A Future Percent-level Measurement of the Hubble Expansion at Redshift 0.8 with Advanced LIGO

Simultaneous measurements of distance and redshift can be used to constrain the expansion history of the universe and associated cosmological parameters. Merging binary black hole (BBH) systems are standard sirens—their gravitational waveform provides direct information about the luminosity distance to the source. There is, however, a perfect degeneracy between the source masses and redshift; some nongravitational information is necessary to break the degeneracy and determine the redshift of the source. Here we suggest that the pair instability supernova (PISN) process, thought to be the source of the observed upper limit on the black hole mass in merging BBH systems at , imprints a mass scale in the population of BBH mergers and permits a measurement of the redshift–luminosity–distance relation with these sources. We simulate five years of BBH detections in the Advanced LIGO and Virgo detectors with a realistic BBH merger rate, mass distribution with smooth PISN cutoff, and measurement uncertainty. We show that after one year of operation at design sensitivity the BBH population can constrain H(z) to at a pivot redshift . After five years the constraint improves to . If the PISN cutoff is sharp, the uncertainty is smaller by about a factor of two. This measurement relies only on general relativity and the presence of a mass scale that is approximately fixed or calibrated across cosmic time; it is independent of any distance ladder. Observations by future “third-generation” gravitational wave detectors, which can see BBH mergers throughout the universe, would permit subpercent cosmographical measurements to z ≳ 4 within one month of observation.

[1]  J. Gair,et al.  Cosmological inference using gravitational wave standard sirens: A mock data analysis , 2019, Physical Review D.

[2]  J. K. Blackburn,et al.  A Gravitational-wave Measurement of the Hubble Constant Following the Second Observing Run of Advanced LIGO and Virgo , 2019, The Astrophysical Journal.

[3]  M. Zevin,et al.  Black holes: The next generation—repeated mergers in dense star clusters and their gravitational-wave properties , 2019, Physical Review D.

[4]  Will M. Farr,et al.  Accuracy Requirements for Empirically Measured Selection Functions , 2019, Research Notes of the AAS.

[5]  Osvaldo A. Martin,et al.  ArviZ a unified library for exploratory analysis of Bayesian models in Python , 2019, J. Open Source Softw..

[6]  M. S. Shahriar,et al.  Binary Black Hole Population Properties Inferred from the First and Second Observing Runs of Advanced LIGO and Advanced Virgo , 2018, The Astrophysical Journal.

[7]  B. A. Boom,et al.  GWTC-1: A Gravitational-Wave Transient Catalog of Compact Binary Mergers Observed by LIGO and Virgo during the First and Second Observing Runs , 2018 .

[8]  S. Nissanke,et al.  Unbiased Hubble constant estimation from binary neutron star mergers , 2018, Physical Review D.

[9]  A R Walker,et al.  Cosmological Constraints from Multiple Probes in the Dark Energy Survey. , 2018, Physical review letters.

[10]  Marius Millea,et al.  Sounds Discordant: Classical Distance Ladder and ΛCDM-based Determinations of the Cosmological Sound Horizon , 2018, The Astrophysical Journal.

[11]  V. Kalogera,et al.  Pulsational Pair-instability Supernovae in Very Close Binaries , 2018, The Astrophysical Journal.

[12]  J. Gair,et al.  Extracting distribution parameters from multiple uncertain observations with selection biases , 2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society.

[13]  W. Farr,et al.  Measuring the Star Formation Rate with Gravitational Waves from Binary Black Holes , 2018, The Astrophysical Journal.

[14]  S. Nissanke,et al.  Prospects for Resolving the Hubble Constant Tension with Standard Sirens. , 2018, Physical review letters.

[15]  M. Fishbach,et al.  Does the Black Hole Merger Rate Evolve with Redshift? , 2018, The Astrophysical Journal.

[16]  Eric Thrane,et al.  Measuring the Binary Black Hole Mass Spectrum with an Astrophysically Motivated Parameterization , 2018, 1801.02699.

[17]  Miguel de Val-Borro,et al.  The Astropy Project: Building an Open-science Project and Status of the v2.0 Core Package , 2018, The Astronomical Journal.

[18]  M. Fishbach,et al.  A two per cent Hubble constant measurement from standard sirens within five years , 2017, Nature.

[19]  David O. Jones,et al.  The Complete Light-curve Sample of Spectroscopically Confirmed SNe Ia from Pan-STARRS1 and Cosmological Constraints from the Combined Pantheon Sample , 2017, The Astrophysical Journal.

[20]  B. A. Boom,et al.  Prospects for observing and localizing gravitational-wave transients with Advanced LIGO, Advanced Virgo and KAGRA , 2013, Living Reviews in Relativity.

[21]  M. Fishbach,et al.  A 2 per cent Hubble constant measurement from standard sirens within 5 years , 2018 .

[22]  S. P. Littlefair,et al.  THE ASTROPY PROJECT: BUILDING AN INCLUSIVE, OPEN-SCIENCE PROJECT AND STATUS OF THE V2.0 CORE PACKAGE , 2018 .

[23]  M. Fishbach,et al.  Precision standard siren cosmology , 2017 .

[24]  M. Fishbach,et al.  Where Are LIGO’s Big Black Holes? , 2017, 1709.08584.

[25]  M. Mapelli,et al.  The cosmic merger rate of stellar black hole binaries from the Illustris simulation , 2017, 1708.05722.

[26]  M. Mapelli,et al.  Very massive stars, pair-instability supernovae and intermediate-mass black holes with the sevn code , 2017, 1706.06109.

[27]  K. Chatziioannou,et al.  Constructing gravitational waves from generic spin-precessing compact binary inspirals , 2017, 1703.03967.

[28]  M. Fishbach,et al.  Are LIGO's Black Holes Made from Smaller Black Holes? , 2017, 1703.06869.

[29]  Jiqiang Guo,et al.  Stan: A Probabilistic Programming Language. , 2017, Journal of statistical software.

[30]  Michael Boyle,et al.  Improved effective-one-body model of spinning, nonprecessing binary black holes for the era of gravitational-wave astrophysics with advanced detectors , 2016, 1611.03703.

[31]  V. Raymond,et al.  Parameter estimation for heavy binary-black holes with networks of second-generation gravitational-wave detectors , 2016, 1611.01122.

[32]  David R. Silva,et al.  The DESI Experiment Part I: Science,Targeting, and Survey Design , 2016, 1611.00036.

[33]  S. Woosley Pulsational Pair-instability Supernovae , 2016, 1608.08939.

[34]  Chris L. Fryer,et al.  The effect of pair-instability mass loss on black-hole mergers , 2016, 1607.03116.

[35]  B. A. Boom,et al.  THE RATE OF BINARY BLACK HOLE MERGERS INFERRED FROM ADVANCED LIGO OBSERVATIONS SURROUNDING GW150914 , 2016, 1602.03842.

[36]  Michael Purrer,et al.  Frequency-domain gravitational waves from nonprecessing black-hole binaries. II. A phenomenological model for the advanced detector era , 2015, 1508.07253.

[37]  B. A. Boom,et al.  SUPPLEMENT: “THE RATE OF BINARY BLACK HOLE MERGERS INFERRED FROM ADVANCED LIGO OBSERVATIONS SURROUNDING GW150914” (2016, ApJL, 833, L1) , 2016 .

[38]  C. A. Oxborrow,et al.  Planck2015 results , 2015, Astronomy & Astrophysics.

[39]  Adam D. Myers,et al.  Cosmological implications of baryon acoustic oscillation measurements , 2014, 1411.1074.

[40]  L. Verde,et al.  Calibrating the cosmic distance scale ladder: the role of the sound horizon scale and the local expansion rate as distance anchors , 2014, 1411.1094.

[41]  P. Graff,et al.  Parameter estimation for compact binaries with ground-based gravitational-wave observations using the LALInference software library , 2014, 1409.7215.

[42]  Michael Boyle,et al.  Effective-one-body model for black-hole binaries with generic mass ratios and spins , 2013, Physical Review D.

[43]  Frank Ohme,et al.  Twist and shout: A simple model of complete precessing black-hole-binary gravitational waveforms , 2013, 1308.3271.

[44]  Prasanth H. Nair,et al.  Astropy: A community Python package for astronomy , 2013, 1307.6212.

[45]  Gaël Varoquaux,et al.  Scikit-learn: Machine Learning in Python , 2011, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[46]  Adam D. Myers,et al.  INFERRING THE ECCENTRICITY DISTRIBUTION , 2010, 1008.4146.

[47]  I. Mandel Parameter estimation on gravitational waves from multiple coalescing binaries , 2009, 0912.5531.

[48]  Daniel E. Holz,et al.  Using Gravitational-Wave Standard Sirens , 2005, astro-ph/0504616.

[49]  T. Loredo Accounting for Source Uncertainties in Analyses of Astronomical Survey Data , 2004, astro-ph/0409387.

[50]  S. Woosley,et al.  The Nucleosynthetic Signature of Population III , 2001, astro-ph/0107037.

[51]  Finn,et al.  Observing binary inspiral in gravitational radiation: One interferometer. , 1993, Physical review. D, Particles and fields.

[52]  B. Schutz Determining the Hubble constant from gravitational wave observations , 1986, Nature.

[53]  J. R. Bond,et al.  The Evolution and fate of Very Massive Objects , 1984 .

[54]  G. Shaviv,et al.  CARBON AND OXYGEN BURNING STARS AND PRE-SUPERNOVA MODELS. , 1967 .

[55]  F. Hoyle,et al.  Neutrino processes and pair formation in massive stars and supernovae. , 1964 .