Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge / 2002 / iii / Paper 71 / 2

Use radiation-era $H=C_{\ast }{T}^2/m_{\mathrm{pl}}$, with $C_{\ast }=1.66\sqrt{g_{\ast }}$. The stipulated interaction rate is ${\alpha }_Y^4{T}^5/m_Y^4$, not ${\alpha }_Y^2{T}^5/m_Y^4$. Decoupling therefore givesAt the threshold $T_D=m_{Y\mathrm{nr}}$, the assumed $g_{\ast }\simeq 100$ is self-consistent with the stated high-temperature condition. Smaller masses decouple nonrelativistically, with $x_D=m_Y/T_D=(m_{Y\mathrm{nr}}/m_Y{)}^{1/3}\gg 1$.

For an thermal equilibrium species with zero chemical potential, $n_Y=2(m_Y{T}_D/2\pi {)}^{3/2}{e}^{-x_D}$, while $s=2{\pi }^2{g}_{\ast s}{T}_D^3/45$. ThusThe numerical coefficient before rounding is about $2.9\times 10^{-3}$ for $g_Y=2$ and $g_{\ast s}=100$. This is mass-dependent fermion freeze-out. It assumes the rate maintains chemical equilibrium until sudden cosmological particle freeze-out and that entropy is conserved afterwards. Elastic scattering alone would not justify the thermal equilibrium number-density estimate. For decoupling below the high-temperature range, changes in effective degrees of freedom modify the numerical estimate; the requested formula treats them as roughly constant.

In the specified dust model $H_0=2/(3t_0)$, so ${\rho }_{\mathrm{crit}}=m_{\mathrm{pl}}^2/(6\pi t_0^2)$ and $n_B={\Omega }_{B0}{\rho }_{\mathrm{crit}}/m_B$. Photons and the six neutrino/antineutrino helicity states giveUsing the supplied GeV estimates literally givesThe rounded time/temperature conversions are unusually crude: converting $10$ Gyr to $4.8\times 10^{41}{\mathrm{GeV}}^{-1}$ and $3$ K to $2.6\times 10^{-13}$ GeV instead gives $Y_B\sim 10^{-10}$. Either set gives the same order-of-magnitude mass conclusion below, but the numerical abundance should identify which supplied units are used.

For a stable relic, the relevant comparison is energy density, not merely particle number. The matter density left over after the baryons is at most nine times the baryon density here. ConsequentlyPut $x=(m_{Y\mathrm{nr}}/m_Y{)}^{1/3}$ and use $Y_Y\simeq C_Y{x}^{3/2}{e}^{-x}$ with $C_Y\simeq 10^{-3}$. The condition becomesFor the literal supplied numbers the right side is about $30.5$, giving $x\gtrsim 25.6$ and $m_Y\lesssim 40$–$50$ GeV. With the physically consistent conversions the estimate is about $60$ GeV. The intended rough conclusion is therefore a sufficiently suppressed branch with $m_Y$ no larger than order $10^2$ GeV, within the toy cosmological particle freeze-out law. Comparing the two number yields alone gives a similar rough scale but misses the mass weighting. This is a thermal relic density bound for a tunable fermion.

For $m_Y\gtrsim m_{Y\mathrm{nr}}$, relativistic decoupling would instead leave $Y_Y\simeq 135\zeta (3)g_Y/(8{\pi }^4{g}_{\ast s})\simeq 4\times 10^{-3}$, incompatible with the matter-density bound for such heavy stable particles. These are conditional bounds on a populated, stable thermal relic. A short lifetime or an initially suppressed nonthermal population can change the conclusion; the supplied information alone does not constrain every possible production and decay history.

Above the transition,for $g_{\ast }\sim 100$. The ratio increases during cooling, rather than at higher temperature. A GUT transition at $T_c\sim 10^{15}$–$10^{16}$ GeV occurs well above this scale, so the interaction is too slow to establish or maintain thermal equilibrium throughout $T>T_c$. In fact its integrated interaction probability from an arbitrarily high temperature down to $T_c$ is at most of order $T_{\mathrm{eq}}/T_c\ll 1$, since $dt=-dT/(HT)$.

An initial Fermi-Dirac distribution with zero chemical potential therefore cannot be assumed from this high-temperature rate alone. If imposed initially and collisionlessly redshifted while the particles are massless, its thermal-looking form can persist, but this is not dynamically maintained thermal equilibrium. Other initial states can remain nonthermal. This is the thermalization temperature for a massless gauge mediator.

The below-transition rate stipulated in the model has $\Gamma /H=(T/T_D{)}^3$. If $T_c\gg T_D$ and it includes efficient number-changing reactions, it can restore chemical equilibrium after the transition and erase the initial-state memory, making the estimates in a and b applicable. If it only equilibrates momenta, or if reheating never populates the relevant range, the thermal relic calculation must be reconsidered.