Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 6 minor 69 references

Light propagation in the 2PN approximation in the monopole and quadrupole field of a body at rest: Boundary value problem

T0 review · 2 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read The paper turns the 2PN initial-value solution for light in a static monopole-plus-quadrupole field into a boundary-value solution, expressing the coordinate velocity and trajectory directly in terms of the source and observer positions.

desk verdict New 2PN quadrupole boundary-value formulas with a real verification gap in Appendix J; worth a careful referee. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.19963 v2 pith:HOKL2OXJ submitted 2025-05-26 gr-qc

Sven Zschocke This is my paper · ORCID
classification gr-qc MSC 83C25 PACS 04.25.Nx
keywords post-Newtonianapproximationlightpropagationboundaryvalueproblemquadrupolegravitationalfielddeflectiontimedelayrelativisticastrometrynullgeodesic
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

Real light sources and observers sit at finite distances from the bodies whose gravity bends the signal, so an astrometric model must solve a boundary value problem: given the emitter position $x_0$ and the observer position $x_1$, find the trajectory. This paper claims to solve that problem at second post-Newtonian (2PN) order for the gravitational field of a body at rest with monopole and quadrupole structure. Starting from the recently derived initial-value solution, it rewrites the photon's coordinate velocity and trajectory so that the arguments of the perturbation terms are the actual endpoint positions instead of the asymptotic ray. The result is an explicit system of equations for $\dot{x}_{2\mathrm{PN}}$ and $x_{2\mathrm{PN}}$ in terms of $x_0$, $x_1$, and the still-unknown asymptotic direction $\sigma$. These formulas are a basic requirement for next-generation tests of light deflection at the sub-microarcsecond level and time delay at the sub-picosecond level.

What carries the argument

The machinery is the iterative post-Newtonian solution of the null geodesic equation, decomposed into time-independent tensorial coefficients and time-dependent scalar functions. The coefficients are built from the unit direction $\sigma$ and from the impact vectors $\mathbf{d}^0_\sigma = \sigma \times (x_0 \times \sigma)$ and $\mathbf{d}^1_\sigma = \sigma \times (x_1 \times \sigma)$; an impact vector points from the origin to the closest point of the straight unperturbed ray. The load-bearing algebraic step is a Taylor shift of the 1PN perturbations from the unperturbed ray $x_N$ to the 1PN ray $x_{1\mathrm{PN}}$, using the series expansions (30)--(35) for inverse powers of $x_{1\mathrm{PN}}$ and of the intermediate impact parameter. The 2PN-order pieces produced by that shift are collected into the $\triangle$-functions so that the final expressions can be evaluated directly at $x_1$ without losing $c^{-4}$ accuracy. The monopole part of the result is checked against earlier 2PN boundary-value formulas, which anchors the method.

What would settle it

Numerically integrate the null geodesic in the 2PN metric for a near-grazing ray at Jupiter with the observer at 1 AU and compare the endpoint direction and arrival time with Eqs. (53)--(54), or directly evaluate the next term dropped in the expansion for $1/(\hat{d}_\sigma)^n$; if that term is not negligible at the $c^{-6}$ level, the series-shift step fails for realistic geometries.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the 2PN boundary-value solution for light in the static monopole-plus-quadrupole field can be obtained from the initial-value solution by a systematic re-arrangement of arguments. The paper defines redefined 2PN perturbations $\triangle \dot{x}_{2\mathrm{PN}}$ and $\triangle x_{2\mathrm{PN}}$ that absorb the extra terms generated when the 1PN perturbations are evaluated at the 1PN ray instead of the unperturbed ray. At reception time $t_1$, the observer's position is inserted in place of the ray argument, which is legitimate at 2PN order because $x_1 = x_{1\mathrm{PN}}(t_1) + O(c^{-4})$. The resulting formulas, Eqs. (53)--(56), express the coordinate velocity $\dot{x}_{2\mathrm{PN}}(t_1)/c$ and the trajectory $x_{2\mathrm{PN}}(t_1)$ as sums of tensorial coefficients built from the unit direction $\sigma$ and the two impact vectors of emitter and observer, multiplied by scalar functions of $x_0$ and $x_1$. The travel time and the direction $\sigma$ are the unknowns that remain to be solved from these equations.

Load-bearing premise

The truncated series expansions in Eqs. (31) and (35), used to shift the 1PN perturbations from the unperturbed ray to the 1PN ray and then to the observer's position, must converge for realistic source-observer geometries; the paper gives a plausibility argument, not a proof.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The 2PN quadrupole light deflection, about $0.95\,\mu$as for grazing rays at Jupiter and $0.29\,\mu$as at Saturn, can now be referred to the actual source and observer positions rather than to asymptotic initial data.
  • The 2PN quadrupole time delay, about $0.14$ ps for Jupiter and $0.04$ ps for Saturn, is placed in the boundary-value setting needed for clock-comparison and time-transfer experiments.
  • The result provides one of the two ingredients for the three direction transformations $k\to\sigma$, $\sigma\to n$, and $k\to n$ that underlie the relativistic model of Gaia-type astrometry.
  • Any future data-reduction or ray-tracing code aimed at sub-$\mu$as deflection and sub-ps timing can use Eqs. (53)--(56) directly instead of re-deriving the boundary-value reduction.
  • In the monopole limit the equations reduce to known 2PN boundary-value results, giving an internal consistency check on the quadrupole generalization.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Beyond the paper: the same argument-shifting technique should extend to time-dependent multipoles or slowly moving bodies at 2PN, because it relies only on the fact that the 1PN perturbations are $O(c^{-2})$; re-deriving the endpoint formulas for a moving quadrupole body and comparing with retarded-position prescriptions would test this.
  • Beyond the paper: the appearance of two impact vectors, one for the source and one for the observer, suggests a symmetric iterative scheme for solving the remaining equations for $\sigma$; the paper does not develop such a scheme.
  • Beyond the paper: an implementation subtlety is that the overdotted functions in Eqs. (46) and (55) are not time derivatives of the undotted functions, so a numerical code must treat the two sets as independent coefficients.
  • Beyond the paper: the stated convergence of the key series expansions holds for observers anywhere in the solar system and even a few hundred AU away; pushing the formulas to extreme geometries, such as very close grazing rays, would test whether that bound is sufficient.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper derives a boundary-value form of the 2PN light-propagation solution in the static monopole-plus-quadrupole field. Starting from the initial-value solution of [50], it shifts the arguments of the 1PN perturbations from the unperturbed ray x_N to the 1PN ray x_1PN and absorbs the resulting 2PN corrections into new scalar functions X(n), Y(n), Z(n). Replacing arguments by the observer position x_1 then yields Eqs. (53)-(56) for the coordinate velocity and trajectory at reception. The monopole-monopole part is reported to agree with [37]; the monopole-quadrupole and quadrupole-quadrupole parts are new. The formulas still contain the unknown direction sigma and travel time t_1-t_0, so they constitute an implicit equation system for the boundary-value problem rather than a closed explicit solution.

Significance. If the lengthy scalar functions in Appendix J are correct, the paper is a useful and non-trivial step toward sub-microarcsecond modeling of light deflection and pico-second time delay in the solar system: it provides for the first time a 2PN boundary-value formulation including quadrupole terms, with no free parameters and with a plausible reduction to the known monopole limit. The main strength is the systematic tensorial decomposition and the explicit display of all coefficients. The main risk is that the genuinely new Y and Z functions are presented without derivation trace or independent verification; a single coefficient error would change the headline formulas, so the paper's value depends on verification that is not currently in the manuscript.

major comments (2)
  1. [Sec. IV and Appendix J] The central new content is the set of scalar functions X(n), Y(n), Z(n) entering Eqs. (55)-(56), but their derivation is not shown. The intermediate functions eA(n), eB(n), eC(n) in Eqs. (36)-(37) are explicitly said to be 'not presented here' (Sec. IV), and Appendix J states the final functions without a derivation trace or a computer-algebra check. The only validation offered is for the monopole-monopole part (J1)-(J4), which is said to agree with [37]; the monopole-quadrupole (Y) and quadrupole-quadrupole (Z) functions are new and untested. Since a single transcription error in any of these rational coefficients would invalidate Eqs. (53)-(56), I ask for a derivation record, a machine-readable expression file with independent evaluation, or numerical cross-checks (e.g., comparison with direct numerical integration of the 2PN geodesic equation in a test configuration).
  2. [Sec. VI and Sec. VII] Eqs. (53)-(54) are not yet a solution of the boundary value problem in the usual sense: they still contain the unknown unit vector sigma and the unknown travel time t_1-t_0. The abstract and Sec. VII say the solution of the boundary value problem has been deduced, but what is actually provided is an implicit reformulation in which the boundary positions x_0 and x_1 appear as arguments; the direction and travel time are left to be determined 'by solving these equations' (as acknowledged near the end of Sec. VII). This should be stated explicitly in the abstract and introduction to avoid overstating the result.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Sec. IV, Eq. (35)] The convergence of the series expansion below Eq. (35) is asserted rather than proved. For solar-system observers the expansion parameter is |Delta x_1PN|/r ~ GM/(c^2 r) with r >= R_body, so the first-order truncation is consistent to 2PN order and the omitted terms are O(c^-6); please include this estimate explicitly in the text.
  2. [Appendix J and Sec. V] The notation is confusing because the new scalar functions X(n), Y(n), Z(n) in Eqs. (46)-(47) and (55)-(56) reuse the same symbols as the master functions W(n), X(n), Y(n), Z(n) from [50] used in Appendices C and D. Please rename the new functions (e.g., calligraphic or barred symbols) to avoid ambiguity.
  3. [Sec. V, after Eq. (46)] The dot over the scalar functions in Eq. (46) is explicitly not a time derivative, which is confusing because dots in Eqs. (17)-(20) are true time derivatives. A different notation for the velocity coefficients would prevent misreading.
  4. [Appendices I and J] The abbreviations a(n), b(n), c(n), d(1), d(2), d(3), d(4) are defined in Appendix I but are used extensively in Appendix J without a local reminder. Add a pointer or repeat the definitions at the start of Appendix J.
  5. [Appendix D and Ref. [61]] The full set of intermediate functions B(n) and C(n) is not in the paper; only selected members are displayed, with the rest relegated to supplementary material [61]. Since Ref. [61] has the same arXiv identifier as the paper itself, please clarify that this material is an ancillary file or a separate document, and ideally include the full set in the paper's appendix or in a permanent repository.
  6. [Appendix A] There are minor typographical issues, e.g., 'Einstein ’ssum convention' in the notation appendix, and the ellipses in Eqs. (D6), (D9), (D12), (D15) should be replaced by explicit references to the supplementary material.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the boundary-value formulas are algebraic rearrangements of a parameter-free prior initial-value solution, with no fitted constants and no result defined in terms of its own conclusion.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is: take the 2PN initial-value solution from the author's prior work [50] (a parameter-free integration of the null geodesic in the monopole-plus-quadrupole field, with stated assumptions that do not include the boundary-value result), then rewrite it by shifting the arguments of the 1PN perturbations from x_N to x_1PN and finally to x_1. The key relations, Eqs. (30), (31), (34), (35), (38), and (39), are explicit algebraic identities or controlled series truncations to the declared PN order, and Eq. (25) is the only place where the observer position x_1 enters, with a stated O(c^-4) error that is consistent with the 2PN approximation. No parameter is fitted to x_1, no observable is renamed as a prediction, and no scalar function in Appendix J is defined in terms of the target equations (53)-(56). The monopole-monopole part is cross-checked against [37], and the genuinely new monopole-quadrupole and quadrupole-quadrupole functions are asserted from lengthy algebra rather than demonstrated step by step; this is an omitted-derivation or verification risk, not circularity. The convergence assertion below Eq. (35) is a validity assumption about the series expansion, not a circular step. The self-citations to [50] and [37] are normal dependencies on prior independent work, and they do not carry a conclusion that is equivalent to this paper's input. Therefore the derivation is self-contained in the sense relevant to circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The derivation introduces no ad hoc parameters, forces, or new entities. It relies on the standard GR framework, the metric of Ref. [32], and the initial-value solution of Ref. [50]; the only nontrivial technical assumption is the convergence of the series expansions used in the argument shift.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The 2PN metric in harmonic coordinates for a stationary body is taken from Refs. [32,57] without re-derivation.
    Section II, Eq. (7); all later geodesic integrations use this metric.
  • domain assumption The iterative solution of the geodesic equation, including the master integrals and the 2PN initial-value solution, is imported from Ref. [50].
    Section II, Eqs. (11)-(20); the boundary-value rewrite starts from this solution.
  • domain assumption The series expansions in Eqs. (30)-(35) for 1/(x1PN)^n and 1/(\hat d_sigma)^n are truncated at linear order in the 1PN perturbation.
    Section IV, Eqs. (31) and (35); dropping quadratic terms is justified because the perturbation is O(c^-2), but the convergence is asserted.
  • domain assumption The replacement x1 = x_1PN(t1) + O(c^-4) is valid, so 1PN terms may be evaluated at x1 without spoiling 2PN accuracy.
    Section III, Eq. (25); standard perturbative argument.
  • standard math Standard differential-geometry background (geodesic equation, Christoffel symbols) and the harmonic gauge framework.
    Section II, Eq. (8).

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Light propagation in the 2PN approximation in the monopole and quadrupole field of a body at rest: Boundary value problem." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/HOKL2OXJ

@misc{pith2026250519963,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Light propagation in the 2PN approximation in the monopole and quadrupole field of a body at rest: Boundary value problem},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/HOKL2OXJ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.19963}
}
read the original abstract

In a recent investigation, the initial value problem of light propagation in the gravitational field of a body at rest with monopole and quadrupole structure has been determined in the second post-Newtonian (2PN) approximation. In reality, the light source as well as the observer are located at finite distances from the solar system bodies. This fact requires solving the boundary value problem of light propagation. In this investigation, the solution of the boundary value problem is deduced from the initial value problem of light propagation in 2PN approximation. These results are a basic requirement for subsequent investigations aiming at ultra-highly precise tests of light deflection and time delay in the solar system.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.19963 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. A geometrical representation of the propagation [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

69 extracted references · 67 canonical work pages

  1. [37]

    Zschocke,Post-linear metric of a compact source of matter, Physical Review D100(2019) 084005

    S. Zschocke,Post-linear metric of a compact source of matter, Physical Review D100(2019) 084005

    work page 2019

  2. [50]

    A. Hees, S. Bertone, C. Le Poncin-Lafitte,Relativistic formulation of coordinate light time, Doppler and astrometric observables up to the second post-Minkowskian order, Physical Review D89(2014) 064045

    work page 2014

  3. [51]

    Br¨ ugmann,Light deflection in the post-linear gravitational field of bounded point-like masses, Physical Review D72 (2005) 024012

    M.H. Br¨ ugmann,Light deflection in the post-linear gravitational field of bounded point-like masses, Physical Review D72 (2005) 024012

    work page 2005

  4. [1]

    (62) and (66) in [50] one ob- tains the scalar functions of the 1PN monopole terms in Eqs

    Scalar functions of the 1PN monopole term in (17) and (18) By comparing with Eqs. (62) and (66) in [50] one ob- tains the scalar functions of the 1PN monopole terms in Eqs. (17) and (18): ˙F(1) (xN) = +2 ˙W(3) (xN),(C1) ˙F(2) (xN) =−2 ˙X(3) (xN),(C2) with ˙W(3) (xN) =− 1 xN ,(C3) ˙X(3) (xN) = + 1 (dσ)2 1 + σ·x N xN ,(C4) and F(1) (xN) = +2W(3) (xN),(C5) F...

    work page

  5. [2]

    (63) and (67) in [50] one ob- tains the scalar functions of the 1PN quadrupole terms in Eqs

    Scalar functions of the 1PN Quadrupole term in (17) and (18) By comparing with Eqs. (63) and (67) in [50] one ob- tains the scalar functions of the 1PN quadrupole terms in Eqs. (17) and (18): ˙G(1) (xN) = +6 ˙W(5) (xN),(C9) ˙G(2) (xN) = +6 ˙X(5) (xN),(C10) ˙G(3) (xN) = +3 ˙W(5) (xN)−15 (d σ)2 ˙W(7) (xN), (C11) ˙G(4) (xN) = +18 ˙X(5) (xN)−30 (d σ)2 ˙X(7) (...

    work page

  6. [3]

    (83) and (89) in [50] one obtains the scalar functions for the 2PN monopole-monopole terms in Eqs

    Scalar functions of the 2PN monopole-monopole term in (19) and (20) By comparing with Eqs. (83) and (89) in [50] one obtains the scalar functions for the 2PN monopole-monopole terms in Eqs. (19) and (20): ˙A(1) (xN) =−4 ˙W(4) −12 (x 0 +σ·x 0) ˙W(5) −2 (d σ)2 ˙W(6) + 4 ˙X(3) −12 (d σ)2 ˙X(5) −8 ˙Z(3) + 12 (dσ)2 ˙Z(5) ,(D1) ˙A(2) (xN) =− 4 (dσ)2 ˙W(3) −12 ˙...

    work page

  7. [4]

    (84) and (90) in [50] one obtains the scalar functions for the 2PN monopole-quadrupole terms in Eqs

    Scalar functions of the 2PN monopole-quadrupole term in (19) and (20) By comparing with Eqs. (84) and (90) in [50] one obtains the scalar functions for the 2PN monopole-quadrupole terms in Eqs. (19) and (20): ˙B(1) (xN) = + 4 (dσ)2 ˙W(4) + 22 ˙W(6) −60 (x 0 +σ·x 0) ˙W(7) + 21 2 (dσ)2 ˙W(8) − 4 (dσ)2 σ·x 0 x0 ˙X(3) + 60 ˙X(5) −60 (dσ)2 ˙X(7) −48 ˙Z(5) + 60...

    work page

  8. [5]

    Scalar functions of the 2PN Quadrupole-Quadrupole term in (19) and (20) By comparing with Eqs. (85) and (91) in [50] one obtains the scalar functions for the 2PN quadrupole-quadrupole terms in (19) and (20): ˙C(1) (xN) =− 12 (dσ)2 ˙W(6) + 9 ˙W(8) −13 (d σ)2 ˙W(10) + 12 (dσ)2 σ·x 0 x0 ˙X(5) ,(D11) ... (D12) ˙C(28) (xN) = + 120 (dσ)6 ˙W(7) − 420 (dσ)4 ˙W(9)...

    work page

Show all 69 references
  1. [6]

    (51) and (52) are given by ˙F(1) (x1) =−2b (1) ,(I8) ˙F(2) (x1) =− 2 (d 1σ )2 1 +c (1) ,(I9) F(1) (x1) = +2d(1) ,(I10) F(2) (x1) =− 2 (d 1σ )2 a(1) .(I11)

    Scalar functions of the 1PN monopole term in (51) and (52) The scalar functions of the 1PN monopole term in Eqs. (51) and (52) are given by ˙F(1) (x1) =−2b (1) ,(I8) ˙F(2) (x1) =− 2 (d 1σ )2 1 +c (1) ,(I9) F(1) (x1) = +2d(1) ,(I10) F(2) (x1) =− 2 (d 1σ )2 a(1) .(I11)

  2. [7]

    Scalar functions of the 1PN quadrupole term in (51) and (52) The scalar functions of the 1PN quadrupole term in Eqs. (51) and (52) are given by ˙G(1) (x1) =−2b (3) ,(I12) ˙G(2) (x1) = + 4 (d 1σ )4 1 +c (1) + 2 (d 1σ )2 c(3) ,(I13) ˙G(3) (x1) =−b (3) + 3 (d1 σ )2 b(5) ,(I14) ˙G...

    1901

  3. [8]

    Perryman,Astronomical Applications of Astrometry: Ten Years of Exploitation of the Hipparcos Satellite Data, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2008

    M.A. Perryman,Astronomical Applications of Astrometry: Ten Years of Exploitation of the Hipparcos Satellite Data, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2008

    2008

  4. [9]

    Gaia Collaboration,The Gaia mission, Astronomy & Astrophysics595(2016) A1

    2016

  5. [10]

    Hobbs, A

    D. Hobbs, A. Brown, A. Mora, et al.,GaiaNIR: Combining optical and Near-Infra-Red (NIR) capabilities with Time-Delay- Integration (TDI) sensors for a future Gaia-like mission, arXiv:astro-ph/1609.07325

    arXiv

  6. [11]

    Boehm, A

    C. Boehm, A. Krone-Martins, A. Amorim, et al. (Theia Collaboration),Theia: Faint objects in motion or the new astrometry frontier, 2021, arXiv:astro-ph/1707.01348

    2021 arXiv

  7. [12]

    Wei-Tou Ni,Astrod and Astrod 1 - overview and progress, International Journal of Modern Physics D17(2008) 921

    2008

  8. [13]

    Braxmaier, H

    C. Braxmaier, H. Dittus, B. Foulon, et al.,Astrodynamical space test of relativity using optical devices I, Experimental Astronomy34(2012) 181

    2012

  9. [14]

    Plowman, R.W

    J.E. Plowman, R.W. Hellings,Lator covariance analysis, Classical and Quantum Gravity23(2006) 309

    2006

  10. [15]

    Turyshev, M

    S.G. Turyshev, M. Shao, K.L. Nordtvedt, et al.,Advancing fundamental physics with the laser astrometric test of relativity, Experimental Astronomy27(2009) 27

    2009

  11. [16]

    Christophe, P.H

    B. Christophe, P.H. Andersen, J.D. Anderson, et al.,Odyssey: a Solar system mission, Experimental Astronomy23(2009) 529

    2009

  12. [17]

    Wolf, Ch

    P. Wolf, Ch. J. Bord´ e, A. Clairon, et al.,Quantum physics exploring gravity in the outer Solar system: the Sagas project, Experimental Astronomy23(2009) 651

    2009

  13. [18]

    Samain,Proceedings of one way laser ranging in the Solar system: Tipo, EGS XXVII General Assembly, Nice (2002)

    E. Samain,Proceedings of one way laser ranging in the Solar system: Tipo, EGS XXVII General Assembly, Nice (2002)

    2002

  14. [19]

    Guyon, E.A

    O. Guyon, E.A. Bendek, T.D. Milster, et al.,High-precision astrometry with a diffractive pupil telescope, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement200(2012) 11. [13]Towards Models and Constants for sub-µasAstrometry, 2000, Proceedings IAU Colloquium180, Washington D.C., USA, Editor...

    2012

  15. [20]

    Vallenari,The future of Astrometry in Space, Frontiers in Astronomy and Space Sciences5(2018) 11

    A. Vallenari,The future of Astrometry in Space, Frontiers in Astronomy and Space Sciences5(2018) 11

    2018

  16. [21]

    Kopeikin, C.R

    S.M. Kopeikin, C.R. Gwinn,Sub-Microarcsecond Astrometry and New Horizons in Relativistic Gravitational Physics, arXiv:gr-qc/0004064

    arXiv

  17. [22]

    Brown,Space astrometry in the Gaia era and beyond, EAS Publications Series67 - 68(2014) 307

    A. Brown,Space astrometry in the Gaia era and beyond, EAS Publications Series67 - 68(2014) 307

    2014

  18. [23]

    Malbet, C

    F. Malbet, C. Boehm, A. Krone-Martins, et al.,Faint objects in motion: the new frontier of high precision astrometry, Experimental Astronomy51(2021) 845. [18]Report of the Senior Survey Committee on the selection of the science themes for the L2 and L3 launch opportunities in ...

    2021

  19. [24]

    Thorne,Multipole expansions of gravitational radiation, Review Modern Physics52(1980) 299

    K.S. Thorne,Multipole expansions of gravitational radiation, Review Modern Physics52(1980) 299

    1980

  20. [25]

    Blanchet, T

    L. Blanchet, T. Damour,Radiative gravitational fields in general relativity: I. General structure of the field outside the source, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London A320(1986) 379

    1986

  21. [26]

    Damour, B.R

    T. Damour, B.R. Iyer,Multipole analysis for electromagnetism and linearized gravity with irreducible Cartesian tensors, Physical Review D43(1991) 3259

    1991

  22. [27]

    Kopeikin,Propagation of light in the stationary field of multipole gravitational lens, Journal of Mathematical Physics 38(1997) 2587

    S.M. Kopeikin,Propagation of light in the stationary field of multipole gravitational lens, Journal of Mathematical Physics 38(1997) 2587

    1997

  23. [28]

    Kopeikin, P

    S. Kopeikin, P. Korobkov, A. Polnarev,Propagation of light in the field of stationary and radiative gravitational multipoles, Classical and Quantum Gravity23(2006) 4299

    2006

  24. [29]

    Kopeikin, G

    S.M. Kopeikin, G. Sch¨ afer,Lorentz covariant theory of light propagation in gravitational fields of arbitrary-moving bodies, Physical Review D60(1999) 124002

    1999

  25. [30]

    Kopeikin, B

    S.M. Kopeikin, B. Mashhoon,Gravitomagnetic-effects in the propagation of electromagnetic waves in variable gravitational fields of arbitrary-moving and spinning bodies, Physical Review D65(2002) 064025

    2002

  26. [31]

    Kopeikin, V.V

    S.M. Kopeikin, V.V. Makarov,Gravitational bending of light by planetary multipoles and its measurement with micro- arcsecond astronomical interferometers, Physical Review D75(2007) 062002

    2007

  27. [32]

    Klioner, M

    S.A. Klioner, M. Peip,Numerical simulations of the light propagation in the gravitational field of moving bodies, Astronomy & Astrophysics410(2003) 1063

    2003

  28. [33]

    Klioner,Light Propagation in the Gravitational Field of Moving Bodies by means of Lorentz Transformation

    S.A. Klioner,Light Propagation in the Gravitational Field of Moving Bodies by means of Lorentz Transformation. I. Mass monopoles moving with constant velocities, Astronomy & Astrophysics404(2003) 783

    2003

  29. [34]

    Zschocke,Light propagation in the gravitational field of N arbitrarily moving bodies in 1PN approximation for high- precision astrometry, Physical Review D92(2015) 063015

    S. Zschocke,Light propagation in the gravitational field of N arbitrarily moving bodies in 1PN approximation for high- precision astrometry, Physical Review D92(2015) 063015

    2015

  30. [35]

    Zschocke,Light propagation in the gravitational field of N arbitrarily moving bodies in the 1.5PN approximation for high-precision astrometry, Physical Review D93(2016) 103010

    S. Zschocke,Light propagation in the gravitational field of N arbitrarily moving bodies in the 1.5PN approximation for high-precision astrometry, Physical Review D93(2016) 103010

    2016

  31. [36]

    Blanchet,On the multipole expansion of the gravitational field, Classical Quantum Gravity15(1998) 1971

    L. Blanchet,On the multipole expansion of the gravitational field, Classical Quantum Gravity15(1998) 1971

    1998

  32. [38]

    Blanchet,Second-post-Newtonian generation of gravitational radiation, Physical Review D51(1995) 2559

    L. Blanchet,Second-post-Newtonian generation of gravitational radiation, Physical Review D51(1995) 2559

    1995

  33. [39]

    Brumberg,Post-post-Newtonian propagation of light in the Schwarzschild field, Kinematica i physika nebesnykh tel 3(1987) 8, in Russian

    V.A. Brumberg,Post-post-Newtonian propagation of light in the Schwarzschild field, Kinematica i physika nebesnykh tel 3(1987) 8, in Russian

    1987

  34. [40]

    Brumberg,Essential Relativistic Celestial Mechanics, (1991) Bristol: Adam Hilder

    V.A. Brumberg,Essential Relativistic Celestial Mechanics, (1991) Bristol: Adam Hilder

    1991

  35. [41]

    Klioner, S.M

    S.A. Klioner, S.M. Kopeikin,Microarcsecond Astrometry in Space: Relativistic Effects and Reduction of Observations, The Astronomical Journal104(1992) 897. 23

    1992

  36. [42]

    Klioner, S

    S.A. Klioner, S. Zschocke,Numerical versus analytical accuracy of the formulae for light propagation, Classical and Quan- tum Gravity27(2010) 075015

    2010

  37. [43]

    Ashby, B

    N. Ashby, B. Bertotti,Accurate light-time correction due to a gravitating mass, Classical and Quantum Gravity27(2010) 145013

    2010

  38. [44]

    Teyssandier,Direction of light propagation to orderG 2 in static, spherically symmetric spacetimes: a new derivation, Classical and Quantum Gravity29(2012) 245010

    P. Teyssandier,Direction of light propagation to orderG 2 in static, spherically symmetric spacetimes: a new derivation, Classical and Quantum Gravity29(2012) 245010

    2012

  39. [45]

    Deng, Yi Xie,Two-post-Newtonian light propagation in the scalar-tensor theory: AnN-point mass case, Physical Review D86(2012) 044007

    X.M. Deng, Yi Xie,Two-post-Newtonian light propagation in the scalar-tensor theory: AnN-point mass case, Physical Review D86(2012) 044007

    2012

  40. [46]

    Yan-Xiang, Wu Xiao-Mei,Post-post-Newtonian deflection of light ray in multiple systems with PPN parameters, Chinese Physics Letters20(2011) 020403

    G. Yan-Xiang, Wu Xiao-Mei,Post-post-Newtonian deflection of light ray in multiple systems with PPN parameters, Chinese Physics Letters20(2011) 020403

    2011

  41. [47]

    Deng,The second post-Newtonian light propagation and its astrometric measurement in the solar system, International Journal of Modern Physics D24(2015) 1550056

    X-M. Deng,The second post-Newtonian light propagation and its astrometric measurement in the solar system, International Journal of Modern Physics D24(2015) 1550056

    2015

  42. [48]

    Huang,Second post-Newtonian approximation of Einstein-aether theory, Physical Review D77(2008) 124049

    Yi Xie, T.Y. Huang,Second post-Newtonian approximation of Einstein-aether theory, Physical Review D77(2008) 124049

    2008

  43. [49]

    Minazzoli, B

    O. Minazzoli, B. Chauvineau,Scalar-tensor propagation of light in the inner solar system including relevantc −4 contribu- tions for ranging and time transfer, Classical and Quantum Gravity28(2011) 085010

    2011

  44. [52]

    Zschocke,Light propagation in the field of one arbitrarily moving pointlike body in the 2PN approximation, Physical Review D94(2016) 124007

    S. Zschocke,Light propagation in the field of one arbitrarily moving pointlike body in the 2PN approximation, Physical Review D94(2016) 124007

    2016

  45. [53]

    Zschocke,Light propagation in 2PN approximation in the field of one moving monopole I

    S. Zschocke,Light propagation in 2PN approximation in the field of one moving monopole I. Initial value problem, Classical and Quantum Gravity35(2018) 055013

    2018

  46. [54]

    Zschocke,Light propagation in 2PN approximation in the field of one moving monopole II

    S. Zschocke,Light propagation in 2PN approximation in the field of one moving monopole II. Boundary value problem, Classical and Quantum Gravity36(2019) 015007

    2019

  47. [55]

    Zschocke,Light propagation in 2PN approximation in the monopole and quadrupole field of a body at rest: Initial value problem, Physical Review D105(2022) 024040

    S. Zschocke,Light propagation in 2PN approximation in the monopole and quadrupole field of a body at rest: Initial value problem, Physical Review D105(2022) 024040

    2022

  48. [56]

    Zschocke,Time delay in the quadrupole field of a body at rest in 2PN approximation, Physical Review D106(2022) 104052

    S. Zschocke,Time delay in the quadrupole field of a body at rest in 2PN approximation, Physical Review D106(2022) 104052

    2022

  49. [57]

    Jefferts, T.P

    S.R. Jefferts, T.P. Heavner, T.E. Parker, J.H. Shirley,NIST Caesium Fountains - Current status and future prospects, Acta Physica Polonica A112(2007) 759

    2007

  50. [58]

    Chen, A.M

    S.M.Brewer, J.S. Chen, A.M. Hankin, et al., 27Al + Quantum-logic clock with a systematic uncertainty below10 −18, Physical Review Letters123(2019) 033201

    2019

  51. [59]

    Seubert, T.A

    J. Seubert, T.A. Ely, J. Stuart,Results of the Deep Space Atomic Clock Deep Space Navigation Analog Experiment, Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets59(2022) 1914

    2022

  52. [60]

    Cacciapuoti, C

    L. Cacciapuoti, C. Salomon,Space clocks and fundamental tests: The ACES experiment, The European Physical Journal Special Topics172(2009) 57

    2009

  53. [61]

    Soffel, S.A

    M. Soffel, S.A. Klioner, G. Petit, et al.,The IAU 2000 Resolutions for Astrometry, Celestial Mechanics, and Metrology in the Relativistic Framework: Explanatory Supplement, The Astronomical Journal126(2003) 2687

    2003

  54. [62]

    Frutos-Alfaro, M

    F. Frutos-Alfaro, M. Soffel,On the post-linear quadrupole-quadrupole metric, Revista de Matem´ atica: Teor ´ ıa y Aplicaciones 24(2017) 239

    2017

  55. [63]

    Misner, K.S

    C.W. Misner, K.S. Thorne, J.A. Wheeler,Gravitation, Palgrave Macmillan (1973), Princeton University Press

    1973

  56. [64]

    Kopeikin, M

    S. Kopeikin, M. Efroimsky, G. Kaplan,Relativistic Celestial Mechanics of the Solar System, Wiley-VCH, Signapure (2012)

    2012

  57. [65]

    Klioner,Influence of the quadrupole field and rotation of objects on light propagation, Soviet Astronomy35(1991) 523

    S.A. Klioner,Influence of the quadrupole field and rotation of objects on light propagation, Soviet Astronomy35(1991) 523

    1991

  58. [66]

    Zschocke,Light propagation in 2PN approximation in the monopole and quadrupole field of a body at rest: Supplementary, arXiv:gr-qc/2505.19963

    S. Zschocke,Light propagation in 2PN approximation in the monopole and quadrupole field of a body at rest: Supplementary, arXiv:gr-qc/2505.19963

    arXiv

  59. [67]

    Klioner,A practical relativistic model for microarcsecond astrometry in space, The Astronomical Journal125(2003) 1580

    S.A. Klioner,A practical relativistic model for microarcsecond astrometry in space, The Astronomical Journal125(2003) 1580

    2003

  60. [68]

    Zschocke, S.A

    S. Zschocke, S.A. Klioner,On the efficient computation of the quadrupole light-deflection, Classical and Quantum Gravity 28(2011) 015009

    2011

  61. [69]

    Høg,A review of 70 years with astrometry, Astrophysics and Space Science369(2024) 23

    E. Høg,A review of 70 years with astrometry, Astrophysics and Space Science369(2024) 23

    2024

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.