Abstract
We introduce a novel model of affine gravity, which implements the no-scale scenario. Namely, the Planck mass and Hubble constant emerge dynamically in our model, through the mechanism of spontaneous breaking of scale invariance. This naturally gives rise to inflation, thus introducing a new inflationary mechanism. Moreover, the time direction and nondegenerate metric emerge dynamically as well, which allows considering the usual General Relativity as an effective theory. We show that our model is phenomenologically viable, both from the perspective of the direct tests of gravity and from the standpoint of cosmological evolution.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
For a general \(w\), this procedure may require redefining \(\varphi\) to be a purely imaginary field. In that case, by \(\varphi\)’s value one should understand its absolute value.
\(\varkappa=-4\) corresponds to a special solution for which \(H=0\) and \(v\) is time-dependent. We do not consider this case here.
References
A. Einstein, “The theory of the affine field,” Nature, 112, 448–449 (1923).
R. D. Carmichael, “Book review: A. S. Eddington. The Mathematical Theory of Relativity,” Bull. Amer. Math. Soc., 31, 563–563 (1925).
E. Schrödinger, “The general unitary theory of the physical fields,” Proc. Roy. Irish Acad. Sec. A, 49, 43–58 (1943).
E. Schrödinger, “The union of the three fundamental fields (gravitation, meson, electromagnetism),” Proc. Roy. Irish Acad. Sec. A, 49, 275–287 (1943).
E. Schrödinger, “Space-time Structure,” Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge (1956).
E. Schrödinger, “The affine connexion in physical field theories,” Nature, 153, 572–575 (1944).
J. Kijowski, “On a new variational principle in general relativity and the energy of the gravitational field,” Gen. Rel. Grav., 9, 857–877 (1978).
M. Ferraris and J. Kijowski, “General relativity is a gauge type theory,” Lett. Math. Phys., 5, 127–135 (1981).
D.-E. Liebscher, “Purely affine theories,” Ann. Phys., 500, 200–204 (1988).
E. S. Fradkin and A. A. Tseytlin, “Quantum equivalence of dual fiel theories,” Ann. Phys., 162, 31–48 (1985).
T. Ortín, Gravity and Strings, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge (2004).
G. Magnano, “Are there metric theories of gravity other than general relativity?” in: General Relativity and Gravitational Physics (Proceedings of 11th Italian Conference, Trieste, Italy, September 26–30, 1994, M. Carfora, M. Cavaglia, P. Fre et al., eds.), World Sci., Singapore (1995), pp. 213–234; arXiv: gr-qc/9511027.
P. Minkowski, “On the spontaneous origin of newtons constant,” Phys. Lett. B, 71, 419–421 (1977).
A. Zee, “Broken-symmetric theory of gravity,” Phys. Rev. Lett., 42, 417–420 (1979).
Y. Fujii, “Origin of the gravitational constant and particle masses in a scale-invariant scalar-tensor theory,” Phys. Rev. D, 26, 2580–2588 (1982).
M. E. Shaposhnikov and D. Zenhäusern, “Scale invariance, unimodular gravity and dark energy,” Phys. Lett. B, 671, 187–192 (2009).
D. Blas, M. Shaposhnikov, and D. Zenhäusern, “Scale-invariant alternatives to general relativity,” Phys. Rev. D, 84, 044001, 21 pp. (2011); arXiv: 1104.1392.
J. Kubo, M. Lindner, K. Schmitz, and M. Yamada, “Planck mass and inflation as consequences of dynamically broken scale invariance,” Phys. Rev. D, 100, 015037, 17 pp. (2019); arXiv: 1811.05950.
A. B. Borisov and V. I. Ogievetskii, “Theory of dynamical affine and conformal symmetries as the theory of the gravitational field,” Theoret. and Math. Phys., 21, 1179–1188 (1974).
C. Cutler and R. M. Wald, “A new type of gauge invariance for a collection of massless spin-\(2\) fields. I. Existence and uniqueness,” Class. Quantum Grav., 4, 1267–1278 (1987).
T. P. Sotiriou and V. Faraoni, “\(f(R)\) theories of gravity,” Rev. Modern Phys., 82, 451–497 (2010); arXiv: 0805.1726.
J. B. Jiménez, L. Heisenberg, G. J. Olmo, and D. Rubiera-Garcia, “Born–Infeld inspired modifications of gravity,” Phys. Rep., 727, 1–129 (2018).
M. Ferraris and J. Kijowski, “Unified geometric theory of electromagnetic and gravitational interactions,” Gen. Rel. Grav., 14, 37–47 (1982).
K. Krasnov, “Non-metric gravity: a status report,” Modern Phys. Lett. A, 22, 3013–3026 (2007); arXiv: 0711.0697.
K. Krasnov, “Pure connection action principle for general relativity,” Phys. Rev. Lett., 106, 251103, 4 pp. (2011); arXiv: 1103.4498.
N. J. Poplawski, “Gravitation, electromagnetism and cosmological constant in purely affine gravity,” Found. Phys., 39, 307–330 (2009); arXiv: gr-qc/0701176.
N. Poplawski, “Affine theory of gravitation,” Gen. Rel. Grav., 46, 1625, 11 pp. (2014); arXiv: 1203.0294.
O. Castillo-Felisola and A. Skirzewski, “Einstein’s gravity from a polynomial affine model,” Class. Quantum Grav., 35, 055012, 23 pp. (2018); arXiv: 1505.04634.
O. Castillo-Felisola, J. Perdiguero, O. Orellana, and A. R. Zerwekh, “Emergent metric and geodesic analysis in cosmological solutions of (torsion-free) polynomial affine gravity,” Class. Quant. Grav., 37, 075013, 30 pp. (2020); arXiv: 1908.06654.
H. Azri and D. Demir, “Induced affine inflation,” Phys. Rev. D, 97, 044025, 7 pp. (2018); arXiv: 1802.00590.
H. Azri, “Cosmological implications of affine gravity”; arXiv: 1805.03936.
S. Weinberg, “Photons and gravitons in \(S\)-matrix theory: derivation of charge conservation and equality of gravitational and inertial mass,” Phys. Rev. B, 135, 1049–1056 (1964).
S. Deser, “Self-interaction and gauge invariance,” Gen. Rel. Grav., 1, 9–18 (1970); arXiv: gr-qc/0411023.
D. G. Boulware and S. Deser, “Classical general relativity derived from quantum gravity,” Ann. Phys., 89, 193–240 (1975).
R. M. Wald, “Spin-two fields and general covariance,” Phys. Rev. D, 33, 3613–3625 (1986).
D. N. Vollick, “Born–Infeld–Einstein theory with matter,” Phys. Rev. D, 72, 084026, 6 pp. (2005); arXiv: gr-qc/0506091.
H. B. Nielsen and M. Ninomiya, “\(\beta\)-Function in a non-covariant Yang–Mills theory,” Nucl. Phys. B, 141, 153–177 (1978).
S. Chadha and H. B. Nielsen, “Lorentz invariance as a low energy phenomenon,” Nucl. Phys. B, 217, 125–144 (1983).
G. Bednik, O. Pujolàs, and S. Sibiryakov, “Emergent Lorentz invariance from strong dynamics: holographic examples,” JHEP, 11, 064 (2013); arXiv: 1305.0011.
V. Rubakov, “Lorentz-violating graviton masses: getting around ghosts, low strong coupling scale and VDVZ discontinuity”; arXiv: hep-th/0407104.
S. L. Dubovsky, “Phases of massive gravity,” JHEP, 10, 076, 31 pp. (2004); arXiv: hep-th/0409124.
V. A. Rubakov and P. G. Tinyakov, Phys. Usp., 51, 759–792 (2008); arXiv: 0802.4379.
D. Blas and S. Sibiryakov, “Completing Lorentz violating massive gravity at high energies,” JETP, 120, 509–524 (2015); arXiv: 1410.2408.
P. Hořava, “Quantum gravity at a Lifshitz point,” Phys. Rev. D, 79, 084008, 15 pp. (2009); arXiv: 0901.3775.
P. Hořava, “Membranes at quantum criticality,” JHEP, 03, 020, 34 pp. (2009).
T. Asaka, S. Blanchet, and M. Shaposhnikov, “The \(\nu\)MSM, dark matter and neutrino masses,” Phys. Lett. B, 631, 151–156 (2005); arXiv: hep-ph/0503065.
J. Greensite, “Dynamical origin of the Lorentzian signature of spacetime,” Phys. Lett. B, 300, 34–37 (1993); arXiv: gr-qc/9210008.
E. Elizalde, S. D. Odintsov, and A. Romeo, “Dynamical determination of the metric signature in space-time of nontrivial topology,” Class. Quantum Grav., 11, L61–L67 (1994); arXiv: hep-th/9312132.
A. Carlini and J. Greensite, “Why is spacetime Lorentzian?,” Phys. Rev. D, 49, 866–878 (1994); arXiv: gr-qc/9308012.
S. W. MacDowell and F. Mansouri, “Unified geometric theory of gravity and supergravity,” Phys. Rev. Lett., 38, 739–742 (1977).
A. H. Chamseddine, “Massive supergravity from spontaneously breaking orthosymplectic gauge symmetry,” Ann. Phys., 113, 219–234 (1978).
A. H. Chamseddine and P. C. West, “Supergravity as a gauge theory of supersymmetry,” Nucl. Phys. B, 129, 39–44 (1977).
K. S. Stelle and P. C. West, “Spontaneously broken de Sitter symmetry and the gravitational holonomy group,” Phys. Rev. D, 21, 1466–1488 (1980).
F. W. Hehl, J. D. McCrea, E. W. Mielke, and Y. Ne’eman, “Metric affine gauge theory of gravity: field equations Noether identities, world spinors, and breaking of dilation invariance,” Phys. Rept., 258, 1–171 (1995); arXiv: gr-qc/9402012.
A. Einstein, The Meaning of Relativity, Routledge, London–New York (2003).
B. Julia and S. Silva, “Currents and superpotentials in classical gauge invariant theories. 1. Local results with applications to perfect fluids and general relativity,” Class. Quantum Grav., 15, 2173–2215 (1998); arXiv: gr-qc/9804029.
N. Dadhich and J. M. Pons, “On the equivalence of the Einstein–Hilbert and the Einstein–Palatini formulations of general relativity for an arbitrary connection,” Gen. Rel. Grav., 44, 2337–2352 (2012); arXiv: 1010.0869.
L. P. Eisenhart, Non-Riemannian Geometry, Dover, New York (2012).
K. Borchsenius, “An extension of the nonsymmetric unified field theory,” Gen. Rel. Grav., 7, 527–534 (1976).
N. J. Poplawski, “A unified, purely affine theory of gravitation and electromagnetism”; arXiv: 0705.0351.
K. Krasnov and R. Percacci, “Gravity and unification: a review,” Class. Quantum Grav., 35, 143001, 55 pp. (2018); arXiv: 1712.03061.
N. V. Kharuk, S. N. Manida, S. A. Paston, and A. A. Sheykin, “Modifying the theory of gravity by changing independent variables,” EPJ Web Conf., 191, 07007, 7 pp. (2018); arXiv: 1811.00831.
K. Peeters, “Cadabra2: computer algebra for field theory revisited,” J. Open Source Software, 3, 1118, 2 pp. (2018).
K. Peeters, “Introducing Cadabra: a symbolic computer algebra system for field theory problems”; arXiv: hep-th/0701238.
C. M. Will, “The confrontation between general relativity and experiment,” Living Rev. Relativity, 17, 4, 117 pp. (2014); arXiv: 1403.7377.
Acknowledgments
The author thanks V. Rubakov and A. Shkerin for the useful discussions.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
The author declares no conflicts of interest.
Additional information
Translated from Teoreticheskaya i Matematicheskaya Fizika, 2021, Vol. 209, pp. 125–141 https://doi.org/10.4213/tmf10069.
Appendix: Linearized limit
To verify the phenomenological validity of scalar–affine gravity, we show that the linearized limit of our model coincides with that of GR. We parameterize the fluctuations of the metric as
For our choice of the constant \(c=-3\), \(\varphi\) follows the dynamics of the determinant of the metric. Hence, their fluctuations are the same. However, we also need to obtain a formula governing the fluctuations of the covariant derivatives of \(\varphi\). For the \(v_\mu\) fluctuations, \(v_\mu=v_\mu^{\mathrm{vac}}+u_\mu\), we then obtain the equation
We now consider the equations of motion for the perturbations of the metric. As follows from Eq. (3.13), the terms quadratic in \(h_{\mu\nu}\) are suppressed if
We use Cadabra software [63], [64] for obtaining the equations of motion for the perturbed metric. The result is that the equations of motion in the spin-2 and spin-1 sectors are the same as those in GR on the de Sitter background. Hence, gravitational waves are the same in our model as in GR, and vector perturbations are stable.
In the spin-0 sector in the gauge \(E=0\), the equations of motion are
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kharuk, I.V. Emergent Planck mass and dark energy from affine gravity. Theor Math Phys 209, 1423–1436 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1134/S004057792110007X
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1134/S004057792110007X