View Full Version : Lorentz Invariance Violation .....LV

2012-Sep-05, 12:13 PM
Lorentz Invariance means the laws of physics must look the same in all reference frames. The authors suggest that perhaps Dark Matter violates that, and suggest ways to check it out. SEE:http://arxiv.org/abs/1209.0464

2012-Sep-05, 01:14 PM
I looked at that paper, and thought it would have gone well inour ATM section.
The big plus is the suggestion for how to validate it.

2012-Sep-05, 03:15 PM
I didn't read it quite that way. It looked more like three physicists deciding to have some fun and say, "If Lorentz violation happened with DM, what would it look like?", with the motivation being nailing down some properties of quantum gravity.

2012-Sep-09, 02:12 AM
I found it odd that among the 53 references they did not mention either of the Busack papers. While they were constraining to Einstein-Aether or khronometric models, it was still looking towards a prefered gravitational frame which is anathema to GR. Busack's first trial interpretation of his apparently working simulation, which not only postdicted the known flyby anomalies but also was the only simulation that made the correct advance prediciton regarding Rosetta II and III flybys, was also based on a prefered second gravitational frame in addition to GR. Treating this second frame as a near fluid DM field would compare to this current paper. Only here we have evidence in need of a hypothesis.

Two critical observations though: most papers including these so far make the arbitrary but unproven assumption that GR is somehow unified with DM even in the face of observations that seem to show DM to be inverse linear while GR approximates inverse squared in the weak field limit.

For example the equation is GR(1+correction term) giving GR + GR X correction suggesting that DM is of the nature of the GR field. More cautious would be GR + DM( correction term_perigee - correction term_apogee). The Busack formula neglects the second correction term without penalty as it practically vanishes for hyperbolic orbits leading to a secular increase or decrease of velocity as monitored. For closed orbits both correction terms sum to a non-secular variation over an orbit noticeable in eccentric orbits; for circular orbits the anomaly dissappears with respect to the planet it orbits. This may become apparent over the MESSENGER mission where 3 flybys were followed by highly eccentric orbits followed by a more circular orbit.

This is different from the idea followed by Adler for DM particles which will affect circular, eccentric, and hyperbolic orbits in the same physical way. Considering the magnitude of the observed anomalies, when the Adler approach was applied to orbiting spacecraft the predictions were many orders higher than observation allowed which essentially falsified the two fluid Dark Matter Particle approach towards a solution of the flyby anomaly.