TESTING GENERAL RELATIVITY with GRAVITATIONAL WAVES By

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

TESTING GENERAL RELATIVITY with GRAVITATIONAL WAVES By TESTING GENERAL RELATIVITY WITH GRAVITATIONAL WAVES by Laura Mae Sampson A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Physics MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY Bozeman, Montana March 2014 COPYRIGHT by Laura Mae Sampson 2014 Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Thank you to my advisor, Neil Cornish, to the rest of my committee members, in particular Nico Yunes, and to all of my professors in the physics department. A special thank you also goes to Margaret Jarrett, who made sure that all of the paperwork hoops involved in graduate school were as painless as possible. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION . .1 2. GRAVITATIONAL WAVES IN GENERAL RELATIVITY . .3 2.1. Linearized Gravity . .3 2.2. Gravitational Wave Detectors . .8 2.2.1. Interferometric Detectors . .9 2.2.2. Pulsar Timing Array . 11 2.3. Gravitational Wave Sources . 12 3. NON-GW TESTS OF GR . 15 3.1. Perihelion Precession of Mercury . 15 3.2. Gravitational Lensing . 19 3.3. Shapiro Time Delay . 21 3.4. Testing the Equivalence Principle . 23 3.5. Constraints from Binary Pulsars . 25 4. NON-GR THEORIES OF GRAVITY . 29 4.1. Theoretical Properties . 29 4.2. Scalar-Tensor Theories . 30 4.3. Massive Graviton Theories . 32 4.4. Modified Quadratic Gravity . 34 5. PARAMETERIZING ALTERNATIVES TO GENERAL RELATIVITY . 37 5.1. Parameterized post-Newtonian . 43 5.2. Parameterized post-Keplerian . 48 5.3. Parameterized post-Einsteinian . 53 5.4. ppN-ppE correspondence . 56 5.5. ppN-ppK Correspondence . 62 5.6. ppE-ppK Correspondence . 66 5.7. Current Constraints . 70 5.8. Conclusion . 72 6. BAYESIAN PROBABILITY THEORY AND MARKOV METHODS . 74 6.1. Bayesian Inference . 74 6.2. Computational Techniques . 75 6.2.1. Differential Evolution . 79 6.2.2. Langevin Proposals . 81 6.3. Calculating Bayes Factors . 83 6.3.1. Thermodynamic Integration . 85 6.3.2. Volume Tessellation Algorithm . 88 v TABLE OF CONTENTS { CONTINUED 6.3.3. Reversible Jump MCMC . 89 6.3.4. Savage-Dickey Density Ratio . 91 6.3.5. Comparison of Techniques . 92 6.4. Fitting Factor . 100 7. TESTING GR USING PPE TEMPLATES . 108 7.1. Analysis Framework . 112 7.1.1. Instrument Response . 112 7.1.2. Likelihood Function. 113 7.2. Approximate Bounds and Comparison with Pulsar Bounds . 116 7.3. Noise Modeling and Signal Strength . 123 7.4. Full Bayesian Bounds and Model Selection . 128 7.5. Parameter Biases . 134 7.6. More Complicated Waveforms . 136 7.7. Optimal Model Selection . 147 7.7.1. Overfitting . 148 7.7.2. Inclusion of Spin . 150 7.7.3. Parsimonious Fitting . 151 7.8. Detecting GWs from Scalar-Tensor Gravity . 156 7.9. Inspiral-Merger-Ringdown Signals . 164 7.9.1. Extracting with Inspiral-only ppE Templates . 165 7.9.2. Extracting with Inspiral-Merger-Ringdown ppE Templates . 171 8. SUMMARY . 179 REFERENCES CITED . 184 vi LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. The ten ppN parameters, as well as their physical significance, and their value in GR and in semi-conservative theories, in which energy and momentum are conserved. 46 2. The current experimental constraints on the four ppN parameters that we will consider in this thesis, along with the effect used to ¯ measure that constraint [144]. We use the definitions βppN “ βppN ´ 1; γ¯ppN “ γppN ´ 1 ............................................ 48 3. Uncertainty in measured values for PSR J0737-3039A. [86] . 53 4. The values that the ppE parameters take on in various non-GR theories [165]. 56 5. Values of ppN parameters for a selection of alternative theories. These expressions are in the large ! limit. [144, 28, 79, 60] . 59 6. ppK parameters expressed as combinations of the ppN parameters. 64 7. The current constraints that can be placed on βppE from Solar System and binary pulsar tests. These values are only for b “ ´3.. 70 8. Source parameters for sources used in Fig. 33 (top), Fig. 34 (middle) and Figs. 25, 26, and 35 (bottom). All sources had pα; cos δ; φL; cos θLq “ p1:0; 0:77; 1:76; ´0:43q.......................... 142 9. Number of useful cycles from the different injected ppE terms - Fig 33 and Fig 34. 146 10. Source parameters for Figures 37 and 38. The βb values listed are for a particular case - the ratio between different βb values was kept constant for each injected signal. The ratio for sub- critical was ˆ1:0, critical was ˆ30, and super-critical was ˆ100. All sources had pα; cos δ; φL; cos θLq “ p1:42; 0:87; 2:5; 0:43q............... 152 11. Number of useful cycles from the different injected ppE terms - Fig. 37 .......................................................... 155 vii LIST OF TABLES { CONTINUED Table Page 12. ISCO frequency and percentage of total SNR before the ISCO for systems of different total mass. 170 viii LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. The effect of the two different polarizations of GWs on a ring of test particles. The top panel shows the plus polarization, and the bottom panel shows the cross. [75] . .9 2. Cartoon of a Michelson interferometer, like the LIGO and VIRGO detectors. A beam of light is split in two and sent down both arms of the detector. Each half of the beam bounces off of the test mass in one arm, and the beam is recombined at the photodetector. Changes in the length of the two arms will re- sults in changes of the light intensity at the photodetector, which allows us to use these interferometers to detect GWs. [36] . 10 3. The perihelion precession of a planet around the Sun - greatly exaggerated so as to be visible. (Copyright 2010, Professor Ken- neth R. Lang, Tufts University ) . 16 4. Light from a distant star being bent by the Sun as it travels to Earth. [144] . 20 5. The measured orbital period for the Hulse-Taylor pulsar (points) plotted with the GR prediction (line). The agreement between the measured values and the theoretical predictions is very pre- cise. [138] . 27 6. The measured value of parameters that characterize possible de- viations from GR in binary pulsar orbits. Each parameter is a function of the two masses. If all of the measured curves overlap in the same region of the mass1- mass2 plane, the data is con- sistent with GR. As we can see, the curves do, in fact, overlap. [85].............................................................. 27 7. Limits that can be placed on the ppE strength parameter, βppE, using the known limits.
Recommended publications
  • Kaluza-Klein Gravity, Concentrating on the General Rel- Ativity, Rather Than Particle Physics Side of the Subject
    Kaluza-Klein Gravity J. M. Overduin Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Victoria, P.O. Box 3055, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada, V8W 3P6 and P. S. Wesson Department of Physics, University of Waterloo, Ontario, Canada N2L 3G1 and Gravity Probe-B, Hansen Physics Laboratories, Stanford University, Stanford, California, U.S.A. 94305 Abstract We review higher-dimensional unified theories from the general relativity, rather than the particle physics side. Three distinct approaches to the subject are identi- fied and contrasted: compactified, projective and noncompactified. We discuss the cosmological and astrophysical implications of extra dimensions, and conclude that none of the three approaches can be ruled out on observational grounds at the present time. arXiv:gr-qc/9805018v1 7 May 1998 Preprint submitted to Elsevier Preprint 3 February 2008 1 Introduction Kaluza’s [1] achievement was to show that five-dimensional general relativity contains both Einstein’s four-dimensional theory of gravity and Maxwell’s the- ory of electromagnetism. He however imposed a somewhat artificial restriction (the cylinder condition) on the coordinates, essentially barring the fifth one a priori from making a direct appearance in the laws of physics. Klein’s [2] con- tribution was to make this restriction less artificial by suggesting a plausible physical basis for it in compactification of the fifth dimension. This idea was enthusiastically received by unified-field theorists, and when the time came to include the strong and weak forces by extending Kaluza’s mechanism to higher dimensions, it was assumed that these too would be compact. This line of thinking has led through eleven-dimensional supergravity theories in the 1980s to the current favorite contenders for a possible “theory of everything,” ten-dimensional superstrings.
    [Show full text]
  • Conformal Symmetry in Field Theory and in Quantum Gravity
    universe Review Conformal Symmetry in Field Theory and in Quantum Gravity Lesław Rachwał Instituto de Física, Universidade de Brasília, Brasília DF 70910-900, Brazil; [email protected] Received: 29 August 2018; Accepted: 9 November 2018; Published: 15 November 2018 Abstract: Conformal symmetry always played an important role in field theory (both quantum and classical) and in gravity. We present construction of quantum conformal gravity and discuss its features regarding scattering amplitudes and quantum effective action. First, the long and complicated story of UV-divergences is recalled. With the development of UV-finite higher derivative (or non-local) gravitational theory, all problems with infinities and spacetime singularities might be completely solved. Moreover, the non-local quantum conformal theory reveals itself to be ghost-free, so the unitarity of the theory should be safe. After the construction of UV-finite theory, we focused on making it manifestly conformally invariant using the dilaton trick. We also argue that in this class of theories conformal anomaly can be taken to vanish by fine-tuning the couplings. As applications of this theory, the constraints of the conformal symmetry on the form of the effective action and on the scattering amplitudes are shown. We also remark about the preservation of the unitarity bound for scattering. Finally, the old model of conformal supergravity by Fradkin and Tseytlin is briefly presented. Keywords: quantum gravity; conformal gravity; quantum field theory; non-local gravity; super- renormalizable gravity; UV-finite gravity; conformal anomaly; scattering amplitudes; conformal symmetry; conformal supergravity 1. Introduction From the beginning of research on theories enjoying invariance under local spacetime-dependent transformations, conformal symmetry played a pivotal role—first introduced by Weyl related changes of meters to measure distances (and also due to relativity changes of periods of clocks to measure time intervals).
    [Show full text]
  • MITOCW | 14. Linearized Gravity I: Principles and Static Limit
    MITOCW | 14. Linearized gravity I: Principles and static limit. [SQUEAKING] [RUSTLING] [CLICKING] SCOTT All right, so in today's recorded lecture, I would like to pick up where we started-- HUGHES: excuse me. I'd like to pick up where we stopped last time. So I discussed the Einstein field equations in the previous two lectures. I derived them first from the method that was used by Einstein in his original work on the subject. And then I laid out the way of coming to the Einstein field equations using an action principle, using what we call the Einstein Hilbert action. Both of them lead us to this remarkably simple equation, if you think about it in terms simply of the curvature tensor. This is saying that a particular version of the curvature. You start with the Riemann tensor. You trace over two indices. You reverse the trace such that this whole thing has zero divergence. And you simply equate that to the stress energy tensor with a coupling factor with a complex constant proportionality that ensures that this recovers the Newtonian limit. The Einstein Hilbert exercise demonstrated that this is in a very quantifiable way, the simplest possible way of developing a theory of gravity in this framework. The remainder of this course is going to be dedicated to solving this equation, and exploring the properties of the solutions that arise from this. And so let me continue the discussion I began at the end of the previous lecture. We are going to find it very useful to regard this as a set of differential equations for the spacetime metric given a source.
    [Show full text]
  • Linearized Einstein Field Equations
    General Relativity Fall 2019 Lecture 15: Linearized Einstein field equations Yacine Ali-Ha¨ımoud October 17th 2019 SUMMARY FROM PREVIOUS LECTURE We are considering nearly flat spacetimes with nearly globally Minkowski coordinates: gµν = ηµν + hµν , with jhµν j 1. Such coordinates are not unique. First, we can make Lorentz transformations and keep a µ ν globally-Minkowski coordinate system, with hµ0ν0 = Λ µ0 Λ ν0 hµν , so that hµν can be seen as a Lorentz tensor µ µ µ ν field on flat spacetime. Second, if we make small changes of coordinates, x ! x − ξ , with j@µξ j 1, the metric perturbation remains small and changes as hµν ! hµν + 2ξ(µ,ν). By analogy with electromagnetism, we can see these small coordinate changes as gauge transformations, leaving the Riemann tensor unchanged at linear order. Since we will linearize the relevant equations, we may work in Fourier space: each Fourier mode satisfies an independent equation. We denote by ~k the wavenumber and by k^ its direction and k its norm. We have decomposed the 10 independent components of the metric perturbation according to their transformation properties under spatial rotations: there are 4 independent \scalar" components, which can be taken, for instance, ^i ^i^j to be h00; k h0i; hii, and k k hij { or any 4 linearly independent combinations thereof. There are 2 independent ilm^ ilm^ ^j transverse \vector" components, each with 2 independent components: klh0m and klhmjk { these are proportional to the curl of h0i and to the curl of the divergence of hij, and are divergenceless (transverse to the ~ TT Fourier wavenumber k).
    [Show full text]
  • Gravity, Inertia, and Quantum Vacuum Zero Point Fields
    Foundations of Physics, Vol.31,No. 5, 2001 Gravity, Inertia, and Quantum Vacuum Zero Point Fields James F. Woodward1 Received July 27, 2000 Over the past several years Haisch, Rueda, and others have made the claim that the origin of inertial reaction forces can be explained as the interaction of electri- cally charged elementary particles with the vacuum electromagnetic zero-point field expected on the basis of quantum field theory. After pointing out that this claim, in light of the fact that the inertial masses of the hadrons reside in the electrically chargeless, photon-like gluons that bind their constituent quarks, is untenable, the question of the role of quantum zero-point fields generally in the origin of inertia is explored. It is shown that, although non-gravitational zero-point fields might be the cause of the gravitational properties of normal matter, the action of non-gravitational zero-point fields cannot be the cause of inertial reac- tion forces. The gravitational origin of inertial reaction forces is then briefly revisited. Recent claims critical of the gravitational origin of inertial reaction forces by Haisch and his collaborators are then shown to be without merit. 1. INTRODUCTION Several years ago Haisch, Rueda, and Puthoff (1) (hereafter, HRP) pub- lished a lengthy paper in which they claimed that a substantial part, indeed perhaps all of normal inertial reaction forces could be understood as the action of the electromagnetic zero-point field (EZPF), expected on the basis of quantum field theory, on electric charges of normal matter. In several subsequent papers Haisch and Rueda particularly have pressed this claim, making various modifications to the fundamental argument to try to deflect several criticisms.
    [Show full text]
  • Loop Quantum Cosmology, Modified Gravity and Extra Dimensions
    universe Review Loop Quantum Cosmology, Modified Gravity and Extra Dimensions Xiangdong Zhang Department of Physics, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou 510641, China; [email protected] Academic Editor: Jaume Haro Received: 24 May 2016; Accepted: 2 August 2016; Published: 10 August 2016 Abstract: Loop quantum cosmology (LQC) is a framework of quantum cosmology based on the quantization of symmetry reduced models following the quantization techniques of loop quantum gravity (LQG). This paper is devoted to reviewing LQC as well as its various extensions including modified gravity and higher dimensions. For simplicity considerations, we mainly focus on the effective theory, which captures main quantum corrections at the cosmological level. We set up the basic structure of Brans–Dicke (BD) and higher dimensional LQC. The effective dynamical equations of these theories are also obtained, which lay a foundation for the future phenomenological investigations to probe possible quantum gravity effects in cosmology. Some outlooks and future extensions are also discussed. Keywords: loop quantum cosmology; singularity resolution; effective equation 1. Introduction Loop quantum gravity (LQG) is a quantum gravity scheme that tries to quantize general relativity (GR) with the nonperturbative techniques consistently [1–4]. Many issues of LQG have been carried out in the past thirty years. In particular, among these issues, loop quantum cosmology (LQC), which is the cosmological sector of LQG has received increasing interest and has become one of the most thriving and fruitful directions of LQG [5–9]. It is well known that GR suffers singularity problems and this, in turn, implies that our universe also has an infinitely dense singularity point that is highly unphysical.
    [Show full text]
  • Rotating Sources, Gravito-Magnetism, the Kerr Metric
    Supplemental Lecture 6 Rotating Sources, Gravito-Magnetism and The Kerr Black Hole Abstract This lecture consists of several topics in general relativity dealing with rotating sources, gravito- magnetism and a rotating black hole described by the Kerr metric. We begin by studying slowly rotating sources, such as planets and stars where the gravitational fields are weak and linearized gravity applies. We find the metric for these sources which depends explicitly on their angular momentum J. We consider the motion of gyroscopes and point particles in these spaces and discover “frame dragging” and Lense-Thirring precession. Gravito-magnetism is also discovered in the context of gravity’s version of the Lorentz force law. These weak field results can also be obtained directly from special relativity and are consequences of the transformation laws of forces under boosts. However, general relativity allows us to go beyond linear, weak field physics, to strong gravity in which space time is highly curved. We turn to rotating black holes and we review the phenomenology of the Kerr metric. The physics of the “ergosphere”, the space time region between a surface of infinite redshift and an event horizon, is discussed. Two appendices consider rocket motion in the vicinity of a black hole and the exact redshift in strong but time independent fields. Appendix B illustrates the close connection between symmetries and conservation laws in general relativity. Keywords: Rotating Sources, Gravito-Magnetism, frame-dragging, Kerr Black Hole, linearized gravity, Einstein-Maxwell equations, Lense-Thirring precession, Gravity Probe B (GP-B). Introduction. Weak Field General Relativity. In addition to strong gravity, the textbook studied space times which are only slightly curved.
    [Show full text]
  • Relativity and Fundamental Physics
    Relativity and Fundamental Physics Sergei Kopeikin (1,2,*) 1) Dept. of Physics and Astronomy, University of Missouri, 322 Physics Building., Columbia, MO 65211, USA 2) Siberian State University of Geosystems and Technology, Plakhotny Street 10, Novosibirsk 630108, Russia Abstract Laser ranging has had a long and significant role in testing general relativity and it continues to make advance in this field. It is important to understand the relation of the laser ranging to other branches of fundamental gravitational physics and their mutual interaction. The talk overviews the basic theoretical principles underlying experimental tests of general relativity and the recent major achievements in this field. Introduction Modern theory of fundamental interactions relies heavily upon two strong pillars both created by Albert Einstein – special and general theory of relativity. Special relativity is a cornerstone of elementary particle physics and the quantum field theory while general relativity is a metric- based theory of gravitational field. Understanding the nature of the fundamental physical interactions and their hierarchic structure is the ultimate goal of theoretical and experimental physics. Among the four known fundamental interactions the most important but least understood is the gravitational interaction due to its weakness in the solar system – a primary experimental laboratory of gravitational physicists for several hundred years. Nowadays, general relativity is a canonical theory of gravity used by astrophysicists to study the black holes and astrophysical phenomena in the early universe. General relativity is a beautiful theoretical achievement but it is only a classic approximation to deeper fundamental nature of gravity. Any possible deviation from general relativity can be a clue to new physics (Turyshev, 2015).
    [Show full text]
  • Gravitational Interaction to One Loop in Effective Quantum Gravity A
    IT9700281 LABORATORI NAZIONALI Dl FRASCATI SIS - Pubblicazioni LNF-96/0S8 (P) ITHf 00 Z%i 31 ottobre 1996 gr-qc/9611018 Gravitational Interaction to one Loop in Effective Quantum Gravity A. Akhundov" S. Bellucci6 A. Shiekhcl "Universitat-Gesamthochschule Siegen, D-57076 Siegen, Germany, and Institute of Physics, Azerbaijan Academy of Sciences, pr. Azizbekova 33, AZ-370143 Baku, Azerbaijan 6INFN-Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, P.O. Box 13, 00044 Frascati, Italy ^International Centre for Theoretical Physics, Strada Costiera 11, P.O. Box 586, 34014 Trieste, Italy Abstract We carry out the first step of a program conceived, in order to build a realistic model, having the particle spectrum of the standard model and renormalized masses, interaction terms and couplings, etc. which include the class of quantum gravity corrections, obtained by handling gravity as an effective theory. This provides an adequate picture at low energies, i.e. much less than the scale of strong gravity (the Planck mass). Hence our results are valid, irrespectively of any proposal for the full quantum gravity as a fundamental theory. We consider only non-analytic contributions to the one-loop scattering matrix elements, which provide the dominant quantum effect at long distance. These contributions are finite and independent from the finite value of the renormalization counter terms of the effective lagrangian. We calculate the interaction of two heavy scalar particles, i.e. close to rest, due to the effective quantum gravity to the one loop order and compare with similar results in the literature. PACS.: 04.60.+n Submitted to Physics Letters B 1 E-mail addresses: [email protected], bellucciQlnf.infn.it, [email protected] — 2 1 Introduction A longstanding puzzle in quantum physics is how to marry the description of gravity with the field theory of elementary particles.
    [Show full text]
  • 9 Linearized Gravity and Gravitational Waves
    9 Linearized gravity and gravitational waves 9.1 Linearized gravity 9.1.1 Metric perturbation as tensor field 1 We are looking for small perturbations hab around the Minkowski metric ηab, gab = ηab + hab , hab 1 . (9.1) ≪ These perturbations may be caused either by the propagation of gravitational waves through a detector or by the gravitational potential of a star. In the first case, current experiments show that we should not hope for h larger than (h) 10−22. Keeping only terms linear in h O ∼ is therefore an excellent approximation. Choosing in the second case as application the final phase of the spiral-in of a neutron star binary system, deviations from Newtonian limit can become large. Hence one needs a systematic “post-Newtonian” expansion or even a numerical analysis to describe properly such cases. We choose a Cartesian coordinate system xa and ask ourselves which transformations are compatible with the splitting (9.1) of the metric. If we consider global (i.e. space-time inde- b ′a a b pendent) Lorentz transformations Λa, then x = Λb x . The metric tensor transform as ′ c d c d c d ′ c d gab = ΛaΛb gcd = ΛaΛb (ηcd + hcd)= ηab + ΛaΛb hcd = ηab + ΛaΛb hcd . (9.2) Thus Lorentz transformations respect the splitting (9.1) and the perturbation hab transforms as a rank-2 tensor on Minkowski space. We can view therefore hab as a symmetric rank-2 tensor field defined on Minkowski space that satisfies the linearized Einstein equations, similar as the photon field is a rank-1 tensor field fulfilling Maxwell’s equations.
    [Show full text]
  • Vacuum Energy
    Vacuum Energy Mark D. Roberts, 117 Queen’s Road, Wimbledon, London SW19 8NS, Email:[email protected] http://cosmology.mth.uct.ac.za/ roberts ∼ February 1, 2008 Eprint: hep-th/0012062 Comments: A comprehensive review of Vacuum Energy, which is an extended version of a poster presented at L¨uderitz (2000). This is not a review of the cosmolog- ical constant per se, but rather vacuum energy in general, my approach to the cosmological constant is not standard. Lots of very small changes and several additions for the second and third versions: constructive feedback still welcome, but the next version will be sometime in coming due to my sporadiac internet access. First Version 153 pages, 368 references. Second Version 161 pages, 399 references. arXiv:hep-th/0012062v3 22 Jul 2001 Third Version 167 pages, 412 references. The 1999 PACS Physics and Astronomy Classification Scheme: http://publish.aps.org/eprint/gateway/pacslist 11.10.+x, 04.62.+v, 98.80.-k, 03.70.+k; The 2000 Mathematical Classification Scheme: http://www.ams.org/msc 81T20, 83E99, 81Q99, 83F05. 3 KEYPHRASES: Vacuum Energy, Inertial Mass, Principle of Equivalence. 1 Abstract There appears to be three, perhaps related, ways of approaching the nature of vacuum energy. The first is to say that it is just the lowest energy state of a given, usually quantum, system. The second is to equate vacuum energy with the Casimir energy. The third is to note that an energy difference from a complete vacuum might have some long range effect, typically this energy difference is interpreted as the cosmological constant.
    [Show full text]
  • New Experiments in Gravitational Physics
    St. John Fisher College Fisher Digital Publications Physics Faculty/Staff Publications Physics 2014 New Experiments in Gravitational Physics Munawar Karim St. John Fisher College, [email protected] Ashfaque H. Bokhari King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals Follow this and additional works at: https://fisherpub.sjfc.edu/physics_facpub Part of the Physics Commons How has open access to Fisher Digital Publications benefited ou?y Publication Information Karim, Munawar and Bokhari, Ashfaque H. (2014). "New Experiments in Gravitational Physics." EPJ Web of Conferences 75, 05001-05001-p.10. Please note that the Publication Information provides general citation information and may not be appropriate for your discipline. To receive help in creating a citation based on your discipline, please visit http://libguides.sjfc.edu/citations. This document is posted at https://fisherpub.sjfc.edu/physics_facpub/29 and is brought to you for free and open access by Fisher Digital Publications at St. John Fisher College. For more information, please contact [email protected]. New Experiments in Gravitational Physics Abstract We propose experiments to examine and extend interpretations of the Einstein field equations. Experiments encompass the fields of astrophysics, quantum properties of the gravity field, gravitational effects on quantum electrodynamic phenomena and coupling of spinors to gravity. As an outcome of this work we were able to derive the temperature of the solar corona. Disciplines Physics Comments Proceedings from the Fifth International Symposium on Experimental Gravitation in Nanchang, China, July 8-13, 2013. Copyright is owned by the authors, published by EDP Sciences in EPJ Web of Conferences in 2014. Article is available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/epjconf/20147405001.
    [Show full text]