Abstract:We first briefly review the adventure of scale invariance in physics, from Galileo Galilei, Weyl, Einstein, and Feynman to the revival by Dirac (1973) and Canuto et al. (1977). In the way that the geometry of space–time can be described by the coefficients gμν, a gauging condition given by a scale factor λ(xμ) is needed to express the scaling. In general relativity (GR), λ=1. The "Large Number Hypothesis" was taken by Dirac and by Canuto et al. to fix λ. The condition that the macroscopic empty space is scale-invariant was further preferred (Maeder 2017a), the resulting gauge is also supported by an action principle. Cosmological equations and a modified Newton equation were then derived. In short, except in extremely low density regions, the scale-invariant effects are largely dominated by Newtonian effects. However, their cumulative effects may still play a significant role in cosmic evolution. The theory contains no "adjustment parameter". In this work, we gather concrete observational evidence that scale-invariant effects are present and measurable in astronomical objects spanning a vast range of masses (0.5 M⊙< M <1014M⊙) and an equally impressive range of spatial scales (0.01 pc < r < 1 Gpc). Scale invariance accounts for the observed excess in velocity in galaxy clusters with respect to the visible mass, the relatively flat/small slope of rotation curves in local galaxies, the observed steep rotation curves of high-redshift galaxies, and the excess of velocity in wide binary stars with separations above 3000 kau found in Gaia DR3. Last but not least, we investigate the effect of scale invariance on gravitational lensing. We show that scale invariance does not affect the geodesics of light rays as they pass in the vicinity of a massive galaxy. However, scale-invariant effects do change the inferred mass-to-light ratio of lens galaxies as compared to GR. As a result, the discrepancies seen in GR between the total lensing mass of galaxies and their stellar mass from photometry may be accounted for. This holds true both for lenses at high redshift like JWST-ER1 and at low redshift like in the SLACS sample. Of note is that none of the above observational tests require dark matter or any adjustable parameter to tweak the theory at any given mass or spatial scale.

Effect of Large-Scale Structure on Multiply Imaged Sources

Impacts of Source Properties on Strong Lensing by Rich Galaxy Clusters

Imprints of dynamical dark energy on weak-lensing measurements

Strong gravitational lensing by multiple galaxies

Effective Models for Statistical Studies of Galaxy-Scale Gravitational Lensing

Systematic errors in strong gravitational lensing reconstructions, a numerical simulation perspective

What Multiple Images Say About the Large-Scale Mass Maps of Galaxy Clusters

Strong gravitational lensing's 'external shear' is not shear

Gravitational Lensing of Galaxy Clustering

Probing the Structure of Lensing Galaxies with Quadruple Lenses: the Effect of ‘external’ Shear

A Survey of Dynamical and Gravitational Lensing Tests in Scale Invariance: The Fall of Dark Matter?

The impact of line-of-sight structures on measuring $H_0$ with strong lensing time-delays

Quantifying Environmental and Line-of-Sight Effects in Models of Strong Gravitational Lens Systems

Strong Lensing by Galaxies

Complex angular structure of three elliptical galaxies from high-resolution ALMA observations of strong gravitational lenses

Lensing by Groups of Galaxies

Strong gravitational lensing’s ‘external shear’ is not shear

Euclid Preparation. XL. Impact of magnification on spectroscopic galaxy clustering

Gravitational Lensing By a Massive Object in a Dark Matter Halo. II. Shear, Phase, and Image Geometry