4.7 Article

Impact of multiple modes on the black-hole superradiant instability

期刊

PHYSICAL REVIEW D
卷 99, 期 10, 页码 -

出版社

AMER PHYSICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.99.104019

关键词

-

资金

  1. King's College London
  2. Royal Society [RGF\R1\180073]
  3. European Union [DarkGRA-757480]
  4. Amaldi Research Center - MIUR program Dipartimento di Eccellenza [CUP: B81I18001170001]
  5. European Union's H2020 research and innovation program under Marie Sklodowska-Curie Grant [BHstabNL-655360]
  6. Royal Society University Research Fellowship [UF160547]
  7. COST Action [CA16104]
  8. BSC/RES [AECT-2017-2-0011, AECT-2017-3-0009, AECT-2018-1-0014]
  9. PRACE [2018194669]
  10. STFC DiRAC [ACTP186, ACSP191]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Ultralight bosonic fields in the mass range of approximately (10(-20) - 10(-11)) eV can trigger a superradiant instability that extracts energy and angular momentum from an astrophysical black hole with mass M similar to (5,10(10))M-circle dot, forming a nonspherical, rotating condensate around it. So far, most studies of the evolution and end state of the instability have been limited to initial data containing only the fastest growing superradiant mode. By studying the evolution of multimode data in a quasiadiabatic approximation, we show that the dynamics is much richer and depends strongly on the energy of the seed, on the relative amplitude between modes, and on the gravitational coupling. If the seed energy is a few percent of the black-hole mass, a black hole surrounded by a mixture of superradiant and nonsuperradiant modes with comparable amplitudes might not undergo a superradiant unstable phase, depending on the value of the boson mass. If the seed energy is smaller, as in the case of an instability triggered by quantum fluctuations, the effect of nonsuperradiant modes is negligible. We discuss the implications of these findings for current constraints on ultralight fields with electromagnetic and gravitational-wave observations.

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