Constraints from the time lag between gravitational waves and gamma rays: Implications of GW170817 and GRB 170817A

Ian M. Shoemaker1 and Kohta Murase2, 3 1Department of Physics, University of South Dakota, Vermillion, SD 57069, USA 2Department of Physics; Department of Astronomy & Astrophysics; Center for Particle and Gravitational Astrophysics, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802, USA 3Yukawa Institute for Theoretical Physics, Kyoto University, Kyoto 606-8502, Japan (Dated: June 6, 2018)

The Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory (LIGO) has recently discovered grav- itational waves (GWs) from its first neutron star-neutron star merger at a distance of ∼ 40 Mpc from the Earth. The associated electromagnetic (EM) detection of the event, including the short gamma-ray burst within ∆t ∼ 2 s after the GW arrival, can be used to test various aspects of sources physics and GW propagation. Using GW170817 as the first GW-EM example, we show that this event provides a stringent direct test that GWs travel at the speed of light. The gravitational po- tential of the Milky Way provides a potential source of Shapiro time delay difference between the arrival of photons and GWs, and we demonstrate that the nearly coincident detection of the GW and EM signals can yield strong limits on anomalous gravitational time delay, through updating the previous limits taking into account details of Milky Way’s gravitational potential. Finally, we also obtain an intriguing limit on the size of the prompt emission region of GRB 170817A, and discuss implications for the emission mechanism of short gamma-ray bursts.

I. INTRODUCTION One may express the observational time delay as

∆t = ∆t + ∆t , (1) New observations of gravitational phenomena provide obs ast non−GR

an opportunity for new discoveries, or more minimally where ∆tast is the astrophysical time delay caused by the stringent constraints on theories of gravity. The re- fact that the gamma-ray emission region should be larger cent observation of Gravitational Waves (GWs) from than the coalescence site, whereas ∆tnon−GR is the time Black Hole - Black Hole (BH-BH) mergers by the ad- delay caused by possible non-GR effects including the vanced Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Obser- violation of the weak equivalence principle and massive vatory (advanced-LIGO) and the Virgo interferometer gravitons. have ushered in a new window on the Universe for as- In light of the GW150914 BH-BH merger event, a num- trophysics, but also for fundamental tests of our under- ber of constraints on modifications to GR were obtained standing of gravity [2, 3]. Now the LIGO Collabora- in [14]. For example, the LIGO collaboration obtained tion has also observed the first neutron star – neutron directly one of the strongest model-independent bounds −22 star merger (NS-NS) event, GW170817, with high sig- on the graviton mass, mg ≤ 1.2 × 10 eV. Other nificance electromagnetic (EM) counterparts at different methods include testing the GW speed if the GW sig- wavelengths (e.g., [4–12]). The significance of the ob- nal was strongly lensed [15]. The disputed association of served EM counterparts with a GW event is hard to over- GW150914 with the transient source with > 50 keV pho- state. In addition to representing a enormous milestone tons observed by the Fermi Gamma-Ray Burst Monitor for multi-messenger astrophysics, it also gives us an un- (GBM) was similarly used to derive tentative constraints

arXiv:1710.06427v3 [astro-ph.HE] 5 Jun 2018 precedented test of General Relativity (GR). In Ref. [13], on Lorentz violation in the graviton propagation [16, 17], some implications for both astrophysics and fundamental the weak equivalence principle [18], certain properties of physics have been considered independently of this work. extra dimensional models [19], and most directly differ- Among various EM counterparts from radio, IR, opti- ences from the relation, cgw = c. cal, X-rays, and gamma rays, gamma-ray emission was Contrary to the previous claims, GW170817 can be re- detected by the Fermi-GBM and INTEGRAL detectors. garded as the first convincing example of the event with The advanced-LIGO triggered the NS-NS event ∼ 1.7 s EM counterparts. In this paper we examine in light of prior to the GBM trigger, and the observed duration of this first established GW signal and EM association the gamma-ray emission was 2.0 ± 0.5 s [5, 6]. The emission constraints one can derive on various non-GR effects as is consistent with short gamma-ray bursts (SGRB) with well as on source physics. Given the observed time delay a typical duration of ∼ 2 s, which supports the hypoth- between the GW and EM signals of ∆t = 1.74±0.05 s [13] esis that the progenitors of SGRBs are NS-NS mergers. and the observed “electromagnetic” distance to NGC 2

+2.9 ◦ 4993 of D = 41±3.1 Mpc (DGW = 43.8−6.9 Mpc) [11], we θob ∼ 30 . Thus, in order to explain the observed lu- 47 −1 can set new stringent limits on the size of the gamma- minosity, Lγ ≈ 1.1 × 10 erg s , a structured jet with ray emission region, GW propagation speed, and pro- a slow jet component with a wide opening angle may vide new tests on effects of the gravitational time delay. also be invoked. In addition, more realistically, the jet In the latter, we will examine the impact of modeling may propagate with a subrelativistic or mildly relativistic the Milky Way’s gravitational potential on these limits, speed in the merger ejecta [23], and makes a contribution thus extending and refining the initial analysis made in to the time delay. Also, the jet formation has not been Ref. [13]. clearly seen yet in the latest numerical relativity simula- tions [24, 25], and there could be a time offset between the jet launch and GW emission at the coalescence, which II. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE GAMMA-RAY can also cause an additional time delay. EMISSION SITE Based on the constraints we obtained, we suggest the emission from the jet-induced breakout emission from First, we consider the astrophysical time delay with the merger ejecta as one of the possible scenarios (see ∆tnon−GR = 0 in Eq. (1). The assumption of ∆tast = 0 also [12, 26]). Note that the observed duration of the is not realistic because the emission region is far from of gamma-ray spike is δt ∼ 0.5 s, which was found in Fermi- the central object – a black hole or neutron star. There GBM [6]. If the effective jet speed in the ejecta is subrel- is the so-called compactness problem, in which gamma ativistic, given that the merger ejecta is launched with rays cannot escape from the too compact region due to a subrelativistic velocity, V ∼ 0.3 c, the emission radius + − γγ → e e . In the context of gamma-ray bursts [20], 10 can be rem ≈ V ∆tast ' 1.7 × 10 (V/0.3c) cm, which this can be solved when the source moves relativistically. may lead to emission with a duration of ∼ rem/c ∼ 0.6 s. Assuming that the source, which is likely to be a relativis- This radius should be regarded as the minimum radius, tic jet, moves with the velocity vj, and the gamma-ray and a larger radius is favored to avoid the compactness emission occurs at the radius rem, the time delay between problem for gamma rays. Also, the outer envelope of the GW and gamma rays is given by merger ejecta is usually extended to larger radii. In more

rem  vj  realistic situations, the emission region may be more ∆tast = 1 − cos θob , (2) vj c mildly relativistic with γc ∼ 2, and for a quasi-isotropic outflow we may use the on-axis relationship, ∆tast ≈ where θob is the angle between the jet axis and line of 2 rem/(2γc c). Then, the size of the emission region is es- sight to the source. Knowing the size of the emission re- 2 11 2 timated to be rem ≈ 2γc ∆tast . 4.8 × 10 (γc/2) cm, gion is important to understand the physical mechanism which can be compatible with the observations of gamma of prompt emission [21, 22]. For a top hat jet with a rays. The latter case is expected for the cocoon breakout ◦ finite opening angle with θj ∼ 10 , we may replace θob (e.g., [26]) or trans-relativistic ejecta that is formed by a with θob − θj. choked jet (e.g., [27, 28]). With θob . θj, the time delay be is given by ∆tast = Note that the assumptions that the outflow is launched 2 rem/(2γ c), where γj is the jet Lorentz factor. While j at the same time of the GW emission and vj ≈ c are low-luminosity SGRBs cannot be excluded only by the rather conservative. If the observed time delay is ex- observation of the prompt emission, the possibility of plained by astrophysical effects, in principle, we could on-axis, highly relativistic jets with θob . θj is con- improve the bounds on non-GR effects in the GW prop- strained by x-ray and radio observations [8, 10, 12]. With agation, which we discuss below. ◦ ∆tast ≤ 2 s and θob − θj ∼ 20 [8–10], which is consistent with the late-time afterglow data, the emission radius is constrained to be III. BOUNDS ON THE PROPAGATION SPEED −1 11 OF GRAVITATIONAL WAVES r . c∆tast(1 − cos θob) ' 9.9 × 10 cm. (3)

Note that the above constraint is applied if the emis- In GR, GWs propagate with a speed of cgw = c, but sion comes from the jet. This upper limit can be com- the time difference can be expected in some modified GR patible with the photospheric radius. With a typical theories. It was recently pointed out that even in the ab- 50.5 −1 isotropic-equivalent luminosity of Liso ∼ 10 erg s sence of an EM counterpart, the speed of GWs can be and γj ∼ 100, the photospheric radius is estimated to be bounded using the timing information between widely 3 3 11 rph = LisoσT /(4πγj mpc ) ' 3.7 × 10 cm. However, spaced detectors [29]. Using the first three GW detec- as long as we consider a top hat jet, the off-axis emis- tions from BH mergers, they found 0.55c < cgw < 1.42c. sion from a highly relativistic jet is highly suppressed for Assuming that GWs and gamma-rays are emitted at 3 the same time, the time delay between GW and EM sig- A crucial hallmark of Einstein’s Theory of GR is the nals is written as: weak equivalence principle. However this principle is an D  c  outcome of the metric nature of GR, and thus any metric ∆t = 1 − . (4) theory of gravity whether GR or otherwise will similarly c c gw predict that test particles will follow the same trajec- Then, we find that the deviation from the EM speed can tories. Thus an observed anomalous Shapiro time de- be deduced to be lay between the arrival of different test particles (pho-     tons, neutrinos, gravitons, etc.) can bound violations  cgw  40 Mpc ∆t 1 − = 5 × 10−16 . (5) of the weak equivalence principle. The use of time de- c D 2 s lays between various messenger particles/waves to place Note that other stringent, albeit indirect, tests of GW constraints on the Equivalence Principle has a long his- speed can be obtained from the non-observation of grav- tory (e.g. [1, 34, 35]). itational Cherenkov radiation from high-energy cosmic To derive the impact of this effect we assume that rays [30]. any observed time delay is dominantly controlled by the Shapiro time delay due to the Milky Way gravitational potential. Similar constraints on the weak equivalence principle for neutrinos and photons were obtained in the aftermath of the SN1987A event [34, 36]. Related IV. BOUNDS ON WEAK GRAVITON MASS constraints were obtained on long-range neutrino inter- actions as well [37]. To date the strongest limits on A nonzero graviton mass may also contribute to the weak equivalence principle tests come from FRBs, lim- −9 time dispersion in GW signals. In this case the gravi- iting ∆γ . 4.4 × 10 [38]. ton speed is diminished relative to the massless photon Using the standard notation in the post-newtonian ap- q 2 2 proximation, metric theories of gravity have spatial and as, cgw = 1 − mg/E , where E is the graviton energy. Then the relative time delay between a photon and gravi- temporal metric components written as ton signal will be g00 = − [1 − 2U(r)] (7) 2   Z zs 0 0 j mg 1 1 (1 + z ) dz gij = δij [1 + 2γU(r)] dxidx (8) ∆t ≈ 2 − 2 0 (6) 2H0 E1 E2 0 h(z ) where γ is one of the ten parameterized post-Newtonian where hz ≡ H(z)/H0, with H(z) the redshift dependent −1 −1 Hubble parameter and H0 = 68 km s Mpc the cur- rent expansion rate. The parameter zs is the source red- shift. The existing analysis of the BH-BH merger in [14], resulted in dramatically strong bounds, mg ≤ 1.2 × 10−22 eV, as a result of the detailed waveform informa- tion. We find that GW170817 imposes no stronger bound since the source is so close, but the LIGO collaboration may be able to improve on this limit from a similar wave- form analysis as done previously in Ref. [14]. Note that in Ref. [31] the authors considered the si- multaneous impact of weak equivalence principle with nonvanishing ∆γ and finite graviton mass.

V. BOUNDS ON GRAVITATIONAL TIME DELAY DIFFERENCE

A classic test of GR, the original Shapiro time delay FIG. 1: The dependence on the PPN bound as a function was a proposal to use the “echoes” of radar pulses di- of the DM density, normalized to the canonical local value −3 rected toward the inner solar system to test the predicted ρ0 ≡ 0.3 GeV cm . The shaded blue region shows how the time delay photons should experience as they sample the bound changes within the time window uncertainty. gravitational potential [32]. 4

(PPN) parameters. The parameter γ is a measure of the where the bulge mass is taken to be Mb = (2 ± 0.3) × 10 spatial curvature experienced by test particles. Then one 10 M [43]. The DM halo component can be found by can compute the coordinate time delay as solving the Poisson equation with a NFW density profile

Z r ρs gxx ρ(r) = (15) τ = dx (9) NFW 2 (r/rs)(1 + (r/rs)) −g00 +17 +2.9 Assuming a Keplerian form for the potential U(r) = where rs = 16.1−7.8 kpc and ρs = 1.4−0.93 × 7 −3 −GM/r and keeping only the part proportional to ∆γ 10 M kpc [44]. one can estimate the time delay as [36, 39] Taking into account the above uncertainties on the MW density profile we find that this more detailed model

∆t = ∆γ GMMW results in the bound on the PPN parameter at 90% CL, ( 2) d + (d2 − b2)1/2 r + s (r2 − b2)1/2 −8 × ln G n G (10), ∆γ|MW model . 8.3 × 10 . (16) b with the dominant source of modeling error coming from where rG = 8.3 kpc is the galactic center, b is the impact the scale radius of the NFW dark matter profile. parameter, and d is the distance to the source. The dis- We see that the more realistic treatment of Milky crete parameter sn = ±1 is a correction taking the value Way’s gravitational potential results in a weakening of +1 for sources along the direction of the Milky Way and the derived bound. This is expected however since the −1 for sources pointing away [18]. The Milky Way mass DM halo is significantly more disperse than a point mass 11 is roughly MMW ≈ 5 × 10 M [40, 41]. at the Galactic Center. In addition we can scan more The impact parameter can be found from the source broadly the dependence of the bound on the DM den- direction, sity. This is illustrate in Fig. 1 where we have varied p the DM halo density in units of the canonical value at b = r 1 − (sin δ sin δ + cos δ cos δ cos(β − β ))2 −3 G S G S G S G 8 kpc, ρ0 ≡ 0.3 GeV cm . In addition we show in the (11) blue band how the uncertainty in the timing information impacts the limit. using the source and galactic center right ascension (β) We also note that our PPN bounds are somewhat and declination (δ). stronger than the conservative estimation made in [13] Given the observed time delay of ∆t ≈ 2 s and the which only include the MW potential out to 100 kpc. distance to NGC 4993 of ≈ 40 Mpc we can set the limit Further, while Ref. [45] finds similar bounds on the PPN parameters, our complementary work considers the ef- ∆γ| 7.4 × 10−8 (12) Keplerian . fects of the MW potential. This estimate is meant only as an illustration of the order Finally, note that strong bounds on PPN parame- of magnitude for the constraint. Let us now investigate ters have been obtained from FRB and GRB observa- the constraint on the gravitational time delay difference tions [38]. These have been obtained however using the in a more complete description of the Milky Way’s po- Keplerian model of the MW potential. Using the MW tential. model outlined above, we can return to these limits. For The above treatment of the Milky Way as a point example, the strongest bounds came from GRB 100704A −9 source can be improved as follows. Extending the analy- which gave a Keplerian bound of, ∆γ . 4×10 . We find sis to a more realistic potential comprised of bulge, disk for the MW model however that this bound is weakened −8 and dark matter (DM) halo components can be done to ∆γ . 3 × 10 . straightforwardly. Here we model the disk as a spher- ical potential of the form VI. SUMMARY

GMd   U (r) = − 1 − e−r/rd , (13) d r We have shown that the exciting recent LIGO observa- tion of the first NS-NS merger, GW170817 with the asso- 10 where the disk mass is Md = (5.17±1.11)×10 M [42], ciated EM counterpart can provide new distinct tests on and rd = (2.6 ± 0.5) kpc. both astrophysics and fundamental physics. This demon- For the bulge component a simple Keplerian treatment strates the power of multi-messenger astrophysics. is adequate We have discussed implications for the emission mech- GM anism of prompt emission. SGRBs have been believed U (r) = − b , (14) b r to be the gamma-ray emission from relativistic jets. 5

If GW170817 is associated with off-axis outflows, the the related work [47] appeared. Our work is distinct from prompt emission radius for GRB 170817A is constrained Ref. [47] in at least two respects: (1) In addition to WEP 12 to be r . 10 cm. This radius can be consistent with violations we also consider the implications of GW170817 the photospheric radius, but it could be jet-induced shock for the gamma-ray emission site, and (2) in our calcula- breakout emission. We point out that the constraints on tion of the gravitationally induced time delay we consider non-GR effects can further be improved by understand- a more detailed model of the Milky Way galaxy, while ing the jet formation, propagation, and resulting prompt they include the impact of neighboring galaxies. We emission mechanisms. therefore consider our work complementary to Ref. [47]. We have examined time-lag tests on Einstein’s theory of GR. We expect these bounds to be improved with more GW and EM associations are found. In particu- lar, we have demonstrated the relevance of more detailed Acknowledgments modeling of the gravitational potential to place more ro- bust limits on the gravitational time delay among differ- We thank Kazumi Kashiyama and Peter M´esz´aros ent messengers. In future, not only GWs and electro- for useful discussion. The work of K. M. is partially magnetic waves but also neutrinos may be detected [46], supported by Alfred P. Sloan Foundation and the U.S. which would give us new information on the physics con- National Science Foundation (NSF) under grants NSF sidered in this work. Grant No. PHY-1620777.

Note added

The same day our work first appeared on the arXiv,

[1] C. Sivaram, Speed of Gravitational Waves from Strongly prompt gamma-ray signal coincident with the Lensed Gravitational Waves and Electromagnetic gravitational-wave event gw170817, The Astrophysical Signals, Bull. Astro. Soc. of India 27 (1999) 627. Journal Letters 848 (2017) L15. [2] Virgo, LIGO Scientific collaboration, B. P. Abbott [8] R. Margutti, E. Berger, W. Fong, C. Guidorzi, K. D. et al., Observation of Gravitational Waves from a Alexander, B. D. Metzger et al., The electromagnetic Binary Black Hole Merger, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116 (2016) counterpart of the binary neutron star merger ligo/virgo 061102, [1602.03837]. gw170817. v. rising x-ray emission from an off-axis jet, [3] Virgo, LIGO Scientific collaboration, B. P. Abbott The Astrophysical Journal Letters 848 (2017) L20. et al., GW170814: A Three-Detector Observation of [9] E. Troja, L. Piro, H. van Eerten, R. T. Wollaeger, Gravitational Waves from a Binary Black Hole M. Im, O. D. Fox et al., The x-ray counterpart to the Coalescence, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119 (2017) 141101, gravitational-wave event gw170817, Nature advance [1709.09660]. online publication (10, 2017) –. [4] LIGO Scientific Collaboration and Virgo [10] P. A. Evans, S. B. Cenko, J. A. Kennea, S. W. K. Collaboration collaboration, B. P. Abbott, Emery, N. P. M. Kuin, O. Korobkin et al., Swift and R. Abbott, T. D. Abbott, F. Acernese, K. Ackley, nustar observations of gw170817: Detection of a blue C. Adams et al., Gw170817: Observation of kilonova, Science (2017) , gravitational waves from a binary neutron star inspiral, [http://science.sciencemag.org/content/early/2017/10/13/science.aap9580.full.pdf]. Phys. Rev. Lett. 119 (Oct, 2017) 161101. [11] J. Hjorth, A. J. Levan, N. R. Tanvir, J. D. Lyman, [5] Virgo, LIGO Scientific collaboration, B. P. Abbott R. Wojtak, S. L. SchrAˇzderet˜ al., The distance to ngc et al., Multi-messenger observations of a binary neutron 4993: The host galaxy of the gravitational-wave event star merger, The Astrophysical Journal Letters 848 gw170817, The Astrophysical Journal Letters 848 (2017) L12. (2017) L31. [6] A. Goldstein, P. Veres, E. Burns, M. S. Briggs, [12] M. M. Kasliwal et al., Illuminating Gravitational R. Hamburg, D. Kocevski et al., An ordinary short Waves: A Concordant Picture of Photons from a gamma-ray burst with extraordinary implications: Fermi Neutron Star Merger, 1710.05436. -gbm detection of grb 170817a, The Astrophysical [13] Virgo, Fermi-GBM, INTEGRAL, LIGO Scientific Journal Letters 848 (2017) L14. collaboration, B. P. Abbott et al., Gravitational Waves [7] V. Savchenko, C. Ferrigno, E. Kuulkers, A. Bazzano, and Gamma-rays from a Binary Neutron Star Merger: E. Bozzo, S. Brandt et al., Integral detection of the first GW170817 and GRB 170817A, Astrophys. J. 848 6

(2017) L13, [1710.05834]. Rev. Lett. 111 (2013) 121102, [1306.2274]. [14] Virgo, LIGO Scientific collaboration, B. P. Abbott [29] N. Cornish, D. Blas and G. Nardini, Bounding the speed et al., Tests of general relativity with GW150914, Phys. of gravity with gravitational wave observations, Rev. Lett. 116 (2016) 221101, [1602.03841]. 1707.06101. [15] X.-L. Fan, K. Liao, M. Biesiada, A. Piorkowska-Kurpas [30] G. D. Moore and A. E. Nelson, Lower bound on the and Z.-H. Zhu, Speed of Gravitational Waves from propagation speed of gravity from gravitational Strongly Lensed Gravitational Waves and Cherenkov radiation, JHEP 09 (2001) 023, Electromagnetic Signals, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118 (2017) [hep-ph/0106220]. 091102, [1612.04095]. [31] S. K. Bose and W. D. McGlinn, EFFECT OF FINITE [16] J. Ellis, N. E. Mavromatos and D. V. Nanopoulos, MASS ON GRAVITATIONAL TRANSIT TIME, Phys. Comments on Graviton Propagation in Light of Rev. D38 (1988) 2335. GW150914, Mod. Phys. Lett. A31 (2016) 1675001, [32] I. I. Shapiro, Fourth Test of General Relativity, Phys. [1602.04764]. Rev. Lett. 13 (1964) 789–791. [17] N. Yunes, K. Yagi and F. Pretorius, Theoretical Physics [33] C. M. Will, The Confrontation between General Implications of the Binary Black-Hole Mergers Relativity and Experiment, Living Rev. Rel. 17 (2014) 4, GW150914 and GW151226, Phys. Rev. D94 (2016) [1403.7377]. 084002, [1603.08955]. [34] L. M. Krauss and S. Tremaine, Test of the Weak [18] X.-F. Wu, H. Gao, J.-J. Wei, P. M´esz´aros,B. Zhang, Equivalence Principle for Neutrinos and Photons, Phys. Z.-G. Dai et al., Testing Einstein’s weak equivalence Rev. Lett. 60 (1988) 176. principle with gravitational waves, Phys. Rev. D94 [35] S. Desai, E. O. Kahya and R. P. Woodard, Reduced (2016) 024061, [1602.01566]. time delay for gravitational waves with dark matter [19] H. Yu, B.-M. Gu, F. P. Huang, Y.-Q. Wang, X.-H. emulators, Phys. Rev. D77 (2008) 124041, [0804.3804]. Meng and Y.-X. Liu, Probing extra dimension through [36] M. J. Longo, New Precision Tests of the Einstein gravitational wave observations of compact binaries and Equivalence Principle From SN1987A, Phys. Rev. Lett. their electromagnetic counterparts, JCAP 1702 (2017) 60 (1988) 173. 039, [1607.03388]. [37] S. Pakvasa, W. A. Simmons and T. J. Weiler, Test of [20] P. Meszaros, Gamma-Ray Bursts, Rept. Prog. Phys. 69 Equivalence Principle for Neutrinos and Anti-neutrinos, (2006) 2259–2322, [astro-ph/0605208]. Phys. Rev. D39 (1989) 1761. [21] K. Murase and K. Ioka, Closure Relations for [38] J.-J. Wei, H. Gao, X.-F. Wu and P. M´esz´aros, Testing Electron-Positron Pair-Signatures in Gamma-Ray Einstein’s Equivalence Principle With Fast Radio Bursts, Astrophys. J. 676 (2008) 1123, [0708.1370]. Bursts, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115 (2015) 261101, [22] P. Kumar and B. Zhang, The physics of gamma-ray [1512.07670]. bursts & relativistic jets, Phys. Rept. 561 (2014) 1–109, [39] C. W. Misner, K. S. Thorne and J. A. Wheeler, [1410.0679]. Gravitation. W. H. Freeman, San Francisco, 1973. [23] H. Nagakura, K. Hotokezaka, Y. Sekiguchi, M. Shibata [40] P. J. McMillan, Mass models of the Milky Way, Mon. and K. Ioka, Jet Collimation in the Ejecta of Double Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 414 (2011) 2446–2457, Neutron Star Mergers: A New Canonical Picture of [1102.4340]. Short Gamma-Ray Bursts, Astrophys. J. 784 (2014) [41] P. R. Kafle, S. Sharma, G. F. Lewis and L28, [1403.0956]. J. Bland-Hawthorn, Kinematics of the stellar halo and [24] K. Kiuchi, Y. Sekiguchi, M. Shibata and K. Taniguchi, the mass distribution of the Milky Way using BHB Longterm general relativistic simulation of binary stars, Astrophys. J. 761 (2012) 98, [1210.7527]. neutron stars collapsing to a black hole, Phys. Rev. D80 [42] T. C. Licquia and J. A. Newman, Improved Estimates (2009) 064037, [0904.4551]. of the Milky Way’s Stellar Mass and Star Formation [25] K. Kiuchi, K. Kyutoku, Y. Sekiguchi and M. Shibata, Rate From Hierarchical Bayesian Meta-analysis, Global simulations of strongly magnetized remnant Astrophys. J. 806 (2015) 96, [1407.1078]. massive neutron stars formed in binary neutron star [43] E. Valenti, M. Zoccali, O. A. Gonzalez, D. Minniti, mergers, 1710.01311. J. Alonso-Garc´ıa, E. Marchetti et al., Stellar density [26] D. Lazzati, A. Deich, B. J. Morsony and J. C. profile and mass of the Milky Way bulge from VVV Workman, Off-axis emission of short -ray bursts and the data, ??jnlA&A 587 (Mar., 2016) L6, [1510.07425]. detectability of electromagnetic counterparts of [44] F. Nesti and P. Salucci, The Dark Matter halo of the gravitational-wave-detected binary mergers, Monthly Milky Way, AD 2013, JCAP 1307 (2013) 016, Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 471 (2017) [1304.5127]. 1652–1661. [45] J.-J. Wei, X.-L. Fan, B.-B. Zhang, X.-F. Wu, H. Gao, [27] P. Meszaros and E. Waxman, TeV neutrinos from P. M´esz´aroset al., Multimessenger tests of the weak successful and choked gamma-ray bursts, Phys. Rev. equivalence principle from GW170817 and its Lett. 87 (2001) 171102, [astro-ph/0103275]. electromagnetic counterparts, 1710.05860. [28] K. Murase and K. Ioka, TeV–PeV Neutrinos from [46] S. S. Kimura, K. Murase, P. M´esz´arosand K. Kiuchi, Low-Power Gamma-Ray Burst Jets inside Stars, Phys. High-Energy Neutrino Emission from Short 7

Gamma-Ray Bursts: Prospects for Coincident Detection [47] S. Boran, S. Desai, E. O. Kahya and R. P. Woodard, with Gravitational Waves, Astrophys. J. 848 (2017) L4, GW170817 Falsifies Dark Matter Emulators, [1708.07075]. 1710.06168.