1 / 41

Estimating the Spin of Stellar-Mass Black Holes

Estimating the Spin of Stellar-Mass Black Holes. Jeffrey McClintock Harvard-Smithsonian CfA STScI Black Hole Symposium April 25, 2007. Chronological List of Team Members. This effort to measure spin requires a 50-50 mix of theory & observation. Int roduction. The Essentials.

kimo
Download Presentation

Estimating the Spin of Stellar-Mass Black Holes

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Estimating the Spin of Stellar-Mass Black Holes Jeffrey McClintock Harvard-Smithsonian CfA STScI Black Hole Symposium April 25, 2007

  2. Chronological List of Team Members This effort to measure spin requires a 50-50 mix of theory & observation.

  3. Introduction

  4. The Essentials • Objects: Stellar-mass BHs in X-ray binaries • Method: Spin via fitting the X-ray continuum • Absolute Requirements: Accurate values of BH mass, i & D “Thermal-Dominant” X-ray data State-of-the-art relativistic models Li, Zimmerman, Narayan & McClintock 2005 Shaffee, McClintock, Narayan, Davis, Li & Remillard 2006 McClintock, Shafee, Narayan, Remillard, Davis & Li 2006

  5. Ii Number of BH binaries known = 21 M ~ 10 Msun Courtesy J. Orosz

  6. Ii Number of BH binaries known = 21 M ~ 10 Msun Courtesy J. Orosz

  7. Black Holes are Extremely Simple • Mass:M • Spin:J = a*GM2/c (0 < a* < 1) • (Electric Charge: Q) 21 BH massesM have been measured Obvious next frontier: Measure BH spina* (much harder)

  8. f RISCO: Extreme-Kerr vs. Schwarzschild T ~ 2 keV 42% a* = 1 RISCO = 15 km a* = 0 T ~ 1 keV 6% RISCO = 90 km

  9. Two Foundations1.ISCO2. Thermal Dominant State

  10. First Foundation Innermost Stable Circular Orbit (ISCO) • A disk terminates at RISCO and gas falls freely onto the BH inside this radius. • Thus, disk emission has a “hole” of radius RISCO at center. • If we measure the size of the hole, we will obtain a*  90 km RISCO  a* 15 km 

  11. Second Foundation • Typical X-ray nova 2-20 keV light curve • 170 RXTE/PCA observations over 9 months • Fit spectra with MCD model (diskbb) + power law • Non-relat. MCD model has 2 params:Tin&Rin Mitsuda et al. 1984 Makishima et al. 1986 Tanaka & Lewin 1995 Remillard & McClintock 2006

  12. Second Foundation (cont.) • Consider disk component of emission only • Focus on 4-month monotonic decay of accretion disk

  13. Second Foundation (cont.) Thermal Dominant State • Ldisk / Ltotal > 75% (2-20 keV) • No QPOs • Weak power continuum (r < 0.075) • Power-law/Comptonization minimal • Remillard & McClintock 2006, ARAA, 44,49

  14. Second Foundation (cont.) • Smooth, monotonic decline of temperature as disk decays on a thermal time scale

  15. Second Foundation (cont.) Second Foundation (cont.) • Inner disk radius Rin quite constant • Compare Tanaka & Lewin 1995 in XRBs

  16. Second Foundation (cont.) Second Foundation (cont.) • Now, plot Ldisk/Llotal versus Tin

  17. Second Foundation (cont.) H1743-322 Tin4 Kubota et al. 2001 Kubota & Makishima 2004 Kubota & Done 2004 Gierlinski & Done 2004

  18. Tin4 Second Foundation fcol = Tin/Teff Davis et al. 2005, 2006 Teff4 Conclusion: There exists a constant radius

  19. Outline of Method for Estimating Spin Fitting the X-ray continuum 

  20. Measuring the Radius of a Star • Measure the flux Freceived from the star • Measure the temperature T (from spectrum) • Then, assuming blackbody radiation: • F and T give solid angle of star • If we know distanceD,we directly obtainR R

  21. Measuring the Radius of the Disk Inner Edge • We want to measure the radius of the ‘hole’ in the disk emission • Same principle as before • From Fand T get solid angle of hole • Knowing D and i get RISCO • From RISCO and M get a* Zhang et al. (1997) Gierlinski et al. 2001; Li et al. (2005); Shafee et al. (2006); McClintock et al. (2006); Davis et al. (2006);… RISCO

  22. Estimates of Spin Obtained with this Method

  23. Diving into the Method

  24. How to Get Reliable Results? • Need good estimates of M, D, i • Should include all relativistic effects: Doppler beaming, grav. redshift, ray deflections  KERRBB (Li et al. 2006) • The system should be in the Thermal Dominant state • H/R < 0.1 L/Ledd < 0.3 • Deviations from blackbody (parameter f) should be estimated via a disk atmosphere model Shimura & Takahara (1995); Davis et al. (2005, 2006)

  25. How to Get Reliable Results?(cont.) • Need accurate theoretical profiles of disk flux F(R) and temperature T(R)

  26. RISCO S Flux vs. Radius Shafee, Narayan & McClintock (Poster #31) a* = 0 RISCO a* = 0.95 aa Zero-torque at ISCO H/R < 0.1 L/Ledd < 0.3

  27. Bottom Line Errors due to hydro effects are modest. Shafee et al. (Poster #31)

  28. Only a* and Mdot Determined from X-ray Spectrum • M,D,i from ground-based observations • fcol from disk atmosphere model • Zero torque at ISCO for L/Ledd < 0.3 • Fit for a* and Mdot (Mdot  L/Ledd) only T & flux  a* & Mdot

  29. GRS 1915+105 ASCA: 1.2-10 keV RXTE: 3-25 keV a* = 0.994 L/Ledd = 0.21 a* = 0.988 L/Ledd = 0.18 Flux Flux 20 Thermal-Dominant Observations out of 640 2 5 Energy (keV) 5 10 20 Energy (keV) KERBB: Fit for a* and mass accretion rate Mdot (L/Ledd) McClintock, Shafee, Narayan et al. 2006

  30. Observational Work in Progress HEASARC

  31. Key Spin Targets • M33 X-7: Gemini-N, Chandra, XMM • GRS 1915+105: VLBA, Gemini-S • LMC X-1: Magellan, SMARTS • A0620-00: Spitzer/ground-based • XTE J1550-564: Magellan Additional targets:Nova Mus 1991, XTE J1859+226, XTE J1650-500, GS 2000+25, GRS 1009-45… about a dozen in total

  32. M33 X-7 Preliminary Orosz et al. 2007 Porb 3.45 days D = 845 +/- 25 kpc i = 74 +/- 2 deg M = 14 +/- 3 Msun O6 giant M2 = 57 +/- 10 Msun R2 = 18.5 +/- 1 Rsun Teff = 35,000 +/- 2500K Spin analysis underway Liu et al. Pietsch et al. 2006

  33. Radio Jet v/c = 0.92 GRS 1915+105 Mirabel & Rodriguez 1994 a* = 0.98-1.0 McClintock, Shafee, Narayan et al. 2006

  34. GRS 1915+105 GRS 1915+105 6 8 10 12 14 Distance (kpc) Gemini-S GNIRS proposal pending McClintock, Shafee, Narayan et al. 2006

  35. GRS 1915+105 Distance (kpc) VLBA observations underway

  36. Nominal Spinsof 4 BHs LMC X-3: a* = 0.2 GRO J1655-40: a* = 0.7 4U 1543-47: a* = 0.8 GRS 1915+105: a* = 0.99 McClintock, Shafee, Narayan, et al.

  37. Discussion

  38. Black Hole Spins Chiefly Natal • Accretion torques inadequate to spin up BH in lifetime of system King & Kolb 1999 • GRS 1915+105 a prime example: Accretion of 4 Mo onto a 10 Mo hole  a* ~ 0.77 << a* = 0.98 – 1 Lee, Brown & Wijers 2002 Podsiadlowski, Rappaport & Han 2003 McClintock, Shafee, Narayan, et al. 2006 For discussion, see McClintock et al. 2006

  39. Uses of Spin Data • Test Jet Models Blandford & Znajek (1977) Hawley & Balbus (2002) • Validate core-collapse GRB models Collapsar: Enough J to form disk? Woosley (1993) MacFadyen & Woosley (1999) Woosley & Heger (2006) • Inform modelers of GW waveforms Shafee et al. motivated first waveform work to include spin Campanilli, Lousto & Zlochower (2006) • Test evolutionary model of binary black-hole formation Were GRS 1915+105, GRO J1655-40?, etc. GRB sources? Lee, Brown & Wijers (2002) Brown, Lee & Walter (2007) van den Heuvel et al. (2007)

  40. 3 Other Avenues to SpinRemillard & McClintock 2006, ARAA 44, 49 • Fe line profile Fabian et al. 1989 Reynolds & Nowak 2003 • High-frequency X-ray QPOs (100-450 Hz) Abramowicz & Kluzniak 2001 Torok et al. 2005 • X-ray polarimetry Lightman & Shapiro 1975 Connors, Piran & Stark 1980

  41. Conclusions • 4 spins estimated: GRS 1915+105: a* > 0.98 • Straightforward methodology Fully relativistic disk model, KERRBB2: fit for a* and Mdot Thermal Dominant spectra only Accurate ground-based data on M, D & i essential Advanced treatment of spectral hardening fcol • Future work Amass a dozen spin estimate No torque assumption for L/Ledd < 0.3:hydro  GRMHD Test model for GRS 1915+105 Examine possible effects of warm absorber Attempt Fe K and HFQPO spin measurements

More Related