Paper detail

Introducing a new multi-particle collision method for the evolution of dense stellar systems II. Core collapse

In a previous paper we introduced a new method for simulating collisional gravitational $N$-body systems with linear time scaling on $N$, based on the Multi-Particle Collision (MPC) approach. This allows us to simulate globular clusters with a realistic number of stellar particles in a matter of hours on a typical workstation. We evolve star clusters containing up to $10^6$ stars to core collapse and beyond. We quantify several aspects of core collapse over multiple realizations and different parameters, while always resolving the cluster core with a realistic number of particles. We run a large set of N-body simulations with our new code. The cluster mass function is a power-law with no stellar evolution, allowing us to clearly measure the effects of the mass spectrum. Leading up to core collapse, we find a power-law relation between the size of the core and the time left to core collapse. Our simulations thus confirm the theoretical self-similar contraction picture but with a dependence on the slope of the mass function. The time of core collapse has a non-monotonic dependence on the slope, which is well fit by a parabola. This holds also for the depth of core collapse and for the dynamical friction timescale of heavy particles. Cluster density profiles at core collapse show a broken power law structure, suggesting that central cusps are a genuine feature of collapsed cores. The core bounces back after collapse, and the inner density slope evolves to an asymptotic value. The presence of an intermediate-mass black hole inhibits core collapse. We confirm and expand on several predictions of star cluster evolution before, during, and after core collapse. Such predictions were based on theoretical calculations or small-size direct $N$-body simulations. Here we put them to the test on MPC simulations with a much larger number of particles, allowing us to resolve the collapsing core.

preprint2021arXivOpen 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.