A Cosmological Theory without Singularities

A. Sornborger (Brown); R. Brandenberger (Brown); V. Mukhanov (ETH Zuerich)

REVIEW

A Cosmological Theory without Singularities

R. Brandenberger (Brown), V. Mukhanov (ETH Zuerich), A. Sornborger (Brown)

General Relativity and Quantum Cosmology · Submitted 1 Mar 1993 · 26 references

Pith's verdict: An explicit, checkable construction that funnels high curvature into de Sitter — the 'all solutions' claim is plausible but rests on region-by-region asymptotics rather than a global proof.

T0 · AI review

How this review was made: An AI referee (selfhosted/deepseek-v4.1-flash) read the paper on November 11, 2026 and answered a fixed list of questions about it. T0 is the starting level every paper gets. The levels describe how deeply Pith has checked the paper, never the authors.

T0 AI review An AI read the paper and answered a fixed list of questions.
T1 Audit Automatic checks that the references and files the paper relies on exist and match.
T2 Compute The paper's code or calculations re-run with the same results.
T3 Formal statement The claims written out in a formal math language a computer can read.
T4 Proof Those claims proved, and the proof checked by computer.

How Pith checks papers →

· 2 major objections · 9 minor · Ask about this paper · The compiled record · Read the full review →

Challenge this review Comment (0) Read on arXiv ↗

Cite ▾

arXiv IDgr-qc/9303001 (version 1)

Pith IDUOBIVNUU, Pith's permanent record of this paper and its review

CitationA. Sornborger (Brown), R. Brandenberger (Brown), V. Mukhanov (ETH Zuerich). "A Cosmological Theory without Singularities." arXiv:gr-qc/9303001 (1993). https://pith.science/paper/UOBIVNUU

Cite this reviewBibTeX for Pith's review of this paper

Claim paper

Why Pith says this

Highlight any text to comment on it.

Editor's note

read the letter

Worth your time, with one caveat about how strong the headline claim really is. The construction is explicit and clever: two Lagrange-multiplier fields, one coupled to I1 = R − √3(4RμνR^μν − R²)^1/2 to cap the curvature, one coupled to I2 = 4RμνR^μν − R², which vanishes only for de Sitter. The constraint equations then force I2 → 0 as φ2 → ∞, so the auxiliary field running off to infinity is what drives the geometry to de Sitter. That is a real mechanism, not a slogan, and the equations of motion (2.25)–(2.27) and the reduced phase-space equations (3.1)–(3.3), (4.1)–(4.3) are written out cleanly enough to check by hand. The 'asymptotically free' observation — the effective matter coupling to gravity goes to zero as curvature approaches its limit — is a nice piece of physics that falls out rather than being put in. The single-field warm-up in Section 3 is a sensible way to introduce the technique before the two-field case. Credit where due: this is honest model building, and the authors say plainly that they are guessing an effective action rather than deriving one. On the soft spots. The global closure is the weak point, and the authors half-acknowledge it. The region A–D analysis is asymptotic in each region, the separatrices are sketched rather than computed, and the matching across them is asserted. The logarithmic term in V1 (Eq. 4.7) is a hand-tuned fix; the paper says outright that without it, trajectories with φ1 ≫ 1 and φ2 ≃ 0 escape to φ1 = ∞ in finite time and produce singularities in higher invariants. That is an admission that nonsingularity depends on the potential, not on the structure of the theory. For k ≠ 0 the only evidence is numerical (Figs. 10–11), and the figures are not shipped. The abstract's 'all curvature invariants are bounded' is inherited from the LCH framework — only I1 and I2 are bounded by construction; the rest follows conditionally on the de Sitter asymptotics actually holding. The anisotropic and black-hole generalizations are deferred to ref. 13, listed as in preparation, so the abstract's 'we expect... can easily be generalized' is a promissory note. On the reader's circularity worry: partly right, partly overblown. Yes, the action is designed to deliver the result, but whether φ2 actually runs to infinity along generic trajectories is genuine dynamical content, and the phase analysis does address it. Who should read it: anyone working on nonsingular bounces, limiting curvature, or higher-derivative gravity. Send it to referees.

Referee report

Significance

If the central claim holds, this is a significant construction: a local higher-derivative theory with an explicit action (2.24) and explicit equations of motion (2.25)-(2.27) in which every homogeneous isotropic cosmology is past- and future-complete. The Lagrange multiplier technique is a clean way to implement the LCH, and the paper gives checkable reduced equations (3.1)-(3.3), (4.1)-(4.3) and a detailed region-by-region phase-space analysis. The construction is not circular — the potentials are designed to enforce the bounds, and the substantive content is the dynamical claim that all trajectories reach the asymptotic de Sitter region — but that dynamical claim is where the analysis is least complete. The paper is candid about open problems (inhomogeneous perturbations, stability of Minkowski space).

Major objections (2)

[§4, Eqs. (4.3)-(4.21), Fig. 8] The central claim that 'all solutions are either periodic about Minkowski space or are asymptotically de Sitter' (end of Section 4) rests on an asymptotic analysis in four regions A-D with separatrices that are sketched rather than computed. The equations for the separatrices (4.10), (4.16), (4.19) are asymptotic, and the matching of trajectories across regions is asserted. In particular, the paper introduces the logarithmic term in V1 (Eq. 4.7) specifically 'to prevent solutions starting with φ1 >> 1 and φ2 ≃ 0 from escaping to φ1 = ∞ at φ2 < 1 in finite time,' and states that without it such solutions 'would lead to singularities in higher order curvature invariants.' This shows the nonsingularity claim is conditional on a hand-chosen potential and on the asymptotic matching. A global argument — for example, an explicit integral bound showing φ1 remains finite for all finite times in Region B, or a monotonic quantity along the flow — would make the 'all solutions' claim convincing.
[§3, Figs. 5-6; §4, Figs. 10-11] The k ≠ 0 claims rest on numerical integration whose initial conditions, integration scheme, step size, and handling of the H = 0 crossing are not documented. The text specifies only the potential (3.5) or (4.7)-(4.8) and, in some cases, a(t0) = 10 or 1. Since the de Sitter bounce is where singularity avoidance is most non-trivial for closed universes, and the abstract claims 'all homogeneous and isotropic solutions,' this is load-bearing. The paper should either document the numerical method and convergence or give an analytic argument for the bounce (e.g., from the k-dependent terms in (3.24)-(3.25)).

Minor objections (9)

[§3, after Eq. (3.25)] The text refers to 'the terms on the right hand side of (3.29) become inﬁnite,' but there is no Eq. (3.29) in the manuscript; presumably (3.24) or (3.25) is meant.
[§2, Eq. (2.14)] Give the explicit FRW expression for I2 = 4RμνRμν − R2 (e.g., I2 = 12Ḣ² for flat FRW) to make the 'I2 = 0 iff de Sitter' claim transparent.
[§3, before Eq. (3.1)] The analysis is stated for a contracting universe (H < 0, as introduced before Eq. 2.22); state explicitly that the expanding case follows by time reversal of the action (2.24).
[§2, Eq. (2.16)] The field equations are stated without derivation, and the variation of the I2 = 4RμνRμν − R2 term is lengthy. The reduced equations (2.25)-(2.27) can be independently checked by the ansatz method the paper mentions, but the reader cannot easily verify (2.16); give the intermediate steps or note that (2.25)-(2.27) were independently derived from the ansatz.
[§2, Eq. (2.17)] The bound on I1 follows from f1(I1) = −V1'(φ1) and the boundedness of V1', but the paper does not state this explicitly; add the one-line argument to support the abstract's claim that all curvature invariants are bounded.
[§3, Eqs. (3.20)-(3.23); §5] The 'asymptotic freedom' claim — that the effective gravitational coupling goes to zero as curvature increases — is qualitative. No definition of an effective G is given; the argument is that matter terms become subdominant in the asymptotic expansion of dH/dφ. Since this property is used in Section 5 to justify neglecting nonlocal terms and to argue that the effective action approach remains valid up to Planck curvature, a more quantitative statement (e.g., an explicit effective G(φ) or a bound on the matter backreaction) would be appropriate.
[§4, Eq. (4.7)] The potential V1 is garbled in the preprint; give it in a clear form so that the asymptotic condition (4.5) can be checked.
[Fig. 8] Label regions A-D on the figure and give the separatrix equations beyond the asymptotic form, so that the reader can see how the four classes of trajectories are separated.
[References and text] Typos: 'procede' (§1), 'approch' (§2), 'contribition' (§3), 'preceeding' (§3), 'Sornborg er' (Ref. 13), 'Callen' should be 'Callan' (Ref. 10), 'Starobinski' should be 'Starobinsky' (Ref. 25), and Birrell and Davies is 1982, not 1992.

How Pith checks papers → · Full audit of this paper →

The paper

The paper claims

By adding two constraint fields to Einstein's action, the authors argue that every homogeneous, isotropic universe becomes past- and future-complete, with high curvature funneled into de Sitter space.

The reading

General relativity makes singularities unavoidable: a closed universe begins and ends in one, and a black hole hides one at its centre. The authors attack this not by quantizing gravity but by guessing a modified, higher-derivative action for the metric that reduces to Einstein's at low curvature and forbids curvature from growing without bound. Their construction adds two non-dynamical multiplier fields, each tied to a curvature invariant by its own potential: one caps the overall curvature, the other forces any solution that reaches the cap toward de Sitter space, where the Weyl tensor vanishes. Working in homogeneous and isotropic cosmologies, they argue that the resulting phase-space trajectories are either periodic about Minkowski space or asymptotically de Sitter, so every solution extends through $t = +infty$ and $t = -infty$. They also report that the coupling of matter to gravity switches off as curvature grows, which is what keeps the asymptotic behaviour clean.

What carries the argument

The limiting-curvature construction: a Lagrange multiplier field coupled to a curvature invariant, with a potential whose shape enforces a bound. The template is the authors' own particle-mechanics analogy, where adding $varphi dot{x}^2 - V(varphi)$ to a Newtonian action and eliminating $varphi$ reproduces the relativistic point-particle action, so a velocity cap becomes special relativity. Transplanted to gravity, the first multiplier caps curvature and the second, through the invariant $I_2 = 4R_{munu}R^{munu} - R^2$, singles out de Sitter space as the only place the constraint can be satisfied at large field values. The extra ingredient that makes the argument close globally is the logarithmic correction to $V_1$, which the authors say is needed to stop trajectories with $varphi_1 gg 1$ and $varphi_2 simeq 0$ from escaping to $varphi_1 = infty$ in finite time.

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper claims that a specific local higher-derivative action, Eq. (2.24), has no singular homogeneous and isotropic solutions. The action is Einstein's $R$ plus two Lagrange-multiplier terms, $-(1+varphi_1)R$ style corrections built from the invariants $I_1 = R - sqrt{3}(4R_{munu}R^{munu} - R^2)^{1/2}$ (equal to $12H^2$ in a flat FRW model) and $I_2 = 4R_{munu}R^{munu} - R^2$, which vanishes only for de Sitter and Minkowski space. The potentials are chosen so that $V_i sim varphi_i^2$ at small field values, $V_1 sim varphi_1 - ln varphi_1$ at large $varphi_1$, and $V_2$ tends to a constant at large $varphi_2$; the constraint equations then drive $I_2 to 0$ as $|varphi_2| to infty$, which is what turns the limiting-curvature regime into de Sitter. For $k = c = 0$ the phase space reduces to the $(varphi_1, varphi_2)$ plane, and the authors analyse four asymptotic regions, finding that trajectories either oscillate about the origin or run to de Sitter at $varphi_2 = pm infty$. With spatial curvature included they find a de Sitter bounce: $H$ passes through zero and the universe re-expands, again without a singularity. The stated conclusion is that all solutions are either periodic about Minkowski space or asymptotically de Sitter, all extend to $t = pm infty$, and hence there are no singularities.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the asymptotic analysis of the four phase-space regions, plus the numerical integrations, accounts for every trajectory, so that no solution slips through an intermediate channel into a singularity at finite time.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Every flat or closed Friedmann model in this theory is geodesically complete in both directions, so questions about what came before a big bang or after a big crunch have answers inside the theory rather than outside it.
The universe either emerges from a de Sitter phase or from a de Sitter bounce, giving an inflationary epoch driven by gravity itself rather than by a scalar inflaton.
Because $I_2 = 0$ forces the Weyl tensor to vanish at the limiting curvature, Penrose's hypothesis that the Weyl curvature vanishes at the beginning of the universe is implemented rather than assumed.
The effective coupling between matter and gravity goes to zero as curvature approaches its bound, so matter content does not change the asymptotic geometry; the authors call this asymptotic freedom and use it to argue that nonlocal corrections from particle production should also fade in that regime.
If the same construction extends to the invariant $R_{munu}R^{munu} - R^2 + C^2$, the black-hole interior would contain a piece of de Sitter space instead of a singularity, which the authors suggest could give infalling information somewhere to go.

Reading between the lines

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

The mechanism is a bounded-curvature prior rather than a quantum theory: it says nothing about what the fundamental degrees of freedom are, only that no classical trajectory may exceed a curvature ceiling. A reader should expect the ceiling to be put in by hand at the Planck scale, not derived.
Because the cap is enforced by constraint equations rather than by energy conditions, the construction evades the Penrose-Hawking theorems by giving up their second premise, that Einstein's equations hold universally. That is a cleaner logical move than violating energy dominance, and it suggests the singularity-avoidance could survive in any theory whose high-curvature limit is de Sitter.
The reliance on a hand-tuned logarithmic term in $V_1$ hints that global nonsingularity is a property of a chosen potential family, not of the multiplier idea in general; a natural follow-up is to ask which potentials satisfy the asymptotic conditions and still close the phase space everywhere.
The paper's own stated plan to extend the analysis to anisotropic and black-hole metrics is where the claim would be tested hardest, since $I_2 = 4R_{munu}R^{munu} - R^2$ also vanishes for Schwarzschild and therefore does not by itself single out de Sitter once $C^2 neq 0$.

Original abstract

A theory of gravitation is constructed in which all homogeneous and isotropic solutions are nonsingular, and in which all curvature invariants are bounded. All solutions for which curvature invariants approach their limiting values approach de Sitter space. The action for this theory is obtained by a higher derivative modification of Einstein's theory. We expect that our model can easily be generalized to solve the singularity problem also for anisotropic cosmologies.

The compiled record

The paper's own sentences, arranged, kept beside the review and separate from it. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.

Compiled by classifier-1.13-20260917 via OpenRouter, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-09-23: 1 request, 3,507 input tokens, $0.0001 reported.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.04 · states limitation 0.56 · human participants 0.01 · controlled comparison 0.02 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.08 · compares with prior results 0.15 · mentions code or data availability 0.01.

The abstract, sentence by sentence

arXiv listing abstract v1. Results and the main claim are underlined; show every role.

A theory of gravitation is constructed in which all homogeneous and isotropic solutions are nonsingular, and in which all curvature invariants are bounded. All solutions for which curvature invariants approach their limiting values approach de Sitter space. The action for this theory is obtained by a higher derivative modification of Einstein's theory. We expect that our model can easily be generalized to solve the singularity problem also for anisotropic cosmologies.

background contribution method result interpretation main claim

What the classifier reports for each sentence. The number is the probability it gave the label.
#	sentence	role	the authors' own work	states the main conclusion	strength
s0	A theory of gravitation is constructed in which all homogeneous and isotropic solutions are nonsingular, and in which all curvature invariants are bounded.	contribution 0.81	0.92	0.83	asserted 1.00
s1	All solutions for which curvature invariants approach their limiting values approach de Sitter space.	result 0.99	0.78	0.18	asserted 1.00
s2	The action for this theory is obtained by a higher derivative modification of Einstein's theory.	method 0.90	0.86	0.06	asserted 1.00
s3	We expect that our model can easily be generalized to solve the singularity problem also for anisotropic cosmologies.	future work 0.99	0.14	0.07	hedged possibility 0.68

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: theoretical result 1.00 · evidence from proof or derivation 0.99.

What was examined, and what was not

sources read

arXiv listing abstract v1

not examined

full text
figures and tables
references and citing sentences
relations to other papers

levels run

P abstract

not run

S sections
T body sentences
C citations
R cross-paper relations

Every quoted sentence on this record is the authors'. Every label is from Pith's closed vocabulary, with the probability shown beside it. Every number in the measurements table is the authors', checked by code. Record as JSON

References

Works cited (26)

[1]

R. Penrose, Phys. Rev. Lett. 14, 57 (1965); S. Hawking, Proc. R. Soc. London , A300, 182 (1967)

View on Pith 1965
[2]

C. Misner, K. Thorne and J. Wheeler, Gravitation (Freeman , New York, 1972)

View on Pith 1972
[3]

R. Brandenberger and C. Vafa, Nucl. Phys. B316, 391 (1989); A. Tseytlin and C. Vafa, Nucl. Phys. B372, 443 (1992); G. Veneziano, Phys. Lett. B265, 287 (1991); M. Gasperini and G. Veneziano, Phys. Lett. B277, 256 (1992); M. Gasperini and G. Veneziano, “Pre–Big-Bang in String Cosm ology”, CERN preprint TH6572/92 (1992)

View on Pith 1989
[4]

C. Clarke, Comm. Math. Phys. 41, 65 (1975)

View on Pith 1975
[5]

J. Narlikar and T. Padmanabhan, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 150, 289 (1983)

View on Pith 1983
[6]

M. Markov, Pis’ma Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 36, 214 (1982); M. Markov, Pis’ma Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz 46, 431 (1987); V. Ginsburg, V. Mukhanov and V. Frolov, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 94, 1 (1988)

View on Pith 1982
[7]

R. Penrose, in “General Relativity: An Einstein Centenar y”, ed. by S. Hawking and W. Israel (Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1979)

View on Pith 1979
[8]

V. Frolov, M. Markov and V. Mukhanov, Phys. Lett. B216, 272 (1989); V. Frolov, M. Markov and V. Mukhanov, Phys. Rev. D41, 383 (1990); D. Morgan, Phys. Rev. D43, 3144 (1991)

View on Pith 1989
[9]

S. Hawking, Phys. Rev. D14, 2460 (1976)

View on Pith 1976
[10]

C. Callen, S. Giddings, J. Harvey and A. Strominger, Phys. Rev. D45, R1005 (1992)

View on Pith 1992
[11]

V. Mukhanov and R. Brandenberger, Phys. Rev. Lett. 68, 1969 (1992)

View on Pith 1992
[12]

B. Altshuler, Class. Quant. Grav. 7, 189 (1990)

View on Pith 1990
[13]

R. Brandenberger, M. Mohazzab, V. Mukhanov, A. Sornborg er and M. Trodden, in preparation (1993)

View on Pith 1993
[14]

A. Guth, Phys. Rev. D23, 347 (1981). 25

View on Pith 1981
[15]

G. ’t Hooft and M. Veltman, Ann. Inst. H. Poincar´ e20, 69 (1974); A. Barvinsky and G. Vilkovisky, Phys. Rep. 119, 1 (1985)

View on Pith 1974
[16]

N. Birrell and P. Davies, “Quantum Fields in Curved Space ”, (Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1992)

View on Pith 1992
[17]

J. Scherk and J. Schwarz, Nucl. Phys. B81, 118 (1974); T. Yoneya, Prog. Theor. Phys. 51 1907 (1974); C. Lovelace, Phys. Lett. 135B, 75 (1984); E. Fradkin and A. Tseytlin, Nucl. Phys. B261, 1 (1985)

View on Pith 1974
[18]

M. Markov and V. Mukhanov, Nuovo Cimento 86B, 97 (1985)

View on Pith 1985
[19]

B. Whitt, Phys. Lett. B145 176 (1984)

View on Pith 1984
[20]

M. Born and L. Infeld, Proc. R. Soc. London A144, 425 (1934)

View on Pith 1934
[21]

R. Brandenberger, R. Kahn and W. Press, Phys. Rev. D28, 1809 (1983)

View on Pith 1983
[22]

see e.g. V. Arnold, Ordinary Diﬀerential Equations (MIT Press, Cambridge, 1973)

View on Pith 1973
[23]

T. Ruzmaikina and A. Ruzmaikin, JETP Lett. 30, 372 (1970); H. Nariai and K. Tomita, Prog. Theor. Phys. 46, 776 (1971); M. Giesswein and E. Steernwitz, Acta Phys. Austriaca 41, 41 (1975); V. Gurovich, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 73,369 (1977); J. Barrow and A. Ottewill, J. Phys. A16, 2757 (1983)

View on Pith 1970
[24]

A. Linde, Rep. Prog. Phys. 47, 925 (1984)

View on Pith 1984
[25]

A. Starobinski, Phys. Lett. B91, 99 (1980)

View on Pith 1980
[26]

B. Altshuler, in “Proc. of lst Int. A.D. Sakharov Confere nce”, Moscow, May 1991 (NOV A Science Publishing, Inc., New York, 1992). 26 Figure Captions Fig. 1 : Penrose diagram of an eternal black hole in Einstein gravi ty (a) and in the nonsingular Universe theory (b). The singularities (S) are replaced by d e Sitter phases (dS) which couple to Friedmann U...

View on Pith 1991

Forward citations

Cited by 26 Pith papers

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

From the Big Bang Theory to the Theory of a Stationary Universe
gr-qc 1993-06 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

In chaotic inflation with V ~ phi^n or e^{alpha phi}, the volume-weighted distribution of the scalar field approaches a stationary form concentrated below the Planck density, so the relative volume of the universe wit...
Non-Gaussianity in a Matter Bounce
astro-ph.CO 2009-03 conditional novelty 6.5 of 10

In a matter-bounce cosmology the three-point function of curvature perturbations has amplitude of order one, a mostly local shape, and a fixed negative sign, distinct from slow-roll inflation.
Affine ANEC selects the closed FRW branch for geodesically complete cosmology
gr-qc 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

Affine ANEC obstructs non-static flat and open FRW from being null geodesically complete while ANEC-satisfying, but allows explicit scalar-field realizations for closed FRW with NEC-respecting matter.
Tidal Deformation Bounds and Perturbation Transfer in Bounded Curvature Spacetimes
gr-qc 2026-02 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

Bounded tidal fields imply a rigorous limit on accumulated geodesic deviation set by τ* = λ_max^{-1/2} and a critical wavenumber k* ~ τ*^{-1} for perturbation transfer with exponential suppression at high k.
Stability of magnetic black holes in general nonlinear electrodynamics
gr-qc 2020-04 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

Sufficient conditions for the perturbative stability of magnetic black holes in general nonlinear electrodynamics are derived and applied to three models.

Show 21 more citing papers

Cosmological perturbations and stability of nonsingular cosmologies with limiting curvature
hep-th 2017-04 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

A new curvature invariant built from covariant derivatives of the Ricci scalar yields nonsingular cosmological backgrounds that avoid Ostrogradski, ghost, and gradient instabilities for most of the inflationary and ge...
Evolution of cosmological perturbations and the production of non-Gaussianities through a nonsingular bounce: Indications for a no-go theorem in single field matter bounce cosmologies
hep-th 2015-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Single-field matter bounce cosmologies with vacuum initial conditions appear unable to satisfy both the tensor-to-scalar ratio bound and the Planck non-Gaussianity bound at the same time.
G-Bounce
hep-th 2011-09 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Kinetic-gravity-braiding scalar fields generically produce ghost-free, gradient-stable bounces in a flat Friedmann universe, with a specific window of the braiding parameter and a late-time radiation or de Sitter attractor.
Emergent Universe and Genesis from the DHOST Cosmology
gr-qc 2020-09 conditional novelty 5.5 of 10

A DHOST-modified Galileon Genesis model exits its emergent Minkowski-like phase into radiation-like expansion with stable scalar and tensor perturbations, but scale-invariant primordial fluctuations require an externa...
DHOST Bounce
gr-qc 2020-02 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

Adding DHOST operators to a Horndeski bounce lifts the scalar sound speed above zero through the bounce, evading the no-go theorem for nonsingular cosmologies in Horndeski/Galileon theories.
Higher Derivative Mimetic Gravity
astro-ph.CO 2017-09 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

Adding classified quintic higher-derivative terms to mimetic gravity, with coefficients tuned to preserve the background equations, can in principle remove the linear ghost and gradient instabilities of mimetic dark m...
Matter Bounce Cosmology with the f(T) Gravity
astro-ph.CO 2011-04 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

A torsion-based modified gravity, f(T), can be engineered to produce a nonsingular matter bounce whose scalar perturbations have a scale-invariant spectrum and a background-dependent sound speed.
Cyclic cosmology from Lagrange-multiplier modified gravity
astro-ph.CO 2010-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

By inverse reconstruction, a Lagrange-multiplier modified gravity model can be made to oscillate cyclically without a singularity, and in the scalar branch its perturbations pass smoothly through the bounce.
A Matter Bounce By Means of Ghost Condensation
hep-th 2010-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

A ghost-condensate scalar field with a hand-chosen inverse-power potential yields a non-singular matter bounce whose observable-scale perturbations survive the bounce.
On the Generation of a Scale-Invariant Spectrum of Adiabatic Fluctuations in Cosmological Models with a Contracting Phase
hep-th 2001-12 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

A scalar field with a pressureless equation of state in a contracting universe produces a scale-invariant spectrum of curvature perturbations that, the authors argue, passes through a nonsingular bounce into the expan...
The classical double copy of non-singular black holes
gr-qc 2020-07 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

For the T-dual (Bardeen-like) regular black hole and its de Sitter extension, the single-copy gauge field stays finite everywhere, and its electric field passes through zero between any two horizons.
Singular cosmological evolution using canonical and phantom scalar fields
gr-qc 2015-03 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

A two-field scalar-tensor model, one canonical and one ghost, reproduces a Hubble rate containing a Type IV singularity with a stable critical point, whereas the single-field reconstruction develops an instability at ...
Superbounce and Loop Quantum Ekpyrotic Cosmologies from Modified Gravity: $F(R)$, $F(G)$ and $F(T)$ Theories
gr-qc 2015-01 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

Explicit F(R), F(G), and F(T) gravity forms are reconstructed that reproduce the superbounce and loop quantum ekpyrotic backgrounds, with linear stability holding conditionally or fully.
Bounce and cyclic cosmology in extended nonlinear massive gravity
astro-ph.CO 2012-07 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

Extended nonlinear massive gravity can accommodate non-singular bounces and cyclic expansion, but the cyclic solutions are reconstructed by imposing a desired oscillatory scale factor and solving for the potential or ...
RRR fluctuations from non-singular bounce
gr-qc 2026-09 reject novelty 3.0 of 10

The essay asserts that contraction plus a non-singular bounce evades a no-go bound and yields solar-mass primordial black holes at about 60 total e-folds, but the supporting loop calculation is deferred to the author'...
A Critical Review of Classical Bouncing Cosmologies
astro-ph.CO 2014-06 accept novelty 3.0 of 10

Most bouncing cosmologies do not yet match current data or avoid known instabilities, but a few, notably the super-bounce and S-brane bounce, remain viable research directions.
The Matter Bounce Alternative to Inflationary Cosmology
astro-ph.CO 2012-06 accept novelty 3.0 of 10

A contracting, matter-dominated universe that bounces reproduces the near-scale-invariant primordial spectrum usually attributed to inflation, and this review lays out how and with what observable consequences.
Introduction to Early Universe Cosmology
astro-ph.CO 2011-03 accept novelty 3.0 of 10

Cosmological perturbation theory applied to inflation, a matter bounce, and string gas cosmology shows all three can produce a scale-invariant spectrum, with distinguishable predictions in tensor tilt and non-Gaussianity.
Bouncing Cosmologies: Progress and Problems
hep-th 2016-03 accept novelty 2.0 of 10

Bouncing cosmologies can reproduce inflation's near scale-invariant spectrum of primordial perturbations without a singularity or trans-Planckian modes, but every known implementation needs new physics and none is yet...
f(T) teleparallel gravity and cosmology
gr-qc 2015-11 conditional novelty 2.0 of 10

The review argues that f(T) teleparallel gravity can explain cosmic acceleration and fit the thermal expansion history, while cataloguing its cosmological, astrophysical, and theoretical open issues.
The Null Energy Condition and its violation
hep-th 2014-01 conditional novelty 2.0 of 10

A review argues that Galileon scalar theories can violate the Null Energy Condition with stable, subluminal backgrounds, enabling early-universe scenarios such as Genesis and a laboratory universe.

How the literature uses it

60 arXiv papers cite this in 91 sentences

Each citing sentence is taken from the citing paper's LaTeX source and typed by Pith's classifier. A label appears at probability 0.8 or more (0.95 for support), a contest at 0.7 or more; the quoted words are the citing authors'. How each label was checked · JSON

Papers citing it · 49 sentences without a confident label

Uses its method or tool 1 paper

This idea was used by Brandenberger, Mukhanov, and Sornborger [ref] for homogeneous and isotropic spacetimes.

Resolution of Curvature Singularities in Higher Derivative Gravity · Motivation and Results · 0.83

Compares with it 3 papers

The non-singular evolutional paths found in this paper, in contrast to the seminal Starobinsky type of evolution [ref] , are generic in the sense that they do not depend on specific choice of initial conditions in the phase space nor were carefully designated [ref] .

A new generic and structurally stable cosmological model without singularity · Conclusions · 0.96
This is in contrast to the isotopic model [ref] where exponential growth of $ϕ$ is generic.

Resolution of Curvature Singularities in Higher Derivative Gravity · Large $ϕ$ limit · 1.00
Non-singular bouncing cosmologies have been successfully realised in this framework [ref] , but black hole space-times remain singular [ref] ; this is similar to what we find here for the limiting curvature mimetic gravity theory proposed in [ref] .

The singularity in mimetic Kantowski-Sachs cosmology · Introduction · 0.81

Cites it as background 31 papers

Let us review the gravitational theory with limiting curvature scalars proposed in Refs. [ref] .

Singularities in Spherically Symmetric Solutions with Limited Curvature Invariants · Gravitational Theory with Limiting Curvatures · 0.99
The aforementioned FLRW background geometry is expressed with the metric structure ds^2 = a^2(τ)(-dτ^2+dx^2), where now the scale factor $a(τ)$ can be chosen in the following two conditions to identify the pre-inflationary phases [ref] of our framework, 228 In the Contraction phase, the scale factor obeys the power law solution a(τ) = a_0(τ/τ_0)^1/ϵ-1, where for the choice of parameter in, $1 < ϵ< 3$, the value $ϵ=3/2$ results in a matter contraction phase.

Negative non-Gaussianity as a salvager for PBHs with PTAs in bounce · Bounce from EFT framework · 0.93
Further modifications of mimetic gravity were considered in Ref. [ref] , where a new term $f(ϕ)$ depending on the d'Alemebertian of the scalar field was included in the gravitational Lagrangian.[The simplest model with $f(χ)$ quadratic was considered earlier in Ref. [ref] .] In particular, the idea of limiting curvature can be implemented in mimetic gravity by means of a suitable choice for the newly introduced function $f$, which allows for singularity resolution in cosmology [ref] and black holes [ref] .[An alternative realization of the limiting curvature hypothesis by means of higher order curvature invariants was studied in Ref. [ref] (see also earlier works [ref] ).

Limiting curvature mimetic gravity for group field theory condensates · Limiting Curvature Mimetic Gravity · 0.92

Discussion

Disagree with the review, or know something it missed? Leave a comment, highlight any passage above to comment on it, or challenge this review formally.

[1] [1]

R. Penrose, Phys. Rev. Lett. 14, 57 (1965); S. Hawking, Proc. R. Soc. London , A300, 182 (1967)

View on Pith 1965

[2] [2]

C. Misner, K. Thorne and J. Wheeler, Gravitation (Freeman , New York, 1972)

View on Pith 1972

[3] [3]

R. Brandenberger and C. Vafa, Nucl. Phys. B316, 391 (1989); A. Tseytlin and C. Vafa, Nucl. Phys. B372, 443 (1992); G. Veneziano, Phys. Lett. B265, 287 (1991); M. Gasperini and G. Veneziano, Phys. Lett. B277, 256 (1992); M. Gasperini and G. Veneziano, “Pre–Big-Bang in String Cosm ology”, CERN preprint TH6572/92 (1992)

View on Pith 1989

[4] [4]

C. Clarke, Comm. Math. Phys. 41, 65 (1975)

View on Pith 1975

[5] [5]

J. Narlikar and T. Padmanabhan, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 150, 289 (1983)

View on Pith 1983

[6] [6]

M. Markov, Pis’ma Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 36, 214 (1982); M. Markov, Pis’ma Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz 46, 431 (1987); V. Ginsburg, V. Mukhanov and V. Frolov, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 94, 1 (1988)

View on Pith 1982

[7] [7]

R. Penrose, in “General Relativity: An Einstein Centenar y”, ed. by S. Hawking and W. Israel (Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1979)

View on Pith 1979

[8] [8]

V. Frolov, M. Markov and V. Mukhanov, Phys. Lett. B216, 272 (1989); V. Frolov, M. Markov and V. Mukhanov, Phys. Rev. D41, 383 (1990); D. Morgan, Phys. Rev. D43, 3144 (1991)

View on Pith 1989

[9] [9]

S. Hawking, Phys. Rev. D14, 2460 (1976)

View on Pith 1976

[10] [10]

C. Callen, S. Giddings, J. Harvey and A. Strominger, Phys. Rev. D45, R1005 (1992)

View on Pith 1992

[11] [11]

V. Mukhanov and R. Brandenberger, Phys. Rev. Lett. 68, 1969 (1992)

View on Pith 1992

[12] [12]

B. Altshuler, Class. Quant. Grav. 7, 189 (1990)

View on Pith 1990

[13] [13]

R. Brandenberger, M. Mohazzab, V. Mukhanov, A. Sornborg er and M. Trodden, in preparation (1993)

View on Pith 1993

[14] [14]

A. Guth, Phys. Rev. D23, 347 (1981). 25

View on Pith 1981

[15] [15]

G. ’t Hooft and M. Veltman, Ann. Inst. H. Poincar´ e20, 69 (1974); A. Barvinsky and G. Vilkovisky, Phys. Rep. 119, 1 (1985)

View on Pith 1974

[16] [16]

N. Birrell and P. Davies, “Quantum Fields in Curved Space ”, (Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1992)

View on Pith 1992

[17] [17]

J. Scherk and J. Schwarz, Nucl. Phys. B81, 118 (1974); T. Yoneya, Prog. Theor. Phys. 51 1907 (1974); C. Lovelace, Phys. Lett. 135B, 75 (1984); E. Fradkin and A. Tseytlin, Nucl. Phys. B261, 1 (1985)

View on Pith 1974

[18] [18]

M. Markov and V. Mukhanov, Nuovo Cimento 86B, 97 (1985)

View on Pith 1985

[19] [19]

B. Whitt, Phys. Lett. B145 176 (1984)

View on Pith 1984

[20] [20]

M. Born and L. Infeld, Proc. R. Soc. London A144, 425 (1934)

View on Pith 1934

[21] [21]

R. Brandenberger, R. Kahn and W. Press, Phys. Rev. D28, 1809 (1983)

View on Pith 1983

[22] [22]

see e.g. V. Arnold, Ordinary Diﬀerential Equations (MIT Press, Cambridge, 1973)

View on Pith 1973

[23] [23]

T. Ruzmaikina and A. Ruzmaikin, JETP Lett. 30, 372 (1970); H. Nariai and K. Tomita, Prog. Theor. Phys. 46, 776 (1971); M. Giesswein and E. Steernwitz, Acta Phys. Austriaca 41, 41 (1975); V. Gurovich, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 73,369 (1977); J. Barrow and A. Ottewill, J. Phys. A16, 2757 (1983)

View on Pith 1970

[24] [24]

A. Linde, Rep. Prog. Phys. 47, 925 (1984)

View on Pith 1984

[25] [25]

A. Starobinski, Phys. Lett. B91, 99 (1980)

View on Pith 1980

[26] [26]

B. Altshuler, in “Proc. of lst Int. A.D. Sakharov Confere nce”, Moscow, May 1991 (NOV A Science Publishing, Inc., New York, 1992). 26 Figure Captions Fig. 1 : Penrose diagram of an eternal black hole in Einstein gravi ty (a) and in the nonsingular Universe theory (b). The singularities (S) are replaced by d e Sitter phases (dS) which couple to Friedmann U...

View on Pith 1991