1: % conf2esa.tex -- sample pages for CUP conference proceedings document class

2: % (based on v1.1 jfm2esam.tex)

3: % v0.1 released 20 September 2000 by Alison Woollatt

4: % Copyright (2000) Cambridge University Press

5: 

6: \NeedsTeXFormat{LaTeX2e}

7: 

8: \documentclass{cupconf}

9: \usepackage{graphicx}%%line added by slt%%

10: 

11: % See if the author has AMS Euler fonts installed: If they have, attempt

12: % to use the 'upmath' package to provide upright math.

13: 

14:   \checkfont{eurm10}

15:   \iffontfound

16:     \IfFileExists{upmath.sty}

17:       {\typeout{^^JFound AMS Euler Roman fonts on the system,

18:                    using the 'upmath' package.^^J}%

19:        \usepackage{upmath}}

20:       {\typeout{^^JFound AMS Euler Roman fonts on the system, but you

21:                    dont seem to have the}%

22:        \typeout{'upmath' package installed. cupconf.cls can take advantage

23:                  of these fonts,^^Jif you use 'upmath' package.^^J}%

24:        \providecommand\upi{\pi}%

25:       }

26:   \else

27:     \providecommand\upi{\pi}%

28:   \fi

29: 

30: % See if the author has AMS symbol fonts installed: If they have, attempt

31: % to use the 'amssymb' package to provide the AMS symbol characters.

32: 

33:   \checkfont{msam10}

34:   \iffontfound

35:     \IfFileExists{amssymb.sty}

36:       {\typeout{^^JFound AMS Symbol fonts on the system, using the

37:                 'amssymb' package.^^J}%

38:        \usepackage{amssymb}%

39:        \let\le=\leqslant  \let\leq=\leqslant

40:        \let\ge=\geqslant  \let\geq=\geqslant

41:       }{}

42:   \fi

43: 

44: % See if the author has the AMS 'amsbsy' package installed: If they have,

45: % use it to provide better bold math support (with \boldsymbol).

46: 

47:   \IfFileExists{amsbsy.sty}

48:     {\typeout{^^JFound the 'amsbsy' package on the system, using it.^^J}%

49:      \usepackage{amsbsy}}

50:     {\providecommand\boldsymbol[1]{\mbox{\boldmath $##1$}}}

51: 

52: %%% Example macros (some are not used in this sample file) %%%

53: 

54: % For units of measure

55: \newcommand\dynpercm{\nobreak\mbox{$\;$dynes\,cm$^{-1}$}}

56: \newcommand\cmpermin{\nobreak\mbox{$\;$cm\,min$^{-1}$}}

57: 

58: % Various bold symbols

59: \providecommand\bnabla{\boldsymbol{\nabla}}

60: \providecommand\bcdot{\boldsymbol{\cdot}}

61: \newcommand\biS{\boldsymbol{S}}

62: \newcommand\etb{\boldsymbol{\eta}}

63: 

64: % For multiletter symbols

65: \newcommand\Real{\mbox{Re}} % cf plain TeX's \Re and Reynolds number

66: \newcommand\Imag{\mbox{Im}} % cf plain TeX's \Im

67: \newcommand\Rey{\mbox{\textit{Re}}}  % Reynolds number

68: \newcommand\Pran{\mbox{\textit{Pr}}} % Prandtl number, cf TeX's \Pr product

69: \newcommand\Pen{\mbox{\textit{Pe}}}  % Peclet number

70: \newcommand\Ai{\mbox{Ai}}            % Airy function

71: \newcommand\Bi{\mbox{Bi}}            % Airy function

72: 

73: % For sans serif characters:

74: % The following macros are setup in cupconf.cls for sans-serif fonts in text

75: % and math.

76: %

77: % \textsfi, \mathsfi   : sans-serif slanted

78: % \textsfb, \mathsfb   : sans-serif bold

79: % \textsfbi, \mathsfbi : sans-serif bold slanted (doesnt exist in CM fonts)

80: %

81: % For san-serif roman use \textsf and \mathsf as normal.

82: %

83: \newcommand\ssC{\mathsf{C}}    % for sans serif C

84: \newcommand\sfsP{\mathsfi{P}}  % for sans serif sloping P

85: \newcommand\slsQ{\mathsfbi{Q}} % for sans serif bold-sloping Q

86: 

87: % Hat position

88: \newcommand\hatp{\skew3\hat{p}}      % p with hat

89: \newcommand\hatR{\skew3\hat{R}}      % R with hat

90: \newcommand\hatRR{\skew3\hat{\hatR}} % R with 2 hats

91: \newcommand\doubletildesigma{\skew2\tilde{\skew2\tilde{\Sigma}}}

92: %       italic Sigma with double tilde

93: 

94: % array strut to make delimiters come out right size both ends

95: \newsavebox{\astrutbox}

96: \sbox{\astrutbox}{\rule[-5pt]{0pt}{20pt}}

97: \newcommand{\astrut}{\usebox{\astrutbox}}

98: 

99: \newcommand\GaPQ{\ensuremath{G_a(P,Q)}}

100: \newcommand\GsPQ{\ensuremath{G_s(P,Q)}}

101: \newcommand\p{\ensuremath{\partial}}

102: \newcommand\tti{\ensuremath{\rightarrow\infty}}

103: \newcommand\kgd{\ensuremath{k\gamma d}}

104: \newcommand\shalf{\ensuremath{{\scriptstyle\frac{1}{2}}}}

105: \newcommand\sh{\ensuremath{^{\shalf}}}

106: \newcommand\smh{\ensuremath{^{-\shalf}}}

107: \newcommand\squart{\ensuremath{{\textstyle\frac{1}{4}}}}

108: \newcommand\thalf{\ensuremath{{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}}}

109: \newcommand\Gat{\ensuremath{\widetilde{G_a}}}

110: \newcommand\ttz{\ensuremath{\rightarrow 0}}

111: \newcommand\ndq{\ensuremath{\frac{\mbox{$\partial$}}{\mbox{$\partial$} n_q}}}

112: \newcommand\sumjm{\ensuremath{\sum_{j=1}^{M}}}

113: \newcommand\pvi{\ensuremath{\int_0^{\infty}%

114:   \mskip -33mu-\quad}}

115: 

116: \newcommand\etal{\mbox{\textit{et al.}}}

117: \newcommand\etc{etc.\ }

118: \newcommand\eg{e.g.\ }

119: 

120: \newtheorem{theorem}{Theorem}[section]

121: \newtheorem{lemma}{Lemma}

122: \newtheorem{corollary}{Corollary}

123: 

124: \title[Estimating Black Hole Spin]{Estimating the Spins of\break

125:   Stellar-Mass Black Holes}

126: 

127: \author[J.\ McClintock, R.\ Narayan \& R. Shafee] {J\ls E\ls F\ls F\ls R\ls

128:   E\ls Y\ns E.\ns M\ls C\ls C\ls L\ls I\ls N\ls T\ls O\ls C\ls K\break

129:   R\ls A\ls M\ls E\ls S\ls H\ns N\ls A\ls R\ls A\ls Y\ls A\ls N\break

130:   \and R\ls E\ls B\ls E\ls C\ls C\ls A\ns S\ls H\ls A\ls F\ls E\ls E}%

131: 

132: \affiliation{Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, 60 Garden St., 

133: Cambridge, MA 02138, USA}

134: 

135: %\author[A. N. Other {\it et al.\/}]%

136: %{A\ls L\ls A\ls N\ns N.\ns O\ls T\ls H\ls E\ls R$^1$%

137: %  \thanks{Present address: Fluid Mech Inc.,

138: %24 The Street, Lagos, Nigeria.},\ns

139: %H.\ls-\ls C.\ns S\ls M\ls I\ls T\ls H$^1$\break

140: %\and J.\ns Q.\ns P\ls U\ls B\ls L\ls I\ls C$^2$}

141: %

142: %\affiliation{$^1$Department of Chemical Engineering, University of America,

143: %Somewhere, IN 12345, USA\\[\affilskip]

144: %$^2$Department of Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering, University of

145: %Camford, Academic Street, Camford, CF3 5QL, UK}

146: 

147: \pubyear{2007}

148: \volume{538}

149: \pagerange{1--10}

150: \date{?? and in revised form ??}

151: \setcounter{page}{1}

152: 

153: \begin{document}

154: 

155: \def\msun{$M_{\odot}$}

156: \def\mdot{$\dot M$}

157: \def\zz{$\a_*$}

158: \def\risco{$R_{\rm ISCO}$}

159: 

160: \maketitle

161: 

162: \begin{abstract}

163: We describe a program that we have embarked on to estimate the spins

164: of stellar-mass black holes in X-ray binaries.  We fit the continuum

165: X-ray spectrum of the radiation from the accretion disk using the

166: standard thin disk model, and extract the dimensionless spin parameter

167: $a_*=a/M$ of the black hole as a parameter of the fit.  We have

168: obtained results on three systems, 4U 1543-47 ($a_*=0.7-0.85$), GRO

169: J1655-40 ($0.65-0.8$), and GRS 1915+105 ($0.98-1$), and have nearly

170: completed analysis of two additional systems.  We anticipate expanding

171: the sample of spin estimates to about a dozen over the next several

172: years.

173: \end{abstract}

174: 

175: \firstsection % if your document starts with a section,

176:               % remove some space above using this command.

177: 

178: \section{Introduction}

179: 

180: The first black hole (BH), Cygnus X-1, was identified and its mass

181: estimated in 1972.  We now know of about 40 stellar-mass black holes

182: in X-ray binaries in the Milky Way and neighboring galaxies.  The

183: masses of 21 of these, which range from $\sim 5-15$\msun, have been

184: measured by observing the dynamics of their binary companion stars

185: (Remillard \& McClintock 2006; Orosz et al.\ 2007).  In addition, it

186: has become clear that virtually every galaxy has a supermassive black

187: hole with $M \sim 10^6 - 10^{10}$\msun~in its nucleus.  A few dozen of

188: these supermassive BHs have reliable mass estimates, which have been

189: obtained via dynamical observations of stars and gas in their vicinity

190: (Begelman 2003).

191: 

192: With many mass measurements now in hand, the next logical step is to

193: measure spin.  This would mark a major milestone since, once we have

194: both a BH's mass and spin, we will have achieved a complete

195: description of the object.  Furthermore, spin is arguably the more

196: important parameter.  Mass simply supplies a scale, whereas spin

197: changes the geometry and fundamentally conditions the ways in which a

198: BH interacts with its environment.  

199: 

200: Unfortunately, spin is much harder to measure than mass.  The effects

201: of spin are revealed only in the regime of strong gravity close to the

202: hole, where the sole probe available to us is the accreting gas.

203: Thus, we must make accurate observations of the radiation emitted by

204: the inner regions of the accretion disk, and we must have a reliable

205: model of the emission.  Until recently, there was no credible

206: measurement of BH spin.

207: 

208: The situation has changed within the last couple of years.  Following

209: up on the pioneering work of Zhang, Cui \& Chen (1997), the first

210: breakthrough came with estimates of the spin parameter $a_*\equiv a/M$

211: reported by our group (see Table 1) for three stellar-mass BHs (Shafee

212: et al.\ 2006; McClintock et al.\ 2006): GRO J1655--40, 4U 1543--47,

213: and GRS 1915+105.  These spin estimates were obtained by modeling the

214: continuum X-ray spectrum from the accretion disk surrounding the BHs.

215: Following our work, the spin of a supermassive BH was estimated by an

216: independent method, modeling the profile of the Fe K line (Brenneman

217: \& Reynolds 2006).

218: 

219: This paper is organized as follows.  In \S2 we describe the

220: continuum-fitting method and comment on our efforts to establish our

221: methodology.  In \S3 we review the extensive evidence for the

222: existence of a stable inner accretion-disk radius, which provides a

223: strong empirical foundation for the continuum-fitting method of

224: determining spin.  The importance of measuring spin is briefly

225: described in \S4.  In \S5 we discuss work in progress and future

226: prospects, and we offer our conclusions.

227: 

228: \begin{center}

229: \begin{table}

230: 

231: \begin{tabular}{lccl}

232: 

233: \multicolumn{4}{c}{TABLE 1} \\  \\ \multicolumn{4}{c}{Spin

234: Estimates of Stellar-Mass Black Holes} \\

235: 

236: \hline \hline

237: \multicolumn{1}{l}{BH Binary System}

238: &\multicolumn{1}{c}{$M/M_\odot$}&\multicolumn{1}{c}{$a_*$}

239: &\multicolumn{1}{l}{Reference} \\

240: \hline 4U 1543--47 &$~~~~9.4\pm1.0~~~~$ &$~~~~0.7 - 0.85~~~~$ 

241: &Shafee et al. (2006) \\

242: \hline GRO J1655--40 &$~~~~6.30\pm0.27~~~~$ &$~~~~0.65 - 0.8~~~~$ 

243: &Shafee et al. (2006) \\

244: \hline GRS 1915+105 &$~~~~14\pm4.4~~~~$ &$~~~~0.98 - 1~~~~$ 

245: &McClintock et al. (2006) \\

246: \hline\hline

247: \end{tabular}

248: 

249: \end{table}

250: \end{center}

251: 

252: \section{The Method: Fitting the X-ray Continuum Spectrum}

253: 

254: A definite prediction of relativity theory is the existence of an

255: innermost stable circular orbit (ISCO) for a test particle orbiting a

256: BH.  Once a particle is inside this radius, it suddenly plunges into

257: the hole.  Gas in a geometrically thin accretion disk has negligible

258: pressure support in the radial direction and behaves for many purposes

259: like a test particle.  Thus, the gas spirals in (through the action of

260: viscosity) via a series of nearly circular orbits until it reaches the

261: ISCO, at which point it plunges into the BH.  In other words, the disk

262: is effectively truncated at an inner edge located at the ISCO.

263: 

264: In our method, we estimate the radius of the inner edge of the disk by

265: fitting the X-ray continuum spectrum and identify this radius with

266: $R_{\rm ISCO}$, the radius of the ISCO.  Since the dimensionless ratio

267: $\xi \equiv R_{\rm ISCO}/(GM/c^2)$ is solely a monotonic function of

268: the BH spin parameter $a_*$ (Fig.\ 1), knowing its value allows one

269: immediately to infer the BH spin parameter $a_*$.  The variations in

270: \risco~are large: e.g., for a BH of 10\msun, \risco~ranges from 90 km

271: down to 15 km as $a_*$ increases from 0 to unity, which implies that

272: we should in principle be able to estimate $a_*$ with good precision.

273: %We now discuss the theoretical basis of

274: %our model and its requirements and application.

275: 

276: \begin{figure}

277: \begin{center}

278: \includegraphics[width=3.5in]{f1.eps}

279: \end{center}

280: \vspace{-1.0cm}

281: \caption{Shows the dependence of the quantity, $\xi =R_{\rm

282: ISCO}/(GM/c^2)$, on the BH spin parameter, $a_* \equiv a/M = cJ/GM^2$,

283: where $M$ and $J$ are the mass and angular momentum of the BH (Shapiro

284: \& Teukolsky 1983).  The spin parameter is restricted to the range $-1

285: \leq a_* \leq 1$; negative values correspond to the BH

286: counter-rotating with respect to the orbit.}

287: \end{figure}

288: 

289: The idealized thin disk model (Novikov \& Thorne 1973) describes an

290: axisymmetric radiatively-efficient accretion flow in which, for a

291: given BH mass $M$, mass accretion rate $\dot M$ and BH spin parameter

292: $a_*$, we can calculate precisely the total luminosity of the disk,

293: $L_{\rm disk} = \eta\dot Mc^2$, where the radiative efficiency factor

294: $\eta$ is a function only of $a_*$, as well as the profile of the

295: radiative flux $F_{\rm disk}(R)$ emitted as a function of radius $R$.

296: Moreover, the accreting gas is optically thick, and the emission is

297: thermal and blackbody-like, making it straightforward to compute the

298: spectrum of the emission.  Most importantly, as discussed above, the

299: inner edge of the disk is located at the ISCO of the BH space-time.

300: By analyzing the spectrum of the disk radiation and combining it with

301: knowledge of the distance $D$ to the source and the mass $M$ of the

302: BH, we can obtain $a_*$.  This is the principle behind our method of

303: estimating BH spin, which was first described by Zhang et al.\ (1997;

304: see also Gierli\'nski, Maciolek-Niedz\'wiecki \& Ebisawa 2001).

305: 

306: In practice, as we describe below, the method involves fitting X-ray

307: spectral data to a fully relativistic model of the disk emission and

308: obtaining $a_*$ as a fit parameter.  However, one can understand the

309: method qualitatively by noting that it effectively seeks to measure

310: the radius of the ISCO.  Before discussing how this is done, we remind

311: the reader how one measures the radius $R_*$ of a star.  Given the

312: distance $D$ to the star, the radiation flux $F_{\rm obs}$ received

313: from the star, and the temperature $T$ of the continuum radiation, the

314: luminosity of the star is given by

315: \begin{equation}

316: L_* = 4\pi D^2 F_{\rm obs} = 4\pi R_*^2 \sigma T^4.

317: \end{equation}

318: Thus, from $F_{\rm obs}$ and $T$, we can obtain the solid angle

319: $\pi(R_*/D)^2$ subtended by the star, and if the distance is known, we

320: immediately obtain the stellar radius $R_*$.  Of course, for accurate

321: results we must allow for limb darkening and other non-blackbody

322: effects in the stellar emission by computing a stellar atmosphere

323: model.

324: 

325: The same principle applies to an accretion disk, but with some

326: differences.  First, since $F_{\rm disk}(R)$ varies with radius, the

327: radiation temperature $T$ also varies with $R$.  But the precise

328: variation is known for the idealized thin disk, so it is easily

329: incorporated into the model.  Second, since the bulk of the emission

330: is from the inner regions of the disk, the effective area of the

331: radiating surface is directly proportional to the square of the disk

332: inner radius, $A_{\rm eff} = C R_{\rm ISCO}^2$, where the constant $C$

333: is known.  Third, the observed flux $F_{\rm obs}$ depends not only on

334: the luminosity and the distance, but also on the inclination $i$ of

335: the disk to the line-of-sight\footnote{We assume that the spin of the

336: BH is approximately aligned with the orbital angular momentum vector

337: of the binary; there is no strong contrary evidence despite the

338: often-cited examples of GRO J1655-40 and SAX J1819.3-2525 (see \S2.2

339: in Narayan \& McClintock 2005).}.  Allowing for these differences, one

340: can write a relation for the disk problem similar in spirit to

341: eq. (2.1), but with additional geometric factors that are readily

342: calculated from the disk model.  Therefore, in analogy with the

343: stellar case, given $F_{\rm obs}$ and a characteristic $T$ (from X-ray

344: observations), one obtains the solid angle subtended by the ISCO: $\pi

345: \cos i\, (R_{\rm ISCO}/D)^2$.  If we know $i$ and $D$, we obtain

346: $R_{\rm ISCO}$, and if we also know $M$, we obtain $a_*$.  This is the

347: basic idea of the method.

348: 

349: We note in passing that for the method to succeed it is essential to

350: have accurate measurements of the BH mass $M$, inclination of the

351: accretion disk $i$, and distance $D$ as inputs to the

352: continuum-fitting process (Shafee et al.\ 2006; McClintock et al.\

353: 2006).  This dynamical work is not discussed here, although roughly

354: half of our total effort is directed toward securing these dynamical

355: data (e.g., Orosz et al.\ 2007).

356: 

357: Given accurate information on $M$, $i$ and $D$, there are three main

358: issues that must be dealt with before applying the method: 

359: 

360: \noindent (1) We must carefully trace rays from the surface

361: of the orbiting disk to the observer in the Kerr metric of the

362: rotating BH in order to compute accurately the observed flux and

363: spectrum.  To this end, our group has developed a model called {\sc

364: kerrbb} (Li et al.\ 2005) which has been incorporated into XSPEC

365: (Arnaud 1996) and is now publicly available for fitting X-ray data.

366: 

367: \noindent (2) We need an accurate model of the disk atmosphere for

368: computing the spectral hardening factor $f$ (see \S4).  We use the

369: advanced models of our collaborator Shane Davis (Davis et al.\ 2005)

370: and this element is thus well in hand.  Specifically, we have computed

371: tables of $f$ versus $L/L_{\rm Edd}$ for a wide range of models.

372: Further, we have incorporated these into a new version of {\sc kerrbb}

373: dubbed {\sc kerrbb2} (McClintock et al.\ 2006), which allows us to fit

374: directly for the spin parameter $a_*$ and the mass accretion rate

375: \mdot.

376: 

377: \noindent (3) Most importantly, the accretion disk around

378: the BH must be well described by the standard geometrically-thin and

379: optically-thick disk model, whose validity is assumed by {\sc kerrbb}

380: and {\sc kerrbb2}.  To ensure this, we restrict our attention strictly

381: to observations in the thermal state (optically thick emission) and

382: limit ourselves to luminosities below 30\% of the Eddington limit

383: (McClintock et al.\ 2006; Shafee, Narayan \& McClintock 2007).

384: 

385: \noindent Beyond these three issues, we must ultimately push

386: theory to its limits in order to understand accretion processes near

387: the ISCO and to obtain the most accurate model of $F_{\rm disk}(R)$

388: that can be achieved (see \S3).

389: 

390: For a full description of the mechanics of our current

391: continuum-fitting methodology, we refer the reader to \S4 in

392: McClintock et al.\ (2006).  In brief, we first select

393: rigorously-defined thermal-state X-ray data (\S4; Remillard \&

394: McClintock 2006).  We then fit the broadband X-ray continuum spectrum

395: using our fully relativistic model of a thin accretion disk ({\sc

396: kerrbb2}) in Kerr space-time, which includes all relativistic effects

397: (Li et al.\ 2005) and an advanced treatment of spectral hardening

398: (\S4; Davis et al.\ 2005).  The model also includes self-irradiation

399: of the disk (``returning radiation''), the effects of limb darkening,

400: and the effect of a torque of any magnitude at the inner edge of the

401: disk, although our published results are based on zero torque, which

402: is justified in Shafee et al. (2007).  As noted above, our new hybrid

403: code {\sc kerrbb2} allows us to fit directly for the two parameters of

404: interest: the spin $a_*$ and the mass accretion rate $\dot M$.  Using

405: the known radiative efficiency factor $\eta$ of the disk for a given

406: $a_*$, and the fitted value of $\dot M$, we compute for each

407: observation the Eddington-scaled luminosity, $L/L_{\rm Edd}$, and

408: consider only those observations for which $L/L_{\rm Edd} < 0.3$ (\S3;

409: Shafee et al.\ 2007).  Finally, we present our results in the form of

410: plots of $a_*$ versus log($L/L_{\rm Edd})$.

411: 

412: As an example, Figure 2 shows our results on GRS 1915+105 (McClintock

413: et al. 2006).  Over the luminosity range $L/L_{\rm Edd} < 0.3$, the

414: data are consistent with a single value of $a_*$ close to unity.

415: Allowing for statistical errors and uncertainties in the input values

416: of $M$, $i$ and $D$, we estimate $a_*$ to lie in the range $0.98-1$

417: (Table 1).  For luminosities closer to Eddington, the $a_*$ estimates

418: obtained using our method are lower, as also found by Middleton et

419: al. (2006), who analyzed three observations with luminosities between

420: $0.4L_{\rm Edd}$ and $1.4L_{\rm Edd}$ (cf. McClintock et al. 2006,

421: Fig. 12).  Neither the cause for the decrease nor its magnitude are

422: presently understood.  However, it is not surprising that our model,

423: which assumes a geometrically thin accretion disk, should fail at

424: luminosities close to Eddington when the disk is likely to be very

425: thick.

426: 

427: \begin{figure}

428: \begin{center}

429: \includegraphics[width=3.5in]{f2.eps}

430: \end{center}

431: \caption{Shows the estimated spin parameter $a_*$ of the BH in GRS

432: 1915+105, as a function of the Eddington-scaled luminosity $L/L_{\rm

433: Edd}$.  The spectral data were analyzed using {\sc kerrbb2} combined

434: with three different models of the high energy Comptonized radiation

435: (shown by different symbols).  For $L/L_{\rm Edd} < 0.3$ (to the left

436: of the vertical dotted line), all the estimates of $a_*$ are

437: consistent with a value nearly equal to unity.  The result is

438: insensitive to the precise Comptonization model used in the analysis.

439: (Taken from McClintock et al. 2006).}

440: \end{figure}

441: 

442: The results we published on 4U1543--47 and GRO J1655--40 in Shafee et

443: al. (2006) were obtained with {\sc kerrbb}.  We have re-analyzed the

444: same data using {\sc kerrbb2}, which gives a slightly larger range of

445: uncertainty for the derived values of $a_*$.  The spin values listed

446: in Table 1 correspond to the more recent analysis.

447: 

448: \section{Establishing the Continuum-Fitting Method}

449: 

450: Given our straightforward methodology and our in-depth experience in

451: determining the spins of three BHs, we are confident that we can

452: achieve our goal of amassing a total of a dozen or so measurements of

453: BH spin during the next 3--4 years.  Equally important, however, are

454: our efforts to demonstrate that our methodology is sound.  

455: %Not surprisingly, our knowledge of accretion disk physics close to a BH is

456: %still incomplete.  

457: The largest systematic error in the BH spin estimates reported so far

458: arise from uncertainties in the validity of the disk model we employ.

459: Thus, it is obviously crucial to pursue detailed theoretical studies

460: of the physics of BH accretion flows near the ISCO.

461: 

462: Recently, we obtained encouraging preliminary results (Shafee et

463: al. 2007) based on a hydrodynamic study showing that the errors in our

464: spin estimates due to viscous torque and dissipation near the ISCO are

465: quite modest for disk luminosities $\lesssim$ 30\% of the Eddington

466: limit.  This is the luminosity limit that we had already adopted in

467: our earlier work (McClintock et al.\ 2006).  We are presently working

468: to extend these hydro models to full GR MHD, where magnetic stresses

469: may possibly cause important deviations from the standard thin disk

470: model (e.g., Krolik 1999; Gammie 1999; Krolik \& Hawley 2002).

471: 

472: In addition to this fundamental theoretical work, we are engaged in a

473: broader effort to assess all scenarios that can ultimately impact upon

474: our estimates of BH spin.  Two examples: (1) With J.\ C.\ Lee, we are

475: examining the possible effects of warm absorbers (i.e., photoionized

476: gas) on our spin estimates via an analysis of HETG grating spectra; and

477: (2) we are in the process of making a stringent test of our spin model

478: by obtaining a VLBA parallax distance and improved radial velocities for

479: the microquasar GRS 1915+105 (see \S6.4 in McClintock et al.\ 2006).

480: 

481: \section{A Basis for Optimism}

482: 

483: Among the several spectral states of accreting BHs, the {\it thermal

484: state} (see Table 2 in Remillard \& McClintock 2006), formerly known

485: as the high soft state, is central to the work proposed here.  A

486: feature of this state is that the X-ray spectrum is dominated by a

487: soft blackbody-like component which is emitted by (relatively) cool

488: optically-thick gas in the accretion disk.  In addition, there is a

489: minor nonthermal tail component of emission, which probably originates

490: from a hot optically-thin corona.  In practice, this poorly-understood

491: Comptonized component of emission contributes $\lesssim~10$\% of the

492: flux in a 2--20 keV band (e.g., {\it RXTE}) and an even much smaller

493: fraction in an 0.5-10 keV band (e.g., {\it ASCA} and {\it Chandra}),

494: which captures nearly all of the $\sim 1$ keV thermal spectrum.  Thus,

495: the only spectra we consider -- thermal-state spectra -- are largely

496: free of the uncertain effects of Comptonization (e.g., Fig. 2).  These

497: observed spectra are believed to match very closely the classic thin

498: accretion disk models of the early 1970s (Shakura \& Sunyaev 1973;

499: Novikov \& Thorne 1973).

500: 

501: There is a long history of evidence suggesting that fitting the X-ray

502: continuum is a promising approach to measuring BH spin.  This history

503: begins in the mid-1980s with the simple non-relativistic multicolor disk

504: model (Mitsuda et al.\ 1984; Makishima et al.\ 1986), which returns the

505: color temperature $T_{\rm in}$ at the inner-disk radius $R_{\rm in}$.

506: In their review paper on BH binaries, Tanaka \& Lewin (1995) summarize

507: examples of the steady decay (by factors of 10--100) of the thermal flux

508: of transient sources during which $R_{\rm in}$ remains quite constant

509: (see their Fig.\ 3.14).  They remark that the constancy of $R_{\rm in}$

510: suggests that this fit parameter is related to the radius of the ISCO.

511: More recently, this evidence for a constant inner radius in the thermal

512: state has been presented for a number of sources via plots showing that

513: the bolometric luminosity of the thermal component is approximately

514: proportional to $T_{\rm in}^4$ (Kubota, Makishima, \& Ebisawa 2001;

515: Kubota \& Makishima 2004; Gierli\'nski \& Done 2004; Abe et al.\ 2005;

516: McClintock et al.\ 2007).

517: 

518: We now demonstrate that the case for the constancy of the inner disk

519: radius is further strengthened if one considers the effects of

520: spectral hardening, which we determine via the state-of-the-art disk

521: atmosphere models of Davis et al.\ (2005).  At the high disk

522: temperatures typically found in BH disks ($T_{\rm in} \sim 10^7$ K),

523: non-blackbody effects are important and one replaces $T_{\rm in}$ by

524: the effective temperature $T_{\rm eff} = T_{\rm in}/f$, where $f$ is a

525: ``spectral hardening factor'' (Shimura \& Takahara 1995; Merloni,

526: Fabian, \& Ross 2000; Davis et al.\ 2005).  In Figure 3, we illustrate

527: the effects of spectral hardening on the relationship between

528: luminosity and temperature for two BH transients (see also Davis,

529: Done, \& Blaes 2006).  The figure extends results that are presented

530: in Figure~8 in McClintock et al.\ (2007).  The top two panels show the

531: Eddington-scaled luminosities of the two BH transients during their

532: entire outburst cycles.  The bold plotting symbols denote the

533: rigorously-defined thermal-state data (see Table 2 in Remillard \&

534: McClintock 2006).  In the lower panels, we consider only these

535: thermal-state spectral data, and we ignore the remaining data that are

536: strongly Comptonized and for which the models are very uncertain.

537: 

538: \begin{figure}

539: \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{f3.eps}%%slt changed width to \textwidth%%

540: \caption{Evidence for the constancy of the inner disk radius and an

541: illustration of the effects of spectral hardening.  Shown are

542: thermal-state data collected for H1743-322 in 2003 and XTE J1550-564

543: in 1998--1999 in hundreds of pointed observations using the {\it RXTE}

544: PCA detector (McClintock et al.\ 2007). ($a$) The evolution of the

545: luminosities of the two transients throughout their complete 8-month

546: outburst cycles.  The luminosities are scaled to the Eddington limit;

547: for mass and distance estimates, see McClintock et al. (2007).  ($b$)

548: Luminosity versus the color temperature; the log-log slope of the

549: dashed line is 4.  ($c$) The spectral hardening factor $f \equiv

550: T_{\rm in}/T_{\rm eff}$ versus luminosity computed from the disk

551: atmosphere model of Davis et al.\ (2005) using {\sc bhspec} in XSPEC

552: (Arnaud 1996).  This model was computed for a PCA response matrix in

553: the 2--20 keV band, $M = 10$\msun~and $i = 70^{\circ}$ (McClintock et

554: al.\ 2007), and $a_* = 0.5$.  The model depends only weakly on the

555: assumed value of the spin parameter.  ($d$) Luminosity versus the

556: effective temperature $T_{\rm eff} = T_{\rm in}/f$, derived from the

557: model results shown in panel $c$.  Note how the data here hug the

558: dashed $T^4$ line much more closely than in panels $b$.}

559: \end{figure}

560: 

561: Panels $b$ show plots of Eddington-scaled luminosity versus the color

562: temperature $T_{\rm in}$; the dashed lines show an $L/L_{\rm Edd}

563: \propto T_{\rm in}^4$ relation (McClintock et al. 2006).  Note that

564: the observed luminosity rises more slowly than $T_{\rm in}^4$, which

565: appears to suggest that $R_{\rm in}$ is not constant.  Panel $c$ shows

566: an appropriate model of the spectral hardening factor $f$ as a

567: function of luminosity.  Using this relationship, we replotted the

568: luminosity data shown in panels $b$ versus $T_{\rm eff}$, thereby

569: obtaining the results shown in panels $d$.  Here one finds that the

570: luminosity is closely proportional to $T_{\rm eff}^4$, which provides

571: strong evidence for the presence of a {\it stable inner disk radius}.

572: Obviously, this non-relativistic analysis cannot provide a secure

573: value for the radius of the ISCO nor even establish that this stable

574: radius is the ISCO.  Nevertheless, the presence of a fixed radius

575: indicates that the continuum-fitting method is a well-founded approach

576: to measuring BH spin.

577: 

578: \section{Importance of Measuring Spin}

579: 

580: In order to model the ways that an accreting BH can interact with its

581: environment, one must know its spin.  For example, the many proposals

582: relating relativistic jets to BH spin (Blandford \& Znajek 1977; Meier

583: 2003; McKinney \& Gammie 2004; Hawley \& Krolik 2006) will remain mere

584: speculation until sufficient data on BH spins have been amassed and

585: models are tested and confirmed.  Likewise, measurements of spin are

586: comparably important for testing stellar-collapse models of Gamma-Ray

587: Burst sources (Woosley 1993; MacFadyen \& Woosley 1999; Woosley \&

588: Heger 2006).  Knowledge of spin is also crucial for the development of

589: gravitational-wave astronomy, and our Shafee et al.\ (2006) paper has

590: already motivated the first computation of waveforms for coalescing

591: BHs that includes the effects of spin (Campanelli, Lousto \& Zlochower

592: 2006).  There are several other obvious applications of spin data,

593: such as crucial input to models of BH formation and BH binary

594: evolution (Lee, Brown \& Wijers 2002; Brown et al.\ 2007) and to

595: models of the powerful low-frequency QPOs (1--30 Hz) and complex,

596: non-thermal BH states and their evolution (Remillard \& McClintock

597: 2006).  Finally, we note that the high spins we have measured to date

598: were very likely imparted to these BHs during the process of their

599: formation (see \S6.2 in McClintock et al.\ 2006).

600: 

601: \section{Conclusions and Future Prospects}

602: 

603: We have recently completed a thorough and precise dynamical study of

604: the only known eclipsing BH, M33 X-7 (Pietsch et al.\ 2006), which is

605: the most massive stellar BH known, $M = 15.65 \pm 1.45$\msun~(Orosz et

606: al.\ 2007).  Furthermore, the mass of the secondary star is $M_2 =

607: 70.0 \pm 6.9$\msun, which puts it among the most massive stars whose

608: masses are well-determined.  We are presently preparing a paper on the

609: spin of this BH based on $\sim2$ Msec of {\it Chandra} ACIS data (Liu,

610: McClintock, Narayan, et al.).  We are also in the process of

611: estimating the spin of XTE J1550--564 using {\it RXTE} PCA data, and

612: we anticipate estimating the spins of more than half a dozen other

613: stellar-mass BHs during the next 3--4 years.

614: 

615: An especially exciting prospect is the possibility of obtaining

616: independent estimates of spin via either the Fe K line profile

617: (Reynolds \& Nowak 2003; Brenneman \& Reynolds 2006; Miller et al.\

618: 2007) or high-frequency ($50-450$ Hz) QPOs (T\"or\"ok et al.\ 2005;

619: Remillard \& McClintock 2006), which are observed for some of these

620: sources.  Because spin is such a critical parameter, we and many

621: others are planning to pursue vigorously these additional avenues, as

622: this will provide arguably the best possible check on our results.

623: Future X-ray polarimetry missions may provide yet an additional

624: channel for measuring spin (e.g., Connors, Stark \& Piran 1980).

625: 

626: We conclude with a list of questions that motivate us.  What range of

627: spins will we find?  Will GRS 1915+105 stand alone, or will we find

628: other examples of extreme spin?  As we continue to refine our models

629: and our measurements of $M$, $i$ and $D$, will we consistently find

630: values of $a_* < 1$, or will we be challenged by apparent and

631: unphysical values of the spin parameter that exceed unity?  Will there

632: be large differences in spin between the class of young, persistent

633: systems with their massive secondaries (M33 X-7, LMC X-1 and LMC X-3)

634: and the ancient transient systems with their low-mass secondaries?

635: What constraints will these spin results place on BH formation,

636: evolutionary models of BH binaries, models of relativistic jets and

637: gamma-ray bursts, etc.?  What will be the implications of these spin

638: measurements for the emerging field of gravitational-wave astronomy in

639: the Advanced LIGO era?  How will this new knowledge help shape the

640: observing programs of {\it GLAST}, {\it Black Hole Finder Probe}, {\it

641: Constellation-X}, and {\it XEUS}?

642: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

643: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

644: 

645: \begin{thebibliography}{}

646: 

647: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

648: %\bibitem[]{}\textsc{} 1991

649: %{.}

650: %\textit{.} \textbf{}, xx-xx.

651: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

652: 

653: \bibitem[]{abe05}\textsc{Abe, Y., Fukazawa, Y., Kubota, A., Kasama, \&

654: D., Makishima, K.} 2005

655: {Three Spectral States of the Disk X-Ray Emission of the Black-Hole

656: Candidate 4U 1630-47.}

657: \textit{PASJ.} \textbf{57}, 629--641.

658: 

659: \bibitem[]{arn96}\textsc{Arnaud, K. A.} 1996

660: {XSPEC: The First Ten Years.}

661: IN \textit{ASP Conf.\ Ser.\ 101, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and

662: Systems V.} (ed. G. H. Jacoby \& J. Barnes). pp.\ 17--20. ASP.

663: 

664: \bibitem[]{beg03} \textsc{Begelman, M. C.}, 2003

665: {Evidence for Black Holes.} 2003

666: \textit{Science.} \textbf{300}, 1898--1904.

667: 

668: \bibitem[]{bla77}\textsc{Blandford, R. D., \& Znajek, R. L..} 1977

669: {Electromagnetic Extraction of Energy from Kerr Black Holes.}

670: \textit{MNRAS.} \textbf{179}, 433--456.

671: 

672: \bibitem[]{bre06}\textsc{Brenneman, L. W., \& Reynolds, C. S.} 2006

673: {Constraining Black Hole Spin via X-Ray Spectroscopy.}

674: \textit{ApJ.} \textbf{652}, 1028--1043.

675: 

676: \bibitem[]{bro07}\textsc{Brown, G. E., Lee, C.-H., Moreno-Mendez, E., \&

677: Walter, F. M.} 2007

678: {Kerr Parameters a* for GRO J1655-40 and 4U 1543-47, and their

679: Consequences; Modeling GRS 1915+105.}

680: \textit{astro-ph/0612461.}

681: 

682: \bibitem[]{cam06}\textsc{Campanelli, M., Lousto, C. O., \& Zlochower,

683: Y.}  2006

684: {Spinning-Black-Hole Binaries: The Orbital Hang-up.}

685: \textit{Phys.\ Rev.\ D.} \textbf{74}, 041501(1--5).

686: 

687: \bibitem[]{}\textsc{Connors, P. A., Stark, R. F., \& Piran, T.} 1980

688: {Polarization Features of X-ray Radiation Emitted near Black Holes.}

689: \textit{ApJ.} \textbf{235}, 224--244.

690: 

691: \bibitem[]{dav05}\textsc{Davis, S. W., Blaes, O. M., Hubeny, I., \&

692: Turner, N. J.} 2005 {Relativistic Accretion Disk Models of High-State

693: Black Hole X-Ray Binary Spectra.}  \textit{ApJ.} \textbf{621}, 372--387.

694: 

695: \bibitem[]{dav06}\textsc{Davis, S. W., Done, C., \& Blaes, O. M.} 2006

696: {Testing Accretion Disk Theory in Black Hole X-Ray Binaries.}

697: \textit{ApJ.} \textbf{647}, 525--538.

698: 

699: \bibitem[]{gam99}\textsc{Gammie, C. F.} 1999 {Efficiency of Magnetized

700: Thin Accretion Disks in the Kerr Metric.}  \textit{ApJ.} \textbf{522},

701: L57--L60.

702: 

703: \bibitem[]{gie04}\textsc{Gierli\'nski, M., \& Done, C.} 2004

704: {Black Hole Accretion Discs: Reality Confronts Theory.}

705: \textit{MNRAS.} \textbf{347}, 885--894.

706: 

707: \bibitem[]{gie01}\textsc{Gierli\'nski, M., Maciolek-Niedz\'wiecki, A.,

708: \& Ebisawa, K.} 2001

709: {Application of a Relativistic Accretion Disc Model to X-ray Spectra of

710: LMC X-1 and GRO J1655-40.}  

711: \textit{MNRAS.}  \textbf{325}, 1253--1265.

712: 

713: \bibitem[]{haw06}\textsc{Hawley, J. F., \& Krolik, J. H.} 2006

714: {Magnetically Driven Jets in the Kerr Metric.}

715: \textit{ApJ.} \textbf{641}, 103--116.

716: 

717: \bibitem[]{kro99}\textsc{Krolik, J. H.} 1999 {Magnetized Accretion

718: inside the Marginally Stable Orbit around a Black Hole.}

719: \textit{ApJ.} \textbf{515}, L73--L76.

720: 

721: \bibitem[]{kro02}\textsc{Krolik, J. H., \& Hawley, J. F.} 2002

722: {Where Is the Inner Edge of an Accretion Disk around a Black Hole?}

723: \textit{ApJ.} \textbf{573}, 754--763.

724: 

725: \bibitem[]{kub04}\textsc{Kubota, A., \& Makishima, K.} 2004

726: {The Three Spectral Regimes Found in the Stellar Black Hole XTE

727: J1550-564 in Its High/Soft State.}

728: \textit{ApJ.} \textbf{601}, 428--438.

729: 

730: \bibitem[]{kub01}\textsc{Kubota, A., Makishima, K., \& Ebisawa, K.} 2001

731: {Observational Evidence for Strong Disk Comptonization in GRO J1655-40.}

732: \textit{ApJ.} \textbf{560}, L147--L150.

733: 

734: \bibitem[]{lee02}\textsc{Lee, C.-H., Brown, G. E., \& Wijers,

735: R. A. M. J.} 2002

736: {Discovery of a Black Hole Mass-Period Correlation in Soft X-Ray

737: Transients and Its Implication for Gamma-Ray Burst and Hypernova

738: Mechanisms.}

739: \textit{ApJ.} \textbf{575}, 996--1006.

740: 

741: \bibitem[]{lil05}\textsc{Li, L.-X., Zimmerman, E. R., Narayan, R., \&

742: McClintock, J. E.} 2005

743: {Multitemperature Blackbody Spectrum of a Thin Accretion Disk

744: around a Kerr Black Hole: Model Computations and Comparison with

745: Observations.}

746: \textit{ApJS.} \textbf{157}, 335--370.

747: 

748: \bibitem[]{mac99}\textsc{MacFadyen, A. I., \& Woosley, S. E.} 1999

749: {Collapsars: Gamma-Ray Bursts and Explosions in ``Failed Supernovae.''}

750: \textit{ApJ.} \textbf{524}, 262--289.

751: 

752: \bibitem[]{mak86}\textsc{Makishima, K., Maejima, Y., Mitsuda, K., Bradt,

753: H. V., Remillard, R. A., Tuohy, I. R., Hoshi, R., \& Nakagawa, M.} 1986

754: {Simultaneous X-ray and Optical Observations of GX 339-4 in an X-ray

755: High State.}

756: \textit{ApJ.} \textbf{308}, 635--643.

757: 

758: \bibitem[]{mcc06}\textsc{McClintock, J., E., Shafee, R., Narayan, R.,

759: Remillard, R. A., Davis, S. W., \& Li, L.-X.} 2006

760: {The Spin of the Near-Extreme Kerr Black Hole GRS 1915+105.}

761: \textit{ApJ.} \textbf{652}, 518--539.

762: 

763: \bibitem[]{mcc07}\textsc{McClintock, J. E., Remillard, R. A., Rupen,

764: M. P., Torres, M. A. P., Steeghs, D., Levine, A. M., \& Orosz, J. A.}

765: 2007

766: {Outburst of the X-ray Nova H1743-322: Comparisons with the Black Hole

767: Binary XTE J1550-564.}

768: \textit{ApJ.} submitted. arXiv:0705.1034.

769: 

770: \bibitem[]{mck04}\textsc{McKinney, J. C., \& Gammie, C. F.} 2004

771: {A Measurement of the Electromagnetic Luminosity of a Kerr Black Hole.}

772: \textit{ApJ.} \textbf{611}, 977--995.

773: 

774: \bibitem[]{mei03}\textsc{Meier, D. L.} 2003

775: {The Theory and Simulation of Relativistic Jet Formation: Towards a

776: Unified Model for Micro- and Macroquasars.}

777: \textit{New Astron.\ Rev.\.} \textbf{47}, 667--672.

778: 

779: \bibitem[]{mer00}\textsc{Merloni, A., Fabian, A. C., \& Ross} 2000

780: {On the Interpretation of the Multicolour Disc Model for Black Hole

781: Candidates.}

782: \textit{MNRAS.} \textbf{313}, 193--197.

783: 

784: \bibitem[]{mid06}\textsc{Middleton, M., Done, C., Gierli\'nski, M., \&

785: Davis, S. W.} 2006 {Black hole spin in GRS 1915+105.} \textit{ApJ.}

786: \textbf{373}, 1004--1012.

787: 

788: \bibitem[]{mil07}\textsc{Miller, J. M.} 2007

789: {Relativistic X-ray Lines from the Inner Accretion Disks Around Black

790: Holes.}

791: \textit{ARAA.} to appear in vol.\ \textbf{45}. arXiv:0705.0540.

792: 

793: \bibitem[]{mit84}\textsc{Mitsuda, K., Inoue, H., Koyama, K., et al.}

794: 1984

795: {Energy Spectra of Low-Mass Binary X-ray Sources Observed from TENMA.}

796: \textit{PASJ.} \textbf{36}, 741--759.

797: 

798: \bibitem[]{nar05}\textsc{Narayan, R., \& McClintock, J. E.} 2005

799: {Inclination Effects and Beaming in Black Hole X-Ray Binaries.}

800: \textit{ApJ.} \textbf{623}, 1017--1025.

801: 

802: \bibitem[]{nov73}\textsc{Novikov, I. D. \& Thorne, K. S.} 1973

803: {Black Hole Astrophysics.} 

804: In \textit{Blackholes.} (ed. C. DeWitt \& B. DeWitt). 

805: pp.\ 343--450. Gordon \& Breach.

806: 

807: \bibitem[]{or007}\textsc{Orosz, J. A., McClintock, J. E., Narayan, R.,

808: et al.}  2007 

809: {A Massive Stellar Black Hole Binary in the Nearby Spiral

810: Galaxy Messier 33.} \textit{Nature.} submitted.

811: 

812: \bibitem[]{pie06}\textsc{Pietsch, W., Haberl, F., Sasaki, M., Gaetz,

813: T. J., Plucinsky, P. P., Ghavamian, P., Long, K. S., \& Pannuti, T. G.}

814: 2006

815: {ChASeM33 Reveals the First Eclipsing Black Hole X-Ray Binary.}

816: \textit{ApJ.} \textbf{646}, 420--428.

817: 

818: \bibitem[]{rem06}\textsc{Remillard, R. A., \& McClintock, J. E.} 2006 

819: {X-ray Properties of Black-Hole Binaries.}

820: \textit{ARAA.} \textbf{44}, 49--92.

821: 

822: \bibitem[]{rey03}\textsc{Reynolds, C. S., \& Nowak, M. A.} 2003

823: {Fluorescent Iron Lines as a Probe of Astrophysical Black Hole Systems.}

824: \textit{Phys.\ Rep.} \textbf{377}, 389--466.

825: 

826: \bibitem[]{sha06}\textsc{Shafee, R., McClintock, J. E., Narayan, R.,

827: Davis, S. W., Li, L.-X., \& Remillard, R. A.} 2006

828: {Estimating the Spin of Stellar-Mass Black Holes by Spectral Fitting of

829: the X-ray Continuum.}

830: \textit{ApJ.} \textbf{636}, L113--L116.

831: 

832: \bibitem[]{sha07}\textsc{Shafee, R., Narayan, R., \& McClintock, J. E.}

833: 2007

834: {Viscous Torque and Dissipation in the Inner Regions of a Thin Accretion

835: Disk: Implications for Measuring Black Hole Spin.}

836: \textit{ApJ.} submitted. arXiv:0705.2241.

837: 

838: \bibitem[]{sha73}\textsc{Shakura, N.I. \& Sunyaev, R.A.} 1973

839: {Black Holes in Binary Systems. Observational Appearance.}

840: \textit{A\&A.} \textbf{24}, 337--355.

841: 

842: \bibitem[]{teu83}\textsc{Shapiro, S. L. \& Teukolsky, S. A.} 1983 

843: {Black Holes, White Dwarfs, and Neutron Stars.} Wiley.

844: 

845: \bibitem[]{shi95}\textsc{Shimura, T., \& Takahara, F.} 1995

846: {On the Spectral Hardening Factor of the X-ray Emission from Accretion

847: Disks in Black Hole Candidates.}

848: \textit{ApJ.} \textbf{445}, 780--788.

849: 

850: \bibitem[]{tan95}\textsc{Tanaka, Y, \& Lewin, W. H. G.} 1995

851: {Black Hole Binaries.}

852: IN \textit{X-ray Binaries.} (ed. W. H. G. Lewin, J. van Paradijs, \&

853: E. P. J. van den Heuvel). pp.\ 126--174. Cambridge Univ.\ Press.

854: 

855: \bibitem[]{tor05}\textsc{T\"or\"ok, G., Abramowicz, M. A., Kluz\'niak,

856: W., Stuchl\'ik, Z.} 2005

857: {The Orbital Resonance Model for Twin Peak kHz Quasi

858: periodic Oscillations in Microquasars.}

859: \textit{A\&A.} \textbf{436}, 1--8.

860: 

861: \bibitem[]{woo93}\textsc{Woosley, S. E.} 1993

862: {Gamma-ray Bursts from Stellar Mass Accretion Disks around Black Holes.}

863: \textit{ApJ.} \textbf{405}, 273--277.

864: 

865: \bibitem[]{woo06}\textsc{Woosley, S. E., \& Heger, A.} 2006

866: {The Progenitor Stars of Gamma-Ray Bursts.}

867: \textit{ApJ.} \textbf{637}, 914--921.

868: 

869: \bibitem[]{zha97}\textsc{Zhang, S. N., Cui, W., \& Chen, W.} 1997

870: {X-Ray Binaries: Observational Consequences.}

871: \textit{ApJ.} \textbf{482}, L155--L158.

872: 

873: \end{thebibliography}

874: 

875: \end{document}

876: