1 / 26

Gravitational radiation from Massive Black Hole Binaries

Gravitational radiation from Massive Black Hole Binaries. Andrew Jaffe PTA “Focus group” — PSU/CGWP 22 July 2005 + D. Backer, D. Dawe, A. Lommen. Gravitational Radiation from MBH Binaries. Ingredients: Galaxy mergers & MBH assembly Black Hole Demographics

annora
Download Presentation

Gravitational radiation from Massive Black Hole Binaries

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Gravitational radiation from Massive Black Hole Binaries Andrew Jaffe PTA “Focus group” — PSU/CGWP 22 July 2005 + D. Backer, D. Dawe, A. Lommen

  2. Gravitational Radiationfrom MBH Binaries • Ingredients: • Galaxy mergers & MBH assembly • Black Hole Demographics • Galactic dynamics & the Final Parsec Problem • GW waveforms • ⇒ Stochastic Background of MBH Binary GWs

  3. Model Universe of MBH Binaries D. Backer

  4. GWs from MBH Mergers • Massive Black Holes in nearby galaxies... • MBH demographics from kinematics • ... and high z (AGN) • Modern galaxies are the result of mergers • Ellipticals from major mergers • → MBH binaries ubiquitous • Quickly driven to center of daughter galaxy by Dynamical Friction, followed by... • ...Gravitational-Radiation-driven coalescence • IF they get close enough...

  5. Binary MBH GW Spectrum • Merger rate + Mass function + GWs: • N(z, f, M1, M2) df φ1φ2 R(z)C[Ω, z] M-5/3 f-8/3df/fhc2(f) = f∫dz dM1 dM2h2(z,M) N(z, f, M1, M2)= (M /108M⊙)5/3 (f/yr-1)-4/3 Ih(see also Phinney 2002)nb. integral separates: φ(M) f -8/3 I(z) Stochastic (mean-square) M=(M1M2)3/5/(M1+M2)1/5

  6. Gravitational Radiationfrom MBH Binaries • GWs from ~Kepler motion: weak-field GR • P~1 yr for 109M⊙ at 0.01 pc • hc(f) ~ μ (Mf )2/3r-1 (& redshift to z=0) • h~10-15 for 109M⊙ at 1 Gpc forf=1/yr • long lifetime at P~months-year • Pulsar Timing (Kaspi et al 1994; Rajagopal & Romani 1995; Thorsett & Dewey 1997)

  7. 109M⊙ & 108M⊙, P = 1 yr GWs from MBH Binaries • Orbits circularized quickly (dynamics and/or GW) • hrms(f )~μ(M f )2/3r-1~ M5/3chirp • (stochastic sum over population) • Cosmology, mass, frequency dependence

  8. Binary formation and Dynamics:Approaching the problem • Pioneers: • Begelman Blandford & Rees • Haehnelt & Kauffmann • Rajagopal & Romani • Analytic (e.g., Backer & J) • Explicit calculations of MBH binary/galaxy dynamics (Dawe & J) • Semi-analytic (Extended Press-Schechter formalism) • Menou et al (0101196) • Wyithe & Loeb (0211556) • Enoki et al (0404389) • From Halos - Galaxies (baryons): • Sesana et al (0401543, 0409255) • Some explicit MBH binary/galaxy dynamics

  9. MBH Coalescence:Galaxy merger rate • Binary MBH formation driven by Galaxy mergers • Poorly-measured even at moderate z Enoki et al 2005

  10. MBH Growth • Coalescence dominates dM/dtfor z<1 • From Halos to MBHs • Gas physics • Heating, cooling, star formation • Accretion Enoki et al 2005

  11. Massive Black Hole Demographics • Roughly, M ≈ 0.003 Msph • M≈ 108M⊙(σ/200km/s)4.72 • Implies accretion-dominated growth? (Silk & Rees) • How to maintain in the presence of mergers? • (Magorrian et al, Gebhardt et al, Ferrarese & Merritt, Tremaine et al) • Traces merger history and/or potential depth? • High z? • AGN activity (McClure & Dunlop)

  12. MBH Mass function • MBH Demographics roughly constant over large z range • Conversion of AGN to normal galaxies Ferrarese 2002

  13. MBH Binary dynamics • Dynamical friction (&c.) drags black holes to center • tDF ≈ Myr (M/108 M⊙)-1,Binary hardens • loss cone is depleted, GW timescale still >>H0-1 • Need to get to a~0.02 pc, P~30 yr • Stellar Dynamics difficult (Yu 2001; Milosavljevic & Merritt 2002; ...) • Gas dynamics? (Gould & Rix 2000; Armitage & Natarajan 2002) • “Wandering”? 3-body interactions? • GW energy loss until final inspiral (~1 day) • Successful inspiral or many MBH binaries? • too close to observe? • Absence of evidence or evidence of absence? • Need evidence of post-merger binary activity (e.g., Merritt & Ekers 2002 “X” sources; dual-nucleus Chandra source; ...)

  14. Life cycle of a MBH Binary

  15. Dynamics and the low-f cutoff • Losing energy to stars/gas/galaxy prior to GW regime Sesana et al 2004

  16. The final parsec problem • Binary “hung up” before GW regime — energy-loss timescale >> Hubble time H-1 • (nb also need to take delay into account when not << H-1) Sesana et al 2004 Delayed instantaneous

  17. Timescales and the final pc problem • Need careful accounting of MBH Binary dynamics • (and galaxy merger/coalescence delay)

  18. Contributions to the GW spectrum Enoki et al 2005

  19. Coalescence and the high-f cutoff • Quasi-Newtonian until Innermost Stable Circular Orbit. • Enoki et al: high-f cutoff bend at ~10-6 Hz • Feeds into LISA rate Sesana et al 2004 Enoki et al 2005

  20. Stochastic GW Background

  21. Gravitational Waves from LISA • See some fraction of total event rate (only sensitive to events in-band:M ~ 105M⊙/(1+z) • nb. lighter MBHs inevitably more common at higher z • Individual events, not stochastic background • Hughes 2001 for parameter extraction

  22. MBH Binaries at z=1:LISA Signal

  23. Future Work • Full calculation/measurement of Galaxy (MBH) merger rate • Crucial especially for LISA event rate • Use n-body, Press-Schecter, merger trees • Measurement of high-z merger rate • (DEEP2) • Detection of binary MBHs • Galactic Dynamics: the final parsec problem • Pulsar Timing Array

  24. Conclusions • Massive Black Hole Binary coalescence rate depends on merger rate, Black Hole demographics, galactic dynamics • Major uncertainties in all of these, esp. at high z • µhz - nHz “Newtonian” regime potentially observable via Pulsar Timing • Final coalescence are brightest GW events; observable via LISA

More Related