4.4 Article

Analysis of Birefringence and Dispersion Effects from Spacetime-Symmetry Breaking in Gravitational Waves

期刊

UNIVERSE
卷 7, 期 10, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/universe7100380

关键词

Lorentz invariance violation; CPT symmetry breaking; spacetime birefringence; gravitational waves; gravity

资金

  1. United States National Science Foundation (NSF) [1806871, 1806990]
  2. Swiss National Science Foundation [199307]
  3. COST Actions [CA16104, CA18108]
  4. NSF
  5. STFC
  6. INFN
  7. CNRS
  8. LIGO Lab (CIT)
  9. National Science Foundation [PHY-0757058, PHY-0823459]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This work reviews the effective field theory framework for searching for symmetry breaking in gravitational waves, focusing on dispersion and birefringence effects. The study presents preliminary results of modified gravitational waveforms and sensitivity studies, demonstrating the potential of gravitational wave sources to probe for new physics signals.
In this work, we review the effective field theory framework to search for Lorentz and CPT symmetry breaking during the propagation of gravitational waves. The article is written so as to bridge the gap between the theory of spacetime-symmetry breaking and the analysis of gravitational-wave signals detected by ground-based interferometers. The primary physical effects beyond General Relativity that we explore here are dispersion and birefringence of gravitational waves. We discuss their implementation in the open-source LIGO-Virgo algorithm library suite, and we discuss the statistical method used to perform a Bayesian inference of the posterior probability of the coefficients for symmetry-breaking. We present preliminary results of this work in the form of simulations of modified gravitational waveforms, together with sensitivity studies of the measurements of the coefficients for Lorentz and CPT violation. The findings show the high potential of gravitational wave sources across the sky to sensitively probe for these signals of new physics.

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

4.4
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