General Massive Gravity and Cosmology · General Massive Gravity and Cosmology L. Pilo1 1Department...

General Massive Gravity and Cosmology

L. Pilo1

1Department of Physical and Chemical SciencesUniversity of L’Aquila

Tales of Lambda, Nottingham , July 2013

Based onComelli-Crisostomi-Nesti-LP Phys.Rev. D86 (2012) 101502

Comelli-Nesti-LP arXiv:1302.4447, PRD in pressComelli-Nesti-LP arXiv:1305.0236 , JHEP in press

Comelli-Nesti-LP to appear

1 / 26

Einstein’s GR

A 95 year-long successful theorya single free parameter and it works great

Weak Equivalence principle (10−13 )Solar system tests (weak field) (10−3 − 10−5 )Binary pulsar (nonlinear) (10−3)Newton’s Law tested between 10−2mm and 1016mmAs an effective field theory the cutoff is hugeΛ ∼

(10−33 cm

)−1 ∼ M2pl ∼ 1019 GeV

Modify GR at large distance to explain the present acceleration ?

2 / 26

Einstein’s GR

A 95 year-long successful theorya single free parameter and it works great

Weak Equivalence principle (10−13 )Solar system tests (weak field) (10−3 − 10−5 )Binary pulsar (nonlinear) (10−3)Newton’s Law tested between 10−2mm and 1016mmAs an effective field theory the cutoff is hugeΛ ∼

(10−33 cm

)−1 ∼ M2pl ∼ 1019 GeV

Modify GR at large distance to explain the present acceleration ?

2 / 26

Massive Deformed GR

Add to GR an extra piece such that when gµν = ηµν + hµν

R − m2 V)

= Lspin 2 +14(m2

0 h200 + 2m2

1 h0ih0i −m22 hijhij

+ m23 h2

ii − 2m24 h00hii

)+ · · ·

Beyond lin. approximation building V requires extra stuffOne is possibility is to introduce gµν = ∂µφ

A∂νφB ηAB

Scalars made out of Xµν = gµαgαν , τn = Tr(X n)

Unitary gauge: ∂µφA = δA

a (τ1 − 4)2 + b (τ2 − 2τ1 + 4) =(

a hµνhµν + b h2)

+ · · ·

Lorentz invariant mass term:m2

0 = a + b , m21 = −b , m2

2 = −a , m24 = b , m2

3 / 26

Massive Deformed GR

Add to GR an extra piece such that when gµν = ηµν + hµν

R − m2 V)

= Lspin 2 +14(m2

0 h200 + 2m2

1 h0ih0i −m22 hijhij

+ m23 h2

ii − 2m24 h00hii

)+ · · ·

Beyond lin. approximation building V requires extra stuffOne is possibility is to introduce gµν = ∂µφ

A∂νφB ηAB

Scalars made out of Xµν = gµαgαν , τn = Tr(X n)

Unitary gauge: ∂µφA = δA

a (τ1 − 4)2 + b (τ2 − 2τ1 + 4) =(

a hµνhµν + b h2)

+ · · ·

Lorentz invariant mass term:m2

0 = a + b , m21 = −b , m2

2 = −a , m24 = b , m2

3 / 26

Massive Deformed GR

Nondynamical g breaks inevitably local Lorentz (grav. sector)

gab = diag(−1,1,1,1) , gab = diag(−α0, α1, α2, α3)

Accidental Lorentz symm. of V (unitary gauge) unrelated withLorentz symmetry in the equivalence principleAlternatively only rotational invariance can be retained in theunitary gauge. Helps with phenomenology Rubakov ’04

fµν = ∂µΦm ∂νΦnδmn , n = (−gµν∂µΦ∂νΦ)1/2 , nµ = n ∂µΦ

Γµν = gµα fαν + nµ nαfαν , gµαgαµ = Xµν = Γµµ − n2

Γµµ + c1 n2 , τ1 = Tr(X ) = Γµµ − n2

Matter always couples with gµν , weak equivalence principle is OK

4 / 26

Massive Deformed GR

Γµµ + c1 n2 , τ1 = Tr(X ) = Γµµ − n2

4 / 26

Massive Deformed GR

Γµµ + c1 n2 , τ1 = Tr(X ) = Γµµ − n2

4 / 26

Taming the zoo of Massive Gravity

How many degrees of freedom propagate ?

Canonical analysis is best suitednonperturbativebackground independent

Variable in the ADM form : lapse N, shift vector N i and spatial metric γij

gµν =

(−N2 + N iN jγij γijN j

γijN j γij

)NA = (N,N i)

V = m2√

(g) V = m2 N γ1/2 V (NA, γij)

5 / 26

Results from Canonical Analysis

1 No condition on V ⇒ 6 DoF propagatearound flat space : 2 tensors + 2 vectors + 1+ 1 scalarsOne of the scalars is a the Bolware-Deser ghost. No good

2 5 DoFs propagate if and only if NB V = det(γij)1/2 V

det(∂V

∂NA∂NB ) = 0 and rank(VAB) = 3 Monge-Ampere eq.

Vi + 2 ξAξj ∂VA

∂γ ij = 0 , ξA = (1, ξi) VAB ξB = 0

6 / 26

Results from Canonical Analysis

1 No condition on V ⇒ 6 DoF propagatearound flat space : 2 tensors + 2 vectors + 1+ 1 scalarsOne of the scalars is a the Bolware-Deser ghost. No good

2 5 DoFs propagate if and only if NB V = det(γij)1/2 V

det(∂V

∂NA∂NB ) = 0 and rank(VAB) = 3 Monge-Ampere eq.

Vi + 2 ξAξj ∂VA

∂γ ij = 0 , ξA = (1, ξi) VAB ξB = 0

6 / 26

Taming the zoo of Massive Gravity: bottom line

All massive gravity theories with residual rotational invariance (unitarygauge) with five DOF are of the form (for any U and E )

V (N,N i , γij) = U + N−1(E +Qi Uξi

)U(Kij) , E(γij , ξ

i) Kij = γ ij − ξi ξj

ξi is defined by N i − N ξi =

(∂2U∂ξi∂ξj

)−1∂E∂ξj ≡ Q

i(γ ij , ξi)

Simplest case: E(γij) ⇒ ξi = N i/N

Kij = γ ij − N−2 N i N j ≡ g ij and V = U(g ij) + N−1 E(γij)

Z+dRGT Lorentz inv. is recovered. The price is a very low cutoffΛ3 = (m2 Mpl)

1/3 ∼ 103 Km−1 in conflict with Newton’s law testsgenerically (no Lorentz inv. only rotation inv.) the cutoff isΛ2 = (m Mpl)

1/2 >> Λ3. OK with Newton’s law tests

7 / 26

Massive Gravity Cosmology

CMB isotropy frame ≡ massive GR preferred frame (unitarygauge) with Stuckelbergs are trivialThe only reasonable option if mGR is relevant for cosmologyFRW metric in conformal time (zero spatial curvature for simplicity)

ds2 = a2 ηµν dxµdxν , 3H2 = a2

2 M2pl

mGR→ ρeff

= m2 U , peff

= m2[2U ′ − U + 2a−1

(E ′ − E

)]Bianchi → H

(E ′ − 1

= 0∂U∂γ ij = U ′γij

Either there is no cosmology or E must be tuned: for instance Ehomogeneous of degree -3/2 in γij or simply E = 0dRGT choice for V ∼ Tr(X 1/2) does not satisfy Bianchi:ELI = (1− ξiγijξ

j)−1/2 no FRW solution8 / 26

mGR Cosmology: perturbations vs DE eq. of state

Perturbationsgµν = a2(ηµν + hµν) hij = χij + ∂isj + ∂jsi + δij τ + ∂i∂jσ

L(v) =M2

1s′ik2

k2 + a2m21

s′i −m22 k2 sisi + · · ·

1 ∝ 2 m2 U ′2

L(s) =a4 Λ4

2 U ′

2 k2 Σ′2 −a4 M2

pl(m22 −m2

2Σ2 + · · · Σ = k2 σ

Dark Energy eq. of state

weff =peff

ρeff= −1 +

2U ′

dS and/or Minkowski perturbations are strongly coupled if FRWsolutions exist: perturbatively instead of 5 DOF only 2 DOF (tensors)General conclusion for any mGR theory with 5 DOF !

9 / 26

How much DE dominated Universe can differ from dS ?Away from dS the strong coupling scale for vectors and scalar is

Λscal '√

MplH(weff + 1)1/4

Λvect '√

(weff + 1)1/2 X =2U ′

2U ′ + E ′′v

(Mpl H)1/2 ∼ 10−1 mm−1 and with the present uncertainty on weffwe can still have a sub-millimiter cutoff scaleFurther progress on small scale test of 1/r would give a predictionfor weff to stay away from strong coupling

10 / 26

Λscal '√

MplH(weff + 1)1/4

Λvect '√

(weff + 1)1/2 X =2U ′

2U ′ + E ′′v

10 / 26

Λscal '√

MplH(weff + 1)1/4

Λvect '√

(weff + 1)1/2 X =2U ′

2U ′ + E ′′v

10 / 26

Λscal '√

MplH(weff + 1)1/4

Λvect '√

(weff + 1)1/2 X =2U ′

2U ′ + E ′′v

10 / 26

Conclusions

A randomly picked deforming potential propagates 5+1 DOF;one is a ghost around Minkowski spaceThe condition for having 5 DoF in encoded in a set differentialequationsBesides dGRT, there are a lot of new interesting solutions(infinitely many)Generically, the new solutions has no vDVZ discontinuity and nostrong coupling is needed in the solar systemAs an effective field theory the cutoff Λ2 = (m Mpl)

1/2 seems to bethe highest possible in the absence of a Higgs mechanism forgravityIf FRW solution exist then perturbations around dS and/orMinkowski are strongly coupleddeviations from Minkowski are needed

11 / 26

Conclusions

11 / 26

Conclusions

11 / 26

Conclusions

11 / 26

Conclusions

11 / 26

Conclusions

11 / 26

Directions

Canonical Analysis

Stuckelberg Formulation

Derivation of the new solutions

Conclusions

12 / 26

The Stuckelberg Trick in Massive GR I

The extra metric is non-dynamical flat given metric

To recover diff (gauge) invariance introduce 4 (Stuckelberg)scalars to recast the fixed metric as

gµν =∂φA

∂xµ∂φB

∂xνηAB

Minimal set of DOF to recover diff invariancegµν , Xµ

ν = gµαgαν are tensors and τn = Tr(X n) scalarsGeometrically φA are coordinates of some fictitious flat spaceMpoint-wise identified with the physical spacetime with a tetradbasis EA = dφA

One can chose coordinates such that (Unitary gauge)

xµ = φAδµA ,∂φA

∂xµ= δA

µ ⇒ gµν = ηµν

13 / 26

gµν =∂φA

∂xµ∂φB

∂xνηAB

∂xµ= δA

13 / 26

gµν =∂φA

∂xµ∂φB

∂xνηAB

∂xµ= δA

13 / 26

gµν =∂φA

∂xµ∂φB

∂xνηAB

∂xµ= δA

13 / 26

The Stuckelberg Formulation II

Weak equivalence principle is OK, matter still couples with gResidual Lorentz symm. in the unitary gauge is not related withEinstein equivalence principleThe extra metric g breaks inevitably local Lorentz invariance in thegravitation sectorLocally (tetrad basis)

14 / 26

The Stuckelberg Formulation II

Galileian structure inMuniversal time field Φ defines Φ = const . slices, on each of them a flatmetric f is given

fµν = ∂µΦm ∂νΦnδmn .

Galileian Unitary gauge (defined up to rotations)

x0 = Φ, x i = Φi fµν = δiµδ

jνδij .

Basic objects:

(−gµν

∂xµ∂Φ

∂xν

, nµ = n ∂µΦ , Yµν = gµα fαν

Γµν = (gµα + nµ nα) fαν = Yµν + nµ nαfαν

Dictionary

N → n , γ ikδkj → Γµν N i → n nµ = n gµνnν

15 / 26

The Stuckelberg Formulation III

The deforming potential is made of SO(3) scalars. For instance

Γµν , nµnµ

The two approaches are related but do not coincide. For instance,

gµαgαµ = Xµν = Γµµ − n2

but a general scalar function of n,nµ, Γµν is not function of Tr(X n)The residual symmetry in the unitary gauge is differentSO(3,1) vs SO(3)

Action

SmGR =

∫d4x√

g M2pl

[R(g) + Lmatt (ψ,g)−m2 V (g, g)

]Index

16 / 26

Hamiltonian Analysis

ADM decompositions

gµν =

(−N2 + NiNjhij Ni

Ni γij

)Hamiltonian of GR and mGR in the unitary gauge

H = M2pl

∫d3x

[NAHA + m2 N

√γ V]

HA = (H, Hi)

Πij → Conj. momenta of γij

PA = (P0,P i) Conjugate momenta of NA = (N,N i)

Hi = −2γijDk Πjk , H = −γ1/2 R(3) + γ−1/2(

ΠijΠij − 1

No time derivatives of NA → PA = 0 Constrained theory !

17 / 26

Constrained Theory: Dirac treatment in a nutshell

1 Momenta are not all independent→ introduce Lagrangemultipliers (LMs) to enforce the constraints

2 Time evolution us generated by the the total Hamiltonian:canonical + constraints + LMs

HT = H +

∫d3x λAΠA ,

EoMs: dynamical + time evolution of primary (PA = 0) constraints3 enforcing the consistency of constrs. with time evolution produces

new constraints or determine some of the LMs4 Full set of conserved constraints {Cs , i = 1,2, · · · c} reduces the

number of DoF from 10 down to (10 + 10− c)/2 = 10− c/2If some of the LMs are not determined→ gauge invariance

18 / 26

HT = H +

∫d3x λAΠA ,

18 / 26

HT = H +

∫d3x λAΠA ,

18 / 26

HT = H +

∫d3x λAΠA ,

18 / 26

Example: GR

Time evolution of PA = 0 via Poisson brackets are just the Eqs. ofNA, being H linear in NA

{PA(t , x), HT (t)} = {PA(t , x), H} = HA = 0

Thanks to the GR algebra the four secondary constraints areconserved and no LM is determined (Diff invariance)

{H(x), H(y) = Hi (x) ∂(x)i δ

(3)(x − y)−Hi (y) ∂(y)i δ

(3)(x − y)

{H(x), Hj (y)} = H(y) ∂(x)j δ

(3)(x − y)

{Hi (x), Hj (y)} = Hj (x) ∂(x)i δ

(3)(x − y)−Hi (y) ∂(x)j δ

(3)(x − y)

In GR four diffs have to be gauge fixed adding 4× 2 additionalconstraints

DoF = (10 + 10− 4− 4− 8)/2 = 2

The analysis is nonpertutbative and background independent

19 / 26

Example: GR

Time evolution of PA = 0 via Poisson brackets are just the Eqs. ofNA, being H linear in NA

{PA(t , x), HT (t)} = {PA(t , x), H} = HA = 0

Thanks to the GR algebra the four secondary constraints areconserved and no LM is determined (Diff invariance)

{H(x), H(y) = Hi (x) ∂(x)i δ

(3)(x − y)−Hi (y) ∂(y)i δ

(3)(x − y)

{H(x), Hj (y)} = H(y) ∂(x)j δ

(3)(x − y)

{Hi (x), Hj (y)} = Hj (x) ∂(x)i δ

(3)(x − y)−Hi (y) ∂(x)j δ

(3)(x − y)

In GR four diffs have to be gauge fixed adding 4× 2 additionalconstraints

DoF = (10 + 10− 4− 4− 8)/2 = 2

The analysis is nonpertutbative and background independent

19 / 26

When V deforming potential is turned on, the time evolution ofPA = 0 still gives NA Eqs

{PA(t , x), HT (t)} = SA = HA + VA 4 new secondary constraints

V = m2 N γ1/2 V∂V∂NA = VA

Is time evolution consistent with SA ?VAB ≡ V,AB =

∂2V/∂NA∂NB

TA ≡ {SA, HT} = {SA, H} − VAB λB = 0

If the r = Rank(VAB) = 4: deforming pot. has non degenerateHessianall LMs λA are determined and we are doneDoF=10 - (4 + 4)/2 = 6 = 5 + 1Around Minkowski: massive spin 2 (5) plus a ghost scalar (1)Boulware-Deser mode

20 / 26

When V deforming potential is turned on, the time evolution ofPA = 0 still gives NA Eqs

{PA(t , x), HT (t)} = SA = HA + VA 4 new secondary constraints

V = m2 N γ1/2 V∂V∂NA = VA

Is time evolution consistent with SA ?VAB ≡ V,AB =

∂2V/∂NA∂NB

TA ≡ {SA, HT} = {SA, H} − VAB λB = 0

If the r = Rank(VAB) = 4: deforming pot. has non degenerateHessianall LMs λA are determined and we are doneDoF=10 - (4 + 4)/2 = 6 = 5 + 1Around Minkowski: massive spin 2 (5) plus a ghost scalar (1)Boulware-Deser mode

20 / 26

The Hessian matrix of V has a single zero mode χA, r = 3

VAB χB = 0 , VAB EB

n = κn EAn

λA = z χA +3∑

dn EAn

def≡ z χA + λA .

If det(Vij) 6= 0, then χA = (1,−V−1ij V0j) ≡ (1, ξi)

Projection of TA = 0 along χA is a single new constraintProjection on the remaining eigenvectors gives Three (λA) out of thefour LMs

χA{SA, H} = TAχA = T = 0

EAn {SA, H} − dn κn = 0 No sum in n

21 / 26

Time evolution of T

Q(x) = {T (x),HT}

= {T (x),H}+

∫d3y {T (x), λA(y)ΠA(y)} = 0

1 If Q does not depend on z, the last LM, we have a new constraint

z is determinate by the time evolution of Q. OK

Total # of constraints 4 (PA) + 4 (SA) + 1 (T ) + 1 (Q) = 10

DoF: 10− 10/2 = 5

2 If Q = 0 determines z, There is no additional constraintsTotal # of constraints 4 (PA) + 4 (SA) + 1 (T ) = 8 + 1

DoF: 10− 9/2 = 5 + 1/222 / 26

Time evolution of T

Q(x) = {T (x),HT}

= {T (x),H}+

∫d3y {T (x), λA(y)ΠA(y)} = 0

DoF: 10− 10/2 = 5

DoF: 10− 9/2 = 5 + 1/222 / 26

Time evolution of T

Q(x) = {T (x),HT}

= {T (x),H}+

∫d3y {T (x), λA(y)ΠA(y)} = 0

DoF: 10− 10/2 = 5

DoF: 10− 9/2 = 5 + 1/222 / 26

{T , λA · ΠA} = terms z indep.−∫

d3y Θ(x , y) z(y) = · · · − I[z]

Θ(x , y) = χA(x) {SA(x),SB(y)}χA(y) = Ai(x , y)∂iδ(3)(x − y)

A(x , y) = A(y , x)

Only in field theory Θ can be non zero !

I[z] = − 12z(x)

[z(x)2Ai(x , x)

]Q is free from z if Ai(x , x) = 0, which consists in the following condition

Vi + 2χAχj ∂VA

∂γ ij = 0 , V = γ1/2V

23 / 26

mGR: Summary of the Canonical Analysis

Necessary and sufficient conditions for having 5 DoF in mGR

Rank(VAB) = 3⇒ V00 − V0i(Vij)−1Vj0 = 0 (1)

Vi + 2χAχj ∂VA

∂γ ij = 0 χA = (1,−V−1ij V0j) (2)

Notice: If only (1) holds 5+1/2 DoF propagate

5+1/2 DoF found also in a class of Horava-Lifshitz modified gravitytheory(1) is a homogeneous Monge-Ampere equation(2) is much more restrictive: it involves of the the spatial metric

24 / 26

New solutions: sketch of the derivation I

Change variable from N i to ξ ≡ χi and then Monge-Ampere eq. ⇒V is a degree zero homogeneous function of (N, χi)

Introduce U = χA VA of ξi and γij , sort of Legendre transformation

V0 = U − Ui ξi , Vi = Ui . (3)

Any V that satisfies (3) solves the Monge-Ampere eq.Eqs. (3) can be integrated using the integtability conditionN i − N ξi = − U ij Ej ≡ Qi

where U ij ≡ (Uij)−1 hessian inverse of U and Ei ≡ ∂ξiE gradient of

a generic function E(ξi , γ ij). The general solution is

V = N U + E + UiQi

25 / 26

New solutions: sketch of the derivation II

The remaining equation for having 5 Dofs reads

∂U∂ξi + 2 ξj ∂U

∂γ ij = 0

The spatial metric γij enters here. The Monge-Ampere involvedonly the lapse and the shiftsKey observation: any function of K ij = γ ij − ξi ξj is a solution.SO(3) invariant solutions ara made from the invariants of K inδnj

Pick up a function E of ξi and γij and express ξi in terms of N i

Take ∂E/ξi = 0⇒ ξi = N−1 N i and K ij = γ ij − ξiξj ≡ g ij

The potential is given by

V = U(

+ N−1 E(γij)

U scalar function of g ijand E scalar function of γij Index

26 / 26

General Massive Gravity and Cosmology · General Massive Gravity and Cosmology L. Pilo1 1Department...

Documents

Transcript of General Massive Gravity and Cosmology · General Massive Gravity and Cosmology L. Pilo1 1Department...

Galileons & Massive Gravity

Topologically Massive Gravity

A Brief Introduction to Massive Gravity

Cosmological Measurements of Neutrinos and Other Massive ......Cosmological Measurements of Neutrinos and Other Massive Light Relics New England Theoretical Cosmology, Gravity and

Dilaton quantum gravity and cosmology. Dilaton quantum gravity Functional renormalization flow, with truncation :

0.7cm Quantum Gravity and Cosmology · Inverno Astrof´ısico - 2019 Fazenda do Centro - Castelo, ES. Quantum Gravity and Cosmology Outline of the course IIntroduction: Quantum Gravity

Massive Gravity

EXPLORING THE COSMOLOGY OF MODIFIED GRAVITY

Quantum Cosmology with Distorted Gravity

f(T) Gravity and Cosmology

Kiritsis.d-branes in Standard Model Building Gravity and Cosmology

EMERGENT GRAVITY AND COSMOLOGY: THERMODYNAMIC …

Massive Scalar Field Quantum Cosmology › ~dark › 2012 › doc › 29 › AM › DMDEMA2012 …2012/12/28 · Massive Scalar Field Quantum Cosmology Sang Pyo Kim Kunsan National

Black Hole Cosmology in Gravity with Torsionmath.newhaven.edu/poplawski/UNH2016b.pdfBlack Hole Cosmology in Gravity with Torsion Nikodem Popławski Department of Mathematics and Physics

Theoretical Aspects of Massive Gravity

Origin of inflation in CFT driven cosmology: R2-gravity … · Origin of inflation in CFT driven cosmology: R2-gravity and non-minimally coupled inflaton models ... of inflation

Quantum Gravity, Cosmology and High -Energy … · Quantum Gravity, Cosmology and High -Energy Gamma -Ray Astronomy Nick E. Mavromatos King ’s College London Physics Department

Nonlinear massive gravity and Cosmologyvietnam.in2p3.fr/2013/Cosmology/transparencies/Mukohyama1.pdf · Massless limit ≠ Massless theory = GR 5 d.o.f remain PPN parameter g= ½

Physics 270 – The Universe: Astrophysics, Gravity and Cosmology

Massive Gravity - Springer · of massive gravity emerge from a higher-dimensional theory of general relativity, leading to the Dvali–Gabadadze–Porrati model (DGP), cascading gravity,