2020
DOI: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab6ef5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Model-independent Constraints on Lorentz Invariance Violation: Implication from Updated Gamma-Ray Burst Observations

Abstract: Astrophysical observations provide a unique opportunity to test possible signatures of Lorentz Invariance Violation (LIV), due to the high energies and long distances involved. In quantum theory of gravity, one may expect the modification of the dispersion relation between energy and momentum for photons, which can be probed with the time-lag (the arrival time delay between light curves in different energy bands) of Gamma-ray bursts (GRBs). In this paper, by using the detailed time-delay measurements of GRB 16… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

3
65
1

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
3
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 39 publications
(69 citation statements)
references
References 55 publications
3
65
1
Order By: Relevance
“…More striking regularity is that 9 out of these 14 photons falls very nicely on a same mainline, giving a strong indication of a light speed variation suppressed by a single power of the Planck scale. 5 It is worth noting that such a LIV scale ( 21) is consistent with various constraints from high-energy γ-ray observations of pulsars [36,37,38,39], active galactic nuclei (AGNs) [40,41,42,43,44] as well as GRBs [6,7,8,45,46,47,48,49,50] and it is also compatible with the strongest robust limit to date [51] from a recent study on 8 Fermi-LAT GRBs with bright emissions in multi-GeV energies [52]. We need to mention that there can be more stringent limits on this characteristic scale of LIV from individual analyses of flaring PKS 2155-304 [53,54], 6 short GRB 090510 [5,56,57] or striking TeV event of GRB 190114C lately found by MAGIC [58,59], which tend to place lower bounds E LIV (0.1 − 10) × E Pl , stronger than that in Eq.…”
Section: Velocity Dispersion Of Light In the D-particle Quantumgravitational Foam Mediumsupporting
confidence: 79%
“…More striking regularity is that 9 out of these 14 photons falls very nicely on a same mainline, giving a strong indication of a light speed variation suppressed by a single power of the Planck scale. 5 It is worth noting that such a LIV scale ( 21) is consistent with various constraints from high-energy γ-ray observations of pulsars [36,37,38,39], active galactic nuclei (AGNs) [40,41,42,43,44] as well as GRBs [6,7,8,45,46,47,48,49,50] and it is also compatible with the strongest robust limit to date [51] from a recent study on 8 Fermi-LAT GRBs with bright emissions in multi-GeV energies [52]. We need to mention that there can be more stringent limits on this characteristic scale of LIV from individual analyses of flaring PKS 2155-304 [53,54], 6 short GRB 090510 [5,56,57] or striking TeV event of GRB 190114C lately found by MAGIC [58,59], which tend to place lower bounds E LIV (0.1 − 10) × E Pl , stronger than that in Eq.…”
Section: Velocity Dispersion Of Light In the D-particle Quantumgravitational Foam Mediumsupporting
confidence: 79%
“…which is close to the Planck scale E Pl ≃ 1.22 × 10 19 GeV. It is worth noting that such a LV scale ( 7) is consistent with various constraints from high-energy γ-ray observations of pulsars [19], AGNs [21,22,23] as well as GRBs [24,25,26,27,28], and it is also compatible with the strongest robust limit to date from a recent study [29] on 8 Fermi-LAT GRBs. We should mention that there can be severer bounds to E LV from other time-delay studies (see, e.g., Ref.…”
supporting
confidence: 86%
“…for the massive photon. We will assume a ΛCDM cosmology to determine the Hubble parameter H(z); in general one should consider a variety of cosmological models [45][46][47][48], although this is beyond the scope of this work. In both cases we see that the parameter of interest (E QG or m γ ) and the observed energy bands appear as scaling factors.…”
Section: A Forward Modelling the Time Delaymentioning
confidence: 99%