Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Stationarity and large ω Brans–Dicke solutions versus general relativity

  • Research Article
  • Published:
General Relativity and Gravitation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

    We’re sorry, something doesn't seem to be working properly.

    Please try refreshing the page. If that doesn't work, please contact support so we can address the problem.

Abstract

It is often claimed that the asymptotic behaviour of the Brans–Dicke solutions versus general relativity, when \({\omega \longrightarrow \infty }\) , is related to the trace of the stress tensor. Considering the standard Euclidean cosmological model, we argue that this claim is not correct. On the other hand, we argue that this behaviour depends on the property of the considered solutions versus stationarity and asymptotical flatness.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

We’re sorry, something doesn't seem to be working properly.

Please try refreshing the page. If that doesn't work, please contact support so we can address the problem.

References

  1. Will, C.M.: The confrontation between general relativity and experiments www.livingreviews.org/Irr-2006-3 (living reviews in relativity, 2006)

  2. Fujii Y. and Maeda K. (2003). The Scalar–Tensor Theory of Gravitation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. Will C.M. (1993). Theory and Experiment in Gravitational Physics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Weinberg, S.: Gravitation and Cosmology. Wiley, New York, pp 157–60 (1972)

  5. Romero C. and Barros A. (1993). Phys. Lett. A 173: 243

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  6. Faraoni V. (1999). Phys. Rev. D 59: 084021

    Article  MathSciNet  ADS  Google Scholar 

  7. Banerjee N. and Sen S. (1997). Phys. Rev. D 56: 1334

    Article  MathSciNet  ADS  Google Scholar 

  8. Faraoni V. (1998). Phys. Lett. A 245: 26

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  9. Banerjee A., Banerjee N. and Santos N.O. (1985). J. Math. Phys. 26: 3125

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  ADS  Google Scholar 

  10. Chauvineau B. (2003). Class. Quant. Grav. 20: 2617

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  ADS  Google Scholar 

  11. Yazadjiev S.S. (2002). Phys. Rev. D 65: 084023

    Article  MathSciNet  ADS  Google Scholar 

  12. Gurevich L.E., Finkelstein A.M. and Ruban V.A. (1973). Astrophys. Space Sci. 22: 231

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  13. Hawking S.W. (1972). Commun. Math. Phys. 25: 167

    Article  MathSciNet  ADS  Google Scholar 

  14. Bekenstein J.D. and Meisels A. (1978). Phys. Rev. D 18: 4378

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  15. Bhadra A. and Sarkar K. (2005). Gen. Rel. Grav. 37: 2189

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  ADS  Google Scholar 

  16. Banerjee A., Choudhury S.B.D. and Banerjee N. (1984). J. Math. Phys. 25: 3041

    Article  MathSciNet  ADS  Google Scholar 

  17. Scheel M.A., Shapiro S.L. and Teukolsky S.A. (1995). Phys. Rev. D 51: 4236

    Article  MathSciNet  ADS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Observatoire de la Côte d’Azur, UMR 6162, Avenue Copernic, 06130, Grasse, France

    Bertrand Chauvineau

Authors
  1. Bertrand Chauvineau
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bertrand Chauvineau.

About this article

Cite this article

Chauvineau, B. Stationarity and large ω Brans–Dicke solutions versus general relativity. Gen Relativ Gravit 39, 297–306 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10714-006-0384-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10714-006-0384-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation