Paper detail

Spectroscopy of binary black hole ringdown using overtones and angular modes

The black hole uniqueness and the no-hair theorems imply that the quasinormal spectrum of any astrophysical black hole is determined solely by its mass and spin. The countably infinite number of quasinormal modes of a Kerr black hole are thus related to each other and any deviations from these relations provide a strong hint for physics beyond the general theory of relativity. To test the no-hair theorem using ringdown signals, it is necessary to detect at least two quasinormal modes. In particular, one can detect the fundamental mode along with a subdominant overtone or with another angular mode, depending on the mass ratio and the spins of the progenitor binary. Also in the light of the recent discovery of GW190412, studying how the mass ratio affects the prospect of black hole spectroscopy using overtones or angular modes is pertinent, and this is the major focus of our study. First, we provide ready-to-use fits for the amplitudes and phases of both the angular modes and overtones as a function of mass ratio $q\in[0,10]$. Using these fits we estimate the minimum signal-to-noise ratio for detectability, resolvability, and measurability of subdominant modes/tones. We find that performing black-hole spectroscopy with angular modes is preferable when the binary mass ratio is larger than $q\approx 1.2$ (provided that the source is not located at a particularly disfavoured inclination angle). For nonspinning, equal-mass binary black holes, the overtones seem to be the only viable option to perform a spectroscopy test of the no-hair theorem. However this would require a large ringdown signal-to-noise ratio ($\approx 100$ for a $5\%$ accuracy test with two overtones) and the inclusion of more than one overtone to reduce modelling errors, making black-hole spectroscopy with overtones impractical in the near future.

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.