Nicolas Yunes eXtreme Gravity Institute Montana State University

LISA Telecon May, 2017

What Theoretical Physics can we learn from LISA Gravitational Wave Observations ?

Yunes

eXtreme Matter meets eXtreme Gravity

2

Yunes

Plan of Attack

3

How well will we do?

What are we testing?

What are the open problems?

Yunes

What are we testing?

4

Gravitational Wave Generation

Gravitational Wave Propagation

Scalar/Vector Field Activation

Extra-Dimensional Leakage

Time-Variation of G

Gravitational Parity Violation

Gravitational Lorentz Violation

Modified Dispersion Relations

Cosmological Screening

Time-Variation of G

Modified Kinematics

Gravitational Lorentz Violation

Parity Violation

Lorentz Violation

SEP Violation

Spacetime Dimensionality Speed of Gravity

Mass of Graviton

Lorentz Violation

SEP Violation

Constrain Deviations of GR Pillars

Yunes

What well will we do?

5

[Chamberlain & Yunes, submitted]

10−27

10−26

10−25

10−24

10−23

10−22

aLIG

O

Voy.

A+

CE

ET-D

N2A

1

N2A

2

N2A

5

Ground-based

Space-based

Current Bound

Con

strainton

mg[eV/c

2]

Instrument

NSNSlBHNSlBHBHBHBH

GW150914

EMRIIMRIIMBHSMBH

Massive Graviton

[Barausse, Yunes, Chamberlain, PRL ’16]

Dipole Radiation

Yunes

What are the open problems?

6

Theory Data Analysis

New & Interesting Physical Mechanisms?

Cosmological Modified Theories?

Spin Precession in Modified Gravity?

Efficient data analysis w/high D parameter space? Reduced order methods for Modified gravity?

Mergers in Modified Gravity?

Pipelines for combined GW+EM studies of modified gravity?

EMRIs and resonances in Modified Gravity?

Pipelines for stacking tests of gravity ? (including e.g. coherent stacking and ringdown tests)

Modified Gravity

GR Modeling

Collaborative structure for theorists and data analysts? Just releasing analysis “code” will not work

Community

Support for both data analysis development and theory development is needed.

Yunes 7

Back Up Slides

Yunes 8

Intro Stuff

Yunes

What Physics Regime do GWs Probe?

9

Field Strength

Curvature Strength

GWs probe eXtreme Gravity

Extreme Gravity Tests

Weak Field Tests

[Will, Liv. Rev., 2005, Psaltis, Liv. Rev., 2008, Baker, et al, Siemens & Yunes, Liv. Rev. 2013, Yunes, et al PRD 2016]

Yunes

The Parameterized post-Einsteinian Framework

10

[Yunes & Pretorius, PRD 2009]

h(f) = hGR(f) (1 + ↵fa) ei�fb

[MSU: Cornish et al PRD 84 (’11), Sampson et al PRD 87 (’13), Sampson, et al PRD 88 (’13), Sampson et al PRD 89 (’14), Nikhef: Del Pozzo et al PRD 83 (’11), Li et al PRD 85 (’12), Agathos et al PRD 89 (’14), Del Pozzo et al CQG (’14).]

Yunes 11

Current Ligo Bounds

Yunes

GR Consistency Implies Constraints on Modified

12

Scalar Dipole Radiation

Anomalous Acceleration

Parity Violation

Lorentz Violation

Stronger GravityWeaker Gravity

[Yunes, Yagi, Pretorius, PRD ‘16]

Yunes

Theory Implications of Published GW Observations

13

[Yunes, Yagi, Pretorius, PRD ‘16]

Yunes

GR Consistency Implies Constraints on Modified

14

E2 = (pc)2 + A(pc)↵⇣vgc

⌘2= 1 + (↵� 1)AE↵�2

Massive Graviton

Doubly Special Relativity

SME, Horava-Lifshitz, Extra-Dimensions

Multifractal Spacetime

Superluminal

Subluminal

[Yunes, Yagi, Pretorius, PRD ‘16]

…. —> SME (5.5PN, 7PN)

Yunes

More on Robustness of Constraints

15

Constraint on ppE amplitude as a function of PN order at which the modification first enters (assuming BD functional structure)

Constraints are always robust, provided the modifications to the GW generation enter below 2.5PN order (ie. provided there is enough “information” in the

inspiral part of the waveform)

Yunes

But what about the higher PN order terms?

16

Case Study: Scalar-Tensor (Brans Dicke) theory

Caveat: These constraints are “conservative.” We could do better if we knew how the merger was modified and we included this in the analysis.

Yunes 17

Some Future Bounds (Including With Lisa)

Yunes

Future ppE Constraints on GR

18

[Chamberlain & Yunes, to appear soon]

bin. pul. bin. pul.

ground-basedspace-based

Yunes

Future Constraints on Violations of SEP

19

Extractable Physics:

Maximize Extraction:

Open Questions:

Non-Schw BHs (yes-hair theorem in EdGB)

NSs have scalar charge (scalar-tensor)

Low-mass BH or NS (long-inspiral) GWs

Merger? Hybrid IMR waveforms?

Compact Object binaries inspiral faster due to dipole radiation

[Chamberlain & Yunes, to appear soon]

10−8

10−7

10−6

10−5

10−4

10−3

10−2

aLIG

O

Voy.

A+

CE

ET-D

N2A

1

N2A

2

N2A

5

Ground-based

Space-based

A0620-00 LMXB

ConstraintonδE

Instrument

NSNSlBHNSlBHBHBHBH

GW150914

EMRIIMRIIMBHSMBH

� = � 3

224⌘2/5�E

Binary with tiny mass ratio

Yunes

Future Constraints on Gravitational Lorentz

20

Extractable Physics:

Maximize Extraction:

Non-Spinning BH is not SchwarzschildNSs have sensitivity-dependent GR deviationsCompact Object binaries inspiral faster due to dipole radiation

SMBHs or EMRIs do best

Open Questions:BH sensitivities and Inspiral BH waveforms? Merger? Hybrid IMR waveforms?

[Chamberlain & Yunes, to appear soon]

� =3

128nasty(c+, c�)

Yunes

Future Constraints on the Variation of Newton’s G

21

Maximize Extraction:

Open Questions:

Generation of GWs?

Merger? Hybrid IMR waveforms?

Binary system at widest separation possible (lowest frequency)

[Chamberlain & Yunes, to appear soon]

� = � 25

65526

G

GMz

Binary with largest chirp mass