pith. sign in

arxiv: 1302.2938 · v1 · pith:EVQSTY52new · submitted 2013-02-12 · 🌀 gr-qc

Mathematical Equivalence vs. Physical Equivalence between Extended Theories of Gravitations

classification 🌀 gr-qc
keywords conformalshalltheoriesargueequivalenceequivalentgaugeperihelia
0
0 comments X
read the original abstract

We shall show that although Palatini f(R)-theories are equivalent to Brans-Dicke theories, still the first pass the Mercury precession of perihelia test, while the second do not. We argue that the two models are not physically equivalent due to a different assumptions about free fall. We shall also go through perihelia test without fixing a conformal gauge (clocks or rulers) in order to highlight what can be measured in a conformal invariant way and what cannot. We shall argue that the conformal gauge is broken by choosing a definition of clock, rulers or, equivalently, of masses.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. The Unknown Face of Scalar-Tensor Gravitational Theories

    gr-qc 2025-03 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    The conformal frame problem in scalar-tensor theories stems from incomplete transformation rules for parameters and overlooked Ward identities; active conformal transformations provide the suitable framework while pas...