www.ligo.caltech.edu/page/press-release-gw170104 Four Formation of the first three gravitational-wave observations through isolated binary evolution Simon Stevenson, Alejandro Vigna-Gómez, Ilya Mandel, Jim W. Barrett, Coenraad J. Neijssel, David Perkins, Selma E. de Mink
me arXiv:1701.07032 dynamical isolated binary formation VS evolution
1 dynamical isolated binary formation VS evolution
1 1 chemically homogeneous evolution stellar rotation, mixing, no RLOF
2 chemically homogeneous evolution stellar rotation, mixing, no RLOF
“classical” evolution RLOF, common envelope 2 C MPAS Compact Object Mergers: Population Astrophysics and Statistics www.sr.bham.ac.uk/compas
Team: Supervisor Dr. I. Mandel, S.Stevenson, J.Barrett, A.Vigna-Gomez, C.J.Neijssel, + others
2 Pop synth in a nutshell
Create large samples for better statistics
3 Steps Input
create -2.3 binary pdf P(m) ∝m
5 m1 100 [Msun] (Kroupa 2001)
pdf flat
0.0 q 1 [m2/m1] (Sana et al, 2012)
pdf flat
10-1 log a 103[Au] (Öpik 1924) 4 We assume assume zero eccentricity at ZAMS Steps Input
evolve stars time Mass, Lum, Teff, Radius etc
Pols et al 1998, 5 Hurley, Pols, and Tout 2000/2002 Steps Input
time Mass, Lum, Teff, Radius etc
binary interaction examples
6 Steps Input
Accreting star can only time Mass, Lum, Teff, Radius etc accrete on thermal binary interaction timescale examples m↓ m↑ Hurley, Pols, and Tout 2002 Schneider et al 2015
RLOF
7 Steps Input
250 km/s time Mass, Lum, Teff, Radius etc
binary interaction examples m↓ pdf m↑
V [km/s]
RLOF supernovae Hobbs et al. 2005
8 Steps Input
time Mass, Lum, Teff, Radius etc
binary interaction α=1.0 λ=0.1 examples m↓ Webbink et al. 1984 Hurley et al. 2002 m↑
RLOF supernovae common-envelope
9 Steps Output
time Mass, Lum, Teff, Radius etc Rapid population synthesis
On average less than m↓ 0.3 seconds per binary m↑
10 Mtot [M⊙] M2/M1 +3.8
GW150914 = 65.3 -3.4 q>0.65
+5.7
GW170104 = 50.7-4.6 q>0.46
+13.0
LVT151012 = 37.0 -4.0 q>0.24
+5.9
GW151226 = 21.8 -1.7 q>0.28
PB Abott et al. 2016 (O1 BBH), PB Abott et al. 2017 (GW170104)
11 Mtot [M⊙] M2/M1 +3.8
GW150914 = 65.3 -3.4 q>0.65
+5.7
GW170104 = 50.7-4.6 q>0.46
+13.0
LVT151012 = 37.0 -4.0 q>0.24
+5.9
GW151226 = 21.8 -1.7 q>0.28
PB Abott et al. 2016 (O1 BBH), PB Abott et al. 2017 (GW170104)
11 Mtot [M⊙] M2/M1 +3.8
GW150914 = 65.3 -3.4 q>0.65
+5.7
GW170104 = 50.7-4.6 q>0.46
+13.0
LVT151012 = 37.0 -4.0 q>0.24
+5.9
GW151226 = 21.8 -1.7 q>0.28
PB Abott et al. 2016 (O1 BBH), PB Abott et al. 2017 (GW170104)
an event!
11 Mtot [M⊙] M2/M1 +3.8
GW150914 = 65.3 -3.4 q>0.65
+5.7
GW170104 = 50.7-4.6 q>0.46
+13.0
LVT151012 = 37.0 -4.0 q>0.24
+5.9
GW151226 = 21.8 -1.7 q>0.28
PB Abott et al. 2016 (O1 BBH), PB Abott et al. 2017 (GW170104)
11 Mtot [M⊙] M2/M1 +3.8
GW150914 = 65.3 -3.4 q>0.65
+5.7
GW170104 = 50.7-4.6 q>0.46
+13.0
LVT151012 = 37.0 -4.0 q>0.24
+5.9
GW151226 = 21.8 -1.7 q>0.28
PB Abott et al. 2016 (O1 BBH), PB Abott et al. 2017 (GW170104)
11 Mtot [M⊙] M2/M1 +3.8
GW150914 = 65.3 -3.4 q>0.65
+5.7
GW170104 = 50.7-4.6 q>0.46
+13.0
LVT151012 = 37.0 -4.0 q>0.24
+5.9
GW151226 = 21.8 -1.7 q>0.28
PB Abott et al. 2016 (O1 BBH), PB Abott et al. 2017 (GW170104)
11 Mtot [M⊙] M2/M1 +3.8
GW150914 = 65.3 -3.4 q>0.65
+5.7
GW170104 = 50.7-4.6 q>0.46
+13.0
LVT151012 = 37.0 -4.0 q>0.24
+5.9
GW151226 = 21.8 -1.7 q>0.28
PB Abbott et al. 2016, PB Abbott et al. 2017
11 +5.9
GW151226 Mtot= 21.8 -1.7 q>0.28
12 GW151226
13 GW151226
13 GW151226
13 GW151226
13 GW151226
13 GW151226
13 GW151226
14 Ligo estimated rate Black Hole Binaries = 9-240 Gpc−3 yr−1 Abbott et al. 2016 (O1 Results)
From Z=0.002 run COMPAS estimate ~300 per Gpc−3 yr−1
15 Ligo estimated rate Black Hole Binaries = 9-240 Gpc−3 yr−1 Abbott et al. 2016 (O1 Results)
COMPAS estimate ~70 per Gpc−3 yr−1 Neijssel et al. in prep
15 C MPAS www.sr.bham.ac.uk/compas
Yes binaries can create the LIGO events arXiv:1701.07032
Our current prediction ~70 per Gpc−3 yr−1 at redshift z=0.0 Neijssel et al in prep. 15
COMPAS estimates ~70 events per Gpc−3 yr−1 arXiv:1701.07032 Neijssel et al in prep. Rate estimates/normalization depends on metallicities, multiplicity, and IMF of all stars. COMPAS estimates −3 −1 Possible unification~70 events of all stellar per Gpcdistributions yr arXiv:1701.07032 Neijssel et al in prep.
Rotation/tides: How many would be in population synthesis? chemically homo- geneous instead?
Stability/efficiency Mass Transfer Nr of Blue Stragglers, in binaries/ mergers and their parameters
Cores/HeMS masses: Identify binary products and constrain masses/cores? 5Msun Wolf Rayet stars/Asteroseismology? There are a lot more channels in Be/HM Xray-Binaries the simulations!!!!! Progenitors of events? Orbital parameters? Common Envelope: Possible Eccentricities/kicks? Universal physics? If so channel for what? And can planetary Rates: triple+ binary + WD-WD? nebulae/ Luminous red novae dynamical help to constrain? within LIGO estimates? SFR -> Madau & Dickinson 2014 metallicty fraction -> Norman & Langer 2005 Common envelope prescriptions, HMXB, Giant Stars mass transfer stabilities. Luminous red novae Single star uncertainties
Parameter ~70 per Gpc−3 yr−1 correlations at redshift z=0.0 Methods of sampling distributions
Formation Channels
Integrating rates over Bayesian Inference on metallicities, redshifts, model assumptions from and SFR LIGO O2 results.
15 Common envelope prescriptions, HMXB, Giant Stars mass transfer stabilities. Luminous red novae
~70 per Gpc−3 yr−1 at redshift z=0.0
Integrating rates over Bayesian Inference on metallicities, redshifts, model assumptions from and SFR LIGO O2 results.
15