Bruce GRB Wiki

User Tools

Site Tools

Trace:
public:bggrbinfo

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
Next revision 		Previous revision
public:bggrbinfo [2021/07/09 18:09]
bruce [Correlation Studies] 		public:bggrbinfo [2023/09/12 12:04] (current)
bruce [X-rays]
Line 8: Line 8:
 ^GRB^Comment^ ^GRB^Comment^
 |080319b| **Prototype?** Naked Eye Burst, probably optically brightest, best optical light curve, proposed two-component jet (Racusin+08| |080319b| **Prototype?** Naked Eye Burst, probably optically brightest, best optical light curve, proposed two-component jet (Racusin+08|
-|11025A|**Prototype?** Very long burst, optical correlates better with MeV than KeV (Guiriec+16)|+|110205A|**Prototype?** Very long burst, optical correlates better with MeV than KeV (Guiriec+16)|
 |130427A|Largest E_ISO ever measured; 5.65e54  erg  (1 keV-10MeV); Fermi and Swift  -  Ref: GCN 14576 E_iso; Swift GCN 14448| |130427A|Largest E_ISO ever measured; 5.65e54  erg  (1 keV-10MeV); Fermi and Swift  -  Ref: GCN 14576 E_iso; Swift GCN 14448|
 |130603B| - short, Bright burst| |130603B| - short, Bright burst|
Line 119: Line 119:
  
 === Alternative Classifications to the Short vs. Long Classification Scheme: === === Alternative Classifications to the Short vs. Long Classification Scheme: ===
 +
 +At the GRB50 meeting there was a lot of talk of long GRBs apparently with Knovae, longs with no SNe, etc.  So the distinction is not that clear. 
 +
 +Here is a Girlanda paper asking if they are so different: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214404815000129
    
  
Line 175: Line 179:
 To understand the various spectral components and the theoretical slopes, please see the section on [[public:emission|Emission Mechanism Theory]].  To understand the various spectral components and the theoretical slopes, please see the section on [[public:emission|Emission Mechanism Theory]]. 
  
-GRB 110205A: http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.0283 This paper looks like this burst 110205a might be one of the best observed ever, rivaling the Naked Eye Burst 080319B.+==== GRB 110205A ==== 
 + 
 +GRB 110205A was a 200 s duration GRB from z=2.2 that has really good data. 
 + 
 +http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.0283 This paper looks like this burst 110205a might be one of the best observed ever, rivaling the Naked Eye Burst 080319B. This paper claims it puts together multi-wavelength and makes FS+RS fit everything.  
 + 
 +==== GROND Prompt Measurement (but long delayed) ==== 
 + 
 +Eliot+13  arXiv:1312.5099 is a conference paper NOT PEER-REVIEW PUBLISHED about GRB121217 which had a delayed episode 700 seconds later!!!  Who knows how applicable this is to regular GRB, who knows if this is totally bogus but...   
 + 
 +Listen to this incredibly useful summary from abstract, "Only in a handful of cases has it been possible obtain simultaneous coverage of the prompt emission in a multi-wavelength regime (gamma-ray to optical), as a result of: observing the field by chance prior to the GRB (e.g. 080319B/naked-eye burst), long-prompt emission (e.g., 080928, 110205A) or triggered on a pre-cursor (e.g., 041219A, 050820A, 061121). [...And to this they now add 121217]" 
 + 
 + 
 +==== Other Papers ==== 
 +   
 + 
 +This oddly short little paper gives a kind of list of "all" prompt optical, and may be useful: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0273117710003972# 
  
-Other Papers:  This oddly short little paper gives a kind of list of "all" prompt optical, and may be useful: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0273117710003972# 
  
 BIggest collected study of prompt is Kopac+13 http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/bib_query?arXiv:1305.6897, mostly ground-based. BIggest collected study of prompt is Kopac+13 http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/bib_query?arXiv:1305.6897, mostly ground-based.
Line 239: Line 259:
 This paper  http://arxiv.org/abs/1306.3960v1  claims that SGRB are from Kilonova.  The evidence is maybe a little thin, but at least it's an interesting reference. This paper  http://arxiv.org/abs/1306.3960v1  claims that SGRB are from Kilonova.  The evidence is maybe a little thin, but at least it's an interesting reference.
  
 +Later, however, [[public:gw170817|GW170817]] confirmed that NS-NS coalescence and resulting SNe are associated with SHGRB. 
  
  
Line 462: Line 482:
 Spectra:  Spectra: 
 Mostly GRB have BAND function spectra, which can only sort-of be explained by a synchrotron emission mechanism. However, optical never quite fits these predictions. **ELIMINATED:** Synch. Self Compton (SSC) is eliminated in all observations, as Fermi-LAT has never seen the high energy upscattered part of that emission.  Mostly GRB have BAND function spectra, which can only sort-of be explained by a synchrotron emission mechanism. However, optical never quite fits these predictions. **ELIMINATED:** Synch. Self Compton (SSC) is eliminated in all observations, as Fermi-LAT has never seen the high energy upscattered part of that emission. 
 +
 +
 +===== Emission Time Evolution =====
 +
 +Of course prompt may be dominant in early emission but there could be evolution and phases of emission. 
 +
 +Lots of GRB are dominated by Reverse Shock, especially in the optical, rather than forward shock. This is most noticeable by smooth and round light curve structure, rather than spiky 980123b like light curve structure. 
 +
 +IN GRB 160625B. Nat Astron 2, 69–75 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41550-017-0309-8, the authors identified different gamma-ray spectra for a precursor 200 s before the burst, a blackbody or black body!!!, then band function during the usual burst, then a cutoff power law during time-extended emission 300-600 s after main burst. 
  
  
public/bggrbinfo.1625854148.txt.gz · Last modified: 2021/07/09 18:09 by bruce

Page Tools

Donate Powered by PHP Valid HTML5 Valid CSS Driven by DokuWiki