Next Article in Journal
The Updated Version of the A.Ne.Mo.S. GLE Alert System: The Case of the Ground-Level Enhancement GLE73 on 28 October 2021
Previous Article in Journal
Periodic Variations of Solar Corona Index during 1939–2020
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

How Inflationary Gravitons Affect the Force of Gravity

Universe 2022, 8(7), 376; https://doi.org/10.3390/universe8070376
by Lintao Tan 1, Nikolaos Christos Tsamis 2 and Richard Paul Woodard 1,*
Reviewer 1:
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Universe 2022, 8(7), 376; https://doi.org/10.3390/universe8070376
Submission received: 27 June 2022 / Revised: 5 July 2022 / Accepted: 6 July 2022 / Published: 8 July 2022
(This article belongs to the Section Gravitation)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This is rather interesting and technically very-well prepared paper on the calculation of graviton self-energy on de Sitter background. After the calculation of renormalised quantity the authors discuss quantum-corrected Einstein equations.They calculate the corresponding corrections to Newtonian potential. I fully recommend this ms for publication.

Minor remark which the authors may wish or wish not comment in the conclusion. It is rather well-known that modified gravities ALSO correct Newtonian potentials (see reviews e-Print: 1108.6266;e-Print:1011.0544). Then, just the same correction to Newtonian potential maybe provided by different modified gravity? 

  •  

Author Response

We are grateful to the referee for his favorable review. We have followed his suggestion to discuss possible degeneracy with classical modified gravity models by inserting a paragraph just before the end of section 4. The new text is on pages 30-31, lines 419-429.

Reviewer 2 Report

In this manuscript, the authors compute renormalized graviton self-energy on de Sitter background and use this result to analyse the effect of point mass. The work is rather technical, but it brings out new important and interesting results. I am very much impressed. I believe, this work has to be published almost as it is. I have a couple of small comments which the authors can easily address. On Fig.1, the upper part of 3rd digram has been cut out at least on the pdf which was sent to me for a review. On the first line of sec. 2.2.3 the first "factors" needs to be deleted.

Author Response

We are grateful to the referee for his positive review. We have corrected the typo on page 16, line 197. The problem with the graph does not show up when we LaTeX the journal's file. Perhaps it is due to something their machine does. We will check carefully to see that the figure is correct when the proof copy comes back for editing.

Back to TopTop