higher powered jets from black hole space times

Higher powered jets from black hole space-times L. Lehner (Uof - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Higher powered jets from black hole space-times L. Lehner (Uof Guelph/Perimeter Inst/CIFAR) (Uof Guelph/Perimeter Inst/CIFAR) C. Palenzuela, L. Liebling C. Hanna, D. Neilsen, E. Hirschman, M. Anderson Gravitational Waves:


  1. ‘Higher powered’ “jets” from black hole space-times L. Lehner (Uof Guelph/Perimeter Inst/CIFAR) (Uof Guelph/Perimeter Inst/CIFAR) C. Palenzuela, L. Liebling C. Hanna, D. Neilsen, E. Hirschman, M. Anderson

  2. Gravitational Waves: ‘Current’ detectors… ������ ��������� ���� ����� ��������������� ��� ���� ����� ���� ������� ���� ���������� 2

  3. (?) Future detector: LISA.

  4. Ideal source: Binary black holes… [Pretorius 05, �..]

  5. (some) notable outcomes… • Radiation: convert ~ 5% of total intial mass and angular momentum. (can be higher for ‘tuned’ collisions). E GW ~ 10 58 ergs (M T /10 6 M sun ) in ~ 500 (M T /10 6 M sun ) secs • • L GW ~ 10 23 L sun • Asymmetric scenarios give rise to kicks, these can be as large as 3-5 10 3 km/s! (claim Quasar SDSS J092712.65+294344.0 ) – Yet… these need some tweaking. – Yet… these need some tweaking. – A few 100s km/s more typical. (Mech Energy ~ 10 53 ergs ( M T /10 6 M sun ) >> SN !) • Dynamics/energetics of thesystem can profoundly influence neighboring matter/gas/plasma, etc.

  6. Example of ‘what’s coming’: LISA signals? LISA: superb signal to noise ratio. Excellent accuracy to: strain & freqn • waves will be ``seen’’ directly and to very large redshifts (z~ 5-15 …) • h ~ [(1+z) � ] 5/3 f 2/3 /d L ; f ,t ~ [(1+z) � ] 5/3 f 11/3 • h ~ [(1+z) � ] /d L ; f ,t ~ [(1+z) � ] f f • However: • localization to ~ square degrees [Holz-Hughes] • distance obtained is redshift dependent (arcmin 2 << deg 2 ) (from Kocsis et.al. 2006,2008 and Holz1Hughes 05)

  7. LISA signals? LISA: superb signal to noise ratio. Excellent accuracy to: strain & freqn • waves will be ``seen’’ directly and to very large redshifts (z~ 5-15 …) • h ~ [(1+z) � ] 5/3 f 2/3 /d L ; f ,t ~ [(1+z) � ] 5/3 f 11/3 • h ~ [(1+z) � ] /d L ; f ,t ~ [(1+z) � ] f f • However: • localization to ~ square degrees [Holz-Hughes] • distance obtained is redshift dependent An electromagnetic counterpart resolves these issues Can get a purely gravitational & clean Hubble diagram! (d l vs z)

  8. Nature cooperates… • Super massive binary black holes seem to exist NGC 6240. Black hole pair In the process of merging? • Understand both gravitational and electromagnetic wave • Understand both gravitational and electromagnetic wave emissions from key systems – Binary black holes interacting with surrounding media 10 51 Ergs routinely inferred� (~10 49 LHCs) �?! The ‘key’ is to tell observers what to look for�

  9. Studying relevant systems • Deal with spacetime curvature – Einstein equations. That’s the ‘solved’ part! (ie… if you ‘think’ about it.. NR can likely give the answer, for comparable masses that is….) • Black holes… are not really quite in vacuum…must deal with fields describing gas and electromagnetic fields with fields describing gas and electromagnetic fields – Poorly understood systems [we don’t control the experiment] – Emission process? – What physics? • Electromagnetic fields? • Matter, what matter ? Concentrate on appropriate systems…

  10. ������������������������������������ �observations indicate the presence of supermassive BHs in the center of galaxies, surrounded by gas and an accretion disk � these galaxies have undergone mergers � binary black hole merger � further, AGNs � BHs are surrounded by a disc of matter likely magnetized.

  11. Two fronts. (circumbinary picture) • Pre/prompt/post - merger emissions? – (pre/prompt) Binary black holes as stirrers of ‘stuff’ – (post) merged black hole as bully for matter

  12. Binary black holes and emissions • Different possible options. – Postmerger events from circumbinary disks around BHs [Milosavljevic-Phinney; Lipai-Loeb; Lipai et.al, Bonning et.al; Bode et.al; O’Neil et. al; O’Neil et. al; Megevand et.al; Corrales et.al, etc. ] – Pre/merger events from gas/plasmas in between BHs / torques on disk [Armitage et.al; MacFadyen et.al.; Dotti et.al; Chang. et.al .; Palenzuela et.al.; Bode et.al…]

  13. Binary black holes as blenders. A new spin on an old story How does the curvature/dynamics influence EM fields? • Blandford-Znajek. Connected to “Penrose” process for Kerr bh’s surrounded by magnetic fields (anchored by the disk) • Stray charges accelerate � photons � pair production • Stray charges accelerate � photons � pair production � cascade. BH becomes surrounded by a tenuous conducting plasma with little inertia [Goldreich-Julian, Blandford-Znajek]

  14. Approach: Force-free electrodynamics ▼ a T ab =0 � ▼ a T ab (fluid) = �▼ a T ab (em) = �F ab J a if ρ,P << B 2 then ▼ a T ab (fluid) << F ab J a ≈ 0 � · � = 0 , q � + � x � = 0 → E3B = 0 System can thus be studied in an ``effective way” • plasma supplies charges/currents which in turn enforce E.B = 0 • furthermore, fields can carry charged particles, and establish a circuit Need to solve this problem, what can we expect that is interesting/relevant?

  15. Basic picture from the membrane paradigm BH: (poor) conductor Battery: Black hole’s rotation Plasma to close the circuit Far load: to dissipate energy 1 1 1 1 1 1 L ~ B 2 a 2 + + +

  16. • • IF IF analogy can be pushed further, there is little special about BH’s rotation, any relative motion of conductor wrt ambient magnetic field would give and EMF • SMBH merger will give such scenarios – Prior to merger, 2 bhs orbital motion inside the circumbinary disk region – After merger finally BH rotates, but also might have a velocity due to recoil • Can this intuition be confirmed? And connection further exploited? • we knew. L ~ B 2 a 2 in the aligned • we knew. L ~ B 2 a 2 in the aligned case [Tchechovskoy,Narayan,McKinney 2010]. • For misaligned case? • Poynting flux still there, along B • L ~ B 2 a 2 (1 + cos 2 ) (can be predicted using Damour 74 + mp!) [Palenzuela,Garret,LL,Liebling, PRD 2010]

  17. What if it moves? • E.g. after black holes merge, individual black holes prior to merger. • Where from? From membrane paradigm � bh is a • Where from? From membrane paradigm � bh is a conductor. If moving through a B field, induce E ~ v x B � EMF=V ~ (vB) ; L ~ V 2 /R • Thus, L ~ B 2 v 2 (from boost) ������������������������������������������� �������������������������������������

  18. Onto the binary case • Orbit � Black holes move through B. Hall effect analogue! • As in head1on case, ‘circuit’ can be established due to charge separation • Thus, expect Poynting flux through orbiting stages. Also at late time (BZ). [Palenzuela,LL,Liebling , Science 2010]

  19. � F Poynting flux

  20. Putting all together: L ~ ( 1 [a/0.6] 2 + 100 v 2 ) 10 43 ergs [M 8 B 4 ] 2 * EM flux acts as a “spacetime tracer” * Can exploit ‘standard’ BBH results to predict much of the EM flux behavior Multimessenger? : LISA & PTA for gravity waves EM observations? For 10 4 G, 10 8 M O flux ~ 10 43-44 ergs. IF Poynting flux energy efficiently transferred to observable emissions, interesting pre/post merger • observations possible; to z=1 ? • What/how to see it? This story just beginning… How about Ligo/Virgo sources?

  21. Wrapping up: ‘back’ to stellar masses • NS source magnetic fields and issues – Talks at HEPRO! – Pulsar spin down (Spitkovsky) – Magnetosphere interactions ? (Lyutikov-Hansen) – NS crust-quakes (Tsang) – QPOs and magnetars (Cerda-Duran et al) • Gravity stirrers + above – NS-BH interaction. (BH moves in field of NS) [McWilliams-Levin, our collaboration] – NS collapse (both freqn, and, field grows. If star is byproduct of NS-NS merger, starting field ~ 10 16-17 G!, independent test of BH-NS vs NS-NS for sGRB) [our collaboration] – NS-NS close interaction..

  22. In progress: In progress: • How does the BH gets bold? • Energetics? • Angular structure. • ev vs. ff • Emission processes. sGRB precursor? • Connection with BNS merger / after merger • Different magnetic field structure of star Hanna,LL,Liebling,Palenzuela, Thompson,Neilsen, Hirschmann…

  23. Summary • Gravitational wave astronomy ‘around the corner’. Multimessenger astronomy requires identifying electromagnetic/neutrino counterparts • GWs (and even more with counterparts) possibly will tie many knots, inform models, etc. • Still much to be understood, the field is just beginning to consider options and possibilities. In particular, we need to follow your lead!

Recommend


More recommend


Explore More Topics

Stay informed with curated content and fresh updates.