pith. sign in

arxiv: 1907.07135 · v1 · pith:VX6YG333new · submitted 2019-07-14 · 🌀 gr-qc

Brans-Dicke Scalar Field Cosmological Model in Lyra's Geometry

Dinesh Chandra Maurya , Rashid Zia This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-24 21:32 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌀 gr-qc
keywords Bianchi type-IBrans-Dicke theoryLyra geometrydark energyaccelerating universesupernova observationsgauge functionscalar field
0
0 comments X

The pith

A Brans-Dicke scalar field in Lyra geometry yields a Bianchi-I model that accelerates today and matches supernova Ia data.

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

The paper builds a spatially homogeneous anisotropic cosmological model by placing Lyra geometry on the left side of the Einstein equations and the Brans-Dicke scalar field on the right. The resulting solution shows the universe decelerated in the past and accelerates now, with the gauge function and scalar field acting together as the dark-energy source. Parameters are fixed so the coupling constant satisfies solar-system bounds, and the expansion history is stated to agree with type Ia supernova observations. A sympathetic reader would care because the construction offers a single geometric-plus-scalar mechanism that replaces a separate cosmological constant while remaining consistent with existing distance measurements.

Core claim

The authors obtain an exact Bianchi type-I solution in Brans-Dicke theory formulated in Lyra geometry; the gauge function β and the scalar field φ are taken as the physical agents supplying the effective dark energy that drives the present acceleration, and the derived Hubble evolution reproduces the observed supernova Ia luminosity distances when the Brans-Dicke coupling exceeds 40000.

What carries the argument

The gauge function β of Lyra geometry together with the Brans-Dicke scalar field φ, inserted as the effective dark-energy component in the modified field equations.

If this is right

  • The universe decelerated at early times and accelerates at late times.
  • The effective dark energy is supplied entirely by the gauge function and scalar field.
  • The model remains compatible with solar-system constraints on the coupling constant.
  • Geometrical and physical quantities can be compared directly with those of the corresponding general-relativistic models.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same mechanism might produce observable differences in the growth of large-scale structure compared with a pure cosmological-constant model.
  • Extending the solution to include explicit matter fields would test whether the acceleration persists when ordinary matter is restored.
  • Anisotropy signatures in the model could be searched for in future cosmic microwave background polarization data.

Load-bearing premise

The gauge function and Brans-Dicke scalar field can be identified as the physical cause of dark energy and the observed acceleration without independent dynamical evidence.

What would settle it

A set of supernova Ia distance measurements whose inferred expansion history deviates from the model's predicted deceleration-to-acceleration transition at the chosen coupling value.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1907.07135 by Dinesh Chandra Maurya, Rashid Zia.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Variation of Gravitational constant over red shift [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Hubble constant versus red shift best fit curve. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Luminosity distance modulus versus red shift best [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Apparent magnitude versus red shift best fit curve. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Plot of H0t versus red shift z. (ρσ)0 = 4.40108h 2 0 × 10−43gm/cm3 (69) (ρβ)0 = 1.399284h 2 0 × 10−29gm/cm3 (70) Here, we have taken (Ωm)0 = 0.2991, (Ωσ)0 = 2.341 × 10−14, & (Ωβ)0 = 0.7443. General expressions for energy densities are given by ρ = ρ0 a0 a 3(1+γ) = ρ0(1 + z) 3(1+γ) (71) ρσ = k 2 c 2φ 3 8π a0 a 6 = k 2 c 2φ 3 8π (1 + z) 6 (72) and ρβ = (ρc)Ωβ = 3c 2β 2 32π φ (73) From above, we observe t… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Variation of deceleration parameter versus red sh [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_6.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

In this paper, we have developed a new cosmological model in Einstein's modified gravity theory using two types of modification.(i) Geometrical modification, in which we have used Lyra's geometry in the left hand side of the Einstein field equations (EFE) and (ii) Modification in gravity (energy momentum tensor) on right hand side of EFE, as per Brans-Dicke (BD) model. With these two modifications, we have investigated a spatially homogeneous and anisotropic Bianchi type-I cosmological models of Einstein's Brans-Dicke theory of gravitation in Lyra geometry. The model represents accelerating universe at present and decelerating in past and is considered to be dominated by dark energy. Gauge function $\beta$ and BD-scalar field $\phi$ are considered as a candidate for the dark energy and is responsible for the present acceleration. The derived model agrees at par with the recent supernovae (SN Ia) observations. We have set BD-coupling constant $\omega$ to be greater than 40000, seeing the solar system tests and evidences. We have discussed the various physical and geometrical properties of the models and have compared them with the corresponding relativistic models.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript develops a Bianchi type-I cosmological model combining Brans-Dicke theory with Lyra geometry. It claims the solution exhibits a transition from past deceleration to present acceleration, identifies the gauge function β and BD scalar field φ as dark-energy candidates responsible for the acceleration, and states that the model agrees with SN Ia observations once the BD coupling ω is fixed above 40000 in accordance with solar-system constraints.

Significance. A successful, quantitatively demonstrated match to SN Ia data in this two-modification framework would constitute a modest incremental contribution to phenomenological modified-gravity cosmologies. The present description, however, indicates that agreement is obtained after parameter assignment rather than through independent prediction, limiting the result's novelty and testability.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the assertion that the model 'agrees at par with the recent supernovae (SN Ia) observations' supplies no derivation details, error analysis, or statement of which quantities were fitted versus predicted, so the central observational claim rests on unshown steps.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract / model interpretation: once ω is fixed from solar-system tests and β, φ are assigned the role of dark energy, the reported agreement reduces by construction to a consistency fit rather than an independent prediction; this is load-bearing for the claim that the model explains the observed acceleration.
minor comments (1)
  1. The abstract states that 'various physical and geometrical properties' are discussed but does not indicate which quantities (e.g., deceleration parameter, statefinder, energy conditions) receive explicit analytic or numerical treatment.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the detailed reading and constructive feedback. We address each major comment below and have revised the manuscript to improve clarity on the nature of the observational comparison.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the assertion that the model 'agrees at par with the recent supernovae (SN Ia) observations' supplies no derivation details, error analysis, or statement of which quantities were fitted versus predicted, so the central observational claim rests on unshown steps.

    Authors: The abstract is concise by design. The full manuscript derives the exact solution in Sections 3–4 from the field equations and, in the discussion section, compares the resulting expansion history (deceleration parameter q(z) and luminosity distance) with SN Ia compilations for the fixed value ω > 40000 required by solar-system tests. No additional parameters are fitted to the SN data; the comparison is a consistency check. We will revise the abstract to read 'the model is consistent with recent SN Ia observations' and add a brief statement that the comparison uses the theoretically derived scale factor without further adjustment. A formal statistical error analysis is not performed, as the work presents an exact solution rather than a statistical fit. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract / model interpretation: once ω is fixed from solar-system tests and β, φ are assigned the role of dark energy, the reported agreement reduces by construction to a consistency fit rather than an independent prediction; this is load-bearing for the claim that the model explains the observed acceleration.

    Authors: We agree that the agreement constitutes a consistency test once ω is fixed by independent solar-system bounds and β, φ are identified as the effective dark-energy sources. The functional form of a(t), φ(t) and β(t) is obtained directly from the modified field equations without reference to SN data. The non-trivial result is that this form, with the same ω that satisfies local tests, produces a transition from deceleration to acceleration at z ≈ 0.6–0.7 and yields present-day q0 values compatible with observations. We do not claim an a-priori prediction of the acceleration from SN data alone. We will revise the abstract and concluding section to replace 'agrees at par with' by 'is consistent with' and to state explicitly that the comparison is a viability check under solar-system constraints. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity identified

full rationale

The paper constructs a Bianchi-I solution by combining Lyra geometry on the left-hand side of the Einstein equations with a Brans-Dicke scalar on the right-hand side. The coupling constant ω is fixed at a value >40000 drawn from independent solar-system tests. The resulting scale-factor evolution is then compared with SN Ia data. No equation in the supplied text reduces a derived quantity to a fitted input by construction, no uniqueness theorem is imported from the authors' prior work, and no ansatz is smuggled via self-citation. The identification of β and φ as dark-energy candidates is an interpretive assumption, not a definitional loop. This is ordinary phenomenological model-building whose central derivation chain remains independent of the final observational comparison.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 2 axioms · 1 invented entities

The construction rests on setting the Brans-Dicke parameter by hand to satisfy external tests, postulating that β and φ supply dark energy, and assuming a specific anisotropic metric whose scale factors are solved under those identifications.

free parameters (1)
  • BD-coupling constant ω
    Set greater than 40000 to satisfy solar-system constraints; value chosen externally but then used to tune the cosmological solution.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Spatially homogeneous and anisotropic Bianchi type-I line element
    Adopted without derivation as the background geometry for the universe.
  • ad hoc to paper Gauge function β and scalar field φ act as dark energy
    Introduced in the abstract to explain the present acceleration.
invented entities (1)
  • Gauge function β treated as dark-energy component no independent evidence
    purpose: To source the observed cosmic acceleration inside Lyra geometry
    Postulated without independent observational handle outside the model fit.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5735 in / 1560 out tokens · 45791 ms · 2026-05-24T21:32:38.315639+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

64 extracted references · 64 canonical work pages · 5 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Weyl, Sitzungsber.Preuss.Akad.Wiss.Berlin (Math

    H. Weyl, Sitzungsber.Preuss.Akad.Wiss.Berlin (Math. Phys.) 1918, 465 (1918)

    work page 1918

  2. [2]

    Lyra, Math

    G. Lyra, Math. Z. 54, 52 (1951)

    work page 1951

  3. [3]

    Scheibe, Math

    E. Scheibe, Math. Z. 57, 65 (1952)

    work page 1952

  4. [4]

    D. K. Sen, Zeitschrift fo ˜A 1 4 r Physik, 149, 3, 311 (1957)

    work page 1957

  5. [6]

    Brans, R.H

    C. Brans, R.H. Dicke, Phys. Rev. 124, 925 (1961)

    work page 1961

  6. [7]

    R. H. Dicke, ibid, 125, 2163 (1962)

    work page 1962

  7. [8]

    W. D. Halford, Australian Journal of Physics, 23, 5, 863 (1970)

    work page 1970

  8. [9]

    Halford, J

    W.D. Halford, J. Math. Phys. 13, 1399 (1972)

    work page 1972

  9. [10]

    G. F. R. Ellis and R. Maartens, Class. Quant. Grav. 21, 223 (2004)

    work page 2004

  10. [11]

    G. F. R. Ellis, J. Murugan and C. G. Tsagas, Class. Quant. Grav. 21, 233 (2004)

    work page 2004

  11. [12]

    Mukherjee, B

    S. Mukherjee, B. C. Paul, N. K. Dadhich, S. D. Maharaj and A. Beesham, Class. Quant. Grav. 23, 6927 (2006)

    work page 2006

  12. [13]

    D. K. Sen, Z. Phys. 149, 311 (1957)

    work page 1957

  13. [14]

    D. K. Sen and K. A. Dunn, J. Math. Phys. 12, 578 (1971)

    work page 1971

  14. [15]

    K. S. Bhamra, Aust. J. Phys. 27, 541 (1974)

    work page 1974

  15. [16]

    S. B. Kalyanshetti and B. B. Waghmode, Gen. Relat. Grav. 14, 823 (1982)

    work page 1982

  16. [17]

    D. R. K. Reddy and P. Innaiah, Astrophys. Space Sci. 114, 285 (1985)

    work page 1985

  17. [18]

    D. R. K. Reddy and R. Venkateswarlu, Astrophys. Space Sc i. 136, 183 (1987)

    work page 1987

  18. [19]

    Beesham, Astrophys

    A. Beesham, Astrophys. Space Sci. 127, 355 (1986)

    work page 1986

  19. [20]

    Beesham, Aust

    A. Beesham, Aust. J. Phys. 41, 833-842 (1988)

    work page 1988

  20. [21]

    Pradhan, S.S.Kumhar, Astrophys Space Sci

    A. Pradhan, S.S.Kumhar, Astrophys Space Sci. 321, 137-146 (2009)

    work page 2009

  21. [22]

    Inhomogeneous Perfect Fluid Universe with Electromagnetic Field in Lyra Geometry

    A. Pradhan and P. Mathur, Fizika B, 18, 243 (2009). [gr-qe/0806.4815]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  22. [23]

    Pradhan and P

    A. Pradhan and P. Yadav, International Journal of Mathe matics and Mathematical Science, Article ID 471938, 1-20 (2009). DOI: 10.1155/2009/471938

    work page doi:10.1155/2009/471938 2009

  23. [24]

    Pradhan, J

    A. Pradhan, J. Math. Phys. 50, 022501-022513 (2009)

    work page 2009

  24. [25]

    Pradhan, H

    A. Pradhan, H. Amirhashehi, H. Zanuddin, IJTP 50, 56-69 (2011)

    work page 2011

  25. [26]

    Pradhan, A.K.Singh, IJTP 50, 916-933 (2011)

    A. Pradhan, A.K.Singh, IJTP 50, 916-933 (2011)

    work page 2011

  26. [27]

    A. K. Yadav. Fizika B, 19, 53-80 (2010)

    work page 2010

  27. [28]

    Agarwal, R.K

    S. Agarwal, R.K. Pandey, A. Pradhan, IJTP 50, 296-307 (2011). 18

    work page 2011

  28. [29]

    R. S. Singh and A. Singh, Electronic Journal of Theoreti cal Physics, 9, 265-282 (2012)

    work page 2012

  29. [30]

    Riess, et al., Astron

    A.G. Riess, et al., Astron. J. 116 1009 (1999)

    work page 1999

  30. [31]

    Perlmutter, et al., Astrophys

    S. Perlmutter, et al., Astrophys. J. 517 565 (1999)

    work page 1999

  31. [32]

    Spergel, et al., Astrophys

    D. Spergel, et al., Astrophys. J.S. 148, 175 (2003)

    work page 2003

  32. [33]

    Komatsu, et al., Astrophys

    E. Komatsu, et al., Astrophys. J.S. 192, 18 (2011)

    work page 2011

  33. [34]

    Blake and K

    C. Blake and K. Glazebrook, Astrophys. J. 594, 665 (2003)

    work page 2003

  34. [35]

    Seo and D

    H. Seo and D. Eisenstein, Astrophys. J. 598, 720 (2003)

    work page 2003

  35. [36]

    Dvali, G

    G.R. Dvali, G. Gabadadze, M. Porrati, Phys. Lett. B 485, 208 (2000)

    work page 2000

  36. [37]

    Nojiri and S.D

    S. Nojiri and S.D. Odintsov, Phys. Rev. D 68, 123512 (2003)

    work page 2003

  37. [38]

    Capozziello, Int

    S. Capozziello, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 11, 483 (2002)

    work page 2002

  38. [39]

    P. S. Apostolopoulos, et al, Phys. Rev. D 72, 044013 (2005)

    work page 2005

  39. [40]

    Nojiri and S.D

    S. Nojiri and S.D. Odintsov, Int. J. Geom. Meth. Mod. Phy s. 4, 115 (2007)

    work page 2007

  40. [41]

    Diakonos and E.N

    F.K. Diakonos and E.N. Saridakis, JCAP, 0902, 030 (2009)

    work page 2009

  41. [42]

    Prajapati, Astrophys

    Abdussatter, S.R. Prajapati, Astrophys. Space Sci. 331, 657 (2011)

    work page 2011

  42. [43]

    Bennet et al., Astrophys

    C.L. Bennet et al., Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser. 148, 1 (2003)

    work page 2003

  43. [44]

    Riess et al., Astrophys

    A.G. Riess et al., Astrophys. J. 607, 665 (2004)

    work page 2004

  44. [46]

    Rapetti, S.W

    D. Rapetti, S.W. Allen, M. Amin, R.D. Blandford, Mon. No t. Roy. Astron. Soc. 375, 1510 (2007)

    work page 2007

  45. [47]

    Garcia-Salcedo, T

    R. Garcia-Salcedo, T. Gonzalez, I. Quiros, Physical Re view D 89, 084047 (2014)

    work page 2014

  46. [48]

    Sahni, T.D

    V. Sahni, T.D. Saini, A. A. Starobinsky, U. Alam, JETP Le tt. 77, 201 (2003)

    work page 2003

  47. [49]

    Akarsu, S

    O. Akarsu, S. Kumar, R. Myrzakulov, M. Sami, Lixin Xu, JC AP. 01, 022 (2014)

    work page 2014

  48. [50]

    B. Saha, H. Amirhashchi, A.Pradhan, Astrophys.Space S ci. 342, 257-267 (2012)

    work page 2012

  49. [51]

    J. V. Narlikar, An Introduction to Cosmology (Cambridg e University Press 2002), p 483

    work page 2002

  50. [52]

    Bertotti et al., Nature 425, 374 (2003)

    B. Bertotti et al., Nature 425, 374 (2003)

    work page 2003

  51. [53]

    A. D. Felice et al., Phys. Rev. D 74, 103005 (2006)

    work page 2006

  52. [54]

    G. K. Goswami, M. Mishra, and A. K. Yadav, Int. J. Theor. P hys. 54, 315 (2015)

    work page 2015

  53. [55]

    Suzuki et al., Astrophys. J. 746, 85 (2012)

    work page 2012

  54. [56]

    Sahani, A

    V. Sahani, A. Shafieloo, and A. A. Starobinsky, Astrophy s. J. Lett. 793, L40 (2014)

    work page 2014

  55. [57]

    Improved constraints on the expansion rate of the Universe up to z~1.1 from the spectroscopic evolution of cosmic chronometers

    M. Moresco et al., JCAP 1208, 006 (2012); [arXiv:1201.3609]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  56. [58]

    Four New Observational $H(z)$ Data From Luminous Red Galaxies of Sloan Digital Sky Survey Data Release Seven

    C. Zhang et al., Res. Astron. Astrophys. 14, 1221 (2014), [arXiv:1207.4541[astro-ph.CO]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  57. [59]

    Moresco, Mon

    M. Moresco, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 450, L16 (2015). 19

    work page 2015

  58. [60]

    Stern et al., JCAP 2010, 008 (2010)

    D. Stern et al., JCAP 2010, 008 (2010)

    work page 2010

  59. [61]

    R. Zia, D. C. Maurya, Int. J. Geom. Meth. Mod. Phys., 15, 1850168 (2018)

    work page 2018

  60. [62]

    A. G. Riess et al., Astron. J. 116 (1998) 1009

    work page 1998

  61. [63]

    Astier, et al., Astron

    P. Astier, et al., Astron. Astrophys. 447, 31 (2006)

    work page 2006

  62. [64]

    Davis, E

    T.M. Davis, E. M¨ ortsell, J. Sollerman, et al., ApJ 666, 716 (2007)

    work page 2007

  63. [65]

    Is the transition redshift a new cosmological number?

    J.A.S. Lima, J.F. Jesus, R.C. Santos, M.S.S. Gill, arXi v:1205.4688v2[astro-ph.CO], (2012)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  64. [66]

    Extended Gravity Cosmography

    S. Capozziello et al., Extended Gravity Cosmography, a rXiv:1904.01427v1 [gr-qc], (2019). 20

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1904