4.7 Article

High-order post-Newtonian fit of the gravitational self-force for circular orbits in the Schwarzschild geometry

期刊

PHYSICAL REVIEW D
卷 81, 期 8, 页码 -

出版社

AMER PHYSICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.81.084033

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Science Foundation [PHY-0555484, PHY-0855503]
  2. Programme International de Cooperation Scientifique (CNRS-PICS)
  3. Direct For Mathematical & Physical Scien
  4. Division Of Physics [0855503] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We continue a previous work on the comparison between the post-Newtonian (PN) approximation and the gravitational self-force (SF) analysis of circular orbits in a Schwarzschild background. We show that the numerical SF data contain physical information corresponding to extremely high PN approximations. We find that knowing analytically determined appropriate PN parameters helps tremendously in allowing the numerical data to be used to obtain higher order PN coefficients. Using standard PN theory we compute analytically the leading 4PN and the next-to-leading 5PN logarithmic terms in the conservative part of the dynamics of a compact binary system. The numerical perturbative SF results support well the analytic PN calculations through first order in the mass ratio, and are used to accurately measure the 4PN and 5PN nonlogarithmic coefficients in a particular gauge invariant observable. Furthermore we are able to give estimates of higher order contributions up to the 7PN level. We also confirm with high precision the value of the 3PN coefficient. This interplay between PN and SF efforts is important for the synthesis of template waveforms of extreme mass ratio inspirals to be analyzed by the space-based gravitational wave instrument LISA. Our work will also have an impact on efforts that combine numerical results in a quantitative analytical framework so as to generate complete inspiral waveforms for the ground-based detection of gravitational waves by instruments such as LIGO and Virgo.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据