Satellite test of special relativity using the global positioning system
Abstract
A test of special relativity has been carried out using data of clock comparisons between hydrogen maser clocks on the ground and cesium and rubidium clocks on board 25 global positioning system (GPS) satellites. The clocks were compared via carrier phase measurements of the GPS signal using geodetic receivers at a number of stations of the International GPS Service for Geodynamics (IGS) spread worldwide. In special relativity, synchronization of distant clocks by slow clock transport and by Einstein synchrony (using the transmission of light signals) is equivalent in any inertial frame. A violation of this equivalence can be modeled using the parameter $\ensuremath{\delta}c/c,$ where $c$ is the round-trip speed of light ($c=299792458\mathrm{m}/\mathrm{s}$ in vacuum) and $\ensuremath{\delta}c$ is the deviation from $c$ of the observed velocity of a light signal traveling one way along a particular spatial direction with the measuring clocks synchronized using slow clock transport. In special relativity $\ensuremath{\delta}c/c=0.$ Experiments can set a limit on the value of $\ensuremath{\delta}c/c$ along a particular spatial direction (henceforth referred to as ``direction of $\ensuremath{\delta}c$''). Within this model our experiment is sensitive to a possible violation of special relativity in any direction of $\ensuremath{\delta}c,$ and on a nonlaboratory scale (baselines $>~20000\mathrm{km}$). The results presented here set an upper limit on the value of $\ensuremath{\delta}c/c<5\ifmmode\times\else\texttimes\fi{}{10}^{\ensuremath{-}9}$ when considering all spatial directions of $\ensuremath{\delta}c$ and $\ensuremath{\delta}c/c<2\ifmmode\times\else\texttimes\fi{}{10}^{\ensuremath{-}9}$ for the component in the equatorial plane.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
First-order tests in w/c based on comparison of clocks gave the best constraints on the Lorentz-invariance-violating parameter alpha until recently, with e.g. |alpha| <= 10^-6 obtained by comparing atomic clocks onboard GPS satellites with ground atomic clocks.
“Until recently, they gave the best constraints on the LI violating parameter α (see Ref. [14] for a review) with, e.g., jαj ≤ 10 -6 obtained by comparing atomic clocks' onboard GPS satellites with ground atomic clocks [15].”
From Test of Special Relativity Using a Fiber Network of Optical Clocks (2017) · cites this paper as [15]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 12 · Cited by 99
- Authors
- Wolf, P., & Petit, G.
- Affiliations
- Queen Mary University of London (GB)
- Bureau international des poids et mesures (FR)
- Venue
- Physical Review A
- Publisher
- American Physical Society (APS)
- Published
- 1997-12-01
- Volume
- 56
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 4405-4409
- ISSN
- 0556-2791 (ISSN-L)
- 1050-2947
- 1094-1622
- OpenAlex
- W2060458136
- Cited by
- 99
- References
- 12
- Citations by year
- 2024: 2 · 2022: 6 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 1.63
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Physical Review A (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Relativity and Gravitational Theory
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Advanced Frequency and Time Standards
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Aerospace Engineering › GNSS positioning and interference
- Keywords
- special relativity, GPS satellites, clock comparison, hydrogen maser clock, one-way speed of light, carrier phase measurements, clock synchronization
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review