Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-s2hrs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T06:12:47.345Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Imprints of IMBHs on the Structure of Globular Clusters: Monte-Carlo Simulations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 September 2007

Stefan Umbreit ,
John M. Fregeau  and
Frederic A. Rasio
Stefan Umbreit
Affiliation:
Northwestern University, Dearborn Observatory 2131 Tech Drive, Evanston, Illinois, 60208, USA email: s-umbreit@northwestern.edu
John M. Fregeau
Affiliation:
Northwestern University, Dearborn Observatory 2131 Tech Drive, Evanston, Illinois, 60208, USA email: s-umbreit@northwestern.edu
Frederic A. Rasio
Affiliation:
Northwestern University, Dearborn Observatory 2131 Tech Drive, Evanston, Illinois, 60208, USA email: s-umbreit@northwestern.edu
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

We present the first results of a series of Monte-Carlo simulations investigating the imprints of a central black hole on the core structure of globular clusters. We investigate the three-dimensional and the projected density profile of the inner regions of idealized as well as more realistic globular cluster models, taking into account a stellar mass spectrum, stellar evolution and allowing for a larger, more realistic, number of stars than was previously possible with direct N-body methods. We compare our results to other N-body simulations published previously in the literature.

Keywords

stellar dynamicsmethods: n-body simulationsglobular clusters: general
Type
Contributed Papers
Information
Proceedings of the International Astronomical Union , Volume 3 , Symposium S246: Dynamical Evolution of Dense Stellar Systems , September 2007 , pp. 351 - 355
Copyright
Copyright © International Astronomical Union 2008

References

Bahcall, J. N., & Wolf, R. A. 1976, ApJ, 209, 214Google Scholar
Baumgardt, H., Makino, J. & Hut, P. 2005, ApJ, 620, 238Google Scholar
Baumgardt, H., Makino, J. & Ebisuzaki, T. 2004, ApJ, 613, 1133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Belczynski, K., Bulik, T. & Kluźniak, W. ł. 2002, ApJL, 567, L63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frank, J., & Rees, M. J. 1976, MNRAS, 176, 633CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fregeau, J. M., & Rasio, F. A. 2007, ApJ, 658, 1047CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fregeau, J. M., Gürkan, M. A., Joshi, K. J., & Rasio, F. A. 2003, ApJ, 593, 772CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freitag, M. & Benz, W. 2001, A&A, 375, 711Google Scholar
Freitag, M. & Benz, W. 2002, A&A, 394, 345Google Scholar
Freitag, M., Amaro-Seoane, P., & Kalogera, V. 2006, ApJ, 649, 91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joshi, K. J., Rasio, F. A., & Portegies Zwart, S. 2000, ApJ, 540, 969CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kroupa, P. 2001, MNRAS, 322, 231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Noyola, E. & Gebhardt, K. 2006, AJ, 132, 447Google Scholar
Peebles, P. J. E. 1972, ApJ, 178, 371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shapiro, S. L. & Marchant, A. B. 1978, ApJ, 225, 603Google Scholar
Volonteri, M., Haardt, F., & Madau, P. 2003, ApJ, 582, 559CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wyller, A. A. 1970, ApJ, 160, 443Google Scholar