A scan of fr models admitting Rindler type acceleration S. Hai Mazharimousavi, M. Kerachian, M. Halilsoy Dated: Septemer, 018 As a manifestation of large distance effect Grumiller modified Schwarzschild metric with an extraneous term reminiscent of Rindler acceleration. Such a term has the potential to explain the oserved flat rotation curves in general relativity. The same idea has een extended herein to the larger arena of f R theory. With particular emphasis on weak energy conditions WECs for a fluid we present various classes of f R theories admitting a Rindler-type acceleration in the metric. PACS numers: 04.0.-q, 04.50.Kd, 04.70.Bw Keywords: Rindler acceleration;fr gravity; Exact solution arxiv:1309.4768v [gr-qc] 1 Dec 013 I. INTRODUCTION Flat rotation curves around galaxies constitute one of the most stunning astrophysical findings since 1930s. The cases can simply e attriuted to the unoservale dark matter which still lacks a satisfactory cidate. On the general relativity side which reigns in the large universe an interesting approach is to develop appropriate models of constant centrifugal force. One such attempt was formulated y Grumiller [1, ] in which the centrifugal force was given y F = m r + a. Here m represents the mass oth normal dark while the parameter a is a positive constant - called Rindler acceleration [3] - which gives rise to a constant attractive force. The Newtonian potential involved herein is Φ r m r + ar, so that for r the term Φ r ar ecomes dominant. Since in Newtonian circular motion F = mv r, for a mass m, tangential speed v r radius r are related y v r r 1 for large r, overall which amounts slightly nearer to the concept of flat rotation curves. No douts, the details exact flat rotation curves must e much more complicated than the toy model depicted here. Physically the parameter a ecomes meaningful when one refers to an accelerated frame in a flat space, known as Rindler frame accordingly the terminology Rindler acceleration is adopted. In [4] impact of a Rindler-type acceleration is studied on the Oort Cloud in [5] the solar system constraints on Rindler acceleration is investigated while in [6] ending of light in the model of gravity at large distances proposed y Grumiller [1, ] is considered. Let us add also that to tackle the flat rotation curves, Modified Newtonian Dynamics MOND in space was proposed [7]. Assuming a physical source to the Rindler acceleration term in the spacetime metric has een challenging in recent years. Anisotropic fluid field was considered originally y Grumiller [1, ], whereas nonlinear electromagnetism was proposed as an alternative source [8]. A fluid model with energy-momentum tensor of the hai.mazhari@emu.edu.tr morteza.kerachian@cc.emu.tr mustafa.halilsoy@emu.edu.tr form Tµ ν = diag[ ρ, p, q, q] was proposed recently in the popular f R gravity [9]. For a review of the latter we propose [10 1]. By a similar strategy we wish to employ the vast richness of fr gravity models to identity possile cidates that may admit Rindler type acceleration. Our approach in this study eside the Rindler acceleration is to elaorate on the energy conditions in f R gravity. Although violation of the energy conditions is not necessarily a prolem for instance, any quantum field theory violates all energy conditions ut it is still interesting to investigate the non-violation of the energy conditions. Note that energy conditions within the context of dark matter in fr gravity was considered y various authors [13]. This at least will filter the viale models that satisfy the energy conditions. In rief, for our choice of energy-momentum the weak energy conditions WECs can e stated as follow: i WEC1 says that energy density ρ 0. ii WEC, says that ρ + p 0, iii WEC3 states that ρ + q 0. The more stringent energy conditions, the strong energy conditions SECs amounts further to ρ + p + q 0, which will not e our concern in this paper. However, some of our models satisfy SECs as well. Our technical method can e summarized as follows. Upon otaining ρ, p q as functions of r we shall search numerically for the geometrical regions in which the WECs are satisfied. A detailed work on energy condition in fr gravity was done y J. Santos et al in [14]. From the outset our strategy is to assume validity of the Rindler modified Schwarzschild metric a priori search for the types of fr models which are capale to yield such a metric. Overall we test ten different models of f R gravity models oserve that in most cases it is possile to tune free parameters in rendering the WECs satisfied. In doing this we entirely rely on numerical plots we admit that our list is not an exhaustive one in f R arena. Organization of the paper goes as follows. Sec. II introduces the formalism with derivation of density pressure components. Sec. III presents eleven types of f R models relevant to the Mannheim s metric. The paper ends with Conclusion in Sec. IV.
We adopt the static spherically symmetric line element ds = A r dt + 1 Ar dr + r dθ + sin θdϕ 3 with A r = 1 m r + ar 4 which will e referred henceforth as the Mannheim s metric [15] Note that it has een rediscovered y Grumiller in [1, ]. Einstein s field equations follow the variation of the action with respect to g µν which reads as G ν µ = 1 F T ν µ + Ť ν µ 5 FIG. 1: A plot of W EC1, W EC W EC3 for m = 1, a = 0.1 = 1. To have an idea of the range in which WECs are satisfied we also plot the metric function which identifies the location of the horizon. It is oserved from the figure that WECs are all satisfied for r r h in which r h is the event horizon of the Grumiller s metric. Since R < 0 the plot of fr is from up to zero as can e seen df < 0 while d f > 0. We also plot the heat capacity C w.r.t the horizon radius r h. in which G ν µ is the Einstein s tensor. The share of the curvature in the energy-momentum is given y Ťµ ν = 1 [ ν µ F F 1 F f + 1 ] RF δµ ν 6 while Tµ ν refers to the fluid source [1, ]. Following the stard notation, = µ µ = 1 g µ g µ ν µ u = g λν λ u,µ = g λν λ u,µ Γ β λµ u,β for a scalar function u. The three independent Einstein s field equations are explicitly given y F R t t f + F = t t F + T t t 7 F R r r f + F = r r F + T r r 8 FIG. : Our choice of the parameters are ν = 1, µ =, = 1, c = 1, Λ 1 = 0 = Λ. WECs are shown to satisfy while staility is valid only for R < 1. This can easily e checked from f R = R + 1 R + R. Thermodynamic staility i.e. C > 0 is also shown in the inscription. F R θi θ i f + F = θi θi F + T θi θ i 9 F = df, 10 in which θ i = θ, ϕ. Adding these equations i.e., tt, rr, θθ ϕϕ one gets the trace equation F R f + 3 F = T 11 II. THE FORMALISM which is not an independent equation. equations one finds Using the field Let s start with the following action κ = 8πG = 1 ρ = t t F F Rt t + f F, 1 S = 1 gf R d 4 x + S M 1 where f R is a function of the Ricci scalar R S M is the physical source for a perfect fluid-type energy momentum T ν µ = ρ 0 0 0 0 p 0 0 0 0 q 0 0 0 0 q p = r r F + F Rt t f + F, 13 q = θ θ F + F Rθ θ f + F. 14 In what follows we find the energy momentum components for different models of fr gravity together with their thermodynamical properties.
3 FIG. 3: Our parameters in this case are ν = 1, µ =, = 1, c = 1 with Λ 1 = 0 = Λ. So that fr takes the form f R = R + 1 R R3 which satisfies the WECs. This choice yields a stale model for R < 1 4. Beyond certain horizon radius the 3 specific function C is also positive. FIG. 4: From Eq. 31 we choose the parameters as µ = 1, = 1 n = 3. We find a restricted domain in which WECs are satisfied. From those parameters eside WECs from d f = 6 1 + R 1 + 5R > 0 the staility condition also is satisfied. III. fr MODELS APT FOR THE RINDLER ACCELERATION In this section we investigate a set of possile fr gravity models which admit the line element 3 as the static spherically symmetric solution of its field equations. Then y employing Eq.s 1 to 14 we shall find the energy density ρ the pressures p q. Having found ρ, p q we investigate the energy conditions together with the feasiility of the fr models numerically. More precisely we work on weak energy conditions which includes three individual conditions W EC1 = ρ 0, 15 W EC = ρ + q 0 16 W EC3 = ρ + p 0. 17 In the numerical plotting, we plot explicitly W EC1, W EC W EC3 in terms of r to work out the regions in which the WECs are satisfied. In addition to WECs we plot f R in terms of R to find out the physically acceptale model y imposing the well known conditions on f R which are given y F R = for not to have ghost field df R > 0 18 d f R > 0 19 to have a stale model. Before we start to study the fr models, we add that in the case of Mannheim s metric the Ricci scalar is given y R = 1a r which is negative a > 0. FIG. 5: In this model given y the fr in Eq. 3 we have not een ale to find a physically admissile region to satisfy WECs. A. The Models 1 Our first model which we find interesting is given y [16] f R = R + 0 for =constant. For R, this model is a good approximation to Einstein s fr = R gravity. For the other extent, namely R, may e considered as a cosmological constant. Having this f R one finds df = R 1 R + d f = R + 3/ which are positive functions with respect to R. This means that this model of fr gravity is satisfying the
the heat capacity of the spacetime to investigate if the solution is stale from the thermodynamical point of view. To do so, first we find the Hawking temperature T H = r g tt 4π r=rh 4 = m + ar h πrh. 4 Then, from the general form of the entropy in fr gravity we find S = A 4G F r=rh = πr hf h 5 FIG. 6: From f R model in Eq. 33 the choice c = 1/3, ε = 1 = 1, we oserve that WECs are not satisfied. Specific heat function is also pictured in the inscription. FIG. 7: The choice of parameters c = 1.1, ε = 1 = 1 in Eq. 33 yields a region where WECs are satisfied. It can e checked that d f df > 0 is also satisfied. For R > R 0 where f R 0 = 0, > 0 which implies ghost free solution. Everywhere positive specific heat C is also shown in the inscription. necessary conditions to e physical. Yet we have to check the WECs at least to see whether it can e a good cidate for a spacetime with Rindler acceleration, namely the Mannheim s metric. Figure 1 displays W EC1, W EC W EC3 together with part of Ar in terms of r. We see that the WECs are satisfied right after the horizon. Therefore this model can e a good cidate for what we are looking for. This model is also interesting in other aspects. For instance in the limit when is small one may write f R R + R R 3 which is a kind of small fluctuation from R gravity for R. In particular, this model of fr gravity is satisfying all necessary conditions to e a physical model to host Mannheim s metric. Hence we go one step more to check in which A r=rh = 4πrh is the surface area of the lack 1a hole at the horizon F r=rh =. Having + r h 144a r h T H S availale one may find the heat capacity of the lack hole as S C = T = 1 1 + 4ar h 88a + rh r h πa. T 144a + rh 3/ 6 We comment here that C is always positive nonsingular irrespective of the values of the free parameters given the fact that a > 0. This indeed means that the lack hole solution will not undergo a phase change as expected form a stale physical solution. The second model which we shall study, in this part, has een introduced studied y Nojiri Odintsov in [17]. As they have reported in their paper [17], this model naturally unifies two expansion phases of the Universe: in-flation at early times cosmic acceleration at the current epoch. This model of fr is given y fr = R c R Λ 1 ν + R Λ µ 7 in which, c, Λ 1, Λ, µ ν are some adjustale parameters. Our plotting strategy of each model is such that if the WECs are violated note that such cases are copious we ignore such figures regions satisfying WECs are shaded. The other conditions df > 0, d f > 0 are satisfied in some cases whereas in the others not. In Figs. 3 we plot W EC1, W EC W EC3 in terms of r for specific values of ν, µ,, c i.e. in Fig. ν = 1, µ =, = 1, c = 1, Λ 1 = 0, Λ = 0. In Fig. 3 ν = 1, µ = 3, = 1, c = 1, Λ 1 = 0, Λ = 0. Among the particular cases which are considered here, one oserves that Fig. Fig. 3 which correspond to f R = R + 1 R + R 8 f R = R + 1 R R3 9 respectively, are physically acceptale as far as WECs are concerned. We also note that in these two figures we
5 FIG. 8: The model with f R = Re R 1 gives a region in which WECs are satisfied. Furthermore, since d f = 1 R 3 e R 1 < 0, it gives an unstale model. Beyond certain radius the specific heat is also positive which is required for thermodynamical staility. FIG. 9: Our model in this case is given y f R = R e R 1 with = const. With the choice = 1.1 its oserved that WECs are satisfied while the staility condition is violated in spite of the fact that the specific heat C is everywhere positive. plot the heat capacity in terms of r h to show whether d thermodynamically the solutions are stale. f reveals that 8 9 are locally stale. 3 Our next model is a Born-Infeld type gravity which has een studied in a more general form of Dirac-Born- Infeld modified gravity y Quiros Ureña-López in [18]. The Born-Infeld model of gravity is given y f R = 1 1 + R, which implies 1 F R = 1 + R d f = 1 3/ 30 1 + R Clearly oth are positive functions of R therefore the solution given in this model is stale ghost free. In spite of that, the WECs are not satisfied therefore this model is not a proper model for Mannheim s metric as far as the energy conditions are concerned. 4 Another interesting model of fr gravity is given y [19] [ n ] f R = R µ 1 1 + R 31 in which µ, n are constants. Figure 4 with µ = 1, = 1, n = 3 shows that etween horizon a maximum radius we may have physical region in which f > 0. Now let s consider [0] the model f R = R µ R R n n + 1 3 which amounts to the Fig. 5 clearly there is no physical region. 5 Here, we use another model introduced in [1] which is given y cosh R ε f R = R 1 c + cε ln + R cosh 6m 33 in which c, ε, µ are all constants. Our analysis yields to the Fig. 6 with c = 1 3 Fig. 7 with c = 1.1. One oserves that although in Fig. 6 there is no physical region possile for different c in Fig. 7 for r > r h our physical conditions are satisfied provided R < R 0 where R 0 is the point for which F R = 0. 6 In Ref. [] an exponential form of fr is introduced which is given y f R = Re R 34 in which =constant with its first derivative F R = e R 1. 35 R Our numerical plotting admits the Fig. 8 for this model with = 1. We comment here that although the case = 1 provides the WECs satisfied ut in oth cases f R is negative which makes the model not physical. 7 Another exponential model which is also given in [] reads in which =constant fr = Re R, 36 F R = e R 1 + R. 37
6 This does not satisfy the energy conditions therefore it is not a physically interesting case. 8 In Ref. [3] a modified version of our models 6 7 is given in which fr = R e R 1 with =constant F R = e R 1 1. R Figure 9 is our numerical results with = 0.1. For a ounded region from aove from elow the WECs are satisfied while f R is negative which makes our model non-physical. 9 Among the exponential models of gravity let s consider [4] f R = R + e αr 38 FIG. 10: In this model we use f R = R + e αr where α are constants. For α = 1 = 1, WECs are satisfied d f > 0. Specific heat is shown also to e positive. where α are constants F R = 1 + α e αr. Figure 17 displays our numerical calculations for specific values of α = 1. Evidently from these figures we can conclude that this model is not a feasile model. 10 Finally we consider a model of gravity given in Ref. [5] f R = R 1 Λ 39 in which is a constant. The first derivative of the model is given y F R = R 1 R 1 Λ 1. Figures 11 1 are with = 1 =, respectively, for Λ = 1. We oserve that WECs are satisfied in a restricted region while for = / 1 it gives a stale / unstale model. FIG. 11: Our model is given y f R = R 1 which has WECs satisfied ut d f > 0, for R > R 0 where f R 0 = 0. This indicates staility of the solution. Furthermore the specific heat suggests a thermodynamically stale model too. IV. CONCLUSION In Einstein s general relativity which corresponds to f R = R, Rindler modification of the Schwarzschild metric faces the prolem that the energy conditions are violated. For a resolution to this prolem we invoke the large class of f R theories. From cosmological stpoint the main reason that we insist on the Rindler acceleration term can e justified as follows: at large distances such a term may explain the flat rotation curves as well as the dark matter prolem. Our physical source eside the gravitational curvature is taken to e a fluid with equal angular components. Being negative the radial pressure is repulsive in accordance with expectations FIG. 1: This is the model with f R = R 1 1 1 which has WECs conditions all satisfied while the staility condition is violated. It is thermodynamically stale since C > 0.
7 of the dark energy. Our scan covered ten different f R models in most cases y tuning of the free parameters we show that WECs are satisfied. All over in ten different models we searched primarily for the validity of WECs as well as for d f > 0, i.e. the staility. With some effort thermodynamic staility can also e checked through the specific heat. With equal ease df > 0, i.e. asence of ghost can e traced. Fig. 1 for instance, depicts the model with fr = R +, =constant in which WECs staility, even the thermodynamic staility are all satisfied, however, it hosts ghosts since df < 0 for R < 0. Finally, among all models considered herein, we note that, Fig. 7 satisfies WECs, staility conditions as well as ghost free condition for r > r min in which r min r h depends on the other parameters. Finally we comment that aundance of parameters in the f R theories is one of its weak aspects. This weakness, however, may e used to otain various limits for this reason particular tuning of parameters is crucial. Our requirements have een weak energy conditions WECs, Rindler acceleration, staility asence of ghosts. Naturally further restrictions will add further constraints to dismiss some cases considered as viale in this study. [1] D. Grumiller, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 11303 010, 039901E 011. [] S. Carloni, D. Grumiller F. Preis, Phys. Rev. D 83, 1404 011. [3] W. Rindler, Essential Relativity: Special, General, Cosmological revised second edition Springer-Verlay 1977. [4] L. Iorio, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 419, 6 01; [5] L. Iorio, JCAP 05, 019 011; S. Carloni, D. Grumiller F. Preis, Phys. Rev. D 83, 1404 011. [6] J. Sultana D. Kazanas, Phys. Rev. D 85, 08150 01. [7] M. Milgrom, Astrophys. J. 70, 365 1983. [8] M. Halilsoy, O. Gurtug S. H. Mazharimousavi, arxiv:11.159. [9] S. H. Mazharimousavi M. Halilsoy, Mod. Phys. Lett. A, 8, 1350073 013. [10] S. Nojiri S. D. Odintsov, Phys. Rep. 505, 59 011. [11] A. De Felice, S. Tsujikawa, Living Rev. Rel. 13, 3 010. [1] T. P. Sotiriou V. Faraoni, Rev. Mod. Phys. 8, 451 010. [13] S. Capozziello, V. F. Cardone, S. Carloni A. Troisi, Phys. Latt. A 36, 9 004; C. Frigerio Martins P. Salucci, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 381, 1103 007. [14] J. Santos, J. S. Alcaniz, M. J. Reouças F. C. Carvalho, Phys. Rev. D 76, 083513 007. [15] P. Mannheim, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 56, 340 006; H. Culetu, Int. J. Mod. Phys. Conf. Ser. 3, 455 011; H. Culetu, Phys. Lett. A 376, 817 01. [16] M. S. Movahed, S. Baghram S. Rahvar, Phys. Rev. D 76, 044008 007. [17] S. Nojiri S. Odintsov, Phys. Rev. D 68, 1351 003. [18] D. N. Vollick, Phys. Rev. D 69, 064030 004; I. Quiros L. A. Ureña-López, Phys. Rev. D 8, 04400 010. [19] A. A. Staroinsky, J. Exp. Theor. Phys. Lett. 86, 157 007. [0] W. Hu I. Sawicki, Phys. Rev. D, 76, 064004 007. [1] S. A. Appley, R. A. Battye A. A. Staroinsky JCAP 06, 005 010; S. A Appley R. A Battye, JCAP 05, 019 008. [] L. Amendola, R. Gannouji, D. Polarski S. Tsujikawa, Phys. Rev. D 75, 083504 007. [3] Z. Girones, A. Marchetti, O. Mena, C. Pena-Garay N. Rius, JCAP 11, 004 010. [4] G. Cognola, E. Elizalde, S. Nojiri, S.D. Odintsov, L. Seastiani, S. Zerini, Phys.Rev. D77 008 046009; E. Elizalde, S. Nojiri, S.D.Odintsov, L.Seastiani, S. Zerini. Phys.Rev. D 83, 086006 011. [5] L. Amendola S. Tsujikawa, Phys. Lett. B 660, 15 008.