Paper detail

Models of quasi-periodic oscillations related to mass and spin of the GRO J1655-40 black hole

Frequencies of the three quasi-periodic oscillation (QPO) modes observed simultaneously in the accreting black hole GRO J1655-40 are compared with the predictions of models. Models in which all three QPO signals are produced at the same radius are considered: these include different versions of relativistic precession, epicyclic resonance, tidal disruption, and warped disc models. Models that were originally proposed to interpret only the twin high-frequency QPOs are generalized here to interpret also the low-frequency QPO in terms of relativistic nodal precession. Inferred values of the black hole mass and spin from each QPO model are compared with the mass measured from optical observations and the spin inferred from X-ray spectroscopy techniques. We find that along with the relativistic precession model predicting $M=(5.3\pm0.1)~M_{\odot}, a=0.286\pm0.004$, the so-called total precession model ($M=(5.5\pm0.1)~M_{\odot}, a=0.276\pm0.003$), and the resonance epicyclic model with beat frequency ($M=(5.1\pm0.1)~M_{\odot}, a=0.274\pm0.003$) also satisfy the optical mass test. We compare our results with those inferred from X-ray spectral measurements.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 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.

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.