Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T10:28:34.770Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

COMMISSION 52: RELATIVITY IN FUNDAMENTAL ASTRONOMY

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 December 2008

Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The tremendous progress in technology which we have witnessed during the last 30 years has led to enormous improvements of observational accuracy in all disciplines of fundamental astronomy. Relativity has been becoming increasingly important for modeling and interpretation of high accuracy astronomical observations during at least these 30 years. It is clear that for current accuracy requirements astronomical problems have to be formulated within the framework of General Relativity Theory. Many high-precision astronomical techniques have already required the application of relativistic effects, which are several orders of magnitude larger than the technical accuracy of observations. In order to interpret the results of such observations, one has to construct involved relativistic models. Many current and planned observational projects can not achieve their goals if relativity is not taken into account properly. The future projects will require the introduction of higher-order relativistic effects. To make the relativistic models consistent with each other for different observational techniques, to formulate them in the simplest possible way for a given accuracy, and to formulate them in a language understandable for astronomers and engineers who have little knowledge of relativity are the challenges of a multidisciplinary research field called Applied Relativity.

Type
Contributed Papers
Copyright
Copyright © International Astronomical Union 2009

References

Ashby, N., Bender, P. L., & Wahr, J. M. 2007, Phys. Rev. D, 75, 022001Google Scholar
Bertotti, B., Ashby, N., & Iess, L. 2008, Class. Quan. Grav., 25, 045013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bertotti, B., Iess, L., & Tortora, P. 2003, Nature, 425 374CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brumberg, V. A. 2007, Cel. Mech. Dyn. Astr., 99, 245Google Scholar
Brumberg, V. A. & Simon, J.-L. 2007, Notes scientifique et techniques de l'insitut de méchanique céleste, S088Google Scholar
Duchayne, L., Mercier, F., & Wolf, P. 2007, in press [arXiv:0708.2387v2]Google Scholar
Fienga, A., Manche, H., & Laskar, J. 2007, private communicationGoogle Scholar
Folkner, W. 2007, private communicationGoogle Scholar
Klioner, S. A. 2008, A&A, 478, 951Google Scholar
Klioner, S. A., Soffel, M., & Le Poncin-Lafitte, Chr. 2008, in: Capitaine, N. (ed.), The Celestial Reference Frame for the Future, Proc. of Journeés, 2007, Observatoire de Paris, 139Google Scholar
Kopeikin, S. M. & Makarov, V. V. 2007, Phys. Rev. D, 75, 062002Google Scholar
Kouba, J. 2004, GPS Solutions, 8, 170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milani, A., et al. 2002 Phys. Rev. D, 66, 1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larson, K. M., Ashby, N., Hackman, C., & Bertiger, W. 2007, Metrologia, 44, 484CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Le Poncin-Lafitte, Chr., & Teyssandier, P. 2008, Phys. Rev. D, 77, 044029Google Scholar
Müller, J., Soffel, M., & Klioner, S. A. 2007, J. Geod., 82, 133CrossRefGoogle Scholar