Alignment of Quasar Polarizations on Large Scales Explained by Warped Cosmic Strings. PART II: The Second Order Contribution

Download Download as PDF (Size:453KB)  HTML   XML  PP. 163-180  
DOI: 10.4236/jmp.2017.82015    343 Downloads   509 Views  
Author(s)    Leave a comment


We find an azimuthal-angle dependent approximate wave like solution to second order on a warped five-dimensional manifold with a self-gravitating U(1) scalar gauge field (cosmic string) on the brane using the multiple-scale method. The spectrum of the several orders of approximation show maxima of the energy distribution dependent on the azimuthal-angle and the winding numbers n of the subsequent orders of scalar field. This breakup of the quantized flux quanta does not lead to instability of the asymptotic wavelike solution, due to the suppression of the n-dependency in the energy mo-mentum tensor components by the warp factor. This effect is triggered by the contribution of the five dimensional Weyl tensor on the brane. This con-tribution can be understood as dark energy and can trigger the self-acceleration of the universe without the need of a cosmological constant. There is a striking relation between the symmetry breaking of the Higgs field described by the winding number and the SO(2) breaking of the axially symmetric configuration into a discrete subgroup of rotations about 180°. The discrete sequence of non-axially symmetric deviations, cancelled by the emission of gravitational waves in order to restore the SO(2) symmetry, triggers the pressure Tzz for discrete values of the azimuthal-angle. There can be a possible relation between the recently discovered angle-preferences of polarization axes of quasars on large scales and our theoretical predicted angle-dependency and can be an evidence for the existence of cosmic strings. The discovery of the increase of polarization rate in smaller subgroups of the several large-quasar groups (LQGs), the red shift dependency and the relative orientation of the spin axes with respect to the major axes of their host LQGs, point at a fractional azimuthal structure, were also found in our cosmic string model. This peculiar discontinuous large scale structure, i.e., polarizations directions of multiples of, for example, π/2 orπ/4, can be explained by the spectrum of azimuthal-angle dependent wavelike modes without the need of conventional density perturbations in standard 4D cosmological models. Carefully com-parison of the spectrum of extremal values of the first and second order φ-dependency and the distribution of the alignment of the quasar polarizations is necessary. This can be accomplished when more observational data become available.

Cite this paper

Slagter, R. (2017) Alignment of Quasar Polarizations on Large Scales Explained by Warped Cosmic Strings. PART II: The Second Order Contribution. Journal of Modern Physics, 8, 163-180. doi: 10.4236/jmp.2017.82015.


[1] Vilenkin, A. and Shellard, E.P.S. (1994) Cosmic Strings and Other Topological Defects. Cambridge University press, Cambridge, UK.
[2] Anderson, M.R. (2003) The Mathematical Theory of Cosmic Strings. IoP Publishing, Bistol.
[3] Nielsen, H.B. and Olesen, P. (1973) Nuclear Physics B, 61, 45.
[4] Garfinkle, D. (1985) Physical Review D, 32, 1323.
[5] Laguna-Castilo, P. and Matzner, R.A. (1987) Physical Review D, 36, 3663.
[6] Gregory, R. (1989) Physical Review D, 39, 2108.
[7] Hutsemekers, D., Braibant, L., Pelgrims, V. and Sluse, D. (2014) Astronomy & Astrophysics, 572, A18.
[8] Taylor, A.R. and Jagannathan, P. (2016) Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 459, L36.
[9] Slagter, R.J. and Pan, S. (2016) Foundations of Physics, 46, 1075.
[10] Slagter, R.J. (2016) Journal of Modern Physics, 7, 501.
[11] Laguna-Castillo, P. and Garfinkle, D. (1989) Physical Review D, 40, 1011-1016.
[12] Arkani-Hamed, N., Dimopoulos, S. and Dvali, G. (1992) Physics Letters B, 429, 263-272.
[13] Arkani-Hamed, N., Dimopoulos, S. and Dvali, G. (1999) Physical Review D, 59, Article ID: 086004.
[14] Antoniadis, I., Arkani-Hamed, N., Dimopoulos, S. and Dvali, G. (1998) Physics Letters B, 436, 257-263.
[15] Randall, L. and Sundrum, R. (1999) Physical Review Letters, 83, 3370-3373.
[16] Randall, L. and Sundrum, R. (1999) Physical Review Letters, 83, 4690-4693.
[17] Maartens, R. (2007) Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 68, Article ID: 012046.
[18] Maartens, R. (2007) Lecture Notes in Physics, 720, 323-332.
[19] Maartens, R. and Koyama, K. (2010) Living Reviews in Relativity, 13, 5.
[20] Shiromizu, T., Maeda, K. and Sasaki, M. (2000) Physical Review D, 62, Article ID: 024012.
[21] Slagter, R.J. (2014) International Journal of Modern Physics D, 10, 1237.
[22] Pelgrims, V. (2016) ArXiv:astro-ph/160405141v1.
[23] Choquet-Bruhat, Y. (1969) Communications in Mathematical Physics, 12, 16-35.
[24] Choquet-Bruhat, Y. (1977) General Relativity and Gravitation, 8, 561-571.
[25] Slagter, R.J. (1986) Astrophysical Journal, 307, 20-29.
[26] Bogomol’nyi, E. (1976) Soviet Journal of Nuclear Physics, 24, 449-454.
[27] Felsager, B. (1987) Geometry, Particles and Fields. Odense University Press, Odense.
[28] Chandrasekhar, S. and Lebovitz, N.R. (1973) Astrophysical Journal, 185, 19-30.
[29] ‘T Hooft, G. (2014) ArXiv: gr-qc/14106675v3.
[30] ‘T Hooft, G. (2015) ArXiv: gr-qc/151104427v1.
[31] Wald, R.W. (1984) General Relativity. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
[32] Maldacena, J. (2011) ArXiv: gr-qc/11055632v2.

comments powered by Disqus

Copyright © 2017 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.