4.7 Article

Red or blue? A potential kilonova imprint of the delay until black hole formation following a neutron star merger

期刊

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stu802

关键词

accretion, accretion discs; dense matter; gravitational waves; hydrodynamics; neutrinos; nuclear reactions, nucleosynthesis, abundances

资金

  1. Columbia University
  2. University of California Office of the President
  3. NSF [AST-1206097]
  4. Office of Science of the US Department of Energy [DE-AC02-05CH11231]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Mergers of binary neutron stars usually result in the formation of a hypermassive neutron star (HMNS). Whether and when this remnant collapses to a black hole (BH) depends primarily on the equation of state and on angular momentum transport processes, both of which are uncertain. Here, we show that the lifetime of the merger remnant may be directly imprinted in the radioactively powered kilonova emission following the merger. We employ axisymmetric, time-dependent hydrodynamic simulations of remnant accretion discs orbiting an HMNS of variable lifetime, and characterize the effect of this delay to BH formation on the disc wind ejecta. When BH formation is relatively prompt (a parts per thousand(2)100 ms), outflows from the disc are sufficiently neutron rich to form heavy r-process elements, resulting in similar to week-long emission with a spectral peak in the near-infrared (NIR), similar to that produced by the dynamical ejecta. In contrast, delayed BH formation allows neutrinos from the HMNS to raise the electron fraction in the polar direction to values such that potentially Lanthanide-free outflows are generated. The lower opacity would produce a brighter, bluer, and shorter-lived similar to day-long emission (a 'blue bump') prior to the late NIR peak from the dynamical ejecta and equatorial wind. This new diagnostic of BH formation should be useful for events with a signal to noise lower than that required for direct detection of gravitational waveform signatures.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据