Next-Generation Lunar Laser

Ranging

Tom Murphy UCSD

Designing the Perfect Gravity Test

Gravity must be the dominant influence

Negligible frictional, electrostatic, radiation forces
Make test bodies large
Gravity dominates
Test Strong Equivalence Principle (SEP) by
having appreciable self-energy: how does
gravity pull on gravity?
Place in vacuum environment
Precision Requirements

Order-of-Magnitude improvement over

current measurements/tests of gravity
~10-5 test of General Relativity
~10-14 measurement precision needed
Good clocks are 10-12
Need leverage somehow
Earth-Moon System Fits the Bill

Earth self-energy is ~0.510-9 of total mass

Moon is large, but only 0.0210-9 in grav. energy
Non-gravitational forces very small
Self-energy small compared to that of earth
Sun dominates for both bodies
Can test differential motion/acceleration to Sun
Leverage from proximity of moon to earth
Rearth-moon = 1/400 A.U. test motion with respect to sun at
1 A.U. via much shorter (differential) measurement
Historical Accuracy of Lunar Ranging

30
Weighted RMS Residual (cm)

25

20

15

10

0
1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
 Current PPN Constraints on GR
Lunar Laser Ranging
Mercury Perihelion Shift Is the Parameterized
1.002 Post-Newtonian (PPN)
Mars Radar Ranging formalism still relevant?

1.001
Basic phenomenology:

VLBI & combined measures curvature of

planetary data
1 spacetime, measures
nonlinearity of gravity
Spacecraft range
& Doppler
0.999
What fool would want
to push this further?
0.998 Isnt GR obviously right?

0.998 0.999 1 1.001 1.002
Why Push Further: Aristotelian Analogy
Newtonian Gravity

Einsteinian Departures
2.5
at ~10-8 level of precision
Trajectory Polynomial Order

2.0

Aristotelian
1.5 Gravity

1.0

0.5

0.0
-1.0 -0.5 0 0.5 1.0
Trajectory Asymmetry
Real Rationale for Pushing Further

Gravity is incompatible with the Standard Model

Cosmological departures from old GR model
Acceleration of expansion of Universe
Fine structure constant, , possibly varying?
What about gravitational constant, Equivalence Principle
Scalar Field modifications to GR
Predictions of PPN departures from GR
Brane-world cosmological models
Gravitons leaking into bulk, modifying gravity at large scales
APOLLO: Next-Generation LLR
recipe for success:

Move LLR back to a large-aperture telescope

3.5-meter: more photons!
Incorporate modern technology
Detectors, precision timing, laser
Re-couple data collection to analysis/science
Scientific enthusiasm drives progress
Devise brilliant acronym:
Apache Point Observatory Lunar Laser-ranging Operation
APOLLO Goals*:

One millimeter range precision

Weak Equivalence Principle (WEP) to a/a 10-14
Strong Equivalence Principle (SEP) to 310-5
Gravitomegnetism (frame dragging) to 10-4
dG/dt to 10-13G per year
Geodetic precession ( ) to 310-4
Long range forces to 10-11 the strength of gravity

* These 1 errors are simply ~10 times better than current LLR limits. In each
case, LLR currently provides the best limits. Timescales to achieve stated
results vary according to the nature of the signal.
The APOLLO Apparatus

Uses 3.5-meter telescope at

9200-ft Apache Point, NM
Excellent atmospheric
seeing
532 nm Nd:YAG, 100 ps,
115 mJ/pulse, 20 Hz laser
Integrated avalanche
photodiode (APD) arrays
Multi-photon capability
Daylight/full-moon capability
APD Arrays
We have a working
prototype courtesy MIT
Lincoln Labs
44 format (LL has made
much larger)
30m diameters on 100m
centers
Fill-factor recovered by
lenslet array
~30 ps jitter at 532 nm,
~50% photon detection eff.
Multiple buckets for photon
bundle
Millimeter Range?!!

Seven picosecond round-trip travel time error

Half-meter lunar reflectors at 7 tilt up to 35 mm
RMS uncertainty per photon
95 ps FWHM laser pulse 6 mm RMS
Need ~402 = 1600 photons to beat down error
Calculate ~5 photon/pulse return for APOLLO
Realistic 1 photon/pulse 20 photons/sec
millimeter statistics achieved on few-minute timescales
APOLLO Random Error Budget

Expected Statistical Error RMS Error (ps) One-way Error (mm)

Laser Pulse (95 ps FWHM) 40 6
APD Jitter 50 7
TDC Jitter 15 2.2
50 MHz Freq. Reference 7 1
APOLLO System Total 66 10
Lunar Retroreflector Array 80230 1235
Total Error per Photon 105240 1637
APOLLO Systematic Errors

Various contributions to systematic error:

Atmospheric refractive delay (2-meter signal)
Ocean, atmosphere, and ground-water loading
Thermal expansion of telescope & reflectors
Will implement supplemental metrology on-site
Barometric transducer array
Superconducting gravimeter (<1 mm vertical displacements)
Precision GPS (0.5 mm horz., 2.3 mm vert. in 24 hr)
IMPORTANT: Science signals are narrow-band
Environmental factors will not mimic new physics
Laser Mounted on Telescope

Mounted June 2003

In thermal enclosure (fridge)
Timing Electronics Built/Verified

Timing System in Operation CAMAC Crate Inhabitants

APOLLO Command Module Calibration/Frequency Board

Timing/APD control, CPU interface
Future Laser Ranging Tests of GR

Interplanetary is next logical step

Laser transponder on Mars measures to 410-6,
and to 10-5
Mercury orbiter (Messenger: launched) could be
used to measure perihelion shift
May perform test-ranging from Apache Point this summer
LATOR (stay tuned for Turyshev talk) uses inter-
spacecraft laser ranging to measure curvature of
spacetime to unprecedented precision: to 10-8
APOLLO Collaboration

UCSD: JPL:
Tom Murphy Jim Williams
John Goodkind Jean Dickey
Eric Michelsen Slava Turyshev

U. Washington: Lincoln Labs:

Eric Adelberger Brian Aull
Jana Strasburg Bernie Kosicki
Larry Carey Bob Reich

Northwest Analysis: Harvard:

Ken Nordtvedt Chris Stubbs

Joint NASA/NSF funding