Paper detail

The evolutionary roads leading to low effective spins, high black hole masses, and O1/O2 rates of LIGO/Virgo binary black holes

All ten LIGO/Virgo binary black hole (BH-BH) coalescences reported from the O1/O2 runs have near zero effective spins. There are only three potential explanations of this fact. If the BH spin magnitudes are large then (i) either both BH spin vectors must be nearly in the orbital plane or (ii) the spin angular momenta of the BHs must be oppositely directed and similar in magnitude. Or, (iii) the BH spin magnitudes are small. We test the third hypothesis within the framework of the classical isolated binary evolution scenario of the BH-BH merger formation. We test three models of angular momentum transport in massive stars: a mildly efficient transport by meridional currents (as employed in the Geneva code), an efficient transport by the Tayler-Spruit magnetic dynamo (as implemented in the MESA code), and a very-efficient transport (as proposed by Fuller et al.) to calculate natal BH spins. We allow for binary evolution to increase the BH spins through accretion and account for the potential spin-up of stars through tidal interactions. Additionally, we update the calculations of the stellar-origin BH masses, include revisions to the history of star formation and to the chemical evolution across cosmic time. We find that we can match simultaneously the observed BH-BH merger rate density, BH masses, and effective spins. Models with efficient angular momentum transport are favored. The updated stellar-mass weighted gas-phase metallicity evolution now used in our models appears to be a key in better reproducing the LIGO/Virgo merger rate estimate. Mass losses during the pair-instability pulsation supernova phase are likely overestimated if the merger GW170729 hosts a BH more massive than 50 Msun. We also estimate rate of BH-NS mergers from recent LIGO/Virgo observations. Our updated models of BH-BH, BH-NS and NS-NS mergers are now publicly available at www.syntheticuniverse.org.

preprint2020arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access34 authors2 topics

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.

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.