Journal of Modern Physics
Vol.05 No.15(2014), Article ID:50107,8 pages
10.4236/jmp.2014.515143
Emergent Gravity, Violated Relativity and Dark Matter
Yury F. Pirogov
Theory Division, Institute for High Energy Physics, Protvino, Russia
Email: yury.pirogov@ihep.ru
Copyright © 2014 by author and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY).
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/



Received 7 May 2014; revised 2 June 2014; accepted 25 June 2014
ABSTRACT
The nonlinear affine Goldstone model of the emergent gravity, built on the nonlinearly realized/ hidden affine symmetry, is concisely revisited. Beyond General Relativity, the explicit violation of general invariance/relativity, under preserving general covariance, is exposed. Dependent on a nondynamical affine connection, a generally covariant second-order effective Lagrangian for metric gravity is worked out, with the general relativity violation and the gravitational dark matter serving as the signatures of emergence.
Keywords:
Spontaneous Symmetry Breaking, Nonlinear Realizations, Emergent Gravity, General Relativity Violation, Dark Matter

1. Introduction
It is widely accepted nowadays that General Relativity (GR) may be just (a piece of) an effective field theory of gravity to be ultimately superseded at the high (conceivably, as high as the Planck scale) energies by a more fundamental/underlying theory. At that, the conventional metric gravity could cease to be a priori existent, but, instead, would become an emergent/induced phenomenon. A lot of the drastically different approaches towards the emergence of gravity and space-time is presently conceivable1. In this paper, we work out an approach to the goal treating gravity as an affine Goldstone phenomenon in the effective field theory framework.
Typically, as a herald of an unknown high-energy theory there serves at the lower energies a nonlinear model. Being based on a nonlinearly realized/hidden symmetry, remaining linear on an unbroken subgroup, such a model could encounter in a concise manner for the spontaneously/dynamically broken symmetries of the fundamental theory. Inevitably, this occurs at the cost of more uncertainty and a partial loss of content. For the global continuous internal symmetries, the nonlinear model framework was developed in [3] [4] . This approach proved to be extremely useful for studying, e.g., the so-called chiral model and played an important role in the advent of QCD as the true fundamental theory of strong interactions.
One might thus naturally expect that in the quest for an underlying theory of gravity GR should first be substituted by a nonlinear model. As such a model for gravity, aimed principally at reconstructing GR, there was originally proposed the model based on the nonlinearly realized/hidden affine symmetry, remaining linear on the unbroken Poincare subgroup [5] [6] 2. In the context of emergence of gravity and space-time, the model was elaborated in [7] [8] . At that, reproducing GR the model may well include the GR violation [9] 3. To this end, one should envisage in a field theory two kinds of fields—the dynamical/relative and nondynamical/absolute ones—and, respectively, two kinds of the diffeomorphism symmetries. First, the kinematical symmetry—the covariance restricts the mathematical form of the theory. Second, the dynamical symmetry—the general invariance/relativity serves as a gauge symmetry for gravity determining the physical content of the latter [10] 4. In GR, without nondynamical fields, these notions coincide, both being the general ones. But beyond GR, in the presence of nondynamical fields, the notions differ. For consistency, the general covariance should better be preserved. On the other hand, the general invariance/relativity violation may well take place, serving as a source of the gravitational dark matter (DM). In the simplest case, such a scenario was worked out for the well-posed theory of gravity minimally violating GR to the unimodular relativity, with the scalar-graviton DM [9] [10] . Extending this scenario to other types of the GR violation and gravitational DM would thus be urgent.
In this paper, the model of emergent gravity based on the nonlinearly realized/hidden affine symmetry—the nonlinear affine Goldstone model—is systematically revisited. To allow for the GR violation, two kinds of co- ordinates—the absolute/background and relative/observer’s ones—are envisaged. A generally covariant second- order effective Lagrangian for the emergent metric gravity, dependent on a nondynamical affine connection, is consistently worked out in the most general fashion, with a limited version discussed in more detail. The model is proposed as a prototype for the emergent gravity and space-time, with the GR violation and the gravitational DM serving as the signatures of emergence. In Section 2, the nonlinear realizations are applied in the context of emergent gravity on an arbitrary nondynamical affine background. In Section 3, an effective Lagrangian of emergent metric gravity is worked out and discussed. Appendix A shortly describes the general techniques of nonlinear realizations for the spontaneous/dynamical symmetry breaking. Appendix B presents a short compendium of conventions and notations.
2. Nonlinear Realizations and Emergent Gravity
2.1. Gravity as an Affine Goldstone Phenomenon
In the case at hand in the paper, an underlying theory of gravity is to be originally invariant under the global affine symmetry group
,
5. Eventually, the symmetry spontaneously/dynamically brakes down to the Poincare one, assumed to be exact:
. (1)
A putative mechanism of such a breaking is beyond the scope of the nonlinear model. According to general theory (see, Appendix A), the breaking results in the nonlinear realization of the affine symmetry on the coset space
, with the
-component coset elements. The Goldstone boson of the respective nonlinear realization is to be treated as a primary gravity field. To consistently apply the nonlinear realization technique to such a global external symmetry, a two-stage procedure is to be implemented, starting from a flat affine background and extending then onto a curved one.
2.2. Flat Affine Background
First, let
be a
-dimensional homogeneous space, with the affine group of motions,
. By default,
admits the globally affine coordinates
,
6, undergoing the affine transformations:
, (2)
with the arbitrary constant parameters
and
for the (reversible) linear deformations and translations, respectively7. This space will serve as the representation one for constructing the nonlinear model. In accord with the general formalism, there are two modes for realization of the hidden affine symmetry: the nonlinear and linearized ones.
2.2.1. Pseudo-Symmetric Nonlinear Realization
A coset element
,
, may uniquely be chosen to be pseudo-symmetric, i.e.,

(at least in a suitable neighborhood of







with












2.2.2. Locally Lorentzian Linear Representation
The affine Goldstone model gets simplified with the nonlinear realization being linearized in terms of a






(and likewise for








Restricting ourselves to the pure gravity, introduce the generic action element produced by an infinitesimal neighborhood



with






In particular, one has
being absent prior to the affine symmetry breaking. Transforming the result to the arbitrary curvilinear coordinates



2.3. Curved Affine Background
Let now









where







where








implying

In view of Equation (9) one thus gets


The manifold









with the tangent space



approximation the action element given by Equation (6) from













Evidently, the locally Lorentzian frame







(and likewise for






Emergent Metric
Restricting himself by the pure gravity one can choose as an independent variable for gravity, instead of the Lorentzian frame

with



gravity field, manifests itself explicitly only in interactions with matter (omitted here). The tensor field


3. Violated Relativity and Dark Matter
3.1. Affine Symmetry
Building the real nonlinear model starts out from




A derivative of







with the partial bilinear in


For completeness, there is included into









3.2. General Covariance
Let us then map the above results from








we get the relation

where conventionally (with

is the Christoffel connection corresponding to metric

dependent on the generally covariant tensor

The background-independent term






3.3. Gravitational DM
Varying the gravity action with respect to


Here



with





3.4. Limited GR Violation
Generally, the phenomenological study of VR is rather cumbersome. To simplify it as much as possible, consider the formal limit







Here


dinates and the arbitrary observer’s ones in terms of the




3.5. Unimodular Relativity
For


where

Thus under this limitation one has

where

with

The field








4. Conclusion
The nonlinear affine Goldstone model may provide a prototype for the emergent gravity, with the GR violation and the gravitational DM serving as the signatures of emergence. The proper account for a nondynamical affine connection, missing in GR, proves to be crucial. The main outcome of the model is the effective Lagrangian for the emergent metric gravity given by Equations (17), (21) and (22) (supplemented in the limited version by Equation (25)). Resulting in VR, the model widely extends the phenomenological horizons beyond GR, with the possible substitution of GR first by UR and then by VR. In an ultimate theoretical perspective, the model may, hopefully, serve as a guide towards a putative underlying theory of gravity and space-time.
5. Appendices
5.1. Spontaneous Symmetry Breaking and Nonlinear Realizations
Let us shortly recapitulate the techniques of the nonlinearly realized/hidden symmetries. Let a global continuous internal symmetry




















































5.2. Conventions and Notations
For convenience, let us present a short compendium of conventions and notations used in the paper. For generality, the dimension of space-time is assumed


















arbitrary point



namical Christoffel connection on





References
- Sindoni, L. (2012) SIGMA, 8, 27-71 [arXiv:1110.0686 [gr-qc]]
- Carlip, S. (2012) Challenges for Emergent Gravity. arXiv:1207.2504 [gr-qc]
- Coleman, S.R., Wess, J. and Zumino, B. (1969) Physical Review D, 177, 2239-2250.
- Salam, A. and Strathdee, J. (1969) Physical Review D, 184, 1750-1759.
- Isham, C., Salam, A. and Strathdee, J. (1971) Annals of Physics (New York), 62, 98-119. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0003-4916(71)90269-7
- Borisov, A.B. and Ogievetsky, V.I. (1974) Teoreticheskaya i Matematicheskaya Fizika (in Russian), 21, 329-342. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01038096
- Sardanishvily, G. (1980) Physics Letters A, 75, 257-258. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0375-9601(80)90555-1
- Pirogov, Yu.F. (2005) Physics of Atomic Nuclei, 68, 1904-1915 [Yad. Fiz., 68, 1966-1977] [arXiv:gr-qc/0405110] http://dx.doi.org/10.1134/1.2131118
- Pirogov, Yu.F. (2005) Physics of Atomic Nuclei., 69, 1338-1344 [Yad. Fiz., 69, 1374-1380] [arXiv:gr-qc/0505031] http://dx.doi.org/10.1134/S1063778806080102
- Pirogov, Yu.F. (2012) The European Physical Journal C, 72, 2017-2039 [arXiv:1111.1437 [gr-qc]]
- Anderson, J.L. (1971) General Relativity and Gravitation, 2, 161-172. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02450447
- Van Dam, H. and Ng, Y.J. (2001) Physics Letters B, 520, 159-162 [arXiv:hep-th/0108067] http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0370-2693(01)01140-6
- Anber, M.M., Aydemir, U. and Donoghue, J.F. (2010) Physical Review D, 81, 084059 [arXiv:0911.4123 [gr-qc]]
- Alvarez, E., Blas, D., Garriga, J. and Verdaguer, E. (2006) Nuclear Physics B, 756, 148-170 [arXiv:hep-th/0606019] http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2006.08.003
NOTES
1For recent surveys of the emergent gravity and space-time, see, e.g. [1] [2] .
2For a fiber bundle formalism, cf. [7] .
3To characterize such a phenomenon, the term “general covariance violation” used in [9] is to be more appropriately substitutes by the “general invariance/relativity violation” [10] used in what follows.
4For a discussion of the general covariance vs. general invariance, cf. also [11] .
5The following consideration is formally independent of
6Being here just a notation, the index

7Remaining unbroken, the translation part of the symmetry is omitted in what follows.
8Moreover, the dilatations


9The index

10By this token, one can use the convectional relation
11the same vein, one could formally consider other patterns of the affine symmetry breaking,




12On the affine symmetry reason, one could add two more linear terms,


13The terms without derivatives of

14Treating


15Under restriction ab initio by GR, the type of the affine background, flat or curved, would superficially seem irrelevant.
16A limiting generally noncovariant case corresponding here, in this paper, to GR violation with


17Such a specific dilaton in disguise, representing a compression gravity mode in metric, may be called the “systolon” [10] .
18It proves that the unknown modulus


19A theory of gravity (the so-called “TDiff gravity”) in the generally noncovariant form corresponding here, in this paper, to UR in the gauge










