the gravity probe b satellite is scheduled to fly in the year 2000  @xcite .
it contains a set of gyroscopes intended to test the predictions of general relativity ( gr ) that a gyroscope in a low circular polar orbit , with altitude @xmath3 will precess about 6.6 _ arcsec / year _ in the orbital plane ( geodetic precession ) and about 42 _
milliarcsec / year _ perpendicular to the orbital plane ( lt precession , see  @xcite ; @xcite , secs . 4.7 and 7.8 ; @xcite , sec .
9.1 ) . in this paper
we review the theoretical derivation of these effects and in particular consider the contributions of the earth s quadrupole and higher multipole fields .
we first review the derivation of the metric for a rotating body using the standard lgrt approach (  @xcite ;  @xcite ; @xcite , secs . 4.7 and 7.8 ) .
the metric is characterized by a newtonian scalar potential ( the gravito - electric field ) and a vector potential ( the gravito - magnetic field )  ( @xcite , sec .
we then obtain the same result with a simple transformation argument which clarifies the physical meaning of the metric ( @xcite , sec .
specifically it makes clear that if the metric of a point mass contains fundamental parameters such as the eddington parameters @xmath0 and @xmath1 , then to lowest order the metric of a rotating body contains no * new * fundamental parameters  @xcite .
thus there is no new lense  thirring or frame - dragging parameter to be measured by gp - b or any other experiment .
we then derive the precession equations for a gyroscope in a general weak field system , that is for any scalar and vector potential fields  @xcite .
the calculation is valid to first order in the fields and velocities of the source body and the satellite .
the gravitational field of the earth is described by the scalar and vector potentials which depend on the shape of the body and the mass and velocity distribution inside it .
we treat both of these fields by a multipole expansion and express the precessions in series of spherical harmonics .
we do not limit ourselves with the axially symmetric case which has been thoroughly studied by teyssandier  ( @xcite ) ,  ( @xcite ) .
in particular we show that for a solid body rotation up to the order @xmath4 both precessions depend only on the tensor of inertia of the earth .
the major nonspherical contributions to the gp - b precessions are from the earth s quadrupole moment .
the contribution to the geodetic precession which has a magnitude of about 1 part in @xmath5 is detectable by gp - b and quite important for the determination of the parameter @xmath1 which is to be measured to about 1 part in @xmath6 , the most accurate measurement envisioned  ( @xcite , sec .
3.5 and in particular table 14.2 ) .
this contribution has been calculated independently by wilkins  @xcite and barker & oconnel  @xcite , and then in the most elegant and general way by breakwell  @xcite .
the contribution to the lense  thirring precession is beyond the expected accuracy of gp - b and close enough to the result by teyssandier  ( @xcite ) obtained from a different earth s model .
we also estimate the influence of moon and sun to find that only the geodetic contribution of the sun must be included in the gp - b data reduction , as anticipated .
we first briefly review this standard derivation of linearized general relativity theory .
the metric of a rotating body such as the earth is obtained by introducing a small perturbation of the lorentz metric @xmath7 , that is @xmath8 the perturbation @xmath9 is assumed to be expressed in isotropic space coordinates so that @xmath10 .
similarly we suppose the matter producing the metric field is described by the energy  momentum tensor of slow - moving and low density matter with negligible pressure , @xmath11 where @xmath12 is the 4velocity and @xmath13 is the matter density .
the field equations are : @xmath14 where @xmath15 is the einstein tensor .
the calculation of @xmath15 and @xmath16 to the lowest order in the perturbation is straightforward and results in the following equations : @xmath17 @xmath18 here indices are raised and lowered with the lorentz metric , which is consistent to lowest order , and the slash denotes differentiation .
the last expression imposes the so - called lorentz condition which can always be achieved by a coordinate transformation ( to lowest order ) and involves no loss of generality ; it is also the analog of a gauge choice in electromagnetism .
because we have used isotropic coordinates equation ( [ eq:4 ] ) leads immediately to @xmath19 , and the standard classical correspondence gives @xmath20 .
we thereby obtain the wave equations for the scalar and vector potentials : @xmath21 @xmath22 where @xmath23 is the velocity of the source .
these equations may be solved in the standard way by means of a retarded green s function . in the case of a time independent system , or a system which changes so slowly that retardation effects may be ignored , the solution is @xmath24 @xmath25 note that these expressions are analogs of the equations of electrostatics and magnetostatics , which is why one may speak about gravito - electric and gravito - magnetic effects in the linearized theory .    in summary , we may write the ( lense  thirring ) line element as @xmath26 this is valid to first order in field intensity and source velocity , and will serve as a basis for calculating the gyroscope precession .
1 shows the general aspects of the scalar and vector fields of a spinning body ; the vector field generally points in the same direction as the velocity of the surface of the body .
it is , in fact , possible to obtain the above result from a different and physically interesting perspective , and moreover introduce parameters convenient for discussing experimental measurements .
following eddington , consider the metric of a massive point with a geometric mass @xmath27 at a large distance @xmath28 , so that @xmath29 .
we expand the schwarzschild solution in isotropic coordinates for this situation as @xmath30 @xmath31 eddington suggested that this be written in terms of parameters as  @xcite ,  @xcite @xmath32 where @xmath0 and @xmath33 and @xmath1 are equal to @xmath34 for general relativity .
the power series ( [ eq:11 ] ) is clearly a rather general form for the metric far from a spherical body .
since the parameter @xmath27 which appears in the metric is a constant of integration representing the mass of the central body ( specifically @xmath35 ) , we may absorb the parameter @xmath0 into it , which is equivalent to taking @xmath36 .
this is consistent as long as no independent nongravitational determination of the mass of the body is considered .
we will nevertheless retain @xmath0 in our calculations as a book - keeping device .
indeed , the parameters in ( [ eq:11 ] ) may all be viewed as a tool for tracking which terms in the metric contribute to a gravitational phenomenon such as the perihelion shift of mercury or the deflection of the starlight by the sun .
alternatively they may be viewed as numbers which may _ not _ be equal to @xmath34 if a metric theory other than general relativity is actually valid . in either case
they provide a convenient way to express the results of experimental tests of gravity as giving value to the parameters .
this parameterized approach has been extended to include many other parameters and has been highly developed under the name parameterized post
newtonian theory , or ppn  @xcite . in this paper
we take the viewpoint that general relativity is to be tested and emphasize that we are _ not _ using the more general ppn approach .
solar system measurements give @xmath37 and @xmath38 , which are of course entirely consistent with general relativity .
we consider now only phenomena in which the quadratic term , @xmath39 , in @xmath40 is unimportant , that is in which we may ignore @xmath33 and assume that the underlying gravitational theory is linear .
then for a stationary mass , @xmath41 since this is nearly the lorentz metric , we may generalize it to a moving mass point by simply transforming to a moving system using a transformation that is lorentzian to the first order in velocity : @xmath42 here the subscript @xmath28 labels the system in which the mass is at rest , and which moves at velocity @xmath43 in the @xmath44 direction in the laboratory system .
this transformation gives the metric for the moving mass point as @xmath45 @xmath46 this obviously generalizes for motion in any direction to @xmath47 @xmath48 as we assume that our theory is linear to this order ( like general relativity ) , we can superpose the fields of a distribution of such point masses and replace @xmath49 by @xmath50 from ( [ eq:8 ] ) and @xmath51 by @xmath52 from ( [ eq:9 ] ) , resulting in @xmath53 @xmath54 @xmath55 this agrees with the general relativity result ( [ eq:12 ] ) when @xmath56 but now contains appropriate combinations of eddington parameters .
we emphasize that this line element has been obtained for any slowly moving mass distribution from the parameterized metric for a stationary mass point by transformation and superposition , and thus no new parameter appears in the expression .
therefore a measurement of a phenomenon which depends on the cross term in ( [ eq:14 ] ) provides a value for @xmath57 and not for some new parameter associated with gravito - magnetism .
note also that the result is rather strong since it depends on the observationally verified schwarzschild metric ( [ eq:12 ] ) , the well - tested lorenz transformation , and the principle of superposition , valid for any linear theory .
an orbiting gyroscope has its spin axis parallel displaced in accord with the metric ( [ eq:14 ] ) .
we calculate this motion with minimal assumptions about the potentials , which could be the potentials of a nearly spherical and rather uniform rigid body such as the earth or a potato - shaped body such as in fig .
1 , with some interior mass distribution . we will work always to the first order in the potentials and in the velocities , @xmath23 and @xmath58 , of the source and orbiting gyroscope .
the parallel displacement equation for the gyro spin @xmath59 is (  @xcite ; @xcite , secs .
4.7 and 7.8 ; @xcite , sec .
9.1 ) : @xmath60 we suppose that the gyro spin 4-vector is perpendicular to the velocity 4-vector , which is equivalent to assuming that the gyro spin has no zero component in its rest frame . from this assumption the zero component in another frame is easily obtained , and to first order in the satellite velocity it is given by @xmath61 .
we calculate the euler
lagrange equations in the standard way , and then put them into canonical form to give the christoffel symbols .
to lowest order in the potential and velocity the christoffel symbols are @xmath62 @xmath63 the roman indices in these expressions are space indices and run from 1 to 3 , a slash denotes an ordinary derivative , and @xmath64 .
note that the gravitational vector potential @xmath65 occurs in a gauge invariant way , that is only its @xmath66 appears .
substitution of the christoffel symbols into the spin equation of motion gives @xmath67 we break the drift rate into two parts , the geodetic drift rate due to the scalar potential @xmath68 , and the lense  thirring precession rate due to the vector potential @xmath65 . separating also symmetric and antisymmetric parts of the geodetic effect , we arrive at , in a 3dimensional vector notation , @xmath69 and @xmath70 + \gamma\bigl(\vec v\cdot\nabla\phi\bigr)\vec s \biggr\},\ ] ]
@xmath71 @xmath72 where @xmath73 and @xmath74 are the instantaneous values of the lense  thirring and geodetic precessions , respectively .
since @xmath73 is the _ curl _ of the gravitational vector potential the lense  thirring precession rate is the analog of the magnetic field in magnetostatics theory .
the geodetic effect is of the order of the scalar potential times the orbital velocity of the satellite , while the lense  thirring terms are of the order the scalar potential times the velocity of the central body ( the earth ) , which is typically much smaller than the orbital velocity .
symmetric geodetic terms are responsible for stretching the spin vector @xmath75 , and the reason for separating them is that their effect almost vanishes when averaged over any reasonable satellite orbit . to see this
consider the last term in the symmetric part of the geodetic drift rate .
using newton s law in the form @xmath76 we may write @xmath77 where @xmath78 is the change in the velocity squared in total time @xmath79 , and it is assumed that the drift rate is small and @xmath75 does not change significantly during this period of time . if the orbit is periodic , this quantity will be zero , and for a nearly periodic orbit it will be very small . similarly for the remaining symmetric terms in the geodetic drift we may write : @xmath80 @xmath81 again , this is zero for a periodic orbit and very small for a nearly periodic orbit .    in summary the average precession rate of the gyro spin is @xmath82 with the values of the geodetic and precessions given in ( [ eq:17 ] ) and ( [ eq:18 ] ) .
note that the geodetic and lense  thirring effects are approximately perpendicular to each other for an approximately polar orbit around a central body of reasonable shape ; for a circular polar orbit about a spherical body they are perpendicular .
2 shows the orientation of the various vectors for a fairly general situation , a satellite in a roughly planar polar orbit about an oddly shaped body .
the geodetic precession vector @xmath74 is roughly perpendicular to the orbit plane and the lense  thirring precession vector @xmath73 has the general appearance of a dipole magnetic field .
if there are relatively distant masses , such as the moon , in the neighborhood of the central body , their density distribution @xmath83 may be expressed as @xmath84 the effect on the scalar and vector potentials is @xmath85 it then follows that the precessions due to these distant masses are @xmath86 where @xmath87 is the angular momentum of the distant mass .    for the specific case of the moon and the gp - b experiment the numerical values will be discussed in sec .
we will henceforth study the case of a body such as the earth which is rigidly rotating , that is @xmath88 .
motivated by expression ( [ eq:9 ] ) we introduce a new vector potential quantity @xmath89 : @xmath90 the vector @xmath89 is a harmonic function outside the body which we will expand in spherical harmonics ; for a special spherically symmetric case @xmath89 is collinear with @xmath91 . in terms of @xmath89 , the metric ( [ eq:14 ] ) may be written as @xmath92    using ( [ eq:8 ] ) and ( [ eq:9 ] ) it is possible to express the divergence of @xmath89 via the scalar potential , namely , @xmath93 which allows us to rewrite formula ( [ eq:17 ] ) for the lense  thirring precession as @xmath94 \vec\omega_{lt}= -(\alpha+\gamma)\omega\,\biggl[\vec\pi_{|z}+\bigl(\phi+r\phi_{|r}\bigr)\biggr]\hat z   \label{eq:24}\ ] ] here we have chosen the @xmath95 axis to be along the spin , @xmath96 .
we now put the origin of spherical coordinates @xmath97 at the center of mass of the body , introduce spherical harmonics with the notation @xmath98 and expand the potentials @xmath68 and @xmath99 in corresponding series : @xmath100 \label{eq:26}\ ] ] @xmath101 \label{eq:27}\ ] ] [ @xmath102 terms in ( [ eq:26 ] ) and @xmath103 terms in ( [ eq:27 ] ) are missing because the origin is at the center of mass of the body , see expressions ( [ eq:28 ] ) and ( [ eq:29 ] ) below ] .
these expansions are in the inertial frame in which the body rotates ; the direction of the coordinate polar axis z is so far arbitrary ; @xmath104 is the characteristic size of the body , which we take to be the equatorial radius for the earth .
the potentials are slowly varying functions of time due to the earth rotation , so we write the coefficients as explicit functions of time . these coefficients are related to the mass distribution in the standard way by @xmath105 @xmath106 note that generally the domain of integration here is also time dependent . in particular , we write for convenience @xmath107 .
the time dependence in ( [ eq:28 ] ) and ( [ eq:29 ] ) may be easily analyzed for a rigidly rotating body provided that the rotation axis is fixed both in the inertial space and in the body . in that case in the inertial frame with the @xmath95 axis along the spin , @xmath96 , the earth density is @xmath108 where @xmath109 is the time independent density measured in the frame rotating with the earth . substituting this for the density in ( [ eq:28 ] ) and ( [ eq:29 ] ) and transforming to the earth fixed frame we find that the time dependent coefficients may be written in terms of constant moments of density according to @xmath110= \left|\left|\matrix{\cos\omega t&-\sin\omega t\cr\sin\omega t&\cos\omega t \cr}\right|\right| \left[\matrix{a^{c}_{lm}\cr a^{s}_{lm}\cr}\right ] \label{eq:30}\ ] ] @xmath111= \left|\left|\matrix{\cos\omega t&-\sin\omega t\cr\sin\omega t&\cos\omega t \cr}\right|\right| \left[\matrix{p^{ic}_{lm}\cr p^{is}_{lm}\cr}\right ] , \label{eq:31}\ ] ] and the time independent coefficients are explicitly given by @xmath112 @xmath113    if the rotation axis wanders in the body and/or in the inertial space , the relation between the time dependent and time independent coefficients is given by a combination of appropriate rotation matrices which is more complicated than the one matrix in ( [ eq:30 ] ) and ( [ eq:31 ] ) ( see c. f.  @xcite ) .
generally , a time dependent coefficient with the indices @xmath114 and @xmath27 is a linear combination of the appropriate time independent coefficients with the indices @xmath114 and @xmath115 .    introducing now the time dependent coefficients from ( [ eq:32 ] ) and ( [ eq:33 ] ) back into ( [ eq:26 ] ) and ( [ eq:27 ] ) we obtain the time dependent potentials in a convenient form using time independent coefficients only : @xmath116 \label{eq:34}\ ] ] @xmath117 \label{eq:35}\ ] ] this is of course what one should expect intuitively ; in general this form will be most useful for our purposes .
the constant coefficients @xmath118 in ( [ eq:34 ] ) are those that are measured very accurately for the earth ( up to @xmath119 their values are found in  @xcite ) . however , for the earth of arbitrary shape and composition it is impossible to express @xmath120 through @xmath118 , in other words , their values , and hence the scalar and vector potentials , are independent .
nevertheless , a useful relationship between the two sets of coefficients exists ; to describe it , we need a notation for a general moment of the density , @xmath121 in particular , @xmath122 using the definitions ( [ eq:32 ] ) and ( [ eq:33 ] ) and the recurrence relations for legendre functions  @xcite , we derive the following equalities relating @xmath120 to @xmath118 : @xmath123 @xmath124 \left[m^{\nu}_{l+1l-1m+1}-(l+m-1)(l+m)m^{\nu}_{l+1l-1m-1}\right ] \bigr\}\ ] ] @xmath125 @xmath124 \left[m^{\mu}_{l+1l-1m+1}-(l+m-1)(l+m)m^{\mu}_{l+1l-1m-1}\right ] \bigr\ } \label{eq:38}\ ] ] @xmath126 in the second line of ( [ eq:38 ] ) , the minus sign is taken and @xmath127 when @xmath128 , the plus sign and @xmath129 when @xmath130 .    from ( [ eq:34 ] ) and ( [ eq:35 ] ) using the definition ( [ eq:17 ] ) of @xmath73 a rather compact multipole expansion for the lense  thirring precession
may be computed : @xmath131\biggl({r\over r}\biggr)^l y^{\nu}_{lm}(\theta,\varphi-\omega t ) \label{eq:39}\ ] ] the corresponding expansion for the geodetic precession is too cumbersome to be useful .
if the shape of the central body and the mass distribution inside it are known , then all the pertinent quantities , including multipole expansion coefficients @xmath118 and @xmath120 , may be found by integration , but this is rarely the case . even when @xmath118 are measured , as for the earth , all the @xmath120 , and the lense  thirring effect with them , remain entirely undetermined .
however , for a body of any shape and composition , the coefficients @xmath132 and @xmath133 can be expressed in terms of the elements @xmath134 of the tensor of inertia @xmath135 determined in a standard way , @xmath136 writing @xmath137 , we find : @xmath138 @xmath139 @xmath140 @xmath141 this is done by comparing the integrals ( [ eq:32 ] ) ( with @xmath142 ) and ( [ eq:33 ] ) ( with @xmath102 ) to @xmath134 using explicit expressions of legendre functions with @xmath143 ; formulas for @xmath144 and @xmath145 are known and used in geodesy for the determination of the earth s moments of inertia  @xcite .
introducing ( [ eq:40 ] ) into ( [ eq:34 ] ) , ( [ eq:35 ] ) and dropping the terms with @xmath146 for @xmath68 and @xmath147 for @xmath99 , we first obtain the @xmath4 formulas for the potentials : @xmath148,\quad \vec\pi(\vec r)=-{g\over r^3 } \biggl [ { \bf i}\vec r-{1\over2}\,\bigl({\rm tr}\,{\bf i}\bigr)\vec r \biggr ] \label{eq:41}\ ] ] from these we then obtain the approximation for the precessions by differentiation of the expressions ( [ eq:18 ] ) and ( [ eq:17 ] ) ( see also ( [ eq:22 ] ) ) : @xmath149
\bigl(\vec r\times\vec v\bigr)+ { 3\over r^2}\,\bigl({\bf i}\vec r\times\vec v\bigr ) \biggr\ } \label{eq:42}\ ] ] @xmath150\vec\omega+ 3\,{\vec\omega\cdot\vec r\over r^2}\,\biggl[{1\over2}\,\bigl({\rm tr}\,{\bf
i}\bigr)\vec r-{\bf i}\vec r\biggr ] \biggr\ } \label{eq:43}\ ] ] [ of course , the same expression for @xmath73 is also obtained from ( [ eq:40 ] ) and ( [ eq:39 ] ) with @xmath142 ] .
note that formulas ( [ eq:40 ] ) and ( [ eq:41 ] ) hold in both the body - fixed and inertial frames , and the coefficients and moments of inertia in the latter depend on the time if the rotation is not axisymmetric , @xmath152 , @xmath153 , @xmath154 .
the expressions ( [ eq:42 ] ) and ( [ eq:43 ] ) for the precessions are meaningful in the inertial frame where generally @xmath155 , @xmath156 being a rotation matrix which converts the body - fixed radius - vector into the inertial one . in the above case of a simple rotation about an inertially - fixed axis , @xmath157 , @xmath158    the results ( [ eq:41])([eq:43 ] ) are valid under either of the two conditions :    \1 ) _ far field _
, @xmath159 ;    \2 ) _ high symmetry _ , i.e. , all higher order moments are small    these results alter somewhat our usual notion of the geodetic and lense  thirring effects : the first one is generally proportional not only to the orbital momentum , but to @xmath160 as well , and the lense - thirring precession generally points not only in the direction of the angular momentum @xmath161 , but has also components parallel to @xmath162 , and @xmath163 .
two particular cases of the inertia tensor are of special interest .    _ a ) spherical symmetry _
, @xmath164 . in this case , the standard formulas follow immediately from ( [ eq:43 ] ) for @xmath56 : @xmath165 \label{eq:44}\ ] ] note that we have thus shown this to be the exact result for a spherical earth with any _ radial _ density distribution @xmath166 .    _ b ) symmetric top , _
@xmath167 , @xmath168 .
it turns out that for @xmath157 , i. e. , for the rotation about the material symmetry axis , the previous expression for @xmath169 remains true ; to lowest order in the oblateness , this also proves to be the exact result for a slightly oblate uniform ellipsoid of revolution rotating about its semiminor axis . the corresponding expression for @xmath170
is given and discussed in sec .
to go beyond the @xmath4 approximation , one must make some assumptions about the shape of the central body and density distribution inside it , and use the data of gravitational potential measurements , as available .
bearing in mind the application to gp - b , that is , the earth , we use the following set of assumptions .
_ 1 . gravitational potential . _
we assume it to be measured , i.e. , the gravitational coefficients @xmath171 known .
our problem is thus to determine the vector potential in terms of the coefficients @xmath172 using as general an earth model as possible .
_ 2 . shape .
_ we assume that the earth is a slightly oblate ellipsoid of revolution , so its surface equation to lowest order in the eccentricity @xmath173 is @xmath174 where @xmath104 is the semi - major axis ( equatorial radius ) ; the eccentricity is the ratio of the difference of the semi - axes to the major one .
_ 3 . mass distribution . _
we examine two different models :    _ a ) _ with @xmath175 and @xmath176 being arbitrary functions of their arguments , we set @xmath177 the first term here describes any depth variation of the _ average _ density , and the only assumption is that the angular variations are depth  independent .
_ b ) _ for arbitrary functions @xmath175 and @xmath178 , we set @xmath179 contrary to the previous model , here all angular variations of the density are concentrated at the earth s surface .    we will call model a the set of assumptions @xmath180 and @xmath181 , and model b the assumptions @xmath180 and @xmath182 ; in both cases the mass distributions are , of course , assumed consistent with the gravitational data of the assumption @xmath34 .
as far as the earth is concerned , assumption 2 ) reflects the classical clairaut formula ( see c. f.  @xcite ) ( the eccentricity is @xmath183 ) ; also the mass model @xmath182 seems rather realistic for the earth since the estimated thickness of the layer where its mass distribution varies significantly in the angular directions is only about @xmath184 .
note that an entirely different earth model is used in geodesy : it assumes that the sum of gravitational and centrifugal potentials is constant at the earth s ellipsoid s surface  ( @xcite ) .
this allows one to relate @xmath185 to the eccentricity and the earth angular velocity only ( in particular , to obtain the earth s gravitational oblateness @xmath186 with a surprisingly good accuracy ) , but gives zero values to @xmath187 and leaves @xmath120 undetermined .
evidently , our two models should give bounds for the corrections to the @xmath188 values of the precessions .
moreover , for both of them it is possible to find the corrections explicitly by means of the following four steps :    @xmath189 calculate @xmath171 by ( [ eq:32 ] ) via spherical harmonics coefficients @xmath190 of the function @xmath191 for model a , [ or @xmath192 for model b ] ;    @xmath193 since @xmath171 are assumed known , solve the resulting equations for @xmath190 , hence having them expressed via @xmath171 ( thus @xmath176 or @xmath178 are uniquely determined at this stage through the gravitational data ) ;    @xmath194 using that , calculate the needed moments @xmath195 of the density by ( [ eq:36 ] ) in terms of @xmath171 ;    @xmath196 using the found values of @xmath195 , express @xmath172 through @xmath171 according to ( [ eq:38 ] ) .
in fact , what is described here is a fit of our density distributions ( [ eq:46 ] ) and ( [ eq:47 ] ) to the known gravitational coefficients @xmath171 which allows us , in these two cases , to express the former through the latter and thus determine uniquely the coefficients @xmath172 , i.e. , the gravito - magnetic part of the field .
the implementation of this procedure is rather cumbersome , though basically straightforward , so the details are given in the appendix .
the results of the calculations to lowest order in the earth s eccentricity are : @xmath197 @xmath198+o\bigl((\epsilon l)^2\bigr)\ ] ] @xmath199 @xmath200+o\bigl((\epsilon l)^2\bigr ) \label{eq:48}\ ] ] @xmath201 + o\bigl((\epsilon l)^2\bigr),\ ] ] with the minus sign and @xmath127 for @xmath128 , plus sign and @xmath129 for @xmath130 in the second of these formulas , and @xmath202    it is remarkable that the first non - zero oblateness correction is quadratic , and that the results for the two models differ by just a factor @xmath203 in front of a couple of terms .
these expressions are needed only for @xmath188 since for @xmath102 formulas ( [ eq:40 ] ) always hold .
we now apply the above results to the gp - b satellite which will be circling the earth on a low ( @xmath204 ) polar nearly circular orbit .
our aim is to check the gr predictions for the geodetic and lense - thirring drift of a gp - b gyroscope taking into account all the peculiarities of the real earth s gravito - electric and gravito - magnetic field pertinent to the expected experimental error of one part in @xmath205 for the geodetic effect and about one part in @xmath206 for the lense - thirring effect .
more precisely , one needs to check whether the spherically symmetric approximation ( [ eq:44 ] ) , which has been used for many years in the theoretical discussion and planning of the experiment , needs any corrections to match the above experimental accuracy .
we use the gr values for the eddington parameters @xmath56 in the sequel .
we always use the assumption 2 of the previous section that the earth has a shape of a slightly oblate ellipsoid of revolution with the eccentricity @xmath207 . its semi - minor axis is assumed fixed in the inertial space and coincident with the earth rotation axis and the @xmath95 axis of the cartesian
coordinates .    _
1 . gravitational potential_. for the required accuracy , it is enough to include only the earth s quadrupole moment into @xmath68 , i. e. , to set @xmath208 this is because all gravitational coefficients other than the earth s oblateness @xmath2 are at least 2 orders of magnitude smaller  @xcite . by ( [ eq:49 ] ) and ( [ eq:40 ] ) ,
the @xmath4 expression ( [ eq:40 ] ) for @xmath68 is valid with @xmath209 which gives the gravitational potential in the usual form : @xmath210= -\frac{gm}{r}\left[1-j_2\frac{r^2}{r^2}p_2(\cos\theta)\right]\ ] ]    _ 2 .
instantaneous geodetic precession_. just as for the potential , ( [ eq:49 ] ) assures that the @xmath4 formula ( [ eq:42 ] ) is valid for @xmath211 .
the explicit form of the geodetic precession is obtained either from ( [ eq:42 ] ) and ( [ eq:50 ] ) or from its general definition ( [ eq:18 ] ) by differentiating the above expression for the potential .
the result reads : @xmath212 \right\ } , \label{eq:51}\ ] ] this expression contains the @xmath2 corrections to the classical spherically symmetric expression ( [ eq:44 ] ) .
breakwell  @xcite obtained it but in a different form , pinning the value of the precession to a point on a given satellite orbit rather than to a given point in space through which the spinning particle passes with a velocity @xmath58 .
_ 3 . gravito - magnetic field and the instantaneous lense
thirring precession_. we now invoke our assumption about the mass distribution ( models a and b of the previous section ) and substitute the values ( [ eq:49 ] ) of the gravitational coefficients into the expressions ( [ eq:48 ] ) for @xmath120 . in this way it turns out that for _ both _ models a and b the only additional to @xmath102 non - zero coefficients are those with @xmath213 , and their values are @xmath214 @xmath215 so , for both our models the only addition to the field of a symmetric top is the gravito - magnetic field ( [ eq:52 ] ) . in terms of the lense
 thirring precession that means that the standard expression ( [ eq:44 ] ) has to be appended by the terms ( [ eq:52 ] ) from the general formula ( [ eq:39 ] ) for the precession .
the result reads : @xmath216-\ ] ] @xmath217 , \label{eq:53}\ ] ] where ( recall @xmath218 ) @xmath219 @xmath220 the second line of ( [ eq:53 ] ) is the correction to the classical lense  thirring expression in the first line which is induced by the gravito - magnetic field ( [ eq:52 ] ) .
[ recall from section 7 , b ) , that the dependence of @xmath73 on @xmath2 for a symmetric top rotating about its symmetry axis cancels out - remarkably!. thus the first line of ( [ eq:53 ] ) contains no @xmath2 ] .
note that the only difference between the earth s models a and b is a factor of 7/5 in the constants @xmath222 and @xmath223 .
note also that allowing for more multipoles in the gravitational potential than given in the equation ( [ eq:49 ] ) we automatically obtain higher order multipoles in the gravito - magnetic field by the expressions ( [ eq:48 ] ) for @xmath120 .
however , for gp - b all these higher order corrections prove to be too small to be taken into account .
orbit of the gp - b satellite and the instantaneous values of precessions_. the perfect orbit for the gp - b satellite would be a circular polar one with the altitude @xmath224 which is described by @xmath225 . in reality
it is slightly distorted by the quadrupole moment of the earth s gravitational field ; with the lowest order in @xmath2 corrections included , the orbit becomes  ( @xcite ) ,  ( @xcite ) : @xmath226 , \label{eq:55}\ ] ] @xmath227 \left [ \hat { \theta}+{1\over2}\,j_2\left({r\over r_0}\right)^2\sin2\theta\,\hat { r }   \right],\ ] ] where @xmath228 are the corresponding unit vectors .
( in view of the orbit symmetry , it is enough to consider a half - orbit from one pole to the other , @xmath229 ; otherwise , the second half may be assigned to @xmath230 , with the proper direction of the unit vector @xmath231 ) .
introducing the orbital velocity ( [ eq:55 ] ) into the formula ( [ eq:51 ] ) and dropping some terms @xmath232 , we obtain the geodetic precession for the gp - b gyroscope in the following form : @xmath233 \biggl [ 1+{3\over2}\,j_2\biggl({r\over r_0}\biggr)^2\,\biggl(1 - 3\cos^2\theta\biggr ) \biggr]\hat e_{\varphi}\ ] ] using now the orbit radius ( [ eq:55 ] ) and keeping only the corrections linear in @xmath2 , we arrive at the expression we need : @xmath234\hat e_{\varphi } \label{eq:56}\ ] ]    to derive a similar formula for @xmath73 from ( [ eq:53 ] ) we , of course , need no orbital velocity but only the orbit radius ( [ eq:55 ] ) ; with accuracy @xmath235 the instantaneous value of the lense  thirring precession for gp - b turns out to be @xmath236 @xmath237 ; \label{eq:57}\ ] ] @xmath238\ ] ] for convenience , we have assumed that the orbit is in the plane @xmath239 ; the values of @xmath240 and @xmath241 are given in ( [ eq:54 ] ) , while @xmath242    note that the expressions ( [ eq:56 ] ) and ( [ eq:57 ] ) contain the corrections coming both directly from the non - spherically symmetric gravito - electric and gravito - magnetic field and also through the influence of the former on the orbit .
the first contribution can be recognized from the second in the lense  thirring precession ( [ eq:57 ] ) by the presence of the factor @xmath243 , however , in the geodetic precession ( [ eq:56 ] ) this difference is concealed .
orbit - averaged precessions : the gp - b drift rates_. with the above results , it is now straightforward to carry out the orbit averaging which reduces to a simple integration over @xmath244 . in this way , to lowest order in the earth s oblateness @xmath245 using ( [ eq:56 ] ) we find @xmath246\hat e_{\varphi}={3gmv\over 2r_0 ^ 2}\ , \biggl [ 1 - 1.003\times10^{-3 } \biggr]\hat e_{\varphi } , \label{eq:59}\ ] ] where the values @xmath247 and @xmath248 for the earth s and orbit radius have been taken .
the result exactly coincides with the one found by breakwell  @xcite in a different way ( he gave the formula for the orbit of any inclination ) .
since gp - b is intended to measure the geodetic precession and the eddington parameter @xmath1 to about a part in @xmath6 , a @xmath249 correction is critically important .
note that the gp - b gyro spin axis will be initially aligned with the reference direction to the guide star in the orbit plane , so the geodetic effect will cause the in - plane drift of the spin in the north  south direction .    in a similar fashion , from ( [ eq:57 ] ) we derive @xmath250\hat z \label{eq:60}\ ] ] for our model b , @xmath251 according to ( [ eq:54 ] ) ; therefore , with @xmath252 for the earth , @xmath253\hat z= { gi\omega\over 2r^3_0}\ , \biggl [ 1 - 2.97\times10^{-4 } \biggr]\hat z \label{eq:61}\ ] ] thus the @xmath2 correction for the model b is @xmath254 , which is essentially beyond the expected gp - b accuracy for the lense  thirring effect . for the model a the correction is of the opposite sign and almost one order of magnitude smaller , about @xmath255 . for a different model of the mass distribution inside the earth teyssandier  @xcite has obtained a slightly larger correction of about @xmath256 , with the same relevance to gp - b .
effect of the moon_. according to formula ( [ eq:21 ] ) from section 5 the geodetic effect from a distant mass such as the moon scales with the mass and inversely with the square of distance .
since the moon has a small mass and is at a large distance we expect its effect to be small . a rough estimate for the geodetic precession due to the moon is @xmath257 which is too small to be of significance for gp - b experiment .
the lense  thirring effect scales with the angular momentum and inversely with the cube of the distance .
since the velocity of the moon in its orbit is small we expect its effect to be small , and the estimate @xmath258 shows that it is really far beyond the gp - b accuracy .
thus the moon is of no consequence for the gp - b experiment .
effect of the sun_. although the sun is quite distant its mass is large compared to the earth so it is not apparent how large its effect on the precession will be .
we can calculate this using ( [ eq:18 ] ) . in the inertial frame centered on the sun
the velocity of the satellite will be the sum of the satellite velocity in the earth orbit plus the orbital velocity of the earth @xmath259 but the satellite velocity averages to zero in the course of one orbit , while the other factors in ( 18 ) change very little , so for long time averages we may neglect the satellite velocity compared to the earth orbital velocity . treating the sun as a point mass and approximating the earth orbit as a circle we may thus write ( [ eq:18 ] ) as @xmath260 where the unit vector @xmath261 is perpendicular to the plane of the ecliptic and @xmath262 is the earth - sun distance .
the numerical value of this , with @xmath56 , is @xmath263 this contribution to the gp - b precession is not negligible and must be included in the data analysis .
it was first discussed by desitter in 1916  @xcite ,  @xcite , and further information and references can be found in the book of will  @xcite .
note an important fact concerning the direction of the above precession vector : it is perpendicular to the plane of the ecliptic , whereas the geodetic precession vector due to the earth lies mainly in the equatorial plane of the earth , so the two are not parallel . indeed
the precession due to the sun is roughly in the direction of the lense - thirring precession due to the earth .
finally we may estimate the precession due to the spin of the sun by using ( [ eq:44 ] ) . since the spin period of the sun is about 1 month this gives roughly @xmath264 which is far too small to be of relevance to the gp - b experiment .
this work was supported by nasa grant nas 8 - 39225 to gravity probe  b. we are grateful to the members of gp - b theory group , especially , to c.w.f.everitt , g.m.keiser , r.v.wagoner , and p.w.worden , for many fruitful discussions and enlightening comments .
let us show briefly the implementation of the four - step procedure described in section 8 which allows us to obtain expressions ( [ eq:48 ] ) for gravito - magnetic multipole coefficients @xmath120 .
we do it for the earth s model a ; calculations for the model b are similar .    first , we introduce the model a density distribution ( [ eq:46 ] ) into the definition ( [ eq:36 ] ) of the general moment @xmath265 of the density and calculate this moment for the shape of a slightly oblate ellipsoid of revolution ( assumption 2 of section 8) .
working to the first order in the eccentricity @xmath173 , we find @xmath265 in terms of the spherical harmonics coefficients @xmath266 of the function @xmath191 from ( [ eq:46 ] ) , namely : @xmath267+o\bigl((\epsilon k)^2\bigr ) \eqno(a.1)\ ] ] here @xmath268 are known positive rational fractions of @xmath114 and @xmath27 bounded for all pertinent values of those parameters , @xmath269 @xmath270 formula ( a.1 ) is slightly different for the case @xmath271 , but we do not need it . for @xmath272 the left - hand side of the equality ( a.1 ) is given via @xmath273 according to ( [ eq:37 ] ) : @xmath274 @xmath275+o\bigl((\epsilon l)^2\bigr)\ ] ] this is a tri - diagonal system of linear algebraic equations for @xmath276 with small off - diagonal elements .
solving it for @xmath276 , we express the latter in terms of @xmath273 : @xmath277 @xmath278+o\bigl((\epsilon l)^2\bigr),\ ] ] where @xmath279 introducing now the expression ( a.2 ) back into the general formula ( a.1 ) , we get _ all _ moments , with _ any k _ , expressed through the gravitational coefficients : @xmath280 @xmath281 \biggr\ } + o\bigl((\epsilon l)^2\bigr),\ ] ] with the quantities @xmath282 simply related to @xmath268 , respectively : @xmath283 we finally set @xmath284 in ( a.3 ) and use the resulting expressions in the relation ( [ eq:38 ] ) , completing thus the last fourth step of the procedure described in section 8 and obtaining the equalities ( [ eq:48 ] ) for @xmath120 ( model a ) .