Non-linear dynamics of the minimal theory of massive gravity. (arXiv:2011.14697v2 [astro-ph.CO] UPDATED)
<a href="http://arxiv.org/find/astro-ph/1/au:+Hagala_R/0/1/0/all/0/1">R. Hagala</a>, <a href="http://arxiv.org/find/astro-ph/1/au:+Felice_A/0/1/0/all/0/1">A. De Felice</a>, <a href="http://arxiv.org/find/astro-ph/1/au:+Mota_D/0/1/0/all/0/1">D. F. Mota</a>, <a href="http://arxiv.org/find/astro-ph/1/au:+Mukohyama_S/0/1/0/all/0/1">S. Mukohyama</a>

We investigate cosmological signatures of the minimal theory of massive
gravity (MTMG). To this aim, we simulate the normal branch of the MTMG by
employing the textsc{Ramses} mbox{$N$-body} code and extending it with an
effective gravitational constant $G_{rm eff}$. We implement an
environment-dependent $G_{rm eff}$ as a function of the graviton mass and the
local energy density as predicted by MTMG. We find that halo density profiles
are not a good probe for MTMG, because deviations from general relativity (GR)
are quite small. Similarly, the matter power spectra show deviations only at
the percentage level. However, we find a clear difference between MTMG and GR
in that voids are denser in MTMG than in GR. As measuring void profiles is
quite a complex task from an observational point of view, a better probe of
MTMG would be the halo abundances. In this case, MTMG creates a larger amount
of massive halos, while there is a suppression in the abundance of small halos.

We investigate cosmological signatures of the minimal theory of massive
gravity (MTMG). To this aim, we simulate the normal branch of the MTMG by
employing the textsc{Ramses} mbox{$N$-body} code and extending it with an
effective gravitational constant $G_{rm eff}$. We implement an
environment-dependent $G_{rm eff}$ as a function of the graviton mass and the
local energy density as predicted by MTMG. We find that halo density profiles
are not a good probe for MTMG, because deviations from general relativity (GR)
are quite small. Similarly, the matter power spectra show deviations only at
the percentage level. However, we find a clear difference between MTMG and GR
in that voids are denser in MTMG than in GR. As measuring void profiles is
quite a complex task from an observational point of view, a better probe of
MTMG would be the halo abundances. In this case, MTMG creates a larger amount
of massive halos, while there is a suppression in the abundance of small halos.

http://arxiv.org/icons/sfx.gif