Physics Letters B 820 (2021) 136511

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Physics Letters B
www.elsevier.com/locate/physletb

A new generic and structurally stable cosmological model without

singularity ✩
Orest Hrycyna
Theoretical Physics Division, National Centre for Nuclear Research, Ludwika Pasteura 7, 02-093 Warszawa, Poland

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Dynamical systems methods are used to investigate a cosmological model with non-minimally coupled
Received 11 May 2021 scalar field and asymptotically quadratic potential function. We found that for values of the non-minimal
Received in revised form 6 July 2021 coupling constant parameter 163
< ξ < 14 there exists an unstable asymptotic de Sitter state, free from a
Accepted 6 July 2021 5
Available online 9 July 2021 parallelly propagated singularity for 24 ≤ ξ < 14 , giving rise to non-singular beginning of the universe.
Editor: M. Trodden The energy density associated with this state depends on value of the non-minimal coupling constant
and can be much smaller than the Planck energy density. For ξ = 14 we found that the initial state is in
Keywords: form of the static Einstein universe. Proposed evolutional model, contrary to the seminal Starobinsky’s
Modified theories of gravity model, do not depend on the specific choice of initial conditions in phase space, moreover, a small
Cosmology change in the model parameters do not change the evolution thus the model is generic and structurally
Dark energy stable. The values of the non-minimal coupling constant can indicate for a new fundamental symmetry
Non-minimal coupling
in the gravitational theory. We show that Jordan frame and Einstein frame formulation of the theory are
physically nonequivalent.
© 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Funded by SCOAP3 .

1. Introduction [12,13] and is required by the renormalisation of theory [9]. The

In theoretical cosmology we investigate future and past evo-
lution of the Universe. Methodological tools used to explore dy-
namical behaviour are based on models derived from the general
theory of relativity. The discovery of accelerated expansion of the
Universe [1,2] changed our understanding of the Universe and pro-
voked growing interest in dynamical dark energy models [3,4]. The
so-called quintessence idea was formulated as the simplest cosmo-
logical model filled with a scalar field and a potential function in
order to describe the current accelerated expansion of the Universe
[5–7].
The simples extension of the scalar field sector of a cosmologi-
cal theory can be obtained by inclusion the non-minimal coupling
term −ξ R φ 2 between the gravity and the scalar field with the di-
mensionless parameter ξ serving as the coupling constant [8–10].
One can find various theoretical motivations for this term. Treat-
ing the general relativity as an effective theory such contribution
naturally emerge in expansion [11]. Additionally, the non-minimal
coupling between the curvature and the scalar field appears as a
result of quantum corrections to the scalar field in curved space
✩
This work is dedicated to memory of late Marek Szydłowski who passed away
on the 8th of October 2020.
E-mail address: orest.hrycyna@ncbj.gov.pl.
non-minimal coupling is also interesting in the context of super-
string theory [14] and induced gravity [15]. From an effective the-
ory approach the coupling constant ξ becomes free parameter in
the theory and should be obtained from some general considera-
tions [16–19], from a more fundamental theory or its value should
be estimated using the observational cosmological data [20–24].
The non-minimally coupled scalar field cosmology attracted a
lot of attention by many authors over the years in the connec-
tion with an inflationary epoch and description of the current
accelerated expansion of the universe [25–37]. In connection with
the standard model of particle physics the non-minimally coupled
Higgs field plays also important role [38–41].
In the present paper, using dynamical systems methods, we
investigate dynamical behaviour of the flat Friedmann-Robertson-
Walker cosmological model filled with the non-minimally coupled
scalar field. The potential is assumed as asymptotically quadratic
function for large values of the scalar field. We investigate dynam-
ical behaviour of the theory in original Jordan frame formulation
as well as in conformally transformed Einstein frame. In the Jor-
dan frame we find generic asymptotically unstable de Sitter state
as the initial state for cosmological evolution. While in the Ein-
stein frame this sate corresponds to asymptotically stable Einstein
static universe. We show that both formulations of the theory are
physically nonequivalent.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2021.136511
0370-2693/© 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Funded by
SCOAP3 .
O. Hrycyna Physics Letters B 820 (2021) 136511

2. The model 3. An asymptotically quadratic potential function

The total action integral for the theory is composed of two parts In this section we investigate dynamics with an asymptotically
quadratic scalar field potential U (φ) → ± 12 m2 φ 2 as φ → ∞.
S = S g + Sφ , (1) Let us assume, that starting from some values of the scalar field
where the gravitational interaction is described by the pure φ > φ ∗ the potential function can be approximated as
Einstein-Hilbert action 1
 U (φ) = ± m2 φ 2 ± M 4+n φ −n ,
1 4 √ 2
Sg = d x −g R , (2)
2κ 2 where n > −2 and the second term constitutes small, asymptoti-
with the gravitational constant κ = 8π G, and the matter part of
2 cally vanishing deviation. The scalar field potential function under
investigations can be treated as the assumed approximation to po-
the theory is given by the non-minimally coupled scalar field de-
tential energy at large φ and also as a classical phenomenological
scribed by
 modification and extension to the Ratra–Peebles potential [5,6].
1 √  
Next, we introduce the following dimensionless phase space
Sφ = − d4 x − g ε∇ α φ ∇α φ + εξ R φ 2 + 2U (φ) , (3)
2 variables
√
where ε = ±1 corresponds to canonical and phantom scalar field, φ̇ 61
respectively. We work in units where c = h̄ = 1. u= , v= ,
Hφ κ φ
Variation of the total action with respect to the metric tensor
gives the field equations for the theory and dimensionless parameters describing potential function of the
scalar field
1 (φ)  2+n
R μν − g μν R = κ 2 T μν , m2 M 4+n κ
2 μ=± , α = ±2 √ ,
where the energy-momentum tensor for the non-minimally cou- H 02 H 02 6
pled scalar field is given by where H 0 is the present value of the Hubble function.
(φ) 1 Thus we obtain the energy conservation condition (4) in the
T μν = ε ∇μ φ∇ν φ − ε g μν ∇ α φ∇α φ − U (φ) g μν form
2
   
1
+ ε ξ R μν − g μν R φ 2 + ε ξ g μν φ 2 − ∇μ ∇ν φ 2 . H2 μ + α v 2+n
2 = (7)
H 02 v2 − ε (1 − 6ξ )u 2 − ε 6ξ(u + 1)2
The dynamical equation for the scalar field we obtain from the
variation δ S φ /δφ = 0 as and the acceleration equation (5) as

φ − ξ R φ − ε U  (φ) = 0 Ḣ
=−2+
1
− ε (1 − 6ξ )u 2
H2 v 2 − ε 6ξ(1 − 6ξ )
where () = d
.
dφ
− 1
(8)
Assuming the spatially flat Friedmann-Robertson-Walker metric H2  
  + 2(1 − 3ξ )μ + (2 + 3ξ n)α v 2+n .
ds2 = −dt 2 + a2 (t ) dx2 + d y 2 + dz2 , H 02

we obtain the following energy conservation condition Finally, the dynamical system describing evolution of the model
under consideration is in the following form
3 1  
H 2 = ρφ = ε φ̇ 2 + U (φ) + ε 3ξ H 2 φ 2 + ε 6ξ H φ φ̇ , (4) du Ḣ
κ2 2 = − u ( u + 1) − ( u + 6ξ ) +2
the acceleration equation d ln a H2

− 1  
κ 2 −ε(1 − 6ξ )φ̇ 2 + 4U (φ) − 6ξ φ U  (φ) H2 1 2+n (9)
Ḣ = −2H + 2
, (5) −ε μ − nα v ,
6 1 − ε ξ(1 − 6ξ )κ 2 φ 2 H 02 2
and the equation of motion for the scalar field dv
= − uv ,
  d ln a
φ̈ + 3H φ̇ + 6ξ Ḣ + 2H φ + ε U  (φ) = 0 ,
2
(6)
where evolution of the phase space curves is a function of the
where an over dot denotes differentiation with respect to the cos- natural logarithm of the scale factor.
mological time. In what follows, we are interested only in asymptotic states lo-
Dynamical equations (5) and (6) subject to the energy conser- cated at infinite values of thescalar field φ i.e. with v ∗ ≡ 0. One
vation condition (4) with a given scalar field potential function can easily check that for ξ
= 0, 16 , 14 there are three such states
√
completely describe dynamical evolution of the model. One can with u ∗ = −6ξ ± −6ξ(1 − 6ξ ) and u ∗ = − 1−4ξ , with the later
2ξ
introduce various dimensionless dynamical variables [42–46] in or-
one giving rise to de Sitter type of evolution.
der to parametrise the phase space and investigate dynamics of a
model. In the previous paper [44] it was shown that for a mono-
4. Instability of the initial de Sitter state
mial potential functions at infinite values of the scalar field there
exist generic de Sitter and Einstein–de Sitter states for a particular
3 We will investigate dynamical behaviour in the vicinity of the
value of the non-minimal coupling constant ξ = 16 . In the present
critical point
paper we are interested only in asymptotic behaviour of a limited
class of scalar field potential function, namely, a class with asymp- 2ξ
totic in the form of a quadratic potential function [46–48]. u∗ = − , v∗ = 0 .
1 − 4ξ

2
O. Hrycyna Physics Letters B 820 (2021) 136511

The energy conservation condition (7) calculated at this point gives Also, we should be aware that if the de Sitter state is reached
∗ asymptotically, then the model might not be non-singular au-
H2 (1 − 4ξ )2
= −εμ > 0, (10) tomatically. The scalar curvature invariants would be finite in
H2
0
2ξ(1 − 6ξ )(3 − 16ξ ) this case, but a parallelly propagated singularity could be present
[54,55]. Using the linearised solutions to dynamics in vicinity of
and this quantity must be positive in order to obtain the asymp-
the de Sitter state we find
totic state in the physical region of the phase space. With the
2 ∗  a −6+ 1−14ξ
vanishing acceleration equation (8) at this critical point and the Ḣ a (i ) H2
constant value of the energy conservation condition (10) we con- ≈ 2 2 u (i ) ,
a2 H0 H 0
a
clude that this state corresponds to the de Sitter type of evolution.
To determine stability conditions of the critical point under and at the de Sitter state represented by an unstable node in the
3 5
considerations we calculate eigenvalues of linearisation matrix of limit a → 0 this quantity diverges to infinity for 16 < ξ < 24 , tends
5 5
the system (9) which gives to a constant value for ξ = 24 , and vanishes for 24 < ξ < 14 . This
way we have found more stringent constraint on the non-minimal
1 2ξ
λ1 = −4 + , λ2 = , coupling constant in the model giving rise to non-singular begin-
1 − 4ξ 1 − 4ξ ning of the universe.
and the linearised solutions in the following form
5. Physics from dynamics
 a λ 1
u (a) = u ∗ + u , The general form of the energy conservation condition in a
a (i )
 a λ2 model with the FRW symmetry and an arbitrary form of matter
v (a) =  v , can be presented as
a (i )
3
where u = u (i ) − u ∗ and  v = v (i ) are the initial conditions in H 2 = ρeff < ρPl = m4Pl ,
the vicinity of the state. κ2
The stability conditions will be established with respect to ex- where we need to assume that during the evolution the effective
pansion of the model since the time parameter in dynamical equa- energy density ρeff is smaller than the Planck energy density in
tions (9) is natural logarithm of the scale factor. Combining the order to eliminate possible contributions from quantum gravity ef-
eigenvalues of the linearisation matrix with positivity of the en- fects.
ergy conservation condition at the critical point (10) we obtain the From the energy conservation condition (10) we have that at
following stability conditions of the de Sitter state: the asymptotic unstable de Sitter state
∗
H2 (1 − 4ξ )2 κ 2m4Pl
– a stable node with λ1 < 0 ∧ λ2 < 0 for = −εμ < ,
    H 02 2ξ(1 − 6ξ )(3 − 16ξ ) 3H 02
1
εμ < 0 ∧ ξ > ∨ εμ > 0 ∧ ξ < 0 , where εμ < 0 and we obtain the following inequality
4
m 2
3 (1 − 4ξ )2
– a saddle with λ1 < 0 ∧ λ2 > 0 for < 1.
    m2Pl 8π 2ξ(1 − 6ξ )(3 − 16ξ )
1 1 3
εμ < 0 ∧ 0 < ξ < ∨ εμ > 0 ∧ <ξ < , We can observe that even for the mass of the scalar field of order
6 6 16 of the Planck mass m2  m2Pl we have
– an unstable node with λ1 > 0 ∧ λ2 > 0 for
3 (1 − 4ξ )2
< 1,
3 1 8π 2ξ(1 − 6ξ )(3 − 16ξ )
εμ < 0 ∧ <ξ < .
16 4 and we can find values of the non-minimal coupling constant that
satisfy this relation and potential quantum gravity effects are ex-
We conclude that unstable de Sitter state exists for the non-
3 cluded from the model.
minimal coupling constant 16 < ξ < 14 both for the canonical and
the phantom scalar field. Additionally we obtain the asymptotic
6. The Einstein frame dynamical analysis
value of the scalar field potential function from the condition
εμ < 0 and for the canonical scalar field with ε = +1 potential
To obtain some considerable mathematical simplification of the
tends to negative values U (φ) → − 12 m2 φ 2 [44,49,50] while for the
theory one usually uses the following conformal transformation of
phantom scalar field with ε = −1 potential tends to positive values
the metric tensor
U (φ) → + 12 m2 φ 2 .
We should notice some analogies between asymptotic state
g̃ μν = 2 g μν ,
under consideration and fast-roll (or rapid-roll) inflationary state
[51–53]. The condition for rapid-roll inflation with the conformal with the conformal factor
coupling ξ = 16 is φ̇ = − H φ [52] which corresponds to the dynami-
cal variable u = −1. In our case this value of the non-minimal cou- 2 = 1 − ε ξ κ 2 φ 2 , (11)
pling is excluded since it leads to a non-hyperbolic, degenerated
where . stands for the absolute value of an argument, in order to
asymptotic state. For the de Sitter state under considerations the
2ξ relate cosmological models with a non-minimally coupled scalar
fast-roll condition is u = − 1−4ξ which gives the behaviour of the
field in, so called, the Jordan frame with its conformal counterpart
2ξ 3
scalar field as φ̇ = − 1−4ξ H φ and we obtain that for 16 < ξ < 14 at with, now, a minimally coupled scalar field in so called the Ein-
infinite values of the scalar field φ → +∞ the scalar field changes stein frame. Note that the values of the scalar field φ where the
infinitely fast with respect to the cosmological time φ̇ → −∞. conformal factor vanishes are excluded.

3
O. Hrycyna Physics Letters B 820 (2021) 136511

Now, the total action integral for the theory in the Jordan frame dt̃ = dt , ã = a .
(1) is
   We introduce the following dimensionless phase space variables
S = sgn 1 − ε ξ κ 2 φ 2 S̃ g̃ + S̃ φ , (12) √
φ̇ 61
ũ = , v= ,
where sgn(.) stands for the sign function and action integrals for H̃ φ κ φ
the theory in the Jordan frame (2) and (3) transform to
where now a dot denotes differentiation with respect to time t̃ and
 
1 4 H̃ is the Einstein frame Hubble function given by
S̃ g̃ = d x − g̃ R̃ , (13)
2κ 2
1 dã(t̃ )
and H̃ = .
   ã(t̃ ) dt̃
1 ω(φ) ˜ α ˜
S̃ φ = − d4 x − g̃ ∇ φ ∇α φ + 2Ũ (φ) , (14) Following the Jordan frame approach the dimensionless parame-
2 φ ters describing potential function of the scalar field are introduced
where  2+n
m2 M 4+n κ
1 − ε ξ(1 − 6ξ )κ φ 2 2 μ̃ = ± , α̃ = ±2 √ ,
ω(φ) = ε  2 φ, H̃ 02 H̃ 02 6
1 − εξ κ 2 φ 2
where H̃ 0 is the present value of the Hubble function in the Ein-
and the scalar field potential function stein frame. Thus, we obtain the Einstein frame energy conserva-
  U (φ) tion condition
Ũ (φ) = sgn 1 − ε ξ κ 2 φ 2  2 .    
1 − εξ κ 2 φ 2 H̃ 2 sgn v 2 − ε 6ξ v 2 μ̃ + α̃ v n+2
= 2   , (15)
H̃ 02 v 2 − ε 6ξ − ε v 2 − ε 6ξ(1 − 6ξ ) ũ 2
Using the following scalar field transformation
   and the acceleration equation
ε 1 − εξ(1 − 6ξ )κ 2 φ 2
dφ̃ = dφ ˙
H̃ v 2 − ε 6ξ(1 − 6ξ )
1 − εξ κ 2 φ 2 = −ε 3  2 ũ 2 . (16)
H̃ 2 v2 − ε 6ξ
one can normalise scalar field kinetic term in (14) and work in
canonical minimally coupled scalar field cosmology. In the present Dynamical system describing evolution of the model can be di-
approach we work in original scalar field dynamical variable in rectly found using the procedure from the Jordan frame approach,
order to directly compare dynamical behaviour of the model in but now, the evolution of the phase space curves is in the Einstein
Jordan and Einstein frames. frame scale factor ã. Again, we are interested only in the critical
We have to note that the minimally coupled phantom scalar points located at infinite values of the scalar field, i.e. atv ∗ ≡ 0.
field with ε = −1 gives rise to nonphysical ghosts (see e.g. [56]).
We find three such critical points, for ξ
= 16 , with ũ ∗ = ± − 1−6ξ
6ξ
However, in theory under considerations with non-minimally cou-
pled scalar field given by the Einstein frame action integrals (13) and ũ ∗ = − 1−2ξ6ξ
with the later one giving rise to the Einstein static
and (14) we have the following condition for the theory to be universe solution.
ghost free The asymptotic state under considerations
  2ξ
ε 1 − εξ(1 − 6ξ )κ 2 φ 2 > 0 . ũ ∗ = − , v∗ = 0 ,
1 − 6ξ
Thus, both for the canonical ε = +1 and the phantom ε = −1 non-
gives the vanishing energy conservation condition (15) and the ac-
minimally coupled scalar field we can always find values of the
celeration equation (16) as
non-minimal coupling constant ξ and phase space regions where
the theory is ghost free. ˙ ∗
H̃
In the Einstein frame the field equations are the following = 2ξ .
H̃ 2
1 − 6ξ
1 (φ)
R̃ μν − g̃ μν R̃ = κ 2 T̃ μν , One can conclude that this leads to vanishing of the Einstein frame
2
cosmological time derivative of the Hubble function
where now the energy momentum tensor for the scalar field is
˙ ∗
H̃
ω(φ) ˜ 1 ω(φ) = 0,
∇μ φ ∇˜ ν φ − ˜ α φ ∇˜ α φ − Ũ (φ) g̃ μν ,
(φ)
T̃ μν = g̃ μν ∇ H̃ 2

φ 2 φ 0

and from variation δ S̃ φ /δφ = 0 we have and give rise to the Einstein static universe.
  The eigenvalues of the linearisation matrix at this state are
ω(φ) ω (φ) ω(φ)
2 ˜φ+
 − ∇˜ α φ ∇˜ α φ − 2Ũ  (φ) = 0 . 3 − 16ξ 2ξ
φ φ φ2 λ1 = − , λ2 = ,
1 − 6ξ 1 − 6ξ
Now, we can assume the Einstein frame spatially flat FRW met-
and then the linearised solutions are
ric
 λ1
   ã
2
ds̃ = −dt̃ + ã 2 2
t̃ 2
dx + d y + dz 2 2
, ũ (ã) = ũ ∗ + ũ ,
ã(i )
 λ2
where the cosmological time and the scale factor transform ac- ã
cording to v (ã) =  v ,
ã(i )

4
O. Hrycyna Physics Letters B 820 (2021) 136511

where ũ = ũ (i ) − ũ ∗ and  v = v (i ) are the initial conditions in Fig. 1 represents the phase space diagrams of the dynamical
the vicinity of the state and ã(i ) is the initial value of the scale system (9) compactified with circle at infinity in the Jordan frame
factor in the Einstein frame. and in the Einstein frame, both, for the canonical ε = +1 and the
The stability conditions of the asymptotic Einstein static uni- phantom ε = −1 scalar field. The direction of arrows on the phase
verse are obtained from the eigenvalues of the linearisation matrix space trajectories indicates expansion of universe. The blue dots in
calculated at this state and we find that the critical point is in the the phase space diagrams for the canonical scalar field (left panel)
form of do not correspond to any particular physical state since the evo-
lution at those states is regular with finite values of the Hubble
– a stable node with λ1 < 0 ∧ λ2 < 0 for function and the acceleration equation, additionally, the scalar field
potential function vanishes at those points. One can immediately
3
ξ <0 ∨ ξ > , notice differences in evolution in the vicinity of the asymptotic
16 states under considerations, namely, the unstable de Sitter states
– a saddle with λ1 < 0 ∧ λ2 > 0 ∨ λ1 > 0 ∧ λ2 < 0 for dS − in the Jordan frame and the stable Einstein static solutions
E in the Einstein frame. We conclude that both formulations of
3 the model are physically nonequivalent since the unstable de Sit-
0<ξ < .
16 ter state in the Jordan frame is transformed in the stable Einstein
universe in the Einstein frame.
Note that a minimally coupled scalar field case with ξ = 0 is ex-
cluded from the considerations since for this value both frames 7. The special case ξ = 1
3 4
of the theory coincide. Additionally, for ξ = 16 which is the value
of conformally coupled scalar field in 5D theory of gravity [44], In this section we investigate dynamics for the special, previ-
the first eigenvalue λ1 vanishes what leads to a degenerated non- ously excluded value of the non-minimal coupling constant ξ = 14
hyperbolic critical point. for which location of the investigated asymptotic state is moved
Additionally, using the condition for the Einstein frame theory to infinity. Examination of the energy conservation condition (10)
to be ghost free we find that for values of the non-minimal cou- indicates that for this value of the parameter the physics of the
3
pling constant under considerations 16 < ξ < 14 the asymptotically asymptotic state can be completely different from the de Sitter
stable Einstein static solution is located in the ghost free region of state.
the phase space. Introducing the following projective coordinate
Now, we can show that the asymptotic Einstein static universe
in the Einstein frame indeed corresponds to the de Sitter asymp- 1 φ
û = =H
totic state in the Jordan frame. The phase space variables in the u φ̇
Einstein and the Jordan frame are in the dynamical system (9) and the following time redefinition
dφ
  
dφ d 3 α d
ũ = dt̃
, u= dt
, = −ε û v 2 + ε 1 + v 2+n , (17)
Hφ dη 4 μ d ln a
H̃ φ
with the energy conservation condition
using the following transformations between the frames
  H2 μ + α v 2+n
1 1 d = û 2 ,
dt̃ = dt , H̃ = H+ , H 02 v 2 û 2 + ε 12 − ε 23 (1 + û )2
dt
we obtain and the acceleration equation
  −1    
u 1 d 2 H2
=1+ . ε 12 + û 2 H 02
1
2
μ + 2 + 34 n α v 2+n
ũ 2 2 d ln a Ḣ
= −2 +   ,
The conformal factor in the theory is given by (11) and we find H2 û 2 v 2 + ε 43
the following equation relating phase space variables in the Jordan
frame and the Einstein frame we find dynamical system with the new projective coordinates.
In what follows we are interested in dynamics in vicinity of the
u ε 6ξ
=1− u. critical point
ũ v 2 − ε 6ξ
At the asymptotic states under considerations v ∗ ≡ 0 this relation û ∗ = 0 , v∗ = 0 ,
reduces to the following transformations between both frames with linearised solutions
 
ũ ∗ 3
u∗ = , û (η) = û exp η ,
1 − ũ ∗ 2
  (18)
∗ u∗ 3
ũ = . v (η) =  v exp η ,
1 + u∗ 4
Finally, we arrive at the following correspondence between asymp- where û = û (i ) and  v = v (i ) are the initial conditions. The crit-
totic states in both frames ical point is unstable in time η .
2ξ 2ξ Simple inspection gives that at the asymptotic state the energy
u∗ = − ⇐⇒ ũ ∗ = − ,
1 − 4ξ 1 − 6ξ conservation condition vanishes together with the cosmological
time derivative of the Hubble function
and we can conclude that for the non-minimal coupling constant ∗ ∗
3
< ξ < 14 the unstable de Sitter state in the Jordan frame corre- H2 Ḣ
16 = 0, = 0, (19)
sponds to the stable Einstein static state in the Einstein frame. H2
0 H2
0

5
O. Hrycyna Physics Letters B 820 (2021) 136511

Fig. 1. The phase space diagrams representing evolutional paths of the dynamical system (9) compactified with circle at infinity in the Jordan frame (top) and in the Einstein
7
frame (bottom) with ε = +1, ξ = 32 , n = 1, μ = −1, α = 3 (left) and ε = −1, ξ = 29 , n = − 12 , μ = 1, α = − 16 (right). The direction of arrows on the phase space trajectories
indicates expansion of universe. The vertical line through critical point S on the bottom left phase space diagram corresponds to vanishing of the conformal factor for the
values of the scalar field κ 2 φ 2 = ε1ξ . The shaded regions where the Hubble functions H 2 < 0 or H̃ 2 < 0 are nonphysical. We immediately see that both formulation of the
model, for the canonical and the phantom scalar field, is physically nonequivalent since the unstable de Sitter state in the Jordan frame dS − is transformed in the stable
Einstein universe in the Einstein frame E.

6
 O. Hrycyna Physics Letters B 820 (2021) 136511

which gives rise to the Einstein static universe [57–59]. Addition- φ − ξ R φ − ε n U 0 φ n−1 = 0 ,
ally, the acceleration equation calculated at this state is

which in general is not conformally invariant. However, using
∗
Ḣ
appropriate conformal or Weyl transformation we can find con-

= −3 , (20)
H2
straints on the parameters for which the matter sector of gravi-
tational theory is conformally invariant. Working in D ≥ 2 space-
which suggest that the Einstein static state under considerations is
time dimensions and using the following point dependent rescal-
filled with effective substance in the form of Zeldovich stiff matter
ing of the metric tensor and the scalar field
with equation of state parameter w eff = 1 [60,61].
Up to linear terms the time redefinition (17) is in the following D −2
g̃ μν =
2 g μν , φ̃ =
− 2 φ,
form
3 where
is a regular, nowhere vanishing function on a smooth
d ln a ≈ − û (η)dη , manifold we obtain
4

using the linearised solutions (18) we obtain ˜ φ̃ − ξ R̃ φ̃ − ε n U 0 φ̃ n−1 =

a∗ −∞   D +2
 
1 3 3
− 2 φ − ξ R φ − ε n U 0 φ n−1 = 0 ,
da ≈ − û exp η dη ,
a 4 2
a (i ) 0 and this equation holds iff the parameters are
where integration is taken from the initial state toward the critical 1 D −2 2D
point since the critical point under considerations in the form of ξ = ξconf = , n = nconf = .
4 D −1 D −2
an unstable node. Thus, we obtain
  Hence, we obtain the following discrete set of theoretically moti-
a∗ 1 vated values of the non-minimal coupling constant and the expo-
ln ≈ û ,
a (i ) 2 nent of a monomial scalar field potential function suggested by the
and one can read that value of the scale factor at the critical point conformal invariance condition in D ≥ 2 space-time dimensions
corresponding to the Einstein static universe is       
1 1
( D , ξ, n) = (2, 0, ∞) , 3, , 6 , 4, , 4 ,
a ∗ > a (i ) for û > 0 , 8 6
   
∗ (i ) 3 10 1
a <a for û < 0 . 5, , , . . . , ∞, , 2 .
16 3 4
This indicates that the trajectories with the initial conditions û >
0 correspond to contracting cosmological models while with the We can observe that those theoretically motivated values are lo-
initial conditions û < 0 describe expanding cosmologies.
Fig. 2 represents the phase space diagrams of evolutional paths
of the dynamical system (9) for the special case ξ = 14 in the ( v , û )
and the original ( v , u ) dynamical variables compactified with a
circle at infinity of phase space. In the top panel we present phase
space diagrams in ( v , û ) variables where the arrows indicate di-
rection of time η related with the scale factor by (17). We see that
in the vicinity of the static Einstein universe represented by the
cated within observationally obtained intervals [24] and the con-
straints from quantum cosmology consideration [62]. Values of
3
the non-minimal coupling constant 16 < ξ < 14 lead to extra-
dimensional conformally coupled scalar field theory. Additionally,
we have to note that for a quadratic potential function investigated
in this paper the value of the non-minimal coupling constant ξ = 14
may suggest existence of the additional fundamental conformal in-
variance in the matter sector of the theory [63–69] and necessity
unstable critical point E trajectories with initial value û > 0 cor- of postulating large number or even an infinite number of extra
respond to initially contracting cosmological solutions and at some dimensions [70–72].
time η the û (η) variable changes the sing which corresponds to
the transition for contracting to expanding phase of the evolu- 9. Conclusions
tion. The trajectories in the vicinity of the critical point E with
û < 0 initially correspond to the expanding models. In the bot-
tom panel we present evolutional paths for the system in original
( v , u ) dynamical variables. The arrows indicate direction of the
growing scale factor a and now the critical point corresponding
the static Einstein universe is located at infinity u → ±∞, where
for u → +∞ it corresponds to a stable critical point while for
u → −∞ to an unstable critical point.
The evolutional paths for the canonical scalar field represented
on the left panel in Fig. 2 starting form the unstable critical point
E corresponding to the Einstein static universe, continue toward
the stable critical point dS + corresponding to the de Sitter state.
There is an open and dense set of initial conditions giving rise
to this non-singular and generic type of evolution. Additionally, in
the phase space, there is no non-hyperbolic critical points which
indicates that the dynamical system is structurally stable.
8. Non-minimal coupling and the conformal invariance
The Klein-Gordon equation for the scalar field with a monomial
potential function U (φ) = U 0 φ n is in the following form
7
We have investigated dynamics of a flat FRW cosmological
model filled with the non-minimally coupled scalar field. We
have found that for generic scalar field potential functions which
asymptotically tend to a quadratic form at infinite values of the
scalar field there is an unstable critical point corresponding to two
interesting physical states. For the non-minimal coupling constant
3
16
< ξ < 14 we found the unstable de Sitter state, additionally free
5
from a parallelly propagated singularity for 24 ≤ ξ < 14 , as an ini-
tial state for the evolution of universe with vanishing value of the
scale factor but finite value of the energy density. The energy den-
sity at this de Sitter state depends on the non-minimal coupling
constant and can be smaller that the Planck energy density. Addi-
tionally, we have shown that for special value of the non-minimal
coupling constant ξ = 14 the initial state for the evolution of uni-
verse is an unstable Einstein static universe filled with effective
matter in the form of Zeldovich stiff matter.
We have shown that for those two types of initial state for
universe there is an open and dense set of initial conditions lead-
3
ing to non-singular evolution. In the first case for 16 < ξ < 14 and
the canonical ε = +1 scalar field (see Fig. 1) there are evolutional
O. Hrycyna Physics Letters B 820 (2021) 136511

Fig. 2. The phase space diagrams representing evolutional paths of the dynamical system (9) for the special case with ξ = 14 in the ( v , û ) variables where direction of
the arrows corresponds to time η and the original ( v , u ) dynamical variables where direction of arrows corresponds to the scale factor a. The phase space diagrams are
compactified with circles at infinity of phase spaces. The left panel represents the phase space diagrams for the canonical scalar field ε = +1 with n = 1, μ = −1, α = 3
while the right panel for the phantom scalar field ε = −1, with n = − 12 , μ = 1, α = − 16 . The critical point E corresponds to the Einstein static universe while the critical
point dS + denotes the stable de Sitter state. From the phase space diagrams in the left panel we notice open and dense set of initial conditions leading to the non-singular
evolutional paths connecting the unstable Einstein static universe E with the stable de Sitter state dS + . The shaded regions where H 2 < 0 are nonphysical.

8
O. Hrycyna
paths connecting the initial unstable de Sitter state with the sta-
ble final de Sitter state. In the second case for ξ = 14 and also
for the canonical scalar field ε = +1 (see Fig. 2) there are evolu-
tional paths starting from the unstable Einstein static state which
asymptotically tend to the stable de Sitter state. Note that for the
phantom scalar field ε = −1 we are unable to connect the unsta-
ble de Sitter state (or the unstable Einstein state) with the sable
de Sitter state.
Using dynamical systems methods we were able to directly
compare dynamics of the model in original Jordan frame and con-
formally transformed Einstein frame. We have shown that both
descriptions are physically nonequivalent since the initial unstable
de Sitter state in the Jordan frame is transformed in to the stable
Einstein static state in the Einstein frame.
The non-singular evolutional paths found in this paper, in con-
trast to the seminal Starobinsky type of evolution [73,74], are
generic in the sense that they do not depend on specific choice
of initial conditions in the phase space nor were carefully desig-
nated [75,76]. Moreover the phase space of the model is organised
only by hyperbolic critical points with no trajectories connecting
saddle type critical points, which leads to structurally stable dy-
namics [77–79].
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing finan-
cial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to
influence the work reported in this paper.
References
[1] A.G. Riess, A.V. Filippenko, P. Challis, A. Clocchiattia, A. Diercks, P.M. Garnavich,
R.L. Gilliland, C.J. Hogan, S. Jha, R.P. Kirshner, B. Leibundgut, M.M. Phillips, D.
Reiss, B.P. Schmidt, R.A. Schommer, R.C. Smith, J. Spyromilio, C. Stubbs, N.B.
Suntzeff, J. Tonry, Observational evidence from supernovae for an accelerating
universe and a cosmological constant, Astron. J. 116 (1998) 1009–1038, https://
doi.org/10.1086/300499, arXiv:astro-ph/9805201.
[2] S. Perlmutter, G. Aldering, G. Goldhaber, R. Knop, P. Nugent, P. Castro, S.
Deustua, S. Fabbro, A. Goobar, D. Groom, I.M. Hook, A. Kim, M. Kim, J. Lee,
N. Nunes, C.P.R. Pain, R. Quimby, C. Lidman, R. Ellis, M. Irwin, R. McMahon,
P. Ruiz-Lapuente, N. Walton, B. Schaefer, B. Boyle, A. Filippenko, T. Matheson,
A. Fruchter, N. Panagia, H. Newberg, W. Couch, Measurements of omega and
lambda from 42 high-redshift supernovae, Astrophys. J. 517 (1999) 565–586,
https://doi.org/10.1086/307221, arXiv:astro-ph/9812133.
[3] E.J. Copeland, M. Sami, S. Tsujikawa, Dynamics of dark energy, Int. J. Mod.
Phys. D 15 (2006) 1753–1936, https://doi.org/10.1142/S021827180600942X,
arXiv:hep-th/0603057.
[4] S. Bahamonde, C.G. Böhmer, S. Carloni, E.J. Copeland, W. Fang, N. Tamanini,
Dynamical systems applied to cosmology: dark energy and modified grav-
ity, Phys. Rep. 775–777 (2018) 1–122, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep.2018.
09.001, arXiv:1712.03107.
[5] P.J.E. Peebles, B. Ratra, Cosmology with a time variable cosmological constant,
Astrophys. J. Lett. 325 (1988) L17, https://doi.org/10.1086/185100.
[6] B. Ratra, P.J.E. Peebles, Cosmological consequences of a rolling homogeneous
scalar field, Phys. Rev. D 37 (1988) 3406, https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.37.
3406.
[7] C. Wetterich, Cosmology and the fate of dilatation symmetry, Nucl. Phys. B 302
(1988) 668, https://doi.org/10.1016/0550-3213(88)90193-9, arXiv:1711.03844.
[8] N.A. Chernikov, E.A. Tagirov, Quantum theory of scalar fields in de Sitter space-
time, Ann. Poincare Phys. Theor. A 9 (1968) 109.
[9] C.G. Callan Jr., S.R. Coleman, R. Jackiw, A new improved energy-momentum ten-
sor, Ann. Phys. 59 (1970) 42–73, https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-4916(70)90394-
5.
[10] N.D. Birrell, P.C.W. Davies, Conformal-symmetry breaking and cosmological par-
ticle creation in λφ 4 theory, Phys. Rev. D 22 (1980) 322, https://doi.org/10.
1103/PhysRevD.22.322.
[11] J.F. Donoghue, General relativity as an effective field theory: the leading quan-
tum corrections, Phys. Rev. D 50 (1994) 3874–3888, https://doi.org/10.1103/
PhysRevD.50.3874, arXiv:gr-qc/9405057.
[12] N.D. Birrell, P.C.W. Davies, Quantum Fields in Curved Space, Cambridge Univer-
sity Press, Cambridge, 1984.
[13] L.E. Parker, D.J. Toms, Quantum Field Theory in Curved Spacetime. Quantized
Fields and Gravity, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2009.
9
Physics Letters B 820 (2021) 136511
[14] K.-i. Maeda, Stability and attractor in a higher-dimensional cosmology. I, Class.
Quantum Gravity 3 (1986) 233, https://doi.org/10.1088/0264-9381/3/2/017.
[15] F.S. Accetta, D.J. Zoller, M.S. Turner, Induced gravity inflation, Phys. Rev. D 31
(1985) 3046, https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.31.3046.
[16] T. Muta, S.D. Odintsov, Model dependence of the nonminimal scalar graviton
effective coupling constant in curved space-time, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 6 (1991)
3641–3646, https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217732391004206.
[17] I.L. Buchbinder, S.D. Odintsov, I.L. Shapiro, Effective Action in Quantum Gravity,
Taylor & Francis, New York, London, 1992.
[18] M. Atkins, X. Calmet, On the unitarity of linearized general relativity coupled
to matter, Phys. Lett. B 695 (2011) 298–302, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.
2010.10.049, arXiv:1002.0003.
[19] M. Atkins, X. Calmet, Unitarity bounds on low scale quantum gravity, Eur. Phys.
J. C 70 (2010) 381–388, https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-010-1476-2, arXiv:
1005.1075.
[20] M.-X. Luo, Q.-P. Su, Fitting non-minimally coupled scalar models to gold SnIa
dataset, Phys. Lett. B 626 (2005) 7–14, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2005.
08.050, arXiv:astro-ph/0506093.
[21] K. Nozari, S.D. Sadatian, Non-minimal inflation after WMAP3, Mod. Phys. Lett.
A 23 (2008) 2933–2945, https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217732308026698, arXiv:
0710.0058.
[22] M. Szydlowski, O. Hrycyna, A. Kurek, Coupling constant constraints in a non-
minimally coupled phantom cosmology, Phys. Rev. D 77 (2008) 027302, https://
doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.77.027302, arXiv:0710.0366.
[23] M. Atkins, X. Calmet, Bounds on the nonminimal coupling of the Higgs bo-
son to gravity, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110 (2013) 051301, https://doi.org/10.1103/
PhysRevLett.110.051301, arXiv:1211.0281.
[24] O. Hrycyna, What ξ ? Cosmological constraints on the non-minimal coupling
constant, Phys. Lett. B 768 (2017) 218–227, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.
2017.02.062, arXiv:1511.08736.
[25] B.L. Spokoiny, Inflation and generation of perturbations in broken-symmetric
theory of gravity, Phys. Lett. B 147 (1984) 39–43, https://doi.org/10.1016/0370-
2693(84)90587-2.
[26] V.A. Belinsky, I.M. Khalatnikov, L.P. Grishchuk, Y.B. Zeldovich, Inflationary stages
in cosmological models with a scalar field, Phys. Lett. B 155 (1985) 232–236,
https://doi.org/10.1016/0370-2693(85)90644-6.
[27] L. Amendola, M. Litterio, F. Occhionero, The phase space view of inflation. 1:
the nonminimally coupled scalar field, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 5 (1990) 3861–3886,
https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217751X90001653.
[28] V. Faraoni, Non-minimal coupling of the scalar field and inflation, Phys. Rev.
D 53 (1996) 6813–6821, https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.53.6813, arXiv:astro-
ph/9602111.
[29] A.O. Barvinsky, A.Y. Kamenshchik, A.A. Starobinsky, Inflation scenario via the
standard model Higgs boson and LHC, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 11 (2008)
021, https://doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2008/11/021, arXiv:0809.2104.
[30] M.R. Setare, E.N. Saridakis, Non-minimally coupled canonical, phantom and
quintom models of holographic dark energy, Phys. Lett. B 671 (2009) 331–338,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2008.12.026, arXiv:0810.0645.
[31] J.-P. Uzan, Cosmological scaling solutions of non-minimally coupled scalar
fields, Phys. Rev. D 59 (1999) 123510, https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.59.
123510, arXiv:gr-qc/9903004.
[32] L. Amendola, Scaling solutions in general non-minimal coupling theories, Phys.
Rev. D 60 (1999) 043501, https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.60.043501, arXiv:
astro-ph/9904120.
[33] D.J. Holden, D. Wands, Self-similar cosmological solutions with a non-
minimally coupled scalar field, Phys. Rev. D 61 (2000) 043506, https://doi.org/
10.1103/PhysRevD.61.043506, arXiv:gr-qc/9908026.
[34] R. Gannouji, D. Polarski, A. Ranquet, A.A. Starobinsky, Scalar-tensor models of
normal and phantom dark energy, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 09 (2006) 016,
https://doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2006/09/016, arXiv:astro-ph/0606287.
[35] S. Carloni, S. Capozziello, J.A. Leach, P.K.S. Dunsby, Cosmological dynamics of
scalar-tensor gravity, Class. Quantum Gravity 25 (2008) 035008, https://doi.org/
10.1088/0264-9381/25/3/035008, arXiv:gr-qc/0701009.
[36] F.L. Bezrukov, M. Shaposhnikov, The standard model Higgs boson as the infla-
ton, Phys. Lett. B 659 (2008) 703–706, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2007.
11.072, arXiv:0710.3755.
[37] A.Y. Kamenshchik, I.M. Khalatnikov, A.V. Toporensky, Nonminimally coupled
complex scalar field in classical and quantum cosmology, Phys. Lett. B
357 (1995) 36–42, https://doi.org/10.1016/0370-2693(95)00834-8, arXiv:gr-qc/
9508034.
[38] A. De Simone, M.P. Hertzberg, F. Wilczek, Running inflation in the standard
model, Phys. Lett. B 678 (2009) 1–8, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2009.05.
054, arXiv:0812.4946.
[39] F.L. Bezrukov, A. Magnin, M. Shaposhnikov, Standard model Higgs boson
mass from inflation, Phys. Lett. B 675 (2009) 88–92, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.physletb.2009.03.035, arXiv:0812.4950.
[40] A.O. Barvinsky, A.Y. Kamenshchik, C. Kiefer, A.A. Starobinsky, C. Steinwachs,
Asymptotic freedom in inflationary cosmology with a non-minimally coupled
Higgs field, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 12 (2009) 003, https://doi.org/10.1088/
1475-7516/2009/12/003, arXiv:0904.1698.
O. Hrycyna
[41] T.E. Clark, B. Liu, S.T. Love, T. ter Veldhuis, The standard model Higgs boson-
inflaton and dark matter, Phys. Rev. D 80 (2009) 075019, https://doi.org/10.
1103/PhysRevD.80.075019, arXiv:0906.5595.
[42] O. Hrycyna, M. Szydlowski, Uniting cosmological epochs through the twister
solution in cosmology with non-minimal coupling, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys.
12 (2010) 016, https://doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2010/12/016, arXiv:1008.
1432.
[43] O. Hrycyna, M. Szydlowski, Cosmological dynamics with non-minimally cou-
pled scalar field and a constant potential function, J. Cosmol. Astropart.
Phys. 11 (2015) 013, https://doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2015/11/013, arXiv:
1506.03429.
[44] O. Hrycyna, The non-minimal coupling constant and the primordial de Sitter
state, Eur. Phys. J. C 80 (2020) 817, https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-020-
8397-5, arXiv:2008.00943.
[45] M. Kerachian, G. Acquaviva, G. Lukes-Gerakopoulos, Classes of nonminimally
coupled scalar fields in spatially curved FRW spacetimes, Phys. Rev. D 99 (12)
(2019) 123516, https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.99.123516, arXiv:1905.08512.
[46] L. Järv, A. Toporensky, Global portraits of nonminimal inflation (4 2021), arXiv:
2104.10183.
[47] O. Hrycyna, M. Szydlowski, Route to lambda in conformally coupled phantom
cosmology, Phys. Lett. B 651 (2007) 8–14, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.
2007.05.057, arXiv:0704.1651.
[48] O. Hrycyna, M. Szydlowski, Non-minimally coupled scalar field cosmology on
the phase plane, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 04 (2009) 026, https://doi.org/10.
1088/1475-7516/2009/04/026, arXiv:0812.5096.
[49] G.N. Felder, A.V. Frolov, L. Kofman, A.D. Linde, Cosmology with negative po-
tentials, Phys. Rev. D 66 (2002) 023507, https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.66.
023507, arXiv:hep-th/0202017.
[50] B. Boisseau, H. Giacomini, D. Polarski, A.A. Starobinsky, Bouncing universes
in scalar–tensor gravity models admitting negative potentials, J. Cosmol. As-
tropart. Phys. 07 (2015) 002, https://doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2015/07/002,
arXiv:1504.07927.
[51] A.D. Linde, Fast-roll inflation, J. High Energy Phys. 11 (2001) 052, https://doi.
org/10.1088/1126-6708/2001/11/052, arXiv:hep-th/0110195.
[52] L. Kofman, S. Mukohyama, Rapid roll inflation with conformal coupling, Phys.
Rev. D 77 (2008) 043519, https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.77.043519, arXiv:
0709.1952.
[53] T. Chiba, M. Yamaguchi, Extended slow-roll conditions and rapid-roll condi-
tions, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 10 (2008) 021, https://doi.org/10.1088/1475-
7516/2008/10/021, arXiv:0807.4965.
[54] D. Yoshida, J. Quintin, Maximal extensions and singularities in inflationary
spacetimes, Class. Quantum Gravity 35 (15) (2018) 155019, https://doi.org/10.
1088/1361-6382/aacf4b, arXiv:1803.07085.
[55] K. Nomura, D. Yoshida, Past extendibility and initial singularity in Friedmann-
Lemaître-Robertson-Walker and Bianchi I spacetimes (5 2021), arXiv:2105.
05642.
[56] J.M. Cline, S. Jeon, G.D. Moore, The phantom menaced: constraints on low-
energy effective ghosts, Phys. Rev. D 70 (2004) 043543, https://doi.org/10.1103/
PhysRevD.70.043543, arXiv:hep-ph/0311312.
[57] G.F. Ellis, R. Maartens, The emergent universe: inflationary cosmology with no
singularity, Class. Quantum Gravity 21 (2004) 223–232, https://doi.org/10.1088/
0264-9381/21/1/015, arXiv:gr-qc/0211082.
[58] G.F. Ellis, J. Murugan, C.G. Tsagas, The emergent universe: an explicit construc-
tion, Class. Quantum Gravity 21 (1) (2004) 233–250, https://doi.org/10.1088/
0264-9381/21/1/016, arXiv:gr-qc/0307112.
[59] J.D. Barrow, G.F. Ellis, R. Maartens, C.G. Tsagas, On the stability of the Einstein
static universe, Class. Quantum Gravity 20 (2003) L155–L164, https://doi.org/
10.1088/0264-9381/20/11/102, arXiv:gr-qc/0302094.
[60] Ya.B. Zeldovich, The equation of state at ultrahigh densities and its relativistic
limitations, Sov. Phys. JETP 14 (1962) 1143–1147; Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 41 (1961)
1609.
10
Physics Letters B 820 (2021) 136511
[61] Ya.B. Zeldovich, A hypothesis, unifying the structure and the entropy of the
universe, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 160 (1972) 1P–3P, https://doi.org/10.1093/
mnras/160.1.1P.
[62] S.-J. Wang, M. Yamada, A. Vilenkin, Constraints on non-minimal coupling from
quantum cosmology, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 08 (2019) 025, https://doi.org/
10.1088/1475-7516/2019/08/025, arXiv:1903.11736.
[63] Y. Nakayama, Scale invariance vs conformal invariance, Phys. Rep. 569 (2015)
1–93, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep.2014.12.003, arXiv:1302.0884.
[64] I. Bars, P. Steinhardt, N. Turok, Local conformal symmetry in physics and cos-
mology, Phys. Rev. D 89 (4) (2014) 043515, https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.
89.043515, arXiv:1307.1848.
[65] F. Englert, E. Gunzig, C. Truffin, P. Windey, Conformal invariant general relativ-
ity with dynamical symmetry breakdown, Phys. Lett. B 57 (1975) 73, https://
doi.org/10.1016/0370-2693(75)90247-6.
[66] F. Englert, C. Truffin, R. Gastmans, Conformal invariance in quantum gravity,
Nucl. Phys. B 117 (1976) 407, https://doi.org/10.1016/0550-3213(76)90406-5.
[67] G. ’t Hooft, A class of elementary particle models without any adjustable
real parameters, Found. Phys. 41 (2011) 1829–1856, https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10701-011-9586-8, arXiv:1104.4543.
[68] G. ’t Hooft, Local conformal symmetry: the missing symmetry component for
space and time, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 24 (2015) 1543001, https://doi.org/10.1142/
S0218271815430014, arXiv:1410.6675.
[69] G. ’t Hooft, Spontaneous breakdown of local conformal invariance in quantum
gravity, in: L. Baulieu, K. Benakli, M.R. Douglas, B. Mansoulie, E. Rabinovici, L.F.
Cugliandolo (Eds.), Theoretical Physics to Face the Challenge of LHC, August
2011, in: Lecture Notes of the Les Houches Summer School, vol. 97, Oxford
University Press, 2015, pp. 209–253.
[70] A. Strominger, The inverse dimensional expansion in quantum gravity, Phys.
Rev. D 24 (1981) 3082, https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.24.3082.
[71] S. Deser, Dimensionally challenged gravities, in: J. Renn, L. Divarci, P. Schröter,
A. Ashtekar, R.S. Cohen, D. Howard, S. Sarkar, A. Shimony (Eds.), Revisiting the
Foundations of Relativistic Physics: Festschrift in Honor of John Stachel, in:
Boston Studies in Philosophy of Science, vol. 234, Springer, Netherlands, Dor-
drecht, 2003, pp. 397–401, arXiv:gr-qc/9812013.
[72] D. Sloan, P. Ferreira, The cosmology of an infinite dimensional universe,
Phys. Rev. D 96 (4) (2017) 043527, https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.96.043527,
arXiv:1612.02853.
[73] A.A. Starobinsky, A new type of isotropic cosmological models without singu-
larity, Phys. Lett. B 91 (1980) 99–102, https://doi.org/10.1016/0370-2693(80)
90670-X.
[74] A.A. Starobinsky, On a nonsingular isotropic cosmological model, Sov. Astron.
Lett. 4 (1978) 82–84; Pism’a Astron. Ž. 4 (1978) 155–159.
[75] V.F. Mukhanov, R.H. Brandenberger, A nonsingular universe, Phys. Rev. Lett. 68
(1992) 1969–1972, https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.68.1969.
[76] R.H. Brandenberger, V.F. Mukhanov, A. Sornborger, Cosmological theory with-
out singularities, Phys. Rev. D 48 (1993) 1629–1642, https://doi.org/10.1103/
PhysRevD.48.1629, arXiv:gr-qc/9303001.
[77] A.A. Andronov, L.S. Pontryagin, Grubyye sistemy, Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR 14
(1937) 247–251;
English translation: Lev Semenovich Pontryagin in: Russian Mathematicians in
the 20th Century, Ya.G. Sinai (Ed.), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd,
2003, pp. 345–366.
[78] H.B. Nielsen, Catastrophe theory programme, in: C.D. Froggatt, H.B. Nielsen
(Eds.), Origin of Symmetries, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., Singa-
pore, 1991, pp. 566–581; Dual Strings - Section 6. Catastrophe Theory Pro-
gramme by H. B. Nielsen, in: I.M. Barbour, A.T. Davies (Eds.), Fundamen-
tals of Quark Models, Scottish Universities Summer School in Physics, 1976,
pp. 528–543.
[79] R. Thom, Structural Stability and Morphogenesis: An Outline of a General The-
ory of Models, Advanced Book Classics, Westview Press, Reading, Mass., 1989.