Paper detail

The impact of realistic models of mass segregation on the event rate of extreme-mass ratio inspirals and cusp re-growth

One of the most interesting sources of gravitational waves (GWs) for LISA is the inspiral of compact objects on to a massive black hole (MBH), commonly referred to as an "extreme-mass ratio inspiral" (EMRI). The small object, typically a stellar black hole (bh), emits significant amounts of GW along each orbit in the detector bandwidth. The slowly, adiabatic inspiral of these sources will allow us to map space-time around MBHs in detail, as well as to test our current conception of gravitation in the strong regime. The event rate of this kind of source has been addressed many times in the literature and the numbers reported fluctuate by orders of magnitude. On the other hand, recent observations of the Galactic center revealed a dearth of giant stars inside the inner parsec relative to the numbers theoretically expected for a fully relaxed stellar cusp. The possibility of unrelaxed nuclei (or, equivalently, with no or only a very shallow cusp) adds substantial uncertainty to the estimates. Having this timely question in mind, we run a significant number of direct-summation $N-$body simulations with up to half a million particles to calibrate a much faster orbit-averaged Fokker-Planck code. We then investigate the regime of strong mass segregation (SMS) for models with two different stellar mass components. We show that, under quite generic initial conditions, the time required for the growth of a relaxed, mass segregated stellar cusp is shorter than a Hubble time for MBHs with $M_\bullet \lesssim 5 \times 10^6 M_\odot$ (i.e. nuclei in the range of LISA). SMS has a significant impact boosting the EMRI rates by a factor of $\sim 10$ for our fiducial models of Milky Way type galactic nuclei.

preprint2011arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors3 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.

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.