1: %%
2: %% This is file `template-6s.tex',
3: %% generated with the docstrip utility.
4: %%
5: %% The original source files were:
6: %%
7: %% template.raw (with options: `6s')
8: %%
9: %% Template for the LaTeX class aipproc.
10: %%
11: %% (C) 1998,2000,2001 American Institute of Physics and Frank Mittelbach
12: %% All rights reserved
13: %%
14: %%
15: %% $Id: template.raw,v 1.12 2005/07/06 19:22:14 frank Exp $
16: %%
17:
18: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
19: %% Please remove the next line of code if you
20: %% are satisfied that your installation is
21: %% complete and working.
22: %%
23: %% It is only there to help you in detecting
24: %% potential problems.
25: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
26:
27: \input{aipcheck}
28:
29: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
30: %% SELECT THE LAYOUT
31: %%
32: %% The class supports further options.
33: %% See aipguide.pdf for details.
34: %%
35: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
36:
37: \documentclass[
38: ,final % use final for the camera ready runs
39: %% ,draft % use draft while you are working on the paper
40: %% ,numberedheadings % uncomment this option for numbered sections
41: %% , % add further options here if necessary
42: ]
43: {aipproc}
44:
45: \layoutstyle{6x9}
46:
47: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
48: %% FRONTMATTER
49: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
50:
51: \begin{document}
52:
53: \title{Estimating the Spins of Stellar-Mass Black Holes
54: by Fitting Their Continuum Spectra}
55:
56: \classification{04.; 97.60.Lf; 97.80.Jp}
57: \keywords {accretion disk; black hole; spin; X-ray binary}
58:
59: \author{Ramesh Narayan}{
60: address={Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, 60 Garden St.,
61: Cambridge, MA 02138, USA}
62: }
63:
64: \author{Jeffrey E. McClintock}{
65: address={Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, 60 Garden St.,
66: Cambridge, MA 02138, USA}
67: }
68:
69: \author{Rebecca Shafee}{
70: address={Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, 60 Garden St.,
71: Cambridge, MA 02138, USA}
72: }
73:
74:
75: \begin{abstract}
76: We have used the Novikov-Thorne thin disk model to fit the continuum
77: X-ray spectra of three transient black hole X-ray binaries in the
78: thermal state. From the fits we estimate the dimensionless spin
79: parameters of the black holes to be: 4U~1543--47, $a_*\equiv a/M
80: =0.7-0.85$; GRO~J1655--40, $a_*=0.65-0.8$; GRS~1915+105, $a_*=0.98-1$.
81: We plan to expand the sample of spin estimates to about a dozen over
82: the next several years. Some unresolved theoretical issues are
83: briefly discussed.
84: \end{abstract}
85:
86: \maketitle
87:
88: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
89: %% MAINMATTER
90: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
91:
92: \section{1. Introduction}
93:
94: Currently, about 40 black hole (BH) X-ray binaries are known in the
95: Milky Way and Local Group galaxies. The masses of 21 of these BHs
96: have been measured by observing the dynamics of their binary companion
97: stars (McClintock \& Remillard 2006; Orosz et al.\ 2007). Having
98: measured the mass $M$ of a BH, the logical next step is obviously to
99: measure the dimensionless spin parameter, $a_* \equiv a/M = cJ/GM^2$,
100: where $J$ is the angular momentum of the BH. Indeed, $a_*$ is
101: arguably more interesting and important than $M$. Mass merely sets
102: the scale of a BH, whereas spin is an intrinsic parameter that
103: determines the geometry of space-time in the vicinity of the hole.
104:
105: Unfortunately, spin is much harder to measure than mass. The effects
106: of spin are revealed only in the regime of strong gravity close to the
107: hole, where the sole probe available to us is the accreting gas.
108: Thus, in order to measure spin, we must make accurate observations of
109: the radiation emitted by the inner regions of the accretion disk, and
110: we must have a reliable model of the emission. Until recently, there
111: was no credible measurement of BH spin.
112:
113: The situation has now changed. Following up on the pioneering work of
114: Zhang, Cui \& Chen (1997), our group recently estimated the spin
115: parameters of three stellar-mass BHs (Shafee et al.\ 2006; McClintock
116: et al.\ 2006): GRO~J1655--40, 4U~1543--47, and GRS~1915+105. These
117: spin estimates (Table 1) were obtained by modeling the continuum X-ray
118: spectra of the accretion disks surrounding the BHs. Independently,
119: Davis, Done \& Blaes (2006) estimated the spin of the BH in LMC X-3.
120:
121: In \S2 we describe the continuum-fitting method and summarize our
122: results. In \S3 we discuss some of the remaining uncertainties in our
123: disk model. We conclude with a brief discussion in \S4.
124:
125: \begin{center}
126: \begin{table}
127:
128: \begin{tabular}{lccl}
129:
130: \multicolumn{4}{c}{TABLE 1} \\ \\ \multicolumn{4}{c}{Spin
131: Estimates of Stellar-Mass Black Holes} \\
132:
133: \hline \hline
134: \multicolumn{1}{l}{BH Binary System}
135: &\multicolumn{1}{c}{$M/M_\odot$}&\multicolumn{1}{c}{$a_*$}
136: &\multicolumn{1}{l}{Reference} \\
137: \hline 4U 1543--47 &$~~~~8.4-10.4~~~~$ &$~~~~0.7 - 0.85~~~~$
138: &Shafee et al. (2006) \\
139: \hline GRO J1655--40 &$~~~~6.0 - 6.6~~~~$ &$~~~~0.65 - 0.8~~~~$
140: &Shafee et al. (2006) \\
141: \hline GRS 1915+105 &$~~~~10 - 18~~~~$ &$~~~~0.98 - 1~~~~$
142: &McClintock et al. (2006) \\
143: \hline LMC X--3 &$~~~~5.9 - 9.2~~~~$ &$~~~~<0.26~~~~$
144: &Davis et al. (2006) \\
145: \hline\hline
146: \end{tabular}
147:
148: \end{table}
149: \end{center}
150:
151: \section{2. The Method}
152:
153: A definite prediction of general relativity is the existence of an
154: innermost stable circular orbit (ISCO) for a test particle orbiting a
155: BH. Once a particle is inside this radius, no stable orbits are
156: available and the particle plunges into the hole. Gas in a
157: geometrically thin accretion disk has negligible pressure support in
158: the radial direction and behaves for many purposes like a test
159: particle. Thus, the gas spirals in slowly (as a result of viscosity)
160: through a series of nearly circular orbits until it reaches the ISCO,
161: and it then plunges suddenly into the BH. In other words, the disk is
162: effectively truncated at the ISCO. Therefore, if we can measure the
163: radius of the disk inner edge, we will obtain the radius of the ISCO,
164: $R_{\rm ISCO}$.
165:
166: Since the dimensionless ratio, $\xi \equiv R_{\rm ISCO}/(GM/c^2)$, is
167: a monotonic function of the BH spin parameter $a_*$ (Fig.\ 1), knowing
168: its value allows us immediately to infer the BH spin parameter $a_*$.
169: The variations in $R_{\rm ISCO}$ are large -- fully a factor of 6 as
170: $a_*$ increases from 0 to unity -- which implies that we should in
171: principle be able to estimate $a_*$ with good precision.
172:
173: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
174: %% Sample figure:
175: %%
176: %% The option [height=...] scales the picture to the given height,
177: %% without it it would be printed at its nominal size
178: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
179:
180: %\begin{figure}
181: % \includegraphics[height=.3\textheight]{golfer}
182: % \caption{Picture to fixed height}
183: %\end{figure}
184:
185: \begin{figure}
186: %\begin{center}
187: \includegraphics[width=3.5in]{f1.eps}
188: %\end{center}
189: \vspace{-1.0cm}
190: \caption{Shows the dependence of the quantity, $\xi =R_{\rm
191: ISCO}/(GM/c^2)$, on the BH spin parameter, $a_* \equiv a/M = cJ/GM^2$
192: (Shapiro \& Teukolsky 1983). The spin parameter is restricted to the
193: range $-1 \leq a_* \leq 1$; negative values correspond to the BH
194: counter-rotating with respect to the particle orbit.}
195: \end{figure}
196:
197: In our work on BH X-ray binaries, we estimate the radius of the inner
198: edge of the disk by fitting the X-ray continuum spectrum. For this
199: purpose, we use the idealized thin disk model of Novikov \& Thorne
200: (1973, hereafter NT model) which describes an axisymmetric
201: radiatively-efficient accretion flow. For a given BH mass $M$, mass
202: accretion rate $\dot M$ and BH spin parameter $a_*$, the NT model has
203: a precise prediction for the profile of the radiative flux $F_{\rm
204: disk}(R)$ emitted by the disk as a function of radius $R$. Moreover,
205: the accreting gas is optically thick, and the emission is thermal and
206: blackbody-like, making it relatively straightforward to compute the
207: spectrum of the emission (but see
208: \S3.2). Therefore, by analyzing the spectrum of the disk radiation
209: and combining it with knowledge of the distance $D$ to the source, the
210: mass $M$ of the BH, and the inclination $i$ of the disk, we can
211: estimate $R_{\rm ISCO}$ and thereby obtain $a_*$.
212:
213: For a full description of the mechanics of our current
214: continuum-fitting methodology, we refer the reader to \S4 in
215: McClintock et al.\ (2006). In brief, we first select
216: rigorously-defined thermal-state X-ray data (McClintock \& Remillard
217: 2006). This is because a BH accretion disk in the thermal state is
218: likely to be very well described by the NT disk model. We fit the
219: broadband X-ray continuum spectrum using the NT model, combined with
220: an advanced treatment of spectral hardening (\S3.2). We also include
221: (see Li et al. 2005) self-irradiation of the disk (``returning
222: radiation''), limb darkening, gravitational and Doppler redshifts,
223: deflection of photon trajectories in the metric of the BH, and the
224: effect of a torque of any magnitude at the inner edge of the disk,
225: although our published results are based on zero torque (see \S3.1).
226:
227: Using the disk model, we fit directly for the two parameters of
228: interest: the spin $a_*$ and the mass accretion rate $\dot M$. Using
229: the known radiative efficiency of the NT disk model for a given $a_*$,
230: and the fitted value of $\dot M$, we compute for each independent
231: spectral observation the Eddington-scaled luminosity, $L/L_{\rm Edd}$,
232: and consider only those observations for which $L/L_{\rm Edd} \leq 0.3$,
233: which corresponds to disk thickness $H/R \leq 0.1$ (see McClintock et
234: al. 2006). Finally, we present our results in the form of plots of
235: $a_*$ versus log($L/L_{\rm Edd})$.
236:
237: As an example, Figure 2 shows our results for GRS~1915+105 (McClintock
238: et al. 2006). Over the luminosity range $L/L_{\rm Edd} \leq 0.3$, the
239: data are consistent with a single value of $a_*$ close to unity.
240: Allowing for statistical errors and uncertainties in the input values
241: of $M$, $i$ and $D$, we estimate $a_*$ to lie in the range $0.98-1$
242: (Table 1). For luminosities closer to Eddington, the $a_*$ estimates
243: obtained with our method are lower. We note that Middleton et
244: al. (2006) obtained a very different spin estimate for GRS~1915+105
245: than we did because they relied exclusively on high luminosity data,
246: which we argue is unreliable for the determination of spin (\S3.1).
247:
248: \begin{figure}
249: %\begin{center}
250: \includegraphics[width=3.5in]{f2.eps}
251: %\end{center}
252: \caption{Shows the estimated spin parameter $a_*$ of the BH in
253: GRS~1915+105, as a function of the Eddington-scaled luminosity
254: $L/L_{\rm Edd}$. The spectral data were analyzed using the model {\sc
255: kerrbb2} (Li et al. 2005; McClintock et al. 2006) combined with three
256: different models of the high energy Comptonized radiation (shown by
257: different symbols). For $L/L_{\rm Edd} < 0.3$ (to the left of the
258: vertical dotted line), all the estimates of $a_*$ are consistent with
259: a value nearly equal to unity. The result is insensitive to the
260: precise Comptonization model used in the analysis.}
261: \end{figure}
262:
263: In our method, we assume that the inner regions of the disk are
264: aligned with the equatorial plane of the spinning BH. This is likely
265: to be true because of the effects of frame-dragging and precession.
266: In addition, we assume that the disk plane is aligned with the orbital
267: plane of the binary system. This assumption allows us to estimate the
268: inclination angle $i$ of the disk from the inclination of the binary
269: orbit (which can be obtained from measurements of ellipsoidal
270: modulation in the optical/infrared light curve). Thus, in effect, we
271: assume that the BH spin axis is approximately aligned with the orbital
272: angular momentum of the binary. There is no strong contrary evidence
273: to this assumption, despite the often-cited examples of GRO~J1655--40
274: and SAX~J1819.3--2525 (see \S2.2 in Narayan \& McClintock 2005).
275: GRS~1915+105 is a special case. For this source, we obtain the
276: inclination angle of the disk from the known orientation of the radio
277: jets, which are presumably perpendicular to the disk.
278:
279: \section{3. Theoretical Issues}
280:
281: Even with the best data, and assuming no errors in our estimates of
282: disk inclination, the results we obtain are still only as good as the
283: model we use to fit the observations. Here we discuss two crucial
284: issues.
285:
286: \subsection{3.1 Reliability of the Model of $F_{\rm disk}(R)$}
287:
288: The NT model on which we base our analysis assumes a thin accretion
289: disk with a steady mass accretion rate. Because we limit ourselves to
290: luminosities below $0.3L_{\rm Edd}$, the disks we study have $H/R \leq
291: 0.1$ (McClintock et al. 2006) and are evidently thin. A thin
292: accretion disk has the remarkable feature that the vertically
293: integrated viscous shear stress at any radius $R$ is uniquely
294: determined by $M$, $\dot{M}$ and $a_*$, and is independent of the
295: details of the viscosity (Shakura \& Sunyaev 1973; NT). The energy
296: dissipation rate per unit area is simply the product of the stress and
297: the local gradient of the Keplerian velocity profile. Thus, the
298: energy dissipation profile is very well determined. Further, the
299: dissipated energy is immediately radiated (since a thin disk is
300: radiatively efficient), so we can calculate $F_{\rm disk}(R)$
301: precisely. All this means that the profile of $F_{\rm disk}(R)$ that
302: we use for spectral fitting is likely to be quite accurate.
303:
304: \begin{figure}
305: %\begin{center}
306: \includegraphics[width=5.5in]{f3.eps}
307: %\end{center}
308: \vspace{-1.0cm}
309: \caption{Shows the vertically integrated viscous stress profiles of
310: a series of hydrodynamic models with $H/R=0.01$ (left) and $H/R=0.1$
311: (right). The BH is taken to be non-spinning, which corresponds to
312: $R_{\rm ISCO}/R_g=6$, where $R_g=GM/c^2$. In each panel, the solid
313: line corresponds to the NT model (more precisely, the equivalent of
314: the NT model for the Paczy\'nski-Wiita potential used in these
315: Newtonian calculations) and the dotted lines correspond to
316: hydrodynamic models for various choices of $\alpha$ (see Shafee et
317: al. 2007 for details). It is seen that the hydrodynamic models agree
318: very well with the NT model for these disk thicknesses.}
319: \end{figure}
320:
321: There is, however, one important caveat, viz., the NT model assumes
322: that the shear stress vanishes at the ISCO. To test the validity of
323: this assumption, we have calculated numerical viscous-hydrodynamic
324: thin disk models using height-integrated differential equations with
325: $\alpha$-viscosity and the Paczy\'nski-Wiita (1980) pseudo-Newtonian
326: potential (Shafee, Narayan \& McClintock 2007). The key feature of
327: our work is that we do not impose any boundary condition at the ISCO.
328: Instead, we self-consistently solve for the position of the sonic
329: radius, where the gas makes the transition from subsonic viscous
330: inflow to supersonic free-fall into the BH. The differential
331: equations provide natural boundary conditions at this radius.
332:
333: Figure 3 shows profiles of the height-integrated viscous stress for a
334: number of hydrodynamic disk models with $H/R=0.01$ and 0.1, and
335: compares them to the profile predicted by the idealized NT model (the
336: solid line). We see that the hydrodynamic models agree very well with
337: the NT model. This means that our results on BH spin are likely to be
338: reliable so long as $H/R \leq 0.1$, i.e., $L/L_{\rm Edd} \leq 0.3$.
339: Afshordi \& Paczy\'nski (2003) had previously reached a similar
340: conclusion.
341:
342: \begin{figure}
343: %\begin{center}
344: \includegraphics[width=3.5in]{f4.eps}
345: %\end{center}
346: \vspace{-1.0cm}
347: \caption{Similar to Fig. 3, but for thicker disks (from Shafee et
348: al.\ 2007). The disk thickness is adjusted by varying the fraction of
349: the dissipated energy that is retained in the gas (25\%, 50\% and
350: 100\% for the three models shown by dashed and dotted lines). Notice
351: the large deviations between these thick disk models and the NT model
352: (solid line).}
353: \end{figure}
354:
355: Figure 4 shows in contrast what happens for thicker, more luminous
356: disks. The shear stress profiles in these models deviate enormously
357: from the NT model. Clearly, we cannot hope to obtain reliable
358: estimates of BH spin under these conditions. This is precisely what
359: we find for GRS~1915+105. In Fig. 2, the points at higher luminosities
360: are increasingly discrepant from the results we trust, viz., those
361: that correspond to luminosities below $0.3L_{\rm Edd}$. In our view,
362: the results of Middleton et al. (2006) on GRS~1915+105 are not
363: reliable because they focused exclusively on high luminosity data.
364:
365: While the results shown in Figs. 3 and 4 are very encouraging, we note
366: that our calculations correspond to a hydrodynamic model, whereas real
367: disks doubtless have strong magnetic fields. How well do magnetized
368: thin disks respect the zero-stress condition at the ISCO? This is
369: presently an open question, since most of the MHD work to date (Krolik
370: 1999; Gammie 1999; Hawley \& Krolik 2002) has focused on thick disks.
371: Interestingly, the stress profiles we find for thick (radiatively
372: inefficient) hydrodynamic disks (Fig. 4) are quite similar to the
373: profile obtained by Krolik \& Hawley (2002) from their 3D MHD
374: simulation of a radiatively inefficient disk (see their Fig. 10). MHD
375: simulations of thin ($H/R \leq 0.1$) disks are highly desirable to
376: confirm the hydrodynamic results shown in Fig. 3.
377:
378: \subsection{3.2 Spectral Hardening}
379:
380: Even when an accretion disk is in the thermal state, it does not
381: radiate as a perfect blackbody. Electron scattering and
382: Comptonization modify the emerging spectrum. This effect was first
383: considered by Shimura \& Takahara (1995), who showed that to a good
384: approximation the emerging spectrum can be desribed by means of a
385: spectral hardening factor $f$. That is, the spectrum retains the
386: shape of a blackbody, but the temperature $T$ of the radiation is
387: related to the radiative flux by $F_{\rm disk} = \sigma (T/f)^4$,
388: where $\sigma$ is the Stefan-Boltzmann constant.
389:
390: In our work, we use the state-of-the-art spectral models of Davis et
391: al.\ (2005) to compute tables of $f$ versus $L/L_{\rm Edd}$ for each
392: BH mass $M$ and disk inclination $i$ of interest. A feature of
393: Davis's work is that he includes metal opacities, whereas Shimura \&
394: Takahara considered only a light element atmosphere. The metals
395: generally reduce the amount of spectral hardening.
396:
397: Because of the inclusion of the detailed disk atmosphere computations
398: of Davis, we believe the spectral model we use for our BH spin work is
399: reliable. The thermal state has negligible energy in an external
400: corona, so there are unlikely to be any significant surface effects
401: that might modify the spectrum. The one remaining issue has to do
402: with the vertical density structure in the disk. The Davis model
403: assumes vertical hydrostatic equilibrium and uses a general equation
404: of state that includes both gas and radiation pressure. For this
405: case, the model is likely to be very accurate. Astrophysicists have
406: considerable experience in carrying out such calculations through
407: decades of work on stellar atmospheres. However, recent radiation MHD
408: simulations (Blaes et al. 2006) suggest that magnetic support might be
409: significant near the surface of an accretion disk. This would reduce
410: the gas density in the atmosphere and cause additional hardening of
411: the spectrum. Ongoing numerical simulations should clarify the
412: situation.
413:
414: \section{4. Discussion}
415:
416: In order to model the ways that an accreting BH can interact with its
417: environment, one must know its spin. Many studies have suggested a
418: link between relativistic jets and BH spin (e.g., Meier 2003; McKinney
419: \& Gammie 2004; Hawley \& Krolik 2006), but observational confirmation will
420: be possible only when we have measured the spins of a reasonable
421: sample of BHs. Likewise, measurements of spin are important for
422: testing collapsar models of Gamma-Ray Burst sources (Woosley 1993;
423: MacFadyen \& Woosley 1999) and for understanding binary evolution and
424: BH formation in general (e.g., Brown et al.\ 2007). In this context
425: we note that the high spins we have measured for three of the four BHs
426: listed in Table 1 were very likely imparted to these BHs during the
427: process of their formation (see \S6.2 in McClintock et al.\ 2006).
428: Knowledge of BH spin is also crucial for the development of
429: gravitational-wave astronomy and for models of quasi-periodic
430: oscillations in BH X-ray binaries (T\"or\"ok et al.\ 2005).
431:
432: We are presently working on two other systems, M33~X-7 and
433: XTE~J1550--564, and we expect to report the spins of these BHs within
434: the next few months. Over the next 3--4 years, we anticipate epanding
435: the sample of spin estimates to about a dozen.
436:
437:
438: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
439: %% BACKMATTER
440: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
441:
442: %\begin{theacknowledgments}
443: % Infandum, regina, iubes renovare dolorem, Troianas ut opes et
444: % lamentabile regnum cruerint Danai; quaeque ipse miserrima vidi, et
445: % quorum pars magna fui. Quis talia fando Myrmidonum Dolopumve aut duri
446: % miles Ulixi temperet a lacrimis?
447: %\end{theacknowledgments}
448:
449: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
450: %% The bibliography can be prepared using the BibTeX program or
451: %% manually.
452: %%
453: %% The code below assumes that BibTeX is used. If the bibliography is
454: %% produced without BibTeX comment out the following lines and see the
455: %% aipguide.pdf for further information.
456: %%
457: %% For your convenience a manually coded example is appended
458: %% after the \end{document}
459: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
460:
461: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
462: %% You may have to change the BibTeX style below, depending on your
463: %% setup or preferences.
464: %%
465: %%
466: %% For The AIP proceedings layouts use either
467: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
468:
469: %\bibliographystyle{aipproc} % if natbib is available
470: \bibliographystyle{aipprocl} % if natbib is missing
471:
472: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
473: %% You probably want to use your own bibtex database here
474: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
475: %\bibliography{sample}
476:
477: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
478: %% Just a reminder that you may have to run bibtex
479: %% All of it up to \end{document} can be removed
480: %% if you don't like the warning.
481: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
482: %\IfFileExists{\jobname.bbl}{}
483: % {\typeout{}
484: % \typeout{******************************************}
485: % \typeout{** Please run "bibtex \jobname" to optain}
486: % \typeout{** the bibliography and then re-run LaTeX}
487: % \typeout{** twice to fix the references!}
488: % \typeout{******************************************}
489: % \typeout{}
490: % }
491:
492: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
493: %% The following lines show an example how to produce a bibliography
494: %% without the help of the BibTeX program. This could be used instead
495: %% of the above.
496: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
497:
498: \begin{thebibliography}{9}
499:
500: %\bibitem[]{abe05}{Abe, Y., Fukazawa, Y., Kubota, A., Kasama, \&
501: %D., Makishima, K.} 2005
502: %{Three Spectral States of the Disk X-Ray Emission of the Black-Hole
503: %Candidate 4U 1630-47.}
504: %\emph{PASJ.} \textbf{57}, 629--641.
505:
506: %\bibitem[]{arn96}{Arnaud, K. A.} 1996
507: %{XSPEC: The First Ten Years.}
508: %IN \emph{ASP Conf.\ Ser.\ 101, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and
509: %Systems V.} (ed. G. H. Jacoby \& J. Barnes). pp.\ 17--20. ASP.
510:
511: \bibitem[]{afsh03}{Afshordi, N., and Paczy\'nski, B.},
512: %Geometric Thin Disk Accreting onto a Black Hole,
513: \emph{ApJ}, \textbf{592} 354--367 (2003).
514:
515: %\bibitem[]{beg03} {Begelman, M. C.}, 2003
516: %{Evidence for Black Holes.} 2003
517: %\emph{Science.} \textbf{300}, 1898--1904.
518:
519: \bibitem[]{bla06}{Blaes, O. M., Davis, S. W., Hirose, S., Krolik, J. H.,
520: and Stone, J. M.}, \emph{ApJ} \textbf{645}, 1402--1407 (2006).
521:
522: %\bibitem[]{bla77}{Blandford, R. D., \& Znajek, R. L..} 1977
523: %{Electromagnetic Extraction of Energy from Kerr Black Holes.}
524: %\emph{MNRAS.} \textbf{179}, 433--456.
525:
526: \bibitem[]{bro07}{Brown, G. E., Lee, C.-H., Moreno-Mendez, E., and
527: Walter, F. M.},
528: %{Kerr Parameters a* for GRO J1655-40 and 4U 1543-47, and their
529: %Consequences; Modeling GRS 1915+105.}
530: \emph{astro-ph/0612461} (2007).
531:
532: %\bibitem[]{cam06}{Campanelli, M., Lousto, C. O., \& Zlochower,
533: %Y.} 2006
534: %{Spinning-Black-Hole Binaries: The Orbital Hang-up.}
535: %\emph{Phys.\ Rev.\ D.} \textbf{74}, 041501(1--5).
536:
537: %\bibitem[]{}{Connors, P. A., Stark, R. F., \& Piran, T.} 1980
538: %{Polarization Features of X-ray Radiation Emitted near Black Holes.}
539: %\emph{ApJ.} \textbf{235}, 224--244.
540:
541: \bibitem[]{dav05}{Davis, S. W., Blaes, O. M., Hubeny, I., and
542: Turner, N. J.},
543: %{Relativistic Accretion Disk Models of High-State
544: %Black Hole X-Ray Binary Spectra.}
545: \emph{ApJ} \textbf{621}, 372--387 (2005).
546:
547: \bibitem[]{dav06}{Davis, S. W., Done, C., and Blaes, O. M.},
548: %{Testing Accretion Disk Theory in Black Hole X-Ray Binaries.}
549: \emph{ApJ} \textbf{647}, 525--538 (2006).
550:
551: \bibitem[]{gam99}{Gammie, C. F.},
552: %{Efficiency of Magnetized
553: %Thin Accretion Disks in the Kerr Metric.}
554: \emph{ApJ} \textbf{522},
555: L57--L60 (1999).
556:
557: \bibitem[]{haw02}{Hawley, J. F., and Krolik, J. H.},
558: \emph{ApJ} \textbf{566}, 164--180 (2002).
559:
560: \bibitem[]{haw06}{Hawley, J. F., and Krolik, J. H.},
561: %{Magnetically Driven Jets in the Kerr Metric.}
562: \emph{ApJ} \textbf{641}, 103--116 (2006).
563:
564: \bibitem[]{kro99}{Krolik, J. H.},
565: %{Magnetized Accretion
566: %inside the Marginally Stable Orbit around a Black Hole.}
567: \emph{ApJ} \textbf{515}, L73--L76 (1999).
568:
569: \bibitem[]{kro02}{Krolik, J. H., and Hawley, J. F.},
570: %{Where Is the Inner Edge of an Accretion Disk around a Black Hole?}
571: \emph{ApJ} \textbf{573}, 754--763 (2002).
572:
573: %\bibitem[]{kub04}{Kubota, A., \& Makishima, K.} 2004
574: %{The Three Spectral Regimes Found in the Stellar Black Hole XTE
575: %J1550-564 in Its High/Soft State.}
576: %\emph{ApJ.} \textbf{601}, 428--438.
577:
578: %\bibitem[]{lee02}{Lee, C.-H., Brown, G. E., \& Wijers,
579: %R. A. M. J.} 2002
580: %{Discovery of a Black Hole Mass-Period Correlation in Soft X-Ray
581: %Transients and Its Implication for Gamma-Ray Burst and Hypernova
582: %Mechanisms.}
583: %\emph{ApJ.} \textbf{575}, 996--1006.
584:
585: \bibitem[]{lil05}{Li, L.-X., Zimmerman, E. R., Narayan, R., and
586: McClintock, J. E.},
587: %{Multitemperature Blackbody Spectrum of a Thin Accretion Disk
588: %around a Kerr Black Hole: Model Computations and Comparison with
589: %Observations.}
590: \emph{ApJS} \textbf{157}, 335--370 (2005).
591:
592: \bibitem[]{mac99}{MacFadyen, A. I., and Woosley, S. E.},
593: %{Collapsars: Gamma-Ray Bursts and Explosions in ``Failed Supernovae.''}
594: \emph{ApJ} \textbf{524}, 262--289 (1999).
595:
596: %\bibitem[]{mak86}{Makishima, K., Maejima, Y., Mitsuda, K., Bradt,
597: %H. V., Remillard, R. A., Tuohy, I. R., Hoshi, R., \& Nakagawa, M.} 1986
598: %{Simultaneous X-ray and Optical Observations of GX 339-4 in an X-ray
599: %High State.}
600: %\emph{ApJ.} \textbf{308}, 635--643.
601:
602: \bibitem[]{mcc06}{McClintock, J. E., and Remillard, R. A.},
603: ``Black Hole Binaries,'' in \emph{Compact Stellar X-ray Sources},
604: edited by W. Lewin and M. van der Klis, Cambridge Univ. Press, 2006,
605: pp. 157--213.
606:
607: \bibitem[]{mcc06b}{McClintock, J., E., Shafee, R., Narayan, R.,
608: Remillard, R. A., Davis, S. W., and Li, L.-X.},
609: %{The Spin of the Near-Extreme Kerr Black Hole GRS 1915+105.}
610: \emph{ApJ} \textbf{652}, 518--539 (2006).
611:
612: %\bibitem[]{mcc07}{McClintock, J. E., Remillard, R. A., Rupen,
613: %M. P., Torres, M. A. P., Steeghs, D., Levine, A. M., \& Orosz, J. A.}
614: %2007
615: %{Outburst of the X-ray Nova H1743-322: Comparisons with the Black Hole
616: %Binary XTE J1550-564.}
617: %\emph{ApJ.} submitted. arXiv:0705.1034.
618:
619: \bibitem[]{mck04}{McKinney, J. C., and Gammie, C. F.},
620: %{A Measurement of the Electromagnetic Luminosity of a Kerr Black Hole.}
621: \emph{ApJ} \textbf{611}, 977--995 (2004).
622:
623: \bibitem[]{mei03}{Meier, D. L.},
624: %{The Theory and Simulation of Relativistic Jet Formation: Towards a
625: %Unified Model for Micro- and Macroquasars.}
626: \emph{New Astron.\ Rev.\.} \textbf{47}, 667--672 (2003).
627:
628: %\bibitem[]{mer00}{Merloni, A., Fabian, A. C., \& Ross} 2000
629: %{On the Interpretation of the Multicolour Disc Model for Black Hole
630: %Candidates.}
631: %\emph{MNRAS.} \textbf{313}, 193--197.
632:
633: \bibitem[]{mid06}{Middleton, M., Done, C., Gierli\'nski, M., and
634: Davis, S. W.},
635: %{Black hole spin in GRS 1915+105.}
636: \emph{ApJ} \textbf{373}, 1004--1012 (2006).
637:
638: \bibitem[]{nar05}{Narayan, R., and McClintock, J. E.},
639: %{Inclination Effects and Beaming in Black Hole X-Ray Binaries.}
640: \emph{ApJ} \textbf{623}, 1017--1025 (2005).
641:
642: \bibitem[]{nov73}{Novikov, I. D., and Thorne, K. S.},
643: ``Black Hole Astrophysics,'' in
644: \emph{Blackholes}, edited by C. DeWitt and B. DeWitt,
645: Gordon \& Breach, 1973, pp.\ 343--450.
646:
647: \bibitem[]{or007}{Orosz, J. A., McClintock, J. E., Narayan, R.,
648: Bailyn, C. D., Hartman, J. D., Macri, L., Liu, J., Pietsch, W.,
649: Remillard, R. A., Shporer, A., and Mazeh, T.},
650: %{A Massive Stellar Black Hole Binary in the Nearby Spiral
651: %Galaxy Messier 33.}
652: \emph{Nature} in press (2007).
653:
654: \bibitem[]{pac80}{Paczy\'nski, B., \& Wiita, P. J.}, \emph{A\&A}
655: \textbf{88}, 23--31 (1980).
656:
657: %\bibitem[]{pie06}{Pietsch, W., Haberl, F., Sasaki, M., Gaetz,
658: %T. J., Plucinsky, P. P., Ghavamian, P., Long, K. S., \& Pannuti, T. G.}
659: %2006
660: %{ChASeM33 Reveals the First Eclipsing Black Hole X-Ray Binary.}
661: %\emph{ApJ.} \textbf{646}, 420--428.
662:
663: %\bibitem[]{rem06}{Remillard, R. A., and McClintock, J. E.},
664: %{X-ray Properties of Black-Hole Binaries.}
665: %\emph{ARAA} \textbf{44}, 49--92 (2006).
666:
667: \bibitem[]{sha06}{Shafee, R., McClintock, J. E., Narayan, R.,
668: Davis, S. W., Li, L.-X., and Remillard, R. A.},
669: %{Estimating the Spin of Stellar-Mass Black Holes by Spectral Fitting of
670: %the X-ray Continuum.}
671: \emph{ApJ} \textbf{636}, L113--L116 (2006).
672:
673: \bibitem[]{sha07}{Shafee, R., Narayan, R., and McClintock, J. E.},
674: %{Viscous Torque and Dissipation in the Inner Regions of a Thin Accretion
675: %Disk: Implications for Measuring Black Hole Spin.}
676: \emph{ApJ} submitted (2007) \emph{arXiv:0705.2241}.
677:
678: \bibitem[]{sha73}{Shakura, N. I., and Sunyaev, R. A.},
679: %{Black Holes in Binary Systems. Observational Appearance.}
680: \emph{A\&A} \textbf{24}, 337--355 (1973).
681:
682: \bibitem[]{teu83}{Shapiro, S. L., and Teukolsky, S. A.},
683: \emph{Black Holes, White Dwarfs, and Neutron Stars}, Wiley (1983).
684:
685: \bibitem[]{shi95}{Shimura, T., and Takahara, F.},
686: %{On the Spectral Hardening Factor of the X-ray Emission from Accretion
687: %Disks in Black Hole Candidates.}
688: \emph{ApJ} \textbf{445}, 780--788 (1995).
689:
690: \bibitem[]{tor05}{T\"or\"ok, G., Abramowicz, M. A., Kluz'niak, W.,
691: and Stuchlik, Z.}, \emph{A\&A} \textbf{436}, 1--8 (2005).
692:
693: \bibitem[]{woo93}{Woosley, S. E.},
694: %{Gamma-ray Bursts from Stellar Mass Accretion Disks around Black Holes.}
695: \emph{ApJ} \textbf{405}, 273--277 (1993).
696:
697: %\bibitem[]{woo06}{Woosley, S. E., \& Heger, A.} 2006
698: %{The Progenitor Stars of Gamma-Ray Bursts.}
699: %\emph{ApJ.} \textbf{637}, 914--921.
700:
701: \bibitem[]{zha97}{Zhang, S. N., Cui, W., and Chen, W.},
702: %{X-Ray Binaries: Observational Consequences.}
703: \emph{ApJ} \textbf{482}, L155--L158 (1997).
704:
705:
706:
707: \end{thebibliography}
708:
709: %\endinput
710: %%
711: \end{document}
712:
713: %% End of file `template-6s.tex'.
714: