Constraints on Lorentz violation from clock-comparison experiments

Physical Review D - Particles, Fields, Gravitation and Cosmology

Volumn 60, Issue 11, 1999, Pages

  Kostelecký, V Alan ^a   Lane, Charles D ^a  

^a INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 18244364374     PISSN: 15507998     EISSN: 15502368     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.60.116010     Document Type: Article

References (70)

1. V. W. Hughes, H. G. Robinson, and V. Beltran-Lopez, Phys. Rev. Lett. 4, 342 (1960).
2. R. W. P. Drever, Philos. Mag. 6, 683 (1961).
3. J. D. Prestage, Phys. Rev. Lett. 54, 2387 (1985).
4. S. K. Lamoreaux, Phys. Rev. Lett. 57, 3125 (1986)
5. S. K. LamoreauxPhys. Rev. A 39, 1082 (1989).
6. T. E. Chupp, Phys. Rev. Lett. 63, 1541 (1989).
7. C. J. Berglund, Phys. Rev. Lett. 75, 1879 (1995).
8. The term “clock-comparison experiment” is used throughout this work to denote a generic class of experiments comparing transition frequencies in atoms or ions, whether the experiment uses actual atomic clocks, sensitive magnetometers, or other techniques.
9. D. Colladay and V. A. Kostelecký, Phys. Rev. D 55, 6760 (1997)
10. Phys. Rev. DD. ColladayV. A. Kostelecký58, 116002 (1998).
11. V. A. Kostelecký and S. Samuel, Phys. Rev. Lett. 63, 224 (1989)
12. Phys. Rev. Lett.V. A. KosteleckýS. Samuel66, 1811 (1991)
13. V. A. KosteleckýS. SamuelPhys. Rev. D 39, 683 (1989)
14. Phys. Rev. DV. A. KosteleckýS. Samuel40, 1886 (1989)
15. V. A. Kostelecký and R. Potting, Nucl. Phys. B359, 545 (1991)
16. V. A. KosteleckýR. PottingPhys. Lett. B 381, 89 (1996).
17. See, for example, Particle Data Group, C. Case, Eur. Phys. J. C 3, 1 (1998)
18. Some recent developments for several of the approaches to Lorentz and CPT violation are discussed in CPT and Lorentz Symmetry, edited by V. A. Kostelecký (World Scientific, Singapore, 1999).
19. Many unconventional theories of gravity (without standard-model physics), including some containing various possible sources of local Lorentz violation, are reviewed in C. M. Will, Theory and Experiment in Gravitational Physics (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1993).
20. V. A. Kostelecký and R. Potting, in Gamma Ray-Neutrino Cosmology and Planck Scale Physics, edited by D. B. Cline (World Scientific, Singapore, 1993), hep-th/9211116
21. V. A. KosteleckýR. PottingPhys. Rev. D 51, 3923 (1995)
22. D. Colladay and V. A. Kostelecký, Phys. Lett. B 344, 259 (1995)
23. D. ColladayV. A. KosteleckýPhys. Rev. D 52, 6224 (1995)
24. Phys. Rev. DV. A. Kostelecký and R. Van Kooten, 54, 5585 (1996).
25. B. Schwingenheuer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 74, 4376 (1995)
26. L. K. Gibbons, Phys. Rev. D 55, 6625 (1997)
27. R. Carosi, Phys. Lett. B 237, 303 (1990).
28. OPAL Collaboration, R. Ackerstaff, Z. Phys. C 76, 401 (1997);DELPHI Collaboration, M. Feindt et al., Report No. DELPHI 97-98 CONF 80, 1997.
29. V. A. Kostelecký, Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 1818 (1998)
30. V. A. KosteleckýPhys. Rev. D (to be published), hep-ph/9909554.
31. P. B. Schwinberg, R. S. Van Dyck, Jr., and H. G. Dehmelt, Phys. Lett. 81A, 119 (1981)
32. R. S. Van Dyck, Jr., P. B. Schwinberg, and H. G. Dehmelt, Phys. Rev. D 34, 722 (1986)
33. L. S. Brown and G. Gabrielse, Rev. Mod. Phys. 58, 233 (1986)
34. R. S. Van Dyck, Jr., P. B. Schwinberg, and H. G. Dehmelt, Phys. Rev. Lett. 59, 26 (1987)
35. Phys. Rev. Lett.G. Gabrielse,, 74, 3544 (1995).
36. R. Bluhm, V. A. Kostelecký, and N. Russell, Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 1432 (1997)
37. R. BluhmV. A. KosteleckýN. RussellPhys. Rev. D 57, 3932 (1998).
38. G. Gabrielse et al., in CPT and Lorentz Symmetry, Ref. 11
39. Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 3198 (1999).
40. H. Dehmelt, Phys. Rev. Lett. (to be published), hep-ph/9906262.
41. R. Mittleman et al., in CPT and Lorentz Symmetry, Ref. 11
42. Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 2116 (1999).
43. S. M. Carroll, G. B. Field, and R. Jackiw, Phys. Rev. D 41, 1231 (1990).
44. R. Jackiw and V. A. Kostelecký, Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 3572 (1999).
45. M. Charlton, Phys. Rep. 241, 65 (1994)
46. Antihydrogen, edited by J. Eades (Baltzer, Geneva, 1993).
47. R. Bluhm, V. A. Kostelecký, and N. Russell, Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 2254 (1999).
48. O. Bertolami, Phys. Lett. B 395, 178 (1997).
49. V. A. Kostelecký and C. D. Lane, J. Math. Phys. (to be published), hep-ph/9909542.
50. L. L. Foldy and S. A. Wouthuysen, Phys. Rev. 78, 29 (1950).
51. A. P. Lightman and D. L. Lee, Phys. Rev. D 8, 364 (1973).
52. H. B. Nielsen and I. Picek, Nucl. Phys. B211, 269 (1983).
53. S. Coleman and S. Glashow, Phys. Rev. D 59, 116008 (1999).
54. See, for example, M. E. Rose, Elementary Theory of Angular Momentum (Dover, New York, 1957).
55. A general discussion of nuclear models can be found in A. Bohr and B. R. Mottelson, Nuclear Structure (Benjamin, New York, 1969).
56. See, for example, M. Goeppert Mayer and J. H. D. Jensen, Elementary Theory of Nuclear Shell Structure (Wiley, New York, 1955).
57. Some recent developments in shell models are described in Contemporary Nuclear Shell Models, edited by X.-W. Pan, D. H. Feng, and M. Vallières (Springer-Verlag, New York, 1997).
58. T. Schmidt, Z. Phys. 106, 358 (1937).
59. See, for example, J. M. Blatt and V. F. Weisskopf, Theoretical Nuclear Physics (Wiley, New York, 1952).
60. M. E. Rose and H. A. Bethe, Phys. Rev. 51, 205 (1937).
61. See, for example, R. M. Green, Spherical Astronomy (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 1985).
62. The clock-comparison experiments of Refs. 123456 are distributed over several decades, so in principle a comparison of their bounds should allow for this precession. We neglect this effect here.
63. In the absence of Lorentz violation, applying a weak magnetic field (Formula presented) to W causes a degenerate energy level to split and a single associated peak to appear in the idealized spectrum, which remains unaffected as the Earth rotates. The Lorentz-violating perturbations can further split this peak and move the location of its centroid, while the Earth’s rotation typically causes the centroid to move back and forth and the spacing of the subsidiary peaks to expand and contract. However, in general the link between the multipolarities of the energy shifts and the number of subsidiary peaks or the frequencies of the motion can be involved.
64. D. J. Wineland and N. F. Ramsey, Phys. Rev. A 5, 821 (1972).
65. N. F. Ramsey, Molecular Beams (Oxford University Press, New York, 1956).
66. The deuteron wave function is discussed in, for example, R. Machleidt, K. Holinde, and C. Elster, Phys. Rep. 149, 1 (1987).
67. In a nuclear shell model, the magic numbers are 2, 8, 20, 28, 50, 82, 126, and 184 34. A closed-shell number is one corresponding to a closed nuclear shell, in which the protons (neutrons) occupy a state with zero orbital and spin angular momenta: 2, 6, 8, 14, 16, 20, 28,….
68. R. E. Stoner, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 3971 (1996).
69. R. E. Stoner, in CPT and Lorentz Symmetry, Ref. 11;R. E. Stoner and R. Walsworth, Smithsonian Scholarly Studies proposal, 1998.
70. G. Breit and I. I. Rabi, Phys. Rev. 38, 2082 (1931).