4.7 Article

Toward a magnetic warm inflation scenario

期刊

PHYSICAL REVIEW D
卷 106, 期 4, 页码 -

出版社

AMER PHYSICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.106.043511

关键词

-

资金

  1. DGAPA-UNAM [PAPIIT-IN117817, PAPIIT-IN118219, PAPIIT-IN120620]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this work, the effects of a possible primordial magnetic field on the inflaton effective potential are explored within the framework of warm inflation. The study considers a two-step process of radiation production for the inflaton field, where it couples to heavy intermediate superfields that interact with light particles. It is found that the magnetic contribution makes the potential flatter near the origin, preserving the conditions for a successful inflationary process. The viability of this magnetic warm inflation scenario is supported by estimating the effect of the magnetic field on the decay width of heavy particles.
In this work we explore the effects that a possible primordial magnetic field can have on the inflaton effective potential, taking as the underlying model a warm inflation scenario, based on global supersymmetry with a new-inflation-type potential. The decay scheme for the inflaton field is a two-step process of radiation production, where the inflaton couples to heavy intermediate superfields, which in turn interact with light particles. In this context, we consider that both sectors, heavy and light, are charged and work in the strong magnetic field approximation for the light fields. We find an analytical expression for the one-loop effective potential, for an arbitrary magnetic field strength, and show that the trend of the magnetic contribution is to make the potential flatter in the origin's vicinity, preserving the conditions for a successful inflationary process. This result is backed up by the behavior of slow-roll parameter epsilon. The viability of this magnetic warm inflation scenario is also supported by the estimation of the effect of the magnetic field on the heavy particles decay width.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据