Paper detail

How important is secular evolution for black hole and neutron star mergers in 2+2 and 3+1 quadruple-star systems?

Mergers of black holes (BHs) and neutron stars (NSs) result in the emission of gravitational waves that can be detected by LIGO. In this paper, we look at 2+2 and 3+1 quadruple-star systems, which are common among massive stars, the progenitors of BHs and NSs. We carry out a detailed population synthesis of quadruple systems using the MSE code, which seamlessly takes into consideration stellar evolution, binary and tertiary interactions, $N$-body dynamics, and secular evolution. We find that, although secular evolution plays a role in compact object (BH and NS) mergers, (70--85) \% (depending on the model assumptions) of the mergers are solely due to common envelope (CE) evolution. Significant eccentricities in the LIGO band (higher than 0.01) are only obtained with zero supernova (SNe) kicks and are directly linked to the role of secular evolution. A similar outlier effect is seen in the $χ_{\mathrm{eff}}$ distribution, with negative values obtained only with zero SNe kicks. When kicks are taken into account, there are no systems that evolve into a quadruple consisting of four compact objects. For our fiducial model, we estimate the merger rates (in units of $\Gpcyr$) in 2+2 quadruples (3+1 quadruples) to be 10.8 $\pm$ 0.9 (2.9 $\pm$ 0.5), 5.7 $\pm$ 0.6 (1.4 $\pm$ 0.4) and 0.6 $\pm$ 0.2 (0.7 $\pm$ 0.3) for BH-BH, BH-NS and NS-NS mergers respectively. The BH-BH merger rates represent a significant fraction of the current LIGO rates, whereas the other merger rates fall short of LIGO estimates.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

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 graph slice

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.