1. Towards Constraining the initial state using Non-Gaussianities Daan Meerburg University of Amsterdam, ITF-API PASCOS 2008 WORK IN PROGRESS: Meerburg and van der Schaar

2. MAIN MESSAGE Initial state modifications always lead to enfolded non-Gaussianities (NG) BEFT gives extra contribution ((cor)related) [WIP] Construction of enfolded template Bounding enfolded NG might strongly constrain the initial state

3. OUTLINE Introduction BEFT (Boundary Effective Field Theory) Non-Gaussianities Conclusions Non-Gaussian Shapes

4. INTRODUCTION Komatsu et al. 2002

5. INTRODUCTION > Degrees of Freedom Deviation from Random Quantum fl. -> Inflation Different Models, Different Shapes Signature of Fundamental Physics

6. BEFT 2 Possibilities to set a Boundary NPHBEFT Schalm, Shiu & v d Schaar 2005 Danielsson 2002

7. BEFT In the language of Actions: For single field models

8. BEFT The idea: Tolley & Holman 2007, Porrati 2005 Computing prim. 3p function Need to consider: 1) 3pf from boundary: 2) 3pf from bulk:

9. BEFT Using the in-in formalism Schwinger 1961, Keldysh 1964 where

10. Contribution from Bulk (SFSR) NON-GAUSSIANITIES With Holman & Tolley 2007

11. Contribution from Bulk (SFSR) NON-GAUSSIANITIES With Holman & Tolley 2007 Max: ENFOLDED!

12. NON-GAUSSIANITIES Contribution from Boundary (WIP): Poratti et al 2005, Meerburg & v d Schaar With Vanishes for modes, working on details of what happens in between. For super-horizon modes ( ) : LOCAL!

13. NON-GAUSSIAN SHAPES Non-Gaussian Shapes Komatsu et al, Babich, Creminelli 2004 Local, Equilateral & Enfolded

14. NON-GAUSSIAN SHAPES Factorizable template Take and replace and demand and demand Meerburg & v d Schaar in prep.

15. NON-GAUSSIAN SHAPES

16. Three templates, three extreme Triangles: Last triangle seem to be unique for Initial state mod. Equilateral and local shape alone do not completely do not completely parameterize a general 3p function

17. NON-GAUSSIAN SHAPES Example: ‘Flat shape’ Can be written as: When this shape dominates data then:

18. CONCLUSIONS BEFT elegant approach to take all contributions due to initial state mod. in consideration Non-Gaussianities coming from bulk and boundary differ: shapes, regime and likely amplitude (WIP) Measure using our template to constrain initial state

19. HYPOTHETICAL CONSTRAINTS From bulk If: Then

20. WIP Still need to relate to. Basically comparing a Gaussian to a Non-Gaussian, using one parameter Constrain in CMB data, as done for and Consider higher order correlation function in part. for boundary action Do these triangles represent a full set?