Nonperturbative φ4 potentials: Phase transitions and light horizons

Yuan Shi∗ Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, California 94551, USA (Dated: July 12, 2021) It is commonly believed that a massive real scalar field φ only mediates short-range interactions on the scale of its Compton wavelength via the Yukawa potential. However, in the nonperturba- tive regime of nonlinear self coupling, φ can also mediate larger scale interactions. Moreover, the classical potential, namely, the static configuration of φ in the presence of an external source, is not always unique for given boundary conditions. In this paper, a complete set of finite-energy potentials (FEPs) induced by a Gaussian source is identified in one, two, and three spatial dimensions when the nonlinearity is of the Mexican-hat type, which is often prescribed to induce spontaneous sym- metry breaking. In the size-strength parameter space of the source, phase boundaries are mapped out, across which the number of FEPs differ. Additionally, softer phase transitions are delineated according to whether the potential exhibits a light horizon at which φ vanishes. The light horizon is of physical significance when φ couples with other particles. For example, when φ is the Higgs field, all elementary particles become massless at the light horizon. It is remarkable that white dwarfs and neutron stars are potentially in a phase where light horizons exist, whose outer radii are a few times the star sizes. Moreover, suppose elementary fermions of mass greater than ∼ 103 GeV exist, then they may also be surrounded by light horizons with radii comparable to the Higgs Compton wave- length. Finally, nonperturbative states may also be realized in condensed matter systems, wherein phase transitions are controllable using localized sources.

I. INTRODUCTION Another example is the Yukawa potential, which arises due to the φψψ¯ coupling: When the expectation value of ¯ In the presence of nonlinearities, solutions to classi- fermions hψψi is nonzero, the classical field equation for cal field equations may contain configurations that are φ acquires a finite source term. The significance of an ex- distinct from wave-like solutions [1]. For example, in one ternal source is that it adds to the energy integral a term spatial dimension, a self-interacting real scalar field φ ex- whose sign is indefinite. Consequently, Derrick’s theo- hibits kink solutions [2], whose asymptotic values φ(+∞) rem [9], which uses a scaling argument to show that spe- and φ(−∞) are different. In two spatial dimensions, with cific finite-energy configurations only exist in specific spa- a complex scalar field coupling to a U(1) gauge field, lo- tial dimensions, no longer applies. Moreover, the source calized vortex solutions exist for which the scalar field term also appears in the conservation law of topologi- is depleted at locations where the magnetic flux pene- cal charges, so field configurations in different topological trates [3]. Other nontrivial field configurations exist in classes become connected via the external source. Since higher dimensions when the gauge group is nonabelian, we are living in a universe that is filled with matter, and such as monopoles in three spatial dimensions [4, 5] and possibly dark matter [10], it is important to also consider instantons in four spatial dimensions [6]. Nonperturba- field configurations in the presence of external sources. tive field configurations are not topologically equivalent As an example of smooth and localized sources, this pa- to the trivial vacuum, in the sense that they cannot be per will focus on an isolated Gaussian. Sources of other obtained by continuously deforming of the vacuum at a profiles, which will be briefly discussed in Sec. IV, lead finite energy cost. Moreover, configurations that have to similar features. On a microscopic scale, the Gaus- different topological charges are also disconnected from sian source may approximate the wave packet of a single each other in perturbation theory, so each topologically particle; On a macroscopic scale, the Gaussian source arXiv:2107.04206v1 [hep-ph] 9 Jul 2021 equivalent class must be included separately in path inte- may approximate the averaged distribution of an aggre- grals [7]. Accounting for nonperturbative configurations gated amount of matter. Regardless of the physical origin may lead to additional terms in the effective Lagrangian, of the source term, the resultant spherically symmetric which may have profound consequences, including break- static field configuration in D spatial dimension satisfies ing the fundamental symmetries of the field theory [8]. ∂2φ D − 1 ∂φ ∂U + = + S , (1) In this paper, I will show that additional nonpertur- ∂r2 r ∂r ∂φ bative field configurations exist in the presence of ex- ternal sources. External sources arise when one focuses where U(φ) is the self interaction potential and S (r) on a subsystem of a bigger problem. A familiar exam- is the source term. The physical significance of static ple is the Coulomb potential, which acquires a nontriv- field configurations is that they provide low-energy ial configuration when external charges are prescribed. descriptions of the φ-mediated interaction between a test particle and the external source when their rela- tive motion is nonrelativistic. For a Gaussain source, S = (α/aDπD/2) exp(−r2/a2), which becomes a D- ∗ [email protected] dimensional δ-function when a → 0. Knowing φ due 2 to the δ-function source is sufficient for linear theories, Among an infinite number of solutions to the static in which potentials resultant from other sources can be field equation, only a countable number of potentials have constructed using convolutions. However, in nonlinear finite energy. The energy of a given field configuration R D 1 2 1 2 theories, the behavior of φ is qualitatively different for is E = d x[ 2 (∂tφ) + 2 (∇φ) + U + S φ], and the sources of different size a and strength α. The goal of time derivative vanishes for static field configurations. this paper is to map out the behaviors of φ in the source For spherically symmetric source and potentials, E = 2 2−D size-strength parameter space. v m σD−1H, where σD is the surface area of the unit R ∞ D−1 Apart from the external source, the other key ingredi- D-sphere, and the normalized energy H = 0 dρρ E. ent for nontrivial field configurations is the nonlinearity, The normalized energy density is which enters via the self interaction potential. A particu- 1 1 larly important case is the Maxican-hat potential which, E = p2 + (q2 − 1)2 + Sq, (4) up to some shifts and rescalings, can be written as 2 8 2 2 λ where S = S0 exp(−ρ /R ). The extremum of H, which U = (φ2 − v2)2, (2) satisfies δH/δq = 0, leads to Eq. (3). To have a finite en- 4! ergy, the potential must be well behaved near the origin, where the constant v > 0 is the vacuum expectation value which is possible because the smoothness of the source (VEV) and the coupling constant λ > 0 so that the the- regularizes the behavior of q at ρ ∼ 0. Then, a finite ory is temporally stable. The Maxican-hat potential is energy only requires that E approaches zero faster than often prescribed to model spontaneous symmetry break- ρ−D when ρ → ∞. Since S falls off rapidly, the energy ing: There exist two degenerate ground states φ = ±v is finite as long as q approaches ±1 faster than ρ−D/2. in the absence of source terms. Spontaneous symmetry In fact, when the source term vanishes and q → ±1, the breaking plays an important role in field theories. For potentials becomes the Yukawa potential, which falls off example, in the phenomenological model of superconduc- as ∼ exp(−ρ)/ρ(D−1)/2 when ρ → ∞. Therefore, the tivity [11], a U(1) version of the spontaneous symmetry spherically symmetric potential is of finite energy if and breaking emulates effects of Cooper-pair formation below only if p(0) = 0 and q(∞) = ±1. the superconducting transition temperature [12]. More- For a given boundary condition, the existence and over, in the standard model of particle physics, an SU(2) uniqueness of finite-energy potentials (FEPs) are not version of the spontaneous symmetry breaking is invoked guaranteed. To see why, notice that as a classical dynam- to explain a finite Higgs VEV that endows elementary ical system, Eq. (3) has three fixed points in the qp-phase particles with their masses [13]. space at (0, 0) and (±1, 0) when S0 = 0. While (0, 0) is Given the source and the nonlinearity as two key ingre- a stable fixed point, (±1, 0) are unstable saddle points. dients, to study classical potentials, namely, static field In other words, the boundary conditions q(∞) = ±1, configurations, it is convenient to nondimensionalized the which may lead to FEPs that are stable against tempo- field equation. In the natural units ~ = c = 1, since the ral fluctuations, are associated with solutions that are R D 1 2 unpredictable against spatial uncertainties. This intrigu- action dtd x[ 2 (∂µφ) − U − S φ] is dimensionless, φ has the mass dimension (D − 1)/2. Then, in Eq. (2), ing situation, although perhaps not surprising, may be v has the same unit as φ, the self coupling λ has the better appreciated through the following thought exper- mass dimension 3 − D, and the strength of the Gaus- iment: Suppose an experimentalist measures the Higgs sian source α has the mass dimension (3 − D)/2. Thus, expectation value hφi to be v1 near the sea level of Earth, a natural scheme to nondimensionalize Eq. (1) is to de- which serves as a localized source; and another experi- fine q = φ/v, ρ = rm, R = am, and A = αmD−2/v. mentalist, who lives on the top of a mountain, measures Here, m = vpλ/3 is the mass of φ, and m2 is defined hφi to be v2. Then, if there is any uncertainty in the as ∂2U/∂φ2 at the minimum of U. The static field equa- measurements, one cannot reliably predict what hφi is at tion can then be put into a form that is reminiscent of the edge of the solar system, without assuming that the classical dynamical systems in phase space: classical field is in a finite-energy configuration. As will be shown in this paper, it turns out that ex- D − 1 1 2 2 actly how many different FEPs exist depends on both p˙ + p = q(q2 − 1) + S e−ρ /R , (3) ρ 2 0 the size R and the strength A of the source, as well as the dimensionality D of the problem. Due to symme- D D/2 wherep ˙ = dp/dρ, p = dq/dρ, and S0 = A/R π . No- tries of Eq. (3), we can assume without loss of generality tice that the equation is invariant under q → −q, p → −p, that A ≥ 0. Then, there always exist a unique ground and A → −A. Therefore, it is sufficient to consider the state configuration with q(∞) = −1. The situation is case A ≥ 0. Moreover, notice that when ρ → −ρ the more subtle for q(∞) = 1, which corresponds to excited equation is invariant under q → q and p → −p. There- states. For example, in one spatial dimension (1D), there fore, we can focus on q(ρ) that is an even function. The exist two FEPs with q(∞) = 1 when A < Ac, while no limit ρ → 0 is well behaved if p(0) ∼ ρ. Alternatively, FEP with q(∞) = 1 when A > Ac (Sec. II). The critical −γ q ' cρ . Matching the leading divergence requires value Ac √' 1 for R  1; and for R  1, Ac is such that 2 γ = 1 and c = 2(3 − D), which is possible when D < 3. S0 ' 1/3 3. The behavior is different in higher spatial 3 dimensions (Sec. III): When R  1 there always exist a R  1, two of the four FEPs exhibit light√ horizons when unique FEP with q(∞) = 1; When R  1, there is also the√ source strength satisfies (D − 1) 2e/(3R) < S0 . a unique FEP with q(∞) = 1 if A < Ac1 or A > Ac2. 1/3 3, where e is the base of natural logarithm. In However, when Ac1 < A < Ac2, there exist three different this 1210 phase, the larger light horizon has a radius of p FEPs with q(∞) = 1. ρc ' R ln[(3RS0)/(D − 1)] and the smaller light hori- The R-A parameter space can thus be divided into zon has a radius of ρc ' (D − 1)/(3S0). Notice that ρc different phases, which will be mapped out completely in is potentially macroscopic. Moreover, it is worth not- this paper by combining asymptotic and numerical so- ing that the critical source density for reaching the 1210 lutions. As an informative name, each phase will be la- phase decreases with R (Sec. IV). For a source of size + + − − + 14 3 beled by a four-digit number N+ N− N− N+ , where N+ a ∼ 1 m, the critical mass density ∼ 10 kg/m is enor- is the number of FEPs with q(0) > 0 and q(∞) = 1, mous for the Higgs field in 3D, so usual objects in our + N− is the number of FEPs with q(0) < 0 and q(∞) = 1, daily life are well within the perturbative phase. On the and so on. Obviously, the sum of four digits is the to- other hand, when a ∼ 106 km, which is on the order of tal number of FEPs in that phase. For example, in 1D, the solar radius, the critical mass density is reduced to the region R  1 and A < 1 is the 1110 phase, while ∼ 105 kg/m3, which suggests that stars are not far away the region R  1 and A > 1 is the 0010 phase. In from reaching the nonperturbative phase. Indeed, white addition to relying on asymptotic solutions for R  1 dwarfs and neutron stars are likely within the 1210 phase or R  1, numerical solutions are used to map out the where light horizons exist, whose outer radii are typically phase boundaries when R ∼ 1. A nominal second-order a few times the star sizes. In Sec. IV, physical implica- algorithm is constructed using a central difference scheme tions of nonperturbative FEPs will be discussed both for 2 by approximatingq ¨(ρn) ' (qn+1 − 2qn + qn−1)/h and the Higgs field and other effective fields. q˙(ρn) ' (qn+1 − qn−1)/(2h), where qn = q(ρn), ρn = nh for n ∈ N, and h is the step size. The step size is taken to be h = ε min(1,R), which resolves both the intrinsic II. POTENTIALS IN ONE DIMENSION scale of the nonlinear problem ρ ∼ 1, and the scale length of the source ρ ∼ R. At any finite h, numerical conver- Building upon the kink solutions, let us first con- gence is inevitably poor near the saddle points. Nev- sider potentials in 1D. Since the singular term p/ρ is ertheless, away from the saddle points, numerical results absent from Eq. (3), 1D potentials are special. Nev- −3 −2 are hardly distinguishable for ε = 10 and ε = 10 , the ertheless, many features of 1D potentials are preserved later of which is used for all numerical results reported in in higher dimensions. In particular, notice that when this paper. For given R and A values, initial conditions ρ → ∞, the source term vanishes and Eq. (3) approaches q(0) and p(0) are scanned to search for boundaries across q¨ = q(q2 − 1)/2, which is integrable. Therefore, no which numerical solutions transition from oscillatory to chaotic behavior is expected for a localized source term, divergent, and these phase-space boundaries correspond and static potentials are asymptotic to the 1D case when to FEPs. Subsequently, the source parameters R and ρ → ∞. The general solutions to the 1D source-free prob- A are scanned to determine parameter-space boundaries lem are given by Jacobi elliptic functions, which are peri- across which FEPs exhibit distinct phases. odic and possibly divergent. Except for the special case In addition to discrete jumps of the number of FEPs, where the period of elliptic functions is infinite, which there also exist softer phase transitions, which can be corresponds to the kink solutions, the total energy of characterized using the radius of light horizons as an classical potentials are infinite. order parameter. A light horizon is a sphere in D- Key results that will be shown in this section are sum- dimensional space where q(ρc) = 0, which is a gener- marized here: (i) When R  1, the system is in the alization of domain walls for kink solutions. To see how 0010 1110 phase when A < A1110 and in the 0010 phase when light horizons emerge, naively, q(∞) = 1 is slightly de- A > A0010. The phase boundary is pleted by a weak source; and for a stronger source, the 1110 0010 VEV is depleted more. A light horizon emerges when the A1110 ' 1, (5) source exceeds a critical strength, beyond which q crosses zero. When φ is the Higgs field, all elementary particles which is independent of R. In the 1110 phase, there exists become massless at the light horizon where they move one FEP that exhibits a light horizon with radius at the speed of light, therefore the name “light horizon”. √ ρc ' 2 arctanh 1 − A, (6) Since solutions to Eq. (3) are smooth, q2 is noticeably depleted in a thin spherical shell surrounding ρc, whose which diverges as √ρc ∼ ln(4/A) when A → 0 and ter- thickness ∆ρ is at least the Compton wavelength. The minates as ρc ∼ 2 1 − A when A increases towards 1. exact values of ρc and ∆ρ, and whether the light horizon (ii) When R  1, the system transitions through the exists at all, again depend on R and A. 1110, 2010, and 0010 phases as A increases. The phase As a nonperturbative effect, the light horizon may boundaries are have a radius that is much larger than the Compton rπ R rπ R wavelength. For example (Sec. III), when D > 1 and A2010 ' ,A0010 ' . (7) 1110 6 3 2010 3 3 4

In the 1110 phase, there exists one nonperturbative FEP horizon thickness is ∆ρ ∼ 2, which is on the order of the that exhibits a light horizon with radius Compton wavelength.√ When A is slightly below 1, the or- der parameter ρ ∼ 2 1 − A shows a typical phase tran- s c 1 (2 + θ)qc sition behavior and the critical exponent is 1/2. When ρc ' arcsinh − , (8) A further decreases towards 0, the light horizon radius k 2q∞ diverges as ρc ∼ ln(4/A), which manifests the nonper- √ turbative nature of q+. which diverges as ρ ∼ ln(2/ S ) when S → 0 and − c √ 0 0 The above results have three notable features. First, terminates as ρ ∼ 65/4 S − S when S increases to- c c 0 0 √ there exist two solutions with the same boundary condi- wards the 1110-2010 phase boundary S = 1/3 6. In c tion q(∞) = 1 while only one solution with q(∞) = −1 the above formula, q is the largest positive root of ∞ for A > 0. In other words, the sign of the source term 1 q (q2 −1)+S = 0, q = −q +f < 0 is the critical ini- 2 ∞ ∞ 0 c ∞ dictates the behaviors of FEPs, which are not uniquely p 2 tial value for the nonperturbative FEP, f = 2(1 − q∞), determined by the boundary condition. Second, the po- and θ = (q∞ − qc)/(q∞ + qc). The thickness of the light√ tential due to a localized source is not necessarily short p 2 horizon is ∆ρ ∼ 1/k, where k = (3q∞ − 1)/8 > 1/2 2 ranged as the Yukawa potential ∆q ∼ exp(−|ρ|). For the in the 1110 phase where the light horizon exists. (iii) + nonperturbative q−, the influence of the source, which Numerical results are summarized in Fig. 3, which shows causes FEPs to deviate from the VEVs, is barely felt un- no additional phase when R ∼ 1. In other words, the 1D til possibly a large distance ρc away. Nevertheless, notice problem has three phases in total, and one FEP has a that the depletion of q2 only occurs within a thin layer light horizon, whose radius diverges logarithmically when whose thickness is on the order of the Compton wave- the source strength diminishes. + length. Third, the q± solutions cease to exist when the source strength is too large. In other words, for a strong source, there is no FEP that has the asymptotic value A. Asymptotic solutions for R  1 q(∞) = 1. In fact, when A > 1, any potential with q > −1 at some ρ will diverge at a finite distance. In this regime, the source term may be approximated The three FEPs have different total energy: The − + as a delta function, which gives the solution an instan- ground state is q−, the first excited state is q+, and the taneous kick at the origin. Away from ρ = 0, the 1D + top state is q−. To evaluate the total energy, substitute equationq ¨ = q(q2 − 1)/2 can be integrated to give the field configurations [Eqs. (9) and (10)] into the nor- 2 1 4 1 2 dρ(p − 4 q + 2 q ) = 0. For FEPs, q → ±1 and malized energy density [Eq. (4)], which can be simplified p → 0 when ρ → ∞, so the integration constant is 1/4. using the fact that p2 = 1 (q2 − 1)2. Then, integrating 2 1 2 2 4 Then, the FEPs satisfy p = 4 (q − 1) in the q-p phase space (Fig. 1a, thick black), which can be further in- tegrated to find q(ρ). The four possible solutions are 1 1 q = ± tanh 2 (ρ − ρ0) and q = ± coth 2 (ρ − ρ0), where ρ0 is some constant. Connecting solutions for ρ > 0 and ρ < 0 with the conditions that q(0+) = q(0−) and p(0+) − p(0−) = A > 0, three solutions can be con- structed. The solution with q < −1 is (Fig. 1, purple) √ − qc − tanh |ρ|/2 q− = , qc = − 1 + A, (9) 1 − qc tanh |ρ|/2 whose asymptotic value is −1 when ρ → ∞. Notice that − the q− solution exist for all A ≥ 0. The remaining two solutions satisfy |q| < 1 and are given by FIG. 1. (a) The 1D source-free case contains three fixed points (black dots). The island boundaries and separatrices (thick 2 1 2 2 √ black) are given by p = 4 (q − 1) . The δ-function source + qc + tanh |ρ|/2 q± = , qc = ± 1 − A, (10) gives solutions a kick ∆p = A at ρ = 0. (b) Except for the 1 + qc tanh |ρ|/2 + + − three special cases q+ (orange), q− (blue), and q− (purple), kicks either land inside the island resulting in oscillatory so- whose asymptotic values are both +1 when ρ → ∞. No- lutions (cyan), or land outside the island causing divergent + √ tice that the q± solutions exist only when A ≤ 1. Based solutions (red). (c) A constant source S0 < 1/3 3 deforms on the behaviors of qc, the boundary between the 1110 the phase-space island and maintains three fixed points. (d) A + √ and 0010 phases is given by Eq. (5). The q+ solution constant S0 > 1/3 3 causes two fixed points to annihilate and (Fig. 1, orange) is perturbative when A → 0. In con- destroys the phase-space island. The island boundaries and trast, the q+ solution (Fig. 1, blue), which hops from separatrices (thick black) that pass through the fixed point − 1 2 q ∼ −1 to q ∼ 1, is nonperturbative. The hopping oc- (Q, 0), which satisfies 2 Q(Q − 1) + S0 = 0, are given by 2 1 2 2 2 curs at the light horizon whose radius can be solved from p = 4 (q − Q) [(q + Q) + 2(Q − 1)]. The solutions are in + general of infinite energy. q−(ρc) = 0, and the solution gives Eq. (6). The light 5 over ρ, which picks up half the contribution from the density E ' ±S. Integrating the Gaussian source in D- δ-function source, the normalized energy is dimensional space, the total energy is 1 1 A D  H− = (1 + q3),H+ = (1 − q3), (11) H± ' ± Γ , (13) − 3 c ± 3 c a 2πD/2 2 − + where qc is the critical initial condition of q− and q±, where Γ is the gamma function. In the perturbative − + + regime, the two adiabatic FEPs have approximately respectively. Notice that H− ≤ 0 ≤ H+ ≤ H− . More- − + equal and opposite energy, which is independent of R, over, H− and H− are monotonously decreasing functions + and the energy split increases linearly with A . of A, whereas H+ is monotonously increasing. When A → 0, the lowest two states become degenerate with In addition to the adiabatic solutions, there also exists − + + a nonperturbative solution that hops between the VEVs. H− = H+ = 0, whereas the excited state H− = 2/3 reaches the highest energy. On the other hand, when Similar to Sec. II A, when A > 0, the hopping solution A → 1 approaches the 1110-0010 phase boundary, the can only jump from −1 to +1, but not vice versa. When − + hopping occurs on a scale that is much smaller than R, two excited states become degenerate with H− = H+ = + the√ source term√ may be regarded as a constant. For S0 < 1/3. Beyond the phase boundary, the q± solutions no − 1/3 3, let 1/ 3 < q∞ < 1 be the largest fixed point. longer exist, while H keeps on decreasing. 2 − Then, integrating the 1D equationq ¨ = q(q − 1)/2 + S0, 2 1 2 the FEP with q(∞) = q∞ satisfies p = 4 (q − q∞) (q − qb)(q − qc), where qb = −q∞ − f, qc = −q∞ + f, and B. Asymptotic solutions for R  1 p 2 f = 2(1 − q∞). Further integrating this equation for qc < q < q∞ gives the hopping solution In this regime, the source is much larger than the 2 Compton wavelength. Therefore, the instantaneous fixed (2 + θ)qc + 2q∞ sinh kρ points, which satisfy 1 q(q2−1)+S = 0, are being dragged qh = , (14) 2 θ + 2 cosh2 kρ adiabatically as the source slowly ramps off. Notice√ that there are three real roots when 0 ≤ S < 1/3 3, and p 2 √ where θ = (q∞ − qc)/(q∞ + qc) and k = (3q − 1)/8. only one real root when S > 1/3 3. Therefore, the 0010 ∞ We see qh(ρ) varies on the scale ∆ρ ∼ 1/k, which phase boundary is given by Eq. (7). Below the phase √ goes to infinity when q∞ → 1/ 3. The hopping solu- boundary, the adiabatic solutions can be written as tion monotonously increases from the initial condition 2 ψ + 2πn q(0) = qc, which lies between the two smaller fixed points, qa = √ cos , (12) to the largest fixed point q . After reaching q , the so- 3 ∞ ∞ 3 lution then tracks the adiabatic solution q+ as the source √ a where ψ = arccos(−3 3S) is a function of ρ and n is slowly ramps off. The above approximations is the domi- an integer. When ρ → ∞, S → 0, so q (n = 0) → 1, nant balance of Eq. (3) when kR  1. In other words, as a long as the adiabatic solutions are good approximations, qa(n = 1) → −1, and qa(n = 2) → 0. Therefore, only the n = 0 and n = 1 solutions, which will be re- qh is also a good asymptotic solution. + − The hopping solution exhibits a light horizon when ferred to as qa and qa , correspond to FEPs. To see p under what conditions is Eq. (12) the dominant balance qc < 0. This√ occurs when q∞ > 2/3, which corresponds of Eq. (3), take ρ derivative on both sides of the cu- to S0 < 1/3 6. Therefore, the 1110-2010 phase bound- bic equation, which givesq ˙ = 2S/˙ (1 − 3q2) andq ¨ = ary is given by Eq. (7). The light horizon radius can be a a a solved from q (ρ ) = 0, and the solution ρ gives Eq. (8). 2S/¨ (1−3q2)+24q S˙ 2/(1−3q2)3. For the Gaussian source, h c c a a a To see the asymptotic behavior of ρ when S → 0, no- S˙ = −2ρS/R2 and S¨ = (2S/R2)(2ρ2/R2 − 1), so the left √ c 0 √ tice that q∞ ∼ 1 − S0, f ∼ 2 S0, qc ∼ −1, θ ∼ 1/ S0, hand side (LHS) of Eq. (3) becomesq ¨a + (D − 1)q ˙a/ρ = and k ∼ 1 . Since arcsinh x ∼ ln(2x) when x → +∞, {4S/[R2(1 − 3q2)]}{(2ρ2/R2)[1 + 12q S/(1 − 3q2)2] − D}. 2 √ a a a we see ρ ∼ ln(2/ S ) diverges logarithmically when We see LHS  S when R2(3q2 − 1)  1, if the term in c 0 a S → 0. In the opposite limit, when S increases to- the second braces is O(1). In other words, for sufficiently 0 0 √ 2 wards the 1110-2010 phase boundary Sc = 1/3 6, we large R and away from q = 1/3, the adiabatic solutions p asymptotically solve Eq. (3) within the source region. On can write q∞ ∼ 2/3 + ε where ε = 2(Sc − S0) → 0. p √ the other hand, outside the source region, ∆q approaches Then, f ∼ 2/3 − 2ε, qc ∼ −3ε, θ ∼ 1, and k ∼ 1√/2 2. 3/4 the Yukawa potential, which decays exponentially on the Since√ arcsinh x ∼ x when x → 0, we see ρc ∼ 6 3ε = 5/4 scale of the Compton wavelength. 6 Sc − S0. The adiabatic solutions are valid in all spatial dimen- The energy of the hopping solution, which is always sions, and their total energy is easy to estimate in the larger than the energy of adiabatic solutions, has a sim- ± perturbative regime. Notice that when both qa exist, ple approximation when S0 → 0. To lowest order, √ 2 2 √ S0 ≤ 1/3 3 ≈ 0.2 is small. Therefore, we can treat qh ' (sinh ρ/2−V )/(cosh ρ/2+V ), where V = 1/2 S0. 1 2 S as a perturbation. Then, to lowest order, the adia- When V  1, the kinetic energy 2 p roughly equals to ± 1 2 2 batic solutions qa ' ±1 − S, and the normalized energy the self potential energy 8 (q − 1) , which dominates the 6 external potential energy Sq. Then, the energy density the lower left separatrix to the upper. In general, the so- 2 2 2 2 2 4 Eh ' V (sinh ρ/2 + cosh ρ/2) /(cosh ρ/2 + V ) . The lutions are either oscillatory (cyan), which occurs inside R ∞ integral Hh = 0 dρEh can be carried out exactly. How- the island, or divergent (red), which occurs outside the is- ever, since the approximation is only valid when V  1, land. In the opposite√ limit R → ∞, for a constant source it is sufficient to keep the leading terms with S0 < 1/3 3, there exist three fixed points and a √ phase-space island (Fig. 1c). The perturbative FEPs are 2 1 3arcsinh V  the adiabatic solutions that track the saddle points, while Hh ' 1 − + 2 + ... . (15) 3 V 2V the nonperturbative FEP travels along√ the island bound- ary. In comparison, when S > 1/3 3, only one saddle We can write H = 2g/3, where the factor g(V ) ∼ 1. In 0 h point remains (Fig. 1d), which gives rise to the the only other words, H only has a weak dependence on S = h 0 FEP with q(∞) = −1. These phase-space pictures give 1/4V 2. Check that in the limit S → 0, H → 2/3 coin- 0 h intuitive explanations for results in Sec. II A and II B. cides with the case of a δ-function source H+ [Eq. (11)]. − Based on the pictures for the special cases R = 0 and This is expected because when the source vanishes, the R = ∞, it is now easy to understand the problem at fi- energy of the nonperturbative FEP is agnostics of the nite R. In this case, due to the explicit ρ dependence, the source size. phase portrait is not well defined. Nevertheless, by scan- While exhibiting some notable differences, solutions for ning the initial conditions in the q -p space, features that R  1 have many features in common with R  1. In 0 0 are analogous to phase-space islands and separatrices can both cases, when the source is weak, there exists a single be identified (Fig. 2). For (q , p ) within the island, so- FEP with q(∞) = −1, and two FEPs with q(∞) = 1, one 0 0 lutions are oscillatory when ρ  R. On the other hand, of which is perturbative and the other is nonperturbative. beyond the island boundaries, solutions are divergent. At The nonperturbative FEP is the highest-energy state and finite ρ, q → +∞ outside the island boundary marked by hops from the lower VEV to the upper within a layer of “+”, while q → −∞ outside the boundary marked by thickness ∆ρ. When the critical initial condition q < 0, c “◦”. The island boundary is divided into the “+” and the hopping solution exhibits a light horizon whose radius “◦” segments by two separatrices marked by “•”. For ρ ∼ ln(1/A) and thickness ∆ρ ∼ 1 when A ∼ 0. As A c (q , p ) above the separatrix, q → +∞, while below the increases, q for the hopping solution becomes positive 0 0 c separatrix, q → −∞. When R = 0.01 (Fig. 2a), the when R  1, giving rise to a 2010 phase where the light portraits are similar to the δ-function-source case. For horizon no longer exists. Nevertheless, in the 2010 phase, a larger A, the island is displaced further downward, so the scale length of the nonperturbative FEP is ∆ρ → R that it can be restored to the source-free case by the when A → A0010. We see in both the 1110 and the 2010 2010 ∆p = A/2 kick when ρ increases from 0. Likewise, when phases, the nonperturbative FEP varies on scales that R = 100 (Fig. 2c), the portraits closely resemble the are much larger than the Compton wavelength. Finally, constant-source case. As A increases, the island shrinks when A further increases, the two FEPs with q(∞) = 1 and eventually vanishes. Notice that when R  1, solu- extinct when A exceeds the phase boundary. tions with (q0, p0) immediately outside the island always diverges to +∞. Finally, when R ≈ 2.37 (Fig. 2b), we see C. Numerical results an intermediate behavior: As A increases, the island is shifted downwards. At the same time, the left separatrix gradually peels off the island, while the right side of the In the intermediate regime R ∼ 1, all terms of Eq. (3) island narrows and merges into the right separatrix. are comparable, and the nonlinear equation is solved nu- Having understood the 1D problem as a classical dy- merically to mapped out the phase diagram. Notice that namical system, we can return to the analysis of spher- in 1D, ρ is defined also for ρ < 0. Therefore, to capture a ically symetric potentials, for which p(0) = 0. Then, it more complete picture, we can relax the constraint that is sufficient to focus on the q axis, where the islands the initial condition p(0) is zero. Then, regarding Eq. (3) 0 and separatrices cross at qc. Solutions with the initial as a classical dynamical system, its behavior can be an- condition (q , p ) = (q , 0) approach q(∞) = ±1, and alyzed in the q-p phase space. 0 0 c yield FEPs. From the q0-p0 phase portraits, it is easy The q-p phase portraits are well defined for a δ-function to see that three FEPs exist for small A, two of which source and a constant source, for which Eq. (3) has no ex- come from the upper island boundary while the third plicit ρ dependence. For the δ-function source (Fig. 1a), comes from the left separatrix. On the other hand, when the phase portrait is the same as the source-free case, A increases above a threshold, only the separatrix FEP except for a ∆p = A > 0 kick at ρ = 0. The two FEPs remains. The threshold, namely, the 0010 phase bound- with q(∞) = 1 are the results of the two ways of kicking ary (Fig. 3a, orange) is mapped out by bisecting A at the solution from the lower island boundary to the upper a given R, and numerical results match the asymptotic (orange and blue). Since the p width of the island is 1, results (dashed black) given by Eqs. (5) and (7). To il- we see A = 1 is the critical value beyond which no kick lustrate the discontinuous nature of the phase transition, can both start and end on the island boundaries. On three examples of qc(A) are shown in Figs. 3b-3d. In the other hand, the FEP with q(∞) = −1 always exists these figures, the island boundaries are marked by “+”, (purple), which is obtained by kicking the solution from 7

FIG. 2. (a) Numerically obtained q0-p0 phase portraits for small R = 0.01, which are closely related to the δ-function- source case, are displaced downwards to compensate for the ∆p = A/2 kick when ρ increases from 0. (b) At intermediate R ≈ 2.37, in addition to displacements, the left separatrix gradually peels off the island, whose right side slims into the right separatrix. (c) At large R = 100, the phase portraits closely resembles the constant-source case. For larger A, the FIG. 3. (a) For the 1D problem, the R-A phase diagram is left separatrix detaches and the island shrinks. The separatri- constituted of three phases. In the 1110 phase (pink), three ces are marked by “•”, which divide the island boundary into FEPs exist, one of which is nonperturbative and exhibits a two segments. Outside the segment marked by “+”, solutions light horizon, whose radius ρc is shown in the inset. In the diverges to +∞, while outside the boundary marked by “◦”, 2010 phase (brown), the light horizon disappears; and in the solutions diverges to −∞; Within the island, solutions are os- 0010 phase (white), only the FEP with q(∞) = −1 (“ ” cillatory. FEPs are solutions whose initial conditions are on marker) remains. As illustrated by the three examples at island boundaries or separatrices. R = 0.01 (b, e), R ≈ 2.37 (c, f), and R = 100 (d, g), the critical initial condition qc and the light horizon radius ρc are two order parameters: The two FEPs with q(∞) = +1 (“+” indicating q(∞) = +1, and the separatrices are marked marker) annihilate when A reaches the 0010 phase; ρc termi- by “ ”, indicating q(∞) = −1. The dashed black lines nates when A enters the 2010 phase. (h) At R = 100, example solutions when A is in the 1110 (dark green) and 2010 (light are asymptotic results, which match numerical results for green) phases match asymptotic expressions when the FEP R  1 and R  1. Regarding qc as an order parameter, is the adiabatic [Eq. (12), dashed] and the hopping [Eq. (14), we see the two upper FEPs annihilate when A reaches dotted] solutions. Black lines are asymptotic results, and col- the 0010 phase. ored markers are numerical data. In addition to discrete jumps of the number of FEPs, softer phase transitions can also be identified using the light horizon radius ρc as another order param- with q(∞) = +1 annihilate. We see whenever the non- eter (Fig. 3a, inset). Since q(ρ) is continuous and perturvative FEP exists, it varies on scales that are much monotonous, it is easy to see that ρc exists only for the larger than the Compton wavelength. “+” solutions when qc ≤ 0. The condition qc = 0 de- termines the 1110-2010 phase boundary (Fig. 3a, red), whose asymptotic expression is given by Eq. (7) when III. POTENTIALS IN HIGHER DIMENSIONS R  1 (dashed black). To illustrate the 1110-2010 phase transition, examples of ρc(A) are shown in Figs. 3e- In higher dimensions, although nontrivial vacuum field 3g, where the dashed black lines are asymptotic results configuration does not exist according to Derrick’s the- [Eqs. (6) and (8)]. When A increases towards the phase orem, nonperturbative FEPs are possible in the pres- boundary Ac, instead of gradually falling√ off, the light ence of a source term, which allow tunneling between horizon radius terminates sharply as ρc ∼ Ac − A. In the VEVs. In contrast to the 1D case where there is at the opposite limit, ρc ∼ ln(1/A) diverges logarithmically most one nonperturbative FEP, up to three nonperturba- when A → 0, which is clearly a nonperturbative behavior. tive FEPs can exist in higher dimensions. Moreover, in Across the light horizon, the FEP passes q = 0 within a higher dimensions, there always exist at least one FEP layer of thickness ∆ρ ∼ O(1), and an example solution with q(∞) = +1, unlike in the 1D case where such a is shown in Fig. 3h (dark green) when R = 100 and potential ceases to exist for sufficiently large A. The dif- A = 10, where the dotted black line is the asymptotic ferences originate from the singular term p/ρ, which sub- result [Eq. (14)]. The thickness of the hopping layer, stantially changes the R-A phase diagram. Nevertheless, where q(ρ) changes rapidly, increases with A. After A some essential features are preserved: For given bound- reaches the 2010 phase, the light horizon disappears, but ary conditions, the FEPs are not always unique, and non- the nonperturbative FEP continues to exist, for which an perturbative FEPs, whenever exist, span on scales that example is shown in Fig. 3h (light green) when A = 30. are much larger than the Compton wavelength. The thickness ∆ρ ∼ O(R) when A increases towards the Key results that will be shown in this section are sum- 2010-0010 phase boundary, beyond which the two FEPs marized here: (i) When R  1, the system transitions 8 from the 1010 phase to the 0110 phase when A increases A. Asymptotic solutions for R  1 0110 beyond A1010. In both phases, there is a unique FEP with q(∞) = −1 and a unique FEP with q(∞) = +1. Unlike the 1D case, a δ-function source does not cap- The phase boundaries in 2D and 3D are ture the full picture when R → 0 in higher dimensions. 2π This is because the term (D−1)p/ρ diverges when ρ → 0, A0110(D = 2) ' , (16) which competes with the divergence of the source term 1010 ln(2/R) − γ/2 when R → 0. Asymptotic solutions for R  1 may be 2πR A0110(D = 3) ' √ , (17) divided into several regions, and in each region, the domi- 1010 1/ π − R/2 nant balance of Eq. (3) is given by a different set of terms. In particular, near the phase boundary A ∼ A0110, the where γ is the Euler–Mascheroni constant. Notice that 1010 0110 solutions can be divided into inner and outer regions. A1010 → 0 when R → 0, which means that a δ-function In the inner region, the nonlinear term can be ignored; source is always in the 0110 phase. In this phase, one while in the outer region, the source term is subdominant FEP exhibits a light horizon, whose radius ρc is on the and the nonlinear term can be linearized. By matching order of the Compton wavelength. (ii) When R  1, the inner and outer solutions in their common region of the D-dimensional system transitions though 1010, 1210, validity, global asymptotic solutions can be constructed. 2110, and 0110 phases as A increases, where the phase The exact behaviors in 2D and 3D are different, which boundaries are given by will be discuss below separately. D − 1√ A1210 ' 2eπDRD−1, (18) 1010 3 1. 2D solutions near phase transition D/2 2110 0110 π D A1210 . A2110 ' √ R , (19) 3 3 In the inner region, the source term diverges when where e is the base of the natural logarithm. Notice that R → 0 for a fixed A. However, q ∼ O(1) remains fi- 1210 D−1 2110 D nite near the 1010-0110 phase boundary, which means A1010 ∝ R while A1210 ∝ R . Therefore, as R in- creases, the onset of the 1210 phase occurs at lower den- that the nonlinear term is subdominant. Then, the dom- inant balance of Eq. (3) is given by the linear equation sity S0, and the 1210 phase becomes wider. In the 1210 phase, two FEPs hop from q < 0 to q > 0 at different q¨ +q/ρ ˙ ' S. The homogeneous problem can be eas- ily integrated to give p ∝ 1/ρ. For the inhomogeneous radii ρ±, whose lowest-order approximations are problem, suppose p(ρ) = c(ρ)/ρ, thenc ˙ = ρS. This r 3RS0 equation can be integrated for the Gaussian source to ρ ' R ln , (20) 2 2 + D − 1 give c = c0 + (A/2π)[1 − exp(−ρ /R )]. The integration constant c = 0, because of the initial condition p(0) = 0 D − 1 0 ρ− ' , (21) for spherically symmetric potentials. Then, for the dom- 3S0 inant balance to hold near the 1010-0110 phase bound- ary, the condition p/ρ  1 is satisfied if ρ  pA/2π. when ρ± is not much larger than R. At the 1010-1210 Within this region where the above dominant balance is phase boundary, the exact values of ρ± equal. As S0 valid, further integrating p =q ˙ with q(0) = q gives the increases from the boundary, ρ+ grows logarithmically, 0 asymptotic solution in the inner region while ρ− drops to zero at the 1210-2110 phase bound- ary, near which Eq. (21) is no longer a good approxima- A h ρ2  ρ2 i tion. The two nonperturbative FEPs have different en- q ' q + γ + ln + E , (22) in 0 4π R2 1 R2 ergy H+ < H−, which means that a larger light horizon is always energetically more favorable. Near the 1010-1210 where γ is the Euler–Mascheroni constant and E1(z) = − + R ∞ boundary, Ha < Ha < H+ < H−, which means that z dt exp(−t)/t is an exponential integral. Check that in + the adiabatic FEP qa is the first excited state. However, the limit z → 0, E1(z) ' −γ − ln z + z + ... , so qin → q0 for slightly larger A values, the energy levels cross and as demanded. In the opposite limit z → ∞, E1(z) ' − + Ha < H+ < Ha < H−, which means the nonperturba- exp(−z)/z + ... is subdominant, so qin ' (A/2π) ln ρ + tive FEP q+ becomes the first excited state. (iii) Numer- q0+(A/4π)(γ−2 ln R)+... . We see that qin depends on ρ ical results are summarized in Fig. 5 and Fig. 6. When logarithmically when ρ → ∞. This asymptotic behavior R ∼ 1, there exist an additional 0310 phase, wherein will be used to match with the outer solution. three FEPs exhibit light horizons. In total, there are five In the outer region ρ  R, the source term S ∝ phases, and in every phase there are at least two FEPs, exp(−ρ2/R2) falls off rapidly, so the equation quickly ap- one with q(∞) = −1 and the other with q(∞) = +1. proaches the source-free problem. According to Derrick’s Except for the 1010 phase where A is small, all other theorem, there is no nontrivial vacuum field configura- phases have at least one FEP with a light horizon. Con- tions in 2D. Therefore, the FEPs must be close to the trary to what happens in 1D, light horizons emerge when VEVs. We can then expand q = ±1 + y, where |y|  1 is the source strength is above a critical value in higher di- perturbative. To lowest order, y satisfiesy ¨+y/ρ ˙ −y ' 0, mensions. and the general solutions are given by the modified Bessel 9 functions K0 and I0. Using the boundary condition In the outer region, we can expand q = ±1 + y where y → 0 when ρ → ∞, only K0 contributes, so y ' BK0(ρ) |y|  1. To lowest order, y satisfiesy ¨+2y/ρ ˙ −y ' 0, and where B is some constant. To determine B, notice that the general solutions are given by the modified spherical in the limit ρ → 0, K0(ρ) ' − ln ρ + (ln 2 − γ) + ... . Bessel functions k0 and i0. Using the boundary condition In other words, qout(ρ → 0) matches the ln ρ behavior of y(∞) = 0, only k0 contributes so y ' Bk0(ρ), where B qin(ρ → ∞). Asymptotic matching gives B = −A/2π, is determined by asymptotically matching. Using the and the outer solution is the Yukawa potential exact special case k0(ρ) = π exp(−ρ)/2ρ, the solution in the outer region ρ  R is given by the Yukawa potential A q ' ±1 − K (ρ). (23) out 2π 0 A q ' ±1 − e−ρ. (26) out 4πρ Matching the inner and outer solutions to the next order, A and q0 become related. In other words, similar to the To the next order, matching the inner and outer solutions 1D case, the critical initial conditions that lead to FEPs gives the critical initial conditions for the two FEPs are not arbitrary, but are given by A 1 1  A  2 γ  qc ' ±1 + − √ , (27) q ' ±1 − ln − . (24) 2π 2 πR c 2π R 2

which can be substituted into Eq. (25) to give qin ' ±1+ Substituting qc into Eq. (22), qin ' ±1 + (A/2π)[γ + 1 1 2 2 (A/4π)[1 − ρ erf(ρ/R)]. The “−” solution, which satisfies ln(ρ/2)+ 2 E1(ρ /R )]. While the “−” solution is always below −1, the “+” solution, which satisfies q(∞) = +1, q(∞) = −1, is always below −1. In contrast, the “+” solution, which satisfies q(∞) = 1, crosses zero at ρ ∼ exhibits a light horizon with radius ρc ∼ O(1) when- c O(1) if q < 0. Hence, the 1010-0110 phase boundary ever qc < 0. Hence, the 1010-0110 phase boundary is c is given by the condition q = 0, which gives Eq. (17). given by the condition qc = 0, which yields the critical c Near the phase boundary, ρ is well approximated by source strength Ac in Eq. (16). When A → Ac, ρc may c the root of q = 0, whose limiting behavior is ρ → be approximated as the root of qin = 0, whose limiting in c p p 3/2 p form is ρc → 2R π(1/Ac − 1/A). Finally, as a posteri- R (6π R)(1/Ac − 1/A) ' R 3(1 − Ac/A). Similar 2 ori check, notice that Ac decreases as 1/ ln(1/R)  R to the 2D case, the asymptotic expressions give better when R → 0. Therefore, the region of validity for the approximations for smaller R. inner solution, which is given by ρ  pA/2π, overlaps better with the region of validity for the outer solution, which is given by ρ  R. Consequently, the asymptotic B. Asymptotic solutions for R  1 expressions give better approximations when the source size is smaller. Similar to the 1D case, there exist two adiabatic solu- tions [Eq. (12)], which track the saddle points, as well as hopping solutions, which tunnel from q ∼ −1 to q ∼ +1. 2. 3D solutions near phase transition However, due to the singular term p/ρ, 1D-like hopping can no longer occur near ρ ∼ 0. This is because for 1D- Following similar procedures, we can find the asymp- like hopping, q, p,p ˙ and S are all of order O(1) near the totic solutions in 3D near the 1010-0110 phase bound- light horizon. Then, for a small ρ, the only large term in ary. In the inner region, the dominant balance of Eq. (3) would be p/ρ, which cannot be balanced. Never- Eq. (3) isq ¨ + 2q/ρ ˙ ' S. The homogeneous problem theless, there are two scenarios to balance the equation is solved by p ∝ 1/ρ2, and the inhomogeneous prob- in higher dimensions: Either 1D-like hopping occurs at 2 2 lem is solved by p(ρ) = c(ρ)/ρ wherec ˙ = ρ S. In- some large value ρ∗, or p goes to zero sufficiently fast at tegratingc ˙ with the initial condition p(0) = 0, we small ρ. The second scenario may be grossly approxi- 3/2 √ 2 have c = (A/π )[( π/4)erf(ξ)−(ξ/2) exp(−ξ )], where mated by the first in the limit ρ∗ → 0. √ R ξ 2 Now, let us find an approximation to the hopping so- ξ = ρ/R and erf(ξ) = (2/ π) 0 dt exp(−t ) is the error function. Further integrating p =q ˙ with the initial con- lutions. Since the solution is continuous, there exist some ρ∗ near which q crosses −1. The goal is to find dition q(0) = q0 yields the inner solution equations that determine the unknown ρ . Suppose the √ ∗ A h πR  ρ i width of the crossing layer ∆ρ  ρ∗, then we can expand q ' q + 1 − erf , (25) in 0 2Rπ3/2 2ρ R ρ = ρ∗ + x and q = −1 + y. To lowest order, Eq. (3) be- comesy ¨ + (D − 1)y/ρ ˙ ∗ − y ' S∗ + S˙∗x, where S∗ and 1/3 S˙ are the source term and its derivative evaluated at which√ is valid for ρ  (A/2π) . When ρ → 0, erf(ξ) ' ∗ 3 ρ . For this linearized equation, the homogeneous prob- (2/ π)(ξ − ξ /3 + ... ), so qin → q0 as demanded.√ In the ∗ 2 lem is solved by y ∝ exp(ωx), and the eigenvalues are opposite limit ρ → ∞, erf(ξ) ' √1 − exp(−ξ )/ πξ + ... , 3/2 p 2 so qin ' q0 + (A/2π )(1/R − π/2ρ + ... ), which will ω± = ± η + 1 − η, where η = (D − 1)/2ρ∗  1. The be used to match with the outer solution. general solution to the inhomogeneous problem is given 10

3 2 by y = −S∗ − (2η + x)S˙∗ + C+ exp(ω+x) + C− exp(ω−x), root may be approximated as ξ ' (2µ −1)/(2µ −1) ∼ µ, p where C± will be determined by asymptotic matching. where µ = ln(1/) gives the outer ρ∗ in Eq. (20). On When ρ∗  1, the hopping solution is constituted of the other hand, the smaller root may be approximated as four layers: the lower adiabatic layer, the crossing layer, ξ ' [exp(2) − 22]/(1 − 22) ∼ , which gives the inner the 1D hopping layer, and the upper adiabatic layer. To ρ∗ in Eq. (21). Notice that although  is small, ρ∗ ' R match the lower adiabatic and crossing layers, notice that may still satisfy ρ∗  1 because R is larger, which is ω+ > 0 and ω− < 0, so we need C− = 0 to avoid the ex- required for the approximations to be valid. ponentially divergent behavior when x → −∞. Next, to The conditions whereby two real roots exist give the match the crossing and 1D hopping layers, we need an lower and upper boundaries of the 1210√ phase. Notice exponential approximation to Eq. (14). Notice that when that the maximum of ξ exp(−ξ2) is 1/ 2e. Therefore, q∞ ∼ 1, we have qc ∼ −1, k ∼ 1/2 and θ  1. Then, in when S0 is too small such that  exceeds the maxi- the intermediate regime where kx  1 and exp(kx)  θ, mum,√ the two solutions no longer exist. The condition we can approximate qh(x) ' −1 + exp(2kx)/θ. Compar-  = 1/ 2e marks the 1010-1210 phase boundary, which ing this with the expression for y, in the crossing layer gives Eq. (18). In the opposite√ limit, when S0 is too large, q decreases towards 1/ 3, in which case the RHS of e2kx ∞ q ' −1 − S − (2η + x)S˙ + . (28) Eq. (30) goes to zero. Then, the smaller root decreases cross ∗ ∗ θ towards ρ∗ = 0. In this√ case S∗ becomes S0, and the Matching the exponents requires ω+ = 2k. Notice that critical value S0 = 1/3 3 gives Eq. (19) as the upper ω+ depends on ρ∗ through η, while k also depends on ρ∗ boundary of the 1210 phase. Notice that in the 1210 through q∞. To lowest order, q∞ may be estimated from phase, S0 . 0.2 is small, so the assumption that S∗  1 S∗. However, notice that the 1D hopping layer width is always justified. However, when ρ∗ → 0, 1D hopping is may be large, so instead of expanding S at ρ∗, estimat- no longer a good approximation. As A increases beyond ing q∞ from S at ρ0 = ρ∗ + βρ1 gives a better approx- the upper boundary of the 1210 phase, the inner hopping imation. Here, β is a weighting parameter, and ρ1 is solution moves upwards and merges with the upper adi- given by Eq. (8) after replacing S0 with S(ρ0). Then, abatic solution, so a narrow 2110 phase appears before the equations that determine the crossing radius ρ∗ are the system reaches the 0110 phase. Finally, using the approximate crossing radius, the to- 1 2 q∞(q∞ − 1) + S(ρ0) = 0, (29) tal energy of hopping FEPs can be estimated. Since 2 the crossing layer is narrow, its energy contribution is r 2 D−1h  2ρ∗  i − p 2 subdominant, and the total energy H± ' Ha (ρ < 1 + − 1 = 2(3q∞ − 1), (30) + ρ∗ D−1 ρ0) + Ha (ρ > ρ0) + H0. The first term is the con- which require numerical root finding for a given β. For tribution from the lower adiabatic layer. Following Sec. II B, its energy density E ' −S. Integrating E in small S0, the above equations have no real root, and − D-dimensional space from ρ = 0 to ρ = ρ0, Ha (ρ < hence there is no hopping FEP for weak sources. How- D/2 2 2 ρ0) ' −(A/2π )γ(D/2, ρ /R ), where γ(a, z) = ever, for intermediate S0, the above equations have two 0 R z dt ta−1 exp(−t) is the lower incomplete gamma func- real roots, which correspond to two hopping FEPs with 0 tion. Similarly, the second term is the contribution from different light horizon radii. Finally, for large S0, there the upper adiabatic layer. Integrating E' S from ρ = ρ0 is a single real root, so a nonperturbative FEP always + D/2 2 2 exists for strong sources. The light horizon radius is to ρ = ∞, Ha (ρ > ρ0) ' (A/2π )Γ(D/2, ρ0/R ), where Γ(a, z) = R ∞ dt ta−1 exp(−t) is the upper incom- ρc = ρ∗ + ρ1, which is usually dominated by the ρ∗, z and the thickness of the hopping layer ∆ρ is 1D like. No- plete gamma function. Finally, the third term H0 is the contribution from the 1D hopping layer. Integrating the tice Eq. (29) is valid when ρ∗ is not much larger than R D−1 1D energy density, H0 = dρ ρ Eh now contains a R. Otherwise, q∞ should be estimated from the Yukawa surface contribution. Since the hopping width ∆ρ  ρ∗, potential, which is valid outside the source region. D−1 Without relying on numerical root finding, the cross- we can approximate H0 ' ρ0 Hh, where Hh is given ing radius may be estimated asymptotically. To lowest by Eq. (15). Then, summing the three contributions, the order, we can take the weighing parameter β to be zero. total energy of hopping FEPs is Then, q∞ ' 1 − S∗ when S∗  1. Substituting this into 2 A h D ρ2  1 D i Eq. (30), we see its right-hand side (RHS) is ' 2 − 3S . H ' ρD−1 + Γ , 0 − Γ . (31) ∗ ± 3 0 πD/2 2 R2 2 2 On the LHS, notice that the function is monotonously increasing with the asymptotic value 2. Hence the so- To see how the energy depends on the source strength, + D−1 D−1 2 lution to Eq. (30) satisfies ρ∗  1, which justifies this 3(H± − Ha )/R ' 2ξ − [(D − 1)/]γ(D/2, ξ ) approximation to the hopping solution a posteriori. In may be regarded as a function of  = (D − 1)/(3RS0) the limit ρ∗ → ∞, LHS' 2−(D−1)/ρ∗. Then, the equa- if ξ = ρ0/R is approximated using Eqs. (20) and (21). tion becomes (D − 1)/ρ∗ ' 3S∗, which can be written as Then, above the 1010-1210 phase boundary, it is not dif- 2 − ξ exp(−ξ ) ' , where ξ = ρ∗/R and  = (D − 1)/(3RS0) ficult to see that Ha < H+ < H−, which means that the − is a small parameter. It is clear that when   1, the ground state is always the adiabatic qa and the FEP with transcendental equation has two real roots. The larger a larger light horizon always has lower energy. More- 11

a + over, using γ(a, z) ' z /a when z → 0, H− − Ha ' 2(R)D−1/3D > 0. In other words, the highest-energy state is always the nonperturbative q−. However, the or- + dering of Ha and H+ depends on the source strength: + Ha < H+ if and only if S0 < Sc, where Sc may be esti- mated from 2µD−1 ' (D−1) exp(µ2)γ(D/2, µ2). Solving for µ2 = ln(1/), the asymptotic roots can be written in terms of c(D = 2) ' exp[2/(1 − e)] ≈ 0√.31, and c(D = 3) ' exp[1/(1 − ς)] ≈ 0.38, where ς√= e πerf(1)/2. No- tice that in the 1210 phase  < 1/ 2e ≈ 0.43, so level crossings occur within the 1210 phase and near its lower boundary. In other words, not far above the 1010-1210 boundary, the nonperturbative q+ becomes the first ex- cited state, in contrast to what happens in 1D where the + adiabatic qa is always the first excited state.

C. Numerical results

Since the behaviors in 2D and 3D are qualitatively sim- ilar, to keep the discussion compact, parts of the numer- ical results will only be shown for 2D, while complemen- tary results will be shown for 3D, which are obtained us- FIG. 4. Example finite-energy potentials (FEPs), critical ini- ing the following method. First, for a given R and A with tial condition qc, light horizon radius ρc, and normalized en- p0 = 0, the initial condition q0 is scanned to search for ergy H at R = 0.01 and R = 100 in 3D. Whenever applicable, boundaries across which numerical solutions to Eq. (3) asymptotic expressions (black) match numerical results (col- 0110 transition from divergent to oscillatory. On each bound- ored). (a) Two FEPs exist when A ≈ 0.14 & A1010. The ary, the critical initial value qc, which is determined using asymptotic solutions are constituted of the inner [Eq. (25), dashed] and outer [Eq. (26), dotted] layers. (b) Four FEPs bisection, gives rise to a FEP. Notice that at any finite 5 precision, since the VEVs are saddle points of the dy- exist when A ≈ 5.5 × 10 is in the 1210 phase. The hopping solutions tunnel between the adiabatic solutions [Eq. (12), namical system, numerical solutions always oscillate or dashed] via the crossing [Eq. (28), dash-dot] and hopping diverge at finite ρf , which goes to infinity only when [Eq. (14), dotted] layers. (c) When R  1, qc decreases lin- q0 → qc. For results reported here, the precision |q0 − qc| 3/2 early with A [Eq. (27), dashed] for A . O(4π R), while is set to target for ρf > 5 max(1,R), which ensures that 1/3 qc scales with A (dotted) in the nonperturbative regime both the Compton and source scales are captured at a 1 3 2 q + S ' 0. (d) When R  1, qc for the adiabatic so- manageable numerical cost. For each FEP, its energy is lutions is given by the largest and smallest real roots of estimated by numerically integrating Eq. (4) from ρ = 0 1 2 2 qc(qc − 1) + S0 ' 0 (dashed). (e) Near the phase boundary, to ρ =ρ ˜f < ρf , where E(˜ρf ) is the first local minimum p 0110 ρc → R 3(1 − A1010/A) (dashed) may be determined from after H has reached a plateau. Moreover, when the FEP the inner layer qin(ρc) = 0. (f) In the 1210 phase, ρc has two exhibits a light horizon, its radius ρc is estimated from possible values correspond to ρ± [Eqs. (20) and (21)]. The the numerical solution. Second, using qc and ρc as two crossing radii are estimated as roots of Eqs. (29) and (30) with order parameters, phases in the R-A parameter space are β = 0.95 (dashed). (g) In the perturbative regime, H ∼ O(A) identified. At a given R, the order parameters are com- and q− and q+ are the ground and excited states, respectively. puted as multi-valued functions of A. Then, bisections (h) In the 1210 phase, the energy levels of hopping [Eq. (31), dash-dot] and adiabatic [Eq. (13), dashed] FEPs cross near are used to determine phase boundaries Ac, across which A = (2π3/2/3)R2 ≈ 9.8R2 (gray). the number of qc and ρc values jumps. Finally, R is scanned to map out the R-A parameter space. Since the behaviors for R  1 and R  1 are known asymptot- ically, which match numerical results (Fig. 4), scanning the 0110 (white), 1010 (gray), and 1210 (bisque) phases. R between 0.01 and 100 is sufficient to characterize the A fourth 2110 phase appears between the 1210 and 0110 entire R-A parameter space. For R ≤ 10, numerical solu- phases as a narrow stripe (purple). The numerical phase tions with a decimal precision of 28 is usually sufficient, boundaries (colored dots) approach asymptotic results but for larger R, the decimal precision is set to 125 or (dashed black) when R → 0 and R → ∞. In the inter- higher in order to resolve the 1210 phase, which shows mediate region R ∼ 1, the phase diagram is constituted of up as a narrow secondary island. an additional 0310 phase (green), which is bordered with The 2D phase diagram and examples of the underlying other phases via a double point and two quadruple points order parameters are shown in Fig. 5. The R-A parame- (Fig. 5a, insets). On the left is the double point, where a ter space (Fig. 5a) is constituted of three major regions: wedge of the 0310 phase cuts into the 0110 phase. In the 12 middle is a quadruple point where the 0110, 0310, 1210, there are four FEPs, three of them exhibit light horizons. and 1010 phases meet. On the right is another quadru- Notice that at each A, there is no longer a unique solution ple point, where the 0310 phase attenuates while the 2110 for a given boundary condition. The situation is similar phase emerges between the 0110 and 1210 phases. The in the 1210 phase, except that only two of the four FEPs five phases have distinct features, as characterized by the have light horizons. Finally, in the 2110 phase, there are critical initial condition qc (Fig. 5b-5e) and the light hori- again four FEPs and one of them has a light horizon. No- zon radius ρc (Fig. 5f-5i). In the 1010 phase, there are tice that at large R, the two FEPs in the 0110 phase have two values of qc at each A. The upper (lower) qc leads to infinitesimally close qc when A → ∞. In other words, two a FEP with q(∞) = +1(−1), and neither FEP has a light potentials with hardly distinguishable initial conditions horizon. In comparison, in the 0110 phase, there are also bifurcate towards disparate boundary values. two FEPs, but now the upper FEP exhibits a light hori- The 3D phase diagram, together with example FEPs zon. While the 1010-0110 phase transition only changes and the normalized energy are shown in Fig. 6. For small the number of light horizons, the 0110-0310 phase transi- R (Fig. 6b), there is a unique FEP for a given boundary tions also change the number of FEPs: In the 0310 phase, condition at each A. For example, at A ≈ 14.9 (solid orange), the potentials are noticeably depleted from the

FIG. 5. (a) The 2D R-A phase diagram is constituted of five phases, whose asymptotic boundaries (dashed black) match numerical results (colored dots). (b) R = 1 shows an example FIG. 6. (a) The 3D R-A phase diagram is also constituted of qc at small R near the 1010 (gray) and 0110 (white) phase of five phases, whose asymptotic boundaries (dashed black) boundary. In this regime, there are always two critical ini- match numerical results (colored dots). (b) As shown by ex- tial conditions, one of which leads to a finite-energy-potential ample solutions at R = 1, in the 1010 (A ≈ 14.9, orange) (FEP) with q(∞) = +1 (“+” marker) while the other leads and 0110 (A = 21.6, red) phases, there is a unique finite- to a FEP with q(∞) = −1 (“◦” marker). (c) R ≈ 1.9 and energy-potential (FEP) with q(∞) = ±1. (c) At intermediate (d) R ≈ 2.1 show two examples at intermediate R, where R ≈ 4.1, the 0310 phase emerges, where three FEPs have the 0310 (green) and 1210 (bisque) phases emerge. In these q(∞) = +1 when A ≈ 192.7. (d) The situation is similar at phases, there are four qc values for each A. (e) R ≈ 13.3 larger R ≈ 4.3 in the 1210 phase, except that the upper FEP shows an example at large R, where the “+” branch folds to- no longer exhibits a light horizon when A ≈ 208.0. (e) At wards the “◦” branch on the left while bulges up on the right, large R ≈ 17.8 and A ≈ 7005.1, the 2110 phase appears. The giving rise to a narrow 2110 phase (purple). (f) Whenever two upper FEPs merge whereas the two lower FEPs split as qc < 0, the FEP with q(∞) = 1 exhibits a light horizon with ρ increases. In these figures, black arrows indicate the direc- radius ρc. For small R, ρc is a single valued function of A and tions towards which the FEPs move when A increases. (f) 0 − + the derivative ρc > 0 at Ac. (g) At intermediate R, ρc folds Energy of the lower FEP H decreases with A, whereas H back and becomes a triple-valued function in the 0310 phase. is not monotonous. (g) At intermediate R, H+ folds up near (h) At larger R, ρc folds further back and is double valued in the maximum, and two additional energy levels arise in the 0 the 1210 phase. (i) When R  1, the derivative ρc(Ac) < 0 0310 phase (green). (h) The four energy levels extend further changes sign, and ρc(A) transitions from a double-valued to a in the 1210 phase (bisque) at large R. (i) For even larger R, single-valued function above the 1210-2110 phase boundary. the 0310 phase is replaced by the 2110 phase (purple). 13

VEVs on the Compton scale; At larger A = 21.6 (dashed ample, when studying electronic structures of materials, red), the potentials are depleted further, and the upper atomic nuclei are usually prescribed, which provide ex- FEP crosses zero, giving rise to a light horizon. While ternal Coulomb potentials for electrons. As another ex- the energy for the lower branch H− monotonously de- ample, in fluid dynamics, a boundary foreign to the flow creases with A, the energy for the upper branch H+ has set a scale for the Reynolds number, which determines a maximum near A ≈ 28 in the 0110 phase (Fig. 6f). The whether the flow is in the laminar, vortex, or turbulent decreasing behavior is expected, because at large A where phases. Here, the external source, which may originate 1 3 S  1, the dominant balance of Eq. (3) is 2 q + S ' 0, from other particles and interactions, allow a FEP to so the solution q ' −(2S)1/3 becomes universal. Then, tunnel between VEVs by providing the necessary activa- the energy density [Eq. (4)] is dominated by the Sq term, tion. Regardless of its exact functional form, the source which is negative and decreases with A. It is worth noting has certain characteristic size and strength. Since these that the energy splitting H+ − H− always increases with parameters introduce additional scales, interesting phe- A. While these large-scale trends of H± remain the same nomena can occur in the presence of external sources. for all cases, extra details develop near the maximum of For small sources, they give instantaneous kicks, while H+ for larger R. For example, at R ≈ 4.1 (Fig. 6g), for large sources, they adiabatically deform the VEVs, the H+ branch folds back sharply and two additional en- which can spill over into another local minimum when ergy levels emerge in the 0310 phase. In this phase, three the deformation is strong enough. A remarkable conse- FEPs have the same boundary value q(∞) = 1, and ex- quence is that FEPs can vary on scales that are much ample solutions are shown in Fig. 6c when A ≈ 192.7. larger than the Compton wavelength. The FEPs are similar in the 1210 phase when R ≈ 4.3 To show that qualitative features of nonperturbative and A ≈ 208.0 (Fig. 6d), except that the upper FEP potentials are preserved for other source profiles, let us 2 2 no longer exhibits a light horizon. Near the 1010-1210 use a Lorentzian source S = S0/(1 + ρ /R ) as an exam- boundary, the upper adiabatic FEP is the first excited ple. Consider the 1210 phase in D ≥ 1 dimensions when state and the outer hopping FEP is the second excited R  1. Then, the hopping potentials are constituted state (Fig. 6h, inset). However, the energy ordering is of the four layers described in Sec. III B. To connect the switched at larger A. This switching behavior remains for layers, one again solves for Eqs. (29) and (30), except larger sources, for example at R ≈ 17.8 (Fig. 6i), except that now the source profile is Lorentzian. Denoting S∗ that a shrinking 0310 phase is replaced by an expanding the source strength at the crossing radius ρ∗, then in the 2110 phase, in which the inner light horizon disappears. limit S∗  1, the equations are well approximated by 2 In the 2110 phase, as shown in Fig. 6e where A ≈ 7005.1, (D − 1)/ρ∗ ' 3S∗, which can be written as ξ + 1 ' ξ/, the two upper FEPs merge whereas the two lower FEPs where ξ = ρ∗/R and  = (D − 1)/(3RS0). The con- split when ρ increases. After A surpasses the 2110-0110 dition that real roots exist is  ≤ 1/2, so the asymp- phase boundary, the two upper FEPs annihilate while totic 1010-1210 phase boundary is Sc ' 2(D − 1)/(3R), the two lower FEPs split at ever larger radius. which decreases linearly with R. Hence, up to some O(1) D constants with S0 ∼ A/R , the phase boundary for a Lorentzian source is the same as that for a Gaussian D−1 IV. DISCUSSION source [Eq. (18)], which scales as Ac ∝ R . Within the 1210 phase when   1, the lowest-order asymp- totic expressions for the crossing radii are ξ ' 1/ and While quantitative results in this paper are specific to + ξ ' . In other words, ρ ' (3S R2)/(D − 1)  R a real scalar field with a Maxican-hat self nonlinearity − + 0 and ρ ' (D − 1)/(3S )  R. Although the exact de- under the influence of a Gaussian source, qualitative fea- − 0 pendencies on R and S0 are different from Eqs. (20) and tures of nonperturbative potentials are likely more gen- (21), we see that both Lorentzian and Gaussian sources eral, provided that the two key ingredients, namely, the allow nonperturbative hopping potentials, whose scales nonlinearity and the source, are present. First, for mul- are potentially well beyond the Compton wavelength. tiple FEPs to exist, the nonlinearity should allow more The nonperturbative potentials may be realized in than one local minimum at which a vacuum field con- many physical systems. For example, in condensed mat- figuration is stable. A stable minimum against temporal ter systems, impurities may serve as source terms, and fluctuations is a saddle point for static spatial configu- the effective field theory may contain nonlinearities that rations, which means that any slight deviation from the allow for spontaneous symmetry breaking. Notably, in VEV will lead to runaway distortions that allow the field the Ginzburg-Landau model of superconductivity [11], to hop spatially from one VEV to another. Second, for the nonlinearity is exactly of the Maxican-hat type below the hopping to occur at a finite energy cost, an external the critical temperature, albeit that the effective field of source is often necessary. This is because different VEV Cooper pairs is a complex scalar field, which may allow may be associated with different topological charges, so additional vortex-like nonperturbative states. Changes tunneling between VEVs may require breaking topologi- to the Cooper-pair field φ may be induced by an iso- cal invariance, which is possible with an external source. lated impurity or simply an electrode, whose size and The source term, which may seem artificial, arises when strength may be controlled experimentally. Here, the one focuses on a subsystem of a bigger problem. For ex- 14

TABLE I. Example sources for the Higgs field in 3D. The source distribution is assumed to be a spherical Gaussian, which may be inaccurate but sufficient for order-of-magnitude estimations. The estimates are made using asymptotic expressions whenever applicable and numerical solutions otherwise. In most cases, the Higgs is in the perturbative 1010 phase, and the ratio A/Ac 1210 0110 indicates the distance from the phase boundary, where Ac = A1010 (Ac = A1010) for R > 1 (R < 1). rc is the light horizon radius, which is present only in nonperturbative phases. E0 is the energy of the ground-state configuration, and ∆E is the gap between the ground and the first excited states. As reference scales, contemporary inertial confinement fusion experiments 6 16 10 input ∼ 10 J; Hydrogen bombs release ∼ 10 J; supernovae release ∼ 10 L ·yr, where L is the solar luminosity.

Source size R mass A A/Ac phase rc −E0 ∆E hypothetical fermion 0.2 am a 0.1 103 GeV 100 100 0110 0.2 am b 103 GeV 103 GeV top quark 1 am a 0.7 173 GeV 10−1 10−2 1010 102 GeV 102 GeV 12C 3 fm 2 × 103 11.3 GeV 10−4 10−11 1010 10−1 GeV 10−1 GeV 197Au 8 fm 5 × 103 185 GeV 10−3 10−11 1010 100 GeV 100 GeV electron 0.4 pm a 2 × 105 0.511 MeV 10−6 10−18 1010 100 MeV 100 MeV fusion stagnation 50 µm 3 × 1013 1 mg 1016 10−12 1010 109 J 109 J uranium ball 1 m 6 × 1017 80 t 1027 10−10 1010 1020 J 1020 J 22 52 8 11 4 neutron star 10 km 10 1.5M 10 10 1210 40 µm, 50 km 10 L ·yr 10 L ·yr 3 24 24 47 −3 5 6 earth 6 × 10 km 4 × 10 6 × 10 kg 10 10 1010 10 L ·yr 10 L ·yr 4 25 52 2 4 11 10 white dwarf 10 km 10 0.6M 10 10 1210 70 km, 2×10 km 10 L ·yr 10 L ·yr 4 25 27 49 −3 8 8 Jupiter 7 × 10 km 4 × 10 2 × 10 kg 10 10 1010 10 L ·yr 10 L ·yr 26 52 −2 11 11 Sun R 4 × 10 M 10 10 1010 10 L ·yr 10 L ·yr 29 53 −6 12 12 supergiant 500R 10 15M 10 10 1010 10 L ·yr 10 L ·yr c 38 9 61 −17 20 20 dwarf galaxy halo 25 kpc 10 10 M 10 10 1010 10 L ·yr 10 L ·yr c 40 12 64 −16 23 23 Milky Way halo 280 kpc 10 10 M 10 10 1010 10 L ·yr 10 L ·yr a The scales of elementary fermions are estimated using their Compton wavelengths. b For heavier fermions, the light horizon radius is on the order of the Higgs Compton wavelength λc ∼ 1 am. c Dark matter and baryonic matter are assumed to have comparable coupling with the Higgs. The size and mass are virial.

size should be compared to the Compton wavelength λ∗ give order-of-magnitude estimations regarding when non- associated with the effective mass m∗. For small sources perturbative effects become important for the Higgs field in D ≥ 2 dimensions, the field configuration is perhaps and its beyond-standard-model extensions [16]. Taking not very interesting: The local disturbance of φ decays parameters for the Higgs field [17], v ≈ 246 GeV and m ≈ exponentially on the scale of λ∗. However, interesting 125 GeV, which corresponds to a Compton wavelength −18 phenomenon may occur, for example, in a 1D nanowire of λc = ~/mc ≈1.6 × 10 m. In 3D, the normalized [14]: When the impurity strength is below a critical value, source strength is A = αm/v. To see how α might be there exists an excited state of φ such that the Cooper interpreted, notice that elementary fermions couple to ¯ pairs are depleted at a distance rc  λ∗ away from the the Higgs field via Lf = −mf ffφ/v where mf is the source, and rc increases when the impurity strength di- fermion mass. Comparing Lf to Eq. (4), the source term ¯ ¯ minishes. Additionally, interesting phenomena may oc- S = (mf /v)hffi, where hffi is related to the particle cur in all dimensions when the source is of larger sizes. number density. Then, α ∼ (mf /v)N, where N is the In this case, as one adjusts the source strength, horizons number of particles that constitute the source. First, and vortices may be turned on or off. Moreover, since consider elementary particles, for which N = 1. For 2 each additional FEP is associated with an extra energy low-mass fermions such as electrons, A ∼ mmf /v  1 level, properties of the material, such as the specific heat, while R ∼ m/mf  1. Then, from Fig. 6, we see φ susceptibility, and permittivity, may experience accom- is in the 1010 phase, where the unique potential is well panying phase transitions. In other words, one may be approximated by the Yukawa potential. On the other able to add or remove energy levels discontinuously by hand, for heavy fermions such that R . 1, the 1010-0110 adjusting the source parameters. Notice that such phase phase boundary is given by Eq. (17). To lowest order, 2 3/2 2 transitions are controlled by a localized source within the the critical mass is mc = 2π v , and to the next or- material, without the need of changing extrinsic global der mc ≈ 3.57v ≈ 878 GeV. Notice that the top quark parameters such as temperature and magnetic fields. mass is mf ≈ 173 GeV, so all known elementary fermions Another important example is the Higgs field. In are in the 1010 phase and the potentials are always per- the standard model of particle physics, the Higgs field turbative. However, suppose hypothetical fermions with 3 originates from a SU(2) doublet, whose nonlinear self- mass mf & 10 GeV exist, then they are in the nonper- interaction is exactly of the Maxican-hat type [13]. Al- turbative 0110 phase, for which the Higgs field vanishes though there are additional effects due to the non-abelian on a light horizon whose radius rc ∼ λc. Second, con- group [15], results for the real scalar field may be used to sider composite-particle sources, for which atomic nu- 15 clei are perhaps the most common examples [18]. Al- objects accelerate equally towards the light horizon, and though nuclei do not directly couple with the Higgs, its photons emitted from bound states are redshifted. More- constituent quarks do. Counting valance quarks only, over, the kinematics of particle interactions is altered. In N ' 3M/mp where M is the total mass of the source particular, since the W -boson mass is reduced, the Fermi and mp is the proton mass. Then, α ∼ 3Mmf /mpv, constant increases, which may change nuclear states and where mf may be estimated from the up and down their reaction rates. quark masses (mu + md)/2≈ 3.45 MeV. The normal- In summary, in the presence of symmetry-breaking −5 ized source strength is then A ∼ 2.3 × 10 MGeV ≈ nonlinearities and external sources, finite-energy configu- 22 1.3 × 10 Mkg, where MGeV and Mkg are M in units rations of a massive scalar field are not always unique for of GeV and kg, respectively. For a single nucleus, its given boundary conditions. Apart from the well known 1/3 size is a ' a0(M/mp) where a0 ≈ 1.4 fm, so R ∼ Yukawa potential, the scalar field may exhibit additional 2 1/3 nonperturbative configurations, such as the hopping po- 9 × 10 MGeV is large. We see all stable nuclei are well within the 1010 phase. However, for an aggregated tentials, which vary on scales that are much larger than amount of matter, the situation becomes more interest- the Compton wavelength. Exactly what static potentials ing. Using Eq. (18), the 1010-1210 phase boundary in are allowed depends on the source size and strength, and 1210 2 36 2 the phase diagrams in one, two, and three spatial dimen- 3D is A1010 ≈ 8.7R ≈ 3.5 × 10 am, where am is the source size in units of meter. Then, the critical mass sions are mapped out completely for an isolated Gaus- 1210 14 2 sian source by combining asymptotic and numerical so- for reaching the 1210 phase is M1010 ∼ 2.7 × 10 am kg, which is reduced by an O(1) factor if we also account lutions. Nonperturbative potentials may have observable 1210 2 consequences in many physical systems. Dynamical ef- for electrons. Since M1010 ∝ a , the Higgs field will always transitions into the 1210 phase for a sufficiently fects when sources move and fields fluctuate remain to large source at a given density. Further transitions into be explored in the future. the 2110 and 0110 phases are formidable, because the 3 53 3 requisite Ac ≈ 1.1R ≈ 2.7 × 10 am [Eq. (19)]. The cor- 31 3 DATA AND CODE AVAILABILITY responding Mc ∼ 2.1 × 10 am kg, which means that the critical density far exceeds even the nuclear matter den- sity ∼ 1017 kg/m3 and is independent of the source size. The data underlying numerical results are available A number of source examples are listed in Table. I, rang- at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5021378. The ing from microscopic particles [18], macroscopic objects computer codes used to generate and plot the data are [19, 20], astrophysical bodies [21], to galaxies [22, 23]. In available at https://github.com/seanYuanSHI/Phi4. most cases, the Higgs is well within the perturbative 1010 phase. However, for astrophysical bodies such as white dwarfs and neutron stars, the Higgs is potentially in the ACKNOWLEDGMENTS nonperturbative 1210 phase where light horizons exist. Near the light horizons, the Higgs expectation value is This work was performed under the auspices of the depleted, so the mass of all elementary particles are re- U.S. Department of Energy by Lawrence Livermore Na- duced proportionally. The resultant universal mass gra- tional Laboratory under Contract DE-AC52-07NA27344 dient mocks many effects of gravity [24]. For example, all and was supported by the Lawrence Fellowship through LLNL-LDRD Program under Project No. 19-ERD-038.

[1] E. J. Weinberg, Classical solutions in quantum field the- [7] S. Coleman, Aspects of Symmetry: Selected Erice Lec- ory: Solitons and Instantons in High Energy Physics tures (Cambridge University Press, 1985). (Cambridge University Press, 2012). [8] G. ’t Hooft, Symmetry breaking through Bell-Jackiw [2] R. F. Dashen, B. Hasslacher, and A. Neveu, Nonpertur- anomalies, Phys. Rev. Lett. 37, 8 (1976). bative methods and extended-hadron models in field the- [9] G. H. Derrick, Comments on nonlinear wave equations as ory. II. Two-dimensional models and extended hadrons, models for elementary particles, J. Math. Phys. 5, 1252 Phys. Rev. D 10, 4130 (1974). (1964). [3] A. Abrikosov, The magnetic properties of superconduct- [10] A. Arbey and F. Mahmoudi, Dark matter and the early ing alloys, J. Phys. Chem. Solids 2, 199 (1957). universe: A review, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 119, 103865 [4] G. ’t Hooft, Magnetic monopoles in unified gauge theo- (2021). ries, Nucl. Phys. B 79, 276 (1974). [11] V. L. Ginzburg and L. D. Landau, On the theory of su- [5] A. M. Polyakov, Particle spectrum in the quantum field perconductivity, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 20, 1064 (1950). theory, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. Pis. Red. 20, 430 (1974). [12] J. Bardeen, L. N. Cooper, and J. R. Schrieffer, Micro- [6] A. A. Belavin, A. M. Polyakov, A. S. Schwartz, and scopic theory of superconductivity, Phys. Rev. 106, 162 Y. S. Tyupkin, Pseudoparticle solutions of the Yang-Mills (1957). equations, Phys. Lett. B 59, 85 (1975). [13] P. W. Higgs, Broken symmetries and the masses of gauge bosons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 13, 508 (1964). 16

[14] F. Altomare and A. M. Chang, One-dimensional super- [19] J. Lindl, Development of the indirect-drive approach to conductivity in nanowires (John Wiley & Sons, 2013). inertial confinement fusion and the target physics basis [15] R. F. Dashen, B. Hasslacher, and A. Neveu, Nonper- for ignition and gain, Phys. plasmas 2, 3933 (1995). turbative methods and extended-hadron models in field [20] H. A. Bethe, The hydrogen bomb, B. Atom. Sci. 6, 99 theory. III. Four-dimensional non-Abelian models, Phys. (1950). Rev. D 10, 4138 (1974). [21] A. Norton, An Introduction to Astrophysics (The Open [16] O. Witzel, Review on composite Higgs models, Proc. Sci. University, 2002). 334, 006 (2019). [22] Y. Revaz and P. Jablonka, Pushing back the limits: de- [17] Particle Data Group, P. Zyla, R. Barnett, J. Beringer, tailed properties of dwarf galaxies in a ΛCDM universe, O. Dahl, D. Dwyer, D. Groom, C.-J. Lin, K. Lugovsky, Astron. Astrophys. 616, A96 (2018). E. Pianori, et al., Review of particle physics, Prog. Theor. [23] L. Posti and A. Helmi, Mass and shape of the Milky Exp. Phys. 2020, 083C01 (2020). Wayˆa€™s dark matter halo with globular clusters from [18] G. Choppin, J.-O. Liljenzin, J. Rydberg, and C. Ekberg, Gaia and Hubble, Astron. Astrophys. 621, A56 (2019). Radiochemistry and nuclear chemistry, 4th ed. (Elsevier, [24] Y. Shi, Force, curvature, or mass: disambiguating causes 2013). of uniform gravity, arXiv:1908.02159 (2019).