2015
DOI: 10.1088/0004-637x/799/1/3
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Gamma-Ray Bursts Are Observed Off-Axis

Abstract: We use the ScaleFit package to perform Markov chain Monte Carlo light curve fitting on a large sample of Swift-XRT gamma-ray burst afterglows. The ScaleFit model uses scaling relations in the hydrodynamic and radiation equations to compute synthetic light curves directly from a set of high resolution two-dimensional relativistic blast wave simulations. The data sample consists of all Swift-XRT afterglows from 2005 to 2012 with sufficient coverage and a known redshift, 188 bursts in total. We find the jet half … Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

22
137
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 124 publications
(159 citation statements)
references
References 44 publications
22
137
0
Order By: Relevance
“…−0.38 found by Ryan et al (2015), though the uncertainty is large. Nonetheless, there is no evidence of any curvature in the X-ray temporal decay that might signal an approach to values that could be considered post jet-break (α x 2).…”
Section: Jet Breaksmentioning
confidence: 74%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…−0.38 found by Ryan et al (2015), though the uncertainty is large. Nonetheless, there is no evidence of any curvature in the X-ray temporal decay that might signal an approach to values that could be considered post jet-break (α x 2).…”
Section: Jet Breaksmentioning
confidence: 74%
“…They find a jet opening angle of 0.34 +0.11 −0.13 radians, corresponding to a beaming factor of 17.5 +28.0 −7.5 . The Ryan et al (2015) beaming factor is more than 30 times smaller than that required by the Metzger et al (2015) model.…”
Section: The Magnetar Energy Budgetmentioning
confidence: 84%
“…There are several works that explore other possibilities, such as magneto-hydrodynamic simulations (van Eerten, van der Horst & MacFadyen 2012), which was satisfactorily used, e.g. in Guidorzi et al (2014);Ryan et al (2015); Zhang et al (2015), or central engine activities (Zhang et al 2014). These and other effects might be considered together in future works to get a more accurate view of the GRB afterglow physics.…”
Section: O N C L U S I O N Smentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Moreover, they argued that while other types of relation, for example, lag - [144] or the redshift dependence of the shallow decay in X-ray afterglows by Stratta et al [145], might have connections with the jet geometry, they are also likely to stem from observational biases or sample selection effects. Also, Ryan et al [146] investigated the jet-opening angle properties using a sample of 226 Swift/XRT GRBs with known redshift. They found that most of the observed afterglows were observed off-axis; hence the expected behaviour of the afterglow light curves can be significantly affected by the viewing angle.…”
Section: Physicalmentioning
confidence: 99%