1:
2: \documentclass[11pt,twoside]{article}
3: \usepackage{graphicx}
4: \usepackage{ihep,epsf,amsfonts,amssymb,amsbsy}
5:
6:
7: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
8:
9: \setcounter{page}{81}
10: \begin{document}
11: \title
12: %\begin{center}
13: {\Large\bf \uppercase{Ghost condensate model \\ of flat rotation curves}} %\\[4mm]
14: \author{
15: {\bf V.V.Kiselev }\\ [1mm] %\email{kiselev@th1.ihep.su}
16: {\it \small Russian State Research Center ``Institute for High Energy
17: Physics'', Protvino, Russia}
18: }
19: \date{}
20: \maketitle
21:
22: %\end{center}
23:
24: %\pacs{95.35.+d, 98.62.Gq,
25: %04.40.-b, 04.40.Nr}
26: %\maketitle
27:
28: \begin{abstract}
29: An effective action of ghost condensate with higher derivatives
30: creates a source of gravity and mimics a dark matter in spiral
31: galaxies. We present a spherically symmetric static solution of
32: Einstein--Hilbert equations with the ghost condensate at large
33: distances, where flat rotation curves are reproduced in leading
34: order over small ratio of two energy scales characterizing
35: constant temporal and spatial derivatives of ghost field:
36: $\mu_*^2$ and $\mu_\star^2$, respectively, with a hierarchy
37: $\mu_\star\ll \mu_*$. We assume that a mechanism of hierarchy is
38: provided by a global monopole in the center of galaxy. An estimate
39: based on the solution and observed velocities of rotations in the
40: asymptotic region of flatness, gives $\mu_*\sim 10^{19}$~GeV and
41: the monopole scale in a GUT range $\mu_\star\sim 10^{16}$~GeV,
42: while a velocity of rotation $v_0$ is determined by the ratio: $
43: \sqrt{2}\, v_0^2= \mu_\star^2/\mu_*^2$. A critical acceleration is
44: introduced and naturally evaluated of the order of Hubble rate,
45: that represents the Milgrom's acceleration.
46: \end{abstract}
47:
48: \vskip 5mm
49: \hbadness=1500
50: %\end{document}
51: %%\section{Introduction}
52: %
53: In addition to cosmological indirect indications of dark matter
54: representing a nonbaryonic pressureless contribution to energy
55: budget of Universe during evolution \cite{WMAP,SNe}, there are
56: explicit observational evidences in favor of existence of dark
57: matter. Firstly, rotation curves in spiral galaxies cannot be
58: explained by Keplerian laws with visible distributions of luminous
59: baryonic matter at large distances, where curves are becoming flat
60: and reveal a $1/r^2$-profile of mass for the dark matter at large
61: distances, if Newtonian dynamics remains valid. Secondly,
62: gravitational lensing by galaxies corresponds to masses, which are
63: significantly greater than those of visible matter. Thirdly,
64: virial masses in clusters of galaxies witness for the dark matter,
65: too. While the existence of dark matter is well established, its
66: nature and origin are under question \cite{dark,silk}.
67:
68: The most straightforward opportunity is to assume an existence of
69: weakly interacting massive particle, which could be experimentally
70: observed in on-Earth-grounded facilities \cite{silk}. However,
71: numerical simulations of N-body dynamics for the cold dark matter
72: \cite{NFW} give, firstly, a more rapid decay of mass density with
73: distance ($1/r^3$ instead of $1/r^2$) and, secondly, a $1/r$-cusp
74: in centers of galaxies. Yet both phenomena are in contradiction
75: with observations, which prefer a core-like distribution with a
76: constant density of dark matter in the center \cite{Salucci} and
77: do not exhibit a falling down of rotation curves in spiral
78: galaxies.
79:
80: A second way suggests a modification of Newtonian dynamics (MOND)
81: in the asymptotic regions of flat rotation curves. The most
82: successful approach was offered by Milgrom in his MOND
83: \cite{Milgrom,BM,Sanders}, which has many phenomenological
84: advances. Milgrom supposed a phenomenon of critical acceleration
85: $a_0$ below which the gravitational dynamics should be modified in
86: order to reproduce the flat rotation curves, so that an actual
87: acceleration is equal to $\sqrt{g_N a_0}$, where $g_N$ is the
88: acceleration generated by visible matter in galaxy. In the
89: framework of MOND the rotation curves can be explained in terms of
90: visible matter only! Moreover, the critical acceleration naturally
91: leads to a strong correlation of asymptotic velocities with
92: visible masses of galaxies: the Tully--Fisher law. Similar
93: successes of MOND are reviewed in \cite{SanMcG}. Certainly, the
94: phenomenological evidence in favor of critical acceleration
95: challenges the model of cold dark matter, where a regularity like
96: the Tully--Fisher law seems quite occasional and could be some-how
97: introduced as an effect of evolution only. Some theoretical
98: shortcomings of primary MOND model \footnote{For instance, one
99: could mention superluminal velocities of graviscalar and
100: insufficient gravitational lensing.} have been recently removed in
101: a novelty version of tensor-vector-scalar theory by Bekenstein
102: \cite{Bekenstein}. However, a critical acceleration remains an
103: \textit{ad hoc} quantity in MOND paradigm as an indication of
104: essential modification of general relativity in infrared.
105:
106: Another example of modification is a nonsymmetric gravitation
107: theory by Moffat \cite{Moffat}, which involves several parameters,
108: for example, a decay length of extraordinary force. The parameters
109: can be also combined to compose a critical acceleration. A
110: question is whether an introduction of nonsymmetric rank-2 tensor
111: instead of metric is natural or rather exotic.
112:
113: Finally, a possible explanation of flat rotation curves in terms
114: of scalar fields was tried in several papers
115: \cite{Arbey,NSS,Matos}. One found that relevant scalar fields
116: should differ from both a scalar quintessence~\cite{quint}
117: responsible for a measured acceleration of Universe expansion
118: \cite{SNe} and a scalar inflaton governing an inflation in early
119: Universe \cite{introduc}. For example, Nucamendi, Salgado and
120: Sudarsky (NSS) \cite{NSS} have derived a metric consistent with
121: flat rotation curves caused by a presence of perfect fluid given
122: by a scalar field. Moreover, they have found that the scalar field
123: should be represented by a triplet with an asymptotic behavior of
124: global monopole at large distances. In addition, the NSS metric is
125: consistent with gravitational lensing, too. Nevertheless, one
126: still has not found a convincing relation of parameters in a
127: scalar field dynamics with properties of rotation curves.
128:
129: Let us focus an attention on the rotation curves. In present
130: letter we introduce a ghost condensate model which dynamical
131: parameters are deeply related with characteristics of rotation
132: curves. Moreover, we find a natural way to get a critical
133: acceleration in general relativity with the ghost condensate and
134: estimate its value, which turns out to be of the order of Hubble
135: rate at present day in agreement with phenomenological
136: measurements.
137:
138: The ghost condensate \cite{ACLM} is an analogue of Higgs
139: mechanism. Indeed, a tachyon field $\sigma$ with a negative square
140: of mass can be stabilized by $\lambda \sigma^4$ term of its
141: potential, which leads to a tachyon condensate, known as a Higgs
142: mechanism in gauge theories. Similarly, a ghost field $\phi$
143: possessing an opposite sign of kinetic term can be stabilized by
144: introduction of higher order terms leading to a ghost condensate.
145: In contrast to tachyon condensation being a renormalizable and
146: Lorentz-invariant procedure, an isotropic homogeneous ghost
147: condensation gives a nonzero square of time derivative $\langle
148: \dot\phi^2\rangle$, which breaks a Lorentz invariance, while
149: higher derivative terms are acceptable in an effective theory in
150: infrared, only. As for the breaking down the Lorentz invariance,
151: it can simply imply appearing an arrow of time in a non-static
152: isotropic homogeneous expanding Universe with ordinary
153: Friedmann--Robertson--Walker metric. A modification of gravity in
154: infrared by postulating a Goldstone nature of ghost in an
155: effective theory was investigated in \cite{ACLM}. This model leads
156: to instability of gravitational potential in a time exceeding the
157: Universe age at least \cite{Dubovsky,Peloso}. We do not accept the
158: Goldstone hypothesis, that allows us to avoid strict constraints
159: on dimensional parameters of ghost action. A dilatonic ghost
160: condensate as dark energy is considered in \cite{add}.
161:
162: A leading term of lagrangian for the ghost field with invariance
163: under a global translations $\phi\to \phi+ c$ is given by
164: \begin{equation}\label{P_X}
165: {\cal L}_X = P(X), \qquad X=\partial_\nu\phi\partial^\nu\phi,
166: \end{equation}
167: in flat space-time with a metric signature $(+,-,-,-)$, so that $
168: {\cal L}_X\to -\frac{1}{2}\,\partial_\nu\phi\partial^\nu\phi$ at $
169: X\to 0$ reproduces the kinetic term with the negative sign,
170: indicating instability which will be removed by ghost
171: condensation. Indeed, expanding (\ref{P_X}) near $X_0 =\mu_0^4$ by
172: fixing
173: $$
174: \phi =\mu_0^2\, t+\pi(x),\quad \partial_\nu\phi =(\mu_0^2+\dot
175: \pi,\boldsymbol \nabla \pi),
176: $$
177: we get a quadratic approximation for small perturbations %%$\pi$
178: $$
179: {\cal L}_X^{(2)} =\dot\pi^2
180: (P^\prime+2\mu_0^4\,P^{\prime\prime})-(\boldsymbol \nabla
181: \pi)^2\,P^\prime,
182: $$
183: which is stable at $P^\prime>0$ and $P^\prime+2\mu_0^4\,
184: P^{\prime\prime}>0$ at any suitable $X_0$. For definiteness, at
185: relevant values of $X$ we put a Higgs-like function
186: \begin{equation}\label{canon}
187: P(X) = -\frac{m_0^2}{2\eta^2}\, X+\frac{\lambda}{4\eta^4}\,X^2.
188: \end{equation}
189: An expansion with the Friedmann-Robertson--Walker metric gives
190: $$
191: \partial_t\left(a(t)^3\,P^\prime\,\dot\phi
192: \right)=0\quad\Rightarrow\quad P^\prime\,\dot\phi=\frac{{\rm
193: const.}}{a^3}\to 0,
194: $$
195: where $a(t)$ is a scale parameter of metric. So, the evolution
196: drives to $P^\prime\to 0$, since $\dot\phi=0$ is not a stable
197: point by construction. Thus, a preferable choice is an extremum
198: point $P^\prime(X_0) = 0$ with $P^{\prime\prime}> 0 $ \footnote{It
199: is easy to recognize that a substitution of $\partial_\nu\phi
200: =\eta\, {\cal A}_\nu$ transforms lagrangian (\ref{P_X}) to a
201: potential of vector field ${\cal A}_\nu$, and the preference point
202: is the extremum of potential for the vector field, representing
203: the ghost condensate (see also \cite{me}).}. We introduce a
204: correction of the form
205: \begin{equation}\label{corr}
206: \Delta {\cal L}
207: =-\frac{1}{2\eta^2}\,\partial_\alpha\partial_\beta\phi\,
208: \partial^\alpha\partial^\beta\phi,
209: \end{equation}
210: which does not destroy a stability, since in quadratic
211: approximation it gives
212: $
213: \Delta{\cal L}^{(2)} \approx -\frac{1}{2\eta^2}\,(\boldsymbol
214: \nabla^2\pi)^2,
215: $
216: leading to the following dispersion relation for perturbations
217: $\pi$ in momentum space: $\omega^2\approx\boldsymbol k^4/2m_0^2.$
218: A scaling analysis performed in \cite{ACLM} has confirmed that the
219: model is a correct effective theory in infrared.
220:
221: Next, consider the ghost condensate in presence of global monopole
222: \cite{monopole}. Then we put \textit{at large distances}
223: \begin{equation}\label{ghost}
224: \phi=\mu_*^2\,t-\mu_\star^2\,r+\sigma(x),
225: \end{equation}
226: with $ \mu_*^2-\mu_\star^2=\mu_0^2,$ $
227: \kappa={\mu_\star}/{\mu_*}\ll 1, $ so $P^\prime =0$, and we add a
228: correction induced by monopole $ \Delta\widetilde{\cal L}
229: =-\varkappa^2\left(\boldsymbol \nabla\phi+\boldsymbol
230: n\,\mu_\star\right)^2,\, \boldsymbol n=\boldsymbol \nabla r, $
231: where $\mu_\star$ fixes an energy scale in dynamics of monopole,
232: while $\varkappa^2>0$ guarantees a stability of monopole, and its
233: rather large absolute value preserves a stability over
234: perturbations \footnote{In Minkowski space-time at large distances
235: from a monopole center, one could compose a constant four vector
236: ${\cal A}^\nu$ by the ghost field and monopole triplet-scalar
237: \cite{Vilenkin}, so that the temporal derivative of ghost
238: $\dot\phi$ would be combined with the spatial triplet
239: $\phi^a=\boldsymbol n$ in $ {\cal A}^\nu
240: =\frac{1}{\eta}\,\{\dot\phi,\mu_\star^2\boldsymbol n\}, $ which
241: take the form $ {\cal A}^\nu
242: =\frac{1}{\eta}\,\{\mu_*^2,\mu_\star^2,0,0\} $ in polar
243: coordinates $\{t,r,\theta,\phi\}$ with the ghost
244: $\phi=\mu_*^2\,t$. In Minkowski space-time we can simply put $
245: \eta\,{\cal A}_\nu =\partial_\nu(\mu_*^2\, t -\mu_\star^2\,r), $
246: which is exact in this case, and we get a purely gauge vector
247: field \textit{composed by the ghost in presence of global
248: monopole} (see (\ref{ghost})).}, \footnote{Higgs-like fields as
249: dark matter are treated in \cite{Bert}.}.
250:
251: Neglecting perturbations, we study the ghost condensate in
252: presence of monopole (\ref{ghost}) as a source of gravity at large
253: distances in spherically symmetric quasi-static limit.
254: %\footnote{The static limit is an approximation based on a
255: %factorization of scales: the time scale in evolution of Universe,
256: %given by inverse Hubble rate, is much greater than sizes of
257: %galaxies. The approximation is tested below.}.
258: Then, the only source of energy-momentum tensor is the correction
259: of (\ref{corr}), where we should replace partial derivatives by
260: covariant ones \footnote[1]{A model extension to a curved
261: space-time is the following: $
262: %\begin{equation}\label{curved}
263: {\cal A}^\nu
264: =\frac{1}{\eta}\,\{\mu_*^2,\mu_\star^2,0,0\},\quad
265: \Delta{\cal L} =-\frac{1}{2}\,\nabla_\alpha{\cal A}^\nu\nabla^\alpha{\cal
266: A}_\nu,
267: $ %\end{equation}
268: i.e. the constant covariant four-vector is reasonably motivated,
269: %Note, that with a constant spatial components of curved metric
270: %further obtained, the triplet-scalar contribution is recovered
271: %from (\ref{curved}) up to a normalization factor $1+{\cal
272: %O}(v_0^2)$,
273: though the specified ${\cal A}^\nu$ cannot be
274: represented as a gradient function, since $ {\cal A}_{t;r}-{\cal
275: A}_{r;t}\neq 0. $} with the metric
276: \begin{equation}\label{static}
277: {\rm d}s^2 ={\tt f}(r)\,{\rm d}t^2-\frac{1}
278: {{\tt h}(r)}\,{\rm d}r^2-r^2[{\rm
279: d}\theta^2+\sin^2\theta\,{\rm d}\varphi^2],
280: \end{equation}
281: so that due to a small parameter $\kappa$ we can expand in it and
282: find the following solution of corresponding Einstein--Hilbert
283: equations in the leading order over $\kappa$ \footnote{We use an
284: ordinary notation for the derivative with respect to the distance
285: by the prime symbol $\partial_r f(r) =f^\prime(r)$.}:
286: \begin{equation}
287: v_0^2=\kappa^2/\sqrt{2},\quad {\tt h}(r) =
288: 1-2v_0^2,\quad{\tt f}'(r)=\frac{2v_0^2}{r},
289: \end{equation}
290: giving a $1/r^2$-profile of the curvature and a flat asymptotic
291: behavior for a constant velocity of rotation $v_0$ \footnote{Thus,
292: we have found the NSS metric with a perfect fluid of ghost
293: condensate.}, if
294: $
295: 8\pi\,G\, %%%\frac
296: {\mu_*^4}/{\eta^2}=1+{\cal O}(\kappa^4).
297: $
298: In the leading order at $\mu_\star\ll \mu_*$ we have
299: $\mu_*^4\approx m_0^2\eta^2/\lambda$, and, hence, $8\pi\,G\,
300: m_0^2/\lambda\approx 1$. So, putting $\eta=m_0$ for a canonical
301: normalization in (\ref{canon}) at $\lambda\sim 1$, we get
302: \newpage
303:
304: \begin{equation}\label{constar}
305: 8\pi\,G\,\mu_*^2\sim 1,
306: \end{equation}
307: and the ghost condensate scale is of the order of Planck mass:
308: $\mu_*\sim 10^{18-19}$ GeV.
309:
310: The solution leads to the temporal component of the
311: energy-momentum tensor dominates and has the required profile with
312: the distance \footnote{The accretion of ghost to the center of
313: gravity should be suppressed at $P'=0$ (see \cite{AFrolov}).}:
314: \begin{equation}
315: T_r^r\sim T_\varphi^\varphi\sim T_\theta^\theta\sim {\cal
316: O}(v_0^2)\cdot T_t^t\sim {\cal O}\left(\frac{1}{r^2}\right).
317: \end{equation}
318: Numerically at $v_0\sim 100-200$ km/sec, we get
319: \begin{equation}
320: \kappa\sim 10^{-3}\quad \Rightarrow\quad \mu_\star\sim 10^{15-16}\,\mbox{GeV,}
321: \end{equation}
322: so, the characteristic scale in the dynamics of monopole is in the
323: range of GUT. Thus, the small ratio of two natural energetic
324: scales determines the rotation velocity in dark galactic halos.
325:
326: Since we treat the ghost condensate as an external source in the
327: Einstein--Hilbert equations, let us consider conditions providing
328: that the corrections could be neglected.
329:
330: Firstly, suppressing the dependence of ghost on the distance, in
331: the Friedmann-Robertson--Walker metric we find that the covariant
332: derivatives in (\ref{corr}) generate the correction, determined by
333: the Hubble rate $H$ (see \cite{me}):
334: \begin{equation}
335: \delta {\cal L}=-\frac{3}{2\eta^2}\,H^2 \,\dot\phi^2,
336: \end{equation}
337: so that the temporal derivative acquires a slow variation with the
338: time due to the displacement of stable point, since we can use an
339: effective quantity $m^2_{\rm eff} = m_0^2+3H^2$, and the
340: dependence is really negligible, if the Hubble rate is much less
341: than the Planck mass, $H\ll m_0\sim m_{\rm Pl}$.
342: %Note, that as was
343: %shown in \cite{me}, the dependence of ghost condensate on time
344: %generates a variation of effective gravitational constant with the
345: %time in the evolution equations. However, such the dependence
346: %should be small as forced by the experimental observations. We
347: %have seen that in the scheme described above the time-dependence
348: %of ghost condensate is negligible.
349:
350:
351: Secondly, if we take into account both the expansion and radial
352: dependence, then in presence of monopole the covariant derivatives
353: of ghost with respect to polar coordinates $(r,\theta,\varphi)$
354: (more accurately see [31])
355: \begin{equation}
356: \label{if}
357: \phi^{;r}_{\;;r}=H\,\dot\phi,\qquad
358: \phi^{;\theta}_{\;;\theta}=\phi^{;\varphi}_{\;;\varphi}=-\frac{1}{r}\,\phi^\prime
359: +H\,\dot\phi,
360: \end{equation}
361: induce the correction
362: \begin{equation}
363: \label{if-V}
364: \delta_\star {\cal L}
365: =-\frac{1}{2\eta^2}\,H^2\,\dot\phi-\frac{1}{\eta^2}\left(-\frac{1}{r}\,\phi^\prime+H\,\dot\phi\right)^2,
366: \end{equation}
367: which can be neglected at large distances, only. Therefore, the
368: `cosmological limit' of ghost condensate is consistently reached,
369: if
370: \begin{equation}
371: \frac{1}{r}\,\mu_\star^2\ll H\,\mu_*^2.
372: \end{equation}
373: The consideration above is disturbed because of (\ref{if-V}) at
374: distances less than $r_0$ defined by
375: \begin{equation}
376: \label{r0}
377: \frac{1}{r_0}\,\mu_\star^2 = \varepsilon\,H\,\mu_*^2\quad \Rightarrow\quad
378: \frac{1}{r_0}\,\frac{\mu_\star^2}{\mu_*^2} = \varepsilon\,H_0,
379: \end{equation}
380: where $H_0=H(t_0)$ is the value of Hubble rate at present, and
381: $\varepsilon$ is a parameter of the order of $1-0.1$. Substituting
382: $\mu_\star^2/\mu_*^2=\sqrt{2}\,v_0^2$ into (\ref{r0}), we get $
383: %\begin{equation}\label{acc}
384: {v_0^2}/{r_0} ={\varepsilon\,}\,H_0/{\sqrt{2}},
385: $ %\end{equation}
386: while
387: \begin{equation}\label{a0}
388: a_0 =\frac{v_0^2}{r_0}
389: \end{equation}
390: is a centripetal acceleration, and, then, the critical
391: acceleration is determined by the Hubble rate,
392: \begin{equation}\label{Milgrom}
393: a_0 =\frac{\varepsilon\,}{\sqrt{2}}\,H_0,
394: \end{equation}
395: that is the acceleration below which the limit of flat rotation
396: curves becomes justified. That is exactly a direct analogue of the
397: critical acceleration introduced by Milgrom in the framework of
398: MOND \cite{Milgrom}.
399:
400: Further, we could suppose that in the case, when the gravitational
401: acceleration produced by the visible matter in the galactic
402: centers exceeds the critical value, we cannot reach the limit of
403: flat rotation curves. Indeed, in that case the distance dependence
404: cannot be excluded from the ghost condensate. The Newtonian
405: acceleration at distance $r_0$ is equal to
406: \begin{equation}
407: a_0^* =\frac{G {\cal M}}{r_0^2},
408: \end{equation}
409: where $\cal M$ is a visible galactic mass. According to
410: (\ref{Milgrom}), the critical acceleration is a universal quantity
411: slowly depending on the time, while (\ref{a0}) implies that the
412: distance and velocity can be adjusted by variation in order to
413: compose the universal $a_0$. Therefore, we should put
414: \begin{equation}
415: \label{coin}
416: a_0^* =a_0,
417: \end{equation}
418: which yields
419: \begin{equation}\label{Tully-Fisher}
420: v_0^4 = G{\cal M} a_0.
421: \end{equation}
422: The galaxy mass is proportional to an H-band luminosity of the
423: galaxy $L_H$, so that (\ref{Tully-Fisher}) reproduces the
424: Tully--Fisher law
425: $ %\begin{equation}
426: L_H \propto v_0^4.
427: $ %\end{equation}
428: Then, other successes of MOND can be easily
429: incorporated in the framework under consideration, too.
430:
431: Nevertheless, we could treat (\ref{coin}) as a coincidence. For
432: instance, (\ref{Tully-Fisher}) leads to
433: $$
434: \mu_\star^4\sim {\cal M} H_0/G.
435: $$
436: Therefore, if the flattening is observed in a spiral galaxy, the
437: mass of galaxy should strongly correlate with the Hubble rate at
438: present as well as the scale of monopole dynamics. This fact could
439: be reflected in a correlation of rotation velocity with a mass of
440: central body, a supermassive black hole, as observed empirically.
441:
442: Thus, we have presented the working example of ghost condensate
443: model in presence of monopole in order to get the description of
444: flat rotation curves in spiral galaxies at large distances. There
445: are two energy scales in the model. The scales are natural, and
446: they represent the Planck mass and GUT scale. The critical
447: acceleration determining the region of validity for the model has
448: been estimated in general relativity with the ghost condensate.
449:
450: This work is partially supported by the grant of the president of
451: Russian Federation for scientific schools NSc-1303.2003.2, and the
452: Russian Foundation for Basic Research, grant 04-02-17530.
453:
454:
455: %\newpage
456: %%\section*{References}
457: \begin{thebibliography}{**}
458: \bibitem{WMAP}
459: E.~L.~Wright,
460: %``The WMAP data and results,''
461: arXiv: astro-ph/0306132,
462: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 0306132;%%
463: C.~L.~Bennett {\it et al.},
464: %``First Year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Observations:
465: %Preliminary Maps and Basic Results,''
466: Astrophys.\ J.\ Suppl.\ {\bf 148}, 1 (2003) [arXiv:
467: astro-ph/0302207],
468: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 0302207;%%
469: D.~N.~Spergel {\it et al.},
470: %``First Year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Observations:
471: %Determination of Cosmological Parameters,''
472: Astrophys.\ J.\ Suppl.\ {\bf 148}, 175 (2003) [arXiv:
473: astro-ph/0302209].
474: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 0302209;%%
475: \bibitem{SNe}
476: S.~Perlmutter {\it et al.} [Supernova Cosmology Project
477: Collaboration],
478: %``Measurements of Omega and Lambda from 42 High-Redshift Supernovae,''
479: Astrophys.\ J.\ {\bf 517}, 565 (1999) [arXiv:astro-ph/9812133].
480: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 9812133;%%
481: A.~G.~Riess {\it et al.} [Supernova Search Team Collaboration],
482: %``Type Ia Supernova Discoveries at z>1 From the Hubble Space Telescope:
483: %Evidence for Past Deceleration and Constraints on Dark Energy Evolution,''
484: arXiv:astro-ph/0402512.
485: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 0402512;%%
486: \bibitem{dark}
487: S.~Khalil and C.~Munoz,
488: %``The enigma of the dark matter,''
489: Contemp.\ Phys.\ {\bf 43}, 51 (2002) [arXiv:hep-ph/0110122].
490: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0110122;%%
491: \bibitem{silk}
492: G.~Bertone, D.~Hooper and J.~Silk,
493: %``Particle dark matter: Evidence, candidates and constraints,''
494: arXiv: hep-ph/0404175.
495: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0404175;%%
496: \bibitem{NFW}
497: J.~F.~Navarro, C.~S.~Frenk and S.~D.~M.~White,
498: %``The Structure of Cold Dark Matter Halos,''
499: Astrophys.\ J.\ {\bf 462}, 563 (1996) [arXiv: astro-ph/9508025].
500: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 9508025;%%
501: \bibitem{Salucci}
502: A.Burkert, Astrophys. J. {\bf 447}, 25 (1995),
503: %%%
504: P.~Salucci and A.~Borriello,
505: %``Cold Dark Matter Halos Must Burn,''
506: arXiv: astro-ph/0106251,
507: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 0106251;%%
508: %P.~Salucci and A.~Borriello,
509: %``The Intriguing Distribution of Dark Matter in Galaxies,''
510: Lect.\ Notes Phys.\ {\bf 616}, 66 (2003) [arXiv:
511: astro-ph/0203457],
512: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 0203457;%%
513: G.~Gentile, P.~Salucci, U.~Klein, D.~Vergani and P.~Kalberla,
514: %``The cored distribution of dark matter in spiral galaxies,''
515: arXiv: astro-ph/0403154.
516: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 0403154;%%
517: \bibitem{Milgrom}
518: M.~Milgrom,
519: %``A Modification Of The Newtonian Dynamics As A Possible Alternative To The
520: %Hidden Mass Hypothesis,''
521: Astrophys.\ J.\ {\bf 270}, 365 (1983).
522: %%CITATION = ASJOA,270,365;%%
523: \bibitem{BM}
524: J.~D.~Bekenstein and M.~Milgrom, {\it Astrophys.\ J.}\ {\bf 286},
525: 7 (1984).
526: \bibitem{Sanders}
527: R.~H.~Sanders,
528: %``A stratified framework for scalar-tensor theories of Modified Dynamics,''
529: Astrophys.\ J.\ {\bf 480}, 492 (1997) [arXiv: astro-ph/9612099].
530: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 9612099;%%
531: \bibitem{SanMcG}
532: R.~H.~Sanders and S.~S.~McGaugh,
533: %``Modified Newtonian Dynamics as an Alternative to Dark Matter,''
534: Ann.\ Rev.\ Astron.\ Astrophys.\ {\bf 40}, 263 (2002) [arXiv:
535: astro-ph/0204521].
536: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 0204521;%%
537: \bibitem{Bekenstein}
538: J.~D.~Bekenstein,
539: %``Relativistic gravitation theory for the MOND paradigm,''
540: arXiv: astro-ph/0403694.
541: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 0403694;%%
542: \bibitem{Moffat}
543: J.~W.~Moffat,
544: %``Nonsymmetric gravitational theory,''
545: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 355}, 447 (1995) [arXiv: gr-qc/9411006],
546: %%CITATION = GR-QC 9411006;%%
547: J.~W.~Moffat and I.~Y.~Sokolov,
548: %``Galaxy Dynamics Predictions in the Nonsymmetric Gravitational Theory,''
549: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 378}, 59 (1996) [arXiv: astro-ph/9509143],
550: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 9509143;%%
551: J.~W.~Moffat,
552: %``Nonsymmetric Gravitational Theory,''
553: J.\ Math.\ Phys.\ {\bf 36}, 3722 (1995) [Erratum-ibid.\ {\bf
554: 36}, 7128 (1995)],
555: %%CITATION = JMAPA,36,3722;%%
556: %J.~W.~Moffat,
557: %``Modified Gravitational Theory and Galaxy Rotation Curves,''
558: arXiv: gr-qc/0404076,
559: %%CITATION = GR-QC 0404076;%%
560: %J.~W.~Moffat,
561: %``Modified gravitational theory as an alternative to dark energy and dark
562: %matter,''
563: %arXiv:
564: astro-ph/0403266.
565: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 0403266;%%
566: \bibitem{Arbey}
567: J.~Lesgourgues, A.~Arbey and P.~Salati,
568: %``A Light Scalar Field At The Origin Of Galaxy Rotation Curves,''
569: New Astron.\ Rev.\ {\bf 46}, 791 (2002),
570: %%CITATION = ASTRE,46,791;%%
571: A.~Arbey, J.~Lesgourgues and P.~Salati,
572: %``Galactic Halos of Fluid Dark Matter,''
573: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 68}, 023511 (2003) [arXiv: astro-ph/0301533],
574: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 0301533;%%
575: %A.~Arbey, J.~Lesgourgues and P.~Salati,
576: %``Cosmological constraints on quintessential halos,''
577: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 65}, 083514 (2002) [arXiv: astro-ph/0112324],
578: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 0112324;%%
579: %A.~Arbey, J.~Lesgourgues and P.~Salati,
580: %``Quintessential haloes around galaxies,''
581: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 64}, 123528 (2001) [arXiv: astro-ph/0105564].
582: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 0105564;%%
583: \bibitem{NSS}
584: U.~Nucamendi, M.~Salgado and D.~Sudarsky,
585: %``An alternative approach to the galactic dark matter problem,''
586: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 63}, 125016 (2001) [arXiv: gr-qc/0011049],
587: %%CITATION = GR-QC 0011049;%%
588: %U.~Nucamendi, M.~Salgado and D.~Sudarsky,
589: %``Nonminimal global monopoles and bound orbits,''
590: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 84}, 3037 (2000) [arXiv: gr-qc/0002001].
591: %%CITATION = GR-QC 0002001;%%
592: \bibitem{Matos}
593: T.~Matos and F.~S.~Guzman,
594: %``Scalar fields as dark matter in spiral galaxies,''
595: Class.\ Quant.\ Grav.\ {\bf 17}, L9 (2000) [arXiv:
596: gr-qc/9810028],
597: %%CITATION = GR-QC 9810028;%%
598: F.~S.~Guzman, T.~Matos and H.~B.~Villegas,
599: %``Scalar Fields As Dark Matter In Spiral Galaxies: Comparison With
600: %Experiment,''
601: Astron.\ Nachr.\ {\bf 320}, 97 (1999),
602: %%CITATION = ASNAA,320,97;%%
603: T.~Matos, F.~S.~Guzman and L.~A.~Urena-Lopez,
604: %``Scalar field as dark matter in the universe,''
605: Class.\ Quant.\ Grav.\ {\bf 17}, 1707 (2000) [arXiv:
606: astro-ph/9908152],
607: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 9908152;%%
608: F.~S.~Guzman, T.~Matos, D.~Nunez and E.~Ramirez,
609: %``Quintessence-like dark matter in spiral galaxies,''
610: Rev.\ Mex.\ Fis.\ {\bf 49}, 203 (2003) [arXiv: astro-ph/0003105],
611: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 0003105;%%
612: T.~Matos, F.~S.~Guzman and D.~Nunez,
613: %``Spherical scalar field halo in galaxies,''
614: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 62}, 061301 (2000) [arXiv: astro-ph/0003398],
615: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 0003398;%%
616: T.~Matos, F.~S.~Guzman, L.~A.~Urena-Lopez and D.~Nunez,
617: %``Scalar field dark matter,''
618: arXiv:astro-ph/0102419,
619: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 0102419;%%
620: T.~Matos, D.~Nunez, F.~S.~Guzman and E.~Ramirez,
621: %``Geometric conditions on the type of matter determining the flat behavior of
622: %the rotational curves in galaxies,''
623: Gen.\ Rel.\ Grav.\ {\bf 34}, 283 (2002) [arXiv:
624: astro-ph/0005528].
625: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 0005528;%%
626: \bibitem{quint}
627: T.~Chiba,
628: %``Quintessence, the gravitational constant, and gravity,''
629: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 60}, 083508 (1999) [arXiv: gr-qc/9903094],
630: %%CITATION = GR-QC 9903094;%%
631: N.~A.~Bahcall, J.~P.~Ostriker, S.~Perlmutter and P.~J.~Steinhardt,
632: %``The Cosmic Triangle: Revealing the State of the Universe,''
633: Science {\bf 284}, 1481 (1999) [arXiv: astro-ph/9906463],
634: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 9906463;%%
635: P.~J.~Steinhardt, L.~M.~Wang and I.~Zlatev,
636: %``Cosmological Tracking Solutions,''
637: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 59}, 123504 (1999) [arXiv: astro-ph/9812313],
638: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 9812313;%%
639: L.~M.~Wang, R.~R.~Caldwell, J.~P.~Ostriker and P.~J.~Steinhardt,
640: %``Cosmic Concordance and Quintessence,''
641: Astrophys.\ J.\ {\bf 530}, 17 (2000) [arXiv: astro-ph/9901388],
642: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 9901388;%%
643: V.~Sahni,
644: %``The cosmological constant problem and quintessence,''
645: Class.\ Quant.\ Grav.\ {\bf 19}, 3435 (2002) [arXiv:
646: astro-ph/0202076].
647: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 0202076;%%
648: \bibitem{introduc}
649: A.~R.~Liddle,
650: %``An introduction to cosmological inflation,''
651: arXiv: astro-ph/9901124.
652: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 9901124;%%
653: \bibitem{ACLM}
654: N.~Arkani-Hamed, H.~C.~Cheng, M.~A.~Luty and S.~Mukohyama,
655: %``Ghost condensation and a consistent infrared modification of gravity,''
656: arXiv: hep-th/0312099.
657: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 0312099;%%
658: \bibitem{Dubovsky}
659: S.~L.~Dubovsky,
660: %``Star tracks in the ghost condensate,''
661: arXiv: hep-ph/0403308.
662: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0403308;%%
663: \bibitem{Peloso}
664: M.~Peloso and L.~Sorbo,
665: %``Moving sources in a ghost condensate,''
666: arXiv: hep-th/0404005.
667: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 0404005;%%
668: \bibitem{add}
669: F.~Piazza and S.~Tsujikawa,
670: %``Dilatonic ghost condensate as dark energy,''
671: arXiv:hep-th/0405054.
672: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 0405054;%%
673: \bibitem{me}
674: V.~V.~Kiselev,
675: %``Vector field and rotational curves in dark galactic halos,''
676: Class.\ Quant.\ Grav.\ {\bf 22}, 541 (2005)
677: [arXiv:gr-qc/0404042];\\
678: %%CITATION = GR-QC 0404042;%%
679: V.~V.~Kiselev,
680: %``Vector field as a quintessence partner,''
681: Class.\ Quant.\ Grav.\ {\bf 21}, 3323 (2004)
682: [arXiv:gr-qc/0402095].
683: %%CITATION = GR-QC 0402095;%%
684: \bibitem{monopole}
685: A.~M.~Polyakov,
686: %``Particle Spectrum In Quantum Field Theory,''
687: JETP Lett.\ {\bf 20}, 194 (1974) [Pisma Zh.\ Eksp.\ Teor.\ Fiz.\
688: {\bf 20}, 430 (1974)],
689: %%CITATION = JTPLA,20,194;%%
690: %``Isomeric States Of Quantum Fields,''
691: Zh.\ Eksp.\ Teor.\ Fiz.\ {\bf 68}, 1975 (1975);\\
692: %%CITATION = ZETFA,68,1975;%%
693: G.~'t Hooft,
694: %``Magnetic Monopoles In Unified Gauge Theories,''
695: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 79}, 276 (1974).
696: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B79,276;%%
697: \bibitem{Vilenkin}
698: M.~Barriola and A.~Vilenkin,
699: %``Gravitational Field Of A Global Monopole,''
700: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 63}, 341 (1989).
701: %%CITATION = PRLTA,63,341;%%
702: \bibitem{Bert}
703: M.~C.~Bento, O.~Bertolami and R.~Rosenfeld,
704: %``Cosmological constraints on an invisibly decaying Higgs boson,''
705: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 518}, 276 (2001) [arXiv:hep-ph/0103340],
706: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0103340;%%
707: M.~C.~Bento, O.~Bertolami, R.~Rosenfeld and L.~Teodoro,
708: %``Self-interacting dark matter and invisibly decaying Higgs,''
709: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 62}, 041302 (2000) [arXiv:astro-ph/0003350],
710: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 0003350;%%
711: O.~Bertolami and F.~M.~Nunes,
712: %``Nucleosynthesis constraints on a scale-dependent new intermediate range
713: %interaction,''
714: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 452}, 108 (1999) [arXiv:hep-ph/9902439].
715: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9902439;%%
716: \bibitem{AFrolov}
717: A.~V.~Frolov,
718: %``Accretion of ghost condensate by black holes,''
719: arXiv:hep-th/0404216.
720: %%CITATION = HEP-TH 0404216;%%
721: \end{thebibliography}
722: \end{document}
723: