4.7 Article

Dynamics of stellar black holes in young star clusters with different metallicities - II. Black hole-black hole binaries

期刊

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stu824

关键词

black hole physics; gravitational waves; methods: numerical; binaries: general; galaxies: star clusters: general

资金

  1. Italian Ministry of Education, University and Research (MIUR) [FIRB 2012 RBFR12PM1F]
  2. Padova University through Strategic Research Project AACSE (Algorithms and Architectures for Computational Science and Engineering)
  3. INAF [PRIN-2011-1]
  4. CONACyT [169554]
  5. CINECA [HP10B3BJEW, HP10CLI3BX, HP10CXB7O8, HP10C894X7, HP10CGUBV0, HP10CP6XSO, HP10C3ANJY]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this paper, we study the formation and dynamical evolution of black hole-black hole (BH-BH) binaries in young star clusters (YSCs), by means of N-body simulations. The simulations include metallicity-dependent recipes for stellar evolution and stellar winds, and have been run for three different metallicities (Z = 0.01, 0.1 and 1 Z(aS (TM))). Following recent theoretical models of wind mass-loss and core-collapse supernovae, we assume that the mass of the stellar remnants depends on the metallicity of the progenitor stars. We find that BH-BH binaries form efficiently because of dynamical exchanges: in our simulations, we find about 10 times more BH-BH binaries than double neutron star binaries. The simulated BH-BH binaries form earlier in metal-poor YSCs, which host more massive black holes (BHs) than in metal-rich YSCs. The simulated BH-BH binaries have very large chirp masses (up to 80 M-aS (TM)), because the BH mass is assumed to depend on metallicity, and because BHs can grow in mass due to the merger with stars. The simulated BH-BH binaries span a wide range of orbital periods (10(-3)-10(7) yr), and only a small fraction of them (0.3 per cent) is expected to merge within a Hubble time. We discuss the estimated merger rate from our simulations and the implications for Advanced VIRGO and LIGO.

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