2022
DOI: 10.1103/physrevd.106.043014
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Revisiting the common envelope evolution in binary stars: A new semianalytic model for N -body and population synthesis codes

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 100 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…If the system remains bound, the postcollapse orbital parameters are related to the precollapse parameters by (see, 5 Note, however, that population synthesis studies suggest that a sizable fraction of binaries might be eccentric as they enter the common envelope phase (Vigna-Gómez et al 2020), and recent common envelope modeling suggests that a fraction of these might still maintain some residual eccentricity post−common envelope (Trani et al 2022). We stress that while the assumption of e i = 0 in the present work significantly simplifies the expressions and provides clarity, it is by no means required, and that the most important results of the present work (such as the ultrafast merger time tail) are independent of this assumption.…”
Section: Bound Systemsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…If the system remains bound, the postcollapse orbital parameters are related to the precollapse parameters by (see, 5 Note, however, that population synthesis studies suggest that a sizable fraction of binaries might be eccentric as they enter the common envelope phase (Vigna-Gómez et al 2020), and recent common envelope modeling suggests that a fraction of these might still maintain some residual eccentricity post−common envelope (Trani et al 2022). We stress that while the assumption of e i = 0 in the present work significantly simplifies the expressions and provides clarity, it is by no means required, and that the most important results of the present work (such as the ultrafast merger time tail) are independent of this assumption.…”
Section: Bound Systemsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…During the rapid plunge-phase of the CEE the accretion flow is not in a steady state because the spiraling-in timescale  a a is on about the dynamical timescale of the giant star (e.g., Ohlmann et al 2016;Iaconi et al 2017b;Law-Smith et al 2020;Glanz & Perets 2021a, 2021bLau et al 2022aLau et al , 2022bGonzález-Bolívar et al 2022;Moreno et al 2022;Ondratschek et al 2022;Trani et al 2022;Roepke & De Marco 2023 for some recent papers and references to earlier studies therein). I take the plunge-in timescale as…”
Section: Timescalesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In isolated COBs several processes (e.g.,tidal interactions or dynamical friction during a common envelope phase) tend to circularise the orbit of the binary progenitor [e.g. [153][154][155][156][157], although some of the physical processes still partly unknown -like common envelope -could produce mildly eccentric binaries [158]. Conversely, the eccentricity distribution of dynamically assembled BBHs generally follows a thermal distribution, P(e)de ∼ 2e, which implies a probability of 50% to form a binary with eccentricity e > 0.7.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%