Handbook of Gravitational Wave Astronomy 2021
DOI: 10.1007/978-981-15-4702-7_16-1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Formation Channels of Single and Binary Stellar-Mass Black Holes

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
35
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 47 publications
(35 citation statements)
references
References 344 publications
0
35
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Where initially stated in different units, we convert these, using, as appropriate, factors of 1:7 Â 10 10 solar blue-light luminosities per Milky Way equivalent galaxy (MWEG), 1:17 Â 10 À2 MWEG per Mpc 3 (Kopparapu et al 2008), a globular cluster space density of 2.9 per Mpc 3 at z ¼ 0 (Portegies Zwart and McMillan 2000) and a local supernova rate of 1:06 Â 10 5 Gpc À3 yr À1 (Taylor et al 2014). Of course, such simple re-scalings do not account for the dependence of merger rates on the star formation history and metallicity (de Freitas Pacheco et al 2006;Belczynski et al 2010;Dvorkin et al 2016;Neijssel et al 2019;Mapelli 2021).…”
Section: Executive Summarymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Where initially stated in different units, we convert these, using, as appropriate, factors of 1:7 Â 10 10 solar blue-light luminosities per Milky Way equivalent galaxy (MWEG), 1:17 Â 10 À2 MWEG per Mpc 3 (Kopparapu et al 2008), a globular cluster space density of 2.9 per Mpc 3 at z ¼ 0 (Portegies Zwart and McMillan 2000) and a local supernova rate of 1:06 Â 10 5 Gpc À3 yr À1 (Taylor et al 2014). Of course, such simple re-scalings do not account for the dependence of merger rates on the star formation history and metallicity (de Freitas Pacheco et al 2006;Belczynski et al 2010;Dvorkin et al 2016;Neijssel et al 2019;Mapelli 2021).…”
Section: Executive Summarymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The inferred distribution can be used to compute constraints on BBH formation channel models, most broadly divided into dynamical formation in dense environments [20][21][22][23], such as star clusters [24][25][26][27][28] and active galactic nuclei (AGN) disks [29][30][31][32][33][34]); and binary co-evolution in isolation [35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42] or with external agents [43][44][45][46][47][48][49]. Refer to Mapelli [50] for a recent review of formation channels.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The astrophysical interpretation of GW detections is crucial to shed light on the evolutionary history of compact-object binaries. We still do not know how heavy stellar black holes form, how two black holes can merge within a Hubble time, and what are the distinguishing features that would allow us to piece-together the formation pathways of compact-object binaries [14,15].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…At the same time, the orbital period of tight binaries can be as short as ∼days [46,47]. Furthermore, it is also crucial to consider time-scales related to binary stellar evolution, such as the typical timescale for stable mass transfer (SMT) O 10 3 yr, or the common envelope (CE) time scale, that is O 10 3 − 10 5 yr [15]. N-body simulations that aim at investigating merging compact objects in GCs need to cover, at least, t relax (∼Gyrs) of evolution and to resolve all the mentioned timescales simultaneously.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%