2021
DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361/202039992
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The role of mass transfer and common envelope evolution in the formation of merging binary black holes

Abstract: As the number of merging binary black holes observed with ground-based gravitational-wave detectors grows, increasingly accurate theoretical models are required to compare them to the observed sample and disentangle contributions from multiple channels. In formation models involving isolated binary stars, important uncertainties remain regarding the stability of mass transfer and common-envelope evolution. To study some of these uncertainties, we have computed binary simulations using the MESA code consisting … Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
125
1

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
3
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 119 publications
(129 citation statements)
references
References 203 publications
3
125
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The situation is even more complex when considering that our larger suite of models (560 realizations) still only represents a subset of the overall uncertainties in population synthesis studies. For example, even our broader set of models does not account for uncertainties in the stellar evolution tracks (e.g., Laplace et al 2020;Agrawal et al 2020), internal mixing (e.g., Schootemeijer et al 2019), stellar rotation (e.g., de Mink & Mandel 2016Mapelli et al 2020), the more complex physics of the CE phase (e.g., Klencki et al 2021;Ivanova et al 2020;Marchant et al 2021;Olejak et al 2021), the additional possible remnant mass prescriptions (e.g. Dabrowny et al 2021;, the initial conditions of binary systems (e.g., de Mink & Belczynski 2015;Moe & Di Stefano 2017;Klencki et al 2018), and the possible contributions from other formation channels (e.g., Zevin et al 2021).…”
Section: A Realistic View Of Population Synthesis Modelsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The situation is even more complex when considering that our larger suite of models (560 realizations) still only represents a subset of the overall uncertainties in population synthesis studies. For example, even our broader set of models does not account for uncertainties in the stellar evolution tracks (e.g., Laplace et al 2020;Agrawal et al 2020), internal mixing (e.g., Schootemeijer et al 2019), stellar rotation (e.g., de Mink & Mandel 2016Mapelli et al 2020), the more complex physics of the CE phase (e.g., Klencki et al 2021;Ivanova et al 2020;Marchant et al 2021;Olejak et al 2021), the additional possible remnant mass prescriptions (e.g. Dabrowny et al 2021;, the initial conditions of binary systems (e.g., de Mink & Belczynski 2015;Moe & Di Stefano 2017;Klencki et al 2018), and the possible contributions from other formation channels (e.g., Zevin et al 2021).…”
Section: A Realistic View Of Population Synthesis Modelsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We have generated a suite of detailed binary stellar evolution models, examining angular momentum (AM) transport and core rotation rates of massive helium stars in close binary systems. Such binaries could possibly be formed via common envelope evolution (e.g., Belczynski et al 2002), or via stable mass transfer (e.g., Marchant et al 2021), which may be more likely for massive helium stars (Klencki et al 2020). Our models improve upon prior efforts by implementing an updated AM transport prescription based on magnetic torques associated with the Tayler instability (Fuller et al 2019), which has been calibrated with asteroseismic core rotation rates of low-mass red giant stars.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…The discrepancy is even worse when one considers that the ejecta mass of our massive models would be far larger than 5 M , meaning that the ejecta velocity would be smaller than 15, 000 km/s and those SNe would not appear broad-lined. Another problem with this scenario is that such massive He stars may be less likely to form via a common envelope event (Klencki et al 2020;Marchant et al 2021;van Son et al 2021), and less likely to explode (O'Connor & Ott 2011;Zapartas et al 2021). This may disfavor magnetars as the power source of most Ic-BL SNe.…”
Section: Magnetar Central Enginesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Furthermore, the boundary between stable and unstable mass transfer when a star fills its Roche lobe around a companion is poorly understood, especially in triples. Here, we adopted a strongly simplified criterion (based on Hurley et al 2002), whereas it is known that such criteria based on population synthesis methods can over-predict the occurrence rate of CE in binaries (e.g., Woods & Ivanova 2011;Ge et al 2015;Marchant et al 2021). Evidently, these uncertainties are even more severe in the triple case.…”
Section: Caveats and Future Improvementsmentioning
confidence: 99%