Paper detail

Progress in Lunar Laser Ranging Tests of Relativistic Gravity

Analyses of laser ranges to the Moon provide increasingly stringent limits on any violation of the Equivalence Principle (EP); they also enable several very accurate tests of relativistic gravity. We report the results of our recent analysis of Lunar Laser Ranging (LLR) data giving an EP test of Δ(M_G/M_I)_{EP} =(-1.0 +/- 1.4) x 10^{-13}. This result yields a Strong Equivalence Principle (SEP) test of Δ(M_G/M_I)_{SEP} =(-2.0 +/- 2.0) x 10^{-13}. Also, the corresponding SEP violation parameter ηis (4.4 +/- 4.5) x 10^{-4}, where η=4β-γ-3 and both βand γare parametrized post-Newtonian (PPN) parameters. Using the recent Cassini result for the parameter γ, PPN parameter βis determined to be β-1=(1.2 +/- 1.1) x 10^{-4}. The geodetic precession test, expressed as a relative deviation from general relativity, is K_{gp}=-0.0019 +/- 0.0064. The search for a time variation in the gravitational constant results in \dot G/G=(4 +/- 9) x 10^{-13} yr^{-1}, consequently there is no evidence for local (~1AU) scale expansion of the solar system.

preprint2004arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.