2015
DOI: 10.1103/physrevd.92.044055
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Chameleon effect in the Jordan frame of the Brans-Dicke theory

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
9
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 74 publications
0
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In addition to the CC and SN data sets, we also consider the impact of priors on the Hubble constant in the CBD MCMC analyses. In the constraint analyses, we consider three scenarios: (i) The combined CC and SN data sets without any prior on H0 which gives the result of purely observational data; (ii) we add the latest SH0ES local estimate (Riess et. al.…”
Section: Direct Implementation Of Mcmc and Estimation Of Model Parame...mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In addition to the CC and SN data sets, we also consider the impact of priors on the Hubble constant in the CBD MCMC analyses. In the constraint analyses, we consider three scenarios: (i) The combined CC and SN data sets without any prior on H0 which gives the result of purely observational data; (ii) we add the latest SH0ES local estimate (Riess et. al.…”
Section: Direct Implementation Of Mcmc and Estimation Of Model Parame...mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We find motivation in a theory where the scalar, apart from its self-interaction, has interaction with ordinary matter as well. We call the theory a generalized Chameleon-Brans-Dicke (CBD) theory and give it's basic formalism in both Einstein and Jordan frames, employing a suitable conformal transformation following the standard literature (Jarv, Kuusk, Saal and Vilson 2015;Quiros et al 2015). In the process, the scalar interaction in the Einstein Frame is modified beyond the standard conformal coupling with matter and leads to modification of gravitational interaction in small scale as well as large scale structure formations.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…STT-s are a generalization of the BD theory where the coupling parameter is a function of the scalar field: ω BD → ω(φ), i. e., it is a varying parameter. The need for a generalization of BD theory comes from the tight constraints on ω BD that the solar system experiments have established [40], although these constraints are smoothed out by the chameleon mechanism in BD theories with a self-interacting scalar field [41][42][43]. If ω BD were a varying coupling then the latter experimental constraints may be avoided or, at least, alleviated.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…From cosmological studies, it has been found that while a theory can provide an acceleration phase in one frame it may not be able to do so in the other. From this it is clear the conformal equivalence transformation between the two frames does not necessarily mean physical equivalence; see also the discussions in [34,[38][39][40][41][42][43][44][45] and references therein. The study of the physical properties between the Jordan and the Einstein frame has been extended to astrophysical objects, such as black-holes [46][47][48][49][50] or to even more exotic configurations like the wormholes [51][52][53] and the black branes or strings [54,55].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%