Paper detail

Merger rate of black hole binaries from globular clusters: theoretical error bars and comparison to gravitational wave data from GWTC-2

Black hole binaries formed dynamically in globular clusters are believed to be one of the main sources of gravitational waves in the Universe. Here, we use our new population synthesis code, cBHBd, to determine the redshift evolution of the merger rate density and masses of black hole binaries formed in globular clusters. We simulate $\sim 2$ million models to explore the parameter space that is relevant to real clusters and over all mass scales. We show that when uncertainties on the initial cluster mass function and density are properly taken into account, they become the two dominant factors in setting the theoretical error bars on merger rates. Other model parameters (e.g., natal kicks, black hole masses, metallicity) have virtually no effect on the local merger rate density, although they affect the masses of the merging black holes. Modelling the merger rate density as a function of redshift as $R(z)=R_0(1+z)^κ$ at $z<2$, and marginalizing over uncertainties, we find: $R_0=7.2^{+21.5}_{-5.5}{\rm Gpc^{-3}yr^{-1}}$ and $κ=1.6^{+0.4}_{-0.6}$ ($90\%$ credibility). The rate parameters for binaries that merge inside the clusters are ${R}_{\rm 0,in}=1.6^{+1.9}_{-1.0}{\rm Gpc^{-3}yr^{-1}}$ and $κ_{\rm in}=2.3^{+1.3}_{-1.0}$; $\sim 20\%$ of these form as the result of a gravitational-wave capture, implying that eccentric mergers from globular clusters contribute $\lesssim 0.4 \rm Gpc^{-3}yr^{-1}$ to the local rate. A comparison to the merger rate reported by LIGO-Virgo shows that a scenario in which most of the detected black hole mergers are formed in globular clusters is consistent with current constraints, and requires initial cluster half-mass densities $\gtrsim 10^4 M_\odot \rm pc^{-3}$. Such models also reproduce the inferred primary black hole mass distribution for masses $13-30 M_\odot$, but under-predict the data outside this range.

preprint2020arXivOpen 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.