CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 89Noncommutative and Quantum Gravity TheoriesAstrophysics and Cosmic PhenomenaCosmology and Gravitation Theories

Limits on Lorentz violation from the highest energy cosmic rays

Open access
Gagnon, Olivier, Moore, Guy D.·2004·Physical Review D
DOI 10.1103/physrevd.70.065002
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

We place several new limits on Lorentz violating effects, which can modify particles' dispersion relations, by considering the highest energy cosmic rays observed. Since these are hadrons, this involves considering the partonic content of such cosmic rays. We get a number of bounds on differences in maximum propagation speeds, which are typically bounded at the ${10}^{\ensuremath{-}21}$ level, and on momentum dependent dispersion corrections of the form $v=1\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}{p}^{2}/{\ensuremath{\Lambda}}^{2}$, which typically bound $\ensuremath{\Lambda}>{10}^{21}\text{ }\text{ }\mathrm{G}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{V}$, well above the Planck scale. For ($CPT$ violating) dispersion correction of the form $v=1+p/\ensuremath{\Lambda}$, the bounds are up to 15 orders of magnitude beyond the Planck scale.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1103/physrevd.70.065002

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • A vacuum Čerenkov effect must be forbidden up to the highest observed UHECR energy.

    “A complimentary constraint to the GZK analysis can be derived by recognizing that 1019 − 1020 eV protons reach us — a vacuum Čerenkov effect must be forbidden up to the highest observed UHECR energy [88, 154, 119].”

    From Modern Tests of Lorentz Invariance (2005) · cites this paper as [119]

  • The parton approach yields two-sided bounds on dimension six operators of order a certain value for all constituent particles, depending on assumptions about equal parton dispersion corrections.

    “The parton approach yields two-sided bounds on dimension six operators of order for all constituent particles, depending on the assumptions made about equal parton dispersion corrections.”

    From Modern Tests of Lorentz Invariance (2005) · cites this paper as [119]

  • Bounds on the coefficients of CPT violating dimension five operators are of the order 10−15.

    “Bounds on the coefficients of CPT violating dimension five operators are of the order 10−15.”

    From Modern Tests of Lorentz Invariance (2005) · cites this paper as [119]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 18

  1. [2]F. Cane et al. , physics/0309070; D. F. Phillips, M. A. Humphrey, E. M. Mattison, R. E. Stoner, R. F. C. Vessot and R. L. Walsworth, Phys. Rev. D 63 , 111101 (2001) [physics/0008230]. · arXiv
  2. [3]S. K. Lamoreaux, J. P. Jacobs, B. R. Heckel, F. J. Raab and E. N. Fortson, Phys. Rev. Lett. 57 , 3125 (1986); C. D. Lane, PhD. thesis, Indiana University, 2000 (UMI-99-93635); R. Bluhm, V. A. Kosteleck´ y, C. D. Lane and N. Russell, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88 , 090801 (2002) [hep-ph/0111141]; R. L. Walsworth, D. Bear, M. Humphrey, E. M. Mattison, D. F. Phillips, R. E. Stoner and R. F. C. Vessot, AIP Conf. Proc. 539 , 119 (2000) [physics/0007063]; R. L. Walsworth and D. F. Phillips, physics/0007062; V. A. Kosteleck´ y and C. D. Lane, Phys. Rev. D 60 , 116010 (1999) [hep-ph/9908504]. · arXiv
  3. [4]O. W. Greenberg, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89 , 231602 (2002) [hep-ph/0201258]. · arXiv
  4. [5]S. R. Coleman and S. L. Glashow, Phys. Rev. D 59 , 116008 (1999) [hep-ph/9812418]. · arXiv
  5. [6]S. R. Coleman and S. L. Glashow, hep-ph/9808446; Phys. Lett. B 405 , 249 (1997) [hep-ph/9703240]. · arXiv
  6. [7]T. A. Jacobson, S. Liberati, D. Mattingly and F. W. Stecker, astro-ph/0309681; T. Jacobson, S. Liberati and D. Mattingly, Nature 424 , 1019 (2003) [astro-ph/0212190]; Phys. Rev. D 66 , 081302 (2002) [hep-ph/0112207]. · arXiv
  7. [11]G. D. Moore and A. E. Nelson, JHEP 0109 , 023 (2001) [hep-ph/0106220]. · arXiv
  8. [12]R. C. Myers and M. Pospelov, Phys. Rev. Lett. 90 , 211601 (2003) [hep-ph/0301124]. · arXiv
  9. [13]V. A. Kosteleck´ y and R. Lehnert, Phys. Rev. D 63 , 065008 (2001) [arXiv:hep-th/0012060]. · arXiv
  10. [14]V. A. Kosteleck´ y, C. D. Lane and A. G. M. Pickering, Phys. Rev. D 65 , 056006 (2002) [arXiv:hep-th/0111123]. · arXiv
  11. [17]A. Retey and J. A. M. Vermaseren, Nucl. Phys. B 604 , 281 (2001) [hep-ph/0007294]. · arXiv
  12. [18]S. A. Larin, P. Nogueira, T. van Ritbergen and J. A. M. Vermaseren, Nucl. Phys. B 492 , 338 (1997) [hep-ph/9605317]. · arXiv
  13. [19]J. Pumplin, D. R. Stump, J. Huston, H. L. Lai, P. Nadolsky and W. K. Tung, JHEP 0207 , 012 (2002) [hep-ph/0201195], see also http://www.phys.psu.edu/ ∼ cteq/#PDFs · arXiv
  14. [20]A. D. Martin, R. G. Roberts, W. J. Stirling and R. S. Thorne, hep-ph/0307262; Phys. Lett. B 531 , 216 (2002) [hep-ph/0201127]. See also, http://durpdg.dur.ac.uk/HEPDATA/PDF. · arXiv
  15. [21]M. Gluck, E. Reya and A. Vogt, Eur. Phys. J. C 5 , 461 (1998) [hep-ph/9806404]. · arXiv
  16. [23]C. J. Morningstar and M. J. Peardon, Phys. Rev. D 60 , 034509 (1999) [hep-lat/9901004]. · arXiv
  17. [25]S. M. Carroll, J. A. Harvey, V. A. Kosteleck´ y, C. D. Lane and T. Okamoto, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87 , 141601 (2001) [hep-th/0105082]. · arXiv
  18. [26]C. Ford, D. R. T. Jones, P. W. Stephenson and M. B. Einhorn, Nucl. Phys. B 395 , 17 (1993) [hep-lat/9210033]. · arXiv

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Gagnon, O., & Moore, G. D.
Affiliations
McGill University (CA)
ORCID
Moore, Guy D.
Venue
Physical Review D
Publisher
American Physical Society (APS)
Published
2004-09-03
Volume
70
Issue
6
ISSN
  • 0556-2821 (ISSN-L)
  • 1550-7998
  • 1550-2368
DOI
10.1103/physrevd.70.065002
OpenAlex
W2001092647
Cited by
89
References
28
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2019: 2 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 8
FWCI
5.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
link.aps.org/licenses/aps-default-license (vor)
Locations
  • Physical review. D. Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology/Physical review. D. Particles and fields (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (publishedVersion)
  • CERN Document Server (European Organization for Nuclear Research) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Statistical and Nonlinear Physics › Noncommutative and Quantum Gravity Theories
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Nuclear and High Energy Physics › Astrophysics and Cosmic Phenomena
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Cosmology and Gravitation Theories
Keywords
Lorentz violation, ultra-high-energy cosmic rays, hadronic cosmic rays, dispersion relation, CPT violation, Planck scale, Lorentz-violating coefficients

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