1 / 15

Are all grbs of merger origin? FJV, Zhang, o’brien , troja , 727, 109 (2011)

Francisco J Virgili Prompt GRB Conference, 2011 March 5, 2011; Raleigh, NC. Are all grbs of merger origin? FJV, Zhang, o’brien , troja , 727, 109 (2011). Short: smaller energy budget? Energy injection?

khan
Télécharger la présentation

Are all grbs of merger origin? FJV, Zhang, o’brien , troja , 727, 109 (2011)

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. Francisco J Virgili Prompt GRB Conference, 2011 March 5, 2011; Raleigh, NC Are all grbs of merger origin?FJV, Zhang, o’brien, troja, 727, 109 (2011)

  2. Short: smaller energy budget? Energy injection? Eichler et al. (1989), Paczynski (1986), Narayan et al. (1992) propose merger scenario as possible progenitor Supported by host observations, lack of SN

  3. Short-hard and long-soft • Nomenclature based on the observational properties of the burst • Type I and Type II • Based on the intrinsic progenitor of the burst • Type I = compact object (e.g. merger progenitor) • Type II = massive star (e.g. stellar core collapse) Intrinsic v. empirical

  4. Short burst Long Burst (Evans et al 2007) sGRB + Extended Emiss. (long-short?) Barthelmy 2007 High z long burst, but intrinsically short? (Zhang et al. 2009)

  5. GRB 080916C (Abdo et al. 2009) Zhang et al. (2009)

  6. Observational evidence supports a merger model as possible progenitor Tricky nomenclature…but boils down to: Are all short-hard bursts consistent with a merger progenitor? I. Short hard bursts as mergers

  7. Monte carlo simulations • Test the underlying luminosity function, redshift distribution (including the merger time delay) and validity of the assumption that SHBs are of type I origin by comparison with the observational sample through multiple criteria: • 1D z and L • 2D z-L • log N – log P (BATSE) • log N – log P (Swift)

  8. Merger timescale distribution • Constant + scatter (SD = 0.3, 1.0) (Nakar and Gal-yam, 2006; Guetta and Piran, 2006) • Logarithmic (Piran 1992, Guetta and Piran 2006) • Population Synthesis (Belczynski et al. 2008, 2007)

  9. Merger timescale distribution • No delay • Mix (Population synthesis + Type II population) • Use to gauge the amount of contamination from different burst populations

  10. Results: No delay • Extreme case: All SHB are Type II (related to massive stars) • Small area of consistency with L-z constraints, LNLP incompatible • Need SOME delay

  11. Results: constant mtd • Large delay (>2 Gyr) models not favored by most LNLP constraints and not supported by host galaxy observations • Smaller (esp. 2 Gyr model) passes all tests

  12. Results: pop synthesis/log • Twin model(Belczynski 2007) • Regular and logarithmic do not

  13. Results: Mixed models • Both fully merger and no delay models ruled out by current observations of short-hard bursts • 100% type II model (as modeled in FJV 2009 and Liang et al 2007) ruled out in L-z consideration but consistent with slope of BATSE log N-log P • Consider a model with mixing of a type I population (with a merger time delay that follows the twin population synthesis distribution) and a population that follows the Type II luminosity function

  14. Mixed models Population synthesis mix Twin model mix

  15. Constant delay ~2 GYR (plus scatter) • At odds with Galactic NS-NS binary observations • Different origin? (e.g. AIC – (Qin et al. 1998, Dermer & Atoyan 2006)) • Mixing • High z – High L GRBs Type II? (Zhang et al. 2009) • Off-axis emission? (Lazzati et al. 2010) • 090510 of massive star origin? (Panaitescu 2010) Conclusions

More Related