4.4 Review

Testing general relativity with present and future astrophysical observations

期刊

CLASSICAL AND QUANTUM GRAVITY
卷 32, 期 24, 页码 -

出版社

IOP Publishing Ltd
DOI: 10.1088/0264-9381/32/24/243001

关键词

general relativity; black holes; neutron stars; compact binaries; gravitational waves

资金

  1. FP7-PEOPLE-IRSES Grant [295189, 606096]
  2. H-MSCA-RISE Grant [690904]
  3. European Union's FP7 ERC Starting Grant 'The dynamics of black holes: testing the limits of Einstein's theory' grant [DyBHo-256667]
  4. H ERC Consolidator Grant 'Matter and strong-field gravity: New frontiers in Einstein's theory' grant [MaGRaTh-646597]
  5. FP7-PEOPLE-CIG Grant [293412, PCIG11-GA-2012-321608]
  6. NSF [PHY-1055103, PHY-1260995, PHY-1306069, PHY-1300903]
  7. NASA [NNX13AH44G]
  8. ERC-StG Grant [279363-HiDGR]
  9. FP7 ERC Grant [306425]
  10. DFG Research Training Group 1620 'Models of Gravity' FP7-PEOPLE-IRSES Grant [606096]
  11. STFC GR Consolidator Grant [ST/L000636/1]
  12. FCT-Portugal [PTDC/FIS/116625/2010, CERN/FP/116341/2010, CERN/FP/123593/2011, IF/00293/2013, IF/00797/2014/CP1214/CT0012]
  13. CIDMA [UID/MAT/04106/2013]
  14. Marie Curie IEF [aStronGR-2011-298297, AstroGRAphy-2013-623439]
  15. COST Action [MP1304]
  16. UIUC Fortner Fellowship
  17. Sao Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP) [2011/11973-4, 2013/14754-7]
  18. NSF XSEDE Grant [PHY-090003]
  19. Cosmos system, part of DiRAC - STFC
  20. BIS [ST/K00333X/1, ST/H008586/1, ST/J001341/1, ST/J005673/1]
  21. CESGA-ICTS Grant [249]
  22. All Souls College, Oxford
  23. Alexander von Humboldt Foundation
  24. STFC
  25. BIPAC
  26. Oxford Martin School
  27. UK STFC
  28. Isaac Newton Studentship of the University of Cambridge
  29. DFG Research Training Group 1620 'Models of Gravity'
  30. NSF-GRFP fellowship
  31. LIGO Visitor Program through the National Science Foundation [PHY-0757058]
  32. STFC grant [ST/J000345/1]
  33. NASA through Einstein Postdoctoral Fellowship [PF2-130101]
  34. National Aeronautics Space Administration [NAS8-03060]
  35. Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics
  36. Government of Canada through Industry Canada
  37. Province of Ontario through the Ministry of Economic Development Innovation
  38. Direct For Mathematical & Physical Scien
  39. Division Of Physics [1404105, 1505824, 1055103] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  40. Direct For Mathematical & Physical Scien
  41. Division Of Physics [1306069, 1305730] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  42. STFC [Gravitational Waves, ST/L000636/1, ST/M000877/1, ST/J000345/1, ST/K00333X/1, ST/H008586/1, ST/L000962/1, ST/L000393/1, ST/J001341/1, ST/J005673/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  43. Science and Technology Facilities Council [ST/J005673/1, 1344276, ST/M000877/1, Gravitational Waves, ST/K00333X/1, ST/L000393/1, ST/J001341/1, ST/L000962/1 Gravitational Waves, ST/L000636/1, ST/H008586/1, ST/J000345/1, ST/L000962/1] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

One century after its formulation, Einstein's general relativity (GR) has made remarkable predictions and turned out to be compatible with all experimental tests. Most of these tests probe the theory in the weak-field regime, and there are theoretical and experimental reasons to believe that GR should be modified when gravitational fields are strong and spacetime curvature is large. The best astrophysical laboratories to probe strong-field gravity are black holes and neutron stars, whether isolated or in binary systems. We review the motivations to consider extensions of GR. We present a (necessarily incomplete) catalog of modified theories of gravity for which strong-field predictions have been computed and contrasted to Einstein's theory, and we summarize our current understanding of the structure and dynamics of compact objects in these theories. We discuss current bounds on modified gravity from binary pulsar and cosmological observations, and we highlight the potential of future gravitational wave measurements to inform us on the behavior of gravity in the strong-field regime.

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