Astrophysics > Astrophysics of Galaxies
[Submitted on 5 Dec 2023 (v1), last revised 7 May 2024 (this version, v2)]
Title:A critical review of recent GAIA wide binary gravity tests
View PDF HTML (experimental)Abstract:Over the last couple of years, the appearance of the {\it Gaia} DR3 has triggered the performance of various wide binary low acceleration gravity tests. Wide binaries with typical total masses $\approx 1.0 - 1.6 M_{\odot}$ and separations above a few thousand au probe the low acceleration $a \lesssim a_{0}$ regime, where at galactic and larger scales gravitational anomalies typically attributed to the presence of an as yet undetected dark matter component appear, where $a_{0} \approx 1.2\times 10^{-10}$ m s$^{-2}$ is the acceleration scale of MOND. Thus, studies of the relative velocities and separations on the plane of the sky, $v_{2D}$ and $s_{2D}$ respectively, of wide binary stars extending to separations above a few kau, provide an independent approach on the empirical study of gravity in the interesting $a \lesssim a_{0}$ acceleration range. Two independent groups, through complementary approaches, have obtained evidence for a departure from Newtonian predictions in the low acceleration regime, using the latest high quality {\it Gaia} catalogue. These two groups, also report this observed gravitational anomaly to be consistent with MOND expectations for wide binary orbits in the Solar Neighbourhood. Two other groups however, have instead reported results showing a clear preference for Newtonian gravity over various MOND alternatives tested, over the same low acceleration regime. We here take a critical look at the various studies in question, from sample selection to statistical treatment of the wide binary relative velocities obtained, in an attempt to clarify the current state of affairs. We discover a couple of critical problems in the formal design and statistical implementation shared by the two groups reporting a preference for Newtonian gravity over MOND models, and show explicitly how these yield biased conclusions.
Submission history
From: X. Hernandez Dr. [view email][v1] Tue, 5 Dec 2023 22:09:13 UTC (821 KB)
[v2] Tue, 7 May 2024 04:54:37 UTC (1,425 KB)
Current browse context:
astro-ph.GA
Change to browse by:
References & Citations
Bibliographic and Citation Tools
Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)
Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)
scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)
Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article
CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)
DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)
Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)
Papers with Code (What is Papers with Code?)
ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)
Demos
Recommenders and Search Tools
Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)
Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)
CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)
IArxiv Recommender
(What is IArxiv?)
arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.