1: \documentstyle[11pt,iau177,twoside,psfig]{article}

2: 

3: \pagestyle{myheadings}

4: 

5: 		 \markboth{Wex}{Small-eccentricity binary pulsars and relativistic gravity}

6: 		 \setcounter{page}{113}

7: \begin{document}

8: 

9: \keywords{General Relativity, binary pulsar, 

10: gravitational Stark effect, gravitational

11: radiation}

12: 

13: \title{Small-eccentricity binary pulsars and relativistic gravity}

14: 

15: \author{Norbert Wex}

16: 

17: \affil{Max-Planck-Institut f\"ur Radioastronomie, 

18:        Auf dem H\"ugel 69, 53121 Bonn, Germany}

19: 

20: \begin{abstract}

21: Small-eccentricity binary pulsars with white dwarf companions provide

22: excellent test laboratories for various effects predicted by alternative

23: theories of gravity, in particular tests for the emission of gravitational

24: dipole radiation and the existence of gravitational Stark effects. We will

25: present new limits to these effects. The statistical analysis presented here,

26: for the first time, takes appropriately care of selection effects.

27: \end{abstract}

28: 

29: \vspace{-3ex}

30: 

31: \section{Introduction}

32: 

33: The majority of binary pulsars is found to be in orbit with a white-dwarf

34: companion. Due to the mass transfer in the past, these systems have very small

35: orbital eccentricities and, therefore, neither the relativistic advance of

36: periastron nor the Einstein delay were measured for any of these binary

37: pulsars. In fact, the only post-Keplerian parameters measured with reasonable

38: accuracy for a small-eccentricity binary pulsar are the two Shapiro parameters

39: in case of PSR B1855+09 (Kaspi {\it et al.\ }1994). However, since the orbital

40: period of this system is 12.3 days, the expected gravitational wave damping of

41: the orbital motion is by far too small to be of any importance for timing

42: observations and, consequently, there is no third post-Keplerian parameter

43: which would allow the kind of test conducted in double-neutron-star systems

44: (Damour \& Taylor 1992). On the other hand, many alternative theories of

45: gravity, tensor-scalar theories for instance, predict effects that depend

46: strongly on the difference between the gravitational self energy per unit mass

47: ($\epsilon\equiv E^{{\rm grav}}/mc^2$) of the two masses of a binary systems

48: (Will 1993; Damour \& Esposito-Far\'ese 1996ab). While this difference in

49: binding energies is comparably small for double-neutron-star systems, it is

50: large in neutron star-white dwarf systems since for a white dwarf

51: $\epsilon\sim 10^{-4}$ while for a 1.4$M_\odot$ neutron star $\epsilon \approx

52: 0.15$.

53: 

54: \vspace{-1ex}

55: 

56: \section{Gravitational dipole radiation}

57: 

58: Unlike general relativity, many alternative theories of gravity predict the

59: presence of all radiative multipoles --- monopole and dipole, as well as

60: quadrupole and higher multipoles (Will 1993). For binary systems scalar-tensor

61: theories, for instance, predict a loss of orbital energy which at highest

62: order is dominated by scalar dipole radiation. As a result, the orbital

63: period, $P_b$, of a circular binary system should change according to

64: %

65: \begin{equation} 

66:    \dot P_b^{({\rm dipole})} \simeq -\frac{4\pi^2G_*}{c^3P_b} \;

67:                             \frac{m_pm_c}{m_p+m_c} \;

68:                             (\alpha_p-\alpha_c)^2 \;,

69: \end{equation}

70: %

71: where $m_p$ and $m_c$ denote the mass of the pulsar and its companion,

72: respectively, $G_*$ is the `bare' gravitational constant and $c$ the speed of

73: light. The total scalar charge of each star is proportional to its mass and

74: its `effective coupling strength' $\alpha(\epsilon)$ (Damour \&

75: Esposito-Far\'ese 1996b).  For a white dwarf companion $|\alpha_c|\ll 1$ and

76: thus the expression $(\alpha_p-\alpha_c)^2$ in equation (1) can be of the

77: order one if the pulsar develops a significant amount of scalar charge. In

78: this case the gravitational wave damping of the orbit is completely dominated

79: by the emission of gravitational dipole radiation.

80: 

81: PSR J1012+5307 is a 5.3 ms pulsar in a 14.5 h circular orbit with a low mass

82: white-dwarf companion. Since its discovery in 1993 (Nicastro {\it et al.\

83: }1995) this pulsar has been timed on a regular basis using the Jodrell Bank

84: 76-m and the Effelsberg 100-m radiotelescope, sometimes achieving a timing

85: accuracy of 500 ns after just 10 min of integration (Lange {\it et al.\ },

86: this conference). In addition, the white-dwarf companion appears to be

87: relatively bright ($V=19.6$) and shows strong Balmer absorption lines. Based

88: on white dwarf model calculations, a companion mass of $m_c=0.16\pm0.02$ and a

89: distance of $840\pm90$ pc was derived (van Kerkwijk {\it et al.\ }1996,

90: Callanan {\it et al.\ }1998).  Further, a reliable radial velocity curve for

91: the white dwarf has been extracted, which then, in combination with the pulsar

92: timing information, gave a mass for the pulsar of $m_p = 1.64 \pm 0.22$. Since

93: ~$\dot P_b = (0.1\pm1.8)\times 10^{-13}$ for this binary system, we find from

94: equation (1)

95: %

96: \begin{equation}

97:    |\alpha_p|<0.02 \quad \mbox{(95\% C.L.)}

98: \end{equation}

99: Simulations show, that this value should improve by a factor of five within

100: the next three years (Lange {\it et al.}, in prep.).

101: 

102: \vspace{-1ex}

103: 

104: \section{Gravitational Stark effects}

105: 

106: \subsection{Violation of the strong equivalence principle}

107: 

108: The {\em strong equivalence principle (SEP)} requires the universality of free

109: fall of all objects in an external gravitational field regardless of their

110: mass, composition and fraction of gravitational self-energy. While all metric

111: theories of gravity share the property of universality of free fall of test

112: particles (weak equivalence principle), many of them, which are considered as

113: realistic alternatives to general relativity, predict a violation of the

114: SEP. A violation of the SEP can be understood as an inequality between the

115: gravitational mass, $m_g$, and the inertial mass, $m_i$, which can be written

116: as function of $\epsilon$:

117: %

118: \begin{equation}

119:    m_g/m_i \equiv 1 + \delta(\epsilon) 

120:       = 1 + \eta \epsilon + {\cal O}(\epsilon^2) \;.

121: \end{equation}

122: %

123: While the analysis of lunar-laser-ranging data tightly constrains the

124: `Nordtvedt parameter' $\eta$ (M\"uller {\it et al.\ }1997) it indicates

125: nothing about a violation of the SEP in strong-field regimes, i.e.\ terms of

126: higher order in $\epsilon$, due to the smallness of $\epsilon$ for

127: solar-system bodies. For neutron stars, however, $\epsilon \sim 0.15$ and thus

128: binary-pulsars with white-dwarf companions ($\epsilon \sim 10^{-4}$) provide

129: ideal laboratories for testing a violation of the SEP due to nonlinear

130: properties of the gravitational interaction (Damour \& Sch\"afer 1991).

131: 

132: In case of a violation of the SEP the eccentricity vector of a

133: small-eccentricity binary-pulsar system exposed to the external gravitational

134: field of the Galaxy, ${\bf g}$, is a superposition of a constant vector ${\bf

135: e}_F$ and a vector ${\bf e}_R$ which is turning in the orbital plane with the

136: rate of the relativistic advance of periastron. The `induced' eccentricity

137: ${\bf e}_F$ points into the direction of the projection of the Galactic

138: acceleration onto the orbital plane, ${\bf g}_\perp$, and $e_F \propto

139: (\delta_p-\delta_c) P_b^2 g_\perp$.  However, neither the length of ${\bf

140: e}_R$ nor its rotational phase $\theta$ are known quantities. We therefore

141: have to proceed as follows.  Given a certain

142: $(\delta_p-\delta_c)\simeq\delta_p$, i.e.~a certain $e_F$ for a given binary

143: pulsar, the observed eccentricity $e$ sets an upper limit to $|\theta|$ which

144: is independent of $e_R$: $\sin|\theta|<e/e_F$ for $e<e_F$ and $|\theta|\le\pi$

145: for $e \ge e_F$ (Wex 1997). We now have to calculate an upper limit for

146: $\theta$ for every observed small-eccentricity binary pulsar and compare the

147: result with Monte-Carlo simulations of a large number of (cumulative)

148: distributions for the (uniformly distributed) angle $\theta$.  This way, by

149: counting the number of simulated distributions which are in agreement with the

150: `observed' limits, one obtains the confidence level with which a certain

151: $\delta_p$ is excluded.  As a safe upper limit for $|\delta_p|$ we find

152: %

153: \begin{equation}

154:    |\delta_p| < 0.009 \quad \mbox{(95\% C.L.)}

155: \end{equation}

156: %

157: Note, in order to calculate $e_F$ for a given binary system, we need also the

158: masses of pulsar and companion and the location and orientation of the binary

159: system in the Galaxy. If there are no restrictions from timing and optical

160: observations, the pulsar masses were assumed to be uniformly distributed in

161: the range $1.2M_\odot<m_p<2M_\odot$, the companion masses were taken from

162: evolutionary scenarios (Tauris \& Savonije 1999), and the pulsar distances

163: were estimated using the Taylor-Cordes model assuming a typical error of 25\%

164: (Taylor \& Cordes 1993). Finally, the orientation of the ascending node in the

165: sky, which is an unobservable parameter for all our binary system, was treated

166: as variable which is uniformly distributed between 0 and $2\pi$.

167: 

168: 

169: \subsection{Violation of local Lorentz invariance and conservation laws}

170: 

171: If gravity is mediated in part by a long-range vector field or by a second

172: tensor field one expects the global matter distribution in the Universe to

173: select a preferred frame for the gravitational interaction (Will \& Nordtvedt

174: 1972). At the post-Newtonian level, gravitational effects associated with such

175: a {\em violation of the local Lorentz invariance} of gravity are characterized

176: by two theory dependent parameters $\alpha_1$ and $\alpha_2$.  

177: %

178: %The close

179: %alignment of the Sun's spin axis with the total angular momentum of the solar

180: %system yields a tight bound on the second parameter, $\alpha_2 < 2.4 \times

181: %10^{-7}$ (Nordtvedt 1987).  

182: %

183: If $\alpha_1$ were different from zero, the eccentricity of a binary system

184: which moves with respect to the global matter distribution in the Universe

185: would suffer a secular change similar to a violation of the SEP.  This time,

186: $|e_F| \propto \alpha_1 |m_p-m_c| P_b^{1/3} w_\perp$ where ${\bf w}$ denotes

187: the velocity of the binary system with respect to the preferred frame,

188: i.e.~the cosmic microwave background.  Again, we can perform a Mote-Carlo

189: analysis as outlined in the previous section to derive the upper limit

190: %

191: \begin{equation}

192:    |\alpha_1| < 1.2\times 10^{-4} \quad \mbox{(95\% C.L.)}

193: \end{equation}

194: %

195: This limit is slightly better than the limit obtained from lunar-laser-ranging

196: data (M\"uller {\it et al.\ }1996) and, more importantly, also holds for

197: strong gravitational-field effects which could occur in the strong-field

198: regions of neutron stars. Due to its small eccentricity, $e<1.7\times 10^{-6}$

199: (95\% C.L.), and high velocity with respect to the cosmic microwave background

200: ($w \approx 500$ km/s), PSR J1012+5307 turns out to be the most important

201: binary system for this kind of analysis (Lange {\it et al.\ }, in prep). While

202: for PSR J1012+5307 also the radial velocity of the system is known from

203: spectroscopic observations of the white dwarf companion, for all the other

204: binary pulsars no radial velocity information is available and we have to

205: assume an isotropic probability distribution for the 3-d velocity.

206: 

207: In theories of gravity which violate the local Lorentz invariance and the

208: momentum conservation law, a rotating self-gravitating body will suffer a

209: self-acceleration which is given by ${\bf a}_{{\rm self}} = -\frac{1}{3}

210: \alpha_3 \epsilon {\bf w} \times \mbox {\boldmath{$\Omega$}}$ (Nordtvedt \&

211: Will 1972), where $\alpha_3$ is a theory dependent parameter and $\mbox

212: {\boldmath{$\Omega$}}$ denotes the rotational velocity of the body. Again,

213: binary pulsars are ideal probes for this kind of self-acceleration effects

214: (Bell \& Damour 1996).  A careful analysis analogous to the previous analyses

215: (SEP, local Lorentz invariance) gives

216: %

217: \begin{equation}

218:    |\alpha_3| < 1.5 \times 10^{-19} \quad  \mbox{(95\% C.L.)}

219: \end{equation}

220: 

221: Note, the statistical tests for gravitational Stark effects presented here for

222: the first time appropriately take care of selection effects by simulating the

223: whole population, therefore, giving the first reliable limits for $\delta_p$,

224: $\alpha_1$, and $\alpha_3$.

225: 

226: \acknowledgements

227: 

228: I am grateful to Kenneth Nordtvedt for pointing out to me the problem of

229: selection effects related with binary-pulsar limits to gravitational Stark

230: effects. I thank Christoph Lange for numerous valuable discussions.

231: 

232: \begin{references}

233: 

234: \reference %\bibitem{bd96}

235: J.~F.~Bell \& T.~Damour:

236: Class.~Quantum~Grav., \textbf{13}, 3121 (1996)

237: 

238: \reference %\bibitem{cgk98}

239: P.~J.~Callanan, P.~M.~Garnavich, D.~Koester:

240: MNRAS, \textbf{298}, 207 (1998)

241: 

242: \reference %\bibitem{de-f96a}

243: T.~Damour \& G.~Esposito-Far\'ese:

244: Phys.~Rev.~D, \textbf{53}, 5541 (1996a)

245: 

246: \reference %\bibitem{de-f96b}

247: T.~Damour \& G.~Esposito-Far\'ese:

248: Phys.~Rev.~D, \textbf{54}, 1474 (1996b)

249: 

250: \reference %\bibitem{ds91}

251: T.~Damour \& G.~Sch\"afer:

252: Phys.~Rev.~Lett., \textbf{66}, 2550 (1991)

253: 

254: \reference %\bibitem{dt92}

255: T.~Damour \& J.~H.~Taylor: 

256: Phys.~Rev.~D, \textbf{45}, 1840 (1992)

257: 

258: \reference %\bibitem{ktr94}

259: V.~M.~Kaspi, J.~H.~Taylor \& M.~F.~Ryba: ApJ, \textbf{428}, 713 (1994)

260: 

261: \reference %\bibitem{mnv96}

262: J.~M\"uller, K.~Nordtvedt \& D.~Vokrouhlick\'y:

263: Phys.~Rev.~D, \textbf{54}, R5927 (1996)

264: 

265: \reference %\bibitem{msn+97}

266: J.~M\"uller, M.~Schneider, K.~Nordtvedt \& D.~Vokrouhlicky:

267: In: {\em Proceedings of the 8th Marcel Grossman Meeting, Jerusalem 1997}

268: 

269: \reference %\bibitem{nll+95}

270: L.~Nicastro, A.~G.~Lyne, D.~R.~Lorimer, P.~A.~Harrison, M.~Bailes,

271: B.~D.~Skidmore:

272: MNRAS, \textbf{273}, L68 (1995) 

273: 

274: %\reference %\bibitem{nor87}

275: %K.~Nordtvedt: , ApJ, \textbf{320}, 871 (1987)

276: 

277: \reference %\bibitem{nw72}

278: K.~Nordtvedt \& C.~M.~Will: ApJ, \textbf{177}, 775 (1972)

279: 

280: \reference

281: T.~M.~Tauris \& G.~J.~Savonije: A\&A, \textbf{350}, 928 (1999)

282: 

283: \reference

284: J.~H.~Taylor \& J.~M.~Cordes: ApJ, \textbf{411}, 674 (1993)

285: 

286: \reference %\bibitem{vankbk96}

287: M.~H.~van Kerkwijk, P.~Bergeron \& S.~R.~Kulkarni:

288: ApJ, \textbf{467}, L89 (1996)

289: 

290: \reference %\bibitem{wex97}

291: N.~Wex: A\&A, \textbf{317}, 976 (1997)

292: 

293: \reference %\bibitem{wil93}

294: C.~M.~Will: {\em Theory \& experiment in gravitational physics}, 

295: (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1993)

296: 

297: \reference %\bibitem{wn72}

298: C.~M.~Will \& K.~Nordtvedt: ApJ, \textbf{177}, 757 (1972)

299: 

300: \end{references}

301: 

302: \end{document}

303: \end{document}

304: