4.6 Article

Intermediate-mass Black Holes from High Massive-star Binary Fractions in Young Star Clusters

期刊

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL LETTERS
卷 908, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

IOP Publishing Ltd
DOI: 10.3847/2041-8213/abdf5b

关键词

Young star clusters; Intermediate-mass black holes; Stellar mergers; Binary stars; N-body simulations

资金

  1. NSF [AST-1757792, AST-1716762, DGE-0948017, AST-2001751]
  2. CIERA Riedel Graduate Fellowship
  3. CIERA Fellowship at Northwestern University
  4. Department of Atomic Energy, Government of India [12-RD-TFR-5.02-0200]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study found that in young star clusters with low metallicity and high binary star fractions, several black holes within the mass gap and at least one intermediate-mass black hole can be formed naturally through dynamical interactions.
Black holes formed in dense star clusters, where dynamical interactions are frequent, may have fundamentally different properties than those formed through isolated stellar evolution. Theoretical models for single-star evolution predict a gap in the black hole mass spectrum from roughly 40-120 M caused by (pulsational) pair-instability supernovae. Motivated by the recent LIGO/Virgo event GW190521, we investigate whether black holes with masses within or in excess of this upper-mass gap can be formed dynamically in young star clusters through strong interactions of massive stars in binaries. We perform a set of N-body simulations using the CMC cluster-dynamics code to study the effects of the high-mass binary fraction on the formation and collision histories of the most massive stars and their remnants. We find that typical young star clusters with low metallicities and high binary fractions in massive stars can form several black holes in the upper-mass gap and often form at least one intermediate-mass black hole. These results provide strong evidence that dynamical interactions in young star clusters naturally lead to the formation of more massive black hole remnants.

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

4.6
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