The discovery of a population of superluminous supernovae (SLSNe), with peak luminosities a factor of ~100 brighter than normal SNe (typically SLSNe have M_V <-21), has shown an unexpected diversity in core-collapse supernova properties. Numerous mod
els have been postulated for the nature of these events, including a strong interaction of the shockwave with a dense circumstellar environment, a re-energizing of the outflow via a central engine, or an origin in the catastrophic destruction of the star following a loss of pressure due to pair production in an extremely massive stellar core (so-called pair instability supernovae). Here we consider constraints that can be placed on the explosion mechanism of Hydrogen-poor SLSNe (SLSNe-I) via X-ray observations, with XMM-Newton, Chandra and Swift, and show that at least one SLSNe-I is likely the brightest X-ray supernovae ever observed, with L_X ~ 10^45 ergs/s, ~150 days after its initial discovery. This is a luminosity 3 orders of magnitude higher than seen in other X-ray supernovae powered via circumstellar interactions. Such high X-ray luminosities are sufficient to ionize the ejecta and markedly reduce the optical depth, making it possible to see deep into the ejecta and any source of emission that resides there. Alternatively, an engine could have powered a moderately relativistic jet external to the ejecta, similar to those seen in gamma-ray bursts. If the detection of X-rays does require an engine it implies that these SNe do create compact objects, and that the stars are not completely destroyed in a pair instability event. Future observations will determine which, if any, of these mechanisms are at play in superluminous supernovae.
We present millimetre (mm) and submillimetre (submm) photometry of a sample of host galaxies of Gamma Ray Bursts (GRBs), obtained using the MAMBO2 and SCUBA bolometer arrays respectively. These observations were obtained as part of an ongoing project
to investigate the status of GRBs as indicators of star formation. Our targets include two of the most unusual GRB host galaxies, selected as likely candidate submm galaxies: the extremely red (R-K approx 5) host of GRB 030115, and the extremely faint (R>29.5) host of GRB 020124. Neither of these galaxies is detected, but the deep upper limits for GRB 030115 impose constraints on its spectral energy distribution. As a framework for interpreting these data, and for predicting the results of forthcoming submm surveys of Swift-derived host samples, we model the expected flux and redshift distributions based on luminosity functions of both submm galaxies and GRBs, assuming a direct proportionality between the GRB rate density and the global star formation rate density. We derive the effects of possible sources of uncertainty in these assumptions, including an anticorrelation between GRB rate and the global average metallicity.
GRB 050911, discovered by the Swift Burst Alert Telescope, was not seen 4.6 hr later by the Swift X-ray Telescope, making it one of the very few X-ray non-detections of a Gamma-Ray Burst (GRB) afterglow at early times. The gamma-ray light-curve shows
at least three peaks, the first two of which (~T_0 - 0.8 and T_0 + 0.2 s, where T_0 is the trigger time) were short, each lasting 0.5 s. This was followed by later emission 10-20 s post-burst. The upper limit on the unabsorbed X-ray flux was 1.7 x 10^-14 erg cm^-2 s^-1 (integrating 46 ks of data taken between 11 and 18 September), indicating that the decay must have been rapid. All but one of the long bursts detected by Swift were above this limit at ~4.6 hr, whereas the afterglows of short bursts became undetectable more rapidly. Deep observations with Gemini also revealed no optical afterglow 12 hr after the burst, down to r=24.0 (5-sigma limit). We speculate that GRB 050911 may have been formed through a compact object (black hole-neutron star) merger, with the later outbursts due to a longer disc lifetime linked to a large mass ratio between the merging objects. Alternatively, the burst may have occured in a low density environment, leading to a weak, or non-existent, forward shock - the so-called naked GRB model.
