Skip to main content

The Fate of Tensor-Vector-Scalar Modified Gravity

Abstract

The 2017 codetection of electromagnetic radiation and gravitational waves was the first of its kind and marked the beginning of multimessenger astronomy. But this event has been treated within recent literature as something of an end as well. The 2017 detection is often regarded as an instance of falsification for all theories of modified gravity which postulate gravitational waves propagate along separate geodesics from electromagnetic radiation, perhaps most notably Jacob Bekenstein’s Tensor-Vector-Scalar gravity (TeVeS). I critically examine this explicit endorsement of falsification by astronomers and astrophysicists. While the current state of multimetric modified gravity theories is dim, recent developments in multimessenger observation do not offer a deductive falsification. Rather such evidence should be regarded as a corroboration of the null hypothesis, following Deborah Mayo's (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2018) error-statistical account.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Data Availability

Data sharing not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analyzed during the current study.

Notes

  1. Zhang et al. [22] also operates within the Lambda-CDM framework.

  2. Wang et al. actually advance the less conservative thesis that “the dark matter model is favored [25],” which does not take careful account of the myriad other MG theories that do not posit multiple metrics. Boran et al. are careful to make this distinction (Boran et al. 2017).

  3. Contrast this with Bertone’s description of TeVeS as a “more fundamental” theory than MOND (Bertone [32], p. 37). This remark is true, as MOND is merely a paradigm and not a full relativistic theory. But it is dubious whether TeVeS is more fundamental in any larger sense.

  4. I’d like to thank an anonymous reviewer for suggesting this useful name for the account.

  5. The theory cannot rely upon adding an additional field that couples to matter disformally with the Einstein metric, as TeVeS, but rather upon a modification of the field equation itself and hence of the Einstein metric (Sanders 2018, p. 3).

  6. This view of robustness has been criticized by Orzack and Sober [36], but their criticisms are largely orthogonal to the account proposed, as their diagnosis treats only of the outcomes of models, while the proposed collection of accounts is intended to encompass evidence supporting assumptions and retrodiction as well. See [34, 35] for the rebuttal to their objection.

  7. A similar situation arguably obtains for other scalar-tensor theories that posit multiple fields in order to modify the need for dark energy, such as generalized Galileon theories, Gleyzes–Langlois–Piazza–Vernizzi (GLPV) theories, and non-trivial Horndeski theories [37]. Researchers seeking to rule out such theories are much more careful with their terminology and do not claim a falsification has taken place.

  8. I would like to thank Kirk Ludwig and Andrew Smith for emphasizing the persuasiveness of this position.

  9. There were multiple instances of community members, purporting to operate under objective frequentist methodologies, claiming the discovery of gravitational waves in contexts with very low confidence assessments, most notably Joe Weber’s 1969 data manipulation resulting in a false-positive result (Collins [41], pp. 51–53).

  10. Perhaps it would be more apt to think of Boran et al.’s model as a final test, if one sets aside the potential problems in applying the model to TeVeS discussed above.

References

  1. Baker, T.E., Bellini, P.G., Ferreira, M., Lagos, J.N., Sawicki, I.: Strong constraints on cosmological gravity from GW170817 and GRB 170817A. Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 25130 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Boran, S., Desai, S., Kahya, E.O., Woodard, R.P.: GW 170817 falsifies dark matter emulators. Am. Phys. Soc. 97(4), 041501 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Green, M.A., Moffat, J.W., Toth, V.T.: Modified gravity (MOG), the speed of gravitational radiation and the event GW170817/GRB170817A. Phys. Lett. B 780, 300–302 (2018)

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Sakstein, J., Jain, J.: Implications of the neutron star merger GW170817 for cosmological scalar-tensor theories. Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 251303 (2017)

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Schmidt, F.: "Reining in Alternative Gravity". Physics 10, 134 (2017). https://physics.aps.org/articles/v10/134

  6. Mayo, D.: Statistical Inference as Severe Testing: How to Get Beyond the Statistics Wars. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2018)

  7. Sus, A.: Dark matter, the equivalence principle and modified gravity. Stud. Hist. Philos. Sci. B 45, 66–71 (2014)

  8. Weisberg, M., et al.: The dark galaxy hypothesis. Philos. Sci. 85, 5 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Bekenstein, J.: Relativistic gravitation theory for the MOND paradigm. Phys. Rev. D 70, 083509 (2004)

  10. Sanders, R.H.: "Does GW170817 Falsify MOND?" Int. J. Mod. Phys. D. 27(14), 1847027 (2018)

  11. Sanders, R.H.: A historical perspective on modified Newtonian dynamics. Can. J. Phys. 93, 126–138 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1139/cjp-2014-0206

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Seifert, M.: Stability of spherically symmetric solutions in modified theories of gravity. Phys. Rev. D 76, 064002 (2007)

  13. Sagi, E.: Propagation of gravitational waves in the generalized tensor-vector-scalar theory. Phys. Rev. D 81, 064031 (2010)

  14. McGaugh, S.: The Baryonic Tully-Fisher relation of galaxies with extended rotation curves and the stellar mass of rotating galaxies. Astrophys. J. 632, 859–871 (2005)

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  15. McGaugh, S.: The Baryonic Tully-Fisher relation of gas rich galaxies as a test of LCDM and MOND. Astron. J. 143, 40 (2012)

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Skordis, C., et al.: Large scale structure in Bekenstein’s theory of relativistic Modified Newtonian Dynamics. Phys. Rev. Lett. 96(1), 011301 (2006)

  17. Dodelson, S., Liguori, M.: Can cosmic structure form without dark matter? Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 231301 (2006)

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Dodelson, S.: The real problem with MOND. Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 20(14), 2749–2753 (2011)

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Mellier, Y.: Gravitational lensing and dark matter. In: Bertone, G. (ed.) Particle Dark Matter: Observations, Models, and Searches. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2010)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  20. Sanders, R.H.: Clusters of galaxies with modified Newtonian dynamics (MOND). Mon. Notices R. Astron. Soc. 342(3), 901–908 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-8711.2003.06596.x

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Loureiro, A., et al.: Upper bound of neutrino masses from combined cosmological observations and particle physics experiments. Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 081301 (2019)

  22. Zhang, W., et al.: Detecting the neutrino mass and mass hierarchy from global data. arXiv (2019). https://arxiv.org/abs/1904.09698

  23. Parno, D.: KATRIN: toward a high-precision neutrino-mass determination with tritium. Zenodo (2018). https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1287933

  24. Abbott, B.P., et al.: Gravitational waves and gamma-rays from a binary neutron star merger: GW170817 and GRB 170817A. Astrophys. J. Lett. 848(2), L13 (2017)

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Wang, H., et al.: GW170817/GRB 170817A/AT2017gfo association: some implications for physics and astrophysics. Astrophys. J. Lett. 851, 1 (2017)

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Wei, J.J., et al.: Multimessenger tests of the weak equivalence principle from GW170817 and its electromagnetic counterparts. J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 11, 035 (2017)

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Wu, M-R., Qian, Y-Z., Martínez-Pinedo, G., Fischer, T., Huther, L.: Effects of neutrino oscillations on nucleosynthesis and neutrino signals for an 18M supernova model, Phys. Rev. D 91, 065016 (2015)

  28. Bertone, G., Tait, T.: A new era in the search for dark matter. Nature 562, 56 (2018)

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Popper, K.: Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge. Basic Books, New York (1963)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Carroll, S.M.: Beyond falsifiability: normal science in a multiverse. In: Dardashti, R., Dawid, R., Thébault, K. (eds.) Why Trust a Theory: Epistemology of a Fundamental Physics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Sanders, R.H.: The Dark Matter Problem: A Historical Perspective. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2010)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  32. Bertone, G.: Behind the Scenes of the Universe: From the Higgs to Dark Matter. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2013)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  33. Wimsatt, W.: Robustness, reliability and overdetermination (2012). In: Brewer, M., Collins, B. (eds.) Characterizing the Robustness of Science. Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, vol 292. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi-org.proxyiub.uits.iu.edu/10.1007/978-94-007-2759-5_2

  34. Lloyd, E.A.: Models in the biological sciences. In: Magnani L., Bertolotti T. (eds) Springer Handbook of Model-Based Sciences, Springer Handbooks. Springer, Cham (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-30526-4_42

  35. Lloyd, E.A.: Model robustness as a confirmatory virtue: the case of climate science. Stud. Hist. Philos. Sci. 49, 58–68 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Orzack, S.H, Sober E.: A Critical Assessment of Levins's The Strategy of Model Building in Population Biology (1966), The Quarterly Review of Biology Vol. 68, No. 4 (Dec., 1993), pp. 533–546 (14 pages) The University of Chicago Press

  37. Ezquiaga, J.M., Zumalacárregui, M.: Dark energy after GW170817: dead ends and the road ahead. Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 251304 (2017)

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Cole, D.R., Binney, J.: A centrally heated dark halo for our galaxy. Mon. Notices R. Astron. Soc. 465(1), 798–810 (2017)

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Abbott, B.P., et al.: “GW170814: a three-detector observation of gravitational waves from a binary black hole coalescence,” (LIGO Scientific Collaboration and Virgo Collaboration). Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 141101 (2017)

  40. Abbott, B.P., et al.: “Tests of general relativity with GW150914,” (LIGO Scientific and Virgo Collaborations). Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 221101 (2016)

  41. Collins, H.: Gravity’s Ghost: Scientific Discovery in the Twenty-First Century. University of Chicago Press, Chicago (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  42. Li, T., Mehta, M., Srikumar, V.: A logic-driven framework for consistency of neural models. arXiv (2019). https://arxiv.org/abs/1909.00126

Download references

Acknowledgements

For invaluable feedback I would like to thank Elisabeth A. Lloyd, Gary Ebbs, Kirk Ludwig, the Lichtenberg Group for History and Philosophy of Physics, Steven Mischler, Suzanne Kawamleh, Ryan O’Loughlin, Dan Li, Stuart Gluck, and Evan Arnet. This paper is dedicated in memory of David McCarty, who encouraged me to pursue this project.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shannon Sylvie Abelson.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Abelson, S.S. The Fate of Tensor-Vector-Scalar Modified Gravity. Found Phys 52, 31 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10701-022-00545-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10701-022-00545-1

Keywords

  • Modified gravity
  • Multimessenger
  • Falsification