4.7 Article

Black hole, neutron star, and white dwarf merger rates in AGN discs

期刊

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/mnras/staa2681

关键词

binaries: general; galaxies: active; gravitational waves; accretion, accretion discs; stars: black holes; stars: neutron stars

资金

  1. NSF [AST-1831412, PHY-1707965, AST-1909534, PHY-1912632]
  2. Simons Foundation [533845]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Advanced LIGO and Advanced Virgo are detecting a large number of binary stellar origin black hole (BH) mergers. A promising channel for accelerated BH merger lies in active galactic nucleus (AGN) discs of gas around supermasssive BHs. Here, we investigate the relative number of compact object (CO) mergers in AGN disc models, including BH, neutron stars (NS), and white dwarfs, via Monte Carlo simulations. We find the number of all merger types in the bulk disc grows alpha t(1/3) which is driven by the Hill sphere of the more massive merger component. Median mass ratios of NS-BH mergers in AGN discs are (q) over tilde = 0.07 +/- 0.06(0.14 +/- 0.07) for mass functions (MF) M-1(- 2). If a fraction f(AGN) of the observed rate of BH-BH mergers (RBH-BH) come from AGN, the rate of NS-BH (NS-NS) mergers in the AGN channel is RBH-NS similar to f(AGN)[10, 300] Gpc(-3) yr(-1), (RNS-NS <= f(AGN)400 Gpc(-3) yr(-1)). Given the ratio of NS-NS/BH-BH LIGO search volumes, from preliminary O3 results the AGN channel is not the dominant contribution to observed NS-NS mergers. The number of lower mass gap events expected is a strong function of the nuclear MF and mass segregation efficiency. CO merger ratios derived from LIGO can restrict models of MF, mass segregation, and populations embedded in AGN discs. The expected number of electromagnetic (EM) counterparts to NS-BH mergers in AGN discs at z < 1 is similar to [30, 900] yr(-1)(f(AGN)/0.1). EMsearches for flaring events in large AGN surveys will complement LIGO constraints on AGN models and the embedded populations that must live in them.

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