First Neutrino Point-Source Results From the 22 String Icecube Detector

Abbasi, Rasha; Abdou, Y.; Ackermann, M.; Adams, J. H.; Aguilar, J. A.; Ahlers, M.; Andeen, K.; Auffenberg, J.; Bai, X.; Baker, M. D.; Barwick, S. W.; Bay, R.; Alba, J. L. Bazo; Beattie, K.; Beatty, J. J.; Bechet, S.; Becker, J.; Becker, K.-H.; Benabderrahmane, M. L.; Berdermann, Jens; Berghaus, P.; Berley, D.; Bernardini, E.; Bertrand, Daniel; Besson, D.; Bissok, M.; Blaufuss, E.; Boersma, D. J.; Böhm, C.; Bolmont, J.; Böser, S.; Botner, O.; Bradley, L.; Braun, J.; Breder, D.; Castermans, T.; Chirkin, D.; Christy, B.; Clem, J.; Cohen, S.; Cowen, D. F.; D’Agostino, M. V.; Danninger, M.; Day, C. T.; Clercq, C. De; Demirörs, L.; Depaepe, O.; Descamps, F.; Desiati, P.; Vries-Uiterweerd, G. de; DeYoung, T.; Díaz–Vélez, Juan Carlos; Dreyer, J.; Dumm, J. P.; Duvoort, M. R.; Edwards, W. R.; Ehrlich, R.; Eisch, J.; Ellsworth, R. W.; Engdegård, O.; Euler, S.; Evenson, P. A.; Fadiran, O.; Fazely, A. R.; Feusels, T.; Filimonov, K.; Finley, C.; Foerster, M. M.; Fox, B. D.; Franckowiak, A.; Franke, Robert; Gaisser, T. K.; Gallagher, J.; Ganugapati, R.; Gerhardt, L.; Gladstone, L.; Goldschmidt, A.; Goodman, J. A.; Gozzini, R.; Grant, D.; Griesel, T.; Groß, A.; Grullon, S.; Gunasingha, R. M.; Gurtner, M.; Ha, C.; Hallgren, A.; Halzen, F.; Han, K.; Hanson, K.; Hasegawa, Y.; Heise, J.; Helbing, K.; Herquet, P.; Hickford, S.; Hill, G. C.; Hoffman, K. D.; Hoshina, K.; Hubert, D.; Huelsnitz, W.; Hülß, J.-P.; Hulth, P. O.; Hultqvist, K.; Hussain, Shahid; Imlay, R.; Inaba, M.; Ishihara, A.; Jacobsen, J.; Japaridze, G. S.; Johansson, H.; Joseph, J.; Kampert, K.‐H.; Kappes, A.; Karg, T.; Karle, A.; Kelley, J. L.; Kenny, Patrick; Kiryluk, J.; Kislat, Fabian; Klein, S. R.; Klepser, S.; Knops, S.; Kohnen, G.; Kolanoski, H.; Köpke, L.; Kowalski, M.; Kowarik, T.; Krasberg, M.; Kuêhn, K.; Kuwabara, T.; Labare, M.; Lafèbre, S.; Laihem, K.; Landsman, H.; Lauer, R.; Leich, H.; Lennarz, D.; Lücke, Andreas; Lundberg, J.; Lünemann, J.; Madsen, J.; Majumdar, P.; Maruyama, R.; Mase, K.; Matis, H. S.; McParland, C.; Meagher, K.; Merck, M.; Mészáros, P.; Middell, E.; Milke, N.; Miyamoto, H.; Mohr, Anna; Montaruli, T.; Morse, R.; Movit, S. M.; Münich, K.; Nahnhauer, R.; Nam, J. W.; Nießen, P.; Nygren, D. R.; Odrowski, S.; Olivas, A.; Olivo, M.; Ono, M.; Panknin, S.; Patton, S.; Heros, C. Pérez de los; Petrović, J.; Piegsa, A.; Pieloth, D.; Pohl, A. C.; Porrata, R.; Potthoff, Nils; Price, P. B.; Prikockis, M.; Przybylski, G. T.; Rawlins, K.; Redl, P.; Resconi, E.; Rhode, W.; Ribordy, M.; Rizzo, A.; Rodrigues, J. P.; Roth, Peter M.; Rothmaier, F.; Rott, C.; Roucelle, C.; Rutledge, D.; Ryckbosch, D.; Sander, H. G.; Sarkar, S.; Satalecka, K.; Schlenstedt, S.; Schmidt, T.; Schneider, D.; Schukraft, A.; Schulz, O.; Schunck, M.; Seckel, D.; Semburg, B.; Seo, S. h.; Sestayo, Y.; Seunarine, S.; Silvestri, A.; Slipak, A.; Spiczak, G. M.; Spiering, C.; Stamatikos, M.; Stanev, T.; Stephens, G.; Stezelberger, T.; Stokstad, R. G.; Stoufer, M. C.; Stoyanov, S.; Strahler, E. A.; Straszheim, T.; Sulanke, K.-H.; Sullivan, G. W.; Swillens, Q.; Taboada, I.; Tarasova, O.; Tepe, A.; Ter–Antonyan, S.; Terranova, C.; Tilav, S.; Tluczykont, M.; Toale, P. A.; Tosi, D.; Turčan, D.; Eijndhoven, N. van; Vandenbroucke, J.; Overloop, A. Van; Voigt, B.; Walck, C.; Waldenmaier, T.; Walter, Michael; Wendt, C.; Westerhoff, S.; Whitehorn, N.; Wiebusch, C. H.; Wiedemann, Armin; Wikström, G.; Williams, D. R.; Wischnewski, R.; Wissing, H.; Woschnagg, K.; Xu, X. W.; Yodh, G.

doi:10.1088/0004-637x/701/1/l47

Cited by 47 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As N ∝ 1/D 2 E CR , TDEs that are the closest and most powerful have the best chances to be observed. We hence select a few nearby and energetic TDEs that happened after the first physics run of IceCube in June 2007 (Abbasi et al 2009). Their coordinates and properties are listed in Table 1.…”

Section: Expected Event Numbers Of the Observed Tdesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Can tidal disruption events produce the IceCube neutrinos?

Dai

Fang

2017

Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Powerful jets and outflows generated in tidal disruption events (TDEs) around supermassive black holes have been suggested as possible sites producing high-energy neutrinos, but it is unclear whether such an environment can provide the bulk of the neutrinos detected by the IceCube Observatory. In this work, by considering realistic limits on the non-thermal emission power of a TDE jet and the birth rate of the TDEs with jets pointing towards us, we show that it is hard to use the jetted TDE population to explain the large flux and isotropic arrival directions of the observed TeV-PeV neutrinos. Therefore, TDEs cannot be the dominant sources, unless those without aligned jets can produce wide-angle emission of high-energy neutrinos. Supposing that is the case, we list a few recent jetted and non-jetted TDEs that have the best chance to be detected by IceCube, based on their energetics, distances, and directions. A spatial and temporal association of these predicted events with the IceCube data should provide a decisive test on TDEs as origin of the IceCube neutrinos.

show abstract

Section: Expected Event Numbers Of the Observed Tdesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Can tidal disruption events produce the IceCube neutrinos?

Dai

Fang

2017

Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The Karlsruhe Tritium Neutrino Experiment (KATRIN) is another experiment aimed at measuring the electron neutrino mass with a precision of 0.2 eV [331]. The ANTARES detector [332] is a directional neutrino telescope aimed to observe neutrinos from the cosmos in the southern hemisphere, whereas IceCube [333] detects neutrinos from the North. The list of neutrino detectors is impressive and it is hard to make justice to their contribution to physics in this limited space.…”

Section: Electron Capture On 7 Bementioning

confidence: 99%

Frontiers in nuclear astrophysics

Bertulani

Kajino

2016

Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics

109

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The synthesis of nuclei in diverse cosmic scenarios is reviewed, with a summary of the basic concepts involved before a discussion of the current status in each case is made. We review the physics of the early universe, the proton to neutron ratio influence in the observed helium abundance, reaction networks, the formation of elements up to beryllium, the inhomogeneous Big Bang model, and the Big Bang nucleosynthesis constraints on cosmological models. Attention is paid to element production in stars, together with the details of the pp chain, the pp reaction, 3 He formation and destruction, electron capture on 7 Be, the importance of 8 B formation and its relation to solar neutrinos, and neutrino oscillations. Nucleosynthesis in massive stars is also reviewed, with focus on the CNO cycle and its hot companion cycle, the rp-process, triple-α capture, and red giants and AGB stars. The stellar burning of carbon, neon, oxygen, and silicon is presented in a separate section, as well as the slow and rapid nucleon capture processes and the importance of medium modifications due to electrons also for pycnonuclear reactions. The nucleosynthesis in cataclysmic events such as in novae, X-ray bursters and in core-collapse supernovae, the role of neutrinos, and the supernova radioactivity and light-curve is further discussed, as well as the structure of neutron stars and its equation of state. A brief review of the element composition found in cosmic rays is made in the end.

show abstract

“…Unfortunately, M82 is at high declination (sin δ ≈ 0.93), where IceCube's sensitivity is relatively weak (Abbasi et al 2009b). Even with a full year of IceCube-80, our most optimistic models predict that M82 is ∼5 times too faint to be observed.…”

Section: What Neutrinos and Tev γ -Rays Can Tell Usmentioning

confidence: 99%

Diffuse Hard X-Ray Emission in Starburst Galaxies as Synchrotron From Very High Energy Electrons

Lacki

Thompson

2012

ApJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The origin of the diffuse hard X-ray (2-10 keV) emission from starburst galaxies is a long-standing problem. We suggest that synchrotron emission of 10-100 TeV electrons and positrons (e ± ) can contribute to this emission, because starbursts have strong magnetic fields. We consider three sources of e ± at these energies: (1) primary electrons directly accelerated by supernova remnants, (2) pionic secondary e ± created by inelastic collisions between cosmic ray (CR) protons and gas nuclei in the dense interstellar medium of starbursts, and (3) pair e ± produced between the interactions between 10 and 100 TeV γ -rays and the intense far-infrared (FIR) radiation fields of starbursts. We create one-zone steady-state models of the CR population in the Galactic center (R 112 pc), NGC 253, M82, and Arp 220's nuclei, assuming a power-law injection spectrum for electrons and protons. We consider different injection spectral slopes, magnetic field strengths, CR acceleration efficiencies, and diffusive escape times, and include advective escape, radiative cooling processes, and secondary and pair e ± . We compare these models to extant radio and GeV and TeV γ -ray data for these starbursts, and calculate the diffuse synchrotron X-ray and inverse Compton (IC) luminosities of these starbursts in the models which satisfy multiwavelength constraints. If the primary electron spectrum extends to ∼PeV energies and has a proton/electron injection ratio similar to the Galactic value, we find that synchrotron emission contributes 2%-20% of their unresolved, diffuse hard X-ray emission. However, there is great uncertainty in this conclusion because of the limited information on the CR electron spectrum at these high energies. IC emission is likewise a minority of the unresolved X-ray emission in these starbursts, from 0.1% in the Galactic center to 10% in Arp 220's nuclei, with the main uncertainty being the starbursts' magnetic field. We also model generic starbursts, including submillimeter galaxies, in the context of the FIR-X-ray relation, finding that anywhere between 0% and 16% of the total hard X-ray emission is synchrotron for different parameters, and up to 2% in the densest starbursts assuming an E −2.2 injection spectrum and a diffusive escape time of 10 Myr (E/3 GeV) −1/2 (h/100 pc). Neutrino observations by IceCube and TeV γ -ray data from HESS, VERITAS, and CTA can further constrain the synchrotron X-ray emission of starbursts. Our models do not constrain the possibility of hard, second components of primary e ± from sources like pulsars in starbursts, which could enhance the synchrotron X-ray emission further.

show abstract

First Neutrino Point-Source Results From the 22 String Icecube Detector

Cited by 47 publications

References 25 publications

Can tidal disruption events produce the IceCube neutrinos?

Can tidal disruption events produce the IceCube neutrinos?

Frontiers in nuclear astrophysics

Diffuse Hard X-Ray Emission in Starburst Galaxies as Synchrotron From Very High Energy Electrons

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About