Tidal disruption events
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 27

Tidal Disruption Events PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 176 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Tidal Disruption Events. Andrew Levan University of Warwick. r T = R * (M CO / M * ) 1/3. Bound, falls back. Unbound, escapes. r T = R * (M CO / M * ) 1/3. Bound, falls back. Unbound, escapes. WD, NS, BH. r T = R * (M CO / M * ) 1/3. Bound, falls back. Unbound, escapes.

Download Presentation

Tidal Disruption Events

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.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Tidal disruption events

Tidal Disruption Events

Andrew Levan

University of Warwick


Tidal disruption events

rT =R* (MCO / M*)1/3

Bound, falls back

Unbound,

escapes


Tidal disruption events

rT =R* (MCO / M*)1/3

Bound, falls back

Unbound,

escapes

WD, NS, BH


Tidal disruption events

rT =R* (MCO / M*)1/3

Bound, falls back

Unbound,

escapes

Asteroid, planet, star (MS, WD, RG, NS)

WD, NS, BH


Tidal disruption events

rT =R* (MBH / M*)1/3

Rs ~ 2 GM / c2


Tidal disruption events

rT =R* (MBH / M*)1/3

tmin ~ R*3/2 MBH1/2

Duration of event:

WD = hours

MS = months - years

RG = decades - centuries


Tidal disruption events around massive black holes

Tidal disruption events – around massive black holes

Probe of the existence of massive BHs in faint galaxies, even globular clusters?

Timescales much more rapid than in AGN to probe accretion physics

Contribution to the AGN LF

Reverberation mapping of circumnuclear material

Signposts of gravitational wave sources

Signatures of merging BHs (disruption rates 1 per decade)

Possible accelerators of ultra-high energy cosmic rays


Finding tdes

Finding TDEs

Nuclear X-ray and/or optical flares

Hot blackbody components (UV, soft X-ray spectrum)

Characteristic decay t-5/3

Rates 10-4-5 /yr/L* galaxy (0.1-1% of core collapse SNe rate)


Except

Except……

Nuclear AGN and multiple variable X-ray sources.

Often relatively poor X-ray cadence (don’t realise until it is late)

X-ray’s often give poor positions compared to optical/radio

Nuclear supernovae more common than TDEs

Some UV bright at early times, extinction always a concern.

Nuclei are bright, and often excluded from optical transient searches due to difficulties in subtractions

Contributions from disc, wind etc complicate the lightcurve.


Early work x ray s

Early work(X-ray’s)

Halpern, Gezari & Komossa 2004 ApJ 604 572

Komossa & Bade 1999 A&A 343 775


Recent work x ray s

Recent work(X-ray’s)

Saxton et al. 2012 A&A 541 106


Recent work optical

Recent work (optical)

Gezari et al. 2012 Nature 485 217

Wavelength (A)


Recent work optical1

Opt

UV

Recent work (optical)

ASASSN-14ae (200 Mpc)

HST (13 June 2014)

Holoein et al. 2014 arXiv:1405.1417


Why not both

PS1-10jh

Why not both?

NUV

X-ray

Just disc/wind temperature?

Different components at different times?

Lodato & Rossi 2011 MNRAS 410 359


Tidal disruption events

ULGRB

TDE?

LGRB

SGRB

SGR

Galactic Sources

Levan et al. 2014 ApJ 781 13


Tidal disruption events

Swift J1644+57

Levan et al. 2011 Science 333 199

Levan et al. 2011 Science 333 199, Bloom et al. 2011 Science 333 202


Tidal disruption events

Levan et al. 2011, Cenko et al. 2012, Brown et al. in prep


In context

In context

Levan et al. 2011, Cenko et al. 2012


Host galaxies

Host Galaxies

Levan et al. 2011 Science 333 199

All 3 events consistent with nuclei of their hosts


Tidal disruption events

Bloom et al 2011 Science 333 202


Relativistic outflow

Swift J1644+57

Relativistic outflow

Zauderer et al. 2011 Nature 476 425


Switch off

Swift J1644+57

Switch-off


Switch off1

Swift J2058+0516

Switch-off


Implications

Implications

A unique probe of galactic nuclei

Miller & Gultekin 2011 ApJ 738 13; Berger et al. 2012 arXiv 1112.1697

Host galaxies with MB <-18 have massive black holes in their cores


Jets are rare

Jets are rare

3 relativistic TDEs at z=0.35, 0.89, 1.19

All well detected by Swift

No other compelling candidates in BAT archive

Jetted TDE rate ~10-6“classical TDEs”

Jet angles much larger than this

Requirements for jet creation unclear


Tidal disruption events

PS1-10jh

D23H-1

D3-13

D1-9

PS1-11af

ASASSN-14ae

PTF09ge

PTF09axc

PTF09djl

NGC5905

RXJ1242-1119

RXJ1420+5334

NGC3599

SDSSJ1323+4827

TDXFJ1347-3254

SDSSJ1311-0123

2MMMi J1847-6317

SDSSJ1201+3003

Swift J1644+57

Swift J2058+0516

Swift J1112-8238

Ultra-long GRBs?

UV/optical

X-ray

Relativistic

PTF10iya

Are these all TDEs? Why are they so diverse?

A naming convention ala SNe is urgently needed (NT-X 2014A?)


Summary and next steps

Summary and next steps

  • TDEs are exceptionally useful astrophysical probes

  • But: Candidates to date are extremely diverse.

    • X-ray detected events have poor optical follow-up

    • Many optically detected events don’t have detectable X-ray’s

    • Jetted events appear to be extremely rare

  • We still need to understand the physical mechanisms at play to cleanly identify TDEs from other transients, and deploy them as probes.

  • Multiwavelength follow-up in close to real time is essential

    • Rule out SNe

    • Tie events to SMBH as tightly as possible

    • Map emission processes


  • Login