Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                

Gravitational wave memory of compact binary coalescence in the presence of matter effects

Dixeena Lopez, Shubhanshu Tiwari, and Michael Ebersold
Phys. Rev. D 109, 043039 – Published 21 February 2024
PDFHTMLExport Citation
Abstract
Authors
Article Text
  • INTRODUCTION
  • NONLINEAR MEMORY WAVEFORM
  • IMPACT OF NONLINEAR MEMORY ON THE…
  • DETECTION PROSPECTS OF POSTMERGER MEMORY…
  • LINEAR MEMORY OF EJECTA FROM BINARY…
  • DISCUSSIONS
  • ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
  • APPENDICES
    • References

    Abstract

    Binary neutron stars (BNSs) and neutron star–black hole (NSBH) binaries are two of the most promising gravitational wave (GW) sources to probe matter effects. Upcoming observing runs of LIGO-Virgo-KAGRA detectors and future third generation detectors like Einstein Telescope and Cosmic Explorer will allow the extraction of detailed information on these matter effects from the GW signature of BNS and NSBH systems. One subtle effect which may be helpful to extract more information from the detection of compact binary systems is the nonlinear memory. In this work, we investigate the observational consequences of gravitational wave nonlinear memory in the presence of matter effects. We start by quantifying the impact of nonlinear memory on distinguishing BNS mergers from binary black holes (BBHs) or NSBH mergers. We find that for the third generation detectors, the addition of nonlinear memory to the GW signal model expands the parameter space where BNS signals become distinguishable from the BBH and NSBH signals. Using numerical relativity simulations, we also study the nonlinear memory generated from the postmerger phase of BNS systems. We find that it does not show a strong dependence on the equation of state of the NS. However, the amplitude of nonlinear memory from the BNS postmerger phase is much lower than the one from BBH systems of the same masses. Furthermore, we compute the detection prospects of nonlinear memory from the postmerger phase of NS systems by accumulating signal strength from a population of BNS mergers for the current and future detectors. Finally, we discuss the impact of possible linear memory from the dynamical ejecta of BNS and NSBH systems and its signal strength relative to the nonlinear memory. We find that linear memory almost always has a much weaker effect than nonlinear memory.

    • Figure
    • Figure
    • Figure
    • Figure
    • Figure
    • Figure
    • Figure
    1 More
    • Received 9 May 2023
    • Accepted 17 January 2024

    DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.109.043039

    © 2024 American Physical Society

    Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

    1. Research Areas
    Gravitational waves
    1. Physical Systems
    Astronomical black holesNeutron stars & pulsars
    Gravitation, Cosmology & Astrophysics

    Authors & Affiliations

    Dixeena Lopez1, Shubhanshu Tiwari1, and Michael Ebersold2

    • 1Physik-Institut, University of Zurich, Winterthurerstrasse 190, 8057 Zurich, Switzerland
    • 2Laboratoire d’Annecy de Physique des Particules, CNRS, 9 Chemin de Bellevue, 74941 Annecy, France

    Article Text (Subscription Required)

    Click to Expand

    References (Subscription Required)

    Click to Expand
    Issue

    Vol. 109, Iss. 4 — 15 February 2024

    Reuse & Permissions
    Access Options
    Author publication services for translation and copyediting assistance advertisement

    Authorization Required

    Log In
    Other Options
    ×

    Images

    • Figure 1
      Figure 1

      The top panel plots SEOBNRv4_ROM_NRTidalv2 oscillatory waveform for BNS and BBH, and SEOBNRv4_ROM_NRTidalv2_NSBH for NSBH systems with equal mass binaries. The plots show four combinations of total mass and tidal deformability of the BNS system with Mtotal equal to 2.7M⊙ and 5M⊙ and Λ˜ equal to 200 and 600. The NSBH system plot with ΛNS equals 200 and 600. The second panel shows the corresponding nonlinear memory and the bottom panel plots the nonlinear memory waveform with a low-frequency cutoff of 10 Hz. The distance to the source is fixed at 100 Mpc.

      Reuse & Permissions
    • Figure 2
      Figure 2

      The peak amplitude of the memory waveform from NR simulations as a function of its EOS for an edge-on system at 100 Mpc are presented for different values of mass ratio. The text in each point shows the name of the EOS and the x axis corresponds to the tidal deformation parameter.

      Reuse & Permissions
    • Figure 3
      Figure 3

      SNR of postmerger phase (dashed) and nonlinear memory (solid) BNS NR waveforms for equal mass systems with Mtotal=2.7 at 100 Mpc. The SNR is computed with PSDs of Advanced LIGO, ET and CE [40].

      Reuse & Permissions
    • Figure 4
      Figure 4

      Match between the GW waveform for BNS and BBH system (q=1). The plot on the left side shows the match between oscillatory waveforms of GW from BNS and BBH. The right side shows the GW waveform from the same systems with the memory signal. The solid black line refers to the match of 98.5%, 99%, and 99.5%, at which we can distinguish the two waveforms with 90% confidence when the source is at 20 Mpc (SNR∼14.3), 170 Mpc (SNR∼17.4), and 200 Mpc (SNR∼25) for PSDs corresponding to the Advanced LIGO, ET, and CE, respectively [40]. The oscillatory waveforms are above 400 Hz.

      Reuse & Permissions
    • Figure 5
      Figure 5

      Cumulative memory SNR of ten and 100 events corresponds to Advanced LIGO, Einstein Telescope, and Cosmic Explorer design sensitivity. The plot shows the events within the redshift of z=0.1. The three rows correspond to events with the NR waveform template of EOSs B, HB, and 15H. Each box plot corresponds to 50 realizations. The solid black line indicates the median value and the edges correspond to the spread of cumulative SNR values that fall within 25% of the median.

      Reuse & Permissions
    • Figure 6
      Figure 6

      Peak amplitude of the nonlinear memory waveform as a function of its EOS for the CoreDB waveforms. All the events are with a mass ratio of 1 and a total mass equal to 2.7M⊙. The source is fixed at 100 Mpc with an orbital inclination angle of 90°. The text in each point shows the name of EOS and the x axis corresponds to the tidal deformation parameter.

      Reuse & Permissions
    • Figure 7
      Figure 7

      Match between the GW waveform for the BNS and the NSBH system (q=1). The plot on the left side shows the match between oscillatory waveforms of GW from BNS and NSBH. The right side shows the GW waveform from the same systems with the memory signal. The solid black line refers to the match of 98.5%, 99%, and 99.5%, at which we can distinguish the two waveforms with 90% confidence when the source is at 20 Mpc (SNR∼14.3), 170 Mpc (SNR∼17.4) and 200 Mpc (SNR∼25) for PSDs corresponding to the Advanced LIGO, ET, and CE, respectively. The oscillatory waveforms are above 400 Hz.

      Reuse & Permissions
    • Figure 8
      Figure 8

      The cumulative memory SNR of BBH waveforms with the SEOBNRv4_ROM_NRTidalv2 model (i.e., Λ1=Λ2=0). All the events with mass ratio 1 and total mass equal 2.7M⊙. The plot shows the distribution of ten and 100 events within the maximum redshift of z=0.1. The solid black line corresponds to the median of the cumulative SNR from 50 realizations.

      Reuse & Permissions
    ×

    Sign up to receive regular email alerts from Physical Review D

    Log In

    Cancel
    ×

    Search

    Article Lookup

    Paste a citation or DOI
    Enter a citation
    ×