- 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

Mass-energy and momentum extraction by gravitational wave emission in the merger of two colliding black holes: The non-head-on case

R. F. Aranha1,2,*, I. Damião Soares1,†, and E. V. Tonini3,‡

  • 1Centro Brasileiro de Pesquisas Físicas, Rio de Janeiro 22290-180, Brazil
  • 2Center for Relativistic Astrophysics, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia 30332, USA
  • 3Instituto Federal do Espírito Santo, Vitória 29040-780, Brazil

  • *rafael.aranha@physics.gatech.edu
  • †ivano@cbpf.br
  • ‡tonini@cefetes.br
PDF

Phys. Rev. D 85, 024003 – Published 4 January, 2012

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.85.024003

Abstract

We examine numerically the post-merger regime of two nonspining holes in non-head-on collisions in the realm of nonaxisymmetric Robinson-Trautman spacetimes. Characteristic initial data for the system are constructed and evolved via the Robinson-Trautman equation. The numerical integration is performed using a Galerkin spectral method which is sufficiently stable to reach the final configuration of the remnant black hole, when the gravitational wave emission ceases. The initial data contains three independent parameters, the ratio mass α of the individual colliding black holes, their initial premerger infalling velocity and the incidence angle of collision ρ0. The remnant black hole is characterized by its final boost parameter, rest mass and scattering angle. The motion of the remnant black hole is restricted to the plane determined by the directions of the two initial colliding black holes, characterizing a planar collision. The net momentum fluxes carried out by gravitational waves are confined to this plane. We evaluate the efficiency of mass-energy extraction, the total energy and momentum carried out by gravitational waves and the momentum distribution of the remnant black hole for a large domain of initial data parameters. Our analysis is based on the Bondi-Sachs four-momentum conservation laws. The process of mass-energy extraction is shown to be less efficient as the initial data departs from the head-on configuration. Head-on collisions (ρ0=0o) and orthogonal collisions (ρ0=90°) constitute, respectively, upper and lower bounds to the power emission and to the efficiency of mass-energy extraction. On the contrary, head-on collisions and orthogonal collisions constitute, respectively, lower and upper bounds for the momentum of the remnant. Distinct regimes of gravitational wave emission (bursts or quiescent emission) are characterized by the analysis of the time behavior of the gravitational wave power as a function of α. In particular, the net gravitational wave flux is nonzero for equal-mass colliding black holes in non-head-on collisions. The momentum extraction and the patterns of the momentum fluxes, as a function of the incidence angle, are examined. The relation between the incidence angle and the scattering angle closely approximates a relation for the inelastic collision of classical particles in Newtonian dynamics.

View figure in article

Article Text

References (36)

  1. F. Pretorius, in Physics of Relativistic Objects in Compact Binaries: from Birth to Coalescence, edited by M. Colpi, P. Casella, V. Gorini, U. Moschella, and A. Possenti, Astrophysics and Space Science Library Series, Vol. 359 (Springer, Heidelberg, 2009), p. 305.
  2. L. Cadonatti et al., Classical Quantum Gravity 26, 114008 (2009); M. Boyle, D. A. Brown, and L. Pekowsky, 26, 114006 (2009); M. Hannam, 26, 114001 (2009).
  3. I. Robinson and A. Trautman, Phys. Rev. Lett. 4, 431 (1960); Proc. R. Soc. A 265, 463 (1962).
  4. R. F. Aranha, I. Damião Soares, and E. V. Tonini, Phys. Rev. D 81, 104005 (2010).
  5. R. F. Aranha, I. Damião Soares, and E. V. Tonini, Phys. Rev. D 82, 104033 (2010).
  6. K. P. Tod, Classical Quantum Gravity 3, 1169 (1986); 6, 1159 (1989).
  7. H. Bondi, M. G. J. van der Berg, and A. W. K. Metzner, Proc. R. Soc. A 269, 21 (1962).
  8. R. K. Sachs, Proc. R. Soc. A 270, 103 (1962).
  9. R. K. Sachs, Phys. Rev. 128, 2851 (1962).
  10. Jeffrey Winicour, Living Rev. Relativity 8, 10 (2005). http://www.livingreviews.org/lrr-2005-10.
  11. L. Blanchet, M. S. S. Qusailah, and C. M. Will, Astrophys. J. 635, 508 (2005).
  12. M. Campanelli, Classical Quantum Gravity 22, S387 (2005).
  13. A. Le Tiec, L. Blanchet, and C. M. Will, Classical Quantum Gravity 27, 012001 (2010).
  14. J. Centrella, J. B. Baker, B. J. Kelly, and J. R. van Meter, Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 60, 75 (2010).
  15. J. A. González, U. Sperhake, Bernd Brügmann, M. Hannam, and S. Husa, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 091101 (2007).
  16. P. Chrusciel, Commun. Math. Phys. 137, 289 (1991); Proc. R. Soc. A 436, 299 (1992); P. Chrusciel and D. B. Singleton, Commun. Math. Phys. 147, 137 (1992).
  17. A. Z. Petrov, Sci. Nat. Kazan State University 114, 55 (1954); F. A. E. Pirani, in Introduction to Gravitational Radiation Theory, Lectures on General Relativity, Brandeis Summer Institute in Theoretical Physics, Vol. 1 (Prentice-Hall, New Jersey, 1964).
  18. R. Sachs, Proc. R. Soc. A 264, 309 (1961); E. T. Newman and R. Penrose, J. Math. Phys. (N.Y.) 3, 566 (1962).
  19. E. T. Newman and T. W. J. Unti, J. Math. Phys. (N.Y.) 3, 891 (1962).
  20. U. Gönna and D. Kramer, Classical Quantum Gravity 15, 215 (1998).
  21. R. F. Aranha, I. Damião Soares, and E. V. Tonini (unpublished).
  22. L. Smarr, in Sources of Gravitational Radiation, edited by L. Smarr (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1978), p. 245.
  23. F. Pretorius, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 121101 (2005).
  24. R. A. D’Inverno and J. Stachel, J. Math. Phys. (N.Y.) 19, 2447 (1978); R. A. D’Inverno and J. Smallwood, Phys. Rev. D 22, 1233 (1980).
  25. J. W. York, Jr., in The Initial Value Problem and Dynamics, edited by N. Deruelle and T. Piran, Gravitational Radiation (North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1983).
  26. R. F. Aranha, H. P. Oliveira, I. Damião Soares, and E. V. Tonini, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 17, 2049 (2008).
  27. G. Arfken, Mathematical Methods for Physicists, § 2.14 (Academic Press, New York, 1968).
  28. J. A. Vickers, in Approaches to Numerical Relativity, edited by R. D’Inverno (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1992).
  29. C. A. J. Fletchet, Computational Galerkin Methods (Springer-Verlag, Berlin-New York, 1984).
  30. R. P. Macedo and A. Saa, Phys. Rev. D 78, 104025 (2008).
  31. G. A. Korn and T. M. Korn, Mathematical Handbook for Scientists and Engineers (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1967).
  32. R. F. Aranha, I. Damião Soares, and E. V. Tonini (unpublished).
  33. D. Eardley, in Theoretical Models for Sources of Gravitational Waves, edited by N. Deruelle and T. Piran, Gravitational Radiation (North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1983).
  34. M. Campanelli, C. O. Lousto, P. Marronetti, and Y. Zlochower, Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 111101 (2006); J. G. Baker, J. Centrella, Dae-Il Choi, M. Koppitz, and J. van Meter, 96, 111102 (2006).
  35. M. J. Fitchett, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 203, 1049 (1983); L. Blanchet, M. S. S. Qusailah, and C. M. Will, Astrophys. J. 635, 508 (2005).
  36. H. P. Oliveira, E. L. Rodrigues, and J. E. F. Skea, Phys. Rev. D 84, 044007 (2011).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. D 85, 024003– Published 4 January, 2012
  • Received 17 May 2011

© 2012 American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation