__Background__

**MOND and other modified gravity theories**

**that explain dark matter**

A phenomenological toy-model theory developed in 1983 by M. Milgrom called MOND (for "Modified Newtonian Dynamics") has been used to successfully explain the weak field behavior of the gravitational force at all scales from Earth bound and solar system scales to the scale of galaxies and galaxy-satellite galaxy systems, although it tends to underestimate the non-Newtonian effects seen in weak fields in galaxy clusters.

Despite the fact that this theory is only a simple toy-model with a single universal acceleration parameter (a

_{0}= 1.2 × 10

^{−10}ms

^{−2}), it can reproduce the dark matter phenomena in all systems of galaxy scale or smaller, and can reproduce some, but not the full extent of, dark matter phenomena in galactic cluster scale systems.

This toy model version of the theory isn't relativistic, however, so its doesn't capture many of the distinctive features of General Relativity, although generalizations of its in a relativistic sense (e.g. TeVeS), and a variety of alternative formulations that reproduce its core insight, have been attempted with mixed success.

*See also, e.g*., MOG by John Moffat.

__Deur's Work On Gravity__
One of the most promising gravity based explanations of dark matter phenomena is Alexandre Deur's efforts to identify quantum gravity effects in a graviton based theory of quantum gravity.

For mathematical simplicity, he models these effects in the static, scalar graviton case. It also exploits analogies to quantum chromodynamics (i.e. the Standard Model's theory of the strong force that binds quarks and gluons based upon their color charge). This model is useful because, like the self-interacting massless spin-1 gluons that are the carrier bosons of QCD (and unlike the massless spin-1 photons of quantum electrodynamics, which is the Standard Model theory of electromagnetism which don't interact with each other), the gravitons which are the carrier bosons of a hypothetical quantum gravity theory would have gravitational interactions with each other. Graviton based quantum gravity, like QCD, is a non-Abelian force mediated by a massless carrier boson.

Deur concludes, by analogy to QCD, that graviton-graviton interactions lead to effects that look like dark matter and dark energy, in the weak fields of very massive gravitational sources, to the extent that the systems are not spherically symmetric.

Despite the fact that he claims that his theory is consistent with General Relativity, this is not accurate, even though in the limit of spherical systems and strong gravitational fields, it closely approximates General Relativity's predictions.

Deur's "day job" is as a QCD physicist at Jefferson Labs, so he brings to the field a different set of mathematical tools and insights than the typical quantum gravity researcher, who typically starts with a study of classical General Relativity and then expands from there.

Deur's papers are not widely cited, even though they have been published in peer reviewed journals, and his papers have not received in depth investigation from other scientists in the astronomy and gravity field.

But, they remain very promising as a possible solution to the dark matter and dark energy problems.

* There is strong evidence, developed in the MOND context (and to a lesser extent in tests of other gravity modification approaches), that dark matter phenomena involved in galactic dynamics can be understood as a modification of conventional Newtonian approximations of gravity. This is in contrast to explanations of dark matter phenomena involving one or more dark matter particles beyond the Standard Model. Because the formula that Deur develops is observationally almost indistinguishable from MOND, in the circumstances where MOND works well, his theory benefits from this body of evidence.

* Deur's approach also makes predictions similar to MOND in other contexts. For example, new 21 cm background radiation observations, that are contrary to the predictions of the Lambda-CDM Model, also support Deur's theory.

* Deur's solution elegantly solves the galactic cluster problem of MOND by resorting to the differences in shape of clusters and their subparts, and the geometry between bodies attracted to each other in galactic clusters, and the arrangements of matter found in galaxies. Thus, it cures one of the main short fallings of MOND.

* Deur's solution predicts and explains a previously unnoticed relationship between the apparent amount of dark matter in an elliptical galaxy and the extent to which the galaxy is not spherical, which other modified gravity and dark matter particle theories do not.

* Deur's solution predicts and explains a previously unnoticed relationship between the thickness of a disk galaxy and the apparent amount of dark matter in a disk galaxy.

* This quantum gravity theory overcomes problems arising from observational evidence from correlated visible light and gravitational wave observations of black holes merging with neutron stars that shows that gravitational waves travel at a speed indistinguishable from the speed of light to high precision. This observation is inconsistent with massive gravitons in some modified gravity theories (e.g. many scalar-tensor or scalar-vector-tensor theories), because it utilizes only a single massless graviton.

* The Lambda-CDM Model does a great job of predicting the peaks in the cosmic background radiation of the universe, but does not do a good job of explaining dynamics of galaxies, or explaining why those dynamics are so tightly correlated with the distribution of baryonic matter in those systems. Simple cold dark matter models with a single "sterile" massive fermion do not accurately reproduce the inferred dark matter halos that are observed, nor do many more complicated dark matter particle theories. There are actually myriad discrepancies between observation and predicted behavior in the Lambda-CDM Model at the galaxy scale and some problems even at the galactic cluster scale. This is so even thought the Lambda-CDM Model is incomplete because it doesn't, by itself, explain how the cold dark matter in that matter came to have the very structured distribution that inferred dark matter distributions do observationally.

* Deur explains dark matter and dark energy phenomena as a natural outgrowth of quantum gravity, with no "moving parts" that can be adjusted to make it fit the data in advance.

* Deur's theory provides a sound theoretical basis for an explanation of the dark matter phenomena with modifications of the Newtonian gravity approximation widely used in large scale astronomy contexts, that it utilizes, because it derives these modifications from first principles. It does so in a way that sidesteps the overwhelming calculation difficulties of doing the full fledged calculations of gravity with a spin-2 massless graviton that has been an insurmountable barrier to other quantum gravity theories, but without inducing significant systemic error in the systems to which the theory is applies (i.e. the differences between a spin-0 graviton theory and a spin-2 graviton theory in dark matter and dark energy contexts is slight except in gravitational systems that are far from equilibrium). It is not mere numerology or a purely phenomenological theory.

* While Deur's approach does not reproduce the conclusions of General Relativity as conventionally applied in the weak gravitational fields and spherically asymmetric systems where it dark matter and dark energy phenomena are observed,

* Deur's approach builds on the common quantum gravity paradigm of gravity as QCD squared (strictly speaking Yang-Mills squared, but QCD is an SU(3) Yang–Mills theory).

* Basically, if Deur's approach ends up being correct, then the way that gravitational field self-interactions are incorporated into General Relativity in the Einstein's equations as conventionally applied must be subtly flawed. This also explains why quantum gravity researchers trying to build a quantum gravity theory that exactly reproduces Einstein's equations have failed. They have tried to reproduce a slightly erroneous equation and the theoretical difficulties with doing this become more apparent in the quantum gravity context.

* Deur's background as a professional QCD scientist pretty much assures that his non-abelian gauge field mathematics are sound. Independent efforts corroborate the validity of the main simplification he makes relative to quantum gravity with a spin-2 massless graviton.

* Deur's solution is pretty much the simplest possible resolution of the problems of quantum gravity, dark matter and dark energy, because (1) it does so with no new particles (other than the graviton found in all quantum gravity theories), (2) no new forces, and (3) one fewer fundamental physical constants than the existing core theory of the Standard Model and General Relativity (without dark matter).

* The ΛCDM Model, also known as the Lambda-CDM Model, also known as the Standard Model of Cosmology, requires that 97.8% of the mass-energy of the universe be made up of never observed dark matter and dark energy, while Deur's theory relies entirely on Standard Model fundamental particles and massless gravitons.

* Many modified gravity theories assume new scalar and vector fields in addition to the tensor field of the graviton. Many dark matter particle theories require a new self-interaction force between dark matter particles or a new force governing interactions between dark matter and ordinary matter, or both. Deur's theory, in contrast, gives rise to no new forces or fields.

* This quantum gravity theory, in principle, replaces the three constants of general relativity plus MOND (Newton's constant

* Deur's theory harmonizes gravity and the Standard Model with no particles beyond the Standard Model other than the massless graviton.

* Deur's theory explains the cosmic coincidence problem in a very natural way.

* Deur's theory solves the conservation of mass-energy problem with general relativity's cosmological constant solution to "dark energy." Conventional general relativity theory, in contrast, accepts that gravitational energy is only conserved locally and not globally. In Deur's theory, dark energy arises from self-interacting gravitons staying within the galaxy at rates higher than they would in the absence of self-interactions which causes mass of the edge of a galaxy to be pulled more tightly towards the galaxy. Because these gravitons leave the galaxy at a rate lower than they would in the absence of self-interactions, the gravitational pull between galaxies is weaker than it would be in the absence of gravitational self-interaction. Thus, dark energy is due to a weaker pull between galaxies than in the Newtonian or cosmological constant free general relativity model, rather than due to having something pervasive in space pulling apart distant objects.

* Deur's theory is not plagued with tachyons, causation violations, ghosts, unitarity violations and similar defects that are common in efforts to modify gravity.

For mathematical simplicity, he models these effects in the static, scalar graviton case. It also exploits analogies to quantum chromodynamics (i.e. the Standard Model's theory of the strong force that binds quarks and gluons based upon their color charge). This model is useful because, like the self-interacting massless spin-1 gluons that are the carrier bosons of QCD (and unlike the massless spin-1 photons of quantum electrodynamics, which is the Standard Model theory of electromagnetism which don't interact with each other), the gravitons which are the carrier bosons of a hypothetical quantum gravity theory would have gravitational interactions with each other. Graviton based quantum gravity, like QCD, is a non-Abelian force mediated by a massless carrier boson.

Deur concludes, by analogy to QCD, that graviton-graviton interactions lead to effects that look like dark matter and dark energy, in the weak fields of very massive gravitational sources, to the extent that the systems are not spherically symmetric.

Despite the fact that he claims that his theory is consistent with General Relativity, this is not accurate, even though in the limit of spherical systems and strong gravitational fields, it closely approximates General Relativity's predictions.

Deur's "day job" is as a QCD physicist at Jefferson Labs, so he brings to the field a different set of mathematical tools and insights than the typical quantum gravity researcher, who typically starts with a study of classical General Relativity and then expands from there.

__Why Is Deur's Approach Promising?__Deur's papers are not widely cited, even though they have been published in peer reviewed journals, and his papers have not received in depth investigation from other scientists in the astronomy and gravity field.

But, they remain very promising as a possible solution to the dark matter and dark energy problems.

*Observational Evidence Supports Deur's Model** There is strong evidence, developed in the MOND context (and to a lesser extent in tests of other gravity modification approaches), that dark matter phenomena involved in galactic dynamics can be understood as a modification of conventional Newtonian approximations of gravity. This is in contrast to explanations of dark matter phenomena involving one or more dark matter particles beyond the Standard Model. Because the formula that Deur develops is observationally almost indistinguishable from MOND, in the circumstances where MOND works well, his theory benefits from this body of evidence.

* Deur's approach also makes predictions similar to MOND in other contexts. For example, new 21 cm background radiation observations, that are contrary to the predictions of the Lambda-CDM Model, also support Deur's theory.

* Deur's solution elegantly solves the galactic cluster problem of MOND by resorting to the differences in shape of clusters and their subparts, and the geometry between bodies attracted to each other in galactic clusters, and the arrangements of matter found in galaxies. Thus, it cures one of the main short fallings of MOND.

* Deur's solution predicts and explains a previously unnoticed relationship between the apparent amount of dark matter in an elliptical galaxy and the extent to which the galaxy is not spherical, which other modified gravity and dark matter particle theories do not.

* Deur's solution predicts and explains a previously unnoticed relationship between the thickness of a disk galaxy and the apparent amount of dark matter in a disk galaxy.

* This quantum gravity theory overcomes problems arising from observational evidence from correlated visible light and gravitational wave observations of black holes merging with neutron stars that shows that gravitational waves travel at a speed indistinguishable from the speed of light to high precision. This observation is inconsistent with massive gravitons in some modified gravity theories (e.g. many scalar-tensor or scalar-vector-tensor theories), because it utilizes only a single massless graviton.

* The Lambda-CDM Model does a great job of predicting the peaks in the cosmic background radiation of the universe, but does not do a good job of explaining dynamics of galaxies, or explaining why those dynamics are so tightly correlated with the distribution of baryonic matter in those systems. Simple cold dark matter models with a single "sterile" massive fermion do not accurately reproduce the inferred dark matter halos that are observed, nor do many more complicated dark matter particle theories. There are actually myriad discrepancies between observation and predicted behavior in the Lambda-CDM Model at the galaxy scale and some problems even at the galactic cluster scale. This is so even thought the Lambda-CDM Model is incomplete because it doesn't, by itself, explain how the cold dark matter in that matter came to have the very structured distribution that inferred dark matter distributions do observationally.

*Deur's Model Is Attractive Theoretically** Deur explains dark matter and dark energy phenomena as a natural outgrowth of quantum gravity, with no "moving parts" that can be adjusted to make it fit the data in advance.

* Deur's theory provides a sound theoretical basis for an explanation of the dark matter phenomena with modifications of the Newtonian gravity approximation widely used in large scale astronomy contexts, that it utilizes, because it derives these modifications from first principles. It does so in a way that sidesteps the overwhelming calculation difficulties of doing the full fledged calculations of gravity with a spin-2 massless graviton that has been an insurmountable barrier to other quantum gravity theories, but without inducing significant systemic error in the systems to which the theory is applies (i.e. the differences between a spin-0 graviton theory and a spin-2 graviton theory in dark matter and dark energy contexts is slight except in gravitational systems that are far from equilibrium). It is not mere numerology or a purely phenomenological theory.

* While Deur's approach does not reproduce the conclusions of General Relativity as conventionally applied in the weak gravitational fields and spherically asymmetric systems where it dark matter and dark energy phenomena are observed,

**he does not make any assumptions about the properties of the graviton which are not utterly vanilla in the context of graviton based quantum gravity theories.**None of the underlying assumptions from which this approach is derived contradict the underlying assumptions associated with General Relativity, except in ways generic to all quantum gravity theories (e.g. all quantum gravity theories with gravitons localize gravitational mass-energy, while classical General Relativity does not).* Deur's approach builds on the common quantum gravity paradigm of gravity as QCD squared (strictly speaking Yang-Mills squared, but QCD is an SU(3) Yang–Mills theory).

* Basically, if Deur's approach ends up being correct, then the way that gravitational field self-interactions are incorporated into General Relativity in the Einstein's equations as conventionally applied must be subtly flawed. This also explains why quantum gravity researchers trying to build a quantum gravity theory that exactly reproduces Einstein's equations have failed. They have tried to reproduce a slightly erroneous equation and the theoretical difficulties with doing this become more apparent in the quantum gravity context.

* Deur's background as a professional QCD scientist pretty much assures that his non-abelian gauge field mathematics are sound. Independent efforts corroborate the validity of the main simplification he makes relative to quantum gravity with a spin-2 massless graviton.

* Deur's solution is pretty much the simplest possible resolution of the problems of quantum gravity, dark matter and dark energy, because (1) it does so with no new particles (other than the graviton found in all quantum gravity theories), (2) no new forces, and (3) one fewer fundamental physical constants than the existing core theory of the Standard Model and General Relativity (without dark matter).

* The ΛCDM Model, also known as the Lambda-CDM Model, also known as the Standard Model of Cosmology, requires that 97.8% of the mass-energy of the universe be made up of never observed dark matter and dark energy, while Deur's theory relies entirely on Standard Model fundamental particles and massless gravitons.

* Many modified gravity theories assume new scalar and vector fields in addition to the tensor field of the graviton. Many dark matter particle theories require a new self-interaction force between dark matter particles or a new force governing interactions between dark matter and ordinary matter, or both. Deur's theory, in contrast, gives rise to no new forces or fields.

* This quantum gravity theory, in principle, replaces the three constants of general relativity plus MOND (Newton's constant

**G**, the cosmological constant**λ**, and the MOND universal acceleration,**a**) and replaces them with a single fundamental constant, the gravitational coupling constant (whose value has already been measured moderately precisely). This coupling constant is basically Newton's constant_{0}**G**, although possibly in different units. Both the cosmological constant and the universal acceleration constant of MOND can be derived, in principle, from**G**in this theory (although he has not done this derivation himself). In contrast, MOND adds one physical constant to the existing core theory, and dark matter adds at least one dark matter particle mass (and more masses in the dark matter sector such as a mass and coupling constant for a dark boson that carries a self-interaction or ordinary matter-dark matter interaction or both, are present in many versions of dark matter theories), one dark matter abundance constant, and other properties related to the dark matter particle. Modified gravity theories other than MOND (such as Moffat's MOG theory) often have even more new physical constants than MOND does.* Deur's theory harmonizes gravity and the Standard Model with no particles beyond the Standard Model other than the massless graviton.

__The deep theoretical inconsistencies of the two models that make up core theory are eliminated__(almost). Deur's formulation of the theory as a quantum field theory simplifies its integration as a quantum gravity theory with the Standard Model, which is also a quantum field theory.* Deur's theory explains the cosmic coincidence problem in a very natural way.

* Deur's theory solves the conservation of mass-energy problem with general relativity's cosmological constant solution to "dark energy." Conventional general relativity theory, in contrast, accepts that gravitational energy is only conserved locally and not globally. In Deur's theory, dark energy arises from self-interacting gravitons staying within the galaxy at rates higher than they would in the absence of self-interactions which causes mass of the edge of a galaxy to be pulled more tightly towards the galaxy. Because these gravitons leave the galaxy at a rate lower than they would in the absence of self-interactions, the gravitational pull between galaxies is weaker than it would be in the absence of gravitational self-interaction. Thus, dark energy is due to a weaker pull between galaxies than in the Newtonian or cosmological constant free general relativity model, rather than due to having something pervasive in space pulling apart distant objects.

* Deur's theory is not plagued with tachyons, causation violations, ghosts, unitarity violations and similar defects that are common in efforts to modify gravity.

__A Quick Primer__One of the better and more intuitive introductions to his ideas is in this power point presentation. Some of the key points from that presentation are restated below:

*Empirical parallels between Cosmology and Hadronic Physics*----------------------

**Cosmology (1)**

**Galaxies (or clusters of galaxies) have a larger mass than the sum of their known constituents.**

Alternatively Gravity is stronger than we think for these systems.

**Hadronic Physics (1)**

**Hadronic physics 2 quarks ~10 MeV, Pion mass 140 MeV 3 quarks ~15 MeV, Nucleon: 938 MeV**

**For non-relativistic quarks, this extra mass comes from large binding energy.**

----------------------

**Cosmology (2)**

Tully-Fisher relation: log(M)=γlog(v)+ε

(γ=3.9±0.2, ε ~1.5)

(M galaxy visible mass, v rotation speed)

Unexplained with dark matter. Assumed by MOND.

**Hadronic Physics (2)**

Regge trajectories: log(M)=c log(J)+b

(c=0.5)

(M, hadron mass, J angular momentum)

----------------------

**Cosmology (3)**

Negative pressure pervades the universe and repels galaxies from each other. The attraction of galaxies is smaller than we think at very large distances.

**Hadronic Physics (3)**

Relatively weak effective force between hadrons (Yukawa potential) compared to QCD’s magnitude.

----------------------

*Deur's Quantum Gravity LaGrangian and QCD Compared*The gravitational Lagrangian that Deur develops is as follows:

ℒGR=[∂ψ∂ψ]+√G[ψ∂ψ∂ψ]+G[ψ2∂ψ∂ψ]+ΣGn/2[ψn∂ψ∂ψ]+√ψμνTμν

This is derived by expanding the ℒGR in term of tensor gravity field ψμν by developing gμν around the Minkowsky metric: gμν~ημν+G

^{1/2}ψμν+...This is compared to the QCD Lagrangian:

ℒQCD=[∂ψ∂ψ]+√4πα

_{s}[ψ

^{2}∂ψ]+ 4πα

_{s}[ψ

^{4}]

The first terms of each are Newtonian gravity and perturbative QCD respectively (in the static case). The next two terms of the respective Lagrangians are field self-interaction terms.

*How strong are the gravitational self-interaction terms?*

This is a function, roughly speaking, of system mass and system size:

Near a proton GM

_{p}/r_{p}=4×10^{-38}with M_{p}the proton mass and r_{p}its radius. ==>Self-interaction effects are negligible:ℒGR=[∂ψ∂ψ]+

For a typical galaxy: Magnitude of the gravity field is proportionate to GM/size

_{system}which is approximately equal to 10^{-3}.
Basically, the more thinly spread the mass is in space, the stronger the self-interaction terms are relative to the Newtonian term of the Lagrangian. For gravitons, the profoundly weak strength of the Newton's constant means that self-interaction terms are only significant at immense distances where the mass is spread thinly.

In QCD, by comparison, the profoundly greater strength of the QCD coupling constant allows the self-interaction terms to be significant even at tiny distances on the order of 10

^{-15}meters, despite the fact that the color charges are not spread thinly.

*Matter Distribution Shapes and Self-Interaction Strength*
Essentially, self-interacting gravitons, rather than going off randomly in all directions, tend to veer towards direct gravitational fields between clumps of mass, making those fields stronger, while weakening the fields in the direction of empty space.

*Isolated Point Masses*

For two significant point masses with nothing else nearby, self-interactions cause the system to reduce from a three dimensional one to a flux tube causing the force between them to remain nearly constant without regard to distance.

*Disk-Like Masses*

**If the mass is confined to a disk, the self-interactions cause the system to reduce from a three dimensional one to a two dimensional one, causing the force to have a 1/r form that we see in the MONDian regime of spiral galaxies.**

In the geometries where Deur's approach approximate's MOND, the following formula approximate's the self-interaction term:

F

_{G}= G

_{N}M/r

^{2}+ c

^{2}(aπG

_{N}M)

^{1/2}/(2√2)r

where F

_{G }is the effective gravitational force, G

_{N}is Newton's constant, c is the speed of light, M is ordinary baryonic mass of the gravitational source, r is the distance between the source mass and the place that the gravitational force is measured, and a is a physical constant that is the counterpart of a

_{0 }in MOND (that should in principle be possible to derive from Newton's constant) which is equal to 4*10

^{−44}m

^{−3}s

^{2}.

Thus, the self-interaction term that modifies is proportionate to (G

_{N}M)

^{1/2}/r. So, it is initially much smaller that the first order Newtonian gravity term, but it declines more slowly than the Newtonian term until it is predominant.

*Spherically Symmetric Masses*

If the mass is spherically symmetric, the self-interactions cancel out and the system remains three dimensional causing the force to have the 1/r

^{2}form that we associate with Newtonian gravity.*Why do galactic clusters have so much more apparent dark matter than spiral galaxies?*

Because geometrically, they are closer to the two point particle scenario, in which galaxies within the cluster are the point particles that exert a distance independent force upon each other (analogous to flux tubes in QCD), rather than being spherically symmetric or disk-like.

*Why does the Bullet Cluster behave as it does?*

Since gas dominates the visible mass of a cluster, the observation that most of the total (dark) mass did not stay with the gas appears to rule out modifications of gravity as an alternative to dark matter. But, actually, this isn't the case in a self-interacting graviton scenario.

Because it has a gaseous component that is more or less spherically symmetric, that component has little apparent dark matter, while the galaxy components, which come close to the two point mass flux tube paradigm which is equivalent to a great amount of inferred dark matter. So, the gaseous portion and the core galaxy components are offset from each other. The apparent dark matter tracks the galaxy cores and not the interstellar gas medium between them.

__Annotated Bibliography__The first article in the series by Deur on gravity is:

The non-abelian symmetry of a lagrangian invalidates the principle of superposition for the field described by this lagrangian.A consequence in QCD is that non-linear effects occur, resulting in the quark-quark linear potential that explains the quark confinement, the quarkonia spectra or the Regge trajectories. Following a parallel between QCD and gravitation,we suggest that these non-linear effects should create an additional logarithmic potential in the classical newtonian description of gravity. The modified potential may account for the rotation curve of galaxies and other problems, without requiring dark matter.

The first of his papers published in a peer reviewed journal is:

Our present understanding of the universe requires the existence of dark matter and dark energy. We describe here a natural mechanism that could make exotic dark matter and possibly dark energy unnecessary.Graviton-graviton interactions increase the gravitational binding of matter. This increase, for large massive systems such as galaxies, may be large enough to make exotic dark matter superfluous. Within a weak field approximation we compute the effect on the rotation curves of galaxies and find the correct magnitude and distribution without need for arbitrary parameters or additional exotic particles. The Tully-Fisher relation also emerges naturally from this framework. The computations are further applied to galaxy clusters.

A. Deur, “Implications of Graviton-Graviton Interaction to Dark Matter” (May 6, 2009) (published at 676 Phys. Lett. B 21 (2009)).

Deur also makes a theoretical prediction which neither dark matter nor MOND suggest, which is born out by observation. This prediction is that non-spherical elliptical galaxies have greater deviations from general relativity without dark matter than more spherically symmetric elliptical galaxies do. This is found in a 2014 paper:

We discuss the correlation between the dark matter content of elliptical galaxies and their ellipticities. We then explore a mechanism for which the correlation would emerge naturally. Such mechanism leads to identifying the dark matter particles to gravitons.A similar mechanism is known in Quantum Chromodynamics (QCD) and is essential to our understanding of the mass and structure of baryonic matter.

Alexandre Deur, “A correlation between the amount of dark matter in elliptical galaxies and their shape” (July 28, 2014).

Deur argues that most or all of observed dark energy phenomena results from gravitons being confined in galaxy and galactic cluster scale systems, which is what gives rise to the dark matter phenomena in this systems. The diversion of gravitons to more strongly bind matter in the galaxies leads to a small deficit of gravitons which escape the galaxy and cause galaxies and galactic clusters to bind to each other. It also neatly explains the "cosmic coincidence problem." He spells out this analysis in a 2018 pre-print (with an original pre-print date in 2017) which also examines cosmology implications of his approach more generally:

Numerical calculations have shown thatthe increase of binding energy in massive systems due to gravity's self-interaction can account for galaxy and cluster dynamics without dark matter.Such approach is consistent with General Relativity and the Standard Model of particle physics.The increased binding implies an effective weakening of gravity outside the bound system. In this article, this suppression is modeled in the Universe's evolution equations and its consequence for dark energy is explored. Observations are well reproduced without need for dark energy.The cosmic coincidence appears naturally and the problem of having a de Sitter Universe as the final state of the Universe is eliminated.

A. Deur, “A possible explanation for dark matter and dark energy consistent with the Standard Model of particle physics and General Relativity” (August 14, 2018) (Proceeding for a presentation given at Duke University, Apr. 2014. Based on A. D. PLB B676, 21 (2009); A.D, MNRAS, 438, 1535 (2014). The published version is https://link.springer.com/article/10.1140/epjc/s10052-019-7393-0). The body text of this paper explains at greater length that:

The framework used in Refs. [3, 4] is analogous to the well-studied phenomenology of Quantum Chromodynamics (QCD) in its strong regime. Both GR and QCD Lagrangians comprise field self-interaction terms. In QCD, their effect is important because of the large value of QCD’s coupling, typically αs ' 0.1 at the transition between QCD’s weak and strong regimes [8]. In GR, self-interaction becomes important for p GM/L large enough (G is Newton’s constant, M the mass of the system and p L its characteristic scale), typically for GM/L & 10−3 [4].In QCD, a crucial consequence of self-interaction associated with a large αs is an increased binding of quarks, which leads to their confinement. Refs. [3, 4] show that GR’s self-interaction terms lead to a similar phenomenon for p GM/L large enough, which can explain observations suggestive of dark matter.Beside confinement,the other principal feature of QCD is a dearth of strong interaction outside of hadrons, the bound states of QCD. This is due to the confinement of the color field in hadrons. While the confined field produces a constant force between quarks that is more intense than the 1/r2 force expected from a theory without self-interaction, this concentration of the field inside the hadron means a depletion outside. If such phenomenon occurs for gravity because of trapping of the gravitational field in massive structures such as galaxies or clusters of galaxies, the suppression of gravity at large scale can be mistaken for a repulsive pressure, i.e. dark energy.Specifically, the Friedman equation for the Universe expansion is (assuming a matter-dominated flat Universe) H2 = 8πGρ/3, with H the Hubble parameter and ρ the density.If gravity is effectively suppressed at large scale as massive structures coalesce, the Gρ factor, effectively decreasing with time, would imply a larger than expected value of H at early times, as seen by the observations suggesting the existence of dark energy.Incidentally,beside dark matter and dark energy, QCD phenomenology also suggests a solution to the problem of the extremely large value of Λ predicted by Quantum Field Theory[9].

Reference [9] in that paper is worth noting because is provides a simple and analogous solution to the gross disparity between the quantum mechanical expectation for the cosmological constant and its actual, tiny value. It is as follows:

Casher and Susskind [Casher A, Susskind L (1974) Phys Rev 9:436–460] have noted that in the light-front description, spontaneous chiral symmetry breaking is a property of hadronic wave functions and not of the vacuum. Here we show from several physical perspectives that,because of color confinement, quark and gluon condensates in quantum chromodynamics (QCD) are associated with the internal dynamics of hadrons.We discuss condensates using condensed matter analogues, the Anti de Sitter/conformal field theory correspondence, and the Bethe–Salpeter–Dyson–Schwinger approach for bound states. Our analysis is in agreement with the Casher and Susskind model and the explicit demonstration of “in-hadron” condensates by Roberts and coworkers [Maris P, Roberts CD, Tandy PC (1998) Phys Lett B 420:267–273], using the Bethe–Salpeter–Dyson–Schwinger formalism for QCD-bound states. These results imply thatQCD condensates give zero contribution to the cosmological constant, because all of the gravitational effects of the in-hadron condensates are already included in the normal contribution from hadron masses.

Stanley J. Brodsky and Robert Shrock, "Condensates in quantum chromodynamics and the cosmological constant" 108(1) PNAS 45 (January 4, 2011).

This finding in the MINRAS paper for elliptical galaxies is further explored in the following (117 page) pre-print from 2020:

Observations indicate that the baryonic matter of galaxies is surrounded by vast dark matter halos, which nature remains unknown. This document details the analysis of the results published in MNRAS 438, 2, 1535 (2014) reporting an empirical correlation between the ellipticity of elliptical galaxies and their dark matter content. Large and homogeneous samples of elliptical galaxies for which their dark matter content is inferred were selected using different methods. Possible methodological biases in the dark mass extraction are alleviated by the multiple methods employed. Effects from galaxy peculiarities are minimized by a homogeneity requirement and further suppressed statistically. After forming homogeneous samples (rejection of galaxies with signs of interaction or dependence on their environment, of peculiar elliptical galaxies and of S0-type galaxies) a clear correlation emerges. Such a correlation is either spurious --in which case it signals an ubiquitous systematic bias in elliptical galaxy observations or their analysis-- or genuine --in which case it implies in particular that at equal luminosity, flattened medium-size elliptical galaxies are on average five times heavier than rounder ones, and that the non-baryonic matter content of medium-size round galaxies is small. It would also provides a new testing ground for models of dark matter and galaxy formation.

A. Deur, "A correlation between the dark content of elliptical galaxies and their ellipticity" (October 13, 2020).

The use of a scalar graviton approximation used by Deur is justified in a published 2017 paper:

We study two self-interacting scalar field theories in their high-temperature limit using path integrals on a lattice. We first discuss the formalism and recover known potentials to validate the method.We then discuss how these theories can model, in the high-temperature limit, the strong interaction and General Relativity.For the strong interaction, the model recovers the known phenomenology of the nearly static regime of heavy quarkonia.The model also exposes a possible origin for the emergence of the confinement scale from the approximately conformal Lagrangian. Aside from such possible insights,the main purpose of addressing the strong interaction here --given that more sophisticated approaches already exist-- is mostly to further verify the pertinence of the model in the more complex case of General Relativity for which non-perturbative methods are not as developed. The results have important implications on the nature of Dark Matter. In particular, non-perturbative effects naturally provide flat rotation curves for disk galaxies, without need for non-baryonic matter, and explain as well other observations involving Dark Matter such as cluster dynamics or the dark mass of elliptical galaxies.

A. Deur, “Self-interacting scalar fields at high temperature” (June 15, 2017) (published at Eur. Phys. J. C77 (2017) no.6, 412).

A paper in the same journal by independent authors confirms that scalar approximations can reproduce experimental tests:

We construct a general stratified scalar theory of gravitation from a field equation that accounts for the self-interaction of the field and a particle Lagrangian, and calculate its post-Newtonian parameters. Using this general framework, we analyze several specific scalar theories of gravitation and check their predictions for the solar system post-Newtonian effects.

Diogo P. L. Bragança, José P. S. Lemos “Stratified scalar field theories of gravitation with self-energy term and effective particle Lagrangian” (June 29, 2018) (open access) (pre-print here).

A 2019 paper with two collaborators restates the basis premise of Deur's previous work.

The discrepancy between the visible mass in galaxies or galaxy clusters, and that inferred from their dynamics is well known. The prevailing solution to this problem is dark matter. Here we show that a different approach, one that conforms to both the current Standard Model of Particle Physics and General Relativity, explains the recently observed tight correlation between the galactic baryonic mass and its observed acceleration.Using direct calculations based on General Relativity's Lagrangian, and parameter-free galactic models, we show that the nonlinear effects of General Relativity make baryonic matter alone sufficient to explain this observation.

A. Deur, Corey Sargent, Balša Terzić, "Significance of Gravitational Nonlinearities on the Dynamics of Disk Galaxies" (August 31, 2019, last revised January 11, 2020) (pre-print). Latest update May 18, 2020. https://arxiv.org/abs/1909.00095v3

Deur's latest paper approaches the question of dark matter phenomena in disk galaxies using more a more conventional gravitational field approach rather than an quantum gravity Lagrangian simplified to a scalar graviton approximation, with the same basic analysis focusing on self-interactions of the gravitational field, and derives a predicted relationship between disk thickness and inferred dark matter amount which he then verifies with empirical data.

We present a method to investigate the effect of relativistic corrections arising from large masses to the rotation curves of disk galaxies. The method employs a mean-field approximation and gravitational lensing. Applying it to a basic model of disk galaxy, we find that these corrections become important and magnified at large distances. The magnitude of the effect is sufficient to explain the galactic missing mass problem without requiring a significant amount of dark matter.A prediction of the model is that there should be a strong correlation between the inferred galactic dark mass and the galactic disk thickness. We use two independent sets of data to verify this.

Alexandre Deur, "Relativistic corrections to the rotation curves of disk galaxies" (April 10, 2020) (lated updated February 8, 2021 in version accepted for publication in Eur. Phys. Jour. C).

This paper also makes clear that the primary effect is actually a classical gravitational field self-interaction effect, rather than a genuinely quantum gravitational effect. As the introduction in the body text explains:

This paper also makes clear that the primary effect is actually a classical gravitational field self-interaction effect, rather than a genuinely quantum gravitational effect. As the introduction in the body text explains:

The total mass of a nearby disk galaxy is typically obtained from measuring its rotation curve and deducing from it the mass using Newton’s dynamics. The rationale for this non-relativistic treatment is the small velocity of stars: v/c << 1 sufficiently far from the central galactic black hole. However, the assumption that relativistic corrections are negligible may be questioned on several grounds. Inspecting the post-Newtonian [1] Lagrangian, e.g. for two masses M1 and M2 separated by r, shows non-Newtonian potential terms of the type G^2M1M2(M1+M2)/2r^2 (G is the gravitational constant) that are independent of v, thus not suppressed at small v, and can be non-negligible for large enough M1 and M2. These terms express the non-linear nature of General Relativity (GR), which arises from its field self-interaction: the gravitational field has an energy and hence gravitates too.

Field self-interactions are well-known in particle physics: Quantum Chromodynamics (QCD), the gauge theory of the strong force between quarks, features color-charged fields that self-interact. In fact, GR and QCD have similar Lagrangians, including self-interacting terms, as can be seen when the Einstein-Hilbert Lagrangian of GR is expanded in a polynomial form [2, 3]. Field self-interaction in QCD, which causes quark confinement, exists even for static sources, as shown by the existence of numerous heavy quark bound states (in which v ≈ 0 for quarks) [4] and by classic numerical lattice calculations for v = 0 quarks [5]. This, as well as the correspondence between the respective terms of the GR and QCD Lagrangians, shows that for bodies massive enough a relativistic treatment is required regardless of their velocity. Finally, the measured speeds at the rotation curve plateaus are of several hundreds of km/s, e.g. 300 km/s (or v/c = 0.1%) for NGC 2841. They are similar to that of stars orbiting the central black hole of our galaxy and clearly display the relativistic dynamics expected in the strong regime of GR [6].

These arguments suggest that one should investigate the importance of relativistic dynamics in galaxies and how it affects the missing mass problem. From experience with QCD, a non-perturbative approach is required to fully account for field self-interaction, making post-Newtonian formalism inadequate. In Refs. [2, 3], a nonperturbative numerical lattice method was used. Here, we propose to approach the problem with a mean-field technique combined with gravitational lensing. There are several advantages of the approach compared to the lattice method used in [2, 3]: (1) it is an entirely independent method, thereby providing a thorough check of the lattice result; (2) it is not restricted to the static limit of the lattice method and can be applied to systems with complex geometries; (3) it is significantly less CPU-intensive than a lattice calculation, and hence much faster; (4) iThe references in the 2020 paper are as follows, with references to Deur's own prior works in bold.t clarifies that the effect calculated in Refs. [2, 3] is classical.The lattice approach – an inherently quantum field theory (QFT) technique – used in Refs. [2, 3] may misleadingly suggest that a quantum phenomenon is involved. In fact,the classical nature of the effect is consistent with these lattice calculations being performed in the high-temperature limit in which quantum effects disappear, as discussed in Ref. [3]; (5) the lensing formalism is more familiar to astrophysicists and cosmologists, in contrast to lattice techniques with its QFT underpinning and terminology.

[1] A. Einstein, L. Infeld and B. Hoffmann, Annals Math. 39, 65 (1938)Reference [16] in the 2020 paper is:

[2]A. Deur, Phys. Lett. B 676, 21 (2009)[3]A. Deur A, Eur. Phys. J. C 77, 412 (2017)[4] M. Tanabashi et al. [Particle Data Group], Phys. Rev. D 98, 030001 (2018)

[5] G. S. Bali, Phys. Rept. 343, 1 (2001)

[6] A. Hees et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 211101 (2017)

[7] L. D. Landau, E. M. Lifshitz, The Classical Theory of Fields (Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann, 2000)

[8] S. J. Brodsky, G. F. de Teramond, H. G. Dosch and J. Erlich, Phys. Rept. 584, 1 (2015)

[9] B. S. DeWitt, Phys. Rev. 162, 1195 (1967); Phys. Rev. 7 162, 1239 (1967); L. F. Abbott, Acta Phys. Polon. B 13, 33 (1982)

[10] W. J. G. de Blok, Advances in Astronomy, 2010, 789293 (2010)

[11] M. Milgrom, Astrophys. J. 270, 365 (1983)

[12] E. B. Amores, A. C. Robin and C. Reyle A&A 602, A67 (2017)

[13]A. Deur, S. J. Brodsky, G. F. de Teramond, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 90, 1 (2016)

[14] Y. Sofue, PASJ 68, 2 (2016)

[15] T. P. K. Martinsson et al. Astron. Astrophys. 557, A131 (2013)

[16]A. Deur, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 438, 2, 1535 (2014)

[17]A. Deur, C. Sargent and B. Terzic, arXiv:1909.00095 [astro-ph.GA]

[18]A. Deur, Eur. Phys. J. C 79, 883 (2019)

The QCD running coupling sets the strength of the interactions of quarks and gluons as a function of the momentum transferQ. The dependence of the coupling is required to describe hadronic interactions at both large and short distances. In this article we adopt the light-front holographic approach to strongly-coupled QCD, a formalism which incorporates confinement, predicts the spectroscopy of hadrons composed of light quarks, and describes the low- analytic behavior of the strong coupling . The high- dependence of the coupling is specified by perturbative QCD and its renormalization group equation. The matching of the high and low regimes of then determines the scale which sets the interface between perturbative and nonperturbative hadron dynamics. The value of can be used to set the factorization scale for DGLAP evolution of hadronic structure functions and the ERBL evolution of distribution amplitudes. We discuss the scheme-dependence of the value of and the infrared fixed-point of the QCD coupling. Our analysis is carried out for the , ,MOMandVrenormalization schemes. Our results show that the discrepancies on the value of at large distance seen in the literature can be explained by different choices of renormalization schemes. We also provide the formulae to compute over the entire range of space-like momentum transfer for the different renormalization schemes discussed in this article.

# Alexandre Deur, Stanley J. Brodsky and Guy F. de Termond, "On the interface between perturbative and nonperturbative QCD" 90 Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 1 (2016).

We check whether General Relativity's field self-interaction alleviates the need for dark matter to explain the universe's large structure formation. We found thatself-interaction accelerates sufficiently the growth of structures so that they can reach their presently observed density. No free parameters, dark components or modifications of the known laws of nature were required. This result adds to the other natural explanations provided by the same approach to the, inter alia, flat rotation curves of galaxies, supernovae observations suggestive of dark energy, and dynamics of galaxy clusters, thereby reinforcing its credibility as an alternative to the dark universe model.

Alexandre Deur, "Effect of gravitational field self-interaction on large structure formation" arXiv: 2018:04649 (July 9, 2021) (Accepted for publication in Phys. Lett. B) DOI: 10.1016/j.physletb.2021.136510

Deur's approach to gravity, emphasizing gravitational field self-interactions in weak fields, that are generally neglected on the assumption that they are negligible in aggregate effect, is used to explain the Cosmic Microwave Background power spectrum which is the crowing achievement of the LambdaCDM model.

Field self-interactions are at the origin of the non-linearities inherent to General Relativity. We study their effects on the Cosmic Microwave Background anisotropies. We find that they can reduce or alleviate the need for dark matter and dark energy in the description of the Cosmic Microwave Background power spectrum.

A. Deur, "Effect of the field self-interaction of General Relativity on the Cosmic Microwave Background Anisotropies" arXiv:2203.02350 (March 4, 2022).

*See also*:

We investigate the possible existence of graviballs, a system of bound gravitons, and show that two gravitons can be bound together by their gravitational interaction. This idea connects to black hole formation by a high-energy 2→N scattering and to the gravitational geon studied by Brill and Hartle. Our calculations rely on the formalism and techniques of quantum field theory, specifically on low-energy quantum gravity. By solving numerically the relativistic equations of motion, we have access to the space-time dynamics of the (2-gravitons) graviball formation. We argue that the graviball is a viable dark matter candidate and we compute the associated gravitational lensing.

B. Guiot, A. Borqus, A. Deur, K. Werner, "Graviballs and Dark Matter" (June 3, 2020 revised September 3, 2020). A follow up paper from February 9, 2022 is here.

## 26 comments:

would graviton graviton interactions analogy with QCD hold only when gravity is strong?

the weaker gravity is, the weaker graviton graviton interactions the less it is like QCD and more like QED

Deur's approach might make most sense in the strong QG regime, where gravitons behave like QCD such as a black hole, but i don't see how it explains the MOND regime

Graviton-graviton interactions are a second order effect (because gravitons don't have a lot of mass-energy relative to other things it could couple to). So, in a strong field, that second order effect (which is only present in non-spherical systems in any case) is overwhelmed by the first order effect of the gravitational pull from stuff other than gravitons.

The analogy with QCD holds because both carrier bosons are self-interacting.

QED has no self-interactions (it is abelian). Photons don't have electric charge and hence don't interact with other photons. And, weak force bosons (W and Z bosons) are so short lived (on average 10^-25 seconds) that they don't have much of an opportunity to interact with each other before they decay.

You do need a large source mass to get a discernible effect from graviton-graviton interactions, but you also need the strength of the gravitational field itself to be very weak so that the second order effects can become larger than the first order effects.

The easiest way to see this is to look at the terms of the relevant equations in the Power Point presentation.

Lee Smolin's paper attempts to provide an outline why the Mond scale ao is close to the cc, Verlinde entropic gravity also takes note of this

MOND is a dark energy effect

how does Deur explain this apparent coincidence?

on Stacy's webpage a poster provided links to another theory that MOND is result of quantized inertia, rather than gravity.

"Lee Smolin's paper attempts to provide an outline why the Mond scale ao is close to the cc, Verlinde entropic gravity also takes note of this --- MOND is a dark energy effect -- how does Deur explain this apparent coincidence?"

In Deur's approach, the phenomena attributed to dark energy arise from the fact that gravitons that would head out into empty space to pull galaxies and galactic clusters together, instead stay inside those galaxies holding them together tighter that they would if they were not self-interacting. Thus, the "cosmological constant" is really due to a graviton deficit in empty space that is matched by a graviton surplus in systems that appear to have dark matter.

"on Stacy's webpage a poster provided links to another theory that MOND is result of quantized inertia, rather than gravity."

While this theory was proposed, it never really went anywhere and was hard to conceptualize. Our brains like thinking in terms of forces more than they do thinking in terms of inertia. Deur's approach, likewise, is conceptualized in terms of force fields.

Mike McCulloch whose website is at http://physicsfromtheedge.blogspot.com/ is the leading proponent of quantitized inertia and has done some interesting things with it, although I think that his efforts to devise engineering applications in the form of space propulsion applications for his theory are flawed.

This has a sort of intuitive appeal. One of the big differences between Newton's and Einstein's theories is that in the latter, the gravitational field itself has mass. If that mass is made of self interacting gravitons, then why not?

So if gravitons exist, it should be possible to find them? Or are they just meant to be hypothetical?

We will probably never detect an individual graviton in isolation the way that we can for an individual photon (the human eye needs at least 4-5 photons to trigger its ability to detect light, so we were close to start with).

In the same vein, on of the operative laws of QCD which governs the strong force is that quarks and gluons are always confined in hadrons and never observed in isolation (below the energy threshold of quark-gluon plasma (about 5.5 trillion degrees kelvin), except for top quarks which decay to fast to hadronize.

This said, there are qualitative properties of a graviton based theory of quantum gravity that differ in kind from classical General Relativity.

For example, in a quantum theory with a graviton, the energy of a gravitational field can be localized, and gravitational fields are treated the same way as, for example, the electromagnetic fields in analog to the stress-energy tensor of general relativity. Some of these predictions are experimentally testable if we are clever enough.

To prove that a particular theory of quantum gravity more accurately matches experimental data than general relativity, which is the usual null hypothesis, however, is not necessarily proof that the predictions of your quantum gravity theory are really due to a graviton. For example, one of Deur's recent papers reproduces his findings that come naturally from the self-interactions of gravitons using self-interactions of classical gravitational fields instead. So, the most central of his explanations of dark matter and dark energy phenomena, while constituting a very natural consequence of a spin-0 massless graviton approximation of a spin-2 massless graviton conventional quantum gravity theory flows very naturally and intuitively from that approach, it isn't the only way to reach the core conclusions of the theory. And, the features of this approach that can be handled both classically and on a quantum basis are easier to discern experimentally than a definitive distinction between a classical modified gravity theory and a quantum gravity theory.

The main motive for taking the graviton based quantum gravity approach, rather than the classical modified gravity approach, is that a quantum gravity with a graviton approach is much easier to integrate with the Standard Model of Particle Physics than a classical modification of General Relativity which, for example, doesn't do a good job of dealing with point particles.

Deur has updated his April, 2020, paper and it is accepted to the Eur. Phys. Jour. C.

@jd Thanks for the heads up. I'm update the page when I get a chance.

does Deur provide actual data in the form of galaxies rotation curves as did Gerson Otto Ludwig, with a derivation (i.e Gem)

Yes.

reference

is it more plausible Gerson Otto Ludwig Gem derivation

The paper you are referencing, to be clear to other readers, is G. O. Ludwig, "Galactic Rotation Curve and Dark Matter According to Gravitomagnetism" 81 European Physical Journal C 186 (2021) DOI 10.1140/epjc/s10052-021-08967-3.

The theories are both very plausible and work from the same foundation, i.e. that dark matter phenomena in galaxies arise for general relativistic effects that are neglected in the conventional Newtonian approximations of galactic dynamics that assume that GR differences from Newtonian gravity in the weak field limit where dark matter phenomena are predominantly observed are insignificant, based upon non-rigorous arguments that neglect the fact that the GR effects, while small, don't cancel out.

Neither author's work has received much critical examination from major third party experts in the GR and astronomy field so far, in part, because Ludwig is a nuclear physicist best known for work on fusion reactor design, and Deur is a QCD physicist best known for his work on the perturbative/nonperturbative QCD calculation methods transition that bridges to high and low energy QCD methods. So, both physicist are working outside their primary specialty.

Deur's work relies largely on the self-interaction of the gravitational field is most transparently understood in a graviton based quantum gravity approach, although none of his conclusions rely inherently on anything particularly quantum and can be expressed (less transparently in a manner he works out in one of his recent papers) in a classical fashion. Indeed, arguably, one of the reasons his approach didn't flourish sooner is that the way that the gravitational field self-interaction is integrated into the Einstein Field Equations obscures the nature of the self-interaction.

Gravitomagnetism, in contrast, is a way of thinking about one of the important distinctions between Newtonian gravity and GR that has long been recognized and flows more naturally from classical GR as traditionally formulated. In the Einstein Field Equations, the four by four stress-energy tensor has 16 components, one for mass, three for pressure (for the dimensions of space), three for momentum density, three for momentum flux, three sheer stress, and three for electromagnetic flux. Gravitomagnetism arises from the momentum and sheer stress components that are neglected in Newtonian gravity.

I can't confidently say that the two approaches are actually even saying something different although they are expressing it very differently.

Gem appears to be too feeble by a factor of a million

Apr 9, 2021,02:00am EDT|2,288 views

Ask Ethan: Could Gravitons Solve The Mystery Of Dark Matter?

Starts With A Bang

Ethan SiegelSenior Contributor

Starts With A BangContri

eason #4: gravitons have extraordinarily low self-interactions. One of the questions I commonly get asked is whether it’s possible to surf gravitational waves, or whether, if two gravitational waves collided, they’d interact like water waves “splashing” together. The answer to the first one is “no” and the second one is “yes,” but barely: gravitational waves — and hence, gravitons — do interact in this way, but the interaction is so small that it’s completely imperceptible.

The way we quantify gravitational waves is through their strain amplitude, or the amount that a passing gravitational wave will cause space itself to “ripple” when things pass through it. When two gravitational waves interact, the main portion of each wave just gets superimposed atop the other one, while the portion that does anything other than pass through one another is proportional to the strain amplitude of each one multiplied together. Given that strain amplitudes are typically things like ~10-20 or smaller, which itself requires a tremendous effort to detect, going 20+ orders of magnitude more sensitive is virtually unimaginable with the limitations of current technology. Whatever else might be true about gravitons, their self-interactions can be disregarded.

But some of the properties of gravitons pose a challenge for them to be a viable dark matter candidate. In fact, there are two major difficulties that gravitons face, and why they’re rarely considered as compelling options.

Difficulty #1: it’s very difficult to generate “cold” gravitons. In our Universe, any particles that exist will have a certain amount of kinetic energy, and that energy determines how quickly they move through the Universe. As the Universe expands and these particles travel through space, one of two things will happen:

either the particle will lose energy as its wavelength stretches with the expansion of the Universe, which occurs for massless particles,

or the particle will lose energy as the distance it can travel in a given amount of time decreases, due to the ever-growing distances between two points, if it’s a massive particle.

At some point, regardless of how it was born, all massive particles will eventually move slowly compared to the speed of light: becoming non-relativistic and cold.

The only way to accomplish this, for a particle with such a low mass (like a massive graviton would have), is to have it be “born cold,” where something occurs to create them with a negligible amount of kinetic energy, despite having a mass that must be lower than 10-55 grams. The transition that created them, therefore, must be limited by the Heisenberg uncertainty principle: if it their creation time occurs over an interval that’s smaller than about ~10 seconds, the associated energy uncertainty will be too large for them, and they’ll be relativistic after all.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2021/04/09/ask-ethan-could-gravitons-solve-the-mystery-of-dark-matter/?sh=1836908a7c4d

@neo There are lots of reasons that massive gravitons don't work. The weak interaction is why self-interaction is only relevant in very weak gravitational fields. And, gravitons aren't proposed as cold dark matter candidates, instead, gravitational field self-interactions are proposed as alterations to conventionally applied GR.

The weak interaction is why self-interaction is only relevant in very weak gravitational fields.

isn't this backwards - self-interaction is only relevant in very strong gravitational fields since : gravitons have extraordinarily low self-interactions in the weak field it would be unmemorable

One key issue is the relative strength of the self-interaction effect, with is a second or third order effect, to the strength of gravity without considering the self-interaction effect, which in weak fields is effectively Newtonian.

While the self-interaction effect is indeed small, it gets smaller more slowly with distance in asymmetrical matter distributions than the first order Newtonian effect does with distance. When the Newtonian contribution is much smaller than the self-interaction contribution, it behaves basically like MOND for disk-shaped matter distributions.

Another key issue is that in strong fields, scientists don't use the Newtonian approximation that completely ignores self-interaction effects that they do in weak fields. Instead, they use full fledged strongly non-linear general relativity calculations.

The third factor is that strong fields force matters distributions into a very nearly spherical shape (in the same way that heavier planets are spherical and only less massive asteroids are asymmetrical) so the asymmetrical self-interaction effects in the strong field are very modest relative to the overall strong gravitational field, and therefore usually ignored, because they cancel out in spherical distributions unlike the way that they do in asymmetrical distributions, and because our ability to make precise measurements of gravitational fields in the immediate vicinity of very strong fields like neutron stars and black holes in not at all precise compared to our ability to observe the dynamics of stars in the fringes of galaxies.

Duer and MOND both predict essentially no modification of gravity as conventionally calculated in Newtonian approximation in the close vicinity of strong gravitational fields, which is consistent with what is observed.

From any local source, the self-interaction contribution is small, but in an asymmetrical matter distribution (which GR physicists devote stunningly little attention to in published papers, perhaps because they lack good mathematical tools to deal with it), these small contributions don't cancel out. So, while the instinct to ignore them is great, due to their local triviality, that is a mistake.

the question Ethan was asked was,

Ask Ethan: Could Gravitons Solve The Mystery Of Dark Matter?

one point he makes relevant to Deur

"Given that strain amplitudes are typically things like ~10-20 or smaller, which itself requires a tremendous effort to detect, going 20+ orders of magnitude more sensitive is virtually unimaginable with the limitations of current technology. Whatever else might be true about gravitons, their self-interactions can be disregarded. "

So Deur's theory of graviton self-interaction is simply too weak an effect to explain galaxy rotation curves, which I suspect is the reason it's got zero citations. gravitational waves is a way to directly measure graviton self-interaction, and the effect is too weak as to be almost unmeasureable. graviton self-interaction can also be calculated, as gravity is an extremely weak force and gravitons are thought to be massless

this is similar to GO Ludwig proposal why Garret Lisi and Stacy McGaugh reject gravitomagnetism as too weak by a factor of a million.

the entire planet earth's gravitomagnetism requires extremely sensitive probe Gravity probe B to measure.

graviton self-interaction was measured in gravity waves and can be calculated and also gravitomagnetism, and both are too weak to explain galaxy rotation curves

Not convinced until I see a serious calculation that understands what Deur is trying to do.

* Deur's solution predicts and explains a previously unnoticed relationship between the apparent amount of dark matter in an elliptical galaxy and the extent to which the galaxy is not spherical, which other modified gravity and dark matter particle theories do not.

Regarding this point I found this article, of which I share in this link, in the summary of the article is written "At face value, the correlation found implies that at equal luminosities, rounder medium-size elliptical galaxies appear to contain less dark matter than flatter elliptical galaxies, eg the rounder galaxies are on average four times less massive than the flatter ones. ", which corroborates the theory of Dr. Alexandre Deur.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/236326229_A_relation_between_the_dark_mass_of_elliptical_galaxies_and_their_shape

I am working on something similar to that of Dr. Alexandre Deur. I am also using the self-interaction of gravity. But I'm doing the self-interaction in reverse of how he's using it. And I am getting very good results in fitting to the rotation curves of the galaxies.

Atte. Dr. Rigoberto carbajal Valdez.

email: rcarbajal68@gmail.com

Thanks for the tip. Do you have any papers (pre-publication or otherwise) spelling out your work?

does Deur explain origin of the MOND critical acceleration scale ?

i ask because I saw this paper

The origin of the MOND critical acceleration scale

David Roscoe

The irrefutable successes of MOND are predicated upon the idea that a critical gravitational acceleration scale, a0, exists. But, beyond its role in MOND, the question: 'Why should a critical gravitational acceleration scale exist at all?' remains unanswered. There is no deep understanding about what is going on.

Over roughly the same period that MOND has been a topic of controversy, Baryshev, Sylos Labini, Pietronero and others have been arguing, with equal controversy in earlier years, that, on medium scales at least, material in the universe is distributed in a quasi-fractal D≈2 fashion. There is a link: if the idea of a quasi-fractal D≈2 universe on medium scales is taken seriously then there is an associated characteristic mass surface density scale, ΣF say, and an associated characteristic gravitational acceleration scale, aF=4πGΣF. If, furthermore, the quasi-fractal structure is taken to include the inter-galactic medium, then it is an obvious step to consider the possibility that a0 and aF are the same thing.

Through the lens of very old ideas rooted in a Leibniz-Mach worldview we obtain a detailed understanding of the critical acceleration scale which, applied to the SPARC sample of galaxies with a stellar MLR, Υ∗∈(0.5,1.0), and using standard photometric mass models, provides a finite algorithm to recover the information that aF≈1.2×10−10mtrs/sec2. This, combined with the fact that the Baryonic Tully-Fisher Relationship (BTFR) arises directly from the same source, but with a0 replaced by aF, leads to the unambiguous conclusion that a0 and aF are, in fact, one and the same thing.

Comments: arXiv admin note: substantial text overlap with arXiv:2006.08148

Subjects: Astrophysics of Galaxies (astro-ph.GA)

Cite as: arXiv:2111.01700 [astro-ph.GA]

based on this paper

Gravitational force distribution in fractal structures

A. Gabrielli, F. Sylos Labini, S. Pellegrini

We study the (newtonian) gravitational force distribution arising from a fractal set of sources. We show that, in the case of real structures in finite samples, an important role is played by morphological properties and finite size effects. For dimensions smaller than d-1 (being d the space dimension) the convergence of the net gravitational force is assured by the fast decaying of the density, while for fractal dimension D>d-1 the morphological properties of the structure determine the eventual convergence of the force as a function of distance. We clarify the role played by the cut-offs of the distribution. Some cosmological implications are discussed.

In Deur's work it is possible in principle to calculate the acceleration scale from other physical constants including Newton's constant, although it isn't quite a constant outside a fairly specific domain of applicability.

Most of his early works determine it empirically and assume that it can be derived since the acceleration scale is order of magnitude correct. There may be a derivation from first principles somewhere in a later paper (probably the one deriving the effect in classical GR), but I don't recall from memory and don't have time to check at the moment.

In Deur's work it is possible in principle to calculate the acceleration scale from other physical constants including Newton's constant, although it isn't quite a constant outside a fairly specific domain of applicability.

but does Deur ever attempt to calculate this from his theory?

I thought about asking Stacy McGaugh about this papers, but I'd like to run it by you first.

what do you think of the attempt to do so in the papers I cite, specifically,

We study the (newtonian) gravitational force distribution arising from a fractal set of sources. We show that, in the case of real structures in finite samples, an important role is played by morphological properties and finite size effects.

The irrefutable successes of MOND are predicated upon the idea that a critical gravitational acceleration scale, a0, exists. But, beyond its role in MOND, the question: 'Why should a critical gravitational acceleration scale exist at all?' remains unanswered. There is no deep understanding about what is going on.

Over roughly the same period that MOND has been a topic of controversy, Baryshev, Sylos Labini, Pietronero and others have been arguing, with equal controversy in earlier years, that, on medium scales at least, material in the universe is distributed in a quasi-fractal D≈2 fashion. There is a link: if the idea of a quasi-fractal D≈2 universe on medium scales is taken seriously then there is an associated characteristic mass surface density scale, ΣF say, and an associated characteristic gravitational acceleration scale, aF=4πGΣF. If, furthermore, the quasi-fractal structure is taken to include the inter-galactic medium, then it is an obvious step to consider the possibility that a0 and aF are the same thing.

Fractal Analysis of the UltraVISTA Galaxy Survey

Sharon Teles (1), Amanda R. Lopes (2), Marcelo B. Ribeiro (1,3) ((1) Valongo Observatory, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, (2) Department of Astronomy, Observatório Nacional, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, (3) Physics Institute, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Brazil)

claims made

1 galaxies and the universe are approximately fractal d=2

https://bigthink.com/starts-with-a-bang/universe-fractal/

this is an empirical claim supported by observational evidence

2 using newtonian gravity it is possible to calculate using standard newtonian physics the gravitational attraction of a fractal structure

3 the result exactly matches the MOND scale of acceleration.

the origin of MOND is standard Newtonian physics analyzed in the context of a fractal distributions of matter

this is not 1 paper by 1 author but a series of papers by different research groups

MOND is the result of fractal distribution and standard Newton/einstein gravity

a different paper suggests sterile neutrinos are needed to explain galaxy clusters and CMB third peak to explain MOND failure.

Post a Comment