* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Slides from the fourth lecture
Dyson sphere wikipedia , lookup
Non-standard cosmology wikipedia , lookup
Physical cosmology wikipedia , lookup
Structure formation wikipedia , lookup
H II region wikipedia , lookup
Dark energy wikipedia , lookup
History of supernova observation wikipedia , lookup
Hubble Deep Field wikipedia , lookup
Timeline of astronomy wikipedia , lookup
Lambda-CDM model wikipedia , lookup
Corvus (constellation) wikipedia , lookup
Observational astronomy wikipedia , lookup
Stellar evolution wikipedia , lookup
Star formation wikipedia , lookup
The Nearest Galaxies LMC February 22, 1987 Image Courtesty of Mike Bessell SMC SN 1987A (Type II) Image Courtesty of David Mailn, AAO The Next Type II Supernova? Image Courtesty of Mike Bessell Betelgeuse Image Courtesty of Mike Bessell Massive Stars • Stars with masses greater than 8-10 Msun the stars are able to fuse elements beyond Oxygen into heavier elements by adding 4He to each nucleus. • However, 56Fe has a minimum binding energy, when you add an 4He to it, you get a nucleus heavier than the sum of its parts, and so there is no energy release (energy is consumed!) • This leads to a situation where not only is there no longer any heat being supplied by nuclear reactions (and these supply pressure to counteract gravity), The core actually starts to cool as 56Fe+4He reactions occur. The denser it gets, the cooler it gets, and a runaway collapse occurs, where the core of the star overcomes electron degeneracy, and collapses to about 10 km where neutron degeneracy takes over. Core Collapse SNe Forming Neutron Star Oxygen nBurning n n Burning n Silicon n n Iron Burning n n The Evolution of a SN II-P transition releaseray ofto shock nebular gamma deposition radioactive adiabatic cooling reheating shock breakout phase deposited energy 16 18 20 0 50 100 SN 92ba 150 <1 >1 <1 H >1 <1 H >1 <1 H >1 <1 H >1 •progenitor loses mass? Wolf Rayet Binary Interaction •progenitor surrounded by dense Circumstellar Material? massive star loses H envelope via wind. Stars seem to trap gamma rays on radioactive tail indicating large mass... Quite Rare Wolf Rayet Stars? associated with GRBs? 0 20 40 60 massive star loses envelope via binary interaction. Stars do not seem to trap gamma rays on radioactive tail indicating low mass... If incomplete envelope loss IIb If very complete envelope loss Ic if just through Hydrogen, Ib 0 10 20 Filippenko 30 1992am Single Stars (but 2 out of 3 binaries) Lots of Iron………………………………….Iron Poor 10 solar masses 40 100 260 THE DISCOVERY Gamma-Ray Bursts (GRBs) Short (few seconds) bursts of 100keVfew MeV were discovered accidentally by Klebesadal, Strong, and Olson in 1967 using the Vela satellites (defense satellites sent to monitor the outer space treaty). The discovery was reported for the first time only in 1973. There was an “invite prediction”. S. Colgate was asked to predict • as a scientific excuse for GRBs the launch of the Vela Satellites 1970s….The Data-free years (aka..Theorists run wild) • 1974: The NY Texas Symposium – Meegan - GRB distribution is isotropic. – Ruderman - First theoretical review: > 30 models (More models than bursts) None even remotely relevant today. • During the late seventies a consensus formed that GRBs originate on galactic neutron stars. COMPTON-GRO results Duration 0.01-100s Two populations (long and short) ~ 1 BATSE burst per day Non thermal Spectrum (very high energy tail, up to GeV, 500GeV?) Rapid variability (less than 10ms) Compton-GRO 1991-2000: BATSE BATSE on Compton GRO (Fishman et. al.) discovered that the distribution of GRBs is isotropic: Number versus Brightness shows cosmological effects (few fainter ones than Euclidean Space) Two Classes of Events Two populations of GRBs – short and long Anti-correlation with spectral hardness – short and hard (Higher energy), long and soft (lower energy). Internal Shocks Shocks between different shells of the ejected relativistic matter D=cT d=cdT • dT=R/cg2=d/c D/c=T • The observed light curve reflects the activity of the “inner engine”. • To produce internal shocks the source must be active and highly variable over a “long” period. From Piran dT T The Internal-External Fireball Model g-rays Inner Engine Relativistic Wind Internal Shocks Afterglow External Shock OPTICAL FLASH From Piran 1997: Afterglow Discovery The Italian/Dutch satellite BeppoSAX discovered x-ray afterglow on 28 February 1997 (Costa et. al. 97). Immediate discovery of Optical afterglow (van Paradijs et. al 97). The Radio Afterglow of GRB970508 (Frail et. al, 97). Variability: * Scintillations (Goodman, 97; Frail Kulkarni & Waxman 97) Size after one month ~1017cm. Rising Spectrum at low frequencies: Self absorption (Katz & Piran, 97; Frail et al 97) Size after one month ~ 1017cm. Relativistic Motion!!! (but g~2-3since this is a long time after the explosion Afterglow Theory Hydrodynamics: deceleration of the relativistic shell by collision with the surrounding medium (Blandford & McKee 1976) (Meszaros & Rees 1997, Waxman 1997, Sari 1997, Cohen, Piran & Sari 1998) Radiation: synchrotron (Sari, Piran & Narayan 98) Clean, well defined problem. Few parameters: E, n, p, (fraction of energy in electrons and magnetic fields)ee, eB From Piran initial shell ISM Comparison with Observations (Sari, Piran & Narayan 98; Wijers & Galama 98; Granot, Piran & Sari 98; Panaitescu & Kumar 02) Powerlaws in both frequency And in time are predicted, unfortunately, they do not predict well the powerlaw indices… n F (n , t ) F0 (t0 ,n 0 ) n 0 Radio to X-ray t t0 GRB 990123 - The Prompt Optical Flash ROTSE’s detection of a 9th magnitude prompt optical flash z=1.6 (M_V=-36…as bright as the entire Universe for 50seconds) … if isotropically emitted The Initial Lorentz Factor The observations of early afterglow from GRB 990123 lead to several independent estimates of the initial Lorentz factor (Sari &Piran, 1999): gi~200 (The most relativistic motion known in the Universe) From Piran “Direct” Energy Measurements In bursts with afterglow for which the host galaxy was observed we could estimate the total energy “directly” using the redshift of the host galaxy. GRB970508 971214 z=0.865 3.418 5.5x1051 2.1x1053 980703 0.966 6x1052 990123 1.6 1.4x1054 000131 4.5 1.2x1054 000418 1.119 8.2x1052 000926 2.037 3x1053 1.4x1054=Mc2 all in gamma Rays! The Resolution of the Energy Crisis Etot - The total energy eg - Fraction of Energy in gamma rays Egiso - Observed (iostropic) g-ray energy Etot eg Eg iso -1 Beaming: Eg- Actual g-ray energy Etot e g Eg e g -1 -1 2 2 Eg iso JETS and BEAMING Particles remain within initial cone Radiation is “beamed” into a narrow cone Particles spreads sideways quickly Radiation is “beamed” into a large cone g-1 Jets with an opening angle expand forwards until g-1 and then expand sideways rapidly lowering quickly the observed flux (Piran, 1995; Rhoads, 1997; Wijers et al, 1997; Panaitescu & Meszaros 1998). GRB 990510 Jet Break! 1 0.8522.18 tbreak = 1.2 days jet angle = 4o From Harrison et al 1999 Revised Energy Estimates • Frail et al, 01: Eg 5 1050ergs FWHM ~ 5 • GRBs release a constant amount of energy ~1051 ergs – about same as a SN What makes a GRB? • Occur in Galaxies which are rapidly forming stars • Rapidly rotating Massive Stars… – Collapsar Model (MacFayden & Woosley) – Big Star that rapidly rotate should make blackholes and shoot jets out in the same way that a forming star does SN 1998bw! Very Energetic SN, Within hours of GRB Brightest Radio SN ever – Measurements indicate relativistic Ejecta… But 10000 times fainter than normal GRBs Berger et al. Berger et al. GRB 030329 SSO 40inch observations Matheson et al. Rates and Distances One long GRBs per 104 (/0.1)-2 years per galaxy. Beaming factor One observable long burst per year at D~600 Mpc (z~0.1) if you could cover entire sku Should be one mis-directed burst per year at D~135 (/0.1) 2/3 Mpc (z=0.03). Do all GRBs Have SNe? GRB 020405 • Collapsar models allow jet to be produced, where the shock will not have enough energy to disrupt star, (whole shooting match goes into Black Hole) • Presently, there is no GRB observed as faint as the faintest Hypernovae – but some are close! GRB010921 What are Short-Hard Bursts • Counts verus brightness tests indicated they occur at lower redshift then long-soft bursts and have less energy. • Best guess for last decade has been NeutronStar Neutron Star mergers. The Frenetic Pace of GRB-science • Mon 09 May 05 04:00:33 UT – BAT Position +12h 36m 13s +29d 00' 01" +/- 3’ • Mon 09 May 05 04:04:01 UT – BAT light curve • 05/05/09 05:03:23 UT – Reported as a Short Hard Burst – 1st one for SWIFT • 05/05/09 06:29:23 UT – XRT position 12:36:13.6 +28:58:58.6 +/- 6” • 05/05/09 06:44:52 GMT – Nothing in Rband down to 21st mag from La Palma • 05/05/09 07:21:27 GMT – Bloom et al. Noted there is a big 2mass Elliptical near the XRT position using WIYN+Paritel • 05/05/09 07:38:23 GMT – Frail and Soderberg No radio with VLA • 05/05/09 08:44:13 GMT – Bloom et al. report Point source in XRT position • 05/05/09 09:22:11 GMT – Prochaska report z of big galaxy from Keck-I z=0.22 – The spectral features are consistent with an early type galaxy with no ongoing star formation. If the association is confirmed, this would be the first GRB host that is an early-type, hinting that GRBs of short duration may be due to progenitors that are unrelated to current and on-going star formation. • 05/05/09 09:36:49 GMT • – Cenko et al (Keck-II) Inside the XRT error circle, we find four sources, three of which are marginal detections to 26th magnitude in g,r 5/10/2005 18:20:00 GMT – HST triggered • 24 May 2005 18:27:28 GMT – Closing in on a Short-Hard Burst Progenitor: Constraints from Early-Time Optical Imaging and Spectroscopy of a Possible Host Galaxy of GRB 050509b – Authors: J. S. Bloom, J. X. Prochaska, D. Pooley, C. H. Blake, R. J. Foley, S. Jha, E. Ramirez-Ruiz, J. Granot, A. V. Filippenko, S. Sigurdsson, A. J. Barth, H.-W. Chen, M. C. Cooper, E. E. Falco, R. R. Gal, B. F. Gerke, M. D. Gladders, J. E. Greene, J. Hennanwi, L. C. Ho, K. Hurley, B. P. Koester, W. Li, L. Lubin, J. Newman, D. A. Perley, G. K. Squires, W. M. Wood-Vasey Comments: ApJ, in press. 35 pages, 9 figures – The localization of the short-duration, hard-spectrum GRB 050509b was a watershed event. Thanks to the nearly immediate relay of the GRB position by Swift, we began imaging the GRB field 8 minutes after the burst and continued for the following 8 days. No convincing optical/infrared candidate afterglow or supernova was found for the object. We present a re-analysis of the XRT afterglow and find an absolute position that is ~4" to the west of the XRT position reported previously. Close to this position is a bright elliptical galaxy with redshift z=0.2248, about 1' from the center of a rich cluster of galaxies. Based on positional coincidences, the GRB and the bright elliptical are likely to be physically related. We thus have discovered evidence that at least some short-duration, hard-spectra GRBs arise at cosmological distances. However, while GRB 050509b was underluminous compared to longduration GRBs, we demonstrate that the ratio of the blast-wave energy to the gamma-ray energy is consistent with that of long-duration GRBs. Based on this analysis, on the location of the GRB (40 +- 13 kpc from a bright galaxy), on the galaxy type (elliptical), and the lack of a coincident supernova, we suggest that there is now observational consistency with the hypothesis that short-hard bursts arise during the merger of a compact binary. We limit the properties of a Li-Paczynski ''mini-supernova.'' Other progenitor models are still viable, and additional rapidly localized bursts from the Swift mission will GRB 050505b: Keck/Subaru Kulkarni et al. GRB 050724 Berger et al. Keck Laser Guide Star AO Kulkarni & Camer GRB050813 After the dust has settled + 4 more bursts • • • • • 3/4 bursts at z<0.3 3/4 bursts elliptical 1/4 bursts spirals optical afterglow in 2 out of 5 cases, but No supernova to very faint level in all cases Summary: 050509b, 050709, 050724 Comparison to Long-Soft Bursts Conclusions • Short hard bursts occur in spiral and elliptical galaxies (cf SN Ia) • The energy release of short hard bursts is smaller than those of long duration bursts (duration of engine) • Median redshift of detectable sample is 0.2 Ramifications • Short time scale of events indicates small size (ct < 50ms=15000km) of Engine • No supernova light indicates very small ejected mass with almost no radioactive output • No star formation eliminates any massive star progenitors • Lack of afterglow indicates very clean interstellar medium – – – – – – Best Guess is a Neutron Star – Neutron Star/Blackhole merger. Gives reasonable agreement with the rates Gives right time scale for energy release Occurs in right galaxies Has right amount of energy No expected supernova – just afterglow if enough interstellar medium GRBs as Beacons for the Universe • Long Soft GRBs should follow the star formation rate. • LS-GRBs and their afterglow can be detected even from Z~10. • Some LS-GRBs are from Z>5 ??? • LS-GRBs are ideal beacons to explore the early universe – at the time of “first light”. How-bright is bright... Gamma Ray Bursts are the Brightest Objects in the Universe (e.g. GRB990123 MR=-36 mag) Associated with explosions of Massive stars Their underlying continuum is smooth power law Useful beacons for probing very high-z galaxies and re-ionisation (i.e. Gunn-Peterson effect) Studying Normal Galaxies at z>4 GRB050505 GRB050730 Ly Si IV OI C IV Berger et al. personal communication Chen et al. 2005 GRB050904 • SWIFT GRB – • No r/i detection with Palomar 60inch at – t+3h33m R > 20. – t+3h49m i > 19.7 • Bright J=17.5 object seen with SOAR @ 3 hrs • Subsequent photometry sees it in i (barely),z,and Y, J,H,K. A Missed Opportunity • Labour Day Holiday USA • Spectrum taken at 3.5 days (Z=21.5) showed z=6.28 • At 10 minutes, was J=13, or MJ=-35.9 • At 100 minutes was still J=16.5 or MJ=-32.4 But there are still more outhere Opportunities for South Africa. South Africa owns this time zone for the southern sky. Need to coordinate smaller telescopes with the SALT. SALT at a disadvantage because it must wait for GRB to transit into observable ring, but there will still be opportunities. Two Key Science areas •What are objects which explode into GRBs (need spectroscopy of z<0.5 objects at regular intervals between t=5 to 50 days) •Spectroscopy of objects at 5<z<7. Got to get onto them when they are young. Follow up the objects we find in Australia? (Need red arm of the spectrograph) •How many GRBs as a function of z. Get redshifts of GRBs and their host galaxies. Other Considerations: In next 3 years, Swift with provide GRBs over ¼ of useful sky for optical/IR follow-up. No real planned mission post Swift to feed SALT or other facilities.