Stellar-mass black holes in young massive and open stellar clusters and their role in gravitational-wave generation

By S. Banerjee. 2016

144 citations recorded by the source corpus.

The study of stellar-remnant black holes (BH) in dense stellar clusters is now in the spotlight, especially due to their intrinsic ability to form binary black holes (BBH) through dynamical encounters, that potentially coalesce via gravitational-wave (GW) radiation. In this work, which is a continuation of a recent study (Paper I), additional models of compact stellar clusters with initial masses $\lesssim10^5M_\odot$ and also those with small fractions of primordial binaries ($\lesssim10$%) are evolved for long term, applying the direct N-body approach, assuming state-of-the-art stellar-wind and remnant-formation prescriptions. That way, a substantially broader range of computed models than that in Paper I is achieved. As in Paper I, the general-relativistic BBH mergers continue to be mostly mediated by triples that are bound to the clusters rather than happen among the ejected BBHs. In fact, the number of such in situ BBH mergers, per cluster, tend to increase significantly with the introduction of a small population of primordial binaries. Despite the presence of massive primordial binaries, the merging BBHs, especially the in situ ones, are found to be exclusively dynamically assembled and hence would be spin-orbit misaligned. The BBHs typically traverse through both the LISA's and the LIGO's detection bands, being audible to both instruments. The "dynamical heating" of the BHs keeps the Electron-Capture-Supernova (ECS) neutron stars (NS) from effectively mass segregating and participating in exchange interactions; the dynamically-active BHs would also exchange into any NS binary within $\lesssim1$ Gyr. Such young massive and open clusters have the potential to contribute to the dynamical BBH merger detection rate to a similar extent as their more massive globular-cluster counterparts.

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/c8e38e510fd37f41099a3fedd8ae5c76a871d4b9

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Astronomy and Astrophysics

1. Michela Mapelli
2. N. Giacobbo
3. Ilya Mandel
4. Mario Spera
5. F. Antonini
6. D. Holz
7. F. Rasio
8. Maya Fishbach

Citations in the corpus

• Modeling Dense Star Clusters in the Milky Way and Beyond with the CMC Cluster Catalog (2019, background): “…(GW) sources (e.g., Moody & Sigurdsson 2009; Banerjee et al. 2010; Bae et al. 2014; Ziosi et al. 2014; Rodriguez et al. 2015, 2016; Askar et al. 2017; Banerjee 2017; Fragione & Kocsis 2018; Hong et al. 2018; Rodriguez et al. 2018a; Samsing & D’Orazio 2018; Kremer et al. 2019c; Zevin et al. 2019).”
• Formation and Evolution of Compact-object Binaries in AGN Disks (2019, background): “…Gondán et al. 2018b; Rodriguez et al. 2018; Rasskazov & Kocsis 2019; Zevin et al. 2019; Samsing et al. 2020), dynamical evolution in open clusters (Banerjee 2017, 2018a, 2018b; Bouffanais et al. 2019; Kumamoto et al. 2019; Rastello et al. 2019) and dense star clusters (e.g., Portegies Zwart &…”
• Eccentric Black Hole Mergers in Dense Star Clusters: The Role of Binary–Binary Encounters (2018, background): “…stellar ∗ zevin@u.northwestern.edu environments such as globular clusters (GCs) and nuclear star clusters (NSCs) (Portegies Zwart & McMillan 2000; Downing et al. 2009, 2011; Rodriguez et al. 2015, 2016a; Fragione & Kocsis 2018), as well as young massive and open clusters (Banerjee 2017, 2018a,b).”
• Formation of Double Neutron Star Systems (2017, background): “One reason is that dense cluster simulations show that the segregation of NSs (and hence the formation of DNS systems via encounters) is not efficient on a Hubble timescale — especially at low metallicities (Banerjee 2017, see figs.”
• The progenitors of compact-object binaries: impact of metallicity, common envelope and natal kicks (2018, background): “…Colpi et al. 2003; Mapelli et al. 2005; Grindlay et al. 2006; Ivanova et al. 2008; Clausen et al. 2013; Mapelli & Zampieri 2014; Ziosi et al. 2014; Rodriguez et al. 2015, 2016; Mapelli 2016; Askar et al. 2016; Antonini et al. 2017; Petrovich & Antonini 2017; Banerjee 2017; Belczynski et al. 2017a).”
• Binary Black Hole Population Properties Inferred from the First and Second Observing Runs of Advanced LIGO and Advanced Virgo (2018, background): “…et al. 2008; Downing et al. 2010, 2011; Clausen et al. 2013; Ziosi et al. 2014; Rodriguez et al. 2015, 2016a; Mapelli 2016; Askar et al. 2017; Banerjee 2017; Chatterjee et al. 2017) and galactic nuclei (Antonini & Perets 2012; Antonini & Rasio 2016; Petrovich & Antonini 2017), evolution of…”
• GW190521: Orbital Eccentricity and Signatures of Dynamical Formation in a Binary Black Hole Merger Signal (2020, background): “…may also occur in active galactic nuclei(e.g., Kocsis & Levin 2012; Yang et al. 2019a; Gröbner et al. 2020), nuclear star clusters(e.g., Mapelli et al. 2020), young open clusters(e.g., Di Carlo et al. 2019), and young massive clusters (Banerjee 2017, 2018a, 2018b, 2020; Kremer et al. 2020).”
• Binary Black Hole Mergers from Field Triples: Properties, Rates, and the Impact of Stellar Evolution (2017, background): “…in the dense stellar core of globular clusters (Rodriguez et al. 2015; Haster et al. 2016; Chatterjee et al. 2017) or young massive star clusters (Banerjee 2017); (iv) the evolution of isolated triples in galactic fields (Silsbee & Tremaine 2016), leading to a merger of the inner binary through…”
• Merging black hole binaries with the SEVN code (2018, background): “…et al. 2016; Mapelli & Giacobbo 2018) or from dynamical processes involving BHs in dense star clusters (e.g. Portegies Zwart & McMillan 2000; Colpi et al. 2003; Ziosi et al. 2014; Giersz et al. 2015; Askar et al. 2016; Kimpson et al. 2016; Mapelli 2016; Rodriguez et al. 2016; Banerjee 2017).”
• Merging black holes in young star clusters (2019, background): “Despite this, most studies of BH dynamics neglect young SCs and star forming regions, with few exceptions (Portegies Zwart & McMillan 2002; Banerjee et al. 2010; Ziosi et al. 2014; Goswami et al. 2014; Mapelli 2016; Banerjee 2017, 2018; Fujii et al. 2017; Rastello et al. 2018).”