<i>Gravitation and Inertia</i>

Ciufolini, Ignazio; Wheeler, John Archibald; Schücking, E. L.

doi:10.1063/1.2807658

Cited by 136 publications

(243 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

238

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We follow the notation of [19] for the parametrization of the metric tensor: the parametrization (4.2) reduces to first order in m to the one used in [19]. In the case of a PPN metric we have ( [31], Sec. 3.4.1):…”

Section: Parametrizations Of Metric and Torsion In Spherical Symmmentioning

confidence: 99%

Constraining spacetime torsion with the Moon and Mercury

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We report a search for new gravitational physics phenomena based on Einstein-Cartan theory of General Relativity including spacetime torsion. Starting from the parametrized torsion framework of Mao, Tegmark, Guth and Cabi, we analyze the motion of test bodies in the presence of torsion, and in particular we compute the corrections to the perihelion advance and to the orbital geodetic precession of a satellite. We describe the torsion field by means of three parameters, and we make use of the autoparallel trajectories, which in general may differ from geodesics when torsion is present. We derive the equations of motion of a test body in a spherically symmetric field, and the equations of motion of a satellite in the gravitational field of the Sun and the Earth. We calculate the secular variations of the longitudes of the node and of the pericenter of the satellite. The computed secular variations show how the corrections to the perihelion advance and to the orbital de Sitter effect depend on the torsion parameters. All computations are performed under the assumptions of weak field and slow motion. To test our predictions, we use the measurements of the Moon geodetic precession from lunar laser ranging data, and the measurements of Mercury's perihelion advance from planetary radar ranging data. These measurements are then used to constrain suitable linear combinations of the torsion parameters

show abstract

Section: Parametrizations Of Metric and Torsion In Spherical Symmmentioning

confidence: 99%

Constraining spacetime torsion with the Moon and Mercury

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…W h e n a clock that corotates very slowly around a spinning body returns to its startine uoint, it finds itself " advanced relative to a clock kept there at "rest" (with resuect to "distant stars"). Indeed, synchronization of clocks all around a closed path near a spinning body is not possible, and light co-rotating around a soinnine bodv would take less time to return to: fixed point than light rotating in the opposite direction (2). Similarly, the orbital period of a particle co-rotating around a spinning body \vould be longer than the orbital period of a particle co~unter-rotating o n the saine orbit.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Test of General Relativity and Measurement of the Lense-Thirring Effect with Two Earth Satellites

Ciufolini¹,

Pavlis

Chieppa

et al. 1998

Science

Self Cite

216

242

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Lense-Thirring effect, a tiny perturbation of the orbit of a particle caused by the spin of the attracting body, was accurately measured with the use of the data of two laser-ranged satellites, LAGEOS and LAGEOS II, and the Earth gravitational model EGM-96. The parameter &mgr;, which measures the strength of the Lense-Thirring effect, was found to be 1.1 +/- 0.2; general relativity predicts &mgr; identical with 1. This result represents an accurate test and measurement of one of the fundamental predictions of general relativity, that the spin of a body changes the geometry of the universe by generating space-time curvature.

show abstract

“…The mass increase of (5) may be interpreted as arising from the potential aDh, which in the gravitational field of a source mass M at radius R corresponds to GM=R. This in turn can be interpreted as the Machian inertia induced by the local potential field of M. 6,10,12,[23][24][25] This is the inertia that was thought possibly to be anisotropic. [15][16][17][18][19][20] Our derivation was, however, done using lateral momentum, perpendicular to the radius to any central mass M, and is based only on potential (by way of the Doppler shift), so it is likely to be isotropic, but we must show that (5) holds for arbitrary motion.…”

Section: Equivalence and Isotropymentioning

confidence: 99%

Isotropy, equivalence, and the laws of inertia

Shuler¹

2011

Physics Essays

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An analysis of the appearance of time and motion in an accelerated frame gives the result expected by Einstein and others of an apparent mass increase in proportion to potential. This leads to a set of transformations we call the laws of inertia. The resulting inertia is isotropic. One can infer that these results apply to a gravitational field due to the Einstein equivalence principle. This removes an objection to Mach's principle based on possible anisotropy. Further exploring the gravitational analogy reveals nonphysical properties the analogy must have for an acceleration to be "equivalent" to gravity for weak field effects such as precession and light bending. The new formulation, modified equivalence, clarifies the literature about what is or is not derivable from equivalence by showing exactly where the deficiency lies in ordinary equivalence, without resorting to Riemannian mathematics.Résumé: Une analyse de l'apparence du temps et du mouvement au sein d'un cadre accéléré donne lieu au résultat prédit notamment par Einstein, à savoir une augmentation de masse par rapport au potentiel. Ce phénomène entraîne une série de transformations que nous désignons sous le terme de principes de l'inertie. L'inertie qui en résulte est isotrope. Nous pouvons déduire que ces résultats s'appliquent à un champ gravitationnel en raison du Principe d'É quivalence d'Einstein. Cette observation supprime une objection au Principe de Mach découlant d'une anisotropie éventuelle. Une poursuite de l'analogie gravitationnelle révèle des propriétés non physiques que doit posséder l'analogie pour que l'accélération soit « équivalente » à la gravité dans le cadre de l'effet des champs faibles, tels que la précession et la déviation de la lumière. La nouvelle formulation, l'É quivalence modifiée, apporte des clarifications dans le corpus portant sur les éléments qui sont dérivables ou non de l'équivalence, en démontrant précisément où se situent les déficiences dans l'équivalence ordinaire, sans nécessiter de recours aux mathématiques de Riemann.

show abstract

Gravitation and Inertia

Cited by 136 publications

References 0 publications

Constraining spacetime torsion with the Moon and Mercury

Constraining spacetime torsion with the Moon and Mercury

Test of General Relativity and Measurement of the Lense-Thirring Effect with Two Earth Satellites

Isotropy, equivalence, and the laws of inertia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About