx_{x_i^{}}^{x_f^{}}Dx^{}e^{i(S_s[x]S_s[x^{}]+S_{IF}[x,x^{},t])}\rho _r(x_i,x_i^{},t_i)$$
(I.1)
where $`S_{IF}`$ is the influence action related to the influence functional $``$ defined by

$$[x,x^{}]e^{iS_{IF}[x,x^{},t]}𝑑q_f𝑑q_i𝑑q_i^{}_{q_i}^{q_f}Dq_{q_i^{}}^{q_f}Dq^{}e^{i(S_e[q]+S_{int}[x,q]S_e[q^{}]S_{int}[x^{},q^{}])}\rho _e(q_i,q_i^{},t_i).$$
(I.2)
$`S_{IF}`$ in general is complex. Retaining only quadratic terms (an approximation which covers many of the interesting applications that we will consider later), we may write

$$S_{IF}(x,x^{})=𝑑t𝑑t^{}\{\frac{1}{2}(xx^{})(t)D(t,t^{})(x+x^{})(t^{})+\frac{i}{2}(xx^{})(t)N(t,t^{})(xx^{})(t^{})\}$$
(I.3)
where $`D`$ and $`N`$ stand for the real dissipation and noise kernels respectively. Note that in this quadratic order approximation, the influence action $`S_{IF}(x,x^{})`$ is related to the closed-time-path(CTP) or in-in effective action (for details on the CTP effective action see ) $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{CTP}[x,x^{}]`$ through

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_{CTP}[x,x^{}]=S[x]S[x^{}]+S_{IF}[x,x^{}].$$
(I.4)
The equation of motion obtained from the CTP effective action for the expectation values is clearly seen to be real and causal . It reads

$$\frac{\delta }{\delta x(t)}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{CTP}[x,x^{}]|_{x^{}=x=\overline{x}}=0$$
(I.5)
From the influence functional a Langevin equation for the system dynamics may be derived by a formal procedure, first introduced by Feynman and Vernon , which consists of introducing a Gaussian stochastic source $`\xi (t)`$ with $`\xi (t)_\xi =0`$ and $`\xi (t)\xi (t^{})=N(t,t^{})`$ and defining an improved or stochastic effective action as

$$S_{eff}[x,x^{};\xi ]=S_s[x]S_s[x^{}]+S_{IF}[x,x^{}]+\xi (xx^{})$$
(I.6)
such that $`e^{iS_{eff}[x,x^{};\xi ]}_\xi =e^{i\mathrm{\Gamma }_{CTP}[x,x^{}]}`$. This leads to equations of motion with a stochastic force:

$$\frac{\delta S_{eff}[x,x^{};\xi ]}{\delta x}|_{x=x^{}}=0\mathrm{or},\mathrm{equivalently},\frac{\delta \mathrm{\Gamma }_{CTP}[x,x^{};\xi ]}{\delta x}|_{x=x^{}}=0.$$
(I.7)
The equation of motion obtained from (I.7) using (I.6) is

$$\frac{S_s}{x(t)}+𝑑t^{}\gamma (t,t^{})\frac{dx(t^{})}{dt^{}}=\xi $$
(I.8)
where $`D(t,t^{})=_t^{}\gamma (t,t^{})`$. Being now in the form of a Langevin equation, the physical meaning of the $`\gamma `$ and $`N`$ kernels in Eq. (I.8) becomes clearer. Both the terms involving $`\gamma `$ and $`\xi `$ represent the backreaction of the environment on the system. However, $`\gamma `$ (or more properly the odd part of $`\gamma `$) is associated with dissipation and $`\xi `$ is a stochastic noise term associated with random fluctuations of the system, exactly as the terms are interpreted in the context of Brownian motion. Averaging (I.8) over the noise using the appropriate probability distribution will give the semiclassical equation of motion for the mean value of $`x`$. Since the noise and dissipation arise by considering a subsystem within a closed system (as is done here, as opposed to being put in by hand), they are in general related by a set of generalized fluctuation-dissipation relations (FDR), which can be represented by a linear, non-local relation of the following form, provided that the Hamiltonian for the environment and the system-environment interaction are time independent and the initial state of the environment is stationary with respect to the Hamiltonian of the environment:

$$N(tt^{})=d(ss^{})K(tt^{},ss^{})\gamma (ss^{})$$
(I.9)
To keep the discussion simple, we have written the noise and dissipation kernels in terms of single scalar functions. However, the method is general enough to encompass multiple noise and dissipation kernels and cases where the kernels are tensorial, as in the stochastic gravity theory discussed later.

## II Stochastic Gravity and Metric Fluctuations

Stochastic semiclassical gravity  of the 90’s is a theory naturally evolved from semiclassical gravity  of the 80’s and quantum field theory in curved spacetimes  of the 70’s. Whereas semiclassical gravity is based on the semiclassical Einstein equation with sources given by the expectation value of the stress-energy tensor of quantum fields, stochastic semiclassical gravity is based on the Einstein-Langevin equation, which has in addition stochastic sources with correlation functions characterized by the noise kernel. the noise kernel. The noise kernel is the vacuum expectation value of the (operator-valued) stress-energy bi-tensor which describes the fluctuations of quantum matter fields in curved spacetimes.

### A From Semiclassical to Stochastic Gravity

The first stage in the road to stochastic gravity begins with quantum field theory in curved spacetime, which describes the behavior of quantum matter fields propagating in a specified (not dynamically determined by the quantum matter field as a source) background gravitational field. For a scalar field $`\varphi `$ it obeys the wave equation $`(\mathrm{}+m^2)\varphi (x)=0`$ where $`\mathrm{}`$ is the Laplace-Beltrami operator, which contains the imprint of the curvature of the background spacetime. In this theory the gravitational field is given by the classical spacetime metric determined from classical sources by the classical Einstein equations, and the quantum fields propagate as test fields in such a spacetime. For time dependent spacetime geometry it may not be possible to define a physically meaningful vacuum state for the quantum field at all times. Assuming that one defines a vacuum state at some initial time, the vacuum state at a latter time will differ from that defined initially because particles are created in the intervening time. An important process described by quantum field theory in curved spacetime is indeed particle creation from the vacuum (and effects of vacuum fluctuations and polarizations) in the early universe  and Hawking radiation in black holes .

The second stage in the description of the interaction of gravity with quantum fields is back-reaction, i.e., the effect of quantum fields on the spacetime geometry. The dynamic classical spacetime metric creates particles of the quantum field and these in turn provide a backreaction on the spacetime metric which alters its dynamics in response. One assumes a general class of spacetime where the quantum fields live in and act on, and seek a solution which satisfies simultaneously the Einstein equation for the spacetime and the field equations for the quantum fields. The Einstein equation which has the expectation value of the stress-energy operator of the quantum matter field as the source is known as the semiclassical Einstein equation:

$$G_{\mu \nu }(g_{\alpha \beta })=\kappa \widehat{T}_{\mu \nu }_q$$
(II.1)
where $`\widehat{T}_{\mu \nu }`$ is the stress-energy tensor operator of, say, a free scalar field $`\varphi `$, $`G_{\mu \nu }`$ is the Einstein tensor, $`\kappa =8\pi G_N`$ and $`G_N`$ is Newton’s constant. Here $`_q`$ denotes the expectation value taken with respect to some quantum state compatible with the symmetries of the background spacetime, a classical object. The theory obtained from a self-consistent solution of the geometry of the spacetime and the quantum field is known as semiclassical gravity. Incorporating the backreaction of the quantum matter field on the spacetime is thus the central task in semiclassical gravity.

Studies of the semiclassical Einstein equation for the backreaction problems have been carried out in the last two decades by many authors for cosmological and black hole spacetimes. A well-known example of semiclassical gravity is the damping of anisotropy in Bianchi universes (which is the basis of chaotic cosmology in the 70’s) by the backreaction of vacuum particle creation, and inflationary cosmology  of the 80’s driven by a constant vacuum energy density source such as the expectation value of a Higgs field.

In analogy with the open system dynamics described in Section I A, Eq.(II.1) is equivalent to Eq.(I.5) where the degrees of freedom $`x`$ of the system are identified with the metric $`g_{\alpha \beta }`$ and those of the environment $`q`$ are identified with the scalar field $`\varphi (x)`$. However, from the discussion in the last section it is also clear that Eq. (I.5) , and hence also the semiclassical Einstein Eq. (II.1) results on averaging the full Langevin-type Eq. (I.7) over noise. Thus the semiclassical Einstein equation incorporates the dissipation but misses out the fluctuation aspect of the backreaction. The recognition of this crucial point  ushered in a new theory known as stochastic semiclassical gravity, (or in short, stochastic gravity, as there is no confusion in this context as to where the stochasticity originates). Aided by the concept of open systems and the techniques of the influence functional and the Closed Time Path (CTP) effective action, stochastic gravity is the new framework for the consideration of backreaction because it encompasses fluctuations and dissipation (from particle creation and other quantum field processes) on the same footing. Spacetime dynamics is now governed by a stochastic generalization of the semiclassical Einstein equation known as the Einstein-Langevin equation, the analog of Eq. (I.8) in the context of semiclassical gravity (SCG). Schematically the Einstein-Langevin equation takes on the form

$$\stackrel{~}{G}_{\mu \nu }(x)=\kappa \left(T_{\mu \nu }^\mathrm{c}+T_{\mu \nu }^{\mathrm{qs}}\right),T_{\mu \nu }^{\mathrm{qs}}\widehat{T}_{\mu \nu }_\mathrm{q}+T_{\mu \nu }^\mathrm{s}$$
(II.2)
Here, $`T_{\mu \nu }^c`$ is due to classical matter or fields, $`\widehat{T}_{\mu \nu }_q`$ is the expectation value of the stress tensor of the quantum field, and $`T_{\mu \nu }^{\mathrm{qs}}`$ is a new stochastic term which is related to the quantum fluctuations of $`T_{\mu \nu }`$ for the state of the field under consideration. Taking the average of (II.2) with respect to the noise distribution will lead to the conventional semiclassical Einstein equation. It is in this context that SCG is regarded as a mean field theory.

The fundamentals of this new theory were developed via two approaches: the axiomatic and the functional. The axiomatic approach is useful to see the structure of the theory from the framework of semiclassical gravity, showing the link from the mean value of the stress-energy tensor to its correlation functions. The functional approach uses the Feynman-Vernon influence functional and the Schwinger-Keldysh closed-time-path effective action methods which are convenient for computations. It also brings out the open systems concepts and the statistical and stochastic contents of the theory such as dissipation, fluctuations, noise and decoherence. There was also theoretical work on the properties of the stress energy bi-tensor and its vacuum expectation value, the noise kernel. See, e.g., . For a broader exploration of ideas and issues based on this theory read the reviews ; For a pedagogical introduction with applications, see .

Thus with the aid of the open system viewpoint it is easy to see that stochastic gravity is a natural extension of the well-established semiclassical gravity theory and a useful framework for the considerations of fluctuations in quantum matter fields and dissipative dynamics of classical spacetimes, including metric fluctuations. Stochastic gravity can address many important issues related to nonequilibrium quantum field processes in curved spacetimes and find applications to many problems in gravitation and cosmology.

### B Stochastic Gravity in relation to Quantum Gravity

Before embarking on the discussion of some applications of stochastic gravity, let us illustrate the theory with a simple toy model which minimizes the technical complications. The model will be useful to clarify the role of the noise kernel and illustrate the relationship between the semiclassical, stochastic and quantum descriptions. Let us assume that the gravitational equations are described by a linear field $`h(x)`$ whose source is a massless scalar field $`\varphi (x)`$ which satisfies the Klein-Gordon equation in flat spacetime $`\mathrm{}\varphi (x)=0`$. The field stress-energy tensor is quadratic in the field, and independent of $`h(x)`$. The classical gravitational field equations will be given byIn this article we use the $`(+,+,+)`$ sign conventions of Ref. , and units in which $`c=\mathrm{}=1`$.

$$\mathrm{}h(x)=\kappa T(x),$$
(II.3)
where $`T(x)`$ is the (scalar) trace of the stress-energy tensor, $`T(x)=_a\varphi (x)^a\varphi (x)`$ and $`\kappa 16\pi G`$, where G is Newton’s constant. Note that this is not a self-consistent theory since $`\varphi (x)`$ does not react to the gravitational field $`h(x)`$. We should also emphasize that this model is not the standard linearized theory of gravity in which $`T`$ is also linear in $`h(x)`$. It captures, however, some of the key features of linearized gravity.

In the Heisenberg representation the quantum field $`\widehat{h}(x)`$ satisfies

$$\mathrm{}\widehat{h}(x)=\kappa \widehat{T}(x).$$
(II.4)
Since $`\widehat{T}(x)`$ is quadratic in the field operator $`\widehat{\varphi }(x)`$ some regularization procedure has to be assumed in order for (II.4) to make sense. Since we work in flat spacetime we may simply use a normal ordering prescription to regularize the operator $`\widehat{T}(x)`$. The solutions of this equation, i.e. the field operator at the point $`x`$, $`\widehat{h}(x)`$, may be written in terms of the retarded propagator $`G(x,y)`$ as,

$$\widehat{h}(x)=\widehat{h}^{(0)}(x)+\kappa 𝑑x^{}G(x,x^{})\widehat{T}(x^{}),$$
(II.5)
where $`\widehat{h}^{(0)}(x)`$ is the free field which carries information on the initial conditions and the state of the field. From this solution we may compute, for instance, the symmetric two point quantum correlation function (the anticommutator)

$$\frac{1}{2}\{\widehat{h}(x),\widehat{h}(y)\}=\frac{1}{2}\{\widehat{h}^{(0)}(x),\widehat{h}^{(0)}(y)\}+\frac{\kappa ^2}{2}𝑑x^{}𝑑y^{}G(x,x^{})G(y,y^{})\{\widehat{T}(x^{}),\widehat{T}(y^{})\},$$
(II.6)
where the expectation value is taken with respect to the quantum state in which both fields $`\varphi (x)`$ and $`h(x)`$ are quantized. (We assume for the free field, $`\widehat{h}^{(0)}=0`$.)

We can now consider the semiclassical theory for this problem. If we assume that $`h(x)`$ is classical and the matter field is quantum the semiclassical theory may just be described by substituting into the classical equation (II.3) the stress-energy trace by the expectation value of the stress-energy trace operator $`\widehat{T}(x)`$, in some quantum state of the field $`\widehat{\varphi }(x)`$. Since in our model $`\widehat{T}(x)`$ is independent of $`h(x)`$ we may simply renormalize its expectation value using normal ordering, then for the vacuum state of the field $`\widehat{\varphi }(x)`$, we would simply have $`\widehat{T}(x)_0=0`$. The semiclassical theory thus reduces to

$$\mathrm{}h(x)=\kappa \widehat{T}(x).$$
(II.7)
The two point function $`h(x)h(y)`$ that one may derive from this equation depends on the two point function $`\widehat{T}(x)\widehat{T}(y)`$ and clearly cannot reproduce the quantum result (II.6) which depends on the expectation value of the two point operator $`\{\widehat{T}(x),\widehat{T}(y)\}`$. That is, the semiclassical theory entirely misses the fluctuations of the stress-energy operator $`\widehat{T}(x)`$.

Let us now see how we can extend the semiclassical theory in order to account for such fluctuations. The first step is to characterize these fluctuations. For this, we introduce the noise kernel as the physical observable that measures the fluctuations of the stress-energy operator $`\widehat{T}`$. Define

$$N(x,y)=\frac{1}{2}\{\widehat{t}(x),\widehat{t}(y)\}$$
(II.8)
where $`\widehat{t}(x)=\widehat{T}(x)\widehat{T}(x)`$. The bi-scalar $`N(x,y)`$ is real and positive-semidefinite, a consequence of $`\widehat{t}`$ being self-adjoint. A simple proof can be given as follows. Let $`|\psi `$ be a given quantum state and let $`\widehat{Q}`$ be a self-adjoint operator, $`\widehat{Q}^{}=\widehat{Q}`$, then one can write $`\psi |\widehat{Q}\widehat{Q}|\psi =\psi |\widehat{Q}^{}Q|\psi =|\widehat{Q}|\psi |^20`$. Now let $`\widehat{t}(x)`$ be a self-adjoint operator, then if we define $`\widehat{Q}=𝑑xf(x)\widehat{t}(x)`$ for an arbitrary well behaved function $`f(x)`$, the previous inequality can be written as $`𝑑x𝑑yf(x)\psi |\widehat{t}(x)\widehat{t}(y)|\psi f(y)0`$, which is the condition for the noise kernel to be positive semi-definite. Note that when considering the inverse kernel $`N^1(x,y)`$, it is implicitly assumed that one is working in the subspace obtained from the eigenvectors which have strictly positive eigenvalues when the noise kernel is diagonalized.

By the positive semi-definite property of the noise kernel $`N(x,y)`$ it is possible to introduce a Gaussian stochastic field as follows:

$$\xi (x)_s=0,\xi (x)\xi (y)_s=N(x,y).$$
(II.9)
where the subscript $`s`$ means a statistical average. These equations entirely define the stochastic process $`\xi (x)`$ since we have assumed that it is Gaussian. Of course, higher correlations could also be introduced but we just try to capture the fluctuations to lowest order.

The extension of the semiclassical equation may be simply performed by adding to the right-hand side of the semiclassical equation (II.7) this stochastic source $`\xi (x)`$ which accounts for the fluctuations of $`\widehat{T}`$ as follows,

$$\mathrm{}h(x)=\kappa \left(\widehat{T}(x)+\xi (x)\right).$$
(II.10)
This equation is in the form of a Langevin equation: the field $`h(x)`$ is classical but stochastic and the observables we may obtain from it are correlation functions for $`h(x)`$. In fact, the solution of this equation may be written in terms of the retarded propagator as,

$$h(x)=h^{(0)}(x)+\kappa 𝑑x^{}G(x,x^{})\left(\widehat{T}(x^{})+\xi (x^{})\right),$$
(II.11)
from where the two point correlation function for the classical field $`h(x)`$, after using the definition of $`\xi (x)`$ and that $`h^{(0)}(x)_s=0`$, is given by

$$h(x)h(y)_s=h^{(0)}(x)h^{(0)}(y)_s+\frac{\kappa ^2}{2}𝑑x^{}𝑑y^{}G(x,x^{})G(y,y^{})\{\widehat{T}(x^{}),\widehat{T}(y^{})\}.$$
(II.12)
Note that in writing $`\mathrm{}_s`$ here we are assuming a double stochastic average, one is related to the stochastic field $`\xi (x)`$ and the other is related to the free field $`h^{(0)}(x)`$ which is assumed also to be stochastic with a distribution function to be specified.

Comparing (II.6) with (II.12) we see that the respective second term on the right-hand side are identical provided the expectation values are computed in the same quantum state for the field $`\widehat{\varphi }(x)`$ (recall that we have assumed $`T(x)`$ does not depend on $`h(x)`$). The fact that the field $`h(x)`$ is also quantized in (II.6) does not change the previous statement. The nature of the first term on the right-hand side of Eqs. (II.6) and (II.12) is different: in the first case it is the two point quantum expectation value of the free quantum field $`\widehat{h}^{(0)}`$ whereas in the second case it is the stochastic average of the two point classical homogeneous field $`h^{(0)}`$, which depends on the initial conditions. Now we can still make these terms equal to each other if we assume for the homogeneous field $`h^{(0)}`$ a Gaussian distribution of initial conditions such that

$$h^{(0)}(x)h^{(0)}(y)_s=\frac{1}{2}\{\widehat{h}^{(0)}(x),\widehat{h}^{(0)}(y)\}.$$
(II.13)
This Gaussian stochastic field $`h^{(0)}(x)`$ can always be defined due to the positivity of the anti-commutator. Thus, under this assumption on the initial conditions for the field $`h(x)`$ the two point correlation function of (II.12) equals the quantum expectation value of (II.6) exactly. An interesting feature of the stochastic description is that the quantum anticommutator of (II.6) can be written as the right-hand side of equation (II.12), where the first term contains all the information on the initial conditions for the stochastic field $`h(x)`$ and the second term codifies all the information on the quantum correlations of the source. This separation is also seen in the description of some quantum Brownian motion models which are typically used as paradigms of open quantum systems .

It is interesting to note that in the standard linearized theory of gravity $`T(x)`$ depends also on $`h(x)`$, both explicitly and also implicitly through the coupling of $`\varphi (x)`$ with $`h(x)`$. The equations are not so simple but it is still true that the corresponding Langevin equation leads to the correct symmetrized two point quantum correlations for the metric perturbations . Thus in a linear theory as in the model just described one may just use the statistical description given by (II.10) to compute the symmetric quantum two point function of equation (II.5). This does not mean that we can recover all quantum correlation functions with the stochastic description, see Ref.  for a general discussion about this point. Note that, for instance, the commutator of the classical stochastic field $`h(x)`$ is obviously zero, but the commutator of the quantum field $`\widehat{h}(x)`$ is not zero for timelike separated points; this is the prize we pay for the introduction of the classical field $`\xi (x)`$ to describe the quantum fluctuations. Furthermore, the statistical description is not able to account for the graviton-graviton effects which go beyond the linear approximation in $`\widehat{h}(x)`$.

## III Black Hole Fluctuations and Backreaction

As the first example we consider the backreaction of Hawking radiation on black holes  with fluctuations, i.e., how a quantum field and its fluctuations influence the behavior of the background spacetime. We will only sketch the strategy of this program based on stochastic gravity, as detailed calculations are still in progress. The formalism described in Section I A will be useful. Here we study the simpler class of problems of a quasi-static black hole in quasi-equilibrium (a box is required) with its Hawking radiation described by a scalar field. The goal is to obtain a stochastic influence action analogous to (I.6) for this model of a black hole coupled to a scalar field. From it one can derive an Einstein-Langevin equation analogous to (I.8).

We consider the simplest model of this class described by a perturbed Schwarzschild metric, used by York  to analyze black hole backreaction. We focus on the new aspects of noise and fluctuations, their origin and attributes.

In this model the black hole spacetime is described by a spherically symmetric static nonvacuous metric with line element of the following general form written in advanced time Eddington-Finkelstein coordinates

$$ds^2=g_{\mu \nu }dx^\mu dx^\nu =e^{2\psi }\left(1\frac{2m}{r}\right)dv^2+2e^{2\psi }dvdr+r^2d\mathrm{\Omega }^2$$
(III.1)
where $`\psi =\psi (r)`$ and $`m=m(r)`$ , $`v=t+r+2Mln\left(\frac{r}{2M}1\right)`$ and $`d\mathrm{\Omega }^2`$ is the line element on the two sphere. Hawking radiation is described by a massless, conformally coupled quantum scalar field $`\varphi `$ with the classical action

$$S_m[\varphi ,g_{\mu \nu }]=\frac{1}{2}d^nx\sqrt{g}[g^{\mu \nu }_\mu \varphi _\nu \varphi +\xi (n)R\varphi ^2]$$
(III.2)
where $`\xi (n)=\frac{(n2)}{4(n1)}`$ ($`n`$ is the dimension of spacetime) and $`R`$ is the curvature scalar of the spacetime it lives in.

Let us consider linear perturbations $`h_{\mu \nu }=g_{\mu \nu }g_{\mu \nu }^{(0)}`$ off a background Schwarzschild metric $`g_{\mu \nu }^{(0)}`$ with line element

$$(ds^2)^0=\left(1\frac{2M}{r}\right)dv^2+2dvdr+r^2d\mathrm{\Omega }^2$$
(III.3)
We look for this class of perturbed metrics in the form given by (III.1), (thus restricting our consideration only to spherically symmetric perturbations):

$$e^\psi 1+ϵ\rho (r),mM[1+ϵ\mu (r)]$$
(III.4)
where $`\frac{ϵ}{\lambda M^2}=\frac{1}{3}aT_H^4;a=\frac{\pi ^2}{30};\lambda =90(8^4)\pi ^2`$. $`T_H`$ is the Hawking temperature. (This particular parametrization of the perturbation is chosen following York’s  notation.) Thus the only non-zero components of $`h_{\mu \nu }`$ are

$$h_{vv}=\left((1\frac{2M}{r})2ϵ\rho (r)+\frac{2Mϵ\mu (r)}{r}\right),h_{vr}=ϵ\rho (r)$$
(III.5)
So this represents a metric with small static and radial perturbations about a Schwarzschild black hole. The initial quantum state of the scalar field is taken to be the Hartle-Hawking vacuum, which is essentially a thermal state at the Hawking temperature as far as static observers are concerned §§§The Hartle-Hawking vacuum is a pure state which is perceived as vacuum by free-falling observers crossing either the black hole or the white hole horizons. However, if one traces out the modes localized in the second asymptotically flat region, one ends up with an incoherent density matrix perceived as a thermal state by static observers in the first asymptotically flat region. and it represents a black hole in (unstable) thermal equilibrium with its own Hawking radiation.

The metric perturbation expansion induces a decomposition of the Einstein tensor $`G_{\mu \nu }G_{\mu \nu }^{(0)}+\delta G_{\mu \nu }`$ where $`G_{\mu \nu }^{(0)}`$ is the Einstein tensor for the background spacetime. The zeroth order solution gives a background metric in empty space, i.e, the Schwarzschild metric. $`\delta G_{\mu \nu }`$ is the linear correction to the Einstein tensor in the perturbed metric. The semiclassical Einstein equation in this approximation therefore reduces to

$$\delta G_{\mu \nu }(g^{(0)},h)=\kappa T_{\mu \nu }$$

York solved this equation to first order by using the expectation value of the energy momentum tensor for a conformally coupled scalar field in the Hartle-Hawking vacuum in the unperturbed (Schwarzschild) spacetime on the right hand side and $`\delta G_{\mu \nu }`$ on the left hand side is calculated using (III.5). This yields the corrections to the background metric induced by the backreaction encoded in the functions $`\mu (r)`$ and $`\rho (r)`$, which amounts to the noise-averaged backreaction effects. We are interested in the fluctuations and its effects.

We now derive the CTP effective action for this model, following the treatment of Ref. . Using the metric (III.3) (and neglecting the surface terms that appear in an integration by parts) we have the action for the scalar field written perturbatively as

$$S_m[\varphi ,h_{\mu \nu }]=\frac{1}{2}d^nx\sqrt{g^{(0)}}\varphi \left[\mathrm{}+V^{(1)}+V^{(2)}+\mathrm{}\right]\varphi ,$$
(III.6)
where the first and second order perturbative operators $`V^{(1)}`$ and $`V^{(2)}`$ are given by

$`V^{(1)}`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{g^{(0)}}}}\left\{[_\mu \left(\sqrt{g^{(0)}}\overline{h}^{\mu \nu }(x)\right)]_\nu +\overline{h}^{\mu \nu }(x)_\mu _\nu +\xi (n)R^{(1)}(x)\right\},`$ (III.7)
$`V^{(2)}`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{g^{(0)}}}}\left\{[_\mu \left(\sqrt{g^{(0)}}\widehat{h}^{\mu \nu }(x)\right)]_\nu +\widehat{h}^{\mu \nu }(x)_\mu _\nu \xi (n)\left(R^{(2)}(x)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}h(x)R^{(1)}(x)\right)\right\}.`$ (III.8)
In the above expressions, $`R^{(k)}`$ is the $`k`$-order term in the pertubation $`h_{\mu \nu }(x)`$ of the scalar curvature $`R`$ and $`\overline{h}_{\mu \nu }`$ and $`\widehat{h}_{\mu \nu }`$ denote a linear and a quadratic combination of the perturbation, respectively,

$$\overline{h}_{\mu \nu }h_{\mu \nu }\frac{1}{2}hg_{\mu \nu }^{(0)};\widehat{h}_{\mu \nu }h_\mu ^\alpha h_{\alpha \nu }\frac{1}{2}hh_{\mu \nu }+\frac{1}{8}h^2g_{\mu \nu }^{(0)}\frac{1}{4}h_{\alpha \beta }h^{\alpha \beta }g_{\mu \nu }^{(0)}.$$
(III.9)
From quantum field theory in curved spacetime considerations we take the following action for the gravitational field (see  for more details)

$$S_g^{(div)}[g_{\mu \nu }]=\frac{1}{\mathrm{}_P^{n2}}d^nx\sqrt{g}R(x)+\frac{\alpha \overline{\mu }^{n4}}{4(n4)}d^nx\sqrt{g}\left[3R_{\mu \nu \alpha \beta }(x)R^{\mu \nu \alpha \beta }(x)\left(1360(\xi (n)\frac{1}{6})^2\right)R(x)R(x)\right].$$
(III.10)
The first term is the classical Einstein-Hilbert action and the second term is the counterterm in four dimensions used to renormalize the divergent effective action. In this action $`\mathrm{}_P^2=16\pi G`$, $`\alpha =(2880\pi ^2)^1`$ and $`\overline{\mu }`$ is the renormalization mass scale.

We are interested in computing the CTP effective action for the model given by the form (III.6) for the matter action and when the field $`\varphi `$ is initially in the Hartle- Hawking (HH) vacuum. Since the initial state of the field is described by a thermal density matrix at the HH temperature $`T_H`$As mentioned earlier, this is true for the basis of modes associated to static observers and provided that one is not concerned about quantum correlations (entanglement) between the two asymptotically flat regions, so that the modes localized in the second region can be traced out. Otherwise the full Hartle-Hawking vacuum, which is a pure state, should be considered., the finite temperature CTP effective action ($`T1/\beta `$) for this model is given by (for details see )

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_{CTP}^\beta [h_{\mu \nu }^\pm ]=S_g^{(div)}[h_{\mu \nu }^+]S_g^{(div)}[h_{\mu \nu }^{}]\frac{i}{2}Tr\{\mathrm{ln}\overline{G}_{ab}^\beta [h_{\mu \nu }^\pm ]\},$$
(III.11)
where $`\pm `$ denote the forward and backward time path of the CTP formalism and $`\overline{G}_{ab}^\beta [h_{\mu \nu }^\pm ]`$ is the complete $`2\times 2`$ matrix propagator ($`a`$ and $`b`$ take $`\pm `$ values: $`G_{++},G_+`$ and $`G_{}`$ correspond to the Feynman, Wightman and Schwinger Green’s functions respectively) with thermal boundary conditions for the differential operator $`\sqrt{g^{(0)}}(\mathrm{}+V^{(1)}+V^{(2)}+\mathrm{})`$. The actual form of $`\overline{G}_{ab}^\beta `$ cannot be explicitly given. However, it is easy to obtain a perturbative expansion in terms of $`V_{ab}^{(k)}`$, the $`k`$-order matrix version of the complete differential operator defined by $`V_{\pm \pm }^{(k)}\pm V_\pm ^{(k)}`$ and $`V_\pm ^{(k)}0`$, and $`G_{ab}^\beta `$, the thermal matrix propagator for a massless scalar field in Schwarzschild spacetime . To second order $`\overline{G}_{ab}^\beta `$ reads

$`\overline{G}_{ab}^\beta =G_{ab}^\beta G_{ac}^\beta V_{cd}^{(1)}G_{db}^\beta G_{ac}^\beta V_{cd}^{(2)}G_{db}^\beta +G_{ac}^\beta V_{cd}^{(1)}G_{de}^\beta V_{ef}^{(1)}G_{fb}^\beta +\mathrm{}`$ (III.12)
Expanding the logarithm and dropping one term independent of the perturbation $`h_{\mu \nu }^\pm (x)`$, the CTP effective action may be perturbatively written as

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{CTP}^\beta [h_{\mu \nu }^\pm ]`$ $`=`$ $`S_g^{div}[h_{\mu \nu }^+]S_g^{div}[h_{\mu \nu }^{}]+{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}Tr[V_+^{(1)}G_{++}^\beta V_{}^{(1)}G_{}^\beta +V_+^{(2)}G_{++}^\beta V_{}^{(2)}G_{}^\beta ]`$ (III.14)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{i}{4}}Tr[V_+^{(1)}G_{++}^\beta V_+^{(1)}G_{++}^\beta +V_{}^{(1)}G_{}^\beta V_{}^{(1)}G_{}^\beta 2V_+^{(1)}G_+^\beta V_{}^{(1)}G_+^\beta ].`$
However, unlike the case of Ref. where $`h_{\mu \nu }`$ represented a perturbation about flat space and hence one had knowledge of exact “unperturbed” thermal propagators, in this case, since the perturbation is about Schwarzschild spacetime, exact expressions for the corresponding unperturbed propagators $`G_{ab}^\beta [h_{\mu \nu }^\pm ]`$ are not known. Therefore apart from the approximation of computing the CTP effective action to certain order in perturbation theory, an appropriate approximation scheme for the unperturbed Green’s functions is also required. York used the Page approximation  for $`T_{\mu \nu }`$ in the Schwarzschild metric. The additional complication here is that while to obtain $`T_{\mu \nu }`$ the knowledge of only the thermal Feynman Green’s function is required, to calculate the CTP effective action one needs the knowledge of the full matrix propagator, which involves the Feynman, Schwinger and Wightman functions. We can put aside the technical complexity in the calculation of the full thermal matrix propagator $`G_{ab}^\beta [h_{\mu \nu }^\pm ]`$ as our main interest is to identify and analyze the noise term which is the new ingredient in the backreaction problem. We have mentioned that the noise term gives a stochastic contribution $`T_{\mu \nu }^\mathrm{s}`$ to the Einstein Langevin equation (II.2). We have also stated that this term is related to the variance of fluctuations in $`T_{\mu \nu }`$, i.e., schematically, to $`T_{\mu \nu }^2`$. Since the Influence Functional or CTP formalism itself does not depend on the nature of the approximation, we will attempt to exhibit the general structure and project what is to be expected.

If we denote the difference and the sum of the perturbations $`h_{\mu \nu }^\pm `$ by $`[h_{\mu \nu }]h_{\mu \nu }^+h_{\mu \nu }^{}`$ and $`\{h_{\mu \nu }\}h_{\mu \nu }^++h_{\mu \nu }^{}`$, respectively, the influence functional form of the thermal CTP effective action may be written to second order in $`h_{\mu \nu }`$ as

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{CTP}^\beta [h_{\mu \nu }^\pm ]`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\mathrm{}_P^2}}{\displaystyle d^4xd^4x^{}[h_{\mu \nu }](x)L_{(o)}^{\mu \nu ,\alpha \beta }(x,x^{})\{h_{\alpha \beta }\}(x^{})}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle d^4x[h_{\mu \nu }](x)T_{(\beta )}^{\mu \nu }(x)}`$ (III.17)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle d^4xd^4x^{}[h_{\mu \nu }](x)H^{\mu \nu ,\alpha \beta }(x,x^{})\{h_{\alpha \beta }\}(x^{})}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle d^4xd^4x^{}[h_{\mu \nu }](x)D^{\mu \nu ,\alpha \beta }(x,x^{})\{h_{\alpha \beta }\}(x^{})}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}{\displaystyle d^4xd^4x^{}[h_{\mu \nu }](x)N^{\mu \nu ,\alpha \beta }(x,x^{})[h_{\alpha \beta }](x^{})}.`$
The first term is the Einstein-Hilbert action to second order in the perturbation $`h_{\mu \nu }^\pm (x)`$ and $`\mathrm{L}_{(o)}^{\mu \nu ,\alpha \beta }(x)`$ is a symmetric local kernel, i.e. $`\mathrm{L}_{(o)}^{\mu \nu ,\alpha \beta }(x,x^{})`$ = $`\mathrm{L}_{(o)}^{\mu \nu ,\alpha \beta }(x^{},x)`$. The second is a local term linear in $`h_{\mu \nu }^\pm (x)`$. $`T_{(\beta )}^{\mu \nu }(x)`$ represents the zeroth order contribution to $`\widehat{T}_{\mu \nu }(x)`$ and far away from the horizon it takes the form of the stress tensor of massless scalar particles at temperature $`\beta ^1`$. The third and fourth terms constitute the remaining quadratic component of the real part of the effective action. The kernels $`H^{\mu \nu ,\alpha \beta }(x,x^{})`$ and $`D^{\mu \nu ,\alpha \beta }(x,x^{})`$ are respectively even and odd in $`x,x^{}`$. The last term gives the imaginary part of the effective action and the kernel $`N^{\mu \nu ,\alpha \beta }(x,x^{})`$ is symmetric. This is the general structure of the CTP effective action arising from the calculation of the traces in equation (III.14). Of course, to write down explicit expressions for the non-local kernels one requires the input of the explicit form of $`G_{ab}^\beta [h_{\mu \nu }^\pm ]`$ , which we have not used. In spite of this limitation we can make some interesting observations from this effective action. Connecting this thermal CTP effective action to the influence functional via equation (I.4) we see that the nonlocal imaginary term containing the kernel $`N^{\mu \nu ,\alpha \beta }(x,x^{})`$ is responsible for the generation of the stochastic noise term in the Einstein-Langevin equation and the real non-local term containing kernel $`D^{\mu \nu ,\alpha \beta }(x,x^{})`$ is responsible for the non-local dissipation term. The Einstein-Langevin equation can be generated from equation (I.7) by first constructing the improved semiclassical effective action in accordance with (I.6) and deriving the equation of motion (I.7) by taking a functional derivative of the above effective action with respect to $`[h_{\mu \nu }]`$ and equating it to zero. With the identification of the noise and dissipation kernels, one can use them to write down a Fluctuation-Dissipation relation (FDR) analogous to (I.9) in the context of black holes.

## IV Structure Formation in Inflationary Universes

Cosmological structure formation is a key problem in modern cosmology  and inflation  offers a natural solution to this problem. If an inflationary period is present, the initial seeds for the generation of the primordial inhomogeneities that lead to the large scale structure observed in the present universe have their source in the quantum fluctuations of the inflaton field, the field which is generally responsible for driving inflation. Stochastic gravity provides a sound and natural formalism for the derivation of the cosmological perturbations generated during inflation.

In Ref.  it was shown that the correlation functions that follow from the Einstein-Langevin equation which emerges in the framework of stochastic gravity coincide with that obtained with the usual quantization procedures  when both the metric perturbations and the inflaton fluctuations are both linearized. Stochastic gravity, however, can naturally deal with the fluctuations of the inflaton field even beyond the linear approximation.

Here we will illustrate the equivalence with the usual formalism, based on the quantization of the linear cosmological and inflaton perturbations, with one of the simplest chaotic inflationary models in which the background spacetime is a quasi de Sitter universe .

In this chaotic inflationary model  the inflaton field $`\varphi `$ of mass $`m`$ is described by the following Lagrangian density

$$(\varphi )=\frac{1}{2}g^{ab}_a\varphi _b\varphi +\frac{1}{2}m^2\varphi ^2.$$
(IV.1)
The conditions for the existence of an inflationary period, which is characterized by an accelerated cosmological expansion, is that the value of the field over a region with the typical size of the Hubble radius is higher than the Planck mass $`m_P`$. In order to solve the cosmological horizon and flatness problem more than 60 e-folds of expansion are needed; to achieve this the scalar field should begin with a value higher than $`3m_P`$. The inflaton mass is small: as we will see, the large scale anisotropies measured in the cosmic background radiation restrict the inflaton mass to be of the order of $`10^6m_P`$. We will not discuss the naturalness of this inflationary model and we will simply assume that if one such region is found (inside a much larger universe) it will inflate to become our observable universe.

We want to study the metric perturbations produced by the stress-energy tensor fluctuations of the inflaton field on the homogeneous background of a flat Friedmann-Robertson-Walker model, described by the cosmological scale factor $`a(\eta )`$, where $`\eta `$ is the conformal time, which is driven by the homogeneous inflaton field $`\varphi (\eta )=\widehat{\varphi }`$. Thus we write the inflaton field in the following form: $`\widehat{\varphi }=\varphi (\eta )+\widehat{\phi }(x)`$, where $`\widehat{\phi }(x)`$ corresponds to a free massive quantum scalar field with zero expectation value on the homogeneous background metric: $`\widehat{\phi }=0`$. We will restrict ourselves to scalar-type metric perturbations because these are the ones that couple to the inflaton fluctuations in the linear theory. We note that this is not so if we were to consider inflaton fluctuations beyond the linear approximation, then tensorial and vectorial metric perturbations would also be driven. The perturbed metric $`\stackrel{~}{g}_{ab}=g_{ab}+h_{ab}`$ can be written in the longitudinal gauge as,

$$ds^2=a^2(\eta )[(1+2\mathrm{\Phi }(x))d\eta ^2+(12\mathrm{\Psi }(x))\delta _{ij}dx^idx^j],$$
(IV.2)
where the scalar metric perturbations $`\mathrm{\Phi }(x)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }(x)`$ correspond to Bardeen’s gauge invariant variables .

### A Einstein-Langevin equation for scalar metric perturbations

The Einstein-Langevin equation is gauge invariant, thus we can work in a desired gauge and then extract the gauge invariant quantities. It is given by

$$G_{ab}^{(0)}8\pi G\widehat{T}_{ab}^{(0)}+G_{ab}^{(1)}(h)8\pi G\widehat{T}_{ab}^{(1)}(h)=8\pi G\xi _{ab},$$
(IV.3)
where the two first terms cancel, that is $`G_{ab}^{(0)}8\pi G\widehat{T}_{ab}^{(0)}=0`$, as the background metric satisfies the semiclassical Einstein equations. Here the subscripts $`(0)`$ and $`(1)`$ refer to functions in the background metric $`g_{ab}`$ and linear in the metric perturbation $`h_{ab}`$, respectively. The stress tensor operator $`\widehat{T}_{ab}`$ for the minimally coupled inflaton field in the perturbed metric is:

$$\widehat{T}_{ab}=\stackrel{~}{}_a\widehat{\varphi }\stackrel{~}{}_b\widehat{\varphi }+\frac{1}{2}\stackrel{~}{g}_{ab}(\stackrel{~}{}_c\widehat{\varphi }\stackrel{~}{}^c\widehat{\varphi }+m^2\widehat{\varphi }^2).$$
(IV.4)
Using the decomposition of the scalar field into its homogeneous and inhomogeneous part and the metric $`\stackrel{~}{g}_{ab}`$ into its homogeneous background $`g_{ab}`$ and its perturbation $`h_{ab}`$, the renormalized expectation value for the stress-energy tensor operator can be written as

$$\widehat{T}_{ab}^R[\stackrel{~}{g}]=\widehat{T}_{ab}[\stackrel{~}{g}]_{\varphi \varphi }+\widehat{T}_{ab}[\stackrel{~}{g}]_{\varphi \phi }+\widehat{T}_{ab}^R[\stackrel{~}{g}]_{\phi \phi },$$
(IV.5)
where the subindices indicate the degree of dependence on the homogeneous field $`\varphi `$ and its perturbation $`\phi `$. The first term in this equation depends only on the homogeneous field and it is given by the classical expression. The second term is proportional to $`\widehat{\phi }[\stackrel{~}{g}]`$ which is not zero because the field dynamics is considered on the perturbed spacetime, i.e., this term includes the coupling of the field with $`h_{ab}`$ and may be obtained from the expectation value of the linearized Klein-Gordon equation, $`\left(\mathrm{}_{g+h}m^2\right)\widehat{\phi }=0.`$ The last term in Eq. (IV.5) corresponds to the expectation value to the stress tensor for a free scalar field on the spacetime of the perturbed metric.

After using the previous decomposition, the noise kernel $`N_{abcd}[g;x,y)`$ can be written as

$$\{\widehat{t}_{ab}[g;x),\widehat{t}_{cd}[g;y)\}=\{\widehat{t}_{ab}[g;x),\widehat{t}_{cd}[g;y)\}_{(\varphi \phi )^2}+\{\widehat{t}_{ab}[g;x),\widehat{t}_{cd}[g;y)\}_{(\phi \phi )^2},$$
(IV.6)
where we have used the fact that $`\widehat{\phi }=0=\widehat{\phi }\widehat{\phi }\widehat{\phi }`$ for Gaussian states on the background geometry. We consider the vacuum state to be the Euclidean vacuum which is preferred in the de Sitter background, and this state is Gaussian. In the above equation the first term is quadratic in $`\widehat{\phi }`$ whereas the second one is quartic, both contributions to the noise kernel are separately conserved since both $`\varphi (\eta )`$ and $`\widehat{\phi }`$ satisfy the Klein-Gordon field equations on the background spacetime. Consequently, the two terms can be considered separately. On the other hand if one treats $`\widehat{\phi }`$ as a small perturbation the second term in (IV.6) is of lower order than the first and may be consistently neglected, this corresponds to neglecting the last term of Eq. (IV.5). The stress tensor fluctuations due to a term of that kind were considered in Ref. .

We can now write down the Einstein-Langevin equations (IV.3) to linear order in the inflaton fluctuations. It is easy to check  that the space-space components coming from the stress tensor expectation value terms and the stochastic tensor are diagonal, i.e. $`\widehat{T}_{ij}=0=\xi _{ij}`$ for $`ij`$. This, in turn, implies that the two functions characterizing the scalar metric perturbations are equal: $`\mathrm{\Phi }=\mathrm{\Psi }`$ in agreement with Ref. . The equation for $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ can be obtained from the $`0i`$-component of the Einstein-Langevin equation, which in Fourier space reads

$$2ik_i(\mathrm{\Phi }_k+\mathrm{\Phi }_k^{})=8\pi G(\xi _{0i})_k,$$
(IV.7)
where $`k_i`$ is the comoving momentum component associated to the comoving coordinate $`x^i`$, and we have used the definition $`\mathrm{\Phi }_k(\eta )=d^3x\mathrm{exp}(i\stackrel{}{k}\stackrel{}{x})\mathrm{\Phi }(\eta ,\stackrel{}{x})`$. Here primes denote derivatives with respect to the conformal time $`\eta `$ and $`=a^{}/a`$. A nonlocal term of dissipative character which comes from the second term in Eq. (IV.5) should also appear on the left hand side of Eq. (IV.7), but we have neglected it to simplify the forthcoming expressionsSuch a term, which leads to an integrodifferential Einstein-Langevin equation, might not be negligible in some situations. Despite the apparent difficulty of dealing with an integrodifferntial equation, in this case the Einstein-Langevin equation can be actually transformed, after suitable manipulation, into an ordinary differential equation, so that the inclusion of the nonlocal term is still tractable . Note, however, that the equivalence of the stochastic approach to linear order in $`\widehat{\phi }`$ and the usual linear cosmological perturbations approach is independent of that approximation . To solve Eq. (IV.7), whose left-hand side comes from the linearized Einstein tensor for the perturbed metric , we need the retarded propagator for the gravitational potential $`\mathrm{\Phi }_k`$,

$$G_k(\eta ,\eta ^{})=i\frac{4\pi }{k_im_P^2}\left(\theta (\eta \eta ^{})\frac{a(\eta ^{})}{a(\eta )}+f(\eta ,\eta ^{})\right),$$
(IV.8)
where $`f`$ is a homogeneous solution of Eq. (IV.7) related to the initial conditions chosen and $`m_P^2=1/G`$. For instance, if we take $`f(\eta ,\eta ^{})=\theta (\eta _0\eta ^{})a(\eta ^{})/a(\eta )`$ the solution would correspond to “turning on” the stochastic source at $`\eta _0`$. With the solution of the Einstein-Langevin equation (IV.7) for the scalar metric perturbations we are in a position to compute the two-point correlation functions for these perturbations.

### B Correlation functions for scalar metric perturbations

The two-point correlation function for the scalar metric perturbations induced by the inflaton fluctuations is thus given by

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_k(\eta )\mathrm{\Phi }_k^{}(\eta ^{})_s=(2\pi )^2\delta (\stackrel{}{k}+\stackrel{}{k}^{})\times ^\eta 𝑑\eta _1^\eta ^{}𝑑\eta _2G_k(\eta ,\eta _1)G_k^{}(\eta ^{},\eta _2)(\xi _{0i})_k(\eta _1)(\xi _{0i})_k^{}(\eta _2)_s.$$
(IV.9)
Here the two-point correlation function for the stochastic source, which is connected to the stress-energy tensor fluctuations through the noise kernel is given by,

$$(\xi _{0i})_k(\eta _1)(\xi _{0i})_k(\eta _2)_s=\frac{1}{2}\{(\widehat{t}_{0i})_k(\eta _1),(\widehat{t}_{0i})_k(\eta _2)\}_{\varphi \phi }=\frac{1}{2}k_ik_i\varphi ^{}(\eta _1)\varphi ^{}(\eta _2)G_k^{(1)}(\eta _1,\eta _2),$$
(IV.10)
where $`G_k^{(1)}(\eta _1,\eta _2)=\{\widehat{\phi }_k(\eta _1),\widehat{\phi }_k(\eta _2)\}`$ is the $`k`$-mode Hadamard function for a free minimally coupled scalar field in the appropriate vacuum state on the Friedmann-Robertson-Walker background.

In practice, to make the explicit computation of the Hadamard function we will assume that the field state is in the Euclidean vacuum and the background spacetime is de Sitter. Furthermore, we will compute the Hadamard function for a massless field, and will make a perturbative expansion in terms of the dimensionless parameter $`m/m_P`$. Thus we consider

$$\overline{G}_k^{(1)}(\eta _1,\eta _2)=0|\{\widehat{y}_k(\eta _1),\widehat{y}_k(\eta _2)\}|0=2\left(u_k(\eta _1)u_k^{}(\eta _2)\right),$$

with $`\widehat{y}_k(\eta )=a(\eta )\widehat{\phi }_k(\eta )=\widehat{a}_ku_k(\eta )+\widehat{a}_k^{}u_k^{}(\eta )`$ and where $`u_k=(2k)^{1/2}e^{ik\eta }(1i/\eta )`$ are the positive frequency $`k`$-mode for a massless minimally coupled scalar field on a de Sitter background, which define the Euclidean vacuum state: $`\widehat{a}_k|0=0`$ .

The assumption of a massless field for the computation of the Hadamard function is made because massless modes in de Sitter are much simpler to deal with than massive modes. We can see that this is, however, a reasonable approximation as follows. For a given mode the $`m=0`$ approximation is reasonable when its wavelength $`\lambda `$ is shorter that the Compton wavelength, $`\lambda _c=1/m`$. In our case we have a very small mass $`m`$ and the horizon size $`H^1`$, where $`H`$ is the Hubble constant $`H=\dot{a}/a`$ (here $`a(t)`$ with $`t`$ the physical time $`dt=ad\eta `$) satisfies that $`H^1<\lambda _c`$. Thus, for modes inside the horizon $`\lambda <\lambda _c`$ and $`m=0`$ is a reasonable approximation. Outside the horizon massive modes decay in amplitude as $`\mathrm{exp}(m^2t/H)`$ whereas massless modes remain constant, thus when modes leave the horizon the approximation will eventually break down. However, we only need to ensure that the approximation is still valid after $`60`$ e-folds, i.e. $`Ht60`$, but this is the case since $`60m^2<H^2`$ given that $`m10^6m_P`$, and $`mH`$ as in most inflationary models .

The background geometry is not exactly that of de Sitter spacetime, for which $`a(\eta )=(H\eta )^1`$ with $`\mathrm{}<\eta <0`$. One can expand in terms of the “slow-roll” parameters and assume that to first order $`\dot{\varphi }(t)m_P^2(m/m_P)`$, where $`t`$ is the physical time. The correlation function for the metric perturbation (IV.9) can then be easily computed; see Ref.  for details. The final result, however, is very weakly dependent on the initial conditions as one may understand from the fact that the accelerated expansion of de quasi-de Sitter spacetime during inflation erases the information about the initial conditions. Thus one may take the initial time to be $`\eta _0=\mathrm{}`$ and obtain to lowest order in $`m/m_P`$ the expression

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_k(\eta )\mathrm{\Phi }_k^{}(\eta ^{})_s8\pi ^2(m/m_P)^2k^3(2\pi )^3\delta (\stackrel{}{k}+\stackrel{}{k}^{})\mathrm{cos}k(\eta \eta ^{}).$$
(IV.11)
From this result two main conclusions are derived. First, the prediction of an almost Harrison-Zel’dovich scale-invariant spectrum for large scales, i.e. small values of $`k`$. Second, since the correlation function is of order of $`(m/m_P)^2`$ a severe bound to the mass $`m`$ is imposed by the gravitational fluctuations derived from the small values of the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) anisotropies detected by COBE . This bound is of the order of $`(m/m_P)10^6`$ .

We should now comment on some differences with those works in Ref.  which used a self-interacting scalar field or a scalar field interacting nonlinearly with other fields. In those works an important relaxation of the ratio $`m/m_p`$ was found. The long wavelength modes of the inflaton field were regarded as an open system in an environment made out of the shorter wavelength modes. Then, Langevin type equations were used to compute the correlations of the long wavelength modes driven by the fluctuations of the shorter wavelength modes. In order to get a significant relaxation on the above ratio, however, one had to assume that the correlations of the free long wavelength modes, which correspond to the dispersion of the system initial state, had to be very small. Otherwise they dominate by several orders of magnitude those fluctuations that come from the noise of the environment. This would require a great amount of fine-tuning for the initial quantum state of each mode . We should remark that in the model discussed here there is no environment for the inflaton fluctuations. The inflaton fluctuations, however, are responsible for the noise that induce the metric perturbations.

Acknowledgements This work is supported in part by NSF grant PHY98-00967, the MICYT Research Project No. FPA-2001-3598 and European project HPRN-CT-2000-00131.


format: text

text:
# Muon Capture and Muon Lifetime

## 1 Overview

A new generation of muon lifetime experiments is under preparation at the Paul Scherrer Institute (see Table 1). The combination of novel experimental approaches, technological advances and excellent beam quality promises a dramatic improvement in precision by typically an order of magnitude over earlier efforts. This paper surveys the scientific motivation and impact as well as the strategy and status of these experiments.

## 2 Muon Capture on the Proton

### 2.1 Scientific Motivation

Precision measurements of muon capture by the proton provide an excellent opportunity to probe the weak axial current of the nucleon and to test our understanding of chiral symmetry breaking in QCD. The importance of such experiments is underscored by the current controversy between experiment and basic QCD predictions on the induced pseudoscalar coupling constant of the proton.

Ordinary muon capture (OMC) is a basic electroweak charged current reaction involving first-generation quarks and second-generation leptons

$$\mu ^{}+pn+\nu _\mu .$$
(1)
By virtue of Lorentz covariance and in the absence of second-class currents, the microscopic electroweak structure of the nucleon can be parametrized by the four form factors $`g_V`$, $`g_M`$, $`g_A`$, and $`g_P`$ that determine the matrix elements of the charged vector and axial currents

$$\overline{u}_n(p^{})\left[g_V\gamma _\alpha +i\frac{g_M}{2M_n}\sigma _{\alpha \beta }q^\beta (g_A\gamma _\alpha \gamma _5+\frac{g_P}{m_\mu }\gamma _5q_\alpha )\right]u_p(p).$$
(2)
The momentum transfer relevant for reaction (1) is $`q_0^2=(p^{}p)^2=0.88m_\mu ^2`$. The first three of these form factors are well determined by standard model symmetries and experimental data, leading to $`g_V(q_0^2)=0.9755(5)`$, $`g_M(q_0^2)=3.582(3)`$ and $`g_A(q_0^2)=1.245(3)`$.

The induced pseudoscalar term is a direct consequence of the partial conservation of the axial vector current. Its pion pole structure plus the leading correction have been derived early on within current algebra . During the last ten years $`g_P`$ has been studied with increasing sophistication with baryon chiral perturbation theory (ChPT) , i.e., within a model-independent effective theory of QCD. The theoretical results are summarized in Table 2 and indicate remarkably robust predictions for $`g_P`$ at the 2-3% level, where the main uncertainty is related to the present knowledge of the pion–nucleon coupling constant. Very recently a direct calculation confirmed that the ChPT corrections at the two-loop order are small . Ref.  specifically addresses the sensitivity of muon capture experiments to physics beyond the standard model. A similar body of recent theoretical work has focused on the more intricate calculations of radiative muon capture in hydrogen (RMC) .

Despite more than 30 years of experimental effort in this field, existing OMC data only poorly constrain $`g_P`$. In addition to the small rate $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_S`$ and the all neutral final state of reaction (1), a main problem lies in the kinetics of muonic hydrogen. In order to achieve acceptable muon stop rates, most experiments were performed in high density (i.e. liquid) targets, where muonic atoms quickly form $`pp\mu `$ molecules. The capture rates from these states differ due to the strong spin dependence of the V-A interaction, so that the uncertain transition rate $`\lambda _{OP}`$ between the molecular ortho and para state confuses the interpretation of observed capture rates. The recent pioneering measurement of the RMC process  is less sensitive to $`\lambda _{OP}`$, but disagrees by 4.2 standard deviations from the accurate theory. Fig. 1 summarizes the present controversial situation . In spite of intense theoretical scrutiny, RMC could not be reconciled with theory, whereas even the best OMC measurement cannot clarify this issue due to its dependence on muonic molecular physics. The most accurate determination of $`g_P`$ in nuclear muon capture from a recent experiment on $`\mu ^3`$He capture  gives $`g_p=8.53\pm 1.54`$ in good agreement with theory. Note that the accuracy is limited by the theoretical extraction of $`g_P`$ from the three–nucleon system. A very recent calculation argues that this uncertainty in $`g_P`$ can be reduced to 6% by constraining the axial two-body current contributions from tritium beta decay .

### 2.2 The MuCap experiment

The MuCap experiment  is based on a new method that avoids the above mentioned molecular and other key uncertainties of earlier efforts, like the neutron detector calibration if the outgoing neutron from reaction (1) is observed. The experiment is a muon lifetime measurement in ultra-pure and deuterium-depleted hydrogen gas. The measured decay lifetime $`\tau _\mu `$ of the negative muon in hydrogen is shorter, compared with that of the positive muon $`\tau _{\mu +}`$, because of the additional muon capture reaction. The rate $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_S=1/\tau _\mu 1/\tau _{\mu +}`$ can be determined to 1% if both the lifetime of the positive and negative muon are measured with at least 10 ppm precision. Muons of both polarities will be stopped in an active target. Incoming muons are tracked by wire chambers and are stopped in a specially developed time projection chamber (TPC) contained in a 10-atm hydrogen pressure vessel. Two cylindrical wire chambers and a large scintillator hodoscope surround the TPC, covering an effective solid angle $`\mathrm{\Omega }/4\pi 75\%`$ (see Fig. 2). This system will reconstruct the trajectories of the electrons from muon decay.

Several unique features allow a dramatic improvement in precision:

Unambiguous interpretation. As the target density is only 1% of LH2, $`pp\mu `$ formation, which scales with density, is slowed. Muon capture takes place predominantly from the singlet hyperfine state of the $`p\mu `$ atom and is nearly independent of $`\lambda _{OP}`$ (see fig. 1).

Clean muon stop definition. As the muon capture rate in higher-Z material can exceed $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_S`$ by several orders of magnitude, it is essential to eliminate muon stops and delayed diffusion to wall materials. By tracking the incident muons inside the TPC in all three dimensions, the muon stop location is determined event by event. This eliminates wall stops and allows systematic off-line studies by selective cuts on the stopping distribution.

Gas purity control. Critical background reactions leading to charged recoils can be monitored in situ with the TPC. This includes detection of nuclear recoils in a $`\mu +ZZ^{}+\nu `$ capture, where a sensitivity to impurity levels of $`10^8`$ has been demonstrated. Also $`p\mu d\mu `$ transfer on isotopic deuterium impurities in the target gas, which subsequently leads to significant $`d\mu `$ diffusion, can be directly seen in the data. In addition, a recirculating purification system is under development and gas analysis of higher-Z impurities and deuterium have been developed on the 0.01 and 1 ppm sensitivity level, respectively.

High statistics. The detector system can operate with high muon stop rates up to 30 kHz using a custom designed, dead-time free readout electronics for the TPC and the electron detectors. Pile-up effects, which have traditionally limited the acceptable rate by causing high accidental background, are reduced by identifying muon electron pairs by their common vertex.

$`\mu SR`$ rotation. The remnant polarization for positive muons introduces a position-dependent intensity variation of the decay positrons, which can affect the lifetime measurement if the detector is not perfectly uniform. A saddle coil magnet generates a constant dipole field of $``$ 80 G in the target region, which will precess the muon spin at 1 MHz. Monte Carlo studies indicate that this sinusoidal part largely decouples from the lifetime fit to the data.

Several engineering runs with prototype TPCs have been performed at PSI to establish the feasibility of the new method and to optimize physics and detector parameters . Fig. 3 shows the new TPC during assembly in the hydrogen pressure vessel. The design was optimized for the extremely stringent experimental purity requirements. Only UHV-proof materials were used, bakeable to 130 C. Chamber glass frames with metallic coatings were developed onto which the gold coated tungsten wires are soldered. The glass matches the small thermal expansion of tungsten. The drift voltage of 30 kV produces a homogeneous electrical field of 2 kV/cm. In 10 bar hydrogen, this leads to drift velocities of $``$ 5 mm/$`\mu `$s. In the MWPC located at the bottom of the TPC, anode wires and cathode wires are read out giving two-dimensional coordinates. Operation at $``$ 6.5 kV high voltage results in a typical gas amplification of $`10^4`$.

The final hydrogen chamber system has been constructed and is presently being conditioned. The main part of the electron detector was commissioned in fall of 2002 and was used for a high statistics $`\mu ^+`$ lifetime measurement in a realistic set-up. This included the precession magnet, the full data acquisition chain and a selection of target materials to study $`\mu SR`$ effects. For 2003, two runs are planned: a commissioning/integration run of the TPC and first physics data taking in fall. In 2004, we foresee a high statistics MuCap run with a continuous beam or with the advanced Muon-On-Request beam , which is developed in the context of the MuLan experiment.

## 3 Muon Capture on the Deuteron

Muon capture on the deuteron,

$$\mu ^{}+dn+n+\nu _\mu ,$$
(3)
results from the same hadronic current as shown in Eq. 2 and its rate $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_D`$ from the doublet state of the $`d\mu `$ atoms shows a similar sensitivity to $`g_P`$ as $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_S`$. There are additional interesting features. The final 3-body state covers a broad range of momentum transfer to the 2-N system (see Fig. 4). The properties of the 2-N system enter, in particular the deuteron wave function and the neutron scattering length $`a_{nn}`$ in the final state. Furthermore, two-body currents contribute, making process (3) uniquely suited to study the axial meson exchange currents (MEC) in the 2-N system.

In recent years the structure of the two-nucleon system and its response to electro-weak probes have received considerable attention. Progress has been made in complementary nuclear physics approaches, the calculation within the framework of phenomenological Lagrangian models , the development of pionless effective theory  of nucleon-nucleon interaction and the hybrid MEEFT approach , which incoporates both effective field theory (EFT) and Lagrangian models. These sophisticated calculations were partially fueled by astrophysics interest, the importance of solar fusion $`p+pd+e^++\nu `$ as well as charged and neutral current $`\nu +d`$ scattering for the solar neutrino problem and the analysis of the SNO experiment. In particular, it has been shown in model-independent EFT , that up to NNLO all neutrino deuteron break-up channels as well as pp fusion are related by one isovector axial two-body current, parametrized by the counterterm L1A. This stimulated intense effort  to calibrate all of these reactions by a single accurate measurement. Alas, precision measurements of electroweak reactions in the 2-N system are extremely difficult, so that the most precise constraint of L1A is derived from the 3-N system .

It was suggested by Kammel and Chen , that a determination of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_D`$ with $``$1% precision could provide the most accurate measurement of an electroweak reaction in the two-nucleon system and, in particular, determine L1A. Such an experiment is under consideration by our collaboration. In this context, one has to address at least two questions: (a) Is reaction (3) soft enough so that it can be compared to solar neutrino reactions? (b) Is a measurement at the required precision feasible?

A recent exploratory calculation  within the framework of baryon ChPT constraining the axial MECs by tritium decay gives an affirmative answer to (a). $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_D`$ can be calculated with 1% precision, while the contribution from the small $`p_\nu `$ region, where ChPT is questionable, is negligible. The L1A term contributes about 4% to the rate. On the other hand, the applicability of pionless EFT is limited to $`p_\nu `$90 MeV/c and it would be preferable to measure the reduced rate for this region .

As regards (b) current experimental results are of 6-10% precision and only marginally agree with each other . However, the MuCap strategy should allow significant improvement. Moreover - if necessary - the reduced rate for the kinematic region $`p_\nu `$90 MeV/c can be determined as the difference between a precise measurement of the total rate $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_D`$ (via the lifetime method) and a measurement of the Dalitz plot of neutrons with E$`{}_{n}{}^{}`$10 MeV (with neutron detectors). The latter measurement needs only limited precision of 5-10%, as the high-energy part contains only a small fraction of the total intensity. The main challenge is, in a different guise as for $`\mu +p`$ capture, the muon induced kinetics. The hyperfine quenching of the upper $`d\mu ()`$ quartet to the $`d\mu ()`$ doublet state is slow. In addition, $`^3`$He$`\mu `$ atoms are formed after $`dd\mu `$ formation and fusion, where muon capture is larger than in deuterium. The $`d\mu `$ system has been intensively studied as the prototype for resonant muon-catalyzed fusion . For a clean interpretation the target conditions should be chosen such that the $`d\mu ()`$ state dominates and the population of states can be verified in-situ by the observation of muon-catalyzed fusion reactions. A preliminary optimization (Fig. 5) indicates promising conditions at $`\varphi =5\%`$ and T=80 K.

## 4 Muon Lifetime

### 4.1 Scientific Motivation

The Fermi Coupling Constant $`G_F`$ is a fundamental constant of nature. In particular, together with $`\alpha =1/137.03599976(50)(0.0037\mathrm{ppm})`$ and $`M_\mathrm{Z}=91.1876(21)\mathrm{GeV}(23\mathrm{ppm})`$, $`G_F`$ defines the gauge couplings of the electroweak sector of the standard model. The most precise determination of $`G_F`$ comes from the measurement of the muon lifetime $`\tau _\mu `$

$$\frac{1}{\tau _\mu }=\frac{G_F^2m_\mu ^5}{192\pi ^3}(1+\mathrm{\Delta }q).$$
(4)
Here $`\mathrm{\Delta }q`$ encapsulates the higher order QED and QCD corrections calculated in the Fermi theory. The remaining electroweak corrections are contained in the quantity  $`\mathrm{\Delta }r`$ defined by

$$\frac{G_F}{\sqrt{2}}=\frac{g^2}{8M_\mathrm{W}^2}\left(1+\mathrm{\Delta }r\right)$$
(5)
where $`g`$ and $`M_\mathrm{W}`$ are the $`SU(2)_L`$ coupling constant and the W boson mass, respectively. Interesting quantum loop effects are absorbed in this quantity, including a remarkable sensitivity to the top quark mass and to the Higgs mass as well as potential new physics . At the moment, $`G_F`$ is not the limiting factor in exploiting these loop contributions, as the precision of other electroweak observables still has to be improved considerably. Recent 2-loop QED calculations  led to a revised value and error of $`G_F=1.16637(1)\times 10^5\mathrm{GeV}^2(9\mathrm{ppm})`$. The hitherto dominant theoretical uncertainty in Eq. 4 was reduced to a negligible level. Thus an extraction of $`G_F`$ from experiment down to the level of 0.5 ppm is becoming feasible before encountering theoretical limitations. This fact together with the spectacular precision achieved for other electroweak parameters, most notably the Z mass, has stimulated a new generation of $`\mu ^+`$ lifetime experiments at PSI  and Rutherford Appleton Laboratory .

The extraction of $`G_F`$ from Eq. 4 involves the following experimental contributions

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}\frac{\delta G_F}{G_F}\hfill & =\hfill & \sqrt{(\frac{5}{2}\frac{\delta m_\mu }{m_\mu })^2+(\frac{1}{2}\frac{\delta \tau _\mu }{\tau _\mu })^2[+(4\frac{m_{\nu _\mu }^2}{m_\mu ^2})^2]}\hfill & =\hfill & \sqrt{0.38^2+9^2[+10^2]}ppm\hfill \end{array}$$
(6)
The last contribution is based on the current upper bound of $`m_{\nu _\mu }170`$ keV from direct experiments. However, given the present empirical information on neutrino masses from $`\nu `$-oscillation and cosmic microwave background measurements, such a large $`m_{\nu _\mu }`$ appears unrealistic. Thus the main uncertainty in $`G_F`$ is due to $`\tau _\mu `$.

### 4.2 The MuLan experiment

The MuLan collaboration  plans to reduce the uncertainty of the present experimental value of 2197.03$`\pm `$ 0.04 ns (18 ppm) to 1 ppm. Both the statistics and systematics must be dramatically improved, relying on the following experimental concept.

Statistics of 1012 events. This statistics cannot be achieved with the conventional “one-muon-at-a-time” method. Instead, muons from the continuous PSI beam will be electrostatically chopped  at $``$ 50 kHz in the secondary surface muon beam line of the high intensity $`\pi `$E3 area. This allows to accumulate pulses with several muons and then have beam free interval of $`20\mu s`$ for measurement.

Pile-up suppression. Decay positrons are registered in a soccer ball shaped arrangement of 170 tile elements consisting of 3 mm thick fast plastic scintillator pairs, which covers $`75\%`$ of $`4\pi `$. The average inner diameter of the ball is $``$ 80 cm. The analog signals from the photomultipliers coupled to the scintillators will be digitized by 8-bit 500 MHz waveform digitizers. High segmentation, excellent pulse pair resolution and energy information are crucial to identify and suppress pile-up of two electrons hitting a tile simultaneously, which would systematically distort the observed time spectrum.

Detector stability. Target and detector material are minimized and low thresholds are used, so that the majority of Michel electrons hitting a tile are detected and the effect of time-dependent gain/threshold changes is reduced.

$`\mu SR`$ effect. As discussed for MuCap, residual $`\mu ^+`$ polarization and subsequent precession and depolarization can lead to systematic distortions of the decay spectra. This effect is suppressed in several steps: by the highly symmetric detector geometry, the choice of depolarizing target material and the use of a transverse magnetic field to reduce the overall ensemble polarization per pulse and to monitor the muon spin asymmetry.

The effect of muonium formation to the lifetime has been found to be negligible .

A recent milestone for MuLan was the development of a new kickable tune of the $`\pi E3`$ channel, based on extensive phase space simulations and measurements. The tune minimizes the angular divergence in the kicker plane, while simultaneously optimizing the phase space acceptance to obtain the required muon flux. The measured extinction factor of $`10^3`$ at a beam intensity of $``$15 MHz lies comfortably within the proposed design specifications. The new chopper is presently being built at TRIUMF and PSI. Two MuLan runs are scheduled for 2004, the first for commissioning the chopper and beamline and the second for commissioning the newly built detector, electronics and high rate data acquisition. The new chopper supports different time structures, providing an exciting new facility for MuLan, MuCap and other fundamental muon experiments.