content_image/404576.jpg content_image/404574.jpg content_image/404577.jpg content_image/404573.jpg content_image/404566.jpg content_image/404567.jpg content_image/404565.jpg content_image/404570.jpg
no scalar force and GR is recovered, so µ = 1. On the other hand, for r < r$_{M}$ , the effect of the mass can be neglected and we get the same result as for the massless case. Thus, for M ̸ = 0, µ becomes scale-dependent. This BD theory contains two well known modified 

gravity models as special cases: f ( R ) gravity and the DGP braneworld model. Firstly, in f ( R ) gravity we have ω BD = 0 [34]. In this case µ = 4 / 3 for Ma/k ≪ 1 and µ = 1 for Ma/k ≫ 1. In f ( R ), though, G$_{N}$ can be time- dependent, which effectively modifies Σ and µ . However, its dependence on time is strongly constrained by obser- vations and we can safely neglect such an effect. Sec- ondly, in the DGP model we have ω BD = (3 / 2)( β ( t ) − 1) with β ( t ) = 1 − 2 Hr$_{c}$ (1 + ˙ H/ 3 H $^{2}$), where ˙ H is the time derivative of the Hubble parameter and r$_{c}$ ∼ H − 1 0 is the cross-over scale, which is a parameter in this model [33]. Here M = 0 for quasi-static perturbations. We should note that 3 + 2 ω BD < 0 and µ < 1 in DGP indicating a theoretical pathology of the model [37]. 

The dark energy can in principle support long-lived fluctuations [38–46]. In these clustering dark energy (cDE) models the baryons will fall into the potential wells created by both the dark matter and energy. Here we consider a general dark energy fluid with a time-varying barotropic equation of state parameter, w$_{de}$ ≡ P$_{de}$/ρ$_{de}$ , and some scalar anisotropic stress σ$_{de}$ . However, in this section we restrict the dark energy to be minimally cou- pled to gravity and (dark and baryonic) matter, which means that here ρ$_{i}$ = ρ s i for i = m, de ; and we can treat the baryons and the dark matter as a single pressureless perfect fluid. 

Given the different physical behaviour of matter and dark energy the total density fluctuation will not be a simple linear function of δ$_{m}$ but acquires a contribution from the dark energy. The Poisson equation in cDE mod- els is then given by 

The dark energy anisotropic stress, σ$_{de}$ , enters the second Einstein constraint equation as 

<img src='content_image/404576.jpg'>

Because the evolution of the background energy densities in cDE is not modified with respect to the sDE reference, we have ρ s m = ρ$_{m}$ . So the definition of Q in Eq. (5) directly implies 

for cDE models. By combining the two constraints we find that the η parameter here is 

## IV. CLUSTERING DARK ENERGY 

<img src='content_image/404574.jpg'>

<img src='content_image/404577.jpg'>

<img src='content_image/404573.jpg'>

As we want to get a feeling for the time- and scale- dependence of Q and η we take a look at the evolution equations of δ$_{m}$ and δ$_{de}$ without specifying the dark en- ergy pressure and anisotropic stress perturbations. Later we will consider a simple model for the pressure pertur- bation and a specific model for the anisotropic stress of dark energy motivated by the possibility of having scale- invariant growth of dark energy perturbations. 

From the energy-momentum conservation of the mat- ter and the dark energy we can derive second-order dif- ferential equations for δ$_{m}$ and δ$_{de}$ in the quasi-static ap- proximation where time derivatives of the gravitational potentials are neglected. For the matter component we find the well-known growth equation 

with the source term as found from the two Einstein con- straint equations above: 

<img src='content_image/404566.jpg'>

Here Ω$_{i}$ = Ω$_{i}$( t ) are the fractional energy densities as functions of time. For the general barotropic dark energy fluid perturbations we find the evolution equation 

<img src='content_image/404567.jpg'>

A priori there are no evolution equations for δP$_{de}$ and σ$_{de}$ available. To close the system we need some relation between the pressure and anisotropic stress perturbations and the density perturbation. 

Formally, cDE can predict any Q ( a, k ) and η ( a, k ). From Eqs. (23) and (24), we can derive δ$_{de}$ and σ$_{de}$ in terms of Q and η . Then substituting them into Eq. (27), we can find a solution for δP$_{de}$ . However, in physical models, δP$_{de}$ and σ$_{de}$ should be determined by micro- physics of the dark energy and it is very unlikely that we have enough degrees of freedom to fine-tune these quantities to get any desirable Q and η . Of course it is a formidable task to find a theoretical prior for dark energy clustering. In the following, we consider a toy model for δP$_{de}$ and σ$_{de}$ to get some idea. 

The pressure perturbation is related to the density per- turbation via the speed of sound. Usually one defines the speed of sound in the rest-frame of the fluid where the pressure perturbations are assumed to be adiabatic: ˆ c 2 s ≡ ( δP$_{de}$/δρ$_{de}$ ) rest . The transformation back into the Newtonian gauge leads to a correction to δP$_{de}$ which is proportional to the velocity potential, θ$_{de}$/k $^{2}$. Here we simply parameterise the pressure perturbation as 

<img src='content_image/404565.jpg'>

<img src='content_image/404570.jpg'>

