Paper detail

Comparing scalar-tensor gravity and f(R)-gravity in the Newtonian limit

Recently, a strong debate has been pursued about the Newtonian limit (i.e. small velocity and weak field) of fourth order gravity models. According to some authors, the Newtonian limit of $f(R)$-gravity is equivalent to the one of Brans-Dicke gravity with $ω_{BD} = 0$, so that the PPN parameters of these models turn out to be ill defined. In this paper, we carefully discuss this point considering that fourth order gravity models are dynamically equivalent to the O'Hanlon Lagrangian. This is a special case of scalar-tensor gravity characterized only by self-interaction potential and that, in the Newtonian limit, this implies a non-standard behavior that cannot be compared with the usual PPN limit of General Relativity. The result turns out to be completely different from the one of Brans-Dicke theory and in particular suggests that it is misleading to consider the PPN parameters of this theory with $ω_{BD} = 0$ in order to characterize the homologous quantities of $f(R)$-gravity. Finally the solutions at Newtonian level, obtained in the Jordan frame for a $f(R)$-gravity, reinterpreted as a scalar-tensor theory, are linked to those in the Einstein frame.

preprint2010arXivOpen 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.