PhysRevD 82 025022
PhysRevD 82 025022
PhysRevD 82 025022
approximation which permits a treatment of the solution the appropriate homotopy group of the manifold of the
in terms of a single collective coordinate, the radius R of vacua of the symmetry breaking SUð2Þ ! Uð1Þ is
the thin wall. We argue that the monopole is unstable to 2 ðSUð2Þ=Uð1ÞÞ which is Z. This suggests the existence
025022-2
FATE OF THE FALSE MONOPOLES: INDUCED VACUUM DECAY PHYSICAL REVIEW D 82, 025022 (2010)
III. THIN-WALLED MONOPOLES
When the difference between the false and true vacuum
energy densities is small, the monopole can be treated as
a thin shell, the so-called thin-wall approximation. Within
Potential V(φ) -->
þ K2 h2 þ r2 VðhÞ ; (6)
Wall
1
2 2h @V
h00 þ h0 2 K2 ¼ 0; (7) 0.4
r r @h
0.2
K 2
K00 ðK 1Þ e2 h2 K ¼ 0: (8) h(r)/ η K(r)
r2 0 R
R - δ/2 R + δ/2
025022-3
BRIJESH KUMAR, M. B. PARANJAPE, AND U. A. YAJNIK PHYSICAL REVIEW D 82, 025022 (2010)
where a tilde over a variable indicates that it is dimension-
less. The vacuum expectation value of or h then becomes ε
~ where
, −η h0 η h -->
v
u ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
u qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
u
t2~ a2 a~4 ~2 3 ~2 ~
~¼
þ : (11)
3~
−V(h) -->
3
The expression for V can be rearranged as
~a4 þ
V ¼ ðð~ ~a2 h2 Þh2 þ Oðh6 Þ:
~2 Þ2 2~ (12)
The condition that V is approximately quadratic in h is
given by
h2 ~a4 þ
~ ~2
: (13)
2 ~a2
2~ FIG. 3 (color online). The scalar potential VðhÞ which is the
Euclidean space equivalent of the potential given in (4). The
When the above condition is satisfied, @V=@h is linear in h. potential has zeroes at h ¼ h0 and h ¼ .
The equation of motion for h given in Eq. (8) can then be
written as
Eq. (4), as shown in Fig. 3. The particle must start at h ¼
2 2h 0 with a finite velocity and must reach h ¼ as r ! 1.
h00 þ h0 2 k2 h ¼ 0; (14)
r r We prove the existence of the solution that achieves h ¼
~a4 þ at r ¼ 1 by proving that initial conditions can be chosen
where k2 ¼ ð~ ~2 Þ2 and K has been set to unity. so that the particle can undershoot or overshoot h ¼ for
Equation (14) has the form of the modified spherical Bessel r ! 1, depending on the choice of the initial velocity.
equation whose general form is Then by continuity there must exist an appropriate initial
z2 w00 þ 2zw0 ½z2 þ lðl þ 1Þw ¼ 0 (15) condition for which the particle exactly achieves h ¼ at
r ! 1.
for a function wðzÞ. The primes in the above equation In the following, we will assume that K ¼ 1 is always a
denote derivatives with respect to z and Eq. (14) is obtained good approximation. Indeed, in Eq. (7) the term dependent
from (15) with l ¼ 1. on K is negligible for large r no matter the value of K,
The solution of Eq. (14) is while for small r, K ¼ 1 is a reasonable approximation. On
the other hand, Eq. (8) for K critically depends on the value
I3=2 ðkrÞ
hðrÞ ¼ C pffiffiffiffiffi ¼ Ci1 ðkrÞ; (16) of hðrÞ Þ 0, especially for large kr. In that sense, the
kr function hðrÞ does not depend strongly on KðrÞ, whereas
where IJ is the modified Bessel function of the first kind of hðrÞ drives the behavior of KðrÞ.
order J, in is the modified spherical Bessel function of the
first kind of order n, and C is an arbitrary constant. The A. Overshoot
function i1 ðkrÞ ekr =ðkrÞ for kr 1 and is linear in kr The existence of the overshoot can be proven by taking a
for small kr 1. If we choose C ¼ ek
with arbitrarily sufficiently small value of C. As explained earlier, C can be
large k
, we see that we can keep Eq. (13) satisfied and chosen small enough so that Eq. (13) is valid even for large
hence stay with the linear equation for hðrÞ for arbitrarily kr; hence, the equation remains linear. If kr is large
large kr. enough, the friction term ð2=rÞh0 and the term ð2=r2 Þh in
The existence of the particular solution with hðrÞ ¼ at the equation of motion can be neglected in any further
r ¼ 1 can be proven using an argument similar to evolution and the evolution can be thought of as conserva-
Coleman’s, where he proved, in a somewhat different tive. Thus with such a choice of C, h increases to h~ < h0 at
context, the existence of a thin-wall instanton, [15]. We a large value of kr according to the linearized equation (h0
can reinterpret the equation for the monopole profile, is the zero crossing point of the potential; see Fig. 3). The
Eq. (7), as describing the motion of a particle whose motion from then onwards is frictionless. The particle has
position is denoted by hðrÞ where r is now interpreted as ~ thus its energy is still positive
an energy E > 0 at h ¼ h;
a time coordinate. The particle moves in the presence of
when it reaches h ¼ . As a result, it overshoots to h > .
friction with a time dependent Stokes coefficient given by
the second term in Eq. (7) and a time dependent force given
by the third term in Eq. (7) (setting K ¼ 1), both of which B. Undershoot
are singular at r ¼ 0. The particle also moves in the To prove the existence of the undershoot, we start with
potential VðhÞ, obtained by inverting the potential the full equation for hðrÞ:
025022-4
FATE OF THE FALSE MONOPOLES: INDUCED VACUUM DECAY PHYSICAL REVIEW D 82, 025022 (2010)
2 2 @V 1. Overshoot
h00 þ h0 2 h ¼0 (17)
r r @h For the case of the overshoot, we use the expression
Eq. (19) which gives
which after multiplying both sides by h0 can be rewritten as
Z rf 0
0 E ¼ 2 drh0
h
d 1 02 h h : (22)
ðh Þ VðhÞ ¼ 2h0 2 ; (18) r0 r
dr 2 r r
Assuming that h0 ðrÞ is positive, we will find an estimate for
0 h0 ðrÞ < v. Then
h
¼ 2h0 : (19)
Z rf h0
r jEj < 2v dr
(23)
r
r0
The quantity on the left-hand side of Eq. (18) can be
thought of as the time derivative of the energy E. In the
hðrf Þ hðr0 Þ
linearized regime, it is easy to show that the right-hand side ¼ 2v
(24)
is strictly negative for all r. It starts with a value of zero at
rf r0
r ¼ 0 and decreases essentially exponentially for large kr.
hðr0 Þ
We can choose C, which amounts to choosing the initial < 2v
r
; (25)
velocity so that h evolves according to the linearized f r0
equation until kr can be taken to be large. However, in
contrast to the case of the undershoot, we now require that where we replaced hðrf Þ with since that is its largest
E becomes negative. This means that the value of C is possible value. As long as v is well behaved, as r0 ! 1,
taken larger than in the case of the overshoot. E is made up rf > r0 , thus the first term vanishes, while the second term
of two terms, the kinetic term which is positive semidefin- can be made small by choosing the value of C to be
ite and the potential term which becomes negative for h > arbitrarily small. Thus we see that E ! 0 and therefore
h0 . We impose conditions on the parameters so that E the change in the energy is arbitrarily small. Thus we
becomes negative and consequently h > h0 within the necessarily obtain an overshoot since at r ¼ r such that
linearized regime. Now if kr is large enough, as before, hðr Þ ¼ , VðÞ ¼ 0; hence the particle has a positive
the subsequent evolution will be conservative, and since kinetic energy giving an overshoot.
the total energy is negative, the subsequent evolution will To get the value of v, we use Eq. (18):
never be able to overcome the hill at h ¼ and the particle 0
d 1 02 h h
will undershoot. ðh Þ VðhÞ ¼ 2h0 2 ; (26)
dr 2 r r
C. Technical details
hh0 ðh2 Þ0
To make the previous arguments more precise and rig- <2 < 2 : (27)
r2 r0
orous, we note that when the condition Eq. (13) is satisfied,
the linear regime is valid and VðhÞ is approximately qua- Integrating both sides from r0 to rf yields
dratic in h; i.e., VðhÞ ð1=2Þk2 h2 and the equation
1
of motion for h is approximately ðh ðrf ÞÞ < 2 2 ðh2 ðrf Þ h2 ðr0 ÞÞ
0 2
(28)
r0
0
d 1 02 1 h h
ðh Þ þ k2 h2 ¼ 2h0 2 : (20)
dr 2 2 r r 1 0 2
þ Vðhðrf ÞÞ Vðhðr0 ÞÞ þ ðh ðr0 ÞÞ : (29)
2
Using the properties of i1 ðkrÞ we can compute E in the
linear regime; we find for large kr Thus v2 is given by
1 2
k2 C2 e2kr v2 ¼ 2 ð h2 ðr0 ÞÞ (30)
E (21) r20
4ðkrÞ3
which can be evidently taken to be positive or negative by 1
þ supjVðhðrf ÞÞ Vðhðr0 ÞÞj þ ðh0 ðr0 ÞÞ2 (31)
simply choosing the value of C. Then in the subsequent 2
evolution, where we can no longer rely on the linear
which is a bounded function of r0 .
evolution, the right-hand side has two competing terms:
the friction term, which only reduces the energy, and the
time dependent force term, which tries to increase it. The 2. Undershoot
change in the energy for evolution between r0 and rf is To prove the undershoot we use the expression Eq. (18)
given by the integral of the right-hand side. which gives
025022-5
BRIJESH KUMAR, M. B. PARANJAPE, AND U. A. YAJNIK PHYSICAL REVIEW D 82, 025022 (2010)
Z rf h02 Z rf h0 h 2
E ¼ 2 dr þ2 dr 2 : (32) < h2 ðr0 Þ < 2 : (42)
r0 r r0 r kr0
Integrating the second term by parts we obtain Using hðr0 Þ Cekr0 =2kr0 we can choose
Z rf h0 h Z rf h2 0 Z rf 2h2 2kr0
2 dr 2 ¼ dr 2 þ dr 3 (33) C¼ (43)
r0 r r0 r r0 r ekr0 r1=4
0
2 which gives
h
rf
2 1
rf
< 2 ;
2
(34) 2 2
r r
r0 r0 < pffiffiffiffiffiffiffi < 2 : (44)
kr0 kr0
where we obtain the inequality using the fact that we are
only interested in the region h . It is obvious that for large enough kr0 this is easily sat-
We now prove that this contribution to the energy cannot isfied. Thus we have established the existence of a choice
be sufficient to push h to h > . We take r0 to be the value of C or initial velocity which contradicts the existence of
of r as described after Eq. (19), where the energy becomes r .
negative within the linearized regime with kr0 1. We
now assume there exists a value rf r for which hðr Þ ¼
IV. COLLECTIVE COORDINATE AND THE
. Then INSTANTONS
Z r h02 h2 r
r
E < 2 þ 2
2 1 The potential VðÞ given in (4) can be normalized so
dr
(35)
r0 r r r0 r
2 r0 that the energy density of the metastable vacuum is vanish-
ing whereas the energy density of the true vacuum is .
2 h2 ðr0 Þ 2 1 1 By making use of the thin-wall approximation, the expres-
< 2 2 2 2 (36) sion for the total energy in the static case given in (6) can
r r0 r r0
be expressed as
Z Rð =2Þ Z1
2 h2 ðr0 Þ 1
¼ (37) E ¼ 4 drr2 VðhÞ þ dr 2 2
r20 0 Rþð =2Þ 2e r
Z Rþð =2Þ ðK0 Þ2 ð1 K 2 Þ2 1
which is an upper bound to the energy that can be added to þ dr þ þ r2 ðh0 Þ2
the particle. But now it is easy to see that this additional Rð =2Þ e2 2e2 r2 2
energy is insufficient to push h to h > , for kr0 large
þ K 2 h2 þ r2 VðhÞ : (45)
enough. Indeed the energy of the particle at r ¼ r0 is
obtained, via the linear regime, by Eq. (21):
In the above expression, we have made use of the fact that
k2 C2 e2kr h2 ðr0 Þ VðhÞ is zero for r > R þ 2 , K ¼ 1 for r < R 2 , K ¼ 0
E !k : (38)
4ðkrÞ 3 r0 for r > R þ 2 , and both the derivative terms and the term
K2 h2 are nonzero only when R 2 < r < R þ 2 . Since
This expression is negative. Furthermore, if kr0 is large
is small, the first integral on the right-hand side of (45)
enough, we will see that E cannot provide enough energy
gives R3 where ¼ 4=3 because VðhÞ ¼ in the
to increase E to zero, giving a contradiction to the exis-
domain of integration. The second integral gives C=R
tence of r . To see this, we would require jEj > E, i.e.,
where C ¼ 2=e2 . The third integral is due to the energy
h2 ðr0 Þ 2 h2 ðr0 Þ of the wall and can be written as 4R2 where is the
k > : (39) surface energy density of the wall given by
r0 r20
02
1 Z Rþð =2Þ ðK Þ ð1 K2 Þ2 1 2 0 2
The linear approximation assumes hðr0 Þ ; hence we ¼ 2 dr þ þ r ðh Þ
get R Rð =2Þ e2 2e2 r2 2
kh2 ðr0 Þ 2 þ K2 h2 þ r2 VðhÞ : (46)
2 > (40)
r0 r0
We can thus write the total energy of the monopole as
reorganizing the terms, which for small enough simply
C
implies EðRÞ ¼ R3 þ 4R2 þ : (47)
R
2 2
h ðr0 Þkr0 > : (41)
This function is plotted in Fig. 4. There is a minimum at
Thus we get the inequality sandwich R ¼ R1 and this corresponds to the classically stable
025022-6
FATE OF THE FALSE MONOPOLES: INDUCED VACUUM DECAY PHYSICAL REVIEW D 82, 025022 (2010)
2
1 _a _a 1 dK _ 2
A A ¼ 2 2 R: (52)
4 2e r dr
The Lagrangian can then be expressed as
Z 1 dh2
1 dK 2 _ 2
R_ 2 þ 2
ENERGY -->
L ¼ 2 r2 R dr EðRÞ:
0 dr e dr
Instanton Tunneling
(53)
From (8), for large r, the equation of motion of h can be
written as
R1 R2
@VðhÞ
h00 ¼ 0: (54)
@h
RADIUS OF BUBBLE -->
Multiplying both sides by h0 and integrating by parts with
FIG. 4 (color online). The function EðRÞ plotted versus bubble respect to r, one obtains
radius. The classically stable monopole solution has R ¼ R1 . pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
This solution can tunnel quantum mechanically to a configura- h0 ¼ 2VðhÞ: (55)
tion with R ¼ R2 and then expand classically.
Furthermore, since dh=dr is nonvanishing only in the thin-
wall, the value of r in the first integral in (53) can be
monopole solution. This solution has a bubble of true replaced by R and we have
vacuum in its core and the radius R1 of this bubble is Z1 2 Z 1 dhpffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
obtained by solving dE=dR ¼ 0. However, this monopole 2 dh _ 2 2 _2
drr R ¼R R dr 2VðhÞ
configuration can tunnel quantum mechanically through 0 dr 0 dr
the finite barrier into a configuration with R ¼ R2 where ¼ R2 R_ 2 S1 ; (56)
EðR1 Þ ¼ EðR2 Þ. Once this occurs, the monopole can con-
tinue to lose energy through an expansion of the core since where
the barrier which was present at R1 is no longer able to Z pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
prevent this. S1 ¼ dh 2VðhÞ: (57)
We now proceed to determine the action of the instanton 0
describing the tunneling from R ¼ R1 to R ¼ R2 . In the Defining
thin-wall approximation, the functions h and K can be 2
written as 1 Z1 dK
S2 ¼ 2
dr ; (58)
e 0 dr
h ¼ hðr RÞ; K ¼ Kðr RÞ; (48)
the Lagrangian (53) becomes
and the exact forms of the functions h and K will not be
required in the ensuing analysis. The only requirement is L ¼ 2R_ 2 ðS1 R2 þ S2 Þ EðRÞ (59)
that both h and K change exponentially when their argu- and the action can be written as
ment (r R) is small. An example of a function with this
type of behavior is the hyperbolic tangent function. The Z1
S¼ dtð2R_ 2 ðS1 R2 þ S2 Þ EðRÞÞ: (60)
time derivative of can be written as 1
025022-7
BRIJESH KUMAR, M. B. PARANJAPE, AND U. A. YAJNIK PHYSICAL REVIEW D 82, 025022 (2010)
V. BOUNCE ACTION 0 neglecting the constant and linear term in R since R2 is
large, obtaining R2 4= ¼ 3=.
In this section, we will derive an expression for bounce
Factoring J, we have
action SE for the monopole tunneling and compare it with
the bounce action for the tunneling of the false vacuum to pffiffiffiffi Z R2 pffiffiffiffiqffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
the true vacuum as discussed in [15] with no monopoles SE ¼ A dR R ðR R1 Þ2 ðR R2 ÞðR R3 Þ
R1
present. From (61), the equation of motion for R can be pffiffiffiffi Z R2 pffiffiffiffi qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
written ¼A dR RðR R1 Þ ðR R2 ÞðR R3 Þ
R1
1 @E
ðR S1 þ S2 ÞR€ þ S1 RR_ 2
2
¼ 0: (62) pffiffiffiffi 2 R1 5=2 R1 R3
4 @R ¼ A R7=2 2 1 I ;
105 R2 R2 R2
Multiplying both sides by R,_ the equation of motion as-
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffip ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 7=2 2 R1 5=2 R1 R3
sumes the form ¼ 32S1 4=3R2 1 I ; :
105 R2 R2 R2
d 1 EðRÞ
ðS2 þ R2 S1 ÞR_ 2 ¼ 0: (63) (69)
dt 2 4
Here I is a dimensionless function of R1 =R2 and R3 =R2
The term in the square brackets is a constant of motion and which is finite everywhere in the domain ½R1 ; R2 and is
can be taken to be zero with loss of generality. Setting this obtained from the integral defined in Eq. (69) removing the
constant to zero gives
factor of ð1 ðR1 =R2 ÞÞð5=2Þ and R27=2 and some numerical
EðRÞ ¼ 2ðS2 þ S1 R2 ÞR_ 2 : (64) factors. It is expressible in terms of elliptic integrals and its
explicit expression is not illuminating. As S1 has dimen-
Substituting this in (61), we have sions of 3 and has dimensions of 4 , the expression is
Z1 dimensionless, as expected. Substituting the value of R2 in
SE ¼ d
4ðS2 þ S1 R2 ÞR_ 2 : (65) SE ,
1
Solving for R_ from (64) and using this in the above 144 pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 7=2 R 5=2 R1 R3
SE ¼ 2S1 3 1 1 I ; : (70)
equation yields 35 R2 R2 R2
Z1
dR ~ in the potential (10) can
SE ¼ d
4ðS2 þ S1 R2 ÞR_ For small , the term containing
1 d
be neglected. Using Eq. (57) and the fact that ¼ a~
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi Z R2 qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi when ~ ¼ 0,
¼ 32 dR ðS2 þ S1 R2 ÞEðRÞ: (66) pffiffiffiffiffiffi
2~ Z a~
R1
Using the expression for EðRÞ given in (47) and neglecting S1 ¼ dhðhðh2 2 a~2 ÞÞ (71)
0
S2 in comparison to S1 R2 , the Euclidean action of the
bounce solution can be written sffiffiffiffi
Z R2 qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ~ 4 3
¼ a~ : (72)
SE ¼ A dR ðR5 4R4 CR þ E0 R2 Þ; (67) 8
R1
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi The value of can be obtained from Eq. (46) by noting that
where A ¼ 32S1 . In deriving the above expression, the
the terms multiplying r2 are large compared to the terms
constant E0 ¼ EðR1 Þ was subtracted from the expression
independent of r and the term multiplying 1=r2 . Since is
for EðRÞ in (47) so that the bounce has a finite action.
small, we can write r ¼ R and Eq. (46) becomes
Pulling out a factor of R from the square root in the
integrand, we have Z Rþð =2Þ 1
¼ 0 2
dr ðh Þ þ VðhÞ : (73)
Z R2 pffiffiffiffipffiffiffiffiffiffiffi Rð =2Þ 2
SE ¼ A dR R J ; (68)
R1 Substituting for h0 from Eq. (55), becomes
4 3
where J ¼ R 4R C þ E0 R. The function J has Z Rþð =2Þ
a double root at R ¼ R1 , a positive root at R ¼ R2 , and a ¼ drðh0 Þ2 (74)
Rð =2Þ
negative root at R ¼ R3 . Since we are working with small
and ¼ 4=3, we can neglect the term containing Z
while solving dE=dR ¼ 0 and obtain R1 ð4e2 Þ1=3 . To ¼ dhðh0 Þ (75)
find R3 we also neglect the term containing , and sub- 0
025022-8
FATE OF THE FALSE MONOPOLES: INDUCED VACUUM DECAY PHYSICAL REVIEW D 82, 025022 (2010)
¼ S1 : (77) bles will eventually convert the entire system to the true
vacuum without the need for quantum tunneling. Such a
Using (77) and (72) in (70) yields phenomenon may be referred to as a rollover transition
pffiffiffi [20] characterized by the relevant critical value.
144 2 S41 R1 5=2 R1 R3
SE ¼ 1 I ; (78)
35 3 R2 R2 R2
VI. MONOPOLE DECAY IN A SUPERSYMMETRIC
pffiffiffi SUð5Þ GRAND UNIFIED THEORY MODEL
9 2 ~2 16 12 R1 5=2 R1 R3
¼ a~ 1 I ; (79)
140 3 R2 R2 R2 The results of this work have direct relevance to a super-
symmetric SUð5Þ model studied in [25] in which super-
as the final value of the bounce action. From the values of symmetry symmetry breaking is sought directly through
R1 and R2 , we have O’Raifeartaigh type breaking. The Higgs sector, which
R1 1 1 contains two adjoint scalar superfields 1 and 2 and the
¼ 2=3 (80) superpotential, including leading nonrenormalizable
R2 e ð4Þ 3
1=3
terms, is of the form
1=3
1 16
W ¼ Tr 2 1 þ 21 þ 1 31 þ 2 Trð21 Þ1
¼ ; (81)
~
ðeÞ 2=3 27
a~ 4
16=3 M M
21
where the value of has been expressed in terms of the ¼ 1 2 p ffiffiffiffiffi
ffi 1 þ ð71 þ 302 Þ ; (85)
couplings appearing in the potential using Eqs. (77) and 30 30M
(72). From the expression given in (79), it is evident that where 1 and 2 are selected components of 1 and 2 ,
the bounce action SE is zero when R1 ¼ R2 as expected. respectively, relevant to the symmetry breaking. Two mass
With small, R1 =R2 is small, but it is interesting to note scales appear in the superpotential, and M, the latter
that variations in the couplings can reduce the bounce being a larger mass scale whose inverse powers determine
action. For example, a reduction in the Uð1Þ gauge cou- the magnitudes of the coefficients of the nonrenormaliz-
pling e has the effect of increasing the monopole mass and able terms. The scalar potential derived from this super-
of reducing the bounce action. potential can be written as
We now compare our answer with the well known
2 7 3 3 2
formula of [15] relevant to homogeneous nucleation, i.e., V ¼ 1 pffiffiffiffiffi1ffi þ 1 1 þ 2 1
tunneling of the translation invariant false vacuum to the 30 30M M
true vacuum. Denoting this bounce to be B0 , 21 ð71 þ 302 Þ 2 2
þ 2 pffiffiffiffiffiffi þ 1 : (86)
272 S41 30 10M
B0 ¼ (82)
2 3 In [22], monopole solutions were shown to exist in this
model and the classical instability of the vacuum structure
272 ~2 16 12 of this theory in the presence of such monopoles was
¼ a~ : (83)
128 3 discussed.
Thin-walled monopoles can be obtained in this model
Comparing this expression with our bounce B SE for the
under the condition
monopole assisted tunneling given in (79), we see that pffiffiffiffiffiffi
pffiffiffi 1 30
32 2 R 5=2 R1 R3 (87)
B¼ B0 1 1 I ; : (84) 2
105 R2 R2 R2
which is equivalent to the condition in Eq. (13), and hence
We see that unlike the homogeneous case, the bounce can the results of this paper could be applied directly there. In
parametrically become indefinitely small and vanish in the [22] the region of parameter space studied did not coincide
limit R1 ! R2 . The interpretation of this limit is that the with this condition, and thus the monopoles were not thin
very presence of a monopole in this parameter regime walled. The monopoles were classically unstable when
implies the unviability of a state asymptotically approach- M4 was increased beyond a critical value. We can
ing the vacuum deduced by a naive use of the effective recover this behavior from Eq. (79) as is increased;
potential. If the parameters in the effective potential ex- however, it is important to note that our approximation in
plicitly depend on external variables such as temperature, it this paper becomes invalid for large enough .
may happen that the limit R1 ! R2 is reached at a critical
value of this external parameter. In this case, as the external
VII. DISCUSSIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
parameter gets tuned to this critical value, the monopoles
will become sites where the true vacuum is nucleated We have calculated the decay rate for so-called false
without any delay and the indefinite growth of such bub- monopoles in a simple model with a hierarchical structure
025022-9
BRIJESH KUMAR, M. B. PARANJAPE, AND U. A. YAJNIK PHYSICAL REVIEW D 82, 025022 (2010)
of symmetry breaking. The toy model that we use has a R1 5=2 R1 R3
breaking of SUð2Þ to Uð1Þ which is the false vacuum, F ðR1 ; R2 ; R3 Þ ¼ R7=2
2 1 I ; ; (89)
R2 R2 R2
which in principle happens at a higher energy scale, and
then a true vacuum which has no symmetry breaking. The
symmetry broken false vacuum admits magnetic mono- where contains the determinantal and zero mode factors,
poles. The false vacuum can decay via the usual creation of and I is defined in Eq. (69). In the limit that R1 ! R2 the
true vacuum bubbles [15]; however, we find that this decay tunneling rate is unsuppressed while the homogeneous
can be dramatically enhanced in the presence of magnetic tunneling rate for the nucleation of true vacuum bubbles
monopoles. Even though the false vacuum is classically as found by Coleman [15] still remains suppressed. Hence
stable, the magnetic monopoles can be unstable. At the in this limit, the classical false vacuum is classically stable,
point of instability, the monopoles are said to dissociate. but subject to quantum instability through the nucleation of
This corresponds to an evolution where the core of the true vacuum bubbles, but the rate for such a decay can be
monopole, which contains the true vacuum, dilates indef- quite small. However, the existence of magnetic monopole
initely [17,18,24]. However, before the monopoles become defects renders the false vacuum unstable, and in the limit
classically unstable, they can be rendered unstable from of large monopole mass, the decay rate is unsuppressed.
quantum tunneling. We have computed the corresponding
rate and find that as we approach the regime of classical ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
instability, the exponential suppression vanishes. The tun-
neling amplitude behaves as We thank NSERC, Canada for financial support. The
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi visit of B. K. was made possible by a grant from CBIE,
Canada. The research of U. A. Y. is partly supported by a
16 2S1 2
exp F ðR1 ; R2 ; R3 Þ (88) grant from DST, India. The authors would like to thank
V 2 105 3
R. MacKenzie and P. Ramadevi for useful comments re-
with garding this work.
[1] G. ’t Hooft, Nucl. Phys. B79, 276 (1974). [13] S. Kachru, R. Kallosh, A. D. Linde, and S. P. Trivedi, Phys.
[2] A. M. Polyakov, JETP Lett. 20, 194 (1974). Rev. D 68, 046005 (2003).
[3] A. M. Polyakov, Nucl. Phys. B120, 429 (1977). [14] I. Y. Kobzarev, L. B. Okun, and M. B. Voloshin, Sov. J.
[4] S. R. Coleman, Subnuclear series 13, 297 (1977). Nucl. Phys. 20, 644 (1975).
[5] R. Rajaraman, Solitons and Instantons. An Introduction to [15] S. R. Coleman, Phys. Rev. D 15, 2929 (1977).
Solitons and Instantons in Quantum Field Theory (North- [16] S. R. Coleman and F. De Luccia, Phys. Rev. D 21, 3305
Holland, Amsterdam, 1982). (1980).
[6] J. Preskill and A. Vilenkin, Phys. Rev. D 47, 2324 (1993). [17] P. J. Steinhardt, Nucl. Phys. B190, 583 (1981).
[7] T. H. R. Skyrme, Nucl. Phys. 31, 556 (1962). [18] Y. Hosotani, Phys. Rev. D 27, 789 (1983).
[8] T. Gisiger and M. B. Paranjape, Phys. Rep. 306, 109 [19] U. A. Yajnik, Phys. Rev. D 34, 1237 (1986).
(1998). [20] U. A. Yajnik and T. Padmanabhan, Phys. Rev. D 35, 3100
[9] See [10] for discussion of supersymmetric field theories. (1987).
[10] J. Terning, in Particle Physics and Cosmology: The Quest [21] B. Kumar and U. A. Yajnik, Phys. Rev. D 79, 065001
For Physics Beyond The Standard Model(s), edited by (2009).
H. E. Haber and A. E. Nelson (TASI, Boulder, CO, 2002). [22] B. Kumar and U. Yajnik, Nucl. Phys. B831, 162 (2010).
[11] M. Dine and A. E. Nelson, Phys. Rev. D 48, 1277 [23] S. R. Coleman, Subnuclear series 15, 805 (1979).
(1993). [24] P. J. Steinhardt, Phys. Rev. D 24, 842 (1981).
[12] K. A. Intriligator, N. Seiberg, and D. Shih, J. High Energy [25] B. Bajc and A. Melfo, J. High Energy Phys. 04 (2008) 062.
Phys. 04 (2006) 021.
025022-10