Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byJamie Sorsby Modified over 10 years ago
1
Testing the blast wave model with Swift GRBs Peter A. Curran Mullard Space Science Laboratory, UCL with RLC Starling, AJ van der Horst, A Kamble, RAMJ Wijers, M de Pasquale & M Page
2
pre-Swift versus Swift GRBs
3
pre-Swift (GRB 990510) (Kuulkers et al. 2000) X-ray Optical
4
pre-Swift (GRB 990510) Swift era(GRB 070107) (Evans et al. 2007) (Kuulkers et al. 2000) X-ray Optical X-ray only pre-Swift versus Swift GRBs
5
pre-Swift (GRB 990510) Swift era(GRB 070107) (Evans et al. 2007) (Kuulkers et al. 2000) X-ray Optical pre-Swift versus Swift GRBs Does pre-Swift theory work? X-ray only
6
The blast wave model (CXC/M. Weiss)
7
The blast wave model (CXC/M. Weiss) k – circumburst density profile (ρ ~ r -k )
8
The blast wave model (CXC/M. Weiss) k – circumburst density profile (ρ ~ r -k ) q – continued energy injection index (E ~ t q )
9
The blast wave model (CXC/M. Weiss) p – electron energy distribution (Fermi; dN/dE ~ E -p ) k – circumburst density profile (ρ ~ r -k ) q – continued energy injection index (E ~ t q )
10
Synchrotron spectra (Sari et al. 1998)
11
Synchrotron spectra Optical / X-ray (Sari et al. 1998)
12
Derivation of p
13
α ➝ p( α, k,q) & accuracy of temporal fit ⇒ multiple options Derivation of p
14
α ➝ p( α, k,q) & accuracy of temporal fit ⇒ multiple options β opt ➝ p( β opt,E B-V ) ⇒ multiple options Derivation of p
15
α ➝ p( α, k,q) & accuracy of temporal fit ⇒ multiple options β opt ➝ p( β opt,E B-V ) ⇒ multiple options β X ➝ p( β X,N H ) ⇒ multiple options Derivation of p
16
α ➝ p( α, k,q) & accuracy of temporal fit ⇒ multiple options β opt ➝ p( β opt,E B-V ) ⇒ multiple options β X ➝ p( β X,N H ) ⇒ multiple options ⇒ above/below synchrotron cooling frequency Derivation of p
17
Sample of 10 Swift GRB afterglows
18
(GRB 060729) X-ray Optical
19
Consistent with the blast wave model? (GRB 060729) X-ray Optical Sample of 10 Swift GRB afterglows
20
Blast wave interpretations Compare possible multi-wavelength interpretations with blast wave †... ( † Nousek et al. 2006; Starling et al. 2008)
21
Blast wave interpretations Compare possible multi-wavelength interpretations with blast wave †... 8/10 consistent with blast wave 4/10 unambiguous jet breaks 6/10 calculated k 3/10 require q ; 3/10 don’t 6/10 unambiguous p 4 above cooling break 2 below cooling break ( † Nousek et al. 2006; Starling et al. 2008) (Curran et al. 2009)
22
k
23
Circumburst density profile, k (Curran et al. 2009)
24
Circumburst density profile, k Wind
25
(Curran et al. 2009) Wind ISM Circumburst density profile, k
26
(Curran et al. 2009) Wind ISM Circumburst density profile, k Not consistent with only one of ISM or Wind
27
q
28
Energy injection index, q (Curran et al. 2009) E ~ t q
29
Energy injection index, q (Curran et al. 2009) E ~ t q
30
Energy injection index, q (Curran et al. 2009) E ~ t q
31
Energy injection index, q (Curran et al. 2009) E ~ t q Required but inconclusive... so far
32
p
33
Distribution of p (Curran et al. 2009)
34
Distribution of p Not consistent with a single, universal value
35
Distribution of p
36
βXβX
38
Distribution of spectral index, β below cooling break above cooling break
39
Distribution of spectral index, β (Curran et al. in prep; data from Evans et al. 2009)
40
Distribution of spectral index, β (Curran et al. in prep; data from Evans et al. 2009)
41
Distribution of spectral index, β (Curran et al. in prep; data from Evans et al. 2009) Most X-rays above cooling break?
42
Conclusions 8 out of 10 GRBs favour the blast wave model* (*or at least don't disfavour it) k is not consistent with only one of ISM or Wind q is required in some bursts, inconclusive so far p is not consistent with a single, universal value Most X-rays above the cooling break?
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.