This paper was converted on www.awesomepapers.org from LaTeX by an anonymous user.
Want to know more? Visit the Converter page.

Enhanced curvature perturbations from spherical domain walls nucleated during inflation

Zhen-Min Zeng1,2 cengzhenmin@itp.ac.cn    Jing Liu3,4 liujing@ucas.ac.cn    Zong-Kuan Guo1,2,5 guozk@itp.ac.cn 1CAS Key Laboratory of Theoretical Physics, Institute of Theoretical Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100190, China 2School of Physical Sciences, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China 3International Centre for Theoretical Physics Asia-Pacific, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China 4Taiji Laboratory for Gravitational Wave Universe (Beijing/Hangzhou), University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China 5School of Fundamental Physics and Mathematical Sciences, Hangzhou Institute for Advanced Study, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Hangzhou 310024, China
Abstract

We investigate spherical domain walls (DWs) nucleated via quantum tunneling in multifield inflationary models and curvature perturbations induced by the inhomogeneous distribution of those DWs. We consider the case that the Euclidean action SES_{E} of DWs changes with time during inflation so that most of DWs nucleate when SES_{E} reaches the minimum value and the radii of DWs are almost the same. When the Hubble horizon scale exceeds the DW radius after inflation, DWs begin to annihilate and release their energy into background radiation. Because of the random nature of the nucleation process, the statistics of DWs is of the Poisson type and the power spectrum of curvature perturbations has a characteristic slope 𝒫(k)k3{\cal P}_{\cal R}(k)\propto k^{3}. The amplitude of 𝒫(k){\cal P}_{\cal R}(k) depends on the tension and abundance of DWs at the annihilation time while the peak mode depends on the mean separation of DWs. We also numerically obtain the energy spectra of scalar-induced gravitational waves from predicted curvature perturbations which are expected to be observed in multiband gravitational-wave detectors.

I Introduction

Domain walls (DWs) are sheet-like topological defects in three spatial dimensions that can be generated in the early Universe when a discrete symmetry is spontaneously broken. A variety of new physics models predict the existance of DWs Zeldovich et al. (1974); Kibble (1976); Vilenkin (1981), such as axion models Linde and Lyth (1990); Sikivie (1982); Hiramatsu et al. (2013a); Cicoli et al. (2012); Arvanitaki et al. (2010), suppersymmetric models Dvali and Shifman (1997); Kovner et al. (1997); Takahashi et al. (2008); Dine et al. (2010), and the Standard model Higgs Buttazzo et al. (2013); Andreassen et al. (2014); Krajewski et al. (2016). DWs receive extensive investigation since the formation and evolution of DWs leave trace on various cosmological observations including the large-scale structure Vilenkin (1985a); Hill et al. (1989), the cosmic microwave background (CMB) Zeldovich et al. (1974); Takahashi and Yin (2021); Gonzalez et al. (2022), stochastic gravitational wave backgrounds (SGWBs) Hiramatsu et al. (2014); Saikawa (2017a); Hiramatsu et al. (2013b); Wei and Jiang (2022); Sakharov et al. (2021); Liu et al. (2021) and first-order phase transitions Blasi and Mariotti (2022).

The formation of the DW network was regarded as a disaster in cosmology Zeldovich et al. (1974); Vilenkin (1985b); Saikawa (2017b). The curvature radius of DWs is comparable to the Hubble horizon size and the proportion of two different vacua are comparable to each other, which is well-known as the scaling behavior of DWs Press et al. (1989); Hindmarsh (1996). Numerical results confirm that the DW energy density scales as ρDWt1\rho_{DW}\propto t^{-1} in the matter-dominated (MD) and radiation-dominated (RD) eras Martins et al. (2016); Leite and Martins (2011); Leite et al. (2013). Since ρDW\rho_{DW} decreases much slower than the energy density of radiation and matter, DWs will finally dominate the Universe which conflicts with the present observations Collaboration et al. (2020). The temperature fluctuations of the CMB imply that DWs with tension σ>𝒪(MeV3)\sigma>\mathcal{O}(\mathrm{MeV}^{3}) does not exist in the Universe at pressent Zeldovich et al. (1974). In general, the DW problem can be avoided by introducing a bias term in the effective potential so that DWs become unstable. In this case, the DW tension and the annihilation time can be constrained by the SGWB produced from the DW network Hiramatsu et al. (2014); Saikawa (2017a), see Ref. Jiang and Huang (2022) and Refs. Bian et al. (2022); Ferreira et al. (2022) for corresponding constraints from LIGO-Virgo and pulsar timing array experiments. Ref. Ramberg et al. (2022) obtains the constraint on DWs from CMB spectral distortions.

In this work, we focus on spherical DWs nucleated through quantum tunneling during inflation Basu et al. (1991); Liu et al. (2020a). This scenario of DW formation and evolution is remarkably different from the scaling case. The radius of spherical DWs is comparable to the Hubble scale at the nucleation time. Once DWs are nucleated, they are stretched by inflation and remain stable at superhorizon scales. The Hubble horizon expands after inflation, and DWs begin to collapse when they reenter the Hubble horizon. Since the tunneling rate is exponentially suppressed by the Euclidean action of DWs, SES_{E}, the DW problem is naturally avoided in this scenario. We consider the case that DWs have nonnegligible interaction with the matter fields so that the energy stored in DWs finally transforms into background radiation Vachaspati et al. (1984); Pujolas and Zahariade (2022); Blasi et al. (2022), rather than primordial black holes (PBHs) Tanahashi and Yoo (2015); Garriga et al. (2016); Deng et al. (2017a); Liu et al. (2020b); Ge (2020). According to Birkhoff’s theorem, the collapse of a single spherical DW cannot produce gravitational waves (GWs). However, the inhomogeneous distribution of spherical DWs induces curvature perturbations which can serve as the source of scalar-induced GWs, providing an opportunity to verify or give constraints to this scenario. Since the nucleation of different DWs is independent of each other, the statistics of DWs obey the Poisson distribution and induce superhorizon curvature perturbations with a typical k3k^{3} slope in the infrared power spectrum. We obtain the energy spectrum of scalar-induced GWs which is expected to be detected in multiband GW detectors. For convenience, we choose c=8πG=1c=8\pi G=1 throughout this paper.

II Statistical properties of DWs

II.1 Nucleation of DWs via quantum tunneling

The nucleation of quantum topological defects during inflation is investigated in Ref. Basu et al. (1991), where the authors obtain the nucleation rate of spherical DWs and cosmic string loops in a de Sitter background spacetime. The Euclideanized de Sitter space is a four-sphere of radius H1H^{-1}, and DWs nucleated during inflation by quantum tunneling can be described as a three-sphere with radius H1H^{-1}. The Euclidean action is proportional to the surface area

SE(t)=2π2σ(t)H3(t),S_{E}(t)=2\pi^{2}\sigma(t)H^{-3}(t)\,, (1)

where σ(t)\sigma(t) is the tension of DWs. The nucleation rate per unit physical volume per unit time is

λ(t)=H4(t)AeSE(t),\lambda(t)=H^{4}(t)Ae^{-S_{E}(t)}\,, (2)

which is obtained in the semiclassical approximation, i.e., σ>H3\sigma>H^{3}. The nucleation rate is exponentially suppressed in the case of σH3\sigma\gg H^{3}. However, on the contrary, the case σH3\sigma\ll H^{3} leads to the formation of the DW network. Thus, we mainly consider the case that σ\sigma and H3H^{3} are of the same order. Here AA is a slowly varying function of σH3\sigma H^{-3} which can be estimated as A1A\sim 1~{}Basu et al. (1991); Garriga (1994). Then the number density of DWs is obtained as

dN=λ(t)a3(t)d3xdt,dN=\lambda(t_{*})a^{3}(t_{*})d^{3}x\,dt_{*}, (3)

where tt_{*} denotes the nucleation time. One can find that the nucleation rate of DWs is totally described by the dynamics of inflation and the evolution of the tension σ(t)\sigma(t). We investigate the case where the DW tension is not a constant during inflation. Since the nucleation rate is exponentially suppressed by SES_{E}, the nucleation of DWs happens in a small period around the time when SES_{E} reaches the minimum so that the radii of spherical DWs are almost the same, see Ref. Liu et al. (2020a) for a specific example. In this case, the probability of nucleating a spherical DW in a Hubble-sized region at tt_{*} is obtained by

p\displaystyle p =\displaystyle= 4π3(1H(t))3dNd3x\displaystyle\frac{4\pi}{3}\left(\frac{1}{H(t_{*})}\right)^{3}\int\frac{dN}{d^{3}x} (4)
\displaystyle\backsimeq 4π3H(t)eSE(t)Δt,\displaystyle\frac{4\pi}{3}H(t_{*})e^{-S_{E}(t_{*})}\Delta t_{*}\,,

where Δt\Delta t_{*} is the typical time scale of the nucleation process.

II.2 Statistical distribution of DWs

The previous section indicates that spherical DWs with the comoving radius R0a1(t)H1(t)1(t)R_{0}\sim a^{-1}(t_{*})H^{-1}(t_{*})\equiv\mathcal{H}^{-1}(t_{*}) are randomly generated in the Universe when the Euclidean action SES_{E} reaches the minimum at tt_{*}. The nucleation of DWs is irrelevant in each Hubble volume, which means that DWs satisfy the Poisson distribution. Consider a comoving volume of (2L)3(2L)^{3}, where L=nR0L=nR_{0} and n1n\gg 1. To investigate the statistical properties of spherical DWs, LL should be larger than their comoving mean separation, S=R0p1/3S=R_{0}\,p^{-1/3}, so that plenty enough spherical DWs are contained in the volume. Let pp denote the probability that a spherical DW presents in a Hubble horizon and XiX_{i} denote the number of spherical DWs contained in the ii-th Hubble volume, where in3i\leq n^{3} and Xi=0X_{i}=0 or 11 by definition.

The expectation value and the varience of the random variable XiX_{i} are respectively E(Xi)=pE(X_{i})=p and D(Xi)=p(1p)D(X_{i})=p(1-p). Since the DW number in the volume (2L)3(2L)^{3} is much larger than one, according to the central limit theorem, the total DW number X=Σ1n3XiX=\Sigma_{1}^{n^{3}}X_{i} in the comoving volume (2L)3(2L)^{3} is subject to Gaussian with the expectation value E(X)=n3E(Xi)E(X)=n^{3}E(X_{i}) and the variance D(X)=n3D(Xi)D(X)=n^{3}D(X_{i}). We then obtain the power spectrum of curvature perturbations induced by the inhomogeneous distribution of DWs in the following.

We focus on density perturbations smoothed at the scale LL to avoid the nonlinear effect Bardeen et al. (1986)

δ(𝒓;L)=d3r(2πL2)3/2exp(|𝒓𝒓|22L2)δ(𝒓),\delta(\bm{r};L)=\int\frac{d^{3}r^{\prime}}{(2\pi L^{2})^{3/2}}\exp{\left(-\frac{|\bm{r}-\bm{r^{\prime}}|^{2}}{2L^{2}}\right)}\delta(\bm{r^{\prime}})\,, (5)

where δ(𝒓)δρ(𝒓)/ρ\delta(\bm{r})\equiv\delta\rho(\bm{r})/\rho with ρ\rho and δρ(𝒓)\delta\rho(\bm{r}) being the spatial averaged energy density and its perturbations. Here we have chosen the Gaussian window function exp(|𝒓𝒓|22L2)\exp\left(-\frac{|\bm{r}-\bm{r^{\prime}}|^{2}}{2L^{2}}\right). The Fourier transformation of δ(𝒓;L)\delta(\bm{r};L) is

δ𝒌(L)\displaystyle\delta_{\bm{k}}(L) =\displaystyle= d3𝒓(2π)3/2δ(𝒓;L)ei𝒌𝒓\displaystyle\int\frac{d^{3}\bm{r}}{(2\pi)^{3/2}}\delta(\bm{r};L)e^{-i\bm{k}\cdot\bm{r}} (6)
=\displaystyle= δ𝒌exp(k2L2/2),\displaystyle\delta_{\bm{k}}\exp{(-k^{2}L^{2}/2)}\,,

where δ𝒌\delta_{\bm{k}} is the Fourier transformation of δ(𝒓)\delta(\bm{r}). The variance of density perturbations can also be smoothed at this scale

σδ2(L)\displaystyle\sigma^{2}_{\delta}(L) =\displaystyle= δ(𝒓;L)δ(𝒓;L)|r=r=dlnkk32π2|δk(L)|2\displaystyle\langle\delta(\bm{r};L)\delta(\bm{r^{\prime}};L)\rangle|_{r=r^{\prime}}=\int d\ln{k}\frac{k^{3}}{2\pi^{2}}|\delta_{k}(L)|^{2} (7)
=\displaystyle= dlnkPδ(k)exp(k2L2),\displaystyle\int d\ln{k}\,P_{\delta}(k)\exp{(-k^{2}L^{2})}\,,

where Pδ(k)k32π2|δk|2P_{\delta}(k)\equiv\frac{k^{3}}{2\pi^{2}}|\delta_{k}|^{2} is the power spectrum of density perturbations. Assuming Pδ(k)P_{\delta}(k) has a power-law form, Pδ(k)knP_{\delta}(k)\propto k^{n}, then Eq. (7) implies that the smoothed variance satisfies

σδ2(L)Ln.\sigma^{2}_{\delta}(L)\propto L^{-n}. (8)

Total density perturbations are

δtot=δρr+δρDWρr+ρDW,\delta_{tot}=\frac{\delta\rho_{r}+\delta\rho_{DW}}{\rho_{r}+\rho_{DW}}\,, (9)

where we neglect other subdominant components in the Universe, δρr\delta\rho_{r} and δρDW\delta\rho_{DW} are density perturbations of radiation and DWs, respectively. Note that ρDW\rho_{DW} should be much smaller than ρr\rho_{r}, otherwise DWs will dominate the Universe which conflicts with the observations. Density perturbations from radiation and DWs both contribute to total density perturbations. In general, δρr\delta\rho_{r} comes from vacuum fluctuations during inflation so that δρr/ρr105\delta\rho_{r}/\rho_{r}\sim 10^{-5}, while δρDW\delta\rho_{DW} comes from the random distribution of spherical DWs which could be much larger than 10510^{-5}. In the case of δρDW>δρr\delta\rho_{DW}>\delta\rho_{r}, curvature perturbations induced by DWs become dominated, then we have

δtot\displaystyle\delta_{tot} \displaystyle\approx δρDWρr=4πσea2R02(XX¯)ρrL3a3\displaystyle\frac{\delta\rho_{DW}}{\rho_{r}}=\frac{4\pi\sigma_{e}a^{2}R_{0}^{2}(X-\overline{X})}{\rho_{r}L^{3}a^{3}} (10)
=\displaystyle= ρDWρrXX¯X¯,\displaystyle\frac{\rho_{DW}}{\rho_{r}}\frac{X-\overline{X}}{\overline{X}},

where σe\sigma_{e} is the tension of DWs at the annihilation time, X¯\overline{X} is the averaged number of spherical DWs over each region of volume (2L)3(2L)^{3} and we have used ρDWL3a3=4πσea2R02X¯\rho_{DW}L^{3}a^{3}=4\pi\sigma_{e}a^{2}R_{0}^{2}\,\overline{X}. Eq. (10) implies that δtot\delta_{tot} is also a random variable which satisfies Gaussian distribution with zero expectation value and the variance reads

σδtot2=(ρDWρr)2σX2X2=(ρDWρr)2(1p)R03pL3.\sigma_{\delta_{tot}}^{2}=\left(\frac{\rho_{DW}}{\rho_{r}}\right)^{2}\frac{\sigma^{2}_{X}}{\langle X\rangle^{2}}=\left(\frac{\rho_{DW}}{\rho_{r}}\right)^{2}\frac{(1-p)R_{0}^{3}}{pL^{3}}\,. (11)

Here, we can see that σ0,δ2(L)L3\sigma^{2}_{0,\delta}(L)\propto L^{-3}, so according to the discussion in Eq. (8), Pδ(k)P_{\delta}(k) is proportional to k3k^{3}. Since the length scale of induced perturbations is larger than the Hubble radius at the annihilation time, we can safely use the superhorizon relation

Pδ(k)=1681𝒫(k),P_{\delta}(k)=\frac{16}{81}{\cal P}_{\cal R}(k)\,, (12)

where 𝒫(k){\cal P}_{\cal R}(k) is the power spectrum of curvature perturbations. Eq. (12) allows us to parameterize 𝒫(k){\cal P}_{\cal R}(k) in the form 𝒫(k)=Ad(k/kcut)3{\cal P}_{\cal R}(k)=A_{d}(k/k_{cut})^{3} where kcutk_{cut} is a cutoff scale arising from the requirement of central limit theorem L>SL>S. Since in smaller scale, the distribution of DWs become nongaussian and 𝒫(k){\cal P}_{\cal R}(k) decrease rapidly, we simply apply the approximation kcut=S1k_{cut}=S^{-1} and 𝒫(k)=0{\cal P}_{\cal R}(k)=0 for k>kcutk>k_{cut}. Then, Eq. (7) could be rewritten in the form

σδtot2(L)\displaystyle\sigma_{\delta_{tot}}^{2}(L) =\displaystyle= 16Ad81(kcutL)30kcutd(kL)exp(k2L2)(kL)2\displaystyle\frac{16A_{d}}{81(k_{cut}L)^{3}}\int_{0}^{k_{cut}}d\left(kL\right)\exp{\left(-k^{2}L^{2}\right)}\left(kL\right)^{2} (13)
=\displaystyle= 4πAd81(kcutL)3,\displaystyle\frac{4\sqrt{\pi}A_{d}}{81(k_{cut}L)^{3}}\,,

which helps to determine the coefficient

Ad=94π(ρDWρr)21pp.A_{d}=\frac{9}{4\sqrt{\pi}}\left(\frac{\rho_{DW}}{\rho_{r}}\right)^{2}\frac{1-p}{p}\,. (14)

The final result of the power spectrum of induced curvature perturbations is

𝒫={94π(ρDWρr)21pp(kkcut)3forkkcut,0fork>kcut.{\cal P}_{\cal R}=\left\{\begin{aligned} &\frac{9}{4\sqrt{\pi}}\left(\frac{\rho_{DW}}{\rho_{r}}\right)^{2}\frac{1-p}{p}\left(\frac{k}{k_{cut}}\right)^{3}\quad&\mathrm{for}\;k\leq k_{cut}\,,\\ &0\quad&\mathrm{for}\;k>k_{cut}\,.\end{aligned}\right. (15)

II.3 Evolution of the DW energy density

At the time tt_{*} when DWs are nucleated, the energy density of DWs is

ρDW(t)\displaystyle\rho_{DW}(t_{*}) =\displaystyle= 4π(1H(t))2σ(t)dNa3(t)d3x\displaystyle 4\pi\left(\frac{1}{H(t_{*})}\right)^{2}\sigma(t_{*})\frac{dN}{a^{3}(t_{*})d^{3}x} (16)
=\displaystyle= 3H(t)σ(t)p.\displaystyle 3H(t_{*})\sigma(t_{*})p\,.

Afterward, DWs are stretched by inflation and their tension evolves with time. At the end of inflation tet_{e}

ρDW\displaystyle\rho_{DW} =\displaystyle= 4π(a(te)H(t)a(t))2σ(te)dNa3(te)d3x\displaystyle 4\pi\left(\frac{a(t_{e})}{H(t_{*})a(t_{*})}\right)^{2}\sigma(t_{e})\frac{dN}{a^{3}(t_{e})d^{3}x} (17)
=\displaystyle= 3H(t)a(t)a(te)σ(te)p,\displaystyle 3H(t_{*})\frac{a(t_{*})}{a(t_{e})}\sigma(t_{e})p,
ρtot=3H2(te).\rho_{tot}=3H^{2}(t_{e})\,. (18)

Here, we assume a short reheating process and the Universe quickly enters the RD era after inflation. If the tension of DWs remains constant after inflation, the energy density of spherical DWs scales as ρDWa1\rho_{DW}\propto a^{-1}(the area of a single spherical DW scales as a2a^{2} and the number density of spherical DWs scales as a3a^{-3}) at superhorizon scales, while the total energy density scale as ρtotρra4\rho_{tot}\approx\rho_{r}\propto a^{-4} in the RD era, then we have

ρDWρr|tr=H(t)H2(te)a(t)a(te)σ(te)p(a(tr)a(te))3,\frac{\rho_{DW}}{\rho_{r}}\bigg{|}_{t_{r}}=\frac{H(t_{*})}{H^{2}(t_{e})}\frac{a(t_{*})}{a(t_{e})}\sigma(t_{e})p\left(\frac{a(t_{r})}{a(t_{e})}\right)^{3}, (19)

where trt_{r} corresponding to the time that DWs reenter the horizon(annihilation time), which is long before reenter time of kcutk_{cut}. Thus, the other undetermined term in Eq. (15), ρDW/ρr\rho_{DW}/\rho_{r}, can be obtained from physical parameters σ(te)\sigma(t_{e}) and SES_{E} during inflation. Note that ρDW\rho_{DW} cannot exceed ρr\rho_{r} even inside the Hubble horizons containing a spherical DW, otherwise, the Hubble horizon collapses into a PBH before trt_{r}, which is investigated as the “supercritical” case in Deng et al. (2017b). This condition requires ρDW/ρr<p\rho_{DW}/\rho_{r}<p. If the interaction between DWs and matter fields is nonnegligible, spherical DWs dissipate their energy into background radiation at the annihilation time. Thus, the random distribution of DWs finally leads to density perturbations in the background radiation.

III Scalar-induced GWs

Induced curvature perturbations reenter the Hubble horizon and begin to evolve soon after the annihilation of DWs. Since the collapse of a single spherical DW cannot produce GWs, the unique SGWB in this scenario is induced by curvature perturbations predicted in the last section. In this section, we introduce the formula to calculate GWs induced by scalar perturbations at the second order Espinosa et al. (2018); Kohri and Terada (2018). The perturbed metric of a Friedmann-Robertson-Walker Universe in the Newtonian gauge reads

ds2\displaystyle ds^{2} =\displaystyle= a2(τ){(1+2Φ)dτ2\displaystyle a^{2}(\tau)\Big{\{}-(1+2\Phi)d\tau^{2} (20)
+[(12Ψ)δij+12hij]dxidxj},\displaystyle+[(1-2\Psi)\delta_{ij}+\frac{1}{2}h_{ij}]dx^{i}dx^{j}\Big{\}},

where τ\tau is conformal time, Φ\Phi and Ψ\Psi represent scalar perturbations and hijh_{ij} denotes tensor perturbations of the second order. Here, we neglect vector perturbations and first-order tensor perturbations. We also neglect the anisotropic pressure so that we take Φ=Ψ\Phi=\Psi in the following. The equation of motion (EoM) of the tensor modes sourced by curvature perturbations reads

hij′′+2hij2hij=4Πijlm𝒮lm,h_{ij}^{\prime\prime}+2\mathcal{H}h_{ij}^{\prime}-\nabla^{2}h_{ij}=-4\Pi_{ij}^{lm}\mathcal{S}_{lm}, (21)

Πijlm\Pi_{ij}^{lm} is the transverse-traceless projection operator and SlmS_{lm} is the scalar-induced source term. Tensor perturbations can be expanded into the Fourier modes as

hij(τ,𝒙)=d3k(2π)3/2[eij+(𝒌)h𝒌++eij×(𝒌)h𝒌×]ei𝒌𝒙,h_{ij}(\tau,\bm{x})=\int\frac{d^{3}k}{(2\pi)^{3/2}}\left[e_{ij}^{+}(\bm{k})h_{\bm{k}}^{+}+e_{ij}^{\times}(\bm{k})h_{\bm{k}}^{\times}\right]e^{i\bm{k}\cdot\bm{x}}, (22)

where eijλ(𝒌)(λ=+,×)e_{ij}^{\lambda}(\bm{k})(\lambda=+,\times) are the polarization tensors. Similarly, the Fourier modes of the source term are

Πijlm𝒮lm(τ,𝒙)=λ=+,×d3k(2π)3/2eijλ(𝒌)eλ,lm(𝒌)Slm(τ,k).\Pi_{ij}^{lm}\mathcal{S}_{lm}(\tau,\bm{x})=\sum_{\lambda=+,\times}\int\frac{d^{3}k}{(2\pi)^{3/2}}e_{ij}^{\lambda}(\bm{k})e^{\lambda,lm}(\bm{k})S_{lm}(\tau,k)\,. (23)

Then, the EoM of the tensor modes h𝒌(τ)h_{\bm{k}}(\tau) can be written in the form

h𝒌′′(τ)+2h𝒌(τ)+k2h𝒌(τ)=4S𝒌(τ).h_{\bm{k}}^{\prime\prime}(\tau)+2\mathcal{H}h_{\bm{k}}^{\prime}(\tau)+k^{2}h_{\bm{k}}(\tau)=4S_{\bm{k}}(\tau)\,. (24)

Here, we ignore the upper index of two different polarization modes since they satisfy the same equation. The source term S𝒌S_{\bm{k}} reads

S𝒌(τ)\displaystyle S_{\bm{k}}(\tau) =\displaystyle= d3q(2π)3/2eij(𝒌)qiqj[2Φ𝒒Φ𝒌𝒒+43(1+3ω)\displaystyle\int\frac{d^{3}q}{(2\pi)^{3/2}}e_{ij}(\bm{k})q_{i}q_{j}\Bigg{[}2\Phi_{\bm{q}}\Phi_{\bm{k-q}}+\frac{4}{3(1+3\omega)} (25)
×(1Φ𝒒+Φ𝒒)(1Φ𝒌𝒒+Φ𝒌𝒒)],\displaystyle\times(\mathcal{H}^{-1}\Phi^{\prime}_{\bm{q}}+\Phi_{\bm{q}})(\mathcal{H}^{-1}\Phi^{\prime}_{\bm{k-q}}+\Phi_{\bm{k-q}})\Bigg{]}\,,

where ω\omega is the equation of state parameter of the Universe and ω=1/3\omega=1/3 in the RD era. The Newtonian potential Φ\Phi obeys the following equation

Φk′′+6(1+ω)1+3ω1τΦk+ω2k2Φk=0,\Phi_{k}^{\prime\prime}+\frac{6(1+\omega)}{1+3\omega}\frac{1}{\tau}\Phi_{k}^{\prime}+\omega^{2}k^{2}\Phi_{k}=0\,, (26)

where we ignore entropy perturbations. The initial value of the Newtonian potential, Φk,0\Phi_{k,0}, is related to the power spectrum of curvature perturbations as

Φk,0Φk,0=δ(3)(𝒌𝒌)2π2k3(3+3ω5+3ω)2𝒫(k).\left\langle\Phi_{k,0}\Phi_{k^{\prime},0}\right\rangle=\delta^{(3)}(\bm{k}-\bm{k^{\prime}})\frac{2\pi^{2}}{k^{3}}\left(\frac{3+3\omega}{5+3\omega}\right)^{2}{\cal P}_{\cal R}(k)\,. (27)

We can use the Green’s function method to solve Eq. (24)

a(τ)h𝒌(τ)=4τ𝑑τ1𝒢(τ,τ1)a(τ1)S𝒌(τ1),a(\tau)h_{\bm{k}}(\tau)=4\int^{\tau}d\tau_{1}\mathcal{G}(\tau,\tau_{1})a(\tau_{1})S_{\bm{k}}(\tau_{1})\,, (28)

where the Green function 𝒢(τ,τ)\mathcal{G}(\tau,\tau^{\prime}) is the solution of

𝒢𝒌′′(τ,τ1)+(k2a′′(τ)a(τ))𝒢𝒌(τ,τ1)=δ(ττ1).\mathcal{G}^{\prime\prime}_{\bm{k}}(\tau,\tau_{1})+\left(k^{2}-\frac{a^{\prime\prime}(\tau)}{a(\tau)}\right)\mathcal{G}_{\bm{k}}(\tau,\tau_{1})=\delta(\tau-\tau_{1})\,. (29)

The power spectrum of tensor perturbations is defined by

h𝒌λ(τ)h𝒌λ(τ)=δλλδ(3)(𝒌𝒌)2π2k3𝒫h(τ,k).\langle h_{\bm{k}}^{\lambda}(\tau)h_{\bm{k}^{\prime}}^{\lambda^{\prime}}(\tau)\rangle=\delta_{\lambda\lambda^{\prime}}\delta^{(3)}(\bm{k}-\bm{k}^{\prime})\frac{2\pi^{2}}{k^{3}}{\cal P}_{h}(\tau,k)\,. (30)

The energy spectrum of GWs is defined as

ΩGW(τ,k)1ρtotdρGWdlnk=124(k(τ))2𝒫h(τ,k)¯,\Omega_{\mathrm{GW}}(\tau,k)\equiv\frac{1}{\rho_{tot}}\frac{d\rho_{\mathrm{GW}}}{d\ln k}=\frac{1}{24}\left(\frac{k}{\mathcal{H}(\tau)}\right)^{2}\overline{{\cal P}_{h}(\tau,k)}\,, (31)

where the overline represents the oscillation average and the two polarization modes have been added up. Then, in the RD era, ΩGW\Omega_{\mathrm{GW}} of scalar-induced GWs can be evaluated by the following integral

ΩGW(τ,k)\displaystyle\Omega_{\mathrm{GW}}(\tau,k) =\displaystyle= 1120𝑑v|1v||1+v|𝑑u(4v2(1+v2u2)24uv)2\displaystyle\frac{1}{12}\int_{0}^{\infty}dv\int_{|1-v|}^{|1+v|}du\left(\frac{4v^{2}-(1+v^{2}-u^{2})^{2}}{4uv}\right)^{2} (32)
×𝒫(ku)𝒫(kv)(34u3v3)2(u2+v23)2\displaystyle\times{\cal P}_{\cal R}(ku){\cal P}_{\cal R}(kv)\left(\frac{3}{4u^{3}v^{3}}\right)^{2}(u^{2}+v^{2}-3)^{2}
×{[4uv+(u2+v23)ln|3(u+v)23(uv)2|]2\displaystyle\times\Bigg{\{}\Bigg{[}-4uv+(u^{2}+v^{2}-3)\ln{\left|\frac{3-(u+v)^{2}}{3-(u-v)^{2}}\right|}\Bigg{]}^{2}
+π2(u2+v23)2Θ(u+v3)}.\displaystyle+\pi^{2}(u^{2}+v^{2}-3)^{2}\Theta(u+v-\sqrt{3})\Bigg{\}}\,.

In order to obtain the GW energy spectrum at present, we need to take the thermal history into consideration

ΩGW(τ0,k)=Ωγ,0(g,0g,eq)13ΩGW(τeq,k),\Omega_{\mathrm{GW}}(\tau_{0},k)=\Omega_{\gamma,0}\left(\frac{g_{*,0}}{g_{*,eq}}\right)^{\frac{1}{3}}\Omega_{\mathrm{GW}}(\tau_{eq},k)\,, (33)

where Ωγ,0\Omega_{\gamma,0} is the density parameter of radiation at present, g,0g_{*,0} and g,eqg_{*,eq} are the effect numbers of relativistic degrees of freedom at present and the radiation-matter equality, τeq\tau_{eq}.

We choose three sets of parameters in Table. 1 to show the predictions of ΩGW\Omega_{\mathrm{GW}}. The probability pp, the abundance of DWs ρDW/ρr\rho_{DW}/\rho_{r} and the cutoff scale kcutk_{cut} are determined by the DW tension σ\sigma and the evolution of SES_{E} during inflation, and thus can also be treated as free parameters with the only constraint ρDW/ρr<p\rho_{DW}/\rho_{r}<p to avoid the formation of PBHs. For the three parameter sets, the predicted ΩGW\Omega_{\mathrm{GW}} peak at 0.0010.001Hz, 0.10.1Hz and 1010Hz, respectively, which are expected to be detected by multiband GW detectors, including LISA/Taiji (set 1), DECIGO/BBO (set 2), CE/ET and LIGO-Virgo-KAGRA collaboration (set 3), as shown in Fig. 1.

set ρDW/ρtot\rho_{DW}/\rho_{tot} kcut/Mpc1k_{cut}/\mathrm{Mpc}^{-1} pp
1 2×1032\times 10^{-3} 2×10102\times 10^{10} 4×1034\times 10^{-3}
2 10310^{-3} 2×10122\times 10^{12} 5×1035\times 10^{-3}
3 5×1025\times 10^{-2} 2×10142\times 10^{14} 10110^{-1}
Table 1: Parameter sets we choose in this paper.

The observation of the CMB temperature anisotropies give strict constraints on primordial curvature perturbations 𝒫(k)2×109{\cal P}_{\cal R}(k)\approx 2\times 10^{-9} for 103Mpc1k1Mpc110^{-3}\,\mathrm{Mpc}^{-1}\lesssim k\lesssim 1\,\mathrm{Mpc}^{-1}. At smaller scales, the observations of CMB spectral distortions, big-bang nucleosynthesis and ultracompact minihaloes also give constraints on 𝒫(k){\cal P}_{\cal R}(k) at the scales of 1Mpc1k108Mpc11\,\mathrm{Mpc}^{-1}\lesssim k\lesssim 10^{8}\,\mathrm{Mpc}^{-1} Emami and Smoot (2018); Gow et al. (2021). In the three parameter sets of Table. 1, the results of 𝒫{\cal P}_{\cal R} are orders of magnitude smaller than 101010^{-10} at the scale k3×107Mpc1k\sim 3\times 10^{7}\,\mathrm{Mpc}^{-1} so that we safely avoid the constraints on 𝒫(k){\cal P}_{\cal R}(k) from the observations of the CMB spectrum distortion and the ultracompact minihalo abundance. However, because of the limit on 𝒫(k){\cal P}_{\cal R}(k), GWs are constrained to be ΩGW1017\Omega_{\mathrm{GW}}\lesssim 10^{-17} which is too weak to be observed in the nanohertz band by SKA.

Refer to caption
Figure 1: Predicted energy spectra of scalar-induced GWs with the parameter set 1 (red), set 2 (yellow) and set 3 (blue) in Table. 1, respectively, which are expected to be observed by LISA/Taiji, DECIGO/BBO and LVK/ET/CE respectively. We show the sensitivity curves of the GW detectors, including EPTA Lentati et al. (2015), PPTA Shannon et al. (2015), NANOGrav Arzoumanian et al. (2018, 2020), IPTA Hobbs et al. (2010), SKA Carilli and Rawlings (2004), LISA Amaro-Seoane et al. (2017) Taiji Ruan et al. (2018), DECIGO Kawamura et al. (2011), BBO Phinney et al. (2004), LIGO, Virgo and KAGRA ( LVK) Aasi et al. (2015); Somiya (2012), CE Reitze et al. (2019), ET Punturo et al. (2010), which are summarized in Ref. Schmitz (2021).

IV Realistic example

We show the results of 𝒫(k){\cal P}_{\cal R}(k) and ΩGW\Omega_{\mathrm{GW}} of scalar-induced GWs in a realistic two-field inflationary model where SES_{E} changes with time during inflation. The action reads

S=d4xg[R2+12μϕμϕ+12μχμχ+V(ϕ,χ)],S=\int d^{4}x\sqrt{-g}\left[-\frac{R}{2}+\frac{1}{2}\partial^{\mu}\phi\partial_{\mu}\phi+\frac{1}{2}\partial^{\mu}\chi\partial_{\mu}\chi+V(\phi,\chi)\right], (34)

with the potential V(ϕ,χ)V(\phi,\chi)

V(ϕ,χ)=λχ4[χ2α2(ϕϕc)2m2]2+f(ϕ),V(\phi,\chi)=\frac{\lambda_{\chi}}{4}\left[\chi^{2}-\alpha^{2}(\phi-\phi_{c})^{2}-m^{2}\right]^{2}+f(\phi)\,, (35)

which provides two degenerate vacua in the χ\chi direction. Since the dynamics of ϕ\phi is unaffected by χ\chi during inflation, the term f(ϕ)f(\phi) alone is responsible for the inflationary dynamics and generating primordial perturbations Aghanim et al. (2020).

The Friedmann equation and the EoMs of ϕ\phi and χ\chi are

H2=13[12ϕ˙2+12χ˙2+V(ϕ,χ)],\displaystyle H^{2}=\frac{1}{3}\left[\frac{1}{2}\dot{\phi}^{2}+\frac{1}{2}\dot{\chi}^{2}+V(\phi,\chi)\right]\,,
ϕ¨+3Hϕ˙+Vϕ=0,\displaystyle\ddot{\phi}+3H\dot{\phi}+\frac{\partial V}{\partial\phi}=0\,,
χ¨+3Hχ˙+Vχ=0.\displaystyle\ddot{\chi}+3H\dot{\chi}+\frac{\partial V}{\partial\chi}=0\,. (36)

We consider Starobinsky inflation with the potential

f(ϕ)=Λ0(1e23ϕ)2.f(\phi)=\Lambda_{0}\left(1-e^{-\sqrt{\frac{2}{3}}\phi}\right)^{2}\,. (37)

The tension of DWs is a function of ϕ(t)\phi(t)

σχ(t)=44λχ2[α2(ϕ2ϕc2)2+m2]32.\sigma_{\chi}(t)=\frac{4}{4}\sqrt{\frac{\lambda_{\chi}}{2}}\left[\alpha^{2}(\phi^{2}-\phi_{c}^{2})^{2}+m^{2}\right]^{\frac{3}{2}}. (38)

At the time ϕ(t)=ϕc\phi(t)=\phi_{c}, the Euclidean action SE=2π2σχ(t)H3(t)S_{E}=2\pi^{2}\sigma_{\chi}(t)H^{-3}(t) reaches minimum and most of DWs nucleate. We choose a specific parameter set to show the result of the energy spectrum of induced GWs in Fig. 2, where λχ=0.3,α=1×105,ϕc=3.9,m=5×106\lambda_{\chi}=0.3,\alpha=1\times 10^{-5},\phi_{c}=3.9,m=5\times 10^{-6}. The initial value of the scalar fields are set to be ϕi=5.1\phi_{i}=5.1and χi=0.0008\chi_{i}=0.0008 so that the predicted ee-folds is N=50N=50. ΩGW\Omega_{\mathrm{GW}} peaks at about 11Hz with the peak value 1010\sim 10^{-10}, which is expected to be observed by DECIGO and BBO.

Refer to caption
Figure 2: Predicted energy spectrum (dashed blue) of scalar-induced GWs as a specific realization of our mechanism.

V Conclusion and disscussion

We have investigated spherical DWs nucleated during inflation via quantum tunneling and found their random distribution induces curvature perturbations at the length scales larger than the mean separation of spherical DWs. The statistics of DWs turn out to be the Poisson type and the power spectrum of induced curvature perturbations is proportional to k3k^{3}. We numerically calculate the energy spectrum of scalar-induced GWs in terms of 𝒫(k){\cal P}_{\cal R}(k) which can be detected by multiband GW detectors. Since the collapse of spherical DWs does not directly produce GWs, our work provides a practical method to detect or constrain the case that the energy of spherical DWs decays into radiation.

This result is also applicable to false vacuum bubbles nucleated during inflation, proposed in Refs. Ashoorioon (2015); Ashoorioon et al. (2021); Deng and Vilenkin (2017); Deng (2020), where the vacua of the effective potential are nondegenerate. Induced curvature perturbations from Poisson distribution have been also discussed in other physical processes in the early Universe such as PBH formation Papanikolaou et al. (2021, 2022); Bhaumik et al. (2022a, b); Domènech et al. (2021) and first-order phase transitions Liu et al. (2022). These processes directly produce another SGWB from the transverse-traceless part of the energy-momentum tensor, which could be distinguished from the random distribution of spherical DWs or false vacuum bubbles.

VI Acknowledgement

This work is supported in part by the National Key Research and Development Program of China Grant No.2020YFC2201501, in part by the National Natural Science Foundation of China Grants No. 12105060, No. 12147103, No. 12075297 and No. 12235019, and in part by the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities.

References