153 views

Uploaded by Damian Sowinski

An introduction to how topological defects form in the early universe during phase transitions. Monopoles, strings, and domain walls are studied in depth.

- UG Syllabus Effective From June 2012
- MATH3175-fa10-sol4
- Information-Entropic Stability Bound for Compact Objects:Application to Q-balls and theChandrasekhar Limit of Polytropes
- Group Homomorphism
- Wave Packet Transform over Finite Fields.pdf
- A Friendly Introduction to Group Theory
- Indian Civil Service Exam Maths
- Introduction to finite Fields
- chapter iv
- Group
- Cosmic Anisotropy: A History of the Axis of Evil
- 3rd Part
- The Explanation of the Design Patterns by the Symmetry Concepts
- Category-Group Theory 2
- Photometric Analysis of M & L Dwarfs with the LSST Throughput Profiles
- 9702069v1[1]
- 4 Castillo
- Revision of the Particle-wave Dualism
- Emt
- 10

You are on page 1of 7

Damian R. Sowinski

Department of Physics and Astronomy, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH 03755 March 11, 2012

Abstract

Theories with spontaneous symmetry breaking exhibit degenerate vacuum states. This set of states can be described by a vacuum manifold whose nontrivial topology determines the types of defects that can form in the fabric of spacetime. We examine the simplest classes of defects, and analyze their properties, in particular their contribution to the energy content of the Universe, and their evolution in an expanding FRW spacetime.

Introduction What is the nature of empty space? Classically, we can analyze empty space by considering removing all material objects from the universe. What remains is a highly symmetric structure of points named Euclidean Space, in remembrance of the Greek geometer who first laid out its properties. This picture, though mathematically well developed, is a far cry from the vacuum in reality. The revolution that happened in physics during the last century changed the way we think about empty space. Whereas Euclidean space is is described by the group of isometries, the relativity and quantum theories ascribe to empty space very different symmetry groups. GR tells us that space and time are intricately related to one another. In Einsteins own words, Space by itself, and time by itself, are doomed to fade away into mere shadows, and only a kind union of the two will preserve an independent reality. Within the context of this theory, spacetime is described as a 4-dimensional Reimannian manifold. The Euclidean isometries are replaced by the Poincare group as the symmetry of empty space. This group consists of four translations, one temporal and three spatial, as well as the six generators of the proper Lorentz group, the three rotations and the three boosts. Quantum mechanics changes the way we understand empty space by changing the way that we look at matter. Within the context of this theory we speak about elds that evolve in space. However, due to the uncertainty principle, it is

impossible to completely annihilate a eld. The best that can be done is to lower the eld to its minimum value, known as the ground state or vacuum. In field theory, the effective potentials fields live in are temperature dependent. At high temperatures, these potentials are highly symmetric and there is a single vacuum. As the temperature decreases below some critical value, the minimum of the potential becomes degenerate and the original symmetry of the ground state is broken. The set of degenerate vacua forms a space called the vacuum manifold. With the vacuum manifold defined, empty space can be described as a continuous mapping from real space into the vacuum manifold. To each point in space, a point on the vacuum manifold can be associated. !

Space MV : p (p)

Now this mapping shouldt care about the system of coordinates we use to describe the vacuum manifold. This independence manifests itself as a gauge transformation of the vacuum state allowing us to locally transform the vacuum values at each point in space. If the vacuum manifold has a trivial topology, then all points in space can be brought to the same point on the vacuum and nothing interesting happens. However, if the vacuum has a non-trivial topology, then this is no longer possible, and there is the possibility that the act of breaking the symmetry of the vacuum will generate objects called topological defects. The mechanism for the formation of topological defects in a cosmological setting was first explained by Kibble. When the temperature of the universe drops below the critical temperature, the vacuum of the symmetric potential, also known as the false vacuum, decays into one of the new

From Monopoles to Textures: A Survey of Topological Defects in Cosmological Quantum Field Theory

vacua. The information that the symmetry has been broken will travel outward from the initial point where it occurred, creating regions that are all in the same vacuum state. However, points that are out of causal contact during the symmetry breaking can fall into different vacua. As the regions of broken symmetry expand outward, the mapping into the new vacua needs to be continuous; this constraint may, however, not allow for all points in space to fall into the new vacuum. Regions of false vacuum may be squeezed into topologically stable configurations. This process of defect formation is known as the Kibble Mechanism. We are free to think of topological defects, then, as regions of false vacuum that are prevented from decaying away due to the topological constraint imposed by the vacuum manifold. In the limit that the transition region between vacua becomes infinitely thin, these defects can be 0-dimensional monopoles, 1-dimensional cosmic strings, 2-dimensional domain walls, or higher dimensional textures. We will focus primarily on the properties of strings and walls. For completeness, it should be noted that theories can be constructed in which several symmetry breaking events occur ending in the symmetry group of the standard model:

G H ... ... SU (3)c SU (2)I U (1)Y SU (3)c U (1)em

g G g |0i = |0i

Symmetry breaking will generate a set of vacua:

G H : |0i |0, i

These new vacua will transform trivially under H, but not under elements outside of H:

This means that any possible transformations between the vacuum states is of the form gh:

Note that elements of the form hg generate the same transformation on the vacua, so H is a normal subgroup. Hence it is the cosets, gH, each element of which generates the same transformation, that properly describe all the ways in which the vacua can transform between each other. The set of all of these cosets forms the quotient group, G/H:

In these scenarios there is the possibility of several different types of defects forming. Furthermore, interactions allow for lower dimensional defects to form on the boundaries of higher dimensional ones. Strings form on the boundaries of domain walls, monopoles form on the ends of strings. This leads to a far richer spectrum of possibilities for the evolution of these fascinating entities. Before delving into the properties of some of these objects we will look at the underlying mathematics that is required to describe symmetry breaking and the resulting topologies of the vacuum manifolds that result. We will then explore the defects in the narrow bump limit where they can be modeled by simple geometric constructs. Mathematical Preliminaries In this section we will examine some elementary group theory and topology in order to give us the proper tools to describe topological defects. We will begin by recalling some group theory to see how it pertains to describing spontaneous symmetry breaking. The basics of homotopy theory will then be developed to examine the topological structure of the resulting vacuum manifold. In particular, the homotopy groups will play a central role in the classification of the types of defects that will be allowed to form in a given theory. Consider a theory whose vacuum state has a symmetry group G. Via a mechanism such as the one discussed above, this symmetry will be broken to a subgroup H. The new vacuum will then be parametrized by some parameter !. Let us be a bit more rigorous.

Since the quotient group captures all the structure of the vacua of the broken theory, we call it the vacuum manifold, and denote it:

MV = G/H

Lets take a look at a few simple examples to better acquaint ourselves with the vacuum manifolds associated with different symmetry breakings. Example: Z2!1 Consider a real scalar field with a potential:

V () = m2 2 + 4 2 4!

Here m2 is positive. This potentials vacuum is invariant under the parity transformation:

Hence the symmetry group of the unbroken theory consists of two elements, the identity and the parity flip. This group is denoted:

G = {1, 1} = Z2

If m2 is allowed to change sign smoothly, then the vacuum of the theory splits into two, and these new vacua are no longer invariant under the old symmetry group.

From Monopoles to Textures: A Survey of Topological Defects in Cosmological Quantum Field Theory

VHL

The new vacuum states are now only invariant under an identity transformation, so the vacuum manifold is easily calculated:

MV =

U (1) = U (1) = S 1 1

Here we have used the fact that the group U(1) is topologically equivalent to the circle, S1. Unlike the last example this vacuum manifold is connected. It is not, however, simply-connected, and this will be a crucial ingredient in understanding 1-dimensional string defects. " So far we have looked at two specific examples of symmetry breaking, namely Z2!1 and U(1)!1. There are, of course, many other theories that can be constructed that have a specific form of symmetry breaking. In particular, the breaking of an SU(2) symmetry can lead to many interesting vacuum manifolds. Any theory with SU(2)!U(1) results in a vacuum manifold with a topological structure equivalent that of a sphere, S2. These models result in point-like defects called monopoles. An SU(2)!1 symmetry breaking leads to a vacuum whose topology is that of a 3-sphere, S3. These models have a very interesting class of volume defects known as textures. We will have more to say about how all of these defects are the result of the topology of the vacuum manifold after developing a bit of mathematical machinery called homotopy theory, which we shall now endeavor to do. Let M be a manifold. Consider the set of continuous functions mapping the hyper-dimensional unit cubes into M.

Fn = {f : I n M}

Fig.1 As m2 varies smoothly from positive values, past zero, and into the negatives, the potential deforms from having a single minimum to having two.

The vacua are invariant only under the identity, so the vacuum manifold can easily be read off:

MV = Z2 = Z2 1

This is an example where the vacuum manifold is disconnected. This is a general consequence of any discreet symmetry being broken, and will generate 2-dimensional defects known as a domain walls. We will return to examine the topology of such a manifold once we have developed the proper mathematical tools. " Example: U(1)!1 Consider a complex scalar field with the potential:

m2 2 V () = || + ||4 2 4!

Once again we have m2 positive, and note that the potential is invariant under a U(1) transformation:

G = U (1) : ei

If we allow for a mechanism that smoothly changes m2 to negative values, then the point vacuum of the theory will expand into a ring as the symmetry is broken.

We will now show that this set can be used to construct a group structure by defining a way in which to glue the element functions together. For simplicity we will consider the case of n=1, the set of functions mapping the unit interval into our manifold. Let f1 and f2 be two such functions such that the end point of the first coincides with the start point of the second, f1(1)=f2(0). Then we can define a concatenation product of the two functions via: f1 (2t) : t [0, 1 2] (f1 f2 )(t) = f2 (2t 1) : t [ 1 2 , 1] If we restrict ourselves to the subset of all functions which start and end on the same point, i.e. loops, then this operation will be naturally defined for all the elements of that set. The last ingredient we want to incorporate into this construction is a way to properly define different loops in our set. As an example consider the three loops in figure 3.

Fig.2 The potential for a complex scalar field. When the symmetry is unbroken there is a single vacuum at the center of the potential. When m2 is changed to negative values, the original symmetry is broken.

From Monopoles to Textures: A Survey of Topological Defects in Cosmological Quantum Field Theory

This object will be of central importance in examining the vacuum manifolds. If a manifold has a trivial nth-homotopy group then all of the n-dimensional curves living on the manifold can be contracted to a point. If a homotopy group is not trivial, then there exist curves that cannot be contracted to a point, signifying the presence of a topological defect. The form of the first few homotopy groups of a vacuum manifold will then determine exactly what types of defects will be allowed in each particular model we develop. Lets examine a few examples to get a feel for what the first few homotopy groups are of several different manifolds. Example: MV = ZN Here the vacuum manifold consists of N points. The only nontrivial homotopy group is the 0th. It should be noted that the 0-homotopy is not actually a group, since a binary operation cannot be defined; it is simply a set with a single distinguished point. !

Fig.3 Loops drawn on a manifold that are not homotopically equivalent to one another. The loops cannot be smoothly deformed into one another.

The loop on the left is not wrapped around the hole or diameter of the torus. Hence we can imagine shrinking the loop indefinitely, until it contracts down to a single point. The right loop is wrapped around the diameter, and no matter how we smoothly deform it, it can never be shrunk down into a point. The same goes for the loop wrapped around the hole of the torus. Furthermore, this loop cannot be deformed into the one that is wrapped around the diameter. All three of these loops can, from a topological point of view, be considered distinct. In complete generality, we can find an equivalence class of loops quite easily. Define the equivalence relation:

f1 f2 F Fn+1 s.t. F (0, t) = f1 (t) & F (1, t) = f2 (t)

0 (MV ) = {0, 1, . . . , N }

"

Example: MV =S1 When the vacuum manifold is a circle then points can all be moved to the same place, so the 0-homotopy is trivial. Loops however cannot be deformed into one another if they wind around the circle a different number of times. The winding number of a loop determines its equivalence class, and glueing loops together results in a loop whose winding number is the sum of the daughters. Hence the 1-homotopy is simply the additive group of integers.

1 ( M V ) = Z

It turns out that all of the higher homotopies, like the 0th, are trivial. " Two final results will help us progress further. The first is the fundamental theorem of coset spaces in homotopy theory. It allows us to relate the homotopy of a normal subgroup to its parent group if the parent group satisfies certain conditions. If the nth and (n-1)th homotopy groups of a Lie group are trivial, then the nth homotopy group of the coset space created by modding out the original group by one of its normal subgroups is isomorphic to the nth homotopy group of the normal subgroup:

The deformation of one curve into the other is accomplished by the higher dimensional smooth mapping whose boundaries are the two lower dimensional curves. It is easy to see that this is an equivalence relation. Reflexivity is satisfied by the identity mapping. Symmetry is accomplished by a mapping that is the same as the original but the first argument, s, is replaced by 1-s. Transitivity can be shown by using the same concatenation operation on the higher dimensional mappings that we used earlier. The set of equivalence classes of loops that are deformable into one another is then just the quotient space of the set of mappings modded out by the equivalence relation induced by the concatenation operation:

Fn = {[f ]|[f ] = {g |g f }}

n ( G ) = n 1 ( G ) = 1 G n H = n 1 ( H )

The second piece of machinery is the factoring theorem for arcwise connected spaces. If X and Y are spaces with trivial 0-homotopies, then:

n ( M 1 M 2 ) = n ( M 1 ) n ( M 2 )

By naturally extending the concatenation operation to these equivalence classes, we have a group structure, which we define as the nth homotopy group of our manifold, M: Fn n (M) := ,

With these little gems stuck in our bag of mathematical machinery, we are ready to examine the main classes of topological defects.

From Monopoles to Textures: A Survey of Topological Defects in Cosmological Quantum Field Theory

Monopoles Monopoles result in most any theory that has a series of symmetry breakings that end in the final group being a tensor product with U(1): ! To better understand the energy content of the loop, we can consider the asymptotic solution of the field equation from a simple model for a complex scalar field:

G . . . H K U (1)

L=

1 m2 2 4 || || 2 2 4

These theories are of note because the last two symmetry groups in the Standard Model have the same form as the end of this sequence. Most GUT theories of interest that break into the Standard Model satisfy the conditions of the fundamental theorem of cosets for the second and higher homotopy groups. Considering the hypercharge symmetry, we have then that:

2 ( M V ) = 2 ( G ) H = 1 (K ) 1 (U (1)) = 1 ( K ) Z 6= 1

We allow for the case where the initial symmetry is broken by letting m2 change sign. The asymptotic behavior of the solution to the field equations coming from this Lagrangian is, for winding number n:

( ) e n

r

Since the 2-homotopy is non-trivial values of the vacuum manifold at points on a closed 2-surface in real space prevent the surface from being continuously deformed into a point. There exists a small region of localized false vacuum, and in the limit of being infinitely small in size we call this configuration a monopole. Monopoles have a quantized charge, and an extremely high mass relative to the majority of standard model particles. Furthermore they are produced in copious quantities during the symmetry breaking, which leads them to quickly dominate the energy density of the universe. Since there has never been a confirmed detection of a monopole, the usual way they can be explained away is through inflation. Since they are produced during GUT symmetry breaking, inflation can easily dilute the population of monopoles. A fraction of those that remain would then have velocities low enough to be bound gravitationally to stars. If there are any bound to the Solar System, then we could observe their signature because they can catalyze proton decay and produce X-rays. As of this date, not such X-ray events have been observed. Cosmic Strings A vacuum manifold that is equivalent to a circle will result in the formation of topologically stable loops of false vacuum called cosmic strings. In fact, whenever the 1-homotopy is not trivial this will occur.

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

This solution represents an infinitely long string parallel to the z axis. Note that the sign for the pressure term is negative, implying that there is tension along the string, which will play an important role for the dynamics of the defect. The function f is radially symmetric, and has some cutoff, ", beyond which it is vanishes. It can be thought of as the radius of the string, and is determined by the de Broglie wavelength of the field quanta. The linear density of the string can be approximated by considering the cross section filled with the false vacuum:

V (0) 2 m2

If the linear density in geometrized units is greater than 10-7, then we may be able to observe the effects of string lensing. This could cause multiple images of objects, though the separation between images would be on the order of 3-30 arcseconds. In 2008 there was a lensed quasar discovered that might be due to the passing by of a cosmic string, however several other explanations put this conclusion on shaky ground. The signature of a string might also be seen in the CMB, since a moving one would cause a step function like temperature perturbation due to the light passing in front of and in the wake of the string. Perturbations on the string can propagate along the string, though they do not obey the superposition principle. In the context of an FRW cosmology, modes with curvature radii larger than the Hubble scale will be frozen out, and will not evolve. As the universe ages modes larger than the horizon will be stretched by the Hubble flow. However since the energy density of a string goes as a-1, these modes will eventually enter the horizon. Due to the tension along the string, these modes will then begin to decay, causing the string to attempt to straighten itself out. Interactions between strings require not only infinitely long ones, but loops as well. A crossing of a string with itself or another string can cause a loop to break off. Tension will

1 (MV ) 6= 1 One can understand this by considering the value of the vacuum on the points of a closed loop in real space. As the loop is contracted, the values of the vacuum manifold cannot be continuously brought to the same value if the mapping of the closed loop to the vacuum manifold has a non zero winding number.

From Monopoles to Textures: A Survey of Topological Defects in Cosmological Quantum Field Theory

cause the loop to contract. A contracting loop will generate quadrapole gravitational radiation, and depending on whether the scalar field couples to the the photon field, gamma rays as well. This could lead to a signature in the gamma ray contribution to #$. Unfortunately this contribution to the gamma ray flux is liberally estimated at around 10-9, whereas the current observations place #$ at around 10-7. Hence this signal would be truly difficult to extract from what we already see. The dominant form of matter in the cosmos will also affect the evolution of a bath of strings. Strings have a scale invariant power spectrum, so the expansion rate of the universe will have an important role in determining the rate at which loops are produced. During radiation domination the universe expands at a slower rate, so scale invariance can only be maintained by an increase in the rate of loop production. Once matter domination kicks in, the tension in the strings becomes the dominant factor in maintaining scale invariance, so loop production will fall down drastically. If we want to find decaying loops our best bet is to look for them in the early universe when they were still being copiously produced. On cosmological timescales strings become very important to the evolution of the Universe. Their energy density evolves with the scale factor as a-1, so they eventually come to dominate the total energy density of matter. Domain Walls Domain walls are the result of any discreet symmetry being broken. The resulting vacuum manifold is then simply a set of disconnected points, the number of them determining the number of possible types of domains. We can state this succinctly as a constraint on the 0-homotopy of the vacuum manifold:

0 (MV ) = {1, 2, . . . , N }

The spacial indices correspond to a negative pressure in the xy-plane, so the walls have tension. The surface energy density can be found by integrating the time-time component of the stress energy over the thickness of the wall: Z 2 2 3 0 = dzT0 = m 3 We now invoke the Kibble mechanism to describe the transition from the false vacuum to the true vacuum. The resulting distribution of domains can be described by a percolation model. The number of domains, ns, of a particular size, s is then:

ns s 2 e s

3 /2

Here # and $ are model dependent parameters that come from the lattice structure used to simulate the vacuum transition. The distribution of domains will be dominated by several infinitely large domains, with very interesting topology, and many smaller domains. The domain walls that develop will, in general, have local curvature. In an FRW cosmology, curvature scales larger than the causal horizon will be frozen in. When they enter the horizon they will decay as a-3/2; the tension in the walls will attempt to straighten them out causing any perturbations to get damped out. Through this process, smaller domains will eventually get squeezed out, meaning that the overall distribution of domain walls is scale invariant. Another interesting property of domain walls is that their energy density evolves with the scale factor just like curvature, hence they can come to dominate the energy density of the universe after matter. Due to their constant gravitational fields, when they do so they also generate horizons; causally connected space can fracture into components that can no longer communicate with one another during the transition into wall domination. Unfortunately for theorists, domain walls have never been observed. Does this imply that any theory that predicts their existence should be discounted as unphysical? Not quite, there are several ways out of the no observation constraint. The first way out of the problem is to posit that the symmetry breaking event that lead to their formation occurred before inflation. Since the thickness of a domain wall is very thin relative to its span, it is highly likely that inflation would then have simply blown all the domain walls far beyond the current causal horizon. Though a cute way of getting out of the no observations of horizons problem, it does seem rather unsatisfactory. The second way out is to posit a small bias in the vacua of the theory. The addition of a small linear term in the Lagrangian causes one vacuum to have a slightly lower energy density than the other. This means that that vacuum will be energetically favorable, and any domain in that vacuum will push on domains in the other vacuum more strongly than the push back. The favorable vacuum will then become the dominant domain, saving us from having to see walls.

Lets consider a simple model for a real scalar field by considering the Lagrangian:

L= 1 m2 2 4 2 2 4

Once again we allow for a breaking of the discreet symmetry of the potential by letting m2 be negative. For this model the vacuum has degeneracy two, and the solution to the field equations that interpolates between the two vacua is of the form:

m mz (z ) = tanh( )

This solution describes a domain wall oriented in the xyplane, with a thickness dependent on both the mass and coupling constant of the theory. The stress energy tensor for this solution will shed more light on its structure:

1 0 m4 1 T = 4 0 2 cosh( mz ) 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0

From Monopoles to Textures: A Survey of Topological Defects in Cosmological Quantum Field Theory

Textures The breaking of more complicated symmetries can lead to non localized topological defects called textures. There presence is symptomatic of any vacuum manifold that has non trivial homotopy groups of order 3 or higher. Due to their nonlocal nature, a texture could lens CMB light in a very peculiar way. In 2007, a cold spot was noticed in the CMB that could be caused by such a defect. Future polarization observations of the spot could be used to confirm whether it is actually caused by a texture. This is because a textures time dependent gravitational field would induce no polarization, whereas a statistical fluctuation would result in a preferential radial pattern. Conclusion Quantum field theory and general relativity provide the most accurate description that we have of Nature, but from a theoretical perspective they are incomplete. The Standard Model can be embedded into a myriad of larger symmetry structures; it would be prudent to examine the way in which these symmetries break into the world that we see around us today. This process naturally leads us to an understanding of empty space as capable of supporting topologically stable defects. These defects are relics of false vacuum, with an energy density that can be quite different from the matter and radiation that have dominated the evolution of the Universe up to the present day. In parallel with recreating the high temperature environment of the early Universe in particle accelerators, it is prudent to explore the consequences of symmetry breaking on astronomical and cosmological scales. Detecting the signature of topological defects could help us constrain the models that we are attempting to develop to extend the Standard Model, as well as test the symmetry breakings that have already been incorporated in it. I would like to thank both Micah Dombrowski and Gregory Feiden for stimulating conversations during the late night hours when I seem to do most of my work. I would also like to thank Marcelo Gleiser for conveying his knowledge of Quantum Field Theory to me in both a consice and incredibly illuminating way. Lastly I would like to thank Dartmouth College, without whose support I would not have the time to ponder these fascinating topics. References [1] ! Vilenkin, Alexander. "Cosmic Strings and Domain Walls." Physics Reports 121.5 (1985). Print. [2]! Trodden, Mark, and Sean Carroll. "TASI Lectures: Introduction to Cosmology." Mendeley Research Networks. Web. 12 Mar. 2012. <http://www.mendeley.com/research/ tasi-lectures-introduction-to-cosmology/>. [3]! De Laix, Andrew A., Lawrence M. Krauss, and Tanmay Vachaspati. "Gravitational Lensing Signature of Long Cosmic Strings." Physical Review Letters 79.11 (1997): 1968-971. Print. [4]! Wang, Chih-Hung, Hing-Tong Cho, and Yu-Huei Wu. "Domain Wall Space-times with a Cosmological Constant." Arxiv.org 1012.5252 (2011). Print. [5]! Larson, Sebastian E., Subir Sarkar, and Peter L. White. "Evading the Cosmological Domain Wall Problem." Physical Review D 55.8 (1997). Print. [6]! Kamionkowski, Marc, and Arthur Kosowsky. "The Comsmic Microwave Background and Particle Physics." Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 49 (1999): 77-123. Print. [7]! Kolitch, Shawn J. "Quantum Decay of Domain Walls in Cosmology. I. Instanton Approach." Physical Review D 56.8 (1997): 4651-662. Print. [8]! Schild, R., I. S. Masnyak, B. I. Hnatyk, and V. I. Zhdanov. "Anomalous Fluctuations in Observations of Q0957 561 A,B: Smoking Gun of a Cosmic String?" Arxiv.org/astro-ph (2008). Web. <http://arxiv.org/abs/astroph/0406434v1>. [9]! Cruz, M., N. Turok, P. Vielva, E. MartnezGonzlez, and M. Hobson. "A Cosmic Microwave Background Feature Consistent with a Cosmic Texture." Topologica 1.1 (2008): 008. Print. [10]! Ganjui, Alejandro. "Topological Defects in Cosmology." Arxiv.org (2001). Web. <http://arxiv.org/abs/ astro-ph/0110285v1>. [11] ! Lalak, Zygmunt. "Towards Solution of the Cosmological Domain Walls Problem." Arxiv.org. Web. <http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/9702405>. [12]! Vilenkin, A., and E. P. S. Shellard. Cosmic Strings and Other Topological Defects. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1994. Print. [13]! Da Silva, Josinaldo M. Cosmological Consequences of Topological Defects: Dark Energy and Varying Fundamental Constants. Thesis. Faculdade De Cincias Da Universidade Do Porto, 2007. Departamento De Fsica. Print. [14]! Zee, A. Quantum Field Theory in a Nutshell. Princeton, NJ: Princeton UP, 2003. Print. [15]! Penrose, Roger. The Road to Reality: A Complete Guide to the Laws of the Universe. New York: A.A. Knopf, 2005. Print. [16]! Nakahara. Geometry, Topology and Physics (Graduate Student Series in Physics) (9780852740958): Mikio Nakahara: Books. Web. 07 Mar. 2012.

- UG Syllabus Effective From June 2012Uploaded byManish Patel
- MATH3175-fa10-sol4Uploaded byoscura
- Information-Entropic Stability Bound for Compact Objects:Application to Q-balls and theChandrasekhar Limit of PolytropesUploaded byDamian Sowinski
- Group HomomorphismUploaded bykrishna
- Wave Packet Transform over Finite Fields.pdfUploaded byDanang Stwn
- A Friendly Introduction to Group TheoryUploaded byRichard Aw
- Indian Civil Service Exam MathsUploaded bykondamudisagar
- Introduction to finite FieldsUploaded byPetya Valcheva
- chapter ivUploaded byapi-319349159
- GroupUploaded byAnonymous djehoZ8
- Cosmic Anisotropy: A History of the Axis of EvilUploaded byDamian Sowinski
- 3rd PartUploaded bySikandar Khan
- The Explanation of the Design Patterns by the Symmetry ConceptsUploaded byastraldragon
- Category-Group Theory 2Uploaded bymars
- Photometric Analysis of M & L Dwarfs with the LSST Throughput ProfilesUploaded byDamian Sowinski
- 9702069v1[1]Uploaded byBayer Mitrovic
- 4 CastilloUploaded byRuth Castillo
- Revision of the Particle-wave DualismUploaded byJorge Perdigon
- EmtUploaded bybaibhavvvv
- 10Uploaded byJonel Pagalilauan
- Essential PhysicsUploaded bypticicaaa
- BBTUploaded byLaiza Cavanagh
- 3-5pageresearchpaperUploaded byapi-272728274
- Field Theory by Ganesh Rao PDFUploaded byCrystal
- The Art of PossibilityUploaded byritesh0764
- Article on Group Theory (Moon)Uploaded byCepheid Faarjana
- George F R Ellis_ R Maartens_ M A H MacCallum -Relativistic cosmology-Cambridge University Press (2012).pdfUploaded byPepe Luis
- Algebraic Structures Part 1Uploaded byVanja Karan
- GOD Particle the Higgs BosonUploaded byVeeresh Charantimath
- Basu - Topics in Loop Groups and Vertex AlgebrasUploaded byrodddod

- Schwarz InequalityUploaded byDamian Sowinski
- Prebiotic Multi-letter Polymerization Networks with Chiral Symmetry BreakingUploaded byDamian Sowinski
- Information-Entropic Signature of the Critical PointUploaded byDamian Sowinski
- Scalar/Massive Vector/Gravity TheoryUploaded byDamian Sowinski
- Scale EvolutionUploaded byDamian Sowinski
- Cosmic Anisotropy: A History of the Axis of EvilUploaded byDamian Sowinski
- Photometric Analysis of M & L Dwarfs with the LSST Throughput ProfilesUploaded byDamian Sowinski

- Electrical Engineering UG SyllabusUploaded byNitesh Bhuwania
- Kwon4.2Uploaded byokwon
- AC_theoryUploaded bySwapnil Jadhav
- RP_07Uploaded byRavikanth
- The Evolution of PhysicsUploaded byYtle08
- Lattice Gauge Theories An Introduction.pdfUploaded bySteven Scott
- Branches of PhysicsUploaded byYrrej Onivol Onazol
- Project Invisibility (1943)Uploaded byMarc Barbu
- 10.5923.j.astronomy.20150401.01Uploaded byFrancisco Hernandez
- CompleteUploaded byMin Zay
- Syllabus ElectricalUploaded byJaskaran Sudan
- On Discrete Physics: a Perfect Deterministic Structure for Reality – And "A (Direct) Logical Derivation of the Laws Governing the Fundamental Forces of Nature"Uploaded byZahedi, Ramin (A.)
- 553-2453-1-PBUploaded byTua Mamma Pompa
- Tong - Lectures on String TheoryUploaded byNarmel
- 0110034v1Uploaded byALI E
- Leonard j Malinowski Vol One Issue Two Two Zero ElevanUploaded byJuan Ignacio Carricondo
- CONFORMAL FIELD THEORYUploaded byv_gurucharan
- 1924AEinstein_ConcerningTheAetherUploaded byYoshuaR
- sum_new3Uploaded byapi-3835172
- Syllabus B.tech (Electronic Inst& Control)Uploaded byPritesh Parmar
- 0879422378Uploaded byPanneer Selvam
- blackettUploaded byFebruary Mailbox
- Physics Reports 509 (2011) 167–321_extended Theories of GravityUploaded byAnonymous rJi74AWk
- Introduction Lq gUploaded bybez_180210559
- Introduction to 31 Numerical RelativityUploaded byAlejandro Esperón
- Albert Einstein Was Born at Ulm- IllaaUploaded byTilka Annur Chairil
- EMI Shielding Theory -1Uploaded bygamurugan
- Giere 2004 How models are used to represent reality .pdfUploaded bySant Sophie Alvarado
- qm1Uploaded byb6e12
- Updated CV/2013Uploaded byKathryn Wilson