Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Randomized trial examines orbital eccentricity changes in massive black hole binaries, suggesting minimal impact from smaller perturbers.
The orbital eccentricity of massive black hole binaries (MBHBs) at binary formation shapes the stochastic gravitational-wave background (GWB) detectable by pulsar timing arrays (PTAs). Previous N-body simulations show large run-to-run scatter in this quantity, dominated by Poisson noise, raising the question of whether physical substructure adds genuine astrophysical stochasticity. We test this with high-resolution re-simulations of a major merger from IllustrisTNG100-1, evolved with the Griffin N-body code. A no-perturber control is compared with two matched suites in which ftarget = 0.1 of the primary bulge mass is redistributed into equal-mass perturbers of 10⁷\, M (μp ≈ 3.2 × 10−3) and 10⁸\, M (μp ≈ 3.2 × 10−2), with four realisations per scenario. The control gives σe ≈ 0.11, consistent with the Poisson noise floor at this resolution. The 10⁷\, M case gives σe ≈ 0.115, indistinguishable from the control in its scatter, whereas the 10⁸\, M case gives σe ≈ 0.26, a factor of 2.4 above the floor, though statistically marginal given only four realisations. This excess scatter coincides with larger event-aligned residuals in orbital energy and angular momentum and stronger torque spikes, consistent with near-impulsive perturber–MBHB encounters. In binary–single scattering theory the transition is set by the perturber–MBHB mass ratio μp: the 10⁷\, M case remains diffusive while the 10⁸\, M case approaches the near-impulsive regime. As the expected perturber population in massive ellipticals lies mostly below this regime, perturber-driven eccentricity randomisation is unlikely to matter for GWB-relevant MBHB mergers.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chan et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: