Erratum: Isolated and binary neutron stars in dynamical Chern-Simons gravity [Phys. Rev. D<b>87</b>, 084058 (2013)]

Yagi, Kent; Stein, Leo C.; Yunes, Nicolás; Tanaka, Takahiro

doi:10.1103/physrevd.93.089909

Cited by 44 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Notice that when m 1 = m 2 , then S EDGB = 0 and dipole radiation vanishes. We have checked that these results agree exactly with those of [47] in the circular limit e → 0. For mixed neutron star-black hole binaries, we set ζ 1 = ζ BH = ξ/m 4 BH and ζ 2 = ζ NS = 0.…”

Section: ×10supporting

confidence: 70%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Parametrized post-Einsteinian framework for gravitational wave bursts

2014

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In [1], we developed a parameterized post-Einsteinian (ppE) model for the evolution of gravitational wave (GW) bursts from highly eccentric binary systems in time-frequency space. We here correct a few mistakes in some ingredients of the model. I. KEPLER PROBLEM IN THE PPE FORMALISMAs part of the computation of a ppE burst model, we considered an effective one body description for binary systems with generic modifications to the Newtonian potential. We claimed that the Newtonian potential within a generic modified theory of gravity can be written as shown in Eq. (B1) of [1], where the corrections scale as M/r p , with M the total mass of the binary and r p the pericenter distance of the binary. While the derivations in Appendix B of [1] are self-consistent, this scaling of the corrections is not suitable for some modified theories. We here generalize the results of this appendix to allow the model to apply to a wider set of theories.For equatorial orbits, the corrections to the Newtonian kinetic energy and gravitational potential within a modified theory of gravity may be written aswhere µ is the reduce mass of the binary, (α,β,γ) are amplitude parameters that depend on the coupling constants of the theory, and (ã,b,c) ∈ R that control the post-Newtonian (PN With this potential, we now compute the corrections to orbital quantities necessary to construct the ppE burst model, namely the orbital energy, angular momentum, period, and pericenter velocity. Let us begin by considering the Lagrangian for the binary within an effective one-body formalism. At leading (Newtonian) PN order, the Lagrangian for equatorial orbits may be written as L = T − U , with T = (1/2)µ(ṙ 2 + r 2φ2 ) + δT and U = −µM/r + δU . This Lagrangian admits two conserved quantities associated with the orbital energy and angular momentum, specificallyBy studying the turning points (ṙ = 0) of Eq. (3), and writing E = E N + δE and L = L N + δL, we findwith the Newtonian energy and angular momentum (E N , L N ) given in Eqs. (5.2) and (5.3) in [2], andThese deformations can be related to the generic deformation for the energy and angular momentum given in nonlinearity of the point particle Lagrangian, higher order terms in the velocity can couple to the modifications to the metric. Here, we are only concerned with the leading order terms, i.e. those that scale as v 2 × (α,β,γ). arXiv:1404.0092v3 [gr-qc] 2 Oct 20172 Eqs. (27) and (28) where LO stands for the leading-order term in a PN expansion. Now, let us consider the orbital period within our ppE formalism. In order to do this, it is useful to parametrize the radius of the orbit aswhere p = r p (1 + e) is the semi-latus rectum of the orbit and ψ increases monotonically by 2π from one pericenter passage to the next. The reason for this parametrization is that, in general, any deformation to the Newtonian potential will cause the orbits to precess [3], and as a result, the orbit will return to pericenter when φ = 2π + O (M/r p ). Using ψ to parameterize the orbit allows us to avoid complications from ...

show abstract

Section: ×10supporting

confidence: 70%

“…The mappings for (γ ppE ,c ppE ) and (δ ppE ,d ppE ) are still given by Eqs. (46) and (47) in [1]. The burst model is now fully determined within this updated ppE formalism.…”

Section: Ppe Burst Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Parametrized post-Einsteinian framework for gravitational wave bursts

2014

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, without prior knowledge of the spin magnitudes and component masses, they find that Einsteindilaton Gauss-Bonnet [67], dynamical Chern-Simons [68,69,70], and scalar-tensor theories (e.g., [71]) cannot be constrained meaningfully because of degeneracies with the masses and spins, and Einstein-AEther theory [72,73] and ideas involving extra dimensions ( [74]; see [75] for a limit based on the lack of Hawking evaporation of black holes in globular clusters) or time variation of Newton's constant G [76] are better constrained by other measurements, particularly those of binary pulsars.…”

Section: Tests Of Gravity With Gw150914mentioning

confidence: 99%

Implications of the gravitational wave event GW150914

Miller

2016

Gen Relativ Gravit

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The era of gravitational-wave astronomy began on 14 September 2015, when the LIGO Scientific Collaboration detected the merger of two ∼ 30 M ⊙ black holes at a distance of ∼ 400 Mpc. This event has facilitated qualitatively new tests of gravitational theories, and has also produced exciting information about the astrophysical origin of black hole binaries. In this review we discuss the implications of this event for gravitational physics and astrophysics, as well as the expectations for future detections. In brief: (1) because the spins of the black holes could not be measured accurately and because mergers are not well calculated for modified theories of gravity, the current analysis of GW150914 does not place strong constraints on gravity variants that change only the generation of gravitational waves, but (2) it does strongly constrain alterations of the propagation of gravitational waves and alternatives to black holes. Finally, (3) many astrophysical models for the origin of heavy black hole binaries such as the GW150914 system are in play, but a reasonably robust conclusion that was reached even prior to the detection is that the environment of such systems needs to have a relatively low abundance of elements heavier than helium.

show abstract

“…Recent applications include for instance the neutron star binary [52]. We shall investigate three different DE models: the HDE model with Granda-Oliveros (GO) cut-off, the modified holographic Ricci dark energy (MHRDE) model, and a recently proposed model with higher derivatives of the Hubble parameter H [53] in the framework of Chern-Simons gravity, in order to obtain the expressions of the scale factor for each model.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Holographic dark energy models and higher order generalizations in dynamical Chern–Simons modified gravity

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dark energy models are here investigated and studied in the framework of the Chern-Simons modified gravity model. We bring into focus the holographic dark energy model with Granda-Oliveros cut-off, the modified holographic Ricci dark energy model and a model with higher derivatives of the Hubble parameter. The relevant expressions of the scale factor a(t) for a Friedmann-Robertson-Walker Universe are derived and studied, and, in this context, the evolution of the scale factor is shown to be similar to the one displayed by the modified Chaplygin gas in two of the above models.

show abstract

Erratum: Isolated and binary neutron stars in dynamical Chern-Simons gravity [Phys. Rev. D87, 084058 (2013)]

Cited by 44 publications

References 2 publications

Parametrized post-Einsteinian framework for gravitational wave bursts

Parametrized post-Einsteinian framework for gravitational wave bursts

Implications of the gravitational wave event GW150914

Holographic dark energy models and higher order generalizations in dynamical Chern–Simons modified gravity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About