Pre-Phase A Report - Lisa - Nasa
Pre-Phase A Report - Lisa - Nasa
Pre-Phase A Report - Lisa - Nasa
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
36 Chapter 1 Scientific Objectives<br />
had no characteristic length scale. Observations of the microwave background by COBE<br />
constrain the time at which inflation occurred, and this in turn constrains the energy<br />
density today at LISA frequencies (and, incidentally, at ground-based frequencies as well)<br />
to ΩGW ≤ 8×10−14 [58].<br />
The most-discussed cosmic gravitational wave background has probably been that produced<br />
by cosmic strings. These are defects that could have been left over from a GUT-scale<br />
phase transition at a much earlier epoch than the electroweak transition. Therefore, by<br />
the LISA production time, the strings would not have had any characteristic length-scale,<br />
and the spectrum today would again be essentially scale-free at LISA frequencies, rising at<br />
lower frequencies [59]. This spectrum is constrained by present observations of frequency<br />
fluctuations in millisecond pulsars. This limit suggests that, at LISA and ground-based<br />
frequencies, ΩGW ≤ 10−8 . This is still an interesting level for LISA, although ground-based<br />
detectors are likely to reach this level first.<br />
One example of a process that would produce a spectrum with features in the LISA band<br />
is the collision of vacuum bubbles in the early Universe. This could occur at the end of a<br />
phase transition that occurred randomly throughout space. The expanding bubbles of the<br />
“new” vacuum state collide, and the resulting density discontinuities give off gravitational<br />
waves. If the electroweak phase transition produced such bubbles, the spectrum might<br />
peak at 0.1 mHz with a density ΩGW ∼ 3×10−7 [60]. This would easily be detected<br />
by LISA, and it would again be an extremely important and fundamental result. Such<br />
radiation from the electroweak transition would not be observable from the ground.<br />
It should be emphasized that the cosmic background of gravitational waves is the leastunderstood<br />
prospective source for LISA. The observational constraints are few, and the<br />
predictions of possible spectra depend on relatively simple theoretical models of the early<br />
Universe and on toy models of high-energy physics. LISA’s frequency band is orders of<br />
magnitude different from that which is accessible to ground-based detectors or to pulsar<br />
timing experiments, and it is very possible that LISA will find unexpected surprises here.<br />
These would give us unparalleled insight into the mechanics of the early Universe.<br />
An interesting feature of LISA’s observations of a background is that it can test its isotropy.<br />
As LISA rotates, its sensitivity to different directions changes. The low-frequency CWDB<br />
background is likely to be concentrated near the galactic plane, so by comparing two<br />
3-month stretches of data LISA should have no difficulty seeing this background and identifying<br />
this effect. But even the cosmological background should have a dipole anisotropy<br />
caused by the motion of the solar system, just as the cosmic microwave background has.<br />
If LISA makes a 3-month observation of this background, then its frequency resolution will<br />
be about 10−7 Hz, and there will be about 105 resolvable frequencies near 10 mHz. Given<br />
random fluctuations, the strength of the background at this frequency can be estimated<br />
to a precision of something like √ N, or 0.3 %. Successive periods of 3 months can then<br />
be compared to look for changes. While this is not quite precise enough to detect the<br />
expected anisotropy of about 0.1% in a single year, if the mission lasts 10 yr then LISA<br />
will be getting close to the required level. If the gravitational wave background turned<br />
out not to have the same dipole anisotropy as the cosmic microwave background, then<br />
cosmological models would have to be drastically revised.<br />
3-3-1999 9:33 Corrected version 2.08