This paper was converted on www.awesomepapers.org from LaTeX by an anonymous user.
Want to know more? Visit the Converter page.

Conformal Cosmology with a Positive
Effective Gravitational Constant

Peter R. Phillips
Department of Physics, Washington University, St. Louis, MO 63130
(September 18, 2025)
Abstract

The conformal cosmological model presented by Mannheim predicts a negative value for the effective gravitational constant, GeffG_{\rm eff}. It also involves a scalar field, SS, which is treated classically. In this paper we point out that a classical treatment of SS is inappropriate, because the Hamiltonian is non-Hermitean, and the theory must be developed in the way pioneered by Bender and others. When this is done, we arrive at a Hamiltonian with an energy spectrum that is bounded below, and also a GeffG_{\rm eff} that is positive. The resulting theory closely resembles the conventional cosmology based on Einstein relativity.

pacs:
04.20.Fy, 11.10.Ef, 98.80.jk

1 INTRODUCTION

Mannheim [6] (henceforth M6) has developed a cosmological model (MM) based on conformal invariance. This model has a number of attractive features, but has not so far been accepted as a viable candidate for the correct theory of gravitation, in large part because it predicts, apparently unambiguously, a negative value for the effective gravitational constant, GeffG_{\rm eff}. From this follows a thermal history markedly different from the usual one, and consequent difficulties in addressing questions such as primordial nucleosynthesis [4].

In this paper we point out a mathematical problem in the formulation of the model, and present a new approach that yields a positive GeffG_{\rm eff}, so that the model closely resembles the conventional one.

2 Basic equations of the Mannheim model

The MM involves a scalar field, SS, in a Friedmann-Robertson-Walker (FRW) background metric. It is this field SS that we will be concentrating on in this paper. The treatment of both SS and the gravitational field in M6 is classical. Important subsequent work has been done on the quantization of the fourth-order equations for the gravitational field that result from the conformal Lagrangian [7]. The scalar field, SS, however, has always been treated classically, a procedure that we will question in this paper.

There are several things that are required of SS in a viable model:

  • \bullet 1

    An equation of motion that is conformally invariant.

  • \bullet 2

    An energy-momentum tensor whose 00 component (Hamiltonian) has an energy spectrum that is bounded below.

  • \bullet 3

    A constant vacuum expectation value, S0S_{0}, derived from the equation of motion. The S02S_{0}^{2} in the action generates the effective gravitational constant, GeffG_{\rm eff}.

  • \bullet 4

    A S04S_{0}^{4} term in the action that gives the correct sign for the cosmological constant.

Let us see whether these criteria are met in the MM. Using (as Mannheim does) a metric signature ,+,+,+-,\;+,\;+,\;+, and neglecting the coupling to the fermion field, the terms in Mannheim’s Lagrangian involving SS are (M6 (61)):

=(g)1/2(12S;μS;μ112S2Rμμ+λMS4){\cal L}=-(-g)^{1/2}\left(\frac{1}{2}S^{;\mu}S_{;\mu}-\frac{1}{12}S^{2}R^{\mu}_{\;\;\mu}+\lambda_{\rm M}S^{4}\right) (1)

This results in an equation of motion (M6 (63)):

S;μ;μ+16SRμμ4λMS3=0S^{;\mu}_{\;\;;\mu}+\frac{1}{6}SR^{\mu}_{\;\;\mu}-4\lambda_{\rm M}S^{3}=0 (2)

This equation, as required, is conformally invariant.

SS is assumed to acquire a non-zero vacuum expectation value, S0S_{0}, found by setting the derivative term in (2) equal to zero. This gives

S02=Rμμ24λMS_{0}^{2}=\frac{R^{\mu}_{\;\;\mu}}{24\lambda_{\rm M}} (3)

as in [5] (13), with h=0h=0.

Further development of the model (M6, section 10) shows that, in order to meet observational criteria at the present time, RμμR^{\mu}_{\;\;\mu} and λM\lambda_{\rm M} are both negative, so that S02S_{0}^{2} is real and positive. The effective gravitational constant, GeffG_{\rm eff}, in the MM turns out to be negative (M6 (224)):

Geff=14πS02G_{\rm eff}=-\frac{1}{4\pi S_{0}^{2}} (4)

choosing units with c=1c=1.

The stress tensor in the MM model is obtained by taking the variation of the action with respect to the metric, in the usual way (M6 (64); a similar expression is given in [3]). Retaining just the terms involving SS we get

Tμν\displaystyle T_{\mu\nu} =\displaystyle= 23S;μS;ν16gμνSS;α;α13SS;μ;ν+13gμνSS;α;α\displaystyle\frac{2}{3}S_{;\mu}S_{;\nu}-\frac{1}{6}g_{\mu\nu}SS^{;\alpha}_{\;\;;\alpha}-\frac{1}{3}SS_{;\mu;\nu}+\frac{1}{3}g_{\mu\nu}SS^{;\alpha}_{\;\;;\alpha} (5)
16S2(Rμν12gμνRαα)gμνλMS4\displaystyle{}-\frac{1}{6}S^{2}\left(R_{\mu\nu}-\frac{1}{2}g_{\mu\nu}R^{\alpha}_{\;\;\alpha}\right)-g_{\mu\nu}\lambda_{M}S^{4}

The Lagrangian (1) is analogous to the Minkowski space Lagrangian for a ϕ4\phi^{4} field theory ([8] (7.2.14), with (ϕ)=μ2ϕ4{\cal H}(\phi)=\mu^{2}\phi^{4}):

mink=12(tϕ)212(ϕ)2m22ϕ2μ2ϕ4{\cal L}_{\rm mink}=\frac{1}{2}(\partial_{t}\phi)^{2}-\frac{1}{2}(\nabla\phi)^{2}-\frac{m^{2}}{2}\phi^{2}-\mu^{2}\phi^{4} (6)

The S2S^{2} term in (1) has the “right” sign for an m2m^{2} term. But with λM<0\lambda_{M}<0, the S4S^{4} term has the “wrong” sign, and, in a conventional treatment, will lead to a spectrum that is not bounded below. A theory of this sort has to be treated by methods appropriate to non-Hermitean Hamiltonians [1]. At the level of quantum mechanics, “wrong sign” ϕ4\phi^{4} theory is well developed. Nevertheless, even in Minkowski space, constructing a corresponding quantum field theory is a difficult problem, still incompletely understood [2]. Conformal cosmology will remain flawed until we can make progress in understanding the scalar field.

3 A new approach to non-Hermitean ϕ4\phi^{4} theory in Minkowski space

A conformally invariant theory with a single scalar field has a unique action, M6 (61), provided we use the familiar techniques appropriate for Hermitean Lagrangians. Once we recognize that our theory involves a non-Hermitean Lagrangian, however, a new approach is suggested, that we introduce in this section. We begin by working in Minkowski space, but retain gμνg_{\mu\nu} and (g)1/2(-g)^{1/2} in formulae to simplify the transition to a FRW space.

A ϕ4\phi^{4} theory with a “wrong sign” ϕ4\phi^{4} term is non-Hermitean but is nevertheless 𝒫𝒯{\cal PT} symmetric, and can be treated by the methods outlined in [1]. The distinctive feature of this approach is the use of the 𝒞𝒫𝒯{\cal CPT} norm in place of the usual Dirac norm; for a quantized field, 𝖲{\mathsf{S}}, we write this norm as

N(𝖲)=|𝖲𝒞𝒫𝒯𝖲|N({\mathsf{S}})=\langle|{\mathsf{S}}^{\cal CPT}{\mathsf{S}}|\rangle (7)

Here 𝒫{\cal P} and 𝒯{\cal T} represent the usual parity and time-reversal operations, while 𝒞{\cal C} represents a special operation designed to ensure the norm is real and positive definite and the theory is unitary. The 𝒞{\cal C} operator has to be specifically calculated for each Hamiltonian.

Our cosmological model is written in terms of classical fields (expectation values, S(x)S(x)), which we take to be real. We assume S𝒞𝒫𝒯(x)S^{\cal CPT}(x) can then be expressed as

S𝒞𝒫𝒯(x)\displaystyle S^{\cal CPT}(x) \displaystyle\equiv 4yC(xμyμ)S(y)\displaystyle\int{\rmd}^{4}y\,C(x^{\mu}-y^{\mu})S^{*}(-y) (8)
=\displaystyle= 4yC(xμyμ)[S(z)]ρ:zρ=yρ\displaystyle\int{\rmd}^{4}y\,C(x^{\mu}-y^{\mu})\left[S^{*}(z)\right]_{\forall\rho:z^{\rho}=-y^{\rho}}

(compare [1] (78)), so that

N(S)\displaystyle N(S) =\displaystyle= 4x4yC(xμyμ)[S(z)]ρ:zρ=yρS(x)\displaystyle\int{\rmd}^{4}x\int{\rmd}^{4}y\,C(x^{\mu}-y^{\mu})\left[S^{*}(z)\right]_{\forall\rho:z^{\rho}=-y^{\rho}}S(x) (9)

In an expression of this sort, S(x)S(x) and S(y)S^{*}(-y) describe the field SS at the same physical point, but use different coordinate systems to refer to that point.

Take the complex conjugate of (9), and let xμyμx^{\mu}\rightarrow-y^{\mu} and yμxμy^{\mu}\rightarrow-x^{\mu}:

N(S)\displaystyle N(S) =\displaystyle= 4x4yC(xμyμ)[S(z)]ρ:zρ=xρ[S(u)]ρ:uρ=yρ\displaystyle\int{\rmd}^{4}x\int{\rmd}^{4}y\,C^{*}(x^{\mu}-y^{\mu})\left[S(z)\right]_{\forall\rho:z^{\rho}=x^{\rho}}\left[S^{*}(u)\right]_{\forall\rho:u^{\rho}=-y^{\rho}} (10)
=\displaystyle= 4x4yC(xμyμ)S(y)S(x)\displaystyle\int{\rmd}^{4}x\int{\rmd}^{4}y\,C^{*}(x^{\mu}-y^{\mu})S^{*}(-y)S(x)

showing that C(xμyμ)C(x^{\mu}-y^{\mu}) must be real.

3.1 The action

We define our action by

I\displaystyle I \displaystyle\equiv 4x(g)1/2{σk2gμν[S(x)xμ]𝒞𝒫𝒯S(x)xν\displaystyle\int{\rmd}^{4}x\,(-g)^{1/2}\left\{\frac{\sigma_{k}}{2}g^{\mu\nu}\left[\frac{\partial S(x)}{\partial x^{\mu}}\right]^{\cal CPT}\frac{\partial S(x)}{\partial x^{\nu}}\right. (11)
+σm2m2S𝒞𝒫𝒯(x)S(x)+σμμ2[S𝒞𝒫𝒯(x)S(x)]2}\displaystyle\left.{}+\frac{\sigma_{m}}{2}m^{2}S^{\cal CPT}(x)S(x)+\sigma_{\mu}{\mu}^{2}\left[S^{\cal CPT}(x)S(x)\right]^{2}\right\}

where σk\sigma_{k}, σm\sigma_{m} and σμ\sigma_{\mu} are simply “sign factors”, each of which can be equal to ±1\pm 1. We will determine their actual values as we proceed.

3.2 Energy-momentum tensor

The energy-momentum tensor is obtained in the usual way by varying the action with respect to the metric:

Tμν(x)\displaystyle T^{\mu\nu}(x) \displaystyle\equiv 2(g)1/2δIδgμν(x)\displaystyle\frac{2}{\left(-g\right)^{1/2}}\frac{\delta I}{\delta g_{\mu\nu}(x)} (12)
=\displaystyle= 2(g)1/2(12(g)1/2(g)gμν{σk2gαβ[S(x)xα]𝒞𝒫𝒯S(x)xβ\displaystyle\frac{2}{\left(-g\right)^{1/2}}\left(\frac{1}{2(-g)^{1/2}}(-g)\,g^{\mu\nu}\left\{\frac{\sigma_{k}}{2}g^{\alpha\beta}\left[\frac{\partial S(x)}{\partial x^{\alpha}}\right]^{\cal CPT}\frac{\partial S(x)}{\partial x^{\beta}}\right.\right.
+σm2m2S𝒞𝒫𝒯(x)S(x)+σμμ2[S𝒞𝒫𝒯(x)S(x)]2}\displaystyle\left.{}+\frac{\sigma_{m}}{2}m^{2}S^{\cal CPT}(x)S(x)+\sigma_{\mu}{\mu}^{2}\left[S^{\cal CPT}(x)S(x)\right]^{2}\right\}
(g)1/2σk2gμαgνβ[S(x)xα]𝒞𝒫𝒯S(x)xβ)\displaystyle\left.{}-(-g)^{1/2}\frac{\sigma_{k}}{2}g^{\mu\alpha}g^{\nu\beta}\left[\frac{\partial S(x)}{\partial x^{\alpha}}\right]^{\cal CPT}\frac{\partial S(x)}{\partial x^{\beta}}\right)
=\displaystyle= gμν{σk2gαβ[S(x)xα]𝒞𝒫𝒯S(x)xβ\displaystyle g^{\mu\nu}\left\{\frac{\sigma_{k}}{2}g^{\alpha\beta}\left[\frac{\partial S(x)}{\partial x^{\alpha}}\right]^{\cal CPT}\frac{\partial S(x)}{\partial x^{\beta}}\right.
+σm2m2S𝒞𝒫𝒯(x)S(x)+σμμ2[S𝒞𝒫𝒯(x)S(x)]2}\displaystyle\left.{}+\frac{\sigma_{m}}{2}m^{2}S^{\cal CPT}(x)S(x)+\sigma_{\mu}{\mu}^{2}\left[S^{\cal CPT}(x)S(x)\right]^{2}\right\}
σkgμαgνβ[S(x)xα]𝒞𝒫𝒯S(x)xβ\displaystyle{}-\sigma_{k}g^{\mu\alpha}g^{\nu\beta}\left[\frac{\partial S(x)}{\partial x^{\alpha}}\right]^{\cal CPT}\frac{\partial S(x)}{\partial x^{\beta}}

Setting gμν=diag(1,+1,+1,+1)g_{\mu\nu}={\rm diag\;}(-1,+1,+1,+1), the Hamiltonian is given by

\displaystyle{\cal H} \displaystyle\equiv T00\displaystyle T^{00} (13)
=\displaystyle= (σk2gαβ[S(x)xα]𝒞𝒫𝒯S(x)xβ+σm2m2[S(x)]𝒞𝒫𝒯S(x)\displaystyle-\left(\frac{\sigma_{k}}{2}g^{\alpha\beta}\left[\frac{\partial S(x)}{\partial x^{\alpha}}\right]^{\cal CPT}\frac{\partial S(x)}{\partial x^{\beta}}\right.+\frac{\sigma_{m}}{2}m^{2}\left[S(x)\right]^{\cal CPT}S(x)
+σμμ2{[S(x)]𝒞𝒫𝒯S(x)}2)σk[S(x)x0]𝒞𝒫𝒯S(x)x0\displaystyle\left.{}+\sigma_{\mu}{\mu}^{2}\left\{\left[S(x)\right]^{\cal CPT}S(x)\right\}^{2}\right)-\sigma_{k}\left[\frac{\partial S(x)}{\partial x^{0}}\right]^{\cal CPT}\frac{\partial S(x)}{\partial x^{0}}
=\displaystyle= σk2[S(x)x0]𝒞𝒫𝒯S(x)x0σk2[S(x)]𝒞𝒫𝒯S(x)\displaystyle-\frac{\sigma_{k}}{2}\left[\frac{\partial S(x)}{\partial x^{0}}\right]^{\cal CPT}\frac{\partial S(x)}{\partial x^{0}}-\frac{\sigma_{k}}{2}\left[\nabla S(x)\right]^{\cal CPT}\nabla S(x)
σm2m2[S(x)]𝒞𝒫𝒯S(x)σμμ2{[S(x)]𝒞𝒫𝒯S(x)}2\displaystyle{}-\frac{\sigma_{m}}{2}m^{2}\left[S(x)\right]^{\cal CPT}S(x)-\sigma_{\mu}{\mu}^{2}\left\{\left[S(x)\right]^{\cal CPT}S(x)\right\}^{2}

All four terms in (13) include a (positive definite) 𝒞𝒫𝒯{\cal CPT} norm. By analogy with ordinary ϕ4\phi^{4} theory, the first two terms and the last must be positive if we are to have an energy spectrum that is bounded below. We therefore set σk=σμ=1\sigma_{k}=\sigma_{\mu}=-1.

The sign of the σm\sigma_{m} term will be determined by the requirement of conformal invariance when we go to FRW space.

3.3 Equation of motion

The equation of motion for SS is obtained in the usual way, by requiring the action to be stationary under small variations, δS\delta S. The appearance of S𝒞𝒫𝒯S^{\cal CPT} in the action is unusual, and the variation requires some care; details are given in the appendix. The equation of motion is given in (47). Writing σk=σμ=1\sigma_{k}=\sigma_{\mu}=-1, this becomes

gμν2S(x)xμxνσmm2S(x)+4μ2[S(x)S𝒞𝒫𝒯(x)]S(x)=0g^{\mu\nu}\frac{\partial^{2}S(x)}{\partial x^{\mu}\partial x^{\nu}}-\sigma_{m}m^{2}S(x)+4\mu^{2}\left[S(x)S^{\cal CPT}(x)\right]S(x)=0 (14)

Comparing this with Mannheim’s equation of motion, (2), we infer that we go over to FRW space by setting σmm2=Rμμ/6\sigma_{m}m^{2}=-R^{\mu}_{\;\;\mu}/6. Since Rμμ<0R^{\mu}_{\;\;\mu}<0, we must set σm=+1\sigma_{m}=+1. To maintain Mannheim’s notation as far as possible, we will here define λM=μ2<0\lambda_{\rm M}=-\mu^{2}<0, giving the equation of motion

gμν2S(x)xμxν+16RμμS(x)4λM[S(x)S𝒞𝒫𝒯(x)]S(x)=0g^{\mu\nu}\frac{\partial^{2}S(x)}{\partial x^{\mu}\partial x^{\nu}}+\frac{1}{6}R^{\mu}_{\;\;\mu}S(x)-4\lambda_{\rm M}\left[S(x)S^{\cal CPT}(x)\right]S(x)=0 (15)

Following Mannheim, we assume that SS develops a constant vacuum expectation value, calculated by setting the derivative term in (15) equal to zero. The result is the same as (3), S02=Rμμ/24λMS_{0}^{2}=R^{\mu}_{\;\;\mu}/24\lambda_{\rm M}, where, as before, Rμμ<0R^{\mu}_{\;\;\mu}<0 and λM<0\lambda_{\rm M}<0.

3.4 The action and energy-momentum tensor revisited

We can now use (11) to write the action in FRW space:

I\displaystyle I \displaystyle\equiv 4x(g)1/2{12gμν[S(x)];μ𝒞𝒫𝒯[S(x)];ν\displaystyle\int{\rmd}^{4}x\,(-g)^{1/2}\left\{-\frac{1}{2}g^{\mu\nu}\left[S(x)\right]^{\cal CPT}_{;\mu}\left[S(x)\right]_{;\nu}\right. (16)
Rσσ12S𝒞𝒫𝒯(x)S(x)+λM[S𝒞𝒫𝒯(x)S(x)]2}\displaystyle\left.{}-\frac{R^{\sigma}_{\;\;\sigma}}{12}S^{\cal CPT}(x)S(x)+\lambda_{\rm M}\left[S^{\cal CPT}(x)S(x)\right]^{2}\right\}

From this we can infer the energy-momentum tensor analogous to (5). For a cosmological model comparable to Mannheim’s only the last two terms are of interest, which are

Tμν16(Rμν12gμνRαα)[S𝒞𝒫𝒯(x)S(x)]+gμνλM[S𝒞𝒫𝒯(x)S(x)]2T^{\mu\nu}\approx\frac{1}{6}\left(R^{\mu\nu}-\frac{1}{2}g^{\mu\nu}R^{\alpha}_{\;\;\alpha}\right)\left[S^{\cal CPT}(x)S(x)\right]+g^{\mu\nu}\lambda_{M}\left[S^{\cal CPT}(x)S(x)\right]^{2} (17)

Replacing S(x)S(x) by its vacuum expectation value, S0S_{0}, we get

Tμν16(Rμν12gμνRαα)S02+gμνλMS04T^{\mu\nu}\approx\frac{1}{6}\left(R^{\mu\nu}-\frac{1}{2}g^{\mu\nu}R^{\alpha}_{\;\;\alpha}\right)S_{0}^{2}+g^{\mu\nu}\lambda_{M}S_{0}^{4} (18)

The important point is that the signs of both these terms are reversed in comparison to (5).

4 Cosmological implications

Mannheim points out (M6, section 10) that because the FRW space is conformally flat, the cosmological equation of motion (CEM) reduces to

Ttotalμν=0T^{\mu\nu}_{\rm total}=0 (19)

TtotalμνT^{\mu\nu}_{\rm total} is just the sum of (18) and TkinμνT^{\mu\nu}_{\rm kin}, the contribution from ordinary matter (fermion fields, electromagnetic radiation, etc.). So our CEM, analogous to M6 (222), becomes

Ttotalμν=Tkinμν+16S02(Rμν12gμνRαα)+gμνλMS04=0T^{\mu\nu}_{\rm total}=T^{\mu\nu}_{\rm kin}+\frac{1}{6}S_{0}^{2}\left(R^{\mu\nu}-\frac{1}{2}g^{\mu\nu}R^{\alpha}_{\;\;\alpha}\right)+g^{\mu\nu}\lambda_{\rm M}S_{0}^{4}=0 (20)

or, as in M6 (223)

16S02(Rμν12gμνRαα)=TkinμνgμνΛM\frac{1}{6}S_{0}^{2}\left(R^{\mu\nu}-\frac{1}{2}g^{\mu\nu}R^{\alpha}_{\;\;\alpha}\right)=-T^{\mu\nu}_{\rm kin}-g^{\mu\nu}\Lambda_{\rm M} (21)

with ΛMλMS04<0\Lambda_{\rm M}\equiv\lambda_{\rm M}S_{0}^{4}<0.

The S02S_{0}^{2} term defines the effective gravitational constant in the theory. We find

Geff=34πS02G_{\rm eff}=\frac{3}{4\pi S_{0}^{2}} (22)

analogous to M6 (224), but wth a positive sign.

Of particular interest, since it permits an analytic solution, is a model containing radiation only (M6, section 10.2). A corresponding solution exists for the present model also; let us see how it differs. The equation analogous to M6 (226) is (with HR˙/RH\equiv\dot{R}/R):

R˙2(t)=R˙2(t)(Ω¯M(t)+Ω¯Λ(t)+Ω¯k(t))\dot{R}^{2}(t)=\dot{R}^{2}(t)\left(\overline{\Omega}_{M}(t)+\overline{\Omega}_{\Lambda}(t)+\overline{\Omega}_{k}(t)\right) (23)
Ω¯M(t)\displaystyle\overline{\Omega}_{M}(t) =\displaystyle= 8πGeffρ3H2\displaystyle\frac{8\pi G_{\rm eff}\rho}{3H^{2}} (24)
Ω¯Λ(t)\displaystyle\overline{\Omega}_{\Lambda}(t) =\displaystyle= 8πGeffΛM3H2\displaystyle-\frac{8\pi G_{\rm eff}\Lambda_{M}}{3H^{2}} (25)
Ω¯k(t)\displaystyle\overline{\Omega}_{k}(t) =\displaystyle= kR˙2(t)\displaystyle-\frac{k}{\dot{R}^{2}(t)} (26)
Ω¯M(t)+Ω¯Λ(t)+Ω¯k(t)=1\overline{\Omega}_{M}(t)+\overline{\Omega}_{\Lambda}(t)+\overline{\Omega}_{k}(t)=1 (27)

Since k<0k<0 for the open geometry of the MM, all three terms in (27) are positive, in contrast to M6, where Ω¯M\overline{\Omega}_{M} is negative.

Write the solution as in M6 (230), with ρM(t)=A/R4\rho_{M}(t)=A/R^{4}:

R2(t)=k(β1)2αkβsinh2(α1/2t)αR^{2}(t)=-\frac{k(\beta-1)}{2\alpha}-\frac{k\beta\sinh^{2}(\alpha^{1/2}t)}{\alpha} (28)
α\displaystyle\alpha =\displaystyle= 8πGeffΛM3>0\displaystyle-\frac{8\pi G_{\rm eff}\Lambda_{M}}{3}>0 (29)
β\displaystyle\beta =\displaystyle= (1+16AλMk2)1/2<1\displaystyle\left(1+\frac{16A\lambda_{\rm M}}{k^{2}}\right)^{1/2}<1 (30)

The first term on the right of (28) is negative, not positive as in the MM. This means that RR must start from zero, as in the standard cosmology, not from some finite value, as in the MM. This is illustrated in figure 1. Both curves were drawn using the formula (28), but in the upper graph β>1\beta>1, while in the lower graph β<1\beta<1. The origin of tt is conventionally shifted in the lower graph so that t=0t=0 is at point B, where R=0R=0.

Refer to caption
Figure 1: Two curves drawn using (28), but with different values of parameters. (a) k=1k=-1, α=1.0\alpha=1.0, β=1.4\beta=1.4. RR starts from a non-zero value at t=0t=0 (point A). (b) k=1k=-1, α=1.0\alpha=1.0, β=0.6\beta=0.6. Part of the curve now lies below the horizontal axis, and is non-physical. The origin of tt is conventionally shifted to B, where R=0R=0.

5 How does the new model differ from conventional cosmology?

The present model has two features that are not present in conventional cosmology based on Einstein’s equations.

First, the model includes a scalar field that is essentially massless. The non-zero vacuum expectation value of this field is essential, but we have ignored any excitations. This may be permissible because the field couples very weakly to normal matter, and is difficult to observe, or it may undergo a spontaneous transition that renders it massive.

Second, Mannheim uses (19) for his basic cosmological equation, rather than the more complete one that results from the conformal action, M6 (188):

Ttotalμν=4αgWμνT^{\mu\nu}_{\rm total}=4\alpha_{g}W^{\mu\nu} (31)

where WμνW^{\mu\nu} is the Weyl tensor, defined in M6 (107), (108) and (185). Mannheim justifies the neglect of WμνW^{\mu\nu} by observing that a FRW metric is conformally flat, and in such a space Wμν=0W^{\mu\nu}=0. This is true, but if we are to include perturbations to the metric (as, for example, in the study of anisotropies of the CMB) then this neglected term may become important.

6 Conclusion

We have pointed out two flaws in Mannheim’s conformal cosmological model.

  • \bullet 1

    The model predicts, apparently unambiguously, a negative value for the effective gravitational constant, GeffG_{\rm eff}.

  • \bullet 2

    The model involves a scalar field, S(x)S(x), that satisfies a conformally invariant equation of motion and develops a vacuum expectation value, S0S_{0}. The values of the parameters that are needed to satisfy observations lead to a “wrong sign S4S^{4} theory”, with a Hamiltonian that has a spectrum that is unbounded below.

We have attempted to apply the techniques appropriate for such Hamiltonians to this cosmological problem, restricting ourselves to the classical limit of field equations that are still imperfectly understood. In this limit, using assumptions that appear reasonable, we find both a positive value for GeffG_{\rm eff} and a positive definite spectrum for the Hamiltonian.

Our derivation depends on one simple observation, the change of sign as we go from (41) to (42).

The derivation presented here will remain conjectural until progress is made in two main directions:

  • \bullet 1

    The techniques that have been successfully applied to ϕ4\phi^{4} quantum mechanics will have to be developed to cover the corresponding quantum field theory; this seems not to have been achieved at this time [2]. In particular, the form (8) for S𝒞𝒫𝒯(x)S^{\cal CPT}(x) must be shown to be appropriate at the classical level.

  • \bullet 2

    The various manipulations we have employed are suitable for Minkowski space, but more detailed investigations are needed to show whether they can legitimately be extended to a FRW space.

If, on the other hand, we can accept the present model as viable, without first filling in these important gaps in our understanding, then we have to face the difficult question: how can we conclusively distinguish this model from the conventional one?

The department of physics at Washington University, in particular Carl Bender, have given invaluable support to this retired colleague.

Appendix: variation of the action

The action is defined in (11). We will start with the simplest term,

Im\displaystyle I_{m} \displaystyle\equiv 4x(g)1/2σm2m2S𝒞𝒫𝒯(x)S(x)\displaystyle\int{\rmd}^{4}x\,(-g)^{1/2}\frac{\sigma_{m}}{2}m^{2}S^{\cal CPT}(x)S(x) (32)
=\displaystyle= 4x4y(g)1/2σm2m2C(xμyμ)[S(z)]ρ:zρ=yρS(x)\displaystyle\int{\rmd}^{4}x\int{\rmd}^{4}y\,(-g)^{1/2}\frac{\sigma_{m}}{2}m^{2}C(x^{\mu}-y^{\mu})\left[S^{*}(z)\right]_{\forall\rho:z^{\rho}=-y^{\rho}}S(x)

Let S(x)S(x) vary by a small amount δS(x)\delta S(x). Then S(x)S^{*}(-x) will vary by δ[S(x)]\delta\left[S^{*}(-x)\right]. The variation of ImI_{m} will be the sum of two terms, δIm(1)\delta I_{m}(1) and δIm(2)\delta I_{m}(2):

δIm(1)=4x4y(g)1/2σm2m2C(xμyμ)[S(z)]ρ:zρ=yρδS(x)\delta I_{m}(1)=\int{\rmd}^{4}x\int{\rmd}^{4}y\,(-g)^{1/2}\frac{\sigma_{m}}{2}m^{2}C(x^{\mu}-y^{\mu})\left[S^{*}(z)\right]_{\forall\rho:z^{\rho}=-y^{\rho}}\delta S(x) (33)
δIm(2)=4x4y(g)1/2σm2m2C(xμyμ)δ[S(z)]ρ:zρ=yρS(x)\delta I_{m}(2)=\int{\rmd}^{4}x\int{\rmd}^{4}y\,(-g)^{1/2}\frac{\sigma_{m}}{2}m^{2}C(x^{\mu}-y^{\mu})\delta\left[S^{*}(z)\right]_{\forall\rho:z^{\rho}=-y^{\rho}}S(x) (34)

Take the complex conjugate of (34), and let xμyμx^{\mu}\rightarrow-y^{\mu}, yμxμy^{\mu}\rightarrow-x^{\mu}:

δIm(2)\displaystyle\delta I^{*}_{m}(2) =\displaystyle= 4x4y(g)1/2σm2m2C(xμyμ)δS(x)S(y)\displaystyle\int{\rmd}^{4}x\int{\rmd}^{4}y\,(-g)^{1/2}\frac{\sigma_{m}}{2}m^{2}C(x^{\mu}-y^{\mu})\delta S(x)S^{*}(-y) (35)
=\displaystyle= δIm(1)\displaystyle\delta I_{m}(1)

so that

δIm\displaystyle\delta I_{m} =\displaystyle= 2Re[δIm(1)]\displaystyle 2{\rm Re}\left[\delta I_{m}(1)\right] (36)
=\displaystyle= 4x4y(g)1/2σmm2C(xμyμ)Re{[S(z)]ρ:zρ=yρδS(x)}\displaystyle\int{\rmd}^{4}x\int{\rmd}^{4}y\,(-g)^{1/2}\sigma_{m}m^{2}C(x^{\mu}-y^{\mu}){\rm Re}\left\{\left[S^{*}(z)\right]_{\forall\rho:z^{\rho}=-y^{\rho}}\delta S(x)\right\}

The μ2\mu^{2} term in the action can be treated in the same way, to give

δIμ\displaystyle\delta I_{\mu} =\displaystyle= 44x4y(g)1/2σμμ2C(xμyμ)\displaystyle 4\int{\rmd}^{4}x\int{\rmd}^{4}y\,(-g)^{1/2}\sigma_{\mu}\mu^{2}C(x^{\mu}-y^{\mu}) (37)
×[S𝒞𝒫𝒯(x)S(x)]Re{[S(z)]ρ:zρ=yρδS(x)}\displaystyle\times\,\left[S^{\cal CPT}(x)S(x)\right]{\rm Re}\left\{\left[S^{*}(z)\right]_{\forall\rho:z^{\rho}=-y^{\rho}}\delta S(x)\right\}

Calculating the variation of the kinetic term starts just as with conventional Lagrangians. We imagine a variation δ(S(x)/xν)\delta\left(\partial S(x)/\partial x^{\nu}\right), and convert this to a variation of S(x)S(x) by an integration by parts, discarding a surface term. Recalling that we are working in Minkowski space, where the metric tensor is constant, we get

δIk(1)=4x(g)1/2σk2gμνxν[S(x)xμ]𝒞𝒫𝒯δS(x)\delta I_{k}(1)=-\int{\rmd}^{4}x\,(-g)^{1/2}\frac{\sigma_{k}}{2}g^{\mu\nu}\frac{\partial}{\partial x^{\nu}}\left[\frac{\partial S(x)}{\partial x^{\mu}}\right]^{\cal CPT}\delta S(x) (38)

Using (8) we write this as

δIk(1)\displaystyle\delta I_{k}(1) =\displaystyle= 4x4y(g)1/2σk2gμνxνC(xμyμ)\displaystyle-\int{\rmd}^{4}x\int{\rmd}^{4}y\,(-g)^{1/2}\frac{\sigma_{k}}{2}g^{\mu\nu}\frac{\partial}{\partial x^{\nu}}C(x^{\mu}-y^{\mu}) (40)
×[S(z)zμ]ρ:zρ=yρδS(x)\displaystyle\times\,\left[\frac{\partial S^{*}(z)}{\partial z^{\mu}}\right]_{\forall\rho:z^{\rho}=-y^{\rho}}\delta S(x)
=\displaystyle= 4x4y(g)1/2σk2gμν[yνC(xμyμ)]\displaystyle\int{\rmd}^{4}x\int{\rmd}^{4}y\,(-g)^{1/2}\frac{\sigma_{k}}{2}g^{\mu\nu}\left[\frac{\partial}{\partial y^{\nu}}C(x^{\mu}-y^{\mu})\right]
×[S(z)zμ]ρ:zρ=yρδS(x)\displaystyle\times\,\left[\frac{\partial S^{*}(z)}{\partial z^{\mu}}\right]_{\forall\rho:z^{\rho}=-y^{\rho}}\delta S(x)

Now integrate by parts and discard a surface term:

δIk(1)\displaystyle\delta I_{k}(1) =\displaystyle= 4x4y(g)1/2σk2gμνC(xμyμ)\displaystyle-\int{\rmd}^{4}x\int{\rmd}^{4}y\,(-g)^{1/2}\frac{\sigma_{k}}{2}g^{\mu\nu}C(x^{\mu}-y^{\mu}) (41)
×yν[S(z)zμ]ρ:zρ=yρδS(x)\displaystyle\times\,\frac{\partial}{\partial y^{\nu}}\left[\frac{\partial S^{*}(z)}{\partial z^{\mu}}\right]_{\forall\rho:z^{\rho}=-y^{\rho}}\delta S(x)
=\displaystyle= 4x4y(g)1/2σk2gμνC(xμyμ)[2S(z)zμzν]ρ:zρ=yρδS(x)\displaystyle\int{\rmd}^{4}x\int{\rmd}^{4}y\,(-g)^{1/2}\frac{\sigma_{k}}{2}g^{\mu\nu}C(x^{\mu}-y^{\mu})\left[\frac{\partial^{2}S^{*}(z)}{\partial z^{\mu}\partial z^{\nu}}\right]_{\forall\rho:z^{\rho}=-y^{\rho}}\delta S(x) (42)

The passage from (41) to (42) is best illustrated by an example. Suppose

S(x)xμ=(kσxσ)nkμ\frac{\partial S^{*}(x)}{\partial x^{\mu}}=\left(k_{\sigma}x^{\sigma}\right)^{n}k_{\mu} (43)

where kμk_{\mu} is some fixed vector. Then

xν[S(y)yμ]ρ:yρ=xρ=n(1)n(kσxσ)n1kμkν\frac{\partial}{\partial x^{\nu}}\left[\frac{\partial S^{*}(y)}{\partial y^{\mu}}\right]_{\forall\rho:y^{\rho}=-x^{\rho}}=n(-1)^{n}\left(k_{\sigma}x^{\sigma}\right)^{n-1}k_{\mu}k_{\nu} (44)

and

[2S(y)yνyμ]ρ:yρ=xρ\displaystyle\left[\frac{\partial^{2}S^{*}(y)}{\partial y^{\nu}\partial y^{\mu}}\right]_{\forall\rho:y^{\rho}=-x^{\rho}} =\displaystyle= [n(kσyσ)n1kμkν]ρ:yρ=xρ\displaystyle\left[n\left(k_{\sigma}y^{\sigma}\right)^{n-1}k_{\mu}k_{\nu}\right]_{\forall\rho:y^{\rho}=-x^{\rho}} (45)
=\displaystyle= n(1)n1(kσxσ)n1kμkν\displaystyle n(-1)^{n-1}\left(k_{\sigma}x^{\sigma}\right)^{n-1}k_{\mu}k_{\nu}

Note the change in sign from (44) to (45); it implies that the variation of the kinetic term results in

δIk=Re{4x4y(g)1/2σkgμνC(xμyμ)[2S(z)zμzν]ρ:zρ=yρδS(x)}\delta I_{k}={\rm Re}\left\{\int{\rmd}^{4}x\int{\rmd}^{4}y\,(-g)^{1/2}\sigma_{k}g^{\mu\nu}C(x^{\mu}-y^{\mu})\left[\frac{\partial^{2}S^{*}(z)}{\partial z^{\mu}\partial z^{\nu}}\right]_{\forall\rho:z^{\rho}=-y^{\rho}}\delta S(x)\right\} (46)

Now use δIm+δIμ+δIk=0\delta I_{m}+\delta I_{\mu}+\delta I_{k}=0 for arbitrary (possibly complex) variations δS(x)\delta S(x) to get the equation of motion

σkgμν2S(x)xμxν+σmm2S(x)+4σμμ2[S𝒞𝒫𝒯(x)S(x)]S(x)=0\sigma_{k}g^{\mu\nu}\frac{\partial^{2}S(x)}{\partial x^{\mu}\partial x^{\nu}}+\sigma_{m}m^{2}S(x)+4\sigma_{\mu}\mu^{2}\left[S^{\cal CPT}(x)S(x)\right]S(x)=0 (47)

References

References

  • [1] Bender C M 2007 Reports on Progress in Physics 70 947
  • [2] Bender C M et al. 2006 Phys Rev D 74 025016
  • [3] Birrell N D and Davies P C W 1982 Quantum Fields in Curved Space Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
  • [4] Elizondo D and Yepes G 1994 Astrophysical Journal 428 17
  • [5] Mannheim P D 1992 Astrophysical Journal 391 429
  • [6] Mannheim P D 2006 Prog Part Nucl Phys 56 340
  • [7] Mannheim P D 2007 Conformal gravity challenges string theory arXiv:0707.2283v1 [hep-th]
  • [8] Weinberg S 1995 The Quantum Theory of Fields Cambridge: Cambridge University Press