thanks: sohanghodla9@gmail.com

Galactic and extragalactic probe of dark matter with LISA’s binary black holes near their galactic center

Sohan Ghodla Department of Physics and Astronomy, Colgate University, 13 Oak Dr, Hamilton, 13346 NY, USA
Department of Physics, University of Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland, New Zealand
(October 21, 2024)
Abstract

The upcoming LISA mission will be able to detect gravitational waves from galactic and extragalactic compact binaries. Here, we report on LISA’s capability to probe dark matter around these binaries if the latter constitute black holes. By analyzing the variation in the chirp mass of the binary, we show that depending on the black hole masses, LISA should be able to probe their surrounding dark matter to a luminosity distance of 1absent1\approx 1≈ 1 Gpc if such binaries are observed within the inner 10absent10\approx 10≈ 10 pc of their galactic center for particle-like dark matter or near the galactic solitonic core for wave-like dark matter. However, for the latter, the density of dark matter near the galactic center must be higher than predicted from dark matter only simulations. Even if a null result is recorded during the course of observation of well-localized binaries, one can rule out certain parameter spaces of dark matter as being the dominant contributor to the matter budget of the Universe.

preprint: APS/123-QED

I Introduction

\lettrine

[lines=3]With the emergence of gravitational wave astronomy, the use of gravitational radiation as a probe of dark matter has gained prominence, with black holes being one of the prime targets [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7]. Like all astrophysical bodies, black holes reside within a dark matter surrounding and would slowly accumulate this matter over time. However, in contrast to dark matter accumulation in celestial bodies, such as planets [8, 9, 10], stars [11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19], white dwarfs [20, 21, 22, 23], neutron stars [24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32] which have to rely on as of yet uncertain scattering processes, the presence of event horizon makes black holes unique sinks for their surrounding material. This renders the process of dark matter capture by black holes immune to the uncertain nature of dark matter’s interactions with standard-model particles.

A direct consequence of a steady dark matter accumulation is a continuous increase in the black hole’s mass. Thus, if the black hole is part of a binary system, this mass growth leads to a faster orbital inspiral driven by the emission of gravitational radiation compared to the case when the binary lives in a vacuum. Within the first order of post-Newtonian expansion, the gravitational waveform frequency evolution depends only on the binary’s chirp mass \mathcal{M}caligraphic_M. To this end, by accurately measuring both the gravitational wave frequency and its rate of change — see Eq. (22) later — one can calculate the change in \mathcal{M}caligraphic_M. However, detecting such subtle variations requires a prolonged period of observation.

Current ground-based gravitational wave detectors operating in the 10103absent10superscript103\approx 10-10^{3}≈ 10 - 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT Hz frequency range observe stellar-mass binaries only for a few seconds before merger [33, 34]. In contrast, the upcoming space-based LISA mission will open a new window in the 0.1-100 mHz frequency regime [35], with planned observation times of 4-10 years, offering an excellent resolution into mass variation. Over this extended duration, LISA will be capable of observing binaries across a mass range spanning stellar to supermassive black holes (SMBHs). Moreover, for strain amplitudes with large signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs), many gravitational wave-emitting systems will be individually resolvable [36]. As a consequence, stellar-mass binary black holes (BBHs) present within the Milky Way will provide us with the opportunity to probe their surroundings. On the other hand, for extragalactic distances, intermediate-mass black holes (IMBHs) with masses 102104Msuperscript102superscript104subscript𝑀direct-product10^{2}-10^{4}M_{\odot}10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT become particularly important.

To this end, in this work, we investigate the impact of a dark matter environment on the evolution of BBHs that radiate within the LISA frequency band and are individually resolvable (as a binary). We show that certain BBHs that reside near the center of their galaxy will strongly interact with their surrounding dark matter halo. Depending on the distance to the source, Depending on the distance to the source, for those with gravitational wave frequencies f1greater-than-or-equivalent-to𝑓1f\gtrsim 1italic_f ≳ 1 mHz, changes in their chirp mass can be inferred from the observed frequency evolution, allowing us to probe their environment. For the latter, we focus on two variants of dark matter, namely particle-like dark matter and (wave-like) scalar-field dark matter. We also discuss the possible impact of the presence of interstellar gas around the BBHs on our analysis.

It is anticipated that within its 4-10 yr of operation, LISA will detect 𝒪(10)𝒪(100)𝒪10𝒪100\mathcal{O}(10)-\mathcal{O}(100)caligraphic_O ( 10 ) - caligraphic_O ( 100 ) BBHs distributed across the Milky Way111There is also a possibility of dynamical inband formation, which is not covered by the aforementioned study. [37]. Although it is difficult to make such estimates for the rate of IMBH encounters with their host SMBH, IMBHs will be detectable out to redshift two [38]. Depending on the masses of these black holes, we demonstrate that LISA can probe the surrounding dark matter of BBHs to a luminosity distance of 1absent1\approx 1≈ 1 Gpc provided these binaries are observed either within the inner 10absent10\approx 10≈ 10 pc of their galactic center (for particle-like dark matter) or near their galactic solitonic core (for wave-like dark matter). However, for the latter, the density of dark matter near the galactic center must be higher than predicted from dark matter only simulations. A null result during the course of observation of spatially well-localized binaries could still rule out certain parameter spaces of dark matter as being the dominant contributor to the matter budget of the Universe.

The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. In Section II, we discuss the formalism employed for investigating the capture of dark matter by black holes. In Section III, we study the dynamics of a BBH embedded in such dark matter environments and then discuss its observability in Section IV. In Section V, we present the result for galactic and extragalactic probes of dark matter, followed by a brief discussion in Section VI.

II Capture of dark matter by black holes

For the following investigation, we assume that the dark matter medium is at rest w.r.t. galactic rest frame but has a non-zero dispersion velocity. We consider two variants for dark matter, namely those that have masses 1greater-than-or-equivalent-toabsent1\gtrsim 1≳ 1 eV and can be treated as point particle-like and those that have masses 1less-than-or-similar-toabsent1\lesssim 1≲ 1 eV resulting in wave-like properties that can be modeled via scalar fields. While the former has been successful on large scales within the ΛΛ\Lambdaroman_ΛCDM paradigm, the latter is also naturally (i.e., independent of baryonic physics) able to account for the small-scale discrepancies [39] typically associated with particle-like dark matter [40, 41].

II.1 Particle-like dark matter

For a Schwarzschild black hole with mass m𝑚mitalic_m that is moving at a supersonic velocity vsubscript𝑣v_{\infty}italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT w.r.t. the asymptotic/unperturbed background medium with density ρsubscript𝜌\rho_{\infty}italic_ρ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, matter within the impact parameter ra=2Gm/v2subscript𝑟𝑎2𝐺𝑚superscriptsubscript𝑣2r_{a}={2Gm}/{v_{\infty}^{2}}italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 2 italic_G italic_m / italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT will be captured by the black hole. The resulting accretion cross-section can be estimated as σHL=πra2subscript𝜎HL𝜋superscriptsubscript𝑟𝑎2\sigma_{\rm HL}=\pi r_{a}^{2}italic_σ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_HL end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_π italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT which results in the Hoyle-Lyttleton mass accretion rate [42]

m˙HL=σHLρv=4πG2m2ρv3.subscript˙𝑚HLsubscript𝜎HLsubscript𝜌subscript𝑣4𝜋superscript𝐺2superscript𝑚2subscript𝜌superscriptsubscript𝑣3\dot{m}_{\rm HL}=\sigma_{\rm HL}\rho_{\infty}v_{\infty}=\frac{4\pi G^{2}m^{2}% \rho_{\infty}}{v_{\infty}^{3}}\,.over˙ start_ARG italic_m end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_HL end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_σ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_HL end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ρ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = divide start_ARG 4 italic_π italic_G start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_ρ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG . (1)

Meanwhile, following Bondi [43], for a black hole that has v=0subscript𝑣0v_{\infty}=0italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0, the mass accretion rate reads

m˙B=4πλG2m2ρcs3;λ=14(253γ)53γ2(γ1),formulae-sequencesubscript˙𝑚B4𝜋𝜆superscript𝐺2superscript𝑚2subscript𝜌superscriptsubscript𝑐𝑠3𝜆14superscript253𝛾53𝛾2𝛾1\dot{m}_{\rm B}=\frac{4\pi\lambda G^{2}m^{2}\rho_{\infty}}{c_{s}^{3}}\,;\quad% \lambda=\frac{1}{4}\left(\frac{2}{5-3\gamma}\right)^{\frac{5-3\gamma}{2(\gamma% -1)}}\,,over˙ start_ARG italic_m end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = divide start_ARG 4 italic_π italic_λ italic_G start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_ρ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_s end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG ; italic_λ = divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 4 end_ARG ( divide start_ARG 2 end_ARG start_ARG 5 - 3 italic_γ end_ARG ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT divide start_ARG 5 - 3 italic_γ end_ARG start_ARG 2 ( italic_γ - 1 ) end_ARG end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , (2)

where cs=cγΘsubscript𝑐𝑠𝑐𝛾subscriptΘc_{s}=c\sqrt{\gamma\Theta_{\infty}}italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_s end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_c square-root start_ARG italic_γ roman_Θ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG is the local sound speed and

Θ=kBTmχc2,subscriptΘsubscript𝑘𝐵𝑇subscript𝑚𝜒superscript𝑐2\Theta_{\infty}=\frac{k_{B}T}{m_{\chi}c^{2}}\,,roman_Θ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = divide start_ARG italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_T end_ARG start_ARG italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_χ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG , (3)

is the dark matter dimensionless temperature. Above T,mχ,kB,c𝑇subscript𝑚𝜒subscript𝑘𝐵𝑐T,m_{\chi},k_{B},citalic_T , italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_χ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_c are the dark matter (effective) temperature, particle mass, Boltzmann constant, and the speed of light in vacuum, respectively.

In deriving Eq. (2), it is assumed that the background medium can be treated as a polytrope with the equation of state Pργproportional-to𝑃superscript𝜌𝛾P\propto\rho^{\gamma}italic_P ∝ italic_ρ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_γ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, where γ5/3𝛾53\gamma\leq 5/3italic_γ ≤ 5 / 3 for a non-relativistic fluid, and that dark matter can be treated as a non-relativistic medium. A relativistic extension of the Bondi formalism was later conducted by Michel in Ref. [44] (for a review, see Appendix of Ref. [45]). However, for a medium with Θ105less-than-or-similar-tosubscriptΘsuperscript105\Theta_{\infty}\lesssim 10^{-5}roman_Θ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≲ 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 5 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, the mass accretion rate can be well modelled by Eq. (2) (cf., [46]). Since the current upper bound on the dark matter’s dimensionless temperature is expected to be Θ𝒪(108)subscriptΘ𝒪superscript108\Theta_{\infty}\approx\mathcal{O}(10^{-8})roman_Θ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≈ caligraphic_O ( 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 8 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) [47], thus one can consider Eq. (2) to hold for dark matter accretion irrespective of it being cold or warm.

Since m˙HLv3proportional-tosubscript˙𝑚HLsuperscriptsubscript𝑣3\dot{m}_{\rm HL}\propto v_{\infty}^{-3}over˙ start_ARG italic_m end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_HL end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∝ italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, to generate a larger accretion rate, for the current work, we are interested in the scenario where the black hole either moves at a subsonic or marginally supersonic velocity. To this end, using Eq. (1) and (2), a simple interpolation gives us the Bondi-Hoyle [48] mass accretion rate,

m˙BH=4πλG2m2ρ(cs2+v2)3/2,subscript˙𝑚BH4𝜋𝜆superscript𝐺2superscript𝑚2subscript𝜌superscriptsuperscriptsubscript𝑐𝑠2subscriptsuperscript𝑣232\dot{m}_{\rm BH}=\frac{4\pi\lambda G^{2}m^{2}\rho_{\infty}}{\left(c_{s}^{2}+v^% {2}_{\infty}\right)^{3/2}}\,,over˙ start_ARG italic_m end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_BH end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = divide start_ARG 4 italic_π italic_λ italic_G start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_ρ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG ( italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_s end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + italic_v start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 / 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG , (4)

which holds for both the subsonic and supersonic scenarios. The above expression for the accretion rate would be weakly sensitive to the spin of the black holes since the accretion cross-section is set at a large distance from the black hole. Thus, the performed calculations would not be significantly impacted by the assumption of Schwarzschild geometry.

To determine ρsubscript𝜌\rho_{\infty}italic_ρ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, we use an NFW profile for the dark matter halo; see Eq. (36). In the inner region, the halo can experience adiabatic compression due to the presence of the SMBH, resulting in a spike in dark matter density [49, 50]. To give conservative estimates of m˙˙𝑚\dot{m}over˙ start_ARG italic_m end_ARG, we disregard the presence of such a density spike in this work.

II.2 Scalar field dark matter

If dark matter is instead modeled as a scale field, far away from the black hole, the incoming wave can be treated as a plane wave. The treatment of such long wavelength (λDMmmuch-greater-thansubscript𝜆DM𝑚\lambda_{\rm DM}\gg mitalic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_DM end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≫ italic_m) scalar field absorption by a Schwarzschild black hole is provided in [51]. The resulting mass accretion rate reads

m˙S=σS(m,mχ,v)ρv,subscript˙𝑚Ssubscript𝜎𝑆𝑚subscript𝑚𝜒subscript𝑣subscript𝜌subscript𝑣\dot{m}_{\rm S}=\sigma_{S}(m,m_{\chi},v_{\infty})\rho_{\infty}v_{\infty}\,,over˙ start_ARG italic_m end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_S end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_σ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_S end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_m , italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_χ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) italic_ρ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , (5)

where (with =G=c=1Planck-constant-over-2-pi𝐺𝑐1\hbar=G=c=1roman_ℏ = italic_G = italic_c = 1)

σS=16πG2m2vξ1eξ;ξ=2πGmmχ1+v2v1v2.formulae-sequencesubscript𝜎S16𝜋superscript𝐺2superscript𝑚2subscript𝑣𝜉1superscript𝑒𝜉𝜉2𝜋𝐺𝑚subscript𝑚𝜒1subscriptsuperscript𝑣2subscript𝑣1subscriptsuperscript𝑣2\displaystyle\sigma_{\rm S}=\frac{16\pi G^{2}m^{2}}{v_{\infty}}\frac{\xi}{1-e^% {-\xi}};\quad\xi=2\pi Gmm_{\chi}\frac{1+v^{2}_{\infty}}{v_{\infty}\sqrt{1-v^{2% }_{\infty}}}\,.italic_σ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_S end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = divide start_ARG 16 italic_π italic_G start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG divide start_ARG italic_ξ end_ARG start_ARG 1 - italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_ξ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG ; italic_ξ = 2 italic_π italic_G italic_m italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_χ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT divide start_ARG 1 + italic_v start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT square-root start_ARG 1 - italic_v start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG end_ARG . (6)

The capture rate of such long-wavelength scalar fields is expected to be relatively weak compared to point-particle dark matter and likely to be important when the black hole is present in dense dark matter environments, such as near the center of our galaxy. A generic prediction for such ultralight fields is that they will produce a solitonic core near the galactic center (e.g., [39, 52]). In the absence of self-interaction, the soliton is purely supported via quantum pressure, and its density can be approximated as [39]

ρ=ρc(1+λ~(rrc)2)8,𝜌subscript𝜌𝑐superscript1~𝜆superscript𝑟subscript𝑟𝑐28\rho=\rho_{c}\left(1+\tilde{\lambda}\left(\frac{r}{r_{c}}\right)^{2}\right)^{-% 8}\,,italic_ρ = italic_ρ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 1 + over~ start_ARG italic_λ end_ARG ( divide start_ARG italic_r end_ARG start_ARG italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 8 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , (7)

where λ~=21/81~𝜆superscript2181\tilde{\lambda}=2^{1/8}-1over~ start_ARG italic_λ end_ARG = 2 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 1 / 8 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1. Additionally, the core’s central density can be written as [52]

ρc=ρ0(Gmχ2c22)3Msol4,`subscript𝜌𝑐subscript𝜌0superscript𝐺superscriptsubscript𝑚𝜒2superscript𝑐2superscriptPlanck-constant-over-2-pi23superscriptsubscript𝑀sol4`\rho_{c}=\rho_{0}\left(\frac{Gm_{\chi}^{2}}{c^{2}\hbar^{2}}\right)^{3}M_{\rm sol% }^{4}\,,`italic_ρ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_ρ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( divide start_ARG italic_G italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_χ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_ℏ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_sol end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , ` (8)

where Msolsubscript𝑀solM_{\rm sol}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_sol end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is the mass of the soliton and ρ0=0.00440subscript𝜌00.00440\rho_{0}=0.00440italic_ρ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0.00440 [52]. The core radius rcsubscript𝑟𝑐r_{c}italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is defined as ρ(rc)=ρc/2𝜌subscript𝑟𝑐subscript𝜌𝑐2\rho(r_{c})=\rho_{c}/2italic_ρ ( italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = italic_ρ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / 2 and takes the form [39]

rc=(ρc0.019Mpc3)1/4(mχ1022eV)1/2kpc .subscript𝑟𝑐superscriptsubscript𝜌𝑐0.019subscript𝑀direct-productsuperscriptpc314superscriptsubscript𝑚𝜒superscript1022eV12kpc r_{c}=\left(\frac{\rho_{c}}{0.019{M}_{\odot}\ \text{pc}^{-3}}\right)^{-1/4}% \left(\frac{m_{\chi}}{10^{-22}\text{eV}}\right)^{-1/2}\text{kpc }\,.italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = ( divide start_ARG italic_ρ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 0.019 italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT pc start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 / 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( divide start_ARG italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_χ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 22 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT eV end_ARG ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 / 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT kpc . (9)

The virial velocity of the solitonic core takes the form

vvvir=GMsolmχw01/2subscript𝑣subscript𝑣vir𝐺subscript𝑀solsubscript𝑚𝜒Planck-constant-over-2-pisuperscriptsubscript𝑤012v_{\infty}\equiv v_{\mathrm{vir}}=\frac{GM_{\rm sol}m_{\chi}}{\hbar}w_{0}^{1/2}italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≡ italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_vir end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = divide start_ARG italic_G italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_sol end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_χ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG roman_ℏ end_ARG italic_w start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 1 / 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT (10)

with w0=0.10851subscript𝑤00.10851w_{0}=0.10851italic_w start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0.10851 [52]. Our target black holes will be going in a circular orbit around their galactic center with velocity vcsubscript𝑣𝑐v_{c}italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, with vcvvirmuch-less-thansubscript𝑣𝑐subscript𝑣virv_{c}\ll v_{\mathrm{vir}}italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≪ italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_vir end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (vcsubscript𝑣𝑐v_{c}italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT calculated in Appendix A). Thus, we make the assumption that vvvirsubscript𝑣subscript𝑣virv_{\infty}\equiv v_{\mathrm{vir}}italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≡ italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_vir end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, which would otherwise be determined by vcsubscript𝑣𝑐v_{c}italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT.

The masses of black holes considered here, along with the expression for vsubscript𝑣v_{\infty}italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT in Eq. (10), suggests ξ1much-less-than𝜉1\xi\ll 1italic_ξ ≪ 1, implying that Eq. (5) can be reduced to

dmSdt=16π(Gm)2ρc3.dsubscript𝑚Sd𝑡16𝜋superscript𝐺𝑚2subscript𝜌superscript𝑐3\frac{\mathrm{d}m_{\rm S}}{\mathrm{d}t}=\frac{16\pi(Gm)^{2}\rho_{\infty}}{c^{3% }}\,.divide start_ARG roman_d italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_S end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG roman_d italic_t end_ARG = divide start_ARG 16 italic_π ( italic_G italic_m ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_ρ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG . (11)

Substituting the density of the soliton in Eq. (11) thus results in the accretion rate

dmSdt=2.5M103yrdsubscript𝑚Sd𝑡2.5subscript𝑀direct-productsuperscript103yr\displaystyle\frac{\mathrm{d}m_{\rm S}}{\mathrm{d}t}=\frac{2.5\,M_{\odot}}{10^% {3}\,\mathrm{yr}}divide start_ARG roman_d italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_S end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG roman_d italic_t end_ARG = divide start_ARG 2.5 italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_yr end_ARG (m109M)2(mχ1022eV)6(Msol1010M)4superscript𝑚superscript109subscript𝑀direct-product2superscriptsubscript𝑚𝜒superscript1022eV6superscriptsubscript𝑀solsuperscript1010subscript𝑀direct-product4\displaystyle\left(\frac{m}{10^{9}M_{\odot}}\right)^{2}\left(\frac{m_{\chi}}{1% 0^{-22}\mathrm{eV}}\right)^{6}\left(\frac{M_{\rm sol}}{10^{10}M_{\odot}}\right% )^{4}( divide start_ARG italic_m end_ARG start_ARG 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 9 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( divide start_ARG italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_χ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 22 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_eV end_ARG ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 6 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( divide start_ARG italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_sol end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 10 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT (12)
×(1+λ(rrc)2)8.absentsuperscript1𝜆superscript𝑟subscript𝑟𝑐28\displaystyle\times\left(1+\lambda\left(\frac{r}{r_{c}}\right)^{2}\right)^{-8}\,.× ( 1 + italic_λ ( divide start_ARG italic_r end_ARG start_ARG italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 8 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT .

Based on numerical simulations, Msolsubscript𝑀solM_{\rm sol}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_sol end_POSTSUBSCRIPT can be calculated using the soliton - halo mass relation as [53]

Msol=1.25×109(Mhalo1012M)1/3(mχ1022eV)1M,subscript𝑀sol1.25superscript109superscriptsubscript𝑀halosuperscript1012subscript𝑀direct-product13superscriptsubscript𝑚𝜒superscript1022eV1subscript𝑀direct-productM_{\rm sol}=1.25\times 10^{9}\left(\frac{M_{{\mathrm{halo}}}}{10^{12}{~{}M}_{% \odot}}\right)^{1/3}\left(\frac{m_{\chi}}{10^{-22}\mathrm{~{}eV}}\right)^{-1}{% ~{}M}_{\odot}\,,italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_sol end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1.25 × 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 9 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( divide start_ARG italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_halo end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 12 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 1 / 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( divide start_ARG italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_χ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 22 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_eV end_ARG ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , (13)

where Mhalosubscript𝑀haloM_{\rm halo}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_halo end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is the mass of the dark matter halo. This implies that Msolmχ1proportional-tosubscript𝑀solsuperscriptsubscript𝑚𝜒1M_{\rm sol}\propto m_{\chi}^{-1}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_sol end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∝ italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_χ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT and, as we later discuss, for Milky Way like galaxy with Mhalo1012Msubscript𝑀halosuperscript1012subscript𝑀direct-productM_{\rm halo}\approx 10^{12}M_{\odot}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_halo end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≈ 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 12 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT results in a negligible impact on \mathcal{M}caligraphic_M of the binary. To this end, for the sake of demonstration of the formalism discussed here, we also consider an alternative scenario where we fix the Milky Way’s soliton mass to Msol=109Msubscript𝑀solsuperscript109subscript𝑀direct-productM_{\rm sol}=10^{9}M_{\odot}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_sol end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 9 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (the latter value is based on Ref. [54])).

III Dynamics of a BBH immersed in a dark matter surrounding

III.1 Mass evolution

Since LISA’s binaries will have an orbital period of 1010410superscript10410-10^{4}10 - 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT s [35], this implies raamuch-greater-thansubscript𝑟𝑎𝑎r_{a}\gg aitalic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≫ italic_a, a𝑎aitalic_a being the binary’s semi-major axis. Thus far away from the binary, the infalling point-particle dark matter will perceive the binary as a single object with mass M=m1+m2𝑀subscript𝑚1subscript𝑚2M=m_{1}+m_{2}italic_M = italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [55, 56, 57]. This gives the total mass accretion rate on the BBH as

M˙BH=m˙1,BH+m˙2,BH+2δ4πλG2m1m2ρ(cs2+v2)3/2,subscript˙𝑀BHsubscript˙𝑚1BHsubscript˙𝑚2BH2𝛿4𝜋𝜆superscript𝐺2subscript𝑚1subscript𝑚2subscript𝜌superscriptsuperscriptsubscript𝑐𝑠2subscriptsuperscript𝑣232\dot{M}_{\rm BH}=\dot{m}_{1,\rm BH}+\dot{m}_{2,\rm BH}+2\delta\frac{4\pi% \lambda G^{2}m_{1}m_{2}\rho_{\infty}}{\left(c_{s}^{2}+v^{2}_{\infty}\right)^{3% /2}}\,,over˙ start_ARG italic_M end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_BH end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = over˙ start_ARG italic_m end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 , roman_BH end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + over˙ start_ARG italic_m end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 , roman_BH end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + 2 italic_δ divide start_ARG 4 italic_π italic_λ italic_G start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ρ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG ( italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_s end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + italic_v start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 / 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG , (14)

where 0δ10𝛿10\leq\delta\leq 10 ≤ italic_δ ≤ 1.

As the matter falls into the total potential of mass M𝑀Mitalic_M, far away from the BBH, δ=1𝛿1\delta=1italic_δ = 1. Then, to maintain a steady-state mass accretion rate, this captured mass would eventually have to be accreted. The mass contained in the last term in Eq. (14) would be distributed among the component masses. As the current treatment only serves as a test of LISA’s capability to detect dark matter, in the following, for simplicity, we present our results assuming δ=0𝛿0\delta=0italic_δ = 0, which provides a floor for the expected evolution of the BBH mass.

A similar effect would manifest during the descent of wave-like dark matter on the binary’s collective gravitational potential, cf. Eq. (11). Nevertheless, as previously, we treat the infall and absorption of dark matter on each black hole separately for the latter case as well.

III.2 Orbital decay

III.2.1 Due to emission of gravitational radiation

The rate of orbital decay of a BBH is governed by the rate at which it emits gravitational radiation. For the most part of the evolution, the orbital decay of BBHs considered here can be modeled in the weak field regime. If averaged over the orbital period, the decay takes the form [58]

dadt|GW=645G3μM2c5a3(1e2)7/2(1+7324e2+3796e4)+𝒪(m˙),evaluated-at𝑑𝑎𝑑𝑡GW645superscript𝐺3𝜇superscript𝑀2superscript𝑐5superscript𝑎3superscript1superscript𝑒27217324superscript𝑒23796superscript𝑒4𝒪˙𝑚\left.\frac{da}{dt}\right|_{\rm GW}=-\frac{64}{5}\frac{G^{3}\mu M^{2}}{c^{5}a^% {3}\left(1-e^{2}\right)^{7/2}}\left(1+\frac{73}{24}e^{2}+\frac{37}{96}e^{4}% \right)+\mathcal{O}(\dot{m}),divide start_ARG italic_d italic_a end_ARG start_ARG italic_d italic_t end_ARG | start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_GW end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = - divide start_ARG 64 end_ARG start_ARG 5 end_ARG divide start_ARG italic_G start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_μ italic_M start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 5 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_a start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( 1 - italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 7 / 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG ( 1 + divide start_ARG 73 end_ARG start_ARG 24 end_ARG italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + divide start_ARG 37 end_ARG start_ARG 96 end_ARG italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) + caligraphic_O ( over˙ start_ARG italic_m end_ARG ) , (15)

where μ=m1m2/(m1+m2)𝜇subscript𝑚1subscript𝑚2subscript𝑚1subscript𝑚2\mu=m_{1}m_{2}/(m_{1}+m_{2})italic_μ = italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / ( italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) is the reduced mass of the binary and e𝑒eitalic_e is the eccentricity. We note that due to the capture of dark matter, above the masses are time-varying and only the leading-order effect has been considered. Similarly, the eccentricity of the binary also changes as

dedt|GW=30415eG3μM2c5a4(1e2)5/2(1+121304e2)+𝒪(m˙),evaluated-at𝑑𝑒𝑑𝑡GW30415𝑒superscript𝐺3𝜇superscript𝑀2superscript𝑐5superscript𝑎4superscript1superscript𝑒2521121304superscript𝑒2𝒪˙𝑚\left.\frac{de}{dt}\right|_{\rm GW}=-\frac{304}{15}e\frac{G^{3}\mu M^{2}}{c^{5% }a^{4}\left(1-e^{2}\right)^{5/2}}\left(1+\frac{121}{304}e^{2}\right)+\mathcal{% O}(\dot{m})\,,divide start_ARG italic_d italic_e end_ARG start_ARG italic_d italic_t end_ARG | start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_GW end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = - divide start_ARG 304 end_ARG start_ARG 15 end_ARG italic_e divide start_ARG italic_G start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_μ italic_M start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 5 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_a start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( 1 - italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 5 / 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG ( 1 + divide start_ARG 121 end_ARG start_ARG 304 end_ARG italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) + caligraphic_O ( over˙ start_ARG italic_m end_ARG ) , (16)

where the subscript “GW” indicates that the decay is mediated by gravitational wave emission.

III.2.2 Due to impact on orbital angular momentum

We are interested in BBHs whose orbital frequency lies in the range [104,0.1superscript1040.110^{-4},0.110 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , 0.1] Hz. At such frequencies, the orbital velocity of the binary component vorbvmuch-greater-thansubscript𝑣orbsubscript𝑣v_{\rm orb}\gg v_{\infty}italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_orb end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≫ italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. Regardless of the direction of motion of the BBH w.r.t. the background dark matter medium, averaged over one full orbit, this implies that dark matter accretion would contribute negligibly to the orbital angular momentum L𝐿Litalic_L of the binary. Thus, we assume that outside of the loss in gravitational wave emission,

L=Gμ2Mr(1e2)𝐿𝐺superscript𝜇2𝑀𝑟1superscript𝑒2L=\sqrt{G\mu^{2}Mr\left(1-e^{2}\right)}italic_L = square-root start_ARG italic_G italic_μ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_M italic_r ( 1 - italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) end_ARG (17)

is a constant of the motion. For a mass-changing binary, this yields

dadt|L=a[ddtln(μ2M)2ee˙1e2],evaluated-at𝑑𝑎𝑑𝑡𝐿𝑎delimited-[]𝑑𝑑𝑡superscript𝜇2𝑀2𝑒˙𝑒1superscript𝑒2\left.\frac{da}{dt}\right|_{L}=-a\left[\frac{d}{dt}\ln{(\mu^{2}M})-\frac{2e% \dot{e}}{1-e^{2}}\right]\,,divide start_ARG italic_d italic_a end_ARG start_ARG italic_d italic_t end_ARG | start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_L end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = - italic_a [ divide start_ARG italic_d end_ARG start_ARG italic_d italic_t end_ARG roman_ln ( italic_μ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_M ) - divide start_ARG 2 italic_e over˙ start_ARG italic_e end_ARG end_ARG start_ARG 1 - italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG ] , (18)

where, if averaged over one period, following equation (25) in Ref. [59], we find that

dedt|L=eM˙M.evaluated-at𝑑𝑒𝑑𝑡𝐿𝑒˙𝑀𝑀\left.\frac{de}{dt}\right|_{L}=-\frac{e\dot{M}}{M}\,.divide start_ARG italic_d italic_e end_ARG start_ARG italic_d italic_t end_ARG | start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_L end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = - divide start_ARG italic_e over˙ start_ARG italic_M end_ARG end_ARG start_ARG italic_M end_ARG . (19)

Thus, the net orbit decay rate can be written as a˙=a˙|GW+a˙|L˙𝑎evaluated-at˙𝑎GWevaluated-at˙𝑎𝐿\dot{a}=\dot{a}|_{\rm GW}+\dot{a}|_{L}over˙ start_ARG italic_a end_ARG = over˙ start_ARG italic_a end_ARG | start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_GW end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + over˙ start_ARG italic_a end_ARG | start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_L end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and the net eccentricity decay rate as e˙=e˙|GW+e˙|L˙𝑒evaluated-at˙𝑒GWevaluated-at˙𝑒𝐿\dot{e}=\dot{e}|_{\rm GW}+\dot{e}|_{L}over˙ start_ARG italic_e end_ARG = over˙ start_ARG italic_e end_ARG | start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_GW end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + over˙ start_ARG italic_e end_ARG | start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_L end_POSTSUBSCRIPT.

III.3 Gravitational wave frequency evolution

For BBHs orbiting in a Keplerian orbit, the orbital frequency forbsubscript𝑓orbf_{\rm orb}italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_orb end_POSTSUBSCRIPT satisfies

forb2=GM4π2a3.superscriptsubscript𝑓orb2𝐺𝑀4superscript𝜋2superscript𝑎3f_{\rm orb}^{2}=\frac{GM}{4\pi^{2}a^{3}}\,.italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_orb end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = divide start_ARG italic_G italic_M end_ARG start_ARG 4 italic_π start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_a start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG . (20)

Thus, if the binary accretes dark matter, the evolution of forbsubscript𝑓orbf_{\rm orb}italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_orb end_POSTSUBSCRIPT can be calculated as

dforbdt=G1/24πa3/2M1/2[M˙3Maa˙],𝑑subscript𝑓orb𝑑𝑡superscript𝐺124𝜋superscript𝑎32superscript𝑀12delimited-[]˙𝑀3𝑀𝑎˙𝑎\frac{df_{\rm orb}}{dt}=\frac{G^{1/2}}{4\pi}a^{-3/2}M^{-1/2}\left[\dot{M}-% \frac{3M}{a}\dot{a}\right]\,,divide start_ARG italic_d italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_orb end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_d italic_t end_ARG = divide start_ARG italic_G start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 1 / 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 4 italic_π end_ARG italic_a start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 3 / 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 / 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT [ over˙ start_ARG italic_M end_ARG - divide start_ARG 3 italic_M end_ARG start_ARG italic_a end_ARG over˙ start_ARG italic_a end_ARG ] , (21)

where in the scenario when the BBH lives in a vacuum, we can set M˙=0˙𝑀0\dot{M}=0over˙ start_ARG italic_M end_ARG = 0. From Eq. (21), one can then calculate the gravitational wave frequency evolution, noting that the gravitational wave frequency in the n𝑛nitalic_nth harmonic should be given by f=nforb𝑓𝑛subscript𝑓orbf=nf_{\rm orb}italic_f = italic_n italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_orb end_POSTSUBSCRIPT.

IV Observability

IV.1 An evolving chirp mass

To restate, we are interested in determining the changes in the evolution of the BBH properties, owing to the capture of surrounding dark matter. The leading order orbital evolution of a gravitational wave emitting binary is determined by its chirp mass =μ3/5M2/5superscript𝜇35superscript𝑀25\mathcal{M}=\mu^{3/5}M^{2/5}caligraphic_M = italic_μ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 / 5 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 / 5 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT and in the case where M˙=0˙𝑀0\dot{M}=0over˙ start_ARG italic_M end_ARG = 0, \mathcal{M}caligraphic_M remains invariant over time. Observationally, for certain binaries, LISA may be able to measure their gravitational wave frequency f𝑓fitalic_f as well as the frequency drift f˙˙𝑓\dot{f}over˙ start_ARG italic_f end_ARG yielding

=c3G(596π8/3f11/3f˙)3/5,superscript𝑐3𝐺superscript596superscript𝜋83superscript𝑓113˙𝑓35\mathcal{M}=\frac{c^{3}}{G}\left(\frac{5}{96}\pi^{-8/3}f^{-11/3}\dot{f}\right)% ^{3/5}\,,caligraphic_M = divide start_ARG italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_G end_ARG ( divide start_ARG 5 end_ARG start_ARG 96 end_ARG italic_π start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 8 / 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_f start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 11 / 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT over˙ start_ARG italic_f end_ARG ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 / 5 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , (22)

which LISA can measure with the resolution [60]

σ35f˙σf˙.subscript𝜎35˙𝑓subscript𝜎˙𝑓\sigma_{\mathcal{M}}\approx\frac{3}{5}\frac{\mathcal{M}}{\dot{f}}\sigma_{\dot{% f}}\,.italic_σ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≈ divide start_ARG 3 end_ARG start_ARG 5 end_ARG divide start_ARG caligraphic_M end_ARG start_ARG over˙ start_ARG italic_f end_ARG end_ARG italic_σ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT over˙ start_ARG italic_f end_ARG end_POSTSUBSCRIPT . (23)

Moreover, for circular binaries, f˙˙𝑓\dot{f}over˙ start_ARG italic_f end_ARG can be measured with the resolution

σf˙0.43(ρ¯210)1Tobs2,subscript𝜎˙𝑓0.43superscriptsubscript¯𝜌2101superscriptsubscript𝑇obs2\sigma_{\dot{f}}\approx 0.43\left(\frac{\bar{\rho}_{2}}{10}\right)^{-1}T_{\rm obs% }^{-2}\,,italic_σ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT over˙ start_ARG italic_f end_ARG end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≈ 0.43 ( divide start_ARG over¯ start_ARG italic_ρ end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 10 end_ARG ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_obs end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , (24)

where ρ¯2subscript¯𝜌2\bar{\rho}_{2}over¯ start_ARG italic_ρ end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is the SNR of the gravitational wave of the binary in the second orbital harmonic and is defined later in Eq. (29). This yields

σ0.258(ρ¯210)1f˙Tobs2,subscript𝜎0.258superscriptsubscript¯𝜌2101˙𝑓superscriptsubscript𝑇obs2\sigma_{\mathcal{M}}\approx 0.258\left(\frac{\bar{\rho}_{2}}{10}\right)^{-1}% \frac{\mathcal{M}}{\dot{f}}T_{\rm obs}^{-2}\,,italic_σ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≈ 0.258 ( divide start_ARG over¯ start_ARG italic_ρ end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 10 end_ARG ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT divide start_ARG caligraphic_M end_ARG start_ARG over˙ start_ARG italic_f end_ARG end_ARG italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_obs end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , (25)

implying that a longer observation time will lead to a smaller error in the measured value of \mathcal{M}caligraphic_M. Assuming that we measure \mathcal{M}caligraphic_M for two different observation times t1,t2subscript𝑡1subscript𝑡2t_{1},t_{2}italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (with t2>t1subscript𝑡2subscript𝑡1t_{2}>t_{1}italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT > italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT), we can then calculate the change in the binary’s chirp mass over the observation time as Δ=(t2)(t1)Δsubscript𝑡2subscript𝑡1\Delta\mathcal{M}=\mathcal{M}(t_{2})-\mathcal{M}(t_{1})roman_Δ caligraphic_M = caligraphic_M ( italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) - caligraphic_M ( italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ), where the change in \mathcal{M}caligraphic_M is driven by the capture of dark matter. For a successful detection of this change, we require that the net measurement uncertainty remain smaller than the measured value, i.e.,

Δ(t2)>σ(t1)+σ(t2).Δsubscript𝑡2subscript𝜎subscript𝑡1subscript𝜎subscript𝑡2\Delta\mathcal{M}(t_{2})>\sigma_{\mathcal{M}(t_{1})}+\sigma_{\mathcal{M}(t_{2}% )}\,.roman_Δ caligraphic_M ( italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) > italic_σ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_M ( italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_σ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_M ( italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) end_POSTSUBSCRIPT . (26)

where σ(t1)>σ(t2)subscript𝜎subscript𝑡1subscript𝜎subscript𝑡2\sigma_{\mathcal{M}}(t_{1})>\sigma_{\mathcal{M}}(t_{2})italic_σ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) > italic_σ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ). For calculational simplicity, in the current work, we adopt a more stringent criterion, i.e.,

Δ(t>t1)2σ(t1)Δ𝑡subscript𝑡12subscript𝜎subscript𝑡1\Delta\mathcal{M}(t>t_{1})\geq 2\sigma_{\mathcal{M}(t_{1})}roman_Δ caligraphic_M ( italic_t > italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ≥ 2 italic_σ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_M ( italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (27)

for a successful detection.

IV.2 Strain calculation

For a given value of f,,e𝑓𝑒f,\mathcal{M},eitalic_f , caligraphic_M , italic_e and source luminosity distance DLsubscript𝐷𝐿D_{L}italic_D start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_L end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, the dimensionless gravitational wave strain amplitude of the binary in the n=2𝑛2n=2italic_n = 2 orbital harmonic (i.e., the most dominant harmonic at low eccentricities) is [61, 36]

h2=8G5/35/3π2/3f2/351/2DLc4[152e2+3524e4+O(e6)].subscript28superscript𝐺53superscript53superscript𝜋23superscript𝑓23superscript512subscript𝐷𝐿superscript𝑐4delimited-[]152superscript𝑒23524superscript𝑒4𝑂superscript𝑒6h_{2}=\frac{8G^{5/3}\mathcal{M}^{5/3}\pi^{2/3}f^{2/3}}{5^{1/2}D_{L}c^{4}}\left% [1-\frac{5}{2}e^{2}+\frac{35}{24}e^{4}+O\left(e^{6}\right)\right]\,.italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = divide start_ARG 8 italic_G start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 5 / 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT caligraphic_M start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 5 / 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_π start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 / 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_f start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 / 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 5 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 1 / 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_D start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_L end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG [ 1 - divide start_ARG 5 end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + divide start_ARG 35 end_ARG start_ARG 24 end_ARG italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + italic_O ( italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 6 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) ] . (28)

In calculating h2subscript2h_{2}italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT for a given binary, we will treat DLsubscript𝐷𝐿D_{L}italic_D start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_L end_POSTSUBSCRIPT to remain constant over the course of observation. Moreover, since we are not interested in a particular target, here we consider the gravitational wave SNR to be averaged over inclination, sky location, and gravitational wave polarization over an observing time Tobssubscript𝑇obsT_{\rm obs}italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_obs end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. This yields [36]

ρ2¯=h2Sn(f)1/2Tobs.¯subscript𝜌2subscript2subscript𝑆𝑛superscript𝑓12subscript𝑇obs\bar{\rho_{2}}=\frac{h_{2}}{S_{n}(f)^{1/2}}\sqrt{T_{\rm obs}}\,.over¯ start_ARG italic_ρ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG = divide start_ARG italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_f ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 1 / 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG square-root start_ARG italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_obs end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG . (29)

where Sn(f)subscript𝑆𝑛𝑓S_{n}(f)italic_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_f ) is LISA’s noise power spectral density and is defined in Appendix B. For higher harmonics, hng(n,e)/nproportional-tosubscript𝑛𝑔𝑛𝑒𝑛h_{n}\propto\sqrt{g(n,e)}/nitalic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∝ square-root start_ARG italic_g ( italic_n , italic_e ) end_ARG / italic_n and become increasingly important for e0.2greater-than-or-equivalent-to𝑒0.2e\gtrsim 0.2italic_e ≳ 0.2 (see figure 3 in Ref. [62], the expression for g(n,e)𝑔𝑛𝑒g(n,e)italic_g ( italic_n , italic_e ) can be also be found therein). For simplicity below, we present our calculation only for the case e=0𝑒0e=0italic_e = 0 for which the binary radiates at n=2𝑛2n=2italic_n = 2. As the intensity of the emitted radiation is directly proportional to e𝑒eitalic_e, so our results can be treated as the floor of LISA’s sensitivity.

V Result

Refer to caption
Figure 1: Variation in the chirp mass \mathcal{M}caligraphic_M of a BBH with m1,m2=25Msubscript𝑚1subscript𝑚225subscript𝑀direct-productm_{1},m_{2}=25M_{\odot}italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 25 italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and e=0𝑒0e=0italic_e = 0 that is located at a distance of rcenter=1subscript𝑟center1r_{\rm center}=1italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_center end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1 pc, 10 pc from the center of Milky Way. Colored lines represent ΘsubscriptΘ\Theta_{\infty}roman_Θ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - the dimensionless temperature of particle-like dark matter. The shaded region above the dotted curves represents the region where variations in \mathcal{M}caligraphic_M of a BBH with initial gravitational wave frequency finsubscript𝑓inf_{\rm in}italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_in end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (i.e., f𝑓fitalic_f at the beginning of the observation run) are detectable by LISA.
Refer to caption
Refer to caption
Figure 2: Same as Fig. 1 but now for wave-like dark matter. The colors of the curves represent the mass of dark matter, and the BBH is assumed to be much closer to the galactic center. For reference, the Schwarzschild radius of Sgr A is 4×107absent4superscript107\approx 4\times 10^{-7}≈ 4 × 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 7 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT pc.

V.1 Galactic sources

Given the inverse dependence of h2subscript2h_{2}italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT on DLsubscript𝐷𝐿D_{L}italic_D start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_L end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, binaries within the galaxy will be the optimal target. As mentioned earlier, we assume such binaries to be in a circular orbit around the galactic center with velocity vcsubscript𝑣𝑐v_{c}italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, which will be the source of vsubscript𝑣v_{\infty}italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT in Eq. (4). In addition to a large M𝑀Mitalic_M, Eq. (4) and (11) suggests that a larger change in \mathcal{M}caligraphic_M requires ρsubscript𝜌\rho_{\infty}italic_ρ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT to be large and vcsubscript𝑣𝑐v_{c}italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT to be small. Thus, the ideal location to probe dark matter using LISA would be near the galactic center.

The calculation of vcsubscript𝑣𝑐v_{c}italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT for black holes residing in the Milky Way’s disk is presented in Appendix A. Since the role of the galactic bulge remains uncertain in the inner region, we assume that it is the NFW halo that determines the value of vcsubscript𝑣𝑐v_{c}italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT near the galactic center. Nevertheless, we compare vcsubscript𝑣𝑐v_{c}italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT resulting from the presence of an NFW halo and the bulge independently in Fig. 5. As discussed in Section II, in contrast to particle-like dark matter, absorption of ultralight scalar fields will only be important when the BBH resides within the galactic soliton. For such a case, vvirvcmuch-greater-thansubscript𝑣virsubscript𝑣𝑐v_{\rm vir}\gg v_{c}italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_vir end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≫ italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, thus the effect on a non-zero vcsubscript𝑣𝑐v_{c}italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT can be ignored.

Fig. 1 shows the variation in \mathcal{M}caligraphic_M of a BBH with m1,m2=25Msubscript𝑚1subscript𝑚225subscript𝑀direct-productm_{1},m_{2}=25M_{\odot}italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 25 italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT due to the presence of particle-like dark matter. The shaded area in the figure shows the region of detectability by LISA and is dependent on the emitted gravitational wave frequency. The change in \mathcal{M}caligraphic_M depends on the magnitude of ΘsubscriptΘ\Theta_{\infty}roman_Θ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and rcentersubscript𝑟centerr_{\rm center}italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_center end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (the distance of the BBH from the galactic center) with smaller values resulting in more favorable outcomes. We note that the kink in the curve with initial frequency fin=2subscript𝑓in2f_{\rm in}=2italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_in end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 2 mHz is an artifact and results from the interpolation carried over the LISA sensitivity data presented in Table 1 of Ref. [36].

Similar to Fig. 1, Fig. 2 shows the variation in \mathcal{M}caligraphic_M for the case where the BBH is immersed in a wave-like dark matter surrounding of Msol=109Msubscript𝑀solsuperscript109subscript𝑀direct-productM_{\rm sol}=10^{9}M_{\odot}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_sol end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 9 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT with the corresponding dark matter masses shown in the figure legend. As the mass of dark matter increases, the density of the solitonic core increases. However, this also decreases the value of rcsubscript𝑟𝑐r_{c}italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT in Eq. 9. Thus, we place the BBH closer to the galactic center for a larger value of mχsubscript𝑚𝜒m_{\chi}italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_χ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. For both Fig. 1 and 2, we find that within 4-10 yr of operation, LISA will be able to probe the surroundings of the BBHs if such systems are detected during the observational run. However, Msolsubscript𝑀solM_{\rm sol}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_sol end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is expected to be a dynamical quantity that changes as one varies mχsubscript𝑚𝜒m_{\chi}italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_χ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [53]. For the sake of demonstration, let us pick mχ=1019subscript𝑚𝜒superscript1019m_{\chi}=10^{-19}italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_χ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 19 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT eV as this mass results in a detectable effect in Fig. 2. Then, based on Eq. (13), the corresponding Msol=1.25×106Msubscript𝑀sol1.25superscript106subscript𝑀direct-productM_{\rm sol}=1.25\times 10^{6}M_{\odot}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_sol end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1.25 × 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 6 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. This reduces the mass accretion rate in Eq. (12) by a factor of 1012absentsuperscript1012\approx 10^{12}≈ 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 12 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT compared to the case where Msol=109Msubscript𝑀solsuperscript109subscript𝑀direct-productM_{\rm sol}=10^{9}M_{\odot}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_sol end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 9 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and it gets worse as mχsubscript𝑚𝜒m_{\chi}italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_χ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT increases. As the value of Msolsubscript𝑀solM_{\rm sol}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_sol end_POSTSUBSCRIPT has a direct impact on ρcsubscript𝜌𝑐\rho_{c}italic_ρ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT in Eq. (8), adopting a larger value of Msolsubscript𝑀solM_{\rm sol}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_sol end_POSTSUBSCRIPT results in a larger ρ𝜌\rhoitalic_ρ. This effect is akin to the impact of adiabatic compression of the soliton on dark matter density, where the compression is driven by the SMBH at the galactic center [50]. Thus, we conclude that wave-like dark matter is unlikely to cause any noticeable variation in \mathcal{M}caligraphic_M unless the soliton gets adiabatically compressed to result in larger values of ρ𝜌\rhoitalic_ρ near the galactic center.

Until now, we assumed the BBH mass ratio qm2/m1=1𝑞subscript𝑚2subscript𝑚11q\equiv m_{2}/m_{1}=1italic_q ≡ italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1. To investigate the impact of a lower value of q𝑞qitalic_q, we reproduce Fig. 1 and 2 in Fig. 6 in Appendix C, assuming q=0.1𝑞0.1q=0.1italic_q = 0.1. As anticipated, a lower mass ratio reduces the prospects of detectability, meaning for smaller q𝑞qitalic_q values, a higher value of M𝑀Mitalic_M would be desirable to probe the surrounding dark matter.

Refer to caption
Refer to caption
Figure 3: Top two rows: Shaded region represents the parameter space where variations in \mathcal{M}caligraphic_M of a BBH (with total mass M𝑀Mitalic_M and q=1𝑞1q=1italic_q = 1) are detectable by LISA. Colors represent finsubscript𝑓inf_{\rm in}italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_in end_POSTSUBSCRIPT of the BBH at the onset of observation. The two linestyles represent the length of observation. Various regions are clipped from above as these BBHs merge before the end of observation. The BBHs are assumed to be located at rcenter=1subscript𝑟center1r_{\rm center}=1italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_center end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1 pc from their galactic center. The various values of DLsubscript𝐷𝐿D_{L}italic_D start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_L end_POSTSUBSCRIPT are also shown near the lower left of each plot. Bottom two rows: Same as top two rows but representing wave-like dark matter with rcenter=104subscript𝑟centersuperscript104r_{\rm center}=10^{-4}italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_center end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT pc.

V.2 Extragalactic sources

LISA will be sensitive to IMBHs out to redshift two [38]. Thus, in this section, we apply the above-discussed methodology to larger values of DLsubscript𝐷𝐿D_{L}italic_D start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_L end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. For simplicity, we take the Milky Way’s dark matter profile as a prototype for all galaxies at extragalactic distances.

The resulting detectability prospects are shown in Fig. 3 and 7 (in Appendix C) for q=1,0.1𝑞10.1q=1,0.1italic_q = 1 , 0.1 respectively, where we again set Msol=109Msubscript𝑀solsuperscript109subscript𝑀direct-productM_{\rm sol}=10^{9}M_{\odot}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_sol end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 9 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. For demonstration purposes, here we have chosen a subset of finsubscript𝑓inf_{\rm in}italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_in end_POSTSUBSCRIPT values and assumed a fixed observation time of Tobs=4,10subscript𝑇obs410T_{\rm obs}=4,10italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_obs end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 4 , 10 yr. At the end of Tobssubscript𝑇obsT_{\rm obs}italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_obs end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, ΔΔ\Delta\mathcal{M}roman_Δ caligraphic_M is calculated as Δ(Tobs)=(Tobs)(Tobs0.1)Δsubscript𝑇obssubscript𝑇obssubscript𝑇obs0.1\Delta\mathcal{M}(T_{\rm obs})=\mathcal{M}(T_{\rm obs})-\mathcal{M}(T_{\rm obs% }-0.1)roman_Δ caligraphic_M ( italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_obs end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = caligraphic_M ( italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_obs end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) - caligraphic_M ( italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_obs end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - 0.1 ). Many BBHs merge within this timespan and are thus removed from the figure, as is evident from the clipped region at the top of the shaded area.

In principle, one could fill other regions of Fig. 3 and 7 by calculating ΔΔ\Delta\mathcal{M}roman_Δ caligraphic_M as one continuously varies Tobssubscript𝑇obsT_{\rm obs}italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_obs end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. These figures show that observing \mathcal{M}caligraphic_M variations allow to probe222Maximum value of ΘsubscriptΘ\Theta_{\infty}roman_Θ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is estimated to be 𝒪(108)𝒪superscript108\mathcal{O}(10^{-8})caligraphic_O ( 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 8 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) [47]. Θ108less-than-or-similar-tosubscriptΘsuperscript108\Theta_{\infty}\lesssim 10^{-8}roman_Θ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≲ 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 8 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT for the case of particle dark matter and mχ[1020,5×1019]subscript𝑚𝜒superscript10205superscript1019m_{\chi}\in[10^{-20},5\times 10^{-19}]italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_χ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∈ [ 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 20 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , 5 × 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 19 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ] eV for wave-like dark matter. Such variations can be probed to a distance of 1absent1\approx 1≈ 1 Gpc. The latter depends on the value of rcentersubscript𝑟centerr_{\rm center}italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_center end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, and one can imagine that the detection prospects would be more favorable for smaller values of rcentersubscript𝑟centerr_{\rm center}italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_center end_POSTSUBSCRIPT.

VI Discussion

VI.1 Impact of a baryonic surrounding

Solving Eq. (4) yields the mass evolution of the black hole as

m(t)=ηmi;η(t)=1miαtmiαti1;η(t)1,formulae-sequence𝑚𝑡𝜂subscript𝑚𝑖formulae-sequence𝜂𝑡1subscript𝑚𝑖𝛼𝑡subscript𝑚𝑖𝛼subscript𝑡𝑖1𝜂𝑡1m(t)=\eta m_{i}\,;\quad\eta(t)=-\frac{1}{m_{i}\alpha t-m_{i}\alpha t_{i}-1};% \quad\eta(t)\geq 1\,,italic_m ( italic_t ) = italic_η italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ; italic_η ( italic_t ) = - divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_α italic_t - italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_α italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - 1 end_ARG ; italic_η ( italic_t ) ≥ 1 , (30)

where misubscript𝑚𝑖m_{i}italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is the mass of the black hole at some initial time tisubscript𝑡𝑖t_{i}italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and α=4πλG2ρ(cs2+v2)3/2𝛼4𝜋𝜆superscript𝐺2subscript𝜌superscriptsuperscriptsubscript𝑐𝑠2superscriptsubscript𝑣232\alpha=\frac{4\pi\lambda G^{2}\rho_{\infty}}{(c_{s}^{2}+v_{\infty}^{2})^{3/2}}italic_α = divide start_ARG 4 italic_π italic_λ italic_G start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_ρ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG ( italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_s end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 / 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG. The accretion of the interstellar medium (ISM) will be most efficient when the black hole comoves w.r.t. to its surrounding medium. Thus, for the case of baryonic matter accretion, we set v=0subscript𝑣0v_{\infty}=0italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0 in Eq. (30). Moreover, the value of ρsubscript𝜌\rho_{\infty}italic_ρ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT for the baryonic environment will depend on the nature of ISM in the vicinity of the black hole. A favorable scenario occurs when the ISM is cold and hence contains neutral particles, typically hydrogen. Such a medium is referred to as a cold neutral medium (CNM) and contains an average particle number density nH(2050)subscript𝑛𝐻2050n_{H}\approx(20-50)italic_n start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≈ ( 20 - 50 ) cm-3 and a temperature T100𝑇100T\approx 100italic_T ≈ 100 K [63].

It is likely that most of the surrounding CNM would have already been accreted by the time the BBH enters the LISA frequency band. Nevertheless, it is worthwhile to investigate how the black hole mass evolution compares to the scenario when the mass growth is supported by dark matter and baryonic matter accretion, respectively. To this end, Fig. 4 shows the mass evolution of black holes with mi=100M, 1000Msubscript𝑚𝑖100subscript𝑀direct-product1000subscript𝑀direct-productm_{i}=100M_{\odot},\,1000M_{\odot}italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 100 italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , 1000 italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT immersed in a baryonic and particle-like dark matter medium with variable properties.

Refer to caption
Figure 4: The fractional change in a black hole’s mass with initial mass misubscript𝑚𝑖m_{i}italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT located at rcenter=subscript𝑟centerabsentr_{\rm center}=italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_center end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1 pc, 10 pc from the galactic center. The LHS (RHS) figure shows mi=100Msubscript𝑚𝑖100subscript𝑀direct-productm_{i}=100M_{\odot}italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 100 italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (mi=1000Msubscript𝑚𝑖1000subscript𝑀direct-productm_{i}=1000M_{\odot}italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1000 italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT). In the legend, “DM” and “BM” stand for dark matter and baryonic matter, respectively. ΘsubscriptΘ\Theta_{\infty}roman_Θ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT represents dark matter dimensionless temperature and nHsubscript𝑛𝐻n_{H}italic_n start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H end_POSTSUBSCRIPT represents baryonic particle number density. Although we have considered only two values for misubscript𝑚𝑖m_{i}italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, a similar trend holds for other values as well.

Here, the ISM is considered to be cold with T=100𝑇100T=100italic_T = 100 K. However, there is a possibility that baryonic matter may form an accretion disk around the binary (by borrowing angular momentum from the BBH’s orbit) and thus heat up the surrounding gas. This will cause the temperature to rise, and for nH1subscript𝑛𝐻1n_{H}\approx 1italic_n start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≈ 1, the baryonic matter will have a subdominant impact on the black hole once T200greater-than-or-equivalent-to𝑇200T\gtrsim 200italic_T ≳ 200 K.

To be quantitative, let us assume that only a fraction ν𝜈\nuitalic_ν of the accreted mass is assimilated into the accretion disk (with the rest getting accreted directly). Then, one finds that the mass assimilation rate in the disk w.r.t. the Eddington rate should evolve as [64]

f=ϵm˙m˙Edd=3.9×103ϵν(nHcm3)(mM)(100T)3/2.𝑓italic-ϵ˙𝑚subscript˙𝑚Edd3.9superscript103italic-ϵ𝜈subscript𝑛𝐻superscriptcm3𝑚subscript𝑀direct-productsuperscript100𝑇32f=\epsilon\frac{\dot{m}}{\dot{m}_{\rm Edd}}=3.9\times 10^{-3}\epsilon\nu\left(% \frac{n_{H}}{{\rm cm}^{3}}\right)\left(\frac{m}{M_{\odot}}\right)\left(\frac{1% 00}{T}\right)^{3/2}\,.italic_f = italic_ϵ divide start_ARG over˙ start_ARG italic_m end_ARG end_ARG start_ARG over˙ start_ARG italic_m end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Edd end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG = 3.9 × 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_ϵ italic_ν ( divide start_ARG italic_n start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG roman_cm start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG ) ( divide start_ARG italic_m end_ARG start_ARG italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG ) ( divide start_ARG 100 end_ARG start_ARG italic_T end_ARG ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 / 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT . (31)

For illustrative purposes, assuming ν=0.1𝜈0.1\nu=0.1italic_ν = 0.1, T=100𝑇100T=100italic_T = 100 K, m[10M,1000M]𝑚10subscript𝑀direct-product1000subscript𝑀direct-productm\in[10M_{\odot},1000M_{\odot}]italic_m ∈ [ 10 italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , 1000 italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] and the accretion efficiency ϵ=1/16italic-ϵ116\epsilon=1/16italic_ϵ = 1 / 16, yields f(0.00024nH,0.024nH)𝑓0.00024subscript𝑛𝐻0.024subscript𝑛𝐻f\in(0.00024n_{H},0.024n_{H})italic_f ∈ ( 0.00024 italic_n start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , 0.024 italic_n start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ). Noting that for f0.001greater-than-or-equivalent-to𝑓0.001f\gtrsim 0.001italic_f ≳ 0.001, one excepts the accretion disk to radiate as a Shakura & Sunyaev accretion flow [65, 66], thus, for black holes with m100Mgreater-than-or-equivalent-to𝑚100subscript𝑀direct-productm\gtrsim 100M_{\odot}italic_m ≳ 100 italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, the effect of feedback could be very strong (even for nH=1subscript𝑛𝐻1n_{H}=1italic_n start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1 cm-3), likely shutting off accretion of baryonic ISM due to a rise in its temperature.

VI.2 Implication of a null result and the issue of localization

Regardless of the presence of a baryonic environment near the black holes, LISA not detecting any \mathcal{M}caligraphic_M evolution during the course of observation would imply that the underlying dark-matter model used for performing the calculation here is not the dominant form of dark matter around the BBHs. While it can still be a subdominant component, it has to be below the threshold at which \mathcal{M}caligraphic_M evolution can be observed. Depending on the value of M,q𝑀𝑞M,qitalic_M , italic_q, and DLsubscript𝐷𝐿D_{L}italic_D start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_L end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, the method proposed here can be used to perform such a check for a large parameter space of dark matter.

However, LISA alone will be unable to localize most BBHs to a subgalactic scale if observed at larger distances. Following equation 15 in Ref. [60] suggests that of the BBH mass range considered here, only the massive IMBHs within DL1less-than-or-similar-tosubscript𝐷𝐿1D_{L}\lesssim 1italic_D start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_L end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≲ 1Mpc will have sufficient angular resolution to be localized to an 10absent10\approx 10≈ 10 pc scale. Thus, a null result will only be useful for such values of DLsubscript𝐷𝐿D_{L}italic_D start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_L end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. This is because, as we showed, BBHs at larger distances from their galactic center would not interact strongly with their surrounding dark matter. Thus, for them, one may not expect to see any appreciable \mathcal{M}caligraphic_M variation anyway.

There remains a possibility that if the BBH is located close to its galactic center (i.e., within less-than-or-similar-to\lesssim 100 Schwarzschild radii of the SMBH), the SMBH-BBH system might radiate gravitational waves such that the inspiral of the BBH into the SMBH also becomes resolvable by LISA. This will result in two distinct gravitational wave signals, both coming from the same location in space but from two different sources. This can be a strong clue that the BBH signal may arise from the center of the host galaxy hosting the SMBH. In such a scenario, the null result mentioned above becomes a useful tool for much larger values of DLsubscript𝐷𝐿D_{L}italic_D start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_L end_POSTSUBSCRIPT.

VI.3 Conclusion

In this work, we have attempted to estimate the floor of the possible \mathcal{M}caligraphic_M variation caused by dark matter accretion onto LISA’s BBHs and whether such a variation is detectable. In particular, we set δ=0𝛿0\delta=0italic_δ = 0 - Eq. (14), assumed circular orbits, i.e., e=0𝑒0e=0italic_e = 0, and considered no adiabatic compression of the dark matter halo [49, 50], the latter leading to larger dark matter density near the galactic center (although see Section V.1).

Our analysis demonstrates that the BBH surrounding environment can be probed by measuring variation in the binary’s chirp mass over the course of LISA’s observation. As the impact of baryonic matter accretion may be subdominant for IMBHs (Section VI.1), any significant variation in their \mathcal{M}caligraphic_M value can be attributed to the presence of dark matter. These variations depend on the intrinsic properties of dark matter, allowing us to probe them up to a luminosity distance of approximately 1 Gpc, depending on the BBH’s location relative to the galactic center and the particle physics property of dark matter. For the case where the BBH is very close to the galactic SMBH, the presence of an AGN disk can contaminate the resulting gravitational wave signal. It remains to be seen if meaningful information about the surrounding dark matter can still be recovered under such a scenario.

Acknowledgements.
This work was in part supported by the University of Auckland Doctoral Scholarship and the Picker Interdisciplinary Science Institute.

Appendix A Galactic circular velocity

We calculate the galactic mid-plane (z=0𝑧0z=0italic_z = 0) circular velocity as a function of distance r𝑟ritalic_r from the galactic center as

vc2(r)=rΦr|z=0,superscriptsubscript𝑣c2𝑟evaluated-at𝑟Φ𝑟𝑧0v_{\mathrm{c}}^{2}(r)=\left.r\frac{\partial\Phi}{\partial r}\right|_{z=0}\,,italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) = italic_r divide start_ARG ∂ roman_Φ end_ARG start_ARG ∂ italic_r end_ARG | start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , (32)

where the gravitational potential ΦΦ\Phiroman_Φ is the sum of contributions from different components, denoted as ΦisubscriptΦ𝑖\Phi_{i}roman_Φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. To account for ΦisubscriptΦ𝑖\Phi_{i}roman_Φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, we include contributions from a spherical dark matter halo and a spherical Galactic bulge. When a component is described by its density ρisubscript𝜌𝑖\rho_{i}italic_ρ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - e.g., Eq. (36), we obtain the corresponding ΦisubscriptΦ𝑖\Phi_{i}roman_Φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT through the Poisson equation

2Φi=4πGρi.superscript2subscriptΦ𝑖4𝜋𝐺subscript𝜌𝑖\nabla^{2}\Phi_{i}=4\pi G\rho_{i}\,.∇ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_Φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 4 italic_π italic_G italic_ρ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT . (33)

In the inner region where vcsubscript𝑣𝑐v_{c}italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is small, ΦΦ\Phiroman_Φ could be dominated by the contribution from the bulge. The potential for the latter can be approximated as a Plummer potential and takes the form

ΦPlummer(r)=GMbulge r2+rb2,subscriptΦPlummer𝑟𝐺subscript𝑀bulge superscript𝑟2superscriptsubscript𝑟𝑏2\Phi_{\text{Plummer}}(r)=-\frac{GM_{\text{bulge }}}{\sqrt{r^{2}+r_{b}^{2}}}\,,roman_Φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT Plummer end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_r ) = - divide start_ARG italic_G italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bulge end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG square-root start_ARG italic_r start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG end_ARG , (34)

where Mbulge=1.067×1010Msubscript𝑀bulge1.067superscript1010subscript𝑀direct-productM_{\rm bulge}=1.067\times 10^{10}M_{\odot}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_bulge end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1.067 × 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 10 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and rb=0.3subscript𝑟𝑏0.3r_{b}=0.3italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0.3 kpc is the cut-off radius [67]. The resulting velocity takes the form

vc2(r)=GMbulger2(r2+rb2)3/2superscriptsubscript𝑣𝑐2𝑟𝐺subscript𝑀bulgesuperscript𝑟2superscriptsuperscript𝑟2superscriptsubscript𝑟𝑏232v_{c}^{2}(r)=\frac{GM_{\rm bulge}r^{2}}{(r^{2}+r_{b}^{2})^{3/2}}italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) = divide start_ARG italic_G italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_bulge end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG ( italic_r start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 / 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG (35)

and is shown in Fig. 5.

Although vcsubscript𝑣𝑐v_{c}italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT for r[5,25]𝑟525r\in[5,25]italic_r ∈ [ 5 , 25 ] kpc has been well measured [68], uncertainties remain regarding its value in the inner region of the galaxy. Moreover, there is no unanimous agreement on the nature of the galactic bulge (for small r𝑟ritalic_r), with some studies suggesting that it might be subdominant [69]. In such a case, it is the dark matter halo that dictates the value of vcsubscript𝑣𝑐v_{c}italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT in the inner region of the galaxy (which we assume to be true in the present work). To calculate the resulting value of vcsubscript𝑣𝑐v_{c}italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, we adopt an NFW profile [70] for the Milky Way’s dark matter halo as

ρNFW(r)=ρ0rsr(1+rrs)2,subscript𝜌NFW𝑟subscript𝜌0subscript𝑟𝑠𝑟superscript1𝑟subscript𝑟𝑠2\rho_{\mathrm{NFW}}(r)=\rho_{0}\frac{r_{s}}{r}\left(1+\frac{r}{r_{s}}\right)^{% -2}\,,italic_ρ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_NFW end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_r ) = italic_ρ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT divide start_ARG italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_s end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_r end_ARG ( 1 + divide start_ARG italic_r end_ARG start_ARG italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_s end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , (36)

where ρ0=0.052Msubscript𝜌00.052subscript𝑀direct-product\rho_{0}=0.052\,M_{\odot}italic_ρ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0.052 italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_POSTSUBSCRIPTpc-3, rs=8.1subscript𝑟𝑠8.1r_{s}=8.1italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_s end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 8.1 kpc are the normalisation constant and scale radius, respectively [71]. Eq. (36), thus yields

vc2(r)=4πGρ0rs3r[rsrs+rln(rsrs+r)1]superscriptsubscript𝑣𝑐2𝑟4𝜋𝐺subscript𝜌0superscriptsubscript𝑟𝑠3𝑟delimited-[]subscript𝑟𝑠subscript𝑟𝑠𝑟subscript𝑟𝑠subscript𝑟𝑠𝑟1v_{c}^{2}(r)=4\pi G\rho_{0}\frac{r_{s}^{3}}{r}\left[\frac{r_{s}}{r_{s}+r}-\ln{% \left(\frac{r_{s}}{r_{s}+r}\right)-1}\right]italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) = 4 italic_π italic_G italic_ρ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT divide start_ARG italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_s end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_r end_ARG [ divide start_ARG italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_s end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_s end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_r end_ARG - roman_ln ( divide start_ARG italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_s end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_s end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_r end_ARG ) - 1 ] (37)

and has been plotted in Fig. 5.

Refer to caption
Figure 5: Galactic circular velocity of Milky Way under the scenario when ΦΦ\Phiroman_Φ is dominated by the galactic bulge (blue) and the NFW halo (orange), respectively. The inset figure shows the region near the center in units of parsec.

Appendix B LISA sensitivity

To determine the sensitivity of the LISA towards the detection of a given binary, we follow the fitting relations provided in Ref. [36]. The LISA noise power spectral density Snsubscript𝑆𝑛S_{n}italic_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT has a contribution from two sources

Sn(f)=Snins(f)+SnWDB(f),subscript𝑆𝑛𝑓superscriptsubscript𝑆𝑛ins𝑓superscriptsubscript𝑆𝑛WDB𝑓S_{n}(f)=S_{n}^{\rm{ins}}(f)+S_{n}^{\rm{WDB}}(f)\,,italic_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_f ) = italic_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_ins end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_f ) + italic_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_WDB end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_f ) , (38)

where the former term results from the instrument noise while the latter results due to the confusion noise from the population of unresolved galactic white dwarf binaries. Explicitly,

Snins(f)=superscriptsubscript𝑆𝑛ins𝑓absent\displaystyle S_{n}^{\rm{ins}}(f)=italic_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_ins end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_f ) = A1(POMS+2[1+cos2(f/f)]Pacc(2πf)4)subscript𝐴1subscript𝑃OMS2delimited-[]1superscript2𝑓subscript𝑓subscript𝑃accsuperscript2𝜋𝑓4\displaystyle A_{1}\left(P_{\rm{OMS}}+2\left[1+\cos^{2}\left(f/f_{\star}\right% )\right]\frac{P_{\rm{acc}}}{(2\pi f)^{4}}\right)italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_OMS end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + 2 [ 1 + roman_cos start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_f / italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⋆ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ] divide start_ARG italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_acc end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG ( 2 italic_π italic_f ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG ) (39)
×(1+610f2f2),absent1610superscript𝑓2superscriptsubscript𝑓2\displaystyle\times\left(1+\frac{6}{10}\frac{f^{2}}{f_{\star}^{2}}\right)\,,× ( 1 + divide start_ARG 6 end_ARG start_ARG 10 end_ARG divide start_ARG italic_f start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⋆ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG ) ,

where

A1=103L2,L=2.5Gm,f=19.09mHz,formulae-sequencesubscript𝐴1103superscript𝐿2formulae-sequence𝐿2.5Gmsubscript𝑓19.09mHz\displaystyle A_{1}=\frac{10}{3L^{2}},\,L=2.5{\rm Gm},\,f_{\star}=19.09\rm{mHz% }\,,italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = divide start_ARG 10 end_ARG start_ARG 3 italic_L start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG , italic_L = 2.5 roman_Gm , italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⋆ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 19.09 roman_mHz , (40)
POMS=(1.5×1011m)2[1+(2mHzf)4]Hz1,subscript𝑃OMSsuperscript1.5superscript1011m2delimited-[]1superscript2mHz𝑓4superscriptHz1\displaystyle P_{\rm{OMS}}=(1.5\times 10^{-11}{\rm~{}m})^{2}\left[1+\left(% \frac{2\rm{mHz}}{f}\right)^{4}\right]\rm{Hz}^{-1}\,,italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_OMS end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = ( 1.5 × 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 11 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_m ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT [ 1 + ( divide start_ARG 2 roman_m roman_H roman_z end_ARG start_ARG italic_f end_ARG ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ] roman_Hz start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ,
Pacc=(3×1015ms2)2[1+(0.4mHzf)2]subscript𝑃accsuperscript3superscript1015superscriptms22delimited-[]1superscript0.4mHz𝑓2\displaystyle P_{\rm acc}=\left(3\times 10^{-15}\rm{~{}ms}^{-2}\right)^{2}% \left[1+\left(\frac{0.4\rm{mHz}}{f}\right)^{2}\right]italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_acc end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = ( 3 × 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 15 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_ms start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT [ 1 + ( divide start_ARG 0.4 roman_mHz end_ARG start_ARG italic_f end_ARG ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ]
×[1+(f8mHz)4]Hz1.absentdelimited-[]1superscript𝑓8mHz4superscriptHz1\displaystyle\quad\quad\times{\left[1+\left(\frac{f}{8\rm{mHz}}\right)^{4}% \right]\rm{Hz}^{-1}}\,.× [ 1 + ( divide start_ARG italic_f end_ARG start_ARG 8 roman_m roman_H roman_z end_ARG ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ] roman_Hz start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT .

Additionally,

SnWDB=A2f7/3efα+βfsin(κf)superscriptsubscript𝑆𝑛WDBsubscript𝐴2superscript𝑓73superscript𝑒superscript𝑓𝛼𝛽𝑓𝜅𝑓\displaystyle S_{n}^{\rm{WDB}}=A_{2}f^{-7/3}e^{-f^{\alpha}+\beta f\sin(\kappa f)}italic_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_WDB end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 7 / 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_f start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_α end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + italic_β italic_f roman_sin ( italic_κ italic_f ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT (41)
×[1+tanh(γ(fkf))]Hz1,absentdelimited-[]1𝛾subscript𝑓𝑘𝑓superscriptHz1\displaystyle\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\times\left[1+\tanh\left(\gamma\left(f_{% k}-f\right)\right)\right]\,\,\rm{Hz}^{-1}\,,× [ 1 + roman_tanh ( italic_γ ( italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - italic_f ) ) ] roman_Hz start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ,

where depending on magnitude of Tobssubscript𝑇obsT_{\rm obs}italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_obs end_POSTSUBSCRIPT the parameters A2,α,β,κ,γ,fksubscript𝐴2𝛼𝛽𝜅𝛾subscript𝑓𝑘A_{2},\alpha,\beta,\kappa,\gamma,f_{k}italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_α , italic_β , italic_κ , italic_γ , italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT have been interpolated from Table 1 of Ref. [36].

Appendix C Additioanl figuers

Includes Fig. 6 and 7.

Refer to caption
Refer to caption
Refer to caption
Figure 6: Same as Fig. 1 and 2 but with q=0.1𝑞0.1q=0.1italic_q = 0.1 (M=50M𝑀50subscript𝑀direct-productM=50M_{\odot}italic_M = 50 italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊙ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT).
Refer to caption
Refer to caption
Figure 7: Same as Fig. 3 but with q=0.1𝑞0.1q=0.1italic_q = 0.1.

References