arXiv · 2209.04060
Priorities in gravitational waveforms for future space-borne detectors: vacuum accuracy or environment?
Abstract
In preparation for future space-borne gravitational-wave (GW) detectors, should the modelling effort focus on high-precision vacuum templates or on the astrophysical environment of the sources? We perform a systematic comparison of the phase contributions caused by 1) known environmental effects in both gaseous and stellar matter backgrounds, or 2) high-order post-Newtonian {(PN)} terms in the evolution of mHz GW sources {during the inspiral stage of massive binaries}. We use the accuracy of currently available analytical waveform models as a benchmark {value, finding} the following trends: the largest unmodelled phase contributions are likely environmental rather than PN for binaries lighter than $\sim 10^7/(1+z)^2$~M$_{\odot}$, where $z$ is the redshift. Binaries heavier than $\sim 10^8/(1+z)$~M$_{\odot}$ do not require more accurate {inspiral} waveforms due to low signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs). For high-SNR sources, environmental {phase contributions} are relevant at low redshift, while high-order vacuum templates are required at $z > 4$. Led by these findings, we argue that including environmental effects in waveform models should be prioritised in order to maximize the science yield of future mHz detectors.
Explore related subjects
Keep this discovery
Explore connections, maps & timelines
Lorenz Zwick, Pedro R. Capelo, Lucio Mayer. 2022-09-08. Priorities in gravitational waveforms for future space-borne detectors: vacuum accuracy or environment?. https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras%2Fstad707
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.