text:
# Can high-velocity stars reveal black holes in globular clusters?

## 1 Introduction

It has been suggested (Gebhardt, Rich, & Ho, 2002), that globular clusters may contain central black holes with masses lying along the extension of the correlation between black hole mass and bulge velocity dispersion as seen for galaxies (Ferrarese & Merritt, 2000; Gebhardt et al., 2000). However it has also been suggested that the observational evidence can be otherwise explained (Baumgardt et al., 2003a, b; Dull et al., 2003). These difficulties of interpretation are compounded by the small number of observable stars in the cores of globular clusters. In contrast to a galactic center, current observations approach the limit when the uncertainty of an aggregate measurement, such as a velocity dispersion, cannot be reduced by further observations. Once every star has been observed, there is nothing more to be done. (See Drukier et al. 2003 for a general discussion of issues relating to the observation and interpretation of velocity dispersions in globular clusters.) This is particularly the case for central black holes, since there is only a relatively small region over which the black hole provides the dominant contribution to the gravitational potential.

Most current observational work relating to the possible presence of central black holes in globular clusters has been done using radial velocity measurements to determine the central value and radial gradient of the velocity dispersion. In this Letter we explore an alternative approach, namely the use of proper motion measurements to identify individual stars whose velocities are strongly influenced by the presence of a central black hole. We find that existing crude models suggest that this approach may be fruitful, and that the considerable theoretical and observational work that will be required to apply this approach in practice may thus be justified. In §2, we estimate the number of stars with anomalously high velocities caused by a central black hole, and in §3 we generate a list of the clusters with the highest probability of observing such stars. We find that for plausible assumptions such stars might well be observable with HST in the most favorable clusters.

## 2 Estimating the number of high-velocity stars

Consider a globular cluster with central velocity dispersion $`\sigma _0`$, where this is the dispersion outside the radius of influence, $`r_h`$, of a black hole with mass $`M_{}`$, given by

$$r_h\frac{GM_{}}{\sigma _0^2}.$$
(1)
We define $`\sigma _{}(r)`$ as the one-dimensional velocity dispersion and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$ as the stellar surface density within $`r_h`$. Outside $`r_h`$, the influence of the black hole is too small to significantly affect stellar orbits. For simplicity, we assume that the velocities are distributed as a Gaussian with dispersion $`\sigma _{}(r)`$. Now, at a radius $`r`$, the fraction of stars which will have velocities greater than some multiple $`k`$ of the velocity dispersion $`\sigma _0`$ is given by

$$f(r)=\frac{2}{\sqrt{2\pi }\sigma _{}(r)}_{k\sigma _0}^{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{v^2}{2D\sigma _{}^2(r)}\right)𝑑v,$$
(2)
where $`D`$ is the dimensionality of the observed velocity (1 for radial velocities, 2 for proper motions, and 3 for space velocities). While the upper limit could, in principle, be some multiple of the escape velocity, this is difficult to define without detailed modeling of the structure of the whole cluster. Instead, as the complementary error function drops off rapidly with increasing argument, we will just use the infinite upper limit shown. This will lead to a slight overestimate in the number of expected stars, but this effect is small compared to that due to the uncertainty in $`\beta `$ discussed below. With this limit, equation (2) reduces to

$$f(r)=\sqrt{D}\mathrm{erfc}\left(\frac{k\sigma _0}{\sqrt{2D}\sigma _{}(r)}\right).$$
(3)
The total number of stars with “significantly” high velocities (significant being defined here as $`k`$ times the velocity dispersion $`\sigma _0`$ outside $`r_h`$) is then given by

$$N=2\pi _0^{r_h}r\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)f(r)𝑑r.$$
(4)
The only existing dynamical investigation of the effects of a central black hole on the structure of a globular cluster is that of Cohn & Kulsrud (1978) who used the Fokker-Planck equation to integrate a steady-state, anisotropic distribution function in the vicinity of a black hole. They found that the projected velocity dispersion and surface density profiles could be approximated, for $`r<r_h`$, by

$`\sigma _{}^2(r)`$ $`=`$ $`\{\begin{array}{cc}0.4\sigma _0^2\frac{r_h}{r}\hfill & r<0.4r_h\hfill \\ \sigma _0^2\hfill & 0.4r_hrr_h\hfill \end{array},`$ (7)
$`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_0\left({\displaystyle \frac{r_h}{r}}\right)^{0.5}.`$ (8)
The two terms in equation (7) deal with the flattening of the velocity dispersion profile near $`r_h`$. Substituting these into equation (4) leads, after a suitable rescaling of the integration variable, to

$$N=2\pi \mathrm{\Sigma }_0D^2r_h^2I_{}(k,D),$$
(9)
where

$$I_{}(k,D)=_0^{0.4/D}\sqrt{x}\mathrm{erfc}\left(k\sqrt{\frac{x}{0.8}}\right)𝑑x+\mathrm{erfc}\left(\frac{k}{\sqrt{2D}}\right)_{0.4/D}^{1/D}\sqrt{x}𝑑x.$$
(10)
The integral can be evaluated numerically and gives $`I_{}(3,\{1,2,3\})=\{1.1,1.5,1.5\}\times 10^2`$ to two figures. By way of comparison, if no black hole is present then, assuming $`\sigma _{}(r)=\sigma _0`$ and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(r)=\mathrm{\Sigma }_0`$,

$$I_0(k,D)=\sqrt{D}\mathrm{erfc}\left(\frac{k}{\sqrt{2D}}\right)_0^{1/D}x𝑑x,$$
(11)
for which $`I_0(3,\{1,2,3\})=\{1.4,6.0,8.0\}\times 10^3`$, and the expected number of stars is given by equation (9) with $`I_0`$ in place of $`I_{}`$.

The galactic black hole mass versus velocity dispersion correlation (Ferrarese & Merritt, 2000; Gebhardt et al., 2000) is usually given in the form

$$M_{}=10^\alpha \left(\frac{\sigma _0}{\sigma _{}}\right)^\beta M_{\mathrm{}},$$
(12)
where $`\sigma _0`$ is a suitable velocity dispersion and $`\sigma _{}=200`$ km s-1. The uncertainty in the power-law slope is the largest source of uncertainty in our estimated number of high-velocity stars. Recent estimates for $`\beta `$ (the variation in $`\alpha `$ is small since all studies agree for $`\sigma _0\sigma _{}`$) range from $`\beta ^L=4.02\pm 0.32`$ ($`\alpha ^L=8.13\pm 0.06`$) (Tremaine et al., 2002) to $`\beta ^H=4.65\pm 0.48`$ ($`\alpha ^H=8.17\pm 0.07`$) (Merritt & Ferrarese, 2001). These agree within their quoted errors, but, on extrapolation to the globular cluster regime, the use of $`\beta ^L`$ predicts 20 times as many high-velocity stars as does the use of $`\beta ^H`$. We therefore give results for both these slopes below. The original claim for globular clusters (Gebhardt, Rich, & Ho, 2002) used $`\beta ^L`$.

Substituting equations (1) and (12) into equation (9) we arrive at the following

$$N=2\pi G^210^{2\alpha }\sigma _{}^{2\beta }I_{}(k,D)D^2\mathrm{\Sigma }_0\sigma _0^{2(\beta 2)},$$
(13)
where $`\sigma _0`$ is measured in km s-1 and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_0`$ is the number of measurable stars per square parsec. What we can easily observe is not $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_0`$ but the central surface density, $`\mu _0`$, so we need to rewrite $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_0`$ in terms of $`\mu _0`$ for a reasonable globular cluster stellar population. For a defined population of stars, let $`\overline{L}_{}`$ be the cluster luminosity per star in that population in solar units, and let $`g_{}`$ be the fraction of these stars that are usefully measurable. Then for $`\mu _0`$ in $`V`$ magnitude per square arc second, and taking $`M_V\mathrm{}=4.79`$

$$\mathrm{\Sigma }_0=10^{0.4(\mu _026.37)}g_{}\overline{L}_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}.$$
(14)
In this case

$$N=I_{}(k,D)D^210^{0.4\mu _0}g_{}\overline{L}_{}^1\widehat{\alpha }\sigma _0^{\widehat{\beta }},$$
(15)
where $`\widehat{\alpha }^L=2.37\times 10^4`$, $`\widehat{\beta }^L=4.04`$, $`\widehat{\alpha }^H=36.0`$, and $`\widehat{\beta }^H=5.30`$.

For our problem, $`\overline{L}_{}`$ is determined by the luminosity function in the core of the cluster in question. It needs to take into account mass segregation effects and other possible population peculiarities as might be indicated by, for example, color gradients. The measurable fraction, $`g_{}`$, is an observational selection effect on the luminosity function. It will depend on the observational technique to be used, the distance of the cluster, crowding and so forth.

Since a complete stellar census is a difficult undertaking, we estimate $`\overline{L}_{}`$ as follows. Define our population to be all the stars brighter than some magnitude, $`V_d`$ (e.g. the expected magnitude limit of the observations) in a cluster color-magnitude diagram (CMD). Then,

$$\overline{L}_{}\overline{L}_b+f^1\overline{L}_f.$$
(16)
The quantities $`\overline{L}_b`$ and $`\overline{L}_f`$ are the mean luminosities for the bright and faint parts of the CMD (divided at $`V_d`$) and $`f`$ is the ratio of the number of stars brighter than $`V_d`$ to the number of those fainter. $`\overline{L}_b`$ can be estimated directly from the cluster CMD, for which purpose we use the CMDs in the compilation by Piotto et al. (2002). $`\overline{L}_f`$ and $`f`$ can be estimated from the corresponding theoretical luminosity function (LF). We use those from the models of Silvestri et al. (1998). One limitation is that these LFs only include stars from the hydrogen burning limit to the tip of the red giant branch, so we must use the CMD to correct the ratio of the number of stars in each part of the LF, $`f_{\mathrm{LF}}`$, for the contribution of post-RGB stars. If, brighter than $`V_d`$, we see in the CMD $`n_R`$ stars in the regions covered by the luminosity function, and $`n_B`$ more evolved stars elsewhere, then

$$f=f_{\mathrm{LF}}\left(1+\frac{n_B}{n_R}\right).$$
(17)
By substituting equations (17) and (16) into equation (15), we can now estimate $`N`$ for any given cluster, subject to the selection of $`g_{}`$. We proceed to do this in the next section.

## 3 Best Target Clusters

We present in Table 1 some relevant numbers for the 12 clusters most likely to show evidence for a central black hole. All other clusters are estimated to have at least a factor of three fewer observable high-velocity stars than NGC 5824. The value of $`r_h`$ in the fifth column of the table is calculated assuming $`\alpha ^L`$ and $`\beta ^L`$, and is given in arc seconds for the distance in column 4. Note that while this radius scales as $`\sigma _0^{\beta 2}`$, the radii for $`\beta ^H`$ are smaller by a factor of approximately 5.

Our estimates of $`\overline{L}_{}`$ are given in the sixth column of Table 1. The Piotto et al. (2002) CMDs cover 9 of our listed clusters. For those not listed we have used $`\overline{L}_{}=11.4`$, the mean for the other 9. These are marked by a colon after $`\overline{L}_{}`$. We have taken $`V_d`$ for each cluster such that the division is at $`M_V=4.5`$, a magnitude or so below the turn-off for these low-metallicity systems. For the luminosity functions we use a very flat mass-spectral-index $`x`$ of -0.5, where the Salpeter value is 1.35. Mass segregation is likely to have removed most of the low-mass stars from the cluster center—many of the mass functions are actually inverted see e.g. Sosin, 1997; de Marchi, Paresce, & Pulone, 2000; Albrow, De Marchi, & Sahu, 2002—so this should be a reasonable approximation. In any case, the luminosity-function-dependent term $`f^1\overline{L}_f`$ in equation (16) is roughly 10% that of $`\overline{L}_b`$, so the estimate of $`\overline{L}_{}`$ is dominated by the stars in the CMD.

The final two columns give the expected number of stars for the two estimates of the $`M_{\mathrm{BH}}\sigma `$ relation relative to the number expected for M 15 (NGC 7078), the cluster with the best studied core. Only two clusters, NGC 6388 and NGC 6441, are likely to have more fast-moving stars than M 15 for the lower slope. NGC 5139 ($`\omega `$ Cen) would have roughly the same number as M 15 using the higher slope, but the absolute numbers are down by a factor of 24 with respect to the low slope. To complete our estimate, it remains only to specify $`g_{}`$ to get the number of fast-moving stars we could detect. We consider two scenarios: radial velocities and proper motions.

For radial velocity measurements, $`g_{}`$ is likely to be small, as only the brightest, least crowded, central stars are suitable. For the case of M 15, if we compare the number of stars with radial velocities as compiled by Gerssen et al. (2002) with the HST photometric list in van der Marel et al. (2002) then, with $`r_h=1\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}3`$, we find that about 4% of the stars brighter than $`V_d`$ have velocities. Within $`r_h/2`$ this is 7%, but within $`r_h/4`$, where most of the fast-moving stars are to be found, there are no velocities out of the 10 stars available. Thus, for radial velocities in M 15, $`g_{}=0.07`$ at best, and we would expect to see $`N_{\mathrm{M15}}^L=0.1`$ stars, moving with a relative radial velocity $`3\sigma _0`$ if a black hole is present. That no such star has been seen is, therefore, unsurprising and uninformative. Combining the entire dozen most-likely clusters yields perhaps one or two fast-moving stars. $`N_{\mathrm{M15}}^H=0.004`$ stars. The number expected is effectively zero.

A further problem with using radial velocities to detect the fast-moving stars lies in their radial distribution as given by the integrands in equations (10) and (11) after an appropriate coordinate transformation. We compare these in Figure 1 for $`k=3`$ and the three values of $`D`$. In all three cases, the fast-moving stars are concentrated well within $`r_h`$. The break point at $`0.4r_h`$ is the result of the break in $`\sigma _{}`$ at this radius. Note the very different expected radial distributions for the fast-moving stars depending on whether (solid) or not (dotted) there is a black hole. If there is a black hole, the fast-moving stars should be concentrated in the center of the cluster, with a maximum inside $`0.1r_h`$. For radial velocities, the high-velocity stars are confined within about $`0.15r_h`$ or 0$`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}`$3 for the nearer clusters. For the higher-dimensional velocities, the detection region is somewhat broader. Clearly, radial velocities are unlikely to prove the question one way or another.

For proper motions, the situation is much better, at least for nearby clusters for which such observations are feasible. In the case of NGC 6752, Rubenstein & Bailyn (1997) measure 153 stars brighter than $`V_d`$ within $`r_h=2\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}6`$ of the cluster center. To the same radius, Drukier et al. (2003), measure the proper motions of 15 stars. Their detection region only covers about a third of the area within $`r_h`$ due to gaps in their 1999 data. These gaps, unfortunately, covers much of the very center of the cluster, so it is difficult to estimate the detection rate within about $`0.3r_h`$ where we expect to find most of the fast-moving stars. Crowding is bound to be a problem in this region, even for HST. Extrapolating from the most crowded regions studied by Drukier et al. (2003) and taking into account the gaps in their coverage, we estimate that $`g_{}=0.2`$ is appropriate for proper motions. In this case $`N_{\mathrm{M15}}^L=2`$ stars. If this $`M_{\mathrm{BH}}\sigma `$ conjecture is correct, the top three clusters should contain of order 10 high-velocity stars between them with the balance of the 12 clusters in Table 1 contributing another 5 or so in total. In addition, their radial range is double that for radial velocities. On the other hand, $`N_{\mathrm{M15}}^H=0.08`$ stars, and the black holes will be undetectable by this method.

Proper motions have the feature that their uncertainty is inversely proportional to the time baseline and proportional to the distance. Nonetheless, the top three clusters, all with distances between 10 and 12 kpc, should be close enough that, given sufficient data, the black hole hypothesis can be tested, assuming a value of $`\beta `$ at the lower end of its range. The main limitation at this distance will be the increase in effective crowding, proportional to the distance squared. For the top three clusters in Table 1, crowding will be 10 to 16 times higher than in the NGC 6752 observations of Drukier et al. (2003).

In the absence of a black hole, the flat extrapolation would lead us to expect to see one or two fast-moving stars within $`r_h`$ in each of our top three candidates. These stars will have a radial distribution proportional to radius, and should be found in the vicinity of $`r_h`$, not concentrated within $`0.2r_h`$ as is predicted under the black hole conjecture. Fast-moving stars can have origins other than a black hole, of course. Ejection from the core during core-collapse is one plausible mechanism for producing such stars (Drukier et al., 1999), but their velocity vectors will be radial unlike a star in orbit around a black hole.

We caution that the numbers presented here are only estimates and depend on the scalings found by Cohn & Kulsrud (1978). Those models are single-mass anisotropic Fokker-Planck simulations for the steady-state stellar distribution in the vicinity of the black hole. More modern models, which should include, at the very least, a range of stellar masses and a self-consistent potential, will be needed to fully assess the significance of any fast-moving stars which are observed in these clusters. The estimates made here also depend on the current central velocity dispersions in the globular clusters. Since globular clusters can lose a large fraction of their mass due to stellar evolution and stellar-dynamical evolution, the numbers provided in Table 1 may well be underestimated if the proper velocity dispersion to use in determining black hole masses is the original value, not the current one. Further, the mass of any central black hole will have increased to some extent due to the capture of cluster stars. Using double the current velocity dispersion, for example, would increase $`N_{\mathrm{M15}}^L`$ by a factor of 16 and $`N_{\mathrm{M15}}^H`$ by a factor of 39, in which case the higher slope also predicts significant numbers of observable stars in the top few clusters. Given the sensitivity to these effects, obtaining reliable estimates for the numbers of high-velocity stars will require fully evolving models. Even in the event that proper-motion studies uncover no fast moving stars, such models will allow for firm upper limits on the mass of any black hole. Constructing such models, and carrying out the necessary proper motion observations, is no small task, but given the strong interest and controversy currently surrounding this topic, we believe that efforts along these lines should be vigorously pursued.

This study was supported by a NASA LTSA grant NAG 5-6404.


format: text

text:
# An Algorithm for Obtaining Reliable Priors for Constrained-Curve FitsPresented by T. Draper at Lattice 2003.This work is supported in part by the U.S. Department of Energy under grant numbers DE-FG05-84ER40154 and DE-FG02-02ER45967.

## 1 Background

Traditionally, Monte Carlo estimates, $`G(t)`$, of two-point hadronic correlators have been fit to a theoretical model, such as,

$`G(t;w_i,m_i)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}w_ie^{m_it}`$
by the maximum-likelihood procedure of minimizing the chi-square.

Fitting with a single-source multi-exponential is usually too unstable, so the default has been the popular single-source single-exponential, wherein one fits only at $`t>t_{\mathrm{min}}`$ to damp contributions from excited states. One compromises between high statistical for large $`t_{\mathrm{min}}`$ and high systematic errors for small $`t_{\mathrm{min}}`$; lattice alchemy provides various recipes for making the compromise and estimating the systematic errors. A multi-source multi-exponential fit is a much better, albeit more expensive, alternative; however, the ambiguity of estimating systematic errors through tuning $`t_{\mathrm{min}}`$ remains.

“Constrained Curve Fitting”  offers the alternative of minimizing an augmented chi-square,

$`\chi _{\mathrm{aug}}^2=\chi ^2+\chi _{\mathrm{prior}}^2;\chi _{\mathrm{prior}}^2={\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{(\rho _i\stackrel{~}{\rho }_i)^2}{\stackrel{~}{\sigma }_i^2}}`$
where $`\rho `$ denotes the collective parameters of the fit (e.g. $`\rho =\{w,m\}`$). It achieves stability by “guiding the fit” with the use of Bayesian priors, that is, values of the parameters obtained from a priori estimates $`\rho =\stackrel{~}{\rho }\pm \stackrel{~}{\sigma }`$. It has improved stability; as data sets are enlarged to include small $`t`$, many more terms are added in the fit model until convergence is obtained. The $`t_{\mathrm{min}}`$ systematic error is largely absorbed into the statistical error. The method works well if reliable priors are known; nevertheless, stability of the fit results against choice of prior must be tested, and this reintroduces an element of subjectivity.

However, with our recent data , we enter previously unexplored territory, namely, overlap fermions with exact chiral symmetry at unprecedented small quark mass and large spatial size. There is in general no literature from which to obtain estimates to be used as priors and no reliable model for estimates of level spacings.

## 2 Overview

We propose an adaptive self-contained constrained curve-fitting procedure, dubbed the “Sequential Empirical Bayes Method” method. We obtain the priors gradually (from the ground state up) as the data set is monotonically enlarged (to include earlier and earlier time slices). The basic “fixed $`\mathrm{\Delta }t`$” algorithm is described below for simplicity. In practice we use a refinement, the more adaptable “variable $`\mathrm{\Delta }t`$” method, results of which are presented in the next section.

1. Choose (i) $`t_{\mathrm{min}}`$ and $`t_{\mathrm{max}}`$, the maximum range over which the fits will be done, and (ii) $`t_{\mathrm{start}}`$, the initial minimum time slice of the fitting range.
2. Loop on various trial values (“scanning”) around central values $`w_1`$ and $`m_1`$ obtained from effective mass. For each, use an unconstrained fit on the one-mass-term model (1MTM) to fit over {$`t_{\mathrm{start}}`$, $`t_{\mathrm{max}}`$} to obtain $`w_1^{(1)}\pm \sigma _{w_1}^{(1)}`$ and $`m_1^{(1)}\pm \sigma _{m_1}^{(1)}`$. Choose as input for the next step those values which yield the lowest $`\chi ^2`$.
3. Using these $`w_1`$, $`\sigma _{w_1}`$, $`m_1`$, $`\sigma _{m_1}`$ as both priors and initial values, do a constrained-curve fit, using the 1MTM over {$`t_{\mathrm{start}}1`$, $`t_{\mathrm{max}}`$}, to obtain $`w_1^{(2)}`$, $`\sigma _{w_1}^{(2)}`$, $`m_1^{(2)}`$, $`\sigma _{m_1}^{(2)}`$.
4. Using these $`w_1`$, $`\sigma _{w_1}`$, $`m_1`$, $`\sigma _{m_1}`$ as both priors and initial values, do a half-constrained fit over {$`t_{\mathrm{start}}2`$, $`t_{\mathrm{max}}`$} on a 2MTM; the second mass and weight are unconstrained. Loop on various trial values for the latter; choose as input for the next step those values which yield the lowest $`\chi ^2`$.
5. Using these $`w_1`$, $`\sigma _{w_1}`$, $`m_1`$, $`\sigma _{m_1}`$, $`w_2`$, $`\sigma _{w_2}`$, $`m_2`$, $`\sigma _{m_2}`$ as both priors and initial values, do a fully-constrained fit, using the 2MTM over {$`t_{\mathrm{start}}3`$, $`t_{\mathrm{max}}`$}, to obtain $`w_1^{(4)}`$, $`\sigma _{w_1}^{(4)}`$, $`m_1^{(4)}`$, $`\sigma _{m_1}^{(4)}`$, $`w_2^{(4)}`$, $`\sigma _{w_2}^{(4)}`$, $`m_2^{(4)}`$, $`\sigma _{m_2}^{(4)}`$.
6. Repeat the last two steps until all desired mass terms and time slices are included. One thus obtains a complete set of priors.

## 3 Sample Result

The $`A_4A_4`$ correlator is dominated by the ground state of the pseudoscalar channel (pion) over all but the few earliest time slices. With the variable $`\mathrm{\Delta }t`$ refinement of the algorithm, rather than deciding a priori on the number of terms in the fit and adding time slices a fixed number at a time, one lets the data decide how many time slices to include with each enlargement of the data by choosing the minimum chi-square over a range of reasonable possibilities. Thus since the pion correlator is dominated by the ground state for many time slices, then many time slices will be automatically added before an attempt is made to fit the first-excited state. We find that the variable $`\mathrm{\Delta }t`$ method works very well for the pion correlators.

## 4 Testing the Algorithm

### 4.1 Partitioning the Configurations

Final results should use the priors on a separate data set, thus preserving the ideal Bayesian case. However, empirically this seems to be unnecessary; the output from the algorithm agrees with the final results. We have implemented the following test: We partition the data into two non-intersecting sets of configurations, $`A`$ and $`B`$, with an equal number, $`n_A=n_B=40`$ of configurations in each set. Using the set $`A`$ of configurations, we perform our procedure to obtain priors; we next use this fixed set of priors in the canonical way to perform a constrained fit separately on data set $`B`$, on data set $`A`$, and on the full set $`AB`$. We find no appreciable differences beyond expected statistical fluctuations.

### 4.2 Stability

The Sequential Empirical Bayes’ Method is used to select the priors. Then a standard constrained fit with all of the time slices is made. The number of terms in the fit model is increased until the fit results converge.

### 4.3 Reconstructing Artificial Data

The method can successfully reconstruct the parameters of artificially-constructed data where the true results are known independently of the fit.

We created a sample of artificial data as a sum of decaying exponentials by adding an independent Gaussian noise to the function at each value of $`t`$. The fitting procedure was able to reconstruct the means and weights for the ground and excited states; the actual values were within one measured standard deviation of the measured means.

## 5 Summary

We have introduced an adaptive self-contained constrained curve-fitting procedure which produces priors to be used in a standard constrained fit on different data. One obtains the priors sequentially as data set is enlarged. The method’s advantages include: it is usable whenever external reliable estimates of the priors are not available; it can be fully automated; it reduces human-induced bias; it decreases the frustrating busy-work of fitting; and it is self-correcting. We have checked that the method can reconstruct artificial data, that it is stable against adding more terms, and against partitioning the data.

For more complete details, see  which provides additional examples of applicability and outlines further refinements. The method has been used successfully to make the first lattice identification  of the Roper resonance at low quark mass with exact chiral symmetry.


text:
# History of Astrophysics in Antarctica - A Brief Overview

## 1. Astrogeological Era (from 1912)

In 1912, Mawson discovered the Adelie Land Meteorite. Russian geologists found several meteorites of unrelated morphological types in the Lazarev region in 1961, giving rise to the ablation zone theory. This was followed in 1969 by the first formal meteorite search programme. Thousands of meteorites have since been found in Antarctica, mostly from glacial ablation zones.

## 2. High Energy Era (from mid 1950’s)

In 1955, the first Antarctic astrophysical project was initiated with a cosmic ray detector installed at McMurdo station. A detector was installed at the South Pole in 1964 and others were commissioned at several national research stations. Today, cosmic rays with energies above 50 TeV are recorded by SPASE 2 which is situated on top of AMANDA. AMANDA II is scheduled to start operation in 2003 and by 2006, IceCube, a 1 km3 detector, will open up the PeV energy region where the Universe is opaque to high energy $`\gamma `$-rays from beyond our galaxy.

## 3. Photon Astronomy Era (from 1970’s)

Optical astronomy was first employed at the South Pole in 1964 for site testing. In 1979, a continuous 120 hours of solar observations allowed hundreds of solar eigenmodes to be discovered. Infrared and CMB measurements require the best atmospheric windows, and site testing since 1994 has demonstrated this is provided from the Antarctic plateau. In 1988, the first CMB measurement from Terra Nova Bay produced a map at an angular scale of 1.3. In 1992, the CMB was imaged with better resolution by Python, a 0.75m telescope. It was replaced in 1997 by Viper, a 2.1m off-axis telescope, to be complemented in 1998 by DASI. The first flight of the Boomerang balloon in 1998 provided much improved angular resolution data for a CMB map published in late 2002. AST/RO, a 1.7m sub-mm telescope, has been mapping the Galactic plane in CI and CO since 1995. Between 1994 and 1999, SPIREX imaged the 2–5$`\mu `$m continuum and PAHs with the Grim and Abu cameras.


text:
# References

The effective inertial acceleration due to oscillations of the gravitational potential: footprints in the solar system

D.L. Khokhlov

Sumy State University, R.-Korsakov St. 2,
Sumy 40007, Ukraine
E-mail: khokhlov@cafe.sumy.ua

## Abstract

The conjecture is considered that every body induces the wave field which imposes oscillations on the gravitational potential of a body. The function for oscillations is chosen to prevent the gravitational collapse of the matter at the nucleus energy density. Oscillations of the gravitational potential of a body produce effective inertial outward acceleration for a particle orbiting around the body. Footprints of the effective inertial acceleration due to oscillations of the gravitational potentials of the Sun and Earth are investigated. The conjecture allows to explain the anomalous shift of the perihelion of Mercury and Icarus, the anomalous shift of the perigee of LAGEOS II, the anomalous acceleration acting on Pioneer 10, 11, the anomalous increase in the lunar semi-major axis. The advance of the Keplerian orbit for Earth, Jupiter, Neptune, Uranus caused by the effective inertial acceleration due to oscillations of the gravitational potential of the Sun is in agreement with the observational bounds from the planetary ephemeris.

The theory of gravity  faces the problem of singularities. In particular, singularities may arise as a result of the gravitational collapse of massive stars. A body contracted to the nucleus energy density resembles the neutron star . There is a maximum mass for the neutron star of order of the mass of the Sun, $`m_{max}m_{}`$. For the neutron star with the mass less than the maximum mass, the pressure due to the degenerated neutron Fermi gas balances the gravity of the star. For the neutron star with the mass more than the maximum mass, the gravity of the star overcomes the pressure due to the degenerated neutron Fermi gas, and the star goes to the singularity.

The radius of the first Bohr’s orbit of the Hydrogen atom $`a_0`$ and the classical radius of electron $`r_e`$ are related as

$$\frac{r_e}{a_0}=\alpha ^2$$
(1)
where $`\alpha `$ is the fine structure constant. The velocity of the electron at the first Bohr’s orbit is given by

$$v_e=\alpha c$$
(2)
where $`c`$ is the velocity of light. The radius of the nucleus of the Hydrogen atom $`r_n`$ is of order of the classical radius of electron

$$r_nr_e.$$
(3)
If to contract the Hydrogen atom to the radius of the nucleus, $`r_Hr_n`$, the fine structure constant tends to unity, $`\alpha 1`$, and the velocity of the electron tends to the velocity of light, $`v_ec`$. Since the velocity of light is a limiting one, it is reasonable to think that the radius of the nucleus is a limiting one, and hence the nucleus energy density is a limiting one.

It is reasonable to assume that there is some mechanism which allows to switch off the gravity at a limiting scale thus preventing appearance of singularities in the gravitational collapse of the matter. Below we shall consider such a mechanism, with the nucleus energy density being chosen as a limiting scale.

Assume that every body induces the wave field which carries scalar perturbation of the gravitational potential. Thus the wave field imposes oscillations on the gravitational potential of a body

$$\mathrm{\Phi }=\frac{Gm}{r}+\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Phi }\mathrm{sin}\omega _{gr}t$$
(4)
where $`G`$ is the Newtonian constant, $`m`$ is the mass of the body, $`\omega _{gr}`$ is the frequency of oscillations. On the average oscillations do not change the gravitational potential of a body. When a particle orbits around a body, oscillations of the gravitational potential of the body produce radial oscillations around the Keplerian orbit of a particle.

Assume that the value of oscillations of the gravitational potential is a function of the matter density such that the value of oscillations of the gravitational potential is equal to the Newtonian potential at the radius of neutron star

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Phi }=\frac{Gmr_{NS}^2}{r_0^3}$$
(5)
where $`r_0`$ is the radius of a body, $`r_{NS}`$ is its radius of neutron star. Suppose that the frequency of oscillations is given by

$$\omega _{gr}=\left(\frac{Gm}{4r_{NS}^3}\right)^{1/2}.$$
(6)
The frequency of oscillations is large, $`\omega _{gr}1/T=(Gm/r^3)^{1/2}`$. Then the radial displacement around the Keplerian orbit of a particle is small

$$\delta r=\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Phi }}{\omega _{gr}^2r}.$$
(7)
Kinetic energy due to oscillation motion is given by

$$E_{osc}=\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Phi }^2}{4\omega _{gr}^2r^2}=\frac{Gmr_{NS}^7}{r_0^6r^2}.$$
(8)
Thus we arrive at the effective Newtonian gravity

$$\mathrm{\Phi }=\mathrm{\Phi }_N+E_{osc}=\mathrm{\Phi }_N\left(1\frac{r_{NS}^7}{r_0^6r}\right).$$
(9)
The value of oscillations of the gravitational potential grows under the contraction of a body. When the radius of a body reaches the radius of neutron star, $`r_0r_{NS}`$, oscillations of the gravitational potential tends to the value, $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Phi }Gm/r_{NS}`$. The radial displacement due to oscillations of the gravitational potential tends to the radius of neutron star, $`\delta rr_{NS}`$, and the kinetic energy due to oscillations of the gravitational potential tends to the value, $`E_{osc}Gm/r_{NS}`$. Then oscillations of the gravitational potential switches off the gravity of a body contracted to the radius of neutron star. Thus the radius of neutron star is a limiting one. Oscillations of the gravitational potential prevent the gravitational collapse of the matter to singularity. Thus the conjecture proposed may resolve the problem of singularities in the theory of gravity.

Let a particle orbit around a body. Oscillations of the gravitational potential of the body produce effective oscillations of the circular velocity of the particle

$$\mathrm{\Delta }v=(\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Phi }\mathrm{sin}\omega _{gr}t)^{1/2}.$$
(10)
As a result effective inertial acceleration directed outward the body arises

$$w_{eff}=\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Phi }}{r}.$$
(11)
The effective inertial acceleration does not modify the Newtonian gravity. Therefore displacement of the radius of the Keplerian orbit of a particle due to the effective inertial acceleration cannot be detected in the measurement of the orbit’s radius.

The effective inertial acceleration due to oscillations of the gravitational potential of a body should lead to the precession of the Keplerian orbit of a particle under its motion in the gravitational field of a body. A small addition $`\delta \mathrm{\Phi }`$ to the potential of a body causes the shift of the perihelion of particle’s orbit per revolution by the value

$$\delta \phi =\frac{}{M}\frac{2m^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}2}}}{M}\underset{0}{\overset{\pi }{}}r^2\delta \mathrm{\Phi }𝑑\phi $$
(12)
where $`m^{}`$ is the mass of the particle, $`M`$ is the angular momentum of the particle. The non-perturbed orbit is given by

$$r=\frac{p}{1+e\mathrm{cos}\phi }$$
(13)
with

$$p=\frac{M^2}{Gm^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}2}}m}p=a(1e^2)$$
(14)
where $`p`$ is the orbit’s latus rectum, $`e`$ is the eccentricity, $`a`$ is the semi-major axis. Let the effective potential due to oscillations of the gravitational potential of a body give a small addition to the potential of a body, $`\delta \mathrm{\Phi }=\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Phi }`$. Then integration of eq. (12) with the use of eqs. (13,14) gives the shift (advance) of the perihelion of a particle due to oscillations of the gravitational potential of a body per revolution

$$\delta \phi \frac{6\pi a(1e^2)\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Phi }}{Gm}.$$
(15)
Here we omit the terms containing $`\mathrm{cos}^2\phi `$ since an addition $`\delta \mathrm{\Phi }`$ leads to the deviation from the Keplerian orbit in this order.

Investigate footprints of the effective inertial acceleration due to oscillations of the gravitational potential in the solar system. Suppose that the Sun induces the wave field which imposes oscillations on the gravitational potential of the Sun. Estimate the value of oscillations of the gravitational potential of the Sun adopting the density of neutron star, $`\rho _{NS}10^{14}\mathrm{g}/\mathrm{cm}^3`$. Then the radius of neutron star for the Sun is equal to $`r_{NS}=(3m_{}/4\pi \rho _{NS})^{1/3}=1.7\times 10^6\mathrm{cm}`$. The value of oscillations of the gravitational potential of the Sun is equal to $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Phi }_{}=Gm_{}r_{NS}^2/r_{}^3=1.1\times 10^6\mathrm{cm}^2/\mathrm{s}^2`$.

Observations  give the value, $`43`$ arcseconds per century, for the anomalous shift (advance) of the perihelion of Mercury. This anomalous shift is now explained within the framework of the Einstein general relativity . Suppose that the value, $`43`$ arcseconds, is brought about by the effective inertial acceleration due to oscillations of the gravitational potential of the Sun. Determine the value of oscillations of the gravitational potential of the Sun from the data on the anomalous shift of the perihelion of Mercury with the use of the Mercury data, the semi-major axis $`a=0.387`$ AU, the eccentricity $`e=0.206`$, the period of revolution $`T=0.241`$ yr. Then from eq. (15) we obtain the value of oscillations of the gravitational potential of the Sun, $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Phi }_{}=6.4\times 10^5\mathrm{cm}^2/\mathrm{s}^2`$.

Determine the shift of the perihelion of the asteroid Icarus due to oscillations of the gravitational potential of the Sun with the use of the Icarus data, the semi-major axis $`a=1.076`$ AU, the eccentricity $`e=0.827`$, the period of revolution $`T=1.116`$ yr. In accordance with eq. (15) the value of oscillation of the gravitational potential of the Sun, $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Phi }_{}=6.4\times 10^5\mathrm{cm}^2/\mathrm{s}^2`$, gives the shift (advance) of the perihelion of Icarus, $`8.5`$ arcseconds per century. The observed anomalous shift (advance) is $`9.8\pm 0.8`$ arcseconds per century . Thus the calculated value lies below the uncertainty margin by around $`5\%`$ of the observed effect.

Oscillations of the gravitational potential of the Sun yield the effective outward acceleration of the Earth. This effective outward acceleration may be seen in ranging of distant spacecraft. The effective outward acceleration due to oscillations of the gravitational potential of the Sun should give the blue shift into the frequency of light at the Earth

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }\omega }{\omega }=\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Phi }_{}t}{cr_{SE}}$$
(16)
where $`r_{SE}`$ is the distance between the Earth and Sun, $`t`$ is the time of two-leg light travel. In ranging of distant spacecraft, the acceleration of the Earth outward the Sun looks like the acceleration of the spacecraft inward the Sun. Then one may interpret the shift of the reference frequency given by eq. (16) as a shift of the observed re-transmitted frequency due to the acceleration of the spacecraft inward the Sun. The acceleration of the Earth gives contribution into the shift of the reference frequency during the time of two-leg light travel, while the acceleration of the spacecraft gives contribution into the shift of the observed re-transmitted frequency during the time of one-leg light travel. Then, if to interpret the observed anomalous shift of frequency as the anomalous acceleration of the spacecraft inward the Sun, its value is doubled in comparison with the effective outward acceleration of the Earth. Thus the effective outward acceleration of the Earth due to oscillations of the gravitational potential of the Sun, $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Phi }_{}=6.4\times 10^5\mathrm{cm}^2/\mathrm{s}^2`$, may be interpreted as the inward acceleration of the spacecraft, $`w=2\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Phi }_{}/r_{SE}=8.5\times 10^8\mathrm{cm}/\mathrm{s}^2`$. Analyses of radio Doppler and ranging data from distant spacecraft in the solar system indicated that an apparent anomalous acceleration is acting on Pioneer 10 and 11, with a magnitude $`w_P=(8.74\pm 1.25)\times 10^8\mathrm{cm}/\mathrm{s}^2`$, directed towards the Sun . Thus the effective outward acceleration of the Earth due to oscillations of the gravitational potential of the Sun mimics the anomalous acceleration acting on Pioneer 10 and 11. Thus the value of oscillations of the gravitational potential of the Sun explaining the anomalous shift of the perihelion of Mercury may explain the anomalous acceleration acting on Pioneer 10 and 11.

Oscillations of the gravitational potential of the Sun yield the radial displacement around the Keplerian orbit of a planet. In view of eq. (7), the radial displacement around the Keplerian orbit of the Earth is of order $`\delta r10^{15}\mathrm{cm}`$. This value is too small to be seen in observations. The Viking ranging data  determine the Earth-Mars radius to around a 7.5 m accuracy.

The effective inertial acceleration due to oscillations of the gravitational potential of the Sun yields the advance of the Keplerian orbit, $`\delta \phi 6\pi \mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Phi }_{}/\mathrm{\Phi }_N`$, where $`\mathrm{\Phi }_N`$ is the Newtonian potential of the Sun at the radius $`r`$. The dark matter restricted within the radius $`r`$ yields the advance of the Keplerian orbit, $`\delta \phi 2\pi \mathrm{\Phi }_{DM}/\mathrm{\Phi }_N`$, where $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{DM}`$ is the potential of the dark matter restricted within the radius $`r`$. Hence the effective inertial acceleration due to oscillations of the gravitational potential of the Sun mimics the effective mass restricted within the radius $`r`$

$$m_{eff}=\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Phi }_{}r}{3G}.$$
(17)
Compare the effective mass due to oscillations of the gravitational potential of the Sun, $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Phi }_{}=6.4\times 10^5\mathrm{cm}^2/\mathrm{s}^2`$, with the observational bounds for the dark matter from the planetary ephemeris. Within the Earth’s orbit the effective mass is $`m_{eff}=2.4\times 10^8m_{}`$ while the observational bound is $`m_{DM}7\times 10^8m_{}`$ . Within Jupiter’s orbit the effective mass is $`m_{eff}=1.2\times 10^7m_{}`$ while the observational bound is $`m_{DM}=(0.12\pm 0.027)\times 10^6m_{}`$ . Within Uranus’s orbit the effective mass is $`m_{eff}=4.7\times 10^7m_{}`$ while the observational bound is $`m_{DM}0.5\times 10^6m_{}`$ . Within Neptune’s orbit the effective mass is $`m_{eff}=7.3\times 10^7m_{}`$ while the observational bound is $`m_{DM}3\times 10^6m_{}`$ . Thus the effective mass due to oscillations of the gravitational potential of the Sun is in agreement with the observational bounds for the Earth’s, Jupiter’s, Neptune’s, and Uranus’s orbits.

Oscillations of the gravitational potential of the Sun yield the effective inertial acceleration of the Moon with respect to the Earth, $`w\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Phi }_{}r_{EM}\mathrm{sin}\mathrm{\Omega }t/r_{SE}^2`$, where $`r_{EM}`$ is the distance between the Earth and Moon, $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is the angular velocity of the Moon. This leads to the polarization of the Moon’s orbit in the direction of the Sun, with the Earth-Moon distance decreasing. As a result the Moon’s circular velocity increases by the value, $`\mathrm{\Delta }v=(\sqrt{2}\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Phi }_{}r_{EM}/2r_{SE})^{1/2}`$, average for the period of revolution of the Moon. Then inertial acceleration of the Moon outwards the Earth increases by the value, $`w=\sqrt{2}\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Phi }_{}/2r_{SE}`$, average for the period of revolution of the Moon. Oscillations of the gravitational potential of the Sun, $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Phi }_{}=6.4\times 10^5\mathrm{cm}^2/\mathrm{s}^2`$, yield the effective inertial acceleration of the Moon outwards the Earth, $`w=3.0\times 10^8\mathrm{cm}/\mathrm{s}^2`$.

As follows from telescopic observations of the Earth’s rotation collected for the last 300 years, e.g. , the rate of deceleration of the Earth’s rotation is $`\dot{T}_E=1.4\times 10^5\mathrm{s}/\mathrm{yr}`$. As a result the lunar semi-major axis increases with a rate, $`\dot{a}_{tel}=2.53\mathrm{cm}/\mathrm{yr}`$. Measurement of the Earth-Moon distance in lunar laser ranging  gives the value, $`\dot{a}_{LLR}=3.82\mathrm{cm}/\mathrm{yr}`$, hence points to the anomalous increase in the lunar semi-major axis with an excessive rate, $`\dot{a}_{LLR}\dot{a}_{tel}=1.29\pm 0.2\mathrm{cm}/\mathrm{yr}`$. This corresponds to the anomalous outward acceleration of the Moon, $`w=(\dot{a}_{LLR}\dot{a}_{tel})c/r_{EM}=(3.2\pm 0.5)\times 10^8\mathrm{cm}/\mathrm{s}^2`$. Thus the effective inertial acceleration of the Moon due to oscillations of the gravitational potential of the Sun explains the main part (around $`94\%`$) of the anomalous outward acceleration of the Moon.

Suppose that the Earth induces the wave field which imposes oscillations on the gravitational potential of the Earth. Estimate the value of oscillations of the gravitational potential of the Earth. The radius of neutron star for the Earth is equal to $`r_{NS}=(3m_{}/4\pi \rho _{NS})^{1/3}=2.4\times 10^4\mathrm{cm}`$. The value of oscillations of the gravitational potential of the Earth is equal to $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Phi }_{}=Gm_{}r_{NS}^2/r_{}^3=9\times 10^2\mathrm{cm}^2/\mathrm{s}^2`$.

Observations of the Earth’s satellite LAGEOS II  give the value, $`3.4`$ arcseconds per year, for the anomalous shift (advance) of the perigee of LAGEOS II. This anomalous shift is now explained within the framework of the Einstein general relativity . Suppose that the value, $`3.4`$ arcseconds, is brought about by the effective inertial acceleration due to oscillations of the gravitational potential of the Earth. Determine the value of oscillations of the gravitational potential of the Earth from the data on the anomalous shift of the perigee of LAGEOS II with the use of the LAGEOS II data, the semi-major axis $`a=1.2163\times 10^9\mathrm{cm}`$, the eccentricity $`e=0.014`$, the period of revolution $`T=3.758`$ hr, the inclination $`I=52.65^0`$. Then from eq. (15) we obtain the value of oscillations of the gravitational potential of the Earth, $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Phi }_{}=1.2\times 10^2\mathrm{cm}^2/\mathrm{s}^2`$. Estimate the effect of oscillations of the gravitational potential of the Sun on the motion of LAGEOS II, $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Phi }=\sqrt{2}\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Phi }_{}a\mathrm{cos}I/2r_{SE}=0.3\times 10^2\mathrm{cm}^2/\mathrm{s}^2`$. In view of this effect, we obtain the value of oscillations of the gravitational potential of the Earth, $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Phi }_{}=0.9\times 10^2\mathrm{cm}^2/\mathrm{s}^2`$.

Oscillations of the gravitational potential of the Earth, $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Phi }_{}=0.9\times 10^2\mathrm{cm}^2/\mathrm{s}^2`$, yield the effective inertial outward acceleration of the Moon, $`w=\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Phi }_{}/r_{EM}=0.2\times 10^8\mathrm{cm}/\mathrm{s}^2`$. This acceleration explains around $`6\%`$ of the anomalous outward acceleration of the Moon. The overall effective inertial acceleration of the Moon due to oscillations of the gravitational potential of the Sun and Earth is $`w=3.0+0.2=3.2\times 10^8\mathrm{cm}/\mathrm{s}^2`$ and thus completely explains the anomalous outward acceleration of the Moon.

We have considered the conjecture that every body induces the wave field which imposes oscillations on the gravitational potential of a body. The function for oscillations is chosen to prevent the gravitational collapse of the matter at the nucleus energy density. The radial displacement around the Keplerian orbit of a planet due to oscillations of the gravitational potential of the Sun is too small to be seen in observations. Oscillations of the gravitational potential produce effective inertial outward acceleration for a particle orbiting around the body. Footprints of the effective inertial acceleration due to oscillations of the gravitational potential of the Sun may be revealed as an anomalous shift of the perihelion of the Keplerian orbit of a planet or as an anomalous shift of the frequency of light seen in ranging. Although we have rough estimation of the value of oscillations of the gravitational potential of the Sun it is possible to perform the accurate testing of the conjecture by comparing the results of different observations. The value of oscillations of the gravitational potential of the Sun obtained from the anomalous shift of the perihelion of Mercury is consistent with that obtained from the anomalous shift of the frequency of light at the Earth now interpreted as the anomalous acceleration acting on Pioneer 10, 11. Also the value of oscillations of the gravitational potential of the Sun approximately explains the anomalous shift (advance) of the perihelion of Icarus, with the calculated value lies below the uncertainty margin by around $`5\%`$ of the observed effect. Also the value of oscillations of the gravitational potential of the Sun explains the main part (around $`94\%`$) of the anomalous outward acceleration of the Moon. The value of oscillations of the gravitational potential of the Earth obtained from the anomalous shift of the perigee of LAGEOS II explains the retaining part (around $`6\%`$) of the anomalous outward acceleration of the Moon. The advance of the Keplerian orbit for Earth, Jupiter, Neptune, Uranus caused by the effective inertial force due to oscillations of the gravitational potential of the Sun is in agreement with the observational bounds from the planetary ephemeris.

The conjecture considered provides an explanation of the anomalous precession (advance) of the Keplerian orbit alternative to the general relativity. So from the point of view of the conjecture considered the general relativity is questioned. Note that excluded the anomalous precession (advance) of the Keplerian orbit we may describe the planetary motion in the solar system within the Newtonian mechanics. At the same time the relativistic effects for the electromagnetic waves in the field of the gravitational potential are confirmed by the experiments. If to adopt the conjecture considered we should reinterpret the theory of relativity in the way that relativistic effects pertain only to the electromagnetism while the gravitation remains non-relativistic. That is the motion of the electromagnetic waves follows the relativistic dynamics while the motion of the massive bodies follows the Newtonian dynamics.


text:
# Conformal Bulk Fields, Dark Energy and Brane Dynamics

## 1 Introduction

In the Randall-Sundrum (RS) brane world scenario the visible Universe is a 3-brane boundary of a $`Z_2`$ symmetric 5-dimensional anti-de Sitter (AdS) orbifold . There are two basic settings. On one hand the RS1 model  with two branes and a compactified fifth dimension and on the other the RS2 model  with a single brane which may be associated with an infinite fifth dimension. With two branes the hierarchy problem is reformulated introducing an exponential warp in the fifth dimension. The gravitational field is localized on the hidden positive tension brane and decays towards the visible negative tension brane thus producing an exponential hierarchy between the Planck and weak energy scales. In the RS2 model the same warping of the fifth dimension ensures that the graviton is bound to the brane.

In the RS models the classical field dynamics is defined by 5-dimensional Einstein equations with a negative bulk cosmological constant $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_B`$, Dirac delta sources representing the branes and a stress-energy tensor describing other bulk field modes -. In the RS2 model a set of vaccum solutions is given by

$$d\stackrel{~}{s}_5^2=dy^2+e^{2|y|/l}ds_4^2,$$
(1)
where the 4-dimensional line element $`ds_4^2`$ is Ricci flat, $`l`$ is the AdS radius given by $`l=1/\sqrt{\mathrm{\Lambda }_B\kappa _5^2/6}`$ with $`\kappa _5^2=8\pi /M_5^3`$ and $`M_5`$ the fundamental 5-dimensional Planck mass. The brane cosmological constant is fine-tuned to be zero giving $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_B=\kappa _5^2\lambda ^2/6`$ where $`\lambda >0`$ denotes the brane tension. Due to the periodicity and the $`Z_2`$ symmetry of the RS orbifold these solutions also hold for the RS1 model. Then the two branes have opposite tensions and $`\lambda >0`$ is the tension of the hidden Planck brane.

The low energy theory of gravity on the brane is 4-dimensional general relativity and the cosmology may be Friedmann-Robertson-Walker -. However, it should be noted that in the RS1 model this has only been achieved if a scalar field is introduced in the bulk to stabilize the size of the fifth dimension . The problem of the gravitational collapse of matter was also investigated in the RS scenario -. It was found that a black string solution first discussed in a different context by Myers and Perry  induced the Schwarzschild metric on the brane . However for such a solution the Kretschmann scalar diverged both at the AdS horizon and at the black string singularity . The solution is thus expected to be unstable . It may decay to a black cylinder localized near the brane which is free from naked singularities . So far this continues to be a conjecture. Indeed, while exact solutions interpreted as static black holes localized on a brane have been found for a 2-brane embedded in a 4-dimensional AdS space , a static black hole localized on a 3-brane remains unknown. The difficulty lies in the simultaneous localization of gravity and matter near the brane without the creation of naked singularities in the bulk , -. This has inspired another conjecture stating that $`D+1`$-dimensional black hole solutions localized on a $`D1`$-brane should correspond to quantum corrected $`D`$-dimensional black holes on the brane . Related to the AdS/CFT correspondence  this connection provides an extra motivation to look for 5-dimensional collapse solutions localized on a brane. There are also many braneworld solutions, obained from the effective 4-dimensional point of view by the application of the covariant Gauss-Codazzi formulation , that have so far not been associated with exact 5-dimensional spacetimes -.

In this proceedings we report on research about the dynamics of a spherically symmetric 3-brane when conformal fields are present in the bulk  (see also ). We focus on 5-dimensional solutions which describe the dynamics of polytropic dark energy on the brane .

## 2 Einstein Equations

Let us start by introducing $`(t,r,\theta ,\varphi ,z)`$ as coordinates in the 5-dimensional bulk. The most general metric consistent with the $`Z_2`$ symmetry in $`z`$ and with 4-dimensional spherical symmetry on the brane is given by

$$d\stackrel{~}{s}_5^2=\mathrm{\Omega }^2\left(e^{2A}dt^2+e^{2B}dr^2+R^2d\mathrm{\Omega }_2^2+dz^2\right),$$
(2)
where $`\mathrm{\Omega }=\mathrm{\Omega }(t,r,z)`$, $`A=A(t,r,z)`$, $`B=B(t,r,z)`$ and $`R=R(t,r,z)`$ are $`Z_2`$ symmetric functions. $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is the warp factor and $`R`$ the physical radius of the 2-spheres. With a single brane the classical dynamics is defined by

$$\stackrel{~}{G}_\mu ^\nu =\kappa _5^2\left[\mathrm{\Lambda }_B\delta _\mu ^\nu +\frac{\lambda }{\sqrt{\stackrel{~}{g}_{55}}}\delta \left(zz_0\right)\left(\delta _\mu ^\nu \delta _5^\nu \delta _\mu ^5\right)\stackrel{~}{T}_\mu ^\nu \right],$$
(3)
where the bulk stress-energy tensor is conserved in the bulk

$$\stackrel{~}{}_\mu \stackrel{~}{T}_\nu ^\mu =0.$$
(4)
For a general 5-dimensional metric $`\stackrel{~}{g}_{\mu \nu }`$ the Einstein equations (3) are extremely complex. To be able to solve them we need simplifying assumptions about the field variables involved in the problem. Let us first assume that under the conformal transformation $`\stackrel{~}{g}_{\mu \nu }=\mathrm{\Omega }^2g_{\mu \nu }`$ the bulk stress-energy tensor has conformal weight $`s`$,

$$\stackrel{~}{T}_\mu ^\nu =\mathrm{\Omega }^{s+2}T_\mu ^\nu .$$
(5)
Then Eq. (3) may be re-written as

$`G_\mu ^\nu `$ $`=`$ $`6\mathrm{\Omega }^2\left(_\mu \mathrm{\Omega }\right)g^{\nu \rho }_\rho \mathrm{\Omega }+3\mathrm{\Omega }^1g^{\nu \rho }_\rho _\mu \mathrm{\Omega }3\mathrm{\Omega }^1\delta _\mu ^\nu g^{\rho \sigma }_\rho _\sigma \mathrm{\Omega }`$ (6)
$`\kappa _5^2\mathrm{\Omega }^2\left[\mathrm{\Lambda }_B\delta _\mu ^\nu +\lambda \mathrm{\Omega }^1\delta (zz_0)\left(\delta _\mu ^\nu \delta _5^\nu \delta _\mu ^5\right)\mathrm{\Omega }^{s+2}T_\mu ^\nu \right].`$
Similarly under the conformal transformation the conservation equation becomes

$$_\mu T_\nu ^\mu +\mathrm{\Omega }^1\left[(s+7)T_\nu ^\mu _\mu \mathrm{\Omega }T_\mu ^\mu _\nu \mathrm{\Omega }\right]=0.$$
(7)
If in addition it is assumed that $`\stackrel{~}{T}_\mu ^\nu =\mathrm{\Omega }^2T_\mu ^\nu `$ then Eq. (6) may be separated in the following way

$$G_\mu ^\nu =\kappa _5^2T_\mu ^\nu ,$$
(8)
$`6\mathrm{\Omega }^2_\mu \mathrm{\Omega }_\rho \mathrm{\Omega }g^{\rho \nu }3\mathrm{\Omega }^1_\mu _\rho \mathrm{\Omega }g^{\rho \nu }+3\mathrm{\Omega }^1_\rho _\sigma \mathrm{\Omega }g^{\rho \sigma }\delta _\mu ^\nu =`$
$`\kappa _5^2\mathrm{\Omega }^2\left[\mathrm{\Lambda }_B\delta _\mu ^\nu +\lambda \mathrm{\Omega }^1\delta (zz_0)\left(\delta _\mu ^\nu \delta _5^\nu \delta _\mu ^5\right)\right].`$ (9)
Because of the Bianchi identity we must also have

$$_\mu T_\nu ^\mu =0,$$
(10)
$$3T_\nu ^\mu _\mu \mathrm{\Omega }T_\nu \mathrm{\Omega }=0.$$
(11)
Note that Eqs. (8) and (10) are 5-dimensional Einstein equations with matter fields present in the bulk but without a brane or bulk cosmological constant. They do not depend on the conformal warp factor which is dynamically defined by Eqs. (9) and (11). The warp is then the only effect reflecting the existence of the brane or of the bulk cosmological constant. We stress that this is only possible for the special class of bulk fields which have a stress-energy tensor with conformal weight $`s=4`$.

Thought now partially decoupled the 5-dimensional Einstein equations are still difficult to solve. Note for instance that the warp depends non-linearly on the metric functions $`A`$, $`B`$ and $`R`$. So let us further assume that $`A=A(t,r)`$, $`B=B(t,r)`$, $`R=R(t,r)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }=\mathrm{\Omega }(z)`$. Then we obtain

$$G_a^b=\kappa _5^2T_a^b,_aT_b^a=0,$$
(12)
$$G_z^z=\kappa _5^2T_z^z,$$
(13)
$$6\mathrm{\Omega }^2(_z\mathrm{\Omega })^2=\kappa _5^2\mathrm{\Omega }^2\mathrm{\Lambda }_B,$$
(14)
$$3\mathrm{\Omega }^1_z^2\mathrm{\Omega }=\kappa _5^2\mathrm{\Omega }^2\left[\mathrm{\Lambda }_B+\lambda \mathrm{\Omega }^1\delta (zz_0)\right]$$
(15)
and

$$2T_z^z=T_c^c,$$
(16)
where the latin indices represent the coordinates $`t,r,\theta `$ and $`\varphi `$.

The warp is now independent of $`A`$, $`B`$ and $`R`$. It may be chosen to be the RS factor

$$\mathrm{\Omega }=\mathrm{\Omega }_{\text{RS}}\frac{l}{|zz_0|+z_0}.$$
(17)
Naturally, other warp factors depending only on $`z`$ such as those of thick branes  and non-fine-tuned branes  may also be considered (see ). On the other hand the highly coupled 5-dimensional collapse dynamics has been reduced to 4-dimensional dynamics. Consider a diagonal stress-tensor,

$$T_\mu ^\nu =diag(\rho ,p_r,p_T,p_T,p_z),$$
(18)
where $`\rho `$, $`p_r`$, $`p_T`$ and $`p_z`$ denote the bulk matter density and pressures. Then Eq. (16) is re-written as

$$\rho p_r2p_T+2p_z=0.$$
(19)
The collapse of the conformal bulk matter is in general inhomogeneous and defined by Eq. (12). The matter dynamics generates a pressure $`p_z`$ along the fifth dimension which must consistently be given by Eqs. (13) and (19).

## 3 Polytropic Dark Energy

To behave as polytropic dark energy the stress-energy tensor should be of the form (18) where the bulk matter density $`\rho `$ and pressures $`p_r`$, $`p_T`$ and $`p_z`$ are given by

$$\rho =\rho _\text{P},p_r=\eta \rho _{\text{P}}^{}{}_{}{}^{\alpha },p_T=p_r,p_z=\frac{1}{2}\left(\rho _\text{P}+3\eta \rho _{\text{P}}^{}{}_{}{}^{\alpha }\right).$$
(20)
Above $`\rho _\text{P}`$ defines the polytropic dark energy density and the parameters ($`\alpha `$, $`\eta `$) characterize different polytropic phases. In what follows we restrict our attention to the generalized Chaplygin phase characterized by $`1\alpha <0`$ .

The polytropic energy density $`\rho _\text{P}`$ is obtained by solving the conservation equations in Eq. (12) which in this case reads

$$\dot{\rho _\text{P}}+\left(\dot{B}+2\frac{\dot{R}}{R}\right)\left(\rho _\text{P}\eta \rho _{\text{P}}^{}{}_{}{}^{\alpha }\right)=0,A^{}\left(\rho _\text{P}\eta \rho _{\text{P}}^{}{}_{}{}^{\alpha }\right)\eta \alpha \rho _{\text{P}}^{}{}_{}{}^{\alpha 1}\rho _{\text{P}}^{}{}_{}{}^{}=0.$$
(21)
Taking an homogeneous density $`\rho _\text{P}=\rho _\text{P}(t)`$, the metric function $`A(t,r)`$ may be safely set to zero. Then since the off-diagonal Einstein equation $`G_t^r=0`$ has solution $`e^B=R^{}/H`$ with $`H=H(r)`$ an arbitrary function of $`r`$ we obtain

$$\rho _\text{P}=\left(\eta +\frac{a}{S^{33\alpha }}\right)^{\frac{1}{1\alpha }},$$
(22)
where $`a`$ is an integration constant and $`S=S(t)`$ is the Robertson-Walker scale factor of the brane world which is related to the physical radius by $`R=rS`$.

At small $`S`$ the Chaplygin dynamics is dominated by the homogeneous dust phase with $`\rho _\text{P}=a^{1/(1\alpha )}/S^3`$. The Chaplygin gas has an intermediate phase defined by the equation of state $`p_\text{P}=\alpha \rho _\text{P}`$ which satisfies the dominant energy condition. For large $`S`$ the dynamics is dominated by an effective cosmological constant term. An evolution of the Chaplygin equation of state may thus describe the change in the dark energy behavior during the expansion of the Universe.

Next consider the diagonal Einstein equations in Eq. (12). Because $`p_r=p_T`$ it must be $`G_r^r=G_\theta ^\theta `$. As a consequence

$$H^2=1kr^2,$$
(23)
where the constant $`k`$ is the Robertson-Walker curvature parameter. Then substituting $`R=rS`$ in

$$G_t^t+G_r^r+2G_\theta ^\theta =2\frac{\ddot{R}^{}}{R^{}}4\frac{\ddot{R}}{R}=\kappa _5^2\left(\rho _\text{P}3\eta \rho _{\text{P}}^{}{}_{}{}^{\alpha }\right)$$
(24)
we obtain

$$\frac{\ddot{S}}{S}=\frac{\kappa _5^2}{6}\left(\rho _\text{P}3\eta \rho _{\text{P}}^{}{}_{}{}^{\alpha }\right).$$
(25)
On the other hand the radial equation $`G_r^r=\kappa _5^2p_r`$ leads to

$$\dot{S}^2=\frac{\kappa _5^2}{3}\rho _\text{P}S^2k.$$
(26)
Naturally, Eqs. (25) and (26) are related by a derivative. They are consistent when $`\rho _\text{P}`$ obeys the conservation Eq. (21). Using Eqs. (26), (25), (23) and the expression for $`p_z`$ given in Eq. (20) we conclude that $`G_z^z=\kappa _5^2p_z`$ is an identity for all the parameters of the model.

With $`\mathrm{\Omega }=\mathrm{\Omega }_{\text{RS}}`$ given by Eq. (17) we obtain the following 5-dimensional polytropic solutions for which gravity is confined to the vicinity of the brane

$$d\stackrel{~}{s}_5^2=\mathrm{\Omega }_{\text{RS}}^2\left[dt^2+S^2\left(\frac{dr^2}{1kr^2}+r^2d\mathrm{\Omega }_2^2\right)+dz^2\right].$$
(27)
In Eq. (27) $`S`$ satisfies Eq. (26). Thought obtained for the RS2 model these solutions also hold for the RS1 model due to the periodicity and the $`Z_2`$ symmetry of the orbifold. In the RS1 model the two branes are then twin universes with opposite tensions and an identical cosmological evolution.

Let us now verify that if a 4-dimensional observer confined to the brane makes the same assumptions about the bulk degrees of freedom then she deduces exactly the same dynamics . Indeed, the non-zero components of the projected Weyl tensor  read

$$_t^t=\frac{\kappa _5^2}{4}\left(\rho _\text{P}\eta \rho _\text{P}^\alpha \right),_r^r=_\theta ^\theta =_\varphi ^\varphi =\frac{_t^t}{3}.$$
(28)
Then the effective 4-dimensional dynamics is given by

$$G_t^t=\kappa _5^2\rho _\text{P},G_r^r=G_\theta ^\theta =G_\varphi ^\varphi =\kappa _5^2\eta \rho _\text{P}^\alpha .$$
(29)
The 4-dimensional observer also sees gravity confined to the brane since she measures a negative tidal acceleration  given by

$$a_T=\frac{\kappa _5^2\mathrm{\Lambda }_B}{6}.$$
(30)
This implies that the geodesics just outside the brane converge towards the brane and so for the 4-dimensional observer the conformal bulk matter is effectively trapped inside the brane.

The effective 4-dimensional Chaplygin dynamics on the brane may lead to the formation of a shell focusing singularity at $`S=0`$ and of regular rebounce epochs at some $`S0`$. This can be analyzed  with the following potential $`V=V(S)`$ defined by

$$V(S)=S\dot{S}^2=\frac{\kappa _5^2}{3}\left(\eta S^{33\alpha }+a\right)^{\frac{1}{1\alpha }}kS.$$
(31)
If for all $`S0`$ it turns out that $`V>0`$ then a shell focusing singularity forms at $`S=0`$. However, if an $`S=S_{}>0`$ exists such that $`V(S_{})=0`$ then there is a regular rebounce point at $`S=S_{}`$.

According to recent experimental bounds  the allowed range of values for $`\eta `$ and $`a`$ are $`\eta >0`$ and $`a>0`$ or $`\eta <0`$ and $`a<0`$. For $`k=0`$ the potential is positive for all $`1\alpha <0`$ if $`\eta >0`$ and $`a>0`$. If $`\eta <0`$ and $`a<0`$ then this only happens for the set $`\alpha =p/q`$, $`q>p`$ with $`q`$ and $`p`$ , respectively, even and odd integers. In any of these cases there are only singular solutions without rebouncing epochs. The Chaplygin shells may either expand continously to infinity or collapse to the singularity at $`S=0`$ where

$$V(0)=\frac{\kappa _5^2}{3}a^{\frac{1}{1\alpha }}>0.$$
(32)
It is for $`k0`$ that new dynamics appears. With $`S=Z^{\frac{1}{1\alpha }}`$ we find

$$V=V(Z)=\frac{\kappa _5^2}{3}\left(\eta Z^3+a\right)^{\frac{1}{1\alpha }}kZ^{\frac{1}{1\alpha }}.$$
(33)
Consider $`k>0`$, $`\eta >0`$ and $`a>0`$ (see Fig. 1). The condition $`V0`$ is equivalent to $`𝒱=𝒱(Z)0`$ where

$$𝒱=\left(\frac{\kappa _5^2}{3}\right)^{1\alpha }\left(\eta Z^3+a\right)k^{1\alpha }Z.$$
(34)
Then there are at most two regular rebounce epochs in the allowed dynamical phase space. Since we have

$$𝒱(0)=\left(\frac{\kappa _5^2}{3}\right)^{1\alpha }a>0,𝒱^{}=3\left(\frac{\kappa _5^2}{3}\right)^{1\alpha }\eta Z^2k^{1\alpha }$$
(35)
and

$$𝒱^{\prime \prime }=6\left(\frac{\kappa _5^2}{3}\right)^{1\alpha }\eta Z0$$
(36)
this is determined by the sign of $`𝒱`$ at its minimum $`𝒱_m=𝒱(Z_m)`$ where $`Z_m=\sqrt{(3k/\kappa _5^2)^{1\alpha }/3\eta }`$.

If $`𝒱_m>0`$ then there are no regular rebounce points and the collapsing shells may fall from infinity to the singularity at $`S=0`$ where $`V(0)>0`$ is given in Eq. (32). For $`𝒱_m=0`$ we have just one regular fixed point $`S=S_{}`$ which divides the phase space into two disconnected regions, a bounded region with the singularity at $`S=0`$, $`0S<S_{}`$, and an infinitely extended region, $`S>S_{}`$, where the shells expand with ever increasing speed to infinity. In this region the solutions are regular. If $`𝒱_m<0`$ then we have two regular rebounce epochs $`S=S_{}`$ and $`S=S_+`$ such that $`S_{}<S_+`$. For $`0SS_{}`$ a shell may expand to a maximum radius $`rS_{}`$ and then rebounce to collapse towards the singularity at $`S=0`$. For $`SS_+`$ the collapsing shells shrink to the minimum scale $`S_+`$ and then rebounce into accelerated expansion to infinity. For $`\eta <0`$ and $`a<0`$ we find the same type of dynamics but now only for the special values $`\alpha =p/q`$, $`q>p`$ with $`q`$ and $`p`$ , respectively, even and odd integers.

If $`k<0`$ then for $`\eta >0`$ and $`a>0`$ the potential is always positive and so there are only singular solutions without rebouncing points. For $`\eta <0`$ and $`a<0`$ (see Fig. 2) we must consider $`\alpha =p/q`$, $`q>p`$ with $`q`$ and $`p`$, respectively, odd and even integers to find solutions with rebounce epochs. The condition $`V0`$ is still equivalent to $`𝒱0`$ but now

$$𝒱=\left(\frac{\kappa _5^2}{3}\right)^{1\alpha }\left(|\eta |Z^3+|a|\right)+|k|^{1\alpha }Z.$$
(37)
Because we have

$$𝒱(0)=\left(\frac{\kappa _5^2}{3}\right)^{1\alpha }|a|<0,𝒱^{}=3\left(\frac{\kappa _5^2}{3}\right)^{1\alpha }|\eta |Z^2+|k|^{1\alpha }$$
(38)
and

$$𝒱^{\prime \prime }=6\left(\frac{\kappa _5^2}{3}\right)^{1\alpha }|\eta |Z0$$
(39)
the sign of $`𝒱`$ at its maximum $`𝒱_M=𝒱(Z_M)`$ where $`Z_M=\sqrt{(3|k|/\kappa _5^2)^{1\alpha }/3|\eta |}`$ shows that the only possibilities are the existence of one or two regular rebounce epochs.

In the former case the classical brane stays forever in the fixed point and in the latter it oscilates back and forth between the two rebounce points.

## 4 Conclusions

In this work we have presented new exact 5-dimensional solutions for which gravity is localized in the vicinity of the brane and the dynamics of the bulk fields on the brane is that of an homogeneous Chaplygin gas, a possible candidate for the missing dark energy which controls the expansion of the visible Universe. The bulk fields were seen to belong to a special conformal class which has a stress-energy tensor with conformal weight $`4`$. We have seen that the 5-dimensional solutions are valid for the RS1 and the RS2 models and noted that an observer confined to the brane is led to the same localized braneworld dynamics when using an identical description of the field variables. We have analyzed the dynamical phase space describing the evolution of the Chaplygin shells discussing conditions for the formation of shell focusing singularities and of regular rebounce epochs. However, althought gravity is bound to the brane the conformal bulk fields are not localized near the brane. Indeed, the density and pressures increase with $`z`$ due to the scale factor $`\mathrm{\Omega }^2(z)`$ and diverge at the AdS horizon. This is not a problem in the RS1 model because the space is cut before the AdS horizon is reached. In the RS2 model a solution requires the simultaneous localization of bulk matter and gravity near the brane, an open problem for future research.

Acknowledgements

We are grateful for financial support from Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (FCT) and Fundo Social Europeu (FSE) under the contracts SFRH/BPD/7182/2001 and POCTI/32694/FIS/2000 (III Quadro Comunitário de Apoio) as well as from Centro Multidisciplinar de Astrofísica (CENTRA).