Can Gravity Probe B usefully constrain torsion gravity theories?
| dc.creator | Flanagan, Eanna E. | |
| dc.creator | Rosenthal, Eran | |
| dc.date | 2007-04-11 | |
| dc.date | 2007-05-14 | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2026-07-07T10:59:31Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2026-07-07T10:59:31Z | |
| dc.description | In most theories of gravity involving torsion, the source for torsion is the intrinsic spin of matter. Since the spins of fermions are normally randomly oriented in macroscopic bodies, the torsion generated is normally negligible. However, in a recent paper, Mao et al. point out that there is a class of theories in which the angular momentum of macroscopic spinning bodies generates a significant amount of torsion. They argue that by the principle of action equals reaction, one would expect the angular momentum of test bodies to couple to a background torsion field, and therefore the precession of the GPB gyroscopes should be affected in these theories by the torsion generated by the Earth. We show that in fact the principle of action equals reaction does not apply to these theories. We examine in detail a generalization of the Hayashi-Shirafuji theory suggested by Mao et al. called Einstein-Hayashi-Shirafuji theory. There are a variety of different versions of this theory, depending on the precise form of the coupling to matter chosen for the torsion. We show that for any coupling to matter that is compatible with the spin transport equation postulated by Mao et al., the theory has either ghosts or an ill-posed initial value formulation. These theoretical problems can be avoided by specializing the parameters of the theory and in addition choosing the standard minimal coupling to matter of the torsion tensor. This yields a consistent theory, but one in which the action equals reaction principle is violated, and in which the angular momentum of the gyroscopes does not couple to the Earth's torsion field. Thus, the Einstein-Hayashi-Shirafuji theory does not predict a detectable torsion signal for Gravity Probe B. There may be other torsion theories which do. | |
| dc.description | 13 pages, a small change to the terminology | |
| dc.identifier | https://arxiv.org/abs/0704.1447 | |
| dc.identifier | http://arxiv.org/abs/0704.1447 | |
| dc.identifier | Phys.Rev.D75:124016,2007 | |
| dc.identifier | doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.75.124016 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://salesiana.dossiersoluciones.com/handle/123456789/187425 | |
| dc.subject | General Relativity and Quantum Cosmology | |
| dc.subject | Astrophysics | |
| dc.subject | High Energy Physics - Theory | |
| dc.title | Can Gravity Probe B usefully constrain torsion gravity theories? | |
| dc.type | text |