You are on page 1of 45

INFLATIONARY UNIVERSE

And
Inflation & Mach Principle : In search of a physical connection

Project Report
SUBMITTED FOR PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF WORK ON TIME TRAVELLING

BY
Soumajit Chail

REGISTRATION N0. 10111216114000017 OF 2014-15.

UNDER THE GUIDENCE OF

DR.Debiprosad Duari.

This project report entitled "Inflamatory Universe And Inflamation & Mach
Principle : In search of a physical been prepared by Soumajit Chail
under my guidance and supervision. The project work was undertaken
as partial fulfillment of the requirements for award of a patent on
the work of "Inflamation & Mach Principle from BHAVA ATOMIC
RESEARCH CENTER.
It fulfils, in my opinion the requirements.

Dated.................

.........................................................

Dr. Debiprosad Duari
Director,
Research & Academics
M.P. Birla Institute of Fundamental Research
M.P. Birla Planetarium
96 Jawaharlal Nehru Road, Kolkata 700 071, India

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I utilize the opportunity to express my deep gratitude to Dr.Debiprosad Duari
for his supervision throughout my project work. I greatly appreciate his
guidance, encouragement and critical remarks. I am very grateful to him for
giving me opportunity to work with him and manage time for me to supervise
the project.

I am grateful to my teachers for their continuous encouragement during
the progress of the work.
I also acknowledge the supports I received from my friends and family
without which I would not have been able finish the project in time.

Dated-................................

.................................................
Soumajit Chail
Registration No: 10111216114000017.

Abstract

In this project at first I tried to discuss the inflationary scenario in the modern big bang
cosmology and in next through the discussion about the rotation of universe I tried to
discuss the Mach principle. This project is a search of any physical connection between
inflation and Mach principle.

Inflationary Universe

01. Standard cosmology
A.
B.
C.

General theory of relativity
Friedman-Robertson-Walker Metric
Cosmological models

02. Problems of standard hot big-bang model
A.

The flatness of space
a. The Euclidicity problem.
b. The flatness problem
c. The total entropy problem
d. The problem of the size of the universe

B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.

The horizon problem
The primordial monopole problem
The domain wall problem
The vacuum energy problem
The galaxy formation problem
The singularity problem

03. The concept of inflation
A.
B.

C.

D.

Short history
Old inflation
a. Basic mechanism
b. Potential of the scalar field
c. Problem solved
d. Graceful exit problem
New inflation
a. Coleman-Weinberg potential
b. Problem
Chaotic inflation
a. Basic model

E.
F.

b. Initial condition
c. The potential
d. Solving the problem
e. Chaotic versus new inflation
Eternal Inflation
Other inflationary models
a. Hybrid inflation
b. Extended inflationary cosmology

04. Inflation and quantum cosmology
A.

Quantum fluctuation and Density perturbation

B.

Reheating and particle creation

05. Alternative theory
A.
B.

Critique
Alternatives

06. Observational evidence
07. Inflation through Mach principle: In search of a physical connection
A.

Introduction

B.

Mach principle

C.

Rotation of universe

D.

Brans Dicke theory

09. Conclusion

Standard Cosmology

01.A.General theory of relativity
Standard cosmology is based on the general theory of relativity. It is the theory of
gravitation. Describing gravity not as a force but a nature of geometry it opens the door of
the cosmology. From the solution of Einstein’s equation various cosmological models can
be predicted. The Einstein equation cannot be derived as there are no more classical
fundamental theory to derive it from. It stands in the form,
(

)
(

)

(1)
In the left side it is the measurement of curvature called Einstein curvature tensor. The
is the Ricci curvature and is called the Ricci curvature scalar.
is the metric. On
the right hand side is the measure of matter energy density.
is the stress energy
tensor.
At that time it was believed that the universe is static. Einstein added a constant term to
his equation to make the universe static as,
and named the cosmological
constant. But in the modern cosmology this term get new roll and it is now one of the
most important term in cosmology. Modern practice is to identify this term with the stress
energy of the vacuum and include it on the right hand side as a contribution to the stress
energy tensor of the form,
( ⁄

)

(2)

01.B.Friedman- Robertson-Walker metric
Around 1920-1930 Friedman, Robertson, Walker and Lemaitre independently solved the
Einstein equation based on the assumption that- in large scale our universe is isotropic &
homogeneous. The metric has the form,
( )(

)
(

⁄ )

(3)

Here ( ) is a function of time and it is known as scale factor, is the curvature parameter
having constant values 0,1,-1 . For = 0, the universe is the three dimensional flat space
which is infinite in volume and an open universe. = 1, corresponds to a closed, spherical
universe. It has a finite volume. = -1, volume is infinite and represents an open universe.
However, this is different from the flat universe in that it has nontrivial curvature.

Fig. 1- for k=0

Fig. 2- for k= +1

Fig.3- for k= -1

01.C.Cosmological models
Assumptions The standard cosmology is mainly based on two basic assumptions1. Among the all fundamental interactions gravity is the most influencing force in
cosmological evolution. As GTR can provide the most satisfactory explanation for
the evolution so far, Einstein’s equation along with the plausible basic properties of
matter will be used to construct appropriate model of the universe.
2. In general in large scale universe is isotropic and homogeneous and it can be
thought as a perfect fluid.

Basic equationsNow we know the FRW metric and field equation from these two we can calculate ( )
From our assumption we are free to use the energy momentum tensor for a perfect fluid ,
(

)

(4)

Using relations (1), (3) & (4) we get the two independent field equation as,
̇

( )

̈

̇

( )

From these a mathematical model of the universe can be constructed.
If we take the cosmological constant
like,

term in consideration the equations takes the form

̇

( )

̈

̇

( )

In this model the gravitational attraction was balanced by the cosmological repulsion.
The model in which
, is called Friedman dust model, where the radiation part falling
faster than matter during expansion. The present universe is matter dominated and the
early universe was radiation dominated.
Using eqn. (5) & (6) we get,
̈

(

)

( )

Further conservation law gives,
(
̇

)

̇

(

)

In search of a analogy with the conventional energy conservation we get,
(

)

(

)

So, for dust universe

(
.

H is the Hubble constant. Its present value H0 given by ,

)

̇

(

)

Using above equations (7), (8), (12) we get,
(
Where,

)

(13)
known as density parameter.

Big Bang The Big Bang theory is the cosmological model that describes the early development of
the Universe. According to the theory, the Big Bang occurred approximately 13
billion years ago. It is thus considered the age of the universe. At this time, the Universe
was in an extremely hot and dense state and began expanding rapidly. After the initial
expansion, the Universe cooled sufficiently to allow energy to be converted into
various subatomic particles, including protons, neutrons, and electrons. Though simple
atomic nuclei formed within the first three minutes after the Big Bang, thousands of years
passed before the first electrically neutral atoms formed. The majority of atoms that were
produced by the Big Bang are hydrogen, along with traces of helium and lithium. Giant
clouds of these primordial elements later coalesced through gravity to
form stars and galaxies, and the heavier elements were synthesized either within
stars or during supernovae.
Among the other models of the universe the most successful model is big bang due to its
four key observational successes often known as four pillars of the ‘standard cosmology’.
i. Expansion of the Universe
ii. Origin of the cosmic background radiation
iii. Nucleosynthesis of the light elements.
iv. Formation of galaxies and large-scale structure.

i. Expansion of the universe:
Hubble observationally first discovered that the galaxies are receding from us in all
directions, and is a consequence of this initial explosion. It states that the recessional
velocity v of a galaxy is proportional to its distance d from us, that is, v=Hd where H is
Hubble's constant.

There is considerable observational evidence for this assertion, including the measured
distributions of galaxies and faint radio sources, though the best evidence comes from the
uniformity of the relic cosmic microwave background radiation. This means that any
observer anywhere in the Universe will enjoy much the same view as we do, including the
observation that galaxies are moving away from them.
Universe is expanding about every point in space. The analogy of an expanding balloon
may be helpful. As the balloon is blown up, the distance between all neighbouring points
grows; the two-dimensional universe grows but there is no preferred centre.
ii. Origin of the cosmic background radiation:
About 100,000 years after the Big Bang, the temperature of the Universe had dropped
sufficiently for electrons and protons to combine into hydrogen atoms, p + e --> H. From
this time onwards, radiation was effectively unable to interact with the background gas; it
has propagated freely ever since, while constantly losing energy because its wavelength is
stretched by the expansion of the Universe. Originally, the radiation temperature was
about 3000 degrees Kelvin, whereas today it has fallen to only 3K.
Observers detecting this radiation today are able to see the Universe at a very early stage
on what is known as the `surface of last scattering'. Photons in the cosmic microwave
background have been travelling towards us for over ten billion years, and have covered a
distance of about a million billion miles.
iii. Nucleosynthesis of the light elements:
Prior to about one second after the Big Bang, matter - in the form of free neutrons and
protons - was very hot and dense. As the Universe expanded, the temperature fell and
some of these nucleons were synthesised into the light elements: deuterium (D), helium-3,
and helium-4. The heavier elements, of which we are partly made, were created later in
the interiors of stars and spread widely in supernova explosions.
iv. Formation of galaxies and large-scale structure:
‘The standard Hot Big Bang model’ also provides a framework in which to understand the
collapse of matter to form galaxies and other large-scale structures observed in the
Universe today. At about 10,000 years after the Big Bang, the temperature had fallen to
such an extent that the energy density of the Universe began to be dominated by massive
particles, rather than the light and other radiation which was predominant earlier. This
change in the form of the main matter density meant that the gravitational forces
between the massive particles could begin to take effects, so that any small perturbations
in their density would grow. Ten billion years later we see the results of this collapse. ‘The
standard cosmology’, then, provides a framework for understanding galaxy formation.

The pictorial view of the standard
model is given in the picture (side).
Now in the next part we will see that
there are some major problems in the
theory of big-bang. To solve these
problem we need a correction in the
GUT epoch in the time limit of ( 10-3610-33 s) . This part is our region of
interest.
Another picture (below) shows that
the deviation of the standard model
with and without the concept of
inflation.

Problems of standard hot big bang model
Around 1965 the works of Penzias and Wilson quite accidently establish the work of
Gamow and confirm the big bang model. When it came it ruled out all the other theories
and made a sensation. But it also faced some problems. Around 1970-1980 it passed
through some hard questions, there became a situation like that either it was wrong or
incomplete. The inflationary scenario gave it a new birth and made it complete (not
ultimate). Here we will discuss on some problems of the old big bang model.
02.A.The flatness of space
This problem can be stated in many equivalent or almost equivalent formulations,
differing somewhat in the approach taken. Here I take some of thesea. The Euclidicity problemOur universe in large scale is flat i.e. it follows the rules of Euclidean geometry
perfectly. Mainly questioning on the fifth postulate we get the non Euclidean geometry or
Riemannian geometry but in our universe this postulate is almost true, the angles of a
triangle sum to 180◦ and parallel lines meet at infinity. Our space is almost perfectly
Euclidean on large scales, up to l∼ 1028 cm - 60 orders of magnitude greater than the
Planck length. The question is why the space is Euclidean in so much accuracy! Though it
is not Euclidean in Planck length scale (lp 10-33cm) or below it due to the quantum
fluctuation how it became large scale Euclidean !

b. The flatness problemThe problem was first mentioned by Robert Dicke in 1979. It is a cosmological
fine-tuning problem. Such problems arise from the observation that some of the initial
conditions of the universe appear to be fine-tuned to very 'special' values, and that a small
deviation from these values would have had massive effects on the nature of the universe
at the current time.
In the case of the flatness problem, the parameter which appears fine-tuned is the density
of matter and energy in the universe ( ). This value affects the curvature of space-time,
with a very specific critical value being required for a flat universe. The current density of
the universe is observed to be very close to this critical value. Since the total density
departs rapidly from the critical value over cosmic time, the early universe must have had
a density even closer to the critical density, departing from it by one part in 1053. This leads
cosmologists to question how the initial density came to be so closely fine-tuned to this
special value.
The derivation can be done from the previous equations.
From (13) if we put ᴧ = 0 we get,

(

)

(14)

Putting
(

we get,

)

(15)

At present t=t0 we get
(
)

(16)

From (15) and (16) we have,
(
(

)

Now as a(t)

T-1 , we have

(
(

Or, (

(17)

)

)

(18)

)

)

(

)

(19)

Putting the values we get ,
(
)
(
)
) . Then (
) was in the order of 10-53 at GUT epoch.
According to data we have (
So there was a probably fine tuning of the value close to
in order to make the
universe evolve to the present state.
Using Friedmann equation we can write ,
(

)

̇
It tells for a decelerating universe
is away from unity, in such case k<0 would disperse
to infinity much earlier than the present age. And for k>0 would lead to collapse of the
universe.

c. The total entropy problemThe flatness problem can be posed alternatively as follows. The entropy density of
photons at thermal equilibrium at temperature T is given by
, it gives the
85
present value of
in order of 10 such a large value for a dimensionless conserved
quantity is hard to explain. The question here is why the total entropy of the universe is so
large?
d. The problem of the size of the universeAnother problem associated with the flatness of the universe is on mass. According
to the big bang the total size of the part of the universe currently accessible to
observation is proportional to a(t) so, it is inversely proportional to the temperature T.
This means that at T 1032 K, the region from which the observable part of the universe
(with a size of 1028 cm) formed was of the order of 10-4 cm in size i.e. 29 orders of

magnitude greater than the Planck length. The question is why, when the universe was at
the Planck density, was it 29 orders of magnitude bigger than the Planck length? Where do
such large numbers come from?

02.B.The horizon problem
Basic concept
The horizon problem is a problem with was identified in the late 1960s, primarily
by Charles Misner. It points out that different regions of the universe have not ‘contacted’
each other because of the great distances between them, but nevertheless they have the
same temperature and other physical properties. This should not be possible, given that
the transfer of information can occur, at most, at the speed of light.
When one looks out into the night sky, distances also correspond to time into the past. A
galaxy measured at ten billion light years in distance appears to us as it was ten billion
years ago, because the light has taken that long to travel to the viewer. If one were to look
at a galaxy ten billion light years away in one direction, say "west", and another in the
opposite direction, "east", the total distance between them is twenty billion light years.
This means that the light from the first has not yet reached the second, because the 13.8
billion years that the universe has existed simply isn't a long enough time to allow it to
occur. In a more general sense, there are portions of the universe that are visible to us, but
invisible to each other, outside each other's respective particle horizons.
In standard physical theories, no information can travel faster than the speed of light. In
this context, "information" means "any sort of physical interaction". For instance, heat will
naturally flow from a hotter area to a cooler one, and in physics terms this is one example
of information exchange. Given the example above, the two galaxies in question cannot
have shared any sort of information; they are not in "causal contact". One would expect,
then, that their physical properties would be different, and more generally, that the
universe as a whole would have varying properties in different areas.
Contrary to this expectation, the universe is in fact extremely isotropic, which also
implies homogeneity. The cosmic microwave background radiation(CMB), which fills the
universe, is almost precisely the same temperature everywhere in the sky, about 2.728 +/0.004 K. The differences in temperature are so slight that it has only recently become
possible to develop instruments capable of making the required measurements. This
presents a serious problem; if the universe had started with even slightly different
temperatures in different areas, then there would simply be no way it could have evened
itself out to a common temperature by this point in time.
The magnitude of this problem is quite large. According to the Big Bang model, as the
density of the universe dropped while it expanded, it eventually reached a point where
photons in the "mix" of particles were no longer immediately impacting matter; they
"decoupled" from the plasma and spread out into the universe as a burst of light. This is
thought to have occurred about 300,000 years after the Big Bang. The volume of any
possible information exchange at that time was 900,000 light years across, using the speed

of light and the rate of expansion of space in the early universe. Instead, the entire sky has
the same temperature, a volume 1088 times larger.
Derivation
The typical fundamental observer O at a given epoch t has his past light cone truncated
at t = 0, the epoch of the big-bang. A light signal in the radiation-dominated era could have
only travelled a proper distance
( )

( )∫

( )

during the time interval (0, t). Thus, any causal communication to O is limited by a sphere
of radius RH centred on O. This boundary is called the particle horizon. If we assume that
the universe is homogeneous at a fairly early time then this homogeneity cannot exist
outside the particle horizon. If a slightly inhomogeneity is occurred anywhere beyond it,
no physical process can make it homogeneous. Suppose that the universe at an instant t
subsequently expanded by a factor η to the present time t0 then,
( )

( )

( )

( )

Now if the temperature is expressed in GeV, then
T0(GeV)= 2.3×10-13(T0/2.7 K)
We get,

( )

-2

Now we have to put the value of T . It is the scenario of GUT epoch at that time all the four
types of interactions were of equal strength. As the universe was cooled the gravitational
interaction was first decoupled. The decoupling of strong field occurs at the temperature
T ≈ 1015 e . f we consider that temperature then the proper radius of hori on at present
become
cm. o, there is no reason to e pect homogeneity on a scale larger than m.
28
ut the
observed to be homogeneous on the cosmological scale
cm ! That’s
the horizon problem.
A similar to the horizon problem a problem arises when we take into account the
extraordinary smoothness of the CMBR at small angles. In the context of the large-scale
homogeneity in the universe this problem known as smoothness problem.
02.C.The primordial monopole problem
Although the standard electro–magnetic theory doesn’t allow magnetic monopole but the
GUT epoch tells that at every symmetry breaking there creates magnetic monopole like
particles. According to GUT they are the monopoles are highly stable and if created cannot
be destroyed. Then the monopoles should be present still now.

Now if we calculate the minimum rate of creation of monopoles at the rate of one per
horizon-size sphere. Then the mass density was
(

)(

)

Putting the values and calculating we get,
g/cm3
This result is absurd, because in that case the universe would have re-collapsed long ago,
less than 105 years. Since monopoles are stable objects, they cannot be destroyed. Thus
the excess monopoles problem remains within the standard model.

02.D. The domain wall problem
During the spontaneous symmetry breaking the GUTs phase transition produces certain
characteristic discontinuities in the matter distribution which leads the mediating scalar
fields to have a discrete set of characteristic values. Thus one region has one value of the
scalar field, while its neighbour has another. These regions are called domain. Domains
filled by the field are separated from the other by domain walls. The energy density of
these walls turns out to be so high that the existence of just one in the observable part of
the universe would lead to unacceptable cosmological consequences. The boundary wall
between the domains is the region of discontinuity. We expect to see this as a sheet of
inhomogeneity in the large scale matter distribution in the universe. The present data do
not reveal any such inhomogeneity in the observable universe.
02.E. The vacuum energy problem
The cosmological constant ᴧ was introduced by Einstein somewhat empirically to retain
the static model of the universe. When Hubble gives the law of expanding universe,
ᴧ became the source of the vacuum energy to explain the expansion. It is related to the
( ) cosmological data implies the present day
vacuum energy by the relation,
value of ᴧ has to be of the order of the square of Hubble's constant, | ᴧ | << 10-35 s-2 and
vacuum energy density
is not much greater in than the critical density
10 29
g/cm3
|

| = | ( )| ≤

-29

g/cm3

The GUTs epoch generates a cosmological term purely from quantum field theoretical
effects. The order of magnitude of this term is very large, however, about ~ 1070 s-2.
According to the GUT after the first phase transition the value of ( ) decreased by
approximately 1080 g/cm3. After the second it was reduced by about another 1025 g/cm3.
Finally, after the phase transition that formed the baryons from quarks, the vacuum
energy again decreased about 1014 g/cm3 and after all of these enormous drops, it turned
out to equal zero to an accuracy of ±10-29 g/cm3 ! This decreasing of vacuum energy is

surprising without some deep physical reason. Thus we have to find why the present term is smaller by an order ~ 10-105 of the primordial -term. This problem is also known
as cosmological constant problem.

02.F. The galaxy formation problem
The universe is of course not perfectly homogeneous. It contains such important
inhomogeneities as stars, galaxies, clusters of galaxies, etc. These structures are originated
from the primordial inhomogeneities which already existed in the early universe. For a
long time, the origin of such density inhomogeneities remained completely obscure. The
expansion rate of the radiation dominated universe would not favour the inhomogeneties
suitable for the later formation of galaxies.

02.G. The singularity problem
Big bang cosmology imply that for all equations of state, the density of matter in the
universe goes to infinity as t → 0, and the corresponding solutions cannot be formally
continued to the domain t < 0. The point when t = 0 is known as singular point. Now this is
the question whether anything existed before t = 0; if not, then where did the universe
come from?

The concept of inflation
03.A. Short History
The term inflation was first introduced by Allan Guth with a simpler and very clear physical
motivation in 1981. But its conceptual journey begins near about ten years ago. In the
beginning of the 1970s it was realised that the energy density of a scalar field plays the
role of the vacuum energy or cosmological constant and it change during the cosmological
phase transitions. In certain cases these changes occur discontinuously, due to first-order
phase transitions from a supercooled vacuum state. In 1978, Andrei Linde with Gennady
Chibisov tried to use these facts to construct a cosmological model involving exponential
expansion of the universe in the supercooled vacuum as a source of the entropy of the
universe but they realise some problem in their theory. The first semi-realistic model of
inflationary type was proposed by Alexei Starobinsky in 1979–1980. It was based on the
investigation of quantum gravity. His model was rather complicated and different from
inflationary cosmology. Unaware about the trarobinsky’s work Allan uth in his
breakthrough paper ‘The nflationary universe: A possible solution to the hori on and
flatness problem’, first proposed the inflationary theory of cosmology and used the name
inflation which is now called “old inflation”. It was based on the theory of supercooling
during the cosmological phase transitions. It played a profound role in the development of
inflationary cosmology since it contained a very clear explanation of how inflation may
solve the major cosmological problems. According to this scenario, inflation is described by
the exponential expansion of the universe in a supercooled false vacuum state. This
picture of inflation in the false vacuum state leads to the graceful exit problem, which we
will discuss later.
So there need something new. In an international meeting in Moscow, 1981 Russian
cosmologist Andrei Linde presented an improved version of uth’s inflation called "new
inflation", which got around the difficulties with Guth's model. Within a few months, the
new inflationary scenario was also published by Andreas Albrecht and Paul Steinhardt, of
the University of Pennsylvania, and by the end of 1982 inflation was well established. In
this theory, inflation may begin either in the false vacuum, or in an unstable state at the
top of the effective potential. But it has its own problem, it works only if the effective
potential of the field φ has a very flat plateau near φ = 0, which is somewhat artificial. In
most versions of this scenario the inflaton field has an extremely small coupling constant,
so it could not be in thermal equilibrium with other matter fields.
The theory of cosmological phase transitions, which was the basis for old and new
inflation, did not work in such a situation. Moreover, thermal equilibrium requires many
particles interacting with each other. This means that new inflation could explain why our
universe was so large only if it was very large and contained many particles from the very
beginning. Old and new inflation represented a substantial but incomplete modification of

the big bang theory. In 1983 Andrei Linde proposed the chaotic inflation scenario. This
scenario resolved all problems of old and new inflation. According to this scenario,
inflation may begin even if there was no thermal equilibrium in the early universe, and it
may occur even in the theories with simplest potentials such as V (φ) ∼ φ2. Linde called
this "chaotic inflation", because the scalar fields can have any value at different places in
the early universe. It is the standard version of inflation today.

03.B. Old inflation
a. Basic mechanismThe difficulties of standard big bang model lies in the GUT epoch. So there was a need of
correction or an input around the GUT that would change the dynamics of the universe, at
least for a temporary period. The term inflation means ‘rapid e pansion’. The trick of
inflation was lies in introducing a temporary phase during which the universe
expanded exponentially as it in the classical de Sitter model which described an empty
universe with expansion caused by cosmological constant term. The inflationary universe
also requires a but here it arises and is supposed to last only during the transient stage
in which the GUTs phase transition is taking place.
Alan Guth proposed that in the scenario of expansion of universe there exist an
inflationary phase in which the early universe goes through a rapid expansion which
intervened between Friedmann-type expansion. It can be written as,
t < ti : a(t) t1/2

(radiation dominated)

ti < t < tf : a(t)= ai exp H(t-ti)
t > tf : a(t) t1/2

(radiation dominated, until t = teq )

At t = teq (when the matter and radiation energy densities are equal)≈ 4.36 x 1010 ( h2)-2 s,
evolution becomes matter-dominated for teq < t < tnow = t0. Typical values for ti, tf,
and H gives,
t0 ≈ 10-36s , H ≈ 1010 Gev , tf ≈ 10-33s
which give an overall inflation of about A exp N exp (70) ≈ 2.5 x 1030 to the scale factor
in the period ti < t < tf. At t = ti, the temperature of the universe is about 1014 GeV. During
this exponential inflation, the temperature drops drastically but the matter is expected to

be reheated to the initial temperature ~ 1014 GeV at t ≈ tf. The reheating takes place when
the phase transition is over, and the energy released in the process is passed on to the
radiation content of the universe. The phase transition is analogous to a bar of
ferromagnetic material at the curie temperature or to the reheating that takes place when
supercooled steam condenses and releases its latent heat.
b. Potential of the scalar field
To know about the exact phenomenon we have to know how V (φ) will affect the space
time geometry via Einstein equations. For the universe to expand exponentially, the
energy density should remain (at least approximately) constant. We need to average over
the quantum fluctuations of the φ- field. It gives the effective average potential :
( )

( )

Where
are parameters from particle physics. Since there is a thermal fluctuation
as this is the case of hot early universe there will be an addition with the term to give the
total potential,
(

)

( )

(

Here is a constant. The plot of
looks like,

(

) as a function of

)1/2}]
for a range of values of

(
) , the effective potential of the Higgs field at different temperatures For
Fig. 4
T<T c the true vacuum, i.e. the state of lowest energy is no longer at
.
At any given temperature T that is higher than a critical temperature Tc, the minimum
value of V is found at = 0. It is the vacuum state. As the temperature is lowered,
however, the minimum of V may no longer remain at = 0 but may shift to a finite
value = . This phase transition occurs at T = Tc . Thus would tend to transit from = 0
to = .
If were to condensed immediately at Tc, all the excess energy could be released at once.
In the more likely case of supercooling, however, may continue at = 0 and move to the
true minimum = later. During this transitional stage, the state = 0 is called the false
vacuum state, since the true vacuum is now at = . This temperature dependence of
the potential energy of the Higgs field V ( , T) is in the old inflation where Tc ≈ 3 x
1014 GeV.
At temperatures T >> Tc, the potential V has only one minimum (at = 0). As the
temperature is lowered to T ~ Tc, a second minimum appears at = . For T << Tc,
the = minimum is the ``true'' minimum.
In the early universe matter cools through at T ≈ Tc. At T >> Tc, the minimum configuration
corresponds to = 0 whereas for T ~ Tc it is = . Matter in the universe does not
instantaneously switch over from = 0 to = , however. The universe can get ``stuck''
at = 0 (the false vacuum), with V = V (0), even at T < Tc, and will expand exponentially
because the dominant energy density driving the expansion is the constant V (0) V ( ) ≈ V (0). Over the course of time, thermal fluctuations and quantum tunneling will
induce a transition from the false vacuum = 0 to the true vacuum = , thereby ending
the inflation in localized regions it is known as bubble nucleation. The phase transition is
expected to be completed by the expanding bubbles colliding, coalescing, and reheating
the matter.
c.Problem solvedIf we consider first the “flatness problem”, which concerns the unusually small value of the
curvature term (k / a2) in the early epochs. Inflation of a(t) by a factor x decreases the
value of this term by a factor x-2 ≈ 10-58. Thus one can start with moderate values of (k / a2)
before inflation and bring it down to a very small value by the end of inflation. This solves
the flatness problem, interpreted as the smallness of (k / a2). No classical process can
change a, k = ± 1 universe to a, k = 0 universe, since doing so involves a change in
topological properties. What inflation does is to decrease the importance of (k/ a2) so
much that, for all practical purposes, we can ignore the dynamical effect of the curvature
term thus having the same effect as setting k = 0.

Inflation also solves the horizon problem by bringing the entire observed region of the last
scattering surface into a causally connected patch. From the relations of old inflation we
( )
get, ( )
. If we put the value of
, so that
. This
shows that inflation lasts long enough to blow up
times. This is sufficient to cover
the entire observable universe at present. Thus the problem was solved.
Inflation can also reduce the density of any stable, relic particle, e.g. the magnetic
monopoles, by a dilution factor A-3 10-90, provided these relics were produced before
the onset of inflation. Likewise, any discontinuities, e.g. the domain walls etc., are
expanded away from one another so that the chance of observing one by a typical
observer is made negligibly small. Further, because of the reheating at the end of inflation,
one arrives at the large entropy presently observed in the universe.

d.Graceful exit problemFrom the analysis of the potential when we face the situation of tunnelling we see that
there are some bubble formation happening. In order to have sufficient amount of
inflation, it is necessary to keep the “false” vacuum fairly stable. In such a case, the bubble
nucleation rate is small and even the resulting bubbles do not coalesce together
efficiently, i.e. the bubbles formed buy tunnelling do not collide and so there is no thermal
equilibrium.
If the probability of the bubble formation is large, bubbles of the new phase are formed
near each other, inflation is too short to solve any problems, and the bubble wall collisions
make the universe extremely inhomogeneous. The final configuration is quite different
from the universe we need. As it is still not clear that how the end came in inflationary
scenario and how the Friedmann type expansion gave rise again, problem named as
‘‘ raceful e it problem”.
03.C. New Inflation
a. Coleman-Wienberg Potential
The new inflationary scenario begins with a change in the form of the potential. The
potential was replaced by the Coleman-Weinberg potential. At zero temperature, this
potential is given by,
( )
Where, B ≈ 10-3 ;

≈ × 1015 GeV

This potential is nearly flat for
and drops rapidly near
. At finite temperature
the potential picks up a small barrier in origin and also creates a local minimum. This is a

false vacuum and it is unstable when the temperature become in the order of 109 GeV.
Then the scalar field rapidly tunnels to
and starts rolling down the gently sloped
potential toward
. Since the potential is nearly flat in this region there is an
approximately constant energy density driving the universe, it is in the order of 3×1014
GeV.

Figure 5. The Coleman-Weinberg potential.
It is known as the slow roll potential, due to its nature. This phase approximated as
( )
̈

( )
̇

where we have ignored the term ̈ and

(

̇
)

( )

2 x 1010GeV (in energy units).

From the curve we see that when
approaches , the field ``falls down'' the potential
and oscillates around the minimum at
with the frequency
( )
(2x
14
2
2
10 GeV) >> H . As the field
decaying into other particles with some decay time
(say) and the universe is expanding , these two will damped the oscillation. If
,
the field energy will be converted into relativistic particles which will allow the universe to
be reheated to a temperature of about 2×1014 GeV . This is how reheating occurs in the
new inflationary model.
In the present case when T >> Mx the potential becomes,
(

)

(

)

Where c is some constant of order 10. An analysis of this expression shows that at high
) is the one at =0; that is symmetry is
enough temperature T, the only minimum of (
restored. When
GeV, all high-temperature corrections to ( ) at
vanish. However, the masses of all particles in the Coleman–Weinberg theory tend to zero
) holds for
as
so in the neighbourhood of the point = 0 this equation for (
GeV as well. This means that the point = 0 remains a local minimum of the
) at any temperature . According to the Coleman–Weinberg potential a
potential (

phase transition is a long, drawn-out affair that takes place only when the temperature T
of the universe has fallen to approximately
GeV. At such a low temperature, the
barrier separating the minimum at = 0 from the minimum at
will be located at
)
and the bubble formation process will be governed solely by the shape of (
near = 0, rather than by the value of . As a result, the field within the bubbles of the
new phase formed in this way is at first very small. The field within the bubble will
clearly grow to its equilibrium value in a time
For most of this time, the field
will remain much smaller than . This means that over this time period the vacuum
) will remain almost exactly equal to V(0), and consequently the part of
energy of (
the universe inside the bubble will continue to expand exponentially as it was at the
beginning of the phase transition. It is the fundamental difference between the new
inflationary universe scenario and the old, in old it is assumed that exponential expansion
ceases at the moment that bubbles are formed. Here instead of several bubbles having to
collide, coelesce, and make up the whole observable universe of today, we have one huge
bubble encompassing everything observable now.
b. Problem
Though it is an improvement on the original version, this model, too, is not free from
problems. These are1.There are no realistic elementary particle physics theory to support the scenario of new
potential. For example, the potential ( ) must be very close to flat for values of the field
close to 0. If for instance, the behaviour of ( ) at small is close to ( )
,then
in order for density inhomogeneities generated at the time of inflation to have the
required amplitude
And B takes the value, B

10-12-10-14

On the other hand, the curvature of the effective potential ( ) near its minimum at
must be great enough to make the field oscillate at high frequency after inflation,
thereby heating the universe to a rather high temperature T. There are no elementary
particles theory that satisfies all the necessary requirements.
2. The second problem is related to the fact that this field is most likely not to be in a state
of thermodynamic equilibrium with the other fields present in the early universe. But even
if it were in equilibrium, if B is small, high temperature corrections to potential cannot
alter the initial value of the field and make it zero in the time between the birth of the
universe and the assumed start of inflation.
3. Another problem relates to the fact that in both the old and new scenarios, inflation will
only begin when the temperature of the universe has dropped sufficiently far according it
inflation will begin at a time following the beginning of expansion of the universe that

exceeds the Planck time by six orders of magnitude. But the entropy required for a hot,
closed universe is greater than S 109. Thus the flatness problem remain in both these
theory when we consider the closed universe, though one can thought it as an argument
of flat or open universe.
c. Discussion
The original model for inflation used a strongly first order phase transition whereas the
second model may be considered to be using a weakly first order (or even second order)
phase transition. And there was a need of new theory or point of view in inflationary
picture. Cosmologist thought about a picture where the theory is not based upon the high
temperature phase transition but the evolution of a universe which is filled with a
chaotically distributed scalar field .

03.D. Chaotic Inflation
a.Basic Model
This theory consider a simplest model of the scalar field φ with a mass m and potential
energy density V (φ) =
. Since this function has a minimum at φ = 0, the scalar field φ
should oscillate near this minimum. Then the equation of motion for the scalar field will
be, ̈
as for simple harmonic motion. This is the case when the universe is not
̇
expanding. But as we know the universe is expanding with Hubble constant H = , an
additional term will appear in the equation:
̈
̇
(1)
The term
̇ can be interpreted as the friction term. Then Einstein equation for a
homogeneous universe containing a scalar field φ will be,
( ̇
)
(2)
Where, the curvature parameter k = −1, 0, 1 for an open, flat or closed universe
respectively.
If the scalar field φ initially was large then from (2) we get H was large too. This means
that the friction term also was very large and therefore the scalar field was moving very
slowly. So, at this stage the energy density of the scalar field remained almost constant
and the expansion of the universe continued at a much greater speed than in the old
cosmological theory. Due to the rapid growth of the scale of the universe and the slow
motion of the field φ, then soon after the beginning, ̈
̇
̇
so the system of equations can be simplified,
̇
(3)

and

̈

(4)

The first equation shows that if the field φ changes slowly, the size of the universe in this
regime grows approximately as
it is the stage of inflation, which ends when the field
φ becomes much smaller Planck mass. The solution to these equations shows that after a
long stage of inflation the universe initially filled with the field φ >> 1 grows exponentially,

.
Thus, chaotic inflation does not require an initial state of thermal equilibrium supercooling
and tunneling from the false vacuum like the old theories. It became clear from the
chaotic inflation that inflation is not just a trick necessary to fix problems of the old big
bang theory, but a natural cosmological theory.
b. initial condition
Now it is about the initial conditions of chaotic inflation. If we consider first a closed
universe of initial size l ∼ 1 (in Planck units), it can emerges from the space–time foam or
from singularity or from “nothing” in a state with the Planck density ρ ∼ 1. At this initial
moment the sum of the kinetic energy density, gradient energy density, and the potential
̇

energy density is of the order unity:

(

)

( )

Chaotic inflation concludes that there are no a priori constraints on the initial value of the
scalar field in this domain, except for the constraints

̇

(

)

( )

.We

consider a theory with V (φ) = const. This theory is invariant under the shift symmetry φ →
φ + c. Therefore, in such a theory all initial values of the homogeneous component of the
scalar field φ are equally probable.
The only constraint on the amplitude of the field appears if the effective potential is not
constant, but grows and becomes greater than the Planck density at φ > φp where V (φp) =
1. This constraint implies that φ ≤ φp, but there is no reason to expect that initially φ must
be much smaller than φp . This suggests that the typical initial value of the field φ in such a
theory is φ ∼ φp.
If

̇

(

)

( ) in the domain under consideration, then inflation begins, and

then within the Planck time the terms

̇

(

) become much smaller than V (φ),

which ensures continuation of inflation. It seems therefore that chaotic inflation occurs
under rather natural initial conditions, if it can begin at V (φ) ∼ 1. The different view on
this from quantum fluctuation will be discussed later.

c.The potential-

Fig.6- This is the motion of the scalar field in the theory with V (φ) =
Several different cases are possible, depending on the value of the field φ. If the potential
energy density of the field is greater than the Planck density quantum fluctuations of
space–time are so strong that one cannot describe it in usual terms. Such a state is called
space–time foam.
At a somewhat smaller energy density the quantum fluctuations of space–time are small,
but the quantum fluctuations of the scalar field φ may be large. Jumps of the scalar field
due to quantum fluctuations lead to a process of eternal self-reproduction of inflationary
universe which we are going to discuss later.
At even smaller values of potential fluctuations of the field φ are small; it slowly moves
down as a ball in a viscous liquid. Inflation occurs for 1 ≤ φ ≤ m-1. Finally, near the
minimum of V (φ) the scalar field rapidly oscillates, creates pairs of elementary particles,
and the universe becomes hot.

d.Solving the problems
Total amount of inflation achieved starting from V (φ) ∼ 1 is of the order (1010)10 . The
total duration of inflation in this model is about 10-30 s. When inflation ends, the scalar

field φ begins to oscillate near the minimum of V (φ). So, it looses its energy by creating
pairs of elementary particles. These particles interact with each other and come to a state
of thermal equilibrium with some temperature. And from this time on, the universe can be
described by the usual big bang theory.
The main difference between inflationary theory and the old cosmology becomes clear if
we calculate the size of a typical inflationary domain at the end of inflation. The
investigation of this question shows that even if the initial size of inflationary universe was
as small as the Planck size lp ∼ 10-33 cm, after 10-30 s of inflation the universe acquires a
huge size of l (1010)10 ! In all realistic models the size of the universe after inflation
appears to be many orders of magnitude greater than the size of the part of the universe
which we can see now, l ∼ 1028 cm. And this solves most of the problems of the old big
bang.
Our universe is almost exactly homogeneous on large scales because all inhomogeneities
were exponentially stretched during inflation. The density of primordial monopoles and
other undesirable relics becomes exponentially diluted by inflation. The universe becomes
enormously large. Even if it was a closed universe of a size ∼ 10-33 cm, after inflation the
distance between its “ outh” and “North” poles becomes many orders of magnitude
greater than 1028 cm. We see only a tiny part of the huge cosmic balloon. That is why the
universe looks so flat. If our universe initially consisted of many domains with chaotically
distributed scalar field then domains in which the scalar field was too small never inflated.
The main contribution to the total volume of the universe will be given by those domains
which originally contained a large scalar field φ. Inflation of such domains creates huge
homogeneous islands out of initial chaos. Each homogeneous domain in this scenario is
much greater than the size of the observable part of the universe.

e. Chaotic Inflation versus New Inflation
One should consider any particular potential V (φ), polynomial or not, with or without
spontaneous symmetry breaking, and study all possible initial conditions without assuming
that the universe was in a state of thermal equilibrium, and that the field φ was in the
minimum of its effective potential from the very beginning. This scenario strongly deviated
from the standard lore of the hot big bang theory.By now the debate is over: no realistic
versions of new inflation based on the theory of thermal phase transitions and
supercooling have been proposed so far. Gradually it became clear that the idea of chaotic
initial conditions is most general, and it is much easier to construct a consistent
cosmological theory without making unnecessary assumptions about thermal equilibrium
and high-temperature phase transitions in the early universe.

f. Eternal Inflation
A significant step in the development of inflationary theory was the discovery of the
process of self-reproduction of inflationary universe. This process was known to exist in
old inflationary theory and in the new one but its significance was fully realized only after
the discovery of the regime of eternal inflation in the simplest versions of the chaotic
inflation scenario.
In theories of eternal inflation, the inflationary phase of the universe's expansion lasts
forever in at least some regions of the universe. Because these regions expand
exponentially rapidly, most of the volume of the universe at any given time is inflating. All
models of eternal inflation produce an infinite multiverse. It appears that in many
inflationary models large quantum fluctuations produced during inflation may significantly
increase the value of the energy density in some parts of the universe. These regions
expand at a greater rate than their parent domains, and quantum fluctuations inside them
lead to production of new inflationary domains which expand even faster. This leads to an
eternal process of self-reproduction of the universe

03.E.Other inflation theories
a.Hybrid InflationTill now we discussed the inflation involve just one scalar field. But as in supergravity and
string theory there are many different scalar fields so cosmologists give the hybrid
inflation where many different scalar fields are considered. In a typical hybrid model the
scalar field which responsible for inflation evolves toward a minimum with nonzero
vacuum energy. The end of inflation arises due to the instability in the second field.
The simplest version of hybrid inflation describes the theory of two scalar fields with the
effective potential
(

)

(
)
The effective mass squared of the field σ is equal to –M2 + g2φ2. Therefore for φ > φc =
M/g the only minimum of the effective potential V (σ, φ) is at σ = 0. The curvature of the
effective potential in the σ-direction is much greater than in the φ-direction. Thus at the
first stages of expansion of the universe the field σ rolled down to σ = 0, whereas the field
φ could remain large for a much longer time.

At the moment when the inflation field φ becomes smaller than φc = M/g, the phase
transition with the symmetry breaking occurs. The fields rapidly fall to the absolute
minimum of the potential at φ = 0, σ2 = M2/λ. If m2φc2 = m2M2/g2 << M4/λ, the Hubble
constant at the time of the phase transition is given by H2 = M4/12λ. If M2>> λm2/g2 and
m2<< H2, then the universe at φ > φc undergoes a stage of inflation, which abruptly ends at
φ = φc.
According to Linde hybrid inflation is also a version of the chaotic inflation scenario. The
main difference between this scenario and the simplest versions of the one-field chaotic
inflation is in the way inflation end. Here the steeping of the second potential ends the
inflation which allow much greater flexibility of construction of inflationary models.
b.Extended inflationary cosmology The saga of inflationary models does not end here. After discussing the quantum
fluctuation we will discuss the theory of eternal inflation or self reproducing universe.
Another model named extended inflation given by La & Steinhardt was given by on the
basis of Brans-Dicke cosmology, in which the gravitational constant G ought to be related
to the average value of a scalar field φ which is coupled to the mass density of the
universe. There occurs a dimensionless constant
If is much larger than unity, i.e. at
infinity the theory looks like Einstein theory. Using this in the extended inflationary
cosmology the form of expansion is became power law type, not exponential. It allows the
inflation to end smoothly through bubble nucleation. Though it also has problem with the
observation of
. o, the theory changed again to hyper e tended inflation but it’s
also not satisfactory. Actually no single model of inflation can be considered completely
satisfactory, till now.

Inflation and quantum cosmology
04.A. Quantum fluctuation and density perturbation
It begins with the problem of structure formation. In big bang cosmology cosmological
perturbation theory is the theory by which the evolution of structure is understood. It
uses general relativity to compute the gravitational forces causing small perturbations to
grow and eventually seed the formation of stars, quasars, galaxies and clusters. It only
applies to situations in which the universe is predominantly homogeneous, such as
during cosmic inflation and large parts of the big bang. So, in search of a origin of density
perturbation, the most natural choice to explain it is the quantum fluctuations in the scalar
field φ. A quantum fluctuation is the temporary appearance of energetic particles out of
empty space, as allowed by the uncertainty Principle. In quantum field theory, fields
undergo quantum fluctuations. So, the fluctuation of the inflation field is the source of the
density perturbation.
The perturbation of the inflation field is coupled with the perturbation of the metric. The
logics are like that, as fluctuation of the inflation field dominates the energy density of the
universe it will also perturbed the stress-energy tensor. Through the Einstein field
equation this will change the metric. On the other hand a perturbation of the metric also
induces a back-reaction in the evolution of the inflationary field through the perturbed
Klein-Gordon equation. So, we can write a coupled equation
, this is a
Gauge invariant relation with high importance.
The formulation from the fluctuation of the inflation field to the density perturbation can
be done by the following way,
1. In quantum theory, the field ̂(t, x) and its Fourier coefficient ̂(t) become
operators. In any quantum state, the variables will have a mean value and
fluctuations around this mean value.
2. Since the mean evolution of the scalar field is described by a homogeneous
part
(t), we expect the mean values of ̂ to vanish (for k 0); ⟨ | ̂| ⟩= 0. The
fluctuations around these mean values do not vanish.
3. We incorporate these quantum fluctuations in a semiclassical manner by taking the
scalar field to be (t, x) =
(t) + f (t, x) , where f (t, x) is related to (t) , which is
the dispersion characterised the fluctuations in qk .
4. The density perturbations are calculated by treating (t, x) as a classical object.
The detail calculation results the density contrast,
(

)

(̇ )

̇( )

For observation we need to know this when the perturbation enters in Hubble radius, for a
Coleman- Weinberg model the finally we get,
(

)

We can see that the density perturbation have the correct spectrum but high amplitude(
acceptable value 10-4). This requires a fine tuning . This has been the most serious difficulty
faced by all realistic inflationary models: They produce too large an inhomogeneity. The
problem can be solved if it were possible to keep
arbitrarily small but from the
quantum field theory the inflationary phase induces a fluctuation of about ⁄ . This
lower bound prevents us from getting sensible values for unless we fine-tune the
dimensionless parameters of ( ) . Several solutions have been suggested but none is
complete.
O4.B. Reheating and particle creation
The theory of reheating of the universe after inflation is the most important application of
the quantum theory of particle creation, since almost all matter constituting the universe
was created during this process. At the stage of inflation all energy is concentrated in a
classical slowly moving inflation field φ. Soon after the end of inflation this field begins to
oscillate near the minimum of its effective potential. Eventually it produces many
elementary particles, they interact with each other and come to a state of thermal
equilibrium with some temperature. Reheating of the universe after inflation were based
on the idea that the homogeneous inflation field can be represented as a collection of the
particles of the field φ. Each of these particles decayed independently. This process can be
studied by the usual perturbative approach to particle decay. Typically, it takes thousands
of oscillations of the inflation field until it decays into usual elementary particles by this
mechanism. More recently, however, it was discovered that coherent field effects such as
parametric resonance can lead to the decay of the homogeneous field much faster than
would have been predicted by perturbative methods, within a few dozen oscillations.
These coherent effects produce high energy, nonthermal fluctuations that could have
significance for understanding developments in the early universe, such as baryogenesis.
This early stage of rapid nonperturbative decay was called “preheating.”

Criticism

05.A. Critique
Since its introduction by Alan Guth in 1980, the inflationary paradigm has become widely
accepted. Nevertheless, many physicists, mathematicians, and philosophers of science
have voiced criticisms, claiming unfulfilled promises and lack of serious empirical support.
In 1999, John Earman and Jesús Mosterín published a thorough critical review of
inflationary cosmology, concluding that “we do not think that there are, as yet, good
grounds for admitting any of the models of inflation into the standard core of cosmology”.
Paul J. Steinhardt one of the founding fathers of inflationary cosmology, has recently
become one of its sharpest critics. He calls ‘bad inflation’ a period of accelerated
e pansion whose outcome conflicts with observations, and ‘good inflation’ one compatible
with them: “Not only is bad inflation more likely than good inflation, but no inflation is
more likely than either”.
Roger Penrose considered all the possible configurations of the inflation and gravitational
fields. Some of these configurations lead to inflation. Other configurations lead to a
uniform, flat universe directly –without inflation. Obtaining a flat universe is unlikely
overall. Penrose’s shocking conclusion, though, was that obtaining a flat universe without
inflation is much more likely than with inflation –by a factor of 10 to the 100 power!
Narlikar and Padmanabhan in their paper on inflation in 1991 discussed that how serious
are the original problems that the inflation was invoked to solve? What alternative
explanations are possible for these difficulties?
It is true that inflation does solve the horizon and flatness problem but both these
problems deal with the initial conditions for our universe. Since Einstein's equations
permit k = - 1, 0 or + 1 in a FRW solution, the value of k needs to be supplied as an extra
input to classical theory. But the creation of the universe needs to be understood quantum
mechanically rather than classically! Inflation thus tries to provide a classical answer to an
inherently quantum gravitational question.
This anomaly is quite striking when we consider the horizon problem. The horizon problem
( )
( )∫
exists because the integral
, is finite. But do we know that it is
( )

finite? To make such a claim we have to assume that there was a singularity at t = 0 and
that we know the behaviour of a(t) arbitrarily close to t = 0. For t < tp, quantum
gravitational effects will modify the behaviour of a (t) and will probably eliminate the
singularity problem. Then, for almost all a (t) (except for a class of functions of measure
zero), the above integral will diverge, automatically solving the horizon problem. In other
words, flatness and horizon problems owe their existence to our using classical physics
beyond its domain of validity. There are several quantum gravitational models in which
these problems are solved as an offshoot of elimination of the singularity problem. This is
a possibility that did not exist in classical cosmology.

05.B. Alternatives
There were some alternatives of inflationary cosmology but they are less popular due to
there inconsistent results. The theories like- cosmic strings and textures, pre big bang,
cyclic scenario, string gas scenario, mirage bounce, bounce in quantum cosmology.
In the steady state cosmology an alternative theory based on Hoyle's earlier ideas of a
cosmological field creating matter was investigated further by Hoyle & Narlikar. This
involved a scalar C-field.
In the steady state solution, matter creation is compensated by augmentation of the
strength of the C-field, which has negative energy.
There were also solutions of this theory with no creation of matter, however. What role
did they have to play? Hoyle & Narlikar argued that these solutions appear as “bubbles” in
a highly dense steady state universe with H >> H0, the present value of Hubble's constant.
The mechanism of the switch-over from a “creation” to “noncreation” mode was left
undiscussed for want of a quantum field theory of the C-field.

OBSERVATION

Though it has faced many criticism, inflation hold its status because some of its features
are well judged through experiment. Inflation is not just an interesting theory that can
resolve many difficult problems of the standard big bang cosmology, it also made several
predictions which can be tested by cosmological observations. Here are the most
important predictions:
( ) The universe must be flat. n most models Ω0 = 1± 10-4.
It is not easy to test all of these predictions. The major breakthrough in this direction was
achieved due to the recent measurements of the CMB anisotropy. These observations
received further confirmation, most impressively by the detailed observations of CMB
made by the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) spacecraft. [It is a
spacecraft which measures differences in the temperature of the Big Bang’s remnant
radiant heat – the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation – across the full sky. The
WMAP spacecraft was launched on 2001]. This analysis shows that the universe is flat to
an accuracy of at least a few percent, and that it is homogeneous and isotropic to a part in
10,000.
(2) The nature of the perturbation
In addition, inflation predicts that the structures visible in the universe today formed
through the gravitational collapse of perturbations which were formed as quantum
mechanical fluctuations in the inflationary epoch. The detailed form of the spectrum of
perturbations called a nearly-scale-invariant Gaussian random field (or Harrison–Zel'dovich
spectrum) is very specific and has only two free parameters, the amplitude of the
spectrum and the spectral index which measures the slight deviation from scale invariance
predicted by inflation. Inflation predicts that the observed perturbations should be
in thermal equilibrium with each other means there are adiabatic perturbations. This
structure for the perturbations has been confirmed by the WMAP spacecraft and other
cosmic microwave background experiments and galaxy surveys, especially the
ongoing Sloan Digital Sky Survey. These experiments have shown that the one part in
10,000 inhomogeneities observed have exactly the form predicted by theory. Moreover,
there is evidence for a slight deviation from scale invariance. The spectral index, ns is equal
to one for a scale-invariant spectrum. The simplest models of inflation predict that this
quantity is between 0.92 and 0.98. From the data taken by the WMAP spacecraft it can be
inferred that ns = 0.963 ± 0.012. This is considered an important confirmation of the theory
of inflation.

INFLATION & MACH PRINCIPLE: IN SEARCH OF A PHYSICAL CONNECTION

07.A. Introduction
Now I will discuss on another interesting and controversial principle of physics “ ach
principle”. According to ir Fred Hoyle “ think it was Hermann ondi who once said that
Physics is such a consistent and connected logical structure that if one starts to investigate
it at any point and if one pursues correctly every issue that branches away from one’s
starting point, in the outcome one will be led to understand the whole of physics. With
ach’s principle it seems something like that.”
In this project at first part I discuss on a basic theory of inflation which is quite verified
with the modern observational facts. Now my target in this part to search is there are any
connection between Mach principle and inflation ? If it is , then what we can conclude. If it
is not, then what it indicate. For the demand of this relation we have to discuss on another
interesting question “ s our universe rotating ?”
Now what is the actual meaning of the term ‘ ach’s principle’. Actually it was Einstein
who first used the term ach’s principle in 9 8 and tried to incorporate ach’s idea into
his theory of general relativity. Mach (1838- 9 ) in his book “the science of mechanism”
critici ed Newton’s idea of absolute space and the concept of inertia. We will discuss it
later in some different language but in same logic. Einstein was very much influenced by
ach’s thinking and he was the first who tried to incorporate it in a physical law. Let us
first discuss on the ach’s principle in its most accepted form. will discuss it according to
Narlikar’s way.

07.B.Mach principle
1. Absolute Space Revisited
We can measure the Earth's spin about its polar axis, in two ways. One is observing the
rising and setting of stars and the second method is using a Foucault pendulum. The two
methods give the same answer.
At first sight this does not seem surprising. If we are measuring the same quantity, we
should get the same answer regardless of the method used. But if we think deeply we can
realise that these two methods are not measuring the same quantity. The first method
measures the Earth's spin period against a background of distant stars, while the second
employs the standard Newtonian mechanics in a spinning frame of reference. In the latter
case, we are using the concept of absolute space, how laws of motion get modified when
their consequences are measured in a frame of reference spinning relative to the
`absolute space' in which these laws were first stated by Newton.
Ernst Mach was first who pointed out that this coincidence is nontrivial. He conclude that
the postulate of absolute space that allows one to write down the laws of motion and

arrive at the concept of inertia is somehow intimately related to the background of distant
parts of the universe.
This argument is known as `Mach's principle'.
In the framework of the absolute space, Newton's second law of motion takes the familiar
form P = mf. This law states that a body of mass m subjected to an external force P
e periences an acceleration f. Let us denote by ∑ the coordinate system in which P and f
are measured. f we choose another frame ∑’ that has an acceleration a relative to ∑ , the
second law of motion measured in ∑’ becomes,
P’ = P - ma = mf’
Although both looks the same with f’ the acceleration of the body in ∑’ but something new
has entered into the force term. This is the term ma, which has nothing to do with the
external force but depends solely on the mass m of the body and the acceleration a of the
reference frame relative to the absolute space. Newton termed it “inertial force". As this
name implies, the additional force is proportional to the inertial mass of the body. Newton
gives an example of a rotating water filled bucket, which was letter criticized by Mach. Let
us look at that experiment.
2. Newton's Bucket Experiment

In figure there is a bucket full of water hanging
by a rope tied to the ceiling. Suppose the rope
is given a twist and let go. In Figure we see the
same bucket turning around and around as a
result of the rope unwinding. To an observer in
the room the bucket appears spinning in state
(b). However, a fly sitting on the bucket might
conclude that in the bucket is at rest and the
room is spinning. The same fly would have
concluded that in (a) the room was not
spinning. However there is one difference
between states (a) and (b). The water surface
in (a) is flat and horizontal, while that in (b) is
curved inwards, rising at the rim. Why this curvature? The fly would reason that the
curvature of the water surface is due to the centrifugal force that acts on the water mass,
being radially outwards, it would produce the observed effect on the water. Then Newton
argued that in (a) the bucket is at rest relative to the absolute space, while in (b) it is
rotating relative to the absolute space and hence extra inertial forces have to be
postulated to explain the curvature of the water surface. The centrifugal force is the
inertial force in this example.
Mach criticized the Newtonian discussion and said that it was incomplete in the sense that
the existence of the absolute space was postulated arbitrarily and in an abstract manner.
Why does ∑ have a special status in that it does not require the inertial force? How can
one physically identify ∑ without recourse to the second law of motion, which is based on
it?

To Mach the answers to these questions were contained in the observation of the distant
parts of the universe. It is the universe that provides a background reference frame that
can be identified with Newton's frame ∑. Instead of saying that it is an accident that Earth's
rotation velocity relative to ∑ agrees with that relative to the distant parts of the universe,
Mach took it as proof that the distant parts of the universe somehow enter into the
formulation of local laws of mechanics.

3. Inertia in an Empty Universe
This could happen if there is a direct connection between the property of inertia and the
existence of the universal background. If we imagine a single body in an empty universe, in
the absence of any forces, then
mf = 0
Following Newton we could conclude that f = 0, that is, the body moves with uniform
velocity. But we now no longer have a background against which to measure velocities.
Thus f = 0 has no operational significance. Rather, the lack of any tangible background for
measuring motion suggests that f should be completely indeterminate. So, one can
conclude that, m = 0
It means the measure of inertia depends on the existence of the background in such a way
that in the absence of the background the measure vanishes! This aspect introduces a new
feature into mechanics not considered by Newton. The Newtonian view that inertia is not
only the property of matter but inertia is the property of matter as well as of the
background provided by the rest of the universe.
But the problem is Mach himself never gave a quantitative expression to these ideas, but
from Einstein to many other scientists have tried to done so. In search of a theory which
will be completely Machian in nature they interpret it in various ways.
4. Variation of Mach principle
Till now what we have discussed is just a part of ach’s principle. As say before there is
no quantitative expression of ach’s idea it takes several forms. n 99 Hermann ondi
and Joseph Samuel in their paper named "The Lense–Thirring Effect and Mach's Principle"
, mention 11 different forms of ach’s principle. With mentioning that does they make
any sense in these theories, i. Newtonian space time. (N) ii. Einsteinian space time (E) iii.
Asymptotically flat space time.(EA) iv. Relativistic cosmology (EC ). These are:
• Mach0: The universe, as represented by the average motion of distant galaxies does not
appear to rotate relative to local inertial frames.
ach is an e perimental observation and not a principle. One could interpret ach’s
writings as a suggestion to construct a theory in which Mach0 appears as a natural
consequence. ut ach’s writings have been variously interpreted so the interpretations
are :

ach : Newton’s gravitational constant G is a dynamical field.

akes sense in N, EA, E . t is not true in N or E. This version applied to Einstein’s
theory has led to Brans–Dicke Theory of gravity.

ach : An isolated body in otherwise empty space has no inertia

Makes sense in N, EA, EC. Neither Newtonian nor Einsteinian gravity satisfy this version.
In both theories the motion of an isolated body is determined and not arbitrary.
• ach3: local inertial frames are affected by the cosmic motion and distribution of
matter.
Makes sense in N, EA, EC. This version is closest to the bucket experiment. In this form,
Newton’s theory is in clear conflict with ach3. Einstein’s theory is not.

ach4: The universe is spatially Closed.
Makes sense only in EC. Still we do not know if Mach4 is true.

ach5: the total energy, angular and linear momentum of the universe are zero

Makes sense in N, EA, EC. It is not true in N and EA. In EC it is claimed that the total
angular momentum of a closed universe must vanish.

ach : Inertial mass is affected by the global distribution of matter.

Makes sense in (N, EA, EC). Is not true in any of them. Hoyle and Narlikar proposed a
theory in which implements Mach6.

ach7: If you take away all matter, there is no more space.
Makes sense in (N,EA,EC). Not true in any of them.

• ach8: Ω 4πρ T2 is a definite number of order unity. (Here,
ρ is the mean density matter in the universe and T is the Hubble time.
Makes sense in EC only. does seem to be of order unity in our present universe, but
note that of all EC models, only the Einstein–DeSitter makes this number a constant, if is
not exactly one. Making a theory in which this approximate equality appears natural is a
worthwhile and ongoing effort (eg inflationary cosmologies).

ach9: The theory contains no absolute elements.
akes sense in N, EA and E . Newton’s theory does not satisfy ach9 (space and time
are absolute) and neither does EA (asymptotic flatness introduces an absolute element–
the flat metric at infinity). EC does satisfy Mach9 From the point of view of invariance
groups, in this light Mach9 is just the principle of general covariance.

ach : Overall rigid rotations and translations of a system are unobservable.
Makes sense only in N; In Einsteinian spacetime one has no idea what a rigid rotation is
anymore than one knows what a rigid body is. This is not satisfied in Newtonian theory.

o our discussion of Newton’s bucket leads to the conclusion that it is the observational
fact that our universe is flat so it is also a observational fact that it is non rotating as
ach said and it’s e planation from the achian view close to the ach3. Newtonian
view conflict with it but Einsteinian not, so what Einstein’s theory incorporate from it ?
Einstein takes it in the form “...inertia originates in a kind of interaction between
bodies...”, and at it’s first appearance it seems to incorporate ach fully but there was a
problem when Gödel give his solution of Einstein equation. It was a rotating universe
solution.

O7.C. Rotation of universe
A rotating universe Gödel’s solution
The form of Gödel metric is,
( (

)

)

Where is a constant (of the dimension of a frequency). Let us have a look at some of its
properties:
It describes a universe which is filled with a perfect fluid with very high pressure, or
equivalently, with pressure less dust together with a negative cosmological constant. It is
homogeneous and stationary but not static.
Two nearby observers, both at rest with respect to matter, rotate with respect to each
other. This means that any observer who is at rest with respect to matter and always looks
towards a particular nearby observer feels extra forces ! Conversely, any observer who is
at rest with respect to matter and orients himself along a fixed direction of his local inertial
frame sees all nearby observers rotating around him with angular velocity ω. His
impression must be that the whole universe is rotating around him! However, since spacetime is homogeneous, there is no distinguished axis of rotation of the universe! Hence, in
this sense, local inertial frames rotate with respect to each other.
By appropriately moving around, one may travel into his own past! i.e. ödel’s universe
contains closed time-like curves.

Now in general relativity, the question arose whether it incorporated ach’s principle in a
stronger form than just predicting Machian effects or it does not. Is there a sense in which
one may state that inertia emerges from the distribution and motion of matter in the
universe? ödel’s universe arose the question again, does it confirm or contradict ach’s
principle? The answer is not unique. n a sense, the (theoretical) e istence of ödel’s
universe may be viewed to confirm ach‘s distribution and motion of matter. On the
other hand, it may be viewed to contradict ach‘s principle, because local inertial frames
rotate with respect to each other, while the universe as a whole does not rotate around
some particular axis. And the conflict rise because of the various presentation of Machian
view.
Now let us move on the question does our universe rotates ??

Rotation rate of universe
Now the question arises is our universe really rotating ? According to the mathematics of
Kurt Gödel it is. But there is no prove of it , rather if one use the recent data of CMBR to
make a constrain in rotation of universe gate the slow rate of rotation. According to S .W.
Hawking, MNRAS 142, 129 (1969), J. D. Barrow et al:, MNRAS 213, 917 (1985). , C. B.
Collins and S. W. Hawking, MNRAS 162, 307 (1973) these papers the rate of rotation of
universe is ,
– For closed universe (Hawking 1969) < 10-14 - 7 x 10-17 rad/yr
– For open universe (Hawking 1969) < 2 x 10-17 rad/yr
– For flat universe (Barrow et al. 1985) < 1.5 x 10-15 rad/yr
The detail theoretical calculation in ‘ nflation can solve the rotation problem’ ( ef.TH.
3399-CERN) John Ellis & Keith A. Olive where they took angular velocity as perturbation
and derive a dimensionless quantity in the early universe and conclude that it must have
been less than 5 x 10-28 to be compatible to the present data .
They possess it as the ‘rotational problem’, why this quantity is so much small ? o, if one
can solve this he can argue that is obvious that the universe must have slow rotation rate.
It can be done in two ways, to believe Mach and according to his principle it is logical. Or
take some other way. Ellis and Olive shows that it can be obtained from inflationary view
and rotation problem can be solved.
The conclusion of above discussion is done later. Now, let us move into another topic.

07.D.The Brans Dicke Theory of Gravity
We see that Einstein’s relativity cannot assure that it completely incorporate ach’s
principle. To incorporate ach’s idea in theory many other scientist developed their
theory but most strongest competitor of general relativity is Brans Dicke theory of gravity.

In 1961, C Brans and R H Dicke provided an interesting alternative to general relativity
based on Mach's principle (Mach1). To understand the reasons leading to their field
equations, we first note that the concept of a variable inertial mass itself leads to a
problem of interpretation. How do we compare masses at two different points in spacetime?
Masses are measured in certain units, such as masses of elementary particles, which might
themselves be subject to change! We need an independent unit of mass against which an
increase or decrease of a particle mass can be measured. Such a unit is provided by
gravity, by the so-called Planck mass defined by Mp :
Mp = ( )

≈ .

×

-5

gm

Thus the dimensionless quantity,
(

)

measured at different space-time points can tell us whether masses m are changing. Or
alternatively, if we insist on using mass units that are the same everywhere, a change of
would tell us that the gravitational constant G is changing. We could of course assume that
and c also change. However, by keeping
and c constant we follow the principle of
least modification of existing theories. Thus special relativity and quantum theory are
unaffected if we keep and c fixed. This is the conclusion Brans and Dicke arrived at in
their approach to Mach's principle. They looked for a framework in which the gravitational
constant G arises from the structure of the universe, so that a changing G could be looked
upon as the Machian consequence of a changing universe.
Brans Dicke theory in inflation
In the modern context, if the universe is governed by the Brans-Dicke action, then some
problems in the inflationary scenario get resolved. In the conventional inflationary
scenario, within the frame work of Einstein Hilbert action, the universe underwent an
exponential expansion for a brief period in its early phase. After the exponential phase is
over the universe transit to the normal cosmology phase. But there is no satisfactory
mechanism by which the universe transits to the normal phase. According to extended
inflation (La & Steinhardt 1989; Mathiazhahan & Johri 1984), within the framework of
Brans-Dicke gravity, a constant energy density leads to a rapid power-law expansion
instead of exponential. This is rapid enough to solve problems in standard cosmology and
at the same time slow enough to make the transition to normal state possible after the
inflationary phase.
n their paper ‘Fluctuations of the Gravitational Constant in the Inflationary Brans–Dicke
Cosmology’ , Juan arc´ıa–Bellido, Andrei Linde, Dmitri Linde conclude that according to
the Brans–Dicke theory, the value of the gravitational constant G which we measure at
present is determined by the value of the Brans–Dicke scalar field φ at the end of inflation.
However, due to quantum fluctuations of the scalar fields produced during inflation, the
gravitational constant G(φ) may take different values in different exponentially large parts
of the Universe.

CONCLUSION
So from these relations and discussion I conclude that1. Inflation can explain the slow rotation rate of universe and make the same
conclusion what ach said. n their paper “ nflation can solve the rotational
problem”, Ellis and Olive suggest that as we can solve the rotational problem
through inflation it redundant Mach principle. But we can conclude another way
saying that as inflation incorporates Mach principle, it gives the same result.
2. Now the question is how inflation incorporate ach’s principle ? would say it
directly does it through the Brans-Dicke gravity (Mach1). So, it may be concluded
that Mach0 & Mach1 is related through inflation.

3. Inflation used general theory of relativity and confirms the slow rotation rate of
universe. ontradictory odel’s solution of Einstein equation predicts the rotational
universe, which also contradict Mach. So, somehow, inflation is directing towards a
unique Mach principle.
4. If we can develop a unique Mach principle through these consequences and make a
choice (selection) between those 11 views, we can use it as a selection principle in
the solution of general relativity.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Banerjee, S and Banerjee, A (2007) ; General relativity and cosmology, Elsevier, Reed
Elsevier India Private Limited
2. Wienberg, S (1972); Gravitation and cosmology , Wiley India (P.) Ltd, New Dellhi
3. Kolb, W.E & Turner , M. S ; The early Universe , Levants Book , Kolkata, India
4. Narlikar, J.V (1983); Introduction to cosmology , Cambridge University Press
5. Linde. A (1990); Particle Physics And Inflationary Cosmology , Harwood, Chur,
Switzerland
6. Lemoine, M & Martin, J & Patrick, P (2010); Inflationary Cosmology , Springer
7. arbour, J & Pfister, H ( 995) ; ach’s principle from Newton’s ucket to Quantum
gravity, The center for Einstein Studies, Birkhäuser

Papers ( Due to lack of information I just mention the paper name and the writers
name)
1.
2.
3.
4.

A possible solution to the horizon and flatness problenm, Alan H. Guth
Inflation can solve the rotation problem, John Elis & Keith. A. Olive.
The Lense–Thirring Effect and Mach's Principle, Hermann Bondi & Joseph Samuel.
Brans Dicke class of Cosmology, T. R. Seshadri.