Massive Stellar Black Hole Binaries and Gravitational Waves

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Massive Stellar Black Hole Binaries and Gravitational Waves"

Lenard Miles
7 years ago
Views:

BH-BH binaries: modeling Massive Stellar Black Hole Binaries and Gravitational Waves Chris Belczynski1 Tomek Bulik1 Daniel Holz Richard O Shaughnessy Wojciech Gladysz1 and Grzegorz

1 BH-BH binaries: modeling Massive Stellar Black Hole Binaries and Gravitational Waves Chris Belczynski1 Tomek Bulik1 Daniel Holz Richard O Shaughnessy Wojciech Gladysz1 and Grzegorz Wiktorowicz1 1 Astronomical Observatory, Warsaw University BH-BH binaries: modeling (field) (field) of LIGO detections Chris Belczynski The Astrophysics of BH-BH Mergers (Italy 2016)

2 modeling: synthetic universe

3 Star formation rate update Time since Big Bang [Gyr] -1 OLD: Strolger et al NEW: Madau & Dickinson z=0.7 (t=7gyr) LIGO -3 GRB GRB B revised SFR: merger rate decrease

4 Metallicity evolution update Time since Big Bang [Gyr] 1 0 NEW: mean metallicity (standard) OLD: mean metallicity (low model) models no models revised metallicity: merger rate increase

5 Predictions: BH-BH merger rates and masses Evolutionary assumptions and uncertainties: global properties: cosmology, SFR(z), Z (z), f binary fraction initial conditions: IMF, q, a orbit, e, V rotation single star evolution: winds + mixing > radius & BH mass? binary CE evolution: development criteria + survival? BH formation: SN or Direct BH > BH mass? BH formation: BH natal kicks > low or high? population synthesis calculations ->

6 Maximum BH mass: first breakthrough Belczynski et al. 2010a (ApJ 714, 1217) two existing updates: stellar models: 130 M (Spera et al. 2015) 60 IMF extension: 300 M (Belczynski et al. 2014) two upcoming updates: Pair-instability SNe: 100 M (Mapelli et al. 2016) stellar origin BH can reach: 100 M (Zamperi & Roberts 2009; Mapelli et al. 2009) Pair-instability SNe: 50 M (Belczynski et al. 2016)

7 Common envelop at low Z: second breakthrough Belczynski et al. 2010b (ApJ 715, L138) BH-BH progenitors survive CE at low Z: rates up by 70 times!!! (Z -> 0.1 Z ) (low-z stars: RLOF beyond HG -> convective envelope -> CE & orbit decay)

Formation of massive BH-BH merger 0.0000 TIME [Myr] MS 96.2 M ZAMS MS 60.2 M a [R ] e 2463 0.15 low metallicity: Z < 10% Z RLOF CE: during CHeB 3.5445 HG 92.2 M MS 59.9 M 2140 0.

1 M DIRECT BH MS 84.7 M 3700 0.03 total merger mass: 20 80 M 5.0445 BH 35.1 M CE CHeB 82.2 M 3780 0.03 aligned BH spins: tilt= 0 deg 5.0445 5.3483 BH BH 36.5 M 36.

8 Formation of massive BH-BH merger TIME [Myr] MS 96.2 M ZAMS MS 60.2 M a [R ] e low metallicity: Z < 10% Z RLOF CE: during CHeB HG 92.2 M MS 59.9 M delay: 10 Gyr or 2 Gyr HG or CHeB 42.3 M MS 84.9 M O1 horizon: z = 0.7 (inspiral-merger-ringdown) He star 39.0 M MS 84.7 M BH 35.1 M DIRECT BH MS 84.7 M total merger mass: M BH 35.1 M CE CHeB 82.2 M aligned BH spins: tilt= 0 deg BH BH 36.5 M 36.5 M DIRECT BH He star 36.8 M He star 34.2 M BH spin: a = 0.0 -> a = a = 0.5 -> a = a = 0.9 -> a = ,294 BH 36.5 M MERGER BH 30.8 M credit: Wojciech Gladysz (Warsaw)

9 BH-BH progenitors: birth times Redshift typical BH-BH progenitors: very old (10 Gyr) or young (2 Gyr) systems

10 LIGO detections: all BH-BH mergers (44 days) O1 upper limits M2 M1 LIGO rate M4 M3 standard model M BH-BH only BH-BH mergers: GW150914: M, LVT151012: M, GW151226: M

11 BH-BH mergers: LIGO 60 days of O2 O2 EXPECTED SENSITIVITY M1 M10 M3 LIGO RATE BH-BH Only # of BH-BH detections: 64 (M1), 62 (M10), 2 (M3) in 60 days of LIGO O2

12 Astro implications: from BH-BH merger detection massive BH-BH merger: dominant GW source (field evolution) (1000 over NS-NS, 200 over BH-NS ) BH-BH merger: comparable masses, aligned (?) birth spins BH-BH progenitor: either very old or young and low Z environ easy common envelope: (case B) excluded high BH kicks: most likely excluded (more detections?) field detection rates: 40 times higher than for dynamical BH-BH! (Belczynski et al versus Rodriguez et al. 2016)

13 Birth time distribution for BH-BH progenitors 10 Redshift

14 BH natal kicks: extras 1/ EM observations: no good information if BH kicks decrease with M BH : asymmetric mass ejection asymmetric neutrino emission both mechanisms: OK! Belczynski et al (arxiv: )

15 Observations (Tomek Bulik): 1/3 The interesting case of IC10 X-1 and NGC300X-1 WR stars mass ~30 solar masses Compact objects ~ solar masses (but see later) Orbital period ~ 1.25 days Future evolution: mass transfer, mass loss, formation of 2 nd BH Formation of BH-BH with the coalescence time ~a few Gyrs Low metallicity host galaxies Bulik, Belczynski, Prestwich 2011

16 Observations (Tomek Bulik): 2/3 Rate density estimate Estimate of the observability volume and object density Estimate of the time to coalescence Just two objects low stastistic leads to high uncertainty Rate density very high Expected to be close to detection even with Initial LIGO/VIRGO Expected component mass range: ~20-40 solar mass Expected total mass: ~60 solar masses Bulik, Belczynski, Prestwich 2011

17 Observations (Tomek Bulik): 3/3 Potential problem with mass estimate Recent mesurement of the X-ray eclipse over the optical lightcurve (Laycock et al. 2015) Offset of 0.25 in phase The radial velocity has a contribution from ionized wind velocity Imply a possibilty that the companion is a low mass BH or a NS Model of Kerkwijk et al. (1996) Potential problems: Evolution: it is very difficult to form a massive WR star in a binary with a low mass compact object Mass transfer: if wind, then the X- ray luminosity (10 38 erg/s) is unusually high (too large by 2-3 orders of magnitude) Mass transfer: if RLOF, then the system should not be stable. It is still quite likely that the companions in IC10 X-1 and NGC300 X-1 are ~20 solar mass BHs

18 Advanced LIGO/Virgo upper limits: OLD OLD OLD Dominik et al. 2013, 2015 > Belczynski et al (arxiv: ) EXPECTED ADVANCED LIGO/VIRGO UPPER LIMITS V1l V2l V3l most likely detection: BH-BH merger with total redshifted mass M

19 Initial mass function update: 2/ NS BH revised IMF: merger rate increase (de Mink & Belczynski 2015)

20 Overall updates ( ): Most important recent model updates: low metallicity introduced: Z -> 10% Z -> 1% Z (2010) binary CE evolution: more physical (2012) NS/BH formation: updated models (2012) first metallicity grid: 11 grid points (150% Z 0.5% Z ) (2013) BH natal kicks: low and high (2015) initial conditions: a orb, e, f binary (2015, now) global properties: IMF, SFR(z), Z(z) (now) metallicity grid: 32 grid points (150% Z 0.5% Z ) (now) statistics: Monte Carlo (2 millions -> 20 millions) (now)

21 BH-BH progenitors: chemical composition typical BH-BH progenitors: low metallicity stars Z < 10% Z

Probability of detecting compact binary coalescence with enhanced LIGO

Probability of detecting compact binary coalescence with enhanced LIGO Richard O Shaughnessy [V. Kalogera, K. Belczynski] GWDAW-12, December 13, 2007 Will we see a merger soon? Available predictions Isolated