Paper detail

The effect of differential accretion on the Gravitational Wave Background and the present day MBH Binary population

Massive black hole binaries (MBHBs) form as a consequence of galaxy mergers. However, it is still unclear whether they typically merge within a Hubble time, and how accretion may affect their evolution. These questions will be addressed by pulsar timing arrays (PTAs), which aim to detect the GW background (GWB) emitted by MBHBs during the last Myrs of inspiral. Here we investigate the influence of differential accretion on MBHB merger rates, chirp masses and the resulting GWB spectrum. We evolve a MBHB sample from the Illustris hydrodynamic cosmological simulation using semi-analytic models and for the first time self-consistently evolve their masses with binary accretion models. In all models, MBHBs coalesce with median total masses up to $1.5 \times 10^8 M_{\odot}$, up to $3-4$ times larger than in models neglecting accretion. In our model with the largest plausible impact, the median mass ratio of coalescing MBHBs increases by a factor $3.6$, the coalescence rate by $52.3\%$, and the GWB amplitude by a factor $4.0$, yielding a dimensionless GWB strain $A_{yr^{-1}} = 1 \times 10^{-15}$. Our model that favours accretion onto the primary MBH reduces the median mass ratio of coalescing MBHBs by a factor of $2.9$, and yields a GWB amplitude $A_{yr^{-1}} = 3.1 \times 10^{-16}$. This is nearly indistinguishable from our model neglecting accretion, despite higher MBHB masses at coalescence. \textbf{We further predict binary separation and mass ratio distributions of stalled MBHBs in the low-redshift universe, and find that these depend sensitively on binary accretion models. This presents the potential for combined EM and GW observational constraints on merger rates and accretion models of MBHB populations.}

preprint2020arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 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.