I've been reading about inflation and i encountered that one can always define the sound's speed as(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

[tex]c_s^2 \equiv \frac{\partial_X P}{\partial_X \rho}[/tex]

where [tex]X \equiv \frac{1}{2} g^{ab} \partial_a \phi \partial_b \phi[/tex]. In the case of a canonical scalar field [tex]P=X-V[/tex] and [tex]\rho=X+V[/tex], so [tex]c_s^2=1[/tex]. That is what is obtained by definition. But i can always consider [tex]P[/tex] and [tex]\rho[/tex] as a function of [tex]P=(X,\phi)[/tex] and [tex]\rho=(X,\phi)[/tex] so

[tex]P+\rho=2 X[/tex] and

[tex]\rho-P= 2 V[/tex]

taking variations of these last to equations i obtain

[tex]\delta P = - \delta \rho + 2 \delta X[/tex] (1) and

[tex]\delta P = \delta \rho - 2 \partial_\phi V \delta \phi[/tex] (2)

Recalling that in general [tex]P=(\rho,S)[/tex] then [tex]\delta P = c_s^2 \delta \rho + \tau \delta S[/tex]. Thus if i read the coefficient of [tex]\delta \rho[/tex] of eq. (1) one obtains that [tex]c_s^2 = -1[/tex] and [tex]\tau \delta S = 2 \delta X[/tex], but if i read the coefficient of eq. (2) one obtains [tex]c_s^2 = 1[/tex] and [tex]\tau \delta S = - 2 \partial_\phi V \delta \phi[/tex], according to the definition the correct reading would be the one done by (2) but is there another explanation of why reading the coefficient [tex]c_s^2[/tex] from (2) is the correct way, or is there a motivation for the first definition for [tex]c_s^2[/tex]?

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**

Join Physics Forums Today!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# The speed of sound of the inflaton field

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**