Stellar structure models in modified theories of gravity: lessons and challenges Gonzalo J. Olmo Depto. de F´ısica Te´orica and IFIC, Centro Mixto Universidad de Valencia-CSIC, Burjassot-46100, Valencia, Spain. Departamento de F´ısica, Universidade Federal da Para´ıba, 58051-900 Jo˜ao Pessoa, Para´ıba, Brazil. Diego Rubiera-Garcia Departamento de F´ısica Te´orica and IPARCOS, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, E-28040 Madrid, Spain Aneta Wojnar N´ucleo Cosmo-ufes & PPGCosmo, Universidade Federal do Esp´ırito Santo, 29075-910, Vit´oria, ES, Brasil Laboratory of Theoretical Physics, Institute of Physics, University of Tartu, W. Ostwaldi 1, 50411 Tartu, Estonia Abstract The understanding of stellar structure represents the crossroads of our theories of the nuclear force and the gravita- tional interaction under the most extreme conditions observably accessible. It provides a powerful probe of the strong field regime of General Relativity, and opens fruitful avenues for the exploration of new gravitational physics. The latter can be captured via modified theories of gravity, which modify the Einstein-Hilbert action of General Relativity and/or some of its principles. These theories typically change the Tolman-Oppenheimer-Volkoff equations of stellar’s hydrostatic equilibrium, thus having a large impact on the astrophysical properties of the corresponding stars and opening a new window to constrain these theories with present and future observations of different types of stars. For relativistic stars, such as neutron stars, the uncertainty on the equation of state of matter at supranuclear densities intertwines with the new parameters coming from the modified gravity side, providing a whole new phenomenology for the typical predictions of stellar structure models, such as mass-radius relations, maximum masses, or moment of inertia. For non-relativistic stars, such as white, brown and red dwarfs, the weakening/strengthening of the gravita- tional force inside astrophysical bodies via the modified Newtonian (Poisson) equation may induce changes on the star’s mass, radius, central density or luminosity, having an impact, for instance, in the Chandrasekhar’s limit for white dwarfs, or in the minimum mass for stable hydrogen burning in high-mass brown dwarfs. This work aims to provide a broad overview of the main such results achieved in the recent literature for many such modified theories of gravity, by combining the results and constraints obtained from the analysis of relativistic and non-relativistic stars in different scenarios. Moreover, we will build a bridge between theefforts of the community working on different theories, formulations, types of stars, theoretical modellings, and observational aspects, highlighting some of the most promising opportunities in the field. arXiv:1912.05202v2 [gr-qc] 8 Jul 2020 Contents 1 Preamble 3 1.1 Introduction.................................... ............ 3 1.1.1 Astrophysical phenomenology beyond General Relativity ................... 3 1.1.2 Relativisticstars:neutronstars . .................. 3 Email addresses: [email protected] (Gonzalo J. Olmo), [email protected] (Diego Rubiera-Garcia), [email protected] (Aneta Wojnar) Preprint submitted to Elsevier July 9, 2020 1.1.3 Non-relativistic stars: white, brown, and red dwarfs ....................... 4 1.1.4 Thiswork:aimandlimitations. .............. 5 1.2 StellarstructuremodelsinGeneralRelativity . ....................... 6 2 Stellar structure models in metric formalism 9 2.1 Field equations and scalar field representation of f (R)gravity...................... 9 2.1.1 Sphericallysymmetricstellarmodels . ................. 10 2.1.2 Weak-field limit, PPN formalism, and matching to the exteriorsolution . 11 2.2 Non-relativisticstars . ................ 15 2.2.1 NewtonianlimitandtheLane-Emdenequation . ................. 15 2.2.2 Modifications to Lane-Emden equation. White dwarfs . ................... 17 2.2.3 Minimummainsequencemass.Browndwarfs . .............. 22 2.3 Relativistic stars: mass-radius relations and maximum masses ..................... 25 2.3.1 Anoverviewonequationsofstate . .............. 25 2.3.2 f (R)gravity........................................... 27 2.3.3 Scalar-tensortheories. .............. 31 2.3.4 Horndeski family, beyond Horndeski, and extensions . ..................... 34 2.3.5 Einstein-Dilaton-Gauss-Bonnetgravity . ................... 35 2.3.6 Procatheories................................. .......... 36 2.3.7 Massivegravity................................ .......... 36 2.3.8 Teleparallelgravity . ............. 37 2.3.9 Mimeticgravity................................ .......... 38 2.3.10 Lorentzinvariance-breakingtheories. .................... 38 2.3.11 Braneworldmodels. ........... 38 2.3.12 Non-minimalgravity-mattercouplings. ................... 39 2.3.13 Action-dependentLagrangiantheories . ................... 40 2.3.14 Furtherconsiderations . .............. 40 2.4 Rotatingstellarmodels . ............... 41 2.4.1 Slowlyrotatingmodels. ............ 41 2.4.2 Fullyrotatingmodels. ............ 44 2.4.3 Binaryneutronstarmergers . ............. 45 3 Stellar structure models in metric-affine formalism 46 3.1 Families of metric-affinetheoriesofgravity ............................... 47 3.1.1 Field equations and scalar-tensor representation of f ( )gravity ................ 47 3.1.2 Eddington-inspiredBorn-Infeldgravity . .R . ................... 49 3.1.3 Ricci-basedgravitytheories . ............... 50 3.1.4 Other metric-affinemodels ................................... 52 3.2 Physicsofcompactstars . .............. 53 3.2.1 VacuumsolutionsandTOVequations . .............. 53 3.2.2 Matchingatthestellarsurfaces. ................ 54 3.2.3 Shortcomings with stellar surfaces or limitations of themodels? .. .... .... .... .. 57 3.2.4 Junctionconditions. ............ 62 3.3 Relativisticstars............................... ............... 63 3.3.1 f (R)gravity........................................... 63 3.3.2 Radiative spherical collapse in f ( )............................... 65 3.3.3 Eddington-inspiredBorn-InfeldgravityR . ................... 66 3.3.4 Hybridgravity ................................. ......... 70 3.4 Non-relativisticstars . ................ 71 3.4.1 Lane-Emden equation in f (R)gravity .............................. 71 3.4.2 Eddington-inspiredBorn-Infeldgravity . ................... 72 2 4 Conclusion and perspectives 74 Acknowledgments 76 References 77 1. Preamble 1.1. Introduction 1.1.1. Astrophysical phenomenology beyond General Relativity More than one hundred years after its formulation, Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity (GR) still stands as an extremely successful theory of the gravitational interaction. It has passed tests ranging from submilimiter to solar system scales [1], has been built in the concordance cosmological model [2], and has received further confirmation from the recent detection of gravitational waves consistently interpreted as emitted out of binary mergers [3], and by the imaging of the shadow of the supermassive object at the center of the M87 galaxy assumed to be a Kerr black hole [4]. Despite this, in the last decades there has been an enormouseffort invested by the gravitational community at large to find alternatives to this framework following different directions. This effort is motivated by a plethora of reasons. On the theoretical side one finds the need for an ultraviolet completion of GR, seen as an effective theory [5], or the studies aimed at the resolution of space-time singularities deep inside black holes and in the early universe (see [6] for a pedagogical and historical discussion of this issue). On the phenomenological side, alternatives to the concordance model without dark sources has become a rich reservoir of proposals for extending GR, many of which have been severely constrained by the finding of the binary neutron star merger GW170817 [7] and its electromagnetic 15 counterpart GRB170817 [8]. Indeed, the reported constraint cT /c 1 1 10− on the speed of propagation of gravitational waves as compared to the speed of light, has pu|t into− trouble| ≤ many× such proposals, see e.g. [9] for a insightful analysis of this question. Among the many different scenarios proposed in the literature to study gravitational phenomenology beyond GR, the one of stellar structure models represents both a powerful probe for testing gravity in its strong field regime [10] and a promising avenue to find eventual deviations from GR predictions. The main target of this analysis are compact stars such as neutron stars and white dwarfs, which represent the end-state of stellar evolution of main-sequence stars, but also other types of stars such as brown and red dwarfs. Moreover, along the decades other stellar objects have appeared in the literature, such as hyperon stars [11], quark/hybrid stars [12, 13], strange stars [14], and even more exotic objects such as boson stars [15]. 1.1.2. Relativistic stars: neutron stars Neutron stars represent the most extreme packing of nuclear matter known in Nature, being the smallest and densest stars known so far. By a neutron star we roughly refer to an astrophysical object whose innermost region may 14 3 reach from five to ten times the nuclear saturation density ρs 2.8 10 gr/cm , its mass is of order M 1.4 2.0M , and its radius lies in the range R 10 13km. Though≈ their structural× properties can be roughly und∼erstood− by assuming⊙ that they are composed of∼ neutrons− (hence their name) supported by their degeneracy pressure, other baryonic components such as pions,