Paper detail

Mass Measurements of Black Holes in X-Ray Transients: Is There a Mass Gap?

We explore possible systematic errors in the mass measurements of stellar mass black holes. We find that significant errors can arise from the assumption of zero or constant emission from the accretion flow, which is commonly used when determining orbital inclination by modelling ellipsoidal variations. For A0620-00, the system with the best available data, we show that typical data sets and analysis procedures can lead to systematic underestimates of the inclination by ten degrees or more. A careful examination of the available data for the 15 other X-ray transients with low-mass donors suggests that this effect may significantly reduce the black hole mass estimates in several other cases, most notably that of GRO J0422+32. With these revisions, our analysis of the black hole mass distribution in soft X-ray transients does not suggest any "mass gap" between the low end of the distribution and the maximum theoretical neutron star mass, as has been identified in previous studies. Nevertheless, we find that the mass distribution retains other previously identified characteristics, namely a peak around 8M\odot, a paucity of sources with masses below 5M\odot, and a sharp drop-off above 10M\odot.

preprint2012arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 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.