Paper detail

Voids in Modified Gravity: Excursion Set Predictions

We investigate the behavior of the fifth force in voids in chameleon models using the spherical collapse method. Contrary to Newtonian gravity, we find the fifth force is repulsive in voids. The strength of the fifth force depends on the density inside and outside the void region as well as its radius. It can be many times larger than the Newtonian force and their ratio is in principle unbound. This is very different from the case in halos, where the fifth force is no more than 1/3 of gravity. The evolution of voids is governed by the Newtonian gravity, the effective dark energy force and the fifth force. While the first two forces are common in both LCDM and chameleon universes, the fifth force is unique to the latter. Driven by the outward-pointing fifth force, individual voids in chameleon models expand faster and grow larger than in a LCDM universe. The expansion velocity of the void shell can be 20% to 30% larger for voids of a few Mpc/h in radius, while their sizes can be larger by ~10%. These differences are smaller for larger voids of the same density. We compare void statistics using excursion set theory; for voids of the same size, their number density is larger in chameleon models. The fractional difference increases with void size. The chance of having voids of radius ~25 Mpc/h can be 2.5 times larger. This difference is about 10 times larger than that in the halo mass function. We find strong environmental dependence of void properties in chameleon models. The differences in size and expansion velocity with GR are both larger for small voids in high density regions. In general, the difference between chameleon models and LCDM in void properties (size, expansion velocity and distribution function) are larger than the corresponding quantities for halos. This suggests that voids might be better candidates than halos for testing gravity.

preprint2013arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

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 graph slice

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.