An interesting new paper on f(X) gravity

In summary, the paper discusses the hybrid metric-Palatini gravity theory, also known as f(X) gravity, which combines elements from both metric and Palatini versions of modified gravity. It has been shown to have interesting features and avoids some of the drawbacks of the original approaches. The theory has been tested using theoretical consistency checks and observational constraints, and has been found to be a viable alternative to dark energy and dark matter. It also modifies the cosmological dynamics at large scales and has been shown to be compatible with observations of large-scale structure. The paper concludes by suggesting that further study of this theory could potentially lead to a better understanding of quantum gravity.
  • #1
ohwilleke
Gold Member
2,369
1,363
http://arxiv.org/abs/1508.04641

Hybrid metric-Palatini gravity
Salvatore Capozziello, Tiberiu Harko, Tomi S. Koivisto, Francisco S.N. Lobo, Gonzalo J. Olmo
(Submitted on 19 Aug 2015)
Recently, the phenomenology of f(R) gravity has been scrutinized motivated by the possibility to account for the self-accelerated cosmic expansion without invoking dark energy sources. Besides, this kind of modified gravity is capable of addressing the dynamics of several self-gravitating systems alternatively to the presence of dark matter. It has been established that both metric and Palatini versions of these theories have interesting features but also manifest severe and different downsides. A hybrid combination of theories, containing elements from both these two formalisms, turns out to be also very successful accounting for the observed phenomenology and is able to avoid some drawbacks of the original approaches. This article reviews the formulation of this hybrid metric-Palatini approach and its main achievements in passing the local tests and in applications to astrophysical and cosmological scenarios, where it provides a unified approach to the problems of dark energy and dark matter.

The body text of the paper ends up calling the "Hybrid metric-Palatini gravity theory" f(X) gravity. From the body text (citations and internal references omitted without notation):

In this work we have presented a hybrid metric-Palatini framework for theories of gravity, and have tested the new theories it entails using a number of theoretical consistency checks and observational constraints. From the field theory perspective, we found that the f(X) class of theories, where X = R + κ2T, enjoys a similar special status amongst the more general hybrid metric-Palatini theories as the f(R) theories within the narrower framework of purely metric gravity. This is so because when one excludes theories inhabited by ghost-like, superluminally propagating and otherwise pathological degrees of freedom, there is evidence that the f(X) family is singled out as the only viable form of an action one can construct using the metric (and thus the metric Levi-Civita connection) and an independent “Palatini connection”. . . . f(X) gravity represents a generic case within the one-parameter family of the Algebraic Scalar-Tensor theories at one end of which lies the pure Palatini f(R) (wherein the scalar field is a function of the stress-energy trace T) and at the other end the pure metric f(R) (where the field is a function of the metric curvature R). Furthermore, the propagating degrees of freedom have proven to be healthy also on curved backgrounds as confirmed also by our cosmological perturbation analysis. Concerning the Cauchy problem, it was shown that in this class of theories the initial value problem can always be well-formulated and well-posed depending on the adopted matter sources. Having established the theoretical consistency and interest on the hybrid metric-Palatini f(X) family of theories, we considered applications in which these theories provide gravitational alternatives to dark energy.

As shown by our post-Newtonian analysis, the hybrid theories are promising in this respect as they can avoid the local gravity constraints but modify the cosmological dynamics at large scales. This is simply because as a scalar-tensor theory, the hybrid f(X) gravity is characterised by an evolving Brans-Dicke coupling, which allows to introduce potentially large deviations from GR in the past (and future) as long as the coupling at the present epoch is strong enough to hide the field from the local gravity experiments. In contrast, in the metric f(R) models the Brans-Dicke coupling is a finite constant and one needs to invoke some of the various “screening mechanisms” (workings of which remain to be studied in the hybrid theories) in order to reconcile the Solar system experiments with cosmology.

Cosmological perturbations have been also analysed in these models up to the linear order, and the results imply that the formation of large-scale structure in the aforementioned accelerating cosmologies is viable though exhibits subtle features that might be detectable in future experiments. We derived the full perturbations equations and extracting their Newtonian limit, describing the observable scales of the matter power spectrum, the growth of matter overdensities was shown to be modified by a time-dependent effective fifth force that is expected to modify the redshift evolution of the growth rate of perturbations. We also note that numerical studies of the perturbations imply that the difference of the gravitational potentials can exhibit oscillations at higher redshifts even when the background expansion and the full lensing potential are indistinguishable from the standard ΛCDM predictions. Such features could potentially be observed in cross-correlations of the matter and lensing power spectra. . . .

At an effective level, the f(X) modifications involve both (the trace of) the matter stress energy and (the Ricci scalar of) the metric curvature, and from this point of view it appears appealing to speculate on the possible relevance of these theories to both the problems of dark energy and dark matter, in a unified theoretical framework and without distinguishing a priori matter and geometric sources. Various aspects of dark matter phenomenology from astronomical to galactic and extragalatic scales were discussed. The generalised virial theoreom can acquire, in addition to the contribution from the baryonic masses, effective contributions of geometrical origin to the total gravitational potential energy, which may account for the well-known virial theorem mass discrepancy in clusters of galaxies. In the context of galactic rotation curves, the scalar-field modified relations between the various physical quantities such as tangential velocities of test particles around galaxies, Doppler frequency shifts and stellar dispersion velocities were derived. More recently, observational data of stellar motion near the Galactic centre was compared with simulations of the hybrid gravity theory, which turned out particularly suitable to model star dynamics.

The paper closes by identifying many issues for further study and arguing that the effort to do so would be worthwhile.

This is a classical modified GR theory, not a quantum gravity theory. But, the fact that a term in the form of a Yukawa potential naturally arises in the f(X) formulation is suggestive of the notion that f(X) gravity might be the classical limit of a quantum gravity theory with a non-trivial self-interaction term.

While f(R) gravity theories and Palatini gravity theories have each been studied extensively in isolation, the f(X) gravity hybrid is a new car that has only been on a small number of test drives.

Equations that seem to make sense have been derived to address both dark energy and dark matter phenomena with this theory (and it may be able to provide guidance on the issue of inflation as well), but no one has plugged in numbers and rigorously compared the performance of f(X) gravity to other modified gravity theories or to lamdaCDM relative to the empirical evidence. Several specific realistic to conduct observational tests of the theory have been suggested, but none have actually been conducted.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I expect you are right that f(R) gravity (as a category of variants of GR) is older
http://search.arxiv.org:8081/?query=F(R)+gravity&in=physics&qid=14400884582899a_nCnN_2080800338
Here's the Wikipedia on this type of variant:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F(R)_gravity
The article says this type of modification of standard GR was first proposed in 1970.
I have the impression that I have also been seeing papers on various versions of f(X) gravity. We should do a search. Regret to say I haven't paid much attention and know very little about it. I'll check.

http://search.arxiv.org:8081/?query=F(X)+gravity&in=physics&qid=14400888958899a_nCnN_2080800338&startat=0
Yes, much newer category if we can judge by this 2013 abstract:
http://arxiv.org/abs/1304.3607
Ghosts in pure and hybrid formalisms of gravity theories: a unified analysis
Tomi S. Koivisto, Nicola Tamanini
(Submitted on 12 Apr 2013)
...
...ating New types of second, fourth and sixth order derivative gravity theories are investigated and the so called f(X) theories are singled out as a viable class of "hybrid" extensions of General Relativity.
9 pages
 
Last edited:

1. What is f(X) gravity?

F(X) gravity is a modified theory of gravity that incorporates higher-order curvature terms in addition to the Ricci scalar curvature present in Einstein's theory of general relativity.

2. What makes this new paper on f(X) gravity interesting?

This new paper introduces a novel approach to solving the problems of dark matter and dark energy in the traditional theory of gravity. It also presents new mathematical formulations that could potentially lead to a better understanding of the fundamental laws of the universe.

3. How does f(X) gravity differ from other theories of gravity?

Unlike other theories of gravity, f(X) gravity incorporates higher-order curvature terms and does not rely on the concept of a cosmological constant. This allows for a more comprehensive and potentially more accurate description of the universe.

4. What are the potential implications of this paper for the field of physics?

If this paper's findings are validated and further explored, it could lead to a significant shift in our understanding of gravity and the fundamental laws of the universe. It could also have practical implications for future space missions and technologies.

5. Is there any experimental evidence to support the claims made in this paper?

At this time, there is no direct experimental evidence to support the claims made in this paper. However, the mathematical formulations and predictions put forth in this paper provide a basis for future experiments and observations that could potentially validate or refute its findings.

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
413
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
12
Views
1K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
2
Views
456
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
1
Views
198
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
9
Views
499
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
4
Replies
105
Views
10K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
8
Replies
264
Views
15K
Back
Top