Draft version January 11, 2021 Typeset using LATEX twocolumn style in AASTeX63 The NANOGrav 11 yr Data Set: Limits on Supermassive Black Hole Binaries in Galaxies within 500 Mpc Zaven Arzoumanian,1 Paul T. Baker ,2 Adam Brazier,3 Paul R. Brook ,4, 5 Sarah Burke-Spolaor ,4, 5 Bence Becsy,6 Maria Charisix ,7, 8, ∗ Shami Chatterjee ,3 James M. Cordes ,3 Neil J. Cornish ,6 Fronefield Crawford ,9 H. Thankful Cromartie ,10 Megan E. DeCesar ,11 Paul B. Demorest ,12 Timothy Dolch ,13 Rodney D. Elliott,14 Justin A. Ellis,15 Elizabeth C. Ferrara,16 Emmanuel Fonseca ,17 Nathan Garver-Daniels ,4, 5 Peter A. Gentile ,4, 5 Deborah C. Good ,18 Jeffrey S. Hazboun ,19 Kristina Islo,20 Ross J. Jennings ,3 Megan L. Jones ,20 Andrew R. Kaiser ,4, 5 David L. Kaplan ,20 Luke Zoltan Kelley ,21 Joey Shapiro Key ,19 Michael T. Lam ,22, 23 T. Joseph W. Lazio,24, 7 Jing Luo,25 Ryan S. Lynch ,26 Chung-Pei Ma,27 Dustin R. Madison ,4, 5, ∗ Maura A. McLaughlin ,4, 5 Chiara M. F. Mingarelli ,28, 29 Cherry Ng ,30 David J. Nice ,11 Timothy T. Pennucci ,31, 32, ∗ Nihan S. Pol ,4, 8, 5 Scott M. Ransom ,31 Paul S. Ray ,33 Brent J. Shapiro-Albert ,4, 5 Xavier Siemens ,34, 20 Joseph Simon ,24, 7 Renee´ Spiewak ,35 Ingrid H. Stairs ,18 Daniel R. Stinebring ,36 Kevin Stovall ,12 Joseph K. Swiggum ,11, ∗ Stephen R. Taylor ,8 Michele Vallisneri ,24, 7 Sarah J. Vigeland ,20 Caitlin A. Witt ,4, 5 The NANOGrav Collaboration 1X-Ray Astrophysics Laboratory, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Code 662, Greenbelt, MD 20771, USA 2Department of Physics and Astronomy, Widener University, One University Place, Chester, PA 19013, USA 3Cornell Center for Astrophysics and Planetary Science and Department of Astronomy, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA 4Department of Physics and Astronomy, West Virginia University, P.O. Box 6315, Morgantown, WV 26506, USA 5Center for Gravitational Waves and Cosmology, West Virginia University, Chestnut Ridge Research Building, Morgantown, WV 26505, USA 6Department of Physics, Montana State University, Bozeman, MT 59717, USA 7Theoretical AstroPhysics Including Relativity (TAPIR), MC 350-17, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California 91125, USA 8Department of Physics and Astronomy, Vanderbilt University, 2301 Vanderbilt Place, Nashville, TN 37235, USA 9Department of Physics and Astronomy, Franklin & Marshall College, P.O. Box 3003, Lancaster, PA 17604, USA 10University of Virginia, Department of Astronomy, P.O. Box 400325, Charlottesville, VA 22904, USA 11Department of Physics, Lafayette College, Easton, PA 18042, USA 12National Radio Astronomy Observatory, 1003 Lopezville Rd., Socorro, NM 87801, USA 13Department of Physics, Hillsdale College, 33 E. College Street, Hillsdale, Michigan 49242, USA 14Department of Astrophysical and Planetary Sciences, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, CO 80309, USA 15Infinia ML, 202 Rigsbee Avenue, Durham NC, 27701 16NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD 20771, USA 17Department of Physics, McGill University, 3600 University St., Montreal, QC H3A 2T8, Canada 18Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of British Columbia, 6224 Agricultural Road, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z1, Canada 19Physical Sciences Division, University of Washington Bothell, 18115 Campus Way NE, Bothell, WA 98011, USA 20 arXiv:2101.02716v1 [astro-ph.GA] 7 Jan 2021 Center for Gravitation, Cosmology and Astrophysics, Department of Physics, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, P.O. Box 413, Milwaukee, WI 53201, USA 21Center for Interdisciplinary Exploration and Research in Astrophysics (CIERA), Northwestern University, Evanston, IL 60208 22School of Physics and Astronomy, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, NY 14623, USA 23Laboratory for Multiwavelength Astrophysics, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, NY 14623, USA 24Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, 4800 Oak Grove Drive, Pasadena, CA 91109, USA 25Department of Astronomy & Astrophysics, University of Toronto, 50 Saint George Street, Toronto, ON M5S 3H4, Canada 26Green Bank Observatory, P.O. Box 2, Green Bank, WV 24944, USA 27Department of Astronomy, University of California Berkeley, Campbell Hall, Berkeley, CA 94720 Corresponding author: Maria Charisi [email protected] 2 The NANOGrav Collaboration 28Center for Computational Astrophysics, Flatiron Institute, 162 5th Avenue, New York, New York, 10010, USA 29Department of Physics, University of Connecticut, 196 Auditorium Road, U-3046, Storrs, CT 06269-3046, USA 30Dunlap Institute for Astronomy and Astrophysics, University of Toronto, 50 St. George St., Toronto, ON M5S 3H4, Canada 31National Radio Astronomy Observatory, 520 Edgemont Road, Charlottesville, VA 22903, USA 32Institute of Physics, E¨otv¨osLor´andUniversity, P´azm´anyP. s. 1/A, 1117 Budapest, Hungary 33Space Science Division, Naval Research Laboratory, Washington, DC 20375-5352, USA 34Department of Physics, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR 97331, USA 35Centre for Astrophysics and Supercomputing, Swinburne University of Technology, P.O. Box 218, Hawthorn, Victoria 3122, Australia 36Department of Physics and Astronomy, Oberlin College, Oberlin, OH 44074, USA (Received January 11, 2021; Revised; Accepted) Submitted to ApJ ABSTRACT Supermassive black hole binaries (SMBHBs) should form frequently in galactic nuclei as a result of galaxy mergers. At sub-parsec separations, binaries become strong sources of low-frequency gravita- tional waves (GWs), targeted by Pulsar Timing Arrays (PTAs). We used recent upper limits on con- tinuous GWs from the North American Nanohertz Observatory for Gravitational Waves (NANOGrav) 11 yr dataset to place constraints on putative SMBHBs in nearby massive galaxies. We compiled a comprehensive catalog of ∼44,000 galaxies in the local universe (up to redshift ∼0.05) and pop- ulated them with hypothetical binaries, assuming that the total mass of the binary is equal to the SMBH mass derived from global scaling relations. Assuming circular equal-mass binaries emitting at NANOGrav's most sensitive frequency of 8 nHz, we found that 216 galaxies are within NANOGrav's sensitivity volume. We ranked the potential SMBHBs based on GW detectability by calculating the total signal-to-noise ratio (S/N) such binaries would induce within the NANOGrav array. We placed constraints on the chirp mass and mass ratio of the 216 hypothetical binaries. For 19 galaxies, only very unequal-mass binaries are allowed, with the mass of the secondary less than 10 percent that of the primary, roughly comparable to constraints on a SMBHB in the Milky Way. Additionally, we were able to exclude binaries delivered by major mergers (mass ratio of at least 1/4) for several of these galaxies. We also derived the first limit on the density of binaries delivered by major mergers purely based on GW data. Keywords: editorials, notices | miscellaneous | catalogs | surveys 1. INTRODUCTION GW regime is of paramount importance for understand- Supermassive black hole binaries are a natural con- ing galaxy evolution (Taylor et al. 2019). 8 10 sequence of galaxy mergers, since massive galaxies are The most massive binaries (10 − 10 M ) are strong known to host supermassive black holes (SMBHs) (Kor- sources of GWs in the nanohertz band (∼ 1 − 100 nHz) mendy & Ho 2013; Haehnelt & Kauffmann 2002). In the and are promising targets for Pulsar Timing Arrays post-merger galaxy, the SMBHs evolve through dynam- (PTAs). PTAs measure precisely the times of arrival ical friction and stellar interactions, and eventually form (TOAs) of pulses for a set of very stable millisecond pul- a gravitationally bound binary. At small (milli-parsec) sars. GWs passing through the Milky Way distort the separations, the binary evolution is dominated by the Earth-pulsar distance, and induce coherent deviations in emission of gravitational waves (GWs). Even though the the TOAs. If such deviations are measured over multi- main steps of binary evolution were proposed decades ple pulsars in the array with a characteristic quadrupole ago (Begelman et al. 1980), there are significant theo- correlation signature, then GWs can be detected (De- retical uncertainties in the path of the SMBHs to their tweiler 1979; Hellings & Downs 1983). final coalescence (e.g., see Colpi 2014; De Rosa et al. Currently, three collaborations are involved in the 2019 for reviews). Therefore, detecting binaries in the effort to detect nanohertz GWs: the North Amer- ican Nanohertz Observatory for Gravitational waves (NANOGrav, Ransom et al. 2019), the European Pul- ∗ NANOGrav Physics Frontiers Center Postdoctoral Fellow sar Timing Array (EPTA, Desvignes et al. 2016) and the limits on smbhbs within 500 mpc 3 Parkes Pulsar Timing Array (PPTA, Kerr et al. 2020). EPTA's sensitive frequencies, with the mass of the sec- Together along with other emerging PTAs, they form ondary SMBH a few percent that of the primary. a wider consortium, known as the International Pulsar In this paper, we expand on this work considering the Timing Array (IPTA, Perera et al. 2019). most recent (and most sensitive) CW upper limits from PTAs are expected to detect two main types of GW NANOGrav, derived from the 11 yr dataset (Aggarwal signals: (1) the stochastic GW background (GWB), i.e., et al. 2019; Arzoumanian et al. 2018a). This dataset the incoherent superposition of many unresolved sig- spans from 2004 to 2015 and contains TOAs of 45 pul- nals from a population of binaries, and (2) continuous sars. Of those, only 34 were observed for at least 3 yr and waves (CWs), i.e., monochromatic GWs from individual were included in the present CW analysis. At the most SMBHBs. Additional (albeit less likely) signals, such as sensitive frequency (fGW = 8 nHz), the sky-averaged −15 1 bursts with memory from SMBHBs, primordial GWs, upper limit on the GW strain is h0 < 7:3 × 10 . For or cosmic strings may also be detected (Burke-Spolaor comparison, the sky-averaged upper limits used in SM16 −14 −14 et al. 2019). As the sensitivity of PTAs is continuously were h0 < 1:7 × 10 and h0 < 1:1 × 10 (at 10 nHz) improving, the first detection is expected in the near fu- from PPTA and EPTA, respectively. ture (Rosado et al.