4.7 Article

Probing the size of extra dimensions with gravitational wave astronomy

Journal

PHYSICAL REVIEW D
Volume 83, Issue 8, Pages -

Publisher

AMER PHYSICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.83.084036

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS) [22.900]
  2. DOE [DE-FG03-91ER40674]
  3. JSPS [21244033]
  4. MEXT [21111006, 22111507]
  5. MEXT of Japan
  6. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [10J00900, 21244033, 22111507, 21111006] Funding Source: KAKEN

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In the Randall-Sundrum II braneworld model, it has been conjectured, according to the AdS/CFT correspondence, that a brane-localized black hole (BH) larger than the bulk AdS curvature scale l cannot be static, and it is dual to a four-dimensional BH emitting Hawking radiation through some quantum fields. In this scenario, the number of the quantum field species is so large that this radiation changes the orbital evolution of a BH binary. We derived the correction to the gravitational waveform phase due to this effect and estimated the upper bounds on l by performing Fisher analyses. We found that the Deci-Hertz Interferometer Gravitational Wave Observatory and the Big Bang Observatory (DECIGO/BBO) can give a stronger constraint than the current tabletop result by detecting gravitational waves from small mass BH/BH and BH/neutron star (NS) binaries. Furthermore, DECIGO/BBO is expected to detect 10(5) BH/NS binaries per year. Taking this advantage, we find that DECIGO/BBO can actually measure l down to l = 0.33 mu m for a 5 yr observation if we know that binaries are circular a priori. This is about 40 times smaller than the upper bound obtained from the tabletop experiment. On the other hand, when we take eccentricities into binary parameters, the detection limit weakens to l = 1.5 mu m due to strong degeneracies between l and eccentricities. We also derived the upper bound on l from the expected detection number of extreme mass ratio inspirals with LISA and BH/NS binaries with DECIGO/BBO, extending the discussion made recently by McWilliams [Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 141601 (2010)]. We found that these less robust constraints are weaker than the ones from phase differences.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available