CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 813Pulsars and Gravitational Waves ResearchCosmology and Gravitation TheoriesNoncommutative and Quantum Gravity Theories

Strong Constraints on Cosmological Gravity from GW170817 and GRB 170817A

Open access
Baker, T., Bellini, E., Ferreira, P. G., Lagos, M., Noller, J., Sawicki, I.·2017·Physical Review Letters
DOI 10.1103/physrevlett.119.251301
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

The detection of an electromagnetic counterpart (GRB 170817A) to the gravitational-wave signal (GW170817) from the merger of two neutron stars opens a completely new arena for testing theories of gravity. We show that this measurement allows us to place stringent constraints on general scalar-tensor and vector-tensor theories, while allowing us to place an independent bound on the graviton mass in bimetric theories of gravity. These constraints severely reduce the viable range of cosmological models that have been proposed as alternatives to general relativistic cosmology.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1103/physrevlett.119.251301

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • For Generalized Einstein-Aether theories, the GW speed constraint makes the effective Planck mass reduce to the GR value, while the cosmological background evolution remains different from GR.

    “The constraints imposes on Generalized Einstein-Aether theories (Jacobson and Mattingly 2001; Zlosnik et al. 2007) the condition (see Sect. 7.3.2) which makes the effective Planck mass reduce to the GR value, while the cosmological background evolution remains different from GR (Baker et al. 2017).”

    From Testing general relativity in cosmology (2019) · cites this paper as Baker et al. (2017)

  • The arrival time difference of 1.7 s between GW170817 and GRB170817A and the distance to the source yield a stringent bound on the fractional difference between the speed of gravitational waves and the speed of light.

    “Using the arrival time difference of seconds and the value of into the above equation and translating the results to (323) gives the stringent bound327”

    From Testing general relativity in cosmology (2019) · cites this paper as Baker et al. (2017)

  • For Generalized Proca theories, the GW speed constraint imposes either a fine-tuned cancellation of terms or that the terms related to c_gw be identically zero; the latter gives a branch with cosmological evolution different from GR with a rescaled Planck mass.

    “For the Generalized Proca theories (Tasinato 2014; Heisenberg 2014), the condition imposes either a fine tuned cancellation of terms in the action or imposes that the terms related to be all identically zero. The latter natural interpretation gives a branch with a cosmological evolution different from GR with a rescaled Planck mass in the modified Friedmann equation (Baker et al. 2017).”

    From Testing general relativity in cosmology (2019) · cites this paper as Baker et al. (2017)

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 67

  1. B. P. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific Collaboration and Virgo Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 161101 (2017). · DOI
  2. A. Goldstein et al., Astrophys. J. Lett. 848, L14 (2017). · DOI
  3. V. Savchenko et al., Astrophys. J. Lett. 848, L15 (2017). · DOI
  4. B. P. Abbott et al., Astrophys. J. Lett. 848, L13 (2017). · DOI
  5. B. P. Abbott et al., Astrophys. J. Lett. 848, L12 (2017). · DOI
  6. L. Amendola, M. Kunz, M. Motta, I. D. Saltas, and I. Sawicki, Phys. Rev. D 87, 023501 (2013). · DOI
  7. L. Amendola, G. Ballesteros, and V. Pettorino, Phys. Rev. D 90, 043009 (2014). · DOI
  8. E. V. Linder, Phys. Rev. D 90, 083536 (2014). · DOI
  9. M. Raveri, C. Baccigalupi, A. Silvestri, and S.-Y. Zhou, Phys. Rev. D 91, 061501 (2015). · DOI
  10. I. D. Saltas, I. Sawicki, L. Amendola, and M. Kunz, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 191101 (2014). · DOI · Paper page
  11. L. Lombriser and A. Taylor, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 03 (2016) 031. · DOI · Paper page
  12. D. Bettoni, J. M. Ezquiaga, K. Hinterbichler, and M. Zumalacarregui, Phys. Rev. D 95, 084029 (2017). · DOI
  13. I. Sawicki, I. D. Saltas, M. Motta, L. Amendola, and M. Kunz, Phys. Rev. D 95, 083520 (2017). · DOI · Paper page
  14. E. Bellini and I. Sawicki, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 07 (2014) 050. · DOI · Paper page
  15. D. Blas, M. M. Ivanov, I. Sawicki, and S. Sibiryakov, Pis'ma Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 103, 708 (2016) [JETP Lett. 103, 624 (2016)]. · DOI
  16. N. Cornish, D. Blas, and G. Nardini, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 161102 (2017). · DOI
  17. E. Bellini, A. J. Cuesta, R. Jimenez, and L. Verde, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 02 (2016) 053. · DOI
  18. D. Alonso, E. Bellini, P. G. Ferreira, and M. Zumalacarregui, Phys. Rev. D 95, 063502 (2017). · DOI · Paper page
  19. G. W. Horndeski, Int. J. Theor. Phys. 10, 363 (1974). · DOI · Paper page
  20. C. Deffayet, X. Gao, D. A. Steer, and G. Zahariade, Phys. Rev. D 84, 064039 (2011). · DOI · Paper page
  21. A. De Felice and S. Tsujikawa, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 02 (2012) 007. · DOI
  22. X. Gao and D. A. Steer, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 12 (2011) 019. · DOI
  23. M. Zumalacarregui, T. S. Koivisto, and D. F. Mota, Phys. Rev. D 87, 083010 (2013). · DOI
  24. J. Gleyzes, D. Langlois, F. Piazza, and F. Vernizzi, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 08 (2013) 025. · DOI
  25. A. Nicolis, R. Rattazzi, and E. Trincherini, Phys. Rev. D 79, 064036 (2009). · DOI · Paper page
  26. M. A. Luty, M. Porrati, and R. Rattazzi, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2003) 029. · DOI · Paper page
  27. G. Goon, K. Hinterbichler, A. Joyce, and M. Trodden, J. High Energy Phys. 11 (2016) 100. · DOI
  28. I. D. Saltas and V. Vitagliano, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 05 (2017) 020. · DOI
  29. D. Pirtskhalava, L. Santoni, E. Trincherini, and F. Vernizzi, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 09 (2015) 007. · DOI
  30. P. Creminelli and F. Vernizzi, following Letter, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 251302 (2017). · DOI · Paper page
  31. J. Wang, L. Hui, and J. Khoury, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 241301 (2012). · DOI · Paper page
  32. L. Lombriser and N. A. Lima, Phys. Lett. B 765, 382 (2017). · DOI · Paper page
  33. P. Brax, C. Burrage, and A.-C. Davis, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 03 (2016) 004. · DOI
  34. J.-P. Uzan, Living Rev. Relativity 14, 2 (2011). · DOI
  35. M. Zumalacarregui and J. Garcia-Bellido, Phys. Rev. D 89, 064046 (2014). · DOI
  36. J. Gleyzes, D. Langlois, F. Piazza, and F. Vernizzi, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 211101 (2015). · DOI
  37. C. Deffayet, G. Esposito-Farese, and D. A. Steer, Phys. Rev. D 92, 084013 (2015). · DOI
  38. D. Langlois and K. Noui, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 02 (2016) 034. · DOI · Paper page
  39. J. B. Achour, M. Crisostomi, K. Koyama, D. Langlois, K. Noui, and G. Tasinato, J. High Energy Phys. 12 (2016) 100. · DOI
  40. D. Langlois, M. Mancarella, K. Noui, and F. Vernizzi, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 05 (2017) 033. · DOI · Paper page
  41. C. Deffayet, O. Pujolas, I. Sawicki, and A. Vikman, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 10 (2010) 026. · DOI · Paper page
  42. O. Pujolas, I. Sawicki, and A. Vikman, J. High Energy Phys. 11 (2011) 156. · DOI
  43. T. Jacobson and D. Mattingly, Phys. Rev. D 64, 024028 (2001). · DOI · Paper page
  44. T. G. Zlosnik, P. G. Ferreira, and G. D. Starkman, Phys. Rev. D 75, 044017 (2007). · DOI · Paper page
  45. G. Tasinato, J. High Energy Phys. 04 (2014) 067. · DOI
  46. L. Heisenberg, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 05 (2014) 015. · DOI
  47. E. Allys, P. Peter, and Y. Rodriguez, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 02 (2016) 004. · DOI
  48. J. B. Jimenez and L. Heisenberg, Phys. Lett. B 757, 405 (2016). · DOI
  49. A. De Felice, L. Heisenberg, R. Kase, S. Mukohyama, S. Tsujikawa, and Y.-l. Zhang, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 06 (2016) 048. · DOI
  50. L. Heisenberg, R. Kase, and S. Tsujikawa, Phys. Lett. B 760, 617 (2016). · DOI
  51. C. de Rham, G. Gabadadze, and A. J. Tolley, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 231101 (2011). · DOI · Paper page
  52. C. de Rham and G. Gabadadze, Phys. Rev. D 82, 044020 (2010). · DOI · Paper page
  53. S. Hassan and R. A. Rosen, J. High Energy Phys. 02 (2012) 126. · DOI · Paper page
  54. B. P. Abbott et al. (Virgo, LIGO Scientific Collaborations), Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 221101 (2016). · DOI
  55. C. de Rham, J. T. Deskins, A. J. Tolley, and S.-Y. Zhou, Rev. Mod. Phys. 89, 025004 (2017). · DOI
  56. E. Babichev, L. Marzola, M. Raidal, A. Schmidt-May, F. Urban, H. Veermae, and M. von Strauss, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 09 (2016) 016. · DOI
  57. X. Chu and C. Garcia-Cely, Phys. Rev. D 96, 103519 (2017). · DOI
  58. N. L. G. Albornoz, A. Schmidt-May, and M. von Strauss, arXiv:1709.05128. · arXiv
  59. G. Cusin, R. Durrer, P. Guarato, and M. Motta, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 05 (2015) 030. · DOI · Paper page
  60. A. De Felice, T. Nakamura, and T. Tanaka, Prog. Theor. Exp. Phys. 2014, 43E01 (2014). · DOI
  61. T. Narikawa, K. Ueno, H. Tagoshi, T. Tanaka, N. Kanda, and T. Nakamura, Phys. Rev. D 91, 062007 (2015). · DOI
  62. K. Max, M. Platscher, and J. Smirnov, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 111101 (2017). · DOI
  63. P. Brax, A.-C. Davis, and J. Noller, Phys. Rev. D 96, 023518 (2017). · DOI
  64. J. Renk, M. Zumalacárregui, F. Montanari, and A. Barreira, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 10 (2017) 020. · DOI
  65. J. Sakstein and B. Jain, this issue, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 251303 (2017). · DOI
  66. J. M. Ezquiaga and M. Zumalacárregui, this issue, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 251304 (2017). · DOI · Paper page
  67. H. Wang et al., arXiv:1710.05805. · arXiv

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Baker, T., Bellini, E., Ferreira, P. G., Lagos, M., Noller, J., & Sawicki, I.
Affiliations
  • University of Oxford (GB)
  • University of Chicago (US)
  • ETH Zurich (CH)
  • FZU - Institute of Physics of the Czech Academy of Sciences (CZ)
ORCID
Venue
Physical Review Letters
Publisher
American Physical Society (APS)
Published
2017-12-18
Volume
119
Issue
25
Pages
251301-251301
ISSN
  • 0031-9007 (ISSN-L)
  • 1079-7114
DOI
10.1103/physrevlett.119.251301
OpenAlex
W2766528830
Cited by
813
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 37 · 2025: 55 · 2024: 60 · 2023: 62 · 2022: 66 · 2021: 99 · 2020: 123 · 2019: 141 · 2018: 164 · 2017: 6
FWCI
64.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
link.aps.org/licenses/aps-default-license (vor)
Locations
  • Physical Review Letters (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • ASEP (submittedVersion, public-domain)
  • Queen Mary Research Online (Queen Mary University of London) (submittedVersion)
  • RUNG (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
  • University of Oxford
  • H2020 European Research Council
  • Science and Technology Facilities Council
  • University of Edinburgh
  • University of Chicago
  • Kavli Foundation
  • European Regional Development Fund
  • Ministerstvo Školství, Mládeže a T?lovýchovy
  • BIPAC
  • Walter Haefner Foundation
  • ETH Zurich Foundation
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Pulsars and Gravitational Waves Research
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Cosmology and Gravitation Theories
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Statistical and Nonlinear Physics › Noncommutative and Quantum Gravity Theories
Keywords
GW170817, GRB 170817A, neutron star mergers, electromagnetic counterparts, tests of gravity, scalar-tensor gravity, vector-tensor theories, graviton mass, bimetric theory, alternative cosmology

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review