Massive Stellar Black Hole Binaries and Gravitational Waves

Similar documents
Probability of detecting compact binary coalescence with enhanced LIGO

Low-Mass X-Ray Binary Models for Ellipticals NGC3379 and NGC4278

Delayed mergers: The contribution of ellipticals, globular clusters, and protoclusters to the LIGO detection rate

The Orbital Period Distribution of Wide Binary Millisecond Pulsars

ULX S, GR SOURCES, SNIA PROGENITORS

The Promise of Low-Frequency Gravitational Wave Astronomy

arxiv:astro-ph/ v1 24 Feb 2006

A STUDY OF LONG-PERIOD GAMMA-RAYS BURSTS. Knicole Colón. May 2008

Neutron Stars. How were neutron stars discovered? The first neutron star was discovered by 24-year-old graduate student Jocelyn Bell in 1967.

Top 10 Discoveries by ESO Telescopes

= = GM. v 1 = Ωa 1 sin i.

Probes of Star Formation in the Early Universe

Pablo Laguna Center for Relativistic Astrophysics School of Physics Georgia Tech, Atlanta, USA

Faber-Jackson relation: Fundamental Plane: Faber-Jackson Relation

Direct Detections of Young Stars in Nearby Ellipticals

Supplementary Materials for

Einstein Rings: Nature s Gravitational Lenses

STELLAR BLACK HOLES AT THE DAWN OF THE UNIVERSE

arxiv: v1 [cs.ce] 16 Jul 2012

Modeling Galaxy Formation

The formation and evolution of massive galaxies: A major theoretical challenge

The High-Redshift Universe Bologna, June 5-6

Lecture 2. Gravitational Waves from Binary Systems: Probes of the Universe. Historical importance of orbiting systems.

Metal Abundances of Accretion Discs in AM CVn Binaries

The Birth and Assembly of Galaxies: the Relationship Between Science Capabilities and Telescope Aperture

165 points. Name Date Period. Column B a. Cepheid variables b. luminosity c. RR Lyrae variables d. Sagittarius e. variable stars

White Dwarf Properties and the Degenerate Electron Gas

Science Standard 4 Earth in Space Grade Level Expectations

Relating Accretion Rate and Jet Power in Elliptical Galaxies


Class #14/15 14/16 October 2008

NITROGEN-TO-OXYGEN RATIO As a solid tool to ascertain the chemical evolution of star-forming galaxies

Test Natural Sciences 102, Professors Rieke --- VERSION B March 3, 2010

Resultados del Concurso 2015B para Observaciones en Gemini-Sur

FRONT-LINE RECURRENT NOVA SCIENCE REQUIRES CENTURY OLD DATA

Chapter 15.3 Galaxy Evolution

The Evolution of GMCs in Global Galaxy Simulations

arxiv:astro-ph/ v1 31 Jan 2001

Carol and Charles see their pencils fall exactly straight down.

The Gaia Archive. Center Forum, Heidelberg, June 10-11, Stefan Jordan. The Gaia Archive, COSADIE Astronomical Data

Lecture 14. Introduction to the Sun

Malcolm S. Longair. Galaxy Formation. With 141 Figures and 12 Tables. Springer

Ay 20 - Lecture 9 Post-Main Sequence Stellar Evolution. This file has many figures missing, in order to keep it a reasonable size.

JINA AT UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO

Ellipticals. Elliptical galaxies: Elliptical galaxies: Some ellipticals are not so simple M89 E0

Astronomy & Physics Resources for Middle & High School Teachers

J-PAS: low-resolution (R 50) spectroscopy over 8000 deg 2

Linking Optical and Infrared Observations with Gravitational Wave Sources Through Variability

Intermediate Mass Black Holes near Galactic Center: Formation. and Evolution

massive binary evolution.

Solar Ast ro p h y s ics

LIGO SCIENTIFIC COLLABORATION VIRGO COLLABORATION

Astro 102 Test 5 Review Spring See Old Test 4 #16-23, Test 5 #1-3, Old Final #1-14

The CGM around Dwarf Galaxies

Indiana University Science with the WIYN One Degree Imager

Follow-up Observations of SPY White Dwarf + M-Dwarf Binaries

Magellanic Cloud planetary nebulae as probes of stellar evolution and populations. Letizia Stanghellini

7. In which part of the electromagnetic spectrum are molecules most easily detected? A. visible light B. radio waves C. X rays D.

The Hidden Lives of Galaxies. Jim Lochner, USRA & NASA/GSFC

PHYSICS FOUNDATIONS SOCIETY THE DYNAMIC UNIVERSE TOWARD A UNIFIED PICTURE OF PHYSICAL REALITY TUOMO SUNTOLA

astronomy A planet was viewed from Earth for several hours. The diagrams below represent the appearance of the planet at four different times.

Mass limit on Nemesis

OUTLINE The Hubble parameter After these lectures, you should be able to: Define the Hubble parameter H Sketch a(t) for k>0, k=0, k<0 assuming Λ=0 Def

Supplementary Material

8 Radiative Cooling and Heating

Gravitational waves from neutron stars binaries: accuracy and tidal effects in the late inspiral S. Bernuzzi TPI-PAF FSU Jena / SFB-TR7

This paper is also taken for the relevant Examination for the Associateship. For Second Year Physics Students Wednesday, 4th June 2008: 14:00 to 16:00

Class 2 Solar System Characteristics Formation Exosolar Planets

Simulation of Spiral Density Waves with Rotating, Shallow water

A Preliminary Summary of The VLA Sky Survey

Constraints on the explosion mechanism and progenitors of Type Ia supernovae

Stellar Astrophysics: Stellar Evolution 1. Stellar Evolution

BASTI: an interactive database of updated stellar evolution models

The Sino-French Gamma-Ray Burst Mission SVOM (Space-based multi-band astronomical Variable Objects Monitor)

Transcript 22 - Universe

Supernova. Author: Alex Nervosa. Essay Supervisor: Brad Gibson, HET611 Swinburne Astronomy Online

6 A High Merger Fraction in the Rich Cluster MS at z =0:83: Direct Evidence for Hierarchical Formation of Massive Galaxies y

Physics 879: Gravitational Wave Physics Week 1: Overview

Understanding the size growth of massive (spheroidal) galaxies through stellar populations

Ay Fall The Sun. And The Birth of Neutrino Astronomy. This printout: Many pictures missing, in order to keep the file size reasonable

X-ray Emission from Elliptical Galaxies

THE HR DIAGRAM THE MOST FAMOUS DIAGRAM in ASTRONOMY Mike Luciuk

PROPERTIES OF THE BRIGHTEST CLUSTER GALAXY AND ITS HOST CLUSTER Haruyoshi Katayama, 1 Kiyoshi Hayashida, 1 Fumio Takahara, 1 and Yutaka Fujita 2

A Universe of Galaxies

Evolution of Close Binary Systems

From lowest energy to highest energy, which of the following correctly orders the different categories of electromagnetic radiation?

Classroom Exercise ASTR 390 Selected Topics in Astronomy: Astrobiology A Hertzsprung-Russell Potpourri

Activity: Multiwavelength Bingo

Stellar Evolution. The Basic Scheme

The Milky Way Galaxy is Heading for a Major Cosmic Collision

Nuclear fusion in stars. Collapse of primordial density fluctuations into galaxies and stars, nucleosynthesis in stars

arxiv: v1 [astro-ph.co] 23 Jul 2010

The Sun: Our nearest star

What Can We Learn From Simulations of Tilted Black Hole Accretion Disks?

On the evolution of massive close binary systems

The Main Point. Lecture #34: Solar System Origin II. Chemical Condensation ( Lewis ) Model. How did the solar system form? Reading: Chapter 8.

The Chemical Composition of a Molecular Cloud at the Outer Edge of the Galaxy

Radiation reaction for inspiralling binary systems with spin-spin

NASA s Future Missions in X-ray Astronomy

Gravitomagnetism and complex orbit dynamics of spinning compact objects around a massive black hole

Transcription:

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)

modeling: synthetic universe

Star formation rate update Time since Big Bang [Gyr] -1 OLD: Strolger et al. 2004 NEW: Madau & Dickinson 2014-2 z=0.7 (t=7gyr) LIGO -3 GRB 090423 GRB 090429B 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 revised SFR: merger rate decrease

Metallicity evolution update Time since Big Bang [Gyr] 1 0 NEW: mean metallicity (standard) OLD: mean metallicity (low model) -1-2 -3 models no models -4-5 -6-7 -8 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 revised metallicity: merger rate increase

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 ->

Maximum BH mass: first breakthrough 100 80 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) 40 20 0 two upcoming updates: Pair-instability SNe: 100 M (Mapelli et al. 2016) 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 stellar origin BH can reach: 100 M (Zamperi & Roberts 2009; Mapelli et al. 2009) Pair-instability SNe: 50 M (Belczynski et al. 2016)

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 0.00 delay: 10 Gyr or 2 Gyr 3.5448 HG or CHeB 42.3 M MS 84.9 M 3112 0.00 O1 horizon: z = 0.7 (inspiral-merger-ringdown) 3.8354 He star 39.0 M MS 84.7 M 3579 0.00 3.8354 BH 35.1 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 36.5 M DIRECT BH He star 36.8 M He star 34.2 M 43.8 0.00 45.3 0.00 BH spin: a = 0.0 -> a = 0.126 a = 0.5 -> a = 0.572 a = 0.9 -> a = 0.920 5.3483 10,294 BH 36.5 M MERGER BH 30.8 M 47.8 0.05 0 0.00 credit: Wojciech Gladysz (Warsaw)

BH-BH progenitors: birth times 15 2.0 Redshift 1.0 0.5 0.1 0 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 typical BH-BH progenitors: very old (10 Gyr) or young (2 Gyr) systems

LIGO detections: all BH-BH mergers (44 days) O1 upper limits M2 M1 LIGO rate M4 M3 standard model M1 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 BH-BH only BH-BH mergers: GW150914: 36 + 29 M, LVT151012: 23 + 13 M, GW151226: 8 + 14 M

BH-BH mergers: LIGO 60 days of O2 O2 EXPECTED SENSITIVITY M1 M10 M3 LIGO RATE 0 50 100 150 200 250 BH-BH Only # of BH-BH detections: 64 (M1), 62 (M10), 2 (M3) in 60 days of LIGO O2

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. 2016 versus Rodriguez et al. 2016)

Birth time distribution for BH-BH progenitors 10 Redshift 3.0 0.5 0 1 10

BH natal kicks: extras 1/4 600 400 EM observations: no good information 200 0 600 400 if BH kicks decrease with M BH : asymmetric mass ejection asymmetric neutrino emission both mechanisms: OK! 200 0 5 10 15 Belczynski et al. 2015 (arxiv:1510.04615)

Observations (Tomek Bulik): 1/3 The interesting case of IC10 X-1 and NGC300X-1 WR stars mass ~30 solar masses Compact objects ~ 20-30 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

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

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

Advanced LIGO/Virgo upper limits: OLD OLD OLD Dominik et al. 2013, 2015 > Belczynski et al. 2015 (arxiv:1510.04615) EXPECTED ADVANCED LIGO/VIRGO UPPER LIMITS V1l V2l V3l 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 most likely detection: BH-BH merger with total redshifted mass 25 73 M

Initial mass function update: 2/5 9 8 7 NS BH 6 5 4 3 2 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 revised IMF: merger rate increase (de Mink & Belczynski 2015)

Overall updates (2010-2015): 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)

BH-BH progenitors: chemical composition 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 typical BH-BH progenitors: low metallicity stars Z < 10% Z