DOCSLIB.ORG

Gravitomagnetism in Modified Theory of Gravity

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Gravitomagnetism in Modified Theory of Gravity Gravitomagnetism in MOdified theory of Gravity Qasem Exirifard The Abdus Salam International Centre for Theoretical Physics (ICTP), Strada Costiera, Trieste, Italy ∗ We study the gravitomagnetism in the Scalar-Vector-Tensor theory or Moffat’s Modified theory of Gravity(MOG). We compute the gravitomagnetic field that a slow-moving mass distribution pro- duces in its Newtonian regime. We report that the consistency between the MOG gravitomagnetic field and that predicted by the Einstein's gravitional theory and measured by Gravity Probe B, LAGEOS and LAGEOS 2, and with a number of GRACE and Laser Lunar ranging measurements requires jαj < 0:0013. We provide a discussion. The human civilisation still lacks a conclusive knowl- where LM is the Lagrangian density of the matter and edge about the physics at galaxies and beyond, in the sense that either dark matter exists or the dynamics p 1 1 L = −g [ gµν r Gr G − V (G)] of gravity is more involved than that predicted by the S G3 2 µ ν Einstein's gravitional theory. In the first approach, we 2 1 µν have not yet found any dark matter. The later approach +µ G[ g rµµrν µ − V (µ)] ; (2) 2 started by the Milgrom's theory of the Modified Newto- nian Dynamics (MOND)[1], changed to the a-quadratic 1 p 1 µν 1 2 µ LΦ = −g B Bµν − µ Φ Φµ + V (Φ) ;(3) Lagrangian model for gravity (AQUAL)[2]. A generally 4π 4 2 covariant realisation of the AQUAL model is the TeVeS 1 p L = −g(R + 2Λ) ; (4) theory [3]. TeVeS is in agreement with the Gravitomag- G 16πG netism and the near horizon geometry of super massive black hole [4]. It has been shown that changing EH grav- are the Lagrangian densities of the scalar, the vector and ity to TeVeS can not reproduce the CMB [5]. Though the tensor, respectively. G(x) is related to the Newton's adding a 4th sterile neutrino for 11 − 15 eV to matter constant. µ(x) represents the mass of the vector field, content of TeVeS theory fits the spectrum in a LCDM Bµν = @µΦν −@ν Φµ, and V (G);V (µ);V (Φ) are potential. cosmology [6], it wouldn't form the large structure of the Following [13], \we neglect the mass of the Φµ field, universe [7]. TeVeS also appears not to be consistent with for in the determination of galaxy rotation curves and GW170817 [8]. There is also Moffat’s theory of gravity galactic cluster dynamics µ = 0:042 (kpc)−1, which cor- −28 [9] that passes many tests and observations when TeVeS responds to the vector field Φµ mass mΦ = 2:6 × 10 fails; particularly it produces the acoustic peaks in the eV [17{19]. The smallness of the Φµ field mass in the cosmic microwave background radiation and the matter present universe justifies our ignoring it when solving the power spectrum [10], and it is consistent with gravita- field equations for compact objects such as the vicinity tional wave's data [11, 12]. We would like to study the of Earth, neutron stars and black holes. However, the gravitomagnetism in Moffat’s theory. In the first sec- scale µ = 0:042 kpc−1 does play an important role in fit- tion we review Moffat’s theory of gravity around the ting galaxy rotation curves and cluster dynamics". Ref. Earth space-time geometry[13]. In the second section [20] provides the latest most detailed fitting of MOG to we present the gravitomagnetism approximation to Mof- galaxy dynamics. Around the Earth space-time geom- fat's theory around the space-time of the Earth. We re- etry GN is constant. So we set @µG = 0. Since µ is port how Gravity Probe B [14], LAGEOS and LAGEOS very small we ignore @µµ at the vicinity of the Earth. 2[15], and with a number of GRACE and Laser Lunar We ignore the cosmological constant as well. Since the ranging measurements [16] constrain the α parameter to vector field around the space-time geometry of the Earth arXiv:1906.02013v2 [gr-qc] 15 Jun 2019 jαj < 0:0013. In the last section we provide a discussion. is small, and assuming that V (Φ) has a Taylor expan- sion around Φµ = 0, we can ignore V (Φ) as well. These simplify Moffat's action at the vicinity of the Earth to [13]: I. THE ACTION OF MOG THEORY AROUND THE EARTH 1 Z p S = d4x −g(R + GBµν B ) : (5) 16πG µν The action of MOG theory [9] is given by: The matter current density is defined in terms of the Z 4 matter action SM : S = d x(LG + LΦ + LS + LM ) ; (1) 1 δS p M = −J µ ; (6) −g δΦµ ∗Electronic address: [email protected] where J µ is proportional to the mass density. A test 2 particle action is given by where ρ is the local density of the fluid and uµ is the local Z Z four velocity of the fluid. Notice that the fluid interaction p µ ν µ STP = −m dτ gµν x_ x_ − km dτΦµx_ ; (7) with itself is not a functional of φµ. In so doing the source current for the vector/gauge field reads: where dot is variation with respect to τ and m denotes µ µ the test particle's mass. This means that geodesics in J = kρu : (18) the Randers's geometry describes orbits of particles in The equation of motion for the gauge field, in the gauge the MOG [21]. The coupling constant is assumed to be of r Φµ = 0, reads proportional to the mass of the test particle and the pro- µ µ µ portionality factor reads: Φ = −4πkJ : (19) p k = ± αGN ; (8a) G − G II. GRAVITOMAGNETISM IN MOG AROUND α = N ; (8b) GN THE EARTH where GN is the gravitational Newton's constant. Let an auxiliary field e(τ) be defined on the world line In order to address the gravitomagnetism, we look at of the test particle. Then consider the following action: a small deviation from the flat space-time geometry: Z Z g = η + h ; (20) 1 µ ν e µ µν µν µν STP [x; e] = −m dτ( gµν x_ x_ + ) − km dτΦµx_ ; 2e 2 Φµ = 0 + φµ ; (21) (9) the variation of which with respect to e(τ) yields: where in the natural unites it holds jh j 1 ; (22) δSTP [x; e] p µ ν µν = 0 ! e(τ) = gµν x_ x_ (10) δe jφµj 1 : (23) inserting which in (9) reproduces (7). So (9) is equiv- We then consider a slow moving test particle: alent to (7). Notice that (9) is invariant under the reparametrization of the world-line: jt_j ≈ 1 ; (24) i τ ! τ~ =τ ~(τ) ; (11) jx_ j c : (25) dτ e(τ) ! e~(~τ) = e(τ) : (12) These simplify the action of the test particle (15) to dτ~ Z 1 1 The reparametrization invariance allows to set S = m dt( jx_ ij2 + h + kφ + (h + kφi)_xi) ; TP 2 2 00 0 0i e(τ) = 1 ; (13) (26) µ ν in analogy with electromagnetism, the gravitoelectric and gµν x_ x_ = 1 (14) gravitomagnetic potentials are then identified to: as the standard parametrization of the world-line. Doing 1 so yields: φ = h + kφ ; (27a) Phys 2 00 0 Z 1 S [x] = −m dτ( g x_ µx_ ν + kmΦ x_ µ ); (15) APhys = h + kφ : (27b) TP 2 µν µ i 0i i We would like to study the theory around slow moving The equation of motion derived from (26) can be rewrit- mass distribution. Consider that the we have a mass ten as follows v distribution composed of N particles. The action of the x¨ = −∇Φ + × (r × A ) : (28) these particles follow from (15): Phys c Phys N This allows interpreting r×A as a gravitomagnetic field. X X SM = STP [mi; xi] + V (i; j) ; (16) r × A causes precessions of the orbits of a test particle. i=1 i6=j This precession is referred to as the Lense-Thirring pre- cession [22]. Ref. [23] provides a decent recent review where STP [mi; xi] for each particle is given in (15) and on Lense-Thirring precession for planets and satellites in V (i; j) defines the interaction between particles. In the the Solar system. The similarity between the gravito- continuum limit, where we have a fluid at equilibrium, magnetic field and magnetic field beside the spin preces- this suggests that _ e sion formula in electrodynamics (S = µ × B; µ = 2m S) Z dictates that the spin of a gyroscope precesses by [24] 4 p 1 µ ν ν SM = − d x −g( ρgµν u u + kρΦν u ) (17) 2 1 Ω = − r × A : (29) +Interaction of fluid with itself ; LT 2 Phys 3 This precession is called the Pugh-Schiff frame-dragging III. CONCLUSION AND DISCUSSION precession [25, 26]. The Pugh-Schiff frame-dragging pre- cession due to the rotation of the earth recently has been We have reported that the consistency between the measured by the gravity probe B with the precision of MOG gravitomagnetic field and that predicted by the 19% [14]. The gravitomagnetic field due to geodesic ef- Einstein's gravitional theory and measured by Gravity fects are measured at an accuracy of 0.28%[14]. GIN- Probe B, LAGEOS and LAGEOS 2, and with a num- GER, aiming to improve the sensitivity of the ring res- ber of GRACE and Laser Lunar ranging measurements onators, plans to measure the gravitomagnetic effect with requires jαj < 0:0013.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Gravity Without Dark Matter
    Gravity Without Dark Matter John Moffat Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada 1/13/2005 Miami 2004 1 Contents n 1. Introduction n 2. Gravity theory n 3. Action and field equations n 4. Quantum gravity and group renormalization flow n 5. Modified Newtonian acceleration n and flat galaxy rotation curves n 6. Galaxy clusters and lensing n 7. Cosmology without dark matter n 8. Conclusions 1/13/2005 Miami 2004 2 1. Introduction n Can gravity theory explain galaxy dynamics and cosmology without dominant dark matter? n We need a gravity theory that generalizes GR. Such a generalization is nonsymmetric gravitational theory (NGT). n A simpler theory is metric-skew-tensor gravity (MSTG). n There is also the problem of the nature of Dark Energy that explains the accelerating Universe. n The gravity theory must be stable and contain GR in a consistent way. It must yield agreement with solar system tests and the binary pulsar PSR 1913+16. n The cosmology without dominant dark matter must agree with the latest WMAP and CMB data. 1/13/2005 Miami 2004 3 2. Gravity theory n A popular phenomenological model that replaces dark matter is MOND (Milgrom, Beckenstein, Sanders-McGough). This phenomenology fits the flat rotation curves of galaxies, but has no acceptable relativistic gravity theory (see, however, Beckenstein 2004). n The MSTG theory can explain flat rotation curves of galaxies and cosmology without dominant dark matter. n We need to incorporate quantum gravity in a renormalization group (RG) flow framework with effective running coupling “constants” and an effective action.
    [Show full text]
  • Einstein Not Yet Displaced Controversial Theory of Varying Speed of Light Still Lacks a Solid Foundation
    books and arts Einstein not yet displaced Controversial theory of varying speed of light still lacks a solid foundation. Faster Than the Speed of Light: The Story of a Scientific Speculation MILES COLE by João Magueijo William Heinemann/Perseus: 2003. 320 pp. £16.99/$26 George Ellis João Magueijo is one of many who hope to see the epitaph ‘Einstein was wrong, I was right’ on their gravestone. He is a cosmolo- gist who, one rainy morning in Cambridge, suddenly saw the possibility of a varying speed of light (VSL) as an alternative to the inflationary-theory paradigm that domi- nates present-day theoretical cosmology. He knew from the start that it represented a fundamental challenge to physics ortho- doxy (it violates the foundations of Einstein’s special theory of relativity) and would not easily be accepted, but he worked enthusi- astically to develop the idea. He found a collaborator who wavered but eventually completed a joint paper with him on the topic. This was rejected by major journals but was eventually accepted for publication read and referred to. Why, then, his major dis- Magueijo has not gone back to the founda- after a long battle. He then discovered that content? He has had no more difficulty than tions and sorted them out. Any theory of the idea had already been proposed, in a many others who have presented challenges this kind needs, first, a viable proposal slightly different form, by John Moffat. He to orthodoxy. All major new ideas have for measuring both time and distance, as found new collaborators and with them been resisted in their time: the expanding velocity is based on this; second, a physical developed variants of his theory.
    [Show full text]
  • Explaining Planet Formation and the Initial Mass Function of Stars with a Universe Composed of Mathematics Plus Re- Evaluation of the Mass-Gravity Relationship
    EXPLAINING PLANET FORMATION AND THE INITIAL MASS FUNCTION OF STARS WITH A UNIVERSE COMPOSED OF MATHEMATICS PLUS RE- EVALUATION OF THE MASS-GRAVITY RELATIONSHIP By Rodney Bartlett (corresponding author), [email protected], vUniversity3A (Science and Technology), Stanthorpe, Qld. 4380, Australia Abstract - This preprint is a never-print. It can never be printed in a science journal because that approach has often been tried, only to see the submission's ideas repeatedly rejected as too speculative and non-mathematical. Professor John Wheeler used to say the early papers on quantum mechanics were regarded as highly speculative. Nevertheless, editors of the 1920s published them (today's editors would be too timid). Maybe the maths in it doesn't qualify as maths since it isn't complicated (Einstein used to say a theory that can't be explained to a 6-year-old isn't really understood by its author). Or maybe editors believe the only real maths is the squiggly lines of algebra. The distribution of stellar masses at the birth of stars is called the Initial Mass Function or IMF. Why does the IMF favour the production of low-mass stars? There is a clue in the report that most planetary systems seem to outweigh the protoplanetary disks (PPDs) in which they formed, leaving astronomers to re-evaluate planet-formation theories. (AstroNews 2019) Science must always be free to question everything: even the long- established idea that mass is the cause of gravity (by, according to General Relativity (Einstein 1915), warping and curving space-time). Exploration of the reverse, that gravity forms mass, sounds absurd to modern science.
    [Show full text]
  • 1. Introduction
    Beichler (1) Preliminary paper for Vigier IX Conference June 2014 MODERN FYSICS PHALLACIES: THE BEST WAY NOT TO UNIFY PHYSICS JAMES E. BEICHLER Research Institute for Paraphysics, Retired P.O. Box 624, Belpre, Ohio 45714 USA [email protected] Too many physicists believe the ‘phallacy’ that the quantum is more fundamental than relativity without any valid supporting evidence, so the earliest attempts to unify physics based on the continuity of relativity have been all but abandoned. This belief is probably due to the wealth of pro-quantum propaganda and general ‘phallacies in fysics’ that were spread during the second quarter of the twentieth century, although serious ‘phallacies’ exist throughout physics on both sides of the debate. Yet both approaches are basically flawed because both relativity and the quantum theory are incomplete and grossly misunderstood as they now stand. Had either side of the quantum versus relativity controversy sought common ground between the two worldviews, total unification would have been accomplished long ago. The point is, literally, that the discrete quantum, continuous relativity, basic physical geometry, theoretical mathematics and classical physics all share one common characteristic that has never been fully explored or explained – a paradoxical duality between a dimensionless point (discrete) and an extended length (continuity) in any dimension – and if the problem of unification is approached from an understanding of how this paradox relates to each paradigm, all of physics and indeed all of science could be unified under a single new theoretical paradigm. Keywords: unification, single field theory, unified field theory, quantized space-time, five-dimensional space-time, quantum, relativity, hidden variables, Einstein, Kaluza, Klein, Clifford 1.
    [Show full text]
  • UTPT-Lt-15 1
    The Status and Prospects of Quantum Non-local Field Theory N. J. Cornish Department of Physics University of Toronto Toronto, Ontario M5S 1A7, Canada & School of Physics University of Melbourne Parkville, Victoria 3052, Australia UTPT-lt-15 1 Abstract It is argued that non-locality is an essential ingredient in Relativistic Quantum Field Theory in order to have a finite theory without recourse to renormalisation and the problems that come with it. A critical review of the physical constraints on the form the non-locality can take is presented. The conclusion of this review is that non- locality must be restricted to interactions with the vacuum sea of virtual particles. A successful formulation of such a theory, QNFT, is applied to scalar electrodynamics and serves to illustrate how gauge invariance and manifest finiteness can be achieved. The importance of the infinite dimensional symmetry groups that occur in QNFT are discussed as an alternative to supersymmetry, the ability to generate masses by breaking the non-local symmetry with a non-invariant functional measure is given a critical assessment. To demonstrate some of the many novel applications QNFT may make possible three disparate examples are mooted, the existence of electroweak monopoles, an mechanism for CP violation and the formulation of a finite perturbative theory of Quantum Gravity. 2 1 Introduction There was once a time, not so very long ago, when a manifestly finite, unitary and gauge invariant Quantum field theory would have been accepted as the natural union of Relativity and Quantum mechanics. Unfortunately, the Quantum field theory born of that time gave infinite results for what should have been small Quantum correc­ tions.
    [Show full text]
  • Non-Particle Proposals for Dark Matter
    Non-particle Proposals for Dark Matter Will Bunting California Institute of Technology Ph 199 Seminar Presentations May 28, 2014 Overview 1 What is the dark matter problem? Experimental discrepencies Proposed solutions 2 Exotic Candidates Exotic particles Hidden sector particles Black hole remnants Modified gravity Geons 3 Conclusion Astrophysical evidence for dark matter • Galactic rotation curves • Gravitational lensing on cluster scales • Cosmic microwave background • Large scale structure formation (Vera Rubin's original Andromeda rotation curve) Astrophysical evidence for dark matter • Galactic rotation curves • Gravitational lensing on cluster scales • Cosmic microwave background • Large scale structure formation (Abell 2744 cluster lensing) Proposals Particle Dark Matter Non-particle Dark Matter • WIMP • Black hole remnant • Axion • Modified Gravity • Majorana fermion • Modified Newtonian Dynamics (MOND) • Tensor-vector-scalar gravity (TeVeS) • Sterile neutrino • Moffat gravity • Q-Ball • Topological Geons • Hidden sector particles Proposals Particle Dark Matter Non-particle Dark Matter • WIMP • Black Hole Remnant • Axion • Modified Gravity • Majorana fermion • Modified Newtonian Dynamics (MoND) • Tensor-vector-scalar gravity (TeVeS) • Sterile neutrino • Moffat gravity • Q-Ball • Topological Geons • Hidden sector particles Einstein Gravity • Our current best theory of gravity is General Relativity • Governed by an action principle for the gravitional field gµν 1 Z p Z p S = d4x R −g + d4xL −g (1) EH 8πG M • Varying the action gives the
    [Show full text]
  • Inhomogeneous Cosmology, Inflation and Late-Time Accelerating Universe
    Inhomogeneous Cosmology, Inflation and Late-Time Accelerating Universe J. W. Moffat The Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics, Waterloo, Ontario, N2L 2Y5, Canada and Department of Physics, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario N2L 3G1, Canada Abstract An exact inhomogeneous solution of Einstein’s field equations is shown to be able to inflate in a non-uniform way in the early universe and explain anomalies in the WMAP power spectrum data. It is also possible for the model to explain the accelerated expansion of the universe by late-time inho- mogeneous structure. e-mail: john.moff[email protected] 1 Introduction In the following, we shall investigate an exact inhomogeneous cosmological solu- tion of Einstein’s field equations obtained by Szekeres [1], for an irrotational dust dominated universe and subsequently generalized by Szafron [2] and Szafron and Wainright [3, 4] to the case when the pressure p is non–zero. The cosmological model contains the Friedmann-Lemaˆıtre-Robertson-Walker (FLRW) cosmology and arXiv:astro-ph/0606124v2 30 May 2007 the spherically symmetric Lemaˆıtre-Tolman-Bondi (LTB) model [5, 6, 7] as special solutions. The Szafron model describes a more general inhomogeneous spacetime with no prescribed initial symmetry [8]. We will show that the Szafron inhomogeneous cosmology in the early universe near the Planck time can lead to an inhomogeneous inflationary period, which can predict that the primordial power spectrum is not uniform across the sky. Recent investigations have revealed that there appears to be a lack of power in the CMB power spectrum above 600 and anisotropy in hot and cold spots on the sky [9, 10, 11, 12, 13].
    [Show full text]
  • The Subtleties of Light Alan Van Vliet
    The Subtleties of Light Alan Van Vliet P.O. Box 1676, Pinehurst, NC 28370 [email protected] 910.673.6797 910.690.2333 Fax 910.673.8980 Abstract The foundations of modern physics are based upon a conditional constant, a paradox within itself. The “constancy” of the speed of light is valid only when considered in the context of a vacuum or empty space. I propose there is no “caveat” and consequently the speed of balanced, white light is absolute, always 300,000 km/sec. I further propose that the seven monochromatic components of light have absolute, but individual speeds, these speeds differing from the absolute speed of balanced, white light. Based upon these premises, I explore a different explanation for the geometrical “deflection” of light proposed by General Relativity. I consider the gravitational field as a refractive medium that optically disperses light. A viable solution for the “deflection” of light is considered as a result of the curved path created by these “divergent speeds of monochromatic light.” The consideration of this divergent relationship within the very nature of light raises significant questions about the curvature of space-time itself. As a result, this opens the field to the possibility of a non-geometric theory of gravity, one that may more closely align with the quantum theory. In conclusion, I examine the historical implications of Einstein’s quest, his never-ending search for the unification of electromagnetism and gravity, and his personal vision of unity that still guides us today. Introduction "We find the world strange, but what’s strange is us.
    [Show full text]
  • Ultraviolet Complete Quantum Field Theory and Particle Model
    Ultraviolet Complete Quantum Field Theory and Particle Model John Moffat Perimeter Institute Waterloo, Ontario, Canada Talk given at Miami 2018 Conference December 13 , 2018 J. W. Moffat, arXiv:1812.01986 2018-12-13 1 1. Introduction • We will address the following question: If at the beginning of the development of the standard model (SM), the quantum field theory (QFT) had been a finite theory free of divergencies, how would the SM have been formulated? • The 12 quarks and leptons, the weak interaction vector bosons and the scalar Higgs boson would be discovered and complete the detected particle content of the SM. However, guaranteeing the renormalizability of the electroweak (EW) sector would not have been a problem needing resolution, because a perturbatively finite QFT would be the foundation of the theory. • The motivation of the SM is through symmetry. The renormalizability of the model requires a gauge invariance symmetry. This succeeds for QCD and QED, for the eight colored gluons and the photon are massless guaranteeing gauge invariance. 2018-12-13 2 • The SM is successful in describing experimental data. The discovery of the Higgs boson at mH = 125 GeV has supported the standard scenario of the spontaneous symmetry breaking of the electroweak group SU(2)L X U(1)Y through a non-zero vacuum expectation value of the complex scalar field. • The scalar field potential has the Ginsberg-Landau form: • The Higgs boson mass is determined to be 2018-12-13 3 • The radiative corrections are given by where is the top quark coupling constant or order 1, and the loop is quadratically divergent.
    [Show full text]
  • Dark Matter in Higgs Aligned Gauge Theories
    Dark matter in Higgs aligned gauge theories Rainer Dick Department of Physics & Engineering Physics University of Saskatchewan [email protected] 1 The case for minimal dark matter models: - Small number of parameters → high predictability - Occam’s razor: Counting of on-shell helicity states for particle physics + gravity: Standard model plus Einstein gravity 124 + 2 = 126 MSGSM (Minimal supergravitational SM) 264 E8 × E8 heterotic string theory 2×3968 + 128= 8064 (at the Planck scale) Minimal dark matter models (125..132) + 2 = 127..134 “Competition”: Modified gravity theories TeVeS 124 + 4 = 128 MOG 124 + 6 = 130 2 Standard Higgs Portal Models Dark matter consists of electroweak singlets • Higgs coupling to scalar dark matter = + 2 ℋ 2 � • Higgs coupling to vector dark matter = + ℋ 2 � • Higgs coupling to fermionic dark matter = 1 + 3 ℋ 2 � ̅ Standard Higgs Portal Models Standard Higgs portals lead to symmetric dark matter 3 What we (usually) want to know: • Annihilation cross sections for - calculating abundance as a function of dark matter parameters - indirect signals in cosmic rays from dark matter annihilation • Nuclear recoil cross sections for comparison with direct dark matter search experiments. • Production cross sections for dark matter signals at colliders. 5 What we (usually) want to know: • Annihilation cross sections for - calculating abundance as a function of dark matter parameters - indirect signals in cosmic rays from dark matter annihilation • Nuclear recoil cross sections for comparison with direct dark matter search experiments. • Production cross sections for dark matter signals at colliders. 6 Higgs-portal couplings as a function of dark matter mass 7 Dark matter recoil off nucleons 8 Standard Higgs portal dark matter recoil off nucleons F.
    [Show full text]
  • Galaxy Cluster Masses Without Non-Baryonic Dark Matter 3
    Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 000, 1-16 (2005) Printed 4 December 2008 Galaxy Cluster Masses Without Non-Baryonic Dark Matter J. R. Brownstein⋆ and J. W. Moffat† The Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics, Waterloo, Ontario, N2J 2W9, Canada, and Department of Physics, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario N2Y 2L5, Canada Submitted 2005 July 8. ABSTRACT We apply the modified acceleration law obtained from Einstein gravity coupled to a massive skew symmetric field, Fµνλ, to the problem of explaining X-ray galaxy cluster masses without exotic dark matter. Utilizing X-ray observations to fit the gas mass profile and temperature profile of the hot intracluster medium (ICM) with King “β- models”, we show that the dynamical masses of the galaxy clusters resulting from our modified acceleration law fit the cluster gas masses for our sample of 106 clusters with- out the need of introducing a non-baryonic dark matter component. We are further able to show for our sample of 106 clusters that the distribution of gas in the ICM as a function of radial distance is well fit by the dynamical mass distribution arising from our modified acceleration law without any additional dark matter component. In previous work, we applied this theory to galaxy rotation curves and demonstrated good fits to our sample of 101 LSB, HSB and dwarf galaxies including 58 galax- ies that were fit photometrically with the single parameter (M/L)stars. The results there were qualitatively similar to those obtained using Milgrom’s phenomenological MOND model, although the determined galaxy masses were quantitatively different and MOND does not show a return to Keplerian behavior at extragalactic distances.
    [Show full text]
  • 2017-2018 Perimeter Institute Annual Report English
    WE ARE ALL PART OF THE EQUATION 2018 ANNUAL REPORT VISION To create the world's foremost centre for foundational theoretical physics, uniting public and private partners, and the world's best scientific minds, in a shared enterprise to achieve breakthroughs that will transform our future CONTENTS Welcome ............................................ 2 Message from the Board Chair ........................... 4 Message from the Institute Director ....................... 6 Research ............................................ 8 The Powerful Union of AI and Quantum Matter . 10 Advancing Quantum Field Theory ...................... 12 Progress in Quantum Fundamentals .................... 14 From the Dawn of the Universe to the Dawn of Multimessenger Astronomy .............. 16 Honours, Awards, and Major Grants ...................... 18 Recruitment .........................................20 Training the Next Generation ............................ 24 Catalyzing Rapid Progress ............................. 26 A Global Leader ......................................28 Educational Outreach and Public Engagement ............. 30 Advancing Perimeter’s Mission ......................... 36 Supporting – and Celebrating – Women in Physics . 38 Thanks to Our Supporters .............................. 40 Governance .........................................42 Financials ..........................................46 Looking Ahead: Priorities and Objectives for the Future . 51 Appendices .........................................52 This report covers the activities
    [Show full text]