4.7 Article

The survival of star clusters with black hole subsystems

Journal

MONTHLY NOTICES OF THE ROYAL ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY
Volume 491, Issue 2, Pages 2413-2423

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stz3179

Keywords

methods: numerical; galaxies: star clusters: general; stars: black holes

Funding

  1. Alexander von Humboldt Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Recent observations have detected top-heavy initial mass functions (IMFs) in dense star-forming regions like the Arches cluster. Whether such IMFs also exist in old dense stellar systems like globular clusters is difficult to constrain, because massive stars already became black holes (BHs) and neutron stars (NSs). However, studies of stellar dynamics find that BHs/NSs influence the long-term evolution of star clusters. Following Breen & Heggie (2013) and by carrying out two-component N-body simulations, we demonstrate how this dynamical impact connects with the shape of IMFs. By investigating the energy balance between the BH subsystem and the global, we find that to properly describe the evolution of clusters, a corrected two-body relaxation time, T-rh,T-p = T-rh/psi, is necessary. Because psi depends on the total mass fraction of BHs, M-2/M, and the mass ratio, m(2)/m(1), the cluster dissolution time is sensitive to the property of BHs or IMFs. Especially, the escape rate of BHs via ejections from few-body encounters are linked to mass segregation. In strong tidal fields, top-heavy IMFs easily lead to the fast dissolution of star clusters and the formation of BH-dominant dark clusters, which suggests that the observed massive GCs with dense cores are unlikely to have extreme top-heavy IMFs. With the future observations of gravitational waves providing unique information of BHs/NSs, it is possible to combine the multimessage observations to have better constrains on the IMFs of old star clusters.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available