Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T14:27:26.663Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Relativistic models for the BepiColombo radioscience experiment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 January 2010

Andrea Milani
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy email: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Giacomo Tommei
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy email: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
David Vokrouhlický
Affiliation:
Institute of Astronomy, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic email: [email protected]
Emanuele Latorre
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy email: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Stefano Cicalò
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy email: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

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.

To test General Relativity with the tracking data of the BepiColombo Mercury orbiter we need relativistic models for the orbits of Mercury and of the Earth, for the light-time and for all the spatio-temporal reference frames involved, with accuracy corresponding to the measurements: ≃10 cm in range, ≃2 micron/s in range-rate, over 2 years.

For the dynamics we start from the Lagrangian post-Newtonian (PN) formulation, using a relativistic equation for the solar system barycenter to avoid rank deficiency. In the determination of the PN parameters, the difficulty in disentangling the effects of β from the ones of the Sun's oblateness is confirmed. We have found a consistent formulation for the preferred frame effects, although the center of mass is not an integral. For the identification of strong equivalence principle (SEP) violations we use a formulation containing both direct and indirect effects (through the modified position of the Sun in a barycentric frame).

In the light-time equations, the Shapiro effect is modeled to PN order 1 but with an order 2 correction compatible with (Moyer 2003). The 1.5-PN order corrections containing the Sun's velocity are not relevant at the required level of accuracy.

To model the orbit of the probe, we use a mercury-centric reference frame with its own “Mercury Dynamic Time”: this is the largest and the only relativistic correction required, taking into account the major uncertainties introduced by non-gravitational perturbations.

A delicate issue is the compatibility of our solution with the ephemerides for the other planets, and for the Moon, which cannot be improved by the BepiColombo data alone. Conversely, we plan to later export the BepiColombo measurements, as normal points, to contribute with their unprecedented accuracy to the global improvement of the planetary ephemerides.

Type
Contributed Papers
Copyright
Copyright © International Astronomical Union 2010

References

Ashby, N. & Bertotti, B. 2008, American Astronomical Society, DDA meeting #39Google Scholar
Bertotti, B., Iess, L., & Tortora, P. 2003, Nature, 425, 374CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klioner, S. A. & Peip, M. 2003, A&A, 410, 1063Google Scholar
Klioner, S. A. & Zschocke, S. 2007, GAIA-CA-TN-LO-SK-002-1 reportGoogle Scholar
Kopeikin, S. 2008, eprint arXiv:0809.3433Google Scholar
Le Poncin-Lafitte, C. & Teyssandier, P. 2004, Class. Quantum Grav., 21, 4463CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milani, A. & Gronchi, G. F. 2009, Theory of Orbit Determination, Cambridge Univ. PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milani, A, Vokrouhlický, D., Villani, D., Bonanno, C., & Rossi, A., 2002, Phys. Rev. D 66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moyer, T. D. 2003, Formulation for Observed and Computed Values of Deep Space Network Data Types for Navigation, Wiley-InterscienceCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Noerdlinger, P. D. 2008, eprint arXiv:0801.3807v1Google Scholar
Nordvedt, K. 1970, ApJ, 161, 1059CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teyssandier, P. & Le Poncin-Lafitte, C. 2008, Class. Quantum Grav., 25, 145020CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Will, C. M. 1993, Theory and experiment in gravitational physics, Cambridge Univ. PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Will, C. M. 2003, ApJ, 590, 683CrossRefGoogle Scholar