Paper detail

Towards the use of the most massive black hole candidates in AGN to test the Kerr paradigm

The super-massive objects in galactic nuclei are thought to be the Kerr black holes predicted by General Relativity, although a definite proof of their actual nature is still lacking. The most massive objects in AGN ($M \sim 10^9 M_\odot$) seem to have a high radiative efficiency ($η\sim 0.4$) and a moderate mass accretion rate ($L_{\rm bol}/L_{\rm Edd} \sim 0.3$). The high radiative efficiency could suggest they are very rapidly-rotating black holes. The moderate luminosity could indicate that their accretion disk is geometrically thin. If so, these objects could be excellent candidates to test the Kerr black hole hypothesis. An accurate measurement of the radiative efficiency of an individual AGN may probe the geometry of the space-time around the black hole candidate with a precision comparable to the one achievable with future space-based gravitational-wave detectors like LISA. A robust evidence of the existence of a black hole candidate with $η> 0.32$ and accreting from a thin disk may be interpreted as an indication of new physics. For the time being, there are several issues to address before using AGN to test the Kerr paradigm, but the approach seems to be promising and capable of providing interesting results before the advent of gravitational wave astronomy.

preprint2012arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author2 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.