Paper detail

Common envelope ejection in massive binary stars - Implications for the progenitors of GW150914 and GW151226

The recently detected gravitational wave signals (GW150914 and GW151226) of the merger event of a pair of relatively massive stellar-mass black holes (BHs) calls for an investigation of the formation of such progenitor systems in general. We analyse the common envelope (CE) stage of the "traditional" formation channel in binaries where the first-formed compact object undergoes an in-spiral inside the envelope of its evolved companion star and ejects the envelope in that process. We calculate envelope binding energies of donor stars with initial masses between 4 and 115 Msun for metallicities of Z=Zsun/2 and Z=Zsun/50, and derive minimum masses of in-spiralling objects needed to eject these envelopes. We find that CE evolution, besides from producing WD-WD and NS-NS binaries, may, in principle, also produce massive BH-BH systems with individual BH component masses up to ~50-60 Msun, in particular for donor stars evolved to giants. However, the physics of envelope ejection of massive stars remains uncertain. We discuss the applicability of the energy-budget formalism, the location of the bifurcation point, the recombination energy and the accretion energy during in-spiral as possible energy sources, and also comment on the effect of inflated helium cores. Massive stars in a wide range of metallicities and with initial masses up to at least 115 Msun may possibly shed their envelopes and survive CE evolution, depending on their initial orbital parameters, similarly to the situation for intermediate mass and low-mass stars with degenerate cores. We conclude that based on stellar structure calculations, and in the view of the usual simple energy budget analysis, events like GW150914 and GW151226 could possibly be produced from the CE channel. Calculations of post-CE orbital separations, however, and thus the estimated LIGO detection rates, remain highly uncertain. [Abridged]

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access6 authors2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.