1 / 19

The prompt optical emission in the Naked Eye Burst

R. Hascoet with F. Daigne & R. Mochkovitch ( Institut d’Astrophysique de Paris) Kyoto − Deciphering then Ancient Universe with Gamma-Ray Bursts. The prompt optical emission in the Naked Eye Burst. Modeling the « Naked Eye Burst ». ( Racusin et al. 2008 ).

ciel
Download Presentation

The prompt optical emission in the Naked Eye Burst

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. R. Hascoet with F. Daigne & R. Mochkovitch (Institutd’Astrophysique de Paris)Kyoto − DecipheringthenAncientUniversewithGamma-RayBursts The prompt optical emission in the Naked Eye Burst

  2. Modeling the « Naked Eye Burst » (Racusin et al. 2008) Observations : a cosmological naked eye burst- For the first time, optical light curve during the whole prompt emission high temporal resolution. - huge radiated energy : Eg,iso = 1.3×1054 erg (20 keV – 7 MeV) - redshift :z = 0.937- V magnitude peak : mV,max = 5.3 (bright as 107 galaxies) Huge optical brightness – big challenge for the different models – Light curves (gamma & optical) g-ray spectrum optical ✕

  3. Different scenarios already proposed Scenario 1 (single zone) : Synchrotron-Self Compton radiation from a single electron population • Optical : synchrotron • Gamma : first IC scattering on the synchrotron photons(Racusin et al. 2008)(Kumar & Panaitescu 2008) • (Kumar & Narayan 2009) ✕ No self-abs Self-abs Scenario 2 (single zone) : Synchrotron radiation from two electron populations • Optical : synchrotron – mildly relativistic electron pop. • Gamma : synchrotron – highly relativistic electron pop. ✕ No self-abs Self-abs These two scenarios face big problems : energy crisis, ….(Zou, Piran & Sari 2008)

  4. Scenario 3 : Huge optical brightness due to a highly variable jet Log(R) [m] Internal Shock model • Variability during the ejection : “fast” shells catch up with “slow” shells (G ≈ 100) • Shocks : magnetic field amplification particle acceleration (relativistic electrons) • Radiation (g-rays) from the electrons : Synchrotron – IC • We use a multi-shell model as proposed by Daigne & Mochkovitch 1998 Huge optical brightness due to a highly variable jet ( Lorentz Factor : Gmax/Gmin≈ 5 - 10) (see also Yu, Wang, Dai 2009) Synchrotron radiation from shock-accelerated electrons in multi-shocked regions - gamma component : violent shocks - optical component : mild shocks

  5. Huge optical brightness due to a highly variable jetInternal Shock model framework violent shockcontribution Proposed scenario : 1 electron population in multiple regions – Synchrotron emission - optical component : mild shocks - gamma component : violent shocks mild shock contribution ✕ No self-abs Self-abs initial profile Characteristic photon energy vs. radius Spectrum – Asymptotic Synch.(Sari, Piran & Narayan 1998) Ekin,iso = 5⋅1055 erg ee = 1/3 eB = 1/3 z = 10-2 Optical light curve Gamma light curve Ekin,iso = 5⋅1055 erg ee = 1/3 eB = 1/3 z = 10-2 Ekin,iso = 5⋅1055 erg ee = 1/3 eB = 1/3 z = 10-2 Ekin,iso = 5⋅1055 erg ee = 1/3 eB = 1/3 z = 10-2 Ekin,iso = 5⋅1055 erg ee = 1/3 eB = 1/3 z = 10-2 Ekin,iso = 5⋅1055 erg ee = 1/3 eB = 1/3 z = 10-2

  6. Huge optical brightness due to a highly variable jetInternal Shock model framework violent shockcontribution Proposed scenario : 1 electron population in multiple regions – Synchrotron emission - optical component : mild shocks - gamma component : violent shocks mild shock contribution ✕ initial profile Characteristic photon energy vs. radius Spectrum – Ad hoc Ekin,iso = 5⋅1055 erg ee = 1/3 eB = 1/3 z = 10-2 Optical light curve Gamma light curve

  7. (gamma & optical) Summary The Naked Eye Burst : why is it so bright in the optical domain ? • The high optical brightness of the Naked Eye Burst is very challenging for GRB models. • Proposed scenario : the initial outflow is highly variable. A potential problem : the shape of the gamma-ray spectrum in some cases. Due to a high dispersion in the characteristic energies of the emitted photons Reproduced observational features (with a fair probability : Monte Carlo analysis) : • High optical flux : - mainly built up by the milder shocks • The optical light curve is less variable than the gamma-ray one : - G of the shocked material is smaller for mild shocks (Dtobs ≈ R/2G2c) • The optical light curve begins after the gamma-ray one : - the optical synchrotron emission of the shocks with smaller radii is self-absorbed • The optical light curve ends after the gamma-ray one : - same reason as for (2.) - late shocks enhance the delay, in some cases (Racusin et al. 2008) The precise predicted fraction of optically bright bursts depends on the unknown central engine exact properties

  8. Statisticalapproach – Monte Carlo Simulation – the physics of the central engineisstillunclear – What is the probability of having a burst such as the “naked eye burst” ? Whatwouldbe the probability of an eventsuch as the NakedEyeBurst ? Gvalues are uniformly distributed between 200 or 800 G varies on timescales 0.5s andis forced to be either 200 or 800 (with equal probability) Series of 500 runs 66% cases brighter than GRB080319B Example of the − optical mean flux − N N Cumulative fraction 16% cases brighter than GRB080319B Cumulative fraction

  9. Modeling Internal Shocks • Discretisation of the jet in N shells • Successive collisions between these shells mimic the propagation of shock waves • We follow the evolution of the physical conditions in shocked regions

  10. Modeling Internal Shocks • Discretisation of the jet in N shells • Successive collisions between these shells mimic the propagation of shock waves • We follow the evolution of the physical conditions in shocked regions Shock2 Shock1

  11. Modeling Internal Shocks • Discretisation of the jet in N shells • Successive collisions between these shells mimic the propagation of shock waves • We follow the evolution of the physical conditions in shocked regions Shock2 Shock1

  12. Modeling Internal Shocks • Discretisation of the jet in N shells • Successive collisions between these shells mimic the propagation of shock waves • We follow the evolution of the physical conditions in shocked regions Shock2 Shock1

  13. Modeling Internal Shocks • Discretisation of the jet in N shells • Successive collisions between these shells mimic the propagation of shock waves • We follow the evolution of the physical conditions in shocked regions Shock2 Shock1

  14. Modeling Internal Shocks • Discretisation of the jet in N shells • Successive collisions between these shells mimic the propagation of shock waves • We follow the evolution of the physical conditions in shocked regions Shock2 Shock1

  15. Modeling Internal Shocks • Discretisation of the jet in N shells • Successive collisions between these shells mimic the propagation of shock waves • We follow the evolution of the physical conditions in shocked regions Shock1

  16. Modeling Internal Shocks • Discretisation of the jet in N shells • Successive collisions between these shells mimic the propagation of shock waves • We follow the evolution of the physical conditions in shocked regions Shock1

  17. Modeling Internal Shocks • Discretisation of the jet in N shells • Successive collisions between these shells mimic the propagation of shock waves • We follow the evolution of the physical conditions in shocked regions Shock1

  18. Modeling Internal Shocks • Discretisation of the jet in N shells • Successive collisions between these shells mimic the propagation of shock waves • We follow the evolution of the physical conditions in shocked regions Shock1

  19. Modeling Internal Shocks • Discretisation of the jet in N shells • Successive collisions between these shells mimic the propagation of shock waves • We follow the evolution of the physical conditions in shocked regions

More Related