Paper detail

The evolution of ultracompact X-ray binaries

Context. Ultracompact X-ray binaries (UCXBs) typically consist of a white dwarf donor and a neutron star or black hole accretor. The evolution of UCXBs and very low mass ratio binaries in general is poorly understood. Aims. We investigate the evolution of UCXBs in order to learn for which mass ratios and accretor types these systems can exist, and if they do, what are their orbital and neutron star spin periods, mass transfer rates and evolutionary timescales. Methods. For different assumptions concerning accretion disk behavior we calculate for which system parameters dynamical instability, thermal-viscous disk instability or the propeller effect emerge. Results. At the onset of mass transfer, the survival of the UCXB is determined by how efficiently the accretor can eject matter in the case of a super-Eddington mass transfer rate. At later times, the evolution of systems strongly depends on the binary's capacity to return angular momentum from the disk to the orbit. We find that this feedback mechanism most likely remains effective. In the case of steady mass transfer, the propeller effect can stop accretion onto recycled neutron stars completely at a sufficiently low mass transfer rate, based on energy considerations. However, mass transfer will likely be non-steady because disk instability allows for accretion of some of the transferred matter. Together, the propeller effect and disk instability cause the low mass ratio UCXBs to be visible a small fraction of the time at most, thereby explaining the lack of observations of such systems. Conclusions. Most likely UCXBs avoid late-time dynamically unstable mass transfer and continue to evolve as the age of the Universe allows. This implies the existence of a large population of low mass ratio binaries with orbital periods ~ 70 - 80 min, unless some other mechanism has destroyed these binaries.

preprint2011arXivOpen 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.