Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userTesting the blast wave model with Swift GRBs
265
0
0.0
(
0
)
Authors
P.A. Curran
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
The complex structure of the light curves of Swift GRBs has made the identification of breaks, and the interpretation of the blast wave caused by the burst, more difficult than in the pre-Swift era. We aim to identify breaks, which are possibly hidden, and to constrain the blast wave parameters; electron energy distribution, p, density profile of the circumburst medium, k, and the continued energy injection index, q. We do so by comparing the observed multi-wavelength light curves and X-ray spectra of our sample to the predictions of the blast wave model. We can successfully interpret all of the bursts in our sample of 10, except two, within this framework and we can estimate, with confidence, the electron energy distribution index for 6 of the sample. Furthermore we identify jet breaks in a number of the bursts. A statistical analysis of the distribution of p reveals that, even in the most conservative case of least scatter, the values are not consistent with a single, universal value. The values of k suggest that the circumburst density profiles are not drawn from only one of the constant density or wind-like media populations.
rate research
Read More
The complex structure of the light curves of Swift GRBs has made their interpretation and that of the blast wave caused by the burst, more difficult than in the pre-Swift era. We aim to constrain the blast wave parameters: electron energy distribution, p, density profile of the circumburst medium, k, and the continued energy injection index, q. We do so by comparing the observed multi-wavelength light curves and X-ray spectra of a Swift sample to the predictions of the blast wave model. We can successfully interpret all of the bursts in our sample of 10, except two, within the framework of the blast wave model, and we can estimate with confidence the electron energy distribution index for 6 of the sample. Furthermore we identify jet breaks in half of the bursts. A statistical analysis of the distribution of p reveals that, even in the most conservative case of least scatter, the values are not consistent with a single, universal value. The values of k suggest that the circumburst density profiles are not drawn from only one of the constant density or wind-like media populations.
One of the most prominent, yet controversial associations derived from the ensemble of prompt-phase observations of gamma-ray bursts (GRBs) is the apparent correlation in the source frame between the peak energy Epeak) of the nu-F(nu) spectrum and the isotropic radiated energy, Eiso. Since most gamma-ray bursts (GRBs) have Epeak above the energy range (15-150 keV) of the Burst Alert Telescope (BAT) on Swift, determining accurate Epeak values for large numbers of Swift bursts has been difficult. However, by combining data from Swift/BAT and the Suzaku Wide-band All-Sky Monitor (WAM), which covers the energy range from 50-5000 keV, for bursts which are simultaneously detected, one can accurately fit Epeak and Eiso and test the relationship between them for the Swift sample. Between the launch of Suzaku in July 2005 and the end of April 2009, there were 48 gamma-ray bursts (GRBs) which triggered both Swift/BAT and WAM and an additional 48 bursts which triggered Swift and were detected by WAM, but did not trigger. A BAT-WAM team has cross-calibrated the two instruments using GRBs, and we are now able to perform joint fits on these bursts to determine their spectral parameters. For those bursts with spectroscopic redshifts, we can also calculate the isotropic energy. Here we present the results of joint Swift/BAT-Suzaku/WAM spectral fits for 91 of the bursts detected by the two instruments. We show that the distribution of spectral fit parameters is consistent with distributions from earlier missions and confirm that Swift bursts are consistent with earlier reported relationships between Epeak and isotropic energy. We show through time-resolved spectroscopy that individual burst pulses are also consistent with this relationship.
We report the first Atacama large millimeter/submillimeter array observations of MCG-03-58-007, a local ($z=0.03236pm0.00002$, this work) AGN ($L_{AGN}sim10^{45}~rm erg~s^{-1}$), hosting a powerful X-ray ultra-fast ($v=0.1c$) outflow (UFO). The CO(1-0) line emission is observed across $sim18,$kpc scales with a resolution of $sim 1,rm kpc$. About 78% of the CO(1-0) luminosity traces a galaxy-size rotating disk. However, after subtracting the emission due to such rotating disk, we detect with a S/N=20 a residual emission in the central $sim 4,$kpc. Such residuals may trace a low velocity ($v_{LOS}=170,rm km,s^{-1}$) outflow. We compare the momentum rate and kinetic power of such putative molecular outflow with that of the X-ray UFO and find $dot{P}_{out}/dot{P}_{UFO}=0.3pm0.2$ and $dot{E}_{mol}/dot{E}_{UFO}sim4cdot10^{-3}$. This result is at odds with the energy-conserving scenario suggested by the large momentum boosts measured in some other molecular outflows. An alternative interpretation of the residual CO emission would be a compact rotating structure, distinct from the main disk, which would be a factor of $sim10-100$ more extended and massive than typical circumnuclear disks revealed in Seyferts. However, in both scenarios, our results rule out the hypothesis of a momentum-boosted molecular outflow in this AGN, despite the presence of a powerful X-ray UFO. [Abridged]
Since GRBs fade rapidly, it is important to publish accurate, precise positions at early times. For Swift-detected bursts, the best promptly available position is most commonly the X-ray Telescope (XRT) position. We present two processes, developed by the Swift team at Leicester, which are now routinely used to improve the precision and accuracy of the XRT positions reported by the Swift team. Both methods, which are fully automated, make use of a PSF-fitting approach which accounts for the bad columns on the CCD. The first method yields positions with 90% error radii <4.4 90% of the time, within 10--20 minutes of the trigger. The second method astrometrically corrects the position using UVOT field stars and the known mapping between the XRT and UVOT detectors, yielding enhanced positions with 90% error radii of <2.8 90% of the time, usually ~2 hours after the trigger.
Using Gaussian Mixture Model and Expectation Maximization algorithm, we have performed a density estimation in the framework of $T_{90}$ versus hardness ratio for 296 Swift/BAT GRBs with known redshift. Here, Bayesian Information Criterion has been taken to compare different models. Our investigations show that two instead of three or more Gaussian components are favoured in both the observer and rest frames. Our key findings are consistent with some previous results.
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
