Paper detail

Does Matter Matter? Using the mass distribution to distinguish neutron stars and black holes

Gravitational-wave detectors have opened a new window through which we can observe black holes (BHs) and neutron stars (NSs). Analyzing the 11 detections from LIGO/Virgo's first gravitational-wave catalog, GWTC-1, we investigate whether the power-law fit to the BH mass spectrum can also accommodate the binary neutron star (BNS) event GW170817, or whether we require an additional feature, such as a mass gap, in between the NS and BH populations. We find that with respect to the power-law fit to binary black hole (BBH) masses, GW170817 is an outlier at the 0.13\% level, suggesting a distinction between NS and BH masses. A single power-law fit across the entire mass range is in mild tension with: (a) the detection of one source in the BNS mass range ($\sim 1$--$2.5 \,M_\odot$), (b) the absence of detections in the "mass-gap" range ($\sim 2.5$--$5 \,M_\odot$), and (c) the detection of 10 sources in the BBH mass range ($\gtrsim 5 \,M_\odot$). Instead, the data favor models with a feature between NS and BH masses, including a mass gap (Bayes factor of 4.6) and a break in the power law, with a steeper slope at NS masses compared to BH masses (91\% credibility). We estimate the merger rates of compact binaries based on our fit to the global mass distribution, finding $\mathcal{R}_\mathrm{BNS} = 871^{+3015}_{-805} \ \mathrm{Gpc}^{-3} \ \mathrm{yr}^{-1}$ and $\mathcal{R}_\mathrm{BBH} = 47.5^{+57.9}_{-28.8} \ \mathrm{Gpc}^{-3} \ \mathrm{yr}^{-1}$. We conclude that, even in the absence of any prior knowledge of the difference between NSs and BHs, the gravitational-wave data alone already suggest two distinct populations of compact objects.

preprint2020arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 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.