Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                

Cosmological models based on an asymmetric scalar doublet with kinetic coupling of components. II. Numerical modeling11footnotemark: 1,22footnotemark: 2

Yu.G. Ignat’ev1
Institute of Physics, Kazan Federal University, Kremlyovskaya str., 16A, Kazan, 420008, Russia

I.A. Kokh2
N.I. Lobachevsky Institute of Mathematics and Mechanics, Kazan Federal University, Kremlyovskaya str., 35, Kazan, 420008, Russia

Numerical modeling of a mathematical model of the cosmological evolution of an asymmetric scalar doublet with kinetic interaction between the components was carried out. A wide range of values of fundamental parameters and initial conditions of the model are considered. Various types of behavior have been identified: models with an infinite inflationary past and future - with and without a rebound point, models with a finite past and infinite future, with an infinite past and finite future (Big Rip), as well as models with a finite past and future. Based on numerical analysis, the behavior of models near the initial singularity and the Big Rip is studied; it is shown that in both cases the barotropic coefficient tends to unity, which corresponds to an extremely rigid state of matter near singularities. A numerical example of the cosmological generation of the classical component of a scalar doublet by its phantom component is given. An assessment was made of the creation of the velocity of fermion pairs by a scalar field near the rebound points and it was shown that a scalar field at the cold stage of the Universe can ensure the creation of the required number of massive scalarly charged fermions.
Keywords: cosmological model, phantom and classical scalar fields, quality analysis, asymptotic behavior, numerical modelling, scalar field generation, types of behavior.


1 Introduction

In the first part of the article [1] a cosmological model based on an asymmetric scalar doublet with kinetic coupling of components was formulated and its main properties were investigated. In addition, this work demonstrated an example of numerical modeling for a special case of a set of fundamental constants and initial conditions, illustrating the analytical properties of the model.

In this part of the article we will present a wider range of numerical modeling results and their analysis in order to identify types of behavior of the model, as well as solve the problem of generating one of the components of a scalar doublet by another, similar to cosmological models with scalarly charged fermions [2], [3], [4]. As we noted in [1], we will also pursue the goal of possibly replacing the mathematically complicated and cumbersome model of scalarly charged fermions with a simpler mathematical model in the theory of scalar-gravitational instability.

We present the necessary information from the first part of the article [1]111In the future, when referring to the results of the first part of the article, we will append the Roman numeral I to the link, for example, Fig.I.15..

The dynamical system corresponding to the cosmological model in the spatially flat Friedmann metric with the scale factor a⁒(t)π‘Žπ‘‘a(t)italic_a ( italic_t ) consists of a normal system of ordinary differential equations:

ΞΎΛ™=H(a≑exp⁑(ΞΎ));Λ™πœ‰π»π‘Žπœ‰\displaystyle\dot{\xi}=H\qquad(a\equiv\exp(\xi));overΛ™ start_ARG italic_ΞΎ end_ARG = italic_H ( italic_a ≑ roman_exp ( italic_ΞΎ ) ) ; (1)
Ξ¦Λ™=Z;˙Φ𝑍\displaystyle\dot{\Phi}=Z;overΛ™ start_ARG roman_Ξ¦ end_ARG = italic_Z ; (2)
ZΛ™=βˆ’3⁒H⁒Zβˆ’m2β’Ξ¦βˆ’Ξ±β’Ξ¦31+Ξ³2βˆ’Ξ³β’ΞΌ2β’Ο†βˆ’Ξ²β’Ο†31+Ξ³2;˙𝑍3𝐻𝑍superscriptπ‘š2Φ𝛼superscriptΞ¦31superscript𝛾2𝛾superscriptπœ‡2πœ‘π›½superscriptπœ‘31superscript𝛾2\displaystyle\dot{Z}=-3HZ-\frac{m^{2}\Phi-\alpha\Phi^{3}}{1+\gamma^{2}}-\gamma% \frac{\mu^{2}\varphi-\beta\varphi^{3}}{1+\gamma^{2}};overΛ™ start_ARG italic_Z end_ARG = - 3 italic_H italic_Z - divide start_ARG italic_m start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_Ξ¦ - italic_Ξ± roman_Ξ¦ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 1 + italic_Ξ³ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG - italic_Ξ³ divide start_ARG italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_Ο† - italic_Ξ² italic_Ο† start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 1 + italic_Ξ³ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG ; (3)
Ο†Λ™=z;Λ™πœ‘π‘§\displaystyle\dot{\varphi}=z;overΛ™ start_ARG italic_Ο† end_ARG = italic_z ; (4)
zΛ™=βˆ’3⁒H⁒z+ΞΌ2β’Ο†βˆ’Ξ²β’Ο†31+Ξ³2βˆ’Ξ³β’m2β’Ξ¦βˆ’Ξ±β’Ξ¦31+Ξ³2;˙𝑧3𝐻𝑧superscriptπœ‡2πœ‘π›½superscriptπœ‘31superscript𝛾2𝛾superscriptπ‘š2Φ𝛼superscriptΞ¦31superscript𝛾2\displaystyle\dot{z}=-3Hz+\frac{\mu^{2}\varphi-\beta\varphi^{3}}{1+\gamma^{2}}% -\gamma\frac{m^{2}\Phi-\alpha\Phi^{3}}{1+\gamma^{2}};overΛ™ start_ARG italic_z end_ARG = - 3 italic_H italic_z + divide start_ARG italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_Ο† - italic_Ξ² italic_Ο† start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 1 + italic_Ξ³ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG - italic_Ξ³ divide start_ARG italic_m start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_Ξ¦ - italic_Ξ± roman_Ξ¦ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 1 + italic_Ξ³ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG ; (5)
HΛ™=βˆ’12⁒Z2+12⁒z2βˆ’Ξ³β’Z⁒z,˙𝐻12superscript𝑍212superscript𝑧2𝛾𝑍𝑧\displaystyle\dot{H}=-\frac{1}{2}Z^{2}+\frac{1}{2}z^{2}-\gamma Zz,overΛ™ start_ARG italic_H end_ARG = - divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG italic_Z start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG italic_z start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_Ξ³ italic_Z italic_z , (6)

and its first zero integral - the equations of the Einstein - Higgs hypersurface222In fact, the Einstein equations are 44subscriptsuperscriptabsent44{}^{4}_{4}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT 4 end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 4 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. of the autonomous subsystem S1=subscript𝑆1absentS_{1}=italic_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = {(2) – (6)} dynamic system S0=subscript𝑆0absentS_{0}=italic_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = {(1) – (6)} (S1βŠ‚S0subscript𝑆1subscript𝑆0S_{1}\subset S_{0}italic_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT βŠ‚ italic_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT):

3⁒H2βˆ’Z22+α⁒Φ44βˆ’m2⁒Φ22+z22+β⁒φ44βˆ’ΞΌ2⁒φ22βˆ’Ξ³β’Z⁒zβˆ’Ξ›=0,3superscript𝐻2superscript𝑍22𝛼superscriptΞ¦44superscriptπ‘š2superscriptΞ¦22superscript𝑧22𝛽superscriptπœ‘44superscriptπœ‡2superscriptπœ‘22𝛾𝑍𝑧Λ0\begin{array}[]{l}3H^{2}-\dfrac{Z^{2}}{2}+\dfrac{\alpha\Phi^{4}}{4}-\dfrac{m^{% 2}\Phi^{2}}{2}\\[11.0pt] +\dfrac{z^{2}}{2}+\dfrac{\beta\varphi^{4}}{4}-\dfrac{\mu^{2}\varphi^{2}}{2}-% \gamma Zz-\Lambda=0,\end{array}start_ARRAY start_ROW start_CELL 3 italic_H start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - divide start_ARG italic_Z start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG + divide start_ARG italic_Ξ± roman_Ξ¦ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 4 end_ARG - divide start_ARG italic_m start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_Ξ¦ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL + divide start_ARG italic_z start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG + divide start_ARG italic_Ξ² italic_Ο† start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 4 end_ARG - divide start_ARG italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_Ο† start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG - italic_Ξ³ italic_Z italic_z - roman_Ξ› = 0 , end_CELL end_ROW end_ARRAY (7)

where Φ⁒(t)Φ𝑑\Phi(t)roman_Ξ¦ ( italic_t ) and φ⁒(t)πœ‘π‘‘\varphi(t)italic_Ο† ( italic_t ) are the potentials of classical and phantom scalar fields, H⁒(t)𝐻𝑑H(t)italic_H ( italic_t ) is the Hubble parameter, Ξ±,β𝛼𝛽\alpha,\betaitalic_Ξ± , italic_Ξ² are the self-interaction constants of these fields, m,ΞΌπ‘šπœ‡m,\muitalic_m , italic_ΞΌ are the masses of their quanta, γ𝛾\gammaitalic_Ξ³ is the kinetic interaction constant of the classical and phantom scalar fields.

Ξ›=Ξ›0βˆ’m44β’Ξ±βˆ’ΞΌ44⁒β,Ξ›subscriptΞ›0superscriptπ‘š44𝛼superscriptπœ‡44𝛽\Lambda=\Lambda_{0}-\frac{m^{4}}{4\alpha}-\frac{\mu^{4}}{4\beta},roman_Ξ› = roman_Ξ› start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - divide start_ARG italic_m start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 4 italic_Ξ± end_ARG - divide start_ARG italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 4 italic_Ξ² end_ARG , (8)

and Ξ›0subscriptΞ›0\Lambda_{0}roman_Ξ› start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is the seed value of the cosmological constant.

Since both dynamical systems, S0subscript𝑆0S_{0}italic_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and S1subscript𝑆1S_{1}italic_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, are autonomous, in cases where we do not need knowledge of the scale factor function a⁒(t)π‘Žπ‘‘a(t)italic_a ( italic_t ), we will study the autonomous subsystem S1subscript𝑆1S_{1}italic_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, otherwise - the system S0subscript𝑆0S_{0}italic_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. Let us note in passing that, in principle, in all cases it would be possible to limit ourselves to studying the system S1subscript𝑆1S_{1}italic_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, since the scale factor a⁒(t)π‘Žπ‘‘a(t)italic_a ( italic_t ) using the equation (1) could be found using integration

a⁒(t)=e∫H⁒(t)⁒𝑑t,π‘Žπ‘‘superscripte𝐻𝑑differential-d𝑑a(t)=\mathrm{e}^{\int H(t)dt},italic_a ( italic_t ) = roman_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∫ italic_H ( italic_t ) italic_d italic_t end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ,

however, from a technical point of view, it is easier to find a numerical solution to a normal system of 6 differential equations S0subscript𝑆0S_{0}italic_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT than to find the integral of the function H⁒(t)𝐻𝑑H(t)italic_H ( italic_t ) based on a numerical solution to a normal system of 5 differential equations S1subscript𝑆1S_{1}italic_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT using numerical methods.

Further, the invariant cosmological acceleration Ω⁒(t)Ω𝑑\Omega(t)roman_Ξ© ( italic_t ) is related to the Hubble parameter H⁒(t)𝐻𝑑H(t)italic_H ( italic_t ) by the relation

Ξ©=a⁒aΒ¨aΛ™2≑1+HΛ™H2=βˆ’12⁒(1+3⁒κ),Ξ©π‘ŽΒ¨π‘ŽsuperscriptΛ™π‘Ž21˙𝐻superscript𝐻21213πœ…\Omega=\frac{a\ddot{a}}{{\dot{a}}^{2}}\equiv 1+\frac{\dot{H}}{H^{2}}=-\frac{1}% {2}(1+3\kappa),roman_Ξ© = divide start_ARG italic_a overΒ¨ start_ARG italic_a end_ARG end_ARG start_ARG overΛ™ start_ARG italic_a end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG ≑ 1 + divide start_ARG overΛ™ start_ARG italic_H end_ARG end_ARG start_ARG italic_H start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG = - divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG ( 1 + 3 italic_ΞΊ ) , (9)

where κ⁒(t)πœ…π‘‘\kappa(t)italic_ΞΊ ( italic_t ) is the barotropic coefficient of cosmological matter:

ΞΊ=P⁒╱⁒Eβ‰‘βˆ’13⁒(1+2⁒Ω),πœ…π‘ƒβ•±πΈ1312Ξ©\kappa=P\diagup E\equiv-\frac{1}{3}(1+2\Omega),italic_ΞΊ = italic_P β•± italic_E ≑ - divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 3 end_ARG ( 1 + 2 roman_Ξ© ) , (10)

and E𝐸Eitalic_E is normalized effective energy and P𝑃Pitalic_P is normalized effective pressure333multiplied by 8⁒π8πœ‹8\pi8 italic_Ο€:

E=𝐸absent\displaystyle E=italic_E = Z22βˆ’Ξ±β’Ξ¦44+m2⁒Φ22superscript𝑍22𝛼superscriptΞ¦44superscriptπ‘š2superscriptΞ¦22\displaystyle\displaystyle\frac{Z^{2}}{2}-\frac{\alpha\Phi^{4}}{4}+\frac{m^{2}% \Phi^{2}}{2}\hskip 56.9055ptdivide start_ARG italic_Z start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG - divide start_ARG italic_Ξ± roman_Ξ¦ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 4 end_ARG + divide start_ARG italic_m start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_Ξ¦ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG (11)
βˆ’z22βˆ’Ξ²β’Ο†44+ΞΌ2⁒φ22+γ⁒Z⁒z+Ξ›,superscript𝑧22𝛽superscriptπœ‘44superscriptπœ‡2superscriptπœ‘22𝛾𝑍𝑧Λ\displaystyle\displaystyle-\frac{z^{2}}{2}-\frac{\beta\varphi^{4}}{4}+\frac{% \mu^{2}\varphi^{2}}{2}+\gamma Zz+\Lambda,- divide start_ARG italic_z start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG - divide start_ARG italic_Ξ² italic_Ο† start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 4 end_ARG + divide start_ARG italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_Ο† start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG + italic_Ξ³ italic_Z italic_z + roman_Ξ› ,
P=𝑃absent\displaystyle P=italic_P = Z22+α⁒Φ44βˆ’m2⁒Φ22superscript𝑍22𝛼superscriptΞ¦44superscriptπ‘š2superscriptΞ¦22\displaystyle\displaystyle\frac{Z^{2}}{2}+\frac{\alpha\Phi^{4}}{4}-\frac{m^{2}% \Phi^{2}}{2}\hskip 56.9055ptdivide start_ARG italic_Z start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG + divide start_ARG italic_Ξ± roman_Ξ¦ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 4 end_ARG - divide start_ARG italic_m start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_Ξ¦ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG (12)
βˆ’z22+β⁒φ44βˆ’ΞΌ2⁒φ22+γ⁒Z⁒zβˆ’Ξ›,superscript𝑧22𝛽superscriptπœ‘44superscriptπœ‡2superscriptπœ‘22𝛾𝑍𝑧Λ\displaystyle\displaystyle-\frac{z^{2}}{2}+\frac{\beta\varphi^{4}}{4}-\frac{% \mu^{2}\varphi^{2}}{2}+\gamma Zz-\Lambda,- divide start_ARG italic_z start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG + divide start_ARG italic_Ξ² italic_Ο† start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 4 end_ARG - divide start_ARG italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_Ο† start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG + italic_Ξ³ italic_Z italic_z - roman_Ξ› ,

at that

E+P=Z2βˆ’z2+2⁒γ⁒Z⁒zβ‰‘βˆ’2⁒HΛ™.𝐸𝑃superscript𝑍2superscript𝑧22𝛾𝑍𝑧2˙𝐻E+P=Z^{2}-z^{2}+2\gamma Zz\equiv-2\dot{H}.italic_E + italic_P = italic_Z start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_z start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + 2 italic_Ξ³ italic_Z italic_z ≑ - 2 overΛ™ start_ARG italic_H end_ARG . (13)

Along with the total effective energy and pressure, we introduce similar quantities for individual components of the cosmological system, normalized energy densities Ec,Efsubscript𝐸𝑐subscript𝐸𝑓E_{c},E_{f}italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and pressure Pc,Pfsubscript𝑃𝑐subscript𝑃𝑓P_{c},P_{f}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT

Ec=Z22βˆ’Ξ±β’Ξ¦44+m2⁒Φ22;subscript𝐸𝑐superscript𝑍22𝛼superscriptΞ¦44superscriptπ‘š2superscriptΞ¦22\displaystyle E_{c}=\frac{Z^{2}}{2}-\frac{\alpha\Phi^{4}}{4}+\frac{m^{2}\Phi^{% 2}}{2};italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = divide start_ARG italic_Z start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG - divide start_ARG italic_Ξ± roman_Ξ¦ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 4 end_ARG + divide start_ARG italic_m start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_Ξ¦ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG ; (14)
Ef=βˆ’z22βˆ’Ξ²β’Ο†44+ΞΌ2⁒φ22;subscript𝐸𝑓superscript𝑧22𝛽superscriptπœ‘44superscriptπœ‡2superscriptπœ‘22\displaystyle E_{f}=-\frac{z^{2}}{2}-\frac{\beta\varphi^{4}}{4}+\frac{\mu^{2}% \varphi^{2}}{2};italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = - divide start_ARG italic_z start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG - divide start_ARG italic_Ξ² italic_Ο† start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 4 end_ARG + divide start_ARG italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_Ο† start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG ; (15)
Pc=Z22+α⁒Φ44βˆ’m2⁒Φ22;subscript𝑃𝑐superscript𝑍22𝛼superscriptΞ¦44superscriptπ‘š2superscriptΞ¦22\displaystyle P_{c}=\frac{Z^{2}}{2}+\frac{\alpha\Phi^{4}}{4}-\frac{m^{2}\Phi^{% 2}}{2};italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = divide start_ARG italic_Z start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG + divide start_ARG italic_Ξ± roman_Ξ¦ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 4 end_ARG - divide start_ARG italic_m start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_Ξ¦ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG ; (16)
Pf=βˆ’z22+β⁒φ44βˆ’ΞΌ2⁒φ22subscript𝑃𝑓superscript𝑧22𝛽superscriptπœ‘44superscriptπœ‡2superscriptπœ‘22\displaystyle P_{f}=-\frac{z^{2}}{2}+\frac{\beta\varphi^{4}}{4}-\frac{\mu^{2}% \varphi^{2}}{2}italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = - divide start_ARG italic_z start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG + divide start_ARG italic_Ξ² italic_Ο† start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 4 end_ARG - divide start_ARG italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_Ο† start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG (17)

and the corresponding interaction values of their components:

Ec⁒f=Pc⁒f=γ⁒Z⁒z,subscript𝐸𝑐𝑓subscript𝑃𝑐𝑓𝛾𝑍𝑧\displaystyle E_{cf}=P_{cf}=\gamma Zz,italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_Ξ³ italic_Z italic_z , (18)

so that

E=Ec+Ef+Ec⁒f+Ξ›;𝐸subscript𝐸𝑐subscript𝐸𝑓subscript𝐸𝑐𝑓Λ\displaystyle E=E_{c}+E_{f}+E_{cf}+\Lambda;italic_E = italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + roman_Ξ› ; (19)
P=Pc+Pf+Pc⁒fβˆ’Ξ›.𝑃subscript𝑃𝑐subscript𝑃𝑓subscript𝑃𝑐𝑓Λ\displaystyle P=P_{c}+P_{f}+P_{cf}-\Lambda.italic_P = italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - roman_Ξ› . (20)

A particular cosmological model M is determined, firstly, by a system of dynamic equations (1)–(6), secondly, by fundamental parameters

P=[[Ξ±,Ξ²,m,ΞΌ],Ξ³,Ξ›]Pπ›Όπ›½π‘šπœ‡π›ΎΞ›\textbf{P}=[[\alpha,\beta,m,\mu],\gamma,\Lambda]P = [ [ italic_Ξ± , italic_Ξ² , italic_m , italic_ΞΌ ] , italic_Ξ³ , roman_Ξ› ] (21)

and, thirdly, by initial conditions

I=[Ξ¦0,Z0,Ο†0,z0,e],(e=Β±1).IsubscriptΞ¦0subscript𝑍0subscriptπœ‘0subscript𝑧0𝑒𝑒plus-or-minus1\textbf{I}=[\Phi_{0},Z_{0},\varphi_{0},z_{0},e],\qquad(e=\pm 1).I = [ roman_Ξ¦ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_Ο† start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_e ] , ( italic_e = Β± 1 ) . (22)

Here the sign e𝑒eitalic_e corresponds to the choice of a positive or negative solution to the equation (7) relative to the initial value of the Hubble parameter. Note that using the autonomy of the dynamical systems S0subscript𝑆0S_{0}italic_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and S1subscript𝑆1S_{1}italic_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and the invariance of the Friedman metric with respect to time translations tβ†’t+t0→𝑑𝑑subscript𝑑0t\to t+t_{0}italic_t β†’ italic_t + italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, we can always choose the initial condition for the scale function ξ⁒(t)πœ‰π‘‘\xi(t)italic_ΞΎ ( italic_t ) in the form ( see for example [6])

ξ⁒(0)=0.πœ‰00\xi(0)=0.italic_ΞΎ ( 0 ) = 0 . (23)

The cosmological model under study can be considered as a five-dimensional dynamical system in the arithmetic phase space ℝ5={Ξ¦,Z,Ο†,z,H}=ℝ3βˆͺℝ3superscriptℝ5Ξ¦π‘πœ‘π‘§π»superscriptℝ3superscriptℝ3\mathds{R}^{5}=\{\Phi,Z,\varphi,z,H\}=\mathds{R}^{3}\cup\mathds{R}^{3}blackboard_R start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 5 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = { roman_Ξ¦ , italic_Z , italic_Ο† , italic_z , italic_H } = blackboard_R start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT βˆͺ blackboard_R start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, three-dimensional phase subspaces ℝ3={Ξ¦,Z,H}superscriptℝ3Φ𝑍𝐻\mathds{R}^{3}=\{\Phi,Z,H\}blackboard_R start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = { roman_Ξ¦ , italic_Z , italic_H } and ℝ3={Ο†,z,H}superscriptℝ3πœ‘π‘§π»\mathds{R}^{3}=\{\varphi,z,H\}blackboard_R start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = { italic_Ο† , italic_z , italic_H } We will further denote by the symbols ΣΦsubscriptΣΦ\Sigma_{\Phi}roman_Ξ£ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ξ¦ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and ΣφsubscriptΞ£πœ‘\Sigma_{\varphi}roman_Ξ£ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Ο† end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and, for simplicity, call them the classical and phantom phase spaces, respectively. In this case, ΣΦβˆͺΣφ=ℝ5subscriptΣΦsubscriptΞ£πœ‘superscriptℝ5\Sigma_{\Phi}\cup\Sigma_{\varphi}=\mathds{R}^{5}roman_Ξ£ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ξ¦ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT βˆͺ roman_Ξ£ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Ο† end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = blackboard_R start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 5 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT and Ξ£Ξ¦βˆ©Ξ£Ο†=ℝ1=O⁒HsubscriptΣΦsubscriptΞ£πœ‘superscriptℝ1𝑂𝐻\Sigma_{\Phi}\cap\Sigma_{\varphi}=\mathds{R}^{1}=OHroman_Ξ£ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ξ¦ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∩ roman_Ξ£ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Ο† end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = blackboard_R start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = italic_O italic_H.

The singular points of the dynamical system under study have coordinates (see[1]):

M0,0±⁒(0,0,0,0,Β±3⁒Λ3);superscriptsubscript𝑀00plus-or-minus0000plus-or-minus3Ξ›3\displaystyle M_{0,0}^{\pm}\left(0,0,0,0,\pm\frac{\sqrt{3\Lambda}}{3}\right);italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 , 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT Β± end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( 0 , 0 , 0 , 0 , Β± divide start_ARG square-root start_ARG 3 roman_Ξ› end_ARG end_ARG start_ARG 3 end_ARG ) ; (24)
M0,Β±1Β±:(0,0,Β±ΞΌΞ²,0,Β±3⁒Λβ3);:superscriptsubscript𝑀0plus-or-minus1plus-or-minus00plus-or-minusπœ‡π›½0plus-or-minus3subscriptΛ𝛽3\displaystyle M_{0,\pm 1}^{\pm}:\left(0,0,\pm\frac{\mu}{\sqrt{\beta}},0,\pm% \frac{\sqrt{3\Lambda_{\beta}}}{3}\right);italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 , Β± 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT Β± end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT : ( 0 , 0 , Β± divide start_ARG italic_ΞΌ end_ARG start_ARG square-root start_ARG italic_Ξ² end_ARG end_ARG , 0 , Β± divide start_ARG square-root start_ARG 3 roman_Ξ› start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Ξ² end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG end_ARG start_ARG 3 end_ARG ) ; (25)
MΒ±1,0Β±:(Β±mΞ±,0,0,0,Β±3⁒Λα3);:superscriptsubscript𝑀plus-or-minus10plus-or-minusplus-or-minusπ‘šπ›Ό000plus-or-minus3subscriptΛ𝛼3\displaystyle M_{\pm 1,0}^{\pm}:\left(\pm\frac{m}{\sqrt{\alpha}},0,0,0,\pm% \frac{\sqrt{3\Lambda_{\alpha}}}{3}\right);italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT Β± 1 , 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT Β± end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT : ( Β± divide start_ARG italic_m end_ARG start_ARG square-root start_ARG italic_Ξ± end_ARG end_ARG , 0 , 0 , 0 , Β± divide start_ARG square-root start_ARG 3 roman_Ξ› start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Ξ± end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG end_ARG start_ARG 3 end_ARG ) ; (26)
MΒ±1,Β±1Β±:(Β±mΞ±,0,Β±ΞΌΞ²,0,Β±3⁒Λ03),:superscriptsubscript𝑀plus-or-minus1plus-or-minus1plus-or-minusplus-or-minusπ‘šπ›Ό0plus-or-minusπœ‡π›½0plus-or-minus3subscriptΞ›03\displaystyle M_{\pm 1,\pm 1}^{\pm}:\left(\pm\frac{m}{\sqrt{\alpha}},0,\pm% \frac{\mu}{\sqrt{\beta}},0,\pm\frac{\sqrt{3\Lambda_{0}}}{3}\right),italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT Β± 1 , Β± 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT Β± end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT : ( Β± divide start_ARG italic_m end_ARG start_ARG square-root start_ARG italic_Ξ± end_ARG end_ARG , 0 , Β± divide start_ARG italic_ΞΌ end_ARG start_ARG square-root start_ARG italic_Ξ² end_ARG end_ARG , 0 , Β± divide start_ARG square-root start_ARG 3 roman_Ξ› start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG end_ARG start_ARG 3 end_ARG ) , (27)

where Λβ≑Λ+ΞΌ4/4⁒βsubscriptΛ𝛽Λsuperscriptπœ‡44𝛽\Lambda_{\beta}\equiv\Lambda+\mu^{4}/4\betaroman_Ξ› start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Ξ² end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≑ roman_Ξ› + italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT / 4 italic_Ξ², Λα≑Λ+m4/4⁒αsubscriptΛ𝛼Λsuperscriptπ‘š44𝛼\Lambda_{\alpha}\equiv\Lambda+m^{4}/4\alpharoman_Ξ› start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Ξ± end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≑ roman_Ξ› + italic_m start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT / 4 italic_Ξ±.

Before moving on to the results of numerical modeling, we make the following remarks:

Remarks I (preliminary).

I.1.   According to Property I.1 of the invariance of a dynamical system with respect to changes in the sign of γ𝛾\gammaitalic_Ξ³, it is sufficient to study mathematical models with a positive value of Ξ³β©Ύ0𝛾0\gamma\geqslant 0italic_Ξ³ β©Ύ 0;

I.2.   According to Property I.2 when transforming similarity :

𝐏~=[[Ξ±k2,Ξ²k2,mk,ΞΌk],Ξ³,Ξ›k2]~𝐏𝛼superscriptπ‘˜2𝛽superscriptπ‘˜2π‘šπ‘˜πœ‡π‘˜π›ΎΞ›superscriptπ‘˜2\displaystyle{\bf\tilde{P}}=\left[\left[\frac{\alpha}{k^{2}},\frac{\beta}{k^{2% }},\frac{m}{k},\frac{\mu}{k}\right],\gamma,\frac{\Lambda}{k^{2}}\right]over~ start_ARG bold_P end_ARG = [ [ divide start_ARG italic_Ξ± end_ARG start_ARG italic_k start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG , divide start_ARG italic_Ξ² end_ARG start_ARG italic_k start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG , divide start_ARG italic_m end_ARG start_ARG italic_k end_ARG , divide start_ARG italic_ΞΌ end_ARG start_ARG italic_k end_ARG ] , italic_Ξ³ , divide start_ARG roman_Ξ› end_ARG start_ARG italic_k start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG ] (28)

solution of the Cauchy problem with initial conditions

𝐈~=[Ξ¦0,Z0k,Ο†0,z0k,e]~𝐈subscriptΞ¦0subscript𝑍0π‘˜subscriptπœ‘0subscript𝑧0π‘˜π‘’\displaystyle{\bf\tilde{I}}=\left[\Phi_{0},\frac{Z_{0}}{k},\varphi_{0},\frac{z% _{0}}{k},e\right]over~ start_ARG bold_I end_ARG = [ roman_Ξ¦ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , divide start_ARG italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_k end_ARG , italic_Ο† start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , divide start_ARG italic_z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_k end_ARG , italic_e ] (29)

is obtained from the solution 𝐒𝐒\mathbf{S}bold_S of the Cauchy problem for the preimage according to the rule

S⁒(t)=[Φ⁒(t),Z⁒(t),φ⁒(t),z⁒(t),H⁒(t)]β‡’Sπ‘‘Ξ¦π‘‘π‘π‘‘πœ‘π‘‘π‘§π‘‘π»π‘‘β‡’absent\displaystyle\textbf{S}(t)=[\Phi(t),Z(t),\varphi(t),z(t),H(t)]\RightarrowS ( italic_t ) = [ roman_Ξ¦ ( italic_t ) , italic_Z ( italic_t ) , italic_Ο† ( italic_t ) , italic_z ( italic_t ) , italic_H ( italic_t ) ] β‡’ (30)
𝐒~⁒(t)=[Φ⁒(t),1k⁒Z⁒(t),φ⁒(t),1k⁒z⁒(t),1k⁒H⁒(t)],~𝐒𝑑Φ𝑑1π‘˜π‘π‘‘πœ‘π‘‘1π‘˜π‘§π‘‘1π‘˜π»π‘‘\displaystyle\!\!\!\mathbf{\tilde{S}}(t)=\left[\Phi\left(t\right),\frac{1}{k}Z% \left(t\right),\varphi\left(t\right),\frac{1}{k}z\left(t\right),\frac{1}{k}H% \left(t\right)\right],over~ start_ARG bold_S end_ARG ( italic_t ) = [ roman_Ξ¦ ( italic_t ) , divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG italic_k end_ARG italic_Z ( italic_t ) , italic_Ο† ( italic_t ) , divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG italic_k end_ARG italic_z ( italic_t ) , divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG italic_k end_ARG italic_H ( italic_t ) ] , (31)

where the connection between the time t~~𝑑\tilde{t}over~ start_ARG italic_t end_ARG in the model 𝐌~~𝐌{\bf\tilde{M}}over~ start_ARG bold_M end_ARG and the time t𝑑titalic_t of the preimage 𝐌𝐌{\bf M}bold_M is taken into account

t~=k⁒t;~π‘‘π‘˜π‘‘\tilde{t}=kt;over~ start_ARG italic_t end_ARG = italic_k italic_t ; (32)

I.3.   According to Property I.4, the coordinates of singular points of an autonomous dynamic system (2)–(6) with the integral condition (7), as well as their character, coincide with the coordinates of singular points and their character for a dynamic system without interaction of components [6];

I.4.   According to [7] during the similarity transformation (28) – (32) the eigenvalues Ξ»πœ†\lambdaitalic_Ξ» of the matrix of the dynamical system are transformed according to the rule

Ξ»~=Ξ»k;~πœ†πœ†π‘˜\tilde{\lambda}=\frac{\lambda}{k};over~ start_ARG italic_Ξ» end_ARG = divide start_ARG italic_Ξ» end_ARG start_ARG italic_k end_ARG ; (33)

I.5.   All singular points (24) – (27) of the dynamical system S0subscript𝑆0S_{0}italic_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT are exact constant solutions of this system. Wherein

a⁒(t)=eΒ±H0⁒t,π‘Žπ‘‘superscript𝑒plus-or-minussubscript𝐻0𝑑a(t)=e^{\pm H_{0}t},italic_a ( italic_t ) = italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT Β± italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , (34)

where H0subscript𝐻0H_{0}italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is the positive value of the 5th coordinate of the corresponding singular point from the list (24) – (27). Thus, all singular points correspond to inflationary solutions - inflationary expansion when choosing a positive sign in (34), or inflationary compression when choosing a negative sign. In both cases, these solutions correspond to cosmological models with an infinite past and an infinite future. At the same time, the question of the sustainability of these solutions remains open.

2 Basic model

Let’s set the parameters of the basic model as follows:

𝐏𝟎=[[1,1,1,1],Ξ³,3β‹…10βˆ’6],subscript𝐏01111𝛾⋅3superscript106\mathbf{P_{0}}=[[1,1,1,1],\gamma,3\cdot 10^{-6}],bold_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = [ [ 1 , 1 , 1 , 1 ] , italic_Ξ³ , 3 β‹… 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 6 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ] , (35)

where the constant γ𝛾\gammaitalic_Ξ³ is still an arbitrary parameter.

2.1 Singular points

The coordinates of the singular points of the model (35) and their characters are indicated in Tab.2.1. Here and in what follows, the following notations are used: 𝐀𝐀\mathbf{A}bold_A – attraction, 𝐑𝐑\mathbf{R}bold_R – repulsion, 𝐒𝐒\mathbf{S}bold_S – saddle, we also somewhat simplify the characteristics of singular points, preserving only their properties of attraction and repulsion.
Remarks II (about the character of the points).

The value of the parameter γ𝛾\gammaitalic_Ξ³ does not affect either the coordinates of singular points or their character. In this case, however, the absolute values of the real and imaginary parts of the eigenvalues depend on the value of γ𝛾\gammaitalic_Ξ³, but the signs of these parts do not change.

Tab. 1. Characters (type) of singular pointsin subspaces [ΣΦ,Σφ]subscriptΣΦsubscriptΞ£πœ‘[\Sigma_{\Phi},\Sigma_{\varphi}][ roman_Ξ£ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ξ¦ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , roman_Ξ£ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Ο† end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] in the model with parameters 𝐏𝟎subscript𝐏0\mathbf{P_{0}}bold_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT

Singular points Coordinates Type
M0,0+superscriptsubscript𝑀00M_{0,0}^{+}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 , 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT [0,0,0,0,0.001]00000.001[0,0,0,0,0.001][ 0 , 0 , 0 , 0 , 0.001 ] [𝐀,𝐒]𝐀𝐒[\mathbf{A},\ \mathbf{S}][ bold_A , bold_S ]
M0,0βˆ’superscriptsubscript𝑀00M_{0,0}^{-}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 , 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT [0,0,0,0,βˆ’0.001]00000.001[0,0,0,0,-0.001][ 0 , 0 , 0 , 0 , - 0.001 ] [𝐑,𝐒]𝐑𝐒[\mathbf{R},\ \mathbf{S}][ bold_R , bold_S ]
M0,Β±1+superscriptsubscript𝑀0plus-or-minus1M_{0,\pm 1}^{+}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 , Β± 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT [0,0,Β±1,0,0.289]00plus-or-minus100.289[0,0,\pm 1,0,0.289][ 0 , 0 , Β± 1 , 0 , 0.289 ] [𝐀,𝐀]𝐀𝐀[\mathbf{A},\ \mathbf{A}][ bold_A , bold_A ]
M0,Β±1βˆ’superscriptsubscript𝑀0plus-or-minus1M_{0,\pm 1}^{-}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 , Β± 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT [0,0,Β±1,0,βˆ’0.289]00plus-or-minus100.289[0,0,\pm 1,0,-0.289][ 0 , 0 , Β± 1 , 0 , - 0.289 ] [𝐑,𝐑]𝐑𝐑[\mathbf{R},\ \mathbf{R}][ bold_R , bold_R ]
MΒ±1,0+superscriptsubscript𝑀plus-or-minus10M_{\pm 1,0}^{+}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT Β± 1 , 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT [Β±1,0,0,0,0.289]plus-or-minus10000.289[\pm 1,0,0,0,0.289][ Β± 1 , 0 , 0 , 0 , 0.289 ] [𝐒,𝐒]𝐒𝐒[\mathbf{S},\ \mathbf{S}][ bold_S , bold_S ]
MΒ±1,0βˆ’superscriptsubscript𝑀plus-or-minus10M_{\pm 1,0}^{-}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT Β± 1 , 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT [Β±1,0,0,0,βˆ’0.289]plus-or-minus10000.289[\pm 1,0,0,0,-0.289][ Β± 1 , 0 , 0 , 0 , - 0.289 ] [𝐒,𝐒]𝐒𝐒[\mathbf{S},\ \mathbf{S}][ bold_S , bold_S ]
MΒ±1,Β±1+superscriptsubscript𝑀plus-or-minus1plus-or-minus1M_{\pm 1,\pm 1}^{+}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT Β± 1 , Β± 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT [Β±1,0,Β±1,0,0.409]plus-or-minus10plus-or-minus100.409[\pm 1,0,\pm 1,0,0.409][ Β± 1 , 0 , Β± 1 , 0 , 0.409 ] [𝐒,𝐀]𝐒𝐀[\mathbf{S},\ \mathbf{A}][ bold_S , bold_A ]
MΒ±1,Β±1βˆ’superscriptsubscript𝑀plus-or-minus1plus-or-minus1M_{\pm 1,\pm 1}^{-}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT Β± 1 , Β± 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT [Β±1,0,Β±1,0,βˆ’0.409]plus-or-minus10plus-or-minus100.409[\pm 1,0,\pm 1,0,-0.409][ Β± 1 , 0 , Β± 1 , 0 , - 0.409 ] [𝐒,𝐑]𝐒𝐑[\mathbf{S},\ \mathbf{R}][ bold_S , bold_R ]

Due to Remarks II, the results of Tab. 2.1 are applicable to models with arbitrary values of the γ𝛾\gammaitalic_Ξ³.

2.2 System in steady state

Let us now specify the γ𝛾\gammaitalic_Ξ³ parameter and consider a model with the following parameters:

𝐏𝟏=[[1,1,1,1],10βˆ’5,3β‹…10βˆ’6].\mathbf{P_{1}}=\bigl{[}[1,1,1,1],10^{-5},3\cdot 10^{-6}\bigl{]}.bold_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = [ [ 1 , 1 , 1 , 1 ] , 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 5 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , 3 β‹… 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 6 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ] . (36)

According to Tab.2.1, there are only two singular points, M0,Β±1+superscriptsubscript𝑀0plus-or-minus1M_{0,\pm 1}^{+}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 , Β± 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT (see (25)), which are simultaneously attractive in the subspaces ΣΦsubscriptΣΦ\Sigma_{\Phi}roman_Ξ£ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ξ¦ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and ΣφsubscriptΞ£πœ‘\Sigma_{\varphi}roman_Ξ£ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Ο† end_POSTSUBSCRIPT.

In Fig.2.2 shows the evolution of geometric factors - the scale function ξ⁒(t)πœ‰π‘‘\xi(t)italic_ΞΎ ( italic_t ) and the Hubble parameter H⁒(t)𝐻𝑑H(t)italic_H ( italic_t ) for a model with parameters 𝐏𝟏subscript𝐏1\mathbf{P_{1}}bold_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT under initial conditions corresponding to the coordinates of stable points M0,Β±1+superscriptsubscript𝑀0plus-or-minus1M_{0,\pm 1}^{+}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 , Β± 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT

𝐈𝟎±=[0,0,0,1,±1].subscriptsuperscript𝐈plus-or-minus00001plus-or-minus1\mathbf{I^{\pm}_{0}}=[0,0,0,1,\pm 1].bold_I start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ± end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = [ 0 , 0 , 0 , 1 , ± 1 ] . (37)
[Uncaptioned image]

Fig. 1.  Functions ξ⁒(t)πœ‰π‘‘\xi(t)italic_ΞΎ ( italic_t ) are dashed and dashed-dotted, H⁒(t)𝐻𝑑H(t)italic_H ( italic_t ) are solid and long-dashed lines, respectively, for the initial conditions 𝐈𝟎+,πˆπŸŽβˆ’subscriptsuperscript𝐈0subscriptsuperscript𝐈0\mathbf{I^{+}_{0}},\mathbf{I^{-}_{0}}bold_I start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , bold_I start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT.

In this case, the initial conditions coincide with the coordinates of the stable singular point, the exact solution is the constant scalar potentials Ξ¦0=0,Ο†0=Β±ΞΌ/Ξ²formulae-sequencesubscriptΞ¦00subscriptπœ‘0plus-or-minusπœ‡π›½\Phi_{0}=0,\,\varphi_{0}=\pm\mu/\sqrt{\beta}roman_Ξ¦ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0 , italic_Ο† start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = Β± italic_ΞΌ / square-root start_ARG italic_Ξ² end_ARG. In this case, the model corresponds to either an infinite inflationary expansion (H=H+>0𝐻subscript𝐻0H=H_{+}>0italic_H = italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT + end_POSTSUBSCRIPT > 0) or an infinite inflationary contraction (H=Hβˆ’<0𝐻subscript𝐻0H=H_{-}<0italic_H = italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT - end_POSTSUBSCRIPT < 0).

2.3 Rebound case

If the initial conditions do not coincide with the coordinates of stable singular points, a rebound point appears in the models – the minimum of the scale function ξ⁒(t)β‡’H=0β‡’πœ‰π‘‘π»0\xi(t)\Rightarrow H=0italic_ΞΎ ( italic_t ) β‡’ italic_H = 0. At this point, inflationary compression gives way to inflationary expansion with a symmetrical value of the Hubble constant parameter HΒ±=Β±H0subscript𝐻plus-or-minusplus-or-minussubscript𝐻0H_{\pm}=\pm H_{0}italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT Β± end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = Β± italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT.

[Uncaptioned image]

Fig. 2.  Functions ξ⁒(t)πœ‰π‘‘\xi(t)italic_ΞΎ ( italic_t ) are dashed and dash - dotted, H⁒(t)𝐻𝑑H(t)italic_H ( italic_t ) are solid and long-dashed lines, respectively for initial conditions 𝐈𝟏+subscriptsuperscript𝐈1\mathbf{I^{+}_{1}}bold_I start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and πˆπŸβˆ’subscriptsuperscript𝐈1\mathbf{I^{-}_{1}}bold_I start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT.

[Uncaptioned image]

Fig. 3.  Functions ξ⁒(t)πœ‰π‘‘\xi(t)italic_ΞΎ ( italic_t ) are dashed and dash - dotted, H⁒(t)𝐻𝑑H(t)italic_H ( italic_t ) are solid and long-dashed lines, respectively for initial conditions 𝐈𝟐+subscriptsuperscript𝐈2\mathbf{I^{+}_{2}}bold_I start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and πˆπŸβˆ’subscriptsuperscript𝐈2\mathbf{I^{-}_{2}}bold_I start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT.

In Fig.2.3–2.3 shows the evolution of geometric factors - the scale function ξ⁒(t)πœ‰π‘‘\xi(t)italic_ΞΎ ( italic_t ) and the Hubble parameter H⁒(t)𝐻𝑑H(t)italic_H ( italic_t ) for a model with parameters 𝐏𝟏subscript𝐏1\mathbf{P_{1}}bold_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT under initial conditions, close to the coordinates of stable points M0,Β±1+superscriptsubscript𝑀0plus-or-minus1M_{0,\pm 1}^{+}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 , Β± 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT

𝐈𝟏±=[0,0,0,0.99,±1],𝐈𝟐±=[0,0,0,1.01,±1].subscriptsuperscript𝐈plus-or-minus10000.99plus-or-minus1subscriptsuperscript𝐈plus-or-minus20001.01plus-or-minus1\begin{array}[]{l}\mathbf{I^{\pm}_{1}}=[0,0,0,0.99,\pm 1],\\ \mathbf{I^{\pm}_{2}}=[0,0,0,1.01,\pm 1].\end{array}start_ARRAY start_ROW start_CELL bold_I start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ± end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = [ 0 , 0 , 0 , 0.99 , ± 1 ] , end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL bold_I start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ± end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = [ 0 , 0 , 0 , 1.01 , ± 1 ] . end_CELL end_ROW end_ARRAY (38)

Commenting on the graphs in Fig.2.2–2.3, note the following:

βˆ™βˆ™\bulletβˆ™ Β Β All the cases considered above describe cosmological models with an infinite past and an infinite future.
βˆ™βˆ™\bulletβˆ™ Β Β In this case, however, in the case of the initial conditions (37) coinciding with the coordinates of the stable singular point, the entire cosmological history is described by the inflationary solution corresponding limitless expansion or contraction of the Universe. In this case, the graphs of the functions ξ⁒(t)πœ‰π‘‘\xi(t)italic_ΞΎ ( italic_t ) and H⁒(t)𝐻𝑑H(t)italic_H ( italic_t ) do not depend on the value of the parameter γ𝛾\gammaitalic_Ξ³.
βˆ™βˆ™\bulletβˆ™ Β Β At the slightest discrepancy between the initial conditions and the coordinates of the stable singular point M0,Β±1+superscriptsubscript𝑀0plus-or-minus1M_{0,\pm 1}^{+}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 , Β± 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, the cosmological history breaks down, regardless of the initially given sign of the Hubble parameter into two stages: first - inflationary compression, then - inflationary expansion. At the same time, graphs of the geometric factors ξ⁒(t)πœ‰π‘‘\xi(t)italic_ΞΎ ( italic_t ) and H⁒(t)𝐻𝑑H(t)italic_H ( italic_t ) corresponding to the initial conditions with positive and negative sign of the Hubble parameter, are similar with a shift along the time axis.

2.4 Evolution of scalar fields

If the initial conditions coincide with the coordinates of the stable singular point, the exact solution, as we indicated above, is the constant scalar potentials Ξ¦0=0,Ο†0=Β±ΞΌ/Ξ²formulae-sequencesubscriptΞ¦00subscriptπœ‘0plus-or-minusπœ‡π›½\Phi_{0}=0,\varphi_{0}=\pm\mu/\sqrt{\beta}roman_Ξ¦ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0 , italic_Ο† start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = Β± italic_ΞΌ / square-root start_ARG italic_Ξ² end_ARG. Therefore, we can talk about the evolution of scalar fields only when the initial state deviates from a stable singular point.

In Fig.2.4–2.5 shows graphs of the evolution of scalar potentials Φ⁒(t)Φ𝑑\Phi(t)roman_Ξ¦ ( italic_t ) and φ⁒(t)πœ‘π‘‘\varphi(t)italic_Ο† ( italic_t ) for initial conditions 𝐈𝟏+subscriptsuperscript𝐈1\mathbf{I^{+}_{1}}bold_I start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and 𝐈𝟐+subscriptsuperscript𝐈2\mathbf{I^{+}_{2}}bold_I start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. From these graphs it is clear that the potentials start from a position close to stable in the infinite past at the stage of inflationary compression, experience fluctuations near the minimum point of the scale factor and then return to an equilibrium position in the infinite future already at the stage of inflationary expansion.

[Uncaptioned image]

Fig. 4.  Scalar potential Φ⁒(t)Φ𝑑\Phi(t)roman_Ξ¦ ( italic_t ) – solid, φ⁒(t)πœ‘π‘‘\varphi(t)italic_Ο† ( italic_t ) – dashed line for initial conditions 𝐈𝟏+subscriptsuperscript𝐈1\mathbf{I^{+}_{1}}bold_I start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT; Ξ³=10βˆ’5𝛾superscript105\gamma=10^{-5}italic_Ξ³ = 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 5 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT.

2.5 Effect of the constant γ𝛾\gammaitalic_Ξ³

Note that if the initial conditions deviate from the coordinates of the points M0,Β±1βˆ’superscriptsubscript𝑀0plus-or-minus1M_{0,\pm 1}^{-}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 , Β± 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, the value of the parameter γ𝛾\gammaitalic_Ξ³ begins to influence the behavior of the scale functions ξ⁒(t)πœ‰π‘‘\xi(t)italic_ΞΎ ( italic_t ) and H⁒(t)𝐻𝑑H(t)italic_H ( italic_t ). In Fig.2.5–2.5 just such an influence was demonstrated. As can be seen from these graphs, as the parameter γ𝛾\gammaitalic_Ξ³ increases, the cosmological model acquires an initial singularity at a finite value of cosmological time (in our case, Fig.2.5, tsβ‰ˆβˆ’8.0421765subscript𝑑𝑠8.0421765t_{s}\approx-8.0421765italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_s end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰ˆ - 8.0421765). At the same time, the Universe finds its beginning, lost by endless inflation in an unstable state.

[Uncaptioned image]

Fig. 5.  Function ξ⁒(t)πœ‰π‘‘\xi(t)italic_ΞΎ ( italic_t ) is dashed, H⁒(t)𝐻𝑑H(t)italic_H ( italic_t ) is solid line for initial conditions 𝐈𝟏+subscriptsuperscript𝐈1\mathbf{I^{+}_{1}}bold_I start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT; Ξ³=1𝛾1\gamma=1italic_Ξ³ = 1.

[Uncaptioned image]

Fig. 6.  Scalar potential Φ⁒(t)Φ𝑑\Phi(t)roman_Ξ¦ ( italic_t ) – solid, φ⁒(t)πœ‘π‘‘\varphi(t)italic_Ο† ( italic_t ) – dashed line for initial conditions 𝐈𝟐+subscriptsuperscript𝐈2\mathbf{I^{+}_{2}}bold_I start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT; Ξ³=10βˆ’5𝛾superscript105\gamma=10^{-5}italic_Ξ³ = 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 5 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT.

At Ξ³=1𝛾1\gamma=1italic_Ξ³ = 1, the scenario with the rebound point remains, but the graphs of ξ⁒(t)πœ‰π‘‘\xi(t)italic_ΞΎ ( italic_t ) and H⁒(t)𝐻𝑑H(t)italic_H ( italic_t ) near the rebound point become more contrasting. At Ξ³=10𝛾10\gamma=10italic_Ξ³ = 10 the rebound point turns into a cosmological singularity.

In Fig.2.5 shows the influence of the value of the constant γ𝛾\gammaitalic_Ξ³ on the evolution of scalar potentials. This case, as we answered above (see Fig.2.5 – 2.5), corresponds to a Universe with a rebound point, or with an initial singularity at tsβ‰ˆβˆ’8.0421765subscript𝑑𝑠8.0421765t_{s}\approx-8.0421765italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_s end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰ˆ - 8.0421765.

The short-term generation of a classical field near the rebound point or singularity occurs precisely due to the kinetic connection of the classical and phantom fields.

[Uncaptioned image]

Fig. 7.  Function ξ⁒(t)πœ‰π‘‘\xi(t)italic_ΞΎ ( italic_t ) is dashed, H⁒(t)𝐻𝑑H(t)italic_H ( italic_t ) is solid line for initial conditions 𝐈𝟏+subscriptsuperscript𝐈1\mathbf{I^{+}_{1}}bold_I start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT; Ξ³=10𝛾10\gamma=10italic_Ξ³ = 10.

[Uncaptioned image]

Fig. 8.  Scalar potential Φ⁒(t)Φ𝑑\Phi(t)roman_Ξ¦ ( italic_t ) – solid, φ⁒(t)πœ‘π‘‘\varphi(t)italic_Ο† ( italic_t ) – dashed line for initial conditions 𝐈𝟐+subscriptsuperscript𝐈2\mathbf{I^{+}_{2}}bold_I start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT; Ξ³=1𝛾1\gamma=1italic_Ξ³ = 1.

In Fig.2.5 shows graphs of the evolution of the barotropic coefficient of cosmological matter κ⁒(t)πœ…π‘‘\kappa(t)italic_ΞΊ ( italic_t ) (10) for the initial conditions 𝐈𝟏+subscriptsuperscript𝐈1\mathbf{I^{+}_{1}}bold_I start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and 𝐈𝟐+subscriptsuperscript𝐈2\mathbf{I^{+}_{2}}bold_I start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT at Ξ³=10βˆ’5𝛾superscript105\gamma=10^{-5}italic_Ξ³ = 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 5 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT. In the first case, the model has a rebound point (Fig.2.5), in the second case, an initial singularity at time tsβ‰ˆβˆ’8.0421765subscript𝑑𝑠8.0421765t_{s}\approx-8.0421765italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_s end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰ˆ - 8.0421765 (Fig.2.5). The system passes through the state H=𝐻absentH=italic_H =, due to which singularities of the functions Ω⁒(t)Ω𝑑\Omega(t)roman_Ξ© ( italic_t ) and κ⁒(t)πœ…π‘‘\kappa(t)italic_ΞΊ ( italic_t ) arise at this point. Far from this critical point, the cosmological model is in the inflationary regime (ΞΊ=βˆ’1β‡’Ξ©=1πœ…1β‡’Ξ©1\kappa=-1\Rightarrow\Omega=1italic_ΞΊ = - 1 β‡’ roman_Ξ© = 1). Among other things, you can see that the model approaches the singularity with the barotropic coefficient ΞΊ=1πœ…1\kappa=1italic_ΞΊ = 1.

[Uncaptioned image]

Fig. 9.  Functions of the barotropic coefficient κ⁒(t)πœ…π‘‘\kappa(t)italic_ΞΊ ( italic_t ) (10): solid line for the initial conditions 𝐈𝟏+subscriptsuperscript𝐈1\mathbf{I^{+}_{1}}bold_I start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, dashed line – 𝐈𝟐+subscriptsuperscript𝐈2\mathbf{I^{+}_{2}}bold_I start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT; Ξ³=1𝛾1\gamma=1italic_Ξ³ = 1.

3 Model with a finite past

The models with an initial singularity, i.e., with a finite past, discussed in the previous section are more likely demonstration examples than models of the real Universe. Indeed, the value of the kinetic interaction constant between the components γ≳1greater-than-or-equivalent-to𝛾1\gamma\gtrsim 1italic_Ξ³ ≳ 1 with values of the other fundamental constants in the set 𝐏𝟏subscript𝐏1\mathbf{P_{1}}bold_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT of order 1 (36) is unacceptably large. Indeed, with large-scale transformations of such a model to a real model with masses of superheavy bosons of the order of 1017⁒Gsuperscript1017𝐺10^{17}G10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 17 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_G, according to Remark I.1 we obtain for this model

𝐏~=[[10βˆ’4,10βˆ’4,10βˆ’2,10βˆ’2],1,3β‹…10βˆ’10].~𝐏superscript104superscript104superscript102superscript1021β‹…3superscript1010\tilde{\mathbf{P}}=\bigl{[}\bigl{[}10^{-4},10^{-4},10^{-2},10^{-2}\bigr{]},1,3% \cdot 10^{-10}\bigr{]}.over~ start_ARG bold_P end_ARG = [ [ 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ] , 1 , 3 β‹… 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 10 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ] .

Thus, the kinetic interaction constant of the components turns out to be 4 orders of magnitude larger than the self-interaction constants of the classical α𝛼\alphaitalic_Ξ± and phantom β𝛽\betaitalic_Ξ² fields, which is physically unacceptable. The real value of the interaction constant must be less than or on the order of the value of the self-interaction constants of these fields.

Therefore, in the class of models with parameters 𝐏𝟏subscript𝐏1\mathbf{P_{1}}bold_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT we consider especially the model with parameters

ππŸβˆ—=[[1,1,1,1],10βˆ’5,3β‹…10βˆ’6]subscriptsuperscript𝐏11111superscript105β‹…3superscript106\mathbf{P^{*}_{1}}=[[1,1,1,1],10^{-5},3\cdot 10^{-6}]bold_P start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT βˆ— end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = [ [ 1 , 1 , 1 , 1 ] , 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 5 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , 3 β‹… 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 6 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ] (39)

and initial conditions

𝐈𝟏=[0.9,0,0.9,0,1].subscript𝐈10.900.901\mathbf{I_{1}}=[0.9,0,0.9,0,1].bold_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = [ 0.9 , 0 , 0.9 , 0 , 1 ] . (40)

3.1 Evolution of geometric factors

This model with an infinite inflationary future with the Hubble parameter H+βˆžβ‰ˆ0.289subscript𝐻0.289H_{+\infty}\approx 0.289italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT + ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰ˆ 0.289 (stable equilibrium point M0,Β±1+superscriptsubscript𝑀0plus-or-minus1M_{0,\pm 1}^{+}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 , Β± 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, Tab.2.1) and a finite past, which corresponds to the singularity at time t=tsβ‰ˆβˆ’2.2284930𝑑subscript𝑑𝑠2.2284930t=t_{s}\approx-2.2284930italic_t = italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_s end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰ˆ - 2.2284930. Fig.3.1 shows the evolution of the scale function ξ⁒(t)=ln⁑(a⁒(t))πœ‰π‘‘π‘Žπ‘‘\xi(t)=\ln(a(t))italic_ΞΎ ( italic_t ) = roman_ln ( italic_a ( italic_t ) ) and the Hubble parameter H⁒(t)𝐻𝑑H(t)italic_H ( italic_t ) (1) for this model. The coordinates and characters of singular points obviously coincide with the corresponding values indicated in Tab.2.1.

On the graph of the function H⁒(t)𝐻𝑑H(t)italic_H ( italic_t ) Fig.3.1, two plateaus can be identified in the intervals T1β‰ˆ(βˆ’1,2)subscript𝑇112T_{1}\approx(-1,2)italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰ˆ ( - 1 , 2 ) and T2β‰ˆ(5,∞)subscript𝑇25T_{2}\approx(5,\infty)italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰ˆ ( 5 , ∞ ), which exactly correspond to singular points: T1subscript𝑇1T_{1}italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT – saddle points MΒ±1,Β±1+superscriptsubscript𝑀plus-or-minus1plus-or-minus1M_{\pm 1,\pm 1}^{+}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT Β± 1 , Β± 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, T2subscript𝑇2T_{2}italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT – attracting points M0,Β±1+superscriptsubscript𝑀0plus-or-minus1M_{0,\pm 1}^{+}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 , Β± 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT and saddle points MΒ±1,0+superscriptsubscript𝑀plus-or-minus10M_{\pm 1,0}^{+}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT Β± 1 , 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT. The H⁒(t)𝐻𝑑H(t)italic_H ( italic_t ) curve demonstrates the transition from an unstable state (saddle point MΒ±1,Β±1+superscriptsubscript𝑀plus-or-minus1plus-or-minus1M_{\pm 1,\pm 1}^{+}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT Β± 1 , Β± 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT) through the first plateau to a stable state (attracting point M0,Β±1+superscriptsubscript𝑀0plus-or-minus1M_{0,\pm 1}^{+}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 , Β± 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT) - second plateau.

[Uncaptioned image]

Fig. 10.  Evolution of the scale function ξ⁒(t)πœ‰π‘‘\xi(t)italic_ΞΎ ( italic_t ) (dashed) and the Hubble parameter H⁒(t)𝐻𝑑H(t)italic_H ( italic_t ) (solid) in a model with a finite past at the point tsβ‰ˆβˆ’2.2284930subscript𝑑𝑠2.2284930t_{s}\approx-2.2284930italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_s end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰ˆ - 2.2284930 with parameters ππŸβˆ—subscriptsuperscript𝐏1\mathbf{P^{*}_{1}}bold_P start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT βˆ— end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (39) and initial conditions 𝐈𝟏subscript𝐈1\mathbf{I_{1}}bold_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (40).

In Fig.3.1 the solid line shows the behavior of the barotropic coefficient κ⁒(t)πœ…π‘‘\kappa(t)italic_ΞΊ ( italic_t ) near this singularity, calculated by the formula (10) using expressions for the total energy density (11) and pressure (12). Note that the value of this coefficient, calculated both from the indicated formulas and from the formula for cosmological acceleration (9), coincide. Further in the same figure, dashed and long-dashed lines show the behavior of the barotropic coefficients for the classical and phantom components, respectively; the dotted line ΞΊ=1πœ…1\kappa=1italic_ΞΊ = 1 shows the behavior of the barotropic coefficient for the interaction component. According to this graph, at the singularity point the barotropic coefficient reaches the value ΞΊ=1πœ…1\kappa=1italic_ΞΊ = 1, which corresponds to the total extremely rigid equation of state P=E𝑃𝐸P=Eitalic_P = italic_E (10). Over time, the functions κ⁒(t)πœ…π‘‘\kappa(t)italic_ΞΊ ( italic_t ) and H⁒(t)𝐻𝑑H(t)italic_H ( italic_t ) tend to ΞΊβ†’βˆ’1β†’πœ…1\kappa\to-1italic_ΞΊ β†’ - 1, which corresponds to inflationary compression with the inflationary equation in the state P=βˆ’E𝑃𝐸P=-Eitalic_P = - italic_E.

[Uncaptioned image]

Fig. 11.  Evolution of barotropic coefficients κ⁒(t)πœ…π‘‘\kappa(t)italic_ΞΊ ( italic_t ) for various system components in a model with parameters ππŸβˆ—subscriptsuperscript𝐏1\mathbf{P^{*}_{1}}bold_P start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT βˆ— end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (39) and initial conditions 𝐈𝟏subscript𝐈1\mathbf{I_{1}}bold_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (40).

3.2 Evolution of scalar fields

In the future, we will be faced with the need to display graphs on significantly different scales. In order to overcome this problem, we will use a one-to-one scaling mapping if necessary (see [5]):

Lig⁒(x)=sgn⁒(x)⁒log⁑[10]⁒(1+|x|);Ligxsgnx101x\displaystyle\rm{Lig}(x)=\mathrm{sgn}(x)\log[10](1+|x|);roman_Lig ( roman_x ) = roman_sgn ( roman_x ) roman_log [ 10 ] ( 1 + | roman_x | ) ;
Ligβˆ’1⁒(x)=sgn⁒(x)⁒(10|x|βˆ’1).superscriptLig1xsgnxsuperscript10x1\displaystyle\rm{Lig}^{-1}(x)=\mathrm{sgn}(x)\left(10^{|x|}-1\right).roman_Lig start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( roman_x ) = roman_sgn ( roman_x ) ( 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT | roman_x | end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 ) . (41)
[Uncaptioned image]

Fig. 12.  Evolution of energy density and pressure.

Fig.3.2 shows graphs of the evolution of energy density and pressure of the classical field, according to their contributions to the expressions (11) and (12): Ec⁒(t)subscript𝐸𝑐𝑑E_{c}(t)italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) (solid line) and Pc⁒(t)subscript𝑃𝑐𝑑P_{c}(t)italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) (dashed line) of a classical scalar field in a model with a finite past at the point tsβ‰ˆβˆ’2.2284930subscript𝑑𝑠2.2284930t_{s}\approx-2.2284930italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_s end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰ˆ - 2.2284930 with parameters ππŸβˆ—subscriptsuperscript𝐏1\mathbf{P^{*}_{1}}bold_P start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT βˆ— end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (39) and initial conditions 𝐈𝟏subscript𝐈1\mathbf{I_{1}}bold_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (40). Note that these quantities are singular at the point of cosmological singularity.

Fig.3.2 shows graphs of the evolution of the scalar classical Φ⁒(t)Φ𝑑\Phi(t)roman_Ξ¦ ( italic_t ) and phantom φ⁒(t)πœ‘π‘‘\varphi(t)italic_Ο† ( italic_t ) potentials, and Fig.3.2 shows the derivatives of these potentials.

[Uncaptioned image]

Fig. 13.  Evolution of Φ⁒(t)Φ𝑑\Phi(t)roman_Ξ¦ ( italic_t ) (solid line) and φ⁒(t)πœ‘π‘‘\varphi(t)italic_Ο† ( italic_t ) (dashed line) in the model with parameters ππŸβˆ—subscriptsuperscript𝐏1\mathbf{P^{*}_{1}}bold_P start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT βˆ— end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (39) and initial conditions 𝐈𝟏subscript𝐈1\mathbf{I_{1}}bold_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (40).

[Uncaptioned image]

Fig. 14.  Evolution of Z⁒(t)𝑍𝑑Z(t)italic_Z ( italic_t ) (solid line) and z⁒(t)𝑧𝑑z(t)italic_z ( italic_t ) (dashed line) in a model with parameters ππŸβˆ—subscriptsuperscript𝐏1\mathbf{P^{*}_{1}}bold_P start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT βˆ— end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (39) and initial conditions 𝐈𝟏subscript𝐈1\mathbf{I_{1}}bold_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (40).

4 A model with a finite future

Let us now consider a model with parameters

𝐏𝟐=[[0.01,0.01,0.1,0.1],0.09876065,0.01]subscript𝐏20.010.010.10.10.098760650.01\displaystyle\mathbf{P_{2}}=\biggl{[}[0.01,0.01,0.1,0.1],0.09876065,0.01\biggr% {]}bold_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = [ [ 0.01 , 0.01 , 0.1 , 0.1 ] , 0.09876065 , 0.01 ] (42)

and initial conditions

𝐈𝟐=[0,0,1,0.01,βˆ’1].subscript𝐈20010.011\mathbf{I_{2}}=[0,0,1,0.01,-1].bold_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = [ 0 , 0 , 1 , 0.01 , - 1 ] . (43)

4.1 Singular points

Tab. 2. Character (type) of singular points in subspaces [ΣΦ,Σφ]subscriptΣΦsubscriptΞ£πœ‘[\Sigma_{\Phi},\Sigma_{\varphi}][ roman_Ξ£ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ξ¦ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , roman_Ξ£ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Ο† end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ]in the model with parameters 𝐏𝟐subscript𝐏2\mathbf{P_{2}}bold_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT

Singular points Coordinates Type
M0,0+superscriptsubscript𝑀00M_{0,0}^{+}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 , 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT [0,0,0,0,0.0577]00000.0577[0,0,0,0,0.0577][ 0 , 0 , 0 , 0 , 0.0577 ] [𝐀,𝐒]𝐀𝐒[\mathbf{A},\ \mathbf{S}][ bold_A , bold_S ]
M0,0βˆ’superscriptsubscript𝑀00M_{0,0}^{-}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 , 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT [0,0,0,0,βˆ’0.0577]00000.0577[0,0,0,0,-0.0577][ 0 , 0 , 0 , 0 , - 0.0577 ] [𝐑,𝐒]𝐑𝐒[\mathbf{R},\ \mathbf{S}][ bold_R , bold_S ]
M0,Β±1+superscriptsubscript𝑀0plus-or-minus1M_{0,\pm 1}^{+}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 , Β± 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT [0,0,Β±1,0,0.0645]00plus-or-minus100.0645[0,0,\pm 1,0,0.0645][ 0 , 0 , Β± 1 , 0 , 0.0645 ] [𝐀,𝐀]𝐀𝐀[\mathbf{A},\ \mathbf{A}][ bold_A , bold_A ]
M0,Β±1βˆ’superscriptsubscript𝑀0plus-or-minus1M_{0,\pm 1}^{-}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 , Β± 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT [0,0,Β±1,0,βˆ’0.0645]00plus-or-minus100.0645[0,0,\pm 1,0,-0.0645][ 0 , 0 , Β± 1 , 0 , - 0.0645 ] [𝐑,𝐑]𝐑𝐑[\mathbf{R},\ \mathbf{R}][ bold_R , bold_R ]
MΒ±1,0+superscriptsubscript𝑀plus-or-minus10M_{\pm 1,0}^{+}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT Β± 1 , 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT [Β±1,0,0,0,2.887]plus-or-minus10002.887[\pm 1,0,0,0,2.887][ Β± 1 , 0 , 0 , 0 , 2.887 ] [𝐒,𝐒]𝐒𝐒[\mathbf{S},\ \mathbf{S}][ bold_S , bold_S ]
MΒ±1,0βˆ’superscriptsubscript𝑀plus-or-minus10M_{\pm 1,0}^{-}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT Β± 1 , 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT [Β±1,0,0,0,βˆ’2.887]plus-or-minus10002.887[\pm 1,0,0,0,-2.887][ Β± 1 , 0 , 0 , 0 , - 2.887 ] [𝐒,𝐒]𝐒𝐒[\mathbf{S},\ \mathbf{S}][ bold_S , bold_S ]
MΒ±1,Β±1+superscriptsubscript𝑀plus-or-minus1plus-or-minus1M_{\pm 1,\pm 1}^{+}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT Β± 1 , Β± 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT [Β±1,0,Β±1,0,0.0707]plus-or-minus10plus-or-minus100.0707[\pm 1,0,\pm 1,0,0.0707][ Β± 1 , 0 , Β± 1 , 0 , 0.0707 ] [𝐒,𝐀]𝐒𝐀[\mathbf{S},\ \mathbf{A}][ bold_S , bold_A ]
MΒ±1,Β±1βˆ’superscriptsubscript𝑀plus-or-minus1plus-or-minus1M_{\pm 1,\pm 1}^{-}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT Β± 1 , Β± 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT [Β±1,0,Β±1,0,βˆ’0.0707]plus-or-minus10plus-or-minus100.0707[\pm 1,0,\pm 1,0,-0.0707][ Β± 1 , 0 , Β± 1 , 0 , - 0.0707 ] [𝐒,𝐑]𝐒𝐑[\mathbf{S},\ \mathbf{R}][ bold_S , bold_R ]

4.2 Evolution of geometric factors

Fig.4.2 shows the evolution of the scale function ξ⁒(t)=ln⁑(a⁒(t))πœ‰π‘‘π‘Žπ‘‘\xi(t)=\ln(a(t))italic_ΞΎ ( italic_t ) = roman_ln ( italic_a ( italic_t ) ) and the Hubble parameter H⁒(t)𝐻𝑑H(t)italic_H ( italic_t ) (1) for this model.

[Uncaptioned image]

Fig. 15.  Evolution of ξ⁒(t)πœ‰π‘‘\xi(t)italic_ΞΎ ( italic_t ) (solid line) and H⁒(t)𝐻𝑑H(t)italic_H ( italic_t ) (dashed line) in a model with a finite future at point t=tsβ‰ˆ241𝑑subscript𝑑𝑠241t=t_{s}\approx 241italic_t = italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_s end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰ˆ 241 with parameters 𝐏𝟐subscript𝐏2\mathbf{P_{2}}bold_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (42) and initial conditions 𝐈𝟐subscript𝐈2\mathbf{I_{2}}bold_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (43).

This model has a rebound point at tβ‰ˆ29𝑑29t\approx 29italic_t β‰ˆ 29, after which it enters the expansion stage t∈(30,240)𝑑30240t\in(30,240)italic_t ∈ ( 30 , 240 ) with positive inflation with H0β‰ˆ+0.065subscript𝐻00.065H_{0}\approx+0.065italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰ˆ + 0.065, after which it goes into a singular state such as a Big Rip , see, for example, [8]).

[Uncaptioned image]

Fig. 16.  Graph of κ⁒(t)πœ…π‘‘\kappa(t)italic_ΞΊ ( italic_t ) in a model with a finite future at point t=tsβ‰ˆ241𝑑subscript𝑑𝑠241t=t_{s}\approx 241italic_t = italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_s end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰ˆ 241 with parameters 𝐏𝟐subscript𝐏2\mathbf{P_{2}}bold_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (42) and initial conditions 𝐈𝟐subscript𝐈2\mathbf{I_{2}}bold_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (43).

In Fig.4.2 shows a graph of barotropic coefficients κ⁒(t)πœ…π‘‘\kappa(t)italic_ΞΊ ( italic_t ). On this graph, the vertical dotted line corresponds to the singularity t=tsβ‰ˆ241𝑑subscript𝑑𝑠241t=t_{s}\approx 241italic_t = italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_s end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰ˆ 241 - the break point, the horizontal dotted line corresponds to the value ΞΊ=1πœ…1\kappa=1italic_ΞΊ = 1, the horizontal dash - the dotted line - to the value ΞΊ=βˆ’1.πœ…1\kappa=-1.italic_ΞΊ = - 1 .

[Uncaptioned image]

Fig. 17.  Graph of Ω⁒(t)Ω𝑑\Omega(t)roman_Ξ© ( italic_t ) in a model with a finite future at point t=tsβ‰ˆ241𝑑subscript𝑑𝑠241t=t_{s}\approx 241italic_t = italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_s end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰ˆ 241 with parameters 𝐏𝟐subscript𝐏2\mathbf{P_{2}}bold_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (42) and initial conditions 𝐈𝟐subscript𝐈2\mathbf{I_{2}}bold_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (43).

In Fig.4.2 shows a graph of the invariant cosmological acceleration Ω⁒(t)Ω𝑑\Omega(t)roman_Ξ© ( italic_t ). On this graph, the vertical dotted line corresponds to the singularity t=tsβ‰ˆ241𝑑subscript𝑑𝑠241t=t_{s}\approx 241italic_t = italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_s end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰ˆ 241 - the break point, the horizontal dotted line corresponds to the value Ξ©=1Ξ©1\Omega=1roman_Ξ© = 1, the horizontal dash - the dotted line - to the value Ξ©=βˆ’2Ξ©2\Omega=-2roman_Ξ© = - 2.

Thus, the cosmological model has a singularity in the future corresponding to a large gap, and near the singularity this kind of model behaves in the same way as near the initial singularity: ΞΊβ†’1β†’πœ…1\kappa\to 1italic_ΞΊ β†’ 1, Ξ©β†’βˆ’2β†’Ξ©2\Omega\to-2roman_Ξ© β†’ - 2.

4.3 Evolution of scalar fields:
generation of a classical field
phantom

Let us consider the problem of the cosmological evolution of the scalar fields Φ⁒(t)Φ𝑑\Phi(t)roman_Ξ¦ ( italic_t ) and φ⁒(t)πœ‘π‘‘\varphi(t)italic_Ο† ( italic_t ). In particular, we are interested in the possibility of generation of one of the components of a scalar doublet by another due to the kinetic connection between them. This question was posed in the first part of the article [1].

Fig.4.3 shows the graphs evolution of the scalar classical Φ⁒(t)Φ𝑑\Phi(t)roman_Ξ¦ ( italic_t ) and phantom φ⁒(t)πœ‘π‘‘\varphi(t)italic_Ο† ( italic_t ) potentials, and in Fig.4.3 - the derivatives of these potentials. In the given graphs of these figures one can observe the transition cosmological model from a state of inflationary compression in the infinite past, which, according to Tab.4.1 corresponds to a point M0,1βˆ’subscriptsuperscript𝑀01M^{-}_{0,1}italic_M start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 , 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT of type [𝐑,𝐑]𝐑𝐑\mathbf{[R,R]}[ bold_R , bold_R ] with coordinates Φ⁒(βˆ’βˆž)=0Ξ¦0\Phi(-\infty)=0roman_Ξ¦ ( - ∞ ) = 0, φ⁒(βˆ’βˆž)=1πœ‘1\varphi(-\infty)=1italic_Ο† ( - ∞ ) = 1, into the state of inflationary expansion, which corresponds to a point M1,βˆ’1+subscriptsuperscript𝑀11M^{+}_{1,-1}italic_M start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 , - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT of type [𝐒,𝐀]𝐒𝐀\mathbf{[S,A]}[ bold_S , bold_A ] with coordinates Ξ¦=1Ξ¦1\Phi=1roman_Ξ¦ = 1, Ο†=βˆ’1πœ‘1\varphi=-1italic_Ο† = - 1. This state ends with a Big Rip.

[Uncaptioned image]

Fig. 18.  Evolution of scalar classical Φ⁒(t)Φ𝑑\Phi(t)roman_Ξ¦ ( italic_t ) (solid) and phantom φ⁒(t)πœ‘π‘‘\varphi(t)italic_Ο† ( italic_t ) (dashed) potentials with parameters 𝐏𝟐subscript𝐏2\mathbf{P_{2}}bold_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (42) and initial conditions 𝐈𝟐subscript𝐈2\mathbf{I_{2}}bold_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (43).

[Uncaptioned image]

Fig. 19.  Evolution of dynamic functions Z⁒(t)𝑍𝑑Z(t)italic_Z ( italic_t ) (solid) and z⁒(t)𝑧𝑑z(t)italic_z ( italic_t ) (dashed) in the model with parameters 𝐏𝟐subscript𝐏2\mathbf{P_{2}}bold_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (42) and initial conditions 𝐈𝟐subscript𝐈2\mathbf{I_{2}}bold_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (43).

Thus, in this model, at the stage of inflationary expansion before the Big Rip, the generation of a classical scalar field is observed. This process corresponds to a transition with a stable state for the phantom field and an unstable state for the classical one.

5 A model with a finite past and future

Let’s consider a model with parameters 𝐏𝟐subscript𝐏2\mathbf{P_{2}}bold_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (42) and initial conditions very close to the coordinates of the singular point M1,0+subscriptsuperscript𝑀10M^{+}_{1,0}italic_M start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 , 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, according to Tab.4.1 saddle point of type [𝐒,𝐒]𝐒𝐒\mathbf{[S,\ S]}[ bold_S , bold_S ], namely, just above it (only 109superscript10910^{9}10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 9 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT !)

πˆπŸ‘=[1+10βˆ’9,0,0,0,1].subscript𝐈31superscript1090001\mathbf{I_{3}}=[1+10^{-9},0,0,0,1].bold_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_3 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = [ 1 + 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 9 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , 0 , 0 , 0 , 1 ] . (44)

This is a model with a finite past, which corresponds to a singularity at the time t=ts0β‰ˆβˆ’84.206597𝑑subscriptsuperscript𝑑0𝑠84.206597t=t^{0}_{s}\approx-84.206597italic_t = italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_s end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰ˆ - 84.206597, and a finite future, which corresponds to a singularity at the time t=ts1β‰ˆ280.04421𝑑subscriptsuperscript𝑑1𝑠280.04421t=t^{1}_{s}\approx 280.04421italic_t = italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_s end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰ˆ 280.04421. Fig.5 shows the evolution of the scale function ξ⁒(t)=ln⁑(a⁒(t))πœ‰π‘‘π‘Žπ‘‘\xi(t)=\ln(a(t))italic_ΞΎ ( italic_t ) = roman_ln ( italic_a ( italic_t ) ) and the Hubble parameter (1) H⁒(t)𝐻𝑑H(t)italic_H ( italic_t ) for this model. The coordinates of singular points and their characters are indicated in Tab.4.1. Thus, the graphs in Fig.5 demonstrate the transition from an unstable state (saddle point M0,0+superscriptsubscript𝑀00M_{0,0}^{+}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 , 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT) through an inflationary plateau to the final singular state (Big Rip).

[Uncaptioned image]

Fig. 20.  Evolution of the scale function ξ⁒(t)πœ‰π‘‘\xi(t)italic_ΞΎ ( italic_t ) is dashed and the Hubble parameter H⁒(t)𝐻𝑑H(t)italic_H ( italic_t ) is solid line in the model with a finite past t=ts0β‰ˆβˆ’84.206597𝑑subscriptsuperscript𝑑0𝑠84.206597t=t^{0}_{s}\approx-84.206597italic_t = italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_s end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰ˆ - 84.206597 (left vertical dotted line) and a finite future t=ts1β‰ˆ280.04421𝑑subscriptsuperscript𝑑1𝑠280.04421t=t^{1}_{s}\approx 280.04421italic_t = italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_s end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰ˆ 280.04421 (right vertical dotted line) with parameters 𝐏𝟐subscript𝐏2\mathbf{P_{2}}bold_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (42) and initial conditions πˆπŸ‘subscript𝐈3\mathbf{I_{3}}bold_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_3 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (44).

In Fig. 5 shows the behavior of the barotropic coefficient κ⁒(t)πœ…π‘‘\kappa(t)italic_ΞΊ ( italic_t ) in this model; in the same figure one can see that the cosmological model at both singular points, ts0subscriptsuperscript𝑑0𝑠t^{0}_{s}italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_s end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and ts1subscriptsuperscript𝑑1𝑠t^{1}_{s}italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_s end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, manifests itself as matter with an extremely rigid equation of state.

[Uncaptioned image]

Fig. 21.  Evolution of the barotropic coefficient κ⁒(t)πœ…π‘‘\kappa(t)italic_ΞΊ ( italic_t ) in a model with parameters 𝐏𝟐subscript𝐏2\mathbf{P_{2}}bold_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (42) and initial conditions πˆπŸ‘subscript𝐈3\mathbf{I_{3}}bold_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_3 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (44).

In Fig.5–5 the behavior of the barotropic coefficient near singular points is shown on a large scale. Finally, Fig.5 shows graphs of the evolution density of the evolution of the potentials of the classical field and phantom fields for this model. As we noted in [1], at the cosmological singularity points ts0subscriptsuperscript𝑑0𝑠t^{0}_{s}italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_s end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and ts1subscriptsuperscript𝑑1𝑠t^{1}_{s}italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_s end_POSTSUBSCRIPT these potentials are also singular. Outside these points on the inflation interval t∈(ts0,ts1)𝑑subscriptsuperscript𝑑0𝑠subscriptsuperscript𝑑1𝑠t\in(t^{0}_{s},t^{1}_{s})italic_t ∈ ( italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_s end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_s end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) the potential values are close to the coordinates of the saddle point M0,0+subscriptsuperscript𝑀00M^{+}_{0,0}italic_M start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 , 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT.

[Uncaptioned image]

Fig. 22.  Evolution of barotropic coefficients κ⁒(t)πœ…π‘‘\kappa(t)italic_ΞΊ ( italic_t ) in a model with parameters 𝐏𝟐subscript𝐏2\mathbf{P_{2}}bold_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (42) and initial conditions πˆπŸ‘subscript𝐈3\mathbf{I_{3}}bold_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_3 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (44).

[Uncaptioned image]

Fig. 23.  Evolution of barotropic coefficients κ⁒(t)πœ…π‘‘\kappa(t)italic_ΞΊ ( italic_t ) in a model with parameters 𝐏𝟐subscript𝐏2\mathbf{P_{2}}bold_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (42) and initial conditions πˆπŸ‘subscript𝐈3\mathbf{I_{3}}bold_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_3 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (44).

Note that the lifetime of this cosmological model Δ⁒t=ts1βˆ’ts0Δ𝑑subscriptsuperscript𝑑1𝑠subscriptsuperscript𝑑0𝑠\Delta t=t^{1}_{s}-t^{0}_{s}roman_Ξ” italic_t = italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_s end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_s end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is sensitive to the difference between the initial value of the potential of the classical scalar field and its value at the unstable point M+1,0+superscriptsubscript𝑀10M_{+1,0}^{+}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT + 1 , 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT – Δ⁒Φ0≑Φ0βˆ’1Ξ”subscriptΞ¦0subscriptΞ¦01\Delta\Phi_{0}\equiv\Phi_{0}-1roman_Ξ” roman_Ξ¦ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≑ roman_Ξ¦ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - 1. As Δ⁒Φ0Ξ”subscriptΞ¦0\Delta\Phi_{0}roman_Ξ” roman_Ξ¦ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT decreases, the model lifetime increases according to the empirical law

Δ⁒tβ‰ˆ41β‹…|lg⁑(Δ⁒Φ0)|.Δ𝑑⋅41lgΞ”subscriptΞ¦0\Delta t\approx 41\cdot|\lg(\Delta\Phi_{0})|.roman_Ξ” italic_t β‰ˆ 41 β‹… | roman_lg ( roman_Ξ” roman_Ξ¦ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) | .

However, the main resource for increasing the lifespan of a model lies in its large-scale transformations. By choosing the similarity coefficient k=102π‘˜superscript102k=10^{2}italic_k = 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, we will achieve an increase in the model lifetime by exactly kπ‘˜kitalic_k times.

[Uncaptioned image]

Fig. 24.  Evolution of potentials Φ⁒(t)Φ𝑑\Phi(t)roman_Ξ¦ ( italic_t ) is solid and φ⁒(t)πœ‘π‘‘\varphi(t)italic_Ο† ( italic_t ) is dashed in the model with parameters 𝐏𝟐subscript𝐏2\mathbf{P_{2}}bold_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (42) and initial conditions πˆπŸ‘subscript𝐈3\mathbf{I_{3}}bold_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_3 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (44).

6 Generating a classical scalar field near the rebound point

As the results of numerical modeling show, a stable classical scalar field corresponding to an inflationary expansion appears to be generated only in models with a finite past at the stage between the rebound point and the Big Rip. In other cosmological models, the classical scalar field is generated only at intermediate stages of cosmological evolution near the rebound point, if there is one. The existence of a rebound point implies that before this point the model was in the compression stage, and after the rebound point it switched to the expansion stage. After this, the system goes into an equilibrium state, the classical scalar field disappears, and further inflation is supported only by the phantom field in stable equilibrium. Let us consider this process in more detail using a specific example of a model with an infinite past and an infinite future:

ππŸ‘=[[0.01,0.01,0.1,0.1],10βˆ’2,10βˆ’6];subscript𝐏30.010.010.10.1superscript102superscript106\displaystyle\mathbf{P_{3}}=\bigl{[}[0.01,0.01,0.1,0.1],10^{-2},10^{-6}\bigr{]};bold_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_3 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = [ [ 0.01 , 0.01 , 0.1 , 0.1 ] , 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 6 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ] ; (45)
πˆπŸ’=[0,0,0.01,0,1].subscript𝐈4000.0101\displaystyle\mathbf{I_{4}}=[0,0,0.01,0,1].bold_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_4 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = [ 0 , 0 , 0.01 , 0 , 1 ] . (46)

Thus, at time t=0𝑑0t=0italic_t = 0 there is no classical scalar field, and the phantom one is very small.

6.1 Singular points and geometric factors

The singular points of the model are shown in Tab.6.1.

Tab. 3. Characters (type) of singular pointsin subspaces [ΣΦ,Σφ]subscriptΣΦsubscriptΞ£πœ‘[\Sigma_{\Phi},\Sigma_{\varphi}][ roman_Ξ£ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ξ¦ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , roman_Ξ£ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Ο† end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] in the model with parameters ππŸ‘subscript𝐏3\mathbf{P_{3}}bold_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_3 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT

Singular points Coordinates Type
M0,0+superscriptsubscript𝑀00M_{0,0}^{+}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 , 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT [0,0,0,0,0.000576]00000.000576[0,0,0,0,0.000576][ 0 , 0 , 0 , 0 , 0.000576 ] [𝐀,𝐒]𝐀𝐒[\mathbf{A},\ \mathbf{S}][ bold_A , bold_S ]
M0,0βˆ’superscriptsubscript𝑀00M_{0,0}^{-}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 , 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT [0,0,0,0,βˆ’0.000576]00000.000576[0,0,0,0,-0.000576][ 0 , 0 , 0 , 0 , - 0.000576 ] [𝐑,𝐒]𝐑𝐒[\mathbf{R},\ \mathbf{S}][ bold_R , bold_S ]
M0,Β±1+superscriptsubscript𝑀0plus-or-minus1M_{0,\pm 1}^{+}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 , Β± 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT [0,0,Β±1,0,0.0289]00plus-or-minus100.0289[0,0,\pm 1,0,0.0289][ 0 , 0 , Β± 1 , 0 , 0.0289 ] [𝐀,𝐀]𝐀𝐀[\mathbf{A},\ \mathbf{A}][ bold_A , bold_A ]
M0,Β±1βˆ’superscriptsubscript𝑀0plus-or-minus1M_{0,\pm 1}^{-}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 , Β± 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT [0,0,Β±1,0,βˆ’0.0289]00plus-or-minus100.0289[0,0,\pm 1,0,-0.0289][ 0 , 0 , Β± 1 , 0 , - 0.0289 ] [𝐑,𝐑]𝐑𝐑[\mathbf{R},\ \mathbf{R}][ bold_R , bold_R ]
MΒ±1,0+superscriptsubscript𝑀plus-or-minus10M_{\pm 1,0}^{+}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT Β± 1 , 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT [Β±1,0,0,0,2.89]plus-or-minus10002.89[\pm 1,0,0,0,2.89][ Β± 1 , 0 , 0 , 0 , 2.89 ] [𝐒,𝐒]𝐒𝐒[\mathbf{S},\ \mathbf{S}][ bold_S , bold_S ]
MΒ±1,0βˆ’superscriptsubscript𝑀plus-or-minus10M_{\pm 1,0}^{-}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT Β± 1 , 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT [Β±1,0,0,0,βˆ’2.89]plus-or-minus10002.89[\pm 1,0,0,0,-2.89][ Β± 1 , 0 , 0 , 0 , - 2.89 ] [𝐒,𝐒]𝐒𝐒[\mathbf{S},\ \mathbf{S}][ bold_S , bold_S ]
MΒ±1,Β±1+superscriptsubscript𝑀plus-or-minus1plus-or-minus1M_{\pm 1,\pm 1}^{+}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT Β± 1 , Β± 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT [Β±1,0,Β±1,0,0.0409]plus-or-minus10plus-or-minus100.0409[\pm 1,0,\pm 1,0,0.0409][ Β± 1 , 0 , Β± 1 , 0 , 0.0409 ] [𝐒,𝐀]𝐒𝐀[\mathbf{S},\ \mathbf{A}][ bold_S , bold_A ]
MΒ±1,Β±1βˆ’superscriptsubscript𝑀plus-or-minus1plus-or-minus1M_{\pm 1,\pm 1}^{-}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT Β± 1 , Β± 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT [Β±1,0,Β±1,0,βˆ’0.0409]plus-or-minus10plus-or-minus100.0409[\pm 1,0,\pm 1,0,-0.0409][ Β± 1 , 0 , Β± 1 , 0 , - 0.0409 ] [𝐒,𝐑]𝐒𝐑[\mathbf{S},\ \mathbf{R}][ bold_S , bold_R ]

In Fig. 6.1 shows graphs of the evolution of the geometric factors ξ⁒(t)πœ‰π‘‘\xi(t)italic_ΞΎ ( italic_t ) and H⁒(t)𝐻𝑑H(t)italic_H ( italic_t ).

[Uncaptioned image]

Fig. 25.  Evolution of geometric factors in a model with parameters ππŸ‘subscript𝐏3\mathbf{P_{3}}bold_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_3 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and initial conditions πˆπŸ’subscript𝐈4\mathbf{I_{4}}bold_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_4 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT: ξ⁒(t)πœ‰π‘‘\xi(t)italic_ΞΎ ( italic_t ) – dashed and H⁒(t)𝐻𝑑H(t)italic_H ( italic_t ) – solid line.

6.2 Evolution of scalar fields

In Fig.6.2 shows graphs of the cosmological evolution of the components of the scalar doublet in this model.

[Uncaptioned image]

Fig. 26.  Evolution of scalar fields in a model with parameters ππŸ‘subscript𝐏3\mathbf{P_{3}}bold_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_3 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and initial conditions πˆπŸ’subscript𝐈4\mathbf{I_{4}}bold_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_4 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT: φ⁒(t)πœ‘π‘‘\varphi(t)italic_Ο† ( italic_t ) is dashed and Φ⁒(t)Φ𝑑\Phi(t)roman_Ξ¦ ( italic_t ) is solid line.

Thus, in the infinite past, the Universe starts from a state close to the singular point M0,1βˆ’=[0,0,1,0,βˆ’0.0289]subscriptsuperscript𝑀0100100.0289M^{-}_{0,1}=[0,0,1,0,-0.0289]italic_M start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 , 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = [ 0 , 0 , 1 , 0 , - 0.0289 ] and is in a state of inflationary compression. Near the rebound point tbβ‰ˆ0subscript𝑑𝑏0t_{b}\approx 0italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT β‰ˆ 0 oscillations of the phantom and classical scalar fields arise in the system, after which the system goes into a state of inflationary expansion corresponding to the singular point M0,1+=[0,0,1,0,+0.0289]subscriptsuperscript𝑀0100100.0289M^{+}_{0,1}=[0,0,1,0,+0.0289]italic_M start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 , 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = [ 0 , 0 , 1 , 0 , + 0.0289 ], restoring the original values of potentials of scalar fields.

In Fig.6.2–6.2 the process of oscillation of scalar field potentials near the rebound point is shown in close-up.

[Uncaptioned image]

Fig. 27.  Evolution of scalar fields in a model with parameters ππŸ‘subscript𝐏3\mathbf{P_{3}}bold_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_3 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and initial conditions πˆπŸ’subscript𝐈4\mathbf{I_{4}}bold_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_4 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT: Φ⁒(t)Φ𝑑\Phi(t)roman_Ξ¦ ( italic_t ) – solid and φ⁒(t)πœ‘π‘‘\varphi(t)italic_Ο† ( italic_t ) – dashed line (close-up).

[Uncaptioned image]

Fig. 28.  Evolution of derivatives of scalar fields in a model with parameters ππŸ‘subscript𝐏3\mathbf{P_{3}}bold_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_3 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and initial conditions πˆπŸ’subscript𝐈4\mathbf{I_{4}}bold_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_4 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT: Z⁒(t)≑Φ˙𝑍𝑑˙ΦZ(t)\equiv\dot{\Phi}italic_Z ( italic_t ) ≑ overΛ™ start_ARG roman_Ξ¦ end_ARG – solid and z⁒(t)β‰‘Ο†Λ™π‘§π‘‘Λ™πœ‘z(t)\equiv\dot{\varphi}italic_z ( italic_t ) ≑ overΛ™ start_ARG italic_Ο† end_ARG – dashed line (close-up)

In this model, the interval of oscillation of scalar field potentials, at which the potential of the classical field reaches values of the order of |Φ⁒(tb)|∼0.005similar-toΞ¦subscript𝑑𝑏0.005|\Phi(t_{b})|\sim 0.005| roman_Ξ¦ ( italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) | ∼ 0.005, and the potential of the phantom field becomes zero, takes about 300 Planck times. When using a scaling transformation to real values of fundamental constants for the scale of QCD theory, this period can stretch to 3β‹…104β‹…3superscript1043\cdot 10^{4}3 β‹… 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT Planck times, and for the Standard Model - up to 3β‹…1015⁒tP⁒lβ‹…3superscript1015subscript𝑑𝑃𝑙3\cdot 10^{15}t_{Pl}3 β‹… 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 15 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_P italic_l end_POSTSUBSCRIPT.

6.3 Production of scalarly charged
fermions near the rebound point

In the above graphs of the evolution of scalar fields (Fig. 2.4, 2.5, 3.2, 3.2, 4.2, 4.3, 6.2 and 6.2) sufficiently large and fast bursts of the potential of the classical scalar field ΦΦ\Phiroman_Ξ¦ and its derivative z⁒(t)𝑧𝑑z(t)italic_z ( italic_t ) are observed near the rebound points (or singularity points, if they exist). If we do not take into account exotic cosmological models with a finite future, then the models presented in the above figures reveal in the region of the rebound points the amplitude of oscillations of the derivative of the potential max⁑|Ξ¦Λ™|∼2β‹…10βˆ’6Γ·6β‹…10βˆ’4similar-toΛ™Ξ¦β‹…β‹…2superscript1066superscript104\max|\dot{\Phi}|\sim 2\cdot 10^{-6}\div 6\cdot 10^{-4}roman_max | overΛ™ start_ARG roman_Ξ¦ end_ARG | ∼ 2 β‹… 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 6 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT Γ· 6 β‹… 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT.

Let us estimate the rate of production, for example, of pairs of scalarly charged fermions with charge qπ‘žqitalic_q and mass mfsubscriptπ‘šπ‘“m_{f}italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT in a classical scalar field with a time derivative Z0subscript𝑍0Z_{0}italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, using an analogy with the formula for the rate of creation of an electron-positron pair in an electric field of strength E𝐸Eitalic_E (see, for example, [11])

nΛ™e⁒e+=e2⁒E24⁒π3⁒ℏ2⁒c2⁒eβˆ’E0E,subscript˙𝑛𝑒subscript𝑒superscript𝑒2superscript𝐸24superscriptπœ‹3superscriptPlanck-constant-over-2-pi2superscript𝑐2superscriptesubscript𝐸0𝐸\displaystyle\dot{n}_{ee_{+}}=\frac{e^{2}E^{2}}{4\pi^{3}\hbar^{2}c^{2}}% \displaystyle\mathrm{e}^{-\frac{E_{0}}{E}},overΛ™ start_ARG italic_n end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT + end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = divide start_ARG italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_E start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 4 italic_Ο€ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_ℏ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG roman_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - divide start_ARG italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_E end_ARG end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ,

where we⁒e+subscript𝑀𝑒subscript𝑒w_{ee_{+}}italic_w start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT + end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is the rate of electron-positron pair production per unit volume, mπ‘šmitalic_m is the mass of the electron, e𝑒eitalic_e is its charge, Ecsubscript𝐸𝑐E_{c}italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is the critical value of the electric field strength

E0=π⁒m2⁒c3ℏ⁒e.subscript𝐸0πœ‹superscriptπ‘š2superscript𝑐3Planck-constant-over-2-pi𝑒\displaystyle E_{0}=\frac{\pi m^{2}c^{3}}{\hbar e}.italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = divide start_ARG italic_Ο€ italic_m start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG roman_ℏ italic_e end_ARG .

Passing to the Planck units in these formulas and making the substitutions eβ†’qβ†’π‘’π‘že\to qitalic_e β†’ italic_q, mβ†’mfβ†’π‘šsubscriptπ‘šπ‘“m\to m_{f}italic_m β†’ italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and Eβ†’Z→𝐸𝑍E\to Zitalic_E β†’ italic_Z, we obtain in the adiabatic approximation an estimate of the rate of production of pairs of scalarly charged fermions with scalar charge qπ‘žqitalic_q and mass mfsubscriptπ‘šπ‘“m_{f}italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT in scalar field Φ⁒(t)Φ𝑑\Phi(t)roman_Ξ¦ ( italic_t )

nΛ™q⁒q+⁒(t)β‰Œq2⁒Z2⁒(t)4⁒π3⁒exp⁑(βˆ’Ο€β’mf2|q⁒Z⁒(t)|).β‰ŒsubscriptΛ™π‘›π‘žsubscriptπ‘žπ‘‘superscriptπ‘ž2superscript𝑍2𝑑4superscriptπœ‹3πœ‹subscriptsuperscriptπ‘š2π‘“π‘žπ‘π‘‘\displaystyle\dot{n}_{qq_{+}}(t)\backsimeq\frac{q^{2}Z^{2}(t)}{4\pi^{3}}% \displaystyle\exp\left(-\frac{\pi m^{2}_{f}}{|qZ(t)|}\right).overΛ™ start_ARG italic_n end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_q italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT + end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) β‰Œ divide start_ARG italic_q start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_Z start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_t ) end_ARG start_ARG 4 italic_Ο€ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG roman_exp ( - divide start_ARG italic_Ο€ italic_m start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG | italic_q italic_Z ( italic_t ) | end_ARG ) . (47)

For efficient production of fermion pairs, the following condition must be met:

|Z⁒(t)|≳π⁒mf2|q|,greater-than-or-equivalent-toπ‘π‘‘πœ‹subscriptsuperscriptπ‘š2π‘“π‘ž\displaystyle|Z(t)|\gtrsim\frac{\pi m^{2}_{f}}{|q|},| italic_Z ( italic_t ) | ≳ divide start_ARG italic_Ο€ italic_m start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG | italic_q | end_ARG , (48)

that is, fermions must be light, but at the same time have a sufficiently large scalar charge. The final density of generated scalarly charged fermions is obtained by integrating over time the expression (47):

nq⁒q+=∫t0t0+Δ⁒tq2⁒Z2⁒(t)4⁒π3⁒exp⁑(βˆ’Ο€β’mf2|q⁒Z⁒(t)|)⁒𝑑tsubscriptπ‘›π‘žsubscriptπ‘žsuperscriptsubscriptsubscript𝑑0subscript𝑑0Δ𝑑superscriptπ‘ž2superscript𝑍2𝑑4superscriptπœ‹3πœ‹subscriptsuperscriptπ‘š2π‘“π‘žπ‘π‘‘differential-d𝑑\displaystyle n_{qq_{+}}=\int\limits_{t_{0}}^{t_{0}+\Delta t}\frac{q^{2}Z^{2}(% t)}{4\pi^{3}}\displaystyle\exp\left(-\frac{\pi m^{2}_{f}}{|qZ(t)|}\right)dtitalic_n start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_q italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT + end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + roman_Ξ” italic_t end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT divide start_ARG italic_q start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_Z start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_t ) end_ARG start_ARG 4 italic_Ο€ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG roman_exp ( - divide start_ARG italic_Ο€ italic_m start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG | italic_q italic_Z ( italic_t ) | end_ARG ) italic_d italic_t
β‰Œq2⁒Z2⁒(t)Β―4⁒π3⁒exp⁑(βˆ’Ο€β’mf2|q⁒Z⁒(t)Β―|)⁒Δ⁒t,β‰Œabsentsuperscriptπ‘ž2Β―superscript𝑍2𝑑4superscriptπœ‹3πœ‹subscriptsuperscriptπ‘š2π‘“π‘žΒ―π‘π‘‘Ξ”π‘‘\displaystyle\backsimeq\frac{q^{2}\overline{Z^{2}(t)}}{4\pi^{3}}\displaystyle% \exp\left(-\frac{\pi m^{2}_{f}}{|q\overline{Z(t)}|}\right)\Delta t,β‰Œ divide start_ARG italic_q start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT overΒ― start_ARG italic_Z start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_t ) end_ARG end_ARG start_ARG 4 italic_Ο€ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG roman_exp ( - divide start_ARG italic_Ο€ italic_m start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG | italic_q overΒ― start_ARG italic_Z ( italic_t ) end_ARG | end_ARG ) roman_Ξ” italic_t , (49)

where Δ⁒tΔ𝑑\Delta troman_Ξ” italic_t is the duration of the burst of the classical field potential, Z⁒(t)¯¯𝑍𝑑\overline{Z(t)}overΒ― start_ARG italic_Z ( italic_t ) end_ARG is the root-mean-square value of the function Z⁒(t)𝑍𝑑Z(t)italic_Z ( italic_t ) on the burst interval.

Let us evaluate the possibility of the creation of fermion pairs based on the last model we studied ππŸ‘subscript𝐏3\mathbf{P_{3}}bold_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_3 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (45), subjecting it, according to Property I.2, to scale transformations in order to bring the model parameters closer to real parameters, for example, SU(5). At the same time, we must also transform the value of the scalar charge according to [7] according to the law q~=q/k~π‘žπ‘žπ‘˜\tilde{q}=q/\sqrt{k}over~ start_ARG italic_q end_ARG = italic_q / square-root start_ARG italic_k end_ARG. Thus, after a scaling transformation with a similarity coefficient kπ‘˜kitalic_k, the expression (6.3) is transformed to the form:

nq⁒q+⁒(t,k)β‰Œq2⁒Z2⁒(t)Β―4⁒π3⁒k2⁒exp⁑(βˆ’Ο€β’mf2k⁒|q|⁒|Z(t|)Β―)⁒Δ⁒t,\displaystyle n_{qq_{+}}(t,k)\backsimeq\frac{q^{2}\overline{Z^{2}(t)}}{4\pi^{3% }k^{2}}\displaystyle\exp\left(-\frac{\pi m^{2}_{f}}{\sqrt{k}|q|\overline{|Z(t|% )}}\right)\Delta t,italic_n start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_q italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT + end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t , italic_k ) β‰Œ divide start_ARG italic_q start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT overΒ― start_ARG italic_Z start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_t ) end_ARG end_ARG start_ARG 4 italic_Ο€ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG roman_exp ( - divide start_ARG italic_Ο€ italic_m start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG square-root start_ARG italic_k end_ARG | italic_q | overΒ― start_ARG | italic_Z ( italic_t | ) end_ARG end_ARG ) roman_Ξ” italic_t , (50)

where |Z⁒(t)|¯¯𝑍𝑑\overline{|Z(t)|}overΒ― start_ARG | italic_Z ( italic_t ) | end_ARG is the average value of the modulus of the burst of the derivative of the scalar field Φ⁒(t)Φ𝑑\Phi(t)roman_Ξ¦ ( italic_t ).

The function nq⁒q+⁒(t,k)subscriptπ‘›π‘žsubscriptπ‘žπ‘‘π‘˜n_{qq_{+}}(t,k)italic_n start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_q italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT + end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t , italic_k ) has a maximum at

k=(π⁒mf24⁒|q|⁒|Z⁒(t)|Β―)2,π‘˜superscriptπœ‹subscriptsuperscriptπ‘š2𝑓4π‘žΒ―π‘π‘‘2\displaystyle k=\left(\frac{\pi m^{2}_{f}}{4|q|\overline{|Z(t)|}}\right)^{2},italic_k = ( divide start_ARG italic_Ο€ italic_m start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 4 | italic_q | overΒ― start_ARG | italic_Z ( italic_t ) | end_ARG end_ARG ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , (51)

from where we get the following:

max⁑(nq⁒q+⁒(t))β‰Œq4⁒Z2⁒(t)¯⁒eβˆ’44⁒π5⁒mf4.β‰Œsubscriptπ‘›π‘žsubscriptπ‘žπ‘‘superscriptπ‘ž4Β―superscript𝑍2𝑑superscripte44superscriptπœ‹5subscriptsuperscriptπ‘š4𝑓\displaystyle\max(n_{qq_{+}}(t))\backsimeq\frac{q^{4}\overline{Z^{2}(t)}% \mathrm{e}^{-4}}{4\pi^{5}m^{4}_{f}}.roman_max ( italic_n start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_q italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT + end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) ) β‰Œ divide start_ARG italic_q start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT overΒ― start_ARG italic_Z start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_t ) end_ARG roman_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 4 italic_Ο€ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 5 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG . (52)

At q=10βˆ’2π‘žsuperscript102q=10^{-2}italic_q = 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, mf=10βˆ’4subscriptπ‘šπ‘“superscript104m_{f}=10^{-4}italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT and according to Fig.6.2 |Z⁒(t)|Β―β‰Œ2β‹…10βˆ’7β‰ŒΒ―π‘π‘‘β‹…2superscript107\overline{|Z(t)|}\backsimeq 2\cdot 10^{-7}overΒ― start_ARG | italic_Z ( italic_t ) | end_ARG β‰Œ 2 β‹… 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 7 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT we obtain from (52) max⁑(nq⁒q+⁒(t))β‰Œ3β‹…10βˆ’10β‰Œsubscriptπ‘›π‘žsubscriptπ‘žπ‘‘β‹…3superscript1010\max(n_{qq_{+}}(t))\backsimeq 3\cdot 10^{-10}roman_max ( italic_n start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_q italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT + end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) ) β‰Œ 3 β‹… 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 10 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT. At first glance, this value seems very small, but when assessing it, two important circumstances must be taken into account. Firstly, this value is expressed in Planck units of length; in Compton units of length Ξ»fsubscriptπœ†π‘“\lambda_{f}italic_Ξ» start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT relative to the generated fermions this value will already be 300⁒λfβˆ’3300subscriptsuperscriptπœ†3𝑓300\lambda^{-3}_{f}300 italic_Ξ» start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT). Secondly, it is necessary to take into account the factor of increase in volume as a result of cosmological expansion exp⁑(βˆ’3⁒ξ⁒(t))3πœ‰π‘‘\exp(-3\xi(t))roman_exp ( - 3 italic_ΞΎ ( italic_t ) ), which, according to the graph in Fig.6.1 is about exp⁑(βˆ’3β‹…3)β‰ˆ10βˆ’4β‹…33superscript104\exp(-3\cdot 3)\thickapprox 10^{-4}roman_exp ( - 3 β‹… 3 ) β‰ˆ 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT. As a result, upon completion of the process of fermion pair production, we obtain their concentration of the order of nf⁒f+≳3β‹…10βˆ’2⁒λf3greater-than-or-equivalent-tosubscript𝑛𝑓subscript𝑓⋅3superscript102subscriptsuperscriptπœ†3𝑓n_{ff_{+}}\gtrsim 3\cdot 10^{-2}\lambda^{3}_{f}italic_n start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT + end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≳ 3 β‹… 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_Ξ» start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. In addition, the statistical factor Nfsubscript𝑁𝑓N_{f}italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT of the number of fermion types in the interaction model is also important. In the standard SU(5) model (colors, electric charges) Nf∼10similar-tosubscript𝑁𝑓10N_{f}\sim 10italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∼ 10, which increases the estimate of the total number of fermion pairs by another order of magnitude.

7 Conclusion

Summing up the main results of both parts of the work, we indicate its following main results.
βˆ™βˆ™\bulletβˆ™ A model of the evolution of the Universe based on an asymmetric Higgs scalar doublet with a kinetic coupling proportional to the product of the derivatives of the components of the scalar doublet is proposed and studied. In particular, a qualitative analysis of the dynamic system of the model was carried out, the symmetry properties of the model with respect to the reflection and similarity transformation were investigated and proven.
βˆ™βˆ™\bulletβˆ™ The main types of behavior of the cosmological model are revealed depending on the fundamental parameters and initial conditions. Cases of the presence of initial and final cosmological singularities and rebound points have been identified.
βˆ™βˆ™\bulletβˆ™ It is shown that near the rebound points the phantom component Ο†πœ‘\varphiitalic_Ο† of a scalar doublet generates its classical component ΦΦ\Phiroman_Ξ¦.
βˆ™βˆ™\bulletβˆ™ The asymptotic behavior of the cosmological model near the points of initial singularity and the Big Rip, corresponding to the barotropic coefficient ΞΊ=1πœ…1\kappa=1italic_ΞΊ = 1 (p=Ξ΅π‘πœ€p=\varepsilonitalic_p = italic_Ξ΅), has been proven analytically and confirmed by numerical modeling.
βˆ™βˆ™\bulletβˆ™ The probability of fermion pair production in a strong alternating scalar field near the rebound points has been estimated.

All identified features of cosmological models based on an asymmetric scalar doublet: the presence of initial singularities, rebound points and large discontinuity points, generation of scalar doublet components, etc., are similar to the features of cosmological models based on systems of scalarly charged fermions [2] – [5], which apparently makes it possible to replace the mathematically complicated model of the formation of supermassive black holes [9] – [10] with a simpler one, built on a purely field basis. In addition, an important circumstance is also the fairly intense production of fermion pairs by the scalar field near the rebound points. Thanks to this factor, the required number of scalarly charged fermions can be obtained independently of the processes of gravitational pair production, and at the stage of the cold Universe.

Founding

The work is performed according to the Russian Government Program of Competitive Growth of Kazan Federal University

References

  • [1] Yu. G. Ignat’ev, I. A. Kokh, Gravit. Cosmol., (submitted for publication).
  • [2] Yu. G. Ignat’ev and D. Yu. Ignatyev, Theoret. Math. Phys., 209:1, 1437 (2021); arXiv:2111.00492 [gr-qc].
  • [3] Yu. G. Ignat’ev, A. A. Agathonov and D. Yu. Ignatyev, Gravit. Cosmol., 27:4, 338 (2021); arXiv:2203.11946 [gr-qc].
  • [4] Yu. G. Ignat’ev, A. A. Agathonov and D. Yu. Ignatyev, Gravit. Cosmol., 28:1, 10 (2022); arXiv:2203.12766 [gr-qc]
  • [5] Yu. Ignat’ev, A. Agathonov, M. Mikhailov, Astrophys. Space. Sci. 357:61 (2015); arXiv:1411.6244v1 [gr-qc].
  • [6] Yu. G. Ignat’ev, I. A. Kokh, Theoret. Math. Phys, 207:1, 514 (2021).
  • [7] Yu. G. Ignat’ev, Theoret. Math. Phys., 219:1, 688 (2024); arXiv:2307.13761 [gr-qc].
  • [8] Robert R. Caldwell, Marc Kamionkowski, Nevin N. Weinberg, Phys.Rev.Lett., 91, 071301 (2003); arXiv:astro-ph/0302506.
  • [9] Yu. G. Ignat’ev, Gravit. Cosmol., 27:1, 30 (2021); 27:1, 36 (2021); 28:1, 25 (2022); 28:3, 275 (2022); 28:4, 375 (2022); 29:2, 163 (2023); 29:4, 327 (2023); 30:1, 40 (2024); 30:2, 141 (2024).
  • [10] Yu. G. Ignat’ev, Theoret. Math. Phys., 215:3 862 (2023); arXiv:2306.17185 [gr-qc].
  • [11] J. Schwinger, Phys. Rev., 75, 651 (1949).