Abstract
Einstein’s theory of gravity—the general theory of relativity^{1}—is based on the universality of free fall, which specifies that all objects accelerate identically in an external gravitational field. In contrast to almost all alternative theories of gravity^{2}, the strong equivalence principle of general relativity requires universality of free fall to apply even to bodies with strong selfgravity. Direct tests of this principle using Solar System bodies^{3,4} are limited by the weak selfgravity of the bodies, and tests using pulsar–whitedwarf binaries^{5,6} have been limited by the weak gravitational pull of the Milky Way. PSR J0337+1715 is a hierarchical system of three stars (a stellar triple system) in which a binary consisting of a millisecond radio pulsar and a white dwarf in a 1.6day orbit is itself in a 327day orbit with another white dwarf. This system permits a test that compares how the gravitational pull of the outer white dwarf affects the pulsar, which has strong selfgravity, and the inner white dwarf. Here we report that the accelerations of the pulsar and its nearby whitedwarf companion differ fractionally by no more than 2.6 × 10^{−6}. For a rough comparison, our limit on the strongfield Nordtvedt parameter, which measures violation of the universality of free fall, is a factor of ten smaller than that obtained from (weakfield) Solar System tests^{3,4} and a factor of almost a thousand smaller than that obtained from other strongfield tests^{5,6}.
Access options
Subscribe to Journal
Get full journal access for 1 year
$199.00
only $3.90 per issue
All prices are NET prices.
VAT will be added later in the checkout.
Rent or Buy article
Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.
from$8.99
All prices are NET prices.
Additional information
Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
References
 1.
Einstein, A. Die Grundlage der allgemeinen Relativitätstheorie. Ann. Phys. 354, 769–822 (1916).
 2.
Deruelle, N. Nordström’s scalar theory of gravity and the equivalence principle. Gen. Relativ. Gravit. 43, 3337–3354 (2011).
 3.
Genova, A. et al. Solar system expansion and strong equivalence principle as seen by the NASA MESSENGER mission. Nat. Commun. 9, 289 (2018).
 4.
Hofmann, F. & Müller, J. Relativistic tests with lunar laser ranging. Class. Quantum Gravity 35, 035015 (2018).
 5.
Freire, P. C. C., Kramer, M. & Wex, N. Tests of the universality of free fall for strongly selfgravitating bodies with radio pulsars. Class. Quantum Gravity 29, 184007 (2012).
 6.
Zhu, W. W. et al. Tests of gravitational symmetries with pulsar binary J1713+0747. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/1802.09206 (2018).
 7.
The NANOGrav Collaboration. The NANOGrav nineyear data set: observations, arrival time measurements, and analysis of 37 millisecond pulsars. Astrophys. J. 813, 65 (2015).
 8.
Ransom, S. M. et al. A millisecond pulsar in a stellar triple system. Nature 505, 520–524 (2014).
 9.
Will, C. M. & Nordtvedt, K. Jr. Conservation laws and preferred frames in relativistic gravity. I. Preferredframe theories and an extended PPN formalism. Astrophys. J. 177, 757–774 (1972).
 10.
Nordtvedt, K. A postNewtonian gravitational Lagrangian formalism for celestial body dynamics in metric gravity. Astrophys. J. 297, 390–404 (1985).
 11.
Meurer, A. et al. Sympy: symbolic computing in python. PeerJ Comput. Sci. 3, e103 (2017).
 12.
Damour, T. & Schaefer, G. New tests of the strong equivalence principle using binarypulsar data. Phys. Rev. Lett. 66, 2549–2552 (1991).
 13.
Baker, T., Psaltis, D. & Skordis, C. Linking tests of gravity on all scales: from the strongfield regime to cosmology. Astrophys. J. 802, 63 (2015).
 14.
Will, C. M. in Theory and Experiment in Gravitational Physics Ch. 4 (Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1981).
 15.
Damour, T. & Taylor, J. H. Strongfield tests of relativistic gravity and binary pulsars. Phys. Rev. D 45, 1840–1868 (1992).
 16.
Berti, E. et al. Testing general relativity with present and future astrophysical observations. Class. Quantum Gravity 32, 243001 (2015).
 17.
Damour, T. & EspositoFarèse, G. Tensorscalar gravity and binarypulsar experiments. Phys. Rev. D 54, 1474–1491 (1996).
 18.
Brans, C. & Dicke, R. H. Mach’s principle and a relativistic theory of gravitation. Phys. Rev. 124, 925–935 (1961).
 19.
Damour, T. & EspositoFarese, G. Tensormultiscalar theories of gravitation. Class. Quantum Gravity 9, 2093–2176 (1992).
 20.
Bertotti, B., Iess, L. & Tortora, P. A test of general relativity using radio links with the Cassini spacecraft. Nature 425, 374–376 (2003).
 21.
Freire, P. C. C. et al. The relativistic pulsar–white dwarf binary PSR J1738+0333 – II. The most stringent test of scalar–tensor gravity. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 423, 3328–3343 (2012).
 22.
Antoniadis, J. et al. A massive pulsar in a compact relativistic binary. Science 340, 1233232 (2013).
 23.
Mignard, F. & Klioner, S. A. Gaia: relativistic modelling and testing. Proc. Int. Astron. Union 261, 306–314 (2010).
 24.
Shao, L., Sennett, N., Buonanno, A., Kramer, M. & Wex, N. Constraining nonperturbative strongfield effects in scalartensor gravity by combining pulsar timing and laserinterferometer gravitationalwave detectors. Phys. Rev. X 7, 041025 (2017).
 25.
Haensel, P., Proszynski, M. & Kutschera, M. Uncertainty in the saturation density of nuclear matter and neutron star models. Astron. Astrophys. 102, 299–302 (1981).
 26.
DuPlain, R. et al. Launching GUPPI: the Green Bank ultimate pulsar processing instrument. Proc. SPIE 7019, 70191D (2008).
 27.
Karuppusamy, R., Stappers, B. & van Straten, W. PuMaII: a wide band pulsar machine for the Westerbork Synthesis Radio Telescope. Publ. Astron. Soc. Pacif. 120, 191–202 (2008).
 28.
Hankins, T. H. & Rickett, B. J. in Methods in Computational Physics. Volume 14 – Radio Astronomy (eds Alder, B. et al.) 55–129 (Academic Press, New York, 1975).
 29.
van Straten, W. Radio astronomical polarimetry and highprecision pulsar timing. Astrophys. J. 642, 1004–1011 (2006).
 30.
Lambert, H. C. & Rickett, B. J. On the theory of pulse propagation and twofrequency field statistics in irregular interstellar plasmas. Astrophys. J. 517, 299–317 (1999).
 31.
Archibald, A. M., Kondratiev, V. I., Hessels, J. W. T. & Stinebring, D. R. Millisecond pulsar scintillation studies with LOFAR: initial results. Astrophys. J. 790, L22 (2014).
 32.
Bulirsch, R. & Stoer, J. Asymptotic upper and lower bounds for results of extrapolation methods. Numer. Math. 8, 93–104 (1966).
 33.
Hobbs, G. B., Edwards, R. T. & Manchester, R. N. TEMPO2, a new pulsartiming package – I. An overview. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 369, 655–672 (2006).
 34.
Kopeikin, S. M. On possible implications of orbital parallaxes of wide orbit binary pulsars and their measurability. Astrophys. J. 439, L5–L8 (1995).
 35.
Nordtvedt, K. Testing relativity with laser ranging to the Moon. Phys. Rev. 170, 1186–1187 (1968).
 36.
Thirring, H. Über die Wirkung rotierender ferner Massen in der Einsteinschen Gravitationstheorie. Phys. Z. 19, 33 (1918).
 37.
Einstein, A. Über Gravitationswellen 154–167 (KöniglichPreußischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Berlin, 1918).
 38.
Russell, H. N. On the advance of periastron in eclipsing binaries. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 88, 641–643 (1928).
 39.
Smarr, L. L. & Blandford, R. The binary pulsar: physical processes, possible companions, and evolutionary histories. Astrophys. J. 207, 574–588 (1976).
 40.
Gusinskaia, N. V. et al. Conquering systematics in the timing of the pulsar triple system J0337+1715: towards a unique and robust test of the strong equivalence principle. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 932, 012003 (2017).
 41.
Prodan, S. & Murray, N. On the dynamics and tidal dissipation rate of the white dwarf in 4U 1820−30. Astrophys. J. 747, 4 (2012).
 42.
Wex, N. in Frontiers in Relativistic Celestial Mechanics. Volume 2: Applications and Experiments (ed. Kopeikin, S. M.) 39–102 (De Gruyter, Berlin, 2014).
 43.
Luan, J. & Goldreich, P. Secular evolution of the pulsar triple system J0337+1715. Astrophys. J. 790, 82 (2014).
 44.
Di Casola, E., Liberati, S. & Sonego, S. Nonequivalence of equivalence principles. Am. J. Phys. 83, 39–46 (2015).
 45.
Damour, T. & EspositoFarèse, G. Testing gravity to second postNewtonian order: a fieldtheory approach. Phys. Rev. D 53, 5541–5578 (1996).
 46.
Horbatsch, M. W. & Burgess, C. P. Modelindependent comparisons of pulsar timings to scalartensor gravity. Class. Quantum Gravity 29, 245004 (2012).
 47.
Bekenstein, J. D. Relativistic gravitation theory for the modified Newtonian dynamics paradigm. Phys. Rev. D 70, 083509 (2004).
 48.
Shao, L. & Wex, N. Tests of gravitational symmetries with radio pulsars. Sci. China Phys. Mech. Astron. 59, 699501 (2016).
 49.
Taylor, J. H., Wolszczan, A., Damour, T. & Weisberg, J. M. Experimental constraints on strongfield relativistic gravity. Nature 355, 132–136 (1992).
 50.
Stairs, I. H. et al. Discovery of three wideorbit binary pulsars: implications for binary evolution and equivalence principles. Astrophys. J. 632, 1060–1068 (2005).
 51.
Arzoumanian, Z. et al. The neutron star interior composition explorer (NICER): mission definition. Proc. SPIE 9144, 914420 (2014).
 52.
Irwin, A. W. & Fukushima, T. A numerical time ephemeris of the Earth. Astron. Astrophys. 348, 642–652 (1999).
 53.
Lorimer, D. R. & Kramer, M. in Handbook of Pulsar Astronomy Ch. 8, Appendix 2 (Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 2004).
 54.
Shklovskii, I. S. Possible causes of the secular increase in pulsar periods. Sov. Astron. 13, 562–565 (1970).
 55.
Pathak, D. & Bagchi, M. GalDynPsr: A package to estimate dynamical contributions in the rate of change of the period of radio pulsars. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/1712.06590 (2017).
 56.
Bovy, J. galpy: a python library for galactic dynamics. Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser. 216, 29 (2015).
Acknowledgements
We thank P. Freire for pointing out how useful PSR J0337+1715 could be for testing the SEP, L. Shao for providing an independent crosscheck on the signature of Δ and K. Nordvedt for explaining why the signature of Δ differs from that in lunar laser ranging. A.M.A. is supported by a Netherlands Foundation for Scientific Research (NWO) Veni grant. N.V.G. is supported by NOVA. J.W.T.H. acknowledges funding from an NWO Vidi fellowship and from the European Research Council under the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP/20072013)/ERC Starting Grant agreement number 337062 (‘DRAGNET’). A.T.D. is the recipient of an Australian Research Council Future Fellowship (FT150100415). D.R.L. also received support from NSF award OIA1458952. S.M.R. and I.H.S. are Senior Fellows of the Canadian Institute for Advanced Research. I.H.S. is also supported by an NSERC Discovery Grant. The NANOGrav project (involving D.L.K., D.R.L., R.S.L., S.M.R. and I.H.S.) receives support from National Science Foundation (NSF) Physics Frontiers Center award number 1430284. The National Radio Astronomy Observatory is a facility of the NSF operated under cooperative agreement by Associated Universities. The Arecibo Observatory is operated by SRI International under a cooperative agreement with the NSF (AST1100968), and in alliance with Ana G. MendezUniversidad Metropolitana and the Universities Space Research Association. The Green Bank Observatory is a facility of the NSF operated under cooperative agreement by Associated Universities. The WSRT is operated by ASTRON with contributions from NWO.
Reviewer information
Nature thanks P. Freire and C. Will for their contribution to the peer review of this work.
Author information
Affiliations
Anton Pannekoek Institute for Astronomy, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
 Anne M. Archibald
 , Nina V. Gusinskaia
 & Jason W. T. Hessels
Netherlands Institute for Radio Astronomy (ASTRON), Dwingeloo, The Netherlands
 Anne M. Archibald
 & Jason W. T. Hessels
Centre for Astrophysics and Supercomputing, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia
 Adam T. Deller
The Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Gravitational Wave Discovery (OzGrav), Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia
 Adam T. Deller
Department of Physics, University of WisconsinMilwaukee, Milwaukee, WI, USA
 David L. Kaplan
Department of Physics and Astronomy, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV, USA
 Duncan R. Lorimer
Center for Gravitational Waves and Cosmology, Morgantown, WV, USA
 Duncan R. Lorimer
 & Ryan S. Lynch
Green Bank Observatory, Green Bank, WV, USA
 Ryan S. Lynch
National Radio Astronomy Observatory, Charlottesville, VA, USA
 Scott M. Ransom
Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
 Ingrid H. Stairs
Authors
Search for Anne M. Archibald in:
Search for Nina V. Gusinskaia in:
Search for Jason W. T. Hessels in:
Search for Adam T. Deller in:
Search for David L. Kaplan in:
Search for Duncan R. Lorimer in:
Search for Ryan S. Lynch in:
Search for Scott M. Ransom in:
Search for Ingrid H. Stairs in:
Contributions
A.M.A. wrote the processing pipeline, orbital modelling, fitting and equationofstate integration code, ran the data processing and fitting operations, wrote the manuscript, with substantial contributions from coauthors, and produced all figures and tables unless otherwise indicated. N.V.G. wrote the systematics analysis code, inspected observations for quality, carried out the systematics analysis, produced Table 1, Figs. 1, 2 and Extended Data Fig. 4, and wrote the section on orbital effects. J.W.T.H. carried out an intensive observing campaign with the WSRT. A.M.A., N.V.G., J.W.T.H., D.R.L., R.S.L., S.M.R. and I.H.S. carried out observations with Arecibo and the GBT. J.W.T.H., S.M.R. and I.H.S. carried out a preliminary version of the data processing. A.T.D. consulted on the astrometry. N.V.G. and D.L.K. carried out the tidaleffects analysis. All authors participated in discussions of the content of the paper.
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Corresponding author
Correspondence to Anne M. Archibald.
Extended data figures and tables
Extended Data Fig. 1 Template pulse profile used for timing.
This figure is based on the average 1,300–1,900MHz profile from the GBT observation on MJD 56,412. The Stokes IQUV data have been smoothed by a waveletbased algorithm (psrsmooth, PSRCHIVE). a, Total intensity (I) and linear (Q, U) and circular (V) polarization after correcting for Faraday rotation. An offset c has been subtracted; see below. b, Polarization angle (P.A.) at the centre frequency of the observation. The linear polarization (red) at some phases is responsible for almost half the flux density and its profile has complicated polarization structure. Offsets have been added to I and to \(\sqrt{{Q}^{2}+{U}^{2}}\) to ensure that I^{2} ≥ Q^{2} + U^{2} + V^{2}.
Extended Data Fig. 2 Timingmodel truncation error.
The rootmeansquare (RMS) arrivaltime error caused by the finite time steps of the orbital integrator is shown as a function of the tolerance parameter. The vertical dotted line is the value used for all orbits in this work; the RMS error from truncation is below 0.1 ns. Blue triangles are calculations done in hardware 80bit floating point; black stars are calculations done in software 128bit floating point, which are much slower to compute. To estimate the errors in this plot, we compute a fiducial solution with 128bit precision and a tolerance parameter of 10^{−22} and compare all other solutions to this one.
Extended Data Fig. 3 Covariances between parameters that affect the orbit.
This plot does not include the parameters that are evaluated by linear leastsquares fitting and marginalized out. Plots on the diagonal are singleparameter histograms; plots off the diagonal are pairwise twodimensional histograms. See Extended Data Table 2 for parameter definitions.
Extended Data Fig. 4 Distribution of residuals divided by uncertainty, for each telescope.
The standard deviation σ represents the factor by which the scatter of the postfit residuals exceeds the claimed uncertainties on pulse arrival times; μ is the mean of the distribution. Each colour represents a different telescope. Only observations in the 1,400MHz frequency band are shown here. Here Δν and Δt are the bandwidth and time, respectively, over which the data are averaged to produce each pulse arrival time.
Rights and permissions
To obtain permission to reuse content from this article visit RightsLink.
About this article
Further reading

General relativity verified by a triplestar system
Nature (2018)

Consequences of finetuning for fifth force searches
Journal of High Energy Physics (2018)
Comments
By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.