Questioning the Equivalence Principle

TL;DR

The paper critically examines the foundational status of the Equivalence Principle, highlighting its heuristic nature and exploring potential violations due to new scalar fields predicted by modern theories like String Theory.

Contribution

It challenges the assumption of the EP's universality and discusses how new fields could lead to observable violations, impacting fundamental physics tests.

Findings

EP is a heuristic, not a fundamental principle.

Scalar fields in modern theories can violate the EP.

Experimental tests compare free-fall accelerations of different materials.

Abstract

The Equivalence Principle (EP) is not one of the ``universal'' principles of physics (like the Action Principle). It is a heuristic hypothesis which was introduced by Einstein in 1907, and used by him to construct his theory of General Relativity. In modern language, the (Einsteinian) EP consists in assuming that the only long-range field with gravitational-strength couplings to matter is a massless spin-2 field. Modern unification theories, and notably String Theory, suggest the existence of new fields (in particular, scalar fields: ``dilaton'' and ``moduli'') with gravitational-strength couplings. In most cases the couplings of these new fields ``violate'' the EP. If the field is long-ranged, these EP violations lead to many observable consequences (variation of ``constants'', non-universality of free fall, relative drift of atomic clocks,...). The best experimental probe of a possible violation of the EP is to compare the free-fall acceleration of different materials.