Comments on (super)luminality
Claudia de Rham, Gregory Gabadadze, Andrew J. Tolley

TL;DR
This paper critiques a superluminal solution in massive gravity, showing it is unphysical due to instabilities and non-physical stress-tensors, and presents a stable, subluminal alternative background.
Contribution
It demonstrates that the superluminal solution is unphysical and introduces a stable, subluminal background in massive gravity.
Findings
The superluminal solution is unstable and unphysical.
A stable, subluminal background exists in the same setup.
The superluminal solution has a non-physical stress-tensor with complex eigenvalues.
Abstract
Recently, in an interesting work arXiv:1106.3972 a solution of the equations of motion of massive gravity was discussed, and it was shown that one of the fluctuations on that solution is superluminal. It was also stated that this rules out massive gravity. Here we find that the solution itself is rather unphysical. For this we show that there is another mode on the same background which grows and overcomes the background in an arbitrarily short period of time, that can be excited by a negligible cost in energy. This solution is triggered by the parameter governing the superluminality. Furthermore, we also show that the solution, if viewed as a perfect fluid, has no rest frame, or that the Lorentz transformation that is needed to boost to the rest frame is superluminal itself. The stress-tensor of this fluid has complex eigenvalues, and could not be obtained from any physically sensible…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsCosmology and Gravitation Theories · Black Holes and Theoretical Physics · Dark Matter and Cosmic Phenomena
