In this paper, we have investigated one of the alternative theories to dark matter named MOdified Gravity (MOG) by testing its ability to describe the local dynamics of the Milky Way in vertical and transverse directions with the baryonic matter. MOG is designed to interpret the dynamics of galaxies and cluster of galaxies without the need for dark matter. We use local observational data such as the vertical dispersion, rotation curve, surface density and number density of stars in the Milky Way to obtained the parameters of MOG and the baryonic component of MW by implementing a Bayesian approach to the parameter estimation based on a Markov Chain Monte Carlo method. We compare our results with the dark matter model of MW. The two models of MOG and CDM are able to describe equally well the rotation curve and the vertical dynamics of stars in the local MW. The best values for the free parameters of MOG in this analysis is obtained as $\alpha = 8.99 \pm 0.02 $ and $\mu =0.054\pm 0.005$ kpc$^{-1}$. Also, we obtain the parameters of the generalized gNFW model in the dark matter model. Our best value of bulge mass from MOG is $(1.06 \pm 0.26)\times10^{10}\rm M_{\odot}$ which is consistent with the estimations form the microlensing observations.

Cameron {\it et al.}~2019 (hereafter C19) recommends a more cautious and rigorous approach to statistical analysis in astronomy. We welcome this particular side of their communication as it helps stimulating the effort towards the adoption of better statistical methods in galaxy rotation curves, an effort to which we contributed with Rodrigues {\it et al.}~2018 (hereafter R18). Indeed, R18 was the first work that, in order to conclude on the universality of the acceleration scale $a_0$, studied the posterior distributions on $a_0$ of a large set of galaxies. As C19 agrees, the credible intervals were found within the Bayesian framework, that is, the marginalized posteriors on $a_0$ were found using Bayes' theorem to update the priors in light of the observational data; this process was done without introducing any approximation. Considering R18, C19 also remarks that: i) better methods to select the nuisance parameters and the corresponding priors could be used; ii) a quality cut based on $\chi^2$ values should not be used, and iii) the compatibility of the posteriors should be assessed in a more robust way. In the following, after first clarifying the context of our work, we address these criticisms.

We study the minimally and non-minimally coupled scalar field models as possible alternatives for dark energy, the mysterious energy component that is driving the accelerated expansion of the universe. After discussing the dynamics at both the background and perturbation level, we confront the two models with the latest cosmological data. After obtaining updated constraints on their parameters we perform model selection using the basic information criteria. We found that the $\Lambda$CDM model is strongly favored when the local determination of the Hubble constant is not considered and that this statement is weakened once local $H_0$ is included in the analysis. We calculate the parameter combination $S_8=\sigma_8\sqrt{\Omega_{m}/0.3}$ and show the decrement of the tension with respect to the Planck results in the case of minimally and non-minimally coupled scalar field models. Finally, for the coupling constant between DE and gravity, we obtain the constraint $\xi\simeq -0.06^{+0.19}_{-0.19}$, approaching the one from solar system tests $|\xi| \lesssim 10^{-2}$ and comparable to the conformal value $\xi=1/6$ at $1\sigma$ uncertainty.

This correspondence answers the criticisms raised in McGaugh et al 2018 and Kroupa et al 2018.

The Radial Acceleration Relation confirms that a nontrivial acceleration scale can be found in the average internal dynamics of galaxies. The existence of such a scale is not obvious as far as the standard cosmological model is concerned, and it has been interpreted as a possible sign of modified gravity. The implications could be profound: it could in principle explain galactic dynamics without large amounts of yet-undetected dark matter and address issues that the standard cosmological model faces at galactic scales. Here, we consider 193 disk galaxies from the SPARC and THINGS databases and, using Bayesian inference, we show that the probability of existence of a fundamental acceleration that is common to all the galaxies is essentially zero: the $p$-value is smaller than $10^{-20}$ or, equivalently, the null hypothesis is rejected at more than 10$\sigma$. We conclude that the acceleration scale unveiled by the Radial Acceleration Relation is of emergent nature, possibly caused by a complex interplay between baryons and dark matter. In particular, the MOND theory, or any other theory that behaves like it at galactic scales, is ruled out as a fundamental theory for galaxies at more than 10$\sigma$.

In this paper we investigate a new phenomenological parameterization for unified dark matter and dark energy based on the polynomial expansion of the barotropic equation of state parameter $w$. Our parameterization provides well-behaving evolution of $w$ for both small and big redshifts as well as in the far future. The dark fluid described by our parameterization behaves for big redshifts like a dark matter. Therefore one can parameterize dark energy and dark matter using a single dark fluid, like in the case of the Chaplygin gas. Within this parameterization we consider 2 models: one with DE barotropic parameter fixed to be $-1$ and the second one, where $w \neq -1$ is chosen to match the best fit to the data. We study main cosmological properties of these models at the expansion and perturbation levels. Based on Markov chain Monte Carlo method with currently available cosmic observational data sets, we constrain these models to determine the cosmological parameters at the level of background and clustering of matter. We consider the interaction between DM and DE which directly affects the evolution of matter and its clustering. Our model appears to be perfectly consistent with the $\Lambda$CDM model, while providing unification of DE and DM.

We study the main cosmological properties of the agegraphic dark energy model at the expansion and perturbation levels. Initially, using the latest cosmological data we implement a joint likelihood analysis in order to constrain the cosmological parameters. Then we test the performance of the agegraphic dark energy model at the perturbation level and we define its difference from the usual $\Lambda$CDM model. Within this context, we verify that the growth index of matter fluctuations depends on the choice of the considered agegraphic dark energy (homogeneous or clustered). In particular, assuming a homogeneous agegraphic dark energy we find, for the first time, that the asymptotic value of the growth index is $\gamma \approx 5/9$, which is close to that of the usual $\Lambda$ cosmology, $\gamma^{(\Lambda)} \approx 6/11$. Finally, if the distribution of dark energy is clustered then we obtain $\gamma \approx 1/2$ which is $\sim 8\%$ smaller than that of the $\Lambda$CDM model.

We investigate the growth of matter fluctuations in holographic dark energy cosmologies. First we use an overall statistical analysis involving the latest observational data in order to place constraints on the cosmological parameters. Then we test the range of validity of the holographic dark energy models at the perturbation level and its variants from the concordance $\Lambda$ cosmology. Specifically, we provide a new analytical approach in order to derive, for the first time, the growth index of matter perturbations. Considering a homogeneous holographic dark energy we find that the growth index is $\gamma \approx \frac{4}{7}$ which is somewhat larger ($\sim 4.8\%$) than that of the usual $\Lambda$ cosmology, $\gamma^{(\Lambda)}\approx \frac{6}{11}$. Finally, if we allow clustering in the holographic dark energy models then the asymptotic value of the growth index is given in terms of the effective sound speed $c_{\rm eff}^2$, namely $\gamma \approx \frac{3(1-c_{\rm eff}^2)}{7}$.