LIGO Detection Question: Why Lighter Masses Mean More Time

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter verve825
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Detection Ligo
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the relationship between the mass of binary black holes and the duration of their gravitational wave signals detected by LIGO. Participants explore the implications of lighter masses on the time spent in the sensitive detection band of the instruments, delving into the underlying physics and mathematical relationships involved.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion about why lighter masses result in a longer duration of gravitational waves in the sensitive band of LIGO detectors.
  • Another participant explains that lower mass objects lead to slower orbital speeds and decay, which in turn affects the frequency of gravitational waves, causing the signal to take longer to rise from undetectable levels to detectable frequencies.
  • A later reply references a formula related to chirp mass and its influence on the evolution of the inspiral phase, indicating that the time to pass through the sensitivity band is inversely proportional to the chirp mass.
  • The formula provided suggests that a lower chirp mass correlates with a greater time spent in the sensitivity band, although the details of the derivation are not fully known to the participant sharing this information.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants present multiple viewpoints regarding the relationship between mass and detection time, with some explanations being more technical than others. The discussion does not reach a consensus, as participants explore different aspects of the topic without resolving all uncertainties.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes references to specific papers and formulas that describe the chirp mass and its effects, but there are limitations in the understanding of the derivations and implications of these formulas among participants.

verve825
Messages
5
Reaction score
4
Re: the second LIGO detection, from Symmetry: “Because of their lighter masses compared to the first detection, they spent more time—about one second—in the sensitive band of the detectors.”

As an absolute (albeit deeply fascinated) novice here, I'm unclear as to why lighter masses would allow for the waves' greater time in the sensitive band of the detectors.

Thanks in advance!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
These were lower mass objects, so everything happens more slowly. Orbital speeds are lower and orbital decay happens slower. Since the frequency of the gravitational waves depends on the time it takes the black holes to go round each other, the result is that the frequency change is slower. So it takes longer for the signal to rise from "too weak to detect" to "too high frequency to detect".
 
verve825 said:
Re: the second LIGO detection, from Symmetry: “Because of their lighter masses compared to the first detection, they spent more time—about one second—in the sensitive band of the detectors.”

As an absolute (albeit deeply fascinated) novice here, I'm unclear as to why lighter masses would allow for the waves' greater time in the sensitive band of the detectors.

Thanks in advance!
If you look at http://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.241103 you'll see the following hint:

The chirp mass [26,45], which controls the binary’s evolution during the early inspiral, is determined very precisely. The individual masses, which rely on information from the late inspiral and merger, are measured far less precisely.

Now, if you look at the first Ligo paper, http://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.061102, you can see how the chirp mass is defined and how it controls the evolution of the inspiral. The formula is:

$$\mathcal{M}^{\frac{5}{3}}= k \, f^{\,-\frac{11}{3}} \, \dot{f}$$

Here f is the observed instantaneous frequency of the gravitational wave (i.e the chirp), ##\dot{f}## is it's time derivative, and k is some constant given in the paper. By letting ##\dot{f} = df/dt## you can find an integral for the time t to pass through the "sensitivity band"

$$dt = \int_{f_{low}}^{f_{hi}} \, \frac{k \, f^{\,-\frac{11}{3}} \, df}{\mathcal{M}^{\frac{5}{3}}}$$

So the time to pass through the "sensitivity band" from ##f_{low}## to ##f_{hi}## is given by the above integral, which is inversely proportional to ##\mathcal{M}##. Thus a lower chirp mass means a greater time to pass through the band.

There is a reference for where the formula for the "chirp mass" was derived in the paper, but I don't actually know the details of the derivation. But given the existence of the formula, you can see how you can compute ##\dot{f}## given the value of ##f## and ##\mathcal{M}##, and thus controls the evolution of the inspiral (at least during the early phase). You can also see the importance of this parameter in determining how the masses were computed from the observed data.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: PeterDonis, vanhees71 and m4r35n357
Thank you for your great and detailed response, Pervect- I really appreciate it.

jb
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 66 ·
3
Replies
66
Views
7K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
6K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K