AG-2024.09-466·gr-qc
Polarization modes of gravitational waves in scalar-tensor-Rastall theory
Authors
- Yu-Zhi Fan
- Xiao-Bin Lai
- Yu-Qi Dong
- Yu-Xiao Liu
Abstract
Rastall theory, originally introduced in 1972, suggests a violation of the usual conservation law. We consider two generalizations of Rastall theory: Brans-Dicke-Rastall theory and the newly established scalar-tensor-Rastall theory, the latter being a further generalization of the former. The field equations in these two generalized theories are studied across different parameter spaces, and the polarization modes of gravitational waves, as a key focus, are subsequently investigated. The results show that the polarization modes of gravitational waves in Brans-Dicke-Rastall theory are the same as those in Brans-Dicke theory; specifically, both theories exhibit the plus, cross, and breathing modes. However, in scalar-tensor-Rastall theory, the polarization modes of gravitational waves depend on the parameter space of the theory. Particularly, over a broad range of the parameter space, regardless of some special values of the parameters, it allows only two tensor modes, just as in general relativity, without introducing any additional degrees of freedom. This indicates that Rastall theory offers a novel approach to constructing modified gravity theories that propagate only two tensor degrees of freedom. In the remaining regions of the parameter space, there is also one scalar mode in addition to the two tensor modes. The scalar mode can be either a mixture of the breathing and longitudinal modes or just a pure breathing mode, depending on the parameter space. These results will play a crucial role in constraining the theoretical parameters through future gravitational wave detection projects, such as LISA, Taiji, and TianQin.
Submitted
27 September 20241 year ago
Version
v1
License
CC-BY-4.0
DOI
10.48550/arXiv.2409.18503
Chat with this PDF
Ask questions, probe assumptions, request a plain-English summary. Answers cite sections from the preprint itself.
Community
Questions and answers about this paper from other readers. No formal peer review — just a place to think out loud.