# Amplification of Isocurvature Perturbations induced by Active-Sterile Neutrino Oscillations

## 1 Introduction

If one assumes the existence of a mixing between an active neutrino flavor $`\alpha `$ and a sterile neutrino flavor, then a lepton number can be generated in the early universe . To this purpose a small vacuum mixing angle ($`\mathrm{sin}2\theta _01`$) is necessary (the mass eigenstates almost coincide with the interaction eigenstates). Moreover the sterile neutrino must be lighter than the active neutrino and the absolute value of $`\delta m^2`$, the difference of squared masses, must be in the range $`(10^5÷10^5)\mathrm{eV}^2`$. In fact the critical temperature at which the generation occurs is given, if the sterile neutrino production is until that time negligible, by the expression:

$$T_c14.5(18.0)\mathrm{MeV}\left(\frac{|\delta m^2|}{\mathrm{eV}^2}\right)^{\frac{1}{6}}\alpha =e(\mu ,\tau )$$
(1)   
It follows that if $`|\delta m^2|\stackrel{<}{}10^5\mathrm{eV}^2`$, then $`T_c\stackrel{<}{}3\mathrm{MeV}`$ and the lepton number variation would be dominated by the MSW effect. In this case a lepton number larger than $`10^7`$ cannot be generated .

On the other hand if $`|\delta m^2|\stackrel{>}{}10^5\mathrm{eV}^2`$ then $`T_c\stackrel{>}{}150\mathrm{M}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{V}`$ and one should be able to describe the neutrino oscillations in a quark-gluon plasma, something beyond the present level of matter effects account (moreover it is not interesting in this context, because it would imply active neutrino masses much higher than $`100\mathrm{eV}`$, cosmologically excluded if neutrinos are stable).

A rigorous description of neutrino oscillations in the early universe requires a quantum kinetic approach able to describe the evolution of the statistical density matrix for the two mixed neutrino flavors . Such a description must include the different effects of matter on the neutrino mixing: a coherent effect due to forward scattering , a loss of coherence due to the collisions that change the neutrino momentum  and the repopulation of active neutrino states (depleted by the oscillations into the sterile neutrino states) through the collisions .

For a better understanding of the generation of a lepton number, it has been shown to be more convenient to turn to a simpler description that neglects the possibility of a MSW effect at the resonance. This approximation proves to be valid at temperatures $`T\stackrel{>}{}5\mathrm{MeV}`$ because the collisions destroy the coherence at the resonance. In this way the physics underlying the lepton number generation is isolated and can be clearly understood . The role of collisions, from this point of view, is crucial: they can be usefully considered, in a heuristic sense, as a measurement process able to make the two-quantum state collapsing in one of the two interaction eigenstates. Through this effect sterile neutrinos are produced and the presence of a small baryon number induces a tiny asymmetry between the production rates of neutrinos and antineutrinos. If the sterile is lighter than the active neutrino and if the values of mixing parameters are in the intervals previously indicated, this initial asymmetry is amplified through the generation of a lepton number that starts at the critical temperature $`T_c`$.

In this mechanism the momentum dependence plays an important role  and a monochromatic approximation provides only a rough description. The interesting feature is that, within this simplified physical picture, the quantum kinetic description through the density matrix collapses into an effective (classic) kinetic description (Pauli-Boltzmann approach). This is possible because in the regime where collisions are rapid enough, the evolution of the off-diagonal terms can be disentangled by the diagonal terms evolution and explicit expressions can be derived for them. In this way, in the description of the evolution of the statistical properties of mixed neutrinos, only the diagonal terms are left, the usual statistical distributions: a simpler physical picture yields a simpler mathematical description. The derivation of the equations for the distributions can be done either directly from the simplified physical model  or also, with a more formal procedure, from the quantum kinetic equations themselves, via some approximations, indicated by the authors globally as static approximation, valid under appropriate conditions on the mixing parameters . The differences that one expects from a full quantum kinetic description are at low temperatures ($`T\stackrel{<}{}5\mathrm{MeV}`$), when the MSW effect becomes important and must be taken into account, and at the critical temperature for large enough vacuum mixing angles, when the growth of lepton number is so rapid that an adiabatic condition to describe the process does not hold anymore. This adiabatic condition is the possibility to neglect any change in the effective potentials, and thus in the mixing angle, between the collisions on average. The collisions, if vacuum mixing angles is not too large, are able to average out the coherent effects of the oscillations in the macroscopic quantity (like the neutrino asymmetry).

This analysis on the validity of the approach is confirmed by the numerical calculations performed using the QKE. In  it has been shown how the MSW effect at low temperature is able to amplify the growth of lepton number up to values slightly lower than the maximum absolute value obtainable of $`3/8`$, corresponding to a situation when all active antineutrinos (or neutrinos) are converted into sterile neutrinos and to a value $`\xi _\alpha 0.5`$ for the chemical potential <sup>1</sup><sup>1</sup>1 The authors of a recent paper obtain much lower values for the final lepton number . This result has been obtained solving an approximated equation that, compared to the static approximation equation, contains a new term responsible, according to them, for the different values. We do not hide our scepticism toward these results, due to the robust coherent picture of previous ones, obtained both in a physically clear approximated picture  and confirmed by numerical calculations using the exact QKE equations . The authors of  try to justify this situation claiming a not rigorous numerical procedure in the exact numerical calculations, without being aware of the conspiracy that would exist between a supposed numerical error in the solution of the exact QKE and the effect of a missing term in the static approximation equation. Moreover new numerical solutions of the exact QKE will be soon presented together with clear checks of their validity  and an accurate description of the adopted numerical procedure. Although there is no final agreement at the present, we wish to thank A.D. Dolgov, S.H. Hansen, S. Pastor and D.V. Semikoz, for the kind availability to answer our questions. . On the other hand it has been shown how, for temperatures $`T\stackrel{>}{}5\mathrm{MeV}`$, an effective kinetic approach agrees almost perfectly with the quantum kinetic one for small mixing angles. It is also possible to extend the numerical study of QKE to large mixing angles  and it has been found that for $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _0\stackrel{>}{}10^6`$ and $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _0\stackrel{<}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3}\times 10^4(\mathrm{eV}^2/|\delta m^2|)`$, in the quantum kinetic approach, at the critical temperature $`T_c`$, rapid oscillations in the lepton number take place. This behaviour was first studied in  and later confirmed in  (even though in a smaller region of mixing parameters), but in these works the momentum dependence was not taken into account and the rapid oscillations are observed for a much larger region of mixing parameters. In  is concluded that, outside the special region of mixing parameters where rapid oscillations are observed at the resonance, at temperatures $`T\stackrel{>}{}5\mathrm{MeV}`$, the effective kinetic approach provides a very good description not only for the evolution of the absolute value of lepton number but also in predicting its final sign. In this paper we will extend this analysis to the case when some tiny inhomogeneities in the baryon number (baryon isocurvature perturbations) are present, dealing with the region of mixing parameters where the effective kinetic approach can be used. This can be done including into the equation a term that describes the diffusion of neutrinos and we will show how this effect can induce the generation of lepton domains <sup>2</sup><sup>2</sup>2 The possibility of a generation of lepton domains was first claimed in  due to a sign indetermination in the obtained equation for the lepton number evolution. This results in a generation of lepton domains with sign randomly determined. However in  it was shown how the account of a correcting term produces a full sign determination of the solution (see Section 2). The idea of a ”chaotic” generation of lepton domains has been recently re proposed in . This model assumes that the lepton number undergoes at the resonance very rapid and unstable changes of sign for any choice of mixing parameters and this would again result in a sign indetermination in different points of space. The analysis presented in , including a full momentum dependence, excludes this possibility for almost all values of mixing parameters, except in a special region where the numerical calculations cannot be, at the moment, conclusive. In the mechanism we present here, the generation is not chaotic but perfectly determined by the spectral features of the baryon number inhomogeneities and moreover the horizon scale is not a limit to the size of lepton domains. .

The plan of the paper is the following. In section 2 we will show how the problem of sign of lepton number is fully determined in the effective kinetic approach, re analyzing and extending a procedure presented in . In section 3 we will extend the analysis to the case where small inhomogeneities in the baryon number are present, through the introduction of a diffusion term. We will illustrate how this term can induce, in some regions, an inversion in the sign of lepton number growth, bringing to the formation of lepton domains. In section 4 we describe qualitatively the evolution of lepton domains once they have been generated. In section 5 we conclude and discuss the possible applications of the new proposed mechanism.

## 2 Final sign of lepton number in a homogeneous background

Within the Pauli-Boltzmann approach developed in , the evolution of the lepton number carried by an active $`\alpha `$-neutrino flavor that is mixed with a sterile neutrino flavor, is described by the following equation:

$$\frac{dL_{\nu _\alpha }}{dt}=\left[A(T,L)\text{ }LB(T,L)L_{\nu _\alpha }\right]$$
(2)   
where we defined <sup>3</sup><sup>3</sup>3 We are actually neglecting a third term that arises only when a sterile neutrino asymmetry is produced, that means when the lepton number of active neutrinos is changing, considering that $`L_{\nu _s}+L_{\nu _\alpha }=`$const. This term can give effects only when an initial $`\alpha `$-lepton number much higher than $`\stackrel{~}{L}`$ is assumed. Here we do not consider this situation and in this case this third term can be neglected. :

$$A\frac{T^3}{2\pi ^2n_\gamma }𝑑yy^2f_{eq}^0(\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\alpha s}\overline{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_{\alpha s})(z_s^+z_\alpha ^+)$$
(3)   
$$B\frac{6\zeta (3)T^3}{\pi ^4n_\gamma }𝑑y\frac{y^2e^y}{(1+e^y)^2}(\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\alpha s}+\overline{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_{\alpha s})$$
(4)   
The variable $`y`$ in the integrals is the adimensional momentum $`p/T`$. The quantity $`L_{\nu _\alpha }`$ is rigorously defined as the lepton number of the $`\alpha `$-active neutrino in the portion of comoving volume that contains a fixed number of photons $`N_\gamma ^{in}`$ at some initial temperature $`T_{in}\stackrel{<}{}150\mathrm{MeV}`$. Considering that the evolution of lepton number freezes at temperatures around $`T_f1\mathrm{MeV}`$, one can safely consider the number of photons in the element of comoving volume as a constant (neglecting muon annihilations) and write:

$$L_{\nu _\alpha }\frac{N_{\nu _\alpha }N_{\overline{\nu }_\alpha }}{N_\gamma ^{in}}\frac{n_{\nu _\alpha }n_{\overline{\nu }_\alpha }}{n_\gamma }$$
(5)   
We indicated with $`n`$ the particle densities and with $`N=nR^3`$ the numbers of particles in the comoving volume $`R^3`$. We also introduced the (effective) total lepton number $`L`$ defined as:

$$LL_{\nu _\alpha }+L_{\nu _e}+L_{\nu _\mu }+L_{\nu _\tau }\pm \frac{1}{2}B_n2L_{\nu _\alpha }+\stackrel{~}{L}$$
(6)   
where $`+`$ holds for $`\alpha =e`$ and $``$ for $`\alpha =\mu ,\tau `$. The field $`\stackrel{~}{L}`$ is the total charge number of non oscillating neutrinos plus a contribution from the baryon number carried by neutrons: we will refer to it as the background charge. It is constant while the oscillations occur, and must be considered as a parameter given by some earlier phase of baryo-leptogenesis. In this section we will assume that it is also strictly homogeneous, while in the next section we will study the effect of the presence of inhomogeneities. Both in $`L`$ and in $`\stackrel{~}{L}`$ we dropped an index $`\alpha `$ to simplify the notation.

The quantities $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\alpha s}`$, $`\overline{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_{\alpha s}`$ are the production rates for sterile neutrinos and antineutrinos, $`f_{eq}^0`$ is the Fermi-Dirac distribution with zero chemical potential and $`z_{\alpha ,s}^\pm =(f_{\nu _{\alpha ,s}}\pm f_{\overline{\nu }_{\alpha ,s}})/2f_{eq}^0`$ are the sum and difference distributions of neutrinos, relative to the Fermi-Dirac one. The active neutrinos distributions can be safely described by thermal equilibrium distributions because the process of generation of lepton number occurs for temperatures $`T1\mathrm{M}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{V}`$ (the total collision rate is therefore much higher than the expansion rate) and for small mixing angles (the collision rates that refill the quantum states of active neutrinos are much higher than the sterile neutrinos production rates that deplete them). On the other hand the sterile neutrinos distributions must be described by two other rate equations that, together with the expressions for the production rates, can be found in  (we do not need them in the present context).

For a qualitative understanding of the evolution of lepton number, with a specific attention to its sign, it is useful to recast the equation (2) in the form:

$$\frac{dL_{\nu _\alpha }}{dt}=\left[2A(T,L)B(T,L)\right](L_{\nu _\alpha }L_{eq})$$
(7)   
where we introduced the quantity:

$$L_{eq}=\frac{A\stackrel{~}{L}}{2AB}$$
(8)   
While the term $`B`$ is always positive, the term $`A`$ changes sign at a critical temperature $`T_c`$, being negative for higher temperatures and positive for lower temperatures. When the temperature is far from the critical value ($`|TT_c|\mathrm{\Delta }T(23)\mathrm{MeV}`$), the $`B`$ term acts as a correcting term ($`B|A|`$) and the fixed point $`L_{eq}L_{eq}^0(1/2)\stackrel{~}{L}`$. Moreover, until the lepton number is below a threshold value $`L_{}10^6(|\delta m^2|/\mathrm{eV}^2)^{\frac{1}{3}}`$ (see ), its non linear effect inside $`A`$ and $`B`$ can be neglected. In this situation the equation (2) becomes extremely simple:

$$\frac{dL_{\nu _\alpha }}{dt}=A(T)L$$
(9)   
While for temperatures above $`T_c`$ the quantity $`A`$ is negative, the fixed point $`L_{eq}`$ is stable and thus the total lepton number is destroyed, for temperatures below $`T_c`$, $`A`$ is positive, the fixed point is unstable and the total lepton number starts to grow. To answer the question toward which direction it grows, one has to take into account the term $`B`$ and study its action in the vicinity of the critical temperature when $`A`$ is small and $`B`$ becomes important in driving the evolution of lepton number. Let us see in different stages what happens when temperature approaches the critical value from the above. When $`B`$ is still small compared to $`A`$, expanding up to the first order in $`B/A`$, one gets:

$$L_{eq}=\frac{1}{2}\stackrel{~}{L}+\frac{1}{4}\frac{B}{|A|}\stackrel{~}{L}$$
(10)   
During this period the term $`2AB`$ is negative and the solution tracks the fixed point $`L_{eq}`$. An approximate expression for the quantity $`\delta LL_{\nu _\alpha }L_{eq}`$ can be derived neglecting a term $`d(\delta L)/dt`$ in the Eq. (7):

$$\delta L=\frac{1}{2AB}\frac{dL_{eq}}{dt}$$
(11)   
Until $`2ABdL_{eq}/dt`$, the solution tracks the fixed point. From the expression (10) it is clear that the term $`B`$ drives the growth of the lepton number toward the same sign as the background charge $`\stackrel{~}{L}`$. At the critical temperature the term $`A`$ vanishes and simply $`L_{eq}=0`$. In this moment the fixed point is changing very rapidly while the term $`2AB`$, that should force the solution $`L_{\nu _\alpha }`$ to track $`L_{eq}`$, is small and the solution starts to diverge from the fixed point. Immediately below the critical temperature, when $`2A=B`$, the fixed point has a vertical asymptote and changes sign and at still lower temperatures it rapidly approaches zero again. This time however $`A`$ is positive and the fixed point $`L_{eq}`$ does not attract the solution any more and this continues to grow toward the same direction transmitted by the ”derailment” action of the term $`B`$ at the critical temperature.

The behaviour of the solution around the critical temperature is shown in fig. 1 for a particular choice of the mixing parameters.

## 3 Lepton domains formation in presence of inhomogeneities

In this section we will generalize the process of active-sterile neutrino oscillations to the case when spatial inhomogeneities are present. From the observation of CMB we know that small inhomogeneities in the temperature field (adiabatic perturbations) were present in the early universe. However taking into account the presence of these perturbations does not change the basic results of the homogeneous scenario. The lepton number growth starts at slightly different times in different points, but the final result is unchanged: the presence in the end of a final lepton number with the same sign everywhere in the space and with the same absolute value as in the homogeneous case.

More interesting is to consider the possibility that small inhomogeneities are present in the background charge $`\stackrel{~}{L}`$ (isocurvature perturbations). This quantity is the sum of the lepton number carried by the non oscillating neutrinos and a term given by the presence of a baryon number. Whatever is the mechanism that created the inhomogeneities, it is reasonable to think that the inhomogeneities in the lepton numbers carried by the non oscillating neutrinos become soon much smoother than those in the baryon number, due to the much higher diffusion of neutrinos. More precisely we can consider the baryon number field expressed in the comoving coordinates as a constant, neglecting the neutron diffusion. This will make much simpler our following discussion, without altering the main results.

A first trivial effect on the equation (2) is simply that now $`\stackrel{~}{L}=\stackrel{~}{L}(𝐱)`$, where $`𝐱`$ are the comoving coordinates. At temperatures above $`T_c`$ this effect is enough to understand how the process is modified by the presence of the inhomogeneities. The $`\nu _\alpha `$-lepton number will evolve in a way to destroy in any point the total lepton number $`L`$ and a zero order solution, considering only the $`A`$-term, is given by $`L_{\nu _\alpha }=(1/2)\stackrel{~}{L}(𝐱)`$. When temperature drops down, approaching the critical value, again the action of the correcting term $`B`$ must be considered in order to understand toward which direction, positive or negative values, the total lepton number will grow.

This time however a new correcting term must be considered in the equation, a term that arises due to the neutrino diffusion, and the full equation becomes now:

$$\frac{dL_{\nu _\alpha }}{dt}=A(T,L)\left[2L_{\nu _\alpha }+\stackrel{~}{L}(𝐱)\right]B(T,L)L_{\nu _\alpha }+\frac{𝒟}{R^2}^2L_{\nu _\alpha }$$
(12)   
where clearly $`L_{\nu _\alpha }=L_{\nu _\alpha }(𝐱,t)`$, $`𝒟`$ is the diffusion coefficient and $`R`$ is the scale factor that appears because we are dealing with comoving coordinates (we normalize $`R`$ in a way that $`R_0=1`$), while the diffusion term must be calculated in physical lengths.

The appearance of a diffusion term is something intuitively clear. For a more rigorous derivation one has simply to write the Liouville operator in the left hand side of the Boltzmann equation in the inhomogeneous case:

$$\frac{d}{dt}f_{\nu _\alpha }(𝐱,𝐩,t)=\frac{}{t}f_{\nu _\alpha }(𝐱,𝐩,t)H𝐩_𝐩f_{\nu _\alpha }(𝐱,𝐩,t)+\frac{c}{R}\widehat{p}_𝐱f_{\nu _\alpha }(𝐱,𝐩,t)$$
(13)   
where $`H`$ is the expansion rate $`\dot{R}/R`$. In this way, integrating on the momenta the Boltzmann equation for the distribution difference of active neutrinos $`f_{\nu _\alpha }^{}f_{\nu _\alpha }f_{\overline{\nu }_\alpha }`$ and dividing for the photon number density, one obtains:

$$\frac{dL_{\nu _\alpha }}{dt}=\left[\frac{dL_{\nu _\alpha }}{dt}\right]_{\mathrm{osc}}+\frac{1}{R^2}_𝐱\left(𝒟_𝐱L_{\nu _\alpha }\right)$$
(14)   
where the first term in the r.h. side is the contribution from the oscillations into the sterile neutrinos (the r.h. side in the Eq. (2)), while the second term is the contribution due to the diffusion. The diffusion coefficient is defined by the expression:

$$\frac{d^3p}{(2\pi ^3)}f_{\nu _\alpha }^{}(𝐱,𝐩,t)\widehat{p}\frac{𝒟}{R}_𝐱\frac{d^3p}{(2\pi ^3)}f_{\nu _\alpha }^{}(𝐱,𝐩,t)$$
(15)   
As we are considering the case of small inhomogeneities in the baryon number, the diffusion coefficient can be safely considered homogeneous and one gets the diffusion term in the form written in the equation (12).

The order of magnitude of $`𝒟`$ is given by $`c\mathrm{}_{int}`$, where $`\mathrm{}_{int}=\mathrm{\Gamma }_{int}^1`$ is the interaction length and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{int}=3.15k_\alpha G_F^2T^5`$ is the total collision rate, with $`k_\alpha 1.27\text{ }(0.92)`$  for $`\alpha =e(\mu ,\tau )`$ <sup>4</sup><sup>4</sup>4An explicit calculation of the diffusion coefficient in the simpler case of ”light” particles diffusing in a ”heavy” particles medium can be found in . .

If the diffusion term is negligible compared to the $`B`$ term, then the homogeneous scenario is practically unchanged. In the equation (10) one has simply to consider that now $`\stackrel{~}{L}=\stackrel{~}{L}(𝐱)`$ and, as we are considering small inhomogeneities so that the sign of $`\stackrel{~}{L}`$ is spatially constant, the $`B`$ term pushes the solution toward the same direction in all the points.

On the other hand if we assume that the diffusion term is dominant, the situation can be much different. Let us assume for definiteness that $`\stackrel{~}{L}>0`$. In the regions where the background charge is lower, the $`\alpha `$-neutrino lepton number, before the critical temperature, would be higher (because $`L_{\nu _\alpha }0.5\stackrel{~}{L}`$). In these regions the diffusion term pushes the lepton number to be depleted with the result that at the critical temperature one can have $`L_{\nu _\alpha }<0.5\stackrel{~}{L}`$ and the growth starts toward a negative sign. The vice versa would happen in the regions where the background charge is higher. The final result is the creation of regions with different sign of lepton number with the same size as the scale of baryon number inhomogeneities. The sign of lepton number is in fact determined at any point by the curvature of the background charge field and thus the global properties of the baryon number inhomogeneities are somehow transmitted to the lepton domains.

We have now to study the conditions for which this mechanism can work. The involved parameters are the mixing parameters, the amplitude of the inhomogeneities and the size of the inhomogeneities. We can assume, for simplicity, that inhomogeneities have only one size scale. Let us introduce the field $`\rho (𝐱)`$ of the inhomogeneities, writing the background charge field as:

$$\stackrel{~}{L}(𝐱)=\overline{L}\left[1+\rho (𝐱)\right]$$
(16)   
where $`\overline{L}`$ is the mean value, and where we assume that the field $`\rho `$ is a perturbation ($`\rho 1`$ at any point). As we already said, while also non oscillating neutrinos give a non negligible contribution to the mean value, the baryon number gives the dominant contribution to the inhomogeneities.

At temperatures higher than $`T_c`$ the solution will approach again the fixed point that at the zero order will be simply $`L_{eq}^0(𝐱)=(1/2)\stackrel{~}{L}(𝐱)`$. The final sign of lepton number will be again determined by the correcting terms that this time include also the diffusion term. This can be generically estimated through the following expression (we drop the dependence on $`𝐱`$ in $`\rho `$ and $`L_{eq}^0`$):

$$\frac{𝒟}{R^2}^2L_{\nu _\alpha }\mathrm{\Gamma }_{int}\rho \left(\frac{\mathrm{}_{int}^{(0)}}{\lambda ^{(0)}}\right)^2L_{eq}^0DL_{eq}^0$$
(17)   
where we indicated with $`\lambda `$ the scale of the inhomogeneities and, given the generic physical length $`\mathrm{}`$, we mean with $`\mathrm{}^{(0)}=(R_0/R)\mathrm{}`$, the comoving length normalized at the present. We also introduced the convenient quantity $`D`$. In this way the expression (8), valid for the fixed point in the homogeneous case, becomes:

$$L_{eq}=\frac{A\stackrel{~}{L}}{2ABD}$$
(18)   
or at the first order in $`(B+D)/A`$:

$$L_{eq}=\frac{1}{2}\stackrel{~}{L}+\frac{1}{4}\frac{B+D}{|A|}\stackrel{~}{L}$$
(19)   
This expression is now describing what we previously said in words: if the term $`D`$ is negative (it means $`\rho <0`$, the regions where the background charge is lower than the mean value if we assume it is positive) and its absolute value higher than $`B`$, then the lepton number growth is addressed toward the opposite sign than in the regions where the opposite condition holds.

To determine the conditions for which an inversion of sign is possible, we have thus simply to compare the term $`B`$ with the absolute value of $`D`$ at temperatures around the critical temperature. An estimation of the order of magnitude of $`B`$ can be easily done considering that the integral on the momenta receives a dominant contribution only around the resonant value. This procedure has already been employed in  (in that paper it was used to estimate the $`A`$-term) and here we only give the result (valid for temperatures $`T\stackrel{>}{}T_c`$, when the lepton number is still small and can be neglected):

$$B10^2s^2\mathrm{\Gamma }_{int}$$
(20)   
where we defined $`s\mathrm{sin}2\theta _0`$. A calculation of the comoving interaction length expressed in parsec gives the result:

$$\mathrm{}_{int}^{(0)}100(70)\mathrm{pc}\left(\frac{\mathrm{MeV}}{T}\right)^4$$
(21)   
for $`\alpha =\mu ,\tau (e)`$. Using this expression and imposing the condition $`|D|>B`$ for the generation of lepton domains, it is thus straightforward to derive the following condition on the (orders of magnitude) of the involved parameters:

$$\rho \left(\frac{\lambda ^{(0)}}{pc}\right)^2\stackrel{>}{}10^7s^2\left(\frac{|\delta m^2|}{\mathrm{eV}^2}\right)^{\frac{4}{3}}$$
(22)   
This analytical expression is confirmed by the numerical calculations. In figure 2 we show the evolution of the terms $`|A|`$, $`B`$, calculated numerically for a particular choice of the mixing parameters and compared with the term $`|D|`$, calculated through the expression (17) with different values of the parameter $`|\rho |/(\lambda ^{(0)})^2`$. The result is in agreement with the one that could be derived using the eq. (22).

This condition can also be expressed as a condition on the order of magnitude of the maximum size of lepton domains that can be generated <sup>5</sup><sup>5</sup>5 There is also a condition on the minimum size of lepton domains that can be generated : $`\lambda ^{(0)}\stackrel{>}{}\mathrm{}_{int}^{(0)}(TT_c)10^3\mathrm{pc}(|\delta m^2|/\mathrm{eV}^2)^{\frac{2}{3}}`$. Below this scale neutrino are free streaming and they can destroy the lepton domains more rapidly than they can be generated, considering that $`\dot{L}\stackrel{<}{}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{int}`$. :

$$\lambda ^{(0)}\stackrel{<}{}10\mathrm{Kpc}\left[\frac{|\delta m^2|}{10^5\mathrm{eV}^2}\right]^{\frac{2}{3}}\left(\frac{\rho }{10^1}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}\left(\frac{10^{10}}{s^2}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}\stackrel{<}{}10\mathrm{Kpc}$$
(23)   
In this last expression we indicated the extreme possible values of the different quantities that yield the maximum value for $`\lambda ^{(0)}`$. In particular the condition $`s^2\stackrel{>}{}10^{10}`$ must be imposed to have a not negligible final absolute value of lepton number.

In next section we will use this result to sketch a scenario of how lepton domains with different sizes evolve and affect the BBN. This analysis will suggest a way to circumvent the upper limit found on the maximum size of a lepton domain.

In conclusion of this section we notice that because of the presence of the term $`B`$ there are always points where, even though $`\rho <0`$, the condition $`B|D|<0`$ is not verified. Therefore we can say that the $`B`$ term will always favour a dominance of regions where the generation of lepton number occurs with the same sign of $`\stackrel{~}{L}`$: we will refer to it as the dominant sign, compared to regions with inverted sign. There are however two much different extreme situations of dominance. In a first one $`B/|D|1`$ everywhere, except in thin walls around the surfaces where $`\rho =0`$ (weak dominance). In this case the size of lepton domains coincides with the size of baryon number inhomogeneities and in a comoving sphere with a much larger radius than the size of inhomogeneities, the volume of regions with dominant sign lepton number is almost equal to that of regions with inverted sign lepton number. The topology of lepton domains is that one of a cubic lattice with each cube surrounded by first closest neighbours cubes with opposite sign and second closest neighbours cubes with the same sign.

In a second extreme situation the condition $`B|D|<0`$ is verified only in small regions around the points where $`|\rho |`$ is maximum, with a size much smaller than that of the inhomogeneities (strong dominance). In this case one has a structure of lepton domains with inverted sign (3-dim) islands in a dominant sign background.

## 4 Lepton domains evolution

Lepton domains start to be formed at $`T=T_c`$. With the increase of lepton number the diffusion at the border of domains also increase. There is some interplay between the rate of generation (the $`A`$-term) and the rate of diffusion.

Let us assume that the dominant sign is positive. In this case the diffusion can be described as a process that gradually fills at the border the regions with negative sign (the ”holes”). At the same time, in the positive sign regions, the lepton number that has been used to fill the holes, is restored by the oscillations through the growth term. In this situation it is clear that if the diffusion is able to cover the whole hole, the generation of lepton domains is only a transient regime without any practical effect. We can refer to this phase as cannibalization regime, in which the dominant sign regions enlarge at the expense of the inverted sign regions, until eventually their complete disappearance.

However this process can last only until the generation of a lepton number can occur at the border of domains, where there is a change of sign and the lepton number is kept small by the diffusion. When the temperature drops down to $`T0.6T_c`$ <sup>6</sup><sup>6</sup>6 It corresponds to a situation when the resonant neutrinos have a momentum $`p\stackrel{>}{}10T`$, in the tail of the distribution. For small values of $`L`$, neutrinos and antineutrinos are both resonant but if $`L>0(<0)`$ and if $`yy_{\mathrm{peak}}2.2`$, the number of resonant antineutrinos (neutrinos) is a little bit higher than the number of resonant neutrinos (antineutrinos): this explains why the fixed point $`L0`$ is unstable and lepton number starts to grow (see ). or in any case down to $`3`$ MeV, the growth starts to be inhibited. We have to calculate the diffusion length to know how large the lepton domains with inverted sign must be in order to survive to the cannibalization regime. This is given by the following expression that takes into account the Universe expansion:

$$\lambda _d^{(0)}=_{t_c}^t\frac{v_ddt^{}}{R(t^{})}$$
(24)   
The diffusion velocity is approximately given by $`v_d\sqrt{𝒟/(tt_c)}`$. Considering that $`tt_c`$ and that $`t\mathrm{}_H`$, it is an easy task to get the following expression for the comoving diffusion length:

$$\lambda _d^{(0)}100(70)\mathrm{pc}\left[\left(\frac{\mathrm{MeV}}{T}\right)^{\frac{5}{2}}\left(\frac{\mathrm{MeV}}{T_c}\right)^{\frac{5}{2}}\right],$$
(25)   
for $`\alpha =\mu ,\tau (e)`$. The generation of lepton number can only occur down to temperatures $`T\mathrm{min}(3\mathrm{MeV},0.6T_c)`$, therefore for $`T_c\stackrel{>}{}5\mathrm{MeV}`$, using the expression (1), we get:

$$\lambda _d^{(0)}(T=0.6T_c)0.1\mathrm{pc}\left(\frac{|\delta m^2|}{\mathrm{eV}^2}\right)^{\frac{5}{12}}$$
(26)   
For sizes below this value (very small scales) lepton domains with inverted sign are destroyed before they can produce any effect. For $`T_c\stackrel{<}{}5\mathrm{MeV}`$ the diffusion length between the beginning of the generation of lepton number at $`T_c`$ and its end at $`T3\mathrm{M}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{V}`$ tends to zero for $`|\delta m^2|10^5\mathrm{eV}^2`$, but in any case there is a lower limit on the size of lepton domains that can be generated  and in the end the same expression (26) can be approximately used.

For larger scales the cannibalization cannot destroy completely the lepton domains before that the generation of lepton number at the border stops. When this happens, the lepton number that diffuses to fill the hole is not generated any more: the result is an effect of dilution of lepton number. The generation of lepton domains leaves a mark that modifies the homogeneous scenario.

In this case, to understand the fate of lepton domains, it is useful to compare the scale of lepton domains with the horizon scale, given by the following expression:

$$\mathrm{}_H^{(0)}=100\mathrm{p}\mathrm{c}\left(\frac{\mathrm{MeV}}{T}\right)$$
(27)   
It coincides with the diffusion length at $`1\mathrm{M}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{V}`$ when neutrinos start to free stream. All lepton domains with small scales $`\lambda ^{(0)}\stackrel{<}{}100\mathrm{p}\mathrm{c}`$, do not survive and one gets in the end a homogeneous lepton number field. However, as already stated, this time the generation of lepton domains produced the effect to dilute the final value of lepton number. If the condition for the formation of domains (22) is satisfied only in the peaks of the inhomogeneities (strong dominance), then the contribution from the regions with inverted sign is negligible and the dilution effect too. Otherwise in the other extreme case, when the relation (22) is satisfied in almost all the space (weak dominance), then there would be an almost total reciprocal cancelation of regions with opposite sign, with only a small relic value of lepton number due to the presence of the $`B`$-term. All intermediate values of lepton number are possible.

Scales of inhomogeneities $`\lambda ^{(0)}\stackrel{>}{}100\mathrm{p}\mathrm{c}`$ can produce lepton domains able to survive until the freezing of neutron to proton ratio and therefore the presence of these scales would give rise to an inhomogeneous BBN scenario.

Another important distinction is between scales able to produce primordial nuclear abundance inhomogeneities that survive until the present (large scales) or not (medium scales). In fact, even though nuclear abundances are produced in a inhomogeneous scenario of BBN, subsequent astrophysical mixing mechanisms, such as shock waves induced by supernovae explosions, would be able to homogenize the products of BBN . These processes are effective on scales $`\lambda ^{(0)}\stackrel{<}{}100\mathrm{K}\mathrm{p}\mathrm{c}`$. From this point of view the mechanism we proposed, in its simplest version, is unable to produce visible primordial abundance inhomogeneities.

We can however circumvent this limit if we relax our initial assumption on the presence of only one characteristic scale in the field of the inhomogeneities $`\rho (𝐱)`$. We can in fact imagine a simple extension with two characteristic scales contemporarily present (for examples two Fourier modes): one small scale and one large scale. The amplitude of the first one could be modulated by the presence of the second. In this case one can have the simultaneous existence of regions where the small scales inhomogeneities are able to efficiently dilute the lepton number generated at the critical temperature down to negligible values, and regions where the amplitude of small inhomogeneities is depressed and there is no dilution effect. In this way one can produce islands where lepton number is present in a background with zero lepton number or vice versa. This time the size of the island regions has no intrinsic limit, but it is a feature of the model that produced the baryon inhomogeneities.

More realistically one has to think that the inhomogeneities are described by a spectrum of lengths. The interesting property is that the spectral features of the isocurvature perturbations would be reflected in the lepton domains features and eventually in the BBN products. Another interesting aspect is that very large scale lepton domains would not be constrained by microwave background observations as models where large amplitude isocurvature perturbations are directly present in the baryon number . This because the inhomogeneity in the active neutrino energy density would be compensated by an opposite inhomogeneity in the sterile neutrino energy density. In fact during active-sterile neutrino oscillations one has that $`L_{\nu _s}+L_{\nu _\alpha }=`$const. Even though sterile neutrinos free stream while active neutrinos are still diffusing, for very large scales (surely larger than the diffusion length of active neutrinos) this different behaviour cannot change the conservation of the sum of the asymmetries of active neutrinos and sterile neutrinos at each point.

In the end of this section we want also to show that small amplitudes of inhomogeneities are sufficient for the mechanism to work. From the expression (22), imposing the lower limit (26) on $`\lambda ^{(0)}`$ (in order to have lepton domains with inverted sign large enough not to be cannibalized), one gets the following condition on the mixing parameters:

$$s^2\left(\frac{|\delta m^2|}{\mathrm{eV}^2}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}<10^5\rho $$
(28)   
that is satisfied for large regions of possible values of the mixing parameters, even for very small values of $`\rho `$. These regions are represented in figure 3 for three different values of $`\rho `$. It can be noticed that even for $`\rho =10^5`$, there is a significant region where lepton domains can be generated and produce interesting effects.

## 5 Conclusions

We proposed a mechanism according to which active-sterile neutrino oscillations would amplify small baryon number inhomogeneities generating a structure of lepton domains. The assumption on the presence of baryon number inhomogeneities is a very reasonable one, because very small amplitudes are sufficient to produce lepton domains large enough to give some effect. The structure of the lepton domains and its effect on the BBN would reflect the spectral features of the same perturbations that seeded the formation of the domains. The main attraction of this mechanism is that the size of these domains is not limited by the horizon scale. Moreover large scale lepton domains cannot be ruled out by current CMB observations (but maybe could be constrained or discovered in future experiments).

The mechanism presents different applications. It provides a scenario for a non standard BBN (see  for a review and see also the recent paper  where the effects of inhomogeneous chemical potentials on BBN are considered). If the active neutrino is an electron neutrino the effects on the nuclear abundances can be remarkable  and some of them could help to explain the present observational picture, for example claimed inhomogeneities in the D/H abundances from measurements in quasar absorption systems . From this point of view one possibility is that we live in a background of zero electron lepton number but some observed high redshift absorption systems, for example the one observed with an high abundance, could be included in an island of non zero lepton number <sup>7</sup><sup>7</sup>7 The possibility that neutrino chemical potentials inhomogeneities can be responsible for the primordial deuterium abundance inhomogeneities able to explain the observations from high redshift quasar absorbers, has been proposed in . A recent analysis of the current measurements of primordial deuterium abundance in high redshift quasars absorbers can be found in . .

We also mention that isocurvature perturbations can have interesting effects on large scale structure .

Very generically we can say that the generation of lepton domains enlarge the possibility of the existence of some observational signature of active-sterile neutrino oscillations in the early universe. In the very fortunate case that active-sterile neutrino oscillations, with the right parameters for a lepton domain formation, do really occur in nature, then we would have a powerful probe for baryogenesis models that predict a spectrum of inhomogeneities. The simple non observation of a signature of the generation of lepton domains would put strong constraints. We conclude saying that the planned earth experiments will be able in next future to test the hypothesis of active-sterile neutrino oscillations and thus to rule out or support the proposed mechanism.

Acknowledgements

P. Di Bari acknowledges many interesting and stimulating discussions with R. Foot, P. Lipari, M. Lusignoli and R.R. Volkas and is grateful to them for many suggestions that made this manuscript clearer. He also thanks K. Jedamzik for a nice discussion during COSMO-99.

## Figure Captions

Fig. 1 The behaviour of $`L_{\nu _\alpha }L_{eq}^0`$ (solid line) around the critical temperature when the sign is determined by the action of the correcting term $`B`$. The dotted line is the quantity $`L_{eq}L_{eq}^0`$, with $`L_{eq}`$ defined by the expression (8) and $`L_{eq}^0=(1/2)\stackrel{~}{L}`$. We used $`\stackrel{~}{L}=10^{10}`$, while the values of mixing parameters are those indicated.

Fig. 2 Comparison of the quantities $`A,B,D`$ times $`|dt/dT|=1/HT`$ (for numerical calculations it is more convenient to replace time with temperature). The term $`A`$ vanishes at the critical temperature $`T15\mathrm{M}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{V}`$. The values of mixing parameters are those indicated. The diffusion term is plotted for different values of the parameter $`\rho /(\lambda ^{(0)}\mathrm{pc}^1)^2`$. It can be noticed that the diffusion term $`|D|`$ is dominant on $`B`$, around the critical temperature, for $`\rho /(\lambda ^{(0)}\mathrm{pc}^1)^2\stackrel{>}{}10^1`$, as it could be deduced by the expression (22).

Fig. 3 Represantation of the regions where the condition (28) for the surviving of lepton domains to the canibalization regime is satisfied. The regions are those below the three solid lines and correspond to the three indicated values for the amplitude $`\rho `$ of the baryon number inhomogeneities that seed the lepton domain formation. Above the dotted line the contribution of sterile neutrinos to the number of effective neutrinos during the BBN is higher than $`0.8`$ for $`\alpha =e`$ (see ). Even for very small amplitudes ($`\rho =10^5`$) there is a significant region of parameters where the condition (28) is satisfied.