Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access
  • Access by Xinjiang University

Topological pseudodefects of a supersymmetric SO(10) model and cosmology

Ila Garg* and Urjit A. Yajnik

  • Department of Physics, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Mumbai 400076, India

  • *ila.garg@iitb.ac.in
  • yajnik@iitb.ac.in

Phys. Rev. D 98, 063523 – Published 20 September, 2018

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.98.063523

Abstract

Obtaining realistic supersymmetry preserving vacua in the minimal renormalizable supersymmetric Spin(10) GUT model introduces considerations of the nontrivial topology of the vacuum manifold. The D-parity of low energy unification schemes gets lifted to a one-parameter subgroup U(1)D of Spin(10). Yet, the choice of the fields signaling spontaneous symmetry breaking leads to disconnected subsets in the vacuum manifold related by the D-parity. The resulting domain walls, existing due to topological reasons but not stable, are identified as topological pseudodefects. We obtain a class of one-parameter paths connecting D-parity flipped vacua and compute the energy barrier height along the same. We consider the various patterns of symmetry breaking which can result in either intermediate scale gauge groups or a supersymmetric extension of the standard model. If the onset of inflation is subsequent to grand unified theory (GUT) breaking, as could happen also if inflation is naturally explained by the same GUT, the existence of such pseudo-defects can leave signatures in the CMB. Specifically, this could have an impact on the scale invariance of the CMB fluctuations and Large Scale Structure data at the largest scale.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (48)

  1. K. S. Hirata et al. (Kamiokande-II), Phys. Rev. Lett. 63, 16 (1989).
  2. S. Fukuda et al. (Super-Kamiokande), Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 5651 (2001).
  3. P. Minkowski, Phys. Lett. 67B, 421 (1977).
  4. T. Yanagida, Conf. Proc. C7902131, 95 (1979).
  5. M. Gell-Mann, P. Ramond, and R. Slansky, Conf. Proc. C790927, 315 (1979).
  6. R. N. Mohapatra and G. Senjanovic, Phys. Rev. Lett. 44, 912 (1980).
  7. T. W. B. Kibble, G. Lazarides, and Q. Shafi, Phys. Rev. D 26, 435 (1982).
  8. A. Stern and U. A. Yajnik, Nucl. Phys. B267, 158 (1986).
  9. P. Bhattacharjee, C. T. Hill, and D. N. Schramm, Phys. Rev. Lett. 69, 567 (1992).
  10. A.-C. Davis and R. Jeannerot, Phys. Rev. D 52, 7220 (1995).
  11. R. Jeannerot, J. Rocher, and M. Sakellariadou, Phys. Rev. D 68, 103514 (2003).
  12. J. Chakrabortty, R. Maji, S. Mohanty, S. K. Patra, and T. Srivastava, Phys. Rev. D 97, 095010 (2018).
  13. C. S. Aulakh and A. Girdhar, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 20, 865 (2005).
  14. T.-j. Li, F. Wang, and J. M. Yang, Nucl. Phys. B820, 534 (2009).
  15. I. Gogoladze, M. U. Rehman, and Q. Shafi, Phys. Rev. D 80, 105002 (2009).
  16. I. Gogoladze, R. Khalid, S. Raza, and Q. Shafi, J. High Energy Phys. 06 (2011) 117.
  17. R. Lal Awasthi and M. K. Parida, Phys. Rev. D 86, 093004 (2012).
  18. S. Bertolini, L. Di Luzio, and M. Malinsky, Phys. Rev. D 85, 095014 (2012).
  19. Y. Mambrini, N. Nagata, K. A. Olive, J. Quevillon, and J. Zheng, Phys. Rev. D 91, 095010 (2015).
  20. T. Blazek, R. Dermisek, and S. Raby, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 111804 (2002).
  21. T. Blazek, R. Dermisek, and S. Raby, Phys. Rev. D 65, 115004 (2002).
  22. G. G. Ross and L. Velasco-Sevilla, Nucl. Phys. B653, 3 (2003).
  23. R. Dermisek, M. Harada, and S. Raby, Phys. Rev. D 74, 035011 (2006).
  24. C. S. Aulakh and R. N. Mohapatra, Phys. Rev. D 28, 217 (1983).
  25. K. S. Babu and R. N. Mohapatra, Phys. Rev. Lett. 70, 2845 (1993).
  26. C. S. Aulakh, B. Bajc, A. Melfo, G. Senjanovic, and F. Vissani, Phys. Lett. B 588, 196 (2004).
  27. B. Bajc, A. Melfo, G. Senjanovic, and F. Vissani, Phys. Rev. D 70, 035007 (2004).
  28. B. Bajc, G. Senjanovic, and F. Vissani, Phys. Rev. D 70, 093002 (2004).
  29. C. S. Aulakh and S. K. Garg, Nucl. Phys. B857, 101 (2012).
  30. C. S. Aulakh and I. Garg, Phys. Rev. D 86, 065001 (2012).
  31. I. Garg and S. Mohanty, Phys. Lett. B 751, 7 (2015).
  32. C. S. Aulakh, K. Benakli, and G. Senjanovic, Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 2188 (1997).
  33. S. Mishra and U. A. Yajnik, Phys. Rev. D 81, 045010 (2010).
  34. S. Mishra, U. A. Yajnik, and A. Sarkar, Phys. Rev. D 79, 065038 (2009).
  35. A. Sarkar, Abhishek, and U. A. Yajnik, Nucl. Phys. B800, 253 (2008).
  36. A. D. Linde, Phys. Lett. 129B, 177 (1983).
  37. J. Martin and C. Ringeval, Phys. Rev. D 82, 023511 (2010).
  38. L. Dai, M. Kamionkowski, and J. Wang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 041302 (2014).
  39. J. L. Cook, E. Dimastrogiovanni, D. A. Easson, and L. M. Krauss, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 04 (2015) 047.
  40. R. Goswami and U. A. Yajnik, arXiv:1806.10340.
  41. G. F. Smoot et al. (COBE), Astrophys. J. 396, L1 (1992).
  42. C. L. Bennett et al. (WMAP), Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser. 208, 20 (2013).
  43. M. Bouhmadi-Lopez, P. Chen, Y.-C. Huang, and Y.-H. Lin, Phys. Rev. D 87, 103513 (2013).
  44. E. W. Kolb and M. S. Turner, Front. Phys. 69, 1 (1990).
  45. R. Durrer, M. Kunz, and A. Melchiorri, Phys. Rep. 364, 1 (2002).
  46. J. Urrestilla, N. Bevis, M. Hindmarsh, M. Kunz, and A. R. Liddle, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 07 (2008) 010.
  47. C. Ringeval, Adv. Astron. 2010, 380507 (2010).
  48. P. A. R. Ade et al. (Planck), Astron. Astrophys. 571, A25 (2014).

Outline

Information

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation