Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T02:56:19.295Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Relativistic effects from planetary and lunar observations of the XVIII–XX centuries

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 August 2017

G. A. Krasinsky ,
E. Yu. Aleshkina ,
E. V. Pitjeva  and
M. L. Sveshnikov
G. A. Krasinsky
Affiliation:
Institute for Theoretical Astronomy Academy of Science USSR 10 Kutuzov Quay, SU-192187, Leningrad, USSR
E. Yu. Aleshkina
Affiliation:
Institute for Theoretical Astronomy Academy of Science USSR 10 Kutuzov Quay, SU-192187, Leningrad, USSR
E. V. Pitjeva
Affiliation:
Institute for Theoretical Astronomy Academy of Science USSR 10 Kutuzov Quay, SU-192187, Leningrad, USSR
M. L. Sveshnikov
Affiliation:
Institute for Theoretical Astronomy Academy of Science USSR 10 Kutuzov Quay, SU-192187, Leningrad, USSR

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.

Lunar and planetary observations of different types are discussed for the time span 1717–1982. The modern ranging observations and the historical ones (mainly transits of Mercury and Venus, solar eclipses and occultations of the inner planets by the Moon) are treated separately and some attempts to detect relativistic effects are carried out. From time delay observations linear combination ν = (2 + 2 γ-β) /3 of the parameters of the PPN formalism is evaluated: ν =0.997±0.003. Statistically significant estimate for the rate Ġ of changing of the gravitational constant G is found: Ġ/G=(4±0.8) · 10−11 /yr. (An alternative interpretation of this result due to Canuto et al. (1979) gives negative sign for Ġ). From transits of Mercury and Venus corrections to the adopted system of differences between the ephemeris (dynamic) and the atomic time scales and a correction to the Mercury's perihelion advance are deduced. With new ephemeris time scale it became possible to determine unambigiously lunar tidal deceleration ṅM making use of the historical lunar observations. The derived value ṅM = (−22.2 ± 0.8)′′/cy2 is in good agreement with reported lunar laser results. By comparing the estimates ṅM obtained by the two methods the rate Ġ has also been evaluated: Ġ/G=(0.5+0.5)·10−11/yr. The origin of the disagreement with the radar based result for Ġ is not yet clear. All the conclusions were checked by making use of different planetary and lunar theories and appear to be practically theory-independent.

Type
High Precision Observations and Relativity
Information
Symposium - International Astronomical Union , Volume 114: Relativity in Celestial Mechanics and Astrometry , 1986 , pp. 315 - 328
Copyright
Copyright © Reidel 1986 

References

Anderson, J.D., Keesey, M.S.W., Lau, E.L., Standish, E.M. Jr, Newhall, XX: 1978, Acta Astronautica 5, p.43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bretagnon, P.: 1982, Astron. Astrophys., 114, p.278.Google Scholar
Brumberg, V.A.: 1972. Relativistic celestial mechanics. (In Russian, Nauka, Moscow).Google Scholar
Canuto, V.M., Hsieh, S.-H., Owen, J.R.: 1979, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., 188,p.829.Google Scholar
Chapront, J., Chapront-Touzé, M.: 1983, Astron. Astrophys., 124,p.50.Google Scholar
Dickey, J.O., Williams, J.G., Yoder, C.F.,; 1982, (in “High precis. Earth. rotat. and Earth-Moon dyn.”),p.209.Google Scholar
Hill, H.A., Bos, R.J., Goode, P.R.: 1982, Phys. Rev. Letts., 49,p.1794.Google Scholar
Hellings, R.W., Adams, P.J., Anderson, J.D., Keesey, M.S., Lau, E.L., Standish, E.M., Canuto, V.M., Goldman, I.: 1983, Phys. Rev. Letts., 51, p.1609.Google Scholar
Krasinsky, G.A., Pitjeva, E.V., Sveshnikov, M.L., Sveshnikova, E.S.: 1982, Bul. Inst. Theoret. Astron., 15,p.145.Google Scholar
Krasinsky, G.A., Saramonova, E. Yu., Sveshnikov, M.L., Sveshnikova, E.S.: 1985, Astron. Astrophys., 145,p.90.Google Scholar
Morrison, L.V.: 1973, Moon, 5,p.253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morrison, L.V., Ward, C.G.: 1975, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., 173,p.183.Google Scholar
Muller, P.M., Stepfensen, F.P.: 1975, (in “Growth rhytms and the hist. Earth rotat.”, John Wiley and Sons, London).Google Scholar
Newhall, XX, Standish, E.M. Jr., Williams, J.G.: 1983, Astron. Astrophys., 125,p.150.Google Scholar
Newton, R.R.: 1970, Ancient astonomical observations and the accelerations of the Earth and Moon. (John Hopkins Press, Baltimore, London).Google Scholar
Newton, R.R.: 1979, The Moon's acceleration and its physical origins. Volume 1. As deduced from solar eclipses (John Hopkins Press, Baltimore).Google Scholar
Oesterwinter, C., Cohen, Ch.: 1972, Celest. Mech., 5,p.317.Google Scholar
Pitjeva, E.V.: 1982, Bull. Inst. Theoret. Asron., 15,p.169.Google Scholar
Reasenberg, R.D., Shapiro, I.I., Pettengill, G.H., Campbell, D.D.: 1976, Bull. Amer. Astron. Soc., 8,p.308.Google Scholar
Reasenberg, R.D., Shapiro, I.I.: 1978, (in “On the measurement of cosmological variations of the gravitational constant”, University Press of Florida, Gainesville),p.71.Google Scholar
Reasehberg, R.D., Shapiro, I.I., MacNeil, P.E., Goldstein, R.B., Breindenthal, J.C., Brenkle, J.P., Cain, D.L., Kaufman, T.M., Komarek, T.A., Zygeilbaum, A.I.: 1979, Astrophys. J., 234, L 219.Google Scholar
Shapiro, I.I., Pettengill, G.H., Ash, M.E., Ingalls, R.P., Campbell, D.B., Dyce, R.B.: 1972, Phys. Rev. Letts., 28,p.1594.Google Scholar
Shapiro, I.I., Counselman, C.C. III, King, R.W.: 1976, Phys. Rev. Letts., 36,p.555.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spencer Jones, H.: 1939, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., 99,p.541.Google Scholar
Van Flandern, T.C.: 1970, Astron. J., 75, p.657.Google Scholar
Van Flandern, T.C.: 1975, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., 170.p.333.Google Scholar
Van Flandern, T.C.: 1982, (in “High precis. Earth. rot. and Earth-Moon dyn.”),p.207.Google Scholar