4.7 Article

The effect of stellar-mass black holes on the central kinematics of ω Cen: a cautionary tale for IMBH interpretations

Journal

MONTHLY NOTICES OF THE ROYAL ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY
Volume 482, Issue 4, Pages 4713-4725

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/mnras/sty1508

Keywords

methods: numerical, stars: kinematics and dynamics, globular clusters: general, globular clusters: individual: omega; Centauri (NGC 5139), galaxies: star clusters: general

Funding

  1. Royal Society
  2. ESA Research Fellowship
  3. European Research Council (CLUSTERS) [ERC StG-335936]
  4. NRC-Canada Plaskett Fellowship
  5. Radboud Excellence Initiative

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The search for intermediate-mass black holes (IMBHs) in the centre of globular clusters is often based on the observation of a central cusp in the surface brightness profile and a rise towards the centre in the velocity dispersion profiles. Similar signatures, however, could result from other effects, that need to be taken into account in order to determine the presence (or the absence) of an IMBH in these stellar systems. Following our previous exploration of the role of radial anisotropy in shaping these observational signatures, we analyse here the effects produced by the presence of a population of centrally concentrated stellar-mass black holes. We fit dynamical models to omega Cen data, and we show that models with similar to 5 per cent of their mass in black holes (consistent with similar to 100 per cent retention fraction after natal kicks) can reproduce the data. When simultaneously considering both radial anisotropy and mass segregation, the best-fit model includes a smaller population of remnants, and a less extreme degree of anisotropy with respect to the models that include only one of these features. These results underline that before conclusions about putative IMBHs can be made, the effects of stellar-mass black holes and radial anisotropy need to be properly accounted for.

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