1: %Aspen proceedings paper (edited version)
2: %aspen12.tex - correct DNS merger rate estimations + minor mods from drl
3: \documentstyle[11pt,newpasp,twoside,epsf]{article}
4: \markboth{C.\ Kim et al.}{Double Neutron Star Merger Rate}
5: \pagestyle{myheadings}
6: \nofiles
7:
8: % Some definitions I use in these instructions.
9:
10: \def\emphasize#1{{\sl#1\/}}
11: \def\arg#1{{\it#1\/}}
12: \def\rate{{\cal R}}
13: \let\prog=\arg
14:
15: \def\edcomment#1{\iffalse\marginpar{\raggedright\sl#1\/}\else\relax\fi}
16: \marginparwidth 1.25in
17: \marginparsep .125in
18: \marginparpush .25in
19: \reversemarginpar
20:
21: \begin{document}
22: \title{The Galactic Double-Neutron-Star Merger Rate: Most Current Estimates}
23: \author{C.\ Kim$^1$, V.\ Kalogera$^1$, D.R.\ Lorimer$^2$, M.\ Ihm$^1$, and K.\ Belczynski$^{1,3}$}
24: \affil{$^{1}$Northwestern University, Department of Physics and Astronomy, 2145 Sheridan Rd., Evanston, IL, 60201, USA}
25: \affil{$^{2}$University of Manchester, Jodrell Bank Observatory, Macclesfield,
26: Cheshire, SK11 9DL, UK}
27: \affil{$^{3}$Lindheimer Postdoctoral Fellow}
28:
29: \begin{abstract}
30: We summarize our results on the Galactic merger rate of double neutron
31: stars (DNS) in view of the recent discovery of PSR J0737$-$3039. We
32: also present previously unpublished results for the {\em global\/}
33: probability distribution of merger rate values that incorporate the
34: presently known systematics from the radio pulsar luminosity
35: function. The most likely value obtained from the global distribution
36: is only $\simeq15\,{\rm Myr}^{-1}$, but a re-analysis of the current
37: pulsar sample and radio luminosities is needed for a reliable
38: assessment of the best fitting distribution. Finally, we use our
39: theoretical understanding of DNS formation to calculate a possible
40: upper limit on the DNS merger rate from current Type Ib/c supernova
41: rate estimates.
42: \end{abstract}
43:
44: \section{Introduction}
45:
46: Soon after the discovery of the highly relativistic pulsar
47: J0737$-$3039 (Burgay et al.\ 2004) we applied our analysis method for
48: pulsar populations and calculated the updated merger rate estimates
49: for the current sample of Galactic close DNS (Kalogera et al.\
50: 2004). Our main conclusion was that this new, remarkably relativistic
51: system is very significant for these estimates and leads to a rate
52: increase by a factor of $5-7$. This implies a correspondingly
53: significant increase in DNS inspiral event rates for
54: gravitational-wave (GW) interferometers like LIGO. In what follows, we
55: summarize our recent results and present new results on: (i) how a
56: {\em global\/} probability distribution of rate estimates can be
57: calculated with the systematic uncertainties; (ii) the possible upper
58: limits that could be imposed on the DNS merger rate if we adopt the
59: theoretically expected relationship between DNS merger rates and Type
60: Ib/c supernova (SN) rates.
61:
62: \section{The revised Galactic DNS merger rate}
63:
64: In Kim, Kalogera, \& Lorimer (2003; hereafter KKL), we introduced a
65: statistical method to calculate the probability density function (PDF)
66: of the rate estimates for Galactic close DNS. After the discovery of
67: PSR~J0737$-$3039, we derived a combined $P({\cal R})$ considering the
68: three observed DNS systems in the Galactic disk (for details see
69: Appendix~A of Kim et al.\ 2004).
70:
71: To calculate the merger rate of DNS systems in our Galaxy, we need to
72: estimate: (i) the number $N_{\rm tot}$ of Galactic pulsars with pulse
73: and orbital characteristics {\it similar\/} to those in the observed
74: sample; (ii) the lifetime $\tau_{\rm life}$ of each observed system;
75: (iii) an upward correction factor $f_{\rm b}$ for pulsar beaming.
76:
77: We calculate $N_{\rm tot}$ by modeling in detail the pulsar-survey
78: selection effects for a number of pulsar population models described
79: in KKL. The model assumptions for the pulsar luminosity function
80: dominate the systematic uncertainties of our overall calculation.
81:
82: The lifetime of the system is defined by $\tau_{\rm life} \equiv
83: \tau_{\rm sd} + \tau_{\rm mrg}$, where $\tau_{\rm sd}$ is a spin-down
84: age of a recycled pulsar (Arzoumanian, Cordes, \& Wasserman 1999) and
85: $\tau_{\rm mrg}$ is the remaining lifetime until the two neutron stars
86: merge (Peters \& Mathews 1963). We note that the lifetime of
87: J0737$-$3039 is estimated to be 185\,Myr, which is the shortest among
88: the observed systems.
89:
90: The beaming correction factor $f_{\rm b}$ is defined as the inverse of
91: the fractional solid angle subtended by the pulsar beam. Its
92: calculation requires detailed geometrical information on the
93: beam. Following Kalogera et al.\ (2001), we adopt $f_{\rm b}=5.72$ for
94: PSR B1913+16 (Hulse \& Taylor 1975) and 6.45 for PSR B1534+12
95: (Wolszczan 1991). Without good knowledge of the geometry of
96: J0737$-$3039A, we adopt the average value of the other two systems
97: ($\simeq 6.1$).
98:
99: In Figure~1, we show $P({\cal R})$ for our chosen reference model that
100: allows for a low minimum pulsar luminosity (Model~6 in KKL). The most
101: likely value of ${\cal R}$ turns out to be $83\,{\rm Myr}^{-1}$,
102: larger by a factor of $\simeq6.4$ than the rate estimated before the
103: discovery of J0737$-$3039. We find the same increase factor for all
104: pulsar population models examined. This revised merger rate implies an
105: increase in the detection rate of DNS inspirals for ground-based GW
106: interferometers such as LIGO (Abramovici et al. 1992). Using the
107: standard extrapolation of our reference model out to extragalactic
108: distances (see Kalogera et al.\ 2001), we find that the most probable
109: event rates are 1 per 29\,yrs and 1 per 2 days, for initial and
110: advanced LIGO, respectively. At the 95\% confidence interval, the most
111: optimistic predictions for the reference model are 1 event per 8\,yrs
112: and 2 events per day for initial and advanced LIGO, respectively. For
113: more details see Kalogera et al.\ (2004).
114:
115: \begin{figure}
116: %\plotfiddle{fig1.eps}{7cm}{0}{30}{24.5}{-100}{-15}
117: \plotone{fig1.eps}
118: \caption{The PDF of DNS merger rate $P({\cal R})$ is shown on a log
119: scale. The thick solid line is the total Galactic rate estimate
120: overlapped with results for individual observed systems (dashed
121: lines). Dotted lines indicate confidence intervals for the rate
122: estimates. The same results are shown on a linear scale in the small
123: inset. All results shown are for our reference model.}
124: \end{figure}
125:
126: The revised DNS merger rate is dominated by PSR
127: J0737$-$3039. Therefore, if the estimated lifetime of this system is
128: revised in the future, it will directly affect our rate
129: estimation. Lorimer et al.\ (in this volume) calculated the spin-down
130: age of the system with various spin-down models and suggested an age
131: in the range 30--70\,Myr, which is shorter than the value we adopted
132: for our calculation ($\tau_{\rm sd}=$100\,Myr). The edges of this
133: range give us rate estimates of ${\cal R}\simeq 90-115\,$Myr$^{-1}$.
134:
135: The beaming correction for J0737$-$3039 is also important for our rate
136: estimation. Recently, Jenet \& Ransom (2004) suggested a geometrical
137: model for this newly discovered system. According to their model, the
138: predicted beaming correction factor is $\geq$6
139: assuming a two-sided beam (Jenet 2004, private communication).
140: If confirmed, this could lead to a further dramatic increase in the merger rate estimates.
141:
142: \section{Global probability distribution of the rate estimates}
143:
144: In KKL, we showed that estimated Galactic DNS merger rates are
145: strongly dependent on the assumed luminosity distribution function for
146: pulsars. So far, we have reported results for each set of population
147: model assumptions. Here we describe how we can incorporate the
148: systematic uncertainties from these models and calculate, $P_{\rm g}
149: ({\cal R})$, a {\em global\/} PDF of rate estimates. However, we
150: stress that the information needed for such a calculation is currently
151: not up to date; therefore, specific quantitative results could
152: change when constraints on the luminosity function are derived from
153: the current pulsar sample.
154:
155: We calculate $P_{\rm g}({\cal R})$ using the prior distributions of
156: the two model parameters for the pulsar luminosity function: the
157: cut-off luminosity $L_{\rm min}$ and power-index $p$. We calculate
158: these priors by fitting the marginal PDFs of $L_{\rm min}$ and $p$
159: presented by Cordes \& Chernoff (1997). We obtain the following
160: analytic formulae for $f(L_{\rm min})$ and $g(p)$: $f(L_{\rm min}) =
161: \alpha_{\rm 0} + \alpha_{\rm 1} L_{\rm min} + \alpha_{\rm 2} L_{\rm
162: min}^{2}$ and $g(p) = 10^{\beta_{\rm 0} + \beta_{\rm 1} p + \beta_{\rm
163: 2} p^{2}}$, where $\alpha_{\rm i}$ and $\beta_{\rm i} ~({\rm
164: i}=0,1,2)$ are coefficients we obtain from the least-square fits and
165: the functions are defined over the intervals $L_{\rm min}=[0.0,\,1.7]$
166: mJy kpc$^{2}$ and $p=[1.4,\, 2.6]$. We note that, although Cordes and
167: Chernoff (1997) obtained $f(L_{\rm min})$ over $L_{\rm min}\simeq
168: [0.3,\,2]$ mJy kpc$^{2}$ centered at 1.1 mJy kpc$^{2}$, we consider
169: $f(L_{\rm min})$ with a peak at $\sim 0.8\,$mJy kpc$^{2}$ considering
170: the discoveries of faint pulsars with L$_{\rm 1400}$ below 1 mJy
171: kpc$^{2}$ (Camilo 2003).
172:
173: We use the above priors to calculate $P_{\rm g}({\cal R})$:
174: \begin{equation}
175: P_{\rm g}({\cal R}) = \int_{p} dp \int_{L_{\rm min}} ~dL_{\rm min} P(R) f(L_{\rm min}) g(p)~.
176: \end{equation}
177: In Figure~2, we show the distributions of $L_{\rm min}$ and $p$
178: adopted (top panels) and the resulting global distribution of Galactic
179: DNS merger rate estimates (bottom panel). We find that $P_{\rm
180: g}({\cal R})$ is strongly peaked at {\em only\/} around
181: 15\,Myr$^{-1}$. We note that this is a factor $\simeq$ 5.5 smaller
182: than the revised rate from the reference model (${\cal
183: R}=$83\,Myr$^{-1}$). At the 95\% confidence interval, we find that
184: the Galactic DNS merger rates lie in the range $\sim$
185: 1--170\,Myr$^{-1}$. These imply LIGO event rates in the range
186: $\sim (0.4-70)\times 10^{-3}\,$yr$^{-1}$ (initial) and
187: $\sim 2-380\,$yr$^{-1}$ (advanced).
188: Given these implications, it is clear
189: that up-to-date constraints on $L_{\rm min}$ and $p$ and their PDFs (a
190: follow-up on Cordes \& Chernoff 1997) are urgently needed.
191:
192: \section{Rate constraints from Type Ib/c supernovae and binary
193: evolution models}
194:
195: Based on our current understanding of DNS formation, the progenitor of
196: the second neutron star is expected to form during a Type Ib/c
197: supernova. Therefore, the empirical estimates for the Type Ib/c SN
198: rate in our Galaxy can be used to provide upper limits on the DNS
199: merger rate estimates. From Cappellaro, Evans, \& Turatto (1999) we
200: adopt ${\cal R}_{\rm SN\,Ib/c} \simeq 1100\pm500\,$Myr$^{-1}$
201: (for Sbc--Sd galaxies). Here, we assume $H_0=71\,$km/s/Mpc and
202: $L_{\rm B,gal}=9\times10^{9}\,L_{\rm B,sun}$.
203:
204: \begin{figure}
205: %\plotfiddle{fig2.eps}{5.4cm}{0}{30}{26}{-100}{-15}
206: \plotone{fig2.eps}
207: \caption{The global $P_{\rm g}({\cal R})$ on a linear scale (lower
208: panel) and the assumed intrinsic distributions for $L_{\rm min}$ and
209: $p$ (upper panels). Dotted lines represent the lower ($SN_{\rm L}$)
210: and upper ($SN_{\rm U}$) bounds on the observed SN Ib/c rate scaled by
211: 1/10 and 1/100 (see text). The empirical SN Ib/c rates range over
212: $\sim 600-1600\,$Myr$^{-1}$, where the average is at $\sim$1100
213: Myr$^{-1}$ (Cappellaro, Evans, \& Turatto 1999), beyond the range
214: shown here.}
215: \end{figure}
216:
217: In order to find the fraction of SN Ib/c actually involved in the
218: formation of DNS, we have examined population synthesis models
219: calculated with the code {\tt StarTrack} (Belczynski, Kalogera, \&
220: Bulik 2002; Belczynski et al.\ 2004) and find very low rate ratios:
221: $\gamma\equiv{\cal R}$/${\cal R}_{\rm
222: SN\,Ib/c}\sim0.001-0.005$. Several models with He-star winds
223: consistent with current observations (weaker than previously thought)
224: lead to $\gamma\simeq 0.005$. We note that systematic overestimation
225: of ${\cal R}_{\rm SN\,Ib/c}$ relative to SN~II rates has already been
226: pointed out (Belczynski, Kalogera, \& Bulik 2002; this is related to
227: the assumption of {\em complete\/} removal of H-rich
228: envelopes). However, we find that this discrepancy would raise the
229: value of $\gamma$ by just a factor of a few. As an approximate
230: constraint, we adopt the empirical ${\cal R}_{\rm SN\,Ib/c}$ and scale
231: it by 1/10 and 1/100, reflecting the results from population synthesis
232: calculations. We overlay these scaled values in Fig. 2 (dotted lines
233: in the bottom panel) using the ranges for SN Ib/c reported by
234: Cappellaro, Evans, \& Turatto (1999).
235:
236: We note that our most optimistic DNS merger rate is
237: ${\cal R}=224^{+594}_{-181}$ Myr$^{-1}$ at a 95\% confidence interval
238: (Model~15 in KKL). We obtain $\gamma$ for SN Type Ib/c to be $\sim$0.8 with the upper limit of ${\cal R}$ at the 95\% confidence interval. This corresponds to $\gamma \sim$0.1 with a SN Type II rate, which is factor 6.1 larger than that of SN Type Ib/c. In both cases, the most optimistic model is lower than the current empirical supernova rate estimates, but not really consistent with the results of population synthesis calculations. If we consider the global distribution, with the upper limit of ${\cal R}$ at the 95\% confidence interval, we obtain $\gamma$ $\sim$0.15 and 0.025 for SN Type Ib/c and II, respectively.
239:
240:
241: \section{Prediction for more DNS detections by the PMB survey}
242:
243: Acceleration searches of the PMB-survey data (Faulkner et al.\ 2003)
244: should significantly improve the detection efficiency of DNS
245: binaries. Although the data analysis is on-going, acceleration
246: searches already led to the discovery of PSR J1756$-$2251 (see
247: Faulkner et al.\ 2004 and the contribition by Lyne in this volume).
248:
249: Following the method described in Kalogera, Kim \& Lorimer (2003), we
250: calculate the probability to detect a pulsar similar to any of the
251: observed DNS systems. We assume that acceleration searches can
252: perfectly correct for the reduction in flux due to Doppler smearing,
253: namely no degradation in the calculation of signal-to-noise ratio for
254: the PMB survey is included. Considering observed DNS systems
255: individually, we calculate the expected number of pulsars to be
256: detected by the PMB survey ($N_{\rm exp}$).
257:
258: The probability distribution of $N_{\rm exp}^i$ for each DNS pulsar
259: sub-population $i$ (B1913+16, B1534+12, J0737--3039) is given by:
260: \begin{equation}
261: P_i(N_{\rm exp})={\frac{{\beta_i}^{2}}{(1+\beta_i)^{2}}}
262: {\frac{({N_{\rm exp}}+1)}{(1+{\beta_i})^{N_{\rm exp}}} }~,
263: \end{equation}
264: where the constants $\beta_i$ are a measure of how less likely it is
265: to detect pulsars without acceleration searches relative to with
266: acceleration searches. For each sub-population, we calculate the mean
267: values of $N_{\rm exp}$, which are $\bar N_{\rm exp, 1913} = 0.9$,
268: $\bar N_{\rm exp, 1534} = 1.2$, and $\bar N_{\rm exp, 0737} = 1.9$.
269:
270: \begin{figure}
271: \plotfiddle{fig3.eps}{6.4cm}{0}{30}{26}{-100}{-15}
272: \caption{$P(N_{\rm exp})$ for close DNS systems in the PMB survey.
273: We consider all three observed systems in the Galactic disk. The mean value
274: is $\bar N_{\rm exp}=$4.0. The result shown here is based on our reference model.}
275: \end{figure}
276:
277: The increase of the observed sample is very important for the
278: reduction of the uncertainties associated with the DNS merger rate
279: estimates. We note, however, that the discovery of new systems that
280: are {\em similar\/} to the three already known does not necessarily
281: imply a significant increase in the rate estimates. Significant
282: changes are expected when new systems are discovered with pulse
283: profiles or binary properties significantly different than the old
284: ones, as those systems will reveal a new DNS sub-population in the Galaxy.
285:
286: \vskip 20pt
287:
288: \acknowledgments
289: We would like to thank Kip Thorne for suggesting incorporating the
290: systematics into a single PDF, Takashi Nakamura and Steinn Sigurdsson
291: for raising the question of Ib/c SN rates, and Frederick Jenet and
292: Thomas A. Prince for useful discussions. This research is partially
293: supported by NSF Grant 0121420, and a Packard Foundation Fellowship in
294: Science and Engineering to VK. DRL is a University Research Fellow
295: supported by the Royal Society. He also thanks the Theoretical
296: Astrophysics Group at Northwestern University for support. KB is a
297: Lindheimer Fellow at Northwestern University and also acknowledges
298: support from grant PBZ-KBN-054/p03/2001.
299:
300:
301: \begin{references}\reference Abramovici, A., et al. 1992, Science 256, 325 \reference Arzoumanian, Z., Cordes, J.M., \& Wasserman, I. 1999, ApJ,520, 696 \reference Belczynski, K., Kalogera, V., \& Bulik, T. 2002, ApJ, 572, 407 \reference Belczynski, K., Kalogera, V., Rasio, F.A., \& Taam, R.E. 2004, ApJ, submitted \reference Burgay, M., et al. 2004, Nature, 426, 531 \reference Camilo, F. 2003, in Radio Pulsars, ed. M.\ Bailes,D.J.\ Nice, \& S.E.\ Thorsett (ASP Conf.\ Series, Vol.\ 302), 145 \reference Cappellaro, E., Evans, R., \& Turatto, M. 1999, ApJ, 351, 459 \reference Cordes, J.M., \& Chernoff, D.F. 1997, ApJ, 482, 971 \reference Faulkner, A.J., et al. 2003, in Radio Pulsars, ed. M.\ Bailes,D.J.\ Nice, \& S.E.\ Thorsett (ASP Conf.\ Series, Vol.\ 302), 141 \reference Faulkner, A.J., et al. 2004, MNRAS, submitted \reference Hulse R.A., \& Taylor J.H. 1975, ApJ, 195, L51 \reference Jenet, F.A., \& Ransom, S.M. 2004, Nature, 428, 919 \reference Kalogera, V., et al. 2001, ApJ, 556, 340 \reference Kalogera, V., Kim, C., \& Lorimer, D.R. 2003, in Radio Pulsars, ed. M.\ Bailes,D.J.\ Nice, \& S.E.\ Thorsett (ASP Conf.\ Series, Vol.\ 302), 299 \reference Kalogera, V., et al. 2004, ApJ, 601, L179 \reference Kim, C., Kalogera, V., \& Lorimer, D.R. 2003, ApJ, 584, 985 [KKL] \reference Kim, C., et al. 2004, ApJ, accepted (astro-ph/0402162) \reference Peters, P.C., \& Mathews, J. 1963, Phys.\ Rev., 131, 435 \reference Wolszczan, A. 1991, Nature, 350, 688
302: \end{references}
303: \end{document}
304: