Bimodular Gravity: Vacuum Evolution with a Frame-Dependent Phantom Crossing

James Hallam; Jo\~ao Magueijo

REVIEW 3 major objections 3 minor 1 cited by

Bimodular Gravity: Vacuum Evolution with a Frame-Dependent Phantom Crossing

T0 review · 3 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-03 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read Two disformally related metrics split unimodular gravity into two inequivalent theories: one with a frozen scalar and a conserved combination Λ = λ1 + νλ2 replacing the cosmological constant, the other with a dynamical scalar.

desk verdict A genuinely new bimetric unimodular construction that breaks the classical equivalence of UG formalisms, but the phantom-crossing headline is not derived and the key conservation law is deferred to a thesis; worth publishing after fixing those. read the letter →

arxiv 2511.13562 v2 pith:3CN3LAQY submitted 2025-11-17 gr-qc astro-ph.COhep-th

James Hallam , João Magueijo This is my paper

classification gr-qcastro-ph.COhep-th

keywords unimodulargravitybimetricdisformalcouplingbiscalarcosmologicalconstantdarkenergyphantomcrossingsoundspeed

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

Bimodular gravity starts from an ordinary unimodular-gravity idea—fixing a metric's volume element with a Lagrange multiplier—and applies it to two metrics at once, where the second metric is disformally related to the first through a scalar field. The paper's central claim is that this double unimodularisation is not a trivial extension: two standard ways of imposing the constraint, which are classically equivalent for a single metric, give different theories once two metrics are involved. In the fixed-determinant version (BUG), the relative volume of the two metrics becomes constant, the scalar's kinetic term is locked, and a conserved 'bimodular cosmological constant' Λ = λ1 + νλ2 emerges, so the scalar can drive expansion without actually propagating. In the diffeomorphism-invariant versions (BHT/BDUG), the two Lagrange multipliers are individually constant and the scalar remains fully dynamical. The abstract additionally promises a frame-dependent phantom crossing of the dark-energy equation of state, but the body of the paper never exhibits such a crossing—no explicit solution, derivation, or phase-space analysis is given—so that part of the abstract currently lacks support.

What carries the argument

The central machinery is the disformal relation ĝμν = gμν + B ∂μφ ∂νφ, with relative volume ν = sqrt(1−2BX), together with a pair of Lagrange multipliers λ1, λ2 that enforce one volume (or divergence) constraint on each metric. The decisive identity is the BUG balance law ∇μ(λ1 + νλ2)=0, obtained from the Bianchi identity plus conservation of the biscalar stress-energy tensor; it replaces the single-metric statement 'λ is constant' with 'a specific linear combination is constant.' The kinematic constraint ∇μX=0—derived from ν constant when B is constant—is what kills the scalar as an independent propagating field while still allowing it to source expansion.

What would settle it

Take the BUG field equations, compute the covariant divergence of Eq. (25) directly using the biscalar equation and the kinematic constraint ∇μX=0, and check whether all unwanted terms cancel; if an uncancelled term survives, Λ is not constant. Separately, integrate the BUG flow with a chosen potential and look for wφ crossing −1; the abstract promises this phantom crossing, but the paper contains no such solution, so a numerical search is the quickest way to test that claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The discovery is that imposing one unimodular constraint per metric produces two inequivalent classical theories, distinguished by how the relative volume element ν = sqrt(1−2BX) is treated. In BUG, fixing both determinants forces ν to a constant and hence forces BX to be constant; the scalar's would-be dynamics reduce to a kinematic constraint, and the divergence of the Einstein equations yields a balance law ∇μ(λ1+νλ2)=0, defining a single conserved bimodular cosmological constant even though λ1 and λ2 separately vary. In BHT/BDUG, the Lagrange multipliers are promoted to strict integration constants, so λ1 and λ2 are separately constant, ν stays dynamical, and the scalar obeys a genuine s

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the scalar field's energy-momentum tensor is conserved on shell, so that the divergence of the modified Einstein equations reduces to the balance law ∇μ(λ1+νλ2)=0; the preprint asserts this conservation and defers the proof to a thesis, so the fixed-volume, non-propagating-scalar picture stands or falls on that missing derivation, with a secondary restriction that B is taken constant throughout.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

In BUG, dark energy can have a time-varying equation of state without any propagating scalar degree of freedom: the scalar moves at constant matter-frame speed and the variation is carried by λ2 and V(φ), while Λ stays conserved.
BHT/BDUG and BUG give different background expansion histories—first-order flow with locked kinetics versus genuine second-order scalar dynamics—so the two theories are in-principle distinguishable with cosmological observations.
On the healthy domain 0 < BX < 1/2 with 1 + B(V+λ2) > 0, biscalar perturbations are ghost-free, gradient-stable, and subluminal; the sound speed drops toward zero in the DBI limit BX → 1/2.
Exact de Sitter solutions differ: BUG's de Sitter branch requires Vφ = 0 and constant λ2, while BHT permits self-tuning de Sitter with a time-dependent roll rate and nonzero potential slope.
The proposed diffeomorphism-invariant completion of BUG correlates the two auxiliary vector densities by a fixed factor ν, recovering the balance law and kinematic constraint on shell while restoring full covariance.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

Inference: the phantom crossing promised in the abstract could, if real, be exhibited by numerically integrating the BUG flow for a simple potential; until such a solution is shown, the claim should be treated as an open question rather than a result.
Inference: the balance law recasts the cosmological constant as a conserved combination of two individually fluctuating quantities; if quantum corrections respect only the combination, this gives a concrete, testable target for radiative-stability calculations that the paper itself lists as future work.
Inference: the BUG/BHT inequivalence likely extends beyond this particular action to any two metrics related by a field-dependent disformal transformation; wherever two volume elements are constrained, choosing the fixed-determinant versus divergence implementation is a physical choice, not a gauge choice.
Inference: because BUG allows the sound speed to vary with time even when the kinetic density is frozen, a measurement of c_s(z) alongside w(z) could distinguish 'locked-roll' from 'dynamical-roll' dark energy; the paper sets up the formulas but does not make this observational prediction.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Colleague, here's my read of Hallam–Magueijo 2511.13562.

The core idea is real: impose a unimodular constraint on each of two disformally related metrics and the standard equivalence between fixed-determinant and diffeomorphism-invariant unimodular gravity breaks. That's not in the earlier literature. The paper works out the consequences carefully: the BUG kinematic constraint on the biscalar, the conserved combination Λ=λ1+νλ2, the k-essence reduction, the sound speed, and the two different de Sitter branches. The algebra hangs together—I checked the Friedmann equations and the flow systems, and they're consistent modulo the equation swap noted below. The covariant completion in Sec. VI is a nice addition.

Now the soft spots.

The title and abstract advertise a "frame-dependent phantom crossing," but the body never demonstrates one. wφ is defined in Eq. (61); the BUG flow (64)–(66) is never integrated, and no example shows wφ < −1. In fact, wφ = ν^2 (Xhat − S)/(Xhat + S) with S = V + λ2, and wφ = −1 requires Xhat = 0, which is impossible for a rolling scalar. So a continuous crossing doesn't happen; at best wφ diverges at a pole. This is a genuine overclaim, not a cosmetic one, because it's the headline.

The other issue is the conservation law. The balance law ∇μ(λ1+νλ2)=0 rests on ∇μT^(φ)_μν=0, which is asserted and deferred to the first author's MSc thesis [29]. I don't think it's wrong—it likely follows from the scalar EOM and the disformal identity—but a preprint that cites an unpublished thesis for a load-bearing step is asking a lot. The referee should require the proof be included or the thesis be made available.

Minor: Eqs. (59)–(60) have ρφ and pφ swapped. The ratio wφ is correct, so it's a labeling error, but it should be fixed.

The paper is honest about its limitations (radiative stability, quantum corrections) and doesn't oversell the rest. It's aimed at the modified-gravity/unimodular-gravity audience, and I think it deserves a serious referee. My recommendation: send to peer review, require demonstration or retraction of the phantom-crossing claim and inclusion of the conservation proof. With those, this is a solid contribution.

Referee Report

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper introduces 'bimodular gravity' by imposing unimodular-type constraints on both the Einstein metric g and a disformally related matter metric ĝ in a scalar-tensor bimetric theory. It distinguishes two implementations: the fixed-determinant formulation (BUG), where the relative volume ν = sqrt(1-2BX) is constant and the scalar is kinematically constrained, and the diffeomorphism-invariant formulations (BHT/BDUG), where the two Lagrange multipliers λ1, λ2 are individually constant and the scalar remains dynamical. The authors derive modified Einstein equations, a k-essence reduction with sound speed, FLRW background equations, exact de Sitter branches, and a covariant completion intended to reproduce BUG. The abstract and title claim a frame-dependent phantom crossing of w = -1, but this is not demonstrated anywhere in the body.

Significance. The central structural claim — that classically equivalent single-metric unimodular formulations become inequivalent once two disformally related metrics are unimodularised — is interesting and appears novel. The paper is commendably explicit: the BUG and BHT/BDUG actions, field equations, sound speed, minisuperspace reductions, and de Sitter branches are laid out in sufficient algebraic detail to be checked independently. The minisuperspace variation and the equation-of-state ratio are internally consistent, aside from a labeling issue in Eqs. (59)-(60). If the deferred conservation proof is supplied and the advertised phantom crossing is actually exhibited, the framework would make falsifiable predictions for the expansion history, dark-energy equation of state, and scalar perturbation speed. As it stands, the paper establishes an inequivalence between unimodular implementations, but it does not deliver its headline phantom-crossing claim.

major comments (3)

[Title/Abstract vs §V.C–V.D] The headline claim of a frame-dependent phantom crossing is not derived. Section V.C defines wφ in Eq. (61) and Section V.D presents the BUG first-order flow (64)-(66), but the paper never integrates this system for a chosen potential, shows a phase portrait, or establishes an inequality that any trajectory crosses wφ = -1. The conclusion (§VII) only states that wφ can evolve because V and λ2 exchange under the balance law. This is load-bearing for the advertised result. Please either add a concrete example or phase-space argument demonstrating wφ < -1 on a trajectory, or revise the abstract/title to the weaker claim that wφ can vary.
[§III.E, Eq. (27)] The central BUG balance law ∇μ(λ1+νλ2)=0 and the resulting bimodular cosmological constant Λ depend on the conservation ∇μT^(φ)_μν=0 and on the Bianchi calculation, both deferred to [29], an MSc thesis by the first author. The preprint states Eq. (27) without proof. Since this conservation is the mechanism that keeps Λ constant in BUG and distinguishes BUG from BHT/BDUG, the derivation should be included in the paper or in a publicly accessible appendix. Without it, the key claim that Λ is conserved in BUG is not self-contained.
[§VI, Eq. (83)] The proposed diffeomorphism-invariant completion imposes τ2^μ = ν τ1^μ with ν a fixed constant. This reproduces the BUG kinematic constraint by construction rather than deriving it from dynamics. The paper should explicitly state that this proportionality is an additional ansatz and discuss its uniqueness; otherwise the claim that this is 'the natural' completion is overstated. This does not invalidate the BUG/BHT inequivalence, but it limits the force of the covariance-restoration claim.

minor comments (3)

[Eqs. (59)-(60)] The labels for ρφ and pφ are interchanged relative to the standard k-essence convention, where p = K and ρ = 2X K_X - K. The displayed right-hand side of Eq. (60) actually equals K, not 2X K_X - K. The ratio in Eq. (61) is the standard w if the labels are swapped; please correct the definitions.
[Throughout] There are numerous typographical issues: 'the the' (Sec. V.A), 'Meanwhilst' (Sec. V.E), 'straight forward' (Sec. III.D), 'donate' for 'denote' (Sec. IV), 'auxillary' (Sec. VI), and 'unimodularised' (Introduction). Equation (66) also has an awkward extra '1' before 1/(1-ν²); please re-set the equation.
[Abstract] Unless the missing phantom-crossing derivation is added, the abstract should be softened to a time-varying wφ rather than promising a phantom crossing.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

No constructional circularity in the action-level derivations; main issue is a load-bearing self-citation for the BUG conservation law, plus an unsupported abstract phantom-crossing claim that is a gap rather than circularity.

self citation load bearing [Sec. III.E (Eqs. (27)-(29)); cf. Sec. III.C]
"Making use of the biscalar equation of motion derived in the next section rexpressed in the Einstein frame, we show in [29] that the biscalar stress-energy tensor is indeed conserved, ∇μTµν(φ) = 0."

Equation (27) is the sole input used to take the divergence of the BUG Einstein equations (25) and obtain the balance law (28), ∇μ(λ1+νλ2)=0, which defines the bimodular cosmological constant Λ=λ1+νλ2 in (29). The preprint does not prove (27); the proof is deferred to [29], the first author's MSc thesis, and Sec. III.C similarly states 'the full proof' of the BUG Bianchi identities is presented in [29]. Thus the central BUG conservation result is load-bearing on an unverified self-citation rather than on equations in the paper. This is a self-citation chain, not a fit or a definitional identity, so it does not make the whole derivation circular; but as presented the key step is an assertion borrowed from the authors' own prior work.

full rationale

The action-level derivations are self-contained in the usual sense: Eqs. (25), (26), (30)-(32), (56)-(58), (63)-(66), and the sound-speed formula (33)-(40) follow from varying the stated actions, with no data fitting and no parameter renamed as a prediction. The BUG vs BHT inequivalence is obtained directly from the different constraint sectors, not from a fitted input. The Sec. VI covariant completion is an explicit construction (τ2=ντ1 with constant ν) designed to reproduce BUG, so its reproduction of BUG is by design rather than a hidden reduction; I do not count it as circular because the paper presents it as a construction. The only load-bearing self-citation is the deferred proof of ∇μT^(φ)_μν=0 and the BUG Bianchi identity in [29], which supports the balance law and Λ. Separately, the abstract's headline claim of 'a phantom crossing through a purely frame-dependent mechanism' is not demonstrated in the body: Sec. V.C defines wφ in (61), Sec. V.D gives the flow (64)-(66), and Sec. V.E obtains wφ=-1 on the exact dS branch, but no trajectory with wφ crossing -1 is exhibited. That is an unsupported-claim/correctness gap, not a circularity. Overall score 4: some self-citation is load-bearing, but the central construction retains independent action-level content.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new physical particles, forces, or dimensions are introduced. The auxiliary vector densities τ_i and V_i are standard devices from Henneaux-Teitelboim / DUG unimodular formulations and are non-propagating. The new object Λ=λ1+νλ2 is a conserved combination of existing Lagrange multipliers, not a new entity. The main uncharged inputs are the disformal coupling B (taken constant), the potential V, the integration constants λ1,2, and the fixed densities ε1,2 in BUG. The most fragile axiom is the asserted conservation of T^(φ) in BUG, deferred to [29].

free parameters (4)

B (disformal coupling) = treated as constant, not fitted
Defined in Eq. (4) as B(φ); Sec. III.A sets B=const for the remainder of the paper. It controls the sound speed, the kinematic constraint, and the cosmology; the results therefore hold for a constant B but not necessarily for the general B(φ).
V(φ) scalar potential = not specified; chosen by hand
The potential is an input function. The de Sitter branches, the first-order BUG flow, and the BHT self-tuning relation all depend on V and Vφ.
λ1, λ2 Lagrange multipliers / integration constants = not fixed; dynamical in BUG, individually constant in BHT/BDUG
The bimodular cosmological constant is Λ=λ1+νλ2. In BUG their variations are tied by the balance law; in BHT/BDUG they are strict integration constants. Their values are free inputs that set vacuum energy offsets.
ε1, ε2 (BUG constant densities) = not specified
In BUG, the fixed determinants fix ν=ε2/ε1 and thus the constant biscalar speed C0 via Eq. (50). Their ratio is a free parameter controlling the kinematics.

assumptions (6)

domain assumption A unimodular constraint is imposed on each metric using Lagrange multipliers
This is the defining construction of the paper. Without imposing both constraints, the theory reduces to ordinary bimetric scalar-tensor gravity with a dynamical scalar.
domain assumption The disformal relation (4) is invertible and preserves Lorentzian signature, requiring 1−2BX>0
Used throughout to write √−ĝ=ν√−g, define the relative volume ν, and impose reality of the lapses (N̂²>0) in Sec. V.A.
domain assumption The biscalar stress-energy tensor is conserved in BUG, ∇μT^(φ)_μν=0
Stated in Sec. III.E with the proof deferred to [29]. This conservation is required to derive the balance law ∇μ(λ1+νλ2)=0 and hence the bimodular cosmological constant.
domain assumption B(φ) is approximated as constant
After Eq. (15), the paper says 'B shall be treated as a constant'. This converts ∇μ(BX)=0 into ∇μX=0 and is used in the BUG kinematic constraint and the first-order flow.
standard math The standard k-essence sound speed formula c_s²=K_X/(K_X+2XK_XX) applies to the Einstein-frame kinetic function K
Taken from [30] and applied in Sec. IV to derive the bimodular sound speed (39)-(40).
ad hoc to paper In the covariant completion of Sec. VI, the proportionality ν between the two HT vector densities is fixed to a constant
The action (84) sets τ2=ντ1 with ν constant, which by construction enforces √−ĝ/√−g=ν and reproduces BUG on shell. This is a designed completion, not an independent derivation of BUG from BHT.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Bimodular Gravity: Vacuum Evolution with a Frame-Dependent Phantom Crossing." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/3CN3LAQY

@misc{pith2026251113562,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Bimodular Gravity: Vacuum Evolution with a Frame-Dependent Phantom Crossing},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/3CN3LAQY}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2511.13562}
}

read the original abstract

Unimodular gravity recasts the cosmological constant as an integration constant, fixed by a constraint on the volume element rather than chosen in the action. We ask what becomes of this constant when matter couples not to the gravitational metric, but to a second metric disformally related to it through a scalar field. Imposing a volume constraint on each metric, we find a theory in which the scalar does not propagate, yet still drives a non-trivial expansion. Written as a single-metric theory, its kinetic term is fixed to a prescribed function of spacetime, and the cosmological constant is replaced by a vacuum contribution that need not be constant. Moreover, we find that this theory admits a phantom crossing through a purely frame-dependent mechanism. This construction, however, rests on a feature invisible with a single metric, and unimodular formalisms that are classically equivalent in that case cease to agree once there are two disformally related metrics.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

Rolling Galileons: Evolving Braiding Strength for Viable Dark Energy
astro-ph.CO 2026-07 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

Rolling Galileon gravity, with field-dependent coupling coefficients, can produce a viable phantom-crossing dark energy with healthy void screening and an acceptable fit to expansion data.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

36 extracted references · cited by 1 Pith paper

[29]

Unruh, Unimodular theory of canonical quantum gravity, Phys

W. Unruh, Unimodular theory of canonical quantum gravity, Phys. Rev. D40, 1048 (1989)

1989
[1]

realises full diffeomorphism invariance off shell
[2]

exact dS

From(49), the quantity ˙φ/ ˆN =dφ/dˆτis the biscalar proper speed as measured in the matter frame. In BUG, this quantity is constant, C0 := dφ dˆτ=const,(51) which in turn impliesX = ˙φ2/2N 2 = const, thereby realising the kinematic constraint in cosmology. Hence, within an FLRW background, BUG enforces a constant proper biscalar speed. As for the BHT the...
[3]

enforces the balance relation∇µ(λ1 +νλ2) = 0on shell
[4]

reproduces the BUG kinematic constraint onν and subsequently onBX
[5]

In what follows we present precisely such an action

reduces to BUG in an appropriate gauge, and hence is classically equivalent to BUG. In what follows we present precisely such an action. One may regard it as the diffeomorphism-invariant completion of unimodularised bimetric scalar-tensor gravity, whereby full covariance is restored and the physical content of BUG is retained on shell. 11 B. A Diffeomorph...
[6]

Riess, A

A. Riess, A. Filippenko,et al., Observational evidence from supernovae for an accelerating universe and a cosmological constant, AJ116, 1009–1038 (1998)

1998
[7]

Perlmutter, G

S. Perlmutter, G. Aldering, G. Goldhaber,et al., Mea- surements ofω and λ from 42 high-redshift supernovae, AJ517, 565 (1999)

1999

Show all 36 references

[8]

Planck Collaboration, Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmolog- ical parameters, aap641, A6

2018
[9]

Zel’dovich, The cosmological constant and the theory of elementary particles, Sov

Y. Zel’dovich, The cosmological constant and the theory of elementary particles, Sov. Phys. Usp.11, 381 (1968)

1968
[10]

Weinberg, The cosmological constant problem, Rev

S. Weinberg, The cosmological constant problem, Rev. Mod. Phys.61, 1 (1989)

1989
[11]

Brout, D

D. Brout, D. Scolnic, B. Popovic,et al., The pantheon+ analysis: Cosmological constraints, AJ938, 110 (2022)

2022
[12]

Anderson and D

J. Anderson and D. Finkelstein, Cosmological constant and fundamental length, Am. J. Phys.39, 901 (1971)

1971
[13]

Álvarez and M

E. Álvarez and M. Herrero-Valea, Unimodular gravity with external sources, JCAP2013(01), 014
[14]

Bufalo, M

R. Bufalo, M. Oksanen, and A. Tureanu, How unimodular gravity theories differ from general relativity at quantum level, Eur. Phys. J. C75, 477 (2015)

2015
[15]

Jordan, Zum gegenwärtigen stand der diracschen kosmologischen, Hyp

P. Jordan, Zum gegenwärtigen stand der diracschen kosmologischen, Hyp. Z. Phys.157, 112–121 (1959)

1959
[16]

Brans and R

C. Brans and R. Dicke, Mach’s principle and a relativistic theory of gravitation, Phys. Rev.124, 925 (1961)

1961
[17]

Brans, Mach’s principle and a relativistic theory of gravitation

C. Brans, Mach’s principle and a relativistic theory of gravitation. ii, Phys. Rev.125, 2194 (1962)

1962
[18]

Bekenstein, Relation between physical and gravitational geometry, Phys

J. Bekenstein, Relation between physical and gravitational geometry, Phys. Rev. D48, 3641 (1993)

1993
[19]

Gubitosi, F

G. Gubitosi, F. Piazza, and F. Vernizzi, The effective field theory of dark energy, JCAP2013(02), 032
[20]

Koivisto, Disformal quintessence, Phys

T. Koivisto, Disformal quintessence, Phys. Rev. D78, 123505 (2008)

2008
[21]

Brax and C

P. Brax and C. Burrage, Constraining disformally coupled scalar fields, Phys. Rev. D90, 104009 (2014)

2014
[22]

Sakstein, Disformal theories of gravity: From the solar system to cosmology, JCAP2014(12), 012

J. Sakstein, Disformal theories of gravity: From the solar system to cosmology, JCAP2014(12), 012
[23]

Clayton and J

M. Clayton and J. Moffat, Scalar-tensor gravity theory for dynamical light velocity, Phys. Lett. B477, 269–275 (2000)

2000
[24]

Clayton and J

M. Clayton and J. Moffat, A scalar-tensor cosmological model with dynamical light velocity, Phys. Lett. B506, 177–186 (2001)

2001
[25]

Moffat, Bimetric gravity theory, varying speed of light and the dimming of supernovae, Int

J. Moffat, Bimetric gravity theory, varying speed of light and the dimming of supernovae, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D12, 281–298 (2003)

2003
[26]

Magueijo, New varying speed of light theories, Rep

J. Magueijo, New varying speed of light theories, Rep. Prog. Phys.66, 2025–2068 (2003)

2025
[27]

Buchmüller and N

W. Buchmüller and N. Dragon, Einstein gravity from restricted coordinate invariance, Phys. Lett. B207, 292 (1988)

1988
[28]

Buchmüller and N

W. Buchmüller and N. Dragon, Gauge fixing and the cosmological constant, Phys. Lett. B223, 313 (1989)

1989
[30]

Padilla and I

A. Padilla and I. Saltas, A note on classical and quantum unimodular gravity, EPJ C75, 561 (2015)

2015
[31]

Henneaux and C

M. Henneaux and C. Teitelboim, The cosmological constant and general covariance, Phys. Lett. B222, 195 (1989)

1989
[32]

Jiroušek, Unimodular Approaches to the Cosmological Constant Problem, Universe9, 131 (2023)

P. Jiroušek, Unimodular Approaches to the Cosmological Constant Problem, Universe9, 131 (2023)

2023
[33]

Magueijo, Bimetric varying speed of light theories and primordial fluctuations, Phys

J. Magueijo, Bimetric varying speed of light theories and primordial fluctuations, Phys. Rev. D79, 043525 (2009)

2009
[34]

Hallam,Bimodular Gravity, MSc Thesis, Imperial College London (2025)

J. Hallam,Bimodular Gravity, MSc Thesis, Imperial College London (2025)

2025
[35]

Garriga and V

J. Garriga and V. Mukhanov, Perturbations in k-inflation, Phys. Lett. B458, 219–225 (1999)

1999
[36]

Armendariz-Picon, V

C. Armendariz-Picon, V. Mukhanov, and P. Steinhardt, Essentials of k essence, Phys. Rev. D63, 103510 (2001)

2001

Pith tools

Reviewed August 3, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [29]

Unruh, Unimodular theory of canonical quantum gravity, Phys

W. Unruh, Unimodular theory of canonical quantum gravity, Phys. Rev. D40, 1048 (1989)

1989

[2] [1]

realises full diffeomorphism invariance off shell

[3] [2]

exact dS

From(49), the quantity ˙φ/ ˆN =dφ/dˆτis the biscalar proper speed as measured in the matter frame. In BUG, this quantity is constant, C0 := dφ dˆτ=const,(51) which in turn impliesX = ˙φ2/2N 2 = const, thereby realising the kinematic constraint in cosmology. Hence, within an FLRW background, BUG enforces a constant proper biscalar speed. As for the BHT the...

[4] [3]

enforces the balance relation∇µ(λ1 +νλ2) = 0on shell

[5] [4]

reproduces the BUG kinematic constraint onν and subsequently onBX

[6] [5]

In what follows we present precisely such an action

reduces to BUG in an appropriate gauge, and hence is classically equivalent to BUG. In what follows we present precisely such an action. One may regard it as the diffeomorphism-invariant completion of unimodularised bimetric scalar-tensor gravity, whereby full covariance is restored and the physical content of BUG is retained on shell. 11 B. A Diffeomorph...

[7] [6]

Riess, A

A. Riess, A. Filippenko,et al., Observational evidence from supernovae for an accelerating universe and a cosmological constant, AJ116, 1009–1038 (1998)

1998

[8] [7]

Perlmutter, G

S. Perlmutter, G. Aldering, G. Goldhaber,et al., Mea- surements ofω and λ from 42 high-redshift supernovae, AJ517, 565 (1999)

1999