format: text

text:
# Time transfer and frequency shift to the order 1/c4 in the field of an axisymmetric rotating body

## I Introduction

Owing to recent progress in absolute frequency measurements of some optical transitions with a femtosecond laser, it seems possible to achieve in a near future atomic clocks having a time-keeping accuracy of the order of $`10^{18}`$ in fractional frequency hol . Since a reduced gravity would significantly increase clock performances, it is envisaged to install such clocks on board artificial satellites and to compare them with terrestrial clocks by exchange of electromagnetic signals. Already, a spatial experiment like ESA’s Atomic Clock Ensemble in Space (ACES) mission sal ; spa  is planned for 2006, the purpose being to obtain an accuracy of order $`10^{16}`$ in fractional frequency.

At a level of uncertainty about $`10^{18}`$, a fully relativistic treatment of time/frequency transfers must be performed up to the order $`1/c^4`$ 111Let us prevent a possible confusion. When we talk about calculating terms of order $`1/c^4`$ in the time transfer, we mean terms of absolute order $`1/c^4`$. As a consequence, these terms are of order $`1/c^3`$ relative to the leading term, which is a distance divided by $`c`$. For the frequency shifts, there is no ambiguity since we are calculating only frequency ratios.. As far as we know, the corresponding calculations have not been carried out. For the time transfer, the main relativistic correction of order $`1/c^3`$ is the well-known Shapiro time delay sha . Other corrections due to the quadrupole moment and to the intrinsic angular momentum have been studied by several authors kli1 . Gravitational corrections of order $`1/c^2`$ in the frequency transfers were theoretically determined and experimentally checked a long time ago ves . These corrections are now commonplace in the Global Positioning System. The relativistic theory of the frequency transfers have been recently extended up to the terms of order $`1/c^3`$ bla1 , justifying the results previously given in ashby  without any detail. However, it must be pointed out that, in bla1 , some terms of order $`1/c^3`$ due to the quadrupole moment $`J_2`$ of the Earth are bounded without any explicit calculation. Furthermore, the time/frequency transfers have been calculated within the limited framework of general relativity, which prevents from discussing new tests of gravitational theories.

The present paper is a first step towards a general theory of the time and frequency transfers including all the terms of order $`1/c^4`$, within the post-Newtonian approximation of any metric theory of gravity. Using the Nordtvedt-Will PPN formalism will , we bring the complete determination of these effects in the field of an isolated, axisymmetric rotating body, the gravitational field being assumed stationary. Of course, modelling a mission in the vicinity of the Earth at a level of accuracy about $`10^{18}`$ will require to add the effects due to the tidal gravitational field induced by the Sun and the Moon.

We assume that the photons ensuring the transfers follow null geodesics. The problems that we have to tackle come down to the following ones, relative to a couple of points $`x_A=(ct_A,𝒙_A)`$ and $`x_B=(ct_B,𝒙_B)`$ connected by a null geodesic:

i) to calculate the (coordinate) time transfer $`t_Bt_A`$ as a function of $`(𝒙_A,𝒙_B)`$;

ii) to determine the vectors tangent to the null geodesic at $`x_A`$ and $`x_B`$. Solving this second problem is indeed indispensable to calculate the frequency shift between $`x_A`$ and $`x_B`$.

The method generally employed to study the questions related to the propagation of light in a gravitational field is based on the solution of the null geodesic equations (see, e.g., kli1 ; kop1 ; kop2 ; kli3 ; kop3  for investigations in the linearized, weak-field limit of general relativity). However, the theory of the world-function developed by Synge syn  presents the great advantage to spare the trouble of integrating the geodesic equations. Once the world-function is determined, it is possible to solve straightforwardly the two above-mentioned problems. This method is particularly elegant for the stationary, axisymmetric field and we apply it in the present paper. We find a new procedure enabling to determine the influence of the mass and spin multipole moments of the body. Explicit calculations are given for the contributions of the mass, of the quadrupole moment and of the intrinsic angular momentum of the rotating body.

The paper is organized as follows. In Sec. II, the relevant properties of the world-function $`\mathrm{\Omega }(x_A,x_B)`$ are recalled and the general expression of this function in the post-Newtonian limit of any metric theory is given. The corresponding expression of the time transfer $`t_Bt_A`$ is derived up to the order $`1/c^4`$. In Sec. III, we determine the expression of $`\mathrm{\Omega }(x_A,x_B)`$ and of $`t_Bt_A`$ within the ten-parameter PN formalism of Nordtvedt and Will. Then, in Sec. IV, we focus our attention on the case of an isolated, axisymmetric rotating body. We show that it is possible to determine the contributions of the mass and spin multipole moments by straightforward differentiations of a single function. Retaining only the terms due to the mass $`M`$, to the quadrupole moment $`J_2`$ and to the intrinsic angular momentum $`𝑺`$ of the rotating body, we obtain explicit expressions for the time transfer up to the order $`1/c^4`$ and for the tangent vectors at $`x_A`$ and $`x_B`$ up to the order $`1/c^3`$. In Sec. V, the frequency shift is developped up to the order $`1/c^4`$ in the case where $`\beta `$ and $`\gamma `$ are the only non vanishing PPN parameters. We find detailed expressions for the contributions of $`J_2`$ and $`𝑺`$ and we discuss the possible influence of these terms in the ACES mission. We give our conclusions in Sec. VI.

In this paper, $`G`$ is the Newtonian gravitational constant and $`c`$ is the speed of light in a vacuum. The Lorentzian metric of space-time is denoted by $`g`$. The signature adopted for $`g`$ is $`(+)`$. We suppose that the space-time is covered by one global coordinate system $`(x^\mu )=(x^0,𝒙)`$, where $`x^0=ct`$, $`t`$ being a time coordinate, and $`𝒙=(x^i)`$, the $`x^i`$ being quasi Cartesian coordinates. We assume that the curves of equations $`x^i=const.`$ are timelike, which means that $`g_{00}>0`$ anywhere. We employ the vector notation $`𝒂`$ in order to denote either $`(a^1,a^2,a^3)=(a^i)`$ or $`(a_1,a_2,a_3)=(a_i)`$. Considering two such quantities $`𝒂`$ and $`𝒃`$ with for instance $`𝒂=(a^i)`$, we use $`𝒂𝒃`$ to denote $`a^ib^i`$ if $`𝒃=(b^i)`$ or $`a^ib_i`$ if $`𝒃=(b_i)`$ (the Einstein convention on the repeated indices is used). The quantity $`𝒂`$ stands for the ordinary Euclidean norm of $`𝒂`$.

## II The world-function and its post-Newtonian limit

### II.1 Definition and fundamental properties

Consider two points $`x_A`$ and $`x_B`$ in a space-time with a given metric $`g_{\mu \nu }`$ and assume that $`x_A`$ and $`x_B`$ are connected by a unique geodesic path $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Throughout this paper, $`\lambda `$ denotes the unique affine parameter along $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ which fulfills the boundary conditions $`\lambda _A=0`$ and $`\lambda _B=1`$. The so-called world-function of space-time syn  is the two-point function $`\mathrm{\Omega }(x_A,x_B)`$ defined by

$$\mathrm{\Omega }(x_A,x_B)=\frac{1}{2}_0^1g_{\mu \nu }(x^\alpha (\lambda ))\frac{dx^\mu }{d\lambda }\frac{dx^\nu }{d\lambda }𝑑\lambda ,$$
(1)
the integral being taken along $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. It is easily seen that $`\mathrm{\Omega }(x_A,x_B)=\epsilon [s_{AB}]^2/2`$, where $`s_{AB}`$ is the geodesic distance between $`x_A`$ and $`x_B`$ and $`\epsilon =1,0,1`$ for timelike, null and spacelike geodesics, respectively. It results from definition (1) that the world-function $`\mathrm{\Omega }(x_A,x_B)`$ is unchanged if we perform any admissible coordinate transformation.

The utility of the world-function for our purpose comes from the following properties syn .

i) Two points $`x_A`$ and $`x_B`$ are linked by a light ray if and only if the condition

$$\mathrm{\Omega }(x_A,x_B)=0$$
(2)
is fulfilled. Thus, $`\mathrm{\Omega }(x_A,x)=0`$ is the equation of the light cone $`𝒞(x_A)`$ at $`x_A`$. This fundamental property shows that if $`\mathrm{\Omega }(x_A,x_B)`$ is known, it is possible to determine the travel time $`t_Bt_A`$ of a photon connecting two points $`x_A`$ and $`x_B`$ as a function of $`t_A`$, $`𝒙_A`$ and $`𝒙_B`$. It must be pointed out, however, that solving the equation $`\mathrm{\Omega }(ct_A,𝒙_A,ct_B,𝒙_B)=0`$ for $`t_B`$ yields two distinct solutions $`t_B^+`$ and $`t_B^{}`$ since the timelike curve $`x^i=x_B^i`$ cuts the light cone $`𝒞(x_A)`$ at two points $`x_B^+`$ and $`x_B^{}`$, $`x_B^+`$ being in the future of $`x_B^{}`$. In the present paper, we always regard $`x_A`$ as the point of emission of the photon and $`x_B`$ as the point of reception, and we are concerned only with the determination of $`t_B^+t_A`$ as a function of $`t_A`$, $`𝒙_A`$ and $`𝒙_B`$. We put

$$t_B^+t_A=𝒯(t_A,𝒙_A,𝒙_B),$$
(3)
and we call $`𝒯(t_A,𝒙_A,𝒙_B)`$ the (coordinate) time transfer function. Of course, it is also possible to introduce an other time transfer function giving $`t_B^+t_A`$ as a function of the instant of reception $`t_B^+`$ and of $`𝒙_A`$, $`𝒙_B`$, but we do not use it here.

ii) The vectors $`(dx^\alpha /d\lambda )_A`$ and $`(dx^\alpha /d\lambda )_B`$ tangent to the geodesic $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ respectively at $`x_A`$ and $`x_B`$ are given by

$$\left(g_{\alpha \beta }\frac{dx^\beta }{d\lambda }\right)_A=\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }}{x_A^\alpha },\left(g_{\alpha \beta }\frac{dx^\beta }{d\lambda }\right)_B=\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }}{x_B^\alpha }.$$
(4)
As a consequence, if $`\mathrm{\Omega }(x_A,x_B)`$ is explicitly known, the determination of these vectors does not require the integration of the differential equations of the geodesic. Let us note that it can be proved that the tangent vectors (4) are null when (2) holds.

Consider now a stationary space-time. In this case, we use exclusively coordinates $`(x^\mu )`$ such that the metric does not depend on $`x^0`$. Then, the world-function is a function of $`x_B^0x_A^0`$, $`𝒙_A`$ and $`𝒙_B`$, and (3) reduces to a relation of the form

$$t_B^+t_A=𝒯(𝒙_A,𝒙_B).$$
(5)
The time transfer function $`𝒯(𝒙_A,𝒙_B)`$ plays a central role in the present paper because a comparaison between (2) and (5) immediately shows that the vectors $`(l^\mu )_A`$ and $`(l^\mu )_B`$ defined by their covariant components

$`(l_0)_A=1,(l_i)_A=c{\displaystyle \frac{}{x_A^i}}𝒯(𝒙_A,𝒙_B),`$ (6)
$`(l_0)_B=1,(l_i)_B=c{\displaystyle \frac{}{x_B^i}}𝒯(𝒙_A,𝒙_B),`$ (7)
are tangent to the ray at $`x_A`$ and $`x_B`$, respectively. It must be pointed out that these tangent vectors correspond to an affine parameter such that $`l_0=1`$ along the ray (note that such a parameter does not coincide with $`\lambda `$). Generally, extracting the time transfer formula (5) from (2), next using (6)-(7) will be more straightforward than deriving the vectors tangent at $`x_A`$ and $`x_B`$ from (4), next imposing the constraint (2). We shall use (6) and (7) in Sec. IV.

To conclude, let us emphasize that the method of the world-function works as long as $`\mathrm{\Omega }(x_A,x_B)`$ is a well-defined, single-valued function of $`x_A`$ and $`x_B`$. This condition is satisfied in any region of space-time in which any points $`x_A`$ and $`x_B`$ are connected by one and only one geodesic, a feature which excludes the existence of conjugate points. This requirement is certainly fulfilled in experiments performed in the solar system and more generally for observations of stars belonging to our Galaxy.

### II.2 General expression of the world-function in the post-Newtonian limit

To begin, let us assume that the metric may be written as

$$g_{\mu \nu }=\eta _{\mu \nu }+h_{\mu \nu }$$
(8)
throughout space-time, with $`\eta _{\mu \nu }=diag(1,1,1,1)`$. Let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{(0)}`$ be the straight line defined by the parametric equations $`x^\alpha =x_{(0)}^\alpha (\lambda )`$, with

$$x_{(0)}^\alpha (\lambda )=(x_B^\alpha x_A^\alpha )\lambda +x_A^\alpha ,0\lambda 1.$$
(9)
With this definition, the parametric equations of the geodesic $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ connecting $`x_A`$ and $`x_B`$ may be written in the form

$$x^\alpha (\lambda )=x_{(0)}^\alpha (\lambda )+X^\alpha (\lambda ),0\lambda 1,$$
(10)
where the quantities $`X^\alpha (\lambda )`$ satisfy the boundary conditions

$$X^\alpha (0)=0,X^\alpha (1)=0.$$
(11)
Inserting (8) and $`dx^\mu (\lambda )/d\lambda =x_B^\mu x_A^\mu +dX^\mu (\lambda )/d\lambda `$ in (1), then developing and noting that

$$_0^1\eta _{\mu \nu }(x_B^\mu x_A^\mu )\frac{dX^\nu }{d\lambda }𝑑\lambda =0$$

by virtue of (11), we find the rigorous formula

$`\mathrm{\Omega }(x_A,x_B)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Omega }^{(0)}(x_A,x_B)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(x_B^\mu x_A^\mu )(x_B^\nu x_A^\nu ){\displaystyle _0^1}h_{\mu \nu }(x^\alpha (\lambda ))𝑑\lambda `$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle _0^1}\left[g_{\mu \nu }(x^\alpha (\lambda )){\displaystyle \frac{dX^\mu }{d\lambda }}{\displaystyle \frac{dX^\nu }{d\lambda }}+2(x_B^\mu x_A^\mu )h_{\mu \nu }(x^\alpha (\lambda )){\displaystyle \frac{dX^\nu }{d\lambda }}\right]𝑑\lambda ,`$
where the integrals are taken over $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }^{(0)}(x_A,x_B)`$ is the world-function in Minkowski space-time

$$\mathrm{\Omega }^{(0)}(x_A,x_B)=\frac{1}{2}\eta _{\mu \nu }(x_B^\mu x_A^\mu )(x_B^\nu x_A^\nu ).$$
(13)
Henceforth, we shall only consider weak gravitational fields generated by self-gravitating extended bodies within the slow-motion, post-Newtonian approximation. So, we assume that the potentials $`h_{\mu \nu }`$ may be expanded as follows

$`h_{00}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{c^2}}h_{00}^{(2)}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{c^4}}h_{00}^{(4)}+O(6),`$
$`h_{0i}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{c^3}}h_{0i}^{(3)}+O(5),h_{ij}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{c^2}}h_{ij}^{(2)}+O(4).`$ (14)
From these expansions and from the Euler-Lagrange equations satisfied by any geodesic $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, namely

$$\frac{d}{d\lambda }\left(g_{\alpha \beta }\frac{dx^\beta }{d\lambda }\right)=\frac{1}{2}_\alpha h_{\mu \nu }\frac{dx^\mu }{d\lambda }\frac{dx^\nu }{d\lambda },$$
(15)
it results that $`X^\mu (\lambda )=O(2)`$ and that $`dx^\mu /d\lambda =x_B^\mu x_A^\mu +O(2)`$. As a consequence, $`h_{\mu \nu }(x^\alpha (\lambda ))=h_{\mu \nu }(x_{(0)}^\alpha (\lambda ))+O(4)`$ and the third and fourth terms in the r.h.s. of Eq. (II.2) are of order $`1/c^4`$. These features result in an expression for $`\mathrm{\Omega }(x_A,x_B)`$ as follows

$$\mathrm{\Omega }(x_A,x_B)=\mathrm{\Omega }^{(0)}(x_A,x_B)+\mathrm{\Omega }^{(PN)}(x_A,x_B)+O(4),$$
(16)
where

$`\mathrm{\Omega }^{(PN)}(x_A,x_B)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2c^2}}(x_B^0x_A^0)^2{\displaystyle _0^1}h_{00}^{(2)}(x_{(0)}^\alpha (\lambda ))𝑑\lambda `$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2c^2}}(x_B^ix_A^i)(x_B^jx_A^j){\displaystyle _0^1}h_{ij}^{(2)}(x_{(0)}^\alpha (\lambda ))𝑑\lambda `$ (17)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{c^3}}(x_B^0x_A^0)(x_B^ix_A^i){\displaystyle _0^1}h_{0i}^{(3)}(x_{(0)}^\alpha (\lambda ))𝑑\lambda ,`$
the integral being taken over the line $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{(0)}`$ defined by (9).

The formulas (16) and (II.2) yield the general expression of the world-function up to the order $`1/c^3`$ within the framework of the 1 PN approximation. We shall see in the next subsection that this approximation is sufficient to determine the time transfer function $`𝒯(t_A,𝒙_A,𝒙_B)`$ up to the order $`1/c^4`$. It is worthy of note that the method used above would as well lead to the expression of the world-function in the linearized weak-field limit previously found by Synge syn .

We shall put henceforth $`𝑹_{AB}=𝒙_B𝒙_A`$ and $`R_{AB}=𝑹_{AB}`$. Defining the quantities $`N^\mu =(x_B^\mu x_A^\mu )/R_{AB}`$, (13) and (II.2) might be easily rewritten with these notations.

### II.3 Time transfer at the order $`1/c^4`$

Suppose that $`x_B`$ is the point of reception of a photon emitted at $`x_A`$. Taking (16) into account, (2) may be written in the form

$$\mathrm{\Omega }^{(0)}(x_A,x_B)+\mathrm{\Omega }^{(PN)}(x_A,x_B)=O(4),$$

which implies the relation

$$t_B^+t_A=\frac{1}{c}R_{AB}\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }^{(PN)}(ct_A,𝒙_A,ct_B^+,𝒙_B)}{cR_{AB}}+O(4).$$
(18)
Using iteratively this relation, we find for the time transfer function

$$𝒯(t_A,𝒙_A,𝒙_B)=\frac{1}{c}R_{AB}\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }^{(PN)}(ct_A,𝒙_A,ct_A+R_{AB},𝒙_B)}{cR_{AB}}+O(5).$$
(19)
This formula shows that the time transfer $`𝒯(t_A,𝒙_A,𝒙_B)`$ can be explicitly calculated up to the order $`1/c^4`$ when $`\mathrm{\Omega }^{(PN)}(x_A,x_B)`$ is known. This fundamental result will be exploited in the following sections.

The quantity $`\mathrm{\Omega }^{(PN)}(ct_A,𝒙_A,ct_A+R_{AB},𝒙_B)`$ in (19) may be written in an integral form using (II.2), in which $`R_{AB}`$ and $`R_{AB}\lambda +ct_A`$ are substituted for $`x_B^0x_A^0`$ and for $`x_{(0)}^0(\lambda )`$, respectively. Hence

$$𝒯(t_A,𝒙_A,𝒙_B)=\frac{1}{c}R_{AB}\left\{1\frac{1}{2c^2}_0^1\left[h_{00}^{(2)}(z^\alpha (\lambda ))+h_{ij}^{(2)}(z^\alpha (\lambda ))N^iN^j+\frac{2}{c}h_{0i}^{(3)}(z^\alpha (\lambda ))N^i\right]𝑑\lambda \right\}+O(5),$$
(20)
the integrals being taken over the line defined by the parametric equations $`x^\alpha =z^\alpha (\lambda )`$, where

$$z^0(\lambda )=R_{AB}\lambda +ct_A,z^i(\lambda )=R_{AB}N^i\lambda +x_A^i,0\lambda 1.$$
(21)
It must be noted that the line defined by (21) is the null geodesic of Minkowski metric from $`x_A`$, the direction cosines of which are $`N^i=(x_B^ix_A^i)/R_{AB}`$.

## III World-function and time transfer within the Nordtvedt-Will PPN formalism

### III.1 Metric in the 1 PN approximation

In this section, we use the Nordvedt-Will post-Newtonian formalism involving ten parameters $`\beta `$, $`\gamma `$, $`\xi `$, $`\alpha _1`$, $`\mathrm{}`$, $`\zeta _4`$ will . We introduce slightly modified notations in order to be closed of the formalism recently proposed by Klioner and Soffel kli4  as an extension of the post-Newtonian framework elaborated by Damour, Soffel and Xu dam  for general relativity. In particular, we denote by $`𝒗_r`$ the velocity of the center of mass O relative to the universe rest frame 222This velocity is noted $`𝒘`$ in Ref. will ..

Although our method is not confined to any particular assumption on the matter, we suppose here that each source of the field is described by the energy-momentum tensor of a perfect fluid

$$T^{\mu \nu }=\rho c^2\left[1+\frac{1}{c^2}\left(\mathrm{\Pi }+\frac{p}{\rho }\right)\right]u^\mu u^\nu pg^{\mu \nu },$$

where $`\rho `$ is the rest mass density, $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ is the specific energy density (ratio of internal energy density to rest mass density), $`p`$ is the pressure and $`u^\mu `$ is the unit 4-velocity of the fluid. In this section and in the following one, $`𝒗`$ is the coordinate velocity $`d𝒙/dt`$ of an element of the fluid. We introduce the conserved mass density $`\rho ^{}`$ given by

$$\rho ^{}=\rho \sqrt{g}u^0=\rho \left[1+\frac{1}{c^2}\left(\frac{1}{2}v^2+3\gamma U\right)+O(4)\right],$$
(22)
where $`g=det(g_{\mu \nu })`$ and $`U`$ is the Newtonian-like potential

$$U(x^0,𝒙)=G\frac{\rho ^{}(x^0,𝒙^{})}{𝒙𝒙^{}}d^3𝒙^{}.$$
(23)
In order to obtain a more simple form than the usual one for the potentials $`h_{0i}`$, we suppose that the chosen $`(x^\mu )`$ are related to a standard post-Newtonian gauge $`(\overline{x}^\mu )`$ by the transformation

$$x^0=\overline{x}^0+\frac{1}{c^3}\left[(1+2\xi +\alpha _2\zeta _1)_t\chi 2\alpha _2𝒗_r\mathbf{}\chi \right],x^i=\overline{x}^i,$$
(24)
where $`\chi `$ is the superpotential defined by

$$\chi (x^0,𝒙)=\frac{1}{2}G\rho ^{}(x^0,𝒙^{})𝒙𝒙^{}d^3𝒙^{}.$$
(25)
Moreover, we define $`\widehat{\rho }`$ by

$`\widehat{\rho }`$ $`=`$ $`\rho ^{}[1+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(2\gamma +12\xi +\alpha _3+\zeta _1){\displaystyle \frac{v^2}{c^2}}+(12\beta +\xi +\zeta _2){\displaystyle \frac{U}{c^2}}+(1+\zeta _3){\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Pi }}{c^2}}+(3\gamma 2\xi +3\zeta _4){\displaystyle \frac{p}{\rho ^{}c^2}}`$ (26)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\alpha _1\alpha _3){\displaystyle \frac{v_r^2}{c^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\alpha _12\alpha _3){\displaystyle \frac{𝒗_r𝒗}{c^2}}+O(4)].`$
Then, the post-Newtonian potentials read

$`h_{00}={\displaystyle \frac{2}{c^2}}w+{\displaystyle \frac{2\beta }{c^4}}w^2+{\displaystyle \frac{2\xi }{c^4}}\varphi _W+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{c^4}}(\zeta _12\xi )\varphi _v{\displaystyle \frac{2\alpha _2}{c^4}}v_r^iv_r^j_{ij}\chi +O(6),`$ (27)
$`𝒉\{h_{0i}\}={\displaystyle \frac{2}{c^3}}\left[\left(\gamma +1+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\alpha _1\right)𝒘+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\alpha _1w𝒗_r\right]+O(5),`$ (28)
$`h_{ij}={\displaystyle \frac{2\gamma }{c^2}}w\delta _{ij}+O(4),`$ (29)
where

$`w(x^0,𝒙)=G{\displaystyle \frac{\widehat{\rho }(x^0,𝒙^{})}{𝒙𝒙^{}}d^3𝒙^{}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{c^2}}\left[(1+2\xi +\alpha _2\zeta _1)_{tt}\chi 2\alpha _2𝒗_r\mathbf{}(_t\chi )\right],`$ (30)
$`\varphi _W(x^0,𝒙)=G^2{\displaystyle \frac{\rho ^{}(x^0,𝒙^{})\rho ^{}(x^0,𝒙^{\prime \prime })(𝒙𝒙^{})}{𝒙𝒙^{}^3}\left(\frac{𝒙^{}𝒙^{\prime \prime }}{𝒙𝒙^{\prime \prime }}\frac{𝒙𝒙^{\prime \prime }}{𝒙^{}𝒙^{\prime \prime }}\right)d^3𝒙^{}d^3𝒙^{\prime \prime }},`$ (31)
$`\varphi _v(x^0,𝒙)=G{\displaystyle \frac{\rho ^{}(x^0,𝒙^{})[𝒗(x^0,𝒙^{})(𝒙𝒙^{})]^2}{𝒙𝒙^{}^3}d^3𝒙^{}},`$ (32)
$`𝒘(x^0,𝒙)=G{\displaystyle \frac{\rho ^{}(x^0,𝒙^{})𝒗(x^0,𝒙^{})}{𝒙𝒙^{}}d^3𝒙^{}}.`$ (33)
### III.2 Determination of the world-function and of the time transfer

For the post-Newtonian metric given by (27)-(33), it follows from (II.2) that $`\mathrm{\Omega }(x_A,x_B)`$ may be written up to the order $`1/c^3`$ in the form given by Eq. (16) with

$$\mathrm{\Omega }^{(PN)}(x_A,x_B)=\mathrm{\Omega }_w^{(PN)}(x_A,x_B)+\mathrm{\Omega }_𝒘^{(PN)}(x_A,x_B)+\mathrm{\Omega }_{𝒗_r}^{(PN)}(x_A,x_B),$$
(34)
where

$`\mathrm{\Omega }_w^{(PN)}(x_A,x_B)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{c^2}}\left[(x_B^0x_A^0)^2+\gamma R_{AB}^2\right]{\displaystyle _0^1}w(x_{(0)}^\alpha (\lambda ))𝑑\lambda ,`$ (35)
$`\mathrm{\Omega }_𝒘^{(PN)}(x_A,x_B)={\displaystyle \frac{2}{c^3}}\left(\gamma +1+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\alpha _1\right)(x_B^0x_A^0)𝑹_{AB}{\displaystyle _0^1}𝒘(x_{(0)}^\alpha (\lambda ))𝑑\lambda ,`$ (36)
$`\mathrm{\Omega }_{𝒗_r}^{(PN)}(x_A,x_B)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2c^3}}\alpha _1(x_B^0x_A^0)(𝑹_{AB}𝒗_r){\displaystyle _0^1}w(x_{(0)}^\alpha (\lambda ))𝑑\lambda ,`$ (37)
the integrals being calculated along the line defined by (9).

The corresponding time transfer function is easily obtained by using (19) or (20). We get

$`𝒯(t_A,𝒙_A,𝒙_B)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{c}}R_{AB}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{c^3}}(\gamma +1)R_{AB}{\displaystyle _0^1}w(z^\alpha (\lambda ))𝑑\lambda `$ (38)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{c^4}}𝑹_{AB}\left[(\gamma +1+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\alpha _1){\displaystyle _0^1}𝒘(z^\alpha (\lambda ))𝑑\lambda +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\alpha _1𝒗_r{\displaystyle _0^1}w(z^\alpha (\lambda ))𝑑\lambda \right]+O(5),`$
the integral being evaluated along the curve defined by (21).

Let us emphasize that, since $`w=U+O(2)`$, $`w`$ may be replaced by the Newtonian-like potential $`U`$ in expressions (35)-(38).

### III.3 Case of stationary sources

In what follows, we suppose that the gravitational field is generated by a unique stationary source. Then, $`_t\chi =0`$ and the potentials $`w`$ and $`𝒘`$ do not depend on time. In this case, the integration involved in (35)-(37) can be performed by a method due to Buchdahl buc1 . Introducing the auxiliary variables $`𝒚_A=𝒙_A𝒙^{}`$ and $`𝒚_B=𝒙_B𝒙^{}`$, and replacing in (9) the parameter $`\lambda `$ by $`u=\lambda 1/2`$, a straightforward calculation yields

$`{\displaystyle _0^1}w(𝒙_{(0)}(\lambda ))𝑑\lambda =G{\displaystyle \widehat{\rho }(𝒙^{})F(𝒙^{},𝒙_A,𝒙_B)d^3𝒙^{}},`$ (39)
$`{\displaystyle _0^1}𝒘(𝒙_{(0)}(\lambda ))𝑑\lambda =G{\displaystyle \rho ^{}(𝒙^{})𝒗(𝒙^{})F(𝒙^{},𝒙_A,𝒙_B)d^3𝒙^{}},`$ (40)
where the kernel function $`F(𝒙^{},𝒙_A,𝒙_B)`$ has the expression

$$F(𝒙^{},𝒙_A,𝒙_B)=_{1/2}^{1/2}\frac{du}{(𝒚_B𝒚_A)u+\frac{1}{2}(𝒚_B+𝒚_A)}.$$

Noting that $`𝒚_B𝒚_A=𝑹_{AB}`$, which implies that $`𝒚_B𝒚_A=R_{AB}`$, we find

$$F(𝒙,𝒙_A,𝒙_B)=\frac{1}{R_{AB}}\mathrm{ln}\left(\frac{𝒙𝒙_A+𝒙𝒙_B+R_{AB}}{𝒙𝒙_A+𝒙𝒙_BR_{AB}}\right).$$
(41)
Inserting (39), (40) and (41) in (35)-(37) and in (38) will enable one to obtain quite elegant expressions for $`\mathrm{\Omega }^{(PN)}(x_A,x_B)`$ and for $`𝒯(𝒙_A,𝒙_B)`$, respectively.

## IV Isolated, axisymmetric rotating body

Henceforth, we suppose that the light is propagating in the gravitational field of an isolated, axisymmetric rotating body. The gravitational field is assumed to be stationary. The main purpose of this section is to determine the influence of the mass and spin multipole moments of the rotating body on the coordinate time transfer and on the direction of light rays. From these results, it will be possible to obtain a relativistic modelling of the one-way time transfers and frequency shifts up to the order $`1/c^4`$ in a geocentric non rotating frame.

Since we treat the case of a body located very far from the other bodies of the universe, the global coordinate system $`(x^\mu )`$ used until now can be considered as a local (i.e. geocentric) one. So, in agreement with the UAI/UGG Resolution B1 (2000) uai , we shall henceforth denote by $`W`$ and $`𝑾`$ the quantities $`w`$ and $`𝒘`$ respectively defined by (30) and (33) and we shall denote by $`G_{\mu \nu }`$ the components of the metric. However, we shall continue here with using lower case letters for the geocentric coordinates in order to avoid too heavy notations.

The center of mass O of the rotating body being taken as the origin of the quasi Cartesian coordinates $`(𝒙)`$, we choose the axis of symmetry as the $`x^3`$-axis. We assume that the body is slowly rotating about O$`x^3`$ with a constant angular velocity $`𝝎`$, so that

$$𝒗(𝒙)=𝝎\times 𝒙.$$
(42)
In what follows, we put $`r=𝒙`$, $`r_A=𝒙_A`$ and $`r_B=𝒙_A`$. We call $`\theta `$ the angle between $`𝒙`$ and O$`x^3`$. We consider only the case where all points of the segment joining $`𝒙_A`$ and $`𝒙_B`$ are outside the body. We denote by $`r_e`$ the radius of the smallest sphere centered on O and containing the body (for celestial bodies, $`r_e`$ is the equatorial radius). In this section, we assume the convergence of the multipole expansions formally derived below at any point outside the body, even if $`r<r_e`$.

### IV.1 Multipole developments of $`W`$ and $`𝑾`$

According to (30), (33) and (42), the gravitational potentials $`W`$ and $`𝑾`$ obey the equations

$$\mathbf{}^2W=4\pi G\widehat{\rho },\mathbf{}^2𝑾=4\pi G\rho ^{}𝝎\times 𝒙.$$
(43)
It follows from (43) that the potential $`W`$ is a harmonic function outside the rotating body. As a consequence, $`W`$ may be expanded in a multipole series of the form

$$W(𝒙)=\frac{GM}{r}\left[1\underset{n=2}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}J_n\left(\frac{r_e}{r}\right)^nP_n(\mathrm{cos}\theta )\right].$$
(44)
In this development, the $`P_n`$ are the Legendre polynomials and the quantities $`M`$, $`J_2\mathrm{}J_n\mathrm{}`$ correspond to the generalized Blanchet-Damour mass multipole moments in general relativity bla2 .

In fact, taking into account the identity

$$\frac{^n}{z^n}\left(\frac{1}{r}\right)=\frac{(1)^nn!}{r^{1+n}}P_n(z/r),z=x^3,$$

it will be much more convenient for the computation of integral (39) to use the following expansion in a series of derivatives of $`1/r`$

$$W(𝒙)=GM\left[\frac{1}{r}\underset{n=2}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{(1)^n}{n!}J_nr_e^n\frac{^n}{z^n}\left(\frac{1}{r}\right)\right].$$
(45)
According to (45), the mass density $`\widehat{\rho }`$ can be developped in the multipole series

$$\widehat{\rho }(𝒙)=M\left[\delta ^{(3)}(𝒙)\underset{n=2}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{(1)^n}{n!}J_nr_e^n\frac{^n}{z^n}\delta ^{(3)}(𝒙)\right],$$
(46)
$`\delta ^{(3)}(𝒙)`$ being the Dirac distribution supported by the origin O.

Now, substituting (42) into (33) yields for the vector potential $`𝑾`$

$$𝑾(𝒙)=G\frac{\rho ^{}(𝒙^{})𝝎\times 𝒙^{}}{𝒙𝒙^{}}d^3𝒙^{}.$$
(47)
It is possible to show that this vector may be written as

$$𝑾=\frac{1}{2}𝝎\times \mathbf{}𝒱,$$
(48)
where $`𝒱`$ is an axisymmetric function satisfying the Laplace equation $`\mathbf{}^2𝒱=0`$ outside the body. Consequently, we can expand $`𝒱`$ in a series of the form

$$𝒱(𝒙)=\frac{GI}{r}\left[1\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}K_n\left(\frac{r_e}{r}\right)^nP_n(\mathrm{cos}\theta )\right],$$
(49)
where $`I`$ and the $`K_n`$ are constants. Inserting (49) into (48) and using the identity

$$(n+1)P_n(z/r)+(z/r)P_n^{}(z/r)=P_{n+1}^{}(z/r),$$

we find for $`𝑾`$ an expansion as follows

$$𝑾(𝒙)=\frac{GI𝝎\times 𝒙}{2r^3}\left[1\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}K_n\left(\frac{r_e}{r}\right)^nP_{n+1}^{}(\mathrm{cos}\theta )\right],$$
(50)
which coincides with a result previously obtained by one of us tey . The coincidence shows that $`I`$ is the moment of inertia of the body about the $`z`$-axis. Thus, the quantity $`𝑺=I𝝎`$ is the intrinsic angular momentum of the rotating body. The coefficients $`K_n`$ are completely determined by the density distribution $`\rho ^{}`$ and by the shape of the body tey ; adler . Expansion (50) may also be written as

$$𝑾(𝒙)=\frac{1}{2}G𝑺\times \mathbf{}\left[\frac{1}{r}\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{(1)^n}{n!}K_nr_e^n\frac{^n}{z^n}\left(\frac{1}{r}\right)\right].$$
(51)
Consequently, the density of mass current can be developped in the multipole series

$$\rho ^{}(𝒙)(𝝎\times 𝒙)=\frac{1}{2}𝑺\times \mathbf{}\left[\delta ^{(3)}(𝒙)\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{(1)^n}{n!}K_nr_e^n\frac{^n}{z^n}\delta ^{(3)}(𝒙)\right],$$
(52)
a property which will be exploited in the following subsection.

### IV.2 Multipole structure of the world-function

The function $`\mathrm{\Omega }^{(PN)}(x_A,x_B)`$ is determined by (34)-(37) where $`w`$ and $`𝒘`$ are respectively replaced by $`W`$ and $`𝑾`$. The integrals involved in the r.h.s. of (34)-(37) are given by (39) and (40). Substituting (46) into (39) and using the properties of the Dirac distribution, we obtain

$$_0^1W\left(𝒙_{(0)}(\lambda )\right)𝑑\lambda =GM\left[1\underset{n=2}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{1}{n!}J_nr_e^n\frac{^n}{z^n}\right]F(𝒙,𝒙_A,𝒙_B)|_{𝒙=0}.$$
(53)
Similarly, substituting (52) into (40), we get

$$_0^1𝑾\left(𝒙_{(0)}(\lambda )\right)𝑑\lambda =\frac{1}{2}G𝑺\times \mathbf{}\left[1\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{1}{n!}K_nr_e^n\frac{^n}{z^n}\right]F(𝒙,𝒙_A,𝒙_B)|_{𝒙=0}.$$
(54)
These formulas show that the multipole expansion of $`\mathrm{\Omega }^{(PN)}(x_A,x_B)`$ can be thoroughly calculated by straightforward differentiations of the kernel function $`F(𝒙,𝒙_A,𝒙_B)`$ given by (41). They constitute the essential result of the present paper, from which it would be possible to deduce the multipole expansions giving the time transfer and the frequency shift between A and B up to the order $`1/c^4`$.

In order to obtain explicit formulas, we shall only retain the contributions due to $`M`$, $`J_2`$ and $`𝑺`$ in the expansion yielding $`\mathrm{\Omega }_W^{(PN)}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_𝑾^{(PN)}`$. Then, denoting the unit vector along the $`z`$-axis by $`𝒌`$ and noting that $`𝑺=S𝒌`$, we get for $`\mathrm{\Omega }_W^{(1)}(x_A,x_B)`$

$`\mathrm{\Omega }_W^{(PN)}(x_A,x_B)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{GM}{c^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{(x_B^0x_A^0)^2+\gamma R_{AB}^2}{R_{AB}}}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{r_A+r_B+R_{AB}}{r_A+r_BR_{AB}}}\right)`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{2GM}{c^2}}J_2r_e^2{\displaystyle \frac{(x_B^0x_A^0)^2+\gamma R_{AB}^2}{\left[(r_A+r_B)^2R_{AB}^2\right]^2}}(r_A+r_B)\left({\displaystyle \frac{𝒌𝒙_A}{r_A}}+{\displaystyle \frac{𝒌𝒙_B}{r_B}}\right)^2`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{GM}{c^2}}J_2r_e^2{\displaystyle \frac{(x_B^0x_A^0)^2+\gamma R_{AB}^2}{(r_A+r_B)^2R_{AB}^2}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{(𝒌\times 𝒙_A)^2}{r_A^3}}+{\displaystyle \frac{(𝒌\times 𝒙_B)^2}{r_B^3}}\right]+\mathrm{}`$
and for $`\mathrm{\Omega }_𝑾^{(PN)}(x_A,x_B)`$

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_𝑾^{(PN)}(x_A,x_B)=\left(\gamma +1+\frac{1}{4}\alpha _1\right)\frac{2GS}{c^3}(x_B^0x_A^0)\frac{r_A+r_B}{r_Ar_B}\frac{𝒌(𝒙_A\times 𝒙_B)}{(r_A+r_B)^2R_{AB}^2}+\mathrm{}.$$
(56)
Finally, owing to the limit $`\alpha _1<0.02`$ furnished in will , we shall henceforth neglect all the multipole contributions in $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{𝒗_r}^{(PN)}(x_A,x_B)`$. Thus, we get

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_{𝒗_r}^{(PN)}(x_A,x_B)=\alpha _1\frac{GM}{2c^3}(x_B^0x_A^0)\frac{𝑹_{AB}𝒗_r}{R_{AB}}\mathrm{ln}\left(\frac{r_A+r_B+R_{AB}}{r_A+r_BR_{AB}}\right)+\mathrm{}.$$
(57)
In this section and in the following one, the symbol $`+\mathrm{}`$ stands for the contributions of higher multipole moments which are neglected. For the sake of brevity, when $`+\mathrm{}`$ is used, we systematically omit to mention the symbol $`O(n)`$ which stands for the neglected post-Newtonian terms.

### IV.3 Time transfer function up to the order $`1/c^4`$

Let us substitute $`R_{AB}`$ for $`x_B^0x_A^0`$ into (IV.2)-(57) and insert the corresponding expression of $`\mathrm{\Omega }^{(PN)}`$ into (19). We get an expression for the time transfer function as follows

$$𝒯(𝒙_A,𝒙_B)=\frac{1}{c}R_{AB}+𝒯_M(𝒙_A,𝒙_B)+𝒯_{J_2}(𝒙_A,𝒙_B)+𝒯_𝑺(𝒙_A,𝒙_B)+𝒯_{𝒗_r}(𝒙_A,𝒙_B)+\mathrm{},$$
(58)
where

$`𝒯_M(𝒙_A,𝒙_B)`$ $`=`$ $`(\gamma +1){\displaystyle \frac{GM}{c^3}}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{r_A+r_B+R_{AB}}{r_A+r_BR_{AB}}}\right),`$ (59)
$`𝒯_{J_2}(𝒙_A,𝒙_B)`$ $`=`$ $`(\gamma +1){\displaystyle \frac{GM}{c^3}}{\displaystyle \frac{J_2r_e^2R_{AB}}{(r_A+r_B)^2R_{AB}^2}}[{\displaystyle \frac{2(r_A+r_B)}{(r_A+r_B)^2R_{AB}^2}}({\displaystyle \frac{𝒌𝒙_A}{r_A}}+{\displaystyle \frac{𝒌𝒙_B}{r_B}})^2`$ (60)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{(𝒌\times 𝒙_A)^2}{r_A^3}}{\displaystyle \frac{(𝒌\times 𝒙_B)^2}{r_B^3}}],`$
$`𝒯_𝑺(𝒙_A,𝒙_B)`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\gamma +1+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\alpha _1\right){\displaystyle \frac{2GS}{c^4}}{\displaystyle \frac{r_A+r_B}{r_Ar_B}}{\displaystyle \frac{𝒌(𝒙_A\times 𝒙_B)}{(r_A+r_B)^2R_{AB}^2}},`$ (61)
$`𝒯_{𝒗_r}(𝒙_A,𝒙_B)`$ $`=`$ $`\alpha _1{\displaystyle \frac{GM}{2c^4}}{\displaystyle \frac{𝑹_{AB}𝒗_r}{R_{AB}}}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{r_A+r_B+R_{AB}}{r_A+r_BR_{AB}}}\right).`$ (62)
The time transfer is thus explicitly determined up to the order $`1/c^4`$. The term of order $`1/c^3`$ given by (59) is the well-known Shapiro time delay. Equations (60) and (61) extend results previously found for $`\gamma =1`$ and $`\alpha _1=0`$ kli1 . However, our derivation is more straightforward and yields formulas which are more convenient to calculate the frequency shifts. As a final remark, it is worthy of note that $`𝒯_M`$ and $`𝒯_{J_2}`$ are symmetric in $`(𝒙_A,𝒙_B)`$, while $`𝒯_𝑺`$ and $`𝒯_{𝒗_r}`$ are antisymmetric in $`(𝒙_A,𝒙_B)`$.

### IV.4 Directions of light rays at $`x_A`$ and $`x_B`$ up to the order $`1/c^3`$

In order to determine the vectors tangent to the ray path at $`x_A`$ and $`x_B`$, we use Eqs. (6) and (7) where $`𝒯`$ is replaced by the expression given by (58). For the sake of brevity, we put henceforth $`𝒍_A=\{(l_i)_A\}`$ and $`𝒍_B=\{(l_i)_B\}`$. We find

$$𝒍_A(𝒙_A,𝒙_B)=𝑵_{AB}+𝒍_M(𝒙_A,𝒙_B)+𝒍_{J_2}(𝒙_A,𝒙_B)+𝒍_𝑺(𝒙_A,𝒙_B)+𝒍_{𝒗_r}(𝒙_A,𝒙_B)+\mathrm{},$$
(63)
$$𝒍_B(𝒙_A,𝒙_B)=𝑵_{AB}𝒍_M(𝒙_B,𝒙_A)𝒍_{J_2}(𝒙_B,𝒙_A)+𝒍_𝑺(𝒙_B,𝒙_A)+𝒍_{𝒗_r}(𝒙_B,𝒙_A)+\mathrm{},$$
(64)
where $`𝒍_M`$, $`𝒍_{J_2}`$, $`𝒍_𝑺`$ and $`𝒍_{𝒗_r}`$ stand for the contributions of $`𝒯_M`$, $`𝒯_{J_2}`$, $`𝒯_𝑺`$ and $`𝒯_{𝒗_r}`$, respectively. Putting

$$𝒏_A=\frac{𝒙_A}{r_A},𝒏_B=\frac{𝒙_B}{r_B},𝑵_{AB}=\frac{𝒙_B𝒙_A}{R_{AB}},$$

we get from (59)

$$𝒍_M(𝒙_A,𝒙_B)=(\gamma +1)\frac{2GM}{c^2}\frac{(r_A+r_B)𝑵_{AB}+R_{AB}𝒏_A}{(r_A+r_B)^2R_{AB}^2}.$$
(65)
From (60), we get

$`𝒍_{J_2}(𝒙_A,𝒙_B)=(\gamma +1){\displaystyle \frac{GMJ_2r_e^2}{c^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{r_A+r_B}{\left[(r_A+r_B)^2R_{AB}^2\right]^2}}`$
$`\times \{𝑵_{AB}[2(𝒌𝒏_A+𝒌𝒏_B)^2{\displaystyle \frac{(r_A+r_B)^2+3R_{AB}^2}{(r_A+r_B)^2R_{AB}^2}}`$
$`({\displaystyle \frac{1(𝒌𝒏_A)^2}{r_A}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1(𝒌𝒏_B)^2}{r_B}}){\displaystyle \frac{(r_A+r_B)^2+R_{AB}^2}{r_A+r_B}}]`$
$`+2𝒏_A{\displaystyle \frac{R_{AB}}{r_A+r_B}}[(𝒌𝒏_A+𝒌𝒏_B)^2{\displaystyle \frac{3(r_A+r_B)^2+R_{AB}^2}{(r_A+r_B)^2R_{AB}^2}}`$ (66)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(13(𝒌𝒏_A)^2\right){\displaystyle \frac{(3r_A+r_B)(r_A+r_B)R_{AB}^2}{r_A^2}}`$
$`+(r_A+r_B)({\displaystyle \frac{2(𝒌𝒏_A)(𝒌𝒏_B)}{r_A}}{\displaystyle \frac{1(𝒌𝒏_B)^2}{r_B}})]`$
$`4𝒌{\displaystyle \frac{R_{AB}}{r_A}}[(𝒌𝒏_A){\displaystyle \frac{(3r_A+r_B)(r_A+r_B)R_{AB}^2}{2r_A(r_A+r_B)}}+(𝒌𝒏_B)]\}.`$
From (61) and (62), we derive the other contributions which are of order $`1/c^3`$

$`𝒍_𝑺(𝒙_A,𝒙_B)=(\gamma +1+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\alpha _1){\displaystyle \frac{2GS}{c^3}}{\displaystyle \frac{r_A+r_B}{r_A[(r_A+r_B)^2R_{AB}^2]}}\{𝒌\times 𝒏_B`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{2r_Ar_B𝒌(𝒏_A\times 𝒏_B)}{(r_A+r_B)^2R_{AB}^2}}[{\displaystyle \frac{(3r_A+r_B)(r_A+r_B)R_{AB}^2}{2r_A(r_A+r_B)}}𝒏_A+𝒏_B]\},`$ (67)
$`𝒍_{𝒗_r}(𝒙_A,𝒙_B)=\alpha _1{\displaystyle \frac{GM}{c^3}}[{\displaystyle \frac{𝒗_r(𝒗_r𝑵_{AB})𝑵_{AB}}{2R_{AB}}}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{r_A+r_B+R_{AB}}{r_A+r_BR_{AB}}}\right)`$
$`+(𝒗_r𝑵_{AB}){\displaystyle \frac{(r_A+r_B)𝑵_{AB}+R_{AB}𝒏_A}{(r_A+r_B)^2R_{AB}^2}}].`$ (68)
We note that the mass and the quadrupole moment yield contributions of order $`1/c^2`$, while the intrinsic angular momentum and the velocity relative to the universe rest frame yield contributions of order $`1/c^3`$.

### IV.5 Sagnac terms in the time transfer function

In an experiment like ACES, recording the time of emission $`t_A`$ will be more practical than recording the time of reception $`t_B`$. So, it will be very convenient to form the expression of the time transfer $`𝒯(𝒙_A,𝒙_B)`$ from $`𝒙_A(t_A)`$ to $`𝒙_B(t_B^+)`$ in terms of the position of the receiver B at the time of emission $`t_A`$. For any quantity $`Q_B(t)`$ defined along the world line of the station B, let us put $`\stackrel{~}{Q}_B=Q(t_A)`$. Thus we may write $`\stackrel{~}{𝒙}_B(t_A)`$, $`\stackrel{~}{r}_B(t_A)`$, $`\stackrel{~}{𝒗}_B(t_A)`$, $`\stackrel{~}{v}_B=\stackrel{~}{𝒗}_B`$, etc.

Now, let us introduce the instantaneous coordinate distance $`𝑫_{AB}=\stackrel{~}{𝒙}_B𝒙_A`$ and its norm $`D_{AB}`$. Since we want to know $`t_Bt_A`$ up to the order $`1/c^4`$, we can use the Taylor expansion of $`𝑹_{AB}`$

$$𝑹_{AB}=𝑫_{AB}+(t_Bt_A)\stackrel{~}{𝒗}_B+\frac{1}{2}(t_Bt_A)^2\stackrel{~}{𝒂}_B+\frac{1}{6}(t_Bt_A)^3\stackrel{~}{𝒃}_B+\mathrm{},$$

where $`𝒂_B`$ is the acceleration of B and $`𝒃_B=d𝒂_B/dt`$. Using iteratively this expansion together with (58), we get

$`𝒯(𝒙_A,𝒙_B)=𝒯(𝒙_A,\stackrel{~}{𝒙}_B)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{c^2}}𝑫_{AB}\stackrel{~}{𝒗}_B+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2c^3}}D_{AB}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{(𝑫_{AB}\stackrel{~}{𝒗}_B)^2}{D_{AB}^2}}+\stackrel{~}{v}_B^2+𝑫_{AB}\stackrel{~}{𝒂}_B\right]`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{c^4}}\left[\left(𝑫_{AB}\stackrel{~}{𝒗}_B\right)\left(\stackrel{~}{v}_B^2+𝑫_{AB}\stackrel{~}{𝒂}_B\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}D_{AB}^2\left(\stackrel{~}{𝒗}_B\stackrel{~}{𝒂}_B+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}𝑫_{AB}\stackrel{~}{𝒃}_B\right)\right]`$ (69)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{c}}{\displaystyle \frac{𝑫_{AB}}{D_{AB}}}\stackrel{~}{𝒗}_B\left[𝒯_M(𝒙_A,\stackrel{~}{𝒙}_B)+𝒯_{J_2}(𝒙_A,\stackrel{~}{𝒙}_B)\right]`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{c^2}}D_{AB}\stackrel{~}{𝒗}_B\left[𝒍_M(\stackrel{~}{𝒙}_B,𝒙_A)+𝒍_{J_2}(\stackrel{~}{𝒙}_B,𝒙_A)\right]+\mathrm{},`$
where $`𝒯(𝒙_A,\stackrel{~}{𝒙}_B)`$ is obtained by substituting $`\stackrel{~}{𝒙}_B`$, $`\stackrel{~}{r}_B`$ and $`𝑫_{AB}`$ respectively for $`𝒙_B`$, $`r_B`$ and $`𝑹_{AB}`$ into the time transfer function defined by (58)-(62). This expression extends the previous formula bla1  to the next order $`1/c^4`$. The second, the third and the fourth terms in (IV.5) represent pure Sagnac terms of order $`1/c^2`$, $`1/c^3`$ and $`1/c^4`$, respectively. The fifth and the sixth terms are contributions of the gravitational field mixed with the coordinate velocity of the receiving station. Since these last two terms are of order $`1/c^4`$, they may be calculated for the arguments $`(𝒙_B,𝒙_A)`$ (note the order of the arguments in $`𝒍_M`$ and $`𝒍_{J_2}`$).

## V Frequency shift in the field of an axisymmetric rotating body

### V.1 General formulas

Consider a clock $`𝒪_A`$ on A and a clock $`𝒪_B`$ on B delivering respectively the proper frequencies $`f_A`$ and $`f_B`$ and suppose that $`𝒪_A`$ is sending photons to $`𝒪_B`$. The one-way frequency transfer from $`𝒪_A`$ and $`𝒪_B`$ is characterized by the ratio $`f_A/f_B`$ which may be written as $`f_A/f_B=(f_A/\nu _A)(\nu _A/\nu _B)(\nu _B/f_B)`$ where $`\nu _A`$ is the proper frequency of the photon as measured on A at the instant of emission and $`\nu _B`$ is the proper frequency of the same photon as measured on B at the instant of receipt. The ratios $`f_A/\nu _A`$ and $`f_B/\nu _B`$ are obtained by local measurements performed on A and B, respectively bla1 . So, in the present paper, we are concerned only with the theoretical determination of $`\nu _A/\nu _B`$. This ratio is given by the well-known relation

$$\frac{\nu _A}{\nu _B}=\frac{u_A^\mu (l_\mu )_A}{u_B^\mu (l_\mu )_B}$$
(70)
where $`u_A^\mu =(dx^\mu /ds)_A`$ and $`u_B^\mu =(dx^\mu /ds)_B`$ are respectively the unit 4-velocity of the clock $`𝒪_A`$ and of the clock $`𝒪_B`$, and $`(l_\mu )_A`$ and $`(l_\mu )_B`$ are the null tangent vectors at the point of emission $`x_A`$ and at the point of reception $`x_B`$, respectively.

Let us denote by $`𝒗_A=(d𝒙/dt)_A`$ and $`𝒗_B=(d𝒙/dt)_B`$ the coordinate velocities of the clocks on A and B, respectively. Since the gravitational field is assumed to be stationary, the formula (70) giving the frequency shift between $`x_A`$ and $`x_B`$ may be written as

$$\frac{\nu _A}{\nu _B}=\frac{u_A^0}{u_B^0}\times \frac{q_A}{q_B},q_A=1+\frac{1}{c}𝒍_A𝒗_A,q_B=1+\frac{1}{c}𝒍_B𝒗_B,$$
(71)
where $`𝒍_A`$ and $`𝒍_B`$ are the quantities respectively defined by (6) and (7).

It is possible to calculate the ratio $`q_A/q_B`$ up to the order $`1/c^4`$ from our results in Sec. IV since $`𝒍_A`$ and $`𝒍_B`$ are given up to the order $`1/c^3`$ respectively by (63) and (64). Denoting by $`𝒍^{(n)}/c^n`$ the $`O(n)`$ terms in $`𝒍`$, $`q_A/q_B`$ may be expanded as

$`{\displaystyle \frac{q_A}{q_B}}=1{\displaystyle \frac{1}{c}}{\displaystyle \frac{𝑵_{AB}(𝒗_A𝒗_B)}{1𝑵_{AB}{\displaystyle \frac{𝒗_B}{c}}}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{c^3}}\left[𝒍_A^{(2)}𝒗_A𝒍_B^{(2)}𝒗_B\right]+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{c^4}}\left[𝒍_A^{(3)}𝒗_A𝒍_B^{(3)}𝒗_B\right]`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{c^4}}𝑵_{AB}\left[\left(𝒍_B^{(2)}𝒗_B\right)(𝒗_A2𝒗_B)+\left(𝒍_A^{(2)}𝒗_A\right)𝒗_B\right]+O(5).`$ (72)
In order to be consistent with this expansion, we have to perform the calculation of $`u_A^0/u_B^0`$ at the same level of approximation. For a clock delivering a proper time $`\tau `$, $`1/u^0`$ is the ratio of the proper time $`d\tau `$ to the coordinate time $`dt`$. To reach the suitable accuracy, it is therefore necessary to take into account the terms of order $`1/c^4`$ in $`g_{00}`$. For the sake of simplicity, we shall henceforth confine ourselves to the fully conservative metric theories of gravity without preferred location effects, in which all the PPN parameters vanish except $`\beta `$ and $`\gamma `$. Since the gravitational field is assumed to be stationary, the chosen coordinate system is then a standard post-Newtonian gauge and the metric reduces to its usual form

$$G_{00}=1\frac{2}{c^2}W+\frac{2\beta }{c^4}W^2+O(6),\{G_{0i}\}=\frac{2(\gamma +1)}{c^3}𝑾+O(5),G_{ij}=\left(1+\frac{2\gamma }{c^2}W\right)\delta _{ij}+O(4),$$
(73)
where $`W`$ given by (30) reduces to

$$W(𝒙)=U(𝒙)+\frac{G}{c^2}\frac{\rho ^{}(𝒙^{})}{𝒙𝒙^{}}\left[\left(\gamma +\frac{1}{2}\right)v^2+(12\beta )U+\mathrm{\Pi }+3\gamma \frac{p}{\rho ^{}}\right]d^3𝒙^{},$$
(74)
and $`𝑾`$ is given by (47). As a consequence, for a clock moving with the coordinate velocity $`𝒗`$, the quantity $`1/u^0`$ is given by the formula

$$\frac{1}{u^0}\frac{d\tau }{dt}=1\frac{1}{c^2}\left(W+\frac{1}{2}v^2\right)+\frac{1}{c^4}\left[\left(\beta \frac{1}{2}\right)W^2\left(\gamma +\frac{1}{2}\right)Wv^2\frac{1}{8}v^4+2(\gamma +1)𝑾𝒗\right]+O(6),$$
(75)
from which it is easily deduced that

$`{\displaystyle \frac{u_A^0}{u_B^0}}=1`$ $`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{c^2}}\left(W_AW_B+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}v_A^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}v_B^2\right)`$
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{c^4}}\{(\gamma +1)(W_Av_A^2W_Bv_B^2)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(W_AW_B)[W_AW_B+v_A^2v_B^2+2(1\beta )(W_A+W_B)]`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{3}{8}}v_A^4{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}v_A^2v_B^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{8}}v_B^42(\gamma +1)(𝑾_A𝒗_A𝑾_B𝒗_B)\}+O(6).`$
It follows from (V.1) and (V.1) that the frequency shift $`\delta \nu /\nu `$ is given by

$$\frac{\delta \nu }{\nu }\frac{\nu _A}{\nu _B}1=\left(\frac{\delta \nu }{\nu }\right)_c+\left(\frac{\delta \nu }{\nu }\right)_g,$$
(77)
where $`(\delta \nu /\nu )_c`$ is the special-relativistic Doppler effect

$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{\delta \nu }{\nu }}\right)_c={\displaystyle \frac{1}{c}}𝑵_{AB}(𝒗_A𝒗_B)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{c^2}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}v_A^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}v_B^2\left(𝑵_{AB}(𝒗_A𝒗_B)\right)\left(𝑵_{AB}𝒗_B\right)\right]`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{c^3}}\left[\left(𝑵_{AB}(𝒗_A𝒗_B)\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}v_A^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}v_B^2+\left(𝑵_{AB}𝒗_B\right)^2\right)\right]`$ (78)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{c^4}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{3}{8}}v_A^4{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}v_A^2v_B^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{8}}v_B^4\left(𝑵_{AB}(𝒗_A𝒗_B)\right)\left(𝑵_{AB}𝒗_B\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}v_A^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}v_B^2+\left(𝑵_{AB}𝒗_B\right)^2\right)\right]+O(5)`$
and $`(\delta \nu )/\nu )_g`$ contains all the contribution of the gravitational field, eventually mixed with kinetic terms

$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{\delta \nu }{\nu }}\right)_g={\displaystyle \frac{1}{c^2}}(W_AW_B){\displaystyle \frac{1}{c^3}}\left[(W_AW_B)\left(𝑵_{AB}(𝒗_A𝒗_B)\right)𝒍_A^{(2)}𝒗_A+𝒍_B^{(2)}𝒗_B\right]`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{c^4}}\{(\gamma +1)(W_Av_A^2W_Bv_B^2)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(W_AW_B)[W_AW_B+2(1\beta )(W_A+W_B)+v_A^2v_B^2`$ (79)
$`2(𝑵_{AB}(𝒗_A𝒗_B))(𝑵_{AB}𝒗_B)]+𝑵_{AB}[(𝒍_B^{(2)}𝒗_B)(𝒗_A2𝒗_B)+(𝒍_A^{(2)}𝒗_A)𝒗_B]`$
$`+(𝒍_A^{(3)}2(\gamma +1)𝑾_A)𝒗_A(𝒍_B^{(3)}2(\gamma +1)𝑾_B)𝒗_B\}+O(5).`$
It must be emphasized that the formulas (75) and (V.1) are valid within the PPN framework without adding special assumption, provided that $`\beta `$ and $`\gamma `$ are the only non-vanishing post-Newtonian parameters. On the other hand, (V.1) is valid only for stationary gravitational fields. In the case of an axisymmetric rotating body, we shall obtain an approximate expression of the frequency shift by inserting the following developments in (V.1), yielded by (63)-(68):

$`𝒍_A^{(2)}/c^2=𝒍_M(𝒙_A,𝒙_B)+𝒍_{J_2}(𝒙_A,𝒙_B)+\mathrm{},𝒍_A^{(3)}/c^3=𝒍_𝑺(𝒙_A,𝒙_B)+\mathrm{},`$
$`𝒍_B^{(2)}/c^2=𝒍_M(𝒙_B,𝒙_A)𝒍_{J_2}(𝒙_B,𝒙_A)+\mathrm{},𝒍_B^{(3)}/c^3=𝒍_𝑺(𝒙_B,𝒙_A)+\mathrm{},`$
the function $`𝒍_𝑺`$ being now given by (67) written with $`\alpha _1=0`$. Let us recall that the symbol $`+\mathrm{}`$ stands for the contributions of the higher multipole moments which are neglected.

### V.2 Application in the vicinity of the Earth

In order to perform numerical estimates of the frequency shifts in the vicinity of the Earth, we suppose now that A is on board the International Space Station (ISS) orbiting at the altitude $`H=400`$ km and that B is a terrestrial station. It will be the case for the ACES mission. We use $`r_B=6.37\times 10^6`$ m and $`r_Ar_B=400`$ km. For the velocity of ISS, we take $`v_A=7.7\times 10^3`$ m/s and for the terrestrial station, we have $`v_B465`$ m/s. The other useful parameters concerning the Earth are: $`GM=3.986\times 10^{14}`$ m3/s2, $`r_e=6.378\times 10^6`$ m, $`J_2=1.083\times 10^3`$; for $`n3`$, the multipole moments $`J_n`$ are in the order of $`10^6`$. With these values, we get $`W_B/c^2GM/c^2r_B=6.95\times 10^{10}`$ and $`W_A/c^2GM/c^2r_A=6.54\times 10^{10}`$. From these data, it is easy to deduce the following upper bounds: $`𝑵_{AB}𝒗_A/c2.6\times 10^5`$ for the satellite, $`𝑵_{AB}𝒗_B/c1.6\times 10^6`$ for the ground station and $`𝑵_{AB}(𝒗_A𝒗_B)/c2.76\times 10^5`$ for the first-order Doppler term.

Our purpose is to obtain correct estimates of the effects in (V.1) with are greater than or equal to $`10^{18}`$ for an axisymmetric model of the Earth. At this level of approximation, it is not sufficient to take into account the $`J_2`$-terms in $`(W_AW_B)/c^2`$. First, the higher-multipole moments $`J_3`$, $`J_4`$, $`\mathrm{}`$ yield contribution of order $`10^{15}`$ in $`W_A/c^2`$. Second, owing to the irregularities in the distribution of masses, the expansion of the geopotential in a series of spherical harmonics is probably not convergent at the surface of the Earth. For these reasons, we do not expand $`(W_AW_B)/c^2`$ in (V.1).

However, for the higher-order terms in (V.1), we can apply the explicit formulas obtained in the previous section. Indeed, since the difference between the geoid and the reference ellipsoid is less than $`100`$ m, $`W_B/c^2`$ may be written as wol

$$\frac{1}{c^2}W_B=\frac{GM}{c^2r_B}+\frac{GMr_e^2J_2}{2c^2r_B^3}(13\mathrm{cos}^2\theta )+\frac{1}{c^2}\mathrm{}W_B,$$

where the residual term $`\mathrm{}W_B/c^2`$ is such that $`\mathrm{}W_B/c^210^{14}`$. At a level of experimental uncertainty about $`10^{18}`$, this inequality allows to retain only the contributions due to $`M`$, $`J_2`$ and $`𝑺`$ in the terms of orders $`1/c^3`$ and $`1/c^4`$. As a consequence, the formula (V.1) reduces to

$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{\delta \nu }{\nu }}\right)_g={\displaystyle \frac{1}{c^2}}(W_AW_B)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{c^3}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\delta \nu }{\nu }}\right)_M^{(3)}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{c^3}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\delta \nu }{\nu }}\right)_{J_2}^{(3)}+\mathrm{}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{c^4}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\delta \nu }{\nu }}\right)_M^{(4)}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{c^4}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\delta \nu }{\nu }}\right)_𝑺^{(4)}+\mathrm{},`$ (80)
where the different terms involved in the r.h.s. are separately explicited and discussed in what follows.

Using the identity $`(r_A+r_B)^2R_{AB}^2=2r_Ar_B(1+𝒏_A𝒏_B)`$, it may be seen that $`(\delta \nu /\nu )_M^{(3)}`$ is given by

$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{\delta \nu }{\nu }}\right)_M^{(3)}={\displaystyle \frac{GM(r_A+r_B)}{r_Ar_B}}[({\displaystyle \frac{\gamma +1}{1+𝒏_A𝒏_B}}{\displaystyle \frac{r_Ar_B}{r_A+r_B}})𝑵_{AB}(𝒗_A𝒗_B)`$
$`+(\gamma +1){\displaystyle \frac{R_{AB}}{r_A+r_B}}{\displaystyle \frac{𝒏_A𝒗_A+𝒏_B𝒗_B}{1+𝒏_A𝒏_B}}].`$ (81)
The contribution of this third-order term is bounded by $`5\times 10^{14}`$ for $`\gamma =1`$, in accordance with a previous analysis bla1 .

### V.3 Influence of the quadrupole moment at the order $`1/c^3`$

Defining the quantity $`K_{AB}`$ by

$$K_{AB}=\frac{(r_Ar_B)^2}{r_Ar_B},$$

it is easily deduced from (IV.4) and (V.1) that the term $`\left(\delta \nu /\nu \right)_{J_2}^{(3)}`$ in (V.2) is given by

$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{\delta \nu }{\nu }}\right)_{J_2}^{(3)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{GM}{2r_e}}J_2\left(𝑵_{AB}(𝒗_A𝒗_B)\right)\left[\left({\displaystyle \frac{r_e}{r_A}}\right)^3\left[3(𝒌𝒏_A)^21\right]\left({\displaystyle \frac{r_e}{r_B}}\right)^3\left[3(𝒌𝒏_B)^21\right]\right]`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma +1}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{GMJ_2r_e^2(r_A+r_B)}{r_A^2r_B^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(1+𝒏_A𝒏_B)^2}}`$
$`\times \{(𝑵_{AB}(𝒗_A𝒗_B))[(𝒌𝒏_A+𝒌𝒏_B)^2{\displaystyle \frac{53𝒏_A𝒏_B+2K_{AB}}{1+𝒏_A𝒏_B}}`$
$`(1{\displaystyle \frac{r_A(𝒌𝒏_B)^2+r_B(𝒌𝒏_A)^2}{r_A+r_B}})(3𝒏_A𝒏_B+K_{AB})]`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{R_{AB}}{r_A+r_B}}(𝒏_A𝒗_A+𝒏_B𝒗_B)(𝒌𝒏_A+𝒌𝒏_B)^2{\displaystyle \frac{7𝒏_A𝒏_B+2K_{AB}}{1+𝒏_A𝒏_B}}`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{R_{AB}}{r_A}}(𝒏_A𝒗_A)\left[13(𝒌𝒏_A)^2\right]{\displaystyle \frac{r_A+r_B(2+𝒏_A𝒏_B)}{r_A+r_B}}`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{R_{AB}}{r_B}}(𝒏_B𝒗_B)\left[13(𝒌𝒏_B)^2\right]{\displaystyle \frac{r_A(2+𝒏_A𝒏_B)+r_B}{r_A+r_B}}`$
$`+R_{AB}[2({\displaystyle \frac{𝒏_A𝒗_A}{r_A}}+{\displaystyle \frac{𝒏_B𝒗_B}{r_B}})(𝒌𝒏_A)(𝒌𝒏_B)`$
$`(𝒏_A𝒗_A){\displaystyle \frac{1(𝒌𝒏_B)^2}{r_B}}(𝒏_B𝒗_B){\displaystyle \frac{1(𝒌𝒏_A)^2}{r_A}}]`$
$`2{\displaystyle \frac{R_{AB}}{r_A}}(𝒌𝒗_A)\left[𝒌𝒏_A{\displaystyle \frac{r_A+r_B(2+𝒏_A𝒏_B)}{r_A+r_B}}+𝒌𝒏_B\right]`$
$`2{\displaystyle \frac{R_{AB}}{r_B}}(𝒌𝒗_B)[𝒌𝒏_A+𝒌𝒏_B{\displaystyle \frac{r_A(2+𝒏_A𝒏_B)+r_B}{r_A+r_B}}]\}.`$
One has $`𝒗_A/c=2.6\times 10^5`$, $`𝒗_B/c1.6\times 10^6`$ and $`K_{AB}=3.77\times 10^3`$. A crude estimate can be obtained by neglecting in (V.3) the terms involving the scalar products $`𝒏_B𝒗_B`$ and $`𝒌𝒗_B`$. Since the orbit of ISS is almost circular, the scalar product $`𝒏_A𝒗_A`$ can also be neglected. On these assumptions, we find for $`\gamma =1`$

$$\left|\frac{1}{c^3}\left(\frac{\delta \nu }{\nu }\right)_{J_2}^{(3)}\right|1.3\times 10^{16}.$$
(83)
As a consequence, it will perhaps be necessary to take into account the $`O(3)`$ contributions of $`J_2`$ in the ACES mission. This conclusion is to be compared with the order of magnitude given in bla1  without a detailed calculation. Of course, a better estimate might be found if the inclination $`i=51.6\mathrm{deg}`$ of the orbit with respect to the terrestrial equatorial plane and the latitude $`\pi /2\theta _B`$ of the ground station were taken into account.

### V.4 Frequency shifts of order $`1/c^4`$

The term $`(\delta \nu /\nu )_M^{(4)}`$ in (V.2) is given by

$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{\delta \nu }{\nu }}\right)_M^{(4)}=(\gamma +1)\left({\displaystyle \frac{GM}{r_A}}v_A^2{\displaystyle \frac{GM}{r_B}}v_B^2\right){\displaystyle \frac{GM(r_Ar_B)}{2r_Ar_B}}(v_A^2v_B^2)`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{GM}{r_Ar_B}}\right)^2\left[(r_Ar_B)^2+2(\beta 1)(r_A^2r_B^2)\right]`$ (84)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{GM(r_A+r_B)}{r_Ar_B}}[({\displaystyle \frac{2(\gamma +1)}{1+𝒏_A𝒏_B}}{\displaystyle \frac{r_Ar_B}{r_A+r_B}})(𝑵_{AB}(𝒗_A𝒗_B))(𝑵_{AB}𝒗_B)`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma +1}{1+𝒏_A𝒏_B}}{\displaystyle \frac{R_{AB}}{r_A+r_B}}((𝒏_A𝒗_A)(𝑵_{AB}𝒗_B)(𝑵_{AB}(𝒗_A2𝒗_B))(𝒏_B𝒗_B))].`$
The dominant term $`(\gamma +1)GMv_A^2/r_A`$ in (84) induces a correction to the frequency shift which amounts to $`10^{18}`$. So, it will certainly be necessary to take this correction into account in experiments performed in the foreseeable future.

The terms $`(\delta \nu /\nu )_𝑺^{(4)}`$ is the contribution of the intrinsic angular momentum to the frequency shift. Substituting (50) and (67) into (V.1), it may be seen that

$$\left(\frac{\delta \nu }{\nu }\right)_𝑺^{(4)}=\left(_𝑺\right)_A\left(_𝑺\right)_B,$$
(85)
where

$`\left(_𝑺\right)_A`$ $`=`$ $`(\gamma +1){\displaystyle \frac{GS}{r_A^2}}(1+{\displaystyle \frac{r_A}{r_B}})𝒗_A\{{\displaystyle \frac{𝒌\times 𝒏_B}{1+𝒏_A𝒏_B}}{\displaystyle \frac{r_B}{r_A+r_B}}𝒌\times 𝒏_A`$ (86)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{𝒌(𝒏_A\times 𝒏_B)}{(1+𝒏_A𝒏_B)^2}}[{\displaystyle \frac{r_A+r_B(2+𝒏_A𝒏_B)}{r_A+r_B}}𝒏_A+𝒏_B]\},`$
$`\left(_𝑺\right)_B`$ $`=`$ $`(\gamma +1){\displaystyle \frac{GS}{r_B^2}}(1+{\displaystyle \frac{r_B}{r_A}})𝒗_B\{{\displaystyle \frac{𝒌\times 𝒏_A}{1+𝒏_A𝒏_B}}{\displaystyle \frac{r_A}{r_A+r_B}}𝒌\times 𝒏_B`$ (87)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{𝒌(𝒏_A\times 𝒏_B)}{(1+𝒏_A𝒏_B)^2}}[𝒏_A+{\displaystyle \frac{r_A(2+𝒏_A𝒏_B)+r_B}{r_A+r_B}}𝒏_B]\}.`$
In order to make easier the discussion, it is useful to introduce the angle $`\psi `$ between $`𝒙_A`$ and $`𝒙_B`$ and the angle $`i_p`$ between the plane of the photon path and the equatorial plane. These angles are defined by

$$\mathrm{cos}\psi =𝒏_A𝒏_B,0\psi <\pi ,𝒌(𝒏_A\times 𝒏_B)=\mathrm{sin}\psi \mathrm{cos}i_p,0i_p<\pi .$$

With these definitions, it is easily seen that

$$\frac{𝒌(𝒏_A\times 𝒏_B)}{1+𝒏_A𝒏_B}=\mathrm{cos}i_p\mathrm{tan}\frac{\psi }{2}.$$

Let us apply our formulas to ISS. Due to the inequality $`v_B/v_A6\times 10^2`$, the term $`\left(_𝑺\right)_B`$ in (85) may be neglected. From (86), it is easily deduced that

$$\left(_𝑺\right)_A(\gamma +1)\frac{GS}{r_A^2}\left(1+\frac{r_A}{r_B}\right)\frac{2+3\mathrm{tan}\psi /2}{1+\mathrm{cos}\psi }v_A.$$

Assuming $`0\psi \pi /2`$, we have $`(2+3\mathrm{tan}\psi /2)/1+\mathrm{cos}\psi 5`$. Inserting this inequality in the previous one and taking for the Earth $`GS/c^3r_A^2=3.15\times 10^{16}`$, we find

$$\left|\frac{1}{c^4}\left(\frac{\delta \nu }{\nu }\right)_𝑺^{(4)}\right|(\gamma +1)\times 10^{19}.$$
(88)
Thus, we get an upper bound which is slightly greater than the one estimated by retaining only the term $`h_{0i}v^i/c`$ in (V.1). However, our formula confirms that the intrinsic angular momentum of the Earth will not affect the ACES experiment.

## VI Conclusion

In this paper, we have shown that the world-function $`\mathrm{\Omega }(x_A,x_B)`$ constitutes a powerful tool for determining the coordinate time transfer and the frequency shift in a weak gravitational field. Our main results are established within the Nordtvedt-Will PPN formalism. We have found the general expression of $`\mathrm{\Omega }(x_A,x_B)`$ up to the order $`1/c^3`$. This result yields the expression of the time transfer function $`𝒯(t_A,𝒙_A,𝒙_B)`$ at the order $`1/c^4`$. We point out that $`\gamma `$ and $`\alpha _1`$ are the only post-Newtonian parameters involved in the expressions of the world-function and of the time transfer function.

We have treated in detail the case of an isolated, axisymmetric rotating body, assuming that the gravitational field is stationary and that the body is moving with a constant velocity $`𝒗_r`$ relative to the universe rest frame. We have given a systematic procedure for calculating the terms due to the multipole moments in the world-function $`\mathrm{\Omega }(x_A,x_B)`$ and in the time transfer function $`𝒯(𝒙_A,𝒙_B)`$. These terms are obtained by straightforward differentiations of a kernel function. We have explicitly derived the contributions due to the mass $`M`$, to the quadrupole moment $`J_2`$ and to the intrinsic angular momentum $`𝑺`$ of the rotating body.

Restricting our attention to the case where only $`\beta `$ and $`\gamma `$ are different from zero, we have then determined the general expression of the frequency shift up to the order $`1/c^4`$. We have obtained the contributions of $`J_2`$ at the order $`1/c^3`$. Our method would give as well the quadrupole contribution at the order $`1/c^4`$ in case of necessity. We have found the complete evaluation of the effect of the intrinsic angular momentum $`𝑺`$, which is of order $`1/c^4`$. It is noteworthy that our formulas contain terms which have not been taking into account until now.

Within the limits of our model, the formulas that we have established yield all the gravitational corrections to the frequency shifts up to $`10^{18}`$ in the vicinity of the Earth. We have applied our results to the ACES mission. We have found that the influence of the quadrupole moment at the order $`1/c^3`$ is in the region of $`10^{16}`$. For the effect of the intrinsic angular momentum, we have obtained an upper bound which is greater than the currently accepted estimate but which remains three orders of magnitude less than the expected accuracy in an experiment like ACES. Finally, it must be noted that our results could be applied to the two-way time/frequency transfers. In particular, the $`O(3)`$ contributions of $`J_2`$ to the two-way frequency transfers would probably deserve to be carefully calculated.


text:
# Millimeter-band Surveys of Extragalactic Sources

## 1. Introduction

The millimeter region is quite a special one, since its corresponds to a minimum in the spectral energy distribution of the Galaxy and of most (but not all) classes of extragalactic sources. The minimum occurs at the cross-over between radio emission, which generally (but not always) decreases with frequency with a power law spectrum ($`S_\nu \nu ^{\alpha _r}`$, with $`\alpha _r0.5`$ to $`1`$), and dust emission which steeply rises with frequency (with a spectral index $`\alpha _d3`$ to $`4`$). Just because of such steep rise the frequency of the minimum is only weakly dependent on the relative intensity of the two components. Moreover, the effect of redshift on the dust emission peak is to some extent compensated by the increase in dust temperature associated with the luminosity evolution of sources. This is why this spectral band is optimal for mapping the Cosmic Microwave Background. For the same reason, it is also optimal for singling out the rare, but very interesting, source populations with non-standard spectra, which at other frequencies are submerged by the much more numerous populations with “standard” spectra.

In particular, the high-frequency selection allows us to beat the strong, free-free or synchrotron, self-absorption occurring in the densest emitting regions which are normally the closest to the central engine. As discussed in the following, this allows us to investigate both the earliest and the late phases of nuclear activity. But the millimeter region also carries key information on more conventional classes of radio sources and allows us to investigate the early phases of dust-obscured galaxy evolution.

## 2. Counts of extragalactic sources in the mm band

Our current best guess for integral counts at some mm wavelengths is shown in Fig. 1. At the brightest flux densities counts are dominated by radio sources. The counts shown here come from the model by  which reproduces quite well the statistics of sources at frequencies up to 8.4 GHz (see also ). Extrapolations to higher frequencies are liable to several sources of uncertainties: poorly known high frequency spectra, variability, appearance of classes of sources with poorly known space densities or whose very existence is not clearly established.

The inflection point, occurring at $`1`$mJy for $`\lambda =3.3`$mm and shifting to brighter (fainter) flux densities with decreasing (increasing) wavelength, signals the stepping in of a different population: dusty galaxies, characterized by very steep mm/sub-mm counts. Below $`0.1`$mJy counts are well constrained by SCUBA and MAMBO surveys at $`850\mu `$m and 1.2 mm, respectively (Fig. 1). Above this flux density, we must resort to model predictions, which show a considerable latitude. Most current models actually predict much smoother counts in the transition region than those shown here. However, the model adopted here  appears to be, at the moment, the most astrophysically grounded. On the other hand, as discussed below, perhaps the transition is really smoother after all, although not for the reasons inherent in competing phenomenological models, but because of gravitational lensing, which introduces a significant tail, extending to $`10`$ times brighter fluxes, of the counts of forming spheroidal galaxies, which, according to , dominate the SCUBA/MAMBO counts.

## 3. Radio sources

### 3.1. Sources with “standard” spectra

Let us focus first on the radio-source component. What is it made of? We know that most classes of sources fade away as we move to mm wavelengths: steep-spectrum sources tend to further steepen their spectra because of electron aging effects, but also it has long been known that only a fraction of sources with flat or rising spectra up to 5 GHz, keep them that way up to 90 GHz ; many of them become optically thin, and therefore steep-spectrum, at mm wavelengths. Still, these populations are expected to comprise quite a significant fraction of sources detected at $`\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{<}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}`$cm so that surveys in this region will allow us to get very interesting information on their physical properties. For example, the distribution of spectral steepenings as a function of frequency provides statistical information on the distribution of radiative ages of sources and on mechanisms for injection and energy losses of relativistic electrons; the transition frequency from optically thick to optically thin synchrotron emission carries unique information on properties of the relativistic electron population and on the magnetic field strength of the most compact emitting regions.

The preliminary results of the survey at $`15.2`$GHz with the Ryle telescope  are already providing interesting hints. Current models , that successfully account for the counts at frequencies up to $`8.4`$GHz (see ) over-predict the number of sources at the survey limit ($`20`$mJy) by a factor $`1.5`$–2, implying that the simple assumptions adopted for source spectra break down. Preliminary results of a more detailed analysis (Ricci & De Zotti, in preparation) show that to account for both the 15 GHz counts and the corresponding spectral index distribution, significant constraints on spectral properties of both steep- and flat-spectrum sources must be introduced. A satisfactory fit is obtained by assuming an average steepening above 5 GHz by $`\delta \alpha 0.35`$ of steep-spectrum sources ($`\alpha _{1.45\mathrm{G}\mathrm{H}\mathrm{z}}>0.5`$) and, for sources with flatter 1.4–$`5`$GHz spectra, a different distribution of high-frequency (5–22 GHz) spectral indices above and below $`\mathrm{log}L_{5\mathrm{GHz}}(\text{W}/\text{Hz})=26.5`$. The model used in the right-hand side panel of Fig. 2 assumes that, below this limit, the spectral index distribution of sources with $`\alpha _{1.45\mathrm{G}\mathrm{H}\mathrm{z}}<0.5`$ is a Gaussian with mean 0.49 and dispersion 0.41, while above this limit the distribution shown in the left-hand panel was used. For sources with $`\alpha _{1.45\mathrm{G}\mathrm{H}\mathrm{z}}>0.5`$ a Gaussian distribution of spectral indices above 5 GHz was adopted, with mean 1.15 and dispersion 0.5.

### 3.2. Blazars

But mm-wave surveys will have an even greater impact on the study of the classes of sources with “non-standard” spectra, keeping flat or inverted ($`\alpha 0`$) up to very high frequencies. The best known population of this kind are blazars.

Blazars are a composite population, with Spectral Energy Distributions (SEDs) characterized by two broad peaks, the synchrotron and the inverse Compton peak, which occur at widely different frequencies. They have also a sort of bimodal distribution of polarization properties. It is not yet clear whether there is a continuity or an evolutionary link between the various sub-populations, although some hints in this direction have been found (e.g. inverse correlation between luminosity and synchrotron peak frequency: ).

With the better samples that can be obtained at mm wavelengths it should be possible to test the currently favoured theoretical paradigm, according to which the phenomenology of bright blazars can be accounted for by a sequence in the source power and intensity of the diffuse radiation field, surrounding the relativistic jet, which determines the distribution of synchrotron and inverse Compton peak frequencies. Millimetric data will therefore enable us to study the structure and the physics of radio jets.

Also, transition and extreme (mm peaking blazars), for which at the moment only some circumstantial evidence is available, should be discovered by mm surveys. For example, the two main discovery techniques, radio and X-ray selection, have produced two subclasses of BL Lac objects with different distributions of radio to X-ray luminosity ratios, X-ray selected ones being substantially weaker in the radio, although no evidence of a significant population of radio-silent BL Lacs has been found. It is not clear whether X-ray and radio selections sample the extremes of the distribution of the BL Lac population or they are discovering populations with different intrinsic properties. Millimetric surveys are optimal for identifying and systematically studying these sources, to assess whether there is continuity among the sub-classes and to investigate whether they fit within the framework of unified models. There are also hints that the radio to mm spectral indices of faint flat-spectrum sources tend to be steeper than those found for the brighter ones . These indications, and their interpretation, can only be tested and investigated with high frequency surveys.

Other very interesting open issues are the characterization of variability and polarization. Very compact sources are variable, with typical timescales limited to $`\delta t>d/c`$, where $`d`$ is the source size and $`c`$ is the velocity of light. In some cases the shape of the spectrum was also found to vary, hinting at evolutionary relationships between different classes of sources. A particularly hot issue is intra-day variability (IDV), which is most pronounced for flat-spectrum sources . Since interstellar scintillation, which is known to play a role in the observed cases of IDV, should not be important at mm wavelengths, measurements in this band would greatly help the physical interpretation of this phenomenon.

The dominant emission process for powerful radio sources is synchrotron whose radiation is intrinsically highly polarized. Yet the observed polarization degree of most sources observed at MHz or GHz frequencies is not higher than a few percent. The depolarization may be due either to random alignment of the magnetic field in the source or to differential Faraday rotation of the emergent radiation. The latter effect scales as $`\nu ^2`$ and is therefore likely to be small at mm wavelengths. Therefore polarimetric measurements in this spectral region would allow us to measure the intrinsic polarization of sources and, together with polarization measurements at lower frequencies, to determine the Faraday depth. Note that the Doppler boosting of photon frequencies along the jet axis, invoked to explain the extreme brightness temperatures of compact sources, would make the observed polarization for these sources liable to Faraday rotation up to much higher frequencies than non Doppler-boosted sources.

It is worth noticing that thanks to Doppler boosting, very high redshift blazars can show up at relatively bright radio fluxes. In fact, several $`z>4`$ blazars have been observed at flux density levels $`\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{>}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}50}`$$`100`$mJy ( and references therein). They are therefore convenient beacons for investigating the abundance of $`10^9\text{M}_{}`$ BHs and of their host galaxies at universe ages of about 1 Gyr and, in general, to explore the early phase of structure formation and the origin of the radio phenomenon. The maximum angle between the jet and the line of sight should be between 13.5 and 6.1 degrees, for the likely range of Lorentz factors , implying that, for each beamed source, a few hundred objects not beamed in our direction should exist at the same redshifts.

### 3.3. Extreme GPS sources

A class of sources that is expected to come out in mm surveys is that of extreme GHz Peaked Spectrum (GPS) or very high frequency peakers. GPS sources are powerful ($`\mathrm{log}P_{1.4\mathrm{GHz}}\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{>}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}25}\text{W}\text{Hz}^1`$), compact ($`\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{<}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}`$kpc) radio sources with a convex spectrum peaking at GHz frequencies. They are identified with both galaxies and quasars. However, unification models by which the two populations differ only by effect of different orientations do not seem to apply in this case. Rather, GPS galaxies and quasars appear to be unrelated populations. They have different redshift, rest-frame frequency, linear size and radio morphology distributions . Also, significantly different evolutionary properties are indicated .

Sources peaking above $`10`$GHz (in the observer’s frame) are strongly under-represented in the present samples because they are relatively weak at the frequencies ($`5`$GHz) where large area surveys are available. Still, some tens such sources are known . Grainge & Edge  report the detection of 50 GPS sources with spectra still rising above 10 GHz (although few details on the survey are given and the source list is not provided); one of these has the emission peak above 190 GHz in the rest frame.

It is now widely agreed that GPS sources correspond to the early stages of the evolution of powerful radio sources, when the radio emitting region grows and expands within the interstellar medium of the host galaxy, before plunging in the intergalactic medium and becoming an extended radio source . Conclusive evidence that these sources are young came from measurements of propagation velocities. Velocities of up to $`0.4c`$ were measured, implying dynamical ages $`10^3`$ years . Estimates of radiative ages of small radio sources are also consistent young ages . The identification and investigation of these sources is therefore a key element in the study of the early evolution of radio-loud AGNs.

There is a clear anti-correlation between the peak (turnover) frequency and the projected linear size of GPS sources (and of compact steep-spectrum sources; ), suggesting that the process (probably synchrotron self-absorption, although free-free absorption is also a possibility, cf. ) responsible for the turnover depends simply on the source size. Although this anti-correlation does not necessarily define the evolutionary track, a decrease of the peak frequency as the emitting blob expands is indicated. Thus millimeter-wave surveys may be able to detect these sources very close to the moment (perhaps within the first years) when they turn on.

On the other hand, it is not clear at this stage whether there is a continuity between low-frequency peaked and very high-frequency peaked GPS sources. The new samples provided by mm surveys and follow-up VLBI observations of extreme GPS sources will allow us to test these ideas. Millimetric surveys might also test the frequency of occurrence of transitions from GPS to blazar spectra, as observed for the quasar PKS0528+134 , and allow us to investigate the nature of processes involved.

The self-similar evolution models by  imply that the radio power drops as the source expands, so that GPS’s evolve into lower luminosity radio sources. With a suitable choice of the parameters, this kind of models may account for the observed counts, redshift and peak frequency distributions of the currently available samples . On the other hand,  support a scenario whereby the luminosity of GPS sources increases with time (while the peak frequency decreases) until a linear size $`1`$kpc is reached, and decreases subsequently. This scenario is consistent with the observed positive correlation between $`S_{\mathrm{peak}}`$ and angular size, although it should be noticed that this property refers to the source population and does not necessarily reflect the evolution of individual sources. The present data are insufficient to conclusively prove/disprove either scenario. However the two scenarios yield widely different predictions for counts of GPS sources at mm wavelengths: the first one implies that GPS sources may comprise a quite significant fraction of bright ($`S>1`$Jy) radio sources at $`\nu >30`$GHz, while very few bright GPS sources are expected at high frequencies in the framework of the second scenario. Bright large area mm surveys will therefore allow us to clearly discriminate among them.

It is often stated in the literature that GPS sources hardly show any variability . However, systematic studies are still lacking. The preliminary results of the study of a complete sample, reported by , indicate low variability for GPS galaxies, while GPS quasars are found to vary as strongly as compact flat-spectrum quasars. The GPS quasars monitored by  do show strong variability. Since we are dealing with very compact sources (the expected linear size of sources peaking at $`100`$GHz is $`\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{<}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}`$pc) the relevant timescales are of the order of months to years.

Another interesting issue is polarization of GPS sources. Despite the fact that synchrotron emission is intrinsically polarized up to $`75\%`$, very low polarization is seen at cm wavelengths ($`0.2\%`$ at 6 cm; ). At least in some cases (particularly for GPS quasars), these low polarizations may be attributed, to a large extent, to Faraday depolarization ( and references therein). Very large Rotation Measures (RM$`\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{>}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1000}\text{rad}\text{m}^2`$) have indeed been found . Peck & Taylor  find, for a sample of Compact Symmetric Objects, limits on the polarization degree at 8.4 GHz with a milli-arcsec (mas) resolution of less than $`1\%`$. In order to depolarize the synchrotron emission to the observed level, Faraday RMs must reach really extreme values ($`\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{>}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}5}\times 10^5\text{rad}\text{m}^2`$) or, alternatively, the magnetic field in the circumnuclear region has to be tangled on scales smaller than $`1`$mas to produce gradients of $`1000\text{rad}\text{m}^2\text{mas}^1`$ or more. There are also GPS sources with small measured values of RM.

Similarly large values of RM ($`\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{>}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1000}\text{rad}\text{m}^2`$) are found for only another class of extragalactic radio sources, namely radio galaxies at the centers of cluster cooling flows . This raises the question of whether GPS sources with high RM are also in cooling flow clusters or whether the high RMs are produced in some other way.

### 3.4. Low radiative efficiency accretion onto super-massive black holes

Millimeter-wave observations are also crucial to investigate late stages of the AGN evolution, characterized by low radiation efficiency. This matter was recently brought into sharper focus by the discovery of ubiquitous, moderate luminosity ($`10^{40}`$$`10^{42}\text{erg}\text{s}^1`$) hard X-ray emission from nearby ellipticals. VLA studies at high radio frequencies (up to 43 GHz) have shown, albeit for a limited sample of objects, that all of the observed compact cores of elliptical and S0 galaxies have spectra rising up to $`20`$$`30`$GHz .

There is growing evidence that essentially all massive ellipticals host black holes with masses $`10^8`$$`10^{10}`$M (see, e.g., ). Yet, nuclear activity is not observed at the level expected from Bondi’s  spherical accretion theory, in the presence of extensive hot gaseous halos, and for the usually assumed radiative efficiency $`10\%`$ . However, as proposed by , the final stages of accretion in elliptical galaxies may occur via rotating accretion flows (Advection-Dominated Accretion Flows, ADAFs), characterized by a very low radiative efficiency . The ADAF scenario implies strongly self-absorbed thermal cyclo-synchrotron emission due to a near equipartition magnetic field in the inner parts of the accretion flows, most easily detected at cm to mm wavelengths.

However the ADAF scenario is not the only possible explanation of the data, and is not problem-free. Chandra observations of Sgr A, at the Galactic Center, are suggestive of a considerably lower, compared to Bondi’s, accretion rate , so that the very low ADAF radiative efficiency may not be required. Also  found that the high frequency nuclear radio emission of a number of nearby early-type galaxies is substantially below the predictions of standard ADAF models. They conclude that, to reconcile the advection-dominated scenario with observations, the radio emission from the inner regions must be strongly suppressed, due perhaps to outflows or jets that dump significant amounts of energy into the medium close to the accretion radius, thereby reducing the accretion rates. In fact, it was pointed out by  that when the radiative efficiency is very low, a large fraction of the plasma in an advection-dominated inflow/outflow solution (ADIOS) may be unbound, leading to significant winds. Both the intensity and the peak of the radio emission depend on the mass loss rate. The data on sources observed so far indicate peak frequencies in the mm region. Therefore, measurements in this region allow very effective tests of the physics of low-radiative-efficiency accretion.

Perna & Di Matteo  estimated that at $`30`$GHz the counts of advection-dominated sources can be comparable to the total counts of radio sources estimated by  and may be up to a factor of 10 higher if a large fraction ($`F\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{>}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}50}\%`$) of such sources have the radio luminosity predicted by standard ADAF models, without outflows. Although the counts by  already rule out large values of $`F`$, much tighter constraints will come from counts in the millimeter region, which are even more critically dependent on the fraction of standard ADAF sources since the emission peak shifts from wavelengths $`\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{<}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}`$mm to wavelengths $`\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{>}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}`$cm when we move from standard ADAF models (no outflow) to models with strong outflows.

The radio emission was found to be correlated with the mass of the central BH ; thus a millimeter survey would also provide an estimate of the BH mass function. Improved estimates can be obtained combining radio and X-ray measurements .

### 3.5. AGNs with high frequency free-free self absorption cutoffs.

Free-free absorption cutoffs at frequencies $`>10`$GHz are expected, in the framework of the standard torus scenario for type 1 and type 2 AGNs, for radio cores seen edge on, and may have been observed in some cases . Again, high radio frequency observations are essential for a comprehensive investigation on these sources.

### 3.6. Radio afterglows of gamma-ray bursts (GRBs)

The afterglow emission of GRBs can be modelled as synchrotron emission from a decelerating blast wave in an ambient medium, plausibly the interstellar medium of the host galaxy . The radio flux, above the self-absorption break occurring at $`\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{<}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}5}`$GHz, is proportional to $`\nu ^{1/3}`$ up to a peak frequency that decreases with time. The counts of GRB afterglows at various frequencies have been estimated by  (see also ). As illustrated by Fig. 1, a large area ($`>10^3\text{deg}^2`$) millimetric survey to a flux limit $`\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{<}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}`$mJy might discover some GRB. Although, according to , GRB counts would be substantially higher at cm wavelengths, higher frequencies are more favorable to pick up the early phases of the GRB evolution.

## 4. Dusty galaxies

As we move to fainter flux densities, the counts are dominated by a very different population, i.e. galaxies with extreme star formation activity, up to $`10^3M_{}/`$year, and a different emission process, namely dust re-radiation. It is now clear that a large fraction, or even most, of star formation, is heavily obscured by dust, so that mm/sub-mm surveys provide crucial pieces of information on the early evolution of galaxies.

Furthermore, surveys at these wavelengths are optimally suited for studying the early evolutionary stages of galaxies, as the result of a number of concurrent factors. First, at mm wavelengths local galaxies are very dim; this is true even for star-burst galaxies and even more for normal spirals (the radio emission is proportional to the star-formation rate) and for radio-quiet ellipticals. Second, spheroidal components of galaxies must have strongly evolved in this band: their dust emission must have been far higher during the phases when they formed their stars. Third, the effect of the strong luminosity evolution is further boosted by the effect of the strongly negative K-correction.

These effects concur to produce the very steep counts, determined by SCUBA and, more recently, by MAMBO (the Max-Planck mm bolometer array at the IRAM 30m telescope) surveys. Surveys at relatively longer wavelengths (mm vs sub-mm) are advantageous for picking up very high redshift forming galaxies, whose observed dust emission at sub-mm wavelengths may come from frequencies beyond the dust emission peak.

Understanding the physical and evolutionary properties of these sources is still a major challenge. Even the best semi-analytic models  hinging upon the standard picture for structure formation in the framework of the hierarchical clustering paradigm, tuned to agree with detailed numerical simulations, are stubbornly unable to account for the (sub)-mm counts of galaxies. In fact, the canonical hierarchical clustering models for the formation of galaxies rather predicted that most star formation in the universe occurred within relatively small proto-galaxies, at typical rates of $`10M_{}/`$year, that later merged to form larger galaxies. The data are more consistent with the traditional “monolithic” approach whereby giant ellipticals were already present at substantial redshifts ($`z\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{>}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}`$), and formed most of their stars in a single gigantic starburst, followed by essentially passive evolution. The “monolithic” approach, however, is inadequate to the extent that it cannot be fitted in a consistent scenario for structure formation from primordial density fluctuations.

A possible way out was proposed by  who elaborated a scheme whereby the early evolution of giant ellipticals is tightly inter-related with that of quasars (see also ), and feed-back effects, from supernova explosions and from active nuclei, delay the collapse of baryons in smaller clumps while large ellipticals form their stars as soon as their potential wells are in place, so that the canonical hierarchical CDM scheme – small clumps collapse first – is reversed for baryons. The counts predicted by this model are shown and compared with SCUBA and MAMBO data in Fig. 1.

This scheme entails a number quantitative, testable predictions, in particular about the clustering and gravitational lensing of forming spheroidal galaxies. SCUBA/MAMBO galaxies are expected to be highly biased tracers of the dark matter distribution and therefore strongly clustered. Their clustering properties are indicative of their halo masses. Recent results by  show that the model predictions are nicely consistent with the (still limited) data. The estimated $`w(\theta )`$ for bright SCUBA galaxies  and for EROs  indicate dark halo masses $`10^{13}\text{M}_{}`$ for these sources; the $`w(\theta )`$ for LBGs  indicate typical masses at least 10 times lower (see also ).

Also, the bright tail of mm/sub-mm counts of forming spheroids is predicted to be strongly affected by gravitational lensing. In fact, although the probability of strong lensing is very small, it has a power-law tail ($`p(A)A^3`$) extending up to large values. Thus, if counts are steep enough, the fraction of lensed sources at bright fluxes may be large. The mm/sub-mm region is ideally suited for detecting them because, on one side, high redshift sources (with highest probability of being gravitationally lensed) are greatly emphasized by steep, negative K-correction plus evolution, and, on the other side, the model by  predicts extremely steep counts, reflecting the exponential decline of the Press-Schechter mass function (there are no low-$`z`$ counterparts to forming spheroids: their formation is essentially completed by $`z2`$). Accurate modelling of the lensing effect on counts  shows that almost all spheroids detected at $`850\mu `$m flux densities larger than $`60`$mJy are strongly amplified by gravitational lensing. Even accounting for all the contributing populations, the fraction of lensed objects at $`S_{850\mu \mathrm{m}}70`$mJy should remain at the level of about $`40\%`$ .

## 5. Sunyaev-Zeldovich (SZ) effect from quasar-driven blast waves

We end in a somewhat more speculative vein, introducing a population of sources that may really be yet to be discovered. It is natural to expect that extremely powerful sources, such as quasars, strongly affect the surrounding medium (e.g., they may photo-ionize the intergalactic medium (IGM) ). The idea of strong shock heating of the medium by energetic outflows from early quasars, originally developed by , has been recently revived by . The main weakness of these analyses is the lack of a convincing physical mechanism or of empirical evidence that a significant fraction of the power generated by quasars comes out as supersonic winds (except in the case of BAL quasars) and goes into heating of the medium. Recent analyses suggest, however, that quasars are the best candidates for accounting for the pre-heating of gas in groups and clusters of galaxies : it is enough that 1–5% of the bolometric emission of the quasars goes into heating of the IGM. But then  the heated gas within the host galaxy produces a SZ effect of amplitude (in the Rayleigh-Jeans region)

$$\left|\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }T}{T}\right)_{\mathrm{RJ}}\right|=\frac{1}{2}\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }ϵ}{ϵ_{\mathrm{CMB}}}$$

with $`\mathrm{\Delta }ϵ=f_h(E_{\mathrm{bol}}/V)(t_{\mathrm{bw}}/t_c)`$, where $`f_h`$ is the fraction of the total energy ($`E_{\mathrm{bol}}`$) emitted by the quasar going into heating of the ambient medium, $`t_{\mathrm{bw}}`$ is the lifetime of the blast-wave, $`V`$ is the volume occupied by the heated gas, and $`t_c`$ is its Compton cooling time. For $`t_{\mathrm{bw}}t_{\mathrm{exp}}`$ ($`t_{\mathrm{exp}}`$ being the expansion timescale) we have

$$\left|\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }T}{T}\right)_{\mathrm{RJ}}\right|3.4\times 10^4\frac{f_h}{0.01}\frac{E_{\mathrm{bol}}}{10^{62}\text{erg}\text{s}^1}\frac{\text{Mpc}^3}{V}\frac{50}{H_0}(1+z)^{3/2}$$

on an angular scale $`\theta 100\mathrm{"}R(\text{Mpc})`$ for $`z\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{>}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}`$ ($`Rv_{\mathrm{bw}}t_{\mathrm{bw}}`$, $`v_{\mathrm{bw}}`$ being the outward velocity of the shocked shell). These figures are not far from the results reported by Richards et al. (1997): $`|\delta T/T|10^4`$ over an area of $`30^{\prime \prime }\times 65\mathrm{"}`$, and by Jones et al. (1997): $`|\delta T/T|1.4\times 10^4`$ in a beam of $`100^{\prime \prime }\times 175\mathrm{"}`$. Estimates of the counts of such SZ effects have been worked out by  who also pointed out that, due to the relatively small angular scale of these signals, they may be swamped by radio and far-IR emissions of galaxies hosting the quasars. Therefore, to detect them, we should take advantage of the frequency region where these sources are weaker, i.e., once again, of the mm to cm range.

## 6. Conclusions

Sub-millimeter (SCUBA) and millimeter (MAMBO) surveys have played a crucial role in shaping our understanding of early phases of galaxy formation. In fact, they have proven that most of the star-light at high redshifts ($`z\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{>}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}`$) has been reprocessed by dust so that the optical view of the cosmic star-formation history is highly incomplete and biased. On the other hand, such surveys have covered only small areas: from $`0.1\text{deg}^2`$ for the shallowest ones (flux limit $`\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{<}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}10}`$mJy; ), to $`0.01\text{deg}^2`$ for the deep ones . Redshift estimates (e.g. ) indicate that many (most?) of the detected sources are likely at substantial redshifts ($`z\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{>}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}`$) and correspond to extreme star-formation activity (up to $`>10^3\text{M}_{}\text{yr}^1`$). Much more extensive surveys are necessary to adequately sample the mm/sub-mm luminosity function of star-forming galaxies. Larger area surveys would also allow us to assess the clustering properties of these sources , which provide unique information on masses of the associated dark halos and, correspondingly, crucial tests for scenarios for the formation of structures. As discussed by , quite a significant number of high-redshift forming spheroidal galaxies are expected at relatively bright fluxes (above several tens of mJy at $`\lambda 1`$mm) due to strong gravitational lensing. Detection of these sources would offer a precious opportunity for investigating their properties and to learn about the distribution of matter in the high-$`z`$ universe.

At somewhat longer wavelengths radio galaxies play an increasingly important role. Surveys at mm to few-cm wavelengths will provide key information on the physical properties of “standard” steep- and flat-spectrum sources and will allow comprehensive investigations of rare, but very interesting, populations of sources with “non-standard” spectra, rising with increasing frequency or keeping flat up to very high frequencies. Such classes of sources are very difficult to single out at low frequencies where they are swamped by the much more numerous “standard” populations. Important examples are blazars, GPS sources, and ADAF/ADIOS sources. Among the many very interesting issues on blazars that can be addressed there are the relationships among the different sub-classes (high- and low-polarization, high- and low-frequency peaked BL Lacs) and the understanding of their variability properties, in particular of intra-day variability. Also, thanks to their strong Doppler boosting, blazars can be seen at relatively bright flux densities up to very high redshifts, thus offering a precious opportunity to investigate the presence of super-massive black holes at early epochs and the origin of the radio phenomenon.

Both the earliest and the latest phases of nuclear activity show up most clearly at mm wavelengths. On one side, extreme GPS sources, whose spectra peak at mm wavelengths, probably correspond to the very earliest phases of the evolution of radio sources (perhaps within the first years). Current evolutionary scenarios predict widely different luminosities for these sources, so that mm surveys can easily discriminate among them.

Also the latest phases of the evolution of active nuclei, characterized by low accretion rates and/or low radiative efficiency (ADAF/ADIOS models), show inverted radio spectra, with turnover frequencies in the millimeter range. According to some models the turnover frequency is related to the rate of mass loss on outflows. The counts of such sources at mm wavelengths are highly sensitive to the accretion/outflow rates.

Yet another class of extragalactic sources with inverted radio emission spectrum are afterglows of gamma-ray bursts. Although they are generally quite faint, some may be discovered by mm surveys covering areas $`\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{>}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}10}^3\text{deg}^3`$ to a flux limit $`\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{<}{}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}`$mJy. Again, the mm selection picks up very early phases of their evolution.

The above are just examples. It is quite likely that, in addition to the many other areas of scientific interest that may be added, unexpected phenomena will show up as this band opens to surveys.

#### Acknowledgments.

LT acknowledges partial financial support from the European Community, Research Training Network Programme, Contract n.HPRN–CT–2000–00124. Work supported in part by MIUR and ASI.