1 / 40

Electromagnetic Models of Gamma Ray Bursts: A Tutorial

Electromagnetic Models of Gamma Ray Bursts: A Tutorial. Roger Blandford KIPAC Stanford With thanks to Jonathan Granot. Outline. Some Reasons to Consider EM Models Variations on a Theme General Principles Formal Approaches Sketch EM Model for Long GRBs. Physics not phenomenology.

azizi
Download Presentation

Electromagnetic Models of Gamma Ray Bursts: A Tutorial

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Electromagnetic Models of Gamma Ray Bursts:A Tutorial Roger Blandford KIPAC Stanford With thanks to Jonathan Granot

  2. Outline • Some Reasons to Consider EM Models • Variations on a Theme • General Principles • Formal Approaches • Sketch EM Model for Long GRBs Physics not phenomenology Santorini

  3. Some reasons to consider EM models • Fireball model presents some difficulties • Hard to create large entropy outflows • Like the early universe S(GRB)~106k; S(COS) ~1010k • Hard to make high Mach number flows • M ~ G~300 • Real flows shock and dissipate long before reaching this level of organization • Pairs may annihilate and radiation may decouple from the jet before it accelerates the baryons to ultrarelativistic speed • Within ~10 stellar radii • If magnetic field is invoked to create the jet power, how do you get rid of it so efficiently? • Must become less important than a small admixture of protons Santorini

  4. More reasons to consider EM models • Other collimated, relativistic, bipolar outflows are not radiation-dominated; electro/hydromagnetic models are most commonly invoked now. • Pulsar wind nebulae • AGN jets • Galactic superluminal sources • Magnetic fields provide active collimation • Hoop stress • Some AGN jets (eg Pictor A) are extremely collimated Santorini

  5. Pulsar Wind Nebulae • Spinning, magnetized neutron stars release energy electromagnetically • Polar jets are common and an appealing interpretation is that you see X-ray synchrotron emission from rapidly cooling electrons where the electrical currents flow

  6. Pictor A Magnetic Pinch?

  7. Electromagnetic Models • Basic hypothesis is that the energy is released electromagnetically by a central spinning object and then transported to the main emission site where it is dissipated in the form of electrons and positrons which radiated Synchrotron and inverse Compton radiation • Applies to all essentially ultrarelativistic outflows

  8. Variations on a theme • GRB Sources • Spinning black holes • Up to 29 % of the mass of a hole is extractable • Relativistic accretion disks/tori • More energy may come from the disk than the hole • Millisecond magnetars • Can release their spin energy in minutes as required Santorini

  9. More Variations • Energy transport • AC transmission • e.g. chaotic electromagnetic fields with length scale ~ 100-1000 km, characteristic of the source variation • E~B as relativistic • Dynamically like radiation-dominated outflow • Scalar pressure • No active collimation • Natural particle acceleration mechanisms Santorini

  10. More Variations • Energy transport • Global DC transmission • Large scale order in magnetic field • Large scale current circuits • Toroidal magnetic field dominates parallel field far from the source • If flux is conserved, parallel field ~ (Area)-1 • If current conserved toroidal field ~ (Area)-1/2 • E ~ B still and energy carried by Poynting flux ~ B2c • Center of momentum frame moves relativistically • Need equipartition particle pressure along axis to oppose hoop stress of toroidal field in comoving frame. Santorini

  11. More Variations • Energy Transport • Local DC transmission • Episodic ejection of magnetically-confined jet segments • No large scale current circuits • Relativistic motion • Changing polarity of parallel field reflects changing polarity of disk field • Disk may eject loops of toroidal field or be launched and collimated by vertical field Santorini

  12. General Principles • Generation • Collimation • Propagation • Dissipation Santorini

  13. Generation • Disks advect magnetic field and generate it through the magnetorotational instability. • Most electromagnetic source models are some sort of unipolar induction mechanism; the details vary • Generally, a rotating magnetic field generates an EMF ~ W B, which drives a current • The relevant impedance is generally that of free space under relativistic, electromagnetic conditions - ~ 100W. • The power is roughly EMF x Current x Coefficients • A current description (plus boundary conditions) is equivalent to an electromagnetic field description. Both descriptions can convey insight Santorini

  14. Generation B  M Unipolar Induction • Rules of thumb: • F ~ B R2 ; V ~W F • I~ V / Z0 ; P ~ V I PWN AGN GRB B1012 G 104 G 1016 G n10 Hz 10-5 Hz 103 Hz R 106 cm 1015 cm 106 cm V 1016.5 V 1020.5 V 1022.5 V I 1014.5 A 1018.5 A 1020.5 A P 1031 W 1039 W1043 W (W =107 erg/s)

  15. Simulations are transforming our understanding • MHD • 3D • GR • Plot of magnetic energy density Villiers et al Santorini

  16. Consequences of large EMFs • Particle energy density / EM energy density • Can be as small as rL/L ~ mec2/eV • In practice, it won’t be! • Vacuum is an excellent conductor thanks to QED • Electric field  rapid breakdown • accelerate electron, scatter photon, create pair and repeat • This ensures that B2 - E2 > 0 • It is hard to produce entropy under these conditions • Not a criticism of neutrino models!

  17. Dipolar vs Quadrupolar Current Flow • It has generally been assumed that disk field has odd parity and the currents are even parity • If large disks trap only a tiny fraction of the radial field present at their outer radii, then the opposite may be closer to the truth. Santorini

  18. Asymmetric Outflows/Jets B I X Even Field Odd Current Odd Field Even Current Hybrid Mixed Parity Can you measure the toroidal field pattern? Santorini

  19. Collimation • Rotating stars (or gas clouds) can provide hydrodynamic collimation of outflow • “Twin exhaust” mechanism • Magnetic collimation is much more powerful and will operate in spherically symmetric surroundings • Principles illustrated by cylindrically symmetric jet Santorini

  20. Simple Model of Cylindrical Jet I I Pext r • Current I flows along jet walls radius r • Return current flows along cylinder radius R • Magnify confining pressure: Pjet=Pext(R/r)2 • Equivalently, cavity adjusts to R=(2pPext)-1/2I • Pjet is mixture of particles and tangled field Pjet R Santorini

  21. Propagation • As can be seen from the preceding table, putative electromagnetic sources generate 1022.5 V EMFs (ample for the most energetic cosmic rays!). • Most fireball models implicitly assume that the associated current ~ 1020.5 A shorts out and dissipates close to the source and creates heat. • Electromagnetic jet models propose that the current flows out into the emission region and we observe the dissipation - like a luminous light filament. Santorini

  22. Magnetic field Nonthermal emission is ohmic dissipation of current flow? 1018 not 1017 A DC not AC Electromagnetic models of extragalactic radio sources and pulsar wind nebulae

  23. Propagation • Jets terminate, sharing their momentum with a shocked external medium • In the case of GRBs the jet only lasts for minutes and becomes a spherical cap while the external shock remains relativistic • AGN and PWN jets evolve differently but the underlying physical processes should be similar Santorini

  24. Dissipation • Relativistic particles by shock Fermi acceleration. • This is demonstrably true in the solar system and probably the case in the SNR, though the details are controversial • This is problematic in the case of GRBs • If shocks are relativistic and especially pair dominated simulations do not exhibit acceleration [Spitkovsky?] • Strong fields  weak shocks • Other dissipation mechanisms worth considering Santorini

  25. Cylindrical Jet (again) • Jets are likely to have a relativistic velocity gradient G(r) and there has to be internal pressure to balance magnetic hoop stress • Force balance: • Electromagnetic and fluid jet powers • Rough equipartition of energy Santorini

  26. Dissipation • Relativistic electromagnetic jets are likely pair-dominated • They are also likely to be locally unstable, though velocity gradients may convey global stability • The best candidate acceleration mechanism seems to be to develop a turbulence spectrum of EM modes cascading down to short wavelengths where they are absorbed by stochastic particle acceleration • Needs simulation! Santorini

  27. Other Particle Acceleration Mechanisms • Internal shocks are ineffectual • Shear flow in jets • Full potential difference is available for particles accelerated via polarization drift along E • UHECR?? • Fast/intermediate wave spectrum • Nonlinear wave acceleration (Blandford 1973) • Charge starvation (Thompson & Blaes 1997) • Force-free allows E>B - catastrophic breakdown

  28. Let there be Light • Faraday • Maxwell • Definition • Initial Condition  Maxwell Tensor, Poynting Flux Santorini

  29. Electromagnetic Velocity U U I • L-C Circuit • Near Solenoid, E < B • U = (E x B)/B^2 < 1 • Near Capacitor, E > B • U = (E x B)/E^2 < 1 • Resistive wire E||E x B into wire where the energy dissipated • Astrophysical Sources • V ~ 10 15 - 1022 Volts • QED effects E < B • Cosmic sources have inductance. • Velocity of frame in which E = 0 ExB U Santorini +Q -Q U

  30. Force-Free Limit of Relativistic MHD • Ignore inertia of matter s =UM/UP>>G2, 1 • Electromagnetic stress acts on electromagnetic energy density • Fast and intermediate wave characteristics • Simpler than RMHD Santorini

  31. Electromagnetic GRB Model • Gravitational binding energy  EM energy flux • Organized, anisotropic, axisymmetric current flow/Poynting flux • VEM=E/B ~ c • Electromagnetic acceleration G ~100, M ~ 1 • Pairs combine, gs escape, E,B dominate • Poynting flux catches shocked CSM ~ 1016cm • Current dissipation-> pairs ->GRB • Relativistic internal motions -> variability • Sweep up CSM at ~ 1017cm • Field incorporated from magnetic piston, electron shock acceleration • Anisotropic afterglow

  32. Sketch EM Model of Long Bursts • I Energy Release • II Bubble Inflation • III Shell Expansion • IV Blast Wave

  33. I Energy Release • Long bursts • Spinning Black Hole + Torus • Millisecond Magnetar • LEM ~ R2B2c • B ~ 1014 G,n~ 3 kHz, E ~ 1052 erg, ts ~ 100 s ~ 106 tdyn • V ~ 1022.5 V , I ~ 1020.5 A • Stationary, axisymmetric DC current flow • Short bursts admit more possibilities • e.g. coalescing neutron stars

  34. II Bubble Inflation • Collapsar/hypernova within stripped star, R ~ 1011 cm • Surface return current, surface stress ~ (I/Rsinq)2 • Anisotropric expansion in absence of rotation • Dissipation inevitable if V < c/ln(qmax/qmin) ~ 0.1c; otherwise not • cf PWN • Rationale for fireball model? • Compute evolution given envelope dynamics; tbreakout ~ 10 s • Biconical expansion outside star dictated by CSM • Shell forms when r > cts ~ 3 x 1012 cm; ultrarelativistic expansion • Thermal precursor measure of dissipation? Toroidal magnetic field self-collimating G ~104 Pairs combine, gs escape

  35. Underlying geometry &  scalings • B ~ 2I/cr, r = Rsin • L ~ R2B2c  (sin)-2 •  E(sin)-2 ~ -2 •  E ~ 2E~ const (as observations imply; Frail et al. 2001) I B B I Santorini

  36. r III Shell Expansion Shocked Circumstellar Medium • rGRB ~ G2cts ~ (Lts2/rc)1/4 ~ 1016 cm • V = ExB/B2;G ~ 100 • Piston thickness cts ~ 3x1012 cm • Instability  variable g-ray emission • Facilitates escape of hardest g-rays t  C ts q r

  37. Simple derivation of radial scaling • The EM outflow travels essencially at the speed of light (i.e. EM = (1-U2)-1/2≫  = CD) • Energy emitted at time te catches up with the CD at ti ~ R(te)/1-ti ~ te/[1-(ti)] ~ te2(ti) •  E(ti) ~ Lti/2(ti) ~ A(cti)3-kc22(ti) ;rRk • (ti) ~ (L/Ac5-kti2-k)1/4for te < ts (ti < Rad/c) • Rad ~ (Lts2/Ac)1/(4-k) ~ RGRB (forward shock becomes adiabatic) • (Rad) ~ (L/Ac5-kts2-k)1/2(4-k) Santorini

  38. IV Blast Wave • rGRB < r < rNR ~ (Lts/rc2)1/3 ~ 1018 cm;G ~ 100-2 • Achromatic break when G ~ q-1 • Magnetic field mixed in from CD? • Particles accelerated at shock? • Constant energy per decade in  • Standard qualitative interpretation of afterglow spectra • More variation than in shock models •  is important parameter • Axial currents  short bursts? • Becomes more spherical at r > rNR q

  39. Possible Tests • Early afterglow evolution • Shape -VLBI • Thermal precursors; no reverse shock • Polarization -constant PA? • GLAST not AMANDA; UHECR • Orientation statistics, orphan afterglows, XRF • Fluctuation statistics

  40. Summary • EM GRB models different from fluid models • Circumvent hydrodynamic “middleman” • Closer to models of other relativistic outflows • Many interesting physical processes, poorly understood • Simulation methods developing rapidly • Proceed with care when drawing conclusions from observations! Santorini

More Related