1 / 12

Blazars as beamlights to probe the EBL

Nijil Mankuzhiyil (INFN, Udine U.) Massimo Persic (INAF+INFN, Trieste) Fabrizio Tavecchio (INAF, Milano). Blazars as beamlights to probe the EBL. Problem: EBL, emitted SED: both unknown ! Aim: measure n EBL ( z ) at different redshifts

lefty
Download Presentation

Blazars as beamlights to probe the EBL

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. Nijil Mankuzhiyil (INFN, Udine U.) Massimo Persic (INAF+INFN, Trieste) Fabrizio Tavecchio (INAF, Milano) Blazars as beamlights to probe the EBL Problem: EBL, emitted SED: both unknown ! Aim: measure nEBL(z) at different redshifts  local normalization, cosmic evolution Tools: homogeneous set @ different redshifts v one same model (parameters) at all z blazars (e.g., High-Peaked BLs [HBLs] ) Emission physics: simple  one-zone SSC emission v synchrotron + compton, PL electron spectrum B.Lott’s talk

  2. One-zone SSC: model parameters: Plasma blob:R, B, dj Electron pop:n0, a1, a2, Ebr, Emin, Emax Tavecchio + 2001 ApJ, 554, 725 Kino+ 2002

  3. The method (1) T T T T T T T T Simultaneous multi-nobs’s: voptical+X-rays+HE g-ray + VHE g-ray Model SED:use SED w/out (EBL-affected) VHEg-ray data:  c2-minimization  SSC model (check structure of multi-D parameter space) simulated data

  4. …the method (2) Extrapolate model SED into VHE regime  “intrinsic” blazar VHE emissionObserved vs “intrinsic” emission  tgg(E,z) s i m u l a t e d d a t a simulated data Assume (concordance) cosmology  nEBL(e,zj) (parametric: å anjen) simulated data

  5. Checking the method … locally PKS 2155-304 Aharonian+ 2009 ApJ, 696, L150 z = 0.12 SSC param’s gmin= 1 gbr1 = 1.4´104 gbr2 = 2.3´105 gmax= 3´106 a1= 1.3 a2= 3.2 a3= 4.3 B = 0.018 G R = 1.5´1017cm d = 32 FERMI Swift ATOM HESS RXTE EBL de-absorbed … caveat… … assumed electron spectrum is triple-PL …

  6. … our effort data: Aharonian+ 2009 ApJ, 696, L150 SSC parameters from c2 minim. ne=150 cm-3 gmin= 1 gbr = 2.9´104 gmax= 8´105 a1 = 1.8 a2 = 3.8 B = 0.056 G R = 3.87´1016 cm d = 29.2 ATOM Swift, RXTE Fermi H.E.S.S. observed R Dt »12 hr  OK

  7. l l l p r e l i m i n a r y l l

  8. Malkan & Stecker 1998 p r e l i m i n a r y l l Stecker & de Jager 1998 l l Stecker 1999 z=0.12

  9. Franceschini + 2008 p r e l i m i n a r y z=0.3 z=0.1 l l z=0.03 l z=0.01 l z=0.003 z=0.12

  10. For EBL photon energies e > 2(mec2)2 / E (1-cosf) b(E,e,f) º [1 – 2(mec2)2 / Ee (1-cosf)]1/2 s(E,e,f) Heitler 1960 s(E,e)max by (for head-on collision) » 2.5 Eg, TeV mm IACT: 0.05 – 100 TeV 0.12 – 250 mm Optical depth 0 £z£zs e > 2(mec2)2 / [Ex(1+z)2] xº1-cosf t(Eg,z) = òdl/dz òx/2 ònEBL(e) s(2xEe/(1+z)2) de dx dz Stecker 1971 = c/(1+z) dtlookback/dz cosmology nEBL(en,zj) = å an,jen nEBL(e,z) unknown  parameterize … work in progress … Stecker 1999

  11. Conclusion Cons: lindirect measurement of EBL lmethod depends on blazar model Pros: lunbiased method lno assumptions on EBL, blazar SED lSSC well tested locally on different emission states Check: lon local (z=0.12) blazar PKS 2155-304 ldeduced t’s within reasonable range OK Aim: l to probe EBL out to z»1 with Fermi/LAT + current/upcoming enhanced IACTs ( + x-ray, optical tel’s ) (  long live Fermi to see CTA / AGIS !! ) Need: lsimultaneous multi-n obs’s of several blazars in shells of z l possibly each source seen @ different levels of activity (to increase statistics)  plan simultaneous obs’s involving IACTs + Fermi + X-rays + optical

  12. Thanks

More Related