arXiv:1212.1416v2 [astro-ph.CO] 8 Jan 2013 mgei”ms gap mass “magnetic” because induce interactions a exist non-Abelian cannot the groups) temperatures high SU(2) the at weak e.g., or to, long-range SU(3) (corresponding color that Note fields magnetic [6]. non-Abelian EWPT before plasma mordial ed rcal ntehlct parameter de- helicity Universe the early on the crucially in pends fields (hypermagnetic) netic es(ogrne yecag fields hypercharge mass- (long-range) from (EWPT) less transition phase electroweak the ing present the till 5]. pres- even [4, inter- survive the the epoch may in which of (CMF) medium fields [3]. indications galactic magnetic epoch cosmological observational of inflation first ex- ence cosmological Universe are the the There of to epochs down Alterna- might earlier pansion, fields ejected much seed nuclei. from or the scenario galactic originate formation, astrophysical active this galaxy to or tively the supernovae produced of first are fields by epoch seed largely that the be is might during fields It magnetic 2]. [1, galactic unknown observed for dynamo ∗ † [email protected] [email protected] h aaa qainwihgvrseouino mag- of evolution governs which equation Faraday The ti elkonta awlinCFmgtaiedur- arise might CMF Maxwellian that known well is It subsequent seed that fields initial the of nature The etnaymtygot ntesmercpaeo nelectro an of phase symmetric the in growth asymmetry Lepton ewrs yemgei ed etnaymty aynas baryon asymmetry, lepton field, hypermagnetic 98.80.Cq for Keywords: 95.30.Qd, value 14.60.-z, initial numbers: an PACS as used be can that EWPT. moment after EWPT the to down aenme.W rdc ozr hrlaymty∆ asymmetry chiral nonzero a predict We number. wave etnaymtiseovdfo h rmrilrgtelect right primordial at the asymmetry fiel from hypercharge evolved take c seed asymmetries is the the lepton phase of and symmetric configuration in numbers wave processes lepton Chern-Simons sphaleron left to of due neutri number violation and contribution the The electrons by left modified interactions. equations and Maxwell right a obeying into for field taking anomalies bosons Higgs Abelian and to leptons for equations kinetic hs rniin(WT conigfrciaiyflpproce below flip temperatures chirality at for equilibrium accounting entering (EWPT) transition phase esuylpo smer vlto npam fteeryUn early the of plasma in evolution asymmetry lepton study We .INTRODUCTION I. yemgei ed essiswsigotb sphalerons by out washing its versus fields hypermagnetic ∼ T g 2 T ≥ . T RL oopeeadRdoaePoaain(IZMIRAN), Propagation Radiowave and Ionosphere P638 E 51-7 ˜oPuo P Brazil; SP, Paulo, S˜ao 05315-970 CEP 66318, CP ai Dvornikov Maxim n nsasrn eedneo h smere nteChern the on asymmetries the of dependence strong a finds One . b nttt fPyis nvriyo ˜oPaulo, S˜ao of University Physics, of Institute a Y uho nttt fTretilMagnetism, Terrestrial of Institute Pushkov µ 410Totk ocwRgo,Russia Region, Moscow Troitsk, 142190 xsigi pri- in existing α hc is which Dtd uy2,2018) 26, July (Dated: a,b T ∗ RL n itrB Semikoz B. Victor and ≃ 0TeV, 10 g ilfrrgthne lcrn pstos.The origin (positrons). tion electrons right-handed for tial and field, hypermagnetic the is ios(S nml emi h MLgaga 6 7] [6, Lagrangian SM the in L term anomaly (CS) Simons sa ffc fcmvn ih lcrn n positrons and electrons right comoving of along effect an as lsatehlct parameter helicity the plasma here. at consider absent, we are scales vortices large at such in Obviously least Universe early plasma. QED isotropic in the conservation parity the to n ouaetemi adulvlwt lgtydiffer- slightly to with due level densities Landau ent main the populate and a hsailvco oc csol ntoeplrzdelec- polarized those on only acts force vector axial This oaie lcrn pstos ie yteailvector axial the by force given (positrons) with (antineutrinos) electrons neutrinos polarized of interaction weak to due T ai MD aaee,wihi eeae yvortices by generated plasma is in which magnetohydrody- parameter, after standard (MHD) and the namic that before remind forms We different EWPT. having and (SM) Model ato ekitrcin ewe etio fteflavor the of neutrinos between a interactions weak of part ′ EW CS = scalar eoeEP ntesmercpaeo primordial of phase symmetric the in EWPT Before hl uhC emvnse nboe hs at phase broken in vanishes term CS such While = ,µ τ µ, e, mer,sphaleron ymmetry, µ ( = e/ 9,teeapasasmlrplrzto ffc [10] effect polarization similar a appears there [9], F B = o smer xsigaoea partial as alone existing asymmetry ron cuttelpo ubrvoaindue violation number lepton the ccount σ ( cos T g A Y ssvaHgsdcy ivredecays) (inverse decays Higgs via sses V o ntesl-ossethypercharge self-consistent the in nos µ EW ,w e h siae fbro and baryon of estimates the get we d, wn othe to owing ′ repnigvoaino h baryon the of violation orresponding fteSadr oe felectroweak of Model Standard the of ) noacuta el suigthe Assuming well. as account into n 2 σ e α ( µ R hc aeopst pnpoetoson projections spin opposite have which n hre leptons, charged and θ A fteC term CS the of = MHD W e ) T < T < − R ( −∇ x / µ sthe is 4 t , e h awlinfil evolution field Maxwellian the vrebfr h electroweak the before iverse π L h ∼ = ) V 2 nti cnroevolved scenario this in 0 6= )( σ ( v A RL µ a U B G † ) · e Y ( R Y esleappropriate solve We . F aiyviolation parity ∇× rsn rmteprt violating parity the from arising 1 ag coupling, gauge (1) · c 0. 6= Y a ( A L ,wihvoae aiy Here, parity. violates which ), v ) CS ( ) ekpam with plasma weak M i α µ is Y a lcdtdi e.[8] Ref. in elucidated was ( e σ R eut rmteChern- the from results pseudoscalar ) · steceia poten- chemical the is δ -Simons j ( ν a nteStandard the in ) ( x B t , Y )) according . = polariza- × ∇ < T B Y Y 2 trons and positrons which contribute to the partial mag- baryon asymmetry of the Universe (BAU) through lep- (σ) netization M = µB sign(σ) n0σB/B with the corre- togenesis in hypermagnetic fields. In Sec. IV we solve sponding densities n of electrons (σ = ) and positrons kinetic equations for all lepton and Higgs asymmetries 0σ − (σ = +) at the main Landau level. Here GF is the both analytically, neglecting hypercharge fields, and nu- (A) Fermi constant, ca = 0.5 is the axial coupling in the merically, including hypermagnetic fields. In Sec. V we Weinberg-Salam model,∓ the upper (lower) sign stays for analyze the evolution of the chiral anomaly parameter electron (muon, tau) neutrinos, and µB is the Bohr mag- ∆µ(t) in the symmetric phase down to t = tEW. Our neton. Note that the neutrino current density asymmetry results are discussed in Sec. VI. (νa) In Appendix A we interpret and compare two quantum δj = jνa jν¯a is the polar vector and the magneti- zation M(σ) −is the axial vector. Thus, the weak axial- mechanisms producing α-helicity parameter for magnetic vector force separates electric charges causing the rel- and hypermagnetic fields: the chiral anomaly leading to ative drift velocity and the corresponding electric cur- the αnew-helicity parameter in the Faraday equation [11], rent that leads to the generation of an additional elec- and the Chern-Simons anomaly for hypercharge fields in- tromagnetic field component resulting from weak inter- terpreted as a polarization effect in plasma caused by the actions Eweak αB GF. Unfortunately the α- hypermagnetic field itself [8]. In Appendix B we derive helicity parameter∼ produced∼ by this mechanism is very kinetic equations for the lepton and Higgs asymmetries small. Moreover, it depends on such additional pa- used in the main Sec. III. In Appendix C we give some (ν) formulas for the lepton number violation due to ’t Hooft’s rameter as a neutrino gas inhomogeneity scale λfluid, (ν) anomaly in non-Abelian fields in order to explain how the α GF(T/λfluid)(δnν /nν ) [10]. It should be mentioned sphaleron processes influence the left lepton kinetics. that∼ the new opportunity for the Maxwellian CMF gen- eration found in recent works [11, 12] seems to be very intriguing. II. EQUILIBRIUM IN THE SYMMETRIC In Ref. [11] it was shown that the evolution of PHASE OF ELECTROWEAK PLASMA AND Maxwellian magnetic fields in a primordial plasma at THE CHIRAL ANOMALY PROBLEM temperatures T 10 MeV is strongly affected by the quantum chiral anomaly≥ proportional to the difference The question of how large the chiral anomaly param- of right-handed and left-handed electron chemical po- eter ∆µ(t) = µeR (t) µeL (t) could be before EWPT is important as an input− for the generation of Maxwellian tentials ∆µ(t) = µeR µeL evolving in a self-consistent way. Such a difference− defines the new helicity parame- magnetic fields after EWPT. In the SM plasma consist- T ter αnew(t)= αem∆µ(t)/πσcond in the modified Faraday ing of quarks, leptons, and one Higgs doublet ϕ = equation that governs evolution of Maxwellian fields just (ϕ(+), ϕ(0)), with the chemical potential being in Bose after EWPT at temperatures 10 MeV
are being protected from washing out by sphalerons all metries ξ = ξ L = 0, where ξ = µ /T , appropri- eL νe 6 a a the way down to TRL. Suggesting such scenario, the au- ate for the stage T
′2 dL g [n (0) n (0) ] eR = (E B )+2Γ L L ϕ − ϕ˜ , dt 4π2s Y · Y RL eL − eR − 2s for decays (inverse decays) e e¯ ϕ˜(0) and e ν¯L ϕ(−), R L ↔ R e ↔ ′2 dL g Γ [n (0) n (0) ] eL = (E B ) sph L +Γ L L + ϕ − ϕ˜ , dt − 16π2s Y · Y − 2 eL RL eR − eL 2s fore ¯ e ϕ(0), as well as R L ↔ L ′2 dLνe g Γsph [nϕ(0) nϕ˜(0) ] = (E B ) L L +Γ L L + − , dt − 16π2s Y · Y − 2 νe RL eR − eL 2s fore ¯ νL ϕ(+). (3.1) R e ↔
Here Lb = (nb n¯b)/s is the lepton number, b = sphaleron transitions decreasing the left lepton numbers L −2 ∗ 3 2 eR,eL,νe , s = 2π g T /45 is the entropy density, and and therefore washing out BAU, where αW = g /4π = g∗ = 106.75 is the number of relativistic degrees of 1/137 sin2 θ = 3.17 10−2 is given by the gauge cou- W × freedom. The factor of 2 in front of the rate ΓRL in pling g = e/ sin θW in SM and θW is the Weinberg angle. the first line takes into account the equivalent reaction The constant C 25 is estimated through lattice cal- branches. We also included Higgs decays with the rate culations (see some≃ comments on ’t Hooft’s anomaly in 5 ΓD =ΓRL/2. The probability Γsph = CαWT is given by Appendix C and Chap. 11 in Ref. [15]). Of course, for 4
L the left doublet LeL = Lνe . have dξ0/dt < 0 for our initial conditions ξeR (t0) > 0
This system is completed by the kinetic equation for and ξeL (t0) = ξ0(t0) = 0 resulting in the negative chem- the Higgs bosons independent of Abelian anomaly inher- ical potential for the boson doublet ϕT = (ϕ(+), ϕ(0)), ent in fermions [19] µ0 < 0, as it should be. Below we simplify the Abelian anomaly contribution d (EY BY) considering, as in Ref. [13], the simplest [(nϕ(0) nϕ˜(0) )/s] ∼ · dt − configuration of hypermagnetic field: CS wave Yx = [n (0) n (0) ] Y (t) sin k z, Y = Y (t)cos k z, Y = Y = 0. Using =Γ L L ϕ − ϕ˜ . (3.2) 0 y 0 z 0 RL eL − eR − 2s the generalized Ohm’s law [8]
Note that the rate of Higgs decays (inverse decays) EY = V BY + ηY BY αYBY, coincides with the rate of a lepton pair production (an- − × ∇× − −1 nihilation) having opposite sign since the creation of a where ηY = (σcond) is the magnetic (hypermagnetic) pair is followed by the disappearance of a Higgs boson diffusion coefficient, αY is the hypermagnetic helicity pa- and vice versa. rameter arising due to the polarization of electroweak In kinetic Eqs. (3.1) and (3.2) we used the rate of all plasma [8, 13], inverse processes [16], which is twice bigger than for the decay ones ΓRL = 2ΓD, ′2 g (µeR + µeL /2) αY = , σcond = 100T, (3.5) 2 2 −3 2 m0 Γ0 1 x 4π σcond ΓRL =5.3 10 he T = − . (3.3) × T 2tEW √x and we get the pseudoscalar (EY BY) entering the This rate vanishes just at the EWPT time x = 1, Abelian anomaly as · 2 where the variable x = t/tEW = (TEW/T ) is given −6 2 by the Friedmann law. Here he = 2.94 10 is the (EY BY)=ηY( BY) BY αYBY Yukawa coupling for electrons, Γ = 121,× and m2(T ) = · ∇× · − 0 0 B2 k g′2 ξ 2DT 2(1 T 2 /T 2) is the temperature dependent effec- = Y 0 ξ + L . (3.6) − EW 100 T − 4π2 R 2 tive Higgs mass at zero momentum and zero Higgs vac- uum expectation value. The coefficient 2D 0.377 for 2 2 ≈ Here we substituted ( BY) BY = k0BY(t) for the CS m0(T ) is given by the known masses of gauge bosons ∇× · wave, where BY(t) = k0Y (t) is the hypermagnetic field mZ and mW, the top quark mass mt, and a still prob- lematic zero-temperature Higgs mass, which is estimated amplitude. 4 as m 125 GeV (see Ref. [20]). Of course, the chi- Using the notations yR(x) = 10 ξeR (x), yL(x) = H ∼ 4 4 rality flipping rate exists after EWPT. However, that 10 ξeL (x), and y0(x) = 10 ξ0(x), as well as accounting for Eq. (3.6), the system (3.4) can be rewritten in the rate is due to electromagnetic processes at T The function eϕ(x) is given by the hypermagnetic field as well as L = δ well above T , T T . If the ini- eR R RL ≫ RL squared tial BAU differs from zero, B(t0) = 0, and if we assume the absence of lepton asymmetries6 for the second and 2 third generations all the way down to TEW, Lµ = Lτ = 0, ϕ(x) BY(x) e = (0) . (3.9) we find that the relation δ2 = δ3 = B(x0)/3 is valid only " BY # for the initial time. From the first conservation law in Eq. (3.12) one finds the change of BAU B(t) at temper- We also substituted the hypermagnetic field BY(t) = atures T −10 −4 x 10 10 −6 10 0.5 −8 B = 25.6 10 0 B = 2.1 × 10−2 0 0 B(t) −10 B(t) 10 −12 −0.5 10 −14 10 −3 −2 −1 0 −4 −3 −2 −1 0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 t/t t/t EW EW (a) (b) (0) 19 −2 FIG. 1. The baryon asymmetry B(t) versus t/tEW for BY = 10 G. (a) The baryon asymmetry for B0 = 2.1 × 10 (solid −3 line) and B0 = 25.6 (dashed line). (b) The baryon asymmetry for B0 = 2 × 10 . tion (3.11), we easily find the solutions of kinetic equa- external fields through Abelian anomalies and sphaleron tions (3.7) transitions leads to a violation of the chemical equilib- rium (2.1) existing in primordial plasma when perturba- yR(x0) Φ(x) yR(x)= [1 + e ], tive reactions (decays, scattering, etc.) are taken into 2 account only. y (x )) y (x)= R 0 [1 eΦ(x)], L 4 − yR(x0)) Φ(x) V. CHIRAL ANOMALY PARAMETER y0(x)= [1 e ], − 4 − (yR − yL) =6 0 IN ELECTROWEAK PLASMA BEFORE EWPT 3/2 3/2 1/2 1/2 (x x0 ) Φ(x)= 4Γ0 (x x0 ) − .(4.1) − " − − 3 # The temporal evolution of the chiral anomaly param- 4 eter yR yL = 10 (∆µ/T ) is shown in Fig. 3. There is Note that y0 < 0, as it should be for a boson chemical − −1 potential. Obviously the chemical equilibrium (2.1) is a strong dependence on the scale Λ = k0 for the cho- settled soon due to huge negative Φ 4Γ = 484, sen configuration of the hypermagnetic field: the shorter ≃− 0 − CS wavelength, the bigger the chiral anomaly parame- Φ(x) yR yL + y0 = yR(x0)e 0, (4.2) ter will be. For the maximum acceptable wave number −7 − → k0 = kmax = 10 TEW (B0 = 25.6), the chiral anomaly that happens somewhere at x > x 10−2 at the parameter ∆µ/T is close to 5 10−5 assumed in Fig. 1 eq ≃ × temperature T = TEW/√xeq 1 TeV before EWPT, of Ref. [11] as a maximum initial value of the chiral ≃ T >TEW (see right panel of Fig. 2). anomaly parameter just after EWPT. However for longer The numerical solution of the system (3.7) accounting CS wavelengths [see dashed line in Fig. 3(b) plotted for −5 for sphalerons and in the presence of BY = 0 for the k0 = 7.8 10 kmax], such an initial value will occur particular case of CS wave configuration is shown6 on the at a negligible× level (∆µ/T 10−8) which can crucially left panel in the same Fig. 2. We see that opposite to change the results of Ref. [11].∼ Note that for the strongest the case in Eq. (4.2), in the presence of hypermagnetic CS field amplitude BY = kmaxY (t), or in the case of the fields and accounting for sphaleron transitions, the chem- maximum Abelian anomaly leptogenesis effect, the left ical equilibrium between leptons and Higgs’s (2.1) never lepton asymmetry yL grows from the beginning due to exists: the sum yR yL + y0 even grows in the symmet- Higgs (inverse) decays and then changes sign, yL < 0, ric phase when t − t . The shorter CS wavelength which is allowed for fermions, cf., Fig. 3(c). → EW (e.g., for B0 = 25.6 if we use the maximum wave number Let us explain qualitatively the growth of the chiral k = 10−7T ), the larger values (y y + y ) evolve anomaly shown in Figs. 3(a) and 3(b). One can simplify 0 EW R − L 0 up to tEW. the kinetic equations for ξeR and ξeL in the system (3.4) All curves in Fig. 2 start from the same initial condi- decoupling them. For this purpose we neglect the Higgs tion y (x ) y (x )+ y (x )= y (x )=10−6 that cor- boson asymmetry ξ = 0. We also omit the asymmetry R 0 − L 0 0 0 R 0 0 responds to the initial right electron asymmetry ξeR = of left leptons ξeL = 0 in the first line of Eq. (3.4), and −10 10 close to the BAU value we expect at the EWPT the right electron in the second line of Eq. (3.4) ξeR = 0. time x = 1. Thus, the violation of lepton numbers in For example, from the first equation in the system (3.4), 7 −6 0 x 10 10 1 −2 0.8 10 0 0 0.6 + y B = 25.6 + y L −4 L 10 0 − y − y 0.4 R B = 2.1 × 10−2 R y 0 y −6 10 0.2 −8 10 −4 −3 −2 −1 0 0 −4 −3 −2 −1 0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 t/t t/t EW EW (a) (b) 4 FIG. 2. The function yR − yL + y0 versus t/tEW for lepton asymmetries ya = 10 (µa/T ). (a) The numerical solution of the (0) 19 −2 system (3.7) for BY = 10 G. The solid line corresponds to B0 = 2.1 × 10 and the dashed line to B0 = 25.6. (b) The analytic expression for yR − yL + y0 given by Eq. (4.2). substituting the pseudoscalar value (E B ) for the CS in our scenario resulting in the right electron asymmetry Y · Y wave from Eq. (3.6), one gets the simple differential equa- yR and the chiral anomaly yR yL, close to what was 4 − tion for the right electron asymmetry yR = 10 ξeR , calculated in Ref. [13]. However, for a long CS wave k0 kmax, a small positive value yL > 0 evolving down dy ≪ R +(Γ+Γ )y = Q, (5.1) to TEW [cf., Fig. 3(d)] is sufficient to allow sphaleron dt B R transitions to wash out BAU. where Γ = 2ΓRL is the chirality flip rate ′2 2 2 2 3 4 ΓB = 6(g /4π ) BY/100T , and Q = 6 10 ′2 2 2 4 × × VI. DISCUSSION g BYk0/400π T come from the second (helicity) term in Eq. (3.6) and from the first (diffusion) term in the same Eq. (3.6). The solution of Eq. (5.1) obtained for In the present work we have studied how the chiral strong and constant hypermagnetic fields ΓB Γ and asymmetry ∆µ = µeR µeL = 0 arises before EWPT 2 ≫ B const in the scenario where,− firstly,6 the initial right electron Y ≈ asymmetry ξ (t ) = µ /T 10−10 provides the gen- eR 0 eR 0 ≃ Q −(Γ+Γ )(t−t ) eration of BAU. Secondly, if we discuss the temperatures y (t)= y (t ) e B 0 R R 0 − Γ+Γ T T = T 10 TeV, chirality flip reactions enter B ≤ 0 RL ∼ Q the equilibrium. Then, at t>t0, the violation of lep- + (5.2) ton numbers leads to a nonzero left electron asymmetry Γ+ΓB ξ (t) = µ /T = 0. Note that we consider the lepton eL eL 6 gives the asymptotic growth of yR(t) up to yR(tEW) [here numbers violation due to Abelian anomalies and because of the presence of the SU(2) anomaly. The generated for its initial value ξeR (t0) = 0], W left electron asymmetry results in change of the primor- Q −ΓB(tEW −t0) Q dial right electron asymmetry ξeR (t) and influences the yR(tEW)= 1 e = ΓB − ΓB BAU evolution. h 4π2 k i For large scales of hypermagnetic field (for a smaller 104 0 =0.32. (5.3) ≈ g′2 T value k0), sphaleron transitions are more efficient to erase EW BAU since the amplitude of a competitive mean hyper- Here we put ΓBtEW 1 for strong fields, as well as charge field decreases [when amplitude BY(t) = k0Y (t) ′2 2 ≫2 −7 substituted g = e / cos θW =0.12 and k0/TEW = 10 goes down], and therefore due to Abelian anomalies, an for the case of B0 = 25.6. enhancement of the lepton number ceases. Of course, the (0) The bigger the wave number k0 or the stronger the bigger the seed hypermagnetic field BY , the bigger the hypermagnetic field BY = k0Y (t), the weaker a sphaleron lepton asymmetries and the baryon one. influence on lepton (baryon) asymmetry is. In a wide While our choice of CS wave as the simplest hyper- region of wave numbers, the left lepton asymmetry yL magnetic field configuration significantly simplifies the remains negligible compared with the right electron yR, analysis of the lepton (baryon) asymmetry evolution, we y y . This is due to the initial conditions (3.11) should comment on some disadvantages that are appro- | L| ≪ R 8 0 0 10 10 −2 −2 10 10 B = 25.6 0 B = 25.6 L 0 −4 −4 R 10 10 − y y B = 2 × 10−3 R B = 2 × 10−3 0 y 0 −6 −6 10 10 −8 −8 10 −4 −3 −2 −1 0 10 −4 −3 −2 −1 0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 t/t t/t EW EW (a) (b) −10 x 10 −10 4 10 2 −12 10 0 B = 2 × 10−2 0 L L y y −2 B = 2 × 10−3 −14 0 10 −4 −16 −6 −4 −3 −2 −1 0 10 −4 −3 −2 −1 0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 t/t t/t EW EW (c) (d) (0) 19 FIG. 3. The normalized chemical potentials yR,L and the chiral anomaly parameter yR − yL versus t/tEW for BY = 10 G. −3 (a) The normalized chemical potential yR for B0 = 25.6 (solid line) and B0 = 2 × 10 (dashed line). The dash-dotted line corresponds to the asymptotic value of yR = 0.32 calculated analytically in Eq. (5.3). (b) The chiral anomaly parameter −3 yR − yL for B0 = 25.6 (solid line) and B0 = 2 × 10 (dashed line). The dash-dotted line corresponds to the asymptotic value of yR − yL equal to 0.34. (c) The normalized chemical potential yL for B0 = 25.6. (d) The normalized chemical potential yL −2 −3 for B0 = 2 × 10 (solid line) and B0 = 2 × 10 (dashed line). priate to such hypercharge field. of medium. Thus, in order to get a necessary scale First, a scale of hypermagnetic field for the chosen CS on the onset of galactic magnetic fields we should rely configuration is rather small. In order to get the BAU on an inverse cascade evolving after the EWPT for the −10 close to the observable value Bobs(tEW) 10 we fit Maxwellian fields [24] that originated from the hyper- ∼ −3 the CS wave number of the order of k0 10 kmax, charge ones in our causal scenario. Note that such in- −7 ≃ where kmax = 10 TEW corresponds to the maxi- verse cascade needs a significant amount of magnetic he- mum wave number for the hypermagnetic field surviving licity in order to operate efficiently. For the CS wave, 3 2 Ohmic losses at EWPT time. The macroscopic long- the helicity density hY k0 dtY (t) decreases faster −1 ∼ ∫ range hypercharge field has the scale Λ = k0 , which is with lowering of the wave number k0 than the energy (B) 2 2 2 much bigger than the mean distance between particles in density ρY = BY/2 = k0Y (t)/2. In other words, the −1 plasma T , and, on the other hand, is much less than lower k0, the further away the CS wave configuration the horizon size Λ lH . Here the horizon size, e.g., at is from the maximum helical field obeying the relation ≪ −2 16 the EWPT time l = (M /1.66√g∗)T = 10 /T , max (B) H Pl EW EW k0h =2ρ . This circumstance should be taken into −1 7 Y Y is much bigger than the scales k0 = 10 /TEW and account for a more realistic continuous hypercharge field −1 10 11 k (10 10 )/TEW applied in our plots. Be- spectrum when the conservation of the global helicity 0 ≃ − cause of the arbitrariness of the z-axis direction cho- governs a spread of helicities over different scales. sen for the CS wave, such macroscopic fields are rather small-scale (random) fields and there is no anisotropy In addition, our choice of CS wave does not appear to 9 be not realistic for transition of hypercharge field to the Appendix A: The origin of the chiral anomaly for a Maxwellian one during EWPT. It was shown in Ref. [25] Maxwellian field and the CS anomaly for a that being provided by the helicity conservation only hypermagnetic field a helical field such as that given by the 3D configura- tion of Yµ can penetrate the boundary wall separating The chiral anomaly parameter ∆µ = (µeR µeL ) = 0 symmetric and broken phases during the EWPT time leads to an additional contribution to the current− in6 the T TEW. The CS wave does not penetrate such surface Maxwell equation of∼ a bubble of a new phase even for a strong hypermag- ∂E αem netic field amplitude, which, in turn, provides possibility + B = σcondE + ∆µB, (A1) of EWPT of the first order for the present bounds on − ∂t ∇× π Higgs masses [20]. where the last pseudovector current j = (αem∆µ/π)B is The evolution of the corresponding hypermagnetic he- coming, e.g., from the energy balance under chirality flip licity for an arbitrary configuration of hypermagnetic for massless particles [29, 30] 3 fields before EWPT HY = d x(Y BY) has been re- αem∆µ cently studied in Ref. [26] neglecting· hypermagnetic dif- d3x(j E)= d3x(E B). (A2) · π · fusion. The following magneticR helicity evolution in hot Z Z plasma at temperatures T T was analyzed in the Note that α and σ were defined in Sec. I. ≪ EW em cond same approximation in Ref. [27] relying on the model Using the Bianchi identity ∂tB = E, one finds proposed in Ref. [10] for the magnetic helicity parameter from Eq. (A1), neglecting in the MHD−∇ approach × the dis- α GF. The new mechanism for the α-helicity parame- placement current ∂tE = 0, the modified Faraday equa- ter∼ suggested in Refs. [11, 12] may improve such estimates tion [11] for primordial Maxwellian fields. ∂B αem∆µ 1 2 To resume, we estimated the chiral asymmetry ∆µ = = B + B, (A3) ∂t πσcond ∇× σcond ∇ µeR µeL arising just at EWPT T TEW using the sim- plest− configuration of the hypercharge≃ field—the Chern- which governs the evolution of the magnetic field after Simons wave—and taking into account both Higgs de- EWPT at temperatures 10 MeV µ e. Left neutrinos For left neutrinos we account for one gets the well-known issue ∂µjR = 0 that guaran- L (+) (i) the inverse decaye ¯Rνe ϕ and (ii) the decay tees the conservation of the right electron current in the (+) L → ϕ e¯Rνe , which give absence of hypermagnetic fields. On the other hand, sub- → tracting Eq. (C1) from Eq. (C2) we get the violation of n L (+) d νe nϕ the left lepton current in the same non-Abelian fields, =Γ [ n n L ]/s +Γ . (B10) dt s RL − e¯R − νe D s 2 f. Left antineutrinos In this case (i) the inverse de- µ µ µ g µν ˜ − − ∂ j = ∂ [j + j L ]= F F . (C3) L ( ) ( ) L µ L µ eL νe 2 a µνa cay eRν¯e ϕ and (ii) the decay ϕ eRν¯e con- 16π tribute to→ the kinetic equation as → Notice that here neutrino and electron currents are equiv- µ µ µ alent j = j L = j /2, as seen from the following repre- eL νe L n L (−) d ν¯e nϕ ˆT L =Γ [ n n L ]/s +Γ . (B11) sentation for the left field doublet L = (ˆνe , eˆL), dt s RL − eR − ν¯e D s Subtracting Eq. (B11) from Eq. (B10), one gets 1 a Lˆ = ψˆL, √ 2 2 b L a + b dLνe =Γ (L L )+Γ [n (+) n (−) ]/s, (B12) dt RL eR − eL D ϕ − ϕ where we may put a = b = 1 for the isospin col- L L − where we took into account that Lνe = LeL or nνe = neL . umn. Then, using the standard field operator in the Of course, nϕ(+) = nϕ(0) with the chemical potential µ0 Schr¨odinger representation in Bose distribution for the doublet ϕT = (ϕ(+), ϕ(0)), − and nϕ( ) = nϕ˜(0) with the chemical potential µ0 for 3 T (−) (0) − 1 d p r ipx the c.c. doubletϕ ˜ = (ϕ , ϕ˜ ). ψˆL(x)= [ˆbr(p)u (p)e (2π)3/2 2ε L For charged Higgs, which are described by Eqs. (B10)- r p X Z (B12), using arguments like in the derivation of Eq. (B9) ˆ† r −ipx + dr(p)vL(p)ep ], we obtain from Eqs. (B10) and (B11) the kinetic equation which is identical to Eq. (B9), since n (+) = n (0) and ϕ ϕ µ − one finds the current asymmetry j (x,t) = nϕ( ) = nϕ˜(0) , L ¯ˆ µ ˆ µ µ Tr[ˆρ(t)ψLγ ψL]= jl j¯ , whereρ ˆ(t) is the nonequilib- L − lL d rium statistical operator obeying the Liouville equation. [(n (+) n (−) )/s] dt ϕ − ϕ Here the currents [n (+) n (−) ] =Γ L L ϕ − ϕ . (B13) RL eL eR 3p µ − − 2s µ d p (lL,¯lL) j ¯ (x,t)= f (p, x,t), lL,lL (2π)3 ε Z p Appendix C: SU(2)W anomaly and left fermion number violation are given by the Wigner distribution functions Let us use Eq. (12-174a) in Ref. [34] written for the ¯ (lL,¯lL) ikx (lL,lL) pseudovector current of the one generation of massless f (p, x,t) = Tr e fp+k/2,r′;p−k/2,r(t) , µ µ µ µ 5 fermions, j = j j = ψγ¯ γ ψ, " k # 5 R − L X g2 µ µ µ µν ˜ which, in turn, are given by the distribution func- ∂µj5 = ∂µ[jR jL ]= 2 Fa Fµνa. (C1) − −16π (lL) tions in the momentum representation fp′r′;pr(t) = µ µ 5 µ µ 5 (¯l ) Here j = ψγ¯ (1 + γ )ψ/2 and j = ψγ¯ (1 γ )ψ/2 are ˆ† ˆ ′ ′ L R L Tr ρˆ(t)br(p)br (p ) for particles and fp′r′;pr(t) = the right and left fermion currents correspondingly− [35]. h ˆ† ˆ ′ ′ i Adding the equality (C1) with the anomaly for leptons Tr ρˆ(t)dr(p)dr (p ) for antiparticles. of the first generation given by Eq. (11.12) in Ref. [15] Theh violation ofi the left lepton number L in non- (see also [36]), eL Abelian fields due to the SU(2)W anomaly (C3) proceeds g2 with the sphaleron transition probability Γsph as we used ∂ jµ = ∂ [jµ + jµ]= F µν F˜ , (C2) in kinetic equations (3.1). µ Le µ R L 16π2 a µνa [1] R. M. Kulsrud and E. G. Zweibel, Rep. Prog. Phys. 71, [2] P. P. Kronberg, Rep. Prog. Phys. 57, 325 (1994). 0046091 (2008), arXiv:0707.2783. [3] D. Grasso and H. R. Rubinstein, Phys. Rep. 348, 163 12 (2001), astro-ph/0009061. (CMS Collaboration), Phys. Lett. B 716, 30 (2012), [4] A. Neronov and I. Vovk, Science 328, 73 (2010), arXiv:1207.7235. arXiv:1006.3504. [21] V. B. Semikoz, D. D. Sokoloff, and J. W. F. Valle, Phys. [5] A. Neronov and D. V. Semikoz, Phys. Rev. D 80, 123012 Rev. D 80, 083510 (2009), arXiv:0905.3365. (2009), arXiv:0910.1920. [22] V. B. Semikoz and J. W. F. Valle, J. High Energy Phys. [6] M. Giovannini and M. E. Shaposhnikov, Phys. Rev. D 03 (2008) 067, arXiv:0704.3978. 57, 2186 (1998), hep-ph/9710234. [23] In numerical estimates, we substitute either the param- −7 [7] A. N. Redlich and L. C. R. Wijewardhana, Phys. Rev. eter k0/(10 TEW) = 1 that is the upper limit for the −7 Lett. 54, 970 (1985). CS wave number k0 ≤ 10 TEW to avoid Ohmic dis- −7 [8] V. B. Semikoz and J. W. F. Valle, J. Cosmol. Astropart. sipation of hypermagnetic field, or k0/(10 TEW) ≃ Phys. 11 (2011) 048, arXiv:1104.3106. (10−3 − 10−4) to get observable baryon asymmetry B = [9] M. Laine and M. E. Shaposhnikov, Phys. Lett. B 463, 0.87 × 10−10 at the EWPT time x = 1. Dynamo ampli- 280 (1999), hep-th/9907194. fication is negligible in both cases. [10] V. B. Semikoz and D. D. Sokoloff, Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, [24] A. Brandenburg, K. Enqvist, and P. Olesen, Phys. Rev. 131301 (2004), astro-ph/0312567. D 54, 1291 (1996), astro-ph/9602031. [11] A. Boyarsky, J. Fr¨ohlich, and O. Ruchayskiy, Phys. Rev. [25] P. M. Akhmet’ev, V. B. Semikoz, and D. D. Sokoloff, Lett. 108, 031301 (2012), arXiv:1109.3350. JETP Lett. 91, 215 (2010), arXiv:1002.4969. [12] A. Boyarsky, O. Ruchayskiy, and M. Shaposhnikov, Phys. [26] V. B. Semikoz, D. Sokoloff, and J. W. F. Valle, J. Cos- Rev. Lett. 109, 111602 (2012), arXiv:1204.3604. mol. Astropart. Phys. 06 (2012) 008, arXiv:1205.3607. [13] M. Dvornikov and V. B. Semikoz, J. Cosmol. Astropart. [27] V. B. Semikoz and D. D. Sokoloff, Astron. Astrophys. Phys. 02 (2012) 040, arXiv:1111.6876; 08 (2012) 01(E). 433, L53 (2005), astro-ph/0411496. [14] J. A. Harvey and M. S. Turner, Phys. Rev. D 42, 3344 [28] R. Brustein and D. H. Oaknin, Phys. Rev. D 60, 023508 (1990). (1999), hep-ph/9901242. [15] D. S. Gorbunov and V. A. Rubakov, Introduction to the [29] H. B. Nielsen and M. Ninomiya, Phys. Lett. 130B, 389 Theory of the Early Universe: Hot Big Bang Theory (1983). (World Scientific Publishing Company, Singapore, 2011), [30] K. Fukushima, D. E. Kharzeev, and H. J. Warringa, p. 251. Phys. Rev. D 78, 074033 (2008), arXiv:0808.3382. [16] B. A. Campbell, S. Davidson, J. Ellis, and K. A. Olive, [31] Of course, the sum of the Adler anomalies leads to the µ Phys. Lett. B 297, 118 (1992), hep-ph/9302221. conservation of the lepton number in QED, ∂µj = µ µ [17] We use the sign for the Abelian anomaly opposite to ∂µ(jR + jL ) = 0. that in Ref. [6] relying on the definition of right states [32] With respect to the Lorentz transformation, this differ- 5 ΨR = (1+ γ )Ψ/2 in Ref. [18]. ence is the time component of the four-pseudovector av- [18] A. Zee, Quantum Field Theory in a Nutshell (Princeton eraged over the Fermi distribution, hψγ¯ 0γ5ψi, while the University Press, NJ, 2010), p. 270. true pseudoscalar should have the form ψγ¯ 5ψ. If we av- [19] Note that we took into account the expansion of the Uni- erage the pseudoscalar term over Fermi distributions in a verse, since for any kind of asymmetries normalized on uniform medium, e.g., in uniform plasma with magnetic the entropy including lepton numbers, the following re- field neglecting plasma dispersion, it vanishes, hψγ¯ 5ψi = lations hold: 0. While in an inhomogeneous medium, one gets the nonzero result at the perturbative level (e.g., for magnons 5 d nb − n¯b ∂(nb − n¯b) in a ferromagnet), hψγ¯ ψit = −i∇·M(x,t)/e =6 0, where s = + 3H(nb − n¯), dt s ∂t b M(x,t) is the magnetization. a˙ T˙ s˙ [33] A. Vilenkin, Phys. Rev. D 22, 3080 (1980). H = = − , and = −3H, a T s [34] C. Itzykson and J.-B. Zuber, Quantum Field Theory (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1980), p. 606. where nb is an arbitrary density. [35] We use the same notations that coincide with Refs. [18, [20] G. Aad et al. (ATLAS Collaboration), Phys. Lett. B 34]. 5 716, 1 (2012), arXiv:1207.7214; S. Chatrchyan et al. [36] Note that anomaly (C2) does not depend on γ at all.