- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine
Access Provided by Xinjiang University

Physical Review D

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Access by Xinjiang University

Comparing effective-one-body gravitational waveforms to accurate numerical data

Thibault Damour1,3 and Alessandro Nagar1,2,3

  • 1Institut des Hautes Etudes Scientifiques, 91440 Bures-sur-Yvette, France
  • 2INFN, Sezione di Torino, Via P. Giuria 1, Torino, Italy
  • 3ICRANet, 65122 Pescara, Italy

PDF

Phys. Rev. D 77, 024043 – Published 28 January, 2008

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.77.024043

Abstract

We continue the program of constructing, within the effective-one-body (EOB) approach, high-accuracy, faithful analytic waveforms describing the gravitational wave signal emitted by inspiralling and coalescing binary black holes. We present the comparable-mass version of a new, resummed 3 post-Newtonian (PN) accurate EOB quadrupolar waveform that we recently introduced in the small-mass-ratio limit. We compare the phase and the amplitude of this waveform to the recently published results of a high-accuracy numerical simulation of 15 orbits of an inspiralling equal-mass binary black hole system performed by the Caltech-Cornell group. We find a remarkable agreement, both in phase and in amplitude, between the new EOB waveform and the published numerical data. More precisely: (i) in the gravitational wave (GW) frequency domain Mω<0.08 where the phase of one of the nonresummed “Taylor approximant” (T4) waveform matches well with the numerical relativity one, we find that the EOB phase fares as well, while (ii) for higher GW frequencies, 0.08<Mω≲0.14, where the Taylor T4 approximant starts to significantly diverge from the numerical relativity phase, we show that the EOB phase continues to match well the numerical relativity one. We further propose various methods of tuning the two inspiral flexibility parameters, a5 and vpole, of the EOB waveform so as to “best fit” EOB predictions to numerical data. We find that the maximal dephasing between EOB and numerical relativity can then be reduced below 10−3 GW cycles over the entire span (30 GW cycles) of the simulation (while, without tuning them, the dephasing is <8×10−3 cycles). In addition, our resummed EOB amplitude agrees much better with the numerical relativity one than any of the previously considered nonresummed, post-Newtonian one (including a recently derived, nonresummed 3 PN-accurate one). We think that the present work, taken in conjunction with other recent works on the EOB–numerical relativity comparison confirms the ability of the EOB formalism (especially in its recently improved avatars) to faithfully capture the “real” general relativistic waveforms.

View figure in article

Article Text

References (61)

  1. T. Damour, B. R. Iyer, and B. S. Sathyaprakash, Phys. Rev. D 57, 885 (1998).
  2. A. Buonanno and T. Damour, Phys. Rev. D 59, 084006 (1999).
  3. A. Buonanno and T. Damour, Phys. Rev. D 62, 064015 (2000).
  4. T. Damour, P. Jaranowski, and G. Schäfer, Phys. Rev. D 62, 084011 (2000).
  5. T. Damour, Phys. Rev. D 64, 124013 (2001).
  6. F. Pretorius, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 121101 (2005).
  7. F. Pretorius, Classical Quantum Gravity 23, S529 (2006).
  8. M. Campanelli, C. O. Lousto, P. Marronetti, and Y. Zlochower, Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 111101 (2006).
  9. M. Campanelli, C. O. Lousto, and Y. Zlochower, Phys. Rev. D 73, 061501(R) (2006).
  10. M. Campanelli, C. O. Lousto, and Y. Zlochower, Phys. Rev. D 74, 041501(R) (2006).
  11. J. G. Baker, J. Centrella, D. I. Choi, M. Koppitz, and J. van Meter, Phys. Rev. D 73, 104002 (2006).
  12. J. G. Baker, J. Centrella, D. I. Choi, M. Koppitz, J. R. van Meter, and M. C. Miller, Astrophys. J. 653, L93 (2006).
  13. J. G. Baker, M. Campanelli, F. Pretorius, and Y. Zlochower, Classical Quantum Gravity 24, S25 (2007).
  14. J. A. Gonzalez, U. Sperhake, B. Brügmann, M. Hannam, and S. Husa, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 091101 (2007).
  15. S. Husa, J. A. Gonzalez, M. Hannam, B. Brugmann, and U. Sperhake, arXiv:0706.0740.
  16. M. Koppitz, D. Pollney, C. Reisswig, L. Rezzolla, J. Thornburg, P. Diener, and E. Schnetter, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 041102 (2007).
  17. L. Rezzolla, E. N. Dorband, C. Reisswig, P. Diener, D. Pollney, E. Schnetter, and B. Szilagyi, arXiv:0708.3999.
  18. L. Rezzolla, P. Diener, E. N. Dorband, D. Pollney, C. Reisswig, E. Schnetter, and J. Seiler, arXiv:0710.3345.
  19. M. Boyle, D. A. Brown, L. E. Kidder, A. H. Mroué, H. P. Pfeiffer, M. A. Scheel, G. B. Cook, and S. A. Teukolsky, Phys. Rev. D 76, 124038 (2007).
  20. F. Pretorius, arXiv:0710.1338.
  21. T. Damour, E. Gourgoulhon, and P. Grandclement, Phys. Rev. D 66, 024007 (2002).
  22. E. Gourgoulhon, P. Grandclement, and S. Bonazzola, Phys. Rev. D 65, 044020 (2002).
  23. P. Grandclement, E. Gourgoulhon, and S. Bonazzola, Phys. Rev. D 65, 044021 (2002).
  24. T. Damour, B. R. Iyer, P. Jaranowski, and B. S. Sathyaprakash, Phys. Rev. D 67, 064028 (2003).
  25. A. Buonanno, G. B. Cook, and F. Pretorius, Phys. Rev. D 75, 124018 (2007).
  26. Y. Pan et al., Phys. Rev. D 77, 024014 (2008).
  27. T. Damour and A. Nagar, Phys. Rev. D 76, 044003 (2007).
  28. A. Buonanno, Y. Pan, J. G. Baker, J. Centrella, B. J. Kelly, S. T. McWilliams, and J. R. van Meter, Phys. Rev. D 76, 104049 (2007).
  29. T. Damour and A. Nagar, Phys. Rev. D 76, 064028 (2007).
  30. T. Regge and J. A. Wheeler, Phys. Rev. 108, 1063 (1957).
  31. F. J. Zerilli, Phys. Rev. Lett. 24, 737 (1970).
  32. K. Martel and E. Poisson, Phys. Rev. D 71, 104003 (2005).
  33. A. Nagar and L. Rezzolla, Classical Quantum Gravity 22, R167 (2005). 23, 4297(E) (2006).
  34. A. Nagar, T. Damour, and A. Tartaglia, Classical Quantum Gravity 24, S109 (2007).
  35. M. Davis, R. Ruffini, and J. Tiomno, Phys. Rev. D 5, 2932 (1972).
  36. M. Sasaki and H. Tagoshi, Living Rev. Relativity 6, 6 (2003), http://www.livingreviews.org/lrr-2003-6.
  37. C. Cutler, L. S. Finn, E. Poisson, and G. J. Sussman, Phys. Rev. D 47, 1511 (1993).
  38. E. Poisson, Phys. Rev. D 52, 5719 (1995). 55, 7980(E) (1997).
  39. H. Tagoshi and M. Sasaki, Prog. Theor. Phys. 92, 745 (1994).
  40. L. E. Kidder, Phys. Rev. D (to be published).
  41. T. Damour and A. Gopakumar, Phys. Rev. D 73, 124006 (2006).
  42. L. Blanchet and T. Damour, Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 320, 379 (1986).
  43. L. Blanchet, Proc. R. Soc. A 409, 383 (1987).
  44. L. Blanchet and T. Damour, Ann. Inst. Henri Poincaré, A 50, 377 (1989).
  45. T. Damour and B. R. Iyer, Phys. Rev. D 43, 3259 (1991).
  46. T. Damour and B. R. Iyer, Ann. Inst. Henri Poincaré, A 54, 115 (1991).
  47. L. Blanchet and T. Damour, Phys. Rev. D 46, 4304 (1992).
  48. L. Blanchet, Classical Quantum Gravity 15, 113 (1998). 22, 3381(E) (2005).
  49. L. Blanchet, T. Damour, B. R. Iyer, C. M. Will, and A. G. Wiseman, Phys. Rev. Lett. 74, 3515 (1995).
  50. L. Blanchet, B. R. Iyer, and B. Joguet, Phys. Rev. D 65, 064005 (2002). 71, 129903(E) (2005).
  51. L. Blanchet, T. Damour, G. Esposito-Farese, and B. R. Iyer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 091101 (2004).
  52. L. Blanchet, T. Damour, G. Esposito-Farese, and B. R. Iyer, Phys. Rev. D 71, 124004 (2005).
  53. L. Blanchet, G. Faye, B. R. Iyer, and B. Joguet, Phys. Rev. D 65, 061501 (2002). 71, 129902(E) (2005).
  54. T. Tanaka, H. Tagoshi, and M. Sasaki, Prog. Theor. Phys. 96, 1087 (1996).
  55. L. E. Kidder, L. Blanchet, and B. R. Iyer, Classical Quantum Gravity 24, 5307 (2007).
  56. E. Berti, V. Cardoso, J. A. Gonzalez, U. Sperhake, M. Hannam, S. Husa, and B. Bruegmann, Phys. Rev. D 76, 064034 (2007).
  57. A. Buonanno, Y. Chen, and T. Damour, Phys. Rev. D 74, 104005 (2006).
  58. M. Hannam, S. Husa, U. Sperhake, B. Brugmann, and J. A. Gonzalez, Phys. Rev. D (to be published).
  59. T. Damour, B. R. Iyer, and B. S. Sathyaprakash, Phys. Rev. D 63, 044023(E) (2001). 72, 029902 (2005).
  60. J. G. Baker, J. R. van Meter, S. T. McWilliams, J. Centrella, and B. J. Kelly, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 181101 (2007).
  61. K. G. Arun, L. Blanchet, B. R. Iyer, and M. S. S. Qusailah, Classical Quantum Gravity 21, 3771 (2004). 22, 3115(E) (2005).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. D 77, 024043– Published 28 January, 2008
  • Received 16 November 2007

© 2008 American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation