Massive Stellar Black Hole Binaries and Gravitational Waves

Similar documents
Optical/IR Counterparts of GW Signals (NS-NS and BH-NS mergers)

Binary black holes: formation scenarios and merger rates

The origin of the coalescing compact object binaries

Gravitational Waves from Compact Object Binaries

Insights into binary evolution from gravitational waves

Stellar mass black holes in young massive and open clusters and their role in gravitational-wave generation

Coalescing Binary Black Holes Originating from Globular Clusters

Unravelling the progenitors of merging black hole binaries

arxiv: v1 [astro-ph.ga] 18 Aug 2017

LIGO Detection of Gravitational Waves. Dr. Stephen Ng

Massive star clusters

arxiv: v1 [astro-ph.he] 11 Jul 2016

Transient Events from Neutron Star Mergers

Lobster X-ray Telescope Science. Julian Osborne

arxiv: v1 [astro-ph.he] 5 Dec 2016

Black Hole Subsystems in Galactic Globular Clusters: Unravelling BH Populations in GCs using MOCCA Star Cluster Simulations

GRAVITATIONAL WAVE ASTRONOMY

Interpreting gravitational wave measurements as constraints on binary evolution?

FORMATION AND EVOLUTION OF COMPACT BINARY SYSTEMS

What have we learned from the detection of gravitational waves? Hyung Mok Lee Seoul National University

Synergy with Gravitational Waves

A synthetic model of the gravitational wave background from evolving binary compact objects

EINSTEIN TELESCOPE rd. 3 generation GW detector

A new route towards merging massive black holes

Open problems in compact object dynamics

Understanding Black Hole

How do black hole binaries form? Studying stellar evolution with gravitational wave observations

Searching for Intermediate Mass Black Holes mergers

Searching for Gravitational Waves from Coalescing Binary Systems

Compact Binaries as Gravitational-Wave Sources

The Formation of the Most Relativistic Pulsar PSR J

arxiv:astro-ph/ v1 17 Apr 1999

The dynamics of neutron star and black hole binaries in young star clusters

A new Population Synthesis Code for NS/BH Binaries

Massive stellar black holes: formation and dynamics

LISA: Probing the Universe with Gravitational Waves. Tom Prince Caltech/JPL. Laser Interferometer Space Antenna LISA

Ultraluminous X-ray Sources forming in low metallicity natal environments

The impact of metallicity on the demographics of ULXs

Matt Brorby (U of Iowa) with Philip Kaaret (U of Iowa) Illustration: NASA/CXC/M.Weiss

GW170817: Observation of Gravitational Waves from a Binary Neutron Star Inspiral

A Study of Compact Object Mergers as Short Gamma-ray Burst Progenitors

Gamma Ray Bursts. Progress & Prospects. Resmi Lekshmi. Indian Institute of Space Science & Technology Trivandrum

The Theory of Supernovae in Massive Binaries

Gravitational waves and fundamental physics

Investigating Ultraluminous X-ray Sources through multi-wavelength variability, broadband spectra, and theoretical modelling

Jongsuk Hong (KIAA) MODEST /06/28. Collaborators: E. Vesperini, A. Askar, M. Giersz, M. Szkudlarek & T. Bulik

arxiv: v3 [astro-ph.he] 20 Mar 2018

Science Olympiad Astronomy C Division Event MIT Invitational

arxiv:astro-ph/ v1 15 Nov 2004

Fundamental Physics, Astrophysics and Cosmology with ET

Spectrum of the Supernova Relic Neutrino Background

Pulsars as probes for the existence of IMBHs

Probing the Cosmos with light and gravity: multimessenger astronomy in the gravitational wave era

Black Hole Subsystems in Galactic Globular Clusters: Unravelling BH Populations in GCs using MOCCA Star Cluster Simulations

Neutron Star Mass Distribution in Binaries

Gravitational Waves. Masaru Shibata U. Tokyo

GRB history. Discovered 1967 Vela satellites. classified! Published 1973! Ruderman 1974 Texas: More theories than bursts!

The direct detection of gravitational waves: The first discovery, and what the future might bring

The spin of the second-born Black hole in coalescing double BH b

LIGO Observational Results

Implications of GW observations for short GRBs

Constraining the progenitors of long and short GRBs through the study of their environments

Formation of z~6 Quasars from Hierarchical Galaxy Mergers

The Evolution of Close Binaries

Gravity s Standard Sirens. B.S. Sathyaprakash School of Physics and Astronomy

Panel: Model selection with gravitational wave observations

Dual and Binary MBHs and AGN: Connecting Dynamics and Accretion

High-energy follow-up studies of gravitational wave transient events

Sources of Gravitational Waves

The Origin of Type Ia Supernovae

Gravitational Wave Astronomy using 0.1Hz space laser interferometer. Takashi Nakamura GWDAW-8 Milwaukee 2003/12/17 1

Black holes in dormant X-ray transients

X-ray binaries. Marat Gilfanov MPA, Garching

GRAVITATIONAL WAVES. Eanna E. Flanagan Cornell University. Presentation to CAA, 30 April 2003 [Some slides provided by Kip Thorne]

Gravitational lensing as a probe of compact object populations in the Galaxy ABSTRACT

A complete sample of bright Swift short GRBs

Electromagne,c Counterparts of Gravita,onal Wave Events

AST Cosmology and extragalactic astronomy. Lecture 20. Black Holes Part II

Binary compact object inspiral: Detection expectations

Rocket experiments. Sco X-1. Giacconi et al. 1962

STELLAR BLACK HOLES & HMXBs AT THE DAWN OF THE UNIVERSE

A Be-type star with a black hole companion

Confronting Theory with Gravitational Wave Observations

HSIN-YU CHEN. ERC 454, 5640 South Ellis Ave. Chicago, IL (515)

Ultraluminous X-ray Sources: The most extreme X-ray binaries

Sources of Gravitational Waves

Learning about Black- Hole Forma5on by Observing Gravita5onal Waves. Michael Kesden (UT Dallas) PPC 2017 Mee5ng Corpus Chris5, TX May 22, 2017

The Origin of Supermassive Black Holes. Daniel Whalen. McWilliams Fellow Carnegie Mellon

The Impact of Gravitational Waves: Detectability and Signatures

MIDTERM #2. ASTR 101 General Astronomy: Stars & Galaxies. Can we detect BLACK HOLES? Black Holes in Binaries to the rescue. Black spot in the sky?

Double-core evolution and the formation of neutron star binaries with compact companions

arxiv: v2 [astro-ph.ga] 17 Oct 2017

Cosmology with Gravitational Wave Detectors. Maya Fishbach

INITIAL POPULATIONS OF BLACK HOLES IN STAR CLUSTERS

Astrophysics & Gravitational Physics with the LISA Mission

Dynamics of Stars and Black Holes in Dense Stellar Systems:

Stellar collisions and their products

DECAM SEARCHES FOR OPTICAL SIGNATURES OF GW Soares-Santos et al arxiv:

On the velocities that X-ray binaries receive at formation

The Galactic Double-Neutron-Star Merger Rate: Most Current Estimates

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 (ULX; Strasbourg 2016)

LIGO detections: all BH-BH mergers O1 upper limits M1 LIGO rate 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

modeling: synthetic universe

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 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 stellar origin BH can reach: 100 M (Mapelli et al. 2009) two upcoming updates: Pair-instability SNe: 100 M (Mapelli et al. 2016) 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

BH-BH mergers: LIGO 16 days of O1 GW150914 UPPER LIMITS RATE M2 M1 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 BH-BH Only # of BH-BH detections: 21 (M2), 2.8 (M1), 0.1 (M3) in 16 days of LIGO O1

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)

Star formation rate update: 3/5 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: 4/5 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

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