Paper detail

Limits on intermediate-mass black holes in six Galactic globular clusters with integral-field spectroscopy

The formation of supermassive black holes at high redshift still remains a puzzle to astronomers. Their growth becomes reasonable only when starting from a massive seed black hole with mass of the order of 10^2 - 10^5 M_SUN. Intermediate-mass black holes (IMBHs) are therefore an important field of research. Especially the possibility of finding them in the centers of globular clusters has recently drawn attention. The search for IMBHs in the centers of globular clusters could therefore shed light on the process of black-hole formation and cluster evolution. We are investigating six galactic globular clusters for the presence of an IMBH at their centers. Based on their kinematic and photometric properties, we selected the globular clusters NGC 1851, NGC 1904 (M79), NGC 5694, NGC 5824, NGC 6093 (M80) and NGC 6266 (M62). We use integral field spectroscopy in order to obtain the central velocity-dispersion profile of each cluster. We compute the cluster photometric center and the surface brightness profile using HST data. After combining these datasets we compare them to analytic Jeans models. We use varying M/L_V profiles for clusters with enough data points in order to reproduce their kinematic profiles in an optimal way. Finally, we vary the mass of the central black hole and test whether the cluster is better fitted with or without an IMBH. We present the statistical significance, including upper limits, of the black-hole mass for each cluster. NGC 1904 and NGC 6266 provide the highest significance for a black hole. Jeans models in combination with a M/L_V profile obtained from N-body simulations (in the case of NGC 6266) predict a central black hole of M_BH = (3 +- 1) x 10^3 M_SUN for NGC 1904 and M_BH = (2 +- 1) x 10^3 M_SUN for NGC 6266. Furthermore, we discuss the possible influence of dark remnants and mass segregation at the center of the cluster on the detection of an IMBH.

preprint2012arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access9 authors1 topic

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.

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.