Comparing geometric and gravitational particle production in Jordan and Einstein frames

TL;DR

This paper compares geometric and gravitational particle production during inflation in Jordan and Einstein frames, revealing that geometric effects are significant and frame-dependent, with implications for quantum gravity and inflationary models.

Contribution

It introduces a formalism to compare particle production mechanisms in different frames and analyzes their dependence on inflationary potentials and coupling constants.

Findings

Geometric particle production can be comparable to gravitational production under certain conditions.

Large field models require extremely small coupling constants for geometric effects to be relevant.

Particle counts differ between frames, indicating a possible quantum frame issue.

Abstract

We explore cosmological particle production associated with inflationary fluctuations by comparing gravitational and geometric mechanisms, within a non-minimal Yukawa-like coupling between a inflaton and spacetime curvature. We show under which circumstances the number of geometric particles is comparable to the purely gravitational contribution by introducing the S-matrix formalism and approximating the inflationary potentials through power series. Despite the geometric production is a second-order effect, we show that it cannot be neglected \emph{a priori}, emphasizing that throughout inflation we do expect geometric particles to form as well as in the reheating phase. This result is investigated in both the Jordan and Einstein frames, selecting inflationary potentials supported by the Planck Satellite outcomes, \textit{i.e.}, the Starobinsky, hilltop, $\alpha$-attractor, and natural inflationary paradigms. We notice that, for large field approaches, the only feasible coupling may occur in case of extremely small field-curvature coupling constants, while the small field frameworks, namely the hilltop and $\alpha$-attractor models with quartic behavior, are essentially ruled out since they do not appear dynamically viable. We then point out that, while dynamically there exists a net equivalence between the Jordan and Einstein frames, the number of particles appears quite different passing from a representation to another one, thus pointing out the existence of a possible \emph{quantum frame issue}. In summary, while the classical inflationary dynamics is equivalently described in the Jordan and Einstein frames, a viable physical description of particle production valid in both the frames may be hindered by the absence of a complete quantum gravity. The latter could therefore be seen as missing puzzle to address the longstanding challenge of consistently passing between the two frames.