We conclude then that with moderate values of η be- tween . 1 − . 01 we can get supersymmetry breaking scales between 10 11 − 10 13 without major fine tunings. We eas- ily get enough efoldings, and furthermore, the inflaton is lighter than the gravitino by an amount given by √ η . seems to be no obstruction to reheating the universe to and acceptable value of temperature, particle abundances and entropy. We are currently working in a more detailed theory incorporating our scenario [25]. For the above range of parameters we can compare the predicted value of n$_{S}$ in our model with observational con- straints. This is shown in the right panel of Fig. 1. The yellow region is the current cosmological constraints from WMAP5 [11] and the other colored areas are the predic- tions for our model with minimal fine tuning for an stable (unstable) X potential, i.e. the field is concave (convex) re- spectively. The constraints will improve greatly when the Planck satellite releases its results next year, and therefore our model can be tested much more accurately. Reheating can proceed in many ways, since we have not provided a detailed microscopic model. Once in the non- linear regime, the X$_{NL}$ field (whose scalar component is made of a goldstino bilinear) could efficiently convert the f $^{2}$-energy density into radiation. We can calculate the amount of entropy and particle density by using the Boltz- man equation and assuming that the pair of Goldstinos will have an out-of-equilibrium decay[16]. Using that In this short note we have studied the possibility of hav- ing supersymmetry breaking as the driving force of infla- tion. We have used the unique chiral superfield X which represents the breaking of conformal invariance in the UV, and whose fermionic component becomes the goldstino at low energies. Its auxiliary field is the F -term which gets the vacuum expectation value breaking supersymmetry. which yields values in the range 10 to 1, and assures that there is no entropy overproduction. We could also compute the depletion of this energy through the soft couplings (10) yielding very similar values as above. In both cases, we can get sufficient reheating with temperatures between √ f and a fraction of m$_{3}$$_{/}$$_{2}$ . The true value depends very much on the details of the microscopic model. However, there Since we have not presented any detailed model, the cos- mological consequences are a bit rudimentary, especially concerning reheating at the end of inflation. However, the comparison of the simplest model with present data, yields very interesting values for the supersymmetry breaking scale, and the ratio of the inflaton and gravitino masses. It is crucial in our analysis to have explicit R-symmetry breaking along with supersymmetry breaking. This allows us to avoid the η problem in supergravity and to take the supersymmetric limit. The simplest model we obtain de- scribes the components of X well below the Planck scale. It is written in terms of three parameters: the supersym- metry breaking parameter f and the masses of the real and imaginary components of the field x (the scalar component of X). In our analysis the imaginary part of x plays the role of the inflaton, and its mass was shown to be smaller than the gravitino mass by an amount given by √ η . This imag- inary component represents a pseudo-goldstone boson, or rather, a pseudomoduli. In supersymmetric theories such fields abound, and any of them could be used to construct some form of hybrid inflation. In our case, however, we want to use the minimal choice that is naturally provided by the universal superfield X that must exist in any su- persymmetric theory. T$_{RH}$ = 10 − 10 ( $^{√}$f/GeV ) 3 / 2 GeV (31) S$_{f}$/S$_{i}$ = 10 $^{7}$( $^{√}$f/GeV ) − 1 / 2 (32) we obtain a range 10 7 < T$_{RH}$ < 10 $^{9}$. This produces a particle abundance of n$_{χ}$ ∼ 10 70 − 90 which are standard values. We can also compute the amount of entropy gen- erated by the out-of-equilibrium decay as 6 4. Conclusions