Pulsar Timing Array Constraints on the Merger Timescale of Subparsec Supermassive Black Hole Binary Candidates
Khai Nguyen (1), Tamara Bogdanovic (1), Jessie C. Runnoe (2), Stephen, R. Taylor (2), Alberto Sesana (3), Michael Eracleous (4), Steinn Sigurdsson, (4) ((1) Georgia Institute of Technology, (2) Vanderbilt University, (3), Universit\`a degli Studi di Milano-Bicocca

TL;DR
This study constrains the merger timescale of supermassive black hole binary candidates using pulsar timing array data, finding that the average coalescence time exceeds 60,000 years, consistent with theoretical models.
Contribution
It provides new limits on SMBHB merger timescales based on PTA data, supporting the binary nature of candidates and demonstrating the effectiveness of multi-messenger approaches.
Findings
Average merger timescale > 6×10^4 years assuming GW-driven evolution.
If some SMBHBs are inactive, timescale could be > 6×10^5 years.
Results align with theoretical predictions and support SMBHB candidate validity.
Abstract
We estimate the merger timescale of spectroscopically-selected, subparsec supermassive black hole binary (SMBHB) candidates by comparing their expected contribution to the gravitational wave background (GWB) with the sensitivity of current pulsar timing array (PTA) experiments and in particular, with the latest upper limit placed by the North American Nanohertz Observatory for Gravitational Waves (NANOGrav). We find that the average timescale to coalescence of such SMBHBs is yr, assuming that their orbital evolution in the PTA frequency band is driven by emission of gravitational waves. If some fraction of SMBHBs do not reside in spectroscopically detected active galaxies, and their incidence in active and inactive galaxies is similar, then the merger timescale could be times longer, $\langle t_{\rm evol} \rangle > 6\times…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
