Paper detail

Can background cosmology hold the key for modified gravity tests?

Modified gravity theories are a popular alternative to dark energy as a possible explanation for the observed accelerating cosmic expansion, and their cosmological tests are currently an active research field. Studies in recent years have been increasingly focused on testing these theories in the nonlinear regime, which is computationally demanding. Here we show that, under certain circumstances, a whole class of theories can be ruled out by using background cosmology alone. This is possible because certain classes of models (i) are fundamentally incapable of producing specific background expansion histories, and (ii) said histories are incompatible with local gravity tests. As an example, we demonstrate that a popular class of models, $f(R)$ gravity, would not be viable if observations suggest even a slight deviation of the background expansion history from that of the $Λ$CDM paradigm.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.