arXiv:1509.06251v1[astro-ph.GA]21Sep2015
Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 000, 000–000 (0000) Printed 22 September 2015 (MN LATEX style file v2.2)
Detecting Stars at the Galactic Centre via Synchrotron
Emission
Idan Ginsburg⋆
, Xiawei Wang†, Abraham Loeb‡ & Ofer Cohen§
Astronomy Department, Harvard University, 60 Garden St., Cambridge, MA 02138, USA
22 September 2015
ABSTRACT
Stars orbiting within 1′′
of the supermassive black hole in the Galactic Centre,
Sgr A*, are notoriously difficult to detect due to obscuration by gas and dust. We
show that some stars orbiting this region may be detectable via synchrotron emission.
In such instances, a bow shock forms around the star and accelerates the electrons.
We calculate that around the 10 GHz band (radio) and at 1014
Hz (infrared) the
luminosity of a star orbiting the black hole is comparable to the luminosity of Sgr A*.
The strength of the synchrotron emission depends on a number of factors including
the star’s orbital velocity. Thus, the ideal time to observe the synchrotron flux is when
the star is at pericenter. The star S2 will be ∼ 0.015′′
from Sgr A* in 2018, and is an
excellent target to test our predictions.
Key words: general-black hole physics-Galaxy:centre-Galaxy:kinematics and
dynamics-stellar dynamics
1 INTRODUCTION
Over 100 young massive stars inhabit the central parsec
of the Milky Way (for a review see Genzel et al. 2010;
Mapelli & Gualandris 2015). The stars whose orbit lies
within ∼ 0.04 pc from the Galactic Centre (GC) are known
as the S-stars (e.g. Sch¨odel et al. 2003; Ghez et al. 2005).
The orbits of 28 S-stars were determined by Gillessen et al.
(2009). 19 members have semimajor axis a 1 arcsec. Of
those, 16 are B stars and the rest late-type stars. Of partic-
ular interest is the star S2 (also known as SO-2) which has
been observed for more than one complete orbit (Ghez et al.
2005; Ghez et al. 2008; Gillessen et al. 2009). S2 orbits the
supermassive black hole, Sgr A*, every 15.9 years. It is
a B0-2.5 V main sequence star with an estimated mass
of ∼15M⊙ (Martins et al. 2008). The second complete or-
bit of a star around Sgr A* was announced not long ago
(Meyer et al. 2012). This star, S102 (also know as SO-102)
has a period of 11.5 years and is about 16 times fainter than
S2. Both S2 and S102 provide compelling evidence that Sgr
A* has a mass of ∼ 4 × 106
M⊙.
The detection of young, massive stars with orbits close
to Sgr A* was surprising (eg. Ghez et al. 2003). A num-
⋆ E-mail: iginsburg@cfa.harvard.edu
† E-mail:xiawei.wang@cfa.harvard.edu
‡ E-mail:aloeb@cfa.harvard.edu
§ E-mail:ocohen@cfa.harvard.edu
ber of possible mechanisms have been proposed to account
for the origin of the S-stars. L¨ockmann et al. (2008) argued
that the dynamical interaction of two stellar disks in the
central parsec could lead to the formation of the S-stars.
Griv (2010) proposed that the S-stars were born in the
disk and migrated inward. Recently, Chen & Amaro-Seoane
(2014) theorized that a few Myr ago the disk extended down
to the innermost region around Sgr A* and Kozai-Lidov-
like resonance resulted in the S-stars. Perhaps the simplest
and arguably most likely scenario is that at least some of
the S-stars are the result of a three-body interaction with
Sgr A* (e.g. Ginsburg & Loeb 2006; Ginsburg & Loeb 2007;
Ginsburg et al. 2012; Zhang et al. 2013). In this scenario, a
binary star system interacts with Sgr A*, and tidal disrup-
tion leads to one star falling into the gravitational well of the
black hole while the companion is ejected as a hypervelocity
star (HVS) (Hills 1988). HVSs were first observed in 2005
(Brown et al. 2005) and as of today some 24 have been iden-
tified (see Brown et al. 2014 for the list). Brown et al. (2015)
studied 12 confirmed HVSs and found that the vast majority
are consistent with having a GC origin. Furthermore, obser-
vations indicate that these HVSs are likely massive slowly
pulsating B stars (Ginsburg et al. 2013) and thus consistent
with the known S-stars.
There are various candidate HVSs which are far
less massive than B-type stars (Palladino et al. 2014;
Zhong et al. 2014; Zhang et al. 2015). Given the fact
that the stellar density in the central parsec is ∼
2 Ginsburg, Wang, Loeb, Cohen
106
M⊙ pc−3
(Sch¨odel et al. 2009) a distribution of masses is
expected. However, detecting stars at the GC is notoriously
difficult due to dust extinction (e.g. Sch¨odel et al. 2010). In
this paper we discuss using synchrotron radio emission to
observe and possibly monitor stars at the GC. Of particular
importance is the fact that S2 will reach periapse in 2017.
We show that the closer S2 is to Sgr A* the more likely we
are detect the synchrotron emission. Thus, S2 serves as an
ideal test subject. In Section 2 we provide the physics behind
the synchrotron emission. In Section 3 we show that a star
such as S2 may be observable via its synchrotron emission.
We conclude with some discussions and future observations
in Section 4.
2 SHOCKS AND SYNCHROTRON EMISSION
We consider stars orbiting Sgr A*. Interactions between
winds from such a star and the interstellar medium (ISM)
will create two shocks, a reverse and forward shock. The
forward shock propagates into the ambient medium which
is swept up and subsequently compressed and accelerated.
The faster wind is compressed and decelerated by the re-
verse shock. We are interested in the emission from electrons
accelerated by the forward shock. In our case the forward
shock is a bow shock with Mach angle θ ∼ M−1
, where M
is the Mach number. In such a scenario, roughly half the
star’s mass loss contributes to the shock. The mechanical
luminosity is simply given by kinetic energy which depends
upon the mass loss rate, ˙M, and wind speed
Lw =
1
2
˙Mwv2
w. (1)
For a massive star such as S2, typical values for ˙Mw are
∼ 10−6
M⊙ yr−1
, vw ∼ 1000 km s−1
and thus Lw is around
1035
erg s−1
. Consequently, the total non-thermal luminos-
ity, Lnt, is given by the fraction of electrons, ǫnt, accelerated
to produce non-thermal radiation
Lnt = ǫntLw. (2)
We let ǫnt be 5% although simulations show that this value
is uncertain (Guo et al. 2014). The energy density of the
amplified magnetic field is given by UB = B2
/8π. Therefore,
assuming equipartition of energy, UB = ξBnskTs leads to
B = (8πξBnskTs)1/2
(3)
where ξB is the fraction of thermal energy in the magnetic
field, ns is the post-shock number density, and kTs the tem-
perature of the post-shock medium. In the strong shock limit
for an adiabatic index of 5/3, the post-shock number density
ns is ∼ 4 times the number density of the ambient ISM. Al-
though the value of ξB is highly uncertain, a value of 0.1 is
reasonable (V¨olk et al. 2005). The resulting values for B are
∼ 10−2
− 10−3
G. The Rankine-Hugoniot jump conditions
give the post shock temperature
Ts =
[(γt − 1)M2
+ 2][2γtM2
− (γt − 1)]
(γt + 1)2M2
To (4)
where To is the upstream temperature, and γt is the adia-
batic index which is taken to be 5/3. At the contact discon-
tinuity, ram pressure from the star/ISM is balanced by ram
pressure from the wind. Thus we have ρ∗v2
∗ = ρwv2
w where
the mass flux is given as ρwvw =
˙Mw
4πR2 and this leads to the
standoff radius
Ro = (
˙Mwvw
4πρ∗v2
∗
)1/2
. (5)
ρ∗ = nomp where mp is the proton mass. At a distance of
around 0.3 pc from Sgr A* no ∼ 103
cm−3
and the tem-
perature of the ISM is ∼ 107
K (Quataert 2004). Assuming
v∗ = 1000 km s−1
a typical standoff radius is approximately
10−3
pc.
We consider a broken power law distribution of elec-
trons generated via Fermi acceleration, written as
N(γ)dγ = Koγ−p
(1 +
γ
γb
)−1
(γmin γ γmax) (6)
where Ko is the normalization factor in electron density
distribution, p is the electron power law distribution index
which in our calculations is ∼ 2. γ is the Lorentz factor,
γmin and γmax are the minimum and maximum Lorentz
factor respectively, and γb is the break Lorentz factor due
to synchrotron cooling. The total power from synchrotron
emission of a single electron is given by
P =
4
9
r2
oβ2
γ2
B2
(7)
where ro is the classical electron radius and β ≡ v/c
(Rybicki & Lightman 1986). The corresponding synchrotron
cooling time is
tcool =
γmc2
P
. (8)
The break Lorentz factor due to synchrotron cooling is ob-
tained by equating the synchrotron cooling times scale and
the dynamical timescale
td =
Ro
vw
(9)
where Ro is the standoff radius and vw the wind veloc-
ity. The peak luminosity lasts for the pericenter crossing
timescale with typical values ∼ 1 yr. The precise shape of
the peak depends on the orbital parameters, the ambient
gas distribution, and the wind mass loss rate. The charac-
teristic timescale for the peak is the pericenter crossing time,
∼ b/v. γmin is set to one in our calculations. γmax is obtained
by equating the acceleration timescale, tacc = ξaccRLc/v2
w
(Blandford & Eichler 1987), to the dynamical or cooling
timescale where ξacc is a dimensionless parameter on the or-
der of unity. The Larmor radius is given by RL = γmec2
/eB
where me is the mass of the electron and e is the electron
charge. We find that tacc ∼ 10−4
yr, which is far shorter than
the dynamic time. At radio frequencies the cooling time is
a few orders of magnitude greater than the dynamical time
and therefore synchrotron cooling is negligible. Thus, we as-
sume that all the shocked electrons contribute to the ob-
served synchrotron emission.
The synchrotron flux and power are computed using
the radiative transfer equation (Rybicki & Lightman 1986)
which leads to
Iν =
jν
αν
(1 − e−τν
) (10)
where jν is the emission coefficient, αν the absorption coef-
ficient, and τν the optical depth (see Wang & Loeb 2014 for
further details).
Detecting Stars at the Galactic Centre via Synchrotron Emission 3
−2.0 −1.8 −1.6 −1.4 −1.2 −1.0 −0.8 −0.6
log(θ⋆/arcsec)
−15.0
−14.5
−14.0
−13.5
−13.0
−12.5
−12.0
−11.5
log(νFν/ergs−1
cm−2
)
109
Hz
1010
Hz
1011
Hz
1012
Hz
1013
Hz
1014
Hz
2012201320142015201620172018
year
Figure 2. Synchrotron power (arcseconds) versus distance (erg
s−1 cm−2) from Sgr A* for star S2. We let ˙M = 10−6 M⊙ yr−1.
At a frequency of around 1 GHz, S2 is quite bright with a lumi-
nosity of ∼ 10 mJy. The synchrotron power will be greatest in
2017, when S2 is at periapse.
3 EMISSION AROUND SGR A*
Figure 1 shows the expected synchrotron flux for a star or-
biting Sgr A*. For the left panel we kept the wind velocity
constant at 1000 kms−1
. We extrapolated the particle den-
sity to have the value ∼ 104
cm−3
from Quataert (2004). The
mass loss rate for hot massive stars is poorly constrained (for
a review see Puls et al. 2008). Thus, we varied the mass loss
rate between 10−7
M⊙ yr−1
and 10−5
M⊙ yr−1
which are
acceptable values for hot massive stars such as the S-stars
(Dupree 2015). Given that
Fν =
νLν
4πd2
1
ν
(11)
where d = 8 kpc we get a flux between ∼ 10 − 1000 mJy
in the GHz range. Recently, Yusef-Zadeh et al. (2015) de-
scribed radio observations of over 40 massive stars within
30′′
of the GC. Their values for the flux are consistent with
our results. Similar results were obtained when we kept the
mass loss rate constant at 10−6
M⊙ yr−1
and varied the wind
velocity between 1000 km s−1
and 4000 km s−1
(see right
panel of Figure 1).
In Figure 2 we plot the synchrotron power versus dis-
tance from Sgr A* for S2. At periapse S2 has a speed of
∼ 5500 km s−1
while at apoapse the speed drops down to
∼ 1300 km s−1
. A higher speed leads to a stronger shock.
However, even at apoapse it may very well be possible to
observe the synchrotron emission from S2. At 10 GHz, S2
has a flux density of ∼ 10 mJy. Thus, S2 is an excellent
target to observe. It is important to note that radio wave-
length photons are scattered and the image size follows a
λ2
dependence (e.g. Bower et al. 2006; Fish et al. 2014) of
∼ 1 mas (λ /cm)2
. Therefore, in order to resolve S2 at the
0.01′′
level, we need to observe at a frequency of 10 GHz or
greater. Sgr A* has been observed in the radio for decades.
Kellermann et al. (1977) used very long baseline interferom-
etry (VLBI) to observe Sgr A* at 7.8 GHz, and they detected
a nearby secondary transient source which has not been ex-
plained, and could in fact be S2 or another star. Further-
more, Herrnstein et al. (2004) monitored the flux density of
Sgr A* using the Very Large Array. Their results are consis-
tent with our calculation. Macquart & Bower (2006) looked
at the long-term variability of Sgr A* and detected a flux
of ∼ 1031
erg s−1
around the 1987 pericenter passage of S2.
This indicates that the mass loss rate of S2 is ∼ 10−6
M⊙
yr−1
. However, these data points are sparse and hence do
not provide a tight constraint on the peak flux during the
future pericenter passage.
While we expect the synchrotron emission to be de-
tectable, the same is not necessarily true for the standoff
radius. In Figure 3 we plot the standoff radius versus or-
bital radius. The standoff radius near the pericenter may
not be resolvable, although at larger distances from Sgr A*
the likelihood for resolving the source increases. It is also
worth noting that we calculated the thermal free-free emis-
sion around Sgr A* and concluded that it is not detectable.
4 CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE
OBSERVATIONS
The innermost stars orbiting Sgr A* (such as the S-stars)
produce a bow shock. Although this shock will likely not be
detectable via thermal emission, we have shown that stars
such as S2 may be detectable via synchrotron emission. Fig-
ure 1 shows that the contrast of synchrotron flux relative to
Sgr A* is maximized around the 1.4 GHz band. However,
due to scattering we will need to use a higher frequency,
around 10 GHz, if we are to resolve our star. If a star such
as S2 emits strong synchrotron emission, the combined sig-
nal from the star and Sgr A* may exceed the quiescent ra-
dio emission from the black hole. As was the case with G2
(see next paragraph) it is not clear that any additional syn-
chrotron emission will be observable. Arguably, it is best
to resolve the synchrotron emission from any star orbiting
Sgr A*, such as S2. At apoapse S2 is ∼ 0.23′′
from Sgr A*
while at periapse it is only ∼ 0.015′′
away. Thus, to detect
a star such as S2 requires both good sensitivity and reso-
lution. VLBI can provide submilliarcsec observations of Sgr
A* (e.g. Lu et al. 2011) and thus the required precision. S2
is an ideal test case since the star will reach periapse in 2017
or early 2018.
Recently, gas cloud G2 was observed orbiting Sgr A*,
and was approximately 3100 Schwarzschild radii from the
black hole at pericenter. It was predicted that the bow
shock from this encounter would displace the quiescent
radio emission of Sgr A* by ∼ 33 mas (Narayan et al.
2012; Sadowski et al. 2013). However, observations across
the spectrum showed no apparent variability during the pe-
riastron passage of G2 (Bower et al. 2015; Valencia-S et al.
2015). It is unclear why a bow shock was not detected.
One possibility is that at the center of G2 is low-mass star
with wind velocity ∼ 100 km s−1
(Crumley & Kumar 2013;
Scoville & Burkert 2013). Synchrotron emission from such a
small vw would be extremely difficult to detect. Star S2 is
massive, and thus the winds are likely an order of magni-
tude larger. If synchrotron emission is not detected for S2
it may be that our value for ǫnt is too large. It may also be
that the wind speeds from S2 are lower than expected, or
that the number density around Sgr A* is significantly less
4 Ginsburg, Wang, Loeb, Cohen
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
log(ν/Hz)
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
log(νLν/erg·s−1
)
˙Mw,−6 =0.1, vw,3 =1
˙Mw,−6 =1, vw,3 =1
˙Mw,−6 =10, vw,3 =1
Sgr A*
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
log(νFν/Hz·mJ)
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
log(ν/Hz)
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
log(νLν/erg·s−1
)
vw,3 =1, ˙Mw,−6 =1
vw,3 =2, ˙Mw,−6 =1
vw,3 =4, ˙Mw,−6 =1
Sgr A*
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
log(νFν/Hz·mJ)
Figure 1. Non-thermal synchrotron power and flux compared with emission from Sgr A* (data for Sgr A* was obtained from
Yuan & Narayan 2014). The left panel shows the dependence of the synchrotron emission on wind mass loss rate. The star’s veloc-
ity and wind velocity are both fixed at 1000 km s−1. Mass loss, ˙M, was computed with values of 10−7M⊙ yr−1 (blue line), 10−6M⊙
yr−1 (green line), and 10−5M⊙ yr−1 (red line). In the right panel we kept the mass loss constant at 10−6M⊙ yr−1 and used wind
velocities of 1000 km s−1(blue line), 2000 km s−1(green line), and 4000 s−1(red line).
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
R⋆,−3
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
0.30
R0/R⋆
˙
Mw
,−6
=
1,
vw
,3
=
4
˙Mw,−6
=1, vw,3
=1
0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20
θ⋆/arcsec
0.00
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.06
0.07
θ0/arcsec
˙Mw
,−6=
1,
vw
,3=
4
˙Mw,−6
=1, vw,3
=1
Figure 3. Left: The standoff radius for S2 (Ro) versus the orbital radius (R⋆ in units of 10−3 pc). We see that the value is always
less than unity, as expected. Right: angular diameter of the standoff radius (θo) versus the angular diameter of the orbital radius (θ⋆).
Around pericenter it may be difficult to resolve the finite size of the standoff radius. However, S2 should still be detectable via synchrotron
emission.
than what is predicted. Arguably, the most likely reason why
synchrotron emission from S2 may not be detected is simply
that the shock is not as strong as assumed. Our results are
valid so long as the shock is strong, but the emission could
be much fainter if the strength of the shock is lessened. Since
the shock will be strongest when S2 passes periapse, this will
be the ideal time to monitor the star for synchrotron emis-
sion. Even a null detection will help place constraints on the
environment around Sgr A* (Giannios & Sironi 2013).
In addition to radio observations at around the 10 GHz
band, Figure 1 shows that at infrared wavelengths, in par-
ticular around 1014
Hz, Sgr A* is approximately the same
luminosity as a close-by star such as S2. However, S2 itself
emits in the infrared, therefore we will not be able to distin-
guish between the non-thermal and thermal emission. We
Detecting Stars at the Galactic Centre via Synchrotron Emission 5
will need to compare the measured flux with that of the S2.
An instrument with enough sensitivity, such as the James
Webb Space Telescope (JWST), should be able to detect the
synchrotron emission in the infrared. JWST is scheduled to
launch in October of 2018. While S2 will have passed peri-
center, if our predictions are correct the synchrotron emis-
sion should still be detectable. Furthermore, it may be pos-
sible to measure the increase in total infrared emission from
S2 between apocenter and pericenter owing to the increased
synchrotron emission. While S2 is the litmus test for detect-
ing stars at the Galactic Centre via synchrotron emission,
we hope that ultimately we can use this technique to detect
and monitor stars that have thus far not been observable.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We thank Michael D. Johnson, Atish Kamble, Robert Kim-
berk, Mark Reid, Lorenzo Sironi, and Ryo Yamazaki for
helpful comments. This work was supported in part by Har-
vard University and NSF grant AST-1312034.
REFERENCES
Blandford R., Eichler D., 1987, PhR, 154, 1
Bower G., S. M., J. D., Gurwell M., Moran J., Brunthaler
A., Falcke H., Fragile P., Maitra D., Marrone D., Peck A.,
Rushton A., Wright M., 2015, ApJ, 802, 69
Bower G., W.M. G., H. F., Backer D., Lithwick Y., 2006,
ApJL, 648, L127
Brown W., Anderson J., Gnedin O., Bond H., W.R. Geller
M., Kenyon S., 2015, ApJ, 804, 49
Brown W., Geller M., Kenyon S., 2014, ApJ, 787, 89
Brown W., Geller M., Kenyon S., Kurtz M., 2005, ApJL,
622, L33
Chen X., Amaro-Seoane P., 2014, ApJL, 786, L14
Crumley P., Kumar P., 2013, MNRAS, 436, 1955
Dupree A. K., 2015, private communication
Fish V., Johnson M., Lu R., Doeleman S., et al. 2014, ApJ,
795, 134
Genzel R., Eisenhauer F., Gillessen S., 2010,
Rev. Mod. Phys., 82, 3121
Ghez A., Duchˆene G., Matthews K., Hornstein S., Tanner
A., Larkin J., Morris M., Becklin E., Salim S., Kremenek
T., Thompson D., Soifer B., Neugebauer G., McLean I.,
2003, ApJL, 586, L127
Ghez A., Salim S., Hornstein S., Tanner A., Lu J., Morris
M., Becklin E., Duchˆene G., 2005, ApJ, 620, 744
Ghez A., Salim S., Weinberg N., Lu J., Do T., Dunn
J., Matthews K., Morris M. R., Yelda S., Becklin E.,
Kremenek T., Milosavljevic M., Naiman J., 2008, ApJ,
689, 1044
Giannios D., Sironi L., 2013, MNRAS, 433, L25
Gillessen S., Eisenhauer F., Fritz T., Bartko H., Dodds-
Eden K., Pfuhl O., Ott T., Genzel R., 2009, ApJL, 707,
L114
Gillessen S., Eisenhauer F., Trippe S., Alexander T., Genzel
R., Martins F., Ott T., 2009, ApJL, 692, 1075
Ginsburg I., Brown W., Wegner G., 2013, arXiv:1302.1899
Ginsburg I., Loeb A., 2006, MNRAS, 368, 221
Ginsburg I., Loeb A., 2007, MNRAS, 376, 492
Ginsburg I., Loeb A., Wegner G., 2012, MNRAS, 423, 948
Griv E., 2010, ApJ, 709, 597
Guo X., Sironi L., Narayan R., 2014, ApJ, 794, 153
Herrnstein R., Zhao J.-H., Bower G., Goss W., 2004, AJ,
127, 3399
Hills J., 1988, Nature, 331, 687
Kellermann K., Shaffer D., Clark B., Geldzahler B., 1977,
ApJL, 214, L61
L¨ockmann U., Baumgardt H., Kroupa P., 2008, ApJ, 683,
151
Lu R.-S., Krichbaum T., Eckart A., K¨onig S., Kunneriath
D., Witzel G., Witzel A., Zensus J., 2011, A&A, 525, 76
Macquart J.-P., Bower G., 2006, ApJL, 641, 302
Mapelli M., Gualandris A., 2015, arXiv:1505.05473v1
Martins F., Gillessen S., Eisenhauer F., Genzel R., Ott T.,
Trippe S., 2008, ApJ, 672, L119
Meyer L., Ghez A., Sch¨odel R., Yelda S., Boehle A., Lu J.,
Do T., Morris M., Becklin E., Matthews K., 2012, Science,
338, 84
Narayan R., ¨Ozel F., Sironi L., 2012, ApJL, 757, L20
Palladino L., Schlesinger K., Holley-Beckelmann K., Prieto
C., Beers T., Lee Y., Schneider D., 2014, ApJ, 780, 7
Puls J., Vink J., Najarro F., 2008, A&ARv, 16, 209
Quataert E., 2004, ApJ, 613, 322
Rybicki G., Lightman A., 1986, Radiative Processes in As-
trophysics. Wiley, New York
Sadowski A., Sironi L., Abarca D., Guo X., ¨Ozel F., 2013,
MNRAS, 432, 478
Sch¨odel R., Merritt D., Eckart A., 2009, A&A, 502, 91
Sch¨odel R., Najarro F., Muzic K., Eckart A., 2010, A&A,
511, A18
Sch¨odel R., Ott T., Genzel R., Eckart A., Mouawad N.,
Alexander T., 2003, ApJ, 596, 1015
Scoville N., Burkert A., 2013, ApJ, 768, 108
Valencia-S M., Eckart A., Zaja˘cek M., et al. 2015, ApJ,
800, 125
V¨olk H., Berezhko E., Ksenofontov L., 2005, A&A, 433,
229
Wang X., Loeb A., 2014, MNRAS, 441, 809
Yuan F., Narayan R., 2014, ARAA, 52, 529
Yusef-Zadeh F., Bushouse H., Sch¨odel R., Wardle M., Cot-
ton W., Roberts D., Nogueras-Lara F., Gallego-Cano E.,
2015, arXiv:1506.07182v1
Zhang F., Youjun L., Qingjuan Y., 2013, ApJ, 768, 153
Zhang Y., Smith M., Carlin J., 2015, arXiv:1501.07824v1
Zhong J., Chen L., Chao L., De Grijs R., Hou J., Shen S.,
Shao Z., Li J., Lou A., Shi J., Zhang H., Yang M., Deng
L., Jin G., Zhang Y., Hou Y., Zhang Z., 2014, ApJL, 789,
L2
This paper has been typeset from a TEX/ LATEX file prepared
by the author.

More Related Content

PDF
Planck intermediate results_high_redshift_infrared_galaxy_overdensity_candida...
PDF
One tenth solar_abundances_along_the_body_of-the_stream
PDF
Ultraviolet morphology and_unobscured_uv_star_formation_rates_of_clash_brighe...
PDF
The xmm newton-view_of_the_central_degrees_of_the_milk_way
PDF
Type iax supernovae_a_new_class_of_stellar_explosion
PDF
The completeness-corrected rate of stellar encounters with the Sun from the f...
PDF
EXTINCTION AND THE DIMMING OF KIC 8462852
PDF
End point of_black_ring_instabilities_and_the_weak_cosmic_censorship_conjecture
Planck intermediate results_high_redshift_infrared_galaxy_overdensity_candida...
One tenth solar_abundances_along_the_body_of-the_stream
Ultraviolet morphology and_unobscured_uv_star_formation_rates_of_clash_brighe...
The xmm newton-view_of_the_central_degrees_of_the_milk_way
Type iax supernovae_a_new_class_of_stellar_explosion
The completeness-corrected rate of stellar encounters with the Sun from the f...
EXTINCTION AND THE DIMMING OF KIC 8462852
End point of_black_ring_instabilities_and_the_weak_cosmic_censorship_conjecture

What's hot (20)

PDF
TEMPORAL EVOLUTION OF THE HIGH-ENERGY IRRADIATION AND WATER CONTENT OF TRAPPI...
PDF
Evidence for the_thermal_sunyaev-zeldovich_effect_associated_with_quasar_feed...
PDF
Exocometary gas in_th_hd_181327_debris_ring
PDF
Periodic mass extinctions_and_the_planet_x_model_reconsidered
PDF
Young remmants of_type_ia_supernovae_and_their_progenitors_a_study_of_snr_g19_03
PDF
WHERE IS THE FLUX GOING? THE LONG-TERM PHOTOMETRIC VARIABILITY OF BOYAJIAN’S ...
PDF
LOW FREQUENCY GW SOURCES: Chapter II: Massive black hole binary cosmic evolut...
PDF
Radioastron observations of_the_quasar_3_c273_a_challenge_to_the_brightness_t...
PDF
Proper-motion age dating of the progeny of Nova Scorpii ad 1437
PDF
Using the milk_way_satellites_to_study_interactions_between_cold_dark_matter_...
PDF
Ringed structure and_a_gap_at_1_au_in_the_nearest_protoplanetary_disk
PDF
Ecography of young_star_reveals_their_evolution
PDF
The characterization of_the_gamma_ray_signal_from_the_central_milk_way_a_comp...
PDF
Exoplanet transit spectroscopy_using_wfc3
PDF
Large turbulent reservoirs of cold molecular gas around high-redshift starbur...
PDF
Shock breakout and_early_light_curves_of_type_ii_p_supernovae_observed_with_k...
PDF
Storm in teacup_a_radio_quiet_quasar_with_radio_emitting_bubbles
PDF
Alma observations of_feed_and_feedback_in_nearby_seyfert_galaxies
PDF
HL Galaxy Metabolism
PDF
Far ultraviolet morphology_of_star_forming_filaments_in_cool_core_brighest_cl...
TEMPORAL EVOLUTION OF THE HIGH-ENERGY IRRADIATION AND WATER CONTENT OF TRAPPI...
Evidence for the_thermal_sunyaev-zeldovich_effect_associated_with_quasar_feed...
Exocometary gas in_th_hd_181327_debris_ring
Periodic mass extinctions_and_the_planet_x_model_reconsidered
Young remmants of_type_ia_supernovae_and_their_progenitors_a_study_of_snr_g19_03
WHERE IS THE FLUX GOING? THE LONG-TERM PHOTOMETRIC VARIABILITY OF BOYAJIAN’S ...
LOW FREQUENCY GW SOURCES: Chapter II: Massive black hole binary cosmic evolut...
Radioastron observations of_the_quasar_3_c273_a_challenge_to_the_brightness_t...
Proper-motion age dating of the progeny of Nova Scorpii ad 1437
Using the milk_way_satellites_to_study_interactions_between_cold_dark_matter_...
Ringed structure and_a_gap_at_1_au_in_the_nearest_protoplanetary_disk
Ecography of young_star_reveals_their_evolution
The characterization of_the_gamma_ray_signal_from_the_central_milk_way_a_comp...
Exoplanet transit spectroscopy_using_wfc3
Large turbulent reservoirs of cold molecular gas around high-redshift starbur...
Shock breakout and_early_light_curves_of_type_ii_p_supernovae_observed_with_k...
Storm in teacup_a_radio_quiet_quasar_with_radio_emitting_bubbles
Alma observations of_feed_and_feedback_in_nearby_seyfert_galaxies
HL Galaxy Metabolism
Far ultraviolet morphology_of_star_forming_filaments_in_cool_core_brighest_cl...
Ad

Viewers also liked (17)

PDF
The abundance of_x_shaped_radio_sources_vla_survey_of_52_sources_with_off_axi...
PDF
Fifteen years of_xmm_newton_and_chandra_monitoring_of_sgr_a_evidence_for_a_re...
PDF
Gravitational waves from_binary_supermassive_black_holes_missing_in_pulsar_ob...
PDF
The high mass_stelar_initial_mass_function_in_m31_clusters
PDF
Detection of magnetic_fields_in_both_b_type_components_of_epsilon_lupi_system...
PDF
The abundance of_x_shpoaed_radio_sources_implications_for_the_gravitational_w...
PDF
Statistical signatures of_panspermia_in_exoplanet_surveys
PDF
The cygnus loop_veil_nebula
PDF
An extreme starburst_in_the_core_of_a_rich_galaxy_cluster_at_z_1_7
PDF
A propable milli_parsec_supermassive_binary_black_hole_in_the_nearest_quasar_...
PDF
An evolucionary missing_link_a_modest_mass_early_type_galaxy_hosting_an_over_...
PDF
Relativistic boost as_the_cause_of_periodicity_in_a_massive_black_hole_binary...
PDF
New m embers_of_the_tw_hydrae_association_and_two_accreting_m_dwarfs_in_scorp...
PDF
Direct imaging and_spectroscopy_of_a_young_extrasolar_kuiper_belt_in_the_near...
PDF
Kathryn wheel a_spectacular_galaxy_collision_discoverd_in_the_galactic_neighb...
PDF
First results from_the_hubble_opal_program_jupiter_in_2015
PDF
Dark side of_comet_67_p_churyumov_gerasiemnko_in_august_october_2014
The abundance of_x_shaped_radio_sources_vla_survey_of_52_sources_with_off_axi...
Fifteen years of_xmm_newton_and_chandra_monitoring_of_sgr_a_evidence_for_a_re...
Gravitational waves from_binary_supermassive_black_holes_missing_in_pulsar_ob...
The high mass_stelar_initial_mass_function_in_m31_clusters
Detection of magnetic_fields_in_both_b_type_components_of_epsilon_lupi_system...
The abundance of_x_shpoaed_radio_sources_implications_for_the_gravitational_w...
Statistical signatures of_panspermia_in_exoplanet_surveys
The cygnus loop_veil_nebula
An extreme starburst_in_the_core_of_a_rich_galaxy_cluster_at_z_1_7
A propable milli_parsec_supermassive_binary_black_hole_in_the_nearest_quasar_...
An evolucionary missing_link_a_modest_mass_early_type_galaxy_hosting_an_over_...
Relativistic boost as_the_cause_of_periodicity_in_a_massive_black_hole_binary...
New m embers_of_the_tw_hydrae_association_and_two_accreting_m_dwarfs_in_scorp...
Direct imaging and_spectroscopy_of_a_young_extrasolar_kuiper_belt_in_the_near...
Kathryn wheel a_spectacular_galaxy_collision_discoverd_in_the_galactic_neighb...
First results from_the_hubble_opal_program_jupiter_in_2015
Dark side of_comet_67_p_churyumov_gerasiemnko_in_august_october_2014
Ad

Similar to Detecting stars at_the_galactic_centre_via_synchrotron_emission (20)

PDF
How to tell an accreting boson star from a black hole h. olivares et al (2020)
PDF
A luminous X-ray outburst from an intermediatemass black hole in an off-centr...
PDF
A precise measurement of the magnetic field in the corona of the black hole b...
PDF
A precise measurement of the magnetic field in the corona of the black hole b...
PDF
The current ability to test theories of gravity with black hole shadows
PDF
Producing science with_ptf
PPT
Sgra235
PPTX
Pawan Kumar Relativistic jets in tidal disruption events
PDF
An elevation of 0.1 light-seconds for the optical jet base in an accreting Ga...
PDF
Candidate young stellar objects in the S-cluster: Kinematic analysis of a sub...
PDF
Probing Extreme Physics With Compact Objcts
PDF
J. Meringa; Quasi Periodic Oscillations in Black Hole Binaries
PDF
The event horizon_of_m87
PDF
The puzzling source_in_ngc6388_a_possible_planetary_tidal_disruption_event
DOCX
High Energy Astrophysics Dissertation
PDF
50 Years of the Astronomy Centre at the University of Sussex
PDF
Bright black holes and neutron stars beat alike
PDF
A magnetar-powered X-ray transient as the aftermath of a binary neutron-star ...
PDF
Diagnostic line ratios_in_the_ic1805_optical_gas_complex
PDF
Resolved magnetic field_structure_and_variability_near_the_event_horizon_of_s...
How to tell an accreting boson star from a black hole h. olivares et al (2020)
A luminous X-ray outburst from an intermediatemass black hole in an off-centr...
A precise measurement of the magnetic field in the corona of the black hole b...
A precise measurement of the magnetic field in the corona of the black hole b...
The current ability to test theories of gravity with black hole shadows
Producing science with_ptf
Sgra235
Pawan Kumar Relativistic jets in tidal disruption events
An elevation of 0.1 light-seconds for the optical jet base in an accreting Ga...
Candidate young stellar objects in the S-cluster: Kinematic analysis of a sub...
Probing Extreme Physics With Compact Objcts
J. Meringa; Quasi Periodic Oscillations in Black Hole Binaries
The event horizon_of_m87
The puzzling source_in_ngc6388_a_possible_planetary_tidal_disruption_event
High Energy Astrophysics Dissertation
50 Years of the Astronomy Centre at the University of Sussex
Bright black holes and neutron stars beat alike
A magnetar-powered X-ray transient as the aftermath of a binary neutron-star ...
Diagnostic line ratios_in_the_ic1805_optical_gas_complex
Resolved magnetic field_structure_and_variability_near_the_event_horizon_of_s...

More from Sérgio Sacani (20)

PDF
Cosmology using numerical relativity - what hapenned before big bang?
PDF
Is Earendel a Star Cluster?: Metal-poor Globular Cluster Progenitors at z ∼ 6
PDF
Worlds Next Door: A Candidate Giant Planet Imaged in the Habitable Zone of ↵ ...
PDF
Worlds Next Door: A Candidate Giant Planet Imaged in the Habitable Zone of ↵ ...
PDF
Looking into the jet cone of the neutrino-associated very high-energy blazar ...
PDF
Warm, water-depleted rocky exoplanets with surfaceionic liquids: A proposed c...
PDF
Cosmic Outliers: Low-spin Halos Explain the Abundance, Compactness, and Redsh...
PDF
Placing the Near-Earth Object Impact Probability in Context
PDF
CAPERS-LRD-z9:AGas-enshroudedLittleRedDotHostingaBroad-lineActive GalacticNuc...
PDF
An interstellar mission to test astrophysical black holes
PDF
Formation of Supersonic Turbulence in the Primordial Star-forming Cloud
PDF
Unveiling a 36 billion solar mass black hole at the centre of the Cosmic Hors...
PDF
MIRIDeepImagingSurvey(MIDIS)oftheHubbleUltraDeepField
PDF
Little Red Dots As Late-stage Quasi-stars
PDF
N-enhancement in GN-z11: First evidence for supermassive stars nucleosynthesi...
PDF
Paleoseismic activity in the moon’s Taurus-Littrowvalley inferred from boulde...
PDF
If quasars form from primordial black holes
PDF
JADESreveals a large population of low mass black holes at high redshift
PDF
A water-rich interior in the temperate sub-Neptune K2-18 b revealed by JWST
PDF
Multiwavelength Study of a Hyperluminous X-Ray Source near NGC6099: A Strong ...
Cosmology using numerical relativity - what hapenned before big bang?
Is Earendel a Star Cluster?: Metal-poor Globular Cluster Progenitors at z ∼ 6
Worlds Next Door: A Candidate Giant Planet Imaged in the Habitable Zone of ↵ ...
Worlds Next Door: A Candidate Giant Planet Imaged in the Habitable Zone of ↵ ...
Looking into the jet cone of the neutrino-associated very high-energy blazar ...
Warm, water-depleted rocky exoplanets with surfaceionic liquids: A proposed c...
Cosmic Outliers: Low-spin Halos Explain the Abundance, Compactness, and Redsh...
Placing the Near-Earth Object Impact Probability in Context
CAPERS-LRD-z9:AGas-enshroudedLittleRedDotHostingaBroad-lineActive GalacticNuc...
An interstellar mission to test astrophysical black holes
Formation of Supersonic Turbulence in the Primordial Star-forming Cloud
Unveiling a 36 billion solar mass black hole at the centre of the Cosmic Hors...
MIRIDeepImagingSurvey(MIDIS)oftheHubbleUltraDeepField
Little Red Dots As Late-stage Quasi-stars
N-enhancement in GN-z11: First evidence for supermassive stars nucleosynthesi...
Paleoseismic activity in the moon’s Taurus-Littrowvalley inferred from boulde...
If quasars form from primordial black holes
JADESreveals a large population of low mass black holes at high redshift
A water-rich interior in the temperate sub-Neptune K2-18 b revealed by JWST
Multiwavelength Study of a Hyperluminous X-Ray Source near NGC6099: A Strong ...

Recently uploaded (20)

PPT
LEC Synthetic Biology and its application.ppt
PPTX
diabetes and its complications nephropathy neuropathy
PPTX
ELISA(Enzyme linked immunosorbent assay)
PPTX
GREEN FIELDS SCHOOL PPT ON HOLIDAY HOMEWORK
PPTX
limit test definition and all limit tests
PPTX
endocrine - management of adrenal incidentaloma.pptx
PDF
Integrative Oncology: Merging Conventional and Alternative Approaches (www.k...
PPT
Enhancing Laboratory Quality Through ISO 15189 Compliance
PDF
Unit 5 Preparations, Reactions, Properties and Isomersim of Organic Compounds...
PPT
Biochemestry- PPT ON Protein,Nitrogenous constituents of Urine, Blood, their ...
PDF
From Molecular Interactions to Solubility in Deep Eutectic Solvents: Explorin...
PPT
Cell Structure Description and Functions
PPT
Animal tissues, epithelial, muscle, connective, nervous tissue
PPTX
Cells and Organs of the Immune System (Unit-2) - Majesh Sir.pptx
PDF
Social preventive and pharmacy. Pdf
PPTX
PMR- PPT.pptx for students and doctors tt
PPTX
2currentelectricity1-201006102815 (1).pptx
PDF
5.Physics 8-WBS_Light.pdfFHDGJDJHFGHJHFTY
PPTX
A powerpoint on colorectal cancer with brief background
PPTX
LIPID & AMINO ACID METABOLISM UNIT-III, B PHARM II SEMESTER
LEC Synthetic Biology and its application.ppt
diabetes and its complications nephropathy neuropathy
ELISA(Enzyme linked immunosorbent assay)
GREEN FIELDS SCHOOL PPT ON HOLIDAY HOMEWORK
limit test definition and all limit tests
endocrine - management of adrenal incidentaloma.pptx
Integrative Oncology: Merging Conventional and Alternative Approaches (www.k...
Enhancing Laboratory Quality Through ISO 15189 Compliance
Unit 5 Preparations, Reactions, Properties and Isomersim of Organic Compounds...
Biochemestry- PPT ON Protein,Nitrogenous constituents of Urine, Blood, their ...
From Molecular Interactions to Solubility in Deep Eutectic Solvents: Explorin...
Cell Structure Description and Functions
Animal tissues, epithelial, muscle, connective, nervous tissue
Cells and Organs of the Immune System (Unit-2) - Majesh Sir.pptx
Social preventive and pharmacy. Pdf
PMR- PPT.pptx for students and doctors tt
2currentelectricity1-201006102815 (1).pptx
5.Physics 8-WBS_Light.pdfFHDGJDJHFGHJHFTY
A powerpoint on colorectal cancer with brief background
LIPID & AMINO ACID METABOLISM UNIT-III, B PHARM II SEMESTER

Detecting stars at_the_galactic_centre_via_synchrotron_emission

  • 1. arXiv:1509.06251v1[astro-ph.GA]21Sep2015 Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 000, 000–000 (0000) Printed 22 September 2015 (MN LATEX style file v2.2) Detecting Stars at the Galactic Centre via Synchrotron Emission Idan Ginsburg⋆ , Xiawei Wang†, Abraham Loeb‡ & Ofer Cohen§ Astronomy Department, Harvard University, 60 Garden St., Cambridge, MA 02138, USA 22 September 2015 ABSTRACT Stars orbiting within 1′′ of the supermassive black hole in the Galactic Centre, Sgr A*, are notoriously difficult to detect due to obscuration by gas and dust. We show that some stars orbiting this region may be detectable via synchrotron emission. In such instances, a bow shock forms around the star and accelerates the electrons. We calculate that around the 10 GHz band (radio) and at 1014 Hz (infrared) the luminosity of a star orbiting the black hole is comparable to the luminosity of Sgr A*. The strength of the synchrotron emission depends on a number of factors including the star’s orbital velocity. Thus, the ideal time to observe the synchrotron flux is when the star is at pericenter. The star S2 will be ∼ 0.015′′ from Sgr A* in 2018, and is an excellent target to test our predictions. Key words: general-black hole physics-Galaxy:centre-Galaxy:kinematics and dynamics-stellar dynamics 1 INTRODUCTION Over 100 young massive stars inhabit the central parsec of the Milky Way (for a review see Genzel et al. 2010; Mapelli & Gualandris 2015). The stars whose orbit lies within ∼ 0.04 pc from the Galactic Centre (GC) are known as the S-stars (e.g. Sch¨odel et al. 2003; Ghez et al. 2005). The orbits of 28 S-stars were determined by Gillessen et al. (2009). 19 members have semimajor axis a 1 arcsec. Of those, 16 are B stars and the rest late-type stars. Of partic- ular interest is the star S2 (also known as SO-2) which has been observed for more than one complete orbit (Ghez et al. 2005; Ghez et al. 2008; Gillessen et al. 2009). S2 orbits the supermassive black hole, Sgr A*, every 15.9 years. It is a B0-2.5 V main sequence star with an estimated mass of ∼15M⊙ (Martins et al. 2008). The second complete or- bit of a star around Sgr A* was announced not long ago (Meyer et al. 2012). This star, S102 (also know as SO-102) has a period of 11.5 years and is about 16 times fainter than S2. Both S2 and S102 provide compelling evidence that Sgr A* has a mass of ∼ 4 × 106 M⊙. The detection of young, massive stars with orbits close to Sgr A* was surprising (eg. Ghez et al. 2003). A num- ⋆ E-mail: iginsburg@cfa.harvard.edu † E-mail:xiawei.wang@cfa.harvard.edu ‡ E-mail:aloeb@cfa.harvard.edu § E-mail:ocohen@cfa.harvard.edu ber of possible mechanisms have been proposed to account for the origin of the S-stars. L¨ockmann et al. (2008) argued that the dynamical interaction of two stellar disks in the central parsec could lead to the formation of the S-stars. Griv (2010) proposed that the S-stars were born in the disk and migrated inward. Recently, Chen & Amaro-Seoane (2014) theorized that a few Myr ago the disk extended down to the innermost region around Sgr A* and Kozai-Lidov- like resonance resulted in the S-stars. Perhaps the simplest and arguably most likely scenario is that at least some of the S-stars are the result of a three-body interaction with Sgr A* (e.g. Ginsburg & Loeb 2006; Ginsburg & Loeb 2007; Ginsburg et al. 2012; Zhang et al. 2013). In this scenario, a binary star system interacts with Sgr A*, and tidal disrup- tion leads to one star falling into the gravitational well of the black hole while the companion is ejected as a hypervelocity star (HVS) (Hills 1988). HVSs were first observed in 2005 (Brown et al. 2005) and as of today some 24 have been iden- tified (see Brown et al. 2014 for the list). Brown et al. (2015) studied 12 confirmed HVSs and found that the vast majority are consistent with having a GC origin. Furthermore, obser- vations indicate that these HVSs are likely massive slowly pulsating B stars (Ginsburg et al. 2013) and thus consistent with the known S-stars. There are various candidate HVSs which are far less massive than B-type stars (Palladino et al. 2014; Zhong et al. 2014; Zhang et al. 2015). Given the fact that the stellar density in the central parsec is ∼
  • 2. 2 Ginsburg, Wang, Loeb, Cohen 106 M⊙ pc−3 (Sch¨odel et al. 2009) a distribution of masses is expected. However, detecting stars at the GC is notoriously difficult due to dust extinction (e.g. Sch¨odel et al. 2010). In this paper we discuss using synchrotron radio emission to observe and possibly monitor stars at the GC. Of particular importance is the fact that S2 will reach periapse in 2017. We show that the closer S2 is to Sgr A* the more likely we are detect the synchrotron emission. Thus, S2 serves as an ideal test subject. In Section 2 we provide the physics behind the synchrotron emission. In Section 3 we show that a star such as S2 may be observable via its synchrotron emission. We conclude with some discussions and future observations in Section 4. 2 SHOCKS AND SYNCHROTRON EMISSION We consider stars orbiting Sgr A*. Interactions between winds from such a star and the interstellar medium (ISM) will create two shocks, a reverse and forward shock. The forward shock propagates into the ambient medium which is swept up and subsequently compressed and accelerated. The faster wind is compressed and decelerated by the re- verse shock. We are interested in the emission from electrons accelerated by the forward shock. In our case the forward shock is a bow shock with Mach angle θ ∼ M−1 , where M is the Mach number. In such a scenario, roughly half the star’s mass loss contributes to the shock. The mechanical luminosity is simply given by kinetic energy which depends upon the mass loss rate, ˙M, and wind speed Lw = 1 2 ˙Mwv2 w. (1) For a massive star such as S2, typical values for ˙Mw are ∼ 10−6 M⊙ yr−1 , vw ∼ 1000 km s−1 and thus Lw is around 1035 erg s−1 . Consequently, the total non-thermal luminos- ity, Lnt, is given by the fraction of electrons, ǫnt, accelerated to produce non-thermal radiation Lnt = ǫntLw. (2) We let ǫnt be 5% although simulations show that this value is uncertain (Guo et al. 2014). The energy density of the amplified magnetic field is given by UB = B2 /8π. Therefore, assuming equipartition of energy, UB = ξBnskTs leads to B = (8πξBnskTs)1/2 (3) where ξB is the fraction of thermal energy in the magnetic field, ns is the post-shock number density, and kTs the tem- perature of the post-shock medium. In the strong shock limit for an adiabatic index of 5/3, the post-shock number density ns is ∼ 4 times the number density of the ambient ISM. Al- though the value of ξB is highly uncertain, a value of 0.1 is reasonable (V¨olk et al. 2005). The resulting values for B are ∼ 10−2 − 10−3 G. The Rankine-Hugoniot jump conditions give the post shock temperature Ts = [(γt − 1)M2 + 2][2γtM2 − (γt − 1)] (γt + 1)2M2 To (4) where To is the upstream temperature, and γt is the adia- batic index which is taken to be 5/3. At the contact discon- tinuity, ram pressure from the star/ISM is balanced by ram pressure from the wind. Thus we have ρ∗v2 ∗ = ρwv2 w where the mass flux is given as ρwvw = ˙Mw 4πR2 and this leads to the standoff radius Ro = ( ˙Mwvw 4πρ∗v2 ∗ )1/2 . (5) ρ∗ = nomp where mp is the proton mass. At a distance of around 0.3 pc from Sgr A* no ∼ 103 cm−3 and the tem- perature of the ISM is ∼ 107 K (Quataert 2004). Assuming v∗ = 1000 km s−1 a typical standoff radius is approximately 10−3 pc. We consider a broken power law distribution of elec- trons generated via Fermi acceleration, written as N(γ)dγ = Koγ−p (1 + γ γb )−1 (γmin γ γmax) (6) where Ko is the normalization factor in electron density distribution, p is the electron power law distribution index which in our calculations is ∼ 2. γ is the Lorentz factor, γmin and γmax are the minimum and maximum Lorentz factor respectively, and γb is the break Lorentz factor due to synchrotron cooling. The total power from synchrotron emission of a single electron is given by P = 4 9 r2 oβ2 γ2 B2 (7) where ro is the classical electron radius and β ≡ v/c (Rybicki & Lightman 1986). The corresponding synchrotron cooling time is tcool = γmc2 P . (8) The break Lorentz factor due to synchrotron cooling is ob- tained by equating the synchrotron cooling times scale and the dynamical timescale td = Ro vw (9) where Ro is the standoff radius and vw the wind veloc- ity. The peak luminosity lasts for the pericenter crossing timescale with typical values ∼ 1 yr. The precise shape of the peak depends on the orbital parameters, the ambient gas distribution, and the wind mass loss rate. The charac- teristic timescale for the peak is the pericenter crossing time, ∼ b/v. γmin is set to one in our calculations. γmax is obtained by equating the acceleration timescale, tacc = ξaccRLc/v2 w (Blandford & Eichler 1987), to the dynamical or cooling timescale where ξacc is a dimensionless parameter on the or- der of unity. The Larmor radius is given by RL = γmec2 /eB where me is the mass of the electron and e is the electron charge. We find that tacc ∼ 10−4 yr, which is far shorter than the dynamic time. At radio frequencies the cooling time is a few orders of magnitude greater than the dynamical time and therefore synchrotron cooling is negligible. Thus, we as- sume that all the shocked electrons contribute to the ob- served synchrotron emission. The synchrotron flux and power are computed using the radiative transfer equation (Rybicki & Lightman 1986) which leads to Iν = jν αν (1 − e−τν ) (10) where jν is the emission coefficient, αν the absorption coef- ficient, and τν the optical depth (see Wang & Loeb 2014 for further details).
  • 3. Detecting Stars at the Galactic Centre via Synchrotron Emission 3 −2.0 −1.8 −1.6 −1.4 −1.2 −1.0 −0.8 −0.6 log(θ⋆/arcsec) −15.0 −14.5 −14.0 −13.5 −13.0 −12.5 −12.0 −11.5 log(νFν/ergs−1 cm−2 ) 109 Hz 1010 Hz 1011 Hz 1012 Hz 1013 Hz 1014 Hz 2012201320142015201620172018 year Figure 2. Synchrotron power (arcseconds) versus distance (erg s−1 cm−2) from Sgr A* for star S2. We let ˙M = 10−6 M⊙ yr−1. At a frequency of around 1 GHz, S2 is quite bright with a lumi- nosity of ∼ 10 mJy. The synchrotron power will be greatest in 2017, when S2 is at periapse. 3 EMISSION AROUND SGR A* Figure 1 shows the expected synchrotron flux for a star or- biting Sgr A*. For the left panel we kept the wind velocity constant at 1000 kms−1 . We extrapolated the particle den- sity to have the value ∼ 104 cm−3 from Quataert (2004). The mass loss rate for hot massive stars is poorly constrained (for a review see Puls et al. 2008). Thus, we varied the mass loss rate between 10−7 M⊙ yr−1 and 10−5 M⊙ yr−1 which are acceptable values for hot massive stars such as the S-stars (Dupree 2015). Given that Fν = νLν 4πd2 1 ν (11) where d = 8 kpc we get a flux between ∼ 10 − 1000 mJy in the GHz range. Recently, Yusef-Zadeh et al. (2015) de- scribed radio observations of over 40 massive stars within 30′′ of the GC. Their values for the flux are consistent with our results. Similar results were obtained when we kept the mass loss rate constant at 10−6 M⊙ yr−1 and varied the wind velocity between 1000 km s−1 and 4000 km s−1 (see right panel of Figure 1). In Figure 2 we plot the synchrotron power versus dis- tance from Sgr A* for S2. At periapse S2 has a speed of ∼ 5500 km s−1 while at apoapse the speed drops down to ∼ 1300 km s−1 . A higher speed leads to a stronger shock. However, even at apoapse it may very well be possible to observe the synchrotron emission from S2. At 10 GHz, S2 has a flux density of ∼ 10 mJy. Thus, S2 is an excellent target to observe. It is important to note that radio wave- length photons are scattered and the image size follows a λ2 dependence (e.g. Bower et al. 2006; Fish et al. 2014) of ∼ 1 mas (λ /cm)2 . Therefore, in order to resolve S2 at the 0.01′′ level, we need to observe at a frequency of 10 GHz or greater. Sgr A* has been observed in the radio for decades. Kellermann et al. (1977) used very long baseline interferom- etry (VLBI) to observe Sgr A* at 7.8 GHz, and they detected a nearby secondary transient source which has not been ex- plained, and could in fact be S2 or another star. Further- more, Herrnstein et al. (2004) monitored the flux density of Sgr A* using the Very Large Array. Their results are consis- tent with our calculation. Macquart & Bower (2006) looked at the long-term variability of Sgr A* and detected a flux of ∼ 1031 erg s−1 around the 1987 pericenter passage of S2. This indicates that the mass loss rate of S2 is ∼ 10−6 M⊙ yr−1 . However, these data points are sparse and hence do not provide a tight constraint on the peak flux during the future pericenter passage. While we expect the synchrotron emission to be de- tectable, the same is not necessarily true for the standoff radius. In Figure 3 we plot the standoff radius versus or- bital radius. The standoff radius near the pericenter may not be resolvable, although at larger distances from Sgr A* the likelihood for resolving the source increases. It is also worth noting that we calculated the thermal free-free emis- sion around Sgr A* and concluded that it is not detectable. 4 CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE OBSERVATIONS The innermost stars orbiting Sgr A* (such as the S-stars) produce a bow shock. Although this shock will likely not be detectable via thermal emission, we have shown that stars such as S2 may be detectable via synchrotron emission. Fig- ure 1 shows that the contrast of synchrotron flux relative to Sgr A* is maximized around the 1.4 GHz band. However, due to scattering we will need to use a higher frequency, around 10 GHz, if we are to resolve our star. If a star such as S2 emits strong synchrotron emission, the combined sig- nal from the star and Sgr A* may exceed the quiescent ra- dio emission from the black hole. As was the case with G2 (see next paragraph) it is not clear that any additional syn- chrotron emission will be observable. Arguably, it is best to resolve the synchrotron emission from any star orbiting Sgr A*, such as S2. At apoapse S2 is ∼ 0.23′′ from Sgr A* while at periapse it is only ∼ 0.015′′ away. Thus, to detect a star such as S2 requires both good sensitivity and reso- lution. VLBI can provide submilliarcsec observations of Sgr A* (e.g. Lu et al. 2011) and thus the required precision. S2 is an ideal test case since the star will reach periapse in 2017 or early 2018. Recently, gas cloud G2 was observed orbiting Sgr A*, and was approximately 3100 Schwarzschild radii from the black hole at pericenter. It was predicted that the bow shock from this encounter would displace the quiescent radio emission of Sgr A* by ∼ 33 mas (Narayan et al. 2012; Sadowski et al. 2013). However, observations across the spectrum showed no apparent variability during the pe- riastron passage of G2 (Bower et al. 2015; Valencia-S et al. 2015). It is unclear why a bow shock was not detected. One possibility is that at the center of G2 is low-mass star with wind velocity ∼ 100 km s−1 (Crumley & Kumar 2013; Scoville & Burkert 2013). Synchrotron emission from such a small vw would be extremely difficult to detect. Star S2 is massive, and thus the winds are likely an order of magni- tude larger. If synchrotron emission is not detected for S2 it may be that our value for ǫnt is too large. It may also be that the wind speeds from S2 are lower than expected, or that the number density around Sgr A* is significantly less
  • 4. 4 Ginsburg, Wang, Loeb, Cohen 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 log(ν/Hz) 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 log(νLν/erg·s−1 ) ˙Mw,−6 =0.1, vw,3 =1 ˙Mw,−6 =1, vw,3 =1 ˙Mw,−6 =10, vw,3 =1 Sgr A* 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 log(νFν/Hz·mJ) 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 log(ν/Hz) 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 log(νLν/erg·s−1 ) vw,3 =1, ˙Mw,−6 =1 vw,3 =2, ˙Mw,−6 =1 vw,3 =4, ˙Mw,−6 =1 Sgr A* 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 log(νFν/Hz·mJ) Figure 1. Non-thermal synchrotron power and flux compared with emission from Sgr A* (data for Sgr A* was obtained from Yuan & Narayan 2014). The left panel shows the dependence of the synchrotron emission on wind mass loss rate. The star’s veloc- ity and wind velocity are both fixed at 1000 km s−1. Mass loss, ˙M, was computed with values of 10−7M⊙ yr−1 (blue line), 10−6M⊙ yr−1 (green line), and 10−5M⊙ yr−1 (red line). In the right panel we kept the mass loss constant at 10−6M⊙ yr−1 and used wind velocities of 1000 km s−1(blue line), 2000 km s−1(green line), and 4000 s−1(red line). 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 R⋆,−3 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 R0/R⋆ ˙ Mw ,−6 = 1, vw ,3 = 4 ˙Mw,−6 =1, vw,3 =1 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 θ⋆/arcsec 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 θ0/arcsec ˙Mw ,−6= 1, vw ,3= 4 ˙Mw,−6 =1, vw,3 =1 Figure 3. Left: The standoff radius for S2 (Ro) versus the orbital radius (R⋆ in units of 10−3 pc). We see that the value is always less than unity, as expected. Right: angular diameter of the standoff radius (θo) versus the angular diameter of the orbital radius (θ⋆). Around pericenter it may be difficult to resolve the finite size of the standoff radius. However, S2 should still be detectable via synchrotron emission. than what is predicted. Arguably, the most likely reason why synchrotron emission from S2 may not be detected is simply that the shock is not as strong as assumed. Our results are valid so long as the shock is strong, but the emission could be much fainter if the strength of the shock is lessened. Since the shock will be strongest when S2 passes periapse, this will be the ideal time to monitor the star for synchrotron emis- sion. Even a null detection will help place constraints on the environment around Sgr A* (Giannios & Sironi 2013). In addition to radio observations at around the 10 GHz band, Figure 1 shows that at infrared wavelengths, in par- ticular around 1014 Hz, Sgr A* is approximately the same luminosity as a close-by star such as S2. However, S2 itself emits in the infrared, therefore we will not be able to distin- guish between the non-thermal and thermal emission. We
  • 5. Detecting Stars at the Galactic Centre via Synchrotron Emission 5 will need to compare the measured flux with that of the S2. An instrument with enough sensitivity, such as the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST), should be able to detect the synchrotron emission in the infrared. JWST is scheduled to launch in October of 2018. While S2 will have passed peri- center, if our predictions are correct the synchrotron emis- sion should still be detectable. Furthermore, it may be pos- sible to measure the increase in total infrared emission from S2 between apocenter and pericenter owing to the increased synchrotron emission. While S2 is the litmus test for detect- ing stars at the Galactic Centre via synchrotron emission, we hope that ultimately we can use this technique to detect and monitor stars that have thus far not been observable. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We thank Michael D. Johnson, Atish Kamble, Robert Kim- berk, Mark Reid, Lorenzo Sironi, and Ryo Yamazaki for helpful comments. This work was supported in part by Har- vard University and NSF grant AST-1312034. REFERENCES Blandford R., Eichler D., 1987, PhR, 154, 1 Bower G., S. M., J. D., Gurwell M., Moran J., Brunthaler A., Falcke H., Fragile P., Maitra D., Marrone D., Peck A., Rushton A., Wright M., 2015, ApJ, 802, 69 Bower G., W.M. G., H. F., Backer D., Lithwick Y., 2006, ApJL, 648, L127 Brown W., Anderson J., Gnedin O., Bond H., W.R. Geller M., Kenyon S., 2015, ApJ, 804, 49 Brown W., Geller M., Kenyon S., 2014, ApJ, 787, 89 Brown W., Geller M., Kenyon S., Kurtz M., 2005, ApJL, 622, L33 Chen X., Amaro-Seoane P., 2014, ApJL, 786, L14 Crumley P., Kumar P., 2013, MNRAS, 436, 1955 Dupree A. K., 2015, private communication Fish V., Johnson M., Lu R., Doeleman S., et al. 2014, ApJ, 795, 134 Genzel R., Eisenhauer F., Gillessen S., 2010, Rev. Mod. Phys., 82, 3121 Ghez A., Duchˆene G., Matthews K., Hornstein S., Tanner A., Larkin J., Morris M., Becklin E., Salim S., Kremenek T., Thompson D., Soifer B., Neugebauer G., McLean I., 2003, ApJL, 586, L127 Ghez A., Salim S., Hornstein S., Tanner A., Lu J., Morris M., Becklin E., Duchˆene G., 2005, ApJ, 620, 744 Ghez A., Salim S., Weinberg N., Lu J., Do T., Dunn J., Matthews K., Morris M. R., Yelda S., Becklin E., Kremenek T., Milosavljevic M., Naiman J., 2008, ApJ, 689, 1044 Giannios D., Sironi L., 2013, MNRAS, 433, L25 Gillessen S., Eisenhauer F., Fritz T., Bartko H., Dodds- Eden K., Pfuhl O., Ott T., Genzel R., 2009, ApJL, 707, L114 Gillessen S., Eisenhauer F., Trippe S., Alexander T., Genzel R., Martins F., Ott T., 2009, ApJL, 692, 1075 Ginsburg I., Brown W., Wegner G., 2013, arXiv:1302.1899 Ginsburg I., Loeb A., 2006, MNRAS, 368, 221 Ginsburg I., Loeb A., 2007, MNRAS, 376, 492 Ginsburg I., Loeb A., Wegner G., 2012, MNRAS, 423, 948 Griv E., 2010, ApJ, 709, 597 Guo X., Sironi L., Narayan R., 2014, ApJ, 794, 153 Herrnstein R., Zhao J.-H., Bower G., Goss W., 2004, AJ, 127, 3399 Hills J., 1988, Nature, 331, 687 Kellermann K., Shaffer D., Clark B., Geldzahler B., 1977, ApJL, 214, L61 L¨ockmann U., Baumgardt H., Kroupa P., 2008, ApJ, 683, 151 Lu R.-S., Krichbaum T., Eckart A., K¨onig S., Kunneriath D., Witzel G., Witzel A., Zensus J., 2011, A&A, 525, 76 Macquart J.-P., Bower G., 2006, ApJL, 641, 302 Mapelli M., Gualandris A., 2015, arXiv:1505.05473v1 Martins F., Gillessen S., Eisenhauer F., Genzel R., Ott T., Trippe S., 2008, ApJ, 672, L119 Meyer L., Ghez A., Sch¨odel R., Yelda S., Boehle A., Lu J., Do T., Morris M., Becklin E., Matthews K., 2012, Science, 338, 84 Narayan R., ¨Ozel F., Sironi L., 2012, ApJL, 757, L20 Palladino L., Schlesinger K., Holley-Beckelmann K., Prieto C., Beers T., Lee Y., Schneider D., 2014, ApJ, 780, 7 Puls J., Vink J., Najarro F., 2008, A&ARv, 16, 209 Quataert E., 2004, ApJ, 613, 322 Rybicki G., Lightman A., 1986, Radiative Processes in As- trophysics. Wiley, New York Sadowski A., Sironi L., Abarca D., Guo X., ¨Ozel F., 2013, MNRAS, 432, 478 Sch¨odel R., Merritt D., Eckart A., 2009, A&A, 502, 91 Sch¨odel R., Najarro F., Muzic K., Eckart A., 2010, A&A, 511, A18 Sch¨odel R., Ott T., Genzel R., Eckart A., Mouawad N., Alexander T., 2003, ApJ, 596, 1015 Scoville N., Burkert A., 2013, ApJ, 768, 108 Valencia-S M., Eckart A., Zaja˘cek M., et al. 2015, ApJ, 800, 125 V¨olk H., Berezhko E., Ksenofontov L., 2005, A&A, 433, 229 Wang X., Loeb A., 2014, MNRAS, 441, 809 Yuan F., Narayan R., 2014, ARAA, 52, 529 Yusef-Zadeh F., Bushouse H., Sch¨odel R., Wardle M., Cot- ton W., Roberts D., Nogueras-Lara F., Gallego-Cano E., 2015, arXiv:1506.07182v1 Zhang F., Youjun L., Qingjuan Y., 2013, ApJ, 768, 153 Zhang Y., Smith M., Carlin J., 2015, arXiv:1501.07824v1 Zhong J., Chen L., Chao L., De Grijs R., Hou J., Shen S., Shao Z., Li J., Lou A., Shi J., Zhang H., Yang M., Deng L., Jin G., Zhang Y., Hou Y., Zhang Z., 2014, ApJL, 789, L2 This paper has been typeset from a TEX/ LATEX file prepared by the author.