Why binary systems for gravitational waves?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the emission of gravitational waves from binary systems, emphasizing that spherically symmetric objects, such as stationary rotating black holes and neutron stars, do not emit gravitational waves due to their lack of a changing quadrupole moment. The participants conclude that binary systems are preferred for gravitational wave detection because their non-uniform mass distribution breaks spherical symmetry, allowing for gravitational radiation. Young neutron stars are highlighted as potential sources of continuous gravitational waves, particularly before they settle into a stationary state.

PREREQUISITES
  • Birkhoff's theorem
  • Quadrupole moment in gravitational physics
  • Characteristics of neutron stars and black holes
  • Understanding of gravitational wave emission mechanisms
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the properties of young neutron stars and their potential for emitting gravitational waves
  • Explore the implications of Birkhoff's theorem on gravitational wave emission
  • Investigate the role of mass distribution in gravitational wave generation
  • Study the Jacobi ellipsoid and its relevance to neutron star shapes under relativistic conditions
USEFUL FOR

Astronomers, astrophysicists, and researchers in gravitational wave detection who are interested in the dynamics of binary systems and the conditions necessary for gravitational wave emission.

binbagsss
Messages
1,291
Reaction score
12
So a spherically symmetric object, by Birkhoff's theorem, does not emit gravitational waves.

Is this why we look to binaries, so that there is some rotation of the objects with respect to each other breaking the spherical symmetry? Or mainly because the gravitational radiation is much greater as needed, or is it both reasons?

What single sources, if the sensitivity of detectors was sufficient enough, would emit gravitational waves . Like a single rotating black hole? (or is this spherically symmetric, if it rotates in a certain way)?

Thanks in advance
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You need a changing quadrupole moment. A spinning BH does not have a changing quadrupole moment.
 
Vanadium 50 said:
You need a changing quadrupole moment. A spinning BH does not have a changing quadrupole moment.
is this related to the way the mass is distributed?
if the mass is spherically symmetrically distributed about the rotation axis, still spherically symmetric and no quadrople moment?
Can the mass be distributed in such a way relative to the rotation axis that there can be a non-zero quadrople moment?
 
binbagsss said:
is this related to the way the mass is distributed?
if the mass is spherically symmetrically distributed about the rotation axis, still spherically symmetric and no quadrople moment?
Can the mass be distributed in such a way relative to the rotation axis that there can be a non-zero quadrople moment?

Yes. The simplest such non-uniform distribution is when the mass takes the form of a binary system.
 
binbagsss said:
So a spherically symmetric object, by Birkhoff's theorem, does not emit gravitational waves.

Is this why we look to binaries, so that there is some rotation of the objects with respect to each other breaking the spherical symmetry? Or mainly because the gravitational radiation is much greater as needed, or is it both reasons?

What single sources, if the sensitivity of detectors was sufficient enough, would emit gravitational waves . Like a single rotating black hole? (or is this spherically symmetric, if it rotates in a certain way)?

Thanks in advance

Probably not black holes, but it's possible that a single neutron star could be source.
 
binbagsss said:
if the mass is spherically symmetrically distributed about the rotation axis

It won't be. A stationary rotating system is only axially symmetric, not spherically symmetric. But that's still symmetric enough to prohibit radiating gravitational waves.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71
Erik 05 said:
Probably not black holes, but it's possible that a single neutron star could be source.

No. A single neutron star, or indeed a single object of any type held together by its self-gravity, has the same problem as a black hole: once it settles down to a stationary state, it's too symmetric to radiate gravitational waves.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71
ligo.org says:
Young neutron stars may be the most likely to emit continuous gravitational waves
RMode_corotating.gif
 
Yes, there is a big difference between black holes and neutron stars. The latter have a solid crust that cracks as the star spins down, and there may be mountains on the surface (a few mm high!) - the question is whether our detectors are sensitive to detect this (likely have to wait for LISA).
 
  • #10
Keith_McClary said:
ligo.org says:

By "young" neutron stars they mean neutron stars that have just formed and have not settled down into a stationary state. There can be "young" black holes by the same criterion--the process of forming a black hole and of the hole settling down into a stationary state can emit gravitational waves. I believe that a black hole would settle down more quickly than a neutron star so a young neutron star might be more likely to have its gravitational waves observed since they would be emitted over a longer period of time.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes   Reactions: Keith_McClary and vanhees71
  • #11
PeterDonis said:
A single neutron star, or indeed a single object of any type held together by its self-gravity, has the same problem as a black hole: once it settles down to a stationary state, it's too symmetric to radiate gravitational waves.

Even a Jacobi ellipsoid?
 
  • #12
PeterDonis said:
By "young" neutron stars they mean neutron stars that have just formed and have not settled down into a stationary state. There can be "young" black holes by the same criterion--the process of forming a black hole and of the hole settling down into a stationary state can emit gravitational waves. I believe that a black hole would settle down more quickly than a neutron star so a young neutron star might be more likely to have its gravitational waves observed since they would be emitted over a longer period of time.

Yes, years rather than seconds.
 
  • #13
DrStupid said:
Even a Jacobi ellipsoid?

Meaning this?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacobi_ellipsoid

Interesting; such an object would be stationary (more precisely, it would be stationary in the Newtonian case, without gravitational wave emission) but not axisymmetric, so it's possible that the third time derivative of its quadrupole moment would be nonzero, which is the condition for being able to emit gravitational waves.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: DrStupid and vanhees71
  • #14
PeterDonis said:
Interesting; such an object would be stationary (more precisely, it would be stationary in the Newtonian case, without gravitational wave emission) but not axisymmetric, so it's possible that the third time derivative of its quadrupole moment would be nonzero, which is the condition for being able to emit gravitational waves.

Than the next obvious question is: Can a Neutron star be shaped like that? The Jacobi ellipsoid depends on the mass distribution and it is a classical solution. I don't know if something like that is possile under relativistic conditions.

If yes, the next question would be: How much angular momentum gets lost with the gravitational waves and how long would it take to turn into a spheroid?
 
  • #15
DrStupid said:
the next obvious question is: Can a Neutron star be shaped like that?

I would think it would be unlikely because of how strong a neutron star's self-gravity is. But without a detailed understanding of how the equilibrium is maintained in a Jacobi ellipsoid, and whether the equilibrium is still the same in GR as compared with Newtonian physics, it's hard to say for sure.
 
  • #16
In a close binary maybe.
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 43 ·
2
Replies
43
Views
6K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K