1: \chapter{Solar Observations}
2:
3: %\vspace*{1cm}
4: Since Eddingtons famous measurement of the bending of light at the solar limb during
5: a total eclipse in 1919 \cite{ded20}, the sun is counted among the most important
6: objects concerning experimental tests of theories of gravity. Due to it's relative
7: spatial proximity it is possible to determine the relevant initial parameters for a
8: particular experiment like the mass and the distance with high accuracy.
9: This, together with the high gravitational potential of the sun, opens the possibility
10: to look for often tiny effects which makes the difference in predictions between
11: competing theories.
12:
13: In this sense we utilize solar polarimetric data to constrain birefringence induced by the
14: gravitational field of the Sun and set limits on the coupling constants $\ell^2$ and $k^2$
15: required by NGT and metric-affine gravity. The initial parameter mentioned above which is
16: relevant for the major part of this present work represents a prediction about the fractional
17: percentage of Stokes profiles with anomalous symmetry properties in solar polarimetric
18: data. Based on intensive numerical simulations of the creation of Stokes profiles in the
19: solar atmosphere as well as on observations, it is found that the fraction of such
20: profiles is always less than 10\% of all observed profiles (if this number is sufficiently
21: large), independent of the spatial resolution of the instrument. Since a sufficiently
22: strong gravity-induced birefringence could produce any desired amount of anomalous profiles
23: up to 100\%, this value serves as an upper limit for our subsequent analysis. To test this
24: approach, we have developed a second technique which is independent of the previous
25: assumptions and gives comparable constrains.
26:
27:
28: The following chapter starts with a description of the two independent statistical
29: approaches, the so-called 'Stokes asymmetry technique' and the 'profile difference
30: technique'. The employed data sets, recorded 1995 at the Iza\~na Observatory in Tenerife and
31: in 2000 in Locarno, are described in section 2.2 together with the relevant technical
32: details of the instruments. We have measured the line profiles of the full Stokes vector
33: in four spectral lines which gave us a total of 1120 spectra. The Stokes asymmetry
34: technique yields $\ell^2_{\odot} < (57.1\, \mbox{km})^2$ in line Cr I 5247.56{\AA}
35: in the case of NGT and $k^2_{\odot} < (1.1\, \mbox{km})^2$ in the same line for
36: metric-affine gravity, respectively. These results are consistent with the profile
37: difference technique. In the case of NGT, the result is seven orders of magnitude smaller
38: than the $\ell^2_{\odot}$ value favored by Moffat (Moffat 1979 \cite{mof79}).
39:
40:
41:
42: \newpage
43: \section{Technique}
44: We follow two strategies to test for gravitational birefringence. One of these
45: was outlined by Solanki \& Haugan (1996)\cite{sah96}. It is summarized and its implementation
46: is described in Sec. 2.1.1. The other technique is new and is described in Sec.
47: 2.1.2.
48:
49: \subsection{Stokes asymmetry technique}
50: The strategy proposed by Solanki \& Haugan (1996)\cite{sah96} makes use of the symmetry
51: properties of the Stokes profiles produced by the Zeeman splitting of atomic
52: spectral lines. In the absence of radiative transfer effects in a dynamic
53: atmosphere net circular polarization, Stokes $V$, is antisymmetric in wavelength
54: and net linear polarization aligned at $45^{\circ}$ to the solar limb, Stokes $U$,
55: is symmetric. Gravitational birefringence changes the phase between orthogonal
56: linear polarizations and thus partly converts Stokes $V$ into Stokes $U$ and
57: vice versa. However, $U$ produced from $V$ by gravitational birefringence
58: still has the symmetry of $V$ and can thus be distinguished from the Zeeman signal.
59:
60: Let $\Delta\Phi$ be the phase shift which accumulates at the central wavelength
61: of a spectral line between Stokes $V$ and $U$ as light propagates from a point on
62: the solar surface to the observer. Formulae for $\Delta\Phi$ as predicted by
63: metric affine theories were already given in chapter 1. For Moffat's NGT
64: (Moffat 1979 \cite{mof79}) a corresponding expression has been published by
65: Gabriel et al. (1991)\cite{gab91}. Further, let subscripts '$a$' and '$s$'
66: signify the antisymmetric and symmetric parts of the Stokes profiles, respectively,
67: and the subscripts 'src' and 'obs' the Stokes profiles as created at the source
68: and as observed, respectively. Then,
69: \begin{eqnarray}
70: \frac{U_{\asc}}{U_{\ssc}} &=&
71: \frac{V_{\aob}\;\, \sin\Delta\Phi + U_{\aob}\;\, \cos\Delta\Phi}
72: {V_{\sob}\;\, \sin\Delta\Phi + U_{\sob}\;\, \cos\Delta\Phi} \label{U_{src}}\\
73: \frac{V_{\ssc}}{V_{\asc}} &=&
74: \frac{V_{\sob}\;\,\cos\Delta\Phi + U_{\sob}\;\,\sin\Delta\Phi}
75: {V_{\aob}\;\,\cos\Delta\Phi + U_{\aob}\;\,\sin\Delta\Phi} \label{V_{src}} \quad .
76: \end{eqnarray}
77: Thus for observed symmetric and antisymmetric fractions of $U$ and $V$ Eqs.(\ref{U_{src}})
78: and (\ref{V_{src}}) predict the ratios $U_{\fa}/U_{\fs}$ and
79: $V_{\fs}/V_{\fa}$ at the solar source.
80:
81: If the solar atmosphere were static these ratios would vanish $(U_{\asc}=V_{\asc}=0)$,
82: so that any observed $U_{\fa}$ or $V_{\fs}$ would be due to either $\Delta\Phi$
83: or noise: $U_{\aob} = V_{\asc} \sin\Delta\Phi$, $V_{\sob} = U_{\ssc}\sin\Delta\Phi$.
84: The solar atmosphere is not static, however, and consequently the Stokes profiles do
85: not fulfill the symmetry properties expected from the Zeeman effect even for rays
86: coming from solar disc centre, which are unaffected by gravitational birefringence.
87: This asymmetry has been extensively studied, in particularly for Stokes $V$, which
88: most prominently exhibits it (e.g. Solanki \& Stenflo 1984 \cite{sos84}, Grossmann-Doerth et al.
89: 1989 \cite{gd89}, Steiner et al. 1999 \cite{sgs99}, Mart\'{\i}nez Pillet et al. 1997
90: \cite{mp97}). Although most profiles
91: have $V_{\fs}/V_{\fa} \lsim 0.2$, a few percent of $V$ profiles exhibit $V_{\fs}/V_{\fa}$
92: values close to unity, even at solar disc centre. Such profiles occur in different
93: types of solar regions, e.g. the quiet Sun (Steiner et al. 1999 \cite{sgs99}), active region
94: neutral lines (Solanki et al. 1993 \cite{sea93}) and sunspots (S\'{a}nchez Almeida
95: \& Lites 1992 \cite{sal92}).
96: The magnitude of $V_{\fs}/V_{\fa}$ decreases rapidly with increasing $V_{\fa}$ and
97: profiles with $V_{\fs}/V_{\fa} \gsim 1$ are all very weak. They are often associated
98: with the presence of opposite magnetic polarities within the spatial resolution element
99: and a magnetic vector that is almost perpendicular to the line of sight, situations
100: which naturally give rise to small $V$ (e.g. S\'{a}nchez Almeida \& Lites 1992 \cite{sal92},
101: Ploner et al. 2001 \cite{plo01}).
102:
103: The observed Stokes $U$ asymmetry is on average smaller than the $V$ asymmetry. This is
104: true in particular for extreme asymmertic values, i.e. $(U_{\aob}/U_{\sob})_{\mbox{\footnotesize{max}}}
105: \ll (V_{\sob} /V_{\aob})_{\mbox{\footnotesize{max}}}$. Since this relation also holds at
106: $\cos\theta = \mu = 1$ where $\theta$ denotes the heliozentric angle between the source
107: on the solar surface and the line-of-sight, it is valid for source profiles as well.
108: % Indeed, Mart\'{\i}nez Pillet et al. (1997) \cite{mp97} had to
109: % average together many $Q$ and $U$ profiles to establish any asymmetry at all.
110: Thus, S\'{a}nchez Almeida \& Lites (1992) \cite{sal92} point out that Stokes $U$ retains
111: $U_{\aob}/U_{\sob} \ll 1$ throughout a sunspot, although $V_{\fs}/V_{\fa} > 1$ is
112: invariably achieved at the neutral line.
113: % Note that, unlike earlier data which often showed significantly
114: % asymmetric $Q$ and $V$ profiles, these data were carefully treated to remove instrumental
115: % cross-talk.
116: The reason for the smaller maximum asymmetry lies in the fact that Stokes $U$ senses the
117: transverse magnetic field. Since velocities in the solar atmosphere are directed mainly
118: along the field lines they generally have a small line-of-sight component when $U$ has a
119: significant amplitude. Sizable line-of-sight velocities are needed, however, to produce a
120: significant asymmetry (Grossmann-Doerth et al. 1989 \cite{gd89}). Another reason for the smaller
121: maximum $U$ asymmetry is that, unlike Stokes $V$, it does not distinguish between oppositely
122: directed magnetic fields.
123:
124: Thus it is not surprising that in the following analysis Stokes $U$ provides tighter
125: limits than Stokes $V$. Another reason is that due to the on average stronger observed $V$
126: profiles asymmetries introduced in $U$ (through gravitationally introduced cross-talk from $V$)
127: are larger than the other way round. However, we also analyse Stokes $V$ as a consistency
128: check.
129:
130: In order to seperate the asymmetry produced by solar effects from that introduced
131: by gravitational birefringence, one strategy to follow is to consider large amplitude
132: Stokes profiles only.
133: %, i.e. profiles with amplitudes which in that particular kind of solar feature exhibit
134: % only a small $V_{\fs}/V_{\fa}$ at $\mu = 1$.
135: Another is to analyse data spanning a large range of $\mu$ values, since gravitational
136: birefringence follows a definite centre-to-limb variation, as predicted by particular
137: gravitation theories. Finally, the larger the number of analysed line profiles, the
138: more precise the limit that can be set on $\Delta\Phi$. Better statistics not only
139: reduce the influence of noise, they are also needed because for a single profile
140: gravitational birefringence can both increase or decrease $V_{\fs}/V_{\fa}$ and
141: $U_{\fa}/U_{\fs}$. The latter may become important if the source profiles are strongly
142: asymmetric. Thus a small observed $V_{\fs}/V_{\fa}$ or $U_{\fa}/U_{\fs}$ is in itself
143: no guarantee for a small gravitational birefringence. However, since almost all source
144: profiles are expected to have $V_{\fs}/V_{\fa} \ll 1$ and $U_{\fa}/U_{\fs} \ll 1$, on average
145: we expect gravitational birefringence to increase these ratios.
146:
147:
148: \vspace*{0.5cm}
149: \subsection{Profile difference technique}
150: The profile difference technique relies on the fact that $\Delta\Phi$ is expected
151: to be a strong function of $\mu$ which is confirmed in the two concrete cases of
152: NGT and metric affine theories (see chapter 1). This means that for any sufficiently large NGT
153: charge $\ell_{\odot}$ or equivalent metric affine parameter $k$ a mixture of Stokes
154: $V$ and $U$ profiles will be observed across the solar disc irrespective of
155: the {\it relative} numbers and strengths of $V$ and $U$ profiles leaving the solar
156: photosphere.
157: Thus, irrespective of the value of $<|V_{\src}|>-<|U_{\src}|>$
158: for sufficiently large $\ell_{\odot}$ or $k$ $<|V_{\obs}|>-<|U_{\obs}|>$ will tend to zero.
159: The averaging is over all $\mu$ values and the total number of profiles is assumed to
160: be very large.
161:
162: This effect is illustrated Fig. \ref{pdt1}. In in the top of Fig.\ref{pdt1}
163: $|V_{\obs}| - |U_{\obs}|$ is plotted vs. $\ell_{\odot}$ and $\mu$ for the extreme cases
164: $|V_{\src}| = 0$ (Fig.\ref{pdt1} top left) and $|U_{\src}| = 0$ (Fig.\ref{pdt1} top right).
165: Other combinations of $|V_{\src}(\mu)|$ and $|U_{\src}(\mu)|$ give qualitatively similar results.
166:
167: \begin{figure}[t]
168: \centerline{\psfig{figure=a-v0-u.ps,height=2.7in,width=2.7in}
169: \psfig{figure=a-v-u0.ps,height=2.7in,width=2.7in}}
170: \centerline{\psfig{figure=avg-v0-u.ps,height=2.7in,width=2.7in}
171: \psfig{figure=avg-v-u0.ps,height=2.7in,width=2.7in}}
172: \caption{Top: $|V_{\obs}| - |U_{\obs}|$ vs. $\ell_{\odot}$ and $\mu$ for
173: $|V_{\src}| = 0$ (left) and $|U_{\src}| = 0$ (right).
174: Bottom:$|V_{\obs}| - |U_{\obs}|$ averaged over all $\mu$ for
175: the cases above. }
176: \label{pdt1}
177: \end{figure}
178:
179: The $|V_{\obs}| - |U_{\obs}|$ surface oscillates even more rapidly with increasing
180: $\ell_{\odot}$ and with decreasing $\mu$. Lines of equal $|V_{\obs}| - |U_{\obs}|$
181: are strongly curved in the $\ell_{\odot} - \mu$ plane. These two points combine to lead
182: to decreasing $<|V_{\obs}|>-<|U_{\obs}|>$ with increasing $\ell_{\odot}$.
183: This is shown in the bottom of Figs.\ref{pdt1} left and right for the cases illustrated
184: in the figures above.
185: As expected the $<|V_{\obs}|>-<|U_{\obs}|>$ vs. $\ell_{\odot}$ curves exhibit a rapidly
186: damped oscillation around zero.
187: This effect can be used to set upper limits on gravitational birefringence if the
188: observations exhibit a $ <|V_{\obs}|>-<|U_{\obs}|>$ that differs significantly from
189: zero. As is later shown, this is indeed the case.
190:
191: %\newpage
192:
193: \section{Observations and data}
194: Two sets of data have been analysed in the present work. They are described
195: below.
196: \subsection{Data obtained in 1995}
197: Observations were carried out from 7 - 13th Nov. 1995 with the Gregory
198: Coud\a'e Telescope (GCT) at the Iza\~na Observatory on the
199: Island of Teneriffe. For the polarimetry we employed the original version
200: of the Z\"urich Imaging Polarimeter (ZIMPOL I), which employs 3 CCD cameras,
201: one each to record Stokes $I\pm Q,$ $I\pm U$ and $I\pm V$ simultaneously
202: (e.g. Keller et al. 1992 \cite{kea92}).
203:
204: The recorded wavelength range contains four prominent spectral lines,
205: Fe I 5247.06{\AA}, Cr I 5247.56{\AA}, Fe I 5250.22{\AA} \& Fe I 5250.65{\AA}.
206: Three of these spectral lines are among those with the largest Stokes amplitudes
207: in the whole solar spectrum and are also unblended by other spectral lines (Solanki
208: et al. 1986 \cite{sea86}). Blending poses a serious problem since it can affect the blue-red
209: asymmetry of the Stokes profiles. By analysing more than one such line it
210: is possible to reduce the influence of hidden blends and noise.
211: Nowhere else in the visible spectrum are similar lines located sufficiently
212: close in wavelength that they can be recorded simultaneously
213: on a single detector. Also, compared to other lines with large Stokes
214: amplitudes the chosen set lies at a short wavelength. This is important since
215: the influence of gravitational birefringence on line polarization is proportional
216: to $1/\lambda$. The sum of the above properties make the chosen range almost
217: uniquely suited for our purpose.
218:
219:
220: In order to image all 4 spectral lines of interest onto a single CCD we introduced
221: reduction optics between the image plane of the spectrograph and the detectors.
222: They produce an image-scale reduction by a factor of 3.2. The final spectral
223: resolving power $\lambda/\Delta\lambda$ corresponded to 210'000. The spatial
224: scale corresponding to a pixel was $1.13''$ (or 860 km on the sun). However,
225: the spatial resolution of the data is limited by turbulence in the Earth's
226: atmosphere, the so-called seeing. This varied somewhat in the course of the
227: observing run, so that the estimated angular resolution of the observations
228: lies between $1.1''$ and $3''$.
229:
230: The modulator package, composed of 2 piezoelectric modulators oscillating
231: at frequencies of around 50'000 \& 100'000 and a linear polarizer (glass prism),
232: was placed ahead of the entrance slit to the spectrograph, but was nevertheless
233: (unavoidably) located after 2 oblique reflections in the telescope. Oblique
234: reflections produce cross-talk between Stokes parameters, i.e. they partially
235: convert one form of polarization into another. Since we are trying to observe,
236: or at least set limits on ''cross-talk'' between Stokes $U$ and $V$ due to
237: gravitational birefringence we took some trouble to reduce the instrumental
238: cross-talk to the extent possible. A first step was the choice of the telescope.
239: With only two oblique reflections, whose relative angles change only slowly in
240: the course of a year, the GCT is relatively benign compared to most other large
241: solar telescopes. Secondly, a half-wave plate was introduced between the two
242: oblique reflections. S\'{a}nchez Almeida et al. \cite{smw91,smk95} have
243: pointed out that a half-wave plate at that location should, under ideal circumstances,
244: completely eliminate all instrumental cross-talk. To test the efficiency of the
245: half-wave plate in suppressing instrumental cross-talk between Stokes $Q$, $U$ and $V$
246: we first carried out a series of observations of a sunspot near the centre of the
247: solar disc both with and without a half-wave plate introduced in the light path.
248: Such tests were necessary since the half-wave plate available at the GCT is not
249: optimized for the observed wavelength. Note that at solar disc centre $(\mu = 1)$
250: gravitational birefringence disappears, so that we test for instrumental cross-talk
251: only. The half-wave plate was indeed found to significantly reduce instrumental
252: cross-talk. Remaining cross-talk was removed during data reduction using a numerical
253: model of the telescope that includes an imperfect half-wave plate (adapted
254: from a model kindly provided by V. Mart\'{\i}nez Pillet). The parameters of the
255: model were adjusted slightly using the observations of the sunspot umbra close to
256: disc centre. We estimated that the residual cross-talk after this procedure is
257: at the level of a few percent. Since Stokes $V$, $Q$, $U$ profiles generally have
258: amplitudes of $0.1I_c$ or less, the influence of the cross-talk is of the same order as
259: the noise, which is roughly $1-2\times10^{-3} I_c$, where $I_c$ is the continuum
260: intensity. Photon noise is by far the largest contributor to this noise level.
261: % The total exposure time needed to reduce the noise to this level was ...
262: At this level instrumental cross-talk caeses to be of concern for our analysis.
263:
264: The Zimpol polarimeters are unique in that they combine CCD detectors with a very
265: high modulation frequency $(\geq 50'000 $ Hz) and hence preclude distortion of the
266: Stokes profiles and cross-talk between them due to seeing fluctuations. This again
267: improves the accuracy of the profile shapes and hence the accuracy of our results.
268:
269: % The orientation of the spectrograph slit of a Gregorian telescope rotates
270: % relative to the solar disc in the course of a day. Since the measured Stokes
271: % $Q$ \& $U$ are defined relative to the slit, they are transformed into solar
272: % coordinates (i.e. relative to the nearest point of the solar limb), such that
273: % Stokes $Q$ is oriented parallel to the limb and Stokes $U$ is oriented at $45^{\circ}$
274: % to the limb.
275: A total of 106 recordings were made at different locations on the solar disc in
276: an attempt to cover a large range of $\mu$ homogenously. Particular emphasis was
277: placed on observations close to the limb since gravitational birefringence is expected
278: to be largest for such rays.
279:
280: Since only a single sunspot was present on the solar disc during the observing run
281: most recordings refer to faculae and network features, i.e. magnetic features with
282: lower Stokes $Q$, $U$, $V$ signals.
283: \begin{figure}
284: \vspace{0.5cm}
285: \centerline{\psfig{figure=n4fac.ps,width=4.37in,height=7.02in}}
286: \vspace{0.5cm}
287: \caption{Sample spectrum of Stokes $I, Q, U$ and $V$.}
288: \label{n4fac}
289: \end{figure}
290: In Fig.\ref{n4fac} a sample Stokes $I,Q,U,V$ spectrum of a facular region near the solar
291: limb is plotted. The 4 analyzed spectral lines are identified. These data were fully
292: reduced following the tedious, but well-tested procedures described by Bernasconi (1997)
293: \cite{ber97}.
294:
295: \subsection{Data set of March 2000}
296:
297: In order to improve the statistics and the $\mu$ coverage a second observing run was
298: carried out in March 2000 with the Coud\a'e - Gregory Telescope in Locarno, Switzerland.
299: This telescope is almost identical to the GCT on Tenerife and the parameters such as
300: spectral resolution, noise level etc. are very similar to those of the 1995 observations.
301:
302: The second generation, ZIMPOL II polarimeter (Gandorfer \& Povel 1997, Povel 1998
303: \cite{gap97,pov98}) was employed
304: for the polarization analysis and data recording. It simultaneously records three
305: of the four Stokes parameters, either Stokes $I,Q,V$ or $I,U,V$ on a single CCD
306: detector chip. Observations in these two modes were interlaced, such that alternate
307: exposures record Stokes $I,Q,V$ and $I,U,V$, respectively.
308: Exposures of the same Stokes parameters were then added together to reduce noise.
309: Thus the final data set consists of all four Stokes parameters. The only differences
310: with respect to the recordings made in 1995 are that the number of
311: spatial pixels is reduced and that the noise level of Stokes $V$ in the newer
312: data is a factor of $\sqrt{2}$ lower than of Stokes $Q$ and $U$, whereas Stokes
313: $Q$, $U$ and $V$ had the same noise level in the earlier recordings. Due to the
314: superior modulation scheme implemented in ZIMPOL II Stokes $Q$ and
315: $U$ achieve a noise level of $10^{-3}I_c$ after roughly the same exposure time
316: during the observations made in 2000 as during the earlier campaign.
317:
318: These observations were carried out on the day of the equinox, at which time
319: the two mirrors producing oblique reflections of the beam ahead of the modulator package
320: are oriented such that their polarization cross-talk cancels out. Hence for
321: these observations the instrumental cross-talk is essentially zero and no further
322: treatment of the data for this effect is required.
323:
324: The Sun was very active at the time of these observations with many active regions
325: harboring sunspots and faculae present on the solar disc. Since active regions
326: generally give larger amplitude Stokes signals we concentrated on observing them.
327: A total of 7 exposures were made. The typical seeing during these observations was estimated
328: to be $2 - 3''$, while the spatial pixel size was $1.13''$.
329:
330: \vspace{0.5cm}
331: \begin{figure}[h]
332:
333: \centerline{\psfig{figure=smdi.ps,height=5.22in,width=3.76in}}
334: \caption{SOHO MDI intensity image from 22nd March 2000.}
335: \end{figure}
336:
337: \newpage
338:
339: \section{Data analysis}
340: Each exposure gives us the line profiles of the 4 spectral lines in Stokes $I, Q, U$
341: and $V$ at a set of 94 (128 in the 1995 data) positions on the solar disc. Once the
342: reduction and calibration procedure is completed we select from a given frame those
343: spectra for further analysis for which the $S/N$ ratio for either Stokes $U$ or $V$
344: in at least one of the four spectral lines is above 12 in the 1995 data and above 15
345: in the 2000 data.
346:
347: This criterion gave us a total of 4480 profiles from the four lines and were analysed further.
348: The non-orthogonal wavelet-packets smoothing scheme of Fligge \& Solanki (1998) \cite{fas98}
349: was employed to enhance the $S/N$ ratio by a factor of 1.5 - 2 without significantly
350: affecting the profile shapes.
351:
352: Then a set of parameters was determined of all Stokes profiles of all 4 spectral lines.
353: Of these parameters only the signed amplitudes of the blue and red wings, $a_{\mbox{\footnotesize{b}}}$ and
354: $a_{\mbox{\footnotesize{r}}}$ (i.e. of the blue and red Zeeman $\sigma$-component) are
355: of relevance for the present study. In Fig. 2 we plot a Stokes $U$ and $V$ profile
356: of the Fe I line at 5250.22{\AA}. $a_{\mbox{\footnotesize{b,r}}}(V)$ and
357: $a_{\mbox{\footnotesize{b,r}}}(U)$ are indicated in the figure. Using these we can
358: form the symmetric and antisymmetric parts of the Stokes $V$ and $U$
359: profile amplitudes, $V_{\fs}=(a_{\mbox{\footnotesize{b}}} + a_{\mbox{\footnotesize{r}}})/2$,
360: $V_{\fa}=(a_{\mbox{\footnotesize{b}}} -
361: a_{\mbox{\footnotesize{r}}})/2$, $U_{\fs}=(a_{\mbox{\footnotesize{b}}} +
362: a_{\mbox{\footnotesize{r}}})/2$ and $U_{\fa}=(a_{\mbox{\footnotesize{b}}} -
363: a_{\mbox{\footnotesize{r}}})/2$, respectively, which enter Eqs. (\ref{U_{src}})
364: and (\ref{V_{src}}). In the following all $V$ and $U$ values and parameters are normalized to the
365: continuum intensity, although this is often not explicitely mentioned.
366: \begin{figure}[h]
367: \centerline{\psfig{figure=vprofile.ps,height=3.2in,width=3.in}
368: \psfig{figure=uprofile.ps,height=3.2in,width=3.in}}
369: \caption{Simultaneously measured profiles of Stokes $V$ and Stokes $U$
370: of the Fe I line at 5250.22{\AA}. }
371: \label{fig2}
372: \end{figure}
373:
374: \newpage
375: \subsection{Stokes asymmetry technique}
376: A measure of the asymmetry of a Stokes profile is given by the ratio
377: $\delta V = V_{\fs}/V_{\fa}$, respectively $\delta U = U_{\fa}/U_{\fs}$
378: (e.g. Solanki \& Stenflo 1984 \cite{sos84}, Mart\'{\i}nez Pillet et al. 1997 \cite{mp97})
379: In Fig. \ref{sat1} we plot these quantities vs. $|V_{\fa}|$ and $|U_{\fs}|$, respectively.
380: Each point in these plots refers to a Stokes profile of the Fe I 5250.65{\AA} line.
381: \begin{figure}[t]
382: \centerline{\hspace*{-1.cm}\psfig{figure=stu-s13.ps,height=3.3in,width=3.3in}\hspace{-0.3cm}
383: \psfig{figure=stv-s13.ps,height=3.3in,width=3.3in}}
384: \caption{Measured amplitude asymmetries for Stokes $U$ and Stokes $V$. }
385: \label{sat1}
386: \end{figure}
387: Although our observations cover a range of $\mu$ values, Fig. \ref{sat1} is very
388: similar to corresponding figures based on data obtained near solar disc centre (Grossmann-Doert
389: et al. 1996 \cite{gd96}, Mart\'{\i}nez Pillet et al. 1997 \cite{mp97}), where the influence of
390: gravitational birefringence is expected to be negligible. For large amplitudes ($V_{\fa}$,
391: $U_{\fs}$) the relative asymmetry ($V_{\fs}/V_{\fa}$,$U_{\fa}/U_{\fs}$) is small,
392: while for weaker profiles it shows an increasingly large spread. For the weaker profiles
393: this spread is mainly due to noise as can be judged from the solid and dashed curves in Fig. \ref{sat1},
394: which outline the $1\sigma$ and $3\sigma$ spread expected due to photon noise, respectively.
395: The curves reveal that Stokes profiles with amplitudes ($V_{\fa}$, $U_{\fs}$) smaller than one percent
396: of the continuums intensity are so strongly affected by noise that they are of little use
397: for the present purpose. This leaves us with 1966 individual profiles for further analysis.
398: In Fig.\ref{histo} we plot a histogram of the number of these profiles as a function of $\mu$.
399: The distribution is uneven, being determined by the position on the solar disc of magnetic
400: features at the time of the observations.
401: \begin{figure}[h]
402: \centerline{\psfig{figure=hg.ps,height=2.75in,width=4.18in}}
403: \caption{Histogram of the number of profiles as a function of $\mu$.}
404: \label{histo}
405: \end{figure}
406:
407: The further analysis is made more complicated by the fact that a $V_{\fs}$ and a $U_{\fa}$
408: signal can be produced not just by gravitational birefringence, but also by radiative
409: transfer processes acting in the dynamic solar atmosphere, as described in Sect. 3.
410: To circumvent this problem we consider all profiles satisfying the criterion that
411: $|V_{\fa}|$ or $|U_{\fs}| \geq 0.01$. For all these profiles $|\delta V_{\obs}| < 0.7$
412: and $|\delta U_{\obs}| < 0.6$. A similar picture is also obtained at the center of the solar
413: disc. Hence one way to limit $\ell_{\odot}^2$ is to require $|\delta V_{\src}| < 1$ and
414: $|\delta U_{\src}| < 1$ for all positions on the solar disc. This condition is strengthened
415: by the fact that $|\delta V_{\obs}|$ and $|\delta U_{\obs}|$ decrease with decreasing $\mu$,
416: (Stenflo et al. 1987 \cite{sta87}, Mart\'{\i}nez Pillet et al. 1997 \cite{mp97}), whereas
417: gravitational birefringence increases towards the limb, so that one would expect exactly
418: the opposite behaviour if gravitational birefringence had a significant effect on the Stokes
419: $V$ or $U$ profiles.
420:
421:
422: In Fig.\ref{max} we plot the maximum $(U_{\asc}/U_{\ssc})$ value predicted for
423: each of the 4 spectral lines, based on all analysed data, vs. $\ell^2_{\odot}$.
424: The horizontal line represents the value $\log(U_{\asc}/U_{\ssc} = 1)$, a limit
425: above which this ratio is not observed at $\mu \approx 1$. Clearly, as $\ell^2_{\odot}$
426: increases $(U_{\asc}/U_{\ssc})_{\fm}$ initially remains almost
427: equal to $(U_{\aob}/U_{\sob})_{\fm}$, but begins to increase
428: for $\ell^2_{\odot} \gsim (50\,\mbox{km})^2$, becoming $\gsim 10$ at $\ell^2_{\odot} < (100\,
429: \mbox{km})^2$ and finally oscillating randomly around $(U_{\asc}/U_{\ssc})
430: _{\fm}$ of 100 - 1000. All 4 spectral lines exhibit a similar behaviour, implying
431: that the influence of noise is very small.The largest effect of gravitational birefringence
432: is exhibited by the two most strongly Zeeman split lines, Cr I 5247.56{\AA}, Fe I 5250.22
433: {\AA}, which also produce the largest Stokes $V$ and $U$ signals, while the line with
434: the smallest splitting, Fe I 5250.65 {\AA} provides the weakest limit.
435:
436: It is in principle sufficient to limit $\ell_{\odot}$ by requiring that none of the observed
437: spectral lines has $(U_{\asc}/U_{\ssc}) > 1$ within the range of allowed
438: $\ell_{\odot}$ values. This gives $\ell^2_{\odot} < (57.1\, \mbox{km})^2$. A limit obtained
439: similarly from Stokes $V$ is both larger $\ell^2_{\odot} < (80.3\, \mbox{km})^2$ and less
440: reliable, since we cannot completely rule out $V_{\ssc}/V_{\asc} > 1$ to be present,
441: although we expect such profiles to be very rare, among large amplitude profiles.
442:
443: Fig.\ref{mag1} shows the analogous plot for metric affine theories. As in the above case
444: for Moffat's NGT it can be seen that the strongest limit for gravity-induced birefringence
445: is exhibited in the Cr I 5247.56{\AA} and Fe I 5250.22{\AA} line.
446: We get $k^2 < (1.1\,\mbox{km})^2$ from Cr I 5247.56{\AA} and $k^2 < (0.9\,\mbox{km})^2$ from
447: Fe I 5250.22{\AA}.
448: % \vspace{-0.3cm}
449:
450: \newpage
451:
452: \begin{figure}[h]
453: \centerline{\psfig{figure=max.eps,angle=90,height=1.98in,width=.24in}\hspace{-0.4cm}
454: \psfig{figure=su-mxa-3900-01.ps,angle=90,height=3.3in,width=4.62in}}
455: % \vspace{0.3cm}
456: \caption{Maximum of $(U_{\asc}/U_{\ssc})$, on a logarithmic scale, values for all 4 spectral
457: lines vs. $\ell^2_{\odot}$.}
458: \label{max}
459: \centerline{\psfig{figure=max.eps,angle=90,height=1.98in,width=.24in}\hspace{-0.4cm}
460: \psfig{figure=su-4000-01-mag.ps,angle=90,height=3.3in,width=4.62in}}
461: % \vspace{0.3cm}
462: \caption{Maximum of $(U_{\asc}/U_{\ssc})$, on a logarithmic scale, values for all 4 spectral
463: lines vs. the metric affine parameter $k$.}
464: \label{mag1}
465: \end{figure}
466:
467: \clearpage
468:
469: \noindent An alternative test is to determine the fraction of profiles with $(U_{\asc}/
470: U_{\ssc}) > 1$ (Fig.\ref{ungt})
471: %, respectively $V_{\ssc}/V_{\asc} > 1$ (Fig. 7), vs. $\\ell^2_{\odot}$.
472: Fig.\ref{ungt} reveals that initially no $U$ profile satisfies
473: the criterion, above $\ell^2_{\odot} = (57.5\, \mbox{km})^2$ 1.5 \% of the profiles does.
474: This number keeps increasing with $\ell_{\odot}$, before finally oscillating around 70\%
475: at large $\ell_{\odot}$. Thus 10\% of all data points have $(U_{\asc}/U_{\ssc}) > 1$ for
476: $\ell^2_{\odot} = (74.0\, \mbox{km})^2$, 20\% for $\ell^2_{\odot} = (79.4\, \mbox{km})^2$.
477: We are not aware of any solar observations of Stokes $U$ with $\delta U > 1$ for which
478: instrumental cross-talk is negligible (see S\'{a}nchez Almeida \& Lites 1992 \cite{sal92},
479: Skumanich et al. 1990 \cite{sku90}). $\ell_{\odot}^2 < (80 \mbox{km})^2$ is thus a very conservative
480: upper limit.
481: \begin{figure}[t]
482: \vspace{-0.3cm}
483: \centerline{\psfig{figure=ufrac.ps,angle=90,height=2.75in,width=4.18in}}
484: \centerline{\psfig{figure=ufrac-mag.ps,angle=90,height=2.75in,width=4.18in}}
485: \caption{Fraction of profiles with $(U_{\asc}/U_{\ssc}) > 1$ for NGT (top) and MAG (bottom).}
486: \label{ungt}
487: \end{figure}
488: The lower picture shows the analogous plot for metric affine theories. Also, initially no profile
489: satisfies the criterion, above $k^2 = (1.33\, \mbox{km})^2$ 1.7 \% of the profiles does.
490: This number keeps increasing with $\ell_{\odot}$, before finally oscillating around 70\%
491: at large $k$. Thus 10\% of all data points have $(U_{\asc}/U_{\ssc}) > 1$ for
492: $k^2 = (1.95\, \mbox{km})^2$, 20\% for $k^2 = (2.43\, \mbox{km})^2$.
493: $k^2 < (2.5\mbox{km})^2$ is thus a very conservative upper limit.
494: \subsection{Profile difference analysis}
495: We now apply the technique outlined in Sect. 2.1.2 to our data. Due to the limited
496: number of profiles and their irregular distribution over $\mu$ (see Sect. 2.3.1)
497: any limit on gravitational birefringence will be less tight than what is achievable
498: with ideal data presented in Sect. 2.1.2. In order to be able to compare the present
499: results with literature values we first set limits on the $\ell_{\odot}$-parameter in
500: Moffat´s NGT, since earlier work has concentrated on constraining this theory.
501:
502: In Fig.\ref{pdtl3} we plot
503: \begin{equation}
504: \frac{|<|V_{\obs}|>-<|U_{\obs}|>|}{<|V_{\obs}|>+<|U_{\obs}|>}
505: \quad \mbox{vs.} \quad \ell_{\odot},
506: \end{equation}
507: for different initial phase differences $\Delta\Phi$ between the orthogonal modes of
508: line Fe I 5250.65{\AA}. The averaging has been done over the $\mu$ values at which
509: observations are available.
510: \begin{figure}[t]
511: \centerline{\psfig{figure=pdtl3b.ps,width=4.4in,height=3.3in}}
512: \caption{Plot of the observable (Stokes $V$, Stokes $U$) mixture for initial phase
513: differences of $0\pi$, $0.1\pi$, $0.25\pi$ and $0.4\pi$. Note that $\Delta\Phi$ values
514: bigger than $0.5\pi$ give cyclic results.}
515: \label{pdtl3}
516: \end{figure}
517: This line is chosen, since it gives the tightest limits on $\ell_{\odot}^2$.
518: The thick horizontal line represents the value obtained from observations. Obviously
519: above $\ell_{\odot}^2 = (178\, \mbox{km})^2$ the curve obtained from theory always lies below
520: the observed value, hence ruling out such $\ell_{\odot}^2$ values. Note that it is
521: sufficient to test for $\ell^2_{\odot} < (305\, \mbox{km})^2$, since this upper limit has
522: been set using independent data and another technique by Solanki \& Haugan (1996) \cite{sah96}.
523:
524: Similarly we can also set a limit on the coupling constant $k$ of the metric affine
525: theories. Using this technique we obtain $k^2 < (0.69\, \mbox{km})^2$ measured in line
526: Fe I 5250.65{\AA}.
527: \newpage
528: \subsection{Brief history of constraints on $\ell_{\odot}^2$}
529: Up to this point we have presented our results with respect to sharp constraints on the coupling
530: constants $\ell_{\odot}^2$ and $k^2$. In order to get an estimate of the quality of these results
531: compared to previous upper limits we will present here a brief overview on the history of
532: constraints on $\ell_{\odot}^2$ achieved with a variety of different techniques.
533:
534: The first upper bound on the value of the NGT charge $\ell^2_{\odot}$ was given by Moffat himself
535: in 1982 \cite{mof82}. Based on a new determination of the quadrupole moment of the sun he concluded
536: that this result would lead to a deviation of 1.6\% from Einstein's prediction for the precession
537: of the perihelion of Mercury. Moffat claimed that NGT could fit the measured precession with the new
538: quadrupole moment by using a value of $\ell_{\odot}=3.1\cdot 10^3\, \mbox{km}$ close to the upper bound
539: of $\ell_{\odot} \leq 2.9\cdot 10^3\, \mbox{km}$ obtained in 1982 by using an average value on the available
540: Mercury data.
541:
542: The next significant improvement was made by Gabriel et al. in 1991 \cite{gea91}. By using for the
543: first time the NGT prediction of gravity-induced birefringence they presented a quantitative prediction
544: for the phase difference between the orthogonal modes. Consequently, birefringence leads to a depolarization
545: of the Zeeman components of spectral lines emitted from extended, magnetically active regions on the
546: sun. Since the solar-physics data which were available at that time limited the extend of such
547: depolarization, they could only conclude that the Sun's antisymmetric charge must be less than
548: $(535 \, \mbox{km})^2$.
549:
550: This result was based on extremely conservative assumptions regarding the polarization of light
551: emitted by the observed solar feature and an inapplicable requirement regarding the determination of the
552: magnetic filling factor, which is defined as the fraction of the aperture covered by magnetic field.
553: In 1995 Solanki and Haugan \cite{sah96} improved the limit on $\ell^2_{\odot}$ by using
554: more realistic values of the parameters that characterize the solar polarization source and a refined
555: analysis procedure which yielded an upper bound of $\ell^2_{\odot}< (305\, \mbox{km})^2$.
556:
557: The current work represents the state of the art with respect to upper limits on gravitational birefringence
558: induced by the nonsymmetric field of the sun. Since the physical consequences of the nonmetric NGT description
559: relevant for our purpose are proportional to $\ell^4_{\odot}$ this new constraint on the Sun's NGT charge
560: is three orders of magnitude smaller than the previous limit by Solanki and Haugan and 7 orders of magnitude
561: smaller than the value favoured initially by Moffat. This gives a further significant restriction to the
562: viability of NGT.
563: \newpage
564: \section{Possible tests using the {\sl Solar Probe} spacecraft}
565: \begin{figure}[t]
566: \centerline{\hspace*{-0.5cm}\psfig{figure=probe-tr.eps,width=3.in,height=3.in}\hspace{0.8cm}
567: \psfig{figure=shift2.ps,width=3.in,height=3.in,angle=90}}
568: \caption{Left figure: Sketch of the {\sl Solar Probe} trajectory near the sun as seen from
569: Earth. Right figures: Expected phase shifts for a signal emitted at $3R_{\odot}$
570: from the sun. Top: Optical wavelength. Bottom: Soft X-ray.}
571: \label{shifts}
572: \end{figure}
573: The possibility of setting strong limits on gravitational birefringence with the tests which
574: we have outlined so far suffered from the major drawback that they all depend strongly on our
575: knowledge of solar magnetic features. For example we have assumed that none of the observed
576: spectral lines has $(U_{\asc}/U_{\ssc}) > 1$ which is also based on current observations with
577: a certain spatial resolution. At the moment nobody can say if this statement will hold if the
578: instrumental resolution could be highly increased in the future, although simulations of solar
579: magnetoconvection suggest that $U_{\asc} < U_{\ssc}$ remains valid even if the resolution is
580: improved by an order of magnitude.
581:
582: Taking this into account, it is obvious that drastic improvements of our limits for $\ell^2_{\odot}$
583: could be achieved by using an artificial source for the polarized radiation with well defined
584: properties, placed in close vicinity to the sun. Such a source could possibly be provided by
585: the {\sl Solar Probe} spacecraft \cite{probe}, which is part of NASA's mid-term plans.
586: Designed mainly as a mission to explore the Sun's Corona, its trajectory (sketched in Fig.a)
587: lies in a plane perpendicular to the ecliptic with a target perihelion distance at 3-4 solar
588: radii. This close
589: perihelion could provide a unique opportunity to look for gravitational birefringence if
590: it is possible to receive a well defined polarized signal from an instrument onboard the
591: spacecraft when it passes near the solar limb.
592:
593: To see, if we could expect a reasonable gravitational effect in the signal, we simply have to
594: take the case $\mu=0$ in the phase shift formula (\ref{ngt-form}) and replace the solar radius $R_{\odot}$
595: with $(R_p+1)\cdot R_{\odot}$ where $R_p$ is the perihelion distance of the spacecraft in units of the
596: solar radius. This leads to
597: \begin{equation}
598: \big.\Delta \Phi\;\big|_{\mu=0} = \frac{3\,\ell^4_{\odot}\,\pi^2}{16\,\lambda\,((R_p+1)\cdot R_{\odot})^3}
599: \end{equation}
600: Of course this result depends strongly on the wavelength of the signal. The shorter the wavelength the
601: bigger is the possible phase shift that we could expect. This is illustrated in Fig.(\ref{shifts}b),
602: which shows the phase difference in units of $\pi$ for a range of $\ell_{\odot}$ values with
603: $R_p = 3$. Optical wavelength is used in the upper diagram and X-ray in the lower.
604: One can see that for optical wavelength a gravitational effect on the polarization of the signal
605: would be extremely difficult to observe under realistic conditions with a certain noise level.
606: Whereas for wavelengths of the order $10^{-10}$m, we could expect a reasonable transformation
607: of linear to circular polarization and vice versa for $\ell^2_{\odot}$ values which are clearly
608: below our current upper limit. However, at the moment it is out of reach from the technological
609: point of view, to place a source of polarized X-rays in the near vicinity of the sun. Nevertheless
610: it is worth to keep this promising possibility for very precise tests of the Einstein equivalence
611: principle in mind.
612: \subsection{Alternative Spacecraft Trajectories}
613: \begin{figure}[t]
614: \centerline{\psfig{figure=probe-alt.ps,width=6.5in,height=3.in,angle=90}}\vspace{-0.6cm}
615: \caption{Expected phase shifts for a signal emitted at $3R_{\odot}$ from the sun when the spacecraft
616: passes in front of the solar disc on an alternative trajectory. The wavelengths are the same as
617: in Fig.\ref{shifts}}
618: \label{shifts-alt}
619: \end{figure}
620: Interestingly the planned spacecraft trajectory is also a very suitable one with respect to possible
621: tests of gravity-induced birefringence. This is due to the fact that when the spacecraft reaches
622: its perihelion position the phase shift is maximized by the mimimal distance to the sun, i.e. highest
623: gravitational potential, and also by the maximum distance that the signal could travel through the
624: gravitational field of the sun.
625:
626: If the craft reaches on a different trajectory its closest position to the sun which is also closer
627: towards earth this would mean a shorter distance for the signal to travel and, hence, a smaller total
628: phase shift. This is shown for a spacecraft passing in front of the visible solar disc at distance $R$
629: to the sun. The phase shift of a signal with wavelength $\lambda$ emitted at this position is given by
630: \begin{equation}
631: \big.\Delta \Phi\;\big|_{ \atop {\mu=0 \atop R \rightarrow \infty}} =
632: \frac{\pi\l^4_{\odot}}{\lambda}\left(\frac{3\pi}{16 R_0^3}-\frac{R}{2}\left(
633: \frac{1}{2(R_0^2+R^2)^2}+\frac{3}{4R_0^2(R_0^2+R^2)}\right)-\frac{3}{8R_0^3}\arctan
634: \frac{R}{R_0}\right)\quad .
635: \end{equation}
636: The detailed calculation is given in Appendix B.
637: Fig.\ref{shifts-alt} shows the result for the same wavelength as in Fig.\ref{shifts} and $\mu=0$.
638: The cumulative phase shift for the alternative trajectory is smaller by a factor of 15 although the
639: distance to the sun is the same in both cases. The crucial point is that in the first case the signal
640: covers a bigger distance within that region of the gravitational field where it is strong enough to
641: induce a reasonable phase shift. This relevant distance has an extend of approximately 5-6 solar radii.
642: A different trajectory where the spacecraft passes the visible limb behind the sun as seen from earth
643: would give no improvement since the phase shift which accumulates from behind the sun up to a position
644: above the poles has an opposite sign compared to the phase shift of a signal which is emitted above the
645: pole, propagating towards earth. This can be seen from equation (B.8) in Appendix B which gives the
646: phase shift for a signal running from the surface up to a distant point $R$. If the signal runs in the
647: opposite direction we have to switch the integration limits which gives a negative sign for the phase shift.
648:
649:
650:
651: \section{Discussion and Conclusions}
652: Using two techniques (the Stokes asymmetry technique and the new profile difference technique)
653: we have improved previous limits on $\ell^2_{\odot}$ given by Solanki \& Haugan (1996) \cite{sah96} by
654: nearly one order of magnitude. It will be difficult to set much tighter limits on gravitational birefringence
655: than those found here using solar data in the visible spectral range. To obtain a significant
656: improvement on the basis of solar data one would need to observe at shorter wavelengths. The line
657: at the shortest wavelength that is strong enough to provide a hope of detecting Stokes $U$ and $V$ at
658: sufficient $S/N$ is Ly$\alpha$ at 1216{\AA}. The maximum gain that one could expect relative
659: to the current analysis is a factor of
660: \begin{equation}
661: \frac{\lambda_{\mbox{\footnotesize{visible}}}}{\lambda_{\mbox{\footnotesize{Ly}}\alpha}} =
662: \frac{5250}{1216} = 4.32 \quad .
663: \end{equation}
664: Although the idea of a possible utilization of future space missions for enhanced new tests
665: is very appealing because of its high potential for further improvements of the current limits
666: on $\ell^2_{\odot}$ and $k^2$, the technological realization of such an experiment is currently
667: out of reach. For setting stronger limits on gravitational birefringence or, if birefringence really has
668: a physical relevance, for having the chance of a direct detection of this effect it is therefore more
669: promising to proceed the investigations with more compact astrophysical objects. This will be the
670: content of the following chapters.
671:
672: % Nevertheless, it might be possible to measure alterations of the polarization of
673: % X-rays due to the propagation through the sun's gravitational field. This kind of measurement
674: % is in principle similar to the famous measurements of the bending of light at the solar limb,
675: % where one compares the position of a star during a solar eclipse with its position in the sky
676: % when the sun is absent. This time one does not compare positions but polarization measurements
677: % from cosmic X-ray sources instead. If the gravitational field of the sun really alters the
678: % polarization state of light, then different measurements, taken near the sun and far away from
679: % the sun for the same source should yield different results, provided that this difference is much
680: % bigger than a possible natural variability in the polarization of the source. This idea is further
681: % outlined in chapter 5.
682:
683:
684:
685:
686:
687:
688:
689:
690:
691:
692:
693:
694: